Chess Publishing ECO B00-B99 - 2ed Vol.2 PDF

Chess Publishing ECO : B00-B99
Volume 2
Second Edition
CBV to PDF
by Scorpionchess
Thanks to
Echai the master Uploader

& his invaluable
successor bandidobk
All friends who made the All in one Cbv
Dedicated to
Dearanna
She inspired the idea
Introduction to the second Edition
If the first edition had no introduction, the second need one !
The publication of the first edition of this series in 2013 represented an innovation in chess
books shared at forums : It is part of a new trend that migrates from simple sharing to the
creativity .
This publication mainly benefited of the work made in the background by many forums
members (Sharers, collectors, Cbv & pgn makers) and as I'm unable to name All, I just want
to thank All of Them .
Special thanks must go to the master sharer & Uploader Echai & his successor bandidobk :
without their invaluable work & perseverance to update the chess publishing thread, this
second edition would never have been released .
This second edition has an updated material & also some improvements, especially to
enhance readability ...and I will let you discover the rest .
All your suggestions are welcome and will be as far as possible taken into account in the next
editions.
S.C
06/10/2014
Scorpionchess Prinout, 06/10/2014
1 B00
1...b6 idea. 2 B00
N,N Aagaard,Jacob 2389
[Glenn Flear] De Weerd,Warner 2071
Essent Open Hoogeveen NED (1) 13.10.2000
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.c3 b4 [Jon Tisdall]
This natural-looking move may in fact be the
source of Black's problems. 1.e4 c6 2.b5 A contest of anti-theory
[ After 4...f6 5.ge2 c5 Black avoids begins. f6 3.d3 g6 A sensible decision -
ceding his dark-squared bishop: 6.0-0 cxd4 rather than get something akin to a Spanish
7.xd4 d6 8.f4 a6 gives a complex or some double e-pawn opening black elects
position where Black is playing a slightly for a Pirc/Modern where white has played d3
provocative Sicilian. ] and Bb5, which cannot be terrifying. 4.f3
5.ge2 This rarer move is apparently quite g7 5.c3 0-0 There is no hurry to play this -
dangerous. black could well play ...a6 at once and not
[ However I still like 5.f3 which isn't easy commit his king. 6.g5 a6 7.xc6 bxc6
for Black. Critical is then f6 6.g5 h6 8.d2 e8 9.h6 h8 10.0-0-0 d6 11.h4
7.xf6 xc3+ 8.bxc3 xf6 9.0-0 d6 g4 12.dg1 b8 13.g5 b4 14.a3 a5
10.d2 e5 11.f4! when White gets great 15.f3 eb8!? 16.d1 xd2+ 17.xd2 d7
attacking chances. ] 18.b3 c5 19.e3 c6 20.g4 e8 21.f4 d4
5...c5 Probably not best. 22.f3 f6 23.f5 d5 24.e5 xe3+ 25.xe3
[ White has comfortable development after d4 26.xd4 cxd4 27.exf6 exf6 28.xd4 c5
5...f6 6.0-0 ] 29.e2 e8 30.f4 e5 31.fxg6 fxg6
[ Possibly 5...d5!? is the move, but that's 32.g5 fxg5 33.xg5 xg5 34.hxg5 f8
another story! ] 35.d5 f2+ 36.e3 xc2 37.f6+
6.a3 xc3+ 1-0
[ W h i t e wa s c le a r l y b e t t e r a f t e r 6...cxd4
7.axb4 dxc3 8.b5!? d5 9.xc3 dxe4
10.xe4 in Vovk, Y-Brethes, F Calvi 2005 ] 3 B00
7.xc3 cxd4 8.b5 This isn't new (Mr. Acosta,Alejandro2 2346
Mon tign ac th ou gh t it wa s). d6 9.g4! Jaramillo,Gonzalo
This however is! Abel Open Cali COL (6) 20.12.2000
[ Black was doing well after the slower [Jon Tisdall]
9.xd4 d7 ( 9...a6! ) 10.e2 ( 10.b5! )
10...a6 11.0-0 c5 12.f4 f6 13.e5 dxe5 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 g4 4.e3 f6
14.xe5 xd3 15.cxd3 0-0 Schubert, S- 5.c3 e6 6.e2 e7 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5
Fr o e h li c h D il l , A W o m e n 's B u n d e s li g a xf3 9.xf3 e5 10.e2 0-0 11.f4 g6
1995. ] [ 11...ed7 12.f3 e8 13.d2 c5
9...f6 14.0-0-0 a5 15.g4 a4 16.g5 fd7 17.h4
[ Or 9...f8 10.xd4 f6 11.h4 bd7 b6 18.d4 f8 19.he1 1/2-1/2 Rohl,J-
12.f3 with a comfortable edge to White. ] Rogers,I New York 1998. Black's position
10.xd6+ xd6 11.xg7 g8 12.xf6 looks precarious, and when the much higher
d7 13.h6 xg2 14.f4 f8 and White rated player agrees a quick draw, and he is
has a clea r advanta ge as poin ted o ut b y as enterprising a man as Ian Rogers, then
Roland Montignac. you can safely conclude that equality and
counterplay were in short supply. ]
12.d2 c5!
[ 12...e8 13.0-0-0 d7 14.h3 f8 15.d3
a6 16.g4 b5 17.a3 c5 18.dxc6 xc6
19.g5 d5 20.e4 xe4 21.xe4 xe3
22.xe3 d5 23.c3 c5 24.f3 c8
25.xd5 c7 26.d7 xf4+ 27.b1 f8
1
28.h4 b4 29.axb4 xb4 30.e4 a5 19.c1 is not so good: xc6 20.xc6
31.f5 b5 32.h5 b8 33.b3 f8 34.h6 d7 21.e7+ f8 22.c8+ xc8
g6 35.e5 e6 36.f6+ f8 37.xh7+ 23.xc8+ e8 and in the endgame
1-0 Bresciani,N-Oppici,G Bratto 1999. The Black's chances are by no means worse. );
game ref erences hint that white should B) 11...e7 12.g3 0-0 13.h4 and White
castle long in this line as he is much better is ready to launch a strong K-side attack. ]
equipped to attack with a space advantage 11.bxc3 xc3 12.e3!? c6
and the bishop pair. ] [ Unfortunately, Black cannot castle in view
13.g4 b5! Black takes his chance to get o f t h e t yp i c a l B i s h o p s a c r i f i c e : 12...0-0
active. 14.xb5 e4 15.d3 h4+ 16.f1 13.xh7+! xh7 14.g5+ g8 15.h3
e8 17.f3 e2+ 16.h1 and Black has to give up his
[ 17.f5!? ] Queen. ]
17...c4! 18.xc4 13.b2 e4 14.a3 d7
[ 18.d4 c5 and black's counterplay with [ 14...a6!? was worthy of consideration,
...Bf6 and pressure on the b- and e-files is aiming to close the dangerous a3-f8
very much alive. ] diagonal by playing either Nc6-e7 or b5-b4. ]
18...g5! 19.fxg5 xe3 15.fc1 e7?! This move doesn't follow on
[ 19...xe3 A bit early to give up, especially from the previous one. After this inaccuracy
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s i ze o f t h e u p s e t , b u t White's initiative progresses without obstacles.
wh it e's p os it ion is a ru in , f or e xam p le : [ Although 15...0-0-0 looks very dangerous,
20.e2 c8 21.d4 xe2 22.xe2 it was Black's only chance. After 16.e1 f6
e8+ ] 17.f3 g5 18.b5 b8 19.d3
0-1 White's position is very strong, but there is
no direct win. ]
16.xe7 xe7
4 B00 [ The other recapture loses on the spot:
Adams,Michael 2640 16...xe7 17.b5 xb5 18.c7+ e8
Vanderwaeren,Serge 2275 19.a3 ]
(ol) Moscow 1994 17.b5+ f8 18.c2! c8 19.xc8+ xc8
[Alexander Volzhin] 20.c1 The difference in activity of the two
Rooks makes Black's position untenable.. b7
1.d4 e6 2.e4 b6 3.d3 b7 4.f3 c5 21.e1 f6 22.f3 g5 23.d3! f7
5.c3 cxd4?! [ 23...f7 24.h4 and White wins a piece. ]
[ The usual 5...f6 is better. ] 24.exf6 gxf6
6.cxd4 b4+ 7.c3 f6 8.e2 d5 9.e5 [ 24...xf6 is bad as it allows 25.c7 ]
e4 10.0-0! This pawn sacrifice gives White 25.f4 e5? Losing on the spot.
a lasting initiative. Such sacrifices are one of [ 25...d8 was slightly more stubborn, but
the mo st dif f icult p ro ble ms in ch ess. I t's Black's position is bad anyway: 26.h5!
absolutely impossible to calculate all the ( t h re a t e n i n g Q h 6 ) h6 27.f4! e5
variations to the very end, you need just to T h e o n l y wa y t o p r e ve n t R c 7 . 28.xf6+
feel it! xc3 xf6 29.xf6 e7 ( 29...exd4 30.c7+-
[ 10...xc3 was the alternative. 11.bxc3 winning ) 30.dxe5 winning. ]
A) 11...xc3? Grabbing the pawn here is 26.c7! The final blow. d6 27.xb7
e xt re m e ly d a n ge ro u s : 12.b5+ c6 1-0
( 12...f8 13.a3+ g8 14.ac1 a5
15.d6 a6 16.c7 with an overwhelming
a d v a n t a g e .) 13.xc6+ xc6 14.c2
xd4 15.xd4 xa1 16.c6+ f8
17.a3+ g8 18.xa1 c8 19.b5
White is clearly better as Black's pieces
a r e u n c o o r d i n a t e d . ( The spectacular
2
5 B00 wh e n t h e b i s h o p r e m a i n s o n t h e l o n g
Aleksandrov,Danila 2254 diagonal. ]
Turikov,Viktor 2311 12...h5! 13.e3 c7 14.fe5 g6
White Nights Open (7) 30.06.2000 [ Not 14...xe5 15.xh7+ xh7 16.xh5+
[Neil McDonald] g8 17.xe5 ]
15.xd7 xd7 16.ad1 c7 17.f3 f4
1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 e6 Black gains the two bishops with balanced
[ If Black is planning to challenge White in ch a n ce s. A ga me o f ca t a n d m o u se n o w
the centre with an early d7-d5 advance, then ensues lasting right up until the final move.
he does best to adopt a move order that After simplification White presses for the win
doesn't allow his opponent the chance to in the endgame, but he has misjudged the
play Ng5. Unless of course White is made strength of Black's counterplay. 18.d2 xd3
of plastic and chips and you want to block 19.xd3 fd8 20.e2 ab8 21.b3 f6
the position at all costs! Thus, in DEEP 22.c1 a5 23.f2 a8 24.g3 a7
JUNIOR-Akopian, Dortmund 2000, play 25.a3 c6 26.f2 ac8 27.e3 a6
went 3...f6 4.e2 e6 5.f3 d5 28.f4 e7 29.c4 b5 30.fd1 xc4
( 5...e7! ) 6.e5 fd7 7.g5! e7 31.xc4 xc4 32.bxc4 xd1+ 33.xd1
Too late! 8.g4 h5 ( Instead 8...g6 9.h4 b8 34.e3 b2 35.d2 b1+ 36.f2 f8
h5 10.h3 was good for White in Gleizerov- 37.e2 e8 38.d1 b7 39.d3 f5
Filipovic, Ljubljana 2000.) 9.g3 f8 40.c2 h5 41.f4 g5 42.e5 f7 43.h3
10.0-0 a6 Here a human player would be h4 44.h2 f6 45.d6 xd6 46.xd6
thinking about pawn breakthroughs, perhaps e5 47.c6 f4! 48.xe6 g3 49.g6
wi t h f 4 - f 4 , b u t m o r e l i k e l y w i t h c 2 - c 4 . g4! 50.fxg4 f4 51.f6 xg2 52.xf4 xh3
Instead the computer just messes around 53.f5 xg4 54.xc5 h3 55.c8 h7
and allows Black to block things up even 56.g8+ h4 57.g1 h2 58.h1 g3
further. 11.xa6 ( Already 11.c4 59.b3 g2 60.c1 h5 61.c5 xc5
was interesting, as if Black takes on c4 with 62.c4 h1 63.xh1 xh1 64.c3 g2
the pawn there is Qf3, attacking both a8 and 65.d4 c8 66.c5 f3 67.d5 e3 68.a4
f7. ) 11...xa6 12.c3?! c5 13.d1 c4 d3 69.c6 c3 70.c5 b3 71.b5 a8
14.e1 c8 15.h4 h7 16.f3 g8 72.c7 a3!
a n d t h e ga m e e ve n t u a lly f in ish e d a s a 0-1
lifeless draw. ]
4.f3 c5 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 d5
8.exd5 So far play has followed DD415, 6 B00
Grosar-Filipovic. In that game White chose to Apicella,Manuel 2510
block the centre with Porrasmaa,Timo 2216
[ 8.e5 The game move tries to keep things ECC Halkidiki GRE (5) 26.09.2002
more fluid. ] [Jon Tisdall]
8...xd5 A difficult choice.
[ 8...xd5!? may have been more accurate, 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
as the aggressive 9.c4 h5 10.d5 exd5 5.e3 e6 6.h3 h5 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5
11.e1 c6 doesn't work for White. ] xf3?! This game does little to dispel the
9.dxc5 bxc5 This keeps over the important d o u b t s a r o u n d t h i s m o v e - t h e m o r e
d4 square, but it leaves a hole on c4 and the complicated
c5 pawn becomes slightly vulnerable. [ 8...e5 9.g4 g6 remains the best bet. ]
[ D e s e r v i n g a t t e n t i o n w a s 9...xc5!? 9.xf3 e5 10.e2 e7 11.0-0-0 0-0
Assuming W hite cannot do anything fast 12.f4 ed7 13.g4 Typical procedure from
Black must then have fully equalised. ] W hite - straightforward pawn storming has
10.a3 0-0 11.f4 bd7 12.c4? enjoyed great success. c5 14.d4 e8
This is too routine. I like the idea of 15.g5 f8 16.f3 fe4
[ 12.h3! to answer h5 with 13.h2 [ 16...fd7 17.h4 ]
3
17.xe4 xe4 18.b5 xd1+ 31.xd1 c8 32.a1 d5 33.a7

[ 18.d3 c5 19.b5 e7 20.f5!? ] g6 34.f2 c2+ 35.g3 b5 36.a1
18...e7 19.hg1! Preparing the road forward b2 37.a3 b3 38.d6 b2 39.a3 b3
for the f- and g-pawns. a6 20.d3 e8 21.f5 40.d6 c4 41.f4 b2 42.g3 h5
c5 22.xc5 dxc5 23.g6 fxg6 43.h4 a2 44.a3 e2 45.d6 f6 46.c1
[ 23...e5!? was possible, preventing Qh5. c4 47.exf6 gxf6 48.b1 a2 49.b4
White's initiative continues, but Black is on f5 50.c3 c2 51.d4 e5 52.b2 exd4
the board 24.d6 ( 24.gxh7+ h8 ) 53.xc2 d3 54.d2 e5 55.f2 d4
24...cxd6 25.c4 h8 ] 56.g4 b4 57.gxh5 b3 58.h6 g8 59.e1
24.fxg6 h6 25.d6! cxd6?? c3 60.h5 h7 61.f4 b2 62.d1 b1
[ 25...d7 is the only move, when Black 0-1 Simonet Pons,M-Gallego,R/Escaldes
looks lost , but no clean KO is obvious. 1999 ]
26.ge1 d8 27.dxc7 g5+! ( 27...xc7 7...h6 8.xf6 gxf6!? Not the most natural
28.c4+ h8 29.xd7 xd7 30.f7+- ) move in the world, but having an extra centre
28.b1 xc7 and Black's position is pawn and some chances on the g-file is an
precarious but not yet lost. ] interesting way to inject some dynamics into
26.c4+ h8 27.d5 the position.
1-0 [ 8...xf6 9.0-0 xc3 10.bxc3 0-0 11.exd5
exd5 12.e5 d6 13.g4 c8 14.g3
d7 15.xd7 xg3 16.f6+ gxf6 17.fxg3
7 B00 g7 18.ae1 d8 19.e7 c5 20.b5 a6
Ardelean,George Catalin 2426 21.e2 e6 22.b1 db8
Barbu,Iulian 2282 1/2-1/2 Brandenberg,K-Krafzik,J/Germany
Banc Post Int (11) 27.09.2000 1999 ]
[Jon Tisdall] 9.a3 xc3+ 10.bxc3 c6 11.e5 f5
[ 11...e7!? Preparing to castle long and
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 f6 keeping options of chipping away in the
5.d3 b4 6.e2 d5 7.g5 centre was interesting Also ]
[ 7.exd5 xd5 8.0-0 xc3 9.bxc3 bd7 [ 11...g8!? has its merits. Closing with ...f5
10.e1 0-0 11.a6?! xa6 12.xa6 c5 robs black's position of some of its
13.d3 cxd4 14.cxd4 ac8 15.d2 b5 flexibility. ]
16.b2 a6 17.a4 b4 18.a5 c6 19.f1 12.d2 g5 13.g3 e7 14.f4 a5 15.g1
b5 20.e3 b8 21.d2 d5 22.h3 0-0-0 16.b3 xb3?! After this black does
7f6 23.ab1 xa5 24.c4 bxc3 25.xc3 not have much to do.
c7 26.a5 d6 27.d3 f4 28.f1 [ 16...c6 ]
bc8 29.ed1 h6 30.b4 d7 31.c5 17.cxb3 c5?! 18.b4 cxd4
6d5 32.c4 c3 33.e5 d5 34.xc6 [ 18...c4 19.c2 h5 will presumably not
xc6 35.g3 fe2+ 36.h2 xd1 37.xd1 keep white out forever, as he has all day
c3 38.c1 d5 39.a3 b7 40.b1 to prepare the break g3-g4 under
c6 41.c5 a5 42.e1 a8 43.b3 a4 eventually favourable circumstances. ]
44.a3 b5 45.g2 c4 46.d6 xd4 19.cxd4 b8 Here too black faces a nearly
47.f3 e3+ 0-1 Ascic,P-Lovric,B/Pula infinite defensive chore. 20.f2 c8 21.gc1
1999 ] c7 22.d2 hc8 23.xc7 xc7 24.b5
[ 7.e5 e4 8.0-0 xc3 9.bxc3 xc3 e7 25.b2 c7 26.b4 d8
10.e3 e4 11.e1 c5 12.c3 xc3 [ 26...c3 27.xc3 xc3 28.e2
13.dxc5 e4 14.xe4 dxe4 15.g3 f8 and the rook will be driven out. ]
16.a3 g8 17.c2 d7 18.fd1 c7 27.e3 f8 28.xf8 xf8 29.c1 g8
19.cxb6 axb6 20.d2 c5 21.ad1 h6 30.f3 c8 31.g2 d7 32.h3 f6
22.d4 d3 23.d6 c4 24.b3 h7 33.exf6 f8 34.h4 xf6 35.e2 e8
25.f3 xa2 26.xa2 xb3 27.ad2 e3 Black has prevented a direct invasion, but
28.xd3 e2 29.e1 exd1 30.xd1 now endures a hostile hard-handed massage
4
for the rest of the game. His plan is g4 ) 11...g4 was fine for black, though
straightforward, and he can implement it with he could also have taken the pawn on e4.
a h e lp i n g o f s lo w t o rt u re . First h 3 +g4 i s 1-0 Levi,E-Tu Hoang Thong/ASK It
played to create a potential passed pawn. Canberra AUS 1995 (57). ]
36.c3 d7 37.c2 b7 38.d3 f8 7...b6 8.e2 e7 9.bd2 d6 10.d3
39.h5 f6 40.c1 e8+ 41.h4 d7 A strong, simple, sensible yet far from
42.h3 f8 43.f1 f6 44.c2 b8 45.c3 obvious move. White just wants to play Nc4
b7 46.e2 b8 47.f3 c7 48.g4 fxg4 and annex the bishop pair. f6
49.hxg4 d6 50.a4 e8 51.g3 [ 10...f5!? looks like an interesting way to try
A new regrouping, where white will tie black to and take advantage of still having the knight
the h6 pawn before preparing the advance of on g8. ]
the g-pawn. f7 52.c3 d7 53.d3 f8 11.c4 d5
54.c1 Preventing any activity on the c-file - [ 11...e6!? was worth a look. While the
black cannot trade rooks as the white king reaction ...d5 reminds me of Milesian
would rush in on the h-file. f6 55.h1 e8 handling of this kind of position, here black
56.h2 d7 57.f3 e8 58.e3 d7 just cannot find sensible squares for the Nf6.
59.h1 e8 60.h7! Preparing escort In fact, I begin to understand lines where
service for the g-pawn. d7 61.g5 hxg5 this piece comes into play via h6... ]
62.fxg5 f7 63.g6 e7 64.g1 g7 65.f4 12.xb6 axb6 13.e5 g4 14.h3 h6
e8 66.g2 f7 67.g5 e8 68.h6 15.g4 f6 16.exf6 xe2+ 17.xe2 gxf6
1-0 18.f2 Black's kingside is seriously
s h a t t e r e d . 0-0 19.g1 h8 20.b4!
I like this move a lot - white relies on the
8 B00 positive energy of his position, and doesn't
Aronian,Levon 2584 mind making a real mess of his queenside in
Pedersen,Erik 2400 order to get his dark-squared bishop on the
It Morso DEN (3) 11.02.2002 long diagonal and the show on the proverbial
[Jon Tisdall] road on the other flank. f7 21.b5 a5
22.e3 d6 23.d4 g8 24.g5
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f4 c6 And now its time for the can opener on this
5.c4 b4+ side. f5 25.g6 h6 26.g7 e8 27.g6 b3
[ 5...f6!? is annotate d elsewhere on the 28.axb3 xa1 29.xh6 A terrific by white - it
site, and is probably the critical line - if it seems to me that you can only convert
works... 6.c3 b4 7.e5 d5 8.exf6 dxc4 advantages with this kind of awesome brute
9.e2+ f8 10.e3 xf6 11.0-0-0 e6 force when you are young...
12.e4 e7 13.f3 c3 14.b3 a5 15.b1 1-0
a4 16.b5 axb3 17.axb3 xb3 18.cxb3
xe4+ 19.d3 a5 20.c4 xc4 21.bxc4
e7 22.d4 xd4 23.xd4 ha8 9 B00
24.e3+ d7 25.he1 a1+ 26.c2 Ascic,Pero 2347
1a2+ 27.d3 d2+ 28.e4 f5+ 29.xf5 Rogulj,Branko 2411
xd4 30.c5 xc5 31.xc3 f8+ 32.g5 TCh-CRO Rabat CRO (1) 07.09.2003
e7+ 0-1 Orso,M-Bordas,G/Budapest HUN [Glenn Flear]
2000 ]
6.c3 a5 7.f3 You know a line is not 1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 ce7 4.e3 f5
terribly well explored when moves like this An idea of Miles that makes an interesting
appear to be novelties. change from the better-known plan with 4...
[ 7.e3 prevents black from taking up Ng6, followed by ...Nf6, and typically ...c6.
annoying possession of the a7-g1 diagonal, That's not bad either but a timely h2-h4-h5
but the Be3 is poorly placed. h4+ 8.g3 generally gives W hite space and pressure.
e7 9.f3 f6 10.0-0 0-0 11.e1 ( 11.e5 5.f3 f6 6.d3 Miles has had two
5
noteworthy games in this line: W h it e's at ta ck h as ru n ou t of ste am a n d

[ 6.h3 Black's king proves to be pretty safe. White's
A) here 6...fxe4!? 7.fxe4 g6 however is another matter... 26.f5+
( 7...xe4? 8.h5+ g6 9.d3 [ The ending after 26.c3 e6 27.f5+ xf5
is catastrophic for Black) 8.f2 b4+ 28.gxf5 f6 clearly favours Black. ]
9.c3 a5 intending ...Bb6 is possible.; 26...g8 27.g5 xg5 28.xg5 xc2+!
B) 6...d6 7.f2 c6 8.c4 c5 9.g3 g6 A fine blow that finally tips the balance in
10.c3 g7 is like a Saemisch King's Bla ck' s f a vo u r. 29.xc2 e2+ 30.c3
Indian (Beliavsky,A-Miles,A St.Vincent xh1 31.f4
2000) and ] [ 31.xd7? loses the bishop to e5+ ]
[ 6.c3 d6 7.d2 g6 8.0-0-0 g7 9.h3 f4 31...e1+ 32.d2 e5+ 33.c2 e4+
10.f2 0-0 11.b1 is presumably some 34.c1 xg4 35.b3 d5 36.e3 g2
sort of Pirc, Campora,D-Miles,A Seville 1993. 37.f2 f1+ 38.b2 e4 39.d4
In both cases W hite's space advantage 0-1
gives him the better options but this type of
ga m e s u i t s t h o s e wh o p r e f e r a c l o s e d
centre. ] 10 B00
6...fxe4!? An interesting interpretation, leading Bakre,Tejas 2446
to more open piece play than in the previous Popchev,Milko 2452
note. 7.fxe4 g6 8.c3?! TSGM December (3) 17.12.2001
[ 8.d2 is surely less complacent but then [Jon Tisdall]
c6! 9.c4 b4 looks fine for Black. ]
8...b4 9.d2 a further imprecision. White 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5
hasn't noticed the storm clouds gathering... 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 c6 8.a3 d5
xc3! 10.xc3 xe4! stealing a pawn. 9.e5 d7 10.bd2
White doesn't have any real compensation but [ 10.b4 f8 11.e3 g6 12.d1 0-0
is able to keep Black on his toes with vigorous 13.g3 e8 14.h4 cxd4 15.cxd4 f6 16.exf6
play. 11.c4 d6 12.c3!? xf6 17.h5 e5 18.hxg6 e4 19.c2 exf3
[ 12.xg6+?! hxg6 13.g4 h4+ 20.d3 e6 21.f5 xf5 22.xf5 hxg6
is too easy for Black. ] 23.xg6 e7 24.d3 g5 25.c3 g7
12...e4 13.e2 0-0 14.0-0-0 f5 26.f1 ae8 27.ac1 a6 28.b5 a8
[ 14...b6 with ...Bb7 comes into 29.e1 c8 30.d2 d8 31.a4 axb5
consideration. ] 32.xb6 xa3 33.xb5? f5 34.c3
15.d6! One might as well be hung for... xd6 a2+ 35.c1 b8 1-0 Grujic,L-Popchev,M
16.g4 b6 17.h4! Keep going lads... xh4?! Belgrade 1991. Presumably this result is
[ If 17...b7 then 18.g5 c8 19.h5 f4 reversed, unless some horrible clock
20.h6 tries to trouble the waters but e6 accident occurred . ]
steadies the ship. ] 10...g5!? 11.e3 f8 12.d1 g4 13.e1
18.h3 f3 19.xd6?! cxd4 14.cxd4 g5 15.e2 h5 16.b3
[ 19.b3+! h8 20.f4 is even more g6 17.a6
d a n g e r o u s . F r i t z t h e n s u g g e s t s xf4 [ 17.xg6!? fxg6 18.xg5 xg5 19.ac1
21.xf4 b7 but chances are approximately was an interesting alternative â (+) black's
equal. ] bishop is potentially a strong piece, but d4
19...cxd6 20.c4+ f7 21.xe4 b8 is more secure and white can occupy the c-
22.c4 Black has of course totally lost control, file quickly. ]
but with the benefit of hindsight, I think that 17...xa6 18.xa6 0-0 19.b7 c8
he's still better. 20.xg5 xg5 21.ac1 e7 Black has a
[ 22.xf3 is insufficient after b7 ] pleasant position and in the very long run he
22...b7 23.xf7+ xf7 24.xh7 e7 also has chances of laying siege to the pawn
25.f4 c8 Black has retained only one ropey duo d4/e5. The d4 pawn is the softest spot on
pawn from his pawn-grabbing spree. However the board. The rest of the game is a good
6
illustration of black's possibilities in this type This position should be completely OK for
of st ruc tu re . 22.a6 c7 23.c3 b8 b l a c k , b u t B a r e e v i s e xt r e m e l y g o o d a t
24.d3 fc8 25.dc1 g7 26.g3 c6 exploiting the dynamics provided by doubled
27.d2 f6 28.exf6+ xf6 29.e3 e7 pawns and the bishop pair. e8 15.a5 e5
30.d3 f5 31.f4 f7 32.e5 xe5 16.e3 c7 17.f5 bxa5 18.d2 e4
33.dxe5 h4 19.d4 b6 20.g5 xc4
[ 33...xc3 34.xc3 xc3 35.bxc3 c6 ] [ 20...e5!? 21.c3 g6 22.f4 ]
34.h3 hxg3 35.hxg4 d4 36.f3 d7 21.xc4 xc4 22.eb1 It seems a bit unfair
[ 36...xc3!? ] tha t black sh ou ld h ave such a ha rd t im e
[ 36...h8!? were better ways of trying to showing any clear advantage at all with two
squeeze a bit more out of the position. ] extra pawns, but the famous bishop pair and
37.xc6 xc6 38.xc6 xc6 39.g2 white's active pieces create a very complex
cxe5 40.xg3 c4 41.xc4 dxc4 situation. d5 23.b5 ad8 24.c5 h6
42.g2 c5 43.e3 b5 44.f4 d3 [ 24...e3!? 25.f3 a4!? ]
45.d1 a5 46.f3 b4 47.axb4 axb4 25.h4 e3 26.f3 g5 27.g3 h5
48.e3 e5 49.fxe5 xe5 50.d4 c3 [ 27...e2!? 28.d3 d2 29.xe2
51.bxc3 bxc3 52.xc3 ( 29.f5!?; 29.xe2 xf3! ) 29...xf3
½-½ 30.gxf3 xd3 31.cxd3 b3 32.f5 xa1
33.d4 h5 34.xa5 xg3 35.hxg3
d8= ]
11 B00 28.c7 f4 29.xd8 xd8 30.c3
Bareev,Evgeny 2709 [ 30.c8!? ]
Bauer,Christian 2612 30...e6 31.xe6 A surprising decision -
It Enghien les Bains FRA (6) 17.04.2001 [ 31.xe6 fxe6 32.d3 looks better. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 31...fxe6 32.f1 b8 33.b5 d2+?
[ 33...c8 ]
1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4 34.e1 c8 35.bxa5 xc3 36.xa7+-
5.d3 f6 6.e2 d5 7.exd5 xd5 8.0-0 f8 37.7a3 xa3
xc3 9.bxc3 0-0 1-0
[ 9...bd7 10.e1 ( 10.a4 0-0 11.a5 h5
12.g5 xe2 13.xe2 h6 14.f3 e4
15.a2 c5 16.d2 g6 17.f3 ac8 12 B00
18.a3 fd8 19.axb6 axb6 20.b3 cxd4 Baumegger,Siegfried 2355
21.xd4 e5 22.d1 d5 23.b5 c4 Freitag,Manfred 2389
24.b4 d2 25.e1 b1 26.b2 bxc3 TCh-2002-3 Fuerstenfeld AUT (10) 15.03.2003
27.xc3 xc3 28.xc3 xc3 29.xb6 [Jon Tisdall]
xc2 30.xc2 xc2 31.b3 dd2 32.f3
g5 33.g3 g7 34.h3 h5 35.e4 d1+ 1.e4 e6 2.d4 b6 3.f3 b7 4.d3 c5
36.g2 cc1 37.a3 f5 38.xe6 g4 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 The most
39.a7+ f8 0-1 Vatnikov,J-Gurgenidze,B popular move at this point. W hite will react
Bad Liebenzell 1995.) 10...h5!? 11.a4 according to Black's reply. d5 Ah-ha! This
xf3 12.gxf3 0-0 13.h1 fe8 (1/2-1/2, move again! as we discussed in March's e-
23 ) S h erze r, A -O live ira , P Ph ilad e lp h ia mail bag, White hasn't been finding this idea
1993 ] easy to meet. In particular, Black feels fairly
10.f4 c8 happy with the French-style closed centre
[ The thematic 10...h5 is still very playable: seen in the game.
11.xc7 xf3 12.xf3 ( 12.gxf3 d5 ) [ The alternative 7...c6 is covered in the e-
12...xf3 13.gxf3 d5 ] book. ]
11.fe1 c5 8.e5 fd7 9.e3 c6 10.a3 c4 A couple of
[ 11...h5!? ] other moves have been played here,
12.dxc5 xc5 13.c4 bd7 14.a4 illustrating that there is no hard and fast rule
7
concerning the placement of Black's king! 12.d2 bd7 13.c4 b6 14.b3 fd7
[ 10...g5 11.bd2 h5 12.b3 g4 13.e1 15.a4 g5 16.b5 xe3 17.xe3 f8
c7 14.f4 0-0-0 15.c2 b8 16.fc1 18.a5 c5 19.a2 c8 20.b4 d7
dg8 17.a4 h4 18.b5 f6 Hiermann,D- 21.a4 b8 22.a6 bxa6 23.xa6 xa6
Aschenbrenner,R Austria tch. 2002 ] 24.xa6 e7 25.c4 f5 26.f3 e8
[ 10...a6 11.e1 0-0 12.g4 f5 13.exf6 27.a6 d7 28.e1 g6 29.exf5 f4
xf6 14.g5 f7 15.xe7 xe7 16.f3 30.de4 xf5 31.f1 h4 32.h2 xg2
f6 17.h3 e5 Trabert, B-Epishin,V 0-1 Mazi,L-Mestrovic,Z/Bled 1995. ]
Lausanne 2001 ] 8...e8 9.h3 h5 10.d5 b8 11.d2 g6
11.c2 a5 12.bd2 h6 With the centre 12.f3?! This allows black to gradually
firmly closed Black can calmly prepare long encroach on the kingside. Mestrovic is a
castling and action on the kingside. This is steady practitioner of this variation as black,
frustrating for White who cannot easily open and seems to thrive on players going astray
the queenside. 13.e1 c7 14.h4 0-0-0 against the somewhat shapeless black
15.h5 dg8 16.g3 b8 17.g2 f8 position. h5 13.h2 h4 14.g4?! f4
18.f3 c6 19.h2 e8 Why hurry? 15.c4 d7 16.e2 g5 17.xf4 exf4
20.g4 b7 21.h3 h7 22.f4 c8 18.b5 to prevent the N using the newly
23.g4 d7 24.f2 e8 25.ae1 c8 formed e5-outpost. a6 19.xd7 xd7 20.c4
26.e2 f8 27.h4 d8 28.h1 c6 h5 Black now has the power to slowly
29.f1 fg8 30.b1 f8 31.f1 g5 infiltrate on the dark-squares, and to open
After a period of heavy manoeuvring, Black lines against the white king. 21.c3 f6
grasps his chance to open lines. 32.hxg6 h5 22.c1 e7 23.g2 e5 24.e1 d4
33.f6 25.b3 f6 26.d2 e5 27.c2
[ If 33.f2 then xh4 34.xh4 xg6 [ 27.c5!? ]
is fine for Black ] 27...g5 28.c1 xc3! 29.xc3
33...xf6 34.exf6 xf6 35.f2 xg6 [ 29.xc3 hxg4 30.hxg4 xe4! 31.fxe4
36.xg6 fxg6 37.f3 h4 A pawn sacrifice to f3+ ]
lever open W hite's king. 38.xh4 xh4 29...hxg4 30.hxg4 xe4! a promising piece
39.xh4 g5 40.fxg5 xg5 41.e3 h8 sacrifice. 31.fxe4 xe4+ 32.f3 xg4+
W hite is powerless to halt ...e5 f or long. [ 32...f5!? looks better, creating a nastily
42.f3 h5 43.c1 e5! With his remaining advanced pawn roller. ]
pieces joining the fray White's insecure king 33.f2 h4+ 34.g1 xc2 35.xc2 e8
becomes the decisive factor. 44.e3 h3+ 36.d3 The worst is over now, white is
45.e1 g4 46.f5 h7 47.f3 e4+ relatively safe once the knight comes to the
48.d2 xf5 49.xf5 g6 50.e3 a6 defence. e4 37.h2 f6 38.b3 g5 39.f2
51.f2 a5 52.e7 b3+ 53.d1 h5+ e2 40.h3 d4 41.g2 g7 42.h5
54.c2 h7 Note the relative safety of the e5 43.g1 f8 44.g4 a1+ 45.g2
two kings in this game! e1 46.c8+ g7 47.h3 g6 48.g8+
0-1 g7 49.c8 a1 50.h8 g1+ 51.h2
g3 52.g8+ g7 53.c8 e3
½-½
13 B00
Belamaric,Goran 2208
Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2434 14 B00
chT Bled SLO (7) 20.10.2000 Beliavsky,Alexander G 2640
[Jon Tisdall] Miles,Anthony J 2579
1st ch-Europe (9) 12.07.2000
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 [Carsten Hansen]
5.e3 e5 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.a3
[ 8.h3 h5 9.e1 e8 10.d5 b8 11.d3 1.d4 c6 2.e4 e5 3.d5 3 dxe5 Nxe5 4 Nf3
The beginning of a pointless pilgrimage. g6 is the main line, but Beliavsky, like Miles, isn't
8
afraid of choosing his own path through the 15 B00

jungle. ce7 4.e3 f5 5.f3 f6 6.h3!? Blimke,Dalia 2209
This move looks a bit bizarre, but the idea Gaprindashvili,Nona 2376
makes sense: transfer the knight to f2, from 2nd ch-EUR Women (10) 02.05.2001
where it protects the e4-pawn and controls the [Jon Tisdall]
g4 -s q u a re , wh i ch o t h e rwi se wo u ld b e i n
Black's hands after an exchange on e4. 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.a3 g6
[ Other possibilities are: 6.c3 d6 7.d2 5.f3 g7 6.g5 e7
g6 8.0-0-0 g7 9.h3 f4 10.f2 0-0 [ 6...c8!? as McShane tried in a similar
11.b1 a6 12.ge2 d7 13.c1 b5 position against Tukmakov, deserves
14.a3 b8 15.b3 Campora-Miles, Seville attention. ]
1993, and now b4 would have given Black 7.h4!? h6 8.f4 d6 9.d2 An interesting
at least the initiative. ] deployment against the Miles/ McShane Hippo
[ 6.d3 f4 7 6...fxe4!? fxe4 c6!? is also an - white prevents expansion with ...g5 and
interesting option 7.f2 g5 8.c4 g6 keeps an eye on h6. d7 10.e2 a6 11.h2
9.c3 b4 10.b3 e7 11.0-0-0 c5 b5 12.g1? b6 13.d1 d7 14.f3
12.xc5 xc5 13.b1 d6 14.ge2 b6 White seems stumped, and only hoping to lure
15.c2 d7 16.a1 e7 , and Black is b l a c k i n t o c a s t l i n g k i n g s i d e . 0-0-0!?
do ing f in e , P a ra m os Dom ingu e z-I ze t a , W hile white has been trundling around
Spain ch 1993. ] planlessly, black has made some sensible
6...d6 7.f2 c6 8.c4 c5 9.g3 g6 10.c3 m o ve s, b u t t h is c o n ve rt s t h e q u e e n s i d e
g7 This looks a bit like a Saemisch Variation expansion into weaknesses, and is very risky
of the King's Indian, in which neither side are indeed.
familiar with the moves. 11.g4 f4 [ 14...d8!? ]
[ 11...fxg4 is far more interesting, but also [ 14...f5!? ]
more challenging for Black 12.fxg4 h5 [ 14...0-0? 15.f4 h7 16.h5 g5
( 12...0-0 is also playable) 13.e2 xg4 17.xg5! hxg5 18.xg5+ g8 19.h6
14.xg4 hxg4 15.xg4 0-0 16.g1 f6 ( 19...h8 20.h7+ g7 21.xf7! )
with an initiative for White. ] 20.f4+- ]
12.d2 g5 13.b4 15.0-0 f5 16.d3 fxe4
[ Or 13.h4 h6 14.hxg5 hxg5 15.xh8+ [ 16...g5!? beats a path to d4 and tries to
xh8 16.h3 g6 17.a4+ f8 18.0-0-0 open all lines on the kingside - this
h4 19.e2 with a long struggle ahead ] definitely deserves attention and is
13...b6 14.bxc5 bxc5 15.d3 h5 16.h3 presumably a reason for castling the other
f7 17.e2 g6 Now it looks like Black is way. ]
slightly better, although the closed pawn 17.xe4 xe4
structure limits the advantage considerably. [ 17...g5!? is still a natural way to try and get
18.a4 f8 19.ab1 e7 20.c2 hxg4 going on the kingside. ]
21.hxg4 xh1 22.xh1 d7 23.a3 b8 18.xe4 f5 19.b3 c6 To justify castling
24.b1 b6 with a fairly balanced game. opposite sides black should be aiming to hook
25.c3 h8 26.g1 c8 27.d2 a6 onto the h4 pawn, but grows understandably
28.xa6 xa6 29.b1 d8 30.a4 c7 uneasy about how peelable her own king
31.b5 c8 32.f1 e7 33.c6 h4 cover is. It is probably already too late to try
34.d2 g2 35.b7 d7 36.a6 b6 and race:
37.f1 h4 38.e1 g2 39.d2 h4 [ 19...e7 20.a5 ( 20.g3 g5 21.hxg5
40.b5 c8 41.e1 g2 42.d2 h4 hxg5 22.xg5 f7 ) 20...b7 21.c4
43.b3 d8 44.c6 xh4 22.xh4 xh4 23.fe1 and black's
½-½ king cover is going, with c4-c5 the main
threat. ]
20.fe1 he8 21.c1 d5 22.c4! bxc4
23.bxc4 c6
9
[ 23...xc4 24.b4+- ] board. 17.f1 e5 The aforementioned break

24.c5 c4 25.cxd6+- xd2 26.xc6 18.fxe5 dxe5 19.d5 d4 20.d2 g4
xf3+ 27.gxf3 d7 28.xa6 xd6 29.xd6 21.g1 xf3 22.xf3 xf3 23.xf3 e4+
xd6 30.xd6+ cxd6 31.xd6 So, far, so forced. I was still happy and felt
1-0 Black to be a little better. But great players do
not cave in. 24.g2
[ 24.xg4 c8+ 25.h4 ( 25.g5 f5+
16 B00 26.h4 h5# ) 25...f6+ 26.g5 xg5+
Bologan,Viktor 27.xg5 f5+ 28.h6 h5# ]
Martin,Andrew D 24...c8
4NCL Birmingham 23.10.2005 [ W i t h h i n d s i g h t m a y b e 24...e5!
[Andrew Martin] was better: 25.e2 ( 25.b3 c8 26.xe4
xc4-+ ) 25...f3 26.e3 xc3 27.bxc3
1.e4 b6 What to play against Bologan? An d8 ]
unorthodox opening reduces the chance of 25.e1 f5 I had designs on his King. 26.f1
getting theoretically outplayed and sidesteps d7 27.e2 xc3! An unconventional
the opponents preparation. Not that Bologan decision but a good one. Black gets to
would have prepared anything special for me preserve his passed pawn and poses
other than a good night's sleep! 2.d4 b7 questions to White about his pawn structure. I
3.d3 g6 Maybe this is trampling on Glenn's didn't see myself getting mated. 28.bxc3 h6
ground, maybe not. The Owen move-order 29.f4 e7 30.c5! I saw this move but it
often allows Black to set up a favourable came as a surprise! Is that a contradiction?
version of the Hippo. 4.f4 f5! A sharp and Well, that's how it was. e3 31.cxb6 axb6
necessary move. White must not be allowed 32.c4 f7 33.d6! cxd6 34.xe3 b7+
to mass his forces in the centre or Black will Still OK, but by now I was getting into mild
be squashed. 5.e2 fxe4 6.xe4 xe4 time-trouble and starting to get worried by the
7.xe4 c6 8.f3 f6 9.e2N nature of White's counterplay. Here the game
Bologan played this quickly but as he was changes course.
suffering from a virus we should not read too [ 34...xe3! l e a d s t o a d r a w : 35.xf7+
much into that. It looked like he wanted to get ( 35.xf7 b5 36.b3 e4+ 37.f3+ d5
the game over as quickly as possible. My own 38.xb5 f8 39.d3 xf3 40.xf3
f eeling is that Black is f ine here. He ca n c2+= ) 35...h8 36.f6+ g8 37.xd6
develop effectively and can look forward to a xc3 38.xb6 d2+ 39.f2 d5+
central pawn break in the near future. 40.h3 h5+ 41.g2 d5+= It's hard to
[ 9.d3 would have been a nice sight for me, say why I didn't play this line. A combination
leading to a game I knew well: g7 10.e5 of over-optimism and underestimation of
0-0 11.xc6 dxc6 12.0-0 d7 13.c3 c5 the opponent has to be the answer, although
14.c4+ d5 15.dxc5 e5 16.fxe5 xf1+ I'm having problems admitting it! ]
17.xf1 f8 18.e2 e7 19.d2 xe5 35.f2 b5 36.b3 e4?!
20.c4 d4+ 0-1 Serpik, I-Blatny, P/Los [ Just 36...e7!= holds easily and crucially,
Angeles 2003 ] protects the Queen! ]
9...g7 10.0-0 0-0 11.d1 e6 12.c4 e7 37.a4! On to the mistake in a flash. g5
13.c3 ae8= Thematic play. Now Black [ 37...xf4+! 38.gxf4 ( I missed 38.xf4
plans either ...d6 and ...e6-e5 or maybe ...d7- a7+ ) 38...h1 39.axb5 xh2+ 40.f3
d5 and ..Ne4 if allowed. 14.g3 d5 was a much, much better try. I just didn't
[ I expected 14.e5 which I was planning to play this part of the game very well. ]
answer with the simple d8 with ...d6, ... 38.xe4 xe4 39.axb5 d5 40.d4 g4
Nf7 and ...e5 as the coming plan. ] 41.d1 g5 42.e2! Now wriggle as he
14...d6 15.g2 d8 16.e3 a8! might, Black cannot escape defeat. h3+
Still no problems for Black in fact it is White 43.e1 b1+ 44.d1 e4+ 45.d2 g5
who has to play very well just to stay on the 46.c1 f3 47.b6 e8 48.b2 b5+
10
49.a3 h5 50.a4 xd4 51.xd4 h7 cxb4 32.g4 ( 32.xh7 h5 ) 32...a5
52.b4 a6+ 53.b3 e2 54.b7 d1+ 33.g3 g7 34.c4 b2 35.d3 f5
55.b2 e2+ 56.a3 e1 57.b8 36.d1 a1 37.g4 xa4 38.gxf5 a1
1-0 39.h5 c3 40.f6 xf6 41.xh7
xf4+ 42.f3 f5 43.xb7 e3+
44.g2 0-1 Frendzas, P-Ibragimov,I
17 B00 Peristeri 1993.;
Brancaleoni,Maurizio 2196 A2) 12...c5 13.f3 d7 14.0-0-0
Tomescu,Vlad 2417 ae8 15.d4 d8 16.he1 xe1
Open Cesenatico ITA (2) 10.09.2001 17.xe1 e8 18.g4 xe1+ 19.xe1
[Jon Tisdall] h6 20.h3 a6 21.e3 e7 22.xe7
xe7 23.b4 cd7 24.d2 h7
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 25.e4 f6 26.f2 g6 27.e2 b6
5.e2 e6 6.d5 exd5 7.exd5 xf3 8.xf3 28.d3 a4 29.c4 b2+ 30.b3
[ 8.gxf3!? Sharper, but not terrifying. e5 d1 31.e1 g7 32.c4 f6 33.f3
9.e3 e7 10.d2 0-0 11.0-0-0 c5 d7 34.c1 e3 35.f2 d4 36.e2
12.dg1 e8 13.f4 d7 14.e4 a6 15.f5 b6 37.e1 g5 38.c3 1/2-1/2 Dlugy,
df6 16.g5 d7 17.d3 b5 18.c4 M-Miles,A USA-ch 1989.;
a4 19.b1 b5 20.b3 xb3 21.axb3 B) 10...c5!? 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.f4 g6
c7 Black has seized the initiative with 13.0-0 0-0 14.e1 d5 15.f2 b8
active play on the queenside and the better 16.ab1 e8 17.b4 c7 18.d4 ab8
pawn structure. 22.c2 fb8 23.d2 f8 19.b5 cxb5 20.xb5 xb5 21.xb5 d8
24.a1 h6 25.h3 d7 26.f4 f6 22.e2 b4 23.b5 xc2 24.f5 e4
27.a2 b7 28.h5 d4 29.c3 xc3 25.e3 f8 26.a3 d2 27.h3 a6
30.xc3 e8 31.d3 e5 32.e1 eb8 28.g4 h6 29.d1 d2 30.xg7 xg7
33.e3 bxc4 34.bxc4 b3+ 35.c2 8b4 31.f6 xf6 32.xf6 axb5 33.f1 d4+
36.xe5 dxe5 37.d6 a8 38.f6 gxf6 0-1 Koelle,A-Storm,R Germany 1991 GER-
39.xf6 b6 40.xa6 xb2+ 41.c1 chT2. ]
xf2 42.xb6 xf6 43.d7 bxb6 44.d8+ 10...0-0 11.e1
g7 45.c7 bd6 46.e2 c6 47.xe5 [ 11.e3 fd7 12.d2 g6 13.b5 f6
ce6 48.g3+ g6 49.c3+ g8 50.f3 14.d4 e8 15.c3 e7 16.c4 xd4
a6 51.e3 a1+ 52.b2 a5 53.e8+ 17.xd4 f5 18.c3 c5 19.d3 xd3
g7 54.e5+ g8 55.c6 a6 56.d5 20.xd3 g5 1/2-1/2 Gruenfeld,Y-Miles,A
gb6+ 57.c1 f8 58.e4 a5 59.h4 Biel 1995. ]
e6 60.b8+ g7 61.g3+ f8 62.b8+ 11...a6 12.a4 e8 13.f1 h6 14.a5 f8
g7 63.f4 a1+ 64.b2 aa6 65.g4+ 15.e4 g6 16.a3 ed7 17.xf6+ xf6
f8 66.d5 eb6+ 67.c2 a2+ 68.d3 18.f3 h4 19.c4 h5 20.g3 g7 21.g5
g6 69.f4 g3+ 70.e4 e2+ 71.f5 d4 22.xe8+ xe8 23.a4 e1 24.e3
g6 72.xf7 gg2 73.d5 gf2 74.f3 b1 25.b4 e5 26.c2 b2 27.c3 f3+
e1 75.g6+ e7 76.f6+ 0-1
1-0 Timoshenko,G-Miles,A Moscow 1990. ]
8...e5 9.e2 e7 10.0-0
[ 10.e3 18 B00
A) 10...0-0 11.f4 ed7 12.d2 Brendel,Oliver 2394
A1) 12...e8 13.f3 b6 14.b3 d7 Hille,Ingo 2244
15.0-0 c5 16.h3 c8 17.d3 d8 Bundesliga 2000-1 (7) 28.01.2001
18.ae1 a5 19.d2 b6 20.e4 [Glenn Flear]
xd2 21.xf6+ gxf6 22.xd2 xe1
23.xe1 e8 24.xe8+ xe8 25.f2 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f6 3.c3 d5 4.e5 d7
c8 26.a4 e7 27.d3 f8 28.g4 [ 4...e4 is more in keeping with the spirit of
h6 29.e4 f8 30.b4? f5 31.xf5 the opening, and black has had very
11
reasonable results - here are a sampling of 24.e5+ c7 25.xa7+

some that are both encouraging and fairly 1-0
representative of the ideas employed. 5.d4
( 5.b5 g4 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 xc3
8.dxc3 e6 9.f4 d7 10.0-0-0 a6 11.d3 19 B00
b5 12.he1 b8 13.b1 e7 14.h4 c5 Campora,Daniel Hugo 2542
15.h5 c4 16.f1 c6 17.g4 c7 18.xd5 Salgado Gonzalez,Julio 2063
exd5 19.e6 d6 20.xd6 xd6 21.xf7+ XXVII Open Sevilla ESP (2) 12.01.2002
d8 22.xg7 e8 23.g5 b4 24.g6 hxg6 [Jon Tisdall]
25.h6 e7 26.xg6 bxc3 27.h7 xb2+
0-1 Vogelmann,P-Renette,H NED 1998.) 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 f6 4.e5 d7
5...g4 6.e3 ( 6.e2 e6 7.0-0 e7 [ 4...g8!? is an interesting option - it takes
8.e3 xc3 9.bxc3 0-0 10.h3 h5 two moves for this piece to reach a decent
11.d3 a5 12.fe1 c4 13.ab1 b6 square in any event, and the traditional route
14.d1 g6 15.e2 h6 16.d2 xe3 to b6 is hardly a dream outpost. On the
17.xe3 c5 18.f4 c8 19.b2 c7 other hand, one has to wonder if the option
20.f1 cxd4 21.cxd4 c3 22.xc3 xc3 of getting the Bc8 out is worth playing a
23.f3 fc8 24.xc3 xc3 25.b3 c7 French with a lot of silly preliminary
26.c3 h4 27.f3 g3 28.f1 d3+ horseplay. ]
29.e2 c2 30.a3 xf4 31.f2 c1 5.f3 b6 6.b5N g4
32.a6 b2 33.e1 e4 34.f3 g6 [ 6...d7!? ]
35.e2 xc3 36.f3 a5 0-1 Dansker,G- 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 Now white has an easy
Ippoliti,H Buenos Aires 1993.) 6...e6 7.d3 advantage, either thanks to the bishop pair, or
b4 8.0-0 xc3 9.bxc3 xc3 10.b1 a better pawn structure after a capture on c6.
xd4 11.xb7 xe3 12.b5 0-0 13.xc6 e6 9.0-0 g6 10.d1 g7 11.a4 a5 12.b3
b6 14.a4 a5 15.h3 h5 16.d3 e7 0-0 13.xc6 bxc6 14.a3 e8 15.e2 f6
17.xb6 cxb6 18.xa8 xa8 19.d4 b4 [ 15...d7!? ]
20.f4 g6 21.f5 exf5 22.xf5 c5+ 16.c3 fxe5 17.dxe5 d7 18.f4 g5
23.h1 e8 24.f3 xe5 25.xg7 f8 Tempting, but white is quite well placed to use
26.f6 xg7 27.xb6 h6 28.xa5 e2 the open lines on the kingside.
29.b5 e5 30.a5 xc2 31.a6 e4 [ 18...a6!? ]
32.g1 g3 0-1 Cioara,A-Pizzuto,S/ 19.g3 gxf4 20.gxf4 h4 21.d3 h5
Castellaneta 1999 ] [ 21...a6 22.g3 h8 23.g4 h5
5.d4 b6 To get the light-squared bishop out 24.h2 ]
before playing ...e6. 22.e1 h8?
[ 5...e6 is a posit ion more often seen via the [ 22...a6 23.g3 h8 24.d4 ]
French, though even there it is rare, and 23.xc6 xe5 24.fxe5 xe5 25.g3
even there Black prefers to put his N on e4. ] [ 25.g3 g8 26.xe6+- ( 26.xa8
6.a3 f5 is possible as well. )]
[ 6...g4!? ] 1-0
7.h4 d7 8.f4 e6 9.f3 Now this looks
like a clumsy French from black. a6 10.e2
a7 11.0-0 c5 12.e3 c7 13.h1 20 B00
0-0-0?! 14.a4 c4 15.xc4 dxc4 16.e2 Campora,Daniel Hugo 2513
cxd4 17.xd4 b8 18.g1 White has a Salgado Gonzalez,Julio 2079
clear edge as the c4 pawn is weak and black's XXVI Open Sevilla ESP (2) 13.01.2001
king exposed. e7 19.e4 f5 20.d6! [Jon Tisdall]
xd6 21.exd6 xd6 22.e5 e7 23.xc4
c6?? 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 We get a thorough look at
[ 23...c6 24.b6 dg8 25.ad1 ] t h i s l i n e t h i s m o n t h . 3.c3 e5!?
[ 23...c8 24.e5+ a8 25.c7 +- ] Nic e t o co n f u se p e o p le s o e a r ly. . . 4.b5
12
A look at some of the alternatives, in dxc3 ) 7...xd2+ 8.xd2 ge7 9.xd4

encouraging form - I like to give the potential 0-0 ]
daring defender something to look forward to - 5...a6 6.a4 b5 7.xb5
it is always best to get to know what one can [ 7.b3!? d4 8.xe4 f5 9.g3 g6
look forward to, while keeping in mind that 10.f3! xb3 11.axb3 d6 12.0-0 ]
daily life in these lines is likely to be far more 7...axb5 8.xb5 ge7 9.g5
pedestrian. [ 9.dxc6 xd1+ 10.xd1 f5 11.c3 c5
[ 4.exd5 xd4 5.f3 ( 5.e3 f5 6.b5+ 12.f3 d6! 13.e2 e6 14.a3 b3+
d7 7.d3 xe3 8.xd7+ xd7 9.xe3 15.e1 0-0 16.fxe4 f5! 17.f3 fxe4
f6 10.ge2 d6 11.0-0 e7 12.ad1 0-0 18.xe5 f2+ 19.d2 e3+ 20.d3 f5
13.e4 b6 14.c4 h6 15.c5 bxc5 16.xc5 0-1 Tomson,H-Panus,V USSR 1994.
g4 17.d2 f5 18.e4 xe4 19.xe4 ( 20...f5 21.f3 d5+ 22.d4 c4+
ab8 20.c1 b4 21.dd1 a5 22.b3 23.c2 xd4 24.cxd4 xe2-+ )]
b6 1/2-1/2 Szabo,Z-Furhoff,J Budapest 9...f6 10.e3 f7?! Probably a
1994. ) 5...g4 6.xd4!? xd1 7.b5+ disimprovement on theory, though things
e7 8.d6+ xd6 9.f4 g4 10.f3 c5 remain reasonably messy.
11.0-0-0 cxd4 12.xd4+ e7 13.d5+ [ 10...b8 11.a4 xb5 12.axb5 d4
e6 14.e1 d6 15.fxg4 f6 16.g3 a5 ( 12...b4!? ) 13.xd4 exd4 14.xd4 xd5
17.f4+ e7 18.d5+ f8 19.ed1 15.e2 xb5 16.c3 c6 17.0-0-0 g6
xb5 20.c3 a5 21.xd6 e7 22.d7 18.he1 h6+ 19.b1 f7 20.xe4 f5
c8 23.e1 b6 24.xe7 xe7 25.d5+ 21.c4+ xc4 22.xc4 c6 23.e4 xe4
e6 26.xb6 axb6 27.f2 hd8 28.e1 24.xe4 f5 25.b4 g7 26.b7 e5
b5 29.h3 c4 30.b3 c6 31.e2 a8 27.g3 g5 28.a2 h5 29.dd7 e8 30.b4
32.b2 ca6 33.a4 bxa4 34.b4 a3+ e6 31.c4 g4 32.b3 f4 33.d1 fxg3
35.a2 c6 36.e1 b5 37.f2 d6 34.fxg3 f5 35.b5 d4+ 36.b4 cxb5
38.c5 d1 39.b6 g6 40.a5 c8 37.cxb5 c8 38.b6+ d5 39.h6 c2
41.xa3 c6 42.b3 f5 43.gxf5+ gxf5 40.xh5 b2+ 41.a4 a2+ 1/2-1/2 Ulibin,
44.g3 h5 45.h4 b1+ 46.a2 g1 47.e3 M-Mohr,G Voskresensk 1990. ]
xc2+ 48.b3 cg2 0-1 Lind,J-Laveryd,P [ 10...d7 11.dxc6 xc6 12.xc6+ xc6
Ro n n e b y 1 9 9 8 . B l a c k s e e m e d t o h a ve 13.g4 ]
control all the time, but it is easier on the [ 10...a5!? seems less reliable than Mohr's
nerves to know this in advance? ] choice as it seems better to target the b2
[ 4.xd5 xd4 5.e3 c6 6.c3 b4 p a w n i n a p o t e n t i a l e n d i n g . 11.xc6+
7.c4 f6 8.a3 a5 9.b4 b6 10.f3 ( 11.a4 xb5 12.axb5 b4 ) 11...xc6
xf3+ 11.gxf3 e7 12.g1 g6 13.d2 12.dxc6 xd1+ 13.xd1 a6!? ]
e6 14.xe6 xe6 15.xb6 axb6 16.f4 11.dxc6 xd1+ 12.xd1 e6 13.a4 d5
exf4 17.xf4 0-0 18.f5 e7 19.e5 fe8 14.e2 e7
20.f4 d5 21.xd5 cxd5 22.d3 f6 [ 14...xe3 15.fxe3 c5 16.c3 ]
23.f3 xe5+ 24.d2 e4 25.af1 d4+ 15.d2 b4 16.xb4 xb4+ 17.c3 e7
26.c1 c4 27.g3 ac8 28.b1 xc2 18.b4 hd8 19.0-0 b3 20.xd8 xd8
29.b3 xh2 0-1 Licardo,R-Bozinovic,B 21.a5 c2 22.g3 g6 23.c4+ f8
Zadar 1998. ] 24.a1 f5 25.a6 d3 26.a7 a8 27.e6
4...dxe4 5.d5 A brief theoretical summary, b5 28.d7 g5 29.a5 d3 30.c8
and I mean brief - there are not a lot of tests xc8 31.a8 xa8 32.xa8+ e7 33.h8
in these lines. h6 34.h4 c1 35.h7+ d6 36.h5 f4
[ 5.dxe5 xd1+ 6.xd1 d7 ] 37.xe4+ xe4 38.hxg6 f3 39.d7+ xc6
[ 5.e3 exd4 6.xd4 d7 ] 40.g7 h7 41.d8 b2 42.h8
[ 5.ge2 d7 6.d5 ( 6.dxe5 xe5; 6.xe4 1-0
exd4 ) 6...ce7 7.c4 ( 7.xd7+ xd7 )
7...f5!? ( 7...f6!? ) 8.0-0 f6 ]
[ 5.xe4 exd4 6.f3 b4+ 7.d2 ( 7.c3
13
21 B00 22 B00
Cebalo,Miso 2473 Cebalo,Miso 2515
Buric,Danijel 2241 Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2402
8th Metalis Open (7) 25.02.2001 Croatian Cup (2) 08.05.2002
[Jon Tisdall] [Glenn Flear]
1.d4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g4 4.e3 e6!? 1.d4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 f6 4.c3 g4
Strangely, this move is either very rare, or new. 5.e3 e5 6.b5 d7 7.d5 cb8 8.h3 h5
It d o es n 't lo ok it , b ut mo st ga m es e ith e r 9.g4 g6 10.h4 h5 Mestrovic rejects
continue ...e5, or feature ...e6 after ...Nf6. [ 10...h6 which he used with a bit more
Black's flexible order is unusual. 5.h3 h5 success, though arguably not because of
6.c3 the positions he got. 11.h5 h7 12.g5 a6
[ 6.d5!? ] ( 12...hxg5 13.xg5 a6 14.g4 g8
6...d5 7.exd5 exd5 8.b5 b4 9.g4 g6 15.e6 fxe6 16.dxe6 xe6 17.xe6+
10.e5 ge7 A handy difference - now white e7 18.g6+ f7 19.xf7+ xf7
must justify his pawn pushing, and black is 20.c4+ e8 21.d5 1/2-1/2 Jonkman,H-
nicely solid. 11.h4 h6 12.xg6 xg6 13.h5 Mestrovic,Z Wijk aan Zee 1999.) 13.f1 b5
h4!? Black could try 14.a3 0-1 Medvegy, N-Mestrovic,Z
[ 13...xc3+!? first. ] Budapest 1999. ]
14.d3 xc3+ Risky - black could try just 11.g5 e7 Mestrovic's improvement over
[ 14...f3+!? ] [ 11...a6 12.f1 b5 13.d2 e7 14.g1
15.xc3 f3+ 16.e2 f6 17.c5 c8 15.a4 b4 16.a2 b7 17.c3 a5
planning Rh3 followed by transferring this to 18.cxb4 axb4 19.b5 1-0 Piket,J-
the e-file. 0-0-0! 18.xc6 bxc6 19.h3 Mestrovic,Z Sremic Krsko 1998. ]
[ 19.xa7 he8 20.ad1 g5!? 12.d2! This looks like a strong new move.
( 20...e4 gives black similar counterplay to White takes a bead on the h5 pawn and the
the game but it must be better for white not Nd2 is very well placed to react to changes in
to have traded minor pieces - his king has the centre or on the queenside.
better cover.) 21.d2 d7! since there [ 12.g1!? c6 13.dxc6 ( 13.f1!? )
is a threat of Ra8 and Ne4. ] 13...bxc6 14.e2 c7 15.d2 c5!
19...g5 20.xg5 xg5 21.g3 he8+ 16.xc5 dxc5 17.c4 d7 18.d3 b6
22.f1 d6! 23.xa7 e4 24.a4 de6 0-1 Soylu,S-Mestrovic,Z/Nova Gorica SLO
25.a6+ d7 and rather alarmingly for white, 2001 (46). ]
who seems to have been playing sensibly and 12...c6 13.e2 b6 14.a4 cxd5
strongly, black's king is saf est, and grim W it h o u t t h is m o ve it is h a rd f o r b la c k t o
defence is now the order of the day. 26.d3 complete development on the queenside as
xg4 27.e1 xe1+?! the pressure on c6 and the possible battering
[ 27...xg3! 28.xg3 xe1+ 29.xe1 by the advance of the a4 pawn leave this
c1+ 30.e2 xc2+ and black should win flank under strong pressure. But black could
the queen ending. ] try to wait:
28.xe1 e4+ 29.f1 c1+ 30.g2 h4 [ 14...a5!? 15.f1 a6 16.g3 b4
31.h3 g5+ 32.f1 g4 33.e2 e4+ 17.c1 Taking on c6 will only give black a
34.f1 c1+ 35.g2 xb2 36.f3 e7 centre and an immediate threat with ...d5 as
37.e3 e6 38.a5 d8 39.g3 b5 compensation for the h-pawn. cxd5 18.exd5
40.a3 c5 41.dxc5 e1 42.d3 xd3 c8 is a critical and logical plan, where black
43.cxd3 a1 44.xg7 e7 45.d4 xa5 has mounted pressure on the queenside
46.h7 a4 47.xh6 xd4 48.c6 d7 as compensation for the doomed h-pawn. ]
49.f6 e7 15.exd5 a6 16.a5 d7 17.de4
½-½ Not just an obvious post, but a stop on the
way to eating h5. ac5
[ 17...dc5!? 18.xc5
14
A) 18...xc5 19.xc5 ( 19.g3!? 47.xf6 xa7 0-1 Meissner,H-Miles,A/

still wins a pawn.) 19...dxc5 20.b5+ f8 Slough 1997/CBM 62 (47) ]
21.d3 with a safe advantage.; 6...f6 7.c3 b4
B) 18...xe4 19.xe4 xc5 20.xc5 [ 7...c5 also looks tempting, but Benjamin
dxc5 21.xh5 where black has practical had a painful experience in this line: 8.a4
chances for the pawn due to the general b4+ 9.c3 e7 10.xf6 xf6 11.d6 cxd6
lack of king safety. ] 12.g3 d5 13.xd5 d6 14.b5+ f8
18.g3 Black has lost the opening battle, 15.0-0-0 g4 16.e2 e7 17.c4 c8
though he does his best to dispute this. f5 18.b1 c6 19.d2 f6 20.e1 e6
19.xh5 21.c2 g8 22.e3 f8 23.c5 c8
[ 19.xh5!? xh5 20.xh5 0-0 21.g3 ] 24.d5 d8 25.cxd6 f7 26.c1 d7
19...0-0 20.f4 e8 21.g3 e4 22.cxe4 27.c5 xc5 28.xc5 xd6 29.c2 d7
exf4 23.xf4 fxe4 24.0-0 e5 25.xe5 30.c4 a6 31.e3 xd2 32.xd2 c5
dxe5 26.h5 33.f3 a5 34.xe6+ xe6 35.d7+ g6
[ 26.d6!? ] 36.f5 1-0 Ivanov,A-Benjamin,J Parsippany
26...c8 27.xf8+ xf8 28.g2 f5 1996. ]
29.d2 d6 30.c4 c5 31.xf5 xf5 8.a3 There seems little point in asking that
32.f1 e3 b la c k d o t h i s, b u t wh it e d o e s b o ls t e r d 5
[ 32...d7!? 33.c2 d8 34.f5 ] quickly this way. An earlier game was more
33.xf5 exd2 34.f3 f8 35.e4 d6 direct:
36.xf8+ xf8 37.f5+- f7 38.b3 a6 [ 8.d2 c6 9.e2 xc3 10.bxc3 cxd5
39.d1 e4 40.xe4 g6 41.h6 b4 42.e5 ( 10...f4!? loo ks saf er.) 11.xh5 f4
xa5 43.c5 c7+ 44.e4 a5 45.c6 b5 12.f3 e6 13.xf6 xf6 14.exd5 c5
46.c2 d6 47.f3 e7 48.e2 e5 15.g3 d6 and white's splintered queenside
49.xg6 d6 50.d3 a4 51.bxa4 bxa4 offers black reasonable compensation for
52.g6 Black must find an improvement, by the pawn. 16.e4 xe4 17.xe4 d7
move 14 at the latest. 18.b1 b6 19.e2 c8 20.c4 g5 21.hxg5
1-0 xh1+ 22.xh1 xg5 23.e4 f5 24.f3
e7 25.a4 f4 26.g4 h8 27.c5 dxc5
28.d6+ f6 29.d1 d8 30.a5 bxa5
23 B00 31.a6 e4 32.xe4 e8 33.f3 h4+
Christiansen,Larry Mark 2563 34.e2 xe4+ 35.fxe4 xg4+ 36.d2
Benjamin,Joel 2577 f2+ 37.c1 e3+ 38.b2 xd1 39.d7+
ch Seattle USA (3) 27.09.2000 e7 40.d8+ xd8 41.d6+ c8
[Jon Tisdall] 42.c6+ b8 43.d6+ b7 44.d7+
b6 45.d6+ b5 46.d7+
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 ce7 4.f3 g6 1/2-1/2 Mortensen,E-Hoi,C/ Ostrava 1992/
5.h4 h5 6.g5 CBM 33 (46) ]
[ 6.g3 c5 7.g5 f6 8.d2 d6 9.c3 d7 8...xc3+ 9.bxc3 c6 10.c4 d6 11.d2
10.e2 6e7 11.h2 g6 12.c1 c6 a5 12.d3?!
13.e3 xe3 14.xe3 b6 15.xb6 axb6 [ 12.xf6 gxf6 13.f3 is very primitive, but
16.dxc6 bxc6 17.0-0 b5 18.a3 c8 that doesn't mean it isn't worth a serious
19.fd1 h6 20.f1 e7 21.e3 b6 look. cxd5 ( 13...f4? 14.g3 g4
22.ac1 g4 23.xg4 xg4 24.d3 c4 15.b3 ) 14.cxd5 f5 15.exf5 e7 and now
25.xc4 bxc4 26.e3 hb8 27.b1 b7 16.d3 give white some chances to seize
28.f3 e6 29.d1 d5 30.a1 d6 the initiative. ( or 16.b1!? )]
31.e2 d4 32.f2 c5 33.c3 d7 34.d2 12...g4 Not only sidestepping the possibility
e6 35.e2 ab8 36.e1 a4 37.a2 of doubled pawns, but preparing ...f6. 13.e2
b3 38.a1 xd1 39.xd1 xb2 40.xb2 f6 14.e3 f4 15.xf4 exf4 Now black
xb2 41.a4 g2 42.a3 d6 43.a5 c7 clearly has the be tter prospe cts - the e 5
44.a6 b8 45.a7+ a8 46.a6 xg3 square is a fine outpost and white's pawn
15
structure is shattered without recompense. interesting struggle where Black's king was
The Bd3 is nothing to write home about either. the most vulnerable. ]
16.0-0 c5 17.f3 e5 18.fb1 c3 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 g6 So White has two
19.xe5 xe5 20.a4 g5 21.hxg5 fxg5 bishops and a lead in development, whereas
22.a3 g4 23.d2 h7! keeping b7 under Black has possibilities to hit back at White's
watch and preparing to monitor the key e5 centre with ...c6 as well as possible access to
square as well. 24.c3 xc3 25.xc3 e7 e5 and c5. Now Cicak decides that his
26.g3 f3 27.a5 f7 28.f1 b8 29.e1? position is sufficiently promising to warrant an
White should sit and wait, though black could ambitious choice. 9.0-0-0!? I prefer
advance his king to g5 and prepare ...h4. f5! [ 9.e2 g7 10.0-0 with a pleasant edge. ]
30.d2 xe4 31.xe4 xe4 32.e3 xe3 9...g7 10.g4 bd7 11.g3?!
33.xe3 f6 34.f4 g6 35.a6 b6 36.c3 [ 11.g2! is a better square to reinforce
f8+ Black's rook invades. control of e4 and d5. ]
0-1 11...c6 12.e2 a5 Sometimes this type of
pawn expansion on the kingside lacks bite
when Black hasn't committed his king. In any
24 B00 case White is committed now and he naturally
Cicak,Slavko 2500 c o n t i n u e s i n t h e s a m e v e i n . . . 13.f4?!
Gonzales,Jayson 2464 Boldly advancing and hoping to create threats
IX Malaga Open (6) 01.03.2006 before Black's counterplay gets dangerous.
[Glenn Flear] Safest however is
[ 13.a3 avoiding anything nasty. Note how
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 the alternative ]
5.e3 a6 There's no real consensus here but [ 13.b1 can be met by the sensational
this move is clearly intended to stop any xc3! 14.bxc3 xe4 with great play for the
annoying B-b5 ideas. Also fairly popular are queen! ]
[ 5...e5 ] 13...c8?
[ 5...e6 ] [ Fritz is quite fond of 13...xe4! 14.xe4
[ and 5...g6 ] xa2 as Black will obtain a third pawn for
6.d5 the piece and White's king will be insecure e.
[ White generally delays this advance until he g. 15.c3 ( 15.d4?? xd4 16.xd4
has advanced his development, for instance a1+ ) 15...a1+ 16.d2 xb2 ]
6.e2 e6 ( Maybe 6...e5 is better as Black 14.d4 cxd5 15.e5?!
obtains a stake in the centre.) 7.0-0 e7 [ With hindsight, it seems that this tempting
8.h3 h5 9.d5 exd5 10.exd5 b8 move isn't as good as 15.exd5! when White
11.d4 and White had a pleasant space s e e m s t o b e a s h a d e b e t t e r e . g . b5
advantage in Binham, T-Horn, P Bonnevoie ( 15...0-0 16.he1 ) 16.g5 ]
1998. The f 5-square is a problem as is 15...e4? This doesn't impress. Instead Black
Black's lack of play. The game didn't last had an interesting idea
very long and finished rather elegantly... g6 [ 15...dxe5! 16.fxe5 c7! using the pin
12.f4 e4 13.xe4 xe4 14.f3 f6 along the b8-h2 diagonal and another one
15.f5 0-0 16.d4 e8 17.e1 bd7 down the c-file to get reasonable chances e.
18.g3 g6 19.h6+ f8 20.f5 e5 g. 17.e3 e4 18.e6 e5 with double-
21.ae1 h5 22.xh5 h4 23.fxg6 xg3 edged play. ]
24.xf7+ and Black resigned due to mate 16.xe4 dxe4 17.e6 f6
with xf7 25.g7# ] [ After 17...xd4 18.exd7+ xd7 19.xd4
6...b8!? xa2 White has the simple 20.c3 as a1+
[ Alternatively Black has 6...e5 7.e2 xf3 21.c2 xh1 22.d1 costs Black his
8.gxf3 c6 9.f4 ed7 10.d4 c5 11.d2 queen. ]
b5 12.e5! Stripunsky, A-Bonin, J Nassau 18.exf7+ f8
2000 and the line rapid opening led to an [ Unfortunately for Black 18...xf7 is met by
16
19.b3+ e6 20.b6 and suddenly Black's c5 9.b4 b6 10.f4 0-0 11.c4 g6
queen is trapped. ] 12.g3 d6 13.exd6 e8+ 14.e2 f6
19.b3 c7 20.g5 d7 21.g4 15.0-0 cxd6 16.b5 d8 17.d2 g4
The turning of the screw. The problem isn't so 18.d4 ac8 19.ac1 e5 20.fe1 c7
much that Black is a pawn down, it's more that 21.f1 a6 22.e4 g6 23.ce1 f6
he can't do much while W hite threatens to 24.h1 dc8 25.4e3 d7 26.a4 h5
simplify and pick up the e4-pawn. xd4 27.f4 g4 28.e7 h4 29.xh4 h5
[ If 21...h6 then White can simply play 30.g3 xc3 31.xd7 xg3 32.h3 d5
22.xg7+ xg7 23.he1 hxg5 24.fxg5 33.f3 xf3 34.c4+ xc4 35.gxf3 xh3+
retaining a clear advantage. ] 36.g2 h2+ 37.g3 xd2 38.ee7 h6
22.xd4 c5 Giving the exchange for a 39.xg7+ f8 40.h7 cc2 41.h8+ g8
breath of fresh air, but it's not enough to save 42.g4 g2+ 43.f5 g7 44.xd6 c6
the game. 23.c3 xf7 24.xc8 xc8 0-1 Kudrin, S-Miles,A USA-ch 1989. ]
25.b1 d7 26.h4 d5 27.h5! Rooks need [ 5.bd2 xf3+ 6.xf3 e7 7.a3 a5
open lines. e6 28.hxg6+ hxg6 29.h7+ 8.b4 b6 9.b2 0-0 10.c4?! c6
[ Or 29.h3 ] 11.b3 h4! 12.g3 h6 13.d1 d6
29...g7 30.c4 A neat way of imposing his 14.d5? e6 15.h5 g6 16.e2 f5
will. 17.exf5 xf5 18.0-0 ae8 (0-1, 41)
[ 30.xg7+ xg7 31.c4+ d4! Garcia, G-Miles,A Matanzas 1995 White's
is less clear. ] pieces are posted terribly artificially and
30...g8 31.c7 f5 32.b4 his position is a disaster. ]
[ 32.c8! xc8 33.xg7+ is the crispest 5...xf3+ 6.xf3 xd2+ 7.xd2 f6!?
way to win but the text is good enough. ] 8.0-0-0 d6 9.c4
32...e6 33.xb7 e3 34.c6 g4 35.f6+ [ 9.e3!? retaining the queens looks worth a
e8 36.a8+ d7 37.xd5+ c7 test. Black is very solid in the game
38.c6+ b7 39.c3+ b6 40.b3+ c7 continuation, even if the position is rather
41.b7+ dour. ]
1-0 9...xf3 10.xf3 g4 11.e5 xf3 12.gxf3
dxe5 13.he1 e7
[ 13...f6 14.f4 ]
25 B00 14.xe5 d8 Black's position should be good
Comas Fabrego,Luis 2520 for a draw thanks to his better pawn structure,
Teran Alvarez,Ismael 2392 but he gets into some trouble by being a bit
III Open Dos Hermanas ESP (5) 09.04.2002 careless. 15.de1
[Jon Tisdall] [ 15.xd8+ xd8 16.b5 b6 17.g5 g6
18.xf7 f8 19.d5 h6 20.e5 c6=
1.d4 c6 2.e4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3 - white's pieces are very poorly placed. ]
b4+ After Plaskett made life uncomfortable 15...d7 16.1e3 f8
for black in one of the main lines (see [ 16...c6!? ]
Plaskett,HJ-Sherwin,J/ 4NCL Birmingham [ 16...f6!? ]
2002) it is worth taking a look at this old Miles 17.b4 a6?!
favourite, and a very solid alternative for black. [ 17...d8 ]
5.d2 18.b5 axb5 19.xb5 b6
[ 5.c3 d6 ( 5...xf3+ 6.xf3 c5 7.d3 [ 19...c6 20.b6 d8 21.eb3 c8
d6 8.d2 e7 9.b4 b6 10.c4 0-0 22.xb7! ]
11.0-0 e6= (0-1, 32) Martin,B-Miles,A 20.h5 Double threat of Bb5 and Rxh7 - black
Auckland 1992. (32)) 6.bd2 xf3+ has managed to lose control. d8 21.a3
7.xf3 e7 This ultra-provocative approach [ 21.xh7 f5 22.d3 ]
i s w e l l s u i t e d a g a i n s t a n a g g r e s s i v e 21...d4 22.a8+ c8 23.a6 d7 24.c3?
opponent like Mr. Kudrin - this game is Overdoing the finesse. Simply
entertaining enough to be quoted in full: 8.e5 [ 24.xh7 p o s e d m o r e p r o b l e m s f4
17
25.xg7 xf3 26.g3! and the win is getting 27 B00

nearer. ] Darnstaedt,Frank 2330
24...d6 25.xh7 g6 26.h4 c5 27.g4 Hille,Ingo 2244
f6 28.g3 d8 29.xg7 xf3 30.xc8+? Bundesliga 2000-1 (2) 15.10.2000
[ 30.g3! Allows white to maintain a healthy [Jon Tisdall]
extra pawn and initiative: f6 ( 30...xf2??
31.d3+ ) 31.d3+ d6 32.a7+ ] 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.d4 xf5
30...xc8 31.xc8 xc8 32.b2 xf2+= 5.b5 e6 6.xc6+ bxc6 7.e5 c5 8.h5+
33.b3 b7 34.h4 a6 35.h5 h2 36.g5 g6 9.e2 g7 10.f4
h4 37.f5 b5 38.xf7 xh5 39.a4+ [ 10.g4 e4 11.f3 cxd4 ]
a6 40.g7 h4 41.f7 [ 10.b5+!? ]
½-½ 10...cxd4 11.g4 e4 12.0-0 g5 13.g3
e7 14.d2 xc2 15.df3 d3 16.e3 0-0
17.xg5 f6 18.xd3 xd3 19.xd3 g6
26 B00 20.e3 d7 21.h3 c6 22.f3 f8
Dammer,Christian 23.e5 xe5
Juegel,Marcel ½-½
SVM-chT1998/99 (8) 22.02.1999
[Glenn Flear]
28 B00
I was sent this pleasant game from a reader. Dautov,Rustem 2595
The featured queen sacrifice is unclear but Bauer,Christian 2641
Black has all the fun! 1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 15th ETC Gothenburg SWE (4) 02.08.2005
3.c4!? [Glenn Flear]
[ 3.d3 is probably best, see the e-book. ]
3...e6 4.cxb5 axb5 5.xb5 b7 6.c3 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 e6
b4 7.d3 f5 8.e2 f6 9.g5 fxe4 [ Blatny has shown a preference for
10.xe4 xe4!? Queen-sac!! A nice move 4...c6!? 5.c3 e5 ]
but this position isn't new! 11.xd8 xc3 5.f3 d5 6.e5 White obtain some space
12.h5+ advantage and at first sight a good looking
[ 12.bxc3!? xc3+ 13.d1 xa1 French as his advanced centre is secure, but
Borrellas Comellas- Gardenas Santiago, things are actually far from clear... fd7 7.c3
B a r c e l o n a 1 9 9 6 a n d n o w 14.xc7 c5 8.0-0 e7 9.e3 c6 10.a3 Otherwise
is unclear. ] Black can aim to capture on d4 and continue
12...xd8 13.f3?! After this tame move Black w i t h . . . N b 4 . c4 Closing the wing now that
has the initiative, instead White has committed himself to a2-a3, in a
[ 13.g5+ c8 14.xg7 is critical. ] similar way to a well-known line of the French
13...a5 14.h4+ g5 15.h6 e4+ 16.f1 Defence Advance variation (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3
a6+ 17.e2 f5 18.a3 d2 19.g7 hf8 e5 c5 4 c3 Nc6 5 Nf3 Qb6 6 a3 c4). A
20.xh7 g4 21.h4+ g5 22.h6 gg8 practical choice by Christian Bauer as his
Black now has a winning attack. 23.h5 f5 opponent is known to f avour long-forcing
24.h7 f6 25.f7 gxf3 26.g3 xe2+ theoretical lines.
27.f2 g4+ 28.g1 e3# [ For those seeking a more dynamic game,
0-1 10...g5!? 11.bd2 h5 was successful in
Hiermann,D-Aschenbrenner,R Austrian Ch.
2002. A closed centre at times allows flank
action to take precedence over
development. ]
11.c2 b5
[ After the alternative method of stabilizing
the queenside with 11...a5 12.bd2 h6
18
13.e1 c7 14.h4 0-0-0 15.h5 dg8 b7 56.fg2 d8 57.g3 d5 58.f2
Baumegger,S-Freitag,M Austrian tch. 2003 a6 59.h2 8h7 60.g1 h8 61.h2
Black was ready for anything. ] b7 62.g4 xg4+ 63.hxg4 xh2
12.bd2 a5 13.e1 h5 Bauer doesn't want 64.xh2 a6 65.g3 a4 66.f2 b7
White to overrun him with a general advance 67.g3 c6 68.g2 b7 69.f2 c6
on the kingside and competes for space and S o t h e re wa s n o b r e a k t h ro u g h a f t e r a l l .
influence even here. 14.f4 g6 15.ef3 However it shows that the under-rated
If Black now did nothing much, it wouldn't be Owen's defence can be played with
e a s y f o r W h i t e t o f in d a co n vi n ci n g wa y confidence in 2600+ encounters.
through. However staying totally passive is ½-½
generally unwise as this gives plenty of time
(and space!) for the opponent to come up with
an testing idea. So Black now decides to test 29 B00
the water on the queenside.. . b4! 16.g5 David,Alberto 2511
[ After 16.axb4 axb4 17.xa8 xa8 Rogers,Ian 2557
Black is better placed to exploit any action Olympiad Bled SLO (13) 08.11.2002
on th e f la nk. I nst ea d ope ning th e f -f ile [Glenn Flear]
gives Black something to think about (the
f7-square!) ] 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
16...xg5 17.fxg5 b3! With the queenside 5.e3
totally closed and Black has thus a safe haven [ Unimpressive was 5.h3?! xf3 6.gxf3 d5
for his king. If f7 is well-secured it's hard to 7.g5 e6 8.d2 ( 8.e5 h6 9.h4 g5 )
see how White will achieve anythingpositive. 8...e7 9.0-0-0 d7 10.h4 h6 11.xf6
18.d1 b6 19.f2 e7 20.g4 hxg4 xf6 12.exd5 exd5 13.h3 d8 14.hg1
21.xg4 a4 22.ab1 h7 23.f6 d7 e7! Best. ( 14...xd4? 15.e3+;
24.f2 ah8 25.f1 It's come down to the f- 14...xd4? 15.g4! ) 15.de1 c6 16.a4
file versus the h-file! Both sides have b6 and there was no way for White to hit at
possibilities to improve but with such a small Black's solid set-up, Vallejo Pons-Rogers,
a r e a o f t h e b o a rd a va i l a b l e f o r c o n t a c t , Bled ol 2002 ]
manoeuvring is required to create problems [ Also less accurate than the game was
for the opponent. a7 26.f3 b5 27.c1 5.b5 d7 6.e3 e6 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3
c7 28.g3 b8 29.a1 Dautov is wary of a6 9.a4 b5 here it's possible as the sac
a potential piece sacrifice to get the b-pawn o n b 5 i s u n s o u n d 10.b3 a5=
through. c6 30.h3 a8 31.h2 b8 Sedina-Lazic, Turin 2002 ]
32.e2 d7 33.b1 b6 34.d2 a4 5...e6 6.h3 h5 7.b5! This was played in a
35.c1 b6 36.g3 c8 37.e3 e7 later round than the above game and clearly
38.f3 c7 39.g2 f5! This move Alberto David had prepared a tricky line for
(blocking the f-file) suggests that Black is his opponent. a6
thinking of going for the whole point. 40.e2 [ 7...d7 8.d5 xf3 9.xf3 ce5 10.g3
bh8 41.f4 h4 42.h1 e8 43.f1 f5 c6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.e2 b5 13.0-0 f6
A canny retreat showing Black's intention to 14.f4 c4 15.xc4 bxc4 16.e5
put his rook on h4. 44.g1 eg7 45.h2 was unpleasant to meet in Rogluj-Buric,
h4 46.g4 h5 47.d2 d8 Bizovac 2001 ]
With potential threats against the g5-pawn, 8.a4 xf3
hence W hite's next. 48.f6 b7 49.h2 [ 8...b5? is bad after 9.xb5 axb5 10.xb5
c6 50.f1 xf6 51.exf6 d6 Heading for d7 11.d5 ]
e4. W hite needs to keep his dark-squared [ 8...d7 is probably the best chance to
(and so-called bad bishop) in order to defend revive the line for Black. ]
g5. 52.g2 e4 53.xe4 dxe4 54.e3 9.xf3 d5 10.exd5 xd5 11.0-0 e7
White must blockade the e-pawn at all costs, 12.fe1 0-0 13.xd5 xd5
but this turns out to be possible. d5 55.e5 [ If 13...exd5 then 14.b3 ]
19
14.xd5 exd5 15.f4 f6 16.c3 ac8 c4 25.c2 a8 26.xa8+ xa8 27.f1
17.d1! So simple yet so strong. Black loses a7 28.e2 f6 29.exf6 gxf6 30.c3 a2
a pawn and ultimately the game. d8 18.g4 31.fe1 f8 32.d1 b1+ 33.e2 a2
e6 19.xe6 fxe6 20.xe6+ h8 21.xc8 34.d1 a7 35.h3 f7 36.d3 e7
xc8 22.e1 c6 23.e5 d8 24.e3 g8 37.c5 g8 38.h4 g6 39.h3 xd4
25.g3 g6 26.f4 f7 27.f5 e7 28.f3 40.xd4 b1+ 41.e2 b2+ 42.f3
gxf5 29.xf5+ g6 30.f3 g5 31.f1 b5 c3+ 43.e2 d2+ 44.f3 e5+
32.e2 e8 33.d3 c5 34.f4 c4+ 0-1 Lindsay,F-Nogueiras,J North Bay 1997/
35.d2 f8 36.e3 98. ]
[ 36.xg5 xf3 37.gxf3 xg5 38.e3 10.d5!? xd3
would also probably win ] [ 10...exd5 is obviously very scary, but not
36...h4 37.e2 f7 38.g3 f6 39.e3 reacting to d5 means suf f ering as well.
d8 40.f4 f6 41.e3 e7 42.e5 g5 11.exd5 ( 11.e5!? ) 11...xd5 12.e1
43.f3 f7 44.xf7 xf7 45.f4 e7 xd3 ( 12...0-0?? 13.e4 xd3
46.a3 g6 47.f3 f5 48.g4+ g6 14.xd5!; 12...f8!? ) 13.xd3 All of these
49.g3 a5 50.h4 h5 51.c7 The remaining lines are frightening for black, but a
moves of the actual game were clearly not materialist preparing with a computer might
those given by "This W eek in Chess". b4 pull them off. ]
Ignore the following nonsense and just look at 11.xd3 a6 12.c4 0-0 13.g5 exd5
the variations below! 14.exd5 d6
[ The following plausible variations show that [ 14...b5!? 15.a3 xa3 16.bxa3 b4
White is winning 51...a4 then 52.f4! xh4 17.xa6 xa6 18.xf6 gxf6 was worth
( 52...xa3? 53.bxa3 b4 54.gxh5+ xh5 trying as this position is quite defensible, if
55.cxb4 ) 53.gxh5+ xh5 and d5 falls after ugly. ]
54.f5 or ] 15.fe1 d8 16.ad1 b5 17.a3 bd7
[ 51...b4 52.xa5 bxa3 53.bxa3 xa3 18.xb5 xb5 19.xb5 b8 20.a4 a6
54.gxh5+ f5 55.h6 d6+ 56.f3 g6 21.xd6 xb2 22.e4 b4 23.xf6+
57.g4 xh6 58.f5 and White wins as xf6 24.d6 xa4 25.d7 c4
Black loses both remaining pawns. ] [ 25...e4 ]
52.xa5 bxa3 53.c7 b4 54.f4 e7 26.xf6 gxf6 27.d4 xd4 28.xd4 f5
55.g3 f8 56.e5 29.c6 c7 30.f1 a5 31.e7+ h8
1-0 32.c1 b6 33.c6 d8 34.c8 a4
35.c6 a3 36.a8 g7 37.xa3 f6
38.g3+ h6 39.e3 a8 40.e8 a1+
30 B00 41.e2 a2+ 42.f3 a3+ 43.e3 a8
De Toledo,James Mann 2384 44.g3
Limp,Eduardo Thelio 2462 1-0
1st Mario Covas (8) 05.02.2001
[Jon Tisdall]
31 B00
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d2 e6 4.gf3 f6 Deep Junior
5.d3 c5 6.c3 e7 7.0-0 cxd4 8.cxd4 Akopian,Vladimir 2660
a6 9.e2 c8 A risky novelty. SuperGM Dortmund GER (6) 13.07.2000
[ 9...xd3 10.xd3 d5 11.e5 fd7 12.a3 [Carsten Hansen]
c6 ( 12...a5 13.b3 c8 14.b2 a6
15.e3 c6 16.e1 c8 17.d3 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 e6
1/2-1/2 Johansen,D-Miles,A Melbourne We looked at 4...Nc6 in Nevednichy-Blatny.
1991. ) 13.b4 a6 14.b5 axb5 15.xb5 5.f3 d5 6.e5 fd7 This position is by
c7 16.b2 a5 17.b3 0-0 18.fc1 definition really a French Defense, but since
b7 19.c3 a7 20.b4 xb4 21.axb4 p e o p l e o n l y a r r i ve a t t h i s p o s i t i o n f r o m
xa1 22.xa1 b5 23.b1 b6 24.a3 Owen's Defense and never via a French move
20
order, I deem it to be an Owen's Defense. 32 B00

7.g5 e7 8.g4 h5! Delchev,Aleksander 2560
[ After 8...g6 9.h4 h5 10.h3 f8 11.f3 Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2387
xg5 12.xg5 d7 13.f6 g8 Christmas Open (3) 16.12.2002
Black appears to have a slight problem on [Glenn Flear]
the dark squares... 14.g4 hxg4 15.xg4
h7 16.h3 xf6 17.exf6 c6 18.b5 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
The dark-squared bishop is gone, but Black 5.e3 e5 The Mestrovic variation. 6.b5
is left with a bad 'French' bishop, and White exd4!?
has all the squares he could want for his [ 6...d7 7.dxe5 ( 7.d5 is critical as has
knight. 0-0-0 19.d2 d6 20.xc6 xc6 been well covered by my predecessor Jon
21.0-0-0 d7 22.e2 b8 23.a3 a5 Tisdall. ) 7...dxe5 8.d5 e6 9.d2 f6!
24.e3 h8 25.f3 with a huge advantage This may be even more solid than ( 9...h6
for W hite, Gleizerov-Filipovic, Ljubljana 10.0-0-0 d6 11.e2 0-0 12.c4 a6
2000. ] 13.hg1 b5 14.xe6 fxe6 15.g4 f6
9.g3 f8 10.0-0 a6 Black wisely decides 16.g3 d4!? A practical decision
to get rid of the light-squared bishops. otherwise White's looming attack would be
11.xa6 White could at this point also too da nge rou s 17.xd4 exd4 18.xd4
consider the sharper 11 c4!?, intending 11... f4+ 19.b1 e5 20.g2 ad8 21.f3
Bxc4 12 Bxc4 dxc4 13 Qf3 with a dual threat d7 22.xe5 xd1+ 23.xd1 xe5
on a8 and f7. xa6 12.c3 c5 13.d1 c4 with enough Black square control as
It's in Black's interest to keep the position compensation 24.f2 d8 25.f1 f4
closed. Black has considerable problems 26.f2 d2 27.e1 d4 28.d3 e3
getting his pieces coordinated, and only by 29.c1 f2 30.c3 e3 31.xe3 xe3
closing the position will he find time to re- 32.e1 f4 33.e2 g5 34.a4 f7 35.h3
group his pieces, which at present are c5 36.axb5 axb5 37.a2 d3 38.xf4
anything but coordinated. 14.e1 I'm not sure gxf4 39.f1 f6 40.h4 d2 41.b3 h2
the computer knows what it's doing. Th e 42.c4 bxc4+ 43.xc4 xb2 44.xc5 h2
correct plan is to proceed to attempt opening 45.h5 d2 46.c4 1/2-1/2 Brkic,A-
the queenside with 14 b3 or even play 14 b4 Mestrovic,Z/Zadar CRO 2002) 10.0-0-0 b4
to gain a space advantage on the queenside 11.d3 a6 12.c4 xc4 13.xc4 xc3
as well, after which Black is left at W hite's 14.xc3 e7 15.a3 0-0-0 White has the
mercy. c8 15.h4 h7 16.f3 g8 17.g5 nominal advantage of bishop over knight but
xg5 18.xg5 b8 19.d2 Finally White there is nothing for him to hit at. 16.d2
gets on the right track. c6 20.b3 a5 f8 17.b3 e6 18.d5 f7 19.c4
21.e3 xg5 22.hxg5 g6 If not White would g6 20.g3 ed4! 21.xd4 ( 21.c5 xd5
play g6 with devastating effect. 23.f3 c7 22.exd5 a5 23.d3 xd3 24.xd3 f3
24.f6 c8 25.f4 f8 26.b4 c6 27.f3 is certainly not better for White) 21...xe4
e7 28.h4 g8 For the remainder of the 22.xd8+ xd8 23.e6+ b8 24.d1
game Black just hangs on, while White tries xd4 25.xd4 xd4 26.g8+ a7
to break through. This doesn't happen thanks 27.xg7 e2 28.xd4 exd4 29.b4 e1+
to Black's excellent defensive play. 29.a4 g7 30.b2 c3+ 31.b1 d3 ( 31...xa3
30.c1 c7 31.a5 b5 32.e3 d7 33.h1 playing for more doesn't look bad) 32.cxd3
a6 34.d1 e8 35.h2 e7 36.h1 g8 xd3+ 33.b2 d2+ 34.b3 d3+
37.f3 e7 38.h3 f5! 39.xf5 exf5 1/2-1/2 Stevic,H-Mestrovic,Z/Zadar CRO
40.e1 c6 41.f3 e6 and the last hole 2002 ]
ge t s s e a le d . 42.h1 c8 43.e3 e7 7.xd4 e7
44.f4 e6 45.e1 [ 7...d7 8.xc6 xc6 9.0-0-0 e7 10.e5
½-½ dxe5 11.xe5 c8 12.he1 d7 13.c5
was a complete disaster for black in
N e ve r o v- U m a n s k a y a , C ze c h R e p u b l i c
21
2002 ] 33 B00
8.h3 The looks tame but Dervishi,Erald 2501
[ 8.xc6+ bxc6 9.e5 xf3 10.gxf3 Salmensuu,Olli 2436
( 10.exf6? xf6 ) 10...dxe5 11.xe5 d6 EuTCh Leon ESP (2) 07.11.2001
12.a5 0-0= doesn't impress. ] [Jon Tisdall]
8...d7 9.xc6 xc6 10.0-0-0 0-0
This reminds me of Qxd4 against the Philidor. 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 This continues to get a
Black generally has less counterplay in these steady workout, largely thanks to a fleet of
type of positions than in analogous opposite- determined Finns. Nevertheless, it seems to
side castling struggles in Sicilians (there is no fall short of equality in the sensible, safe lines,
semi-open c-file for Black to press against though as our selection this month shows, the
White's king). 11.g4 e8 12.g5 d7 13.h4 wilder lines can be great fun. 3.exf5 d5 4.d4
f8 14.h5 e7 By using the e-file, Mestrovic xf5 5.d3
tries to keep his pieces relevant and to hold [ 5.b5 d6 6.e5 f6 7.0-0 d7
back the white attack. However one's 8.xc6 ( 8.f4 looks more worrying but
im p re s s io n is t h a t W h i t e m u st b e b e t t e r there is Finnish experience in this variation
a r o u n d h e r e . 15.h4 e5 16.d2 b5 as well. dxe5 9.xe5 g6 10.xc7
17.dh1 ab8 Finally threatening to xc2 11.d2 c8 12.g3 e6 13.c1
destabilize W hite's hold on the centre. e4 14.xc6+ bxc6 15.a5 d6 16.d2
Capturing on a7 is foolhardy as Black can xg3 17.hxg3 0-0 18.e1 f5 19.xe4
counter with a quick ...b4 and ...Ra8 with an dxe4 20.c3 e8 21.f1 h6 22.e3
inevitable recapture on a2. 18.d5 xe3 23.fxe3 f7 24.ac1 c8 25.c5
[ 18.g6 h6 19.f4 is tempting but after d7 xf1+ 26.xf1 e7 27.e5 d6 28.xe4
Delchev presumably couldn't find anything c5 29.g4 g6 30.dxc5+ xc5 31.d4+
concrete. ] e5 32.d7 c2 33.xh7 xb2 34.xa7
18...xd5 19.exd5 c5! Striking back quickly e4 35.a3 e5 36.g1 g5 37.f1 g4
20.dxc6 e6 21.h6 xc6 22.c3 bc8 38.g1 c2 39.f1 b2 40.g1 e2
23.e4 e5 41.a4+ xe3 42.xg4 xa2 43.h2
[ A l s o c o n c e i v a b l e w a s 23...xa2 a8 44.h4 e4 45.g4 d2 46.h7 d8
for instance 24.hxg7 xg7 25.a3 xa3 47.e7 e3 48.g3 e2 49.f4 e1
26.bxa3 e6 with a playable game. ] 50.xe1 xe1 51.g5 f2 52.g6 xg2
24.b3 g6 25.xe6 xe6 26.g4 c4 53.f5 f3 54.g7 a8 55.g6 g4
27.hxg7 xg7 28.f6+ xf6 29.xc4 bxc4 56.h7 f5 57.g8 xg8 58.xg8
30.gxf6 a6 31.d4 The ending is not without 1/2-1/2 Tuovinen,J-Paakkonen,T Helsinki
interest but the chances are about equal. e4 1999. ) 8...bxc6 9.f3 xe5 10.xf5 f7
32.e3 e6 33.h5!? Trying for more than a 11.f4 d7 12.xd7+ xd7 13.d2 e6
repetition e5 34.h6 f5 35.d2 xf6 14.b3 d6 15.g3 a5 16.a4 hb8
36.c3 d5 37.d4 f5 38.b4 Having the 17.fe1 b4 18.e2 ab8 19.f3
more ac tive k ing co mpe nsa tes th e small with a clear, simple advantage for white. c4
material deficit. g7 39.h1 h5 40.a4 f8 20.e1 c5 21.dxc5 xc5+ 22.xc5+ xc5
41.b5 axb5 42.axb5 e6+ 43.c3 d4+ 23.b3 d4 24.d1 d5 25.e4 d3 26.xd3
[ Allowing the advanced passed pawn to live xd3 27.cxd3 xb3 28.d4+ c6
on with 43...f6 44.b6 d8 45.e1! 29.xa5 e5 30.h4 xd3 31.e4 d5
may prove too dangerous. ] 32.c3 d6 33.a5 c6 34.a6 g6 35.f4
44.xd4+ xd4 45.xd4 xb5 46.xc4 e7 36.f6+ e8 37.a4 a7 38.d4
f5 c5 39.f2 d7 40.f4 e7 41.g4 h6
½-½ 42.e3 g5 43.c4 d6 44.h5 e5 45.c2
c6 46.f2 b5 47.d2 d4 48.a2
d8 49.a7 a8 50.a6+ d5 51.xh6
xa7 52.xg5 a2+ 53.g3 a3 54.f6
e4 55.h6 xf3 56.f5+ e6 57.f4
22
xg5 58.xg5 h3 59.xc5 f7 60.c7+ 19.f3 g6 20.g3 xg5 21.xg5 f6
g8 61.g5 e3 62.e7 h1 63.xe3 f7 22.f4 bd7 23.g2 c5 24.f5 fe4
1-0 Shaw,J-Salmensuu,O EuroTeam Leon 25.xe4 dxe4 26.fxg6 hxg6 27.h4 a5
ESP 2001. ] 28.e3 d8 29.b4 axb4 30.cxb4 a6
5...g4 31.xe4
[ 5...e6!? is an interesting alternative that [ 31.a3+- ]
has had good results. 6.0-0 f6 7.e1 31...xb4 32.xg6 xa2 33.b3 d4
e7 8.xf5 exf5 9.g5 d7 10.e6 f7 34.a3 d2+ 35.f2 xf2+ 36.xf2 f8+
11.f3 ( 11.g5+ must be better, though 37.g2 f6 38.h5 b4 39.f3 d6
black unravels reasonably quickly here as 40.f8+ d7 41.f7+ d8 42.g7 d2+
well. g8 12.f4 e8 13.c3 h6 14.f3 43.h3 d1 44.g4 d5 45.h6 h1
e4 15.e5 xe5 16.dxe5 d8 17.xe4 46.g5
fxe4 18.f3 f5 19.g3 h7 20.h1 hf8 1-0
21.f1 g6 22.e2 exf3 23.xf3 xf3
24.gxf3 h8 25.d3 xd3 26.cxd3 g8
27.g2 f7 28.f4 e6 29.f3 f8 34 B00
30.g4 g6 31.f1 c5 32.b3 h5+ 33.h3 Dorfman,Josif D 2610
g5 34.g2 h4 35.e1 xf4 36.xf4 gxf4 Miles,Anthony J 2595
37.f3 xe5 38.c3+ f5 39.h3 b5 Tilburg 1992
40.b2 c4 41.dxc4 bxc4 42.bxc4 dxc4 [Alexander Volzhin]
43.c3 f6 44.xf6 xf6 45.xf4 c3
46.e3 f5 47.a4 c2 48.d2 f4 1.d4 e6 2.e4 b6 3.f3 b7 4.d3 c5
49.xc2 g3 0-1 Von Buelow,G-Sell,A 5.c3 f6 6.e2 This set-up is White's most
Germany 1993.) 11...he8 12.c3 d6 popular choice, and this position has been
13.g5+ g8 14.f1 e7 15.d3 h6 tested many times. e7 7.0-0 c6 8.a3
16.f3 g6 17.g3 e4 18.c4 f4 19.c5 The idea behind this move is to prevent 8...
fxg3 20.cxd6 gxf2+ 21.xf2 xf2 22.xf2 cxd4 9. cxd4 Nb4 a5 9.bd2
xd6 23.e3 f8 24.bd2 xh2+ [ The seemingly strong 9.e5 d5 10.c4
25.e1 g3+ 26.f2 ae8+ 27.d1 xf2 is just a blunder in view of b3! as in Zelcic
28.xg6 e2+ 29.c1 e6 30.xe6+ - Filipovic, Ljubljana 1999 where Black
xe6 31.e5 c5 32.df3 xf3 33.xf3 ob t a in e d a m a t eria l a d va n t a ge : 11.cxd5
e3+ 0-1 Vasiliev,M (2405)-Demuth,M xd5! 12.e4 The only chance to
(2030) W erfen 1994. A brutal upset, and c o m p l i c a t e . ( 12.a2 xc1 13.xc1
one of those games that makes riskin g xa2 ) 12...xa1 13.xd5 exd5 14.c3
weird defences so satisfying. ] b3 15.e3 cxd4 16.xd4 0-0?!
6.h3 xf3 Black begins to play superficially and allows
[ 6...h5!? ] W hite to get some counterchances and
7.xf3 f6 finally to escape. Black had many better
[ 7...xd4 8.h5+ g6 9.e5 ] p o s s i b i l i t i e s . ( I n m y o p i n i o n , 16...c5
8.c3 exchanging Black's only bad piece, was the
[ 8.b5!? keeping a grip on e5 is more correct decision: 17.xc5 xc5 18.xd5
thematic, and seems to me to be the only 0-0 and Black should win without difficulty.)
way to try and maintain an advantage. ] 17.xd5 xd4 18.xd4 Now White's
8...e5 Black should not have serious trouble Knights are very active. g6 19.g4 h8
now - in fact this position must be roughly 20.d1 c8 21.h4 xh4 22.f3 e7
equal. 9.dxe5 xe5 10.e2 e7 11.c2 23.f4 f5 24.exf6 xf6 25.e5 d6
0-0-0 12.0-0 e8 13.f4 c4= 14.xe7 26.d5! f5 27.xf5 gxf5 28.f7+ g7
xe7 15.b3 d6 29.xd8 xd8 30.e3 and White
[ 15...d6!? ] managed to draw. ]
16.g5 b6 17.d2 h5 18.ae1 f4?! 9...c4 10.c2 c7 11.e5 Probably not the
[ 18...f4!? ] best move. This position seems to be critical
23
f o r t h is lin e . I t h a s o ccu re d ma n y t im e s, f5 The game K. Georgiev - Miles, Biel 1992

primarily in Anthony Miles' games. Some co n t in u e d : 18.f3 fxe4 19.xe4 ae8
examples: 20.be1 a6 21.g3 f6 with a balanced
[ 11.d5 was played in Blees - Miles, Komotini, position. ]
1992. Black gained the upper hand very 15...cxb3 16.f5 exf5! Black must play
quickly: e5 12.g3 g6 13.e1 0-0-0! precisely to parry W hite's kingside attack.
A brave and correct decision! The Q-side is 17.exf5?
blocked and it's very difficult for W hite to [ 17.xf5 would be met by d5! with the idea
open files there, while Black's pawn chain on of Bc8 ]
the K-side is much more flexible. 14.g2 [ correct was 17.xf5 and after d5!? 18.e5
b8 15.b1 d6 16.e3 c8 17.f3 hf8 ( 18.exd5 ad8 ) 18...f6!? the position is
18.d1 d7 19.e2 f5! Black has unclear. W hite still does not have time to
succesfully executed his plan and outplayed comfortably take the b3 pawn as he lags
his opponent very nicely. 20.g2 f6 behind in development. ]
21.exf5 gxf5 22.b4 Desperation, but 17...d6! Now Black is taking the initiative.
White's position is bad anyway. The rest is 18.e4!? By sacrificing a pawn White
just agony. cxb3 23.c4 f4 24.f5 xd5 neutralises the very strong light-squared
25.cxd5 xf5 26.g4 ff8 27.e4 c5 Bishop.
28.e6 a6 29.xc8 xf1 30.f5 a6 [ 18.f6 g6 19.h3 fe8 with the idea of
31.gxf4 g8+ 32.h1 xf2 33.b2 d3 Re2 was dangerous for White. ]
and W hite res igned. A very instructive 18...xe4 19.xe4 xh2+ 20.h1 ae8
game for the understanding of positions with 21.f3 g3! The key idea of the Queen
pawn chains. ] swap is to obtain the e2 square for the Rook.
[ 11.e1 Probably this move is the most 22.a4 White hopes for counterplay on the Q-
p r o m i s i n g f o r W h i t e . 0-0 12.b1! side in the forthcoming endgame.
( The immediate 12.f1 allows b3! ) [ Unfortunately White cannot keep the
12...ae8 13.f1 d6 14.g3 and White is Q u e e n s o n : 22.h5 is met by e4
ready to launch a kingside attack ( with e4- with the idea of Rh4. ]
e5, Ng5, Nh5, etc). The game Sermek - 22...xf3 23.xf3 d6 24.e3 It would
Filipovic, Bled 1999 continued: e5 15.f5 seem that W hite is completely OK at the
h8 16.g5 g8 17.h4 Black has moment, but Black came up with an
managed to avoid a direct attack, however unexpected and excellent resource. g5!!
h i s p o s i t i o n r e m a i n s c r a m p e d . xg5 [ T h e t e m p t i n g 24...e4? doesn't work:
18.hxg5 g6 19.e3 f6 20.bd1 b5 25.axb5 fe8 26.xa7! and White wins:
21.d2 fxg5 22.dxe5 dxe5 23.xg5 h6 xe3 27.xe3 xe3 28.a8+ f8 29.b6 ]
24.f3 c6 25.d5 Now White's 25.g4
advantage is clear. f7 26.e3 e6 [ Of course, both 25.fxg6? fxg6! ]
27.b4 g5 28.ed1 f6 29.d6 e8 [ and 25.axb5? g4 were losing for White ]
30.xe6 xe6 31.xa7 b3 32.c7 h5 [ 25.xg5 does not solve White's problems:
33.d6 e8 34.xe6 xc7 35.xh6+ bxa4! ( exploiting the weakness of the back
, and Black resigned. ] rank) 26.h6 a3 27.bxa3 b2 28.b1 e2
11...b5 12.f4 0-0 13.g4 xg4 14.xg4 29.xf8 xf8 and White is in trouble as the
This position also looks good for W hite but b2-pawn is worth a Rook. 30.c4 ( 30.a4
Black has a very importantresource: b3! c2 31.g1 a3 ) 30...c2 31.g1
15.xb3?! An ambitious but quite dubious xa3! ]
plan. White intends a direct attack on the K- 25...e4 26.axb5 fe8 27.xg5 e2
side, but his resources are rather limited as White is in trouble not only because the pawn
his Q-side pieces are still undeveloped. o n b 3 wi l l b e v e r y s t r o n g s o o n b u t a l s o
[ T h e m o d e s t 15.b1 is more accurate, because his King is badly placed. 28.g1
although here Black can also achieve good xb2 29.f2 ee2 30.b6?
play after xd2 16.xd2 xe4! 17.xe4 [ A blunder but the position was lost anyway,
24
for example: 30.xe2 xe2 31.b1 b2 d6 32.e1 1-0 Golubev,M-Markowski,T/

with Ba3 to follow. ] Biel 1995. ]
30...xf2! 31.bxa7 g2+ 32.f1 bf2+ 12...0-0 13.xe5 dxe5 14.xe5 b4
33.e1 g1+ White resigned. So let's draw Now black is free and active and the pawn is
some conclusions. Although Owen's Defence not likely to mean much with kings on
has a dubious reputation I can't claim that opposite flanks and opposite coloured bishops.
W hite has an easy way to get an opening But black does not have much in the way of
advantage. In my opinion, the lines W hite winning chances to look forward to. 15.e4
chose in Kaidanov - Kengis and Sermek - xe4 16.xe4 d6 17.d3 g6 18.f3
Filipovich are the most unpleasant for Black. ae8 19.c3 c5 20.he1 xe1 21.xe1
0-1 d8 22.e4 b5 23.b1 e8 24.e2 e5
25.d3 b4 26.cxb4 xb4 27.f3 a5 28.a3
c5 29.a2 xe2 30.xe2 b6 31.e8+
35 B00 g7 32.e5+ g8 33.e8+ g7 34.e5+
Dubiel,Jacek 2359 g8 35.e8+
Przewoznik,Jan 2414 ½-½
chT Zakopane chT (2) 03.09.2000
[Jon Tisdall]
36 B00
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 I'll be honest up front - I Ehlvest,Jaan 2602
am not terribly keen on this way of playing Blatny,Pavel 2452
against 2.Nf3 - and while recommending 1... 88th NY Masters (4) 20.01.2004
e5 would be neither daring nor anything to do [Glenn Flear]
with this section, it is a bit more respectable
than these very stodgy lines. 3.d4 f6 4.c3 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.a3 f6
g4 5.e3 e6 6.h3 h5 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5 5.d3 d5 6.e5 fd7 The central structure is
xf3 9.xf3 e5 10.e2 a6 11.0-0-0 e7 reminiscent of a French Defence. White will
12.d4 This isn't bad, but winning a pawn want to meet ...c5 with c2-c3 to maintain the
takes most of the dynamics out of the white centre, so he must lose a tempo with his
position. Those who try to blow black's head queen's knight. Nevertheless, Black's
off here with pawn-storming aggression ... queenside pieces aren't particularly active
tend to blow black's head off: and White has chances to retain a pull. 7.f3
[ 12.f4 g6 ( 12...ed7 13.g4 g6 14.h4 e7 8.e2 c5 9.c3 a6! A typical aim for
b5 15.d4 0-0 16.h5 b4 17.hxg6 bxc3 Black in these closed French type positions is
18.gxh7+ h8 19.g5 cxb2+ 20.b1 e8 the exchange of his bad bishop. 10.f4 c8!
21.h3 f8 22.g2 1-0 Hoffman,A-Fiorito, 11.0-0 xd3 12.xd3 a6 13.d1!?
F/Villa Martelli 1996.) 13.g4 d7 14.g5 0-0 Keeping queens makes sense for White who
( 14...h6 15.gxh6 gxh6 16.e4 f6 has the safer king in any middlegame. c6
17.g3 h4 18.d4 f8 19.f2 g8 14.e3 a5?!
20.c3 d7 21.f5 g5 22.d2 xd5 [ I believe that most 'Frenchies' would be
23.xg5 xg5+ 24.b1 e3 25.e1 satisfied with their position after 14...0-0!=
exf5 26.e4 e8 27.d3 g7 28.xg5 The text eyes up the light-squares in order
xe1+ 29.xe1 hxg5 30.f6 g2 31.g1 to make White regret playing both a2-a3 and
f4 32.xg5 ge6 33.h6+ e7 c2-c3 so early, but for tactical reasons this
34.h4+ f8 35.h7 1-0 Servat,R- move is the source of Black's later woes. ]
Bermejo,L/Buenos Aires 1997.) 15.h4 e8 15.d2 g6?! The problem with this move is
16.h5 gf8 17.d2 c5 18.dxc6 bxc6 an imperceptible weakening of the a1-h8
19.h6 g6 20.e4 d5 21.c3 f6 22.xc6 diagonal. However
dxe4 23.c4+ h8 24.f7 e6 25.c4 [ now 15...0-0?! is met by 16.g4 when
d6 26.xd6 e7 27.xd7 xf7 28.xd8+ fd8 can be met by the strong continuation
xd8 29.xf7 xf7 30.d4 g8 31.xf6 17.xe6 fxe6 18.h6 f8 19.xe6+ h8
25
20.g5 with both a material and positional 11.0-0-0 c7 12.hf1 b5 13.b3 a5
advantage for White. ] 14.xf6 gxf6 15.d4 a4 16.f3 axb3
[ Black had better options such as 15...c4!? 17.xc6 xc6 18.h3 xf5 19.exf5
and ] xf5 20.d5 fe8 21.f3 bxa2
[ 15...cxd4 16.cxd4 c8 as the text leads to 22.xf6+ f8 23.xc6 a1+ 24.d2
trouble. ] b4+ 25.c3 xb2 0-1 Boey,J-Keres,P/
16.b4! Seizing the initiative as we shall see... Varna 1962.) 7...f6 ( 7...c6 8.g5 h6
c4 17.e2 cxd4 9.h3 b5 10.b3 a5 11.a3 a7 12.e2
[ If 17...cxb4 18.axb4 b5 then I quite like 0-0 13.e3 b6 14.xc5 xc5 15.g3
19.xc4 dxc4 20.fd1 with d4-d5 in the a4 16.a2 b4 17.axb4 xb4 18.e3
air. ] e7 19.0-0 h8 20.g4 f5 21.gxf5 xf5
18.xd4 c8 Everything seems to be holding 22.d3 c5+ 23.h2 e3 24.f3 xf4
f i r m o n t h e q u e e n s i d e , b u t . . . 19.xd5! 25.xe3 xg5 26.g1 e5 27.h1 d5
...there are problems elsewhere. exd5 20.e6 28.gf1 g5 29.xa4 xe4 30.xe4
f6 dxe4 31.e3 f6 32.c5 h6 33.d1
[ 20...fxe6 21.xh8 etc. ] xh3+ 34.xh3 xh3 35.c4 e3
21.exf7+ f8 An unfortunate concession, but 36.h2 e2 37.e1 f1 38.d3 g2
the natural 39.a1 e3 40.b3 h5 41.e1 g4+
[ 21...xf7 22.fe1 he8 is refuted by the 42.g1 e3 43.a8+ h7 44.f8 g3+
calm 23.e6+ g7 24.xc4 xc4 25.e3 45.h1 g2+ 46.xg2 xg2 47.e8
and Black is helpless in the face of Rae1 f2 0-1 Winawer,S-Schlechter,C Monte
and or Rf3. ] C a r l o 1 9 0 1 .) 8.f5 e7 9.g5 c6
22.e6 Blatny is bus t ed! He is naturally an W e have already seen that Black is not
optimist and a fighter but all his tricky play afraid of trading his kingside pawn
c a n ' t c h a n g e t h e i n e v i t a b l e r e s u l t . h5 structure for some dark-squared
23.fe1 b7 24.xc4 dxc4 25.xh8 f4 domination. 10.xf6 gxf6 11.d2 b5
26.g7+ 12.b3 h5 13.0-0-0 b6 14.he1 a5
[ or 26.g4 ] 15.a4 b4 16.e2?? 0-1 Rosenberg,J-
26...xg7 27.e5+ f6 28.xf4 xc3 Marder,S Copenhagen DEN 2001.;
29.e8 xf7 30.xf7+ xf7 31.xc8 xa1 B) 5.e3 d5!? A rare and - Black gets
32.xc4 e5 33.b5 e6 34.f1 d5 very quick development but this needs
35.c8 d6 36.a4 c5 37.c7 c4 rather serious analysis as there are many,
38.xa7 b4 39.e2 h5 40.f4 d6 many ways that White could have tried to
41.f3 c5 42.g3 The moral of this tale is grab material quickly. 6.xd5 ( 6.exd5
that even with a closed centre leaving the king f6 7.b5+ d7 8.e2 b4+ 9.c3
in the centre too long can be dangerous. 0-0 10.d4 xc3+ 11.bxc3 e8
1-0 12.0-0-0 e4 13.d2 e7 14.d4
a3+ 15.b1 xd5 16.c4 xd4
17.xd4 xc3+ 18.a1 xd1 19.xf7+
37 B00 xf7 20.xd7+ e7 21.xd1 d8
Fedorchuk,Sergey A 2503 22.e2 f6+ 23.b1 d4 24.f3 b4+
Miles,Anthony J 2562 25.c1 xf4 26.e5+ g8 27.e3
2nd IECC Ohrid MKD (7) 07.06.2001 xg2 28.c5 f4+ 29.d1 b1+
[Jon Tisdall] 30.e2 e4+ 0-1 Reinhardt,E-Rossetto,
H Mar del Plata 1961.) 6...d6 7.d2
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 ( 7.b5+!? is critical as White appears to
This system had a very nice record in this prevent castling - unless Black wants to
instalmentâ []s games. 4.c3 s t a r t s h e d d i n g p a wn s b e f o r e h e h a s
[ 4.f4 g6 developed.) 7...e7 8.c3 b4 9.0-0-0
A) 5.f3 c5 6.c4 d6 7.c3 ( 7.e2 f6 10.d3 ( 10.d3!? ) 10...e6 11.f5
f6 8.f5 e7 9.c3 0-0 10.g5 c6 e5 12.b5+ d7 13.xb7 0-0
26
14.ge2 a5 15.d5 xd5 16.exd5 fb8 32.e3 d1 33.e2 e6 34.f2 f1 35.a4
17.xc7 c8 18.b7 xf5 19.xe7 c5 36.a5 bxa5 37.g5
xc2+ 20.b1 d2+ 0-1 Zapolskis,A- [ 37.xc5 f3 38.f2 c5 and White is
S u l s k i s , S K a u n a s L T U 2 0 0 1 . A ve r y rat he r sh ort of m oves, wh ile Blac k ca n
seductive game, but I wouldn't venture this create trouble with ...c4, trying to pass his
as Black without some double checking. ] a-pawn. ]
4...c5 5.f4 c6 6.f3 37...h1 38.xc5 xh3 39.xg6 g3+
[ 6.c4 d6 7.f3 e6 8.xe6 fxe6 9.a4 40.h7 e3 The time control is over, and
b6 10.xb6 axb6 11.0-0 f6 12.g5 White's position is in ruins - the Black e-pawn
e7 13.e5 dxe5 14.fxe5 xe5 15.e2 ha s m o re t h a n su rvive d a n d t h e re la t ive
a5 16.b4 xb4 17.xe6 e7 18.xg7+ strength of the kings is decisive. 41.g8 g5
xg7 19.d2 d5 20.c4 xd2 21.xe5+ 42.fxg5 xg5+ 43.h7 g7+ 44.h8 g3
d8 22.xf6+ xf6 23.xf6 e8 24.a4 45.h2 xe5 46.a3 g4 47.b2+ e4
ee2 25.f8+ e7 26.g8 d6 27.g7 48.c3 h4+ 49.xh4+ xh4 50.xa5 e2
c6 28.h1 a2 29.g1 h5 30.g6+ c5 51.g7 f3 52.f6 e3
31.g5+ xc4 32.xh5 b5 33.axb5 cxb5 0-1
34.g4 b4 35.g5 b3 36.g6 b2 37.g7 g2
38.h7 c5 39.xg2 b1+ 40.h1 d3
41.h8 b6 42.h6+ a5 43.g8 e4+ 38 B00
44.g2 xg2 45.xg2 b5 46.hg6 b4 Filipenko,Alexander V 2370
47.6g3 a4 48.h4 d5 49.e3 b3 Filipovic,Branko 2435
50.ee2 1/2-1/2 Akopian,V-Miles,A/Moscow 11th Open Ljubljana 2000
1990/TD (50) ] [Neil McDonald]
6...d6 7.a4 b6 8.d3 d5 9.xb6 axb6
10.e5 ge7 Black has a sound and active 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5
position. W hite's main chore will be finding 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 c6 8.dxc5!
gainf ul employment f or his dark-squared This is a significant improvement on
bishop. 11.0-0 f5 12.h4 xd3 13.xd3 [ 8.a3 as played in Gomboc-Filipovic in the
d7 14.d2 g4 15.e1 0-0 16.h3 d7 same tournament. ]
17.d2 a4 This move is so much fun to play 8...bxc5 9.e5 d5 10.c4! b6 11.c3
on e as s u me s it is ve ry st ron g - t h e ro o k Now Black has no compensation for the weak
influences most of the board from this entry square on d6 and backward d pawn. His next
route. 18.c3 g6 19.xg6 fxg6! move makes things worse but I don't like his
Continuing to bank on increasing the activity position in any case. c7? 12.b5 b8
of his rooks, and creating a crowbar - Black 13.g5! The exchange of dark square bishops
wants to undermine W hite's kingside pawn leaves W hite with a huge positional
wedge, and this recapture gains the space he advantage. c8
needs on this flank to advance. Black can [ If 13...xg5 14.d6+ f8 15.xg5
keep White's centre under control with piece wins. ]
play, but one should not underestimate the 14.xe7 6xe7 15.ad1 White's immediate
element of risk when playing so dynamically. plan is simple- tie down the black pieces to
20.g3 e7 21.h2 h5 22.b3 e4 23.ae1 the defence of the d7 pawn. a6 16.c3 g6
c6 24.d2 f5 25.c3 The tension of the 17.e4 a7 18.d2 0-0 19.fd1 xe4
position will not be dissipated by the trade of 20.xe4 d8 21.b3 c7 22.h4! The next
queens - Black must still prove that his activity stage in W hite's strategy is to exploit the
is worth odd pawn structures. h4 26.gxh4 passive Black pieces by beginning a direct
xh4 27.xc6 bxc6 28.g3 f5+ 29.g4 attack on his king. h6 23.h5 f8 24.h4
f7 Clearing the way to the h-file for the Rf8. e8 25.f4 c6 26.e3 c7 27.e4 d8
30.xe4 dxe4 31.e1 d8 28.g4 e7 29.d6 c8 30.g2 a5 31.f4
[ 31...h8 must be roughly equal, but Miles a8 32.f6+! h8
decides to keep more life in the position. ] [ 32...gxf6 33.exf6 c8 34.xh6 mates. ]
27
33.xd7 xd7 34.xd7 c8 35.xe7 17.a4+ c6 18.f6 and White won
A very straightforward win for W hite which material in Anisimov, P-Vlasov, E Warsaw
made 7...Nc6 look bad. So it seems 7...d5 rapid 2010) 9.e3 c6 10.a3 c4 11.c2
should be preferred. b5 12.bd2 a5 13.e1 h5 14.f4 g6
1-0 15.ef3 b4 and White never looked like
breaking through in Dautov, R-Bauer, C
Gothenburg 2005. ]
39 B00 [ I'm not so keen on 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 b4+
Gagunashvili,Merab 2603 8.d2 c6 9.c3 d6 10.0-0 xc3
Savchenko,Boris 2630 11.xc3 0-0 12.ad1 e7 13.e5
TCh-TUR 2011 (12) 08.07.2011 Kulicov, O-Novotny, M Frydek Mistek 2011,
[Glenn Flear] when White had a pleasant edge. ]
7.d5! This looks to be spot on. Black cannot
1.d4 e6 2.f3 A non-committal move that capture on d5, so it's understandable why 6...
has become popular of late because, amongst Be7 7.0-0 Nc6 is more popular (when d4-d5
other reasons, it avoids 2.c4 Bb4+. b6 w o u l d l o s e a p a w n ) . e7 8.c4
[ After 2...f5 White has tried no less than 17 By consolidat ing his pawn wedge , W hit e
moves! One that takes Dutch players out of ensures a space advantage. d6 9.c3 g6
their normal scenario is 3.d5!? e.g. exd5 [ Black could opt for closing the centre with
4.xd5 d6 5.g3 f6 6.b3 a6 7.e3 9...e5 (with a type of Czech Benoni) but then
d5 (Vaisser likes playing the Stonewall) 10.c2! followed by Ba4+ would be better
8.g2 c6 9.c4 dxc4 ( maybe 9...c5 for White. The early ...b6 and ...Bb7 looking
10.c2 ce4 11.0-0 d6= ) 10.xc4 out of place here. ]
b4+ 11.bd2 d5 12.0-0 xc4 13.xc4 10.dxe6
c5 14.fd1 Vachier-Lagrave, M-Vaisser, M [ H e r e a g a i n 10.c2 comes into
French league 2011, and W hite later consideration, but Gagunashvili opts to force
converted his small pull. ] the pace, angling for something more than
3.e4 b7 4.d3 Play has led us into Owen's a positional pull. ]
Defence. c5 5.c3 f6 6.e2 c6?! 10...fxe6 11.g5 d7 12.e5! Breaking up
A rare try, and not one that I'd recommend. Black's structure and leaving the e6-pawn
[ The most commonly played move is 6...e7 ch ro n ica lly we a k. dxe5 13.xe5 g7
then 7.0-0 c6 (here d4-d5 is just bad) 14.xe6
8.a3 a5!? ( although 8...d5 [ Although Black's position looks dodgy, he
may transpose to the line below emanating d o e s h a ve a n u m b e r o f r e so u r c e s , f o r
from 6...d5, White has an extra option with e x a m p l e a f t e r 14.b5 xg2! 15.g1
t h i s m o v e o r d e r : 9.e5 d7 10.b4!? ( 15.d6+ f8 isn't that clear either)
but it's not clear if this offers W hite 15...0-0-0 16.e2 c6 17.xe6 b4
anything ) 9.g5 c4 10.c2 h6 11.xf6 with counter-chances. ]
xf6 12.bd2 c7 13.ab1 Black has no [ Otherwise 14.0-0 0-0-0 15.xe6 h6!
immediate problems, but has to be careful 16.xd7+ xd7 17.e6 xd3 18.xg7
a b o u t w h e n a n d w h e r e t o c a s t l e . e7 offers Black some play for his pawn. ]
14.e5 b5 15.b4 cxb3 16.xb3 xb3 14...f7
17.xb3 a6 18.h5 g6 19.f3 h7= [ Taking the piece is not really a good idea:
Czebe, A-Filipovic, B Basel 2009. 14...xd3?? 15.xg7+ f7 16.e6+
( Or perhaps 19...0-0 )] xg7 17.xe7+ g8 18.xb7 e8+
[ A solid line is introduced by 6...d5 e.g. 7.e5 19.e3 g4 20.d5+ and Black can
fd7 8.0-0 e7! ( Black needs to be wary resign. ]
of leaving his g5-square undefended, for 15.xg7 c6 16.e6+ Safest, as White
example 8...c6 9.a3 c4 10.c2 c7?! retains his extra pawn and avoids
11.g5! e7 12.h5 xg5 13.xg5 f8 middlegame complications. xe6+ 17.xe6
14.d2 e7 15.ae1 g6 16.f3 h5 he8 18.0-0 xe6 19.f4 The bishop pair,
28
plus an extra pawn n atu rally o f f e r W hit e 48.e4 f6+ 49.e5 g4+ 50.e4 f6+
something to look forward to, although Black's 51.d3 g4 52.c2 e5 53.a4!
activity complicates the task of exploiting his Pawns on both rims give the knight an
a d va n t a ge . e5 20.e2 e4 21.b5!? impossible task. c6 54.a5
I'm surprised that Gagunashvili opted for such [ After 54.a5 b8 ( 54...xa5 55.xa5
a complex move when a simple continuation xh6 56.b6 c4 57.b4 g5 58.c3 f5
presented itself. 59.d4 e6 60.c5 c3 61.xb5 c2
[ An alternative is 21.xe4 xe4 22.ad1 62.e3 ) 55.d3 a6 56.e4 h7
ae8 23.e3 when Black is running out of 57.d5 g6 58.c6 Black's position is
compensation. ] hopeless. ]
21...g5! 22.e3 g8 23.ad1 1-0
[ Deciding not to chase a second pawn. In
general with a material advantage it's best
to avoid unnecessary complications, but it 40 B00
seems that White can indeed snatch the a- Gallagher,Joseph G 2519
pawn: 23.xa7 d6 24.b3 g4 25.a4 f5 McShane,Luke J 2460
( 25...f3+ 26.xf3 gxf3 27.g3 ) 26.b5 Bundesliga 2000-1 (10) 10.03.2001
and Black's play isn't worth two pawns. ] [Jon Tisdall]
23...g4 24.h1 f6 25.c7 h5 26.f3!?
Hoping to open lines for his rooks and 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 d6
bishops. gxf3 27.xf3 xf3 5.c4 d7 6.c3 e7 7.h4!? White takes
[ Plausible is 27...xf3 as 28.gxf3 f6 advantage of black's lack of fianchetto on this
29.d5 xc4 30.xf6 xf6 wouldn't be flank, and stakes out a bit of space. h6 8.h5
as easy a technical ride as White would like. c6 9.e2 e7 10.d5 ce5 11.d4
However the first player is still for This looks like a clear safe advantage for
preference. ] white. f8 12.a4+
28.d7+ g6 29.gxf3 xf3!? [ 12.0-0 followed by rumbling the f-pawn
[ Or perhaps 29...g5 as 30.d5 xd5 forward deserves a serious look. ]
31.cxd5 xf3 32.xf3 xf3 33.xa7 f5 12...d7 13.b3 c5 14.c2 d8
would still be complicated. ] Creating a home for the Ne5. Black is now
30.xf3 g5 31.d6+! A precise move that reasonably solid since it will take white some
enables White to ultimately emerge from the time to regroup his queen and Nc2. 15.e3
c o m p l i c a t i o n s w i t h a n e x t r a p a w n . h7 ed7 16.a4 exd5 17.cxd5 h7 18.0-0 0-0
32.d5 xd5 19.f4 e8 20.a3 f6 21.f3 xc3
[ 32...xf3?? 33.f6+ ] This weakens the e4 pawn to the extent that it
33.xd5 xf3 34.f5 e1 35.xh5+ g7 is now black who takes over the driving seat.
36.g5+ h8 37.xg8+ xg8 White has [ 21...d4!? ]
some major trumps in the endgame: Bishop 22.xc3 df6 23.d3 e7 24.ae1 xe4
versus knight, a passed pawn on the edge 25.xc5 xc5 26.xe7 xd3 27.xb7
an d B la c k h a s h is pa wn s st u ck o n d a rk- xb2 28.b5 xa4 29.a1
squares. Despite all these points, White still [ 29.xd6!? c5 30.c7 ]
has some work to do. 38.d2 d3 39.b3 29...c5 30.bxa7 xa7 31.xa7 d8
f7 40.g2 g6 41.f3 f5 42.h4 a6 32.c7 f6 33.c6 d3
43.h5 b5 [ 33...ce4 gave some chances for a
[ If Black temporizes with 43...e5+ 44.g3 microscopic edge. ]
d3 White prepares an invasion via e4 with 34.g3 a8 35.xd6 a1+ 36.h2 a2+
45.h6 g6 46.f3 ] 37.g1 e1 38.e4 xe4 39.xe4 f3+
44.cxb5 axb5 45.h6 e5+ 46.e3 g4+ 40.f1 f5 41.d6
47.d3 g6 ½-½
[ If 47...c4+ simplest is 48.d4 when White
retains a b-pawn. ]
29
41 B00 exciting game!;

Geller,Efim P 2525 B) 7.f5! This is the refutation! f6
Chiburdanidze,Maia 2505 8.h6!! This is the idea behind White's
Aruba 1992 p r e vi o u s m o ve ! xh6 9.gxh7 xh1
[Alexander Volzhin] 10.g6+ f8 11.xh6+ f7 12.h3!
and Black is hopelessly lost, for example:
O we n 's D e f e n ce h a s a ch e ive d a ce rt a i n f8 13.g6+ e6 14.c3 d6
amount of popularity during the last decade. 15.0-0-0 d5 16.xd5 xd5 17.b5
Strong players such as GMs Anthony Miles c6 18.f5+ d6 19.f4+ e5
and Artashes Minasian to name but two, are 20.dxe5+ ]
among the adherents of this opening. 1.e4 b6 4.f3 g6?! This move contradicts basic
2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 opening principles.
[ 3...f5? This move is just bad. But I was [ Either 4...c5 ]
s u r p r is e d t o f i n d t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o m y [ or 4...f6 should be preferred. ]
database Black has scored more than 50% 5.g5! Immediately exploiting the drawbacks
in this line! 4.exf5 xg2 5.h5+ g6 6.fxg6 of Black's previous move. This sortie makes
g7 the normal development of Black's forces
A) My database contains only games difficult. c8
where 7.gxh7+ was played. This move is [ 5...e7? is evidently bad in view of 6.f6 ]
recommended in lots of theoretical [ 5...f6 also cannot be recommended, as this
manuals. However in my opinion it's much move seriously weakens Black's position.
weaker: f8 8.hxg8+ xg8 9.g4 6.e3 g7 7.d2 e7 8.h6 with h4 to
xh1 10.h4 ( 10.c3 f8 11.e3 f6 follow with a clear edge for White. ]
12.h3 h4 13.g6 c6 and Black was [ and if 5...e7 then 6.e3!
better in Lombardy - Regan, USA, 1974.) is very unpleasant, as the dark squares on
10...d5! 11.h5 e6 12.g2 xh5 the K-side are seriously weakened. ]
13.xa8 d5 14.xa7 c6 15.a4 6.c3 g7 7.0-0 d6 8.e1 d7 9.e5!
h1! and Black has tremendous W hite has completed his development and
compensation for the sacrificed piece. The begins action in the centre. d5
game Shmit - Vitolinsh, Riga, 1969 [ The pawn sacrifice cannot be accepted:
c o n t i n u e d : 16.f1 xd4 17.c4 e6 9...xf3? 10.xf3 dxe5 in view of 11.a6!
18.xd5 exd5 b8 12.b7 winning the Rook ]
A1) 19.c3 was better, although after [ In my opinion, 9...dxe5 10.xe5 gf6
c6! ( 19...f3 20.ce2!; 19...h4 was relatively better, although after 11.a4!
20.xd7! and White is winning in both B l a c k s t i l l h a s t o s o l ve m a n y d i f f i c u l t
cases. ) 20.f4 h4 21.g2 xg1+ problems. ]
22.xg1 xf4 Black has excellent 10.a4! a6
compensation for the exchange and can [ 10...a6 is strongly met by 11.b5! ]
decide whether to take a draw by [ 10...a5 gives up the b5-square forever:
perpetual check (Qg5-c1), or to try to for 11.b5 intending Rc1 and c4 with strong
more.; pressure on the Q-side. ]
A2) 19.f4 h4?! This inaccuracy 11.e2 e7 12.f4!
a llo ws W h it e t o e sca p e . ( The natural [ 12.xe7? xe7 leads White nowhere, as
19...f3! was simple and good. After the he cannot exploit the bad position of Black's
forced 20.g2 xg1+ 21.xf3 h4! King, and after evacuating the King with Re8
22.a8+ h7 Black has a winning and Kf8, Black will play c7-c5 obtaining
attack. ) 20.a8+ h7 21.xd5 h3+ good prospects. ]
22.g2 xg1+ 23.xg1 e2+ 24.f1 12...c6
xg2+ 25.xg2 xf4+ 26.f3 xb2 [ After 12...h6 13.xe7 xe7 the following
27.xf4 xa1 28.c3 b2 29.e3 sacrif ice loo ks ve ry p ro mising: 14.xg6!
c1+ and a draw was agreed. A very fxg6 15.xg6+ f7 16.xh8+ xh8
30
17.h4 intending to transfer the Rook to the h7 ( 20...g5 is no better: 21.1xe4! gxf4
K-side via the a3-square with Qh5 and f4-f5 22.xf4+ xe6 23.g6+ e7 24.f6+
with a growing attack. ] d7 25.e5+! xe5 26.g7+
13.c3 a5 wit h a qu ick m a t e .) 21.1xe4! dxe4
[ 13...h6 14.f6! is similar to the game. ] 22.xe4 g7 ( 22...g8 23.xg6+ h8
14.h4! h6 This move seriously weakens the 24.d5! e8 25.e6 e7 26.g6+ ) 23.d5!
g6-square and gives White a target, and Black is hopelessly lost. ]
[ but 14...a6 15.c2 f8 16.h5 20.ae1 Now White is threatening Rxc6 with
was hardly better. ] N e 5 + t o f o l l o w . e4 Allowing a brilliant
15.f6! All White's pieces occupy active combination.
positions and are ready for the decisive attack. [ 20...g7 preparing to evacuate the King to
By sacrif icing a pawn (and a piece soon) the g8-square, was more stubborn, although
White opens files near Black's King. xf6 White has a huge advantage after 21.xc6
[ Nxf6 is the alternative to the text, but White xc6 22.e5+ g8 23.xc6 d7
attacks in a similar way to the game: T h e o n ly m o ve . 24.e7+ ( The tempting
15...xf6 16.exf6 xf6 17.xg6! fxg6 24.e6? fails to h5! ) 24...xe7 25.xg6+
18.xe6+ f7 19.d3! with decisive g7 26.xf6 ]
t h r e a t s , f o r e xa m p l e : e7 ( 19...g8 21.1xe4! dxe4 22.c4!! Black resigned as
20.h5+- winning e7 21.ae1 d6 her position is absolutely hopeless:
22.hxg6+ g7 23.h5+ h8 24.g7+ ) [ 22.c4
20.ae1 g8 ( 20...g8 21.e5+ xe5 A) 22...a6 23.xc6 exf3 ( 23...b7
22.1xe5 ) 21.e5+ xe5 22.1xe5 e8 24.e5+ f8 25.e8+! ) 24.f6+;
23.f3 f5 24.xf5+! gxf5 25.h5+ ] B) 22...g7 23.xc6+ e8 24.e5;
[ Probably, 15...0-0 was relatively best, C) 22...g7 23.xg6+ h8 24.xh6+
although Black's position is bad anyway: g7 25.g6+ h8 26.g5 f8 27.f7+
16.xg7 xg7 17.d2! e7 18.h5! g5 h7 28.e6 We can only admire the
19.xg5! hxg5 20.h3! with a decisive youthful energy of 67 year old Efim
attack, is just one variation that illustrates Geller. ]
W hite's resources: h8 21.xg5+ f8 1-0
22.h6 g8 23.h5 h8 24.e3 e8
25.g5 f5 26.xf5 exf5 27.h7
and Black is hopelessly lost. ] 42 B00
16.exf6 xf6 Gerber,Richard 2432
[ The attempt to protect the weak e6- and g6- Miles,Anthony J 2562
s q u a r e s w i t h 16...f8 fails as 17.b5! Open Crans Montana SUI (5) 21.04.2001
leads to a tragicomic position where Black [Jon Tisdall]
h a s t o p l a y d8 , as there is no other
d e f e n c e a g a i n s t N e 5 . 18.c4 1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3
with an overwhelming advantage. ] b4+ 5.c3 xf3+ 6.xf3 c5 7.c4 f6
[ 16...0-0 Here this move is even worse than Here we get a little course in how Miles, the
a move previously: 17.h5 g5 18.xg5! hero of most of the sections of Daring
xf6 ( 18...hxg5 19.g4+- winning ) Defences, makes a living in what might appear
19.d2! and Black has no compensation for to most to be tedious backwaters. Mainly, by
the weak position of her king, and accepting not having anything against putting in very
the Knight sacrifice loses on the spot: hxg5? long days at the office when the job requires it.
20.xd5! h7 21.f6+! ] 8.e3
17.xg6! fxg6 18.xe6+ f7 19.d3! g8 [ 8.g3 e7 9.0-0 0-0 10.b4 d6 11.f4
[ T h e i m m e d i a t e 19...e4 is the main h6 12.e5 f5 13.g4 e7 14.d3
alternative to the text, but it doesn't help ( 14.xf5 d5 ) 14...b6+ 15.h1 h6
Black: 20.e1! Preparing a new sacrifice 16.h5 f5 17.e2 h8 18.e3 g6
(Rxe4), which works whatever Black replies! 19.d2 b6 and black finally completed his
31
development, achieving a truly murky and 8...xf3 9.gxf3 e7 10.g1 g6 11.d4
daring position. 20.f3 b7 21.ad1 a5 f6 12.a3 a6 13.c2 d6 14.e3 0-0
22.a3 g4 23.g1 axb4 24.axb4 a3 15.0-0-0 e6 16.f5 d8 17.b3 e8
25.b2 aa8 26.b5 d6 27.h3 dxe5 18.g3 d7 19.f4 f8 20.f5 xb3
28.xe5 xe5 29.fxe5 ad8 30.f2 h5 21.axb3 g5+ 22.c2 e5 23.xe5 dxe5
31.xd8 xh3+ 32.h2 xd8 33.g3 24.d7 e7 25.d5 h4 26.b4 c6 27.d6
xg3 34.xg3 d2 35.f2 xf2 36.xf2 ee8 28.gd1 ed8 29.d7 ab8 30.f3
d5 37.d7 g6 38.g3 g7 39.e6 c5 e8 31.xd8+ xd8 32.xd8+ xd8
40.e5+ h6 41.c7 cxb4 42.cxb4 b5 33.f1 g5 34.d3 f4 35.h3 e7
43.xb5 xb4 44.d7 e7 45.h2 g5 36.e3 xe3 37.xe3 f6 38.fxg6 fxg6
46.e5 f4 47.g1 f5 48.d6 xe6 39.f2 g5 40.g3 b6 41.c4 c5 42.b5
49.xe6+ xe6 50.xf4 c5+ 51.h1 axb5 43.cxb5 c4 44.h4+ f6 45.f4 h6
f5 52.g3 d4 53.g2 e5 54.e3 g4 46.g4 exf4 47.xf4 g5+ 48.hxg5+ hxg5+
55.f2 c3 56.e3 g5 57.xg5 xg5 49.g4 e5 50.xg5 xe4 51.f6 d5
58.g4 f4 59.g5 g4 60.h1 h3 0-1
61.g1 d4+ 62.h1 g3 63.g6 hxg6
1/2-1/2 Salimaki,J-Jouhki,Y Helsinki 1998. ]
[ 8.f4 d6 9.d2 e7 10.b5+?! 43 B00
( 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.h4 c6 12.g3 e5 Gicev,Blagoja 2336
13.e2 g6 14.e3 xe3 15.xe3 f4 Blatny,Pavel 2547
16.f1 e8 17.xf4 xf4 18.f3 e6 2nd IECC Ohrid MKD (11) 12.06.2001
19.b3 a5 20.e3 a4 21.b2 axb3 [Jon Tisdall]
22.axb3 a5 23.g3 h3!? 24.d2 ea8
25.c2 a2+ 26.c1 g5 27.g2 g4 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d2
28.c4 h5 29.f4 d7 30.e5 e6 31.exd6 [ 3.d3 e6 4.f4?! Not terribly logically
cxd6 32.xb7? b8 33.c6 xb3 34.d4 directed aggression which doesn't do much
c3+ 35.d1 a1+ 36.e2 xc4+ to stifle the Bb7. c5 5.c3 cxd4 6.cxd4
0-1 Solomon,S-Miles,A Melbourne 1991.) b4+ 7.c3 f5 and Black could be satisfied
10...c6 11.e2 0-0 12.0-0 g6 13.g3 with his unorthodox opening in this recent
e7 14.b4 b6 15.h5 f5 and black has game. 8.e2 fxe4 9.xe4 xe4 10.xe4
a very comfortable game. 16.c4+ h8 c6 11.f3 f6 12.d3 0-0 13.0-0 e7
17.exf5 xf5 18.d1 d5 19.e2 ae8 14.a3 xc3 15.bxc3 c7 16.d2 ac8
20.h5 f6 21.b1 d8 22.d2 e5 17.g3 f5 18.a4 d6 19.a5 b5 20.a6
23.a3 c4 24.xc4 dxc4 25.b2 d3 fe4 21.ac1 c4 22.e3 d5 23.fe1
26.fe1 d5 27.f3 f5 28.a4 a6 29.a5 c6 24.e5 xa6 25.a1 xa1 26.xa1
a7 30.d2 h6 31.a2 xf3 32.gxf3 a8 27.c1 a5 28.d3 c4 29.xc4
xf3 33.d1 f6 34.c1 f5 35.ae2 bxc4 30.c2 b8 31.b2 f6 32.e1 d6
g4 36.d2 f3 37.d6 f5 38.e7 d5 33.c1 b3 34.d2 a4 35.h3 a3 36.g4
39.d2 f7 40.e8+ h7 41.dd8 f6 b2 37.d1 a2 0-1 Csapo, Z-Puschmann,
42.e5 g6 43.ee8 f8 44.e1 xf2+ L Budapest HUN 2001. ]
45.xf2 xe8 46.xe8 xe8 47.f5+ 3...e6 4.gf3 c5 5.c3 f6 6.d3 c6
g8 48.f2 e6 49.e5 f7+ 50.e3 7.a3 d5 8.e5 d7 9.0-0 a5
d5 51.d4 f1 52.c5 g1+ 53.d4 [ 9...e7 10.e1 g5!? This leads to a very
xd4+ 54.xd4 g5 55.c5 h5 56.d6 g4 standard type of King's Indian reversed type
57.g3 f7 58.b6 e6 59.e1 c5 of position, and the game well illustrates
60.xc5 e5 61.h4 e4 62.f6 f7 Black's ideas in this variation. 11.h3 h5
63.b6 e8 64.xb7 b5 65.b6 f3 12.g4 hxg4 13.hxg4 c7 14.f1 0-0-0
66.c5 g2 67.e5 h4 68.d4 f3 15.g3 dg8 16.b4 c4 17.f1 a6 18.a4
69.b8 g3 70.hxg3 hxg3 71.xg3 xg3 d8 19.b5 a5 20.g2 f6 21.a3 xa3
72.e3 g2 0-1 Perdomo,C-Miles,A Ubeda 22.xa3 h4 23.exf6 xg4 24.e5 xe5
1997. ] 25.dxe5 xg3 26.fxg3 c5+ 27.d4 xa3
32
28.xb6 g4 29.f1 f8 30.f4 h8 31.f7 missing White's 22nd. ]

e7 32.xa5 c5+ 33.d4 c6 34.bxc6 19.xg5 xd4 20.xd4 xc2 21.ac1
xa5 35.cxb7+ c7 0-1 Braig,F-Scherer,M e4 22.a7!! Taking picturesque advantage
Schwaebisch Gmuend 1997. ] of Black's weak last rank and dark-square
10.e1 c8?!N Black envisions combining ventilation - and it will get worse. d4
ideas of Ba6 and using the c-file, but only [ 22...b8 23.b7! ]
achieves surrendering the bishop pair without 23.c7
sufficient compensation - as well as keeping [ 23.a6! ]
the position a bit too open. 23...f6 24.xf6 h7 25.d6+- xf6
[ 10...c4 11.c2 b5 led to very complex 26.xe6+ e7 27.xf6 d3 28.ce1 d5
play where a French aficionado like Lputian 29.e6 h5 30.e5 h7 31.d5 g5 32.d1
felt right at home as Black. 12.f1 h6 c8 33.5xd3 g7 34.f5
13.h4 b4 14.d2 b6 15.f4 bxc3 1-0
16.bxc3 a4 17.g3 a5 18.b2 b3
19.ad1 c8 20.h5 e7 21.e3 a7
22.d2 c6 23.b1 b8 24.g3 g6 44 B00
25.f6+ d8 26.h5 g5 27.e3 xd4 Glek,Igor V 2601
28.cxd4 xb2 29.c3 a2 30.xa4 c7 Polak,Tomas 2482
31.xc6 xc6 32.f3 e7 33.h3 g7 10th Open Valls d'Aosta ITA (6) 14.02.2002
34.e4 f8 35.ec3 b2 36.a4 f6 [Jon Tisdall]
37.b5 a5 38.a3 b4 39.exf6 xf6
40.xb4 xb4 41.1c3 c6 42.e3 d7 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4
43.de1 b2 44.f3 d2 45.a5 xa5 5.d3 f6 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xc3+ 8.bxc3
46.xd5 exd5 47.e7+ c6 48.a7+ xf6 9.0-0 d6 10.d2 e5 11.f4 e7
b6 49.xg7 c3 50.c8+ b5 51.c7 c2 Kramnik's choice. The confrontational
52.c3 b4 53.c5 b3 54.e7 xc5 [ 11...exd4 is also very playable, but riskier
55.xd5+ b3 56.xf6 d1 0-1 Narciso 12.e5 dxe5 13.fxe5 g5 14.f3 e3+
Dublan,M-Lputian,S Linares 1996. ] 15.h1 0-0 16.cxd4 d7 17.h4 g5
11.c2 cxd4 12.cxd4 a6 13.f1 xf1 18.e1 ae8 19.f2 d5 20.c4 b7
Chess is not so simple that one can toss off a 21.f5 c8 22.ae1 c5 23.xd7
bishop and then just plonk one's pawn's on 1/2-1/2 Tkachiev, V-Minasian,A/Cannes
those colour squares and claim to be solid 1995 (23) ]
and quit a potentially bad piece. The light- 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.c4
squared bishop protects a lot of potential [ 13.b5+ c6 14.c4 0-0 15.f5 d7
pawn weaknesses, and has long-term career 16.h5 b5 17.b3 c5 18.dxc5 f6
prospects outside the pawn chain. 14.xf1 b5 19.f3 c8 20.xf6 xf6 21.xf6 gxf6
15.e3 a4 16.g5 22.d5 b8 23.f1 g7 24.b3 e6
[ 16.c1!? would have reduced Black's 25.c6 bd8 26.d1 f5 1/2-1/2 Maljutin,E-
tactical possibilities. ] Kramnik,V/Sochi 1990/TD (55) ]
16...e7 13...0-0 14.h5 d7 15.ae1 ae8 16.e3
[ 16...h6 17.h5 ] f6 The fact that this upset is scored so
17.xh7 g6 18.g5 xg5 smoothly illustrates the most salient point of
[ 18...xd4 19.xd4 xg5 20.f4 the position, and that is white, with nearly a
This kind of position demonstrates the dark full set of pawns to worry about, has a hard
side of Black's strategy - White has all sorts time not making things worse. White should
of way to crack open Black position, using be thinking of bailing out. 17.e2 h8
p a wn b re a k s o n e it h e r f la n k, wh e n h i s [ 17...d6 18.ef3 exd4 19.xf6
unopposed light-squared bishop will should again hold for white. ]
steadily increase in strength. Black 18.f5?!
presumably entered this whole adventure [ 18.ef3!? looks better - defending the
intending the game continuation and centre is a thankless task, but aiming to
33
crea te b a la nce by co un te r p un ch in g a t already had an unpleasant position. 19.e4

black's soft spots is more attractive. b3 20.b1 d5 21.ed2 f6 22.xb3
A) 18...exd4 19.xf6 ( 19.cxd4 cxb3 23.d2 a5 24.a4 bxa4 25.a1 a3!
doesn't help black as the pressure on f6 26.xa3 a4 27.c4 fe8 28.b4?
a n d f 7 g i v e w h i t e a t l e a s t e q u a l i t y .) [ Necessary was 28.e2 though after eb8
19...gxf6 20.h5 is again at least equal Black would be ready for a breakthrough on
for white.; the queenside with Bf8 and a4- a3. ]
B) 18...d6 19.xf6 gxf6 20.h5 28...f8
is at least a draw f or white, since th e 0-1
only winning try, .. .f5, just gives up all
shelter around the black king. ]
18...d6 19.b5? exd4 20.cxd4 c6 21.c4 46 B00
xd4 winning material without compensation. Grischuk,Alexander 2606
22.c3 d8 23.e5 d5 24.ef3 f6 25.e4 Lima,Darcy 2525
c8 26.d3 xc3 27.g4 xe5 28.g3 FIDE WCh KO New Delhi IND (1.2) 28.11.2000
g8 [Jon Tisdall]
0-1
1.e4 b6 Been a while since a (coming) world
championship semi-finalist faced this. 2.d4
45 B00 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5 5.c3 f6 6.e2
Gomboc,Miha 2160 e7 7.a3
Filipovic,Branko 2435 [ 7.bd2 A quick look at how to react to
11th Open Ljubljana 2000 n a t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t : cxd4 ( 7...c6
[Neil McDonald] 8.dxc5?! bxc5 9.e5 d5 10.e4 c7
11.g3 f6 12.exf6 gxf6 13.h5 0-0-0
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5 14.h6 hg8 15.g3 f5 16.0-0-0 g6
5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 c6 This leads 17.d2 g4 18.f4 f6 19.h3 g7
to a different type of centre to 20.he1 e4 21.xe4 fxe4 22.xe4 a5
[ 7...d5 8.e5 fd7 as played in Grosar- 23.b1 c4 24.e4 e5 25.xc4 exf4
Filipovic. Here Black looks for active piece 26.xf4 a6 27.e4 f6 28.d6 g6
play rather than a gritty blocked structure. 29.c2 g5 30.xg6 xf4+ 31.xf4 hxg6
In particular, he keeps his queen's bishop 32.xg6 xa2 33.h4 c7 34.b1 d5
active. The drawback is that Black isn't 35.e4 b5 36.d4 xd4 37.xd4 e8
staking much of a claim in the centre, so 38.c4 e1+ 39.d2 a5+ 40.c3 a1
White has direct attacking chances. ] 41.c2 b1 42.e3 xb2 43.d3 b7
8.a3?! Much stronger is 8 dxc5! as played in 0-1 Rausis,I-Kveinys,A Riga 1986.) 8.cxd4
DD416, Filipenko-Filipovic also in the d5 9.e5 fd7 10.a3 a5 11.b1 a6
Ljubljana tournament. With 8 a3 White plans 12.c3 xd3 13.xd3 c6 14.h4 a7
to restrict Black further with 9 b4. Filipovic 15.g5 c8 16.h3 f8 17.b5 xb5
neutralises this idea with his next two moves, 18.xb5+ d7 19.f3 0-0 20.d3 xg5
but this leaves him with less influence on the 21.hxg5 c7 22.d2 c4 23.e3 c2
centre. a5 9.bd2 c4 10.c2 c7 24.c3 c7 25.c1 g6 26.h3 fc8
11.e5 Attacking c4. b5 12.f4 0-0 13.ef3? 27.a4 c4 28.b3 4c7 29.f4 b8 30.f2
This retreat is totally inconsistent. a6 31.g4 b4 32.d2 c6 33.f3 h6
[ White should continue 13.f5! for example 34.gxh6 xh6 35.g3 g6 36.g5 h5
d6 14.g4 with definite attacking chances. ] 37.g2 g7 38.h1 xf3+ 39.xf3
13...h5 14.g3 g6 15.e5? This just xc3+ 40.g4 c2 41.g1 e3+ 42.f3
weakens his light squares. He had to play f5+ 43.g4 g3+ 44.xg3 xg3
[ 15.f5 with unclear play. ] 45.xg3 c3+ 46.f2 xb3 47.e2 b4
15...f5! 16.exf6 xf6 17.e4 g7 18.xb7 48.d3 xa4 49.b1 b4 50.xb4 axb4
xb7 White's next move doesn't help but he 51.c2 f8 52.b3 e7 53.a4 d7
34
54.b3 c7 55.xb4 b8 56.a4 a7 was very strong f or W hite in Gleizerov-
57.b5 b7 58.a4 a6 59.b4 b5 Filipovich from the same tournament. ]
60.c5 a5 61.d6 b4 62.f5 gxf5 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 d5!?
63.e7 b3 64.xf7 b2 65.g6 b1 After White's reply the black queen's bishop is
66.xe6 f4 0-1 Solomon,S-Miles,A/ shut in. On the other hand Black's position
Melbourne 1992. ] becomes secure against any sudden assault
7...c4 8.c2 b5 9.bd2 c6 10.f1 in the centre. A French type pawn centre is
[ 10.a4 led to adventure: a6 11.e5 d5 reached. 8.e5 fd7 9.bd2 c6 10.a3
12.e4 c7 13.axb5 axb5 14.xa8+ White intends to encroach on the queenside
xa8 15.fg5 h6 16.xf7!? That's what with 11 b4, which persuades Black to close
he's here for. xf7 17.h5+ f8 18.h4 the position further. c4 11.c2 b5 12.e1?
The threat of lifting a rook to h3 seems hard This is too routine. Following 10...c4 there is
t o m e e t . . . db4! Feels right, though no real pressure on W hite's centre, so it is
computers like Qa5 to play Nc7 and Nd8 to possible for him to build up an attack on the
protect black's king. Maybe they can get kingside. The obvious strategical plan is to
away with this, but a good counterattack is prepare the advance of the f pawn, and for
more likely to work. 19.cxb4 ( 19.b1 d3+ this task the rook is best placed on f1.
20.xd3 cxd3 21.h3 xd4 ) 19...xd4 Therefore
20.b1 xb4+ 21.f1 f5 22.g5 e7 [ 12.e1!? g6 13.f4 h5 14.df3
23.f7+ d8 followed by g3, Ng2, Ne3 and an eventual
A) 24.xe6! xg2+ ( 24...b7!? ) g4 seems to be the correct continuation.
25.xg2 b7+ 26.e4 xe4+ 27.xe4 Mean while Black could ad vance on his
dxe6; queenside, with an interesting battle in
B) 24.xf5? xe5! 25.g1 hxg5 prospect. ]
26.xg5+ c8 27.f4 A typo clearly, 12...a5 13.f1 b4 14.3d2 h5!
though white is clearly going down here. Black prepares to blockade the kingside. 15.f4
f8 0-1 Crouch,C-Burnett,R/ Coulsden White achieves the desired advance, but it
1999. ] has no punch as his pieces aren't on the best
10...a5 squares. g6 16.g4? This is horrible as
[ 10...c7!? looks more flexible. ] White's kingside pawns are crippled. He had
11.g3 c7 12.0-0 a6 13.d5 0-0 14.e1 to play more patiently for example with
exd5 15.e5 e4 16.xe4 dxe4 17.xe4 [ 16.g3 ]
b3 18.b1 xe4 19.xe4 c5 20.g4 16...hxg4 17.xg4 b3 18.b1?
Presumably e young, ambitious and powerful [ Not 18.xg6? g8 but rather than burying
Mr. Grischuk was not pleased with the holes the bishop on b1 he should have played it to
beckoning to black's knight. Black's kingside d1. ]
can be defended by ...Qc6-g6. 18...b6 19.f3 0-0-0 20.e3 dg8
½-½ 21.e2 d8 22.1d2 h5 23.g2 gh8
24.g5 This is a tactical blunder, but White
was already strategically lost. After all, how
47 B00 can he ever bring his rook on a1 into the
Grosar,Kiti 2210 game? xg5 25.fxg5 xe5!
Filipovic,Branko 2435 0-1
11th Open Ljubljana 2000
[Neil McDonald]
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5

Black has to be careful with his move order.
For example
[ 4...f6 5.e2 d5?! ( 5...e7! ) 6.e5 fd7
7.g5! e7 8.g4 g6 9.h4 h5 10.h3
35
48 B00 It is quite a popular system for black there.

Grosar,Kiti 2223 11.e4 0-0 12.a3 ac7 13.e1 f5
Mashinskaya,Iulia 2335 14.exf6 xf6 15.g3 fd5 16.d3 c8
V ECC Women Halle GER (2) 25.09.2000 17.d2 e8 18.h3 d6 19.ac1 xc1
[Jon Tisdall] 20.xc1 a8 21.e4 xe4 22.xe4
c8 23.xc8+ xc8 24.d3 a6 25.f1
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.d2 b5 26.e2 b6 27.d1 b7 28.c2
A very sensible continuation, akin in c4 29.c1 d5 30.d1 a5 31.e2
philosophy to the Tarrasch French - no a4 32.g3 f6 33.g4 g6 34.b3 axb3
structural damage today, thanks - a pin with ... 35.xb3 e4+ 36.e3 c6 37.h4 g7
Bb4 is ruled out. e6 5.gf3 c5 6.c3 d5 38.a4 bxa4 39.b8+ f8 40.g5 d6
I am not a big fan of this move, but I suppose 41.e8 e7 0-1 Peralta,E-Nogueiras,J/
that might not be relevant to admirers of San Copiapo 1992. ]
French-type positions. Nevertheless, I can't 7.e5 fd7
help feeling the lines where Black tries to [ 7...e4 They tell you to exchange pieces
keep the position open are more in keeping to relieve cramp, but this seems to also rob
with the spirit of the opening. black of a lot of the long-range potential for
[ 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 e7 8.0-0 manoeuvering - white's N on d2 is also
A) 8...0-0 9.e1 d6 10.a3 bd7 11.e5? somewhat of a problem piece. 8.0-0 e7
( 11.b4 should keep white with a safe 9.e1 xd2 10.xd2 c6 11.c1 a5
spatial advantage, and explains why this Black begins the process of liberating or
lovely game has not replaced the standard exchanging the Bb7. 12.e2 White could
plan of trading bishops on a6 - but it is consider ceding the a6-f1 diagonal in order
still nice to know.) 11...dxe5 12.dxe5 g4 to keep the bishops on the board. ( 12.g3!? )
13.c2 c8 14.b1 c5 15.e2 xf2+ 12...a4 13.g3 h6 14.h4 c8 15.c4 dxc4
16.xf2 xf2 17.xf2 xe5 18.e2 16.xc4 0-0 17.d3 a6 18.dxc5 xc5
g4+ 19.g1 b5 20.d3 c7 21.h3 19.e3 xd3 20.xd3 b4 21.e4 a3!
fd8 22.xb5 e3 23.g5 c2 24.b1 22.bxa3 xa3 23.c4 d5 24.xc5 bxc5
b6+ 25.h2 f2 26.d1 e3 27.b3 25.ec1 xa2 26.xc5 a6 27.5c2 a3
d7 28.g3 xg3+ 29.xg3 dc7 28.g2 a8 29.g1 d8 30.e1 a6
30.f2 f5 31.c4 xc4 32.xc4 xc4 31.g2 c3 32.e1 d5 33.e4 a4
33.d2 c2 34.g4 d4 35.b4 e5 36.b5 34.e2 xe2 35.xe2 b8 36.ec2 e4
h6 37.a4 e4 38.e3 g6 39.a1 37.c8+ xc8 38.xc8+ h7 39.f4 g5
c3+ 40.f2 xh3 41.g2 c3 40.hxg5 hxg5 41.f2 gxf4 42.gxf4 a4
0-1 Zuckerman,B-Adorjan,A/New York 1/2-1/2 Hellers,F-Ehlvest,J/New York 1993. ]
1984.; 8.a3 Intending to stake some space on this
B) 8...a6 9.xa6 xa6 10.e5 ( 10.d5 flank, but it seems to me that fooling around
exd5 11.e5 e4 12.xe4 dxe4 13.d4 on this side of the board only helps black find
c5 14.g4 g6 15.h6 d5 16.exd6 something to do. On the other hand, this plan
xd6 17.ad1 f5 18.e2 d3 19.c2 makes it harder for black to rid himself of the
0-0-0 20.e1 f6 21.xd3 exd3 Bb7.
22.xd3 xd3 23.e6+ b7 24.xf6 [ 8.e2 c6 9.0-0 e7 10.d1 cxd4
he8 25.g3 e2 26.f7+ e7 27.b3 11.cxd4 b4 12.b1 c8 13.f1 a6
ed7 28.e3 d1 29.xd1 xd1+ 14.d2 xf1 15.xf1 c7 16.a3 c6
30.xd1 xd1+ 31.g2 c6 32.f3 17.b4 b5 18.d3 a6 19.f4 b6 20.g4
d5 33.f4 b1 34.b3 b2 35.g5 g6 21.h6 c4 22.f4 f5 23.g4 d8
xa2 36.h6 e6 37.xh7 f7 24.g5 f7 25.xe7 xe7 26.gxf5 gxf5
38.h6 b2 0-1 Archangelsky, M-Kveinys, 27.h1 g8 28.g1 d7 29.ac1 b2
A/Cappelle la Grande 1994.) 10...d5 30.xg8 xg8 31.xf5 f8 32.xe6+
This kind of position is very similar to lines xe6 33.g5 xg5 34.xf8 c4 35.g1
in the c3 Sicilian, and may even transpose. h6 36.f4 g6 37.f5 h5 38.e6+ c7
36
39.c5+ b8 40.xd5 b6 41.c6 c8 f4 72.f6 e4 73.e7 d7 74.d2 b5
42.c1 1-0 Sermek,D-Minasian,A/Cannes 75.b4 d7 76.c3 b5 77.e6 c4+
1996. ] 78.f6 b5 79.g5 e8 80.d2 b5
[ 8.0-0 c6 9.e1 is a very logical plan that 81.f6 e8 82.h6 f5 83.g7 e6
led to complex play: e7 10.f1 c7 84.c3 h5 85.f8 d2
11.g3 0-0-0 12.g5 xg5 13.xg5 f6 ½-½
14.exf6 gxf6 15.e3 h5 16.xh5 dg8
17.c1 b8 18.b4 c4 19.e2 a8
20.f3 f8 21.f4 f7 22.g3 e7 49 B00
23.f4 f5 24.g4 xg3 25.hxg3 h6 Gulko,Boris F 2602
26.h3 b8 27.e2 c8 28.f3 g5 Lima,Darcy 2543
29.e3 g7 30.ce1 h8 31.xe6 xe6 I American Continental (7) 16.08.2001
32.xe6 gh5 33.e3 b7 34.e8 xh3 [Jon Tisdall]
35.gxh3 1-0 Tiviakov,S-Reinderman,D/
Singapore 1990. ] 1.d4 b6 2.e4 e6
8...c4 9.c2 b5 10.0-0 c6 11.b4 cxb3 [ 2...b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4 5.d3 f6
[ 11...a5!? ] 6.e2 d5 7.e5 e4 8.d2
12.xb3 e7 13.e1!? A nice move that A) 8...xd2 9.xd2 ( 9.xd2 0-0
opens the way for the white queen and also 10.f4 e7 11.h4 f6 12.exf6 xf6
sends the N on a nice orbit - c5 and more 13.g4 c8 14.e5 f8 15.h3 c5
likely f4 are attractive squares. a5 14.xa5 16.h5 h6 17.g4 f6 18.h5 h6
xa5 15.d2 c7 16.d3 b6 17.f4 1/2-1/2 Dinescu,A-Tomescu,V/ROM 1993
c4 18.c1 Black's problem is that there is (18) ) 9...e7 10.g4 g6 11.e2 c5
no secure place for the king. g6 19.f3 a5 12.c3 a6 13.xa6 xa6 14.0-0 d7
20.h3 h6 21.f4 0-0-0 22.d3 df8 15.f3 0-0 16.e3 fc8 17.fd1 cxd4
23.a4 b4 24.cxb4 axb4 25.b1 b6 18.xd4 b8 19.f1 c6 20.f3 e8
[ 25...a5 26.xb4! xb4 27.b3 ] 21.d3 f8 22.h4 g7 23.1h2 f8
26.a5 24.g4 e7 25.d4 c6 26.e2 c5
[ 26.e3!? to gradually cut off b4 by using 27.g5 e7 28.f6+ h8 29.f3 h6
the c5 square was a serious option. ] 30.f4 c7 31.e3 e7 32.f3 c7
26...xa5 27.xb4 xb4 28.b3 c6 33.e3 e7 34.f3 1/2-1/2 Zetocha,C-
29.xb4 xb4 30.xb4 c7 31.f4 Tomescu,V/ROM 1993 (34);
[ 31.d3 b8 32.xb8 xb8 is reasonably B) 8...xc3 9.bxc3 e7 10.0-0 c5
solid. ] 11.dxc5 bxc5 ( 11...xc5!? ) 12.ab1
31...h5 32.fb1 a3 33.1b2 xc2 c7 13.c4 Now white straightens out his
This piece wasn't doing much - black should pawn structure while maintaining the more
just keep the Nc4 as white gets an initiative in act ive po sitio n . dxc4 14.xc4 d7
the sterile looking ending that arises. 15.a5 c8 ( 15...b6 16.b5+ c6 )
[ 33...c4!? ] 16.fd1 a6 ( 16...0-0? 17.xb7 xb7
34.xc2 b8 35.d2 xb4 36.xb4 a8 18.a6+- ) 17.d3 ( 17.b3!? ) 17...b8
37.h4 d7 38.h2 b5 39.d6 c6 ( 17...xf3!? ) 18.d2 Once the N gets to
40.b2 a4 41.c5 a5 42.f3 b5 43.a2 c4 black faces a grim defensive task trying
b7 44.g3 b1 45.f4 h1 46.g5 h2 to ever get active. 0-0 19.f4 g6 20.b3
47.d6 c6 48.c2+ b6 49.c7+ a7 a8 21.c4 d5 22.e4 xe4 23.xe4
50.a5 a6 51.d8 b5 52.h6 a6 b8 24.db1 xb3 25.xb3 b8
53.g7 b4 54.d2 c3 55.a5+ c4 26.d6 xd6 27.exd6 c4 28.e3 c5
56.xf7 xh4 57.xe6 xd4 58.xd4+ 29.e5 d7 30.xc5 xc5 31.c7 c8
xd4 59.f6 e3 60.xg6 f2 61.xh5 32.a3 f8 33.a5 b7 34.xa6 e8
xg2 62.f4 f3 63.f5 c8 64.e6 e4 35.a7 c5 36.a5 e4 37.e5 f6
65.g6 d4 66.f6 d3 67.d2 a6 68.c3 38.c5 e4 39.e5 f6 40.a5 d5
c8 69.g6 f4 70.d2+ e4 71.c3 41.a4 c3 42.f2 h5 43.f3 d7
37
44.c4 a8 45.a4 a7 46.a5 b7 47.a6 recommend the gambit course of the game.
a7 48.a4 xc7 49.dxc7 xc7 xd5 8.d2 ( 8.0-0 xc3 9.bxc3 bd7
50.e4 b6 51.e5 b5 52.a3 b4 10.a4 0-0 11.a5 h5 12.g5 xe2
53.a1 c5 54.g3 c4 55.a4+ b5 13.xe2 h6 14.f3 e4 15.a2 c5
56.a3 b4 57.a1 c4 58.h3 c5 16.d2 g6 17.f3 ac8 18.a3 fd8
59.g4 hxg4 60.hxg4 c4 61.g5 c5 19.axb6 axb6 20.b3 cxd4 21.xd4 e5
62.e4 c4 63.a2 b4 64.d4 d7+ 22.d1 d5 23.b5 c4 24.b4 d2
65.e5 a7 66.d6 b5 67.a1 b6 25.e1 b1 26.b2 bxc3 27.xc3
68.b1+ a5 69.c6 1-0 Rasik,V-Blatny, xc3 28.xc3 xc3 29.xb6 xc2
P/CZE 2001/The W eek in Chess 357/[J 30.xc2 xc2 31.b3 dd2 32.f3 g5
Tisdall] (69) ] 33.g3 g7 34.h3 h5 35.e4 d1+
3.f3 b7 4.d3 c5 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 36.g2 cc1 37.a3 f5 38.xe6 g4
7.0-0 c6 8.e5 d5 9.dxc5! This move 39.a7+ f8 0-1 Vatnikov,J-Gurgenidze,B
gives black some problems. bxc5 10.a3!? Bad Liebenzell 1995.) 8...xc3 9.xc3
c7 bd7 10.0-0 e4 11.xe4 xe4 12.xe4
[ 10...0-0 11.c4 f5 12.d1 g5 13.d6 xe4 13.e1 f6 14.f3 g6 15.b3 0-0-0
xd6 14.exd6 f4 15.xf4 gxf4 16.b5 16.f2 d7 17.b2 hd8 18.e2 b7
b6 17.a4 f7 18.c4 g7 19.xf4 19.f2 a5 20.a4 d5 21.g3 b4 22.c3
g4 20.h6 d4 21.xd4 cxd4 22.g5 c6 23.g4 f6 24.f4 h5 25.h3 hxg4
xg2+ 23.f1 a6+ 24.e1 g1+ 26.hxg4 f7 27.f3 h8 28.c4 b4
25.d2 dxc3+ 26.bxc3 xd6+ 27.c2 29.g3 c5 30.d1 g6 31.xe6 c2
xg5 28.xg5+ f8 29.g1 e4+ 30.b2 32.d2 xb3 33.dxc5 hd8 34.xb6+
b8+ 31.b3 e8 32.g8+ e7 33.g7+ c7 35.xd7+ xd7 36.d4 xa4 37.c3
f6 34.f7+ e5 35.f4+ 1-0 Jelen,I- c6 38.b5+ xb5 39.cxb5 d3+
Filipovic,B Bled 1999. ] 40.h4 e7 41.xf6 gxf6 42.xf6 d5
11.b5 b8 12.c4 db4 13.e4 a6 43.b6+ b7 44.f5 a4 45.f7 d7 46.g5
14.d6+ xd6 15.exd6 d8 16.d1 xe4 c8 47.f8+ b7 48.f7 c8 49.f6 c6
17.xe4 f6 18.d2 b7 19.b3 a5 20.a3 50.g7 d8 51.g8 b7 52.e8 c6
a6 21.f4 0-0 22.d3 a4 23.d2 d8 53.f5 a3 54.e3 a2 55.a3 d2 56.g5
24.b1 b7 25.b4 axb3 26.bxb3 xe4 f2+ 57.g4 xc5 58.b7
27.xe4 e5 28.e3 f5 29.xc5 xc5 1 / 2 -1 / 2 Mi kh a lc h is h i n , A -G u rg e n id z e , B
30.xc5 f7 Volgodonsk 1981. ]
1-0 7...e4 8.0-0
[ 8.d2 xd2 ( 8...xc3 9.bxc3 d7
10.0-0 f5 11.exf6 xf6 12.ae1 0-0-0
50 B00 13.xe4 dxe4 14.g5 e5 15.xe4 g6
Gunnarsson,Jon Viktor 2368 16.f3 he8 17.d5 xd5 18.c4 b7
Degraeve,Jean Marc 2540 19.c3 h6 20.d1 c6 21.fe1 a6
34th Olympiad (10) 07.11.2000 22.d2 g5 23.e4 e6 24.b3 xc4
[Neil McDonald] 25.xc6 xc6 26.xe5 xe5 27.xd8+
xd8 28.xe5 e6 29.xe6 xe6 30.f2
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4 d7 31.e3 c5 32.e4 d6 33.c1
5.d3 f6 6.e2 d5 About time for a quick g8 34.f5 h7+ 35.f6 xc2 36.g7
survey of this rather popular position in the 1. h5 37.f6 g4 38.f4 h4 39.g5 g3 40.h3
e4 b6 system. W e can see some serious e4 41.xh4 xg2 42.xg3 e4
names in this section, though we are still 43.g4 b5 44.g5 b4 45.f6 c4 46.h4
obviously in theoretical backwaters. 7.e5 a5 47.f5 a4 48.h5 b3 49.axb3 cxb3
[ 7.exd5 Has not posed black problems, but 50.e2 b2 0-1 Usachyi,M-Gurgenidze,B
it is not clear that the sharper path of the Biel 1994.) 9.xd2 c5 ( 9...xc3 10.bxc3
game is any better. In fact, looking at the c5 11.g4 0-0 12.h5 h6 13.h4 a6
games and stats, one can hardly 14.g4 xd3 15.cxd3 f6 16.f4 cxd4
38
17.cxd4 c6 18.f3 fxe5 19.xe5 xd4 c8 29.e3 g6 30.b1 f6 31.xe4 g2
20.g6 c2+ 21.e2 xa1 22.g5 f5 32.c5 d5 33.d3 d7 34.exf6 gxf6
23.c1 h7 24.e5 e8 25.g4 h5 35.f5 xh2 36.fxe6+ xe6 37.f4 g8
26.g6+ g8 27.g1 a4 28.xa1 xf4 38.e4 g4 39.e1 d6 40.ee3 f2
29.d4 c8 30.e3 c2+ 31.d3 c3+ 41.f3 d5+ 42.f5 xf3 0-1 Dahlhaus,F-
0-1 Seidel, A-Wornath,K Wiesbaden 1998.) Mueller,H Germany 1995. ]
10.g4 0-0 11.h3 h6 12.a3 xc3 [ 10...e4 11.e1 c5 12.c3 xc3 13.dxc5
13.bxc3 a6 14.xa6 xa6 15.0-0 cxd4 e4 14.xe4 dxe4 15.g3 f8 16.a3
16.cxd4 c8 17.d3 b8 18.fc1 c6 g8 17.c2 d7 18.fd1 c7 19.cxb6
19.b3 e7 20.a4 a5 21.d2 c6 22.c3 axb6 20.d2 c5 21.ad1 h6 22.d4
c7 23.c2 c8 24.ac1 h5 25.g3 f5 d3 23.d6 c4 24.b3 h7 25.f3
26.h3 e7 27.c4 dxc4 28.xc4 xc4 xa2 26.xa2 xb3 27.ad2 e3 28.xd3
29.xc4 d8 30.f3 b7 31.h2 g6 e2 29.e1 exd1 30.xd1 xd1+
32.g4 hxg4 33.hxg4 e7 34.g3 g7 31.xd1 c8 32.a1 d5 33.a7 g6
35.g5 d5 36.f3 e7 37.e4 g5 34.f2 c2+ 35.g3 b5 36.a1 b2
38.d6 f4 39.c8 h8 0-1 Shaw,T- 37.a3 b3 38.d6 b2 39.a3 b3
Fuller,M Sydney 1995. ] 40.d6 c4 41.f4 b2 42.g3 h5
8...xc3 43.h4 a2 44.a3 e2 45.d6 f6 46.c1
[ 8...xc3 9.bxc3 xc3 10.b1 c6 c4 47.exf6 gxf6 48.b1 a2 49.b4
11.e3 b4 12.c3 ( 12.f4 d7 13.g5 f5 50.c3 c2 51.d4 e5 52.b2 exd4
f8 14.d2 e7 15.a4 a5 16.b5 c6 53.xc2 d3 54.d2 e5 55.f2 d4
17.fc1 xb5 18.axb5 f5 19.g4 h6 56.g4 b4 57.gxh5 b3 58.h6 g8 59.e1
20.h5 e7 21.h3 g6 22.e1 e7 c3 60.h5 h7 61.f4 b2 62.d1 b1
23.f4 h5 24.g5 d8 25.g2 c6 26.bxc6 0-1 Simonet Pons,M-Gallego,R Escaldes
xc6 27.f5 e7 28.fxe6 fxe6 29.f4 f5 1999. ]
30.xh5 e7 31.g6 d7 32.c3 c7 11.g5 d7 12.f3 h6 13.h3 e7 14.f4
33.g4 c4 34.f4 c6 1/2-1/2 Gronn, A- h5 15.a3 a4 16.xe7 xe7 17.g4 hxg4
Ostenstad,B NOR 1992.) 12...e7 13.d2 18.fxg4 af8 19.h5 d7 20.f4 g6
a5 14.f4 c5 15.f5 c6 16.fxe6 fxe6 21.af1 gxh5 22.xf7+ xf7 23.xf7+ c8
17.h3 c8 18.g6+ d8 19.f7 cxd4 24.g5 c6 25.g6 e8 26.g7 g8 27.e7
20.xe6 c7 21.cxd4 xd4 22.f3 xe6 b4 28.g5 b7 29.f6 e4 30.xe6
23.xe6 d7 24.g5 c5+ 25.h1 xe6 e1+ 31.g2 f2+ 32.h1 f3+ 33.g1
26.xe6+ c8 27.f7 e8 28.xc5 bxc5 e3+ 34.g2 g5+ 35.f1 c1+ 36.g2
29.fxb7 xe5 30.d2 1-0 Boege,W- d2+ 37.g1 e3+ 38.g2 f2+ 39.h1
Gutmann,M Badenweiler 1994. ] f3+ 40.g1 c6 41.xg8 g4+ 42.f1
9.bxc3 xc3 10.e3 h3+ 43.g1 e3+ 44.g2 g5+ 45.f1
[ 10.d2 e4 11.f4 h6 12.g4 g5 f4+
13.h5 d7 14.a3 g8 15.xe4 dxe4 ½-½
16.d2 h7 17.c4 a6 18.fe1 g4
19.d5 f5 20.h4 exd5 21.e7+ c8
22.cxd5 xd5 23.ac1 b7 24.e3 ae8 51 B00
25.h4 xe5 26.ce1 f5 27.g3 xa2 Handke,Florian 2467
28.xe4 fxe4 0-1 Braennstroem,S-Wolf,S Poley,Vladimir 2402
Germany 1992. ] 34th Rilton Cup (4) 30.12.2004
10...c6 [Glenn Flear]
[ 10...h6!? 11.a4 c6 12.a3 e4
13.e1 g5 14.f4 f5 15.d2 a5 16.f3 1.d4 b5 2.e4 a6 3.f3 b7 4.d3 f6
e7 17.e1 h7 18.g4 h5 19.g5 f5 [ If White's primitive attack in this game is to
20.e2 h4 21.g2 e3 22.g6 xg2 be f e a re d t h e n Bla ck sh o u ld p la y 4...e6
23.gxh7 xe1 24.xe1 xh7 25.xe4 5.e2 f6 to get back to the standard
dxe4 26.g5 h6 27.f2 e7 28.c3 position. ]
39
5.e5 More aggressive than the usual 5 Qe2. 21.bxc5+ a7 22.d2 b8 23.a4 xc5
d5 6.g5! A strong move that is awkward 24.e3 e7 25.axb5 xh2 It's either this or
to meet. e6 r e s i g n i n g . 26.xh2 h8+ 27.g1 h4
[ After 6...b4 7.e4! ( 7.xh7? 28.f3 h2+ 29.f2 h4+ 30.e2
can be met by xh7! 8.xh7 e4! 9.xf8 1-0
xc2+ 10.f1 xf8 11.c3 g6 )
7...xe4 8.xe4 d5 9.0-0 I prefer
White. ] 52 B00
7.f3 e7 8.xh7 c6 9.c3 0-0-0 10.g5 Handoko,Edhi 2407
f6 11.exf6 xf6 Torre,Eugenio 2535
[ Alternatively 11...gxf6 12.xf6 xd4 2nd Dato' Arthur Tan Malaysian Open (3)
13.cxd4 b4+ 14.d2 xd4 15.e4 b4 [Glenn Flear]
16.0-0-0 didn't give Black enough for his
piece in Wallner,K-Humer,W corr 1989 ] 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4
12.xf6 xd4 13.xb7+?! Spectacular 5.d3 f6 6.e2 d5 7.exd5
stuff! White gets plenty of wood for the queen [ A reasonable try as 7.e5 e4 8.d2
by eliminating Black's active pieces. xd2 gives Black no particular problems. ]
[ M o v i n g t h e q u e e n w i t h 13.f4 7...xc3+
seems strong e.g. e5 ( 13...xg2 14.xd4 [ A number of strong players have opted for
c5 15.f4 xh1 16.e4 ) 14.d5 d6 recapturing with the queen. This is most
15.g4! e6 16.xd8 xd5 17.e2 commonly done immediately e.g. 7...xd5!?
xd8 18.0-0 ] 8.0-0 xc3 9.bxc3 0-0 10.f4 c8
13...xb7 14.e4 f7?! 11.fe1 c5 Bareev,E-Bauer,C Enghien-les-
[ I prefer 14...f3+ 15.gxf3 f7 Bains 2001 with a good position for Black. ]
which messes up W hite's kingside pawns [ Also possible is 7...xd5 although 8.d2
and threatens 16... Qxf3. ] xc3 9.bxc3 e7 10.0-0 d7 11.a4
15.cxd4 e8 16.c5+ b6!? gives White a small initiative. ]
[ After 16...xc5 17.dxc5 Black's major 8.bxc3 xd5 9.f4 bd7 Now it's 'Blunder
pieces can't generate enough immediate o f t h e w e e k ' t i m e . . . 10.xc7?? c6
t h r e a t s t o s t o p W h it e f r o m c o m p l e t in g The threats to the bishop and the queen's
development. The three pieces are rook (via c3) cost W hite a piece. An
probably favourite to outplay the queen long- astonishing oversight for a 2400-player.
term, but things remain fairly unclear. ] 0-1
17.b4 e5! Black must get his rooks into
action. 18.d5!? Rather daring to say the least!
I'm surprised that he didn't opt for 53 B00
[ 18.0-0 exd4 19.a4 when things are Hector,Jonny 2538
double-edged but Black's king is in some Gausel,Einar 2533
danger. Black's defence would then hinge ch-Nordic Aarhus DEN (3) 08.09.2003
on d6 ] [Neil McDonald]
18...xd5?!
[ 18...e4! comes into consideration, then (if 1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3
you d on't min d) I'd like to de scrib e th e Simple Chess. Johnny Hector has a great
position as 'unclear'! ] respect f or slightly of f beat openings and
19.e4! d4 20.0-0 xc5? d o e s n 't s e e k a n o u t - a n d - o u t r e f u t a t i o n .
[ 20...xa1! is really going into the lion's den Instead he relies on natural development to
but after 21.e3 a7! Black might be able yield a space edge. f6?!
to survive e.g. 22.b3+ ( or 22.xd7+! [ M i l e s u s e d t o l i k e t o f l i c k i n 4...b4+!
nobly continuing with the attack c5 23.bxc5 here, as to give White a choice. After
a5! 24.c6+ a6 ) 22...d4 23.xd4+ A) If 5.bd2 then White's development is
exd4 ] slightly gummed up. A recent game
40
continued xf3+ 6.xf3 f6!? ( 6...e7 gradually exposed. ]

was Miles's preference in Garcia,G-Miles, 36...f3 37.e3 d1+ 38.h2 b1
A Capablanca Memorial 1995) 7.g3 d6 [ 38...d4 may oblige White to take the
8.d3 g6 9.c3 c5 10.b4 xg3 winning ending with 39.d3+ ]
11.hxg3 b6 12.c4 f6 13.a4 g4 39.h5 g8 40.g2 d1
14.0-0 xf2+ 15.xf2 xf2 16.xf2 d7 [ 40...h7 resists longer ]
Escofet,J-Kliman,D Montevideo 2003 and 41.e8+ h7 42.e4+ g6 43.hxg6+ fxg6
Black's superior pawn structure means 44.h8+! xh8 45.e8+ h7 46.xd7+
he's fine, despite having had to give up g8 47.c8+
two pieces for a rook.; 1-0
B) 5.c3 xf3+ 6.xf3 c5 7.c4 f6
8.f4 d6 9.0-0 e7 10.g3 g6
11.e3 b6 12.d2 0-0 13.f4 d7 54 B00
gives Black a respectable-looking Hoekstra,Matthew 2221
Classical Scotch type position, Tiller,B- D'Onofrio,Lee C
Houska,M British League 2002 ] 29th World Open (4) 06.07.2001
5.xe5 xe5 6.d3 b4+ 7.d2 e7 [Neil McDonald]
8.0-0 d5 This move is not new, but hasn't
be en te s te d a t such a high le vel be f ore . This game contains a survey of recent games
9.exd5 d6 10.g3 xd5 The centre is in line with ...a6. The line in the game is very
liquidated, but Black has fallen slightly behind unusual and interesting and not as bad for
in development. This is enough for Hector to Black as the results. Black's flashiest game in
obtain an edge. 11.e4 c5 12.b1! a5 t h e s u r ve y c o m e s i n p r o b a b l y h i s wo r s t
[ After 12...0-0 the time and space gaining variation - Resika-Galaras. Black made the
13.b4 is a nuisance ] most of his trumps, but the line is not one I
13.b3 0-0 14.c4 The bishop is trapped by can recommend, though it is not without its
the knight. In such an open position this is dangers for W hite. Maybe I am just getting
s i g n i f i c a n t . d8 15.a3 Now the bishop timid in my old age? 1.e4 a6 2.d4 e6
leaps to life and Black's position starts to [ 2...b5
creak. g5 16.h4 b5 17.xd6 cxd6 A) 3.f3 f6 4.e5 d5 5.c4 bxc4
18.c4 6.xc4 e6 7.0-0 e7 ( 7...b7 ) 8.xd5
[ 18.xd6? is bad after f5 and it's White exd5 9.c3 c6 10.b3 a5 11.e1 a6
who finds himself tangled up. Hector instead 12.f4 c7 13.e2 a6 14.g3 e6
f i x e s t h e we a k n e s s , h e ' l l g e t r o u n d t o 15.d2 g6 16.h6 b8 17.c2 b4
pressurizing it later when his pieces are all 18.a3 c4 19.d2 a4 20.ad1 b3
in play. ] 21.h4 c4 22.h2 d8 23.c1 b5
18...b6 19.c2 h6 20.bd1 g4 21.d2 24.d2 xh4 25.ge4 e7 26.d6+
a4 22.b1 c7 23.d3 c8 Giving up the xd6 27.exd6 e2 28.b1 xd1
d-pawn as a bad job. Instead 29.g5 1-0 Arias Santana,M-Vaglio,J San
[ 23...c8 24.bxa4 a7 25.c5 is grim. ] Jose CRC 2001.;
24.xd6 axb3 25.xb3 c6 26.c5 f5 B) 3.a3 b7 4.c3 e6 5.f3 f6
27.xf5 xf5 28.e1 d7 29.c4 6.d3 c5 7.dxc5 xc5 8.g5 c7 9.0-0
There's no particular hurry for White, he will c6 Black has reached a sensible position
improve his position and avoid any Black a kin t o t h e T a i m a n o v S icilia n . 10.d2
counterplay. dd8 30.b2 d7 31.e4 f3 d4 11.xd4 xd4 12.d1 g4
32.be2 a3 33.4e3 xe3 34.xe3 f5 13.f4 xf4 14.xf4 e7 15.c3 e5
35.e8+ h7 36.g4! Playing for more than a 16.xe5 xe5 17.c2 c4 18.b3 b6
basic pawn-up ending with 19.d3 hc8 20.c1 d5 21.f3 c5
[ 36.e4 Hector recognizes that as Black's 22.f2 d8 23.e2 dxe4 24.xe4 xe4
rook and knight are tied down, White's king 25.fxe4 d3 26.f2 d7 27.e3 e5
is relatively safe whereas Black's is 28.e2 d7 29.f2 c8 30.d1 dc7
41
31.c1 c6 32.d2 d4 33.b1 c6 7.e2

34.c1 a5 35.e5 a4 36.b4 d4 37.d1 [ 7.bd2 ]
f5 38.h3 h5 39.e4 c4 40.c5 7...c6 A very provocative variation which got
d8+ 41.d3 d5 42.e1 g4 43.e2 a workout in recent practice. 8.d5 e7 9.d6
h4 44.xd5 exd5 45.g3 f3+ 46.d3 g6 10.e5 xf3 11.gxf3 d5 12.h1
g5 47.e3 g6 48.h4 e6 49.b7 d4 A very extreme position. Black has
50.cxd4 xd4 51.d6 f5 52.xf5+ surrendered the bishop pair to do some very
gxf5 53.f3 e6 54.e3 d5 55.e2 nasty things to W hite's pawn structure. On
e4 56.f3 d4 0-1 Thiruchelvam,M- the other hand, White has also wedged his
Sinkevich,P Witley ENG 2001.; centre in Black's face. This is one of those
C) 3.d3 b7 4.f3 f6 5.bd2 c5 positions that just seems unlikely to be equal
6.c3 e6 7.0-0 e7 Black should wait with due to the concessions both players have
this - either take on d4, play ...Nc6 first, or made. df4
swit ch pos ition type s with .. .d5 . 8.e1 [ 12...f5 is even more committal - it will take
c6 9.e5 d5 10.dxc5 xc5 11.e4 so long to get his kingside developed, and it
This variation gives W hite a very will be hard to keep a lid on the position in
dangerous initiative as he gains a lot of the meantime. Also, e5 is far more secure
time against Black s dark-squared bishop after this advance. 13.a4 b4? 14.cxb4
which he can use to make usef ul an d cxb4 15.xa6 h4 16.b7 a5 17.xd5
direct threats. e7 12.g5 f6 ( 12...0-0 xd5 18.f4 d4 19.a5 e4 20.f3 d8
13.xe7 cxe7 14.d6 b8 15.xh7+ 21.a6 h4 22.h5+ g6 23.xh4 xh4
xh7 16.g5+ g6 17.g4 f5 18.g3 24.a7 e7 25.a8+ d8 26.e3 0-0
h5 19.gf7 1-0 Rosten,O-Roe,S 27.b7 h3 28.d2 h4 29.g1 g5
Glorney Cup U20 1995. ) 13.exf6 gxf6 30.xe4 f3+ 31.g2 fxe4 32.xd7 h8
C1) 14.h4 fxg5 15.h5+ f8 33.e7 b8 34.d7 1-0 Kulesza,M-
16.g6+ g7 ( 16...hxg6 17.xh8+ Chetverik,M Karvina CZE 2001. ]
f7 18.h7+= ) 17.xh8 e8!; 13.xf4 xf4 14.e4 xd3 15.xd3 g5?!
C2) 14.h6 Black has no safe home for Again Black makes a risky line riskier with
his king. b6 15.a4 0-0-0 extremism. All of
A bold decision. 16.axb5 axb5 17.e2 [ 15...f6!? ]
White seems destined to start landing [ 15...g6!? ]
punches first, since the movement of the [ 15...g5!? give Black counterplay against
Pb 5 in vit es m ost o f h is a rmy in . . . f5 W hite's jagged pawns and kingside. The
18.ed2 ( 18.g3!? ) 18...hg8! ga m e m o ve d o e s h a ve a lo gica l b a s is ,
( 18...b4 19.a6 ) 19.xb5 g6 isolating the e5 pawn and undermining e5 -
20.c4?! The drawback with this is that it it is just obviously much riskier. The bottom
makes Ba6 problematic, and that move line is whether White can crank open some
would draw the teeth of Black's attacking lines of attack before Black can complete
chances. ( 20.c4!? ) 20...db4 development and mount pressure on
21.e3 c7 22.b3?! dg8 23.g3 White's hyperextended pawns. If this line is
f4 Now Black is in charge - everything to be playable for Black, then he must be
converges on the W hite king. 24.d4 able to coordinate and consolidate a bit first -
fxg3 25.fxg3 xg3+! intuitively I would suggest that 15... g6 is
C2a) 26.hxg3 xg3+ 27.h1 the most likely candidate. ]
( 27.f1 h3+ 28.f2 g2+ 16.d2 c4?
mates. ) 27...h3+ 28.h2 xd4+; [ 16...g7 first must be better, making it
C2b) 26.h1 xd4 27.bxd4 3g4 harder for White to put his N on e4. ]
28.c5 xc5 29.xd7+ xd7 30.xe6 17.d4 g7 18.e4 g8 19.g1 h8
c6 0-1 Resika, N-Galaras,A Ikaros 20.xg5 xe5 21.xe5 f6 22.xe6 xg1+
GRE 2001. ] 23.xg1 fxe5 24.g8+ f7 25.xd8 xd8
3.f3 b5 4.d3 b7 5.0-0 c5 6.c3 f6 26.xd8+ e8 27.b7 f7 28.c5 e8
42
29.xa6 h2+ 40.f2 c5 41.e3 a4 42.f3 c4

1-0 43.dxc4+ xc4 0-1 Sorsa,N-Kiik,K/Pori
1997 (43) ]
4...xf5 5.e5 a6
55 B00 [ 5...d7 6.xc6 ( 6.h5+ g6 7.xg6 f6
Holzhaeuer,Mathias 2362 8.h4 presumably allows some cool
Barmbold,Jens 2270 sacrificial continuation?) 6...bxc6 7.a4 e5
72nd ch Seebad Heringsdorf GER (3) 8.h5+ g6 9.xe5+ f7 10.xh8 h4
[Jon Tisdall] 11.c3 e4+ 12.f1 e8 13.e3 xa4
14.f3+ f6 15.b3 d4 16.c3 e5
1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.b5 17.e3 f5 18.xe8+ xe8 19.d4 c2
Let's get quickly acquainted with some of the 0-1 Lahti,J-Porrasmaa,T/Kuopio 1998 (19) ]
main ideas of this offbeat defence. My old [ 5...d6 looks the most sensible, but it has
impression of this one has always been that it a deplorable record. 6.d4 f6 7.0-0 d7
is not bad for a surprise and not nearly as bad 8.c3!? cxe5 9.dxe5 xe5 10.e1 d6
as it looks - quite tricky really - though 11.f3 g6 12.f4 c5 13.b4 1-0 Tissir,M-
statistically black tends to get spanked for his Clery,D Cappelle la Grande 1997. ]
boldness. A closer look indicates that it is 6.xc6+
tricky but nearly as bad as it looks, with white [ 6.xc6 d7 7.xe7 axb5 8.xf5 xf5
ha vin g a varie t y of wa ys to ge t a lastin g 9.d4 ( 9.e2+ f7 10.d4 f6 11.e3
advantage. b4+ 12.c3 xa2 13.xa2 xb1+
[ 4.d4 xf5 5.b5 e6 6.xc6+ bxc6 14.d1 xa2 15.cxb4 c4 16.f3 xb4+
7.e5 c5 8.h5+ g6 9.e2 g7 10.f4 17.f2 xb2+ 18.g3 e8 19.d3 e6
cxd4 11.g4 e4 12.0-0 g5 13.g3 e7 20.h4 c6 21.g5 e4+ 22.h2 c3
14.d2 xc2 15.df3 d3 16.e3 0-0 23.f1 xg5 24.hxg5 c2 25.g3 xd4
17.xg5 f6 18.xd3 xd3 19.xd3 g6 26.h4 e5+ 27.f4+ g6 28.d3+
20.e3 d7 21.h3 c6 22.f3 f8 xg5 29.xc2 xf4+ 30.f2 h5 31.g3
23.e5 xe5 1/2-1/2 Darnstaedt,F-Hille,I/ d4+ 32.g2 c4 33.d2+ f6 34.e3
Germany 2000 ] b4 35.e8 b3 36.f8+ e6 37.c8+
[ 4.h4 e5 5.h5+ g6 6.fxg6 f6 7.g7+ d6 38.xb7 e2+ 39.h3 xf3
( 7.g5 c5 8.d3 e7 9.e2 d7 10.0-0 40.b4+ e6 41.h2 e2+ 42.g1 b2
0-0-0 11.f5 e6 12.g7 he8 13.h6 0-1 Seyffer,B-Poethig,H Germany 1984.)
e7 14.c3 d4 15.h5 xh5 16.xh5 9...f6 10.d3 g4 11.0-0 d6 12.c3
c6 17.e3 xc2 18.ac1 b4 19.xa7 c6 13.e2+ d7 14.xg4+ xg4 15.h3
xd3 20.b6 f4 21.f7 xh6 22.xd5 f6 16.e3 h6 17.a4 b4 18.e2 ae8
e2+ 23.h1 e6 24.xe7+ xe7 Braun-Poethig, Germany 1984 (1/2-1/2, 48 )
25.f8 ee8 26.f3 xc1 27.a3 xa2 though black's compensation for the pawn is
28.d6 e6 "0-1" Jurkovic,A-Tribuiani,R ... abstract. ]
Nereto 1998. Presumably white actually did 6...bxc6 7.f3
deliver mate before his flag fell or some [ 7.d4 e6 8.xc6 h4 9.c3 d6 10.e3
other oddity.) 7...xh5 8.gxh8 xh4 f6 11.d2 e4 12.xe4 xe4 13.0-0-0
9.xh7 d4 10.g6+ d8 11.g3 g4 xg2 14.hg1 f3 15.xg7 xd1
12.xg4 xg4 13.g2 xc2+ 14.f1 16.xd1 f8 17.g1 f7 18.g8+ f8
xa1 15.xd5 c6 16.g2 f5 17.c3 19.g7 c8 20.e5 1-0 Dudek,R-Gross,G/
d3+ 18.g1 c2 19.e4 e1 20.xd3 Germany 1997/GER-chT (20) ]
xd3 21.g2 f6 22.f3 c5 23.h4 e7 7...e6 8.d3 c5 9.h5+ g6 10.e2 h5
24.g4 g8 25.h5 xh5 26.xh5 f4+ 11.d2 This is one of the best positions I
27.h2 xh5 28.gxh5 h8 29.d3 xh5+ have seen for black in this little survey, but he
30.g2 d4 31.e2 e6 32.f4 h8 still has plenty of weaknesses to guard. h6?!
33.fxe5 xe5 34.f3 d5 35.f4+ xf4 Black should not trade this piece - it is his
36.xf4 a5 37.e2 b5 38.a3 h3 39.e3 better bishop, and the pawn weaknesses are
43
easier to tolerate with more material on the [ 12.d5 leads W hite nowhere: after 0-0
board and greater chances to create 13.c4 d7 Black controls the important c5-
complications. 12.df3 xc1 13.xc1 g5 square and has excellent prospects. ]
14.h3 f6 15.g3 xh3 16.xh3 g4 17.h2 12...f7 Black has to waste a tempo because
[ 17.xg4!? hxg4 18.xh8 gxf3 19.xg8+ 13. exf5 was threatened, for example:
f7 20.g4! fxe2 21.f4 ] [ 12...0-0 13.exf5 xf3 14.fxg6 with a clear
17...gxf3 18.xf3 e7 19.e5 f8 extra pawn. ]
[ 19...xe5+ 20.xe5 ] 13.d5! This unexpected and well calculated
20.xf6 breakthrough in the centre of the board is the
[ 20.xh5+!? ] only way to fight for an opening advantage.
20...xf6 21.g5?! fxe4 14.xe4 exd5
[ 21.e2 ] [ Black has to accept the sacrifice, as quiet
21...d7!? continuations like 14...0-0 15.dxe6 xe6
[ 21...h6 ] 16.f5 intending f6 give White a strong attack
22.xh5 f5 23.e2 for nothing. ]
[ 23.g4 ] [ 14...xd5 was the alternative to the text,
23...g8 24.f4 e5 25.f1 exf4 26.gxf4 g6 but it's no better: 15.c4 c6 16.h3!
27.h7+ c6 28.h3 gf8 29.h6 8f6 ( threatening Ng5) xe4 ( forced) 17.xe4
30.d2 d4 31.c3 b5 32.b3 c6 33.cxd4 c6 18.d3! e7 19.ad1 with tremendous
cxd4 34.c1+ d6?? compensation for a pawn. ]
[ 34...b6 leaves white with progress 15.ae1! T h e p o i n t . d8 The only way to
problems - he has managed to pacify his avoid immediate loss. Such a move cannot be
extra pawn and repair black's structure on good, however it's best!
the queenside. ] [ The alternatives are hopeless: 15...dxe4
35.g5+- d5 36.e4 xf4 37.c5+ e6 16.xe4 xe4 17.xe4+ d7 18.xa8 ]
38.c6+ e5 39.h5+ 6f5 40.xf5+ xf5 [ 15...f8 16.g5! hxg5 17.fxg5 xf3
41.f6+ e5 42.xg6 18.xf3+ g8 19.e8# ]
1-0 [ 15...0-0 16.g5! hxg5 17.h3 g6
18.fxg5 g7 ( 18...c8 19.h6 f5
20.xf5 gxf5 21.e6 ) 19.xf8+ xf8
56 B00 ( 19...xf8 20.xg6+- winning ) 20.e6 f7
Ilincic,Zlatko 2545 21.f1 and White wins. ]
Filipovic,Branimir 2410 16.g3 Now it's clear that Black's idea has
Jugoslavija 1997 failed: for the cost of only one pawn White has
[Alexander Volzhin] a l a r g e a d va n t a g e i n d e ve l o p m e n t , a n d
Black's King feels very unsafe in the centre of
1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4 the board. c6
5.d3 f6 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0 [ Black can't prevent Nf5 as 16...c8 fails to
xc3 9.bxc3 d6 10.d2! White should play 17.c4 ]
actively and try to exploit his development 17.f5 a6
advantage, otherwise he will have no [ 17...g6 18.h4 g8 19.e3 with a large
compensation for his weak Q-side pawns. advantage ]
[ Quiet continuations like 10.a4 lead White 18.g4 g8 19.e3! White simply doubles
nowhere: 0-0 11.a5 e5 12.e2 c6 Rooks on the e-file and prepares the decisive
13.a6 c8 14.d5 e7 15.d2 g6 penetration. f6
and Black was already slightly better in [ 19...c8 is no real improvement in view of
Liberzon - Larsen, Geneva, 1977. ] 20.h4+ d7 21.fe1 ]
10...g6?! A novelty of rather doubtful value. 20.fe1 c8 21.f3! Black has failed to
[ 10...e5 is the usual move here. ] coordinate his forces and now material loss is
11.f4 f5 This is the idea behind Black's unavoidable. f7
previous move. 12.f3! [ 21...xf5 22.xd5 f8 23.xc6+-
44
winning ] b8 18.xd7 xd7 19.b5 ee7 20.c4

22.c4! dxc4 exd4 21.xa5 d5 Allowing the queen to
[ 22...xf5 23.xd5 f6 24.xc6+- co m e t o t h e d e f e n c e . 22.xb7 xb7
winning ] 23.exd5 xe1+ 24.xe1 d6 25.a5 xc2
23.xc6 xf5 Forced. 26.cxd4 c3 27.a6+ a7 28.d1 f5
[ The attempt to hold onto his material 29.h3 g4 30.hxg4 fxg4 31.e8 xd5
advantage would lead to disastrous 32.c8 c6 33.xg4 1/2-1/2 Nikolaidis,K-
c o n s e q u e n c e s : 23...a7 24.e7 f8 Minasian,A Panormo 1998. (59) ]
25.d4 b5 ( 25...xe7 is no better: 11.f4 e7 A rare move, and one that has the
26.xe7 xe7 27.xc4 f8 28.c6 a8 Kramnik stamp of approval, though it looks
29.e4 f7 30.d8+ xd8 31.xa8 very passive.
with a decisive material advantage.) 26.e4! [ 11...exd4 12.e5 dxe5
and Black can resign: d7 27.xd7+ xd7 A) 13.fxe5 g5 14.f3 e3+ ( 14...xf3
28.e6+ d8 29.c6# ] 15.xf3 xe5 16.e1 f6 17.cxd4
24.xa8+ c8 25.e4 White has a decisive xe1+ 18.xe1+ d8 19.fe3 d7
advant age, an d converts it to a win very 20.g6 c8 21.e8+ b7 22.e4+ c6
convincingly. 23.e7 1/2-1/2 Sepp,O-Vetemaa,J Brugge
[ 25.e7 was not bad either: xe7 26.xe7 1995 - though white must be better here?)
xe7 27.c6 and although there is still a lot 15.h1 0-0 16.cxd4 d7 17.h4 g5
of play left, W hite should easily win the 18.e1 ae8 19.f2 d5 20.c4 b7
game. ] 21.f5 c8 22.ae1 c5 23.xd7
25...f8 26.h3 h5 27.h2 g6 28.1e3 b5 1/2-1/2 Tkachiev,V-Minasian,A Cannes
29.a3 f5 30.c6 d7 31.d5 f5 1995.;
32.a8 d7 33.g3 f7 34.c6 f5 B) 13.h5!? A very scary idea that has
35.d4 c8 36.g5 g8 37.a4! bxa4 not won supporters despite it leading to a
38.xa4 e8 39.e5 f8 40.c6 d7 very nice win over an ex-world champion.
41.xc4 The rest is easy and needs no g6 14.e2 c6 15.fxe5 e7 16.e6
commentary. b7 42.g5 f6 43.b3 c6 B1) 16...xe6
44.c4! g7 45.c5 d7 46.d3 f7 B1a) 17.xe6+ fxe6 18.xg6+ d8
47.cxd6 xd6 48.xg6! b5 19.ad1 and white should be able to
[ 48...xg6 49.xg6 xd4 50.g7++- net back a pawn while black is
winning ] c o o r d i n a t i n g h i s f o r c e s . ( 19.cxd4
49.dxd6+ cxd6 50.xd6+ xd4 20.ad1 );
1-0 B1b) 17.f2 0-0-0 ( 17...0-0
18.cxd4 );
B2) 16...f5 17.b3 0-0-0 ( 17...dxc3!?
57 B00 was perhaps rejected due to the
Jakic,Ivan 2255 po ssib ilit y o f 18.xf5 but this doesn't
Filipovic,Branko 2462 s e e m s o u n d : gxf5 19.h5+ d8
Christmas Open (2) 16.12.2001 20.ad1+ c8 21.xf5 g8 22.g3
[Jon Tisdall] d8 ) 18.cxd4 xd4 19.xd4 xd4
20.e5 hd8 21.ae1 a4 Very risky,
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.c3 f6 inviting the white bishop in, though black
5.f3 b4 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0 seems to be beating a path to the white
xc3 9.bxc3 d6 10.d2 e5 king. 22.b5 xa2 23.d1 xc2
[ 10...g5!? This looks a much safer 24.xd8+ xd8 25.d7+ b8 26.d1
alternative to the main line. 11.e2 e5 g8 27.b5 ( 27.e7 xg2+ 28.f1
12.e3 d7 ( 12...c6!? ) 13.b5 0-0-0 c4+ 29.e1 h4+ ) 27...a6 28.e7
14.a4 a5 15.ab1 White has the better of xg2+ 29.f1 b3 30.e8+ a7
it as black must exercise great care over his 31.e2 h3 32.e1 h4+ 33.d2
king position. he8 16.fe1 g6 17.d3 g5+ 34.c3 1-0 Ionescu, C-Smyslov,
45
V Sochi 1986. A very entertaining game, 45.d3 b7 46.a2 c7 47.h2 a3
but practice seems to be correct that the 48.b3 c4 49.xh6 d5 50.b5 dxe4+
line is not objectively good for white. ] 51.xe4 exd4 52.cxd4 g7 53.d3 c7
12.g4 54.e6 c8 55.d5 d7 56.d4 c8
[ 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.b5+ ( 13.g4!? 0-0 ) 57.c6 d6 58.bxb6
13...c6 14.c4 0-0 15.f5 d7 16.h5 1-0
b5 17.b3 c5 18.dxc5 f6! 19.f3
( 19.xe5 c7 20.f5 c8 21.f4 h5 )
19...c8 20.xf6 xf6 21.xf6 gxf6 58 B00
22.d5 b8 23.f1 g7 24.b3 e6 Jamrich,Gyorgy 2225
25.c6 bd8 26.d1 f5 1/2-1/2 Maljutin,E- Bordas,Gyula 2186
Kramnik,V Sochi 1990. (55) ] FSIM November (2) 05.11.2000
12...g6? [Jon Tisdall]
[ 12...0-0 ]
13.f5 g5 14.f6 f8 A very ugly move, but 1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 ce7 4.g3
black is understandably concerned about the [ 4.f3 g6 5.e3 f6 6.bd2
state of his kingside after. W hite's lackadaisical development is far
[ 14...d7 15.h5 ] from most accurate. g4 7.g5 e7
15.a4 a5 16.b5+ c6 17.d3 d7 8.xe7 xe7 9.c4 d6 10.d2 0-0
18.ab1 d8 19.c4 c7 20.g3 Black has a very comfortable position -
Black's position is ugly, passive and ideas of breaking up the centre with ...c6 or
precarious. a6 21.e3 xd3?! . . . f 5 a n d kn i g h t s r e a d y t o wo r k o n t h e
[ 21...b7 is probably tougher, the bishop is kingside - white is not at all up to the task of
worth having to harass white's knight. ] trying to keep a lid on all of this. 11.h3 f6
22.cxd3 e8 23.c4 e6 24.d5 cxd5 12.d3 c6 Now that White has released
[ 24...e8 25.dxc6 xc6 26.b5+- pre ssu re on d 6 b la ck can p ry op en th e
black's queenside is going. ] centre while white stumbles back in panic.
25.e3 13.dxc6 bxc6 14.h2 d5 15.exd5 cxd5
[ 25.exd5 was simple and strong: 16.e3 b8 17.b3 d4 18.c4 e4 19.e2
A) 25...e8 26.f2 b8 27.xa5 c5 e3 20.xd4 exf2+ 21.xf2 e8 22.f3
( 27...bxa5 28.a7+ c8 29.xb8+ a6 23.d4 xc4 24.bxc4 b4+ 25.f1
xb8 30.b1+- ) 28.c6 a8 29.d4+-; c3 26.d1 e4 27.e1 g3+ 28.g1
B) 25...xf6 26.xf6 xf6 27.xb6 e3+ 0-1 Segura,J-Ong Chong Ghee
xd5 28.xd6+- ] Istanbul OL 2000. ]
25...b7 4...g6 5.g2 f6 6.c3 c5 7.a4
[ 25...dxe4 26.d5+ b7 27.xb6+ xb6 b4+ 8.c3 e7 9.b3 c6 10.d6 f8 11.a3
28.b1 c8 29.xb6+ a8 30.b5 b6 12.d2 c5 13.h4 h5 14.h3 b7
and white's attack should be decisive as the 15.g5 c8 16.b4 cxb4 17.xb4 a5
black rooks are unlikely to play a role in 18.a3 c6 19.b2 b5 20.0-0 b6
the rest of the game. ] 21.d1 g4 22.h1 f6 23.h3 b7 24.f3
26.xd5 c8 27.b5 c6 28.e3 a6 h6 25.e3 g8 26.ab1 h8 27.fd1
29.fb1 b8 30.h4 As black is thoroughly 8f7 28.e2 g5 29.hxg5 xg5 30.xg5
bound, white probes to win a pawn on the xg5 31.h2 g8 32.d5 f7 33.c1
o t h e r f l a n k . xf6 This prolongs the game xd5 34.xd5 xc3 35.bxb5 c6 36.d2
considerably. 31.xf6 xf6 32.f3 d7 c2 37.xa5 h4 38.g4 h8 39.d1 g8
33.xf7 gxh4 34.d5 xd5 35.xd5 c5 40.f1 h6 41.h1 xd2 42.xd2 c1
36.a1 43.e2 h3 44.h2 c3 45.ad5 h6
[ 36.xd6 xa4 37.c4 ] 46.d1 g7 47.5d3 c5 48.xh3 f7
36...d8 37.h2 b7 38.h3 c6 49.g3 g5 50.g2 e6 51.xc1 xc1
39.xh4 e6 40.b5 f4 41.d4 xg2+ 52.e3 c4 53.d2 f4 54.b3 c5
42.g3 e3 43.f3 c4 44.e2 c8 55.d1 e3 56.a4 e6 57.d3 g5
46
58.f2 f4 59.d2 h2 60.f1 h4 61.a5 [ 9.b3!? leads to great complications and
xg2 62.xg2 h1+ 63.g1 h3+ 64.f2 seems to me to favour white.
h2+ A) 9...e3 10.xe4 ( 10.e6!? )
0-1 10...xg2+ 11.f2 dxe4 12.e6 d6
13.e5!+-;
B) 9...a5 10.e6!? xe6 11.b5+
59 B00 B1) 11...c6 12.xe4 dxe4
Jansa,Vlastimil 2467 ( 12...xe4 13.xb7 ) 13.d5;
Hlavnicka,J 2305 B2) 11...c6 12.xa5 d3 13.g1 e3
Czech Extra League 2000-1 (2) 19.11.2000 14.f2;
[Jon Tisdall] C) 9...xf3 10.xf3;
D) 9...0-0-0 10.xe4 dxe4 11.d2
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.c3 f6 5.f4 D1) 11...cxd4 12.cxd4 xd4
d7 6.f3 h6!? 13.c4! ( 13.d1? c6! );
[ 6...fxe5 This move seems to give white a D2) 11...e3 12.e6! ( 12.xe4?
freer hand, and seems inferior to me than a5! ) 12...e8
keeping the tension - I see no reason to D2a) 13.c4 xg2+ 14.f2 h4
liberate the Bc1 somewhat, nor lose control 15.d5 b8 ( 15...xd5 16.b6+
over g5. 7.fxe5 0-0-0 8.b4 e6 9.e2 e7 axb6 17.xd5 ) 16.e3;
10.0-0 h5 11.bd2 g5 12.b3 g4 D2b) 13.f2!? a5? 14.a3 c2
13.e1 e8 14.c5 g6 15.ed3 b6 15.xa5 e3+ 16.g1 exd2 17.xa7
16.f4 f7 17.a6+ b8 18.a4 xe5 c6 18.xd2 xa1 19.c4+- ]
19.dxe5 xc5+ 20.bxc5 e7 21.e3 h4 9...dxe4 10.d5 exf3 11.dxc6 xd1+
22.e2 h3 23.g3 g6 24.cxb6 axb6 12.xd1 fxg2 13.g1 bxc6 14.a4 0-0-0
25.f4 d3 26.b4 d4 27.f4 e4 [ 14...f7!? 15.xc6 d8 16.xg2 g6!?
28.f2 xa6 29.xa6 c6 30.a4 xe5 ( 16...e6 )]
31.a7+ c8 32.a8+ xa8 33.xa8+ 15.xc6 e6 16.xg2 c5 17.b4 b6
d7 34.xd8+ xd8 35.cxd4 f3+ 18.d2 e7! 19.g2 d5
36.f1 xh2+ 37.e2 f3 38.xh3 e7 [ 19...fxe5! ]
39.f4 xd4+ 40.xd4 xd4 41.c1 c5 20.f5! xc3 21.fxe6 fxe5 22.xd8+ xd8
42.b1 a4 43.xb6 xa2+ 44.f1 a1+ 23.g5 e8 24.d2!+- d4 25.c1 xa2
45.f2 a2+ 46.e2 f6 47.c6 a5 26.c2 e4 27.xa2 e3 28.c1 d8
48.f4 a2+ 49.e3 a3+ 50.d3 f5 29.h3 f8 30.g2 f3 31.g4 f4
51.xc5+ f6 52.c4 f5 53.f4+ g5 32.e2 e7 33.b5 c5 34.f3 g6 35.g5
54.e2 c3 55.e4 f5 56.e5+ f6 b6 36.e5 a4 37.d5 This game is also
57.e3 c2+ 58.f1 f5 59.e5+ f6 found in databases as Votava-Mikhaletz from
60.e4 c3 61.e2 f5 62.a4 b3 the same event...
63.e3 c3 64.a5+ f6 65.d4 b3 1-0
66.c4 b1 67.f2 c1+ 68.d3 g1
69.e4+ e7 70.g5 a1 71.g7+
1-0 Stucl,B-Vombek,D AUT 1993. ] 60 B00
[ 6...0-0-0 7.b5 e6 8.e3 ge7 9.bd2 Jobava,Ba 2705
e4 10.b3 f5 11.f2 a6 12.e2 h5 Oleksienko,M 2622
13.bd2 g5 14.fxg5 fxe5 15.dxe5 g7 Al-Ain Classic Open A 2013 (6.1) 24.12.2013
16.b3 xe5 17.c5 c6 18.a4 g4 [Glenn Flear]
19.b5 d6 20.d2 xf2 21.xf2 xf3
22.gxf3 e5+ 23.e2 e3 24.f4 xc3+ 1.d4 d5 2.c3 c6 3.e4 dxe4
0-1 Starcevic,A-Eklund,L Lidkoeping 1994. ] [ 3...f6 4.e5 d7 5.a4!? New and slightly
7.e2 e4 This manoeuvre leads to strange. ( after 5.xd5 Black has db8
fascinating early complications. 8.bd2 f5 6.c3 xd4 to regain the pawn. Then
9.xe4 7.e3!? is critical e.g. xe5 8.f3 d6
47
9.c4 e6 10.b5 e7 11.e2 a6 [ Necessary is 25...h6! but after 26.f5+

Sergeev, A-Vlassov, N Novokuznetsk 2012. g5 27.e3+ g4 28.d4+ Black has to
W hite has superior development for the play the unfortunate e4 . Nevertheless
pawn, but Black is cramped though not in 29.xe4 e6 30.b4 a5! is highly
immediate danger.) 5...b4 6.f4 b8 complicated, though probably better for
7.e3 f5 8.c1 e6 9.f3 e7 10.e2 White. ]
a6 11.0-0 h6 12.d2 8c6 13.d1 a5 26.e3+ g4 27.d4+ h3 28.f5+ xh2
14.b3 h5!? 15.e2 h4= Zeller, F-Bauer, C 29.h4+
Switzerland 2013. ] [ 29.h4+ xg3 30.h3# is quite an
4.d5 e5 5.d4 g6 6.e3 original mate. ]
[ After 6.xe4 f6 7.a4+ d7 8.b5 a6 1-0
9.xd7+ I don't think that White has
anything special e.g. xd7 10.xd7+ xd7
11.f3 e8 12.e3 e5 13.dxe6+ xe6! 61 B00
14.g5 e7 15.0-0-0+ c8= Strikovic, A- Jones,Gawain C 2561
Nava Pereda, C San Sebastian 1994. ] Smirnov,V 2392
6...e5 7.dxe6 xe6 8.ge2! This is new and Australian Championships (2) 01.2010
could well be an improvement in a position [Gawain Jones]
where White hasn't done that well.
[ An early game continued 8.xe4 c6 9.d1 Longue 90m 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f6 3.e5
a5 10.d4?! f6 11.xf6 gxf6 12.c4 I noticed when preparing for the game that
f5 13.e3 c5 14.e2 0-0 15.xe6 ae8 this hadn't yet been discussed on
Ostojic, P-Knaak, R Budapest 1977, and ChessPublishing but it must be critical. g4
Black was better. ] [ 3...d5 would be more in the Alekhine
8...f6 9.0-0-0 xd4 10.xd4 g4 spirit and I think should be recommended.
11.b5+ c6 12.xc6! 4.d4 d6 5.c4 b6 would transpose directly
[ 12.e2 0-0-0 gets White nowhere. ] in t o a f a irly co m m on A le khin e p o s it io n
12...a6 13.a4 xd1 Taking the exchange examined in the archives. ]
and then accepting that he will be in for a 4.d4 When preparing I was somewhat
rough ride. surprised to see how many games had been
[ Instead 13...d7 14.d5 d6 played in this line recently. The Icelandic IM
looks precarious, but I can't (nor can the Stefan Kristjansson used it against many
computer!) see any way to exploit White's strong players in the Beijing Mind games
lead in development. ] tournament in 2008. That tournament was
14.xd1 e7 15.xe7+ xe7 16.c5+ only rapid but still this line has to be taken
e6 17.e2 seriously. Black, rather than trying to equalise
[ Or 17.f3!? ad8 18.b3+ e5 19.e1 out of the opening, is trying for a double
with scary-looking pieces, but again it may edged position without much theory where
not give any advantage. ] W hite has to play on his own. Objectively
17...hd8 18.d4+ e5 19.b6 Now Bc7+ W h ite sho u ld b e b e t te r b u t h e ha s to b e
is threatened, hence Black's next move. dc8 careful not to advance his pawns too far or he
20.e2 f8 21.d4+ f5 22.g3+ g6 might find himself with some problems to
23.f4 exf3 Opening lines for White's bishops d e f e n d t h e m . d6 5.h3 h6 6.c3
is fraught with danger. My computer was broken for this game and so
[ Instead giving himself some wriggle-room was using my fiancée's, which didn't have a
with 23...h5 makes sense. After 24.f5+ computer engine, but I saw the following
h6 25.h4 b5 26.b3 c7 the struggle Areshchenko game which looked promising
remains unclear. W hite has practical for White.
compensation (great bishops!), but nothing [ 6.b5 has also been played but I'm
concrete. ] doubtful whether W hite wants to trade off
24.c3 fxg2 25.c2+ g5? his light-squared bishop here. a6
48
A) 7.a4 b5 8.b3 e6 ( 8...dxe5 9.d5 6...a6 After the game my opponent informed
a5 10.0-0 b7 is extremely unclear.) me this was the main move.
9.exd6 xd6 ( 9...xd6 looks rather more [ The Areshchenko game ran 6...g6 7.f4
logic al. P erh ap s B la ck wa s sca red o f g7
10.d5 but after a5 Black is still definitely A) 8.d2 f5 9.0-0-0 Immediately would
i n t h e g a m e 11.dxe6 xb3 12.exf7+ be a scarier way of playing, 10.g4 is a big
xf7 13.axb3 0-0 14.0-0 b7 threat. ( 9.g4 does not yet win the piece
gives Black extremely good typical due to dxe5 10.dxe5 xd2+ 11.xd2
Marshall compensation for the pawn, in when Black has the d4 square f or his
the shape of the two bishops and semi- knight );
open f file for the rook to attack down.) B) 8.b5 Again I'd be reluctant to play this
10.c3 f5 11.e4 d7 12.c3 move. W hite wants to decrease the
gave White a fairly comfortable advantage pressure on his centre but he then always
which the strong GM converted quickly in has to watch out f or t he c5 break . 0-0
Korneev-Guerreiro, Malaga 2009 1-0 (25); 9.xc6 bxc6 10.d2 f5
B) 7.xa6 is given as played by Ni Hua B1) 11.g4 is th e mo st f o rcin g dxe5
b u t s e e m s u n l ik e l y! I g u e s s t h is wa s 12.dxe5 xd2+ 13.xd2 b7!!
imp ut inc orrectly an d he also t ried 7 . ( 13...h6 14.0-0-0 would leave White
Bxc6; with an extremely comfortable
C) 7.xc6+ bxc6 advantage with the better pawn structure
C1) 8.0-0 f5 My guess is the Ni Hua- and the offside knight on h6) 14.gxf5 c5
Kristjansson game ran 9.c3 ( 9.e1 15.e2 a6+ 16.e3 ( 16.e1 b7=
was also played against Kristjansson by is Black's idea ) 16...h6+
Martin del Campo in the Beijing Rapid B1a) 17.e4 just favours Black b7+
tournament and after e6 10.g5 d7 18.d5 ( 18.d3 fd8+ ) 18...xd2
11.exd6 cxd6 12.d3 e7 13.c3 h6 19.xd2 xd5+ 20.xd5 ad8+
14.xe7 xe7 15.e4 0-0 16.c4 21.xc5 xd2 when I prefer Black
White was slightly for preference but the with the active rook on the 2nd rank.;
game ended in a draw.) 9...e6 10.g5 B1b) 17.g5 xg5+ 18.f4 h6
d7 11.h4 h6 12.xf5 hxg5 13.e3 19.e4 when White can claim a small
b8 14.c4 e7 15.e1 d5 16.d2 advantage;
c5 when the following moves are too B2) 11.0-0-0 b7 12.g4 c5 13.d5
garbled to decipher and although Ni Hua B2a) 13...dxe5 14.xe5 xe5
went on to win Black is doing very well at 15.xe5 d4 is the computer's top
this point, a sort of super-French.; suggestion but understandable not to
C2) 8.xh6 was a previous game of my tra d e o f f t h e d a rk squ a re d b is h o p
opponent's when after gxh6 a strange which is a good defender but Black
p o s i t i o n a r o se wh e r e B l a ck ' s p a wn seems to be doing ok as the direct
structure has been compromised hugely 16.h4? xd5 17.h5 xh1 18.xh1
but in return he has the bishop pair, fails to ( 18.hxg6 b7 seems to be
some open lines f or his rooks and a winning for Black too 19.g5 fxg6
potential break with c6-c5. Rybka slightly 20.xg6 e5!-+ ) 18...d6;
prefers White which is probably correct B2b) 13...d4 14.xd4 cxd4
but he has to be very care f ul or th e 15.xd4 c6?! ( 15...c5 had to be
bishops will come to live with decisive tried ) 16.b4! b6 17.xb6 axb6
effect. 1/2-1/2 Roy Chowdhury-Smirnov, 18.dxc6 xc6 19.he1 left White a
Parramatta 2009 (34) ] pawn up in Areshchenko-Kristjansson,
[ 6.xh6 It's tempting to worsen Black's Reykjavik 2009 although seems
structure but gives Black good counterplay premature to resign so I guess we're
gxh6 7.c3 g7 8.b5 when the lines will just missing the rest of the score. ]
be similar to 6.Bb5 ] [ 6...e6 7.d3 b4 8.xh6 gxh6 9.e4
49
g7 10.exd6 cxd6 11.b5+ e7 12.a3 18.g2 a4 19.xd5 b5 20.xg6
d5 13.d2 b6 was Haznedaroglu- 1-0 Caspi-Spence, Gibraltar 2008 ]
Kristjansson, Beijing 2008 0-1 (32) when 9...g6 I thought at the time that Black's best
14.c4! looks strong for White as c7 15.c5! was to try sacrificing a piece
dxc5 16.dxc5 xb5 17.d6+ e8 [ 9...dxe5!? 10.xh6! exd4 11.xf5 gxh6
18.xc7 gives White a decisive attack ] 12.e4 shouldn't be too difficult to convert
7.g5 though ]
[ 7.exd6!? is the computer's top suggestion 10.d5 d8
but a human doesn't want to give away his [ 10...xe5 11.f4 traps the knight in the
centre so easily although after cxd6 8.d5 centre of the board. ]
e5 9.xe5 dxe5 10.xh6 gxh6 11.f3 [ 10...b4 11.xg6 hxg6 12.a3+- ]
W hite's structural advantage is obvious. 11.f4 e6 again the only move to prevent
Nevertheless I prefer the game continuation dropping a piece 12.dxe6 fxe6
but it's probably only a matter of style. ] [ 12...xe6 13.xh6 gxh6 14.f5
7...f5 8.h4 d7?! We decided afterwards also picks up a piece but sets White more
that this was probably the losing move! practical problems than the game
[ 8...c8 is a definite concession but not so c o n t i n u a t i o n . e7 15.f3 0-0-0
easy to exploit 9.f4 Not forced of course This position should be an easy win for
A) 9...f5 10.xf5 xf5 11.g4 d7 W hite as long as he can get his king to
12.g2 Must favour White with his huge safety but Black has a surprising number of
centre but he has to play accurately or t ricks, f o r e xa m p le 16.fxe6 ( 16.d5!?
Black will dismantle it with a well timed g5 delaying the capture until the king is
o r h 5 b re a k . ( 12.d5 h6 13.h4 g5 castled looks like the strongest move here.)
shows it's not all one way traffic ); 16...fxe6 ( 16...xe6 17.d5+- ) 17.c4 d5
B) 9...dxe5 10.dxe5 ( 10.d5!? ) 10...e6 ( 17...b8 18.e2 ) 18.b3? ( 18.d3 d4
11.g4 xd1+ ( 11...f6? 12.xh6 gxh6 19.e2 b4+ 20.f2 should be good
13.f5 g8 14.e6 Black's pieces are a enough for W hite too) 18...c5! isn't at all
sorry sight) 12.xd1 g8 13.f5 d7 clear ]
14.g2 0-0-0 and Black has survived. 13.xg6 hxg6 14.d3 df7?!
White might regret his over-expansion. ] [ 14...f7 had to be tried although 15.e2
[ I r e m e m b e r h o p i n g f o r 8...d7? d5 Otherwise Qe4xg6 was coming 16.0-0-0
w h i c h a l l o w s t h e p r e t t y 9.e6! fxe6 gives White a huge position. Not only does
( 9...xe6 10.d5 also picks up a piece) h e h a ve t h e t wo b ish o p s a n d a le a d in
10.xh6 when Black cannot retake the piece d e ve lo p m e n t b u t h e e ve n h a s a b e t t e r
due to the mate on h5 gxh6? 11.h5# ] pawn structure. Black will have to watch out
[ 8...g6 takes a defender away from the for an f5 break or h4-h4 opening up the
vital e6 square. 9.e6! fxe6 10.xh6 gxh6 king. ]
11.xg6 hxg6 12.g4 g5 13.xe6 xd4 15.xg6 c6 16.f1 d5 17.f5 Immediately
14.g6+ d7 15.0-0-0 gives White great go in g f o r t h e kil l b4 18.d4 xc3+
play for the pawn ] 19.bxc3
9.g4 [ I had a pleasant choice between the game
[ 9.exd6 was played in a previous game or 19.xc3 xc3+ 20.bxc3 which should
which also resulted in a quick win for White. be a fairly easy ending for White ]
cxd6 ( 9...b4!? is an interesting try 10.c1 19...d7
exd6 ) 10.g4 ( 10.d5 b4 11.c1 [ 19...0-0 was necessary but 20.xh6 xh6
looks very strong for White as the knight is 21.0-0-0 followed by f6 and g5 and Black
trapped on b4 and so Black will have to play won't survive long. ]
with rook and pawn against two pieces, a 20.fxe6+ xe6 21.xf7+! xf7 22.f5
definite concession here.) 10...g6 11.d2 xg5 23.0-0-0 I don't have to take the queen
d5 12.0-0-0 g8 13.a4 a7 14.e1 e6 immediately:) e7 24.c5+ f7 25.xe6+
15.b6 d6 16.c8 b4 17.xa7 xa7 xe6 26.f1+ This line has been seen more
50
frequently recently but Black has to play 63 B00

a c c u r a t e l y o r a ll t h e wa s t e d t i m e i n t h e Kaidanov,Gregory S 2555
opening with his g8 knight will cost him dearly. Kengis,Edvins 2575
1-0 Gausdal 1991
[Alexander Volzhin]
62 B001.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5

Juan Mas,Santiago 20835.c3 f6 6.e5!? A relatively rare continuation.
Fraga,Jose Carlos However it deserves serious attention. d5
Open Mallorca ESP (3) 04.12.2000 7.dxc5!?
[Jon Tisdall] [ 7.0-0 e7 ( I would prefer 7...cxd4! 8.cxd4
e7 ) 8.a3 ( White could exploit Black's
1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.c4 b7 4.f3 inaccuracy on the previous move by playing
This doesn't appear to be a terribly critical line, 8.dxc5! The recapture with the Bishop leads
but white has had good results with it - though to Kaidanov - Kengis with an extra tempo for
there is very little evidence yet 'theoretically'. White. bxc5 9.a3 0-0 10.c4
bxc4 5.d5 w i t h a c l e a r e d g e f o r W h i t e . A f t e r f6
[ 5.xc4 e6 6.e3 d6 7.e2 f6 8.bc3 11.c2! is very unpleasant and Black has
bd7 9.0-0 b6 10.b3 d5 11.e5 fd7 problems with his King.) 8...cxd4 9.cxd4
12.a4 xa4 13.xa4 e7 14.f4 0-0 The game has transposed to the Alapin
15.f5 exf5 16.xf5 c5 17.h1 cxd4 Sicilian (1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4
18.xd4 c8 19.g4 h8 20.h5 g6 cd 5. Nf3 e6 6. cd b6 7.a3 Bb7 8. Bd3 Be7 9.
21.h3 f5 22.xg6 1-0 Kruck,M-Schaaf,R 0-0). a6! 10.xa6 xa6 11.d3 ac7
Baunatal 1998. ] 12.bd2 0-0 13.e4 f6! 14.exf6 gxf6
5...d6 6.xc4 d7 The strong centralized Knight and open g-
[ 6...c5!? ] file promise Black good chances. 15.d2
7.c3 g6 8.f4 g7 9.f3 b6 h8 16.ac1 c8 17.c2 b7 18.fc1
[ 9...gf6!? 10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 g4 g8 19.g3 g4 White has run out of
12.e6 fxe6 13.g5 ( 13.dxe6 de5 ) ideas while Black has many ways to
13...xc3+ 14.bxc3 exd5 15.e6 c8 increase the pressure (Ra8-g8, Bd6, f5).
16.xd5 ( 16.xg4 f6! 17.h3 dxc4 20.e5?? A gross blunder. fxe5 21.f3
18.f4 xg2! ) xg3! The refutation is not difficult to find.
A) 16...xd5 17.xd5 c6 18.0-0 22.hxg3 b5 23.h6 xd4 24.f7 f5
( 18.g7+ f8 19.0-0+ df6 20.e6+ and W hite resigned in Maiwald - Miles,
g8-+ ) 18...cxd5 19.g7+ d8 Oostende, 1991. ]
20.e6+=; 7...xc5 8.0-0 e7 9.e2 c6 10.c4
B) 16...gf6 ] [ 10.e4 This move was recommended by
10.b3 c5 Kaidanov in his notes in Informant and his
[ 10...f6 ] evaluation of the position is that W hite is
11.dxc6 xc6 12.e3 f6? clearly better. However Lautier - Miles, Biel
[ 12...b8!? ] 199 2 p roved tha t t his evalu ation is to o
13.xf7+! xf7 14.b3+ e8 15.xb6 optimistic: c7 11.d1 b5 12.bd2 a6
d7 16.g5 d5 17.d1 h6 13.b3 c8 14.g5!? xg5 15.xg5 h6
[ 17...e6 ] 16.h5 xe5 17.c5! g6 18.e2 d5!
18.exd5 hxg5 19.dxc6 xc6 20.fxg5 ( 18...xe4?? 19.gxe4+- winning )
xg2 21.g1 xh2 22.gxf6 xf6 23.d2 19.xd5 xd5 ( 19...xd5? 20.xe5 0-0
h5 24.d5 h4+ 25.f2 21.ge4 , intending Rxd5!) 20.xe5 0-0
1-0 21.ge4 e8 22.b4 c6 23.d3 f6
24.d4 g7 25.f4 c7 26.a3 ae8
27.e1 e5! 28.fxe5 xe5 29.de3 e6
30.xe6+ xe6 31.c5 xe3 32.xe3
51
f7 33.d4 h7! with a balanced xe2 29.xe2 xg3 30.e8+ h7
position. ] 31.xf7 g2+ 32.e1 g3+ 0-1 Kercher,
10...db4 11.e4 f5 12.exf6 xf6 13.c3 P-Jaracz,P Bad Wiessee GER 2000. ]
e7 6...h5 7.d2
[ 13...0-0 is premature: 14.a3 a6 15.c2 [ 7.g4 g6 8.d3 d5 9.e5 e4 10.e2
intending b2-b4 with a clear edge. ] h5 11.g5 h4 12.f4 f5 13.g2 e7
14.a3 a6 15.b5 d5 14.gxh4 h7 15.g1 d7 16.c3 0-0-0
[ 15...0-0 16.f4 ] 17.c2 df8 18.0-0-0 a5 19.g4 c6
16.c2 20.dg1 c4 21.xc4 xc4 22.b3 d3
[ 16.xd5? doesn't work in view of exd5 23.e1 e2 24.4g2 c5 25.d1 c4
17.d6+ d7 18.xe7+ xe7 19.xb7 26.b3 e2 27.d1 a6 28.f3 xc3
c6 and White loses a piece. ] 29.bxc3 a3+ 30.d2 xa2+ 31.c2
16...d8! xc2 32.xc2 xc2+ 33.xc2 xh4
[ 16...0-0 17.cxd5 exd5 18.d3 34.h1 fh8 35.gh2 cxd4 36.cxd4 b5
with a clear advantage ] 37.d3 b7 38.e2 a5 39.f2 4h5
17.cxd5 40.f4 c8 41.d3 b4 42.e1 b6 43.h4
[ 17.e1 dxc4 18.g5 c5! ] a4 44.b2 b3 45.d2 b5 46.c3 b4
17...exd5 18.e1 xe2 19.xe2+ f8 47.xb4 xb4 48.d2 a3 49.bb1 b2
20.g5 It may seems that Black's position is 50.h3 c4 0-1 Mamombe,K-Medina
critical. However he has something in mind! Colindres,J Istanbul OL 2000. ]
c5!! 21.xh7+ xh7 22.xh7 7...e7 8.0-0-0 0-0 9.g4 g6 10.d3 d5
[ 22.xh7 a6 ( 22...a6 23.a4 xa4?! 11.e5 e4 12.xe4 xe4 13.e2 f5
24.c7!! is bad for Black.) 23.c7 f7! 14.exf6 xf3
Now Black is threatening g7-g6 or Rd7, [ 14...xf6 15.xe4 dxe4 16.e5 d6 ]
winning one of White's pieces. Here a draw 15.xf3 xf6 16.e2 a5!?
was agreed as both players were already in [ 16...e7 is safe and sound. ]
time-trouble. Generally, this line seems to 17.f4 e8 18.h4 c5 19.b5 b6
be rather unpleasant f or Black. In both [ 19...c4 20.c7 xd4 ]
Lautier - Miles and Kaidanov - Kengis White 20.c7 cxd4 21.xa8 xa8 22.d3 c4
held the initiative throughout the game and 23.b3 a6 24.a3 e5 25.g5 exf4 26.gxf6
Black had difficult problems to solve. So xf6 27.xb7 c8 28.g1 g6 29.h5 e5
undoubtedly we can expect new encounters 30.xh7+ f8 31.h6+ g8 32.h5 d3
in this line. ] 33.hxg6 d2+ 34.d1 h8 35.xh8+ xh8
½-½ 36.h1+ g8 37.g7 f7 38.xa7 xg7
39.xd2 f6 40.a4 d6 41.xf4+ e5
42.g4 e4+ 43.c1 xf2 44.h5+ d6
64 B00 45.d4 c5 46.b4 b5 47.c4
Karjakin,Sergey 2250 1-0
Heberla,Bartlomiej 2330
Artek ol U16 (4) 14.09.2000
[Jon Tisdall] 65 B00
Karpov,Anatoly 2725
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 Miles,Anthony J 2545
5.e3 e6 6.h3 Skara 1980
[ 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.d2 d5 9.exd5 [Alexander Volzhin]
exd5 10.e5 xe2 11.xe2 e8 12.xc6
bxc6 13.d3 b8 14.a4 d6 15.f3 h5 A sensational loss by the World Champion in
16.g3 e6 17.ae1 xg3 18.hxg3 xg3 such an "exotic" opening. 1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5
19.e2 g6 20.g2 h4 21.ff2 xf2+ 3.f3 b7 4.d3 f6 5.e2 This seems to
22.xf2 xg2+ 23.xg2 g5+ 24.f1 h5 be the most natural White set-up. e6 6.a4
25.b3 e8 26.c3 h4 27.e2 h3 28.g3 c5! 7.dxc5
52
[ 7.e5 c4! ] g7 32.hxg5 hxg5 33.d3 a5 34.g3 f6

[ 7.c3 doesn't looks very promising either: 35.g4 d6 36.f1 e5 37.e1 h8 38.f4
the position after c4 8.c2 is similar to gxf4 39.xf4 c6 40.e2 h1+ 41.d2
Dorfman - Miles, but obviously Black has an h2 42.g3 f3 43.g8 g2 44.e1 xe2
extra tempo. ] 45.xe2 xg3 46.a8 c7
7...xc5 8.bd2 b4 9.e5 d5 10.e4 e7 0-1
11.0-0?!
[ 11.g5!? looks more ing as was played in
Volovik - Kozlov.V, USSR 1987. The game 66 B00
c o n t in u e d : 0-0 ( 11...f6?! 12.exf6 gxf6 Karpov,Anatoly 2693
13.e5! ) 12.d6 c6 13.h4 f6 14.exf6 Zhu Chen 2505
gxf6?! This move allows a beautiful FIDE GP Dubai UAE (2.2) 04.04.2002
c o m b i n a t i o n . ( 14...xf6 w a s b e t t e r .) [Jon Tisdall]
15.e5! Picturesque! Now Black has to
decide which of the three pieces to take! 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d2 e6 4.c3 g6
fxg5 ( 15...fxe5 16.h5 f5 17.xf5 exf5 5.d3 g7 6.gf3 e7 7.e2 d6 8.0-0
18.f7+ h8 19.e8+- winning; 15...xd6 a6 9.e5 d7 10.e1 d5
is probably best, although White's attack is [ 10...dxe5 would give black some squares
very strong after 16.xh7+! ) 16.h5 f5 and a potential target on e5. The game
( 16...f6 17.xg5+ with Nf7+ to follow.) choice leads to a poor and slow French
17.xf5 exf5 18.f7+ h8 19.g6+! which Karpov handles very instructively. ]
and Black resigned. ] 11.f1 c5 12.h3! Creating a route to g4 for
11...c6 12.d2 c7 13.c4 bxc3 14.xc3 the Nf1. c6 13.1h2 h6 14.h4
xc3 15.xc3 b4 16.xb4 xb4 White create s an amazing amount of lasting
17.ac1 b6 18.e4 0-0 Now it's cle ar that pressure just by keeping the h6 pawn in his
W h it e h a s n 't m a n a g e d t o re f u t e B la ck ' s sights. b5 15.f4 b6 16.e3 c4 17.c2
opening experiment. Moreover he hasn't even e7 18.b4 cxb3 19.axb3 b4 20.cxb4 c6
got a minimal advantage. However Karpov 21.ec1 xb4 22.d1 a5 23.e2 b8
doesn't want to admit this and therefore he 24.g4 h5 25.f6+ xf6 26.exf6 4c6
starts overreacting. 19.g5 [ 26...8c6 27.c5 a6 28.xa6
[ 19.xh7+ This tempting sacrifice doesn't A) 28...xa6 29.c7 ( 29.e5 );
work here: xh7 20.g5+ g6! 21.g4 B) 28...xa6 29.e5 ]
f5 22.g3 d4! Intending Qg4 and if 23.h3 27.c5 d7 28.xd5 xf6 29.b5 a7
then h5! with the idea of Qh4 parrying the 30.d6 a6 31.f4 g4
attack. ] [ 31...d5 32.xd5 exd5 33.xa6 xa6
19...h6 20.h7+?! Continuing the venture. 34.e1++- ]
[ 20.xb7 xb7 21.e4 with equality was 32.c1 d7
better. ] [ 32...c8 33.bc5 xe2 34.xc6 xc6
20...h8 21.b1 e7 Now I definitely prefer 35.xc6+- ]
B l a c k . H e h a s a p a i r o f s t r o n g B i sh o p s , 33.b6 xe2 34.cxc6 An unusual and
W hite's Q-side is seriously weakened and drastic invasion. xf3 35.gxf3 e5 36.xe5
W h it e 's t h re a t s o n t h e K -sid e a re e a sily f6 37.e6+
parried. 22.e4 ac8 23.d3 xc1 1-0
24.xc1 xb2 Black has won a pawn for
nothing. It's difficult to say what Karpov was
h o p in g f o r a n d wh e re h e m i sca lcu la t e d .
25.e1 xe5 26.xd7 b4 27.e3 d5!
28.xd5 xd5 The rest is easy and needs no
commentary. A clear extra pawn and a pair of
strong Bishops give Black a decisive
advantage. 29.c3 c8 30.e2 g5 31.h4
53
67 B00 68 B00
Keskinen,Sauli 2292 Keskinen,Sauli 2292
Porrasmaa,Timo 2220 Salmensuu,Olli 2428
2nd HCC Helsinki FIN (8) 05.03.2002 2nd HCC Helsinki FIN (5) 01.03.2002
[Jon Tisdall] [Jon Tisdall]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 f6 4.e5 d7 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.h4
[ 4...e4!? ] This line doesn't get played very often, for
5.e6 fxe6 6.f3 reasons that will become obvious - almost no
[ 6.d3!? ] one can be expected to be prepared as white
6...g6!? A sensible novelty. in this variation. On the other hand, one might
[ 6...e5 is more common, despite its lack of argue that since it seems to win huge mounds
success. 7.xd5 exd4 8.c4 e6 9.g5 of material, it would get more off-the-cuff tests.
f6 10.e2 f7 11.f4 d6 12.0-0 d5 e5 Yee-hah! Please fasten your seat belts.
13.ae1 h6 14.xd5 hxg5 15.xg5+ g8 5.h5+ g6 6.fxg6 f6 7.g7+ xh5
16.g3 b5 17.f3 h6 18.f7 1-0 Golubev, 8.gxh8 xh4 9.xh7 d4 10.c3
M-Sergeev,V/Kiev 1995 (18). ] [ 10.g6+ d8 ( 10...e7 11.d3 f4
7.h4 g7 8.h5 e5!? 9.g5?! 12.xf4 xf4 13.c3 xc2+ 14.d1
[ 9.h6 f6 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd5 g4 b4 15.g3 d4 16.e3+- 1-0 Lalic, S-
and black's activity should give him Toll,A/open, St Heliers JER 1997 (71)) 11.d3
comfortable play. ] f4 12.f7 ( 12.g8 e8 13.xf4 xf4
9...xd4 10.hxg6 hxg6 11.xh8+ xh8 14.a3 e6 15.g3 xa3 16.xf4 exf4
12.xd5 f8 13.c4!? 17.bxa3 xc2+ 18.d2 xa1 19.e2 d4
[ 13.e3 ] 20.f3 d7 21.xa1 h8 22.e1 c5
13...f5 23.e4 f8 24.e5 d6 25.g5 b5
[ 13...b5!? 14.xc7+ xc7 15.f7+ d8 26.g6 e5 27.g7 f7 28.g8 c4
16.c3 ] 29.b8 a6 30.a8 c7 31.xa6 c3+
14.b4? 32.c2 xa2 33.h6 b3+ 34.c1 a7
[ 14.e3 ] 35.d1 xa3 36.h5+ d6 37.xb3
14...de6 15.d5 xb3 38.f5 b2 39.xf4 e5 40.f8 b4
[ 15.b5+? was probably the idea behind 41.b8 xf2 42.xb4 xg2 43.b5+ f4
white's odd 14th move, but it doesn't work: 44.h5 f2 0-1 Pavasovic,D-Gross,G/It
c6 16.xc6 xd1+ 17.xd1 a6 18.a4 open, III-IV 1995 (44)) 12...b4+ 13.c3 g4
c5-+ so now white is stuck with a terribly 14.g8+ d7 15.g7+ c6 16.g3 f3+
misplaced piece on b4. ] 17.d1 d4+ 18.d2 f3+ 19.d1
[ 15.f3 ] d4+ 1/2-1/2 Naiditsch,A-Doettling,F/
15...d6! 16.c3 c6 17.b3 a5 18.xe6 Dortmund GER 2000 (19). ]
xe6 19.c2 xd1+ 20.xd1 f4 21.e3 10...f5 11.xc7 g7
d3 22.e2 a4 23.c4 f4+ 24.f3 b5 [ 11...c8 12.b5+ xb5 13.xe5+ e7
25.xf5 gxf5 26.f1 14.xe7+ xe7 15.xb5 xc2 16.d4
[ 26.xf4 bxc4 ] b4+ 17.d2 e7 18.c1 f6 19.c3
26...e6 27.g4 f4 28.e4? The beginning d3 20.f3 d7 21.f2 d6 22.g3 b5
of a suicide run. f6 29.f5 f7 30.g2 23.he1 b4 24.a4 h8 25.g2 a5
g5 31.xc6 e6# 26.c5+ xc5 27.xc5 1-0 Sylbing,G-
0-1 Oudejans, M/Haarlem NED 2001 (27). ]
12.b5+ f8 13.c5+ g8 14.xd5+ h8
OK, now the main meal is over, and white is
the exchange and fully four pawns ahead.
Now the question is, can he just develop and
get his king to safety, or is he too gorged to
run? In this day and age we tend to believe
54
that we have the defensive technology to 17.h4 xf3 18.xf3 xf3 19.gxf3 xh4
avoid the kind of embarrassing defeats that 20.d2 f6 21.c4 h5 22.a4 a5 23.a3
our greedy chess forefathers suffered in the f4 24.e1 f8 25.e4 e7 26.f1 h5
golden age of sacrifices. But some people 27.b1 h4 28.b4 axb4 29.xb4 a8
clea rly re m em b er th e p o te n tia l p owe r o f 30.b5 f7 31.a5 bxa5 32.axa5 c8
ram pa nt d evelop me nt . 15.g3 gets a few 33.b7 e8 34.ba7 d7 35.a8 xa8
things out of his face and prevents ...Nf4, but 36.xa8 d8 37.g1 e2+ 38.g2 f4+
it does perforate the kingside. 39.h2 e7 40.c3 d7 41.e4 e7
[ 15.a4!? ] 42.g5 d7 43.e6 xe6 44.dxe6+ e7
15...e7 The threat of ...Nf4 looms again. 45.h3 c6 46.xh4 b6 47.g3 xe6
16.0-0 e4 17.d3 This gives me the creeps as 48.a6 c5 49.xc6 f5 50.c8 f6
it gives black a free hand on the kingside. 51.f8+ e7 52.h8 f6 53.h4 d4
[ 17.e2!? ] 54.f4 f5 55.fxe5 xe5+ 56.f3 g5
17...d8 18.c4 f3+ 19.h1 d4! 57.h8 f5 58.e3 f6 59.a8 e5
Bringing the last piece into the attack, and 60.f8+ f6 61.f4 g6 62.f3 e6
preparing the romantic finish. 20.b3 exd3 63.e4 e7 64.f5+ gxf5+ 65.xf5 f6
21.xd3 h4! 22.g2 g4 An interesting 66.h5 g7 67.g5 e5 68.g6+ f7
picture of initiative vs. material. 23.h1 d4! 69.h6 f6 70.d5 e7 71.h7+ f6
Black's attack is so dominant that even 72.h6+ f7 73.xd6 e8 74.e6 d7
[ 23...e1!? is an option. ] 75.xe7+ 1-0 Sarkar,J-Glinert,S New York
24.f3?! USA 2001. ]
[ 24.gxh4 to try and extend the game by 8.g3 c6
making black take the queen was probably [ 8...e7 9.0-0 ( 9.h4!? ) 9...0-0 10.c4 c8
the only move. xh4! continues to improve 11.c3 d6 12.e1?! d7 13.b4 a5
the position via attack, and the queen isn't 14.bxa5 xa5 15.a4 Black has again
going anywhere. ] achieved a kind of old-fashioned Spanish
24...xf3+ winning everything. 25.f2 xh1 with traces of a King's Indian. I am not sure
26.c4 xh2+ 27.f1 xg3+ An awesome how to assess this, but it looks playable and
display of the Daring spirit. obscure. White has lost a tempo with his c-
0-1 pawn, Black has fooled around with his light
square bishop. c5 16.b2 f5 ( 16...h3!?
17.g2 xd3 18.xd3 f5 ) 17.exf5 xf5
69 B00 18.a3 d7 19.b4 aa8 20.xf5 xf5
Koch,Jean Rene 2507 21.xc5 dxc5 22.g2 e4 23.xe4 xa4
Degraeve,Jean Marc 2589 24.xa4 xa4 25.e3 f7 26.f4 d7
vs Select GMs (3) 24.06.2001 27.a1 f6 28.a8+ f8 29.xf6+ gxf6
[Jon Tisdall] 30.g4 g7 31.xf8 xf8 32.h4 f7
33.f5 d7 34.e6 h5 35.h6 f8
The stem game is a rapid duel - this whole line 36.xd7+ xh6 37.xc7 e8 38.f4+
is in a grey zone - it bears resemblances to g7 39.g2 a4 40.c7+ h6 41.f4+
1...Nc6 lines, old Spanishes, Old Indians. In g7 42.e4 d1 43.e7+ g8 44.e8+
short, the kind of obscure, slightly g7 45.g6+ f8 46.xf6+ g8
disreputable openings we house here, which 47.e6+ f8 48.f6 d2+ 49.g1 d1+
aim to take the battle out of the books as 50.g2 c2+ 51.h3 g6 52.d6
quickly as possible. 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 1-0 Kurniawan, B-Glinert,S New York USA
3.d3 f6 4.e2 c6 5.c3 e5 6.d5 e7 2001. ]
7.f3 g6 9.c4 b4+ 10.f1 0-0 It is probably more
[ 7...d6 8.g5 d7 9.a6 xa6 10.xa6 flexible to postpone castling a little bit.
h6 11.xe7 xe7 12.bd2 0-0 13.0-0 [ 10...cxd5!? ]
g5 14.b3 f5 15.exf5 xf5 and Black 11.h4 cxd5 12.cxd5 h6
has a reasonable position. 16.d3 f6 [ 12...c8!? ]
55
13.a3 d6 14.c3 e8 15.h5 f8 18.h6 e7 19.dxe5 Xie Jun-Spassky, B/
16.h4 Now White has annexed a bit too Tallinn 1998 White's a little better with the
much space. c5 17.f5 d6 18.b5 a5 pawn on h5 looking out of place. ]
[ 18...8d7 19.f3! ] 5.0-0 d7 6.f4 Kogan is in a belligerent
19.g2 h7 20.h4 c8 21.xe8 xe8 mood. Spassky reacts coolly.
22.f3 xf5 23.xf5+ h8 24.xh6 6h7 [ 6.c3 gf6 7.d2 c5 8.e1 e7 9.a3
25.e3 xe3 26.fxe3 a4 27.hh1 g8 c7 10.b4 0-0 11.b2 fd8 12.g3 f8
28.ac1 c8 29.hf1 c7 30.e2 c5 13.c1 ac8 14.e2 a5 15.h3 g6 16.e3
31.xc5 bxc5 32.g4 f6 33.c3 b8 g7 17.f3 b8 18.b1 a8 19.c1
34.f2 d7 35.c2 g5 36.f2 c8 a6 20.b5 b7 Shabanov, Y-
37.f5 b7 38.xa4 f7 39.c3 c4 Gaprindashvili, N/Satka 2004 ]
40.f2 e7 41.g3 c5 42.c2 b6 6...g6 7.f5?! He really wants to punish
43.h4 d3 44.e2 c5 45.xg5 fxg5+ Spassky for messing around , but it's here
46.xg5 d7 47.h4 f7 48.g5 g8 that the advantage of delaying ...Bg7 comes to
49.f2 f8 50.a4 d7 51.b5 f8 52.g6 the fore and 7 f5 is revealed as premature
d8+ 53.h3 d7+ 54.f5 d8 55.h6 aggression. gxf5! 8.exf5 e5! 9.g3 gf6
1-0 Black suddenly has an extra central pawn
which con ven ien tly co vers t he e f ile an d
threatens to move f orward at the earliest
70 B00 o p p o r t u n i t y . 10.c3 Kogan doesn't really
Kogan,Artur know what to do and lurches on with his '
Spassky,Boris V attack' exd4 11.ce4 e7 12.a4
Corsico 1997 Further indication that White is at a loss. The
[Andrew Martin] advance of the rook's pawn is easily parried.
a6! 13.e1 g8! 14.h5
We are about to see a masterpiece by Boris [ Black defends comfortably after 14.g5
Spassky. Black very instructively tinkers with for instance: e5 15.xf6 xf6
his opening move-order, trying to find the A) 16.xf6+ xf6 17.e4 0-0-0 18.e2
optimal way to reach a Hippo position. 1.e4 de8 19.xb7+ xb7 20.a5 b5;
b6 Yes, I know this isn't strictly part of my B) 16.h5 d7! 17.ad1 ( 17.h6 g5
brief but this is a very grey area and we soon 18.xg5 xg5 19.xg5 xg5 )
transpose to a Hippo. 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 17...c8 18.xf6 xf6;
4.e2 d6 Spassky is very fond of this move C) 16.h5 g5 17.h1 c5 ]
order. By encouraging White's Bishop to go to [ Maybe flicking in 14.a5 b5 was called for
d3 he figures that he cuts out some tricky lines. and then 15.e2 with a difficult game to
The overall idea is to go into a Hippopotamus assess. It must never be forgotten that Black
system but he plays ....d6, ... Nd7 before ...g7- is a pawn up! ]
g6. Note how effective this refinement is in 14...e5 15.h6 d7! Connecting the
this game. Black never need to play ....Bf8-g7 Rooks and Queen as well as getting the King
and uses the g-file later for attack! to saf ety. Such original play is typical o f
[ Developing the queenside first isn't the only S p a s s k y a t h i s b e s t . 16.hxf6+ xf6
way, as the following example shows, again 17.h5 g4 With the simple plan of ... Qe7
with Spassky at the helm. 4...g6 5.0-0 g7 and ...Rag8 and a massive attack to follow.
6.c3 d6 7.d2 d7 8.g3 Perhaps White 18.ad1 Kogan is running out of time and
s h o u l d h a v e p l a y e d f 2 - f 4 h e r e . h5!? moves. If he retreats his Bishop the Black
( 8...e7 9.f4 0-0 10.e2 a6 11.f3 c5! attack builds rapidly:
demonstrates how Black counterplay might [ 18.d2 e7 19.a5 ag8 20.g3 f3! ]
co m e a b o u t .) 9.h3 gf6 10.e1 0-0 18...h4 Now White is lost. 19.xf6+ xf6
11.f3 h7 Before Bg5 ties him down. 20.g5 xh5 21.xf6 g8 22.xe5
12.e3 e5 13.d2 e7 14.g5 xg5 xg2+ 23.f1 dxe5 24.xe5 hxh2
15.xg5 e8 16.c2 f6 17.ad1 h7 25.b5+ d6
56
[ He was hoping for 25...axb5 26.xd4+ [ 29...g6 30.b3 d2+ 31.c2= ]

d5 ( 26...c8?? 27.e8# ) 27.exd5+ 30.b2 b5 31.xg7 d2+ 32.b3 xg2
and at least the game continues. ] 33.e5 f2 34.e3 f6 35.b2 e5 36.a4
0-1 d4+ 37.xd4 exd4 38.d3 f4 39.c4
h4 40.f3 d3+ 41.xd3 xb4 42.xf6
b3+ An interesting idea for white in the
71 B00 opening, and a very thematic handling of
Kosintseva,Tatiana 2373 black's chances in the later stages of the
Grabuzova,Tatiana 2388 game.
52nd ch-w Elista RUS (4) 13.05.2002 ½-½
[Jon Tisdall]
1.e4 c6 2.c3 f6 3.d4 d5 4.e5 g8 72 B00

5.f4 h5 6.e3 Kramnik,Vladimir 2725
[ 6.e2 f5 7.e3 e6 8.a3 g4 9.f3 Ehlvest,Jaan 2600
h6 10.f2 e7 11.d2 f5 12.0-0-0 (ol) Moscow 1994
d7 13.d3 a5 14.d2 xe2 15.xe2 [Alexander Volzhin]
c6= 1-0 Aronian,L-Mudelsee,M Pardubice
1996. (49) ] A spectacular game at the very highest level.
[ 6.f3 g4 7.e2 e6 8.e3 h6 9.f2 1.f3 b6 2.e4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.d4 b4
f5 10.g3 h4 11.xh4 xe2 12.xe2 5.d3 f6 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0
xh4 13.gxh4 g6 14.b5 a6 15.d3 e7 xc3 9.bxc3 d5 A rare move. In my opinion
16.0-0-0 xh4 17.xh4 xh4 18.e2 it's inferior to the usual
0-0-0 19.f3 h3 20.f2 h7 21.d3 [ 9...d6 ]
f5 22.a3 dh8 0-1 Hausmann,I- 10.exd5! xd5 11.e5 0-0 12.h5!
Grabuzova,T Nova Gorica 1999. (32) ] [ The straighforward 12.f4 g6!? is unclear.
6...g4 7.f3 h6 8.b5!? An original After the text f4-f5 is the real threat. ]
approach, rather than cope with the pressure 12...d8 This retreat is forced. Black has to
from the Bg4 white banks on a counterpin. lose a tempo, otherwise it's not clear how to
d7 It is not completely clear that white wants develop his Knight.
to take on c6 - black will get some counterplay [ 12...c6?? is just a blunder in view of
on the b-file in that case - but it is clearly 13.c4 xe5 14.dxe5 ]
risky to allow his queenside to be fractured so [ 12...e7 13.ae1 d7 14.g6! fxg6
early. 9.h3 f5 10.f2 xf3 11.xf3 0-0-0 15.xd5 exd5 16.xe7 and White has an
12.0-0-0 h4 13.a4 e6 14.c5 obvious endgame advantage. ]
[ 14.c3!? looks more likely to keep black 13.c4 b7 14.d5! White exploits Black's lag
under pressure. ] in development and breaks open the centre.
14...xc5 15.dxc5 a6 16.a4 d4 17.c3 d6 The only move.
d5 18.xd5 xd5 19.xc6 bxc6 20.cxd4 [ 14...exd5? just loses on the spot: 15.f5
hd8 White's fragile pawn structure provides g6 16.xg6 ]
black with at least enough compensation for [ 14...d7 is also bad in view of 15.xf7!
th e p a wn, b u t th e we a kne ss o f h 4 h e lp s xf7 16.dxe6 and beside s his extra pawn,
balance the frailty of white's central pawn White can exploit the weakness of the light
constellation. 21.b1 8d7 22.b4 xd4 squares near Black's King with Qg6. ]
23.xh4 e2 24.xd5 xd5 25.c2 xf4 15.ae1 exd5
26.g5 d3 27.d2 xe5 28.c3 c4 [ 15...d7 here is as bad as it was a move
This is a bit adventurous. previously: 16.xf7! xf7 17.dxe6 ]
[ 28...f6!? 29.e1 but basically white's 16.f5 g6 17.h3 g7 18.xf7!
bishop has become strong enough to This sacrifice destroys the seemingly safe
balance the extra pawn. ] position of Black's King and gives W hite a
29.e1 a3+ very strong attack.
57
[ Th e t em p t in g 18.xg6?! fails to c8! 73 B00

( O f c o u r s e , 18...fxg6 is bad in view of Kritz,Leonid 2453
19.e6 ) 19.h4 fxg6 20.e7+ g8 Yu Shaoteng 2522
21.fe1 c6! parrying White's attack. ] Anibal Open Linares ESP (10) 10.03.2002
18...xf7 Black had two ways to capture the [Jon Tisdall]
Knight, but both of them have drawbacks.
[ 18...xf7 Now Black doesn't control the e6- 1.d4 b6 2.e4 e6 3.f3 b7 4.d3 c5
square. 19.e6! f4 ( 19...c8 20.xd6 5.c4 Quite rare - letting black get a kind of
xh3 21.xg6+ f8 22.gxh3 Sicilian/Hedgehog position is not considered a
with an obvious advantage in the way of extracting the maximum against the
endgame. ) 20.g3! d2 21.xg6! f8 Owen's. cxd4 6.xd4 c6 7.xc6 xc6
( 21...f6 i s n o b e t t e r : 22.xf6 xf6 8.0-0 h4!?
23.f5+ e7 24.e5+ d7 25.f5+ c6 [ 8...c7 9.c3 a6 10.e2 e7 11.f4
26.cxd5+ ) 22.d3! ( intending 23. Rg6+ or g6 12.e3 c5 13.xc5 bxc5 14.e5 d6
2 3 . Q g 4 + Q g 5 2 4 . R g 6 ) f7 23.f4! 15.d5 1-0 Hoepfl,T-Steppuhn,T/
with unavoidable mate. ] Regensburg 1998. (52) ]
19.xh6 g8 The only move. 9.e2 c5 10.d2 f6 11.f3 h5 12.a3
[ 19...g8 20.e3 ] a5 13.e5?! A very ugly move.
20.f4? This move ruins an otherwise excellent [ 13.b3!? ]
combination. 13...xf3 14.gxf3
[ T h e n a t u r a l 20.e3! gives White an [ 14.xf3 xf3 15.gxf3 h5 ]
unstoppable attack: 14...g8 15.f4 a4 16.e4 a7 17.h1 f5
A) 20...d4 is the alternative, but it is even 18.e2 e7 19.e3 g5! 20.g1
worse in view of 21.c5! and White wins: [ 20.f4 xe2 21.xe2 gxf4 and ...Bd4 will
xc5 ( 21...bxc5 22.c4+ f6 23.h4+ be unpleasant. ]
g5 24.h6+ g6 25.e6+ xe6 20...h6 21.ae1 c6 22.f4 h4 23.f3
26.f8+ ) 22.c4+! xc4 23.f4+ g7 [ 23.fxg5 hxg5 24.g2 g4 ]
24.e7+; 23...gxf4 24.xc5 bxc5 25.xf5 White
B) 20...d7 21.h7+ f8 22.f3+ f6 understandably wants to swing his fists a few
23.xg6 and Black' position is hopeless. ] times before the end of this game, and this
20...d7! looks the only practical chance. exf5 26.e6
[ 20...dxc4? is met by 21.f5 with a quick f6 27.d5 d8 28.xc5 c7
mate. ] [ 28...c7!? ]
21.f5 h8! White certainly underestimated 29.d6 e7 30.xf4
this move and instead hoped for [ 30.d5 ]
[ 21...g5 22.f6! with a decisive advantage: 30...dxe6 31.g6 e8 32.xh6 d7 33.f3
xf6 23.h7+ f8 24.g6 d4-+ 34.a8+ c8 35.g2 b7 36.d1
with unavoidable mate. ] xg2+ 37.xg2 g8+ 38.f1 d7 39.c5
22.fxg6+ c7 40.h4 e5
[ In his calculations White had missed that 0-1
after 22.xg6+?! Black has the very strong
f8! 23.xd6+ cxd6 with a clear
advantage. ] 74 B00
22...g8 23.f4 xf4 Playing this move, Lanzani,Mario 2419
Black offered a draw which was accepted. Kos,Toni 2400
[ After 23...xf4 24.xf4 c5 Black is Mitropa Team Cup (6) 30.11.2000
considerably better, but he was in time [Jon Tisdall]
trouble and was satisfied with a draw against
such a strong opponent. ] 1.e4 c6 2.c3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.f4 e5
½-½ A move that has served black well - all of the
references here are worth examining. 5.d5
58
[ 5.dxe5 g4 6.f3 ( 6.d3 dxe5

to be originally the idea of the swashbuckling
7.xd8+ xd8 8.f5 b4 9.b5+ c6 Englishman Milner Barry. exf3
10.a4 xe4 11.xe4 d1+ 12.f2 xf5 [ 5...e6!? looks safer and sounder. ]
13.c3 d3+ 14.e3 e1+ 15.xd3 6.xf3 xf3+ 7.xf3 We have a position
xe4+ 16.d2 f1 0-1 Afek,Y-Markowski, with a kind of Blackmar Diemer Gambit feel to
T Paris 1995.; 6.d2 dxe5 7.f5 b4 it . Th e wea kn ess o n c7 is a n in t eres tin g
8.xd8+ xd8 9.d3 d4 10.ge2 xe4 a s p e c t o f w h i t e ' s c o m p e n s a t i o n . g6!?
11.xe4 xe4 12.0-0 c5+
This gives black some additional options. The
1/2-1/2 Klinge r,J-Mestro vic,Z S ara jevo stem game was brutal and interesting.
1988. ) 6...dxe5 7.xd8+ xd8 8.fxe5 d7 [ 7...f6 8.f4 a6 9.h3 g6 10.g4 g7
9.d5 c8 10.f4 d8 11.h3 h5 11.0-0-0 d7 12.g3 c8 13.e2 0-0
12.0-0-0 e6 13.e3 c5 14.xc5 dxc5 14.h4 c6 15.h5 xd5 16.hxg6 xc3
15.d3 g6 16.he1 c6 17.e3 0-0 17.h4 f6 18.g5 a5 19.gxf6 h5
18.f5 c7 19.g4 e8 20.f1 h6 21.d6 20.gxf7+ xf7 21.xh5+ 1-0 Milner Barry,P-
d8 22.f5 xd1+ 23.xd1 f8 24.d2 Mieses,J Margate 1935. ]
d7 25.c4 g5 26.xg5 xe5 27.c3 8.f4 a6 9.g3
hxg5 28.d1 c8 29.d6 d8 30.e2 b6 [ 9.0-0-0!? to set up a la Milner Barry
31.d4 b5 32.b4 d7 33.b7 e8 definitely deserves attention as the
34.xd7 xe4+ 35.a5 a4# 0-1 Buljovcic, pressure against c7 costs black time to
I-Nikolic,S Titograd 1965. ] defend, but costs white more time to pursue.
5...e7 The difference is the option h6 10.g4
[ 5...d4!? 6.e3 c5 7.fxe5 dxe5 8.f3 xf4+ 11.xf4 d6 when white's spatial
d6 9.g5 0-0 10.e2 h6 11.h4 b6! grip and lead in development def initely
12.b1 g4 13.d2 e3 14.d1 xd1 offer compensation. ]
15.xd1 f5 16.c3 fxe4 17.cxd4 cxd4 9...h6 10.xc7 d7 11.e2 f6 12.e5
18.0-0 exf3 19.gxf3 h3 20.f2 b4 [ 12.d6!? looks very primitive, but there are
21.e2 g6+ 0-1 Krivec,J-Zelcic,R Pula advantages from softening black's kingside
1996. ] pawn structure. ]
6.f3 exf4 7.xf4 g6 8.g3 e7 9.d3 12...f5 Black has returned the pawn in
g4! 10.e2 f6 Black's control of e5
order to stop white castling and slow the pace
guarantees him comfortable play. 11.0-0 0-0 of the opening, and the result is a very messy
12.h1 e7 13.ae1 a6 14.d1 d7 position. 13.d6?!
15.c3 ae8 16.e3 xe3 17.xe3 d8 [ 13.d3!? gives good chances of a small,
18.a7 c8 19.f2 e5 20.xe5 xe5 safe advantage, but white wants more. ]
21.xe5 xe5 22.a4 c5 23.dxc6 xc6 13...exd6 14.d4 0-0
24.b3 e6 25.d1 g5 26.b1 g6 [ 14...f4! 15.h4 g5= would show that
27.g1 e8 28.d2 ee5 29.f2 h5 black has nothing to fear. ]
30.f3 h4 31.gf1 e7 32.xd6 h6 15.f1 h5 16.xd6 g5? It is hard to
33.d8+ h7 34.e5+ f5 35.exf6+ g6 understand what prevented black from playing
36.h8+ xh8 37.fxe7 [ 16...xc2 which was presumably one of
1-0 the attractions behind posting the queen on
f 5 i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e . 17.d1 e8
leaves white's king in more trouble than
75 B00 black's. ]
Levi,Eddy 2247 17.f2?? g7??
Rigo,Bernard [ 17...d8 and the bishop on d4 falls as
ch Melbourne AUS (9) 07.01.2002 black has ...Qd2+ up his sleeve. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 18.xg7 xg7 19.e4 d8??
[ 19...e3 leaves black very much in the
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 dxe4 4.d5 e5 game. ]
5.f3!? A rare blast from the past, which seems 20.xf7+
59
[ 20.xf7+ g8 ( 20...xf7 21.xg5+ ) Partly due to the position being non-typical,
21.f8+ both relieve black of his queen. A and partly because the queenside structure
sadly typical game of this month's crop, allows white to play a4 quickly, when he is
where some interesting opening ideas fail to well placed to use the lines that open since
get a proper test due to some hair-raising there is no Nc3 being displaced by black's b-
blunders. ] pawn. c7 10.e2 c5 11.b3 b6
1-0 ( 11...e7 ) 12.a4 b4 13.d2 ( 13.g5!? )
13...bxc3 14.xc3 b4 15.ac1 xd3
16.xd3 e5 17.e2 h5 18.c3 g5
76 B00 19.d6 e3 20.d2 xd2 21.xd2 c6
Liasota,Evgueni 22.c4 e7 23.e5 f6 24.d6+ f8
Chetverik,Maxim 2315 25.b3 e8 26.fd1 f6 27.c5 xd6
Tenkes Kupa Harkany HUN (4) 19.11.2000 28.xd6 c8 29.cd1 f7 30.h5+
[Jon Tisdall] Jonathan,R-Dewachter,M Szeged 1994 (0-1,
60) ]
1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.d3 b7 4.e2 f6 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 b4 10.bc3 xd3
5.f3 e6 6.0-0 c5 7.c3 c6 A line that has 11.xd3 b4 12.d1 e7 13.d5 b8
produced reasonable positions f or black: [ 13...exd5 14.e5 gives white good
8.e3 compensation. ]
[ 8.c2 c8 9.a3 b6 10.h1 cxd4 14.dxe6?
11.cxd4 a5 12.b3 b4 13.a4 e7 14.d3 [ 14.f4= White is about to go to pieces in
d6 15.b2 d7 16.d2 f6 17.f4 g6 spectacular fashion. ]
18.f2 h4 19.f3 0-0 20.h3 d8 14...fxe6 15.d4 d6 16.h3
21.f1 f5 22.b1 f6 23.g3 g7 24.f3 [ 16.g3 h5!? ]
e8 25.h4 h5 ( 25...h6 ) 26.g5 f6 16...0-0 17.g4?? h2+ 18.h1 xe4!
27.d5 exd5 28.e5 dxe5 29.fxe5 e4 0-1
30.f4 d2 31.d1 xb1 32.xb1 d4
33.xd4 xe5
A) 34.xe5! xe5 35.xg6 b2 77 B00
36.e7+ g7 37.e6+ f7 38.xh5+! Licina,Anita 2195
xe7 39.h4+! and the more knights Sucher,Johannes 2234
white loses the closer is victory: 10th Open Aschach AUT (6) 30.12.2001
A1) 39...f6 40.xf8 xh4 ( 40...xf8 [Jon Tisdall]
41.xb4+ ) 41.g6++-;
A2) 39...xe6 40.e3++- guards the 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.a3 e7
last rank and wins the queen.; 5.f3 f6 6.e5 e4
A3) 39...f7 40.g5++-; [ 6...d5!? 7.xd5 exd5 8.b4?!
B) 34.fe6? xd4? ( 34...c2 35.g1 This only creates targets. d6 9.d3 d7
a8 ) 35.xd4 e7 36.g3 f6 10.0-0 f8 11.exd6 xd6 12.e5 e6
37.xb4 e5 38.xf8 xf8 39.e1 d5 13.c3 0-0 14.c2 g6 15.h6 g7 16.f4
40.f3 f6 41.e7 f7 42.xg6+ h7 f5 17.ae1 c5 18.e2 f6 19.bxc5 bxc5
43.g5 1-0 Szabo, Z-Chetverik,M/ 20.b1 ab8 21.e3 cxd4 22.cxd4 c6
Gyongyos 1998. ] 23.fe1 a4 24.f1 c2 25.xb8 xb8
[ 8.a3 cxd4 9.cxd4 b6 10.e3 e5 26.c3 e4 27.a5 b6 28.xb6 axb6
11.f2 exd4 12.bc3 d6 13.d5 xd5 29.c1 e6 30.c6 xe5 31.dxe5 f7
14.exd5 e7 15.xd4 c7 16.h3 xd5 32.a4 e7 33.b5 d4 34.c4 xc6
(1/2-1/2, 41) Praznik,N-Hechl,G Finkenstein 35.b3 a8 36.h3 xa4 37.d5 c8
1994. ] 38.g4 c2 39.f2 b5 40.e1 b4 41.d2
[ 8.h1 cxd4 9.xd4 This kind of position - b3 0-1 Holzmann, H-Portisch,F
Sicilian-ish but with a pawn on c3 instead of Balatonbereny 1996. ]
a N - often poses black some problems. 7.xe4 xe4 8.d2 b7 9.g4 0-0
60
10.d3 f5 11.exf6 xf6 12.0-0 c6 16...cxd4 17.cxd5 e5 18.e4 b8

13.f3 White should have a slight advantage 19.c6 d6 Black wants to deny the rook
here as black must be very wary about his a c c e s s t o f 6 . 20.fc1 hc8 21.b3
more exposed king - though black does have This still looks more comfortable for white, but
active pieces as well. e7 14.c3 d8 th e p o te n t ia l we a kne ss o f d 5 m ak e s t h e
15.g5 g6 16.h4 g7 17.e4 position a bit trickier. b6 22.f1 cb8
[ 17.f4 ] 23.6c2 c8 24.c6 cb8 25.6c4 8b7
17...e7 18.h5 gxh5 19.xh5 f5 20.h3 26.e2 a6 27.1c2 a5 28.d3 e7
Black has problems coordinating his pieces 29.c5+ xc5 30.xc5 xc5 31.xc5 d6
properly - the Rf5 has no stable home. f7 32.a5 a6 33.e4 b6 34.a4 c5 35.dxc6
21.g3 g5 22.g4 f3!? xc6 36.xd4+ e6 37.a4 d6+ 38.d3
A nice confusionary tactic, but it doesn't quite f5 39.a5 d6+ 40.e2 xg3+ 41.hxg3
seem to solve his problems. 23.e2? f5 42.e3 c6 43.d3 d6+ 44.e3
[ 23.c2 is harder to meet - white threatens c6
on g5, and Nh5 also packs more punch with ½-½
the light-squared bishop keeping an eye on
the kingside - black would still have
troubles coordinating here. ] 79 B00
23...f7 24.f4 h8?? Maljutin,Evgeni 2340
[ 24...f3+! and black secures a plus by Kramnik,Vladimir 2490
getting the bishop pair and simplifying the Sochi 1990
position. ] [Alexander Volzhin]
25.e5+- f6 26.h5 f3 27.xf3 xe5
28.xg7 xf3+ 29.h1 h2 30.e4 xf1 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.f3 b4
1-0 5.d3 f6 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0
xc3 9.bxc3 d6 10.d2 e5 11.f4 e7!?
In a well-known position Kramnik finds an
78 B00 int ere st ing way to de via te f rom "o f f icial"
Maki,Veijo 2376 theory.
Salmensuu,Olli 2428 [ Black has another way to deviate from the
TCh-2001-02 FIN (2) 20.10.2001 main line: 11...exf4!? This move was tried in
[Jon Tisdall] Sp a ssky - Mile s, 1 9 8 3 b u t h a sn 't b e e n
played since, although White failed to prove
1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.d4 xf5 a n a d v a n t a g e : 12.g3 ( 12.f3 e7
5.b5 d6 6.e5 f6 7.0-0 d7 8.xc6 13.xf4 0-0 seems OK for Black.) 12...g5
bxc6 9.f3 xe5 10.xf5 f7 11.f4 13.a4 c6 14.e2 0-0-0 15.a5!? xa5
d7 12.xd7+ xd7 13.d2 c5!? 16.a6 White's attacking plan looks similar
Varying from to the Rauser attack in the Sicilian Dragon
[ 13...e6 14.b3 d6 15.g3 a5 16.a4 (of course Black's King is on the K-side in
hb8 17.fe1 b4 18.e2 ab8 19.f3 that case). xa6 17.xa6+ d7 18.c4
1-0 Shaw,J-Salmensuu,O/Leon ESP 2001 xc4 19.b5+ e7! ( Not 19...c8
(63) where black never quite equalized and 20.xa7! with a decisive attack: a5 21.d5
went down after a long massage. The new b8 22.a6 and mate is unavoidable.)
move is trickier, but does not look better. ] 20.xc4 e6 21.xc7+ d7 and Black is
14.c4 slightly better.Undoubtedly this line
[ 14.b3 screams out to be played, but requires further practical tests. ]
access to e6 is not necessarily worth so 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.b5+ c6 14.c4 0-0
much: cxd4 15.c5+ c8 16.e6 b8 ] 15.f5 White embarks upon a very ambitious
14...g5 15.g3 e6 16.ac1 b u t d u b i o u s p la n wh i c h le a d s h i m t o a n
[ 16.cxd5 exd5 17.ac1 must be a safe and inferior position in just a couple of moves. d7
lasting edge for white. ] 16.h5 b5 17.b3 It may seem that White
61
has strong pressure on the f-file (f7 is the 46.e5! Liquidation to the Rook ending is the
main target), but Black's next two moves simplest way to draw here. f5 47.g4+
prove that this conclusion is far from accurate. xg4 48.xg4 Now the outcome of this
c5! 18.dxc5 f6! Black is seizing the exciting encounter is clear. Black's extra pawn
initiative by exploiting the unstable position of means nothing here. e5 49.f3 d4
White's pieces. 19.f3 50.b7 f5 51.g3 a5 52.d7+ c5 53.e7
[ 19.xe5 is the main alternative to the text. d4 54.d7+ e5 55.e7+ d4
c7 20.f5 g4! Black wins the exchange, It's premature to draw final conclusions about
but very precise play is required: 21.f3 the strength of Kramnik's 11... Qe7 because of
xe5 22.xe5 ae8! It's necessary to the lack of practical material. However I feel
drive away the strong Knight immediately, this move is definitely playable, and sooner or
otherwise W hite would obtain strong later it will become popular, especially if
counterplay: ( 22...xc5+ 23.h1 xc3 White manages to find something tangible in
24.f1 ) 23.d7 xe4 24.g4 e7 the sharp main line 11...exd4.
25.xf8 xc5+ 26.h1 xc3 with a clear ½-½
advantage for Black, for example: 27.f1
c6! 28.d1 xf8 29.d8+ e8 30.h5
g6 31.xe8+ xe8 32.c5+ g8 80 B00
33.xa7 e1+ 34.g1 e2 and White Mamedov,Nid 2602
can't mantain the material balance. ] Ipatov,Alexander 2590
19...c8! IsBank TCh-TUR 2013 (5.1) 03.07.2013
[ 19...xc5+ is not so good , as it allows [Glenn Flear]
W hite to escape: 20.h1 ad8 21.xf6
gxf6 22.g4+ h8 23.h3 h7 24.f5+ 1.e4 b6 2.c3 b7 3.f4 This anti-Owen's
g7 25.g4+ and Black cannot avoid Defence set-up is surprisingly popular and not
repetition. ] really covered in the books. e6 4.f3 d5!?
20.xf6 xf6 21.xf6 gxf6 In this endgame A strange-looking move, but Black has to do
Black is the exchange up and has excellent something about White's centre.
winning chances, although good technique is [ The Nimzo-style 4...b4 looks more logical:
required. 22.d5 b8 23.f1 g7 24.b3 5.d3 ( 5.e2 e7 6.d3 d5 (a pertinent
e6 25.c6 bd8 26.d1 f5! 27.d3 fxe4 moment as ...d4 is threatened) 7.d2 d4
28.g3+ f6 8.d1 xd2+ 9.xd2 0-0 10.e2 f5
[ In my opinion, 28...h7 was much more to 11.0-0 c5 12.e5 bc6 Gasik, P-Nguyen, P
the point, leaving White little to hope for, for Warsaw 2012, with easy equality) 5...d5
example: 29.xe4+ f5 30.d3 e4 31.xb5 6.d2 dxe4 ( 6...d4 is less clear in this case,
f4 ] due to 7.b5! xd2+ 8.xd2 c5 9.e5!
29.xe4 d5 30.c7 xe4 31.cxd8+ xd8 and d6 is weak) 7.dxe4 f6 8.b5+ bd7
32.h3 xc2 After this inaccuracy the win 9.e5 xc3 10.xc3 d5 Perez Pietro, C-
becomes problematic. Garcia Palermo, C Buenos Aires 2013, with
[ 32...g5 w a s b e t t e r : 33.g3+ f4 near equality. ]
and W hite can't mantain the material 5.b5+!? A strange move and a new one.
balance. The "active" 34.g7 fails to g6 [ Instead 5.exd5 exd5 6.d4 f6 7.b5+ c6
winning the exchange after a King march to 8.d3 e7 9.g4!? c5 10.e2 xg4
f6. ] (White has enough practical compensation
33.xh6+ g6 34.h3 d6 35.e3 b1 with Black's king so vulnerable) 11.g1 c4
36.e2 c6 37.b2 g6 38.a5 xc3 12.f5 h6 Jakubiec, A-Schandorff, L
39.xb5 c1+ 40.f2 c2+ 41.f3 xa2 Danish league 2012, with a complicated
Black has managed to win a pawn, but the struggle in prospect. ]
small number of pieces on the board promise [ Alternatively 5.e2 has been tried: dxe4
White good drawing chances. 42.c6 e4+ 6.xe4 e7 7.d3 h6 8.d2 c5 9.0-0-0
43.g3 a3+ 44.f4 e3 45.b2 d3 c6 10.g4 (again this ambitious thrust) c7
62
11.f5 (maybe a bit over-enthusiastic) exf5 knight on h7 is somewhat out of play! e5
12.gxf5 xf5 13.g1 Czakon, J-Jaracz, P 27.exf5!? Giving up the bishop, but forcing a
Chorzow 2013, and White didn't really have line which involves freeing the knight.
enough compensation this time. ] [ Otherwise 27.xb5 b8 28.d3
5...c6 6.e2 d4 Pushing back White's would be reasonable. ]
pieces. 7.b1 c5 8.d3 f6 It seems to me 27...xe2 28.f6+ e6 29.h3+ d6
that Black has achieved a fine opening. He 30.fxg7 xg2+? Caving-in.
has a lion's share of the centre, and is not [ Instead 30...xg7! is necessary: 31.xh6+
behind in development. However, I think this g6 32.f8+ e5 33.e7+ e6 34.g5+
type of position is easier for him if the dark- d6 and Black wriggles out. ]
squared bishops were already exchanged, see 31.xg2 xg2 32.g4! Threatening both of
4. . .B b 4 a bo ve . 9.0-0 e7 10.a4 c6 Black's pieces. f3 33.f6!
11.a3 c7 12.e1 Now the question is: [ Af ter the slack 33.g3?? Black has the
What will Black do with his king? Neither flank s t r o n g m o v e e7! and the knight doesn't
looks that safe, but Black needs to make a escape. Black even has the better chances
decision sometime. h6 here! ]
[ T h e c o u r a g e o u s 12...0-0! looks fine: 33...xg4 34.xg8 The bishop has to be
13.e5 a6 14.g3 e8 and I don't see given up for the g-pawn. f6 35.xf6 e6
anything concrete for White. ] 36.g8 xg8 37.xg8 c4 38.xh6 d5
13.e5!? a6 39.f2 b4 40.f5 c3 41.bxc3 It's all over.
[ I t ' s r i s k y t o c a p t u r e o n e 5 : 13...xe5 1-0
14.fxe5 d7 ( 14...xe5?? 15.f4 )
15.b5 b8 16.g3 with a strong initiative
for White. ] 81 B00
14.g3 g8 A committal move, but Ipatov Martinovic,Sa 2537
obviously didn't fancy castling short. Stevic,H 2620
[ After 14...0-0 15.d2 h7 16.ae1 ch-CRO 2014 Porec CRO (1.5) 03.02.2014
I can't see a clear plan for Black, but there [Glenn Flear]
a g a i n , W h i t e d o e s n ' t h a ve a n o b vi o u s
breakthrough. So maybe this was the way 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.f3 e6
forward. ] 5.e2 f6
15.ac4 b5 16.xc6 xc6 17.e5 b7 [ The following is quite innovative: 5...ge7
Now White trades on the a-file, so that Black 6.0-0 h6 7.e1 g5! I like this plan. With a
can't run away with ...0-0-0. 18.axb5 axb5 closed centre advancing the g-pawn like this
19.xa8+ xa8 20.f5!? can be annoying for W hite. 8.c3 g6
[ Opening shop on the other front is plausible, 9.a3!? A cont roversia l choice . xa3
for example 20.d2 b7 21.c3 as if lines 10.bxa3 a5 11.a4 e7 12.g3 g4
start to open, then Black's king and king's 13.d2 h5 14.f1 0-0-0
rook could well prove to be the wrong way Getz, A-Gelashvili, T Dallas 2013, with
round. ] dynamic play. ]
20...d6? [ T h e d i r e c t 5...b4 forces White's next
[ Less dangerous would be 20...exf5 21.xf5 move 6.a3 whereupon Black can attack
b7 ] the centre in thematic style: c5 7.c3 c6
21.f4 Now matters are tricky because of (this looks similar to certain lines of the
potentially dangerous discovered checks Advance Caro-Kann) 8.dxc5 xc5 9.b4
along the diagonal. exf5 22.g4! A strong b6 ( after 9...e7 10.0-0 c8 11.b5 a6
blow. xe4 12.bd4 xd4 13.xd4 g6 14.d2
[ Black's king is about to be cut down after h6 chances are balanced. Capturing on h6
22...xg4 23.xd6 d7 24.xc5 ] would allow Black to become 'ruler of the
23.dxe4 xf4 24.f6+ f8 25.h7+ e7 d a rk s qu a r e s ' .) 10.b5 Abravanel, C-
26.xf4 White has an extra piece, but the Forthoffer, P French league 2006, and now
63
Black should probably accept the need to 12...xe2 13.xe2 xb2 14.ab1 bxc6
d e f e n d d 6 w i t h c7 with an acceptable 15.xb2= ]
position. ] 13.xf2 c5+ 14.e1 xe2 15.xe2 bxc6
[ The idea of 5...e7!? is also to get the g- Phew! After all that, we can calm down and
pawn advancing: 6.0-0 g5!? 7.e1 d7 notice that material is about equal. It's not
8.c3 0-0-0 9.b4 f6 10.a4 a6 clear who has the better minor piece, and
( w i t h d o u b l e - e d g e d p l a y ) 11.b5?! White's passed, but isolated, e-pawn could
Over-optimistic. a7 12.exf6 xf6 13.a3 turn out to be either a strength or a weakness.
McShane, L-Speelman, J Blitz 2000, and 16.d3 f8 17.hf1 d7 18.b3?!
now Houdini suggests f8! with an edge for The knight isn't great over here, but it isn't yet
Black, as White's attacking pretensions are a problem.
stymied. ] [ Better is 18.f3!?= with the idea of bringing
6.e3 over the other rook to help protect both the
[ Feller angles to hold onto his e5-pawn f-file and the e-pawn. ]
wedge by supporting it with his bishop: 6.f4 18...f2! To thwart ideas of R-e1, supporting
ge7 7.g3 fxe5 8.dxe5 g6 9.bd2 the e-pawn. 19.c4?!
c5 10.0-0 0-0 11.c3 b6 12.e1 ce7 [ 19.ad1 e6 20.d2 is a better way
13.b4 Stopping Black expanding on the when Black isn't able to achieve anything
queenside. c6 14.d4 d7 15.2b3 e4 concrete, as c5 can be met by 21.c4!= ]
16.f3 f5 17.f1 h5 18.d2 Feller, S- 19...ae8 20.d2 xe5 21.f3 dxc4+
Bricard, E Caen 2011, and W hite's grip [ Although 21...e3+?! looks like a blunder,
earns him a pull. ] (with 22.d2 in mind) Black rescues himself
6...fxe5 This is already a novelty! with exf3 23.gxf3 d4 with reasonable
[ Black tried 6...g4 without capturing on e5 compensation. However, the game
in the following: 7.bd2 ge7 8.exf6?! continuation is clearly a better try for an
Giving away the centre like this doesn't yield advantage. ]
a n y a d v a n t a g e . ( keeping the tension (and 22.xc4 c5+ 23.d3 d5+ 24.c2 c5
space edge) with 8.0-0 looks better) 8...gxf6 25.ae1 Black has an extra pawn, but
9.h4 xe2 10.xe2 h5! 11.b3 d6 naturally his queenside structure could be
12.c5 b6 13.d3 e5= Scheeff, V-Taeger, better! f4 26.b3 d6 27.d2 df5
W German league 1999. ] 28.xf4 xf4 29.f3 g5 30.h3 h5 31.e4
7.dxe5 g4 8.bd2 ge7 9.g5!? Martinovic builds a light-squared fortress
[ A better try for an opening pull is 9.h3 h5 which will be tough to overcome, as there is
10.0-0 when a later ...Nf5 could be met with n o e v i d e n t w e a k n e s s i n h i s c a m p . c5+
B-f 4, when g2-g4 is a threat. Of course 32.d3 d5+ 33.d4 The trade of rooks isn't
Black can capture on f3, but I prefer White if a problem unless White is forced to capture
he obtains the bishop pair. ] on d5 straightening out Black's structure. d6
9...f5!? A surprise. 34.e4 e6
[ Also possible is 9...xe2 10.xe2 d7= [ After 34...xd4+= White could recapture
when White has more space, but Black is either way. It's hard to imagine that he is
not particularly inconvenienced as his pieces worse. ]
will all find good squares (N on f5, B on e7, 35.a4 a5 36.d4+ d7 37.c4 e5+
f-file for the rooks). ] 38.f3 e3+ 39.f2 d3 40.f3
10.xe6 [ 40.xc6?! would unnecessarily give Black
[ B l a c k is b e t t e r a f t e r 10.xg4 xe3 some winning chances with d2+ 41.f3
11.fxe3?! xg5 ] xa2 ]
10...xe3 11.xd8 xd1 12.xc6 40...d6 41.e2
[ Or 12.xg4 xf2!? 13.xf2 ( 13.xc6? [ Again 41.xg5 is plausible, but again there
xg4 ) 13...xd8= ] is d2+ ]
12...xf2!? 41...d5 42.e4 c5 43.d3 f5 44.e2
[ Another way to a satisfactory game is with g3 45.d3 c8 Trying his luck on the
64
q u e e n s i d e . 46.e8+ b7 47.e4 b6 28.bxc5 g6 29.c6 bxc6 30.dxc6 c7

48.c4 d5+ 49.e2 d6 50.d4 c5 31.d4 c8 32.h4 g7 33.h2 h5 34.c7
51.f3 b4 52.d4 c5 When all else fails, g5 35.hxg5 g6 36.b5 xg5 37.xf8
this pawn advance has to be tried. 53.f3 a4 1-0 Fedorov,A-Ivanov,V Moscow 1995. ]
The point is to leave White with a weak pawn 6.e5 f6!?
on the queenside. Then there would be a real [ 6...ge7 7.d3 f5 8.f3 a5 9.g5
target. 54.bxa4 a5 55.g4! h4 56.e4 c5 10.h5 g6 11.h3 h6 12.f3 c7
xa4 57.e5 A fine defensive plan: the trade 13.0-0 c6 14.g5 ce7 15.f6 g8
of rooks enables White's king to help blockade 16.g4 c4 17.e2 g5 18.h5 g6 19.gxf5
the c4-square. xe5+ 58.xe5 c3 59.c4 f4 20.xh6 xe2+ 21.h1 exf5 22.h7
b4 60.d3 d4 61.d2 e5 62.a3+ f8 23.xg5 xc3 24.g7 e4 25.h7
xf6
No t a l t o g e t h e r n e c e s s a ry, b u t p e r f e c t l y
1-0 Berg,E-Marder,S Copenhagen
adequate. a4 63.e4 xa3 64.c4! 1996. ]
[ 64.xg5?! would allow Black to get the c-
7.b5 The start of an unimpressive plan, I
pawn moving with b3 ] think. I would be tempted to try f4 and Bd3,
64...f4 65.xc5 c6 66.e6 c1 67.d4 since the stability of a B on d3 is one of the
b2 advantages of not having to worry about ...c5
½-½ based counterplay - and ...f6 means slight
ventilation for black on the kingside. But then,
I am hardly a connoisseur of the white side of
82 B00 the W inawer French. d7 8.xc6 xc6
Maslak,Konstantin 2306 9.h5+ d7 10.h3 b5 11.f4 e8
Zajarnyi,Anatolyi 2380 12.xe8+ xe8 13.h5 e7 14.h4 f7
Chigorin Mem (7) 08.11.2000 15.h3 fxe5 16.dxe5 e7 17.f4 g6
[Jon Tisdall] 18.g3 c5 19.b1 c6 20.h1 d8 21.b2
dd7 22.d1 f5 23.g4 f8 24.c1 df7
1.e4 c6 2.c3 e6 3.d4 b4 4.a3 xc3+ 25.e3 xf4 26.xf4 xf4 27.xf4 xf4
5.bxc3 d5 A surprisingly rare continuation, 28.d2 d4 29.g5 d5 30.b1 a6
giving the game more of the feel of a French 31.be1 f2+ 32.c1 d3 33.cxd3 xd3
Defence - where the N is rather oddly placed 34.h3 c4 35.h5 b5 36.g6 h6 37.h4
on c6. The cons of this are obvious - the c2+ 38.d1 xc3 39.f4 xa3 40.d2
counterplay based on ... c5 is absent. On the a2+ 41.e3 h2 42.f7 xh5 43.g1
other hand, black can try to justify this by xe5+ 44.d2 e2+ 45.d1 a2 46.g3
hitting out at e5 at once. d4 47.e1 b4 48.d7+ e5 49.xg7 b3
[ 5...d6 6.d3 ge7 ( 6...e5 7.e2 ge7 50.b7 b2 51.xd3 cxd3 52.g7 b1+
8.0-0 0-0 9.f4 f6 10.e1 d7 11.h4 53.xb1 g2 54.b7 f6 55.xa7 xg7
g6 12.g3 h8 13.f5 ge7 14.h4 56.a3 d7 57.d2 h5 58.a5 d5
e8 15.f3 g8 16.g4 g5 17.f2 d5 59.a8 g5 60.g8+ h4 61.g6 e5
18.exd5 xd5 19.c4 d6 20.d5 e4 62.g7 h3 63.g5 h4 64.g1 h2
21.xe4 e5 22.c3 d4 23.d3 c5 65.g4 h3 66.g5 h1 67.g3 h2 68.g5
24.e3 b5 25.xd4 cxd4 26.xd4 d6 a5 69.e3 a1 70.xd3 g1 71.xe5
27.c5 e5 28.d4 d6 29.c5 d8 g2 72.g5+ f3
30.c6 e7 31.c5 f7 32.d1 a6 33.c7 0-1
d7 34.xe7 1-0 Sumaneev,D-Yemelin,V
Elista 1995.) 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 f5 9.c4 e5
10.d5 a5 11.f4 fxe4 12.xe4 f5
13.d3 d7 14.d2 a4 15.b4 xc4
16.xc4 xe4 17.xe4 a5 18.fxe5 g6
19.xf8+ xf8 20.exd6 cxd6 21.f1 axb4
22.axb4 e8 23.xe8 xe8 24.d4 e5
25.c4 e7 26.f5 d7 27.c5 dxc5
65
83 B00 c3 42.a5 f1 43.f4 e4 44.b4 f6

Mikac,Matjaz 2420 45.h4 g4 46.xh5 xg2 47.g3 f3
Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2434 48.g7 f6 49.f5 d5+ 50.c4 e2+
chT Bled SLO (5) 18.10.2000 51.d4 e6 52.d6 e7 53.e4 d5
[Jon Tisdall] 54.e5 c7 55.f4 d1 56.f5+ d7 57.a5
c2+ 58.f4 d3 59.g5 d5 60.f6 c7
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 61.f7 e7 62.c8+
5.e3 e5 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.xd8+ Unusual to 1-0
a s k b l a c k t o d e ve l o p t h i s r o o k , b u t o n e
difference becomes clear in the game.
[ 7.b5 xd1+ 8.xd1 d7 ( 8...d6 84 B00
9.xc6+ bxc6 10.d3 0-0 11.d2 c8 Mohr,Georg 2492
12.a4 a6 13.b3 fd8 14.g5 e7 Cander,Mitja 2255
15.xf6 gxf6 16.d1 d4 17.g3+ h8 chT Bled SLO (2) 15.10.2000
18.c3 ad8 19.cb1 xe4 20.e1 [Glenn Flear]
ed4 21.c1 f8 22.c3 a4 23.f3 e7
24.a3 d3 25.f1 h4 26.h3 e4 27.f5 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
xf1 28.xf1 d5 29.g4 xf5 30.gxf5 5.e3 e6 6.h3 h5 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5
xh3 31.e1 c5 32.xe4 xf2 33.c2 e5 9.g4 xf3+? If statistics are anything to
h5 34.e7 g7 35.xc7 h4 36.d2 e3 go by, this is a serious mistake. Black aids
37.xc6 h3 38.f1 e1 39.h2 g3 white's development - he now castles quickly,
40.d2 b1 41.g4 xb2+ 42.d3 h4 and also finds it easier to mobilize his
43.c4 g5 44.a4 g2 0-1 Mooser,S- kingside pawn mass. the immediate retreat of
Biro,S/Rieden 1996 (44)) 9.xc6 xc6 the Bh5, on the other hand, has had
10.xe5 xe4 11.xe4 xe4 12.0-0 f6 reasonable success, so this would appear to
13.c4 d6 14.a5 0-0-0 15.d3 e8 be an error.
16.b3 e5 17.d2 e4 18.c4 e8 [ 9...g6 10.d2!? clearing the way for the f-
19.e3 c5 20.fd1 d8 21.f3 xe3+ pawn is definitely the way to frighten black
22.xe3 xd3 23.xd3 d6 24.f2 e8 in th is va ria tion - wha t results is sh ee r
25.d5 f7 26.f4 e5 27.e3 g6 chaos and the whole line can be assessed
28.d3 c6 29.e2 c7 30.g3 d6 with the cliche 'deserves further testing'. But
31.d4 c5 32.d2 e5 33.d4 c5 black should take special note, as despite
34.d2 e5 1/2-1/2 Lehmann,K-Seul,G/ some very unusual handling by white, the
Germany 1989/GER-chT (34) ] lower rated player manages to work up a
7...xd8 8.b5 d6? formidable attack. ( 10.b5+ ed7 11.e2
[ 8...d7 ] e7 12.0-0-0 a6 13.d3 xd3 14.xd3
[ 8...xf3 9.gxf3 a6!? ] 0-0 15.d4 c5 16.dd1 e8 17.f5
9.xa7 This is it - quite an easy move to fe4 18.xe4 xe4 19.h4 d7 20.f3
forget about, really. 0-0 10.xc6 bxc6 f6 21.g5 e5 22.d4 c5 23.h5 xd4
11.e3 b8 12.b1 b4 13.0-0 xc3 24.xd4 e5 25.xg7 xg5 26.h6 e7
14.bxc3 xe4 15.xe5 e2?! 27.h5 f5 28.dd1 f8 29.de1 e4
[ 15...e6 followed by Ra8 gave better 30.f4 f7 31.xe4 g4 32.f3 xe4
chances to save the game. ] 33.c3 g6 34.f3 e7 35.c4 xh6+
16.xc6 xf1 17.xb8 xb8 18.xb8 b5 36.f4 f7 37.g3 g6 38.d3 e8
19.c4 a4 20.a6 c6 21.b4 d6 22.c5 39.h5 d8 40.xf5 g8 0-1 Ivanov,V-
c4 23.f1 b5 24.e1 f6 25.d3 f7 Nesterov,J/Moscow 1995.) 10...e7 11.g2
26.f4 a4 27.e2 xc2 28.d4 a4 h5 12.g5 h7 ( 12...fd7!? ) 13.0-0 f5
29.e2 e5 30.d2 e8 31.f4 f7 14.h2 d7 15.f4 g6 16.f3 e7
32.c3 d7 33.b4 d1 34.a4 g5 17.g3 c5 18.dxc6 bxc6 19.d4 h4+
35.g3 f5 36.xf5 e2 37.a5 h5 38.h4 20.h2 d5 21.xc6 xc6 22.xd5 c8
gxh4 39.xh4 g5 40.b6 e4 41.g6 23.xe7 xe7 24.xa8 xa8 25.c5 f8
66
26.xe7 xe7 27.e1+ e6 28.b4+ 85 B00

d8 29.ad1+ d7 30.f5 d5 31.d6 Mohr,Georg 2492
c6 32.fe1 c8 33.e3 f6 34.e7 b7 Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2434
35.b4 b6 36.d2 e5 37.xe5 fxe5 chT Pula (2) 12.09.2000
38.xe5 e8 39.d6 e1 40.f8+ b7 [Jon Tisdall]
41.f7+ a6 42.c4+ b5 0-1 De la Riva
Aguado,O-Spraggett,K/Santiago 1995. ] 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
10.xf3 g6 11.0-0-0 e7 12.g2 d7 5.e3 e5 6.b5
13.f4 h6 [ 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.xd8+ xd8 8.b5 xf3
[ 13...f5 14.g5 0-0 15.f3 c8 16.h4 a6 9.gxf3 a6 10.xc6+ bxc6 11.e2 h5
17.h5 e8 18.c4 b5 19.b3 b6 12.ad1 d6 13.d3 0-0 14.b1 f5
20.e2 b4 21.h6 g6 22.d4 bxc3 15.c3 fxe4 16.fxe4 f4+ 17.xf4 xf4
23.xc3 xg5 24.fxg5 xg5+ 25.b1 f4 18.f3 df8 19.f1 h4 20.f2 f6 21.f1
26.f3 d7 27.dg1 f5 28.h5 f7 fh6 22.g1 b4 23.c4 a5 24.h1
29.d3 f3 30.hg5 f5 31.d4 f6 e1 25.g2 h3 26.d2 d6 27.f1
32.xf6 xf6 33.xf6 f7 34.d4 d7 xf3 28.g3 f2 0-1 Vrana,F-Kos,T
35.xf5+ gxf5 36.g7+ f8 1-0 Kovacevic, Charleville FRA 2000. ]
P-Kostic,N/Bela Crkva 1990 (36) ] 6...d7
14.d4 0-0 15.h4! Giving black the choice of [ 6...exd4 a la a Steinitz Spanish/Ruy Lopez
opening lines against his own king or having a is probably better. ]
pawn mass stuffed in his face. A glance at the 7.d5 cb8
other flank is enough to confirm that this game [ 7...xf3 8.xf3 e7 9.0-0-0 a6
is likely to feature one-way traffic as black 10.xd7+ I don't see the point of giving back
does not have a glimmer of counterplay. xh4 the bishop pair. ( 10.f1!? and then h4!?
16.h2 f6 17.g5 xg5? Black banks on perhaps? ) 10...xd7 11.h4 ( 11.b1 b5
three pawns and a relatively safer king for a 12.c1 b4 13.e2 c5 14.dxc6 xc6
piece, but with a long term attack still on the 15.g3 a5 16.hd1 b8 17.d3 a4
cards, he will find that a piece is a piece. 18.c4 c8 19.d1 e7 20.c5 a6
[ 17...xd4 18.xd4 e8 ( 18...h5 21.cxd6 xd6 22.c5 d8 23.xd6 g6
19.e2 ) 19.e2 ( 19.gxh6 allows ...Re1+ 24.c2 xd6 25.cd2 e7 26.f1 d7
and/or Qf6, which hinders the attack a bit. )] 27.e3 c8 28.d5+ f8 29.f6 dc7
18.fxg5 xg5+ 19.b1 e5 20.d3 f3 30.xd6 c1+ 31.xc1 xc1+ 32.xc1
21.f2 xd4 22.xd4 xd3 23.xd3 f5?! f1+ 33.d1 xf2 34.g4 b3 35.axb3
This creates weaknesses, but sitting still does axb3 36.c6 g7 37.h3 e3+ 38.b1
not hinder white from training all of his guns a7 39.g5 a2+ 40.c1 a1+ 41.d2
on the kingside either still, something more xb2+ 42.e1 g2 43.e8+ h8
solid was called for: 44.d6 g7 45.e8+ h8 46.d6 xh3
[ 23...ae8 24.dg1 f4 prevents 47.c7 g8 48.xf7 e3+ 49.f1 xg5
immediate catastrophe. ( 24...f6 25.e4 50.f2 h5 51.e1 h3 52.d2 h5
e5 26.d2 h7 27.g5+ g8 53.c1 e3+ 54.fd2 c3+ 55.b1 h4
28.xh6! )] 56.b5 f3 57.d6 h3 58.b2 h2
24.e2 f4 25.d4 f7 26.dg1 xd5 59.c4 h1 60.d8+ g7 0-1 Hendriks,
27.xh6+- f3 28.h7+ f8 29.h8+ e7 W-Mestrovic,Z Wijk aan Zee 1999.) 11...h5
30.e1+ e5 31.xe5+ dxe5 32.e6+ d7 12.g3 g8 13.e2 g6 14.f4 g7 15.d2
33.xa8 0-0-0 16.hf1 exf4 17.xf4 h6 18.f3
1-0 g4 19.f4 de8 20.d2 hf8 21.e1
e7 22.g5 ee8 23.ff1 b8 24.a3 e5
25.f4 e7 26.e2 fe8 27.fe1 f5
28.exf5 xc3 29.bxc3 xe2 30.xe2 gxf5
31.e1 xe2 32.xe2 a4 33.e7
1/2-1/2 Medunova,V-Zielinska,M W arsaw
67
1999. ] c4 37.g1 e3+ 38.d3 xd5 39.g6+

8.h3 xf3!? A change from the man who e5 40.g2 e7 41.xg7 xg7 42.xg7
plays this the most. But it doesn't seem to h4 43.h3 d5 44.e6 b6 45.g5
improve his chances much - this piece will be e7 46.e6 d6 47.b3 d7 48.c4 e5+
sorely missed later. 49.c3 bxc4 50.bxc4 c5 51.f4 f3
[ 8...h5 9.g4 g6 10.h4 h6 ( 10...h5 52.d3 g5 53.g6 a5 54.a4 g1
11.g5 a6 12.f1 b5 13.d2 e7 14.g1 55.g2 h3 56.d5 h2 57.g2 h3
c8 15.a4 b4 16.a2 b7 17.c3 a5 58.e2 f6 59.f3 g1+ 60.g3 e2+
18.cxb4 axb4 19.b5 0-0 20.xb4 c5 61.xh2 c3 62.g3 xa4 63.e4 c3
21.f3 h7 22.b3 f5 23.e2 g8 64.c2 a4 65.f3 a3 66.b3 a2 67.xa2
24.0-0-0 f4 25.xc5 dxc5 26.c6 d6 xa2 68.f8 b4 69.e4 c6 70.e6
27.c4 d7 28.g2 f7 29.h3 e8 e5 71.f4 xc4 72.xc5 xc5 73.e4
30.g2 a8 31.a2 b8 32.6xe5 xe5 e5 74.e3 d5 75.f4 d4 76.g3
33.xe5 f5 34.exf5 xe5 35.f6 d7 e3 77.g2 d3 78.g3 f2 79.g2
36.xd7 a5 37.c2 b4 38.e6 c3 e4 80.f1 d2 81.g2 e2 82.g1
39.xf7+ 1-0 Piket,J-Mestrovic,Z Sremic f3 83.f1 h4 84.f6 f2 0-1 Medvegy,N-
K r s k o 1 9 9 8 .) 11.h5 h7 12.g5 a6 Mestrovic,Z Budapest 1999. ]
( 12...hxg5 13.xg5 a6 14.g4 g8 9.gxf3 e7 10.d2 0-0 11.0-0-0 f5 12.exf5
15.e6 fxe6 16.dxe6 xe6 17.xe6+ xf5 13.dg1 a6
e7 18.g6+ f7 19.xf7+ xf7 [ 13...xf3 invites a vicious attack: 14.e2
20.c4+ e8 21.d5 d8 22.g5+ c8 ( 14.h6 f7 ) 14...f8 15.h6 f6 16.e4
23.0-0-0 c5 24.f3 b5 25.f1 c6 f7 17.h5 e7 18.h2 h8 19.hg2!
26.h3+ b7 27.c3 d8 28.c2 de6 gxh6 ( 19...g6 20.xg6 hxg6 21.xg6+- )
29.xe6 xe6 30.dg1 h7 31.d2 c6 20.xh6+- ]
32.e3 f4 33.f5 e8 34.xf4 exf4 14.g3 f7 15.h4 f6 16.h5 h8 17.a3
35.h4 d5 36.xf4 dxe4 37.fxe4 xh5 c5 18.b1 a6 19.f1 b5 20.b4 cd7
38.xg7+ xg7 39.d6+ b6 40.xe8 21.d3 f8 22.g6 e7 23.e4 xe4
h2+ 41.b1 h6 42.f1 e2 43.d6 24.fxe4 h6 25.f5 f6 26.g6 f7
a5 44.f5 g5 45.g1 e3 46.g6 c5 27.hg1 a5 28.e6 e7 29.d3 axb4
47.e6 c7 48.e5 e4 49.c2 d7 30.axb4 c5 31.xf7 c4 32.e2 xe4
50.d3 e1 51.d4 d1+ 52.e4 e1+ 33.f3 f6 34.xf6 xf6 35.xf6 gxf6
53.f5 f1+ 54.e4 e1+ 55.f5 f1+ 36.g8+ h7 37.e6 f5 38.f3 d8 39.b6
56.g6 e1 57.f6 f1+ 58.g6 e1 1-0
59.a3 b4 60.axb4 axb4 61.f7 e4
62.b3 b6 63.cxb4 xb4 64.f6 e4
65.e6+ c7 66.f3 e3 67.d2 xd2 86 B00
68.e7 c5 69.e8 xe8 70.xe8 c6 Moreda,Lucas 2309
71.d3 b4 72.d8 c4 73.f7 c5 Polak,Tomas 2505
74.e6 c3 75.b3 a5 76.a8 c7 9th Valley Saint Vincent ITA (6) 08.02.2001
77.a4 b5 78.c4 d8 79.d5 g5 [Jon Tisdall]
80.e4 c2 81.xc2 b4 82.b2 c3
83.b1 e7 84.d5 a3 85.c6 c2 1.e4 b6 2.c3 b7 3.d4 e6 4.a3 d5
86.b4 1/2-1/2 Jonkman,H-Mestrovic,Z Wijk 5.exd5 exd5 6.f3!?N An interesting idea,
aan Zee 1999.) 13.f1 b5 14.a3 c5 but white f in ds tha t th e p rice o f c rea tin g
15.g6 fxg6 16.hxg6 xg6 17.xc5 dxc5 concessions is that his position becomes
18.xe5 g5 19.xg6 xg6 20.h3 e7 rather artificial
21.f5 g5 22.h5+ xh5 23.xh5 d7 [ 6.f3 f6 7.d3 e7 8.0-0 e4 9.e2
24.g6+ d8 25.e5 g5 26.e4 f4 0-0 10.c3 d7 11.e1 e8=
27.f5 xe5 28.0-0-0 f8 29.xc5 xf5 Walta,P-Blanco,M Moscow 1994. (1/2-1/2,
30.e6+ e7 31.xf5 f6 32.h3 b6 88) ]
33.f4 d6 34.f5 g8 35.c3 h5 36.c2 6...e7
68
[ 6...f6 7.g5 e7 ( 7...bd7 [ Now that Black has safely castled the move
avoids white's tricky concept.) 8.b5+ c6 16...xb4! is a more serious proposition e.g.
9.xf6 xf6 10.xd5 ] 17.c5 bxc5 18.dxc5 f4! as after ( not
7.g3 f8 8.b5 18...xc5? 19.dc1 d6 20.xf6 xf6
[ 8.f4!? ] 21.xb4 ) 19.xf6 gxf6 20.d7 xd7
8...a6! 9.xc7 a7 10.f4 c6 11.0-0-0 21.xd7 c4 Black seems to be OK. ]
[ 11.f3 f6 ] 17.a3 b8 18.e1 fe8 19.bd1 c6
11...g5 12.e5 xe5 13.xe5 f6 14.g3 Preparing ...b5 in order not to stay too
c8 Black crowns his original opening play passive. 20.c2 b5 The idea is to fix White's
by winning material. 15.xa6 xa6 16.xa6 pawns on dark squares (rendering W hite's
xa6 17.d3 a7 18.e2 h5 19.he1 e7 bishop impotent) and gaining control of d5.
20.b5 h6 21.b4 h4 22.b1 g7 23.f4 21.c5 c7 Preparing ...Rd5 which would give
g4 24.c1 xe1 25.xe1 e7 26.d2 him a satisfactory position. Instead after
f5 27.c3 d7 28.d3 d6 29.e5 f5+ [ 21...d5 22.e5 d7 Black will have
30.a2 e4 31.e3 xe5 32.dxe5 c6 problems to capture on e5 without exposing
33.d4 c5 34.e6+ f6 35.e7 xd4 his queen. ]
36.cxd4 c8 37.c1 e8 38.c6 xe7 22.d5! One way of avoiding the blockade!
39.xb6 d2 40.a4 e2 41.a5 c4 White's better harmonized pieces now come
42.b5 xa5 43.xa5 xg2 44.xd5 f6 to the fore despite the loss of a pawn. xd5
45.h5 xh2 46.d5 g3 47.d6 f7 48.h7+ [ 22...exd5 23.xf6 gxf6 24.xf5
e8 leaves Black under pressure with broken
0-1 kingside pawns and White's intended Nd4
will further strengthen the bind. ]
[ The immediate 22...cxd5 23.xf6 gxf6
87 B00 24.d4 c8 gets into hot water as 25.c6
Morozevich,Alexander 2717 threatens a decisive fork. ]
Chernyshov,Konstantin 2531 23.xd5 cxd5 24.xf6 gxf6 25.d4 c8
TCh Sochi RUS (7) 25.04.2005 26.c6 The extra pawn is a minor detail, Black's
[Glenn Flear] position is a shambles. Just look at the knight!
e5?
1.e4 e6 2.d4 b6 3.f3 b7 4.d3 f6 [ 26...c7 27.c5 f7 would be a better
5.e5 e4 6.0-0 f5 chance. ]
[ Another idea is to wait one tempo with 27.c7 f4
6...e7 before deciding between ...f5 or ...d5 [ Saving the piece with 27...d7 is hopeless
e.g. 7.c4 d5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.e1 d7 after 28.xf5 e6 29.d1 ]
10.c3 xc3 11.bxc3 f8 12.d2 e6 28.cxb8 xb8 29.c6 d8 30.e6 c8
13.f1 g6 14.f4 h5 15.f5! gxf5 16.g3 31.c7 d8 32.c1 f7 33.f3 d4 34.xa6
with an edge to White in Wells,P-Blatny,P d3 35.xb5 d2 36.c4+ g6 37.d1 d7
Puvermuehle 2000 ] 38.e4+ h6
7.xe4 xe4 8.c4 c6 9.g5 [ For the record, 38...f5 regains the piece but
[ 9.c3 is well met by xf3 when White after 39.xe5 xc7 40.xd2 the result
wo u ld h a ve t o m ake t he co nce ssio n o f remains the same. ]
capturing with the pawn. ] 39.f5 xc7 40.xf6+ h5 41.g4+
9...xb1 10.xb1 e7 11.f3 d5 12.exd6 Black is in a mating net.
xd6 13.b4 d8 1-0
[ It would be foolhardy to play 13...xb4?
14.a4+ f8 ( 14...c6 15.xb4 ) 15.c5
bxc5 16.dxc5 xc5 17.a3 b8 18.fc1
b5 19.xb5 xb5 20.xc7 and Black is
in serious trouble. ]
14.b2 f6 15.a4 0-0 16.fd1 a6!?
69
88 B00 25.g2 f5 26.f4 f7 27.xf5+ d6

Mrdja,Milan 2435 28.xe8 xe8 29.b3 c5 30.d3 d4
Lovric,Branko 2357 31.d2 b5 32.g6 xg6+ 33.xg6 e6
It Montecatini Terme ITA (6) 17.02.2001 34.b4 f5 35.h4+ e5 36.bxc5 d5
[Jon Tisdall] 37.f4 xc5 38.f5 d8 39.b4+ b6
40.xd4 a5 41.e7 e8 42.d6 d8
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.a3 f6 43.e5 d5 44.e4 c5 45.f5 c3
5.e5 46.f6 1-0 Ciganikova,A-Dubinskaya,M
[ 5.d3 c5 6.dxc5 bxc5 7.f3 c4 8.xc4 Tallinn 1997. ]
xe4 9.xe4 xe4 10.0-0 e7 11.e1 6.xe4 If this really is a new move, then all I
b7 12.e5 0-0 13.h5 c6 14.f4 can say is that this line must be extremely
xe5 15.xe5 d6 16.xg7 xg7 17.e3 untested.
g8 18.g3+ h8 19.xf7 xg3 20.hxg3 [ 6.f3 doesn't look that impressive. xc3
e8 21.xe6 c6 22.f1 f8 23.d1 7.bxc3 e7 8.d3 0-0 9.0-0 d6 10.e1
xc2 24.d4 g6 25.b3 e4 26.c4 d7 11.exd6 cxd6 12.a4 f6 13.e4
c8 27.e3 e8 28.b3 f6 29.d1 xe4 14.xe4 e8 15.h4 c7 16.d2 e5
g6 30.b4 e5 31.f1 c2 32.g4 g7 17.g4 e4 18.g5 d5 19.g3 f8 20.h5
33.c1 c3 34.e2 xe2 35.xg7 e1+ e3 21.xe3 xg5 22.xe8 xe8 23.xg5
0-1 Szabolcsi,J-Henley,R Budapest 1981. ] xc3 24.e3 h6 25.b1 c4 26.c3 h7
[ 5.g5!? appeals to the develop and 27.f3 e4 28.c1 e6 29.f4 f6
threaten school. Black had to take great 30.g3 e6 31.e5 f6 32.f4 xa4
care in 33.xh6 e7 34.e3 f8 35.f3 d7
A) 5...h6!? 6.xf6 xf6 7.f3 c6 36.h6 b5 37.a1 h7 38.hxg7 xg7
( 7...a6!? ) 8.e5 f5 ( 8...d8 ) 9.d3 39.a6 h8 40.h5 g8 41.h6 e7
f4 10.d5?? ( 10.g3+- xd4 11.gxf4 42.g3 h8 43.g2 g8 44.g6+ h8
xf3 12.e2 ) 10...d4 11.xd4 xd4 45.h2 c7 46.h5 d7 47.f8 e6
12.e2 exd5 13.0-0-0? xa3-+ 48.h3 f5 49.a2 g8 50.c5 a6
(0-1, 37) Drapal,V-Leko,G Hrabyne 1996.; 51.g2 f7 52.h4 g7 53.f3 e8
B) 5...e7 6.d3 c5 7.dxc5 bxc5 8.f3 54.f2 h6 55.e7+ xe7 56.xe7 e6
c4 9.xc4 xe4 10.xe4 xe4 11.xe7 57.b4 f6 58.a2 h5 59.a5 g6
xe7 12.0-0 c6 13.e1 g6 14.d2 60.c7 xg3 61.f2 f4 62.xf4 f5
e8 15.d5 c8 16.ad1 a5 17.b4+ 63.e5+ f7 64.a1 e7 65.e2 d7
d6 18.f4 f8 19.xe6 xe6 20.xe6 66.d3 h4 67.e3 c6 68.h1 f5+
xc2 21.g5 e7 22.d5 f6 23.e3 69.d3 h6 70.g1 e7 71.c2 a5
e7 24.f4 f6 25.g3 e5 26.f4 72.f4 h2+ 73.b1 f2 74.g7 e6
e2 27.e1 d2 28.h4 h6 29.e6+ 75.h7 g2 76.h6+ g6 77.h8 c6
fxe6 30.d8+ e8 31.xd6+ g8 78.f8 e7 79.c8 b4 80.cxb4 xb4
32.xe6+ h7 33.e4+ 1-0 Conquest,S- 81.f5 g1+ 82.b2 f1 83.f6+
Jadoul,M FRA 1991. ] 1/2-1/2 Cetkovic, M-Filipovic,B Becici 1994. ]
5...e4 6...xe4 7.e2 b7 8.f4 d6 9.exd6
[ 5...d5 6.xd5 xd5 7.g4 xd6!? This indicates nervousness about
A) 7...f5 8.g3 b7 9.e2 e7 castling kingside.
10.h3 c6 11.e3 f7 12.g5 g8 [ 9...xd6 10.g4 0-0 11.d3!?
13.d5? (1/2-1/2, 63) Starck, I-Wolf,S may have made black feel uncomfortable,
Stralsund 1988. ( 13.h5+! ); though white has nothing clear here - at any
B) 7...d6 8.g5 d7 9.e2 b7 10.f3 rate there is nothing wrong with the more
c6 11.0-0-0 h6 12.h4 g5 13.d5 exd5 original course chosen in the game.
14.xd7+ xd7 15.g3 e8 16.xd5 ( 11.h5 g6 doesn't accomplish anything,
g7 17.e1 xe5 18.xe5 xd5 and white must beware of being kicked back
19.xg7 hg8 20.c3 g4 21.h4 c6 in disarray by ...f5. )]
22.d2 h5 23.g3 e6 24.d3 d5 10.e3 c6
70
[ 10...d7!? ] move that locks the centre. Both 11...c6 and

11.g4 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 h5 13.h3 11...0-0 are in my opinion better moves
[ 13.xh5? d5 14.f4 a2 is nothing to 12.h4 h5 13.ge2 d6 14.f3 f8 15.d1
a l l o w f o r a p a wn t h a t a l s o a c t i va t e s a 8d7 16.ec3 g6 17.f1 h7 18.h3
piece. ] df6 19.a3 c8 20.xc8 xc8 21.0-0 0-0
13...g5 14.e2 d5 15.b1 g4 16.h4 22.f2 , and White holds the better
e7 17.g3 d6 18.h4 e7 This "feels" prospects because he controls the possible
justified, but in fact repeating moves was breaks on both queenside and kingside,
better. W hite is now forced into the Mortensen-Jakobsen, Denmark ch 1989. ]
weaknesses in black's camp. 19.c3 a5 6...exd4 This is the critical line.
20.b5 f5 21.f6 xe3 22.fxe3 hf8 [ Also 6...d6 has been tried out. Now 7 d5
23.h3! g3 makes more sense than in the above
[ 23...g3 24.h4 rounds up a kingside example, because Black's dark-squared is
pawn. ] now caged in by his own pawns. However,
24.hxg4 a6 even better is 7.0-0 e7 8.dxe5 xe5
[ 24...hxg4 25.h7 threatens f7 as well as 9.xe5 dxe5 10.d2 0-0 11.c4 d7
going behind the g-pawn - nevertheless this 12.d1 g5 13.e3 xe3 14.xe3 e7
looks preferable to the game. ] 15.f3 c5 16.c4 e6 , and Black has
25.c3 h4? 26.e2 e5 27.e7 g7 just about equalised, Berg-E.Pedersen,
This seems an abrupt end to the game, so I Denmark chT 1998. ]
suspect the game score is incomplete, but 7.0-0?! Although White receives some
black has insufficient compensation for the compensation for the pawn, I don't trust this
pawn(s). approach by White.
1-0 [ 7.e5!? is probably more like it. In the
present example, Black's position soon
looks like Swiss cheese. d5 8.e4 d3
89 B00 ( 8...de7 9.cxd4 d5 10.d3 ) 9.xd3
Nevednichy,Vladislav 2589 de7 10.f4 h6?! this isn't a good idea,
Blatny,Pavel 2512 and I don't understand how Black could
zt 1.4 Budapest HUN (2) 18.06.2000 convince himself that this was playable.
[Carsten Hansen] Much better was 10...Ng6 followed by ...Be7,
with about equal chances. 11.0-0 g5?!
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 c6 12.g3 g7 13.bd2 0-0 14.h4 f5
From my records, the earliest game with this 15.exf6 xf6 16.hxg5 hxg5 17.h7+ g7
move stems from 1975. But it has mainly been 18.e4 , and it is pretty obvious that things
the German correspondance player Caprano haven't exactly gone according to Black's
who has made use of it. It aims to challenge plan, Stefansson-Balinas, New York 1989. ]
White in the centre immediately, rather than 7...dxc3 8.xc3 d6
build-up on the queenside as is customary in [ 8...c5 is probably Black's best move,
Owen's Defense. 5.c3 e5 6.f3 although 8... Be7 9 e5 Ng8 followed by ...h5
[ It makes less sense to close the centre. also can be tried out. ]
After 6.d5 e7 7.c4 g6 8.g3 b4+ 9.b5 a6 Now White & Black together take
(since W hite has weakened his dark the game to more complicated hunting
squa res dram a tically by pla cing all h is grounds. The main problem for Black is that
central pawns on light squares, it makes the solid-looking 9...Nd7 can be met with 10
s e n s e f o r B la ck t o e xch a n ge t h e d a rk - Ng5, and if Black answers 10...Be7, then 11
squared bishop to take advantage of this. Nxf7 Kxf7 12 Bxc6 Bxc6 13 Qc4+, and White
However, also 8...h5, intending ...h4 to e n d s u p w i t h a n e x t r a p a w n . 10.xc6+
provoke further weaknesses or 8...c6 can In my opinion a suprising decision.
also be considered) 9.d2 xd2+ 10.xd2 [ A more natural way for White to follow up is
e7 11.c3 c5?! I'm not a great fan of this the more direct approach 10.e5!? axb5
71
11.exf6+ d7 12.fxg7 xg7 13.e4 40.a5+ g4 41.g1 a2

with a better game for White. ] ½-½
10...xc6 11.e5 xf3 12.xf3 dxe5
13.g5 e7 14.fd1 c8 15.xf6 xf6
16.c6+ Obviously, White has plenty of 90 B00
compensation for his two pawns. None of the Ni Hua 2638
Black pieces work together, perhaps with the Gonzales,Jayson 2474
exception of the bishop on f6 and the pawn on 7th Open Dubai UAE (5) 08.04.2005
g7! That Black manages to escape this is an [Glenn Flear]
astonishing accomplishment. f8 17.d7
e8 18.ad1 18 Nd5!? is probably even 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
stronger. c8 5.b5 a6 6.xc6+ bxc6 7.h3 h5
[ 18...d8 19.xc7 xd7 20.xd7 Although this variation has been played a few
is obviously not very interesting for Black. ] times over the years this is the first time at
19.d5 e6 20.xe6 fxe6 21.xc7 h5 such a high level. 8.g5
22.xe6+ White picks the wrong pawn to win [ Another way of introducing this pin is after
back. W ith Black as tied up as he is, White a couple of preliminary moves: 8.e2 e6
can always return to pick up the e6-pawn. 9.g4 g6 10.g5 e7 but it's not clear who
Instead White should have opted for 22 Nxa6 has benefited from this early pawn
after which 22...Rc2 can be answered with 23 advance. ]
Rb7, threatening the b-pawn as well as Rb8+. 8...b8!? With a threat that White doesn't
g8 23.c7 h7 24.g3 take seriously... 9.0-0!? Ni Hua decides that if
[ 24.xa6 c2 is far from ideal for White, Black spends time capturing on b2 then the
since 25.b1 hc8 leaves Black with open b-file will favour the better developed
sufficient compensation for the pawn due to player i.e . W hite. B lack now h as severa l
his active pieces. Notice the consequences opportunities to venture the risky b-pawn grab
of White wasting time with Nxe6. ] but clearly decides that getting developed is
24...h4 more important
[ 24...a5!? is possibly better, although White [ Instead Geller,E-Makropoulos,G Athens
still holds an edge after 25 R1d6. ] 1988 continued with 9.d3 e6 10.0-0 d7
25.1d6 hd8 26.xd8 xd8 27.d5 11.ae1 f6?! ( 11...h6! 12.c1 g5 ) 12.c1
Having seen most of his advantage vanish, b7 13.e5 g6 14.e2 f7 when White's
White adopts a safety-first policy and throws position was the easier to play. ]
even more of it away. Correct is 9...d7 10.d3 e6 11.fe1 h6 12.h4 g5!
[ 27.xa6 h3 28.f1 c1+ 29.e2 A more dynamic way to catch up in
with a clearly bad ending for Black. ] development and keep W hite on his toes.
27...h3 28.f1 g5?! W ith Black's light-squared bishop on the
[ 28...b5!? ] kingside there is little risk of ...g5 leading to
29.c3 c1 30.xb6 xb2 31.e4 c1 excessive self-weakening. 13.g3 g7
32.xa6 c4 33.f3? And here White lets go 14.d2 b6 15.b3 c5! Gaining influence
of his remaining advantage. Correct is 33 Nd6 o n t h e d a r k s q u a r e s . 16.d5 e5!?
followed by Nf5 and Rg7. c2? Black returns Black takes the opportunity to obtain the
the favour. Given the complications earlier on, bishop pair, but there's no hurry to occupy
the players may be in time trouble at this time. this square and maybe
Correct is 33...Bh6! followed by ...Rc2. 34.f4! [ 16...0-0 17.ab1 g6 just waiting and
g6 35.g5+?? White throws the win away. seeing could have been envisaged. ]
[ Here 35.fxe5 is simplest. The e-pawn 17.xe5 xe5 18.ab1 0-0 19.d2
decides. ] Two knights against two bishops is often
35...h6 36.xh3 exf4 37.xf4 xf4 difficult to judge when the pawn structure has
38.gxf4 h5 Black steers safely towards a yet to be decided. White at least can count on
theoretically drawn position. 39.a4 xh2 access to the c4-square as Black's light-
72
squared bishop is out of touch on h5. g7 from perpetual check.

20.c4 b7 21.a5 c8 22.b4! ½-½
Creating some action where he is strongest
before Black can get any counterplay up and
running. cxb4 23.xb4 e8 24.eb1?! 91 B00
[ More precise is 24.c6 d7 25.c4 Novak,Danijel 2359
but in any case it will be hard for White to Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2387
maintain his central bind for long when the TCh Medulin CRO (7) 15.09.2002
bishops start to flex their muscles. ] [Jon Tisdall]
24...g6 25.c6 d7 White has won the
battle for the b-file but meantime Black hasn't 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d6 3.f3 f6 4.c3 g4
panicked. He has reorganized his pieces to 5.e3 e5 6.b5 d7 7.d5 cb8 8.h3 h5
exert latent pressure against the centre . 9.g4 g6 10.h4 h5 11.g5 e7
26.b8 c8 27.f3 exd5 28.xd5 [ 11...a6 12.f1 b5 13.d2 e7 14.g1
[ 28.xd5 c6! 29.e3 d5 c8 15.a4 and White had the advantage
is no improvement. ] in Piket,J-Mestrovic,Z Sremic Krsko 1998. ]
28...c6! 29.c4 12.g1
[ 29.xc6 falls short after xc3 30.c4 f6 [ 12.d2 Cebalo,M-Mestrovic,Z/Pula CRO
31.e7+ xe7 32.xc8 axc8 as Black 2002 was a very interesting idea, intending
has too much wood for the queen. ] to mount pressure on h5. This is annotated
29...d5! The centre blasts open and Black's in the database, and I believe Black had
bishops start to come into their own. 30.exd5 some interesting methods to achieve
xc2 counterplay. ]
[ The alternative is an endgame edge with 12...c6 13.e2 A new move in the continuing
30...cxd5 31.xc8 xc8 32.xd5 f8! ] adventures of Mestrovic. It is very logical for
31.d6?! W hite to keep the pawn on d5 and the
[ A better practical chance is 31.xc6 xb1 continuation
32.xb1 with a pawn plus a strong knight [ 13.dxc6?! was unimpressive: bxc6 14.e2
outpost on c6 for the exchange. Instead the c7 15.d2 c5 16.xc5 dxc5 17.c4
text is trappy but not very convincing, but d7 18.d3 b6 19.g3 xc4 20.xc4
it's easy for me to write that as I'm not in d8 Soylu,S-Mestrovic, Z/Nova Gorica SLO
time trouble! ] 2001. ]
31...xb1 32.d7 xb8! White doesn't have 13...b6 14.a4 cxd5 This game is worth
e n o u g h f o r t h e q u e e n . 33.xb8 exb8 comparing with the Cebalo - Mestrovic
34.xc6 xc3 35.xc3 xa2 36.f6 e6 encounter. I would again be tempted to keep
37.h4! With the d-pawn about to go White the tension between c6 and d5.
tries one last desperate shot... gxh4 38.xh6 [ 14...a5 to stabilize the queenside and
a5? I suppose the a-pawn was the nearest develop with ...Na6-b4, bringing pressure to
thing to his clock! That's the only explanation I bear on c2 and d5, and to use the rook on
have for such a move. W ith a minute or so the c-file, is a more harmonious plan. ]
more in hand I'm sure Gonzales would have 15.exd5 c8!? Black has some tricky ideas
found in mind - he argues that his active piece play
[ 38...b5! when the d-pawn soon falls and means he does not need to take the kind of
there aren't any useful checks. W hite stabilizing precautions mentioned in earlier
could already resign. ] notes. 16.d2 a6 17.xb6!? I would not
[ 38...xd7 would also give winning chances feel terribly comfortable with surrendering this
but after 39.g5+ f8 40.h6+ e8 bishop, even if it does have some obvious
41.h8+ e7 42.xh4+ Black will have to st r u ct u r a l a t t ra ct i o n s. B u t W h it e ' s m o r e
give up his f-pawn to hide his king which tempting alternative is not so convincing, and
would give White some practical chances. ] the capture on b6 does give Black long range
39.g5+ f8 40.c5+ Black can't escape problems to solve.
73
[ 17.a5 is the critical move. knight. ]

A) 17...d7 gives White a number of easy 27...d4 28.d7 f4
wa y s t o m a i n t a i n a p l e a s a n t s p a t i a l [ 28...d8 29.e4 ]
advantage, as well as eventual access to 29.e4+- White now regains coordination and
the weakness on h5 18.a4!? ( 18.de4; the result is never in doubt. f7 30.b6 f8
18.ce4 ); 31.f3 e8 32.d3 f4 33.e4 f8 34.c4
B) 17...b4!? probably justifies Black's f5 35.cxd6 h3 36.f1 xd6 37.xd6
setup: 18.b5+ ( 18.axb6 xc2+ 19.f1 d4 38.b5 g2+ 39.f2 xg5 40.e4
h3+= ) 18...d7 now this is less of a c1 41.b3 g5 42.f1 f4 43.e3 h2+
concession W hite has wasted time with 44.f2 b4 45.d2 h4 46.h1 c4+
the bishop, and the pressure on h5 is 47.d3+ e4 48.xe4 xb2+ 49.d2+
relaxed, and there is no completely xd3+ 50.xd3 g6 51.d6 b6 52.c4
satisfactory way to guard c2 and keep all b3+ 53.d4 f6 54.e1
of his pieces active. Rc1 is passive and 1-0
leaves a5 unattended, and Ba4 is even
clumsier. ( 18...f8 19.axb6 xc2+
20.e2 xa1 21.xa1 axb6 22.f1 92 B00
is messy but must favour White.) 19.a4 Odeev,Handszar 2442
0-0 ] Merrit,Mario 2159
17...axb6 18.c4 b4 34th Olympiad (4) 31.10.2000
[ 18...c5 was a temperate option. 19.a3!? [Jon Tisdall]
b4 20.e3 d4 also creates some
pressure on h4, without losing control. ] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.b5
19.xb6 [ 4.g4 e4 5.f3 g6 6.h4 h5
[ 19.e3 h3 would again justify Black's A) 7.d3 xd3 8.xd3 e6 ( 8...hxg4
plan. ] 9.fxg4 d7 10.g5 g4 11.e3 xh4
19...h3? Incomprehensible - the chaos 12.xh4 xh4+ 13.f2 xg5 14.d2
caused by this is highly temporary. Probably h6 15.0-0-0 g4 16.g3 e6 17.g2
Black missed White's next move. f5 18.df3 b4 19.d2 xa2+
[ 19...xc2+ 20.xc2 ( 20.d2? f5 ) 20.b1 b4 21.e2 a5 22.h4 h5
20...xc2 21.xc8 xc8 22.d2 f5 23.h3 xf2 24.xf2 e7 25.f4
was more sensible, though the passive Be7 xh4 26.xh4 xh4 27.h2 g5
gives White some chances for advantage. If 0-1 Mateu,X-Narciso Dublan,M St Cugat
the bishop manages to emerge, however, it 1993. ) 9.g5 d7 10.a3 ge7 11.e3
will be a monster. ] f5 12.f2 ce7 13.d2 g6 14.e2
20.b5+! The cleanest way to win material as c5 15.f4 cxd4 16.b3 c8 17.bxd4
the king is much better placed on e2. f8 xd4 18.xd4 c5 19.g3 b5
21.xa8 xc2+ 22.e2 xh4 23.d3 20.xc5 xc5 21.b4 c4 22.c3 e4
xa1 23.a2 xf4 24.h2 0-0 25.a4 c4
[ 23...xd3+ 24.xd3 xa1 25.xa1 26.d2 c8 27.g6 fxg6 28.d1 b3+
g4+!? looks like a much better try - Black 29.e1 xc3 30.g5 c1+ 0-1 Agostino,
will at least own the kingside. ] J-Ippoliti,H Buenos Aires 1992.;
24.xg6! fxg6 25.xa1 g8 Black's king B) 7.g5 e6 8.e2 b4 9.a3 c5
will be safe on h7 but his potential for 10.f4 e7 11.c3 bc6 12.xg6 xg6
counterplay can never be anywhere near 13.c2 cxd4 14.cxd4 b6 15.d3 c8
compensation. Compared to the previous note, 16.a3 a6 17.f4 ge7 18.h3 g6 19.b4
n o w win n i n g k i n g si d e p a wn s wi ll m o s t l y a7 20.d2 c4 21.e2 ec6 22.xe6
expose his own king. Still, there are some xc2 23.xd5 xd4+ 24.d1 g7
practical chances until White can return the 25.e3 b5 26.xb5+ axb5 27.a4
Na8 into play. 26.b6 h7 27.b1 c3+ 0-1 Krynicki,H-Markunas,G
[ 27.a5!? deserved attention, to stabilize the Polanczyk POL 2000. ]
74
4...d7 29.b4 h5 30.gxh5 g7 31.c5 e4

[ 4...e6 is perhaps the most solid option. 32.c3 h6 33.xc6 xf5 34.xa7
5.f3 ge7 6.0-0 a6 7.a4 b5 8.b3 e4 35.b5 f5 36.xc7 xh5 37.e6
a5 9.d2 c5 10.dxc5 ec6 11.c3 f4 38.d4 f1 39.b4 f3 40.e3 f2
xc5 12.e2 c4 13.xc4 dxc4 14.g3 41.e2 a8 42.f5 g6 43.d6 d1
g4 15.e4 d5 16.xc5 xc5 17.h3 44.xf2 d5+ 45.b6 xd6+ 46.a7
xf3 18.xf3 d8 19.e3 d5 20.xd5 e4 47.b5 d7+ 48.b6 1/2-1/2 Milov,V-
xd5 21.fd1 e7 22.xd5 exd5 23.c5+ Miles,A Isle of Man 1995.) 7.c3 f6
e6 24.f4 d4 25.d1 d8 26.f2 d5 8.e2 xc3 9.xc3 xe4 10.xg7 g8
27.d6 f6 28.f8 fxe5 29.fxe5 g6 30.d6 11.d5 xg7 12.xe4 d4 13.d3
xe5 31.xe5 xe5 32.e1+ d6 xc2+ 14.xc2 d5 15.e2 xe4
33.e8 f5+ 34.g3 d5 35.d8+ e4 16.xe4+ dxe4 17.0-0 d7 18.c3 f5
36.e8+ e5 37.d8 e3 38.f8 d3 19.d5 0-0-0 20.e3 e6 21.f2 d3
39.cxd3 cxd3 0-1 Tietzen,S-Babula,M 22.e1 f7 23.a3 c5 24.c2 c7
Passau 1999. ] 25.f2 b5 26.h3 h5 27.g3 c4 28.h4
5.c3 e6 6.f3 f6 g7 29.ee2 b7 30.cd2 a5 31.xh5
[ 6...a6 7.d3 ge7 8.0-0 g4 9.bd2 b4 32.axb4 axb4 33.g4 c3 34.bxc3
g6 10.h3 h5 11.b3 h4 12.e2 bxc3 35.c2 fxg4 36.f5 b3 37.f6 c7
xf3+ 13.xf3 g6 14.e1 38.c1 gxh3 39.b1 a6 40.xb3 c2
1/2-1/2 Robson,P-Thurlow,K ENG 1997. ] 41.xc2 0-1 Lazarev,E-Lutikov,A USSR
7.0-0 ge7 8.e1 0-0-0 Castling long is teams 1968.;
risky, castling long early is very risky. It will B) 6.c3 a5
prove difficult to break the pin on the Nc6 B1) 7.f3 b6 ( 7...e7 8.e2 b6
without paying a high price. 9.b4 g4 9.bd2 d6 10.d3 f6 11.c4 0-0
10.bd2 g6 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 h6 12.xb6 axb6 13.0-0 e8 14.e1 h6
13.a4 f7 14.xc6 bxc6 15.a4 b7 15.d2 d7 16.f2 c5 17.c2 f8
16.b5 c5 17.a3 c4 18.a6+ b8 19.c5 18.d4 d7 19.e3 h8 20.b4 xd4
xc5 20.dxc5 Black's king is now seriously 21.cxd4 e6 22.c3 c5 23.d5 d4
out numbered, and the rest is rather sad. d7 24.xd4 cxd4 25.ee1 ec8 26.d3
21.d4 e7 22.c6+ xc6 23.bxc6 c8 e8 27.xd4 b5 28.e5 dxe5
24.ab1+ a8 25.b7 b8 26.eb1 29.xe5 d7 30.f5 d6 31.xc8
1-0 xc8 32.a4 d7 33.e3 c2 34.g3
f6 35.e1 f5 36.h3 a2 37.e3
1-0 Knaak,R-Przewoznik, J/Dortmund
93 B00 1992/TD (37)) 8.e2 d6 9.e3 xe3
Orso,Miklos 2346 10.xe3 f6 11.bd2 e7 12.0-0
Bordas,Gyula 2186 0-0 13.ae1 d7 14.h3 ae8 15.f2
FSIMB October (6) 12.10.2000 h8 16.e5 g8 17.exd6 xd6
[Jon Tisdall] 18.g5 xe1 19.xe1 d8 20.de4
c6 21.c5 e8 22.d1 h6 23.d4
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f4 c6 e7 24.c5 f5 25.f2 h6 26.d5
5.c4 f6!? g6 27.ge4 b6 28.xd7 xd7
[ 5...b4+ is the main line: 29.b3 1/2-1/2 Rytshagov, M-Valkesalmi,
A) 6.d2 e7 ( 6...h4+ 7.g3 e7 K/Jyvaskyla 1998;
8.e2 xd2+ 9.xd2 d6 10.0-0-0 f6 B2) 7.h5 e7 8.e3 f6 9.g5
11.gf3 0-0 12.h3 d5 13.exd5 xe2 xe4 10.xg7 xe3+ 11.e2 f8
14.xe2 xd5 15.c4 b6 16.g4 xc4 12.xf6 d6 13.d2 e6 14.b5 a6
17.xc4 e6 18.b5 fd8 19.xc6 15.c4 xc4 16.xc4 b6 17.f1
bxc6 20.d4 d5 21.he1 e8 22.b3 d4 18.d1 xe2 19.e1 d7
f8 23.b2 ad8 24.c3 g6 25.a4 h6 20.f5+ d8 21.xe2 c5 22.f6+
26.f5 g5 27.xe8+ xe8 28.d3 e1 c8 23.g4+ b8 24.d2 d5+
75
25.c1 xg2 26.h6 a7 27.d7 94 B00

f2 28.d1 e3+ 29.b1 e2 Owczarzak,Jerzy 2249
30.a4 g8 31.xh7 g2 32.c2 f3 Przewoznik,Jan 2414
33.d3 xf4 34.a3 h8 35.a2 chT Zakopane chT (4) 05.09.2000
hxh2 36.ab1 b6 37.b3 f2 [Jon Tisdall]
38.d5 c6 39.h1 d5 40.b3 f5
41.a4 a5 42.f1 g4 43.f3 f4 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
44.xf2 xf2 45.f1 xf1 46.xf1 d4 5.e2 e6 6.d5 exd5 7.exd5 xf3 8.xf3
47.d3 dxc3 48.bxc3 e5 49.d7 e5 9.e2 e7 10.e3 c5 This is a little
f6 50.h7 f4 51.d7 g6 52.b2 sprightlier than just developing - besides
a6 53.c8 a7 54.d7 f6 55.h7 annexing a bit of the centre, it prepares a
d6 56.e4 d2+ 57.c2 xc2+ vista on the d8-a5 diagonal for the Be7.
58.xc2 e3 59.d3 b6 60.c4 [ 10...0-0 leads to solid and fairly stodgy play
c7 61.d3 b5 62.axb5 cxb5 63.c2 - the two daring defenders in the examples
d6 64.b3 c5 65.e2 a4+ 66.b2 here show the toughness and resilience of
b4 67.cxb4+ xb4 68.f3 a3+ black's position, but it still isn't too lively.
69.b1 c3 70.d5 d2 71.a2 c5 11.f4 ed7 12.d2 c5 ( 12...e8
72.f3 e3 73.d5 f3 74.xf3 xf3 13.f3 b6 14.b3 d7 15.0-0 c5 16.h3
75.b3 e3 76.a2 d2 77.b3 c8 17.d3 d8 18.ae1 a5 19.d2
d3 78.a2 c3 79.a1 b3 b6 20.e4 xd2 21.xf6+ gxf6
80.b1 a2+ 0-1 Nossein,F-Elkaim,O/ 22.xd2 xe1 23.xe1 e8 24.xe8+
Paris 1993 (80) ] xe8 Black's argument is that he is solid
6.c3? and white's bishop isn't great, but it takes
[ 6.e5 Screams out to be played, and is some determination and a bit of assistance
surely the reason no one dared this move to make a living from this type of position.
order before. d5 ( 6...e7!? ) 7.b3 g4 25.f2 c8 26.a4 e7 27.d3 f8
8.e2 xe2 9.xe2!? ] 28.g4 h6 29.e4 f8 30.b4 f5
6...b4 Now black has swift development and 31.xf5 cxb4 32.g4 a5 33.g3 g7
central pressure. 7.e5 d5 8.exf6 dxc4 34.c4 b2 35.d3 f5 I don't understand
9.e2+ f8 10.e3 this move at all so will chalk it up to a time
[ 10.fxg7+ gives black a frightening lead in scramble - this pawn otherwise would seem
d e v e l o p m e n t . xg7 11.xc4 d4!? to be hanging. 36.d1 a1 37.g4 xa4
( 11...e8+!?; 11...e6!?; 11...d4!? )] 38.gxf5 a1 39.h5 c3 40.f6 xf6
10...xf6 11.0-0-0 e6 12.e4 e7 41.xh7 xf4+ 42.f3 f5 43.xb7
13.f3 c3 14.b3 a5 15.b1 a4 16.b5 e3+ 44.g2 0-1 Frendzas,P-Ibragimov,I/
axb3 17.axb3 xb3 18.cxb3 xe4+ Peristeri 1993) 13.f3 d7 14.0-0-0 ae8
19.d3 a5 20.c4 xc4 21.bxc4 e7 15.d4 d8 16.he1 xe1 17.xe1 e8
22.d4 xd4 23.xd4 ha8 24.e3+ d7 18.g4 xe1+ 19.xe1 h6 20.h3 a6
25.he1 a1+ 26.c2 1a2+ 27.d3 21.e3 e7 22.xe7 xe7 23.b4 cd7
d2+ 28.e4 f5+ 29.xf5 xd4 30.c5 24.d2 h7 25.e4 f6 26.f2 g6
xc5 31.xc3 f8+ 32.g5 e7+ 27.e2 b6 28.d3 a4 29.c4 b2+
0-1 30.b3 d1 31.e1 g7 32.c4 f6
33.f3 d7 34.c1 e3 35.f2 d4
36.e2 b6 37.e1 g5 38.c3
1/2-1/2 Dlugy,M-Miles, A/USA-ch 1989/CBM
19/[King] (38) ]
11.f4 Taking on c6 might seem logical,
opening the position with the bishop pair, but
black's main problem is lack of space and
manoeuvring room, and capturing en passant
would solve most of these difficulties.
76
[ 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.f4 g6 13.0-0 0-0 below may help. After reviewing the
14.e1 d5 Black has a sensible and fully possibilities following W hite's 4th move my
playable position - solid, central presence recommendation is that Black should
and the b- and e-files for active counterplay. immediately decide what to do with his king's
15.f2 b8 16.ab1 e8 17.b4 c7 bishop. Either continue with 4...g6 as Spassky
18.d4 ab8 19.b5 cxb5 20.xb5 xb5 did with a hippopotamus-style development in
21.xb5 d8 22.e2 b4 23.b5 xc2 mind or more directly with 4...Bb4 5 Ne2 Nc6
24.f5 e4 25.e3 f8 26.a3 d2 or even 5...Ne7. 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3
27.h3 a6 28.g4 h6 29.d1 d2 [ White can also consider the cautious 3.c3
30.xg7 xg7 31.f6 xf6 32.xf6 axb5 e6 4.a3 but an extra tempo for Black in a
33.f1 d4+ 0-1 Koelle,A-Storm,R/ French with .. .Nf6 and ...d5 or a Modern/
Germany 1991/GER-chT2 (33) ] Hippo with ...g6 can't be bad. ]
11...g6 12.d2 a6 13.a4 0-0 14.0-0 d7 3...e6 4.c3 g6
15.h3 ae8 16.g4 d8 17.f5 Something is [ I don't like 4...f6?! 5.ge2
wrong with a position when trouble is caused A) 5...c5 6.d5 a6 7.a4 exd5 8.exd5
xd5
b y t h e b lu n t e s t m e a n s a t a n o p p o n e n t ' s 9.xd5 xd5 10.f4 e6
disposal. e7 18.f2 e4 This loses ( 10...e7+ ) 11.e4 a7 12.0-0 e7
material. 13.a3 was indeed dangerous for Black,
[ 18...e5 19.a5!? ( 19.g5 fd7 Speelman,J-Basman,M British ch. 1984;
20.h4!? )] B) 5...d5 6.e5 fd7 7.f4 e7
19.xe4 xe4 20.fxg6 xe2 21.gxf7+ Peters,J-Sahovic,D Lone Pine 1977 as
xf7 22.ae1! A nasty tactic. xf2 8.g4 looks unpleasant. ]
[ 22...xd2 23.xe8+ f8 24.xf8+ xf8 [ I personally prefer 4...b4 which the reader
25.e3++- ] a s s o c i a t e s wit h S o lt i s b u t a f t e r 5.ge2
23.xe2 fxe2 24.f4 Threatening mate to play
and the d-pawn. If white had taken the d-pawn, A) 5...d5?! 6.0-0 is a safe edge for
I do not see what would have prevented him White;
from winning. f6 25.g5 B) Othe rwise Black could try 5...e7!?
[ 25.xd6 xc2 26.g5 d4+ ( 26...xg5 6.a3 xc3+ 7.xc3 d5 8.e5 a6!?
27.d7+- ) 27.h1 ce2 28.f4 ] in French-style as in Vigliraki,M-
25...2e4 26.f3 Khetsuriani,B Agios Kyrikos 2000;
[ 26.xd6 xg5 27.g2!? ] C) 5...c5?! 6.a3 xc3+ but ( 6...a5
26...d4+ 27.h1 4e7 Now black can looks less natural, Black can double the c-
make fortress faces. He survives, but narrow pawns and hope the bishops don't get too
escapes against lower rated opposition is not lively ) 7.xc3! favours White ( 7.bxc3 d6
the best PR for this subvariation. 28.c3 e5 doesn't look bad. );
29.h4 g6 30.h5 g7 31.hxg6 hxg6 D) 5...c6!? 6.e3 e5! I prefer this to
32.d3 e4 33.f3 4e7 34.d3 e4 ( 6...f6?! 7.a3 or; 6...ge7 ) 7.d5 ce7
35.f3 4e7 36.d3 with chances for counterplay based on
½-½ either . ..f5, or ...c6 or even just simply
piece-play e.g. 8.a3 ( 8.0-0 f5!? ) 8...c5
9.d2 g6 10.b4 e7 11.c1 h6
95 B00 intending ...Bg5 and then if 12.g3 simply
Owen's with Nge2 f6 followed by ...c6. This dynamic
N,N handling reminds me of 1 e4 Nc6 2 d4 e5
[Glenn Flear] 3 d5 Nce7 etc. ]
5.ge2
I n a n s we r t o Mich a e l A yt o n 's qu e ry wh o [ A couple of more recent encounters may
wanted to know how Black should develop give food for thought: 5.f3 g7 6.g5
against W hite's Bd3, Nc3 and Nge2 set-up e7 7.d2 h6 8.h4 d6 9.g4 d7
against the Owen's Defence, I hope the lines 10.0-0-0 a6 11.b1 b5 Toth,Ch-Lima,D
77
Brazilian ch. 1996 ] 16.e3 ab8 17.c3 h5 18.e1 xb2

[ 5.e3 g7 6.d2 d5 ( 6...d6 in hippo- 19.d2 xe3 20.xe3 xd2 21.g3 c5
style is less committal, with ...a6, ...Nd7 0 - 1 S a vi c , M - F u r h o f f , J B e l g r a d e Y U G
and either . ..b5 or ...c5 to follow on the 2001. ]
queenside and ...h6 before developing the 4...xf5 5.b5 d6 6.e5 f6 7.0-0 d7
king's knight on the kingside) 7.f3 d7 8.xc6!
8.h4 gf6 9.e5 e4 10.xe4 dxe4 [ 8.f4 cxe5 9.fxe5 g6 10.a4 c6
11.g5 h6 12.gxe4 f5 13.exf6 xf6 11.c3 e6 12.e2 h5 13.e3 e7
14.f3 e7 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.e2 14.d2 a5 15.c3 b6 16.f4 h7
didn't give quite enough compensation for 17.d1 c4 18.c1 g5 19.e2 g6
the pawn, Ionica,I-Gaprindashvili,N Varna 20.a4 h4 21.b3 xe3 22.xe3 h3 23.g3
2002 ] 0-0-0 24.c1 hf8 25.c4 e4 26.c3
5...g7 6.h4 c6 7.g5 ge7 8.h5 xd4 xf1+ 27.xf1 d3+ 28.e2 f8+ 29.g1
9.hxg6 hxg6 10.xh8+ xh8 11.xd4 xe2 30.xe2 f5 31.c5 b6 32.cxb6 b4
xd4 12.f3 g7 13.0-0-0 f8 14.h1 33.g4 xg4+ 34.g3 f3 35.xc6+ b7
e8 15.f6 g8 and White has 36.c7+ xb6 0-1 Upton,T-Jouhki,Y
compensation but Black is OK, Rogers,I- Panormo GRE 2001. ]
Spassky,B/Reggio Emilia 1983/4 8...bxc6 9.f3!?
[ 9.f4 xe5 10.xe5 g6 11.c3 c2
12.f3 e4 13.g3 xg3 14.xg3 d8
96 B00 ( 14...xb1 15.axb1 d7 16.fe1 e6 )
Paehtz,Thomas Sr 2451 15.d2 d3 16.fe1 g6 17.f3 g7
Salmensuu,Olli 2431 18.g5+- (1-0, 61) Wadsack,W-Hainzinger,
ECC Panormo GRE (6) 28.09.2001 J Austria 1996. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 9...e6
[ 9...e4!? 10.f7+ d8 may be better,
1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 This variation enjoyed strangely enough. Black would like to keep
enormous popularity in recent weeks, but the his light-squared bishop as a justification
question remains if it has more than surprise for the ugliness of his structure it seems to
value. Since the Finnish team seemed to play me. But then again, the game is not quite as
it fairly regularly at the European club clear as it appears to be at first glance. ]
championship one might argues that it does, 10.g4 g6 11.xg6 hxg6 12.f4 b4
on the other hand, when this happens to 13.d3
black... 3.exf5 d5 4.d4 [ 13.e2!? ]
[ 4.b3 xf5 5.b2 a6 6.h4 e6 7.d3 13...0-0-0
f7 8.f3 d6 9.0-0 Having lost control of [ 13...f7!? ]
the centre, white has forfeited the assets 14.d2 d6 15.c3 b8 Very bizarre, but
black of f ered him. h5 10.e2 xf3 the move g4 by white means he has his own
11.xf3 0-0-0 12.d4 e5 13.dxe5 xe5 ugly spots to worry about. 16.xd6
14.e1 xf3+ 15.xf3 g6 16.h3+ b8 [ 16.g3!? ]
17.d3 xd3 18.cxd3 f6 19.e2 b4 16...cxd6 17.g3 f6
20.c3 c5 21.d2 d4 22.b2 d5 [ 17...e5!? looks completely unclear to me. I
23.e4 f4 24.c2 b6 25.d1 he8 don't know how black has managed it. ]
26.f3 d5 27.c1 h6 28.d2 e3 18.b4 g5 19.g2 b7
29.xe3 dxe3 30.f1 xe4!! 0-1 Dutreeuw, [ 19...h6!? ]
M-Salmensuu,O Panormo GRE 2001. [ 19...e5!? ]
( 30...xe4 31.fxe4 f8+ 32.e1 a5+! )] 20.fe1 he8 Black seems to be on the
[ 4.b5 xf5 5.0-0 e6 6.e5 ge7 7.d4 w r o n g t r a c k - h a v i n g p l a y e d b i z a r r e l y ,
a6 8.xc6+ xc6 9.xc6 bxc6 10.h5+ provoked a gash on the kingside and then
g6 11.e2 d7 12.e1 d6 13.xe6+ somehow repaired much of his own structure,
xe6 14.xe6+ d7 15.e2 he8 it looks far more logical to try and use the h-
78
file or the possibilities to play ...e5 earlier. 11...g6 12.c4 White adopts a non-
By suddenly centralizing, black in f act is confrontational war of nerves approach. Again,
p l a y i n g r a t h e r p a s s i ve l y . 21.a4 b8 this makes the game of interest for how the
A sign that things have gone wrong. 22.b5 c5 position is played, rather than any critical test
23.b3 e4 24.e3 Now f3 comes with of black's setup. g4 13.fd2 g5 14.a4 h5
considerable force. f8 25.f3 f4 26.fxe4 15.e3 To prevent ...h4-g3. 0-0-0 16.a5 f5
xg4+ 27.h1 h8 28.a2 dxe4 29.g2 17.axb6 axb6 18.d5 xb2 19.xb2
f4 30.dxc5 d5 31.d2 [ 19.dxe6 c3 20.exd7+ xd7 and white
1-0 will obviously be under attack if he takes the
f5 pawn. ]
19...exd5 20.xd5 c5
97 B00 [ 20...fxe4 21.c4 xd5 22.cxd5 xd5
Pein,Malcolm 2424 to grab a pawn deserved serious attention -
McShane,Luke J 2480 t h e l a c k o f a wh i t e s q u a r e d b i s h o p i n
Norkom European Masters (6) 26.11.2000 defence means risks of course, but black
[Jon Tisdall] looks quite solid here to me, and white's
pieces are not terribly well coordinated. The
1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d2 e6 4.gf3 d6 game does not seem particularly safer at
5.d3 g6 6.b3 all. ]
[ 6.0-0 g7 7.e1 e7 8.f1 h6 9.c3 21.c4 e5 22.a2 de8 23.a1 hg8
This quiet system with Re1 and c3 was 24.b4
Geller's standard treatment of Modern/Pirc [ 24.exf5!? xf5 25.a8+ xa8
positions, and he just outplays his opponent ( 25...d7!? 26.xe8 xe8 27.b4 )
without making any real theoretical 26.xa8+ d7 27.a7 e6 28.c5! ]
statement. d7 10.g3 It is probably worth 24...xe4 25.xe4 Natural once one notices
noting that Geller's unassuming setup does the possibilities based on ...Nf3+, but maybe
rule out the trendy plan of ...g5 by sending a that was worth allowing anyway:
N round to hop into h5 if needed. a6 11.f4 [ 25.xe4!? fxe4 26.xe4 xd5
e5 12.e3 0-0 13.d2 h7 14.ad1 e8 and black wins material by avoiding though
15.h4 g8 16.h5 gf6 17.hxg6+ fxg6 the position remains messier than expected
18.h2 f7 19.b3 ae8 20.d5 e7 after ( 26...f3+ 27.h1 xe4 28.f6
21.b4 f7 22.c1 a8 23.c4 a5 24.a3 b8 29.d7+ c8 30.f6= ) 27.f4!? gxf3
ff8 25.b1 axb4 26.axb4 a7 27.a1 28.cxd5 ]
fa8 28.b2 f8 29.e2 h5 30.c3 25...fxe4 26.xe4 d8 27.ef6
f4 31.f1 xa1 32.xa1 f6 33.g3 [ 27.a8+ xa8 28.xa8+ d7 29.ef6+
4h5 34.c5 bxc5 35.bxc5 xa1 36.xa1 e6 ]
dxc5 37.a7 c8 38.xc5 e8 39.a3 27...b8 28.b5 h4 Now it is distinctly white's
hf6 40.f3 d7 41.h3 c6 42.e7 king that is the less secure. 29.xe8 xe8
cxd5 43.xd5 c6 44.b2 a8 45.a2 30.a3 g5 31.e3 f8 32.e1
b7 46.b1 a8 47.g2 e6 48.a3 Bolstering the kingside - white's main problem
df6 49.h4 a6 50.e7 e6 51.a3 is his position is rather passive. The Nd5 is
a6 52.b2 d7 53.c2 a2 54.c8 pretty but it is really mostly serving a blocking
xd5 55.exd5 xb2 56.e4 f8 57.xe8 role, and it is far unsteadier than the Ne5.
a1+ 58.g2 a6 59.e7 f6 60.d6 W hite must also be on guard against the
g5 61.f7 f6 62.c7 e6 63.xg6+ softening thrusts g3 or h3.
h8 64.e7 g8 65.f5 d4 66.e8+ [ 32.b4 g3 ]
f8 67.d7 f6 68.g6 1-0 Geller, E- 32...f5
Vasiljevic,D/Pancevo 1987/TD (68) ] [ 32...xc4 33.e8+ xe8 34.xe8+ a7
6...g7 7.b2 e7 8.0-0 d7 9.e1 h6 35.xc7= ]
10.b1 g5 11.f1 33.e4 h3 Quite cool - there is a reflex
[ 11.f1!? ] tendency to assume that allowing Rf4 should
79
be avoid ed , b ut a trad e o f roo ks do esn't xd5 19.e2 xc3 20.xd5 b4 21.a3
bother black. 34.f4 c8 35.e4? h5 22.h4 cxd5 23.axb4 c7 24.g1 f8
[ 35.xf8 xf8 36.e4 hxg2 ] 25.xg4 f6 26.e3 b6 27.xg6 xh4
35...e6 36.e3 g8 28.h6+ f7 29.g7+ e8 30.g8+ d7
[ 36...hxg2 ] 31.f8 e5 32.g7+ c6 33.b5+ b7
[ 36...xd5 37.cxd5 xd5 is playable but 34.xc7+ xc7 35.f2 f4 36.xf4 exf4
black still prefers to keep his king snug 37.g7 f3 38.d2 d6 39.xf6 c5
rather than cash in. ] 40.e3 xb5 41.xf3 a5 42.e3 c4
37.f4 g6? Time pressure? 38.e7 b1 43.d8 b5 44.d4 c6
Time? 1-0
[ 38...b1 39.xg8 xg2 ( 39...hxg2
40.f8+ a7 41.a3+ ) 40.f8+ b7
41.e2 f3 42.d2 ( 42.xf3?? gxf3 99 B00
43.d2 g6+ ) 42...g2= ] Pierrot,Juan Facundo 2414
0-1 Garcia Palermo,Carlos H 2470
32nd Open Mar del Plata ARG (4) 10.04.2001
[Jon Tisdall]
98 B00
Philippe,Christophe 2306 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 g6 4.f3 g7
Bordas,Gyula 2186 5.0-0 e6 6.c4 e7 7.c3 0-0
FSIMB December (5) 07.12.2000 McShane and Miles prefer to wait, filling out
[Jon Tisdall] the Hippo contours with d6,Nd7 and a6/h6.
There is no reason why black should not be
A game that only demonstrates that this line a b l e t o p l a y t h i s s ys t e m a b i t m o r e 8.e5
is rather unpleasant for black at the moment - Intending to press with Ne4, Bg5. xf3
Black does a bit better than an earlier game [ 8...f6!? ]
but is never close to holding his own. 1.e4 9.xf3 bc6 10.e2 d6 11.e4 d7
c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 5.d5 [ 11...d5 looks better at once since keeping
b8 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 g6 the dark-squared bishops gives black more
[ 7...a6?! 8.g5 bd7 9.0-0-0 g6 10.b1 chances to play against d4, which is
g7 11.d3 c5 12.he1 b5 13.e5 dxe5 consistent with a plan involving ...Bxf3. After
14.d6 e6 15.e4 a7 16.c6 h6 17.xf6 12.cxd5 exd5 13.c2 f6 14.exf6 xf6
xf6 18.e4 g7 19.xc5 0-0 20.xd7 15.c3 black should be closer to equality
xd7 21.xd7 xd7 22.a3 a8 23.a5 after d7!? ( or 15...a5!? The game
a7 24.e3 f6 25.b6 d8 26.c5 f6 continuation is not so bad for black either,
27.c3 g7 28.c8 d8 29.xd7 xd7 but it seems more limited. )]
30.c6 a5 31.c4 bxc4 32.xc4 e7 12.g5 d5 13.cxd5 exd5 14.c2 f6
33.dxe7 1-0 Philippe,C-Bordas,G Budapest 15.exf6 xf6 16.xf6 e6 17.c3 xf6
2000. ] 18.fe1 d6 19.ac1 af8 20.f3 d8
8.g5 g7 9.0-0-0 bd7 10.e2 c6 11.f4 21.b3 The long-term vulnerability of c7 and
c7 12.g4 h5 d5, plus white's ability to pile up on the c- or e-
[ 12...h6 13.h4 h7 14.e5 g5 ( 14...dxe5 files gives black rather passive prospects.
15.xe7! ) 15.dxc6 xc6 16.g2 c8 B id s f o r a c t ive p la y a re lik e ly t o l e a d t o
17.exd6 e6 18.f5 gxh4 19.fxe6 0-0 increased career options for white's bishop,
20.exd7 xd7 21.e7 ad8 22.xb7 so black is best advised to sit tight, but this is
xc3 23.xd7 xd7 24.c6 xb2+ rat her un ple asa nt as it is dif f icult to se e
25.xb2 b8+ 26.a1 dd8 27.he1 anything to look forward to. e6 22.g3
g5 28.d7 xh3 29.b1 1-0 Sutovski,E- g7 23.e5 8f7 24.ce1 f4 25.e2
Jaracz,P Koszalin 1999. ] xe2+
13.g2 c8 14.he1 hxg4 15.e5 dxe5 [ 25...e6!? ]
16.fxe5 xe5 17.xe5 xe5 18.xe5 26.1xe2 c6 27.c2 d7 28.h4
80
[ 28.b4!? ] probably would give more attention to

28...c8? A very hard move to understand - [ 13.c1 which has the same goals with less
[ 28...f5 is both far more natural, trying to risk. It seems to me that black has difficult
exploit the drawbacks of white's last move, it problems to solve, and that white's plan of
is a rare chance to do something a bit active, gxf3 deserves more tests. ]
and black's prospects must be improved if 13...xe2 14.xe2 xb2 15.b3 d4
he can trade a few more pieces. 29.xf5 16.hg1 First he gives one in front of his own
xf5 30.e3 might keep white very king, now white makes the more conventional
marginally better. ] offer of just about any pawn black wants on
29.h5 Now white achieves some welcome the kingside. White has a huge advantage in
softening of blackâ []s position. d6 30.b3 development and a lasting target in black's
gxh5 31.xh5 h8 32.ee5 g7 33.e3 king. h6
Now white's position is far too active and [ 16...xh4 17.c4 was probably worrying -
b l a c k c a n h a r d l y k e e p h i m a t b a y . f7 one tends to avoid further greed once a bit
34.eg5+- h6 35.e5 g8 36.f2 f4 has led to trouble - but it is not clear that
37.xh6 fg4 38.h2 f4 39.eh5 f6 this version is more dangerous than the
40.h6 game. ]
1-0 17.c1 to sacrifice on d4 and play Bb2 if black
castles. d6 18.c4 f8 19.f4 b5
[ 19...xf2!? ]
100 B00 [ 19...a6!? ]
Plaskett,Jim 2474 20.xb5 cxb5
Sherwin,James T 2339 [ 20...d7!? looks better - the b-file might
4NCL Birmingham ENG (9) 04.05.2002 come in handy, and there are plenty of white
[Jon Tisdall] pawns still up for grabs. ]
[ 20...b7 21.d5!+- ]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3 f6 21.d5 b8 22.e5 This looks insolent to me -
[ 4...b4+!? ] recapturing on d4 at once would give white a
5.c3!? Extremely rare - almost all white clear advantage, but Plaskett wants all lines
players react to the pressure on f3. W hite, open. dxe5 23.fxe5 b6
being Plaskett, prefers an original and [ 23...a6 would create counterplay against
energetic approach that quickly puts the fate w h i t e ' s k i n g . 24.xd4 e6 25.b2
of both players in the balance. b4 6.d2 but here white still has the advantage since
xf3+ 7.gxf3 e7 8.e2 g6 9.0-0-0 c6 his rooks are so superior to their
So far both players proceed logically and counterparts. ]
s t a k e o u t t h e i r t e r r i t o r y . T h e o b v i o u s 24.xd4 e6 25.e4 c8 26.xg7 c5
battleground will be control over f4 and e5. In 27.d6 c4 28.xc4 xc4 29.xh6 xh4
order to maximize his grip on these squares 30.g5 b4+ 31.c1 d7
black has had to soften his position on the d- 1-0
file a bit, so that white has clear opportunities
on his two open files. 10.b1 d6 11.h4
[ 11.g5?! xg5 12.xd6 e5 13.d1 101 B00
e7 and black gets a grip on the dark Ponomariov,Ruslan 2743
squares. ] Vlassov,Nikolai 2462
11...f4 12.e3 e5 Black now appears to FIDE GP Moscow RUS (1.2) 01.06.2002
have set up the desired grip on the central [Jon Tisdall]
holes, but it is both not as firm as it looks, and
it has also taken a very long time to set up. 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 e5 A move best
13.e2!? The beginning of a characteristically kept for faster time controls, as in this game.
e n e r g e t i c P l a s k e t t p e r f o r m a n c e . M o r e 4.dxe5 d4 5.d5 f5 The most popular move,
pedestrian players (like myself) could and despite a truly dreadful track record.
81
[ 5...ge7!? intending first to gain control of counterplay - but it is still very nebulous. 16.f3
d5, then castle queenside and press down e7
the e-file, is a rare bird, but has led to more [ 16...d7!? ]
interesting play than the catalog of disasters 17.f4 hb8 18.b3 a5 19.d2
after ...f5: 6.g5 ( 6.xe7 xe7 7.f3 [ 19.a4!? ]
g4 8.e2 xf3 9.xf3 0-0-0 10.0-0 h5 19...a4 20.d5+
11.xh5 xe5 12.g4+ b8 13.h3 xe4 [ 20.g4!? ]
14.e2 g6 15.f4 d3 16.cxd3 f5 20...xd5 21.exd5 g8 22.ae1+ f7
17.f3 d4 18.d1 xh3 19.g3 d6 23.g4 g5 24.e6 xd5 25.he1 axb3
20.g2 hh8 21.e3 h7 22.e1 c5 26.axb3 d3 27.cxd3 a2+ 28.c3 xh2
23.b4 f4 24.gxf4 g5 25.bxc5 xc5 29.e7+ g6 30.d7 f2?
26.b1 d7 27.fxg5 f5 28.a4 g4 [ 30...h3! 31.ee7 h5= ]
29.xd4 xd4 30.e4 xf2+ 31.xf2 31.ee7 g5 32.xh7 f4 33.hf7?!
f7+ 32.g1 c8 33.eb4 c5+ 34.d4 Presumably white eliminates black with a draw,
d6 35.xb7+ xb7 36.xb7+ c8 or time was pressing. The FIDE champion
37.c6+ xc6 38.xc6 g8 39.xa7 could capitalize on black's inaccuracy with:
xg5+ 40.f2 b8 41.a3 1-0 Mach,H- [ 33.h6! ]
Jaeckle, M GER 1998.) 6...e6 7.f4 d7 33...g5 34.h7 f4
8.b5 ( 8.f3!? ) 8...a6 9.a4 ( 9.xe7!? ) ½-½
9...b5 10.xe6 xe6 11.b3 xe5
12.g4 f5 13.h5+ g6 14.h4 g7
(0 - 1 , 3 2 ) K r e u zh o lz, M -J a e ckl e , M G E R 102 B00
1999. ] Prie,Eric 2429
6.exf6 Flear,Glenn C 2489
[ 6.h3!? is an odd but dangerous move Perpignan 12.04.2004
aiming at speedy development: [Glenn Flear]
A) 6...ge7? 7.h5+ g6 ( 7...g6
8.f6+ f7 9.c4++- ) 8.g5! e7 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 c6
9.xe7 cxe7 10.exf5 xf5 11.xe7+- 5.c3 e5 6.g5!? White develops his 'bishops
(1 - 0 , 2 6 ) T o d o r o vic , G - B u d i m ir , D N i s before knights'. The idea of B-g5 is known in
1995.; 'Blatny's variation' albeit only at a later stage.
B) 6...fxe4 7.c4 xh3? ( 7...f5!? ) h6 7.h4 e7
8.h5+ g6 9.xh3 ce7? ( 9...c8 ) [ 7...g5 8.g3 exd4 hopes to win a pawn
10.g5 c6 11.e6!+- b5 12.c7+ xc7 but after 9.e5 Black will have a ragged
13.f7+ 1-0 Crawley,G-Kemp,P Swansea looking position. ]
1987. ] 8.d5 b8 9.g3 d6 10.c4 White confirms
6...xf6 7.g5 e6 8.xf6 gxf6 9.c4 his space advantage, but in return Black
b4+!? An interesting idea - black at least obtains an outpost on c5. 0-0 11.c3 bd7
gets a good bishop or unsettles the white king - 12.h4 Angling for further control, but in the
but it still seems insufficient long-term value meantime Black counters on the other wing
for a pawn. an d cen tre . c5 13.c2 a5 14.h5 c6
[ 9...f7 10.e2 c5 11.0-0 d6 15.dxc6
( 11...e5 12.b3 f5 13.g3! ) 12.g3 [ If 15.f3 cxd5 16.cxd5 then a6
0-0-0 13.a3 e5 14.a2 (1-0, 34) Bryson, would be annoying. ]
D-Mohr,G Moscow 1994. ] 15...xc6 16.0-0-0 c8 17.f3 b7
10.xb4 xc4 11.xc6 bxc6 12.h5+ 18.d5?!
[ 12.e2!? c5 13.0-0 ] [ Afterwards Prie claimed a small edge to
12...f7 13.c5 d6 14.xd6 cxd6 W h it e wit h 18.h4! fd8 19.xf6 xf6
15.e2 c5 Black has some compensation for 20.d5 which may be so but Black then
the pawn now - two open files for his rooks, doesn't have to exchange on d5. Best could
and active pieces and pawn levers to create be the solid alternative e7 and Black
82
doesn't have that much to worry about. 22.h1 hc8 23.g1 c6 24.h3 ac8
( on the other hand 20...b5 looks risky. )] 25.f4 xf4 26.xf4 b3 27.a1 a6
[ 18.de1!? holds the e-pawn and prepares 28.e3 g5 29.g3 f5 30.f4 g4 31.g1 h5
Nh4-f5 when Black would continue with ... 32.h4 d5 33.e1 b5 34.g3 b8
Rfc8, or ...Rab8 with ...b5 to come. ] 35.xd5 exd5 36.c3 bc8 37.ac1 c4
18...xd5 19.cxd5 d7 Now Black has the 38.f2 8c6 39.e3 e8 40.d2 d8
s a f e r k i n g a n d t h e m o r e d yn a m i c m i n o r 41.e1 c7 42.d2 b6 43.e1 xc3+
pieces. 20.h4? 44.xc3 xc3+ 45.xc3 b4 46.axb4 b5
[ 20.d2 coming to the defence of his king 47.d2 xb4 48.d3 a5 49.d2 c4
looks better. ] 50.c2 xc3 51.bxc3 a4 52.b2 a3+
20...b5 21.b1 b4 22.d3 xd3 23.xd3 53.xa3 xc3 54.a2 xd4 55.b2
fc8 24.f5 Finally getting to f5, but d3 0-1 Villegas,J-Bolivar,J Barranquilla
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n d o e s n ' t d e t e r B l a c k . xf5 1999. ]
25.exf5 c3! 13...b7
[ 25...c5 is also unpleasant but the text [ 13...c5 14.a4 c8 15.b4 b5 16.b3
wins a tempo. ] b6 17.b2 g4 18.d4 xd4 19.xd4
26.e4 ac8! 27.bxc3 c7 20.2f3 e5 21.ac1 xf3+
[ 27.c1 is met by g5 when White has 22.xf3 b6 23.b3 0-0 24.c5 ad8
no t h in g b e t t er t h a n a m ise ra b le qu e e n 25.d6 b7 26.f4 a8 27.c3 f6 28.d1
ending following 28.f4 xc1+ 29.xc1 a5 29.a3 c6 30.dc1 de8 31.h4 a7
xc1+ 30.xc1 exf4 31.xf4 xf4+ 32.xd7 xd7 33.c7 d4 34.xd7 d8
32.xf4 xd5 ] 35.cc7 xd7 36.xd7 axb4 37.axb4 f5
27...bxc3+ 28.c2 b2+ 29.d3 c2 38.g3 fxe4 39.e7 f6 40.b7 d8
30.c1 b5+! The clearest way to victory. 41.xb5 d4 42.b7 g6 43.d7 f7
31.d2 c4 32.d3 d4 33.xd4 exd4 44.f4+ e7 45.g5+ f6 46.xf6+
34.xc2 xd5 On paper material is equal, xf6 47.f1 e5 48.e2 d5 49.b5 h6
but the white king is open to the wind whilst 50.c7 d6 51.b6 xd7 52.xd7+ xd7
Black's still has intact defences. The result is 53.e3 c6 54.xe4 xb6 55.e5 c5
therefore hardly in doubt. 35.e1 g5+ 56.xe6 1-0 Torre,E-Cardoso,R/Bauang
36.d1 xf5 37.f4 g4+ 38.c1 xg3 1973 ]
39.e8+ h7 40.cc8 Setting a final booby- 14.d6 The main idea, and the reason Cardoso
t r a p b e f o r e t h r o wi n g i n t h e t o we l . xf4+ tried so hard to keep the Bf8 out fast. It seems
41.b2 xg2+ 42.a3 h3+ 43.a4 a bit surprising that this pawn is so hard to
xh5 play around. h6!?
0-1 [ 14...c8!? ]
15.e5 d5 16.e4 f5 17.g3
[ 17.c5 bxc5 ( 17...c6 18.d3 )
103 B00 18.xb7 c8 ]
Puljek Salai,Zorica 2271 17...g5?!
Solaja,Branka [ 17...g6 is much more solid. Now disaster
chT (Women) Pula (7) 17.09.2000 could (and should) strike on f5. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 18.d4 f7 19.d2 h5 20.c3 g7
21.ad1
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 f6 [ 21.gxf5!? exf5 22.xf5 g6 23.xg7
5.bd2 c5 6.c3 c6 7.0-0 cxd4 8.cxd4 f8 ( 23...xg7 24.e6+ xc3 25.xc3+
b4 9.b1 a6 10.e1 d3 11.xd3 g6 26.exd7 ) 24.e6 xc3 25.bxc3
xd3 12.b3 a6 13.d5 A rare move but xg7 26.exd7 ]
perhaps the critical variation. 21...xc3 22.bxc3 d5 23.c4 b7
[ 13.e5 d5 14.e4 c7 15.d2 c4 24.b5?
16.d1 d3 17.a3 e7 18.g5 xd1 [ 24.gxf5 exf5 25.c5+ g6 26.c6
19.axd1 f6 20.d2 f7 21.c3 c4 and with everything attacking and even
83
another sacrifice on f5 looming, black will 8.0-0 b5 9.c2 g4!? Ambitious 10.exf6
be hard pressed to survive. ] gxf6 11.h3 h5 12.e1 0-0-0 Very dodgy
24...h4 25.f1 g4 26.h3 g5 27.d4 ag8 13.a4 b4 14.e2 xf3 15.xf3
[ 27...gxh3 To ensure the g-file opens was ( 15.xa6+! b8 16.gxf3 ) 15...b7
worth considering. 28.xh3 ag8 29.f3 16.d3 e5 17.f1 e4 18.e2 a8
h6 ( 29...a6!? )] 19.d2 a5 Dhar,S-Hutchinson,N/
28.hxg4 fxg4 29.e3 xe3 30.xe3 h6 Torquay ENG 2002 ]
[ 30...h3! 31.c7 ( 31.f4+ e8 32.xg4 5.d2
hxg2 33.h2 xh2!-+ ) 31...hxg2 32.f4+ [ 5.e2!? f6 6.f4 ge7 7.g3 g6 8.e2
g6 33.xg4+ f5-+ ] d7 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.b4 f5 11.xf5 xf5
31.a3 a6 32.c7 h3 33.g3 hxg2 12.a4 f7 13.a5 g6 14.a3 e4 15.f2
34.h2 g5? h5 16.a4 e7 17.b5 e8 18.b3 b6
[ 34...c1! 35.dxg4 xg4 36.xg4 h5-+ ] 19.c4 Van Haastert,E-Van Wissen,M/
35.dxg4 xh2 36.xh2 h8+ 37.h3 Hengelo NED 2002 ]
xh3+ 38.xh3 g6 39.f4 f5 40.xg5+ [ 5.d3 T h i s i s h a r d l y c r i t i c a l ge7
xf4 41.h4 f3 42.xe6 f2 43.f4 ( 5...xd3 6.xd3 f6 7.f4 d7 8.f3
1-0 0-0-0 9.0-0 ce7 10.b3 h5 11.a4 f5
12.a3 gh6 13.xf8 dxf8= Godard,M-
La zic, M/S t A f f rique 2 00 2 /I XM21 2 (3 1 ))
104 B00 6.e2 d7 7.0-0 xd3 8.xd3 f5 9.g4
Question Nimzovich h4 10.g3 0-0-0 11.g5 e7 12.xh4
N,N xh4 13.d2 f6 14.f4 fxe5 15.fxe5 xg3
[Glenn Flear] 16.xg3 h5! 17.g5 e7 Arutunian,D-
Gelashvili,T/Batumi GEO 2002 ]
Here's a summary of relevant games from [ 5.f3 f6 6.b5 ge7 7.exf6 gxf6 8.h4
2002 compared to ECO's main line. White has g6 9.0-0 d7 10.d2 a6 11.a4 e5
good chances to retain an advantage if 1. He 12.e1 g7 13.f4 b5 14.xg6 hxg6
aims to meet ...f6 with f4 maintaining the 15.c2 e4 16.a4 b4 17.a5 d6 18.b3
centre 2. He avoids a premature Bd3. 1.d4 f7 19.c5 h5 Djurhuus, R-Furhoff,J/
c6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 f5 Stockholm 2003/IXM213 (35) ]
[ 3...f6 4.d3 g6 5.f4 g7 6.b5! d7 5...f6 6.f4 fxe5 7.fxe5 h6 8.df3 f7
7.xc6 xc6 8.f3 h6 9.c3 f7 9.e2
10.exf6 exf6 11.e2+ d7 12.0-0-0 e8 [ 9.d3 g6 10.e2 d7 11.0-0 e7
13.d3 c8 14.h4 White retains an 12.b4 h5 13.a4 h4 14.g5 xd3 15.xd3
initiative due to superior development. d6 f5 16.xf7 xf7 17.g5 h5 18.f6 g5
15.xd6 xd6 16.h5 f5 17.hxg6 hxg6 19.g4 hxg3 20.xg3 h3 21.xf5!
18.h7 Milos,G-Loureiro,L/Sao Paulo BRA good compensation as Black's king is stuck
2002 with advantage ] in the centre, so the queen's rook never gets
4.c3 into play. exf5 22.xf5 g4 23.xg4 h6
[ 4.f3 e6 5.e2 f6 6.f4 ge7 7.g3 24.f1 g6 25.f5 g8 26.h1 h6
d7 8.c3 fxe5 9.dxe5 g4! freeing the f5- 27.h5 f7 28.f4 c6 29.e6
square for the knight 10.bd2 f5 11.a4 and White won in Golikov,A-Juegel,M/FIDE.
xf3 12.xf3 c5 13.b5 0-0 com 2002/IXM213 (50) ]
1/2-1/2 Makarov,M-Abrashkin,B/Samara 9...e7 10.g3 g4
RUS 2002 ] [ 10...g6!? ]
[ 4.b5 e6 5.f3 f6 6.0-0 ge7 7.e3 11.d3 g5 12.xg5 xd1 13.xe6 b8
a6 8.d3 d7 9.bd2 xd3 10.cxd3 14.xg7+ d8 15.xd1 Smagin-Sahovic,
g6 11.exf6 gxf6 12.b3 b6 13.c1 Biel 1990
d6 Erdos,B-Gross,G/Savaria HUN 2002 ]
4...e6
[ 4...d7 5.f3 f6 6.b5 a6 7.a4 e6
84
105 B00 106 B00

Reichstein,Boris 2223 Rosandic,Denis 2248
Blatny,Pavel 2541 Filipovic,Branko 2462
Millennium II Open (4) 04.03.2001 Christmas Open (4) 18.12.2001
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d2 e6 4.gf3 c5 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5
5.c3 f6 6.d3 c6 7.0-0 c7 8.e5 5.c3 f6 6.e2 e7 7.0-0 c6 8.e5 d5
[ 8.a3 d5 9.e5 d7 10.b4 e7 11.e1 9.dxc5 xc5 10.b4 e7 11.a3 f5 12.c4
0-0-0 12.f1 h6 13.e2 b8 14.b1 c4 c7 13.b2 0-0 14.bd2 g5!?
15.c2 g5 16.d2 df8 17.c1 f6 18.b5 An improved version of
cxe5 19.dxe5 fxe5 20.a4 g4 21.e1 h5 [ 14...e8 15.fd1 g5 16.b3 h8 17.b5
22.g5 xg5 23.xg5 e4 24.e7 c5 g4 18.e1 d8 19.c2 g5 20.a4 f7
25.xc7+ xc7 26.d1 a6 27.bxa6 c6 21.a5 bxa5 22.xa5 c8 23.d3 e7
28.e3 hg8 29.h3 xa6 30.g3 c5 24.f4 with a firm grip on the position (1-0,
31.hxg4 hxg4 32.e3 xa4 33.xa4 83) Gligoric,S-Filipovic,B Podgorica 1996. ]
xa4 34.xc4 dxc4 35.d4 c5 36.xc4 15.fd1 g4 16.e1 g5 17.b5
a8 37.e3 a1 38.exe4 b7 39.e3 [ 17.b3 is probably more accurate since
d8 40.h2 dd1 41.c2 a2 42.d4 black does not mind his knight being chased
xf2 43.xe6 dd2 44.xc5+ bxc5 around to the kingside. ]
45.xg4 b6 46.e5 c2 47.c4 f6 17...e7 18.b3 g6 This is obviously
48.e3 a5 1/2-1/2 Novak,I-Cvetkovic,S superior to the previous game where black
Strbske Pleso 1978. ] used much more time putting his pieces on
8...d5 9.e4? A naive approach by white - inferior squares. 19.g3 A big commitment,
in this type of position white almost always and one which gives black a clear plan of
keeps a close eye on the possibility of black action.
using the b4 square. [ 19.c2!? f4 20.f1 may not look like the
[ 9.dxc5!? ] most active procedure, but it keeps things
[ 9.a3!? ] out of harm's way while preparing to just
9...cxd4 10.cxd4 cb4 11.b1 double on the d-file, which must be white's
[ 11.e2 c2 ] primary plan. Still, d7 is easily defended and
11...c8 Now ...Nc2 and ...Ba6 if needed, will it remains white's job to find a long-term
oblige white to surrender the bishop pair. plan. ]
12.a3 c2 13.xc2 xc2 14.c3 xd1 19...h5 20.a4 h4 21.a5 b8 22.c2 f7
15.xd1 e7 16.e3 f4 17.h1 f6! 23.axb6 axb6 A very interesting position - a
Much stronger than trading in the Bb7 to black rook on h7 will defend his main
fracture white's kingside pawns. This game is weakness and prepare action on the h-file.
worth filing under how to execute a misguided W hite has some annoying obstacles to
opponent in this opening. 18.d2 overcome, since pushing c5 to break through
[ 18.f5 xg2 19.xg7+ f7 ] on the queenside will cede the d5 square for
18...fxe5 19.dxe5 xg2! 20.xg2 0-0 a happy black piece. 24.d6?! Looks a waste
21.fc1 xf3+ 22.g1 c5-+ 23.b4 xb4 of time. e8 25.d4 hxg3 26.fxg3 c7
24.axb4 xc1+ 25.xc1 f4 26.c4 xc4 27.dd1 h7 28.d4 f4! 29.gxf4 xf4
27.xc4 f7 28.h3 g6 29.h2 f5 30.d2 g3 Black could have played the
30.g3 d5 31.d6+ xe5 32.c8 b7 brutally straightforward
33.xa7 a6 [ 30...xh2 31.xh2 xh2+ 32.xh2 d6
0-1 when the black queen enters the game with
decisive effect. ]
31.df3 gxh2+ 32.h1 g7 White is
helpless against the methodical advance of
t h i s k n i g h t . 33.g2 h5 34.f2 g7
85
35.xf4 Getting rid of one bishop does not things as much as possible against lower-
o f f e r r e l i e f , a n d wh i t e c a n n o t a vo i d ye t rated 2.c3 types. And this game is a happy
another painful tactical blow. xf4 36.e3 tale for the favourite , who is rewarded for risk-
xe5! 37.a3 taking. 13.h6 f7 14.c1 h8 15.c3
[ 37.xe5 xf3+ 38.xh2 g2+ 39.h1 xc3 16.bxc3 g8 17.d5!? e5
xf2+ 40.g1 h3# ] 18.xe5?
37...xe3 38.xe3 h3 39.h4 g1 [ 18.e4! should give white an edge. ]
This must have been an extremely satisfying 18...fxe5 19.e4 c5 20.c2?
move to play - I know it would have been for [ 20.e3 was more prudent. ]
me. 40.f1 xf3 41.fxf3 g4 42.f6 f7 20...exd5 21.xd5 W a t ch f o r it . xf2!!-+
43.e5 d6 44.b2 bg8 A ferocious 22.e3
demonstration of the trumps of the black [ 22.xg8 xg8 ( 22...xc2+ )
position, and a game worth studying for 1...b6- A) 23.xf2 xg2+ 24.f1 ( 24.h1
ers. xf2! 25.h3 g3! ) 24...xf2+ 25.g1
0-1 d2+;
B) 23.g3 d2+-+ ]
[ 22.xf2 xf2+ 23.xf2 xd5 with a pawn
107 B00 less and continuing king troubles was the
Roschina,Tatiana 2293 proverbial lesser evil. ]
Filipovic,Branko 2444 22...xc2 23.xb7 xe3+ 24.xe3 g5!
3rd Hilton Open (4) 04.01.2001 25.e1 f8 26.h4 h6 27.d5 d6 28.c4
[Jon Tisdall] f4 29.a3 d4 30.h2 f4 31.h3 c1
0-1
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5
5.c3 f6 6.e5 d5 7.0-0 e7 I am a little
reluctant to go into heavy examination of 108 B00
these type of positions as I think they are Roselli Mailhe,Bernardo 2428
probably well covered under the c3 Sicilian, Cristobal,Ruben 2342
which often transposes - lines with b6 are zt 2.5 Mar del Plata ARG (7) 25.08.2001
some of the more interesting attempts to liven [Jon Tisdall]
up the position for black, though not without
risk. 8.e1 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.e2
[ 8.e2!? c6 9.dxc5!? bxc5 10.c4 b6 [ 4.c3 d7 5.d2 f6 6.f4 g5!? This move
11.c3 f5 12.exf6 gxf6 13.h4 0-0 seems to be a recurring theme across the
14.g4+ h8 15.g6+ hxg6 16.xg6 website, featuring in Budapests, Albins ...
1-0 Thorhallsson,T-Poettinger,H ( 6...e6 7.df3 h6 8.e2 e7 9.g3
Liechtenstein 1996. ] e4 10.e2 0-0 11.exf6 gxf6 12.0-0 h8
8...c6 13.xe4 dxe4 14.d2 f5 15.c4 g8
[ 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 0-0 10.c3 f5 11.exf6 16.e3 ad8 The opening here has been
xf6 12.g5 e8 13.e5 c6 14.c1 interesting and double-edged and black is
c8 15.b1 b4 16.e3 d6 17.g4 c6 eventually outplayed, rather than suffering
18.g3 e8 19.e2 d8 20.e1 h5 because of his choice of defence. 17.h1
21.h3 xg5 22.xh5 h6 23.h3 f4 f6 18.e1 e7 19.h3 g6 20.f2 g7
24.a3 c6 25.d3 xg4 26.h7+ f8 21.g1 dg8 22.d2 c6 23.af1 d8
27.g6 d7 28.d5 e7 29.f3+ f4 24.g4 h4 25.h2 c5 26.c4 e8
30.xf4+ xf4 31.xf4 e5 32.h8+ g8 27.dxc5 c7 28.b4 d8 29.e2 d7
33.h7 f7 34.h5 g4 0-1 Oral,T- 30.b5 xd2 31.xd2 f8 32.gxf5 xf5
Antoniewski,R Pardubice 1996. ] 33.xf5 exf5 34.d7 xd7 35.xd7 c7
9.bd2 cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.e4 f5 36.g5 xf4 37.xf5 xf5 38.xf5 e3
12.exf6 gxf6 This type of position is rather 39.f3 e2 40.e3 h5 41.g4 g3+
typical of Sicilian players trying to sharpen 42.g2 1-0 Wedberg, T-Bodin,S Stockholm
86
1996.; 6...h6 7.e2 fxe5 8.fxe5 0-0-0 46.f3 c2 47.e7+ b6 48.g5 xa2
9.gf3 e6 10.0-0 e7 11.b4 df8 49.c1 d1 50.f1 xc1 51.xc1 c5
12.b3 f7 13.a4 g5 14.a3 g4 15.fd2 52.e1 d4 53.f3 c3 0-1 Stangl, A-
h5 16.b5 cd8 17.c5 e8 18.a5 g5 Holoubkova,M Germany 1994.) 6...h6
19.b6 cxb6 20.axb6 axb6 21.a4 c6 7.0-0 0-0 8.a3 a5 Very sensible, clearing
22.b3 g6 23.xe7 xe7 24.b4 d8 the way for pawn-based counterplay on the
25.b5 c8 26.xb6 f3+ 27.xf3 gxf3 queenside. Black has a pleasant position
28.xf3 xb6 29.d6+ c8 30.xb6 with easy play. 9.b4 c4 10.e2 b5
1-0 Shaked,T-Carlin,A Las Vegas 1994.) 11.d2 a5 A bit hyperactive - after
7.df3 gxf4 8.xf4 h6 9.d2 xf4 something a bit more patient like
10.xf4 fxe5 11.dxe5 e6 12.b5 ge7 ( 11...d7!? white must find a way to
13.e2 a6 14.xc6 xc6= Black has develop without allowing black to play . ..a5
absolutely no problems now. 15.fd4 0-0-0 with more force later.) 12.bxa5 xd3?!
16.0-0 e4 17.g3 g6 18.e3 dg8 ( 12...c6 ) 13.xd3 c6 14.b4! c5 15.dxc5
19.f6 d8 20.h6 c5 21.f3 g7 22.b4 c7 16.h1 ( 16.c6!? ) 16...xc5 17.c3
b6 23.a4 hg8 24.a5 b5 25.bxc5 c6 c6 18.d4 ( 18.fb1!?; 18.e2!?;
26.d4 xc5 27.h1 e7 28.e3 ge8 18.g5!? ) 18...xd4 19.xd4 fc8
29.ge2 c7 30.d2 e4 31.af1 g8 20.e2 xa5 21.xa5 xa5 22.b4
32.1f2 b7 33.h3 h5 34.h6 h4 a4 23.b3 f5 24.fb1 h5 25.c3 e4
35.xh4 e7 36.hf4 g5 37.g1 h7 26.a2 h4 27.xb5 xb5 28.xb5 xc3
38.df3 g3 39.e3 a8 40.d2 hg7 29.g1 ce3 30.f2 xe2+ 0-1 Wang Li-
41.e3 c7 42.e2 g7 43.g4 h8 Cai Lu Suzhou, Jiangsu CHN 2001. ]
44.xg8 xg8 45.g5 b1 46.f6 e8 4...e6 5.g3 g6 6.b5 Very rare if not
47.d4 b4 48.cxb4 a4 49.f8 new.
1 - 0 N e u b a u e r , M - W a c h , M M u re c k A U T [ 6.h4 f6 7.h5 f7 8.f4 d7 9.c3
2001. ] is a more popular setup, and this is one of
[ 4.f4 e6 5.f3 ( 5.c3 e4 6.f3 f5 the higher profile matches from this position.
7.exf6 gxf6 8.d3 d7 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.b4 g6 10.d3 ce7 11.d2 fxe5 12.fxe5
d6 11.a4 ge7 12.a5 g6 13.xe4 0-0-0 13.f3 f5 14.xf5 gxf5 15.g5
dxe4 14.fd2 f5 15.b5 ce7 16.b6 a6 e7 16.e3 e8 17.g5 h6 18.xf7
17.c4 d5 18.bxc7 xc7 19.b6+ xf7 19.d2 g7 20.0-0-0 f8 21.df1
xb6 20.axb6 xb6 21.b3 c6 22.a4 g5 22.g4 e7 23.gxf5 xf5 24.xg5
b8 23.a3 a7 24.e3 d7 25.b1 hxg5 25.xf5 exf5 26.g2 g4 27.xd5
a8 26.h1 e7 27.c4 d5 28.b2 g5+ 28.c2 f4 29.e6+ d8 30.hg1
c6 29.a4 g8 30.c4 d6 31.b5 g3 31.g6 xg6+ 32.hxg6 hg8 33.d3
e7 32.a2 g7 33.d5 xe3 34.dxc6 xg6 34.e4 g4 35.f3 a5 36.a4 e7
d2 35.cxb7+ b8 0-1 Zolnierowicz,K- 37.d5 h4 38.c4 b6 39.b3 d7 40.ff1
Gross,G Trier 1997.) 5...e7 6.d3 ( 6.e3 e7 41.f3 h2 42.g2 fh8 43.fg1
h5 7.d3 h6 8.0-0 xd3 9.xd3 f5 2h4 44.e1 f8 45.d2 f7 46.g2
10.f2 g5!? 11.fxg5 xg5 12.b5 b8 1 / 2 -1 / 2 He b d e n , M- Ro ge rs , I E d i n b u rg h
13.c4 a6 14.a4 dxc4 15.c3 b5 1985. ]
16.xa6 b6 17.a3 e7 18.b4 xb4 6...ge7 7.c3 d7 8.d2 a6 9.e2
19.b2 d5 20.e4 g8 21.c1 g4 White is content to have created something to
22.g3 xg3 23.hxg3 h4 24.gxh4 f4 get his teeth into on the queenside if black
25.h1 xh4 26.h2 d5 27.f3 xf2 decides to try and live there. f5 10.xf5
28.xf2 d3 29.e3 xf2+ 30.xf2 c6 xf5 11.0-0 e7 12.f4 h6 13.f3 0-0-0
31.f1 b7 32.d2 e4 33.h6 g6 Black chooses the sharpest option and both
34.h8+ g8 35.h3 g7 36.g1 h7 sides mount gradual attacks on their
37.h4 g5 38.g3 e3+ 39.g2 xd4 respective flanks. It seems that white must be
40.e1 a7 41.e2 d3 42.g4 c3 a bit better as it is easier for him to strip away
43.g8+ d7 44.f2 c7 45.f8 a4 enemy king cover, but the position is
87
extremely complex, and getting at black's king [ 10...e7 11.d4 c6 ( 11...c5!? ) 12.xg6
proves surprisingly difficult. 14.b4 dg8 hxg6 13.f3 c5 14.de2 bd7 15.f4
15.b5 b8 16.bxa6 xa6 17.a4 g5 Wallner,W-Mohr,G Lienz 1988. ]
18.a2 gxf4 19.b3 c5 20.c4? 11.d4
It is tempting to open every conceivable line in [ 11.xg6!? hxg6 12.d4 to prevent Black
the direction of the white king, but this looks a from fianchettoing his bishop deserved
bit optimistic. Recapturing on f4 was more attention, but Black can try for active play
solid. e4 against White's various light squared targets
[ 20...cxd4! looks better since 21.xd4 e4 with e5 ]
gains time for black and 21.cxd5 allows 21... 11...xd3 12.xd3 g6 This looks like a
d3. ] much more harmonious way of developing for
21.xf4 cxd4 22.cxd5 xd5 23.c2+ b8 Black. 13.0-0-0 g7 14.f4 c5 15.e2 0-0
24.b2 b4 25.b5 d8 26.cc1 b6 16.f3 e8 17.g5
Black should be at least equal here. 27.d2 [ 17.f5!? looks more promising in terms of
g6 creating activity against Black's king, but
[ 27...a2!? ] possession of e4 guarantees Black
28.b1 hg8 29.g3 h5 30.xb4 xb4 comfortable counterplay. ]
31.xb4 xf3 32.xf3 h4 33.f2 xg2+ 17...fe4 18.xe4 xe4 19.he1?!
34.f1 xh2 35.xf7 h1+ 36.e2 h2 [ 19.b4? e8 ]
37.a5 d8 38.c6 xf2+ 39.xf2 b6 [ 19.f2 ]
40.xb6+ 19...e7 20.f2?
1-0 [ 20.c3 xd4 21.cxd4 d7 22.d2 ]
20...xd4 21.xe4 xb2+ 22.xb2 xe4
23.xe4 xe4 24.d4 f5 25.h4?!
109 B00 [ 25.gxf6 f7 26.f5!? was a very tempting
Rosito,Jorge 2424 alternative, when W hite will at least have
Larsen,Bent 2486 some activity. Allowing Larsen to have a
Najdorf Mem Great Final (1.3) 02.10.2002 full technical grip is just booking a seat for
[Jon Tisdall] a nostalgic look at one of the game's great
endgame players. ]
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4 25...c5 26.dxc6 bxc6 27.c1 c5 28.b2
5.e3 e6 6.h3 h5 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5 f7 29.d3 b8 30.a3 b7 Protecting
b8!? A very rare alternative. It seems to be everything. Stage two will be activating the
safer than the more popular options. 9.g4 king and centre pawns. 31.a6 e6 32.a3
[ 9.e2 e7 10.d4 xe2 11.xe2 0-0 d5 33.h5 c4 34.h3 d5 35.hxg6 hxg6
12.f5 e8 13.b5 c8 14.xe7+ xe7 36.h8
15.0-0 a6 16.b3 bd7 with a solid [ 36.e5 d4 and the bishop is missed in
position for Black, Golubovic,B-Muse,M defence. ]
Tucepi 1996. ] 36...d4 37.g8 b6 38.d8 a5 39.a8
9...g6 10.d3 b5 40.d8 d6 41.b8+ a4 42.c8
[ 10.e2!? is the acid test for Black's idea - b6 43.c7 b4 44.c8 a4 45.a3+ c4
how to meet the threat to the queenside 46.a8 c3 47.xc3 xc3 48.xa4 c4
pawns? e7 ( 10...a6!? is the logical and Zugzwang - White must relieve the pressure
probably necessary novelty - the discovered on c4 and so allow ...Rb2. 49.a8 b2
check is in fact the least of White's threats - 50.a6 xc2+ 51.d1 d2+ 52.e1 g2
when Black should be OK.) 11.b5+ bd7 53.xg6 d3 54.d6 c2 55.g6 c3 56.d5
12.xb7 b8 13.xa7 xb2 14.d4 0-0 d2+ 57.f1 xg6
15.0-0-0 and Black did not have 0-1
compensation in Palac,M-Muse,M Tucepi
1996. ]
10...bd7
88
110 B00 A) 8...c6!? is the most critical, making it

Roza,Peter hard for white to keep up the inconvenient
Yadao,Israel bind on the light squares. 9.c4 b5
Australian Open (5) 02.01.2001 10.dxc6 bxc4 11.cxd7+ xd7 12.e2
[Jon Tisdall] e5 13.0-0 c6 14.f4 c5+
( 14...exf4!? ) 15.h1 d4 16.fxe5 8e7
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 dxe4 4.d5 e5 17.ad1 xe5 18.xe5 xe5 19.f4
5.f4 g6 6.g3 e5?! 7.dxe6 xe6 8.b5 0-0 20.cd5 xd5 21.xd5 ae8
d6 9.xd6 cxd6 10.xd6+ This game is 22.fd1 b6 23.d6 xb2 24.e6 f6
really a theoretical footnote - the safe and 25.h5 f7 26.g5 xd6 27.xh7+
simple f8 28.h8+ e7 29.xg7+ f7
[ 10.xd6! should discourage black from 30.xf7 d6 31.e5+ d8 32.xd6+
tryin g this line ve ry of ten - it is ha rd t o c8 33.d7+ b8 34.c6+ 1-0 Eberle,
believe that his temporary activity can be J-Koenig, F/Nuremberg 1987 (34);
worth a pawn, even though black survived B) 8...a6 9.c4 b5 10.b3 f6 11.0-0
after xd6 11.xd6+ e7 12.xe4 c8 c5 12.dxc6 xc6 13.g5 e5 14.e2
13.c3 f6 14.0-0-0 hd8 15.xd8 xd8 c5 ( 14...a7 would prevent the Rh8
16.e2 h5 17.g3 h4 18.gxh4 h8 19.f3 going, but black's real problem is that his
g4 20.g5 xh4 21.xe6 fxe6 22.xg4 king is caught in the center and subject to
xg4 23.d2 e5 24.e2 g6 25.d1 attack - still, this looks a better try.) 15.f7
a4 26.a3 h4 27.e3 f6 28.b3 h3 e7 16.xh8 xh8 17.ad1 d4
29.f1 h5 30.f4 f7 31.f2 h3 18.d5 xd5 19.c3 f4 20.cxd4 fxg3
32.d1 e7 33.g4 c3 34.e3 d6 21.xe4 gxh2+ 22.h1 d8 23.dxe5
35.e2 f5 36.d3 c8 37.xf5+ exf5 e6 24.xh7 h6 25.xh6 gxh6
38.e3+ f6 39.d2 h8 40.h3 h4 26.d4 g6 27.fd1 ge7 28.f4 c8
41.f3 g5 42.fxg5+ xg5 43.c4 f6 29.xd5 xd5 30.xd5 xd5 31.xd5
44.d3 a6 45.b4 e5 46.e3+ d6 c2 32.d6 a5 33.f5 xb2 34.f6 xa2
47.c3 f4 48.c5+ d5 49.d3+ e4 35.e6 f2 36.e7 f7 37.d8 e2
50.d7 xh3+ 51.c4 xa3 52.xb7 f3 38.f8+ 1-0 Gallagher,J-Baker,C/
53.e7+ f4 54.c6 f2 55.f7+ g3 56.c7 Barnsdale 1989/TD (38) ]
f3 1/2-1/2 in Seret,J-Castro Rojas,O Nice 8...a6 9.xd7+ xd7 10.h3 f6 11.e2
1974. ] [ 11.d1 0-0-0 12.d4 xd5 13.a7 c6
10...e7 11.xe4 b6 12.h5 f5 13.g5+ 14.0-0-0 e6-+ ]
f7 14.d2 xb2 15.b1 xc2 16.gf3 11...xd5 12.xd5 xd5 13.d1 b5
e8 17.xb7+ d7+ 14.c4 b4+ 15.f1 e5 16.g5 d6 17.h4
0-1 0-0-0-+ 18.f7 e7 19.xh8 xh8 20.a3
a4 21.c5 xc5 22.xe5 g6 23.h2
e8 24.h5 e5 25.xe5 xe5 26.h3 e3
111 B00 27.c1 f4 28.c4 xf2+ 29.xf2 exf2
Rudd,Jack 2193 30.c1 e3 31.d1 f4 32.b3 c5 33.g3
Briggs,Philip J 2200 fxg3 34.xg3 xh5 35.e2 g5 36.f3
Smith & Williamson ch (5) 03.08.2001 f6 37.xf2 h2+ 38.g1 c2 39.b4 b6
[Jon Tisdall] 40.d5 b7 41.a4 a2 42.a5 b5 43.f4
c2 44.f1 h6 45.e4 c6 46.d3 h5
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c3 dxe4 4.d5 e5 47.e6+ b7 48.d7 c6 49.e8 h4
5.f4 g6 6.g3 f5 7.b5+ 50.g2 c4 51.f7 xb4 52.e6 c4
[ 7.h3!? ] 53.b6+ a7 54.h2 c3
7...d7 8.h5? This is just a primitive threat 0-1
and more likely to just lose time than break
through.
[ 8.h3
89
112 B00 continuation stretches black hard to shake

Sax,Gyula 2563 off white's bind. ]
Hummel,Markus 2173 23...e4 24.c3 e5 25.e1 a6 26.d6
Open Pula CRO (1) 18.05.2001 [ 26.e7!? to take on e5 and keep pressure
[Jon Tisdall] on the seventh looks better. ]
26...g6 27.xd7
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.a3 f6 [ 27.xe5!? ]
5.d3 c5 6.f3 c4 7.xc4 xe4 8.xe4 27...f8 28.d2?!
xe4 9.d5 [ 28.xe5 f2 29.g3!? looks unnecessarily
[ 9.e2 led to a game of minimal theoretical risky, but since the black rook cannot take
interest as black replied with a series of on c2 due to the reply Bxg7, black will be
errors: xf3?! 10.xf3 d5? 11.b5+ d7 pushed back. ]
12.c4 d6 13.cxd5 exd5 14.xd5 e7+ 28...e4 29.g1 c7 30.e5 e6
15.e3 0-0 16.0-0 f6 17.f3 ac8 W ith his pieces all in play again, black is
18.ac1 e6 19.h3 h6 20.d3 xc1 fighting. 31.e3 g5
21.xc1 d8 22.c4 e7 23.g3 b8 [ 31...f5!? 32.g3 d4 33.xe4 xc2!= ]
24.g2 h7 25.h4 f8 26.d3 d7 32.g3 h5?! 33.h1 f5 34.h4 e6
27.c6 d6 28.f5 e7 29.e4 xe4+ 35.xe4 d4 36.c3 xe4 37.xe4 f1+
30.xe4 e6 31.c2 f8 32.b7 c7 38.h2 f5 39.f4 xg3 40.xg3 b1
33.f3 e7 34.e4 f6 35.d3 e6 41.f2 g6 42.f4 f6 43.e4+ e6
36.e2 d7 37.d5 f8 38.d4 f6 39.h5 44.d3 h1 45.c4 xh4+ 46.xc5 g5
f7 40.c4 e7 41.xe7+ xe7 42.f4 47.c4 e4 48.f8 h4 49.b4 f4 50.e8+
d8 43.a4 e8 44.b5 b8 45.c6 d7 51.e5 g4 52.e2 f4 53.b5 g4
d6 46.a6 c7 47.d3 b8 48.b4 c7 54.e5 g3 55.h5 e6 56.h7 f7
49.a5 bxa5 50.bxa5 c8 51.c3 e7+ 57.xh4 f2 58.h7 xg2 59.xa7 a2
52.c5 b8 53.b4 d7 54.b5+ c8 60.g7 xa3 61.b4 f6 62.g8 d3
55.d6 f5 56.d5 a6 57.xa6+ d8 63.b6
58.c5 1-0 Rodriguez,R-Aaron,M Bangalore 1-0
1981. ]
9...f6 10.dxe6?!
[ 10.0-0!? deserved serious attention, 113 B00
making black pay to get rid of the d5 point. Sermek,Drazen 2590
xf3 11.xf3 xf3 12.gxf3 exd5 13.e1+ Kozul,Zdenko 2565
e7 14.xd5 c6 15.g5 f6 16.f4 ] Rapid 1hr Solin-Spilt CRO rapid (18) 20.12.02
10...fxe6 11.e2 c5 12.0-0 0-0 13.g5!? [Glenn Flear]
This leads to some amusing tactics. xf2+!
No fear. 14.h1 b7 15.d3 h6!? An exciting untheoretical game in the St.
[ 15...g6!? 16.xh7 h4! ( 16...xh7 George 1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.d3 b7
17.h5+ g8 18.xg6 h4 19.h7+ ) 4.d2!? White usually plays 4 Nf3 and Qe2
17.g5 g7!? ] maintaining a solid centre which lays the
16.h7+! foundation for action on either wing. Sermek
[ 16.h7 f3!! ( 16...h4 17.xf8 g3 has an ambitious idea in mind. d6 5.f4
18.h7+ ) 17.xf3 ( 17.gxf3 xf3-+ ) T h e b i g p a wn f r o n t r e q u i r e s a vi g o r o u s
17...xf3 18.g6 and while white is counter. e5! 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 e7
t e m p o r a r i l y a f l o a t , t h e N h 7 d o e s n o t 8.e6!?
inspire confidence. ] [ 8.gf3 g6 9.a4 softening up the black
16...h8 17.e4 xe4 18.xe4 h4 queenside is another idea ]
19.e2 c5 20.xc5 xf1+ 21.xf1 bxc5 8...fxe6 9.h5+ g6 10.gf3 e7 11.e5
22.f8+ h7 23.d2! 0-0 12.e4
[ 23.xc5 e1+ 24.g1 e2 reverses [ 12.xg6 hxg6 13.xg6 d5 would offer
roles for minimal cost. The game Black a useful bishop pair and good
90
development for the pawn ] e6 21.eg5? xc4! 22.e4 ac8

12...xf3!? 23.b1 h5 24.b3 b5 25.g4 fxg3
An interesting exchange sacrifice
that takes the sting out of white's attack. 26.hxg3 c6 27.d3 c5 28.g4 h8
29.xc6 xc6 30.f5 g6 31.f4 a3
K o z u l r e l i e s o n h i s ( n o w) s a f e r k i n g f o r
compensation. 13.gxf3 c6 14.g5 32.e5 c7 33.gf3 fc8 34.c4 xc4
[ I t h i n k t h a t W h i t e s h o u ld p l a y 14.g5!
0-1 Shabalov,A-Klinger,J/Werfen 1990. ]
when a continuation such as xg5 15.xg5 7.e5 e4
d5 16.e4 xe5 17.0-0-0 gives Black [ 7...g4 leaves the knight misplaced in the
insufficient compensation ] long run: 8.f3 c5 9.bd2 0-0 10.0-0
14...cxe5 15.0-0-0 d5 16.hg1! e8 11.e1 b6 12.c4 c6 13.h3 h6
[ 16.b1 is too slow as after xd3 17.cxd3 14.c2 e7 15.ac1 d7 16.c5 c7
( or 17.xd3 f5 ) 17...f5 the pin on the 17.d4 g5?? 18.e6!+- xg3 19.exd7
fifth rank costs White material. ] xf2+ 20.xf2 h4+ 21.f1 ed8
16...xd3+ 17.xd3 xa2 18.xe7! 22.2f3 f6 23.e3 xd7 24.ce1 f8
[ 18.c3 a1+ 19.b1 d6 is better for 25.e8 d8 26.xf8+ xf8 27.xg6 hxg6
Black ] 28.e2 f5 29.e5 xe5 30.xe5 g3+
18...a1+ 19.d2 xg1 20.g5 31.e1 e4 32.b4 a5 33.a3 axb4
[ If 20.g5 then e5 is strong. ] 34.axb4 a8 35.e7 a1+ 36.e2 a2+
20...xe7 21.xh7+ f8 37.f1 a1+ 38.e1 f8 39.xb7 g3+
22.h8+?
This loses instead 40.f2 e4+ 41.e2 1-0 Nippgen,G-
[ 22.h5! w a s n e c e s s a r y w h e n g6
Reichenbach,W/Oberursel 1972. ]
23.xg6 xh2+ 24.c1 g8 25.xe6+ 8.xe4 dxe4 9.xd8+ xd8 10.c3 f5
h8 11.0-0-0+ c8 12.ge2 h5 13.h4 c5
offers White at least a draw but
perhaps no more. ] 14.d4 g4 15.d2 e8?! At high tempo
22...g8 23.xe6+ e7 24.e3 f6 agressivity tends to come out first, but by
25.xg7+ xg7 26.xg7+ f7 27.f5 putting a premium on activity rather than
d8+ 28.e2 d5 threats to the e-pawn Black could likely have
0-1 solved his problems:
[ 15...d8!? 16.de2 e3!? ( 16...xd2
17.xd2 b4!? )]
114 B00 16.e6 Tempting, but the simple
Shabalov,Alexander 2601 [ 16.xe4 xd4 17.xd4 xe5 18.e1
Benjamin,Joel 2577 should favour white who has full
ch-Playoff Seattle USA (2) 07.10.2000 mobilization. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 16...xe6 17.xe6 xe6 18.hd1 b6
19.b5 e7 20.xc7 White is banking on
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 This game was played at this tactic to shatter the black position, but it
a fast tempo, but Benjamin is not joking with turns out to be much trickier than it would
putting his knight on c6. A quick data check appear. xc7 21.d8+ b7 22.xc7?!
shows that "Shabba" has had some unhappy No w t h e a b se n ce o f p ro t e ct io n o f t h e f 4
experiences facing this move in the past. square turns out to be a vital dif f erence.
3.dxe5 xe5 4.f4 g6 5.g3 f6 6.d3 White should play
d5 [ 22.xa8 xa8 23.xc7 xf2 24.d7 ]
[ 6...b4+ 7.c3 c5 8.e5 e7 9.e2 d5 22...xd8 23.xd8 xf2 The e-pawn is
10.xg6 hxg6 11.d2 g5 12.e4 b6 suddenly a real terror. 24.d7+ c8 25.xf7
13.0-0-0 f4 14.xf4 gxf4 15.f3 e3 26.g5?
and it seems that white's grip on the centre [ 26.e7! e2 ( 26...a5?? 27.d1 ) 27.b4
should be worth something, but mutual f4!? allows black to fight on ( 27...e1+
insecure kings and those bishops ... make 28.xe1 xe1 29.xa7 xh4 30.xg7 )]
life hard to predict. e6 16.c4 0-0 17.d5 26...e2 27.d2 e3!
d6 18.hd1 h6 19.exd6 cxd6 20.xd6 0-1
91
115 B00 h6 15.e1 c5 16.e3 f5 and again

Shabalov,Alexander 2623 Black had interesting play in Baklan,V-Blatny,
Blatny,Pavel 2452 P Bastia 2003 ]
86th NY Masters (2) 06.01.2004 8...e7
[Glenn Flear] [ 8...a6!? was possible to meet a timely a4-
a5 with ...b5. ]
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6!? Braver then 9.d5 cb8 10.a5 bxa5 White can't be
the more obvious 3.. .e6 . 4.e2 c6!? allowed a major bind with a5-a6. 11.e3
Dynamic stuff. A combination of the Owen's [ Later on, recapturing the pawn proves to be
and the Knights Tan go! Bla tny has bee n h a r d e r t h a n yo u ' d e xp e c t , s o p o s s i b l y
playing this recently against strong opposition Shabalov should have stuck with 11.xa5
so must have faith in this eccentric c6 12.dxc6 xc6 13.a1 where White has
development. 5.c3 e5 Black gains a stake in arguably the better structure, but Black
the centre and enables his knights to have isn't under any immediate pressure. ]
stable squares from which to operate. 6.f3 11...c6 12.c4 a6 13.bd2 ac5 14.a3
d6 According to my database Blatny has had f5! An excellent counterstrike that disturbs
this position five times in the last year! Usually W hite's hold on the centre. 15.exf5 0-0
White will play d4-d5 at some point, but there 16.e4?!
is no consensus as to when it's most [ If 16.dxc6 xc6 17.c2 then b8
a p p r o p r i a t e . 7.0-0 It's worth comparing the with promising counterplay. Even so that
game continuation with other tries as the would have been better than losing the d5-
'main line' has yet to crystallize. pawn. ]
[ 7.g5 e7 8.d5 b8 9.xf6 xf6 16...xe4 17.xe4 cxd5 18.cxd5 f6
10.bd2 a6 11.c4 d7 12.e3 g6 19.b1 xd5 20.d1 h8 Black has the
was fine for Black in Kanovsky,D-Polak,T better chances in this complex middlegame.
Brno 2003 ] He has nominally an extra pawn but his main
[ 7.d5 e7 8.a4 a6 9.a5 c8 10.a3 trump is a grip on the central area which
d7 11.e3 g6 12.g3 e7 13.h4 h6 White's pieces find hard to challenge. 21.d2
14.h5 led to White pressure in Al Modiakhi, f6 22.b3?!
M-Blatny,P Bermuda 2003. This may explain [ 22.xa5 balances material, but after f4
why Blatny now likes to meet d4-d5 with ... 23.e3 e7 Black is very comfortable. ]
Nb8, and a4-a5 with bxa5, see the main 22...c6 23.c1 c8 24.h4 Seeking to mix
game for instance. ] things on the kingside. It's dangerous to open
7...d7 the h-file in front of his king so Black prefers
[ Otherwise 7...e7 8.d5 b8 9.a4 c6 to concentrate his efforts where he is
10.c4 a6 11.c3 0-0 12.b3 c5 13.c2 s t r o n g e s t . a4! White will again regret not
a5 Kritz,L-Kunin,V Griesheim 2003 was having taken the a-pawn when it was hanging.
solid. ] 25.a3 b6 26.g5 Desperately putting all
8.a4 Played in order to obtain a concession his eggs in the attacking basket.
from Black on the queenside. [ If 26.a2 then f4 takes the initiative. ]
[ Against 8.a3 Blatny has tried a couple of 26...xb2 27.a2 f4 28.g4 d4 29.e3
ideas... e7 ( I prefer this to 8...h6 9.d1 h5!? Exchanges help Black, but this move
a6 10.c4 e7 11.c2 g6 12.d5 g7 also deflects the White queen from his king.
13.b4 db8 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.b3 0-0 [ 29...b4 30.d2 d5!? was also
16.a3 Mitkov,N-Blatny,P Lindberg 2003 possible ]
which favoured White) 9.e3 f6 10.fd1 30.g3 d5 31.ac2 b7 Keeping it simple.
0-0 11.ac1 h8 12.b1 g8 13.b4 g5!? The battle is won if he doesn't fall for any
with interesting counterplay, Epishin,V- tricks. 32.xc8 xc8 33.xc8+ xc8
Blatny,P Bastia 2003 ] 34.h2 e2 35.h3 d1 36.f7+ h7
[ 8.a6 c8 9.xb7 xb7 10.a4 g6 37.f4 xb1 38.g5+ g8 39.f3 xg5
11.d5 e7 12.a5 g7 13.c4 0-0 14.c3 40.fxg5 f4 Giving back the piece to steer
92
the game towards a winning ending. Also 22.d3 fxe5 23.dxe5 d4 24.f2
possible was [ 24.xd4 xd4+ 25.f2 xf4 26.xd7
[ 40...b5 41.g6 e4 42.xe4 e5+ ] f5 27.d3 g5 ]
41.xf4 xf5 42.d5+ f7 43.xf7+ xf7 24...d5 25.d2 c8 26.de1 c3
44.c1 g4 45.g3 g6 46.f2 e6 27.e4 a6 28.xd4 xa3 29.c1 a1
47.e3 d5 White never did get his a-pawn 30.h2 xc1 31.xc1 a2 32.c4 xc4
back! 33.xc4 a6 34.g3 g5 35.g2 gxf4 36.gxf4
0-1 b8 37.g3 f7 38.f3 c6 39.e4
e8 40.c1 f7 An odd place to stop - for
example.
116 B00 [ 40...f7 41.e1 and the game continues.
Shabanov,Yuri 2463 The score is probably not the whole story
Minasian,Artashes 2576 a n d t h e r e i s s o m e t yp e o f e r r o r i n t h e
Aeroflot Open (1) 05.02.2002 record. ]
[Jon Tisdall] 0-1
1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4

5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.e3 0-0 8.h3 h5 117 B00
9.d2 xe2 10.xe2 Shavtvaladze,Nikoloz 2314
[ 10.xe2 d5 11.e5 d7 12.f4 b6 Remizov,Juri 2266
13.g3 f5 14.exf6 xf6 15.c3 g6 16.g4 White Tower Open (5) 07.10.2000
d7 17.ae1 ae8 18.f5 exf5 19.xf5 [Jon Tisdall]
h8 20.h6 g7 21.xf8+ xf8 22.f4
d8 23.f2 xe1+ 24.xe1 e6 1.e4 a6 This may not have quite the stamp of
and black had no problems, 0-1 Szegi,V- audacity it had before people like Miles did
Safranska,A/Sala 1994 (42). ] things like beat Karpov with it, but it still has
10...d5 11.e5 d7 12.f4 b4 that touch of daring, in the sense of daring
[ 12...f5!? is probably the most reliable your opponent to come and get you. 2.d4 b5
option, and had the Miles stamp of approval: 3.d3 b7 4.f3 f6 5.e2 e6 6.g5 c5
13.b3 ( 13.exf6 xf6 14.f3 b6 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4
15.ad1 c4 16.c1 e7 17.b3 b6 [ 8.xd4 is an interesting alternative - this
18.b5 d7 19.a3 e7 20.xe7 xe7 kind of pseudo-Sicilian structure poses black
21.e5 xe5 22.xe5 f7= 1-0 Leski,M- some different problems to solve as the
Miles,A/San Francisco 1987 (37).) 13...a5 standard methods of using the c-file as a
14.a4 f7 15.ad1 f8 16.c4 b4 springboard to counterplay do not apply with
17.a3 dxc4 18.axb4 cxb3 19.b5 b4 a white pawn on c3 instead of a N. This
0-1 Checa,C-Miles,A/ Sevilla 1994 (48). ] game rapidly loses its theoretical interest as
13.f3 c5 14.d1 black gets generous without reason. e7
[ 14.f5!? is the most energetic and critical 9.d2 d6 10.0-0 bd7 11.f4 h6 12.h4
response that could have brought white 0-0 13.ae1 c5 14.b1 c8 15.a3 a5
success the one time I have seen it tried: 16.xb5 a6 17.c4 a4 18.e5 dxe5
exf5 15.a3 cxd4 16.xd4 c6 17.xd5?! 19.fxe5 e8 20.f2 b8 21.f3 b6
( 17.xf5 ) 17...xd4? ( 17...dxe5= ) 22.c2 g6 23.fd4 c7 24.c1 fc8
18.xd4 g6 19.ad1 e8 20.e6 25.e3 g5 26.xg5 hxg5 27.xf7 xf7
0-1 Klinova, M-Rooda,K/Hoogeveen 1999 28.xg6+ e7 29.xg5+ d7 30.g7+
(34). This possibility is another argument d8 31.f6+ d7 32.g7+ d8 33.d1
for adopting Miles' 12...f5. ] b3 34.g5+ d7 35.g7+ d8 36.h1
14...cxd4 15.xd4 c5 16.f2 b6 17.c3 xd4 37.xd4+ d5 38.f8+ d7
c6 This must be a relatively successful 39.g7+ d8 40.g5+ d7 41.cxd5
Fr e n c h -t y p e s t r u c t u r e f o r b l a c k . 18.ad1 xb5 42.dxe6+ c6 43.d6+ b7
ae8 19.a3 f6 20.b4 xd4 21.cxd4 e7 44.xb6+ xb6 45.e3+ a6 46.d3
93
d8 47.xb5+ xb5 48.h3 xb2 49.e7 technique but black makes a very big meal of
e8 50.d3+ b5 51.d7 1-0 Sanchez it indeed, and after prolonging white's agony
Almeyra,J-Stranjakovitch,J/Cannes 1990 to an amazing degree, he eventually lets him
(51) ] off the hook. 30.e2 g5 31.b4 f8 32.g3
8...h6 9.h4 e7 e7 33.h4 f5 34.exf6+ xf6 35.hxg5+
[ 9...c6!? is more entertaining - the threat hxg5 36.b5 e5 37.c3 d5 38.g4 d6
to gain the bishop pair with Nb4 is coupled 39.a4 d4 40.b6 c6 41.h5 d3 42.b2
with an idea of charging the g-pawn forward d2 43.g6 f4 44.f6 e5
to undermine d4. 10.a3 ( 10.e5 a5+ ) [ 44...xb6 45.xe6 c5 46.f5 d4
10...e7 ( 10...g5!? ) 11.bd2 g5! 12.g3 wins easily as white's king does not return in
g4 13.h4 ( 13.e5 xd4 ) 13...xd4 time. ]
14.d1 g8 15.e5 c6 16.c3 h5 45.f5 xb6 46.e4 c5 47.d3 d5
17.g3 xh4 18.gxh4 xh4 19.e2 f4 48.d1 e6 49.c3 f5 50.e2 g6
20.f1 h3 21.c2 xf1+ 22.xf1 d6 51.e4 f5 52.c5 e3 53.e4 f4
23.e3 e5 24.d1 e7 25.f1 f3 54.c3 c5 55.e4 b4 56.f2 a5
26.g2 xg2 27.xg2 g5 0-1 Lazaridis, 57.d3+ f5 58.f2 b6 59.e4 e3
S-Moulin,P/ Groningen 1982. A thought- 60.c3 f4 61.d1 g6 62.e2 h5
provoking little rout, and something to file 63.e4 h4 64.xd2 xd2 65.xd2 h3
away for future reference for ...a6 66.d3 h2 67.d2 h1 68.d1
devotees. ] ½-½
10.a4 c6!? I can't help feeling I have seen
this idea before, but I cannot produce any
evidence to back this up. For the sacrificed 118 B00
pawn black gets a very nice pair of bishops Shaw,John K 2433
and constant pressure against both white's Matin,Adam 2433
central pawns, and on the b-file. 4NCL 21.11.2004
[ 10...bxa4 11.xa4 allows white to claim a [Andrew Martin]
small plus - the rook supports the white
c e n t r e , a n d t h e a - p a wn i s a l o n g t e r m 1.e4 b6!? Why not? In actual fact the move-
target. ] order Black adopts is rather cunning. He's
11.axb5 b4 12.xf6 to relieve the pressure aiming for a Hippopotamus system but by
against e4. playing ...b6 and ...Bb7 first he is trying to
[ 12.c3 axb5! ] talk White out of aggressive systems involving
12...xf6 13.bxa6 xd3+ 14.xd3 b6 f2-f4 and/ or Be3, Qd2. 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6
15.0-0 xa6 16.d2 0-0 17.c1 fb8 4.f3 d6 5.d3 d7 6.0-0 g6 7.a4!
A long tactical sequence exploiting various John Shaw is a methodical, logical, classical
p i n s a l o n g t h e a - f i l e i s o ve r . B l a c k h a s player and he usually goes for a nagging edge
excellent compensation as it is very difficult to with W hite rather than the quick attack. I
ward off the threats to white's pawns and keep underestimated 7 a4 and immediately made a
the bishops from raking in and causing bad move. g7?
damage. 18.c2 b7 19.xa8 xa8 20.e5 [ Of course 7...a6 is forced, I know that
[ 20.c3 a1+ 21.c1 xc1+ 22.xc1 now. ]
xd4 23.xd4 xd4 24.c2 and black is 8.a5 bxa5 Horrible. The more I looked at
better - strong bishop, nice compact and [ 8...e7 9.a6 c8 the less I liked it:
active position. But white's choice in the 10.g5 ( 10.f4 0-0 11.d2 e5 12.h6!
g a m e d o e s n ' t d o m u c h e xc e p t f u r t h e r exd4 13.xg7 xg7 14.xd4 e5 15.f4
expose his position. ] xd3 16.xd3 ) 10...h6 11.e3 0-0
20...e7 21.h3 e4 22.c1 a1 23.c3 12.d2 h7 13.fe1 The problem is that
xc1+ 24.xc1 xf3 25.gxf3 xd4 B la ck h a s n o go o d p a wn b re a ks in t h e
26.e1 c5 27.g2 b6 28.e3 xe3 centre, let alone the usual Modern idea of
29.fxe3 xe3 This should be a matter of attacking and dismantling the centre as and
94
when necessary. I looked but I did not see. ] [ 25.bxc4 xe3 transposes. ]
9.e3 gf6 10.d2! I'm not sure how big 25...xe3! 26.bxc4 d4 27.h1 xf4!
W hite's advantage is here. It's in between Shaw was visibly upset and who wouldn't be?
substantial and life-threatening I think, and so The point is that he can't play 28 Rg1 due to
I had to find some way to play on at the same 2 8 . . . B e 5 . T h e Q u e e n a n d Ra 2 a re ve r y
time keeping some chances. I soon remote indeed. 28.aa1 xa1 29.xa1
reconciled myself to the ultimate loss of the xc4 30.xa7 xc2-+ Some care is
a7 pawn after that it was easier.. 0-0 11.b3 required in the endgame but it must be an
c6 easy win. 31.f1 c4 32.a8+ g7
[ The alternatives leave Black with nothing to 33.a1+ d4 34.a7 f6 35.g1 e7
do. At least in the game White has choices 36.a1+ f6 37.h3 e2 38.h1 e5
to make, it's still murky and he could go 39.a7+ h6 40.f7 e1 41.xe1 xe1+
wrong. 11...b8 12.xa5 ] 42.h2 e5+ 43.g3 e2+ 44.g1 d1+
[ 11...b8 12.xa5 ] 45.f2 d4+ 46.f3 c4 47.g4
12.xa5 c7 13.f4! These positions are so [ For one horrible moment I thought I had
difficult to play because one is making original been mated e.g. 47.f8+ g5! I'd seen
jud gem ent s on virtu ally e very move. Fo r this move some time ago of course but
instance should White take on b7 or not and panic sets in when you are winning cleanly
then just play against the a pawn? For Shaw and the opponent gets even the slightest
maybe that was the best approach although chance. ( 47...h5?? is the blunder of the
13 f 4 cannot be wrong indeed it looks as year: 48.g4+ g5 49.h4+ xh4
though Black may be mated e.g. Qe1-h4 etc. 50.h6# )]
Where is his counterplay coming from? 47...d3+ 48.g2 g5 49.f8 e2+
[ 13.a2 fb8 14.f3 c8 15.fa1 ] 50.g3 e3+ 51.g2 c3 52.c8 h4
13...ab8 14.e2 a8 The first glimmer of 53.c7 xh3+ 54.f2 xg4 I will play 1...
light appears at the end of the tunnel. 15.b3 b6 again and this time with an early ...a6.
c5 16.dxc5 dxc5 17.a2 White is still What price 1 e4 b6 2 d4 Bb7 3 Nc3 ( 3 Bd3)
playing very well and very logically too. He a6!? . It's bound to gain time on the clock and
seems to have a total grip. I knew that playing the idea is the same e.g. ...d6,...Nd7 and only
passively would be useless and cast my eye then ...g6,...Bg7,... Ne7 etc.
over the position for an unusual idea. b4 0-1
18.d2 b8 The first stage is to get the big
p i e c e s o u t o f e xp o s e d p o s i t i o n s . 19.c4
d5! For better or worse. At least Black is 119 B00
going down in flames. This came as a surprise Shirov,Alexei 2718
to John Shaw. Chugging along without Martinsen,Stig K
c o m p l i c a t i o n s wa s n o l o n ge r a n o p t i o n . Simul Bergen NOR (1) 10.02.2001
20.exd5 exd5 21.xd5 [Jon Tisdall]
[ 21.e5 xe5 22.fxe5 d4 23.d2 dxc3
24.xc3 d5! is, I would say, unclear. Black It's not every day you get to see an offbeat
is fighting. ] defence against a very top player, and this
[ 21.fa1 dxc4 22.xc4 b6! ] kind of game is why - one should at least pick
21...xd5 22.b3 e8 Now I was very happy. as reputable a line as possible. The game is
The game seemed to have utterly changed. not terribly interesting, but has a kind of
S u d d e n ly W h i t e h a d t o m a ke a m a ss ive historic appeal. 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4
mental readjustment from attack to defence. f6 4.c3 g4 5.e3 e6 6.d5 exd5
Furthermore, in this inspired frame of mind, I 7.exd5 xf3
had spotted an excellent combination. 23.d2 [ 7...e5 8.e2 xf3+ 9.xf3 xf3
xc4 24.xc4 xc4!! Based on White's 10.xf3 e7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.he1 e8
a wk wa r d p ie c e s. I t h i n k t h e id e a wo r ks : 13.d4 d7 14.e2 c5 15.dxc6 bxc6
25.xd7 16.de1 d5 17.g4 ab8 18.h4 h6 19.f5
95
xf5 20.gxf5 b4 21.xe8+ xe8 22.g1 68.e7 c5 69.e8 xe8 70.xe8 c6
e7 23.xa7 a8 24.e3 xh4 25.xh6 71.d3 b4 72.d8 c4 73.f7 c5
xf2 26.g2 d4 27.e2 e5 28.a3 a4 74.e6 c3 75.b3 a5 76.a8 c7
29.c3 e4 30.d4 xd4 31.cxd4 f6 32.a4 77.a4 b5 78.c4 d8 79.d5 g5
f7 33.d2 d6 34.f2 xd4 35.b3 c5 80.e4 c2 81.xc2 b4 82.b2 c3
36.c3 d3 37.c2 c4 38.bxc4 dxc4 83.b1 e7 84.d5 a3 85.c6 c2
39.f4 d5 40.a5 xf5 41.b2 d6 86.b4 1/2-1/2 Jonkman,H-Mestrovic,Z Wijk
42.a6 b5+ 43.c2 b6 44.a7 a6 aan Zee 1999.) 13.f1 b5 14.a3 c5
45.b4 e6 46.c5 b5 0-1 Rotman,D- 15.g6 fxg6 16.hxg6 xg6 17.xc5 dxc5
David,A Geneve 1996. ] 18.xe5 g5 19.xg6 xg6 20.h3 e7
8.gxf3!?N e5 9.f4 ed7 10.f3 e7?! 21.f5 g5 22.h5+ xh5 23.xh5 d7
11.0-0-0 a6 12.e1 d8 13.g1 g8 24.g6+ d8 25.e5 g5 26.e4 f4
14.d3 e7 15.h3 c5 16.xh7 xh7 27.f5 xe5 28.0-0-0 f8 29.xc5 xf5
17.xh7 f8 18.f5 f6 19.h4 xh4 30.e6+ e7 31.xf5 f6 32.h3 b6
20.h6 f6 21.xg7 xg7 22.xg7+ xg7 33.f4 d6 34.f5 g8 35.c3 h5 36.c2
23.h8+ g8 24.h6+ g7 25.f6 c4 37.g1 e3+ 38.d3 xd5 39.g6+
1-0 e5 40.g2 e7 41.xg7 xg7 42.xg7
h4 43.h3 d5 44.e6 b6 45.g5
e7 46.e6 d6 47.b3 d7 48.c4 e5+
120 B00 49.c3 bxc4 50.bxc4 c5 51.f4 f3
Soylu,Suat 2376 52.d3 g5 53.g6 a5 54.a4 g1
Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2417 55.g2 h3 56.d5 h2 57.g2 h3
6th HIT Open (7) 31.01.2001 58.e2 f6 59.f3 g1+ 60.g3 e2+
[Jon Tisdall] 61.xh2 c3 62.g3 xa4 63.e4 c3
64.c2 a4 65.f3 a3 66.b3 a2 67.xa2
A heavyweight theoretical duel from a full-time, xa2 68.f8 b4 69.e4 c6 70.e6
die-hard Nc6-er. 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 e5 71.f4 xc4 72.xc5 xc5 73.e4
f6 4.c3 g4 5.e3 e5 6.b5 d7 7.d5 e5 74.e3 d5 75.f4 d4 76.g3
cb8 8.h3 h5 9.g4 g6 10.h4 h5 e3 77.g2 d3 78.g3 f2 79.g2
Mestrovic follower should note that his e4 80.f1 d2 81.g2 e2 82.g1
choices here are based on long experience: f3 83.f1 h4 84.f6 f2 0-1 Medvegy,N-
[ 10...h6 11.h5 h7 12.g5 a6 ( 12...hxg5 Mestrovic,Z Budapest 1999. ]
13.xg5 a6 14.g4 g8 15.e6 fxe6 11.g5 e7 And here is the sensible new
16.dxe6 xe6 17.xe6+ e7 18.g6+ move. Black reserves the option of kicking the
f7 19.xf7+ xf7 20.c4+ e8 Bb5 with ...c6.
21.d5 d8 22.g5+ c8 23.0-0-0 c5 [ 11...a6 12.f1 b5 13.d2 e7 14.g1
24.f3 b5 25.f1 c6 26.h3+ b7 27.c3 c8 15.a4 b4 16.a2 b7 17.c3 a5
d8 28.c2 de6 29.xe6 xe6 18.cxb4 axb4 19.b5 0-0 20.xb4 c5
30.dg1 h7 31.d2 c6 32.e3 f4 21.f3 h7 22.b3 f5 23.e2 g8 24.0-0-0
33.f5 e8 34.xf4 exf4 35.h4 d5 f4 25.xc5 dxc5 26.c6 d6 27.c4
36.xf4 dxe4 37.fxe4 xh5 38.xg7+ d7 28.g2 f7 29.h3 e8 30.g2
xg7 39.d6+ b6 40.xe8 h2+ a8 31.a2 b8 32.6xe5 xe5
41.b1 h6 42.f1 e2 43.d6 a5 33.xe5 f5 34.exf5 xe5 35.f6 d7
44.f5 g5 45.g1 e3 46.g6 c5 36.xd7 a5 37.c2 b4 38.e6 c3
47.e6 c7 48.e5 e4 49.c2 d7 39.xf7+ 1-0 Piket,J-Mestrovic,Z Sremic
50.d3 e1 51.d4 d1+ 52.e4 e1+ Krsko 1998. ]
53.f5 f1+ 54.e4 e1+ 55.f5 f1+ 12.g1 c6 13.dxc6
56.g6 e1 57.f6 f1+ 58.g6 e1 [ 13.f1!? must be more testing - taking on
59.a3 b4 60.axb4 axb4 61.f7 e4 c6 seems illogical. cxd5 14.xd5 c6
62.b3 b6 63.cxb4 xb4 64.f6 e4 15.h3 ]
65.e6+ c7 66.f3 e3 67.d2 xd2 13...bxc6 14.e2 c7 15.d2 c5!
96
16.xc5 dxc5 17.c4 d7 18.d3 b6 esteemed a personage as David Bronstein
T h e d 4 s qu a r e give s b la c k co u n t e r p l a y. has toyed with the black side of this system,
19.g3 xc4 20.xc4 d8 21.d3 0-0 though I could not locate games of his that I
22.d1?! c4 23.xc4 d4 24.e3 a5+ am sure I saw with my own eyes...
25.c3 xe4 26.e2?! [ 4...d8 5.f3 f6 6.g5 e6 7.d3 e7
[ 26.d1 ] 8.e2 c6 9.d1 b4 10.0-0 xd3
26...b8 27.b3 a6+ 28.f3 c5 11.xd3 0-0 12.fd1 c6 13.e5 d5
29.ge1 e8 30.ad1 xe3 31.fxe3 g4 14.xe7 xe7 15.g3 xc3 16.bxc3 f6
32.h2 e4+ 33.f2 c5!? Preferring to 17.d3 d6 18.e3 b6 19.f3 a5 20.f2
attack to winning the queen, when white can a6 21.e1 fe8 22.b1 ab8 23.e4
hit f 7 a n d ge t s a b it o f p e a ce a n d qu ie t . c7 24.d2 d6 25.e4 c7 26.d2
34.d5 xd5 35.xd5 e6 36.e4 c4 d6 27.e4 1/2-1/2 Timoshchenko,G-
37.d2 f5 38.e3 fxe4-+ 39.e2 f4 Gorbatow,A Arco 1999. ]
40.d1 a6 41.e2 xa2 42.e1 ef8 5.ge2
43.d1 xh4 44.g2 g4 45.g3 xg3 [ 5.c4 f6 6.ge2 b5 7.b3 b7 8.f4
46.xg3 xb2 d7 9.0-0 e6 10.d3 c5 11.dxc5 xc5
0-1 12.g3 0-0 13.ad1 c6 14.e5 h8
15.f4 bd7 16.d3 xe5 17.xe5 e8
18.e2 e4 19.h3 d8 20.c3 xd1
121 B00 21.xd1 f6 22.d3 a7 23.b3 e5
Sprenger,Jan Michael 2326 24.b4 a5 25.d5 xf2 26.xf2 c8
Ristic,Alexandre 2155 27.h4 g5 28.h6 axb4 29.cxb4 e7
Open Metz FRA (3) 09.04.2001 30.a3 d8 31.c3 e6 32.f1 xf2
[Jon Tisdall] 33.xe6 xe6 34.xf2 g8 35.g1
b6+ 36.f1 d4 37.h3 f4+ 38.e1
1.e4 a6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.c3 f2+ 39.d1 f1+ 0-1 Wegener,D-Mozes,
[ 4.c4 d8 5.f3 f6 6.e2 e6 7.0-0 c5 E Budapest 1993. ]
8.e3 cxd4 9.xd4 e7 10.c3 0-0 5...b5!?
11.c2 bd7 12.fd1 c7 13.h3 b6 [ 5...g4 6.h3 f5 7.f4 d8 8.g3 g6
14.ac1 b7 15.a3 ac8 16.b4 b8 9.f3 c6 10.0-0-0 f6 11.d5
17.a2 a8 18.f1 e5 19.a4 d8 This does not look worth repeating for black.
20.f4 g6 21.g5 b8 22.xf6 gxf6 b8 12.d3 bd7 13.he1 xd3
23.c5 b5 24.c3 h8 25.ce2 d5 14.xd3 c5 15.d2 d7 16.d6 cxd6
26.d2 e5 27.c3 c7 28.g3 cd8 17.xd6 c8 18.xf6 gxf6 19.d5 e6
29.e1 f4 30.xf4 xf4 31.de2 g6 20.xe6 fxe6 21.h5+ d8 22.b6 c6
32.d1 f5 33.h5 c4 34.cc1 e5 23.xa8 xg2 24.c7 g1+ 25.d2
35.xd8 xd8 36.c3 xc3 37.xc4 d2 xf2+ 26.e2 e5 27.e6+ d7 28.e3
38.c2 bxc4 39.xc4 e5 40.c2 c6 g2 29.c5+ c7 30.f7 g8 31.e6+
41.f1 h6 42.f4 g7 43.g4 fxg4 d6 32.c5+ d7 33.xf8+ xf8
44.hxg4 g8 45.g2 f8 46.g3 d3+ 34.d5+ c7 35.e6 d8+ 36.e3 d7
47.h4 h6 48.f5 c3 49.e2 d4 50.f4 37.xe7 xe7 38.xe7 e8 39.xf6 e6
d1 51.e3 d2 52.e4 xf4 53.xf4 40.g7 e7 41.f6 e6 42.g7
h1+ 54.g3 e2+ 55.g2 xf4+ 1/2-1/2 Drasko,M-Gorbatow,A Arco 1999. ]
56.xh1 e5 57.g1 d5 0-1 Martin, A- [ 5...f6 6.f4 d8 7.g3 e6 8.g2 d6
Gorbatow,A Schwarzach 1999. ] 9.d2 bd7 10.0-0-0 b6 11.e4 xe4
4...d6 Most games reach this position via 12.xe4 d5 13.e5 f6 14.g2 xe5
the Scandinavian/Centre Counter move order 15.dxe5 xd2+ 16.xd2 g4 17.f4 b8
(1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd6 4. d4 a6) so 18.f3 h5 19.h3 e3 20.d3 f5
one could argue that we are straying out of 21.hd1 e7 22.c3 c6 23.cd3 f6
our territory a bit. It is worth doing a quick 24.h4 a5 25.a4 a8 26.e4 h6 27.f3
mention nonetheless, and I know that as f7 28.e3 d7 29.d4 fxe5 30.fxe5
97
af8 31.e2 g5 32.hxg5 fg8 33.f4 W ith a dynamic posting thanks to the
xg5 34.e2 h4 35.gxh4 xh4 36.f1 p re m a t u r e d 4 -d 5 . 10.c3 0-0 11.a4
h6 37.d3 b6 38.b3 c5 39.f4 c6 Pushing the bishop away but at the cost of a
40.d2 h2 41.e1 h6 42.f2 g1+ misplaced knight. d6 12.e3 At this point,
43.d2 gg2 44.xg2 xg2 45.d1 f5 White may well have had plans of a queenside
46.e1 f3+ 47.c1 d4 48.xf3 xf3 pawn expansion, but he isn't given time to
49.d1 e2 50.b2 d4 51.c1 d7 consolidate... cxd5 Ivanov has a combination
52.b1 c6 53.b2 b5 54.axb5+ xb5 in mind but I wonder if
55.c3 h2 56.b2 c4 57.bxc4+ xc4 [ 12...e7 is b e t t e r e . g . 13.ac1 cxd5
58.e1 e2 59.a1 c6 60.d3 b4 14.cxd5 xd5! 15.exd5 e4 with a good
61.xb4 xb4 62.h1 xe5 63.h4+ game. ]
c5 64.c3 d5 65.b3 e5 66.c3 d6 13.cxd5 xd5!? Aiming to simplify and
67.c4+ d5 68.a4 a6 69.c2 c5 damage White's centre. The piece is regained,
70.b3 a8 71.c4+ d5 72.a4 e4 but does this lose a pawn? 14.exd5 e4
73.c2 e5 74.d2 f4 75.e2 c8 15.c3?! Unambitious. The attempt at
76.xa5 xc3 77.a6 c2+ 78.d1 b2 refutation involves
79.a3 f2 80.e1 f3 81.a8 b3 [ 15.xe4 xe4 16.xb6! when Black has
82.h8 a3 83.e2 a2+ 84.e1 a3 some play for the pawn but nothing concrete
85.e2 1/2-1/2 Ghinda,M-Sygulski,A e.g. axb6 ( or 16...e7 17.fe1 fe8
Potsdam 1985. ] 18.e3 b4 19.ed1 ) 17.xe4 e8
6.f4 d7 7.a4 b4 8.e4 f6 9.2g3 18.d4 f4 19.c3 ]
xe4 10.xe4 d5 11.f3 c6 12.xc7 15...exf3 16.xf3 e5 17.e2 eg4!
xd4 13.b6 [ After 17...xd3 18.xd3 g4 19.h3
[ 13.c3 bxc3 14.bxc3 c6 ] xe3 20.xe3 I would also prefer Black
13...e5 14.c3 bxc3 15.bxc3 f5 16.d2 slightly, but the text leaves an extra pair of
e6 17.a5 f4 minor pieces on the board and thus enables
[ 17...c5 18.c4! ] Black to gain more pressure. ]
18.c4 c6 18.h3 xe3 19.xe3 e8 20.f3 e5
[ 18...d3+ 19.f1 d6 20.b3 ] 21.ac1 c8 Opposite bishops are often
19.0-0 c5+ 20.xc5 xc5+ 21.h1 e6 misunderstood. The standard obsession with
22.b3 e7 23.g3 drawish endgames masks the fact that with
[ 23.b6!? ] oth er p ie ces o n th e b oa rd t hey can b e a
23...ab8 24.a3 xa3 25.xa3 b2 powerful force for the player with the initiative.
26.xe6 xe6 27.c4 Here dark-square play is more relevant as
½-½ W hite's isolated d-pawn (stuck on a light
square) is more of a liability than an asset.
Indeed the simple plan of ...Rc5 and ...Qc7
122 B00 p u t s i t ' s l i f e i n i m m i n e n t d a n g e r . 22.a6
Stein,Alex 2362 Not an ideal square, but at least in this way
Ivanov,Alexander 2590 White holds onto the d-pawn. c5 23.fd1
7th Foxwoods Open (5) 25.03.2005 b5! Cutting the bishop off from the rest of
[Glenn Flear] W hite's forces. 24.d6 Enabling the queen to
come to the rescue.
1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 c6 [ 24.xb5?? xc3 ]
5.c3 e5 6.d5 An imprecision which already [ 24.xb5 is possible but Black then obtains
suggests that W hite was not prepared for a strong initiative with xc1 25.xc1 a5
Black's opening. 26.a3 d2! ]
[ After 6.f3 d6 W h a t e l s e ? 7.d5 24...a5 25.b7? Right square, wrong piece.
Black's dark-squared bishop cannot be Better is
developed outside of the pawn chain. ] [ 25.b7 e.g. b4 26.e4 xc1 27.xc1
6...e7 7.f3 g6 8.0-0 c6! 9.c4 c5 when although Black has good chances to
98
pick off a pawn in the complications, there 36.e3 a5 37.a3 g6 38.f2 h5 39.f4
would then be opposite bishops.. .. Naturally g4 40.h4 f5
one shouldn't get 'obsessed' with the idea, ½-½
but you never know, they could offer
drawing chances to White! ]
25...c6! 26.xb5 b6 27.c7 xb5! 124 B00
Two pieces for the rook is adequate for the Ter Sahakyan,S 2574
win. Petrosian,TL 2654
[ N o t h o w e v e r 27...xc3? 28.xd7! 74th ch-ARM 2014 (9.4) 21.01.2014
and W hite's d-pawn would be converted [Glenn Flear]
from a burden into a decisive passed
pawn. ] 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.c3 f6 4.d4 e5!?
28.xb5 xb5 29.xa7 xb2 30.a4 b4! A ve ry un u su al ch oice, a t t his p oin t, b u t
[ Instead 30...xd6 is also not bad, but the certainly a reasonable option. Black
t e x t l e a d s t o a d e c i s i ve w e a k e n i n g o f transposes to a sideline of the Scotch Four
White's kingside. ] Knights (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4
31.a5 f4 32.g3 f3 33.e3 a8! and now 4...d6!?). However the move order
A great square combining attack with the from the Nimzovich, as here, looks more
slowing down of the a-pawn. 34.a3 e4 logical!
35.a6 g5! Now it becomes clear why [ By opting for 4...g6 Black seeks a type of
provoking g2-g3 was so important. The light- Pirc Defence. The knight on c6 (so early) is
squares around white's king are indefensible. slightly unusual, but White's 'classical' set-
36.f4 d4+ 37.xd4 f3+ 38.f2 xd4 up isn't particularly aggressive. 5.e3 g7
The threat of ...Re2+ is too strong. 39.e1? 6.d2 g4 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 d5!? 9.exd5
Resigning before playing this move is less xd5 10.xd5 xd5 11.h3 f5 12.c4
humiliating. a5 Bjornsson, Si-Kristjansson, St Icelandic
0-1 league 2013, lef t W hite with only a tiny
space advantage. ]
[ The main line here is 4...g4 5.e3 e6
123 B00 6.h3 when White is able to keep a pull e.g.
Teixeira,Ricardo da Silva 2341 h5 7.d5 exd5 8.exd5 e5 9.g4 xf3+
Lima,Darcy 2525 10.xf3 g6 11.0-0-0 e7 12.d4
67th ch Teresina BRA (8) 14.12.2000 ( White has also scored well with the plan of
[Jon Tisdall] 12.g2 followed by f2-f4) 12...h6 13.h4
Kapnisis, S-Papadatos, I Paleochora 2013. ]
A solid and uninspired Hippopotamus - worth 5.h3 Avoiding ...Bg4 and thus maintaining a
c o m p a r i n g wi t h t h e e f f o rt s o f M i l e s a n d space edge. e7
McShane. A good illustration of how even the [ Here 5...exd4 makes sense (after White
oddest of openings can look distinctly h a s s p e n t a t e m p o o n t h e s lo w h 2 - h 3 )
respectable if enough care is exercised by 6.xd4 and then g6 gives a dynamic game
both sides. 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 that could have transposed from a Scotch,
4.ge2 d6 5.g3 g6 6.g2 g7 7.e3 d7 a Philidor, or Three Knights opening! The
8.d2 h6 9.h4 h5 10.0-0-0 e7 11.f3 b8 following involves both sides playing
12.f4 a6 13.g4 f6 14.gxh5 xh5 principled moves: 7.g4! g7 8.de2 h5!
15.xh5 xh5 16.e2 h7 17.f4 d7 9.g5 h7 10.f4 f6 11.h4 fxg5 12.hxg5
18.h5 gxh5 19.xh5 h8 20.xg7 xh1 g4 Vajda, L-Lu Shanglei, Golden Sands
21.xh1 xg7 22.f1 h8 23.xh8 xh8 2012, with chances for both sides. ]
24.c4 h1 25.g2 xg2 26.xg2 d5 6.d5
27.cxd5 exd5 28.h3+ d8 29.e5 c8 [ 6.b5!? looks more like it originated from a
30.f1 f5 31.g5+ d7 32.h3 c6 Spanish, Old Steinitz Variation, e.g. 1.e4 e5
33.xf5 xf5 34.d2 b5 35.c3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 etc). d7 7.d5 b8
99
8.xd7+ ( if W hite retreats with 8.d3 [ More natural is occupying the outpost with
B l a c k c a n h i t b a c k a n y w a y w i t h c6 ) 28...d4! ]
8...bxd7 9.e3 c6 10.d3 a5 11.0-0 29.e2 f7 30.a4 White has the 'threat' of
cxd5 12.exd5 0-0 13.d2 a6 14.a4 fc8= playing c2-c4 with a bind, so Black is 'honour
Sredojevic, I-Todorovic, GN Serbian league bound' to pre-empt this with his next move.
2011. ] d5! 31.c5 c8 32.e3 h6 33.c4!
6...b8 7.g3!? White breaks new ground Forcing Black's hand. d4!? A committal move,
already! b u t o n e t h a t sh o u ld b e go o d e n o u gh f o r
[ Other moves have been tried here, but it equality. 34.c1 a7 35.d3 c5 36.a4!?
certainly isn't clear where the light-squared A safe positional choice. White stabilizes the
bishop is best placed. Here is an example: queenside and now prepares to lay siege to c5,
7.e3 c5 8.dxc6!? (I might have been noting that e5 and a5 will also require
tempted to leave the structure intact and attention from his opponent. On the other
play a sort of Old Benoni with a space edge) hand, b3 and e4 will remain W hite's weak
bxc6 9.c4 0-0 10.0-0 a6 11.xa6 spots.
xa6 12.e2 c8 13.ad1 c7= [ 36.b4 axb4 37.axb4 cxb4 38.xb4
Nanu, C-Rasinaru, G Deva 1998. ] is more double-edged. ]
7...0-0 8.g2 c6 9.dxc6 bxc6 10.0-0 bd7 36...b6 37.c2 b7 38.e2 b8 39.a3
11.b3 A second fianchetto by White in an c6!? Sharpening the struggle.
erstwhile classical opening is a rare [ After 39...ec8 40.b1 I can't see how
o c c u rre n c e . c5 12.e1 e8= 13.b2 either player would be able to make
I'm not a great fan of placing a bishop on b2 progress. ]
against the d6-e5 wall, especially as f2-f4 40.b1 xa4 41.xc5 b7 42.d6!?
looks a long way off. Nevertheless, it [ Possibly 42.b4 xb3 43.xb3 axb4
essentially stops Black seeking any pawn 44.c5!? when I think that White's pieces are
breaks, so the players both go into slightly better than his opponent's, although
m a n o e u vrin g m o d e . b8 14.e2 f8 m y co m p u t e r o n ly c o n sid e rs t h is t o b e
15.ad1 c7 16.e3 a5 17.a3 b7 equal. ]
18.h2 bd8 19.g4 Not really worrying. 42...xb3 43.c1 c6? Sacrificing the
xg4 20.hxg4 c8 21.g5 g4 22.f3 exchange, but not in the best manner.
h3 23.g2 h5 24.c1 [ Promising is 43...bc8!? 44.a3 ( after
[ More enterprising than offering a repetition 44.c5 xc5 45.xc5 a4 White may miss
with 24.f3 but also suggesting that b2 his knight) 44...a4 45.c5 ( 45.xa4 xa4
wasn't such a great square after all. ] 46.xb7 xc4 leaves Black a clear pawn
24...e7 25.f4!? The tension mounts as ahead ) 45...xc5 46.xc5 c8 and Black
W h i t e go e s f o r ki n g sid e e xp a n si o n . e6 has excellent compensation for the
26.f2?! exch a n ge , e sp e cia lly a s t h e d -p a wn is
[ A f t e r t h e m o r e s o l i d 26.e2 xe2 mobile. ]
27.xe2 chances would have been 44.xb8 xb8 45.c5 a4 46.eb2 b5
balanced, but as W hite isn't then going 47.f1 The presence of the knight on d3
anywhere on the kingside this wouldn't have (rather than a bishop, see the previous note)
been a very coherent follow-up to his limits Black's options. So it seems that White
previous move. ] is the one seeking a way to make progress.
26...f6!? It's a wise idea to nibble away at c8 48.d1!? b8 49.c1! xd1?
White's pawns before he gets settled. Not good.
[ However it might have been better to have [ However 49...xc5 50.xb3 axb3
gone about this task in a diff erent way: 51.xb3 looks prospectless for Black. ]
26...exf4 27.gxf4 h6! as 28.gxh6 50.xb5 xb5 51.xb5 f8 52.b7
dro ps m ate rial t o h4 29.e2 c5+ The c-pawn is going to be more dangerous
30.e3 xe1 ] than the a-pawn, although having the only
27.gxf6 xf6 28.f5 g5?! rook helps! e8 53.d3 c2 54.c6 xd3
100
55.b8+ e7 56.c7 a6 57.c8 xc8 drops the e-pawn. e8 125.b5+ e7
58.xc8 Ter Sahakyan has noticed that the a- 126.c5 b6
pawn is going to drop. d6 59.f2 a3 [ After 126...d6 127.c6+ e7 128.a6
60.a8 c5 61.xa3 b4 62.a7 c5 Black is in Zugzwang. ]
63.e2 b6 64.a1 There is no immediate 127.xe5+ For the record, it was 66 moves
breakthrough, so W hite will have to think s i n c e W h i t e l a s t c a p t u r e d a p a w n ! d6
something up on the light squares. This will 128.e8 d3 129.e5+ d5 130.f6 gxf6
involve improving all his pieces one after 131.exf6 d2 A race, but one that Black will
another. f7 65.d3 d6 66.b1+ c5 not win. 132.a4 c5 133.d7!
67.f3 b5 68.h5 c3 69.b2 a4 [ Less clear is 133.f7 g6 134.b3+ d4
70.b1 d6 71.f3 c6 72.c1+ b5 135.d7 f8+ as White's king doesn't have
73.b1+ c6 74.b4 c5+ 75.c4 d7 an easy route to the kingside. ]
76.h5 b6+ 77.d3 c5 78.b1 a4 133...g6 The f8-square is covered, but
79.e8 Finally the bishop is ready to take on a Black's knight is not comfortable here.
more active role, thus limiting Black's knight 134.b3+ d4 135.e6 f4+ 136.f7
to a certain extent. c3 80.a1 b4 81.c6 Now Kf7-g7xh6 is a threat. g2 137.d1
c5 82.d5!? b4 e3 138.f3 d3
[ 82...xd5? makes life easy for White after [ 138...d1 goes down to 139.xd1 xd1
83.a5+ ] 140.d8+ ]
83.a8 d1 84.b8+ c5 85.c8+ b4 139.g6 d1 140.d8+ d4 141.xd1
86.c4+ b5 There is no apparent c4
Zugzwang and no pawn breaks available, so [ 141...xd1 142.f7 ]
White will need all three pieces to squeeze 142.e2+ Time to call it a day!
away at Black's king. This takes time, indeed, 1-0
lo t s o f t i m e ! 87.c2 g5 88.c7 f6
89.b7+ c5 90.b1 f2+ 91.e2 g4
92.b3 g5 93.c2 c4 94.b7 f6 125 B00
95.c7+ b5 96.d3+ b6 97.d7 e3 Therkildsen,Thomas 2108
98.d2 c6 99.a7 g4 100.c2 f2 Philippe,Christophe 2357
101.a1 g5 102.a6+ b7 103.e6 f6 IM Le Touquet FRA (7) 31.10.2001
104.e2 h1 [Jon Tisdall]
[ 104...xe4?? 105.f3 ]
105.g4 It was 44 moves since the last pawn 1.e4 c6 2.f3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.h4
mo ve , s o it wa s a bo ut tim e! No w h e h a s The attempt at outright refutation option. This
another 50 moves to try and make further generally leads to massive chaos and black's
inroads. f2 106.f3 c7 107.a6 e7 outnumbered forces very active. Despite this,
[ More natural is 107...b7 ] I have a feeling a cool head should be able to
108.a7+ d6 109.b3 f6 110.c4 t a ke t h e m o n e y a n d ru n , b u t p ro vid e a n
The king is advancing up the board. This overview of games in the line to help arm
finally feels like progress. c6 111.a6+ potential players of either side of this line. e5
b7 112.a2 h3 113.g2 f4 114.f1 5.h5+ g6 6.fxg6 f6 7.g5
b6 115.a1 e7 116.a8 b7 117.a5 [ 7.g7+ xh5 8.gxh8 xh4
f6 118.b5 e7 119.a2 f6 120.a1 A) 9.c3 f5 10.g3 d4 11.e2 0-0-0
c7 121.c1+ d6 122.b6 d8+ 12.b5 e4 13.f3 xc2 14.g8 a6
123.b7 e7?! 15.d1 c5 16.f7 d7 17.xh5 axb5
[ Better is 123...f6! 124.c6+ 18.a3 d4 19.g5 e4 20.e3 g7
( 124.c8!? ) 124...e7 125.c4 d7 21.fxe4 e8 22.d3 dxe4 23.dxe4 h3
126.b5 e7 127.c7 and White probes 24.d2 xb2 25.c3 xe4 26.xb2
away, but hasn't found a chink in the xe3+ 27.e2 e7 28.d1 b4 29.axb4
armour...yet! ] xb4 30.a8+ d7 31.h8 f5 32.f1
124.c8 Black is now too tangled and soon g6 33.f3 e7 34.d3 f7 35.f5+
101
d6 36.xh7 d5 37.d3 e1+ 38.c2 59.e8+ d7 60.e3 g2+ 61.f7
e2+ 39.c1 e1+ 40.d1 e2 g1 62.d3+ c7 63.f8 f1 64.f7
41.d7+ 1-0 Lambert, A-Mueller,H GER g1 65.d5 c6 66.d4 c7 67.e7
1996.; e1+ 68.f6 f1+ 69.e6 c6
B) 9.b5 e4+ 10.f1 f4 ( 10...h3 70.c4+ b7 71.c5 1-0 Lalic,S-Toll,A
11.g1 0-0-0!? ) 11.f3 f5 12.d4 g6 St Heliers 1997.;
13.xh7 xc2 14.c3 f5 15.xd5 C2) 10...d8 11.g3 ( 11.d3 f4
d1+ 16.f2 xd4+ 17.e3 0-0-0 12.g8 e8 13.xf4 xf4 14.a3
18.d1 c5 19.xd8+ xd8 20.c4 e6 15.g3 xa3 16.xf4 exf4
d4 21.h5 e7 22.e1 d7 23.h7 17.bxa3 xc2+ 18.d2 xa1 19.e2
ec6 24.e4 b4+ 25.e2 d6 26.a3 d4 20.f3 d7 21.xa1 h8 22.e1
d4+ 27.f2 c5 28.b4 b6 29.b2 c5 23.e4 f8 24.e5 d6 25.g5
1-0 Samoilov,I-Ferencz,I Budapest 1998.; b5 26.g6 e5 27.g7 f7 28.g8
C) 9.xh7 d4 10.g6+ ( 10.c3!? c4 29.b8 a6 30.a8 c7 31.xa6
g4? 11.xd5 f5 12.xh5+ xh5 c3+ 32.c2 xa2 33.h6 b3+
13.f6+ e7 14.xh5 xc2+ 15.d1 34.c1 a7 35.d1 xa3 36.h5+
xa1 16.d3 a5 17.g5+ f7 18.e2 d6 37.xb3 xb3 38.f5 b2
e6 19.a3 b3 20.g3 c5 21.e3 39.xf4 e5 40.f8 b4 41.b8 xf2
d4 22.c2 a6 23.e4 c6+ 24.b1 42.xb4 xg2 43.b5+ f4 44.h5
d5 25.f3 xe4 26.xe4 b6 f2 0-1 Pavasovic,D-Gross,G Bled
27.d5+ e7 28.xb3 xb3 29.xd4 1995. ) 11...g4 12.xg4 xg4 13.d3
exd4 30.c2 b5 31.e1+ f7 32.e4 ( 13.g2 xc2+ 14.f1 xa1
d5 33.h4 c5 34.a4 f5 35.f3 f8 15.xd5 c6-+ 16.g2 f5 17.c3
36.b3 f7 37.c4 1-0 Salmensuu,O- d3+ 18.g1 c2 19.e4 e1
Porrasmaa,T Helsinki 1997.; 10.d3?! e4 20.xd3 xd3 21.g2 f6 22.f3 c5
11.g6+ d8 12.g8 e7 13.b3 e6 23.h4 e7 24.g4 g8 25.h5 xh5
14.a3+ d7 15.h7+ g7 16.c3 f5 26.xh5 f4+ 27.h2 xh5 28.gxh5
17.g3 g4 18.h3 f3 19.xh5 xh5 h8 29.d3 xh5+ 30.g2 d4
20.g4 xg4 0-1 Berg,E-Johansson,R 31.e2 e6 32.f4 h8 33.fxe5 xe5
Stockholm 1994. ) 34.f3 d5 35.f4+ xf4 36.xf4 a5
C1) 10...e7 11.d3 f4 12.xf4 37.e2 b5 38.a3 h3 39.e3 h2+
( 12.g3 f6 13.d1 f5 14.f3 40.f2 c5 41.e3 a4 42.f3 c4
h4 15.g3 f5 16.f3 h4 17.g3 43.dxc4+ xc4 0-1 Sorsa,N-Kiik,K Pori
1/2-1/2 McAleer,J-Toll,A Viborg 1996.) 1997. ) 13...e4 14.c3 f3+ 15.f1
12...xf4 13.c3 xc2+ 14.d1 b4 h3+ 16.e2 g2 17.d1 exd3+
15.g3 d4 16.e3 g4+ 17.e2 18.xd3 d7 19.c2 e8 20.d3
h6 18.xd4 xe2+ 19.xe2 exd4 e1+
20.xd4 f8 21.e2 g7 22.f3 d6 C2a) 21.d2 h6+ 22.f4
23.hd1 c5 24.a3 c6 25.ac1 xb2 C2a1) 22...xf4 23.xe1 xe1
26.b1 xa3 27.xb7 b4 28.h4 a5 ( 23...h3+ 24.c2 ) 24.gxf4!;
29.a1 e8+ 30.f1 c3 31.a2 d4 C2a2) 22...f3+ 23.c2 xh2;
32.b6+ c7 33.g6 xf3 34.gxf3 C2b) 21.b3 f3 22.d2 h6 23.d4
h8 35.e2 d7 36.ee6 xh4 xd2 24.xd2 d1+ 0-1 Jahr,U-
37.a6 h1+ 38.g2 h8 39.a7+ Poethig,H Germany 1982. ]
c8 40.f4 b8 41.f7 d8 42.f5 b4 [ 7.d1 c5 8.g7 g8 9.e2 xg7
43.b6+ a8 44.f6 c4 45.dxc4 d4 10.h5+ f8 11.d4 xd4 12.h6
46.a6+ b8 47.c5 xc5 48.xa5 1 / 2 - 1 / 2 R o d r i g u e z L o p e z, R - F e r e n c z , I
d5 49.f3 d3 50.xc5 xc5 51.e3 Budapest 1998. An odd result since xb2-+
f5 52.xd3 xf2 53.e4 c8 seems to win. ]
54.e5 d8 55.f8+ d7 56.a8 7...c5
e2+ 57.f5 f2+ 58.g6 e6 [ 7...e7? 8.b5 d6 9.b3 b4 10.xc6+
102
bxc6 11.0-0 h6 12.g7 g8 13.g6+ d8 24.h5 h6

14.f3 a6 15.xe5 1-0 Vidarsson,J-Ulvin, 0-1
D Gausdal 1988. ]
8.d3
[ 8.d4!? xd4 Black loses some of his 126 B00
initiative by not having the threat/option of Tian Tian 2224
playing the N to d4 later, so perhaps the Bordas,Gyula 2186
m o r e d r a s t i c ( 8...xd4!? should be FSIMB December (1) 02.12.2000
considered, when 9.xe5+ d7 10.d1 [Jon Tisdall]
e8 is interesting.) 9.d3 e4 10.e2
e6 ( 10...g8!? ) 11.c3 hxg6 12.b5 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
e5 13.xg6 g8 14.h6 xg6 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.h3 h5 8.d5 exd5
15.xg6+ f7 16.f5 a6 17.c3 d6 9.exd5 xf3 10.xf3 e5 This kind of
18.f4 exf3 19.xf3 ( 19.xf3 ) 19...d4 position is quite solid for black if white has
20.d3 e6 21.e3 f5 22.xd4 xd4 committed his king to castling short. 11.e2
23.xd4 c5 24.xf6 xf6 25.0-0-0 d4 0-0 12.e3 a6
26.d5 g5+ 27.b1 0-0-0 28.h4 xc2+ [ 12...c5 13.a4 a6 14.b1 d7 15.c4
29.xc2 f5+ 30.c1 xd5 31.xd5 ae8 16.c3 d8 17.a5 g6 18.b1
xd5 32.h5 xa2 33.h6 d3 34.h7 c4+ c8 19.e1 d7 20.d3 f6 21.c2
35.d2 c2+ 36.e3 e2+ 37.f4 f2+ e5 22.f3 g3 23.xg6 hxg6 24.e2 e5
38.e4 e2+ 39.d5 xg2+ 40.xc5 25.f2 f6 26.g4 h5 27.gxh5 xh3
c2+ 41.d4 xb2+ 42.xd3 28.e4 h2+ 29.h1 g3+ 30.g1 f5
1/2-1/2 Brendel,O-Gross,G Germany 1996. ] 31.e6 h2+ 32.h1 gxh5 33.ae1 e5+
8...d4 34.g1 xe6 35.dxe6 h2+ 36.h1 f4+
[ 8...e7!? 9.e2 d7 ( 9...g8!? ) 10.0-0 37.g1 f6 38.g3 g6 0-1 Spisak,C-
( 10.f5?? xf5 11.xf5 d4 ) 10...0-0-0 Przewoznik,J Lubniewice 1995. ]
11.f5 e6 12.g7 he8 13.h6 e7 13.d4 fd7 14.f4 c5 15.dxc6 xc6
14.c3 d4 15.h5 xh5 16.xh5 c6 16.f2 f6 17.a3 d5 18.f3 c7 19.xd5
17.e3 xc2 18.ac1 b4 19.xa7 xd5 20.xd5 xf4 21.b6 e5 22.e1
xd3 20.b6 f4 21.f7 xh6 22.xd5 xb2 23.b1 xa3 24.xc6 bxc6 25.b3
e2+ 23.h1 e6 24.xe7+ xe7 d6 26.d3 b4 27.b3 c5+ 28.h1
25.f8 ee8 26.f3 xc1 27.a3 xa2 c4 29.a5 ae8 30.xe8 xe8 31.d3
28.d6 e6 0-1 Jurkovic, A-Tribuiani,R h6 32.d2 b8 33.h2 e7 34.c3 g5
Nereto 1998. Presumably black lost rather 35.e2 e6 36.f1 b5 37.f3 e7
than white losing on time in this position. ] 38.d3 d6+ 39.xd6 xd6+ 40.g1
9.d1 b1+ 41.f2 c1 42.d3 xc2+ 43.f3
[ 9.xe5+!? d7 ( 9...e7 10.xe7+ c5 44.g4 f2+ 45.e4 e2+ 46.f3 e8
xe7 11.d1 g4 12.e3 xe3+ 47.h4 e6 48.g5 hxg5 49.hxg5 d6
13.fxe3 g4+ 14.d2 ) 10.d1 e8 50.e4 xd3 51.xd3 h7
11.f4 and black has yet to justify his 0-1
sacrifices. By comparison to the note above
in Brendel-Gross, black has a pawn less and
no access to e4. ] 127 B00
9...d6 10.c3 c6 11.e2 e6 12.g7 g8 Tkachiev,Vladislav 2575
13.h6 e7 14.g5 d7 15.h5+ d8 Minasian,Artashes 2540
16.h3?! xh5 17.xe7+ xe7 18.xh5 op Cannes 1995
xg7 Black's lead in development is [Alexander Volzhin]
uncomfortable for white. 19.g4 f6 20.d2
f8 21.f1?? 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.c3 e6
[ 21.hf3 ] 5.f3 b4 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0
21...g5 22.xh7+ f7-+ 23.g6+ xg6 xc3 9.bxc3 d6 10.d2 e5! The main line.
103
As we have seen in previous games Black's to avoid a quick loss.

attempts to deviate from it are hardly [ For example, both 15...dxc3? 16.e6! 0-0
s u f f i c i e n t . 11.f4 exd4 The most popular ( 16...fxe6 17.e5! xe5 18.g6+ e7
continuation. 12.e5 dxe5 13.fxe5 19.f7+ ) 17.exf7+ xf7 18.c4 ]
[ 13.h5 the main alterna tive, was played in [ and 15...xf3 16.xf3 xe5 17.cxd4 e7
Ionescu - Smyslov, Sochi 1986. However, in 18.e1! ( borrowing Sepp's idea) xe1+
my opinion this move is inferior to the text: 19.xe1+ d8 ( 19...f8 20.g6 ) 20.xf7
g6! ( Grabbing the second pawn is too are clearly insufficient for Black. ]
d a n g e r o u s : 13...exf4 14.ae1+ f8 [ However, 15...c6 is worthy of
15.e4 , and White's attack is very strong.) consideration, after 16.cxd4 0-0-0 17.c3
14.e2 ( The endgame af ter 14.xe5+ e7!? a position with mutual chances arises.
xe5 15.fxe5 dxc3 16.e4 d7 Of course, this line needs practical tests. ]
is clearly better for Black.) 14...c6 15.fxe5 16.cxd4 d7! Black has successfully
e7 16.e6 f5! ( 16...xe6 17.xe6+ fxe6 completed his development and has sufficient
18.xg6+ and White has some co u n t e rc h a n c e s d u e t o h i s s t r o n g l ig h t -
compensation.) 17.b3 0-0-0 Black has squa re d Bisho p. His on ly p ro b le m is t h e
successfully completed his development and vulnerable position of his Queen. The position
k e p t t h e e x t r a p a w n . 18.cxd4 xd4 af ter Black's 16th move is critical for the
19.xd4 xd4 20.e5 evaluation of the whole line.
A) The easiest route to the win was by [ In one of the first games in this line (Dautov
l i q u i d a t i n g t o t h e e n d g a m e : 20...c5! - Kengis, Daugavpils, 1989) Black played
21.xc5 Forced. ( 21.xh8+? d8+ ) the inaccurate 16...c5? which was refuted
21...bxc5 and soon Black will win the weak by force: 17.e1! xf3 ( The alternatives
e6-pawn.; a re n o b e t t e r : 17...f2 18.e4! xe4
B) 20...hd8?! 21.ae1 a4? 19.xe4 and Black's Queen is trapped as he
A m is t a k e a ga in . ( 21...4d6 ) 22.b5 can't stop Re2; 17...f4 18.d5! xd5
xa2 23.d1! Now Black is in trouble. 19.h7+ xh7 20.xd5 a6 21.d3+
xc2 24.xd8+ xd8 25.d7+ b8 winning a piece.) 18.gxf3 xd4 19.e4
26.d1! It becomes clear that Black has a6 20.xd4 cxd4 21.xa8 xa8
overestimated the strength of his Rook on 22.ad1 and White won this endgame. ]
the seventh rank. He cannot create real 17.h4 Probably not the best move. It's
threats for White's King, while White's e- obvious drawback is that Black's Queen is
pawn is unstoppable. g8 27.b5 a6 le s s re st ri ct e d a n d ca n o c cu p y t h e v e r y
28.e7 xg2+ 29.f1 b3 30.e8+ a7 comfortable g5-square.
31.e2 h3 32.e1 h4+ 33.d2 [ However,the natural 17.c3 is also not so
g5+ 34.c3 , and Black resigned. ] clear: ad8 ( 17...e4?! 18.c4
13...g5 14.f3 e3+ The only move. intending e6, and White is better.) 18.c2
[ 14...xf3? 15.xf3 xe5 16.e1! d5 19.ae1 f4 and I can't see how
Probably Black underestimated this move. W hite can exploit the unsafe position of
White's attack is very strong even after the Black's Queen. ]
Qu e en swa p . f6 ( 16...xe1+ 17.xe1+ 17...g5 Now Black has little to worry about.
f8 18.g6 and W hite wins.) 17.cxd4 At the right moment he can play c7-c5
xe1+ 18.xe1+ d8 19.fe3 undermining W hite's pawn centre. 18.e1
Now White's Rook is ready to penetrate to ae8 19.f2 d5! Provoking c2-c4 which
the seventh rank, while Black's forces are makes White's centre more vulnerable. 20.c4
u n d e v e l o p e d a n d u n c o o r d i n a t e d . d7 b7 21.f5 c8 22.ae1 c5! 23.xd7
20.g6 c8 21.e8+ b7 22.e4+ c6 [ 23.e6 is the alternative, but it doesn't give
23.e7 and Black couldn't avoid huge White anything: fxe6 24.xe6 f6 25.xe8
material losses in Sepp-Vetemaa, Brugge xe8 and Black has everything in order ]
1995. ] [ The position after 23.xd7 xd7 24.f3
15.h1 0-0 Black should play very carefully ( 24.d5?! g4! is dangerous for White as
104
it's not clear how he should protect the c4- 9.c4 0-0 10.c3 d6 11.ad1 d7
pawn. ) 24...f4 25.dxc5 xc4 26.cxb6 12.e2 e7 13.b4 f5 14.c2 f6
axb6 27.xb6 xa2 is equal, so a draw 15.b5 f4 16.d2 c6? ( 16...a6! )
wa s a g r e e d . A s h o r t b u t t h e o r e t i c a l l y 17.xd6! xd6 18.e5 e7 19.exd6 xd6
important game. ] 20.c5 e7 21.fe1 b5 22.e2 f7
½-½ 23.de1 f8 24.e4 g5 25.h4 h6
26.hxg5 hxg5 27.e5 e8 28.c3 c8
29.xc6 1-0 Karaklajic,N-Puschmann,L
128 B00 Budapest 2000. ]
Tukmakov,Vladimir B 2582 5...c8!? This looks like an improvement over
McShane,Luke J 2480 [ 5...e7 6.h4 d6 7.bd2 c6 8.c3 f6
22nd Open Arbo ITA (7) 27.10.2000 9.e2 d7 10.h6 f8 11.g5 e7
[Jon Tisdall] 12.c4! h6 13.f4 f6 14.h5 g5 15.g3
e7 16.e3 g7 After much toing and
1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 g6 froing Black has again achieved the h6+g5
[ 4...d6 5.0-0 d7 6.c4 g6 7.c3 g7 double f ianchetto f ormation. It is worth
8.e3 e7 looks inspired by the heroic noting that despite white's rather indirect
efforts of Miles against Baburin seen in the a p p ro a c h , h e s e e m s t o h a ve g a i n e d a
p r e v i o u s r e p o r t . 9.c1 Compare with definite advantage - in particular the Ne3 is
Baburin-Miles and Ehlvest-Baburin - here wonderfully posted, and it is really this piece
white has not had to play either a3 or h3, which black must neutralize - it renders
and black has also left out these little moves. virtually all central pawn breaks by black
Mc S h a n e , li k e M il e s, h a s t h e n o s e f o r impossible by having access to f5 and d5,
danger in these positions, and is quick to a n d d 6 via c4 . 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.d2
pre-empt expansion with d4-d5, avoiding f8?! A p l a n l e s s i n t e r l u d e . 19.dc4
the horrible squeeze that befell Baburin. c5! ( 19.a6!? ) 19...b8 20.c2 e7 21.f3
10.d2 0-0 11.fd1 b8 12.b1 d8 c8 22.h2 hd8 23.g4 a6 24.e2 b5?!
13.dxc5 dxc5 14.g5 f6 15.f4 e5 This seems -advised, but this is not a strain
16.xe5 xd2 17.xb8 xd1+ 18.xd1 of the English Defence for nothing. It seems
xb8 19.d7 f8 Black would have a that if you carry the proper passport all
pleasant position if he could evict the rook, manner o f really outra geous goings-o n
but this beast has arrived to stay, so it is merely lead to complete pandemonium,
wh i t e w h o e n j o y s t h e b e t t e r c h a n c e s . whereas if some f oreigner were to give
McShane can never quite get the piece out these things a try, total disaster would be
of his hair. 20.c2 a6 21.a4 f7 22.f1 likely to result. But black's problem is still
h6 23.d1 g5 24.h3 f8 25.d7 h6 finding something to do, and this is very
26.e2 a8 27.g3 g7 28.g4 b7 29.h4 d i f f i c u l t i n d e e d wi t h t h e wh i t e k n i g h t s
f8 30.e3 h5 31.hxg5 hxg4 32.gxf6 constantly in his face. 25.d5 ce5 26.a5
h6+ 33.d3 xf6 34.e5+ f7 35.h2 c5 27.a4?! ( 27.dxc6 xc6 28.a4!? or;
f4 36.xg4 f3 37.f6 xe5 38.fe4 27.xb7 xb7 28.b3 would scare the
xe4+ 39.xe4 xc3 40.bxc3 b5 41.cxb5 hell out of me if I were black, particularly
axb5 42.b3 f6 43.d6 c4 44.d1 d5 the former.) 27...c4 28.axb5 axb5 29.d2
45.d4 e7 46.e5 xc3 47.xe6+ f8 c5 30.e1 c7 31.a1 b6 32.g1
48.c2 xa2 49.f6+ e7 50.a6 b4 c7 33.b4 cxb3 34.xb3 d7 35.b1
51.a7+ f8 52.e4 d8 53.f6 d6+ e8 36.d4 a6 37.f1 a5 38.g2
54.e5 h6 55.b7 c3 56.c7 c2 cd3 39.dxe6 ( 39.xd3!? xc3 40.xb5+
57.xc2 c6 1/2-1/2 Bagaturov,G-McShane, xb5 41.d2 d3!? ) 39...xc3 40.exf7+
L Arco ITA 2000. ] xf7 41.d2 f4+ 42.g3 b4! 43.xa6
5.g5 xa6 44.ef5 ( 44.xb4 d3 45.b2
[ 5.0-0 g7 6.g5 f6 7.e3 h6 8.d2 xd4 46.xd4 e2+ 47.h3 with at least
f7 An interesting twist on the trendy Hippo. a draw for black.) 44...c4 45.d1 e5
105
46.a1 a3 47.f2 a8 48.xa3 bxa3 thing and consolidates his chunky centre
49.b3 d5 50.exd5 b8 51.d1 b2 and gets his king to safety. ]
52.c6 xh5+ 53.g2 f4+ 54.g1 a2 20.d4 0-0 21.hxg5 hxg5 22.c4!? c5
55.xe5+ xe5 56.xh6+ e8 57.f5 23.bxc5 bxc5 24.b5!
a1 0-1 Gofshtein,L-McShane,L Arco ITA [ 24.e6
2000. Very impressive tenacity from A) 24...xf5!?
McShane, but a unjust end to some A1) 25.xf8 xg3 26.fxg3 xf8
sophisticated strategical handling f rom ( 26...d4!? 27.d5 xd5 ) 27.cxd5
Gofshtein. ] xd5 28.xd5 d8;
[ 5...f6!? ] A2) 25.xf5;
6.bd2 d6 7.0-0 g7 8.c3 d7 9.e1 B) 24...d4!?;
Another solid, Russian kind of deployment - C) 24...xe6 25.fxe6 xe6 26.cxd5
white is well placed to move in if black tries to fxd5 27.c4 ad8 28.xd5 xd5
take a stake in the centre, and in the 29.b1 ]
meantime, white plans to inch forward. This 24...d4 25.d6 d7 26.g4 xf5?!
position is a bit easier to play for black than I t a p p e a rs t h a t b la ck f in a ll y slip s in t h i s
the rather grim version McShane got against incredibly complex battle.
Gofshtein - for one thing he knows where [ 26...e3!? should keep black in with full
White's king lives very early, and the Bg5 is chances:
floating a bit. h6 10.h4 e7 11.d5 e5 A) 27.fxe3 xf5 28.xf6+ xf6
12.b4 g5 13.g3 f5 Black appears to have 29.g4!? ( 29.xf5 xf5 30.d3 d7 )
achieved very reasonable chances - the Bg5 29...e6 30.e4! e7 31.xf6+ xf6
has been walled in and the Bb7 is liberated - 32.exd4 e3!? ( 32...xd4 33.h5 );
but black's position is a bit loose and the e4 B) 27.xf7 xg4 28.xg4 xf7 ]
square will be useful for white. 14.exf5 xd5 27.xf6+ xf6 28.xe4 g6 29.g4 c6
[ 14...xd5 15.d4!? ] 30.xg5 g7 31.e4 f5 32.f4
15.c4 f6 16.e3 f7! [ 32.xf6+ ]
[ 16...b7 17.c4 is rather unpleasant as it 32...d3 33.ad1
is not easy to shake off the pressure on the [ 33.xf6+ ]
light squares without loosening his position 33...d4 34.xd3 ae8 Now black gets
further. xf5? 18.xf5 xf5 19.xe5+- ] some practical chances thanks to white's
17.h4!? e4 exposed queen and the sof t spot on f 2. I
[ 17...gxh4 seems to give white the better of assume time pressure was a major factor after
it after either recapture. ] all this. 35.h4 e6! 36.e2 h6
18.b5+ c6 19.f1 A very neat idea. d5! Black's counterplay has now reached serious
[ 19...exf3 looks a bit too risky: proportions.
A) 20.c4 xc4 21.xe7+ xe7 [ 36...fe8 37.de1 ]
22.xd6+ ( 22.xd6+ e8 23.xc4 37.f4 g6! With a vicious threat to double
xf5 ) 22...e8 23.xc4 d7 on the h-file, as well as ... Bxe4 followed by ...
and black defends.; Qxg3. 38.h4 g4??
B) 20.xd6 e4 ( 20...fg8 might be [ 38...xe4! 39.xe4 xe4 40.xe4 xh4!
possible - it also might be forced - but would have completed black's fight back. ]
just looks too passive. I can understand 39.f6+! xf6 40.xf6 h5 41.b8+ f7
someone not wishing to contemplate a 42.c7+
position where this has to be played.) 1-0
21.c4 xf5 22.gxf3 xc4 23.xc4
B1) 23...xc3 24.xe4 f6 ( 24...h7
25.d3!+- ) 25.xe7 xe7 26.xe7+!
xe7 27.d4!+-;
B2) 23...xd6 24.xd6+-
Nice variations - Black does the sensible
106
129 B00 33.xb6 axb6 34.e3 d2+ 35.g3 g8

Valet,Richard 2148 36.e7 xb2 37.xc7 xa2 38.xc4 c2
Barmbold,Jens 2270 39.g4
72nd ch Seebad Heringsdorf GER (7) 23.11.00 ½-½
[Jon Tisdall]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3 f6 130 B00

5.e2 c5 Van Wely,Loek 2700
[ 5...b4+!? is an interesting way to prevent McShane,Luke J 2460
a knight coming to c3-d5. 6.bd2 xf3+ Dutch Open Blitzchess blitz (4) 24.02.2001
7.xf3 e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.c4 d6 10.c3 [Jon Tisdall]
c5 11.e3 xe3 12.xe3 e6 13.g3
e5 14.d2 ad8 15.fe1 c6 16.g2 Included for the sake of occasion and
c5 17.ad1 b6 18.b3 d5 19.exd5 completeness - it is always interesting to see
xd5 20.xd5 xd5 21.xd5 xd5 such a daring defence roll up such a big name,
22.e2 xd1 23.xd1 c7 24.d2 e8 even if just in a ratty blitz game. More
25.d7 b8 26.d4 c5 27.f4 f8 28.h4 evid en ce to su gge st t ha t t his o pe n in g is
b6 29.d5 c7 30.a4 1/2-1/2 Kudrin,S- McShane's calling. 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3
Benjamin,J/Reykjavik 1986 ] e6 4.f3 d6 5.0-0 d7 6.e2 e7 7.h4
6.0-0 e7 h6 8.e1 g6 9.bd2 g7 10.f1 0-0
[ 6...xf3+ looks much better, as seen in the 11.1h2 c5 12.c3 cxd4 13.cxd4 c6 14.a3
next note - it hampers white from expanding c8 15.e3 f6 16.ad1 h5 17.g5 e7
so quickly on the kingside. ] 18.b1 a5 19.hf3 g4 20.f4 c4
7.xe5 21.e5 dxe5 22.dxe5 b5 23.e4 xe4
[ 7.c3 xf3+ 8.xf3 d6 9.e2 0-0 24.xe4 cxe5 25.xe5 xe5 26.g5 f6
10.a4 b6 11.xb6 axb6 12.a3 d7 27.d2 c7 28.g3 d4 29.f4 xf2+
13.e3 c6 14.d4 h4 15.f3 g6 30.g2 e5 31.g5 xe1 32.xe1 c5
16.d2 f4 17.c4 a5 18.e3 g6 33.f1 fd8 34.f3 d7 35.b1 cd8
19.f2 f6 20.b4 h5 21.a4 f4 22.e3 36.a2 f8 37.h1 d6 38.g2 e4
g5 23.b5 d7 24.g4 h4 25.h1 h3 39.e2 c6 40.h3 e3 41.f4 f2+
26.d4 g6 27.c3 h5 28.d4 h7 42.xf2 exf2 43.h2 c5 44.f3 f1
29.e5 f4 30.exd6 hxg4 31.fxg4 xg4 45.xf1 c2+
32.d3 xd3 33.f6 f3+ 34.g1 xd4 0-1
0-1 Al Hadarani,H-Cobb,J Elista 1998. ]
7...xe5 8.c3 0-0 9.h1 d6 10.f4 d4
11.xd4? This relieves black of his main 131 B00
worry, the wandering queen. Van den Doel,Erik 2547
[ 11.d3 poses black more problems. b6 Kogan,Artur 2504
12.a4 a6 13.e2 c5 14.b3 h5 15.b2 VI Open Lisboa POR (9) 26.11.2000
g4 16.f5 f6 17.e1 xe2 18.xe2 e8 [Jon Tisdall]
19.c4+ h8 20.f3 c6 21.e6 g8
22.h4 d8 23.d1 e7 24.h3 h6 1.e4 c6 2.b5 This is seen more often
25.g4 1-0 Jakovlev, D-Zubkov,K Moscow than I would have thought. Black's play in this
1996. ] game leads to a very interesting position. f6
11...xd4 12.b5 b6 13.c3 c6 14.a3 3.d3 d4 4.a4 b5 This is a kind of weird
f5 15.exf5 xf5 16.c4+ h8 17.d2 mirrored and reversed Trompovsky ... 5.c3
ae8 18.ae1 e4 19.e2 d5 20.h3 e7 bxa4 6.cxd4 a6 7.c3 a3 8.b3 c5
21.h2 f5 22.f3 xf3 23.xe8 xe8 9.dxc5 a5 10.ge2 e6 11.d2 xc5
24.xf3 e2 25.d3 h4 26.c4 xg2+ 12.a4 b4 13.xb4 xb4+ 14.d2 b5
27.h1 g1+ 28.h2 g2+ 29.h1 g1+ B l a c k s e e m s t o h a ve a r e l a t i ve l y a c t i v e
30.h2 f3+ 31.xf3 dxc4 32.e3 d1 position, but the a-pawn will be a serious
107
weakness sooner or later, and black has no counterplay on the kingside. xg6 26.f3 h4
real targets. 27.f4 hxg3 28.fxg3 xf4 29.xf4 c6
[ 14...xd2+!? 15.xd2 d6 16.hc1 d7 30.a2 and now control of the a-file proves to
17.e5!? ] be the pivotal aspect of the position. f8
15.d1 0-0 16.ec3 h5 17.0-0 g4 [ 30...gh6 31.b4 h5 32.g4
18.h3 e5 19.e3 fc8 20.f4 c6 21.f2 threatening to break through on e6. ]
b4 22.d4 c7 23.d5 exd5 24.d4 b8 31.ea1 g8 32.a7 e8 33.h4+- g7
25.xd5 xd5 26.xd5 h4 27.c5 b5 34.xg7+ xg7 35.g4+ g6 36.xe6
28.e5 e7 29.f5 f6 30.e4 h8 31.d4 e8 37.d7+ g8 38.xc6 e3 39.a8+
c1+ 32.h2 c6 33.exf6 gxf6 34.xf6 g7 40.d7+ h6
1-0 1-0
132 B00 133 B00

Van der Wiel,John TH 2495 Vitic,Ivan 2332
Hoogendoorn,Joost 2388 Mestrovic,Zvonimir 2387
sf ch Leeuwarden NED (3.2) 10.03.2002 TCh Medulin CRO (5) 13.09.2002
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.f3 d7 1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4
5.c3 5.e3 e5 6.b5 d7 7.d5 xf3
[ 5.e2 f6 6.0-0 e6 7.c3 ge7 8.b4 g6 A very unusual move, and a sign that
9.b5 a5 10.a4 b6 11.e3 a6 12.bd2 Mestrovic's various experiments in the Ncb8
h5 13.fe1 f7 14.f1 e7 15.3d2 h4 line have not satisfied him. 8.gxf3!?
16.g4 hxg3 17.fxg3 h3 18.ab1 fxe5 [ 8.xf3 e7 9.0-0-0 a6 10.xd7+
19.dxe5 f5 20.bc1 axb5 21.d1 xe5 ( 10.f1!? ) 10...xd7 11.b1 and Black
22.d4 ec4 23.h5+ g8 24.g4 xh5 has some difficulties completing
25.gxh5 c5 26.f2 b2 0-1 Shabalov,A- development, Hendriks,W-Mestrovic,Z Wijk
Ardaman,M/Philadelphia USA 1999 (26) ] aan Zee 1999. ]
5...f6!? 6.b5 a6 7.a4 8...e7 9.f4 exf4 10.xf4 a6 11.e2 g6
[ 7.e2 g5 8.0-0 0-0-0 9.b4 b8 12.e3 e7
10.bd2 h5 11.b3 b6 12.a4 h4 13.a5 [ 12...h4 cries out to be played, hindering
b5 14.c5 e8 15.d3 g6 16.xb5 g4 the advance of the f-pawn and trying to
17.e1 fxe5 18.e2 exd4 19.cxd4 e5 c o n t r o l f 4 . 13.d2 e7 14.0-0-0 f6
20.ed3 xc5 21.xe5 g7 22.bxc5 f6 gives Black interesting counterplay. ]
23.b3 e8 24.xg4 1-0 Wohl,A-Yadao, I/ 13.d2 c5!?
Surfers Paradise AUS 2000 ] [ 13...f6 14.0-0-0 e7 seems far more
7...e6 8.exf6!? gxf6 9.h4 g6 10.0-0 natural, and a solid version of the previous
d6 11.e1 ge7 12.d2 f7 note. ]
[ 12...0-0-0!? 13.b4 ] 14.dxc6 bxc6 Now Black has lines to use
13.a3 b5 14.b3 f5 15.xf5! xf5 against all potential homes for the White king,
16.f1 h5 17.a4 ag8 18.axb5 axb5 but with care White's bishop pair and slightly
19.e3 e7 20.xf5 xf5 21.c2 better pawn structure should be more
After some very patient and very instructive relevant. 15.c4?
manoeuvring, white has finally annexed the [ 15.0-0-0!? must be better. I find it very hard
bishop pair and increased the scope of his to understand White's manoeuvrings which
f o rc e s . H e h a s p a id f o r t h is b y a l lo wi n g begin now - they simply seem to wast e
counterplay on the g-file, rather than ever time. ]
taking on g6 which would have made black's 15...de5 16.e2 xc4
position more solid. h4 22.g3 g6 23.f3 [ 16...g5! gives Black very active play on
h4 24.d1 g6 25.xg6+ To dull black's the dark squares. ]
108
17.xc4 e5 18.e2 a5 134 B00

[ 18...g5!? ] Wells,Peter K 2545
19.0-0-0 b8 20.d4 b4? Minasian,Artashes 2565
[ 20...b6!? to try and dislodge the Nc3 so European Club Cup 1995
that Black can use ...Qb5 to consolidate the [Alexander Volzhin]
qu e e n s i d e lo o k s l o g ic a l . 21.b3 a5
22.a4 is just an interesting position. 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 f6 Now White
( 22.b2 f6 23.xd6 e7! )] has two different ways to develop his
21.xb4 xb4 22.xa6 0-0 23.a4 b7 b1-Knight - to c3 or d2, and currently it's
24.a7 xa7 25.xa7 c5 White's bishop difficult to say which is more promising. Let's
looks very silly but not silly enough to deal with 4.Nc3 first. 4.c3 e6 5.f3 b4
compensate for the pawn. 26.d5 h4 27.f4 6.g5 h6 7.xf6 xf6 8.0-0
d7 28.c7 f2 29.d2 T h e k e y p o s i t i o n o f t h i s l i n e . f8?!
[ 29.f1 ] Extremely risky. Black keeps the Bishop pair
29...f5! 30.e2 h4 31.d1 Black does a and transfers the Bishop to the g7-square (
good job of wriggling, but White should be well after g7-g5 ) . However such a retreat cannot
on his way to scoring the full point here. f6! be recommended as W hite's development
32.e5?! advantage is now very big. The position is
[ 32.exf5 ] similar to a Trompovsky (1.d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 e6 3.
32...dxe5 33.xc5? The beginning of a e4 h6 4. Bxf6 Qxf6), but obviously Black has
s e r ie s o f t im e - wa s t i n g m o ve s a n d o t h e r lost some tempi.
methods of allowing counterplay. [ The usual 8...xc3 9.bxc3 d6
[ 33.fxe5 was simple and superior. ] will be considered in subsequent games. ]
33...c8 34.d6 exf4 35.xf4 g5 36.e5 9.d2 e7
g4 37.d6 f4 now Black has been [ 9...g5 i s p r e m a t u r e , a s 10.e5 e7
allowed to create total chaos. 38.g1 11.e4! leads to a clear edge for White. ]
[ 38.a4 ] 10.fe1 d6 11.b5+?! Beginning a very
38...h5 39.c3? White should be pushing interesting but quite dubious attack.
pawns with m ore au thorit y than this . d8 [ In my opinion White could obtain a clear
40.h3? edge by simple means. The natural 11.d5!
[ 40.b5 ] wa s ve ry st ro n g e5 This move is forced.
40...xd6 41.hxg4 hxg4 42.xg4 d7!-+ ( 11...g5?! leads to terrible consequences
Suddenly Black is much better as his pieces after 12.e5! and Black is in trouble, for
are more active and his pawns in motion. example: g7 13.exd6 cxd6 14.dxe6 fxe6
White's pieces are virtually useless and Black 15.c4 e5 16.d4 with an overwhelming
threatens to check and usher the f-pawn in by a d v a n t a g e .) 12.b5+ d7 13.a4!
force. 43.g1 and White has a strong initiative on the Q-
[ 43.b5 e7+ 44.f3 ( 44.f1 f3; side, and after the unavoidable exchange of
44.d3 f3 45.g1 f2 ) 44...e3+ 45.g2 light-squared Bishops it will be difficult for
f3+ ] Black to protect the weak light squares on
43...xc7 44.f3 d7 45.g4 d3 46.f1 the Q-side. ]
f7 47.f5 d5+ 48.e4 e6 49.a4 e5+ 11...d7 12.d5 d8 13.b4 Now White
50.d4 f5 51.b4 g4 52.a5 g3 53.c4 g2 wants to occupy the important c6-square, so
54.a1 e1 Black's reply is forced. c5 14.dxc5 bxc5
0-1 15.e5!? This spectacular move is the point
of White's combination. Unfortunately, Black
has many defensive resources here. dxe5
[ 15...cxb4 16.xd7+ e7 17.xb4 b6
18.xb6 axb6 19.c6+- winning ]
16.ad1 c8
[ 16...cxb4 17.xd7+ e7 18.xb4+ f6
109
19.xb7+- winning ] correct continuation among many options:

17.c6 b6 18.a4 f6 19.a5 d6! Other moves are not so good:
[ 19.xe5 fxe5 20.xd7+ f7 21.xc8 ( 30...xe5?? 31.d4+ f4 32.g3#;
xc8 22.d7+ e7 ] 30...xe5 31.d8+ g7 32.d7+ g8
19...c7 20.e3 e7 21.d3 b6 22.c6 33.f7+ h7 34.g6+ g8 35.f7+
b8 23.d8 g5?! The last ten moves for both and it's a draw by perpetual; 30...xe4
side s we re f orce d, bu t no w Black ha s t o 31.d4! xe5 32.d8+ g7 33.d7+
choose between the text and some g8 34.f7+ is similar to the previous line)
alternatives and he probably makes the wrong 31.f7 xh2+ 32.h1 c8! and Black
choice. wins as 33.g3 doesn't work in view of xg3
[ In my opinion, 23...f5 freeing the f6-square 34.fxg3 xe4+ 35.h2 xc2 ]
for the King was better, and I can't see any 30...e7! 31.xb6
way for White to increase the pressure, for [ 31.fxe6 d8 32.e2 xd1+ 33.xd1
example: 24.e8 b7 25.xb8 xb8 xc4 34.d3 e4 35.xc4 e5-+
26.c6 a6 ] winning ]
24.e8 b7 25.xb8 xb8 26.h5? 31...xb6 32.fxe6 d8 Now the fight is over.
After this mistake White has little hope. W h i t e h a s n o t h i n g f o r t h e p i e c e . 33.e1
[ White could exploit Black's inaccurate 23rd xd1 34.xd1 d4 35.e1 g4
move: 26.c6! 0-1
A) 26...c8 27.d8+ f7 28.e8+ g7
29.c4! and Black cannot hold onto his
extra piece: b7 ( 29...xc4?? 30.d7+ 135 B00
xd7 31.xd7+ , mating. ) 30.xb6 axb6 Wojtaszek,Radoslaw 2640
31.d7 d6 32.xc8 xd8 33.xb7 Bezold,Michael 2517
, and the endgame is equal.; Bundesliga 2009-10 (8) 06.02.2010
B) 26...a6 27.d7+! xd7 28.xd7+ [Glenn Flear]
e8 29.b7+ d8 30.xb8+ c7
31.e8! b6 32.b8+! xa5?! 1.d4 e6 2.f3 b6 3.e4 b7 4.d3
( It's better to take a draw by repetition You can try this yourself. If you enter the
with 32...c7 ) 33.c3! (threatening b2-b4) following moves: 1 e4 b6 2 d4 Bb7 3 Bd3 e6 4
c4 34.b4+ cxb3 35.axb3 ( threatening b3- Nf3 you reach the same position as the game,
b4 , m a tin g) d3 The only move. 36.c4 but with a B00 label. This won't change any
xc4! The only move again! ( 36...a6 assessments but complicates the task of
37.b5+ a5 38.d7 with the idea of 39. seeking games in a particular section. g6!?
Rb5+ Ka6 40.Bc8# xc4 39.b4+ xb4 A dynamic option where Black seeks a
40.xh8 with a large advantage) 37.bxc4 double-fianchetto. If he continues with ... Bg7,
Despite being a pawn up Black's position ...d6, ...e6 and knights to e7 and d7 then this
i s c r i t i c a l : a6 ( w h a t e l s e ? ) 38.c5 development plan is often called a
and W hite's c-pawn is very dangerous: 'Hippopotamus', so W ojtaszek opts f or a
g7 39.e8 f8 40.f7 g7 41.g8! destabilizing move. 5.g5!? f6?! I don't like
and the c-pawn is unstoppable. A this move: as a consequence, Black will have
picturesque position! ] problems to organize his forces with any sort
26...a8! 27.b4! of harmony.
[ 27.c4 c7 28.d6 g7 29.b5 b8 [ Most stronger players have opted for the
30.xa7 d8-+ winning ] no n -co mm itt a l 5...c8 e.g. 6.c4 g7
27...c4 28.b5 f5 29.xc4 f6 30.exf5? 7.c3 c6 8.d5 e5 9.xe5 xe5
T h i s m o v e a ll o ws B la ck t o co m p le t e h i s 10.d2 g7 11.0-0-0 and White had an
development. aggressive set-up in Rublevsky, S-
[ Although objectively White's position was Chernyshov, K Ohrid 2001, but Black had no
already bad, 30.xe5! was a good practical pawn weaknesses. ]
chance, as Black has to choose the only 6.e3 h6 7.d2 f7 8.c4!
110
I am convinced that, even for players who being 24.xc7 a6 25.c6 b8 26.d7 ]
begin with 1 e4, an early c2-c4 is the way to 23.e4 e8 24.c2
challenge the soundness of Black's set-up. If [ Playing for the attack is perhaps the most
Black doesn't do anything dramatic White will fun in such positions, but simplifying and
obtain a clear advantage (space, harmonious winning material was possible: 24.dxc7 a6
development and control) in a type of English 25.xf6 xe2 26.xe2 xf6 27.d6 d7
Defence. f5 9.c3 b4 Now the position 28.a3 ]
looks more like a real 'A40' (English Defence) 24...g6 25.g5+ g8 26.xf5!
than a 'B00' (!) but the knight should really be Tempting and, of course, impossible to meet
on f6 rather than f7. 10.exf5 gxf5 11.d5 satisfactorily. xf5 27.xf5 h6 28.a4
Aiming to pressurize Black's position whilst he f8 29.xh7+ g7 30.dxc7 e5 31.xb4
has a lead in development. f6 12.d4! a6 Bezold wanted to move his knight at least
[ Instead after 12.0-0-0 xc3 13.bxc3 e5 once before resigning! 32.c3 f6 33.d6
Black would be able to keep everything 1-0
together. ]
12...e5 13.xe5! Striking while the iron is hot!
[ T h e s l o w e r 13.e3 would again allow 136 B00
Black the breathing space necessary to Yudasin,Leonid 2568
obtain a decent position: d6 14.a3 xc3+ Blatny,Pavel 2452
15.xc3 c6 16.dxc6 xc6 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 92nd NY Masters (2) 02.03.2004
with only a small pull for White due to the [Glenn Flear]
potential of the bishop pair. ]
13...xe5 14.e2 d6 15.f4 h4+ 1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.c3 e6 4.d3
[ After 15...bd7 16.0-0 White will be able Not bothering with a2-a3, see Game 2. f6
to capture on e5 and then f5 with a clear 5.ge2 c5 6.0-0 c8! Blatny likes these
advantage. ] tricky moves that take his opponent out of the
16.g3 g4 17.fxe5 xd4 Taking the piece, comfort zone. 7.dxc5 bxc5 Still threatening ...
but probably without enthusiasm. c4 winning a piece. Note that Black now has a
[ After 17...xe2+ 18.xe2 c5 19.b5 central pawn majority which makes it harder
cxd4 20.a3 the complications favour White for White to find any pawn breaks in that zone.
e.g. dxe5 ( 20...c5 21.b4 ) 21.axb4 e4 8.g3 h5!? Very manly and obviously not
22.c7+ e7 23.xa8 exd3+ 24.xd3 flinching at the prospect of having his king
a6 25.c7! xc7 26.xa7 b8 27.xd4 stuck in the centre again!
etc. ] [ 8...c4 9.e2 d5 seems wrong as opening
18.exd6+ f7 19.0-0-0 Strong, but not the the central arena must favour W hite e.g.
most incisive. 10.exd5 xd5 11.xd5 xd5 12.f3 xf3
[ The direct 19.e7+! g8 20.xf5 xc3+ 13.xf3 d7 14.d1 when Black has
21.bxc3 xc3+ 22.f2 b2+ 23.f3 problems to complete development. ]
c3+ 24.g2 leaves Black in a hopeless 9.h4?! I'm not sure about this. Why not
state. ] [ 9.e5 h4 10.ge4 xe4 11.xe4 c6
19...f6 12.f4 with extra space and everything under
[ After 19...xc3 then 20.e7+ g8 control? ]
21.xf5 wins. ] 9...c6 10.e1 d6 11.f1 b8
20.hf1 g5+ 21.b1 c8 The fact that Out of harm's way but still pointing in the right
Black has an extra piece doesn't compensate d i r e c t i o n . 12.b3 e7 13.g5 g6
for his suffering. It must have been evident to B rin gin g t h e h 4 - p a wn in t o t h e e qu a t io n .
the players that Black's king will be dethroned 14.d2 h7! 15.a4 e5 Coming to the
long before he can get all his pieces out. central area to influence the dark squares
22.h4! f6 where W hite has some problems. 16.ad1
[ After 22...g6 23.e7+ g8 xg5 17.xg5 d6 18.b5+ I don't think that
White probably has several ways to win, one Blatny cared that his king had to move! f8
111
19.g3 h6 Another tricky move from the wily 33.axb5 cxb5 34.g4 b4 35.g5 b3 36.g6
Czech player. Yudasin doesn't sense the b2 37.g7 g2 38.h7 c5 39.xg2
danger... 20.h2? Normal enough but a fatal b1+ 40.h1 d3 41.h8 b6 42.h6+
mistake! instead a5 43.g8 e4+ 44.g2 xg2 45.xg2
[ 20.c3 covering d4 was required when the b5 46.hg6 b4 47.6g3 a4 48.h4 d5
continuation f4? 21.gxf4 f6 22.g2 49.e3 b3 50.ee2 1/2-1/2 Akopian,V-
g6 fails as White has 23.g3 ] Miles,A Moscow 1990. ]
20...f4!! Surrounding the White queen. 6...f6!? There is nothing wrong with ... d6 a
21.gxf4 f6 The cool intermezzo that makes la Miles. 7.e5 g4 8.c4
Blatny's combination so special. 22.g3 g6 [ 8.e4 b6 ]
23.xg6 fxg6 24.xd6 c7 White has 8...d6 9.e4
enough wood for the queen but his position is [ 9.g5!? is similar, but it seems more
a collection of tactical weaknesses! 25.e5 logical to bring more firepower to bear first. ]
[ 25.d7? is bad after a5 hitting b5 and 9...b6 10.fg5 h6
e1. ] [ 10...dxe5!? leads to interesting
25...e7 26.dd1 d8 27.c4 Trying to complications, and looks safer to me - after
bring his pieces onto effective squares but his all white's king is not exactly safe yet either,
kingside is so shaky. .. xh4 28.c3 a5 and the move accelerates black's
29.xd8+ xd8 30.d1 development. Though after a closer
[ If 30.e4 then xe4 31.xe4 d1+ examination of the game, maybe white is
32.g2 xc2 33.e2 f5 etc. ] simply 'bluffing'. 11.xf7+ e7 12.f3!?
30...xf2+! Piling further humiliation onto his ( 12.d5 b4 ) 12...d4 13.a3+ c5
opponent. 31.xf2 h4+ Now everything 14.b3 ]
goes with check. 32.e3 g3+ 33.d2 11.h5
xf4+ 34.d3 d4+ 35.e2 xe5+ [ 11.exd6 0-0 and white must solve the
36.d3 xh2 37.f1+ e7 38.e1 d6+ problem of his king. ]
39.e2 d4 40.b5 g4+ 41.d2 h4 11...0-0 12.xf7
42.xe6+ xe6 43.xe6 xe6 It's fitting [ 12.e6 fxe6 ( 12...d5 13.xf7 ) 13.xe6
that Black's h-pawn is the decisive factor as xe6 14.xe6+ h8 ]
8...h5 was a courageous move. A truly great 12...xf7 13.g5 d5 14.d3 f5 15.d2?
game from Black. [ 15.xf5 xf5 ]
0-1 15...xg5! 16.fxg5?! g4 17.h4 xe5
As they say, black has compensation for his
material advantage. A thought provoking
137 B00 game, as white's 'natural' threats were made
Zawadzki,Stanislaw 2335 to look terribly primitive.
Heberla,Bartlomiej 2364 0-1
ch-Pol u20 Brzeg Dolny POL (9) 15.02.2001
[Jon Tisdall]
138 B00
1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.c3 Zilberstein,Dmitry 2324
c5 5.f4 c6 6.f3 Blatny,Pavel 2433
[ 6.c4!? d6 7.f3 e6 8.xe6 fxe6 National Open (3) 09.03.2002
9.a4 b6 10.xb6 axb6 11.0-0 f6 [Jon Tisdall]
12.g5 e7 13.e5 dxe5 14.fxe5 xe5
15.e2 a5 16.b4 xb4 17.xe6 e7 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 f6 4.e2 c6
18.xg7+ xg7 19.d2 d5 20.c4 xd2 5.c3 e5 6.f3 exd4 7.e5 d5 8.cxd4
21.xe5+ d8 22.xf6+ xf6 23.xf6 [ 8.e4!? has the best track record. Here is
e8 24.a4 ee2 25.f8+ e7 26.g8 an example of an unrated player shoving
d6 27.g7 c6 28.h1 a2 29.g1 h5 GM Blatny around: a5 9.xd4 e7
30.g6+ c5 31.g5+ xc4 32.xh5 b5 10.b5 b8 11.0-0 a6 12.xb7 xb7
112
13.d4 c5 14.f3 d8 15.g5 g6 139 B01

16.f4 e7 17.f3 1/2-1/2 Koo, O-Blatny,P/ Adams,Michael 2699
Las Vegas USA 2001 (45). ] Pechenkin,V 2346
8...b4+ 9.f1 Canadian Open (3) 13.07.2009
[ 9.d2? xd4 ( 9...f4 ) 10.xd4 f4 [John Watson]
11.g4 ( 11.xb4 xe2 12.xe2 h4 )]
9...c8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4
[ 9...e7 10.a3 c8 11.d2 d8 12.g3 This is the equivalent of 3 d4 Nxd5 4 Nf3,
e6 13.c3 c6 14.xd5 xd5 15.e4 which is a more common order. g6
b7 16.e1 0-0 17.g2 f5 18.exf6 xf6 [ 4...g4 is seen in this month's game
19.xd5 xd5 20.e4 xe4 21.xe4 Tzermiadanos-Shen Siyuan. ]
af8 22.e3 d5 23.e5 d6-+ [ 4...f5 5.d3 xd3 6.xd3
0-1 Hamberger,H-Lovric,B/Celle Ligure 1997 f avours W hite, a s you can verif y in th e
(35). ] recent Archive game Wan Yunguo-Laylo. ]
10.d2 xd2 11.xd2 d8 12.c3 e6 5.c4 A relatively slow line.
13.c4 ef4 14.g3 a6 15.xa6 xa6+ [ 5.c4 b6 6.c3 g7 7.c5 is featured in
16.g1 xc3 17.bxc3 d5 The control of Kovalev-Pluemer. ]
c4 a n d d5 give bla ck a sm a ll b u t la st in g 5...g7 6.0-0
advantage. This is also one of those types of [ Emms suggests 6.c3 , in order to avoid the
small disadvantages that are tough to play, next note. ]
with far more opportunities to worsen the 6...0-0
position than improve it. 18.g2 0-0 19.ac1 [ 6...b6 7.b3 c5!? tries to break up
c4 20.he1 b5 21.e2 xe2 22.xe2 White's centre immediately: 8.dxc5 xd1
a5 23.d2 9.xd1 6d7
[ 23.c4 bxc4 24.xc4 fb8 still gives black A) Perhaps White gets something out of
a nagging edge, with a better rip on the 10.g5 0-0 11.c4 h6 ( 11...xc5?
queenside and the massive knight on d5. ] 12.xf7 with the idea xf7 13.d8+ f8
23...a6 24.e4 c6 25.b2 b8 14.xc8 ) 12.e4 h7 13.bc3 f5
[ 25...b4!? ] 14.d2 xc5 15.b3 , but this looks
26.c4 manageable following ba6 16.xc5
[ 26.c5!? led to interesting complications, xc5 17.e1 e5 18.e3 b6;
but is very risky. d6 27.d7 b7 ( 27...d8 B) 10.c3 xc3?! ( 10...xc5 11.d5
28.xb5 ) 28.c4 b4 29.exd6 cxd6 ba6 ) 11.bxc3 xc5 12.e3 xb3
( 29...d3? 30.e5 ) 30.e1 f6 31.cxb5 13.axb3 a6 14.c5 c6 15.d4 d7
cc7 32.e8+ f7 33.f8+ e6 34.b8 16.e1 0-0 17.xc6 xc6 18.xe7 fe8
and white's poorly coordinated pieces are Rausis-Thorhallsson, Cappelle la Grande
not worth the pawn. ( 34.e2+? d5 )] 1993. Rybka likes White, but this is one of
26...b4 27.c5 d6 28.d7?? those opposite-coloured bishops endings
[ 28.cxb5 xb5 29.exd6 cxd6 30.e1 ( or in which progress is extremely hard to
30.d3 would more or less equalize. )] make - what's his plan? ]
28...d8 29.d5 xc4 30.xc4 bxc4 31.e6 7.e1 g4
0-1 [ 7...c6 8.c3 b6 9.b3 g4 has been
played a fair amount, for example,
A) White can also choose to hit the bishop
with 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 and now:
A1) 11...e5 12.dxe5 xe5 13.d2!
( 13.h6 g7 14.xg7 xg7
followed by ...Qf 6 is okay f or Black)
13...g7 14.e4 e5 15.g3 d3
Lagudin-Piskur, Slovenia 1996) and here
I b e l i e v e t h a t 16.h4 keeps some
113
advantage (White had the bishop pair in xf3 11.xf3 (the point White has clamped
an open position).; down on e5 now Black has to play for ...c5 if
A2) 11...a5!? 12.a4 e5 13.dxe5 possible) 5b6 12.b3 c5 13.g5!
xe5!? 14.xb7 d3 15.d1 e7 A) 13...c7! has the idea ...c4 and comes
16.f3 xc1 17.xc1 ad8 c l o s e t o e q u a l i s i n g , e . g . , 14.h4!?
(Dautov) and Black has some ( 14.d2 c4 15.c2 d5 16.h6 )
compensation for the pawn, although I 14...c4 15.g3 c6 16.c2 d5
would still take White after 18.a3 d2 17.d2 h6 intending ... b5-b4.;
19.c2 fd8 20.f1!; B) 13...f6?! 14.h6 g7 15.d2 cxd4
A3) 11...--; 16.xg7 xg7 17.xd4 c5 18.xe6!
B) 10.f4 e5!? 11.dxe5 xd1 12.xd1 fxe6 ( 18...xe6 19.xe6 ) 19.b4 c4
c4 13.bd2! ( After the alternative 20.e2 d5 21.ad1 ae8 22.bxc5 f6
13.fd2?! 4xe5 14.xg4 d3 15.e3 23.b3 1-0 Zapata, A (2530)-Sariego, W
xf4 (Cao Sang-Palkovi, Budapest 1995) (2435), Linares 1992. ]
it's W hite who is playing to equalise.) 9...xf3 10.xf3 c6 This standard structure
13...xb2 14.c2 fd8! 15.ab1 d3 is designed to restrict White's bishops. Here,
16.xd3 xd3 17.xb7 d8 18.xc7 as in most openings, it gives White a slight
e6 19.c4 xf4 20.xf4 e6 21.a4 e d g e t h a t i s d i f f i c u l t t o c o n v e r t . 11.a4
xc3 The advantage of the bishop pair Another safe move which looks for space on
over the knights just about compensates the queenside (perhaps contemplating a5 to
for the pawn deficit. With accurate play the stop ...Nb6 at some point), while preventing
game should be drawn. 22.d4 d5 a n y s u r p ri se e xp a n s io n b y B l a ck o n t h e
23.a5 d3?! ( 23...d8 24.xa7 xe5! queenside.
(Dautov) is simpler. Now Black has to work [ Bertona-Gomez Laosa, Aragon 2003 was
hard for half-a-point.) 24.2f3 c4 25.h3 also favourable for White following 11.d2
h6 26.a1 f4 27.a4 c3 28.b5 f6 12.d1 ( 12.g3!?; 12.xf6
xb5 29.xf4 ac8 30.a4 c1+ 31.xc1 with the better ending) 12...h6 13.e4 d8
xc1+ 32.h2 c6 33.g5 d5 34.d4 14.f3 d7 15.b3 h7 16.d6 c7
c5 35.e4 xe4 36.xe4 f8 37.f4 17.g3 7f6 18.c4!? h5 19.h2 b4
a5 38.d4 e7 39.g4 c3 40.d5 c4 20.d1 ad8 21.c5 d5 and Black is
41.xa5 xf4 42.g3 b4 43.a8 e6 holding his own. ]
44.a5?! xe5 45.a6 b3+ 46.f2 a3 11...a5 12.a3 d7 13.d2!?
1/2-1/2 Klovans-Dautov/USSR (Game 46) [ 13.c2 prepares for 5b6 14.b3 e5
1986/The Scandinavian/ [John Emms]; 15.e3 , to capture with a piece on d4, but
C) 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 a5 ( 11...e5 Black can play something slower like 13...
12.dxe5 xe5 13.d2! g7 14.e4 ) Qc7. ]
12.a4 ( 12.f4! a4 13.c2 with the idea 13...5b6 Black prepares to break in the
c4 14.e2 xb2 15.b5 e5 16.dxe5 centre.
a3 17.xb7 ) 12...e5 13.dxe5 xe5 [ 13...c7 14.c2 fe8 is a solid
14.xb7 d3 15.d1 - analysis by alternative. ]
Da u t o v a n d n o w B l a c k m ig h t t r y c5! 14.b3 e5 This break is always double-
16.xd8 axd8 17.xc7 xb3 edged: On the one hand, it opens the position
, when the game is about equal following for the bishops (the one on b3 gains in range)
18.d2! xa1 19.xb6 h6 20.f4! xf4 but if Black can isolate and blockade a pawn
21.f2 g5 ] on d4, that will in and of itself limit W hite's
8.c3 e6 bishops and other pieces. 15.c2 exd4
[ 8...c6 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 e6 16.cxd4
transposes. ] [ 16.xd4 c5 17.c2 would be desirable,
9.h3 but c4 is strong. ]
[ 9.bd2 , probably better, has been played 16...f6 17.g5 bd5! 18.e5 b6
in several games, for example, d7 10.h3 A standard spot for the queen. Black should
114
be okay here. 19.ae1 h6 20.h4 h7!? 83.e5 a6 84.d7+ f8 85.d6 xd6
[ 20...ad8 is natural and good. Black 86.xd6 f7 87.e5 e7 88.f6+ f7
probably can't undertake anything positive, 89.f5 f8
but he's in no danger. ] ½-½
21.5e2 g5
[ Or 21...hf6 ]
22.g3 140 B01
[ 22.xg5 hxg5 23.xd5 cxd5 24.e3 Ahn,Martin 2321
ad8 25.xd5 xd4 ] Sebastian
22...f4!? 23.e7 24th ECC Kallithea GRE (2) 18.10.2008
[ 23.xf4 xb3 ] [John Watson]
23...d5 24.xg5 hxg5 25.7e4 ad8
T h e g a m e i s s t i l l a b o u t e q u a l , a lt h o u g h 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4 4.b5+
Black's pieces are better-placed and he has This is a very interesting approach, helping
what chances there are. 26.h1 f6 Black's development but hurting his piece
[ 26...f4! ] coordination. Last month, in Goh Wei Ming's
27.4e3 d5 28.f3 xd4!? Daring. excellent update, he looked at 4 Nf3,
[ 28...f6!? 29.xd5 cxd5 30.b3 c6 [ 4.e2 and ]
keeps in touch with f6. ] [ 4.f3 , the main line. There are 6 other
29.xg5?! games with 4 f3 in the Archives. ]
[ 29.xd4 xd4 30.xg5 g7 ( 30...xb2 [ I also showed a game with 4.d3 xd5
31.xf7! ) 31.xf7+ xf7 32.xd8 xf2 , when 5 h3! seems best but the move 4...
33.e8 f1+ 34.h2 f4+ draws. ] Qxd5 is probably all right for Black after 5
29...xb2 30.h4 d6! Covering both g6 and Nc3 Qd7 and ...Nc6. ]
f6. 31.h5 d8 32.g3 g7?! 4...bd7
[ 32...g7! keeps everything defended and [ 4...d7 leaves Black cramped after 5.e2
contemplates ...gxh5. Then Black is a solid xd5 6.c4 f6 7.c3 or 7 Nf3. ]
pawn up. ] 5.e2 xe2 6.xe2
33.g1 f6 [ 6.xe2 xd5 7.c4 5f6 8.bc3 e6
[ 33...f6! ] 9.0-0 e7 is another line it seems solid
34.xd5! xd5 35.b3 d4 36.xd4 enough f or Black, the more so because
xd4 37.xb7 xa4!? 38.hxg6 xg6 W hit e's knight is so passive on e2 an d
[ 38...f4! ] therefore ...e5 becomes feasible. ( 9...d6
39.e5+ g8 40.g3 e6 41.g5+ g6 is a more ambitious way to proceed )]
42.d2 a3 43.e4 c5 44.f4 g5 6...xd5 7.f3
45.a7 xf4 46.xf4 Of course this is draw, [ 7.c4 (before ...e6 and ...Bb4+ can interfere)
but with a 350-point rating difference, Adams 5f6 8.c3 ( 8.f3 e6 9.0-0 c6
pla ys on . He m a ke s re a l pro gre ss, e ve n transposes to the game.) 8...g6!? 9.f4
wining a pawn, but can't get through in the (9 Nf3 is simple and mildly better for White I
end. g7 47.xa5 d8 48.af5 d7 wouldn't like to play Black in such a position,
49.g2 gd6 50.c5 e6 51.g4 g6 but he has a fairly standard setup) h5!?
52.fc4 dd6 53.g3 f6 54.c3 e1 55.f3 10.g5 h6 11.h4 df6!? (artificial Black
ee6 56.f4 h6 57.f3 g7 58.f5 e1 hunts down the bishop at the cost of time
59.xc6 xc6 60.xc6 f1+ 61.g2 a1 a n d s p a c e ) 12.0-0-0 g5 13.g3 xg3
62.e6 b1 63.f2 a1 64.d6 b1 14.hxg3 g7 15.f3 0-0 16.e5
65.f3 f1+ 66.e4 g1 67.d7+ h6 with a substantial advantage, Rodriguez Vila,
68.f3 f1+ 69.g2 a1 70.g3 g1+ A (2467)-Cubas, J (2369)/ Serra Negra
71.f4 f1+ 72.e3 e1+ 73.f3 f1+ 2002. ]
74.e4 g1 75.d5 xg4 76.e6 a4 7...e6 8.0-0 This type of position is discussed
77.xf6 a6+ 78.e5 a5+ 79.d5 a7 in the forum. I find it in White's favour, which
80.e6 g7 81.d6 f7 82.d1 f6+ is not surprising in view of his greater central
115
control. 141 B01

[ 8.c4 b4+ 9.f1!? 5f6 10.d5?! Al Modiahki,Mohamad 2564
A Rodriguez, A (2498)-Fiori, N/Buenos Aires Tiviakov,Sergei 2668
ARG 2003 now 0-0! 11.dxe6 e8 12.exf7+ 3rd ACT Amsterdam NED (5) 19.07.2006
xf7 yields an attack worth more than a [Andrew Martin]
p a wn . T h u s 9 B d 2 sh o u ld p r o b a b l y b e
preferred. ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
8...c6 9.c4 5f6 10.f4 f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4 7.g2 c6!?
[ Another instructive recent game went 10.b3 W hen you think about it, 7..c6 is logical,
e7 11.b2 0-0 12.c3 e8 13.ad1 blockin g t h e act io n o f t h e Bisho p o n g2 .
b6 ( 13...a5! looks more accurate, when Perhaps the combination of ...a6 and ...c6
14.e5 ad8 15.f4 might be tried, could be seen as a luxury.
intending a slow advance on the kingside) [ 7...c6 has been most common:
14.e5 a5 15.a3 bd7 16.d3 c7 A) 8.0-0 e6 9.f4 b4 10.xc7
17.f4 ad8 18.g4!? should probably allow A1) 10...c8! is my suggested
for defence, although it can be dangerous imp roveme nt : 11.f4 xb2 12.a4
for Black, e.g. , g6 19.h1 f8 20.f5?! b4 ( 12...b5?! 13.c4 a5 14.h3
( 20.df3 ) 20...exf5 21.gxf5 8d7! 22.e4 xf3 15.xf3 xd4 16.xd4 xa4
xe4 23.xe4 xe5? 24.dxe5 xd3 17.xb7 xc4 18.a7 ) 13.c3 a5
25.xd3 d8 26.f3 f8 27.e6! 14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 b5 16.c5 xc5
and W hite's attack is too strong (Qc3 is 17.dxc5 0-0 18.d6 fd8;
one threat), Flores, D (2359)-Fiori, A (2136), A2) 10...e7?! 11.a3 xb2 12.d2
Ezeiza 2001. ] c8 13.fb1 xa3 14.xb2 xb2
10...e7 11.c3 0-0 This could be 15.b1 xc3 16.xc3 d5 17.c5
considered a sort of main line. Black lacks xf3 18.xb7 xc7 19.xf3 d5
positive prospects, but, again, his restraint 20.xd5 exd5 21.d6 1-0 Senff, M-
centre (my term) makes it hard for W hite to Pfleger, M/Bad Wiessee 2005;
do anything. 12.a3 e8 13.ad1 f8 B) 8.h3 h5 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4 b4
[ White played too passively after 13...a5 11.a3 xb2 12.a4 xf3 13.xf3 xd4
14.c1 f5 15.d2 ad8 16.fe1 d6 14.b3 a5 15.b4 xb4 16.axb4 e5!
17.d1?! e5! 18.e3 e4 in Riazuelo- 17.xe5 c4 18.xf6 gxf6 Delchev, A-
Spitz, France 2001. ] Sulava, N/Hyeres 2001 ]
14.e5 g6 15.g3 a5 16.d3 c5? 8.f4N
This runs into concrete problems based upon [ 8.0-0 e6 9.a4 ( 9.e1 e7 10.h3 xf3
Nb5. 11.xf3 0-0 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 f6
[ The stereotyped 16...ad8 would have 14.c3 c7 15.f4 b6 16.c2 g6
kept Black's disadvantage minimal. ] Dworakowska, J-Ogloblin, N/Moscow 2004;
17.xg6 hxg6 18.b5 ac8?! This fails 9.f4 d8 10.d3 d6 11.e5 f5
tactically. 12.e2 0-0 13.h3 h6 14.ad1 e7 15.a3
[ But 18...cxd4 19.c7 ad8 20.xe8 bd7 16.fe1 fd8 17.h2 ac8
xe8 21.e5 isn't attractive either. ] 18.xd7 xd7 19.xd6 xd6 20.e4
19.dxc5 a6 20.c7! xc7 21.b4 a4 xe4 21.xe4 cd8 22.c3 xe4 23.xe4
22.xc7 c8 23.xe6 fxe6 24.xe6+ f8 c7= Cristian, S-Rentner, D/playchess.com
25.xc8+ 2004 ) 9...a5?! ( 9...bd7 10.f4 b4 )
1-0 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 e7 12.f4
Sh a b a lo v, A -G o n za le z, R/P h ila d e lp h ia
2004 ]
8...d8 He intends a solid build-up with ...e6, ..
Bd6 etc. As usual, the Knight on c3 is slightly
misplaced and the time W hite uses to
redeploy the Knight Black uses to develop.
116
9.h3 142 B01

[ 9.0-0 e6 10.e1 d6 11.xd6 xd6 Almasi,Zoltan 2707
12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 f5 14.e3 0-0 Tologontegin,Semetery 2338
15.h4 g6 ends up solid, but passive from Chigorin Memorial 20th (8) 03.11.2012
Black's side. ] [Danny Gormally]
9...xf3 10.xf3 xd4 11.0-0 e6 12.ad1
Modiahki could be relied upon to play sharply 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
p e r h a p s e ve n s a c rif ice a p a wn a s h e re . f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 e6 7.f4 d8
Tivia k o v wa nt s to win an d th in ks h e ca n [ 7...d5 has been played. 8.xd5 xd5
d e f e n d t h e p o s i t i o n o u t . G a m e o n ! b6 9.f3! with the idea of Bc4, should ensure
13.a4 some advantage for White. ( 9.d3!? d7
[ 13.e3 c7 ( 13...xb2 14.a4 xa2 10.xd7 xd7 11.c4 f5 12.xf5 xf5
15.b6+- ) 14.e4 bd7 15.xf6+ xf6 13.e2 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 1/2-1/2 Macak, S
16.f4 a5 17.a3 e7 does not really (2400) -Epishin, V (2562)/Odense 2011)
garner much for White. ] 9...d8 10.d2 d7 11.0-0-0 xe5
13...b5 14.b3 bd7 15.c4 a5 16.g4 12.xe5 where White enjoys a useful lead in
The riddle for White is that he is trying to find development. ]
a way through and is labouring under the 8.d2!
illusion that he holds the advantage. Therefore [ 8.e2 g6 9.d2 bd7 10.f3 g7
he MUST play very actively. But the reality 11.h6 xh6 12.xh6 b6 13.0-0 d6
check is that Black is already a bit better, 14.h3 0-0-0 15.ad1 bd5 16.xd5
without really doing very much and picks xd5 17.c4 f6 18.xd5 cxd5 19.e3
W h i t e o f f a s h e c o m e s t o wa r d s h i m . h6! he8 20.fe1 f7 21.h6 g8 22.d2
17.g3 c8 d7 23.e3 b8 24.de1 f7 25.a5 g5
[ One can understand the reluctance to play 26.a3 b6 27.b5 c8 28.e2 g6
17...0-0-0 but this was also playable: 18.e3 29.c3 h5 30.d2 e8 31.e6 c7
e5! 19.g3 b4 20.f4 e4 21.f5 he8 ] 32.f1 d6 33.e3 d7 34.d2 b7
18.e3 a8 19.g3 e7 No draw, thank 35.b3 c8 36.a4 a8 37.a5 bxa5
you! 20.c7 b4 21.d4 38.a3 a4 39.ea1 c6 40.e3 e8
[ 21.f4 c8 22.e5 xe5 23.fxe5 d7 41.e2 b7 42.f3? ( The simple 42.xa4
retains the Black advantage although an is almost winning for W hite) 42...d6
a n a l y s i s o f 24.xd7 is necessary: xd7 43.3a2 h4 44.c2 e5 45.dxe5 fxe5
25.xf7 cf8! 26.xg7 c8 27.e3 d8! 46.f5 d4 47.xe5 d5 48.f6 dxc3
28.h1 hg8! ( 28...g5 29.g1 hf8 49.bxc3 b5 50.b4 bc5 51.e2 d7
30.xc6! ) 29.h7 g5 30.f2 d1+ 52.e7 xc3 53.xg5 a3 54.d1 3c7
31.f1 f8 32.f7 xf7 33.xf7 e1-+ 55.d5 c5 56.d2 c2 57.e3 a2
34.e8+ d8 35.f7 e4+ ] 58.d3 b2 59.b6+ xb6 0-1 Haslinger,
21...0-0 22.fd1 c5 23.b6?! S (2524)-Tiviakov, S (2674)/Roosendaal
[ H e s h o u l d s e t t l e f o r 23.xc5 xc5 2012 ]
24.4d3 and hope that there is 8...g6 9.0-0-0 bd7 10.d5! This pawn sac
compensation enough. I doubt it after e7 ] has been seen before. Black's position is very
23...ae8 24.f4 ce4! Sharply seen. A fork solid, and if he can get mobilised any danger
will follow on c5. 25.xe4 will pass for him, so it's important for White to
[ 25.xe4 xe4 26.xe4 c5+ ] act quickly. xd5
25...c5 26.a3 xa3 27.c2 d8 28.xd8 [ none of the other captures offer a save
xd8 29.g2 xd4 Against players with an h a v e n e i t h e r , f o r e x a m p l e 10...cxd5
active style, 3...Qd6 works very well. 11.xd7 xd7 12.xd5 which is obviously
0-1 not much fun for Black. ]
[ 10...xd5 11.xd5 xd5? ( 11...cxd5
12.b5! also looks pretty horrible.) 12.xd7
xd7 13.c4! e6 14.c3 is immediately
117
catastrophic ] rooks. h2 40.c6 f2 41.xe6 a7

11.xd5 xd5 12.c4 c7!? After this 42.c1 xd7 43.e8 b8 44.cc8 d1+
W hite can force a clearly better endgame, 45.a2 dd2 46.e7+
where Black can only fight desperately for a 1-0
draw. The problem is that reasonable
alternatives were thin on the ground.
[ 12...5f6 13.c3 gives White very clear 143 B01
compensation. He already has a threat of Amin,Bassem 2561
ta k in g o n d 7 an d winn in g m at e ria l. g8 Sengupta,Deep 2454
14.e2 and although Black remains solid, WCh-Junior Gaziantep TUR (11) 13.08.2008
given his lead in development, and easy [John Watson]
play, I'd much rather take White. ]
13.cxd5 xe5 14.xe5 xe5 15.dxc6 c7 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
16.d7+ f6 5.f3 c6 6.e2 Again White makes this
[ a nice option and quite possibly better was modest move (compare Maze-Bauer), simply
16.b1! xc6 ( 16...g7 17.d7+ xd7 t r y i n g t o u s e h i s s p a c e a d v a n t a g e . f5
18.cxd7+ d8 19.g3 a6 20.d3 Black responds naturally, but he can also
is better for White as then the plan of ...Ra7 consider
is not so effective, as W hite is in time to [ 6...g4 ]
defend the d7 pawn) 17.c1 b6 18.c3 7.e5 This seems to go well with Be2. bd7
f6 19.c4 with very dangerous attacking 8.f4!? White doesn't often set up with Ne5 and
chances for White. ] f4 versus the Scandinavian, but perhaps he
16...xd7 17.cxd7+ d8 18.g3 c7? sh o u ld . Ge n e rally t h e kn ight re tre a ts , is
This ending looks very uncomfortable, which exchanged, or is supported by Bf4 or Qe2, for
might explain why Black was not able to put example. Now g4 is becoming a major theme,
up much resistance (perhaps he thought he e6?!
was already lost.) [ 8...h5 is more accurate. ]
[ But even in difficult positions we should look 9.0-0!?
for a plan, and if he had found the clever [ 9.g4! e4 ( 9...g6 10.0-0 with f5 next, or
idea of 18...a6! with the plan of ...Ra7 e4 11.c4! c7 12.f5 , etc. ) 10.xe4
followed by b5, he would most likely been ( 10.0-0 d5 11.xd5 exd5 may also
a b l e t o s a v e t h e g a m e . 19.g2 a7 f a v o u r W h i t e .) 10...xe4 11.d3
20.b1 b6= ] and White has bishops, space, etc. ]
19.h3 e6 20.d3 d8 21.hd1 9...h5 Either this or
Now W hite has managed to preserve the [ 9...h6 is necessary see the last note. ]
annoying pawn on d7, which ties Black down 10.e3 b6 11.f2!?
completely. h5 22.c3+ b8 23.g2 h4 [ 11.d3 e7 12.xf5 exf5 13.d3 e6
24.g4 h3 25.xh3 h6+ 26.b1 f4 and ...0-0-0 offers Black safety. ]
27.b3 b6 [ 11.a4 is a useful interpolation. ]
[ 27...xh2 28.g2 b6 29.f3 h7 30.f1 11...c7 Black can't castle without protecting
heading for b5, and W hite maintains f7. Now White discourages 0-0-0: 12.a4! a5
uncomfortable pressure. ] 13.f3 e7 14.e2!? e4 15.g3 xf3
28.f1 xh2 29.f3 g5 30.a6 h7 16.xf3 g6
31.c3 c7 32.b5 f6 33.a3 e5 34.c2 [ 16...h4 17.e2 h3 leaves the h-pawn a
a6 35.c6 h4 36.f3 h7 37.c6 h4 later target after 18.g4 ]
38.e4! c7? 17.ae1 f8!? 18.b3 bd5 19.c4 b4
[ 38...xg4 39.dc1 xe4 40.c8+ b7 20.e4 xe4 21.xe4 g7 Now White has
41.xd8 d4 would have enabled Black to space, but at first it looks as though there's
show stern resistance. ] nothing else. However, the knight on b4 is out
39.f3! White has co-ordinated beautifully, and of play, so White has some ideas of attacking
now is free to go on the rampage with his Black's weakened kingside . 22.e1 h4?
118
Soon we see how badly this move weakens 14.f3! would've left White with a pleasant
the kingside, especially by allowing White to bind on the centre. ]
use g4. 23.h3 d6 8.ge2 e6 9.b3 A new move from Anand
[ 23...f6 24.g4 e7 25.e2 ( 25.d5!? ) and it's nothing spectacular but it does seem
25...ad8 26.c3! and d5 follows. ] to secure a slight advantage.
24.xg6! This should win. [ 9.0-0 doesn't seem to yield much edge e7
[ 24.c3 a2 defends. ] A) after 10.e1 0-0 11.a4 Black could've
[ But 24.g4! with the idea f5 is quite equalised in Hamdouchi, H (2617)-Borgo,
awkward for Black, threatening Nxg6, but G ( 2 3 9 7 ) L u g a n o 2 0 1 2 w i t h a5!
also f5 with attack. ] ( inste ad af te r 11...a6?! 12.a5 c6
24...f5? 13.b3 b5 14.axb6 cxb6 15.d5!
[ Black has to accept by 24...fxg6 25.xe6 White has much the better game and went
( 25.c3 a2 ) 25...d8 26.f5! f6 on to win. );
, w h e n W h i t e n e e d s t o f i n d 27.d5! B) 10.h1 0-0 11.a4 a5 12.e4 c6
, for example, cxd5 28.fxg6 f8 29.xh4 ] ( 12...c6! 13.xf6+ xf6 14.c3 d7
25.xe7! fxe4 and Black is very close to equalising.)
[ 25...xe7 26.xf5 ] 13.c3 fd8 14.c2 was slightly better for
26.g4+ f7 27.g6+ xe7 28.g7+ W hite in Gharamian, T (2658)-Prie, E
e8 29.xh8+ f8 30.xh4 With 2 extra (2526) Charleroi 2011 ]
passed pawns and threats against Black's [ 9.e3 c6 ( possibly Black should accept
exposed king, White wins easily. d3 31.h7 a slightly worse position with 9...e7 10.0-0
f5 32.g8+ f8 33.xe6+ e7 34.g8+ 0-0 ) 10.a3 e7 11.0-0 ed5 12.f2
f8 35.g6+ d7 36.xe4 xb2 37.d5 0-0-0 led to interesting play in Edouard, R
xa4 38.g3 e8 39.dxc6+ bxc6 40.d1+ (2607) -Bauer, C (2679) Switzerland 2012
c7 41.f5+ b7 42.d7+ b6 43.c7+ but after 13.b4! h5 14.e4 xe4 15.fxe4
b7 44.d6+ f6 and here White should be somewhat
1-0 better after 16.h4! which holds up Black's
play on the kingside ]
9...c6 10.e3 a5 It's logical to go straight
144 B01 after the bishop pair but it's not the only option
Anand,V 2772 [ 10...0-0-0 is surely a critical way to play this
Van Wely,L 2679 position and in fact Black seems to have
75th Tata Steel GpA (7.6) 19.01.2013 re aso na b le ch an ces h e re , f or exa mp le
[Tom Rendle] 11.d2 e8 12.0-0 b8 ( 12...h5!? )
13.ad1 e7 and chances are very
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 balanced. 14.d5?! is met by c5 ]
f6 5.d2 g4 6.f3 d7 Probably the most 11.0-0 xb3 12.axb3 e7 13.f4 0-0
sensible retreat. 14.e1 fd8 It's hard to believe that Black is
[ 6...h5 7.g4 g6 8.f4 gives White good more than minimally worse but Anand keeps
chances and was covered in two games by up the pressure with some accurate moves
Eric Prié in the archives, Golubev-Kislinsky 15.d3 This prevents Van Wely from playing
and Koepke-Kislinsky ] ...c5 and freeing his game. d6
[ 6...f5 has also been tried but White keeps [ 15...a5! is probably a slight improvement
s o m e a d v a n t a g e wi t h 7.c4 ( 7.g4!? ) and now after 16.f2 b4 White has to
7...b6 8.ge2 ] decide how to make progress. One option is
7.c4 b6 17.d5 d6 18.dxe6 xe6 19.xb4 xb4
[ 7...c6 was seen in Fedorov, A (2598)- but Black should be holding a draw fairly
Mamedyarov, S (2542) Batumi 2002 but it co m f o r t a b l y h e r e a l t h o u g h wi t h 20.e2
just seems to give W hite an easy game: and Ra4 White still has the easier position to
8.e2 e6 9.e4 d8 10.0-0-0 b5 11.d3 play. ]
a6 12.f4 b4 13.xb4 xb4 and now 16.f2 c6 17.e4! xe4 18.fxe4 f5?!
119
This is unnecessarily weakening and g7 10.h1 f5! 11.c4 ( After the game
ultimately it costs Loek the game. Kasparov recommended 11.e3! xd3
[ 18...b6 was better although White is 12.xd3 0-0 13.xd7 xd7 14.f5
somewhat better after 19.c4 d7 20.e5 although in my opinion, Black keeps a tiny
e8 21.g4 b7 however Black's still very advantage.) 11...e6 12.e2 ( threatening
solid so he definitely should have played this g2-g4 ) h5! 13.e3 d8 14.g1 0-0
way. ] 15.f3 d5! 16.xd5 Forced, as ( 16.e2
19.exf5 exf5 20.c4! e4?! After this Black is fails to xf4! ) 16...exd5 with a clear edge. ]
just losing a pawn. 6...f5 7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6 9.h4 bd7!
[ 20...h4 was a better try but after 21.g3 The best line
e4! 22.d5 ( would be a big mistake due to [ 9...b4 does not solve Black's problems as
22.gxh4? g6+ 23.g3 xd4 and Black the game Campora - Cu. Hansen, Palma de
regains the piece with a good positio n) Mallorca GMA 1989 proved: 10.d2 e4
22...xd3 23.xd3 f6 24.xf5 xb2 11.f3! xc3 12.bxc3 xc3 13.b1 b5
25.a2 f6 26.ae2 White is clearly 14.b3 d7 15.xc6 xd2+ 16.xd2
better ] c7 17.d5 with a clear advantage. ]
21.c5 g6 22.xe4 fxe4 23.b1! f6 10.xd7 xd7 11.h5 e4 12.h3
24.xe4 xe4 25.xe4 Anand is a pawn up [ 12.0-0 gives W hite nothing real: d5
and makes the rest of the game look very 13.xd5 cxd5 14.d3 d6 15.c3 g6
easy indeed c6 26.f1 d7 27.e2 a6 16.d2 d8 17.g2 gxh5 18.g5 e7
28.d3 ad8 29.ae1 f7 30.e3 h5 19.xh5 0-0-0= with equality, Westerinen -
31.f1 g6 32.b4! d6 33.h3 6d7 Prie, Andorra 1994 ]
Black is unable to do more than wait and now 12...g2 The idea of this move is that if White
Vishy clamps down on the kingside as well. plays Rg3, then Black will gain a tempo with a
34.g4! hxg4 35.hxg4 f8?? A blunder that later Bd6.
brings the game to a swift conclusion 36.g5 [ 12...d5 is the main Black reply and is
xd4 37.e6+ probably best as the move played here was
[ 37.e6+ f6+ 38.c2 f7 39.e4 disastrous for Black. White then usually tries
and the Bishop is still lost on f6! ] 13.d3 0-0-0 ( 13...d6 14.d2 c7
1-0 15.xd5 cxd5 16.e2 f4 17.0-0-0
gave White a small edge in the game Ochoa
de Echaguen - Denker, New York 1989)
145 B01 14.d2 b6 15.xd5 exd5 with good
Anand,Viswanathan 2765 counterplay in the game Rublevsky - Lastin,
Lautier,Joel 2660 Russia (ch) Elista 1995. ]
Biel 1997 13.e3!
[Alexander Volzhin] [ St ro n ge r t h a n 13.g3 d5 although
White's chances are still preferable. ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 13...b6
f6 5.f3 c6 [ 13...b5 14.d3 b4 does not solve Black's
[ 5...g4 ] problems as he will soon be forced to part
[ 5...f5 are the alternatives. ] with a Bishop by taking on e4 after 15.e4 ]
6.c4 14.d3!
[ 6.e5 was tried in the World title match [ 14.b3?! c5! would give Black good
between Kasparov and Anand. White didn't counterplay ]
obtain any advantage from the opening, 14...d5 15.f3! The point. The bishop is
mo re o ve r t h e W o rld Ch a m p ion , wh o is trapped on g2 and White's task now is not to
famous for his great knowledge of opening give up too much material for it.
theory, found himself in an inferior position [ P r e vio u s l y 15.g3 had been played, the
after 15 moves! The game continued: e6! game Bauer - Prie, France (ch) 1996
7.d3 bd7 8.f4?! ( 8.xd7 ) 8...g6! 9.0-0 continued with xc3 16.bxc3 d5 17.d2
120
a4 18.e2 b5 19.h6 0-0-0 22.xd4 xd4 23.d3! The simplest. d8
with complicated and double-edged play. ] 24.xd8+ xd8 25.d3!
15...b4 [ 25.d3 h1 26.b2 e8 27.f6
[ After 15...xc3 16.bxc3 xc3+ 17.d2 It is remarkable that White still has not won
xd4 18.f2 xf3 19.xf3 White has a the trapped Bishop, but he doesn't need it!
big advantage, according to Anand. ] Black resigned. A very beautiful game by
[ 15...xe3!? was interesting: 16.xe3 a3 Vishy Anand. ]
17.c1 ( 17.bxa3 xf3 18.d2 xg4 1-0
19.h6 Black is slightly better) 17...b4
18.f2 xc3 19.bxc3 xc3 20.d2
xd4+ 21.xg2 and White's chances looks 146 B01
preferable. ] Ansell,S
16.f2! xc3 Martin,Andrew D
[ 16...xc3 was not better: 17.bxc3 xc3 4NCL West Bromwich 01.05.2005
18.b1 xd4 19.xg2 xe3 20.xe3 [Andrew Martin]
with a clear advantage. ]
17.bxc3 xc3 18.b1 xd4 No w, a ra re p e rso n a l d isa s t e r u s in g t h e
[ Both alternatives 18...xf3 19.xf3 xd4 Scandinavian. I've been meaning to
20.xb7 ] experiment with 3...Qd6 for some time what a
[ and 18...xe3 19.xe3 xf3 20.xf3 beginning! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3
fail to make Black's life easier. ] d6!? I think the punctuation is correct. Some
19.xb7 d8 things I like about this move particularly the
[ 19...h3 was another try which would be dynamic aspect of the centralized Queen. But
met by 20.xf7! c5 21.f5!! xe3 t h e Q u e e n is e xp o se d a n d b lo cks in t h e
22.xe3 b2 23.xc5 0-0 24.g3! Bishop on f8 for the time being. Black's plan
with a decisive advantage, as was pointed of ...a6, ...b5, ...Bb7, ...e6, ...Nbd7, ...Be7
out by Joel Lautier. ] and eventually ... c7-c5 is easy to understand
[ 19...f4 20.g3 d6 does not help either though. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 a6 6.d3!
because of the beautiful 21.a3! xh5+ This prevents 6.. b5 for the time being: g4
( 21...xa3 22.e4! winning ) 22.xg2 [ 6...b5 7.a4 b4 8.e4 and Black is
g3+ 23.f1 winning ] already much worse. ]
20.h6!! The idea behind this spectacular move 7.h3 xf3? There is no excuse for this move.
is very beautiful and was not appreciated by Ceding the Bishops at this stage is weak. I
Lautier. gxh6? thought I might be able to make up for this
[ B l a c k c o u l d s t i l l f i g h t w i t h 20...xe3 concession by developing quickly but this is
21.xe3 e5 22.hxg7 g8 23.g1 simply the wrong view of the position.
( 23.h6 h2! ) 23...xf3 24.xf3 [ Instead 7...h5 is correct and then Black
with a big advantage, according to Anand. ] should be able to equalize comfortably: 8.g4
21.g6!! The point! It's not very often you see ( 8.e4 xe4 9.xe4 c6 10.c3 g6!;
such a beautiful combination on the board, 8.e3 c6 9.e2 b4 ) 8...g6 9.xg6
especially in a game between two top players. hxg6 10.g5 d5= Looking at it now I really
e7 cannot find any reason for playing 7...Bxf3.
[ Other moves were also losing: 21...xe3+ I must have been having a very bad day! ]
22.xe3 fxg6 ( 22...hxg6 23.d4 ) 23.c5 ] 8.xf3 c6 9.e3 0-0-0 10.0-0-0 b4
[ 21...f6 22.xf7+ xf7 23.xf7 xe3 This seemed absolutely necessary in view of
24.xd8+! xd8 25.xe3 h3 26.xa7 ] White's idea of Ne4, which is his main trump.
[ 21...xe3 22.xf7+ f8 23.xd4 xd4 For instance
24.xe3 ] [ 10...e6 11.e4! xe4 12.xe4
[ and the main idea is to checkmate the and already the White position is winning. ]
B l a c k K i n g a f t e r 21...xd1 22.xe6+ 11.a3 xd3+ 12.xd3 e6 13.e1!
with Bh6 and Bf7 to follow. ] A nice move. I'd analysed
121
[ 13.hd1 e7 14.d5 exd5 15.xd5 xd5 for 8.e2!? xg2 9.f3 h3 10.f4
16.xd5 g6 and saw that Black was e6+ 11.e5 which gave White some
surviving. The point of 13 Re1 is to play d4- compensation in Plaskett - Houska,J,
d5! again, but this time with added power. ] Islington 1998?) 8...g4 9.f3 e6 10.d2
13...e7 14.g5 d7 0-0-0 11.e5 c4 12.d3 e6 and Black
[ 14...b6 15.d5 seemed horrible. ] was fine in the game Ponomariov -
15.d5! e8 After much thought and mental Hauchard, Belfort 1998 ]
torture. Actually, I could have saved myself 7...f5? This leads to disaster.
the mental recrimination by simply admitting [ T h e c r i t i c a l l i n e i s 7...xd4 8.c4
that Black is lost and resigning. Yes, it's that ( White can force a draw with 8.g6 e6+
bad! 9.e5 (threatening both the knight on d4
[ 15...exd5 16.xf6! ( 16.xd5 xd5 and 10.Bc4) b6 10.c4 e6+ 11.e5
17.xe7 he8 18.e5 c6 might just be d6 12.g6 e6+ 13.e5 1/2-1/2 as in
s u r v i v a b l e) 16...xf6 17.xd5 Smith - Sermek, Auckland 2000. Can he do
is disgusting. ] better?; I t h i n k t h a t 8.g3!?
16.xe7 xe7 17.e3! I must say that looks interesting.) 8...e6 9.xe6 ( And not
Ansell finishes the game incisively . I was 9.g6 b6 10.xh8 xc4 when the
already getting short of time and could find no knight on h8 is trapped.) 9...xe6 10.f3
answer to the direct attack on the King. d6 xf4 11.xf4 e6 12.0-0 e7 13.e4
To try and cover the possible need to play ... d5 14.fe1 d8 15.c4 d4 16.f3 d7
Kd7 18.a7 he8 17.e5 d4 18.f3 d7 19.e5 d4
[ 18...e5 19.a4! ] 1/2-1/2 Mortensen - Bronstein,D, Hastings
19.dxe6 g5+ 20.b1 xe6 21.xe6 fxe6 Challengers 1996 ]
22.e4! G a m e o v e r . e5 23.c5 c6 8.c4 xe5 9.dxe5 c6
24.b3 e8 25.xb7 One mistake in the 3... [ After 9...xd1+ there is 10.xd1 d7
Qd6 and you get gunned down. That was the 11.d5 but the text leads to even greater
valuable lesson taught to me from this game. horrors. ]
1-0 10.e2 xg2 11.0-0-0 e4 12.d5 0-0-0
13.e3 xd1+ 14.xd1 g6 15.d3 b8
16.d8+ c8 17.e6 d6 18.d5
147 B01 A strong argument against moving your queen
Arakhamia Grant,Ketevan 2425 too much in the opening.
Mashinskaya,Iulia 2300 1-0
3rd EIWCh Varna BUL (4) 30.05.2002
[Nigel Davies]
148 B01
I must admit that I am suspicious about the Baron,Ta 2455
merits of 3...Qd6 and this game may point to Kurajica,Bojan 2529
its potential vulnerability. 7.Bf4 offers a pawn 4th Mediterranean Open (9.7) 20.11.2010
for fast development and whilst Black has [Gawain Jones]
d o n e O K s o f a r , t h e p o si t io n l o o k s ve r y
dangerous to me. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3 a6 6.e5 c6 c6 5.d4 0-0-0 6.c4 f5 7.e3 xf3
[ 6...e6 7.f4 looks very unpleasant for 8.xf3 xd4 9.xd4 e6+ 10.e2 c5
Black. ] [ Last time I looked at this line I concentrated
7.f4!? White continues his development and on 10...e4 which didn't solve Black's
offers his d-pawn. At the moment it looks as if problems - see Bruzon Batista, L (2641)-
he has nothing more than a draw by repetition, Kurajica, B (2525) La Laguna 2010. I've
but in such a sharp position there may be ad d e d in a f e w mo re re ce n t e xa mp le s .
improvements for White. 11.0-0
[ 7.xc6 xc6 8.f4 ( Are there any takers A) 11...xd4 12.a4 The first practical
122
encounter of the forum's suggestion. xe2 line.' I still don't see how White can hope for
13.xa7 an advantage here.
A1) I e x a m i n e d 13...g4?! with the A) 13.0-0!? xe2 14.a3 ( 14.a8+
threat of ...Rxg2 for a draw but 14.a8+ is probably a draw although allows Black
d7 15.h3! foils Black's plan and leaves to try playing on with the dangerous c7
White with a great position.; 15.a5+ b6 16.a7+ c6 17.b4 e6
A2) and 13...xb2 la s t t im e : 14.a3 but I feel this is rather foolhardy.) 14...e5
d3 15.b5 f6 16.ad1 c2 17.c1 15.b5 ( 15.c5 g4 16.f4 is another
d2 18.a8+ ( 18.c5!? ) 18...d7 suggestion of AlanG, but I would be rather
19.a4 c6 20.cd1 cxb5 21.xb5+ scared playing this as White as a knight on
c8 22.xd2 xd2 23.c5+- winning for e3 dominates the position rather.) 15...e6
White.; 16.c5 g4 17.g3 b8 18.a4 e5
A3) 13...d6 A new try but this doesn't 19.a7+ c7 20.b5+ d7 21.xd4+
s a v e B l a c k . 14.a8+ d7 15.c5!? e7 given by gewgaw, when Black's king
( 15.xf8 xb2 16.a3 looks like the has escaped the worst with good chances
easiest when Black won't survive long.) to convert the extra piece. In particular
15...d4 16.xf8 d1 17.d2 xd2 watch out for ...Rxd4!;
18.xg7 f6 19.xh8 xb2 20.c6+ B) 13.a3 is the safest although allows
bxc6 21.a4 b4 22.fe1 g4 23.f8 Black to equalise with a6=;
d5 24.a5 1-0 Lyell, M (2202) -Ivanov, C) 13.a8+ 'allows Black at least a draw
M (2438) Zdar nad Sazavou 2010 saw and he might even be able to play f or
the lower rated Englishman grateful to more with' c7 14.a5+ b6 15.e5+
ChessPublishing!; c8 ( This looks more reliable than
B) 11...xd4 12.a4 e6 13.c3 d6 AlanG's 15...d6 16.a5+ b8
B1) Bruzon chose 14.f3! which looks which isn't so clear.) 16.d2 This was
strong. My critical line from the previous actually tried in a correspondence game
annotation ran f4 15.fd1 xh2+ w h i c h w o r k e d o u t w e l l f o r B l a c k . d3
( Looking at the game now I wonder 17.f3 e6 18.0-0 d6 19.c3 b4
whether 15...a6!? might be an 20.b3 d7 21.e4 c5 22.xc5
in t e re s t i n g m o ve o rd e r ke e p in g t h e xc5 23.c3 d4 and I feel Black really
queen active although 16.b4 xc4 can't have any problems. Lopez, A (1670)-
17.e4 b5 18.c2 e5 19.ac1 De h a yb e , A (1 8 8 8 ) Ch e s sf r ie n d . c o m
looks extremely dangerous.) 16.f1 a6 2003. ]
17.c5 xc5 18.xb7+ xb7 19.xd8 [ A practical game saw 12...d3 13.c3 dxe2
h1+ 20.e2 xg2 21.e4 14.a8+ d7 ( 14...c7 simply loses to
and White has a decisive advantage.; 15.b5+ ) 15.xb7+ e8 16.d5 c8
B2) 14.b5 e5 15.xd6+ cxd6 when Top Notch gives 17.a4 with good
16.f3 b8 17.ad1 ( I looked at winning chances. The queenside pawns are
17.fe1 previously.) 17...f6 18.d3 extremely fast! ]
c5 19.fd1 d7 20.c3 hd8 21.b4 13.a3 This was gipc's line on the forum.
b6 22.dc1 e5 23.c5 dxc5 24.bxc5 [ 13.0-0!? looks critical to me. With another
c7 25.a3 a6 26.c6 d4 with very look at this variation I believe that W hite
strong compensation. Trygstad, K should try this but still White has a question
(2301)-Kasparov, S (2492) Leros 2010 ] mark on how to react to 12... Nf 6. xe2
11.a4 And I thought this the critical test. I've 14.a3
added in my annotations from last time. cxd4 A) L a s t t i m e I s a i d 14...e5 15.c5!
'This is now forced as' gives W hite good chances but perhaps
[ 11...xd4 12.xa7 e5 13.c3 B l a c k c a n h o l d . b8 16.a4 e5
is great for White. ] ( 16...h5!? looks like a promising idea
12.xa7 'when' e5 17.c4 h6 18.fc1 c6 19.b6+ c7
[ 12...f6 'has been discussed as the critical 20.a5 e6 looks very artificial but if White
123
has no killer blow then Black will be able A2) 15...xa7 16.xa7+ b8 17.fxe5
to consolidate.) 17.b5 d7 18.ac1 xa7 18.h5 and White has something
d8 19.c6 bxc6 20.xc6 with pressure on f7.;
and the computer starts to like White...; B) 14...b4+?! Actually this is probably
B) 14...e6 15.a8+! d7 16.xb7+ the mistake. 15.f1
e8 17.b5 ( 17.c6+ is the perpetual B1) 15...d3 16.f3 d7 17.a8+ b8
draw f o r W h it e .) 17...e7 ( 17...d6 18.a4 c5 19.d1+- And again
18.c5 e5 19.ae1 also looks good for Black's king is unlikely to survive. ( 19.b4
White. ) 18.c5 e5 ( 18...d3 simply loses actually looks even easier. );
to 19.c6 as the line given by Top Notch B2) 15...c5 16.a5 ( 16.a8+ b8
illu stra tes : d2 20.c7 d1 21.axd1 17.a4 looks very strong too.) 16...d3
xd1 22.c6+ f8 23.a8+ d8 17.f3 e7 18.e1 f4
24.xd8+ xd8 25.cxd8# ) 19.c6 b8 B2a) 19.b4! is actually stronger (a
20.a4! xb7 ( 20...c5 21.fc1 better computer now :)). Black cannot
doesn't help.) 21.cxb7 f6 22.a5 d7 k e e p t h e b i s h o p . d4 ( 19...d6
23.fc1 d5 24.a6 g5 25.c4+- 20.b6+- ) 20.g3 b8 21.xd4 xd4
is an excellent line given by Top Notch 22.c5+ c6 23.xc6 both win a
when the passed pawns are far stronger piece.;
than the piece. ] B2b) 19.g3+- Continuing the line for a
[ 13.f1!? linksspringer is another few more moves b8 20.b4 c6
interesting possibility. It look rather artificial 21.xc6 bxc6 22.bxc5 cxb5 23.cxb5
but it does keep the bishop. e6 14.d2 d5 24.g2 and White is material up
c5 ] and with the safer king. ]
13...e6 We decided this wasn't so good and I 14...b8 15.a5 This controls the e5 square
think this is a case of our analysis outstripping but allows Black to gain time with Ne7-c6.
both players. [ 15.xb8+ xb8 16.c2 e5 obviously
[ 13...d3 was my mainline. favours Black with the central pawns. ]
A) 14.0-0-0!? "look an interesting attempt [ 15.a4 I initially thought was an
to me which I don't think has been improvement but Black has absolutely no
m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e " xe2 15.a8+ problems here. d3 16.f3 d2+ 17.f1
( 15.b1!? ) 15...c7 16.b5+ c6 xa3 18.xa3 f6 19.d1 with a very
17.a4 gives Black extreme practical complex position. It's one of those positions
problems. While the computer informs me in which both sides have ugly positions.
it's a draw, I'm not completely convinced.; Black's king is vulnerable and his d2 pawn
B) 14.a8+ c7 ( 14...b8?! is fairly likely to drop. On the other hand the
was tried in a Corr. game but 15.xb8+ pawn d oes a goo d job kee pin g W hit e's
xb8 16.0-0-0 e5 17.xd3 xd3 rooks out of the game. A possible
18.xd3 xa3 19.bxa3 f6 20.e1 continuation runs: d7 20.g3 hd8 21.a5
an d W h it e co n ve rt ed h is e xt ra p a wn . ( 21.g2 d4! 22.a5 c7 23.a8+
Kovac, S-Nielsen, J (2048) ICCF email d7 ) 21...c7 22.a8+ b8 23.a5
2005. ) 15.b5+ c6 16.a7+ c7 d4!? 24.b3 e5 and I'd select Black. ]
17.b5+ is simply a draw. ] 15...d3?! It's hard to refrain from this move to
14.a8+ try and stop White castling but the pawn now
[ 14.b5! was our choice when Black's becomes vulnerable.
position is tough. [ 15...e7 would exploit the precarious
A) 14...c5 immediately is better but nature of W hite's queen. 16.f3 ( 16.0-0
15.f4! c6 17.a4 d3 18.f3 xa3 19.xa3
A1) 15...c7 16.a4! xf4 17.f1 e5 20.h5 d6 21.c5 d4 and Black's
xh2 18.xf7 e7 ( 18...b8 queen and knight dominate the board. Black
19.b4! ) 19.0-0-0 and White's attack of course always has to be careful in this
must be simply too strong.; line as his king is still somewhat
124
vulnerable.) 16...c6 17.xc6 bxc6 18.0-0 sudden swing in fortunes and is still trying to
d6 19.g3 b4 ( 19...xb2 looks very crash through on the queenside but ceding d5
risky. ) 20.a8+ c7 21.a7+ b7 is terrible.
22.a5+ b6 23.d2 e5 with a very [ Instead he could have still bailed out with
complex position. ] 23.xd2! xd2 24.b4+! f6 ( 24...e8
16.f3 25.xd2 actually favours White as xa7?
[ 16.d1 looks to pick up the pawn but Black loses to 26.d1; 24...d6 25.c6+!
can again exploit W hite's queen position is the cunning idea.) 25.xd2 xh2!
with e7 17.xd3 ( 17.f3 c6 18.xc6 and Black is still for preference but W hite
bxc6 19.0-0 is extremely complicated but stays in the game. ( 25...xa7 26.f4+
subjectively I'd prefer to be Black.) 17...xd3 e7 27.c7+ f6 28.f4+= is a draw. )]
18.xd3 c6 19.g5 b4+ 20.e2 d4+ 23...d5! The rook now dominates the board.
21.f1 d8 and Black has taken over the 24.b5
initiative. ] [ 24.xd2 giving up the knight was White's
16...d2+ 17.e2 e7 18.hd1 f5 best chance but with accurate defence Black
This allows White a clear advantage. is clearly bette r xd2 25.xd2 xa7
[ 18...c6 was the alternative but here too 26.d1 b8! 27.b4 c7 28.c6+ f6
W hite has an edge with 19.xc6 bxc6 29.xb7 d6 and Black has successfully
20.a6+ c7 ( 20...b7 21.xb7+ xb7 developed his kingside pieces. ]
22.b1 is a clear extra pawn.) 21.c2 24...xh2 25.d6 f6! Running the king to
and W hite aims to win the d2 pawn and safer pastures 26.e4+ g6 27.e2 h6
slowly consolidate. It's important that xb2? A human move creating shelter for the king
loses to 22.ab1 xc2 23.b7+ d6 which has just run from c8 to g6 with all the
24.xd2+ xd2+ 25.xd2 ] major pieces still on the board.
19.b5 d4+ Kurajica acknowledges the [ H o w e v e r t h e f e a r l e s s 27...f5!
opening hasn't gone well and offers was the quickest route to victory as 28.g1+
liquidation into a clearly worse middlegame. f7 29.g5+ g8 leaves the Black
[ 19...c5 was the alternative but 20.f1! monarch safe. ]
l e a v e s W h i t e c l e a r l y o n t o p a s xh2 28.xd2 xd2+ Exchanging off pieces
21.a8+ b8 22.xb7+ d7 23.xd2+ simplifies Black's task.
e7 24.xb8 xb8 25.e4 should be a [ 28...e5!? pinning and winning the knight
decisive advantage with the three passed was also possible, for instance 29.c3 h7
queenside pawns. ] 30.d1 xe4 31.d3 h1+ 32.c2 xa1
20.f1? Baron presumably overestimated his 33.xe4+ g8 34.xb7 xc5 35.d8+
position and thought he was mating swiftly but h7 36.xh8+ xh8 37.c8+ h7
this lets Black off the hook. 38.xc5 xa2 with a clear advantage in the
[ The straightforward 20.xd4 was much queen and pawn endgame but playing in
better when Black would have to grovel such a fashion is very foolhardy. ]
t e r r i b l y a f t e r xd4 21.xd2 xd2+ 29.xd2 f5! Black's king has found safety
22.xd2 ] and now White can't prevent Black's kingside
20...xf3 21.a7+?! And this is the wrong pieces finally coming into the game when
way. It looks logical to force the king forwards W hite's position will be hopeless. 30.d7
but it becomes surprisingly safe. White tries to complicate the issue.
[ Instead he should have settled for 21.gxf3 [ It's easy to see that 30.d6 e5+ 31.f1
when c5 22.b4 xf2 23.xf2 xh2+ xc5 offers White no respite. ]
24.f1 h1+ 25.f2 h2+= is drawn. ] 30...e5 31.g1+ h7 32.xb7 fxe4
21...d7 22.gxf3 e7! Suddenly the knight It's amusing that Black can have a completely
looks really offside on a7 and the d2 pawn wi n n i n g p o s it i o n wi t h o u t d e ve lo p in g h i s
prevents W hite from launching a decisive kingside pieces and the king march makes
attack. 23.c5?! And this is probably the q u i t e a n i m p r e s s i o n . 33.b4 b2+
decisive mistake. Baron cannot adjust to the Nothing wrong with this check but missing an
125
immediate win. d4 It is tough to know who to prefer at

[ Instead 33...xc5! activating the rook wins this point-the Bishop[ on d4 acts as an
as W hite's king is too vulnerable. 34.bxc5 effective 'stopper' . Eventually Black won!
exf3+ 35.xf3 f8+ 36.g2 e2 Le Thi Phuong Lien-Chau Thi Ngoc Giao/
and Black will mate shortly. ] ch-VIE w, Dong Thap VIE 2003;
34.f1 b1+ 35.g2 exf3+ 36.h2 xa2 B) 6.f3 e6 7.0-0 e7 8.a3 0-0 9.c4
37.xf3 d5 White's queenside pawns look This would be more representative. It is
a little scary but Black does have an extra difficult to cast off the notion that White is
piece. 38.xd5 exd5 39.e1 g6 40.e5 at least slightly better but, as the game
f6 41.xd5 e7 42.d4 b8 43.e4 d8 goes, Black sustains his position. f6
44.g3 c7+ 45.f3 h5 46.e3 g5 10.h3 h6 11.e3 bd7 12.b3 c6
47.d3 h4 48.c4 h3 49.b5 f5 50.e1 13.c3 c7 14.ac1 fd8 15.fd1
f4 Not a perfectly played game but e4! Each exchange decreases White's
nevertheless very interesting and proof that edge. 16.a4 f6 17.d5 c5 18.d2
even GMs find it hard to navigate correctly in d6 19.c3 xc3 20.xc3 e5
this minefield. The theoretical onus is still on Again Black went on to outplay his
White. opponent. Bellaiche, A-Bergez,L/GM, Evry
0-1 FRA 2003 ]
6.c4 b6 7.c3 g7 8.e3 0-0 9.d2
White will borrow a plan from Fischer: h4-h5,
149 B01 s a c , s a c , m a t e ! f5 If this is the best that
Becquart,Julien 2105 Black has he really does have serious
Sacliez,Alain problems but
6th Open, Elancourt (3) 2003 [ 9...c6 doesn't look great either after
[Andrew Martin] 10.c5! c8 11.d5 e5 12.h6 ]
10.g4! c8 11.0-0-0 c6 12.h4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ d7 Direct and almost impossible to meet. e5
[ I believe that 3...bd7 may be underrated . 13.d5 d4 14.h5 There should be no
It is certainly true to say that 3...Bd7 is hesitation. xe2+ 15.xe2 d7
played much more often. After 3.. .Nbd7 a [ B l o c k i n g w i t h t h e d i s g u s t i n g 15...g5
pawn sacrifice is usually involved-something is legal but little else. Black's position is
like 4.c4 a6 5.xd7+ ( 5.a4 b5 6.cxb5 gh a st l y a f t e r 16.c5 d7 17.h6 h8
b6 ) 5...xd7 6.c3 c6 7.dxc6 xc6 ( 17...f6 18.e4 ) 18.f3 f6 19.e4 ]
but you can see from both of these small 16.f3
lines that the game is very messy. ] [ I quite like 16.hxg6 too. Black's position is
4.e2 xd5 5.d4 White plays for horrid: fxg6 ( 16...hxg6 17.f3 xg4
coordination. At some point he simply intends 18.h4 f5 19.dh1 f6 20.g5!! ) 17.f3
c 2 -c 4 , t a k in g t h e ce n t re in a f a vo u r a b l e b8 18.h3 h6 19.f2 f7 20.h3 ]
manner. g6?! 16...a4 17.e4 f5 18.g5!
[ It looks as though 5...f5 is better. Black [ 18.c5 xc5 19.xc5 f7 ( 19...f6
will not fianchetto his King's Bishop aiming 20.hxg6 xg6 21.gxf5 xf5 and Black
for an ...e6 set-up, or, when White gets too scrapes an existence.) 20.hxg6 hxg6
frisky, maybe even . ..e7-e5! 21.h2 ]
A) 6.c4!? b4 7.a3 e5 8.f3 e4 18...fxg4
9.e5 f6 10.a4+ c6 11.c5 fxe5 [ 18...e4 19.d4 e7 was the only try.
12.xb4 xd4 13.xb7 xc5 14.0-0 White is still much better after both 20 f4
d7 15.xa8 0-0 What an unholy mess! and 20 Ne6 but it's still a game. ]
16.c4 c7 17.a5 ( Fritz suggests 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.e6+- f7 21.h2 f6
17.d2! a6 18.a5 xa8 19.xc7 22.fxg4 xe6 23.dxe6 3 Bb5+ can be
xc7 20.xe5 ) 17...xa5 18.c4+ overlooked in the rush to play 3 d4 or 3 c4 but
h8 19.b7 b6 20.xb6 axb6 21.e3 it remains an interesting line where White is
126
trying to disturb the natural flow of Black's and it is for that reason that I have to give the
development form a very early stage. My n o d t o B l a ck h e r e . O ve r t h e b o a r d , t h i s
experience is that Black players know this line position is just a lot of grief for White. 13.f2
much less well than the variations stemming c5 As White has so obligingly put his King
from the other third moves. As a practical o n f 2 , B la ck' s B ish o p f in d s a n e x c e lle n t
choice for W hite, recommended, although square. 14.b1 a5 15.b3 f7 Here, rather
beware 3...Nbd7! than 0-0-0 which would allow Bh3+. 16.d3
1-0 ad8 17.d1 f5 Tactical threats abound.
W hite has not solved his problems, 18.b2
d7 Just threatening to pile up on the pinned
150 B01 Knight with ...Re8 and ...Rde7. 19.c2 xd1
Belaska,Premysl 2295 20.xd1 d8 21.e2 e8 22.b4 axb4
Sikora Lerch,Jan 2345 [ 22...xe3+ 23.xe3 xe3 24.bxa5
TCh Czech Republic 2002 exc4 25.xc4+ xc4 26.xb7 xa5
[Andrew Martin] 27.a7 c6 28.xc7+ e7 is, of course,
completely lost for White. ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 23.b3 a4 24.d3 c3 25.d2 e7
Clearly playable, but allows Black a free hit at 26.xc3 bxc3 A very simple win for Black,
the centre. b6 5.c3 e5! It turns out that underscoring the unpromising nature of 4 c4.4
White has rushed his central expansion and Nf3 is much, much better. White's problems in
fallen into not exactly an opening trap, but t h i s l i n e a r e t w o f o l d : 1 ) H e c a n n o t
certainly a line to avoid. 6.dxe5 consolidate his early central gains quickly
[ 6.d5 c6 7.e3 b4 8.b3 a6 9.0-0-0 enough. The White centre is shaky. 2) Having
e7 10.ge2 1/2-1/2 Krupkova, P-Sikora won the pawn, he find developing a clumsy
Lerch, J TCh-CZE 2003 says nothing, apart experience. In particular, he cannot anchor
that Black is very comfortable in the final a n y o f h i s m i n o r p i e c e s i n t h e c e n t r e .
position. ] Me an while, Bla ck uses th e d 4 squa re t o
6...xd1+ 7.xd1 c6 8.f4 f6! strong effect.
[ 8...e6 is different and I'm not sure I like it 0-1
as much as the game move. Yes, Black
forces b2-b3, but it's a move White wants to
ma ke a nd t he B isho p blocks t he e f ile . 151 B01
9.e3 c5 10.b3 0-0-0 11.f3 f6 12.f5 Benjamin,Joel 2552
xe3 13.xe3 xf5 14.exf6 gxf6 15.e2 Schroer,Jonathan 2359
b4 16.f2 he8 The position on which US Chess League 2011 (5) 26.09.2011
8...Be6 stands or falls. Black's active, White [Milos Pavlovic]
has two Bishops. Take your pick. 17.d4
d3+ 18.xd3 xd3 19.ad1 e4= 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 This is the first
Bluvshtein, M-Paschall, W New York 2003 ] time that a game in the Scandinavian
9.exf6 gxf6 10.f3 g4 11.e3 Defence featured in one of my updates. a5
The point being that 4.c4 c6 5.e2 f5 6.d3 At first sight this
[ 11.e2 b4+! is embarrassing for White is a modest approach but actually White has
who has to move the King. ] a dangerous attacking idea in mind. f6
11...xf3 12.gxf3 d4 Let's take stock. [ Relevant is: 6...e6 7.g4 g6 8.f4 e7
W hite has an extra doubled pawn. He also 9.f3 h5 10.e5 h4+ 11.f1
owns the Two Bishops. In return Black owns Safer and probably stronger was: ( 11.d1 )
the centre and has a particularly strong Knight 11...e7 12.f5 exf5 13.g5 b5 14.b3 b4
on d4. Black has easy development with Bb4+, 15.a4 f4 16.xf4 0-0 17.g2 d5
0-0-0 and Rhe8 being the easiest moves in 18.f3 d8 19.c5 f5 20.xd5 cxd5
the world to play. I know I am always very 21.xh5 c8 22.d4 xg5 23.xg5 f6
happy when I see a clear plan of campaign And now with 24. Bxf6 Rxf6 25. Raf1 White
127
i s w i n n i n g , M u zy c h u k , A ) - R e p k o v a , E 19.axb3 b4 20.f2 d7 21.gxf7 xf7

Dresden 2008 ] 22.hf1 hf8 23.g2 After a more or less
7.d2 c7 8.h3 e6 forced sequence of moves the position is
[ 8...h5 I think this is more to the point even about equal but Joel managed to outplay his
if it allows White the g5 square, its surely opponent. xc3 24.xc3 d5 25.xf7
the safest option. 9.f3 bd7 10.0-0-0 xf7 26.e8+ d7 27.e4 c8 28.e8+
A) 10...e6 11.d4 g6 ( 11...h7 d7 29.e4 c8 30.e5 d7 31.h2 f5
12.xe6 fxe6 13.xe6 e5 14.c7+ 32.e1 b7 33.g1 g5 Suddenly it is Black
f7 15.xa8 xe2 16.xe2 d6 who controls the game. 34.b1 h5 35.d2
17.f4 xf4+ 18.xf4 xa8 19.he1 ); b4 36.a2 f4 37.g2 a4 38.e4 c1
B) 10...b5 11.d4 bxc4 ( 11...g6 39.bxa4 f1? Black missed an opportunity to
12.xb5 cxb5 13.cxb5 b8 14.f3 beat his famous opponent:
With attack.) 12.xf5 g6 13.d4 cxd3 [ 39...c3+! 40.bxc3 ( 40.b3 xe4
14.xd3 e5 15.a6 b6 16.xb6 41.dxe4 f4 ) 40...a3+ 41.b1 bxc3-+ ]
axb6 17.he1 c4 18.g5 g7 40.d4! The only but good move. d1 41.f2
19.xc6 White is clearly better, Muzychuk, d2? The last and decisive mistake. Black
A -Blazkova, P /Stockholm 2008 ] was still ok with:
9.g4 g6 10.f4 e7 11.f3 bd7 12.0-0-0 [ 41...b1+ 42.b3 xd3+! 43.c4
White has a very dangerous initiative here. xd4+! 44.xd4 xb2 And Black is not
b5N worse anymore. ]
[ 12...b6 13.de1 f8 14.b3 42.f7+ c7 43.e5 xc2 44.xc7+ a6
Already we can consider Black's position 45.c8+ a5 46.c7+ xa4 47.a6#
bad. d6 15.e5 xe5 16.xe5 xe5 1-0
17.fxe5 fd7 18.e4 g8 19.d4 h5
20.g5 xe4 21.xe4 d5 22.f1 g6
23.xd5 cxd5 24.ef4 h7 25.b4 b8 152 B01
26.d6 c6 27.1f3 Black has a difficult Bevilacqua,Andrea 1978
endgame. d8 28.b3 d7 29.d2 e7 Drazic,Sinisa 2497
30.xe7 xe7 31.c3 g7 32.c8 h8 Open A Trieste ITA (1) 04.09.2005
33.xh8 xh8 34.f3 g8 35.c3 f8 [Neil McDonald]
36.a4 e8 37.c8+ d7 38.a8 a6
39.c3 c6 40.b4 c7 41.c4 dxc4 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 Black isn't
42.bxc4 White won in Short, N -Liu Dede / satisfied with symmetry after
Mallorca 2004 ] [ 3...exd5 ]
13.b3 a5 14.de1 c5 4.f3
[ 14...a4 15.xe6 fxe6 16.f5 b4 17.b1 [ I can't resist giving the following game by
e5 18.fxg6 hxg6 19.xe5 ] Nimzowitsch in view of its pretty f inish:
15.f5 exf5 16.d4 Alternatives were 4.c3?! If White wants to refute the early
stronger it seems: black queen move, it has to be through
[ 16.g5!? xb3+ 17.axb3 h5 18.e5 utilising the c-pawn with c2-c4 at some point,
f8 19.xc6 ( 19.f3 c8 20.e2 d6 rather than bringing out the knight
21.he1 g8 22.h4 With strong immediately. b4 5.f3 f6 6.g5 xc3+
compensation. ) 19...xg5 ] 7.bxc3 c6 8.xf6 gxf6 9.e2 g8
[ 16.gxf5 h5 ( 16...xf5 17.d4 xb3+ 10.0-0 d7 11.c4 h5 12.d5 0-0-0
18.axb3 g6 19.xc6+- ) 17.hg1! a4 Black can be pleased with his active set up,
18.xf7+! xf7 ( 18...xf7 19.xg7 g8 but now he is out calculated by his great
20.xf7!! xf7 21.e5+ g7 22.xb5!! opponent: 13.d4!? ( not 13.dxc6? xc6
cxb5 23.g2+ f8 24.xa8++- 14.c1 xg2+! 15.xg2 g8+ 16.h1
A fascinating line!) 19.e5+ f8 20.g2 xf3+ 17.xf3 xf3# ) 13...h3?
With a winning attack for White. ] ( Black is better after 13...g5 14.g3 exd5 )
16...0-0-0 17.gxf5 xd4 18.fxg6 xb3+ 14.g3 g6? ( Here 14...e5 is unclear.)
128
15.dxc6! So Black has finally managed to entice a

A) Or 15...h6 16.cxb7+ b8 17.f3 tactical blunder out of his much lower rated
and wins. ( or 17.c6+!? ); opponent. Still, after
B) 15...xc6 16.xc6! xd1 17.fxd1 [ 22.g4 h8 Black can strengthen his
bxc6 18.c5! Now Black is suddenly in a position with moves like Qc6 and Rab8,
mating net based on Ba6+. g8 ( Or etc. ]
18...b7 19.ab1+ a8 20.d8# ) 22...xa6 23.xa6 xg2! 24.xg2 c6+
19.ab1! 1-0 Nimzowitsch, A-Fleuss/ 25.h2 xa6 Drazic regains his pawn and
Zurich 1906. ] can begin the process of wearing down his
4...f6 5.c4 opponent by exploiting the holes in the white
[ Perhaps the most irritating line for an kingside. 26.g1 xa3 27.xh6 d8
ambitious player of Black is 5.e2 d8 28.c4 f3 29.h4 d3 30.e3 d5
The black queen gets out of the way of Ne5 31.g5 g6 32.b1 e4 33.g1 g7
and Bf3 before b7-b6 is played. 6.0-0 b6 34.f4 d5 35.a1 xe5! 36.a8+
7.e5 More or less forcing the simplification [ Or 36.xe5 xe5+ 37.xe5 xe5+
that follows. b7 8.f3 c8 9.g5 e7 38.g2 xa1 ]
10.d2 0-0 11.xb7 xb7 12.f3 xf3 36...h7 37.xe5 xe5+ 38.g1 f6!
13.dxf3 h6 14.h4 d8 15.h3 f8 Black decides to force the white queen onto a
16.c4 a6 17.fd1 c6 18.d3 and White more passive square rather than simplifying
has a very small but persistent positional immediately with
advantage, and Black, one of the top [ 38...xa8 39.xe5 ]
Chinese GMs, was unable to gain more than 39.g2 e1+ 40.f1 h2+ 41.g2 e4+
a draw in a long struggle in Wei Chenpeng- 42.xh2 xa8 43.e2 d5 44.e3 e5
Zhang Zhong/Wuxi CHN 2005. ] 45.a3 d4 46.g1 h6 47.c6 d1+
5...d8 6.c3 b6 It makes sense to clear 48.h2 c2 49.f8+ g5 50.h4+ f5
the way for Bb7 as soon as possible. It is 51.c8+ f4 52.g1 xc6
inadvisable to aim for a too quick c7-c5: 0-1
[ 6...e7 7.d3 0-0 8.0-0 c5?! 9.d5!
s t o p p i n g N c 6 a n d c r e a t i n g a p o we r f u l
passed pawn in the centre. a6 10.f4 153 B01
exd5 11.cxd5 e8?! ( 11...d6 ) 12.d6! Bielczyk,Jacek 2380
f8 13.a3 e6 14.b5 d7 15.b3 c8 Sabek,Pascal
16.ad1 b6 17.c4 with considerable Katowice 1992
pressure for White in Kovalev, A-Zakhvatov, [Alexander Volzhin]
V/Cherepovets 1997. ]
7.e2 b7 8.h3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6
[ More vigorous was 8.g5 ] 5.c3 e5 6.d5!? A continuation which
8...bd7 9.e3 a6 A useful precaution deserves serious attention. c6
against Nb5, especially in view of his next [ 6...c5 was tried in the game Wagner -
move. 10.0-0 d6 11.a3 White has played Dinstuhl, GER 1991: 7.f3 0-0 8.e2 e8
the opening solidly, but he can't find any plan 9.0-0 with a small advantage for White
apart from the advance of the queenside followed. ]
pawns. This will create an imbalance which [ 6...b4 w o u l d b e m e t b y 7.b3
will suit Black just fine. 0-0 12.b4 e8 13.c5 a l t h o u g h t h e p o s i t i o n a f t e r a6!?
Obviously this loosens the light squares, but is far from clear. ]
White was probably afraid of Black gaining 7.f3 b4 8.e3!? An interesting idea. cxd5
counterplay after say 9.c5! d4
[ 13.b3 e5 etc. ] [ A p r i n c i p l e d d e c i s i o n , a f t e r 9...6d7
13...f8 14.c2 h6 15.fd1 d5 16.xd5 10.xd5 White was slightly better. ]
xd5 17.e5 xe5 18.dxe5 bxc5 19.bxc5 10.xe5!
h4 20.d4 e7 21.a4 d7 22.xa6? [ 10.cxb6 xb6 was unclear. ]
129
10...dxc3 with this in my database!) 6.f3 e6 7.0-0

[ 10...xc5 also came into consideration: e7 , when a typical continuation is 8.a3
11.b5+ 8d7 12.xd4 xd4 13.xd4 0-0 9.c4 b6 10.c3 c6 11.e3 f6
0-0 14.0-0 with a small advantage for and Black might play for ...Qe7 and ...Rfd8. ]
White. ] 6.f3 e6
11.xd8+ xd8 12.0-0-0+ e7 13.cxb6 [ The only other game I have with 5...b5 went
axb6 14.c4 cxb2+ 15.xb2 a3+ 6...g6 7.0-0 g7 8.bd2 0-0 9.e4 a6
This loses control of the e1 square. 10.c3 f5 11.g3 c8?! ( 11...e6 ) 12.a4!
[ 15...e6!? deserved attention: 16.xe6 bxa4!? ( 12...b4 13.c4 f6 14.f4 )
xe6 17.c4 d7 ( 17...b5!? 18.b6 13.xa4 with a definite advantage,
a6 ) 18.d2!? c5 19.he1+ d5 Haznedaroglu-Ayaz, Istanbul 2004. ]
looks good for Black. ] 7.0-0 d6 8.e5!? 0-0 9.a4 This is the key
16.a1 f6?? Missing something interesting. idea, but Black seems to have enough
[ 16...e6 was necessary and after 17.xe6 queenside play to neutralise White attempts
xe6 18.c4 the position looks dangerous there. b4 10.d2
for Black but things are not so clear after [ Black's activity compensates for the bishop
b4 19.xb6 c3+ 20.b1 a5 21.a4 pair following 10.c4 bxc3 11.bxc3 c6
with advantage to White ] 12.xd7 xd7 ]
17.g6+! hxg6 18.c5+! Surely Black did 10...c6 11.df3 h6 12.d3 e8!?
not think his king could be mated so easily. 13.d2 a5 14.c4
It's curious that W hite could sacrif ice his [ 14.fe1 would be more patient. ]
pieces in either order to clear the e-file for his 14...bxc3 15.bxc3 b6!?
rook. xc5 19.he1+ e6 20.xe6+ [ 15...ce7 ]
Black resigned. 16.g4!? f5 17.e3 e7 18.c4 c6
1-0 19.fe5 e4 20.g3 f6 Versus Bxh6.
21.f3 xc4 22.xc4 d5 23.xd5 exd5
24.f4 xe5 25.xe5 g6 26.h4
154 B01 [ Better seems 26.f2 c6 27.c2 ]
Blesic,Vaso 2301 26...c6! Preparing ...Ng6. 27.fe1?!
Karaklajic,Nikola 2303 [ An active line suggested by Rybka is
Belgrade Premier League (9) 13.10.2008 27.ab1 xc3 28.g3 f8 29.b7 ]
[John Watson] 27...g6 28.g3 h4?! Trying to complicate,
although
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ d7 4.e2 [ 28...b8 appears better. ]
[ The other game from this month saw 4.c4 29.xc7 xg3 30.xg3 xc3 31.d6?
g4!? 5.f3 c8 (the basic Portuguese idea - [ 31.e6! f7 32.d6 ]
to provoke f3 and then recover the pawn) 31...c2 32.ac1 ac8 33.e8+ xe8
6.c3 bd7 7.d4 b6 8.b3 bxd5 34.xc2 e1+ 35.f2 a1 36.c5 xa4
9.e4!? ( 9.xd5 xd5 10.e2 g6!? ) 37.xd5 f4 38.g3 a2+ 39.g1 a4
9...e6 10.e2 b5!? (compare the main 40.xf4? The last move before time control, I
game this stops c4 and prepares ...Bb7) imagine. White could draw after
( 10...e7 11.0-0 0-0 12.c4 b6 13.e3 [ 40.a5 ]
should give White a small advantage) 11.0-0 40...xf4 41.gxf4 d2 42.d7??
e7 12.a4 b4 13.c4 ( 13.a5! -compare [ 42.a5 xd4 43.f5 ]
what follows) 13...bxc3 14.bxc3 a5 15.c4!? 42...a3 The pawn queens.
b4 16.e3 0-0 d there's nothing 0-1
particularly wrong with Black's game, Grekh,
A (2391)-Muzychuk, M (2436), Lviv 2008. ]
4...xd5 5.d4 b5!?
[ An original idea, to prevent c4. The main
line goes 5...f5 (I have over 900 games
130
155 B01 moment. ]

Bologan,Viktor 2665 8...c5?! Sharp, too sharp. Perhaps the
Gofshtein,Leonid D 2522 alternatives will have to be considered :
ACP Blitz Prelim4 blitz (12) 15.04.2004 [ 8...b6 9.d5 exd5 10.xd5 xd5
[Andrew Martin] 11.xd5 e7 12.g5 f6 13.e4 g6
14.h5 ( 14.f4 ) 14...c6! ]
The increasing t endency in internationa l [ 8...e7 9.f4 b6 10.d2 0-0 11.a4
chess towards faster and faster time limits is b4= I think I like this line best of all. Black
leading to an obvious lowering of quality in avoids any slaughter with his King stuck in
the games. It seems to me the emphasis is the middle and concentrates on the basics
switching very much away from aesthetic of development. ]
considerations towards the outright brutality of 9.f4 c6 10.e1!
competition. Chess is becoming less an art [ 10.e5! also looks pretty strong.
more a sport. This doesn't matter too much on Essentially W hite is getting on the case
this site where opening information is before Black castles it's as simple as that.
paramount. Quite often in these quick games xe5 ( 10...b6 11.c4 d8 12.dxc5 )
the opening is the only part of the game of 11.dxe5 d7 12.f3 b6 13.b1 e7
interest. Take a look at this recent massacre! 14.e2 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6!? 4.d4 10...b5? Horrible but blitz mode is full of such
f6 5.f3 a6 6.e2 e6 Having played . .. aberrations.
a7-a6,Black probably feels that his Queen's [ If we are talking damage limitation then
Bishop belongs on b7. However it will take 10...cxd4 11.xd4 b6 was probably best
quite some time to get it there! W orth but Black's failure to get castled is making
consideration is me very unsettled. ]
[ 6...g4!? which aims for harmonious 11.d5! POW! But Black was asking for it. b6
development: 7.0-0 e6 8.e1 e7 9.g5 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.g5 With attack! Bf3 is
0-0 ( Either 9...bd7; 9...c6 10.xf6 coming up and e6 hangs. Already Black is
gxf6!? could have been preferred.) 10.xf6 dead. a7 14.h5+ e7 15.xe6 xe6
xf6 11.e4 d8 12.c3 d7 13.b3! 16.d6+ Light fare, easily digested. 8 g3
White begins to work up an edge. His Rooks could well be a dangerous move!.
are influential whereas the Black Rooks 1-0
have yet to enter the fray. b8 14.ad1
e7 15.e5 f5?! ( 15...xe2 16.xe2
d6 minimises White's edge. Black is very 156 B01
nearly equal here.) 16.c5 b6 17.f3 Bologan,Viktor 2692
Fedorov, A-Gashimov,V/Dubai UAE 2004 ] Grafl,Florian 2428
7.0-0 bd7 8.g3!?N If the 3...Qd6 variation 9th Amplico Life Rapid rapid (9) 20.12.2009
is to be exposed as insufficient it will surely [Neil McDonald]
hinge on the insecure position of the Black
Queen. In time-honoured fashion with 8 g3!?, 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3
White plans a quick Bf4. [ Of course 3.c3 is the main move here. ]
[ Instead 8.g5 does not seem as incisive: 3...g4 4.e2 c6 5.d4 0-0-0
e7 9.d2 b5 10.f4 b6 11.d5! Direct, vigorous attacking play by Black. It
If Black were allowed to play ...Bb7 in peace intimidates lower rated opponents and doesn't
his position would be fine. c5 12.dxe6 allow a higher rated player a calm positional
xe6 13.e3 c5 14.xc5 xc5 15.ad1 advantage. 6.e3
b7= Dabo Peranic,R-Sermek,D/TCh-CRO, [ I n t h e a r ch ive s yo u ca n a ls o f i n d 6.c4
Rabac CRO 2003 What's wrong with Black's which incidentally is the move I recommend
game. Castles comes next and all the entry for W hite in 'Starting Out with 1. e4'. One
points on the d file are covered. Perhaps good point about delaying c2-c4 is that
Black will even have kingside chances in a after Black's next move his queen can't go to
131
f5 or h5. However, as we shall see, the 23.a4 and White wins due to the double
queen check on a5 contains a lot of threat of 24.Rxa1 and 24.Na7+. )]
energy. ] 19.xf6
6...e5 7.c4 a5+ 8.d2 b4 9.d5 xf3 [ Not 19.dxc6 as after bxc4 the black knight
10.xf3 d4 has the b3 square. ]
[ For 10...xd2+ see the relevant note to the 19...gxf6 20.c5 a5 21.bxa5 b4 22.e4
game Morozevich- Rogers in the archives. ] xd5 23.a4 b3 24.e2 c2 25.xf6
11.c3 a6 12.e2!? Bologan withdraws ed8 26.xd5 xd5 27.h4 d4+
his bishop from a possible future attack by f7- 28.e1??
f5 and e5-e4. [ After an exciting fight Bologan makes a
[ The natural move is 12.b3 in order to horrible blunder. The game should be a
secure the c4 pawn. But then Ivanchuk draw af ter 28.d2! xc5 29.c1! d5!?
achieved active play in the following high ( Black would be worse af ter 29...xa5?!
profile game: a5 ( Grafl himself has tried 30.xc6 )]
12...g6!? here in Novkovic, J-Grafl, F/ 28...xc5 Now White is going to lose the vital
Austria AUT 2009.) 13.c1 f5 14.0-0 f6 b2 pawn as well. 29.h3 c1+ 30.d2 c2+
15.g3 b8 16.g2 he8 17.e1 h6 31.d3 xb2 32.f4 a2 33.xb3 xb3
18.e3 a6 19.h3 d7 20.e1 c5 34.fxe5 c5+ 35.c4 d7 36.g3 a4+
21.h1 g5 22.f4 exf4 23.xe8 xe8 37.b3 xh4 38.g7 xe5 39.a6 b8
24.xd4 xe1+ 25.xe1 xc3 26.e8+ 40.g3 g4 41.xh7 a7 42.h5 f6 43.f5
a7 27.f2 fxg3 28.xg3 d4 29.d6 xg3+ 44.b4 f3 45.h5 xa6
cxd6 30.xd6 c3 31.h2 a1 32.b8+ 0-1
b6 33.d8+ a7 34.b8+ b6
35.d8+ a7 and draw agreed Leko, P-
Ivanchuk, V/Mukachevo UKR 2009. ] 157 B01
12...f6 13.a3 he8 14.axb4! This is the Bologan,Viktor 2690
idea behind 12.Be2- Bologan sacrifices the Tiviakov,Sergei 2637
exchange in order to trap the black knight on TCh-CRO Gp1A (9) 12.09.2010
a1. [Gawain Jones]
[ I f i n s t e a d 14.0-0 t h e p a wn g r a b xc3
15.xc3 xe2+ 16.xe2 xd5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
looks better for Black, notwithstanding the f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 This strikes me as the
fact that W hite has certain attacking most critical option against 5....c6 . bd7
chances. ] 7.c4 And it was only a matter of time before
14...xa1 15.xa1 c2+ 16.f1 xa1 we had a look at this move. Instead we have
17.d1 The black knight is now shut in, and seen
given time White will trap it with 18.Ba4 and [ 7.f4 ]
19.Ke2. Therefore Grafl has to break open [ and 7.f4 in the archives. ]
lines in the centre as a matter of urgency. c6 7...c7 8.f3 This is a very direct plan and
18.g5 b5 Black has to play accurately to prevent a
[ The critical line is 18...cxd5 19.xf6 ( Not quick loss. b6 9.f4 d7 Black hopes to
19.xd5? b5! or; 19.cxd5? xd5 20.xd8 exchange queens on g4.
xd8 21.xd5 xd5 22.e2 b5 [ 9...d8 is the other option of course.
and White can't win the imprisoned knight 10.e5 This seems to be the most sensible
and meanwhile b4 is a target: 23.e3 d4 o p t i o n h e r e . ( 10.h3 doesn't look so
24.h3 f5 and Black is winning.) 19...gxf6 effective here as Black can ignore the pawn
20.cxd5 b5 to stop 21.Ba4 21.e2 a6 and play e6; 10.0-0-0? allows g4 )
with a bizarre position- W hite is still the A) 10...g4 11.g3 h5 12.h3 ( 12.f3
exchange down and can't easily capture the was Grischuk's attempt but never really
knight, but Black can't rescue the knight troubled Tiviakov.) 12...h4 13.f4 e6
either. ( Thus if 21...a5? 22.xb5 xd5 14.e3 bd5 15.exd5 xd5 16.d2
132
xc3 17.bxc3!? ( 17.xc3 d5 18.d2 attack on the Black queen. d5 19.c4
e6 19.c4 e4 20.f3 f5 21.a3 h5 f7 leaves a complicated position but one
22.d1 d6 23.e3 f6 24.xd6 xd6= in which White doesn't have as much for
Hossain, E (2460)-Tiviakov, S (2669) Turin t h e p a w n a s h e d o e s i n t h e g a m e .)
2006. ) 17...a5 18.e2 d5 19.0-0 16...fxe5 17.xe5 g6 and White never
0-0-0 20.d3 f6 21.h2 f7 22.e3 e6 got enough for the piece.;
23.c4 f5 24.d5! saw Black encounter B) 11.xg4 xg4 was tried in a recent
some serious problems. exd5 25.xa7 game. ( 11...xg4 has also been played
d6 26.xd6 xd6 27.ab1 d7 by, amongst others, Tiviakov himself and
28.a8+ c7 29.xb7+ d6 30.a3+ Black doesn't seem to have any major
1-0 Womacka, M (2478)-Pizzuto, S (2168) problems. ) 12.g3 g6 13.0-0-0 h6+
Schwarzach 2010.; 14.b1 0-0 15.a5 d8 16.e2 f6
B) 10...e6 11.e3 fd7 12.g3 f6 17.he1 bd5 18.xd5 xd5 19.b3
13.0-0-0 a6 14.b1 bd5 15.cxd5 f8 20.f3 d8 21.c5 and White had a
xd5 16.e2 ( 16.xd5 xd5 17.e3 temporary initiative although he couldn't
looks slightly better for W hite thanks to convert it to anything more than that Lastin,
the bishop pair.) 16...e6 17.f3 b5! 18.h4 A (2643) -Lenderman, A (2601)/ICC
e7 19.h5 was rather unclear, Saric, I 2010. ]
(2580) -Drazic, S (2531) Pula 2010.; [ 10.0-0-0 has been the most common but
C) 10...bd5 was tried by Epishin against g4 as Tiviakov has played previously
Gashimov in Ourense 2009 but didn't work seems ok for Black. 11.xg4 xg4 12.f3
out too well: 11.xd5 xd5 12.e2 e6 e6 13.xb6 axb6 14.c7 b5 15.d5
13.c3 e4 14.xe4 xe4 15.d3 0-0-0 xd5 16.xd5 xd5 17.xd5 c8 18.a5
16.e3 c5?! 17.c2?! ( 17.dxc5 xd3 cxd5 19.xb5+ c6 20.d1 e6
18.d4 winning the exchange is the and Black was holding Vokarev, S (2521) -
obvio us st ep .) 17...d7 18.g3 g6 Tiviakov, S (2697) Bhubaneswar 2009. ]
19.b3! h6 20.xe6 fxe6 21.c4 hf8 10...xc4
22.0-0 f4 23.fe1 xg3 24.hxg3 f6 [ 10...xd4 11.d1 c5 12.e3 f5
25.b4 and he successfully converted his 13.g3 looks very risky with the Black king
structural advantage.; stuck in the centre. ]
D) 10...-- When Black has tried a few 11.xc4 xd4 12.b3 e6 13.d1 b6
different moves: ] 14.0-0 so at the cost of a pawn White has a
10.h3!? Seeing as Black plans to use the g4 large lead in development. However Black's
square this move makes sense. Therefore it position looks solid and there's no way to
is perhaps surprising that the move hasn't break through. The real problem for Black is
been played before. Black is obliged to take his c8 bishop which will struggle to get out of
the pawn or else his last looks rather foolish. his own pawn chain. Meanwhile White can set
[ I looked at 10.xb6 in the notes to Bulski- Black some problems on the kingside and on
Stopa which ended in a quick W hite the open lines. e7 15.e4! xe4 16.xe4
victory. ] 0-0 17.e5 The White bishops clearly outrank
[ 10.e5 with a parallel to 9...Qd8 has been t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s a n d wi t h t h e k n i g h t s
playe d a f ew tim es a lth o ugh a ga in g4 exchanged Black's kingside suddenly looks
seems satisfactory for Black. much more vulnerable. Black has to watch out
A) Keeping the queens on with 11.e3 for a rook swing and subsequent sacrifice on
wa s a t t e m p t e d in S wie r cz, D (2 5 0 1 ) - g7 while c3 , Bc2 is also on the cards . c5
Tiviakov, S (2634) Wroclaw 2010 although I think the point of the move is to allow the
fd5 12.xd5 xd5 13.d2 h5!? queen to defend the e6 pawn laterally so that
14.e2!? xg2 15.0-0-0 f6 was quite ...f6 will be playable and thus he won't have to
p r o m i s i n g . 16.h4 ( White isn't actually weaken himself with ....g6.
losing the piece as 16.g3 h4 17.e3 [ 17...a5 is another option but 18.d3 d8
xe3 18.fxe3 threatens a discovered 19.g4 g6 20.xd8+ xd8 21.d1 b6
133
22.a4 leaves White with great compensation 158 B01

for the pawn as Black still really struggles Boros,Denes 2485
to develop. ] Motylev,Alexander 2705
18.fe1 a5 19.e3 Simple play by Bologan 11th EICC Men (4) 09.03.2010
who is preparing nasty business on the Black [Gawain Jones]
king. d8 20.xd8+ xd8 21.d3 f8
[ 21...b6 would be more actively placed but 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
now 22.xg7! is very strong. I think the [ 4.g3 was also tried recently. f6 5.g2
f o l l o w i n g l i n e i s f o r c e d : ( 22.f4!? ) c6 ( 5...c6 was played successfully by
22...xg7 23.g3+ f8 ( 23...h8 Nisipeanu against Topalov in the archives)
24.g4+- ) 24.xh7 f6 25.h6+ e7 6.ge2 f5 7.0-0 e5 8.d3 0-0-0 9.b4!?
26.g8 d4 27.f8+ f6 28.g7 c7 from a non-threatening start suddenly White
29.h7 xf2+! 30.f1 ( 30.xf2 f4+= ) decides he wants to play an aggressive
30...c4 31.h8+ e7 32.xf7+! xf7 game.
33.h7+ e8 34.xc7 cxb3 35.axb3 A) Taking the pawn must be critical
leaving White clearly better in the endgame although 9...xb4 10.b1
as Black still has problems to develop his looks dangerous with play along on the b
queenside while the g and h pawns will be file but ( 10.a3 a5 seems ok for Black.)
able to swiftly advance down the board. ] 10...d7 11.a3 c6 and it doesn't
22.a4 f6 23.c7 f5 I don't like this move seem like White should have enough for
but it's really tough to offer Black any the pawn with .. .Bh3 coming next to trade
su gge st io n s . 24.c4 f6 25.b5 a6 off one of the attackers.;
26.xa5 This leaves White with a B) 9...e4 10.e3 e6?! It turns out
commanding position but he had an even White has better attacking chances with
stronger possibility. that pawn on the board than without so
[ 26.d8! would have exploited the taking the pawn was necessary. 11.b5
undefended c8 bishop. f8 ( 26...xd8 b4 12.d4 e5
27.e8+ f8 28.xd8 xe8 29.xe8+ B1) 13.xe4 is an extra pawn as
f7 30.xc8+- is simply a free bishop.) xe4?! ( 13...xe4 14.xf5! c3
27.xe7 xe7 28.e8+ xe8 29.xe8 15.f3 ) 14.dxe4 xe4?! 15.g4+
and surprisingly Black has no way to hold is winning;
onto the c8 bishop. f8 30.d8 b6 B2) 13.f4!? c5?! ( 13...exf3 14.xf3
31.xc8 xb2 32.a4+ e7 33.b3 xd4 looks exceedingly dangerous but
and White should convert. ] h a d t o b e t r i e d) 14.xe4 xe4
26...e5? The position is already difficult but 15.dxe4 and White had everything he
this just loses. could hope for in the recent game
[ 26...c6 was probably necessary but after Sedlak, N-Caspi, I Rijeka 2010. ]
27.c3 f8 28.e5 White completely 4...f6 5.f3
dominates the board. ] [ 5.c4 bd7!? 6.b3 ( The natural 6.f3
27.d8+! Def lection! xd8 28.e8+ f8 seems to favour White a little although b6
29.b3+ e6 30.xe6+ xe6 31.xe6+ 7.b3 g4 was evidently Black's idea)
h8 32.c8 e7 33.xb7 At the end of the 6...c5 was an interesting idea 7.ge2 cxd4
forced line W hite has f inished up with an 8.xd4 a6 9.e3 e6 10.e2 e7
extra pawn but more importantly there's no 11.0-0-0 e5 12.g4 c5 13.f4 xb3+
way to prevent the a pawn running home. e4 14.xb3 c7 15.g5 d7 16.f5
34.a4 f6 35.c7 c4 36.a5 An interesting looked like a Sicilian which had really gone
idea employed by Bologan and Black players wrong for Black, Simeonov, S-Chatalbashev,
will have to take this positional pawn sacrifice B Plovdiv 2010 although the aggressive
into account. Maybe they'll revert to the older Bulgarian actually went on to win. ]
9...Qd8. 5...g6
1-0 [ 5...a6 used to be the mainline but is played
134
less these days 6.g3 g4 7.h3 h5 8.g2 14.f5 c4 ( 14...d5 would be more
c6 9.d5!? ( 9.0-0 has been examined in prudent ) 15.g4!?
the archives a couple of times ) A1) Again the proof of the pudding is in
A) 9...e5 is the alternative place for the the taking! 15...xg4 But this looks very
knight 10.f4 ( 10.g4!? g6 11.xe5 dangerous. I examined a few lines which
xe5+ 12.e3 seems better for White, a re win n in g f o r W h it e : 16.g1 e6
the bishop on g6 is in danger of being ( 16...gf6 should be tested) 17.e4
trapped while Black's kingside is difficult exf5 18.xf5+ gxf5 19.g5+ h8
to develop.) 10...xf3+ 11.xf3 xf3 20.xg4 fxg4 21.f5 g7 Initially
12.xf3 b4?! ( 12...e5 13.dxe6 xe6+ Rybka said this position was a draw but I
14.f1 0-0-0 15.g2 d6= ) 13.0-0-0 didn't believe it and continued a few
0-0-0 14.he1 h6 15.e5 b6 16.f4 moves... 22.xg4+ h8 ( 22...f6
c5 17.d4 xd5? This loses but the 23.xd7 is very dangerous too but I
position is already very unpleasant guess is Black's best hope.) 23.f5
18.xf7 xc3 19.e6+ 1-0 Samhouri, A- g7 24.0-0-0! fd8 defends the knight
Abdulla, A Abu Dhabi 2006.; but n ot th e kin g ( 24...fe8 25.xd7
B) 9...b4 10.f4 c5 11.e3 a5 The exchange looks like a small price to
( 11...d6 is also possible, it's not clear pay for such a huge attack.) 25.xh7+
which square the queen stands better on.) f8 26.d3! e8 ( 26...xd3 27.cxd3!
12.0-0 bxd5 and despite his extra rook Black is lost:
B1) 13.xd5 xd5 14.d2 a4 c5 28.h8+ e7 29.e1+ d6
( 14...c5 15.b4! xb4 16.g4! g6 30.h6+ c7 31.d5+ c8 32.f4
17.xb4 xb4 18.e5 d8 19.c6+! e5 33.xe5 and Black isn't any
is a very pretty tactic bxc6 20.xd8+ significant material up anymore while the
xd8 21.xc6+ d7 22.xb4 attack is still raging.) 27.h8+ e7
leaves W hite with an extra exchange 28.e1+ d6 29.xe8 xe8 30.xe8
although Black has reasonable drawing xd3 31.cxd3 Is a forced line leaving
c h a n c e s wit h t h e b ish o p p a ir a n d a W hite a pawn up as xd3? 32.e4+!
pawn. ) 15.b3 d7 16.g4 g6 17.c4 c7 ( 32...d5 33.f6+! is another
f6 18.e5 c8 19.g5 d7 20.xd7 pretty tactic showing that Black still has
xd7!? ( 20...xd7 21.xb7 b8 to watch out for his king's safety. xf6
22.g2 would also leave White with the 34.e5+ c4 35.c5# ) 33.xd7+!
more pleasant chances.) 21.f3 c6 picks up the piece.;
22.ad1 and surely White's play is worth A2) 15...ae8 16.g5 d5 17.e4 c7
a pawn, look at the king on d7! Calistri, 18.b3 d5 19.c4 xe4 20.xe4
T-Chabanon, J Clichy 2006.; W h it e h a d m o r e s p a c e a n d B l a c k ' s
B2) 13.d2 0-0-0 14.e2 was Janev, attempt at counterplay b5 21.c5 e5
E-Panbukchian, V Plovdiv 2010 which 22.0-0 g8 23.ae1 had rather
White won quickly but I'm sceptical that backfired, The queen is stuck on a6,
he has enough compensation after b6 especially after White's subsequent b4.
15.c4 b4 16.g4 g6 ] Although Black managed to hold on to
6.b5 The reason 5...a6 and 5. ..c6 have the draw it's understandable he varied
been more common in the past but maybe the next time he played this variation.
Black shouldn't be so worried. Andriasian, Z-Bodiroga, P Rijeka 2010.;
[ 6.g3 g7 7.g2 a6!? ( 7...c6 B) 10...e6 11.h4! Aggressive play and
would be more normal and probably what surprisingly effective a5 12.h5 xh5
Motylev had in mind.) 8.f4 c6 9.d2 0-0 13.xg7 xg7 14.e5 f6 15.g4 fxe5
10.h6 was played twice by Bodiroga in the 16.gxh5 f4 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.0-0-0 d7
recent European Individual Championships. 19.e3 h8?! Black's position was
A) 10...f5 was played in the first game already teetering but here it collapses
11.xg7 xg7 12.h4 e6 13.f4 bd7 ( 19...af8 20.dxe5 g4 21.f3 e6
135
22.e2 xe5 23.xe5+ xe5 24.xf4 Bd2 is really useful is debatable), Black has
xf4 allows Black to get into an endgame played three he's fianchettoed his bishop and
but W hite should be able to co nvert .) played the queen to c7. Hence Black should
20.xh8 xh8 21.h3! Picking up a be very comfortable. 0-0 12.c4 b5!?
piece c5 22.dxe5 1-0 Azarov, S-Bodiroga, Black starts to press for more than the half
P Rijeka 2010. ] point
6...b6 7.f4 [ B l a c k ' s a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n w a s 12...d7
[ Another recent game ran 7.c4 c6 8.c3 13.xd7 ( 13.d3 e5! ) 13...xd7 14.0-0
g7 9.e2 0-0 10.0-0 g4 11.a3 d8 g4 15.c3 b6 16.e2 xf3 17.xf3 e5
12.e3 e8 was Diamant, A-Kurajica, B La 18.dxe5 c4 and Black has definitely
Laguna 2010 when critical looks 13.c5 c7 equalised ]
14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 when xd4!? 16.xd4 13.b3 a5 14.a4 b4 I'm not totally happy
e5 17.xe5 xd1 18.xc7 xa1 19.xa1 about Motylev's plan. True he has gained
xc7 20.d1 would have left Black in an space on the queenside but he has ceded
extremely unpleasant ending but he should control of c4 and c5. Chances remain
be able to hold the draw. ] balanced. 15.0-0 b7 16.c1 d7
7...d5 8.d2 an unconvincing novelty [ I like 16...c5 trying to exploit White's
[ John Watson gives 8.e5 f6 9.g3 a6 previous 17.h6 cxd4 18.xg7 xg7
10.c4 axb5 11.cxd5 a6 12.b3 a5+ 19.d2 d7 ( 19...f6?! 20.xd4! ) 20.xd7
13.d2 d7= as a line from Karolyi's survey xd7 21.xd4+ f6 and Black can
in NIC 90 ] continue to have fun with play along the c
8...c6 9.a3 file. ]
[ 9.c4!? looks more critical when Black can 17.h6
c h o o s e e i t h e r cxb5 ( or the safer choice [ 17.xd7 xd7 18.h6= is safer ]
9...f6 10.c3 f5!? attacking b2 and 17...xe5 18.xd5?! This doesn't work but
giving Black reasonable chances.) 10.cxd5 [ 18.xe5 c5 19.xg7 xg7 favours Black
is very messy but I feel should favour White as d4 is loose and the bishop on b3 is also
as the doubled d pawns control more in danger of being trapped. 20.c3 ( 20.d2
relevant squares than the doubled b. The f6! 21.f3 c4! 22.a2 c3 23.bxc3 xc3
g a m e m i g h t c o n t i n u e g4 11.a4!? is very unpleasant for W hite) 20...bxc3
One of the most difficult aspects of chess, 21.bxc3 fc8 and Black's making progress,
converting one advantage (the doubled b c3 and d4 are going to be a constant
pawns) to another (a strong initiative). xf3 headache for White. ]
( 11...bxa4 12.xa4+ d7 13.c2 g7 [ 18.dxe5 c5 19.xg7 xg7 20.c3 c4
14.a5 d6 15.b3 is awkward for 21.d1 ab8 and Black's play on the
Black. ) 12.xf3 bxa4 13.xa4 xb2 queenside is starting to worry White. ]
14.d3 g7 15.e2 0-0 16.0-0 b3 18...xh6 19.xh6 g4 20.h4 cxd5
17.a5 b6 18.b1 xd4 19.b4 e5 21.xg4 c8?!
20.xe5 xe5 21.xb7 and Black still has [ T h e s i m p l e 21...xc2 22.d7 a6
difficulties with his undeveloped queenside. ] 23.fe1 xb2 is a safe extra pawn for
9...g7 Black ]
[ Of course not 9...xb2? 10.c4 b5 22.g5 f5 23.fc1 fc8 24.h6 f6
11.d6++- ] Black hasn't yet picked up the pawn but he's
10.c4 c7 11.ce5 White has used a lot still definitely got the advantage with pressure
of time to put his knight on e5 which can be o n t h e c f il e a n d M o t yl e v u se s h i s 2 7 0 0
pushed back easily with ...Nd7 and so Black technique to outplay his opponent rated 220
has e qu alis ed com f o rta bly. T he p osit io n points lower. 25.e3?!
reminds me of an Alekhine and if we compare [ 25.c3 was necessary to hold on to the
this position with 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4. pawn ]
Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 we see that while White 25...a6! no w c2 is do om e d 26.c3 c6
has made another two 'useful moves' (whether 27.h4 bxc3 28.b3 e6 29.f3 e4
136
30.h3 b6 31.e1 c2 32.ac1 f5 33.e3 bishops and a big lead in development. ]
c3 34.g5 xd4 35.xe7 f6 36.xf6 8.g2 c6 9.h4 b4 10.a3 Not the best
xf6 37.f3 g5 38.fxe4 fxe4 39.f3 exf3 m o v e h e r e b u t i t ' s g o o d e n o u g h f o r a
40.e5 d4 41.d5 f2+ 42.f1 e8 reasonable advantage.
A success for Black and I wonder if 5...g6 will [ 10.0-0! looks rather strange but Black is
see more high rated adherents? lacking a good move here - for example d5
0-1 ( 10...xc3 11.bxc3 a5 doesn't help -
W h i t e h a s t h e v e r y s t r o n g 12.b1
and Black's position is pretty much lost here
159 B01 as after 0-0 13.c4 h5 is again a very strong
Brkic,A 2584 threat. ) 11.xd5 exd5 ( or 11...cxd5 12.c4!
Bogdanovski,V 2444 0-0 13.h5 e4 14.f3 ) 12.h5 f6 13.c3!
Karpos Open 2013 (6.20) 13.03.2013 d6 14.hxg6 fxe5 15.dxe5 c7 16.c4!
[Tom Rendle] and White is obviously doing very well. ]
10...xc3+ 11.bxc3 d5?
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4 [ 11...a5 was completely necessary here
f6 5.f3 f5 This normally would b u t W h i t e i s s t i l l b e t t e r a f t e r 12.b1!
transpose but it does give White the option to ( 12.d2 is safer and keeps a small edge
play more aggressively, something that Brkic after a4 13.b1 ) 12...e4 13.xe4
immediately does. xc3+ 14.f1 xe4 15.xb7 but at least
[ Black normally chooses the more solid here Black has some counterplay. ]
5...c6 which can be found in several games 12.h5 f6 13.hxg6 fxe5 14.xh7 It's obvious
in the archives. ] the opening has been a disaster for Black g8
6.e5! [ 14...xh7? 15.gxh7 h4 16.d3
[ 6.c4 is obviously reasonable as well but is completely hopeless for Black ]
after e6 7.e2 e7 8.e3 bd7 9.0-0-0 15.dxe5
b6 10.b3 Black was absolutely fine in [ 15.c4! f4 16.xf4 exf4 17.e2
Laznicka, V (2480)-Popchev, M (2460) Brno is even stronger ]
2005 ( 10.d5!? looks more testing here, for 15...d7 16.f4?! After this Black escapes
example bxd5 11.h4! g6 12.xg6 s o m e w h a t a n d t h e g a m e i s a l l o w e d t o
hxg6 13.xd5 exd5 14.b5+ c6 15.xb7 continue
and White probably has the better chances [ 16.c4 would've kept a complete bind and
although it remains complicated after c8! )] after e7 17.b1! a5+ ( 17...xe5
6...e6?! 18.xd8+ xd8 19.xb7 d7 20.b8+
[ 6...c6 should probably be preferred here as d8 21.xd8+ xd8 22.b2 5xg6
it lessens the impact of both g4 and Qf3. Still, 23.xg7 is a simple win for White.) 18.f1
W hite should be a little better after 7.f4 0-0-0 19.d6 c5 20.g5 xc4+ 21.g1
( 7.g4 isn't dangerous here as after e6 White should be easily winning ]
8.g5 d5 9.e4 d7 Black has no 16...a5 17.h3 0-0-0 18.d2?!
problems and White will probably come to [ 18.xd5 was more accurate here - possibly
regret pushing the g-pawn so early.; 7.c4 Brkic was worried about c5 but after
is a better option for White is he still wants 19.d2 exd5 ( or 19...cxd5 20.c4! b6
to go in for g4 e6 8.g4 g6 9.h4 bd7 21.e2 ) 20.e2 he has a much better
10.xd7 xd7 11.h5 e4 12.xe4 xe4 version of the game ]
13.c3 0-0-0 was only a little better for White 18...a4 19.xd5 cxd5 20.e3 e4
i n S v i d l e r , P ( 2 7 1 3 ) - A d a m s , M ( 2 7 1 6 ) Even though White is two pawns up he has to
Frankfurt 1999) 7...bd7 8.d3 xd3 be careful here as his pawn structure is dodgy
9.xd3 e6 ] and Black's pieces are suddenly very well
7.g4! g6 coordinated. 21.d3 g2 Obviously Black
[ 7...e4 is just bad here after 8.xe4 xe4 isn't interested in an exchange of queens at
9.f3 d6 10.e3 and White has the two t h is st a ge . 22.h5 xg4 23.g5 h4+
137
24.d2 b6 wi l l b e p r e f e r r e d - a s I p l a ye d m y s e l f .
[ 24...b8! is more flexible and it's no longer However White is now forced to commit his
clear that White is better at all here. ] queen to b3 and so Black can generate
25.xb6 The can't be allowed to land on c4 c o u n t e r p l a y wi t h a q u i c k . . . b 7 - b 5 . 0-0
axb6 26.g3 h8 27.f1 xg3 28.xg3 10.0-0 xc3 11.bxc3 b5 This is Black's try
df8 29.g5 to exploit the queen already being on b3.
[ 29.c4!? dxc4 30.c3 h2 31.gf3 12.cxb6 ( 12.d3 e6 13.c2 d7 14.a4
wa s wo r t h c o n s i d e ri n g a l t h o u g h B la c k a6 15.g5 was seen in Sjugirov, S (2643)-
should be holding here with g2 ] Smagin, S (2551) Olginka 2011 when e8
29...h2+ 30.d3 d7 31.f5 exf5 keeping e7 defended would have left Black
32.gxf5 and here I assume Black lost on with a fully respectable position.) 12...axb6
time as it's rather a premature time to resign. 13.g5 ( I tried 13.e1 which I think I
[ After 32.gxf5 h3+ 33.d2 c8 prefer: a6 14.xa6 xa6 15.g5 a7
Black's rooks are both very active and it 16.a4 f6 17.h6 g7 18.xg7 xg7
won't be easy for White to win. All in all a 19.e5 and White has a pleasant edge
very strange game - Brkic was basically although failed to convert. Jones, G
winning from the opening before letting (2562)-Welling, G (2371) Gibraltar 2008.)
Black back into it. Black should definitely 13...e6 14.e4 Polgar, J (2686)-Tazbir, M
prefer the more solid lines with .. .c6! ] (2527) W arsaw 2010 when a6 15.xa6
1-0 xa6 16.g5 d5 17.f6+ xf6 18.xf6
b5 would have been completely fine for
Black. ]
160 B01 9...e6!? This speciality of Jacek Tomczak
Brkic,Ante 2592 has recently caught a flurry of interest.
Muzychuk,Anna 2528 [ 9...0-0 10.e1 continues to put Black
12th ch-EUR Aix les Bains FRA (9.67) 31.3.11 under pressure, see Vuckovic, B (2525)-
[Gawain Jones] Vukanovic, S (2358) Bar 2005 annotated by
Andrew Martin in the archives. ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6 10.g5 This move results in a long forcing
Muzychuk keeps faith with her speciality. 5.c4 variation.
b6 6.c3 [ 10.b3 is the alternative which has scored
[ 6.c5 has been looked at a couple of times much b etter f or W hite . xc3 ( 10...b5
in the archives, most recently in Friedel, J 11.cxb6 axb6 12.g5! Sacrificing the d4
(2551)-Pechenkin, V (2372) Edmonton 2009 pawn to wreck Black's structure and weaken
by Neil. The lines are pretty similar to the his king. xd4 13.xe6 fxe6 14.h6 d7
mainline seen in this game. ] 15.ad1 c5 16.c2 f6 17.b4 d7
[ Last time I examined this variation I had a 18.e4 c8 19.fe1 gave White great
look at 6.a4!? in Ni Hua (2657)-Muzychuk, play for the pawn. Van der Velde, W
A (2523) Wijk aan Zee 2010. ] (1 9 7 8 ) -A k o t c h i k , V ( 2 1 2 8 ) H o o g e v e e n
[ While the older 6.h3 was looked at in detail 2008. ) 11.bxc3 xc4 12.xc4 d7
by Alexander Volzhin over ten years ago but 13.b1 b6 14.cxb6 axb6 15.xc6
has since fallen out of fashion. ] A) 15...xa2 regains material equality but
6...g7 7.c5 d5 8.c4 c6 16.e5 is unpleasant to deal with. a7
[ 8...xc3 is Black's other option which was ( 16...xe5 17.dxe5 0-0 18.c4 a5
looked at by John W atson in Kovalev, A 19.e6 e5 20.exf7+ xf7 21.e6 )
(2533)-Pluemer, D (2172) Dresden 2009. 17.f4 and Black is in a lot of difficulty.;
Black continues to have grave problems in B) 15...0-0 16.c4 c8 17.b3 a6
this line. ] 18.b2 fc8 and Black has some
9.0-0 counterplay for the pawn with queenside
[ Should Black's line continue to be pressure but can it really be enough? I'm
f a s h io n a b le t h e n t h e m o ve o rd e r 9.b3 sceptical and certainly Najer successfully
138
converted here: 19.d2 c4 20.e1 e6 d7 21.e2 a5 22.be1 b4 and Black
21.h4!? c8 22.h5 a5 23.h6 f6 started to take over. It's interesting to see
24.d1 ca4 25.c2 c4 26.b3 a8 how easily he managed to reroute the
27.g5 xg5 28.xg5 c8 29.e4 a5 knight round to d5 followed by gaining
30.d1 c7 31.d2 h5 32.g3 d5 space on the queenside. Yilmaz, M (2477)-
33.b3 a8 34.e4 h5 35.g3 ha5 Onischuk, V (2505) Kharkov 2011.;
36.b2 d5 37.e3 a3 38.b3 xa2 B) 17.c3 b8 18.fe1 d7 19.e2
39.c4 f5 40.d5 1-0 Najer, E (2608)- Dubinski, M (2082) -Tomczak, J (2448)
Zurek, M (2421)/ Pardubice 20041 ext ] S z k l a r s k a P o r e b a 2 0 0 7 w h e n d5
10...xc3 11.xe6 xd1 12.xd8 xb2 ( 19...b5 20.b3 e6 21.be1 be8
13.xb2 xd8 14.xf7 So the forcing looks fine. ) 20.b2 fe8 21.be1 b6= ]
variation has resulted in an interesting 15...d7 16.fe1 c7 17.e2 hf8 18.b3
queenless middlegame position. W hite has d5 19.de1 ae8 So again Black has fully
the bishop pair and superior development but coordinated and with his strong knight on d5 I
if Black succeeds in developing peacefully doubt he can really be worse. The computer
then he will be doing well with a ready made gives White a slight edge, presumably due to
outpost for the knight on d5 and pressure on the bishop pair, W hite's spatial advantage
the backward d4 pawn. The position reminds and Black's isolated e pawn but I don't see
me of certain Alekhine positions, White has ho w h e 's t o m a ke p ro gre ss. Ce rt a in ly in
the initiative but should Black successfully practice Black hasn't had any signif icant
coordinate he has good long term chances. difficulties defending here. 20.g3 b6?!
a6 Developing the knight immediately looks This gives Ante the chance to claim an edge.
right. [ I w o n d e r i f 20...e6! might be a more
[ The specialist tried 14...f8 against Shirov accurate move order to prevent the
but after 15.c4 b5 16.e2 a6 17.a4! following variation. Black can reroute the
xc5 18.axb5 bishop round to c7 followed by ... b7-b5. ]
A) 18...cxb5 19.c3 b3 20.a3 b4 21.cxb6
( 20...xd4 21.d1 e5 22.xb5 ) [ 21.xd5! could have exploited Anna's
21.xb4 xd4 22.d1 e8 23.d3 move order. cxd5 22.c6+ d8 23.f4 h6
and W hite has the better chances with 24.g2 f6 25.e6 would have left Black
strong pressure against Black's position. under unpleasant pressure. ]
The open board favours W hite's bishop 21...axb6 22.g2 f6
pair and gives him the advantage despite [ I quite like the idea of 22...e6!? followed by
the pawn deficit.; ...Rf5, ...Bf8-d6 which looks very solid. ]
B) 18...b3?! 19.a3 xd4 20.d1 e5 23.h4 a8 24.h1 a5 25.f4 b5 26.he1
S h i r o v , A ( 2 7 2 0 ) - T o m c za k , J ( 2 4 2 0 ) a8 27.f3 b4 28.d1 b5 29.g4?!
Warsaw 2006 when 21.f3! f7 22.xc6 It was hard to suggest a good plan for White
b8 23.xd4 exd4 24.e1 would leave but this ambitious approach by Brkic shouldn't
White with a decisive advantage. ] have worked. I'm going to hazard a guess at
15.ad1 mutual time trouble as both sides start to err.
[ 15.ab1 has been seen in the earlier xh4
games to defend against the ...Nxc5 threat [ 29...e6!? was also fully playable. ]
but the rook doesn't do much on the b file 30.g5?! A logical continuation of the plan but
as Black is happy to play ...b7-b5 anyway. this makes matters worse.
f8 16.c4 c7 [ 30.h1 g5 31.f5 would at least keep
A) 17.fe1 b5 ( 17...f6 also worked out Black's bishop out of the position although
we ll f o r B la ck f o llo win g 18.e3 b5 h5!? 32.gxh5 f8 33.e5 e6 looks a little
19.cxb6 axb6 20.c3 b5 21.b3 d7= better for Black. ]
Saric, I (2500)-Tomczak, J (2449) Szeged 30...h6? But this plays into the Croatian's
200 8 but t he im med ia te .. .b5 is m ore hands.
forcing. ) 18.f1 d5 19.g3 f6 20.g2 [ Instead 30...xb3+! 31.axb3 f8
139
looks very good for Black. White cannot hold not convinced there is anything Black should
o n t o e i t h e r f 4 o r g 5 p a w n s a n d 32.h2 worry about after 10.Ng5.
xf4+ 33.e2 xg5 34.xh7 e4+ ½-½
35.f2 h4+ 36.g1 f6 is looking very
good for Black. ]
[ 30...f8? immediately f ails to 31.xd5 161 B01
xd5 32.g4 although still h5+ 33.gxh6 Bronstein,David I
f6 is hardly clear. ] Lutikov,Anatoly S
31.gxh6 f8 32.xd5 xd5 33.g1?! USSR (ch) 1960
[ 33.h1 re t a in e d t h e a dva n t a ge . f6 [Alexander Volzhin]
34.g2 h5 35.xh5 gxh5 36.f5 ]
33...h5?! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ d7 4.e2!?
[ 33...g5 was better when it is White who This move has achieved a certain degree of
has to play energetically to keep the popularity in recent practice and it's
position level. 34.xg5! ( 34.h1 xf4+ considered to be the most dangerous f or
35.g3 f8 36.h7 h8 and with the d Black in the 3. Bb5+ line. We begin with this
pawn successfully blockaded the advanced brilliant game (one of the first where 4. Be2
h pawn is nothing to fear.) 34...xg5 35.d5! was played). xd5 5.d4 g6?! Black plays in
The same idea as the following note. It's a similar fashion to the main line with 3.d4,
interesting that the exchange and a pawn but this is a different position! The difference
down White is certainly not worse. will become clear after White's 8th move.
A) 35...xd5 [ 5...e6?! is also not good. Black voluntarily
A1) 36.h2 e5 37.h7 exf4 38.e4! restricts his light-squared Bishop. 6.f3
( 38.h8 d3+! 39.e2 xh8 40.xh8 e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4 b6 9.c3 c5
g3 and only Black can win) 38...d1 10.dxc5 xc5 11.a3 e7 12.e3 f6
39.c3=; 13.c2 c6 14.fd1 c7 15.d4
A2) 36.g7 a8 37.h2 e6 with a clear edge in Zakharov - Remizov,
( 37...a3+ is the initial suggestion of the Moscow 1992. ]
com put er bu t 38.g4 h5 39.xh5 6.c4 b6
gxh5+ 40.g5! leaves Black in trouble [ 6...f6?! was played in Yakovich - Hania,
as the h pawn cannot be stopped.) 38.h7 Leeuwarden 1995. This move def initely
f5 39.h8 d3+ 40.e2 xh8 cannot be recommended as it blocks Black's
41.xh8 a3 should be a draw.; main idea - creating pressure on the d4-
B) 35...h5 36.dxc6+ xc6 37.e6+ square. 7.c3 g7 8.f3 0-0 9.0-0 c6
d7 38.xg6 e5 39.g4 h2 40.xe5 10.f4 g4 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3
g2+ 41.h5 h2+ 42.g5 g2+= ] White is clearly better due to his control of
34.xg6?! Missing a strong shot. the centre and his pair of strong Bishops.
[ Instead 34.d5! would have kept the h pawn bd7 13.e1 b6 14.d3 d7 15.ad1
and left Anna in trouble: cxd5 35.g7 f7 ad8 16.b4! Black has no counterplay and
36.xg6 f6 37.g3 ] White starts a pawn attack on the Q-side.
34...f6 35.g4 xh6 36.g7 e6 37.xe6 e8 17.e3 e5 This move leads by force
xe6 38.f5+ d5 39.c1 h8 40.g5 to a hopeless position, but it's not easy to
xg5 41.xg5 Move 40 has been reached find a real improvement. 18.c5! c8 19.d5!
and a totally level endgame has resulted. d6 cxd5 ( 19...f5 20.dxc6 xd3 21.xd3
42.g6+ d7 43.d5 cxd5 44.xb6 a8 xd3 22.cxb7 and the pawn queens.)
45.f4 xa2 46.e5 d2 47.b7+ e8 20.xd5 xd5 21.xd5 d7 22.f3!
48.b5 f7 49.xd5 xd5+ 50.xd5 f6 Now Black can't avoid material loss. xd1
51.e4 An interesting game, hardly devoid of 23.xd1 c7 24.xb7 e6 25.b5 e7
errors but Black's try of 9...Be6 is important 26.xa7 c7 27.b5 f5 and Black
as Black was really suffering in the mainline. I resigned. ]
think 10.Qb3 is a better try for an edge as I'm 7.c3 g7 8.c5! White exploits the
140
drawbacks of Black's set-up very convincingly. [ and 13.xd5 allows c6! and Black has
Because of the position of the Bishop on d7 sufficient counterplay. ]
the Knight can't go to d5 and has to retreat to 13...c6 14.d1 c7 15.b5 b7 16.d4
c8 where it has no prospects. c8 9.d5!? b8 17.gf3 e5?! This careless move allows
A very ambitious continuation. Now both a brilliant combination.
Black's Knights look miserable. 10. Qb3 is [ 17...e6! forcing simplification was correct,
also an unpleasant threat. Black's reply is and gives Black equal chances:
forced. c6 10.b3 b6 The only move again. A) 18.e4 xd4 19.xd4 ( 19.xb7?!
[ 10...cxd5 11.xb7 c6 12.b5! xb3 20.xd7 xc5 21.xc5 bxc5
is bad for Black. ] with a clear advantage for Black) 19...c6
11.f3 0-0 12.e3 cxd5 13.xd5?! 20.xc6 xc6 is also OK for Black.;
W hite has to choose between several B) 18.xc6 xc6 19.xc6 xc6 20.0-0
possibilities, and the one he picks is not the e7! and after transferring the Knight to
best. d5 Black has little to worry about. ]
[ 13.d1! is very strong, and although Black 18.xf7+!! B r o n s t e i n a t h i s b e s t ! xf7
has plenty of plausible continuations here I 19.xc6 xc6
can't see an acceptable defence: [ 19...xc6 was no better: 20.g5 e8
A) 13...c6 14.xd5 bxc5 15.f6+ exf6 21.d8! Now Black is completely tied up:
( 15...xf6 loses on the spot in view of f8 22.xf7 xf7 23.h6! and White wins:
16.xd8 xd8 17.xc6 xc6 18.b7! ) e4+ ( 23...d6 24.xb8 e8 25.h3
16.xd8 xd8 17.xc5 with a decisive e4+ 26.e3 xg2 27.f1 c4 28.xe8
advantage; xf1+ 29.d2; 23...xc5 24.c3 ) 24.d2
B) 13...xc3+ 14.xc3 e6 15.h6 f6 d4+ 25.d3 xb2+ 26.e3 d4+
16.xf8 xf8 17.e2 and Black has no 27.xd4 exd4+ 28.d2 ]
compensation for the exchange; 20.d8+ f8 21.xe5 bxc5 22.h6!?
C) 13...e6 14.xd5! exd5 15.xd5 [ Here White has a pleasant choice: besides
and Black can't avoid material loss: c6 t h e t e xt t h e r e a re a f e w o t h e r wi n n i n g
16.xd7 xd7 17.xd7; continuations: 22.xf7 xb3 23.h6+
D) 13...e8 14.xd5 a4 -this attempt g7 24.axb3 ]
fails to 15.c7! xb3 16.axb3! [ or 22.xc6 ]
and White wins material: d7 17.xd7 22...c4
xd7 18.xa8; [ 22...xb3 23.axb3 bb7 24.xf7 xf7
E) 13...c6 is just bad in view of 25.xc8 ]
14.xd5; 23.xb7 bxb7 24.xf7 xf7 25.xc8
F) 13...e6 Relatively the best. The xg2 26.g1 b7 27.xf8+ xf8 28.xf8
alternatives are clearly insuff icient: xf8 29.g5 An excellent game!
14.xd5 d7 ( 14...c6 is bad as it 1-0
loses a piece: 15.f6+ xf6 16.xd8
xb3 17.xf8+ xf8 18.xc6 b8
19.axb3 ) 15.c6! ( 15.a3 is not so good 162 B01
in view of bxc5 16.f6+ xf6 17.xa8 Bruzon Batista,Lazaro 2641
d6 and Black has good compensation as Kurajica,Bojan 2525
a ll h is m i n o r p ie ce s a r e ve ry a ct ive .) IV Open La Laguna ESP (7) 10.04.2010
15...e5 16.c7 xf3+ 17.xf3 d6 [Gawain Jones]
18.0-0 with a huge edge as the c7-pawn is
very strong ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
[ White's other possibilities are not so good: c6 5.d4 0-0-0 6.c4 f5 7.e3 xf3
13.0-0-0 with the same ideas is strongly met [ Instead 7...f6 resulted in a quick White in
by e6 14.xd5 exd5 15.xd5 f6! in DeFirmian, Waitzkin in the archives. ]
(th at 's t he d if f e re nce! ) 16.xa8 a4! 8.xf3 xd4 9.xd4
which is very good for Black ] [ 9.g4 is White's other option but the recent
141
game Jovanovic, Z-Mrdja, M Sibenik 2009, chances for an advantage.;

g a v e B l a c k l i t t l e t o w o r r y a b o u t c2+ C) 11.a4 feels like the most critical test
10.xc2 xg4 11.0-0 f6 12.xa7 e6 o f B l a c k ' s o p e n i n g t o m e . cxd4
13.h3 e4 and a draw was already T h i s i s n o w f o r c e d a s ( 11...xd4
agreed. ] 12.xa7 e5 13.c3 is great for
9...e6+ 10.e2 Kevin asks if we can White. ) 12.xa7 when
examine this position. I have tried to copy in C1) 12...e5
as much of the analysis from the forum as C1a) 13.a3 is given by gipc but his
possible and attempted to credit it to the right line finishes in a draw following
p e o p le b u t I a p o l o gise if I ' ve m is qu o t e d C1a1) 13...e6 looks good for White:
someone. Black has two main tries to regain 14.b5! b4+ 15.f1 c5
the piece when Black will have an extra pawn. ( 15...d3 16.f3 d7 17.a8+ b8
In the meantime W hite tries to use his 18.a4 c5 19.d1+- ) 16.a5 d3
development advantage to fire up a quick 17.f3 e7 18.e1 f4 19.g3+-;
initiative. On the surface I would prefer White, C1a2) 13...d3
but perhaps with accurate play, Black C1a21) 14.0-0-0!?
s h o u l d n ' t h a v e a n y p r o b l e m s . e4 look an interesting attempt to me
I doubt I can get to the truth of these positions which I don't think has been
but certainly to play this line Black has to be mentioned before xe2 15.a8+
happy with certain scenarios: A) Black has to ( 15.b1!? ) 15...c7 16.b5+
be content with a draw. W hite has various c6 17.a4 gives Black extreme
lines which end in repetition, especially with practical problems. W hile the
Qa4xa7-a8-a4+. B) Black has to memorise computer informs me it's a draw,
lots of forcing variations or else he will lose I'm not completely convinced.;
very quickly. Of course this point can also C1a22) 14.a8+ c7 15.b5+
apply to W hite who needs to know how to c6 16.a7+ c7 17.b5+
keep compensation for the sacrificed material. is simply a draw.;
C) Black has to be happy to soak up pressure C1b) 13.f1!? linksspringer is another
before hoping to convert his extra material, interesting possibility. It look rather
Black doesn't get much play of his own in the artificial but it does keep the bishop. e6
following positions. 14.d2 c5;
[ 10...c5!? has been played very rarely but C1c) 13.0-0!? xe2 14.a3 e6
it's the main topic of discussion on the forum ( 14...e5 15.c5! gives White good
a n d I p re d ic t t h a t B la ck will swit c h h i s chances b8 16.a4 e5 17.b5
attention to this move if he's to continue d7 18.ac1 d8 19.c6 bxc6
playing the line. I've tried to add all the 20.xc6 and the computer starts to
useful notes from the forum coupled with a l i k e W h i t e . . .) 15.a8+! d7
few notes of my own but I doubt I can get 16.xb7+ e8 17.b5 ( 17.c6+
down to the complete truth of the position i s t h e p e r p e t u a l d r a w f o r W h i t e .)
as there are so many possibilities. 17...e7 18.c5 e5 ( 18...d3
A) 11.c3 cxd4 12.d5 d6! simply loses to 19.c6 as the line given
didn't get W hite anywhere 13.xd4 e6 by Top Notch illustrates: d2 20.c7
14.xa7 exd5 15.c5 xc5!? 16.xc5+ d1 21.axd1 xd1 22.c6+ f8
xc5 17.c1 b6 18.b4 Jurkovic, A- 23.a8+ d8 24.xd8+ xd8
Nevednichy, V Bizovac 2008 when b7 25.cxd8# ) 19.c6 b8 20.a4! xb7
19.bxc5 c8 would result in an ending a ( 20...c5 21.fc1 d o e sn ' t h e l p .)
pawn up.; 21.cxb7 f6 22.a5 d7 23.fc1
B) 11.c2 cxd4 ( 11...xd4 12.c3 a6 d5 24.a6 g5 25.c4+-
should also be investigated) 12.0-0 f6 is an excellent line given by Top Notch
13.c5 Milov, L-Pitl, G Barcelona 2009 when the passed pawns are far
when I'd probably go for b8 with good stronger than the piece.;
142
C2) A p r a c t i c a l g a m e s a w 12...d3 Black by linksspringer and I think it could

13.c3 dxe2 14.a8+ d7 ( 14...c7 be sim p ly win n in g f o r h im a s W h it e 's
s i m p ly l o s e s t o 15.b5+ ) 15.xb7+ attack has disappeared.;
e8 16.d5 c8 when Top Notch E) 11.0-0 The most straightforward move
gives 17.a4 with good winning chances. b u t h e re W h i t e h a s a l o t o f d i f f e r e n t
The queenside pawns are extremely alternatives.
fast!; E1) 11...cxd4 12.c5! is Stefan
C3) 12...f6 has been discussed as the Buecker's suggestion. Personally I don't
critical line. like recapturing on d4 with the pawn ever,
C3a) 13.a8+ allows Black at least a as it allows W hite to open up Black's
draw and he might even be able to k i n g w i t h c 4 - c 5 - c 6 . ( 12.d2
play for more with c7 14.a5+ b6 is also possible );
15.e5+ c8 ( This looks more E2) 11...f6!? was offered by gewgaw
r e l i a b l e t h a n A l a n G ' s 15...d6 and look like a perfectly respectable
16.a5+ b8 which isn't so clear. ); m o ve t o m e . 12.e1 ( 12.a4 cxd4
C3b) 13.a3 is the safest although 13.f3 a6 diffuses White's attack.;
allows Black to equalise with a6=; 12.d2 xd4 merely transposes)
C3c) 13.0-0!? xe2 14.a3 12...xd4 13.c2 is unclear but I have a
( 14.a8+ is probably a draw although feeling that Black should be doing well
allows Black to try playing on with the with the rook on d4 and fairly safe king.;
dangerous c7 15.a5+ b6 E3) 11...h5!? is another interesting
16.a7+ c6 17.b4 e6 but I feel this su gge st io n b y S t e f a n B b u t it lo o k s
is rather foolhardy.) 14...e5 15.b5 rather artificial to me
( 15.c5 g4 16.f4 is another E3a) 12.a4 cxd4 13.xa7 xe2
suggestion of AlanG, but I would be 14.a8+ c7 15.a5+ d7
rather scared playing this as White as ( 15...b6 GJ is a very risky winning try.
a knight on e3 dominates the position 16.a7+ c6 17.a3 e6 18.c2
rather. ) 15...e6 16.c5 g4 17.g3 d6 19.b4 is very dangerous for
b8 18.a4 e5 19.a7+ c7 Black as he hasn't even started
20.b5+ d7 21.xd4+ e7 developing his kingside.) 16.a4+
given by gewgaw, when Black's king e6?! ( 16...c7 17.a5+=
h a s e s c a p e d t h e wo r s t w i t h g o o d a d ra w lo o ks l ike a f a i r o u t c o m e .)
chances to convert the extra piece. In 17.c3 with an extremely strong
particular watch out for ...Rxd4!; initiative.;
D) 11.d2 xd4! apparently first E3b) 12.f3 a6 13.d2 ( 13.c3
suggested by Michael Ayton, this looks cxd4 14.b5 e5 15.e2 also gives
ve ry c o m f o r t a b le f o r B l a c k . ( 11...cxd4 W h i t e d e c e n t c o m p e n s a t i o n .)
12.0-0 d7 has been given as slight edge 13...xd4 ( 13...cxd4 GJ allows the
B l a c k o n t h e f o r u m b u t 13.c5! typical break with 14.c5! ) 14.e2 e6
keeps enough compensation in my view.) 15.b3 d7 16.ad1 f6
12.a4 b6! 13.f3 ( 13.b3 looks ok for Black but White still has
with the idea of 0-0, Bf3, Na5, a3, b4 has an a dva nt age a nd t h e mo ve .. . h 5
been suggested by linksspringer. His line looks rather irrelevant.;
continues d7 14.0-0 f6 15.f3 e5! E4) 11...h6 12.c2 cxd4 13.c5
when Black's successfully consolidated his is another thematic line given by Stefan
position.; 13.0-0-0!? GJ f6 14.f3 B but I confess I'm rather confused as to
xd1+ 15.xd1 e6 16.e5 d6 why Black would put the knight on h6
17.xf7 f4+ also f avours Black.) ra t h e r t h a n t he m o re a ct ive f 6 f ro m
13...d8 14.0-0 e6 15.a3 b8! 16.b4 where it can jump to d5 and hold the
f6 17.fb1 c7! 18.b2 g5!? 19.bxc5 centre.;
xc5 20.ab1 b6 given as clear edge to E5) 11...xd4
143
E5a) 12.e1!? doesn't seem in the consolidates the extra material.;

spirit of the line at all, the queen looks E5c2) 14.fe1 b8 15.d5 f6
s o p a s s i ve o n e 1 b u t a t l e a s t t h e doesn't get anywhere either.;
que en m igh t ju mp ou t to a5 a nd it E5c3) 14.xa7 e6 ( 14...h4?
h e l p s s u p p o r t t h e b 4 b r e a k . f6 15.fd1! reminds me of the mainline
13.d2 d6 14.b1 is given by when White has a decisive
linksspringer when White still seems to advantage.) 15.b5 b8 16.b6
have at least some compensation, for e7 17.xd4 cxd4 18.xd4 c6
example following: g6 15.b4 h6 and Black successfully completes his
16.b3 cxb4 17.xb4; development with the advantage.;
E5b) 12.c2 was another line of E5c4) 14.b5 f6 ( It's far too
analysis given by TopNotch but can greedy to try and keep the rook with
hardly be a winning attempt as this 14...d7? 15.ad1 f6 16.xa7
allows the trade of queens with e4 e6 17.b6 is winning for White due
( 12...f6 13.c3 b6 14.b4= ) to th e th reat of 1 8.Na7 + an d 19 .
13.xe4 ( 13.a4!? would transpose Nc6+; 14...b8 15.xd4 cxd4
t o 1 2 . Q a 4 .) 13...xe4 14.c3 16.e8+ c7 17.xf7 looks wrong
w h e n i n s t e a d o f d4 f o r B l a c k .) 15.xa7 ( 15.xa7+
( A l a n G ' s s u g g e s t i o n o f 14...h4 d8 16.b5 d7 ) 15...e6
would give Black a decent position and ( 15...d7 also seems reasonable.
indeed following 15.g3 h6 16.g4+ 16.fe1 b8 17.a5 b6 18.c3
e6 White is struggling to keep enough e5 19.f3 f6 20.c6+ d8
initiative going for the pawn.) 15.b5 and Black's centre looks quite
d2 16.g4+ e6 17.xa7+ b8 i m p r e s s i v e .) 16.b6 ( 16.a8+
18.b5 xb2 19.ab1 b8 17.a7+ c7 18.b5+
E5b1) 19...b4 20.a3 xb1 is simply a draw) 16...b8 17.ad1
21.xb1 f6 22.f3 b6 23.a4 c8 g4 18.f4 e3 19.a7+ d7
24.a7+ c7 was another long line 20.xd4+ cxd4 21.xd4+ d6
given on the forum but this gives 22.xe3 c5 23.d1+ e8
W hite a chance for an advantage 24.d4 b6! favours Black. ]
with 25.a5! GJ ( 25.b5+ c8= ); 11.0-0 This looks more accurate than 11.Nc3.
E5b2) 19...xb1 20.xb1 It's important to get the king to safety and
and despite the simplification of the develop the kingside rook, even if White has
position, White still has a dangerous to sacrifice the e2 bishop too.
initiative, i.e . f6 21.f3 e8 [ 11.c3 xd4 12.c2 ( 12.xd4
22.a4 e7 23.a5 d8 24.c3 d6 gives Black a favourable endgame position
25.a6 b6 26.d1+- after xd4 13.b5 d8 14.xa7+ b8
winning material.; 15.b5 e5 Lyell, M-Korpa, B Budapest
E5c) 12.a4 given an exclamation 2010. ) 12...e6 13.0-0 d6 14.b5 e5
mark by TopNotch but I'm not so sure. 15.f4? ( 15.xd6+ still gives White
I haven't managed to find any analysis ad e qu a t e co mp e n sa t io n f o r th e pa wn .)
on this move except the note that we 15...c5+ 16.h1 e3 17.f3 Zakic, S-
shouldn't believe our computer's Savic, M Subotica 2008 when the simplest
evaluation! Let's look a little further. f o r B l a c k l o o k s t o b e d2 forcing an
xe2 13.c3 e5 was bizarrely exchange of queens with a decisive
agreed drawn already in Gaponenko, I- advantage. ]
Kharitonov, A Rethymnon 2009. White 11...xd4
has a few different ways to continue [ The most common recapture although
but perhaps the most logical would be Black has also tried taking with the rook
E5c1) 14.ad1 f6 15.xa7 e6 although this leaves Black's back rank very
16.b5 d6! successfully vulnerable. 11...xd4
144
A) 12.d2 has been White's practical Meijers, V-Antoniewski, R Martigny 2005. ]

choice 13.c3 So White has completed his
A1) 12...f4 13.a4 xd2 14.ad1 development while Black hasn't moved a
f6 15.xa7 d7 16.f3 c6 17.xd2 single piece on the kingside. True, Black has
xd2 18.d1 h6 19.b4! This looks gained a pawn, but he will have to suffer for a
slow but Black still has no time to long time before he can hope to utilise it. d6
develop his kingside and so is simply The most logical looking move, both
lost e6 20.b5 g6 Spraggett, K-Shaw, developing one piece and looking at starting a
J Gibraltar 2006 when the most precise counterattack.
finish would have been 21.a8+ b8 [ 13...b6 was tried by the Dutch expert on
( 21...c7 22.b6+! ) 22.bxc6 bxc6 the Scandinavian but he had to suffer a little.
23.b1 d6 24.b7+ d8 25.d1+-; 14.ad1 ( 14.a3 f6 15.b4 and the players
A2) 12...e6 13.a4 xd2 14.ad1 wi m p e d o u t i n G r a b a r c zyk , B - M i l o v , L
xd1 15.xd1 f6 16.xa7 a6 Frankfurt 2008. Of course White has good
17.d4 d6 18.a7 a6 19.d4 compensation for the pawn and it's
d6 20.a7 and both players were disappointing not to be able to see how the
forced to repeat 1/2-1/2 Boskovic, D- game might have continued.) 14...xd1
Savic, M Vrnjacka Banja 2009.; 15.xd1 f6 16.b4! Dynamic play by the
B) 12.a4! was suggested on the forum young IM.
and looks exceedingly dangerous for Black. A) 16...c5 looks like a potential
One line where I managed to beat my improvement f or Black. 17.e4 a6
computer ran: xe2 13.xa7 18.xa6 ( 18.c2!? is a better winning
B1) 13...xb2 14.a3 d3 15.b5 attempt. ) 18...bxa6 19.g5 cxb4
f6 16.ad1 c2 17.c1 d2 20.xf7 g8 seems roughly level.;
18.a8+ ( 18.c5!? ) 18...d7 19.a4 B) 16...xb4 17.b1 a5 18.a3 xc3
c6 20.cd1 cxb5 21.xb5+ c8 19.xb6 cxb6 20.c5! bxc5 21.a6!?
22.xd2 xd2 23.c5+- winning for A f l a s h y w a y t o g e t a d r a w ( However
White.; 21.f3 would leave White with all the
B2) 13...g4?! with the threat of ...Rxg2 winning chances Black's exposed king will
for a draw but 14.a8+ d7 15.h3! c o s t h i m a t l e a s t a c o u p l e p a w n s .)
foils Black's plan and leaves White with 21...bxa6 22.c6+ b8 23.b6+
a great position. ] 1/2-1/2 Brandenburg, D-Tiviakov, S
12.a4 Hilversum 2008. ]
[ 12.b3 looks inaccurate e6 13.c3 d6 [ 13...f6 resulted in a quick White win but
14.b5 c5 15.f3 c6 16.xd6+ xd6 the game was hardly convincing 14.b5
17.a4 e7 and Black has succeeded in ( 14.ad1 b6 15.xd8+ xd8 16.d1+
completing his development. Rodriguez c8 17.b4 with similarities to 13...Qb6
Lapetra, P-Alvarado Diaz, A La Laguna would be my attempt as White.) 14...b6
2010. ] 15.b4!? The start of a piece sacrifice. I
12...e6 wonder wheth er this was intend ed or a
[ 12...xb2 was far too greedy 13.xa7 e6 blunder? I am highly doubtful whether this
14.f3 Black never gets time to take the piece sacrifice is objectively sound but Black
rook f6 ( 14...xa1 15.xb7+ d7 now has to play extremely accurately. c6
16.d1+ d6 17.c5 is hopeless.) 15.c3! 16.c5 cxb5 17.xb5 c7 18.xa7 d5
xc3 16.xb7+ d7 17.c6+ e7 19.fc1 Slightly illogical, why not place the
18.xc7+ d7 19.ad1 ( 19.fd1 other rook on c1 so that we can play Rfd1?
l o o k s e v e n b e t t e r a s xc4 loses to b8 20.a4 c7 21.e2 a8 22.b3
20.ac1! ) 19...g5?! ( 19...xc4 e7 23.a4 Around here Black's position
was necessary although White's still winning collapses. Maybe d4 is the first mistake
after 20.c1! a6 21.fd1! ) 20.xd7 g7 ( 23...d2 followed by ...Bf6 leaves Black
21.e8+ was a complete demolition in with good chances of converting the extra
145
piece. ) 24.a5 a6? Leaving Black's king 20.e2 xg2 but this looks extremely
u n g u a rd e d . . 25.c6! And the attack breaks dangerous to me and indeed White must be
through hd8 26.f3 b8 27.xa6 c l o s e t o w i n n i n g w i t h 21.e4 b6
1 -0 V u c k o vi c, B - Mi la n o vic , D B e o g ra d ( 21...g4+ 22.e1 g1+ 23.d2+- )
2006. ] 22.c1 as Black does not have perpetual
14.f3! This novelty looks strong. Bruzon is g4+ 23.f1 h3+ 24.e1 h1+
not concerned about Black's plan of ...Qf4-h2 25.d2 h6+ 26.c2 and the checks have
as once the rook moves from f1 there's no run out when White has more material and
mate, and he makes sure his attack will come better placed pieces. ]
first. 17.xa7 c6 18.a4 c7 This doesn't save
[ The rather f orcing line 14.b5 e5 Black.
15.xd6+ cxd6 16.f3 b8 17.fe1 c5 [ 18...h1+ 19.e2 h2 20.c5 b8
18.b4 has been played twice against fellow 21.b6+ c7 22.a5 looks lost to me, the
ChessPublishing writer, Eric Prie. Apparently extra pawn is looking extremely irrelevant. ]
Emms and Houska claim a slight edge to [ 18...g6 looks like Black's best to me. A
black here. I haven't seen the analysis but c o u p l e s a m p l e l i n e s m i g h t r u n : 19.c5
certainly following ( 19.g3 xg3 20.fxg3 xg3 21.f2
A) Eric played 18...xc4? the first time he is rather unclear) 19...b8 20.b6+ c7
reached this position, allowing the 21.a5 ( Of course White always has his
knockout 19.xb7! e7 was Brunello, S- draw with 21.a8+ c8 22.b6+= )
Prie, E Arvier 2007 when White has great 21...e5! 22.c4+ c8 23.d6+ xd6!
compensation f or the pawn f ollowing: 24.cxd6 d8 seems ok for Black but I think
( 19...xb7 20.ec1 d5 21.c7+! White still has a small something following:
xc7 22.xa7+ wo u l d b e m a t i n g) 25.d7+ xd7 26.xd7 xd7 27.g3 ]
20.ac1 d4 21.a6; 19.c5 e5 20.a5+ c8 21.b6+ b8
B) 18...c7 A n i m p r o v e m e n t 19.ac1 [ 21...c7 was the only way to survive
e7 20.e3 d7 21.d1 c8 22.c5 although in my view W hite has the
hd8 23.d3 c7 24.a4 dxc5 25.xd8 advantage. Of course, on the practical level,
xd8 26.bxc5 c6 27.b1 d4 28.c2 this isn't a good choice for Black as White
h4 29.xc6 xc6 30.g3 h5 always has at least a draw. 22.g3 ( 22.c4+
and Black had consolidated his extra pawn. c8 23.d6+ b8 24.xf7 xd1+
D'Amore, C-Prie, E Arvier 2007. ] 25.xd1 f8 26.xe5 xe5 seems to hold
[ 14.fd1 has also been tried but it seems on for the second player.) 22...xg3 23.fxg3
too automatic e5 15.g3 b8! 16.b5 a6 xg3 24.c4+ c8 25.d6+ b8
17.xd6 cxd6 18.f3 f6 19.d3 d7 26.c3 and the knight on d6 dominates the
20.b3 c5 21.b4 d7 and again our position and thus the bishop looks more
French contributor had completed his relevant than the kingside pawns. ]
development successfully and could attempt 22.d7! Now Black's king's trapped. xd7
to convert his extra pawn. Michna, C-Prie, E 23.xd7+ c8 24.b6+ b8 25.d1!
San Sebastian 2009. ] And the other rook swings into the game
14...f4 15.fd1 xh2+ 16.f1 So Black when there's no way to avoid dropping a large
has gained another pawn and forced the king amount of material. A disaster for Black but
to f1 but Bruzon has accurately calculated the line certainly still has life, especially in
that his king won't encounter any problems on the 10...c5 line when I think 11.Qa4 is critical
e2. Black's king, on the other hand, has four but I can't find an advantage for White.
pieces directed towa rds it and he swif tly 1-0
regrets his retarded kingside development.
e7
[ 16...a6 was offered as a possible
improvement by MnB. His line runs 17.c5
xc5 18.xb7+! xb7 19.xd8 h1+
146
163 B01 164 B01

Brynell,Stellan 2505 Bulski,Krzysztof 2416
Hodgson,Julian M 2598 Stopa,Jacek 2494
Bundesliga 2001-2 (14) 27.04.2002 ch-POL Warsaw POL (6) 14.01.2010
[Nigel Davies] [Gawain Jones]
Here we see the solid 10...Bxc3, forcing White 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
to accept doubled pawns on his queenside. f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 This is a very
This weakness is not a serious problem if he topical position in the line 7.f4
plays accurately and mass exchanges lead to [ 7.f4 is White's most aggressive setup b6
a draw. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 8.g4 g6 ( 8...e6 was seen in Shirov-
4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 Ivanchuk. Here Saric tries to do without this
8.e2 b4 9.0-0-0 bd7 10.a3 xc3 move but runs into difficulty.) 9.g2 g7
11.xc3 c7 12.e5 10.0-0 0-0 11.a4 a5 12.h1 fd5
[ 12.d2 b5 13.a2 e4 14.b1 0-0 13.e4 c7 14.c3 f6! 15.d3 f5! 16.gxf5
15.g5 d5 left Black with a very solid xf5 17.e2 was very messy and hardly a
game in Enders - Wahls, German Ch., Binz safe way to play for White although he went
1995 ] on to win Radulski, J-Saric, I Zagreb 2010 ]
12...b5! This may be Black's best, but it is not [ 7.c4 is yet to be seen in a featured game
his only move. on ChessPublishing but resulted for a quick
[ He can also play 12...xe5 13.dxe5 d5 W hite win here. c7 8.f3 b6 9.f4
14.d2 0-0-0 15.g4 g6 16.f4 h5 17.h3 d7 10.xb6 An interesting swap so as to
hxg4 18.hxg4 xh1 19.xh1 b6 lessen the power of ... Qg4 axb6 11.0-0-0
as in Morovic Fernandez - W ahls, g4 12.e3 f5 ( Maybe 12...e6
Cienfuegos 1996 ] should be attempted although I prefer White
[ A further possibility is 12...d5 13.d2 b5 after 13.d5! ) 13.d5!? xd5 14.xd5! cxd5
14.b3 h5 15.xd7 xd7 16.a5 g6 15.b5 e5 16.xe5 c5 ( The analyst that
17.he1 0-0 as in Morovic Fernandez - l i v e s i n m y c o m p u t e r s u g g e s t s 16...f6
Rodriguez, Cienfuegos 1996, though this 17.xf6+ f7 18.d4 xa2 19.b1 a4
looks rather passive for Black because of 20.d3 e6 when it looks like Black has
the blockade of his queenside pawns. ] s u r vi ve d b u t W h i t e h a s t h e s u r p r i s i n g
13.d3 21.c7!? xe3 22.fxe3 when despite
[ 13.b3 e4 intending ...Bd5 is super-solid being the exchange down W hite is doing
as usual. ] very well as the rook is trapped on a4 and
13...0-0 14.xf5 exf5 15.f3 d5 16.xf5 B la ck 's p a wn s a re d ro p p i n g l ike f lie s .)
xc3 17.xd7 With his queenside so weak 17.d4+ d8 18.d3 d7 19.g5+ e7
White has to exchange Black's knight. 20.xg7 xd4 21.xd4 f6 22.xb6+ d7
[ 17.bxc3 f6 would be very dangerous. ] 23.c7 was an impressive game by my
17...xd1 18.xf8 xf8 19.xd1 namesake 1-0 Jones, R-Zeidler, S Cardiff
Gallagher - Prie, French Team Ch., Clichy 2010. ]
1997 was agreed drawn at this point. xh2 7...d5 8.xd5 xd5 9.e2 xe5
20.e4 h6+ 21.f4 g6 22.e1 g3 10.xe5 xg2 11.f3 g6 12.e2
23.e3 f2 24.b3 h6 25.c3 f5 26.e6+ and here Stopa deviates from Caruana, F-
h7 27.g3 xd4 28.xc6 a5 29.c5 f6 Milanovic, D in the archives but it doesn't
30.b1 a4 31.b4 d8 32.d3 xd3 work out well. e6
33.cxd3 e6 34.c1 e1+ 35.c2 e2+ [ 12...h5 was played in that game. ]
36.c3 e1+ 13.d5 White needs to play aggressively or he'll
½-½ suffer with his pawn deficit. cxd5 14.0-0-0 f6
Critical, and obliging W hite to sacrifice the
piece. Alternatively:
[ 14...d7 15.xd5 h6+ 16.b1 c6
147
is possible but I don't see how Black is going 22.b4+- ) 22.xd5+ g6 23.f5+ h6
to develop his kingside and so must be 24.a5! e8 25.d2+ h5 26.xe8 xe8
practically lost. ] 27.e2+ and the piece drops. ]
15.xd5! xe5 16.c4! White's barbaric 21.xd5 g6 22.c4 An interesting choice.
play is effective. He's already threatening White pushes his passed pawn! Black needs
mate in one which obliges Black to sacrifice to develop his kingside quickly which isn't so
his queen. e6 Forced easy h5! This looks like the best way to do it
[ 16...h5 doesn't prevent the mate 17.f7+! with ...Rh7-e7 themes and also threatening ...
xf7 18.b5+ ] Be6.
17.he1 exd5 [ 22...e6 immediately doesn't work as
[ 17...g5+ 18.f4 followed by a subsequent 23.c6+ f7 24.xd8 xd8 25.xe6+
Bxe6 is curtains. ] g7 26.d1 w i n s t h e q u e e n b6?!
18.b5+ So far White has played perfectly but 27.d7+ h6 28.h3# ]
here he should have continued with 23.c5?! Again I wonder if White overlooked
[ 18.xe5+! when after the forced line fxe5 Black's reply.
19.xd5 e7 20.xe5 f8 21.e4 f7 [ 23.xe7+ xe7 24.b7 would keep Black
22.xh7 Black would be experiencing great struggling to hold. ]
problems. True he has rook and two bishops 23...e6! 24.c6+ f7 25.xd8 xd8
for the queen and two pawns but his king is 26.xe6+ g7 27.d1 a5 The difference
still stuck in the centre and he continues to now is that the king doesn't get mated on h6.
have difficulty in developing his queenside. ] So White's regained one piece but is now a
18...d7 piece f or two pawns down, while his own
[ 18...f7 is the suggestion of the fearless king's vulnerability gives Black some
computer 19.xe5 fxe5 20.xd5+ counterplay. 28.c6
( 20.xd5 is no longer as efficient as g6 [ 28.d7+ h6 29.c6 ( 29.xf6 xc5+
21.xe5 h6+ 22.b1 d8 and Black's 30.b1 g8 and White's attack gets no
pieces are starting to get out of their further. ) 29...c5+ 30.d2 f2+
s t a r t i n g b l o c k s .) 20...e6! 21.f3+ and Black has taken the initiative. ]
( 21.xb7+ e7 and once Black's pieces 28...c5+
are de ve lo p ed , he 'll b e ab le to u se h is [ 28...h6! running the king to safety would
material advantage.) 21...g8 22.xb7 promise Black good winning chances. ]
e8 23.xa7 is highly unclear but Black 29.b1 The game now proceeds logically and
can continue with either h5!? ( or 23...e7 a draw is the result. A fair result in the end
with a satisfactory position. )] perhaps, but Black's risky opening shouldn't
19.xb7 be repeated and he'll have to go back to
[ 19.xd5?! 0-0-0! 20.xe5 fxe5 21.xe5 alternative 12th moves. e7 30.d7 e8
h5! followed by ...Rh6-c6 and Black's taking 31.a3 f8 32.a2 a5 33.c7 h4 34.h3 a4
the upper hand. ] 35.a1 c1+ 36.a2 c5 37.a1 c1+
19...d8 20.f4 38.a2 c5 39.a1
[ 20.xe5+ would keep the advantage with ½-½
similar ideas to those which we have already
seen: fxe5 21.xd5 e7 22.xe5 f7
23.f4+ f6 24.c7 e8 25.xa7 165 B01
W hen W hite's picked up a lot of pawns Burovic,Ismet 2375
which should give him the advantage but Monange,Serge 2070
the position is still not so clear. It's op Torcy 1991
important that W hite succeeds in keeping [Alexander Volzhin]
Black's pieces offside as they'll control a lot
of squares if they work together. ] The following gambit was introduced in the
20...e7! Perhaps White overlooked this early nineties. This game shows that Black's
[ 20...xe1 loses 21.xe1+ f7 ( 21...e7 attacking potential should not be
148
underestimated. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 [ Of course, 18...e3+ wins easily, but the
g4 A very interesting but dubious line. Black text leads to forced mate. ]
sacrifices a pawn hoping to get active piece 19.h3
play, but W hite's defensive resources are [ 19.xg6 h4# ]
huge and it's quite difficult to get full [ or 19.h4 e3+ 20.h2 g3+ 21.h3
compensation. On the other hand White has xd3 and White has no defence against
to tread very carefully, otherwise Black's Bd3-f5. ]
initiative may become extremely dangerous. 19...h4+ 20.h2 g3+ 21.g1 e3#
4.f3 f5 5.c4 Very natural but probably far 0-1
from best. It may seem that now Black is in
trouble as W hite has an extra pawn and a
ve ry s t ro n g p a wn c e n t re . B u t B l a c k h a s 166 B01
s o m e t h in g in m in d ! e6! 6.dxe6 c6! Camps,Ronald D 2098
The point. 7.e2 Tiviakov,Sergei 2645
[ White couldn't solve his problems with IV Open Alajuela CRC (1) 09.07.2008
7.e3 b e c a u s e o f b4+ 8.c3 e7! [John Watson]
For only a pawn Black has a huge
advantage in development and great activity 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
for all his pieces. It's extremely difficult to f6 5.f3 c6
find a suf ficient def ence for W hite. 9.d5 [ The latest adventure with 5...a6 played last
0-0-0 10.a4 xd5!! A fantastic blow! week was Van Oosterom-E Berg, Maastricht
11.cxd5 h4+ 12.d1 ( 12.g3 loses the 2008: 6.g3 g4 ( an option is 6...f5 )
Queen: xc3+ 13.bxc3 xa4; 12.e2 7.g2!? ( 7.h3 h5 8.g2 c6 9.0-0
is hardly an improvement: d4+ 13.xd4 0-0-0 10.f4 b4 11.g4 g6 12.a3!
xd4 14.d1 e5+ with a decisive attack) xb2 13.e1 was the exciting game
12...xd5+! Another very nice blow! Caruana-Strikovic, Lorca 2005, featured in
13.xd5 e1# Wang Zili - Damaso,1996. ] this column with Fabiano's notes. Check out
[ Of course 7.exf7+ xf7 (now or later) the Archives.) 7...c6 8.e3 ( 8.h3 h5
should not be considered seriously as it 9.0-0 would transpose to the Caruana game
gives Black an important tempo for here 8...Bxf3 9 Qxf3 0-0-0 10 Be3 doesn't
developing his Rook (Rh8-e8). ] improve for Black) 8...0-0-0 9.h3 h5
7...b4! Aiming at the c2 and d3 squares. ( 9...e6!? 10.g5 xd4 11.xd4 xd4
8.g3 c2+ 9.f2 g6 10.e3 c5! 12.xd4 xd4 13.xe6 fxe6 14.0-0 g6
A brave and correct decision! Black plays for isn't entirely clear, especially since Black
a direct attack on White's king. can counter the attack on e6 by 15.fe1
[ The hasty 10...xa1 spoils the attack: d2 ) 10.e2 e6 11.0-0 ( 11.0-0-0
11.exf7+ xf7 12.d3 and after Nb1-c3 is equally interesting, but makes it harder to
W hite wins the Knight back and has two assault Black's king d5 m i g h t f o l l o w)
pawns for the exchange, with a playable 11...d5 12.xd5 exd5 13.c4!? dxc4
position. ] 14.xc4 b4! 15.fc1 ( 15.e2!?
11.a3 xe3 12.xe3 g4+! Excellent! followed by attack on the king.) 15...xc4
After this unexpected sacrifice Black's attack 16.xc4 f6 17.d5 f7 18.dxc6 xc4
becomes unstoppable. 13.fxg4 g5+ 14.f3 19.cxb7+ b8 20.d4 d5 21.c6+
[ 14.f2 didn't help W hite either: f4+ xc6 22.xc6 b4 23.a3 d2 24.c5
15.f3 xd4+ 16.e1 b4+ 17.e2 d3 25.f1?! ( 25.d1 hd8 26.f1 )
xb2+ and Black wins. ] 25...b3! 26.d1?! ( but 26.b1 c3!
14...fxe6! After this simple move the game is isn't thrilling) 26...xb2 27.e4 a5
over. Black opens the f-file for his Rook and 28.d7 g6 29.d4? d2 30.xf6 xd7
the White king is in dead trouble now. 15.d3 ( 30...e8 31.xd2 xd2 is the computer
0-0+ 16.f5 exf5 17.dxc5 fxg4+ 18.g3 solution. ) 31.xh8 d1+ 32.g2 d2
h5! 0-1. ]
149
6.g5 An interesting move. 167 B01

[ In Gashimov-Tiviakov, Reggio Emilia 2008, Carlsen,M 2877
Tiviakov lost on the Black side of 6.e5 Djukic,Ni 2521
bd7 7.f4 d5 , but he certainly had 41st Olympiad Open 2014 (3.3) 04.08.2014
improvements. White decides to go another [Neil McDonald]
way. ]
6...g4 7.e2 bd7 8.d2 e6 9.f4 b4 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8
10.a3! b6 Black sidesteps any critical theory by bringing
[ White has a considerable advantage in all the queen back home. White is given a freer
t h e l i n e s a f t e r 10...xb2 11.0-0 f5 hand but at least the lady will never become a
( 11...xf3 12.xf3 b6 13.fb1 a5 target of Bf4 (after 3...Qd6) or Bd2 (after 3...
14.xb7; 11...b6 12.fb1 d8 13.xb7 ) Qa5). Incidentally, GM Nikola Djukic plays
12.a2 b6 13.b1 d8 14.xb7 e7 this opening system regularly so Carlsen must
15.c7 ] have played through a lot of 3...Qd8 games in
11.0-0 e7 12.a4 d8 13.c4!? 0-0 preparing for the present encounter. It is a
14.fd1 st ro n g en d orsem en t f or th e lin e t ha t t h e
[ The conventional and probably better W orld Champion was persuaded to play it
course is 14.c3 b6 15.b3 himself as Black three rounds later against
with advantage. ] Caruana, one of his biggest rivals. 4.d4 f6
14...b6 15.xb6 axb6 16.h3 5.f3 g4 6.h3 xf3 Not letting White build
[ As so often (and against the traditional up an initiative in the centre with
idea), exchanges make it easier for the side [ 6...h5 7.g4 g6 8.e5 ]
with space: 16.e5 xe2 17.xe2 ] 7.xf3 c6 In return for the bishop pair and a
16...f5 17.e3 e8?! slight space disadvantage, Black will achieve
[ We've seen the theme 17...b5! 18.cxb5 a full development, get his king to safety and
d5 before, in the Caro-Kann: 19.d2 cxb5 avoid any weaknesses in his pawn structure.
with total control of d5. If 20.xb5 , then For some players he has paid too high a price.
b6 21.f1 xf4 22.xf4 xb2 But others will enjoy having a secure position
wins White's a-pawn next. ] with the chance to outmanoeuvre the
18.b3 e4 opponent. It's no wonder that Carlsen was
[ 18...b5!? 19.cxb5 d5 20.g3 b6 willing to play this line as both W hite and
21.c4! ] Black. He likes a game without theory, in
19.e3 c7 20.d2 d6?! 21.ac1 which he can outplay his opponent from a
[ 21.f4 ] position where he has either a small
21...c5 22.f3 advantage or a small disadvantage- it is all
[ 22.f4 cxd4 23.e5 ] the same to him! 8.d3 Consistent with his
22...f6 23.d5!? e5 plan to make his opponent think for himself.
[ A clever response is the easy-to-miss Djukic has played many games with
23...exd5 24.xd5 d7! , when 25.c2 [ 8.e3 e6 Here are some examples. These
f5 repeats, and here 25...Nf5 is a try for segments- they are not the complete games-
advantage. ] end with more or less equality. As you can
24.b1 xb1 25.xb1 e4 26.g4 g6 see Djukic replies to 0-0-0 by W hite with
27.f4 e5 28.xe5 xe5 29.c3 Bb4, whilst against 0-0 he tries to put his
[ Or 29.bc1 ae8 30.e3 ] knight on d5 and cement it there with b7-b5.
29...e7 . Here White would have a 9.d3 ( Or 9.0-0-0 b4! 10.e4 xe4
comfortable but limited edge after 30 Re1. 11.xe4 d5 the exchange of queens is a
The game continued in technical fashion for a cold shower on W hite's attacking aims.
long time, with White losing after inaccuracies. 12.xd5 cxd5 13.c4 dxc4 14.xc4 d7
0-1 and Black was fine in Erdogdu, M (2467)-
Djukic, N (2503)/Novi Sad 2009. ) 9...bd7
A) 10.0-0 d6
150
A1) 11.ad1 0-0 12.fe1 ( 12.e4 advance to negate White's space advantage.
xe4 13.xe4 g6 14.c4 keeping the However, he has to be sure that he is freeing
black knight out of d5, so Djukic his game rather than opening lines for his
prepares c6-c5 to attack d4 instead. e8 opponent's bishop pair. 13.d1 ad8 14.b3
15.f4 c7 16.f3 c5 Dastan, B (2371)- fe8 15.b2 a6 16.e2 e5 At last Black
Djukic, N (2545)/Skopje MKD 2013.) has completed his preparations and carried
12...e8 13.e4 xe4 14.xe4 f6 out the pawn advance. Objectively speaking it
15.d3 d5 16.d2 b5 stopping White is equal, but Carlsen is able to probe away
kicking back the horse with c2-c4. Ali with no worries. Perhaps it was better to try
Marandi, C (2383)-Djukic, N (2534)/ for the initiative with
Sarajevo BIH 2014; [ 16...h5!? 17.c4 ( After 17.h4?! e5 18.c4
A2) 11.fe1 0-0 12.e4 xe4 e4 19.c3 e3! Black has dynamic play in
13.xe4 g6 14.c4 e8 15.ad1 a5 view of the weakness on g3.) 17...h4 18.b4
16.a4 b6 17.b3 d5 once again ( If 18.g4?! f8 heading for g6 when White
the black knight lands on d5 with has to worry about the hole on f4.) 18...hxg3
balanced chances.; 19.fxg3 e5 only now. The position remains
A3) 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 f6 equal, but Black has more potential
13.d3 d5 14.d2 f6 15.e4 counterplay as the white king's defences
( 15.xf6 gxf6 16.e4 f5 17.f3 0-0-0 are slightly eroded. ]
Klino va, M (2 302)-Djukic, N (2 551)/ 17.c4 exd4 Again this should be OK, but as
Cappelle-la-Grande FRA 2014.) 15...f4 the World Champion loves to play 'without an
16.c4 0-0 17.fe1 fd8 18.ad1 b5 opponent' Djukic might have done better to
19.f1 d5 20.d3 g6 21.g3 ac8 keep the tension with
Sp a s o v, V (25 7 3 )-Dju kic, N (2 5 5 1 )/ [ 17...e4 for example 18.e3 ( If 18.c3?!
Kragujevac SRB 2013.; e3! 19.f4 e4 gives Black counterplay as
B) 10.0-0-0 b4! 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 20.xe3? fails to xg3 21.xg3 xe2 )
f6 13.c4 xe4 14.xe4 e7 18...c5 19.d5 b5 with a double edged
Palac, M (2578)-Djukic, N (2528)/Neum game. ]
BIH 2014. I hope these extracts give you 18.xd4 e5 19.c2 c5 20.f3 xb2
some idea of how to play against 8.Be3. 21.xb2 f8 The Magnus Magic starts to
Ca rls e n go e s h i s o wn wa y a n d t a ke s have its effect: a couple of imprecise moves
Djukic out of his tried and trusted opening by the opponent is all it takes for Carlsen's
lines. ] relentless technique to turn a 'dead equal'
8...e6 9.g3 Carlsen fianchettos on g2 and position into one where he is winning.
hopes to eventually soften up Black along the [ It was better to keep the knight active with
h1-a8 diagonal with an advance of his 21...e4 for example 22.e1 ( Or likewise
queenside pawns. In a later game from the 22.h4 df6 ) 22...df6 ]
Tromso 2014 Olympiad Karjakin preferred 22.h4 Unleashing the bishop and preparing
[ 9.e2 against Iotov- see the archives. ] a long journey with the knight to e3 where it
9...bd7 10.g2 d6 The most active eyes the hole in Black's centre on d5. g6
square for the bishop. In the only other game [ Black can bring his knight into contact with
with 9.g3 Black preferred the hole in White's own structure on d4, but
[ 10...e7 with a solid enough position after he is uncomfortable after 22...e6 23.f5
11.0-0 0-0 12.b3 c7 13.b2 ad8 b6 24.ab1 as the white horse looms over
in Bojkovic, N (2434)-Voicu Jagodzinsky, C his kingside. ]
(2 2 9 0 ) / P lo vd iv 2 0 0 8 . T h e d ra wb a ck o f 23.f5 e7 24.e3 b6 25.b4 Finally White
course is that on e7 the bishop doesn't plays the pawn advance he prepared with 12.
support the freeing e6-e5 break. ] a3. c6 26.xd8 xd8 27.b1 cxb4?
11.0-0 0-0 12.a3 Preparing b3-b4 in the A serious mistake that concedes a potential
distant future. c7 Djukic is building up his passed pawn on the c-file and dissolves the
game sensibly. He is angling for the e6-e5 base for his knight on d4. He had to stand his
151
ground on c5 with 168 B01

[ 27...b8! keeping the option of Nd4 to Carlsen,Magnus 2810
activate his game. ] Short,Nigel D 2696
28.axb4 e5 29.c3 d3? Losing a pawn. Corus A Wijk aan Zee NED (4) 19.01.2010
He might have tried [Gawain Jones]
[ 29...h5 though White keeps his advantage
with 30.h4! ( but not immediately 30.c5 1.e4 d5 A surprising number of
as Black gets counterplay with h4 31.g4 Scandinavians were seen in Corus. Tiviakov
g6 and 32...Nf4. )] of course has 3...Qd6 as his main defence
30.a1! I'm sure Carlsen enjoyed making this but Short and Ivanchuk also gave it a try
queen retreat into the corner. He excels like despite knowing that their opponent, in their
Karpov in manoeuvring his pieces on the first preparation for Tiviakov, would have looked at
rank. Now Black has no good way to defend it. 2.exd5 f6 3.d4
a6. h5 [ B l a c k ' s b e e n s t r u g g l i n g a f t e r 3.f3
[ There could have been a pretty finish after recently. I wonder whether Nigel was going
30...a5 31.bxa5 bxa5 32.b7 d6 to play xd5 4.d4 g4 transposing back
the queen has to defend e5 33.c5 e6 into the game ]
( i t ' s m a t e a f t e r 33...xc5 34.b8+ ) 3...g4
34.b8+ e8 35.c6! xc6 36.xc6 xc6 [ 3...xd5 4.f3 g6 is seen in the following
37.f5! with the unstoppable double threat game ]
of 38.Ne7+ winning the queen and 38.Qxg7 4.f3
mate. ] [ Magnus evidently didn't feel comfortable or
31.xa6 h4 Finally Black switches to ready for the supposed critical 4.f3 ]
aggressive mode but it is too late. 32.g4 d2 4...xd5 5.h3 xf3 6.xf3 c6 A new move
33.c5! Creating a passed pawn along the b- for the site. Instead John Watson examines
file is more important than being a pawn up. alternatives in his notes to Tzermiadianos-
bxc5 34.b5 ed7 35.b6 f4 36.a8+ Shen Siyuan in the archives. 7.e2
h7 37.f3 A bit of housekeeping is needed [ 7.c3 has been tried by White in a few
on t he k ingside be f o re th e pa sse d pa wn recent games but I prefer Carlsen's move as
decides the game. xf3 38.xf3 d4 39.b7 t h e n h e c a n p l a y c 4 i n o n e g o . d7
b4 40.d1 T h r e a t e n i n g 4 1 . g5 . e5 A more dynamic reply compared to ( 7...e6
Black can't keep up a blockade of the pawn 8.c4 d6 9.0-0 0-0 10.d2 d7
as attempts to stop 41.g5 fail to Nd5 ideas. 11.e4 e7 12.b3 7f6 and White
For example maintained his typical advantage but Black
[ 40...g6 41.g2 b6 ( Or 41...b2 42.f4 was very solid in So-Strasser, Bad Wiessee
t h e n 4 3 . g 5 .) 42.d5 xd5 43.xd5 2006 1-0 ((35)) 8.d2 e5 9.dxe5 ( 9.d3
w h e n B l a c k l o s e s t h e r o o k a f t e r xb7 might be a better attempt although exd4
44.d6+ ] 10.cxd4 f6 shouldn't be anything for Black
[ If instead 40...g5 41.d6 b2 42.d5 to fear, despite my computer's opinion!)
xd5 43.xd5 b8 44.d8 and wins. ] 9...xe5 10.e4 e7 ( 10...d6
41.g2 fd7 42.c2 f4 would be a more aggressive continuation
[ Or 42...b2 43.f4 xc2 giving white a 11.f3?! 0-0! and White cannot gain a
pleasant choice between 44.fxe5 and piece due to the pin on the e file.) 11.c4
( 44.e4+ )] xc4 12.xe7+ xe7 13.xc4 d8
43.d5 Threatening 44.Rxe5. f6 44.xc5 was completely fine for Black and he even
b8 45.c8 went on to win in Szabo-Varga, Budapest
[ The blockade on b8 will crumble after say 2009 (51) ]
45.c8 ed7 46.d5 a4 47.e6 ] 7...g6 8.0-0 g7 9.d1 0-0 10.c4 c7
1-0 So Black has a reasonably solid position but
I'd prefer W hite with more space and the
bishop pair. 11.e4
152
[ 11.b3!? looks awkward to deal with xd4 f5 17.xf5 gxf5 18.d5 f8 19.xe7 )
is critical and wild complications ensue! 16.xe6+ xe6 17.d5 ( 17.d2 f3 )
( 11...b5 12.a3 bxc4 13.xc4 d5 17...cxd5 18.cxd5 a6 19.d4 xd3
14.b7 c7 15.xc7 xc7 16.f3 20.xd3 a6 gives White a slight
gives W hite a pleasant advantage, Black advantage as Black's pawn advances has
will struggle to get his queenside pieces rather weakened himself. ]
out.; 11...c8 would keep the queenside 12.e3 h8 Nigel takes a time out to give his
solid but is extremely passive.; 11...b6 king a bit more safety
A concession weakening the queenside [ However 12...d7 with the following
12.e3 ) 12.xb7 e6! 13.xa8 ( 13.e3 sacrifice looks interesting 13.b3 h8
b6 14.xb6 xb6 15.f3 is probably ( 13...b6 14.c3 ) 14.xb7 e6
s l i g h t l y b e t t e r f o r W h i t e .) 13...b6 gives Black some compensation for the
Black threatens Nc7 trapping the queen so pawn 15.d5 dc5 16.b4 ( 16.xc6?!
W hite has to act fast 14.h6 ( 14.c3!? c8 17.b5 d4 18.xd4 xd4
migh t b e pla ya b le bu t d e f in it e ly n e e d s is good for Black.) 16...b8 17.a3 cxd5
analysing.) 14...xf2+ 15.h1 ( 15.f1 18.cxd5 d4 ]
g3-+ ) 15...c7 16.xf8 xa8 17.xe7 13.c3 d7 14.b3 e8 15.f4 This move is
( 17.h6 d4 ) 17...xb2 not necessary yet but it's understandable
A) 18.d8+ g7 19.f8+ f6 20.d6+ leaving Black with the chronic weakness on
g5 21.e7+ f4!? ( 21...h6 e7.
22.f8+= ) 22.f6+ [ 15.a3 f7 16.xe7 xe7 17.xe7
A1) 22...e4 23.xf2 xa1 24.f3+ fe8 18.a3 e6 19.d5 cxd5 ( 19...ef8
is winning for White as Black's king is in 20.dxc6 bxc6 21.ac1 xc3 22.f3! )
deep trouble e5 ( 24...f5 25.d5+ 20.ac1 ( 20.cxd5 ef8 when the pins are
e5 26.f6++-; 24...d3 25.d2+ extremely annoying.) 20...d4 is perhaps
e3 26.g5# ) 25.e2+ f4 26.e4+ slightly better for White but nothing special ]
f5 27.g4#; 15...f7 16.b2 ad8 17.f3 so White has
A2) 22...e5 23.xf2 f5 24.b4! a definite advantage here with the bishop pair
( 24.g4!? xa1 25.d3 e6 and potential use of e5 while the e7 pawn will
is extremely unclear) 24...xb4 25.f1! be a permanent weakness. Black on the other
is a truly bizarre line which looked pretty hand tries to get some counterplay going on
forced and which ends up in a roughly the kingside and the d4 pawn isn't always so
balanced position.; secure. f6 18.d2 g7 19.ad1 g5!
B) 18.c3 forces Black to be careful Nigel doesn't want to be squashed by Magnus
xc3 19.d8+ g7 20.f8+ f6 21.f1 and so goes for broke on the kingside 20.e2
e3 and the computer claims the position g8 21.f1 Just removing the king from the g
is a draw: 22.d1 a6 23.xa8 g5 file although
24.d6 d3 25.e7+ h6 26.f8+ [ 21.c3 looks like an interesting alternative
g5= Of course all of this is probably not with the idea of Ba5 to try and force Black
forced but definitely some fun to analyse! ] to compromise his position. ]
11...f5!? Nigel goes for some counterplay 21...h6 22.g3! Exploiting Black's previous to
[ 11...d7 12.c3 f6 13.h4 ] reroute the knight to a stronger square. g6
[ 11...e6 is the other critical move targeting [ 22...gxf4? 23.xf4 xg3?? ( 23...g5
the d4 pawn. 12.e3 ( 12.d5 is the other 24.xc7 xd2 25.xf5 g5 26.xe7+-
op t io n b u t I 'd pre f e r n o t t o rele ase t h e is hopeless for Black ) 24.xh6# ]
tension in the centre cxd5 13.cxd5 c5 23.d3?! This throws away some of White's
14.c2 bd7 looks acceptable for Black) well constructed advantage. Instead Carlsen
12...c8 13.c3 f5 14.d3 f4 ( 14...d7 should have played
would be somewhat similar to the game) [ 23.h5 immediately when White retains a
15.g4! ( 15.d2 xd4 ) 15...h5 clear advantage ]
( 15...fxe3?! 16.xe3 gives Black problems 23...gxf4! 24.h5
153
[ 24.xf5 e5 25.dxe5! The queen queens on. The other option would be
sacrifice is the only way to continue for [ 31.xg7+ xg7 32.e5 when despite
W hite here ( 25.e4 xf3 26.gxf3 e6-+ ) b e in g a p a wn d o wn W h i t e h a s s li g h t l y
25...xd3 26.xd3 xf5 27.exf6 exf6 better prospects due to his activity and
Is messy. Black is material up with Black's terrible pawn structure. ]
queen+pawn for the rook and bishop but 31...d7 32.de1 f8 33.e5
Black's king is rather vulnerable while the [ 33.f4 would retain some chances for an
two bishops are extremely strong here. It's a d v a n t a g e a s b5 34.e6
about balanced ] wields unpleasant pressure ]
24...c5 33...b5! once Black gets his knight to d6 he
[ 24...e5 is the other option but allows the shouldn't really be worse. 34.c5 d6
strong sacrifice 25.dxe5! More active than 35.xa7 Carlsen decides to regain material
( 25.e2 ) 25...xd3 26.xd3 When I prefer equality or else he might well be worse. e4
White, he has total control over the position 36.d4 e6! This manages to trade the
and Black now has no counterplay. ( 26.exf6 position off into a level ending 37.d1 exd5
looks strong f or W hite if it were not f or [ 37...f2! 38.d2 e4 would be an
xf3+!-+ )] immediate draw ]
25.c2 38.xd5 xd5 39.xg7+
[ 25.dxc5!? xd3 26.xf6+ exf6 27.xd3 [ 39.xd5? c3-+ ]
leads to a curious position. W hite doesn't 39...xg7 40.xd5 f6 White has a nominal
have the bishop pair in this variation but advantage in the endgame but Black held
t h e b i s h o p a n d k n i g h t a r e ve r y s t r o n g comfortably. 41.xe4 fxe4 42.e2 e6
pieces combining attack and defence, while 43.d4 f2+ 44.e3 xg2 45.xe4+ d5
W hite rules the d file. Black has queen + 46.d4+ e5 47.e4+ An interesting game.
pawn for rook and bishop but one of the so White got a comfortable advantage out of the
called Irish pawns will drop on the f file. I'd opening but Black defended well and held the
actually prefer White here but I like playing draw. However he failed to solve the opening
material down but with the initiative. problems Black has been facing in the 2...Nf6
Chances look roughly balanced objectively. ] line.
25...e4 26.e2 ½-½
[ Understandably White didn't want to allow
26.xe4 xh5 27.xf5 ( 27.f3!? ) 27...f3
which is very messy ] 169 B01
26...g3+ 27.xg3 fxg3 Black's kingside Caruana,F 2801
play has netted him a pawn but now his attack Carlsen,M 2877
has stalled while his pawns are rather more 41st Olympiad Open 2014 (6.3) 08.08.2014
advanced than ideal. 28.d5! Time for White to [Neil McDonald]
seize the initiative cxd5 29.cxd5
[ 29.xe7! looks very strong for White g7 1.e4 d5! I believe this is the World
30.xg7 xg7 ( 30...xg7 31.cxd5 ) Champion's first Scandinavian Defence in a
31.c1 gives White a pleasant advantage. serious game. Was he influenced by the fact
The two bishops are very strong and Black's that he was playing for Norway in his
king is vulnerable. A sample line could run homeland? More likely he had studied the
dxc4 32.xd8+ xd8 33.xf5 c3 34.f4 variation prior to his game with Djukic a few
c2 35.e2!+- ] rounds earlier and realised it was a solid and
29...xb2 30.xb2+ reliable defence that avoided theory. It was
[ Again 30.xe7! is favourable for White f6 theref ore a good choice against Fabiano
( 30...g7 31.xc7 ) 31.xc7 g7?! Caruana, who is exceptionally well prepared in
32.d6! ] the open ing. 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8
30...g7 31.c1 Carlsen tries to exploit The safest retreat, albeit a little passive. On
Black's weakened king and so keeps the the other hand, W hite has a lead in
154
development, but he no longer has a pawn on example if 17.g5 It may be wrong for White
e4 to spearhead his attack. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 to push his kingside pawns without more
g4 Carlsen continues to copy his game with prep arat ion . g8 18.h4 e7 19.g3
Djukic. You may like to look up this game in fg6 and Black's knight gains access to the
the archives for a discussion of the early f4 square. ]
moves. 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 c6 8.e2!? 17.g3 f8 18.f3 Already White could get
A rare move. Of course Caruana had no idea his kingside pawns rolling with
that Carlsen was going to play this variation [ 18.g5 g8 19.h4 ]
as Black, so he is unlikely to have spent days 18...g6 19.h4 f4 20.h5 xe3+ 21.fxe3
studying it. e6 In the only other game with 8. e7 22.e4? It looks like a fine idea to
Ne2 Black preferred to fianchetto on g7 and conquer space in the centre and get the knight
aim for a quick e7-e5: to d6, but this is the wrong plan. He should
[ 8...bd7 This may be less accurate than 8.. have played
e6, for reasons explained below. [ 22.h6! to undermine the black kingside
A) White has an aggressive plan available pawns and leave Black with problems along
with 9.d2 g6 ( Or 9...e6 10.g4 ) the f-file. For example
10.0-0-0 g7 11.g4 etc.; A) 22...g8!? 23.g5!? ( Also good for
B) 9.g3 g6 10.g2 g7 11.0-0 0-0 White is 23.hxg7 xg7 24.df1
12.d1 e5 13.b3 c7 14.dxe5 xe5 with pressure as taking on g4 would cost
15.f4 fd7 16.a4 c5 17.b4 Black the f7 pawn.) 23...e8 24.hxg7
So far this is Fedorchuk, S (2647)- xg7 25.e4 and the pawns on f7 and h7
Danielsen, H (2501)/Kolkata IND 2014. are more of a liability than the pawn on
White has the proverbial advantage of the g5.;
two bishops, but it isn't much. After b6!? B) 22...g6 23.df1 f8 Black's problems
18.xb6 axb6 19.b3 fe8 Black would along the f-file haven't gone away and the
be very solid. ] white pawn on h6 will be very strong in
9.g4! This pawn thrust was suggested above the endgame. Of course Black is far from
in the variation after 8...Nbd7. But because he lost in these variations, but it would have
has preferred 8...e6, Carlsen can avoid the taken all Carlsen's resourcefulness to
attack by offering the exchange of queens. On defend successfully against a player like
t h e o t h e r h a n d , W h i t e ' s ki n g s i d e s p a c e Caruana. ]
advantage is also of value in the endgame. 22...h6! This little move is a whole lesson in
d5! The black queen returns to d5. 10.g2 strategic play. W hite's last move gave the
bd7 11.g3 c4 World Champion a vital breathing space to
[ The bizarre computer variation 11...b4+?! consolidate his kingside by preventing h5-h6.
leaves White with an edge after 12.c3 d6 He also clears h7 for his knight and creates a
13.xd5 xg3 14.xc6! xf2+ 15.xf2 fine post for it on g5. 23.e5 h7 24.e4 f8
bxc6 16.e1 etc. due to his long range 25.d6+ c7 26.g2 g5 The situation on
bishop and better pawns. ] the kingside has turned around. The black
12.b3 xb3 Evidently Carlsen wasn't knight blocks White's pawns from expanding
bothered by the opening of the a-file as he with g4-g5, which means they become passive
planned to castle queenside. Nonetheless and potentially weak. The horse also helps
avoiding the strengthening of White's pawns guard the f7 pawn. Meanwhile, it may look
with pretty, but what exactly is the white knight
[ 12...b6 was very natural. ] d o i n g o n d 6 ? 27.hf1 f6! The pawn that
13.axb3 d6 14.c4 a6 15.e3 0-0-0 would have been a feeble fellow requiring
16.0-0-0 he8? Since the battle is going to be careful defence after 22.h6! is transformed
fought on the kingside, it seems strange to into an attacking weapon. 28.c2 fxe5
remove the rook from the h-file. Instead 29.dxe5 c8! In order to maintain the knight
[ 16...f8 followed by Ng6 would on d6 White must defend it again with 30.c5
immediately bring up reinforcements. For but now the black knight can return to e7
155
when the d5 square is opened up to it. e7 with previous columns and Michael Melts' new
31.b4? book. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
Since Caruana is planning 32.Bxd5
this pawn move is understandable. However, 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5
he could have kept a defensible position with [ 6.g3 g4 7.g2 e6 8.h3 ( we saw 8.0-0
moves like e7 9.h3 in our game Socko, B (2631)-
[ 31.a1 d5 32.d2 which deal with the Tiviakov, S (2686)/Eppingen GER 2008,
threat of Ne3. Of course it isn't easy to almost transposing after xf3 10.xf3
play such extremely passive moves when , but White has castled and this gives Black
you've been pressing for the advantage. ] a tempo more to set up: 0-0 11.f4 d8
31...d5 32.xd5 12.d3 bd7 13.e2!? e8 14.fd1 f8
It is unpleasant to give
Black a passed pawn, but with the pawn on with rough equality) 8...xf3 9.xf3 e7
b4 hanging as well as the threat of 32...Ne3+ 10.e2 bd7 11.c3 c7 12.f4 d6
13.xd6 xd6 14.d2 0-0 ( 14...e5! )
t h e k n i g h t w a s i n t o l e r a b l e o n d 5 . cxd5
The strength of the knight on d6 is purely 15.0-0 ad8 16.ad1 e5 17.g2 fe8
visual. The Uzbekistani SuperGM Rustam and Black had equalised in Lanin, A
Kasimdzhanov was watching this game live (2457)-Tiviakov, S (2697)/Dagomys RUS
a n d r e m a rk e d t h a t t h e wh i t e kn igh t wa s
2009 ]
terrible on d6- it should be on d4, blocking the
6...bd7 7.f4
passed pawn and putting pressure on e6. [ Here 7.c4 c7 8.f3 b6 9.f4
33.b5 Perhaps the last realistic drawing
T h i s i s , a s Me l t s s a ys , a ve r y p o p u l a r
chance was position. Black sometimes plays 9...Qd8,
[ 33.b3 e.g. f3 34.a2 xe5 35.xf8 but there's also a lot of experience with d7
xf8 36.e1 when White will at least pick 10.0-0-0 , which looks to favour White, but
up the e6 pawn. ] the exchange g4 11.xg4 xg4 12.f3
33...axb5 34.xb5+ c6 35.d6 f3 e6 seems to achieve complete equality,
36.b4 a8 37.a1 xa1 38.xa1 xe5 Simacek, P (2493)-Sedlak, N (2592)/Budva
39.a7 White has lost a key pawn as after MNE 2009 (and earlier games). ]
[ 39.e1 f3 he would drop the rook upon 7...d5
40.xe6 d4+ ] [ 7...xe5 is legitimate, but I think not quite
39...b8 Now Carlsen's technique is more
equal:
than good enough. 40.a3 b6 41.a7 bxc5 A) 8.dxe5 b4 9.d2 ( 9.d2 d5
42.a6+ c7 43.bxc5 d7 44.a7+ c6 and 9...Ne4 are considered equal) 9...e4
45.g5 xc5 46.f7 d4 47.e5+ d5 10.e2 xd2 11.xd2 f5 is equal,
48.d7 d3+ 49.c1 xd7 50.xd7+ e4 according to Melts. Then 12.0-0-0 g6
White resigned as Black's passed pawns soon 13.a3 a5 14.f4 is worth a try.;
cost him a rook e.g. B) 8.xe5 d8 ( 8...b4 9.a3 b6
[ 50...e4 51.xg7 e3 52.d7 ( Or 10.e2 f5 is given by Melts, when 11.b4
52.e7 d2+ 53.c2 c8+ ) 52...e2 a5 12.0-0 d7 13.f4 keeps some kind
53.gxh6 c8+ 54.b2 d2 ] of edge ) 9.d2 ( 9.c4 f5 10.0-0 e6 )
0-1 9...f5 10.0-0-0 may well be better for
White, if only by a limited margin. ]
8.xd5
170 B01 [ Tiviakov doesn't lose many games with 3.. .
Caruana,Fabiano 2646 Qd6, and in this one he doesn't go down
Milanovic,Danilo 2552 easy: 8.g3
10th EICC Budva MNE (5) 10.03.2009 A) 8...xe5 9.xe5 xc3 ( 9...b4
[John Watson] 10.a3! wit h t h e id e a xb2? 11.a4 )
10.bxc3 a3 11.d2 transposes;
An interestin g back-and-f o rth game. I've B) 8...xc3 9.bxc3 xe5 10.xe5 a3
merged quite a few other games from this ( 10...g6!? ) 11.d2 b2 12.d1 xa2
month, most by Tiviakov, and compared them ( 12...e6 13.e2 - Melts ) 13.d3 f6
156
14.f4 e6+ 15.e2 f7 16.0-0 e6 [ 13.h3 f6 was K Szabo-Khernazhitsky,

17.c4 e5?! ( 17...e7 ) 18.dxe5 e7 Za la ka ro si 2 0 08 , wh e n Me lt s su gge s t s
19.exf6 xf6 20.c5! 0-0 21.c4+ 14.f4 ]
( 21.d6 ) 21...e6 22.xe6+ xe6 13...g4 14.h3
23.d6 f7 24.fe1 f6 25.e4!? [ The truly adventurous player might try
( 25.f3 d8 26.b4 ) 25...d8 26.g3 14.hg1 e6 15.b1 0-0-0 16.xg4!?
g6 27.e2 xd6?! 28.cxd6 xd6 hxg4 17.xg4 f5 18.f3 with the attacking
29.e8+ f8 30.c4+ d5 ( 30...f7?? ideas d5 and c4. ]
31.xf8+ xf8 32.b4 ) 31.xf8+ xf8 14...xf3 15.xf3 e6!? 16.b1 f6!?
32.xd5 cxd5 33.c5+ f7 34.xd5+ [ 16...d5!? 17.d3 0-0-0 might be better.
e8 35.xb7 xc2 36.b8+ f7 Maybe W hite is a little short full
37.xa7+ Mastrovasilis, D (2580)-Tiviakov, compensation, but he certainly has free
S ( 2 6 8 4 ) / B u d va M N E 2 0 0 9 . A f t e r 9 4 play. ]
moves, White managed to claim a victory, 17.h2 d5
but that really shouldn't happen. ] [ Or 17...0-0-0 18.a3 a6 19.a5!? d7
8...xd5 20.de1! e5! 21.dxe5 fxe5 22.xe5 d6 ]
[ Tiviakov has also played 8...xe5 , but 18.d3 e6?! I don't get this. 19.g6+ e7
9.dxe5 xd5 10.xd5 cxd5 11.c4 20.he1 d8
should yield some advantage. ] [ 20...h6 21.g3 d8 22.c4! with the idea
9.e2 This pawn sacrifice is the way Anand xc4?? 23.c7+ ]
played against Tiviakov in Wijk aan Zee 2006. 21.a1?
Other moves include [ 21.f4! ]
[ a) 9.f3 , as played this month in Pikula, D 21...h6 22.d3 f7 Now Black is okay
(2570)-Tiviakov, S (2684)/Budva MNE 2009 again. 23.c4 f5 24.e3 d7 25.a3 e7?!
it l e d t o a q u i c k d r a w: b6 ( 9...f6 Over the next few moves he gets careless.
is also played) 10.e2 f5 11.c3 ( 11.0-0? [ 25...g6! was a strong move. ]
e4! ) 11...e6 12.0-0 e7 13.e5 0-0 26.d3 h8?
14.e1 d8 15.b3 d5 1/2-1/2 ] [ 26...e5! ]
[ b) 9.d3 g5 10.g3 g7 ( 10...xe5 27.e2 hd8
11.xe5?! f6 12.g3 f5 is suggested by [ 27...e5 28.e3 hd8 is unclear. ]
Melts here 11 dxe5 improves, but 11...Qa5+ 28.f3 h7?!
is a good equalizer) 11.e3 ( 11.h4! xe5 [ 28...g6! 29.xe6+ f8 is about equal,
12.dxe5 a5+ 13.d2 xd2+ 14.xd2 since 30.fe3 allows f7 ]
g4! ) 11...xe5 12.dxe5 f5 13.c3 29.xe6+ f8 30.fe3! g6 31.d5?
( 13.d1 ) 13...h5 14.h4 g4 with some Some kind of hallucination. W hite stands
advantage for Black, Stojanovic, D (2469)- better after
Tiviakov, S (2684)/Budva MNE 2009. ] [ 31.b8! a6 32.a7! f7 33.f5 ]
9...xe5 10.xe5 xg2 11.f3 g6 31...cxd5 32.cxd5 f7
[ 11...g5!? - Melts ] [ or 32...c5 with the idea 33.c3 e7 ]
12.e2 33.e4 The d-pawn won't last. c5 34.3e2
[ Th e A n an d ga me we n t 12.d5?! g4! xd5 35.c2 b6 36.f4 d3 37.d2 d5
(easy to miss) 13.dxc6 ( 13.xg4? e4+ 38.ed1 xd2 39.xd2 d3 40.a4 a5
14.d2 xe5 ) 13...bxc6 14.e2 xf3 41.h4 g8 42.a2 xf2
15.xf3 d8 and Black had some 0-1
advantage. ]
12...h5!? Still in theory. Also previously played
were
[ 12...e6 ]
[ 12...f5 ]
[ 12...e6!? ]
13.0-0-0 Apparently a new move.
157
171 B01 xd4 15.e5 b6 doesn't look like

Caruana,Fabiano 2381 sufficient compensation) 13.e3! e6
Strikovic,Aleksa 2498 14.ab1 a3 15.b3 a5 16.e5!
Narcisco Yepes Memorial (2) 02.07.2005 with an almost winning game, although
[Caruana] W hite went astray: d5 17.xd5 exd5
18.xc6 bxc6 19.fb1 d7 20.b7
GM Fabiano Caruana was on my ChessFM ( 20.xc7! ) 20...d6 21.xd6 xd6
(ICC) radio show and had prepared a few 22.f4+ ( 22.e5+ d7 23.xg7 )
games for the listeners/viewers. We didn't get 22...d7 23.h4 he8 24.h5 ( 24.1b2!
to this one and he agreed that I could share and 25 h5 will win something) 24...xc2
the game with ChessPublishing readers. The 25.1b2 g5?! 26.hxg6 xg6 27.g5 e7
verbal commentary is wonderful and, although A m e s z, J ( 2 1 8 5 ) - V a n B e e k , A ( 2 2 7 0 ) /
the game itself is a few years old, I think it's Vlissingen 2000 and here 28.f6+ d7
still of theoretical value, and I've included a ( 28...f8 29.h8+ e7 30.e2+ )
game or two. The original annotations are 29.h3+ wins material. ]
extensive, and I've excerpted few of his main 12...xb2
comments, since I hope that he will publish [ [ j w : ] T i v i a k o v c h o s e 12...c4!?
the complete version else where. [All against Svidler in Corus 2007, annotated by
annotations are his except as noted by "jw:"] Jonathan Rowson ["JR"!] for
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 ChessPublishing. The game (with selected
f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4 7.h3 h5 8.g2 notes) went 13.g5 d5 14.xd5 xd5
c6 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4 b4 11.g4! ( 14...xd5 15.e5 xd4 16.g4+! e6
This was a new move at the time and was 17.xc6 looks winning. )
found over the board. Previously White had A) 15.e5 xe5 16.xd5 xd5
played exclusively 11.a3. It is interesting that 17.dxe5 e4 18.d2! , when xc2
although my idea found few followers for a ( jw: but 18...e6 19.fd1 c5
long time, in Wijk aan Zee 2007 Peter Svidler looks reasonable) 19.xc2 xc2 20.fc1
chose it against Sergei Tiviakov and won! For g6 21.e6 is good for White.;
sure he had accurately checked all the B) 15.c3!? d8 16.b3 d3 ( 16...xc3
consequences of it and concluded White had, 17.c1 d3 18.e1 e4 19.e3
if n ot a n ad va nt age, t he n go od p ra ct ica l and it looks like White's initiative is about
c h a n c e s i n u n c l e a r p l a y . g6 12.a3 to grow" - JR) 17.c1 c2 18.e3 e6
Th ere is n o t urn in g b a ck, a s I 'm alrea d y 19.b4 e4 20.d2 xe3 21.fxe3 e5
committed to sacrificing at least one pawn. 22.g3 exd4 23.cxd4 d6 24.xd6
For the material I receive a strong attack cxd6 25.ac1 d7 26.c4 with some
along the b- and c-files also notice all my advantage for White. ]
pieces two bishops glaring down the board at 13.e1! Black has an important choice now.
b7 and c7, knights waiting to hop into any Strikovic prefers to develop, which is probably
entry squares in the centre - in particular Ne5 - t h e w a y t o g o . e6! An interesting move,
rooks coming in on b1 and c1 and my queen preferring to finish develop rather than go
will quickly swing around to the centre or pawn hunting. [jw: I'll just show a condensed
queenside) are aiming at Black's undefended version of FC's analysis and comments on
king. At f irst t he compu ter estimates th e 13...Bxc2, following his main line, although he
position as hopeless for W hite, but after 5 also covers 13..Qxc2:]
minutes its evaluation drops to roughly -0.2, [ 13...xc2 14.a2 ( Actually, the slow
which is not bad for the machine considering a 14.e3!? should be considered) 14...b3
two pawn deficit! 15.c1
[ jw: The only other game I (jw) found with A) 15...d5 16.xc2 xf4 17.b2 xa3
this line went 12.e2!? xb2 ( But after 18.e5 xg2 ( 18...a5!? 19.a1!! )
12...e6! , Black is threatening the d-pawn 19.xc6 f4 ( 19...bxc6? 20.b8+ )
and b-pawn. Then 13.ab1 xd4 14.xd4 20.xb7 xh3+ 21.g2 xc1 22.xc1
158
f4+ 23.f3 e6 24.b8+ d7 long time (therefore later on I was in serious
25.xd8 xd8 is a decidedly odd line time trouble) trying to break Black's
leading to an equally odd position! White defenses and eventually I found it! 19.d5!
has good play after 26.e4; ( 19.a8+? b8 leads nowhere) 19...d6!
B) 15...d3 16.b2 xa3 17.e5; 20.b4! This somewhat illogical backwards
C) 15...e5! 16.xc2 xa3 ( 16...exf4 move was t he mo st d if f icult p art o f th e
17.b2 xa3 18.e5 is a formidable combination. Surprisingly W hite has no
attack ) 17.b1 xb1 18.xb1 exf4 o t h e r w a y t o m a k e p r o g r e s s . c4
19.xa3 xd4 20.xd4 xd4 ( 20...b3 21.b7+ b8 22.c6# )
gives Black an amazing four pawns for the 21.e2! The final point, after which Black
piece, but White is very well coordinated, can no longer defend. I should mention that
and has an initiative after 21.b1!? e4 the entire attack starting with Rxb7 doesn't
22.bc1 c6 23.c4 xc4 24.xc4 ] w o r k w i t h o u t t h i s r e s o u r c e . xe2
14.b1 xc2 15.e5 [Fabiano:] n White's The queen had no other square to cover the
compensation is clearly visible. But Black has critical points a6 and c6 22.b7+ b8
defensive resources. Now comes a large and 23.c6# ]
unpleasant choice for Strikovic, who must 17.xc6 c8 18.e5! xe5? My opponent
separate between two main moves: 15...Nd5 cracks under the sustained tension. A
or 15...Bd6 (other moves such as Bxa3 or possible alternative was 18. ..Bd3 with a
Rxd4 are not very serious). Both are almost probable draw. 19.dxe5 d5 20.xd5 exd5
impossible to fully calculate, so the choice is 21.e7+ Not blindly taking the material. After
partly intuitive." d6!? this strong move W hite gets a huge
[ [Fabiano analyses various options here, advantage. d7 22.xd5 Black is up a lot
including 15...Nd5!, which I've only take his of material but is so uncoordinated and has a
m a i n l i n e o f ] 15...d5! , a natural move terribly weak king that White is near winning!
brin gin g t h e knigh t t o t h e d e f e n s e a n d [jw: There's much more, but since this
opposing the bishop's demand of the long finishes the opening stage, I'm going to show
dia go n a l, wh ich le a d s t o a lo n g f o rce d t h e m o ve s o n l y: ] d3?! 23.b4 c4
variation after 16.c1 xf4 ( 16...b2? 24.d2 e8 25.c1 b3 26.xc7 h6
17.xd5 exd5 18.xc6 ) 17.xc2 xg2 27.c6+ f8 28.d5?? c4! 29.xf7+
18.xg2 xe5 , when the position has e8 30.c6! xd5 31.e7+ f8 32.f4+
undergone a remarkable transformation: g8 33.xg7+ xg7 34.f6+ h7
Bla c k h a s s a crif ice d h is qu e e n f o r t wo 35.f5+ g7 36.f6+ h7 37.f5+ g7
bishops and two pawns, but at the same 38.f6+
time has rebuffed W hite's attack and left ½-½
W hite with many weaknesses, whilst
receiving good control over both the light
and dark-squares. In fact I feel Black is only 172 B01
very slightly worse at the maximum. 19.a2 Casper,Thomas 2390
c4 20.e2 xd4 21.d1 xd1 22.xd1 Speelman,Jonathan S 2580
c5 looks like formidable compensation. ] Bundesliga 2002
16.xb7!! [jw: Here Fabiano analyses the [Andrew Martin]
move 16 Bxc6! at great length, with absurd
complications, ultimately good f or W hite] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5
xb7! Tenacious defence! So what happens Having recently made a video recommending
after 16... Bxe5? In conclusion, it is a tough this system, I approve of Speelman's choice.
nut to crack but leads to a f orced win for If White chooses straightforward development
White. i.e. d4,Nf3 Bc4 Bd2 etc it's difficult to work up
[ 16...xe5? 17.xc6 xf4 18.a7 d7 any advantage at all. Furthermore, If White's
looks very dangerous for Black but it isn't play is too routine, Black can easily take over
easy to see a knockout for White. I spent a the game. In that video, I thought that Black
159
should aim to put his Bishop on f5 and follow 7b6 14.e5 0-0 15.d2 h7 16.ad1
up with ...e6, ...Nf6, ...Bb4, ...Nbd7 etc . Very xc3 17.xc3 d7=;
solid stuff. Here we see an exception to that C) 11.d2 b6 12.ab1 a5 13.h1 0-0
rule when W hite goes off the beaten track 14.e4 xe4 15.dxe4 g6= ]
early. 4.g3 Glek favours this idea against 6...g6! 7.0-0 g7 I like this active method. g7
almost any Kings Pawn opening. The plan is is a much better square than e7 or d6. 8.b1
very interesting i.e. an eventual b4-b5, prising 0-0 9.b4 d8 10.a4 e8 11.b5 d6
open the long diagonal. That takes some Note how Speelman left his Queenside pieces
preparation but Black must be aware. f6 at home to be able to cope with this 'threat'
5.g2 c6! 12.d3 c5 And now counterplay is threatened
[ 5...g6! 6.f3 g7 7.0-0 0-0 8.e1 c6! with the help of ....c5-c4 13.e4 xe4
Braga's method is noteworthy-piece play 14.xe4 d7 15.d2 b8 16.c3 xc3
above all. But I like Speelman's move too 17.xc3 f6 18.g2 b6= 19.e4 xe4
and it is logical, shutting down the diagonal. 20.xe4 d4 21.e1 e6 22.a1 a5!
9.h3 e5 10.d3 e8 11.e3 b4 12.a3 Sp ee lm a n is in h is elem en t - a ma s te r o f
d6 13.b4 a5 14.c5 d8 15.b5 d7 simple positions and endgame structures.
16.e3 d4 17.xd4 exd4 18.d5 Casper tries to break Black's hold on the
( 18.xe8+ xe8 19.d5 d8 20.e2 game and should really draw but his position
c5 21.e7+ f8 22.xc8 xc8= ) worsens as time trouble approaches. 23.bxa6
18...f6 19.xe8+ xe8 20.e1 d7 xa6 24.a3 fd8 25.a1 xa1 26.exa1
21.b1 d6 22.a4 e6 23.f4 f6 c4! 27.dxc4 xc4 28.b1 g7 29.c3
24.xe6 fxe6 25.h4 h6 26.d2 f5 d5 30.xd5 xd5 31.cb3 c8 32.1b2
27.e1 f7 28.e2 e8 29.d2 b6 [ 32.xb6 xc2 33.6b2 must be a draw
30.c4 xc4 31.dxc4 f6 32.e4 e7 although Black could play on forever- not
33.d1 g8 34.d3 f7 35.a3 f8 easy at 30" per move. ]
36.d3 g8 37.a1 f7 38.e1 g7 32...d4 33.b4 xc2! 34.xb6 c1+
39.e2 h5 40.g2 d6 41.d1 c5 35.g2 xa4 36.b7 g5 37.7b4 c4
42.d3 d6 43.e1 e7 44.e4 f7 38.xa4 xa4 39.b5 f6 4 g3 has to be
45.e2 e7 46.g4 hxg4 47.xg4 h6 respected, but I think that Black can attain a
48.e4 f7 49.e2 g7 50.f1 f4 position of equality as long as he pays due
51.xe6 xh4 52.e4 h3+ 53.e1 g4 respect to the upcoming b4-b5. Here
54.h1+ h5 55.a8 g4 56.h8+ g5 Speelman did just that.
57.d8+ h6 58.h8+ g5 59.d8+ 0-1
h6 60.d5 d6 61.h1+ h5 62.e4
h7 63.g2 b4+ 0-1 Ehlvest,J-Braga,F/
Olympiad, Bled SLO 2002 (63) ] 173 B01
6.ge2 White keeps the diagonal open, Cheparinov,Ivan 2572
hoping for the b4 idea mentioned earlier. If he Lorenzini,Martin 2412
tries 6 Nf3 then I think Black should go for the XI Anibal Open (5) 01.03.2005
normal plan: [Andrew Martin]
[ 6.f3 f5 7.0-0 e6 8.d3 e7 9.h3 h6!
10.e2 bd7= A typical position where the 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
battle lies in the difference between the two f6 5.f3 f5 6.c4 e6 7.d2 c6 8.e4
light-squared Bishops. It's up to Black to d8 Avoiding doubled pawns at the cost of a
prove that the pawn c6 is a more effective loss of time. 9.g3
blocker than the pawn d3. I think he can do [ 9.xf6+ xf6 10.c3 d6 holds no
this with active play: terrors. ]
A) 11.a3 0-0 12.e4 h7 13.b4 c7 9...g4 10.c3 bd7 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3
14.b2 ( 14.xf6+ xf6 15.b1 ae8= ) e7
14...a5; [ 12...d6 is a more active deployment and
B) 11.d2 d5 12.c4 d8 13.e1 sh o u ld b e p re f e rre d , a lt h o u gh t h e re i s
160
nothing really wrong with the game move. 174 B01

Nevertheless, against strong opposition, Chiburdanidze,Maia
one should avoid overly quiet play. 13.e2 Klaric,Zlatko
c7 14.g4 d5 15.a4 a5 16.g5 5b6 Banja Luka (3) 1985
17.b3 c5 18.h4 c4 19.c2 d5 20.h5 [Nigel Davies]
1/2-1/2 Movsesian, S-Istratescu, A/Ohrid
2001 ] 4.Nf3 is another interesting alternative. It will
13.0-0 0-0 14.fe1 White has a moderate of ten transp ose b ack in to th e main line s
edge with two Bishops and the possibility of should White play a later d2-d4, but he can
probing the Black kingside. Black's problem is delay this move or even omit it altogether.
that he doesn't seem to have an active plan. Here we see Black pin the knight with 4...Bg4,
Perhaps he should play ...a5, ...b5 and plant but White uses this bishop move to develop
a Knight on d5. a5N here kingside in novel fashion. 1.e4 d5
[ 14...e8 15.ad1 a5 is sim ila r 16.d3 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3
b6 17.c1 ad8 18.c2 f8 19.f1 This natural developing move can transpose
g6 20.e3 c7 21.c4 d5 22.g3 b5 into the lines with d2-d4, but also be a
23.e3 dd8 24.h4 f8 25.h5 h6 prelude to some other plans of development.
26.g4 8h7 27.e5 Thipsay, P-Koeller, [ The immediate 4.h3 invites Black to occupy
O/Biel 1999 Throughout Black has been the centre with e5 ]
hampered by his inability to trouble White 4...g4 The move with independent
with counterplay. ] significance.
15.a4 c7?! An imprecision. [ Both 4...f6 ]
[ I c a n s u gge st 15...d5 16.d3 e8 [ and 4...c6 can be met by 5.h3 , preventing
as a modest improvement. Black is solid-he the pin. ]
must wait. ] 5.h3 h5 6.g4 g6 7.g2! c6
16.f5! fe8 17.f4 b6 18.xe7+ xe7 [ After 7...c6 White can consider 8.b4 ]
19.e2 Now the White position is starting to [ 7...e5 would be bad because of 8.0-0
look very nice. ee8 20.d6 d8 21.d3 intending Re1 and d2-d4. ]
f8 22.g3 g6 8.0-0 0-0-0 9.a3 e5 10.b1
[ 22...h5 23.e5 f6 24.ae1 g6 [ Chiburdanidze also mentioned the weird-
25.h2 hardly helps. ] looking 10.a2!? , once again with the
23.ae1 h5 24.h2 g5 25.e3 hf4 intention of playing b2-b4. ]
26.h4! One can play such moves when the 10...c5 11.d3
opponent's pieces are tripping over each [ The immediate 11.b4!? could conceivably
other's toes. h6 27.xg6 xg6 28.h5 be met by xc3!? 12.dxc3 xd1 13.xd1
e7 29.f4 f6 30.e5 f5 31.f3 c2 xc2 though this seems to offer White
32.g3 Because 32...g6 33 Qh4 is too excellent compensation after 14.b5 ( or
unpleasant to contemplate. I'll summarise by 14.e3 xb1 15.xb1 )]
saying that I don't think 9 Ng3 holds too many 11...e4 12.h4 exd3 13.xg6 dxc2?!
terrors for Black as long as he plays 12...Bd6! W inning a pawn but accelerating W hite's
a little later on in reply. Above all, he must initiative.
avoid an over-passive reaction. [ 13...hxg6 would have been more solid. ]
1-0 14.xc2 hxg6 15.e3 e5 16.fe1 c5
[ 16...d6 is answered by 17.f4 ]
17.b4 xe3 18.xe3 f6 19.a4
With a very strong attack. Black has an extra
pawn, but no real counterplay. ge7
[ 19...b8 is met by 20.e4 intending
Nc5. ]
20.e4
[ And not 20.b5 because of d4! ]
161
20...f4 21.b5 d4 22.c2 d5 queen's bishop whilst continuing to have
[ Or 22...e5 23.c5 etc. ] the move c3-c4, with or without Rb1,
23.bxc6 xe3 24.cxb7+ b8 25.c5 d6 hanging over his head like a sword of
[ After 25...d6 there is 26.c6! ( xc6 Damocles. f5 12.c4 a4 ( 12...a6
27.d7# ) ] 13.xf5 gxf5 14.d5! xa1 15.xa1
26.fxe3 xh3 27.a6+ xa6 28.xc7+ a5 16.d4 Provides White with a
xc7 29.b8+ d7 winning attack.) 13.d5! The Qa4-Qd1
1-0 vis-Ã -vis gives W hite supplementary
t a c t i c a l m o t i v e s . d4 ( 13...a5
14.b1 xd3 15.cxd3 xd1 16.bxd1
175 B01 b6 17.xe7 ) 14.xd4 xd4 15.xe7
Chomet,Pascal 2317 xa1 16.xa1 xd3 17.h6 f6
Collas,Didier 2425 18.cxd3 f7 19.e1 And Black has to
Championnat de Accession (2.5) 08.2005 part with his queen to avoid mate.;
[Eric Prié] B3) 11.e4?! As in the Lacasa-Sanchez
g a m e o f t h i s s u m m e r . d8!?
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 Possibly an improvement, with unclear
f6 5.f3 e4?! 6.d3! xc3 7.bxc3 play, as W hite should play here 12.h3
xc3+ This is suicidal. Although even without ( 12.c4 a4 13.d3 g4 14.c3 xd1
taking the pawn Black's survival only hangs by 15.axd1 c5!= Dranischnikow, E-Prie, E
a thread... Rheinland Pfalz ChT1 2005) 12...c5
[ 7...g6 8.0-0 g7 13.e2 e6 With unclear play. Partly
A) 9.e1!? 0-0! 10.xe7 c6 11.e3 f rom my notes in ChessBase MEG A
xc3 12.d2 b2 13.c3 Of course and 2006. ]
not 13.Bxg6? as in the Reprintsev game 8.d2 a3
commented by Andrew. h6 ( 13...g4 [ 8...b2 9.0-0 White's lead in development
14.h3 xf3 15.xf3; 13...e6 14.b1 is crushing. ]
xa2 15.xb7 ) 14.e1 xd2 15.xd2 9.0-0
xd2 16.xd2 e6 17.e4 a5 [ 9.e5!? d7? ( 9...d6 10.f3 f6;
18.c5 Thus, past the surprise effect, 9...e6 10.h5 e7 ) 10.xf7! Gamback, B-
Black does not manage to equalize in this Paasikangas Tella, J Aaland-Stockholm
line either.; 1997 W ith the idea xf7 11.f3+ e8
B) 9.d2!? My young opponent, who was 12.g6+ hxg6 13.xa3 ]
having quite a good run in the league, 9...d7 10.e1 What impresses me in this
although visibly surprised by the variation, game is the methodical quietness of the white
only spent half an hour to retrieve all the moves on one side when related to the feeling
best moves over the board! 0-0 10.e1 of helplessness of Black on the other side,
c6 totally unable to check the opposing natural
B1) 11.c4 is c r it i c a l a3 ( 11...a4 initiative after his 6th move 'over provocation'
12.c3 xd1 13.axd1 ) 12.c3 xd4 and forced to weaken his position one move
13.xd4 xd4 14.cxd4 xd3 15.xe7 after another. c6 11.f4 e6 12.d2 a4
f5! ( 15...xc4? 16.h6 d8 17.e1! 13.c4 f6 14.f3 d7
c6 18.d5! a4 19.e5; 15...xd4? [ 14...e7 15.d6 ]
16.h6 ) 16.h6 fd8 However, Black 15.ab1 b5
should be able to hold thanks to his [ 15...0-0-0 16.g3 d5 Only move to
activity and the presence of the opposite parry the threat of Qf4. 17.xf7+- ]
coloured bishops.; 16.e5 xd4 17.xd7 xd7 18.xb5
B2) 11.h3! On the other hand d5 19.a4
represents, I reckon, the refutation of [ 19.c4 cxb5 ( 19...e7 20.a6 ) 20.cxd5
Black's optimistic 5th move after which I b7 ( 20...d8 21.dxe6 fxe6 22.bd1 )
c a n n o t s e e h o w h e wi ll d e ve lo p h i s 21.h5 a3 22.xe6+ f8 23.c6
162
Wins too. ] DVD for ChessBase on the Scandinavian

19...c8 20.e5!? because it shows a good way for Black in one
[ 20.bd1! Would have spared White aof the 3...Qd6 critical main lines. 1.e4 d5
couple of moves e7 The black queen has 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.c4
no squares! ( 20...e7 21.xd5 ) 21.c4 0-0 a6 6.ge2 b5!
22.cxd5 exd5 Black ends up in a miserable [ If you wish to embark on an adventure, why
position with only 2 pawns for the piece. ] not try 6...c6 The 3...Qd6 shoreline is
20...f6 21.g3 I really like this game because littered with the corpses of adventurers who
White has missed several clearer have gone bef ore you. To be serious, I
opportunities by not calculating (or calculating believe that 6...b5 is simpler and
too much and becoming muddled afterwards!) thoroughly thematic. ]
and the attack is still overwhelming! 7.b3 b7 8.f4 b6! It's surprising to me
[ 21.c4 fxe5 22.cxd5 xd5 23.g4 c5 that 8...Qd8 has been played more often than
24.b3 ] this very logical sideways step. Presumably
21...f7 22.ed1 e7 23.c4 b6 24.xc6 Black has felt in the past that the Queen would
a3 25.b3 xa2 26.d7! xd7
be hassled by a4-a5 and thus avoided 8...Qb6.
27.xd7+ e7? To me, that isn't a dangerous idea. For the
[ 27...g8! was more stubborn. 28.h3 h5 moment, g2 is en prise.
A) 29.c5 xc5 ( 29...xc5 30.d8 )
[ So, what of 8...Qd8? 8...d8 9.0-0 e6
30.b7 f8 31.xg7+ xg7 32.xc8+ 10.g3 ( 10.e1 e7 11.g3 0-0 12.d2
h7 33.xe6 c2 34.b7; c5 13.dxc5 xd2 14.xd2 bd7 15.ce4
B) 29.e4 xb3 30.xe6+ h7xe4 16.xe4 xe4 17.xe4 xc5
31.f5+ g8 32.d5+ h7 33.xh5+ 18.e2 fd8 1/2-1/2 Pavlov, M-Hasangatin,
g8 34.f7+ h7 35.d5! The point, R/Alushta 2004) 10...d6! Black regains the
White has to provoke the occupation of tempo he lost after 8 Bf4. 11.g5 ( 11.xd6
the c5 square by a rook. ( 35.d4 xg3! cxd6 12.e1 0-0= ) 11...e7 ( 11...h6
36.fxg3 c5 ) 35...c5 36.d412.xf6 xf6 13.d5 might be a bit awkward
And that is why 28.h3 was more precise for Black.) 12.e1 0-0 13.d5 c5 14.dxc6
than 28.h4. White must have various other xc6= Parligras, M-Svetushkin, D/
ways of continuing the attack (for only one Bucharest 2002 I think what we are seeing is
pawn!) but this is a nice one. ] that Black has more than one good way to
28.xe7+! Tragicomic, Black's king bishopmeet 5Bc4 ]
eventually leaves the 8th rank on move 28 just 9.f3 e6 10.d2
to pointlessly attend the end of the game! [ 10.a4 is the traditional way to give the
xe7 29.b7+ e8 Black Queen ' a bit of hassle' but I
[ 29...d8 30.d3+ e8 31.d7+ f8 recommend not to panic: Solving any
32.d6+ g8 33.xe6# ] problems instantly. c5! 11.axb5 ( 11.a5
30.xc8+ f7 31.b7+ g6 32.e4+ a7 ) 11...axb5 12.xa8 xa8 13.0-0
h6 33.h4+ g6 34.g4+ h6 35.f4+ cxd4 14.xd4 c5 ]
g5 36.xg5+! It is mate in 3. 10...c5! The Black Queen supports ...c7-c5
1-0 wonderfully well. Already Black has a good
game. 11.dxc5 xc5 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.b1
c6 One can't ask for more from the opening.
176 B01 Black is fully developed and his queenside
Chulivska,Vita 2262 attack seems to be further advance than any
Stanislavskaya,Kristina comparable White initiative on the Kingside.
ch sf (Women) (2) 16.05.2005 One can reach similar positions from the
[Andrew Martin] Sicilian or Caro-Kann, but not quite as good!
14.g5 e7 15.h4 a5 16.a4 b4 17.b5
This is not the most interesting game in the ad8
world, but I am featuring it on my forthcoming [ 17...fd8 ]
163
18.f4 xd1+ 19.xd1 d8 20.xd8+ Bugojno 1980 ]

xd8 10.a3
[ After 20...xd8! presumably White [ Neither 10.e5 xe5 11.dxe5 d5
continues the hoovering procedure with 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 xd2+ 14.xd2
21.d2 (the best move) and then ( 21.c7 0-0-0 (Sveshnikov - Sutovsky, Bled 1997)
xc7 22.xc7 c5 ) 21...xd2 22.xd2 nor ]
d7 is only slightly better for Black. Yet [ 10.h4 g4 11.f3 xc3! 12.bxc3
maybe this is the line Black should have ( 12.xc3 g5+ ) 12...h5 13.g4 g6
chosen if she really wanted to win. Black (Barua - Speelman, Calcutta 1996) gives
can squeeze a bit here. ] White anything. ]
21.g4 h6 22.xf6 xf6 23.g5 hxg5 [ O n t h e o t h e r h a n d t h e q u i e t 10.b3!?
24.hxg5 e5 25.g4 e3 deserves consideration as after 0-0 11.h4
[ 25...e7 26.f4 b8 27.ed4 g6 White has an improved version of the 10.
is an improvement. ] Nh4 line because Black has committed his
26.f4 d4 27.exd4 xd4 28.f5 g1+ king. ]
29.xg1 xg1 30.fxe6 fxe6 31.xe6+ f8 10...b6
32.f5 e7 33.d3 e3 34.g6 c6 35.b3 [ For 10...xc3 see Brynell - Hodgson. ]
xb5 36.axb5 d6 37.b2 d4+ 11.b3 xc3 12.xc3 b5 13.xb5
The play towards the end was uninspiring best [ Or 13.e5 xe5 14.xe5 0-0
to leave alone. But the beginning of the game with equality as in O'Donovan - Brady, Irish
will be of great interest to 3.. .Qd6 fans where Ch 1996 ]
the fangs of 5 Bc4 appear to be completely 13...cxb5 14.d5 bxd5 15.xd5
drawn. Setting in motion an ambitious plan which
½-½ ultimately backfires.
[ 15.xf6 xf6 16.d4 e4 17.xb5 e7
18.f3 d5 19.xd5 xd5 20.he1 hd8
177 B01 21.d2 a6 22.d4 ac8 was equal in
Chytilek,Roman 2390 Sebe - Vezdeutsan, Bucharest 2001 ]
Konopka,Michal 2468 15...xd5 16.xg7 g8 17.e5 xg2!?
Czech Ch Ostrava CZE (11) 26.05.2002 18.d4 g6 19.g3 Incarcerating Black's
[Nigel Davies] rook, but actually trapping the beast is far
from easy. Meanwhile it acts as a thorn in
8.Qe2 is the most dangerous move with the White's flesh. a6 20.de1 c8 21.h4 b4
clear intention of castling queenside. Black 22.axb4 xb4 23.e2 h5 24.d1 d3+
plays the ambitious 10...Nb6 in this game and 25.b1 c5 26.de1 b5 27.a2 b4 28.b3
later on allows his rook to be caged. 1.e4 d5 a5 29.b5 f8 30.d6 c6 31.c4 a4
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6 5.f3 32.d2 c3+ 33.b2 e4! Eureka! The
f6 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.e2 b4 elimination of the bishop on g3 will mean that
9.0-0-0 bd7 the trapped rook can break free. And his extra
[ T h e wi l d l o o k i n g 9...b5 led Black into pawn will cou nt . 34.d8+ e7 35.e5
serious trouble after 10.b3 bd7 11.d5! xc2+ 36.xc2 xg3+ 37.xg6+ xd8
in the game Rowson - Shaw, Scotish Ch., 38.e5 xf2+ 39.d3 e7 40.c1 f6
Harwick 1995 ] 41.d7+ e7 42.e5 f5 43.c6+ d6
[ A n o t h e r d u b i o u s m o v e i s 9...d5 44.d8 d5+ 45.e3 f5+ 46.f4 e7
after which 10.xd5 xd2+ 11.xd2 cxd5 47.c6+ f6 48.e1 xh4 49.h1 g6+
12.b3 xa2 ( 12...d8 13.b5+ c6 50.e4 h4 51.d4 g5 52.f1+ g7
14.c5 c7 15.g4 gave White a powerful 53.f3 g4+ 54.e3 f5
i n i t i a t i v e i n K o l o s o w s k i - Z i e l i n s k a , 0-1
Polanica Zdroj 2001) 13.xd5 c6 14.g4
g6 15.xc6+ bxc6 16.f4 left Black in
serious trouble in Ljubojevic - Kurajica,
164
178 B01 [ 11...b4 was certainly an interesting

Collins,Sam 2409 c o u n t e r a t t a c k i n g p o s s i b i l i t y : 12.xf6
Mcphilips,Karl 2210 ( 12.g3 0-0-0 13.e2 e6 14.a3 b6
Masters Bunratty IRL (5) 19.02.2006 15.ad1 d6= ) 12...gxf6 13.e1 0-0-0
[Andrew Martin] 14.e4 d7 ]
12.e2
We now turn our attention once again to the [ I quite like 12.d4 with the idea of Qa7 and
fashionable 3...Qd6. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 so b6 13.xb6 cxb6 14.g3
3.c3 d6 4.f3 f6 5.d4 a6 6.g5 is then possible, with an edge to White. ]
One of the sharper moves. Presumably White 12...d7 13.g3 g5 14.e3 b8 15.b4!
is angling to castle long as soon as he can. The Black King seems to be in greater danger
c6 This move I am not sure about and now. g7 16.b5 g4 17.bxa6! gxf3 18.b6
Collins tries to exploit the exposed Knight Given the opportunity, Collins puts his
immediately. opponent away with style. c8 19.b5
[ Instead, I believe 6...b5! to be consistent Does this mean that 3...Qd6 is in trouble? I
and I think Black is OK: 7.d3 ( 7.xf6 don't think so. 6..b5 is a logical choice, better
xf6! 8.d3 b7 9.e4 c6 10.0-0 than 6...Nc6 and has to be preferred on all
0-0-0 ) 7...b7 8.e2 bd7 9.0-0-0 e6 counts.
Black is comfortable, planning ...Be7, ... 0-0 1-0
and ...c5 ]
7.d5N
[ Alternatives: 7.e2 g4 ( 7...e5 8.dxe5 179 B01
xe5 9.0-0 e7 10.e1 0-0 11.xe5 Collutiis,Duilio 2330
xe5 12.f3 xg5 13.xe7 e6 14.d4 Genocchio,Daniele 2345
e8 15.b4 a5 16.a3 d8 17.e4 ch-ITA Montecatini Terme (10) 2002
e5 18.c3 xc3 19.xc3 d2 20.c1 [Andrew Martin]
f5 21.e4 d4 22.g3
Van den Dikkenberg, E-Ellenbroek, T/Dieren 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ Fischer liked
2005 ) 8.0-0 0-0-0 9.xf6 xf6 10.d5 e6 this destabilising idea-Black cannot find the
11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 exd5 13.xd5 b4 ideal formation for his pieces although White
14.a3 xd5 15.xd5 e6 16.c4 d6 struggles too if the real truth be known. I like
17.e1 d7 1/2-1/2 Borsato, C-Rigo, C/ 3...Nbd7 now but 3...Bd7 is far more common
Bratto 2005 ] and quite satisfactory. d7 4.e2
[ 7.d3 g4 8.xf6 xf6 9.e4 f4 [ 4.c4 ]
10.d2 xd2+ 11.exd2 0-0-0 12.c3 e6 4...xd5 5.d4 f5 6.f3 e6 7.0-0 e7
13.0-0 e7 14.e4 a7 15.e5 h5 8.a3
16.g4 g6 17.xg6 hxg6 18.xf7 h3 [ 8.c4 is more incisive. Perhaps White can
19.xd8 xd8 20.g2 h4 21.h3 c6 hope for a edge based on his central control
22.fe1 d7 23.f3 h8 24.e5+ xe5 and easy development:
25.xe5 d6 1-0 Alford, P-Woosh, A/Dos A) 8...b6 is best. 9.c3 c6 10.d5
Hermanas 2004 ] exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 c8 13.f3
[ 7.d2 f5 8.0-0-0 0-0-0 9.c4 e6 A1) 13...4xd5 14.xd5 xd5
10.he1 b4 11.e2 e7 12.d5 exd5 15.a4+ d7 ( 15...c6 16.xc6 )
13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5 he8 15.c4?? 16.b3 b4 17.e1 0-0;
xg5+ 0-1 was the comical end to Daurelle- A2) 13...0-0 Fritz thinks Black can take
Bratanov La Fere 2002 ] the pawn and live- to me it looks as
7...e5 8.e2 xf3+ There was no need to though it might become ugly: 14.c2
rush with this capture. Black can consider f5 15.xb4 xb4 16.d4 e7
[ 8...h6 ] 17.d2 c5 18.f4 Matanovic-
9.xf3 f5 10.0-0 h6 But the Black position Karaklaic Belgrade 1956;
is still reasonable. 11.h4 0-0-0 B) 8...b4?! provokes some strange
165
analysis: 9.a3 0-0 10.b3 a5 11.d1 A) 17.xd5 xd5 18.cxd5 ( 18.xd5

c6 12.f4 d7 13.e1 f6 14.b1 a4 e4 19.d2 f6 20.ed1 c7 )
15.e3 b6 16.c3 ad8 17.a3 c2 18...d6;
18.xc2 xc2 19.d2 b3 20.e5; B) 17.cxd5 d6 ]
C) 8...f6 9.c3 0-0 10.e3 bd7 12...exd5 13.cxd5 c6 14.d4 g6
( 10...h6 11.b3 ) 11.h4 g6 12.xg6 15.dxc6 xc6 16.xc6 bxc6
hxg6 13.f3 c6 14.c2 c7 15.ad1 [ 16...xc6 17.f3 ]
ad8 16.g3 a5 17.g2 e5 18.d5 c5 17.c4 d5 18.e4
19.g5 d4 20.dxc6 bxc6 21.e4 b8 [ After 18.xd5 cxd5 19.xd5 f6
22.b3 a4 23.b1 axb3 24.axb3 xe4 Black has excellent compensation based on
25.xe4 c5 26.h4 b6 27.e2 fb8 strong pressure against White's Queenside
28.d5 f6 29.xf6 gxf6 30.h5 g5 and the exposed White Queen.. ]
31.h6 f5 32.h5 e7 33.h1 f8 34.b4 18...e6 19.d3 ad8 20.c2 fe8
h7 35.bxc5 xc5 36.xb6 xb6 Somewhere along the line W hite lost the
37.b1 f6 38.g4 fxg4 39.e4+ h8 thread. 21.d2 b6 22.fe1 d5-+ 23.f4
40.xb6 xb6 41.xg5 g8 42.xe5+ [ 23.e3 xe4 24.xe4 ( 24.xe4 xd2 )
f6 43.f5 1-0 Kallio,H-Beloudah,S/ 24...xd3 ]
Olympiad, Bled SLO 2002 (43) ] 23...xd3 24.xd3 xd3 25.d6 a8
8...h6 26.xe7 d5
[ Could he not just have castled?: 8...0-0 0-1
9.c4 b6 10.c3 c6 11.h3 ( 11.e3
g4! 12.b3 f6 13.e4 xf3 14.xf6+
xf6 15.xf3 fd8 16.xc6 bxc6 17.g4 180 B01
h6 ) 11...f6 12.e3 g6 13.b4 e5 Cornette,Matthieu 2392
14.dxe5 xe5 15.xe5 xe5 16.b3 f6 Prie,Eric 2429
17.ac1 c6 18.b5 fe8 19.c5 d7 FRA-Cup 1/16 Bordeaux-MTP 28.03.2004
20.fd1 f8 21.f3 c7 22.bxc6 bxc6 [Eric Prié]
23.e2 ac8 24.a4 b8 25.f4 xe2
26.xb8 b2 27.g3 h6 28.e1 d2 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
29.e5 d8 30.xc6 e6 31.g3 c2 f6 5.c4 g4 6.ge2 bd7! Although it
32.xc2 xc2 33.xc2 xc6 34.a4 xc5 is difficult to name it this way, considering the
35.xa7 d2 36.a8+ h7 37.e4+ g6 paternity of the move or the number of games
38.e2 a5 39.a1 c3 40.e1 d3 available on my Megabase, this is 'my
41.h2 h5 42.h4 f5 43.a4 a5 44.b4 variation'. After having deprived White's king's
c5 45.b7 g7 46.d7 f5 47.a3 knight of its best square, Black combines
d5 48.b7 c5 49.b2+ h7 50.f3 aggressive development (more or less
d7 51.a5 e4 52.a6 d2 53.b7 implying long castles) and the concern of his
0-1 Hamdouchi,H-Adianto,U/Gp A, Cap queen's restrictedspace 7.f3 f5 8.g4
d'Agde FRA 2002 (53) ] [ 8.d2 b6
9.c4 f6 10.b3 c8 11.c3 0-0 12.d5 A) 9.a4?! c6 10.b3 e6 11.g3
Despite appearances, it really isn't easy to g6 12.e2 b6 13.xb6 axb6 14.c4
take Black's position by storm. And after more 0-0-0 15.e3 b4+ 16.f2 h5 17.hc1
measured methods, Black gets counterplay h4 18.f1 h3 19.g3 g4+ 20.g1
too. It seems an important nuance to avoid xe3 21.d5 exd5 22.cxd5 d6 23.xe3
moving the c pawn early-Black can then play ... he8 24.f1 e7 25.a4 e5
c7-c5 in one go, prefaced by ... a7-a6 to 0-1 Dupre, M (1820) -Prie, E (2470)
secure the position of a Bishop on d6. Andorre open 1997;
[ 12.e3 would be considered traditional. B) 9.b3 0-0-0 10.a4 d6
Black can go through with his plan: bd7 B1) 11.xf7 e5 ( 11...e6 12.g4 e7
13.ad1 d8 14.fe1 a6! 15.h3 c5 16.d5 13.gxf5 xf7 14.fxe6 xe6 15.0-0 )
exd5 12.g4 g6 13.xg6 hxg6 14.g5
166
h5; 18.xg5 xd4 ]

B2) 11.f4 a6! 12.g3 e5 10...e5! 11.xg6 fxg6 12.d2
Popa, C (2199)-Prie, E (2429) St Vincent [ 12.dxe5 xe5 13.b5+ c6 14.f4
op 2004; ( 14.e2 0-0-0 15.xe5 e8 ) 14...b4!
C) 9.a4 a5! Generally the best response 15.xe5 xb5 ]
in this configuration, gaining the square on 12...0-0-0! 13.d5
b4, even when Black intends long castling. [ 13.d5 a4 14.b3 a6 ( 14...c6 )
10.0-0 ( 10.f4 e6 11.b5 c8 12.0-0 15.e2 xe2+ 16.xe2 exd4 17.xf6
e7 13.h1 0-0 Black is slightly better gxf6 ]
having successfully fulfilled his objective 13...b6! The key improvement in this key
of disorganizing the opposing pieces. variation!
14.e1? With such a lack of coordination, [ 13...b4 14.e2 e4 15.fxe4 e5
embarking on forced lines is just bound to 16.0-0-0 fxg4 17.a3 hf8 18.hf1 xf1
fail. xc2-+ 1-0(40) Alas! Kaaber, J 19.xf1 xc3 20.xc3 c5 21.d3 e7
(2092) -Prie, E (2464) Figueres op 2005. It 22.e1 c6 23.e2! cxd5 24.exd5 e3?
seems, however, that this electroshock did ( 24...f6 25.f3 e8 26.g2 ) 25.f4!
me so me go od be cause, su ddenly all c7 ( 25...xd5 26.xe5 xe5 27.g4+ )
awake, I eventually won thetournament!) 26.e4 5c4 27.g1 b8 28.b3?
10...e6 11.h1 c6= With a pleasant ( 28.d4 Simply wins a knight.) 28...xd5
equality for Black. Crouan, S (2221) -Prie, 29.xc4?? ( 29.d4 xa3 30.e5 )
E (2467) Nantes 2005. ] 29...e7?? I have seen both these chess
8...g6 9.h4 legends in a better day. Is it possible that
[ 9.f4 e5! ( 9...0-0-0? 10.xg6 fxg6 they were already in a furious mutual time
11.e6 ) 10.xg6 hxg6 11.g5 h5 12.d2 scramble? The fact that Black will continue
d6 ( 12...0-0-0! ) 13.e2 ( 13.e4 ) the game a piece down until reaching the
13...g3 14.e4 xe2 15.xa5 xd4 time control seems to add credence to this
Perdomo, C (2320) -Peredy, F (2235) FSIM hypothesis. ( 29...xc3 ! ) 30.h2+ a8
Budapest 1995 ] 31.b2 e8 32.d4 e3 33.d2 f5
9...h6 10.f4 White wants to keep the d4- 34.b1 xh4 35.a2 g5 36.g4 a6
pawn protected by his queen and does not 37.d7 e4 38.c7 f3 39.xf3 xf3
wish to displace the black queen onto an 40.d8+ xd8 41.xd8+ 1-0 Kavalek, L-
arguably better square. Larsen, B Beverwijk 1967. ]
[ 10.d2!? b6 ( 10...0-0-0!? 11.h5 h7 14.e2 xc4 15.xc4 xd5
12.xf7 e5 ) 11.f4 Team strategy in (4 board) cup matches! With
A) 11...xd4 Is too risky. 12.xg6 fxg6 Black I had neutralized the most dangerous
13.e2 e5 14.e3 g3+ 15.f2 e5 and by far the strongest player in the
16.e6; opposing team. The extra pawn is not so easy
B) 11...e5!? 12.dxe5 xe5 13.e2 to exploit. It was a good moment to propose a
0-0-0 14.xe5 xd2 15.xd2 ( 15.xg6 draw that could hardly be declined. As a result,
f2# ) 15...d6; we qualified for the last 16 without sweat.
C) 11...0-0-0! 12.h5 ( 12.xg6 fxg6 ½-½
13.e2 e5 14.dxe5 xe5 15.0-0-0
xc4 16.xc4 b4= ) 12...h7!
( 12...xd4!? 13.e2 e5! 14.xg6 181 B01
xd2+ 15.xd2 xf3+ 16.e2 xd2+ Cuartas,Jaime Alexander 2504
17.xf3 fxg6 18.e6+ d8 19.ad1 Mohota,Nisha 2332
d6 20.b5 gxh5 21.gxh5 c6 22.xd6 XXX Open Barbera del Valles ESP (2) 7.7.07
exd6 ) 13.e2 ( 13.xf7 e5 [John Watson]
W ith suddenly a strong counter attack)
13...e6 14.0-0-0 c6 Black is OK. 15.g5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
hxg5 16.g6 g8 17.xf8 xf8 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 One of the very main
167
lines of the Scandinavian. f5 7.e5 [ T y p i c a l l y , t h e c o m p u t e r f i n d s 45.d7!

[ An interesting comparison is Brynell- , when b6 ( 45...b7 46.d6+ g8
Ho d g s o n , H a m b u r g 2 0 0 2 , a n a l ys e d i n 47.e7; 45...xd7?? 46.b8+ ) 46.f5!
ChessPub: 7.d2 e6 8.e2 b4 9.0-0-0 wins the b5 pawn due to b8? 47.h7 ]
bd7 10.a3 xc3 11.xc3 c7 12.e5 45...d6 46.c5 g6 47.e4 g7 48.f3
In that game, if Black castled, the only f4 Black has come out fine. 49.a7 h4
difference between it and the game before 50.a1 e8 51.xe8 xe8 52.e1 f8
us would be kingside versus queenside 53.d5 d7 54.h1 e8 55.e6 g3
castling on W hite's part. Thus Hodgson 56.d2 e7
played b5! with the idea . ..Be4-d5, which [ 56...g5! would activate Black's bishop,
works because White's king is exposed in because 57.f5 d6 58.e2 c6
certain lines. ] 59.h5! d5 60.h8+ f7 61.h7+
7...e6 8.e2 bd7 9.0-0 b4 10.d2 0-0 is drawn. ]
11.a3 xc3 12.xc3 c7 There it is. With 57.d5!? Incredibly risky! d3?!
0-0 instead of 0-0-0, White doesn't have to [ 57...d7! 58.xd7 xd7 and White's d-
worry about onslaughts and so can take his pawn will probably fall soon, e.g., 59.e2
time and try to use the bishop pair. 13.xd7 ( 59.a2 e1+ 60.h2 e5+ 61.h1
xd7 14.fd1 c7 15.f3!? d5 16.e1 xd5 ) 59...e5 60.d2 ( Maybe 60.f2!
f4 17.c3 h5!? It's a little hard to find a plan. s a v e s W h i t e : xc3 61.a7+ d6
This probably isn't worth creating a weakness 62.c5+ e5 63.d6+! e6 64.d7! xd7
for. 65.xb5+ ) 60...d6 ]
[ 17...e3+? 18.f2 xe2 19.xe2 58.f2! f5??
is an ideal position for the bishops: Black's [ 58...g3 59.c5+ d8= ]
knight has no outpost to compensate for 59.xh4+ d6 60.f4+ e7 61.e5 d1+
them. ] 62.h2 d2 63.xf5+ Fortune favours the
18.d2 c7 19.f2 b5 20.f1 ad8 brave? Or the fortunate.
21.e1 b6 22.h4 g6 23.f4 1-0
White's grip on the board increases. He has
won the opening. c8 24.g3 a4 25.f2
b6 26.h3 d5 27.b3 White is bluffing a bit 182 B01
with c4, but Black has to devote his forces to David,Alberto 2540
stopping it. fd8 28.e3 5d7 29.g5 f6 Tkachiev,Vladislav 2645
[ 29...e8 allows 30.c4 ] (m/4) Cannes 1999
30.c1 f7 31.f4! Clamping down on ...e5. [Alexander Volzhin]
White's dark-squared bishop will be restricted,
but perform a useful function within lines. c7 The Center counter wasn't so popular this
32.f3 d5 33.d3?! month, but the theoretical battle which took
[ 33.e3 would prevent ...c5. ] place in the Tkachiev - David match was quite
33...c5! 34.e4 5d6 35.e3 c4! interesting. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3
[ Probably 35...cxd4 36.xd4 d5 a5 4.f3 f6 5.d4 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d2
is playable, but the text creates an outpost e6 8.d5
and prevents queenside pawn breaks. ] [ Another possibility was tried in the 6th game
36.b4 d5 o f t h e m a t c h : 8.e4 c7 ( 8...d8
[ 36...f5!? 37.c2 d5 allows an eventual i s n o t s o g o o d h e r e , i n v i e w o f 9.g3
g4, although I suspect this is drawish. ] and the position is similar to a main line
37.d2 a5 38.f5 The one break, but is it Caro Kann,although W hite has won some
enough? exf5 39.xf5 axb4?! Opening a extra tempi.) 9.xf6+ gxf6 10.e2 d7
new front for White. ( The brave looking 10...xc2 is in fact a
[ 39...a6 should come first. ] great mistake after 11.c1 g6 12.d5!
40.axb4 b7 41.g3 f8 42.f4 xf4 Exploiting the position of White's Rook and
43.xf4 a6 44.xa6 xa6 45.c7 B l a c k ' s Q u e e n o n t h e s a m e f i l e . cxd5
168
13.b5+ c6 14.d4 and Black is in 13...xc2 14.g5! Threatening both Be6
trouble. ) 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 with a mating attack and Rac1 winning
A) The position after Black's 11th move material a3 ( 14...h6 doesn't help Black
was seen previously in Nunn - Conquest, either: 15.xe6! hxg5 16.xd7+ xd7
Hastings 1995/96. This game continued 17.e5+ will set in motion a decisive
12.h4 g6 13.b3! d6?! attack. ) 15.xe6 fxe6 16.xe6+ f8
( I w o u l d p r e f e r 13...b6 17.xd7 and Black should resign.;
with a comfortable position for Black.) B) 13...xc2 14.fc1 d3 15.xd3
14.g3 he8 15.he1 f5 16.g2 xd3 16.xb7 b8 17.c6 White holds
A1) With his previous move, Black a strong initiative even in the endgame.
probably intended to transfer his Knight b5 ( 17...d6 18.c3 - White threatens
to the central e4-square, but now he both Rd1 and picking off the g7-pawn with
d i s c o v e r s i t d o e s n ' t w o r k 16...f6 a serious advantage.) 18.xb5 xb5
17.g5! e7 ( Unfortunately, the natural 19.c8+ e7 and Black is completely tied
17...e7 loses on the spot to 18.xe6+! up. ]
fxe6 19.xe6+ b8 20.xf6 d6 13.c3 b4! The point. This unexpected
21.xe7 xe7 22.xe7 and White wins blow solves all Black's problems. 14.xb4
d8 o t h e r wi s e 2 3 . B e 5 23.xb7+ ) xb2 15.0-0 xb4 16.ab1 Now both sides
18.f4 and it's not clear how Black is can be satisfied. W hite regains his pawn
going to unpin.; wh i l e B l a c k s u c c e s s f u l l y c o m p l e t e s h i s
A2) 16...b8 17.f4 White now development. After the short storm a quiet
secures a clear advantage, and Black`s balanced position has arisen. a4 17.xb7
attempts to complicate are easily d8 18.e3 0-0 19.d4 b6 20.xf5
refuted: f6 18.xe6! f8 19.c4 Here a draw was agreed. A short but
A2a) 19...xe6 20.xe6 xf4+ interesting and important game.
( 20...f7 21.xd6+-; 20...f7 ½-½
21.xd6 xd6 22.b4+- ) 21.xf4
f7 22.d5 xe6 23.xe6 d6
24.xd8 xd8 25.d3 xd5 183 B01
26.xd5 cxd5 27.d4+-; De Firmian,Nick E
A2b) 19...h5 20.d3! and in a few Schroer,Jonathan
moves White won.; Open New York (USA) (9) 1984
B) 12.b3 b6 13.g3 g6 14.f4 d6 [Nigel Davies]
15.xd6 xd6 16.h4 a5 17.a4 d5
18.f3 e7 19.he1 hd8 20.c3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g4
a n d in t h is le ve l p o sit io n a d ra w wa s 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 e6 7.e1 Here too this is a
agreed. ] st ro n g m o ve , a im in g sim p ly t o su p p re s s
8...d8 9.xf6+ xf6 10.e2 Up to this Black's attempts to free himself, in the short
moment the players have been following the term at least. e7 8.c3 0-0 9.bd2 d7
game Shirov - Salov. Now Black deviates with [ Another example was Belov - Shorin,
a clear improvement. d7! Russian Ch., Serpukhov 1999, which went
[ 10...g4?! was played in the above- 9...f5 10.b5 b8 11.e4 a6 12.d3
me nt ion ed ga m e an d W hit e seize d t h e d7 13.e2 g6 14.c4 b4 15.b1 b6
initiative after 11.d5! ] 16.b3 a5 17.b2 c6 18.a3 with a clear
11.d5 cxd5 12.xd5 Black's position seems advantage. Black's problems, as always,
to be precarious, but the young French has stem from a lack of space. ]
something in mind! e7! 10.e4!?
[ It's extremely risky to grab pawns without [ 10.c4 is an alternative, restraining ... e7-
a n y d e v e l o p m e n t : 12...xb2?! 13.0-0 e5. De Firmian reckons that the surrender of
and White obtains a strong initiative: the two bishops involved with executing
A) The other capture loses by force this advance is too high a price to pay, but
169
this assessment of the position is slightly to go all in, but on this occasion discretion
controversial. ] might have been the better part of valour.
10...xf3 11.xf3 e5 The 'freeing' move Ziatdinov is also a highly dangerous
which gives rise to a double-edged struggle. tactician ) 10.xf3 xd4 11.xd4 xd4
White now 'wins' a second minor exchange 12.xa7 e5+ 13.e2 xc4 14.xb7+
(bishop for knight) at the cost of giving Black d7 15.d1+ d6 16.xd6+!! (Pow!!)
a be t te r p awn struct ure . 12.c5 xc5 xd6 17.b5+ c6 18.0-0! c5 19.d1+
13.dxc5 ad8 14.b3 a5 15.c2 fe8 d5 20.xd5! xb5 21.xc6+ xc6
16.g5 f6 17.ad1 f7 18.c1 e7 19.b4 22.d4+ c5 23.xb5 xb5 24.d7 c6
ac6 20.e3 f5 21.b5 e4 22.e2 25.xf7 d8 26.g4 d2 27.xg7 xb2
[ I'll cop out of assessing 22.bxc6 exf3 28.xh7 d6 29.g5 c5 30.g6 b8 31.h3
23.cxb7 g6 24.g3 c6 - though this e7 32.f3 c4 33.f1 c8 34.f7+
looks as if it would give Black excellent 1-0, Ziatdinov R - Shabalov A, Toront o
counterplay. ( and not 24...g4 25.xd8 1998 ]
xd8 26.b3+ h8 27.b8 )] [ 8.0-0 e5 9.d5 e4 10.fd2 e5 11.c3
22...e5 23.d4 7g6 24.f1 h6 25.h3 h5? ( 11...xe2 ) 12.xg4+ exg4 13.h3
f4 This is starting to look dangerous for xe3 14.xh5 xh5 15.fxe3 f6
White, with storm clouds definitely gathering 16.dxe4 xe4 17.xe4 f6 18.f2 e8
round his king. The threat of a Black knight 19.f3 and White won the endgame in
landing on d3 makes White give up one of his Dolmatov - Perez Candelario, Linares Open
bishops and go hunting for pawns. 26.xe5 2000. ]
xd1 27.xd1 xe5 28.a4 xc5 29.xa7 8...e5 9.d5 b4 10.c1 xa2 11.a1 b4
xc3 12.0-0 a6 13.h3
[ In the shoot-out that follows, de Firmian [ Waitzkin must have had an improvement
shows that he's the stronger player. Black ready because he repeated all of this in a
might have considered 29...b6 at this point, later game. But in Sax - Wiatzkin, Pula 1997,
wit ho ut worryin g ab ou t 30.b8+ h7 the Hungarian got his new move in first with
31.d8 which can be answered by e6 ] 13.a4! and went on to win a dashing
30.xb7 h7 31.c8 a3 32.d8 xa2 a t t a ck in g ga m e : d3 14.xd3 xd3
33.f8 d5 34.h8+ g6 35.xc7 a1 15.a1 e8 16.b4 xf3 17.xf3 xc4
36.xf4 xb5? 18.c1 xd5 19.a5 d3 20.b5 b4
[ Looks like time trouble. Black could play 21.bxa6 xa5 22.xa5 d6 23.g5 hf8
36...xf1+ when W hit e mu st go 37.h2 24.a7 d7 25.c5 a6 26.d2+ c8
( 37.xf1? d1# )] 27.d6 c6 28.xf8 xf8 29.d6 d8
37.d6+ g5 38.e7+ f4 39.c7+ 30.b8+ d7 31.xf7 e8 32.d1+ e6
1-0 33.d6 a4 34.f1 g8 35.c8 f4
36.d6+ f5 37.a8 g4 38.e7 g5
39.g3 1-0 ]
184 B01 13...xf3 14.xf3 d6
De Firmian,Nick E [ Waitzkin might have had the immediate
Waitzkin,Joshua 14...c5 in mind had Sax repeated de
New York (USA) (7) 1996 Firmian's play. Now things get out of hand. ]
[Nigel Davies] 15.a4 c5 16.xb4! cxb4 17.c5 b8 18.d6
a7 19.b3 e4 20.g5 b8 21.xf7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.d4 c6 4.f3 xc5 22.g4 c8 23.c1 b6 24.xh8 xh8
g4 5.e2 0-0-0 6.c4 f5 7.e3 f6 25.a4 d7 26.xa6 xe3 27.c7 xf2+
8.bd2 A subtle move which lends added 28.xf2 e3+ 29.g2
protecting to the d4 square by supporting the 1-0
knight on f3. Yet W hite has also done well
with the more primitive alternatives:
[ a) 8.c3 e6 9.a4 xf3 (Shabalov likes
170
185 B01 186 B01

Degraeve,Jean Marc Degraeve,Jean Marc
De Wolf,Johan Kovarcik,Guillaume
Ch (team) 1996/97 (5) 1996 Open Saint-Affrique (France) (4) 1999
[Nigel Davies] [Nigel Davies]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.e2 f5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 f6 4.d4 g4
5.f3 e6 6.0-0 e7 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.h3 h5 8.c4 d8
[ The alternative is 6...d6 , though the 9.b3
bishop looks more exposed on this square [ This position is just nice for White -
and it blocks any pressure Black might hope because of his greater control of terrain.
for on the d-file. Nijboer - Hoodendoorn, 9.c3 0-0 10.f4 d6 11.e5 xe2
Dutch Ch., Rotterdam 2000 went on 7.c4 12.xe2 c6 13.ad1 e8 14.fe1
f6 8.c3 c6 9.b3 c7 10.c5 e7 wa s a lso ra t h e r m ise r a b le f o r B la c k i n
11.f4 c8 12.fe1 0-0 13.h4 g6 Krauss - Forster, US Open 1982. ]
14.xg6 hxg6 15.c4 with a tremendous 9...c8 10.c3 0-0 11.g4 With Black so
position and an immediate threat to 'sac' the p a s si ve ly p l a c e d , t h i s we a k e n i n g o f t h e
rook on e6. ] kingside is of little significance. White wants
7.e1 0-0 8.a3 Preparing to play c2-c4 to add the bishop pair to his collection of
without having to worry about Black's knight pluses. g6 12.e5 bd7 13.xg6 hxg6
coming in to b4. c6 14.f3 c6 15.f4 d8 16.fe1 f8
[ Black can 'develop' his pieces, but there's 17.ac1 a5 18.a3 e8 19.c5 Played as
not much to do about W hite's grip on the soon as the knight moves away f rom d5 .
centre. He needs to free himself with either Degraeve actually has a nice tactic in mind.
...c7-c5 or ...e7-e5, but 8...c5 would be met ef6 20.a4 d5? Strictly speaking this is
by 9.c4 b6 10.c3 cxd4 ( 10...c6 the losing move. But Black's position is pretty
11.d5 ) 11.xd4 with Bf3 coming and very m i s e r a b l e i n a n y c a s e . 21.xd5 cxd5
strong pressure against Black's queenside. ] 22.b6! c6
9.b5! A nasty move which prompts a full- [ White's last move was a killer - 22...xb6
scale retreat. b8 10.f1 c6 11.bd2 23.cxb6 d7 24.c7 loses the b-pawn and
f6 12.c3 Protecting the d-pawn leaves the game ]
Black with nothing. W ith the knight on c6 23.xa8 xa8 24.a4
Black's only useful pawn lever is ...e6-e5, but 1-0
in this position it is out of the question. h6
13.a4 c8 14.a5 b8 15.b3 b6 16.axb6
axb6 17.e5 fd7 18.df3 c5 187 B01
Fin a lly ge t t in g in t h e ke y le ve r, b u t n o w Del Rio Angelis,Salvador Gabriel 2472
White's superior development starts to tell. Minasian,Artashes 2567
19.xd7 xd7 20.d5 f6 21.f4 c4 Open Ubeda ESP (10) 30.01.2001
22.xc4 c5 23.d1 exd5 24.b5 e4 [Neil McDonald]
25.g3 a8 26.xa8 xa8 27.d4 a2
28.f3 g6 29.b4 xd4+ Much of the analysis to this opening is
[ 29...b7 would have put the knight on a indebted to a ChessBase article by Matthias
pretty miserable post, but now Black is Wahls which gives a very deep examination of
losing a pawn. ] this variation. I have only quoted some key
30.xd4 e6 31.xb6 d2 32.e3 a2 va ria t io n s . 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5
33.d7 f5 34.b5 d8 35.xe6 xe6 I haven't seen this line in ages. Naively, I
36.b6 b3 37.c7 e8 38.d3 d4 39.b1 thought this was one of the main lines but
xc3 40.xc3 dxc3 41.b7 c2 42.c1 white seems to avoid it like the plague in
1-0 practice. We get some indications why in this
game. xd5 4.f3 g4 5.e2 0-0-0 6.e3
171
f6 he gave: b4 10.hxg4 ( 10.c3?! exd4 )

[ 6...e5!? may be black's most solid route to 10...xg4 11.c3 exd4 12.cxd4 ( 12.g5?
equality. dxc3 13.xd8 xd8 ) 12...xd4 ( 12...he8
A) 7.c4 a5+ 8.d2 b4 9.xe5? 13.c4; 12...xd2 13.xd2; 12...d6
( 9.d5 xf3 is better, but looks very nice 13.h4 ) 13.f4 e6 ( 13...xd2
f o r b l a c k .) 9...xe2 10.xc6 e8! 14.xd4+-; 13...f5 14.c1 d6 15.e5
11.xa5 xc4+ 12.e2 xe2+ 13.d1 xe2+ 16.xe2 g5 17.g3+- ) 14.g3
xa5 14.xa5 xf2-+ Hrivnak-Babula, h6 ( 14...f5 15.b3 ) 15.a4+- ]
Kecskemet 1987.; 9...xe5 10.e1 d6 11.xe5
B) 7.c3 a5 8.xe5 xe2 9.xe2 [ 11.h3 ]
xe5 10.dxe5 xe5= ] 11...xe5 12.xg4+ xg4 13.c3 d7!
7.0-0 14.xg4??
[ 7.bd2 f5! 8.c4 e5 9.d5 b4 10.0-0 [ 14.h3 xd1 15.axd1 hd8 when black
c2 11.h4 xe2 12.xf5 xd1 might be able to claim a tiny advantage due
13.axd1 xe3 14.fxe3 g6!? 15.g3 g4 to pre ssure on th e d-f ile - though eve n
16.xf7 xe3 17.e1 c5 18.h1 df8 16.a1!? seems to give white no real
with black having some pressure due to his problems. ]
active pieces - Wahls. ] 14...xh2+! A nasty trick. 15.xh2 xg4+
7...h5 16.g3 xe3 17.xe3 xd2 18.b4 h5
[ 7...xf3! 8.xf3 b5 is black's best 19.f3 f6 20.a4 e8 21.h4 d5 22.g3
according to Wahls - the queen gains a bit 0-1
of peace and there is pressure against d4.
A) 9.b3?! xd4 10.xd4 c5 ( 10...e5?
11.g4+ b8 12.xa7+ ) 11.a4 a6 188 B01
12.c3 ( 12.e2 c6 ) 12...cxd4 13.cxd4 Demetrios,Agnos 2495
b8 14.c3 e5 15.d5 b4 is fine for Santos,Carlos P 2340
black, according to Wahls.; Pula 1997
B) 9.xc6 xc6 10.e2 d5 11.c4 [Alexander Volzhin]
xe3 12.fxe3 e5 13.dxe5 e6 14.c3
d7! ( 14...c5 15.e4 e7 16.h5! g6 In this game Black tried to improve the whole
17.h3 ) 15.ad1 xd1 16.xd1 line by playing 6...e6. Although the arising
( 16.xd1 c5 ) 16...xe5 Wahls. ] positions are very interesting, W hite
8.bd2 outplayed his opponent very convincingly.
[ 8.h3? White's play in this game is very instructive if
A) 8...e5? 9.hxg4? ( 9.bd2! ) 9...xg4 you wish to gain an understanding of White's
10.h4?! f5 11.xg4?! fxg4 12.g3 exd4 resources. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4
13.c1 g5 14.g2 c5 15.d3 hf8 4.f3 f5 5.b5+ bd7 6.c4 e6!? 7.dxe6
16.e1 d6 17.a3 h6 18.h4 hf6! xe6 8.d5 Other moves hardly pose any
19.xg5 xg5 20.e2 e5 21.d2 problems for Black, for example:
h5 22.e1 f5 23.c4 xc4 24.xf5 [ 8.c3 b4 ( 8...c6?! 9.d5! is very good
xf5 25.b3 e3 26.fxe3 dxe3 27.b4 for White ) 9.c5?! ( 9.d5 with a transposition
b6 28.d1 e5 29.d3 f2 to the 8.d5 line should be preferred.) 9...c6
0-1, Hresc-Wahls, Velden Open 1996.; 10.d3 d5 11.ge2 h4+ 12.g3 h3
B) 8...xf3! 9.xf3 b5 Wahls. It is 13.f2 xc5! and the complications favour
very interesting to know this theme. ] Black, Ribeiro - Damaso, Lisbon, 1995. ]
8...e5 8...f5 9.c3 b4
[ 8...d5 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 xe3 11.fxe3 [ 9...c5 is inf erior in view of 10.e2+!
h6 Wahls. ] A very nasty check. e7 ( 10...f8 11.g4!
9.dxe5 g6 12.f4 is also bad for Black) 11.xe7+
[ 9.h3! When Wahls des that black is worse xe7 12.f4 d6 13.xd6+ cxd6
because he cannot justify a piece sacrifice - wi t h a cl e a r e xt r a p a wn in t h e e n d in g ,
172
Rogado-Lima,Spain,1993. ] 22.g2 Now it becomes clear that Black has

[ 9...e7 10.g4!? ( In my opinion, the simple little to show for the sacrificed pawn. Although
10.ge2 0-0 11.xd7! xd7 12.0-0 the White King is slightly exposed, I can't see
is even better I doubt if Black has anything any way to exploit this. a5 23.d2 h4
for the pawn.) 10...g6 11.f4 h6 12.f5 h7 24.f3 f5? Desperation. Black tries to
13.h3 0-0 14.f4 c5 15.f3 a6 16.a4 complicate, but White parries all the threats
xa4 17.xa4 and White is better, very easily, moreover in few moves it is White
although the position remains very who will begin an attack! Wait and see tactics
complicated, Polgar, J-Damaso,R, Oviedo, don't help Black either as White plays Ra1-e1,
1992. ] liquidating to a completely won endgame.
10.ge2 0-0 11.xd7! A very instructive 25.gxf5 gxf5 26.xf5 h7 27.xd6 cxd6
move, typical for such positions. The Bishop 28.f5! A very good move. White prevents the
on b5 is offside, so it's necessary to exchange penetration of Black's Queen to an active
it. On the other hand, Black has also position (c2) as well as preparing f5-f6 with an
achieved something as he hasn't lost a tempo attack on Black's King. The rest is a matter of
with a7-a6. xd7 12.0-0 c5?! technique. e4 29.b3 d4 30.e3 d3
[ 12...e5! is much more to the point, aiming 31.ae1 e8 32.f4 e4 33.g3 c3
at both the c4-pawn and the d3-square. 34.f6! The surest way to victory although
13.h1!? White gives up the extra pawn before playing this move W hite should
and plays for a small but lasting advantage. calculate the variations very precisely. c2+
( S i m p l y p r o t e c t i n g t h e p a w n b y 13.b3 35.h1
allows c5+ 14.h1 d3 with great [ The trick is 35.g1?? g4! and it is Black
activity ) 13...h4?! Too active, and based who is winning! ]
on a miscalculation. ( Simply 13...xc4 35...xh2+ The last chance. 36.xh2 h4
was called for, and W hite's advantage is 37.f7+ f8 38.f4 e4
minimal: 14.d4 xc3 15.xc3 d6 [ 38...xh2+ is more stubborn although with
16.f4 ) 14.g3 d3 15.ce4! Probably accurate play White should easily win this
Black missed this. d8 ( 15...xf1? 16.g5 position. ]
trapping the Queen) 16.f4! White converts 39.e2 h3 40.f3! Black resigned in view
his advantage into a full point very of:
convincingly. Now Black has no choice. xf1 [ 40.f3 xh2+ 41.xh2 and after the
17.fxe5 xc4 18.f5 How strong White's Queen retreat, Bd6 with Rh8 to follow wins
Kn igh ts a re ! xd5 ( 18...xd5 allows a immediately. ]
beautiful mate: 19.f6+! gxf6 20.g4+ ) 1-0
19.g4 g6 20.f6+ h8 21.h4 h5
22.g5 and Black resigned in Votava,J-
Ribeiro,F, Erevan 1996 ] 189 B01
13.f4!? Protecting the d3-square against the Diringer,Klaus
penetration of the Knight or Bishop. Lin,Michael
[ 13.a3!? is not bad either, and Black's 1990 Wuerttemberg 1990
a t t e m p t t o w i n a p a w n b a c k b y xc3 [Paul Motwani]
14.xc3 d3 15.e1 xc4 is strongly met
by 16.d4! b3 17.xc4 xa1 18.f4 W 40: "Lady in trouble" 1.e4 d5 2.exd5
c2 19.e2 winning the Knight with a big xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4
advantage. ] [ 5...c6 is the most common move here,
13...e8 14.ce2 f6 15.g3 d7 because if necessary Black's queen can
Admitting the mistake at move 12. 16.h1 later retreat to d8, thereby avoiding the type
[ 16.xf5!? xf5 17.d3 also deserved of disaster which soon happens to that
attention. ] precious piece in the current game. ]
16...d6 17.gh5 e5 18.g4!? g6 6.h3 h5 7.d2 e6
19.g3 c5 20.xg6 hxg6 21.f4 e7 [ After the move that White has just played,
173
Black's queen should already have sensed promising continuation here although there
some danger, and so 7...c6 would have are alternatives
been a wise reaction. ] [ 7.c4 d8 8.e3 g6 9.h4!?
8.g4! g for "go for it!". g6 9.e5 c6?? looked dangerous but led to no problems for
Black finally puts something on c6, but it's the Black af ter h6 10.h5 h7 11.d5 cxd5
wrong piece at the wrong time! 10.b5 b6 12.exd5 c6 13.b5 xd5 14.xd5
Puzzle Diagram W 40D1 for Reader's xd5 15.xd5 0-0-0 and Black was if
Challenge W40P1: Can you now find a forced a n yt h in g slig h t ly b e t t e r i n S u t o vs k y, E
win f o r W hit e? L o ok o ut . .. t h e an swe r is (2669)-Rogers, I (2594) Nottingham 2005 ]
coming on the very next move of the game! [ 7.g4 is premature and Black quickly
11.c4! xb5 12.d6+ Black resigned equalised after e6 8.c4
wi t h o u t w a i t i n g t o s e e h i s q u e e n b e i n g A) 8...xg4 wins a pawn here although
captured by the f1-bishop on W hite's next White has dangerous compensation after
move. 9.xe6 xe5 10.b3 g6 11.f3
1-0 ( 11.d5!? ) 11...e6 12.d2 with a strong
initiative in return for the pawn. White is
going to castle long and then play h4-h5
190 B01 and Black will have to be very careful not
Dominguez Perez,L 2723 to get over-run.;
Nakamura,Hi 2775 B) 8...bd7 9.xe6 xe5 10.e2 g6
Makedonia Palace GP (6.3) 28.05.2013 11.b3 e6 and White's early aggression
[Tom Rendle] had come to nothing in Pikula, D (2476)-
Zhukova, N (2471) Belgrade 2000 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6 7...xd3 8.xd3 e6 9.0-0 bd7 10.g3!
5.f3 f5 6.e5!? A rare choice from This makes it just a little more difficult for
Dominguez and a new move for this site. f6 Nakamura to develop his kingside although
[ 6...d7 Black should still be just about OK here.
A) 7.c4 d8 8.d3 is a very logical [ 10.xd7 xd7 11.e4 e7 12.g3 g6
way of playing with some advantage to 13.d6+ xd6 14.xd6 d5 15.a3
White after ( 8.d5!? ) 8...xd3 9.xd3; was a little better for W hite in Sokolov, A
B) 7.f3 (2568)-Fischdick, G (2251) Crans Montana
B1) 7...g6 may be playable here 2001 ]
although it does allow White the option 10...c7 11.e1
of 8.xf7!? ( 8.c4 d8 9.e3 [ 11.f4?! is an obvious try but the tactics
is a safer route to a slight edge) 8...xf7 after h5! are in Black's favour 12.xf7
9.g4 although Black seems to be OK ( 12.h4 xf4 13.xf4 is equal ) 12...a5!
here after gf6 10.gxf5 xf5 11.c4+ 13.c7 ( 13.f3 xf7 and White is missing
e6 12.e2 e8 with a roughly level a kille r d isco ve re d ch e ck) 13...xg3
position.; 14.xa5 xf1 15.xh8 d2 and Black
B2) 7...e6 8.f4 ( 8.xd7 xd7 can hardly be worse with White's knight on
9.d2 f5 10.g3 f6 11.0-0-0 h8. ]
is a very logical setup for W hite with 11...b6 12.f3?!
some edge because of White's lead in [ 12.g5 was better, for example d6 ( or
development.) 8...gf6 9.h3?! d5?! 12...h6 13.h4! g5 14.f3 g7 15.g3 )
( 9...xe5 10.xe5 d7 11.f4 g6 13.h4 is very awkward for Black ]
equalises for Black) 10.c4! xc4 12...b4?
11.xc4 e6 12.0-0 e7 13.ad1 [ 12...d6 13.f4 ( 13.h6 0-0 14.g3
and White had a typical advantage with e8 is fine for Black) 13...0-0 and Black
the two bishops in Klimov, S (2518)- has equalised. ]
Romanov, E (2594) St Petersburg 2010 ] 13.h6! After both sides swap mistakes
7.d3 This seems to be White's most Dominguez takes a clear advantage with a
174
simple tactic gxh6 [ for those interested the winning line is as

[ 13...0-0? fails to 14.xg7! xg7 15.g3+ follows 60.g7! e2 61.h5 c5 62.f5+
h8? 16.g6+ - the point, obviously this b4 63.h6 b2+ 64.g6 g2+ 65.f6
doesn't work with the bishop on d6. ] c6+ 66.g5 b3 67.h7 c1+ 68.f4
[ 13...f8 is a rather ugly move to have to c5+ 69.g4 c8+ 70.g3 Black has run
play and White has a clear advantage after out of checks h8 71.c7 a2 72.a7+
14.g5 e7 15.e4! ] b3 73.g2 c2 74.c5+ d2 75.d6+
14.xf6 f8 15.a3 xc3 16.bxc3 d5 c1 76.h6+ d1 77.h1+ c2 78.h2
17.xh6 xc3 18.h4 e7 19.xh7 d3 79.g3+ e4 80.g4+ e3 81.g8
W h i t e i s s i m p l y a p a w n u p h e r e . b5 and White is queening. ]
20.ed1 60...e5 61.g7 c6 62.h6 g2+ 63.g6
[ 20.c3! is more precise with the nice point b7+ 64.f7 g2+ 65.h8 a8+ 66.g8
b e i n g t h a t a f t e r xc3 White wins an f3 White is so close but unable to make
exchange with 21.h3 b5 22.g6! ] progress 67.g6 f8+ 68.h7 f3
20...d8 21.f3 f6 22.d3 g8 23.ab1 69.g7+ e6 70.g8 h5 71.h7 e8+
b6 24.g3 g4 25.c3 72.f8 g6+ 73.h8 f7 74.c8+ e7
[ 25.h3 was better but perhaps Dominguez 75.c7+ e8 76.e5+ d7 77.b5+ e7
didn't want to weaken his kingside, however 78.g5+ e8 79.g8+ f8 80.xf8+
after g7 ( 25...gxd4 26.xd4 xd4 xf8 An incredible save from Nakamura who
27.e4 is winning for White) 26.c4 d6 had to find several only moves in the queen
27.e5 White is in control ] ending.
25...f5! 26.a4 xd3 27.xd3 a3 28.e1 ½-½
c4 Nakamura has done a fantastic job
staying in this game and now has pretty good
drawing chances although White will always 191 B01
be hopeful with the passed h-pawn. 29.e5 Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2726
xe5 30.xe5 d5 31.f4! e7 32.f2 Caruana,Fabiano 2786
g8 33.c4 d7 34.f5 g5 35.fxe6 xe5 FIDE GP Tashkent (7.5) 29.11.2012
36.exd7 a5 37.f3 xd7 38.xf7+ e6 [Tom Rendle]
39.f4 xa4 40.d5+! Now the ending feels
like it should be winning for W hite - it's all 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
about getting the kingside pawns moving f6 5.f3 g6 6.c4 This is less critical than
quickly here. d7 Nb5 which is analysed in Leko-Caruana g7
[ o f c o u r s e n o t 40...cxd5?? 41.cxd5+ 7.0-0
and Black drops the rook on a4 ] [ 7.e5 was tried in a blitz game between
41.dxc6+ xc6 42.g4 a2+ 43.g3 a1 Polgar and Kramnik and after 0-0 8.0-0
44.g5 c6 9.b5 d8 10.f4 h5 Black was
[ 44.h4 seems obvious and strong here, e.g. absolutely fine so Judit tried 11.xf7!? xf7
a5 45.g5 a4 46.f2! and White's pawns 12.xc7 f8 13.xf7+ xf7 and she went
will get there first ] on to win - still I think Black is better here
44...g1+ 45.h4 a5 46.g4 xg4+ so this way of playing is hardly to be
47.xg4 d6 48.h5 a4 49.g6 a3 50.g7 recommended at a slower time control. ]
a2 51.g8 a1 52.d8+ c6 53.c8+ 7...0-0 8.h3
d6 54.d8+ c6 I wouldn't like to say [ 8.b5 b6 9.f4 a6 10.b1 c6
whether or not this endgame is winning or not 11.c3 g4 12.e1 ae8 13.e5 b8
for W hite. I suspect it isn't but it's tough to 14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 bd7 16.ed1 a5
defend as well. 55.d5+ c7 56.f7+ d6 17.h2 b5 18.b3 b6 19.a4 b4 20.e2
57.h4 e5+ 58.h6 b5?! 59.cxb5 xb5 1/2-1/2 (20) Lobzhanidze, D (2483)-
This ending is winning - at least according to Chatalbashev, B (2596) Vaujany FRA 2011 ]
t h e t a b le b a s e s 60.h5 But after this natural 8...a6
move it's drawn - very mysterious [ 8...c6 9.b5 is potentially a little bit
175
awkward for Black ] I'm not sure a pawn sacrifice was necessary
9.e1 White is developing very naturally but I here but I suppose W hite didn't want to sit
don't really see where it is all going - this is passively and wait.
the kind of position Qd6 Scandinavian players [ 31.f3 f5 32.f2 and Black doesn't have
are after in this opening. serious chances here I believe. ]
[ 9.a4! has been White's most popular 31...bxc4 32.6d4 b5 33.h4 g8 34.h2
choice in this position but Black should be c3 35.c2 cxb2 36.xb2 c5 37.a4 c6
d o i n g f i n e a f t e r c6 10.b3 e8!? 38.b6 a5 39.hxg5 gxg5 40.a6 e5
( 10...b6?! runs into 11.a3 b4 12.a5! Black may be a pawn up here but W hite is
bxa5 13.a4 and Black is in some trouble) active and must still have excellent chances
11.a3 d8 12.e1 d6 13.d5 d7 t o h o l d w i t h a c c u r a t e p l a y 41.a7+?!
14.d3 e6 15.xc6 xc6 as in Vovk, A This only forces the king to a better square
(2549)-Tiviakov, S (2656) Altenkirche n [ 41.h4 f5 42.f4! exf4 43.xf4 e4
2012 ] 44.f2! and White should hold the draw ]
9...b5 10.b3 b7 11.g5 c5! After this 41...e6 42.d8 f5 43.h8 g6! 44.hh7
Black has comfortably equalised and can f4 45.ae7+ d6 46.f5+ d5 The King
think about playing for more escapes and Black picks up the a4 pawn
[ 11...bd7 is also very sensible and Black which gives him excellent chances to win.
c a n h a rd l y b e wo r s e h e re . D o m in gu e z 47.xh5 xa4 48.a7?! After this it's
Perez's opening play has certainly been less probably just lost. c4 49.h8 c2 50.h4
than inspiring. ] b6 51.f3 a4 52.g5 b4 53.ha8
12.dxc5 xc5 13.e2 e6 14.ad1 bd7 h6+ 54.h3 b3 55.f3 c2 56.g1 d6
15.f4 fe8 57.e8 dd2 58.g7 a3 59.xe5 a2
[ 15...f5!? was an interesting way of 60.e1 b2 61.h2 b1 62.e4+ c5
u n b a l a n c i n g t h e p l a y . A f t e r 16.e3 63.a7 a1 64.xa1 xa1 65.xf4 a4
( 16.e3 c5 is just better for Black) 66.e5+ d6 67.f5 White can put up some
16...xf3 17.xf3 h5! 18.xd7 xf4 defence here but the extra rook is always
19.xf4 xf4 White is under a little bit of going to win in the end. c2 68.f7 e5
pressure, although a draw remains the most 69.g3 d8 70.h3 g8+ 71.h2 h4
likely result. ] 72.c7 f5 73.c5+ e6 74.g4 gh8
16.d6 b6 17.e3?! Swapping the queens 75.xf5 xh3+ 76.g2 h2+ 77.g3
still leaves White under some pressure 8h3+ 78.f4 f2 79.e5+ f6 80.e3
[ 17.f4 offering to repeat was probably a a2 81.g5+ f7 82.g4 h1 83.b3 g1+
better idea. Black's advantage is very small the pawn on g5 now falls and with it the game.
after ac8 18.a3 ] A nice grind from Caruana.
17...xe3 18.xe3 b6 19.e5 ac8 0-1
20.ed3 c4?!
[ 20...e4! may have been stronger as after
21.xg7 xg7 22.xe4 xe4 23.d6 192 B01
xf3 24.gxf3 b8 it feels to me like White's Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2725
activity is going to be short-lived and the Ivanchuk,Vassily 2764
long term weaknesses on the kingside will Edición 2012 (7.1) 11.05.2012
make the endgame at least unpleasant to [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
defend. ]
21.xc4 xc4 22.a3 h6 23.d2 cc8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
24.xf6 xf6 25.de4 xc3 26.xc3 f6 5.d2 c6 Black's most popular (and
With a pair of bishops swapped off Caruana perhaps most solid) way of meeting Bd2
no longer has and advantage so it's [ 5...g4 is also possible and now 6.f3
impressive that he manages to squeeze out a A) 6...f5 is Bauer's own
win from here. c6 27.1d2 g5 28.d6 f8 recommendation but it does look very
29.d1 e7 30.e3 h5 31.c4?! dangerous for Black after 7.g4!? g6 8.f4
176
e6 9.f5 exf5 10.g5 fd7 11.e2+ d8 [ 7.ge2 e6 8.f3 h5

12.g2 ( 12.0-0-0 looks stronger to me A) 9.e4 was perhaps critical and now
with a very strong initiative for the pawn - d8 ( 9...b6!? 10.xf6+ gxf6 )
I wo u ld b e re lu ct a n t t o p la y a s B la c k 10.xf6+ xf6 although it's not clear how
here! ) 12...c6 13.xc6?! m u c h o f a n e d ge W h i t e h a s h e r e f o r
an o d d de c isio n bxc6 14.0-0-0 b8 example 11.0-0 g6 12.f4 d7
a n d B l a c k w a s b e t t e r i n G o l u b e v, M and Black is holding comfortably enough;
(2499)-Kislinsky, A (2384) Kharkiv 2006 B) 9.f4 c7 10.e2 g6 11.0-0-0
15.e1 b4 16.h3 c8 17.f4 d8 xd3 12.xd3 bd7 13.f4 d6
18.c4 c5 19.fd5 b6 20.e7+ b7 14.xd6 xd6 and Black was very solid in
21.e2 xc3 22.xc3 xa2 23.f3+ Lie, E (2457) -Houska, J (2392) Bergen
d5 24.e5 c6 25.b3 f4 26.b2 xc2 2009 ]
27.xd5 b1+ 28.d2 xb2 29.e7+ 7...h5 8.ge2 bd7
a6 30.b4+ a5 31.xc6+ b6 [ 8...g6 has been tried here before and
32.e1 e8 33.xf4 xe7+ 34.xe7 now 9.e4 b6 10.c3 bd7 11.c2
c3+ 35.d2 a1+ 36.f2 xd4+ 0-0-0? ( 11...xe4! 12.fxe4 e5 seems to
37.xd4 cxd4; give Black an acceptable game although
B) 6...d7 was Bauer's actual choice - t h e p o sit io n re m a in s t e n s e) 12.g5
possibly to avoid preparation - and there Black is already in trouble but now it goes
followed 7.c4 b6 8.ge2 e6 9.e3?! from bad to worse xd3 13.xd3 xb2?!
( 9.0-0 makes more sense as taking the 14.b1 xa2 15.c1 d5 16.c4 d6
pawn on b2 is not good xb2? 10.b1 17.e2 and there's no good way to defend
a3 11.xb7 as Black can't really cover against all the threats and Black went on to
everything here, e.g. d6?! 12.b3 a5 lose in Dominguez, L (2638)-Leon Hoyos, M
13.b5 b6 14.xd6+ xd6 15.b4 (2428) Cuernavaca 2006 ]
and Black is in terrible trouble) 9...c6 9.f4 g6 10.xg6
10.a3 to prevent Nb4 e7 11.0-0 ed5 [ 10.c4 b6 is another critical position,
12.f2 and White had a slight edge in and here White tried the pawn sac 11.e2!?
Edouard, R (2607)-Bauer, C (2679) SUI ( 11.d5 might be worth investigating but my
2012 and in fact won very quickly. ] feeling is Black is OK after d8 ) 11...xc2!
[ 5...b6 6.f3 g4 ( 6...xb2?? loses to 12.c1 f5 ( 12...xb2!? ) 13.d5 g5
7.b1 a3 8.b5 ) 7.h3 h5 8.g4 g6 14.e3 a5 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.d3 e6
9.c4 with some edge for White ] 17.0-0 xd3 18.xd3 c5 19.e4 xe3+
6.d3 20.xe3 b6 and at most White had a tiny
[ 6.c4 is also a dangerous way of playing edge in Aza rov, S (26 48)-S ergie nko, S
and now play is likely to transpose back into (2415) St Petersburg 2011 ]
mainlines after f5 7.f3 e6 which has 10...hxg6 11.e2 e6 12.e4
been covered heavily in the archives ] [ 12.0-0-0 would've been a more ambitious
6...g4 move but maybe Dominguez was just
[ 6...b6 7.f3 and ] playing for a safe edge ]
[ 6...c7 7.ge2 are possible and White 12...b4 13.c3 e7 14.g3 xe4 15.fxe4
seems to keep an edge in both cases ] g5 Ivanchuk is playing very logically - he
7.f3 wants to swap dark squared Bishops and then
[ 7.e4 was tried by Kasparov in a blitz target d4 16.0-0 xd2 17.xd2 c5
game and it does seem to give W hite a [ 17...e5 is very similar - and perhaps a
sligh t e dge a f t e r xd1 8.xf6+ exf6 touch more accurate. The position is about
9.xa5 h5 10.f4 d6 ( 10...c5!? ) 11.f5 equal after 18.c4 f6 19.ad1 b6 ]
g6 and now 12.h3 gxf5 13.e2 18.f2! 0-0 19.e5 ad8 20.e4 cxd4
would've given White a comfortable position 21.cxd4 b8 Black begins his slow play to
in Kasparov, G (2812)-Van Wely, L (2636) attack d4 22.ad1
Wijk aan Zee 1999 ] [ 22.xb7! would've justified White's play -
177
although the advantage is rather minimal [ 7...0-0 8.0-0 a6 And now White usually
after b6 23.g2 xd4 24.ae1 goes 9. a4 preventing ...b5. For instance:
but I still think that the only (small) winning 9.a4 c6 ( Or: 9...f5 10.b3 c6 11.a3
chan ces lie with W h ite he re due to th e d8 12.e1 e8 13.d5 d6 14.xc6
outside passed pawns. The smart money bxc6 15.e5 e8 16.e2 a5 17.ad1
would still be on a draw though! ] h8 18.d5 White's position looks much
22...c6 23.d3?! better. e4 19.xe4 xe5 20.g3 f6
[ 23.xc6 isn't a move White really wants to 21.xf5 gxf5 22.f3 cxd5 23.xd5 c6
play but then again it should be easy 24.dxe5 fxe5 25.xe5 f7 26.b2 g8
enough to hold a draw after bxc6 24.b3 ] 27.e6 d7 28.g3+ f8 29.c3 e8
23...b6 30.xc6 d8 31.h2 d2 32.g3 f4
[ 23...xa2! puts White under more pressure 33.g8+ f8 34.xh7 xf2 35.h5+ f7
as t he c ou n t erp lay d oe sn 't see m to b e 36.g6 1-0 Kosintseva, T -Foisor, C Rijeka
e n o u g h , e . g . 24.f3 ( 24.xc6 bxc6 2010 ) 10.e3 f5 11.e2 b4 12.b3
25.a3 c4 ) 24...xd4 25.xf7 f5 bd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.g5 ae8
and Black is definitely better ] 15.fe1 h6 16.h4 f4 17.e3 g5
24.fd1 d7 25.b3 a6 26.a3 b5 18.g3 e6 19.h4 c6 20.hxg5 hxg5
27.xc6 Finally White tries to simplify bxc6 21.xf4 gxf4 22.xf4 Leko, P -Kramnik, V /
28.f1 f5! 29.b3? A strange move which cuts Moscow 2009, W hite has a pawn for no
the rook on a3 out of the game - the mistake compensation ]
is s wi f t l y p o u n c e d u p o n b y Ch u c ky wh o 8.0-0 c6N Again hesitating with the usual 8..
immediately goes for the kill in the centre 0-0
[ i n s t e a d a f t e r 29.c1 fd8 30.b3 [ Relevant is: 8...b5 9.b3 b7 10.e5!
Black has some work still to do to create 0-0 11.f4 Due to the unusual move order
real winning chances ] from Polgar White has managed to achieve
29...fd8 30.a4 c5! 31.dxc5?! his best setup here. d8 12.e1 bd7
[ 31.d1 was necessary but Black will be 13.e2 c5 14.dxc5 xc5 15.ad1 c8
going a pawn up after b6 which should be 16.xf7+ xf7 17.xf7 xf7 18.xe7+
enough to win here, especially as White's g8 19.c7 ( 19.e5! c6 20.d5!
king is the more open ] White is winning.) 19...f8 20.xf6 xc7
31...d2 Now it's all over 32.f3 xc5+ 21.d5 f7 22.e7+ xe7 23.xe7
33.h1 c2 34.c4 xa2 35.h4 g5 xe7 24.xe7 This endgame is hopeless
36.h5 g4 37.c6 xb3 38.g5 d1 for Black. b8 25.b4 f8 26.xh7 g8
A wonderfully controlled game by Vassily who 27.e7 f8 28.e5 a4 29.d6 f7
shows that it's also possible to win at the 30.ee6 c8 31.xg6 xc2 32.h6 g7
highest level with the Scandinavian - although 33.hg6+ f7 34.h4 c1+ 35.h2 c4
some mistakes from your opponent do help! 36.h6 g7 37.h5 e4 38.he6
0-1 White won in Dominguez Perez, L -Polgar, J/
Khanty Mansiysk 2011 ]
9.a3 0-0 10.e1 d8 11.e3 Black is
193 B01 missing pawns in the center so we can say
Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2719 that its not easy to equalize here despite the
Polgar,Judit 2699 fact that W hite doesn't threaten anything
FIDE World Cup 2011 (4.6) 08.09.2011 significant for the moment. e6 12.xe6
[Milos Pavlovic] xe6 13.e2 f5 14.ad1 d6
[ 14...d5 15.xd5 xd5 16.c4 f5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 17.d5 e5 18.d4 h5 19.xh5 gxh5
f6 5.f3 g6 6.h3 g7 7.c4 20.b3 White keeps the advantage. ]
White decides to develop in a simple logical [ 14...e6 15.c1 d5 16.e4 f4 17.xf4
wa y a n d a v o i d e a r l y s h a r p a t t e m p t s . a6 xf4 18.c3 b6 19.c2 Again White has
The usual move order is: easier play. ]
178
15.g4 e6 16.f1 dd8 17.f4 d7 18.d5 to d8,enquiring how White will break in. 7.e1
a7 19.e5 e8 20.a4 c8 21.b3 d6 [ 7.f4 e7 8.bd2 0-0 9.c4 d8
22.g2 White is controlling all the central 10.e3 g6 is a good indication of the sort
squares and the main problem of Black's o f p o s it i o n B l a ck i s h e a d in g i n t o , wi t h
po sition rem ains: no p awn brea ks in th e 11.e5 bd7 12.xg6 hxg6 giving White
center. d7 23.d3 xe5 24.xe5 xe5 a minimal edge. ]
25.xe5 f8 26.de3 d7 27.f3 7...b4!? A little zwischenzug, encouraging
Simply improving the position move by move the White c pawn forward. Of course, White
W hite actually gains an even bigger takes the opportunity. 8.c3 e7 9.e5 d8
advantage. b5 28.f4 g7 29.e2 f6 10.a3 bd7= Painless equalization. What
30.b4 a5 31.d4 h6 32.c3 b8 could be better after a hard day at work or in
33.g2 bxa4 34.xa4 dd8 35.xa5 h5 a tournament when one needs to economize
36.xc7 With two extra pawns the rest is just on e ne rgy. 11.b3 b6 12.ac4 xb3
t e c h n i qu e . hxg4 37.hxg4 f4 38.xe7 13.axb3 xe5 14.xe5 d5 15.b4 0-0
xg4+ 39.g3 f4 40.e4 xe4 41.xe4 16.f3 a6
f5 42.e5 xe5 43.xe5 f6 44.e7 [ 16...fd8 ]
xd5 45.xg6+ f8 46.c7 b6 47.gg7 [ 16...d6 were both decent alternatives. ]
f5 48.cf7+ e8 49.h7 g5+ 50.f1 17.d7 fe8 For all the world it looks as
h5 51.xf6 thought the game will be drawn. Sometimes I
1-0 don't understand what goes through a player's
head? 18.xd5? Pointless.
[ 18.c5= ]
194 B01 [ 18.d2= and a handshake was indicated. ]
Drljevic,Ljilja 2175 18...exd5 19.b6 c5! Even here White can
Milovanov,Olga 2038 just about play on with 20 Rxe8+ Rxe8 21 g4
TCh-SCG Women (10) 18.09.2004 but after 21..Re1+ 22 Kg2 Be4+ she is of
[Andrew Martin] course, much worse. Disgraced by her recent
play though, Drljevic decides to call it a day.
The players in the coming game aren't that Re-running the opening, we find that Black's
highly rated, bu t they d o provid e us wit h choice can be used against 3 Nf3 e.g. 3...Nf6
t y p i c a l ' c l u b p l a ye r s e n t e rt a i n m e n t ' F o r 4 d4 Bf5,with transposition. As such, it is a
whatever reason, White tries to avoid theory development worth noting.
by choosing 'natural methods' in the opening. 0-1
This can never work against the sophisticated
Modern Scandinavian and Black equalizes
easily, going on to score a quick win. 1.e4 d5 195 B01
2.exd5 xd5 3.d4?! I don't rate this move at Dutreeuw,Marc 2394
a l l . F o r s t a r t e r s , B l a c k h a s a ve r y g o o d Rocha,Sergio 2427
counter in 3...e5!, which takes the wind right Euro Team Ch 1999
out of W hite's sails. Here we see another [Alexander Volzhin]
approach. f6 4.f3 f5!? Unusual, but
viable. A very instructive game for understanding
[ I have played 4...g4 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 Black's attacking resources in the Center
7.c4 d8 many times now. Black gets a Counter gambit. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4
stout defensive position which reacts well to g4 4.f3 f5 5.c4
being attacked. For instance, after 8.c3 [ A s I ' v e o p i n e d b e f o r e , 5.b5+
0-0 9.b3 c8 10.e3 bd7 11.fd1 a6! is more promising for White. ]
12.ac1 e8 13.h3 h5 Black is ready for 5...e6 6.dxe6 c6 7.e3 b4+ 8.c3 e7
... c7-c5. He may or may not play ...h7-h6 9.a4 xe6 10.f2 0-0-0 Black has already
first, another useful move. ] completed his development while White lags.
5.e2 c6 6.0-0 e6 After c2-c4,Black retreats 11.e1
179
[ The attempt to win a piece doesn't work: 196 B01

11.d5 xd5!! 12.cxd5 xd5! 13.xd5 Edouard,R 2662
h4+ 14.g3 e1+! 15.xe1 xa4 Danielsen,Hen 2510
and although W hite has 3 pieces for the Politiken Cup 2013 (5.5) 30.07.2013
Queen, his position is insufficient because [Tom Rendle]
o f p o o r c o o r d in a t io n o f h i s f o rc e s a n d
exposed position of the King, for example: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
16.h3+ b8 17.c3 b4 18.e2 d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.h3
, with huge advantage for Black. ] [ 6.e5 is White's main move here but
11...xd4!! This unexpected exchange Edouard is normally very good on his theory
s a c r if i c e g ive s B l a ck a st ro n g in it ia t ive . so it's interesting to see him demonstrate
12.xd4 xd4 A huge development that a slightly slower approach can also be
advantage, dark-square domination and the very effective. ]
exposed position of W hite's King is 6...f5 This is Black's most popular response
tremendous compensation for the exchange. here but there are alternatives:
13.g4?! This ridiculous move loses by force. [ 6...g6 7.e5
However it's not easy to find suitable defence A) 7...bd7 as played by Tiviakov is
for White. p r o b a b l y s a f e r f o r B l a c k h e r e 8.f4
[ 13.xa7 This move is hardly an ( I prefer 8.c4! e6+ 9.e2 b6
improvement: c5! 14.a8+ d7 10.e5 g7 11.0-0 0-0 and Black is
A) 15.xh8 c2+ 16.e2 ( 16.g3 solid enough although it's still W hite's
h5# ) 16...xc4+ 17.d2 xe1+ position that is easier to play.) 8...d5
18.xc2 xf1 with a decisive attack.; 9.xd5 xd5 10.f3 xf3 11.xf3
B) 15.a4+ b5! 16.d1 c8! b6 12.d3 e6 13.0-0 d5 14.d2
and White is helpless, for example: 17.g4 g7 15.c3 0-0-0 and Black had equalised
e2+ 18.xe2 f5+ 19.e4 xe4 and went on to grind out the win in
20.gxf5 f2+ 21.d2 g5+ ] Hrisanthopoulos, D (2076) -Tiviakov, S
[ 13.d3 This attempt to complete (2623) Vrachati 2011;
development looks most natural, however B) 7...e6!? 8.f4 d8 9.d2 g7
W h it e 's p o s i t io n re m a in s d if f icu lt : c5! 10.0-0-0 Of course White can also play it
14.e3 ( If 14.f1 , then d8! threatening safe by castling on the other side and
Nxf3, is very strong: 15.d1 (what else?) keeping a slight edge, but this option is a
d7! 16.b5 xb5 17.cxb5 d5! l o t m o r e f u n ! 0-0 11.h6 ( 11.g4?!
with decisive threats.) 14...f5! 15.xf5 is premature as after d5! Black has
xf5 Now 16... Bc5 is a nasty threat and the enough play) 11...bd7 12.xg7 xg7
bishop cannot be taken in view of 16.xb4 13.f4 a5 14.xd7 xd7 15.a3 f6
g4+ 17.e2 c2+ ] 16.g4 and with f5 coming quickly White
13...xg4+! 14.fxg4 h4+ 15.g2 xg4+ had a very dangerous attack in Bartel, M
16.f2 h4+ 17.g2 xe1 The game is (2587)-Muse, M (2445) 2007 ]
over: Black has 2 extra pawns and an 7.e5 bd7 8.c4 This is now the only way
unstoppable attack. The rest is easy. 18.xa7 to cause Black any problems
[ White can't take the Bishop in view of [ 8.f4?! d5! 9.xd5 xd5 and Black
18.xb4 f5! and White can't parry the ... has at least equalised - h3 is rather
Nh4 threat, if 19.f3 then e3+ 20.g1 superfluous at this point. ]
xf1# ] 8...c7
18...xc3 19.bxc3 f5 20.e2 d8 [ 8...e6+ doesn't really make sense here
21.a8+ d7 22.xb7 e3+ 23.f3 xf1 as after 9.e2 the bishop on f8 is rather
24.b5+ e7 25.g5+ e8 26.d4 d2+ trapped in, especially as ...g6 is rather risky
27.g2 e4+ 28.g1 xd4+ in view of g4 ideas. ]
0-1 9.f3 e6
[ 9...e6 10.f4 d8 11.0-0-0 b6 12.g4
180
g6 13.h4 h5 14.g5 fd5 and now in 20...h6 21.g5 h7 22.gxf6 xh1
Loeffler, S (2463)-Kreindl, H (2200) Vienna Black is still on the board but with the queen
2006 W hite could've obtained the better out of the game on h7 it's not surprising the
c h a n c e s wi t h 15.xb6! axb6 16.xd5 Edouard is able to find a crisp end to the
xd5 17.xd5 exd5 ( or 17...cxd5 game with 23.f5! h4 24.e5 exf6
18.b5+ d8 19.a3 ) 18.e1+ d8 19.a3 [ or 24...xd1+ 25.xd1 d7 26.c7+
and White's two bishops and control of the e8 27.c8# ]
open e-file give him a clear advantage. ] 25.e8+ c7 26.xd6 xd6 27.e7+ b8
10.f4 d8 11.0-0-0 b6 28.xd6+ a8 29.a6 A pleasing and exact
[ maybe Black should try 11...g6 12.e3 finish bxa6 30.c5 g8 31.xa7#
g7 when his position looks solid if not 1-0
particularly well developed. White can start
pre p a rin g a kin gside a ssau lt h ere wit h
13.b1 0-0 14.g4 ] 197 B01
12.xb6 Erturan,Yakup 2389
[ 12.a5!? d7 13.b1 was also quite a Exizoglou,Dimitrios 2224
reasonable option, and again White is ready Acropolis Open (3) 16.08.2007
to play g4 and increase the pressure on [John Watson]
Black's position. ]
12...xb6 W ith this game I look at various ideas
[ 12...axb6 would be Black's ideal recapture involved when W hite plays Bc4 and Nge2
i f i t w e r e n ' t f o r t h e s t r o n g r e p l y 13.d5! (instead of Nf3). These are not easy lines to
which basically wins on the spot, f or meet, and if they discourage Black from ...Bf5,
example xd5 ( 13...d7 is sadly the best that's quite an achievement for W hite. 1.e4
Black can manage but his position is d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6
horrendous after 14.c4 c8 15.e5 ) 5.c4 c6
14.c4 d7 15.xd5 cxd5 16.xd5! xd5 [ The game Yudasin-Oll, Dos Hermanas
17.xd5 a4 18.d1 and despite being an 1992 illustrated 5...g4 : 6.f3! f5!?
exchange ahead Black can safely resign. ] 7.ge2
13.e5 0-0-0 14.a3 a5 15.h2 A) Yudasin analyses 7...bd7 8.d2!
Very simple play from Romain, keeping all of ( 8.g4 g6 9.h4 h6 10.f4 e5!
his options open and waiting to see what, if , as in Cornette, M-Prié, E/ Saint Vincent
anything, Black will do. Obviously there are 2004 - given in an earlier column) 8...c6
also ideas of Qg3 at some point so Danielsen 9.g4! g6 10.h4 h6 11.f4 h7
at least puts a stop to that g5+ 16.b1 g6 12.e2!;
17.g4! Suddenly the queen is rather short on B) 7...c6 8.g4! g6 9.f4 bd7 10.h4!
squares h5 18.g3 e5 11.h5! f5 ( 11...xc2!? 12.xc2
[ 18.a6! is very flashy but it leads to a exd4 13.e2+ is messy ) 12.gxf5 exf4
similar kind of thing to the game after d5 and now Yudasin gives 13.e2+! e7
( 18...bxa6?? 19.xc6# ) 19.g3 d6 ( 13...d8 14.d3! ) 14.xf4 xf5
20.f4 h6 21.g5 ] ( 14...0-0 15.d3 15 or h6 ) 15.d6
18...d6 19.d5! cutting off the queens escape and wins. ]
along the 5th rank xd5? 6.ge2 f5 This could also arise via 4...c6 5
[ 19...h4 was Black's best try here but it's still Bc4 Bf5 6 Ne2 Nf6.
very bad after 20.f3 xd5 ( or 20...xd5 [ 6...bd7 7.0-0 e5 is rather loose: 8.e1
21.xd5 xd5 22.c4 xd1+ 23.xd1 e7 9.g3 ( 9.d2 c7 10.g3 ) 9...0-0
and Black is defenceless against W hite's 10.d2 c7 11.f5 b4 12.b3
coming attack. ) 21.xd5 xd5 22.c4 ] with the idea exd4 13.b5! cxb5 14.xb4
20.f4?! c5 15.h6+! gxh6 16.xd4 xb3
[ 20.h4 wins on the spot as xg4 ( 20...h6 17.xf6 c6! 18.xc6 bxc6 19.axb3 d8
21.g5 ) 21.h3 picks up the queen ] 20.a5! d6 21.e8+ g7 22.c3+ f6
181
23.ae1 ] 14...d7 15.xd5 cxd5 16.b3 c6

7.d2 Maybe not best, but there's no real
[ Okhotnik-Keitlinghaus, France 2003 went compensation for the pawn. 17.h3! b6
7.0-0 e6 8.g3 and Black tried the other 18.c3 d7 19.f4 c8 20.xc8+ xc8
main plan d6!? ( avoiding the dangerous 21.e5! b5
8...g6 9.f4 ) 9.xf5 ( 9.d2!? ) 9...xf5 [ 21...g8 22.f4 with the idea Qh5. ]
10.d3 ( 10.e2 ) 10...a5 11.e4 xe4 [ 21...f6 22.xf6 ]
12.xe4 d7 13.f3 f6 14.c4 0-0 22.xg7+ xg7 23.xg7 g8 24.e5 a5
15.d2 c7 16.g3 ad8 17.c2 25.c3 xg2 26.g3 d6 27.xd5
with perhaps a small advantage, but Not a well-played game, but W hite's plan
nothing disastrous for Black after c5 ] certainly deserves notice.
7...e6 8.g3 g6 9.h4 Or 1-0
[ 9.e2 and 0-0-0. ]
9...h5?!
[ Black can't solve his problems tactically by 198 B01
9...b6? 10.h5 xd4 in view of 11.e2! Fedorchuk,Sergey 2634
xc2 12.c1 b5 13.xb5 cxb5 14.xb5+ Bauer,Christian 2672
bd7 15.xc2 with a bundle of threats, e.g., TCh-FRA Top 12 2012 (5.2) 04.06.2012
e7 16.c3 b4 17.0-0! ( also good is [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
17.f5 f4 18.xd7+ xd7 19.xg7+
f8 20.h6 ) 17...xc3 18.xc3 with the 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
idea Rd1. ] c6 5.c3 a5 Quite an unusual choice of
[ 9...h6! is probably an improvement on the square in this line and judging by this game
game, when Black should stick to the more popular Qd7 -
A) 10.d5!? d8! 11.f4 h7 12.e2 as we shall see the Queen is a potential target
d6 ( 12...d5 13.0-0-0 d6 14.e4 on a5.
xe4 15.xe4 ) 13.xe6!? ( 13.0-0-0 ) [ 5...d7
13...fxe6 14.xe6 is more interesting A) 6.b4 is an interesting way to mix things
because White has h5 available in some up early on and now
lines but bd7 ( 14...d8?! 15.0-0-0 A1) 6...f6 is probably the simplest
c7 , but 16.he1 intends Qf3.) 15.f5 reply as in Chelushkina, I (2398) -
xf5 16.xf5+ e7 17.g6+ d8 Zhukova, N (2471) Belgrade 2000 which
18.xe7+ xe7 19.0-0-0 looks too continued 7.b5 d4 8.xd4 xd4
speculative, although Black is rather tied 9.b2 ( 9.xg4 xg4 10.0-0 e6
up.; can't be a problem for Black) 9...e6
B) 10.e2 m a y b e b e s t , e . g . , d8 10.f3 h3! 11.f1 and now ( 11.gxh3?
( 10...e7 11.d5! ) 11.0-0-0 e7 12.ge4 h4+ 12.f1 c5 and there's no
xe4 13.xe4 xd4!? satisfactory way to meet the threat of
B1) 14.d3 0-0? ( 14...xe4 15.xe4 Qf2 as after 13.e1 xh3# is mate )
d7 16.c3 a4 17.b1 f6 11...f5! would've left Black clearly on
18.g6! ) 15.c3 a4 16.g4! top;
- threatening Nf6+ - xa2 17.h5; A2) 6...e6?! 7.b5 ce7 8.0-0 g6
B2) 14.c3 c5 15.e3 e5 16.f4 9.h3 and White was better in Sumets, A
c7 17.g4! 0-0 18.h5 h7 19.g5 (2 5 7 9 ) -A ra b a cio gl u , C (1 5 2 4 ) I zm i r
with attack. ] 2011;
10.d5! d8 11.f4 h7 12.e2! d5 B) 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 0-0-0 8.d3
[ 12...d6 13.0-0-0 bd7 14.fxh5 0-0-0 has all been seen in the archives before
15.g5 ] with d4 being analysed by Gawain in
13.0-0-0 d6 14.gxh5 the game Vachier Lagrave, M-Tiviakov, S
[ Or 14.fxh5 d7 15.f3 , tying Black to ( and 8...e5 examined by John Watson in
f7. ] Van den Doel, E-Tiviakov, S )]
182
6.h3 h5 12.xf3 xd1 13.xa7 c6 14.xd1 f6 )

[ 6...xf3 7.xf3 e6 8.0-0 leaves White 10...xd5 ( 10...xd5 11.c4 g6 12.b4
with a stable advantage and in fact he may d6 13.b5 a6 14.d4 and Black is being
now choose to simply capture on c6 for a pushed all over the place) 11.b5 c5 12.c4
lasting structural edge if given the chance. ] c6 13.0-0 and White's attack and lead in
7.b1 d e ve l o p m e n t a r e m o r e t h a n s u f f i c i e n t
[ 7.b4!? xb4 ( 7...xb4? 8.b1 d6 compensation for the sacrificed pawn. ]
9.xb7 a6 otherwise Nb5 is strong 10.e4! 8.a3!
d5 11.d3 is very uncomfortable for Black - [ 8.b4 doesn't really seem to work here as
the lack of Kingside development causes White doesn't have anything after the simple
real problems. ) xb4 ]
A) 8.a3!? c6 9.b1 looks more 8...xf3 Not a move that Bauer really wanted
d a n g e r o u s t h a n i t a c t u a l l y i s a6! to play I suspect but his options were already
( 9...0-0-0? 10.b5 wins an exchange) limited
10.xb7 f6 11.0-0 e6 12.d4 [ 8...f6? 9.b4 f5 ( 9...b6? 10.a4
A1) 12...xc3?! is a rather riskier way to is rather embarrassing ) 10.g4 wins a piece ]
p l a y a s a f t e r 13.xc7 d6 14.d2 [ 8...b6 9.b4 and Black has nothing better
Black should give up his Queen with than to take on f3 here ]
xd2 ( 14...xa3 15.xc6 0-0 16.c4 9.xf3 ge7
leaves Black struggling) 15.xd2 xc7 [ 9...e5+ was perhaps a safer option but
despite Black's nominal material Black is left suffering after either 10.e2
superiority White's initiative is ongoing ( or 10.e2 d6 11.d4 f5 12.0-0 )
an d in f a c t h e is on to p a f t e r 16.c3 10...xe2+ 11.xe2 0-0-0 12.xc6 ]
( 16.g4!? ) 16...d7 17.e5+ [ 9...f6 10.0-0 d6 11.d4 and White is
A1a) 17...xe5 18.xh5 g6 simply threatening b4-b5 with a clear edge ]
( 18...xh5? 19.dxe5 and Black's 10.b4
position will quickly collapse ) 19.f3; [ 10.0-0 delaying b4 looks at least as strong
A1b) 17...xe5 18.dxe5 xe2 b6 11.b4 d4 12.b2 0-0-0 13.e4
19.b1 and it looks unlikely that Black and again W hite's Queenside potentia l
will be able to survive the onslaught; seems the most impo rtant f actor in th e
A2) 12...d6 and Black has equalised position ]
fairly comfortably; 10...e5+ 11.e2 0-0-0 12.0-0 d6
B) 8.b1 was an interesting idea tried in Sid este pp in g Bb 2 13.g3! Getting ready to
Pokazanjev, N-Zolotukhin, V and now play b5 with the idea that after Ne5 or Nd4
g6! 9.a3! ( 9.b2 0-0-0 and Black must the Bishop can simply drop back to g2
be at least equal I think) 9...xc2+ 10.f1 [ 13.d3 e5 14.g3 xf3+ 15.xf3 f6
0-0-0 11.b5 xc3! 12.dxc3 xd1+ 16.e1 should also keep the advantage ]
13.xd1 d3+ 14.e2 xb5 15.xb5 e6 13...h5! A good decision - Black is really in
and Black had come out of the opening need of some counterplay 14.b5 d4
with good chances, although the position [ 14...e5 15.g2 h4 16.g4 f5 ( 16...xg4
remains tense as it's hard to retrieve the 17.hxg4 h3 18.f3 doesn't get Black
knight from c2 and in fact later Black erred anywhere ) 17.d4! and Black is being forced
and lost. ] b a c k - f o r e xa m p l e f7 18.c4! e5
[ 7.0-0 is a very flexible alternative ] wh a t e l s e ? 19.a4 and Black has serious
7...e6 problems ]
[ 7...0-0-0 8.b4! seems to give White strong 15.g2 ef5
p l a y , f o r e x a m p l e xb4 9.a3 d5 [ 15...xe2+ 16.xe2 h4 may look
( 9...xf3?! 10.xf3 c6 11.xc6 bxc6 dangerous but in fact W hite is fine after
12.0-0 and Black's shattered Queenside will 17.d3! ( 17.g4 d5 18.h1 is probably
cost him in the long run) 10.xd5 ( 10.b5 better for White as well although it's more
isn't so clear after xc3! 11.xa5 xf3 unclear ) 17...f5 18.g4 d4 19.e3 c5
183
( 19...xc2 20.xa7 b6 21.a8+ d7 doesn't work here because of simply
22.a4 must be good for W hite) 20.c3 30.dxe5 xd3 31.xd3 xd3 32.xd3
xc3 21.e4 with a very strong attack - the and f2 is defended ]
computer wants to try defending with the 26.a3 e7?? A blunder but it was close to
greedy xa3 but after 22.xb7+ d7 lost in any case
23.c6+ d6 it's hard to believe Black can [ 26...a7 27.c5 b6 28.a3 is a rather
re a l l y g e t a wa y wi t h t h i s , f o r i n s t a n c e ridiculous position , the Black Que en is
24.g2 planning Ra1! is strong ] trap pe d o n a7 an d it sh ou ld be a f a irly
16.a4 simple matter for White to open the game up
[ 16.xd4 xd4 17.d3 was perhaps a and win from here. ]
simpler way to keep the initiative ] [ 26...e5 leaves White with a choice of
16...b6 17.h1 xe2 18.xe2 d4?! strong lines 27.dxe5 ( 27.f3 e8 28.e1
Up until now Bauer has been doing an a7 29.dd1 and Black is almost in
excellent job of staying in the game despite a zugzwang! ) 27...xd3 28.xd3 xd3
very difficult position but this move really 29.xd3 xe5 ( 29...xf2 30.exf6 xg3+
doesn't help his cause 31.h2 e2 32.d1 and White is simply a
[ 18...g5! would've given Black real piece up ) 30.d8+ a7 31.d5
counterchances for example 19.c3 ( 19.b2 with a crushing position ]
g7; 19.d3 g4 ) 19...g4 20.d4 gxh3 27.c5! xc5 28.dxc5 xd3
( 20...h6!? ) 21.xh3 h6 22.b2 b8 [ 28...xc5 29.xd7 ]
with h4 coming the position is less clear than 29.xd3 xd3 30.cxb6 A fine game from
it could be alth ough W hite still has th e Fedorchuk, the plan of a3, b4 seems to be a
better chances after 23.f3 as Black is simple way of dealing with a Qa5 setup in this
always going to be vulnerable on b7 ] line.
[ 18...h4 fails to 19.g4! d4 20.e3 xc2 1-0
21.e4 b4 ( 21...d4 22.a5 wins )
22.xb4 xb4 23.xb4 and the two
Bishops should be enough for White to win 199 B01
here ] Fedorchuk,Sergey 2634
19.a1 a5 Cornette,M 2545
[ 19...a5 doesn't help either after 20.f3 28th Cappelle Open (4) 05.03.2012
d6 21.d3 xa4 22.d2 xb5 23.c4! [Tom Rendle]
a6 24.xa4 xa4 25.c5 and the knight
drops ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3
20.c3 d7 21.d4 The rook has been forced [ 3.f3 was tried against Cornette by
back and Black has just lost time that he another strong Grandmaster this month but
couldn't afford. Fedorchuk puts on a forceful a ga in h e d r e w ve ry co m f o rt a b ly. . . . g4
display from here to generate a quick win e7 4.e2 c6 5.c3 d7 6.d4 ( 6.h3
22.b2 b8 23.ad1 g6 Black is just sitting is perhaps a better try for W hite and then
and waiting and hoping W hite can't find a xf3 7.xf3 0-0-0 8.d3 has featured in
breakthrough. 24.d3 hd8 25.fd1 f6?! both Vachier Lagrave-Tiviakov and Van Den
Letting the Bishop come to a more active Doel-Tiviakov, which can be found in the
diagonal archives. ) 6...e6 7.0-0 f6 8.e5!?
[ 25...d6 26.a3 a7 ( 26...c4? 27.c5 ( White gets nothing at all after 8.e3 d6
wins ) 27.c5 a8 28.b6 is rather 9.h3 h5 10.e1 when Black can play the
unpleasant for Black ] simple 0-0 for equality or go for more by
[ 25...f8 simply waiting was probably castling Queenside.) 8...xe2 9.xe2
Black's only hope but it doesn't look good ( 9.xd7 xd1 10.xf6+ gxf6 11.xd1
after 26.c1 e7 27.h4 f8 28.g1! 0-0-0 12.e3 e7 causes Black no
a k ey mo ve t o d ef e nd f 2 e7 29.f3 problems at all. )
a n d B la c k is slo wly b e in g squ e e ze d e5 A) 9...xd4 also looks like a good option
184
for Black here, for example 10.d3 d6 (2650)-Bauer, C (2631)/ Rogaska Slatina
11.f4 ( 11.c4 doesn't get anywhere SLO 2011; 11.d4!? should perhaps be
c5 12.a4 d5 13.c3 c5 14.a4 investigated by White players 0-0-0 12.xf5
d5 15.c3= ) 11...b6 12.c4 c5 exf5 13.0-0 ) 11...0-0 12.dxe6 xe6
13.ad1 d8 and Black is still a pawn up 13.xe6 xe6 14.e1 f5 15.d4 d5
although W hite's lead in development 16.f3 xf3 17.xf3 fe8 18.ad1
gives him reasonable compensation; xe1+ 19.xe1 e8 20.f3 c5 21.f1
B) 9...xd4 10.xc6 bxc6 e7 was another draw in Magem Badals, J
B1) 11.e3 was perhaps a better way to (2545) -Cornette, M (2545)/ Catalunya ESP
play f or an edge, and now af te r d7 2012 ]
12.ad1 d6 13.d4! e7 ( 13...0-0?! 8...c6 9.e1
runs into difficulties after 14.xf6 gxf6 [ 9.a3 this doesn't feel as critical as it was on
15.e4 e7 16.g4+ h8 17.h4 the previous move xc3 10.xc3 b6
e5 18.c3! with f4 to come next move) 11.b4 ( 11.e1 has also been tried but after
14.e4 White has a strong initiative in 0-0 12.b4 e4 13.g5 f5 14.f3 e4
return for the pawn; W hite ended up regretting avoiding the
B2) 11.d1 b4 12.d2 ( 12.f3! r e p e t i t i o n o f m o v e s w i t h 15.d2?!
b7 13.g5 looks more testing as he didn't have enough compensation
although Black is solid enough af ter after xc2 16.e2 a6 17.c4 a7
e7 ) 12...d6 13.d5 xh2+! 14.f1 18.c1 g6 and Black went on to win in the
( not 14.xh2 h4+ 15.g1 xd5 ) game Naiditsch, A (2685)-Papaioannou, I
14...h4 15.xf6+ xf6 16.c3 f5 (2 6 2 8 )/ No vi S a d S RB 2 0 0 9) 11...0-0
17.d3 xd3+ 18.xd3 d6 19.xg7 ( 11...a6! 12.b2 0-0 is perhaps even more
g8 1/2-1/2 Bruzon Batista, L (2691)- accurate, not allowing White any chance for
Cornet te , M (2 54 5)/ Ca ta lun ya ES P an edge. ) 12.b5 e7 13.b4 fe8 14.e1
2012 ] was about equal in Rombaldoni, A (2471)-
3...a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 f5 6.d2 e6 Dvirnyy, D (2492)/ Siena ITA 2010
7.c4 b4!? Cornette chooses an unusual ( 14.e5!? g6 15.a4! might give some
move in this position but the choice seems small edge to White )]
very sensible to me 9...0-0 10.a3 xc3 11.xc3 b6 12.a4 a5!
[ 7...c6 is much more popular and now Black is comfortably equal here, White's two
8.d5 ( 8.e2 has been examined a Bishops have no open lines to work with and
n u m b e r o f t i m e s in t h e a r ch ive s, m o s t there are no obvious weaknesses in the Black
recently by Gawain in the game Vaibhav, S camp. 13.d3 xd3
(2430)-Yu, R (2431)/Mashhad IRI 2011) [ 13...g4!? keeps more life in the position -
8...d8 9.xf6+ xf6 10.e2 was looked but then again I'm sure Cornette is happy to
at by Pavlovic in the game Howell- swap off and get closer to the draw! 14.d5!
Papaioannou ] xd5 ( 14...exd5 15.xf6 gxf6 16.d2
8.0-0 le a ve s B la c k' s K in g r a t h e r vu ln e ra b l e)
[ 8.a3 is perhaps more testing and it features 15.xh7+ h8 16.e4 ad8 17.c1 f6
in another couple of Cornette games from and Black is probably doing fine, but there's
the last month or so. xc3 9.xc3 b6 no reason to allow any of this of course. ]
10.d5! this must be critical ( 10.0-0 0-0 14.xd3 fd8 15.b3 b4 16.e2 c6!
11.e5 c6 12.xc6 xc6 13.d3 e4 Once Federchuk is forced to take on b4 only
14.xe4 xe4 was already a little better for Black can be better. 17.xb4 axb4 18.ad1
Black and Cornette shows that he can grind a6 19.d3 b5 20.axb5 xb5 If he wanted
out these positions against lower rated to Black could try and press for an edge with ...
opposition by going on to beat Urbina Perez, Nd5 - White has no pawn breaks and no plan.
J (2210) ) 10...bd7 11.0-0 ( 11.e2 Still an impressive set of games from Cornette
led to another quick draw after 0-0 12.dxe6 in the Scandinavian this month!
xe6 13.xe6 ae8 1/2-1/2 Istratescu, A [ 20...xb5 21.h3 d5 22.e4 a2
185
is a little better for Black ] grandmaster on the defensive in the

½-½ opening: 6.g5 g7 7.d2 h6 8.f4 d8
9.0-0-0 c6 10.c4 bd7 11.he1
(pretty impressive pieces) b6 , and here
200 B01 White missed the chance for 12.xf7+ xf7
Fedorchuk,Sergey A 2643 13.e5+ g8 14.xg6 , when Black's
Tiviakov,Sergei 2670 position is being torn apart. But it was only
25th ECC Ohrid MKD (5) 08.10.2009 a Blitz game! ]
[John Watson] [ c) 6.b5 is the subject of an article in New
in Chess 90 by Tibor Karolyi (he also covers
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 6 Bc4 and 6 Ne5). The main line seems to
f6 5.f3 g6 This move has gained be b6 7.f4 , and now Karolyi suggests
so me wh a t in p o pu la rit y, a lt h ou gh it isn 't d5
m e n t io n i n H o u sk a 's S t a r t i n g O u t b o o k . A) 8.e2 d7! ( 8...xf4 9.e5 ) 9.c1
Karolyi calls it the Czebe Variation based a6 10.c3 7f6=;
upon the many games that Czebe has played B) 8.e5 f6 9.g3 a6 10.c4 axb5
wit h it in t h e p a s t t h re e ye a rs . I h a ve n ' t 11.cxd5 a6 12.b3 a5+ 13.d2
covered the precise position, even in my d7= ]
answer to a question in the game 6...g7 7.g2 c6
'Scandinavian 3.. Qd6 w ...g6 - READER [ Here Czebe's 7...a6 prevents 0-0. In his
QUESTION' from earlier this year. The reader article, Karolyi cites 5 games with this move,
had asked about combining ...g6 with ...a6, complete with notes on the critical lines.
which is slightly different, and I included a He thinks that Black stands satisfactorily.
host of lines without Nf3. Anyway, why 5...g6 This takes some guts to play, however,
instead of 5...a6 or 5...c6 ? One idea the since Black's queen is still exposed and
Czebe has introduced is the move ...Qa6, for White can develop his queenside. ]
e x a m p l e , a f t e r 6 g 3 B g 7 7 B g 2 . 6.g3 8.0-0 g4 9.f4
A couple of alternatives played this month, [ 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 xd4 looks risky. In
and a comment on the main line. anoth er O hrid game , Tiviako v survive d
[ a) 6.h3 g7 7.b5 b6 8.c4 c6 ( 8...a6 11.d1 c5 12.e3 f5 13.xf5!?
is more flexible, for example, 9.c3 0-0 ( 13.e2 0-0 ) 13...gxf5 14.b5
10.e2 c6 11.d5 d8 ) 9.c3 0-0 1/2-1/2 Azarov, S (2625)-Tiviakov, S (2670)/
10.d3 c5 11.d5 ( 11.dxc5 xc5 12.0-0 Ohrid MKD 2 00 9. T he n ( 14.b5 a6
d8 13.e3 a5 14.e2 is a touch better 15.c3 0-0 16.xa7 is obviously risky, since
for White ) 11...e6 12.0-0 a6 13.dxe6 the knight is trapped on a7. On the other
xe6 14.a3 ad8 15.c2 c6 16.g5 hand, it is hard to attack, and under some
c7 17.e3 ( 17.f4 d7 18.fe1 ) circumstances White might play Nxc6 and
17...b6 18.ad1 c8 19.ge4 ( 19.e2! gain three passed pawns on the
f5 20.c1 ) 19...fe8 20.xf6+ xf6 queenside. )]
21.e4 h4 22.c6 f8 23.xd8 xd8 9...d8 10.d2
24.d1 d4 25.e4 ( 25.xd4 xd4 [ 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 is possibly better: 0-0
26.e2= ) 25...xe4 26.xe4 e6 27.d2 ( 11...xd4 12.b5 ) 12.ad1 e6 13.fe1
( 27.xd4 xd4 28.d5 e6! 29.c3 with a nice advantage. ]
is roughy equal) 27...g7 28.d5 xe3 10...xf3 11.xf3 e6 Tiviakov has faith in
29.fxe3 c7 30.c6 ( 30.c3 e6 31.e4 ) this rather passive standard structure, which
30...xd2 31.xd2 e6 with the better also arises in the Slav and Caro-Kann. Of
pa wn s tru ct u re , Fo n ta n a S ot o ma yor, L course, W hite has two bishops which are
(2373)-Magem Badals, J (2553), Montcada active enough, and even he might hesitate to
ESP 2009. ] try something like this against a Kasparov or
[ b) Strikovic, A (2512)-Gashimov, V (2740), Anand, however. 12.e2!?
Ourense ESP 2009 saw the elite [ 12.a4!? 0-0 13.c4 is more aggressive. ]
186
12...0-0 13.c4 bd7 14.ad1 e8 15.g2 move. 21.0-0-0

[ 15.b4 b6 16.c3 ad8 17.c1!? [ After 21.gxf7+ xf7 White can't grab the
prepares Nd3 with a discernible edge. ] p a w n i n v i e w o f 22.xe6?? h1+
15...b6 16.c3 e5! 17.dxe5 xe5 and Black wins. ]
Now Black has active pieces and sufficient 21...xh5!
counterplay. [ It's not good to take the other pawn:
½-½ 21...xd4 22.gxf7+ xf7 ( 22...h8 23.h6
is even worse for Black.) 23.xe6 af8
24.g5 e5 25.xe5 xe5 26.xf7 xf7
201 B01 27.xd5 with a clear extra pawn in the
Fedorov,Alexei 2659 endgame and excellent winning chances for
Hauchard,Arnaud 2518 White. ]
Belfort FRA 1999 22.e3?! Too optimistic.
[Alexander Volzhin] [ 22.xf7 is also bad: xe2 23.xf8+ xf8
24.gxh7+ xh7 25.xe2 xf2 and Black
Within a month Alexey Fedorov, 14th in the has a clear extra pawn ]
world rankings, twice had to face the Center [ 22.gxh7+ was obligatory, with mutual
Counter, and he has scored only half a point chances. h8 ]
in 2 games! Even more surprising, both times 22...xg6 White is 2 pawns down for no
his opponents followed the game Anand - compensation. 23.h3 fc8 24.dh1 c7
Lautier which was disastrous for Black, and 25.h4 d7! 26.xh7 xh7 27.xh7
both times Fedorov deviates from Anand's xh7 This position is hopeless for White.
method! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 Bla ck co n ve rt s h is ad va n t a ge in t o a win
4.d4 c6 5.f3 f6 6.c4 f5 7.e5 e6 wit h o u t a ny p ro b le ms. T h e rest n e e d n o
8.g4 g6 9.h4 bd7 10.xd7 xd7 comment. 28.e2 ac8 29.c3 g8 30.b2
11.h5 e4 12.h3 b5 31.d3 c6 32.g1 f6 33.f3 e5!
[ In an earlier game vs Nisipeanu in the 34.dxe5 xe5 35.e2 b4 36.c2 xc3
European Team Championships Fedorov 37.d1 d4 38.g5 e8 White resigned . It's
prefered 12.0-0 but failed to obtain any not clear to me what's wrong with Anand's 13
a d v a n t a g e . T h e g a m e c o n t i n u e d : d5 Re3, his win over Lautier seemingly very
13.xd5 cxd5 14.d3 d6 15.d2 d8! convincing. Nisipeanu and Hauchard definitely
16.g2 h4 17.h1 f6 18.c3 f4! have something in mind. But what? We have
After the exchange of dark-squared Bishops to wait for new games in this line.
Black has little to worry about. 19.c1 xd2 Undoubtedly we'll see them very soon. If so,
20.xd2 0-0-0 21.f4 e7 22.ae1 d6 I'll tell you immediately.
23.h3 b8 24.f2 g6 25.eh1 f6 0-1
26.hxg6 fxg6 27.g5 h5 28.h4 df8
29.f1 f7 30.e2 g7 31.g4 f5
32.xf5 xf5 33.e3 a6 34.e1 202 B01
and in this level position a draw was Ferguson,Mark 2380
agreed. ] Matin,Adam 2425
12...g2 13.g3 4NCL Telford 19.01.2003
[ 13.e3 was Anand's choice. ] [Andrew Martin]
13...d5 14.xd5 cxd5 15.d2 d8
16.e2 d6 Due to the position of White's 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 In some ways
Rook Black wins a very important tempo and an awkward move for Black to meet. The
successfully completes development. 17.f3 standard white-squared pawn chain plans are
0-0 18.g5 b6 19.b3 a6 20.g6?! no longer available and he has to change tack.
A hasty move. I've played the f ollowing plan twice now,
[ 20.0-0-0 first should be preferred. ] against GM Rowson and here and have never
20...h4! Probably White underestimated this been entirely happy with my position although
187
the results are OK. In purely chess terms, 39.c4 g5

White delays Nc3 giving priority to Be2 and [ 39...c2! 40.f4 xf4+ 41.xf4 a3
0-0 and then maybe d4 and c2-c4,gaining would have been a nicer way. I didn't even
space and time in the centre. f6 There are see this cute line, concentrating on making
two sharp alternatives: the win as simple as could be. ]
[ 3...g6 4.d4 h6!? Of course Black doesn't 40.f4 c2 41.fxg5 d1 42.f4 a3 43.g6
have to play this m ove, bu t t he ide a o f [ 43.c8+ g7 44.g6 hxg6 45.h6+
pressurising d4 is without doubt interesting. h7-+ ]
5.c3 d8 6.f4 f5 ] 43...hxg6 44.c8+ g7 3 Nf3 is less
[ 3...g4 4.e2 f6 5.0-0 c6!? 6.d4 common than 3 Nc3 but it does restrict
0-0-0 is another dance on a volcano e.g. Black's choice. I will learn the lines with ....
7.c4 h5 8.h3 e5!? ] 0-0-0 and go for that next time.
4.d4 g4 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.f4 0-1
Rowson put his Bishop on e3. Black sticks to
the plan. d8 The Queen was going to get
pushed back anyway. 8.c4 0-0 9.b3 c8 203 B01
10.c3 bd7 11.ad1 a6 A key move, Fernandez Garcia,Jose Luis 2450
preventing Nb5 and planning ... Bd6. Black Karpov,Anatoly 2685
hopes to get ...c7-c5 in one move that is the Country vs. World Advanced, Sant 2003
p o i n t o f h i s p l a y. Fe r gu s o n co m f o r t a b l y [Andrew Martin]
maintains an edge. 12.fe1 e8 13.e5
xe2 14.xe2 xe5 15.dxe5 d7 1.e4 d5 The ultimate seal of approval.
Variations are inapplicable. Black works with Anatoly Karpov plays the Scheming
a 'manageable disadvantage ' As long as he Scandinavian! Same type of pawn structure as
is modest in his ambitions I believe the Black the Caro Kann and not half as much to learn.
position to be def ensible. 16.e4 f8 It's a very practical choice. 2.exd5 xd5
17.g3 g6 Covering g7 18.ed2 d8 3.d4?! A move which is fine as long as you
O r W h i t e d o m i n a t e s . 19.xd8+ xd8 are content with an equal position which of
20.g4 e7 Creating room for ...Qe8 and ... course most W hite players are not. I think
Rd8. 21.g3 e8 22.h4 d8 23.h5 xd1+ Fernandez Garcia has been genuinely
24.xd1 f8 25.g4 d8= I was happier surprised by Karpov's choice of opening and is
no w. W it h rat io n al e xch an ge s B la ck h a s in rather a hurry to get away from established
minimised any disadvantage and the next task main lines. e5! The best move, guaranteeing
was to get rid of the powerful Knight on e4.. an excellent position for Black. 4.f3
26.h2 [ 4.dxe5?! A horrible move which, if you are
[ 26.f4 d4? ( 26...d7! 27.h6 g6 as skilled as Movsesian, you can just about
28.d1 c6= ) 27.g5! idea ...Nf6+! ] get away with. Others should shun 4 dxe5
26...d7 27.h6 g6 28.f4 c5! because it just allows Black to obtain a very
Now a curious thing happened. W hite active position. xd1+ 5.xd1 c6 6.f4
continued to believe that he was better. That c5 7.f3 ge7 8.bd2 g4 9.g3
cannot be so once Knights are exchanged. 0-0-0 10.d3 f5 11.h3 Already White is
Back rank tricks and possible Queen ending scrambling f or equality. xg3 12.fxg3
squeezes are counterbalanced by the poor xf3+ 13.xf3 he8 14.d2 xe5
white bishop. 29.xc5 xc5 30.f3? 15.xe5 xe5 1/2-1/2 Movsesian, S-
[ 30.e3 xe3 31.fxe3 c5 32.b3 f8 Istratescu, A/National I, Clermont-Ferrand
is slightly better for Black but I think White FRA 2003 (15) ]
should draw. ] [ 4.c3!? Perhaps the best try although
30...d4! Overlooked completely. The tables objectively Black is comfortable.
turn. 31.g3 xb2 32.f6 f8 33.d8 A) 4...xd4 5.xd4 exd4 6.b5 b4+
c1! 34.xc7 xh6+ 35.g1 c1+ 7.d2 xd2+ 8.xd2 a6 ( 8...d8
36.h2 b5-+ 37.c6 bxc4 38.xa6 c3 9.xd4 f6 10.e1 e8= ) 9.e1+ e7
188
10.xd4; 204 B01

B) 4...b4 5.f3 g4 6.e2 exd4 Filipovic,Branko 2412
( I like 6...e4 7.e5 xe2 here. ) 7.0-0 Furrer,Marc 2163
xc3 8.bxc3 f6 9.h3 h5 10.a3 8th Hilton Schachfestival (3) 03.01.2006
bd7 11.cxd4 a5 12.d3 0-0-0 [Eric Prié]
13.ab1 Vasquez Ramirez, R-Ruiz
Jimenez, F Havana 2003 ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
4...c6 5.c3 b4 6.d2 xc3 7.xc3 e4 f6 5.f3 c6 Last year I wrote: "I took up
8.e5 xe5 9.dxe5 e7 10.xd5 xd5= t h e S c a n d i n a vi a n i n 1 9 9 1 . I m e a n T H E
With effortless equality for Black, although Scandinavian, the real one and only with 3...
winning this position against the Two Bishops Qa5, not the feeble 'substitutes' of 2...Nf6 nor
i s q u i t e a n o t h e r m a t t e r . 11.d4 b4 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 or 3...Qd6 that I will talk
Black's active play and ease of development about (if I am given the chance to comment
combat the Bishops. 12.b5+ c6 13.a4 Topalov-Kamsky Corus 2005 [1-0 in 20
There was no better way to defend c2. e6 moves] in the next update!) where White can
With the idea of ...b7-b5. 14.a3 d5 15.c3 either make immediate use of his c-pawn or
[ I prefer 15.0-0-0 f4 16.g3 although hinder the successful development of Black's
W hite has nothing there too. The game light-squared bishop outside his pawn chain.
move seems to voluntarily weaken the d3 Unfortunately, I had to give up this aggressive
square. ] system, with which I and Etienne Bacrot, who
15...f4! 16.c2 xg2+ 17.d2 f5 was my pupil at the time, had tremendous
18.hg1 f4 19.ae1 results, quite soon, when the ultimate
[ 19.xg7 g6 leaves the Rook refutation started to spread." Here it is: 6.d2!
embarrassed. ] a6 Parrying the lethal threat of Nc3-b5, c2-c4-
19...e6 20.xe4 xe4 21.xe4 0-0-0 c5 which once again highlights the delicate
22.c2 b6 23.e3 d7! If White could positioning of the black queen in connection
arrange to play f4-f5, he might be able to put with the move ... Nb8-c6. Still, such a move
Black under pressure, but the Knight on e6 is can only represent a makeshift, waiting for
so strong and that advance can be easily better days when White does not play 6.Bd2
parried by ...g7-g6. 24.h4 d5 25.f4 g6 (6.Bb5 Ne4! for instance in my dated
26.h3 g7 Completing the picture. Black Encyclopaedia B...)
has a better pawn structure and a superior [ For 6...g4 10 See game ]
m in o r p ie c e . B u t if W h it e is vigila n t , it ' s 7.c4 Threatening Nd5, trapping the Black
difficult to see Karpov winning. 27.f2 hd8 queen which is the main feature of the
Black is in a hurry to take the d file lest White p r e v i o u s g a m e s o n t h e 5 . B d 2 l i n e . h5
exchanges a pair of Rooks to ease the For other queen's moves, 7...Qb4, 7... Qb6,
defence. 7...Qf5 and the Pseudo-sacrifice 7...Nxd4 8.
[ 27...h5 28.d3 hd8 29.xd5 xd5 N x d 4 Q c 5 s e e t h e n e x t g a m e . 8.e5!
30.c4= ] Alas, the white initiative will not abate in spite
28.xh7! d2+ 29.b3 e6 30.e3 e2 o f t h e e x c h a n g e o f q u e e n s . xe5?
31.c1! Holding. d7 32.h4 f2 33.h5 More tenacious is
gxh5 34.xh5 xf4 35.xf4= [ 8...xd1+ 9.xd1 e6 is relatively best as
Not an especially memorable game but clear p o in t e d o u t b y G M C u rt Ha n se n i n h i s
evidence that the line with 3 d4 is not to be ChessBase CD on the Scandinavian.
feared. Unfortunately practice lacks relevant
½-½ e x a m p l e s . P l a y m a y c o n t i n u e ( 9...d8
10.0-0 Then the Nd8 is as badly placed as
on h5 but at least it is not threatened with
b e i n g l o s t !) 10.xc6 bxc6 11.a4!
The obligatory move before the optional one,
like castling kingside. The knight is very well
189
placed on this square as Hansen mentions 14.b6 b8 15.e6!! xe6

as well in his general comments about the [ 15...xe6 16.c3 f6 ( 16...g8 17.e5;
position. It eyes c5 and b2 with the idea a5 16...g7 17.xe6 xc3 18.xc8 a5
12.d3! a6 13.c4 d5 14.b3 b6 19.d7+ f8 20.c4 ) 17.xc8 xc8
( 14...b4 15.b1 Threatening a2-a3.) 18.xe6 ]
15.c5 xc5 16.dxc5 d7 17.e3! 16.f4 d8
Black can play more subtly, however, with a [ 16...xc4 17.xb8 e6 18.c7 f6
timely ...Nd7, then White should be ready to 19.d8+ f7 20.b8+- ]
meet ...Nb6 with Nc5 implying a previous b2- 17.xd8+ xd8 18.d1+ e8 19.a8!
b3 to keep the a4-square under control or d7
Bc4-b3 protecting a4 with c6 as a target. It [ 19...f6 20.c7+ f7 21.xe6 xe6
is also good when White prevents the black 22.e1 ]
c-pawns from undoubling with Be3. In any 20.c7+ d8 21.xf7 g5 22.e5 c8
c a s e t h e e n d i n g r e m a i n s d i s s u a s i ve l y 23.a8! The postman always rings twice!
superior for White as in Spassky-Prie ] 1-0
9.xh5 xh5 A new idea that should
backfire like
[ 9...d3+ 10.cxd3!? Safer is ( 10.xd3 205 B01
xh5 11.d5 ) 10...xh5 11.d5 d8 Fischer,Robert James
12.c1 Robatsch,Karl
A) 12...e6! 13.xc7 b8! Now Black olm Varna 1962
will be able to parry the a5 check with ... [Alexander Volzhin]
b7-b6. ( 13...xc7 14.xe6+ d8
15.a5+ e7 16.xc8 ); This line was known not to be very good but it
B) 12...g6? 13.b3 f5 ( 13...c6 has received a certain amount of attention
14.a5+ d7 15.b6+ ) 14.xc7 recently and from time to time it occurs even
1-0 Ernst, T-Einvik, G Gausdal 1995 ] at the very highest level, mainly in Michael
10.dxe5 c6 The threat of Nd5 has to be Adam s' games. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
circumvented and since this is not possible 3.c3 d8 4.d4 The initial position of the
with variation. Now Black has two different plans.
[ 10...e6 because of 11.g4 ] One possibility is the fianchetto of his dark-
11.0-0-0 g6 12.h3 The position was already squared Bishop, and another is to play the
ripe for a frontal assault leading to the win of light-squared Bishop to f5 and the arising
a pawn at least: position looks like a typical Caro Kann. g6
[ 12.a4! b5 ( 12...f5 13.c5 b5 14.e2 5.f4! Although this game was played almost
g7 15.f3 c8 16.xa6 ) 13.b6 b8 40 years ago Fischer's plan is considered as
14.e2! e6 ( 14...xb6 15.a5 f4 the best nowadays. The idea of this move
16.f3 d5 17.xd5 ) 15.e3 g7 16.f3 (followed by 6 .Qd2) is to prevent Black's
( 16.g4 f4 ) 16...xe5 17.xc6+ f8 Knight manoeuvre to f5-square via h6.
18.d7+ xd7 19.xd7 f4 20.a7 [ Another possible plan is 5.c4 g7 6.f3
xe3+ ( 20...b6 21.b7 a5 22.f3 a4 aiming for a small but steady advantage,
23.e1 ) 21.fxe3 b6 22.b7 a5 23.f3 but recent practice proves Black has good
a4 24.d1 f6 25.d8+ g7 26.xh8 cha nces o f equa lising: h6 7.xh6!?
xh8 27.xe7+- ] ( The alternatives are: 7.e4 f5 8.c3 0-0
12...h6? Black overdoes it a bit... 9.0-0 d7 10.f4 d6 11.d3
[ 12...g7 13.a4 e6 ] Kaminski-Kiedrowicz, Bielsko-Biala 1991.;
13.a4 g7 7.g5 f5 8.0-0 0-0 9.e1 h6 10.f4 c6
[ 13...b5 14.b6 b8 15.xc8 ( 15.e2! ) 11.e5 Arakhamia-Petrovic, Tuzla 1987,
15...xc8 16.b3 ( 16.e2 g7 ) 16...e6 with a tiny edge in both cases.) 7...xh6
( 16...g7 17.e3 f5 18.e6! ) 17.g4 g7 8.e5 0-0 9.0-0 d7 10.e2 b6
18.e3 ] 11.ad1 xc4 12.xc4 f5 13.b3 b8
190
and Black has little to worry about, on the g-file. e6 15.dg1 h8
Tiviakov-Galliamova, Elista 1998. ] [ Or 15...f8 16.xg7+ xg7 17.h6 g4
5...g7 18.xh7 and White wins. ]
[ the immediate 5...h6 is not good in view 16.xg7+ xg7 17.h6 g8
of 6.e5! f6 7.f4 , weakening Black's K- [ 17...e6 18.f4! ]
side. ] 18.g5 d8
6.d2! [ 18...f5 i s a l s o b a d : 19.xg8+ xg8
[ T e m p t i n g i s 6.b5 as was played in 20.f8 , Rg1 to follow. ]
Bronstein-Kholmov, Tbilisi 1959 is harmless: 19.hg1 f5? A blunder but Black's position
a6 7.f3 f6 8.c4 c6 9.c3 g4 is lost anyway. 20.xf5 Bobby Fischer at his
10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 d7 12.e3 e5 13.d5 best!
c5 14.e1 xe2 15.xe2 f5 and in this 1-0
complicated position Black's chances are by
no means bad. ]
6...f6 206 B01
[ It's not good for Black to take the d4-pawn: Fressinet,Laurent 2673
6...xd4 7.xd4 xd4 8.b5 b6 Bauer,Christian 2583
9.xc7+ xc7 10.xc7 and the endgame 83rd ch-FRA Pau FRA (2) 12.08.2008
clearly favors White ] [John Watson]
[ 6...xd4? 7.0-0-0 c6 8.b5 d7
9.d5! e5 10.f3 and Black can't avoid 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 c6
gross material losses. ] A very unusual move order in conjunction with
7.0-0-0 c6 8.h6 0-0? This natural looking Black's next move. 5.f3 g4!?
move is indeed the decisive mistake! [ 5...f6 transposes to the main ...Qd6/...c6
[ 8...xh6 9.xh6 f5 intending to castle Q- line. ]
s id e s h o u ld b e p la ye d , a lt h o u gh in m y 6.e3
opinion White is clearly better here. ] [ After 6.h3 , perhaps Black was planning to
9.h4! Exploiting Black's mistake White starts a grab the pawn following xf3 ( 6...h5
K-side attack without delay. a5 10.h5! 7.g4!? g6 8.e5 would be interesting, e.g.
gxh5 The only move. , d7 9.c4!? c7 10.f3 ) 7.xf3
[ Black can't allow the opening of the h-file: xd4!? , following a game Andrew Martin
10...d8 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.xg7 xg7 cited: ( 7...f6 8.e3 e6 9.0-0-0
13.h6+ g8 14.f3 15 and Black can't has appeared in a couple of games - see
parry the threat of Ng5 ] Vorobiov-Hasangatin 2006 in the Archives.)
[ 10...xh5 is also insufficient: 11.e2 f6 8.e3 d8 9.d3!? ( probably 9.d1
12.xg7 xg7 13.h6+ g8 14.g4! is m o r e d a n g e r o u s f o r B la ck a f t e r a5
and White wins by force: d8 15.g5 h5 10.c4 f6 11.0-0 ) 9...d7 10.0-0-0
16.xh5 gxh5 17.xh5 f5 ( or 17...f5 gf6 11.g4!? ( 11.b1 e6 12.g3 )
18.g6! ) 18.g6! xg6 19.g5 winning the 11...e6 12.d4 a5 13.b1 c5! 14.xf6
Queen. ] xf6 15.g5 d7 16.xh7 e5
11.d3! bd7 Grabaczyk - Cicak, Oberliga Ost 2001. ]
[ It would be very good for Black to transfer 6...f6 7.h3 h5
his light-squared Bishop to the g6-square [ 7...xf3 8.xf3 e6 is a standard structure
but White's last move made this manoeuvre that arises f rom m any openings. W hit e
impossible: 11...f5? 12.g5 ] probably has the advantage because Black's
12.ge2 d8 13.g4! The decisive pieces aren't developed or coordinating
breakthrough. Now White's attack becomes ideally. ]
unstoppable. f8 8.g4 g6 9.e5 This is all normal-looking
[ Black can't accept the sacrifice in view of except for W hite's bishop on e3, which is a
13...xg4 14.dg1! with decisive threats. ] little passively-placed to have used up a
14.gxh5 Now Black is helpless against threats tempo on. Still, W hite will try to make
191
something of his space. bd7 10.xg6 [ Only White can win a position like 39.xf6
[ A very important idea in these positions is xf6 40.f4 d7 41.c4 ]
10.f4!? . Then e6 ( 10...d5? 11.c4! 39...d7 40.f4 g7 41.g4 f6 42.f4
and f5 follows) 11.g2 has ideas of Qe2 A bit odd, since W hite risks nothing by
and h4 o r 0-0-0 . Compa re this month's continuing.
Amin-Sengupta game. ( 11.h4 d5 )] ½-½
10...hxg6 11.f3 e6 12.0-0-0 c7
White has two bishops, but this pawn structure
is theoretically suited for restraining W hite 207 B01
pawn moves that might activate them. For all Fressinet,Laurent 2676
that, I think that White's space gives him the Feygin,Michail 2569
a d v a n t a g e . 13.b1 b4 14.e4 xe4 Bundesliga 2008-9 (7) 28.11.2008
15.xe4 f6 16.f3 d5 17.c1 b5! [John Watson]
W e ' ve s e e n t h is i d e a in t h e C a r o - K a n n :
prevention of c4 takes precedence. 18.h4! 3...Qd6 has taken over from 3...Qa5 in
[ 18.c4?! bxc4 19.xc4 b8 ] practice at the top levels of play. 1.e4 d5
18...0-0-0!? Daring, because it risks attack 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3
down the c-file. Other ideas would be c6 6.e3 This apparently passive move is
[ 18...e7 and ] actually rather hard to contend with. 6 Ne5
[ 18...d6 ] and 6 g3 are more common. g4 7.h3
19.h5 xf3?! In this position, because White has
[ More ambitious is 19.c4! bxc4 20.xc4 played Be3, it seems undesirable to bring
. Rd3-b3 and a transfer of the h1 rook to c1 White's queen to f3 while ceding the bishop
would be more pointed. ] pair, because 0-0-0 can come so quickly. It
19...gxh5 20.gxh5 e7!? 21.c4 f6! seems to me that
22.g2 bxc4 23.xc4 e7 Versus Bg5, but [ 7...h5 is better, with a typical continuation
also in order not to lose time on the along the lines of
queenside after, say, Rh3-b3. 24.h3 g5 A) in an earlier update I showed Fressinet-
25.f3!? Bauer, Pau 2008: 8.g4 g6 9.e5 bd7
[ 25.e4 g7 26.dd3 with the idea Rb3 is 10.xg6 ( I think that 10.f4 deserves
one setup. W hite's next few moves don't strong consideration, as explained there)
seem to do anything. ] 10...hxg6 11.f3 e6 12.0-0-0 c7
25...g7 26.f1?! b6 27.b3 b7! 28.a4 W hite has two bishops, but it's not as
g4?! much as he gets in our game, primarily
[ Black would be well on top after 28...xh5! due to the open h-file.;
with the idea 29.a5 g4! ] B) 8.e2 e6 9.d2 c7 (so as to
29.h6! xh6?! Perhaps not objectively best, answer Bf4 by ...Bd6) 10.0-0-0 bd7
but Black wants to fight for the initiative in ( 10...b4!? ) 11.b1 d6 12.he1 0-0-0
what is probably approaching time trouble. and White's edge is nominal. ]
30.xh6 xh6 31.g3 8.xf3 bd7
[ 31.xf7?? g6+ ] [ 8...e6 is a standard structure that arises
31...f4 32.e2 xd4 33.xd4 xd4 from many openings. W hite probably has
34.xg4 White stands better, but he has th e ad va nt a ge b e cau se B la ck's pie c e s
some weaknesses to give Black hope. f6 aren't developed or coordinating ideally.
35.a2 c5 36.f3 a5 37.d2 b4 9.0-0-0 has appeared in a couple of games -
38.f4?! see Vorobiov-Hasangatin 2006 in the
[ 38.xb4! axb4 39.xb4 gives White a Archives. ]
good attack: c7! 40.a5 d7 41.a6 g5 9.0-0-0 e6 10.b1
42.a7 d8 43.c2! a8 44.a4 [ 10.f4 b4 11.c7! cuts the queen off
and Black remains tied up. ] then c8 12.a3 e7 13.e5 d8
38...e7! 39.e4!? 14.g3! must be in White's favour. ]
192
10...c7 11.g4! A major decision. White 208 B01

prevents 11...0-0-0 because of 12 g5 and Friedel,Joshua E 2551
Qxf7, while gaining space. On the whole, this Pechenkin,V 2372
seems to count for more than the fact that g4 4th Int Edmonton CAN (8) 21.12.2009
is weakening. d5!? [Neil McDonald]
[ 11...h6 12.h4 0-0-0 13.d3! ]
[ 11...e7 lo o ks b e st t h e n 12.d3 0-0 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6
13.g5!? d5 14.xd5 ( 14.e4 c5 ) 5.c4 b6 6.c5 d5 7.c4 c6 8.0-0 g7
14...cxd5 15.h4 b6 16.h5 g6 17.e2 9.e1 0-0 10.c3 As you can see in the
c4 18.h5 with the idea of Rh4 and Rdh1 archives, Black is really labouring to stay alive
gives some attacking chances. ] in this variation. His next move makes matters
12.c1 even worse. b6? This game demonstrates in
[ 12.xd5! cxd5 13.c1! and 14 c4 would startling fashion why Black usually chooses to
exploit Black's last move. ] prevent White's next move with
12...xc3+ 13.xc3 d6 14.f3 f6? [ 10...h6 ]
[ 14...0-0 is relatively solid. White might 11.g5 e6 The natural way to defend d5
r e s p o n d w i t h 15.h4 ( 15.d3 c5?! and meet the threat to e7, but rather
16.xh7+ xh7 17.d3+ g8 18.dxc5 surprisingly it allows a combination. 12.xd5
will win a pawn. 15...Rac8 is better) 15...e5 cxd5 13.xe7! xe7 14.xd5 c6
16.h5 exd4 17.h6 g6 18.xd4 ] [ After 14...a6 15.xa8 xa8 16.d5 d8
15.g5 g8?! Black wants to stay in touch 17.e2 xd5 18.xa6 xc5 19.e2
with f7 so as to castle queenside, but he can't Black's two bishops aren't enough for the
easily achieve that, so exchange. ]
[ 15...d7 16.h4 f8 17.h5 0-0-0 15.xc6 ac8?
might improve. Nevertheless, White has a [ A better chance is 15...ad8 to attack the
clear advantage after 18.h6 g6 19.f6 g8 d4 pawn, when White still has a far amount
20.d3! b8 21.c4 ] o f wo r k t o d o t o c la im t h e win , t h o u g h
16.c4 d7 A very bad sign. 16.cxb6 axb6 17.a4 d6 18.ad1
[ After 16...0-0-0 17.c5 f8 18.c4 etc. should do the trick. ]
, Black can't develop. ] 16.d5 bxc5 17.b3
17.d5! [ Even stronger was 17.a4 so that if c7
[ Or 17.h4 wit h t h e id e a e7 18.d3 18.ad1 intending 19.dxe6 Qxc6 20.Qxc6
and h5. ] Rxc6 21.e7 Re8 22.Rd8 when the passed
17...cxd5 pawn gets through. f5 19.g4 and wins. ]
[ 17...exd5 18.cxd5 e7 19.dxc6 bxc6 17...d6
20.c4 0-0 21.d2 and White's bishops [ Black could have muddled on with 17...b8
are asserting themselves. ] 18.e3 d6 ]
18.cxd5 e5 19.h4! e7 20.h3 a4 21.h5 18.dxe6 xc6 19.g5 fxe6 20.xe6 d7
0-0? But Black had serious problems anyway, 21.c6+ h8 22.f7+ xf7 23.xf7 xc6
for example, 24.xa7 xb2 25.b1 d4 26.h1 xf2
[ 21...d8 22.he1 0-0 23.h6 gxh6 27.e7
24.gxh6 f5 25.g5 ] 1-0
22.h6 Suddenly the position is resignable.
gxh6 23.f5! g6 24.h3! fd8 25.xh6
f8
[ 25...f8 26.xh7+ xh7 27.xh7+ f8
28.f5! e7 29.g6! is the end. ]
1-0
193
209 B01 20.bxc7 c8 21.xb2 xc7 22.g3 g7

Frolov,Denis 2330 23.g2 with a small advantage in the game
Vshivkov,Konstantin Smirin - Preissmann, Geneva 1992 ]
Perm 1997 15...c2
[Alexander Volzhin] [ 15...gxh5 does not solve all Black's
problems 16.xf8 xf8 17.c5 6d7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6 18.bxc3 a5 19.d5 a6 20.xh5 f6
5.c3 e5!? 6.f3 g4 7.e2 xf3 8.xf3 21.f5 f7 22.b1 with an advantage in
exd4 9.0-0!? Starting interesting the game Frolov - Sivokho, St. Petersburg
complications. 1995. ]
[ After 9.b5 b4+ 10.d2 xd2+ 16.c1 gxh5 17.xf8 xf8 18.xc2 c6
11.xd2 c6 12.xd4 xc4 13.e2+ e7 19.d2
14.0-0-0 xe2 15.xe2 White had [ 19.b3 was tried in the game Groszpeter -
achieved a small advantage in the endgame W a d s a c k , O b e r w a r t 1 9 9 6 : d8
in Peptan - Casagrande, Biel 1996 ] ( 19...e8!? ) 20.h3 d4 21.c3 d7?!
9...dxc3 ( 21...e8 ) 22.e5 f7 23.ce3 d7
[ 9...c6 trying to complete his development 24.xh5 with real winning chances. ]
safely also comes into consideration, the 19...e8 20.xe8+ xe8 21.b3 Two knights
game Bochinski - Klawa, Germany 1993 are not bad against a rook in such endgames
continued with 10.e1+ e7 11.g5 c8 but of course W hite has some winning
12.b5 0-0 13.xe7 xe7 14.xd4 xd4 chances. e7 22.f3 d7 23.f2 d8
15.xd4 g6 16.f5 and Black's life is not 24.d5 f6 25.e5+ d6 26.g5 e6
so easy in this endgame. ] 27.f5 e7 28.a5 a6 29.b4 c6 30.b5
10.e1+ e7 11.g5! axb5 31.cxb5 c5 32.a7 c4? Too risky.
[ Sacrificing the knight. White of course was W as Black really hoping to promote his c-
n o t g o i n g t o p l a y 11.xd8+? xd8 pawn? Now the White passed pawns are very
12.xb7 after 8d7 13.xa8 xa8 dangerous.
14.bxc3 f6 15.d1 c8 with a big [ 32...d8 was good enough to hold the
advantage for Black as in the game Kaps - balance: 33.a4 c4 34.a5 c3 35.e3
Calota, Rimavska Sobota 1996 ] d5+ 36.d3 d6 and the position looks
11...f6 12.h5+ g6 13.xf6 0-0 drawish. ]
[ 13...f7? was losing by force: 14.xe7+! 33.xb7+ d6 34.b6+ d5 35.e3
xf6 15.f3+ xe7 16.e1+ [ 35.c6!? deserves attention: e8 36.c8
A) 16...d7 17.g4+ d6 18.e6+ d7 d6 37.b6! c5 38.c7 c3 ( 38...e6
( 18...c5 19.e3+ d4 20.e5+ ) 39.b7 ) 39.e2 c4 40.b7 but Black is still
19.xb6+ e8 20.e6+ e7 21.f6 fighting after c2!? ( 40...xb7 41.d3 )
winning; 41.b8 c1 42.g8+ d4 43.d8+ c3
B) 16...d6 17.d3+ ( 17.c5+ 44.f6+ b4 a l t h o u g h a f t e r 45.d4
is good enough as well: xc5 18.xc3+ White has real winning chances. ]
c4 19.e5+ d5 20.b4+ c6 35...e5 36.c6 d5+ 37.d2 c3+
21.xd5 xd5 22.f3+ etc. ) 17...c6 38.xc3 Forced. xc3 39.xc3
18.f3+ d5 19.xd5+ b6 20.c5+ The position looks completely winning for
a5 21.e4 winning ] White but Black has an important resource. h4
14.xe7 40.d2?!
[ Of course not 14.xe7? xd1+ 15.xd1 [ 40.c4 looks more logical: d6 ( 40...h3
xf6 winning ] 41.gxh3 g5 42.f4+ xf4 43.d5 ) 41.a4
14...xd1 15.axd1 and now after h3 42.gxh3 g5 White is
[ This position had already been played a not losing the f-pawn as in the game. 43.f4 ]
c o u p l e o f t i m e s b e f o r e , 15.xd1 40...h3 41.gxh3 d4 42.b6 xf3+ 43.d3
is also worth considering: cxb2 16.b1 e8 d6 44.e3 e5 45.f4 d7 46.b7 e6
17.c5 c6 18.cxb6 xe7 19.xe7 xe7 47.g5 e5
194
[ And a draw was agreed as taking the h- get even that! So why does Glek choose this
pawn is not enough to win the game: line? I think he is confident about his
47...e5 48.h6 f6 49.xh7 technique and of course it is not THAT easy
as the White king is locked up on the edge for White. The type of small edge that White
o f t h e b o a rd a n d t h e kn ig h t ca n e a sil y is getting could easily dissipate. 7.b4!?N
neutralise the passed pawns: f7 50.a4 [ 7.c4 has been most common: f6 8.0-0
b8 51.h4 a6 52.h6 f6= ] e6 9.d3 d5 ( 9...d6 10.e4 xe4
½-½ 11.dxe4 d7 12.e2 c7 13.e3 h2+
14.h1 f4 15.ad1 0-0-0= Karatorossian,
D-Sulskis, S/Linares 2000; 9...e7 10.e1
210 B01 bd7 11.g5 c8 12.a4 a5 13.ad1 0-0
Gabrielian,Artur 2520 14.d4 Jonasson, R-Kurucz, L/Balaton
Glek,Igor V 2560 1996 ) 10.e4 e7 11.e1 0-0 12.e3
Geller Mem Moscow RUS (7) 08.05.2006 d7 13.d4 5f6 14.c3 xe4 15.xe4
[Andrew Martin] c7 16.g4 f6 17.d4 ae8 18.ae1
h8 19.1e3 c5 20.g3 g6 21.f4 h5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.f3 Vazquez Gonzalez, J-Borrajo, A/Orense
W ith this particular move-order, W hite is 1997 22.f3 ]
trying to blunt the variations with...Bc8-f5. If 7...a6 8.b1 f6 9.a4 Very interesting play!
Black plays that move, White responds with Quite often the pawn lever b4-b5 is
Bc4 and d2-d3! and the light-squared Bishop accompanied by a fianchetto of White's King
'bites on granite' I personally don't think this Bishop here White is using his Queen to add
matters a great deal Black is solid anyway, fuel to the fire. Gabriellan's plan is logical,
but here we see that Glek is intimidated and attacking c6 and b7. Yet White's insistence on
enters a somewhat simplistic sideline which a ' different' type of game gives Black extra
all the way along the line is a little better for winning chances too and enables Glek to
White. come to lif e from his currently rather dull
[ 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 This is how he likes position. e6 10.b5 c7
to play it . ( I prefer 5...c6! a more flexible [ 10...axb5 11.axb5 e7 is OK for Black
try. ) 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 c6 8.e3 e6 9.d3 according to Deep Fritz, but the machine
bd7 10.0-0 d6 11.ad1 0-0 12.e4 doesn't seem to understand that W hite is
xe4 13.xe4 g6 14.c4 e8 15.f3 h4 just massively better after 12.bxc6! ]
16.fe1 e5 17.g4 ( 17.c5 exd4 18.cxd6 11.d3! bd7 12.e4 In my view, White's
dxe3 19.xe3 b4 ) 17...xg4 18.hxg4 o p e n i n g p l a y i n t h i s g a m e i s e xt r e m e l y
exd4 19.xd4 e5 20.xe5 xe5 original. e5
1/2-1/2 Khruschiov, A-Glek, I/Moscow RUS [ 12...xe4 13.xe4 conforms to the main
2006/ ] theme. ]
4...g4 [ but Glek could have considered capturing
[ 4...f6 5.c4 c6 is the flexible choice o n b 5 f i r s t : 12...axb5 13.axb5 e5
again. ] 14.xf6+ gxf6 15.xf6 xd3+ 16.cxd3
5.h3 g8 17.0-0 cxb5 18.b2 ( 18.a1 a4! )
[ 5.c4 e6 6.0-0 f6 7.d4 c6 8.e3 e7 18...c6 19.g3 c5 20.e5 ]
9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 0-0 11.g3 d6 12.f4 13.xf6+ gxf6 14.xf6
d5 13.xd5 cxd5 14.d3 d7 15.f3 [ 14.g3 xd3+ 15.xd3 e5+ 16.e3
g6 16.f5 h4 17.f2 f4 18.xf4 xf4 d5! ]
19.fxe6 fxe6 Ladron de Guevara Bravo, P- 14...xd3+ 15.cxd3 g8 16.bxa6 xa6
Martinez Garret, J/Malaga 2005 20.ae1 ] 17.0-0 a5!
5...xf3 6.xf3 c6 This is clearly an option [ A small edge could be gained by 17...xa4
for Black, but not very exciting! After ceding 18.d4 g6 19.h4 h6 ]
the two Bishops, all that Black can hope for 18.h1 ag5 Changing gears! 19.g1 d6
now is long-term equality and a struggle to The worm has well and truly turned and with
195
the threat of ...Bh2, Black is on top! 20.f3 20.xh5 f5 21.dh1 f6 22.xh8 xh8
[ 20.g3 f5 is of course, lost for White. ] 23.xh8+ xh8 24.d2 d8 25.c3 g7
20...h2! 21.e1 26.f4 d5 27.c1 h8 28.g4 h3
[ I don't hold any great hope out for 29.gxf5 xf5+ 30.c2 1/2-1/2 Kravtsiv, M
Gabriellan after 21.xb7 but it would have (2527)-Tomczak, J (2447)/Lublin POL
been better than the game. xb7 22.xh2 2009. White could play on. ]
f5 23.e3 b3! ] [ b) 10.e2 xc2 is critical and apparently
21...xg2 22.xg2 xg2 23.xg2 d6 safe enough for Black if he knows what he's
24.e4 e7 25.f1 f5 26.c4 f7 27.a5 d o i n g , e . g . , 11.c1 g6 12.0-0 e7
c5 28.a3 The game comes to an abrupt 13.fe1 0-0 14.h4 e8 15.xg6 hxg6
end courtesy of the clock. We should discard 16.xe6 fxe6 ( 16...f8 17.d3 fxe6
the latter stages an d con centrate o n th e 18.xg6+ g7 19.h6 e7 20.xe6
opening though. Solid, but passive is my ends in a draw in the main line) 17.xe6+
overall impression of Black's system. g7 18.c3 d7! with equal chances,
0-1 Zhang-Nisipeanu, Cap d'Agde (rapid)
2000. ]
[ c) 10.c3 d7 ( versus 10...c7
211 B01 , we've looked at the interesting 11.h4
Gashimov,Vugar 2740 g6 12.f3 d7 13.h3! , threatening
Hamdouchi,Hicham 2590 Nxg6, when White might get a small edge if
Galicia Festival Blitz blitz (4) 26.09.2009 b o t h s id e s p la y a c cu ra t e ly.) 11.0-0
[John Watson] ( Emms suggests 11.h4 g6 12.e2
c7 13.0-0-0 ) 11...c7 12.h4 g6
Gashimov is a leading grandmaster, and even 13.e1 ( 13.f3!? ) 13...0-0-0 14.e2 d6
his Blitz games can be instructive. Here's a 15.g3 f5!? 16.g2 is the Archive game
short listing of recent ideas in a critical line. Zhigalko, S (2 592 )-T omczak, J (24 61),
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 Warsaw POL 2008. ]
f6 5.f3 f5 6.c4 c6 7.d2 e6 8.d5 10...g8?!
Houska devotes 28 pages(!) of her new book [ 10...d7! is Houska's recommendation.
to this move, in a chapter 'The Main Line: S h e wa n t s t o ca st le f irst a n d t h e n 'ge t
Shirov's 8 Nd5'. d8 9.xf6+ gxf6 10.0-0 some action' along the g-file. I still prefer
Here are the main lines, with a couple of my White, however. ]
previously Archived games as examples, and 11.e1 g4
a few of Houska's notes: [ White also gets space and the bishops
[ a) 10.b3 d7 11.e2 c7 12.h4 g6 following 11...d7 12.h4 g6 13.xg6
, when the Archives give the f ollowing: hxg6 14.e2 ]
13.0-0-0 ( 13.f4 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 f5 15.g3 12.h1 d6
b8 16.c4 f6 17.xg6 hxg6 was about [ 12...xf3? 13.xf3 xd4 14.b3!
equal in Socko-D Schwarz, Warsaw 2008.) hits b7 and e6. ]
13...0-0-0 14.g3 13.b4!? Stopping ...c5 and preparing b5.
A) 14...d6 15.b1 ( 15.xg6 hxg6 [ 13.h3 h5 14.c3 is a solid alternative. ]
16.h4 b8 17.c3 c8 18.b1 c5 13...d7
19.dxc5 xc5 20.c2 looks to be slightly [ 13...xf3 14.xf3 xd4 15.e2 e5
in White's favour (h5 can follow), Grover- 16.d3 h5 17.b3! threatens Bxe6. ]
Almond, Hastings ENG 2008) 15...he8 14.b5 cxb5 15.xb5 0-0-0
16.xg6 hxg6 17.h4 f5 18.g5!? [ 15...d5 16.e2 xf3 17.xf3 xd4
( 18.h5 ) 18...e7 19.f4 d6 20.g5 18.b1! b8 19.e2 b5 20.h5!
e7 21.f4 d6 1/2-1/2 Bittencourt- threatens Qxe6+, and e5 21.xb5 c8
Vescovi, Porto Alegre BRA 2008.; 22.c3 doesn't help. ]
B) 14...b8 15.b1 a8 16.xg6 hxg6 16.b1 d5 17.f4 xf3 18.gxf3 b6
17.h4 h6 18.c3 g7 19.h5 gxh5 19.c3 d6 20.g3 h5 21.f4 d5+
196
22.g1 xf4 23.c4 xd4 White's attack [ 9.c4 cxd5 10.dxe5 b4+ 11.d2 e6
isn't good enough, and Black should 12.0-0-0 probably the former is the most
consolidate, but tragedy strikes: 24.f3 xg3 promising. ]
25.hxg3 c5 9...d3+ 10.xd3 xf4 11.d5!? cxd5?
[ 25...f5 ] [ (a) Black could have gone for the pawn
26.a4 d7 grab 11...b4+ 12.c3 xb2 , but White
[ 26...h5 27.a5 h4! ] ha s co mp en sa tion , f o r exam ple , 13.d1
27.a6 b6?? 28.xb7# ( 13.b1?! xa2 14.dxc6?! bxc6 15.d1
1-0 a5 16.e2 c7 ) 13...d7 ( 13...b6
14.c4 c7 15.e4! e6 16.d6 b8
17.e2 and Black has no play.) 14.c4!
212 B01 xa2 15.e5 with a convincing attack.
Gashimov,Vugar 2664 Then perhaps best is c5 16.xd7 xd7
Tiviakov,Sergei 2643 17.b5+ c7 18.xc5+ d8 , but any
50th It Reggio Emilia ITA (7) 04.01.2008 d e v e l o p i n g m u c h s u c h a s 19.d3
[John Watson] yields the advantage. ]
[ (b) 11...d7 12.0-0-0 e6 deserves
Tiviakov suffered two recent losses with 1...d5. attention. ]
Maybe he should go back to the Accelerated 12.xd5 e6?
Dragon! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 [ 12...a6 13.0-0-0 c7 is better, but slow, e.
4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 The archives are flooded g., 14.e2 e6 15.d4! d7 16.h5! ]
with games with 5...a6. Only recently has the 13.b5+ e7 14.d2 Threatening Nd5+ and
...c6 formation taken hold. However, I prefer thus winning yet another tempo d6 15.e2
to establish it on move 4 (3...Qd6 4 Nf3 c6). And now Nf5+! f6 16.f3+
6.e5 bd7 This natural move seems a bit [ 16.d1 c5 17.g4+ e7 18.0-0
shaky after White's reply. keeps the king in the centre. ]
[ 6...f5 is the main alternative. ] 16...e7 17.e2 f6 18.f3+ e7 19.0-0
7.f4 c5 20.a4 g6 21.fe1 g7 22.ad1!
[ 7.c4 is also possible, for example, c7 [ Even 22.b4! g5 23.ad1 makes it
8.f3 b6 9.f4 d8 10.e5 impossible to get the h8 rook out and king
Smeets-Feygin, Netherlands NED 2007. ] to safety. ]
7...d5 22...xb2 23.c3!
[ 7...b4 8.a3! ] [ 23.d5+ f8 ]
[ 7...xe5 8.dxe5!? ( 8.xe5 b4 9.a3 23...f5 24.b1 It's over. a3 25.b5 c6
b6 10.c4 ) 8...b4 9.d2 is a problem: 26.g3 d7 27.xf5+! d8 28.b4! c7
e4 10.xe4 xe4+ 11.e2 , when of 29.h4+ c8 30.xd7+ xd7 31.e7+
course xg2 12.0-0-0 is extremely risky. ] 1-0
8.xd5 xe5
[ After 8...xd5 , Ni Hua chose 9 Nf3 with a
small advantage. The most entertaining idea 213 B01
is 9.c4!? ( 9.f3 xe5 10.xd5 cxd5 Geller,J 2544
11.dxe5 e6 12.e2 is formally better for Kovalenko,Igor 2572
W h it e ho wever, Bla ck sho uld n't be t o o 19th TCh-RUS 2012 (4) 12.04.2012
worried.; Finally, 9.c4!? e4+ 10.e3 [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
is worth a look.) 9...e4+ 10.e2 xf4
11.xf7 ( 11.g3 f6 ) 11...g8 12.g3 f6 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
13.0-0-0 b6 14.d6+ xd6 15.xg8 Kovalenko is something of an expert in this
and it's not obvious what's happening. ] line, having played it on numerous occasions
9.e3 recently. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 6.h3 h5
[ Slower ideas were 9.dxe5 xd5 10.xd5 7.g4 g6 8.e5 bd7
cxd5 11.c4 and ] [ 8...c6 has also been played but 9.f4
197
has done well for White ] t h e k n i g h t o n a 8 g ive s W h i t e s o m e

9.xg6 The first new move for headaches, e.g.
ChessPublishing. B1a) or 16.d1 xh1 17.xd2+ c8
[ 9.b5 has been played most often and when both 18.b5 ( or 18.e6 fxe6
looks quite critical. A recent game 19.c4 d5 ) 18...c6 19.xc6 bxc6
c o n t i n u e d : b6 10.c4 c6 20.f4 e6 look good for Black.;
( I n s t e a d G a w a i n l o o k e d a t 10...e6+ B1b) 16.xd2 xh1 17.b5 c6
in Najer, E (2665) -Kovalenko, I (2486) 18.xc6 bxc6 19.d1 e6 20.e2+
Mo s c o w 2 0 1 0 .) 11.d5 xd5 12.xd5 c8 21.d3 e7 22.c4 d8
xd5 13.xc7+ d8 14.xd5 e4 and the knight still cannot escape and
15.h2 ( Previously Gawain wrote: 15.g1 will soon be rounded up.;
xd5 16.f4 White has some advantage B2) 12.g2 xd2 13.xd2 d8
as Black's exposed king on d8 gives him 14.e2 e6 15.0-0 c6 16.e4 xe4
some problems along the d file.) 15...xd5 17.xe4 xe4 18.xe4 c5
16.f4 c8 17.e3 f3 18.g2 xg2 when due to the weakness on e5 Black
19.xg2 e5= and Black was fine. Edouard, had the more comfortable endgame and
R (26 0 7 )-Mila n ovic, D (2 5 20 ) De izisa u e ve n we n t o n t o wi n . K h a l i f m a n , A
2012. ] (2632)-Kova lenko, I (2 587) Jurmala
[ 9.f4 is seen in the archives and also looks 2012. ]
d a n g e r o u s . A r e c e n t K o va l e n k o g a m e 9...hxg6 10.g2 And this looks like the
continued: xe5 The experienced Russian correct continuation.
GM continued ( Instead 9...d5 was seen [ Instead 10.f3 has been tried a fair bit,
in the archives but was very good for White, including a recent game of Ivanchuk's: c6
eve n if o ur b oss la ter e rred . Ko st en , A 11.e3
(2507)-Govciyan, P (2411) Pau 2008. ) A) In those he tried 11...b6 which also
A) Instead 10.xe5 lo o k s b e t t e r b6 l o o k s r e a s o n a b l e f o r B l a c k : 12.0-0-0
Here John Watson gives bd5 13.e4 ( 13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5
A1) b u t w e t h i n k 11.f3! is actually cxd5 15.g2 e6 16.he1 d7 17.b1
stronger, for example d6 was around level but Black eventually
A1a) 11...xc2 looks very risky converted against his lower rated
12.c1 g6 13.b5 e4 ( 13...c8 opponent. Grekh, A (2369) -Kovalenko, I
14.xc7 xc7 15.xc7+ d8 (2581) Mukachevo 2011.) 13...xe4
16.d3 doesn't look at all comfortable 14.xe4 b5!? 15.g2 e6 16.d2 e7
f o r B l a c k .) 14.xc7+ ( 14.a3!? ) 17.f4 a5 18.hf1 d7 19.e5 f6
14...xc7 15.b5+ d7 16.xd7+ 20.xd6+ xd6 21.c3 a4 and only Black
xd7 17.xe4 and Black has could be better in the endgame.
problems completing his Kononenko, D (2563)-Kovalenko, I (2465)
development.; Poltava 2009.;
A1b) 11...xb2? loses to 12.b5+!; B) 11...e6 Kovalenko deviates from a
A1c) 11...0-0-0 12.0-0-0 e6 13.d3 couple of earlier games. 12.0-0-0 d5
with a pleasant edge.; ( B e t t e r t h a n 12...c7 13.b1 b4
A2) 11.g2 an exclamation mark but e6 Fressinet, L (2673)-Bauer, C (2583) Pau
l o o k s o k f o r B l a c k . ( Definitely not 2008 when 14.g5! d5 15.xd5 cxd5
11...xb2? as 12.d2! as observed by 16.h4 gives White good attacking
John, is very strong ); chances. ) 13.e4 c7 14.c4 xe3
B) 10.dxe5 b4 11.d2 e4 15.fxe3 e7 16.b1 f5! 17.c3 0-0-0
B1) The computer wants to grab the 18.c5 hf8 19.g1 f4 20.d3 g5
exchange with 12.d5 but it seems only wi t h a c o m p l e x g a m e i n wh i c h B l a c k
Black can be better: xd2+ 13.xd2 triumphed. Ivanchuk, V (2766)-Kovalenko,
xd2 14.xc7+ d8 15.xa8 e4! I (2587) Jurmala 2012. The game was
And Black regains the exchange when only rapid but perhaps this inspired
198
Ivanchuk to play the Scandinavian too - and b7 pawns. ]

seen elsewhere in this update. ] 15.0-0 e6 16.g2 d6 17.e2 Keeping the
10...c6 knight on h5 out of the game. Geller plays
[ 10...0-0-0?! immediately is too risky 11.f3 very well around here, not giving Kovalenko
( Perhaps 11.g5 immediately was a better e n o u g h t i m e t o a c t iva t e h i s p i e c e s . e7
move order, forcing the knight to move h5 18.d1 hc8 19.c3 e5 20.a4 a5 21.b1
12.f3 b6 13.e3 xb2 14.c1! b6 c4 Attempting to prevent the b4 break but as
15.b1 e6+ 16.e3 c6 17.d5 W hite manages this anyway the plan
looks very good for White.) 11...a6 when obviously fails.
12.g5 e5! was a good practical try although [ It was probably better to try and get some
W h i t e wa s o n t o p a f t e r 13.gxf6 exd4 c o u n t e r p l a y w i t h 21...f6 but White is
14.e2 e5 15.b3 d3 16.f4 d6 obviously much better. ]
17.fxg7 he8 18.g8 xg8 19.xe5 d2+ 22.b3
20.xd2 ge8 21.xb7+ xb7 22.xb7+ [ It was possible to prevent the rook staying
xb7 23.c3 Lallemand, R (2285)-Verot, M on the fourth rank with 22.f4 d7 before
(2125) Pau 2008. ] 23.b3 but there was no need. ]
11.g5!? Geller forces Kovalenko to make a 22...h4
decision with his knight. [ 22...c7 23.e3 is very straightforward.
[ The logical 11.0-0 is also possible and was W hite will continue to press on the
seen in another recent game. That queenside while keeping the h5 knight out of
continued: e6 12.e1 c7 13.e2 ( Here the game. ]
13.g5 looks critical but Black does have 23.e3 c6 24.f1 c8 25.b4!
some play for the pawn after d5 14.xd5 Well calculated.
cxd5 15.xd5 c6 16.f4 0-0-0 ) [ Of course it was possible to continue
13...d6 14.c4 0-0-0 15.b1 h2+ 16.f1 r e g r o u p i n g w i t h 25.b2 when Black's
e5 17.b4 exd4 18.xd4 b8 19.e3 position is really hideous but the game is
b6 20.c3 he8 with a very sharp more forcing. ]
position. Yee, S (2285)-Barbosa, O (2461) 25...axb4 26.cxb4 f4?! After this Black is
Bandar Seri Begawan 2011. ] simply lost.
11...h5?! After this Black is left suffering in [ The best looks to be to bring the rook back
an unpleasant queenless middlegame. into the game with 26...c4 but 27.dc1
[ 11...d5 is definitely critical when perhaps xb4 28.xb7 xc1+ 29.xc1 b8
Geller's idea was 12.0-0! ( 12.e4 c7 30.e4 is obviously much better for White
13.f3 e5 14.dxe5 xe5 15.e2 0-0-0 wi t h h i s b i sh o p p a i r a n d p a s s e d p a wn
should have been ok. Sakelsek, T (2454)- although Black at least has better drawing
Scharrer, P (2160) Lienz 2007.) 12...xc3 chances with d5 ]
( Neither 12...e6 13.e4; nor 12...f4 [ While it doesn't matter which way to take on
13.e4 are pleasant for Black as c7 b4 - they all seem to fail: 26...xb4 27.xb4
14.xf4 xf4 15.d5 looks dangerous as xb4 ( or 27...xb4 28.b1 ) 28.xb7 ]
Black is rather under-developed.) 13.bxc3 [ 26...xb4? 27.f4! ]
looks good for White with his initiative on [ and 26...xb4 27.f4! both cut off the rook
the queenside and lead in development. He and leave White in a winning position. ]
can also play for d5 supported by c3-c4. ] [ 26...f6 ]
12.d5! White breaks in the centre before 27.c5+ e8 28.b5 d8 29.b6 xg5
Black has time to go ...e6. cxd5 13.xd5 30.a5 Black has succeeded in winning a pawn
xd5 14.xd5 b8 but he cannot stop the a pawn. The rest of
[ As the course of the game is so unpleasant the game requires no comment. a4 31.a1
for Black, there's a case to be made for xa1 32.xa1 f4 33.xf4 xf4 34.a6
14...c5 although 15.e3 e6 16.g2 0-0-0 bxa6 35.bxa6 b8 36.a7 xa7 37.xa7
17.d1 e7 18.e2 is very unpleasant c6 38.a8 e7 39.c6+ f8 40.xc8+
with the two bishops raking down on the a7 xc8 41.c5+ e7 42.d7 e5 43.e2 f6
199
44.e6 e8 45.d3 g5 46.e4 g6 18.f3 exf3 19.xf3 d3 20.d1 c8= )
47.c4 h4 48.d5 g6 49.e6 g2 12.g5 e8 13.b5? ( 13.d1 e4
50.d5 f4+ 51.d6 f8 52.e3 g2 14.d4 with a slight edge) 13...e4 14.fd4
53.d5 f4 54.xf4 exf4 55.e6 g7 c5! with great complications in the game
56.f3 Kovalenko has played 5...Bg4 a lot but Womacka - Hennings, DDR 1986 ]
it seems White has a few different paths to an 11.g4! Very typically for this kind of position.
edge. Perhaps 9.Nb5 isn't much for White but W hite prevents Ne7-f5 and prepares a
9.Bf4 is interesting while Kovalenko failed to kingside attack. f5
find anything here against Geller's 9.Nxg6 [ 11...e4 is interesting but not good enough:
followed by a quick g5. 12.xe4 ( 12.g5 f5 13.0-0-0 gave White
1-0 a small edge in the game Hellers -
Kristiansen, Gausdal (zt) 1987) 12...f5
13.c5 fxg4 14.g5 f5 15.ce6 xe6
214 B01 16.xe6 f6 17.xf8 xe3 18.xh7!
Gipslis,Aivars xb2 19.xb2 xb2 20.fxe3 with a big
Maric,Rudolf advantage, Braga-Maric, Bad Woerishofen
Erevan 1971 1985 ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 12.0-0-0! fxg4
[ 12...d7 wa s n o t b e t t e r : 13.h6 a6
The most popular White set up against 4...g6 14.xg7 xg7 15.e3 with a clear
is to play h3, Be3, Qd2 and castle queenside. advantage for White. ]
In this classic game White showed the merits 13.g5 f5
of his position very convincingly. 1.e4 d5 [ The endgame after 13...h6 14.e6 xe6
2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g6 5.c4 15.dxe6 xd2+ 16.xd2 was not much fun
b6 6.h3 g7 7.c3 0-0 8.e3 c6 for Black, for example: f5 17.c5 c8
9.d2 e5 18.hxg4 xe3 19.fxe3 e7 20.d7
[ 9...e8?! does not solve Black's problems winning ]
as the game Smirin - Rechlis, Tel Aviv 1992 14.hxg4 xe3 15.xe3 xg4 It seems like
proved: 10.0-0-0! e5 11.d5 a5 Black has achieved good counterplay, but
( 11...e7? is bad: 12.c5 e4 13.cxb6 exf3 White's next move shows what's really going
14.bxc7 winning ) 12.b3 e4 13.d4 on! 16.xh7!!
with the better prospects. ] [ Other moves leads to Black's advantage:
10.d5 e7 16.e6 e7 ( 16...xe6 17.dxe6 e7
[ The pawn sacrifice 10...d4? is dubious: 18.c5 )]
11.xd4 exd4 12.xd4 e8+ 13.e3 [ or 16.h3 xh3 ( 16...xc4 17.xg4
and it seems Black does not have enough xe3 18.e6+ f7 19.xf7+ f8
compensation, for example: h4 14.g3 20.e6+ ) 17.xh3 xc4 18.g3 f5
e7 15.e2 b4 16.b5!? xb2 19.xh7 d6 and it is Black who has the
17.xb2 xb2 18.d1 e5 19.c5 a6 initiative now. ]
( 19...a4 20.d6 winning ) 20.xc7! xc7 16...f4? Although White's position looked
21.d6! d5 22.xd5 a5+ 23.f1 d7 very promising, only after this mistake does
24.f3! c6 25.g2 xd5 26.xd5 ab8 his advantage become clear. Now White came
27.b1 ed8 ( 27...b5 28.c6 ) 28.xb7 up with a blow:
and W hite had achieved a decisive [ Black has two reasonable alternatives:
advantage in the game Yilmaz-Brady,Manila 16...f6 17.ce4 f4 18.e1 with a small
ol 1992. ] advantage ]
[ 10...a5 seems to be interesting: 11.b3 [ 16...xf2!? 17.d3 ( 17.xg7+?! xg7
f5!? ( Black almost equalised in Bjerring - 18.xe5+ h6 ) 17...f6 18.g1
I s k o v , K o b e n h a v n 1 9 8 8 a f t e r 11...e4 with the initiative on the kingside but in
12.d4 c6 13.dxc6 xc6 14.xc6 bxc6 both lines Black's position was playable. ]
15.xd8 xd8 16.c1 f5 17.e2 e6 17.xg7+! xg7 18.xe5+ f6
200
[ Other moves did not save Black either: Black does not have enough time to capture
18...f6 19.ce4 d7 20.d4 ] the d pawn successfully. c5 11.e3 d6
[ or 18...h6 19.e6!? ( of course 19.xf4 [ It looks like 11...a5! is even better. The d
is also not bad: xg5 20.xg5+ xg5 p a w n f a l l s : 12.h3 ( 12.e2 bxd5
21.e1 winning ) 19...f6 20.xf4+ xf4+ 13.xd5 xd5; 12.a3 bxd5 13.xd5
21.xf4 xd1 22.xd1 with a technical xd5 14.d4 e6 ) 12...bxd5! 13.xd5
win ] xd5! 14.d2 xf3 Given the simplicity of
19.xc7+ h6 these lines, it's surprising that 11...Qd6
[ 19...g8 20.ce4 winning ] has been preferred so many times. ]
20.ce4 xe4 21.xe4 f5 22.d4! 12.c1?!N I think Glek is genuinely surprised
White converts his advantage into a win very by Black's potential in this position and can
convincingly. This solid move protects the see no other way of proceeding. He feels he
Knight and prevents any counterplay. e8 has to get the Queen off the d-file and make
[ The tricky 22...xd5 doesn't work because room for his Rook. This is an unconvincing
of 23.h2+! with an immediate win. idea.
( of course not 23.cxd5?? c8 winning the [ Instead 12.h3 h5
Queen )] A) 13.e2
23.d3 The rest is simple. f3 24.h2+ A1) 13...g6! is at least equal for Black:
g7 25.c2 e2 26.c7+ d7 27.d1 14.f4 ( 14.fd1 xc2 15.ac1
e1 28.c3 f5 29.d2 e5 30.xe5+ xe3 ) 14...c5 15.e3 a5 16.e5
xe5 31.e2 h8 32.b3 h2 33.d1 g5 bxd5 17.xd5 xd5;
34.b2 f6 35.c3 Black resigned. A2) 13...e5!? 14.dxe6 xe6 15.g4
1-0 g6 16.d4 Fressinet, L-Wong Meng
Kong/Mallorca 2004;
B) 13.f4 c5 14.e3 d6 ( 14...a5
215 B01 15.g4 bxd5 16.xd5 xd5 17.d2
Glek,Igor V 2597 xd2 18.xd2 xd2 19.xd2 g6
Muhammad,Stephen A 2334 20.c3 e6 21.fe1 ) 15.e2 bxd5
HB Global CC (6) 21.05.2005 ( 15...g6 ) 16.xd5 xd5 17.ad1 f6
[Andrew Martin] ( 17...b4! is a much better move: 18.d4
e6 19.a3 a4! 20.c4 White certainly
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 has attacking chances but no definite
f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4!? advantage.) 18.d4 e6 19.xe6+ fxe6
[ A recent New In Chess Yearbook article 20.e5 Ibarra Jerez, J-Trent, L/Chalkidiki
concluded that Black's chances after 6...b5 2003 ]
7.g2 b7 8.0-0 e6 9.e5 were very poor. 12...bxd5 Why not? 13.xd5 xd5
I shall return to this in future months. But 14.d1 f6! Reminding White that the Knight
for the time being, fans of 3....Qd6 need not is still pinned clear evidence that white has to
f e a r b e c a u s e 6 . . . B g 4 i s a p l a y a b l e play h2-h3 somewhere. 15.g5
alternative, as you are about to see. ] [ 15.d4 f5! 16.h4 h5 17.e1 f6!
7.g2 c6 8.0-0 18.h3 d7! and White is without
[ 8.d5 is only tempting for a second. After compensation. ]
b4 9.f4 d8 White already runs out of 15...f5 16.h4 e6 17.d2
steam. ] [ If 17.d4 h6 18.d2 c6 19.e1 d7
[ 8.f4 b4 9.xc7 xb2 10.a4 a3 20.f4 e6 21.c4 b4! ]
is not a favourable transaction for W hite, 17...xd1 18.xd1 h6 19.e3 g5
whose pieces are misplaced and pawns are 20.d4??
weak. ] [ 20.c4 gxh4 21.xd5 was the best way
8...0-0-0 This is the point of the variation Black forward perhaps White can equalize there:
is arguing that White's d4 pawn is vulnerable. d6 22.f4 e5 23.xe5 xe5 24.e6+
9.d5 b4 10.f4 And White proposes that b8 25.xd8+ a7= ]
201
20...g7! 21.a7 Glek must have believed G e r m a n y 2 0 0 2 a n d n o w 19.c2

that this was a strong move, but his hopes would retain White's edge. This is the type
are quickly dashed. of position that Emms was referring to in his
[ 21.xg7 xe3 ] book. Black has permanent defects in his
21...c6 22.c5 gxh4 6...b5 is dead, long live pawn structure and a poor endgame looms
6... Bg4! unless he can create counterplay. But where
0-1 are the weaknesses in White's position to
aim at ? Note th e very saf e W h ite king,
another key feature of this line. Returning
216 B01 now to 12 Re1, obviously a decent move,
Glek,Igor V 2597 preparing c2-c4. After that, Black has to
Nakamura,Hikaru 2657 worry about d4-d5 or some sort of white
HB Global CC (3) 19.05.2005 advance on the queenside. ]
[Andrew Martin] 12...d6 13.c4 One move delayed but could
the Rook be slightly misplaced on e1? e5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3 14.h4
f6 5.d4 c6 6.d2 As I think I have [ 14.c5! looks very strong: f8 15.a4 b8
mentioned before, this is a move ( 15...b8 16.a5 e8 17.h4
recommended by GM John Emms in a recent with Bxc6! next.) 16.a5 encourages Black
1 e 4 re p e rt o ire b o o k. W e ca n n o t e xp e ct to weaken himself and looks much better. I
Na k am u ra to s ho w t o o m uch re spe ct f o r can only find advantage for White after b6
anything, as he is quite confident in his ability 17.cxb6 axb6 18.c3 ]
to overturn almost any theoretical verdict. f5 14...g6 15.c5 f8 16.b4
[ 6...b6 7.c4 xb2 is another, riskier [ Point being that after 16.a4 trying to get
way, which I concluded that Black can get into the previous variation, Black has xc5!
away with in my 'Scheming Scandinavian' for example:
DVD. Emms likes white in the upcoming A) 17.xa7 b8! ( 17...xd4 18.c3
doubled pawns position whereas Nakamura d3 19.f1 d8 20.a5 ) 18.a5
seems delighted with Black's activity. Glek ( 18.xb8+ xb8 19.xg6 hxg6
is caught in the middle but he's not a man 20.dxc5 xd2= ) 18...xd4;
short of one or two original ideas himself. ] B) 17.dxc5 xd2 18.xa7 d7 19.f3
7.e4 c7 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.g3 e6 d3 20.b4 e4 and Black is causing
Other moves have been played, presumably confusion, or ]
with the intention of going ...e7-e5 in one go, 16...exd4 17.b3 b8 18.f4 e5 19.b5
should the need arise: [ 19.ad1 ]
[ 9...d7?! or ...Bh3 maybe? 10.g2 e6+ 19...xc5 20.bxc6 b6 21.ac1 So now we
11.e3 h6 Black's whole scheme is about reach a position where Black obviously has to
t o b e e xp o s e d . 12.d5! e4 13.h4+- defend with care, but the d pawn is there to
Pikula, D-Savic, M/Herceg Novi 2001 ] help out later if he does so. d6 22.ed1
[ 9...d7 10.g2 0-0-0 11.0-0 e5 d3 23.xg6 hxg6 24.c3 he8 25.a4
There she blows! 12.c3 b6 13.e2 g7 Glek is hammering away, but it's hard to break
14.a4 he8 15.a5 d7= Hunt,H-Repkova, the Black blockade.
E/Mallorca 2004 I must say that I have a [ 25.xe5 fxe5! 26.cxd3 ( 26.a4 f5
liking for Black's straightforward solution in 27.cxd3 f8 28.a6 f6! 29.a4 e4 )
this game. ] 26...e4 27.3d2 f5= ]
10.g2 d7 11.0-0 0-0-0 12.e1 25...g5 26.xe5 fxe5 27.cxd3 e4
All seen before and Glek's 12 Re1 adds little 28.d5! so far very well played by White.
new to the argument. 12 c4 is also possible: Just a pity that as he moves in for the kill he
[ 12.c4 g4 13.e3 b6 14.b3 c5 is so short of time. xc6 29.xg5
15.fd1 d6 16.a4 d7 17.a5 e5 [ I like 29.a5! I really don't see what Black is
18.dxc5 xc5 Niedermaier,H-Mueller,K/ doing against that. ]
202
29...c7 30.gd5 xd5 31.xd5 e6 ( 11...0-0 was the safest move) 12.xc7+
32.a5 Flag down....... Black can bluster all d8 13.g5? ( 13.c5! a5 14.xa6 bxa6
he likes in this variation, but Emms' judgement 15.xa6 c7 16.xc7+ xc7 17.b4
is difficult to argue with. Perhaps 9...Nd7 is would have given Black real headaches.)
the way, with ... e7-e5 to follow. 13...xc7?! ( 13...xe2+! 14.xe2 h5
0-1 15.xf7+ e7 16.xh8 xf4+ 17.f3
f8-+ ) 14.xh5 xh5 15.xf7+ e7
16.xc7 xf7 With 2 pawns and a rook for
217 B01 the 2 pieces, W hite stands reasonably ok
Goh Wei Ming 2403 and has a slight advantage though he went
Laylo,Darwin 2504 on to lose the game against his
3rd PGMA Cup (6) 10.09.2008 experienced opponent. 17.c5 c8 18.d6
[Goh Wei Ming, Kevin] hf6 19.e2 a5 20.ab1 c7 21.xc7
xc7 22.b4 b8 23.b5 axb5 24.xb5
I received this game and all the notes from an c6 25.d1 d7 26.e3 d5+ 27.d3
International Master, who writes: "My name is e5 28.db1 f4+ 29.c3 exd4+ 30.d2
Wei Ming and one of the contributors in the 1. d8 31.a4 d5 32.1b3 c3 33.xc3
e4 e 5 co lu m n . I n a re ce n t t o u rn am e n t , I dxc3+ 34.xc3 e6 35.f4 d5 36.f5 c7
played an interesting game against GM Laylo 37.b4 c6+ 38.a3 d4 0-1 Ochoa,
Darwin in the afore mentioned opening and I Karl (2268)-Laylo, Darwin (2504)/Duty Free
thought you might want to consider it for your Fiesta Mall, 3rd PGMA Cup 2008 ]
next update." IM Goh Wei Ming Singapore [jw: [ 4.f3 is one of the most common
Wow! It's not often that I get a contribution of responses, especially against the
this quality out of the blue Thank you!! Here's unprepared! xd5 5.e2 c6
the game with Wei Ming's notes:] GM Laylo A) White can try to win the 2 bishops with
Darwin is the newest GM from the Phillipines 6.c3 f5 7.h3 but after xf3 8.xf3
where Chess is one of the most popular sports A1) 8...b4 is too greedy. 9.0-0 0-0-0
in the country. Laylo is a specialist in the ( 9...c6 10.e2! xc2 11.e5!
Portuguese Gambit in the Scandinavian and with dangerous compensation.) 10.e4!
plays it in almost every game with excellent with a clear advantage for White.;
results even against Grandmasters. So, is the A2) 8...0-0-0 9.xc6 e6+! 10.e4
Portuguese gambit playable or not? 1.e4 d5 xe4 11.0-0 f5 , there is nothing
2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4!? 4.f3 Surely, this interesting left in the position.;
move, with the intention of clinging to the B) 6.e3
extra pawn is the critical response. However, B1) Again, there is an option to simplify
L a y l o h a s s h o we d t h a t B l a c k ge t s g o o d if Black wishes to play for a draw,
practical chances in the ensuing middlegame. namely 6...e5 7.dxe5 ( 7.c3 a5
[ 4.e2 Needless to say, this is too straight 8.dxe5 d8 promises Black rich play.)
forward and Black equalizes easily. xe2 7...xf3 8.xf3 xd1+ 9.xd1 d5!
5.xe2 xd5 6.f3 e6 7.c4 h5 10.d2 xe5 11.c3 0-0-0
In general, this is the ideal square for the and I doubt the 2 bishops mean anything
Black queen. It's influence on the d1-h5 much.;
diagonal and the kingside tends to be one of B2) 6...0-0-0 7.bd2 f5 8.0-0 ( 8.h3
the characteristics in this variation. xf3 9.xf3 e5 again gives Black easy
( 7...b4+ 8.c3 xc3+ 9.bxc3 e4 development and active play. 10.g4?
was a safe option for Black but Laylo had This is just pure madness and Laylo
no intentions of simplifying the position!) finishes his opponent (incidentally a
8.c3 bd7 9.b5?! ( 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4 decent 2324 player) cleanly. e6 11.c3
is safer. ) 9...c8 10.f4 b4+ 11.f1 a6? exd4 12.cxd4 b4+ 13.f1 d5
Laylo is well known in the region for his 0-1 Cordts, I (2324)-Laylo, D (2448)/Bad
tactical prowess but here, he missed a trick. W iessee 2006) 8...e5 9.c3 ( 9.xe5
203
xe2 10.xe2 xe5 11.dxe5 xe5 after 5...d7 6.c4 f6 7.c3 e6 )
12.f3 a5= ) 9...e4 A combative move 6.e4 c8 7.c4!? ( Slow. An alternative
t o s t ri ve f o r a co m p l ica t e d p o si t io n is 7.b5+ c6 8.d3 ) 7...f5 8.f4 e6
though this move might return to haunt 9.c3 e7 10.f3 h6?! ( 10...0-0
him a few moves down the road. The 11.e2 c6 ) 11.g3 g5 . And here
simple ( 9...exd4 10.cxd4 d6 12.c5 d5 13.c4 would have kept a
was also possible but it is difficult to see solid advantage. 1-0 Dzhumaev-Laylo,
how Black can make further progress on Kuala Lumpur MAS 2008. ]
his Kingside attack. ) 4...f5
B2a) T h e c o u n t e r i n t u i t i v e 10.h4! [ jw: 4...c8!? has also been played. ]
a p p e a r s t o b e st r o n g a s we l l xe2 5.b5+ Again, the most critical response.
( 10...h5 11.xg4+ xg4 12.h3! [ 5.g4!? g6 6.c4
xh4 13.xg4+ xg4 14.hxg4 e8 A) In view of the difficulties that Black
15.ae1 and White wins the pawn on faced, a safer alternative could be 6...c6
e4. ) 11.xf5 xd1 12.axd1 e8 t h o u g h a f t e r 7.b3 c7 8.c3
13.g5 and as mentioned above, the W hite definitely has the better of it. jw:
e4 pawn seems to be more of a cxd5 9.b5+ bd7 ( 9...c6 10.g5
weakness then a strength.; fd7 11.xd5 ) 10.g5;
B2b) 10.g5 d6 11.f3? B) 6...e6 7.c3 ( I suspect Laylo was
( 11.dxe4! xh2+! 12.xh2 xe2 planning after 7.dxe6 to play b4+ 8.c3
13.xe2 xe4 14.xf7! xf7 0-0 sacrificing a second pawn but getting
15.g4+ b8 16.xe4 and White is more pieces out. jw: 9.h4 fxe6 10.h5 f7
a p awn up f or n ext t o no th in g an d 11.h6 g6 12.g5 e7 13.ge2 )
would have been clearly in the driving 7...exd5 8.g5 h5 9.xd5 d6
seat. ) 11...exf3 12.xf3 xf3 10.e2+ f8 11.h3 c6 12.e3 d7
13.xf3 xf3 14.xf3 d7 13.d2 ( 13.f2 appears to be a safer
with a m ore or less equal positio n option. ) 13...e8 14.f2 b6 15.hf4
though Black actually went on to win xf4 16.xf4 xf4 17.xf4 h6 18.gxh6
this position: 15.af1 e8 16.c4 h6 xh6 19.f6! White has played forcefully
17.h3 d5 18.c1 f6 19.xd6+ in the opening and wins an exchange
cxd6! It is instructive to see Black despite both sides playing the most logical
placing his pawns on the same color of and natural moves. Where has Black gone
the enemy's dark square bishop, wrong? xd4+ 20.xd4 xd4 21.xe8
effectively blunting it and reducing it's xe8 22.d1 c5 23.d3 f5 This must
scope of activity. 20.g4?! The highly be a winning position for White but Laylo
ra t e d G ra n d m a st e r f ro m Ro m a n i a somehow managed to win this position!
must have some idea which I fail to 24.de1+ f7 25.e5 h3 26.e2 f6
notice but this does seem to be a tad 27.d5 h5 28.g2 h4 29.d1 f7
u n c a l l e d f o r . T h e s i m p l e ( 20.f4 30.d7 xc4 31.e1 g6 32.xa7 g5
s e e m s t o b e g o o d , a n d e q u a l .) 33.b3 d5 34.e5?? The culprit. c6
20...de7 0-1 Nevednichy, V (2582)- 35.xd5 xa7 36.e2 c6 37.g3
L a yl o , D ( 2 4 0 6 ) / S a n M a r in o 2 0 0 6 d4 38.d1 e6 39.d6 f4 40.a3
(56) ] h3+ 41.f2 xh2+ 42.e3 b5 43.a4
[ John Watson: A recent game went 4.d3 bxa4 44.bxa4 a2 45.c6 d5+
xd5 0-1 Kutuzov, D (2315)-Laylo, D (2448)/
A) 5.b5+ c6! ( or 5...c6 6.xb7 Calvia 200607 ]
xd4 ) 6.xb7? b6 threatens ...Bc8, 5...bd7 6.c4 e6
and Black is winning after 7.f4 xd4; [ Sensing a trap, Laylo deviated with 6...a6
B) 5.h3! is correct, with perhaps a small wh i c h a p p e a r s t o b e a we a k e r o p t i o n .
advantage after e6 6.f3; 7.xd7+ xd7 8.e2 e6 9.dxe6 xe6
C) 5.a3 b6 ( Black stands well enough 10.b3 0-0-0 11.0-0 c5 12.h1 he8
204
( 12...xd4? 13.xd4 d7 14.e3 c5 B) 13...xg4 14.f3 h5 15.xd7 xf3

15.c3 cxd4 16.a4! was White's main 16.f1 d8 ( 16...xh1 17.xh1 d8
idea in this set-up. b8 17.f4+ a7 18.a4 c6 19.d1 g5+ 20.c2
18.d2 and the idea of Qd2-a5 is g6+ 21.e4 ) 17.a4 c6 18.d1!
d e v a s t a t i n g .) 13.bc3 h6 14.b2? h6+ 19.c2 g6+ 20.b3 xh1
The first real mistake by White in this game 21.xh1 cxd5 22.cxd5 b6+ 23.c2
and I get the impression that Black did not g6+ 24.e4 xe4+ 25.xe4 xd5
give him any chances after this slip. After 26.d2 This piece of analysis is by no
( 14.f4 c6 15.fd5 xd5 16.xd5 means exhaustive but it does outline the
d6 17.e1 xe1+ 18.xe1 e8 difficulties that W hite must go through
19.a5! an idea spotted by my good friend before he is able to get out of the
Rybka 3. The threat is Ne7+ d7 20.d2 opening unscathed. ]
and White appears to be a safe pawn up.) 13...xg4 14.xd7 More or less forced, but I
14...e3! 15.c1 b4 16.xe3? ( 16.g3 was attracted to the position with 3 pieces
xc1 17.axc1 d3 18.fd1 seems good against Queen and many pawns on move 17.
enough. ) 16...xe3 17.g1 d3 18.f2 xe2+ 15.gxe2 d8 16.f5 xc4
de8 Now White is under enormous 17.c2 xd5 White has 3 pieces for a Queen
pressure. 19.g3 xc4! 20.bxc4 xc3 and 3 pawns, a complete mismatch in terms
21.f1 d3 22.d5 d7 23.xc3 xc3 of quality wise. However, I had (misplaced)
24.d2 b6 25.d6 f5 26.dxc7 xc7 faith in my active pieces but ultimately fell
27.d1 d8 28.e1 xc4 29.xc4 xc4 vict im to m y o pp on e nt 's re so urce f ul a n d
30.fe2 d7 31.f2 b5 32.g3 g6 33.h4 accurate defence. 18.f1 b4 19.e3 e5
h5 34.e6 d6 35.e7+ b6 36.1e2 20.f4 c6 21.e4 e8 22.d4 e6
a5 37.7e6 cc6 38.6e5 d4 39.e6 My pieces are beautifully centralized and.....
dc4 40.e7 a4 41.a7 b4 0-1 Mallahi, what next? 23.g1 f6 24.d3 d6 25.fg4
A (2393)-Laylo, D (2504)/ 4th Prospero c5! 26.f2
Pichay Jr Cup 2008 ] [ 26.xg7 was a popular suggestion during
7.dxe6 xe6 8.d5 f5 9.c3 c5 the post mortem but was ultimately refuted
10.e2+ f8 11.g4 I have prepared this easily by my opponent. cxd4 27.xd4 e7!
va ria t io n f o r o u r ga m e b u t d u e t o e it h e r 28.7g4 h5! 29.g6 f7 and White's
carelessness or probably just being attack is snuffed out. ]
un pro f e s sio na l, I co mp let e ly ove rlo oke d 26...g5! Black is slowly but surely unravelling
B l a c k ' s n e x t m o v e . xg4! This was an his pieces and it is only a matter of tim e
unpleasant shock which caused me a lot of before he is able to consolidate his hefty
thinking time. After the game, Laylo told me material advantage. 27.h4?! Not the most
he had already played this variation and this testing option.
very move in blitz games with his friends! [ 27.g3 h5 28.e4 with the possibilities of
12.fxg4 h4+ 13.d1? And almost 29.Nf5 and doubling rooks on the e-f ile
immediately, I erred. would be something for Black to worry about.
[ The correct move is 13.d2! Ho we ver, t he a ccu ra t e xe4 ( 28...h4
A) I was afraid of the continuation 13...e8 29.ge1 xe4 30.gxe4 ) 29.gxe4 c4!
14.gxf5 ( 14.xe8+?? xe8 15.gxf5 A deep move, diverting the bishop off the
g5+ and White can resign.) 14...xe2+ b1-h7 diagonal, the point of which is
15.gxe2 e5 which I assessed to be r e v e a l e d o n m o v e 3 2 . . . ( 29...xh2
good for Black in my calculation. I forgot 30.xc5+ g7 31.g2 f4 32.d4
to count the pieces and after a normal with good chances for W hite.) 30.xc4
move like 16.c2 a6 17.a4 xc4 xh2 31.e1 e5! 32.xf6 g6+
18.b3 d6 19.f4 White has managed Black's ability to give this critical check is
to finally complete development and along the point behind Black's 29th move. 33.fe4
wit h a ma te ria l a dvant age , sho uld b e g7 though the competition remains highly
slightly better in this position.; complicated with chances for Black to go
205
wrong. ] 10.0-0-0 d7 11.ge4 d5 12.xd5

27...h5 28.e4 exd5 13.g3 g6 14.d3
[ 28.c4 was my initial intention but I 1/2-1/2 Mastrovasilis,D-Nikolaidis,I/Athens
o v e r l o o k e d t h a t a f t e r b5 29.xc5 GRE 2004 ]
, t h e d e v a s t a t i n g b4! wins almost [ 6...e6 7.e2 bd7 8.0-0 b5 9.g5 b7
immediately! ( 29...xc5 30.xc5+ g7 10.f3! I think that the diagonal h1-a8 is
31.hxg5 was what I have previously crucial to the understanding of this variation.
calculated. )] As is typical for the Scandinavian, whoever
[ 28.a4 g4! 29.xa7 c6 ] wins the battle of the light squares rules the
28...g4 The rest of the game was a board. You'll note as you go on through this
convincing technical demonstration. 29.g3 game that Nijboer gets control of f5 and that
xg3 30.xc5+ g7 31.xg3 xe4 more or less decides the issue. d5 11.a4
32.xe4 e5 33.f2 f4 34.g2 c8 b4 12.ge4! c6?! ( I think he has to try
35.xb7 c7 36.a8 a4+ 37.b1 e8! 12...b6 13.a5 xe3 14.fxe3 a7
So, is the Portugese Gambit playable after all? but White's still better after 15.a4 e7
It does seem to be an ef f ective practical 16.e1 ) 13.xd5 exd5 14.g3 e7
weapon in the hands of my GM opponent but 15.f5 f6 16.xe7 xe7 17.e1 0-0
it could well be an even more dangerous 18.d2 b6 19.f4 f6 20.e5 c6
we a p o n a t c l u b l e ve l . I ' l l l e a ve i t t o t h e 21.xb4 a5 22.b5 c4 23.xc6 xc6
subscribers to judge for themselves.:) 24.b3 xe5 25.xe5 ae8 26.ae1 xe5
0-1 27.xe5 b8 28.xd5 xa4 29.c4
1-0 Nijboer,F-Spoelman,W /Zwolle NED
2004 ]
218 B01 7.d3?! So natural , but I don't think I like this
Goldin,Alexander 2620 square. It's ineffectual. What you often find is
Stripunsky,Alexander 2533 that the game boils down to whether the Bd3
San Diego USA (9) 04.12.2004 or the Bb7 is the better piece. Black quite
[Andrew Martin] often wins that contest. b7 8.0-0
[ 8.e2 g6 9.a4 b4 10.b1 g7 11.bd2
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 0-0 12.0-0 c6 13.fd1 a5 14.c4
Stripunsky seems absolutely convinced that 3. xc4 15.xc4 g4 16.h3 xe3 17.fxe3
..Qd6 is OK, and he continues to use the c5!= Van Dijk,T-Hasangatin,R/Olomouc
move with success against all comers. Let's 2003 ]
take a look at one of his latest efforts from the 8...bd7 9.e2 e6 10.g5 e7 11.a4
recent US Championship. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 Otherwise ...c7-c5 comes and Black has no
a6!? In many ways this reminds me of certain problems whatsoever. b4 12.e4 d5!
lines of the Sicilian, Caro-Kann or even the Looks riskier than it actually is. If White can't
Queen's Gambit Accepted. Black just plays ... drive the queen away without making
b5,...Bb7,....e6,...Nbd7 and he eventually gets concessions, then d5 is a very good outpost.
...c7-c5! in. White must act soon, because this 13.c4 bxc3 14.xc3 The concession of the
is a pretty reliable and easy-to-play plan. b4 square has been made. a5
6.e3 [ 14...d6 15.fd1 0-0 16.ac1 ab8
[ 6.g3! is more testing I believe. ] 17.e5 fd8 18.c4 is perhaps a little
6...b5 Here are a couple of other, recent congested for Black so Stripunsky makes
examples. In the first, Black shows another the sensible decision, which the new time
dimension to his scheme involving an early... limits oblige one to do. Practicality and
Nc6. W ho is to say that this isn't very universality are the new canons of modern
playable? In the second I think we see GM chess one had better get used to them .....
Nijboer putting Black's whole idea to the test FAST! ]
with some very accurate piece placements. 15.ad1 d8 16.h4 c5= This is now very
[ 6...c6!? 7.d2 g4 8.g5 f5 9.f3 e6 similar to the QGA. 17.b1 cxd4 18.xd4
206
b4 19.g3 0-0 Summarizing so far we can xd6 41.xf8+ xf8 42.d8 h2+
say that Black is very comfortable. Perhaps At last clarifying the situation. 43.f3 e5+
even slightly more than that. He has active 44.e3 g3+
pieces, no weaknesses and a strong queen. 0-1
He must watch out for Nxe6 or some such
move but that's about all. 20.a2 c5
21.b3 a7! The exclam is for the idea alone- 219 B01
what an audacious exchange sacrifice! The Golubev,Mikhail 2525
brain just see Bd6 and switches off surely he Jirovsky,Milos 2455
cannot play . ..Ba7 etc. Stripunsky looks Bundesliga 2002
further. Chess is a practical game and he [Andrew Martin]
wants to find ways to eat at W hite's clock.
22.d6 Who could resist? 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6!?
[ Declining the offer was poor: 22.fe1 b6 An irregular move which has become popular
23.a5 c4 ] in recent years. Eric Schiller would have you
22...h4 23.xf8 xf8 24.d3 e5 believe that the variation is named after him
25.g3 h5 26.d4 g6 I'm really not sure but many strong players have dabbled here,
what to make of this sacrifice. My feeling is Bronstein and Dzindzichasvili among them.
that White MUST be able to defend, but his Previously W hite was thought to obtain an
Kingside is very bare and Black's bishops, easy advantage after d4, Nge2 and Bf4 but a
knights and queen are frighteningly close. recent book by Michael Melts (Russell
Over the board this must be seen as a Enterprises 2002) shows otherwise. 4.d4
speculative, but very noble try by Black. 27.h3 [ 4.f3 f6 5.g3 g4 6.g2 e6 7.0-0
[ 27.c4 b8 28.f4 c5 29.b3 xf4! e7 8.e1 c6 9.e3 0-0 10.d3 d5
30.xf4 h5 is a brief example of how 11.xd5 exd5 12.d4 xd4 13.xd4
things might go wrong quickly, if White is e6 14.f4 d7 15.fe1 c5 16.e3 fe8
not right on the button. ] 17.e5 f6 18.d6 xd6 19.xd6 xb2
27...b8 28.f4 e5! Obviously he has to be 20.ab1 c3 21.e2 b6 22.b3 f6 23.f4
ve ry q u i c k . 29.fxe5 xe5 30.e3 g4 g6 24.e5 xe5 25.xe5 ad8 26.b5 f6
31.e2 27.e3 d4 28.e4 xa2 29.xe8+ xe8
[ The computer shows White surviving after 30.b2 f7 31.c6 e1+ 32.f2 a1
31.hxg4 h2+ 32.f2 xg2 33.e1 g3+ 33.f3 a2 34.xa2 xa2 35.e4 f7
34.f2 e5 35.f5 I am convinced that no 36.d5+ xd5+ 37.xd5 a5 38.c4 e6
human would go into this line voluntarily 39.b5 f5 40.h3 h5 41.a4 h4 42.gxh4
unless all else failed. Goldin is obviously xf4 0-1 Tan Bin Keong-Wee Zhen Yang/
still hoping to tough this one out, though with 20th Cairnhill Open, Singapore SIN 2002
so many pieces around his King the (42) ]
practical difficulties at the board are [ 4.c4 f6 5.ge2 a6 6.d3 b5 7.b3
enormous. ] b7 8.f4 e5 9.g3 bd7 10.0-0 c5
31...h2+ 32.h1 xh3 33.d5 h4 11.f3 e7 12.a4 b6 13.f2 0-0 14.g3
[ 33...xd5! 34.xd5 h5! 35.f5 h4! g6 15.e2 b4 16.ce4 d5 17.d2 f4
A) 36.g3 xg3+ 37.g1 f2+ 38.xf2 18.d1 ad8 19.e1 g7 20.c4 c7
xf2 39.xf2 ( 39.f5 g5+ 40.xf2 21.a5 c6 22.b6 f5 23.c4 d6
xf5+ 41.e1 h3-+ ) 39...g4+-+; 24.xd7 xd7 25.xa6 a8 26.c4 xa5
B) 36.f3 f2+ 37.xf2 xf2 27.xa5 xa5 28.a1 c7 29.a2 c6
38.xh2 ] 30.b3 a8 31.e2 xe2+ 32.xe2
34.f5 h5 35.g3 a1+ 33.e1 a4 34.xa1 xb3 35.xb3
[ 35.xf7+ h8 36.xg6 hxg6 37.xg7 e4 36.dxe4 xh2+ 37.f1 fxe4 38.fxe4
xf1+ 38.xf1 h3!!-+ ] e5 39.d5 xb2 40.a6 d4 41.c6
35...xg3+ 36.g1 h2+ 37.g2 c8 f4 0-1 Arjol Etxeberria,D-Mellado Trivino,J/
38.xf7+ h8 39.xg6 hxg6 40.d6 Pamplona 2002/[amartin] (41) ]
207
4...f6 5.f3 55.a5+ e4 56.a4+ e3 57.c4 f4

[ 5.c4 a6 6.ge2 b5 7.f4 b6 8.b3 58.c5 e4 59.h4 g4 60.f5 f3 61.g3 f2
g6 9.0-0 g7 10.a4 b7 11.axb5 axb5 62.f4 h5 0-1 Lim Jean Nie-Yeo Min Yang,
12.xa8 xa8 13.d3 b4 14.b5+ bd7 E/20th Cairnhill Open, Singapore SIN 2002
15.xb6 xb6 16.b5 fd5 17.xc7+ (62) ]
d7 18.xd5 xd5 19.xd5 xd5 [ 6.e5 c6 7.f4 xd4 8.c4 e6
20.d2 a8 21.b1 e5 22.dxe5 xe5 9.f3 d7 10.xf7 xf4 11.xf4 xf4
23.c4 bxc3 24.xc3 xc3 25.xc3 xc3 12.0-0-0 b5 13.b3 g8 14.d5 e6
26.bxc3 a3 27.c1 d6 28.f1 a2 15.g5 xg5 16.xc7+ d8 17.xa8
29.g4 h5 30.gxh5 gxh5 31.g2 a5 h8 18.he1 h6 19.f4 h7 20.e6 hf6
32.h4 f5 33.g3 c5 34.e1 c4 21.b6 c7 22.xc8 xc8 23.e3 d8
35.e4+ xc3 36.f4 a5 37.xf7 d4 24.ed3 g5 25.f5 g7 26.xd7 xd7
38.f4 a2 39.d7+ c5 40.g5 xf2 27.xd7+ e8 28.d8+ f7 29.xh8
41.xh5 g2 42.h6 c6 43.d4 c5 xh8 30.e1 h5 31.e6 h4 32.xa6 e5
44.d3 g1 45.h5 h1 46.g6 g1+ 33.h3 d6 34.d1 f6 35.e2 xf5
47.h7 c6 48.h6 c7 49.h8 c8 36.a5 f4 37.xb5+ e5 38.a4
50.h7 c7 51.a3 d7 52.a8 e6 1-0 Vazquez,R-Ivanovitch Balsinde,N/Open,
53.g8 h1 54.g7 g1+ 55.f8 f1+ Pamplona ESP 2002 (38) ]
56.e8 b1 57.g6+ f5 58.f6+ g4 [ 6.c4 e6 7.e2 b5 8.b3 b7 9.g5
59.f8 1-0 Collins,S-Sprenger,W/41st WJun, bd7 10.0-0-0 d5 11.e4 b6 12.b1
Goa IND 2002 (59) ] h6 13.c1 e7 14.he1 0-0-0 15.c4 bxc4
[ 5.ge2 c6 6.f4 d8 7.f3 f5 8.g4 16.xc4 7f6 17.xd5 xd5 18.a1
( 8.g3 g6 9.h4 h5 10.d3 xd3 b4 19.a3 c6 20.e3 b5 21.c2
11.xd3 e6 12.0-0-0 bd7 ) 8...g6 a5 22.f4 d7 23.e5 b3+ 24.b1
9.h4 h5 10.g5 d5 ] xd4 25.xd4 xd4 26.xf7 c4 27.c3
5...a6 In many Scandinavian lines, particularly f8 28.g6 xc3 29.xe6+ b8 30.xe7
after 2..Qxd5, you'll see Black playing ...c7-c6. f5+ 31.a1 xf7 32.b4 b3 33.xc7+
Here his intentions are much sharper, a8 34.c5 b5 35.d4 xc7
planning Queenside expansion with ...b7-b5 0-1 Zelcic,R-Kurajica,B/Salona Rapid 1hr,
and... c7-c5! as well as active development Solin-Spilt CRO 2002 (35) ]
w i t h . . . B b 7 . 6.e3 I think Golubev was 6...f5!?N I searched in Melts for this move
surprised, perhaps unpleasantly. The Bishop and was very surprised when I didn't find it.
doesn't sit comfortably on e3 but there are 6...Bf5 looks solid and respectable to me,
ideas of Qd2 and Bf4 as well as the certainly when one considers that Jirovsky
suppression of ...c7-c5 Other ideas: intends to follow up with ...Nc6, adding spice
[ 6.e2 c6 7.0-0 f5 8.d3 xd3 to the mix. Black is not limited:
9.xd3 g6 10.e4 xe4 11.xe4 g7 [ 6...e6 7.d2 e7 8.d3 0-0 9.0-0-0 b5
12.f4 d8 13.c3 0-0 14.d5 b8 15.fe1 10.g5 b7 11.f4 d8 12.h4 bd7
e8 16.c4 c6 17.ad1 cxd5 18.xd5 13.e2 b4 14.ce4 xe4 15.xe4
b6 19.b4 c6 20.a4 ac8 21.a5 xa5 f6 ]
22.bxa5 xc4 23.axb6 xf4 24.d7 xc3 [ 6...g4 7.e2 bd7 8.d2 e6 9.0-0-0
25.c1 a5 26.xb7 b4 27.h3 xb6 d5 10.xd5 exd5 11.f4 b6
28.h2 a5 29.c2 g7 30.e5 d4 12.g5! ]
31.xb4 xe5+ 32.f4 axb4 33.fxe5 b3 [ 6...b5 7.d3 b7 8.0-0 bd7 ]
34.b2 b8 35.g3 f8 36.f3 e8 7.d2 e6 8.0-0-0 c6!= 9.h4 g6
37.e4 d7 38.d5 b5+ 39.c4 c6 10.f4 d7 11.xg6 hxg6 12.d5 exd5
40.d4 b4+ 41.c3 c5 42.d3 b8 13.xd5 0-0-0 14.c4 f5 15.g3 xd5
43.e6 f6 44.c3 d5 45.d2+ xe6 16.xd5 e7 17.he1 g5 18.f4 f6!=
46.b2 f5 47.e2+ f6 48.d2 g5 Black's opening has worked very well. 19.c4
49.d4 h6 50.c4 e5 51.c7 d6 e7 20.e4 c5 21.c2 f5 22.f2 d4
52.a7 b6 53.a5 e5 54.a8 d5 23.xd4 xd4 24.xd4 xd4 25.g3 c6
208
26.a3 c7 27.b1 d8 28.a2 c5 d7 in this situation, but Kislinsky's games
29.g2 b5 30.e4 a5 31.e2 b4 32.axb4 ma y m a ke m e ch an ge m y m in d . . . 8.c4
xb4 33.c5 d2 34.xb4 xe2 35.f3 f2 After this move, we rejoin my work on 5.Bc4
36.b3 a4 37.d3 xb2 38.h4 f5 39.d1 last year (instead of 5. Bd2) 5...Bg4! ( 8.g5
d4+ 40.a3 xc5+ 41.xa4 a2+ h5 9.ge2 e6 10.g2?! c6! 11.e4
42.b3 a3+ 43.c4 xd3 44.xd3 f2 b6 12.c3 0-0-0 Boudre, J-P-Prie, E
45.b3 xg3 46.f7 g5 47.fxg5 xh4 Narbonne-Plage 1hKO op 2005; 8.h3 )
48.g6 d6 49.e3 e5 50.e8 c5 51.f7 8...b6 9.e2 ( 9.ge2?! c6 10.b3
g5+ 52.d3 h4 53.e8 f4 54.b5 xf3 11.f1 xg4 12.f4 Sanchez, J
f2 55.e2 d4 56.f1 g5 57.e8 c4 (2450) - Prie, E (2475) Villeneuve-Tolosane
58.e2 f4 59.d7 f6 60.b5 c3 op 2006 ) 9...c6 10.d5 d4 11.d3
61.d3 g4 I think that 3...Qd6 isn't a bad 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 e5 ( 12...c5 13.ge2 e6
move at all and can certainly be employed as 14.xd4 cxd4 15.dxe6 xe6 16.e2 )
a surprise weapon. The Melts book is 13.ge2 xe2+ ( 13...h5 14.h3 c5
required reading. 15.xd4 xd4 16.g5 e8 17.b3 d6
0-1 18.e4 f5 19.c3 e3 ) 14.xe2 d6=
I don't think White is better here, but I do
not feel comfortable with this pawn structure,
220 B01 which is unusual for me, Mack, A (2262) -
Golubev,Mikhail 2499 Prié, E (2429) 4NCL2 Telford ENG 2004 ]
Kislinsky,Alexey 2384 7.g4 White takes up the gauntlet. Otherwise,
VIII Rector Cup (10) 04.04.2006 the exile of the bishop on h5 also throws up a
[Eric Prié] couple of questions.
[ 7.ge2 c6 8.f4 xd4 9.b5 b6
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 10.e3 c5 11.xh5 xh5 12.xd4 0-0-0
f6 5.d2 g4! Of course there are other 13.c3 xb2 14.c1 cxd4 15.cxd4+ b8= ]
black options against 5.Bd2:5...Qb6 [ 7.h3!? c6 8.b5 ( 8.b5 0-0-0 )
immediately that Kasparov and Kramnik faced 8...b6 9.f4 d5 10.c4 xf4 11.xf4
over the board, 6.Nf3 and then 6...Bg4 or even 0-0-0 12.xh5 e6! ]
6...c6 but anything other than the suicidal [ 7.c4! b6 8.h3! c6 ( 8...xd4
capture on b2. Be that as it may, it seems 9.e2 ) 9.d5 With the initiative, winning a
clear that, if Black can never take any of the piece in return for two pawns and some
white pawns on b2, c2 or d4, then 5...c6 is activity, for instance after d4 10.a4 d6
preferable and after 6.Bc4 the retreat 6...Qc7 11.c3 e5+ 12.f1 xf3 13.gxf3 xd5
intending 7.Nf3 Bf5 or 7...Bg4 if Black feels 14.e2 f5 15.g2 0-0-0 ]
lucky and wishes to test the validity of the rule 7...g6 8.f4! e6 9.f5 exf5 10.g5 fd7
I have previously stated of never moving his 11.e2+ d8 12.g2 The improvement.
queen 3 times unless forced in the One can imagine that Golubev, like every
Scandinavian... 5...c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 remains the fierce Dragon player, is usually keen on such
main line in any case. Nevertheless, since I complicated games with the opposite colour
understand it would be an error of taste not to and had time to prepare something in this
advertize one's products in this peculiar 1...e4 closed tournament, 8 rounds after the
section, I can invite its subscribers to watch surprise caused by his young compatriot. c6
for the publication of the next 2 New In Chess 13.xc6 bxc6 14.0-0-0 This must have been
yearbooks (81 and 82) if they want to know his idea: get rid of the opposing queen's knight,
more about the W orld classical champions' which was ready to jump to b4, and which
m o v e 5 . B d 2 ! 6.f3 h5!? Protecting f7, caused all W hite's sorrows in the previous
although on principle I prefer game, prior to long castling. b8 15.e1 b4
[ 6...f5 to keep this bishop in play. Then, in 16.h3 c8!
case of the aggressive 7.g4 I would think [ 16...xc3 17.xc3 xa2 18.f4 b6
about ...Bg6. Instead I have regularly played 19.h4 c4 20.b3 ]
209
17.f4 38.xg7 xb3-+ ]

[ 17.a3 xa3 Of course. ] 30...a5 31.xc6+ b6 32.e1
17...d8! 18.c4?! White eventually decides [ 32.c3 xc3+ 33.xc3 xc6 34.xc2
to defend a2 or maybe play for a win when he xd4 35.xf7 b7+- ]
had to go all in to look for a saving perpetual 32...e8??
check. [ 32...xd4! 33.xd4 xd4 34.f1 ( 34.h4
[ 18.h4 xc3 19.xc3 xa2 20.h5 c5 d3 35.h3 d6 ) 34...d6! The point of it
21.g2 ( 21.hxg6? e4 ) 21...a4 a l l , t h e e 7 - r o o k i s d o m i n a t e d ! 35.e2
( 21...e4 22.xe4 fxe4 23.hxg6 e3 ( 35.xf7 e8+; 35.e2 d3 ) 35...d1
24.b3 ) 22.xc6 b6 ( 22...xb2 23.xb2 36.xf4 xf4 37.xf4 xe2 38.xe2
xb2+ 24.d2 xd4+ 25.e2 ) 23.a8+ b7-+ ]
b8 24.c6 ( 24.f3 xb2 25.d2 c4+ 33.xf4?? Mutual time trouble, probably.
26.e2 xc2+ 27.f1 b3 28.a8+ [ 33.dxc5+ xc5?! ( 33...b5 34.xa7+
d7 29.d5+ d6 30.hxg6 hxg6! 31.a1 a5 35.c6+ b5= ) 34.b4+ b6
e8!-+ ) 24...b6 25.a8+ b8= ] ( 34...d6 35.xf4+ xc6 36.c4+ b6
18...c5 The opening of the d-file is obviously 37.c5+ a6 38.a5# ) 35.f2+ b5
wh a t B l a c k a i m s f o r w i t h a r o o k o n d 8 . ( 35...xc6? 36.c5# ) 36.e2+ a4
19.fd5? 37.xe8 xe8 38.xe8 d3! 39.g1
[ 19.a3! b6 ( 19...xa3? 20.bxa3 xa3+ c3+ 40.f2 b5 41.e4 d2+
21.d1 b4 22.a2 xa2 23.xa2 ( 41...xc6 42.xf4 ) 42.f3 c3+
b1+ 24.c1 cxd4 25.h4 f6 26.h5 f7 43.xf4 xc6 44.e3 xb4+ 45.g3
27.g6 c4 28.e7 ) 20.a2 ( 20.b3 d6+ 46.f4+ xf4+ 47.xf4 ]
xc3 21.xc3 a6 ) 20...xc3 21.xc3 33...xe7+ 34.xe7 c3+ 35.d2 a1+
a4 22.b3 c6 23.dxc5 d5 24.xd5 36.f2 xd4+ 37.xd4 cxd4
xd5 And Black retains some initiative which 0-1
is the most important in complicated middle
games with opposite-coloured bishops.
25.xg7 f4 26.b4 xg5 ] 221 B01
19...b6! 20.e7+ b7 21.e2 xc3 Gormally,Daniel 2472
22.xc3 Nakamura,Hikaru 2613
[ 22.f3+ d5 23.xd5? xd2+ ] Gibraltar Masters (2) 26.01.2005
22...xa2 23.f3+ d5! [Andrew Martin]
[ 23...a6 24.b3 cxd4 25.c6 dxc3?
26.b4+ ] There now follows a long, rather dour clash
24.e5 c6 25.b3 f4! The black dragon is between two very strong players. Nakmura
free! seems to have embraced the Centre-Counter
[ 25...h5 26.g2 ( 26.xh5 xc3 )] with enthusiasm perhaps he likes the ease
26.b2 with which one can get a playable position.
[ 26.xg6 hxg6 27.dxc5 f6 ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6
26...xc2! 27.xd5 5.f3 f6 6.e5 The teeth have probably
[ 27.xc2 b4+ 28.c1 ( 28.c3 cxd4+ been drawn from 6 Ne5. However, if W hite
29.xb4 a8+ 30.c4 a6+ 31.b5 wa n t s t o i n s u r e ' a g a i n s t t h e l o s s ' , t h e n
xb5# ) 28...xd4 29.d1 bd8 30.ee1 perhaps this is the best way to go about it.
d3! 31.f2 ( 31.f1 c3+ 32.xc3 f5!? Encouraging g2-g4, which has hitherto
c2#; 31.e2 f3 ) 31...xb3 32.e2 a2+ tho ught t o be risky. 6 .. .B e6 is O K, b ut if
33.b1 c3+ 34.c1 xe2+ ] Nakamura can make 6...Bf5 work, then we will
27...b1+ 28.d2 xb2 29.e7+ a6 all be very ha ppy. 7.d3 OK, Gormally is
30.b4+ angling for a draw that is the only explanation
[ 30.f1+ d3+ 31.xd3 xd5 32.a1+ of this boring move.
xa1 33.xa1+ b6 34.axa7 cxd4 [ Clearly 7.g4 is critical and then I think that
35.xf7 c5 36.a3 b4 37.a6 c5 e6! is best, with 8.c4 ( 8.d2 bd7=;
210
8.c4 xg4! 9.xe6 xe5 10.c8 c7 19.e3 a5 ]

11.xb7 xb7 12.dxe5 e6 ) 8...xc4 19.ad1 ac8 20.h3 xc4! Each exchange
9.xc4 e6 10.e2 b4 11.d2 d5= favours Black due to the isolated d-pawn.
If this analysis of John Emms, in his White must make sure that he keeps as active
excellent recent book on the Scandinavian as possible in the upcoming ending to divert
is correct, then Black is absolutely fine Black from realising that positional trump.
after 6...Bf5 ] 21.hxg4
7...xd3 8.xd3 bd7 Challenging the [ 21.xc4 e3 22.fxe6 fxe6 23.xf8+
Knight brings complete equality. Many players xf8 24.e2 xd1 25.xd1 b5!= ]
would shake hands here. 9.f4 21...fc8 22.e3?!
[ 9.xd7 is not especially awe-inspiring, [ 22.d5! would have saved a lot of moves:
rather the prelude to deep and everlasting exd5 23.xd5 xd5 24.xd5 g5 25.d7
peace: xd7 10.0-0 f6 11.d2 c7 e4 ]
12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 e6 14.c4 e7 22...c3 23.d3 xd3 24.xd3 exf5
15.c3 0-0 16.d5 1/2-1/2 Nijboer, F- 25.gxf5 f6 26.f4 d8 27.e3 d5
Hansen, C/Groningen 1992 ] Now, if a nyon e, B lack has a sm all edge .
9...e6 28.c1 f8 29.f2 d6 30.h3 g8
[ 9...xe5 looks faintly inaccurate, although 31.e1 c8 32.g4 b6 33.h4 f8 34.f2
even here Black obtained a decent position a5 35.bxa5 bxa5 36.h3
in a r e c e n t g a m e f r o m T u r k e y: 10.xe5 [ 36.a4 is desirable long-term but might well
( 10.dxe5 d5 11.d2 e6= ) 10...d7 result in the pawn becoming more
11.f4 e6 12.0-0 e7 13.a3 0-0 14.ad1 vulnerable: b4 37.e6 a2 ]
f6 15.fe1 d5 16.xd5 cxd5 17.d2 36...g8 37.a4 b4 38.d1 h8?!
xd2 18.xd2 ac8 19.h3 c6 20.g4 Prompted by time pressure perhaps? I find it
fc8 Korniyuk, M-Warakomska, A/Urgup difficult to understand why Nakamura didn't
2004 Completely equal. ] play
10.0-0 b6 [ 38...c2! o t h e r w i s e : 39.g4 a2
[ 10...d8 11.c4 h5 12.ad1 e7 the point is to combine seventh-rank
13.c7 with the idea of Nd6+ gives White an pressure with an attack on a4. 40.f3 xa4
edge. ] 41.a8+ f7 42.b7+ f8 43.d5 e8
[ 10...xe5! seems reliable again. Somehow 44.d6 xd6! 45.xd6 c1+ 46.h2 h5+
my head doesn't want me to play this move, 47.g3 c3+-+ ]
but the positions reached are quite alright: 39.d3 h6 40.b5 d8 41.c1
11.dxe5 ( 11.xe5 d7 12.g3 e7= ) [ 41.xd5 xd5 42.g4 h5 43.gxh5 xf5
11...d5 12.xd5 xd5 ( 12...cxd5 13.c3 44.d5 d6 45.b6 gives some
c8 14.e3 e7= ) 13.fd1 xd3 14.xd3 counterplay. ]
d8= ] 41...e4 42.b6 d5 43.e6 xf5
11.a3 bd5 12.xd5 cxd5 13.b4 a4 44.c8+ h7 45.g8+ g6 46.e8+ h7
14.c4 This is about the best that White could 47.g8+ g6 48.e8+ g5 OK, he goes
have hoped for. He has the initiative and is for it. At 30 secs a move it's a good punt.
ahead in development, although not massively 49.e3+
so. W hat Nakamura has to do now is to go [ 49.e3+ g4 50.c7 g5 leaves White
into defensive mode for a few moves and get with no obvious continuation although both
castled. This he does. dxc4 15.xc4 d7 Kings are shakily placed. Really, in the
Preventing Nd6+ 16.e5 e7 17.f4 0-0 quickplay shootout, these positions become
18.f5 Gormally tries to rustle up a kingside rather random. ]
attack, but Black's position is very solid and 49...h5 50.g8 b1+ 51.h2 d6+
the early simplification doesn't help White's 52.g3 g5 53.e2+ g6 54.e8+ f5
cause either. g4 55.c8+ g6 56.e8+ f5 57.d7+
[ 18...b5!? gives counterplay at the expense e4?! 58.c6+
of driving White's Knight to a better square. [ Dee p Fritz is showin g 58.e8+ d3
211
59.g2! with xg3 ( 59...b6 60.e3+ fxg3 25.f4! ( 25.fxg3 ce8 26.h2 f7
d2 61.e6 d5 62.xg7 ) 60.e3+ 27.h3 f8 is very good for Black.)
d2 61.xg3 e4+ 62.g1 b1+ 25...ce8 26.e3 f7 27.h3 f8
63.h2 h5+ 64.h3 But with no time, it 28.hg1 c7 29.ef1 b5! 30.xg3
take s a ge niu s ( or a comp ute r) to f in d ( 30.cxb5 c4 with a crushing attack.)
quiet moves such as Kg2!!. ] 30...a5 and in this complicated position
58...f5 59.d7+ e4 60.e8+ f3 Bla ck's ch an ce s a re b y n o me ans b ad ,
61.c6+ g4 62.g2 f5 63.e4+ g5 Malev-Malinin,1990. ]
64.e8 xf2+! 65.xf2 b2+ 66.f3 12.d4 f5 (threatening 13...f5-f4) 13.g5!
c3+ 67.e3 xd4 68.e4 xe4+ [ 13.ce2 is not so convincing in view of
69.xe4 f5 70.g4+ 6 A royal struggle in the A) In Macieja-Terekhin, Sankt Peterburg
end. As for the opening I recommend having 1 9 9 7 B l a c k t r i e d 13...axc4 14.bxc4
another look at ... Bf5! which seems a xc4 , but with a few precise moves White
complete answer to 6 Ne5 r e f u t e d t h i s i d e a : 15.b4! xe3
½-½ ( 15...xd5 16.f4 ) 16.fxe3 xd5
17.c1! a5 18.f4! axb4 19.xd5 c6
( 19...xa2 20.c4 ) 20.b6! a3
222 B01 21.c4+ h8 22.b3 a6 23.xc8
Grischuk,Alexander 2581 xc8 24.h4! and in this position 3 pawns
Malakhov,Vladimir 2593 is not really enough for the piece.;
Lausanne 2000 B) 13...c5! 14.xa5 f4! ( Of course,
[Alexander Volzhin] 14...cxd4 15.xd4 is insufficient for
Black. ) 15.xc5 ( 15.xf4 is bad in view
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6 of cxd4 and White is helpless.) 15...fxe3
5.c4 b6 6.c3 g7 7.e3 0-0 8.h3 c6 16.fxe3 g5! Obviously Black has
9.d2 e5 10.d5 a5!? Nowadays this old tremendous compensation for sacrificed
move becomes more and more popular. The material.
reason is Black suffers serious problems in B1) 17.0-0-0 xe3+ 18.b1 g5
10. .. Ne7 a s we have alrea dy se en . 11.b3 ( 18...f5 is not bad either.) 19.g4 e5
The critical position of this line. Now Black , in te nd ing B d7 , Ra8 -c8 wit h a ve ry
has to choose between two lines: 11...f5 and strong attack.;
11...e4. e4 B2) 17.d2 f2 18.h4 and now the
[ 11...f5 is the alternative to the text. In natural g3 ( in st ea d o f 18...h6?!
numerous games played in this line up to 19.d6 f5 20.g4! c8 21.g5 h5
this moment White had failed to prove his 22.d7! and Black is in trouble, Firman-
advantage. Just a few examples: 12.c5 Ne st e r, L viv 1 9 9 8 .) 19.e1 g4
( 12.0-0-0 e4 13.e1 f6 14.b2 c6 secured Black a very strong attack, for
15.d6 e6 16.c2 axc4+! and Back example: 20.e6 c8 21.b4
wins, Markovic-Gostovic, Jugoslavija 1985.) ( 21.e7? c3+! 22.xc3 xd5+ )
12...e8 13.0-0-0 ( 13.e2 d7 14.a3 21...xe6 22.dxe6 e5 and White's
c5 15.g5 h6 16.h4 b6 17.b2 f8 position is barely defensible. ]
18.f4 exf4 19.xf4 b7 20.b5 e7 13...e8 14.0-0-0 c5 15.de2!
21.d2 a6 22.c3 d6 23.0-0-0 d7 [ The tempting 15.db5 is strongly met by
24.he1 e3 25.f3 b5! and Black is a6! 16.c7 e5 17.xa8 xa8 18.b1
clearly better, S.Nikolic-Stefansson, f4 with tremendous compensation for
Komotini 1993.) 13...d7 14.b4 c5 sacrificed exchange. ]
15.xa5 xa5 16.b5 d8 17.d6 f8 15...axc4!? The Knight on a5 has no better
18.g5 h6 19.h4 e4 20.xc8 xc8 role than to be sacrificed! 16.bxc4 xc4
21.c2 xg5!? 22.hxg5 ( 22.xg5 xg5 17.c2 The critical position for the whole line.
23.hxg5 e5 intending 24...Nf7 is very Black's position looks promising but White's
good for Black.) 22...f4 23.e1 e7 24.g3 d e f e n s i v e r e s o u r c e s s h o u l d n o t b e
212
underestimated. e5 idea is ...Bb4. Then 8.bxc3 ( 8.xe5 b4

[ The tempting 17...b5 doesn't work in view 9.c4 d5! 10.bxc3 xg2 11.f1 e7 )
of 18.d6! c6 19.d5 and White is 8...exd4 9.xd4 e7 is nothing for White at
better. ] all. ]
18.d6! d3+ 19.xd3! exd3 20.xd3 f4?! 7...g6! Reprintsev seems to have decided that
[ 20...e6 is worth considering, for example: t h is m o ve is b e s t , a n gli n g f o r a n a lm o s t
21.d5 c4 22.f3 a4 and Black obtains Grünfeld-like position. I suppose that if Black
real counterchances. ] is left unmolested, he will simply play 0-0 and
21.e7! f7 22.c4! b5 Desperation but I ...c7-c5! So White must be very concrete here
can't see real improvement for Black. and attack e7. 8.0-0 g7 9.e1
23.xb5 b8 24.ec3 b7 25.d5 a6 [ 9.b1 0-0 10.e1 ( 10.e1!? xa2
26.bc7 White Knights dominate in the centre 11.f4 c6 12.xc7 d5 13.b5 d7
of the board. The fact W hite's King has no 14.f4 e6 ) 10...c6 11.h3 xa2
pawn shelter is of no importance here since led nowhere in another Reprintsev game:
all Black pieces are passive and can't create 12.g5 e6 13.d2 d5 14.b5 d7
any real attack. The rest needs no comment. 15.h6 xh6 16.xh6 f6 17.c4 g7
c6 27.d3 b2+ 28.d1 g7 29.e1 18.f4 ( 18.xe6+ xe6 19.xg7+ xg7
d4 30.e4 d7 31.xd4 cxd4 32.e6+ 20.xe6 f7! 21.e1 b6 ) 18...d8
g8 33.f6+ h8 34.c5 19.h4 a6 20.bb1 b5 21.a2 h8 22.c4
1-0 c6 23.c5 a7 Strukov, R-Reprintsev, A/
Moscow 1999 Black's game is a bit awkward,
but he's a pawn up! What do you want? ]
223 B01 [ If 9.g5 xc3 10.e1 e6 11.d2 a3
Groszpeter,Attila 2505 12.f4 a5 is another pawn-down position
Reprintsev,Alexander 2440 for White, where he has some
Pardubice Czech op (5) 1998 compensation, but nothing clear. ]
[Andrew Martin] 9...0-0!? 10.xe7 c6 11.e3
[ 11.e1 led to the decidedly unthrilling xc3
REPRINTSEV'S SURPRISE It's not at all easy 12.d2 a3 13.c1 c3 14.d2 a3
to surprise a well-prepared opponent, 15.c1 c3 1/2-1/2 Genser, H-Plank, F/
especially in these days of the giant database. Austria 1999 ]
I believe the idea we are about to examine 11...xc3 12.d2 b2 This guy is a very
will come as a complete shock to most players tricky player as you are about to see. It still
and is much better than it looks. 1.e4 d5 looks dubious. Material is level and Black's
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 queen seems stranded in the W hite camp.
e4!? Seen this before? Maybe the stronger Moreover White's pieces appear to be better
players among you will have done, but you developed. In a clearly optimistic frame of
didn't bother to analyse it. I must admit 5... mind, Groszpeter goes straight ahead. He is
Ne 4 lo o k s lik e n o n s e n se . I t sh o u ld b e a a b o u t t o e xp e r i e n c e a r u d e a w a k e n i n g .
simple matter to ref ute this time-wasting 13.xg6
Knight move with simple development. [ 13.c3 is certainly better, but not conclusive.
Reprintsev and Sulskis don't think so, play 5... Black is still fighting: a3 14.e4 ( 14.b3
Ne4 whenever they can and get pretty good xb3 15.axb3 d8 16.c4 f5 )
results with it. Besides, 5...Ne4 is unsettling. 14...d6 15.b3 b6 16.ae1 b7 17.b5
W ho likes to be threatened on move five! ae8 ]
Perhaps when we have f inished with this [ 13.b1 xa2 14.c3 d5 ]
article, 5 Bc4 will suddenly become more 13...xd4! 14.b1? In shock.
popular. So a bit of feelgood chess to start off [ 14.xd4 is surprisingly difficult to play
with a quick Black win. 6.d3 xc3 7.bxc3 against because W hite is so far ahead in
[ I thought 7.d2 might be a move, but then development. I think I've found a good line
e5! is a further shock to the system. Black's f o r B l a c k t h o u g h : hxg6! ( 14...xd4
213
15.xh7+ xh7 16.h5+ g8 17.g3+ Ro wso n in t h e a rch ive s. He re P la y t h e

g7 18.f1!; 14...fxg6 15.c3 b6 Scandinavian recommends 18.hg1 c5
16.b1 d6 17.b5 xd1+ 18.xd1 19.xd8+ xd8 20.d4! c8 21.c4 a6
xc3 19.xc3 c6 20.d6 ) 15.c3 b6 22.xc5 xc5 23.xe6+ b8 24.a3 g6
16.b1 d6 17.b5 xd1+ 18.xd1 f5 25.xf6 d8 when he writes "Black will
19.xg7 xg7 20.xc7 ac8 21.e7 likely recover a pawn on either f2 or h2.
fd8!= ] White can play for a win without any risk, but
14...xf3+ 15.xf3 xa2 16.xh7+ xh7 the presence of opposite-coloured bishops
17.b4 d8! 18.h3 a1 Of course, it's all is a sign if ica nt dra win g f a cto r". Hard ly
over . 19.xa1 xa1 20.g3 d4 what Black was hoping for and it would be
Black could never h ave expected such a interesting to know if Bauer had found an
speedy victory treading a familiar highway. improvement over his analysis or whether he
0-1 was confident he could hold the draw here.)
16...c7 17.g5 f6 18.e3 c5 19.c3 g6
20.c2 b8 21.h6 e5 22.d2 c7
224 B01 23.e2 e5 24.d2 c7 25.e2
Hagen,Andreas Skytte 2290 saw Black holding pretty easily. 1/2-1/2
Bo,Morten 2343 Hamdouchi, H (2593)-Bauer, C (2633) Calvi
49th TCh-DEN XtraCon 2010-11 (9.4) 13.03.11 2011. ]
[Gawain Jones] 10.b3 This is actually the main move but
hasn't been featured on ChessPublishing
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 before. W hite defends the c2 pawn in
f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5 preparation for Qe2 and 0-0-0.
d8 9.xf6+ gxf6 [ Instead 10.c3 has been looked at a few
[ 9...xf6 is the other main move. We ought times ]
to check a game of the French author's. [ W h i l e J o h n W a t s o n l o o k e d a t 10.0-0
10.e2! g4 ( 10...d7 was played against in Gashimov, V (2740)-Hamdouchi, H (2590)
me but doesn't have a good reputation. Ourense 2009. ]
11.0-0-0 b6 given a question mark by 10...a5!? This is a rare try which has recently
Bauer who considers that Black should seen a rise in popularity.
transpose to the game with 11...Bg4. 12.g5 [ 10...d7 is by far the main move and the
g6 13.d5! xc4 14.xc4 exd5 only one considered in Play the
15.he1+ e6 16.xd5! e7 17.xe7 Scandinavian but wasn't Bauer's choice in a
cxd5 18.b4 c8 19.c3 g4 20.d6 recent game. I've added in some of John
a4 21.xe6! fxe6 22.e5 b5 23.h4 Watson's analysis from the archives:
1-0 Jones, G (2522)-Wang Puchen (2397) A) 11.h4 The point of this is apparently
Limburg Open Maastricht 2008 was a game to bring the queen over to the kingside but
I wa s ra t h e r p le a se d wit h !) 11.0-0-0 lo o k s a b i t o d d t o m e . g6 12.f3
Oddly Bauer believes this is inaccurate but ( 12.xg6 was the choice in a high rated
in this game he opts to switch back to the blitz game but following hxg6 13.e2
mainline. ( Instead 11.d5 xf3 12.gxf3 c7 14.h4 0-0-0 15.0-0-0 h6!
cxd5 13.xd5 d7 14.0-0-0 Exploiting White's rather early exchange
would transpose to the game.) 11...d7 on g6. 16.xh6 xh6 17.g3 dh8
( He considers 11...e7 to equalise but for 18.he1 g5! and Black had equalised.
some reason chooses not to play it here.) Nepomniachtchi, I (2720) -Nakamura, H
12.d5 xf3 13.gxf3 cxd5 14.xd5 0-0-0 (2741) Moscow 2010. )
15.e4 e5 16.b1 ( 16.c3! A1) An ot h er re cen t gam e sa w 12...f5
was Shirov's choice in the archives and 13.h3 g7 14.f3 ( 14.c3 Bauer. )
Bauer considers this the most challenging. 14...f6 15.h6 xh6 16.xh6 h5?!
c7 17.b1 f6 Shirov, A (2720)-Bauer, C This leaves Black's pieces rather loose.
(2 5 8 5 ) P a m p lo n a 2 0 0 6 is lo o ke d a t b y ( 16...d6 looks fine to me.) 17.e5
214
e7 18.f3 g8 19.g3 0-0-0 20.0-0-0 11.a4 g8?! Considering White's next is a
b8 21.d2 a8 22.hd1 c8 move he wants to play anyway I feel this is an
23.b1 cd8 24.a3 c8 25.a1 cd8 error.
26.c4 and White was starting to take [ Most of the other players have continued
ove r b ut st ill e4? was an ill-advised with the more logical 11...a6 12.e2
idea. Talla, V (2505)-Tripoteau, N (2425) A) 12...b4 13.xb4 ( 13.0-0-0
Chur 2010.; is surely more critical but perhaps White
A2) 12...a5 given an exclam by Bauer. w a s w o r r i e d a b o u t s o m e b5?
13.a4 f5 14.h3 g7 15.f3 0-0 plan? Nonetheless this would be highly
16.0-0 f6 17.g5 b6 18.ad1 e4 p r e m a t u r e a s 14.d5! is ve ry s t ro n g.)
19.h6 fd8 20.xg7 xg7 13...axb4 14.h4 g6 15.e3 g7
1/2-1/2 Venkatesh, M (2468)-Chatterjee, was an easy draw for Black in Balogh, C
D (2312) Chennai 2011 saw Black hold (2628)-Hamdouchi, H (2600) La Massana
comfortably.; 2010.;
B) 11.e2 The mainline and logical. B) 12...b6 13.h4! g6 14.e3?!
W hite prepares to castle long and has This move is rather odd ( Again 14.0-0-0
interesting d4-d5 ideas. c7 12.h4 g6 was critical. This is a much better version
B1) 13.f4 was seen in another high of the game f o r Black who ca n castle
rated blitz game but giving away the e4 safely but still I feel W hite may have a
s q u a r e i s a r i s k y d e c i s i o n . 0-0-0 nibble. ) 14...b4+ Now White is forced to
14.0-0-0 f5 15.h3 ( Watson gives 15.g3 c e d e c a s t l i n g r i g h t s . 15.f1 d8
b8 16.c4 f6 17.xg6 hxg6 ( 15...0-0-0 w a s s a f e a s 16.d5 c5
as about equal in Socko-D Schwarz, 17.dxe6 xe3 18.xe3 xe3 19.fxe3
Warsaw 2008. ) 15...f6 16.c3 h5 c5 gives Black great play for the pawn.)
B1a) 17.g4! was necessary but still 16.c3 e7 17.g3 c7 with a double-
fxg4 18.xe6+ fxe6 19.xe6+ d7 e d g e d b a t t l e in p ro sp e c t . F a r ge re , F
( 19...d7 20.hxg4 e8 21.f5 d6 (2520)-Bauer, C (2633) Nancy 2011. ]
i s i n t e r e s t i n g .) 20.xf6 g8 12.e2! Tactically defending the g2 pawn and
and Black hs good play for the pawn.; preparing to castle long. e7 13.0-0-0 a6
B1b) 17.f3? d6 18.g3 e4 [ 13...b5!? was an interesting alternative but
19.hg1 hg8 and Black had taken perhaps W hite can safely ignore it with
over the initiative. Svidler, P (2734)- 14.hg1 ]
Nielsen, P (2700) Copenhagen 2010.; [ 13...xg2? still drops material to 14.h4!
B2) 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.g3 b8 g4 15.e4 xd1 16.xg2 h5 17.g8+
Given Bauer's approval when his f8 18.xh7+- ]
mainline continues ( 14...d6 15.xg6 14.he1 b4 15.h3 A slightly odd move
hxg6 16.h4 gives W hite an edge.) [ 15.h4! looks more logical. The computer
15.g2 ( 15.xg6 hxg6 16.h4 offers the enterprising xc2 but I remain
is no longer so good for White as Black unconvinced that Black has anything like
can play h6! removing White's bishop enough for a piece following ( Both 15...g4
pair. It's important to remember to wait 16.f3 h5 17.g4 g6 18.f4; and 15...g6
for ...Bd6 before exchanging on g6.; 16.xg6 xg6 17.c3 d5 18.g4
15.b1!? was tried in Kravtsiv, M (2527)- clearly favour W hite) 16.xc2 xc2
Tomczak, J (2447) Lublin 2009 when 17.xc2 xd4 18.g3 xa4+ 19.b1 ]
Black doe s best to sit and wait wit h 15...d6 16.h4 g6 17.f4!? f5 18.f3
a8!? ) 15...e5!? ( He also devotes a lot d5?! Boe wants to utilise the outpost on e4
of analysis to 15...d6 ) 16.c3 exd4! as fast as possible but now he has difficulties
17.xd4 c5 18.he1 xd4 19.xd4 castling.
c5 when White must have a small [ Instead 18...0-0-0 and Black would be
edge due to his better structure but the close to equalising although W hite can
position is fully playable for Black. ] retain a small edge with 19.xb4 axb4
215
20.e5 ] The Dane (who I notice will be 2454 next list!)

19.e5 f6 20.g4! Energetic play e4 plays the energetic exchange sacrifice ripping
21.g5 h6 22.h4 hxg5 23.hxg5 So Black open Black's position. fxe4 28.f5 gxf5
has managed to entrench his knight on the 29.xf5+ e7 30.xe4 White has a pawn
outpost but the rest of his pieces remain for the exchange but much more relevant is
passive while the weakness of the a5 pawn the Black king which is running naked in the
prevents him from castling and therefore his centre of the board with all of W hite's army
pieces remain uncoordinated. f8 behind it. d7
[ It seems a shame to give away the beautiful [ 30...gf8 31.e1 d8 32.c3 c7
k n i g h t b u t 23...xd2 would at least allow 33.h7 f7 34.xe6 picks up another
B l a c k t o g e t c a s t l e d . 24.xd2 c7 pawn while Black's king isn't much safer. ]
( 24...h5 wins the exchange but 25.b1 31.f4 e7 32.d5! Stripping open the king.
xd1 26.xd1 g7 27.h5 allows White exd5 33.xd5+! The rook on g8 will drop so
a very dangerous attack. Black does best material is actually level while W hite's
here to give back the exchange with 0-0-0 ferocious attack continues. cxd5 34.xd5+
but W hite stands better following 28.xf7 e8 35.xg8+ d7 36.d5+
xf4 29.xe6+ b8 30.xd8 xd8 [ Definitely not 36.xa8?? e1# ]
31.g6 ) 25.h1 0-0-0 and Black is solidly 36...e8 37.b1 But now that's a threat. d8
placed but his pieces are rather passively 38.b5+ f8 39.f5+ e8 40.a2 d1
located and so White can continue probing 41.c3 The line employed in this game
without any risk. ] continues to be the critical test of the 3...Qa5
[ 23...c7?! defends a5 and looks logical but Scandinavian and Black doesn't have a sure-
fails to the common blow in the fire route to equality.
Scandinavian of 24.d5! exd5 25.xd5! 1-0
cxd5 26.b5+
A) 26...d8 27.xd5+ d6 ( 27...d6
28.xg6 xg6 29.xe4! fxe4 30.f5 g7 225 B01
31.f4 and White regains a piece with a Hamdouchi,Hicham 2592
vicious attack.; 27...c8 28.xg6+- ) Bo,Morten 2349
28.e3 with a very dangerous attack.; 26th European Club Cup (1.18) 17.10.2010
B) 26...f8 27.d7+ e8 ( 27...g7 [Gawain Jones]
28.xe4! fxe4 29.c3++- forces Black to
give his queen to prevent a mating 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
attack. ) 28.b6+ c6 29.xa8 h5 f6 5.d2 A slightly unusual move order,
30.c7+ d7 31.xa5 xd1 32.xd1 delaying the development of the king's knight.
xb5 33.axb5 and with d5 dropping White c6 The most logical giving the queen a line of
has an extra two pawns in the ending. ] retreat.
24.h2 This allows Black to finally castle and [ 5...b6 is the most critical, forking d4 and
thus eases his position. b2 pawns. 6.f3 ( 6.c4!? is rare but also
[ 24.b1 should have also been considered looks interesting xd4 7.e2 definitely
c7 25.d5!? exd5 26.xd5 cxd5 27.b5+ gives White very good compensation for the
d8 28.e3 is still a very dangerous pawn. He will castle long and Black will have
attack. ] to be very accurate.) 6...g4 7.c4 ( 7.d5!?
24...g7?! c6 8.h3 xf3 9.xf3 cxd5 10.xd5 xd5
[ With 24...c7 Black could castle next 11.xd5 e6 12.b3 c5 13.xb6 xb6
move and only be a little worse. It's 14.a4 gave White a definite advantage
important to recognise that the White queen thanks to his bishop pair. Meier, G (2641)-
can no longer come to b5 so the d4-d 5 Dubkov, A (2311) playchess.com 2009.;
break won't work. ] while hitting the bishop immediately with
25.xg6! fxg6 26.h7 Now Black doesn't 7.h3 also looks logical.) 7...e6 8.h3 xf3
h a v e t i m e t o c a s t l e . f7 27.xe4! ( 8...h5 9.g4 is a typical theme in the
216
Scandinavian. g6 10.e2 gave White a f o r c e d t o p l a y c8 see Kvisla, J (2123)-

s t r o n g i n it i a t i ve . S i m e o n o v, S ( 2 3 5 4 ) - Jakobsen, M Prague 2006 for details. ]
Zheljazkov, V (2027) Borovets 2008.) 9.xf3 [ In the same game he notes that 5...c6?!
c6?! ( 9...c6 would be more of a challenge is also a mistake as 6.b5! already leaves
10.b5 d6 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.e3 d5 Black with severe problems: b4 7.d5 a6
13.xd5 xb5 14.c3 c4 looks to 8.a4 b5 9.xb5! and Black is in all kinds
equalise. ) 10.0-0-0 c7 11.he1 of trouble. ]
gave Carlsen a huge advantage in [ 5...a6!? is a peculiar looking move but the
development which he exploited rapidly: idea is to prevent the pinning Bb5 6.c4
bd7 12.xe6!? ( 12.d5 is a safer b6 7.f3 e6 8.e2 b4 9.0-0-0 0-0
method. ) 12...fxe6 13.xe6+ d8? 10.h4!? ( 10.a3 xc3 11.xc3 must be an
( 13...f7 was f orced although 14.e4! edge to W hite.) 10...c6 11.e4 d5
g8 15.e1 still looks very dangerous.) 12.c3 e7 13.g4 d7 14.g5 h8
14.f4 a5 15.d5! h6 16.d6 c8 17.de1 Mundaca Alvarez, J (2119)-Munoz Pantoja,
1-0 Carlsen, M (2765)-Boixeda, P Madrid M ( 2 4 9 4 ) / B a d a l o n a 2 0 1 0 w h e n 15.h5
2008. ] starts an extremely promising attack. ]
[ Eric looked at a game with 5...g4 6.c4 f5 Another logical looking move but it
A) 6.f3 c6 ( 6...bd7!? has been Eric's may be more prudent to drop the queen back,
choice in a couple of games. 7.h3 h5 either now or the following move. 7.e2 e6
8.c4 0-0-0 9.g4 g6 10.e2 e6 This is by far the more common but allows
11.0-0-0 b4 12.a3 xc3 13.xc3 b6 White a very strong attack.
Leo n Hoyo s, M (24 28)-Prie, E (24 67 ) [ 7...xc2 is very greedy. 8.f3 d8 9.g5
Villeneuve Tolosane 2006 when Black g6 Rosen, B (2322) -Wyrwich, M (2196)
went on to win but 14.d3 d5 15.d2 G e r m a n y 2 0 0 7 10.0-0 and Black is still a
must be a little better for White.; 6...e6 long way from getting his king to safety while
wa s t he s t ron g G M Ch rist ia n Ba u e r's e6 can be met with 11.d5 cxd5 12.xd5
choice 7.h3 h5 8.g4 g6 9.e5 b6 c6 13.ad1 with a powerful attack. ]
Kosintseva, N (2551)-Bauer, C (2612) Biel [ P e r h a p s B l a c k s h o u l d c h o o s e 7...c7
2 0 1 0 w h e n t h e d i r e c t 10.g5 fd7 8.f3 e6 9.0-0-0 with a typical
11.xg6 hxg6 12.d5 would leave Black Scandinavian position. Three games from
with some problems.; 6...f5 was Prie's t h i s y e a r c o n t i n u e d : bd7 ( 9...g4
most recent choice. 7.d3 d7 8.h3 loses a tempo on a normal position. 10.h3
h5 Terrieux, K (2437)-Prie, E (2529) xf3 11.xf3 bd7 12.he1 0-0-0
Belfort 2010 in which Black won quickly 13.b3 d6 14.b1 and White was safely
but here 9.g4 g6 10.e3! c6 11.b5! better. Siebenburger, V (2116)-Divis, J
leaves White with a clear edge.) 7.h3 h5 (1882) Zdar nad Sazavou 2010.) 10.h4
8.c4 e6 9.g4 g6 is a position more g6 11.xg6 hxg6 12.d5! cxd5 13.xd5
often reached from a 5 Nf3 move order. xd5 14.xd5 0-0-0 ( 14...e7 15.f3
O n e g a m e c o n t i n u e d : 10.e2 b4 0-0 was seen in Dickmann, T (2086)-
11.0-0-0 bd7 12.a3 xc3 13.xc3 Hermsen, F (1897) Goch 2010 when I think
c7 14.e5 d5 15.d2 0-0-0 White should exploit the doubled g pawns to
16.xg6 hxg6 17.f3 7f6 18.b3 b5 kick-start his attack with 16.h4! ) 15.f3 f6
19.b1 and White must have had an edge 16.c3 d6 17.g3 b8 18.d3
with his bishop pair but Black is f airly White has a clear advantage thanks to his
solidly placed and he held the draw in bishop pair on the open board and quickly
Kudrin, S (2550)-Rogers, I (2475) Valjevo converted the full point. d7 19.hd1 hd8
1984.; 20.b1 c8? This is just a blunder and a
B) 6.f3 in the archives but I think I'd rather strange looking move anyway.
prefer ] 21.xf6 gxf6 22.c3 c5 23.xd7 xd7
[ H e a l s o p o i n t e d o u t t h a t 5...f5?! 24.b5 b6 25.b4 1-0 Arat, U (2007)-
is a n e rro r d u e t o 6.f3! when Black is Mukhtarov, K (1802) Batumi 2010. ]
217
8.d5 the way of a g4 advance. This move looks

[ 8.d5 has previously been investigated on strange but it's not so easy to offer Black a
this site by Andrew Martin. Have a look at good alternative.
Handke, F (2475)-Motwani, P (2525) 12th [ 10...d7 11.g4 g6 12.f3 d6 13.b1
Monarch Assurance, Port Erin 2003 and ( The direct 13.h4 h5 14.g5 f4+ 15.b1
also by Eric Prie in Solodovnichenko, Y xg5 16.hxg5 f4 17.h4 xg5 18.f4!
(2514)-Pantioukhine, S (2260) Rochefort also looks extremely strong.) 13...e7
2 0 0 5 . A r e c e n t g a m e c o n t i n u e d : cxd5 14.e5 xe5 15.dxe5 0-0-0 16.f4 h5
9.xd5 d8 10.xf6+ gxf6 ( 10...xf6 17.h3 b6 18.b3 hxg4 19.hxg4
as anno tated by Martin lo oks essentia l and White had at least a slight edge. Guido,
here. ) 11.0-0-0 c7 12.g4 xc2? F (2300) -Ferretti, F (2255) Verona 1997. ]
( Eric's annotated game continued with [ 10...g6 targets c2 but White can ignore it
12...g6 but already White looks to be doing with 11.f3! xc2 This was seen in
v e r y w e l l . 13.h3 d6 14.f4 xc2 Sanchez, F (2251)-Frederico, G (2190)
15.xc2 b5 16.c3 bxc4 17.xf6 g8 P a s s o s 2 0 0 7 w h e n t h e d y n a m i c 12.d5!
18.xd6 xd6 19.d1 c7 20.d8+ looks extremely dangerous to deal with
xd8 21.xd8 xd8 1-0 Solodovnichenko, xd1 ( 12...a4 might be forced but 13.g5
Y (2514)-Pantioukhine, S (2260) Rochefort l e a ve s W h i t e wi t h a v i r t u a l l y d e c i s i v e
2005 [Prié, Eric]) 13.xc2 b5 14.c3! attack. ) 13.xd1 cxd5 ( 13...e7 14.dxe6
bxc4 15.xf6 g8 16.d8+ xd8 17.xd8 f5 15.e5! xg2 16.h5+ g6 17.h6+-
xd8 18.f3 and Black should already a n d B l a c k ' s k i n g w o n ' t s u r v i v e l o n g .)
have resigned. Nedev, T (2506)-Galopoulos, 14.xd5 c6 15.xc6+ bxc6 16.a6 e4
P (2095) Porto Carras 2010. ] 17.g5 d5 18.b7 and Black loses the
8...d8 9.xf6+ xf6 This is probably rook. ]
Black's mistake as after this it becomes very [ 10...e7 was seen in a recent game but
hard to combat White's threats. 11.g4! g6 12.f3 h6 unfortunately forced
[ 9...gxf6 is the alternative approach to keep the queen. 13.h4 d6 14.b1
althou gh, if tru th be told , I a lread y like d7 15.g5 e7 16.h5 f5 17.h4 hxg5
White's position. 10.0-0-0 g8 ( 10...d7 18.xf5 exf5 19.xg5 xe2 20.xe2
was played in a more recent game but this and W hite was clearly better Nijboer, F
allows 11.g4! g6 12.f4 f5 13.d3 f6 (2582)-Font Purroy, V (2117) La Bordeta
14.d5! fxg4 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.c3 xf4+ 2010. ]
17.b1 e5 18.xg6+ hxg6 19.xd7 xd7 11.f3 d7 12.g5 f5 Already Black's
20.xe5 and Black was already in trouble. pieces look very tangled. 13.d5! The time is
Gross, D (2462)-Jirovsky, M (2447) Czechia ripe f or this them atic b reakth rough . cxd5
2001. ) 11.f3 e7 ( 11...xg2 12.h3!? 14.d3 g4 15.b5 d6? The final error.
g7 13.h4 g6 14.xg6 hxg6 15.h4 [ 15...d8 would last longer but White's
leaves White with a good initiative for the initiative should power through: 16.xd5
pawn. ) 12.he1 ( The straightforward e7 17.b1!? xg5 18.xd7+ xd7
12.h4 g6 13.xg6 hxg6 14.c3 19.xd7 f6 20.xb7 0-0 21.h3
also favours White.) 12...g6?! 13.xe6! gives Black some compensation but not
fxe6 14.xe6 g7 15.xf6 f7 16.h8+ nearly enough for the exchange and pawn. ]
f8 17.g7 f7 18.g8+ d7 19.e5+ 16.xd7+ and Black resigned as after 16...
c8 20.xd8+ xd8 21.xf7+ xf7 Kxd7 17 Ne5+ picks up the queen. A brutal
and White's rook and three pawns should display which seems to have refuted this way
have been more than a match for the two of playing the line for Black.
pieces in Kupreichik, V (2485)-Votava, J 1-0
(2540) Meisdorf 1996. ]
10.0-0-0 White has racked up a huge score
from this position with just one draw and the
rest wins . g6 Black drops the bishop out of
218
226 B01 14.fb1 xc2 15.c1 b2 Really playing

Handke,Florian 2475 with f ire although as long as he keeps
Motwani,Paul 2525 attacking the Rook on a1 he should be
12th Monarch Assurance, Erin (7) 2003 surviving. W hite hacks on as he must-he's
[Andrew Martin] material down! 16.xc6 bxc6 17.xc6+ f8
18.e1 d8! Keeping the pieces protected is
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 vital in a position like this. As long as Black
Paul wrote a very nice review of my video/ can buy enough time to safety his King he will
DVD on the Scandinavian. It's good to see be winning. 19.e3 b6 20.c3 c5!
him playing this very solid line. 4.d4 f6 With a double attack on f2 and c6. The fate of
5.d2 c6 6.c4 f5 7.e2 e6 8.d5!? the position is clarifying. 21.e3 xe3
Could come as a total shock to the 22.fxe3 d3 23.c1 e7! 24.e5 c8!
unprepared but never to the thorough Motwani. Black chooses a risk-free way. He returns the
Black's position is far too stable to be shaken exchange to enter a better ending. 25.xd3
by such brazen means. cxd5 9.xd5 d8 xc6 26.a3+
10.xf6+ xf6 11.f3 [ 26.xc6 xc6 27.e4 g6-+ ]
[ I wonder what Motwani had in mind against 26...d6 27.b4 f8 28.e4 c5+ 29.h1
immediate castling? 11.0-0-0 c6 12.g4 Very calm. xe4 30.a6 d8 31.a3 f2
g6 13.f4 xc2?! ( 13...0-0-0 14.f3 Verdict: 8 d5 is sharp but perfectly OK for
a3!? is a possible improvement.) 14.xc2 Black as long as he is precise and courageous.
d4+ 15.b1 0-0-0? ( Having reached this Motwani's novelty, the capture on b2, seems
crazy position 15...xe2 is the only option. exciting, playable and an excellent way of
However 16.b5+! d8 17.c3+ c7 playing flat-out for the win.
18.xf6 xg1 19.d7+ b6 20.d4+ 0-1
xb5 21.xg1 will be a very rough ride for
Black. ) 16.e4+- Rutkowski, I-Schoene, M/
Frankfurt 2002. ] 227 B01
11...c6 12.b5 Handke,Florian 2475
[ If 12.0-0-0 g4! is an accurate reply: Zill,Christoph 2295
13.e3 e7= ( 13...c8; 13...xf3 14.gxf3 7th BayEM Bad Wiessee (7) 2003
c8 15.b1 e7 )] [Andrew Martin]
12...xb2!N Very brave, but on the other
hand, why not? Black calls White's bluff and Poor old Handke. In our last update we saw
as long as he can get his King to safety rapidly, h i m f o u n d e r i n g a g a i n s t M o t wa n i ' s s o l i d
should stand well. Scandinavian and now we see him again
[ The less precise 12...g4 is answered by trying to blow Black away in the very same
13.e4 xf3 14.xc6+ bxc6 15.gxf3 c8 opening and again coming unstuck. 1.e4 d5
16.0-0-0 a3 17.c3 d6 18.hg1 0-0 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6!
19.g5 e5 20.h6 xe4 21.fxe4 e5 I quite like this move-order over 4..Nf6. It
22.f4 and White has a large advantage. To makes W hite think twice about Bd2. 5.c4
cede the initiative so easily is not Motwani's f5 6.d2 e6 7.g4!? Well, there he is at it
style. h8 23.fxe5 gxh6 24.d7 a5 again. It was 7 d5 against Motwani and now
25.f1 g7 26.c2 h5 27.f2 comes something even more violent. Can
Nielsen, S-Petersen, F/Aarhus 1990. ] Black's position be assaulted by these
13.0-0 d6 means? I am very doubtful. What has Black
[ 13...d8 also seems perfectly viable: done wrong? It even benefits him that the
14.fb1 xc2 15.c1 e4 16.xc6+ bxc6 Knight remains on g8 so there's nothing to hit
17.a6 d5 18.a5 a8 19.b7 with g4-g5. g6 8.e2
( 19.xc6 e7 20.c8+ xc8 21.xc8+ [ 8.h4 h5 9.g5 e7! is absolutely OK for
d8 ) 19...c5 One can understand Motwani's Black. ]
desire to prepare castling. ] 8...b4
219
[ A word or two about taking on c2 now, order to attack the black queen again from
because Black can play this way in many c4. This isn't just stubbornness, as on c4
lines. The usual response is 8...xc2 9.d5! the horse will be in touch with the
and in this particular case the pawn grab strategically important e5 point. c6 8.c4
looks too risky: cxd5 10.b5+! c6 11.c1 c7 9.g3 e6 10.f4 ( Or 10.e2 xc4
d4 12.e4! xa2 13.xc2 conceding the bishop pair allows Black to
Only comp uters take these p awns - f o r play e7-e6 and set up a solid light square
humans the defence is just too difficult. ] centre. 11.xc4 d7 12.g2 gf6 13.0-0
9.0-0-0 e7 10.h3 d5= Zill has a very 0-0 14.e1 e6 15.a4 a5 16.c3 b6
comfortable game with no problems about his 17.e2 a6 18.c2 fe8 19.h4 ad8
development and ample counterplay. Indeed, 20.g5 c8 and Black survived the slight
if anyone is better it is Black with his compact pressure to hold a draw against his very
pawn structure. 11.xd5 cxd5 12.f4 c6 strong opponent in Giri, A (2758)-
13.fxd5? Handke just doesn't enjoy playing Rakhmanov, A (2626)/ Linares ESP 2014.)
against 1 ...d5, that is clear. Salvation 10...c8 Black's queen has been pushed
possibly lies in the second of the two following around, but it's not clear White has achieved
variations: that much. The white queen's knight has
[ 13.xg6 hxg6 14.a3 e7 15.d3 c8 ] moved four times after all! 11.d2 d7
[ 13.a3 xd4 14.e5 xc3 15.xc3 a4 12.e2 h6 13.fe5
16.d2 f3 17.xg7 0-0-0 18.xg6 fxg6 A) Here 13...gf6 looks OK for Black due
19.d3 Tough to find. ] to a tactical point a couple of moves in the
13...xc2! 14.de1 0-0 future: 14.f3 g5 15.e3 c7 16.h4 g4
[ 14...xc3 wa s st r o n ge r st i l l : 15.xc3 17.f4
( 15.xc3 xd5 16.xc2 xa2 ) A1) After 17...gxf3 18.xf7 the white
15...xd4 16.e5 xe5 17.xe5 g6 knight isn't after the rook on h8- it wants
There's no way back for White here. ] the black queen which has no safe move
15.xb4 xb4 16.b5 a4 17.c3 a5 as if c8 ( Instead 18...e4!
18.b5 xa2 19.xc2 The Bishop led a c o m p l i c a t e s m a t t e r s b u t 19.e3
charmed life until now but Zill still has the is st ill go o d f o r W h it e .) 19.fd6+
game under control. a6 20.c3 and after chasing the black queen all
[ 20.d5! was the only chance: xd5 21.c3 o ve r t h e b o a rd t h e wh it e h o r s e m e n
d4+ 22.b1 xh1 23.xh1 xe2 finally capture her.;
24.xe2 fd8 25.e3 ac8 Black has a A2) 17...b6! 18.xb6 ( 18.xf7?
large advantage but White has some hope xc4 ) 18...xb6 19.g2 h5
.] ( 19...xb2? 20.0-0 with an attack-
20...xd4+ 21.d1 b3+ where can Black castle safely as h6 is
0-1 hanging and the b-file plus white bishop
on g2 look deadly after 0-0-0.) 20.0-0-0
0-0-0;
228 B01 B) 13...df6 14.h4 ( White should
Hansen,Eric 2593 p r o b a b l y s e t t l e f o r t h e s o l i d 14.d3!?
Spraggett,K 2564 d5 15.d2 ) 14...d5 15.h5 ( 15.0-0-0
TCh-ESP Div Honor 2014 (1.1) 04.09.2014 gf6 ) 15...g5 16.e3 gf6 17.f3 xe3
[Neil McDonald] 18.xe3 0-0 19.0-0-0 d8 20.b4 c7
21.c4 xc4 22.xc4 d5 23.xd5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 g6 xd5 24.f4 ad8 Black has gained
Avoiding 4...Nf6. Black plans to put pressure against d4 typical of that in the
immediate pressure on the d4 pawn with Bg7. Caro-Kann where he often doubles rooks
5.b5 along the d-file.
[ Another recent game went 5.f3 g7 B1) 25.he1!? c5?! ( Better to play
6.b5 b6 7.a3 The knight retreats in 25...e6!? keeping the tension.) 26.b4
220
xe5 27.dxe5 xd1+ 28.xd1 xd1+ 29...f4! 30.xf4

29.xd1 d7+ 30.c1 gxf4 31.gxf4 [ After 30.xf4 xf5 to defend d3 31.h3
cxb4 32.xb4 is about equal.; g6! An insidious quiet move White has no
B2) 25.c3? creating a weakness on c3 good way to meet the twin threats of 32...
that Black exploits. b5! 26.e2 b4 gxf4 and 32...c4. ]
27.c4 bxc3 28.bxc3 xe5! 29.dxe5? 30...gxf4 31.xf4 e5 White is now losing
( But 29.fxe5 c5 is still good for Black.) 'on points' as there is no strong blow against
29...b6 30.xd5 e3+ 31.b2 xd5 the black king. 32.g4+ h7 33.xd8 xd8
32.xc6 ( 32.fxg5 hxg5 is still terrible 34.c1 d4 35.f3 b4 36.e2 xf5+
f o r W h it e .) 32...e2+ 33.a1 a5 37.a1 g7 38.a3 h4 39.h3 f6 40.e3
34.a4 c2 0-1 Raetsky, A (2426) - e5 41.f2 c4
Rakhmanov, A (2626)/Abu Dhabi UAE 0-1
2014. ]
5...b6 6.f4 a6 7.e2 Beginning an
ambitious scheme involving queenside 229 B01
castling. White is playing with fire as a black Haslinger,S 2535
bishop on g7 often has the last laugh in such Kjartansson,G 2408
step ups. 38th Seville Open (5.1) 15.01.2013
[ Black develops easily after 7.f3 f6 [Tom Rendle]
8.e2 f5 etc. ]
7...g7 8.0-0-0 f6 9.f3 f5 10.e5 0-0 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
11.g4 e6 12.c4 c6 13.c3 ad8 14.e3 f6 5.f3 a6 This used to be the main move
a5 15.f4 c5! A pawn thrust typical of in this line but in the last couple of years it
Black's half open defences versus 1.e4. 16.d5 seems to have fallen strangely out of fashion.
[ Upon 16.h3 cxd4 17.xd4 b4 18.a3 6.g3 g4 7.h3 h5 8.g2 c6 9.0-0!
c6 19.xc6 bxc6 20.e3 a6! So far we've followed the mainline of 5...a6
defending the c4 pawn is a nuisance and and the current consensus is that W hite is
after 21.c5 a5 22.g2 the exchange doing well but maybe it's not so clear... e6!?
sacrifice xd4!? 23.xd4 xc5 24.d3 An unusual move in this position but Black is
c4 25.hd1 d5 gives Black a nice in definite need of something new
initiative. ] [ 9...0-0-0 10.f4 b4 11.g4 g6 12.a3!
16...xg4! Not a shattering blow as White is is analysed in Svidler-Tiviakov by Rowson
a b l e t o k e e p a s o l i d c e n t r e . H o w e ve r i t but in summary White is just doing well here
activates the black pieces, whereas retreating as it's to o risky f o r Black to take on b 2
the bishop to c8 would leave Black without because of xb2 13.e1 e6 14.e5 ]
much dynamism. 17.xg4 xg4 18.d2! 10.f4
[ White will be mated after 18.xg4 xc3 [ 10.g4 is less convincing here, after g6
19.bxc3?! xc3+ 20.b1 d6 ] 11.e3 and now in Korneev, O (2568)-Vinas
18...h6 19.b1 f5 20.b5 b6 21.h3 G u e rre ro , C (2 0 9 7 ) Ma l a g a 2 0 0 2 0-0-0!
d4 22.xd4 xd4? A strange mistake. would've given Black an excellent opening ]
Black would have a very pleasant game after 10...b4
[ 22...cxd4 -threat 23...d3- 23.d3 c5 [ 10...d8 is too passive after 11.g4 g6
etc. ] 12.e5! xd4 13.xb7 xc2 14.c1
23.c1 f6 24.hf1 b5 25.f5 g5 26.h5? and Black was already in trouble in Marzahn,
[ White would be better again after 26.cxb5 H (1984)-Kaspereit, H (2124) W iesbaden
b4 27.g2 xd5 ( Or 27...h8 28.c4 ) 2011 ]
28.h4! seeing that gxh4? loses material to 11.a3
29.xd5 xd5 30.g2+ ] [ 11.xc7! may be the safest way to play the
26...h6 27.cxb5 b4 28.g2 xd5 position as W hit e if yo u're not keen o n
29.d3? allowing a piece sac. c8 12.f4 xb2
[ Now 29.h4 leaves the game unclear. ] 13.a4 and now b4 14.c4! gives White a
221
good game. Black can temporarily win a 15.e3 h5!? ]

pawn with xd4 15.xd4 xa4 but 14.g4! xg4 The only move that makes
16.e5 leaves White doing well and the sense here
pawn on b7 is dropping anyway. ] [ 14...g6? 15.c4 a5 16.d2 would be
11...b6 12.a4 rather embarrassing for Black ]
[ 12.g4!? avoids the piece sacrifice as [ 14...xg4?! 15.hxg4 xg4 16.c3
A) 12...g6 should be preferred and now and Black doesn't have nearly enough for
13.a4 a7! and now ( 13...b5?! 14.b3 the piece ]
leaves Black in real trouble) 14.xc7! 15.hxg4 xg4 Black has two pawns for the
leads to huge complications but af te r sacrificed knight and reasonable practical
computer analysis I think White is doing chances but I don't think it's quite enough
well: b5 15.b6 against accurate play. 16.e1?!
A1) 15...d8 16.e5! ( 16.xd8 xd8 [ 16.c3! leaves Black struggling for enough
isn't so clear as the knight is trapped on compensation - f or examp le play could
b6 ) 16...xe5 17.xd8 exg4 18.c4 continue h5 17.c2 h4 18.g5! f5
xd8 19.c5 h6 20.b4 and although 19.d1 g6 20.e3 h5 21.h3
Black has two pieces for the rook it's and Black's attack is going nowhere. ]
cle a r W h it e is d o in g we ll a s h e h a s 16...f5! 17.g3 h5 Suddenly White is
complete control of the centre and under real pressure and he chooses to swap
queenside and Black's king is in real queens although this does allow Black to gain
danger.; a third pawn. 18.d3
A2) 15...c8 16.xc8 xc7 17.e5 [ 18.e3!? is my computer's suggestion but
d8 18.c4! xc8 19.cxb5 axb5 20.a4 even it agrees that Black has real chances
d6 21.axb5 0-0 22.a8 c7 23.b3 after g5! ]
and White has much the better chances 18...xd3 19.cxd3 xf3 20.xf3 xd4
with a dangerous passed pawn on b5; 21.e4 d6 Things have calmed down and
B) 12...xg4? 13.hxg4 xg4 14.d5! we've reached a f airly level middlegame.
and White is pretty much winning here. ] Normally I'd slightly prefer the piece over the
12...b5?! pawns but here White's pawn structure is still
[ 12...a7!? is probably best but after 13.g4 slightly compromised. 22.ac1 f5 23.xd6
g6 14.xc7 we transpose to the mainline xd6 24.h1 g5 25.c5 c6 26.c4 e8
of 12.g4 which is better for White although 27.e5 e7 28.b4 b8 29.a4 h4
at least not totally clear. ] Black is very solid and has the easier position
13.b3?! to play with a plan of pushing the kingside
[ 13.c4! is a strong suggestion of Houdini's pawns. The rest of the game has the feeling
and it does seem as though White is doing of mutual time-trouble. 30.h2 a7 31.a5
well after xc4 14.c1 b5 15.g4 g6 g4 32.g1 h7 33.f1 h6 34.g2?!
16.e1 g6?!
A) 16...0-0-0 17.f1! d5 18.c4 d7 [ 34...h3 35.h1 h2 and with Nf3 and e5
and now 19.e5! leads to a clearly better co m in g it 's c le a r t h a t B la ck i s t h e o n e
ending for White after xd4 ( 19...xe5? pressing to win ]
loses to 20.b6+! cxb6 21.xe6+ ) 35.h1 d8
20.xc6 xd1 21.exd1 xd1+ 22.xd1 [ 35...g3! and I still prefer Black here ]
bxc6 23.xa6+ b8 24.d8+ a7 36.d5 xd5 37.xd5 cxd5 38.xd4 h3
25.c8 and Black is completely tied up; 39.g1 b8 40.d7+?!
B) 16...d3 17.xd3 xd3 18.xc7 ] [ 40.b5! was needed to activate the rook ]
13...0-0-0 This commits Black to a piece 40...c7 41.e5 d6?? This must be
sacrifice but I don't think he gets quite enough based on a terrible miscalculation because
compensation. now White is simply winning
[ 13...xf3 was a better option as White is [ 41...g7 may just be winning here after
on ly sligh t b e t t e r a f t e r 14.xf3 0-0-0 42.f4 ( or 42.h2 d6 43.c4+ e7
222
44.e3 f6 45.b5 e5 46.b4 f4 ) advantage could be retained with simple
42...d6 43.d4 c7 and the rook is horribly moves:
misplaced on f4 ] [ 12.xd6 xd6 13.0-0-0 bd7 14.e4
42.xg6 e5 43.e7! exd4 44.xf5+ e5 xe4 15.xe4 f6 16.g2 0-0 17.he1 ]
45.g3 White keeps an extra knight and [ 12.e5 xe5 13.dxe5 xd3 ( 13...d5
Black can no longer get his pawns rolling. The 14.0-0-0 d7 15.he1 ) 14.cxd3 fd7
rest of the game is simple d6 46.e2 b6 15.d4 ]
47.axb6 c6 48.xd4+ xb6 49.h2 12...c7
c7 50.f3 gxf3 51.xf3 c6 52.d4+ [ Commentating live at the time, I thought
d6 53.xh3 e5 54.e2 f5 55.g3 Black's id ea m ight h ave be e n 12...xf4+
g5 56.f3 f5 57.e3 13.gxf4 g6 This is very risky because of the
1-0 immediate 14.f5! and the Black King gets
st u ck in th e m id d le : ( 14.h4; 14.he1 )
14...gxf5 15.he1! Already Qxf5 is an
230 B01 u n p l e a s a n t t h r e a t . ( 15.hg1 bd7
Haslinger,Stewart 2423 16.g7 ) 15...0-0 ( 15...d6 16.d5! xd5
Parker,Jonathan 2509 17.xd5 cxd5 18.xd5+- ) 16.g1+ h8
93rd ch-GBR Swansea WLS (7) 13.08.2006 17.e3 bd7 Such a variation can't be
[Andrew Martin] seen through to the end one must trust
one's intuition. Parker makes the practical
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 choice, rejecting a line where his King would
A complete surprise for Haslinger. 4.d4 f6 be in peril, whether he could have defended
5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4 7.g2 c6 the position or not. ]
Another outing for Tiviakov's solid idea. White 13.xd6 xd6 14.e4 xe4 15.xe4 d7
may be able to gain a small advantage in T h e K n i g h t w i l l c o m e t o f 6 a n d t h e n
many different ways, but the Black position everything will be in order. Haslinger makes a
remains diff icult to crack. 7..c6 is a good bold move. 16.xh7!?
choice against opponents who are desperate [ 16.he1 f6 17.g2 leads to a position
to win. 7..Nc6 is more combative. 8.h3 where it's very tough for W hite to make
[ 8.0-0 e6 9.a4 ( 9.e1 e7 10.h3 xf3 progress. ]
11.xf3 0-0 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 16...g6 17.xg6 fxg6 18.xg6+ d8
Dworakowska, J-Ogloblin, N/Moscow 2004 19.he1 e8?!
(23) leads to a typical example of White's [ 19...c7! is an improvement, with the idea
minute advantage. Two Bishops and the 20.xe6 ( 20.h4 might be better: af8 21.f4
long-term prospect of b4-b5.; 9.f4 d8 hg8 22.d3 d5 23.b1 b5 ) 20...d5
10.d3 d6 11.e5 f5 12.e2 0-0 21.b1 hg8 22.f7 af8 Black marshals
13.h3 h6 14.ad1 e7 15.a3 bd7 h i s f o r c e s ve r y q u i c k l y a n d c a n n o t b e
16.fe1 fd8 17.h2 ac8 18.xd7= worse. ]
Cristian, S-Rentner, D/playchess.com 2004) 20.c4?
9...a5 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 e7?! [ 20.f4! probably justifies the piece sacrifice.
( 11...xd4 12.d1 b6 had to be played, I don't see how Black organises his pieces
asking W hite to prove it!) 12.f4 d8 now: c7 ( 20...d5 21.b1 c7 22.g4
13.ad1 0-0 14.e4 xe4 15.xe4 d7 h8 23.d3 ) 21.d3 h8 22.h4 ag8
16.c4 e8 17.c2 c8 18.h4 b6 23.e3 f6 24.de1 e8 25.e5
19.d3 f6 20.fd1 Shabalov, A- Haslinger is intent on opening up the Black
Gonzalez, R/Philadelphia 2004 ] King, but as the game goes, c2-c4 only
8...xf3 9.xf3 Not repeating Al-Modiahaki's exposes his own monarch! ]
9 Qxf3, which we saw in the previous update. 20...c7 21.h4 b5! 22.c5 d5 23.b3 f5!
e6 10.f4 d8 11.d3 d6 The time 24.h5
W hite gained with 10 Bf4 is regained! [ 24.xf5 exf5 25.d2 f6 sees the
12.0-0-0!? Very sharp! Once again a small Black Kn ight h ea ding f or t wo e xc elle n t
223
squares. ] l o o k i n g a t ( W h i t e a l s o h a s 16.f3
24...xg6 25.hxg6 f6 26.d3 , to prevent ...Bf4: c5 17.b1 b8 18.b3
[ 26.f4 was perhaps a superior try, but both f5 19.g4! ) 16...f4! 17.h5 xd2+ 18.xd2
p l a y e r s we r e i n t i m e - t r o u b l e a f t e r t h e c5 19.b1! Then e5?! 20.b3! xg4
earlier complications. As the game goes, 21.hxg6 is too ambitious. ]
Black keeps light-squared control to the end 14.b3 c7 15.g3
and this is enough to take the point. ] [ White keeps space and two bishops after
26...e7 27.f3 d5 28.h1 g8 15.xg6! hxg6 16.f3! with the idea h4
29.h6 d7 30.g4 e8 31.g5 eg7 and g4. This time his advantage would be a
32.h7 e7 33.f7 xh7 34.xh7 xg6-+ serious one. ]
35.f4 d5 36.a7 xf4 37.xa6 e2+ 15...0-0-0 16.xg6 hxg6 17.h4 f5!?
38.d2 xd4 39.e3 e5 40.a4 bxa4 [ Definitely better although still not equal was
41.bxa4 xg5 42.a5 g1 43.a7 e1+ 17...c5 18.b1 b8 19.dxc5!? xc5
44.d2 a1 45.e3 b3 46.a6 xc5 20.g4 ]
47.a8+ d7 48.a7 c7 49.e8 xa7 18.b1
50.xe5 d6 My verdict on 7...c6 is that [ Or 18.g5! d7 ( 18...e7? 19.xe6+!
Black should o nly play this move if he is fxe6 20.xe6+ d7 21.xe7 e8
happy with a draw. 22.xg6 dxe7 23.xf5+ ) 19.f6 g8
0-1 20.h5 ]
18...he8 19.h5 gxh5 20.xh5 h8
21.dh1 xh5 22.xh5 d5 23.h7 d7
231 B01 Black's pieces are very awkwardly placed, and
Haznedaroglu,Kivanc 2440 the f-pawn is a real problem. From here on out
Gogolis,Alexandros 2289 he can't hold.
Acropolis Open (3) 16.08.2007 [ 23...f6?? 24.xe6+ ]
[John Watson] 24.g5 g8 25.h5! e8 26.c4
[ 26.xf7? xg5 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6 26...c7 27.c5 e7 28.xe7 xe7 29.xf7
The ChessPublishing e-book gives this an '!' d8 30.h7 e8
for 'sidestepping a number of attacking ideas.' [ 30...h8 31.xc7+ ]
5.f3 31.a4 a5 32.g7 b8 33.d7 c8 34.f7
[ But the line given, 5.c4 f5 , has its own h8 35.xe6 h1+ 36.a2 f1 37.xf5
drawbacks, in that W hite can play 6.ge2 a7 38.d5 a6 39.d6 h8 40.c4 d4
a n d t r a n s p o s e t o s o m e o f t h e m o r e 41.xb7+ xb7 42.d7+ An instructive
attractive Ng3/f4/f5 lines. ] ga m e . B la ck wa sn 't t h a t b a d ly o f f in t h e
5...f6 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5 opening, but it was hard to shake W hite's
This is still a popular sequence after many modest pressure.
y e a r s , a n d s t i l l n o t f u l l y r e s o l v e d . O n e 1-0
attraction is that White can safely play for a
small advantage. d8 9.xf6+ gxf6 10.c3
d7 11.e2 d6 12.h4 g6 13.0-0-0 232 B01
In Hungaski-Di Diego, we see a plan with 0-0 Heinatz,Thomas 2332
that shouldn't have achieved much. b6 Keitlinghaus,Ludger 2503
[ In the notes to that game I suggested that Bundesliga 2003-4 (7) 13.02.2004
13...c7 14.xg6 hxg6 15 g3, and gave [Andrew Martin]
W h ite o nly t h e m in or ad va nt a ge o f t h e
bishop pair. Perhaps the plan with 15.h4 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6
0-0-0 ( 15...f4 16.xf4 xf4+ 17.b1 5.f3 f5 6.c4 d7!? A very interesting
0-0-0 18.g3 c7 19.g4!?; 15...f5? 16.xe6 approach, delaying ...Nf6 in order to develop
fxe6 17.xe6+ d8 18.xg6 ) 16.g4 the other pieces first and thus taking away a
and h5, to create a passed pawn, is worth lot of W hite's attacking options. As long as
224
Black can't be downed by an early d4-d5 then What else does White have? His position is
I think this is a pretty good idea. 7.d2 e6 dubious and therefore he has to try some
8.e4N Other moves appear satisfactory for tactics. xe3 19.xa8 xc1 20.xc1 0-0
Black. White has a very hard time 21.c6
commencing the attack: [ 21.e4 xe4 22.xe4 xe4 23.xe4
[ 8.b3 c7 ( 8...gf6 9.e2 b6 xb2 24.c7 f6 25.c2 xc2 26.xc2
10.0-0-0 d6 11.he1 0-0 12.h3 fe8 b8 is simple enough well, White's a pawn
13.e3 c7 14.b1 b4 15.d2 c5 down. Other than that there is no other
16.dxc5 xc5 17.e3 e7 18.g4 g6 retreat. ]
19.g5 e4 20.xe4 xe4 21.d2 f5 21...c8-+ A crushing pin! 22.c4 xb2
22.c4 ed8= Handan, A-Nuesken, N/ [ 22...b8! ]
Oberhof 1998) 9.e2 e7 10.h3 gf6 23.a4
11.e5 xe5 12.dxe5 d7 13.f4 b4 [ 23.d1 b6 24.d6 f8! Deep Fritz!
14.0-0 xc3 15.bxc3 h6 16.c4 0-0 25.b5 xb5 26.xb5 c1+ 27.f1 e5-+ ]
17.d3 xd3 18.cxd3 b5 19.fe1 b6 23...b8 24.d4 d3! No way back from
20.g4 h7 21.e3 c5 22.e4+ h8 here. 25.c3 xc3 26.xc3 a6 27.c2
23.c4 b4 24.ad1 a4 25.h4 h7 e5 28.df5 f8 I think it was Wahls in his
26.e4+ h8 27.h4 h7 28.e4+ excellen t 'Mode rnes Ska ndinavisch' wh o
1/2-1/2 Stepovaia Dianchenko, T-Zhukova, suggested this move order for Black and you
N/Belgrade 2000 ] will see a similar strategy ef fected in the
[ 8.0-0 c7 9.e2 e7 10.e4 gf6 Pat ze r Va ria tion where Black d elays th e
11.xf6+ xf6 12.d3 xd3 13.xd3 0-0 development of his Kingside. I see no reason
14.g5 xg5 15.xg5 is level, Sutovsky, E- at all why this should not be a very successful
Doettling, F/Tel Aviv 2001. ] method. Highly recommended!
[ 8.e2 b4 ( 8...c7?! 9.d5! e5 0-1
10.0-0-0 e7 11.he1 f6 12.h4 g6
13.g4 Fuellgrabe, T-Rickert, D/ Ruhrgebiet
1999 ) 9.a3 e7 10.0-0 xc3 11.xc3 233 B01
c7 12.h4 b6 13.d5 f4! 14.xf5 Heinemann,Ernst 2211
xf5 15.d3 xd5 16.e5 g5 17.f4 Sieber,H 2067
g6 18.g4 de3 19.xf5 xf5 20.h1 16th VR Bank Open (5) 25.08.2007
h6 21.g1 0-0-0 22.b4 f6 Korneev, O- [John Watson]
Kogan , A/Port Erin 2003 And of course, if
White cannot attack Black directly then the 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c3
Black position is very solid indeed. ] a5 5.c4 c6 6.ge2 This poses a real
8...c7 9.g3 g6 10.h4 h6 11.h5 h7 ch a ll e n ge t o B la ck' s d e ve l o p m e n t . f5!?
12.e2 This is the consistent move, however risky.
[ 12.h4 gf6 13.f4 b6 is Caro-Kann Black can also accede to blocking off his
like, but only W hite has problems in this bishop by
position. ] [ 6...e6 7.0-0 bd7 , accepting a Slav/Caro-
[ Maybe either 12.0-0 ] Kann structure in which W hite's knight is
[ or 12.e3 are the moves to play, just not ideally place on e2. Of course, W hite
accepting that White has no advantage yet. ] still has the advantage by virtue of his space
12...xc2! In other main lines where this and free development. ]
capture is possible, White would usually have 7.g3 g6
the advance d4-d5 ready. No such advance is [ 7...e6 8.xf5 ( 8.d2 ) 8...xf5 9.0-0
possible here. The Knight on g3 seems a little bd7 is playable, although I'd rather be
o u t o f t h e ga m e so wh y n o t t a ke o n c2 ? White with the bishops. ]
13.c1 h7 14.0-0 gf6 15.d5 This has to 8.0-0
work or White is just a pawn down for nothing. [ 8.h4 h6
cxd5 16.xd5 b6 17.e3 c5! 18.xb7 A) 9.0-0 bd7 ( 9...e6 10.f4 d6 11.f5
225
exf5 12.d3 0-0 13.xf5 with an attack, 16.e4! e8? 17.a5 and White won easily:
and the immediate threat of 14 Nxh6+.) xe4 18.xb6+ axb6 19.f3 xd4 20.d1
10.f4 h7!? is harder to crack than it xd1+ 21.xd1 c7 22.f1 e5 23.g3
looks. Perhaps 11.e2 c7 12.ce4 b5 24.d3 xa2 25.b3 eg4 26.e2 a8
is as good as anything; 27.h3 e8 28.xe8 xe8 29.xf7+ b6
B) 9.h5 h7 10.e2 e6 30.hxg4 h6 31.g2 b4 32.g6 c5
B1) Insipid. The natural course was 33.c3 f6 34.xg7 d5 35.f3 xc3
11.d2 c7 12.0-0-0 e7 ( 12...bd7 36.f5 d5 37.h7 e3 38.c8 g5
13.xe6 fxe6 14.xe6+ d8 15.he1 39.xb7+ c5 40.e4 e7 41.e6 f6
with attack) 13.ge4 bd7 ( 13...0-0 42.d7 b4 43.b7 c5 44.f7 d6
14.g4! ) 14.f3 with the idea of Bf4, 45.a7 c3 46.a2 c5 47.c2 b4
although W hite should have only the 48.d3 f6 49.f2 g5 50.e2 d5
slightest of advantages.; 51.e4+ xb3 52.d4 b4 53.c4 a4
B2) 11.b3!? b4 12.d2 bd7 54.xc6 e3 55.c4 a3 56.a6+ b2
13.0-0 0-0 14.a3 xc3 This is now the 57.a2+ b1 58.a4 b3 59.xb3 b2
standard Scandinavian motif, introduced 60.e6 c1 61.a1+ b2 62.e1 xg4
(or at least brought to general attention) 63.xg4 d8 64.e6 c7 65.g4 d8
by Larsen. 15.xc3 g5 16.fe1 h4 66.h1 g5 67.h2+ a3 68.e4 b4
17.f3 g4!? ( 17...fd8 ) 18.f4 df6 69.f5 c3 70.g6 d4 71.xh6 c1
19.f3 xh5 1/2-1/2 Becerra Rivero, J -A 72.h5 f4 73.f5 c1 74.f7 e4 75.g5
Rodriguez, San Martin 1995. ] xg5 76.xg5 f4 77.a5 e4 78.c8
8...bd7 d4 79.e6 c4 80.d6 b4 81.c5
[ 8...e6 9.f4 and f5 with a nice initiative. ] a4 82.c1 b5 83.d5 b4 84.f5
[ 8...h5!? has been played more than once: b3 85.d4 b2 86.b1+ a3 87.c4
A) 9.e1 bd7 ( 9...h4 10.ge4 xe4 a2
11.xe4 e6 ) 10.ge4 e6 11.g5!?; 1-0
B) 9.e2 (safe bd7 10.f4 ( 10.ge4
t h is is r o u gh ly e q u a l, a lt h o u gh B la c k
always has to deal with his small space 234 B01
deficit in this line.) 10...h4 11.ge4 0-0-0 Hernandez Carmenates,Hold 2541
12.g5 e6 13.f5 h5! 14.e1 e5! Almeida Quintana,O 2506
15.xf7 exd4 16.e2 ( 16.ce4= ) ch-CUB Men Final 2013 (6.3) 12.02.2013
16...xe1 17.xe1 b4 ( better may be [Tom Rendle]
17...c5 18.f4 d3+ 19.h1 dxc2
20.xh5 xh5 21.ge6 de8 ) 18.c3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
dxc3 19.xc3 xf7 20.xf7 and White f6 5.c4
enjoyed some advantage in Van den Berg- [ 5.f3 is more common and now it seems
Saptarshi, Dieren 2006. ] that c6 is somewhat dubious, for example
9.f4 e6 10.f5 exf5 11.e2+ d8 12.d2 6.d2 g4 7.b5 ( 7.d5
b6 13.h1 is also dangerous) 7...b6 8.c4 xf3
[ 13.xf5! is a more convincing move in view 9.xf3 xd4 10.xd4 xd4 11.xb7
of xf5 14.xf5 xd4+ ( 14...d6 e4+ 12.xe4 xe4 13.e3 and White
could lead to something like 15.d1 c7 had a very comfortable endgame and went
16.g5 ae8 17.f1 e7 - else Bxf7 - on to win in Yu Yangyi (2585)-Wang Chen
18.a4! b4 19.b3 b5 20.c3 a5 (2399) Hefei 2010. In fact this position has
21.c4! he8 22.d2 ) 15.e3 g4 been reached a few times and it just seems
16.f1! ] this line is a good antidote to 5...Nc6 ]
13...d6 5...c6!? This move is pretty rare and has
[ 13...xd4 ] never been examined on ChessPub before -
14.xf5 xf5 15.xf5 f8? c6 and Bg4 have both been seen many times.
[ 15...xd4 16.d1 ] 6.d5 The critical response but it might not be
226
best. B) 7...g4 8.f3 xf3 9.gxf3 c6

[ 6.ge2 is safer and now the mainline ( 9...0-0-0!? 10.a3 c5 11.axb4 xc4
continues g4 7.f3 12.xa7 e6 may be playable for Black but
A) 7...e6!? is worth investigating here it's certainly a bit risky.) 10.dxc6 e5+
8.xe6 must be critical and I feel White 11.e3 xc6 12.f4 a5 13.f3
should have slightly the better position and White had some advantage due to his
after ( 8.d3 led to equality after f5 two bishops and control over the centre
9.0-0 xd3 10.xd3 e6 11.a3 0-0-0 in Hernandez Leon, A (2227)-Hernando
in Ortiz Suarez, I (2569)-Ruiz Sanchez, O Rodrigo, J (2375) La Laguna 2007 ]
(2418) Badalona 2012) 8...fxe6 9.e3 7...c6! A key move in this line - other options
0-0-0 10.d3; are not so good.
B) 7...h5 8.d2 0-0-0 9.b5 b6 [ 7...g4 8.b5+!
10.a4 a5 11.a3!? led to a very sharp A) 8...xb5 doesn't equalise either after
game in Pavasovic, D (2561)-Bauer, C 9.xb5 xd1 10.xc7+ d7 11.axb4
(2631) Rogaska Slatina although I would d8 12.e6 ( or 12.xd1 xc7 13.f4+
certainly rather be White in these positions c8 14.c4 e6 15.c2 exd5 16.c5 a6
a s i t a l wa y s f e e l s a s t h o u g h B l a c k ' s 17.f3 wit h so m e e d g e f o r W h it e)
position is somewhat precarious. ] 12...fxe6 13.xd1 a6 14.dxe6+ xe6+
6...b4 15.e2;
[ 6...e5 is another option but it seems B) 8...c6 9.axb4 xa1 10.dxc6 a6!
White keeps a safe edge after 7.b3 e6 ( 10...bxc6 11.xc6+ d7 12.ge2!
8.e2 d6 9.d2 ( 9.f4 immediately may leaves Black in real trouble) 11.cxb7+
be stronger, e.g. g6 10.f5 e7 11.dxe6 axb5 12.bxa8+ xa8 13.f3
fxe6 12.fxe6 0-0 13.f3 and Black doesn't and Black does not have enough for the
have enough for the pawn) 9...c5 10.f4 pawn as b5 is still very weak ]
g6 11.f5 and White had good chances in [ 7...f5?! is tricky but bad after
Neuschmied, S (2308) -Schramm, C (2371) A) 8.axb4?! is not so convincing although
Jenbach 2012 although it went wrong after it worked well in the following game xa1
f4 12.xf4 xf4 13.h3 e3 14.fxe6?! 9.ge2 g6? 10.d4 e4 11.xe4
( 14.dxe6 should keep the advantage) xe4 12.0-0 0-0-0 13.b3 ( 13.e2
14...0-0 15.c4?! fxe6 16.xc5 xc5 is possibly stronger, e.g. xd5 14.f4
17.dxe6 e8 and Black was suddenly a4 15.e5! d7 16.xd5 and White
better. ] should be winning) 13...b1?? ( 13...a4
7.a3 At first this looks good but I can't actually was an only move but White is now only a
see any edge for W hite at all after Black's little better after 14.d4 xc2 15.c3
strong reply. e6! 16.xc2 exd5 ) 14.d4 xc2
[ 7.d2 has scored well for White and it may 15.xa7 xc4 16.c5 1-0 Warakomski,
be the simplest way to play this line T (2485)-Kleman, M (2238) W arsaw
A) 7...c5 8.b5+ d7 ( 8...c6 2009;
leaves W hite a little better after 9.e3 B) 8.b5+!
d6 10.dxc6 xc6 11.xd6 exd6 B1) or 8...c6?! 9.axb4 xa1 10.dxc6
12.f3 ) 9.xd7+ xd7 10.e3 d6?! b6 11.c7+ d7 12.xd7+ ( 12.f3!?
( 10...c4 offered much better chances xc1+ 13.d1 also wins ) 12...xd7
although White is still better after 11.f3 13.ge2 a6 14.d5 c8 15.0-0
e8 12.e5 a6 13.a3! bxd5 and although Black can survive for a few
14.xd5 a5+ 15.c3 xe5 16.f3 c6 moves it's clear he's getting crushed.;
17.0-0-0 and Black's king is terribly placed. B2) 8...d7 9.a4 xa4 ( 9...a6
Of course it would be different if he could 10.f3 g6 11.e3 leaves Black in a
still castle!) 11.e2 and White had a clear horrendous tangle - the best move may
advantage in Lazic, M (2459)-Hernando be ab8 and that helps to illustrate just
Rodrigo, J (2393) Halkidiki 2002; how bad Black's position is!) 10.xa4
227
xc2+ 11.f1 xa1 12.c3 improvement:

and with Black's pieces rather [ 18.c5 d7 ]
uncoordinated White's queen must be [ 18.g4 makes it a little harder for Black to
worth more than the rook, bishop and develop and perhaps g6 19.h4 xd6 20.h5
pawn. ] g5 21.f4 is the way for White to continue.
8.axb4 Very aggressive but it seems to me Still I prefer Black here after f5! 22.xg5
that only Black can be better in this line e7 ]
[ 8.dxc6 xc6 9.f3 g4 and Black has a 18...xd6 19.d3 After so much early
very com f ortable o pening a nd an e xtra excitement the players agreed to a draw here.
centre pawn. ] [ I think it's Black who should play on at this
8...xa1 9.ge2 e6 point, one possible continuation is 19.d3
[ 9...e5!? cuts out the line played in the 0-0 20.c4 bxc3 21.xc3 a1 22.xd5
g a m e a s n o w 10.d6?! ( 10.dxe6 exd5 and Black has most of the winning
i s b e s t a n d n o w xe6 11.xe6 fxe6 chances as the pawns could certainly get
12.d4 a6 and White doesn't have dangerous as the game goes on. ]
enough for the exchange although he can ½-½
keep it unclear with 13.0-0 d8 14.e3
c4 15.b3! xb4 16.f4 and White still
has some practical chances) 10...e6 235 B01
11.xe6 fxe6 followed by 0-0-0 looks much Hess,Robert L 2625
better for Black ] Tiviakov,Sergei 2650
10.d6 48th Groningen Open A (8.1) 29.12.2011
[ 10.dxe6 transposes to the variation [Milos Pavlovic]
above. ]
10...b5 11.a2 a5! This forces White to act 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
quickly and although he is trapping the queen f6 5.f3 g6 In my survey on 3...Qd6 I
Black is always getting plenty of material for it. focused mainly on 5...a6 and 5...c6, but here
12.d4 axb4 13.b3 xa2 we will see a third idea. 6.b5 d8
[ 13...bxc3! is more accurate I think as it [ 6...b6
doesn't allow a draw but perhaps Black A) 7.f4 d5 8.e5 f6 9.g3
wasn't so worried about that. After 14.xa1 This is another way of handling this line a6
xa2 15.b3 cxb2 16.e3 e4 10.c4 axb5 11.cxd5 e6 ( 11...c6 12.d3
( 16...d5!? is also strong) 17.d4 xd6 cxd5 13.0-0 c6 14.b3 e6 15.xb5
Black has the better chances and White has a5 16.a3 f7 17.ac1 d7 18.fe1
to be very careful. ] e7 19.d3 a7 20.b1 hc8 21.e3
14.xa1 g7 22.h4 b6 23.b4 f8 24.h5
[ 14.e2! seems to force a rather odd draw Menkinoski, R -Milanovic, D Obrenovac
after b1 15.d2 a1 ( 15...xb2 2011, White managed to built up a better
would be taking a big risk playing on after position ) 12.d3 a5+ 13.f1 c6
16.xb2 xb2 17.a1! xc2 18.a8 14.c2 f7 15.h4 a6 16.h5 b4
d7 19.d4 and Black has to be very 17.xg6+ e7 18.d6+ d7 19.e4
careful in this incredibly complicated hxg6 20.e1 xa2 21.xg6 xd6
position. ) 16.b3 b1 17.d2= ] 22.xd6 xd6 23.g3+ d5 24.e5+
14...xa1 d6 25.xb5+ e5 26.dxe5+ fxe5
[ 14...bxc3! transposes to the 13...bxc3 line 27.xe5+ d7 28.xb4 c5 29.xc5
and it's still Black's best option. ] a6+ 30.g1 d6 31.e5+ e6
15.e2 d5 16.d4 f6 17.b3 a2 32.xd6+ xd6 33.f7+ c5 34.hh4
This position is very difficult to judge but I 1 - 0 P e t r o s i a n , T (2 6 1 3 ) - K u r a j i c a , B
don't think Black can be worse here as the (2535) Plovdiv BUL 2010;
knight on d5 is very strong. 18.0-0 After this I B) 7.c4 c6 8.c3 g7 9.e2 0-0
like Black's position but it's hard to find an 10.0-0 d8 11.h3 f5
228
B1) 12.c5!?N c7 13.c4 b5 236 B01

( 13...bd7 14.g4 e6 15.xe6 fxe6 Hinks Edwards,Thom
16.e2 ) 14.b3 b4 15.e2 a6 Martin,Andrew D
( 15...bd7 16.f4 b7 17.g5 e6 T/T England 04.11.2003
is very risky for Black as the f5-bishop is [Andrew Martin]
"in the air" ) 16.g5 d5 17.g3;
B2) 12.e1!?N e4 13.f1 ( 13.c5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 As good as 3
c7 14.b3 e6 15.c4 xc4 Nc3 and cuts out a lot of tricky lines. g6?!
16.xc4 xc3 17.bxc3 e6 18.g5 ) I approached this game in a rather
13...xd4 14.xe4 xf2+ 15.xf2 experimental mood. My results with 3.. Nf6
xd1 16.xd1 a6 17.g4 e6 have been good: draw vs Rowson, win vs M.
18.b3; Ferguson, but Black was undoubtedly slightly
B3) 12.b3 a6 13.e3 xb3 worse in both games out of the opening, and
14.axb3 b4 15.g4 d3 16.xd3 not the type of edge that is easily shaken off.
xd3 17.fd1 b4 18.d2 So to 3... g6, offering W hite the chance to
Anan d, V -Kram nik, V Moscow RUS transpose to the 3 Nc3 Qd8 4 d4 g6 variation,
2009 ] another Scandinavian adventure bringing
7.f4 a6 8.a3!? I like this move, it mixed results. Probably Black's most reliable
prepares Na3-c4 where it strongly controls move right now is 3... Bg4 - I just didn't feel
the center. Also possible was: like playing it! 4.c3! d8 5.c4 g7 6.d4
[ 8.c4 c6 9.c3 g7 10.h3 f5 11.e2 h6 The point of Black's idea is to attack
0-0 12.b3 b6 13.xb6 axb6 14.a3 White's d pawn with Nh6-f5. The Knight often
Playing against the knight on a6 White has drops back (out of necessity) to d6 which can
s o m e p r e s s u r e i n t h i s e n d g a m e . b4 be a very influential central post. Do you
15.0-0-0 c5 16.g4 c2 17.axb4 xd1 remember the game Fischer-Robatsch, which
18.xd1 cxb4 19.b5 e4 20.e3 started 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 3 Nc3 Qd8 4 d4
Polgar, J)-Tomczak, J Warsaw POL 2011 ] g6 5 Bf4! and is traditionally thought to be
8...c6 9.c3 c7 10.c4 g7 11.e5 0-0 good for W hite? Then Larry Evans
12.a4 The position resembles many from the recommended 5... Nh6! and if 6 Be5 Rg8!? in
Alekhine or even Caro-Kann, we can say that 'The Chess Opening for you'. This may look
it is += cd5 13.a5 h6 14.e2 h5 zany but Black is threatening to recuperate
15.0-0 hf4 16.e1 xe2+ 17.xe2 e6 with ... Nc6 and W hite's game isn't quite as
18.g3 c8 19.ce5 f5 20.d3 xd3 promising as it looks. 7.f4 f5 8.e5!
21.xd3 e6 22.c4 e7 23.b3 Hinks-Edwards finds an excellent plan. If
An unpleasant position for Black. b6 24.axb6 White dallies, Black's idea takes shape and
xb6 he will have a fine game. W hite must play
[ 24...axb6 25.h4 ] sharply, emphasizing the slowness of Black's
25.c3 f5 26.e5 f6 27.c5! b7 28.g3 knight manoeuvre and go for the throat. 0-0
fe8 29.c4 d7 30.a4 xg3 31.hxg3 I didn't like it at all by now but Black has
c7 32.a6 f7 33.a4 b8 34.b4 b5 nothing better. He's got to hope that he can
35.d5! xd5 36.xa7 xa7 37.xa7+ g8 survive the attack. 9.xg7 xg7 10.e2
38.e7 xb4? d6 11.h4! g4
[ 38...f8 39.xf6 xb4 40.xe6 b7 [ 11...h5 12.d3 g4 13.0-0-0 just seemed
41.e5 d7 White is better but Black can too disgusting for words. ]
still play on. ] 12.h5 d7
39.a1! f8 40.a8 b1+ 41.h2 h5+ [ 12...xh5 13.d3 c6 14.e3 xf3
42.h4 h6 43.xe6+ h8 44.f7 15.gxf3 just seemed to be checkmate...
1-0 soon. ]
13.d3 f6 14.e5! A very powerful move
reminding me of a unpleasant experience in
this line at the hands of Peter Wells back at
229
Oakham in 1995. White centralizes and it will 33.xf7+ e7 34.xg2 xg2 35.xf5
be some time before Black shifts the Queen xf7 In all honest y, I cannot recommend 3...
from this dominant position. Qe5-h2 lurks in g6. The defensive task just seems too
the wings. I thought I was lost now not a nice onerous. Hinks-Edwards found a very strong
feeling. Black has to take a risk. attacking idea and if White plays 15 Nd2!, I
[ 14.hxg6 hxg6 15.0-0-0 e6 16.e3 h8 think Black is going down.
17.b1 xf3 18.xf3 d7 ] 0-1
14...xh5 15.xh5!? Executed instantly
and with confidence, but I am far from
convinced that this is best. Instead 237 B01
[ 15.d2! I believe to be better, threatening Howell,David 2633
f 3 an d g4 . I do n't se e wh at B la ck d oe s Papaioannou,Ioannis 2600
against that: g8 ( 15...g4 16.f3 f5 18th European Teams (2.5) 04.11.2011
17.de4 c6 18.0-0-0 ) 16.f3 ] [Milos Pavlovic]
[ By contrast 15.0-0-0? xf3 16.gxf3 h8
allows Black the chance to recuperate. ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
15...gxh5 16.e2 f6 5.f3 f5 6.c4 e6 7.d2 c6 8.d5
[ 16.0-0-0 with the idea of Nd5 might be d8 9.xf6+ xf6 10.e2 d7 11.0-0-0
better, although Black is surviving e.g. c6 The mainline of the Scandinavian, or should I
A) 17.g5 h6 18.h7 g8 19.xf6 say one of the mainlines. In the last couple of
exf6 20.xh5 f5 21.b1 g5!; years the Scandinavian has started to become
B) 17.h1 g8 18.xh5 f8 19.g5 a very popular defence with lots of tactical
( 19.h2 g4 ) 19...xg5 20.xg5 e8 ideas ready to be discovered, just as in this
21.xh7 xh7 22.xh7 d7; game. e7!?N Allowing Bg5, on the other
C) 17.e2 g8 18.f4 f8 ] hand, exchanging one more pair of pieces
16...g8 17.f4 f8 18.0-0-0 d7 might help Black to solve his opening
19.e1 e8 20.xh5 xh5 21.xh5 g4! problems.
After several accurate moves Black is right [ The usua l p la y f or Black was: 11...b6
back in the game. Hinks-Edwards sacrifice 12.b3 g4 13.d5 xf3 14.gxf3 cxd5
has been shown to be optimistic and if only 15.xd5 0-0-0 16.e4 d6 17.b1
Black can find time to take on g2 or to get his ( 17.a4 f4 18.xf4 xf4+ 19.b1 b8
Rooks going he will surely be winning. 20.a5 c8 21.a6 b6 Black holds
22.h6+ g7 23.e3 xg2! 24.xh7 g7 somehow. ) 17...e7 18.a4 a6 ( 18...b8
25.d3 h3! An excellent defensive move, 19.a5 d5 20.a6 b6 21.f4 g6 22.f3 )
tying the W hite Queen down and keeping 19.a5 d5 20.c4 ( 20.hg1 g6 21.f4 b8
communication open with d7. 26.c4 c6 27.c5 22.g3 ) 20...f4 ( 20...b4 21.f4 b8
W hite is very disappointed at his failure to 22.hg1 g6 23.g3 f5 24.g2 c7 )
mate and doesn't put up any further 21.e3 f5 22.c5 xc5 23.c1 b8
resistance. 24.xc5 xc5 25.xf4+ d6 26.xd6+
[ Maybe 27.f4 but Black is winning by xd6 27.c2 d2 28.hf1 1-0 Fedorchuk,
now. ] S-Reinderman, D /Warsaw 2005 ]
27...f5 28.e4 e6 29.e5 d8 30.h1 12.h3
[ 30.xf7 was the last chance to confuse [ 12.g5 g6 13.xe7 xe7 14.b1
matters but I think Black escapes : d5!! ( 14.h4 g4 15.d5 cxd5 16.xd5 ac8
The key defence! 31.xe6 ( 31.d6 xd6 17.xb7 c7 18.e4 f6 ) 14...hd8
32.cxd6 xd6-+; 31.h1 g4 32.xe6 ( 14...f8 15.hg1 g4 16.d2 f6
xf7 33.c8+ e7 34.xb7+ d7 17.b4+ e7 18.xb7 ) 15.h4 ( 15.h3
35.e1+ f6 36.xc6+ g7-+ ) 31...xf7 f8 16.g4 e4 17.d3 xf3 18.xf3
32.c4 h6+ 33.xh6+ xh6 34.xd5 f6 19.g3 b6 ) 15...f6 16.xf5+
cxd5 35.e5 f5-+ ] xf5 17.d3 f6 18.c3 f8 19.h4 h6
30...g2 31.h8+ e7 32.xd8 xd8 This is less clear. ]
230
12...h5 13.he1 White decides to centralise W hite at all .) 11...xc3 12.bxc3 d7
his pieces. 13.ab1 Vila Gazquez, J-Alsina Leal, D/
[ 13.g5 g6 14.xe7 xe7 15.b1 f8 B a r c e l o n a 2 0 0 2 w h e n I t h i n k t h a t b6!
16.hg1 h4 17.e5 xe5 18.dxe5 g8 is the best way:
A strange-looking position, but Black does A) 14.fe1 b7 15.e5 ( 15.g5 f6
have counterplay here. ] 16.f3 fd8= ) 15...xe5 16.xe5 fd8;
13...g6 14.f4 c8 15.d5 This looks B) 14.b5 d8 15.c6 b8 16.fe1
premature. b7 17.xb7 xb7 18.c4 f6=
[ 15.b1 b5 ( 15...h4 16.d3 xd3
All seems comfortable enough. ]
17.xd3 f5 18.h2 ) 16.d3 xd3 [ 8.a3 almost wastes a tempo but White's
17.xd3 h4 18.d5 cxd5 19.xd5 h5! development must be given full respect. b4
With a defendable position. For instance: 9.d3 0-0 10.0-0 xc3 11.bxc3 d7
20.xd7 xd7 21.e5+ xe5 22.xe5 a6 12.fb1 c5 13.e3 c7 14.g5 h6= ]
23.g4 hxg3 24.fxg3 e8 25.g4= ] 8...b4 9.a3
15...cxd5 16.xd5 b6 17.d4 xc4 [ E m m s s u g g e s t s 9.g2 after which I
18.xc4 xc4 19.xc4 0-0 White didn't recommend d7 10.0-0 0-0 11.fe1 d8
manage to get anything in the opening and 12.a3 and now Black may simply take on c3,
instead has a slightly inferior position. 20.d4 o r p l a y m o r e a m b i t i o u s l y w i t h e7
g5 21.c7 xf4+ 22.xf4 xg2!
Either way, he is alright. ]
23.xf5 exf5 24.xf5 g6 25.c5 xh3 9...b6 10.g2 b7 11.0-0 xc3 12.xc3
26.xa7 f5 27.xb7 a5 28.e3 d8 [ 12.bxc3 0-0= ]
29.a3 d2+ 30.b1 d1+ 31.a2 xc2 12...xc3 13.bxc3 c6 14.d2 a5 15.a4
The black king is safer and this helps Black to
0-0-0
conduct the initiative. 32.f3 c4+ 33.b3 [ 15...xg2 16.xg2 e7 wasn't bad either.
c7 34.c3 d7 35.c4 f5 36.f3 f6 W e have reaches another one of those
37.b3 g7 38.e4 h4 This is a lost p o s i t i o n s wh e r e W h i t e h a s s h o w n h i s
position for White, with a perfectly safe king opponent far too much respect and now
the black h-pawn starts rolling without any faces an uphill struggle to make a draw. If
n e g a t i v e c o n s e q u e n c e s . 39.g4 d4
Black could guarantee such a position from
40.h3 f4 41.e3 c6 42.c3 d5+ the opening he would play 5...Ne4 every
43.b1 g5 44.c1 d4 45.h2 e5 game. ]
46.h1 d4 47.b1 f5+ 48.a1 h3 16.b3 c4 17.a5 xg2 18.xg2 b5
49.g1 h4 50.h2 f4 51.xf4 xf4 19.fe1 g5 20.a6 c6 21.c5 c7 22.e4
0-1 h5 23.e2? A nothing move. Given Black's
plan of playing his King to b6 he has to try a
diversion such as
238 B01 [ 23.ae1 b6 24.f4 g4 25.h3 ]
Howell,David 2304 23...d5 24.d3 f5 25.h3 b6 26.e4
Sulskis,Sarunas 2582 d8 27.h4 d6 28.e5 gxh4 29.gxh4
Masters Catalan Bay ENG (10) 05.02.2004 g8+ 30.f1 g4! 31.xf5 xf5 32.e5
[Andrew Martin] xh4 33.e2 h3! 34.f3 h2+ 35.d3
d6 36.g1 xa6 37.xc6 c4 38.e4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 b6 39.d8 h4+ 40.d3 f4 41.g7
f6 5.f3 e4 6.d2 I guess people will do d6 42.e3 f6 43.h7 c7 44.xf7
this. White relies on his development to see xf7 45.xh5 a5 46.c5+ b6 47.e5 a4
him through. xd2 7.xd2 e6! Time for a 48.xe6 c6 49.h6 a3 50.h1 e7+
quiet life and perhaps to contemplate ...Bb4, 51.f2 a2 52.a1 a7 53.e3 d5
saddling White with the same doubled pawns. 54.d3 a8 55.c4+ xc4 56.c3 b6
8.g3 57.f4 a3 58.c2 a4 Instinct tells me that
[ 8.c4 b4 9.0-0 0-0 10.a3 xc3 5...Ne4 cannot really be a permanent idea but
11.xc3 ( 11.bxc3 b6! is really nothing for it is by no means easy to play against as
231
we've seen. Used occasionally, it could be a 13.b3 c7 14.h4 g6

v e r y u s e f u l a d d i t i o n t o yo u r r e p e r t o i r e . [ 14...xh2+? 15.h1 g6 16.xe6! 0-0!
Summarising Black's intentions: 1) 5...Ne4 is 17.b3 looks nice for White. ]
a disturbing move and also a gamble. 2 ) 15.g3 0-0-0 16.a4 c5?! Loosening, and
Black hopes to double W hite's pawns and therefore dangerous.
settle in for a nice technical game. W hite [ 16...d7= ]
must find a precise way to take advantage of 17.a5 d5 18.dxc5!?
his lead in development. He has not done so [ 18.xd5 exd5 19.dxc5 xc5 20.g4+
yet. b8 21.f4 d6 22.xd6 xd6 23.fe1
0-1 gives White an optical advantage which is
probably real as well. Such a position would
be hard to win. ]
239 B01 18...xc5 19.c4 e7? Cutting off his
Hungaski,Robert Andrew 2382 bishop's retreat. Better simply
Diego,O 2059 [ 19...b8 ]
XXXVIII Open (2) 01.04.2007 20.b4 d6 21.b5! c5?! 22.b6!?
[John Watson] [ 22.f4! e5 23.h6 threatens b6, when
Black is in some trouble. ]
As often happens, a lower-rated player finds 22...axb6 23.axb6 e5??
a natural plan that calls into question the [ 23...xb6 has to be tried, when 24.e3
previous assessment of a theoretical position. ( or 24.h6 ) 24...xe3 25.fxe3
The game itself is another matter! 1.e4 d5 retains serious queenside attacking
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 chances. ]
f5 6.d2 c6 7.c4 e6 8.d5 d8 24.b5! An intermezzo. Now Black can't
9.xf6+ gxf6 10.c3 d6!? Black plays a capture White's queen due to mate, but Ra8+
simple move that retains the active character and Bf4 are threats, among others. c6
of Black's position. [ 24...xb6 25.f4 ]
[ In ChessPub, Martin, who had previously 25.xc6
promoted 9...gxf6 in a video, said that it was 1-0
u n d e r a c l o u d d u e t o t h e l i n e 10...c7
11.h4 g6 12.f3 d7 13.h3!
'with uncomfortable pressure'. ] 240 B01
[ 10...d7 may also improve upon that line, Huschenbeth,Niclas 2502
especially because Black retains the idea of Dranov,Aleksandar 2465
...Be7 at some point. ] 82nd ch-GER Bonn GER (5) 30.05.2011
11.e2 [Gawain Jones]
[ Now 11.h4 g6 12.f3 d7 13.h3
is n't cle ar a f t e r e4! (which would have 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
been answered by Bxe6 in the last note) f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.c4 c7
14.0-0-0! ( 14.f3 d5 ) 14...b6 15.b3 8.f3 b6 9.f4 d8 According to Sergey
d5 ( or 15...d5!? ) 16.xd5 cxd5 Kasparov in New in Chess "This leads to a
17.he1 d7!? , keeping White's knight more complicated struggle (than 9...Qd7).
from f5. ] The queens remain on the board in any case.
11...d7 12.0-0 Slow. Thematic is Black attacks on the kingside with ...h7-h5-h4
[ 12.0-0-0 , b u t a f t e r c7 , White has and ...g7-g5." Perhaps but I found the whole
nothing special, e.g., 13.h4 g6 14.xg6 article absurdly pro-Black these positions look
hxg6 15.g3 0-0-0 and the theoretical easier for White to play for me as Black must
advantage of the bishop pair doesn't mean play accurately to survive the opening.
much. ] [ I looked at 9...d7 10.h3!? in Bologan, V
12...b6!? (2690)-Tiviakov, S (2637) Sibenik 2010. ]
[ Or 12...c7! , with no problems. ] 10.e5
232
[ 10.e5 is White's alternative when the and White is still clearly better: ( 18.xe6?
author of the New in Chess article declined h6 ) 18...h6 19.e2 ]
the pawn e6 ( 10...xd4 is critical but 18.f4 f8?! Attempting to keep material
W hite of course has good compensation equality but there's a flaw.
with his large lead in development.) 11.0-0-0 [ Perhaps 18...c7 was the best chance.
g6 12.h4!? g7 13.e2 fd5 14.d2 19.hf1 e7 temporarily keeps material
xc3 15.xc3 d5 16.a3 0-0 17.f4 f6 leve l bu t W hite now ha s 20.de1 0-0
18.f3 c4 19.c3 b5 with a complex 21.xe6 fxe6 22.xe6+ xe6 23.xe6
struggle. Petrosian, T (2634)-Kasparov, S which looks like an extra pawn to me. ]
(2493) Bhubaneswar 2011. ] [ 18...0-0-0 19.xe6+ fxe6 20.xe6+ b8
10...g4 11.g3 h5 12.h3 h4 13.e3! 21.xf6 hf8 22.xh4 xf4+ 23.b1
This looks like an improvement. xd4 24.xd4 xd4 25.e7 and White
[ I looked at 13.f4 in the notes to Bologan- has a clear extra pawn. ]
Tiviakov. ] 19.xe6 e8 Consistent but still not good!
13...e6 Unfortunately Black is still forced to 20.a4! Black's pin on the e file looked like he
stick his bishop here and therefore it's not so was winning back the piece but this throws a
easy for Black to develop his kingside. spanner in the works. b4 This simply leaves
[ 13...f5 14.d6+ exd6 15.xf6+ e7 Black a piece down.
16.xg7 g8 17.f6 gives Black very little [ 20...a5 was the best try but 21.a3+
for the pawn. ] g7 22.b3 xf4+ 23.b1 b5 24.c5+- ]
[ 13...xc4 14.xc4 f5 15.0-0-0 e6 [ 20...b5 21.a3++- ]
16.d5! is very dangerous. ] 21.b3! Sidestepping the pin and suddenly
14.xb6 xb6 Black's a piece down. He grovelled on for a
[ 14...axb6 is also possible but Black while but the result was never in doubt. xf4+
remains very passive after 15.d3 g6 22.b1 xb3 23.xb3 e2 24.hf1 g5
16.0-0 ( 16.xg6!? wins a pawn or two but 25.d5 xg2 26.d6
h6 17.e2 g8 18.e4 xe4 19.xe4 [ 26.c5 b6 27.d3+- bringing the knight
d7 20.xh4 g6 at least gives Black back into play looks the easiest. ]
some counterplay.) 16...h6 ( 16...g7 26...b6 27.d7 e7 28.xf7 g3 29.h1
17.xg6! now leaves Black with zero play.) c7 30.g6 g4 31.f5 gxh3 32.xh3 f8
17.f4 and Black still struggles to breathe. ] 33.c3 f5 34.he1+ d8 35.xf5 h3
15.0-0-0 g6?! This doesn't solve Black's 36.e4 13.Qe3! looks like a good
problems and so we have to look at Black's improvement and I don't see an easy
alternatives. equalising plan for Black.
[ 15...0-0-0 16.a3 1-0
A) 16...a5 is better but following 17.d3
g6 18.b1 h6 19.f4 White is still on
top. ( 19.e1!? ); 241 B01
B) 16...g6 17.a4! a5 18.c5 h6 Ibragimov,Ildar 2565
19.f4 d5 20.f3 f6 21.xe6 ( 21.b4!? Fierro Baquero,Martha Lorena 2310
traps the queen but xc5 22.dxc5 fxe5 North American Open (1) 2003
23.c4 xf4+ 24.b2 doesn't feel so [Andrew Martin]
c l e a r t o m e .) 21...fxe5 22.dxe5
is very good for White. ] NATURAL MOVES?! This game gives us a
[ 15...d7 16.f4 g6 ( 16...f5 17.d3 reminder that the Scandinavian cannot be
xd3 18.xd3 e6 19.b1 ) 17.e2 0-0-0 defeated purely by 'natural moves'. White has
18.he1 g7 19.f3 and Black still can't no advantage as of right - he must
coordinate perfectly. ] demonstrate a good plan. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5
16.xf6! exf6 17.c4 h6 xd5 3.c3 d8 The BANKER - still viable.
[ 17...c7!? would be an interesting move 4.d4 c6 5.g5
order when it's important to throw in 18.b1 [ 5.c4 is critical. ]
233
5...f6 6.c4 f5 7.f3!? 242 B01

[ It's a little surprising that Ibragimov doesn't Iordachescu,V 2599
t a k e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p l a y 7.ge2 Tiviakov,S 2650
After all, that is the main point of delaying Nakhchivan Open A 2013 (8.5) 30.04.2013
Nf3 so long. ] [Tom Rendle]
7...e6 8.e2 b4 9.0-0 0-0 10.ad1
You see what I mean about normal moves 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
because W hite ahs simply chosen a bog- f6 5.f3 g4 Tiviakov is obviously very
standard plan of development, hoping to experie nced in these 3...Qd 6 lines but it
outplay Black in the middlegame. there is no surprises me that he went for this line as
reason to suppose that W hite is in any way W hite appears to have a number of good
bett er h ere . bd7= Black's active plan is ... options. 6.h3 h5
Qa5 etc 11.e5 xc3! 12.bxc3 a5 [ 6...xf3 7.xf3 c6 8.e3
13.b3 is very comfortable for White who has a lead
[ 13.xd7 xd7 14.e7 fe8 15.b4 c7 in development and the two bishops. ]
delivers nothing for White. ] 7.g4 g6 8.e5 bd7 A critical position has
13...xe5 14.xe5 xe5 15.dxe5 e4 now been reached but the strange thing is that
16.e7 fe8 17.d7 a5! Still equal although all the sensible moves seem to give White the
unbalanced. W hite's pawn structure advantage here so I'm not really sure why
we a k n e s s e s a n d t h e p o o r B is h o p o n b 3 strong players still play this way as Black.
cancel out the active Rook on d7. Black can 9.c4 Another dangerous idea for White
d i s s o l v e h i s p r o b l e m s wh e r e a s W h i t e ' s which further calls into question this line for
defects are permanent. 18.g4 g6 19.f4 Black.
[ 19.a4 b5! ] [ 9.xg6 hxg6 10.g2! is probably White's
19...a4 20.c4 b5 21.d3 xc3! main alternative and should lead to some
The only thing one can say is that Black is advantage. It's analysed in detail in Geller-
playing forced moves which are very easy to Kovalenko ]
see and understand. 22.f5 Or White is just [ 9.b5!? b6 10.c4 is also dangerous.
lost. exf5 23.gxf5 h5 24.e1 d5 Black has to try e6+ but White is better
[ Here, I think Black could have been bold: after 11.e2 see Najer-Kovalenko
24...xa2! White's initiative soon runs out of ( 11.e3!? is tricky and is examined in the
steam: 25.e4 ( 25.e6 fxe6 26.fxe6 g4! ) notes to the above game. )]
25...c3 26.xc6 ac8 27.b7 c4 28.e6 9...e6+
fxe6 29.fxe6 g6-+ ] [ 9...a6 10.f4 and the threat of Qe6+
25.c5 f4 26.f1 ad8 forces the queen to e6 in any case. ]
[ 26...g4! would have called a complete 10.e3 h5 11.g5?! This gives Black good
halt to White's ambition. ] chances to equalise here although Tiviakov
27.xd8 xd8 28.d6 f6 29.c4 fxe5 30.c5 still has to find some accurate moves. e4
I suppose in an Open tournament with the 12.g2 b6
clock ticking, White is still (just) in the game. [ 12...c6 has been seen before in Kostitsina,
B u t B l a c k p l a y s v e r y w e l l i n d e e d . e8 L (2000) -Rakhmangulova, A (2196)
31.xe5 f7 32.a3 c4! 33.f2 xf1 Moscow 2011 and here W hite should've
34.xf4 xe1 35.xe1 d3 There is no played 13.0-0 0-0-0 14.d5! ( 14.a4
solace in opposite-coloured Bishops. Black is also strong, intending to play d5! in the
can establish pawn majorities on both sides of n e a r f u t u r e) 14...cxd5 15.exd5 b6
the boa rd and st ret ch W hit e's re sou rce s 16.xb6+ xb6 17.e2 xc3 18.bxc3
beyond the limit. 36.d2 f7 37.f2 xf5-+ and White has a very dangerous attack on
38.e3 g5 39.d4 g6 A simple, effective the queenside, once a rook lands on b1
game by Black. That's why the Scandinavian Black is going to be in serious trouble. ]
is popular! [ 12...xc3 13.bxc3 a6! seems to
0-1 equalise, for example
234
A) 14.b1 c6 ( 14...b6 15.c4! ) 15.f1 Black's position. d4 25.a4 c5 26.d2
is probably White's best try for an edge, he [ 26.c7! was more clinical, threatening to
k e e p s t h e b e t t e r c h a n c e s a f t e r b5 trap the queen with Rc4. Black can try f7
( 15...a5 16.xb7 xc3+ 17.d2 but after 27.d3 threatening mate on d8
xd2+ 18.xd2 and White's activity gives Black's position is completely hopeless. ]
him a pleasant advantage.) 16.a4! xa4 26...f7 27.e5 d8 28.e2 a7 29.xf5
17.g2 c8 18.0-0 and White has a A crushing victory f rom Iordachescu and
dangerous initiative combined with a clear although the game wasn't perfect from either
plan of f4-f5.; side it's another good example of what can
B) 14.e2 xe2+ 15.xe2 0-0-0 happen to Black in this line. I wouldn't
16.b1 c6 and although White is more recommend 5.. .Bg4 to anyone right now!!
active he has some weaknesses in his 1-0
structure whereas Black is very solid. ]
13.f3 d6?!
[ 13...xc3 was definitely Black's best option 243 B01
h e r e . A f t e r 14.bxc3 c6 15.0-0 d7 Jaulin,Philippe 2105
Black prepared to play ...e6 with a solid Prie,Eric 2425
positio n. I s till pref e r W hit e a f te r 16.a4! 2nd Open Nantes (1) 2003
but the advantage is only small. ] [Andrew Martin]
14.a4! Now Black is in serious difficulties a6
[ 14...a5 i s n o b e t t e r : 15.b5! xb5 A BRACE OF PRIE 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
16.axb5 b8 ( 16...a7 17.0-0 is miserable 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5
for Black, that rook on a7 is horribly placed!) 7.d2 e6 8.d5 d8 9.xf6+ xf6!?
17.xa5 xc2 18.a7 and White wins a I recommended 9...gxf6 in a recent video
pawn ] although that move is slightly under a cloud
15.0-0 due to
[ 15.a5 was even stronger straight away, e. [ 9...gxf6 10.c3! c7 ( 10...d7!? ) 11.h4
g. bc8 16.f4! xc2 17.0-0 d3 18.d1 g6 12.f3 d7 13.h3!
g6 19.ed5 d8 and Black is so poorly with uncomfortable pressure. So to 9...Qxf6,
developed and coordinated that it's pretty undoubtedly a tricky and provocative move,
much hopeless. ] well suited to playing for the win. ]
15...d7 16.a5 bc8 17.e1 10.e2! d7
[ 17.a4 bringing the knight to c5 is also [ 10...g4 11.d5 xf3 12.gxf3 cxd5
very good for White. ] 13.xd5 d7 14.0-0-0 a3 15.c3 0-0
17...e6 18.d5! Iordachescu thematically 16.e4 Shirov-Salov Madrid 1997 is a
opens up the centre with Black's pieces still possible way to go for Black although White
un co ordina te d an d Tiviakov is un ab le t o has the makings of a good Kingside attack. ]
defend. e7 [ Meanwhile taking on c2 is very risky :
[ 18...e7 was possibly more stubborn but 10...xc2 11.c1 f5 12.d5 I prefer
W hite's init iative still gives him a clea r W hite's initiative to the long haul needed
a d v a n t a g e a f t e r 19.b3 ( 19.a4!? to exploit the extra pawn. So to Prie's 10...
is also dangerous, either the rook is Nd7, just sensible development. As long as
swinging over to d4 or it supports Nc4.) Black isn't falling victim to either d4-d5! or
19...0-0-0 20.c4! ] Bg5 then he should have a playable
19.dxe6 fxe6 20.h4 f8 21.e2 c6 22.h3 position. ]
White targets the weak pawn on e6 and Black 11.0-0-0 b6 12.e5?! I don't think allowing
is in no position to defend. f5 23.xf5 exf5 Black to take on c4 is very testing and two of
[ 23...xf5 24.xf5 xf5 25.xh5+ Prie's recent opponents seem to agree.
is also easily winning for White ] [ 12.b3 g4 W e l l - t i m e d ! 13.d5
24.f4! A simple developing move that If this tactical stroke doesn't work, White will
u n d e rl i n e s e v e ryt h i n g t h a t ' s wr o n g wi t h simply be left with a bad pawn structure.
235
xf3 14.gxf3 cxd5 [ 17.dg1! would have given White a very

A) 15.xd5! The best move in the st ro n g a t t a ck . P rie se e m t o b e a b l e t o
position. mesmerise his opponents into playing weak
A1) 15...xd5 16.b5+ e7 moves. After 17 Rdg1, the variations are
( 16...d8 17.xb7 c8 18.a5+ c7 brief and uncomplicated: xf2 18.xg7
19.xc7+ e8 20.c8+ e7 xc2+ ( 18...xc2+ 19.a1 e4 20.hg1
21.d8# ) 17.xb7+; 0-0-0 21.xf7!+- ) 19.a1 f8 20.xb7
A2) 15...0-0-0! 16.e4 d6 17.e3 d8 21.xc6+ ]
f4 18.b5 e5 19.xe5 xe5 20.f4 17...xc2+! By contrast, the Black Queen now
f6 21.xb6 All steam ahead for the returns to the defence. 18.xc2 xf2+
draw. axb6 22.c3 g6 23.xd8+ xd8 19.c1 xf7 20.hf1 e7 21.a4 f8
24.d2 c7 25.e3 d8 26.f3 d6 22.fe1 f7 23.b3 ae8 24.e5 g8
27.b4 c7 28.e2 a8 29.c4 b5 Castling by hand. Two pawns up is too much
30.b3 a6 31.d1 f8 32.d3 h6 so the game ends rapidly. 25.de1 f6
33.e4 g7 34.h3 h5 35.d3 f8 26.e3 d8 27.xe6 xe6 28.xe6+
36.f5 exf5 37.xf7 e7 38.e3 d6 xe6 29.xe6 xd4 30.e7 b4
39.e6 g5 40.f6 xh2 41.xa6 At this time of writing I don't see why 9...Qxf6
1/2-1/2 Delorme, A-Prie, E/2nd Open, cannot be played. Prie's results are very good
Nantes FRA 2003; although he pushed the boat out a long way in
B) 15.b5+ Looks more uncomfortable our featured game. Nevertheless, 15...0-0-0
than it actually is! d8 16.a5 ( 16.hg1 would have been OK.
d6! 17.b1 xf3 ) 16...d6 0-1
B1) 17.xb6+ axb6 18.xb6+ c7
19.xb7 b8 20.c6 ( 20.a6
possibly the best try. xf3 21.c4 ) 244 B01
20...e5 21.d3 xb2+ 22.b1 e5 Kaidanov,Gregory S 2603
23.c4 g6 24.c2 c8 25.b6+ e7 Zatonskih,Anna 2433
Prie is pushing his lower-rated opponent USA-ch GpB San Diego (6) 08.03.2006
into making difficult decisions at the [Andrew Martin]
board and of course, that is the way to
win Open tournaments.; 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 A move which
B2) 17.b1? Rank bad. Whether he has caused considerable discomfort to
liked it or not White had to take on b6: Scandinavian fans over the past few years.
e7 18.xd5 exd5 19.he1+ f8 White gains by delaying Nc3 and is able in
20.a4 c4 21.xd5 xa5 22.f5 d8 many cases to push the Black Queen around
23.b4 c6 0-1 Mullon, J-Prie, E/2nd with the help of a well-timed c2-c4. However,
Open, Nantes FRA 2003 Naturally these Black does not need to give up hope just yet.
results and positions reached are very 3... Bg4, as played here, is perfectly good and
satisfactory for Black. ] 3 . . . g 6 i s we l l p l a ya b l e a s t h e g a m e s o f
12...xc4 13.xc4 d6 I slightly prefer Epishin and Kurajica have shown. g4
B l a c k n o w . 14.b4 Jaulin to exchange the [ 3...f6 4.e2 g4 5.d4 e6 6.0-0 e7
pieces, aiming for a balanced position that he 7.c4 d8 8.c3 0-0 is similar to the game
cannot lose. Prie now takes a risk. and a system for Black which I
[ 14.h4 h6 15.de1 0-0-0 16.e3 recommended in 'The Essential Centre-
was also possible, with White taking up a Counter' Black can play ... c7-c5 in one
more aggressive stance. ] move if need be. ]
14...xb4 15.xb4 g5+!? 4.e2 c6!? Tiviakov's idea which is solid of
[ I prefer 15...0-0-0! 16.he1 h5 which is course. 5.d4 f6 6.c4 d8 7.c3 e6 8.h3
rather equal. ] h5 9.0-0 The recent match between
16.b1 xg2 White has a decision to make. Korneev and Tiviakov in Khanty-Mansiysk
He gets it wrong. 17.xf7? featured this position more than once,
236
although Tiviakov did not opt for the coming 24.xd6 b8 ( 24...d8 25.e4 ) 25.e3!
9...Bd6 sticking to more solid 9...Be7. d6?!N and White wins. The text is OK, but Black
Active and slightly more risky than 9...Be7. gets the chance to grovel on. ]
[ The evidence about 9...e7 will show what 21...b8
we intuitively know already that White must [ 21...xb2 22.b1 b8 23.h4 c5
keep a small edge: 10.f4 ( RR 10.e3 0-0 24.xb2! is devastating: xb2 25.xf6+
11.g4 g6 12.e5 fd7 13.f4 xe5 g7 26.h5+ f8 27.f4-+ ]
14.dxe5 f6 15.exf6 xf6 16.c5 a6 22.a5 c7? Losing on the spot.
17.c4 c7 18.f5 f7 19.fxe6 xe6 [ 22...f5 is the reason that 21 Nd6 was better.
20.xe6+ xe6 21.b3 h8 22.e4 Maybe Black survives after 23.ed2 c5
d4 23.c4 e7 24.f4 e6 24.b4 ( 24.c3 d3 25.c2 f6 )
Paragua, M-Laketic, G/Milan 2001 Black has 24...d3 25.xf5+ exf5 26.xe7 xb4
negated any W hite pressure and stands 27.xf7+ g6 Of course this will not be
slightly better.) 10...0-0 11.a3 bd7 pleasant. ]
( 11...a5 12.e1 e8 13.e5 xe2 23.d4+- d5
14.xe2 a6 15.d2 d7 16.e4 c8 [ 23...e8 24.xc6 xc6 25.xd8+- ]
17.c2 Korneev, O-Tiviakov, S/Khanty 24.cxd5 cxd5 25.c3 d6 26.f3 g8
Mansiysk 2005) 12.e5 xe2 13.xe2 27.e4 f4 28.g3 c2 29.d4 xf3
e8 14.ad1 b6 15.fe1 a6 16.g4 [ 29...c7 ]
f8 17.g5 6d7 18.xd7 xd7 19.d5 30.gxf3 xg3 31.g4 xf2+ 32.h1 xe1
Korneev, O-Tiviakov, S/Khanty Mansiysk 33.xe1 xg4 34.hxg4 xb2 35.c3 xa2
2005 ] 36.xf6 g8 37.xh6 f2 38.f6 a5
10.g5 Trying to take advantage of the pin. 39.g1 c2 40.g5 c6 41.g6 4...c6 is
h6 clearly possible, although I feel Black should
[ 10...bd7 11.d5 cxd5 12.cxd5 exd5 continue in the same restrained manner a
( 12...e5?! 13.e4 e7 14.h4! ) little later by playing his King's Bishop to e7.
13.xd5 0-0 ] 1-0
11.xf6 gxf6? Poor, almost inexplicable,
making it appear as though she is making it up
on the spot. 245 B01
[ Black HAS to play 11...xf6 12.e4 f4 Kalegin,Evgenij 2485
13.xd6+ xd6 14.b3 b6 15.c5 c7 Galkin,Sergey
16.e3 ] Perm 1997
12.d5! e7 [Alexander Volzhin]
[ 12...e5? 13.h4! ]
13.e1 Increasing the pressure on e6. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.c3
[ Or 13.d4!? xe2 14.xe2 e5 a5 5.d4 c6 6.b5
15.ad1 Finkel ] [ 6.d2!? which leads to quieter play is also
13...a6 14.h4 worth considering we'll take a closer look at
[ Finkel gives 14.d4!? xe2 15.xe2 e5 this move in the next game. ]
16.dxc6 and I think he is right. ] 6...d7 7.d5!? b4 8.xd7+ xd7 9.a3
14...xe2 15.xe2 e5 16.dxc6 bxc6 f6 10.axb4 The point of White's previous
17.f3 Black has no place for her King. c8 play. This exchange sacrifice is dangerous for
18.ad1 0-0 19.h5 Black as his Queen is forced to go to a very
[ 19.e3 h7 20.f3 is equally bad square, while his other pieces remain
uncomfortable: ] undeveloped. xa1 11.0-0 a6
19...h7 20.e4 fd8 [ After 11...d8 12.d4!? c6 ( 12...xd5?
[ 20...xb2? 21.f5 exf5 22.g5+ ] 13.db5 winning; 12...e6 13.db5 ) 13.dxc6
21.f3?! bxc6 14.e2! xd4 15.e3 Black is in
[ Preferable is 21.d6 xd6 ( 21...c7 trouble ]
22.df5+- ) 22.xd6 xd6 23.f5 f8 12.d4
237
[ Usually white tries to maintain the initiative problems halting White's queenside advance.
by 12.d4 d8 13.db5 d7 14.f4 The pawn on b6 plus the Bishop on c7 keep
and after t h e B la c k Ro o ks p a ssive . d7 21.c5!
A) 14...xd5 also comes into xb2!? Trying to do something active, rather
c o n s i d e r a t i o n : 15.xd5 ( 15.xd5!? t h a n j u s t w a i t f o r t h e e n d . 22.b1!
is int e re st in g: xd5 16.xc7+ d8 winning The text move is stronger.
17.xa6 f5 18.e3 bxa6 19.a1 f6 [ Of course not 22.xb2?! xc5 23.c1
20.f1 trying to breakthrough on the b3 24.c3 a4 and Black is okay ]
queenside.) 15...xb5 16.xc7+ xc7 [ 22.c6 was possible but after bxc6 23.dxc6
17.xc7 d7 18.b8 xd1 19.xd1 e6 xb6 24.xb6 c8 25.c7 xb6 26.xb6
Black was able to hold the balance in xc7 White should eventually win. ]
Siklosi - Laszlo, Hungary (tt) 1993.; 22...a3 23.c6 bxc6
B) 14...d8 15.e2 An unclear position [ 23...b8 does not help as after 24.cxb7
has arisen. White has sufficient the Knight is going to c6. ]
compensation for his material losses. ] 24.dxc6 xb6 25.xb6 c8 26.d4 d6
12...g6 27.c1 f4 28.c2 c7 There was nothing
[ 12...d8!? deserves attention. ] better. 29.xc7 xc7 30.f4! The ending
13.f4 b6 looks winning for W hite. His plan is simple:
[ Black has two good alternatives: 13...c8!? his King is going to the queenside to help the
14.b5 b6 15.c4 a6! is unclear ] c-pawn promote. f6 31.c5 Securing the
[ 13...g7!? 14.xc7 h5 15.c5 ( 15.b5 Knight on d4 against e7-e5. f7 32.f2 e6
d6 16.xd6 xd4 17.e1 0-0-0 33.e3 g5 34.g3 gxf4+ 35.gxf4 e5
18.xd4 exd6 with a small edge) 15...0-0 36.fxe5 fxe5 37.f3
in both cases with unclear play. ] [ 37.xe5 axc6 38.xc6 xc6
14.c4 a5? This is a big mistake. was also winning for White but the text move
[ 14...c6?! was dubious because of 15.e3 is stronger. ]
c7 ( 15...d8?! 16.dxc6 c8 17.e5 e6 37...e8 38.xe5 d8 39.d4 g7
18.d1 c7 19.f4 puts Black in trouble) 40.d5+ c7 41.c5 e7 42.c3 a4
16.b5 c8 17.dxc6 bxc6 18.xa7 b7 43.b5+ c8 44.c4 White's pieces look
19.xc6+!? ( 19.xc6 ) 19...xc6 20.xc6 v e r y s p e c t a c u l a r ! h6 45.b6+
and Black has real problems neutralising the Black resigned.
White pawns on the queenside. ] 1-0
[ Probably Black had underestimated his
defensive possibilities, but he was not doing
a s b a d l y a s h e b e li e ve d a f t e r t h e c o o l 246 B01
14...a6! Now taking on c7 is good for Black. Kaminski,Marcin 2535
15.e1 with excellent compensation for the Gipslis,Aivars 2450
exchange. ] Cappelle la Grande 1998
15.b5?! This looks good but White has a [Alexander Volzhin]
much better move.
[ After 15.b5! Black was hopelessly lost: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ d7 4.e2
c8 ( 15...xd5 16.xd5 c6 17.e5 xd5 5.d4 f5 The most popular move.
winning ) 16.bxa5 xa5 17.b4 b6 6.f3 e6 7.a3 e7 8.c4 b6 9.c3 0-0
18.xc7+ d8 19.e5 winning a lot of 10.h3 c6 11.e3 f6 12.0-0 The "tabiya"
material. ] of this line. White has a certain advantage in
15...g7 16.a4! space while Black has counterchances due to
[ 16.xc7 was much weaker: c8 17.xb6 his pressure on the d4-pawn. By the way the
( 17.d6? xd6 ) 17...xc4 18.xa5 e4 position looks like one from the Alekhine Four
19.xe4 xe4 20.b3 was unclear. ] Pawns Attack, (without the f2 and f7 pawns
16...a7 17.xc7 0-0 18.b6 a6 19.xa6 it's just a position from Yudasin - Kengis!) and
xa6 20.c4 Black's life is difficult as he has the ideas of both sides are very similar. h6
238
Black prepares 13...Qe7 (he couldn't play it White's advantage is big already: 17.xd5
im m e d ia t e l y in vi e w o f 1 3 . g4 B g 6 1 4 . g 5 exd5 18.e1! b6 19.xa5 ( 19.d3 e4 )
winning a piece). But his move wastes an 19...bxa5 20.a4 Now White wins a pawn
important tempo and now Black has no time for nothing: e4 21.xa5 d7 22.c3
to create pressure on the d4-pawn. xf3 23.c6 d6 24.xf3 f4 25.xe8+
[ 12...d7! is much more to the point. After xe8 26.d1 and with accurate play White
this move White can't hold the centre, and should win the game. ]
has to sacrifice his d4-pawn and hope to 17.xc3 b6 18.cxb6 axb6
gain sufficient initiative as compensation. [ 18...b7 19.bxa7 xa7 20.a4
13.b4 ad8 14.b3 ( 14.a2!? xd4 is also hopeless for Black. ]
15.xd4 xd4 16.d2 xc3! 17.xd7 19.b4 d8 20.xf8 xf8 21.d3
xd7 18.b3 f6 19.d1 xd1+ 20.xd1 White is the exchange up for nothing. The rest
d8 21.c2 xc2 22.xc2 c6 and Black's is a matter of technique. xd3 22.xd3 c5
chances are by no means worse, as shown 23.bxc6 xc6 24.e4 e7 25.e5 a4
by the game Hait - Romcovici, Eforie Nord, 26.fd1 f5 27.b7 e7 28.d5 So after
1996. ) 14...xd4 15.xd4 xd4 16.ad1 considering these games we can conclude
e5 17.b5 e7 18.fe1 f6 19.xc7 that the 4.Be2 line is rather promising for
e4 20.b5 White. In my opinion the line considered in
A) The natural 20...a6! is much stronger this game is the most solid for Black.
and Black has equal chances here: 1-0
21.c3 ( 21.bxd4 exd4 22.c5 d5
23.xd4 This attempt to win a pawn is
strongly met by xg2! 24.xg2 f4+ ) 247 B01
21...c6 22.c5 d5=; Karjakin,Sergey 2786
B) 20...c6?! A m i s t a k e . 21.c5 xb5 Iotov,V 2553
22.xb5 d5 23.c4! f4 24.xd4 41st Olympiad Open 2014 (5.2) 06.08.2014
xd4 25.xd4 exd4 26.f3 with a clear [Neil McDonald]
edge as in Hait - Rasskazov, Moscow
1997. ] 1.e4 d5 The Scandinavian Defence is a rare
13.b4! A multipurpose move. White starts a bird at elite level. 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8
pawn attack on the Q-side. The other idea is Sergey Karjakin is one of the best prepared
to chase away Black's Knight in order to free players in the world, so it makes sense to play
the d4-pawn from attack. this 'anti-theory' system against him. 4.d4 f6
[ 13.c1 A somewhat sophisticated move. 5.f3 g4 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 c6 8.d3 e6
e7?! ( B l a c k s h o u l d p l a y 13...d7! 9.e2!? A couple of rounds before this game
intending Rd8 and again White has to think at the Tromso 2014 Olympiad, Carlsen had
about how to protect the d4-pawn.) 14.c5! essayed
d5 15.xd5 exd5 16.b3 e6 17.xb7 [ 9.g3 against Djukic. ]
ab8 18.xc7 xb2 19.d1 e4 20.a4? 9...bd7 10.0-0 d6
( 20.e1 was much better and Black has [ Another way to arrange the black pieces
little to show for the pawn.) 20...c8? was 10...e7 11.f4 f8 then 12...Ng6
M i s s i n g a d r a w : ( 20...xf3! 21.xc6 and 13...0-0. The point of going 11...Nf8 is
xe3! 22.fxe3 xg2+ 23.h1 f2+ tha t af te r 11 .. .0 -0 Black wo uld ha ve t o
24.g1 g2+ with a perpetual.) 21.d6 prepare the knight manoeuvre with Rfe8, so
a2?! 22.d2 xd4 23.xe6 fxe6 it might save a tempo to play it
24.xe4 xe3 25.fxe3 dxe4 26.b3 straightaway. ]
and Black resigned in Pokorna - Aleksieva, 11.g5 c7 12.e4 h2+?! Playing with
Batumi 1999. ] fire.
13...e7 14.b5 a5 15.c5 d5 16.d2! [ He should prefer 12...xe4 13.xe4 h6
xc3 This move loses material by force. Instead
[ 16...fe8!? was relatively best although A) 14.d2 0-0 ( White has some edge
239
after 14...f6 15.f3 d5 16.c4 f4 Iotov's only hope of counterplay is against the
17.d1 retaining the bishop pair and d4 pawn. As we shall see, he enjoys a
threatening 18.c5 winning a piece.) 15.d3 spectacular success af ter Karjakin loses
f6 16.f3 threatening 17.Bxh6. e7 control. b8 18.ad1 h5 Black makes an
Black has less space but he can put his aggressive looking pawn move, but what can
rooks on d8 and e8 when his position it attack? In contrast, White's b-pawn has a
would be very hard to crack. The ready target on c6. 19.b4 d7 20.b5?
exchange of two sets of minor pieces has Kramnik discussed this position during the
eased his game. Nonetheless White has live commentary at the Tromso 2014
kept his opening advantage which Olympiad. He was highly critical of his team
indicates that 9. Be2! was a good move.; mate's decision to allow Black to gain
B) 14.e3 f6 15.d3 d5 seems OK counterplay with his next move. He couldn't
for Black. ] understand why Karjakin didn't play
13.h1 f4? He had to bail out with [ 20.c5! to squash any c6-c5 move, and then
[ 13...xe4 14.xe4 h6 15.d2 f6 follow up with b4-b5. He felt W hite would
16.f3 d6 then 17...Qe7 and 18...0-0. He then at least have a strong attack, whether
is a tempo down on the line given in the or not it is winning. Here are some sample
notes to 12...Bh2+ above, but he still seems variations. My computer program thinks
OK. ] Black is doing OK, but it wouldn't be at all
14.xf6+? Symptomatic of the poor form of fun to defend like this: hd8 Black can also
some of the Russian players at the Tromso fight to scrape a draw in an endgame after
Olympiad. White misses the shot A) White could instead let Black give up
[ 14.a3! when Black is suddenly busted. his rooks for the queen: 21.b5 xd4
For example xg5?! ( Not only is the black 22.xd4 xd4 23.xd4 e5 24.b4
king displaced, the f 7 pawn drops after a5 25.fb1 b6 Somehow Black stays
14...d8 15.h5!; The best chance is to alive by blocking the b-file. 26.cxb6 c5
g i ve u p a p a wn f o r n o t h i n g wi t h 14...c5 27.bxa7+ xa7 28.b6 xa2 29.d1 d4
which is resignable against a 2786 player.) ( 29...cxb4 30.d8# ) 30.b5 a6
15.d6+ d8 ( Even worse is 15...f8 31.xc5 xc5 32.d8+ c8 33.xc8+
16.b5+ ) 16.xf7+ e8 17.xg5 xc8 34.b7+ ( Or likewise 34.xh5 xb6
and Black is ruined. ] 35.xf7 d7 ) 34...b8 and Black just
14...xf6 15.xf6! Good judgement. As we holds the draw thanks to the opposite
shall see, Black can do nothing down the g- coloured bishops.;
f i l e wh i l e t h e r e s p e c t i ve p o s i t i o n o f t h e B) 21.c4 a6 22.a4 e5 23.d5 cxd5
opposite coloured bishops favours W hite's 24.xd5 xd5 25.xd5 d7 26.f3 d3
attack. 27.xd3 xd3 28.xh5 d4 and Black's
[ Instead after 15.xf4 xf4 Black looks pressure on b4 probably gives him enough
very comfortable. ] to hold the game. ]
15...gxf6 16.c4 0-0-0 17.f3 For attacking 20...c5 21.d5 e5 22.de1 h4 23.a4
purposes, the black queen and bishop are the [ White is losing the thread of the game. He
wrong way around. If the queen were on f4, might have played 23.c2 to break the pin
and the bishop on c7, W hite would be on the d-file. ]
compelled to play g2-g3 to stop mate on h2. 23...a5! The queen manually blocks the
Then the g3 point would become an object of advance of W hite's a pawn and cement s
attack with the pawn ram h5-h4 or f5-f4, or Black's control of the dark squares. 24.a3
even a sacrifice with involving Bxg3 or Rxg3. d2 25.e3 After
With the actual situation in the game, Black [ 25.a5? f4 Black would have achieved
has no way to provoke g2-g3. The white pawn the rearrangement of bishop and queen we
therefore remains beyond the reach of Black's talked about earlier. With the lady leading
o wn k i n g s i d e p a wn s , a n d a n y i d e a o f a from the front they are suddenly a deadly
sa crif ic e on g2 is f a r f et ch e d. Th ere f o re duo, threatening mate on the move. ]
240
25...b4 26.a2 exd5 27.d3? Losing a xc3+ 11.d1 xc4 12.xf7+ d8
couple of pawns. It's equal after 13.g5+ c8 14.e8+ b7 ) 10...xa6
[ 27.xd5 xd5 28.cxd5 f4 29.xe5 11.f4 f6! ( 11...xc3+? 12.d2 xa1+
( but not 29.g3 hxg3 30.xg3 e4+! 31.f3 13.e2 xh1 14.xf7+ d8 15.d7# )
h4! when Black wins. ) 29...xe5 ] 12.f3 d5 I missed this move which
27...hd8 28.c1 Here permits Black to equalize on the spot. ]
[ 28.xd5 xd5! 29.xd5 xd5 30.cxd5 10.xc4 d5 11.e3 d7 12.0-0 g6
f4 is suddenly winning for Black as The move that stands at the heart of the
compared to the variation after 27.Rd3? Black idea: If he manages to castle without
above White no longer has a defence with getting mated, then he will enjoy a superior
Rxe5 giving up the exchange. For example pawn structure. 13.e2
31.g3 f3+ 32.g1 hxg3 33.d6 g2 [ 13.e1 g7 14.c4 0-0 15.a3
34.b1 xh3 and the mate threats are ( 15.e5 d6 ) 15...e8 Just in time. ]
decisive. ] 13...g7 14.f3
28...dxc4 29.xd7 xd7 30.c2 [ 14.e1 0-0 15.g4!? ]
[ Instead 30.xc4 loses to the spectacular 14...c6 15.d5 e5 16.e2 f5!
move d1+!! winning the queen as 31.xd1 White's fine strategy falls through with this
e1+ mates. ] forgotten move. 17.e1 0-0-0!
30...c3 31.d1 b2 32.e4 d2 33.xd2 [ 17...0-0!? 18.c4 f7! 19.xe7 xd5
cxd2 34.d1 d4 20.xc7? fc8 ]
[ White resigned as it's all over after 34...d4 18.a4?
35.f3 f2 and a check on e1. ] [ 18.b2 f4 19.d1 e6! ( 19...f3 20.a6+
0-1 b8 21.c4 g4 22.e3; 19...xd5?
20.c4 ) 20.dxe6 xe6 21.c4? he8 ]
18...f4! 19.a5?
248 B01 [ 19.c4 f3! 20.gxf3 ( 20.xe5 fxe2
Karpatchev,Aleksandr 2461 21.xd7 xd7 22.xe2 xc3 23.a3
Prie,Eric 2439 xd5 24.f3 f6 ) 20...xc4 21.xc4 xd5
4eme Open International de (5.2) 17.02.2005 22.a6+ b7 ]
[Eric Prié] [ 19.d1 w a s t h e m o s t s t u b b o r n f3
20.a6+ b8 21.f4 xd5 22.a5 c4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 23.xc4 ]
f6 5.f3 e4?! A breath of fresh air in the 19...b5! Without the check on a6, White's
Scandinavian, where, walking in Shirov's position is now collapsing for having only
footsteps, (See game 10) White often plays relied, in this 'morning game', on
the same line , whatever his level of play may [ 19...fxe3? 20.xe3
be, which may not be particularly dangerous A) 20...xd5 21.d4 ( 21.axb6 axb6 );
as we will see, but annoyingly enough to play B) 20...f7 21.axb6 cxb6 22.xb6!
for a win... At least was that my state of mind axb6 23.a8+ b7 24.a6+ c7
before tackling this game with the assurance 25.a7+ d6 26.xb6+ ]
that ignorance brings. 6.c4 Scottish Master 20.a6 fxe3 There is no compensation for the
Geoff Chandler's suggestion as I later learned. 'sacrificed' piece. 21.xe3
See the next game for the refutation of the [ 21.xe3 c4 22.xa7 xc3 ]
opening. xc3 7.d2 b6!? Instead of 21...b8 22.d1 c4 23.c5 a8 24.f4
[ 7...e6 which had previously been briefly e5 25.g5 b8 26.d6 c6 27.e7 he8
analysed by Andrew. ] 28.ab1 b6 29.a1 f8 30.h3 xe7
8.bxc3 a6 9.e5 31.dxe7 xe7 Partly from my notes in
[ 9.xa6 xa6 10.e5 d7 11.xd7 ChessBase MEGA 2006.
xd7 12.f4 c4 ] 0-1
9...xc4
[ 9...e6!? 10.xa6 ( 10.0-0 d6; 10.f4
241
249 B01 the kingside too much: 11.xg6 fxg6 12.g5

Karpov,Anatoly d5 13.d2 with a clear advantage. ]
Rogers,Ian 11.d2 b6 12.h5 e4
Bath 1983 [ 12...xd4 13.f3 ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 13.e3
[ Unfortunately 13.c4? xd4 14.xe4?
In this game we'll see similarities to the game is impossible because of xe4 15.xb4
Anand - Lautier when White pushed the Black xf2# mate! ]
bishop back by g4 and h4 etc. The key 13...xc3
difference in my opinion, is that Black [ 13...xd4? was bad for Black because of
preferred e7-e6 rather then c7-c6 and found 14.g5! ]
himself in trouble because his Queen had few 14.xc3 d5
po ss ib le re trea t s. L at er he p la yed c7-c6 [ The pawn advance g4-g5 could not be
anyway but this lost time so that's probably stopped by 14...h6 because of 15.c4 c7
wh y th is line h a s no t be e n so p o pu la r in 16.b4 with Nd6 to follow ]
recent practice. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 15.g5 e4 16.g4 d6
3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 6.h3 h5 [ 16...xc3 17.bxc3 b2 18.d1 c5
7.g4 g6 8.e5 e6 9.h4 b4 w a s n o t b e t t e r a s a f t e r ( of course not
[ 9...bd7 has been tried a couple of times 18...xa2? 19.c4 winning xc4 20.xc4
but Black has failed to equalise: 10.c4 b5 21.d6+ ) 19.c4 xc4 20.xc4
a6 11.h5 e4 and here White has a Black is in trouble (Rb1 and g5-g6 are the
number of possibilities: threats). ]
A) 12.xe4 xe4 13.f3 with a small 17.0-0-0 d7 Finally Black has developed his
edge; Queen's Knight but was faced with another
B) 12.d2!? a5 13.cxe4 xe4 p r o b l e m a f t e r t h e v e r y s t r o n g 18.e1!
14.f3 (c2-c4 is threatened) xe5 19.dxe5 f5
B1) 14...xd2 15.xd2 d5 16.g2 20.h3! White's idea is still c2-c4 and it
( 16.xd5!? ) 16...c6 17.c3 h6 18.g3 cannot be parried! 0-0-0
d6 19.xd5 xg3 20.f3 with a small [ 20...c5 is not a defence due to 21.xd5
edge in Kotliar - Garma, New York exd5 22.xf5 with a large advantage ]
1993; 21.c4 c5 22.b4 That's why the Rook did
B2) 14...f5 15.d3 df6 16.g5 d5 not retreat to a3 - it would be hanging after
17.xe4 fxe4 18.xe4 with a large Qb4. f3 23.xd8+ xd8 24.xf3 xe5
edge in A. Sokolovs - Sh ch eka ch ev, 25.c3 The rest is n ot imp ort ant . d6
Moscow 1992; 26.d3 d4 27.xf7 f5 28.xf5 f4+
B3) 14...d6 15.c4 c5 16.dxc5 xc5 29.e3 Black resigned.
17.a3 d8 18.e2 ce4 19.e3 1-0
with a slight edge in Nataf -
Abdulghafour, Bratislava 1993;
C) 12.h3!? b4 13.d2 xc3 14.xc3 250 B01
This pos ition which wa s te ste d in th e Kasparov,Garry 2835
game Westerinen - Zeidler, Pula 1997 is in Rogers,Ian 2535
White's favour in my opinion because of EUR-ASIA Rapid Match rapid (2) 2001
the bishop pair, the possibility of attacking [Andrew Martin]
on the kingside, and the opportunity to
utilise the awkward position of the Black 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
queen on a6, but of course Black's Well, there it is, the ultimate endorsement.
better development should not be Rogers normally plays 3...Qa5 and is one of
ignored. ] the world's leading experts in that line. It is
10.h3 c6 very interesting to see him venture 3..Qd6.
[ 10...h5 does not look good as it weakens 4.d4 f6 5.d3 g4!? 6.f3 h5 7.ge2
242
a6 [ 31...e6!= Rogers ]
[ 7...c6 is definitely worth a thought too: 32.f5+ h7 33.xe3 gxf4 34.c4 d5
8.f4 d8 35.e1?!
A) 9.d2 e6 10.0-0-0 g6 11.e4 d5 [ 35.e5 ]
12.g5 e7 13.xe7 xe7 14.h4 h5 35...g7 36.e5 f6 37.f5+ e6
15.f4 xe4 16.fxe4 xf4 17.xf4 e5! With the idea of ...f7-f6, trapping the White
18.g3 ( 18.xe5 xe5 19.dxe5 d7; Rook. 38.e5+ f6 39.e4 g5! 40.e5
18.dxe5 d7 ) 18...d7 19.xg7 h4! 41.xc6 g3! The game has been
0-0-0; coloured by time shortage. Of course with any
B) 9.0-0 e6 10.e4 e7 11.c4 0-0 normal time control, Black's active King would
12.h1 a6= ( 12...bd7= )] guarantee him at least an equal game.
8.f4 d7 9.d5! Apparently Kasparov 42.d4 d8 43.c1?! with one minute left!
screwed this one in as if to demonstrate his [ 43.e1 e3 44.c3 bxc3 45.bxc3 xd4
total control of the game. Certainly things look ( 45...d5! 46.b2 f2 47.e2+ g3
difficult for Black. There is a distinct danger 48.b3 ) 46.cxd4 xf3 47.g5+- ]
that the Knight on b8 may never emerge! g6 [ 43.e5 e3 44.c3 bxc3 45.bxc3 xd4
10.d2 xd3 11.xd3 g6 12.0-0-0 g7 46.cxd4 xf3 47.g5 hxg5 48.h6+- ]
13.c4 c6! Black is clinging on as best he 43...e3?! forty seconds left, not enough
can. 14.d6 The only realistic way to play for time to find the deadly
the initiative. It's not clear whether White has [ 43...f6! when Black is better in all lines:
even a technical advantage after 44.e2+ ( 44.f5+ xf3 45.e5 xg4
[ 14.xb8 xb8 The only realistic way to 46.xa5 e3 47.b1 d1+ 48.a2
p l a y f o r t h e i n it ia t ive . 15.dxc6 xc6 e4; 44.c6 xe4 45.xd8 xf3
16.xc6+ bxc6 17.he1 d5!= ] 46.xf7 e2 47.e5 f3-+ ) 44...xf3
14...0-0 15.b1 45.xf4+ xe2 46.xf6 d1# ]
[ 15.dxe7 xe7 16.d6 e3+ 17.b1 44.c3 bxc3 45.bxc3 c8 46.d2 b8
e8 18.he1 bd7= ] 47.e2+ xf3 48.xf4+ Kasparov's play in
15...e8 16.g3 exd6 17.xd6?! the opening was powerful enough for me to
[ Ro ge rs give s 17.xd6 e7 18.hd1 move away from 7...a6 in favour of either 7...
as much stronger and it is certainly puzzling c6 , 7 .. . Nc6, o r 7. . . e 6 . A f t e r 9 d 5 , B la c k
that Kasparov rejected this natural should have been toiling.
continuation. White seems to mobilize his 1-0
whole army with no problems.
A) 18...b5 Probably this is the best
response. Intuitively, it feels dubious. 251 B01
19.d3 ( 19.b3 a5 20.ge4 xe4 Keserovic,Milan 2225
21.xe4 a4 22.a3 a6 23.g5 Lajthajm,Borko 2464
c7 ) 19...b4 20.ce4 d5 21.g5 ch-Serbia Vrnjacka Banja SCG (1) 30.01.2006
e5 22.b3 a5; [Andrew Martin]
B) 18...bd7 19.g5! ]
17...e6 18.xe6 xe6 19.ge4 bd7= SHORT AND NOT SO SWEET Here's what
By contrast, here White has nothing. Due to can happen when W hite does not pay the
the fact that this was a 25 minute game and Black system full respect. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5
that Kasparov was ahead on the clock, the xd5 3.c3 d6 There is nothing wrong
game continued.... . 20.g3 b5 21.a3 xe4 with this move. Attempts to bury 3...Qd6, such
22.xe4 b6 23.f2 d5 24.d4 a5 as the over-optimistic recent article in New In
25.g4! White finds a way to prevent the game C h e s s Y e a r b o o k h a ve n o t b e e n p r o v e d
from f izzling out. W ith time ticking down, conclusive. 4.d4 f6 5.c4
Rogers resolved to keep the position solid. h6 [ 5.f3 a6 6.g3 is satisfactorily answered
26.h4 xd4 27.xd4 g7 28.h5 b4 29.a4 with g4! ]
f6 30.d6 e3 31.f4 g5 5...a6 Now Black may answer 6 Nge2 with the
243
risky 6....Qc6!? or stick to the program with e7 14.c7+ f7 15.xa8 xa8 ]
6....b5 (which I prefer). 6.f3 b5 7.b3 b7 12.xe6 f7 13.dxc5? This is a real howler.
8.0-0 e6 9.e1 W hite should take on c5 with the Knight of
[ 9.g5 c5 10.dxc5 xd1 11.axd1 bd7 course:
12.c6 xc6 13.d4 b7 14.fe1 0-0-0 [ 13.xc5 c6 ( 13...a7 14.xb7 xb7
15.a4 b4 16.a2 c5 17.c3 xb3 15.e4 d5! 16.f3 d7 ) 14.d3 c8
18.xb3 xd1 19.xd1 d5 20.bc1 ( 14...d8 15.e2 c7 16.f4 d6
e4 21.e3 bxc3 22.xc3 xc3 23.bxc3 17.d5 ) 15.f4 d8 16.e5+ g8 ]
e7 Vass, V-Werner, D/Budapest 2005/ ] 13...c6 Disgusted, White throws in the towel.
9...c5! All part of the grand plan. In general He should have least have tried 14 Ng5+ Kg8
Black can delay this move preferring .. . Nbd7, 15 Nf3, but there can be no doubting that
...Be7 and ...0-0 beforehand, but I guess if he Black is better. An odd conclusion.
can play it immediately he should! 0-1
[ However 9...e7 10.g5! initiates a
dangerous attack, with a sacrifice on e6 not
far away. In my opinion Black is unwise to 252 B01
allow this sequence: Koepke,Christian 2274
A) 10...0-0? 11.xe6! fxe6 12.xe6+-; Kislinsky,Alexey 2384
B) 10...c5 11.xf7! xf7 12.xe6 xe6 VIII Rector Cup (2) 29.03.2006
13.xe6+ xe6 14.g5! ( 14.dxc5 f7 [Eric Prié]
15.g5 bd7 ) 14...f7 15.xf6 xf6
16.h5+ g6 17.xc5 d8 18.b6 d7 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
19.d1 c6 This last variation is unclear, f6 5.d2
but Black is walking a fine line. It seems [ 5.c4 g4 Often transposes or at least
more sensible not to allow the leads to very similar positions to our subject.
complications.; A crucial difference may be that 6.f3 f5
C) 10...h6 11.xf7! ( 11.ge4 7.g4 g6 8.f4 ( 8.h4 h6 9.ge2 bd7
is good, but not as good: xe4 12.xe4 10.f4 e5! 11.xg6 fxg6 12.d2 0-0-0
c6 13.c4 0-0 14.d5 exd5 15.cxd5 13.d5 b6! A capital improvement on the
d7 16.f4 Djalal, B-Bordi, K/Cannes 13...Bb4 of Kavalek-Larsen Bewerjik 1967
2000 ) 11...xf7 12.xe6 xe6 which has rehabilitated this way of treating
13.xe6+ xe6 14.f4 c5 15.e2+ f7 . . . B g 4 f o r B l a c k , a s we s a w l a s t y e a r .
16.d5 e8 17.e6+ g6 18.b6 c8 14.e2 xc4 15.xc4 xd5
19.xb8 d7 20.d6 d8 21.xc5 c8 1/2-1/2 Cornette, M-Prie, E FRA-Cup 2004)
22.d4 c4 23.d2 b6 24.d3+ f5 8...e6 ( 8...e4 9.f3 b4 10.xf7+ xf7
25.f3+- Delivre, R-Le Ruyet, L/Clichy 11.g5+ g8 12.a3 )
2003; A) 9.d2 b4 10.e2 c6 11.f3
D) 10...d5 U n c o m f o r t a b l e . 11.xd5 0-0-0 12.d5 ( 12.0-0-0 xd4 13.xd4
xd5 12.e4 d8 13.g4! g6 14.g5 xd4 14.b3 d6 ) 12...exd5 13.xd5
h5 15.f3! xg5 16.xd5 xc1 17.xa8 xb2 14.c3 b4;
xb2 18.ad1+- Matikozian, A-Mitkov, N/ B) 9.h4 e4;
Santa Monica 2005 ] C) 9.e2 c6 10.f3 0-0-0;
10.xe6!? Tempting. However the D) 9.f5 exf5 10.e2+ Is less to be feared
alternatives do not achieve much: because of the possibility e7 Instead of
[ 10.dxc5 xd1 11.xd1 xc5= ] having to move the king as in this game.
[ 10.a4 c4 11.a2 b6= ] 11.d2 b6 12.g5 h5! This is the key
10...fxe6 11.g5 e7 move in these positions. 13.f3 e4
[ 11...xd4 also appears possible: 12.xe6 14.0-0-0 xd2 15.d5 d6 16.xd2
( 12.e2 e5 13.d1 g4 14.xe5+ e7 D1) 16...xf3!? 17.xf3 xg5 18.e1+
15.f3 c8 It would take a certain type of f8 19.e3 c6 ( 19...g6 20.xb7 );
player to go for this.....) 12...xd1 13.xd1 D2) 16...c6 17.e1 0-0 18.xe7+
244
xe7 19.f2 xf3 20.xf3 c6 21.h4 [ 11...e7 12.g2! a6 ( 12...c6 13.d5
Yet to pass the test of practice. ] That is one of the interesting features of 5.
5...g4! 6.f3 Bd2 compared to 5.Bc4. By developing
[ 6.e2 Cannot be critical. Still, Black has to himself on the long diagonal in a more active
watch out for the surprising recapture xe2 way, White's king bishop also controls the
7.cxe2 b6 8.f3 bd7 9.0-0 e6 d5 square, enabling this recurrent theme.;
10.c4! Karpov, An ] 12...c6 13.h4 ) 13.h4! ( 13.xa6 xa6
6...h5 7.g4 g6 8.f4! The critical line, and 14.xb7 b4 15.xa8 xc2+ ) 13...f4
this is where the two branches 5.Bd2 and 5. 14.0-0-0 xe2 15.gxe2 c6 16.h5 f5
Bc4 diverge because here the bishop is not 17.xf4 0-0-0 18.b5+- ]
exposed, the knight on c3 is not pinned and 12.0-0-0 f4! 13.g2 c6 14.xf4 b4!
White is ready to castle long after a queen 15.b5
move. [ 15.a3 xc2 16.b5 c8! 17.xb7 b4!
[ 8.h4 h6 9.c4 b6 ( 9...c6? 10.h3 e6 A) 18.axb4 xb4 19.e4 e8 20.e5
11.f4 h7 12.e2 b4 13.0-0-0 xe4 21.xe4 xb5 22.g2 ( 22.f3
With a winning attack. bd7 14.g5 d5 f6 ) 22...xe5 23.dxe5+ e7 24.f3
15.xd5 cxd5 16.g6+- Nijboer, F-Massink, f8-+;
H Vlissingen op 2005) 10.ge2 bd7 B) 18.c4 a2+ 19.xa2 xb5
11.f4 20.xc8 a4! 21.d2 ( 21.d2 c6+
A) 11...xd4 Is too risky. 12.xg6 fxg6 22.d1 xh1; 21.b3 xa3+ 22.d2
13.e2 e5 14.e3 g3+ 15.f2 e5 b4+ ) 21...b4+ 22.e3 xd1 ]
16.e6; 15...d6 16.xd6 cxd6 17.e1
B) 11...e5!? 12.dxe5 xe5 13.e2 [ 17.xd6 e8! Parrying the mating threat of
0-0-0 14.xe5 xd2 15.xd2 ( 15.xg6 Qe7 first.
f2# ) 15...d6; A) 18.d2 c8 19.c5 xc5 20.dxc5+
C) 11...0-0-0! 12.h5 ( 12.xg6 fxg6 d3+!! 21.cxd3 xc5+ 22.c2 ( 22.b1
13.e2 e5 14.dxe5 xe5 15.0-0-0 xd2 23.xd2 e1+ 24.d1 xd1# )
xc4 16.xc4 b4= ) 12...h7! 22...e1 23.f3 xc2+ 24.xc2 a4+
( 12...xd4!? 13.e2 e5! 14.xg6 25.b3 ( 25.c3 xd1; 25.d2 xd1+ )
xd2+ 15.xd2 xf3+ 16.e2 xd2+ 25...xa2+ 26.c3 xd1 27.xd1
17.xf3 fxg6 18.e6+ d8 19.ad1 xg2;
d6 20.b5 gxh5 21.gxh5 c6 22.xd6 B) 18.xb4 xb4 19.d2 c8 20.xb4
exd6 ) 13.e2 ( 13.xf7 e5 ( 20.c3 c4 21.f1 d5! 22.g2
W ith a strong counter attack suddenly) xa2 ) 20...xc2+ 21.b1 c4+ 22.a1
13...e6 14.0-0-0 c6 Black is OK. 15.g5 xb4 ]
hxg5 16.g6 g8 17.xf8 xf8 17...c7 18.c4+
18.xg5 xd4 ] [ 18.e7 b6 19.e3 xa2+ 20.b1
8...e6 9.f5 Consistent. he8 21.xd6+ xd6 22.xd6+ xd6
[ 9.g2 a6! 10.g5 ( 10.f5 exf5 11.gxf5 23.xe8 xe8 24.xa2 xc2 25.f3
h5! And not 11...Bxf5 12.Qf3.) 10...fd7 e4-+ ]
11.d5 d6 ( 11...c5! Intending 12.e3 18...b6!-+ Suddenly, the white queen finds
bd7 ) 12.e2 xe2+ 13.gxe2 exd5 herself on the most embarrassing place of the
14.xd5 c6 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.c3 chessboard, powerless to prevent the
Lanka, Z (2575) - Bacrot, E (2500) Linz hoovering of a black rook along the second
1997 ] rank. 19.d2 ac8 20.xb4+ xb4
9...exf5 10.g5 fd7 Only move. 21.xb4 xc2+ 22.d1 xg2 23.h3
[ 10...g4 11.e2+ e7 12.g2 a6 xb2 24.c3 xa2 25.f4 c8 26.d5+
13.h3 ] b5
[ 10...h5 11.b5+! c6 ( 11...d7 0-1
12.d5 ) 12.e2 ]
11.e2+ d8!
245
253 B01 b4 21.ad1 d5 22.f4 White eventually

Korneev,Oleg 2543 won this superior endgame. Khalifman,
Galego,Luis 2498 A -Polgar, Z Ruschess.com INT 2005 ]
Tch-POR 1st Div Final (3.1) 26.07.2010 10.a4 b4 11.a5 a7 12.xc7! bd7
[Milos Pavlovic] [ 12...xf3 13.xf3 xc7 14.b5! axb5
15.xa8 fd7 16.a6 b6 17.b7 d7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 18.xb6 xb6 19.a7 d6 20.a8 c8
f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 One of many choices for 21.a7+ e8 22.e4 d8 23.b7 xb7
W hite, but to me the most logical one. b5 24.xb7 a6 25.c6+ f8 26.a1
Alternatives will be seen in the next game. 1-0 Mazi, L (2401)-Djurkovic, M (2150)
7.g2 b7 8.0-0 e6 Aschach AUT 2004 ]
[ 8...bd7 9.f4 b6 10.a4 b4 11.a5 13.a4 d5 14.b6 7xb6 15.axb6 xb6
a7 12.a4 c8 13.c4! bxc3 14.bxc3 e6 16.xb6 xb6 17.c4! e7
15.c4 White is much better, with d5 coming. [ 17...bxc3 18.bxc3 c7 19.b1 e4
Black will face a difficult task defending. d6 20.e5 xg2 21.xg2 d6 22.f3 a7
16.b6!? d8 17.xd7 xd7 18.g5 b8 23.c6 a8 24.b3 0-0 25.fb1
19.a4 a8 20.d5! h6 21.d2 e7 With a big, almost winning advantage. ]
22.fe1 c5 23.c2 f8 24.e5 e8 18.e5 c7 19.a4+ f8 20.d7! xd7
25.ab1 c8 26.b4 a8 27.xc5 xc5 21.xd7+ e8 22.xb7 xd7 23.xa8
28.dxe6 xe6 29.g6+ xg6 30.xe8+ xa8 24.a4 Winning the exchange simply
xe8 31.xg6 fxg6 32.b8+ f7 33.xh8 puts an end to this game. f6 25.d1 a5
xg2 34.xg2 f8 35.f3 g5 36.e4 26.b3 c6 27.f1 d8 28.da1 b7
1-0 (36) Gerzhoy, L (2497)-Kudischewitsch, 29.e2 c7 30.d3 g5 31.c5 g4 32.c4
D (2348) Petach Tikva ISR 2011 ] h5 33.b5 d8 34.xa5 xa5 35.xa5
9.f4 b6 xd4 36.c6+ b8 37.b6
[ 9...d8 10.e5 1-0
A) 10...xg2 11.xg2 d6 12.f3 a7
13.ad1 0-0 14.d5!?
A1) 14...b4 15.dxe6 bxc3 16.exf7+ 254 B01
h8 17.e3 e7 18.xa7 xe5 Kosintseva,Nadezhda 2468
A1a) 19.fe1 b5 ( 19...g5 Mohota,Nisha 2311
20.xb8!+- ) 20.d4 bd7 21.xc3 38th Olympiad w (3) 15.11.2008
c4 22.b3 xf7 23.f5; [John Watson]
A1b) 19.d4 g5 20.xc3 bd7
21.fe1 g6 22.a3; 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ This is a good
A2) 14...exd5 15.xd5 xd5 16.xd5 w a y t o g o i f y o u a r e n ' t h a p p y w i t h t h e
c8 17.fd1 b7 18.e3 a8 19.c5 Portuguese Gambit
xc5 20.xc5 b6 21.b4 Sulskis, S [ 3.d4 g4 ]
(2564)-Ramon, D (2169) Cappelle la 3...d7 4.e2 xd5 5.d4 f5
Grande FRA 2005. White has a winning [ In last month's column, we saw 5...b5!? ]
position.; 6.f3 e6 7.0-0 e7
B) 10...c8 11.d5 b4 12.dxe6 fxe6 [ A too-aggressive option is 7...d6 8.c4
B1) 13.e4!N 0-0 ( 13...xe4 f6 ( 8...b4 9.c3 c2 10.b1 b4
14.h5+ g6 15.xg6 f6 16.e5 11.g5!? f6 12.e3 xb1 13.xb1
xg2 17.xf6 g8 18.e5 f8 gives White terrific compensation. Compare
19.h4 f5 20.xg2+- ) 14.xf6+ this with the note to 8 a3 below.) 9.b3!
xf6 15.xb7 xb7 16.e2 f8 c8 10.c3 bd7 11.b5!? ( 11.h4 )
17.ad1; 11...0-0 12.xd6 cxd6 13.f4 with two
B2) 13.xb7 xb7 14.g5 0-0 bishops and threats: c6 14.d5 c5
15.xf6 xf6 16.d4 e7 17.e4 15.e3 c8 16.dxe6 xe6 17.fd1 c5
xe4 18.xe4 f8 19.fe1 d8 20.a4 18.a3 ce4 19.d4 and Black won't be
246
able to hold on to his d-pawn, Movsesian- [ 28.a4 ]

Al Subaihi, Dresden 2008. ] 28...a6 29.d2?! xe2 30.xe2 xe2
8.a3 A little slow White wants to play c4 31.xe2 c7
without allowing . ..Nb4. [ 31...h3!? 32.f3! h2 33.g2 ]
[ It's remarkable that Rybka 3, in contrast to 32.xg6 hxg6 33.xh4 . This is about equal,
the materialistic reputation of some playing in spite of Black's better bishop. I'll let you
engines, says that 8.c4 b4 9.c3 c2 see the consequent ups and downs for
10.b1 b4 11.e3!? xb1 12.xb1 yourself. e7+ 34.e3 f6 35.gxf6 xf6
actually f avours W hite!! W hether or not 36.g3 f7 37.a4 f8 38.b8 e7
that's true, he has a lot of space and 39.d2 f7 40.c3 h7 41.b5 axb5
development, whereas Black will have a 42.axb5 g7 43.b4 d7 44.d6 c8
hard time getting his pieces out at all. A 45.e7 g8 46.a5 cxb5 47.xb5 c6+
sample line might be 0-0 13.a3 4a6 48.b4 f8 49.d8 f7 50.a8 b6+
( 13...4c6 14.d5 ) 14.d1 d7 15.b4 f6 51.c3 b5 52.a2 e6 53.d2 b4+
16.e5 with attacking chances, for example, 54.d1 b5 55.c2 f6 56.e1 f7
xe5 17.dxe5 e7 18.e4 c6 19.d3 g6 57.f3 e7 58.f2 h4+ 59.g2 f6
20.h6 fd8 21.f4 ( 21.h4 is another 60.f2 g7 61.d2 c6 62.f4+ f6
good move ) 21...f6 22.exf6 xf6 23.c1! 63.e3 e7 64.c1 e6 65.b1 a6
with ideas of Bg5 and Ne4. ] 66.b3 c6 67.a2 f6 68.a8 d7
8...0-0 9.c4 b6 10.c3 g4 At least this 69.b8 c6 70.f4 g7 71.e3 e8
indicates that 3 Bb5+ and 4 Be2 was a type of 72.f2 f7 73.h2 g7 74.h6+ g8
gain of time, because Black has now played 75.f4 g7 76.g4 e7 77.e2 e8
three moves (...Bd7-f5-g4) to get this bishop 78.f4 b5+ 79.f2 e8 80.d2 f7
to its best post. On the other hand, a3 isn't 81.a5 e7 82.d2 e8 83.e3 f7
exactly a powerhouse move. 11.h3 xf3 84.e2 e8 85.d2 f7 86.h2 g7
12.xf3 c6 13.c5 d5 14.xd5 exd5 87.d6 c6 88.b8 d7 89.h2 e8
15.e3 f6 16.d3 g6 17.fe1 90.h3 g8 91.g4 f7 92.g5 g7
[ 17.ad1 (wit h t h e i d e a o f Q b 3 ) e7 93.f4+ g8 94.h6 xh6 95.xh6 e6
18.fe1 c6 19.h6 e8 20.g4 96.f4 c6 97.e5 f7 98.c3 g8
looks a little irritating for Black. ] 99.b4 f7 100.f4 g8 101.e7 h8
17...e8 18.b4 e7! 19.g4!? To stop ...Nf5. 102.d6 c8 103.xd5 a8 104.d7
g5!? Black would like to sink a knight on f4 or a6 105.d6 a8 106.xg6 d8
h4. White sacrifices a pawn to prevent this, 107.h6+ g8 108.g5+
which is hardly necessary, but interesting. 1-0
20.h4!? gxh4
[ Not 20...g6?! 21.xg5 xe1+ 22.xe1
xg5 23.hxg5 c6 24.e3 ] 255 B01
21.g5 g7 22.g4 g6 23.f5 c6 Kosintseva,Nadezhda 2425
24.d1!? To take up an active post on g4. It's Zhukova,Natalia 2471
about equal here. FIDE WCh Women KO (2.5) 25.05.2004
[ A lt e rn a t i ve l y 24.h1 would prepare b5 [Andrew Martin]
without allowing ]
[ 24.b5 cxb5 25.xb5? xe3! ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6!
24...c7 25.g4 e7 26.e2 ae8 The most accurate way, sidestepping various
27.ae1 d8 W hite tries with an early Bd2 followed by
[ 27...b6 has the idea 28.cxb6 axb6 29.c1 discovered attacks from the Knight on c3.
b5 30.ec2 xe3! ( or 30...a7 31.c3 Black delays ...Nf6 until he or she is ready.
xe3 32.fxe3 xe3 ) 31.fxe3 xe3 5.f3 f5 6.c4 e6 7.0-0 f6 It's fine now
32.xc6 g3+ 33.xg3 xg3+ 34.h1 that White has castled short, taking outright
xd4 with a kind of dynamic equality. ] attack out of the equation. 8.e2
28.f1 [ T h e r e i s n o t h i n g t o f e a r f r o m 8.d2
247
for instance: bd7 9.d5 d8 10.xf6+ to play for a win, but of course White risks
( 10.e3 g6 11.e1 d6= ) 10...xf6= more this way. xf3 ( 19...fd8 ) 20.xf3
( 10...xf6!? 11.g5 g6 12.c3 g4 )] xc4 21.fe1 c3 22.d3 d5 ]
8...b4 Again quite regular. Black is happy to 19...xe4 20.f4 d6 21.xd6 xd6
surrender the dark-squared Bishop in order to 22.e4 xf3 23.xf3 b6 24.fd1 e5=
gain control of the central light squares and to Black must keep the Queens on for as long as
facilitate a queenside pawn advance. it takes to adjust Rook endings in his favour.
[ 8...bd7 9.h4 g6 10.xg6 hxg6 W ith the Rook on c1 ready to support the
11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 0-0-0 also seems advance of the c pawn it might look as though
good. ] White is better but practically, in view of the
9.b3 0-0 10.d2 bd7 weakness of W hite's a pawn, chances are
[ 10...c7 11.b5! ] equal. 25.h3 All roads seem to lead to
11.a3 xc3 12.xc3 c7= Lots of strong equality:
players would be looking at the two Bishops, [ 25.d7?? xc4 ]
expecting an advantage as of right. But it's [ 25.d3 c7 26.h3 h6 27.d6 xd6
really tough for White to get the dark-squared 28.xd6 fc8= ]
Bishop going and often, if Black plays ...Nf6- [ 25.g3 f6 26.c5 bxc5 27.bxc5 c6
d5, White will just have to surrender the other 28.h3 fc8 29.d7 a6= ]
Bishop, forfeiting any hope of attack. 13.d2 25...c7 26.c3 h6 27.dc1 fc8 28.d3
[ The following fragment is a good example g5 29.d6 c6 30.d7 6c7 31.d3
of what I meant: 13.fe1 fd8 14.ad1 a5 e5 32.c2 g5 33.c5 Without this
15.c1 b6 16.e5 xe5 17.xe5 d5! advance, White cannot win. bxc5 34.bxc5
18.xd5 cxd5= Kerbrat,J-Kovarcik,G/ c6 35.c4 e5 36.a4 g5 37.c3 d5
France 2003 Perhaps Black is even f or 38.b4 e5 39.a5 White has to attack or
choice. ] cre a t e a se co n d we a kn e s s - t h e c p a wn
13...c5! An unusual counter but in this cannot win alone. In this case there is no
instance, with the Bishop on b3, completely weakness to be found. a6 40.b4 d5
c o rre c t . B l a c k a ct iva t e s a t ju s t t h e righ t 41.c3 e5 42.e3 f5! Just reminding White
moment, before White is allowed to sit on his about her own majority. 43.4c3 g6 44.f3
trumps. 14.ac1 gc6 45.1c2 d8 46.h2 d4!
[ 14.c3? b6 ] Progress has been made, the c pawn might
14...ac8 15.c4 g4 be weak so off come the Queens. 47.xd4
[ 15...b6! was an active deployment: exd4
16.c2 ( 16.e3 e4! 17.dxc5 xc5 [ I would surely have preferred 47...xd4!
18.c2 xb2 19.c3 a2 20.xf6 xc2 48.c4 f7 49.xd4 exd4 50.d2 xc5
21.xg7 xg7 22.c3+ f6 23.xc2 b3 51.xd4 e6 With the White King so
24.xb3 xb3 ) 16...cxd4 17.xf5 exf5 remote, Black is slightly better. ]
18.b4 fe8 19.d3 e5 20.xe5 xe5 48.d3 d5 49.c4 cxc5 50.xc5 xc5
21.c5 d8 22.g5 d5 ] 51.xd4 a5 52.f4 f7 53.d7+ f6
16.dxc5 xc5 17.c2 c6 18.b4 54.a7 c4 55.a6+ f7 56.xa5 xf4
The only danger to Black comes from the 57.a8 f1 58.a5 Black's opening play is
queen side pawn ma jority b ut Zhuko va is very good. By delaying ...Nf6 a lot of
active enough to at least keep a balance. aggressive and dangerous W hite tries are
ce4 avoid ed . I b e lieve it was GM W a hls wh o
[ 18...xf3 19.xf3 ( 19.gxf3 cd7 suggested this approach. As...c7-c6 and ...
20.fd1 b6 ) 19...xf3 20.gxf3 fd8! Bc8-f5 have to be played anyway, why not
21.c3 d3 ] play them first? Recommended.
19.xe4 This is a lazy move. White tires of ½-½
even the thought of complications and heads
for quieter waters.
[ 19.f4 keeping some tension, was the way
248
256 B01 16.g2 xe3 17.he1

Kosmo,Santul 2145 A) 17...h5! 18.xe3 ( 18.xe3 xe3
Smerdon,David 2380 19.xe3 hxg4 ) 18...hxg4;
41st WJun, Goa (1) 2002 B) 17...d2 18.xe3 c5 19.b3 h5
[Andrew Martin] 20.f5+ xf5 21.gxf5 e8 22.ae1
xe3 23.xe3 d7 24.g3 c2 25.xg7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.c4 e6 4.dxe6 xe6 e7 26.g3 c6 27.e3+ d7 28.e4
The Icelandic Gambit, usually the scene of a xe4 29.xe4 a2 30.a4 d2 31.f6
brief, violent struggle which ends in a victory d6 32.e7+ d8 33.xf7 e8
for Black. W hy W hite would allow this 34.xb7 xf6 35.xa7 d6 36.b7 h4
co n t in u a t io n I d o n o t kn o w-t h e p ra ct ica l 37.a5 c5 38.b6 d7 39.c6 b7
chances all lie with Black. The popularity of 3 40.b6 a7 41.b5 1-0 Litwak,P-Bennett,
c4 has suffered as a result of 3...e6 5.f3 H/Christchurch 2002 ]
[ 5.d4 b4+ 6.d2 e7 ( 6...xd2+ 7...g4
7.xd2 e7 is also strong.) 7.e2 c6 [ 7...0-0-0 8.e3 f5 9.c3 b4 10.0-0-0
8.f3 0-0-0 9.d5 xd2+ 10.bxd2 b4 e4 11.f4 g5 12.e5 xc3 13.bxc3 g4
11.0-0-0 f5 12.e1 xa2+ 13.d1 b4 14.xh8 d6 15.c5 h6+ 16.b2 d5
14.e5 g6 15.g3 he8 16.h3+ b8 17.cxb4 gxf3 18.xf3 xf3 19.gxf3 xh8
17.d4 c5 18.f4+ a8 19.f5 xb2 20.c4 f6 21.de1 d7 22.c3 c6 23.d5
20.e3 xe3 21.fxe3 c1+ 22.e2 xh1 1-0 Krupko,A-Kobzar,A/ Evpatoria 2002 ]
23.xg6 hxg6 24.c7 e8 25.d6 c1+ 8.e3 0-0-0 9.d5 e5 10.c3 fd7 11.h3
0-1 Hernandez,J-Lopez,M/Merida 2002 So now comes the question :Is this all bluff?
(25) ] Smerdon seems unconcerned to be a pawn
5...e7 Perhaps this is the trickiest move. down. He lames White's structure and plays
6.e2 for positional pressure.
[ Giving back the extra pawn doesn't hinder [ 11.0-0-0 f6 12.h3 h5 13.g4 xf3
Black in any way : 6.e2 xc4 7.d3 a6 14.gxh5 e8 15.c2 c5 16.g2 xe3+
8.0-0 c6 9.c3 0-0-0 Quite a good way 17.fxe3 g5 18.b1 h4 19.hg1 xh5
of handling Black's position. 10.a3 e5 20.e4 e5 21.f2 b6 22.f1 f5 23.xg7
11.xe5 xe5 12.e3 c5 13.xc5 xc5 h6 24.g1 fxe4 25.g4 f5 26.xe4
14.d2 d4 15.b4 f5 16.b5 xb5 e3 27.e1 xf1 28.xf1 f8 29.h1
17.xb5 xb5 18.ab1 e5 19.f3 b6 xe4 30.xe4 c5 31.e7 g6+ 32.a1
20.b2 e8 21.b3 e7 22.h3 a5 f7 33.e8+ b7 34.b5 d3 35.b1
23.fc1 h5 24.c2 d6 25.a4 a6 26.c4 b4 36.b3 g7+ 0-1 De Silva,N-Eid,F/Bled
g5 27.g3 b8 28.g2 g4 29.hxg4 hxg4 2002 ]
30.c6 f5 31.h1 c8 32.a5 ee6 11...xf3+ 12.gxf3 h5 13.0-0-0 e5?!
33.a4 b7+ 34.g1 d8 35.h6 b5 [ 13...f6 14.g2 b4 15.b5 a6 16.d4
36.c2 de8 37.d2 f3 38.b4 e4 he8 must also have appeared attractive.
39.h2 c5 40.b2 g5 41.c3 e4 Black organises his game and stands well. ]
42.a1 xg3 43.b3 e2+ 44.f1 e5 14.g2 b4 That was the reason he kept his
45.h8 a7 46.h7 c4 47.xc4 bxc4 Queen on e7 but there is a flaw. 15.d4
48.b2 g3+ 49.g1 e1+ 50.h2 f1+ [ Fritz suggests 15.xa7 xc4 16.d4
51.g1 e3+ 0-1 Sandipan,C-Smerdon,D/ but then Fritz would. Frankly, I don't see
41st WJun, Goa IND 2002 (51) ] wh a t B la c k d o e s a g a in st t h i s. K o s m o s
6...c6 7.d4 reaction is timid-he has been well and truly
[ 7.a3 0-0-0 8.h3 is a cagier way of treating intimidated. ]
the position. White keeps the Black minor 15...c5 16.h4 xe3+ 17.xe3 he8!
pieces out as far as he can. d7 9.d4 18.xh5 xc4 19.d4 c5! Open up those
xd4 10.xd4 xd4 11.e3 e5 12.c3 lines please! 20.g4+ d7 21.d1 e2
f5 13.g4 d3 14.f3 xf1 15.xf1 c5 22.f4 a3 23.f5 d2# In its own little
Of course this position is excellent for Black. way a typical Icelandic game. I have some
249
advice for White : play 3 d4 or 3 Nf3-they are 12...xd5 13.g1 0-0-0 [TK: Accompanied
both good moves...... by a draw offer, which I immediately refused.
0-1 At this point I was in the lead, a half point
ahead of my opponent, but although I had
used a lot of time in the opening I like having
257 B01 more space and the pair of bishops!] 14.g2
Kosten,Anthony C 2507 [ 14.c3 e6 15.g2 b5 16.b3
Govciyan,Pavel 2411 leaves White with his bishops, although this
83rd ch-FRA National B (4) 14.08.2008 time the second player has well-placed
[John Watson] pieces and a good bishop. ]
14...a5+!?
I think that this is the first time I've shown our [ 14...b5! is more solid. ]
webmaster and Fearless Leader lose a game! 15.c3 c6 16.f3!?
Probably Black can keep his opening [ [TK: 16.b3 e6 17.0-0-0 was my first
disadvantage to a minimum, based upon choice, f o llowed by c4 with a small bu t
some unusual tricks. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 obvious plus.] ]
3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 6.h3 h5 16...f6 17.g5 d5 18.d2 [TK: Aiming for
7.g4 g6 8.e5 The most challenging move, more than the pawn grab.]
and I think best. [ Or 18.xf7!? xe3 ( [TK: After the game
[ 8.c4 is an aggressive option, to be my opponent revealed that he had intended
followed by Qe2 and Be3/ g5 with 0-0-0 in 18...e5? but this loses to 19.xd5 xd5
some lines. ] 20.e8+ c7 21.dxe5 xe5 22.f7+
8...bd7 9.f4!? After this natural move e7 23.f4+ with a solid pawn more.])
White's advantage isn't clear. 19.e6+ b8 20.fxe3 xg5 21.0-0-0 d6
[ 9.f3 is an obvious option, if nothing else 22.e4 yielding a limited advantage
to discourage castling: 0-0-0 10.xg6 hxg6 (opposite-coloured bishops help Black in this
11.g5 and White will soon capture on f7. ] case). ]
9...d5!? Black works with tactics. 18...e5!? 19.dxe5 b6
[ Another surprising possibility is 9...xe5 [ 19...c5 w o u l d h a v e t h e i d e a 20.b4
10.xe5 ( 10.dxe5 b4! hits f4 ) 10...b6 ( 20.f1 he8 ) 20...xb4! 21.cxb4 xb4
11.g2! c6 , which may not be so bad for 22.g4+ c7 23.xb4 xe5+ ]
Black, although W hite's control of space 20.f5+ b8 21.f4 a8 22.e4!?
m u s t c o u n t f o r s o m e t h i n g . ( 11...xb2? Perhaps dreaming of e6 and Qxc6. [TK: And
12.d2! threatens Rb1 with a large also a4 followed by b4.] f6! 23.gxf6
advantage. )] [ 23.e6 d6 ]
10.xg6 23...gxf6 24.e6 d6 Apparently Black stands
[ 10.f3 xf4 11.xf4 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 all right now. White's next is risky: 25.0-0-0?!
cedes the bishops for some attacking [TK: I still think this is best!]
chances. ] [ 25.xd6 xd6 26.e7!? e8 27.f3
10...xg6 11.xd5 h a s i d e a s o f R g 8 a n d B h 5 , b u t c8
[ Another sharp line is 11.f3 xf4 12.xf4 seems to hold. ]
e5! 13.dxe5 xc2 14.c4 0-0-0 15.0-0 25...f5! Driving the queen from defence from
, although Black has counterplay my engine b1 or c2.
suggests g5 , w i t h t h e i d e a 16.xg5 [ White was probably counting upon
( 16.xf7 xb2 17.e6 xc3 18.exd7+ 25...xf4+ 26.xf4 wit h t h e id e a xa2
b8 ) 16...xb2 17.ac1 h5! 27.e7 ]
with an unclear position. One feels that [ C o n t r a s t t h e g a m e w i t h 25...xa2??
White should maintain an edge after 11 Qf3, 26.xd6 c4 27.b1! ]
but again, not much. ] 26.f3 xa2! 27.xd6 [TK: I was very short
11...e4+ 12.e3 of time, and still wanted to win the game, but
[ Or 12.e3 xf4 ] this is just a blunder.]
250
[ 27.e7 a4! 28.exd8+ xd8 29.xd6 B) 9.0-0 xd4! 10.xd4 xe2

xb2+ 30.d1 xd6+ 31.xd6 xc3+ 11.cxe2 ( 11.xe2 xd4 12.e3 e5
32.xc3 xc3 is extremely difficult for 13.b5 d1! ) 11...e5 12.e3 c5
W h it e b e ca u se h e ca n't coo rdin at e h is 13.c3 exd4 14.xd4= This Is the normal
pieces and Black's a-pawn will advance. ] theory I know where Black has obviously
[ 27.xd6! [TK: This is forced and leads to easily equalized. That said, with little risk
an immediate draw, c4 28.a3 xa3 he can certainly push for more... ]
29.bxa3 xa3+ 30.b1 b3+ [ Of course not 7...xf3? 8.xf3 xd4
with perpetual.] ] 9.xb7 d8 10.0-0 ]
27...c4!? 8.g4 g6 9.d2 0-0-0 10.g5!
[ Similar but slightly more promising would be [ 10.d5? a4 The "mouse hole trick" as in
27...xd6 28.xd6 c4! ] the previous game! This only works when c7
[ 27...a4! [TK: Is very strong.] ] is defended, when the square a3 is not
28.d7! xb2+ 29.d1 b1+ Heading for a occupied by a white pawn and preferably
draw. when White does not have a queen on e2 to
[ 29...xd7+ 30.exd7 d8 31.xc6!! b1+ avoid a horrible doubling of the a-pawns (or
32.e2 c2+ 33.e1 xc3+ 34.e2 the draw by repetition...) after the exchange
c2+ 35.e1 will also draw. ] of queens. ]
30.c1?? Trying for too much. [TK: I had just 10...xd4!
seconds left and still wanted to win!] [ 10...h5? 11.d5 b4 12.b3 e6 13.a3 ]
[ W hite had to settle for 30.e2 c2+ [ 10...d7!? However is interesting, and
( again, 30...xg1 31.xc6! is too strong.) leading to a maze of complications: 11.b5
31.e1 he8 32.xd8+ xd8 33.e7 b1+ ( 11.d5? b4 12.b3 c5 ) 11...b6
, etc. ] 12.a4 a5 ( 12...a5 13.e2 Intending b2-
30...xd7+ 31.exd7 d8 32.f4 b4 ) 13.d5 b4 ( 13...ce5 14.e3+- )
[ 32.e1 xd7+ 33.e2 e7+ 34.f1 14.xb4 axb4 15.a5 c5 16.e2 ]
xe1+ 35.xe1 xc1+ only delays the 11.xd4!
worst. ] [ 11.gxf6? xc2-+ 12.d5 a4 13.b3
32...b2+ 33.e1 ( 13.fxe7 xd1 14.exd8+ xd8 15.xd4
[ 33.e2 d3+ 34.e1 d1# ] xc4 ) 13...xd1 14.bxa4 xf3 15.fxe7
33...d3+ 34.d2 xf4 35.f1 c2+ 16.f1 xe7 17.xe7+ b8
0-1 Everything hangs in the white camp! ]
11...xd4 12.b5?
[ 12.d5? e4+ 13.f1 ( 13.e3 xg5 )
258 B01 13...c5 ]
Kotlyar,Dimitri 2313 [ 12.e2!? is the critical continuation.
Prie,Eric 2439 A) 12...e4?! 13.xe4 xe4 14.f3!
Rheinland Pfalz ChT1 (1.1) 12.10.2004 ( 14.xa5? xd1+ 15.xd1 xh1 )
[Eric Prié] 14...e5 15.fxe4 e6 ( 15...xe4 16.f1 )
16.d3 g3+ 17.f1 c5 18.e1 xg5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 19.f3;
f6 5.c4 g4! 6.f3?! c6 7.h3 h5!? B) 12...e5?! 13.gxf6 gxf6 14.c1 g8
More tricky, with 10...Nxd4! in mind, and the 15.e3;
idea of playing for a win, than the levelling C) 12...d5!? 13.b5 b6 ( 13...xd2
[ 7...h5 8.e2 0-0-0 14.xd2 xd2+ 15.xd2 This position
A) 9.e3 e5 10.0-0 ( 10.g1? xd4 looks superior for White to the one of the
11.xd4 exd4 12.hxg4 a5 13.xd4 game be cau se of the possib ility Bd3 ,
a3! The legendary one!) 10...exd4 exchanging one of Black's strong bishops.
( 10...xd4 11.xd4 exd4 12.hxg4 xg4 Anyway Fritz gives 15...a6 15.Nc3 Nf4 17.
13.e4 ) 11.xd4 xe2 12.cxe2 c5 h4 e6 as 0.00 where on general grounds,
13.c3 he8; as in the game I would not mind being
251
Black (exposed enemy king, weaknesses pressure. ]

on g5, c2 and f2, excellent pieces and a 15...e6!
strong pair of bishops) as I know I cannot [ 15...a6!? 16.d4 xg5 17.h4 e5
lose this position! a6 16.c3 f4 ) 18.hxg5 exd4 19.d3 xd3 20.cxd3 e7
14.xd4 xd4 White's position looks 21.f4 I do not think Black can lose this, but
quite uncomfortable. Indeed where to this is definitely not a good pawn structure
castle now? If Black wins a second pawn to exploit his 2 pawns against the exchange.
on g5 or b2 he will even have a material I understood that a bit late. ]
advantage! Fortunately for him, compared 16.h4! h6!
to the main line, he now benefits from a [ 16...c6 17.h5 cxb5 18.hxg6 bxc4?
tactical trick because of the seemingly 19.xh7 b4+ 20.c3+- ]
more aggressively placed knight on d5 [ 16...b4+ 17.c3 c5 18.f3 g3 19.h3 ]
which will allow him to force the exchange 17.gxh6 xh6 18.xa7+ b8 19.b5 c6
of queens. 15.c3 e4 16.0-0 e6 17.f3 20.d4
h4 18.xd5 exd5 19.g4+ xg4+ [ 20.c3! xc3 ( 20...b4 21.a3 ) 21.bxc3
20.hxg4; xc2 22.e2 Against such a weak
D) 12...d7! 13.b5 b6 14.xd4 opposing structure, with already one pawn
xd4 With the queens still on the board, for the exchange, Black has little chance
and such white weaknesses and exposed of losing the ending but he may not win. ]
king, the exchange sacrifice for one pawn 20...c5 21.c3 e5 22.f3 xf2+ 23.f1
is almost trite and will always be b6?! Giving the opponent a unique chance
in te res t in g. 15.c3 e4 16.g1 e6 to escape.
17.d2 xc2 18.xc2 xc2 I prefer [ 23...f6!? Maintaining the pressure. ]
Black. ] 24.h2?
12...xd2? I misjudged this position. The [ 24.xe5! g3+ 25.g2 xh1 26.xg6
moment of simplifying (i.e. looking for the xg6+ 27.xh1 g4 ( 27...f6 28.h5 g5
material of two pawns for the exchange) had 29.f7 ) 28.xf7= ]
not come yet. 24...h5! 25.xe5
[ 12...e4+! 13.f1 b6 [ 25.g5 f6+ 26.g2 ( 26.e1 f2+
A) 14.d3 e5 15.e3 ( 15.gxf6 27.xf2 xf2 ) 26...f2! 27.e1 ( 27.f1
xd3+-+ ) 15...xd3+ 16.xd3 xb5 f4 ) 27...g4 28.hh1 ( 28.h3 f2+
17.xb5 xb5 18.gxf6 exf6-+; 29.h1 xb2 ) 28...e3+ ]
B) 14.e2 d7! ( 14...d5?! 15.c4 f4 [ 25.e2 g3+ 26.e1 xe2 27.xe2
16.c5 ) 15.e3 xe3 16.fxe3 c6 e4 ]
17.d4 e5 18.f3 c5-+; 25...f6+
C) 14.e3 xe3! 15.fxe3 e4 16.g4+ [ 25...c7 26.d7+ c8 Is even stronger. ]
e6 17.d3 c5 18.xg6 xb5+ 26.g2 A bit more resistant, then, was
19.d3 xd3 20.cxd3 xd3+ 21.f2 [ 26.e1 f2+ 27.xf2 xf2 28.d3
c5 22.he1 d8-+ ] f4-+ ]
13.xd2 xd2+ 14.xd2 e4+ 15.e1 26...f2+ 27.h3 xh2+! 28.xh2 c7
[ 15.e2!? was possibly better. White must 29.e1 xe5+ 30.h3 f5 31.g1 f3!
have been af raid of some check on h5. Installing an uncommon mating network .
Anyway, in this line or in the game, Black 32.f1
cannot take g5 under favourable [ 32.h5 xh5 ]
circumstances because of tactical counter 32...g4+ 33.g2 d2 34.e1 xc4 35.b3
points. e5! ( 15...a6 16.d4 xg5 17.h4 xc3 36.e8+ c7 37.bxc4 d6 38.b8
e5 18.hxg5 exd4 19.d3 ) 16.xa7+ b8 c7 39.f8 b6 40.a4 d6
17.b5 h5+ 18.e1 ( 18.e3 xg5 ) 0-1
18...b4+! To take the c3 retreat square off
the white knight. 19.c3 c5 20.e2 xf2+
21.f1 g6 22.h4 b6 White is still under
252
259 B01 12...c8?!

Kotronias,Vasilios 2570 [ 12...xc3+! 13.bxc3 a5 This is it! With
Candela Perez,Jose 2430 the help of a surprising resource a f e w
X Anibal Open (2) 2003 moves down the line, Black obtains
[Andrew Martin] sufficient and in some cases very strong
counterplay.
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 A) 14.d2 a4 15.h2 f6;
Believe me,this move is better than it looks. In B) 14.b2 c6! 15.xc6 bxc6 16.h5
England, we have christened it the BANKER xh5!! A shock! 17.xh5 ( 17.gxh5
variation. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5 b8 ) 17...b8;
[ 6...d5? is just nonsense. 7.e5 e6 C) 14.d2 xc2 ]
8.f3 f6 9.g3 h6 10.e4 d8 11.0-0 13.d2 c6 14.b5 e7 15.f4
d7 12.b3 7f6 13.f3 xe4 14.xf7# Mat te rs a re d if f e re nt h ere. B la ck h as n o
1-0 Rizouk,A-Ortega Garcia,F/6th Open, structural weakness to aim at and he has to
Malaga ESP 2003 (14) ] worry continually about the threat of h4-h5. I
7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6 think White's chances are better: xe5
[ 8...e4!? is interesting and rarely played. [ 15...0-0 16.h5 xc2 17.xc2 xe5
Black is arguing that the loss of the Two 18.xc8 xf3+ 19.f2 fxc8 20.xf3
Bishops means little, set against W hite's c2 21.ab1 ]
weakening pawn advance g2-g4. 9.xe4 16.xe5 f6 17.c7+ f7 18.f4!
xe4 10.f3 d6 11.d3 Very calm. It was important to see that ...e6-
A) T h e r e ' s a l s o 11...d7 leading to e5 leads to nothing. e5 19.dxe5 fxe5
12.d2 b6 ( 12...e7 13.0-0-0 b6 ) 20.xe5 d8 21.0-0-0 f6 22.e2 d7
13.0-0-0 ( 13.xd7 xb2 ) 13...d8; 23.h5 When it came, Black's goose was
B) 11...a5+ 12.d2 d5 13.c4 xf3 cooked. xc2 24.xc2 ac8 25.b1
14.xf3 d7 15.b4 f6 16.g5 d7 This game was very critical from moves 10-14.
17.0-0 g6 Structurally, Black is fine. Black must be exact or he will be swept from
18.ae1 0-0-0 19.a4 g7 20.c1 f5 the board. I think Kotronias won this game
21.e3 h6! 22.gxh6 xh6 23.xh6 t h r o u g h s h e e r p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r e s s u r e -
xh6 Velcheva,M-Jovkova Draganova,P/ somehow he convinced Black to lose faith in
52nd ch-BUL w, Sofia BUL 2003 If the his position. But as we've seen, 12...Bxc3+
main line fails to hold up, 8. ..Be4 should and 13...Qa5 is good enough and therefore 12
be examined more closely. ] Qe2 cannot be considered a refutation.
9.h4 b4 Better than 1-0
[ 9...bd7?! 10.e2 ( 10.f3! xe5 11.dxe5
xd1+ 12.xd1 0-0-0+ 13.d2 d7
14.h5 xe5 15.e2 ) 10...b4 11.d2 260 B01
xe5 12.dxe5 d7 13.h5 xc2 14.c1 Kotronias,Vasilios
xc3 15.xc3 a4 16.b3 b5 17.xb5 Thorhallsson,Throstur
cxb5 18.d1 c7 19.h3 c5 20.h6 Reykjavik (Iceland) 1988
gxh6 21.d4 b4+ 22.c3 c5 23.d4 [Nigel Davies]
b4+= Soltanici,R-Ardelean,G/Bucharest
2003 ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4
10.f3! The acid test, leading to extremely [ 3.e2! xd5 4.d4 would cut out the
sharp play. d5 11.xd5 possibility of Black's gambit line with 3...
[ 11.h5 f6 ] Bg4 and is, in my opinion, more precise. But
11...cxd5 12.e2 This works well for this was not how Thorhallsson wanted to
Kotronias but Black misses a good chance. play it. ]
[ 12.h5 f6 13.hxg6 fxe5 14.gxh7 c6 3...xd5 4.e2! g6 5.f3 g7 6.0-0 0-0
15.dxe5 d4 16.a3 a5 17.b4 dxc3 7.e1!
18.bxa5 xa5 19.f4 d8 20.e2 d5 ] [ Once again this restricts Black's options.
253
A f t e r t h e i m m e d i a t e 7.c4 Black gets 28.h8 d7 29.xh6 f6 30.h3 d2

counterplay with b6 8.c3 c6 ] 31.b3 xe2 32.xb6+ f7
7...c5 [ This and the following moves look as if they
[ Black has a major alternative in 7...c6 were influenced by time-trouble. 32...g5
after which White should once again avoid 33.xa6 xb2 looks better, with Black's king
pla yin g c 2-c 4 p re m at u re ly. In Lo b ro n - more active than in the game. ]
Veinger, Munich 1987 White kept insidious 33.f1 c2 34.xa6 xb2 35.d6 c2
pressure with 8.h3 ( 8.c3 e8 9.a3 b6 36.d5 c1+ 37.e2 c2+ 38.e1 xc4
10.f4 a6 11.c4 d5 12.g3 39.xe5 c2 40.a4 f6 41.e2 c1+
was also nice for White in Galkin - Genba, 42.d2 g1
Russia Cup, Ekaterinburg 1997) 8...b6 [ This must have been a time-scramble.
9.c3 e5 10.dxe5 xe5 11.xd8 xd8 42...a1 just wins the a-pawn and draws -
12.f4 xf3+ 13.xf3 c6 14.c7 f8 and in fact Black could have taken the a-
15.a4 when Black's queenside was under pawn at almost any point. ]
serious pressure. ] 43.g3 f4
[ 7...f5 develops a piece but ignores the [ 43...a1 ]
crucial battle for the centre. Romanishin - 44.gxf4 a1 45.e3 a2+ 46.e1 f5
Comas, Moscow (ol)1994continued 8.c3 47.f1 xf4 48.g3 f5 49.g2 c2?
c6 9.a3 a6 10.c4 c8 11.a4 h6 Missing the last chance to capture on a2.
12.a5 b8 13.h3 c8 14.f1 with a very Now W hite is better. 50.h4 a2 51.g5+
passive game for Black. ] f6 52.g4 c2 53.g3 c3+ 54.f3 b3
8.c4 55.f4+ g7 56.f2 b8 57.e3 d8
[ Alternatively White can play 8.dxc5 a6 58.c4 e8+ 59.f4 f8+ 60.e4 f5
9.c4 ( hanging on to the pawn gives Black 61.a5
g o o d p l a y , 9.xa6 bxa6 10.c3 b7 1-0
11.d4 c7 12.c6 c8 13.f3 d8
14.d2 e5 15.c2 xc6 seeing Black
recover his pawn with the better position in, 261 B01
one example being Lobron - Stefansson, Kotronias,Vasilios 2588
Moscow (World Cup) 1989) 9...e6 10.g5 Tiviakov,Sergei 2623
a5 11.c3 h6 12.h4 g5 13.g3 d8 1st Isthmia Open (5.1) 22.08.2011
14.bd2 xc5 15.e5 with the better [Milos Pavlovic]
game for W hite in Godena - Comas,
Mondariz 200 0 due to the weakn ess o f 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
Black's kingside. ] f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.c4 c7
8...b6 9.d5 e5 10.c3 f5 The battle lines 8.f3 b6 9.f4 We come to an important
are drawn. White has a passed d-pawn, Black crossroads in this line, in the next game we
a kings id e p awn ma jorit y. 11.g5 f6 will focus on 9...Qd8 d7 10.xb6 axb6
12.xf6 xf6 13.c1 11.0-0-0 e6 12.e5 d5
[ Another possibility is 13.f1 e4 14.d2 [ 12...e7 13.g3 0-0 14.h4 e8 ( 14...b5
, a im in g to re st ra in B la ck's p a wn s a n d 15.h5 b4 16.e4 d8 17.h6 g6
p o s s ib ly g e t in a la t e r f 2 -f 3 . K o t ro n ia s 18.xf6+ xf6 19.c4 b5 20.b3
chooses a much more forcing line. ] White is much better.) 15.c4 b5 16.b3
13...a6 14.h6 d7 15.g5 g7 f6 17.f4 d6 18.xd6! ( 18.b1 c4
16.xg7+ xg7 17.a3 c8 18.ed1 e8 I s n o t t h a t cle a r.) 18...xd6 19.e3
19.b5 h6 20.e6+ xe6 21.dxe6 b6 White has easy play and the better pieces. ]
22.d6 e7 23.ad1 f6 24.xa7 13.c4 f6 14.f4 e7 15.he1
White is managing to maintain the initiative by [ 15.de1!?N b5 16.xd5 exd5 17.d3!
the skin of his teeth. But the position remains Now in such a structure it is obvious that the
OK for Black for a long time to come. xa7 bishop belongs on the b1-h7 diagonal. xa2
25.xb6 xe6 26.xe6+ xe6 27.d8 b6 18.b1 a4
254
A) 19.e3 f7 20.e2 b6 21.he1 e8 B) 7...d5 ]

( 21...d8 22.c3 ) 22.b8! Black is 5.f3 g6 6.c3 g7 7.c5 One of several
paralysed, W hite's advantage is moves, but after Black's next, the position
undisputed.; becomes extremely important, because it is a
B) 19.e3 0-0 20.he1 f7 21.h5 f5 direct way for White to deviate from the 2...
22.g5 xg5 23.xg5 d6 24.e8+ f8 Nf6 Scandinavian that begins with 4...Nb6, as
25.1e7 g6 26.xf8+ xf8 27.e3 given in the previous note. d5 Transposing
White is winning. ] to the main 4...Nb6 line of the previous note.
15...b5 16.b3 Even here it was possible to The main options are
play in the same manner: [ 7...0-0 8.c4 g4 and ]
[ 16.xd5 exd5 17.d3 0-0 18.e3 f7 [ 7...b6 ]
19.de1 d8 20.b1 d7 21.g3 ( 21.h4 8.c4 xc3 This is the normal move.
f8 22.h5 a5 This gives counterplay to [ We saw 8...c6 in Vuckovic-Vukanovic,
Black. ) 21...f8 22.c7 c8 23.h4 Sozina 2005 it has been used a lot, but
White has the initiative. ] W hite seems to get the advantage in all
16...b4 17.xd5 exd5 18.h5+ g6 19.h6 lines. The game continue d 9.0-0 0-0
f7 Although White has pressure here, in my 10.e1! h6 ( 10...g4 11.g5 f6 12.h3
opinion he simply doesn't have enough for a xf3 13.xf3 bd7 14.b4 h6
big advantage due to the blocked bishop on Smirnov-Prokopchuk, Nefteyugansk 2002
b3. 20.f3 b6 21.g4 a7! 22.d3 d8 and instead of 15 Bh6, when Black missed
23.de3 f8 24.h4 e7 Exchanging one 15...Nc5, White keeps the upper hand with
rook Black will get easier play. 25.g3 xe3 simply 15.f4; After 10...e6 , Martin
26.xe3 d7 27.h4 c5 28.dxc5 bxc5 suggests 11.b3 with a considerable
29.d3 b7 30.g5 e6 31.e3 d7 advantage; 10...b6 11.g5 e6 12.xd5!
32.e5 fxe5 33.xe5 c4 34.a4 xa4 cxd5 13.xe7! xe7 14.xd5
35.e6+ g7 36.e5+ g8 37.e6+ g7 Zakurdyaeva-Muzychuk, Dresden 2004)
38.h5 gxh5 39.f6+ g8 40.e6+ g7 11.b3 ( or 11.e2 ) 11...e6 12.e4
½-½ with the idea Nd6 and White must have the
better of it. The game went d7 13.d2 b6
14.a3 c7 15.ac1 a5 16.b4 bxc5?!
262 B01 17.bxc5 e5 18.d6! , with a winning
Kovalev,Andrei 2533 game. ]
Pluemer,Detlef 2172 9.bxc3 0-0 10.0-0
ZMD Open Dresden GER (4) 28.07.2009 [ Jo hn Em m s calls 10.h4 g4 11.h5
[John Watson] "a very dangerous continuation". He gives
xh5 12.xh5 ( 12.d3 xf3 13.xf3 )
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 f6 12...gxh5 , when "White's attack after
This is an independent alternative to the main 13.g5 looks menacing." To carry this
line 4...Nb6. It is less popular and reduces further, Black is forced to play h6 14.xf7
Black's counterplay, but still playable. In this ( 14.e4 is also interesting, and probably
game it transposes to the best winning try) 14...xf7 15.xf7+!
[ 4...b6 5.f3 g6 6.c3 g7 7.c5 ( 15.xh5 e6 16.xe6 f6 ) 15...xf7
A) 7...6d7 8.c4 0-0 9.0-0 16.xh5+ ( 16.f3+ g8 17.xb7 d7
has a terrific score for W hite. One ugly 18.d5+ h8 19.xh5 f6 ) 16...g8
example for Black was b6 10.e1 b7 17.xh6 xh6 18.xh6 d7 19.0-0-0 f6
( 10...bxc5 11.g5! ) 11.g5 f6 20.g6+ ( 20.d3 f7 21.g3 h8
12.e5! c6 ( 12...c6 runs into 13.a6! ) 22.g6+ f8 ) 20...f8 21.h1 d5
13.xf7+!? ( 13.b3 ) 13...xf7 14.b3 22.h8+ g8 23.h6+!? f7 24.f4+
f8 15.xf7 xf7 16.xe7 xb3 e8 25.g4 f7 26.f4+= ]
17.axb3 fd7 18.e4! and it's hopeless, 10...c6
Yakovich-Zagema, Leeuwarden 1993.; [ Another of this month's games tested the
255
logical 10...b6 : 11.e1 e6 ( Emms gives [ 20...cxd5! 21.cxd5 c8 ]

11...bxc5 12.g5 f6 13.h6 g7 21.c3 c7?!
14.xg7 xg7 15.e2; The incredible [ 21...b6 is the last chance not to be tied
continuation of Nataf-Galego, Andorra 1999 down. ]
was 11...b7 12.g5 f6 13.xf6! exf6 22.d6 d8 23.d3! f8 24.d2 b6 25.f5
14.d5! bxc5 15.b1 c8 16.d6! c6 bxc5 26.b1 White is winning. Compare the
17.d5 xd6 18.xd6 cxd6 19.d5 d7 effect of each side's pieces. e6 27.xe6
20.b7 ad8 21.xd7 xd7 22.xc6 ) xe6 28.e4 g8 29.ed1 e8 30.xc5
12.g5 f6 13.h6!? ( or 13.xf6! xf6 f5 31.d7 e7 32.c2 f4 33.h2 e4 34.d6
14.e5 bxc5 15.g4 with attacking ideas c7 35.bd1 d8 36.e6 xe6 37.xe6
including Qf3 and d5 White is clearly better) xd7 38.e8+ f7 39.xe4 b7 40.ee1
13...e8 14.e5 b7 15.b5 ( 15.e2! ) xd1 41.f5+ g8 42.xd1 e7 43.c8+
15...d5? 16.g4! e7 17.c4 d8 h7 44.f5+ g8 45.c8+ h7 46.d7
18.xf7 xf7 19.xe6 d5 20.xf6+ e2 47.b1 I'm not sure why Black continues
xf6 21.f4+ e6 22.e5+ f7 to play this line, except that it's hard to avoid!
23.xd5+ e8 24.h8+ d7 25.xd8+ 1-0
xd8 26.xa8 1-0 Kaaber-Berkemer,
Helsingor 2009. ]
11.e1 g4 12.g5 263 B01
[ 12.h3? xf3 13.xf3 xd4! ] Kristensen,Bjarke 2470
12...h6 13.h4 g5 Bern,Ivar 2370
[ 13...xf3 14.xf3 xd4? 15.cxd4 xd4 Gausdal 1993
16.xe7 xc4 17.ac1! xa2 18.xf8 [Alexander Volzhin]
xf8 19.xb7 d4 20.f1 a5 21.xc7
Tiviakov-Maliutin, USSR 1987. ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
14.g3 e5!? f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 g4 7.d5!?N
[ 14...b6 15.h3 h5 was played in De [ 7.b5!? b6 8.c4!? deserves attention.
Firmian-Thorhallsson, Akureyri 1994 but it St ra ight f rom t he op en in g we re ac h a n
doesn't seen to work out any better: 16.a4 ending where Black's life is not so easy.
( 16.e2 e6 17.a4 e7 was the game, xf3 9.xf3 xd4 10.xd4 xd4
a n d n o w W h i t e h a s 18.a3! -Emms ) 11.xb7 e4+ 12.xe4 xe4 13.e3
16...xf3 17.gxf3 a5 18.d3 e8 White's position is clearly better thanks to
19.ad1 c6 20.b1!? ( or 20.f4 ) 20...d5 his pair of bishops and better pawn structure.
21.c2 c4 22.h7+ f8 23.e4 d7 In my opinion it's not much fun for Black
24.d5! ] but surprisingly a lot of games have been
15.d5 p l a ye d wi t h t h i s p o s i t i o n . A ve r y g o o d
[ 15.h3!? h5 16.dxe5 gives White the example of utilisation of W hite's winning
edge in view of xd1?! 17.axd1 xf3 chances was the game Macieja - Myc, Sopot
18.gxf3 with the idea e6 (and f4). ] 1997. ]
15...a5 16.f1 7...xd5?!
[ 16.e2?! e4 17.e5 xe2 18.xe2 [ 7...e5 8.b5+ ed7 looks more reliable
e8 ] but of course White is better here. ]
16...f6?! Passive. Better looks 8.b5 xf3
[ 16...e4! 17.xe4 xf3 18.xf3 xd5 [ 8...b6? is weaker because after 9.c4
19.d1 xc5 20.d7 , and White's activity the threat of c4-c5 wins material. ]
is a plus, but Black is still in the game, e.g., 9.gxf3
xc3 21.e3 f6 22.d5! b6 23.xc7 [ 9.xf3?! i s d u b i o u s a s a f t e r db4
c6 24.f5 ] Black gains valuable time. ]
17.h3 h5 18.d3 c6 19.c4?! 9...b6 The only move. 10.c4 0-0-0
[ 19.d6! ] [ Black is forced to give up a piece as
19...f7 20.ad1 e8?! 10...db4 was losing due to 11.c5! a5
256
( 11...xc5? 12.xc7+ d8 13.xb4+ ) left vacant for the white queen! This is why
12.a3 ] Black has to play the preventive 5...c6. See
11.cxd5 xd5 12.c3 further.
[ 12.b3 was also not bad: e5+ 13.e3 [ 5...c6? is another blunder in this position.
( but not 13.e2? xe2+! 14.xe2 6.b5! Much stronger than the transposition
xb5+! 15.xb5 d4+ with a clear into the previous chapter after ( 6.f3 g4
advantage ) 13...a5+ 14.c3 ] 7.b5 b6 8.c4 E t ce t e ra .) 6...b4?
12...e5+ 13.e2 e6 ( 6...d8 In fact is the only move in this
[ After 13...xb2 White would maintain the position to protect c7, but who would not
initiative on the queenside by 14.b1 a3 snort in front of such a plight.) 7.d5! a6
15.0-0 with f4 and Bf3 to follow. ] 8.a4 b5 9.xb5! ( 9.xb5? axb5
14.f4 f5 15.0-0 White has almost 10.dxc6 c5 Mauko, L-Pokorna, R EU-
completed his development and his extra light- Youth Ch Szombathely 1993 )
squared bishop is quite enough to win this A) 9...e4+ 10.e2 axb5 ( 10...xg2
position without many problems. b4 11.xc7+ d8 12.xa8 xh1
[ 15...d6 16.g4 winning ] 13.0-0-0 ) 11.xe4 xe4 12.xb5;
16.a3 xc3 17.bxc3 d8 18.c2 e7 B) 9...xa4 10.xc7+ d8 11.xa8
19.e3 a5 20.c4 g6 21.e4 c6 xd5 ( 11...d4 12.b3 a3 13.e3 )
22.fd1 xd1+ 23.xd1 c7 24.g4 f6 12.e2 b7 13.c3 d4 14.xd5
25.f5 Black resigned. xd5 15.b6+- xg2 16.f4+ e8
1-0 17.d7# ]
6.f3! c8
[ 6...c6 7.b5 ( 7.b5? e4 ) 7...b6
264 B01 8.xf5 a6 9.d5 e6 10.dxe6 axb5
Kvisla,Johannes Luangtep 2123 11.xb5+- ]
Jakobsen,Terje Vidar [ 6...c6 7.b4 ]
Open A Prague (2) 14.01.2006 7.c4 c6 8.h3 bd7 9.0-0-0 e6 10.ge2
[Eric Prié] c7 11.f4 Normally, White has made
positional concessions, as in the first four
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 games, or sacrificed a pawn, as in the next
f6 game, to obtain such a steam-roller against
[ 4...f5? 5.f3! c6 ( 5...c6 6.b5 d7 the Centre Counter... b6 12.b3 d7
7.d2 a6? 8.d5 ) 6.b4 xb4 7.b1 13.d3 d6 14.g4! After having completed
a5 ( 7...xd4 8.xf5 xc3+ 9.d2 e6 mobilization, it is now time for concrete action.
10.xf7+! xf7 11.xb7+ e7 12.xc3 ) f8
8.xb7 e4 9.g3 d7 10.d2 g6 [ 14...0-0 15.g5 fd5 16.e4 a5 17.a3
11.d5! c8 12.dxc6 e5+ 13.e2 a4 18.a2 e7 19.c4 Wins a piece but
1-0 Prie, E-Rodriguez, D La Reunion IBM W hite may also ignore it and play on the
open 1997 ] kingside with Rhg1 and the idea Nf6+ ]
5.d2 By comparison with the Caro-Kann, 15.g5 fd5 16.e4 0-0-0 17.xd6+ xd6
which brings about the same pawn structure 18.h5 Of course anything wins but this
after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3(d2) dxe4 4. Nxe4, o v e r c a u t i o u s e va c u a t i o n o f t h e f - f i l e i s
practice suggests that it is rather problematic nonetheless difficult to understand.
for White to hope for an advantage against [ 18.c4 f6 ( 18...xc4 19.xc4 f6 ) 19.cxd5
t h e C e n t r e C o u n t e r wi t h o u t s o l v i n g t h e fxg5 20.e3 exd5 21.b4 g6 22.xf8
problem of setting his beast on c3 free. Thus, xf8 Black again obtains a 'normal' position
this most direct attempt, keeping the king's but if you look at it more closely, something
knight back for the moment, is the move order is missing ...! ]
chosen by at least the last 3 (classical) World 18...e7? And Black resigns seeing that 19.
c h a m p i o n s t o r e a c h t h i s p o s i t i o n . f5? Bb4 eventually wins a rook after the capture
A mistake precisely because the f3 square is
257
on e7. Strukov, R-Reprintsev, A/Moscow 1999 ]

1-0 9...0-0! Inviting White to go on a small spree
with his Rook, when Black will use the time
either take on c3 or to develop his pieces:
265 B01 10.d2
Lacasa Diaz,Jose Antonio 2420 [ One would assume that Black is OK after
Sanchez Guirado,Francisco Javier 2408 10.xe7 xc3 11.d2 a3 12.xc7 c6
49th TCh-ESP Honor 1 (3) 26.08.2005 The position has Grünfeld-like contours. ]
[Andrew Martin] 10...c6 11.e4 g4
[ 11...e8 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 12.h3
f6 5.f3 e4!? A move that caused a [ 12.xc6 bxc6 13.xe7 ( 13.e4 xf3
flurry of attention after I wrote a TWIC Theory 14.xf3 e6= ) 13...c5 14.e3 fd8
article on this very subject. To my knowledge gives Black welcome counterplay ]
Reprintsev's 5 ...Ne4 remains unrefuted and 12...xf3 13.xf3 e5! I think this is also a
interesting. Doubtless White has several ways correct move. Black comes out of his corner
to step around Black's move order for aggressively and tries to pin White down, even
instance with 5 Bc4. but that might commit him if it means giving up a pawn. 14.d5
to moves he otherwise would not like to have [ 14.xc6 bxc6 15.c4 a4 16.dxe5
played. 6.d3 ad8! ]
[ 6.c4!? has been suggested and played by 14...e7 15.c4 a4!= Again, Black has
S c o t t is h Ma s t e r G e o f f Ch a n d le r. I t 's a developed sufficient counterplay to at least
natural move alright and White's first idea is hold the balance. White has two Bishops, but
that xc3 will be met by ( I propose 6...f5 his pawn structure is poor and Black's queen
7.0-0 xc3 8.e1 e6 with a reasonable is very active. 16.c3
game for Black.) 7.d2 However, after e6! [ 16.c5 fd8 is no solution for White. ]
8.bxc3 d6 9.0-0 0-0 Black plans ...Nd7, ... 16...xc4 17.xe5 f5 18.xg7
b6 etc and there's no reason why he should [ 18.e4 c5 19.b1 xe5 20.xe5 d6
be worse e.g.. 10.b1 d7 11.b5 a4 21.d3 fe8!= ]
12.d3 a6 13.h5!? ( 13.b2 b5 14.b3 18...xg7 19.e2 xe2 20.xe2 d6=
a5 ) 13...f6 ] As lon g a s B lack keep s W hit e o ut of th e
6...xc3 7.bxc3 seventh rank his excellent Knight will ensure
[ 7.d2 was played in one of the earlier equality. 21.d3
examples of the system: g6 ( 7...e6 8.bxc3 [ 21.ab1 b6 22.g3 fe8= ]
d6 9.0-0 d7 may be better still.) 8.xc3 21...fe8 22.f4 White opens up a route for his
xc3+ 9.bxc3 g7 10.0-0 0-0 11.e1 e6 King to come to the centre. Both parties now
12.f4 c6 13.ab1 d7 14.a4 e8 15.a5 seem to understand that the game is going to
f6 16.d2 e5 Melamed, T-Reprintsev, A/ end in a draw and play develops accordingly.
Alushta 1999 ] [ 22.c4 b6 23.a4 f6 might even be better
7...g6 for Black! ]
[ Naturally enough 7...xc3+ is suggested 22...xe1+ 23.xe1 e8 24.xe8 xe8
by my trusty silicon friend but I cannot like 25.f2 f6 26.e3 e7 27.d4 d6
Black's position after 8.d2 c6 9.b1 28.g4 f6 29.c4 b6 30.e2 White has the
d6 10.c4 although Deep Fritz insists that wrong colour bishop to make progress. h6
Black is OK. ] 31.h4 d7 32.d3 f6 33.e2
8.0-0 g7 9.e1 The most natural move in [ 33.g5 is the last chance to play on: hxg5
the world. 34.fxg5 g4! ( 34...h5 35.e2 g3
[ 9.b1 0-0 10.e1 c6 11.h3 ( 11.f4 36.g4 ) 35.e2 e5 It is now unclear
or; 11.b5 xa2 12.f4 are more testing.) what White can achieve further. ]
11...xa2 12.g5 e6 13.d2 d5 14.b5 33...d7 34.d3 f6 A reasonably correct
d7 15.h6 xh6 ( 15...a5! ) 16.xh6 game by both players and evidence that 5...
258
Ne4 is still very much in business. position will not take on any supporters, as it's
½-½ amazing what people are willing to defend
these days.
[ Black can hardly play 16...e5 as after
266 B01 17.h2 the pin on the e5 pawn is most
Landa,Konstantin 2641 annoying for him. ( 17.xe5? by contrast
Chatalbashev,Boris 2535 does not work out in White's favour: xe5
Bayern-chI Bank Hofmann 16th (9) 04.11.12 18.dxe5 d7! 19.e6 fxe6 20.xe6+ h8
[Danny Gormally] 21.e3? ae8 and the pin on the bishop is
nasty. )]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 17.fe1 e6 18.a4! White has won the
f6 5.f3 g6 6.b5! b6 7.c4 opening battle. Black is very passive and can
[ 7.a4!? is examined in Smirin, I (2638)- only look forward to a difficult defence. bxa4
Kurajica, B (2558)/Eilat 2012. ] 19.xa4 d5 20.ad1 fc8 21.e4
[ White could also throw in 7.f4 a6 8.a4 [ the simple continuation 21.xd5 exd5
first, somewhat misplacing the knight on 22.e3 e8 23.dd3 was certainly worthy
a6. ] of consideration. ]
7...c6 8.c3 g7 9.c5! I can see this 21...b4
method of play becoming quite popular, as [ 21...xb2? 22.d6 c7 23.xf7! xf4
there seems no obvious way f or Black to 24.xf4 loses quickly for Black. ]
equalise after this. Landa plays as 22.b3 xd4 23.d2 b8 24.d6
aggressively as possible. He wants to put the Black is now left with a difficult choice. f8?
bishop on c4. The c6 pawn proves too important to give up
[ Normal would be 9.e2 g4 ] so easily.
[ 9.h3 with the idea of preventing Black's [ it was time to give up the exchange:
normal idea of playing ...Bg4, has also been 24...f6! 25.xc8 xc8 and White will
played. ] have a tough job indeed breaking down the
9...c7 tough carapace of Black's position. ]
[ Landa has played this position himself from 25.xc6 e5 26.xe5 xe5 27.xa8 xa8
th e B la c k p oin t o f vie w, (p e rh a ps wh a t 28.h6 g7 29.xg7 xg7 30.a1 a7?
inspired him to try this opening in the first Walking into a tactical shot. 31.b4! a4
place) and preferred 9...d8 which led to a [ 31...xb4 32.c3+ f6 33.xb4
draw after 10.c4 0-0 11.0-0 g4 12.e3 ends matters immediately. ]
bd7 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 e6 15.fd1 32.a3 With two strong connectors White is
d5 16.e4 1/2-1/2 Djukic, N (2509) - winning easily. e7 33.b5 f6 34.b6 c3
Landa, K (2635)/Rijeka 2010 (32) ] 35.e1 d4 36.b7 e5 37.c8 d2 38.a1
10.c4 0-0 11.0-0 b5 12.b3! a5 13.a3 1-0
g4?! Now I think this exchange just gives
White too easy a life. The problem is that with
this pawn on c5 cramping the queenside, 267 B01
White is threatening to create a complete bind Lanka,Zigurds 2510
on the Black position, therefore he needs to Hauchard,Arnaud 2420
try and breakout as quickly as possible. Torcy 1991
[ However, there is no easy way for Black to [Alexander Volzhin]
breakout and create any meaningful play, for
example 13...bd7 14.e1 e6 15.g5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4 4.f3 f5
with the idea of Qd2, followed perhaps by 5.b5+! In my opinion only by playing this
Bh6 or Bf4, where White has a bind. ] move can W hite hope for an opening
14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 bd7 16.f4 b7 a d v a n t a g e . bd7 6.c4 The position is
A pretty unpleasant position to have to play, somewhat similar to Movsesian - Damaso.
although I will hesitate to say that Black's But compared to that game White has gained
259
some tempi here, so it's not so easy for Black contains a threat. Now Black should parry
to prove he has something for a pawn. a6 Rc5. b5
[ B l a c k c a n t r y 6...e6 immediately. We'll [ Relatively best 22...d3 Doesn't help Black
consider that move in the next game. ] t o o m u c h i n v i e w o f 23.xb7! xf1
7.xd7+ 24.xd8 and Black's King is in trouble. ]
[ 7.a4?! is strongly met by the thematic b5! 23.c5! Now all White's pieces participate in
8.cxb5 b6 with ample compensation. ] t h e a t t a c k . a8 24.Qf4 was threatened.
7...xd7 8.e2 e6! 9.dxe6 xe6 10.b3! 24.a4! a6 25.b3! d3
[ 10.d5 is inferior as it seriously weakens the [ 25...d3 didn't help Black either in view of
d a r k s q u a r e s . A f t e r b6 White has 26.d4 ]
difficulties evacuating his King from the 26.g1 e2 27.b4 h5 28.b6! de8
centre. ] 29.c5 8e5 T h e l a s t t r i c k . 30.gd1
10...0-0-0 11.0-0 So White has managed to It's necessary to keep your concentration even
complete his development. Often he can only in completely won positions. Taking the queen
dream about castling! c5!? Now Black has led to sudden mate:
t o f i n d s o m e t h i n g , o t h e r wi s e W h i t e wi l l [ 30.xa6?? g3+ 31.hxg3 h5#
complete his development with a clear extra After the text Black has nothing to hope for,
pawn and an undisputed advantage. The so he resigned. A very good performance
prospects of a kingside attack are far from from Latvian GM Zigurds Lanka. ]
clear, so Black decides to win the pawn back. 1-0
12.h1!
[ The inaccurate 12.bc3?! allows e5!
with equality. ] 268 B01
12...xd4! 13.xd4 d7 Absolutely the only Lee,Graham D 2316
move, as Ledger,Stephen 2203
[ 13...e5? fails to 14.b2 c5 15.e2! ch Scarborough ENG (8) 10.08.2004
a n d W h i t e k e e p s a n e xt r a p i e c e : xe2 [Andrew Martin]
16.xe2 d3 17.bc3 xe2 18.xe2
d2 19.xf6 ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 A dangerous
14.b2 c5 15.b4! Excellent! Now it's White move. f6 4.d4 g4 5.e2 c6!?
who is attacking! cxd4 16.b5! axb5 17.a3! I have played 5...e6 here several times and
bxc4 believe that move to be well playable. 5...Nc6
[ Of course not 17...b4? 18.b5 and Black is much sharper, immediately unbalancing the
has no defence against Qa4 with a decisive game. Black puts pressure on d4 and will get
attack. ] castled quickly. The downside is he'll have to
18.xc4 For only one pawn White has a very give up the two bishops. Which will be more
strong attack, as he has opened files on the important? I prefer White.
queenside and Black's King is not protected [ 5...e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 d8 8.c3 0-0
by his pa wn s. Th e pre sen ce o f o p p osit e 9.e3 bd7 10.b3 c8! has feature d in
coloured Bishops favours the attacker as two of my games against GM Rowson and
usual. All these factors make Black's defence IM Ferguson. Black plans ... a6 and . ..c5,
extremely difficult. b8 19.a3! working with a manageable disadvantage.
[ The position after Black's 18th move also Black scored 1.5 from 2 in those games. ]
oc c u rre d in t h e ga m e Ma rcin ke viciu s - 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 e6+ Awkward. 8.e3
Azevedo, 1997. W hite preferred 19.c1!? 0-0-0 9.0-0 d5 Speed is of the essence,
and obtained a huge advantage after e6 lest White just sit on his advantages. 10.e2
20.d2 b5 21.a4 a6 22.a3 c8 xe3N An unimpressive novelty, but then the
23.xd4 a8 24.b5 hd8 25.g5! ] whole variation seems unpromising.
19...d5 20.c1 he8 21.d2! e6 [ Instead 10...d7 was roughly treated in a
22.a5! White continues his attack with very recent Olympiad game: 11.xd5 xd5
simple and natural moves. Each move 12.c3
260
A) 12...xd4 13.xd4 ( 13.g4+ f5 ) and Black had equalised comfortably in

13...xd4 14.ad1 b6 15.xd8+ xd8 Solak, D (2567)-Milanovic, D (2499)
16.d1+ c8 17.d3 d6 18.c4!; Vrnjacka Banja 2010 ]
B) 12...f5 13.d5 b4 14.b5 xd5 9.g3
15.xa7+ b8 16.c4 d3 17.f3 xc4 [ 9.ce5 again this move doesn't really
18.xf7 c5 19.ac1 e4 20.b5 f5 co n vi n c e m e g7 10.c4 0-0 11.0-0
21.f4+ 1-0 Rohl Montes,J-Bryson,D/ bd7 12.c3 xe5 13.xe5 d5 14.e1
Elista 1998 ] e6 and Black had largely equalised in
11.fxe3 d7 12.xc6 xc6 13.xf7 Soltanici, R (2367) -Grigore, G (2505) Baia
Black must find a better way to play against 3 Sprie 2011 ]
Nf3 because this is just hopeless. e5 14.dxe5 9...e6 10.e2 The knight on c4 has to be
d5 15.g4+ b8 16.e6 c5 17.c3! defended before White can fianchetto on the
Lee is very happy to jettison the weakling on kingside. g7 11.g2 0-0 12.0-0 c8!?
e3 in order to fully develop. It's not an A slightly odd move as Black can't play Bh3
exaggeration to say that Black is lost. xe3+ with the pawn on e7 undefended - probably
18.h1 c6 19.e7 de8 20.xg7+- hg8 the idea is to support a possible c5 break.
21.xg8! xg8 22.f8+ e8 23.xg8 [ 12...bd7 would be my preferred choice
What a hero! xg8 24.e1 c6 and White has a typical slight edge for this
[ 24...e6 25.d5! ] line after 13.a4 a5 14.e1 ]
25.xe3 e8 26.e2 c7 27.g3 13.g5!
3 Nf3 is a definite threat to the Scandinavian [ 13.a4 c5! 14.dxc5 xc5 15.ce5 bd7
but Black must not panic. He can choose to and Black has no real problems here. ]
defend stoutly with 3...Nf6 (but NOT with a 13...d5 14.h3 xc4
subsequent ...Nc6) or punt the sharper 3...Bg4 [ 14...bd7 15.e5 is uncomfortable for
. In either case, he must study the resulting Black who has to play the weakening move
positions very carefully indeed. b5 in order to prevent c4 and White must be
1-0 doing well after 16.a4! ]
15.xc4 Leko must be very happy with how
the opening has turned out, two bishops and
269 B01 a space advantage - he should be able to play
Leko,Peter 2732 f o r a wi n f r o m h e r e wi t h l it t l e ri s k . bd7
Caruana,Fabiano 2786 16.e2
FIDE GP Tashkent (11.1) 04.12.2012 [ 16.e1 feels more natural to me with a very
[Tom Rendle] c o m f o r t a b l e g a m e f o r W h i t e a f t e r e6
17.b3 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 16...d8 17.c4 h6 18.f3
f6 5.f3 g6 6.b5 A critical test of 5...g6. [ 18.e4?! would not be so good as Black is
In Dominguez Perez-Caruana we see the helped by the swapping of pieces and also
m a i n a l t e r n a t i v e 6 . B c 4 b6 7.a3!? after xe4 19.xe4 b6! White cannot
Previously 7.Bf4, 7.c4 and 7.a4 have all been defend both central pawns and is actually a
analysed on ChessPub c6 li t t l e wo r s e I t h i n k a f t e r 20.c5 d5
[ 7...g7 8.c4 c6 9.e2 0-0 10.0-0 as the p awn on d 4 h as th e p ote nt ial t o
bd7 11.e1 d5 was a little better for become vulnerable in the long run. ]
White in an "advanced rapid" game: Karpov, 18...e8 19.d1 e6 20.d2 a5 21.c3
A (2686)-Fernandez Garcia, J (2452) c7 22.ac1 a4 23.g2 ad8 Both sides
Santurtzi 2003 ] have placed their pieces on sensible squares
8.c4 d8 and now the question is "can W hite do
[ 8...c7 9.ce5 ( 9.g3 as in the game is a n yt h i n g ? " 24.d3 g4! A nice idea from
probably a better option) 9...g7 10.c4 Caruana who realises the knight can be more
d5 11.0-0 d7 12.d3 0-0 13.b3 b5 useful than on f6. 25.e1 h5 26.h3 h6
14.e1 7b6 15.c3 a5 16.a3 f5 This is the point, the knight isn't heading back
261
to f6 but instead to f5 via h6 (although it takes 270 B01

a while to actually get there)! 27.d2 c5 Lemos,Damian 2439
[ 27...f5 seems more natural to me but Flores,Diego 2541
perhaps Fabiano was worried about 28.g4 zt 2.5 m San Luis ARG (3) 20.03.2007
hxg4 29.hxg4 d6 30.f4 although Black [John Watson]
should be OK after c5 ]
[ 27...e5! may be the best move in the A fairly typical example of the Scandinavian ...
position as it's not clear White is better at all c6/...e6 structure in one of the standard lines.
after 28.dxe5 ( or 28.g5 f6 29.xh6 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3
xh6 30.dxe5 xe5 31.xd8 xd8 f6 5.d4 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d2
32.e4 xf3+ 33.xf3 f7 which will [ The 'old' main line is 7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6
almost certainly end in a draw) 28...xe5 9.h4 bd7 10.xd7 when Black seems to
29.xd8 xd8 30.f1 e6 ] be doing well enough after either recapture
28.g5 c8 29.f4 on d7. This has been analyzed in earlier
[ 29.d5 was worth considering when play ChessPublishing games. ]
m i g h t c o n t i n u e f5 30.d1! exd5 7...e6 8.e2
31.xe8+ xe8 32.xd5 d4 33.xa4 [ (a) 8.e4 c7!? ( 8...d8 9.xf6+
and Black must fight hard for compensation is the main line that usually stems from 8
for the pawn with b5! but I still prefer White Nd5) ) 9.xf6+ gxf6 has held up reasonably
after 34.a6 bxc4 35.a4 xf3+ 36.xf3 well for Black. A recent game West-Katz,
e1+ 37.g2 as the two bishops should be P a r s i p p a n y 2 0 0 7 w e n t 10.e2 e7
worth something in this ending. ] 11.0-0-0 d7 12.h4 g6 13.f4?! f5
29...a5 30.dxc5 xc5 31.d2?! 14.xg6 hxg6 15.g3 0-0-0 16.h4 f6
[ 31.dd1 keeps a slight edge ] and Black had the more comfortable game. ]
31...xd2 32.xd2 ed8 It's hard to believe [ (b) 8.d5 d8 9.xf6+ xf6
Black is worse any longer. 33.ed1 xd2 (often arrived at by 8 Nd5 Qd8, etc.) 10.e2
34.xd2 e4 35.c2 c5 36.d2 e4 is Shirov's favourite, which has been played
[ 36...f5 surely it was time to bring the and analysed by some very strong players.
knight into the game? W hite can try 37.g4 In Jonathan Rowson's recent overview,
but h6! 38.g5 f8 is just equal ] White was coming out on top, but that could
37.d7 c5 38.d1 f6 39.e3 f5 change at any moment. ]
40.xc5 xc5 41.d8+ h7 42.f1 8...b4 9.0-0-0 bd7 10.a3 xc3 11.xc3
Black's last f ew moves have been a little The whole idea here, brought to attention by
sloppy and suddenly Leko is a little better Larsen, is that White's bishop on c3 is bad
again - it's not quite enough to create serious and all of Black's pieces are active, in spite of
winning chances though. c7 43.a8 e5 his slightly cramped pawn structure.
44.xa4 e4 Counterplay arrives just in time Variations like this helped in the explosion of
45.d2 d6 46.a5 f5 47.d5?! popularity of the .. .e6/...c6 restraint structure.
[ 47.c5 f7 48.c4 was more promising ] c7 12.e5 xe5 Logical, but it does give
47...c8 48.b4 c3 49.a3 e7 50.d6 White a permanent space advantage.
b2 51.b1 c6 52.c5 e7 53.g2 h4! [ A more dynamic approach was 12...b5!?
54.b5 d4 55.d2 hxg3 56.xg3 c3 13.d3 xd3 14.xd3 xe5 ( 14...a5!? )
57.b1 b2 Black's pieces are active enough 15.dxe5 d5 Pavlogianni-Makropoulou,
to dissuade W hite from going for the win. Aghia Pe la gia 20 04 , give n as e qu al b y
58.d2 c3 59.b1 b2 60.d2 Davies. ]
½-½ 13.dxe5 d5 14.d2 0-0-0 Traditionally,
White has been held to stand better in such
positions, aided by space and the two bishops.
That may be objectively true, but it's going to
be very hard to break through on either wing.
White tries the most likely side to attack on,
262
gaining important space there: 15.g4 g6

Cuba, was a Scandinavian Defence with the
16.f4 h5! A tough decision, because if Blackfollowing moves: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
doesn't gain activity, he can regret opening3.c3 a5 4.d4
lines for White on the kingside. 17.h3 b6
[ Reader's Challenge W12P1 Consider also
18.hf1 hxg4 19.hxg4 c5! 20.b3 h3! 4.f3 f6 5.c4 c6 6.e2 f5 7.d3 e6
8.d2 b4 9.a3 bd7? as happened in
The point. Black gets activity (and threatens ...
Rxb3) before f5 can come. 21.f2 xf2
one of my games from a 1992
22.xf2 e4 23.e1 f3 24.g5?!
simultaneous exhibition in Troon, Scotland.
Weakening, although it needn't be as bad as a) What is White's strongest possibility now
it turns out. e7 25.b4 d5 26.d2 g4 at move 10? b) Going back to move six, why
[ 26...e7 27.c4!? ] would 6...Bg4? be a serious mistake? A
27.c4 f5 28.b3 solution appears after the game W12. ]
[ 28.f1 h1 29.c4 e7 30.g2 xe1+ 4...c6 Black gives his queen an extra retreat
31.xe1 d4! 32.b3 c5 33.c3 d3 path along the a5-d8 diagonal in case trouble
34.b2 c7 is roughly equal. The bishops arises withBc1-d2 5.c4 f5 6.d2 e6?!
are frustrated on the kingside. White begins[ A common line is 6...f6 7.d5 d8 ]
to play aimlessly. ] 7.g4 the action really starts with this case of g
28...e7 29.a4!? g6 30.a5 b6 31.f1 f o r " g o f o r i t ! " g6 8.h4 h5 9.d5!
g3 32.e3 g1 33.c3?! c7 34.e3 White quickly blasts open the position to take
h8! 35.b2 hh1 36.d3? b1+ 37.c3 full advantage of Black's lack of development
e7 38.c4 c5! 39.b5 b7 40.a6+? c5
[ 40.g3 ] [ 9...cxd5 10.xd5 d8 ( 10...c5 11.e2
40...c7 41.e4 hd1! A kind of zugzwang. would transpose to the actual game) 11.f4
42.f3 is also fabulous for White ]
[ 42.h2 b2! 43.c3 a2 ] 10.e2 cxd5 11.xd5 hxg4? Black cannot
42...xc2! Taking over the light squares,
af f ord t he time to make this unimportan t
although. capture when he is already critically behind in
[ 42...g1! is more sadistic. ] development 12.f4! c6
43.xd1 xd1 44.e1 f5?! [ White was threatening 13 Nc7+ and
[ 44...xb3+ 45.c4 b1 ] intending 12...d6 13.b4! d4 ( or
45.c3? 13...c6 14.b5 a fatal pin ) 14.d1 ]
13.c7+ e7 14.xe6
[ White could have mixed it up with the risky-
looking 45.b4! b3 46.bxc5 d4+ 47.b4 [ B la ck wa s h o p in g f o r 14.xa8 d4
c2+ 48.c3 xe1 49.cxb6+ xb6 but W hite had other plans. IM Carlos
50.xe1 xe1 51.xb3 g6 ] Matamoros (rated 2492) resigned in view of
45...xb3+ 46.c4 a3 14...fxe6 15 Qxe6+ Kd8 16 0-0-0+ Nd4 17
[ Or 46...b5+ 47.d3 b4 48.xd1 xc3+ Ne2, with a totally crushing attack against
49.d2 d4 ] Black's bare king. Solution to W12P1 a) 10
47.d2 f3 48.a1? d5+ 49.d3 c4+ Nd4! not only pu ts Black's f 5-b ishop in
0-1 trouble, but also threatens to win his other
b i s h o p v i a 1 1 N b 3 wh i c h p r o t e c t s t h e
a1-rook and thereby unpins the a3-pawn.
271 B01 Black could struggle on after 10...Be7 11
Leyva,Ricardo Nd5 Qd8, but in the 'simul' game he lost
Matamoros,C quickly with 10...Bxc3? 11 Bxc3 Qe5 12
Mem Premier II, Var 2000 Qxe5 Nxe5 13 Nxf5 Nxc4 14 Nxg7+ 1-0:
[Paul Motwani] re sign a t io n in vie w o f t h e f a ct t h a t t h e
black knights were both 'en prise'
2) W 12: The game R.Leyva-C.Matamoros simultaneously---a real (k)nightmare! b)
played on 7 May 2000 in the Capablanca White wins with 7 Bxf7+!, intending 7...Kxf7
Memorial Premier II tournament at Varadero, 8 Ne5+ putting Black in double trouble at f7
263
and g4. ] 27.h2 hxg4 28.hxg4 h8+ 29.g3 f4+

1-0 30.exf4 gxf4+ 31.xf4 bf8+ 32.e3 f3+
0-1
272 B01
Lopez,Manuel 273 B01
Huerta,Ramon 2288 Luther,T 2535
XIV Torre Merida MEX (4) 17.12.2001 Hera,I 2573
[Jon Tisdall] TCh-AUT 2012-13 (5.1) 18.01.2013
[Tom Rendle]
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.e3 e5
5.c3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
[ 5.c4!? ] f6 5.e3 c6
5...b4 6.a3 xc3+ 7.bxc3 d6!? [ 5...a6 is Black's other option, keeping the
[ 7...f6 8.c4 e4 9.dxe5 xe5 10.d4 c6 square free for the knight.
e6 11.xe4 xe4 12.d3 f6 13.f4 A) 6.d3 as in the game would be a more
fd7 14.f3 xf3+ 15.gxf3 0-0-0 16.g1 testing approach
c5 17.0-0-0 xd3+ 18.cxd3 hg8 A1) 6...g6 7.d2 g7 8.f3 0-0 9.f4
19.c2 c5 20.c3 b6 21.a4 d7 22.a5 d8 10.0-0 is more comfortable for
f5 23.axb6 axb6 24.d4 cxd4+ 25.xd4 White.;
xd4 26.xd4 d8+ 27.c3 d3+ A2) 6...c6 is possibly Black's best
28.b4 g6 29.e3 b7 30.c5 bxc5+ response and now 7.f3 ( 7.d2 b4!
31.xc5 e6 32.b1+ c7 33.f4+ d7 must be fine for Black )
34.b7+ c8 35.b8+ d7 36.b7+ c8 A2a) 7...g4 is a lso p laya b le 8.h3
1/2-1/2 Maria,L-Stefanova,A Moscow 1994. ] h5 9.g4 g6
8.f3 f6 9.b5?! A2a1) 10.xg6!? hxg6 11.e2
[ 9.dxe5 xe5 10.xd6 cxd6 ( 10...xf3+ is an interesting pawn sacrifice, for
11.gxf3 cxd6 12.0-0-0 ) 11.0-0-0 example xg4 12.0-0-0 ( 12.d5!? )
and white's active pieces compensate for 12...xe3 13.xe3 and Black is a
his fractured pawns. ] long way behind in development;
[ 9.e2 ] A2a2) 10.e2 and I slightly prefer
9...e4 10.e5 0-0 11.xc6 bxc6 12.0-0 W hite although both sides can be
a6 black has a very comfortable position - fairly happy.;
t h e wh it e p l a n o f u si n g so m u c h t im e t o A2b) 7...g6 8.d2 g7
fracture black's queenside has not been worth A2b1) 9.0-0-0 is probably too
the loss of light-squared control. 13.e1 d5 a m b i t io u s h e r e . B la c k h a s go o d
Mobilizes the kingside pawns and begins chances after b4 10.c4 bd5
pressure on white's wobbly centre. 14.c4? ( or 10...b5!? 11.f4 b6 12.b3
White may have thought that he could achieve b7 );
c5 and save the front c-pawn, but this proves A2b2) 9.0-0 0-0 10.h3 and White
to be problematic. ha s a slight a d va n t a ge a lth o u gh
[ 14.d2 f6 15.g4 ad8 ] Black is very solid as is typical for
14...xe3 15.fxe3 this line.;
[ 15.xe3 f6 16.c5 d5 17.c4 ( 17.g4 A3) 6...g4 gives White the better
h5 ) 17...e6 18.f3 xc4 ] c h a n c e s h e r e a f t e r 7.f3 ( 7.d2
15...c5 White's centre pawns now collapse. is also sensible) 7...d7 8.ge2 c6
16.c3 f6 17.g4 xc4 18.f2 f5-+ 9.d2;
A pawn up with the better position, the rest is B) 6.d2!?;
already technique. 19.a4 d5 20.a5 C) 6.g3 wasn't a particularly successful
cxd4 21.xd5+ xd5 22.cxd4 g5 23.ac1 approach by White in Zhang Zhong-Dreev,
c6 24.g4 h5 25.h3 ab8 26.b1 g7 a n n o t a t e d in t h e a rch ive s b y A n d re w
264
Martin ] c a r e f u l o v e r t h e n e x t f e w m o v e s . bd7
6.d3 14.f4
[ 6.d2 with the idea of castling queenside [ 14.g1 was worth considering - Black now
as soon as possible has also been tried, to solve the problem of how to develop the
including by Luther himself. f5 7.0-0-0 bishop on f8. ]
( 7.f3 was Luther's choice and it maybe 14...d6 15.e3+ f8
critical e6 8.h4 g6?! 9.xg6 hxg6 [ 15...d8 might've been a safer option
10.h4 and White had the two Bishops and although it's clear White is still doing well
some advantage in Luther, T (2541)- after 16.g3 xf4 17.xf4 g6 18.d2 ]
Boricsev, O (2396) Marrakesh 2010 bd7 16.g3 xf4 17.xf4 e8+?!
11.0-0-0 b4 12.b1 d5 13.e4 xe3 Things quickly turn more unpleasant after this
14.xe3 e7 15.f4 a5 16.d3 e5 move although the position was already tricky.
17.dxe5 xe5 18.f3 e6 19.he1 e5 [ 17...c8 to defend the queen from
20.g3 xh4 21.h3 0-0-0 22.c5 ) discovered checks was better although
7...e6 8.f3 bd7 9.ge2 b6 10.g3 White keeps the initiative with 18.d2 g6
g6 11.ge4 xe4 12.fxe4 and White 19.ae1 ]
was a little better in Alekseev, E (2688)- 18.d2 d8 19.ae1! Luther swaps off
Zolotukhin, V (2338) Olginka 2011 although Black's only active rook xe1 20.xe1 g6
B la c k s u c c e ss f u lly h e ld a d r a w in t h a t 21.xh5 xh5 22.d6+ g7 23.e7?
game. ] An unfortunate mistake just as W hite was
6...g4 7.d2 c7?! This doesn't work out building a winning attack
well and gives White exactly what he's after [ 23.fxg6! hxg6 24.e7 was the way to do it
with this Be3 setup. and now W hite has excellent winning
[ 7...e6 has been played before here and chances after hf6 ( of course 24...e8??
brought Black a quick win in the following c a n n o w b e m e t b y 25.xg6+ h8
game although there are plenty of points for 26.h7# ) 25.c4 f8 26.e6! g8
im p ro ve m e n t . . . 8.ge2 bd7 9.0-0-0 27.xd7 e8! a remarkable move to keep
( 9.f3! h5 10.f4 b4 11.0-0-0 Black in the game 28.xf7 xf7 29.xe8+
gives W hite some edge) 9...h5 10.f4?! xe8 30.c7+ e7 31.xe7+ xe7
This doesn't really fit with the position 0-0-0 and the extra pawn should be enough to
( 10...b5!? ) 11.f5 e5 12.dxe5 xe5 win although there's still quite a bit of work
13.de1 xe2 14.xe2 a5 15.h3 e5 to do. ]
W hite is already in some trouble 16.g4? 23...e8! 24.xe8
b4 17.a3 xa3 18.bxa3 xa3+ 19.b1 [ the point is that 24.xd7?? loses to g5+
f3 0-1 Eisen, L (2242)-Gonzalez, R (2419) 25.d1 g1+ 26.f1 xf1+ 27.d2
Las Vegas 2004 ] e1+ 28.d3 b5! and White will get mated
[ 7...bd7 is more combative as Black may or lose huge amounts of material ]
be able to play ...e5 in one more to gain 24...xe8 25.e4
counterplay in the centre, e.g. 8.ge2 e5 [ 25.c7 puts Black in an awkward pin but
but I still like White's position after 9.0-0-0 he can escape with e7 26.d1 g5!
0-0-0 10.h3 e6 11.b1 and White is and now he has a perpetual after 27.xd7
better placed for when the centre opens g1+ 28.d2 g5+ 29.d1 g1+
up. ] 30.e2 g2+ 31.e1 g3+ 32.f1
8.h3 h5 9.f4! f3+ ]
[ 9.f4 i s a l s o p r o m i s i n g a f t e r b6 25...df6 26.xf6 xf6 Black has escaped
10.ge2! as xb2? 11.b1 a3 12.xb7 and the position is just equal. 27.h4 c8
bd7 13.d5! is simply winning for White ] 28.e5 d8 29.c3 g8 30.fxg6
9...e6 Otherwise the bishop is simply getting A missed opportunity for W hite but 5.Be3
trapped 10.g4 g6 11.f5 exf5 12.gxf5 h5 looks to be an interesting (and non-
13.ge2 It's clear that the opening has gone theoretical) way to play against 3...Qd6
in White's favour and so Hera has to be very ½-½
265
274 B01 10.h3 h5 11.g4 g6 12.e5 fd7?!

Macieja,Bartlomiej 2600 Simply
Tiviakov,Sergei 2686 [ 12...bd7 13.xg6 ( 13.e2 xe5
Remco Heite Wolvega NED (3) 29.11.2008 14.dxe5 d7 15.fd1 h5!? ) 13...hxg6
[John Watson] with ...Qb6 next would keep Black's
disadvantage minimal. ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 13.xg6 hxg6 This must favour White's
f6 5.f3 c6 bishop and space. 14.e4 Not a bad move,
[ In an earlier update, Fabiano Caruana but there's no need for this before completing
annotated a lovely game versus Strikovic development, since Black isn't going
which began with 5...a6 6.g3 g4 7.h3 anywhere.
h5 8.g2 c6 9.0-0 0-0-0 ] [ A simple way to expand would be 14.d3
6.g3 One of White's favourite setups. His f1 f6 15.fe1 0-0 16.e2! bd7 17.c4
bishop gets a safe post on g2, and he places , etc., with a healthy advantage. ]
his dark-squared bishop on its best square f4 14...f6 15.c5 b6!
while gaining a tempo. g4 7.g2 e6 [ 15...xc5 almost equalises following
[ The more active 7...bd7 keeps both ...e5 16.dxc5 xd1 17.axd1 a6 18.d6
and ...0-0-0 as options, for example, 8.0-0 ( 18.e3 d7 ) 18...0-0-0 with the idea ...
( 8.f4 b4 9.0-0 0-0-0 ) 8...0-0-0 9.e3 Ne8. ]
( 9.f4 xf3!? 10.xf3 e5 11.dxe5 xe5 16.xb8!? Interesting
12.g2 e6 13.e2 d6 is only slightly [ 16.b3 keeps an edge. ]
better for White) 9...e5!? 10.dxe5 xe5 16...xb8 17.xc6+ f8 18.a6
11.xd6 xd6 12.xe5 xe5 13.xa7 [ 18.d3 is safer: xh3 19.e5 h4
d2 gives some compensation, e.g., 20.f3 d6 21.g2 ]
14.ac1 xc3 15.bxc3 e8 ] 18...c8!?
8.0-0 e7 [ Black plays for compensation by placing a
[ IF he intends to play ...Bxf3 (see below) powerful knight on f4. He decides to bypass
then, given the course of the game, Black a pretty good opportunity with 18...xh3!
may wish to consider another order: 8...c7 , which has the idea 19.xb8 xb8 20.f4
9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 bd7 ( and not h4 ]
10...d6? , as in Rahal-Bravo Barranco, 19.g2 d5 20.c3 f4 21.f3 d6
Valles Tancat 1999, because of 11.b5! 22.fe1 g5
, which White neglected to play. )] [ 22...f6 23.e3 ]
[ The typical chase that Black experiences is 23.e3 g6 24.b7!? Greedy, but apparently
illustrated in Azarov, S (2571)-Zablotsky, S harmless. White's knight on a6 is a problem
(2500), Voronezh 2007: 8...bd7 9.f4 piece, so maybe he should bring it back into
b4 10.b1 a5 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 play by
e7 13.a3 0-0 14.b4 f5 15.e2 d5 [ 24.a3! g7 25.b4 ]
16.xd5 cxd5 17.c4 dxc4?! 24...g7 25.xa7?
(all reasonable play thus far, but this allows [ 25.ae1 e8 26.a3! e7 27.e4 ]
the bishops to become strong better was 25...e8! Black threatens ...Re7. 26.b7 e7
( 17...b6 ) 18.xb7 ad8 19.c7 de8 27.e4 a7 28.b4
20.xc4 xh3 , and here simply 21.g2 [ 28.f1 ca8 ]
f5 22.c6 would have won material. ] 28...xb4 29.cxb4 c4 30.a3!?
9.f4 d8 [ 30.d1 xa2 ]
[ In the 3...Qd6 lines we usually see 9...b4 30...ac7!?
, and that indeed keeps the queen a bit [ 30...xa3! 31.bxa3 xd4 is a very clear
more active, e. g., 10.a3! b6 ( 10...xb2 way of demonstrating the strength of
11.d2 f5 12.a2 b6 13.b1 ) 11.d2 Black's knight on f4 Black follows with ...Rd3
0-0 , though White still has a normal, small, and stands much better. ]
advantage. ] 31.c3 h7 32.xc4 xc4 33.d1 xb4
266
34.b3 Black still has compensation for the 275 B01

pawn, but only that. c7? Makropoulou,Marina 2270
[ 34...xd4 35.xd4 xd4 36.xd4 e2+ Papadopoulou,Vera 2227
37.f1 xd4 38.e1 would be depressing ch-GRE w Athens GRE (6) 09.12.2004
for Black, since a potential outside passed [Andrew Martin]
pawn is supported by a powerful W hite
bishop. ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
[ 34...b5 is also possible, with a point that There are many grey areas after 3...Qd6 that
immediately becomes clear: ] the adventurer may wish to explore. I find 3...
35.f1! Black's rook on b4 is trapped, and this Qd6 much less reliable than 3... Qa5. 4.d4
h a u n t s h i m f o r m u c h o f t h e g a m e . d5? f6 5.c4 g4!? Is it worth a tempo to
36.e1 provoke f2-f3? I doubt it, as in many
[ 36.f3 threatens a3 and therefore forces Scandinavian lines W hite plays that move
f4 37.xf4 gxf4 , but then White is simply anyway as a prelude to swamping the light-
a pawn up ( 37...xf4? 38.c4 b5 39.a3 )] squared Bishop with g2-g4,h2-h4 etc.
36...b5? 37.d2!? Time trouble has However, with the Black queen on d6 the g3
obviously taken over. Here W hite can win square becomes exposed, and therefore this
outright with procedure is not at all easy to carry out.
[ 37.g2 , which threatens to win the rook by [ We know 5...a6 to be playable, and in this
Bxd5, and c3 38.d2 doesn't save Black case, better I think. For instance: 6.ge2 b5
because Rc2 follows. d5 39.xd5 exd5 7.b3 b7 8.0-0 e6 9.f4 d8 10.e1
40.d3 c2 ( 40...d6 41.a3 ) 41.d2! e7 11.g3 0-0 12.d2 c5 This would be
xd2 42.xd2 followed by Rd3 and a3. ] a good representation of a successful Black
37...e7 38.e1?! pla n . He ge t s h is K in g t o sa f e t y ( n o t e
[ 38.b2 with the idea 39 a3 will wins, for castling SHORT) and as in many of the
example, after e5 39.dxe5 f4 40.d2 Semi Open games, follows with ... c7-c5.
e4 41.d7 ] 13.dxc5 xd2 14.xd2 bd7 15.ce4
38...a7 39.d1 e7 40.g2 xe4 16.xe4 xe4 17.xe4 xc5
[ Again, 40.b2! ] 18.e2 fd8 1/2-1/2 Pavlov,M-Hasangatin,
40...f4 41.f1 e5 One last bad decision. R/Alushta UKR 2004 With such a reliable
42.e3?? plan available, 5...Bg4 becomes something
[ 42.e1! is extremely strong. ] of a luxury. ]
42...a7! 43.dxe5 xa2 44.d5 c2 6.f3 f5 7.ge2 bd7
[ 44...xd5! 45.xd5 xb3 ] [ 7...c6 8.f4 d8 9.g4 g6
45.d2? A) 10.h4! h5 11.g5 d5 12.xd5 cxd5
[ 45.c1! ] 13.xb8!! xb8 ( 13...xb8 14.xd5 )
45...xd2 46.xd2 g7 47.f3 f8 14.f4 f5 15.fxd5 A pawn or the
Black stan ds be tter now. The rest o f th e bishops. Take your pick!;
ga m e c o n t a i n s m i s t a k e s , b u t i s e a s y t o B) 10.g3 e6 must be at least a little
understand: 48.f2 xh3+ 49.e3 f4 better for W hite, but as we've seen in
50.f2 e7 51.d1 xd5 52.xd5 xb3 many Scandinavian variations, Black's
53.d6 b4 54.b6 b1 55.e3 b3 56.f2 position is very solid when he uses light-
b2 57.g2 d7 58.h2 c7 59.b3 c6 squared counterplay as his focus:
60.g2 d5 61.b5+ e6 62.h2 f1 11.ce4 d5! 12.d2 xf4 13.xf4
63.xb2 xf3 64.g2 f4 65.g3 xe5 e7 ( The computer ( I won't say which
66.b5+ f6 67.b6+ g7 68.b7 d4 one but they all will) states that Black
69.a7 d3+ 70.g2 c3 71.f2 c4 should take on d4. If he can ,why not?
72.f3 f4+ 73.g3 h6 74.a8 f5 13...xd4! 14.c3 d8 15.d1 d7
75.gxf5 gxf5 16.d6+ xd6 17.xd6 e7 White is
0-1 not breaking through and is thus a pawn
d o wn f o r n o t h i n g .) 14.0-0-0 xe4
267
15.xe4 a5 16.e5 0-0 17.g5 b5 edge and in this type of situation it makes
18.d3 d5 19.f6+ xf6 20.gxf6 d7 sense to stick to basics. Black loses because
21.xd5 exd5 22.fxg7 Stoumbou,E- she never attends to her queen. b8 23.fe1
Papadopoulou,V/Athens GRE 2004 ] f5 24.c5 b5?
8.f4 This would be a very usual objection to [ 24...g6 offers protection, but it is only of
placing the Queen on d6. b4 9.b3 0-0-0 the most temporary kind: 25.c2! xc2
10.a3 b6 11.a4 Tempo after tempo, but 26.xc2 g7 27.c6!
are they moves that W hite wants to make? Cutting communication! xd4+ 28.xd4
Perhaps the main use of Na4 is to free up the f8 29.c5 ]
c pawn for action. 25.c6 Too obvious to applaud loudly. bxa4
[ Alternatives do not give Black any especial 26.c4 And resigns rather than face 26...Qc8
trouble: 11.xf7 e5! ( 11...xb2 12.b3 ) 27 Qa5! Nb6 28 d6! Bxd6 29 Ba6. There are
12.g3 exd4 13.xd4 b8 ] enough exclamation marks for me to have
[ 11.g3 g6 12.e2 e6 ( 12...xd4 asked Black to play that out. These Greek
13.xc7! ) 13.0-0-0 d6= ] women see everything. 5...Bg4 seems quite
11...a6 12.c1 OK.
[ We wouldn't get the same excitement after 1-0
12.g3 g6 13.e2 xe2+ 14.xe2 e6
although this was maybe the objectively
best course of action. Of course, in order to 276 B01
play this way, White must admit that he (or Martin,Andrew D
she) has no advantage. ] Lalic,Susan
12...h6?! It's around here that Papadopoulou Corres Ward Higgs Surrey 2005
begins to play erratically. Just [Andrew Martin]
[ 12...e6! was indicated to be followed by ...
B d 6 , a d t h e re is n o t h i n g wro n g . A l l t h e A recent correspondence team tournament
tempo-gaining moves turn out to be tempos game gave me the chance to play against the
W h it e d o e s n 't e sp e cia lly wa n t t o ga in ! sharp Portuguese Gambit. I must say I am
Quantity versus quality. ] su sp icio u s a bo u t B lack' s pa wn o f f e r, a n
13.c4?! A double blip. observation made more than once at
[ W hite misses 13.xc7! xc7 14.f4+ ChessPublishing.com. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6
c8 15.xf5 ] 3.d4 g4 I was pretty surprised that a very
13...g5 14.e3 d3 15.g3 e5 16.d5 e4 strong player like Susan would try this line in
W h it e n e e d s t o ge t ca st le d a n d q u ickly. correspondence . Let's face it, everyone uses
17.fxe4! playing engines these days to help them and
[ 17.c3 d6 18.xe4 xe4 19.fxe4 Fritz 9 or f riends will just take you to the
xe4 leads only to advantage for Black. ] cleaners if you make an unsound sacrifice.
17...xe4 18.xe4 xe4 19.0-0 With a sigh That's not to say I use Fritz 9 of course, just a
of relief no doubt. Now she can start to think slip of the keyboard. 4.f3 f5 5.b5+
about attack. f5 Nothing better. 20.c3 g8 Definitely the critical test. White tries to keep
[ S h e p r o b a b l y d i d n ' t p l a y 20...d6! his extra pawn. bd7 6.c4 e6
b e c a u s e o f 21.d4 he8 22.c5 [ 6...a6 is the other variation, with White
but I think Black is more than OK, with nice doing very well recently after the greedy
centralization and some aggressive 7.a4 b5 8.cxb5 With ample time to reflect
possibilities: e5! 23.ae1 ( 23.ad1 e2! on the position, I was not af raid of this
24.f2 h5 ) 23...xd4+ 24.xd4 e5 continuation. Over the board, it may well
25.c3 d3 26.xe5 xf1 27.xe8 xe8 be another matter. ]
28.d6 ] 7.dxe6 xe6 8.d5 f5 9.c3 b4
21.ad1 f4 22.d4 Whereas now it looks like [ 9...c5 10.e2+! e7 11.f4 ]
W hite who has the more meaningful 10.ge2 0-0 11.xd7! So that the Bishop
centralization. Both sides have pieces on the does not get stranded on b5.
268
[ 11.0-0 e5! ] Qa4! Perhaps we should both hand in our

11...xd7 12.0-0 e8!?N An innovation of titles!
Graeme Buckley I believe. Black relies on the [ But if 15...e7 White's route to advantage
two B is h o ps a n d t h e we a kn e ss if t h e e 3 is clear enough: 16.xe7 xe7 17.f2
s qu a re t o p r o vi d e co m p e n sa t io n a n d s o c5 18.d2! b6 ( 18...xc4 19.fc1 )
makes a natural developing move. It's 19.b3 ]
surprising that 12...Re8 hasn't been tried 16.a4! Very strong. fxe4
before, but perhaps it has just been thought [ 16...c5+ 17.xc5 xc5 18.b4 b6
too slow. Certainly Black needs an 19.d2 is a pawn more for White, simple as
improvement here: that. ]
[ 12...e5 is unpromising: 13.g3 17.xb4 exf3 18.xf3 e5
A) 13...d7 14.d4! e7 15.e3 xc4 [ I thought that the main idea behind 15...
16.f2 b6 17.fe1 xc3 ( 17...d6 Qb8 lay in 18...b5 but now I see that this is
18.ce4 e7 19.h5+- ) 18.xc3 d8 no good either|: 18...b5 19.c5 ( 19.xb5
19.ad1; xb5 20.cxb5 e5 21.f4 xd5 22.a4 a6
B) 13...d3 14.e1 c5+ 15.e3 d6 23.xc7 axb5 24.a5 c5 ) 19...e5
16.h1 xe3 17.xe3 xc4 18.d4 20.g4 xc5 21.e3 e4 22.d4 xg3
ae8 19.xe5 xe5 20.xc4 f5 21.d1 23.xg3 ( 23.xe5 b6+ 24.f2 e4 )]
h8 22.g1 a6 23.d4 b5 24.a3 g8 19.e3 d3
25.f2 fe8 26.f4 e4 27.cxe4 xf4+ [ 19...a5 20.c3 a7 21.c5+- ]
28.g1 fxe4 29.xg7+ xg7 30.h5+ 20.xe8+ xe8 21.xb7 Over the board a
1-0 Kaugars, A-Pitre, H/San Francisco cowardly White might not take all the pawns,
1999 ] but this is a different type of game. Black is
[ Maybe 12...c5 is the best chance, after just busted I think. h6 22.d2 f8
which I was intending 13.e3 e8 14.d4! [ Or 22...b8 23.xa7 xb2 24.e3 d7
( 14.xc5 xc5+ 15.h1 h4 16.b3 e3 25.h4! c2 26.h5 h7 27.b1+- ]
17.g3 f6 18.a4 d3 19.f2 xe2 23.e3 h5 24.xc7 h4 25.f1 I think the
0-1 Dworakowski, L-Krivoshey, S/ Koszalin conclusion is clear that this is a variation for
1998 ) 14...e7 15.g3! g6 16.f2 d3 over the board play only. Black's pawn offer,
17.ce4 xf2 18.xf2 f5 19.a3 whilst popular (because Black gets a
wit h a dvant age t o W hit e. Su ch ta ctica l temporary initiative), is ultimately dubious.
jousting is easy to handle in 1-0
correspondence. ]
13.g3 g6
[ 13...f6 is a move of the same kind as 12... 277 B01
Re8, getting the pieces out, but Black is a Maze,Sebastien 2553
pawn down! So it's not surprising that White Bauer,Christian 2583
can keep an edge, although as the game 83rd ch-FRA Pau FRA (4) 14.08.2008
goes, it may well have been Black's best [John Watson]
shot. 14.ce4 b6+ 15.h1 g6
16.b3 ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
14.ce4 f5 f6 5.f3 g4 6.h3 h5 7.e2
[ Two alternatives fail to convince: 14...e7 A sa f e m o ve W h it e co u n t s u p o n a s m a ll
15.g5 f6 16.d2 f5 17.b3! xd2 space advantage. This is the sort of thing that
18.xd2 c5+ 19.h1 b6 20.a4 ] ca n d rive B la ck n u t s in a S ca n d in a via n ,
[ 14...c5 15.d4 xe4 16.fxe4 e7 because he has no natural source of
17.f2! f8 18.a3 d6 19.f4 xe4 counterplay.
20.xd6 cxd6 21.d4 g6 22.ae1 ] [ The main move for years has been 7.g4
15.g5 b8!? I hadn't seen this move at all, (7 Bd2 is also played, usually with the same
and when I spoke to Susan at a recent 4NCL idea) g6 8.e5 , a position which Bauer
weekend she told me that she had missed 16 has played many times, for example, e6
269
9.g2 c6 10.e2 bd7 11.xd7 xd7 h5 44.d1 e5+ 45.f1 h4 46.d4 g5

12.d2 0-0-0 13.0-0 c7 with no problems, 47.f3
Libiszewski-Bauer, Calvia ESP 2005. Of [ 47.g3! ]
course, there's much, much more theory 47...f5 48.f2 f6 49.b4 d5 50.e3
here. ] e5+ 51.e4 d5 52.d4
7...bd7 8.0-0 e6 9.d2!? White's idea is [ 52.f4 d1 53.d4 ]
to play Nc4 and then develop his c1 bishop 52...e5+ 53.d2 e6 54.c4?! bxc4
aggressively. A normal-looking sequence 55.xc4 b6 56.b4 e5 57.c3 b7
would be 58.e4+ d5 59.g4 a7 60.f4 gxf4
[ 9.f4 b4 10.d3 , or ] 61.xf4 a3+ 62.b2 g3 63.xh4 f5
[ 9.d2 c6 10.e1 c7 ] ½-½
9...xe2 10.xe2 c6 11.c4 c7 12.g5
e7 13.ad1 0-0 14.h4 Now he would like
to play Bg3. b5!? Very committal. Objectively, 278 B01
Black is better off waiting, but that's hardly McShane,Luke J 2565
satisfying. Lalic,Bogdan 2545
[ 14...b6 15.g3 d8 is the sort of solid, Masters, Catalan Bay (5) 2003
slight disadvantage that leading GMs play [Andrew Martin]
accept. ]
15.g3 d8 16.e5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
[ 16.d6 b6 17.b7! c8 18.c5 f6 5.c4 a6 6.ge2 I wonder if McShane
is a n a c t ive a p p ro a ch p r o m i sin g s o m e s a w B l a c k ' s n e x t m o v e ? c6?!
advantage. ] The 'Poisoned Pawn' variation of the
16...c8 17.f3 S c a n d i n a vi a n ! P e r s o n a l l y I d o n ' t l i k e i t
[ Or 17.a4 b4 18.e4 ] because of the massive advantage in
17...d5 18.e4 7f6 19.xf6+ xf6 development that White gets but matters are
20.c3 c5?! Finally, this freeing move, but not so clear. Let's take a look at the
Black should get off the d-file first: complications: 7.b3
[ 20...a5 . The position would remain [ The alternative is 7.d3!? White develops
somewhat better for White, however. ] a new piece, protects the Bishop and
21.dxc5 xe5? facilitates long castling. This gives quite a
[ 21...xc5 22.d3 c6 23.b4 c5 dangerous initiative: xg2 8.g1 xh2!?
keeps Black's disadvantage down. With the Leading to a white-knuckle ride! ( 8...h3!?
text, he cedes the dark squares and loses More circumspect. Black gives his Queen a
material. ] way out and intends to close the g file as
22.xe5 xc5 Sacrificing the exchange in the soon as he can. 9.e3 g6! If Black is to
face of Qg4 or Bd6. 23.g3 g6 24.d6 c4 grab pawns and live he must trust in the
25.xf8 xf8 26.e5 c5 27.e4 c8 following idea. 10.0-0-0 g7 11.f4 f5
28.d4 g7 29.a4 a6 30.axb5 axb5 12.d2 d7 13.h4 b5 14.b3 c6
31.a1 c7 32.d3 White is drifting 32 Re1 15.d3 A position reminiscent of the
is more natural, or even 32 g3. f4! 33.d2 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. It's not entirely
f5 34.e4?! clear that the W hite initiative is worth a
[ 34.d7! c6 35.f3 ] pawn but Black certainly has some serious
34...e5 35.h2 c6 36.ae1 h5 defending to do before he can consolidate.)
37.xf4!? White feels some pressure (in time 9.f4 h3 10.g3 b5 ( 10...d7
trouble?) and goes for a lesser, but clear, Time-wasting. 11.0-0-0 g6 12.e5 c6
advantage. The rest of the game isn't very 13.xf6 exf6 14.d5 g7 15.de1+ f8
interesting. Black fights like a tiger, while 16.a3+ ) 11.b3 c6 12.0-0-0 bd7
White evidently tires and gives away the win. 13.e2 g4 14.e3 e6 15.ge4 h5
exf4 38.xf4 f5 39.d4+ f6 40.xf6+ 16.h1 f5 17.g3 g6 18.dg1
xf6 41.g3 g5+ 42.f3 f5+ 43.e2 Most players would be very unwilling to allow
270
such an attack unless forced to. I believe the Kingside. I do not like this time-consuming
in White's compensation and my conclusion m a n o e u vr e . 13.e5 g6 14.xf6 gxf6
is that 7 Qd3 is probably the best move. ] 15.d5! e5
7...xg2 8.g1 h3 [ 15...h6+ leads to a position which seems
[ 8...xh2!? 9.f4 h5 10.xc7 disgusting for Black, but which might just be
( Perhaps its better to ignore pawns at this playable due to the strength of the dark-
stage and play for outright attack: 10.d2 squared Bishop : 16.b1 e5 17.a4 b5
g6 11.0-0-0 a5 12.b1 g7 13.d5 18.xb5 f8!? 19.bc3 d8 20.d6
xd2 14.xc7+ f8 15.xd2 a7 ( 20.c4!? ) 20...cxd6 21.xd6+ xd6
Even so, Black is surviving.) 10...g4 22.xd6 e6 ]
11.d2 bd7 12.0-0-0 c8 13.g3 a5 16.a4 b5 17.xb5 h6+ 18.b1 0-0
14.f4 e6 15.d5 e5 16.f3 xf3 17.e3 he could have transposed with ...Kf8. The
c5 18.xf3 xg1 19.xg1 exf4 20.xg7 problem with the text move isn't the
f8 21.g5 g8 22.f5 g4 23.xf4 vulnerability of the Black King as much as the
g1+ 24.d1 e1 25.c3 e4 26.h3 impending power of the W hite d pawn and
xf3 27.xf3 e1 28.hf2 h5 29.d2 the inability of the King on g8 to play a
e5 30.d3 e4+ 31.c1 g5 32.f4 defensive role. 19.bc3 h3 20.c4 g7
g3 33.f1 h4 0-1 was the complicated 21.xc7 g4 22.d6 f5 23.d7
continuation of Govbinder-Melts Internet McShane has played the position very well,
1998. If you don't mind defending for a while giving Lalic no time at all to a ctiva te th e
you can take the second pawn. The Lalic potential monster on g7. ad8 24.d3 h5
game plan seems to be to lead the game 25.e1 xh2 26.c5 e4
into as murky a position as possible. ] [ 26...f4 27.d6 h3 28.c6 with the idea
9.f4 d7 of Rh1 is very good for White. h5 ]
[ After 9...f5 10.xc7 g6 11.d5! c8 27.d5 f4 28.xf4 xf4 29.e2 b8
12.f4 bd7 13.d4 Black is tied up. ] 30.d4 h5 31.c3 xd4 32.xd4 f4
10.d3! As before, I like this idea. White 33.d1 h4 34.xg4 xg4 35.f3!
trusts in development and prepares to castle. with Rg1 to follow. Summarising: The
It's straightforward. A wedge can be Poisoned Pawn variation is not for the timid,
established after with either colour! Many White players won't
[ 10.d5!? The story is the same. Is Black even realise that they are giving away a pawn
able to extricate himself from his cramped after 6 Nge2 and 6. ..Qc6 could come as a
p o s i t i o n b e f o r e t h e r o o f c a v e s i n : g6 colossal shock! Knowledge of the
11.d2 g7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.h6 e5 complications could be quite a good point
14.h4 e7 15.g5 xh6 16.xh6 ] scorer for potential Black players, but I would
10...c6 11.a3 e6N A sign that Lalic is prefer to keep this line as a surprise weapon
feeling uncomfortable with McShane's in my repertoire. W ith 6...b5 available, to
pressure. He shuts down the diagonal. venture 6... Qc6 on a regular basis to me just
Surprisingly this move is a novelty-previously seems too risky.
Black gave priority to ...b7-b5 and ...Na5, 1-0
again trying to blot out the strong Bishop on
b3. According to Michael Melts this latter
method is both interesting and satisfactory: 279 B01
[ 11...b5!? 12.0-0-0 b7 13.d5 ( 13.g3 Milos,Gilberto 2620
0-0-0 14.ge4 xe4 15.xe4 e5 ) Sapis,Witalis 2403
13...a5 14.a2 c5 15.b4 ( 15.dxc6 Cappelle la Grande 2000
xd3 16.xd3 xc6 ) 15...cxb4 16.axb4 [Alexander Volzhin]
c4 17.xc4 bxc4 18.xc4 c8 ]
[ 11...a5!? 12.a2 b5 13.0-0-0 b7 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 Considering this line a
14.b4 c4 15.xc4 bxc4 16.xc4 ] few months ago we came to the conclusion
12.0-0-0 e7?! So this was the idea-to pack Black suffered serious problems.
271
Nevertheless currently this line is played White resigned, Vlcek-Kujovic, Bratislava

rather often although the statistics are 1998. ]
disastrous for Black. Mainly W hite chooses 18...g3 Black has to accept the exchange
dif ferent setups with an early g2-g4. 3.d4 sacrifice since after
xd5 4.f3 g6 5.c4 b6 6.h3 g7 7.c3 [ 18...e7 19.d6 cxd6 20.d5+ h8
0-0 8.e3 c6 9.d2 e5 10.d5 e7 21.ce4! dxc5 22.h5! White has an
11.g4 f5 12.0-0-0 fxg4 13.g5 unstoppable attack. ]
We have already examined this line in Gipslis- 19.c4 xh1 20.d6+ h8 21.d7!
Maric (AV60) where Black failed to equalize White plays very inventively.
after 13... Nf5. Now he tries a relatively new [ The hasty 21.f7+ is not good in view of
idea. g3!? 14.c5 xf7 22.xf7 cxd6! , and Black is better:
[ Black's idea would be justified after the 23.xd6 f8! ]
natural looking 14.fxg3?! : xf1! 15.hxf1 21...xd7 22.f7+ xf7 23.xf7 xh4!
xc4 and Black has ample compensation [ 23...f8?! i s i n f e r i o r : 24.xd7 f2
for the sacrificed exchange. Unfortunately in 25.xb7 d3+ 26.c2 xc5 27.xg7+!
Afek-Shrentzel, Tel Aviv 1993 Black xg7 28.xg7 xb7 29.xc7 with a huge
committed a blunder on the very next move: edge for White. ]
16.f2 xe3? Missing a very nice 24.xd7 h6 25.e4! g8?
com bin ation . ( 16...f5! should be played A gross mistake.
and here Black's chances are by no means [ 25...f8 is also bad in view of 26.g5!
worse, for example: 17.e6 xe6 18.dxe6 ( t h r e a t e n i n g 2 7 Q x f 8 ) f2 27.d5!
e8 ) 17.f7+! (an unexpected piece and Black is hopeless against the threat of
s a c r i f i c e ) h8 18.d6! g8! and now 29 Qg8+. ]
19.ce4!! (with the idea 20.Q:g7! K:g7 21. [ 25...xe3+? is even worse: 26.c2 e2+
R f 7 ) w o n b y f o r c e : ( Instead 19.f4? ( 26...g8 27.xh1 ) 27.d2 g8 28.d5
was played and after xg5!! 20.xg5 xf1 winning on the spot ]
21.xf1 h6 22.xh6 xh6 23.f8+ g7 [ but the unexpected 25...g3! 26.xg3
24.d7! xd7 25.xa8 xh3 26.xa7 g2 f8! secured Black good counterchances:
an equal endgame had arisen.) 19...xf1 27.xg7+ (the only move) ( 27.b3? g5;
( 19...h6 20.dxc7 xd1+ 21.xd1 xf7 27.e7 f6 ) 27...xg7 28.xg7 xg7
22.d8+! winning on the spot.) 20.dxc7! 29.xb7 h5 and in this complicated
xd1+ ( or 20...f8 21.d8! ) 21.xd1 endgame Black's chances are by no means
e3+ 22.e2 f5 23.xf5! and White worse. ]
wins ] 26.c2! Probably Black missed this very
[ B e s i d e s t h e t e x t , 14.e2!? is worth st ro n g p ro p h yl a c t i c m o ve . No w B l a c k i s
considering. In Liss-Veinger, Rishon Lezion defenseless. h4 27.xh1 xh1 28.f6!
1991 White obtained an opening advantage g2+ 29.c3 Now White's King is in safety
after g2 ( 14...gxf2 15.c5 ) 15.hg1 h6 and in view of the unavoidable mate Black
16.ge4 xh3 17.xh6 c8 18.xg7 resigned. Despite the convincing win in this
xg7 19.g5 f5 20.d3 d6 21.xe5+ game it would be premature to draw definite
g8 22.xd6 cxd6 23.xd6 f7 24.g3 conclusions since the position is very
g7 25.c5 f5 26.e6+ and Black complicated and Black had the possibility to
resigned. ] improve on move 29. So in my opinion, 14
14...g2 15.xg2 c4 16.e2 xe3 Be2 as was played in Liss-Veinger deserves
17.fxe3 f5 18.h4! An important novelty. serious attention and undoubtedly we'll see
[ Before White played 18.ge4 h6 19.d3 this move in future games.
w h i c h d o e s n ' t l o o k p r o m i s i n g : b6! 1-0
(threatening 20...Ba6) 20.b4 bxc5 21.xc5
g3 22.b2 xh1 23.xh1 f1+ 24.d1
xe3+ 25.b1 f5+ 26.a1 xd1+
and in view of 27.xd1 xc5 28.bxc5 b8
272
280 B01 way the Bishop on g2 has no future. 15.f3

Moriuchi,Toshiyuki 2301 ( 15.g3 xc3 16.bxc3 d5 17.d2 a4
Prie,Eric 2439 18.e2 b5 19.h6 0-0-0 20.a3 g6 21.g5
XXVIII Open San Sebastian ESP (9)26.03.2005 d6 22.xd8 xd8 23.f3 f5 24.f1
[Andrew Martin] xf3 25.xf3 c7 26.e3 fxg4 27.xe6
a5 28.f7+ d7 29.b3 f4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 Bauer, C-Prie, E/Auxerre 1996) 15...b4
Muc h h as bee n mad e rece nt ly abo ut th e 16.f2 xc3 ( 16...xe3 17.xe3 xc3
uncertain future of 3...Qa5. Read some of the 18.bxc3 h3 19.h1 xc3 20.b1 )
posts at the forum and one would think that 17.bxc3 xc3 18.b1 xd4 19.xb7 d8
this venerable line were all but refuted. This is 20.h6 gxh6 21.g6 e7 22.xd4 xd4
nonsense of course and Eric Prié continues to 23.d3 d8 24.xd8+ xd8 25.d3
play 3...Qa5 with success. In our featured 1-0 Anand, V-Lautier, J/ Biel 1997 ]
game W hite is happy to repeat a line which 14.f4 b6 15.b3 0-0-0 Black is absolutely
Anand has used with success. No doubt he fine, albeit in a complicated position. His King
expected Prie to fold in the same way that is safe, the Bishop on g2 can get out and
Lautier does in one of our sidelines. 4.d4 f6 White's King is not altogether secure in the
5.f3 f5 6.c4 c6 7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6 middle of the board. It's also not clear to me
9.h4 A system which is described as ' whether the white pawns aren't just a target
menacing' by GM John Emms, but which I for Black to latch on to. 16.f2 d5 17.xd5
analyse as satisfactory for Black in my recent There are only a limited number of moves
Centre Counter book. bd7 10.xd7 xd7 which deal with the threat of ..Qxf4+ xd5
11.h5 e4 12.h3 g2! An important move 18.f3 f6 19.g3 g6! The first prod at
mentioned by Beat Zuger and Matthias Wahls, those exposed pawns. There is a downside to
the point of which is to drive the White Rook all this White aggression you know. 20.hxg6
to an awkward square. hxg6 21.g5
[ 12...d5 13.d3 0-0-0 14.d2 b6 [ 21.c3 d6 22.g1 g5 spells serious
15.e2 xd4 16.0-0-0 d6 17.b1 e5 problems for White ]
18.h6 g6 19.f4 xf4 20.xd5 cxd5 21...e4+ 22.g2 xg5-+ Game, set and
21.c3 b6 22.xh8 xh8 23.c4 d4 match I think. White limps to the finishing line.
24.f3 e5 25.e4 c5 26.d5 f6 23.d3 e4 24.f3 d6 25.e3 f5
27.a3 b8 28.b4 b6 29.b2 e6 26.f2 d6 27.d5 exd5 28.xd5 h4+
1/2-1/2 Matsuura, E-Zarnicki, P/Santos 29.xh4 xh4 Just a very convincing game
2004 ] by Prie. Rumours of the death of 3... Qa5
13.e3 have been greatly exaggerated.
[ 13.g3 d5 14.d3 d6! ] 0-1
13...c7!N An interesting new move. Prie
makes f2-f3 unattractive. Other moves may
be satisfactory too: 281 B01
[ 13...d5 14.xd5 ( 14.f1 0-0-0 15.d2 Morozevich,Alexander
b6 16.xd5 exd5 17.c3 f6 ) 14...cxd5 Rogers,Ian
15.d2 b4 16.a3 xc3 17.xc3 d8 Bundesliga 1998/99 (10) 1999
( 17...c7 is an obvious improvement.) [Nigel Davies]
18.f3 0-0 19.0-0-0 a5 20.a4 b5 21.axb5
b8 22.g5 xb5 23.g4 a4 24.g6 a3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
( 24...f6! 25.gxh7+ h8 ) 25.gxh7+ c6 5.d4 0-0-0 6.e3 In my view is the
xh7 26.bxa3 f6 27.g5 g8 28.h6 most accurate order of moves, something
e4 29.xe4 gxh6 30.h5 g5 31.xf7+ which Scandinavian expert Ian Rogers seems
g7 32.xe6 1-0 Otero, D-Matamoros to agrees with because he later played it
Franco, C/Santa Clara 1999 ] himself.
[ 13...b6 14.d3 d5 If Black plays this [ After the immediate 6.c4 , Black can play
273
f5 7.e3 xf3! 8.xf3 xd4 9.xd4 ( or rather ho hum for Morozevich. Black is a pawn
9.g4 c2+ ) 9...e6+ 10.e2 c5 ] d o w n w i t h o u t m u c h t o s h o w f o r i t . e5
6...f6 16.e2 xc4 A rather desperate piece sac in
[ After 6...e5 7.c4 , Black's queen is cut off an attempt to drum up counterplay.
from either f5 or h5. Rogers - Matamoros, Morozevich deals with it in very cool fashion.
Hamburg 1999 continued a5+ 8.d2 b4 17.xc4 xd5 18.ad1 hd8 19.e3
9.d5 xf3 10.xf3 xd2+ 11.xd2 d4 e5+ 20.c2 b5 21.xd5 xd5 22.g4+
12.0-0 b4 13.b3!? ( Rogers sacrifices a f5 23.f4 e6 24.b1 g5 25.xg5 e4+
pawn for a dangerous looking attack, though 26.a1
Black manages to hold the balance with 1-0
precise defence. White could also consider
13.e1 and meet xb2 with 14.b3 )
13...xc4 14.xd4 xd4 15.c2 f6 282 B01
16.fd1 f4 17.d6 d7 18.c5 b8 Movsesian,Sergei 2555
19.dxc7+ xc7 20.d6 hc8 21.e1 g4 Biolek,Richard 2410
22.xg4 xg4 23.xe5 f6 24.d6 d7 Olomouc 1997
25.g3 a6 26.h3 1/2-1/2 ] [Alexander Volzhin]
7.c4 h5 For 7...Qf5 see de Firmian -
Waitzkin. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ d7 4.e2
[ 7...a5+ 8.c3 e5 9.d5 b4 10.0-0 xd5 5.d4 b6 6.c4 e5!? A rare but very
he8 11.c2 xf3 12.xf3 d4 13.xd4 interesting gambit line. Black's ideas are
exd4 14.e4 e7 15.a3 xe4 16.b4 similar to those in the well-known line 3.d4
b6 17.xe4 gave Whtie a tremendous Nxd5 4.c4 Nb6 5. Nc3 e5 which we have
position in Kudla - Majer, Valtice (Czech Ch) considered already ( see Remizov - Bezgodov
1992, though he later managed to lose. ] ). 7.dxe5 c6 8.f3
8.bd2 e5 9.d5 d4 10.xd4 exd4 [ 8.f4?! seems to weaken White's position.
11.xg4+ Another drawback of this move is that White
[ Improving on 11.xd4 , after which Rogers lags behind in development. e6! 9.xd8+
might have intended to follow the game De xd8 10.b3 c5 11.b2 d4 12.d1 f5
La Villa - Arizmendi, Pamplona 1998. Black 13.c3 e3 with tremendous
scared his opponent half to death with b4 compensation. ]
( 11...e8 12.f3 f5 13.f1 h4+ 14.g3 8...b4+ 9.bd2 e7
h3 15.f2 d6 16.e3 e7 17.f1 [ 9...0-0 10.a3 xd2+ 11.xd2 g4 12.c5
left Black struggling to find adequate xf3 13.xf3 c4 14.c3 xd1+ 15.xd1
counterplay in Poluljahov - Volokitin, 4xe5 16.e2 with a huge edge as White's
Polanica Zdroj Open,1999; and 11...d6 bishops dominated Black's Knights in Rasik -
12.xg4+ xg4 13.h3 f5 14.0-0 Zurek, Czech, 1993. ]
left Black a pawn down in S Movsesian - 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.c2 g5!
Damaso, Cappelle la Grande 1998.) 12.f3 [ Black could win the sacrificed pawn back,
xf3 13.gxf3 ( 13.xf3 h4+ 14.f2 but this allows White to gain some tempi for
xc4 keeps W hite's king in the centre) launching a Q-side attack: 11...xe5 12.a3
13...xd5 14.cxd5 xd5 15.c2 xd4 d6 13.b4 ]
16.0-0-0 h6 17.a3 xd2+ 18.xd2 hd8 12.b3 g4? A mistake which loses by force.
19.hd1 f4 20.c3 8d6 21.c2 xd2+ [ 12...xe5 Here this move was already
22.xd2 xd2+ 23.xd2 xh2 o b li g a t o r y: 13.a3 xf3+ 14.xf3 c5
with a probable draw if both sides play well. 15.xc5 xc5 16.b4 xc4 17.xc4 xc4
There is also the danger that Rogers may 18.xg5 de8 and White's chances are
have found an improvement for Black. ] only slightly better. ]
11...xg4 12.xd4 b4 13.h3 xd2+ 13.g5! Definitely Black underestimated this
14.xd2 g5+ 15.c3 Having bee n move. f8
brought up on the King's Gambit, this is all [ The Queen sacrifice is also hopeless for
274
Black: 13...gxf3 14.xe7 fxe2 15.xd8 [ 5.a4!? deserves attention, but after b5!
exf1+ 16.xf1 xd8 17.c5 with a decisive 6.cxb5 xd5 7.c3 b7 in my opinion
advantage. ] Black has ample compensation. ]
14.fd4 xd4 15.xd4 e7 16.xe7 5...xd7!?
xe7 17.c5! a4 [ Black wouldn't obtain sufficient
[ 17...d5 18.c6 winning ] compensation after 5...xd7?! 6.d3 c6
18.c3 7.dxc6 xc6 8.f3 f5 9.0-0 d8
[ 18.b3! was not bad either: xd4 19.cxb6 10.e5! c8 11.d4 Now White has an
c6 20.bxa7 a3 21.c5!! and White extra pawn as well as a huge advantage in
wins. ] development . d7 12.a4 f6 13.xd7
18...d5 This move loses a piece. xd7 14.b3 e6 15.f4 and I would not
[ 18...d7 is more stubborn, although the like to play Black in this position, Calzetta,
position is very bad for Black: 19.a5 xc5 M-Medina, Espana, 1992. ]
( 19...xc5 20.xa7 h5 21.fc1 ) 20.xa4 6.d4 White has tried various different
b6 21.xg4+ b8 22.b3 xa4 continuations in this position, but none of
23.xc5 xc5 24.f4 and with accurate play them have brought him any advantage, for
White should win the endgame. ] example:
19.a5 xe5 20.xa4 f4 21.xg4+ b8 [ 6.f3 e6! 7.dxe6 xe6 8.a4+ c6 9.0-0
22.f3 e2+ 23.h1 g7 24.ae1 d3! ( blocking the d-pawn and preventing
Despite the speedy disaster in this game this W h i t e ' s n o r m a l d e v e l o p m e n t ) 10.b3
gambit line looks rather viable. The theory of 0-0-0! 11.xd3 xd3 12.b3 c5 13.b2
this line is based on just a few games, and e4 with fantastic compensation in Euler -
there is much scope for further investigation. Buenermann, 1993 ]
1-0 6...e6! This is much more to the point than the
p la n wi t h c 7 -c 6 f r o m Ca lze t t a - Me d in a .
7.dxe6 xe6 8.d5 g4 9.f3 f5 10.e3
283 B01 Otherwise after Bf8-c5 it would be difficult to
Movsesian,Sergei 2630 castle kingside. Queenside castling is also
Damaso,Rui 2465 very dangerous for W hite because Black's
Pula 1997 li g h t -s q u a r e d B i sh o p i s ve r y s t r o n g , f o r
[Alexander Volzhin] example:
[ 10.c3?! c5 11.ge2 ( 11.e2+?!
The following game is an excellent example l e a d s W h i t e n o w h e r e i n v i e w o f d7!
of dynamic positional chess. Early in the and although the threat of Re8 is obvious,
o p e n i n g B la c k sa c rif ic e s a p a wn f o r t h e it's not easy to parry.) 11...0-0 12.g5 h6
initiative and outplays his strong opponent 13.h4 e8 14.b3 b8 , intending to
very convincingly. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 meet 15.0-0-0 with b5! ]
3.b5+ bd7! This move leads to a very 10...b4+ 11.f2
sharp and interesting game. It allows White to [ 11.d2?! is weaker: e7 the pin on the e-
k e e p a n e xt r a p a wn b u t B l a ck h a s g o o d file is quite unpleasant ( 11...0-0 intending
prospects for gaining the initiative. Re8 is not bad either.) 12.e2 0-0 13.a3
[ 3...d7 winning the pawn back, is also ( w h a t e l s e ? ) c5 14.xc5 xc5
possible, but White is slightly better after Now Re8 is threatened, and the only move
4.c4 g4 5.f3 c8 6.c3 bd7 7.ge2 15.0-0-0 allows Black to win the pawn back:
b6 ( now White can't protect the d5-pawn ) xd5 16.b3 e3+ with a clear edge. ]
8.b3!? bxd5 ( After 8...xc4 9.bxc4 e6 11...0-0 12.a3 d6 13.e2 e8
10.dxe6 xe6 11.d3 Black hardly has full White's extra pawn is of no importance for an
compensation for the pawn.) 9.xd5 xd5 assessment of this position, because all the
10.b2 as the game Kalichkin - Pisakov, Black pieces are placed very actively and the
Russia, 1997 proved. ] White king can't feel completely safe. All this
4.c4 a6 5.xd7+ fully compensates Black f or the loss of a
275
pawn. 14.g3 g6 15.d4 This move is just game it appears very threatening.
a waste of time. [ 7.g4 has also been looked at a couple
[ Either 15.e1 protecting the Be3 and times in the archives. ]
preparing an escape for the king ] 7...cxd5 8.xd5 d8 9.e2 f6
[ or 15.c3 completing his development, [ Bauer observes that 9...e7? 10.e3
should be preferred. ] bc6 11.c3! c7 12.0-0-0 is very good
15...d7! Clearing a e for the queen and for White. ]
t r a n s f e rr i n g t h e kn i g h t t o a m o re a ct i ve 10.xf6+ xf6
position. 16.f1 White decides to give up his [ 10...gxf6?! didn't work well in
extra pawn to give time for his king to escape. Solodovnichenko, Y (2514)-Pantioukhine, S
e5 17.g1 It took White three moves to (2260) Rochefort 2005 looked at by Eric Prié
castle, definitely too many! h4!? in the archives. ]
[ Simply 17...xc4!? is not bad either. ] 11.0-0-0
18.c3 xc4 Now the material balance has [ White should avoid 11.c3? b4! 12.xb4
b e e n re s t o re d a n d B la ck's a d va n t a ge i s xb2 ]
beyond doubt. 19.ce4 f4! [ B a u e r ' s m a i n l i n e r u n s 11.f3 c6
[ Of course, gathering the harvest 12.0-0-0 a3 13.c3 c5 14.g5 g6
immediately is possible: 19...xe4 20.fxe4 15.d2 0-0 16.h4 h5 17.e2 g4
xg3 21.hxg3 xe4 but the text is even 18.f3 h6!= ]
better as White has no defence against f7- 11...c6
f5. ] [ This was the last opportunity to play
20.e1 f5 Now White is in real trouble. 11...a3 but 12.c3 c5? is no longer
21.d3 playab le du e t o ( 12...e7 13.g4 g6
[ 21.c3 didn't help W hite either: xe1+ 14.h4 h6 15.f4 Proved very unpleasant for
22.xe1 xg3 and Black wins a piece. Black. One game continued: c6 16.f5!
23.xg3 xd4+ ] exf5 17.g5 e5 18.gxh6 0-0-0 Lanka, Z
21...e5 22.xe5 fxe4! 23.c4 xe5 (2494)-Zvara, P (2409) Czechia 2008 when
The rest needs no comment. 24.d6+ h8 19.h5 h7 20.hxg7 xg7 21.h3 g4
25.d7 ed8 26.ad1 e7 Excellent game! 22.f4 would have left White with a fantastic
0-1 position. ) 13.b5+ c6 14.c4 e7
15.b4+- ]
12.c3! This looks like a nuance cutting out
284 B01 Bauer's ...Ba3 plans.
Muzychuk,Anna 2528 [ 12.g4 is looked at by Andy Martin in the
Repkova,Eva 2446 archives in the notes to Handke-Motwani
II Controceni Open (4) 05.03.2011 Port Erin 2003 but Bauer is unimpressed. ]
[Gawain Jones] [ T h e Fr e n c h G M o n l y co n sid e r s 12.f3
transposing back into his mainline with a3 ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6 12...g5+ Perhaps this logical check is
Black delays ...Nf6 which we will see in the actually an error as if the g2 pawn is too hot
last games of the update. According to then Black is just giving White an extra tempo
Bauer's book this line is known as the to develop his knight.
"Konigspringerzuruckhaltungspolitik". It really [ 12...g6 13.f3 e7 14.h3 f6
rolls off the tongue doesn't it! 5.c4 f5 ( 14...0-0 15.g4 e4 16.he1 xf3
[ 5...f6 6.f3 ( 6.d2!? would transpose 17.xf3 b4 might be Black's best but I'd
to various games in the archives including still choose W hite after 18.xb4 xb4
Hamdouchi-Boe which I looked at last year.) 19.b3 ac8 20.c3 ) 15.g4 ( 15.xf6
6...f5 7.d2 would transpose to the xf6 16.b5 0-0 17.xc6 bxc6 18.e3
mainline seen later in this update. ] ab8 19.e5 gives White a slight
6.d2 e6 7.d5 Suggested by Eric Prié in positional edge.) 15...e4 16.xf6 xf3
notes to earlier games and after checking this 17.xf3 xf6 18.xf6 gxf6 19.b5 c8
276
20.d6 e7 21.hd1 b8 22.e2 [ 13...b4 would at least try to exchange
and only White can win the endgame but the some pieces but energetic play proves Black
draw was successfully held in Kaufeld, J still ha s h uge p ro ble ms. 14.f3 g4
(2265)-Boehnke, M (2206) Germany 2005. ] 15.xb4!? ( 15.h3 e4 16.xg7 g8
[ 12...h6+ has also been played a couple 17.g4 xe2 18.xe2 xc2+ 19.xc2
of t ime s b u t 13.b1 b4 14.g4! g6 xg7 20.b5 leaves Black in an
( 14...xc3 15.gxf5 ) 15.h4! xc3 16.bxc3 unpleasant ending.) 15...xb4 16.b5+
0-0 17.h5 forces Black to try f6 to keep the f8 17.a4! c8 18.d4 xg2 19.hd1
piece 18.xe6+ f7 19.f3 and Black a n d W h i t e 's in it ia t ive is d e cisive : xc2
doesn't have enough for the pawn. ] 20.d8+ e7 21.1d7+ f6 22.e5+
13.b1 c5 This is a logical developing g6 23.h4+ g5 24.xf5!
move but in conjunction with her next it leaves 1-0 Schlesinger, O (2207)-Duncker, J (2256)
an odd impression. Germany 2004. ]
[ Taking the pawn is very risky but needs to 14.f3 xg2 Grabbing the pawn is extremely
be examined: 13...xg2 14.f3 g4 foolhardy.
A) 15.b5 is also possible and also forces [ 14...g4 was played in the only other
Black to be accurate. This might even be game to reach this position and looks a
stronger. e4 ( 15...e7 16.hg1 e4 better choice. 15.he1 ( 15.h3 is a further
17.d2 d8 18.d4 g6 19.d3 d5 possibility when e4 16.g4 xe2 17.xe2
20.xc6 xc6 21.xg7 g8 22.c3 e4 18.xg7 g8 19.c3 xf2 20.hf1
and Black's king has no safe location.) c5 21.b5 is very good for W hite.)
16.d2 d5 17.e5 h5 15...0-0 16.h3 f4 17.d7 b4 18.g3
A1) 18.xc6 bxc6 19.xd5! b8 19.xb4 xb4 Feuerstack, A (2286)-
is very appealing but xd5 ( 19...exd5 Storm, R (2235) Germany 2004 and Black
20.xc6+ e7 21.he1+ d6 was closing in on equalising. ]
22.xa8+- ) 20.xd5 cxb5 21.xb5 h5 15.h4 e4
22.d1 h4 gives Black good drawing [ Grabbing yet another pawn simply opens
chances.; another file towards Black's king. 15...xf2
A2) 18.he1 With huge pressure on 16.xf5 ( 16.xf2 xf2 17.xf5 exf5
Black's position, i.e. e7 19.xd5! 18.hf1 h4 19.xf5 d8 20.xd8+
A v e r y s t r o n g q u e e n s a c ri f i c e . exd5 xd8 21.xg7 g8 22.d4 regains both
20.xc6 bxc6 21.xc6+ f8 22.xa8 pawns and would give W hite a great
xh2 23.xd5 c7 24.b5 endgame. ) 16...xf5 17.xg7 g8 18.hf1
and White's position looks fantastic to g6 19.f6 with very strong pressure for
me.; the pawn. ]
B) 15.d5!? when unfortunately for Black 16.xf5 xf5 17.hg1 I wonder if we were
i t a p p e a r s n e c e s s a r y t o p l a y e7 still following Muzychuk's preparation.
to prevent being mated in the centre but [ Restoring the material balance was also
now 16.hg1 h5 17.xc6+ bxc6 possible and favoured White: 17.xg7 g8
18.xg7 ( 18.g3!? ) 18...g6 19.e5 18.hg1 d8 19.d3 xf2 ( 19...h3
with ongoing pressure. ] 20.b5 xd1+ 21.xd1! leaves Black
[ 13...e7 14.f3 g6 15.b5 0-0? u n d e r u n p l e a s a n t p r e s s u r e a s xg7
This loses on the spot but the position was 22.e5! wins back the piece when I doubt
already very difficult. 16.xc6 bxc6 17.e5 Black's king will survive very long.) 20.d4!
xg2 ( 17...f6 18.g4 g6 19.h4 h6 i s a n e a t t r i c k g a i n i n g m a t e r i a l . xg1
20.h5 h7 21.g6 e5 22.xf8+- ) 21.xf2 xd1+ 22.xd1 xf2 23.e2 ]
18.hg1 e4 19.xc6 xc6 20.xg7+ 17...g8?! This move looks pretty terrible as
h8 Lutz, D (2139) -Hillmann, M (1763) Anna's energetic play shows.
W illingen 2003 when W hite overlooked [ 17...d8 is more logical when 18.xd8+
forced mate with 21.xh7+! xh7 22.h5+ ( 18.d3 now allows xf2 as there's no Bd4
g8 23.h8# ] trick. ) 18...xd8 19.xg7 e8 20.d3 f4
277
21.h5 although White still has a clear [ 9.b1 is a very meek move given that
advantage ] Black isn't threatening to take on b2 anyway.
18.d3 xf2 White pretends that his Rook move is doing
[ 18...h3 would prevent White's next but something by playing b2-b4 in short order
following 19.e4! Black is totally lost. ] but Black's game is very comfortable: bd7
19.h5! xg1 Repkova decides to give up 10.b4 c7 11.e1 d6 12.h3 h6 13.f1
material to reduce the pressure on her 0-0= 14.a4 e5 15.c5 e4 16.h4 h7
position but at the end of the following forced 17.g4 A very silly move. ad8 18.c1
variation Black can resign. xc5 19.bxc5 h2+ 20.h1 xd4
[ 19...0-0-0 would attempt to get the king to winning, Gazarek,D-Horvath,C/Pula 1998. ]
safety but 20.gf1! g6 ( 20...xd3 21.cxd3 9...e7 10.b3 As Black moves his queen
e3 22.xh7+- is no better.) 21.xh7 e3 three times, so White moves his bishops. 0-0
22.de1 g5 23.xf7 e7 24.xe6+- 11.g5N
would see White suddenly having an extra [ 11.h3 h6 ( 11...e8 12.e2 bd7
pawn whilst still keeping a strong attack. ] 13.ad1 ad8 14.g4 g6 15.e3 d5
20.xg1 xg1 21.xh7 h8 22.xg7 d4 16.xd5 cxd5 Benda,H-Riedner,M/Austria
[ 22...xh7 23.xh7 d8 would be a better 1999 ) 12.g4 h7 13.f4 bd7 14.e2
move order but still I feel the h pawn will fe8 15.a4 a5 16.d2 c7 17.g5
decide matters easily. ] hxg5 18.xg5 f5 19.f3 g6 20.c4 h5
23.xh8 xh8 24.g8 0-0-0 25.xf7 21.e4 df6 22.ac3 ad8 23.e3 g7
The complications have cleared and White is 24.ac1 h8 25.g5 d6
left with queen and pawn for rook and knight. Kiss,G-Kamaras,P/ Hungary 2002 The Black
Repkova fights on for almost 20 moves but Bishops are more influential and there are
the result is never in doubt. e5 26.a3 b8 prospects on the Kingside. ]
27.g6 a6 28.h4 a8 29.h5 e7 30.g5 [ 11.e3 c7 12.h4! I feel that this is
c6 31.h6 e4 32.d5 b8 33.xe4 e5 White's best chance in this line to nab the
34.c3 c4 35.a2 d6 36.d5 a7 two Bishops and try to make something of it.
37.e3+ b6 38.e7+ b7 39.b3 a8 It may be worth Black considering an early ...
40.a4 a7 41.c2 a8 42.h7 a7 43.a5 h7-h6 to stop this idea. g6 13.xg6 hxg6
bxa5 44.e3+ 12.Bc3! looks to put a big hole 14.f3 bd7 15.e2 d5 16.d2 b5
in Black's attempts to play the 17.c3 7b6 18.c2 a5 19.h4! xh4
Konigspringerzuruckhaltungspolitik and it'll be 20.h3 e7 21.g3 c4 22.c1 a4
interesting to see if any Black players can 23.xe6! fxe6 24.xg6 h4 25.xh4 f6
repair the damage. Calavalle,G-Lotti,F/Marche Estate 2003
1-0 26.h7++- ]
11...bd7= Once again we are treated to an
effortless Scandinavian development by Black
285 B01 and he is fully equal in this position. W hite
Myhrvold,Rune 2192 players can get very frustrated by the ease of
Pedersen,Lars Erik 2054 this process and go right over the top. 12.e5
Open ch Oslo NOR (6) 08.04.2004 [ White can try to fish in troubled waters with
[Andrew Martin] 12.h4 but the tactics are easy to rebuff:
g4 13.f3 h5 14.f5 b4 15.g3
KING HUNT 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 g6= ]
a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 Could be 12...xe5?!
dangerous if White is allowed to play Bc4 and [ 12...ad8 was the simple way. Black
Nd5 or Ne4. Black moves to prevent this chooses wild tactics, possibly right for this
scheme. b6! One could argue that Black is particular opponent. ]
moving his Queen too much but the Bd2 isn't 13.dxe5 g4 14.xe7 xf2
exactly ideal. 7.c4 f5 Normal service is [ 14...xf2+ 15.h1 is nothing. ]
resumed. 8.0-0 e6 9.e1 15.d2! g4+ 16.f1 Yes, for the first time
278
he is starting to think about winning the game. he'll have a pleasant position. Here he didn't...
K h 1 o f c o u r s e l e a d s t o a d r a w . xh2+ [ 5...e6 is Black's more solid option. ]
17.e2 One of those positions where White is 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 d7 8.c3 e5 9.d5
balancing on the edge of the mountain. One Immediately grabbing space and trying to
would think that the Bishop on e7 would stand exploit Black's previous.
him in good stead ... but ... g4+ [ 9.0-0 was suggested by Andy Martin. His
[ I like 17...ad8! I think Black has at least a line continues
draw: A) 9...exd4 is rather dangerous 10.e1+
A) 18.xd8 xd8 19.e3 a6+ 20.f2 e7 11.b3 ( 11.cxd4 leaves White with
( 20.b5 xb5+ 21.c4 d3+ 22.f2 a tiny advantage after xd4 12.xb7
xc4 ) 20...g4+-+; b8 13.a6 0-0 14.c3 fd8 15.b1
B) 18.d6 g4+ 19.d3 f5+ b4 16.e3 c6 17.f1 f5 18.c2
20.e2= ( 20.c4 a6+ 21.d4 c5+ xe3 19.xe3 d5 20.e4 e6
22.e3 c4 23.a4 f6 )] 21.xd5 xd5 and Black was very close
18.d3 fd8+ 19.d6 c5? Goodness to equ ality. Fern andes, A-Dam aso, R
me, this fellow is willing to take a risk. Saner Portugal 1992.) 11...b8 ( 11...dxc3?!
players would have preferred is bad for Black thanks to 12.xb7 b8
[ 19...f5+ which again looks drawn: 20.e2 13.xc6 cxb2 14.xb2 xb2 15.a8+
( 20.c4 a6+ 21.d4 g4! cutting off d8 16.c6+ f8 17.xa7 as pointed
the retreat. ) 20...g4+= ] out by Mueller.) 12.xc6 xc6 13.g5
20.e4?? h6 14.h4 f8?! ( 14...d8 is Karsten
[ 20.f4 f6 21.d4! was a very strong Mue ller's sugge st io n bu t af te r 15.cxd4
defensive manoeuvre. One cannot blame xd4 16.xf6 gxf6 17.e3 e6 18.c1
White too severely though. ] White has a lot of compensation for the
20...xd6! 21.xd6 pawn. ) 15.cxd4 d8 16.d2 Liss, E-Afek,
[ 21.exd6 f6! takes away squares and Y Herzliya 1998 was rather unpleasant for
creates multiple threats. Black should win. Black but here he blundered with
But it's preferable to the game where White A1) 16...b6!? looks like Black's best
suffers an attack of panic. 22.d7 d8 ] t r y b u t h e r e e i t h e r 17.e3 ( or
21...f5+ It's mate in three more moves! A 17.ac1!? Mueller ) 17...b4 18.c4
short game which points out the importance xd4 19.ad1! xe3 ( 19...xd1
of holding the initiative in chess. 20.xd1 xd1+ 21.h2 and despite
0-1 the material deficit Black's in trouble
without a safe haven for his king and
p i e c e s w h i c h d o n o t c o o r d i n a t e .)
286 B01 20.xd8+ e7 21.xe3+ xd8
Nabaty,Tamir 2493 22.xf6+ gxf6 23.b3 c5 24.xb7
Chatalbashev,Boris 2593 and White has the better of the ending.;
Open Eforie Nord ROU (11) 27.06.2010 A2) 16...xd4? allowing 17.xe7!+-;
[Gawain Jones] B) 9...0-0-0
B1) 10.a4 exd4 11.xc6 xc6
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 f6 12.xa7 c5 De la Torre, I-Krivoshey,
Recently more time has been devoted to the S Me t z 2 0 0 1 wa s ve r y p l e a s a n t f o r
immediate Black.;
[ 3...g4 ] B2) 10.b3 looks the critical test. e4
4.d4 g4 5.e2 c6 Black's sharpest 11.e2 d5 ( 11...d6!? 12.d2 h5;
response to 3.Nf3. Generally, Black gives up 11...h5!? )
important trumps, the centre and the bishop B2a) 12.d2!? is also interesting as
p a ir, b u t in re t u rn h e d ru m s u p a st ro n g f5? fails to ( 12...e8 13.c2 f5
initiative with his development advantage and 14.c4 d6 15.b4 g5 16.b5 d8
pressure on White's centre. If White survives 17.xd6+ xd6 18.c4 f4
279
Leventic, I -Filipovic, B Zadar 2003 9...e7 10.c4 g6

was highly unclear.) 13.xe4! fxe4 [ 10...e4 was tried by Dave Smerdon who's
14.g4+-; experienced in the Scandinavian. However
B2b) 12.c2 didn't make much sense, his position was dodgy following: 11.e2
encouraging Black's kingside initiative f5?! ( 11...c6 looks interesting although
f5 13.d2 f4 14.c4 g5 15.b4 W hite retains an advantage with 12.c3
xb4! 16.xf4 gxf4 17.d5 g7 cxd5 13.cxd5 a6 14.c4 ) 12.g4!
18.dxc6 hg8 19.g4 fxg4 20.xe4 The Englishman finds a strong dynamic
gxh3 21.cxb7+ b8 22.e5 d6 reply. b4+ 13.c3 h4 14.g5 ( 14.g5!
23.fd1 xc3 24.xd6 xe5 g8 15.d4 would cause Black's position
and Black's attack hit first. 0-1 Webb, to totter.) 14...g6 15.b3 e7 16.0-0-0
R -Povah, N West Bromwich 2004.; 0-0 17.h4 d6 18.b5 f4+ 19.b1 e5
B2c) 12.d1 Kovalev, A-Krivoshey, S and David used his higher rating to offer a
Rymarov 1999. when Black could have tactful draw. 1/2-1/2 Ashton, A-Smerdon, D
used the trick d6!? to complete his Port Erin 2007. ]
development although the position is 11.0-0 c5 White has the bishop pair and
still a little better for White with 13.c4 has caught up in development whilst he can
f4 14.xf4 xf4 15.d5 e5 16.c5 try pressing forward on the queenside and
although Black has reasonable counter thus should have an advantage. However, as
chances.; Chatalbashev shows, Black's counterplay
B3) 10.g5 exd4 ( 10...b8!? s h o u l d n o t b e u n d e r e s t i m a t e d . 12.b3
is also interesting (GJ)) 11.g4 xg4 As taking the pawn on b7 doesn't work out
12.xd8 leaves a curious material well, perhaps here W hite should look f or
imbalance. alternatives.
B3a) 12...h5 has also been tried. [ 12.c3 0-0 13.e1 a6 is a little better for
13.h4 ( 13.g5!? ) 13...ge5 W h it e bu t pe rf ectly p la ya ble f o r Blac k .
14.cxd4 Rios Parra, A-Krivoshey, S 14.g5 can be safely responded to by f5
Salou 2005 when Black should have ( while relocating the knight with 14...e8
r e c a p t u r e d o n d 4 w i t h xd4 is also interesting. )]
with a respectable position.; 12...0-0! 13.xb7? Very foolhardy. It wasn't
B3b) 12...xf2 13.xf2 xd8 too late to keep an easy equality with Now
( 13...xd8! GJ is far stronger as Chatalbashev shows why he's famed as an
Black shouldn't worry about 14.xf7 attacker.
d3 with d e ce nt co mp en sat io n .) [ 13.e3 ]
14.cxd4 c5 15.h1 c8 16.c3 13...e4 14.e2 ab8 15.c6
xd4?! (GJ) 17.d2 e8 18.e2 [ 15.a6 e7 isn't so different to the game
e4 19.c1 d6 20.xc6 xc6 b u t a t l e a s t t h e q u e e n wo u l d n ' t lo s e a
21.xd4 e8 22.f3 g5 23.d5 tempo against ...Ng6-e5. ]
Shabalov, A-Gershon, A Paget Parish 15...e7 So White is a pawn up but that's the
2001. ] end of the positives. Black has queen, rook
[ 9.b3 e4 ( 9...a5!? 10.c2 exd4 and three minor pieces all pointing towards
11.cxd4 c6 12.xc6 xc6 13.xc6+ White's king and the e4 pawn is a very useful
bxc6= looks fine to me.) 10.e2 0-0-0 battering ram. 16.c3 e3 17.fxe3
11.d2 h5!? 12.c4 d5 13.d2 f5 [ 17.f4 h5! doesn't slow Black's attack:
14.0-0-0 e7 and Black could be happy 18.f5 e5 19.a4 h4 and I see no
with his opening. Felgaer, R-Gershon, A reason why White should survive. ]
Linares 2001. ] 17...xe3+ 18.xe3
[ 9.dxe5 is very tame and practice has [ 18.h1 looks like a better bet although
shown that Black shouldn't have any worries d4! ( 18...xc1 19.axc1 xb2
after the simple xd1+ Kabanov, N-Genba, is better for Black but allows White to fight
V St Petersburg 2000. ] on. ) 19.d1 ( 19.f3 e5 is no better.)
280
19...xc3 20.bxc3 e4! 21.f4 f2+! bd7 12.h4 c5 13.dxc5 c7 and Black
22.h2 xf4 23.xf2 e5 wins, White's had at least enough play on the queenside
pieces are too uncoordinated for any hope. ] here although W hite could consider the
18...xe3+ 19.h1 xb2 20.d1 xe2 risky
21.xb2 h4! 22.g1 e4 Perfectly A1) instead after 14.e4 Black went on
precise play. Now White must deal with the to score a quick win: xe4 ( 14...h6!
threat of ...Ng3+ and ...Qe5. 23.xc7 15.xf6+ xf6 and I slightly prefer
[ 23.d3 is W hite's last hope but xd3 Black ) 15.xe4 ac8 16.c6 c5
24.xc7 f5! threatening ...f4 to claim the g3 17.xf6 xf6 18.xh7+? a nice idea
square is decisive. ] bu t it d o e sn 't qu ite wo rk h e re ! xh7
[ 23.d1 would fail to deal with the threat: 19.g5+ g8 20.h5 fd8 21.xf7
g3+ 24.h2 e5 when the computer xf7 22.xc5 c7 23.xd8+ xd8
informs me it's mate in 7! ] 24.c4! d2 0-1 Vujacic, B (2318)-Djukic,
23...f2 and Nabaty threw in the towel as he N (2509) Bar 2010;
has no defence to ...Ng3+ and ...Nf3 mate. A2) 14.b4!? here to try and hang on to
An extremely energetic display by the the pawn but it's hardly convincing;
Bulgarian Grandmaster who shows the B) 6...h6 7.xf6 exf6 8.h5! g6 9.e2+
hidden potential in Black's position. I believe e7 10.0-0-0 ( 10.e3! delaying Black
that with perfect play White has a couple of from castling also looks promising here)
different ways for an advantage but no human 10...0-0 11.h4 Sutovsky true to style
is perfect and White's positions are difficult to immediately goes for the attack ( 11.e3
keep together. again looks stronger, e.g. g7 12.f3
0-1 d7 13.b3! with a pleasant edge for
White ) 11...h5 12.f3 f5 13.h3 b5
14.b3 xh4! I think Black can safely take
287 B01 this pawn but of course it's a risk! 15.g4
Naiditsch,A 2706 fxg4 16.fxg4 hxg4 17.f4 g7?
Danielsen,Hen 2501 one mistake is all it takes in this kind of
N1 Reykjavik Open 2014 (6.4) 08.03.2014 position ( 17...f5! 18.h2 g5 19.fd5
[Tom Rendle] d7 and White has a dangerous attack...
but is it enough for two pawns?) 18.e5+
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4 f6 19.e4 g5 20.b1 f5 21.h5+!
f6 5.c4!? Slightly unusual from Naiditsch, ( 21.xa8?! xf4 i s j u s t u n c l e a r)
developing the bishop rather than playing the 21...gxh5 22.xf5 f6 23.e4 f3
usual 5.Nf3 - the idea is he wants to play 24.e5+ f6 25.xc7 e7?! ( 25...f4
Nge2 later and not allow a pin with ...Bg4. was the only chance but Black is still only
The other move we've seen here is 5.Bg5 and j u s t h a n g i n g o n a f t e r 26.b7 c6
Naiditsch has tried this before, see Naiditsch- 27.e7 g6 28.e2 ) 26.h2! h4
Djukic which I annotated in 2012. Still his 27.g2 d7 28.xg4 h6 29.d5 f5
setup isn't a success, at least as far as the 30.xh4+! xh4 31.xe7 h5 32.dg1
opening goes as Danielsen shows the right f6 33.d5 1-0 Sutovsky, E (2655)-Djukic,
way for Black to handle this setup. a6 6.a4 N (2528) Crete 2007 ]
[ 6.g5!? 6...c6 7.ge2 e5! This looks like the critical
A) 6...e6 perhaps Djukic was better off test of White's setup
sticking with what he'd previously played [ 7...f5 didn't work out so well for Black in
but I suspect he was worried about the following game but of course he
running into Sutovsky's preparation 7.f3 could've improved: 8.0-0 e6?! ( 8...b4!
b5 8.d3 e7 9.e2 ( 9.xf6!? xf6 9.b3 e6 prevents White's idea of d5 and
10.0-0 b7 11.e4! is perhaps slightly Black is close to equalising after 10.e1
b e t t e r f o r W h i t e) 9...b7 10.0-0-0 e7 11.g3 g6 12.ce4 bd5 13.c3
This feels rather risky to me 0-0 11.b1 0-0 ) 9.d5! exd5 10.xd5 e6 ( or
281
10...e7 11.g3 e6 12.xf6+ xf6 although it will be difficult for Black to win
13.xe6 fxe6 14.h5+ g6 15.g4 without a further mistake from White ]
a n d B l a c k i s i n s o m e t r o u b l e a l r e a d y) 24.e4 f5 25.e6 f8?! Black is playing too
11.ef4 xd5 12.xd5! xd5 13.xd5 passively and this allows White time to bring
d7? ( 13...e7! looks a bit grim but Black the bishop on b3 back into the game 26.c4!
is surviving here after 14.e1 c6 15.e3 Suddenly there are real threats of Bxa6 fxg4
xd1 16.xd1 d8 and Black is only a little 27.fxg4
w o r s e a f t e r 17.d2! ) 14.e1+ d8 [ 27.xa6! is already very close to winning
15.g5+ ( 15.f4! d6 16.xd6 xd6 bxa6 28.xa6 gxf3! the only move!
17.b6! a7 18.g4 wins immediately) ( 28...g5? 29.b5 c5 30.c6 and a5-a6
15...c8 16.f4 c5 17.xc7 b4 is very difficult to stop b4 31.a5! xa5
18.b6+ xb6 19.xb6 d5 20.d4 32.c5 b6 33.xf8+ b7 34.xh6
xb6 21.xb6 d8 22.a3 1-0 Ljubicic, F and White is winning) 29.b5+ ( 29.b5?
(2398)-Plenkovic, Z (2366) Zupanja 2007 ] now loses to c5 30.c6 f2! 31.xc5
8.d5 f1+ 32.a2 f2 33.d4 xd4 34.xd4
[ 8.dxe5 is very unambitious xd1+ 9.xd1 f5 ) 29...c8 30.c6! b8 31.xd7 f2
xe5 10.b3 d6 11.0-0 0-0 32.e8+ xe8 33.xe8+ b7 34.f7 c5
and if anything Black has a slight edge in a and Black is hanging on here - the f-pawn
fairly dull queenless middlegame ] is enough of a distraction to hold the draw
8...b4 9.g5?! f5 although it's still tricky! ]
[ 9...h6! immediately is also good ] 27...dd8 28.e4 g8 29.g5 Black starts to
10.b3 h6! 11.xf6 get the better of it around here
[ it seems a shame to give up the bishop pair [ 29.xa6 bxa6 30.xa6 f7 is just a
but after 11.h4 g5! 12.g3 d6 perpetual here 31.b5+ c8 32.a6+
the bishop on g3 is rather shut out of the b8 ( not 32...d7?? 33.c6+ c8
game and I like Black's position ] 34.xd6+ xd6 35.xd6 ) 33.b5+ ]
11...xf6 12.g3 0-0-0 29...hxg5 30.xg5?!
[ 12...g6! 13.0-0 0-0-0 and Black keeps [ 30.xa6 is again a draw ]
the bishop pair and a slightly better position ] 30...h8 31.g6 h4 32.e6 f2 33.d3
13.xf5 xf5 14.e2 e7 15.0-0-0 d7 h8 Suddenly Black is very active and should
16.b1 hd8 17.he1 f6 The position is still have the advantage but first he must defend
roughly equal but the presence of opposite accurately on the queenside 34.b3 h3
coloured bishops is interesting here. In an 35.d3 xh2 36.xg7 e3?
ending it would lean to wards ma king th e Under pressure (both position and possibly on
positions more drawish but here it helps the the clock as well) Danielsen makes a first
side with the initiative. 18.f3 b8 19.g4! mistake in a while and Naiditsch immediately
Naiditsch starts to take control of the light seizes upon it
squares h7 20.d2?! Perhaps missing [ 36...h4! was the key here allowing the
Black's next move rook to come to b4 for defense, for example
[ 20.a5! slowly increases the pressure. Black 37.xc7! h1+! 38.a2 b4 39.xa6+!
can keep the position level but only with ( 39.a3? h4 wins ) 39...bxa6 40.g8+
accurate play c6! 21.dxc6 xc6 22.xd7 a7 41.g7+ a8 42.g8+ a7 43.g7+
xd7 23.a4 d4! 24.g2 d8 b6!? 44.a3 a5 45.g6 h2 46.c3 e5
and chances are still about equal ] 47.cxb4 xd5+ 48.b3 a1+! 49.xa1
20...c6! 21.ed1 d4 22.xd4!? xb3 50.xd6+ c7 51.d4 xa4+
A n i n t e re s t i n g e xch a n ge sa cr i f i ce b u t i t 52.b1 axb4 and Black can press for a win
shouldn't be enough here exd4 23.xd4 but this looks like a fortress for White after
d6?! 53.c2 a5 54.b3 ]
[ 23...c5! 24.e4 h5 25.h3 hxg4 26.hxg4 37.xc7! xc7?!
h8 is much more active and White doesn't [ 37...e1+ 38.a2 b4 39.xb4 xb4
really have enough compensation here, 40.e6 2h5 and Black should hold the
282
draw with accurate defence ] [ 11...c6 12.h1 xe4 ( 12...0-0-0

38.d6 c8 39.dxc7+ xc7?! A final mistake is risky but perhaps it's just about playable.
brings the game to an abrupt conclusion Still, W hite has an easy plan after 13.c3
[ 39...a7 40.f5 xb3 41.cxb3 hh8 and slowly preparing b4 so I wouldn't like to
and it's unclear if W hite is winning in this b e B l a c k h e r e .) 13.fxe4 0-0 14.c3
ending but obviously he has good chances ] and Black is struggling for space in the
40.g8+ c8 41.d5 c6 42.e4! hh6 centre ]
43.e5+ a8 44.e8+ [ 11...xe4! 12.fxe4 c6 13.d3 d7
[ 44.e8+ a7 45.xb7+ xb7 46.xc6+ is perhaps Black's most solid setup but
xc6 47.xe3 ] White still has control of the centre and with
1-0 14.c3! he is well placed to start a kingside
attack with Nf4 ]
12.dxc5
288 B01 [ 12.c3 allows xe4 13.fxe4 cxd4!
Naiditsch,A 2710 14.xd4 c7 15.d3 0-0 and Black
Stevic,H 2626 should be fine. ]
TCh-CRO Ia Liga 2013 (7.3) 20.09.2013 12...xc5+ 13.h1 xe4 14.fxe4 0-0
[Tom Rendle] 15.f4! This move signals what is to come -
Naiditsch is massing his forces for a kingside
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 attack and Black will have to be extremely
f6 5.d2 g4 6.f3 d7 7.c4 b6 accurate to defend. c6
8.ge2 e6 9.0-0 [ 15...xb2?! is, unsurprisingly perhaps, too
[ 9.b3 led to an easy win for Anand against greedy: 16.c3! b6 17.h5 e5 ( or
Van Wely in the archives but the move itself 17...e7 18.g4 g6 19.g5 with a winning
isn't particularly dangerous as can be see attack, e.g. gxh5 20.g3! xg5 21.xg5+
from the analysis to that game. ] h8 22.f6+ g8 23.f3 and Black is
9...e7 10.a4 completely lost) 18.xg7! xg7 19.h5
[ 10.b4!? is a typical idea in these kind of e8 20.f3 and despite the extra piece
position and it's well worth considering here. there is no way for Black to survive. ]
N o t o n l y d o e s i t s e i z e s p a c e o n t h e 16.h5 d4
queenside but it prevents a ...c5 break from [ 16...e5? loses to 17.c3!
Black. 0-0 11.b1 ( 11.a3 was safer a6 A) 17...xc4? 18.f6+ h8 ( 18...gxf6
12.e3 and White is a little better, Black has 19.g4+ h8 20.xf6# ) 19.h5 wins;
to be wary of a quick Qd2 and d5.) 11...a5?! B) 17...d6 18.e1 and with Rd1 coming
( 11...a6 12.e3 b5! is not so clear) 12.b5 as well as Qg3 or Qh4 Black is in trouble. ]
a4 13.e3 d8 14.d3 ( 14.f2!? e8 17.g4 c5? A first big error from Stevic and
15.e4 was perhaps slightly more already it's the decisive mistake.
accurate ) 14...e8 15.e4 d5 [ 17...h8 was an only move and now there
and now in Muzychuk, A (2594) -Daulyte, D doesn't seem to be a crushing blow f or
(2363) Belgrade 2013 W hite could've White although he can keep a very pleasant
achieved an obvious advantage with p o s i t i o n w i t h 18.ad1 g8 19.c3
16.xd5! exd5 17.4c3 and Black is rather ( 19.xf7?? runs into e5 ) 19...e5
cramped - in particular it will be tough to 20.e2 xc4 21.xc4 c5 22.e3! xe3
develop the knight on b8. ] 23.xd7 and Black is still purely on the
10...a5! Otherwise White will play a5 with a defensive. ]
good game. 11.e4!? A new and interesting 18.e3! xc4
idea from Naiditsch, forcing Black to find a [ 18...f5 loses to 19.xg7+! xg7 20.xc5
plan before castling. c5 fc8 21.xg7 xg7 22.ad1 and Black is
[ t h e p o i n t i s t h a t 11...0-0 12.g5! a pawn down with a completely hopeless
will leave Black with doubled pawns and an position. ]
exposed king. ] 19.e5! A nice touch, closing off the bishop
283
from g7 so Black has no choice but to give up [ 6.xf6 exf6 7.c4

his queen but there's no way back at this A) 7...c6 looks like an interesting
sta ge f or St evic. xf1+ 20.xf1 xe5 alternative here but maybe White has an
21.f4?! e d g e a f t e r 8.h5! e7+ 9.ge2 g6
[ 21.xg7! h8 22.h5 opens up Black's ( 9...xd4?! 10.d5! xc2+ 11.d2
king and would've led to an easier win ] c5 12.xf6+ gxf6 13.xf7+ d8
21...f5 22.g3 f6 23.b3 d8 24.d1 14.xf6+ e7 15.xe7+ xe7 16.xc2
c6 25.g3 h8 26.e5 f7? This brings leaves Black with insufficient
the came to a swift conclusion compensation for a pawn) 10.h4 f5
[ 26...xe5 27.xe5 g8 was more 11.g3;
stubborn but Black is so passive that after B) 7...e7 is a possibility and perhaps
28.b3 e4 29.d7 c6 30.g3 Black simplest way of playing.;
he is still going to lose in the end although C) 7...b4 8.e2+ e7 9.0-0-0 xc3
f4! 31.xf4 ad8 will give him the slimmest ( 9...0-0 10.a3 d6 11.d3 and White
of hopes to setup some kind of fortress with keeps a tiny advantage) 10.bxc3 xe2
his rook and bishop. ] 11.xe2 c6 12.he1 0-0 13.f4
27.xf6 gxf6 28.c3 e5 29.d6 was unpleasant for Black in Filippov, A
[ 29.xa5! ] (2558)-Golod, V (2575) Tashkent 2009 ]
29...e7 30.g3 e6 31.xe6 d7 32.d6 6...c6 7.c4 f5
g8 33.xg8+ A tricky new idea from [ 7...b5!? 8.b3 e6 9.a4 g5 10.g3 b4
Na i d it s c h t h a t i sn ' t s o e a s y f o r B l a ck t o 11.ce2 c5 12.f3 b7 13.a5
neutralise. ha d ch a nce s f o r b o t h sid e s in B rk ic , A
1-0 (2541)-Kurajica, B (2555) Zadar 2006 but
n o w B l a c k w e n t w r o n g w i t h xf3?!
( 13...e7 w a s b e t t e r) 14.gxf3 d6?!
289 B01 15.dxc5 xc5 16.xd8+ xd8 17.h4!
Naiditsch,Arkadij 2712 and White's two Bishops and extra activity
Djukic,Ni 2523 gave him an obvious advantage. ]
40th Olympiad Open (5.3) 01.09.2012 8.xf6
[Tom Rendle] [ 8.f3 had been played against Djukic
before but with no success after e6 9.e5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4 bd7 10.e2 xe5 11.dxe5 d4! 12.g3
f6 5.g5 Not as unusual a move as I d5 and Black was already better in
expected but it hasn't been covered yet on P a va s o vi c , D ( 2 5 6 6 ) - D j u k i c , N ( 2 5 2 1 )
ChessPub, so I'll do my best to do an Portoroz 2005 ]
overview of the variation. h6 8...exf6 9.e2+ e7 10.0-0-0 I'm not sure
[ 5...c6 6.c4 f5 7.xf6 ( 7.f3 this aggressive move is best here as Black
takes us back into more of an mainline seems to get very easy play and W hite's
position and now e6 8.e2 e7 9.0-0-0 Kingside attack was not as dangerous as he
0-0 and Black had no real problems in Jansa, hoped
V (2478)-Kolbak, J (2262) Rijeka 2011) [ 10.f3 seems more sensible to me and the
7...gxf6 8.ge2 e6 9.0-0 ( 9.h4!? question is does White have any real edge
s e e m s m o r e c h a l l e n g i n g b u t b6 after 0-0 11.0-0 d6 12.ae1 c7
is a good reply and Black is doing fine after ( 12...g4?! 13.h3 h5 14.e4
10.b3 h5 ) 9...d7 10.g3 g6 11.e1 and Black has to take on f3 anyway here so
b6 12.b3 e7 13.a4 c7 ( 13...a5 W h i t e i s o b v i o u s l y b e t t e r) 13.h3
is logical and pretty much equalises) 14.a5 and I susp ect th e a nswer is tha t W hit e
d5 15.a6 b6 with unclear equality in keeps slightly the better chances as he can
Belov, V (2619) -Szabo, G (2525) Rijeka always play Bd3 to swap off light-squared
2010 ] Bishops ]
6.h4 10...0-0 11.f3 b4! A move that shows
284
Black has no real problems here at all. 20...a4! 21.xg4 e6! An important move
12.g4!? that holds Black's position together
[ 12.h4 h7 13.d3 xc3 ( 13...a5 [ 21...h8?? loses to 22.ef6! xf6
allows 14.e4!? with dangerous play) 23.xf6 gxf6 24.g3 ]
14.bxc3 a5 15.xh7+ xh7 16.b2 [ 21...d7?! 22.xh6+ h8 23.g3 g6
d7 and White has to be careful ] 24.h5 and Black is coming under a nasty
12...h7 a t t a c k a l t h o u g h i t ' s n o t c l e a r a f t e r g5
[ 12...xg4 is possible but White does get a 25.xg5 a3 ]
d a n ge r o u s a t t a c k a f t e r 13.hg1 h5 22.b1?! Too slow but perhaps there was
( 13...c8!? might be safer) 14.e4 h8 nothing really in the position for White
15.xg7! xg7 16.g1+ h8 17.h4 [ 22.e5 a3 23.bxa3 xa3 24.g3 g6
so perhaps Black was wise to decline the and White has no breakthrough ]
pawn ] [ 22.g3 looks dangerous but in reality there
13.d3 xd3 14.xd3 a5 15.e4!? Black can simply continue with a3! 23.bxa3
An interesting pawn sacrifice designed to xa3 and sadly White's best here is to swap
complicate a position that was heading for Queens into a miserable ending with
dull equality - but ultimately it backfires. 24.e5 ]
[ 15.a3 xc3 16.xc3 xc3 17.bxc3 d7 22...f5
is just equal ] [ 22...a3! is also very strong ]
15...xa2 16.c3 e7 17.g5? 23.ef6+?
Another interesting idea but this one doesn't [ 23.xh6+ was relatively best but after
really work against accurate defence xh6 24.c4+ h8 25.g5 h5 26.e6
[ 17.h4 would've been much more b5 27.d3 f6 and White doesn't have
challenging, for example d7 18.f5 fe8 anything special here - still at least here
19.h4 and White is building up a decent th e re a re ch a n ce s t o get b a ck in t o t h e
attack on the Kingside. Still, I prefer Black game. ]
after a5 ] 23...xf6 24.xh6+ h8 25.xf5 e8
17...fxg5! [ 25...a3! would have been more to the point,
[ 17...hxg5 18.de1 is less convincing for Black is simply winning now as he has the
Black ] more dangerous attack as well as an extra
18.h4 piece ]
[ 18.de1 now doesn't have any threat of 26.h5
Nxg5 ] [ 26.e1 is a better try but Black is winning
18...g4 19.e5 a5 Black chooses to go on e a si l y e n o u g h a f t e r g8 ( 26...xe1+
the attack which works out very well, although 27.xe1 xe1+ 28.a2 a6 is also good
it may not have been objectively the most enough ) 27.d6 xe1+ 28.xe1 d7
accurate move. 29.g6 h7 ]
[ 19...e6 would've been the safe option - 26...a3! 27.d5 Pure desperation xd5
W hite doesn't really have compensation [ 27...e2! kills the game off immediately ]
here and Black is just going to play Nd7 on 28.xd5 cxd5 29.h6 g5 30.f4 axb2
the next move. ] 31.xb2 This gets mated but it was safe to
20.dg1?! resign in any case. e2+ 32.b3 d7
[ 20.hg1! was perhaps a trickier way to play, 33.fxg5 c5+ 34.b4 d3+
e.g. h5 ( 20...a4? 21.xg4 and it's White's White resigned as it's mate next move.
attack that is the more dangerous because 0-1
now e6? 22.de1 wins ) 21.g3 a4
( 21...g6?? 22.xg6 ) 22.xh5 a3 23.d2!
suddenly isn't so clear as axb2 ( 23...f5!
24.b1 d6 still leaves Black with the
ad va nt a ge b u t t h e p o sit io n is st ill ve ry
unclear ) 24.b1 blocks off Black's attack ]
285
290 B01 (2635)-Berg, E (2593) Khanty Mansiysk

Najer,Evgeniy 2638 2007. ) 8...f5 9.g4 g6 10.h4 h5 11.g5
Ajrapetian,Gevorg 2419 is the most dynamic reply and worked well
TCh-RUS Premier (11) 23.04.2011 in the game Najer, E (2634) -Kharitonov, A
[Gawain Jones] (2524) Moscow 2008. g8 12.h3 f5
13.b3 c8 14.f4 e6 15.f2 e7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 16.fe4 g6 17.d6+ xd6 18.xd6
f6 d7 19.a3 and White had a clear
[ If Black is anxious to avoid the game edge.;
continuation he can try either 4...c6 or 4...a6 B) 7...f5 This has been Tiviakov's
but th is one looks a little pre mat ure . A choice. 8.f3 e6 9.e2 ( 9.h4!? g4
recent game continued 5.f3 ( 5.ge2 10.b3 i s i n t e r e s t i n g .) 9...e7
has been looked at in the archives by John ( The second time the Dutchman reached
Tisdall. Check out Sprenger, J (2326)-Ristic, this position he opted to keep the bishop
A (2155) Metz 2001.) 5...b5?! This lunge is with 9...h6 and drew easily. 10.0-0 e7
too weakening. ( 5...f6 would transpose to 11.d3 xd3 12.xd3 bd7 13.f4 0-0
a more theoretical position but one in which 14.fe1 e8 15.e4 xe4 16.xe4
White has been scoring well recently.) 6.a4! b6 17.e2 c5 18.e3 f6 19.ed1
b4 7.e4 d5 8.d3 f6 9.e2 b7 ac8 20.ac1 a6 21.b3 1/2-1/2 Leon
10.eg5! And suddenly the GM playing Hoyos, M (2490)-Tiviakov, S (2635) Lodi
Black f o und he could no t def en d his f 7 2008. ) 10.0-0 0-0 11.h4 g6
pawn. a5 11.c4 ( 11.e5 is even more B1) In a recent game White deviated
crushing ) 11...d5 12.e5 bd7 with 12.e3 bd7 ( 12...h5!?
13.exf7 g8 14.e5 b6 15.e6 c8 13.xh5 xh5 14.xh5 xh4 15.d5
16.c5 e6 17.xd5 bxd5 18.c4 exd5 16.cxd5 f6 17.fd1 and White
1-0 Djukic, N (2486)-Kurajica, B (2531) has an edge as Black's failed to
Sarajevo 2011. An opening experiment that I complete his development.) 13.xg6
doubt will be repeated. ] hxg6 14.d5!? exd5 15.cxd5 cxd5
5.b5!? We've looked at this jump with 5.Nf3 16.xd5 c5 17.xf6+ gxf6 18.h6
g6 thrown in but not this immediate attack on e8 19.b5 e7 20.c1 a6 21.a4
the queen. The idea is to be able to play c2- b5 22.b3 b6 23.d5 ae8 24.h4!?
c4 when White's extra space should grant him and White still retained an edge thanks
a s m a ll a d van t a ge . b6 Black keeps his to his bishop pair and kingside initiative.
queen out hoping to disrupt W hite's Vysochin, S (2526)-Zolotukhin, V (2338)
development. A somewhat risky strategy it's Olginka 2011.;
interesting to note that Tiviakov used ...Qd8 B2) 12.xg6 hxg6 13.f3 a6
against GM opposition but this sidestep in 14.e3 d6 15.b3 b8 16.g3 e8
order to generate greater winning chances. 17.ad1 c7 18.fe1 c8 and Black's
[ 5...d8 This retreat has been played more position was passive but solid. Certainly
often. In comparison to 3...Qd8 Black has in the ga me W hite f ailed t o achieve
spent an extra tempo with his queen but a n y t h i n g a n d a f t e r 19.e4 xe4
White will have lost two with his knight (Nc3- 20.xe4 a5 21.a3 a4 22.c2 e5
b 5 - c 3 ) . T h e r e f o r e W h i t e m u s t t r y 6.c4 a draw was agreed, albeit rather
when, as usual in the 3...Qd6 Scandinavian, pre ma t u re ly a s W h it e st ill re t a in s a
i t ' s u s e f u l t o f o l l o w S e r g e y T i vi a k o v' s n i g g l i n g e d g e . K u r n o s o v, I ( 2 5 9 3 ) -
defence. c6 7.c3 Tiviakov, S (2635) Plovdiv 2008. ]
A) Other GMs have tried 7...g4 when 6.c4 The logical follow up.
8.f3!? l o o k s c r i t i c a l . ( 8.e2 xe2 [ Instead White has tried 6.d5?! attempting
9.gxe2 bd7 10.0-0 g6 11.f4 g7 to trap the queen but this makes W hite's
12.c2 0-0 13.ad1 and White had a position too loose. e6 7.e3 c5 8.xc5
small plus but Black was solid. Najer, E xc5 9.d6 a6 10.dxc7 0-0
286
( There wasn't anything wrong with pleasant for Black.) 16.cxb5 axb5
10...xc7 as 11.d6+ e7 12.xc8+ 17.xb5 Rozentalis, E (2577)-Caspi, I
axc8 leaves Black with a completely safe (2408) Israel 2008 when a6 18.xa6
king and huge development advantage.) xa6 19.c3 c4+ 20.g1 d7
11.c3 d7 12.d4?! ( 12.d6 xb5 gives Black great play for the pawn.;
13.xc5 xc5 14.xb5 d5 15.f3 B1b) 9...0-0 would leave White with
xc7 16.e2 would have allowed White to p r o b l e m s d e v e l o p i n g a s 10.d3
retain rough equality.) 12...xc7 13.gf3 ( 10.a4 b4+ 11.d2 xd2+
e5 14.b3 e7 15.e2 fd5 16.0-0 f4 12.xd2 d6 ) 10...e8 followed by
17.e1?! ad8 18.c2 f6 19.f3 f5 ...e5-e4 is awkward.;
20.e4? h3+! 0-1 Armbrust, F (2321)- B2) 8.e2!? xd4 9.f3 c5
Tiviakov, S (2684) Neustadt an der 10.xe5 e7 looks acceptable.;
Weinstrasse 2009. ] B3) 8.dxe5 g4 9.h3 c5 10.c2
6...c6 Black's two moves to kick back the c6? This fails tactically ( 10...e6
knight have been tried an equal number of would leave Black with strong play for
times. The move chosen is solid but I can't the pawn. ) 11.d5 d4 when
help feeling that if Black is simply going to 12.a4+! works tactically: ( Instead of
develop his pieces normally then his queen 12.d1?! as played in Gavric, M (2398) -
might be bette r ba ck on d8 as it 's rathe r K u r a j i c a , B ( 2 5 3 9 ) N e u m 2 0 0 5 .)
offside here on b6. 12...c6 13.xc6+ bxc6 14.xc7+
[ 6...a6 is the sharper alternative when Black e7 15.g5+ f6 16.exf6+ gxf6
has to play dynamically. 7.c3 17.xa8 c2+ 18.d1 xa1 19.d2
A) T h e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d 7...c6 and White has an extra pawn while his
isn't enough to equalise: 8.d5 g4 9.h3 knigh t ca n escape more ea sily tha n
d4 10.e2 xe2 11.xe2 left Black Black's. ]
w i t h p r o b l e m s i n c o m p l e t i n g h i s 7.c3
d e v e l o p m e n t . H e t r i e d f5 12.0-0 [ 7.c5 d8 8.c3 was tried in one game
( Forcing the pieces back with 12.f3!? f6 but Black can equalise with the customary
13.g4 d7 14.f4 0-0-0 15.e3 b4 break e5! ( I n s t e a d t h e s a f e 8...g6
16.0-0-0 looks very pleasant for White with was played in Blesic, V (2383)-Milanovic, D
his extra space and development (2499) Vrnjacka Banja 2010.) 9.dxe5
a d v a n t a g e .) 12...0-0-0 13.g5 g6 xd1+ 10.xd1 d5= and c5 drops when
14.d1 h6? ( 14...e5 15.h3 f6 Black is fine. ]
looks respectable for Black as 16.xe5?! 7...g6
e8 17.d4 h6 18.f3 xh3 19.h4 [ 7...g4!? should also be considered when
g4 is better for Black.) 15.f3 e5 16.h3 Black is close to equality.
h5 Safarli, E (2587)-Agaragimov, D (2313) A) 8.ge2 to keep the bishop pair is
St Petersburg 2009 when 17.h4 h7 s e n s i b l e b u t a6! sets White some
18.xf5 xf5 19.hxg4 hxg4 20.e3 concrete problems on the light squares.
h5 21.f1 h1+ 22.e2 xg2 White's best looks to be ( Instead 8...e6
23.e4 leaves Black insufficient play for 9.h3 xe2 10.xe2 c7 11.0-0 d6
the piece.; 12.e3 f4 13.xf4 xf4 14.d5
B) 7...e5! Opening up the position is the gave White an edge. Shimanov, A (2583) -
most energetic approach. Rozum, I (2468) St Petersburg 2011.) 9.h3
B1) 8.d5 was Rozentalis' choice and he f5 10.g4 g6 11.c5 a5 12.f4 e5
eventually triumphed but c5 9.c2 with a highly complex position.;
B1a) Instead 9...g4 10.h3 0-0 B) 8.e2 xe2 9.gxe2 e6 10.0-0 e7
11.d3 f5 12.a4 b4+ 13.f1?! 11.d5 exd5 12.cxd5 0-0 13.e3 c7
Ove r-o p tim ist ic d4 14.a3 e7 14.c1 d8 15.b3 a6 16.b5 d7
15.d2 b5!? ( 15...d7 16.c3 a5 17.dxc6 bxc6 18.fd1 and White still had
followed by ...Nb8-a6-c5 is very a slight edge but Black held the draw.
287
Amonatov, F (2647)-Zhigalko, A (2572) slight edge thanks to his queenside space. ]

Moscow 2009. ] 11...e6 12.0-0 a6
[ Again 7...e5!? should be considered, [ 12...d8!? also looks possible. The most
exploiting Black's temporary development forcing line is 13.g5 xb2 14.a4 a3
edge. 8.dxe5 ( 8.e2!? xd4 9.f3 c5 15.c1 b4 16.b1 a5 17.b5 c7
10.xe5 e7= is again satisfactory.) 18.xc5 d6 which is respectable for
8...g4 9.e2 c5 10.e4 0-0 Black. ]
( 10...b4+ 11.d2 xe5 12.a3 xd2+ 13.f4 This is actualy the first new move of
13.xd2 e7 and White's advantage is the game.
minimal. ) 11.xc5 xc5 12.f4 b4+ [ Earlier White tried 13.dxe6 xe6 14.a3
13.d2 a6 14.a3 a4?! The queen is ad8 15.c2 c6 16.g5 c7 17.e3
rather misplaced here. This was Khruschiov, b6 18.ad1 c8! 19.ge4 fe8 20.xf6+
A (2400)-Sulava, N (2526) Ohrid 2001 when xf6 and Black equalised and even went on
( 14...e7 retained good compensation.) to win. Fontana So tomayour, L (2373)-
15.h3 h6 16.g4 f6 17.exf6 e8+ 18.f2 Magem Badals, J (2553) Montcada 2009. ]
looks risky but Black's queen is offside so 13...h5 Black declines grabbing the pawn
it looks as though White's doing well. ] immediately.
8.h3 Preventing Black from exchanging his [ However the pawn grab must be critical.
light squared bishop. Arjapetian was obviously concerned about
[ 8.f3 would transpose to a position more 13...xb2 14.e5 when White certainly has
often reached via the move order 5.Nf3 g6 6. good compensation but perhaps no more
Nb5!? I f eel W hite should have slightly than that, e.g. a3 15.b5 a5 16.d6
better chances here but Najer attempts to b4 17.e1 xd3 18.xd3 exd5 19.cxd5
get a better version. ] a6!? 20.xa6 bxa6 21.ad1 d8
8...g7 9.f3 0-0 10.d3 I'm not convinced 22.g5 d7 23.xf6 xf6 24.e8+ g7
that this is the best square as the bishop 25.ge4 and White has managed to keep
rather gets in the way on the d file. some initiative but perhaps Black's play can
[ Instead a high powered blitz game be improved. Anyway grabbing the pawn is
continued 10.e2 which I think would be my certainly dangerous. ]
choice. Th e downsid e is of course tha t 14.e5 Najer continues to offer the pawn.
Bla ck ' s b is h op ca n de velo p t o f 5 b ut it [ It was possible to keep the b2 pawn by
appears White still has an edge. d8 11.0-0 t h r o w i n g i n 14.a4!? a5 ( 14...d8
f5 12.a4!? c7 13.e3 bd7 14.c1 15.g5 is a bit better for White) 15.d6
e5 15.d5 f8 16.c3 Svidler, P (2754)- d7! 16.c3 fe8= and Black's almost
Kramnik, V (2772) Moscow 2009 and White completed his development with a
c o n ve r t e d . I t 's in t e r e st in g t o n o t e t h a t respectable position. ]
Kramnik tried this line three times with Black 14...xe5 15.xe5 xb2 16.c1
in the blitz tournament but he failed to score I'm not convinced Black's plan of exchanging
a single point. ] bishops first has really worked. True he no
10...c5!? Not the first move you'd look at as longer has to worry about discovered knight
the pawn has moved once already. attacks but now his king is rather vulnerable.
[ I n s t e a d d e v e l o p i n g w i t h 10...a6 b6 Black runs his queen back but now he
looked flexible, preparing the break. ] struggles to develop his queenside.
11.d5 [ 16...b4 17.b1 b6 would at least allow
[ W h it e c o u ld a lso h a ve ch o se n 11.dxc5 Black to complete his development but the
with a slight initiative while White can hope queen's location on b2 is very precarious
to make gains on the queenside. However which he can exploit with 18.e1 exd5
Bla c k h a s t h e e xtra ce n t ra l pa wn . O n e 19.e2 a3 20.b5 a5 21.a3!
sample line runs xc5 12.e3 a5 13.0-0 wh ich win s ma t eria l a s a6? 22.c6
c6 14.a3 d8 15.b4 h5 16.e2 e5 traps the queen. ]
17.xe5 xe5 18.c2 and White has a 17.e1 c7 18.d2 f6 19.g5 g7
288
[ 19...exd5 20.cxd5 d6 21.cd1 Keeping full control of the position and
doesn't solve Black's problems. ] preventing Black from achieving any
20.cd1 White's pieces are perfectly counterplay before breaking open Black's
positioned while Black still has problems position. fe8?!
completing his development. The extra pawn [ 30...c4 was probably essential to prevent
is rather meaningless here. d8 White's next. ]
[ 20...exd5 21.cxd5 cxd5 22.xd5 xd5 31.c4! a6? And this just loses material.
gives W hite a choice between grabbing a [ 31...d7 would have kept the material
p a w n b a c k w i t h 23.xf7 temporarily but 32.g5! followed by Bg4 is
( A n d m y p r e f e r e n c e 23.c4! d8 too strong. ]
24.e5+ f6 25.g3 which gives White a lot 32.xe8! xe8 33.xe8 xe8 34.xc7
of pressure for the couple pawns.) 23...xf7 Two knights for rook and pawn but Black's
24.xd5 when Black can still not complete sad queenside is still undeveloped. Black tries
h i s d e v e l o p m e n t a s f5?! 25.c4 a crazy bid for counterplay but White converts
wins material, f6? 26.e7+ cannot be easily. b5 35.b6 b4 36.xa8 bxc3
considered. ] 37.xc5 e1 38.xc8 d2 39.d6 c2
21.e4 40.d7
[ 21.c2 was also possible as d5 is not yet 1-0
hanging. exd5 22.cxd5 ce8 23.e3
is still dangerous for Black. ]
21...exd5 22.cxd5 ce8 23.f3 d6 291 B01
Black has defended well and is preparing to Najer,Evgeniy 2665
finally develop his queenside, hence White's Kovalenko,Igor 2486
following choice: 24.g4!? Perhaps preparing Open A Moscow RUS (6) 04.02.2010
g4-g5 to gain further attacking chances on the [Gawain Jones]
kingside but more importantly preventing
Black using the f5 square. a5 25.e3 e8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
26.f4 d8?! After playing very well Black f6 5.f3 g4
makes a small error, after which Najer doesn't [ 5...c6 is still causing White problems to
look back. gain an advantage and was seen no less
[ 26...h6!? threatening ...g5 keeps White's than three times in the A group of Corus last
attack under control. The important tactic to month. 6.e5 ( 6.g3 was attempted by
be aware of is 27.h4?! allows xe5! ] Fabiano Caruana to break Tiviakov's
[ 26...b4!? 27.g3 g5! would also see opening: g4 7.g2 e6 8.0-0 e7 9.h3
Black starting to see the upper hand. ] xf3 10.xf3 0-0 11.e2 finally deviating
27.de1 Building up a slow burn attack on the from a previous Tiviakov game which had
kingside against which Black is pretty gone 11.Bf4 Socko-Tiviakov and agreed
powerless. drawn which is examined by John in the
[ A tactical possibility was available in the archives. bd7 12.g2 e5 13.c3 ad8
shape of 27.c6! which looked very strong 14.b3 c7 15.dxe5 xe5 16.e3
bxc6 ( 27...d7 28.g5 g8 29.xe8 when White had a small advantage with the
xe8 30.d6! bxc6 31.g4 d8 32.d7+- ) two bishops but Black is very solid.
28.dxc6 xe3 29.xe3 and Black fails to Caruana converted eventually in a long
keep his material, i.e. h5 ( 29...e6 30.e5 game with very good technique. I remember
c4 31.xd8 xe5 32.xa8 xf3+ being convinced the game was going to end
33.g2 d4 34.c7+- ) 30.g5 fe8 31.c7 in a draw, Caruana-Tiviakov, Corus 2010)
xc7 32.xa8 ] 6...bd7 7.c4 ( Instead on the White side,
27...h6 As there's no longer any tactic earlier in the tournament, Ivanchuk tried
preventing h4 I think this just further weakens 7.f4 but failed to get any real advantage
Black's kingside but it isn't easy to offer an after d5 8.xd5 xd5 9.f3 b6
alternative. 28.h4 e7 29.g2 c7 30.a4! 10.e2 f5 11.c3 e4 12.d2 c2
289
13.xc2 xc2 and the game was ultimately problems finding a safe square for his
agreed drawn, Ivanchuk-Tiviakov, Corus king. ) 13.f5 xe3 14.fxe6 xd1
2010 ) 7...c7 It's surprising to see Ivanchuk 15.exd7+ xd7 16.xd1 e6? ( 16...a6
attempt the Black side but he must have 17.c3 xd4+ 18.d3 White's piece is
been convinced of it's sound solid game more effective than the three pawns as his
when preparing for his game against pieces will coordinate faster.) 17.a3?
Tiviakov. 8.d5!? A new move. White ( 17.xa7+ b8 18.b5 c6 19.c3
immediately tries to force some concessions xd4+ 20.d3 gives Black nothing like
in Black's camp. g6 ( 8...b6 looks like an enough ) 17...xd4+ 18.e2 0-1 Rigo-
immediate equaliser 9.dxc6 bxc6 10.d4 Scharrer, Arco di Trento 2007 (52) ]
xc4 11.xc4 e5 12.d3 e7= 11...xe2+
Black's increased control over the kingside [ 11...c6 12.f4! d5 13.xc7!
and centre compensates for the damaged i s u n c o m f o r t a b l e f o r B l a c k a s xc7
queenside.) 9.d4 g7 10.f4 ( 10.d6 14.bd6+ d8 15.a5 xh1 16.axb7+
d8 doesn't get White anywhere.) 10...d8 xb7 17.xb7+ c8 18.a5
11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.d2 b7 leaves Black's king seriously exposed. ]
14.h6 c7 15.xg7 xg7 16.e3 b6 12.xe2 d8
17.e5 ac8 18.e1 fe8 19.f3 xe5 [ 12...0-0-0 13.xa7+ b8 14.b5 xc2
20.xe5 bd5 although this even favoured 15.f4 d5 16.g3 also has Black under
Black. The Black pawn structure remind me pressure on the queenside ]
of certain lines of the Dragon but when 13.a5
Black has control over the d5 square he [ 13.e5 c6 ( 13...xe5 14.dxe5 )
has nothing to fear, White could never really 14.xg6 hxg6 15.c3 e6= and Black is
us e t h e c 5 s qu are . 1 / 2-1 / 2 Dom in gu e z rock solid and has nothing to fear. ]
Perez-Ivanchuk, Corus 2010 (56) ] 13...c6 14.c3 c8 15.f4 And so Black
6.h3 h5 7.g4 g6 8.e5 bd7 9.b5 has his typical super-solid pawn structure and
Deviating from 9.Bf4 seen in Kosten-Govciyan if he can just switch around places of the rook
in the archives. This move must be critical for on a8 and king then he would have the better
the future of this variation. b6 10.c4! c h a n c e s . H o we ve r t h i s i s i m p o s s i b l e t o
Of course b5 isn't really en-prise as W hite achieve and so W hite has chances to hold
has the discovered check on d6. e6+ onto the initiative. e6
[ 10...c6 is also possible although after [ The pawn is taboo 15...xc2 16.c1 e4
11.d5! Black is forced to go down the ( 16...g6 17.d5 c5 18.f3 Despite the
following variation xd5 12.xd5 xd5 queens being traded Black encounters big
13.xc7+ d8 14.xd5 e4 15.g1 problems, d6 is a big threat while White also
xd5 16.f4 White has some advantage has ideas of Nb5 and b4 while how exactly
as Black's exposed king on d8 gives him does Black develop any pieces?) 17.xe4
some problems along the d file. ] xe4 18.d5 c5 19.f3 d6 20.b4 b6
11.e2 21.bxc5 bxc5 ( 21...xc5 22.b3 )
[ 11.e3 was tried previously in this position 22.c6 ]
A) 11...b6 i s a l s o p l a y a b l e 12.g5 16.a3
( 12.c4= ) 12...a6 13.c3 e4 14.g2 [ 16.0-0-0 b4 17.c4 b6 18.d6+
xc3 15.bxc3 e6; xd6 19.xd6 bd5 20.xd5 xd5
B) 11...0-0-0 12.f4 ( 12.xa7+ is theoretically better for W hite with the
grabs a pawn but leaves W hite two bishops but Black shouldn't have too
dangerously behind in development b8 many problems, he has successfully
13.b5 h5 14.g5 e4 gives Black very swapped off enough pieces that he will be
good compensation, it's not clear where able to finally develop his rooks while he
W h i t e ' s k i n g w i l l e v e r f i n d s a f e t y .) still has his perfect structure. ]
12...d5?! ( 12...e4 13.g1 a6 14.c3 16...b6
is very messy but again W hite will find [ 16...xc2!? This pawn might be edible now
290
17.c1 g6 18.g5 ( White should probably White picks off the a pawn and now has three
play 18.f3 and play slowly when he has connected passed pawns. Black already could
some compensation for the pawn as it is resign, his own two connected passed pawns
still awkward for Black to develop his final wo n ' t h e l p m u c h . b8 37.c6+ b7
pieces. ) 18...e4 19.b5 ( 19.d5 exd5 38.d4+ a6 39.f1 h6 40.b4 g6
20.xd5 c5 ) 19...a6! 20.c7 a7 41.b5+ b6 42.c3 e5 43.b3 xb5
21.xa6 d6 22.xd6 xd6 23.xc6 Black tries to get rid of all White's pawns as
bxc6 24.xc6+ d8 25.xd6 e7 his best winning try. 44.cxb5 xb5+ 45.b2
26.xd7+ ( 26.c6 e4 ) 26...xd7 ] d6
[ 16...e4! looks like it equalises 17.d3 [ 45...g4 successfully gets rid of the h4
d6= ] pawn 46.xf6+ c7 47.c6+ d8 48.f3
17.0-0-0 e7 18.h4 h5 19.g5 e8 20.f3 xh4 49.e2 h2 50.c2 xa3 51.xa3
Black has to watch out for sacrifices on c6 is of course totally lost but at least might
which he falls for in the game. Black still has force White to show he can remember how
problems developing while W hite has to mate with bishop and knight vs king:) ]
coordinated his pieces well. d6 21.e2 46.d5 e4 47.c1 f5 48.c6+ a7 49.d4
d5 22.e5 c7 23.b3 h7 e3 50.b5+ b8 51.xd6 e2 52.c8+
[ 23...b6 24.c4 e7 25.a1!? with the idea a7 53.c4! A cute finish. b6+ 54.c2
to reroute the knight to c2 and then either to 1-0
e3 or b4 is slightly better for W hite but at
least Black can bring out that a8 rook. ]
24.c4! b6 292 B01
[ 24...e7 25.f4 is also extremely Najer,Evgeniy 2638
unpleasant for Black. ] Kruchev,Boris 2256
25.a5 xe5?! This just makes it worse ch-Rapid Olginka RUS rapid (4) 25.04.2011
[ 25...d7 26.xc7 xc7 might still be [Gawain Jones]
manageable for Black. ]
26.dxe5 d7 27.xc6! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8
[ 27.xd7! i s a l s o v e r y s t r o n g xd7 It's been a while since this queen retreat has
28.xb7 c7 29.a5 White gets two been examined on the site. Generally I've felt
pawns for the exchange while Black's pieces this is solid but non-critical and White should
are still imp ossible to co ordinat e while have various ways to gain an edge due to his
Black's king will also find itself in difficulty. development advantage. However White has
However the game continuation is simpler t o b e c a r e f u l a s if t h e a d va n t a ge o f t h e
and also winning. ] temporary initiative dries up then Black will
27...bxc6 28.xc6 xe5 stand well. 4.d4
[ 28...b8 29.xd7+- is of course totally [ W h i t e c a n a l s o d e l a y d 4 w i t h 4.f3
lost. ] wh ich is t ricky f o r Bla ck t o h an d le . f6
29.xa8 c7 30.g2 d3+ 31.d2 xf2 ( Glek has tried to exploit White's move
32.d4 xh1 33.xh1 so Black has o r d e r w i t h 4...g4 but this looks like it
survived without dropping any material but his should be a comfortable edge for W hite.
rook on h7 is looking decidedly silly while 5.h3 xf3 6.xf3 c6 7.b4!?
White's queenside pawns are extremely fast. is an int erestin g wa y to e xploit Blac k's
f6 missing c8 bishop. a6 8.b1 f6 9.a4 e6
[ 33...h8 34.c6 a6 35.e7+ d8 10.b5 1-0 Gabrielian, A (2520)-Glek, I
36.xg6 fxg6 37.e3+ e7 38.c6 d8 (2560) Moscow 2006. ) 5.c4
39.xd8 xd8 40.d4 e7 41.e5+- A) 5...f5 has been the most common but
W hite is totally dominating, Black has an Black now encounters difficulties following
awful pawn structure and his knight cannot 6.e5! e6 7.f3 when a game from this
move ] year saw Black surviving only a few more
34.c6 e8 35.gxf6 gxf6 36.xa7+ moves.
291
A1) 7...c8 looks best when Rybka axb5 and the position remained highly
suggests 8.h3!? Preparing taking on f7. complex but White ultimately
( 8.xf7? Immediately fails to g4! ) triumphed.;
8...d6 ( 8...xc2?! is far too risky. One C2) 7.d3 This is actually a rare retreat
sample line could continue: 9.d3 b4 but looks a more active square to me.
10.d2 0-0 11.c1 xc3 12.xc3 Black can try and claim that he's gained
a4 13.0-0 bd7 14.xd7 xd7 a tempo with ...a6-b5 but W hite can
15.g3 g6 16.fe1 with a huge counter that he is rather over-extended.
initiative.) 9.xf7 c6 10.xd6+ cxd6 Remember too that Black arguably lost
11.f4 d5 12.b3 0-0 13.0-0 two tempi with ... Qd8-d5-d8. e6 8.g5
and Black appears to have some ( 8.a4!? b4 9.e4 bd7 10.0-0 b7
compensation for the pawn but a pawn 11.e2 looks slightly more comfortable
is still a pawn!; for White to me but fully playable for the
A2) 7...c6? has actually been played second player.) 8...e7 9.e2 b7
m o s t c o m m o n l y b u t n o w 8.xf7+- 10.0-0 0-0 11.fd1 bd7 12.e5
is very strong.; xe5 13.dxe5 d5 14.xd5 xd5?!
A3) 7...d4?! 8.xb7! xe5+ 9.e2 ( 14...xg5= ) 15.e3 b8 16.b3
c6 ( 9...e4 10.xe4 xe4 11.xe4 and White ultimately exploited his extra
xe4 12.f3 is the lesser evil.) 10.d4 couple hundred rating points. Timofeev,
a5 11.f4 b4 12.0-0 0-0 13.c7 A (26 7 7)-Dju kic, N (2 49 5 ) S ara je vo
and Black found his queen 2010. ]
embarrassingly short on squares. bd7 4...c6
14.xa5 xa5 15.xc6 fc8 16.a6 [ U s u a l l y B l a c k s t a r t s w i t h 4...f6
1-0 Tesik, C (2299)-To, N (2340) which seems more flexible to me but likely
Budapest 2011.; to t ra n sp ose t o simila r p o sitio n s . 5.c4
B) 5...e6 is probably safest but White can This looks the most accurate to me. ( 5.f3
usually claim an edge in these positions is more common but this gives Black further
due to the blocked in bishop on c8.; options. ) 5...e6 ( 5...a6 6.f3 transposes
C) 5...a6 Recently this seems to be to 4.Nf3; 5...c6 6.f3 would transpose to
Black's preferred method of exploiting the the game. ) 6.f3 And White should have a
early bishop sortie. 6.d4 b5 definite edge as the bishop is blocked in on
C1) 7.b3 c5 8.a4 ( 8.dxc5 xd1+ c8. One recent game continued: c6 7.0-0
9.xd1 e6 10.a4 1/2-1/2 Papp, G e7 8.f4 0-0 9.e1 a6 10.a3 d5
(2545)-Szabo, G (2568) Szombathely 11.xd5 exd5 12.d3 g4 13.c3 h5
2010 wasn't much of a game but I A n d B la c k h a d d e f e n d e d we ll t o r e a c h
suppose therefore a successful opening almost equality but never succeeded in
by Szabo. ) 8...c4 9.a2 b6 getting quite there and ultimately went down.
Reached an interesting position. The S ve t u s h k i n , D ( 2 5 6 0 ) - O r l o v, A ( 2 5 0 2 )
bishop on a2 is currently totally out of Rethymno 2010. ]
play but the question is whether White, 5.c4 f6 6.f3 f5 If Black has to play ...
by playing actively, can exploit Black's e6 then White can claim an edge due to the
over-extension before he gets round to blocked in bishop on c8 and so this is the
some development. In Getz, N (2333) - critical test. 7.e5 And White continues to go
Djukic, N (2494) Aix-les-Bains 2011 the down the critical line.
young Norwegian succeeded in [ Of course 7.0-0 can also be played but one
defeating the GM from Montenegro but it feels this shouldn't trouble Black unduly. ]
c e r t a in l y wa s n ' t so l e l y d o wn t o t h e 7...e6 8.g4 g6 9.h4 b5?! This hasn't been
opening choice. 10.e5 e6 11.0-0 b7 considered previously and probably for good
12.e3 bd7 13.d5 c5 14.xd7 reason. To me it feels that this is too
xd7 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.h5+ g6 weakening.
17.xc5 xc5 18.h6 0-0-0 19.axb5 [ 9...bd7 was twice the choice of England's
292
number one Mickey Adams, admittedly over correct play I think White has a clear edge.
10 years ago. Here Andrew Martin's 11.xd5 cxd5 ( 11...xd5 12.h5 xc2
suggestion of 10.f3! looks strong, e.g. xe5 13.xc2 f6 14.d3 xf3 15.g1
( 10...c7 was seen in Philippe, C (2360) - is clearly very good for White as observed
Mateuta, G (2435) St Lorrain 2003 but here by Volzhin.) 12.h5 ( This looks a lot more
11.e2! would leave Black with severe reliable than the 12.e2 of Kotronias, V
problems. ) 11.dxe5 d5?! ( 11...d7 (2570) -Candela Perez, J (2430) X Anibal
was necessary but White still has the upper Open, Linares 2003 analysed by Andrew
ha n d a f t e r 12.h5 xe5 13.b3 xd1+ Martin. ) 12...f6 13.hxg6 fxe5 14.gxh7
14.xd1 xh5 15.xh5 xf3 16.e3 B1) V o l z h i n o n l y l o o k s a t 14...c7
d8+ 17.e2 d4+ 18.f2 as with so giving the line 15.d2 c6! ( 15...exd4
many pieces left on the board a piece is 16.e2 xd2+ 17.xd2 c6 18.0-0-0
worth more than three pawns.) 12.xd5 e5 19.f4!+- ) 16.dxe5 g6 17.b5
exd5 13.h5 d4 14.hxg6 dxc3 15.xd8+ xe5+ 18.e2 xb2 19.xe6+ e7
xd8 16.xh7 ( 16.gxh7!? ) 16...cxb2 but here the computer observes White
17.xb2 g8 18.gxf7+ xf7 19.f4 can improve over 20.Nc7+ with 20.e2!
saw White with a clear extra pawn. Hanley, xc2 21.d6+ xd6 22.xd6 d8
C (2322) -Vujatovic, R (2249) Hastings 23.e5 f7 24.ac1 xa2 25.c7+-
2004. ] with a decisive advantage.;
[ 9...b4 has been the most common and B2) 14...e7 15.dxe5 c6
covered a few times on this site before but Prokopchuk, E (2520)-Lopez Martinez, J
th is wh o le line h a s ra t h e r f a lle n o u t o f (2468) Moscow 2005 when continuing in
fashion. I've had a look with newer the same spirit with 16.d2 followed by
computer analysis. 10.f3! This looks critical. Q e 2 a n d 0 - 0 - 0 g i ve s W h i t e a c l e a r
W h it e t h re a t e n s h 5 t r a p p in g t h e B la c k edge. ]
bishop. ( 10.h3!? is looked at by Volzhin in 10.b3 b4 11.f3! We've seen this idea
Ponomariov, R (2550)-Garcia Ilundain, D before. Black cannot retain his light squared
(2520) Pamplona 1996 ) bishop and doesn't even have ...Bxc2 ideas to
A) The computer advises Black to try his complicate the position. d5 12.xd5 cxd5
lu c k wi t h t h e p ie ce sa cr i f i c e 10...xc2 [ 12...xd5 13.h5 f6 14.hxg6 fxe5 15.d2
although this is condemned by Volzhin. A) 15...xd4 16.e2 ( 16.gxh7!? )
11.xc2 xd4 12.e2!? ( 12.f4 16...h6 17.0-0-0 leaves White with a
is recommended by Volzhin and should strong attack.;
g i v e W h i t e a s m a l l e d g e a f t e r bd7 B) 15...xc3 16.xc3 h6 17.dxe5
13.xd7 xg4! 14.b3 xd7 15.d2 and Black has no compensation for the
but Black still has three pawns for the pawn. ]
piece. ) 13.h5 f6 14.hxg6 fxe5 15.dxe5
A1) 12...b5?! was given as an [ 15.gxh7 looks even stronger when Black is
improvement but here W hite has the a pawn down and has nothing to show for it.
shot 13.xf7! xc3+ 14.f1 0-0 True the position is complex but I struggle to
15.xe6 xf7 ( 15...a5 16.e3! s e e p o s i t i v e s i n B l a c k ' s c a m p . c7!?
and the queen ha s actually becom e ( 15...c6 16.dxe5 xc3+ 17.bxc3 xe5
trapped. ) 16.bxc3 leaves White with a 18.e3 f6 19.f4 c4 20.d3 ) 16.d2
material advantage.; ( 16.f2!? ) 16...exd4 17.xb5 g3+
A2) 12...xc3+ 13.bxc3 xc3+ 14.f2 18.f1 xd2 19.xd2 xf3+ 20.g1
xa1 15.d1 c3 16.b2 b4 xg4+ 21.g2 xg2+ 22.xg2 a6
17.xf7! with a decisive attack. Perez, L 23.xd4 c5 24.c4 and Black has
(2459)-Lopez Martinez, J (2465) managed to survive to a materially level
Varadero 2000.; ending but is extremely passive and I have
B) 10...d5 This is Volzhin's suggestion a feeling that the h7 pawn should win the
in the archives and more common but with day. ]
293
15...c6 24.xh4 xg6 25.a3 d7 26.axb4 e5

[ 15...h6 was necessary, at least to prevent 27.h1 f8 28.h8+ f7 29.xf8+ xf8
White having a passed pawn on the seventh 30.h5 f6 31.xe5 a6 32.e1 d4 33.g5
but of c ourse W h ite is still on top af te r These lines with 7. Ne5 and 8.g4 are complex
16.d2 i.e. xc3 17.xc3 g5 18.e2 but White looks to have great chances.
0-0 19.d2 xg6 20.xb5 xf3 1-0
21.0-0-0 ]
16.d2
[ Again 16.gxh7 was strong transposing to 293 B01
15...gxh7. ] Nevednichy,Vladislav 2576
16...e7 Afek,Yochanan 2316
[ 16...xc3 17.xc3 h6 should have been 5th Open La Fere FRA (6) 12.07.2006
played when at least Black is only a pawn [Eric Prié]
down although the natural line 18.f4 0-0
19.f3 e8 20.0-0-0 xg6 21.f5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
leaves White with a very dangerous attack f6 5.f3 e4?! 6.d3! In this line it is
and completely safe king. ] clear that moves like 6.Bd2?! (or 6.Qd3?) will
17.xh7 h4+ 18.f1 0-0 19.h5 a l wa ys m a k e t h i s v a r i a t i o n l o o k a l m o s t
White has an extra two pawns and as long as playable for Black. The question then may be:
he's careful should be able to convert the win. what is the point of proposing such games
b4 20.a4 when Black has been consistently crushed all
[ 20.b5 i s a b e t t e r s q u a r e a s a6 year long when faced with this critical move?
can be met with 21.g2! axb5 22.h1 To draw a red herring across the trail of chess
xe5 23.g5! xg6 24.xd8 xd8 Truth? This is hardly going to stop people
25.e1 with a large material advantage. ] from playing this refutation, you can take my
20...e8! A good practical try. word for it. xc3 7.bxc3 g6 8.0-0 g7
[ 20...c8 is the computer's top suggestion 9.e1 c6 A Novelty. 10.h3!?
but 21.c3 bxc3 22.xc3 leaves Black with [ 10.d2 g4 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 0-0
very little to show for his material deficit. ] May have been the idea behind it ...
21.g2! Najer declines the piece, a good a l t h o u g h e ve n t h i s d o e s n o t lo o k v e r y
practical decision in rapid chess. promising after ( 12...xd4? 13.cxd4 xd2
[ 21.xh4 Suddenly allows Black's pieces to 14.b5+ c6 15.xc6+ ) 13.ad1! e5
become active although objectively White is ( 13...xa2? 14.a1 b2 15.eb1 ) 14.d5
s t ill b e t t e r. Ho we ve r t h e f o llo win g lin e e7 15.c4 a4 16.c3 ]
indicates some of Black's chances: xe5 [ 10.b1!? ]
22.h3 xg6 23.f4 ac8 24.g1 c4! 10...f5 In order to profit from the move order,
25.b3 d4 26.e2 e4 27.g2 exf4 it is now or ... a lot later, as illustrated by
28.xf4 xf4 29.h1 xg4 30.f3 h6+ the next games. 11.b1! xd3
31.g1 xf3 32.xf3 h2+ 33.f1 h4 [ 11...0-0-0 12.b5 xa2 Practice suggests
and Black looks to be holding the draw. ] it is not very wise to open two files
21...xe5? But this knight was necessary to o p p o s i t e o n e ' s o w n k i n g . . . ( 12...xc3?
crea te pro ble ms in W hit e's ca mp so this 13.b2 )]
sacrifice is unsound. 12.xd3 0-0-0 Castling 'coffin side'?! Or else,
[ 21...e7! was best and would force White how to defend b7?
t o f i n d a c c u r a t e m o ve s t o s u r e u p h i s [ 12...b8 13.d5 d8 ( 13...d8 14.d6;
advantage 22.xh4 xg6 23.h2! xa4 13...xc3 14.b5 ) 14.b5 xa2
24.c4! d7 25.c2 f7 26.f4 ] ( 14...a6 15.c4 a5 16.xc7 xb5
22.xe5 xa4 23.h5! f6 17.xe7# ) 15.e4 xc3 16.dxc6 xe1
[ 23...f6? a l l o w s m a t e w i t h 24.h8+ 17.cxb7 0-0 18.xe1 ]
so Black is forced to give up the piece with 13.c4 e6
absolutely zero compensation. ] [ 13...d5 14.a4 a5 15.xa5 xa5
294
16.xe7 ] pleasant game.;

14.b5 a6 15.f4 d7? A2) 10.d5 Committal. White forces
[ 15...d5! 16.a4 hd8 17.eb1 ( 17.g5 Black's knight to move again but leaves
f5 18.xf7 xf7 19.xe6+ dd7 ) the c5 square vulnerable. b4 11.0-0
17...8d7 And there is no direct win in sight c5 12.e3 b6 13.d4 was a little
for White since 18.d2? allows xd4! ] better for White. I'll leave the rest of the
16.eb1 a5? game as it was a nicely played game by
[ 16...d5 17.g5! f8 ( 17...f5 18.xf7 the young Pole. d7 14.b3 ba6
xf7 19.xe6+ d7 20.xb7; 17...xd4 15.f3 b8 16.axb6 axb6 17.xc5
18.cxd4 xd4 19.c3 xf4 20.xh8+ ) xc5 18.a7 f5 19.b5 xb2
18.e4+- F o l l o w e d b y N c 5 . a5? 20.g5 ( 20.f4! ) 20...b7 21.a2
19.xc7# ] e5 22.e1 d6 23.h6 e8 24.d4
[ 16...h6 17.d2! ] f6 25.ae2 d7? ( 25...b8 26.g4
[ For all the tactical hints given above d7 ) 26.g4! Suddenly the bishop's
16...e8! Then was the most stubborn. trapped e5 27.xe5 xe5 28.xe5
17.b3 b6 18.c4 b7 ] c8 29.e3 b8 30.f4 b7 31.g3
17.d3 c6 Realizing the unavoidable d7 32.d6! c6 33.dxe7 xe7 34.xc6
nature of the capture on b7 a bit late. 1-0 Swiercz-Savchenko, Budva 2009;
[ 17...c6 18.xb7 xb7 19.a6!! xa6 B) 8...c5 9.dxc5 ( I prefer 9.d5
20.b8# ] k e e p i n g t h e b i n d o n t h e q u e e n s i d e .)
18.xb7 xd3 19.cxd3 f6 20.d5! 9...xc3+ ( 9...0-0!? 10.e3 xc3+
[ 20.d5 exd5 21.d4 ] 11.bxc3 c7 looks double-edged. Black
1-0 will be better if she completes
development so White needs to go for an
attack against the exposed Black king
294 B01 12.d4 c6 13.h4 f6; 9...a6!? )
Ni Hua 2657 10.bxc3 xc5 11.xd8+ xd8 12.e3
Muzychuk,Anna 2523 ba6 and Black didn't really have anything
Corus B Wijk aan Zee NED (6) 22.01.2010 to f ea r and went o n to win in Dembo -
[Gawain Jones] Muzychuk, Kusadasi 2006 0-1(57) ]
7.c3
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g6 [ 7.c5 Immediately has also been tried but it
5.c4 b6 6.a4!? A new move for the site. gives Black additional options d5 8.c4
White decides he'd prefer having a4 and a5 A) 8...g7 has been played more often
thrown in. On the downside it gives Black the when 9.Nc3 would be a direct
b4 square potentially but it also makes the transposit ion to the game while 9.b3
thematic b6 break harder to achieve for Black is the other way to play for White
as she will be forced to recapture with the c A1) 9...e6 10.c3 ( 10.g5
pawn rather than the preferred a pawn. a5 was played in Real de Azua-Luconi,
[ Ann a trie d 6...g7 last time she reached Mendoza 2008 1-0 (30) but instead of
this position but I feel White should be able 10...f6 I'd prefer e7 not weakening the
to get the advantage without too much effort kingside squares.) 10...c6 11.0-0
here. 7.a5 6d7 8.c3 ( 11.xd5 seems to lead to a long
A) 8...0-0 was tried by Boris Savchenko, a forcing line exd5 12.xd5 0-0 13.0-0
high rated Grandmaster recently 9.e2 g4 14.g5 xd4 15.xf7 xb3
c6 16.xd8+ h8 17.f7+ xf7 18.xb3
A1) A case could be made f o r 10.0-0 e7 which nets White a pawn but gives
when after Black's only logical break e5 B l a c k ve ry go o d d ra wi n g ch a n c e s .)
11.g5 f6 ( 11...f6 12.e3 ) 12.xf6 11...0-0 12.d1 ce7 13.g5
xf6 13.b5 exd4 14.xc7 b8 Gave W hite a comfortable advantage
15.d5 g7 16.b4 gives White a and Black's bid for counterplay with f6
295
14.h4 g5 15.g3 h5 16.h3 g4 b6 Muzychuk decides to play this despite

17.hxg4 hxg4 18.e1 c6 19.d6 f5 having to recapture with the c pawn.
20.xd5 exd5 21.e2 f6 22.d3 [ The other option would be 11...f5 12.e3
g6 23.df4 xf4 24.xf4 h6 8c6 ( 12...c2 13.c1 xe3 14.fxe3
25.g3 didn't improve matters for him Gains Black the two bishops but White has
Le k ic -Jo van o vic, He rce g Novi 2 0 0 6 a big centre now and attacking chances
1-0(65); d o w n t h e f f i l e .) 13.d5 ( 13.c1
A2) 9...c6 10.c3 0-0 11.0-0 is also possible slowly building up when it's
( 11.xd5 taking the pawn is also unclear what the bishop is doing on f5.)
p o s s i b l e h e r e cxd5 12.xd5 c6 13...e5 14.xe5 xe5 15.h6 e8
13.e3 g4 14.0-0 ) 11...b4 16.e2 f6 17.ad1 gives White a
has been seen in a couple of games and pleasant space advantage. ]
looks promising for W hite but Qb3 so 12.cxb6 cxb6 13.g5 This is a useful square
early isn't necessary and he might find for the bishop. Not only does it put pressure
the queen has a better square.; on e7, it also means that it will be harder for
B) 8...c6 9.0-0 I'd prefer 9.Nc3 Black to utilise the d5 square. a6 14.b5
tran sp os in g b ack in to t h e ga me style Of course W hite would prefer not to trade
position. g7 10.c3 cb4 11.e1 e6 bishops but to keep as many pieces on the
12.b3 ( 12.xe6! looks like a thematic board as possible. The d4 pawn will become
sacrifice ruining Black's pawn structure wea ker with eve ry exchan ge. Me anwhile
and significantly weakening his king fxe6 White will want to put pressure on the e7 and
13.g5 d7 14.g4 when White will f7 pawns. d7 15.b3 f6
pick up a pawn for the exchange too and [ 15...c8 16.fe1 f6 17.e5 is rather
ha ve go o d co m p e n sa t io n .) 12...0-0 similar to the game. ]
13.g5 f5 and Black had at least 16.e5 fd5 17.fe1 b7 On the surface,
equalised, It's important for White not to Black can be fairly happy with her opening
allow Black to set up his knight on the d5 sh e 's m an a ge d t ot a l co nt ro l o ver t h e d 5
outpost while 14.xd5 xd5 15.xd5?! square thanks to the b4 outpost which keeps
xd5 16.xe7 cannot be advised as e7 and f7 adequate defended. However Black
B l a c k c o u l d p l a y t h e s i m p l e d8 is a little passive and it's unclear how she
gives Black a clear advantage as he's improves her position much. She wants to
regaining the pawn on d4 when White will exchange as many pieces as possible, a
regret his queenside pawn pushes. perfect endgame would be a knight on d5
( Instead in the game Mader-Tomczak, against the dark squared bishop. W hite on
Neuhausen 2007 Black played 16...f6 the other hand has more space and the d4
which was also strong and he converted in pawn is useful at the moment and so White
32 moves. )] needs to hold on to the initiative and attack!
7...g7 8.c5 d5 9.c4 b4 18.d2 e6 19.ac1 c8 20.g3 e7
Perhaps Black should transpose into the [ 20...e7 Trying to reroute that knight to f5
previous notes with 9...c6 or 9...e6 and the other from b4 to d5 would be a
[ 9...xc3 looks too obliging this is exactly sound strategic plan but unfortunately it fails
th e p awn s tru ct ure W h it e is a im in g f o r tactically to 21.xf7! xf7 22.xe6 xc1
10.bxc3 0-0 11.0-0 h6 12.c2 e6 23.xc1 d5 24.xf7+ xf7 25.g5
13.f4 1-0 Szabo-Malmdin, Caleta 2009 Leaves White with rook and two pawns for
(42) ] the two pieces which in itself is not so bad
10.0-0 0-0 but his king is in a lot of danger while 26.Rc7
[ Black cannot play 10...g4? immediately i s a b i g t h r e a t bc6 stops that but now
as it falls for the well known trick 11.xf7+ W hite has a choice either to keep the
xf7 12.g5++- ] pressure on or swap off into a favourable
11.h3 And now Ni Hua prevents Black e n d ga m e wi t h 26.d6+ g8 27.xc6!
developing the bishop to the ideal g4 square xc6 28.b3+ d5 29.xd5+ xd5
296
30.xd8 xd4 31.b3 Should probably be 33.c7 Black now has a bind in the middle
winning for White although Black has some of the board but at the cost of too much
chances to hold. ] material f8 ( 33...e8 34.d7 e1+
21.h4! The more I look at this game however, 35.h2+- ) 34.e7+- with the threat of Rc7 ]
the more difficult it appears for Black to come 30.d6! xd6
u p wi t h a n y a c t i v e p l a n . h6 22.g4! [ 30...3f4 31.f7+ g8 32.e4+- ]
Forcing Black to relinquish control over g5 31.xd6 xc1 32.xd5 e2+ 33.h2
and further weakening his kingside. h5 xd5 34.xd5 And so after a fairly forced
[ 22...h7 would be the other option when line, White's swapped off material and h5 is
23.d6 cd8 24.xb7 xb7 25.h5 g5 falling by force when the connected three
26.f3 leaves Black under unpleasant passed pawns on the kingside will decide.
pressure. ] Black has no passed pawn of her own and
23.e5 f6?! thus no counterplay. xd4 35.xh5+ g8
[ 23...h7 is probably necessary to stop the 36.d5+ h7 37.e4+ g8 38.h5 c6
dark square infiltration which occurs in the 39.f4 e6 40.d5 h7 41.g4 e2+
game. Black needs to play very accurately to 42.h3 e3+ 43.g2 e6 44.f5+ g8
hold and against such a good attacking 45.g5 f8 46.d5+ h8 47.f7 e6
player as Ni Hua she's in deep trouble. ] 48.h6
24.h6! fd8 1-0
[ 24...xh4 h a d t o b e t r i e d 25.xg6!
( 25.xf8 xf8 isn't at all clear, White no
longer has an attack.) 25...fxg6 ( 25...xg3 295 B01
26.xe7+ xe7 27.xf8 xf2+ 28.xf2 Ni Hua 2641
xf8 29.h1 is extremely unpleasant for Tiviakov,Sergei 2643
Black. Compared to the previous variation 50th It Reggio Emilia ITA (5) 02.01.2008
Black's kingside pawns are shattered and [John Watson]
B l a c k d o e s n ' t h a ve t h e b i sh o p p a ir a s
compensation.) 26.xg6+ h8 27.xf8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
xf8 28.xh5+ g7 ( 28...h7 29.xh7+ f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.f4 d5
xh7 30.g3 g5 31.f4 f6 32.xe6 8.xd5 xd5 This month's other
and White has too many pawns.) 29.e5+ Scandinavian game went 8...Nxe5 at this point,
f6 30.g3 g5 31.f4 xf4!? ( 31...xe5 without success. The queen recapture is
32.xe5 f6 33.xe6 again gives White surely preferable. 9.f3! Whether this is the
rook and three pawns for the 2 pieces which very best move or not, it is clear and logical,
should be more than enough.) 32.gxf4 xf4 emphasising W hite's space advantage. For
33.xf6+ xf6 34.c3 with the reduced alternatives, see Gashimov-Tiviakov. f6
number of pawns and some kingside activity 10.e2 g4 11.0-0 e6 12.h3 xf3
Black has good chances to hold the draw. ] [ 12...h5 13.c4 a5 14.a3 prepares a
25.xg6! Crashing through fxg6 26.xg6+ q u e e n s i d e a t t a c k a n d p r e v e n t s 0-0-0?
h8 27.xe6! Ni Hua doesn't miss the due to 15.g4 g6 16.b4 a6 17.c5 b5
chance. xe6 28.g7+ xg7 29.xe6 18.a4 ( or 18.cxb6 xb6 19.e5 )]
So after a forced line we've reached a 13.xf3 d7 We've arrived at the standard ...
position where W hite has queen and three e6/ ...c6 restraint structure that comes up so
pawns for rook, bishop and knight which is often in the Scandinavian (and Slav, and
roughly balanced. However Black's king is still Caro-Kann). W hite h as a healt hy lead in
vulnerable and the h5 pawn looks like it will development, however, and that should make
drop while Nd6 is an awkward threat to meet a difference. It's not clear if he handles the
so White has a big advantage. d3 position so well over the next few moves.
[ 29...f4 is the computer's top choice trying 14.c4 Committal.
to solve Black's problems tactically but after [ Also possible is just 14.e1 d6 15.e5
30.f7 bd3 31.c3 xc4 32.xc4 d5 , when 0-0 16.xf6 gxf6 17.d2 g7
297
18.e4 f5 19.h4 f4 20.c3 f6 21.e1 35.e4 a6?

looks advantageous (compare the next [ A pretty line is 35...g6 36.d2! g7
note). ] 37.xh6+! xh6 38.xg6 xg6 39.f6! ]
14...d6 15.g5 36.xg7+! xg7 37.g4+ g6 38.xg6
[ 15.e5!? ] f8 39.h7 d7 40.g8+ e7 41.g6
15...e7 1-0
[ After 15...0-0 , I don't think that White gets
mu c h f ro m 1 6 B xf 6 gxf 6 , b u t t h e m o ve
16.d5!? could lead to a better version: cxd5 296 B01
( 16...exd5 17.xf6 gxf6 18.cxd5 Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter 2693
and the f-pawns are weak) 17.xf6 gxf6 Prie,Eric 2467
18.cxd5 e5!? (intending ...f5) 19.d2 f5 TCh-Top 16 Gp A (4) 30.03.2006
20.fe1 ] [Andrew Martin]
16.b3 0-0 17.fd1 fd8 18.f4 a5 19.a3
a4 20.c2 d6 21.g5 e7 It is rare to see Eric Prié smashed in his
[ 21...e7 is probably equal. The idea 22.d5 favourite variation although it happens to us
cxd5 23.xf6 xf6 24.cxd5 is usually all occasionally. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
harmless, here because of exd5 25.xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5
ac8 ] 7.d2 e6 8.e4 b6
22.d3 h6 23.d2 a6 24.e1 c7 [ I presume after 8...d8 Nisipeanu would
25.b4 d7!? have played 9.g3! ]
[ 25...d6 ] [ I prefer 8...c7 when some analysis from
26.ed1 d6 27.c3 c7 28.d5! Finally. my own book 'The Essential Centre-Counter',
cxd5 29.cxd5 e5? This pawn becomes a de mo nstrat e s th at B lack is O K : 9.xf6+
target. gxf6 10.e2 ( 10.c3 d7 11.e2 0-0-0
[ 29...exd5 30.xd5 xd5 31.xd5 h2+ 12.h4 g6 13.g3 c5!; 10.h4 g6
32.h1 xd5 33.xd5 leaves White the 11.f3 d7 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.g3 d6= )
better bishop. Whether that can be exploited 10...d7 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 12.h4 g6
is not clear. A sample line might be d6 Reaching a critical position. 13.g3 ( 13.c3
(versus g3) 34.d3 f6 35.e4 ( 35.h4 f8 b6 14.b3 c5 15.xg6 hxg6 16.dxc5
36.e2 ) 35...e7 36.g4 ] xc5 17.g3 c6 18.f3 d5=; 13.b3 c5!
30.e3 aa8 31.f5 e8 32.de1 d7 14.d5 b6 15.xg6 hxg6 16.a5 exd5
33.h5!? 17.xd5 f5 18.f3 g7 19.c3 d7= )
[ 33.e4!? f6! ( 33...g6 34.g3 f8 13...b6 14.a5 h6+ 15.b1 d6! 16.f4
35.h5 g7 36.d2 ) 34.g3 e7 35.d2 hd8 gives Black a coherent game. Why did
f8 36.c1 with control of the c-file, since Prié not go into this line, when he must
d7 37.xd7 ( 37.xh6!? xf5 38.xg7+ surely have known this analysis? Perhaps
e7 39.xf5 h5 is unclear) 37...xd7 he f e a re d h o me p re p a ra t ion , o r a s t h e
38.gc3 f6 39.f3! keeps the edge. ] featured game shows, he had the instinct to
33...f8?! try something new and to take a risk. ]
[ B e t t e r t o e n t e r t h e e n d i n g b y 33...f6 9.xf6+ gxf6 10.e2 xb2 11.0-0 xc2
34.xe5 xe5 35.xe5 xe5 36.xe5 Once he has committed himself with 8...Qb6,
xe5 37.xe5 xh5 38.xh5 d8 he has to take the pawns. 12.fe1
39.h4! ] [ White is relying on moves such as 12.d5
34.g3 e7?! possibly combined with Nh4 to make his
[ But 34...g6 35.e4 with the idea Bxg6 and sacrifices work, but here cxd5 13.xd5 d3
Reg4 is tough to meet. ] 14.e1 c7 enables Black to escape with
[ Best may be 34...d7 35.f6 g6 36.xe5 his extra booty. ]
xe5 37.xe5 xe5 38.xe5 with the idea 12...d7 Prié misses his opportunity!
e8 39.d4 e1+ 40.h2 b5 41.f3 [ After 12...a3! covering c1, White may not
f1 42.g4 ] have enough compensation for the pawns:
298
13.d5 ( 13.h4 d7 14.d5 cxd5 15.xd5 threatens to take on e7 with the bishop and
d3 16.e3 c5 17.f4 b2 18.ac1; t h e n o n c 5 w i t h t h e s a m e p i e c e . c6
13.ad1 d7 14.d5 cxd5 15.xd5 0-0-0 ( 11...f6 12.xf6 exf6 13.d2 g4
16.d4 d3 ) 13...cxd5 14.xd5 c6 14.f4 xf3 15.xf3 d7 16.xb7;
15.b5 ( 15.xc6+ xc6 16.d4 d5 11...e6 12.e7 e8 13.xc5 xc3
17.b5 0-0-0! 18.f4 d3 ) 15...0-0 14.b1 ) 12.d5 This is the problem with
16.b3 d3 It is very hard to evaluate such having the c5-pawn interrupting the queen's
lines at the board, for even a Grandmaster. control of this square. c4 13.dxc6 ( 13.f1
But put it this way: for the future of 8...Qb6, d8 ) 13...cxd3 14.xe7 xc3 ( 14...e8
12...Ba3 has to work! ] 15.b4 )]
13.ac1N 11...e8 12.c4 c6 13.d5 d8
[ 13.d5 cxd5 14.xd5 d3 15.xd3 xd3 [ 13...b5 14.d3 d8 15.c4 b4 16.e5 ]
16.xb7 b8 17.c6 b5 18.xb5 xb5 14.b1 d7
19.ac1 c5 20.e3 e7 21.xc5+ xc5 [ 14...a6! 15.d6 e6 ]
22.d4 hc8 23.b1 b6 24.f4 a5 15.e5 a4 16.f3! f8
25.b2 c4 26.d2 d5 27.ed1 a4 [ 16...xc2 17.b5 ]
was unconvincing for White. Bloemhard, R- [ 16...c8 17.d6 e6 18.d7 ]
Remmel, T/ Dieren 2000 ] 17.d3 c8 18.c4 c7 19.g5 e6 20.d6
13...b2 14.h4! From here on in, Nisipeanu d7 21.e7 e8 22.e5 xe5 23.xe5
plays extremely well. By decoying the Bishop xe7
he softens e6. g6 15.xe6 0-0-0 [ 23...c6 24.f6 xd6 ( 24...xe5
[ Naturally 15...fxe6 loses: 16.xe6+ d8 25.xe5 f5 26.xb7 ) 25.h5 e5 ( 25...f8
17.a5+ b6 18.xg6 hxg6 19.xc6+- ] 26.g3 e5 27.h4 e6 28.xh7 xf6
16.xd7+ xd7 29.h8+ g7 30.h6# )]
[ 16...xd7 17.xg6 hxg6 18.b1 24.dxe7 xe7 25.b5 xb5 26.xb5 b6
is simple enough. ] 27.b1 c6 28.ee1 g7 29.bd1 c7
17.e8+ d8 18.xc6+! Black is dead meat. 30.d3 f6 31.g3 e7 32.h4 h5
bxc6 19.xc6+ b8 20.f4+ d6 33.ed1 f8 34.f4 g7 35.d6 g8
21.xd6+ xd6 22.xd6+ a8 23.xg6 36.e4 e8 37.a4 g7 38.f3 e7?
fxg6 24.xf6 c8 25.e6 b7 26.d5+ [ 38...c8 39.d7 ]
b8 27.g3 A challenging game for Centre- [ 38...h7 ]
Counter fans, but Black need not play 8...Qb6 39.xc6 e8 40.dd6 xc6 41.xc6
and even if he does, there might be 12...Ba3 W hat amazes me in this saga is that there
to fall back on. seem to be such a weariness with the burden
1-0 of computerized theory nowadays that even
titled players are ready to accept anything
and even give the highly suspect 5...Ne4 a try
297 B01 in a serious game, just to emancipate
Palliser,Richard 2413 themselves from its tyranny. Unfortunately,
Majer,Christopher 1991 'one swallow does not make a summer', when
Monarch Assurance Isle of Man (3) 25.09.06 no t e sta b lish ed on so lid last in g o p en in g
[Eric Prié] principles.
1-0
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
f6 5.f3 e4?! 6.d3! xc3 7.bxc3 g6
8.0-0 g7 9.d2 0-0 10.e1 c5 Black is
desperately striving to improve on 10...Nc6 as
in the next game but it seems to just make
things worse. 11.h3!?
[ 11.xe7?! c6 12.e1 g4 ]
[ 11.g5! The inconvenience of ...c5. White
299
298 B01 2004 ]

Pavlogianni,Despina 1964 15.dxe5 d5 16.d2 0-0-0 17.f4?
Makropoulou,Marina 2246 Putting another pawn on a dark square seems
TCh Aghia Pelagia GRE (1) 04.07.2004 wrong. Maybe he should settle for
[Andrew Martin] [ 17.d1 d7 18.g3 when White might be
a little better although the Black Knight on
No w I t h i n k I wo u l d l i k e t o sh o w yo u a n d5 is very strong. ]
interesting possibility for Black in the main line 17...g6 18.g4 h5! 19.f5 hxg4 20.fxg6 fxg6
which is not often played. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 21.xg4 xe5 22.xg6 f5 Our light
xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6 5.f3 f6 squared theme persists all the way through
6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.e2 b4 9.0-0-0 the book. 23.g1 e4! 24.e1 xe1+
bd7 10.a3 xc3 11.xc3 c7 12.e5 25.xe1 e5 26.f2
b5!? Wahls thinks very highly of this move, a [ 26.h4 h5 27.f2 e4 28.g3 a5
sharper alternative to the usual is certainly better for Black but maybe not
[ 12...xe5 13.dxe5 d5 ] much. ]
13.d3 26...a6 27.h4 h5 28.e1 f8 29.g3 ff5
[ After 13.b3 Black appears to get a very 30.d2 d7 31.de2 e6 The poor White
good game by stationing his Bishop on d5 e. Bishop is almost redundant. 32.d2 b6
g. e4! 14.he1 ( 14.f3 d5; 14.b1 a6 33.b3 d7 34.f2 f3 35.g1 f6
15.he1 d5 ) 14...d5! It's crucial that the 36.g3??
tactics aren't working f or W hite: 15.xf7 [ 36.e1 escapes the tactics but the
( 15.xd5 xd5 16.xf7 f4+ ) 15...xf7 uncomfortable endgame pressure persists
16.xd5 exd5 17.e7+ g6 18.d3 after hf5! ]
he8! 19.g3+ xg3-+ ] 36...xf2 Crushing. 37.xf2 e4+ 38.e3
13...xd3 xg3 39.f8 f5+ Black didn't seem in
[ There's also 13...0-0 which Wahls favours. trouble at any stage. Certainly I will be trying
W hite can double Black's pawns but he 12... b5 myself. The further manoeuvre ... Be4-
does not achieve anything in particular by d5 is rather nifty! My new book, 'The Essential
doing so: 14.xf5 exf5 15.f3 d5 Ce n t re-Co u n te r' will b e p u b lish e d in t h e
16.xf5 xc3 autumn of2004
A) 17.xd7 xd1 18.xf8 xf8 0-1
19.xd1 ( 19.xd1 xh2= ) 19...d8!
20.e4 c5 21.d5 c6! 22.e1 xd5+
23.xd5 xd5+=; 299 B01
B) 17.bxc3 b6 18.d3 e7 19.b2 Perelshteyn,Eugene 2526
ac8 when Black has obviously good Gonzalez,Ren 2470
attacking chances. ] Masters Las Vegas USA (7) 13.06.2006
14.xd3 Not everyone will like the idea of [Eric Prié]
bringing the White Rook into play on the third
rank. xe5 But it's clear that his idea is to 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
Hoover the pieces of f and go into a good f6 5.f3 e4?! 6.d3! xc3 7.bxc3 g6
Knight vs Bad Bishop scenario. I feel White 8.0-0 g7 9.e1 0-0 10.d2 It is also
has to react energetically and probe Black's possible to play this move earlier as in the
Kingside before all the possible middlegame/ next game. e8? 11.b1! An excellent move
endgame squeezes take over. not only because it mobilizes the last White
[ 14...d5 is a second move worth piece before her majesty, usefully along an
co n s id era t io n : 15.d2 xe5 16.xe5 open file, but also because it enables White
xe5 17.dxe5 c5 18.g3 g8 19.c4 bxc4 to freely set his central mass in motion after
20.g4 b6 21.d1 0-0-0 22.e3 d5 removing the rook from a1. This is the only
23.xd5 exd5 24.xc5 d7= opening at Master level where White can be
Abhay,T-Murali Krishnan,B/Chennai IND lucky enough to get such a massive lead in
300
development, with each of his pieces active popular nowadays and it's not easy for White
and ideally posted, in return for the to prove an advantage. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5
opponent's laughable joy at having "sprung a xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4 f6 5.f3
surprise"! d7 [ In the classic game Fischer-Addison, Palma
[ 11...xa2 12.e5 Forces Black to part de Mallorca 1970 W hite pref erred 5.c4
with the sole defender of his castle unless and Black immediately committed serious
d7 13.c4+- ] mistake: f5? ( 5...c6 should be played,
[ 11...c6 and after 6.f3 f5 the game would
A) 12.c4!? h6 13.d5 ( 13.c1 g4 t r a n s p o s e t o t h e m a i n l in e .) 6.f3!
14.e2 ) 13...d8 14.b3; E x p l o i t i n g B l a c k ' s i n a c c u r a c y . c8
B) 12.c1!?; (wh a t e lse ? ) 7.g5! xc2 8.c1 g6
C) 12.a4! a6 13.e4 ( 13.c4!? h5 9.ge2 For the cost of only one pawn White
14.c3 e5 15.e4 f5 16.xb7 xe4 has an overwhelming development
17.xe4 exd4 18.xe8+ xe8 19.xc7 ) advantage and the active position of all his
13...d5 14.c4 d8 15.d5 b8 pieces that makes Black's defence
16.e2 Isn't Black's position comic?! ] extremely hard. bd7 10.0-0 e6 11.xf6
12.c4! Game over. h5 gxf6 ( 11...xf6 is hardly better in view
[ 12...a6 13.c3 xa2 14.a1 b2 12.d5! e5 13.b5! with a growing
15.a4 ] initiative.) 12.d5! e5 13.b5 e7 14.g3
[ 12...xa2 13.c1 a4 14.c5 c6 a6 15.d3! By exchanging light-squared
15.b5 f6 16.g5 f5 17.d3 d5 Bishops White obtains firm control over the
( 17...g4 18.e4 ) 18.c4 c6 19.e4 key f5-square. d8 16.h4 h5 17.f5 b6
a6 20.a1 e6 21.d5! Stronger than 18.ce4 xd5 19.fd1 c6 20.c3 b6
the 'got you!' 21.Bxb7 which would allow the 21.xd5 cxd5 22.xd5 xb2 23.b1
black queen to die with honour. f5 22.c6 xa2 24.xb7 and Black resigned. ]
bxc6 23.xc6 b8 24.xa7+- ] 5...c6
13.e4! g5 Unfortunately for Black, this is the [ Black has also tried 5...g4?! , but this
only move. move is weaker: 6.h3 h5 7.g4 g6
[ 13...f6 14.g4 h3 15.f1 ] 8.e5 e6 9.g2! c6 10.0-0 bd7 11.e2
14.xg5 f5 15.xe7 xe7 16.xe7 xe5 12.dxe5 d7 13.e4 h5 14.f4
W hite has good compensation for his two hxg4 15.hxg4 a5 16.ad1 0-0-0 17.a3
extra pawns, thus the prolongation of this e7 18.d6+ xd6 19.xd6 b6 20.c4
game, f rom the B lack point of view, only with a huge edge for White, Chandler-Santo
destined to lessen the ridiculousness of his Roman, Cannes 1992. ]
aborted ambush, does not entail any interest. 6.c4 f5 7.e5! This move is the only way
b6 17.h4 xd1+ 18.xd1 f4 19.f5 b7 to fight for any real opening advantage.
20.g5 f3 21.xg7 xg7 22.e1 f8 [ Quiet moves like 7.0-0 don't promise White
23.e7+ f7 24.h6+ f6 25.g5+ g7 anything: e6 8.f4 e7 9.d3 g4
26.xf7+ xf7 27.xh7 fxg2 28.f5 f6 10.e4 xe4 11.xe4 d7 12.h3 h5
29.d5 c6 30.d6 13.c3 f6 14.d3 0-0 with a balanced
1-0 position, Rivera Kuzawka-Garcia Ilundain,
Ponferrada 1997. ]
7...e6 8.g4 g6!
300 B01 [ 8...e4?! is weaker since after 9.xe4
Perez,Luis 2459 xe4 10.f3! White is clearly better. The
Martinez,Jose 2465 game Sermek-Gerencer, Pula 1999
Varadero 2000 c o n t i n u e d : d6 11.b3 d7 12.e3
[Alexander Volzhin] xe5 13.dxe5 a5+ 14.c3 xe5 15.0-0-0
For the cost of only one pawn W hite has
Black's plan of developing his light-squared h u g e d e v e l o p m e n t a d va n t a g e a n d h i s
Bishop to the f5-square. is much more initiative grows rapidly. e7 16.he1 g5
301
17.h4 xe3+ 18.xe3 c5 19.xe6! 0-0 and Black wins.;

20.b3 a5 21.f4 a4 22.e5 a7 23.c2 B) 12...xd7 13.h5 e4 14.f3 d5
b5 24.h5 g6 25.h6 and in view of 15.d3 c5 16.c4 c6 17.d5 exd5
unavoidable mate Black resigned. ] 18.cxd5 xd5 19.b2 e7+ 20.f2
9.h4 b4!? The sharpest continuation. 0-0-0 with an unclear position, Moreno-
[ 9...bd7 i s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e : 10.xd7 Candela, 2000. ]
( 10.e2 b4 11.h5 e4 12.h3 d5 [ 10.h3 will be considered in the next
13.d2 xc3 14.xc3 xe5 15.dxe5 game. ]
xc4 16.xc4 d5 17.d2 0-0 18.0-0-0 10...xc2?! A striking blow but does it really
f5 19.gxf5 xf5 20.g3 h8 21.g4 f8 favor Black?
is Ok for Black, McShane-Hodgson, [ Later Lopez tried 10...d5!? The game
Kilkenny 1999.) 10...xd7 11.h5 e4 continued:
12.xe4 xe4 Practice proves White's A) The natural 11.xd5 (with the idea h4-
chances should be preferred due to the h5 on the next move) should be played
b i s h o p p a i r : 13.e3 ( or 13.c3 0-0-0 and Black has difficult problems to solve.
14.e2 f6 15.d2 d6 16.0-0-0 he8 Here is my analysis: cxd5! The only move.
17.f4 c7 18.f3 c5 19.dxc5 xc5 ( L i n e s l i k e 11...xd5 12.h5 xc2
and White is slightly better, Svidler-Adams, 13.xc2 f6 14.d3 xf3; or 11...exd5
Frankfurt 1999.) 13...0-0-0 14.f3 b4+ 12.h5 are clearly insufficient for Black.)
15.c3 xc3!? 16.bxc3 xc3+ 17.e2 12.h5 f6 13.hxg6 fxe5 14.gxh7
xa1 18.xa1 f5!? 19.gxf5 exf5 20.d5!? ( 14.dxe5 looks harmless: d4 15.a3 a5
cxd5 21.d3 b8 22.f4+ a8 23.d4 16.b4 dxc3 17.xh7 xd1+ 18.xd1
b6 24.a4 f4 25.xf4 and in this position 0-0 19.bxa5 c6 20.f4 e7 and Black
W h it e 's t wo B ish o p s a re st ron ge r t h a n is OK. ) 14...c7 15.d2 c6!
Black's Rook and 2 pawns as the game Lutz- T h e o n l y m o ve . ( T h e n a t u ra l 15...exd4
Adams, Frankfurt 1999 proved. ] 16.e2 xd2+ 17.xd2 c6 18.0-0-0
10.f3!? The most ambitious continuation. e5 19.f4! is insufficient for Black.) 16.dxe5
W h it e h o p e s to t ra p t h e B ish o p (1 1 h 5 ). g6 17.b5 xe5+ The critical position.
Besides the text lots of alternatives has been A1) 18.f2 c5+ 19.g2 a6 20.c3
tested: ( 20.c3 is n o t go o d in vie w o f d4
[ 10.h5 looks harmless: e4 11.f3 d5 21.e1 g7 22.xe6+ f7 ) 20...0-0-0
12.d3 bd7 and Black is OK, for example: 21.e1 f6 and Black has good
13.h6 g6 14.g5 a5 with excellent play ] chances due to the exposed position of
[ 10.f1 is also hardly good: xc3 11.bxc3 White's King.;
bd7 , and it's already White who has to A2) 18.e2 xb2! 19.xe6+ e7
think about equality. 12.e2 xe5 13.dxe5 20.c7+ d8 21.e2 xc2 22.xa8
d5 14.g5?! A blunder but after ( 14.d2 xd2+ 23.f1 c3 24.g2 d2+
h5 I prefer Black as well.) 14...xc3! and W hite should take a draw by
15.e3 d5 16.e2 c3 17.e3 a5 perpetual
18.h5 b4 19.xe6 xc2 20.xf7+ xf7 A2a) 25.g3 c5 26.h2 f5+!
21.c1 c4+ 22.e1 d5 and White a n d B l a c k wi n s : 27.xf5 ( 27.gxf5
resigned, R.Perez -Lopez Martinez Varadero g5+ 28.h3 xh7# ) 27...d6+
2000 ] 28.f4 e3+ Of course, all these lines
[ 10.a3?! (wasting an important tempo) need practical tests.;
xc3+ 11.bxc3 bd7 12.xd7 A2b) 25.f1 as playing for a win
A) I would prefer 12...xd7 13.h5 e4 leads to disaster:;
14.f3 d5 15.d3 c5! with good play for B) 11.d2?! After this passive move Black
Black. If 16.g5 then d6! ( 16...g8!? ha s e a sy p la y. b6! 12.e2 xd2+
is worth considering.) 17.gxf6 g3+ 13.xd2 8d7 14.c3? A blunder.
18.d2 f4+ 19.e1 g3+ , and White ( 14.xd7 is better although the endgame
c a n 't a vo i d p e rp e t u a l : 20.f1 xf3 after xc4 15.c3 xd7 16.xc4 d5
302
17.xd5 cxd5 18.0-0-0 f6 is slightly h8 25.d8+ g7 26.g8+ h6 27.e4
better for Black.) 14...xe5 15.dxe5 d4+ 28.g2 b2+ 29.h3
xc4 16.xc4 a5+ 17.c3 0-0-0 with unavoidable mate. ]
18.f4 h5 19.d4 d5 20.f2 xe5 21...d4+ 22.g2 d2+ 23.h3 g7
wi t h a d e c is i ve a d va n t a g e f o r B l a c k , 24.e7 f4 25.g5+
Haznedaroglu-Lopez Martinez, Yerevan 1-0
2000. ]
11.xc2 xd4 12.e2?! This move leads to
wild complications. 301 B01
[ After the simple 12.f4! it's not easy to prove Perez Ferris,Miguel
B l a c k h a s e n o u g h f o r t h e p i e c e : xg4 Hernando Rodrigo,Jose Maria 2355
( 12...e4 13.h3 g1+ 14.f1 ) 13.xg4 VII Pablo Gorbea (1) 2003
xc4 14.d2 intending Q-side castling with [Andrew Martin]
a clear edge for White. ]
12...xc3+? 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
[ Just a few days later after this game Black f6 5.f3 g4 An older move which hasn't
im p r o v e d wit h 12...b5! , Herrera-Del Rio, really been getting much attention recently but,
Santa Clara 2000. 13.b3 xc3+ 14.bxc3 as you'll see, the results are very good. 5...
xc3+ 15.f2 xa1 16.d1 c3 Bg4 is a very aggressive move but the Bishop
The difference is Black's Queen can now might get into trouble? 6.e3
retreat to the e7 via c5 squares. 17.xf7 [ 6.h3 is the critical line which I don't think
0-0 18.xe6 a6 19.b2 c5+ 20.d4 most average players know very well at all.
e7 The critical position for the whole line. h5 ( 6...xf3 7.xf3 c6 is an extremely
It's not easy to evaluate it even in home tough nut to crack, although a radically
analysis. 21.g5? A gross mistake. different game to the one that we will see.
( 21.xf6!? deserves serious attention: xf6 There are similarities with the French Fort
22.g5+ h8 23.c2 h6 24.g3! Knox. ) 7.g4 g6
- I can only say the position is a mess!) A) 8.b4!? In the style of the Mieses
21...g4+ 22.g2 xf7 23.fxg4 e8 Gambit. 8 b4 might not be sound but, hey,
24.e1 c7 25.xf7+ xf7 26.e5 d5 it's difficult to play against and a lot of fun!.
27.g3 b6 28.c2 c4 29.c3 xe5 xb4 9.d2 d6 10.b1
30.xe5 c7 31.f4 xe5 32.xe5 A1) 10...b6 i s m u c h b e t t e r : 11.e5
xe5+ 33.xe5 c5 and White resigned. ( 11.g2 c6 ) 11...xd4 12.xg6
Undoubtedly, this line is very interesting e4!;
and both sides are able to improve. A2) 10...c6? Poor. 11.xb7 bd7
Definitely we can expect new exciting games 12.g2 h5 13.g5 e4 14.0-0 e6
here. ] 15.xd7 xd7 16.e5 xd4 17.xg6
13.bxc3 xc3+ 14.f2 xa1 15.d1 c3 fxg6 18.xe4 0-0-0 19.e2 c7
16.b2 b4 17.xf7! Here this blow is 20.d1 d6 21.b5+ 1-0 Tronenkovs,
decisive. 0-0 V-Dimitrijevic, A/EYb18, Budva YUG
[ 17...e4+!? doesn't work either: 18.xe4 2003;
xb2+ 19.g3 and Black is helpless: 0-0 B) 8.e5 e6 9.g2 ( 9.h4 b4 10.h3
20.g5 g6 21.xe6+ h8 22.d8! xd8 is supposed to be good for White but just
23.e7 with unavoidable mate. ] look at what happens to him here! xc3+
18.xf6 gxf6 19.xe6 c3 11.bxc3 bd7 12.h5 xe5 13.dxe5
[ 19...g7 is no better in view of 20.h5! h6 xe5+ 14.e3 e4 15.d3 xc3+
21.f5 , mating. ] 16.d2 c6 17.g5 xd3 0-1 Moes, W-
20.d8! Exchanging the sole defender of Bjarnason, O/12th Monarch Assurance,
Black's King. d7 21.xa8 Port Erin IOM 2003) 9...c6 10.h4 ( 10.0-0
[ 21.xd7 w a s n o t b a d e i t h e r : ae8 bd7 11.h4 xe5 12.dxe5 xe5
22.g5+! xe6 23.xe6+ f7 24.xf7+ 13.e1 c7 14.h5 xc2 15.xc2 xg4
303
16.a4 f6 17.g5 should favour White, stronger than the Knight. It's easy for Black to
Del Rio Angelis, S-Hernando Rodrigo, J/ dissolve his weaknesses i.e. ...Bb6, ...c6-c5
VII Pablo Gorbea, Madrid ESP 2003 (57)) but virtually impossible for White to do likewise.
10...e4 11.xe4 xe4 12.f3 d6 Demoralised with the turn of events, W hite
13.e3 ( 13.d2 c7 14.0-0-0 d7 goes under. 15.ab1
15.he1 e7 16.h5 0-0 17.g5 xe5 [ If 15.d1 then b6 16.c3 c5! 17.dxc5
18.dxe5 f5 gives an edge to White, xc5 18.e1 e7 ]
Macak, S-Karnik, P/Tatry Open, Tatranske 15...xc3 16.bxc3 e7 17.b3 hd8
Zruby SVK 2003 (87).) 13...e7 14.a3 18.fb1 b6! The rook and pawn ending
0-0 15.f1 d8 16.g2 d7 17.ad1 might look tricky for Black to win, but he has
f6 18.d3 e8 19.g3 f7 20.he1 two major advantages: 1) His King is nearer to
c4 21.f4 db6 22.f2 d5 23.b1 the centre. 2) He has only three weak pawns,
b5 24.c3 d6 25.f3 ae8 26.d2 easily covered, to White's six! 19.f1 d5
g6 27.e4 f5 28.xd6 fxg4 20.e2 a6 21.a3 c5! 22.dxc5 xc5
Baeza Andres, R-Hernando Rodrigo, J/VII 23.d1 ac6 It's just too easy. 24.d3 d6+
Pablo Gorbea, Madrid ESP 2003, when Some lines are theoretically suspect, but can
29.e4 is forced. Without the main idea of give excellent results over the board. For me,
flinging his Kingside pawns forward to gain 5...Bg4 fits into that category. Below master
space and put pressure on the Bishop, level, I think it's a very good bet and even for
White achieves nothing. Matters are far the strongest players will yield very good
from clear however- Black has results if used correctly at the right time.
counterplay!! ] 0-1
[ 6.e2 You can count on this insipid type of
move if the opponent is unprepared. Black
equalizes effortlessly: e6 7.0-0 bd7 302 B01
8.e5 xe5 9.dxe5 d8 10.d2 xe5 Perez Mitjans,O 2487
11.xg4 xg4 12.xg4 xd2 13.ad1 Monell Camarasa,D 2266
xd1 14.xd1 c5 1/2-1/2 Sejkor a, V- 40th La Roda Open (9.8) 31.03.2013
Papan, C/ Tatry Open, Tatranske Zruby [Tom Rendle]
SVK 2003 Although Black is for choice. ]
6...c6 7.b5 e4! Good enough for 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.f3
equality. Black is f orcing exchanges and f6 5.d4 c6 This is more solid than the 5...
demonstrating that the Bishop on e3 is Bf5 played by Bogdanovski in the previous
i n e f f e c t u a l . 8.d2 Others lead to easy game but Black still has to be careful in this
equality for Black: position. 6.c4
[ 8.xc6+ bxc6 9.d2 ( 9.d3 xf3 [ 6.g5 is another option for White but it's
10.gxf3 xc3 11.d2 e6 12.xc3 b4 not as dangerous, at least not in the short-
13.g1 g6= ) 9...xd2 10.xd2 xf3 term. Andrew Martin examines it in
11.gxf3 b8 12.d1 d5= ] Stellwagen-Bartel. ]
[ 8.d3 xf3 9.gxf3 xc3 10.bxc3 a6 6...bd7 This is the first time this move has
11.xc6+ bxc6 12.g1 e6 13.c4 d5= ] been seen on ChessPublishing - the idea is
8...xd2 9.xd2 xf3 10.gxf3 e6 11.g5 obviously to avoid the complication that arise
Threatening Bxc6+ but the idea is comfortably after 6...Bf5 7.Ne5 with g4 to follow. I've also
parried. b4!= 12.xc6+ bxc6 13.xa5 added in some recent games and analysis to
[ 13.xg7 xc3+ 14.e2 ( 14.bxc3 complement what can be found in the
xc3+ ) 14...0-0-0 15.bxc3 xc3 ] archives.
13...xa5 14.0-0 b8 The opening phase [ 6...b5!? was played in Zorko-Vukovic and
has gone extremely well for Black. W hite there White played 7.Bb3 but I'm wondering
hasn't played with much of a plan and now if i t ' s b e t t e r t o c h a n g e p l a n s n o w wi t h
s t a n d s wo r s e . He h a s a ve ry p o o r p a wn 7.d3!? and claim Black's b5 move is a
structure and the Bishop is potentially much weakness. Play might continue g6 8.0-0
304
g7 9.e4 ( or 9.e1!? ) 9...0-0 10.c3 12.0-0-0?! e6 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 xc3
and W hite has a normal slight advantage 15.xc3 and Black had pretty much
even without Black's now rather odd looking equalised in Gonzalez Perez, A (2491)-
b5. This is certainly a very comfortable way Monell Camarasa, D (2259) Lleida 2012)
for White to deal with the interesting 6...b5 ] 12...xd5 13.h3 xf3 ( 13...h5?! 14.g4
[ 6...f5 has long been considered the g6 15.0-0-0 and White has a big
mainline and now critical is 7.e5 e6 8.g4 initiative. ) 14.xf3 ]
g6 9.h4! b4! 10.f3! ( 10.h5 e4 9.e5 e6 10.g4 g6 11.f4!
should be OK for Black ) [ 11.h4?! is less effective here as Black can
A) 10...d5 11.xd5 cxd5 12.h5! probably get away with xd4 and then meet
( 12.e2 was less clear in Kotronias- 12.h5 with e4 ]
Candela Perez.) 12...f6 13.hxg6 fxe5 11...e7 This blocks the e-file and stops f5 but
14.gxh7 c6 15.dxe5 now White's h-pawn joins in the fun!
A1) 15...d4!? is Andrew Martin's [ 11...xd4? 12.f3! d6 13.f5
suggestion from several years ago. With wins a piece. ]
the help of a faster computer I believe [ 11...b4 is Black's other option - at least
W hite is doing well after 16.a3 a5 he's now threatening Be5 but instead of h4
17.b4 dxc3 18.bxa5 xa5 19.d3! W hite now plays 12.f5 and Black is in big
( stronger than saving the pawn with trouble: xd4 is the best that Black can do
19.f4 d8 ) 19...xe5+ 20.f2 but after ( 12...exf5?? loses a queen to
and although the position remains 13.xc6+ ) 13.fxg6 ( 13.d2!? ) 13...xc3+
unclear White has managed to 14.bxc3 xc3+ 15.f1! Black is lost. For
coordinate and the pawn on h7 still gives example xa1?! ( 15...hxg6 16.b1
him a clear advantage.; is Black's best chance but it must still be
A2) 15...b6 16.f1 0-0-0 17.g2 good for W hite as the extra piece is
xe5 18.e2 g6 and here a draw definitely worth more than 3 pawns here.)
was agreed in Paramos Dominguez, R 16.gxf7+ d8 17.g2 and Black's queen is
(2434)-Garcia Ilundain, D (2467) Cala in trouble and White has a winning attack. ]
Galdana 2001 but I believe White should 12.h4! There's nothing Black can do here -
p l a y o n wi t h 19.d3! e5 20.b5 he's simply losing a piece. bd5 13.xd5?
xc3 21.xb6 axb6 22.bxc3 This appears to be the simplest option but
and White is basically a pawn up.; actually Black has a clever way to get
B) 10...xc2 11.xc2 xd4 12.e2! counterplay
has scored very well for White. Indeed it [ 13.f5! was the right way to do it - for
seems that after xc3+ 13.bxc3 xc3+ example exf5 14.h5 xc3 15.bxc3
14.f2 xa1 15.d1! Black is in serious and the bishop on g6 is lost. ]
trouble - see Perez-Martinez from the 13...xd5? Black misses his opportunity and
archives. ] now he's lost.
7.e2 b6 8.b3 f5?! Black's attempted [ 13...exd5! isn't so clear. What both players
improvement over his own previous game but p r o b a b l y m i s s e d w a s t h a t a f t e r 14.f5
W hite comes up with a f orcef ul idea that Black can keep fighting with e4! 15.fxg6
almost refutes it. xh4+ 16.d1 f2+ 17.d2 e4+!
[ 8...a5 had been tried by Monell Camarasa and the position is a mess, although
in an earlier game and I think it's the best apparently White is better after
move although with accurate play White is ( 17...xh1?? 18.xc6+ ) 18.e3!
still somewhat better: 9.a3 a4 10.a2 according to Houdini at least! ]
bd5 11.d2 g4 and now White could've 14.h5 f6 15.xc6
kept an edge with ( 11...xc3! 12.xc3 f5 [ 15.hxg6 is also very strong ]
looks like a better equalising attempt 15...bxc6 16.hxg6 b4+
although W hite can still try 13.e5 e6 [ 16...h6 17.xe6 is also terrible for Black ]
14.f3!? preparing g4.) 12.xd5! ( instead 17.c3 xc3?! A desperate attempt that
305
d o e s n ' t re a l ly h e l p b u t t h e p o si t i o n wa s shouldn't be too concerned.

already hopeless for Black. 18.bxc3 xc3+ [ Instead 8.d2 was seen in Boros, D (2485)-
19.d2 xa1 20.xh7 f8 Motylev, A (2705) Rijeka 2010 in the
[ or 20...xh7 21.gxh7 d7 22.xe6+ c7 archives. ]
23.a5+ ] 8...f6 9.g3 a6 This appears to be a novelty
21.xe6+ e7 22.xe7+ xe7 23.b4+ although it has been examined previously.
c5 24.xc5+ d7 25.xg7+ c6 26.xf8 [ 9...c6?! was played in an earlier game from
xf8 27.h7 A very forceful game from Perez this yea r bu t 10.c4! is a strong antidote.
Mitjans that shows the danger of going wrong cxb5 11.xd5 e6 12.e4 f5 13.d3 g7
in this line as Black. 8...a5 is a better option 14.e2 c4?! 15.xc4 bxc4 16.xc4
where W hite's advantage is kept to a c6 17.c3 d8 18.g5
minimum. was straightforward. 1-0 Perez Aleman, P
1-0 (2111)-Septien Lopez, V (1887) El Sauzal
2010. ]
10.c4 axb5 11.cxd5 This is a strange
303 B01 position. Both sides' pawn structures are
Petrosian,Tigran L 2613 compromised and the assessment will come
Kurajica,Bojan 2535 down to whether Black's play against the d5
26th European Club Cup (4.2) 20.10.2010 pawn and down the a file is stronger than
[Gawain Jones] W hite's play down the c file and attacking
chances against Black's kingside. I think
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 Black would be better were the f6 pawn back
f6 5.f3 g6 6.b5 The critical test of the on f 7 but here the position is simply very
5...g6, 3...Qd6 Scandinavian. b6 7.f4 messy. e6
d5 [ 11...a6 is the computer's suggestion and
[ 7...a6 Used to be the method to defend 12.b3 ( 12.a3 might be a better try but
c7 but White must be somewhat better here. a5+ 13.d2 h6 14.f4 0-0 is probably
A) 8.c3 c6 ( 8...g7 should be preferred ok f or Black.) 12...a5+ 13.d2 d7
which looks satisfactory for Black.) 9.a3 was examined in Tibor Karolyi's NiC Survey.
g7 ( 9...xb2? 10.c4 xc3+ 11.d2 A potential line could run: 14.e2 h6
traps the queen.) 10.c4 d8 11.e2 15.d1 b4 16.c3 f7 17.b3 hc8
0-0 12.0-0 c7 13.e1 cd5 14.e5 18.0-0 xc3 19.bxc3 c5 and I'd prefer
f5 15.a4 a5 16.b3 and Black was Black. ]
u n d e r u n p l e a s a n t p r e s s u r e . L o p e z 12.d3! If White had to take on e6 then Black
Ma rt in e z , J (2 5 8 9 ) -M a g e m B a d a l s, J would be doing very well as Black would be
(2564) Barcelona 2009; a b l e t o s t a r t u p a n i n i t i a t i v e . a5+
B) 8.c4 c6 9.c5 a5+ 10.c3 b4 Perhaps this check is a mistake.
11.c4 g7 12.0-0 0-0 13.d2 [ Having said that, I think Black can get away
looks like a simple White edge. Krishnan, with taking on d5 although he will have to
V (2042)-Lee, K (1775) Kemer 2009.; soak up a lot of pressure. 12...exd5 13.0-0
C) 8.a4 g7 ( 8...g4 Bellia, F (2405)- f7 14.b3 e6 15.fe1 h6 16.e2
Epishin, V (2587) San Nicola Arcella 2007 e8 17.ae1 d7 18.h4 c5 19.dxc5
should be met by 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 xc5 20.xb5 xb5 21.xb5 d7
g7 11.0-0-0 ) 9.a5 c6 10.e2 g4 with equality. ]
11.c3 0-0 was seen in the high rated [ 12...b4+ 13.f1 ( 13.e2!? looks weird
encounter Adams, M (2735)-Epishin, V but is the computer's choice.) 13...exd5
(2554) Gibraltar 2007 when 12.h3 xf3 14.c2 e7 15.xc7 c6= is also fine for
13.xf3 e6+ 14.e2 leaves White with Black. ]
a very pleasant advantage. ] 13.f1 c6? And this is definitely a mistake.
8.e5 This must be the critical test of Black's [ T h e p a w n h a d t o b e t a k e n . 13...exd5
opening but as far as I can see Black 14.c2 ( 14.e2+ e7 15.xb5+ c6
306
16.e1 0-0! 17.xc6 b4 but

is v e r y m e s s y.) 14...c6 ( 14...d8!? [ 20.xg6! immediately was winning easily.
is very odd but at least would prevent White d5 ( 20...xd6 21.g7++- ) 21.f7+ d8
capturing on g6 with check. However White 22.h4 xd6 23.xf6+ xf6 24.xf6+
must have decent compensation after 15.h3 wins the rook and game. ]
c6 16.a3 b4 This is probably over- 20...xa2 21.xg6 xd6 22.xd6 xd6
ambitious. 17.axb4 xa1+ 18.e2 a6 23.g3+ d5 This looks ridiculous but
19.xc7+ e8 20.e1 e7 21.f1 e6 [ 23...e7 24.g7+ is of course easy. ]
22.f4 and White has dangerous pressure 24.e5+
for the exchange. )] [ 24.d2!? is the computer's top suggestion
14.c2! Black evidently overlooked this. The and it reckons White is still winning but this
pawn on d5 may be vulnerable but it does a is obviously much more complicated than 20.
good job keeping Black passive. f7 Qxg6. ]
[ Of course Black cannot take on d5 with the 24...d6 I wonder if both sides were in time
c pawn with the loose bishop, while trouble.
14...exd5? allows 15.xg6+! hxg6 [ 24...fxe5 25.xe5+ c4 26.d2+ d3
16.xg6+ e7 ( 16...d7 17.xf6+- ) 27.e3+ c2 28.c3+ d1 29.f3 xh5
17.e1+ e6 18.e2! ( Of course not 30.g1! and Black cannot ultimately prevent
18.f5?? xe1+ ) 18...d7 traps in the Kf1-f2 mate. ]
Black king and so ( 18...xa2 19.f5+- ) 25.xb5+? This is actually a mistake.
19.xe6+! xe6 20.g5+ e7 21.f7+ [ 25.e2+ d5 26.e1 is very good for
d8 22.e6+ c8 23.e8+ ] White with Black's king stuck in the centre. ]
15.h4! Both activating the dormant h1 rook 25...e5? But this loses immediately.
and opening up lines towards the Black king. [ 25...e7 26.xb4 ( 26.g7+ d6
a6 16.h5 b4 17.xg6+!? Hard to resist. 27.xh8 c4+ 28.g1 c1+ 29.h2
The bishop is poisoned. f4+ 30.g3 xf3 31.xb4 xf2+ 32.h3
[ However the calm 17.e2 is also very f5+= ) 26...a6+ 27.g1 a1+ 28.h2
good for White. g7 ( 17...xd3 18.hxg6+ xh5+ 29.h4 a5 and Black looks fine so
g7 19.xd3 b4 20.b3 leaves White White should take the draw 30.g7+ e8
material up and with an ongoing initiative.) 31.g6+ e7= ]
18.g5! and Black cannot survive, i.e. 26.dxe5+ fxe5 27.xe5+ d7 28.xb4
fxg5?! 19.e5+ g8 20.hxg6! xd3 W hite is even material up now, while also
21.f6+- ] threatening mate in one and Black has no
17...e7 counterplay. c5 29.xc5 a6+ 30.g1
[ 17...g8 18.e4! and the Black king won't d6 31.e5+ e6 32.xd6+!?
survive for long: xd5 ( 18...f5 19.f7+! [ 32.b6 is simpler. ]
xf7 20.dxe6+ e8 21.xf5+- ) 19.h6! f5 32...xd6 33.f7+ c5 34.hh4
20.e5 hxg6 21.xh8+! xh8 22.e5+ So White reached a very powerful position out
g8 23.h7+ f7 24.h8 and White wins. ] of the opening but this doesn't seem to be a
18.d6+ d7 problem with the opening. Instead 13...c6?
[ Perhaps 18...d8 is stronger with chances was the mistake and I imagine we'll see more
to survive for longer although White has a games in this complicated line.
huge initiative. 19.e4 hxg6 20.xg6 d5 1-0
21.h6 b4 22.h4 xh6 23.xf6+ xf6
24.xh6 and Black's position is resignable. ]
19.e4 hxg6
[ 19...xd6 i s b e t t e r b u t 20.xh7
should still be winning as f5?! 21.xf5
xg3 22.fxg3 exf5 23.xf5+ c7
24.e5+ b6 25.xh8+- wins ]
20.e1?! Not throwing away all the advantage
307
304 B01 structure promises White a slight ongoing

Pikula,Dejan 2537 edge. ]
Saric,Sinisa 2448 9.g3
ch-SRB Kragujevac SRB (10) 10.03.2011 [ 9.h4!? is another interesting try seen time
[Gawain Jones] to time. Another recent game continued:
g6 10.f4 f5 The bishop is blocked in on g6
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 but in return he's got the potential of a very
f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 f5 7.e4 pleasant e4 outpost. 11.d3 e6 12.e2
[ The next game focuses on the mainline of e7 13.f3 h5 14.0-0 d7 15.ae1
7.c4 e6 8.d5 ] 0-0-0 16.c3 d6 17.e3 f6 and Black's
7...c7 This move is more common p ie ce s h a d co o r d in a t e d we ll. V a zq u e z
[ although previo usly on the sit e 7...b6 Re ye s , R ( 2 2 1 7 )- C h a t t e r j e e , D ( 2 2 8 8 )
has been recommended. 8.xf6+ gxf6 Khanty-Mansiysk 2010. ]
A) 9.b4!? was examined last year by Neil 9...d7
in S t a r o s t i t s , I (2 4 7 1 ) -H a m d o u c h i , H [ 9...e6 was looked at by Andrew Martin in
(2601) Seville 2010.; Glek, I (2597)-Nakamura, H (2657)
B) if White is worried about the capture on Minneapolis 2005 but the text gives Black
b2 he can try the rather artificial looking the opportunity to play ...e7-e5 in one go. ]
9.c3 but this feels like a gain for Black 10.g2 0-0-0
over 7...Qc7. The game could continue: [ 10...g4 has also been seen fairly recently
d7 10.g3 0-0-0 11.g2 e6 but it looks slightly suspicious ceding
( 11...a6!? would make a virtue out of another tempo and 11.h3 h5 12.e2
Black's oddly placed queen.) 12.h4 g6 0-0-0 13.0-0-0 is a little more pleasant for
13.0-0 b4 14.d2 xc3 15.xc3 f5 White. ]
16.d5 exd5 17.xd5 c5 and Black's 11.0-0 e5 I'm not sure about this move. I
activity made up for his compromised understand that this is the point of delaying ...
structure. Black can also play ...f 5-f 4 e6 but now Black has crippling weaknesses,
anyway. De Firmian, N (2598)-Matamoros in particular the f5 square and I don't think
Franco, C (2462) Las Palmas 1999.; Black's activity adequately compensates for it.
C) 9.c4 w h e n o b v i o u s l y xb2 [ 11...e6 would transpose to the previously
is critical ( 9...g8 is looked at in Renet, O mentioned game in the archives when Glek
(2520)-Prie, E (2480) Clichy catX 1995 by continued with 12.Re1 but 12.h4!? g6
E r i c P r i é .; while John Watson looks at 13.c4 b6 14.a5 c5 15.d5! d6
9...d7 in Popovic, P (2478)-Savic, M 16.a3! xc4 17.xd8 xd8 18.xg6 hxg6
( 2 5 1 9 ) S u b o t i c a 2 0 0 8 .; 9...e6 left White material up in Korneev, O (2583)-
would transpose to a position more Mellado Trivino, J (2447) Montcada 1999.
commonly reached via 7.Bc4 e6 8.Ne4 The most clinical finish looks to be 19.b4!
Qb6 9.Nxf6 gxf6.) 10.b3 ( John Watson b6 20.dxc6 bxc6 21.a4+- ]
gives 10.b1 xc2 11.xc2 xc2 12.c4 Aggressive.
12.xb7 "gives White compensation for [ Andrew Martin offers the line 12.c3 b6
his pawn and probably more, for example 13.e2 g7 14.a4 he8 15.a5 d7
e4 13.e2 d7 14.e3 d5 15.xd5 in the archives as equal. It's a rather odd
cxd5 16.c1 with a decent initiative.) assessment as ( 15...d5 is better but still
10...g8 11.0-0 e6 12.b1! ( 12.a4 g4 16.dxe5 fxe5 17.h4 e6 18.a6 b6 19.c4
was s atisf actory f or B la ck. S edina , E e7 20.c5! looks very pleasant for White.)
(2342)-Repkova, E (2447) Khanty- 16.h4! e6 17.a6 b6 18.e4
Mansiysk 2010.) 12...a3 13.h4 g4 picks up material and leaves White with a
14.f3 h5 15.e2 would have given clear advantage. In fact 12.c3 looks very
White a strong initiative for the pawn. ] logical and I don't see a good way for Black
8.xf6+ gxf6 to equalise here. ]
[ 8...exf6 is played from time to time but this [ 12.e1!? is another interesting semi-
308
w a i t i n g m o v e . A f t e r d6 13.c4! still try 16.h4!? tying the knight down to

is now stronger. h5 14.c5 e7 15.a4 the defence of f6. ]
b8 16.a5 dg8 17.h4 e6 18.xc6! 16.h4 b6 Black's moves around here don't
and Black's position had collapsed instantly. achieve very much.
Popovic, P (2489)-Chokouhian, A (1972) [ 16...e7 would prepare to move the knight
Belgium 20 09. RR g4 19.e4 xe4 but 17.e4!? e5 18.f5 b8 19.f4
20.xe4 d5 21.f5 f8 22.c1 c6 xf5 20.xf5 h4 21.c5 a5 22.b4
23.b3 xe4 24.xf7 b6 25.cxb6+ c5 still looks more comfortable for White. ]
26.xc5+ xc5 27.bxa7 1-0 Popovic, P 17.ad1 e5 Finally Black activates the
(2489)-Chokouhian, A (1972)/Belgium 2009/ knight.
EXT 2010 ] [ A n o t h e r w a i t i n g m o v e w i t h 17...b8
12...exd4 This move is really ugly and gives would be too slow as 18.a3! preparing b2-
White quite easy play. b4 is very strong. ]
[ 12...b8 makes more sense to me but 18.xf6 g4
perhaps Black has a major problem here, viz. [ G r a b b i n g t h e p a w n w i t h 18...xc4?
White's attack on the queenside looks like it leaves Black's king f ar too open. W hite
can crash through much more easily than actually has a choice of ways to win material
Black's corresponding play on the kingside, i. but the most direct is 19.b4! xd4 20.xd4
e. 13.e1 h5 14.b4! g4 15.b5 b6 xb4 21.xa7 and Black's king is caught in
( 15...cxb5 16.cxb5 b6 17.c1 d7 a net created by the queen and bishops. ]
18.c2 a3 19.cd1 xb5 20.dxe5 ) 19.h3 b8? The pressure takes its toll and
16.bxc6 xc6 ( 16...xc4 17.c2 xd2 Saric blunders.
18.xd2 looks suspicious) 17.c5 e4 [ Black should probably have retaken the
18.f4+ a8 19.cxb6 exf3 20.d5 xb6 pawn with 19...xb2 but White is still clearly
21.xf3 and White's attack still looks more on top following 20.f4 a3 21.f5 ]
threatening while he's also achieved 20.xg4 hxg4 21.xc6+ Everything drops
positional gains. ] with check.
13.xd4 g6N [ In fact the silicon monster slightly prefers
[ 13...d3 was played in the only other game 21.e6! but if any of your opponents choose
t o re a c h t h is p o sit io n . 14.a5! xa5 that you can check their pockets for an
15.xd3 h5 16.c3 e5 17.ad1 c5 iPhone! ]
18.b4 xd4 19.xd4 e2 and White had a 21...bxc6 22.xc5 xc5 23.xd8+ xd8
definite edge but wimped out, presumably 24.xd8+ b7 25.d7+ This line looks
due to the rating disparity. 1/2-1/2 Bosboom, troublesome for Black to me and I think the
M (2425)-Dorfman, J (2580) Brussels 1993. suggestion of previous annotators of 7...Qb6
20.f4! d3 21.e1 would force Black to is a better try.
grovel in a frankly disgusting position. ] 1-0
14.e3
[ 14.c3 is perhaps more accurate. It looks
more natural to point the bishop towards 305 B01
Black's king but the idea is that after h5 Polgar,Judit 2365
( 14...c5 would of course be illogical as Stefansson,Hannes 2395
15.b4! is strong.) 15.a4 b8 16.ad1 Egilsstadir 1988
h4? Black cannot defend against ( 16...d6 [Alexander Volzhin]
was better but 17.a5 b6 18.b3 c5
19.c3 e5 20.f3 xc3 21.xc3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6
stops Black being mated but White still has 5.f3 g6
good chances thanks to the superior [ 5...g4 is the alternative. ]
structure. ) 17.a5+- ] 6.e2 g7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c3 c6 9.d5!
14...c5 15.g4 h5 The only way to fight for an opening
[ 15...b8 is perhaps better but White could advantage.
309
[ After 9.e3?! g4! it is White who has to [ Although there was nothing wrong with
fight for equality! In Janetsch - Larsen, 1977, 26.fe1 the text move is good as the rook
he f ailed to achieve this: 10.d5 xf3 could be useful on the f-file as we'll see. ]
11.gxf3?! ( The natural 11.xf3 looks better 26...h6 27.f3 b6 28.fxe4 bxc5 29.bxc5
e5 12.c5 bc4 with mutual chances.) h5
11...a5! 12.c5 bc4 13.f4 e6! [ 29...g4 30.f3 winning ]
sacrificing a pawn in order to penetrate to 30.e5 e6 31.f2 a5 32.c6 c5 33.b7
the 7th rank 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.xd8 axd8 The quickest way to win as the pawn on e5
16.xc7 d2 with a clear advantage for cannot be taken. d5
Black. ] [ 33...xe5 34.xe5 xe5 35.f7+ xf7
9...e5 36.xf7 e1+ 37.f1 winning ]
[ 9...a5?! leads to a clear advantage for 34.e7 Black resigned.
W h i t e a f t e r 10.c5 xc3 11.cxb6 g7 1-0
12.f4! xb2 ( 12...axb6 13.b4 xa1
14.xa1 b3 15.b2 winning ) 13.bxc7 ]
10.xe5 306 B01
[ 10.c5!? is worth considering. The game Ponizil,Cyril 2198
Brodski - Maljutin, Moscow, 1991 continued: Bombek,Peter 2225
bd7 11.e3 xf3+ 12.xf3 e5 13.e2 17th Pobeskydi Hamont Cup (8) 16.04.2006
c6 14.f4! d7 15.f3 a5? A ridiculous [Andrew Martin]
move. ( 15...cxd5 should be preferred, after
16.xd5 c7 17.ac1 f6 18.d1 d8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
19.e2 White is slightly better, but Black f6 5.f3 e4 I have given up putting !?
easily held the position in Vlad - Prudnikova, next to 5..Ne4. You either like it or you don't!
Romania, 1992.) 16.dxc6 xc5 17.d5! The surprise value is waning so I will simply
and Black is in trouble. ] say that there is no known refutation. The
10...xe5 11.h6 g7?! A clear inaccuracy. only problem for Black is that the line is very
After the exchange of dark-squared Bishops easy to avoid, White can either delay d4 or
White obtains a huge space advantage. Nf3. 6.d2 xd2 7.xd2 e6 8.g3 b4
[ Black has a playable position after 11...e8 The idea is simple enough. Black will
12.d2 ( 12.c5 leads White nowhere after downgrade White's pawn structure and hope
xc3 ) 12...e6! and White couldn't obtain t o s lo wl y n e u t r a l ize sm a l l W h i t e l e a d i n
any advantage in Dmitriev - Volzhin, Russia, development.
1990: 13.ad1 exd5 14.cxd5 d7 15.fe1 [ 8...c6 has recently been tried, a passive-
c8 16.g5 f6 17.xf6 xf6 18.b5 looking move, but as usual with these type
xb5 19.xb5 d6 20.b4 xb5 of positions, very difficult to play against.
21.xb5 xe1+ 22.xe1 b6 23.g3 d6= ] Black plans a slow unfolding of the game for
12.xg7 xg7 13.d4+ f6 the two Bishops. In the following example
[ 13...g8 14.c5 d7 was also not much White can find no way through. 9.g2 e7
fun. ] 10.0-0 d7 11.a3 0-0 12.fe1 f6 13.b4
14.c5 e5 15.d2 d7 16.b4 f5 17.ad1 c7 14.e5 d8 15.f4 d6 16.h4 a5
a5 18.a3 axb4 19.axb4 Black's position is 17.ab1 axb4 18.axb4 d5 The dormant
very diff icult. His pieces are passive and Bishop on c8 doesn't seem to worry Black at
cannot be activated due to White's powerful all. 19.e4 e7 20.h5 g6 21.h6 f8
pawn mass, his king is also not safe. f4?! 22.h4 e7 23.xe7 xe7= 24.b5 cxb5
[ This pawn advance makes things worse. 25.xb5 c7 26.b3 xd4 27.c3 b4
19...f6 was more tenacious. ] 28.d1 xb3 29.cxb3 a6 ( 29...g7 )
20.d6! f6 21.b5! cxd6 22.b2! f5 30.a4! Hanging on. b8 31.b6 c5
23.xd6 e7 24.f3 e4 This is losing but 32.b4 b3 33.ec4 e5 34.xc8
B l a c k h a d n o c h o i c e . 25.xe4! xe4 1/2-1/2 Ponizil, C-Chytilek, R/Brno 2005
26.de1 The strategy of gaining the two Bishops
310
early, SLOWING DOWN the game and then better.

gradually playing to gain the upper hand has ½-½
been known since the days of Nimzowitsch.
Immense patience is required, but if you
possess this quality then 8..c6 is alright. ] 307 B01
9.g2 Ponomariov,Ruslan 2616
[ 9.a3 b6 10.g2 b7 11.0-0 xc3 Fressinet,Laurent 2440
12.xc3 xc3 13.bxc3 c6 14.d2 a5 EuroTeam Ch Batumi 1999
15.a4 0-0-0 16.b3 c4 17.a5 xg2 [Alexander Volzhin]
18.xg2 b5 19.fe1 g5 20.a6 c6 21.c5
c7 22.e4 h5 23.e2 d5 Howell, D- 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
Su ls k is , S / Ca t ala n B ay 20 0 4 h as be e n Last year this move became rather popular in
quoted here before, but is worth seeing tournament practice, but I doubt it's really
again as a counterpoint to our featured good enough. Anyway the statistics of this
game. ] line can hardly satisfy Black players. 4.f3
9...d7 10.0-0 0-0 11.d3 xc3 12.bxc3 f6 5.d4 a6
b8 Quite thematic for this line. Black slows [ 5...g4 was tried in Psakhis - Sygulski,
down the pace and goes for the long-haul Jurma la 1 987 . W h it e e asily gaine d th e
structural win. His next task is to drain the life upper hand after 6.h3 h5 7.g4 g6
out of W hite's initiative. White, for his part, 8.e5! c6 9.f4! White exploit s the unsafe
must press and get active as quickly as he position of Black's Queen very energetically.
can. 13.ab1 b6 14.c4 Now Nxg6 winning a piece is threatened.
[ 14.b5 is confidently answered by xa2 d5 10.d2 xf4 11.xf4 d7 12.0-0-0!
Ideas of ...Ba6 come into the frame. ] xe5 13.dxe5 c7
14...h5 15.b5 g6! In general, A) 14.d5! Here Black is unlikely to able
exchanges favour the player with the better to avoid quick loss:
structure. 16.c3 A1) 14...a5 15.b4!;
[ Deep Fritz is giving 16.e5 but what is A2) 14...cxd5 15.a4+ d8 ( 15...c6
wrong with xe5 17.xe5 xd3 18.cxd3 16.b5 ) 16.xd5+ c8 17.e8+;
d8 19.d5 exd5 20.xd5 e6 The game A3) 14...b8 Absolutely the only move,
looks completely equal to me. ] the alternatives lose on the spot:
16...b7 17.fb1 c5! Black has a fine 15.d2! (threatening 16 Nf6+ exf6 17
position. 18.dxc5 xf3 Qd7) c8 16.a5! b6 17.c3!
[ 18...xc5 19.e5 grants White a bit of and Black is hopeless against White's
activity, but even there f6 20.xb7 xb7 threats (18.Ba6! or 18.Bb5!, to name
21.a3 bd8 22.xa7 d6 looks good for only a few).;
Black. ] B) 14.d3 This isn't bad. However, White
19.xf3 xc5 20.a3 xc2 21.xa7 could exploit his huge development
d3 22.f1 xc4 23.xb6 xb6 24.xb6 advantage by playing xd3 15.xd3 g6
e5 25.g2 xa2 White should really have 16.e4! Although White missed a quick
to struggle now. 26.d4 e2 27.c3 d7 win Black's position remains difficult. f6
[ 27...d3 28.d4 h6 29.e4 c5 30.g2 ( 16...g7 is even worse in view of
c2 looks like a decent way to continue, 17.d6+! exd6 18.exd6 b6 19.e1+
preparing to use the Rook. ] f8 20.c3 , and Black is helpless.) 17.g5!
28.e1 g4 29.h3 g5 30.a1 f6 g7 18.gxf6 0-0 19.g5! exf6 20.e6
31.c1 b8 32.a7 f8 33.c5 h6 f7 21.xf8 xf8 22.b1 and Black has
A baffling draw offer. In the hands of most no compensation for the exchange White
s t r o n g p l a y e r s , t h e g a m e wo u l d j u s t b e won in a few more moves. ]
starting! Summarising, 6 Bd2 leads nowhere 6.c4!
against 5...Ne4. White must find something [ 6.e3 Is another good possibility for White.
the game Karpov - Lutikov, USSR, 1979
311
continued: c6 7.d2 g4 8.g5! e5 attempt to fight for an opening advantage.
9.d5 b4 10.f3 f5 11.ge4 W hite intends transfer the rook to the e3-
with an obvious advantage for White. d7 square threatening h4-h5, and meanwhile the
12.0-0-0 c6 13.dxc6 xd2+ 14.xd2 xe4 Kn igh t o n c3 is "o verp ro t ecte d " whic h is
15.xe4 xc6 This move leads to new important in many lines (for example, ...Bxc2
weaknesses, but ( 15...xe4 is no better: will never work). bd7 11.e2 b6 12.h5
16.fxe4 xc6 17.c4 e7 18.f1 e4 13.f4
with a huge advantage in the endgame.) [ T h e t e m p t i n g 13.g5? is bad in view of
16.xf6+ gxf6 17.d3 0-0-0 18.hd1 c7 xd4! 14.gxf6 xe5 15.fxg7 g8 16.e3
19.c3 h5 20.f5 xd2 21.xd2 b8 ( Unfortunately, 16.h6 is impossible in view
22.h4 h6 23.xh6 xh6 24.a4 h8 of xc4 ) 16...xg7! and Black wins, as was
25.b4 b6 26.b5! Now the Knight is pointed out by Ponomariov: 17.xe4 xc3+
completely out of play. g8 27.c2 axb5 18.f1 h2! ]
28.axb5 e8 29.c4 , and Black resigned. ] 13...xd4 14.d1 d3! Both players play
6...bd7 7.0-0 b5 8.b3 b7 9.g5! very inventively. 15.hxd3 xf4 16.d4
Only 9 moves have been played, but Black's h2 17.xf7! The typical blow. 0-0 18.xe6
position is hopeless already! e6 The critic al position. Although W hite's
[ 9...d5 is just a blunder in view of 10.xf7! ach ieveme nts are o bviou s B lack h as his
xf7 11.xd5 xd5 12.h5+ and Black chances due to the unsafe position of White's
can resign. ] King in the centre. bd5 19.e5! g2
10.e1! Simple and good. Now the e6-square 20.xb4!
becomes the main target. e7 11.xe6! [ 20.d6+ le a d s W h i t e n o wh e re : h8
fxe6 12.xe6 b4 13.a3 a5 14.d2 21.1d3 xf2+! 22.xf2 xg4+ 23.g2
[ The straightforward 14.e2 was not bad xe5 with advantage for Black. ]
either after the obligatory g8 15.g5 20...xb4 21.d8! xc2+ 22.e2 g1?
df6 White has quite a pleasant choice A gross blunder.
between 16.e5 ( and 16.xf6 gxf6 [ T h e c o r re c t 22...axd8 leads to a draw:
17.d5 ) 16...f8 17.xg8 d6 18.e6 23.xd8+ h8 24.f7+ xf7 ( 24...g8?
xe5 19.xe5 with a quick win in both is bad in view of 25.h6! g1 26.hxg7
cases. ] e1+ 27.d3 b4+ 28.c4 and White
14...b4 The only move as 15 Nd5, trapping the wins. ) 25.b8+ ( 25.xf7? xf2+! 26.d3
queen, was threatened. 15.axb4 f5 16.e2 e1+ 27.c4 b5+ 28.b3 xb2+! )
g8 17.a5! f8 18.d5 d8 19.b5 d6 25...g8 26.xf7 xg4+ 27.f1 h3+
[ 19...axb5 20.xb5 ] with perpetual or an equal position after
20.bxa6 c6 21.b4! b8 28.e2 g4+ 29.d2 d7+ 30.xc2
[ B l a c k r e s i g n e d i n v i e w o f 21...b8 xf7 31.xa7 h6 ]
22.xc6+ xc6 23.e4 and White wins 23.d6! Obviously Black missed this move.
the piece back. A great performance from Now the game is over. e1+ 24.d3 e8
the 16-year-old! ] 25.xa8 b4+ 26.c4
1-0 [ In view of 26.c4 b5+ 27.b3 xa8
28.d8+ Black resigned. Now let's draw
some conclusions. This variation occurs
308 B01 ve r y s e l d o m i n m o d e r n p r a c t i c e b u t i t
Ponomariov,Ruslan 2550 certainly deserves more attention. It leads
Garcia Ilundain,David 2520 to very sharp, interesting play where both
Pamplona 1996 sides have chances. ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 1-0
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4

f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5 7.e5 e6 8.g4!?
g6 9.h4 b4 10.h3!? An interesting
312
309 B01 [ But also losing is 18...xd4 19.c4 d8

Popovic,Petar 2478 20.e5 c5 21.xc6! bxc6 22.xd4 xd4
Savic,Miod1 2519 23.a6+ d7 24.d1 e7 25.a3+ e8
TCh-SRB 1st League (2) 02.09.2008 26.a4 ]
[John Watson] 19.f3 b5!? Black wants to discourage Nc4.
He doesn't have much in the way of
We've seen this type of variation before (with counterplay, but even worse, he is losing to
Nxf6+ doubling Black's pawns) and it's still not threats such as Nxf5:
much fun for Black. Again, that's not because [ 19...de8 20.c4 d8 21.g4! fxg4
of his theoretical disadvantage, which is fairly 22.e5 d7 23.xh5 ]
small, but because of his lack of positive [ 19...d5 20.xd5! ( or 20.xf5 exf5
prospects against careful play by White. 1.e4 21.xd5 xd5 22.xe7 xf3 23.c4 )
d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 20...cxd5 21.c4! ]
5.f3 c6 6.d2 20.c4 a6 21.xf5! This is even stronger
[ 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5 d8 than it looks. White wins a pawn and retains a
9.xf6+ gxf6 was the actual order of the clear positional advantage. He wins rather
Babaev-Del Valle Cirera game below which, easily. g6 22.c2 xf5 23.xf5 d7
surprisingly, transposes at a considerable 24.d3 f6 25.d5 c5 26.dxe6 fxe6
distance from this divergence point. ] 27.c2 h5 28.a3 d4? 29.xd4 xd4
6...f5 7.e4 b6 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.c4 30.e5
d7 1-0
[ 9...xb2 10.b1 xc2 11.xc2 xc2
12.xb7 gives White compensation for his
pawn and probably more, for example, e4 310 B01
13.e2 d7 14.e3 d5 15.xd5 cxd5 Pruijssers,R 2519
16.c1 ] Tiviakov,S 2659
10.b3 e6 11.e2 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 c7 Bundesliga 2012-13 (7) 02.02.2013
13.h4 g6 14.g3 e7?! Too passive. [Tom Rendle]
[ White's immediate prospects after 14...d6
15.xg6 hxg6 16.h4 are nothing special, 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
bu t h e ha s t o b e care f u l a bo u t W h ite 's f6 5.f3 g6 This is currently the most
bishop pair and stay active, for example, f5 fashionable way for Black to proceed in the
17.g5 de8 18.h5!? gxh5! 19.xh5 f4 Qd6 Scandinavian. See Haslinger-Kjartansson
20.g4?! ( 20.dh1 hg8 is unclear) 20...f6? for the some of the current problems after 5...
Now the e-pawn becomes surprisingly weak. a6 6.e2
( 20...xh5 21.gxh5 g8 22.h4 a5 [ 6.b5 is the most critical line here and it
with the idea ...Qf5 should be fine) 21.h4 was tried against Tiviakov again recently:
e5 ( 21...b8 22.xe6!; 21...xh5 22.gxh5 d8
a5 23.g4! ) 22.dxe5 fxe5?? ( But A) 7.f4 was seen in Hess-Tiviakov which
22...xe5 23.d3 keeps White well on top: is annotated by Pavlovic in the archives.
bishops and structure) 23.d3 xh5 Hess won that game so presumably
24.gxh5 1-0 Babaev -Del Valle Cirera, Se rge i h a d so m e imp ro ve me n t . . . a6
M a n r e s a E S P 2 0 0 8 . . I n v i e w o f c5 8.a3
25.g6 ] A1) 8...b4!? is one possibility, looking
15.b1 f5 16.g2! Quite strong, with the to target the bishop on f4, however this
dual ideas of Bf4 and Nf4. isn't convincing af te r 9.d2 bd5
[ 16.xg6 hxg6 17.h4 resembles the 10.e5 and White is still a little better.;
previous note. ] A2) 8...g7 is perhaps a more
16...f6 interesting option, obviously critical is
[ 16...d6 17.f4! threatens h4-h5. ] 9.xa6 bxa6 10.0-0 and after 0-0
17.f4 b6 18.e3 h5?! 11.c4 b7 it's unclear whether or not
313
Black's two bishops give him enough 12.ad1 White has kept a typical edge for this
compensation for his bad pawn structure, line. All pieces are still on the board and he
although I think I'd be happy enough as has a pleasant space advantage - his main
Black here. ( or 11...b8!? ); problem is finding ways of increasing the
A3) 8...c6 9.c3 c7 10.c4 g7 pressure. e8 13.c1
11.e5 0-0 12.a4 cd5 13.a5 h6 [ 13.h3 feels more natural and now after
14.e2 h5 15.0-0 hf4 16.e1 b6 14.b3 a5 15.h6 Black's position is
even this position seems fine for Black to very difficult to play ]
me. Here Tiviakov took on e2 but 13...b6 14.b3 a5 15.a4
perhaps it was better to simply develop [ 15.h6 personally I'd want to exchange
with e6 and I can't believe Black is these bishops but it's partly a matter of taste
really worse here.; I guess. xh6 16.xh6 a4 17.h3 ]
B) 7.c4 g7 8.f4 a6 9.h3 15...f5 16.a2 White is looking to gain
I'm not sure if this is necessary, Black space in the centre with c4 but this strikes me
seems to be close to equalising here. as a little artificial
( 9.e2 offers more chance for an [ 16.d3!? xd3 ( 16...e6 may be best,
advantage ) 9...0-0 10.e2 c5! 11.0-0 keeping the tension) 17.xd3 gives White's
cxd4 12.fxd4 e4 13.f3 ac5 rooks a few more options ]
( Black is very comfortable after the 16...bd5 17.d2 c7 18.c4!? xd4
immediate 13...e5! 14.xe4 exf4 15.d2 This seems to lead to a draw
c5 16.d5 e6! followed by ...a6) [ 18...d7 is a possible way for Black to play
14.b4 e5 15.bxc5 xc5 16.g3 exd4 on but White is a little better after 19.h6 ]
17.c7 b8 18.d5 a8 19.c7 b8 19.f4 c5 20.xf7! Otherwise White is
20.d5 a8 ( 20...e6 was the more simply a pawn down xf7
ambitious way to proceed - Black has [ 20...g4!? would be a final attempt but it's
exc elle nt pla y f o r t h e e xch a nge af t e r hard to play this during the game. It seems
21.xb8 xb8 22.d2 d6 ) 21.c7 likely to lead to a draw anyway with one
1/2-1/2 Grandelius, N (2572)-Tiviakov, S m a i n l i n e b e i n g 21.xg4 ( 21.xc7?
(2655) Wijk aan Zee 2013 ] loses to xf2+ 22.h1 e3; 21.f1 e6
6...g7 is a little better for Black) 21...xg4 22.d2
[ 6...c6!? has been tried in one game but xf7 23.xc7 h6 24.e5 xd2 25.xd2
W hit e is do ing well a f te r 7.d5! ( 7.a3 a3 26.f4+ f5 27.xf5+ gxf5 28.xf5+
was less critical in Sonjaya, D (2313)-Bitoon, g7 29.g5+ f7 30.f5+= ]
R (2504) Jakarta 2011.) 7...b4 8.b5 21.e3 e5 22.f4 c5 23.e3
b6 9.c4 Black has nothing better than to take the
A) 9...a6 10.e3 c5 ( 10...a5? 11.c3 repetition here e5 24.f4 c5 A short but
and the knight is trapped on b4) 11.c3 interesting draw.
with a clear edge to White; ½-½
B) 9...c6 10.e3 a5 11.c3 ]
7.e5 0-0 8.0-0 e6 After this White seems
to get some edge 311 B01
[ 8...c6 puts more pressure on White's Psakhis,Lev 2599
centre but after 9.b5 d8 10.xc6 bxc6 Manor,Ilan 2504
11.a3 b8 12.c3 White keeps an edge ] Israel 2000
[ 8...c5! looks best to me and Black could be [Alexander Volzhin]
equalising here, for example 9.b5 b6
10.a4 cxd4 11.c4 d8! 12.xd4 ( or 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6
12.xd4 d5 ) 12...c6 and Black has no 5.c4 b6 6.h3 g7 7.c3 0-0 8.e3 c6
problems ( 12...xd4 13.xd4 a6 9.e2 e5 10.d5 e7 11.g4!? This line is
is also sensible )] considered in the games Varavin-Terekhin
9.f4 d8 10.e1 c6 11.d2 bd7 and Varavin-Vshivkov (see AV134). Now this
314
line becomes more and more popular and , and the Bishop is by no means trapped in
recent practice proves Black has difficult view of 18.d6! ) 17.xc8 fxe3 ( 17...xc8
problems to solve here. e8!? Alternatives: 18.e6 is even worse for Black.) 18.xe7
[ 11...a5 was played in the above mentioned xe7 19.xe3 Now White has a clear
games where Black failed to equalise ] extra pawn as well as a positional
[ T h e p a n i c k y 11...e4? is bad as well: a d va n t a ge . h6 20.h4 d7 21.b1
12.xe4 f5 ( 12...xb2 fails to 13.d4! ae8 22.h2 xg5 23.hxg5 c5
xa1 14.f6+ h8 15.xa1 and Black is 24.e4 and in a few moves Black
in real trouble.) 13.c3 fxg4 14.hxg4 xg4 resigned, Rodriguez,A - Gomez Baillo,
15.g5! The refutation is not difficult xe2 1996. ]
16.xe2 d7 17.xh7 fe8 18.0-0-0 12.b3! The best square for Queen in this
and White is winning, R.Anderson-Levina, line is b3 . d7 13.c5 b6 14.g5! f8
Los Angeles 2000 ] A sad necessity.
[ 11...f5!? Definitely this natural move is [ The natural looking 14...h6 is bad in view of
critical for the evaluation of the whole line. 15.xf7! and Black is in trouble: xf7
Here White has a wide choice. 16.d6+ f8 17.b5! c6 ( 17...xc5
A) 12.d2 e4! ( 12...fxg4? 13.g5 g3 18.xc5 bxc5 19.f3+ ) 18.d5! b7
14.0-0-0 h6 15.ge4 f5 16.fxg3 h7 19.c4 with unavoidable mate. ]
17.h4 xe3 18.xe3 f5 19.hf1 xe4 15.c6 c5 16.xc5 bxc5 17.ge4
20.xe4 e7 21.d3 g8 22.c3 b4 Now White wins the c5-pawn and it's not easy
23.e4 and White is winning, Ankerst- for Black to prove he has enough for it
Pfeiffer, Germany 1992.) 13.g5 h6 although the position is very sharp and very
14.gxe4!? fxe4 15.xe4 exd5! precise play is required. h8 18.0-0-0 f5
16.cxd5 xd5 17.c2 e6 18.0-0 c4 19.gxf5 gxf5 20.xc5 e4?! After this
19.d2 xd2 20.xd2 ad8 21.e4 inaccuracy W hite quickly obtains huge
h7 and Black is even slightly better, advantage.
Sulskis-Zolnierowicz, Pardubice 1994.; [ Black should try 20...d6 21.c4 e4
B) 12.gxf5? i s r i d i c u l o u s : xf5 with certain counterplay for the pawn. ]
and Black is already better: 13.c5 e8 21.e6! xe6 22.dxe6 e8 Black had a
14.e4 d4 15.d3 f5 16.fd2 d7 joyless choice.
17.a3 f6 18.g4 xe4 19.xe4 h6 [ 22...c8 is bad as well in view of 23.d7
Now White can castle neither side. 20.c5 xc6 24.xg7! xg7 25.g1+ h8
b6 21.xf5 gxf5 22.g1+ f7 23.d6 26.d5! and White wins: b7 27.e7 fe8
bxc5 24.dxc7 xc7 25.d1 e6 ( 27...f6 28.d7 ) 28.f7 ]
and White resigned, Ciuksyte-Medvegy, 23.d7 b8 24.c4 g6
Szeged 1994.; [ 24...b6 didn't help Black either: 25.c5!
C) 12.g5 h6 13.e6 xe6 14.dxe6 xc6 ( 25...h6+ 26.b1 xc6 27.d5
e8 15.b3 d8 16.0-0 c6 17.c5 xe6 28.c3+ e5 29.xb6 xc3
bd5 18.xd5 xd5 19.c4 xe6 20.f3 30.bxc3 axb6 31.xc7 ) 26.xg7! xg7
c6 21.ae1 d7 22.c2 h8 23.xd5 27.g1+ h8 28.d5! with decisive
cxd5 and in this complicated position threats. ]
Black has sufficient compensation for the 25.b1 f6 26.c1 fc8 27.c5 g6
exchange, Eolian-Mnatsakanian, Erevan 28.e7 The rest is easy. e5 29.a6 xd7
1977.; 30.cxd7 xa6 31.dxc8+ xc8 32.xf5
D) 12.b3! In my opinion, the best. The d3+ In this hopeless position Black
alternatives are weaker: h8 13.0-0-0 exceeded the time limit.
d7 14.g5 f6 15.b5! a6 16.a7! 1-0
After exchanging off Black's light-squared
Bishop White's Knight will occupy the key
e 6 - s q u a r e f o r e v e r . f4 ( 16...xa7
This idea doesn't work: 17.xa7 b6
315
312 B01 [ and 6.d5 are examined elsewhere. ]

Rantanen,Tanja 2149 6...xd1+ 7.xd1? Although Black has
Grabics,Monika 2354 excellent play it was not obligatory to make
2nd ch-EUR Women (7) 29.04.2001 things worse by placing the king on the open
[Jon Tisdall] file.
[ After the correct 7.xd1 c6 8.f4 e6
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.f3 9.b3 0-0-0 10.e3 d4 ( weaker is
g4 5.e2 0-0-0 6.e3 e5 7.c4 a5+ 10...b4?! 11.a3 d3+ 12.xd3 xd3
8.d2 b4 9.d5 e4 10.g5 xe2 11.xe2 13.f5 d7 14.b4 White had obtained an
d4 12.d1 h6 13.0-0 xd2 14.xd2 advantage in the game Torre - Hsu Li, Kuala
This is all fairly well known theory, and white Lumpur 1993) 11.e2 b4+ 12.f2 c5
is supposed to pick up the e-pawn with a Black had enough compensation for the
massive advantage. Black plays a new and pawn. ]
n a t u r a l m o v e t o c o n f u s e t h e i s s u e . e3!? 7...c6 8.g5
15.b3?! [ 8.f4 was bad as after g4+ with 0-0-0 next
[ 15.fxe3 df5 16.e2 b6 ] the attack could become decisive. ]
15...exf2+ 16.xf2 xb3 17.xb3 c5 8...h6 9.h4
18.d3 he8 19.af1 e5 20.e4 e7 [ 9.f4 e6 was about the same. ]
21.d2 f5 22.b3 a6 23.d4 g6 24.h3 9...g5 10.g3 e6 11.b3 0-0-0+ 12.e1
f7 25.c3 e3 26.a5 e5 27.c2 e4 [ 12.c2 loses immediately af ter f5+
28.d1 xd4 29.xd4 f3+ 30.gxf3 e3+ 13.b2 ( 13.c1 a3# ) 13...d2+ 14.c1
31.g2 xd4 32.c3 f4 33.e2 g5+ c2+ ]
34.h2 f4 35.g2 h5 36.g4 g5 37.e5 12...d4 13.d3?
e8 38.xg5 e2+ 39.g1 xg5 40.xg5 [ 13.c1 a3 14.d1 b4 was also bad for
xb2 41.f5 xa2 42.xf4 c2 43.e4 a5 White but resistance could be prolonged. ]
44.f4 a4 45.f5 a3 46.f6 a2 47.e1 xc4 13...b4 14.c1 xb3
48.f1 f4 49.a1 xf6 50.xa2 f5 [ The text is good enough for a win, but
51.a8+ d7 52.h8 h5 53.h7+ d6 14...b5! wins a piece by force: 15.cxb5
0-1 xd3 16.ge2 d5 and White should
resign. ]
15.axb3 xd3 16.ge2 a5! 17.f1 a4
313 B01 18.xa4 xa4 19.bxa4 hd8
Remizov,Juri 2150 White resigned.
Bezgodov,Alexei 2425 0-1
St.Petersburg op 1994
[Alexander Volzhin]
314 B01
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6 Renet,Olivier 2520
5.c3 This move order prevents the 5.Nf3 Prie,Eric 2480
Bg4 line but allows an interesting counterblow catX Clichy (8) 1995
in the centre. e5!? 6.dxe5?! In my opinion [Eric Prié]
this is a dubious move.
[ The alternatives are: 6.e2 then the game 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6
Tivjakov - Maljutin, URS (ch) Moscow 1991 5.f3 f6 6.d2 f5 7.e4 b6! 8.xf6+
continued with e7 7.dxe5 c6 8.e3 [ 8.g3 g4! The logical complement to ...
e6 ( 8...xe5?? 9.xb6 ) 9.d1 c8 Q b 6 a im in g a t d 4 a n d b 2 . 9.c4 e6
10.c5 ( 10.b3 b4 with initiative) 10...d7! ( 9...xf3? Watch out for this trap! 10.xf3
11.f4 0-0 12.d5 xd5 13.xd5 b4 xd4? 11.b3+- e6 12.xb7 xc4
14.d1 c6 15.f2 d5 with good 13.c8+ e7 14.a5! bd7 15.xa8 )
prospects for black ] A) 10.b3!? xf3 11.xf3 xd4
[ 6.f3 g4 7.e2 ] 12.0-0-0 bd7 13.f5? e4!
316
( 13...exf5? 14.he1+ e7 15.f4 b6 against each other's castle. ]

16.d6 ); [ When 9...xb2!? is also a test, intending
B) 10.0-0!? Hamdouchi, H Intending 10.b3 ( 10.b1 xc2 11.xc2 xc2
xf3?! ( 10...bd7 ) 11.xf3 xd4 12.xb7 e4 ) 10...g8! now
12.b3 b6 13.xe6!; A) 11.0-0!? h3? ( 11...g4 ) 12.g5!
C) 10.c3 xf3! 11.xf3 xb2 12.d1 fxg5 13.h5! e6 ( 13...g7 14.xh3
bd7 13.0-0 d6 14.g5 b6 d7 15.ad1! 0-0-0 16.c1 a1
Co n t ra ry t o S ca n d in a via n le ge n d I a n 17.a3 ) 14.xh3 xd4? 15.xe6;
Ro ge r s , I d o u b t W h i t e h a s s u f f ic ie n t B) 11.b1 a3 12.0-0 g4! Unclear.
compensation for the pawn here. ] The pin on f3 is a bit annoying for White.
8...gxf6 9.c4 13.h3 xh3 ( 13...h5!? ) 14.g5 fxg5
[ 9.b4!? 15.h5 e6 16.xh3 g6 With good
A) 9...e5?! 10.c4! Nijboer-Prié, E chances of holding the opposing attack,
Linares zt 1995; and then... ]
B) 9...e6 10.a3 Intending Bf4, c2-c4-c5 10.b3
g8 11.f4! And not ( 11.h4? xc2 [ 10.0-0 d7 11.e1 e6 12.a4 0-0-0
12.xc2 xd4 13.d1 xh4 ) 11...d7 13.b4 c7 14.b5 cxb5 15.xb5 b8
12.c4; 16.a5 a6 17.d3 xd3 18.cxd3 c6
C) 9...g8! In the opening, when in doubt 19.f4+ d6 20.g3 xg3 21.hxg3 c8
(...e6 or ...e5?) start playing the forced 22.b3 c3 23.a4 c7 24.a3 c6
moves before the optional ones! With the 25.b4 e8 26.b3 d5 27.d2 ec8=
idea 10.c4? ( 10.c4 d7 And Black will Smirin, I-Prie, E Bastia op 1997 ]
lo n g c a s t l e a n d p l a y . . . e 7 - e 5 wi t h a [ 10.c3!
complicated game without having to worry A) 10...xg2? 11.h4 g5 12.xf5
about f7. ) 10...xg2 11.h4 xd4 ( 12.f4 g4 13.d3 h5 ) 12...xf5
12.xg2 xc4 13.e3 e4 ] 13.g4 e6 ( 13...g5 14.c8+ ) 14.g8
9...g8!? Designed to prevent White from c7 ( 14...d7 15.xe6! ) 15.0-0-0 xf2?
short castling but not really threatening to 16.he1 Followed by Bxe6.;
take on g2 in a position where development B) 10...e6 ]
should be the priority. 10...a5! 11.a4 a6! The 'semi refutation' of
[ 9...e6 Transposing into the next game, this set-up for White. Thus the d-file remains
therefore should be preferred, if only to meet open after long castling, the queen can stay
10.c3 with on b6 for a while with the Bb3 in the line of
A) 10...a6!? 11.h4! g6?! ( 11...e4! fire in case of a white c2-c3, and the knight is
is the right approach: With a bishop on c3 annoying on b4 with the retreat square d5 in
it not easy to try to catch a black bishop on case of necessity, instead of the less
d 5 wi t h c 2 - c 4 . 12.0-0 b4 13.h5 economical manoeuvre ...Nd7, ...Qc7, ...Nb6,
d5 ) 12.f4! 0-0-0 ( 12...f5 13.d5 ...Nd5. 12.e2?
This is the problem.) 13.f5 exf5 14.0-0 [ 12.0-0! e6 And White now has a problem.
b4 ( 14...h6 15.xf5 xf5 16.xf5 ( 12...h3 13.g5! Again ) 13.c3
e3+ 17.h1 xd4 18.a5; 14...c5 A) 13...h3!? 14.e1 ( 14.g5
15.f3; 14...d6 15.xf5 xf5 16.xf5 no longer works xg2 15.xg2 fxg5 )
c7 ) 15.xf5 d5 16.f3; 14...0-0-0;
B) 10...b4 11.0-0 d7 12.h4 g6 B) 13...g4! 14.c4 d6 It is important
13.f4 xc3 14.bxc3 f5 15.b1 c7 to prevent W hite's Bf4-g3 consolidation
16.a4 ( 16.f3 h5 ) 16...0-0-0 with attacking prospects for Black. ]
W ith an unbalanced position difficult to [ 12.c3 e6 13.h4 ]
assess: Black has a poor bishop, though it 12...b4 13.0-0-0?
is possible to a ctivate it via h 5, but a [ 13.e3 d5= ( 13...d3+ 14.f1 b4
strong outpost on e4 while both sides have 15.d5 )]
a worsened structure with an open file 13...d3+! 14.cxd3
317
[ 14.b1 xb3! 15.cxb3 f4+ 16.a2 11.c3 xc6 12.xe4 xa4 13.c1
xe2 17.e3 ( 17.de1 d3-+ ) 17...e4 c6 14.c3 c5 and Black had
( 17...xg2 18.h4 ) 18.he1 xg2 e q u a li s e d i n G u n a r s so n - B r o n s t e i n ,
19.d2 ( 19.h4 xh2 ) 19...c2 20.a1 Reykjavik,1996. ]
d3-+ ] 6...b5!! The point! 7.xb5
14...xb3 White realizes his position has [ Probably 7.cxb5 is better, although after
suddenly become a ruin. d4! 8.a3 ( 8.b6+ d7 ) 8...e5!
[ 14...xb3 15.c3 xg2! ( 15...xa4 ) Black has an excellent position. ]
16.h4 g4 17.d2 ( 17.e4 xd1 7...c2+ Now White's king has to choose
18.xg2 c2# ) 17...xd1 18.xg2 f3 between two squares .Unfortunately for him
19.g1 xa4-+ ] both moves lose! 8.d2
0-1 [ 8.d1 d7 9.dxc6 ( After 9.a6 6b4
10.b7 c6! White's Queen was suddenly
trapped, Brashon - Gedult,1973.) 9...g4+
315 B01 It's interesting to note that from this moment
Rhode,AB on all Black's moves are checks! 10.xc2
Tsitevic d1+ 11.c3 xc1+ 12.b3 d1+
[Alexander Volzhin] 13.b4 a5+ 14.c5 e5+ 15.d5 d8+
16.xe5 d6+ and White resigned in
Before considering the main lines, let's have a Goldobov - Kanadin, Minsk, 1970, as the
lo o k a t t h e p ro vo ca tive 4 . . . Nb 4? ! wh ich "brave" King will soon be mated. ]
contains a very nice trick. Although this has 8...d7 9.dxc6 f5+ 10.d5 b4!!
been known since the last century, Black has Black's attack is even very strong without
won hundreds of games very easily with this Queens. 11.xd8+ xd8+ 12.c3 c2
line. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 13.f4 e5! Gaining an important tempo for
b4 5.a4+ Why not play to win the brave developing the dark-squared Bishop. 14.xe5
Knight?! b4+ 15.b3 b8 16.xc7 0-0!
[ 5.a3!? is worth considering 4c6 6.d5 Excellent! Now all Black's pieces participate in
e5 White is slightly better here, but th e a tt ack. 17.xb8 xb8 18.a3 xa3+
matters are not so clear. ] 19.c3
5...8c6 6.d5? [ W h i t e ' s K i n g h a s n o e s c a p e : 19.a2
[ Instead of the text 6.a3! should be played xb2# ]
a6 ( a sad necessity) 7.f3 ( 7.d5?! 19...b4+ 20.b3 d2+ 21.a4
here is also far from good in view of c5 [ 21.a2 also leads to a beautiful mate after
and now 8.b5?! is too optimistic in view of c1! and 22... Rb2 as 22.b3 allows another
e6! 9.dxc6 b6! and White's Queen is mate: b4# ]
trapped, for example: 10.e3 a6 11.b4 21...b4+ 22.a5 d4 Now Nxc6+ and Bc8
d3+; In my opinion, 7.e3! is best, after is unavoidable, so White resigned. Although I
d7 8.d1 e5 9.d5 e7 White is clearly can't recommend you try this line against
better, although the fight is still ahead.) Kasparov, why not to try it against somebody
7...e5! An excellent move! else?
A) 8.d5 c5 9.d1 d4 Look how 0-1
active Black's Knights are now! White can't
win a p a wn : 10.xd4 exd4 11.xd4?
( 11.b4 e7+ 12.e2 d3! is unclear.)
11...b3 12.e3+ e7 and Black wins
material;
B) 8.dxe5 c5 with obvious
compensation.;
C) 8.xe5 Probably White has nothing
better: xd4 9.xc6 e4+ 10.e3 d7
318
316 B01 14.e4 g6 15.e5 b6 16.xg6 hxg6

Ristic,Neb1 2380 17.ab1 d8 18.c3 c5 19.dxc5 xc5
Markovic,Milovan 2320 20.bd1 d7 ) 14.e4 f6 15.h4 h6
ch-Serbia, Dimitrovgrad (8) 2003 16.e5 d8 17.c3 d5 18.e4 f6
[Andrew Martin] 19.f3 d7 20.e3 ]
13.c3 d7 14.e5! c6 15.f3 h6 16.d2
NASTY,BRUTISH AND SHORT 1.e4 d5 The Bishops look very menacing and some
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 The Banker n- sort of sacrifice is inevitable. d7 17.h3
quite playable. Black plans ...c6,...Nf6 and .. xe5 Doesn't help. The net effect is that the
Bf5 with a Caro-Kann like position. At least, White Rook joins the party. 18.xe5 d7
t h a t ' s w h a t h e s h o u l d b e d o i n g ! 4.c4 19.xh6! gxh6 20.xh6 A brief game and a
OK, no problem-just play 4.. .Nf6! lesson to all defenders. COUNTERPLAY IS
[ 4.d4 f6 5.g5 c6 6.f3 f5 7.e5 NECESSARY!
bd7 8.f3 xc2 9.c4 e6 10.e2 g6 1-0
11.h4 b4 12.f1 xc3 13.bxc3 a5
14.xd7 xd7 15.xf6 gxf6 16.h5 f5
17.f3 hg8 Pap,M-Markovic,Z/ch-Serbia, 317 B01
Dimitrovgrad YUG 2003 was much more like Ritov
it f rom Black's point of view. A more Skuya
orthodox development, provocation with the USSR 1971
ca pt ure o n c2 a nd a ge nu in e ly u ncle a r [Alexander Volzhin]
middlegame. Markovic lost this one too . ]
4...e6?! Black might be able to make 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 e5
something of this if he angles for a Rubinstein A rare continuation which can confuse the
French structure. But apparently Markovic White player if he does not know what to do.
intends to just sit there, weather the storm 5.f3
and take over later. 5.d4 c6?! Ugly-far too [ After 5.dxe5 Black can develop his pieces
passive. Why not very quickly: b4 6.f3 g4 7.d2 c6
[ 5...f6 6.f3 e7 followed by castles and 8.a3 d4 9.e2 xf3 10.xf3 xe5+
angle for a quick ...c7-c5? ] 11.f1 xc3 12.xc3 0-0-0 13.xd4 xd4
6.f3 f6 7.0-0 e7 8.e1 0-0 9.g5 and Black was completely okay in
bd7 10.e2 b6 Evidence of the 'sitting' Landenbergue - Casagrande, Biel 1996. ]
procedure. My problem with this move is that 5...exd4
there is no counterplay to be seen for Black. [ 5...b4 does not solve Black's problems:
Of course W hite keeps an edge after other 6.d2 g4 ( 6...exd4 7.xd4 e5+
moves : is not enough: 8.e2 xe2+ 9.xe2 c6
[ 10...h6 11.h4 b6 12.ad1 b7 10.e4 xd2+ 11.xd2 with a big
13.e5 ] advantage in development in the endgame.)
[ 10...b6 11.ad1 b7 12.e5 xe5 7.a3 d6 8.c4 with a strong initiative. ]
13.dxe5 d5 14.xe7 xe7 15.e4 6.e2+ e7 7.xd4 c6?
but I feel that these positions are [ After 7...f6 8.b5+ xb5 9.dxb5 a6
manageable, particularly the first line. ] 10.f4 d8 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.c4
11.d3 bd5 12.xd5 cxd5? Ugly and W hite has an unpleasant initiative in the
now Markovic gets what he deserves. He must endgame thanks to his development
not a llow W hite such a f re e ha nd o n th e advantage but this was obviously the lesser
Kingside. I think evil. The text move allows White to maintain
[ 12...xd5 was more or less forced : a very strong attack against the Black king. ]
13.xe7 xe7 ( 13...xe7 Defending 'a la' 8.f4 a6 9.0-0-0 d7 It's hard to see how
Lasker might be possible. Black knows he is Black can castle kingside. 10.b1 0-0-0
worse but will avoid making any further 11.c4!
weaknesses and invite W hite to attack. [ White could win a pawn by force with
319
11.b3 f5 12.xa6! xf4 ( 12...bxa6?? xd5 16.c4 e5 17.cxd5 exf4 18.e2+
13.xa6# ) 13.xa7 but the text move is d8 with decent play - Buecker;
even stronger. ] A2) 12.g2! xb2 ( 12...0-0-0!
11...g5 13.f3 ) 13.cd5 xd5 14.xd5;
[ 11...f6 12.e6 ] B) 10.d5!? e6? ( 10...e4! , when
[ 11...h6 12.b3 b4 13.d5 ] 11.xe4 xe4 12.f3 g6 13.e3 e6
[ 11...h5 12.xa6 ] 14.d2 might yield an edge) 11.f4 e5
12.g3 Black already has no defence against 12.xe5 b6 13.c4 c5 14.e2+
the numerous threats. h6 13.b3 b4 d8 15.0-0-0 and Black is getting killed,
[ 13...f5 14.xa6! ] Lagerman- Rodriguez Fonseca, Reykjavik
14.d5! ISL 2009. ]
[ 14.xa6 bxa6 15.xa6+ b7 16.xb7+ 9.d2
xb7 could prolong Black's suffering. ] [ One game this month followed a much-
14...e6? a n a lys e d va r ia t io n ch a m p io n e d b y I a n
[ 14...xc4 15.xe7# ] Rogers as Black: 9.g2 c6 10.h4 ( 10.0-0
[ 14...e8 was the only move to avoid has also been played) 10...bd7 ( 10...e4
checkmate after which W hite has a lot of 11.xe4 xe4 12.f3 d6 13.d2
winning possibilities: 15.xb4 ( 15.xa6!? with advantage, Macak, S-Karnik, P/Tatry
xd5 16.xd5 winning ) 15...xd1+ 16.c1 Open, Tatranske Zruby SVK 2003. )
xb4 ( 16...xb4 17.e2! ) 17.b3 A) 11.0-0!? xe5 ( 11...0-0-0 12.e2 )
winning another piece. ] 12.dxe5 xe5 13.e1 may well give
15.xc6+! Black resigned. W hite the advantage this simple ide a
1-0 should be looked into;
B) 11.xd7 xd7 (a long-debated
position) 12.d2
318 B01 B1) 12...h5 13.g5 g8 - Andrew Martin
Rivera,Daisy 2338 but it's hard to like Black's game after
Bauer,Christian 2590 14.e2 c7 ( 14...xc2 15.d5 )
Galicia Festival Blitz blitz (3) 26.09.2009 15.e4! xe4 16.xe4;
[John Watson] B2) 12...h6
B2a) 13.d5 exd5 14.xd5 e8+
Black is still playing one of the oldest lines in 15.e3 a4 16.b3 f4 17.f1
the Scandinavian, and GM Christian Bauer is ( 17.0-0 d6 18.e1 e4 ) 17...e4
leading the way. Remarkably, the variation 18.xe4 xe4 19.f3 Wynn Zaw Htun-
doesn't even appear in Jovanka Houska's R ogers, I, Bangkok 2004. In this
'Starting Out: the Scandinavian', probably colu mn, An drew Ma rtin su gge ste d
because the most recent battles concentrate e6! 'maintaining a strong initiative'.;
upon other lines. Nevertheless, there seems a B2b) 13.d5 a4 14.e3 d5
lot to look into here. The best source that I 15.h5 h7 16.f3 xd4 17.xf7+
know of is John Emms' second edition of 'The e7 18.xd5 cxd5 19.f3 e5+
Scandinavian'. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 20.e3 e4 21.h3 b4+ 22.f1
a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 6.h3 h5 7.g4 xc2 23.f3 e4 24.e2 a6 25.d1
g6 8.e5 e6 xg2+ 26.xg2 ac8 27.d3 hf8
[ Another recent game went 8...bd7 9.c4 28.h3 c5 29.e1 xe3 30.hxe3
a6 xb2 31.1e2 f6 32.b3 b5
A) 10.f4 is more usual and important, 33.xe6 xe6 34.xe6 xe6 35.a4
with the continuation e6+ 11.e3 b6! c4 36.e3+ e4 37.b6+ f7
can lead to 38.b7+ f6 39.f3 xa4 40.c6+
A1) 12.b5!? c8 13.g5 e4! 14.g1 e7 1/2-1/2 Safarli, E (2587)-Bauer, C
( best looks 14.f3 d5 15.xd5 xd5 (2590)/Lugo ESP 2009/The Week in
16.c4 e5 17.e3! ) 14...d5 15.xd5 Chess 777 ]
320
[ 9.h4 b4 ( 9...bd7 10.c4 a6 11.h5 [ 14.xa7+ b8 15.b5 xc2 16.c1
e4 12.h4! is thought to give some e4 17.g1 d5 ]
advantage ) 14...a6 15.c3 xd4 16.g2 c5! 17.e2
A) 10.h3 used to be the 'refutation' of c4 18.c3 xf2 with a won game: 19.hf1
Black's play in this line based upon a e3+ 20.b1 h5 21.f3 hxg4 22.hxg4
famous game by Karpov but theory has e4 23.xg7 g8 24.xe4 xe4 25.c3
changed over the years: xg4 26.c1 g2 27.d3 b6 28.a4 a5
A1) Alexander Volzhin annotated the 29.b3 d8 30.f6 d5 31.fe1 d4
following game in this column: ' 10...c6 32.xd4 xd4 33.g1 xg1 34.xg1 xd3
11.d2 b6 12.h5 e4 ( 12...xd4 35.cxd3 xd3 36.c2 f3
13.f3 ) 13.e3 xc3 ( 13...xd4? 0-1
was bad for Black because of 14.g5! )
14.xc3 d5 15.g5 e4 16.g4 d6
17.0-0-0 d7 18.e1! (c2-c4 is 319 B01
t h r e a t e n e d ) xe5 19.dxe5 f5 Rohde,Michael A
20.h3! White's idea is still c2-c4 and it Seirawan,Yasser
c a n n o t b e p a r r i e d ! 0-0-0 ( 20...c5 USA 1976
is not a defence due to 21.xd5 exd5 [Nigel Davies]
22.xf5 with a large advantage) 21.c4
c5 22.b4 That's why the Rook did not 5.Bc4 continues to flirt with transposition into
retreat to a3 - it would be hanging after the main lines, and this could easily come
Qb4. f3 23.xd8+ xd8 24.xf3 about if W hite played a later d2-d4. This
xe5 25.c3 The rest is not important. game sees White stubbornly refuse to do so,
d6 26.d3 d4 27.xf7 f5 and this highly imaginative game is rich in
28.xf5 f4+ 29.e3 Black resigned. combinative play. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
1-0 Karpov, A-Rogers, I/Bath 1983; 3.c3 a5 4.f3 f6 5.c4 g4
A2) 10...xc3+ 11.bxc3 bd7 12.h5? [ Black can also wait with 5...c6 but then
( 12.xd7 xd7 13.g2 , and I like h5! 6.e2 creates some problems, for example
14.xb7 d8 ) 12...xe5 13.dxe5 f5 ( 6...e6 7.d4 b4 8.0-0 0-0 9.d2
xe5+ 14.e3 e4 15.d3 xc3+ left Black passively placed in Plaskett - Hunt,
16.d2 c6 17.g5 xd3 0-1 Moes- B r i t i s h C h . , H o v e 1 9 9 7; 6...g4?
Bjarnason, 12th Monarch Assurance, is bad because of 7.xf7+ xf7 8.e5+
Port Erin IOM 2003; etc. ) 7.e5 g6 8.d4 e6 9.d2 b4
B) 10.d2 bd7 11.xd7 xd7 12.g2 10.h4 bd7 11.h5 f5 12.f3 xe5
h5 13.g5 d5 , and Emms thinks White 13.dxe5 d7 14.0-0-0 and White was
gets something from 14.xd5 exd5 15.c3 much better in the game Crosa -
he8+ 16.e3 d6 17.b3! ] Spangenberg, Buenos Aires 2000 ]
9...b6 [ In Kharlov - Westerinen, Gausdal 1992
[ One of the shortest games I've ever seen Black's 5...f5 wa s m e t b y 6.b4!? b6
on ChessPublshing was 9...c6?? 10.b5 ( 6...xb4 7.e2 gives White very
b6 11.c4! xb5 12.d6+ 1-0 Diringer, dangerous attacking chances for the pawn)
B-Link, M/Wurttemberg 1990 1990. ] 7.0-0 e6 8.d3 e7 9.f4 0-0 10.b5
[ 9...bd7 10.c4 a6 11.f3 0-0-0 a6 11.a3 d5 12.e5 f6 13.e1
12.0-0-0 ] with much the better game for W hite
10.e2 because of his space. ]
[ 10.f3! c6 ( 10...c6 11.b5 0-0-0!? ) [ Another Kharlov game went 5...c6 6.h3
11.0-0-0 seems better, although Bauer was e5 7.b3 xf3+ 8.xf3 e5+ 9.e2
doubtless ready for this. ] e6 10.d4 e4 11.g3 d7 12.f3 g6
10...c6! 11.xc6 xc6 12.b5 xb5 13.f2 h5 14.h4 , once again with excellent
13.xb5 0-0-0 Black is more active and play for White in Kharlov - Reprintsev, St
stands better. 14.0-0-0?! Petersburg 1998 ]
321
6.h3 h5 57.c5+ e4 58.f3+

[ The safe line is 6...xf3 7.xf3 , but here 1-0
White might claim to be better because of
his bishop pair. ]
7.e2 bd7 8.g4 g6 9.b4!? Continuing in 320 B01
ga m b it s t yl e , a n d i n f a ct W h it e c h a rg e s Rosandic,Denis 2285
forward throughout the game. Zelcic,Robert 2575
[ 9.d3 was the solid way to play it. ] 9th Open, Bosnjaci (4) 2003
9...b6 [Andrew Martin]
[ 9...xb4 10.b1 wins the b7 pawn. ]
10.h4 h6 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
[ Capturing on g4 is very good for White after f6 5.e2 Just a 'normal' developing move,
10...xg4? 11.d5 d6 12.h5 f5 the reaction of an opponent who has been
13.d4 etc. ] unsettled by 3...Qd6. White has been drawn
11.h5 h7 12.a4 c6 13.g5 hxg5 14.xg5 out of theory and seeks a simple solution.
g8 15.a5 c7 16.b5 cxb5 17.xb5 c6 This type of approach cannot worry Black
18.h3 a6 19.c3 e6 20.b2 g2!? when he has such a straightf orward plan
Ambitious. available. a6 Why not? The usual ideas of ...
[ The solid way to play it was with 20...c8 b7-b5, ...e7-e6, ...Bb7, ...Nbd7 ...Be7 and
21.b3 c5 etc. ] eventually ...c7-c5! are perfectly applicable
21.e3 c5 22.d4 xd4 23.xd4 xg5 here.
24.e4 xe4 25.xe4 h7 26.d4 g8?! [ 5...c6 Also playable:
[ Black should have taken this opportunity to A) 6.g5 f5 7.f3 bd7 8.d2 b6
get the queens off with 26...f5 27.g3 Giving the Queen some room. I prefer
f6! after which 28.xg7 xd4 29.xd4 ( 8...e6 9.f4 b4 ) 9.e5 e6 10.g4
would probably be drawn ] e4 11.xe4 xe4 12.f3 g6 13.f4
27.e3 xh5 d8 14.c4 e7 15.0-0-0 d7 16.xg6
[ A n d h e r e t o o h e s h o u l d p l a y 27...f6 hxg6 17.b1 f6 18.e5 Obodchuk,A-
. Now W hite's initiative moves up a notch Kuntz,P/Olympiad, Bled SLO 2002;
with the sacrifice of another pawn. ] B) 6.f3 f5 7.0-0 e6 8.e1 e7 9.h3
28.a3! xa5+ 29.f1 f5 30.d1 0-0-0 0-0 ( If h2-h3, why not ...h7-h6, preserving
31.d6 b6 32.c3?! t h e B i s h o p ? 9...h6!= ) 10.h4 g6
[ 32.c3! would have been even stronger as 11.xg6 hxg6 12.f3 bd7 13.e4
after xd4 33.xd4 Black would have to try c7 14.c4 ad8 15.b3 xe4 16.xe4
and bail out with c5 ] f6 17.e3 d7 18.d1 c5!
32...c6 33.xa6 c5! 34.xb7+! xb7 Kim,E-Zavar Mosavi,M/Asian Youth GU14,
35.b1+ a8? The final mistake. Tehran IRI 2002 ]
[ 35...c8 36.xc5 h1+ 37.e2 g4+ [ 5...c6!? Combative. 6.f3 g4 7.b5
38.f3 g2+ would draw by perpetual d7 8.f4 d5 9.g3 a6 10.c3 e6
check. ] 11.0-0 xc3 12.bxc3 d6 13.b1 xg3
36.xc5! h1+ 14.fxg3 b8 15.g5 xe2 16.xe2 d8
[ 36...xc5 37.xc5 leaves Black 17.f4 h6 18.h4 d5! 19.e4 xa2
defenceless against the threat of 38.Ra3 but 20.f1 b5 ( 20...0-0? 21.f6+ gxf6
the text doesn't fare much better. ] 22.g4+ h7 23.f4!+- ) 21.g4 b4 22.g5
37.e2 g4+ 38.d2 xd6+ 39.xd6 h5 23.g6 fxg6 24.c5 bxc3 25.e4 h6
xb1 40.a3+ b7 41.b3+ xb3 26.hf4 g5 27.c6+ xc6 28.f8+ e7
42.cxb3 f5 43.d7+ b6 44.c3 h8 29.1f7+ d6 30.d7# 1-0 Manea,A-
45.xf7 h3+ 46.b4 h4+ 47.a3 g6 Osman,M/Juventus, Bucharest ROM 2002 ]
48.f6 h3 49.d8+ b5 50.b8+ a5 [ 5...e6 6.f3 a6 7.ge2 bd7 8.f4
51.a7+ b5 52.b7+ c5 53.a4 d3 b6 9.0-0 c6 10.a4 d8 11.c4 e7
54.c7+ d5 55.b4 d4 56.a5 d3 12.d3 0-0 13.fd1 e8 14.ac1 f8
322
15.ec3 a5 16.a3 e5 17.b4 c7 41...xc3 42.g1 e5 43.f1 b8

18.g3 1/2-1/2 Muhren, W-Ryan,J/Lost He is losing a second pawn with little to show
Boys Open, Amsterdam NED 2002 (66) ] for it..
6.f3!? He prevents ... b7-b5 but Black can 0-1
switch plans with ease. Straightforward play
leads to nothing either:
[ 6.f3 b5 7.d3 b7 8.e5 bd7 9.f4 321 B01
b6! 10.a4 b4 11.a5 e6 12.a4 xg2 Roth,P 2252
Black point-blank refuses to be intimidated. Rogers,Ian 2618
13.g1 e4 14.d2 xe5 15.xe5 c6 Baden 1999
16.c4 e6 17.c5 d5 18.c4 f6 19.g3 [Alexander Volzhin]
e7 20.xd5 exd5 21.xb4 0-0 22.c3
f3 23.a4 b7 24.b4 fe8 25.d2 c8 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3
26.c6 g4 27.ge1 xd4+ 28.c2 f6 5.d4 c6 6.c4 g4 7.h3 h5 8.g4
0-1 Crouan,S-Carton,C/TCh-FRA Nat 2002 g6 9.d2 e6 10.e2 b4 11.e5 bd7
In continually seeking compensation, White 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.h4?! White hopes that the
ran out of time. ] h4-h5 threat will give him a big advantage.
6...c6 7.ge2 f5 8.f4 d7 9.d2 However an unpleasant surprise awaits him.
0-0-0 10.d1 e6 11.a3 h6 12.h3 g5 [ 13.a3 xc3 14.xc3 c7 ]
Posing the question as to where White will put 13...xe5 14.dxe5 xd2! 15.xd2 xc3
his King. 13.g3 d6 14.xd6 xd6 16.bxc3?!
15.xc6 xc6 16.0-0 e4 17.xe4 xe4 [ 16.xc3 xc3 17.bxc3 xg4 18.he1
18.f3 f5 19.c3 White's policy has been to xf2 19.d4 h5 20.f4 g4 21.d3
exchange as many pairs of pieces as he can xd3 22.cxd3 h6 By transferring his
to lessen the impact of the Black attack. One Knight to f5 Black avoids any possibility of
cannot fault this strategy but if this is the best losing while keeping some winning chances,
that he can do the variation with 5 Be2 and 6 although in my opinion White should hold
Bf3 will have to be scrapped. h5 20.xg5 the draw. ]
xh3! 21.c5 xc5 22.dxc5 f5 23.d4 16...a3+
g6 24.f4 d5! 25.b4 h4 26.h2 h3 [ Probably 16...e4 immediately was even
27.gxh3? He decides to eliminate the passed better, for example: 17.d7+ b8 18.e7
p a wn . T h is is u n d e r st a n d a b le b u t f a u lt y c8! 19.d7 c5 and after the Rook
judgement. I believe that a better chance was retreat Black just takes the c3-pawn with
[ 27.g3!? e5 ( 27...h5 28.de1 g4 major threats. ]
29.e5 f6 30.xd5 exd5 31.e1 d7 17.b1 e4 18.d7+? A clear inaccuracy.
may be Black's best, although this is far After the sudden blow on move 14 White has
from winning.) 28.fxe5 xe5 29.de1 f6 completely lost his confidence.
30.f3= ] [ 18.e3 should be played, and the
27...h5 28.de1 g4! The problem now is interesting complications lead by force to a
that W hite has to contend with two rook ending! xc3+ 19.a1 e4 20.h3
weaknesses. His Queenside is weak and the Absolutely the only move, otherwise 20...
King is exposed. 29.g3 Bd5 wins. b2+! A very nice exchanging
[ 29.e3 dh5 ] co m b i n a t i o n . 21.xb2 xd1+ 22.b3
29...xh3 30.h1 dh5 31.e5 g8+ xe3 23.xe3 d5 24.xd5 cxd5 25.f3!
[ 31...5h7 32.c6! ] (making Black's Rook very passive) f8
32.g5 hxg5+ 33.fxg5 f5 34.f4 g6 26.c4 and White has drawing chances. ]
35.e5 d8 36.f6 e4 37.e1 d5 18...b8 Now the game is practically over.
38.g6 fxg6 39.xg6 g8+ 40.f6 g3 After the unavoidable Nxc3 Black wins the
He penetrated eventually. 41.e7 exchange back, keeping an extra pawn as well
[ 41.xe6 xe6 42.xe6 xc3 43.a4 as a big positional advantage and the
c4 ] possibility of an attack on the W hite King.
323
19.b3 xc3+ 20.a1 xd1 21.xd1 h5! 12.xc1 f6 13.g2 h5! and Black has
22.b1 White tries to create an attack down the easier position to play. ]
the b-file, but Black parries all the threats very 10.e3 g7 11.g3 xf3
easily. a5! 23.d5 [ 11...h5!? is slightly more aggressive but
[ 23.xe6 d o e s n ' t h e l p e i t h e r : xe5+ probably Kramnik wanted to grind out a win
24.b2 c7 25.xc7+ (forced) xc7 with a slower approach but after 12.g2 h4
and after the Bishop retreat and 26...hxg4 13.g4 f5! White definitely has to be the
Black wins one more pawn. ] more careful ]
23...c3+ 24.b2 e1+ 25.b1 xe5+ 12.xf3 f6 13.e1 f5! Kramnik is happy
26.b2 c7 27.xc6? Blundering a Bishop to swap the queens into an endgame where
but White is absolutely lost anyway. 27... exd5 only he can really press for the win. It's fair to
is too obvious, so White resigned immediately. say the opening has not been a success for
T h is ga m e i s a n e xc e l l e n t e xa m p le o f a Rowson, however he now digs in deep to
sudden attack. defend the endgame. 14.g2
0-1 [ 14.xf5+ gxf5 15.g2 e6 and Black's
doubled pawns are hardly a weakness here
and in fact they help by giving him more
322 B01 control of the centre. ]
Rowson,J 2569 14...xf3+ 15.xf3 d5 16.xd5 xd5
Kramnik,V 2793 17.b3 e6 18.a4 Sensibly Jonathan just
5th Classic GpB 2013 rapid (6.2) 13.12.2013 places all his pawns on light squares and
[Tom Rendle] waits to see what Black will do hd8 19.b1
W hit e is pu rely on the def ensive here a5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2 20.he1 b6 21.e2 b7 22.be1 8d6
c6 5.h3 23.d1 c3 24.f4 c6 25.e4 e5!
[ Because of the line Kramnik chooses in this Finally Black has all of his pieces on the best
game I pref er 5.0-0 0-0-0 and only now squares so he now grabs more space in the
6.h3! which we saw in Vachier Lagrave- centre. It's not quite enough for real winning
Papaioannou which I annotated back in chances however. 26.e3 f5 27.c4 dd6
November. ] [ 27...xc4 doesn't help at all 28.bxc4 d8
5...xf3 6.xf3 e6+ 7.f1!? Very creative 29.b1 c6 30.b5! and White is easily
play from Rowson but I'm not sure this really holding the draw. ]
gives White any chances for an edge against 28.e2 h5
sensible play. [ 28...xc4 is perhaps worth a try as now
[ in my notes to Zhigalko-Sharif I only after 29.bxc4 c6 30.b1 Black can
c o n s i d e r e d 7.e2 xe2+ 8.xe2 prevent Rb5 with b4! although probably
when Black should equalise without too W h it e sh o u l d d ra w wit h 31.d2! c5
many problems, e.g. e5 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.d3 32.e3 ]
g6 ] 29.g4! When under pressure you should try to
7...0-0-0 8.d3 excha nge p awns and that's exactly wha t
[ 8.c3?! just leads to trouble after g6! 9.d4 Rowson is doing to get himself closer to the
e5 10.e3 f5 11.a4 e4 12.e2 f6 d ra w h e is a f t e r . hxg4 30.hxg4 xc4
13.c4 d5 and Black was already better 31.bxc4 c6 32.b1 b4 33.gxf5 gxf5
in Bozic, M (2427)-Cabarkapa, N (2361) 34.b3?!
Kragujevac 2013 ( 13...d7! is also strong )] [ 34.f4! e4 35.dxe4 fxe4 36.f5 gives White
8...g6! Kramnik chooses a very harmonious a little counterplay and now the draw should
setup - with his queen blocking the e-pawn it be easy enough, for example d7 37.h1
makes a lot of sense to fianchetto the bishop g7 38.h6+ d7 39.h4 g2+ 40.d1
and gain complete control of d4. 9.c3 d4 e7 41.xe4+ f6 42.c5! xf5 43.c4
[ 9...h6! may give Black the slimmest of and the position is just a draw ]
advantages, e.g. 10.e4 e5 11.g3 xc1 34...f4! 35.d2 f3+ 36.e1 c5 37.e3
324
b4+ Kramnik decides to force a draw but I'm 23.e4 c8 24.b3 e5 25.xf6+ gxf6
surprised he didn't go for one last trick 26.d5 e6 27.d3 f8 28.d8 bxc4
[ 37...e4! keeps White under pressure for a 29.bxc4 g7 30.xc8 xc8 31.d2 e6
little bit longer - even so White should draw 32.e3 e5 33.a3 e6 34.d3 e5
with accurate play 38.xc5 xc5 39.dxe4 35.a3 e6
e6 40.e3 xc4 41.d2! d6+ 42.c1 ½-½
f6 43.d2 and Black can't really make
progress here. ]
38.d2 c5 39.e3 b4+ 40.d2 c5 324 B01
Great defence from Rowson but not the most Rozentalis,Eduardas
inspiring opening considering he had White! Khalifman,Alexander
½-½ Germany 1993
[Nigel Davies]
323 B01 K h a l i f m a n wi s e l y r e f r a i n s f r o m c a s t l i n g
Rowson,Jonathan 2512 queenside but even here the pressure on the
Martin,Andrew D 2443 b-file proves to be unpleasant for Black. 1.e4
Redbus Knock-Out (1.2) 29.03.2002 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.g3 f6
[Nigel Davies] 5.g2 c6 Attempting to impede the activity of
W hite's bishop on g2. In this game W hite
What should Black do against the flexible 3. manages to remove this obstacle later on.
Nf3, which leaves open the option of a later 6.f3 g4 7.0-0
c2-c4? In this game Black plays the standard [ W hite can also play the immediate 7.h3
3 . . . Nf 6 a n d 4 . . . B g4 - a n d a s u su a l f in d s h5 8.0-0 e6 9.a3 ( 9.d3 bd7 10.e2
himself worse. Having lost the first game of e7 11.d2 c7 12.b4 0-0 13.b1 ad8
this two game mini-match, Martin needed to 14.f4 was also nice for White in Benjamin -
win this one at all costs. In this respect, I Shabalov, Key West 1994) 9...bd7 10.d3
can't help but think that another defence, such e7 ( 10...h6 11.b1 a6 12.b4 c7
as the Modern, would have been better. 1.e4 13.g4 g6 14.h4 h7 15.f4 Rozentalis,
d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 f6 4.d4 g4 E-Paasikangas,J/Bad Wiessee GER 1999
5.e2 e6 (55) ) 11.d2 c7 12.b4 0-0 13.b5 c5
[ The sharpest move is 5...c6 after which 14.e1 ad8 15.g4 g6 16.h4 b6
6.c4 f5 leads to complications which 17.xg6 hxg6 18.f3 fd5 19.xd5
probably favour White. ] exd5 20.a4 with a strong initiative for White
[ Rowson has also played this position with in Smirin - Oll, New York 1994 ]
B l a c k , c h o o si n g 5...c6 against Lyell in a 7...e6 8.h3 xf3
4NCL game this year (2002). After 6.0-0 e6 [ 8...h5 would probably transpose into the
7.c4 d8 8.c3 e7 9.h3 h5 10.f4 note to 7.h3 above ]
0-0 11.b3 b6 12.xb6 axb6 13.g4 9.xf3 e7
g6 14.e5 his position did not seem [ Black can also play 9...bd7 as in Tiviakov
massively promising though he did - Hansen ]
eventually manage to eke out a win. ] 10.a3!? 0-0 11.b1 c7 12.b4 a6 13.d3
6.h3 h5 7.c4 d8 8.0-0 e7 9.b3 c8 bd7 14.f4 d6 15.d2 a5 16.e2
10.c3 0-0 11.e3 bd7 12.ad1 a6 White's pair of bishops and space advantage
13.c2 If Rowson needed more than a draw, g i v e s h i m t h e b e t t e r g a m e . H e r e h e i s
he might well have played more aggressively directing pressure towards b7 along the b-file
a t t h is s t a ge . E ve n so h e ke e p s a sligh t and with his bishop on g2. e7 17.f4 fe8
advantage right to the end of the game. c5 18.g4 f8 19.f3 g6 20.h1 axb4
14.d5 exd5 15.xd5 xd5 16.xd5 f6 21.axb4 g7 22.b5 ac8 23.bxc6 bxc6
17.d2 c7 18.g5 g6 19.d3 ad8 24.e2 d6 25.g3 d5 26.f2 d6
20.xg6 hxg6 21.fd1 xd2 22.xd2 b5 27.f5 exf5 28.gxf5 c5 29.f4! e5
325
[ 29...d4 30.b7 would win the Bischoff - Hickl, Altensteig 1987; 6...c6
exchange. ] transposes into Rozentalis - Khalifman) 7.h3
30.g5 ed7 31.b7 d4 32.e4 xe4 h5 8.0-0 0-0-0 9.d3 g5 10.g4 g6
33.xe4 xf2 34.xf2 e5 35.d5 b8 11.d2 h5 gave Black a dangerous attack
36.a7 h8?! in Payen - Prie, Cannes 1992 ]
[ 36...gxf5 would have been a better chance, 6...c6!?
before this pawn lands on f6. ] [ 6...c6 is solid enough but slightly passive. ]
37.f6 f8 38.xf7 xf7 39.xf7 h6 7.h3 h5 8.d3 e5 9.0-0 0-0-0 The natural
40.d2 e6 41.c3 c4 42.dxc4 e3 follow-up to 6...Nc6, but Black's king will
43.d4 xh3+ 44.g2 h5 45.c7 g5+ come under fire on the queenside. W hite's
46.f1 g4 47.c3 b1+ 48.e2 g3 bish o p o n g2 will su pp o rt an ad van c e o f
49.f3 White's queenside pawns. 10.a3 d4 11.g4
[ W hite must be careful not to play 49.c5? g6 12.f4! exf4 13.xf4 xe2+ 14.xe2
because b2+ 50.f1 b1+ would force a c5+ 15.h1 d4 16.f3 c6 17.ae1
draw. ] he8 18.g3 Threatening 19.Qf4. Black
49...g2+ 50.d3 d1+ 51.e4 e1+ attempts to construct a ramshackle blockade
52.e3 f1 53.c5 in the centre. d7 19.b4 b6 20.e4 e5
1-0 21.d6+ xd6 22.xd6 d4 23.h2 e5
24.g3 f6 25.g5! f8 26.gxf6 gxf6 27.h4
d6 28.f4 f7? Losing a piece, but Black
325 B01 is in a bad way in any case. 29.h5! b8
Rozentalis,Eduardas [ 29...xh5 30.f5+ picks up the bishop. ]
Milos,Gilberto 30.hxg6 hxg6 31.xe5 h7 32.e2 xf4
Tilburg (4) 1992 33.xf4 dh8 34.h4+ c8 35.xh7 xh7
[Nigel Davies] 36.e6 f7 37.h3
1-0
The move 4.g3!? represents a much quieter
way of playing this opening for White, aiming
to complete his development and hopefully 326 B01
develop pressure on the h1-a8 diagonal. The Rusanov,Michail 2448
position of Black's queen on a5 encourages Alekseev,Evgeny 2300
an advance of W hite's b-pawn with gain of St Petersburg 1999
t e m p o , wh ic h ca n se t u p co m p lim e n t a r y [Alexander Volzhin]
pre s s u re o n t h e b -f ile . Ne e d le ss t o sa y,
queenside castling will be very risky for Black, 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g6
as in this game. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 5.c4 b6 6.c3 g7 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 g4
3.c3 a5 4.g3!? An alternative mode of 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 c6 11.c5 c4
development for W hite, with which aims to [ 11...d7 is the alternative to the text, but it
complete his development and hopes to keep looks rather passive: 12.e3 e5 13.xc6
a slight space advantage. f6 5.g2 g4 bxc6 14.d5! Now Black has difficult
[ 5...c6 , blocking the h1-a8 diagonal, problems to solve. b8 15.c1 f5 16.b3
f ea tu res in Rozent alis - Kha lif ma n an d h8 17.cd1 h4 18.f3 e4 19.f4 g5
Tiviakov - Hansen. The text is more 20.e2! with a huge positional advantage
aggressive, forcing White to block the attack for White, Lutz - Casagrande, Biel, 1996. ]
on his queen before deciding whether or not 12.xc6! An important novelty.
to move the c-pawn. ] [ Before this game the whole line was
6.ge2 considered as harmless as after the natural
[ W hite can also play 6.f3 after which 12.d5 d4! Black's Knights are very active
B l a c k ' s m o s t a g g r e s s i v e p l a n i s c6!? and his chances are by no means worse.
( 6...e6 7.h3 h5 8.0-0 e7 9.e1 c6 One example: 13.e2 a5 14.d3 c6!
10.d3 0-0 11.a3 ad8 was fine for Black in 15.b4?! White clearly overestimates his
326
chances. ( Modest 15.dxc6 axc6 327 B01

sh o u ld b e p la ye d , wit h le ve l ch a n ce s.) Russell,MKA 2221
15...b5! 16.xb5 xa1 17.h6 g7 Sulskis,Sarunas 2555
18.xg7 xg7 19.c3 cxd5 20.bxa5 Calvia ol (Men) (1.35) 15.10.2004
xa5 21.xd5 xc5 22.a1+ f6 [Andrew Martin]
, and Black has the better prospects, Polak -
Stefansson, Oberwart, 1991. ] Sulskis would be about the strongest player
12...bxc6 13.e2 e5 14.a4 d5!? a r o u n d wh o is wi ll i n g t o g i ve 5 . . . N e 4 a
Black sacrifices a piece, hoping for a strong regular outing. He seems quite convinced that
pawn phalanx in the center. the move is good. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5
[ 14...exd4!? is the alternative to the text, 3.c3 a5 4.f3 f6 5.d4 e4
and after 15.xc4 d3 16.c3 d2 17.d1 The positional idea behind 5.. . Ne4 is easy to
dxc1 18.axc1 White's chances are only understand. Black wants to double W hite's
slightly better. ] pawns, hunker down and try to win over the
15.b3 b6 16.cxb6 axb6 17.c4?! long haul with his better structure. The risks
I don't like this move as it creates a weak involved are very clear in that he permits his
pawn. opponent to develop quickly. We see a good
[ White should definitely prefer 17.b4 exd4 example of 'structure play' here in a game
a n d n o w e i t h e r 18.f4 ( or 18.b2 from the recent Olympiad, where Sulskis wins
, and I doubt whether Black has enough for effortlessly . 6.d3!? A move which has been
the piece. )] very popular, without giving White any joy at
17...xc4 18.bxc4 exd4 19.b2 fe8 all. xc3 7.xc3? I really don't like 7 Qxc3
[ 19...d3 is worthy of consideration after at all. White permits the downgrading of his
20.c3 d2 21.fd1 fd8 Black has pawn structure and gets nothing in return.
adequate compensation for the piece. ] [ But 7.bxc3 f5! is OK for Black too :
20.fe1 c5 8.b5+ xb5 9.xb5+ c6 10.d3 xd3
[ 20...d3 Here too this move deserves 11.cxd3 e6 12.b1 b6 13.f4 d7 14.0-0
attention: 21.c3 ( 21.xg7 xg7 22.c3 e7 15.a4 ( 15.e5 xe5 16.dxe5 0-0
xe1+ 23.xe1 a3 and Black is OK.) 17.e3 fd8 18.fd1 d5 19.f4 ad8
21...b5! 22.xe8+ xe8 23.cxb5 cxb5 20.d4 a5 21.d2 c5 22.c2 g6 23.g4
24.d1 d8 , intending to advance c-pawn, c8 24.bb2 a4 25.g2 c4 26.f3
with ample compensation for the piece. ] cxd4 27.xd4 c5 28.xc5 8xc5
21.f4 29.b3 a4 Pisarsky, L-Vickers, K/San
[ White could retain some winning chances Francisco 2000) 15...0-0 16.fe1 f6
b y p l a y i n g 21.a4 a5 22.a2 ea8 17.e5 xe5 18.xe5 xe5 19.xe5
23.ea1 intending to transfer his knight to fd8 20.a5 f8 21.f1 b5 22.c5 d6
the d3-square. ] 23.e2 a6 24.e3 c8 25.c4 cd8
21...xe1+ 22.xe1 xa2 23.d3 a4 26.cxb5 cxb5 27.b4 e7 28.f4 d5
24.c1 f8 25.f1 b5 26.cxb5 c4 27.e5 29.g4 d6 30.c2 h5 31.g5 d7 32.c5
c3 28.xc3 c8 33.xd5+ exd5 Bernat Capdevila E-
[ White can't keep his extra piece in view of Ca n e lla s Ma gid e B a rce lo n a 2 0 0 4 I a m
28.a1 h6! 29.e1 d2 and Black wins. ] reminded of the Czech Pirc, . where Black
28...dxc3 29.xc3 g7 And a draw was falls behind in development, but because
agreed. his structure hasn't been compromised at all
[ 29...g7 30.c5 ] he is able to defend. The defense requires
½-½ patience without doubt, but there are
chances of success at the end. ]
[ 7.d2 f5 8.xc3 d5 is critical, in the
sense that the White pawn remain intact. I
still think that this position is equal though:
9.b5+ xb5 10.xb5+ c6 11.a4 e4!
327
12.e2 d7 13.e1 0-0-0 14.f3 g6 improved. ]

15.d3? ( 15.b3 e6= ) 15...xd3+ 36...f4 37.h3
16.cxd3 ( 16.xd3 c5+ ) 16...e6 17.h4 [ 37.g3 f8! 38.gxh4 h8 39.ad1 xh4
h5 18.a3 b6 19.c2 e7 20.a4 d5 40.d7+ f6 41.b7 xh2 42.xb6 e5
21.ac1 f6 22.d2 xd4 23.b4 b2 43.a5 xf2 44.a1 ee2! 45.a6 a2 ]
24.b1 c3 25.b5 xd2 26.xd2 c5 37...g3 38.fxg3 hxg3 39.c3 e5 40.c5
27.b3 f4 28.c4 d4 29.g3 hd8 bxc5+ 41.xc5 xc5 42.xc5 e4 43.d4
30.gxf4 xc4 31.hc1 xc1 32.xc1 b6 f3 44.gxf3 exf3 45.e3 f8 46.a5 f2
33.c4 d4 34.e3 xc4 35.dxc4 d7 6 Qd3 cannot be a ref utation of our little
36.e4 e7 37.e5 g6 38.e4 f6 scheme.
0-1 Pavlov-Reprintsev Alushta 1999 A t 0-1
first opportunist, then remarkably patient.
Di d y o u n o t i c e B l a ck c h a n g e h i s s t yl e
DURING the game? ] 328 B01
7...xc3+ 8.bxc3 e6 9.b2 Saiboulatov,Danial 2413
[ 9.a4 c6 10.d3 d6 11.0-0 0-0= Geirnaert,Steven 2357
is another very equal position from our 'silly' ch-BEL Namur BEL (2) 02.07.2006
line. 12.g5 h6 13.e4 Zozulia, A- [Eric Prié]
Reprintsev, A/Alushta 1999 and now most
accurate seems to be d8 14.b1 b6 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 c6
15.xd6 cxd6 16.e1 b7= ] Following Matthias Wahls' recommendation in
9...d7 10.c4 b4+ 11.c3 e7 12.d3 b6 his Mammoth book "Modernische
13.e4 b8 14.c6 b7 15.e5 xc6 Skandinavish", published 9 years ago.
16.xc6 a8 17.a4 White's pressure is an However, a more modern approach suggests
illusion. He is working with very few tools. it may not prove the most accurate to lose a
Sulskis now plays an excellent move. b8! development tempo and compromise oneself
Exchanging off W hite's best placed piece. with the c-pawn so early in the game.
Eventually, Black's trumps will make [ 4...f6 5.d2 c6 Forced then, prior to
themselves felt. 18.xe7 xe7 19.a3+ d e v e l o p i n g t h e b i s h o p t o f 5 . 6.c4
f6 20.c5 c6 If White takes on b6, his a Is the fashionable white order of moves
pawn becomes exposed. It's not so easy. transposing into the game and our subject. ]
21.0-0-0 a5 22.c2 c4 23.b3 5.c4 As a matter of fact this move should be
[ 23.c1 a6 24.he1 b5 25.f4 c6 preferred to 5.Bd2 against 4...c6 for reasons
26.a1 was a better chance to maintain of common sense and logic.
equality. ] [ 5.d2 Nevertheless, the greedy b6
23...xa3 24.xa3 hd8 25.b4 6.f3 g4 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 xd4
[ 25.cxb6 axb6 26.b1 d5 27.b4 must be extremely perilous for Black. For
leaves Black only marginally better. ] instance 9.0-0-0 d7 10.f4 f6
25...d5 26.cxb6 axb6 27.a1 g5! 11.b5+- ]
Sulskis has fashioned a position where the 5...f6
stronger player can begin to stretch out, go up [ 5...f5 Is more consistent then 6.d2 e6
a g e a r a n d p u ll a h e a d . T h e B l a c k p a wn According to me this is the only way to
advances to g4, pinning down White's h and f justify 4...c6, restricting the black options
pawns and giving the Black Rooks excellent without provoking the equivalent in the
mobility along the fourth rank. 28.hd1 g4 o p p o si n g c a m p . 7.d5! cxd5 ( 7...c5
29.d3 da5 30.c4 c5+ 31.b3 cxd4 8.e2 ) 8.xd5 d8 9.e2! ( 9.e3?!
32.xd4 h5 33.b4 e7 34.b3 f5 g6 10.f3 d7= Batyte, D-Dubkov, A
35.b4 h4 36.d3 Salzburg 2004) 9...f6! 10.xf6+ xf6
[ There's no guarantee that White would Better than 10...gxf6, that I produced an
h a v e s a v e d t h e g a m e a f t e r 36.f4 example of one year ago. 11.0-0-0 ( 11.c3
but his chances would certainly have been b4! 12.xb4 xb2 13.d2 xa1+
328
14.e2 e5+ ) 11...c6 Just transposes e8 21.g6+ d8 22.a5+ d7
into a well known line of the Scandinavian 23.f7+! xf7 ( 23...e7 24.xe6+ )
about which some food for thought can be 24.xf7+ e7 25.xe6+ d6 26.b4+ c5
found in Handke-Motwani previously 27.xc5+ c7 28.xe7+ A masterpiece of
commented in this section. This optimization of attacking forces. ]
transposition is also what Wahls gives and 17...xg7 18.g3+ h8 19.d3 End of the
the only reason I see for having centred fireworks. Fritz announces a quick forced mate
his analysis on 5...Nf6 instead of 5...Bf5 is after
that he wanted to lean on the actual order [ 19.d3 e4 20.xe4 f5 21.xf5 exf5
of moves of the presented games. ] 22.e8+ f8 23.f4 ( 23.f7 xg3
6.d2 b6?! As a quasi unbreakable rule in 24.hxg3 d7 )]
the Scandinavian, the black queen should not 1-0
move 3 times in the opening phase unless
being forced to. A rule that people who do not
practice the variation themselves in serious 329 B01
games over the board rather than games Sakaev,Konstantin 2660
without stake on the Internet, are usually not Kurajica,Bojan 2550
too well acquainted with. 7.f3 xb2? 4th IECC Istanbul (1) 2003
One too many. Moving the queen for more [Andrew Martin]
than half of the moves in the opening can
only lead to disaster in the Centre Counter. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
8.b1 a3 9.e5 e6 I bet that whoever has f6 5.f3 a6 Kurajica seems fatally
faced this position with Black in a real game attracted to this move. He loses lots of games
on a proper board will never reproduce the b u t s t i l l c a r r i e s o n . T h e r e wi l l b e m a n y
experience. Such a thing as danger, with a explanations for this strange state of affairs
screaming flashing huge D in our case, can but I think we can simply put it down to good
only be sensed during the tension and old-fashioned stubbornness- not a quality
conc ent ration of a re al gam e. W hen yo u guaranteeing success in today's pragmatic
comfortably sit in front of your 'advanced' chess scene. 6.g3
screen, it is easier to give in to the siren's [ Movsesian chose simple development in
song... 10.0-0 e7 11.e1! The right plan, another game from the same event : 6.d3
mobilizing the last piece to exchange the g6 7.0-0 g7 8.g5 c6 ( Perhaps Black
main defender of the enemy kingside, instead could consider 8...g4!? ) 9.h3! 0-0 10.e3
of the previously played 11.Qe2 since the b4 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 f5!?
wh it e qu ee n m a y join t h e a ssa ult o n t h e ( Even here 12...d5 was less manic.)
kings id e d irec t ly with ou t p assin g b y th is 13.d3 xd3 14.xd3 b5 15.a4 b8
station. 0-0 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 16.axb5 axb5 17.fe1 b7 Which is
This leads to an overwhelming attack. It might more important : The backward e pawn or
not be possible to demonstrate a forced win Black's powerf ul light-squared Bishop?
after the capture on b2, but the amount of Movsesian-Kurajica Sarajevo 2003 ]
suffering Black will have to endure after being 6...g6!? This is on e interpretation. Black can
forced to shut his queen's bishop in with ...e7- certainly consider the simple ....c7-c6 and later
e6 is clearly not worth a pawn. b5 13...Nd7 or . . .Bc8-f5 but that might not marry too well
13...Qd6 could be better defences but I do with ...a7-a6. 7.f4
not think this can change the outcome of the [ 7.g2 g7 8.0-0 0-0 9.f4 d8 10.d2
game. 14.b3 d6 15.h5! f6 c6 11.fe1 g4 12.e5 e6 13.ad1
[ 15...f5 16.h3 h6 17.xh6 ] bd7 14.c1 b6 15.h6 c8 16.xg7
16.g4! fxe5 17.xg7+! xg7 17.e4 h3 18.c5 g4??
[ 17.h3 Wins too: f6 ( 17...bxc4 1-0 Asrian, K-Kurajica,B/4th IECC, Istanbul
18.xh7+ f7 19.g6+ g8 20.xg7# ) TUR 2003 What prompted such a blunder.
18.xg7+ xg7 19.xh7+ f7 20.f3+ Rather than face the captures on g4 and
329
e7 Kurajica does the gentlemanly thing. 330 B01

( Of course Black has a playable but slightly Sanchez,Louis 2239
worse position after 18...xg2 19.xg2 e6 Marchal,Nicolas 2034
nothing catastrophic though. )] Le Touquet op 17th (3) 28.10.2002
7...d8 8.e5 g7 9.g2 0-0 10.0-0 c6 [Andrew Martin]
11.d2 e6 12.fe1 We must take stock :
W hite's game is freer and he will probably 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
build on the e file e.g. Re2,Rae1 etc. He's f6 5.f3 e4 6.d3 If there is a drawback
probably interested in Bf4-h6 and an to Black's idea it must be that he is moving
exchange on g7 because that loosens Black's the same pieces twice in the opening. Back to
King giving him something extra to worry basics! So energetic action is needed and
about. I would question the value of ... a7-a6 po ssib ly th e p awn sacrif ice wh ich 6 B d 3
in the current position. However, I think that precedes is the right way to go from White's
Black is solid and will be difficult to break point of view. xc3 Black must damage the
down thus I call this only a slight edge to pawn structure. 7.bxc3 g4 The parting of
White. d5?! I find this move a little weird. the ways. Each Black move here has good
Why not just get the pieces out : and bad things about it 7... Bg4 develops but
[ 12...bd7! leaves b7 unguarded..
A) 13.ad1 xe5 ( 13...d5! 14.e4 [ 7...e6 8.0-0 e7 9.e1 d7 10.d2 c6
xf4 15.xf4 xe5 16.dxe5 a5 ) is modest and must lead to a small edge for
14.xe5 d5 15.xg7 xg7 16.e4; White, but a tough defender might like the
B) 13.h6 xe5 14.dxe5 ( 14.xe5 Black position, whose long-term chances are
xh6 15.xh6 g4 ) 14...xd2 15.xd2 good: 11.c4 c7 12.a4 0-0 13.a5 c5
d7= ] 14.c3 d8 15.e2 f8 16.h4 d7 17.h5
13.h6 xh6 14.xh6 xc3 15.bxc3 d5 f6 18.h4 e8 19.d5 f7 20.dxe6 xe6
16.xd5 cxd5 17.e3! A multi-purpose Rook 21.f5 xf5 22.xf5 d6 23.g4 h8
deployment which will leave Black regretting 24.e7 xe7 25.xe7 xe7 26.e1 d7
his undeveloped Queenside. e6 18.g4! 27.h6 g6 28.f3 e8 29.g5
W ith ideas of Rh3 and/or g5,Ng4-f6 . I like 1-0 Nevednichy, V-Tratar, M/Cannes 2005 A
this pla n ve ry m uch . f6 19.g5 g7 very good display by Nevednichy. ]
20.h4 f6 21.g4 fxg5 22.xg5 c6 [ 7...xc3+ is critical: 8.d2 a3 9.0-0
Too late! 23.xe6 ad8 24.ae1 Sakaev's d7 10.e1 c6 11.f4 e6 12.d2
play gives a very good, clean impression. He ( 12.e3 a4 13.e2 e7 14.c4 0-0
attacks with all his pieces and continually 15.e1 gives White tremendous
finds ways to prevent the optimal development compensation for a pawn.) 12...a4 13.c4
of his opponent. h8 25.1e3! The third f6 14.f3 d7 Chomet, P-Collas, D/
ran k a gain! Jus t Rh3 and Rxg6 is a very Chartres 2005 and now 15.c3! seems to be
worrying threat. f7 26.f6 g7 27.xf8+ excellent for White. Black's counterplay is
xf8 non-existent. It looks like Reprintsev's 7...g6
[ 27...xf8 28.xd5+- ] is about the only decent way to play the
28.f6 g7 29.h3 h5 30.f1! position for Black. ]
Very elegant. The idea is Nxh5 and there's no 8.0-0N
pin on the g f ile. Black's rook and knight [ 8.d2 c6 9.b1 b6 10.e5 h5
spectate this procedure. 6 g3 may well pose a 11.0-0 g6 12.xb6 axb6 13.xg6 hxg6
problem to Black's variation with 5...a6 which 14.fb1 a6 ( 14...b5 15.c4 ) 15.c4 e6
seems dependant on ...b7-b5 and . ..Bb7 for 16.c5 d7 17.xd7 xd7 Faibisovich, V-
Black to get his act together. Poor Kurajica- Dragovic, N/Pula 1990 and now 18.xb6
he will have to start searching for xb6 19.cxb6 c5 20.e3 c6 21.a4!
improvements- how about 3...Qe5+? xb6 22.dxc5+ c6 23.b1 ]
1-0 [ I like the logical 8.b1! b6 9.0-0 d7
10.h3 e6 11.g5 xa2 12.xe6 xe6
330
13.f3 Ryan, J-McDermott, R/Dublin 2003 wa s B e laska -S ikora L e rch , Cze c h T Ch

Does the sum total mean that Black is in 2002. ]
trouble? He certainly has it all to prove. ] [ 6.d5 c6 is considered harmless, as is ]
8...e6 9.h3 h5 10.e2 [ 6.f3 exd4 7.xd4 c6 8.xd8+ xd8
[ Again 10.b1! with xa2 11.xb7 d6 9.d4 e6 ]
12.e4 c6 13.d3 g6 14.d2 6...xd4
Black is going to be kicked around. ] [ 6...e7 may be best, or at least not so risky,
10...c6 11.f4 d7 12.ab1 g5? although it needs more tests. One example
I think he is simply desperate for moves. is 7.dxe5 c6 8.e3 e6 ( 8...xe5??
[ 12...b6 would appear 'obvious', but then 9.xb6 ) 9.d1 c8 10.c5 ( 10.b3 b4
13.c4 0-0-0 14.d5!! xf3 ( 14...cxd5 with initiative) 10...d7! 11.f4 0-0 12.d5
15.e5 ) 15.xf3 cxd5 16.cxd5 xd5 xd5 13.xd5 b4 14.d1 c6 15.f2
17.c4 b4 ( 17...b6 18.e4 a6 19.c5 d5 with good compensation, Tiviakov -
d5 20.fc1 ) 18.e4 a6 19.a3 ] Maliutin, Moscow 1991 ]
13.g3 xf3 7.f3 g4!? An odd square Black wants to
[ Better resistance is possibly offered by get the queens off.
13...0-0-0 b u t e ve n t h e r e 14.b3 e7 [ 7...c5 8.e3 a5 9.d2 b4!? 10.a3
15.fb1 is shaping up horribly for Black. ] c6 Nisipeanu-Palkovi, Balatonbereny 1996
14.xf3 xc3 15.xb7 e7 16.d5 e5 Emms quotes Nisipeanu's analysis 11.d1!
17.xe5 xe5 18.dxe6 xe6 19.f5 e5 xc3 12.xc3 a4 13.g5! 0-0 14.d3
20.xc6++- f8 21.b5 e2 22.xa8+ g6 15.g3 d4 16.h4 'when White has
g7 23.d5 f6 24.b7 f8 25.d3 h5 obvious compensation for the pawn.' ]
26.xa7 h4 27.c4 h5 28.b1 d8 8.xe5
29.xf7+ It took me a while to get to this [ 8.xe5+! frees White's bishop on f1, and in
game, but it is a convincing rebuff of Black's some cases, Qxc7 becomes possible, e.g.,
seventh move alternatives apart from 7...g6 e7 ( 8...e6 9.f4 c6 10.xe6+ xe6
The path is narrow. 11.0-0-0! ) 9.e2 c6 10.xc7 xc4!
1-0 11.e5!? xg2 12.f3 xf3! 13.xf3
d6 14.b5 xc7 15.xc7+ e7
16.xa8 g4 17.d2 looks better for
331 B01 White ]
Sarenac,David 2227 8...xe2+ 9.xe2 e6 10.b3 f6 11.d3
Scepanovic,Labud 2228 c6 12.e3 0-0-0 13.f4? This doesn't
13th Battle of Senta Open A (9) 25.07.2009 work out for tactical reasons. White stands
[John Watson] sl i g h t l y b e t t e r d u e t o h i s s u p e r i o r p a wn
structure after
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6 [ 13.0-0 ]
5.c3 The idea with this order is to avoid ... 13...b4 14.c1 f5 15.g4!?
Bg4, as in [ 15.0-0 d4! 16.xd4 xd4 17.h5 g8
[ 5.f3 g4 , one of the main Scandinavian is pleasant for Black. ]
lines. The problem is Black's next move: ] 15...d7?
5...e5! 6.e2! This 'gambit' appears to be the [ 15...g6 16.0-0 d4 ]
most promising course. 16.c5! a8 17.fd5 xc3+ 18.xc3
[ We've seen 6.dxe5 xd1+ 7.xd1 c6 [ 18.xc3 leaves White with the bishops
8.f4 in the Archives. Then f6!? ( or 8...e6 now he has to deal with getting his pieces
9.b3 0-0-0 10.e3 d4 11.e2 b4+ out. ]
12.f2 c5 ) 9.exf6 gxf6 10.f3 g4 18...he8 19.g1
11.e3 ( 11.e2 b4+ 12.f2 [ 19.0-0 d4! ]
or here 11...0-0-0! 12 Be3 is not so clear) 19...e5 20.f4 f7 21.f5
11...xf3 12.gxf3 d4 13.f2 c5 [ 21.f2 ]
with obvious compensation and then some 21...c6 22.f4 c7 23.h4 e7 24.f2
331
de8 25.b4?! e4 Jirovsky, P/ Czechia 2 00 4, whe n f5!?

[ 25...h5! has the idea 26.xh5? d5 ] is interesting, 13.f3?! b3 ) 6...b4?!
26.a3 e5 27.d1!? 7.a3! xb2?! 8.c7! traps the queen and
[ 27.d3 xd3+ 28.xd3 keeps White leaves Black in dire straights, Saiboulatov,
disadvantage down. ] D-Kalka, A/Belgium BEL 2005;
27...h5 D) 5...f5 simplest, in my view, Black
[ 27...g6! 28.fxg6 hxg6 29.g5 b5 ] prepares to castle queenside 6.f4 b6
28.gxh5 ( 6...d7 also makes sense, as a white
[ 28.xh5 d5 ] knight cannot hop to e5, 7.d2 e6 8.a3
28...xf5 29.d4 g4+!? c6 9.0-0-0 0-0-0 Esprit, Y-Boudre, J/
[ Or 29...b5 30.xe4 xc3 31.d4 g4+ Toulon 1999) 7.d2 e6 8.0-0-0 c6
32.xg4 xg4 ] 9.g3 g6 10.d3 0-0-0 11.xg6 hxg6
30.xg4 xg4 31.xe4 xe4 32.g3 f5 Black is already better, Ayas Fernandez, A-
33.d2 b5 34.f3 d4 35.e3 c4 Mellado Trivino, J/Cala Mendia 2001 ]
36.f2 c3 White is tied down and beginning 5...a6 6.d3
to face concrete threats. 37.e3? [ As 6.g3 now seems to be very satisfactorily
[ 37.e1 e4+ 38.h2 ] met by g4! White is turning to other moves
37...e4+ 38.xe4 to try to secure an advantage. I learned a
[ 38.f3 d2+ 39.e2 xf4 ] hard lesson against Simon Ansell that 6 Bd3
38...xe4 39.f3 c4 And wins. 40.e1 could not be underestimated fortunately
d7 41.d2 c2 42.e3 a2 43.e2 g4 Black has improvements on my play there. ]
44.c3 xa3 45.f4 xh5 46.f5 a6 6...g6!?
0-1 [ 6...g4 7.h3 h5 8.e4 xe4 9.xe4
c6 is reasonable too. ]
7.h3 g7 8.0-0 0-0 You expect a position
332 B01 like this to be a little better for White who will
Saric,Ibro 2476 s i m p l y p l a y a R o o k t o e 1 a n d f o r c e a
Milanovic,Danilo 2513 con cessio n. Ho wever, a s so o f t en in th e
XXXVI Bosnia GMB (6) 13.05.2006 Scandinavian the Knight on c3 is not ideal
[Andrew Martin] an d t his a llo ws B lack t o get co un te rpla y
against d4. So the upcoming game move of 9
E a s y t o l e a rn a n d e a sy t o p la y - f o r t h e Ne4 , wh ich ap pe ars odd a t f irst sigh t, is
umpteenth time in recent years the Centre W h i t e ' s l o g i c a l a t t e m p t t o g e t r i d o f h i s
Counter proves reliable. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 problem piece. 9.e4 xe4 10.xe4 d7
xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3 11.c3 b8!?N The pawn structure offers
[ 5.ge2 has aroused some interest on the Black the chance to play this peculiar Rook
Forum. White wants to play Bf4 and gain a move, planning ...b5-b4!
tempo on the queen, but the knight is not [ 11...c5 12.dxc5 xd1 13.xd1 xc5
particularly well placed on e2. 14.c2 b6 1/2-1/2 Babas, V-Kaufmann, R/
A) 5...a6 6.f4 d8 7.d3!? Budapest 2005 only reinforces the thought
is a suggestion of Melts, with the clear that Black is equal. ]
idea of Qf3, c6 8.0-0-0 e6 9.f3 b4 12.g5 b5 13.e1 f6 It is simple enough
10.g4 was tried by jeupham (see the to cover e7. 14.c2 b7 15.e2 fe8=
Forum); It remains to play....c7-c5 and Black will then
B) 5...g4 6.d3 c6 7.f4 d7 be completely free. 16.ad1 d5
8.0-0-0 e6 9.h3 f5 10.f3 0-0-0 [ 16...c5 17.dxc5 xc5 18.f4 bc8
looks solid enough, Malinovsky, K-Klima, L/ 19.e5 might be a little better for White. ]
Olomouc 2004; [ I quite like 16...h6! 17.xf6 xf6 18.e4
C) 5...c6?! 6.f4 ( 6.d3 g6 7.f4 b4 xe4 19.xe4 b4 20.c4 c5 which seems
8.0-0-0 g7 9.h4 e6 10.c7 h6+ co m p l e t e ly t h e m a t i c t o m e a n d u t t e r l y
11.b1 a6 12.a3 is Fedorchuk, S- equal. ]
332
17.b3 a5 18.d2 d8 ) 5...f6 6.f4 b6 ( 6...d8 )

[ 18.xd5 xd5 19.h4 a4 20.g3 d7 7.d2 g7 8.0-0-0 0-0 9.h4 d8
21.a3 f5 22.e5 was certainly a better 10.e3?! e5 11.xe5 g4 12.g3
try. ] xe5 13.dxe5 xd1+ 14.xd1 a5
18...a8 19.a3 c5 The game now fizzles out. and Black was better in a game Volokitin-
20.dxc5 xc5 21.xf6 xf6 22.e4 xe4 Kurajica, although he later lost;
23.xe4 ed8 24.xd8+ xd8 25.d1 B) 4...f6 5.g3!? c6 6.g2 g6 7.f4
It's frustrating as White to play such games. ( 7.f3 g7 8.0-0 0-0 9.f4 b4 )
You think you are a little bit better throughout 7...b4 8.ge2 g7 9.c1 0-0 10.0-0
but nothing seems to come of it. Then if you g4 11.a3 a5 12.h3 xe2 ( 12...f5!?
try too hard, the opponent can step in and -Melts ) 13.xe2 bd7 14.c4 e5 15.b4
take advantage. I give this game, not because c7 16.dxe5 xe5 17.c2
it is b y a n y m e a n s gre a t , b u t b e ca u se it Topalov-Nisipeanu, Sofia 2007. White's a
shows just how reliable 1...d5 can be. bit be tt er becau se of his b ish op pa ir,
½-½ although Black ultimately won. ]
4...a6
[ If Black is going to get away with ...Qd6 and
333 B01 ...g6 he should probably do so without ...a6,
Scandinavian 3..Qd6 w ...g6 so as not to completely retard his
Reader Question development. That is the only way that Melts
[John Watson] or Emms uses ...g6, as far as I can tell, for
example, the lines of the previous note and:
Reader Wane Inkpen (Wink) asks about the a) 4...f6
line 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 A) 5.c4 g6 isn't mentioned in Melts, who
The question is about combining ...a6 with ... gives . Then ( 5...e6; 5...c6 and; 5...a6 )
g6, something that he feels may have been 6.d4 and 6 0-0 will probably transpose.;
played by Bronstein, which is quite plausible. I B) 5.d4 g6 6.c4 g7 7.0-0 ( 7.b5
will look at the combination of the moves ... b4+ 8.d2 a5; Melts cites games with
Qd6 and ...g6 in many contexts below. 7.e5 0-0 8.0-0; 7.h3 , and; 7.g5 0-0
[ First, however, in the only Bronstein game I 8.d2 , suggesting the line c6 9.b5
can find with ...g6, he was W hite (which d8 10.f4 e4 11.e2 d6 ) 7...0-0
doesn't of course mean that he didn't play ... with the idea 8.b5 ( 8.h3 a6 9.e2
g6, just that I haven't found it) . That game d r a wn wa s a g a m e P s a k h i s - E p i s h i n)
went 3...d8 4.d4 g6 5.f4 g7 6.b5 8...d8 9.f4 a6 ( 9...e8 10.e1 a6
a6 7.f3 f6 8.c4 c6 9.c3 g4 11.c3 d6 12.b3 g4 is only slightly
10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 d7 12.e3 e5!? in White's favour (space).) 10.d5 xd5!?
13.d5 c5!? Bronstein, D-Kholmov, R, Tbilisi ( 10...d7 11.c3 g4 12.h3 xf3
1959. White has various good moves here, 13.xf3; 10...d7 11.e2 xb2!?
f o r e x a m p l e , 14.a3 xf3 ( 14...f5?! 12.ad1 gives White a lot of
15.g5; 14...h8 15.b1 with the idea b4) compensation Black has trouble getting
15.xf3 f5 16.d6 e4 17.e2 , but he his pieces out) 11.xd5 c6 12.xf7+!
played 14 Ne1?! Bxe2 15 Qxe2 f 5, and xf7 13.bd4 and White is for choice. ]
Black got a mobile centre, sufficient for [ b) 4...g6 is obviously possible, but I'm not
equality. The game was drawn. ] sure that it will have much independent
4.f3 s i g n i f i c a n c e a f t e r 5.d4 g7 6.c4
[ Other lines with ...g6 go 4.d4 and: a) , w h e n 6 . . . N f 6 i s n o r m a l a n d c6??
A) M e l t s c i t e s g a m e s w i t h 4...g6 ( 6...g4? 7.xf7+ xf7 8.g5+ e8
a n d i r r e g u l a r m o v e s s u c h a s 5.ge2 9.xg4 ) 7.b5 b4+ ( 7...d8 8.f4 )
( 5.e3 g7 6.f3 a6 7.d2 f6 8.f4 8.d2 xc4 9.xc7+ d8 10.b3!
b6 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.e5 bd7 11.c4 and Black's queen is trapped! ]
a7; 5.c4 g7 6.ge2 f6 7.f4 5.c4 Wink: "Since the pawn at e6 becomes a
333
huge target for White I was wondering what 7.g5!

the latest theoretical assessment was for a [ 7.e5 e6 ]
Black K-side fianchetto the idea being to get 7...e6 8.0-0 g7 9.d5! e5
the Black K castled before playing ...e6. I [ 9...h6 10.ge4 xe4 11.xe4 b4
think Bronstein introduced this idea about a 12.e2 0-0 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.c3 e7
deca de ago ." jw: This pa rticular o rde r is 15.e3 with a big advantage. ]
unusual, probably because W hite doesn't 10.ge4 xe4 11.xe4 b4 12.b3 f5
want to get hit with a timely ...b5. But it will [ 12...0-0 13.a4! threatening Ba3 ]
usually transpose: f6 13.c3 f8
[ 5...b5? has been played on several [ 13...e7 14.d6 ]
o c c a s i o n s , b u t 6.g5! (unplayed) is a 14.g3 d7 15.xf5 gxf5 16.f3
strong response, threatening to capture on and Black has problems defending f5 in view
f7: ( 6.xf7+ xf7 7.g5+ e8 8.f3 of f4 17.d6!
e5+ 9.f1 a7 isn't quite as clear) [ 17.a4 ]
6...e5+ ( 6...bxc4 7.f3 f6 8.xa8 c6 17...c6
9.0-0 ) 7.f1 and whichever piece Black [ 17...xd6 18.d1 e7 19.xb7 0-0
ca pt u re s , W hite pla ys 8 Qf 3 , e .g. , bxc4 20.xc7 ]
8.f3 xg5 9.xa8 e5 10.xb8 d8 18.a3 0-0-0 19.xa6!
11.a8 f6 12.c6+ d7 13.b3 , etc. ]
[ At this point, 5...g6?! is slow and neglects
development, for example, 6.e4 d8 334 B01
7.0-0 g7 8.d4 h6 ( 8...f6 9.xf6+ Schoucair,Henry 2106
xf6 10.h6 ) 9.f4 0-0 10.c3 f5 Prie,Eric 2439
11.e1 with greater control of the board. ] 4eme Open International de (1.4) 14.02.2005
6.d4 It's best to revert to a main line, although [Eric Prié]
[ 6.0-0 is naturally possible. Then g6 7.d4
( 7.g5 e6 8.f3 g7 9.ce4 e7 ) 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
7...g7 transposes. ] f6 Unlike GM Wahls, I never was an
6...g6?! The timing is difficult here, but I think a d vo c a t e o f t h e " K Ã P n i g s p r i n g e r z u r Ã 1 /
that this is too slow. The main moves are: 4ckhaltungpolitik"! (The policy of keeping the
[ a) 6...g4 7.h3 h5 8.g4 ( 8.e3 ) king's knight back) as IM Leon PLIESTER
8...g6 9.e5?! c6 10.xg6 hxg6 teasingly wrote in NIC Yearbook 68. In certain
11.e3 e5! equalises, as in Kamsky- sharp and interesting lines for White, like this
Tiviakov, Wijk aan Zee 2006. ] present one, I need my knight on f6 to play ...
[ b) 6...f5 7.e5!? ( 7.0-0 e6 8.d5!? ) Bg4 in order to disturb the nice attacking
7...e6 8.g4 xg4 9.xg4 c6 10.g1 order of the white pieces as shown in the 2
xc4 11.e3 c6 12.d5 is unclear ] previous games of this update. 5.c4 g4
[ c) 6...e6 , when White has a slew of There are many other lines where this idea
reasonable moves, for example, 7 Bb3 and represents the acid test for White. Maybe next
7.a4 , preventing ...b5 and maintaining a 6.f3 f5 I have also had success with the
space advantage. ] idea
[ d) 6...b5 7.d3 ( 7.b3 has been played a [ 6...d7!? 7.d2 b6 8.ge2 e6
lot. Then b7 8.0-0 b4 9.e2!? xf3 A) 9.0-0 b4 But I do not think it is quite
10.gxf3 e6 11.a3! bxa3 12.xa3 sound because of 10.a3! ( 10.e4 e7
favours White: d7 13.a1 d6 14.h1 11.h1 c6 12.xf6+ xf6 13.c3
0-0 15.g1 g6 16.d3 ) 7...b7 8.0-0 e6 b5!= Bedouin, X (2274)-Prie, E (2464)
( 8...g6 9.e1 g7 10.e4 xe4 11.xe4 Ch-Fra ACC Chartres 2005) 10...xc3
xe4 12.xe4 d5 13.e2 with some 11.bxc3 b5 Otherwise White will play
advantage ) 9.e2 e7 10.a4 b4 11.e4 Rb1, Bd3, c4 12.b1 xc4 13.xb6 axb6
xe4 12.xe4 xe4 13.xe4 c6 14.c4 14.e1 Black will win a pawn in addition to
bxc3 15.bxc3 with a positional superiority. ] having rook and bishop against the queen,
334
with enhanced control of the white squares 8.0-0 g6!? Black wants to castle queenside
b u t t h e re m a y b e le s s co m p r o m i si n g in this line and for doing so generally has to
options in this line!; pro t e ct f 7 . T h e n h e will h a ve t h e c h o ic e
B) 9.e3?! c6 10.d2 b4 11.b3 between ...e5 or ...e6, the reason behind the
0-0-0 12.e4 bd5 13.f2 xe4 subtle bishop's move instead of the more
14.fxe4 f6 15.g3 h5 16.e5 g4 natural 8...e6. 9.f4
17.g1 c6 18.h3 xe5 19.dxe5 xd2 [ 9.b4!? Fritz9 xb4 Usually, Black does not
20.xb6 xg2 0-1 Paci, C (2238)-Prie, E have to fear this pawn move unprotected
(2464) Ch-Fra Acc Chartres 2005 ] when attacking the bishop after its capture.
7.ge2 10.d3 Followed by Rb1, Nb5 with some
[ 7.g4 d7!? Some time after this game, I initiative for W hite. Is it worth a pawn is
s t a r t e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e ( 7...g6 another question. ]
more seriously, and although the position 9...e6 10.g3 0-0-0 11.e3?
looks quite dangerous for Black, I have not [ 11.f5 exf5 12.d3 c5 13.xf5? c4!
seen how White could avoid transposition 14.xc4 xf5 ]
into the key next game. I guess therefore 11...b6! When White does not exactly know
that this retreat should be preferred at this what to with his pieces and castles kingside
state of knowledge. 8.h4 h6 ) 8.d2 b6 Black generally obtains excellent prospects
9.e2 c6 10.d5 d4 11.d3 0-0-0 b y ca st lin g o n t h e o t h e r si d e wit h d ire c t
12.0-0-0 e5 ( 12...c5 13.ge2 e6 pressure against the enemy d4 pawn.
14.xd4 cxd4 15.dxe6 xe6 16.e2 ) 12.e2?!
13.ge2 xe2+ ( 13...h5 14.h3 c5 [ 12.d3 xd3 13.xd3 g4 14.ce4
15.xd4 xd4 16.g5 e8 17.b3 d6 e7 Is fine for Black ( 14...xe3 15.xe3
18.e4 f5 19.c3 e3 ) 14.xe2 d6= c4 16.e2 xb2 17.g5 d7 18.f5 )
I don't think White is better here, but I do 15.f5 e5 ]
n o t f e e l c o m f o rt a b l e wit h t h i s u n u su a l 12...b4 13.b1?! Two inaccuracies in this
pawn structure for me. Mack, A (2262)-Prié, sharp variation and W hite goes down
E (2429) 4NCL2 Telford ENG 2004 ] ineluctably.
7...bd7! This variation enjoys a bad [ 13.b5 bd5 14.c1 c6 15.c3 e7
reputation for Black because he has often 16.c4 b4 17.d2 ( 17.c3 xd4
gone wrong here with 18.xd4 c5 ) 17...cxb5 18.a3 b6 19.c5
[ 7...c6? which is as usual refuted by xc5 20.dxc5 ( 20.c1 xd4 21.axb4
8.d2! 0-0-0 ( 8...b4 9.c1 0-0-0 10.a3 xd2+ 22.bxc5 d8 ) 20...xc5+ 21.h1
c6 11.a1! is the same) 9.a3! And not c6 ]
( 9.d5 a4 The "mouse hole trick" 13...bd5 14.d2?
again! ) [ 14.c1 b6 15.a3 ( 15.c3? xb1
A) 9...e6 10.d5!? ( 10.b4! 16.xb1 xc3 ) 15...d6 16.c4
W i n s i m m e d i a t e l y b6 11.a4 ) ( 16.c3 c5 ) 16...xf4!! 17.xf4 xb2
10...xd5 ( 10...a4 11.b3 a2-a3 makes 18.xd6 xd6 19.d2 xa1 20.c3
a diff erence!) 11.xa5 e3 12.d2 xa3 21.b5 b3 22.xd6+ cxd6-+ ]
xc4 13.c3 4xa5 14.b4 Wins too.; 14...xd2 15.xd2 xd2 16.xd2 e3-+
B) 9...xd4 10.xd4 xd4 11.b5 At least two pawns or the exchange, the game
xd2 ( 11...b6 12.xd4 xd4 is over. 17.c3 xf1 18.xf1 h5 19.f3 h4
13.xf7 ) 12.xd2 xd2+ 13.xd2 20.ge4 xe4 21.xe4
Because, compared to the previous game, [ 21.xe4 c5 ]
White did not weaken his position, with a 21...xe4 22.xe4 c5! Always have in mind
relatively safe king close to manual that in rather closed positions, an exchange
qu e e n s i d e c a st l i n g s a f e t y a n d , m o s t up do es n ot win b y itself . T o expres s it s
important, Black will not be able to prevent superiority over the light pieces, it needs files
the disappearance of his pair of bishops and ranks! 23.dxc5 d2 24.b1
after the exchange Bc4-d3. ] [ 24.f2 hd8 ]
335
24...hd8 25.f3 h3 26.g3 8d3 27.g4 23...xd5 24.e5! Not only a good move, but
g2+ there is little else to try! xe5!? 25.dxe5!?
0-1 [ Or 25.xe5 , intending to expand on both
wings, now that Black is in no position to
play actively. ]
335 B01 25...e7 26.d1
Senff,Martin 2468 [ 26.e3!? d8 27.h3 ]
Man 2457 26...d8 27.d6! gxh5 28.d2!
Bundesliga 2006-7 (12) 17.03.2007 Well-calculated. The passed pawn and Black's
[John Watson] kingside weaknesses combine to give White
just enough to work with. xd6 29.exd6 d7
In his game we see the classic battle between 30.g5+ f8
White's bishop pair and Black's pawn structure, [ 30...h8?? 31.e7 ]
which is ubiquitous in contemporary play. The 31.e5 Threatening mate. g8 32.g5+
same issues arise n the Caro-Kann and Slav f8 33.e5 g8 34.c4! The point of Rd6
Defence, among others. The play itself is of and Qd2: Once c5 is in, Black will be simply
very high quality. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 too tied down.
3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 g4 [ 34.g3+ f8 35.c4 generally transposes,
[ 6...f5 is by far the most common choice. ] since c5? loses to 36.e5 ]
7.h3 xf3 This is also not the usual move, 34...f6
although it has been used now and then. [ 34...b6 35.b4 ]
Black's idea is to get rid of his bad bishop and 35.g3+ f8 36.c5 f7
establish the kind of position in which White [ After 36...f7 , Black might hold out hope
can't make progress without allowing Black's of simplification, but not blockade: 37.a3
knights to become effective. b6 38.b4 b5 39.f3 g6 40.h2!
[ 7...h5 ] Zugzwang to come. ]
8.xf3 e6 9.0-0 bd7 10.b3 37.a3 a6
An interesting choice. White is settling down [ 37...b6? 38.cxb6 axb6 39.d7+ ]
for the long haul, and will exchange off his 38.b3 d7?
remaining knight next. e7 [ Not offering maximum resistance. 38...e8!
[ 10...d6 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 0-0? forces W hite to make progress, which he
allows the tactic 13.xe6! f6 14.f5 ] can try to do by zugzwang, e.g., 39.a4 d7
11.e4 0-0 12.c3 fe8 Black covers e6, and ( 39...f8 40.b6 e8 41.a7 d7
...e5 lingers in the background. 13.f4 xe4 42.b8+ f7 43.h8 g6 44.g8+ f5
14.xe4 f6 15.fe1 b6 45.f3 ) 40.c3 f7 ( 40...f7 41.f3 g6
[ More assertive would be 15...e5 16.f5! 42.h2 ) 41.b4 e5 ( 41...g6 42.b5 )
e7 17.ad1 ( 17.g5 ) 17...g6 18.g4 42.h3 d8 43.f5 h4 44.h2
ae8 , when 19.g3 should maintain some and again Black is running out of moves. ]
advantage. ] 39.d1 g7 40.xh5 b6 41.b4 bxc5
16.e2 g6 17.d6 42.bxc5 e5? 43.h3! xh3
[ 17.ae1! g7 18.f3 looks good, but [ 43...f5 44.d3 a5 45.a6 ]
White still needs a way to make progress, 44.gxh3 f7 45.f4 White's exchanges
perhaps h4-h5. ] pawns and his king comes to f3.
17...e7 1-0
[ 17...ad8 18.f4! b5 ]
18.xe7 xe7 19.ae1 d8 At some point
Black should bring his queen's rook into the
centre, if only for defence. 20.f4 b6
21.h4! d7 22.h5 d5 23.xd5
[ 23.g3 f6 is not so easy, although Fritz
approves of 24.h6 ]
336
336 B01 19.xc5 g4! 20.xg4 xg4 21.0-0

Shaw,John K 2465 f5 ) 18...xf6 19.e5 c8;
Zeidler,Sven P 2245 B) 17.0-0-0 h6+ 18.b2 e6 19.he1
EuTCh Plovdiv (9) 2003 f5 ]
[Andrew Martin] [ Finally 13...xg2 14.f3 h3 15.c5
c8 16.a4 is an adventure few would
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 e5+ relish. ]
I met Zeidler at the recent 4NCL weekend and 14.0-0 Bf3 would be answered by ...Be4 e5
we fell into conversation about the PATZER This has to work or the Black pieces will end
variation. I was impressed that he had been up as targets. 15.dxe5 fxe5 16.b3
prepared to try this outlandish Queen move at [ 16.xd5 xd5 17.fd1 ( 17.c4 d2
what is, after all, a pretty high level. He said 18.ae1 b5 19.xe5 d7 20.f4 d6!
that John Shaw took a week out to refute the 21.xd2 xe5 22.xg8 xg8 23.c5 f5
whole line and thought that he had succeeded. 24.e1 f6 25.e2 d8 ) 17...e4 18.b2
Let us see. I'll just repeat that ...Qxd5-e5-c7 is f6 ]
exactly the same number of tempi as .... Qxd5- 16...b5 17.c5 xc5 18.bxc5 f6 19.c4!
a5-c7 and the idea is to get a regular I like the way Shaw played it. He has two
Sc an dina via n po sitio n with W h it e's Kin g Bishops and a big attack. Zeidler has
Bis h o p le s s a ct ive ly p la ce d o n e 2 . 4.e2 problems. d2 20.fe1 Simple play. The
Clearly critical. c6 5.d4 c7 6.f3 f5 deficiencies in Black's position won't go away.
[ 6...g4 7.e5 xe2 8.xe2 d7 9.f4 a6 21.cxb5 axb5 22.a4 The can-opener
xe5 10.xe5 b6 11.0-0-0 f6 12.xf6 attack! b4 23.xe5 b7 24.ad1 c2
gxf6 13.d5 ] 25.f7+ d7 26.xd2 So is the end for the
[ 6...f6 7.e5 bd7 8.f4 xe5 9.dxe5 Patzer Variation? Black must rely on 13...e5
e6 10.b5! ] perhaps that is not too bad. A good game by
7.e5! And this is once again by far the best John Shaw.
move. After everything else, Black is quite 1-0
comfortable. I know I must have played about
500 blitz games in this line against some very
strong players. d7 Otherwise Bf4. 337 B01
[ 7...e6!? 8.g4 g6 9.h4 b4 ( 9...f6 Shirov,Alexei 2720
10.f3 ) 10.f4 a5 11.d2 xc3 12.xc3 Bauer,Christian 2585
d5 13.f3 ] XVI Magistral A (5) 27.12.2006
8.f4 xe5 9.xe5 b6 10.a4 a5+ [Jonathan Rowson]
11.c3 f6! My own idea, where Black intends
to sacrif ice a pawn after Typically, Shaw 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 Around 2000,
continues down the critical line. 12.b4 I lost a few games to Julian Hodgson in the
[ Not 12.g3 e5! 13.dxe5 d8 14.b3 Scandinavian, despite trying hard to make
b5 ] s e n s e o f a l l t h e l i n e s wh e r e W h i t e wa s
12...d5 13.g3 supposed to be better. For a while I opted for
[ 13.f3 e4 14.g3 xf3 15.xf3 xf3 3.Nf3, intending d4 and c4 later, and in the
16.gxf3 e6 is fine for Black whilst ] process I realised that really I wanted to play
[ 13.c7 e5 14.dxe5 xg2 15.h5+ g6 d4 and c4 much earlier- as in moves one and
16.f3 h3 is murky, but Black has good two-so I started to play 1d4, and the
counterplay. ] Scandinavian ceased to be a problem! a5
13...0-0-0 One could call this move natural, 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 f5 7.c4 e6
but 8.d5 d8 9.xf6+ xf6 Critical. As far as
[ 13...e5! is possible too, although Black will I can tell, W hite is just a bit better if Black
have to play creatively: 14.dxe5 xg2 takes with the pawn(a good version of the
15.f3 h3 16.d4 e7 alre ad y su sp ect gf 6: Caro-Ka nn ). 10.e2
A) 17.c5 d8 18.exf6 ( 18.e3 xc5 g4 11.d5! An important move, creating
337
some fluidity in the position. xf3 12.gxf3 b6 36.g4 d5 37.c4 b6 38.d3
cxd5 13.xd5 d7 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 d2 39.f5 xf5 40.xf5 h2 41.g4!
Currently thought to be Black's best, but Instructive. I think many players might play
perhaps not the only move. Bg6 here, only to realise that they have no
[ 14...a3 15.c3 0-0 16.e4 c5! further ideas. Shirov plans Bg4-f3 and Rh1. f5
( 16...e7?! was Salov's mistake in the 42.f3 h3 43.h1 xf3 44.h6 e3 45.h7
o r i g i n a l g a m e i n t h i s l i n e .) 17.e3 e8 46.h8 xh8 47.xh8 d5 48.f8 f4
This is given by Shirov, but it is not forced, 49.f5 c3+ 50.b2 e2 51.f6 a5
and White may have better chances without 52.c2 f3 53.d2 g1 54.e3 e2
th e bis h o p e xcha n ge . ( 17.hg1!? h6; 55.d2 g1 56.d3 b6 57.c4 b7
17.h4!? e7 ) 17...xe3+ 18.xe3 58.b5 c7 59.f7+ d6 60.xb6 e5
given as slightly better for White by Shirov, 61.xa5 e4 62.b4 h3 63.b5 f2 64.b6
and probably is at the highest level, but f4 65.b7 f1 66.b8 d5 67.f5+
more generally I think this position should 1-0
be playable for Black. e5!? looks like a
good place to start. ]
15.e4 e5 338 B01
[ 15...a3 16.b5 ] Shirov,Alexei 2705
16.c3 c7 17.b1 f6 18.f4! This appears Mueller,Karsten 2489
to be a novelty and it is probably quite a good Nordhorn op act rapid 09.2005
one. d6 [Eric Prié]
[ 18...xf4 19.a5 Looks terminal- I don't
think Black even has a dodgy exchange 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3
sac. ] f6 5.d4 c6 6.c4 f5 Commenting s
19.f5 exf5 game which, considering the 'fighting
[ 19...e5 is worth considering. g7 remains a intensity' it exhibited, would certainly have
weakness, but the bishop on c3 is less been ignored by Andrew... is a special treat
powerful. However, Black was probably ok in for me! Indeed, reacting to Sergei Tiviakov's
the game. ] article (published in NIC Yearbook 74)
20.xf5 b8 21.h4! b6 22.h5 a4 provocatively entitled "A series of simple
23.d4 c5 24.c3 b6 moves suffices" and insinuating that 3...Qa5
[ 24...a3!? ] was doomed (!) on the grounds of the line
25.c2 xd4 26.cxd4 xd4 [ 6...g4 7.h3 h5 8.d2 e6 9.d5 d8
[ 26...d5!? 27.e4 xd4 28.xd4 xd4 10.xf6+ gxf6 ( 10...xf6
29.c1 c5 30.xh7 and white keeps is here impossible because of 11.g4 g6
some nagging pressure. ] 12.e2 xc2 13.c1 g6 14.f4
27.xd4 xd4 28.c1 a6 29.b3 b6 W ith a winn ing attack.) 11.g4 g6
[ 29...g6!? ] he asserted that: "White has the upper hand
30.c7+ a7 31.xg7 in the centre and on the kingside, castling on
[ 31.f3 was also worth considering, given the queenside. Lots of games have been
that Black could have forced a draw now ] played. It is still up to Black to prove that
31...e8 he can reach a satisfactory position
[ 31...a4! is a surprising shot, but it seems anywhere", I have myself published two
to draw immediately. 32.bxa4 ( 32.c2 articles on this annoying white idea: The first,
e8! winning. ) 32...b4+ 33.a1 ( 33.c2 confidential as it was not included in
is probably losing e.g. d8! 34.d7 e4+ MEGA2006, in ChessBase Magazine 106,
35.c3 f3+ 36.c2 xf2+ 37.b1 and the second in the latest NIC yearbook
b6+ 38.a1 d4+ 39.b1 xd7 ) 77 '(Centre) Counter-provocatively' entitled
33...d4+ with a perpetual ] "can a series of simple moves suffice?" o)
32.g4 xf2 33.xh7 Now the h-pawn is from where the following comments of this
very dangerous. e2 34.c2 d5 35.c4 game are mainly extracted. ]
338
7.d2 e6 setup in '93 and was happy enough to become

[ 7...bd7? is the first mistake the classic 1. a Grandmaster and French champion in 1995
e4 d5 student is warned about! 8.e2 e6 with it. It was the golden age of the variation.
9.d5 cxd5 10.xd5 d8 11.xf6+ xf6 Everybody was playing it, even at the highest
12.0-0-0 Threatening Bb5 with an initiative level under the impulse of GM Matthias Wahls
practically winning by force! ] and others. Then came Shirov-Salov (from
8.d5 d8 9.xf6+ xf6 Quoting myself: Madrid 1997) which, incredible as it may seem,
"Like me most Scandinavian players believe first saw this move, intending a rapid d4-d5,
that it is an improved Caro-Kann where White only 9 years ago! and things were never going
was not even given the choice of opting for to be the same again... g4 The only move
the advance variation 3.e5. What they like is 11.d5!
this structure and show reluctance, apart from [ 11.0-0-0 e7!? The best set-up for Black
well defined dynamic cases, to play with the is o b vi o u s l y . . . B d 6 , . . . Q e 7 , . . . N d 7 b u t
doubled f-pawns. I agree that the idea 8.Nd5 various games have demonstrated he had
is critical first of all because it exchanges the no time for that. Thus, profiting from
'good' knight on f 6 which was controlling W h ite 's m o ve ord er, Bla ck will d u ra b ly
some interesting squares in the centre against prevent the critical d4-d5 breakthrough. ]
the 'worse' knight c3 which, opposed to the 11...xf3 12.gxf3 cxd5 13.xd5 "Suddenly
Caro-Kann main lines was hampering the use we have a completely different picture: White
of the c-pawn by White. If I had to recapture has managed to get in the d4-d5 push
with (dangerously opening the play for his better
[ 9...gxf6 which if Tiviakov is right could be developed pieces) and the doubled f-pawns
the only move to get a playable position. (usually so crippling when Black could hold
Then I would be distinctly less enthusiastic onto the d5 square) prove to be irrelevant as
about Black's game, so much so that I would he is going to castle queenside anyway. In
feel like giving up the opening! Indeed, in addition, the opening of the g-file seems to
spite o f the h ighly tactica l chara cter o f se r ve h i m we ll wh e n c o m b in e d wi t h t h e
some continuations, the c6-Bf5 further harassment of the black queen, who is
Scandinavian has to be ranked among the more exposed than ever! It looks as if this
'static' defences against the king pawn, to was the of the story..." d7
employ the GM Iossif Dorfman's terminology. [ 13...c6 14.xc6+ bxc6 15.e4! c8
In the middle term, It means that if White 16.0-0-0 a3 17.c3 c5 18.hg1 xf2?
plays passively, without clear ideas of what 19.g5! g6 20.xc6+! 1-0 Marciano, D
to do, then Black will harmoniously catch up (2470)-Prie, E (2465) Ch-Fra Narbonne
in development obtaining comfortable play 19 9 7 O f cou rse , yo u can im a gin e t ha t ,
with all his pieces on good squares." By way although I had overlooked W hite's super
of reaction, White has to play 'dynamically', 15th move in my prep, things are not that
that is to say to try to profit from his simple... Anyway, I actually had to give up
advanced development to keep the t h e S c a n d i n a vi a n a f t e r a n a l ys i n g t h i s
initiative basically using short term themes disaster, finding no mercy for Black in this
against the Black queen and/or his queen's variation. If you want to know the whole
bishop. The recapture with the g-pawn - story about it (including why 14th FIDE
compromising the structure and potentially W orld champion Alexander Khalifman's
le a d in g t o a c le a r d is a d va n t a g e in t h e conclusion, covering the idea 10... Nd7 11.
ending - does not fit in with Black's 0-0-0 Nb6? as in Jaulin-Prié, at the very end
philosophy. Playing dynamically right from of his otherwise excellent 3rd volume of
the beginning of the game gives me the his series "opening for White according to
impression of 'putting all my eggs in the Anand" is erroneous and irrelevant!) I invite
same basket'. At least is it not the way I you to refer to any of the 2 works
understand or like to play chess. ] mentioned above... Or wait f or the time
10.e2! I had to switch to the ...c6-...Bf5 wh e n I co m e b a ck t o t h is se ct io n , in a
339
couple of months hopefully, to give you time such thing as 'the Scandinavian revival' just
to digest this material, for the second part of yet. One immense consolation, nevertheless,
my 'secrets'! As a matter of fact, I could is that the player who brought doubt, sorrow
have made at least 2 updates with great and misfortune to the Centre Counter kingdom
games only issued from this specific line did not find a way of breaking this last bastion
which stands at the front of all the 1.e4 d5 of resistance!
corpus, but I am curious to see how my ½-½
sown ideas will grow. ]
14.0-0-0 0-0-0! Its is likely that the Spanish no.
1 was not aware of the theoretical articles in 339 B01
ChessBase Magazine 106. And NIC 77 was Shirov,Alexei 2690
not yet out in September. As for his German Salov,Valery 2665
opponent, he happens to be a member of staff Madrid 1997
o f t h e f a m o u s H a m b u r g f i r m . . . 15.e4 [Alexander Volzhin]
"This position looks terrible for Black: He's
behind in development, his queen is out of 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
play and two mighty white bishops are pointing f6 5.f3 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5
at his castled king. Anyway, so far, Black has d8 9.xf6+ xf6
passed the test of [ After 9...gxf6!? the position is similar to a
[ 15.xb7+ See Ye-Malakhov in the Caro-Kann line: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4
archives. ] 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6 gxf6. In my opinion White
15...e5! Once again the only move and a has the better chances here. ]
small miracle about which I would not be so 10.e2!? True to his style, Shirov uses the
confident if it had not been acknowledged by first opportunity to complicate. White has tried
high level practice so far and by my friend different moves in this position, but has failed
super-GM Laurent Fressinet (whose game to achieve anything real from the opening.
against Hod gso n is Kh alif man 's u ltimat e [ 10.0-0 d7 ( 10...g4!? ) 11.c3 d6
ref erence) and who much to his surprise 12.g5 g6 13.d2 h6 14.f4 e7
"found nothing for W hite" in this position. 15.fe1 0-0 16.g3 with a small advantage,
16.e3 A novelty that will probably not remain Campora-Wolff, Buenos Aires 1997. ]
long in the annals... [ 10.c3 d7 11.b3 b6 ( 11...0-0-0
[ 16.b1 c7 17.c3 f6 18.d3 c5 12.0-0 Djurhuus - Westerinen, Gausdal
19.c4 d6! With h2 in the line of fire, is 1996 ) 12.0-0-0 d6 13.e2 ( 13.g5 g6
Black's central resource in this line, while 14.h4 xc4 ) 13...0-0 14.g5 g6 15.h4
An drew's in t erest in g sugge stion of 1 8 . g4 with unclear play, Donev - Bacrot, Biel
Rhg1!? has yet to be tested in practice. ] 1995. ]
16...c5! 17.c4 c7 18.e2 f6 19.g5 [ 10.e5 d7 11.xd7 xd7
h6 20.xf6 gxf6 21.h3 f5 Black is clearly ( 11...xd4!? ) 12.c3 g6 13.0-0 d6
better but the chessboard pyromaniac, even 14.e1 h5 15.f1 h4= and Black was
though in bad form at the moment, remains more o r less o kay in t he ga me Emm s -
an impressive opponent! If you look at the Haveland, Gausdal 1996. ]
statistics in MEGA 2006, which do not [ 10.c3!? deserves attention, White was
comprise some of my results (including a no- able to get an advantage in the game Koch -
sweat draw against hard fighting Baklan - Relange, France, (tt) 1993: g4 11.e2
rated 2601 - just two weeks ago!) you will be d8 12.h3 h5 13.d2 d7 14.0-0-0
awa re t ha t, ap art f rom t he ga me s wh ere f6 15.g4 g6 16.e5 ]
W hite obviously went crazy, Black has not 10...g4
been able to score any victory yet after 14... [ After 10...xc2 11.d5 White's initiative
0-0-0! It is a sad thing to say, but only White would be dangerous. ]
can press for an edge in this variation and for [ as it would be after 10...d7 11.d5 ]
that reason alone we are not about to see 11.d5 xf3
340
[ 11...xb2!? deserves attention and after 17...xh7 18.d3+ g8 19.xd7

12.0-0 xf3 13.gxf3 cxd5 14.xd5 c6 W hite has an advantage which should be
15.ab1 d4! it's not clear if the activity of provable only by precise play as his kingside
the White pieces is sufficient compensation p a w n s a r e w e a k . b6 20.hg1 ad8
f o r t h e p a w n , a c c o r d i n g t o A l e xa n d e r 21.xa7
Finkel. ] [ 21.b7!? deserved attention. ]
12.gxf3 cxd5 21...c5 22.e3 a8 23.b7 xa2 24.e4
[ 12...xb2!? 13.0-0 cxd5 14.xd5 c6 xe3+?! This makes White's task easier.
15.ab1 d4! was interesting as we have [ 24...fa8 looked better. ]
already mentioned above. ] 25.fxe3 b5?!
13.xd5 d7! [ 25...c8 was more to the point. ]
[ 13...c6 14.0-0-0 a3 15.c3 26.c2 b4 This was probably Black's idea
was in White's favour. ] but White has enough resources to defend his
14.0-0-0 King. 27.xb4 f5+
[ T h e l o g i c a l 14.c3? was bad for White [ 27...xf3 loses by force after the excellent
after b4! 15.xb4 xb2 ] 28.b3!! ( t h e i m m e d i a t e 28.xg7+?
14...a3 wa s p r e m a t u r e : xg7 29.g1+ f6
[ Castling queenside does not solve Black's 30.h4+ e5 31.d4+ f5 32.d3+
problems completely but probably should e5= ) 28...aa8 29.xg7+! xg7
have been preferred: 14...0-0-0!? 15.e4 30.g1+ f6 31.h4+ e5 32.d4+ f5
with Be3 next W hite's chances are better a n d n o w W h it e h a s t h e ve ry im p o rt a n t
but Black's position is playable. ] resource 33.e4+! f4 34.f6+ e3
15.c3 0-0 16.e4 35.e1+ d2 ( 35...e2 36.g5+ d3
[ W hite had no need to go in for 16.xb7? 37.b5+ winning ) 36.xf3 and fortunately
ab8! ( 16...xb2+ was unclear: 17.xb2 the White King has an escape route: fb8+
ab8 18.b5 xb7 19.xb7 b8 37.c4 c8+ 38.d4 d8+ 39.e5
20.xb8+ xb8 21.e3 ) 17.b5 c5 winning ]
18.bxa3 fc8! with a big advantage for 28.b3 aa8?? Although Black's position
Black. ] was bad there was no need to blunder like
16...e7?! this.
[ After 16...c5 17.hg1 h6 18.b5!? [ After 28...a5 29.e4 ( 29.xg7+?
ad8 19.e3 xe3+ 20.fxe3 Black had d o e s n o t w o r k : xg7 30.g1+ h7
problems but this was clearly the lesser 31.xf8 b5+ 32.a3 a5+=
evil. ] with a perpetual..) 29...h5 30.c2 xh2+
17.xh7+?! ( 30...b5 31.d4 g6 White is winning)
[ According to later analysis White could 31.d2 xg1 32.xa5 Black could
obtain a very strong and maybe decisive continue fighting. ]
attack by 17.h4! h6 18.g5! hxg5 29.xg7+ Black resigned because in the line
19.h7+!! ( 19.xd7? gxh4 ) 19...h8 [ 29.xg7+ xg7 30.g1+ g6
20.hxg5 xg5+ 21.b1 f6 ( 21...fd8 ( 30...h8? 31.h4+ h7 32.f6+ g7
22.f4 xf4 23.d4 g5 24.f4 c5 33.xg7# ) 31.xg6+ fxg6 32.e4
25.h2 winning ) 22.c2+ g8 23.dg1 Black has nothing to hope for. An interesting
f4 ( 23...d5 24.e3 winning ) 24.f1!! game which is important for theory. ]
g6 ( 24...fd8 25.h3 f8 26.h8+ g8 1-0
27.xg7 e8 28.g4 winning ) 25.g2
with Bg6 next but it was not easy to
calculate the whole variation, even for a
great tactician like Alexey Shirov, since we
have not reached the end of the line yet.
Black could now defend by c5 26.xg6
fd8 etc. ]
341
340 B01 as the knight is trapped on g4. ( 12.a4!?

Shirov,Alexei 2749 also looks interesting.) 12...f5 13.h3 f6
Tiviakov,Sergei 2637 14.e1 0-0-0 15.e4 xe4 16.xe4 f5
Unive Crown Group (2) 26.10.2010 17.e1 e5! 18.hxg4 e4 19.gxf5 exf3
[Gawain Jones] 20.xf3 gxf5 21.c3 and White's king
lo o ks se cu re t o m e a n d t h u s h a s t h e
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 advantage with his extra pawn.;
f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.f4 B) 10...0-0 11.a4 a5 12.h1 ( 12.f5!? )
Shirov keeps faith with his aggressive pawn 12...fd5 13.e4 c7 14.c3 f6 15.d3
thrust. b6 f5 16.gxf5 xf5 17.e2 h6 18.ec5
[ 7...e6 8.g4 f6 19.e5 af8 feels promising for
A) 8...c7 9.g2 d5 10.e4 e7 White as his knights dominate the board
11.0-0 0-0 12.c4 5b6 13.b3 ( 13.g5!? but Black has counterplay thanks to his
looks an interesting try with the idea that pressure on f 4 . 20.d2 ( 20.c4 b4
xe5 14.fxe5 xc4 15.d3 b5 16.b3 21.e4 looks stronger to me with an
b6 17.f6+ gives White a strong edge. ) 20...c8 21.e4 f5 22.g3
attack. ) 13...f6 14.d3 d8 15.e2 f8 5f6 23.f5!? xd2 24.xd2 xf5 25.c4
16.b2 and White had a clear advantage b4 26.xf5 gxf5?! After sensible play
as Black was so passive. Kosintseva, N b y b o t h s i d e s B l a c k e r r s . ( Instead
(2551)-Huang Qian (2447) Ningbo 2010; 26...xf5 27.xf5 xf5 28.h3 f6
B) 8...c5 This was the route of a previous 29.e1 leaves White with decent
Shirov game from this year. 9.g5 d5 compensation for the pawn but the game
10.e4 c7 11.c4 xe5?! This just is still ongoing.) 27.g1! h8 28.f4
leaves Black with significant positional a6 29.f3 e6 30.h4 d8 31.g5 c5
problems. 12.dxe5 b4 13.g2 d7 32.ag1 1-0 Radulski, J (2577)-Saric, I
14.0-0 0-0-0 15.d6+ xd6 16.exd6 (2556) Zagreb 2010. ]
b8 17.e3 b6 18.a3 c6 19.b4! [ 8...fd7?! looks far too passive, ceding the
and already W hite's attack is breaking c e n t r a l c o n t r o l . 9.e4 c7 10.g2
through. Shirov, A (2732)-Kurkowski, K ( 10.d3!? ) 10...xe5 11.fxe5 e6 12.0-0
Toronto 2010. ] d5 13.a4! xe4 14.xe4 d7 15.a5
[ 7...c7 8.d3 ( 8.g4 is no longer so good d5 16.f3 e6 17.c4 b4 18.a6! bxa6
as xe5 9.fxe5 xg4 10.e2 xe2 19.xa6 left White with a fantastic position.
11.xe2 d5 doesn't look threatening.) Gledura, B (2102)-Kreindl, H (2206)
8...e6 9.0-0 e7 10.f3 0-0 11.h1 c5 Zalakaros 2010. ]
12.e3 a6 13.ae1 cxd4 14.xd4 c5 9.g2 This seems to be a novelty but a very
Kosintseva, N (2551)-Huang Qian (2447) sensible developing move and the top
N i n g b o 2 0 1 0 w h e n t h e s i m p l e 15.e2 suggestion of the computer.
leaves W hite with a pleasant edge with [ 9.g5 was played in the previous game.
more control of the position. ] xc3 10.bxc3 d5 11.c4 c7 12.c5 d5
8.g4 bd5 13.g1 f6 14.c4 e6 15.e3 0-0-0
[ 8...e6 was tried in their previous 16.d2 f5 17.c4 d7 was very messy
encounter - see Shirov, A (2726)-Tiviakov, but I'd pref er to b e Black as W hite ha s
S (2686) Benidorm 2008 annotated by John severe problems finding sanctuary for his
Watson in the archives. ] king. Lorenzo de la Riva, L (2331)-Caspi, I
[ I l o o k e d a t t h e i m m e d i a t e 8...g6 (2417) Barcelona 2009. ]
in the notes to Bulski, K-Stopa, J earlier this 9...g6 10.g5 xc3 11.bxc3 d5?!
year. A couple of more recent encounters After this Black is in trouble.
continued: 9.g2 g7 10.0-0 [ I n s t e a d h e s h o u l d g o f o r 11...d7
A) 10...h5 11.g5 g4 Kosintseva, N The position is hard to assess. I feel that
(2565)-Kosteniuk, A (2524) Moscow 2010 W h it e sh o u ld b e b e t t e r wi t h h is s p a c e
w h e n I l i k e t h e l o o k o f 12.f3 advantage but Black can create counter-
342
chances with ...h6. Perhaps this will be does not last long. d7 20.0-0 b8
examined in the next Shirov-Tiviakov game? [ 20...dxc4 would take the d5 square for the
12.b1 h6 13.gxh6 xh6 14.0-0 g7 knight but fails tactically to 21.f6 b8
15.e2 e6 16.c4 d6 17.c3 22.b1 b5 23.xb5! cxb5 24.c6+- ]
and the computer rates the position as equal 21.a4 b7 22.ab1
but I feel practically W hite has the more [ 22.fb1 is the computer's suggestion, with
pleasant chances. ] the idea a8 23.xb7 ( 23.a5!?
12.c4 c7 13.c5 This is obviously a better also appears to win a piece.) 23...xb7
version of 9.g5 as now Black cannot play ... 24.b3!
Qd5, and thus W hite will not lose castling A) 24...xb3 25.axb3 d8 26.xa7
rights. Already I think Black is in some trouble e8 27.a8+ c8 ( 27...e7 28.d6+
as he has become so passive. d8 wins the rook.) 28.cxd5 cxd5 29.f1 c7
[ 13...e6 would prevent White's next and 30.a7 e8 31.c3+-;
should be preferred although if White reacts B) 24...c8 25.h3+- and Black's
dynamically Black will be in trouble: 14.0-0 position collapses. ]
g7 15.e1 f5 16.b1 h6 17.b3 hxg5 22...c8 23.xb7 xb7 24.f2
18.fxg5 h4 19.f1 e6 20.f4 Simple chess. Tiviakov cannot prevent White
and Black is obliged to sacrifice the taking the b file and infiltrating Black's position.
exchange when xf4 21.xf4 xe5 22.e4 d4 25.a5!?
xh2+ 23.xh2 leaves White clearly on [ The straightforward 25.xd4 also wins. ]
top. ] 25...d8 26.e4 Black resigned as he is
14.d5! Shirov doesn't miss this tactical basically in zugzwang. A demolition of the
opportunity, exploiting Black's lack of Russian-Dutch GM and I imagine Shirov's pet
development. cxd5 variation 7 f4 will garner more interest.
[ 14...xd5 is an alternative try but 15.c4 f6 [ 26.e4 c8 27.b2+- is one idea. ]
16.cxd5 fxe5 17.a4! also leaves Black in 1-0
trouble. g7 18.dxc6 b5 19.cxb6
( 19.xb5!? ) 19...axb6 ( 19...xb6 20.c7+
f7 21.xa8 e4 22.b3+ xb3 23.axb3 341 B01
xa1 24.e3+- ) 20.xa8 exf4 21.0-0! Shirov,Alexei 2726
xa1 22.xf4 0-0 23.c7 and White has a Tiviakov,Sergei 2686
clear edge. ] VII Stars Benidorm ESP rapid (8) 07.12.2008
15.c4 e6 [John Watson]
[ 15...h6 attempting to get kingside
counterplay also leaves Black much worse: Some Tiviakov games (see the notes) should
16.a4+ d7 17.xd7+ xd7 18.xd7 cla rif y t his p a rticula r m ain lin e. Sh iro v's
xd7 19.cxd5 leaves White with a huge approach is typically dynamic, but no great
positional advantage. ] threat to Black's system. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5
16.b2 g7 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3
[ 16...g8 17.g4 xc5 ( 17...e7 [ 5.c4 c6 6.ge2 f5 7.f4 b4 8.b3
18.f6+ would be very similar to the game.) e6 9.c7 e7 10.g3 gave White a
18.f6+ f8 19.xh7+ e8 20.f6+ f8 standard space edge characteristic of the
when of White is clearly better and perhaps surrendered centre in Stenersen-Tiviakov,
most accurate is 21.b3 h8 22.e4 Gjovik NOR 2008, although Black's
dxe4 23.xh8 with a great advantage. ] 500-point rating edge told in the end. ]
17.c6! bxc6 18.xg7 g8 19.e5 5...c6 6.e5 bd7 7.f4!?
White completely dominates the dark squares [ In previous updates, Tiviakov lost twice to
and has more than enough compensation for 7.f4 d5 8.xd5 xd5!? ( after 8...xe5
the pawn. c6 is vulnerable while Black is 9.e3 d3+ 10.xd3 xf4 11.d5!?
exceedingly passive and cannot coordinate of Gashimov-Tiviakov, Reggio Emilia ITA
his pieces and so it's not a surprise that Black 2008, I suggested 11...Bd7 or even the
343
pawn grab 11...Qb4+ 12 c3 Qxb2, rather e5 27.a3 c4 28.a7 d6 29.xc6
than cxd5? 12.xd5 e6? 13.b5+ e7 xf5 30.g4 d4 31.a4 h5 32.g5 e2
14.d2 with a strong attack.) 9.f3! 33.d7+ c8 34.xe7 g3+ 35.g2 c7
, so in Vila Gazquez-Tiviakov, Benidorm 36.xc7+ xc7 37.xg3 h4+ 38.h3 d6
ESP 2008, he played b6 ( rather than 39.b3 e7 40.b2
9...f6 10.e2 g4 11.0-0 e6 12.h3 xf3 1-0
13.xf3 and White stands better see, for
example, Ni Hua -Tiviakov, Reggio Emilia
ITA 2008 in the Archives) 10.e2 f5 342 B01
11.c3 (Black's point with ...Nb6 was to Short,Nigel D 2692
temporarily prevent c4) e6 12.0-0 e7 Liiva,R 2451
, although this was perhaps more to avoid 12th Puhajarve Rapid 2012 (6.1) 23.11.2012
the theory stemming from 9...Nf6 than to [Tom Rendle]
prove equality: 13.e1 0-0 14.e5 ac8
15.a4 (White appears slightly better in any 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 This is an
case) d8 16.a5 d5 17.g3 g5!? option that is increasingly worth considering
18.b3 e7 , and here White should with the rise in players choosing lines like the
probably be content with a small advantage 3...Qd6 Scandinavian as a solid repertoire
following 19.d3 ] against 1.e4. One major advantage of this
7...b6 8.g4!? Typical Shirov, creating a move is that W hite aims to play c4 before
maximal imbalance. e6 9.g2 g6 10.0-0 developing a knight to c3. f6
g7 [ 3...g4 4.e2 c6 5.d4 f6 6.c4 d8
[ 10...0-0-0 puts serious pressure on the d- 7.c3 e6 is quite similar to the game and
pawn. White would undoubtedly offer it via was analysed in Kaidanov-Zatonskih by
something like 11.f3 , but Black can play Andrew Martin. ]
a6 ( 11...xd4+? 12.e3 d6 13.b5 ) 4.e2 g4 5.0-0 e6 This exact position
12.d1 h5! with good counterplay. ] hasn't really been examined on this site before
11.f5 gxf5 12.gxf5 c4 13.xc4!? so I'll add in a few possibilities for both sides.
This and W hite's next look inaccurate. An [ 5...c6 was also tried against Nigel in the
alternative is same event. 6.h3
[ 13.e1 d8 14.a4!? ] A) 6...xf3 7.xf3 d7 8.d3 should be a
13...xc4 14.d3?! g4! 15.f4 xb2! li t t l e b e t t e r f o r W h i t e d u e t o t h e t wo
16.g3 xd4+ 17.h1 f2+?! bishops ( 8.e1 0-0-0 9.c3
[ T h e c o u r a g e o u s w a y w a s 17...xc3! is more ambitious than settling for d3 );
18.xc3 g8 , when 19.xb2 d1+ B) 6...h5 7.d4 0-0-0 8.e3 e6 9.c4
20.f1 ( 20.f1 xf1+ 21.xf1 f2# ) f5 10.bd2 xf3 11.xf3 h6 12.b1
20...e3! threatens ...Qd5+. ] and W hite had a comf ortable ed ge in
18.xf2 xg3 19.hxg3 xc3?! Short, N (2692) -Vihmand, A Puhajarve
[ 19...xf2! 20.xb2 g8 wins a third pawn 2012 ]
in exchange f or the two-pieces-for-rook [ 5...c6 6.h3 h5 7.c4 d8 8.d4 e6
trade-of f . That more than makes up f or 9.b3 ( 9.c3 e7 10.f4 0-0 11.e1
bishop pair, although it won't be easy to gain is also very comfortable for White as he can
a serious advantage in the face of White's co n si d e r m e e t in g bd7 with 12.d5!?
bishops. ] which seems to lead to some advantage)
20.b1 c4 21.xb7 White is clearly better 9...b6 10.c3 was somewhat better for
now why did Black allow this to happen when W hite in Turov, M (2527)-Megaranto, S
he had so many options? Anyway. the (2499) Dieren 2005 ]
opening came out well for him, and 6.h3 I quite like this plan of a quick h3 to put
Scandinavian players needn't be afraid of the question to the bishop h5 7.d4 e7?!
Shirov's setup. a5 22.c7 d8 23.xa7 This gives White a very easy game
d7 24.a8+ d8 25.xd8+ xd8 26.f3 [ 7...c6 is more challenging and now 8.c4
344
( 8.e3 is a very flexible alternative) 8...d8 is hard to asses but after f6 Black is
( 8...d7 9.e3 0-0-0 10.bd2 h6 11.a3! starting to get coordinated and the extra
and White had the more dangerous attack Queen should give him the better chances ]
in Michielsen, J (2359)-Reed, D (2061) 27.h1 f6 28.e6+ h7 29.g1 f4
Jyvaskyla 2009) 9.e3 e7 10.c3 0-0 30.xc5 f3+ 31.h2 f4+ 32.g3
11.d2 ( 11.a3!? seems a bit more Pla yin g f o r th e win h5 33.e3 f6
ambitious to me) 11...g6 and White has a 34.gg1 f4
minimal edge in Kaufman, L (2364)- [ 34...g7! 35.d7 f5 36.xf5 gxf5
Zatonskih, A (2445) Philadelphia 2004 ] and now Black has enough counterplay - for
8.c4 d8 9.b3! Now Black has to waste example 37.d6 f4 38.b6 e3! 39.fxe3 f3
time covering b7 c8 a n d i t 's W h it e t h a t h a s t o b e t h e m o r e
[ 9...b6 is not a move Black wants to play as careful although it's possible the game is
it leaves too many weaknesses on the light- drawn after 40.g4 f2 41.f1 f8 42.c5
squares around it ] f3 43.d7 e2 44.g2 f3+ 45.h2
10.c3 0-0 11.e3 bd7 12.ad1 a6 e2 ]
A sign Black is still searching for a plan. 13.g4 35.g4 d3 36.d2 h8? Finally Black
g6 14.h4 Nigel grabs the two Bishops to cracks - it's inevitable someone is going to go
add to his space advantage and already White wrong in a rapid game like this. 37.f3! g7
is clearly better. c5 15.g5 It's pretty safe to 38.fxe4 It's not just that Black has lost a pawn
push the g-pawn here as any Black but the counterplay is gone as well. The last
counterplay is a very long way off here! e8 few moves are not especially accurate as
16.xg6 hxg6 17.d5 both players were no doubt low on time. f4
[ 17.dxc5!? xc5 18.a3 creates an 39.g3 b6 40.d6 d8 41.d7 c6 42.b4?!
awkwa rd p in o n th e knigh t an d af te r b6 [ 42.b3 ]
19.b4 d7 20.e4 White is doing well ] 42...f7?!
17...e5 [ 42...xc4 gives Black chances to hold ]
[ 17...d6 probably offered more play, after 43.c5 xe4 44.cxb6 d5? 45.f3
18.dxe6 fxe6 19.g4 f5 Black may have This setup is a useful one to learn as it takes
a wrecked pawn structure but the position is players out of their normal Qa5/Qd6/Qd8
still complicated. Still White is much better systems where often the knight on c3 looks
after 20.c2 c6 21.e4! ] out of place in front of the pawn on c2.
18.e4 d6 The only move as otherwise d6 1-0
was coming.
[ 18...c7? runs into 19.d6! xd6 20.xd6
xd6 21.d3 and Black drops a piece ] 343 B01
19.xd6 xd6 20.c2 e8 21.e4 Smeets,Jan 2558
[ 21.d3 would have kept more control over Feygin,Michail 2531
the kingside but Black can aim for NED-chT 0708 (5) 15.12.2007
counterplay with b5!? ] [Milos Pavlovic]
21...f5! 22.gxf6 gxf6 23.h6 f5 Suddenly
things aren't so clear and Short chooses an 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
interesting Queen sacrifice. 24.xf8!? f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.c4 c7
[ I suspect at a slower time-limit he might've 8.f3 b6 9.f4 d8
chosen 24.g2 w h e n a f t e r f6 25.f3 [ 9...d7 is considered in this month's game
White should have some edge with the two Kotronias-Tiviakov. ]
bishops and half-open g-file for play. ] 10.e5 As Gawain wrote: "This seems to be
24...fxe4 25.xd6 d8 26.g4?! the most sensible option here." e6
[ 26.b4 keeps the game very unclear ] [ 10...g4 is the main alternative, 11.g3
26...g5?! Liiva misses his best chance of the h5 12.h3 h4
game A) 13.e3!? is an interesting move, my
[ 26...b6! 27.xe5 xc4 28.g3 first analysis shows that is strong. e6
345
14.xb6! This is the idea of 13. Qe3 B2b) 17.bxc3 d5 ( 17...a5
A1) 14...axb6 15.d3 It is not clear to was played in Womacka, M-Pizzuto, S/
me what Black should do to untangle his Schwarzach 2010, which is examined
pieces. g6 ( 15...d5 16.xd5 xd5 by Gawain in his notes to Bologan-
17.0-0 b5 18.fe1 ) 16.d5!? ( 16.0-0 Tiviakov. )
h6 17.f4 f8 18.ad1 c8 B2b1) Very sharp might be:
19.e4 ) 16...h6 17.e2 ( 17.f4 18.e3!?N f5 19.e2 ( 19.b1
cxd5 18.b5+ f8 19.0-0-0 g7 xa2 20.xb7 h6 21.e2 e6
20.b1 c8 ) 17...cxd5 18.b5 0-0 22.0-0 f6 23.f3 g6 Computer
19.c7 d7 ( 19...h7 20.xa8 xa8 style chess, but interesting
21.d4 ) 20.xa8; nonetheless, the position is
A2) 14...xb6 15.0-0-0 unclear. ) 19...e4! ( 19...xg2
A2a) 15...d7 16.f4 g6 17.e2 20.f3 g6 21.0-0-0 e6 22.c4 f6
( 17.d3 g7 18.xg6 0-0-0 19.e4 23.hg1 f7 24.h2 0-0-0
f6 20.f3 h5 With some chances 25.d5 );
f o r B l a c k .) 17...f6 ( 17...g7 B2b2) 18.b1 0-0-0 19.e3 f5
18.g4! ) 18.he1 0-0-0 19.f3 g7 20.e2 f6 21.h2 e4!;
20.a4! a5 21.c5 xa2 B2b3) 18.f3 h5 19.f4 d8
22.xe6; 1/2-1/2 (19) Brkic, A (2577)-
A2b) 15...g6 16.xf6 exf6 17.c4 Gallagher, J (2497) Crete GRE 2007,
h6 18.f4 f8 ( 18...0-0-0 19.xe6+ Interesting play by Gallagher, in the
fxe6 20.xe6+ b8 21.hf1 xd4 final position after 20.Bd3 g6 21.0-0
22.xf6 xd1+ 23.xd1 f8 Bg7 it is unclear. 20.d3 g6 21.0-0
24.xh4 xf4+ 25.b1 g5 g7;
26.e1 ) 19.xe6 e8 B3) 16...a5 17.d3 b4 ( 17...f6
Black overlooks W hite's reply. 18.h2 f7 19.0-0 e6 20.e2 xc3
( 19...c7 20.hf1 fxe6 21.xe6 ) 21.bxc3 ) 18.0-0 xd3 19.xd3 f6
20.a4! b4 21.b3! White stays a 20.fe1! 0-0-0 21.c7 xc7 22.xe6
piece up, see Gawain's annotations to with a positional advantage, Kotronias, V
Huschenbeth, N-Dranov, A/Bonn GER (2570)-Marcelin, C (2493) Clichy FRA
2011 in the PGN Archive.; 2007. ]
B) 13.f4 The usual move. e6 14.e3 11.e3 bd7
This was considered best, and after... [ 11...g6 can be met by
bd5 15.exd5 xd5 16.d2 A) 12.h4;
This also looks like good pressure as B) 12.d1 g7 13.d5!? cxd5
Black is cramped here. ( 13...bxd5 ) 14.b5+ f8 15.0-0
B1) 16...f5 17.d3 xd3 18.xd3 with compensation, Geffroy, L (1867)-Pytel,
xc3 19.bxc3 d7 20.0-0 e6 21.ab1 K (2314)/Rennes 2011.;
Although the position is simplified it is C) 12.a4! a5 13.d5! bxd5 14.cxd5
not easy for Black with his king stuck in xd5 15.xd5 xd5 16.xd5 cxd5
the center, no possibilities to undermine 17.b5+ d8 18.0-0-0 g7 19.c4
the central structure and passive rooks- C1) 19...g8 20.b1 e6 21.he1 d7
more then enough to say that White has ( 21...c8 22.cxd5 xd5 23.xg7
the better prospects. b6 22.c4 f6 xg7 24.xd5!+- ) 22.xg7 xg7
23.f4 Kotronias, V-Ardelean, G/Kavala 23.cxd5 e5 24.d6;
GRE 2004.; C2) 19...c8 20.b1 e6 21.cxd5 exd5
B2) A very interesting line is: 16...xc3 22.he1 e7 23.c7+ f8 24.xa5
B2a) 17.xc3!?N d5 18.d3 f6 which should win, Zuniga, D-Libre, V/
19.f4 xg2 ( 19...g5 20.e3 xg2 Greenhills 1996. ]
21.0-0-0 d5 22.b4 0-0-0 23.c4 [ 11...bd5 is the most common, 12.cxd5
d6 24.a5 ) 20.0-0-0; ( 12.d3!? xc3 13.bxc3 a5 14.0-0
346
is promising, Nokso Koivisto, A (2226)- 344 B01

Haanpaa, J (2110)/ Turku 1999.) 12...xd5 Smirin,Ilia 2638
13.c3 f6 14.g3 g6 15.d3 with a plus, Kurajica,Bojan 2558
Ghattour, M-Ekstroem, R/ Graechen 2009. ] EU-Cup 28th Eilat (4.6) 14.10.2012
12.0-0-0 [Danny Gormally]
[ 12.c4 is also good, xc4 13.xc4 g6
14.0-0-0 h6+ 15.b1 0-0 16.h4! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
with a strong attack, Roeder, F (2183) -Barth, f6 5.f3 g6 6.b5 b6 7.a4!?
N (2221)/Bayern 2007. ] [ White could also throw in 7.f4 a6 8.a4
12...a5 13.xf6 exf6 14.c4 first, somewhat misplacing the knight on
[ 14.b1 b4 15.d5! cxd5 16.cxd5 a6. ]
0-0-0 17.e4 f8 18.e2 ] 7...c6 8.a5 d8 9.c3 g7 10.c4 0-0
14...b4 15.xe6 fxe6 16.g4 xc3 11.h3 c5!? A typically "Grunfeldesque" move,
[ 16...0-0-0! 17.d3 ] Black strives to find immediate counterplay in
17.xe6+ d8 18.bxc3 xc3 19.he1 the cen ter. T he pro ble m is t hat he 's los t
e8 20.f7 several tempi. He's played ...c6, and he's also
[ Missing 20.xe8+! xe8 21.d5+ xe1 lost time with the queen (...Qd5-d6-b6-d8) so
22.xe1+ d8 23.f4 with a big by all rights White should be better. But chess
a d v a n t a g e i n t h e e n d g a m e , e . g . g6 is a funny old game... 12.d5?! The problem is
24.e6+ c8 25.c5 menacing Re8+. ] this blocks the path of the bishop on c4.
20...a3+?! 21.d2 a5+ 22.e2 c7 [ 12.dxc5! was critical. xd1+ ( 12...c7!?
23.f1 W hite is much better now. ad8 13.e3 a6 14.0-0! xc5 15.b5 c6
24.xg7 16.e5 e4 with messy play, is one
[ 24.d5! ] option. ) 13.xd1! ( much better than
24...xa2? 13.xd1? e4 14.e3 d7 which allows
[ 24...b8 ] Black to equalise with little effort) 13...d8+
25.g3+ c8 26.f5 Black is losing. xe1+ 14.e2 c6 15.d1 xd1 16.xd1 f5
27.xe1 f8 28.d6+ d8 29.xb7+ c8 I don't think gives enough for the pawn after
30.d6+ d8 31.c4 d2 32.f3 c7 17.a6! bxa6 18.g4 d8+ 19.d2 c8
33.e8+ b7 20.xa6 ]
[ 33...xe8 was forced, but 34.xe8 c1+ 12...e8 13.0-0 d6 14.d3 a6!
35.e1 xc4+ 36.g1 xd4 can only Now the game is balanced. 15.e3 f5
prolong the inevitable. ] 16.xf5 xf5 17.d2 e8 18.a4 e5!
34.b1+ 19.g5 d7 20.aa1 f5? Too optimistic.
[ 34.b3+! b6 35.c5 ] [ After the forcing line 20...h6 21.ge4 f5
34...b6 35.d6+ c7 36.g3 22.xc5 f4 The computer points out the
[ 36.a3! ] v e r y s t r o n g 23.e2! but even here Black
36...g8 A last trick, but it loses in various can maintain the balance with careful play:
ways. 37.b5+ xc5! ( 23...fxe3 24.xb7 c7 25.xa6
[ 37.xg8?? d3+ 38.e1 xb1+ draws. ] eb8 26.d6 xb2 27.de4 is good for
37...d7 38.d6+ e8 39.xc6+ White. ) 24.xc5 e4 with good play for a
[ 39.e6+ forces mate in 9. ] pawn. 25.xe4? f5! 26.f3 xd5 ]
39...f7 21.d6! e6 22.f4!?
1-0 [ 22.ad1! f4? 23.xe6 xe6 24.d5+- ]
22...d7 23.fxe5 xe5 24.f4 d4+
25.h1 c4 26.fe1 b4 27.f3 c6
28.xd4 cxd4 29.a4 f7 30.b3 d5
31.c5 xe1+ 32.xe1 b6 33.axb6 axb6
34.a4 b7 35.h6 e4 Black has
defended well in the face of a sizeable White
initiative, and now Smirin starts to go astray.
347
36.g5?! e8 37.h2 e5 38.f6 f7 effective long diagonal and supports Bf4 with
39.d7? xd7 40.xb6 xg2!? Not strictly tempo. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
necessary, but it gives White a chance to go 4.d4 f6 5.f3
astray. 41.c5? [ A rather passive approach is 5.d3 a6
[ 41.xg2 d5+ is curtains for White, of 6.ge2 , although White will gain another
course. ] tempo with Bf4. Another game from this
[ The only way to save the game was by month, Howell-Bosboom, W ijk aan Ze e
41.xe5! xe5 42.xg2 e2+ 43.g1 2009, saw g4 7.f3 h5 8.f4 b6 9.g4
e8 when I feel the game should objectively g6 10.g5 h5 11.e3 e6 12.e4 c6
end in a draw- it is difficult for either side to 13.d2 ( 13.c3 e5! ) 13...b4 , winning
mount a winning attempt without exposing t h e b ish o p p a ir, sin c e 14.c4?! c6!
his own king to too much danger. ] favoured Black. ]
41...f7 42.xe5 xe5 43.d6 5...a6 6.g3 g4
[ 43.xg2 No w lo se s t rivia lly t o d5+ [ Let me quote some of my own notes to
44.g1 xc5 ] Spasov-Kurajica, La Laguna 2007: " 6...c6
43...e2 44.g1 e7? 7.f4 d8 ( Almost automatic, but Melts
[ 44...a8 45.xd4 c6 and Black should analyses 7...e6+ at some length, for
be winning easily. ] example, 8.e2 d5 9.xd5 xd5
45.xe7 xe7 46.xg2 e2+ 47.f3 xc2 10.xc7 h3 with compensation.) 8.g2
The ending is clearly better for Black, but e6 ( 8...f5 is also played.) 9.0-0 e7
W hite does retain some hopes of a draw. 10.e2 ( 10.e1 0-0 11.d3 might be a
48.e6 better setup.) 10...0-0 11.ad1 (White's
[ 48.b4! h2 49.f4 xh3+ 50.e2 a3 development should give him a big edge,
51.d6 would have been tricky, with this but...) d5! 12.c1 ( 12.xd5 exd5
annoying b-pawn, even if objectively 13.fe1 e8 14.e5 e6! ) 12...b5!?
speaking Black should be winning here. ] 13.e4 b7 14.c3 d7 15.fe1
48...c3+ 49.g2 c2+ 50.f3 d3! 51.f4 "White has harmoniously-placed pieces and
c3 52.b4 d2+ 53.e2 c4 54.b5 e4+ must be better, but how to make progress?".
55.xd2 xe6 56.c7 e4 57.c3 f4 Black eventually took over the initiative, but
58.b6 f3 59.g3 f7-+ 60.f2 g5 61.d3 the opening phase favoured his opponent. ]
e7 62.c4 e2 63.c3 h5 64.d4 g4 [ 6...b5 7.g2 ( 7.f4 b6 ) 7...b7 8.0-0
65.hxg4 hxg4 66.f2 g6 67.b7 e8 e6 looks a little slow after 9.e5 or 9 Re1. ]
68.g3 f2 69.xf2 b8 7.g2
0-1 [ Fabiano Caruana annotated a game for this
column that continued 7.h3 h5 8.g2
c6 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4 b4 11.g4 g6
345 B01 12.a3 xb2 ( Tiviakov chose 12...c4!?
So,Wesley 2627 against Svidler in Corus 2007) 13.e1! e6!
Bosboom,Manuel 2418 14.b1 xc2 15.e5 with compensation,
Corus C Wijk aan Zee NED (11) 30.01.2009 Caruana-Strikovic, Lorca 2005. ]
[John Watson] 7...e6 8.0-0 c6 If Black has to combine ...e6,
...c6, and ...a6, he probably stands badly.
It's interesting that the ...a6/...b5 lines are [ 8...c6 9.f4 should favour White,
taking a backseat to the ... c6 lines recently. especially in view of b4!? 10.a3! xb2
Ultimately, whether ...a6 works will 11.d2 ]
nevertheless determine whether the most 9.f4 d8 10.h3
aggressively-minded players will be attracted [ Or 10.e1 ]
to the 3...Qd6 lines and, for that matter, to 1... 10...xf3 11.xf3 e7
d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 as a whole. The g3 system in [ Black can muddy the waters with 11...xd4
this game may be the biggest threat to ...Qd6 12.ad1 b6 13.e4!? xe4 14.xe4
with ...a6. White quite simply takes over the d7 ( 14...xb2?? 15.b1 is killing )]
348
12.e2 0-0 bishops, but if you're a Scandinavian player,

[ 12...bd7 ] it's very likely that you'll have some positions
13.b3! a7 14.c4 b5!? 15.fc1 d6 like this in your repertoire. The restraint centre
16.e5!? bxc4 Now things go from bad to makes it difficult for White to progress with
worse. But pawn breaks, and Black himself can aim for ...
[ 16...xe5 17.dxe5 fd7 18.e3 e5 or ...c5 once he's caught up in
is easy for White. ] development (although the latter extends the
17.xc4 d5 18.c3!? xe5 19.dxe5 g5 range of W hite's bishop along the long
20.e1 d7?! 21.xc6 xe5 22.xd5 diagonal). Top players seem happy with these
exd5 23.xd5 e7 24.e3 White remains a formations, which also arise in the Caro-Kann
clear pawn ahead with pressure. h6 25.xa6 and Slav Defences. 11.f4 d8 12.d3
f5 26.g2 c8 27.a4 d8 28.b5 d2 bd7 13.e2!? Clearly White would like to
29.xe5 xb2 30.c5 xf2+ 31.xf2 achieve c4 and possibly d5. It would be more
xh3 32.a8+ h7 33.h5 conventional to preface this with
1-0 [ 13.fe1 and perhaps a3, but he may feel
that Black has more to gain than he does in
that case by, say, bringing rooks to e8 and
346 B01 d8. ]
Socko,Bartosz 2631 13...e8 14.fd1 f8 15.g2 c8
Tiviakov,Sergei 2686 A typical manoeuvering policy. Now W hite
Bundesliga 2008-9 (8) 13.12.2008 could move slowly, but he chooses to commit:
[John Watson] 16.c4 e5! This break (as well as ...c5) is
ge n e ra lly p la ye d a s a re sp on se t o c 4 . I f
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 played earlier, he doesn't have the square d3
f6 5.f3 c6 6.g3 This has become a to try to exploit. 17.e3!?
popular setup in the 3...Qd6 systems. But it's [ 17.dxe5 xe5 18.c3 is a natural
worth noting that Black's pawn on c6 to some s e q u e n c e , w h e n g6 19.e3 c7
extent restricts the effectiveness of White's might follow. Again, W hite has a nominal
fianchettoed bishop. Compare the game So- edge, but obviously Tiviakov is confident that
Bosboom from this month, in which ...a6 was he can handle any strategy that White can
played instead of ...c6. Then the bishop on g2 cook up. ]
has more scope. g4 7.g2 e6 For 7.. . 17...exd4 18.xd4 c5 19.c2 a5
Nbd7, see my notes to Macieja-Tiviakov, Black h as se cured an exce lle n t ps e ud o -
Wolvega 2008 in the Archives. 8.0-0 e7 outpost on c5 with tempo. 20.e1 c7
[ L i k e w i s e f o r t h e m o v e 8...c7 21.f5 e6!? 22.ad1 c5
. Black delays ...Nbd7 so that he can keep a Now he eliminates the bishop pair. The rest is
path to d8 open in case of Bf4. ] dull stuff, although I perhaps W hite could
9.h3 A direct approach. have tried harder to squeeze the bishop-
[ The Macieja-Tiviakov game continued 9.f4 versus-knight position that arises. 23.a3 xe3
d8 10.h3 h5 ( Tiviakov may have 24.xe3 ed8 25.de1 d4 26.xd4
intended 10...xf3 , as in the game) 11.g4 xd4 27.c3 dd8 28.e7 d7 29.7e5
g6 12.e5 , and here I suggested bd7 d8 30.5e3 d1 31.b4 axb4 32.axb4
with a minimal disadvantage. ] xe1+ 33.xe1 c7 34.e3 h6 35.c5
9...xf3 e8 36.xe8+ xe8 37.f3
[ After 9...h5 , Black needn't fear 10.g4 ½-½
( 10.f4 i s m o r e p o i n t e d , w h e n d8
transposes to the previous note.) 10...g6
11.e5 bd7 12.f4 xe5 13.xe5 b4
14.b1 0-0 ]
10.xf3 0-0 It's interesting that any computer
will like W h ite he re, ba sed up on the two
349
347 B01 advantage. ]

Solak,Dragan 2515 10...g7 11.d2 e6 12.0-0 0-0-0
Nadanian,Ashot 2418 It's quite clear that Black's opening has been
1st ch-Europe (7) 10.07.2000 a s u c c e s s . W i t h m i n i m u m e f f o r t h e h a s
[Carsten Hansen] obtained the initiative. 13.fd1 h5 14.e1
h4 15.ge4 xe4 16.xe4 d5 17.c3
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 [ 17.c4 h5 18.d5 f5 with a complicated
To me it doesn't make much sense to place game was certainly also worth considering. ]
the queen on this awkward square. More 17...f5! 18.d3 h5 19.e2 xd4
logical, and, I'm confident, much better is the [ 19...xd4!? 20.f4 h6 21.xd4 xd4
normal 3...Qa5. 4.d4 f6 5.e2 22.xe6 fxe6 only leaves Black with a
[ 5.f3 a6 6.e3 c6 7.d2 f5 useless extra pawn, but much more
this improves over 7...Bg4 8 Ng5! e5 9 d5 importantly also with opposite coloured
Nb4 10 f3 Bf5 11 Nge2 Qd7 12 0-0-0, with a bishops which favour the attacking side, in
clear advantage for White, Karpov-Lutikov, this case Black. Therefore Black is clearly
USSR 1979 8.h4 d7 or 8...Be6!? 9.f3 better. ]
f5 10.c4 e6 11.h4 g6 12.xg6 20.f4 h6 21.xd4 xd4 22.xe6 fxe6
hxg6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 13...b5!? is also very 23.e4 g7 24.c3 b5 25.xb5
interesting for Black 14.h3 b4 15.b3 ½-½
a5 16.e2 1/2-1/2 Zhang Zhong-Ye
Jiangchuan/Beijing CHN 2000 ]
5...a6 6.f3 h6 348 B01
[ 6...c6 7.ge2 e5 Black can also Solak,Dragan 2629
consider 7...Bg4 and 7...Bf5 8.xc6+ xc6 Schartz,Alain 2160
9.dxe5 g4 10.d5 White understandably 18th European Teams (1.18) 03.11.2011
w o u l d l i k e t o h a n g o n t o h i s m a t e r i a l [Milos Pavlovic]
advantage, but 10 0-0 is probably even
better to enhance the lead in development. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
b6 11.0-0 e6 12.e4 c5 13.a4+ f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4 This is considered
d7 14.f4 e6 White invested all that the 6.g3 main line.
time just to keep the pawn, and now he has [ 6...f5 7.g2 c6 8.0-0 0-0-0 ( 8...e6
to hand it back anyway. That should teach 9.a3 0-0-0 10.e2 b8 11.e3 e7
him a lesson. 15.h3 xe5 16.d4 xd4 12.e5! ) 9.d5 It is also possible to play in
17.xd4 c6 18.h4 e7 19.f3 f5 a different way: ( 9.e3 e6 10.e2 e7
20.e4 0-0-0 21.xe6 xe6 22.f4 f6 11.a3 d5 12.xd5 exd5 13.b4! g6
23.fe1 d4 24.ac1 xh3 25.e3 f5 14.fc1 h5 15.b5 axb5 16.xb5 h4
26.xd4 xd4 27.e2 hd8 28.f2 h5 17.ab1 b6 18.a6+ d7 19.b7 )
29.h1 g6 30.h3 f7 31.g3 g5 9...b4 ( 9...xd5 10.xd5 xd5
32.e4 c4 33.e1 h4 34.h3 f5 35.c3 11.xd5 xd5 12.g5 d7 13.xf7 g8
d1 36.xd1 xd1 37.xg5 f4 14.xc6 bxc6 15.e5 d6 16.e1 xc2
0-1 Rezonja,S-Sermek,D/Ljubljana CRO 17.e3 It seems that White's advantage in
2000 ] the endgame is undisputed.) 10.f4 c5
7.ge2 g5!? This bizarre move looks 11.e5 g6 12.e3 d6 13.c4 d7
absolutely awful, but it attempts to punish 14.d4 g4 15.c5 e6 16.d6 xd6
White for his Bf1-e2-f3. 8.e3 c6 9.g3 17.xd6+ xd6 18.h3 1-0 Rohonyan, K
g4 This is a bit unnecessary, moves like 9... (2316)-Braunlich, T (2177) Stillwater USA
Rg8 and 9...Bd7 are excellent choices for 2007 ]
B la c k , a n d p ro m isin g h im a t l e a st e qu a l 7.g2 c6 8.0-0 0-0-0
chances. 10.e2 [ 8...e6 9.f4 d7 10.h3 xf3 ( 10...h5
[ 10.xc6+ xc6 11.d5 c4 12.d2 11.g4 g6 12.e5! xe5 13.dxe5 d5
is a more active way of seeking an 14.xd5 exd5 15.c4 ) 11.xf3 d6
350
12.d5! exd5 13.fe1+ e7 14.xd5 38.d3 c5 39.e2 d5 40.f3 d4
fxd5 15.xd5 xf4 ( 15...0-0 16.xb7 41.g4 hxg4+ 42.xg4 d5 43.h8 e3
xf4 17.gxf4 Simply transposes.) 16.xb7 44.h4 f5+ 45.g3 d4 46.e8+ d2
0-0 17.gxf4 g6 18.ad1 f5 19.e4 47.xb4 winning, Hracek, Z (2629) -
f6 20.f5 h4 21.e7 ] Tomczak, J (2541) Miedzybrodzie-Zywiec
9.d5 e5 POL 2011 ]
[ 9...b4 10.h3 h5 11.f4 c5 12.e3 15.ad1 xd1 16.xd1 d6 17.xf6 xf6
d6 13.e2 e5 ( 13...bxd5 14.xd5 18.xf6 gxf6 19.e4 e5 20.c3
xd5 15.ad1 e6 16.g4 xe3 17.g5 Aga in we have a similar en dga me to th e
b6 18.xd8+ xd8 19.gxh5 xf1 Hracek game above, and again Black was
20.d3+ e8 21.f5 d6 22.xb7 unable to solve the problems. f5 21.g5 f6
1-0 (22) Brkic, A (2530) -Niemi, M (2214) 22.e6 h4 23.g2 d6 24.d2 d7
Gaziantep TUR 2008 ) 14.dxe6 xe6 25.d4 hxg3 26.fxg3! f4 27.g4 e8 28.h3
A) 15.fd1!?N xd1+ 16.xd1 c6 e5 29.f3 This is practically over. d6
17.a3 d6 18.b4 It looks to me that 30.h4 f7 31.e2 d8 32.h5 h8 33.h3
W hite is much better here. e8 19.b5 f5 34.g5+ f8 35.gxf5 xh5+ 36.g4
axb5 20.xb5 xf3 21.xf3 xh3 h1 37.f6 f3 38.xf3 g1 39.e4 f7
22.f4! e6 ( 22...xf4 23.xc6+- ) 40.xd6+ cxd6 41.e7+ xf6 42.xb7
23.xd6 xd6 24.xd6 cxd6 25.xc6 a1 43.e4 e6 44.a3
bxc6 26.xc6+; 1-0
B) 15.g4 g6 16.d4 e8 17.fe1 h5
18.f3 c6
B1) And now with: 19.g5 fd5 20.h4+- 349 B01
Fressinet could get easy win. d6 21.a3 Solodovnichenko,Yuri 2514
xe3 ( 21...xc3 22.axb4 d5 Pantioukhine,Slava 2260
23.b5+- ) 22.xe3+-; 4eme Open International de (3.4) 2005
B2) 19.a3 hxg4 20.hxg4 bd5 [Eric Prié]
21.xd5 xd5 22.g5 e4! 23.h3+
c7 24.f4+ d6 25.gxf6 xf3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
26.xe8 xe8 27.xd6+ xd6 28.xf3 f6 5.c4
xf6 1/2-1/2 (71) Fressinet, L (2640)- [ 5.f3 g4 directly is dubious because of
W ong Meng Kong (2470) Calvia ESP 6.h3 h5 7.g4 g6 8.e5 Threatening
2004 The position is unclear. ] Nc4 e6 ( 8...c6 9.h4 bd7 10.c4 c7
[ 9...xd5 10.xd5 xd5 11.xd5 xd5 11.h5 e4 12.xe4 xe4 13.f3 d6
12.g5 ] 14.f4 b6 15.e3! ) 9.g2 ( 9.c4
10.f4 xf3+ 11.xf3 xf3 12.xf3 e5 a6 Intending ...Qc6 with complications.)
13.dxe6 xe6 14.g5 h5 9...c6 10.h4 e4 ( 10...bd7 11.xd7
[ 14...d6 15.ae1 e5 16.a4! he8 xd7 12.d2 With the combined ideas of
17.c5 d5 18.xd5 xd5 19.xf6 gxf6 h4-h5, g4-g5 and the classical d4-d5
20.d3 We have a typical endgame of corresponds to the game Wynn Zaw Htun-
knight vs bishop, but the problem for Black Rogers already commented in this section
is t h e s h at t e re d p awn st ru ctu re o n t h e and highly dangerous for Black....) 11.xe4
kingside. e6 21.e4 d6 22.fe1 d7 xe4 12.f3 d6 13.g5! d7 ( 13...f6
23.f1 h5 24.h4 b5 25.a4 c5 26.axb5 14.xf6; 13...h6 14.d2 White has won the
axb5 27.b3 xe1+ 28.xe1 e5 29.d2 g6 square for his e5-knight in case of ...f7-
b4 30.e3 d6 31.f3 e6 32.e2 c7 f6. )]
33.f4 The idea now is to bring the knight to 5...c6 As the rest of the game will testify, this
c4. It's not a winning endgame by default but system for White, postponing the development
it 's o bvio us t ha t B la ck h as t o de f e nd a of his Ng1 with the idea of threatening to win
d i f f i c u l t e n d ga m e . b6 34.b2 c4 the black queen as early as possible with
35.xc4 g1 36.b2 c5 37.d2 f5 Bc1-d2, Nc3-d5 and then long castles to open
351
the position with the d4-d5 breakthrough 18.hg1+ g6 ( 18...h8 19.f3 xc4
before Black has time to interpose ... Bf8-b4 20.xd6 ) 19.d3! e5 ( 19...g7
does not lack venom . That is why I have 20.xd6 xc4 21.xd7 xa2 22.f4
regularly played the more unusual. ad8 23.h5+ h6 24.d2+ xh5
[ 5...g4 h e r e , b e c a u s e 6.f3?! 25.h3# ) 20.xe5 xe5 21.xg6+! hxg6
i s n o w s u s p i c i o u s a l l o w i n g c6! 22.xg6+ h8 23.h6+ g8 24.g1+;
S e e t h e n e x t 2 ga m e s. A n d t h a t is t h e B) 15...xf4+ 16.xf4 xf4+ 17.b1
reason why 5.Nf3 (avoiding the disruption of e4 ( 17...c6 18.h4! e4 19.f1 e5
5.Bc4 Bg4) is the main move order of the 20.h5 xc2+ 21.a1 e4 22.d2 )
Scandinavian where 5... Bg4 then allows a 18.f2! c6 19.xf6 xc2+ 20.a1 e5
free expansion of the white kingside, 21.b3! e2 ( 21...g2 22.d5 xg4
beginning with 6.h3, against the Bg4, with 23.xc6 bxc6 24.xe5 ) 22.he1 xg4
his counterpart better placed on g2 than c4 23.xe5 ]
as shown above. ] 15.xc2 b5 16.c3 bxc4 17.xf6 g8
6.d2 f5 7.e2! e6 8.d5! The main 18.xd6! xd6 19.d1 c7 20.d8+ xd8
weapon for White against the Centre Counter 21.xd8 xd8 A queen move along the
then! His advance of development generated h1-a8 diagonal would have followed.
by Black's early queen sortie is naturally 1-0
expressed in a more vigorous way by breaking
open the lines. cxd5 9.xd5 d8 10.xf6+
gxf6 350 B01
[ 10...xf6 11.0-0-0 g6 12.f3 xc2? Solovjov,Sergey 2445
13.b5+ c6 14.c4 e4 15.e5 ] Alekseev,Evgeny 2300
11.0-0-0 c7 12.g4! The side idea of St . Petersburg 1999
keeping the knight on g1: g4 remains under [Alexander Volzhin]
control! g6
[ 12...xc2 13.xc2 b5 14.c3 bxc4 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g6
15.xf6 is expensive. ] 5.e2 g7 6.c4 b6 7.0-0 0-0 8.c3 c6
13.h3! Immediately followed by its natural [ 8...g4 is the main alternative to the text,
complement. d6 14.f4! White has played and will be considered in Rusaanov-
his partition with the best possible rhythm and Alekseev. ]
it is already time to say goodbye. xc2 9.d5 e5 10.c5! This move is the most
[ 14...f5 15.c3 f8 ( 15...0-0 16.gxf5 serious attempt to fight for an opening
xf5 17.xe6! fxe6 18.hg1+ g6 advantage.
19.xe6+ f7 20.xd6; 15...g8 [ After 10.xe5 xe5 11.h6 e8!
16.xe6 ) 16.xd6!! xd6 17.d1 White has failed to prove his advantage in
A) 17...e7 18.b5+ c6 19.xc6+ numerous games. ]
bxc6 20.a6 c7 21.a5 c8 22.d8+ 10...bd7 11.e3 xf3+ The alternatives
xd8 23.xc6+! e7 ( 23...d7 are clearly insufficient:
24.xa8+ e7 25.b4+ ) 24.b4+ f6 [ 11...g4?! 12.d4 df6 13.h3 h6
25.c3+ e5 26.xe5#; 14.e5! with an obvious advantage for
B) 17...b6 18.f6 c6 ( 18...d7 W hite, Veselovsky - Sluka, 1999. Black's
19.b5 ) 19.xe6; attempt to improve position of ugly-looking
C) 17...c7 18.xe6! fxe6 19.xe6+ Knight f5 fails to 15.g4! , and White wins
e7 20.c8+ f7 21.g5+ g8 a piece ]
( 21...xg5 22.c4+ ) 22.c4+ f7 [ 11...b6?! This move was played in Prie -
( 22...f7 23.d4 ) 23.xf7 xf7 Lepelletier, 1997 and White easily got the
( 23...xf7 24.d8# ) 24.c8+ e8 upper hand: 12.c6 xf3+ 13.xf3 f6
( 24...e8 25.d8 ) 25.e1 ] 14.e1 e8 15.g5 f6 16.h6
[ 14...0-0 15.c3!! with a clear edge. ]
A) 15...d7 16.f5 exf5 17.gxf5 xf5 12.xf3 e5 13.e2 c6
352
[ 13...f5?! was played in some games, but it 33...xe8 34.xe8+ g7 35.d7 h5
looks quite dubious: 14.f4 f7 This move 36.xb7 In my opinion this line is promising
leads to a very passive position, but for White. Although Black managed to hold
( 14...g4 is even worse: 15.xg4 fxg4 the position W hite missed some promising
16.d4! f5 17.xg7 xg7 18.d4+ possibilities (especially 18. d6).
g8 19.fe1 with an overwhelming ½-½
positional advantage, Vogt - Preismann,
1993. ) 15.b3 a6 16.ad1 e8 17.fe1
and W hite is clearly better due to his 351 B01
space advantage, pressure down the e-file Sonter,Matthew 2206
and the poor position of all Black's pieces, Smerdon,David 2425
Isaksen - Nielsen, Esbjerg, 1994. ] Mount Buller AUS (7) 04.01.2005
14.f4 d7 15.f3 c7 16.c1 [Andrew Martin]
[ I n m y o p i n i o n , 16.d6!? is worthy of
c o n s i d e r a t i o n : a5 17.a3! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4!? 4.e2?!
( Other possibilities lead nowhere for White: [ 4.f3 f5 5.b5+ is a very stern test of
17.dxe7 e8; 17.d4 xd4+ 18.xd4 Black's open ing variation. The poin t o f
xc5 19.xc5 xc5 20.dxe7 e8 showing this game of course, is to
a n d in b o t h c a s e s B la ck h a s e xce l le n t demonstrate how effective 3...Bg4!? can be
prospects.) 17...e8 18.b4 d8 19.d4 against an unprepared opponent. ]
f8 20.e4 and White's pieces dominate 4...xe2 5.xe2 xd5 6.f3 e6 7.0-0
th e c e n te r. T h is lin e re qu ires pra ctica l Of course White's play is reasonable and he
tests. ] expecting to get an edge with the forthcoming
16...f6 17.e2 c2-c4. But this advance will bring as many
[ 17.dxc6 is another possibility, but it gave problems as it sets. Note the following points:
W hite no advantage in Evdokimov - 1) After c2-c4 White's d pawn becomes easier
Alekseev, Russia, 1998: bxc6 18.b5 d7 to attack. 2) The Black Queen is driven to a
19.xd7 xd7 20.d4 fc8 21.h3 e6! much more dangerous square on h5. c6
22.f2 d5 and due to the strong position 8.e3 0-0-0 9.c4
of the knight in the center Black's chances [ If White must play this line then I prefer
are by no means worse. ] 9.bd2! here. The idea is to meet a
17...d7 Black has successfully completed his subsequent ...Bd6 with Nc4. As far as I can
development and can be satisfied with the see this maintains equality: h5 ( 9...e7
result of the opening fight. 18.dxc6 xc6 10.fe1 f5 11.c4 d5 12.a3 he8
19.b4 ad8 20.fd1 e5 21.fxe5 xe5 13.ad1 f6= ) 10.fe1 d5 11.c4 e7
22.f2 xd1+ 23.xd1 f4 24.c4 e4! 12.ad1 xe3 13.xe3 d6 14.c4= ]
[ The endgame after 24...xc4 25.xc4 9...h5 10.c3 I understand that White is
xf3 26.gxf3 is not good for Black as soon trying to be ambitious but he has no real
White will get a dangerous passed pawn on justification for thinking that he is better. With
the queenside. ] ...Rg8 and ...g7-g5! Black has very good
25.e3 e5 chances. The Bishop on f8 can stay where it is
[ 25...h4 is a good alternative to the text. for the time being. g8! 11.fd1 g5 12.c5?
Here the game could continue: 26.f2 h6! I was very surprised to discover that this
27.xh6 xf2+ 28.h1 e8! 29.f1 d5 move had been played bef ore it's just so
30.b5 c6 31.c4 ,with a draw by horrible and anti-positional to cede the d5
repetition. ] square.
26.b5 d5 27.d3 c8 28.f2 xf2 [ 12.d5 appears to be the move that White
29.xf2 xf3 30.e1 b2 31.gxf3 f6 has been leading up to, but the
32.d7 d8 33.e8+ c o m p l i c a t i o n s f a v o u r B l a c k I t h i n k : g4
[ 33.xb7 d4 34.xd4 xd4+ 35.h1 13.d4 ( 13.dxc6 gxf3 14.xd8+ xd8
xc5 ] 15.d3+ d6 16.g3 g4 17.h4 bxc6;
353
13.g5 exd5! 14.xd5 xd5 15.xd5 White has more than one good way to obtain
d6 16.g3 e7! 17.a5 h6 18.xa7 a definite advantage. 3...Bg4 develops and at
hxg5 19.c5 h8! 20.h4 gxh3 21.a8+ the same time tries to force a concession.
d7 22.xd8+ xd8 23.xh5 xh5 The trouble is that White can quite often make
24.cxd6 cxd6 ) 13...d6! 14.g3 e5 use of the 'weakening' 4 f3 and so the whole
15.dxe6 c5 ] idea is devalued if this is indeed the case.
[ The meek 12.e5 was certainly called for, 4.f3 Curiously, Spangenberg plays a quiet
demonstrating a true grasp of the needs of move, rejecting two sharper alternatives which
the position and White can hope for equality, are simply good for White:
although xe2 13.xe2 xe5 14.dxe5 [ 4.b5+! d7 ( 4...c6 5.dxc6 xc6 6.f3
d7 doesn't look too great for him. ] f5 7.e2 ) 5.xd7+ xd7 6.c4 b5
12...d5! 13.xd5 xd5 14.b4 g7N 7.cxb5 xd5 8.e2 c6 9.bxc6 xc6
[ 14...g4! is also very strong: 15.e1 g7 10.f3 g6 11.0-0 g7 12.d1 0-0
16.c2 gd8 The dark side of c4-c5 is 13.c3 ab8 14.xd5 xd5 15.e3 fc8
revealed or even c2-c4 in the first place. The 16.b3 b4 17.ac1 e4 18.d2 d8
d pawn will be done to death. 17.c4 e5 19.f4 bc8 20.c7 1-0 Pelikian, J-Lucena,
18.b5 xd4 19.xd4 exd4 20.c6 b6 S/Pre-Amazon Open, Imperatriz BRA 2003
21.ab1 d3 22.e3 d4 23.b3 f8 (20) ]
24.bc1 8d6 25.c4 g3 26.hxg3 h6 [ 4.f3! f5 5.b5+ This is the line which
27.f3 d6 28.a4 h1+ 0-1 Keskinen,S- most worries me. bd7 6.c4 e6 7.dxe6
Salmensuu,O/Helsinki 1998 ] xe6 8.d5 f5 9.e2 c5 10.g3 g6
15.b5 Now a forced sequence follows. g4 11.e2+ e7 12.c3 1-0 Bitalzadeh,A-
16.bxc6 gxf3 17.b5 bxc6 18.xc6 g4! Naalden,M/ ch-NED Open, Dieren NED
19.f1? He did not want to suffer after 2003 (21) ]
[ 19.g3 h3 20.a6+ d7 21.b5+ e7 4...xd5 5.e2 c6 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3
22.f1 xf1+ 23.xf1 gd8 The d pawn d7 8.c3 0-0-0 Nimzowitsch taught that the
falls and W hite cannot play a Rook to b7 two Bishops become increasingly powerful
due to the back-rank mate. ] the longer the game goes on. Thus Black's
19...fxg2+ 20.g1 e5! 21.a8+ strategy in this particular situation must be to
[ W hite can prolo ng the game wit h 21.f4 open the centre as quickly as possible and try
xf4! 22.xf4 xf4 23.a8+ d7 24.c6+ to get some action together with his Knights
e7 25.xg8 e3+ 26.xg2 g5+ before White has a chance to settle down.
27.xg5+ xg5+ 28.f3 h5+ 29.g2 [ Thus 8...e5 would appear more logical than
d5+ 30.f2 xc6 31.ac1 d6 ] 8... 0-0-0, provoking an immediate crisis.
21...d7 22.xd5+ exd5 23.dxe5 e4 Th e f ollowing ga m e de m on stra te s h o w
24.e6+ Black can just take on e6 either way White can cope: 9.0-0! 0-0-0 10.g5! exd4
perhaps the pawn is best. No, Black is in 11.g4! xg4 12.xd8 xf2 13.xf2
good shape after 4 Be2, a wimpy move from xd8 14.cxd4 c5 15.h1 c8 16.c3
White. 4 f3 is necessary. xd4 17.d2 e8 18.e2 e4 19.c1
0-1 d6 20.xc6 xc6 21.xd4 e8 22.f3
g5 23.d5 Shabalov,A-Gershon, A/Paget
Parish 2001 Black toiled on for a further 45
352 B01 moves but his position is almost resignable
Spangenberg,Hugo 2495 right now. ]
Llanos,Guillermo 2395 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5N
II American Continental, A (5) 2003 [ The straightforward 10.0-0 also appears
[Andrew Martin] good: e4 11.e2 b8 12.d2 a5
13.c2 c6 14.xe4 xe4 15.xe4 d5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 g4?! 16.xd5 xd5 17.e1 d8 18.c4 f6
Th e J a d o u l va ria t io n , t ricky, b u t lo o kin g 19.f4 d6 20.xd6 cxd6 21.d5 he8
increasingly unsound as time goes by. I think 22.f1 c7 23.xe8 xe8 24.e1+-
354
Della Morte,P-Fiori,N/Esperanza 2002 1-0 underrated. ]

(39) Easy chess ] 6.g3 One of White's favourite lines. c6
10...d3 Desperate already. This is one [ 6...g4 '!' is suggested in Jonathan
sacrifice that simply doesn't work. Probably Rowson's Scandinavian survey. But then
Llanos intended 10..Re8 but that's pretty 7.h3! h5 8.g2 c6 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4
lousy: b4 11.g4 was clearly to White's advantage
[ 10...e8 11.0-0 xe5 12.f4 e6 13.d1 in Svidler-Tiviakov, Wijk aan Zee 2007. ]
d6 14.xd6 xd6 15.xd6 xd6 [ I think that 6...b5 7.f4 b6 is the most
16.xc6 ] interesting option. ]
[ 10...a5 11.c2 e8 12.0-0 xe5 7.f4 d8
13.f4 e8 14.d1 ] [ Almost automatic, but Melts analyses
11.exf6 Why not? c5 12.d2 a5 7...e6+ at some length, for example, 8.e2
Hoping to attack with a subsequent ..Nc4. d5 9.xd5 xd5 10.xc7 h3
The immediate 12...Rhe8 could be deemed with compensation. ]
more 'natural' but with Qc2 as the key 8.g2 e6
resource, White defends comfortably. [ 8...f5 is also played. ]
[ 12...he8+ 13.d1 xf2 ( 13...gxf6 9.0-0 e7 10.e2
14.c2 e5 15.e4! a6 16.e1 ) [ 10.e1 0-0 11.d3 might be a better
14.fxg7 e3 15.c2 b5 16.e1+- ] setup. ]
13.a4 he8+ 14.d1 c4 15.c2 d6 10...0-0 11.ad1 White's development should
16.b3! A killer. The attack on b7 forces give him a big edge, but... d5! 12.c1
Black's retreat. a5 17.b5 xf2 18.xa5 [ 12.xd5 exd5 13.fe1 e8 14.e5
g3 19.b4 Of course 3...Bg4 is a great idea e6! ]
and has scored reasonably well over the years. 12...b5!? 13.e4 b7 14.c3 d7 15.fe1
For me though, the surprise element has White has harmoniously-placed pieces and
gone (which accounted for most of the wins in muct be better, but how to make progress?
th e f irst p la c e), an d we a re le f t t o ju d ge ae8 16.c2 h6 17.b3 f5!? 18.c5
objectively whether Black's pawn sacrifice [ 18.ed2 is probably advantageous after b4
stands up. I hope I've shown some key lines 19.b1 bxc3 20.a3 . Black can try to hang
h e r e wh i c h d e m o n s t r a t e B l a c k h a s r e a l on to the pawn for a few moves by b4!?
the oret ic al p ro blem s t o so lve. 3 .. .B g4 is and then shift his bishop to b6, for example,
almost certainly on the way out. 21.e5 xe5 22.dxe5 a5 23.b4 b6
1-0 24.xc3 ]
18...xc5 19.dxc5 c8 20.c4 f6 21.b2
e4 22.cxb5 axb5 23.a4!?
353 B01 [ 23.h4!? . After the text, White forces the
Spasov,Vasil 2588 pace. ]
Kurajica,Bojan 2549 23...bxa4 24.bxa4 a8 25.d7 e7
I Open La Laguna ESP (7) 10.03.2007 26.xe7 xe7 27.e5 d8 28.c6?
[John Watson] An obscure move. Perhaps White missed a
tactical theme.
The Scandinavian has that strange quality [ White stands better after 28.d1 ]
that good defenders always seem to win from [ or 28.xe4!? xe4 29.c4 d5
inferior positions. Here W hite, the higher- ( 29...d5?? 30.c3 wins outright!) 30.c3
rated player, does everything right, but can't d2 although his advantage is limited. ]
seem to find a way through. Then he gets 28...xc6 29.xe4 fxe4 30.xe4?
careless. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 They always say that one mistake follows
The Melts Variation. No one seems to trust it, another, probably because the player is trying
but a lot of people play it! 4.d4 f6 5.f3 a6 to make up for the first. Better
[ I ' v e m e n t i o n e d t h e m o v e 5...c6 [ 30.c4 ]
in numerous articles, and think that it's 30...d4 31.g4?
355
[ 31.b1! h1! 32.f3 xf3+ 33.xf3 xf3 9.xf3 xd4 10.xd4 xd4 11.xb7
34.c2 a8 and White's king is still the e4+
more exposed one. ] [ 11...d8!? At least this is more exciting
31...a5! Threatening ...Qxe1+ as well as ... than a depressing ending after the exchange
Qxe5!. The game is suddenly over. 32.e3 o f q u e e n s . 12.e3 e5 13.d1!
f5 The analysis stops after 13.c5 instead in
[ 32...d5! 33.f3 f5 is even stronger. ] Khalifman's book "Opening according to
33.c3 d5 34.f3 d1+ 35.g2 f8 Anand" vol 3, with the evaluation of a "big
On this or the next move, ...Ba6 wins, but it advantage for White" based on some game
makes no difference. 36.a5 e2 37.g1 Kotsur (2500) - Lependin (2395) RUS-Cup
a6?! Krasnoiarsk 98 which was eventually won by
[ 37...xf3! 38.xf3 ( 38.xf3 d8 ) White. It may be right at the end of the day,
38...d4 wins. ] but 13.Rd1! is a much stronger continuation,
38.h4 d1+ 39.g2? exchanging a vital defensive piece in the
[ 39.h2 b7 40.a6 hangs on for a while. black camp while searching shelter on the
On move 39, it's understandable that both queenside for the white king. ]
sides miss the next shot. ] 12.xe4 xe4 13.a5?
39...b7?! [ 13.e3!
[ 39...e3+!! 40.fxe3 f1+ 41.h1 A) 13...e6 14.g3! 0-0-0 15.g2 c5
( 41.h2 e2+ ) 41...h3+ ] 16.e2 e7 17.b3 f5 18.ab1 g5?
40.a6 xf3+ 41.xf3 e2 42.g1 xa6 ( 18...a6 19.b4 e4 20.hc1 ) 19.b4
Black could resign. 43.e5 e3 44.h3 a4 ( 19...e4 20.xe4 fxe4 21.xa7 )
d6 45.d3 xd3 46.xe6+ h7 20.b3 b6 21.c1 Volokitin, A-
47.xe3 Reprintsev, A Swidnica op 1999, and after
0-1 this severe defeat, the Ukrainian, who is
re a so n a b ly we l l kn o wn in t h e Ce n t r e
Co u n te r un iverse f o r h is o rigin a l a n d
354 B01 often tactical ideas, imagined 5...Ne4 to
Spassky,Boris V 2545 bring this update full circle, in a way.;
Prie,Eric 2440 B) 13...e5 14.g3! I have known this
Coupe de FRAnce Fin (1) 1992 refutation for long time... before it was
[Eric Prié] played by Macieja in 97 or reproduced in
Khalifman's book. Thus, Black cannot
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 exchange the dark-squared bishops with
f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 g4 The obvious 14...Bc5? because of 15.Bg2 winning the
reaction, instead of the more artificial 6...a6. exchange and at the very least ends up in
7.b5 b6 8.c4! As a bonus for this a miserable ending where the check 14...
section's subscribers, I will now follow with the Bb4+ 15.Ke2 hardly helps. 0-0-0 15.g2
necessary complement to explain the c5 16.d5! An illustration of the pros
theoretical state of this line nowadays. Indeed, and cons of having pushed the e-pawn 2
one can't imagine things could be as simple squares. f5 17.e2! ( 17.b4!?
as they appeared to be in the previous 2 Karavaev, V (2384) - Rodin, D (2260)
games! xf3 Voronezh op 1999; 17.0-0-0!? e4 18.f3 )
[ 8...xd4 9.bxd4 e5 10.h3 xf3 17...e7 18.ab1 ( 18.xc5? xc5
11.xf3 e4 12.a4+! c6 13.0-0-0 exf3 19.e6+ b8 20.xf5 hf8 ) 18...g5
14.e1+ e7 15.a3 0-0-0 16.xe7 xd2 19.b4 a4 20.hc1 b8 21.c6 b6
17.xd2 xf2+ 18.c1 fxg2 19.xg2 22.a4 f4 23.d2! White is clearly better
xg2 20.he1 d8 21.a5!+- Covering in every ending resulting from the strong
lots of important squares while threatening plan (inaugurated by 6.Bd2!) that was
mate. Matjushin, G (2349) -Kislinsky, A implemented in this game up till move 15,
(2412) UKR-ch U18 Kiev 2001 ] thanks to his powerful pair of bishops and
356
better structure. Unless there is a miracle Playable thanks to the loose pawn at c2 and
like the one we are about to witness in this the best move.
game, the best Black can hope for [ 9...d6 is possible. I wasn't sure where I
nowadays in the long traditional ...Nc6, ... wanted the f8 Bishop though. ]
Nf6 Scandinavian is to defend a difficult 10.xd7 xd7 11.d3
opposite bishop and rooks ending a pawn [ The critical variation arises after 11.h5
down. A rather dissuasive argument at the xc2 12.d3 b5 ( 12...a4!? ) 13.xe6 fxe6
very least. ( 23.c5 c8 )] 14.xe6+ e7! ( 14...d8 15.g5+ c7
13...0-0-0 14.g3 e6 15.f3 For some reason 16.f4+= ) 15.g5 d8 16.d2 xd3!
my great opponent, on leave from the Lyon A) 17.xe7 xe7 18.xe7+ xe7
chess club, was not in a fighting mood that 19.xd3 e5+ 20.c2 ( 20.d4
day... when, as for me, I had felt the wind of xg4= ) 20...hf8;
the cannonball whistle past my ears, and so B) 17.ae1? f6 If Black is surviving
soon dropped the line after this game. But this one the opening lives. At this moment
what sort of a Scandinavian update would it I don't see why he isn't surviving. ]
be without at least one game of mine o) 11...h5! 12.d2
½-½ [ 12.xe6 0-0-0 is far too dangerous for
White to contemplate. ]
12...e5 13.g5 Maybe Black is even slightly
355 B01 better just taking on e2. I was happy to split
Speelman,Jonathan S the point having done the job for the team. As
Martin,Andrew D far the opening goes you will not find the line
4NCL (2) Birmingham 19.09.2004 that Speelman played in W ahls' mammoth
[Andrew Martin] book on the Scandinavian and that is saying
something. What I did seems OK, but Black
Only a short draw, but a variation of great should investigate 4.. .Bg4 as well.
interest to Scandinavian fans. 1.e4 d5 ½-½
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3 Speelman
didn't think too long before playing this move.
Training in on his thought patterns I sensed 356 B01
that something tricky was coming up. f6 Sprenger,Jan Michael 2490
[ 4...g4!? is certainly an interesting move Martyn,Rafe 2265
here. Black wants to play ...Nf6 and ...c6 but Open Vienna (9) 2003
his main priority seem to me to be to [Andrew Martin]
develop the Queen's Bishop without risk.
Could this be problem solved? If so then 4 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
Bc4 could be White's best then I think 4...c6! f6 5.c4 Dangerous. White may follow with
5 Nf3 Bg4! is probably the way 5.h3 h5 Nge2 and keep his f pawn free- that is the
6.c4 e6 ] basic idea. It is particularly effective if Black
5.c4 c6 6.e2!? Dangerous. White sets up pla ys his B ish o p t o f 5. In principle I lik e
ideas of Ne5 and the usual Kingside pawn Black's reply. g4! 6.f3
storm. Speelman has dabbled in the [ After 6.d3 both sides have to change
Scandinavian himself and mentioned after the strategy. white has to cope with strange
game that he was under the impression that pie ce p la ce men ts a nd B lack mu st t ak e
6...Bf5 was a mistake. I was just playing at advantage quickly of the poor position of the
this point, could see what was coming up and Qd3. Castling on the queenside is indicated!
was trying to survive. f5 c6 7.b5 0-0-0! 8.xc6 bxc6 9.c4
[ I considered 6...h5 for a brief moment but e6 10.d3 c5 11.ge2 cxd4 12.xd4
this fails to a typical trick: 7.h3 g4 b6 13.e3 c5 14.0-0-0 cxd4 15.xd4
8.xf7+! ] g6 16.b5 h6+ 17.b1 b7
7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6 9.h4 bd7! 0-1 Szitas, G-Innocente,N/2nd Open,
357
Condom FRA 2003 (63) ] xb2 14.0-0 Martyn has ample material two
6...h5 pawns for the exchange, but will he ever get
[ 6...f5 7.ge2 bd7?! ( 7...c6 ) 8.g4 to use it? Black is behind in development and
g6 9.h4 h6 10.f4 h7 11.e2 b6 must catch up without delay. e6 15.e3 e5
12.fd5 xd5 13.xd5 c6 14.f4 0-0-0 16.f2 d7 17.fe1 c5?? Horrible. Is
15.xc7 e6 16.xd8 exd5 17.b5 b4+ Black's position so bad after
18.f2 g6 19.h5 d6 20.h4 f8 [ 17...d6 18.f4 f6 19.ab1 d8
21.e8+ c7 22.g3 e6 23.xd6+ I think not. W hile most strong players
1-0 Wilsbeck,J-Manley,C/25th Politiken Cup, would prefer to be White it's all to play for. ]
Copenhagen DEN 2003 ] 18.xc5 xc5 19.xc5 xc5 20.e5
7.ge2 c6 8.d2 0-0-0 9.b5 The sting in the tail. g6 21.xc5 b6
A move which completely throws Rafe Martyn 22.a6+ Verdict: Can Black place his faith in
although he must surely have been aware of Martyn's exchange sacrifice? I am doubtful
the dangers. In fact W hite has several a l t h o u g h I h o p e I ' ve sh o wn t h a t B la c k ' s
dangerous alternatives each of which has to position is by no means as bad as Martyn
be paid close attention: made it look.
[ 9.a3 xd4 10.b5 b6 11.bxd4 e5! 1-0
12.f5 e4 13.eg3 c5 14.b4 ( 14.xh5
e3 15.hxg7 exd2+ 16.f1 xb2 )
A) 14...f2+! I think this move is very 357 B01
strong: 15.f1 ( 15.e2 xg3 16.hxg3 Starostits,Ilmars 2471
exf3+ 17.gxf3 e4-+ ) 15...e3 16.xe3 Hamdouchi,Hicham 2601
xe3!! ( 16...xd1+ 17.xf2 xa1 XXXV Open Sevilla ESP (6) 13.01.2010
18.xa1 ) 17.e1; [Neil McDonald]
B) 14...g1? 15.e2 Palac,M-Tkachiev,
V/Pula 1999 ] 1.e4 d5
[ 9.d5 a4 10.xf6 gxf6 11.b3 a3 [ The position that arises in this line of the
12.c3 d6 13.g3 g6 14.e4 d7 Scandinavian Defence is very similar to the
15.0-0 f5 16.c5 d6 Typical Hodgson 5...gxf6 variation of the Caro-Kann: 1...c6
juggling 17.f4 xd4 18.cxd4 xd4+ 2.d4 d5 3.d2 dxe4 4.xe4 f6 5.xf6+
19.h1 xc5 20.e1 e6 21.c1 a3 gxf6 6.f3 f5 and if we add a rather lousy
22.c3 g8 23.xe6+ b8 Gdanski,J- move f or W hite and an unusual one f or
Hodgson,J/ Germany 2002 ] Black we get the position that arises in the
9...b6 10.a4 xd4!?N main game af ter 8...gxf 6: 7.d2 b6
[ Black can try to hold W hite up: 10...a5 The comparison would seem to suggest that
The analysis is complicated: 11.a3 ( 11.c3 Black is doing at least OK- in fact he is
e6 12.b3 e7 13.g5 g6 14.f4 b8 probably already better. ]
15.xg6 xg6; 11.c3 e5 12.b3 exd4 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3
13.cxd4 b4 ) 11...b4 ( 11...e5 12.b3 [ In my book 'Starting Out with 1. e4', I give
b8! Fritz7 ) 12.c3 ( 12.xb4 axb4 13.a5 the sequence 5.d2 c6 6.c4 f5 7.d5
a6 14.a4 g6 15.f4 e6 16.xg6 d8 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.f3 I prefer this way
hxg6 17.c3 ) 12...bd5 13.b3 e5 of handling it with White as Black's queen
14.d3 e6 15.dxe5 c5 16.bd4 xe5 has been driven right back to d8, whereas in
17.b5 b6 18.0-0 g6 19.c4 c5 the main game she can retreat to b6,
20.c2 c7 21.g3 xc2 22.xc2 e3 attacking the b2 pawn. ]
23.xe3 xe3+ 24.f2 d2 25.b3 5...c6 Black opens up a line of retreat for the
Werner,V-Didenko,L/ Germany 1999/ GER- queen and stabilises his control of the
chT and now 25...b6 would be equal. Black important d5 square. 6.d2 f5 7.e4 b6
must walk a very fine line in this variation- 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.b4 White tries to make a
his Queen is in constant danger. ] virtue out of the necessity of defending b2 by
11.bxd4 xd4 12.xd4 xd4 13.e2 clearing the way for the rook on a1 to enter
358
the game via b3. But this time consuming 358 B01
plan doesn't work out well as W hite lags Steiner,B 2245
behind with the development of his kingside. Brustkern,Juergen 2225
g8!? Making it difficult for White to develop FSIM September (9) 2003
his kingside in view of the attack on g2. [Andrew Martin]
[ A sharp battle also occurs after 9...d7
10.a4 e5 11.a5 c7 12.e2 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
( Ideally White would like to fianchetto on f6 5.f3 a6!? 5...c6 is safest but doesn't
the kingside but he doesn't have enough afford the same dynamic potential. 6.g3 b5
time e.g. 12.g3 0-0-0 13.a6 b6 14.g2 7.f4 b6 8.g2 b7 9.0-0 e6 10.a4
exd4 15.0-0 e5 leaving him in trouble.) The f irst critical moment f or Black. Quite
12...d6 Black's well centralised pieces and correctly W hite makes an effort to open up
initiative on the kingside give him at least the position-he has castled and Black has
equal chances in the melee that follows. not! Brustkern has two answers: b4!? Risky.
13.0-0 e4 14.h4 xh2+ 15.h1 e6 [ 10...d6 As the evidence stands, this
16.c4 h5 17.a3 f4 18.d5 g4 19.xf4 seems quite decent. Black isn't in too much
xf4 20.g3 d6 21.a6 b6 22.xg4 hxg4 difficulty on the a file and his b pawn can be
23.xg4 cxd5 24.cxd5 xd5 25.e3 f5 p u s h e d o r p r o t e c t e d e a s i l y : . 11.xd6?!
26.f4 -Hracek, Z-Mueller, K/ Werder ( 11.e5 bd7 12.axb5 axb5 13.xa8+
Bremen GER 2009. ] xa8 14.e2 b4 15.b5 is certainly more
[ Meanwhile White would have the initiative challenging but not lethal by any means.)
after 9...e5 10.c4! d7 11.0-0 11...cxd6 12.axb5 axb5 13.e2 xa1
as discussed previously by Eric Prie in the 14.xa1 c6 15.g5 xg2 16.xg2 0-0?!
archives. ] 17.xb5 c6 18.c3 h6 19.f3 d5
10.b1 d7 11.b3 e5 12.e3 c7 20.e5 b8 21.xc6 xc6 22.a5 b6
13.dxe5 e6 14.c4 0-0-0! White has wasted 23.b4 c6 24.d3 White has almost
too much time making moves on the consolidated his extra pawn, Berczes, C-
queenside and is unable to cope with the Brustkern, J/FSIM October, Budapest HUN
opening of lines in the centre. 15.c2 xe5 2003 (48). ]
16.xe5 xe5 17.f4? A blunder, but White 11.a5! a7 12.e2 d5 Ok, as long as
was already in difficulty due to his inability to Black can maintain the central blockade.
develop his kingside. xb4+! Overloading the 13.c4?! Hum. One can understand his anxiety
roo k on b 3 tha t mu st kee p e 3 de f e nd ed . to attack but I believe that
18.f2 a5 19.xb4 [ 13.g5! was much more effective. White
[ After 19.e2 c5 threatening 20...Rd2 vacates the f4 square for a knight and puts
Black is a pawn up with a strong attack. ] Black under immediate pressure. I do not
19...xb4 20.e2 a5 21.xh7 xa2 see how Black equalizes after this: bd7
22.c1 xg2+ 23.xg2 xe2+ 24.f2 14.f4
g4+ 25.h1 xc4! winning the d5 square A) 14...c6 15.c4! bxc3 ( 15...h6
for the bishop. 26.g3 d1+ 16.xf6 xf6 17.e5 xg2 18.a4+ c6
[ For if 26...d1+ 27.xd1 xd1+ 28.g2 19.xg2 ) 16.bxc3 e7 17.xf6 xf6
f1# ] 18.e5 xg2 19.a4+!;
0-1 B) 14...c4 15.e1 d8 16.c3 d6
17.b3 b5 18.c4 c6 19.d5 ]
13...bxc3 14.bxc3 d6 15.xd6 cxd6
16.f4 e4 Different to the earlier line. White
can't occupy e5 Black is ready to castle.
However, it quickly becomes clear that Steiner
is still keen to punish Black for his seemingly
dubious opening play. 17.e1 bd7 18.g4!?
[ At this point White would do much better
359
ju st t o p la y f o r a d ra w: 18.d2 xg2 Leko-Adams Frankfurt 1999 ]

19.xg2 0-0 20.f3 He SHOULD achieve [ 6...f5 is also very standard perhaps a little
the desired result from here. ] bit duller: 7.d3 xd3 8.xd3 e6 9.0-0
18...h6 19.h4 Consistent but thoroughly bd7 10.e4 e7 White has an edge, but
w e a k e n i n g . d5 The worm turns.. ..so Black's position is hard to break down. ]
suddenly Steiner is unable to react. There are 7.xf6 exf6 8.c4! Paying homage to
dark-squared weaknesses all the way down to Morphy. Getting the pieces out really does
h2. 20.e5 mean something in chess. b4
[ 20.g5 c7! ] [ 8...e7+ might be the best shot and there
20...g5! 21.hxg5 hxg5 22.fd3 c7! are similarities to a line of the Caro: 1 e4 c6
B r u s t k e rn is v e ry f a st wh e n h e g e t s t h e 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Nf6 5 Nxf6+
opportunity. 23.xe4 gxf6 6 Bc4 Qe7+!? 9.f1! ( 9.e2 xe2+
[ 23.f3 xd3 24.xd3 xe5 25.xe5 d7 10.xe2 e6 11.0-0-0 d7= ) 9...g4
26.xg5 h2+ 27.f1 b8 ( 27...f4! 10.d3 d7 11.e1+ e7 12.e4 f5
28.h5 xh5 29.gxh5 f6 30.h6 xh6 ) 13.e5 But if the White King is on f1, it's
28.d2 g3 29.h5 ] not the type of advantage which will be easy
23...dxe4 24.f4 Panic! exd3 25.fxg5 xc3 to prosecute. ]
26.a4 d2 Steiner didn't get what he wanted 9.0-0 0-0 10.d3 a5
out of this game. The variation with 3...Qd6 [ 10...g4 11.d2 d7 12.f3 e6
strikes me as opportunistic. 'Playable but 13.ae1 keeps the White edge. ]
dubious', to reverse Tartakower's famous 11.e4! Black's pieces on the queenside
aphorism. hang in the air and Bartel has no real
0-1 compensation for the queenside pawn
majority. f5
[ 11...f5 12.c3 d6 13.ae1 d7 14.c2
359 B01 ae8 15.d3 xe4 16.xe4 b6 17.a3
Stellwagen,Daniel 2561 is another typical line. W hite has an
Bartel,Mateusz 2513 obvious small advantage based on pawn
World Jr Ch - Boys U20 (8) 17.11.2005 structure. ]
[Andrew Martin] 12.g3 g6
[ With hindsight 12...f4 had to be preferred
A recently published book from New In Chess but there is no doubt about White's ongoing
called Secrets of Opening Surprises Vol 4, advantage after 13.e4 h5 ( 13...d7
has an article by Artur Kogan on the BANKER 14.c3 e7 15.fe1 b6 16.b3 f5
v a r i a t i o n , r e n a m i n g t h e wh o l e l i n e a n d 17.e5 d5 18.f3 ) 14.c3 e7 15.d2 ]
updating a lot of analysis which I investigated 13.e5 g7
over 5 years ago. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 [ 13...d6 14.xg6 ]
3.c3 d8 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 Very 14.h5+!! A tremendous move which I am
straightforward. Black develops coherently sure t hat Ba rtel o verlo oked . At a strok e
and argues that the White Knight on c3 is not White highlights the nakedness of the Black
ideal. 6.g5 Looks more dangerous than it is King. h7
although Black must respect White's plan of [ Taking increases the risk of after-game
quick development. h6?!N Not much respect embarrassment: 14...gxh5 15.g3+
here. Black cannot really afford this loss of A) 15...h8 16.xf7 ( 16.xf7+ xf7
time. Fortunately, there are at least two good 17.xf7 d8 18.c3 d6 19.g6 f8
alternatives: 20.fe1 d7 21.f6+ h7 22.e2+- );
[ 6...g4 i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d : 7.xf6 B) 15...f6 16.c3! d6 17.xf7 xe5
It is obvious that if this is White's best move 18.g6+ e7 19.fe1 d7 20.dxe5 f4
...Bg4 should be preferred to . ..h7-h6. exf6 21.ad1+- ]
8.e2 b4 9.d3 0-0 10.0-0 d7 11.a3 15.g3 g5
a5 12.d2 e6 13.c4 c7 [ 15...gxh5 16.xf7 h8 17.g6 d2
360
18.f4 leads to mate. ] 13.e5+ g8 14.xh5 g6 15.f3;

16.xf7+- White's sudden strike leaves Bartel B2) 9...xd4 10.e2 h4+ 11.f1
quite powerless. e7 17.g6+ g8 18.fe1 h5 12.d5 and here Black made the
W hat is the point of being fancy now? bizarre decision to sacrifice a rook with
Stellwagen brings up the reserves to finish the c6? ( 12...d8 was critical although
job. b4 19.h4 d7 White has reasonable compensation for
[ 19...xb2 20.c3! b6 21.g4!! d8 the pawn after 13.d1 but with White's
22.e5+- ] king also vulnerable the position is just
20.a3 xb2 21.ab1 xa3 22.xd7 xd7 unclear. ) 13.xc7+ d8 14.xa8
[ 22...xg3 23.fxg3 xd7 24.xe7 ] but he never really got compensation in
23.e5 A very attractive miniature, although Ib a rra Je re z, J (2 53 8 )-Ha slin ger, G
Black organised his own funeral to a certain (2127) Seville 2013 and White quickly
extent with the risky 6...h6. won. ]
1-0 8...d5
[ 8...h5 9.c4 leaves the knight on h5
badly placed and the best Black can do is
360 B01 ( 9.f4!? g6 10.f3 c6 11.0-0-0 also gives
Stevic,H 2618 W hite a good position) 9...f5 10.d3
Kovacevic,Bl 2436 e6+ 11.e2 xe2+ 12.gxe2
Zagreb Open A 2013 (4.3) 28.02.2013 with a slight edge for White. ]
[Tom Rendle] 9.e4 a4! The only move to give White any
problems
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 [ 9...b6?! can quickly get Black into trouble
f6 5.d2 g4 6.f3 f5 after 10.c4! f5 ( 10...b4? simply drops a
[ 6...d7 last month we saw Van Wely try piece to 11.c5 a5 12.a3 ) 11.c5 b4
this against Anand with little success. ] 12.a3 4a6 13.xd7 xd7 14.c5 e6+
7.g4 d7 8.g5 15.f2 and despite the messiness of the
[ 8.c4 is White's main alternative and it p o sit io n W h it e is d o in g we ll wit h a b i g
also cau ses Bla ck some prob lem s b6! space advantage and the two bishops. ]
other moves are not so good as g5 just 10.c4 This leads to a pleasant endgame but
gives White a good position it's not the only option
A) 9.e3 is probably better and White is [ 10.e2 might also be better for White as
somewhat better after e6 10.d2 ( 10.g5 the Queen on a4 is still vulnerable. Perhaps
d5! 11.xd5 exd5 12.xd5 a5+ Black can get reasonable chances with e5!
13.c3 a3! 14.c1 0-0 and Black has 11.dxe5 c6 as it's not easy to see what
full compensation for the pawn as White's should do next. Both 12.a3 ( and 12.f4
pawn structure is poor and he still has to deserve attention. ) 12...xe5 13.2c3 ]
find time to castle queenside.) 10...e7 10...xd1+ 11.xd1 b6 12.f4 a6
( 10...xb2 is risky af ter 11.b1 a3 13.b3 e6 14.e2 0-0-0 15.h4 c6 16.h3
12.g5 but maybe Black is OK after d5 b8 17.f2 Both sides have developed
13.xd5 exd5 14.xd5 c6 ) 11.0-0-0; sensibly over the last few moves but it's clear
B) 9.g5 that Stevic has the easier position with a
B1) 9...h5 10.f4 is bad for Black after space advantage on all parts of the board but
B1a) or 10...g6 11.f3 e6 Black is still very solid. e7 18.h5 hf8
( 11...g7? 12.d5 c6 13.e2 e6 19.hg1 White prepares g6 but it's possible
14.f5! gxf5 15.0-0-0 and Black is in that it was already strong
deep trouble. ) 12.e2; [ 19.g6! hxg6 20.hxg6 fxg6 ( 20...f5?!
B1b) 10...xd4 11.xf7+ xf7 21.g5 d7 22.g2 and Rh7 is clearly
12.f3! d6 ( 12...g4 13.xd4 better for W hite) 21.g2! and Black will
xd1 14.xd1 e6 15.e4 have a hard time defending against Bc1 (or
and the knight on h5 is still offside) g3) followed by Nf4. ]
361
19...g6! Now the chance is gone. 20.e5 361 B01

d7 21.g7 g8 22.h6 xe4 Strikovic,Aleksa 2519
B la ck a t t e m p t s t o a lle via t e h i s cr a m p e d Larino Nieto,David 2467
position by swapping off a pair of pieces but IX Open Mondariz ESP (4) 28.12.2009
this leaves the f7 pawn a long term weakness. [Neil McDonald]
[ 22...b4 23.d2 xe4! 24.fxe4 c6
was a better way to do it although White is 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
still better after 25.e3 ] f6 5.f3 c6?! The active move Black
23.fxe4 f8 24.xf8 gxf8 25.e3 e5 wants to play, but where is his queen going to
Black sacrifices a pawn rather than waiting find shelter? 6.d2! A very awkward move to
patiently for W hite to double on the f-file. meet. In fact it makes 5...Nc6 look unplayable.
26.xd7?! g4
[ 26.d5! ac5 27.df1 was much stronger [ Perhaps Black has to make do with 6...a6
as the f7 pawn is a far bigger prize than here. ]
the doubled pawn he wins in the game. ] [ After 6...b6?? White could win the queen
26...xd7 27.dxe5 e7 28.f4 c6 with 7.a4! Rather surprisingly this was
White is a pawn up but Black still has good missed by Garry Kasparov in a simul'
chances to hold a draw. The one thing that although he eventually won after ( 7.d5 b4
makes it really tough is the pawn on h6 with 8.c4 in 1-0 Kasparov, G-Saripanidis, S/
always gives W hite good winning chances. Corfu 1996. )]
29.d3 c7 30.d2 e6 31.e1 d8 7.b5! Looks stronger than the natural
32.xd8+ xd8 33.f3 e6 34.d4 f8 [ 7.b5 when Black is active after 0-0-0
35.f1 d7 36.e6!? fxe6 37.b4 8.xc6 bxc6 ]
[ 37.xe6!? doesn't quite work here against 7...b6 8.c4! Continuing to harass the black
a c c u r a t e d e f e n c e xe6 38.f7 c5 queen. The threat is 9. c5 Qa6 10. Nxc7+.
39.xh7 xe4+ 40.f3 h4 41.g3 h1 b8? It is easy to criticise this move, but
42.e7 a5 and Black is holding a draw ] Black only needs one safe moment to play 9...
37...e5 38.c2 c7 39.d3 d6 40.c5+ c6, driving away the white knight, and his
e6 41.e3 a5 42.a3 f7?! After this the opening problems are over. Furthermore,
ending is probably winning for White although Black isn't much behind in development, even
Stevic has to show excellent technique. after retreating the knight. This idea might
[ 42...axb4 43.axb4 e8 forces White to have worked, and can only be ref uted by
f i n d a w a y t h r o u g h a l t h o u g h 44.a1 energetic play by White.
gives White good winning chances. ] [ Eric Prie has analysed his game with
43.xf7 xf7 44.c4 axb4 45.axb4 e7 Spassky in an ea rlier upd ate th at wen t
46.a5 f8 47.xb7 e6 48.a5 d4 8...xf3 9.xf3 xd4 10.xd4 xd4
49.c4 e6 50.d2 d7 51.c3 e7 11.xb7 Despite holding the great man to a
52.b2 d7 53.a3 c7 54.a4 b7 draw as Black, Eric is decidedly gloomy
55.c4 f3 56.d6+ c7 57.f7 d7 about his chances in the opening. ]
[ 57...d2 58.a5! xe4 59.a6 9.c5! c6
is winning, e.g. d2 60.xe5 e4 61.f3 [ Instead 9...e6+ runs into 10.e5! xd1?
c3 62.d4 ] ( In any case Black is a pawn down for
58.b5 cxb5+ 59.xb5 e7 60.b6 xf7 n o t h in g a f t e r 10...c8 11.xg4 xg4
61.c6 12.xc7+ xc7 13.xg4 ) 11.xc7+ d8
1-0 12.xe6+ fxe6 13.xd1 when Black is
wrecked. ]
10.a4! Threatening 11.Nxc7+ and the less
obvious 11.Nd6+! cxd6 12.Bb5 pinning the
queen. xf3 11.gxf3 bd7 Now the second
wave of the white attack begins. 12.a5! c8
[ If 12...d5 13.c4 7f6 14.d6+! exd6
362
15.b5 and wins. ] t h e r e w o u l d b e N d 6 + 10.e3 d6

13.b3 Threatening a fork on a7. b6 and now W hite's best try f or an edge is
[ Again if 13...d5 14.d6+! is the killer probably 11.g5 g7 12.xe6 xe6
move- it's goodbye to the black queen after 13.e2 0-0 14.0-0 but Black is close to
cxd6 15.b5 ] equalising here and he can choose between
14.d2 a8 15.c6! b8 The knight is sitting the solid c6 ( and the more attacking option
on b8 for the third time in the game. 16.d5 14...c5!? )]
With the idea of 17. Bh3 Rd8 18.Nxc7 when 9.c4! This is more accurate than moving the
both the black king and queen are knight to c4. Obviously there's a threat of
checkmated. e6 A desperate attempt to break taking on e6 and ruining Black's pawn
the stranglehold that costs a lot of material. structure so Black has to do something here
17.dxe6 c5 18.exf7+ f8 19.h3 xc6 but I don't like the option Rakhmanov chooses
20.xc8 xc8 21.e3 a6 22.c3 xe3 as it gives White a very comfortable game
23.fxe3 a5 24.b4+ xf7 25.0-0-0 e6 [ 9.c4 c7 10.d3 c5!? gives Black
26.f4 e8 27.d5 c6 28.xf6 gxf6 reasonable play ( 10...g7 11.0-0 bd7
29.b1 xe3 30.d7+ g6 31.g4+ g5 is more flexible as Black keeps the option
32.g1 c5 33.xg5+ fxg5 34.f4 e2 35.b3 open for ...c5 but may instead choose to
c4 36.xg5+ A very fine game by White. He gain space on the queenside with ...b5. )]
punished Black's inaccurate move with his 9...xc4?!
knight [5...Nc6?!, 8...Nb8?] in brilliant style. [ 9...d5 was a more solid option and White
1-0 gets no more than a typical slight edge after
10.0-0 g7 11.e1 e6 12.d3 0-0
13.c4 xc4 14.xc4 bd7 ( 14...c5!? )]
362 B01 10.xc4 a6
Stripunsky,A 2549 [ maybe 10...c7 is a better option but it's
Rakhmanov,Ale 2603 definitely W hite that has the easier game
4th Continental Class 2013 (5.3) 12.10.2013 still after 11.0-0 g7 12.ce5 0-0 13.d3
[Tom Rendle] bd7 14.f4 b6 15.e1 e6 16.a4!
and one plan for W hite is Nd2-c4 with an
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 eye on the d6 square. ]
f6 5.f3 g6 6.b5 I still consider this to 11.e2! Threatening Nd6+.
be the critical test of 5...g6 b6 7.a3 [ 11.ce5 is less accurate as White cannot
T h i s is f a s t b e co m i n g W h it e ' s m a in l in e castle immediately ]
against this setup although 7.Bf4, 7.a4 and 7. 11...e6 It's not ideal for Black to have to play
c4 have all been analysed in the archives. e6 this move as now the bishop on f8 is
[ 7...c6 is examined in Leko-Caruana where overworked protecting the dark squares on
White obtained a pleasant position from the the kingsid e a s well a s d6. Th is is a ke y
opening with 8.c4 d8 9.g3! ] reason why the Black queen should be on c7.
8.c3 c6 12.g5 bd7 13.fe5 e7 14.0-0
[ 8...g7 9.c4 xc4 10.xc4 0-0 11.0-0 White's moves have been simple but strong
bd7 12.e1 e6 13.b3 not very and Black is already struggling to complete
ambitious but it is a low risk way to keep a development b5
slight edge, especially against a higher [ 14...xe5?! 15.dxe5 d5 16.xe7 xe7
r a t e d p l a y e r ( 13.e2! preparing Bg5 is 17.e4 is very unpleasant for Black. ]
more aggressive) 13...c6 14.a4 d5 15.a5 15.f4!?
xb3 16.xb3 and White was slightly better [ 15.fe1 threatens Nxf7 and after d5
in L u k o v i c , V ( 2 3 4 6 ) - B o g o s a vl j e vi c , B 16.h6 Black's king is still caught in the
(2552) Kragujevac 2013 ] centre and White is clearly better ]
[ 8...bd7 hasn't been played but it looks 15...d5 16.xd7 This is still good for White
very logical to me - one point is that 9.c4 but I feel it lets Black off the hook just a little
c a n b e m e t b y a6! - with a pawn on c6 [ 16.ae1! and what can Black really play
363
here? Perhaps best is h6 17.xd7 xd7 heading to d6 via c3 and e4. ]

( 17...xd7 18.xe7 xe7 19.f5!; 30...exd5 31.xe8+ xe8 32.xd5 g7?!
17...hxg5?! loses to 18.xf6+ xf6 19.f5! [ 32...d7 was a better chance although
gxf5 20.xf5 and the rook cannot be taken W hite retains slim winning chances after
because of the knight fork on d6.) 18.e5+ 33.c7+ e7 34.e1+ d8 35.xb5
e8 19.xf6 xf6 20.f5 and White is still a xc5 36.b4 a4 37.xa7 but with so few
lot better ] pawns on the board a draw is the most likely
16...xd7 17.xe7 xe7 18.e3 h5 result. ]
19.g4!? Aiming to decide the game in the 33.f6+ f7 34.g5! The ending is probably
middlegame isn't a bad choice but objectively lost for Black now as W hite's pieces are so
I think W hite's advantage is larger in the much more active and Black immediately goes
endgame. wrong to bring a swift end to the game e6?!
[ the ending after 19.xh5 gxh5 20.ae1 [ 34...e6 was more stubborn but White
is obviously good for W hite with a space shou ld be win nin g a f te r 35.d7+ f8
advantage and much the better pawn 36.xh7+ g8 37.f6+ f8 38.d5 ]
structure but Black would have reasonable 35.e1+ f5 36.f1+ e6
drawing chances here after b5 21.f5+ [ 36...xg5?! 37.e4+ ]
f8 22.d6 e7 23.e4 hg8 37.e1+ f5 38.e8! g8 39.d6+ xg5
and there is a lot of work for W hite to do 40.e8 And Black resigned (or possibly lost on
here. ] time) as the position is hopeless - he can't
19...b5 Rakhmanov is desperate to escape move the knight or rook!
to the relative safety of an ending but [ 40.e8 h6 41.b8 g7 42.xb7+ f6
Stripunsky is equally determined to keep the 43.c6! e6 44.c7 xc7 45.xc7
queens on. 20.c4 b6 21.f5 af8?! is easily winning for White ]
[ 21...xd4 was worth a try - if under 1-0
pressure you might as well be a pawn up.
Still, W hite has more than enough
compensation and would be doing well after 363 B01
22.fxe6 fxe6 23.ad1 c5 24.d2! ad8 Stripunsky,Alexander 2550
25.b4 e5 26.fe1 c7 27.f5+! gxf5 Lein,Anatoly 2400
28.g5+ f7 29.xe6! xe6 30.xf5+ ch-USA Seattle (1) 2003
e7 31.e1+ e5 32.xe5+ xe5 [Andrew Martin]
33.xe5+ d7 34.d4+ c8 35.xa7
with excellent winning chances in the ending 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6
with two pawn and a queen for two rooks. Anatoly Lein has been a one of the faithful for
Still, this line is easy to find with a many years. He clearly believes in the merit
computer but in a game it's almost of 3...Qd6. 4.d4 f6 5.d3!? A little unusual
im p o s s i b le t o ca lc u la t e s o I ca n 't h e l p .The Bishop most often develops to c4. But
thinking Black's chances would've been White plans Nge2 and the ever-present worry
improved by grabbing the risky pawn! ] B f 4 s o t h i s is a d e ve l o p m e n t i d e a t o b e
22.c5 b4 23.ad1 hg8 24.a3 b5 reckoned with. And as you will see, 5 Bd3 has
25.d5+ d8 26.xb5 Finally White agrees been endorsed by Kasparov! c6 Black has
to an exchange of queens as he's got all of three ways to mobilize his Queenside after 3...
his pieces to their best squares cxb5 27.fxe6 Qd6. He can play . .. c6 or...a6 or go for quick
fxe6 28.f4 e8 29.fe1 f8 30.d5?! piece development with ...Nc6 and ...0-0-0.
This almost let's Black escape with a draw but All three plans are available here-how do they
the position remains difficult to defend for co m p a re ? O b vio u sly t h e m o ve t h a t L e i n
Rakhamov chooses is the most solid. Black cuts out any
[ 30.g5 would've kept a firmed grip on the tricks based on Nb5 and will continue with the
game and White should eventually win here usual Scandinavian light-squared strategy e.g.
after g7 31.e2! and the knight is ...Bg4 or..Bf5,...e6. My only concerns are this
364
might be a little slow and that if W hite can Hasangatin,R/TCh-CZE 2001 As we have
organise Ne5 and Bf4,the Black Queen can seen, improvements are available. ]
find herself in the wrong place. Presumably 6.ge2 e6!? Very solid indeed.
as soon as W hite plays Nf3,setting up this [ 6...g4 ]
plan, Black goes . ..Bg4! Sermek has shown 7.0-0 e7 8.e4 xe4 9.xe4 0-0 10.d3
a liking for 5...Bg4 here, intending ...Nc6 and g6 11.h6 e8 12.ad1 We know these
... 0-0-0.The positions reached are sharp and positions from the Caro-Kann. White has a
murky, with Black attacking d4 to nice edge but where does he go from here?
counterbalance his shaky King position. That Using all his experience, Lein deploys his
leaves 5...a6, which Hasangatin employed pieces prophylactically and waits..... d7
recently. If 6 Nge2 e6 7 Bf4 Qd8 is forced, 13.fe1 f6 14.f3 b6 15.c3 b7 16.g3
then I tend to prefer the other lines, although ad8 This is about the best that Black can do
the f ull story after 8 0-0 c5 has yet to be after 6...e6. White has more choice but that's
written. it. 17.h4 a8 Taking away any tactical shots
[ 5...g4 involving unprotected pieces. 18.h5 c5
A) 6.ge2 c6 7.f3 h5 8.f4 d7 19.xa8 The exchange of light-squared
9.d2 e6 10.a3 ( 10.0-0-0 b4 11.a3 Bishops neutralises any thought White may
1/2-1/2 Palac,M-Sermek,D/7th HIT Open, ha ve h ad o f a la te r sa crif ice on g6 . xa8
Nova Gorica SLO 2002) 10...a6 11.0-0-0 20.g5 cxd4 21.f3 He was depending on
0-0-0 12.c4 d5 13.g3 ce7 14.f4 this move but Lein's next, very accurate idea
g6 15.h4 f6 16.f2 xf4 17.xf4 puts paid to the White initiative.
d5 18.xd5 exd5 19.d3 d6= [ 21.hxg6 hxg6 22.xf6 ( 22.f3 d5! )
Ozgibcev,A-Zaitsev,V/TCh-RUS, Tomsk 22...xf6 23.e4 e7 24.xf6+ xf6
RUS 2001; 25.xd4 xd4 26.xd4 ed8 27.ed1
B) 6.f3 h5 7.ge2 a6 ( 7...c6! 8.f4 xd4 28.xd4 g7 29.d7 f6 ]
d7 I think I prefer this approach. 9.d2 [ 21.xf6 xf6 22.e4 e7 23.hxg6 hxg6
e6 10.0-0-0 b4 11.a3 a5 12.g4 g6 24.f3 g7 25.cxd4 ed8 ]
13.xg6 hxg6 14.b4 b6 15.d5 21...d5!= 22.xd5 xd5 23.xe7 xe7
White tries to assume the initiative but the 24.xd4 f6 25.h6?! That really is a bit
Black position is well-developed enough. ambitious. The veteran is happy with a draw
xd5 16.xd5 xd5 17.xd5 exd5 b u t a yo u n g e r G r a n d m a s t e r m i g h t h a v e
18.xd5 d8 19.xd8+ xd8= punished Stripunsky for this move. f8! 26.f3
Jurkovic,H-Sermek,D/Croatian Cup, Pula g8 27.f2 f5
CRO 2002; 7...e6 8.f4 d7 9.g4 g6 [ 27...xh6 28.h1 g7 29.dh4 ]
10.h4 xd3 11.xd3 c6 12.0-0-0 28.h1 f7 The h pawn ties White down. If
0-0-0 13.b1 d5 A key idea in this line, anything, Black is better now. However, the
taking advantage of the position of White's overall verdict on Lein's play of solid but
Bishop. 14.g5 f6 15.c1 xc3+ passive must stand.
16.xc3 f7 17.h5 e5 18.dxe5 b4 ½-½
19.e3 fxe5 20.g3 xd1 21.xd1
f8= Hracek,Z-Kantorik,M/KB Czech Open,
Pardubice CZE 2002) 8.f4 d7 9.d5 364 B01
g6 10.d2 xd3 11.xd3 g6 12.0-0-0 Suetin,Alexey S
g7 13.c4 c6 14.d6 Kasparov,G- Steiner,Guenter
Rogers,I/EUR-ASIA Rapid Match, Batumi Open Velden op (8) 1996
GEO 2001 ] [Nigel Davies]
[ 5...a6 6.ge2 e6 7.e4 ( 7.f4 d8
8.0-0 c5 ) 7...xe4 8.xe4 d8 With 4...Nf6 Black invites a transposition back
( 8...d7! 9.f4 e5 10.dxe5 b4+! ) 9.d3 into the main lines with 5.d4, but Suetin lends
h6 10.f3 c6 11.0-0 d7 12.c4 f6 the game an original flavour by playing 5.h3
13.c2 d6 14.d1 1/2-1/2 Berezjuk,S- and then 6.Bd3!?. Not the kind of chess we
365
have co me t o e xp ect f rom so lid Ru ssia n with a loss of time.

grandmasters, but interesting nevertheless. [ Maybe 7...e6 is more solid, but then 8.e1
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.f3 d6 9.f1 0-0 10.d4 c7 11.e2 b6
f6 5.h3 c6 A typical move for these 12.e4 was slightly better for White in Saric -
positions, but there are a number of Begic, Bihac 1999. ]
alternatives: 8.e2 f5 9.a3 c7 10.b4 ce4 11.xe4
[ a) After 5...c6 6.b5 d7 7.0-0 e6 8.d4 xe4 12.b2 e6 13.e1 d6 14.f1 g6
b4 9.d3 xc3 10.bxc3 xc3 11.b1 15.c4 Having sent Black's pieces scuttling
xd4 12.e5 c6 13.c4 d4 14.xb7 home, W hite starts taking oodles of space.
White had a strong initiative in Lalic - Zeidler, d7 16.b3 0-0 17.ad1 fd8 18.d4 c7
4NCL1997 ] 19.a4 ab8 20.e5 xe5? Making a
[ b) 5...e6 6.g3 c5 7.g2 e7 8.e5 0-0 passive position into a downright bad one.
9.0-0 c7 10.e1 bd7 11.c4 b6 Black should sit there and do nothing. 21.dxe5
12.b5 d8 13.d3 bd5 14.a4 a6 e8 22.e3 b6 23.c5 bxc5 24.xc5 d5
15.c3 xc3 16.bxc3 gave White some 25.xd5 cxd5 26.xc7 xc7 27.c1
pressure on the queenside in Lalic - With his queenside majority, bishop pair and
Golubovic, Pula 1997 ] the initiative, this endgame is winning for
[ c) Against 5...f5 Murey has specialised in White. e8 28.b5 f6 29.a5 f7 30.d4
the move 6.b4!? b6 7.a3 e6 8.c4 e7 b7 31.a6 d7 32.b6 axb6 33.xb6 d4
9.0-0 0-0 10.d3 c6 11.h4 ( 11.e2 34.b5 e7 35.a7
bd7 12.h4 g6 13.xg6 hxg6 14.d2 1-0
d6 wasn't much for White in Murey -
W este rinen , Brighton 198 3) 11...g6
12.xg6 hxg6 13.e1 e8 14.b2 bd7 365 B01
15.f3 c7 16.b3 b6 17.e4 xe4 Sutovsky,Emil 2687
18.xe4 d5 19.c4 with the bishop pair Van Wely,Loek 2691
and a nice initiative in Murey - Schmid, 40th Olympiad Open (9.6) 06.09.2012
Zurich 1992 ] [Tom Rendle]
[ d) After 5...c5 I quite like 6.g3 intending
similar play to Lalic - Golubovic above. ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
6.d3!? An intriguing idea, which prevents f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 f5 7.e5 An unusual
Black from developing his queen's bishop for move which has not yet been covered on the
the time being (6...Bf5?? 7.b4). Of course site.
t e m p o ra ri ly b lo ck in g t h e d -p a wn h a s it s [ 7.c4 e6 8.e2 is the mainline and was
disadvantages, but White might also develop most recently covered by Gawain in Vaibhav-
his queen's bishop on b2. Yu. ]
[ A natural alternative is 6.d4 f5 7.d3 [ 7.e4 b6 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.b4!?
with W hite having a slight space was examined by Neil McDonald in
advantage. ] Starostits-Hamdouchi ( 9.c4 is probably
6...bd7 the move I would choose here and it was
[ 6...a6 7.0-0 b4 8.c4 f5 9.d3 e6 covered by John Watson in Popovic-Savic )]
10.e2 c7 11.e4 0-0-0 was OK for 7...bd7
Black in Hansen,S - Nielsen,P, Gausdal [ 7...c7 is too passive here I think, for
1999 ] example 8.f4 d8 9.c4 ( 9.d3!? xd3
[ A game Kosintseva - Polyakova, Moscow 10.xd3 is also very comfortable for White)
1999 went 6...e5 7.0-0 d6 8.e1 0-0 9...e6 10.g4 e4 ( 10...g6 11.h4
9.a3 bd7 10.f1 c5 (to prevent d2-d4) is dangerous for Black but possibly
11.d3 b8 12.g5 b6 13.b1 preferable to the game) 11.xe4 xe4
with Black coming under pressure. ] 12.f3 xd4? ( 12...d6 13.b3
7.0-0 c5?! This forces White's bishop to is clearly better for White but at least Black
move, but the knight will be driven back later is still in the game) 13.c3 now Black can
366
safely resign b6 14.xe4 xb2 15.b1 [ 10.c4! would've given White the position
xc3+ 16.d2 a3 17.xf7! 1-0 Di Paolo, he had been after, e.g.
R (2 326 )-Va nob bergh, G (2 105 ) Clich y A) 10...xg4 11.d5! a4 12.b3 a3
2001 ] 13.b4 e3 and White can choose
8.g4 Sutovsky is known to choose the most between 14.xa3 ( or 14.b1!?
aggressive lines where possible but I don't with a mess after xc4 15.xa3 xa3
really like this move here as it can cause 16.b2 xd5 17.0-0 xe5 18.fxe5 e6
White to become overextended as we will see although it seems White should have the
in the game. better chances after 19.xf7 ) 14...xd1
[ 8.c4 is safer and now c7 9.f3 g4 15.xe7+ xe7 16.xe7 with a slight
10.f4!? ( 10.f4 xf4 11.xf4 b6 edge;
12.e3 e6 should be OK for Black) B) 10...xc4 11.xc4 c7 12.e5
10...xf3 11.xc7 d5 12.0-0-0 xe5 13.fxe5 d5 14.e2 with chances
and White had a very slight edge in Renet, for both sides, although I'd rather have
O (2500)-Giua, F (2145) 1998-9 French White here. ]
T e a m C h 1 9 9 9 ( 12.a5!? was worth 10...xe5 11.dxe5?? This just loses, albeit to
considering to provoke a weakness )] an unusual tactic
8...e6! [ 11.fxe5 xg4 12.h3 h6 13.xh6 gxh6
[ both 8...xe5 9.gxf5 ] 14.0-0-0 leaves White with at least some
[ and 8...g6 9.f4!? e6 10.h4 would've compensation for a pawn although Black
given Sutovsky exactly the kind of position must have some edge here. ]
he was after (and a slight edge) ] 11...xd2! This must have come as a nasty
9.f4 A pawn sac that Van Wely chooses to shock to the Israeli Grandmaster 12.exf6
decline [ 12.xd2 d5 13.e3 e4+! 14.c1
[ 9.xd7 would probably have been a wiser xc3 15.g1 a4 leaves Black a clear
choice and now piece up. ]
A) 9...xd7! seems more accurate e.g. 12...xc2 13.d3 xb2 14.c1 exf6
10.f3 ( 10.e2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0 b6 W hite may not have dropped a piece but
and Black is at least equal) 10...g6 11.f4 Black has three extra pawns and a crushing
0-0-0 12.g2 c7 with balanced positional advantage 15.0-0 h5! 16.g5 fxg5
chances; 17.d1 c5+ 18.h1 g4! A crushing victory
B) 9...xd7 10.g5 d5 11.e4 b6 for Van Wely and a game that Sutovsky will
12.c4 c7 13.c3 a6?! ( 13...e6 want to forget.
14.d2 is slightly better for White) 14.d2 [ 18...g4 19.e4 d5 ]
a7 and now in Velcheva, M (2273)- 0-1
Hopman, P (2193) W ijk aan Zee 2001
15.0-0-0! would've given White a clear
space advantage and an easy game. ] 366 B01
[ 9.c4 c7 10.e3 is unclear but it isn't Svidler,Peter 2640
really consistent with how White has played Dreev,Alexey 2650
so far ] Elista 1997
9...0-0-0 [Alexander Volzhin]
[ it's not clear exactly what Black was
worried about after 9...xe5 for example This game shows that to play the Centre
10.fxe5 xg4 11.g2 0-0-0 12.e4 b6 Counter against a top player is not always a
and it's hard to believe that W hite really very good idea. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3
has enough compensation for a pawn xd5 4.d4 g4 5.h3 h5 6.c4 b6
although the position remains complex. ] 7.c3
10.f3?! This must've been based on a [ 7.c5!? 6d7 8.b3 also looks
miscalculation, Sutovsky has clearly missed promising. ( or 8.c4 )]
Black's 11th move 7...e5
367
[ More accurate was 7...e6 8.g4 g6 9.e5 c o n t i n u a t i o n s , f o r e x a m p l e 17.e4

c6 ( 9...8d7 10.xg6 hxg6 11.c5 with the clearly better chances because all
with a large advantage; 9...c6 10.xc6 the Black pieces are very passive and his
bxc6 11.g2 d7 12.0-0 xc4 13.a4 k i n g i s n o t c a s t l e d . ( or the prophylactic
b6 14.xc6 d8 15.b7 ) 10.g2 8d7 17.b3!? )]
11.xg6 hxg6 12.e2 with a small 15.g5!! Excellent! Although White's position
advantage for W hite, according to Peter looks very promising anyway he chooses the
Svidler. ] most energetic way. 0-0 Black decides to give
8.g4! up the exchange to get his king away from the
[ T h e e n d g a m e a f t e r 8.dxe5?! xd1+ centre.
9.xd1 c6 10.g4 g6 with compensation [ If 15...hxg5 White continues with 16.e6!
wa s f i n e f o r B l a c k we s a w t h is k in d o f and after a5 ( 16...fxe6 is losing:
position in the game Remizov - Bezgodov. ] 17.h5+ g6 18.fxg6 xc5+ 19.h1 )
[ According to Svidler 8.e2!? could give 17.xg7+ ( 17.h5!? is also not bad:
White a small edge: e7 ( 8...c6 9.g4 xc5+ 18.h1 with a clear edge) 17...f8
g6 10.d5 b4 11.xe5 with a clear 18.e6+ and the knight cannot be taken:
advantage ) 9.xe5 ( 9.dxe5 c6 ) 9...xf3 fxe6?! 19.fxe6+ f6? 20.h5 with mate on
10.gxf3 f7 ]
A) 10...c6 11.xg7 f6 12.g4 xd4 [ after 15...xc5 16.b4! ca6 ( 16...cd7
13.d3 d7 14.f4! e7+ ( 14...c5 17.g6 fxg6 18.e6 b6+ 19.h1
15.0-0-0 with a clear advantage) 15.f1 would give W hite strong attacking
h5 16.g2 with a clear edge; po ssib ilit ie s.) 17.g6! g8 ( 17...fxg6
B) 10...0-0 11.e3 c6 12.f4 18.fxg6 xg6 19.g4 with a clear
( 12.e4 f6 13.0-0-0 e8 14.g4 advantage ) 18.b5 Black's pieces look
with a slight edge) 12...d6 13.f5 ridiculous. ]
with a slight edge but Black has a lot of 16.g6! fxg6 17.e6 c8
tactical possibilities thanks to his better [ 17...xc5+ was not better: 18.h1 e7
development. ] 19.xf8 xf8 20.e4 with a big
8...exd4 9.xd4 g6 advantage. ]
[ 9...c5? w a s b a d d u e t o 10.e2+! 18.xf8 xc5+
with Nf5 next. ] [ After 18...xf8 White could leave the Black
10.g2 c6 light-squared bishop locked out with 19.f6!
[ 10...c5 11.db5 was bad for Black ] gxf6 ( 19...xf6 20.e4 ) 20.xh6 ( or
[ 10...c5 did not solve his problems either: 20.e4 In all cases White is much better )]
11.e2+! f8 12.b3 d3! 13.d1 e7+ 19.h1 xf8 20.fxg6 xg6 It could seem
( or 13...e8+ 14.e3 xe3 15.xd3 that Black is more or less okay here as he
h6+ 16.f1 c6 17.c5 with a clear has enough pawns for the exchange, and
advantage ) 14.e3 xe3 15.xd3 c1+ W hite kingside pawn structure is also
( 15...c5+ 16.f1 8d7 17.e1 e5 damaged but it's White turn and he continued
18.f5 with a clear advantage) 16.e2 with the unexpected and crushing 21.xh6!!
xb2 17.b1 and Black is in trouble. ] e5
11.0-0 e7 12.f4 h6 Black had no [ Taking the bishop by 21...gxh6 could lead
opportunity to keep his Bishop in play. 13.f5 to Black finding himself under a very strong
h7 14.c5! White maintains his initiative with attack after 22.g4 g7 ( other moves do
very strong and natural moves. 6d7 not help: 22...h7 23.f6 e8 24.xg6
[ 14...xc5!? comes into consideration e5 25.e6 xg4 26.xe8 f2+ 27.g1
although it looks dangerous: 15.e1+ f8 c5 28.f1 winning; 22...e8 23.ae1
( 15...e7 was weaker because of 16.f6! e5 24.xe5 xe5 25.xg6+ g7
gxf6 17.xh6 c4 18.g7 xb2 19.d2 26.e6+ h8 27.c8 g8 28.g1 h8
winning (found by Alexander Finkel)) 16.e3 29.d5 winning ) 23.e4 e8 24.ae1
a6 and now White has a lot of possible A) other saving attempts were: 24...c5
368
25.e2 e5 ( 25...h5 26.g3 e6 30...xe5

27.f5 d6 28.xd6 xd6 29.xg6 [ 30...xe5 31.ae1 e8 32.e4 winning ]
xg6 30.e6+ winning; 25...f8 26.xg6 31.f7+ h8 32.f5 f2+ Trying to confuse
xg6 27.c4 winning; 25...d6 26.g1 his opponent but W hite is winning anyway.
e5 27.xg6 xg6 28.d4 winning ) 33.g1
26.xg6 xg6 27.xe5 xg4 28.hxg4 [ 33.xf2 wa s a lso go o d e n o u gh : d6
d7 29.ef5 with a large advantage; 34.f1 f8 35.xf8+ ( in time trouble White
B) 24...h5 25.g5 e6 ( 25...e7 could easily miss 35.c4 xf2 36.h4+ )
26.xg6 xg5 27.xe8 f6 28.e7+ 35...xf8 36.xf8+ h7 37.f2 winning ]
winning ) 26.f5 f6 27.g1 xg5 33...xh3+ 34.f1 Black resigned. An
28.xg5 f6 29.xg6+ f7 30.g2 excellent game by Peter Svidler. This victory
winning; allowed him to equalise the score in the match
C) 24...f6 25.xf6 xf6 26.f1+ g7 and win it after the tie-break rapid games.
27.xg6 xg6 28.d4+ g8 29.g1 1-0
with real winning chances, according to
Svidler. ]
22.f4 bd7 23.e4 e8 24.b3+ f7 367 B01
25.g3 Svidler,Peter 2728
[ There wa s no thin g wrong wit h 25.xb7 Tiviakov,Sergei 2667
b8 26.xa7 xe4 27.xe4 h5 28.g2 Corus A Wijk aan Zee NED (2) 14.01.2007
with a decisive advantage but W hite [Jonathan Rowson]
probably decided to place his pieces close
to his king to avoid surprises in time 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4
trouble. ] f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 At the moment, the
25...xe4 26.xe4 f6 27.g2 position seems quiet, and g3 looks like an
[ 27.xe5 was more direct: xe4 28.g2 inn oce nt at te mpt t o gain a t emp o on th e
d5 29.xf8+! xf8 30.xg7+! queen with Bf4. However, the resulting lines
( 30.xg7+?! e8 31.h8+ d7 32.xa8 tend to be very sharp, so anybody seeking to
leaves W hite's king exposed) 30...g8 play this way should study this game carefully.
( 30...f7 31.f1+ e6 32.e1 winning ) g4 7.h3 The advantage of playing this now
31.e5+ ( 31.c3+ g3+ ) 31...f7 is that when things liven up, White is ready to
32.f1+ e6 33.g4+ xe5 ( 33...e7 play g4 to keep the knight on f3 controlling
34.g7+ e6 35.f7+ xe5 36.f5+ ) the centre. However, there is also something
34.f5+ d6 35.xd5+ cxd5 and the h- to be said for keeping the bishop on g4. For
pawn should be decisive. ] instance after
27...h5 Trying to make things complicated [ 7.g2 c6 8.0-0
but White keeps cool. 28.g5 d3 29.e5 A) 8...0-0-0 9.d5 Black cannot take on d5
e7 due to the position of the bishop on g4.
[ After 29...e7 White was winning by ( 9.f4!? ) 9...b4 10.h3 h5 11.f4
30.g4 xe5 ( 30...f6 31.xf6 xf6 c5 12.e3 a5 13.g4 bxd5 14.xd5
32.xf6 xf6 33.c4+ winning ) 31.xf7 xd5 15.d2 xd2 16.xd2 xd2
xg4 32.xe7 ] 17.xd2 was better for White in Kotronias-
30.xh5 Godena Batumi 2002.;
[ 30.xf8+ was not winning as was pointed B) 8...d8?! 9.f4 d7?! 10.d5!
out by Svidler: xf8 ( 30...xf8 31.f1+ the position of the bishop on g4 is
winning ) 31.xh5 c5! 32.f1 xe5 im p o r t a n t , d u e t o t h e N f 3 - e 5 t r i c k i n
( 32...xe5 33.f7+ h7 34.f5 winning ) several lines. b4 ( 10...xd5 11.xd5
33.e4 g6 34.xg6 d5+ 35.h2 d2+ xd5 12.e5! ) 11.e5! xd1 12.xd7
36.g3 xg6 37.xg6+ h8 xd7 13.fxd1 was clearly better for
and the Rook's transfer to the h-file is not White in Rowson-Lazik, Verona 2006. ]
decisive as the white king is too exposed. ] 7...h5
369
[ 7...xf3 8.xf3 c6 9.e3 followed by prepared Black player with a strong nervous
0-0-0(or perhaps just Bg2 and 0-0) looks system might find a way to make this line
better for White. ] playable. That said, I think it is quite low-
8.g2 c6 risk for White, unless you really hate being
[ 8...c6 is another way to play, but one which a pawn down, in which you probably
never made much sense to me. ...a6 and ... sh o u l d n 't b e a c h e ssp la ye r in t h e f i rs t
c6 are useful moves, but you don't need place. ]
both of them! ] 17.c1
9.0-0 0-0-0 10.f4 b4 [ 17.xd3 xd3 18.fe1 also looks good,
[ 10...d7 is n o t s o g o o d . 11.g4 g6 simply planning b4 and a4. ]
12.e5! xe5 13.dxe5 xd1 14.axd1 17...c2 18.e3 e6 19.b4 e4 20.d2
xd1 15.xd1 d7 16.e6 ] xe3 21.fxe3 e5 22.g3 exd4 23.cxd4
11.g4! g6 12.a3 c4 d6 24.xd6 cxd6 Taking some pressure
[ If 12...xb2 t h e i d e a i s 13.e1! off the c-file, but Black still has some
intending Ne5, with a dangerous initiative. problems. 25.ac1 d7 26.c4 h6
Black may be able to play this way, but my 27.b6+ e8 28.gxh6 xh6 29.d5 f6
intuition, for what it is worth, is that White 30.a4 f7 31.b5
has more than a pawn's worth here, with a [ 31.c7+ e7 ( 31...d7 32.xa6! )
le a d in d e ve lo p m e n t a n d se ve ra l o p e n 32.xa6 looks playable, and may have been
lines pointing towards Black's king. ] a more incisive way to exploit the
13.g5 d5 advantage. ]
[ 13...e8 is playable, but hardly attractive, 31...axb5 32.axb5 a5 33.a1 c4
a n d W h i t e c a n r e p l y i n va r i o u s w a y s , 34.a7 h5 35.c7+ f8 36.xb7 xh3
including the mundane 14.e3 with the idea 37.f3 h5 38.c6 I suspect Svidler could
of Nd2 or d5. ] have been more accurate, but he has retained
14.xd5 xd5 so m e a d van t a ge , an d Bla ck n o w f ind s it
[ 14...xd5 15.e5 xd4 16.g4+! e6 difficult to deal with the b-pawn. b8 39.g3
17.xc6 looks winning. ] b6 40.e4 c8 41.a1 h4 42.a6 b6
15.c3!? An instructive decision, showing, yet 43.b4 b8 44.ga3 b6 45.a7 d5
again, that at the highest level, 'winning the 46.a6 d8 47.b7 c4 48.c5 dxe4
exchange' is not always thought to be 49.aa7 g4+ 50.h2 d6 51.xf7+!
worthwhile when it means 'losing control'. xf7 52.e6+ g8 53.xd8 g5
[ 15.e5 gives Black various options. xe5 [ 53...xd8 54.a8 ]
( 15...xe5 16.xe5 h6 and would be 54.d5+ h7 55.e6 f3+ 56.h3 f5
enough to put me off this line, even though 57.xg7+! xg7 58.xg7 xd4 59.b6 e3
it seems likely that White should have some 60.g2 c2 61.f1 b4 62.b7 a6
way to be better.) 16.xd5 xd5 17.dxe5 63.xf5 g6 64.e7+ f6 65.c6
e4 looks like it gives Black serious Svidler was probably relieved to see that he
counterplay. However, this is probably not wouldn't have to mate with bishop and knight.
sufficient after 18.d2 when xc2 19.xc2 Bc4 is the next move and the b-pawn will soon
xc2 20.fc1 g6 21.e6 looks good for be a queen.
White. ] 1-0
15...d8 16.b3 There is something simple
about Svidler's play. He relies on his extra
space and well-placed bishop on g2 for his
advantage, and knows that is Black takes any
pawns he will be able to whip up an attack.
d3
[ 16...xc3 17.c1 d3 18.e1 e4
19.e3 and it looks like White's initiative is
abou t t o grow, alt hou gh, aga in, a well-
370
368 B01 g7 17.c6! bxc6 18.xg7 g8 19.e5

Svidler,Peter 2730 and I wrote: White completely dominates the
Zolotukhin,Valery 2338 dark squares and has more than enough
TCh-RUS Premier (7) 19.04.2011 compensation for the pawn. c6 is vulnerable
[Gawain Jones] while Black is exceedingly passive and
cannot coordinate his pieces and so it's not
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4 a surprise that Black does not last long.
f6 5.f3 c6 6.e5 bd7 7.f4 Shirov, A (2749)-Tiviakov, S (2637)
Svidler follows Shirov's example and plays the Hoogeveen 2010. Check out the archives for
most aggressive line. my comments. ]
[ 7.c4 is the mainline and looked at in the 12.0-0 A logical move continuing development.
following game. ] W hite's not planning f or a quick kingside
7...b6 assault but instead wants to use his extra
[ 7...e6 is quite a passive approach that I've space to slowly crush Black.
looked at previously. A game from this year [ 12.b1 h6 13.gxh6 xh6 14.0-0 g7
went 8.g4 c7 9.g2 c5?! 10.e3 cxd4 15.e2 e6 16.c4 d6 17.c3
11.xd4 xe5 12.xe5 b6 13.e2 b4 and the computer rates the position as equal
14.a3 xc3+ 15.xc3 0-0 16.0-0-0 but I feel practically W hite has the more
and White had a fantastic position with the pleasant chances. ]
bishop pair, development advantage and a [ 12.e2 xe5 13.fxe5 c7 14.0-0 f5
r e a d y m a d e a t t a c k . G r o ve r , S ( 2 4 9 5 ) - is offered in Sergey Kasparov's article in
Ptacnikova, L (2307) Reykjavik 2011. ] NiC Yearbook 98 but without an
8.g4 bd5 assessment. ]
[ 8...e6 was Tiviakov's first choice but he 12...h6 13.f3! xe5 A change of tack and
went down and later varied. Check out John were I White I would enjoy seeing this move,
Watson's annotations in Shirov, A (2726)- improving W hite's structure and allowing
Tiviakov, S (2686) Benidorm 2008. A recent strong pressure down the f file.
encounter continued 9.g2 g6 10.0-0 [ 13...hxg5 was obviously the idea of 12...h6
( 10.a4!? is interesting.) 10...d8 ( 10...g7 b u t t h i s a l l o ws W h i t e t h e s h o t 14.xf7!
was Tiviakov's choice; while 10...0-0-0 xf7 15.fxg5+ e8 ( Giving the piece back
was John's suggestion.) 11.g5 ( 11.a4 g7 with 15...f6 16.f4 a3 17.ab1
12.a5 bd5 13.e2 0-0 14.f5 keeps White on top.) 16.f7+ d8 17.f4
is a valid approach.) 11...h5 12.a4 e5 18.dxe5 e7 19.xg6 and White has
( 12.e3 d5 13.xd5 xd5 14.f5 ) three pawns for the piece and obviously
12...f6?! T o o a m b i t i o u s 13.a5! fxe5 dangerous play but this is probably the
14.axb6 axb6 15.fxe5 c7 Grover, S critical test of Svidler's opening idea. c5
(2432)-Crouch, C (2335) London 2010 when 20.ad1+ d7 21.e4 continues to look
16.e2! looks very good for White as xd4 highly dangerous. ]
17.b5! cxb5 18.xb5+ d8 19.a8+ [ Perhaps 13...g7 was best but White can
c8 20.c3 d7 21.e3+- ] continue as in the game with 14.a4 as hxg5
9.g2 g6 10.g5 xc3 11.bxc3 d7 15.xf7! is still strong, i.e. xf7 16.fxg5+
This was my suggested improvement with the e8 17.f7+ d8 18.f4 xd4+ 19.cxd4
comment: "The position is hard to assess. I xd4+ 20.h1 f8 21.ad1 xd1
f eel th at W hit e shou ld b e b ett er with his 22.xf8+ xf8 23.xd1+ and White
space advantage but Black can create continues to have strong pressure in the
counter-chances with ... h6. Perhaps this will centre compensating for the pawn. ]
be e xam ine d in t he next Sh iro v-T iviako v 14.fxe5 e6 15.a4 Black has a major
game?" W e've now got our practical problem that he cannot complete his
encounter! development due to the pressure down the f
[ Tiviakov chose 11...d5?! 12.c4 c7 file and so the Russian GM continues to grab
13.c5 d8 14.d5! cxd5 15.c4 e6 16.b2 space, dissuading Black from castling long.
371
hxg5 16.xg5 h6 369 B01

[ 16...h5 17.f4 continues to leave Black Tal,Mihail
with problems completing development. ] Bronstein,David I
[ Against 16...f5 White can sidestep with Moscow (16) 1967
17.g3! as xc2?! 18.d5! c5 19.d6 [Nigel Davies]
gives White an overwhelming attack. ]
17.xh6 xh6 18.a5 a6 19.ab1 h5 An game from the great era of Soviet chess in
20.f4 f8 21.f3 Simple play. White which we see Bronstein play a similar plan to
trebles on the f file tying down Black further. that of Epishin - but with the queen on d8.
[ 21.f3 h7 ( 21...f5 22.e3 Even so it would have been reasonable if
leaves Black struggling to move.) 22.e4 Black had played more actively on move 12.
would also increase the pressure on 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6
Black's position. ] [ 2...xd5 3.f3 g6 4.d4 f6 5.c4 d8
21...g8 would transpose back into the game. ]
[ 21...a2 is the computer's choice but after 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6 5.c4 f6 Against an
22.b2 he has to drop the queen back with aggressive player such as Tal, Bronstein no
e6 when 23.f2 g7 24.h4 still leaves d o u b t wa n t e d t o k e e p h i s k n i g h t o n t h e
Black with problems. ] kingside though it does block the activity of
22.bf1 h7 his bishop on g7.
[ 22...f5 23.h4 h5 24.e1 h7 [ In this particular position Black could also
25.b1! and the rook still had to go passive play 5...b6 , but with a 2...Qxd5 move
on h7. ] order this would not be an option. ]
23.g3 d7 6.c3 g7 7.h3
[ 23...g7 24.g5! preparing 25.h4 is [ 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 c6 9.e1 g4 10.h3
similar to the game. ] xf3 11.xf3 bd7 12.b3 e5 13.dxe5
24.h4! d8 25.g5 f8? The king is now c5 14.c2 fd7 led to approximate
caught in the crosshairs and cannot escape. equality in Chandler - Hodgson, Hastings
[ 25...h8 was necessary although White 1991 ]
can win material with 26.h3 ( 26.d5!? 7...0-0 8.e3 bd7 9.d2 c6 10.e2 e8
cxd5 27.h3 f5 28.exf6 exf6 29.xf6 11.d1
e1+ 30.f1 b5 31.f2 is also good for [ After 11.0-0 Black plays e5 with equality. ]
White. ) 26...d5 27.xe7 xh3 28.xh3 11...a5 12.0-0 a6?! Black hesitates.
and White has a clear extra pawn. ] [ The logical move was 12...e5 after which
26.e4! g7 27.h5!? 13.d5! would give White some advantage. ]
[ Th e re wa s no t hin g wron g wit h 27.xg6 13.a3 d8 14.c1 b6 15.e5 b7 16.c5
forcing resignation ] c7 17.f4 c8 18.c4 xe5
27...g8 28.hxg6 f8 29.f5 d5 30.xd7 [ With White developing such massive
xg6 31.f5! xg5 32.xg5+ h8 33.f2 pressure, Black decides to make a bid for
A pretty finish. 7.f4 is still looking an freedom. 18...e6 would be very passive and
interesting approach. White isn't planning on seriously weaken d6. ]
an immediate mate but instead keeps Black 19.dxe5 d5 20.xd5 cxd5 21.cxb6
under pressure and leaves him struggling for Winning a pawn for which Black never gets
good squares for his pieces. enough counterplay. e6 22.e3 ac8
1-0 23.fe1 ed8 24.d4 h6
[ And not 24...c4?? 25.xc4! etc. ]
25.b3 g5 26.g3 c6 27.c1 e6 28.h4
c5 29.xc5 xc5 30.a4 b5 31.c7
gxh4 32.xh4 b8 33.e3 d4 34.g3 h8
35.xf7 xe5 36.f4 g8 37.xb7 xg3
38.xg3 d6 39.d7 xa3 40.b7 d3 41.f5
exf5 42.b8+ xb8 43.e5+ g8 44.xb8
372
d2 45.f1 [ 10.0-0 xb2 11.b1 ( 11.b3!?;

1-0 11.e2?! xc2 12.h4 ) 11...xc2
12.xc2 ( 12.e2? b5 13.b3 d3
14.e1 xb1 ) 12...xc2 13.xb7 ]
370 B01 10...a5 11.a4 a6! 12.h3?! Only weakening
Tan,Desmond 2332 the kingside and losing an important
Prie,Eric 2447 development tempo. Better is
4NCL/Div2/WG3-HK1 (7.3) 09.04.2005 [ 12.h4 g6 13.e3 0-0-0 14.0-0 b4
[Eric Prié] ( 14...c7 15.c3 And the Na6 looks stupid.)
15.h3 ( 15.f3!? xc2 16.d5 ) 15...c7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 16.c3 d5 17.xd5 xd5 18.c4 h5
f6 5.f3 f5 One big question at this early 19.xg6 hxg6 20.f3 f5 ( 20...g5!
stage about the Scandinavian (Provided that 21.xf6 g4 22.f4 d7 23.fd1 gxh3
5...Bg4 is clearly inferior, see the note to 24.g3 h2+ 25.h1 g8 26.e5 f5
game 3) is which is the most precise move at 27.h4 xf2 ) 21.f4 d6 22.xd6 xd6
this important moment: The prophylactic 23.d5!
[ 5...c6 or the move of the game? ] A) 23...g5! 24.dxe6 g4 25.fd1!
6.c4 For instance, neither ( 25.c3 xh3 26.gxh3 xh3! )
[ 6.d3 xd3 7.xd3 c6 8.0-0 e6 25...xe6 26.c3 f4!! Maximising the
( 8...0-0-0? 9.g5 xd4 10.h3+ )] efficiency of the black rook on h5. 27.c5
[ Nor 6.d2 e6 7.e4 b6 8.xf6+ gxf6 gxh3 28.xa5 e7 29.a8+ c7
W o r k f o r W h i t e i n t h i s o r d e r o f m o ve s 30.a5+ b8 31.d2 hxg2-+;
because Black will play ...Nc6 and castle B) 23...exd5? 24.cxd5 xd5 25.xd5
queenside with big pressure against d4. ] cxd5 26.fd1 f4 27.ac1+ d7 28.c5
[ But 6.e2 e6 ( 6...c6? 7.d2 b4 b6 1/2-1/2 Slaby, J-Prie, E Figueres op
8.c1 0-0-0 9.b5 ) 7.0-0 c6 8.h4 2005 ( 28...d6 29.xa5 f3 30.d3 )]
That would not exist in the order of moves 12...g8! 13.h4 e4 14.e3 0-0-0
5... c6 6.Be2 Bg4! and, because of the extra [ 14...b4+! 15.c3 e7 With a big black
tempo and the innocuous placement of advantage underlined by the idea ...f6-f5
White's light squared bishop, Black does not and the W hite queen cannot go to h5
fear (on the contrary!) W hite's expansion because of the hanging Bb3. ]
(weakening then!) on the kingside anymore 15.0-0 c7
by 7.h3 Bh5 8.g4 Bg6. ] [ 15...e7!? 16.h5 f5 17.xf7? ( 17.d5?
6...c6 7.d2 e6 8.e4 b6 I always found xh4; 17.f3! d5 18.xd5 cxd5 19.c3
it important to gain immediate counter-play Unclear. White will eventually play f3-f4 and
a ga in s t W h it e 's d a n d b p a wn s wh e n h e Nf3 recycling his knight. xb2? 20.ab1
threatened to transfer his queen's knight to e2 21.fe1 c4 22.xf7+- xh4
the k ingside , in th is wa y solving W h it e's 23.xb7#; 17.g3 c7 18.h2 d6 19.f4
foremost concern in the Centre Counter: its b4 ) 17...xh4 18.xe6+ b8 19.f3
misplacement on c3, in front of the c-pawn. c7! ( 19...d5 20.xd5 c7 21.xg8 )
[ 8...d8 9.g3! g4 ( 9...g6 10.h4! 20.fxe4 xg2+ 21.xg2 g3+ 22.h1
Compared to a normal 4...Bf5 Caro-Kann xh3+ 23.g1 xe3+ 24.g2 g3+
W hite benefits from the extra tempo Bd2 25.h1 h3+ 26.g1 g3 27.xf5 h2+
and ca n d eve lop an a nno yin g init iat ive 28.f1 h1+ 29.e2 xa1-+ ]
thanks to this. h5 11.e2! xg3 12.fxg3 16.f3 g6 17.xg6 hxg6
xc2 13.c3 f5 14.e5 ) 10.c3 [ 17...xg6!? ]
Followed by h2-h3 seizing Black's strong 18.e2
bishop at a cheap price. ] [ 18.c3 Would have forced Black to use a
9.xf6+ gxf6 10.b3?! Likewise in the less economic circuit via c7 in order t o
game against Smirin, White had better leave reactivate his knight to d5. Possibly White
b2 hanging. was afraid of e5 19.c4! ( 19.e2 exd4
373
20.xd4 c5 ) 19...exd4 20.cxd4 b4 [ 8.d5!? for example

21.b3 d7 22.fd1 d5 23.xd5 xd5 A) 8...e7 9.h3! and there doesn't seem
24.xd5 cxd5 25.ac1 b4= ] to be any satisfactory move for Black's
18...b4 Now, White is condemned to waiting bishop e.g. h5 ( Other moves also give
with his inferior pawn structure provided that W hite strong pressure: 9...f5 10.e2
Black maintains the overprotection of the d5 0-0 11.0-0 or; 9...xf3 10.xf3 e5
square. 19.f2 h8 20.fd1 h5 11.0-0-0 bd7 12.g4 ) 10.dxe6 fxe6
Not the right regrouping but it does not really 11.g4 g6 ( Or 11...f7 12.e2 ) 12.g5
matter. 21.c4 d6 22.f1 g3 23.g1 f4 and the weak pawn on e6 is a terrible
24.f2 b8 25.g1 d7 26.f2 h8 burden.;
27.e1 hd8 28.g3 h6 29.c5 B) 8...bd7 9.dxe6 ( 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3
[ 29.g2 c5! 30.dxc5 d3 31.f1 xf2 e5 ) 9...xe6 10.e2 e7 11.xe6
32.xd7 xd7 33.xf2 d2 ] fxe6 and Black was left with a weak pawn
29...f5 30.g2 g7 31.c3 e5 in Popelyshev, I (2078)-Cherepova, B
And the opposing position explodes. 32.dxe5 (2026)/Konopega 2007. ]
xe5 33.xd7 [ It's good to see Magnus Carlsen in action,
[ 33.c4 d3-+ ( 33...xd1 34.xd1 xd1 even in a simul'. He preferred to challenge
35.xd1 xb2 36.b3 d5 )] Black's bishop straightaway with 8.h3 xf3
33...xd7 34.e1 d3 35.e2 xf2 9.xf3 c6 10.0-0-0 Now the d4 is taboo:
36.xf2 xg3 A) 10...xd4? 11.e2! preparing a sac
0-1 on e6. e7 ( Also decisive for White is
11...bd7 12.xe6! fxe6 13.xe6+ e7
14.he1 when Black does best to remain
371 B01 a p a w n d o w n a f t e r 0-0-0 15.xe7 )
Tari,A 2402 12.xe6! fxe6 13.g5! b4 14.a3 c5
Smerdon,D 2519 15.xf6 gxf6 16.xe6 and Black will be
Visma GM 2014 (7.2) 28.06.2014 unable to escape with his king or develop
[Neil McDonald] his queenside without dropping material.
Play could continue f8 17.c8+ g7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 18.xb7 a6 19.he1 he8 20.d7
f6 5.d2 b6 Black attacks the d4 pawn f8 21.exe7 xe7 22.xa8+ etc.;
left unguarded by W hite's previous move. B) 10...c7? Since capturing on d4 is too
More usual are risky Black should at least develop a piece.
[ 5...c6 or ] W asting a tempo in such a position is
[ 5...g4!? ] fatal. 11.he1 bd7 12.xe6!
6.f3 g4 Making good use of his extra tempo. fxe6
[ Of course the b2 pawn is immune as 13.xe6+ d8? ( White has an initiative
6...xb2 7.b1 a3 8.b5 is fatal. ] for the piece but it isn't over after 13...f7!
[ In view of what follows 6...f5 7.c4 e6 14.de1 g8 15.d5 ) 14.f4 a5 15.d5
looks a safer approach for Black, but it begs h6 Now most decisive is
the question why he played 5...Qb6 if he B1) 16.dxc6 bxc6 17.xf6 gxf6
doesn't try to put further pressure on the 18.d3! a quiet computer move that
d4 square. ] wins the house because d7 can't be
7.c4 defended. Most humans would prefer
[ Instead 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 e6 9.0-0-0 c6 the butcher's approach with ( 18.xc6
10.c4 reaches the Carlsen game given in which also wins at once. );
the notes below. ] B2) 16.d6 c8 ( The only defence is
7...e6 8.0-0 White is always sad he has been 16...f5 but then 17.e3
deprived of the d4-d5 advance in the l o o k s o v e r w h e l m i n g .) 17.de1
Scandinavian, so maybe he should take the No w t h e r e 's n o g o o d a n swe r t o t h e
chance for threat of 18.Qe2 and 19.Re8+ forcing
374
mate. 1-0 Carlsen, M (2765)-Boixeda, P/ 51.g4 d5 52.g7

Madrid 2008 ] 1-0
8...c6 9.b3 xf3?! Black decides he wants
to take on d4. Instead after
[ 9...bd7 his position looks fairly 372 B01
comfortable, which indicates that back at Tennyson Gambit
move eight White should have played 8.d5 N,N
or 8.h3. ] [Tony Kosten]
10.xf3 xd4 A risky decision but consistent
with his previous move. Objectively 1.f3 d5 2.e4?! I must say, I was not even
[ 10...bd7 should be preferred, though it aware of the existence of this gambit until last
leaves W hite in possession of the bishop month! Apparently it is named the 'Tennyson'
pair. ] alt ho u gh I ha ve b e e n u na b le t o f in d a n y
11.f4 e7 12.ad1 c5 13.fe1 bd7 mention of it in any of my opening books, and
14.g4! White needs to use his pawns to soften no games by the 'creator', either! the earliest
up Black's defences. 0-0? Rather surprisingly game I have is one by Latvian Gambit
this leads to a bad endgame for Black. He had aficionado Victor Pupols, dating to 1951.
to oppose White's next move with dxe4! As this is a reversed Budapest Gambit,
[ 14...h6 One double edged variation is the only critical move is the capture, although
15.h4 g5 16.e3 a5 17.d4 c7 Black sometimes tries to avoid the issue:
18.xe6 fxe6 19.xe6 f8 etc. ] [ 2...c6 might appeal to a Caro player,
15.g5 d5 16.xd5! cxd5 17.xd5 exd5 3.exd5 ( 3.c3 g4 is a Caro Two Knights,
[ U n f o r t u n a t e l y f o r B l a c k a f t e r 17...d8 Pessi,E-Moldovan,D/Miercurea Ciuc 1998)
18.d6! wins t he e xch an ge a f t e r c6 3...cxd5 4.d4 is a Caro Exchange, Pessi,E-
( 18...xd6 19.f6+ ) 19.e7+ xe7 Vidoniak,N/Drobeta 1993. ]
20.xc6 bxc6 21.xe7 ] [ 2...e6 3.c3 f6 4.e5 fd7 5.d4
18.xd5 xc2 19.xd7 b4 20.e4! c6 leads to a French, Shepley,J-Franklin,M/
[ Even worse is 20...xb2 21.b1 ] England 1996. ]
21.xc6 bxc6 22.e4 a5 With a rook on 3.g5
the seventh rank and weak pawns to attack, [ The 'Reversed Fajarowicz' with 3.e5?!
White has excellent winning chances. 23.c4 is even worse than here, as Black's c-pawn
f6 24.xc6 fxg5 25.e3! A cute move! is on c7, and he doesn't have to worry about
Before recapturing on g5 White forces 25...a6 a check on b5. ]
so that the b6 square doesn't become a base 3...f5! This is best.
for Black's bishop as occurs after [ As in the Budapest, 3...f6 is the other
[ 25.xg5 b6 ] main possibility,
25...a6 A) 4.c3 bd7?! ( 4...f5! as in the
[ Obviously Black wouldn't relish 25...b6 m a i n l i n e ,) 5.c4 e6?! ( 5...e5 )
26.xb6 axb6 27.cc7 when g7 drops with 6.xe6!? White can also capture the other
mayhem on his second rank. ] e-pawn, of course! fxe6 7.xe6 e7
26.xg5 f7 27.dd6 b4 28.xa6 8.xc7+ d8 9.xa8 is very messy,
W ith connected passed pawns W hite Kozii,Y-Sutorikhin,V/Szeged 1998.;
e v e n t u a l l y b r i n g s h o m e t h e b a c o n . af8 B) 4.c4 e6 5.c3 e7 ( 5...d7!?
29.d8 xf2 30.xf8+ xf8 31.e3 e8 6.gxe4 c6 7.e2 bd7 looks like the
32.b6 a5 33.b5 c7 34.f2 e6 Fort Knox variation of the French: Black is
35.g3 b6+ 36.f1 f7 37.a4 d4 38.b4 solid, but White has a spatial plus, Opalka,
a6 39.a5 e6 40.f2 e5 41.g2 c7 G-Smagin,S/Dortmund 1995.) 6.0-0 0-0
42.b7 d6 43.b6 xb6 44.xb6 d5 7.cxe4 bd7 8.d4 and now the game
45.b5 c4 46.a6 b8 47.a7 xa7 resembles a Rubinstein French, with a
48.xa7 xb5 49.d4 g6 50.f3 c6 small edge for W hite, Pessi,E-Susak,Z/
Pula 1997. ]
375
[ 3...e5!? is sharper, 4.xe4 f6 ( 4...f5!? ) 373 B01

5.xf6+ ( 5.f3!? ) 5...xf6 6.c3 c6 The Patzer Variation
7.b5 d7 8.d3 I prefer Black, Kahn,E- N,N
Mork,K/Budapest 1998. ] THEORETICAL
4.c3 [Andrew Martin]
[ 4.g4!? is probably the best chance, g6
5.g2 f6 6.c3 c6 7.gxe4 Mr Buckley of Bath asks: I saw a recent article
recuperates the pawn, but W hite's o f y o u r s i n C H E S S m a g a z i n e wh e r e a n
wea ke ne d k in gside d ark squ ares are a outlandish variation of the Scandinavian was
cause for concern, Soppela,J-Cording,H/ suggested. Can you give a basic analysis here
Hamburg 1992. ] and go through some ideas. It looked
4...f6 5.c4 This is the reason that the interesting! 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3
variation is worse than the Budapest, as with e5+!? Let us christen this ' THE PATZER '
colours reversed Bb5+ would be played, but for obvious reasons. Black sees a check and
here ...c6 would be the reply. gives a check... .... It is quite remarkable that
[ 5.e2? (threatening Qb5+) c6! 6.c4 this move can be made to work sensibly. In
e6 7.gxe4 xe4 8.xe4 d4 f a c t , B l a ck re a ch e s a n o t t o o d i s s i m il a r
led to an upset Black victory in Rivas Pastor, p o si t i o n t o t h a t o f t h e 3 . . . Q d 8 li n e . T h e
M-Gonzalez Merino,F/Cala Galdana ESP psychological impact is considerable- it will be
2001, but ( 8...d4! is even better, 9.d3? very difficult for your opponent to take the
b5! 10.c3? b4 wins. )] game seriously now. 4.e2 I am forecasting
5...e6 6.f3!? This seems like the best try, and that most people will play this irrespective of
at least contains a trap. rating. They think they are going to punish
[ 6.e2 d4 Black simply hangs-on to his you after 5 Nf3' Not so!
pawn, 7.b5 d7 8.c3 d4 9.b5 [ 4.ge2! Once a few games have been
d7 10.c3 c6! 11.b5 a6 White is played this might turn out to be 'the main
losing, Mangei,P-Stern,R/Baden-Baden line'. c6 ( 4...f6 I prefer this move I think.
1991. ] 5.d4 a5 6.g3 c6 7.g2 f5 8.0-0 e6
6...c5! This is a good idea, g1-a7 looks very 9.d2 bd7= ) 5.d4 c7 6.g3 f5 7.f4
sensitive, b6 ]
[ 6...exf3 7.xf3 c6?! ( missing the more [ 4.e2 Nothing xe2+ 5.xe2 f6
i m p o r t a n t o f t h e t w o t h r e a t s , 7...c8! ( 5...c6 6.f3 f6 7.0-0 f5 8.d3 e6
is simpler: 8.xf7?! g4 and should win) 9.f4 bd7 10.fe1 b4= 1-0 Sarquis,M-
8.xf7! Ouch! d4! ( 8...xf7? 9.xf5 Hegarty,S/Oropesa del Mar 2001) 6.f3
d7 10.e4 is horrible, Moser,G-Schone/ f5= ]
Biel 1981.) 9.xh8 ( 9.xe6!? ) 9...xc4 4...c6! Useful, giving the Queen a retreat and
10.d3 h4+ 11.g3 h3 if Black can round- keeping a White Knight out of d5 5.f3
u p t h e h 8 - k n igh t t h e n h e will h a ve f a i r [ 5.d4 c7 6.e3 ( 6.f3 f5 7.ge2 e6
c h a n c e s , Ho f f m a n n , W -A u t e n gru b e r, R / 8.0-0 d7 9.b1 gf6 10.e1 d6
Erlangen 1994. ] 11.g3 g6 12.ce4 xe4 13.xe4
7.cxe4?? xe4 14.xe4 f6= 1-0 Zhao Jun-Buckley,
[ 7.fxe4 xe4 8.gxe4 xe4 9.h5 S/Oropesa del Mar 2001) 6...f5 7.d2
( 9.xe4 h4+ 10.g3 xc4 ) 9...d4 f6 8.0-0-0 e6 ]
looks pretty disgusting for White. ] 5...c7 Check this line out on your database
7...xe4 8.xe4 xe4 and White has lost a and you'll find a wealth of games from
piece, Neher,G-Teubner,W/Ulm 1995. assorted U8 Championships. Forgive me for
not showing them here. 6.d4
[ 6.0-0 f5 7.d3 d7 ( 7...e6 8.h4 g6
9.e3 d6 ) 8.h4 g6 9.f4 e6 10.g4
e7 ]
6...f5! This move holds the real key to the
376
PATZER. Black delays the development of his Black has gotten rid of White's dark-squared
Knight on g8. It's the Bishop on c1,you see- bishop and retained his own, to cover his
that's the W hite piece that can hassle the weaknesses. Arguably, too, the bishop on f5
Black Queen i.e. Bg5-h4-g3 for instance, or, is better developed outside of the pawn chain
with Knight on f6, Ne5 and then Bf4. We keep (compare the previous note). But Black may
our Knight at home then and play other useful not get time to castle kingside. 7.d2
moves first e.g. ...Bf5, ...e6,,, Nd7. .Bd6- you [ Now if W hite gambits by 7.0-0 xc3
sort out the order. I'll just say that the timing 8.bxc3 xc3 , his bishop hangs.
of ...Nf6 is crucial. A few lines: 7.0-0 N e v e r t h e l e s s , 9.e5 e6 10.b1
[ 7.h4 g6 8.f4 e6 9.0-0 f6 ] gives some compensation. ]
[ 7.g5 e6 8.h4 g6 9.0-0 e7! 7...xd2 8.xd2 e6 9.0-0
I prefer Black now ] [ 9.d5! is critical, to tear apart the centre
[ 7.e3 e6 8.d2 f6 9.f4 d6 before Black consolidates. In Narayanan-
( 9...a5!? idea ...Bb4 ) 10.e5 bd7= ] Tiwari, New Delhi 2009, the second player
[ 7.e5 d7 8.f4 ( 8.f4 gf6 9.0-0 e6; managed to hold on after d7 ( 9...b4
8.xd7 xd7 9.0-0 f6 10.e3 e6= ) may improve) 10.dxe6 fxe6 ( 10...xe6
8...xe5 9.xe5 b6 10.b1 f6 11.f4 11.0-0-0 d6!? ) 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 12.g5!
d8 ] ( 12.d4 b6 ) 12...d6 13.xe6 ( here
7...e6 8.g5 d7 9.h4 d6= You couldn't 13.xe6! calls Black's play into doubt)
say that Black has been in any way troubled 13...b4 14.d4 xc2! 15.cb5
by the opening. Very odd! This weird idea ( 15.xc2 xc4 16.he1 might retain an
seems to produce a position similar to that of edge ) 15...a4 16.xb4 xb4 17.xa7+
the Caro-Kann. I rather like the White Bishop b8 18.b3 xa7 19.bxa4 , and here c5
sitting pretty on e2, doing precisely nothing. was approximately equal. There's a lot to
be looked at here I suspect that if there's a
serious problem with 6...Ne4, it's 9 d5. ]
374 B01 9...d7 10.a3 c6 Playable, if a bit slow.
Thipsay,Praveen Mahadeo 2453 [ 10...e7 11.b4 b6 looks risky, but the
Tiwari,Arjun 2256 queen is actually relatively safe on b6. 12.d5
1st Open Gurgon IND (4) 23.01.2009 0-0-0 13.ad1 f6 14.fe1 might follow,
[John Watson] with White probably having some edge. ]
11.fe1 W hite has 12 d5 in mind. 0-0-0?!
When Black plays 3...Qa5, he's often happy Allowing some bothersome threats.
with simplification, so the following idea of ... [ 11...c7 is better, intending ...0-0-0. ]
Ne4 bears notice. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 12.g5! e5?!
3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 f5 [ 12...g6 , when 13.b4 f5 ( 13...c7!?
[ 5...e4 is the normal version of the idea in 14.xe6! fxe6 15.xe6 d6 16.xd8
the game, for example, 6.d2 ( quite a few xd8 17.d5! ) 14.d3 f6 15.b5!? ]
ga m e s h a ve co n t in u e d 6.d3!? xc3 13.xe5!?
7.bxc3 , when instead of grabbing the pawn, [ 13.b3! is still more convincing after e7
Black can choose g6 8.0-0 g7 9.e1 ( 13...h6 14.xe5 xe5 15.xf7 ) 14.xe5
0-0!? 10.xe7 c6 11.e3 xc3 xe5 15.xf7 xd4 16.c1! f6
, but it's hard not to prefer White somewhat 17.xh8 d8 18.e3 ]
after 12.d2 b2 13.c3 ) 6...xd2 7.xd2 13...xe5 14.xf7 xd4 15.e2! c5
e6 with the idea ...Bb4. ] 16.xh8 xh8 17.xe6+ xe6 18.xe6+
6.c4 Now 6...e6 has been played in b8 19.e2 f8 Black has some
hundreds or thousands of master games. c o m p e n s a t i o n , b u t i t s h o u l d n ' t b e q u i t e
e4!? This is a rather counterintuitive line that enough, because White lacks weaknesses.
aims at gaining the bishop pair at the cost of 20.d1
considerable development. Still, a structure [ Or 20.f1 , transposing. ]
with ...e6 and ...c6 can hold up a lot better if 20...d8 21.c3!?
377
[ 21.g3 intends Rc1 and b4. ] Sax - Gausel, Skelleftea 2001 continued
21...f8 22.f1 xa3! 23.d1 f6 24.bxa3 c7 8.b5 (White could also delay this
xc3 25.e7 c8 26.g3 xc2 27.d7 move) e6 9.0-0 a6 10.bxc6 xc6 11.h3
[ 27.d8!? b1+ 28.g2 b6 ] h5 12.e2 d6 13.d4 a5 14.f4
27...b1+ 1/2-1/2 ]
[ 27...b2! covers g7. Black seems to be 7...xf3
holding. ] [ 7...h5 8.b4 c7 9.0-0 e6 10.b1 a6
28.g2 b6 29.d6+ a8 30.xg7 a5?! was a game Shahade - Stefanova, Andorra
31.xh7 a7 32.h6 d8 33.e5 d2 2000 af ter which 11.d3 intending Ne2-f4
34.f6 Now it's 'a matter of technique'. The would have been quite promising for White. ]
rest of the moves were d8 35.c5+ a6 8.xf3 e6 9.0-0 bd7 10.a3
36.f5 d5 37.c4+ b6 38.f7 b5 [ The idea of a queenside expansion is more
39.h4 a4 40.xa4 d5+ 41.f3 c5 42.f4 p r o m i s i n g t h a n t h e ' c l a s s i c a l ' 10.d4
b3 43.h5 c6 44.g4 c4 45.g5 xf3 when Ward - Emms, 4NCL 1997 went d6
46.xf3 c3 47.xc6+ bxc6 48.g6 c2 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 0-0 13.c4 ad8
49.g7 c1 50.g8 f4 51.g6 b5 52.h6 14.c2 fe8 15.d2 c7 with a solid
c5 53.h7 e5 54.g8 e4+ 55.h2 f4+ game for Black. ]
56.g1 c1+ 57.g2 10...e7 11.b3 0-0 12.b2 fd8 13.d4
1-0 ac8 14.d1 b5 15.e3 c7 16.e2
[ According to Tiviakov, the immediate 16.c4
would have given him an edge. ]
375 B01 16...b6 17.fd1 a5 18.c4
Tiviakov,Sergei ½-½
Hansen,Curt
Wijk aan Zee (5) 1994
[Nigel Davies] 376 B01
Topalov,Veselin
Hansen's play is much better, but even here Kamsky,Gata
W hite could have maintained an edge with Corus Chess 2006 2006
stronger play on move 16. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 [Andrew Martin]
xd5 3.c3 a5 4.g3 f6 5.g2 c6
6.f3 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 A rare outing for the
[ White can also play 6.ge2 in this position, Modern variation at this level. W as Kamsky
which has the advantage that it does not trying to surprise Topalov? 3.f3 xd5 4.d4
block his f-pawn. g6 ( 6...f5 7.b4!? c7 f5 Rare in comparison with 4...Bg4 or 4...g6
8.b1 bd7 9.0-0 e6 10.d3 e7 11.h3 Topalov sticks with a tried and trusted
h6 12.f4 e5 13.d2 d6 14.f4 exf4 formula: when surprised keep it simple and
15.xf4 h7 16.b5 and White had the aim for a small, enduring edge. 5.d3 xd3
initiative in Payen - Kholmov, St Petersburg 6.xd3 e6 7.0-0!
1998 ) 7.0-0 g7 8.b1 c7 was a game [ But not the reckless 7.b5+ c6 8.xb7
Paz Ladron - Bellon Lopez, Malaga 1998 db4 9.a3 b8 ]
and now 9.b4 looks logical (in the game 7...c6 8.c4 b6 9.c3 e7 10.f4
White played 9.d4) ] White has obtained a typical small edge with
6...g4 the simplest of moves. He has choice for this
[ Once again White can meet 6...f5 with Rooks, good development and ands plenty of
7.b4!? after which Shabalov - Minasian, New scope for the middlegame. Black is cramped.
York Open 1998 went c7 8.0-0 e6 9.b1 Perhaps this is why 4...Bf5 isn't seen more
wit h W h it e 's ch a n ce s b e in g s o m e wh a t often, although there is no need for Kamsky's
preferable in this rich position. ] ne xt m o ve . g5?! He feels that his position is
7.h3 so prospectless that he has to try and
[ White can also consider 7.b4 after which unbalance the game. But 10...g5?! is almost
378
certainly a game-losing move. g7 26.e8+ xe8 27.dxe8 xe8

[ Black should keep it tight with something 28.g3+ h8 29.xc7+- ]
like 10...0-0 11.ad1 d7 He is still worse, 23.e5 c7 24.g4+ h8 25.d6
but very much in the game. ] Not a very good advert for 4...Bf5 and I am
11.g3! A deliberate sacrifice of a pawn (or not sure what advice to offer Black, other than
two) in order to keep the initiative. g4 12.e5 to avoid the whole thing! 5 Bd3! is the easiest
xd4 of moves to play and understand and seems
[ 12...xd4 leads naturally to 13.e2 0-0-0 to offer an advantage.
14.xf7 ( 14.ad1 c5 15.xf7 ) 1-0
14...xc4 15.ae1 ]
13.c5! Excellent. Black's central pieces hang
in the air and after the capture on c5 White 377 B01
threatens Ne4. Topalov,Veselin 2772
[ The natural 13.ad1 was also good: c5 Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter 2693
( 13...f5 14.e2 c8 15.c5! xc5 MTel Sofia BUL (1) 10.05.2007
16.b5+ ) 14.e2 a4 15.xd4 xb2 [John Watson]
16.e2 xd1 17.xe6!! fxe6 18.xg4+-
I guess Topalov just didn't want him to play It's hard not to include such a high-profile
...c7-c5 ] game, but it wasn't particularly exciting, so I'll
13...xc5 14.ad1 0-0? I put a question just take a run through the opening. 1.e4 d5
mark by this move simply because it is so ugly. 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 This has become
However, I am not sure what advice to offer a m a j o r w e a p o n f o r N i s i p e a n u . 4.g3
because the Black King is already I don't think that this is enough to truly bother
permanently compromised: Black, but there are 129 games with it in
[ 14...e7 15.b4 0-0-0 16.bxc5 f3+ Megabase and White has done respectably
17.gxf3 xd3 18.xd3 d5 19.c6 gxf3 well. Topalov probably wanted to get away
20.cxb7+ xb7 21.xd5 exd5 22.xd5+- ] from hypercritical lines. f6
[ 14...f6 15.xg4 d7 16.b5! ] [ T h e m o s t p o p u l a r m o v e i s 4...c6
15.e4 e7 16.xg4! , to exploit White's lack of control over d4.
[ Many would have been tempted by Some examples and notes 5.g2 f6
16.xd4 but White gets pushed back: xd4 ( 5...f5 prepares ...0-0-0 more quickly, but
17.xd4 f5 18.c3 c5 19.dd1 f4 ] most players seem to hold off just in case
16...c5 White plays Nf3 and they can play ...Bg4.
[ Or 16...f5 17.c3 d5 18.xd5 exd5 Also the move ... Bg4 can be irritating in and
19.ef6+ xf6 20.xf6+ g7 21.e5!+- ] of itself. )
[ 16...f5 17.h6+ g7 18.e5+ xh6 A) 6.d3 g4! 7.f3 d4 8.h3 xf3+
19.h3+ g6 20.xd4+- There really is ( 8...xf3 9.xf3 0-0-0 is tempting, to
nothing worthwhile to say about these lines exploit Black's increasing lead in
other than the damage has already been development) 9.xf3 xf3 10.xf3 c6=
done. ] MaciejewskiM-Sygulski, POL-ch 1987;
17.b4?! B) 6.ge2
[ Kasparov pointed out at the time that B1) 6...f5 7.b4!? is a very bizarre
17.e5! won immediately: f6 18.g5 f5 move by a leading grandmaster! Black
19.h3+- ] naturally accepts: xb4 8.d3 c6 9.0-0
17...d5 d7 ( 9...e5!? ) 10.b1 e6 11.g5
[ 17...f5 18.c3 d5 19.xd5 exd5 bd5 12.e4 h6 ( 12...e7
20.ef6+ h8 21.e5 ] Does White have anything?) 13.xf6
18.bxc5 f5 19.f3 c8 20.d6 xd6 xf6 14.xf6+ gxf6 15.b3 c8
21.cxd6 h4 22.d7 c6 16.f4 e7 17.h5 d6? 18.h4
[ 22...c7 leads to a further White sacrifice: e7 19.h5 and Black had equalized in
23.xd5 exd5 24.ef6+ xf6 25.xf6+ Bologan-Hauchard, Belfort 1998,
379
eventually drawn!; 16.h5! e6 17.ad1 e5 18.f4

B2) 6...g4 7.h3 h5 ( 7...f5 8.d3 ( 18.f4! ) 18...f6? 19.d4 fe8 20.xe4
e5 clamps down on d4. It's hard to g6 21.d5 d8 22.h4! g5 23.h5 fxe4
believe that this can be bad: 9.0-0 0-0-0 24.xe4 e6 25.f4 f5 26.xe5 1-0 Socko-
10.a3 h5! 11.b4 d7 12.g5? xh3 Bitansky, Panormo 2001. ]
13.e4 xg2 14.xg2 f5 7.f4 This is one of the few games in which
with a clear extra pawn, Skripchenko- we actually see the 'point' of g3 realised! b4
Gofshtein, playchess.com INT 2004. But 8.ge2 g7 9.c1!? Very odd, especially
I liked Black's position anyway) 8.d3 since
0-0-0 9.0-0 e5 10.e3 (this is more like [ 9.0-0 xb2 10.d3! f5 ( 10...b6
a picture of what W hite is after) b8 11.ab1 a6 12.d2 ) 11.e4
11.d2 d4 12.g4 g6 13.fe1 must favour White's space and
( 13.f4! xe2+ 14.xe2 ) 13...h6 development. ]
14.a4!? a6 15.b5 c5? ( 15...c6 ) 9...0-0 10.0-0 g4 11.a3 a5 12.h3 xe2
16.exd4 exd4 17.f4 b6 18.a5!? 13.xe2 bd7 (With ...e5 coming, Black has
( 18.b4 ) 18...xb5 19.axb6 xb6 near-equality in this typical Slav structure)
20.a4 with a strong attack, Amonatov- 14.c4 e5 15.b4 c7 16.dxe5 xe5
Zablotsky, Internet 2006. ] 17.c2 a5 18.ae1 axb4 19.axb4 fe8
5.g2 c6 20.c5!? d5 21.d2 d7 22.c4 7f6
[ 5...h5!? is a funny move that led to success and the game was roughly even. White went
after 6.d4 ( 6.h3 ) 6...h4 7.f4 b6 on lose when Topalov blundered: 23.g4 h5
8.ge2 c6 9.d3 a6 10.a3 ( 10.0-0-0 ) 24.g3 hxg4 25.hxg4 d7 26.g5 xe1
10...hxg3 11.fxg3 g4 12.0-0-0 e6 13.h3 27.xe1 e8 28.f3 ec7 29.g4 d8
f5 14.f3 d5 15.g4 h7 16.g3 30.g2 b5 31.d1 a1 32.xa1 xa1
and W hite is probably slightly better but 33.f3 e5 34.e2 dc7 35.e3 e6
went on to lose in Smirin-Kurajica, Solin 36.g4 bc7 37.e4 g7 38.f4 d1
1999. ] 39.f2 c3 40.b5 e1+ 41.g2 d5
6.d4 42.bxc6 bxc6 43.d3?? d4 44.xe6
[ (a) The game takes a conventional course xe3+ 45.h2 f2+ 46.h3 f3+ 47.g3
after 6.f3 f5 ( 6...g4 ) 7.0-0 e6 8.d4 g2+
( 8.d3 c7 9.e2 bd7 10.e4 0-1
Hogenacker-Brecht, BLW9697 Griesheim-
KKS Koeln 1997 about equal) 8...e7
( 8...bd7!? 9.f4 b4 ) 9.e5 h5 10.h3 378 B01
( 10.f4!? ) 10...bd7 11.f4?! ( 11.c4!? ) Trabert,Bettina 2269
11...b6 12.g4?! hxg4 13.hxg4 xg4! Fakhiridou,Ekaterini 2296
14.xg4 xg4 15.xg4 xd4+ 16.f2 35th TCh-GRE (6) 07.07.2006
h4 with a strong attack, Kharlov-Vokarev, [Eric Prié]
Moscow1998. ]
[ (b) 6.ge2 g4! 7.h3 h5 8.d3 e6 9.g4 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
g6 10.f4 e5?! ( 10...bd7 ) 11.e2 f6 5.f3 e4?! 6.d3! xc3 7.bxc3 g6
e7 12.xg6 hxg6 13.d2!? bd7 8.0-0 g7 9.e1 0-0 10.d2 c6
14.0-0-0 0-0-0 15.e3 with the better The fact that Black has to play this move,
prospects, Delgado-R Gonzalez, Dos thus blocking his c-pawn in order to defend e7,
Hermanas 2004. ] is an alarming sign for the line. It means that
6...g6 h i s ga m b le t o a cc e p t a s e ve r e r e t a r d i n
[ Slightly odd, but apparently fine. A normal development in return for some attacking
line is 6...f5 7.ge2 e6 8.0-0 c7 prospects against the damaged opposing
, when things turned wild after 9.e1 d6 structure, turns out to be just a dream. 11.h3!
10.d5! cxd5 11.d4! 0-0 12.xf5 exf5 I gave this refutation "of Black's optimistic 5th
13.g5 e4 14.xd5 d7 15.e3 c6 move" one year ago, but it seems to have
380
gone unnoticed... at least on this site! a3 21.c5 ) 15...a2 16.b2 d5 17.e4
I do not see how Black could develop his xe4 18.xe4 e6 19.f4 b6 20.xc7
queen's bishop whilst continuing to have the c8 21.d6 a5 22.b4 c4
move c3-c4, with or without Rb1, hanging over With compensation, but for Black! ]
his head like a sword of Damocles. 14...d7
[ 11...f5 12.c4 a4 ( 12...a6 13.xf5 [ 14...xa2 15.a1 d5 16.c4 e6
gxf5 14.d5! xa1 15.xa1 a5 16.d4 17.xe6 fxe6 18.c3 xd4 19.cxd4 xd4
Pro vid e s W h it e wit h a win n ing a t t a ck.) 20.e3 xa1 21.xa1 a5 22.a4
13.d5! The Qa4-Qd1 vis-Ã -vis gives White ( 22.c5!? a4 23.a3 a5 24.f1 ) 22...b6
s u p p l e m e n t a r y t a c t i c a l m o t i v e s . d4 23.c5 fb8 24.cxb6 cxb6 25.b5 ]
( 13...a5 14.b1 xd3 15.cxd3 xd1 15.f4
16.bxd1 b6 17.xe7 ) 14.xd4 xd4 [ 15.b1 b6 16.f4 fe8 17.xc7 ( 17.f3
15.xe7 xa1 16.xa1 xd3 17.h6 f6 a5 18.e5 e6 19.e4 xe5 20.xe5
18.cxd3 f7 19.e1 And Black has to part c6 ) 17...ac8 18.g3 ( 18.f4 e5 )
with his queen to avoid mate. ] 18...a5 19.e3 ( 19.e4 f5 20.g5
12.c1! xc3 21.f3 c6 ) 19...h6 ( 19...xc3
[ 12.d5!? a5 13.c1 c5 14.h6 20.xg6! xe3 21.xf7+ f8 22.fxe3;
xc3? 15.xf8 xe1 ( 15...xa1 16.xa1 19...h6 ) 20.f4 c4 21.xc4 xc4 ]
xf8 17.h8#; 15...xf8 16.h6+ g7 15...h6
17.xh7 xa1 18.e5! xe5 19.xe5 [ 15...fe8 16.xc7 ac8 17.g3 a5
e8 20.g8+ d7 21.xf7 ) 16.h6! ( 17...h6 18.f4 a5 19.e4 b6! ) 18.e4
xf2+ 17.h1 c3 18.f1 f5 19.g5+- ] f5 ( 18...f5 19.c5 )]
12...xc1 13.axc1 Black will lose a pawn, 16.f3 e6 17.b1 g5
either on b7, c7 or e7. Thus it has to be c7 [ 17...b6 18.e4 ]
f r o m h i s p o i n t o f v i e w . e6 14.g5! [ 17...a5 18.xc7 ( 18.h4!? ac8
It was also tempting to activate the queen's 19.b5 b6 20.xe6 fxe6 21.xg6 fe8
rook and provoke considerable disruption in 22.h5 ) 18...b6 19.bd1 ( 19.xe6 fxe6
the black camp. 20.e1 ac8 21.g3 f7 ) 19...ac8
[ 14.b1 20.e5 xc3? ( 20...xe5? 21.xe5
A) 14...d8 15.c4 c6 ( 15...c5 16.d5 xc3 22.xg6 ) 21.d5 xe5 22.xe5 c8
d7 17.xe7 ) 16.a4 ( 16.f4 e8 23.xe7 ]
17.c3 ) 16...e8 17.a5; 18.xc7 b6 19.a4
B) 14...b6 15.xe6! fxe6 16.e4 a5 [ 19.a6! xa2 20.a1 d5 21.b7 ae8
17.xa8 xa8 18.e1 e5 ( 18...f7 ( 21...ac8 22.xc8 xc8 23.g3 f5
19.g5+ ) 19.xe5 xe5 20.xe5 c4 24.e5 xe5 25.xe5 xc3 26.xa7 e6
21.e2; 27.b1+- ) 22.xc6 xc6 23.xa7 ]
C) 14...ab8 15.g5 xa2 ( 15...d7 19...ac8 20.g3 a5 21.e5
16.f4 ) 16.a1 d5 17.c4 e6 18.xe6 [ 21.h4 g4 22.e5 xc3 23.g6 e8
( 18.d5 xa1 19.xa1 d7 20.dxc6 24.d5 ]
xc6 21.f4 bd8 22.xc7 d7 21...fd8
23.f4 ) 18...fxe6 19.c3! xd4 [ 21...xe5 22.xe5 xc3 23.d5 ]
The best cha nce . ( 19...d8 20.xa7; 22.xg7?? Time trouble already? Anyway this
19...f6 20.g5 ff8 21.xe6; 19...e5 is an incomprehensible slip that spoils all
20.d5 b6 21.dxc6 bd8 22.e3 h6 White's efforts so far in this quality game.
23.d1 xe3 24.xe3 f6 25.c5 g7 [ 22.e3! And Black is not out of trouble yet.
26.f1 ) 20.cxd4 xd4 21.e3 xa1 xc3? 23.h7+ ]
22.xa1 a6 23.c5; 22...xg7 Now White loses the pawn back
D) 14...fb8! 15.a4 ( 15.f4 xa2 and will rapidly go down. 23.bd1 xc3
16.b2 d5 17.xc7 c8 18.xb7 24.e4 d7 25.a1 c6 26.d3
xd4; 15.g5 xa2 16.a1 d5 17.c4 Certainly not the most difficult to negotiate for
e6 18.xe6 fxe6 19.c3 e5 20.d5 d8 the opponent... xf3 27.gxf3 e6 28.e4
381
c6 29.f4 xd4 30.fxg5 hxg5 31.a2 d5 B2) 8.c4 e6 9.e3 c6 10.c3 e7
32.g2 f5 33.e1 e5 34.d1 e6 35.e1 11.a3!? ( 11.0-0 0-0 12.e2 ) 11...e5?!
e4 36.f1 f4+ 37.h2 d2 38.g1 ( 11...0-0 ) 12.d5 d4 13.g4 xf3+
xh3+ 39.xh3 xh3 40.a5 c3 41.axb6 14.xf3 g6 Byrne-Rogoff, US Ch 1978
axb6 42.b1 dxc2 43.a7+ c7 and 15.d6! cxd6 16.cxd6 xd6 17.d1
0-1 gives White tremendous pressure. ]
7...e6
[ 7...e5?! 8.g4 exd4 9.xd4 g6 10.g2
379 B01 c6 11.0-0 has won some games for White,
Tzermiadianos,Andreas 2447 intending e7 12.f4 ]
Shen,Siyuan 2321 8.g4
FSGM August Budapest HUN (4) 04.08.2009 [ 8.e3 b4!? 9.b3 c6 10.e2 0-0
[John Watson] 11.a3 e7!? 12.g4 g6 13.d5 ( 13.0-0-0
a5! ) 13...a5! 14.b5 bxc4! 15.xc4 c6
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.f3 g4 16.dxc6 a6 , and White should give the
5.h3 h5 piece back by 17 Qb4, rather than 17.b6?
[ 5...xf3 6.xf3 wins the bishop pair and/or 1/2-1/2 of Keitlinghaus (2525) -Holzhaeuer
secures a central advantage after (2355), Gladenbach 1997 because here
A) 6...b4? 7.xb7 xc2+ 8.d1 xd4 axb5 18.xd8 axd8 19.xb5 bxc6
( 8...xa1 9.b5+ d7 10.xd7+ xd7 20.e2 f6 uses the bishops to good
11.d5+ e8 12.c6+ d7 13.xa8+ ) effect. ]
9.xa8 b3+ 10.d2; 8...g6 9.e5
B) 6...c6!? 7.c3!? ( or 7.b5 e6 8.0-0 [ R y b k a l i k e s 9.b3 threatening c5 and
wit h a n e d g e) 7...d7 8.d3 e6+ Qxb7 then c8 ( 9...c5!? 10.e3 8d7
9.e2! 0-0-0 10.0-0 f6 11.d2 e5 11.0-0-0 ) 10.c5 6d7 11.h4 e7
12.dxe5 xe5 13.xf6 xf6 14.c4 12.xg6 hxg6 13.g2 c6 14.e3
with the bishop pair; is at any rate more comfortable for White. ]
C) 6...e6 7.c3 e7 (White can play Bd3 9...c6 Black has tried all kinds of things here,
or Bc4 versus most moves) 8.c4 ( 8.d3 but without much success:
0-0 9.0-0 d7 10.d1 ) 8...0-0 9.0-0 c6 [ 9...8d7 10.xg6 hxg6 11.e3 ( 11.e2
10.d2 d7 11.e1 ] b4!? 12.g2 c5 Conquest, S (2601)-
6.c4 I like this move order, which reverts to 4 Ekstroem, R (2495), Leon 2001 and here
c4 positions but without Be2 and retaining the 13.d5! was stron g) 11...f6 12.f3 c6
idea of an early g4. b6 13.0-0-0 b4 14.g5! fd7? ( 14...h5!? )
[ 6...xf3 7.xf3 b4 again appears to fall 15.e4 e7 16.h4 a5 17.h5 gxh5
a bit short after 8.c3! e5!? ( 8...8c6 18.xh5 xh5 19.xh5 c7? ( 19...f8
9.a3 e5 10.d2! exd4? 11.b3 20.h8 g6 21.d5! ) 20.g6 f5 21.g5 f8
with the idea a6 12.xb7 ) 9.d5 d7 22.f7 ( 22.h8! wins, in view of f6?
10.a3 a6 11.b4!? c5 12.dxc6 bxc6 23.xf8+ ) 22...bd7 ( 22...f6 ) 23.b1
13.c5 c7 14.c4 ] f6 24.d5! exd5 25.xf5 e5 26.cxd5
7.c3 cxd5? 27.b5+ c6 1-0 Conquest (2530) -
[ W h it e h a s a l so h a d s u c ce s s wi t h 7.c5 Branger, Paris 2001. ]
, e.g., [ 9...b4 10.g2 8d7 ( 10...c6 11.h4 f6
A) 7...d5 8.b3 b6 9.e5! c6 10.c3 12.xg6 hxg6 13.d3 ) 11.xg6 hxg6
( 10.g4 f6! ) 10...e6 11.a4; 12.b3 c5 13.0-0 xc3 14.xc3 f6
B) 7...6d7 15.e3 c8 16.b3 c7 17.ad1 0-0
B1) 8.b3 b6 ( 8...c6 9.g4 g6 18.fe1 e8 19.c1! and Black's position
10.c3 ) 9.d5!? xf3 10.xf3 c6 was horrendous in Voitsekhovsky-Ulko,
11.g5!? bxc5 12.dxc5 ( 12.c4 f6 ) Novgorod 1998. ]
12...a5+ 13.c3 e6 14.e2 xc5 [ 9...c6 10.g2 8d7 11.xg6 hxg6
15.0-0 0-0 16.g3 with attack; 12.e2 favours White, according to
382
Svidler. ] 14.cxb4 e5 15.b2 xb3 16.axb3

10.xc6 bxc6 11.g2 xb2 17.xa7 b8 18.a2 e5
[ 11.a4! w i t h t h e i d e a a5 12.g2 and Black has enough compensation for
compare Black's 12th. ] the pawn. ) 14.g3 h5 15.b5!;
11...d7 12.f3 c5?? B) 12.xe4! xe4 13.xe4 f5 14.e1
[ 12...0-0-0 13.0-0 ( 13.a4 xc4 ) 13...h5 and Black probably doesn't have enough
( 13...xc4 14.b5! b8 15.f4 ) 14.b5 for the pawn here. Still, it's a lot better
b8 15.f4 hxg4 16.hxg4 c8 17.b3 a6 than what happens in the game! ]
18.c3 d6 and Black is hanging in there, 12.a4!?
although White still has an advantage after [ \/White has a safe advantage after 12.e2
19.e2 ] but Vachier Lagrave is going for a quick
13.b7! Threatening Bc6. d8 14.g5+ f6 win ]
15.dxc5 xc5 16.d1 d4 17.e3 xc3+ 12...xd3?!
18.bxc3 xd1+ 19.xd1 A disaster, but it's [ 12...e4! is now necessary when White is
interesting to look over the opening I can't only slight better after
help but wonder about the worth of 2...Nf6 in A) 13.xe4?! e5! ( of course not
this and several other lines. 13...xe4?? 14.g4 winning the queen );
1-0 B) 13.dxe4 e5 14.g3 xb4 15.f4
a5 16.b3 c5 ]
13.b5! b8 14.e3 Suddenly White has a
380 B01 massive attack and sadly for Papaioannou he
Vachier Lagrave,M 2742 makes a further mistake here which brings the
Papaioannou,I 2639 game to a premature end. f5?!
19th European Teams (6.1) 14.11.2013 [ 14...a6 is a better try but after 15.d2!
[Tom Rendle] xb5 16.c2 Black is still in a lot of trouble
as Rab1 is a big threat. ]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2 15.d2 c5?! After this Black is just lost
c6 5.0-0 0-0-0 This is a very risky setup [ 15...he8 16.xa7 should still be winning
that can payoff against an unprepared for White but at least Black can fight on for
opponent. Unfortunately for Black I don't think a little with g6 17.ab1 fd7 ]
Vachier Lagrave is the right player to play this 16.e4 xe3 17.xe3 h5 18.xa7 d5
way against! 6.h3 19.c5! Black can resign here but he
[ in s t e a d t h e o d d 6.e1 worked well for s p o r t i n g l y a l l o w s m a t e i n s t e a d . xe3
White in Zhigalko-Sharif in the archives. ] 20.xb7# A pretty painful game for Centre
6...xf3 7.xf3 d7 8.c3 e5 Counter players to watch, but it just shows
[ 8...e5 I mentioned as an options in the why this quick ...0-0-0 line isn't popular at a
above game with a typical slight edge to higher level.
W h i t e a f t e r 9.d4 xf3+ 10.xf3 e6 1-0
11.d2 and now White's plan should be
Nc4 with the option of coming into e5 or
assisting a queenside push of a4/b4-b5 ] 381 B01
9.e1 f6 10.b4! One nice thing for Black in Vachier Lagrave,Maxime 2721
this line is he gets control of the centre with Tiviakov,Sergei 2637
th e e a rly . . . e5 b u t Va ch ie r L a gra ve isn 't Unive Crown Group (5) 29.10.2010
worried as he's just going for a big queenside [Gawain Jones]
attack! d6 11.d3 f5
[ perhaps Black should try a pawn sacrifice 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
with 11...e4!? c6 5.c3 d7
A) 12.dxe4 e6 when he has some [ The extremely unusual 5...f5 was tried in
counterattacking chances based on ...Qe5 a recent game. The queen looks rather
a n d h 5 - h 4 . 13.b3 e5 ( 13...xb4!? awkwardly placed here but Black equalised
383
rather comfortably. 6.h3 xf3 7.xf3 e6+ equality. ) 11...xc3 12.bxc3 e7
A) 8.e2 xe2+ ( 8...d4!? 9.xe6 13.d1 c6 14.c4 0-0 15.a3 fe8
xf3+ 10.gxf3 fxe6 11.d3 and White's 16.xe7 xe7 17.d3=;
structure looks slightly less ugly than A2) 8.e3 b4 ( 8...0-0-0
Black's. W hite will be able to achieve would transpose to my own game.) 9.0-0
strong pressure down the e file.) 9.xe2 ge7 10.e4 g6 11.d3 f5 12.c3
0-0-0 10.xc6 bxc6 11.d3 and White has xe3 13.fxe3 e7 14.b4 0-0 15.b5
a slight but definite edge and Black has b8 16.a4 c6 17.e5 c7 18.xg6
a thankless task to hold the draw.; hxg6 19.b3 d7 20.f3 f6
B) 8.e2 Perhaps the wrong piece to and Black had gradually equalised and a
blo ck t he c he ck. d4 9.0-0 xe2+ draw was agreed in a few moves. Short,
10.xe2 0-0-0 11.d4 f6 12.f4 g5!? N (2695)-Hansen, C (2595) Yerevan
13.h2 ( 13.xg5 g8 14.xf6 xf6 1996.;
gives Black strong kingside pressure for B) 7...0-0-0
the pawn. ) 13...g8 ( 13...g4!? 14.h4 B1) 8.d5! looks strong here, exploiting
f5 also looks quite comfortable for Black Bla ck's m ove o rd er. xf3 ( 8...b4
but Abu Sufian wanted to go for mate.) 9.e5 xe2 10.xe2 e8 11.0-0
14.c4 h5 15.d5 f6 16.c3 looks more pleasant for White with Black
This looks to rather tie in with Black's plan so passive.) 9.xf3 e5 10.e4 f6
( 16.d3 is more sensible when I'd still 11.d4 xe4 12.xe4 and White has
prefer White slightly.) 16...f4 17.a4 a6 a very comfortable position.;
18.ad1 g4 19.xf4 xf4 20.c5 xa4 B2) 8.e3 e6 9.b5 f6 ( 9...a6
21.xa4 gxh3 22.g3 g5 23.c3 g7 could be a better move order, forcing the
and Black is doing extremely well so I'm bishop to retreat immediately. ) 10.e2
rather confused why he offered a draw! 1/ B2a) 10...a6 looks stronger as I don't
2-1/2 Torre, E (2484)-Abu Sufian, S s e e a k n o c k o u t b l o w . 11.xa6
(2340) Guangzhou 2010. ] ( 11.a4 is of course a way to play
6.h3 Vachier Lagrave employs a quiet method on. ) 11...xf3 12.gxf3 bxa6
seeking a small, risk free advantage. xf3 13.xa6+ b8 14.d5 exd5 15.0-0-0
Black accepts that he will be slightly worse d4 16.b5+ a8 17.a6+ b8
but hopes to equalise within the next few seems to be a draw although W hite
moves. doesn't have to take the perpetual
[ When looking through games in this immediately.;
variation I was surprised to discover one of B2b) 10...f7 11.0-0-0 ge7
my own! 6...h5 is the other try. 7.d4 ( 7.d3 and Black was somewhat passively
as in the game is of course possible here; pla ce d but f airly solid in Jon es , G
while 7.b4!? should also be considered. ) (2526)-Dubois, M (2073) Porto San
A) 7...e6 is more circumspect guarding Giorgio 2007. I believe White should
the d5 square. probably look into the alternatives to 7
A1) 8.e5!? is untried but looks like an d 4 f o r a n a d va n t a ge , p e rh a p s t h e
int eres ting ide a alt ho ugh Black ca n unplayed 7 b4!? ]
prob a bly e qua lise . xe2 ( 8...xe5 7.xf3 0-0-0
9.xh5 must favour White with his [ 7...e6+ now looks frankly bizarre but
bishop pair.) 9.xe2 xe5 ( 9...xd4 would actually transpose to the 5...Qf 5
10.d3 d6 11.f4 b4 12.a3 b6 note. ]
13.c4 c5 14.e4 d5 15.xc7 8.d3 d4 Immediately aiming to trade off
looks good for White.; 9...xd4 10.xc6 White's bishop pair.
bxc6 11.e3 b4 12.0-0! [ Tiviakov played 8...e5 in a previous game
with a decent initiative for the pawn.) annotated by John Watson in the archives
10.dxe5 b4 11.0-0 ( 11.d2 e7 and drew fairly quickly but the young
12.0-0-0 c6 and Black is close to Frenchman must have found an
384
improvement. 9.0-0 d4 10.e1 d6 19.e2 d8 20.b4 with strong queenside
Van den Doel, E (2581)-Tiviakov, S (2667) pressure in return for the pawn. ]
Dresden 2007. Maybe here Vachier Lagrave 16.g3 g6 17.d4 White has successfully
h a d p l a n n e d 11.a4!? followed by a forced Black's pieces to retreat and visually
subsequent Nb5. ] the position is starting to look promising. The
9.0-0 e6 So Tiviakov decides it's safer to computer still states Black is fine but it doesn't
leave the pawn on e6 where it keeps the light fully comprehend how quickly White's pawns
squares defended. 10.e3 e7 Sensibly can overpower Black's queenside. d6
defending. Black threatens to support the d4 [ 17...f6 is the computer's suggestion but it
square with ...Nef5 so W hite is obliged to isn 't im m ed ia t e ly ob vio u s t o m e h o w it
exchange his bishop. intends to fight for the initiative following
[ 10...xf3+ is not so strong as following 18.b4 ]
11.xf3 b8 12.a4 Black's pieces aren't 18.b4! Continuing to gain space, White
doing a good job defending his king. ] doesn't worry about a slight structural
11.xd4 xd4 12.e4 Strictly speaking weakening while the f3 bishop is still a strong
Black probably shouldn't have any problems attacking piece. xg3 19.fxg3 d6 20.b5
here but White's queenside expansion looks a5 Trying to slow up White's pawn storm
easier to achieve than Black's counterplay on and defending b7 but the knight is rather
the kingside. The opposite coloured bishops offside here and indeed in a few moves time it
will favour the side which can start attacking drops off.
f irst while W hite's bish op is alread y well [ 20...e7 should probably be preferred
located to cause Black some problems. c6 although White is obviously on top following
[ 12...f5 The knight could also come out to 21.c4 b8 ( 21...xg3? 22.a3
f5. 13.a4 I was talking to the author of the wins material) 22.h2 e5 23.c5 e6
Rybka software at the weekend and he 24.dxe5 xd1 25.xd1 xe5 26.c6
mentioned that it often shows an evaluation and Black still has some problems. ]
of 0.00 and not just when there's a 21.c4! e5
perpetual upcoming. This is a case in point [ 21...xg3? would be a blunder as 22.c3
but I feel the position is easier to play with b6 23.b7+ wins the queen. ]
the White pieces as if Black drops his guard [ 21...c5 22.bxc6 xc6 23.b1
then he will quickly run into trouble. If we and it doesn't look like Black should be able
continue along the top line we have: c6 to survive for long. ]
14.a5 xb2 15.a6 b6 16.c3 e7 17.d4 22.c5 e7 23.c3 e4 Tiviakov tries to
b8 18.e1 and Black's pawn grab is complicate matters.
starting to look somewhat foolish. ] [ 23...b6 24.cxb6 axb6 25.dxe5
[ Grabbing the pawn is very dangerous wins a clean pawn and continues with the
12...xb2?! 13.b1 e5 14.xb7!! attack. ]
regaining the pawn as xb7 15.d6+ a6 24.xe4
16.b7+ b6 17.c4+ wins the queen. ] [ 24.xa5 is another promising option. exf3
13.c1 This isn't so much to defend the pawn 25.e1! d7 26.xa7 xb5 ( 26...f2+?!
but to prepare advancing in the centre. e7 d o e s n ' t g e t B l a c k a n y w h e r e . 27.xf2
14.d1 f5 xd4+? 28.f1 c4+ 29.g1 xb5
[ M a y b e B l a c k s h o u l d t h r o w i n 14...e5 30.a8+ d7 31.ad1++- ) 27.a8+ d7
15.e2 a n d o n ly n o w f5 16.c3 b6!? 28.a3 he8 29.xf3 and White has an
in comparison with the following note the extra pawn although Black has some
knight cannot drop to back to d2 but again chances to hold. ]
17.g3 hf8 18.d4 g6 19.b4 24...fxe4?! after this Black has no
looks more pleasant for the first player. ] compensation for the pawn deficit.
15.c3 d7 [ He should have tried 24...xe4 25.xa5
[ 15...b6 ca n n ow be m e t b y 16.d2!? xd4 when the position is rather complex.
xd3 17.c4 xd1+ 18.xd1 a6 W h i t e s h o u l d p r o b a b l y c o n t i n u e 26.c6
385
( 26.xa7?? a4 unexpectedly traps the 45.e8+ a6 46.c8+ b5 47.c1! e3
queen. ) 26...b8 27.h2 and White still 48.b8+ b6 49.e8+ b4 50.e4+ a3
has some advantage thanks to his 51.a1+ a2 52.d3+ b3 53.a6+ b2
somewhat safer king but Black's position is 54.f6+ a3 55.e7+
hardly a disaster. ] [ 55.d6! is a neat win as cxd6 56.xd6+
25.xa5 b8 26.c3 b2 57.e5+ a3 58.c5+
[ 26.b6 cxb6 27.cxb6 a6 28.e5+ wins material. ]
a l s o l o o k s v e r y p r o m is i n g b u t V a ch i e r 55...a4 56.xa2+ The simple approach
Lagrave prefers to keep more material on going into a winning queen and pawn
the board. ] endgame.
26...d5 27.e1 hd8 28.ad1 d7 [ 56.e1!? was an alternative, more
This series to exchange pawns leaves Black complicated path. ]
with a horrible position. 56...xa2 57.xc7 xd5 58.xa7+ b5
[ 28...b6 29.cxb6 cxb6 30.a4 is a clear 59.xh7 e6 60.h4 c5 61.h6 e8
extra pawn for W hite while Black must sit 62.f4 d5 63.g4 e1 64.g5+ d4
passively but perhaps this was his best 65.f6+ d5 66.h5 gxh5 67.gxh5 e8
option. ] 68.f5+ d4 69.h6 b8+ 70.h3 b3+
29.c6 d6 30.xe4 xb5 31.cxb7 xb7 71.g3 b7 72.h7 h1+ 73.g4 d1+
32.d5! Not only does White have an extra 74.g5
pawn b ut he now ha s t he saf er kin g t oo . 1-0
Vachier Lagrave converts with admirable ease,
n o t a l l o w i n g T i vi a k o v a n y c h a n c e s . b5
33.h2 b6 34.a4 b3 35.c4 b2 382 B01
36.e7 f8 37.e4 b4 38.e5 b2 Vaibhav,S 2430
39.e8+ Yu,Ruiyuan 2431
[ 39.h4! is the computer's choice, giving the ch-Asian Individual (9.18) 10.05.2011
king a safe square on h3 but this would [Gawain Jones]
r e q u i r e f a r m o r e c a l c u l a t i o n a f t e r ff2
It's easy for a computer to state that 40.d6 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
xg2+ 41.h3 is completely winning for f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 f5 7.c4 e6 8.e2
White but this isn't the kind of thing you want Finally we have come o nto W hite's mos t
to analyse on move 39 with little time. ] common try. bd7?! Already I think this is an
39...xe8 40.xe8+ b7 41.a5 error.
[ 41.d6!? cxd6 42.h8 is another route to [ 8...b4 has been by far the most common
immediate victory as Black cannot defend and has been looked at a few times in the
his kingside pawns but the newly crowned archives. 9.0-0-0 ( 9.a3 is Bauer's
European Blitz Champion prefers to go for recommended move order to cut out Black's
mate. ] plans with ...Nd5.) 9...bd7 ( 9...d5!?
41...c5?! The final mistake. is also examined in Play the Scandinavian. )
[ Tiviakov had to try 41...d6 although A) 10.h4
42.a6+! xa6 43.d6! is winning once we A1) B a u e r p re f e r s 10...g4 with the
se e t h a t B lack ru n s o u t o f ch e cks: c4 tactical point of 11.f3 xc3! 12.bxc3
44.d7! xg2+ 45.xg2 c2+ 46.f3 ( 12.xc3 g5+ is the idea.) 12...h5
xd1+ 47.f4 d6+ 48.g5 xg3+ 13.g4 g6 and his line demonstrates
49.h6 xh3+ 50.g7 c3+ 51.xh7 that Black has good counterplay due to
h3+ 52.g8 b3+ 53.f7 d3 54.e7 White's weakened queenside.;
d5+ 55.g7 d4+ 56.h7 and Black A2) 10...g6 11.xg6 hxg6 12.a3?!
has run out of checks ] xc3 13.xc3 h5 ( 13...g5+
42.a6+! The king is forced out alone to fend was critical picking up a pawn. W hite
against the queen and rook. It doesn't have a has some play but I'm sceptical if it's
chance. xa6 43.c8+ b5 44.b8+ b6 really enough.) 14.f3 0-0-0 15.h4 d5
386
16.d2 de8 17.g4 h7 18.b3 similar ideas are played in the Caro-
and Black's position had become Kann and here the knight on d5 keeps
extremely passive. Alekseenko, K (2317)- Black's position solid. Check out the
Smirnov, V (1957) Kirishi 2011.; archives for Andrew Martin's comments
B) 10.a3 in Pavlogianni, D (1964) -Makropoulou,
B1) Nigel Davies examines 10...b6 M (2246) Aghia Pelagia 2004. ]
B1a) 11.axb4 a1+ 12.b1 a4 [ Should Black want to get the position he
13.c3 e4 14.d3 a5 15.bxa5 reaches in the game without allowing White
( 15.b5!?; and 15.d5!? are also the strong deviation on move 9 then 8...c7
c o n s id e r e d b y B a u e r .) 15...xa5 looks the most accurate move order when
16.b3 exc3 17.bxc3 0-0 18.d2! 9.0-0-0 bd7 would transpose to the
Bauer's proposed improvement. d8 game. ]
19.xa4 xa4 20.e3!? and White's 9.0-0-0 Letting Black off the hook.
king has run to safety and thus he [ 9.d5! looks to refute this variation. cxd5
sta nd s be tt er with t he two kn ight s 10.xd5
versus rook.; A) 10...c5 is rare but was tried by two
B1b) 11.b3 in Chytilek, R (2390)- Grandmasters, including Larsen. However
Konopka, M (2468) Ostrava 2002 but Spassky's dynamic play illustrates White is
fails to look at the critical; still doing well. 11.b4! c8 12.xf6+
B2) 10...xa3?! of course needs gxf6 ( 12...xf6?! 13.b5+ is horrible)
examining but as Bauer observes 13.d4 g6 14.h4!? h5 15.f4! e7
11.d5! b4 12.xb4 a1+ 13.d2 16.h3!? ( 16.0-0-0 looks slightly suspect
xb2 14.b3 xd5 15.b1 xb1 after the b4 advance but White is vacating
16.xb1 xb4 17.h4 and White's the e1 square and following a5 17.he1
doing very well.; White would have a dangerous initiative.)
B3) 10...xc3 11.xc3 c7 12.e5 16...c7 17.0-0-0 b6 18.e1! 0-0-0
W hen Black has tried a few different 19.b5 b8 20.xd8+ xd8 21.f2
paths. b5!? ( 12...xe5 isn't enough to c6 22.xa7 and White had picked up a
equa lis e . Che ck o ut Jo h n W at son 's pawn whilst Black still hadn't found safety
annotations in Lemos, D (2439)-Flores, for his king. Spassky, B (2640) -Larsen, B
D (2541) San Luis 2007.; 12...e4 (2620) Montreal 1979.;
13.e1 d8 14.f3 xe5 15.dxe5 B) 10...d8 11.xf6+
xd1+ was seen last year in Andjelkovic, B1) 11...xf6 has actually been played
S (1827)-Vos, C (2083) Davos 2010 m o r e o f t e n b u t n o w 12.0-0-0!
when the more logical recapture leaves Black in severe difficulties. a3
16.xd1 c5 17.d4 would be very ( 12...a6 13.g5 g6 14.xd7+- )
pleasant for White.; 12...d5 is Bauer's 13.c3 and the computer suggests
mainline. ) 13.d3 xd3 ( 13...0-0 Black's best is giving up the piece with
14.xf5 exf5 15.f3 d5 16.xf5 0-0 although I can hardly believe that
xc3 17.xd7 xd1 18.xf8 xf8 following ( 13...e7 14.b5+-
19.xd1 xh2 20.e4 was all looked is hopeless.) 14.bxa3 ac8 15.b2
at in Brynell, S (2505)-Hodgson, J (2598) c5 16.e5 fd8 17.he1 Black has
Hamburg 2002 by Nigel Davies. The anything like enough play for a piece.;
endgame is drawish but Black hasn't B2) 11...gxf6 12.0-0-0 a6 13.d4!
q u i t e s o l v e d a l l h i s p r o b l e m s y e t .) g6 14.f4 c5 was seen in the recent
14.xd3 xe5 15.dxe5 d5 16.d2 game Petrushin, A (2465)-W inter, K
0-0-0!? Black was evidently worried (2077) Dresden 2010 when White's must
White would generate a quick attack with dynamic continuation would be 15.xe6!
a rook swing should he have castled fxe6 16.xe6 and White's attack looks
short but castling long makes an odd o ve r wh e l m i n g , e . g . e7 17.xd7+
im pres sio n af te r . .. b5 . No n et he le ss xd7 18.b4+ e8 ( 18...c6
387
is a lesser evil but still 19.xe7 xe7 18.d3+- Guttulsrud, O (2110) -Haubro, S
20.xe7 he8 21.xf6 leaves White a (2190) Oslo 2011 with nothing to show for
whole three pawns up.) 19.xe7+ xe7 the exchange. ]
20.he1+- and White regains the piece 15...exd5
with an extra couple of pawns while he [ 15...e8 is of course possible but 16.f3
still has a decisive attack. ] should be a good version of 15. Bf3.
9...c7 However this would probably be my
[ 9...b4 simply transposes to the mainline preference were I to have this with Black. ]
of 8...Bb4. ] [ 15...f6 is important to check but the tactics
10.h4 appear to work for W hite: 16.xe6 fxg5
[ 10.e5 is also played frequently but the 17.d3! Threatening Rc3 pinning the queen
text looks the most forcing. ] whilst also preparing doubling on the d file.
10...g6 11.xg6 hxg6 12.d5! Again this b8 18.hd1 xh2 19.xd7 c5 20.b1
push is critical as if Black were to complete f4 21.f3 and White has regained the piece
his development he could be happy with his with a far better structure. ]
opening. Therefore White strives to open up 16.xd8 xd8?! This looks like the wrong
the position. cxd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5 way to capture to me.
0-0-0 The most common. Black tries to find [ is pretty similar but now at least the king is
relative safety for his king whilst the bishop on a b it s a f e r. T h e g a m e m i g h t co n t in u e :
d5 is suddenly hanging. 16...xd8 17.xd5 h5 Black is forced to
[ 14...e7 has also been seen from time to give away a second pawn to release the
time. 15.c4 S o l i d p l a y . ( 15.f3 0-0 pressure down the d file. 18.xh5 gxh5
as played in Dickmann, T (2086)-Hermsen, 19.xh5 f6 20.e2 and White should
F (1897) Goch 2010 looks very dangerous. have an edge with rook and two pawns for
If I were White here it wouldn't take me long t h e t wo p i e c e s b u t B l a c k i s st i ll i n t h e
to c h oo s e to pla y 16.h4! The doubled g game. ]
pawns have created a big hook with which 17.xd5 h5 As in the previous note, giving
White can open up the position.) 15...xc4 away another pawn looks to be the only way
16.xc4 c8 17.e2 0-0 18.e3 f6 to survive.
19.f3 and White's bishop pair and [ If Black tries sidestepping the pin with
queenside majority gave him good chances 17...f4+ 18.b1 c7? then White's
in the ensuing endgame. Ivanov, A (2430)- a t t a c k w o u l d b e d e c i s i v e ( 18...h5
Grigorian, A (2509) Belgorod 2008. ] should still be preferred.) 19.hd1 b6
15.g5!? The most dynamic. White offers ( 19...c5 20.e8+- and Black's king
Black two pieces for the rook but W hite will cannot survive.) 20.5d3! c5 ( 20...b4
regain at least one pawn while the weakness drops a piece to 21.d4+- ) 21.c3 a4
of Black's king makes it likely he'll have to 22.c4+- and the knight drops. ( Although
cede another. 22.f3!? might even be stronger. )]
[ If White doesn't feel comfortable giving the 18.xh5
bishops then he could also retreat with [ 18.e1 was played in the only previous
15.f3 when the bishop pair ought to grant game to have reached this position but
him a little something. A couple of recent following f4+ 19.d2 d5! Black had
g a m e s h a v e c o n f i r m e d t h i s vi e w . h4? parried the threats. 20.e8+ c7 21.ed1
was a bit of a lemon. ( 15...f6 is better but b4 22.c3 xd2 23.xd2 d6=
doesn't equalise. 16.c3 d6 17.g3 b8 Zubarev, A (2476) -Ustianovich, N (2258)
18.d3 d7 19.hd1 hd8 20.b1 Kharkov 2000. ]
c8?? hoping to start exchanging major 18...gxh5 19.xh5 g6
pieces but allowing 21.xf6! gxf6 22.c3 [ Perhaps 19...f4+ should have been
c5 23.xd7 xd7 24.b5 b6 25.b4 preferred to stop the plan White adopts in
1-0 Arat, U (2007)-Mukhtarov, K (1802) the game. ]
Batumi 2010.) 16.g5! b4 17.xd8 xd8 20.h4+ e7 21.h8+ f8 22.d1
388
White has rook and two pawns for the bishop time trouble but this check gets him nowhere.
and knight which is normally a slight material 37.a2 e6? 38.d7 The queens are
advantage, especially in an endgame, while co ming o f f wh en W hite win s t rivially. A n
Black still has some problems coordinating interesting game but I feel that against this
his pieces due to the vulnerability of his king. move order 9.d5! is very strong. Black should
c5 return to 8...Bb4 of the mainline in which it
[ Escaping the pin with 22...f4+ 23.b1 isn't easy for White to prove an advantage.
c7 merely lands in a worse one following 1-0
24.c3+ c5 25.a3!+- ]
23.f6+ e8 24.f3 c7 25.e3+
Another pawn falls. e7 26.xa7 b6 383 B01
27.b1 A time out but there was no particular Vaklinov,Atanas 2250
reason for the move. Prie,Eric 2429
[ Instead White could have pinned the knight VergÃ¨ze 20' op 02.05.2004
i m m e d i a t e l y w i t h 27.a5 followed by [Eric Prié]
something like f8 28.g3 c6 29.c3!?
xc3 30.bxc3 and despite the ugly structure 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4
the extra pawns should suffice. ] f6 5.c4
27...f8 28.a5 g7 29.b5 f6 30.c3 [ 5.f3 c6 I took up the Scandinavian in
c4 31.d7 1991. I mean THE Scandinavian, the real
[ 31.g3! controlling the f4 square would one and only with 3... Qa5 not the feeble
prevent any complications. ] 'substitutes' of 2...Nf6 nor 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3
31...f4 Now White has to start being careful Qd8 or 3...Qd6 I will talk about (if I am given
as Yu Ruiyuan's pieces are well coordinated the chance to comment Topalov-Kamsky
and his own king isn't totally safe. 32.d5 Corus 2005 1-0 (20) in the next update!)
e5 where White can either make immediate use
[ 32...e5 33.xb7 xh2 34.a4 g1+ of h is c-pa wn o r h in d e r t h e su cc e s s f u l
35.a2 xf2 36.a5 must be winning for development of Black's light-squared bishop
White as the a pawn is too difficult to stop. ] outside his pawn chain. Unfortunately, I had
33.g3 f5+ 34.d3 e6 35.xb7 to give up this aggressive system, with which
Now it's rook and four pawns! I and Etienne Bacrot, who was my pupil at
[ 35.d5!? b6 36.b5 is the computer's the time, had tremendous results, quite soon
odd path but humans would of course grab when the ultimate refutation 6.d2! g4
the pawn. ] ( 6...a6 7.c4 h5 8.e5 ) 7.b5 b6
35...f6 This threatens ...Qe1+ but can easily 8.c4 started to spread. xf3 9.xf3 xd4
be parried. 10.xd4 xd4 11.xb7 e4+ 12.xe4
[ Instead 35...xg3 wa s crit ica l. 36.fxg3 xe4 13.e3 e5 Or 13...e6 it does not
e1+ 37.c2 f2+ 38.b3 xb2+ matter. 14.g3! With the idea b4+ 15.e2
( 38...a5+ 39.b4 xb7 40.d4+ c5? 16.g2 leads to an unplayable
xd4+ 41.cxd4 is a complicated ending but position for Black, with no turning back, to
the three pawns will probably overpower the complete what Andrew said about that line ]
knight. ) 39.xc4 xb7 40.d4+ f6 41.a4 5...g4! 6.f3?! However, this experience
and White's retained a two pawn advantage pro ve d ve ry f o rma t ive f or t h e res t o f m y
in the queen and pawn endgame and should career with the ...c6, ...Bf5 Center Counter
convert in the end although he has to since I ha d be en a cqua in te d with lot s o f
beware some perpetual ideas. ] unusual and aggressive motives based on the
36.a3 original spirit of the line i.e. long castling and
[ Seeing as it's a passed pawn there's no qu ick d e ve lo p m e n t . c6! For instance, I
reason not to push the a pawn two squares knew that this dubious setup for White was
here. 36.a4! ] possibly th e o nly one whe re Blac k c ould
36...e1+?! Drifting. Perhaps Black was in develop like this, without having to fear the
389
diminishing space available for his queen too but Black seems to have sufficient pressure
much. This is the recurrent problem of the ... against the centre, e.g., 5.d4 0-0-0
Nf6, ...Nc6 combination, much more than the A) or 6.bd2 f6 7.c4 ( 7.h3? xf3
doubling of the c-pawns that you sometimes 8.xf3 wins the bishops at the cost of too
find as a reference in not up-to-date theory much development after e5! ) 7...a5
books! 7.d2? 8.d5 xf3 9.xf3 e5 10.0-0 e6
[ 7.h3 is the only move, see next game. ] with a comfortable game;
[ 7.b5 e4 And White has lost an B) 6.e3 e6 (I like this modest move)
important tempo. ] ( After 6...e5!? , Davies likes the
7...0-0-0 8.d5 a4 9.b3 straightforward 7.c3 b4 8.0-0 xc3
[ 9.b3 a3 10.c1 d6 11.f4 e6+ 9.bxc3 f6 10.c4 and d5; Following
12.e3 e4 13.g3 xd4-+ ] 6...f6 , Morozevich beat Rogers
9...a6 I call this manoeuvre "the mouse hole (Germany 1999), as given before in this
trick" and you cannot imagine how often I column: 7.c4 h5 8.bd2 e5 9.d5 d4
have used it with success in rapid or blitz 10.xd4 exd4 11.xg4+ xg4 12.xd4
games! 10.xf6 exf6! Black can afford to b4 13.h3 xd2+ 14.xd2 g5+
compromise his structure, he is just winning 15.c3 and Black didn't have enough (or
by force now. 11.e3 Everybody had played anything?) for his pawn.) 7.c3 a5
the natural ( 7...d7!? ) 8.0-0 f6 ]
[ 11.c3 against me and my little execution 5...d7 6.h3
was well into its stride: xd4! 12.cxd4 [ Likewise, 6.d4 doesn't gain much after e6
e8+ 13.e3 b4+ Winning the queen. ] ( 6...0-0-0 7.d5 b4 8.e5! xe2 9.xe2
11...c5? For some reason in rapid play, I e8!? with the idea ...e6 is almost equal.)
overlooked it also worked, a bit more 7.0-0?! ( 7.e5 xe2 8.xe2 is better, in
complicatedly though, the other way round! view of xd4 9.d3 d8 10.f4
[ 11...xd4! 12.xd4 b4+ 13.c3 he8+ and 0-0-0 ) 7...0-0-0 8.e3 xf3 9.xf3
14.d2 xd4+ 15.xd4 xd1-+ 16.axd1 xd4 ]
c5-+ ] 6...xf3 7.xf3 0-0-0 8.d3 e5
12.c3 xd4 13.xd4 xd4 14.e2! xe2+ Black establishes a grip on d4 this should
15.xe2 e8+ 16.f1 And despite Black's equalise. 9.0-0 d4 Black wants one of the
overwhelming advantage I even ended up not bishops back.
realizing the technical win! [ Other moves are 9...ge7 10.e1 b8 ]
½-½ [ 9...f6 ]
10.e1 d6 11.e3 f5!?
[ 11...f6 is more natural. The text slightly
384 B01 distorts Black's structure, although that's
Van den Doel,Erik 2581 nothing special. ]
Tiviakov,Sergei 2667 12.xd4 exd4 13.d5!? Fancy, but White
8th ch-Euro Dresden GER (5) 07.04.2007 has to waste some time to win a pawn. Some
[John Watson] advantage was to be had by
[ 13.e2 c5 14.d2! intending c3, to open
W hite's f le xible move 3 Nf 3 has e njoye d up queenside files, whereas Nf4 may also
some success, but Black finds a be bothersome. ]
straightforward solution. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 13...b8 14.f3! A clever sacrifice which,
xd5 3.f3 In general, White plays this with however, has its risks.
d4 and c4 in mind, rather than putting his [ van der Doel realises that 14.e6 c6
knigh t on c3. But the latt er mo ve c an b e 15.e2 e5 16.xf5 f6 with the idea ...
played if White thinks circumstances are right. g6 gives Black enough play. ]
g4 4.e2 c6! I like this move, which 14...c6!?
directly challenges the key square d4. 5.c3 [ Acceptance might be strongest: 14...dxc3!?
[ White can get his desired d4/c4 moves in, 15.xb7 threatens bxc3 and Rb1, when the
390
o p p o s i t e - c o l o u r e d b i s h o p s f a vo u r t h e , and the Bishop is by no means trapped in

attacker, as the old saying goes. Black may view of 18.d6! ) 17.xc8 fxe3 ( 17...xc8
have a difficult time defending. Still, e7 18.e6 is even worse for Black.) 18.xe7
16.bxc3 c6 17.ab1 c7 would make xe7 19.xe3 Now White has a clear extra
White prove his point. ] pawn as well as a positional advantage. h6
15.e6 c7 16.e2 e7!? 20.h4 d7 21.b1 ae8 22.h2 xg5
[ 16...e5 17.c3 g6 should be okay. ] 23.hxg5 c5 24.e4 and in a few moves
17.c3 Black resigned, Rodriguez,A - Gomez Baillo,
[ 17.xd4 h2+ 18.h1 xd4 19.g3 xg3 1996. ]
20.xg3 g6 is only slightly in White's favour 12.a4
because of his bishop. ] [ Just a few rounds later in the same
17...e5 18.c4 t o u r n a m e n t V a r a v i n p l a y e d 12.c2!
[ 18.cxd4 xd4 19.xd4 xd4 20.c4 This move seems even stronger than the
hd8 is also solid. ] text. The game Varavin - Vshivkov
18...c5 19.cxd4 cxd4 20.g3 Improve the c o n t i n u e d : a4 13.d1 a3 14.b3 f5
position of your worst piece! g6 21.f1 d6 15.g5! f4 16.c5 Already it's reasonable
22.d2 c6 Likewise. 23.ac1 b4 to claim that White has strategically winning
24.d1 f4 25.c2 he8 26.xe8 xe8 position. e4 By sacrificing a pawn Black
27.b5! Before Black gets real pressure. ho pe s to o bt ain so me cou nt erplay, bu t
xd2 28.xd2 W h i t e c a n e a s i l y p a r r y t h i s . ( 16...f5
½-½ was another possibility to complicate, but is
didn't work as well in view of 17.xf8 xf8
18.xh7! with a decisive material advantage
385 B01 a s B l a c k c a n ' t p l a y d4 in view of
Varavin,Viktor 2445 19.xg6+ ) 17.cxe4 f3 18.xf3 e8
Terekhin,Anatoly 2330 19.0-0 and Black has no compensation for
Perm 1998 sacrificed pawns. ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 12...d7 13.a3 b6 14.h4 c5 15.h5!
White tries to hold the initiative at all costs.
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6 xg4 16.hxg6 hxg6 17.xc5 bxc5 18.e4
5.f3 g6 6.h3 g7 7.c3 0-0 8.e3 c6 xf3 19.xf3 f5 20.d3 d4 21.g3
9.e2 b8?! This move allows a very nice blow,
[ 9.d2 e5 10.d5 e7 11.g4 is a well a f t e r w h i c h W h i t e ' s a t t a c k b e c o m e s
known set-up, the game Gipslis - Maric unstoppable.
proves that Black has difficult problems to [ 21...b8 looks more natural, with mutual
solve here. ] chances. ]
9...e5 10.d5 e7 11.g4! This move is 22.h5!! d8
played very rarely, but I believe after this [ Of course, the Queen is taboo: 22...gxh5
game it will become popular. 23.f6+ h8 24.xh5+ h6 25.xh6# ]
[ 11.0-0 has been played in numerous 23.xg6! This well-calculated sacrifice wins by
games before, but after f5 12.c5 e8 force. fxg6 24.xg6 xb2 25.f1! c1+
Black has excellent prospects. ] 26.g2 f4 27.h7 f3+ 28.g1 f7
11...a5 Losing the Queen, but Black's position is
[ 11...f5 is the main alternative to the text. hopeless anyway:
But compared with Gipslis - Maric White has [ 28...d7 allows a very beautiful mate:
a n im p o rt a n t re so u rce : 12.b3! h8 29.f6+! xf6 30.h8+! xh8 31.h7# ]
13.0-0-0 d7 14.g5 f6 15.b5! a6 [ The attempt to find perpetual also fails:
16.a7! After exchanging off Black's light- 28...d1+ 29.f1 f3+ 30.g2 e1+
squared Bishop White's Knight will occupy 31.h2 f3+ 32.g3 , and there are no
the key e6-square forever. f4 ( 16...xa7 more checks. ]
T h i s i d e a d o e s n ' t wo r k : 17.xa7 b6 29.h8+! xh8 30.xf7 Although there is
391
material equality (Queen vs. 2 Rooks and 13.d2 b8 14.ab1 d7 15.e2 f4
equal pawns) Black's position is totally lost 16.f3 e3 17.fc1 f5 18.e4 d4
because his forces are uncoordinated and his Galego, L-Ferreira, P/Porto 1998 ]
king is very weak. These factors allow White 4...e5
to win the game in just a few more moves. f8 [ 4...f6 5.d4 e6 is ludicrously slow. Is it
31.h5+ g8 32.xc5 f3+ 33.h1 f4 any wonder that in the following game Black
34.h7+! gets crushed: 6.d3 e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.e1
[ Black resigned as he will lose everything: a6 9.c3 b5 10.g5 b7 11.bd2 h6
34.h7+ h8 35.g6+ g8 36.h7+ f8 12.e3 d6 13.a4 b4 14.c4 g4 15.e2
37.e6+ Now it's possible to draw some xe3 16.xe3 g5 17.e4 f5 18.xe6+
conclusions. As we can see, W hite has g7 19.c5 f6 20.a2 f4 21.d5 e7
m a n y p o s s i b i li t i e s t o f ig h t f o r o p e n i n g 22.d6 d5 23.c4 xd2 24.xd5 xd5
advantage against 2...Nf6 and in many lines 25.xd5 xe1 26.xe1 d7 27.xa8
black has to overcome serious difficulties. 1-0 Neu ba u er, M-Cha n se au d , M/ Colo n
Players who tend to play positionally can 2003 ]
choose the variation with kingside castling 5.b5 d6 6.e2N
(like in Soloviov - Alekseev or Rusanov - [ 6.c3 is an adequate remedy once again.
Alekseev), while the system with g2-g4 Perhaps White was confused by the choice
(see Gipslis - Maric or Varavin - Terekhin) of so many good moves. f6 7.0-0 0-0
is good for those who prefer attacking chess. 8.d4 exd4 ( 8...xd4! 9.xd4 exd4
Now it's Black's turn to find improvements. 10.e2 c7 11.h3 c5= ) 9.xc6 bxc6
Definitely there is much room for further 10.xd4 c7 11.h3 xh3 12.gxh3 ad8
debate. ] 13.e3 c8 14.f3 fe8 15.xc6
1-0 1-0 Hyll, J-Okos, A/Bratislava 1991 ]
6...ge7 7.0-0 0-0 8.d4 g4 I guess this
sort of position is the best that Black can
386 B01 hope for from his crazy gambit. He has the
Vela Ignacio,Jose Manuel 2033 usual open lines and tricky tactical chances
Razmyslov,Alexander 2337 for his pawn. In rapidplay Black's idea might
X Open Coria del Rio ESP (4) 14.02.2004 be viable but hardly against anyone with any
[Andrew Martin] class. However.... 9.d3? Drug test please.
An amazingly awful move. xd4 10.e4 f5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 c6 Complete trash? We are 11.e3 xf3 12.gxf3 h8 13.c3 d5
about to witness a game where Black wins in A brevity of little overall value except to show
13 moves. And as White, you would really like t h e r e f u t a t i o n o f 2 . . . c 6 P l e a s e d o n o t
to know what to do against this outrageous complain that you have been shocked by 2...
pawn sacrifice. I hope I can oblige with some c6?! in a game of your own. You know what to
answers. 3.dxc6 A pawn that MUST be do now.
taken. xc6 4.f3 0-1
[ 4.c3! is a very good choice. If Black is
going to advance his e-pawn, W hite will
delay Nf3 so there's nothing to hit. As far as 387 B01
I can see W hite en ds up a pawn up f o r Velicka,Petr 2480
nothing in this line. e5 5.b5 c5 6.xc6+ Dausch,Rene 2373
bxc6 7.e2 e7 8.f3! Well-timed. 0-0 26th Open Böblingen GER (8) 30.12.2009
9.0-0 g4 [Gawain Jones]
A) The cold light of day reveals 10.xe5!
d6 ( 10...xf3 11.xc5+-; 10...d5 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.b5+ Here we have
11.xd5 cxd5 12.g3 f5 13.d3 ) a look at White trying to hold on to the pawn.
11.e4 f5 12.a4+-; Personally I'd probably go for Carlsen's 3.Nf3
B) 10.h3?! xf3 11.xf3 d5 12.d3 f5 which seems comfortable for W hite. bd7
392
4.c4 a6 5.a4 ( 12.axb3 b7 13.a3

[ 5.xd7+ is the other option but Black and I'm sceptical about W hite's
seems to get sufficient counterplay with the compensation but it's not so easy to
bishop pair and a lead in development. refute. ) 12...e6 13.b2 d5
xd7 6.d4 ( V o lzh in su gge st s 6.d3 14.e4 f6 15.c5 b6 16.ed3 e6
in the archives) 6...c6! Black wins back his 17.e1 xc5 18.xc5 0-0
pawn immediately 7.f3 ( 7.dxc6 xc6 an d W h it e 's co m pe n sa t io n f o r t h e
win s e it h e r c 4 o r g2 p a wn .) 7...cxd5 pawn has dwindled.;
The position reminds me of a Panov (see C2b) 11...b4 results in really messy
my last update). W hite has traded off his positions 12.e2 ( 12.a4 c3 13.a3
light squared bishop and so can't hope for e6 looks more than adequate for Black,
any advantage unless he can use his especially as I don't believe in Rybka's
te m p o ra ry in it ia t ive, e xp lo it in g B la ck' s su ggestion o f 14.g4 at all ) 12...c3
misplaced queen. 13.a3 when, compared to 12.Na4,
A) 8.0-0 dxc4 9.e5 d8 10.xc4 Black cannot play
wa s B a e k e l a n t , R - S a n c h e z, J M a r c y C2b1) Black's position seems
L'Etoile 2007 when instead of e6 ( I like playable with the alternative 13...b7
10...g6! when I'd prefer Black, the d4 pawn 14.axb4 c8 15.f3 is very messy.
looks potentially vulnerable, while I can't Black has some problems to develop
see any pluses for White. ); his kin gsid e a s .. .e 6 t ra ps in h is
B) 8.c5 looks a good try to me. If Black queen.;
could play Bc8-g4 then he'd have a good C2b2) 13...d7 seems illogical,
position but the queen gets in the way. Black really needs to develop some
While White has control of e5 he can hold pieces 14.g3 ( 14.c4!? )
onto the ever important initiative. e4?! 14...e6 15.f3 b8 16.axb4
( 8...c7 looks sensible but 9.c3 g4 xe5 17.dxe5 gives White good
10.0-0 xf3 11.xf3 e6 12.f4 attacking chances with his lead in
and White is still better with control over development, although a sample line
e5. ) 9.0-0 ( 9.e5 ) 9...f6 10.bd2 g6 could run xb4 18.xc3 xb3
11.e1 xd2 12.xd2 g7 13.a4 0-0 19.d4 b6 20.c4 e6 21.d4
14.b4 f7 15.b3 g5!? Thirion, M- b6=;
Hoogendoorn, J Belgium 2003.; C2b3) 13...e6 as 14.g3
C) 8.e5 seems to be the mainline f5 traps the queen.;
9.0-0 dxc4 C2c) 11...h5?! Dave told me
C1) 10.xc4 b5 11.e5 e6 ( 11...b7 afterwards he was doing well out of the
looks more relevant) 12.c3 ( 12.a4! opening and I think it's here he should
wo u ld f o r ce so m e c o n c e s s io n f r o m look for improvements. 12.bxc4 e6
Black ) 12...d5?! ( 12...h5! 13.cxb5 and from a pawn up suddenly
is an intriguing suggestion of Rybka's to Black's a pawn down while h5 is of
cu t o u t g4 an d st a rt p ush ing o n t h e dubious benefit g4 14.b6! xe5
kingside. ) 13.a4 ( 13.xd5 exd5 15.dxe5 xe5 16.b7! xb7 17.a4+
14.e1 ) 13...b4? ( 13...xc3 d8 18.d1+ d6 19.f4 xc3
was necessary) 14.xd5 exd5 15.e1 20.ac1 xc1 21.xc1 xf4 22.xf4
e6 16.a5! was Okladnikov, G- c8 23.d6+ e8 24.xc8+ xc8
Shevchenko, V Novosibirsk 2003 when 25.c7 1-0 Li Chao2-Smerdon, D
White had a huge advantage with Qa4+ Parramatta 2010 was played in the
coming although he subsequently threw Sydney International, the last
away his advantage..; tournament in which I played where I
C2) 10.c3 was played in a recent high managed 1st=. ]
rated encounter b5 11.b3 5...b5 6.cxb5 xd5 so White is a pawn up
C2a) 11...cxb3 i s c r i t i c a l 12.xb3 but with an awkwardly placed bishop on a4
393
while Black can hope for Benko Gambit style [ 8.bxa6?! Tries to do the latter but Black
compensation on the queenside and gets too much play xa4 9.xa4 xa6
a n n o y i n g p r e s s u r e wi t h a b i s h o p o n a 6 10.c2 e6+! An unusual rook lift. 11.f1
exerting pressure on d3 and f1. I also prefer a6+ 12.g1 and I can't believe anyone
Black's pawn structure and my gut feeling is can be happy with White's position. Sure, he
that he should have sufficient chances here. has an extra pawn but Black has complete
7.f3 control. ]
[ 7.c3 [ 8.c3 is the best way to keep hold of the
A) 7...c5 also looks promising 8.bxa6+ p a w n b u t a f t e r xa4 9.xa4 b7
xa4 9.xa4+ d7 10.c4 ( 10.a5!? ) I'd feel much happier being Black White's
10...e6 11.f3 b4 12.0-0 xa6 really going to have to suffer to complete
( 12...c8! is a pretty move, the bishop his development and keep that extra pawn,
belongs on the a6-f1 diagonal here when while Black's bishop pair and sound
control over the light squares, in particular structure mean that he has good long term
d3 will give Black the better chances.) as well as short term prospects. Giving back
13.d4 d6 14.a3 0-0 15.g5 a8 t h e p a w n w i t h 10.0-0!? axb5 11.f4
16.e5 1/2-1/2 Pesotsky, V-Barbashin, I/ looks the most prudent with roughly
Lipetsk 2008.; balanced chances. ]
B) 7...5b6 8.b3 ( 8.c2 might be a [ 8.0-0 xa4 9.xa4 b7 10.c3 axb5
better try so White can contest the a6-f1 11.f4 would in fact transpose to 8.Nc3. ]
diagonal with a future Bd3.) 8...e6 9.d4 8...axb5 9.d4 b7 In my opinion Black has
axb5 10.xb5 a6 11.c3 e7 equalised comfortably here, but White's next
( 11...d6 would be more active) 12.ge2 makes his position worse. 10.c3
0-0 13.0-0 f6 14.g5 h6 15.h4 c6 [ 10.0-0 b4 11.e1 e6 and I can't really
16.e1 fd5 17.xe7 xe7 18.xd5 see how White can possibly say he's better
cxd5 19.d2 c4 20.xc4 xc4 but at least he can try utilising e5 and c5 to
and Black had continued pressure for the keep himself in the game. ]
pawn in Zierk, S-Hong, E Reno 2008. ] 10...b4 11.e4 b3! 12.d3 xa2!?
[ 7.d4 resulted in a very quick defeat after b3 is an extra pawn but it's going to drop off.
5b6 8.bxa6?! This wins a pawn but [ 12...bxa2 gives Black a comfortable
Bla ck ' s p re s su re is f ar to o st ro n g xa4 a d v a n t a g e , f o r e x a m p l e 13.c3 g6
9.xa4 xa6 10.c2 b7 11.f3 e5! 14.xa2 xa2 15.xa2 g7 and d4 is a
12.e2 exd4 13.xd4 c5 14.e3 xd4 perpetual weakness. ]
15.xd4 e6+ 16.d1 e5 was a disaster 13.b1 a8 14.c3 a5
for White and he resigned here in [ 14...e6 is an interesting alternative as
Cernousek, L-Spacek, P Czech Republic 15.xa2 bxa2 is extremely risky for White.
2005. ] Though as a practical decision I don't rate
7...5b6 White now has a difficult decision. this for Black as if White doesn't take on a2
He can either keep his light squared bishop or its likely Black will have to retreat the rook
keep his extra pawn. anyway. 16.a1 b4+ 17.d2 ( 17.f1
[ 7...7b6 8.b3 With a knight on d7, rather c5! opens up the position for Black's horde
than d5, the bishop exerts pressure against o f p ie ce s .) 17...xf3 18.xf3 ( 18.gxf3
f7 but here Bb3 seems illogical ( Instead xd2+ 19.xd2 xf3 20.g1 d5
8.c3 xc3 9.dxc3 xd1+ 10.xd1 axb5 is another extremely messy position but one
11.0-0 is somewhat better for White as b5 where White has to be the more careful with
is vulnerable.) 8...axb5 9.d4 e6 10.0-0 his exposed king while the a2 pawn hasn't
e7 11.bd2 f6 12.e2 b4 13.d1 0-0 been recaptured yet...) 18...xd2+ 19.xd2
14.e4 b7 15.c5 d5 16.c2 a5 a7 I can't see how the a2 pawn is retrieved
17.d2 a8 18.xb4 was agreed drawn in and so White's in trouble. ]
Todorovic, J-Mamuzic, M Senta 2006. ] 15.xb3
8.c2 [ 15.d2 trying to exploit Black's premature
394
...Ra5 is strongest which keeps the position 28...g8 29.h1 bc4 30.b8+
roughly level. a6 16.e4 c6 17.e2 a2 [ 30.xd6+ xd6 31.b8+ g7 32.xc7+-
18.xb3 ( 18.c3 a5= ) 18...c4 ] was an easy win ]
15...xf3 16.gxf3 xf3 and so Black keeps 30...g7 31.xc7 f5 32.f3?! xg3+
his extra pawn. Compared to previous lines 33.xg3+ g5 White has played inaccurately
where Black sacrificed a pawn, White needs over the last few moves but such was his
t o u s e h i s i n i t i a t i ve i m m e d i a t e l y a s h i s dominance that he's still winning. 34.h3
structure is a mess. 17.e4 h5?! [ 34.c7! c5 35.a7 h8 36.g2 f5
[ 17...f6 would stop White developing his 37.e4 h5 38.b3! xg2 39.xg2
bishop to f 4 when I don't really believe and again we see how badly Black's
White's compensation, in general I like to pieces coordinate as here he drops a
have a good structure if I'm material down! ] piece. ]
18.f4! Now B la ck sta rts t o su f f er. e5 34...e3 35.e4 f8?
19.dxe5 g4 [ 35...f5! was necessary when Black's still in
[ 19...e7 trying to complete development t h e g a m e a s 36.g1? xg1+! 37.xg1
l o o k s s t r o n g e s t , f o r e x a m p l e 20.e6 a1+ turns the tables. ]
( 20.0-0!? ) 20...c5 21.exf7+ f8 22.c2 36.c8+ g7 37.c3+ h6 38.f6+ h5
xe4 23.xe4 d5 when all three results 39.f3+ h4 40.d4+ h3 The king has
are possible. ] run a long way but sadly it's not safe there on
20.g3 xe5 21.0-0! A dangerous looking h3. 41.xf7
move but W hite's bishop pair will look after [ 41.h6+ xh6 42.xe3 is forced mate but
his king while Black doesn't have enough time the game continuation is adequate. ]
to castle himself now. d6 22.f4 ec4 41...h5 42.g4+!? h4
[ 22...ed7 23.f3 f5 24.be1+ f8 [ Neither 42...xg4 43.c3+ ]
25.e4 is a strange looking position. Black's [ or 42...xg4 43.xe3+ h4 44.f6+
pieces d on't coo rdinate very we ll while ag5 45.f2+ survive for Black either. ]
White's are perfect. ] 43.e6+ g4 44.xg4 An interesting game
23.c6+ f8 but Black was very comfortable out of the
[ 23...d8 looks very ugly but at least there's opening and it seems like he still has enough
no immediate mate ] compensation if White tries to hang on to the
24.be1 Black's in trouble, there's no good pawn for dear life.
way to avoid the mate. g5 1-0
[ 24...c5+ 25.h1 e3 doesn't save
B l a c k e i t h e r 26.f3 g6 27.b5
and Black has to allow the trade of rook for 388 B01
two pieces which is obviously hopeless Volokitin,And 2688
because c6? 28.fxe3 xe3 29.b4++- ] Cioara,A 2462
25.e4 TCh-ROU 2013 (5.1) 04.09.2013
[ 25.b5! blocking in the rook on a5 and [Tom Rendle]
t h r e a t e n i n g Q c 3 i s d e c i s i v e , e . g . gxf4
26.c3 g8 27.e8# ] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.c3
25...gxf4 26.xd6 xd6 27.xf4 h5 a5 5.d4 c6 6.d2 g4?! A very risky
This is of course very good for White too as move against 6.Bd2 and it certainly doesn't
the bishop pair dominate the position while work out well for Black in this game.
Black's king is still much more vulnerable than [ Black should stick to 6...f5 which has
W hite's. Black's rooks are still extremely been seen many times on the site before,
loose too. 28.f2 most recently in Sutovsky-Van Wely. ]
[ 28.xf7+! is a pretty win xf7 ( 28...xf7 7.h3 h5
29.e8+ g7 30.c3++- ) 29.c3 [ 7...xf3 8.xf3 is rather uninspiring for
proves how Black's rooks are really on the Black as White is ready to castle queenside
worst possible squares. ] with an excellent position. For example: b6
395
9.0-0-0 e6 ( 9...xd4? loses to 10.b5! afford to make a mistake and sadly Cioara
b6 11.e3 c5 12.xc5 xc5 13.xb7 ) does just that and it's quickly punished.
10.g3 and Black already has problems [ 11...xd4 i s c r i t i c a l a n d n o w 12.f4!
developing his kingside. ] is a real problem for Black as f5 is a big
8.g4 g6 9.e5 e6 threat so he should try e4 13.h3 d5
[ 9...bd7 is probably Black's safest option but after 14.0-0-0 bd7 15.d3 c5
a t t h is p o in t b u t st il l W h i t e ca n c re a t e 16.xd7 xd7 17.xd5 cxd5 18.f5! c6
problems for the opponent with 10.f4 e6 19.fxe6 fxe6 20.g5 White is going to
11.h4! with the threat of f5 followed by h5 e a sily re ga i n t h e p a wn wit h a m a s s iv e
trapping the bishop and now possible line is position. ]
d5!? 12.h5! ( 12.f5?! is unclear here after [ 11...a6 fails to 12.h5! xc2 13.c1 b4
xe5 13.dxe5 exf5 14.h5 0-0-0! ) 14.a3 xd4 15.axb4 e4 16.h4!
12...xe5 13.dxe5 xc3 14.xc3 a4 with g5 coming W hite's extra piece gives
15.hxg6! e4+ 16.e2 xh1 17.gxf7+ him a winning position. ]
xf7 18.0-0-0 with a big attack and more 12.0-0-0 xc3 13.xc3 e4 This is Black's
than enough compensation for the n o r m a l p l a n t o a vo i d g e t t in g t h e b is h o p
sacrificed exchange. ] trapped by running it to d5. Sadly that turns
10.h4 b6 out not to be far enough!
[ 10...d6? loses to 11.h5 xe5 12.b5! [ 13...a6 is apparently Black's best try here
and after b6 13.dxe5 e4 14.e3 a5+ but it's pretty terrible after 14.h5 ( 14.xa6
15.c3 cxb5 16.hxg6 Black's position was xa6 15.xa6 bxa6 16.he1 is a safe
already hopeless in Antoli Royo, J (2399)- option for White and also strong.) 14...e4
Arance Gonzalez, L (2129) La Roda 15.f3 d5 16.e1! b5 ( 16...xa2 17.c4 )
Albacete 2010 ] 17.g5 fd7 18.a3 and Black can barely
11.e2! An improvement from Volokitin in a move ]
position that was already very precarious for 14.h3! d5 15.e1 Now c4 is coming to
Black players. I don't like 6... Bg4 at all after trap the bishop and there's not a lot Black can
this! do about it xa2
[ 11.h5 e4 12.xe4 xe4 13.f3 xb2 [ 15...c5 gives the bishop a retreat square
( 13...f5!? is a possible alternative although but it loses to 16.g5! ( 16.c4 c6 17.d5
14.0-0-0! xd4 15.c4 xf2 16.d3 is also good enough) 16...e4 17.f3 d6
looks very strong for W hite) 14.d1?! 18.c4 c6 19.dxc5 xc5 20.b4 b6
( 14.xf7+ d8 15.d1 is more accurate 21.c5 ]
an d is lik ely t o t ra n sp ose t o t he ga m e) 16.a3 Here we see the benefit of Rh3
14...xd2?! ( 14...d6! is much less clear inste ad o f f 3 . d5 17.a5 a6 18.c4
here, it's not obvious to me that W hite is The bishop has run as far as it can but it's
better at all here) 15.xf7+ d8 16.xd2 finally trapped. Black can already resign b6
b4+ 17.e3 f8 18.xg7 xc2 19.e2 19.b4 b7 20.cxd5 cxd5 21.d6 bd7
e7 20.d2 c3+ 21.d3 c2 22.b3 22.a6
c5?? A losing move in a tough position 1-0
( 22...b5 23.f1 is better for White but the
position is still tricky. Black has real
problems developing though so it's 389 B01
probably winning for White anyway.) 23.d1 Volzhin,Alexander 2556
cxd4+ 24.xd4+ e8 25.xb7 c1+ Gausel,Einar 2492
26.d3 c5 27.xh7 xf2 28.g6+ f8 Bergen 2000
29.d8+ 1-0 (29) Balogh, C (2448)- [Alexander Volzhin]
Dimitrijevic, A (2369) Novi Sad YUG 2003
( Bla c k is ma t e d a f t e r 29.d8+ xd8 An interesting and theoretically important
30.f7+ e8 31.g8+ f8 32.xf8# )] game which I played in the Center Counter
11...b4?! In this kind of position Black can't Gambit. My opponent grandmaster Gausel
396
has prepared an interesting novelty in a long tremendous compensation for sacrificed

theoretical line... 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.d4 exchange. ) 22...d2 doesn't work in view of
g4 4.f3 f5 5.b5+ In my notes to Lanka- 23.xe2 dxc1 24.xc1 d3 25.d6+ ]
Hauchard I opined this line is the most [ By the way, the attempt to play for
unpleasant for Black. This game was a good pe rp e tu al wit h 21...g8 22.b6+ c7
opportunity for me to support this opinion! 23.xd7 gxg2 fails to 24.xe2! xe2
bd7 6.c4 a6 25.xf6 and White is a clear rook up. ]
[ Black has also tried 6...e6 7.dxe6 fxe6?! 22.d6! The knight occupies a very strong
In the game Tiviakov-Vukovic, Saint Vincent position here. Both opponents have executed
2000 W hite obtained clear edge after their plans: White has transferred the knight
( 7...xe6 which was played in Agnos- to th e d6-square wh ile B lack's Roo k ha s
Santos looks more sound.) 8.e2 c6 9.a4 penetrated to the 7th rank. The question is
d6 10.bc3 0-0 11.c5! c7 12.0-0 b8 whether it's possible to benefit from this. c2
13.h3 e8 14.f4! e5 15.b3+ h8 This move took Black a fair amount of time.
16.xb7 c8 17.dxe5 xe5 18.xe5 [ He noticed that 22...h3 which he intended
xe5 19.b4 xc5 20.d4 e7 21.g3 originally doesn't really work: 23.g1
and Black had absolutely nothing for the A) 23...g8 24.b1! Now Black has wide
pawn. ] but joyless choice:
7.xd7+ xd7 8.e2 e6 9.dxe6 xe6 A1) 24...xg2+ 25.xg2 gxg2
10.b3 0-0-0 11.0-0 c5 12.h1 xd4 26.b7+ d8 27.xd7+;
13.xd4 d7 14.b2 c5 15.b4 cxd4 A2) 24...gxg2 25.b7+ c6
16.b5 he8!? A very interesting attempt to 26.a4+;
improve Black's play. A3) 24...e6 25.b7+ c6 26.a4+
[ After 16...axb5?! which was played in xc5 27.c1+ xd6 ( 27...c2
Lanka-Hauchard White obtained crushing 28.e4+ xe4 29.a3+ ) 28.d4+
attack after 17.a3! ] d5 29.c6+ xc6 30.b6#;
17.bxa6 bxa6 18.d2 d3 The critical A4) 24...c6 25.b3 e6 26.xd3
position for the evaluation of Black's idea. xa2 27.b7+ and in all variations
The position is very sharp and unbalanced. White wins.;
Black's King has no pawn shelter, but merits B) 23...b8!? 24.b1 xb1
of his position are also obvious: he has a very ( T h e i n t e r e s t i n g a t t e m p t 24...xg2+
strong passed pawn in the centre of the board 25.xg2 h3 has a nice refutation:
and after the unavoidable ... Re2 White's king 26.xe2 dxe2 27.e8+! The only move!
also becomes unsafe as there will be some a n d W h i t e w i n s o n t h e s p o t . xe8
tric ks like ... Bh3 . 19.xf6! Played after a 28.d6+ (pointed out by Einar Gausel))
massive thought. This move looks risky as 25.xb1 c6 26.e4! ( 26.xd3?
o p e n i n g o f g - f i le g i ve s B l a c k a d d i t i o n a l a l l o w s B l a c k t o e s c a p e a f t e r xg2+!
chances but the calculations convinced me 27.xg2 e1+ 28.g1 xg1+ 29.xg1
White's chances are preferable. xc5+ with a drawish Queen ending.)
[ T h e i m m e d i a t e 19.c5 allows d5 26...e6 27.xd3 xa2 28.d1
and Black is by no means badly off ] and W hite has a clear edge due to the
[ 19.b1 has also failed to convince me in unsafe position of Black's King. ]
view of e2 20.xf6 gxf6 21.b3 a7 23.b1! xc5 24.b7! Black missed this
and the position is a mess. ] unexpected knight jump.
19...gxf6 20.c5! This is the idea behind the [ He hoped for 24.b7+ xd6 25.xd7+
previous move. W hite intends 21.Nc4. e2 xd7 and Black's chances are by no means
21.c4 c7 bad due to the strong passed pawn. ]
[ 21...b5 deserved certain consideration. I 24...c2 25.xd8 xd8 White has won the
i n t e n d e d t o p l a y 22.c1 and now the exchange but still precise play is required as
tempting ( because 22.d6+? is not good Black's passed pawn may become dangerous.
as after xd6 23.cxd6 d2! Black has [ 25...xd8 is hardly any better in view of
397
26.b8+ c7 ( 26...e7 27.e1+ ) 18.xe3 xh3 19.g5 1-0 Lazic - Vukovic,
27.b1 c6 28.f8 and White wins. ] Serbia 2005 ]
26.e1! Bringing the Queen into the attack. 4...c6
c5 [ A recent example of the more common
[ 26...d2 is no better in view of 27.e3 ] 4...f6 : 5.c4 a6 6.ge2 c6 7.d3
27.b4 Now the game is over. b5 28.c4+ xg2 8.g1 h3 9.xh3 xh3 10.f4
d6 29.xb5 axb5 30.f4+ Black resigned. f5 11.fd5 d8 12.xf6 exf6 13.f4 g5
In spite of the convincing win I still suspect 14.g3 d7 15.0-0-0 g6 Rodriguez -
Black can improve somewhere. No doubt we Galego, Sao Paulo 2005 1/2-1/2 ]
can expect new battles here. 5.f3 g4!? Hasangatin's interesting idea
1-0 delays the entry of the Knight on g8 into the
game, presumably to talk W hite out of the
more critical lines involving g3. 6.h3
390 B01 [ 6.e3 f6 7.h3 h5 8.g4 g6 9.e5
Vorobiov,Evgeny E 2543 bd7 10.c4 c7 11.f3 e6 12.f4
Hasangatin,Ramil 2460 d8 13.0-0-0 d5 14.g3 f6 15.g2
22nd Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (5) xf3 16.xf3 Zinchenko - Hasangatin,
[Andrew Martin] Alushta Victory Cup 2005 1/2-1/2 ]
6...xf3 7.xf3 f6 Black decides not to
A game in the 3...Qd6 line of the Scandinavian. accept White's pawn sacrifice, but maybe he
Voroblov's kingside attack progresses much should.
more quickly than Hasangatin's queenside [ 7...xd4 8.e3 d8 9.d3 d7
attack and then Black falls into a nasty trap. 10.0-0-0 gf6 11.g4 e6 12.d4 a5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 13.b1 c5 14.xf6 xf6 15.g5 d7
A relatively new way of playing the 16.xh7 e5 17.e2 b4 Grabaczyk -
Scandinavian Defence that has significantly Cicak, Oberliga Ost 2001 0-1 ]
increased in popularity this de cade. It is 8.e3 e6 9.0-0-0 e7N
regularly played by the likes of GMs Sermek, [ 9...bd7 10.f4 b4
Hasangatin and Kurajica as well as many A) 11.c7 b6 12.a3 e7 13.e5
other players of all levels and Black has had 0-0-0 14.b1 d7 15.g4 d8 16.g5
considerable success. 4.d4 By far the most e8 17.e4 h6 18.h4 hxg5 19.xg5
popular move, but others are also frequently e7 20.g3 f6 21.g4 d8
played: ( 21...d6= ) 22.h3 c7 ( 22...h6= )
[ 4.f3 f6 5.e2 g6 6.0-0 g7 7.d4 0-0 23.he1 bd5 24.c4 f6 25.f3 e7
8.g5 c6 9.d2 f5 10.fe1 e8 26.e3 b8 27.f3 a8 28.f2 b6 29.f4
11.ad1 bd7 12.f4 b4 13.h4 g4 g6 30.g2 b7 31.f3 d6 32.f5 h5
Voigt - Kritz, Bundesliga 2005 0-1 ] 33.fxg6 fxg6 34.f7 1-0 Zdebskaja -
[ 4.c4 f6 5.d4 a6 6.e2 c6 7.e3 Gheorghe, Chisinau 2005 We have seen
f5 8.f3 0-0-0 9.0-0 e5 10.dxe5 xe5 that Black had chances to equalize along
11.xd6 xf3+ 12.xf3 xd6 Djurhuus - the way.;
Gausel, Norway 2005 1-0 ] B) 11.a3 a5 12.c4 e7 13.he1 0-0
[ 4.g3 is probably one of the toughest moves 14.b3 ac8 15.b1 b5 16.e4 xe4
for Black to meet. c6 ( 4...f6 5.g2 17.xe4 f6 18.e2 d5 19.c1 fd8
c6 6.f3 g4 7.h3 h5 8.d4 0-0-0 20.f4 f8 21.f3 c7 22.f5 exf5
9.0-0 e5 10.dxe5 xe5 11.xd6 xf3+ 23.xf5 d7 24.f3 Jansa - Cicak,
12.xf3 xd6 13.xh5 xh5 Passau 2000 ]
1/2-1/2 Marinkovic - Vojinovic, Serbia 2004) 10.b1 bd7 11.d3 0-0
5.g2 h5!? 6.f3 h4 7.xh4 g5 8.f3 [ 11...b4 might be a better way for Black to
g4 9.g1 f5 10.d3 0-0-0 11.e3 h6 play, holding off from castling until he has
12.d2 d4 13.0-0-0 e5 14.h3 gxh3 started to launch his own queenside attack
15.xh3 xh3 16.xh3 f3 17.xf3 xe3 against White's king. 12.he1 d5 13.d2
398
xd4 14.xd5 xd5 ] 13.g3 b6 14.a5 g7 15.b1 f5

12.g4 b4 13.h4 d5 14.xd5 wa s a b o u t e qu a l in I l le s ca s C o r d o b a -
[ 14.e2 is slightly better to stop Black from Speelman, Leon 2001 ]
opening up the c-file, aiding his attack. xe3 10...g6 11.c3 d7 12.e2 0-0-0 13.0-0-0
15.fxe3 ] b6
14...cxd5 15.g5 f5?! Black opens up files [ T h e i m m e d i a t e 13...c5?! is less good
and diagonals against his king unnecessarily. b e c a u s e o f 14.d5 b6 15.xg6 hxg6
It's best for him to just to get on with his own 16.dxe6 xd2 17.xd2 h6 18.hd1 fxe6
attack. 19.xe6+ b8 20.g3 xd2+ 21.xd2
[ 15...ac8 16.h5 f5 17.gxf6 xf6 xc4 22.xc4 with a good pawn up in
18.e5 d6 is an improvement, securing Psakhis - Gausel, Ohrid 2001 ]
equality. ] 14.b3 c5 15.dxc5 xc5 16.xg6 hxg6
16.gxf6 xf6 17.h3 d6 18.hg1 f7 17.f3 f5 18.h3 c6 19.xc6+ bxc6 20.f3
19.h5 h8?? ½-½
[ 19...b6 20.h6 g6 21.xg6 hxg6
22.xg6+ h8 ]
20.g6! ff8 21.h6! gxh6 22.xh6 392 B01
[ 22.xh6 is slightly better, but makes no Vuckovic,Bojan 2525
difference to the result. ] Vukanovic,Sasa 2358
22...g8 23.f7 One should not be dissuaded Sozina Open Bar SCG (9) 12.03.2005
from playing 3...Qd6 because of this game! [Andrew Martin]
1-0
It's rare indeed to see a strong player reduced
to rubble after only a few moves. Here Black
391 B01 plays what looks like a normal variation and
Votava,Jan 2508 soon finds himself in a kind of Zugzwang! 1.e4
Mueller,Karsten 2530 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.f3 xd5 4.d4 g6 5.c4
Hamburgo (4) 21.05.2002 A m o ve wh i ch is c ri t ic a l f o r t h e s u r vi va l
[Nigel Davies] chances of 4...g6. b6 6.c3 g7 7.c5
Once again White plays the sharpest move.
7.Bd2 is a popular alternative to 7.Ne5 and [ Although 7.e2 appears rather placid, I am
the complex positions which arise are similar unconvinced that Black equalizes after 0-0
to th e Ca ro-Ka nn . 8.Ne4 is not t he m ost 8.0-0 c6 9.d5 e5 10.c5 bd7 11.e3
challenging move and Black seems OK after xf3+ 12.xf3 e5 13.e2 We follow a
both 8...Qd8 and 8...Qc7. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 recommendation of Alex Volzhin: c6 14.f4
xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 d7 15.f3 c7 16.d6! a5 17.a3 e8
6.c4 f5 7.d2 e6 8.e4 c7 18.b4 d8 19.d4 f8 20.e4
[ Black has also played 8...d8 9.g3 Black is running out of things to do. ]
( 9.xf6+ xf6 10.c3 d7 11.e2 g4 7...d5
wa s n o t h i n g f o r W h it e in Fe d o r o wi cz - [ 7...6d7 8.c4 0-0 9.0-0 is just very
W a i t z k i n , N e w Y o r k 1 9 9 9) 9...g4 pleasant for White who can further build up
( 9...g6?! 10.e2 bd7 11.0-0-0 c7 with ideas such as Re1, h3 Bf4. It is so nice
12.h4 h6 13.xe6 fxe6 14.xe6+ e7 to have an uncontested initiative. ]
15.he1 was very dangerous for Black in 8.c4 c6 9.0-0 0-0 10.e1! In his recent
Rossiter - Povah, Portsmouth 2002) 10.c3 excellent book on the Scandinavian, Emms
d6 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 c7 13.0-0-0 describes this move as 'straightf orward'.
bd7 14.he1 0-0-0 15.e4 xe4 White plans Bg5. It is hard to see an effective,
16.xe4 f6 and White had only a nominal active plan for Black. h6 Is it worth a tempo to
edge in Kudrin - Khmelnitsky, Seattle 2002 ] p r e ve n t B g 5 , t h a t i s t h e q u e s t i o n ? T h e
9.xf6+ gxf6 10.h4 alternatives seem so unpromising that
[ 10.e2 d7 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 12.h4 g6 perhaps the answer is yes!
399
[ 10...g4 11.g5 f6 12.h3 xf3 393 B01

13.xf3 bd7 14.b4 h6 15.h4 e6 Wan,Yunguo 2434
16.ad1 Smirnov, P-Prokopchuk, E/ Laylo,Darwin 2509
Nefteyugansk 2002 sees White effortlessly 8th Asian Continental Open (10) 22.05.2009
maintaining the advantage. ] [John Watson]
[ Meanwhile 10...e6 has been suggested in
certain quarters, presumably provoking I was surprised myself to see that I hadn't a
W h i t e i n t o 11.xe6 fxe6 12.e2 single game with one of the Scandinavian
which does look promising, although 11 main lines 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Nf6 3 Nf3 (I have
Qb3! just keeps the edge without risk. ] covered 3 d4 Bg4) 3... Nxd5 (and 3...Bg4) 4
11.b3 d4. Here are a couple of new games, into
[ 11.e2 led to an early bath for Black in a which I've folded notes from John Emms'
r e c e n t g a m e : e8 12.e5! d7? second edition of the Scandinavian, and short
( 12...f5 13.f3! ) 13.xf7! xf7 14.xd5 comments from older Archives files. 1.e4 d5
cxd5 15.e6+ 1-0 Golovchenko, G- 2.exd5 f6 3.f3
Kadatsky, A/Samara 2004 Ouch! ] [ 3.d4 g4 is the Portugese Variation - see
11...e6 12.e4 Eyeing d6. Once the Knight the Archives. ]
arrives on that square Black will have serious 3...xd5 4.d4 f5
problems. As it is I see no real comfortable [ This month's game Rasmussen-Tikkanen,
way to get the queenside pieces out. d7N B a l l e r u p DE N 2 0 0 9 s a w t h e i m p o r t a n t
[ 12...b6 is the only other real way to try to a l t e r n a t i v e 4...g4 (4...g6 is a popular
get the queenside going, but White has an o p t io n , re p re se n t e d b y 9 ga m e s in t h e
i r o n g r i p : 13.e5 bxc5 14.xc5 a5 Archives) 5.e2 ( John Emms: ' 5.h3 h5
15.e2 Singer, K-Zolnierowicz, K/ 6.g4 g6 7.e5 d7 8.xg6 hxg6 9.g2
Bydgoszcz 2001 ] c6 10.c4 5b6 11.e2 e6 12.c3 b4
13.d2 b6 14.a3 c7 15.ac1 a5 13.0-0 0-0 when perhaps White has a pull,
[ 15...bxc5 16.dxc5 b8 17.b3 e5 although Black's position is extremely solid,
is a reasonable way to try and simplify. Then Vitolinsh-Dautov, Daugavpils 1989.' )
I think W hite should play 18.xe5 xe5 A) A selection from John Emms' lengthy
( 18...xe5 19.d6! b2 20.xa7 xd2 notes in his book, skipping the analysis
21.xb8 d4 22.e4 xa2 23.cd1 ) and giving an overview: ' 5...e6 6.0-0
19.xh6 xh2+ 20.h1 f4 21.xf4 xf4 ( White can try to eliminate one or two
22.xa7! g7 23.g1 h8 24.g3 ] black options by playing Ne5 a move early:
16.b4 bxc5?! In a cheerless position one is 6.e5 xe2 7.xe2 c6!? 8.xc6
bound to lose patience and make a mistake. bxc6 9.0-0 h4 10.c4 f6 11.f3 e4
Black is champing at the bit to play an active 12.d2 xf3 13.xf3 gives White a
move but he has no way of doing so just yet. structural edge in the ending, Glek-
[ 16...a6? is poor: 17.cxb6 xb6 Casagrande 1997.) 6...c6 prevents Ne5
18.bxa5 ] for the moment because an exchange on
[ but 16...d8 might hold out some hope: ] e2 leaves the d4-pawn hanging. Instead
17.bxc5 e5 18.d6! Suddenly Black has no ( 6...e7 7.e5! xe2 8.xe2
moves. If 18...exd4 19 Ne8! Qd8 20 Nxg7 Emms: 'One useful point of delaying c2-c4
Kxg7 21 Bxd5! cxd5 22 c6+- Otherwise White is that the black knight on d5 blocks the
takes on e 5. The f irst active move Black a t t a c k o n W h i t e ' s d 4 - p a wn , a ll o wi n g
played lost the game for him! There seems to W h i t e ' s q u e e n t o m o v e f r o m d 1 . ';
be more than one way for White to subject the he also analyses 6...d6!? and thinks that
4...g6 variation to serious pressure. Black has it's reasonable) 7.c3 d6 8.e5 xe2
to do some homework! 9.xe2 xe5 10.dxe5 h4 11.d2 f4
1-0 12.e4 g4 13.e1 h5! left Black
reasonably placed in Aagaard-Bryson,
Rotherham 1997.';
400
B) 5...c6 6.c4 b6 7.d5 xf3 8.gxf3 [ 13...a5 ]

( 8.xf3 e5 9.e2 c6! ) 8...e5 9.f4 14.d3 b6 15.a3
g6 10.c3 e6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.c2?! [ Or 15.ad1 ]
( 12.g4 xd1+ 13.xd1 f7 14.e1 15...a5 16.ad1 a6 17.h4 A standard
with a somewhat better position,) 12...f6 Kingside advance, both initiating attack and
13.e4 b4+ 14.f1 f5 ( 14...h4 driving away a knight if it goes to g6. ad8
is advantageous) 15.h3 h4 ( 15...xf4 18.h5 6d7 It's hard for Black to do anything
16.g4 e5 ) 16.d3 h5 17.e2 f5 about the coming attack. He tries to exchange
18.d3 with equality, A Rasmussen- p ie ce s b u t le a ve s W h it e 's b ish o p a im e d
Tikkanen, Ballerup 2009 a game from this directly at g7. 19.g3 xe5 20.xe5 f6
month's batch. ] 21.g4 Good. Also,
5.d3 Agreed to be the best move by most [ 21.h6 g6 22.f3! is a clever trick,
authors. xd3 6.xd3 e6 7.0-0 intending fxe5?? 23.xe5 ]
[ 7.b5+ is tempting, but c6 8.xb7? 21...g6 22.hxg6 xg6
db4! threatens ...Rb8, winning the queen. ] [ 22...hxg6 23.h5 g7 24.dd3!
7...d7 intending Rxg6+. ]
[ a) Another recent game saw the ultra-solid, 23.c7
but passive, 7...c6 8.c4 f6 9.c3 e7 [ Or 23.h5 g7 24.c7 xc4 25.xd8
10.f4 0-0 11.ad1 e8 12.fe1 xd8 26.h3 h8 27.h6+ g8 28.e1 ]
, with an instructive game to follow, in which 23...c8?
you see that White's space is a significant [ 23...xc4 was the last chance: 24.h5!
advan tage : bd7 13.h3 f8 (it's a bad ( 24.b3 ) 24...g7 25.h3 h8 26.xd8
sign if Black has to retreat like this) 14.c2 xd8 27.b3! xb3 28.b1 c2 29.xb7+
( 14.a3 is a good option, intending b4, with is too strong. ]
the idea a5 15.b4 xa3? 16.a1 xb4 24.xe6+ g7 25.f4 cd8 26.e4 b6
17.eb1 ) 14...a5! 15.h2 b5!? 16.c5 27.xf6 xf6 28.h6+ xh6 29.xf6 e5
( 16.e5! ) 16...b4 17.e4 xe4 18.xe4 30.dxe5
ac8 19.e5 a6 20.a3! bxa3 21.a1 [ 30.dxe5 xd1+ 31.h2 mates soon. ]
a2 22.e3 ( 22.b3 f6 23.f3 ) 22...f6 1-0
23.f3 e5! 24.b4!? exd4? ( 24...c4 )
25.xd4 cd8 26.b2 f7 27.a3 b5
28.xa2+ d5 29.d4 xb4 30.xc6 394 B01
xc5 31.b4 ( 31.d3! ) 31...ed8? Webb,Richard M 2370
( 31...a5! 32.d3! xb4 33.xd5+ e6 Buckley,Simon T 2265
34.h5+ f8 35.xa5 ) 32.d3 xb4 Open Portsmouth (5) 2003
33.xd5 xd5 34.xd5+ e6 35.g3 [Andrew Martin]
b6 36.h5+ g8 37.e8+ f8 38.c1
d4 39.c8 b4 40.h2 g6 41.c7 THE PATZER VARIATION, NUMBER ONE IN
1-0 Al Sayed-Causo, Subic Bay PHI 2009. ] THE NATION 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3
[ b) Topalov-Kamsky, Corus 2006 went e5+! I'm coming to the conclusion that 3...
7...c6 8.c4 b6 9.c3 e7 10.f4 Q e 5 + is p la ya b le i n a ll l in e s . I t s t il l h a s
with the type of advantage in the last note. considerable 'shock' value. I have tried to
Kamsky lashed out with g5?! 11.g3! g4 persuade forum members to start to give this
12.e5 xd4 13.c5! with a great attack. line a try perhaps games such as this one will
See this game in the Archives. ] help. 4.e2 c6
8.c4 5f6 9.c3 e7 10.f4 0-0 11.fd1 [ 4...d6? is complete rubbish and was dealt
Once again we have the basic position for with very severely in this recent miniature:
White, and in fact Black sets up a restraint 5.f3 g4 6.d4 xf3 7.xf3 c6 8.0-0
structure as he did above: c6 12.e2 e8 0-0-0 9.b5 e6 10.d5 f6 11.dxc6
13.e5 f8!? I'm not thrilled with this xd1 12.cxb7+ b8 13.xd1 e6 14.e3
reorganisation perhaps Black should play xb2 15.xa7# 1-0 Vachier Lagrave, M-
401
Shakibi,S/Simul, Aubervilliers FRA 2003 The 26.d2 e4 27.c3 xc3 28.bxc3 d7
PATZER variation taken to extremes! ] 29.h6 e6 30.h7 h8 31.f1 xh7
5.f3 c7 6.d4 f5 7.d5 I've had this 32.xf3 g6 33.e3 a5 34.d2 b5 35.a3
several times at ICC against decent opposition. c8 36.h4 h8 37.c1 xh4 38.g8 h2
White thinks the time is ripe to try and blast 39.b8 xc2+ 40.d1 b2 41.b6+ e7
Black out of the sky. However Buckley and I 42.e6 b1+ 43.d2 b2+ 44.e1 e4
have discussed this position and Black's reply 45.exf7 xf7 46.h3 g7 47.hh6 b4
is accurate, cold-blooded and good. 48.axb4 axb4 49.cxb4 1/2-1/2 Rendle,T-
[ 7.e5 is most critical. White aims for Bf4 Rogers,J/4NCL, Telford ENG 2003 (49) ]
which will highlight the exposed position of 7...f6! 8.dxc6
the Black Queen. He also threatens g2-g4 [ 8.0-0 xd5 9.xd5 cxd5 10.xd5 e6
and h2-h4 should Black venture Bg6. d7 leads to nothing for W hite. Fritz even
( 7...e6?! 8.g4 g6 9.h4 is White's basic suggests that Black might be able to take on
idea. b4 10.f4 d8 11.a3 xc3+ c2-a challenge I wouldn't relish but you know
12.bxc3 d5 13.f3 ) what computers are like.... ]
A) 8.xd7 xd7 9.0-0 0-0-0 ( 9...f6 8...xc6 9.b5 b8 What is wrong with
10.e3 e6= ) 10.e3 e6 11.d5 f6! Black's position? He has an extra central
12.xa7 xd5 13.xd5 exd5 14.b6 pawn and is ready to repel boarders with ...a7-
e8; a6. 10.bd4 d7 11.0-0 e5 12.xc6
B) 8.f4 xe5 9.xe5 b6 xc6 13.e1 d6 14.d3 0-0 I like Black.
B1) 10.d2 He has to exercise a modicum of care on the
B1a) 10...e6! 11.0-0-0 ( 11.0-0?! f6 Kingside but as long as that is forthcoming he
12.f4 0-0-0 ) 11...f6; has no problem with any piece and the pawn
B1b) 10...xb2 11.b1 xc2 o n e 5 co n t in u a lly t h re a t e n s t o a d va n c e .
12.xc2 xc2 13.xb7 e6 14.0-0 15.g5 c7 16.e4 xe4 17.xe4 ad8
e7 15.c1; 18.e2 xe4 19.xe4 f5 20.e2
B2) 10.a4 W ebb is doing the best that he can to
B2a) 10...a5+ is better here, forcing minimise his disadvantage but Black's next
the pace. W hite must then make a move underscores his initiative and thereby
choice a nd I give some o f my own the advantage. e4! 21.h3 de8 22.b3 f4
analysis : 23.c4+N That was the only move with ...f4-
B2a1) 11.c3 f6 ( 11...0-0-0 12.c5 f3 looming. xc4 24.bxc4 c5 25.a4 f5!
e6 13.b4 ) 12.g3 e5 ( 12...0-0-0 White's a bit tied up so Buckley anticipates
13.b4 d5 14.0-0 e5 ) 13.dxe5 Ba3 and prepares in the event of a Bishop
d8 14.b3 b5; exchange to bring his Rook into the action on
B2a2) 11.c3 f6 12.0-0 d7 c5 or a5. 26.a3 e3
13.g3 e6= Of course this is all [ There was something to be said for the
virgin ground.; calm 26...f7 27.ed1 xa3 28.xa3 c5
B2b) 10...d8?! I t h in k t h a t 11.c5 29.b3 b6 too. ]
b6 12.0-0 e6 13.b4 f6 14.b1 27.xc5 xc5 28.fxe3 xe3 29.xe3 fxe3
a6 15.a4 xc5 16.bxc5 a5 30.e1 xc4 31.xe3 xa4 32.e7 b4-+
17.xb7 xa4 18.d3 xd3 Of course this is ghastly for Webb. How does
19.xd3 0-0 20.fb1 he stop that passed pawn on a7? 33.c3
1-0 Skripchenko, A-Tolhuizen,L/Aosta [ 33.f2 a5 34.e3 a4 35.d2 b1
2003 (20) ] 36.c3 a3 37.e8+ f7 38.a8 b5-+ ]
[ 7.c4 e6 8.e2 f6 9.e5 b4 10.d2 33...b6 34.c4 a5 35.c5 b5 36.c7 a4
bd7 11.0-0-0 xc3 12.xc3 xe5 37.c8+ f7 38.c7+ e6 39.c6 d6
13.dxe5 d5 14.d2 0-0-0 15.g4 g6 40.xg7 xc6 Fascinating stuff!
16.f4 h5 17.h3 b6 18.b3 d4 19.f5 0-1
exf5 20.g5 c5 21.xd8 xd8 22.gxh5
h7 23.xd5 cxd5 24.hg1 f4 25.xg7 f3
402
395 B01 castling kingside. Instead

Wei Yi 2638 [ 7...c6 was preferred in the aforementioned
Miroshnichenko,E 2602 Fedorchuk game. ]
TCh-TUR Super League 2014 (5.6) 22.08.2014 8.f4 Black looks comfortable after a queen
[Neil McDonald] exchange for example
[ 8.e2 0-0 9.0-0 xe2 10.xe2 f5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 11.c3 e4 as in Malakhov, I (2441)-
The queen stays resolutely in the middle of Kovalenko, I (2650)/St Petersburg RUS
the action. The question is whether White can 2014. ]
gain anything worthwhile by harassing her with 8...c6 9.d2 0-0 10.0-0-0? Leads to trouble.
Nb5 or Bf4 in the future. 4.d4 f6 5.f3 g6 Black is comfortable but no more after
A kind of Scandinavian-Pirc hybrid. You might [ 10.h6 but Black appears to be able to
like to examine Tiviakov- Fedorchuk in the hold his own or more after xh6 11.xh6
archives for more details. 6.g3 A natural f5 12.0-0-0 b5 for example Sit back and
response as White's light squared bishop will enjoy the attack the attack after
exert pressure on the queenside on g2 and A) Instead 13.h4 might lead to a sharp
the black queen can be hunted by his other draw: e6 14.he1 b4 15.xe6 bxc3!
bishop with Bf4. However as we shall see ( Steering clear of 15...fxe6 16.h3 bxc3
Black can throw a spanner in the works when 17.xe6+ f7 18.xg6 when mate on f8
it comes to White castling kingside. is threatened.) 16.f5 cxb2+ 17.b1
[ Instead 6.b5 gains time for White to play gxf5 18.g5+ h8 19.xf6 exf6
the strategically desirable c2-c4 advance. 20.xf6+ g8 21.g5+ h8 draw!;
For example d8 B) 13.a3 b4! 14.axb4 a1+ 15.b1
A) 7.f4 a6 Slightly awkward for Black a6 16.h4 xc2! 17.xc2 xb4+
is ( 7...d5 8.e5 ) 8.c4 Slightly awkward 18.d2 ad8 19.e2 a6+ 20.f3 c5
for Black is g7 9.e5 0-0 10.e2 h6 21.g4 xd4 22.xd4 cxd4 23.d1 d3
11.0-0 c6 12.c3 c7 13.b3 e6 24.d2 e5 25.g3 e4 26.f4 b8 27.f1
14.d5 f4 15.ad1 this sharp position e6 28.h3 b3 0-1 Berbatov, K (2481) -
was reached in Dastan, B (2432)- Chatalbashev, B (2555)/Albena 2010. ]
Mamedov, R (2659)/Kocaeli TUR 2014, [ Meanwhile 10.e5 e6 11.d3 bd7
and now I like d7!?; looked OK for Black in Akash, G (2404) -
B) 7.c4 c6 8.c3 g7 9.e2 0-0 Sethuraman, S (2520)/ Kolkata 2012. ]
10.0-0 g4 11.e3 bd7 12.b3 10...b5 11.a3? Leads to trouble. Black is
White would have a small plus due to the comfortable but no more after
bish op p air an d his e xt ra spa ce a f t e r [ 11.b1 b4 12.e2 d5 ]
( 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 ) 12...c7 13.fd1 11...b4! A move familiar from the Berbatov
fe8 14.d5?! Evidently Wei Yi doesn't game in the notes above. Black gambits a
enjoy playing against Black's opening pawn for a big initiative. 12.axb4 a1+
system. It's not too late to get a tiny edge 13.b1 a5!?
with ( 14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 ) 14...xf3 [ Black also had an attack after 13...d5
15.gxf3 Not an aesthetic recapture. 14.d3 a5 15.b5 cxb5 16.e5 e6
Pe rha p s W h ite h ad missed t ha t af t e r 17.a3 xa3 18.xa3 b4 in Juggernaut,
( 15.xf3 e5 16.e2 eg4 the double R (2613) -W ikiman, R (2478)/ playchess.
attack on e3 and h2 is very pleasant for com INT 2007, but W hite can at least be
him. ) 15...b6 So far this is Wei Yi (2638)- pleased to have got the queens off! ]
Benidze, D (2458)/Kocaeli TUR 2014 and 14.b5 Wei Yi is relying on this move to keep
here ( 15...h5 16.d2 e5 looks good the queenside blocked, but he meets with an
f o r B l a c k d u e t o W h i t e ' s f r a c t u r e d u n p l e a s a n t s u r p r i s e . cxb5!! 15.e1
kingside. )] White decides to take the piece on offer. If he
6...g7 7.g2 a6!? The black queen slips declines he is left in a horrible position as the
away from attack by Bf4 and prevents White black queenside pawns will run at his king.
403
a6 16.xb8 e6 The bishop on b8 is now Robatsch. ]

h a n g i n g a n d W h i t e h a s n o g o o d wa y t o 5...h6
prevent Black's next move. 17.e5 [ 5...g7 6.c4 c6 7.ge2 h6 8.d2
[ After 17.d5 e4 Black threatens both the f5 was also fine for Black in Meitner -
white queen and mate on b2. ] Blackburne, Vienna 1873 ]
17...a2 18.c3 b4 19.c7 6.d2
[ Attacking the black rook doesn't help much [ Or 6.c4 f5 7.f3 g7 8.0-0 0-0
as it slides to a better attacking square on 9.d2 b6 10.ad1 b7 with a good
the third rank. 19.d3 e6! 20.d2 xb2! position for Black in Golmayo - Blackburne,
The knight on b1 can wait. Black keeps up Havana 1891 ]
the attack rather than falling into a pin after 6...f5 7.d3 g7 8.xf5 xf5 9.h3 h5!?
( 20...xb1? 21.f3 when suddenly White 10.ge2 a6 11.a3 c6 12.g3 d7
is winning as 22.Rxb1 follows.) 21.f4 ( after 13.0-0-0 h4 14.xf5 xf5 Black has
21.f3 c8 the threats include 22...Bh6+ achieved a highly satisfactory position out of
23 .K e1 B c 4, t ra pp ing t he wh it e qu ee n . the opening, 9...h5 was a nice idea and here
22.e1 xb1 ) 21...d8 22.f3 g4! W hite's kin gside is ra the r com pro mis ed .
23.xg7 f2 24.b5 ( Or 24.f1 c8 15.d3 a5 16.e4 e6 17.f4 0-0-0
a n d W h it e 's d e f e n c e s co lla p se o n c2 .) 18.e3 c7 19.xc7 xc7 20.f4?! h5
24...e4+ 25.d3 xb1 26.xb1 c3+ 21.hf1 b6 22.e2 c5! 23.c3 cxd4
27.e2 xc2+ and White is soon mated. ] 24.xd4 e5! 25.c2
19...xb1+ 20.d2 xb2 21.d3 a3 [ And not 25.fxe5 h6 etc. ]
22.a1 It appears that Wei Yi has fought back 25...xd1+ 26.xd1 xe3 27.xe3 h6
well as the black queen is in an awkward pin. 28.d5 exf4 29.c4
But now comes a decisive strengthening of [ If 29.xf4 then f5 . So Black wins a
B l a c k ' s a t t a c k . e8! 23.c5 d6 pawn. ]
A powerful rerouting of the black knight. It 29...e5 30.e1 xe1+ 31.xe1 d7
wins the c8 square for the rook after which 32.e2 f5 33.f3 g5 34.b4 g7 35.d3
White's defences finally crumble. 24.xg7 d6 36.b3 d4 37.e2 e3 38.f3 b6
[ Or 24.d5 c3+ 25.xc3 bxc3+ 26.xc3 39.b4 a6 40.a4 d4 41.e2 c3 42.b5 a5
xd5 and Black has won a piece. ] 43.f2 d4+ 44.e2 g1 45.f3 e3
24...c8 25.g5 xg7 26.hc1 c3+ 46.g4 hxg3 47.g2 d2 48.c5+ bxc5
27.e2 c4 28.f1 b3! The queenside 49.b6 c4 50.e5 xe5 51.b7 e4
pawns have the last word as White's knight is 0-1
fatally undermined. 29.g1 xd3 30.cxb3
[ Unb ea ra ble f or white is 30.cxd3 b2
31.xc3 bxa1+ ] 397 B01
30...xd4 31.xe7 xc1+ White remains a Wojciechowski,Adam 2112
piece down. Janaszak,Dawid 2134
0-1 ch-Boys U18 Zakopane POL (9) 24.01.2001
[Jon Tisdall]
396 B01
1.e4 c6 This move seems to have been
Winawer,Szymon almost obligatory in the recent Polish youth
Blackburne,Joseph Henry championships with boys and girls of all ages
Nuremberg (8) 1883 running it up the flagpole. Unfortunately these
[Nigel Davies] games did not produce any stirring theoretical
currents, but may indicate f uture trends.
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 4.d4 g6 Having gone through the entire section, I
5.e3 Rather inviting the following strong began to wonder if CPub ought not to set up
manoeuvre. an office in Poland - nearly every one of the
[ 5.f4! is White's best as in Fischer - extremely Daring defences got a workout in
404
the Polish youth events. 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 17.b4+ c7 I think it's important to take
xd5 4.f3 g4 5.e2 0-0-0 6.c3 e5 7.c4 away the g4 square from White, so that he
a5+ 8.d2 b4 9.d5 e4 10.g5 xe2 cannot check with the Queen. ]
11.xe2 d4 12.xe4?? 13.d5
[ 12.d1 h6 13.0-0 xd2 14.xd2 b6 [ 13.g5!? is a dangerous attacking move,
15.dxe4 Wahls ] which forces Black to find a good defence:
12...b3! 13.xf7 hxg5 14.hxg5 xh1+ 15.xh1 e8 16.d5
[ 13.axb3 xd2+ 14.d1 xa1 15.xf7 exd5 17.g4+ ( 17.xd5 a4 ) 17...d8
b4 16.xh8 h6-+ ] Perhaps Black stays on the board after all.
13...f6 14.f5+ b8 15.xd8 xd2+ 18.xd5 b5 19.c3 e5+ 20.e4 xe4
16.e2?? Whoa - 21.xe4 xe4+ 22.xe4 d6 23.xd6
[ 16.d1 xd8 17.axb3 xa1 18.xd2 xd6 24.c3 g6 ]
xb2+ exposes white to a terrific attack, 13...exd5 14.xd5 e8+ 15.e3 a4
but... ] A novelty according to Rogers. 16.b3
16...d4+ [ 16.0-0 d6 17.c4= Rogers. ]
0-1 16...f4 17.f1
[ 17.0-0 d6 18.e1 e4 ]
17...e4 18.xe4 xe4 19.f3 d4
398 B01 [ 19...e6! was superior, maintaining a
Wynn Zaw Htun strong initiative. ]
Rogers,Ian 20.c3 d3+! Securing a nominal advantage
Bangkok 2004 in the ending. Black gets the seventh rank.
[Andrew Martin] 21.xd3 xd3+ 22.cxd3 xe3 23.g2 f6
24.d4 e2+ 25.f1 d2 26.e3?!
I saw the following game in Informator 90. It is [ He should take on a7: 26.xa7 a3!
well worth studying here. Ian Rogers makes 27.e3 xd3 28.e2 d5 29.ad1 e8
yet another expedition into the Scandinavian 30.xd5+ cxd5 31.d3 b5= White had to
jungle. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 play a few good moves but the smoke is
4.d4 f6 5.f3 g4 A variation he cannot clearing and he's not worse. ]
put down 6.h3 h5 26...c2 27.g1 c5 28.xc5 xc5 29.g2
[ I p r e d i c t t h a t 6...xf3 7.xf3 c6 e8 30.e1 ce5
will be the next Fort Knox Defence. ] [ Rogers gives 30...xe1+ 31.xe1 e6
7.g4 g6 8.e5 e6 9.g2 c6 10.h4 bd7 as technically correct. With the better King
11.xd7 xd7 12.d2 The first critical and holes on d4 and f4 to occupy, it's hard
position of the game. If White is going to win to see White holding this ending. ]
the opening battle he will have to make d4-d5 31.e4 c5 32.ge2?
work somewhere. Otherwise the pawn [ 32.h5! freezing the kingside pawns, was a
advances look ludicrous. better way to play the position. ]
[ This is the first moment where d4-d5 has to 32...xe4 33.dxe4 g5! Instead it is Black
be considered. In my view it gives Black the who ' freezes ' the pawn majority. Now he gets
attack, not White : 12.d5 exd5 13.h5 e8+ to advance on the queenside with an extra
14.f1 a6+ 15.g1 ( 15.e2 e4 16.f3 pawn. 34.hxg5 hxg5 35.f2 e6 36.d2
c5! 17.fxe4 xe4 18.d3 b6 ) a5 37.g3 c1 38.f2 b5 39.g3 b4
15...e4 16.f3 c5+! 17.h2 d6+ 40.f2 c5 41.e3 c4 Rogers appends a
18.h3 g6 Over the board to go into this rather harsh question mark to this move which
variation without thorough preparation would I will not repeat. These endgames are tough
be madness. ] even for the strongest grandmasters. He then
12...h6 Rogers gives this as the only move but gives the following conclusive analysis :
I believe that 12...h5 is also playable: ' [ 41...c3+
[ 12...h5 13.g5 ( +-, Rogers) g8 14.d5 A) 42.e2 a4 43.d3 ( 43.bxa4 a3 )
exd5 15.xd5 e8+ 16.e3 a4 43...c2+ 44.d2 xd2+ 45.xd2 a3
405
46.d3 e5 47.c4 f4 48.xc5 xf3 1987 12.g5! h6 13.h4 and now tactical
49.xb4 xg4 50.xa3 f4 51.b4 complications led to a quick White victory
xe4-+; xf3 14.xf3 xd4?! 15.cxd4 xd4
B) 42.d3 xd3+ 43.xd3 e5 44.e3 16.xe7 xc4 17.ac1 xa2 18.xf8
c4 45.bxc4 a4 46.d3 a3 47.c2 d4 xf8 19.xb7 d4 20.f1 and Black has
48.b3 c5-+ I Rogers ] little hope.) 12.a3 e6 13.b1 White has a
42.bxc4 xc4 43.e2 c3 44.f2 a3 space advantage and pressure on the b-file
45.e2 a4 46.f2 c3 47.e2 while Black has no counterplay, Tiviakov -
[ 47.d4! c2+ 48.g3 b2 49.a3! bxa3 Khmelnicky, 1987. ]
50.xa4 a2 51.f4 I Rogers. ] 7.c4 g7 8.f3 0-0 9.0-0 b6 10.e1!
47...c6 48.e3 b3 49.axb3 axb3 50.f4 Continuing with active development White is
gxf4+ 51.xf4 b6 52.b2 b4 53.e3 going to play Bg5. b7
e5 54.d3 d4+ 55.c3 xe4 56.xb3 [ 10...bxc5 11.g5! with advantage ]
xg4 57.c3 g3+ 58.c4 e3! 11.g5! f6 12.e5 Now Black is in real
This one is losing. The Lucena position will trouble, and this is no big surprise since he
inexorably arrive. 59.b5+ e4 60.b8 f5 has wasted too much time on piece
61.e8+ f3 62.f8 f4 63.d4 e7 64.f6 manoeuvres. c6
g3 65.d3 f3 66.f8 f2 67.g8+ f3 [ 12...e6 was probably more stubborn. ]
68.f8+ g2 69.g8+ f1 70.d2 d7+ 13.xf7+!
71.e3 [ 13.b3 d5 14.g4 was also good
[ 71.c2 d5 is the aforementioned Lucena enough but the text move is stronger. ]
position. ] 13...xf7 14.b3 f8
71...e1 5...Bg4 is still on the board! [ 14...d5 was losing after 15.xf7 xf7
0-1 16.xd5 cxd5 17.xe7+ xe7 18.xe7
xe7 19.e1+ f7 ( 19...d8 20.e3 )
20.g3 winning ]
399 B01 15.xf7 xf7 16.xe7 xb3 17.axb3
Yakovich,Yuri 2525 fd7 The only move. 18.e4! The knight
Zagema,Wieb 2360 enters with decisive effect. h6
Leeuwarden 1993 [ Other moves were immediately losing
[Alexander Volzhin] 18...f8 19.f6+ ]
[ 18...xd4 19.d6 a6 20.h6 ]
5.Nc3 is a very interesting way to fight for an 19.f4 f8 20.f6+! T h e p o i n t . xf6
opening advantage. Importantly this move 21.xb7 bd7 22.cxb6 a5
order doesn't allow the system with Bg4. As [ 22...a6 wa s n ot be t te r: 23.a7 xb6
the following game shows, the fianchetto 24.xa8 xa8 25.xa6 ]
system also has its drawbacks. 1.e4 d5 23.d2!? e8
2.exd5 f6 3.d4 xd5 4.c4 b6 5.c3 [ After 23...a6 24.xa5 b4 25.a7 xa5
g6 6.c5! This is the idea behind an early Nc3. 26.1xa5 xa5 27.xa5 xb6 28.c5
6d7 one of the W hite pawns would eventually
[ Black has also tried 6...d5 but failed to promote. ]
equalise: 7.c4 xc3 Forced, other moves 24.xa5 d6 25.c1 c5 26.c3! e6
are bad: ( 7...e6 8.b3 xc3 9.xe6 27.f1 f8 28.e1! The rook exchange puts
and Black is in trouble; 7...c6 8.b3! e6 an end to Black's resistance. xe1+ 29.xe1
9.f3 g7 10.0-0 with a big advantage due e8 30.dxc5 xc5 31.xf6 xf6 32.g7
to the weakness of the d6-square.) 8.bxc3 g5 33.b7 d6 34.g6 f7 35.xh6 g4
( 8.f3!? is worth considering) 8...g7 36.h8 g8 37.e2 g7 38.h5
9.f3 0-0 10.0-0 c6 11.e1 The critical Black resigned.
position for the assessment of 6...Nd5. It's 1-0
not easy to find a suitable plan for Black. h6
( 11...g4 was tried in Tiviakov - Maljutin,
406
400 B01 18.hg1 g6 19.h4 c5 20.h5 gives White

Ye Jiangchuan 2681 the initiative.) 16...c7 17.f5 exf5 18.xf5
Malakhov,Vladimir 2674 g6 19.xd7+ xd7 20.c3 h6+ 21.b1
RUS-CHN Moscow CHN (4) 14.08.2004 xd1+ 22.xd1 d8 23.xd8+ xd8
[Andrew Martin] 24.a4 b8 25.e5+ a8 26.a5 a6
27.d4 f8 28.b6 e7 29.c3 b8
GRANDMASTER DRAW NO 687 1.e4 d5 30.e3 d8 31.b3 d6 32.d4 c8
2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.c4 33.c3+ d7 34.b6 e7 35.f3 e8
c6 6.f3 f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5 Certain lines 36.c3 d7 37.f3 e8 38.c3 d7
of the Scandinavian are more crucial than 1/2-1/2 Carmeille,L-Prie,E/ Montpellier FRA
others. W ith 8 Nd5 and 8 Ne4 W hite really 2004 ]
puts the pressure on early and Black must 15...xb7 16.e4+ a6 17.a4+ b7
fight for his life. I show here one way against 18.e4+ a6 19.a4+ b7 There is no
the critical 8 Nd5 which leads to a draw by re a so n t o sh y a wa y f ro m su ch 'd r a wi n g '
perpetual-I guess Black should be happy with systems. 1) W hite has to know everything
that. d8 9.xf6+ (very few do). 2) A draw with Black is a good
[ White is not under any obligation to take on result. 3) You must believe in the soundness
f6,however the transfer to e3 is rather time- of your opening systems if you are to play at
c o n s u m i n g : 9.e3 g6 10.0-0 h5 your very best. Players who continually play
11.e1 e7 12.c3 bd7 13.h3 0-0 tricky or even unsound ideas in the hope of
14.d3 c5 15.g4 g6 16.xg6 hxg6= catching the opponent out only handicap
White,K-Natter,M/Triesen LIE 2004 ] themselves in the long run.
9...xf6 ½-½
[ 9...gxf6 has been scoring well for Black
recently: 10.c3 ( 10.b3 d7 11.e2
c7 12.h4 g6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.g3 401 B01
b8 15.f4 f5 16.c4 g7 17.c3 c5 Zarnicki,Pablo
18.b1 he8 19.he1 cxd4 20.xd4 Fiorito,Fabian
xd4 21.xd4 f6 22.xd8+ xd8 Zonal Tournament 2000
23.xg6 hxg6= Folk,P-Konopka,M/ Czech [Paul Motwani]
Republic 2003 The Bishop is anaesthetized
and is set to remain so. If anyone, Black has Quick Tricks and Traps 1) B12: "A Cool Win
the edge. ) 10...c7 11.e2 d7 12.b3 with the Icelandic Gambit", Code B01 The
( 12.h4 g6 13.f4 f5 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 ) game P.Zarnicki-F.Fiorito played at a zonal
12...0-0-0 13.0-0-0 g4 14.h3 h5 15.g4 tournament in Buenos Aires on 29 July 2000
g6 16.e3 e4 17.he1 d5 18.xd5 was a Scandinavian Defence which saw White
cxd5= Padelli,M-Bourjol,D/ 6th Open Vins du (ra t e d 2 4 8 8 ) lo sin g in o n ly 2 2 m o ve s a s
Mer, Naujac sur Mer FR 2003 Black's follows: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.c4 e6
comfortable and has the easy plan of ...Kb8 The so-called "Icelandic Gambit" 4.dxe6
and ...Nb6-c4 at his disposal. ] [ Personally, I would prefer to decline the
10.e2N Shirov's move. g4! 11.0-0-0 d7 gambit with a move like 4.d4 which does not
12.d5 xf3 13.gxf3 cxd5 14.xd5 0-0-0 give Black the same lightning-speed piece-
So far all known and Black's survival chances developm en t t ha t h e get s in th e a ct ua l
seem fine as long as he is aware of White's game ]
next idea: 15.xb7+ Good enough for a draw 4...xe6 5.d4 b4+
but little else. [ I've actually seen 5...e7!? 6.a4+??
[ 15.e4 e5!? ( 15...d6 16.c3 f4+ d7+ discovered check & White resigns
17.b1 f6 18.hg1 hg8 19.xb7+ happen before!! ]
xb7 20.b5+= leads to the same type of 6.d2 e7 7.xb4 xb4+ 8.d2 e7!
d ra win g m e c h a n i sm t h a t o ccu rs in t h e This cool, calm retreat creates the nasty
game. ) 16.f4 ( 16.c3 c7 17.b1 f6 threat of 9...Bxc4+: another cheeky discovered
407
check 9.e3 c6! 10.f3 Polanica Zdroj 2004 ]

[ Black did not fear 10.d5 because of [ 7...f5 8.h3 e4 9.d5 d7 10.f4
A) or 10...g4! 11.e2 ( and 11.e4 d6 11.e2 e6 12.0-0 Li Shilong-
f6!? leaves White with a head full of Mariano, N/ Tagaytay City 2004, which has
worries too ) 11...d4; already been commented in this section. ]
B) 10...b4 ] 8.a4! a7 9.e3 g4 10.g5! d8
10...g4! 11.e2 0-0-0 12.h3 [ 10...e6? 11.xg4 ]
[ 12.d5 would be met by he8! intending 11.b3 To avoid the ...b7-b5 fork. e5 12.f3!
13.dxe6 b4+ 14.c3 xe6 ] f6 13.dxe5 xe3 14.exf6!+- Undoubtedly
12...he8! 13.hxg4 b4+ 14.d2 xg4+ nice preparation from the polish youth
15.e2 champion... xg2+
[ If 15.d1 then xd4 16.d3 xf3+ [ 14...gxf6 15.fxe3 fxg5 16.0-0-0
17.gxf3 d6 is one possible route to a quick Threatening both Qf6 and Qh5+ ]
victory for Black ] 15.f1 gxf6 16.xf6 g7 17.f7+ xf7
15...xe2+! I bet that rook-move rocked 18.xf7+ d8 19.d1+ d4 20.d5+ e7
White! 16.xe2 xd4+ 17.f1 xc4+ 21.xd4 f6 22.e4+ g7 23.e5+ g6
18.g1 xf3+ 19.gxf3 xf3! the threat of 24.f6+ h5 25.g3#
20...Qg4+ is so great that Black didn't even 1-0
stop to capture White's queen! 20.h3
[ 20.g5 l o s e s i n s t a n t l y t o d1+
( or the prettier 20...f1+ )] 403 B01
20...g4+ 21.g3 h5! 22.xf3 xf3 Zelcic,Robert 2550
W hite resigned in view of 23 Qe3 Rd1+ 24 Kurajica,Bojan 2545
Kh2 Rh1. Salona Rapid 1hr, Solin-Spilt rapid (16) 2002
0-1 [Andrew Martin]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 4.d4

402 B01 f6 5.f3 a6 6.c4 e6 7.e2 b5 8.b3
Zawadzka,Jolanta [ 8.d3 did the business in the following
Socha,Anna recen t min iature, b ut th ere a re se vera l
POL-chT U20 Girls 1999 p o i n t s a t wh i c h B l a c k c a n l o o k f o r a n
[Eric Prié] improvement. b7 9.0-0 e7 ( 9...bd7
10.a4 b4 11.e4 xe4 12.xe4 xe4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 13.xe4 c6 14.f4 d5 15.fe1 a5
f6 5.f3 c6 6.d2 a6 7.c4 b6 16.e5 b6 17.g4 ) 10.a4 b4 11.e4
[ 7...xd4 8.xd4 c5 9.xf7+! xf7 d5 12.xf6+ xf6 13.c4 bxc3 14.bxc3
10.e3 ( 10.f3!? b6 11.b3 e6 12.e2 A) I prefer to strike in the centre
d6 13.g5+ Drabke, L-Langrock, H immediately : 14...c5!
D r e s d e n 2 0 0 2) 10...g4 ( 10...g4 A1) 15.b1 0-0 16.c4 c6 17.dxc5
11.f3+ e8 12.0-0-0 xe3 13.fxe3 e5 d7 18.xb7 ( 18.c2 g6 19.xb7
14.b3 e7 15.d5+- ) 11.f3 d7 xb7 20.e4 c7 21.xa8 xa8= )
12.e2 White has obtained a big 18...xb7 19.e4 c7 20.xa8
advantage: He is ahead in development, xa8=;
the opposing royal couple is weak and he A2) 15.c4 d7 16.b1 cxd4;
enjoys a better pawn structure, favourable B) 14...0-0? 15.b1 c6 16.c4 h5
for his cavalry. Kotsur, P (2415) - Rodin, M 17.e4 g4 ( 17...xe4 18.xe4 d7
(2345) Vladivostok op 1995 ] 19.c6 b6 20.d2! ) 18.d5 exd5
[ 7...b4 8.d5? ( 8.b5! xc4 9.xc7+ ) 19.cxd5 e8 20.b4 xd5? ( 20...d7 )
8...xc4? ( 8...d6 9.f4 e6+ ) 9.xc7+ 21.xd5 1-0 Crosa,M-Giaccio,A/ch-URU,
d8 10.xa8? ( 10.b3+- ) 10...g4 11.c3 Montevideo URU 2002 (21) ]
d7 is less clear Swiatnicki, A-Michalczyk, S 8...b7 9.g5 bd7 A very typical piece set-
408
up for both sides. 10.0-0-0 d5 11.e4 to justify his order of moves but the King is
b6 12.b1 h6! An important little defensive surely misplaced on the queenside: 11.0-0-0
prod which drives the Bishop back to c1 and d5! 12.xd5 xd5
prepares ...Be7. 13.c1 A) 13.c4 a5 14.a3 ( 14.b1? g6+
[ 13.h4 f4 14.d2 xg2 ] 15.a1 b4 ) 14...e7=;
13...e7 14.he1 0-0-0= 15.c4?! B) 13.b3 a5! 14.b1 b4 15.a4
Seeing that the Bishop on b7 has so much d5 16.d2 b4 17.c4 xd2 18.cxd5
more potential than the Bishop on b3 Zelcic c3 19.dxe6 he8 20.e5 d5
tries to change to the emphasis of the game 21.xg7 b4 22.a2 a5 0-1 Drabke, L-
towards a tactical melee. He finds Kurajica on Pirrot, D/Bundesliga GER 2005 W hat a
top form and equally combative. To be frank I depressing game for White! ]
find 15 c4 over-ambitious. Much more realistic 11...e7
was the quieter [ Fritz 9 is showing me the remarkable move
[ 15.c3 7f6 16.xf6 xf6 17.g3= 11...g5!? now, claiming advantage to Black!
admitting that Black has equality and L e t ' s s e e . . . 12.xg5 ( 12.a3 g8 )
simply limiting any damage. ] 12...xd4 13.e3 e7 14.f4 xf3+
15...bxc4 16.xc4 7f6 17.xd5 xd5 15.xf3 c5= Thus 11..g5 is certainly an
18.a1 b4 19.a3 c6 20.e3 b5! option, but not a guaranteed advantage. ]
21.c2 a5 Eyeing b3 and c4 as well as 12.a3 d5 Sermek is very well versed in this
unleashing the giant on b7. 22.f4 d7! line of the Scandinavian and one can trust his
Extremely well-calculated. This looks like a choices. 12...Nd5 pays W hite due respect
mistake. Zelcic is tempted. 23.e5 b3+ and states that Black is happy to equalize.
24.b1 xd4! 25.xd4 xd4 26.xf7 c4 13.e4
27.c3 f8 28.g6 xc3! The point. White [ 13.xd5 exd5 14.b4 f6 15.c3 he8
e n d s u p wi t h t o o m a n y p i e c e s h a n g i n g . is effective development by Black. ]
29.xe6+ b8 30.xe7 f5+! 31.a1 13...d7 14.b4 f5! 15.c5
xf7 32.b4 b3 33.xc7+ a8 34.c5 [ 15.ed2 f4 was obviously unappealing. ]
b5 35.d4 xc7 A game of great control 15...xc5 16.bxc5 f4 But it happens anyway!
from veteran Grandmaster Kurajica. 17.gxf4 hf8 18.ab1 xd4!? really going
0-1 for it!
[ 18...xf4 19.xf4 xf4 20.e3 xf3
( 20...df8 21.e5! ) 21.xf4 xg2
404 B01 22.xg2 d5+ 23.f3 xf3+ 24.xf3
Zelcic,Robert 2514 xd4+ 25.e4 xc2 ]
Sermek,Drazen 2555 19.xd4 xf4 20.e5?
Cup 14th Sibenik (5) 30.05.2005 [ 20.e3 xg2 ]
[Andrew Martin] [ 20.e4 is the only move and may just be
good enough to hang on: d5! 21.g5
D O O M A N D G L O O M I N T H E xe4 22.xe4 xd4 23.xb7+ d7
SCANDINAVIAN? 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 The kings are mutually exposed but
3.c3 d6 4.d4 f6 5.f3 a6 6.g3 g4! Black's position is the tighter. ]
We saw last month that 6...Bg4 could be an 20...xg2-+ 21.xh5 f4 Suddenly White is
effective antidote to the highly-rated 6 g3 lost. 22.e5 c6 23.b3 xd4 24.fb1
variation. Let us see some more compelling xh3+ 25.h2 xf3 26.xf3 xf3
evidence now. To recap: Black's plan is ...Nc6 27.xd4 f4 To be honest I don't understand
and ...0-0-0, hitting d4. Later if allowed, he all the fuss about 6 g3 The articles in New In
will either break with ...e7-e5 or attack White's Chess Yearbook are very selective and do not
King directly. 7.h3 h5 8.e2 c6 9.e3 cover everything. 6...Bg4 just seems like a
0-0-0 10.g2 e6 11.0-0 One could call this good choice!
main-line. 0-1
[ White may also castle long as an attempt
409
405 B01 majority outweigh Black's passed pawn and

Zhang Zhong 2639 the d5 square? xa4 25.xa4 d5 26.f2
Dreev,Alexey 2666 c8 I slightly prefer Black. All his pieces are
CHN-RUS Chess Summit (7) 17.08.2006 working and the c4 pawn is inhibiting. 27.e2
[Andrew Martin] b6 28.c2 f6 29.h4 No pawns left to
push.
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d6 [ 29.a4 d6! is Dreev's point. ]
Dreev is tiring of the Caro-Kann, but notice he 29...c7 30.e4 fd8 31.ed1 d6 32.h5!
goes into a line where the pawn structure is Now it is Zhang who has to create active
very similar. 4.d4 f6 5.e3 I doubt this counterplay to offset d4. gxh5 33.xh5 g6
move troubles Black. W hite may fianchetto 34.a5
his King's Bishop or he can consider Qd2 and [ 34.g4 cd8 35.f5 exf5 36.xf5 g7
0-0-0. Either way, Black is comfortable. a6 continues in the same careful style and
[ I d o n ' t l i k e 5...f5?! 6.f3! c8 Black keeps his advantage. ]
as much. W hy give W hite a f ree move? 34...d8 35.b7 b8 36.f3 xd4
Short, N-Sulava, N/Ohrid 2001 ] 37.xd4 A strange time to agree a draw.
6.g3 c6N Surely 37... Rxd4 is worth continuing f or
[ 6...g4! is also interesting: 7.f3 ( 7.f3 Black?
f5 8.d2 c6 9.0-0-0 b4! ) 7...c6 ½-½
8.g2 e6 9.h3 h5 10.f4 b4 11.xc7
d5 12.a3 xc3 13.axb4 xd1 14.b5
( 14.xd1 xb4 15.c3 d5= ) 14...xf3 406 B01
15.xf3 xd4 16.xb7 a7 17.xd1 Zhigalko,A 2588
( 17.bxa6 ) 17...xb7 18.bxa6 xc7 19.a7 Sharif,Me 2444
xa7 20.xa7 e7 21.a8+ Zamarbide 29th Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (3.14)
Ib a rre a , B -Ma rtin e z P ere z, J/Mo n d a riz [Tom Rendle]
2005/ ]
7.g2 f5 8.f3 e6 9.0-0 bd7 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.f3 g4 4.e2
He gets his desired structure. W hite goes c6 5.0-0 This move is unusual but actually
after the Bishops in typical fashion. 10.h4 very flexible. White hasn't committed to d4, c4
[ 10.a3 is interesting, preparing Bf4, but after or Nc3 so he still has many setups available.
c7 11.f4 d6 12.xd6 xd6 13.h4 [ 5.d4 0-0-0 was last examined in Baron-
g6 it all comes to very little. ] Kurajica by Gawain for ChessPub. ]
10...g6 11.f4 b4 12.a3 b6 [ 5.c3 has also been covered many times
[ 12...xb2 13.xg6 hxg6 14.d3 b6 for this site, most recently by myself and
15.fb1 is an adventure Black would be ill- Gawain in Fedorchuk-Bauer last year. ]
advised to embark on. White's pieces spring [ 5.h3 is another slightly unusual option that
to life. ] deserves to be looked at xf3 6.xf3 e6+
13.xg6 hxg6 14.b4 d8 7.e2 xe2+ 8.xe2
[ Or 14...0-0-0! ] A) 8...0-0-0 9.c3 e5 10.d3 f5
15.e1 e7 16.a4 a7 17.c4 0-0 looks to be a very sensible way for Black
18.c3 fe8 Dreev prepares for his usual to handle things. After 11.d2 g6 12.f3
siege. 19.e3 b8 20.f4 b5! h6 the position was equal in
At some stage Black has to do something and Panchanathan, M (2564)-Kasparov, S
Dreev judges that the time is right now. The (2490) Ranshofen 2012 White should've
overall purpose of ...b7-b5 is to secure th time- accepted this with 13.xh6 ( but instead
honoured square d5, but White can take on after 13.g5?! d7 14.d2 xg5!
c6. 21.xc6! bxc4 22.f3 f8 23.ac1 15.xg5 f4 16.h4 h6 17.f3 ge7
b6 24.a4 The battle begins for the 18.g4 fxg3 19.xg3 f8 Black had a nice
advancement of W hite's queenside pawn advantage and went on to win a smooth
m a j o r i t y . D o t h e W h i t e b is h o p s a n d t h e game. ) 13...xh6 14.0-0-0;
410
B) 8...d4 9.d1 e5 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.d3 ( Black was fine after 9.bd2 g8
g6 ( 11...e7 12.e1 ec6 might give 10.d4 g5 11.g4 g6 in Palac, M (2553)-
B l a c k a b e t t e r c h a n c e o f e q u a l i s i n g) Prie, E (2489) Cannes 2009 although of
12.e1 g7 13.d2 was slightly better course the position is very complicated!)
for White in Nakamura, H (2708)-Tiviakov, 9...d7 10.a3;
S (2662) Wijk aan Zee 2010 ] B) 6...xf3 leads to a typical slight edge
5...0-0-0 f o r W h i t e a f t e r 7.xf3 d7 8.c3
[ 5...f6 transposes to my notes on the ( instead after the odd 8.g3?! e5 9.d3 f5
game Short-Liiva in the archives where I 10.c3 d4 11.g2 f6 Black had a
r e c o m m e n d e d 6.h3 h5 7.d4 0-0-0 fine game in Sitnikov, A (2506)-Kasparov,
( 7...e6 8.c4 d7 9.e3 is also a little S (2521) Donetsk 2011) 8...e5 9.d4
better for White ) 8.e3 ] xf3+ 10.xf3 f6 11.d2 ]
[ 5...e5 probably isn't a good idea here as 6...f6
after 6.c3 d7 White has ( or 6...d6 [ 6...e5?! allows White to win a pawn with
7.e1 0-0-0 8.xe5 ) 7.xe5! xe5 8.d4 7.xe5! xe2 8.xe2 and Black doesn't
winning a pawn as xe2 9.xe2 xd4 seem to get enough compensation here, for
10.d1 c4 11.xe5+ gives White a example e8 ( or 8...d4 9.d1 d6
winning initiative. ] 10.c3 e6 11.g4 g6 12.d3 ) 9.g4+
6.e1 Another very rare move from Zhigalko - b8 10.xc6+ xc6 11.xe8+ xe8
it's not quite a novelty but it hasn't been seen 12.d1 and White has a safe extra pawn. ]
at this level before. 7.h3 xf3?! This seems inaccurate to me.
[ 6.h3 is much more popular and now Black White gets time to prepare d4 and keeps the
has a choice of whether or not to capture on two bishop advantage.
f3. [ 7...h5 is more critical and now play might
A) 6...h5 I generally feel is more testing continue 8.d3 ( 8.c3?! can simply be met
but White is also a little better here after by e5 ) 8...e6 9.c3 f5 10.e3 b8
A1) 7.c3 d7 8.b4!? 11.d2 ( 11.g4?! xg4 is at least a draw
is very interesting here and it's featured for Black ) 11...xf3! 12.xf3 d4
in a couple of games: and Black is close to equalising. ]
A1a) perhaps it's best to decline the 8.xf3 d7 9.c3 g5 Black's play might look
s a c r i f ic e wi t h 8...f6 9.a3 xf3 dangerous on the kingside but in reality it's
10.xf3 d4 as in Aleksic, N (2371)- too slow as he struggles to get in ...h5
Savic, M (2519) Subotica 2008 when whereas White's attack is pretty automatic on
Black had a good game after 11.d3 g6 the queenside.
12.b1 g7 13.e1 he8 14.e3 e5 [ or 9...e5 10.a4! ( 10.xc6 xc6
15.g5 ( 15.b5 was better with 11.xe5 d6 is less clear) 10...e4 11.xe4
balanced chances.) 15...f5 16.e4 xe4 12.xe4 and Black has insufficient
h5 17.xf6 xf6 18.xf6 xf6 compensation for the pawn. ]
19.e4 a6; 10.d4 g8 11.d2 e6 12.b4 d6 13.c4
A1b) 8...xb4?! 9.e5 xe2 d5?!
10.xe2 e6 11.b1 c6 and now [ 13...e7 avoids the line in the next note
( 11...f6 is probably best but White is but W hite is still doing well after 14.d2
still clearly better after 12.xb4 xe5 and Na5 is something of a threat now. ]
13.f3 c6 14.d4! ) 12.b5! 14.d2?!
would've given White a winning attack [ 14.b5! was very strong here as White's
in Nevostrujev, V (2510)-Kabanov, N attack is f ast af ter ce7 ( 14...xc3??
( 2 4 8 9 ) T o m s k 2 0 0 3 a f t e r xe5 15.bxc6 simply wins) 15.d3 f5 16.xd6+
13.xb7+ d7 14.b5 e6 15.d5 xd6 17.g3 and c4 is coming with a
f6 ( 15...d6? 16.a3 ) 16.xc7 crushing attack ]
and Black loses material.; 14...ce7 15.a4 f5 16.g3! Zhigalko takes
A2) 7.d3 e6 8.e3 f6 9.c3 a move to show that Black has absolutely no
411
attack on the kingside. g7 17.a5 h5 20.g5 e7 21.f4 d6

in desperation Black gives up a pawn that 1/2-1/2 Bittencourt-Vescovi, Porto Alegre
White gladly takes. 18.xh5 f6 19.f3 g4 BRA 2008. If White were inclined to play for
The start of a completely doomed tactic. a win, 18 h5 would be appropriate. ]
20.hxg4 xg4? 21.a6! b6 22.xg4 xg3 10...d7 Noncommittal. Caro-Kann players
23.f3! dg8 may recognize this type of position (Caro with
[ 23...c6 24.xd6+ xd6 25.f4 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Nf6 5 Nxf6+ gxf6). The
is h o p e le s s so B la ck s p o rt i n gly a llo ws other main move is
himself to get mated. ] [ 10...d6!? , as in Hungaski-Di Diego in the
24.a8# A straightforward win in an unusual Archives. ]
line f or W hite but I think Black's position [ A well known line is 10...c7 11.h4 g6
should be playable if he keeps the bishop on 12.f3 d7 13.h3! , threatening Nxg6, ,
after 7.h3 when Black's best seems g7! 14.0-0
1-0 ( 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 15.f3 b8 is probably
okay for Black White's plan is not apparent.)
14...0-0! 15.f4!? ( 15.ae1 looks slightly
407 B01 better for White - Emms) 15...f5! 16.f3 c5
Zhigalko,Sergei 2592 with good counterplay. ...Nf6-e4 is a theme ]
Tomczak,Jacek 2461 11.0-0 c7 12.h4 g6 13.e1
8th Amplico AIG Life Rapid rapid (10) [ 13.f3!? -compare the preceding note. ]
[John Watson] 13...0-0-0 14.e2 d6 15.g3 f5!? 16.g2
To put a piece on f4, although ...f4 wasn't
The line in this game may be considered the really a threat. e5?!
main line of the 3...Qa5 variation these days. [ Black should sit tight and prepare his
White has a tendency to gain a small edge, defences, for example, 16...b8 ]
but nothing significant. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 17.dxe5 xe5 18.f4!?
xd5 3.c3 a5 4.d4 f6 5.f3 c6 [ 18.g5! de8 19.ad1 puts pressure on
6.c4 Black, whose pawn structure is in any case
[ In the Archives I give games with 6.d2 suspect. ]
f5 7.e4 b6 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.c4 18...he8 19.xe5!?
, with a small advantage. ] [ 19.ad1 ]
6...f5 7.d2 e6 8.d5 d8 One of the 19...xe5 20.f3 d2?! Perhaps missing the
main Scandinavian lines. 9.xf6+ gxf6 fork.
[ Or 9...xf6 but 9...gxf6 is more double- [ Black can ask White to find a plan by
edged and gives more dynamic playing 20...b8 ]
counterchances. ] 21.e3! d8 22.f4
10.c3 [ Possible, but less clear is the immediate
[ A number of recent games have followed 22.xa7 b8 ( 22...xb2?? 23.ad1 c7
the old 'main line' 10.b3 d7 11.e2 24.a8+ b8 25.xe5! xe5 26.d8+
c7 12.h4 g6 , when Black has scored xd8 27.xb8+ ) 23.a3 ]
reasonably well, but W hite should still be 22...d7
able to scare up chances 13.0-0-0 ( 13.f4 [ 22...xb2? 23.ad1 a5 24.xg6 hxg6
0-0-0 14.0-0-0 f5 15.g3 b8 16.c4 f6 25.f4 ]
17.xg6 hxg6 was about equal in Socko-D 23.e6?! Too fancy. Simply
Schwarz, Warsaw 2008.) 13...0-0-0 14.g3 [ 23.d3 f6 24.xe5 fxe5 25.xa7
d6 15.b1 ( 15.xg6 hxg6 16.h4 b8 would win a clear pawn. Now Black hangs
17.c3 c8 18.b1 c5 19.dxc5 xc5 on in an inferior position. ]
20.c2 looks to be in slightly in White's 23...fxe6 24.xe5 f7 25.e2 c7
favour (h5 can f ollow), Grover-Almond, 26.ae1 xe5 27.xe5 d2 28.5e2 xe2
Hastings ENG 2008) 15...he8 16.xg6 29.xe2 d8 30.f4 e7 31.f2 d8
hxg6 17.h4 f5 18.g5!? e7 19.f4 d6 32.e1 d6 33.e3 h5 34.b3 f6
412
35.c2 c5 36.h3 b6 37.b3 h6 38.a3 e8 13.xf6+ xf6 14.xe6 xe6

39.g4 g6 40.c4 fxg4 41.hxg4 h5 1/2-1/2 Mirzoev, A-Ibrahimov, R Baku
42.e2 hxg4 43.xg4 f5 44.e2 d7 2009. ]
45.g3 e5 [ 5...g6 is another very sensible approach
½-½ 6.0-0 g7 7.d4 0-0 8.f4 d8 ( 8...c6
would restrict White to a very small edge.)
9.d3 f5 10.e3 c6 11.a3
408 B01 A) 11...g4! 12.g3 xd4 13.xc7
Zinchenko,Yaroslav 2546 c5 14.xd8 xd8 15.xd4 ( 15.a2
Bauer,Christian 2607 e5 is a terrific position.) 15...xd4
XXVIII Open A (7) 14.04.2010 and Black's initiative is easily worth the
[Gawain Jones] exchange.;
B) 11...xd4? A shame, throwing away a
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 a5 4.c4 good position. 12.xd4 g4 13.xe7
[ 4.d4 ] Here we see the problem both f7 and c7
[ or 4.f3 are usually played but White has are en-prise. d7 14.b3 xe7 15.xa5
a different idea in mind. ] xc3 16.bxc3 b6 1-0 Shabalov, A-Wahls,
4...f6 5.ge2 A somewhat more passive M Neu Isenburg 1992. ]
square than the usual f3. White cedes control [ 5...f5 is a little premature as the bishop
over the centre, in particular the e5 square, may want to roost on g4.
but prevents the ...Bg4 pin being as annoying A) 6.g3 g6 7.d4?! e6 ( Aggressive
as usual. I don't think this line is critical but play with 7...c6! 8.b5 0-0-0!
I've seen a few games with W hite adopting looks very strong for Black. Admittedly
t h i s p i e c e c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e c e n t l y . c6 White can wreck the pawn cover in front of
This is the most flexible move order. B l a c k ' s k i n g w i t h 9.xc6 bxc6
[ 5...g4 6.d3 e5 This doesn't work out but the bishop pair, Black's lead in
well. ( 6...c6 transposing to the game development and pressure on d4 promise
should be preferred.) 7.d2 c6 8.h3 h5 Black the better game, e.g. 10.f3 e5
9.g4 g6 10.f4 exf4 11.xf4 e5+ 11.dxe5 xe5+ 12.e3 c5 with the
12.e2 bd7 13.0-0-0 xe2 14.cxe2 i n i t i a t i v e .) 8.0-0 c6 ( 8...c6
gave W hite a pleasant advantage, Geller, should again be considered.) 9.f4! b4
J-Cornette, M Moscow 2006. ] 10.f5 exf5 11.e2+ f8 12.d2 b6
[ 5...c6 is an alternative, solid way of playing 13.xf5 and White had a powerful attack.
but this does nothing to exploit the passive S h a b a lo v, A - W e s t e r i n e n , H G a u s d a l
location of the knight. 1991.;
A) 6.g3 h5! I nearly always like this way B) 6.0-0 e6 7.d3 c6 ( 7...c6
o f d e a l i n g wi t h a k n i g h t o n g 3 . 7.e2 would be somewhat similar to the game
bd7 8.d4 h4 9.f1 b6 10.b3 h3 b u t a b e t t e r ve rsi o n f o r W h it e a s t h e
( 10...h5!? is completely fine for Black.) bishop is worse placed on f5 than g4.)
11.g3 g4 12.f3 h5 13.d2 0-0-0 8.e1!? bd7 9.f4 b6 10.h3 e7
14.g4 g6 Runic, Z-Savic, M Vrnjacka 11.e3 c7 12.d4 g6 13.f4!? 0-0
Banja 2004, and here W hite could have 14.f5 exf5 15.xf5 xf5 16.xf5 ae8
hoped for an advantage with 15.d5 a6 was unclear but White had started to take
16.xa6 bxa6 17.f4 xd4 18.xg6 the initiative. Milos, G-Bertona, F Buenos
fxg6 19.0-0-0; Aires 1997. ]
B) 6.d4!? isn't ridiculous of course. 6.0-0 g4 White has tried various options
Another drawback for Black is that ...Qc7 here. 7.d3
i s n o t a s e a s y t o a c h i e ve a s n o r m a l [ 7.b3 Beter, A-Klima, L Strmilov 2005 can
because of Bf4 ideas.; hardly be a serious test for Black and indeed
C) 6.d3 g6 7.0-0 g7 8.g3 0-0 9.d2 d4! threatening 8...Nxb3 when White
c7 10.a4 e5 11.h3 e8 12.ge4 e6 wo u l d h a ve t o r e ca p t u re wi t h t h e a n t i -
413
positional c pawn, would leave Black the [ In a previous game, White first played his
preferred colour. ] king to safety 9.h1 c5 A decidedly odd
[ 7.b5 b6 ( 7...e5 looks fine as taking on looking move. Evidently Black was worried
c6 isn't a serious threat, especially as Black about getting his queen trapped but in that
has not even castled long yet.) 8.d3 e5 case the line with ...Nc6 probably wasn't for
9.a4 a6 10.e3 c5 11.a5 a7 12.xc6+ him. ( Better was 9...e5 10.b3 0-0-0
bxc6 was positionally better for White. w i t h a n u n c l e a r p o s i t i o n .) 10.a3!?
Muslimov, E-Moiseev, V Saratov 2007. ] would attempt to exploit the queen's position.
[ 7.a3 e6 ( 7...d4!? again is interesting.) W hite plans to follow up with b4 and an
8.d3 0-0-0 9.d2 h5 ( 9...xe2 attack against Black's king. As an added
w o u l d h a v e b e e n m o r e c i r c u m s p e c t .) trump W hite gets a square to retreat his
10.c1?? Typical blitz blunder ( 10.f3 d6 bishop to on a2. ( 10.g3 Manelidou, M-
11.f4 c5+ 12.h1 h5 13.b4 f5 Makka, E Athens 2008. )]
14.fe2! and Black's pieces are clumsily 9...g6 10.d2
placed. ) 10...xe2 11.xe2 xe2 12.f3 [ 10.f4 is an idea that has been seen in
c5+ 13.h1 h5 14.b3 e5 15.e1 previous variations but here it doesn't make
g3+ 0-1 Ozgur, E-Bereza, P ICC 2009. ] sense as Black simply castles long 0-0-0
[ 7.h3 looks sensible to me. Perhaps Black when White's attacking on the wrong side of
s h o u l d r e a c t xe2 ( 7...h5 8.d5!? the board. ]
prevents Black from launching an attack.; 10...b6+ Bauer simply gets the queen out of
7...h5 is of course also possible but then any potential discovered attack. 11.h1 0-0-0
the Black queen doesn't have access to It's important to realise that had W hite not
h5. ) 8.xe2 e6 9.d4 d6 10.c3 0-0 played Ng3 then this would be impossible as
and White has a small advantage with the 12.Na4 would then trap the Black queen.
bishop pair. ] Thankfully here we have the d4 square. 12.a3
7...e6 8.f3 loosening the g1-a7 diagonal but [ 12.a4 d4 13.e2 h4 and White only
forcing Black to relinquish his annoying pin a ch ie ve s in f o rcin g B la ck' s qu e e n t o a
and preventing an exchange on e2. stronger square. ]
[ 8.d2 has been White's alternative. e5 12...h5! Time to attack! A knight on g3 always
( 8...h5 9.f3! Now this move has added provokes an ...h7-h5-h4 thrust, even when
venom as the queen f urther congests Black has castled short and here with Black's
Black's pieces. d6 10.f4 c5+ 11.h1 king on the queenside the move is logical.
h5 12.b5 0-0-0 13.e1 g6 14.a4 13.e1
xf4 15.xf4 e5 16.e3 e7 17.xa7+ [ 13.ge2 e5 14.b3 h4
xa7 18.xa7 d5 19.f2 h5 20.a5 c6 is not appetising for W hite either. He is
21.xd5 cxd5 22.b6 1-0 De Visser, L- exceedingly passive and has no counterplay
Herda, C Bad Homburg 2009 was the model whilst Black's kingside attack is obvious. ]
game from the White viewpoint.; 8...0-0-0 13...h4 14.e3
appears possible as I don't see a way to trap [ 14.ge4 xe4 15.xe4 xe4 16.fxe4
the Black queen.) 9.e1 ( 9.f3!? ) 9...xe2 h3 17.g3 xb2 was the better evil but still.
10.xe2 d6 11.xe5 xe5 12.b3 c6 ( 17...e5!? )]
13.h3 ed7 14.a3 0-0 15.ae1 [ 14.a4 is probably the best d4 15.e2
and surprisingly W hite won quickly but I t o f o r c e t h e q u e e n t o r e t r e a t d7
don't really believe he can have any serious but Black is still obviously better. ]
edge here. Summerscale, A-Brady, S Dublin 14...hxg3!! Not too difficult once you've seen
1997. ] the concept but Bauer had to realise the
[ 8.h3 again should be considered although queen sacrifice was strong before playing ...
Black doesn't have any major problems after h4. 15.xb6 xh2+ 16.g1 axb6
either the retreat or the capture. ] Black isn't actually that behind in material with
8...f5 9.g3 Only this is a novelty but one two minor pieces and a pawn for the queen.
that won't be repeated in a hurry. The important aspect is that W hite cannot
414
defend against both the threats on the dark xf3+ 15.g1 xg4+ is the saving
squares (...Bc5+) and the penetration of the grace.;
rooks with ....Rd8-h8. 17.b4 B) 11.f4 d6 12.d2 ( 12.e2! b6
[ 17.b5 c5+ 18.f1 gives Black various 13.b3 fd5 14.xd5 xd5 15.d2
wins but the most accurate appears to be: xe5 16.xe5 xe5+ 17.dxe5 h5 )
d5 19.xd5 ( 19.c1 only survives a few 12...0-0 13.h5 xc2 14.xc2 xe5
moves longer, e.g. f2 20.g5 h1+ 15.dxe5 xe5 16.xe5 xe5+ 17.e2
21.e2 h5 22.d2 e5+ 23.f1 e3+ g3+ 18.f1 ad8 19.d1 xd1+
24.xe3 xe3 and White has no way of 20.xd1 d8 21.f2 b5 22.b3 d4
preventing ...Rd8-h8-h1 other than giving 23.g1 f4 24.g2 g6 25.hxg6 hxg6
h i s e x t r a q u e e n .) 19...xd5 20.d4 26.d1 a5 27.xd4 xd4 28.e4 xe4
Otherwise ...Rh1+ and ....Re5+ ( 20.c3 29.fxe4 a4 30.d1 c5 31.c2 c4
d4-+ ) 20...xd4 21.xd4 xd4 22.g1 32.e2 e3 33.f3 a3 34.bxa3 xa3
dh5-+ ] 35.e2 e3 36.a4 bxa4 37.xc4 a3
17...d6 So one threat prevented but Black 38.a2 g7 39.c4 h6 40.a2 g5
has the other path. 18.b5 41.b1 xg4 42.f1 h3+ 43.g1
[ 18.e2 looks like the toughest test but g3+ 44.f1 g5 45.a2 h3 46.c4
dh8 ( 18...e5 is another option 19.f1 g4 47.d2 f3+ 48.g1 g3+ 49.h1
h1+ 20.g1 d4 21.e2 c3! 1/2-1/2 Philippe,C-Mateuta,G/Masters,
followed by ...Nh5-f4 closes the cage on Saint Lo FRA 2003 From this game, we
White's king.) 19.f1 h1+ 20.g1 8h2 can deduce that 6...Bf5 is still very much
21.e2 ( 21.c3 xg2! 22.xg2 h2+ on the board. ]
23.f1 f2# ) 21...d4 and Black is going 7.b3 e6 8.0-0 bd7 9.g5 c7 10.e2
t o b e a h e a d in d e ve lo p m e n t wh i lst h i s d6 Given time, Black will set up a very
attack continues will full steam. ] reasonable position with ...0-0, ...Bb7, ...a6
18...f4 19.d4 d5 20.xd5 exd5 a n d . . . c 6 - c 5 ! 11.e4 More forcing moves
White is powerless and crippled. 21.e2 d7 don't appear to do the trick:
22.d6 xd6 A very pretty game by the [ 11.d5 xd5 12.xd5 cxd5 13.xb5
French GM. The lines with Nge2 are quite ( 13.xd5 c4 14.xc4 bxc4 15.e3
common but I don't think they should pose a a6 16.fd1 c7 17.d2 ) 13...b6
significant threat to the Scandinavian. 14.xd6+ xd6 15.fe1 0-0 16.ad1 a6
0-1 17.d2 fc8 ]
[ 11.a4 b4 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 h6
14.h4 0-0 15.c4 b7 16.d3 g6
409 B01 17.g3 xg3 18.fxg3 c5 ]
Zorko,Jure 2215 11...f4 12.xf6+ xf6 13.xf4 xf4
Vukovic,Zdravko 2435 14.e5 A noble attempt to obtain the better
24th Open Bled (4) 2003 ending but I believe a waiting move was better,
[Andrew Martin] tempting Black to castle and only then Qe5:
[ 14.fe1! 0-0 15.e5 xe5 16.xe5 b7
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 xd5 3.c3 d8 17.c3 c5 18.dxc5 ac8 19.ad1 xc5
The BANKER Variation. Here, Black finds a 20.d7 ]
novel way to interpret the play. 4.d4 f6 14...xe5 15.xe5 b7 16.a4 d7
5.f3 c6 6.c4 b5!? Very, very unusual, 17.xd7 xd7 18.a5 White has a slight pull
and on the evidence of this game, not so bad and he wants to insure himself against defeat.
[ 6...f5 is more traditional, allowing White to Nevertheless, against a lower-rated opponent,
play very sharply: 7.e5 e6 8.g4 g6 I am convinced that Zorko would have played
9.h4 bd7 10.f3 This is the critical move, either 18 c3 or 18 f4,keeping the tension. The
threatening to win the Bishop. c7!? game heads towards a drawn ending: a6
A) 11.xd7 g3+ 12.f1 xd7 13.h5 19.fe1 b4 20.f4 g6 21.e5 ab8 22.f2
( 13.d3 f6 ) 13...xc2 14.xc2 b5! Simplification reduces the number of
415
pieces that can train on b4. 23.xb5 xb5= 410 B02

24.e1 d6 25.e5 h5 26.h4 Inelastic. Ashton,Adam 2299
Either of the two following suggestions kept Baburin,Alexander 2523
the small White edge: 4NCL Nottingham ENG (8) 10.04.2005
[ 26.g3 ] [Andrew Martin]
[ 26.e3 although this advantage is
nominal. ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 xc3 4.dxc3
26...b8 27.g3 c8 28.c5 b8 29.e3 I remember playing the Alekhine a long time
f1 30.f2 b5 31.e3 f1 ago and quickly came to the conclusion that 4
At this moment it was sensible to shake hands. dxc3 is nothing for White. Sure, he gets active
Zorko plays bravely but the net effect is to piece play ... for a few moves...and then as
invite the Black Bishop to a better square. soon as Black catches up with development,
32.a4 g2 33.d2 d5 34.c4 The crux of problems with the pawn structure begin to
White's winning try but I feel it is misguided loom large. d6 5.f3 dxe5!
for the following reasons: 1) Black's Rook [ 5...c6 is less reliable, due to 6.b5 g6
comes stra ight into the game. 2) From a 7.f4 g7 8.exd6 cxd6 9.d2 followed by
position of a mutual stand-off, where Black long castling. ]
can do nothing, the game suddenly becomes 6.xd8+ xd8 7.xe5 e6! Has the twin
unclear. bxc3+ 35.xc3 f6 36.b4 g5 merit of being less common than 7...Ke8,
Game on! 37.fxg5 fxg5 38.d1 forcing the opponent to think for himself, and
[ 38.hxg5 g8 39.d2 xg5 40.c3 g4 at the same time being not at all a bad move.
41.d3 c4 42.d1 e4 is hardly The main difference is that the Black King has
desirable. ] c8 as flight square if needed and of course,
38...gxh4 39.gxh4 g8 40.xh5 g3+ Black develops a piece. ...f7-f6 is on the cards,
41.c2 h3 42.e2 xh4 43.c3 h3+ to be followed by maybe ....Bg4 or, ...Bf7 and
44.c2 h2 45.d3 h1 46.c2 h2 then...e7-e5!
47.d3 e5 48.dxe5+ xe5 Must be drawn [ 7...e8 8.b5+ d7 Meanwhile ( 8...d7
now but for the first time in this game, 9.f4 f6 10.xd7 xd7 11.xd7+ xd7
Vukovic spies a chink of light and plays with 12.0-0-0+ c6 13.g3 e5 14.f4 exf4
renewed energy. It is now White that has to 15.xf4 e8 Lopez Martinez, J-Jimenez
fight for the draw. 49.c1 h3+ 50.c2 b3 Villena, F/La Roda 2004 is a typical scenario.
51.b1 a3 52.e1 e4+ 53.d2 d4 W hite is slightly worse due to his pawn
54.d1?? The defence was difficult. structure. His initiative is illusory he has no
Perhaps the only way was pieces left to attack with!) 9.xd7 xd7
[ 54.c1 a2+ 55.e1 b2 ( 55...d5 10.f4 c6 11.e2 e6 12.c4 c5
56.d1+ c3 57.b5= ) 56.c4+ e3 is not much for White either, despite the two
57.c3+ f4 58.c4= ] Bishops. In fact the Bishops tilt the game
54...a2+ 55.c1 c3 56.e3+ d3 towards equality. 13.c3 e7 14.d1 a5
57.xd3+ xd3 58.f3 c3 59.b1 a3 15.d3 hd8 16.e2 f6 17.h3 d7
My impression is that 6...Bf5 is a better move 18.a4 ad8 19.c2 xd1 20.xd1 e4
than 6... b5. White can expect an edge. 21.c2 e5 22.c1 d6 23.d3 h6 24.f3
0-1 f5 25.d1 f8 26.b3 f6 27.c2 e4
28.f4 1/2-1/2 Rozentalis, E-Volzhin, A/
Zakopane 2000 ]
8.e3 d7 9.0-0-0 e8
[ Maybe 9...c8 i s b e t t e r : 10.d3 f5
11.g3 e4! 12.g1 f3 13.d2 e6
14.d4 c5 15.e3 e7 16.h3 h5
17.e1 c6 18.d3 g5 19.f4 g4 20.g2
xg2 21.gxg2 f5 22.ge2 h6 23.d1
c7= Radulov, I-Letzelter, J/Vraca 1975
416
Black is untroubled. I guess the problem I nowadays, however the Ukranian GM Vladimir
have with 9... Ke8 is that if Black really Baklan plays it with great success.
wanted to put his King on this square, why [ 4.dxc3 is the alternative and we'll consider
not play it immediately and not commit his it in Rozentalis-Volzhin. ]
Bishop? It's all about playing the opponent 4...d5 After this move a long fight with a
and giving him problems to solve. ] blocked centre and much manoeuvring will
10.f3 g4 11.e2 e5 normally arise.
[ The modest 11...e6 12.h3 h5 13.g4 g6 [ Another possibility is 4...d6 After the
should perhaps have been preferred. ] natural 5.f4 Black has a choice.
12.h3 f5 13.he1 f6 14.c4! e4 A) 5...f5 can hardly be good as the
15.h4 g5 16.f3 c5 Bishop is clearly misplaced here: 6.f3
[ 16...c6 17.f5 ] dxe5 7.fxe5 d5 8.e2 c6 9.0-0!
[ 16...xc2 17.xc2 gxh4 18.f4 ] xe5 10.xe5 xe5 11.d4 a5
17.f7+? White has been playing extremely 12.b1! and Black's position is barely
well so far but now he loses his bearings. defensible: e6 13.xb7 d6 14.b5+
Instead e7 15.e2 g6 16.g5+ f6 17.d5!
[ 17.xc5! keeps an edge: xc5 18.fxe4 with an unstoppable attack was Lisitsin-
gxh4 19.d5! b6 ( 19...d7 20.d2 e7 Tolush, Moscow 1948.;
21.e3 ) 20.b4 e6 21.b5+ ] B) 5...dxe5 6.fxe5 d5 7.d4 c5
17...xf7 18.xd7+ e6 In principle, every was played in Tal-Podgaets, USSR 1970
exchange should favour the guy with better where Black failed to equalise: 8.f3 c6
pawns. 19.xc5 xd7 20.xe4 gxh4 9.e2 g4 10.0-0! cxd4 11.cxd4 e6
21.xh4 h5! Cutting the White Rook out of ( 11...xf3 12.xf3 xd4+ 13.xd4
the g file. Now Black can target g2. 22.e4 xd4 14.xb7 b8 15.b1 is just bad
ag8 23.e2 g3 24.d2 hg8 f o r B l a c k .) 12.b1! d7 13.g5!
Conclusion 4 dxc3 isn't good for anything Tal at his best! Most players would play 13.
other than the occasional surprise. Either 7... c3 without much thought. xe2 14.xe2
Ke8 or 7...Be6 are comfortable enough. e7 ( 14...xd4 15.e4
0-1 is very dangerous for Black) 15.c3 xg5
16.xg5 h6 ( After 16...0-0 17.g4 h8
18.f3 W hite's attack is very strong.)
411 B02 17.c1
Baklan,Vladimir 2552 B1) Again Black can't castle in view of
Miroshnichenko,Evgenij 2500 17...0-0 18.xh6! with a crushing attack:
Alushta 1999 gxh6 19.g4+ h7 20.f6 g8
[Alexander Volzhin] ( 20...h8 21.bf1 af8 22.xh6+
xh6 23.f6+ h7 24.h5+ g7
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 xc3 25.g5+ h7 26.h6# ) 21.f4 g7
This natural move is definitely the best. 22.xh6+ g8 23.h4 f8 24.h8+
[ After 3...e6 4.d4 d6 5.e4! White is g8 25.h7 e7 26.f1 with mate
better. The game Baklan-Marchev, Zagan soon.;
1995 continued: c6 6.f3 e7 7.c3 0-0 B2) 17...e7 18.f3 d5 19.c4 b6
8.d3 a6 9.e2 b5 10.h4! Starting a 20.c5 d5 21.c6! Tal executes the
direct attack on Black's King. b4 11.c4 b6 attack very energetically. bxc6 22.a3!
12.eg5 g6 13.h5! dxe5 14.xh7! Now the Black King has to stay in the
This well calculated blow destroys the Black centre of the board forever. The rest is
K i n g ' s s h e l t e r . xh7 15.hxg6+ g8 easy ( for Tal, of course!) f5 23.exf6
16.xe5 xe5 17.h5! xd3+ 18.f1 gxf6 24.b3 d8 25.fb1 h7 26.g3
g7 19.h6+ g8 20.g5 In view of b6 27.xb6 axb6 28.g8+ e8
unavoidable mate Black resigned. ] 29.xh7 and Black resigned;
4.bxc3 This old line is not so popular C) 5...c6 6.f3 dxe5 7.fxe5 d5 8.d4
417
g4 9.e2 e6 10.0-0 e7 Unlike in Tal- threatened and Black has no adequate
Podgaets Black hasn't played an early ... defence against this move! d3 The only
c7-c5, and due to this important saved move. 14.xd3 xd3 15.xd3 b6
tempo he has time to complete his 16.e3 xf3 17.gxf3 0-0 18.f4 xe3
development. Nevertheless W hite has 19.fxe3 and after a few more moves Black
good prospects for a Kingside attack. The resigned in Baklan-Schneider, Antwerp
game Bilek-Larsen, Sousse 1967 1999. ]
continued: 11.g5 xe2 12.xe2 0-0 9.e6! A very strong novelty.
13.h5 ( 13.g4! intending Rf3-g3 or [ After the usual 9.0-0 e6 Black has no
Ne4 is even stronger.) 13...xg5 14.xg5 problems. ]
e4 15.a3 fd8 16.f2 d7 17.af1 9...xe6 10.f4 c8 11.xb7 The Rook is
and White had strong pressure on the K- very active, and is a bone in Black's throat. c4
side ] The only move, otherwise 12.Bb5 is very
[ 4...c5 5.f4 d6 6.f3 g6 In my opinion, nasty. 12.g5! d7
this set-up is worthy of serious attention. [ 12...f5 is strongly met by 13.g4! xg4
Obviously Black can choose another move 14.xg4 and White has managed to hinder
order such as 4...d6 5.f4c5 7.d4 g7 8.e2 the comfortable development of Black's K-
0-0 9.0-0 dxe5 10.fxe5 c6 11.f4 g4 s i d e s i n c e h6? is bad in view of 15.e6!
12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 cxd4 14.xc6 bxc6 fxe6 16.g6# ]
15.cxd4 d5 16.c3 c5 17.b3 fd8 13.g4 e6 14.f3! White must play very
18.e3 cxd4 19.cxd4 f6 20.exf6 xf6 actively, otherwise Black will complete his
and Black was clearly better in Hennings- development. The text creates threats on the
Gipslis, Havana 1971. ] f 7 s q u a r e . f6 Now it may seem that White
5.d4 c5 6.f3 c6 7.e2 g4 has run out of ideas, but he finds an excellent
[ 7...e6 is also playable. After this move the resource. 15.xd7!! xd7 16.xf7!
position looks similar to a Winawer French. ] [ T h e t e m p t in g 16.xd5+ is not so good:
8.b1 b8?! The usual move in this position. e7 17.d6+?! ( 17.f3 with some
However after this game it is unlikely to be compensation deserves attention.) 17...e8
played any more. 18.xe6 fxe6 19.xe6 xd6 20.xd6
[ 8...d7 seems to be more solid. 9.c4!? b8! parrying the attack. ]
White tries to seize the initiative at any cost. 16...h5
A) 9...e6 In my opinion the best. 10.cxd5 [ 16...xf7 is hardly better: 17.xd5+ e8
exd5 11.0-0 cxd4 12.xd4 xe2 18.xe6 b7 19.xc8 xc8 20.0-0
13.xe2 c5 14.f4 d8 15.e6!? fxe6 and the position is similar to the game. ]
16.h5+ ( T h e t e m p t i n g 16.xe6? 17.h3 xf7 18.xd5+ e7 19.g5+ e8
as played in Shilin-Tobak, Polanica Zdroj 20.xe6 c7 21.xc8 xc8 22.0-0
1999 is weak in view of xe6 17.e1 Now it's clear that Black's position is hardly
xf2+! 18.xf2 0-0+ 19.g1 d7 defensible. W hite has three pawns for the
and Black is a clear pawn up.) 16...g6 sacrificed piece, (and will probably win the
17.xg6 f7 18.f4 xh5 19.xh5 b6 pawn on c4) as well as a strong attack on
with chances for both sides in a Black's King. e7 23.e1 d7 24.b5 a6
complicated endgame; 25.xc4 d8 26.d5! xg5
B) 9...dxc4 is risky: 10.d5 xf3 11.xf3 [ 26...a5 is hardly better in view of
( 11.gxf3 i s d u b i o u s i n v i e w o f d4 27.xa6 xg5 28.xa5+ c7 29.a6
12.xc4 f5! and Black is OK) 11...xe5 and with five (!) pawns for the piece and a
12.e2 b5 13.f4 and White has a strong strong attack White is easily winning. ]
initiative which is clearly worth the 27.dxc6 d2 28.c7+ c8
sacrificed material; [ 28...d7 also loses by force: 29.f7+ c6
C) 9...cxd4?! Definitely far from best. The 30.c8+! xc8 31.e6+ c5 32.a7+
alternatives are: 10.cxd5 xd5 11.xb7 c4 33.xa6+ xc3 34.xc8+ ]
e6 12.0-0 c5 13.b5! 14.c4 is 29.b1 d7 30.a4+ This move is good
418
enough to win, but disastrous. ]

[ 30.c8+! is quicker: xc8 31.b7+ d6 9...cxd4! 10.xc6
32.b6+ e7 33.e6+ ] [ 10.xd5 de5-+ ]
30...xc7 31.xa6 d7 32.b7+ e8 10...bxc6 11.xc6 dxc3! The diagonal h8-
33.e6+ d8 34.b8+ c7 35.b6+ d7 a1 is very long indeed. 12.f4
36.b5+ Black resigned. An excellent [ 12.xa8 cxb2 13.xb2 xb2 14.b1
performance by Vladimir Baklan! However a5+! is a motif known from the Pirc.
despite this convincing victory, I don't think Black's active pieces overwhelm the White
that this line is really dangerous for Black. King: 15.d2 b6 16.c6+ d7 17.c7
Black has several solid possibilities: I c3-+ ]
particularly recommend you pay attention to 12...cxb2 13.d1 a6! 14.g5
the set-up used in the game Hennings-Gipslis. [ So that if 14.xa6 b6! 15.xb6 axb6
Thus we can conclude that this system is 16.e2 e5 17.g3 d4 and the b2 pawn is
playable for both sides, and that there is a winner. ]
much scope for further investigation. 14...c8 15.c7 b7 White walks a fine line
1-0 after 4 e6. You better hope your opponent
doesn't know what to do or you are likely to
suffer a crushing reverse!
412 B02 0-1
Dolzhikova,Kateryna 2248
Pavlov,Sergey1 2459
Independence Cup A (9) 20.08.2005 413 B02
[Andrew Martin] Escudeiro Tilve,Ramon
Piay Augusto,Diego 2285
BERSERKER 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 II Open, Poio (1) 2002
fd7 4.e6!? Spielmann's move from long ago, [Andrew Martin]
which leads to sharp complications, but which
objectively should be fine for Black as long as 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.c3 xd5 4.xd5
he knows what he is doing! fxe6 5.d4 c5 xd5 Playing against this type of thing is a
An e m ine n t ly p la ya ble m o ve . Ma y I a lso question of attitude. Above all it's important
suggest 5...g6: not to be disgusted about White's apparent
[ 5...g6! 6.h4 g7 7.h5 f8 8.h6 ( 8.d3 lack of ambition-just be thankful that he has
c6 9.hxg6 hxg6 10.xh8 xh8 11.e3 given you such easy equality. I show some
e5; 8.f3 c5! ) 8...f6 9.g4 g8 10.g5 recent games where, by and large, Black is
h8 11.f3 e5! 12.dxe5 ( 12.xe5 xe5 not troubled . 5.d4
13.dxe5 c6 ) 12...c6 intending ...Bg4 ] [ 5.f3 g4 ( 5...e5 6.d4 e4 7.e5 e6
6.f3 8.c4 d6 9.xe6 xe6 10.0-0 d6
[ 6.dxc5 is given as the 'main line' on ECO, 11.f4 f5 12.h5+ g6 13.g5 0-0 14.h4
and then c6 7.f3 g6 8.h4 g7! 9.h5 f6 15.g3 g7 16.h5 c6 17.e3
a5! Relying on development to see him xe5 18.fxe5 e6 19.ad1 ad8 20.c3
through. 10.d2 xc5 11.hxg6 hxg6 xa2 21.g5 d7 22.f6+ f7 23.hxg6+
12.xh8+ xh8 13.b5 b6 14.e3 d8 hxg6 24.f2 g8 25.fd2 d5 26.c4
15.c3 f8 16.b3 a6 17.bd4 e5 xc4 27.d5 c5+ 28.h1 e3 29.h4
18.xc6 bxc6 19.0-0-0 c7 20.b6 b7 e8 30.e6 exd2 31.exd7+ xd7
21.c5 e6 Csapo-Blatt Hungary 1991 ] 32.dxc6+ xc6 33.c3 e8 34.xd2
6...c6 7.b5 g6 8.e2 g7! 9.xe6? b5 35.a1 e4 36.a5+ b6 37.f6+
[ 9.dxc5 however unattractive, had to be d6 38.c3 a6 39.b4 e7
played. I prefer Black after a6! 10.xc6 0-1 Kuznetsov, Y-Glukhov,M/Capital of
bxc6 because how is White ultimately going Siberia Open, Novosibirsk RU 2002 (39))
to be able to resist the Black centre, given 6.e2 c6 7.h3 ( 7.d3 e6 8.a3 d6
that 11.xe6?? fails to e5 But 9 Qxe6 is 9.e3 h5 10.h3 0-0 11.0-0 xf3
419
12.xf3 e5 13.g3 xb2 14.b1 xa3 0-1 Sadiqi,A-Cubas,J/ Olympiad, Bled SLO
15.xb7 a6 16.xc6 xc6 17.xa7 2002 (25) ]
ab8 18.a2 b4 19.e2 h5 20.h4 fb8 5...c6
21.c4 b1 22.d4 xf1+ 23.xf1 f3 [ 5...g6 6.c4 d8 7.f3 g7 8.e3 0-0
24.e2 b1+ 0-1 Phanikanth,J-Skytte,R/ 9.c2 f5 10.d3 xd3 11.xd3 e5
Proclient Cup, Olomouc CZE 2002 (24)) 12.0-0-0 c6 13.d5 e7 14.g4 h6 15.h4
7...h5 8.0-0 e6 9.b3 d6 10.c4 e4 f5 16.gxf5 gxf5 17.dg1 f4 18.c5 h8
11.b2 xf3 12.xf3 f4 13.e1 h2+ 19.e4 b5 20.xe5 f5 21.xg7 xg7
14.f1 0-0 15.c2 e5 16.xc6 bxc6 22.g1+ f6 23.xe7+ xe7 24.g6#
17.c5 e7 18.xe5 h1+ 19.e2 xg2 1-0 Van der Veen,R-Velema,S/6th HZ Open,
20.g1 xg1 21.xg1 f6 22.xc7 fe8 Vlissingen NED 2002 (24) ]
23.d1 d8 24.c4+ h8 25.f7 g8 [ 5...f5 6.c4 e4+ 7.e3 e5 8.a3 c6
26.xd8 axd8 27.xa7 1-0 Lafortune,G- 9.e2 exd4 10.g3 e6 11.xf5 xf5
Tardits,A/II Open, St Chely d'Aubrac FRA 12.xd4 0-0-0 13.d3 d7 0-1 Gaillard, B-
2002 (27) ] Therkildsen,T/Open, Le Touquet FRA 2002
[ 5.f3 (13) ]
A) 5...e5+!? 6.e2 c6 7.b3 d4 6.f3
8.a4+ d7 9.b4 xc2+ 10.d1 [ 6.e3 f5 7.f3 b4 8.c1 xa2
xb4 11.f3 f6 12.c4 a4+ 13.e1 9.h4 xc2 10.xc2 xc2+ 11.xc2
c2+ 0-1 Rodriguez Pazos,J-Aguiar 0-0-0 12.f3 e6 13.e2 b4+ 14.d2
Macineiras,S/ XVIII Open, Ferrol ESP xd2+ 15.xd2 b1+ 16.d1 e4+
2002 (13); 17.e2 xe2+ 18.xe2 f6 19.0-0 e5
B) 5...xf3 6.xf3 f5! 7.b5+ ( 7.d3 20.dxe5 fxe5 21.xe5 d2 22.g4+ b8
c6=; 7.d4 d7!= ) 7...c6 8.a4 23.b3 e8 24.c4 d3 25.b1 xb3
d7=; 26.c1 c3 27.b1 xc4 28.f3 c6 29.h3
C) 5...c6 6.e2 f5 7.xd5 cxd5 e7 30.g4 c3 31.g2 c7 32.a1 b6
8.b5+ c6 9.xc6+ bxc6 10.d3 e5 33.b1+ c5 34.a1 b5 35.a6 d6
11.e2 c5 12.e3 b6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 36.d1 b4 37.f3 b3 38.a3 b2 39.xc3
14.xb6 axb6 15.d4 e4 16.he1 he8 b1 40.xc6+ d7 41.a6 e8 42.d6
17.d2 g4 18.a1 xe2 19.xe2 d7 f8 43.d5 b8 44.c6 e5 45.f3 a5
20.e3 f5 21.h4 h6 22.h5 f8 23.f4 46.a6 f7 47.a8+ e7 48.a7+ f6
e6 24.e3 c5 25.d1 a8 26.b3 49.a6+ g5 50.b6 h4 51.b5
fb8 27.a3 c4 28.g3 f7 29.xf5 0-1 Neethling,C-Maeckelbergh,M/Olympiad
g8 30.e5 f8 31.d2 b5 32.xd5 w, Bled SLO 2002 (51) ]
ae8 33.c6 f5 34.d5 b8 35.d6 6...g4 7.e2 0-0-0 8.c3 e5 9.c4 b4+
c8+ 36.b7 d8 37.c7 ff8 38.d7 10.d2 a5 11.d5 e4 12.g5 xe2
f7 39.e3 1-0 Mrkonjic,N-Balazs,G/2nd 13.xe2 he8 14.xe4 f5 15.dxc6 d4
Summer Open, Savaria HUN 2002 (39) ] 16.cxb7+ xb7 17.xb4 xb4+ 18.f1
[ 5.c4 e5+ 6.e2 e6 7.f3 f6 8.0-0 d2
d6 9.d4 h5 10.g5 g6 11.h4 f6 0-1
12.d3 f7 13.c5 fxg5 14.cxd6 cxd6
15.xg5 f4 16.g3 xd4 17.g6+ d8
18.xd4 1-0 Olias Munoz, F-Sanz Chacon, 414 B02
C/Madrid 2002 (18) ] Hector,Jonny
[ 5.c3 e5 6.h3 c6 7.a4 f5 8.c4 Kengis,Edvins
d7 9.a4 0-0-0 10.b5 d3 11.e2 Haninge (Sweden) (9) 1992
c5 12.0-0 h5 13.xd3 xd3 14.d1 [Nigel Davies]
h6 15.a4 g6 16.h2 a5 17.e1 h4
18.h1 f5 19.g1 e4 20.f3 xg1 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 d4 4.exf6 dxc3
21.xg1 exf3 22.xf3 xf3 23.e6+ 5.fxg7 cxd2+ 6.xd2 xg7 7.f3
xe6 24.gxf3 e1+ 25.f2 de8 [ Prior to Balashov's introduction of this move
420
(in the 1974 Alburt game given below), 43.e3 g2 44.c4 g3+ 45.d2 f3
White used to play 7.h5 ] 46.e2 c3 47.d3 c2+ 48.e3 g4
7...c6 Hector's opponents have tried a 49.b4
number of moves with truly miserable results: 1-0
[ a) 7...d6 8.0-0-0 c6 9.c3 h6+
10.b1 0-0 11.g3 f5 12.b5 ad8
13.e2 g6 14.xg6 hxg6 15.xg7 415 B02
xg7 16.xc6 bxc6 17.d4 gave White Hector,Jonny
an endgame edge in Hector - Grujic, Malm0 Mas,SJ
1998 ] Copenhagen (Denmark) 1990
[ b) 7...d4 8.c3 g4 9.xg7 xg7 [Nigel Davies]
10.0-0-0 Hector - Blees, Kecskemet 1987 ]
[ c) 7...xb2 is extremely risky - White's 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 fd7 4.e6
pieces are being developed at lightning [ This pawn sac is White's sharpest option,
speed and the position is wide open. A and once again Hector has his own ideas.
game Balashov - Timoshenko from the 1989 The fact that in a later game (against
Moscow Ch., went on 8.d1 d6 ( 8...d4 H i l l a r p ) H e c t o r a v o i d e d t h i s w i t h 4.d4
9.e2 g4 10.b3 f6 11.f4 doesn't tell us much - he might simply have
gave White excellent attacking chances in wanted to avoid any 'home cooking' whilst
Balashov - Alburt, USSR Ch., Leningrad landing his opponent in unfamiliar territory.
1974. ) 9.c4 f6 10.e2 c6 11.c3 After e6 5.f4 c5 6.f3 we get a Steinitz
xc3+ 12.xc3 b4 13.b5 xc3+ variation of the French. ]
14.xc3 d7 15.d5 c8 16.0-0 4...fxe6 5.d4 g6 6.h4 g7
with Black's king still trapped in the centre. ] [ 6...f6 is no better as White plays 7.h5!
8.b5 d6 anyway: g8 ( 7...xh5 8.xh5 gxh5
[ Or 8...0-0 9.xc6 bxc6 10.c3 xc3+ 9.xh5+ d7 10.f3 g7 11.h6 f6
11.xc3 d5 12.d1 e4+ ( 12...xg2 12.xd5! exd5 13.xd5+ e8 14.h5+
13.d3+- ) 13.e2 a6 14.d2 ad8 d7 15.0-0-0 led to a quick win for White in
15.f3 e6 16.f2 Hector - Daillet, Bellon - Kovacevic, Karlovac 1979) 8.hxg6
Cannes 1989. One of the big problems with hxg6 9.f3 c5 10.e5 c6 11.b5 d7
this line for Black is that even if he avoids 12.xc6 xc6 13.e3 a5 14.f3 b4
getting mated in the middlegame, he often 15.0-0-0 c4 16.g4 g5 17.h5 Hector -
finds himself with a poor pawn structure for Schoen, Malmo 1988 ]
the endgame. ] 7.h5 f8 8.f4! Another of Hector's ideas,
9.c3 0-0 10.xc6 xc3+ 11.xc3 bxc6 clamping down on the e5 square. c5 9.b5
12.e2 a6 13.d1 e6 14.e3 xe3 a6 10.f3 d7 11.e5 a5+ 12.d2
15.fxe3 Ex-Soviet GM s don't usually expect xd2+ 13.xd2 c4 Burgess ('The Complete
to lo se s ligh tly wo rse e nd ga me s against Alekhine') gives no comment on this complex
W esterners. But this one's in for a big endgame. Personally speaking I would not
surprise. fd8 16.xd8+ xd8 17.f1 e5 want to play Black - the extra pawn is useless
18.f5 e8 19.g5+ f8 20.h5 g7 and he is under severe pressure. 14.a4 gxh5
21.h4 b8 22.b3 c8 23.a4 a6 24.c1 15.e2 g6 16.xh5 0-0 17.xg6 hxg6
f6 25.d3 b5 26.c4 b6 27.c5 18.g3
Hector's fancy rook moves have given him a [ And not 18.xg6 f6 19.xe7+ f7
big plus, with Black more or less completely etc. ]
tied down. The harvest of pawns is about to 18...e8 19.ae1 f7 20.e2 fc8 21.he1
begin. f7 28.a4 b7 29.xc6 a7 e8 22.c3 h6+ 23.f4 g7 24.h4 f6
30.c5 a5 31.d2 e7 32.c3 f5 33.g3 25.xf6
h5 34.e4 h3 35.d2 h4 36.gxh4 a8 [ Choosing to force matters but Black
37.d3 h8 38.xc7+ d6 39.a7 xh4 m a n a g e s t o h a n g o n . 25.g5
40.a6+ e7 41.f2 d7 42.xa5 xh2 was an interesting alternative, keeping the
421
tension for the time being. ] Miroshnichenko, Budapest 1999) 10.xc6

25...exf6 26.g4 xb5 27.axb5 c7 dxc3 11.xd7+ xd7 12.xd7+ xd7
28.xf6+ g7 29.d7 b6 30.e3 d8 13.b3 c6 14.e3 d8 15.d1 0-0
31.e5 f8 32.g3 f6 33.h3 h8 and Black had a strong position in Vinnikov-
34.xh8 xh8 35.g4 g7 36.e3 xb5 Sedina, Ukrainian Ch., Lutsk 1986 ]
37.h1 f8 38.g5 d6 39.f3 f7 8...g7 9.e3 a5
40.d7 xg5+ 41.g4 d8 42.xg5 [ The following year Madsen varied with
xd7 43.h6 f7 44.xg6 e7 45.f5 exf5 9...0-0 but after 10.0-0 c7 11.e1 de5
46.xf5 d8 47.c6 e7 48.e6 d7 12.d4 d7 13.e2 xd4 14.xd4 f4
49.c6 e7 50.e6 d7 15.e3 f7 16.f4 c6 17.b5 d8 18.c3
½-½ W hite still maintained his hold on the
ce n t re (He cto r - Ma d se n, Co p en h a ge n
1996 ]
416 B02 10.0-0 0-0 11.b1 a6 12.xc6 bxc6
Hector,Jonny 13.e1 c7 14.g5 e5 15.d4 f5
Sergeev,Vladimir 16.h3 f7 17.xg7 xg7 18.a4 e5
Open Berlin (Germany) (7) 1995 19.b6 b8 20.c4 e6
[Nigel Davies] [ 20...e6 might have been better but I still
like White. Black's centre is immobile and
1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 fd7 4.e6 fxe6 more of a target than a strength. ]
5.d4 c5 6.f3 c6 7.b5!? Hector's move, 21.b4 h5 22.f4 exf4 23.xe6 f3 24.g3
fighting for control of the d4 and e5 squares. g5 25.cxd5! A strong exchange sacrifice
g6 From a statistical point of view, this which recaptures the initiative. xe6 26.dxe6
certainly looks like the best shot Black f8 27.b3 e5 28.d7 d8
develops his kingside and challenges for the [ After 28...xe6 29.xf8 h3 30.xf3
key dark square. The alternatives have held Black's dreams evaporate ]
out for a maximum of 25 moves: 29.e3 d5 30.xf3 xf3 31.xf3 f5
[ a) 7...e5 8.dxe5 e6 9.g5 d4 10.g4 32.a3 a8 33.g2 a7 34.b8 f6
e7 11.xh7 xc2+ 12.d1 xa1 35.xc6 a8 36.d3 c8 37.d8 e5
13.xd5 exd5 14.g5 xe5 15.h5+ 38.a4 f8 39.b7 c7 40.a5 xe6
1-0, Hector - Konopka, Bundesliga1997 ] 41.b3 fc8 42.f3 d7 43.c3 b7
[ b) 7...cxd4 8.xd4 xd4 9.xd4 a6 44.b5 axb5 45.axb5 f6 46.e4 xb5
10.d3 c7 11.0-0 c5 12.e2 d7 47.d5 e6+ 48.c4 b7 49.d4 b1
13.h5+ d8 14.e1 b5 15.f4 c6 50.f4 e7 51.c6 d6 52.b5+ xc6
16.ac1 b7 17.f7 c8 18.e2 d8 53.a7+ b7+ 54.xc8 xc8 55.d4+
19.h5 c4 20.e5 b7 21.b3 c5 d7 56.e5 b7 57.f6 b5 58.g7 h5
22.c4 c6 23.c7# 1-0, Jirkovsky - 59.h4 e5 60.d3+ c6 61.fxe5 xe5
Smejka, Czech Team Ch., 1994-5 ] 62.xh7 e6 63.h6 c7 64.g4
[ c) 7...a6 8.xc6 bxc6 9.0-0 g6 10.e1 1-0
f6 11.dxc5 g7 12.f4 0-0 13.e5 h6
14.d4 h5 15.h4 f4 16.g4 g7
17.d4 xe5 18.xe5 c7 19.g3 b8 417 B02
20.b3 d7 21.e3 f7 22.f4 f8 23.f1 Hector,Jonny
g5 24.ce2 gxf4 25.xf4 0-1, Dobrowolski Van der Werf,Mark
P.(2376) - Oliwa M.(2370), Poland 1994 Ch Open Berlin (Germany) 1993
Poland ] [Nigel Davies]
8.dxc5 White should not allow himself to be
distracted from the priority of central control. 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 e4 4.ce2
[ 8.h4 looks far too optimistic g7 9.dxc5 The critical move, aiming to gain time against
d4 ( 9...xc5 10.e3 d6 11.h5 d7 Black's errant knight. f6
a l s o l o o k e d ve r y s e n s i b l e i n B a l o g h - [ The other method of disrupting White's
422
plans is with 4...d4 when the main line runs

3.c3 Hubner plays for fun these days I
5.c3 c6 6.xd4 xd4 7.a4+ c6 guess. However, the resulting positions from 3
8.xd4 xd4 9.cxd4 g5 . In this position Nc3 can be anything but fun for Black if he
Hector came up with a new move in gets it wrong. Keres used to favour 3 Nc3 it
10.d3!? which left Black with very little for
suits attacking players who like free piece
his pawn after ( 10.c4 e6!? 11.d3 b5 play. xc3 4.dxc3 g6?!
12.xb5 cxb5 13.xg5 d5 14.f3 e6 [ 4...d6 5.f3 dxe5 6.xd8+ xd8
gave Black very annoying play for his pawns 7.xe5 e6 was seen in the recently
in Hector - Werner, Andorra 1988 - and both covered game Ashton-Baburin. No doubt
10... Ne6 and 10. ..b5 are good uncomfortable with the thought of an early
alternatives) 10...e6 ( 10...e6? 11.h4 endgame against Hubner, Junge deviates.
wins a piece) 11.e2 g6 12.e4 c7 4...g6 is uncommon and I'm guessing will
13.b3 h6 14.h4 in Hector - Anagnostou, remain so. Black is putting his head into
Komotini 1992 ] the lion's mouth. ]
5.d3 g5 6.xg5 fxg5 7.h4 g4 8.f4 f5 5.f4 As long as the pawn remains on e5,
[ An attempt to improve on the older 8...g6Black will find it difficult to free himself, so
after which 9.d4 h6 10.d3 a6 11.e2 Hubner indulges in a bit of over-protection
gives Black insufficient compensation for the
before launching the inevitable assault with h2-
g-pawn that's about to drop. ] h4.
9.ge2 [ 5.f3 g7 6.c4 0-0 7.f4 d6 8.e2
[ 9.d4 looks like a reasonable alternative ] g4 9.0-0-0 c6 10.e6 f5 11.e3 xf3
9...c6 10.g3 d7 11.d4 b4 12.e6 12.gxf3 e8 13.h4 also looked pretty
d6 uncomfortable for Black in Samuelsson, L-
[ 12...xe6 13.c3 c6 14.e2 intending to Safranska, A/ Debrecen 1992 ]
ca s tle , e lim in a te th e b ish o p o n e 6 a n d
5...g7 6.e2!N So that if Black plays . ..d7-
recapture the g4 pawn would be very d6, White promptly castles long and goes for
unpleasant for Black. Understandably he the throat.
tries to confuse the issue, but Hector [ 6.d2 0-0 ( 6...d6 7.0-0-0 c6 8.b5
maintains a vice-like grip. ] d7 9.f3 dxe5 10.h6 f6 11.e3 c8
13.xf5 xf4 14.e3 g3 15.f3 xf3 12.he1 a6 13.xc6 xc6 14.xe5 f5
16.gxf3 gxf2+ 17.xf2 0-0-0 18.c3 a6 15.xc6 bxc6 16.g4 xg4 17.c5 a4
19.h5! 18.g7 g8 19.d4 1-0 Grabczewski, R-
Sealing in Black's f8 bishop gives
W hite a strategically won game. The rest Gawlikowski, S/Poznan 1962) 7.0-0-0 c6
requires little comment. c6 20.xa6 bxa6 8.f3 d6 9.exd6 exd6 10.h6 g4
21.f4 g8 22.f5 g6 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.ag1 11.xg7 xg7 12.e2 e8 13.h3 xf3
g7 25.xg6 f6 26.hh6 xg6 27.xg6 14.xf3 f6 15.he1 ab8 16.b3 e5
c5 28.g4 h8 29.f6 xf6 30.xf6 exf6 17.e4 d7 18.g3 c6
31.dxc5 e8 32.xf6 d8 33.e3 e7 1/2-1/2 Myagmarsuren, L-Kraidman, Y/
34.f7+ xe6 35.xa7 e5 36.xa6 b8 Skopje 1972 ]
37.b6 6...c6 7.0-0-0 a5 8.b1 0-0 9.f3 a6
1-0 10.d4! A strong move. a) It's very difficult to
shift this Knight without making major
concessions. b) h2-h4 is imminent and then
418 B02 maybe h5, hxg6 and Qe3-h3. Chess is an
Huebner,Robert 2624 easy game when you have five moves in a
Junge,Kai 2259 row. b5 11.h4 b4 12.c4 Why open any lines
BL 0405 Preetzer TSV - OSC Baden Baden (9.5) at all? c5 13.h5 b7 14.e3 It's all
[Andrew Martin] coming true! e6 15.xe6 dxe6
[ 15...fxe6 16.hxg6 hxg6 17.xd7+- ]
Now a miniature, where Hubner trounces the 16.d3 fd8 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.de1 d7
Alekhine in fine style. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 19.h3 The attack requires little comment. b3
423
20.axb3 d4 21.h7+ After 21 ...Kf8 22 Bh6 7. Who would have thought that only 5 moves
is curtains. By no means a great game, but earlier White had no development advantage
very direct and easy to understand. at all! f6 14.f4! White is ready for a decisive
1-0 attack, so this move which opens central files
suggests itself. Now W hite's initiative
progresses without any obstacles. e6
419 B02 [ 14...exf4 15.h5+ f7 16.be1+ e7
Keres,Paul 17.xe7+ xe7 18.b4+ , winning the
Mikenas,Vladas Queen. ]
URS 1968 15.fxe5 d7 Black was relying on this move it
[Alexander Volzhin] seems that he will recapture on e5 and castle
queenside, completing development
1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.ge2 successfully. However an unpleasant surprise
g4 awaits him. 16.exf6!! xg3 17.fxg7 c5+
[ 4...c6 This developing move is natural [ Unfortunately, Black can't recapture the
and good, moreover it contains very nice pawn: 17...xg7 i n v i e w o f 18.e1!!
trap. 5.g3? This seemingly natural move a n d W h i t e w i n s a p i e c e b a c k : xe1
lose by force! g4! 6.g2 d4! 7.xd5 19.bxe1 xc3 20.xe6+ d8 21.dxc3
( 7.h3 was the only move to avoid immediate with a decisive material advantage. ]
loss, although Black already has a huge 18.h1 g8 19.e1!
a d v a n t a g e i n t h e e n d g a m e a f t e r xc3 [ 19.e2 is inferior in view of the unexpected
8.dxc3 f3+ 9.xf3 xf3 10.xd8+ xd8 0-0-0! 20.xe6 d6! and Black has little to
11.g1 e5 ) 7...xd5! The point! worry about. ]
Incidentally this combination is typical and 19...d6 Here this idea doesn't work.
has occurred plenty of times in different 20.xe6+ d8 21.xg8+ c7 22.xb7+!
openings. One example: 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 xb7 23.b1+ b6
3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 ed 5.Nd5 Bg7 6. Bg5 Nge7? [ 23...c7 is no real improvement: 24.a5+
7.N:d4! B:d4 8 Q:d4! 8.f3 xf3 9.f1 g2 b6 25.f7+ and the pawn queens. ]
a n d W h i t e r e s i g n e d , G i b b s - S c h m i d , 24.f7+ c7 25.g1! The last move of a
Lugano, 1968. ] brilliant combination, foreseen by Keres when
[ 4...g6 is not bad either: 5.xd5 xd5 he sacrif iced the piece on move 16! Now
6.c3 d8 7.b3 g7 8.b2 0-0 9.g3 Black has no threats while White's g7-pawn is
d7! 10.g2 c6 11.xc6 xc6 about to queen. d8
Bla ck alrea d y is b e tt e r. 12.h4?! d6 [ 25...h2+ 26.f2 g3+ 27.f1 ]
13.0-0?! This move doesn't fit with previous 26.c5 xd3 27.cxd3 h2+ 28.f2 g3+
one. d4 14.e4 c6! 15.e1 xc2 29.e2 Black resigned. An excellent game!
Black has a clear extra pawn and won in a 1-0
few moves, Horvath,C-Dede,1997. ]
5.h3 xc3 6.bxc3 f5
[ Later Mikenas tried to improve with 6...xe2 420 B02
The game Lisitsin-Mikenas, USSR, 1968 Markovic,Miroslav 2517
continued: 7.xe2 c6 8.d4 e6 9.b1 c7 Andonov,Bogomil 2364
10.e3 d7 11.c4 e7 12.d2 0-0 TSGM June Belgrade YUG (6) 20.06.2002
13.0-0 ad8 14.c3 e5 and Black has [Glenn Flear]
solved any major problems, although White
keeps small advantage. ] Note how this line occurs via the
7.b1 d5?! I don't like Black's last two Scandinavian (Centre Counter) move-order.
moves. Now White firmly seizes the initiative. 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 f6 3.c3 The same
8.g3 c8 9.c4 a5 10.b2 c6 11.c3 position arises from 1 e4 Nf6 2 Nc3 d5 3 exd5
c7 12.d3! e5 13.0-0 It's interesting to Nxd5. xd5 4.c4 c6 Both 4...e6 and 4...
compare this position with that after the move Nb6 are better-known.
424
[ 4...b6 5.b3 c6 6.f3 f5 7.0-0 e6 16.g3 ]

8.e1 e7 is solid. ] 16.xd5 d6 17.xc4 xc4 18.xc4
[ 4...e6 can also be met by 5.f3 when The smoke has cleared but despite the equal
A) 5...b4 6.b3 8c6 7.ge2 a5 ma t e ria l t h e a sym m et ric p a wn s le a d s t o
8.a4+ d7 9.a3 d5 10.xd7+ xd7 i n t e r e s t i n g c h a n c e s f o r b o t h s i d e s . f4
11.xd5 ( 11.d3!? c5 12.xd5 exd5 19.fe1+ f8 20.f3 h6 21.h4 f5?!
is a better try for something out of the [ 21...d7 was better as after 22.d3 c8
opening ) 11...xd5 12.xd5 exd5 23.c4 b6 Black has the centre under
K a l i n i n a - M e l a m e d , S l o ve n i a 1 9 9 9 i s control. ]
frankly dull.; 22.d3 xd3 23.cxd3 g5 24.f2 g7
B) 5...b6 6.b3 e7 7.ge2 0-0 8.d3 25.c4 White's central pawns are more
c6 9.0-0 a5 10.f4 c6 11.fe1 dangerous than Black's kingside. Indeed he
xb3 12.axb3 d5 and Black had easily has potentially the better bishop so W hite
equalized in D. Jere-M.Kopylov, Golden must be better. b4 26.e4 b6 27.b1
Cleopatra 2002 ] a5!? Not ideal but it's out the way of White's
5.f3 A few years ago a young Galkin tried to pawns and it does cover e1. 28.d5 he8
defend this line three times as Black against 29.b2 f5 30.d4+ f7 31.ee2 ad8
Skatchkov and lost each time. Now increased 32.a4 e1 33.g1 a5 Black waits to see
popularity has led to Black's resources being what White is intending. 34.f1 h5 35.e5
b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d . e6 6.ge2 d7 xe5 36.xe5 c8 37.b5 d2 38.d6!?
Natural but there are other ways of handling A reasonable try. White activates his rook at
the Black position the risk of exchanging this pawn for one of
[ 6...b6 7.g3 h5 8.h4 d7 9.d3 7f6 Black's kingside phalanx. e6 39.d4 e3
10.g5 b7 11.xd5 exd5 12.e5+ d7 40.d7 d8 41.e5+ d6 42.d5+ e6
Olcayoz-Gaprindishvali, Turkey-Georgia 43.e5+ d6 44.c3 xd7 45.xf5 c8
2002 and Black's king found a safe square 46.e2 g8 47.e5 h4 48.d4
on c7 and soon grasped the initiative. ] [ 48.f6? allows an unfortunate pin f8 ]
[ The experimental 6...f6 turned out to be 48...g4 49.fxg4
better for White in Skatchkov-Galkin, Russia [ 49.f7 is messy after h3! ]
1997 after 7.h3 d7 8.0-0 7b6 9.d3 49...xg4 50.f8+ b7 51.f7+ a6
f4 10.xf4 xf4 11.e1 g6 12.b3 g7 52.f1
13.a3 e5 14.e3 xe3 15.dxe3 e6 [ 52.b8? is weak in view of xg2+ 53.f3
16.ad1 because Black then castled long f2+ 54.e4 a5 ]
allowing the strong manoeuvre Ne4-d6. 52...xd4! A clever way of obtaining a drawn
H o we v e r B l a c k s h o u l d h a ve p l a ye d f5! ending. 53.xd4 f3 54.d7 fxg2+ 55.g1
and his position looks sound. ] h3 56.c5 f4 57.h2 f1 58.g1 bxc5
7.d4 xc3 8.bxc3!? An interesting decision. 59.h7 a1 60.xh3 xa4 61.xc5 b5
White allows the doubling of his pawns but the 62.f2 a5 63.xg2 a2 64.f3 a4 65.e3
d-pawn is thus well protected. Instead if White a3 66.h8 c2 67.e4 a2 68.d4 g2
captures with the queen then despite his 69.d3 b4 70.b8+ a4 71.h8
space advantage Black can play for a timely ... [ Not 71.c4 c2+ 72.c3?? xc3+ ]
c5 and dissolve White's centre. d6 9.d3 71...b3 72.e5 f2 73.g8 f3+ 74.e2
c5 10.0-0 c7! Much better than f5 75.d4 a5 76.a1 c2 77.b8 a3
automatically castling. Black threatens the h- 78.b2+
pawn but has a second idea in mind. 11.g3 ½-½
c4! Closing things up and obtaining the d5-
square for his knight. 12.e2 f6 13.g5
d5 14.f5!? Trying to complicate as
o t h e r wi s e W h i t e h a s n o t h i n g o u t o f t h e
opening. xh2+ 15.h1 exf5
[ 15...0-0 looks dangerous after the simple
425
421 B02 11.xb7 d5!-+ ( 11...d7

Nagy,Bence 2355 is also winning. );
Kahn,Evarth 2307 B) 6...d4?? V e r y p o o r . 7.xf7+ d8
FSIMB August (11) 15.08.2006 8.dxc3 xd1+ 9.xd1 e6 10.e2 c5
[Andrew Martin] 11.f4 d6 12.ad1 c7 13.xd6
xd6 14.d1+ 1-0 Braun, G-Schaefer, O/
It is rare that we encounter an entirely new Badenweiler 1995 ]
variation these days. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 6...d5 7.xc3 d7 Logical, as per the
3.f3 d6 4.c3!? I haven't seen this previous note. 8.d4
variation played before. If the coming [ 8.f3 e5! 9.xc7 ( 9.c4 e4+ 10.e2
evidence is anything to go by, it lends itself to d6= ) 9...c5 gives Black the initiative. ]
brutal, short games. dxe5 5.xe5 xc3 8...e6 9.e3 xe5 Opening the d file seems
[ 5...e6 is unnatural, although Black can wrong.
still achieve coherent development: 6.f3 [ Instead, Black should think about
c6 7.c4 d6 8.d4 d7 9.xd7 xd7 co n tin u in g de ve lo p me n t a n d t h u s 9...a5
10.0-0 g6 11.xd5 xd5 12.xd5 cxd5 Intending .. Bb4 and setting a cute trap:
13.c3 g7 14.e1 0-0 15.f4 e6 16.a3 10.a3 b4! 11.axb4 axb4 12.xa8 bxc3
b5 17.g3 a5 18.d6 fc8 19.h4 c6= 13.xc8+ e7 14.xh8 ( 14.xc7 cxb2
Seidov, Z-Logdahl, H/Dos Hermanas 2004 ] 15.xd7+ xd7 16.xd7 b1+ 17.d2
6.f3N I presume this is one of the 'points'. xd7!-+ ) 14...cxb2-+ ]
White angles for a lead in development and 10.dxe5 d7 11.e2
early tactical skirmishes, in the style of the [ I prefer 11.d1 and after c6 12.xc6
open game. But af ter Black's next move, xc6 13.f3 White is a fraction better. His
there really is nothing to fear. refusal to change down gears costs him the
[ Yet 6.bxc3 seems to have been played game. ]
relatively frequently, continuing in the same, 11...c6 12.b3 xg2 13.0-0-0 c6
t r a p p y s t y l e : d7! I think this is the most 14.hg1 e4 15.f4 a4 16.xe6+??
reliable move. Black picks up a couple of Bizarre. Nagy has an hallucination.
tempi exchanging off the aggressive White [ Just 16.xa4 xa4 17.f3
Knight. ( 6...f5 should get roughly treated: was indicated. ]
7.f3! c8 8.c4 e6 9.xf7! g8 10.g4 16...fxe6 17.h5+ g6 18.xg6 The point.
g6 11.g5 c6 12.xe6 e5 13.e2 xc2+! Counterpoint and quite decisive.
d8 14.xe5 e7 15.a3 f6 16.b5+ 19.xc2 e4+ This ' variation' is no better or
c6 17.xb7 xa3 18.xa8+ e7 worse than a lot of lines against the Alekhine
19.xa7+ d6 20.xa3+ c5 21.a6+ and may give White a small edge. An early ...
e5 22.0-0-0 xg5 23.de1+ e4 Nd7 is recommended to Black, after which he
24.xe4+ xe4 25.e2+ 1-0 Plasman, H- can count on equality.
Riefel, J/Deventer 1997) 7.xd7 xd7 0-1
8.f3 c6 9.c4 xf3 10.gxf3 e6 11.d3
c5 12.0-0 0-0 13.d1 h4 14.d4 d6
15.d3 xh2+ 16.f1 e5 17.e4 exd4 422 B02
18.cxd4 fe8 19.xb7 h3# Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter 2410
0-1 Fernandez Arroyo, C-Asensio Diaz, J/ Bagirov,Vladimir 2525
Almendralejo 2003 ] Cuxhaven 1994
[ 6.c4?! is another 'try'. Look at the effect [Alexander Volzhin]
on Black here!
A) O f c o u r s e h e s h o u l d p l a y 6...d5! 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 e4
when the complications after 7 Nxf7 are [ 3...d4 is possible immediately, but after
merely brief and hardly advantageous to 4.ce2 black has nothing better than
White. 7.xf7 ( 7.f3? e6 ) 7...xf7 A) 4...d3 5.f4! ( 5.cxd3!? d5
8.f3+ g8! 9.xd5+ e6 10.xb7 xb7 wit h a m p le co m p e n sa t io n) 5...dxc2
426
6.xc2 leads to a serious advantage for equality. ]

white.; 20.d5 Now black's position is truly
B) 4...e4 transposing to the game, as ] m is e r a b le . d6 21.f4 xc6 22.xc6+
4.ce2 d4 5.c3 White should undermine the d7 23.e1+ d8 With the king in the
d4 pawn as soon as possible, otherwise black centre black can hardly hope to hold the
will strengthen it with a comfortable game. position. 24.a6 e8 25.c1! e6
One example: [ 25...e6 26.xd6+! cxd6 27.a5+ b6
[ Filtzer - Bronstein, 1959 5.d3 c5 6.b4 28.xa7 c6 29.a5+ d7 30.b5
e6 7.f3 c5! This temporary pawn threatening d5, and after d5 31.b7+
sacrifice leads to an excellent position for wins ]
black 8.bxc5 c6 9.b2 b6! 10.c3 26.xa7 xb2 27.a8+ e7 28.g8 ee2
( 10.cxb6 xb6 11.b1 b8 29.xg7+ e8 30.g8+ e7 31.g5!+-
is too dangerous for white) 10...bxc5 11.c1 xf4 32.g7+ d6 33.xd7+ xd7
b8 12.a1 a5 13.d2 g6 14.cxd4 34.g4+ So as we can see, 2. Nc3 deserves
xd2+ 15.xd2 b4 16.g3 cxd4 17.a3 serious attention. I wonder why it is relatively
d5 18.e2 h6 19.xd4 0-0 rarely played. Probably white doesn't want to
and despite being a pawn down black is give black the chance to transpose to other
better, as it is very diff icult f or white to openings, for example, 2... e5 leads to the
complete his development. ] Vienna game, 2...d5 3.e5 Nfd7 4.d4 e6 is the
5...c6! French, and even the Pirc may occur after 2...
[ Of course, 5...dxc3 6.bxc3 is bad for black, d6 3.d4. But anyway, if you play 1.e4 you
as white has an overwhelming advantage in should be ready for these openings!
the centre. ] 1-0
6.cxd4
[ 6.xd4 doesn't promise white any
a d va n t a ge , a s b la ck o b t a i n s su f f icie n t 423 B02
c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r a p a w n a f t e r xd4 Novitzkij,Dmitrij 2408
7.a4+ c6 8.xd4 xd4 9.cxd4 g5 Kupreichik,Viktor D 2464
10.c4 e6 11.e2 c7 12.d3 a5 13.a4 70th ch Minsk BLR (1) 04.03.2004
e6 14.d2 d5 15.c3 b4 as the game [Andrew Martin]
Yakovich - Kengis, 1984 proved ]
6...g5 7.f4 e6 8.f3 exd4 1.e4 f6 2.c3 We don't see this variation
[ Black has no time f or moves like 8...a6 too often. Possibly White was running scared
because of 9.d5! xd5 10.d4! and black of Kupreichik's attacking skills and wanted to
will be smashed after Nc3, d5 etc. ] run the game into a quiet branch line. Of
9.exd4 xd4 10.a4+ c6 11.b5 d7 course 2 Nc3 is OK, but it's not very sharp. d5
12.e6! xe6 3.exd5 xd5 4.g3 A move is a move. Why
[ 12...fxe6 is insufficient, as after 13.e4 should Black let W hite settle on the long
White has a lot of threats. ] diagonal? He has ways of mixing it up. xc3
13.e5 d7 14.xc6 bxc6 15.xc6 e6 5.bxc3 And here's another. I quite like 5..Qd5,
16.0-0 White is slightly better, as he has a which equalizes immediately by the way, but
development advantage and Black's pawn the Queens come off early which might not be
structure is weak to everyone's taste. d7 This is one of them.
[ Besides the text, 16.b3! and /\\ Bb2+/= also [ 5...d5! 6.f3 e4+ 7.e2 xe2+
is worth considering. ] 8.xe2 b6 9.d3 b7 10.g2 d7 11.e1
16...e7 17.d4 b8 18.f5 White plays for a e6 12.f1 e7 13.f4 0-0 14.c4 d6
direct attack. exf5 19.xf5 f6? This panic- 15.e5 xg2+ 16.xg2 fd8 17.c6
induced move is clearly a mistake. After this xf4 18.xd8 d2 19.c6 xe1
black's king will never find a safe place. 20.xe1= Meyer, U-Schlawin, M/Senden
[ The paradoxical 19...0-0! was possible, as 2 0 0 3 B l a ck h a s f e w p ro b le m s t o s o lv e
20.xd7 b4 21.c6 b6 leads to here. ]
427
6.g2 c6 7.f3 g6N Inventive as ever, than the previous variation, where there were
Kupreic hik tries to com e u p with a n ove l two c pawns to defend. d7 19.c4 c6!
winning attempt. A Black Bishop on g7 will A correct move, breaking up the centre before
intimidate this particular W hite pawn the d pawn becomes dangerous. 20.dxc6
formation because if White ever gets around [ 20.e3 e8 21.d6 e6 22.c5 d5
to playing d2-d4, then Black prepares ... c7-c5, 23.xd5 cxd5 24.xd5 c6 25.d2
with pressure. is rather risky for W hite who for his extra
[ 7...d7 8.d4 f6 9.0-0 e6 10.f4 d6 pawn faces a game-long defence on the
is less energetic but perfectly viable. Black light squares. ]
is equal here too. 11.d2 ( He should settle 20...xc6 21.xd7 xd7 22.xc6 bxc6
for 11.e3 0-0 12.c4 with equal chances.) Both players seem happy with this equal
11...0-0 12.e5?? xf3 13.g5 xg2 ending. W hite gets his Rook active first but
14.xf6 xf6 15.xf6 gxf6 16.xg2 c6-+ cannot nurse his weak pawns at the same
0-1 Vilar Rodriguez, M-Alonso Macias,V/ time. 23.b7 b6! 24.c7
Santiago de Compostela 2002 This should [ If 24.c5 d5 25.d6 e8 26.d3 a5
n o t b e a s d i sa st ro u s a s W h it e m a d e i t 27.a7 c3! and Black is fine. ]
seem. ] 24...g5 Nudging the Bishop out of position.
[ 7...e6 is sometimes played: 8.0-0 25.e3 xc4 26.xa7 e5! 27.xc6 xa7
A) 8...e7 9.e1 g5 10.f1 d5 28.xc4 ...Rxa2 is next when there is nothing
11.e3 f6 12.c4 f5 13.d4 e4 left to play for. A short game but full of quality
14.e2 xc2 15.e5 xe5? ( 15...g4! ) ideas. The 2 Nc3 variation and subsequent
16.xe5 g6 17.d5 d7 18.xg5 f6 positions is important because it can arise
19.dxe6 fxe6 20.b5 f8 21.b2 g6 from a Scandinavian move order as well. I
22.xb7 c5 23.xc7 d3 24.xc2 feel that 4 g3 whilst unusual isn't very
1-0 Brendel, O-Grosshans,R/Frankfurt effective if Black gets on the case immediately,
1999; disrupting W hite's plans. 4...Nxc3 5 Bxc3
B) 8...d7 9.d3 e7 10.b1 0-0 Qd5! seems particularly good.
11.e1 f6 12.c4 e8 13.d2 xg2 ½-½
14.xg2 b6= Guyot,P-Hauchard, A/
France 1993 Summarising this information
I feel that Black is equalizing in virtually 424 B02
every conceivable logical line. I fail to Nuevo Perez,Antonio 2195
understand why White tries this variation Vera Gonzalez Quevedo,Reynaldo 2546
apart from as I say to dampen the ardour Open Malaga (2) 26.02.2000
of a violent attacker or to completely avoid [Gary Lane]
the main lines. ]
8.0-0 g7 9.e1 0-0 10.d4 d7 11.g5 1.e4 c5 2.c3 f6 3.e5 d5 4.d4 cxd4
e8 Back at the chicken shack Black is 5.f3 c6 6.cxd4 d6 7.c3 e6 8.xd5
lo ok ing f o r a p a wn brea k. He's got go o d exd5 9.d3!?
development and comfortable squares for his [ 9.e2 is the main alternative and has the
pieces. If he could only play .. e7-e5 now he merit of avoiding the pin with ...Bg4. ]
might stand better. White moves to stop him. 9...g4
12.c4 h6 13.f4 e6 14.d5 exd5 [ 9...dxe5 10.dxe5 b4+ 11.d2 xd2+
Opening up the Rook, only to be exchanged 12.xd2 0-0 13.0-0 g4 14.e2 xf3
unfortunately. He could have played ...Ba4 15.xf3 1/2-1/2 M.Mueller-G.Moehring,
immediately: Senden 1999. ]
[ 14...a4 15.b1 e5 16.e3 ( 16.d2 [ 9...e7 10.0-0 0-0 11.h3
b6 17.c3 e4 18.d4 c5 ) 16...b6 A) 11...e6 12.e1 h8 13.exd6 xd6
17.d2 f5 ] 14.g5 xg5 15.xg5 f5 16.d2 f4
15.cxd5 xe1+ 16.xe1 a4 17.b1 b6 ( 16...xd4 17.f4 d7 18.e3 a4
18.d3 This looks a shade better for White 19.e5 c6 20.xg7+ xg7 21.xe6
428
is good for White) 17.b5 f3 18.g4 xg4 425 B02

19.hxg4 d7 20.h4 xg4+ 21.g3 h5 Nurkic,Sahbaz 2415
22.h2 h4 23.g1 hxg3+ 24.xg3 xd4 Leventic,Ivan 2424
25.g5 f4 it is interesting just to see how TCh Neum BIH (3) 26.08.2002
Black goes wrong in such a good position [Glenn Flear]
( 25...xf2+ 26.h1 d4 wins ) 26.h3+
g8 27.g1 e5 28.hg3 h8 29.d3 1.e4 f6 2.e5
af8 30.a3 xg5 31.xg5 d4 32.h5+ [ 2.c3 d5 ( 2...e5 is of course OK but it's
g8 33.h7+ h8 34.f5+ g8 not an Alekhine!) 3.e5 e4 4.ce2
35.e6+ f7 36.xd5 and White had is considered in ECO as a route to an edge
turned the tables and was winning in V. after 4...d4. However in a number of games
Chikovani-J.Zhitin, Tallinn 1997.; Black has been fairly successful with f6!?
B) 11...e8 12.e1 e6 13.b1 dxe5 for instance 5.d3 g5 6.xg5 fxg5 7.h4
14.xe5 f6 15.b3 c7 16.b2 g6 g4 8.f4 g6 9.g3 h6 10.ge2 c6
17.f4 with equal chances, M.Mueller-M. 11.d4 f5 12.g2 b4 13.0-0 c6 14.c3
Heinelt,Kassel 1999. ] a6 15.c4 e6 and Black had a rock-solid
10.b3 position J.Hector-J.Eriksson, Skara 2002.
[ 10.0-0 e7 11.e1 0-0 12.b1 dxe5 Despite his 200-odd point def icit Blac k
13.dxe5 b4 14.d2 xd2 15.xd2 xf3 never looked in trouble and drew
16.gxf3 the wrecked kingside pawn structure comfortably. ]
is a long-term problem. h4 17.xd5 ad8 2...d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 d5 5.c4 e6
18.e4 h6 19.c2 d4 20.e3 xe3 6.g4!? Unusual but Nurkic has played this
when the king is weak it pays to keep the before. Usual are 6 Nc3 and 6 d4, for instance
queens on the board ( 20...h5! 21.ad1 [ 6.c3 xc3 ( 6...xc5!? ) 7.dxc3 c6
h4 ) 21.xe3 e8 22.e4 d2 23.xc6 8.f4 h4 9.g3 e7 10.b4 g5 11.e3
bxc6 24.b3 and White had a plus due to the xe5 12.d4 g7 13.e2 d6 14.cxd6
extra pawn, P.Varley-A.Longson, cxd6 15.h4 d7 16.hxg5 xg5 17.h5
Birmingham 1999. ] g6 18.h3 with a sharp struggle in Posch-
10...xf3 11.gxf3 Baburin, Vienna 1995 ]
[ 11.xb7 xd4 12.gxf3 dxe5 is winning [ 6.d4 b6 7.cxb6 xb6 8.d3 d5 9.exd6
for Black. ] Otherwise Black has a promising French-
11...dxe5 12.xb7 xd4 Black is a pawn up style position. cxd6 10.f3 b7 11.0-0
and the knight covers the vital b5 square so e7 12.c3 0-0 and Black has no real
the check with the bishop on d3 would not be problems Kruglov-Pushkin, Russia 1992 ]
effective. 13.e3 c5 14.c1 b8 15.a6 6...b4! as White no longer defends c2 this
White's initiative has run out of steam and now move complicates White's development plans.
he must watch Vera go on the off ensive. [ Nurkic-Corvi, Toscalano 1996 continued
xf3+ 16.e2 xe3 17.b5+ Finally, White 6...c6 7.f3 f5 8.g3 keeping an eye on
is able to deliver a check to prevent Black g7 to f rustrate Black's development. b6
from castling. However, on f8 the black king is 9.cxb6 axb6 10.0-0 a6 11.xa6 xa6
fairly safe in contrast to White whose king is 12.c3 a5 13.d4 g8 14.d2 e7
exposed. f8 18.fxe3 e4 19.c6 15.a3 f7 and Black's control of the d5-
[ 19.cd1 keeps the game going because square doesn't compensate having a lack of
g5? runs into 20.d6+ g8 21.xb8+ space t o co-o rdinat e h is pie ces . W hit e
d8 22.xd8# ] developed a dangerous passed a-pawn in
19...g6 20.hc1 g5 subsequent play. ]
0-1 7.a3 b6 8.d4 a6 9.e4 This doesn't look
very dangerous for Black but White needs to
defend both c2 and d3. xc4 10.xc4
[ 10.xa8?? loses to d5 11.xa7 8c6
12.a4 xg2 etc. ]
429
10...8c6 11.f3? A suspicious-looking [ 5.f4!? d6 6.f3 g4 7.d4! dxe5 ( 7...c5!

gambit. Equality with looks more to the point, counter-attacking
[ 11.a3 d5 12.cxb6 w a s s a f e r . ( or
the centre before W hite can complete his
12.e3 )] development.) 8.fxe5 e7 9.d3 0-0
11...bxc5 12.dxc5 xc5 13.0-0 f5!
10.0-0 with the more comfortable game for
After this thematic move White is unable to White Szilagyi-M.Kovacs, Budapest 1974. ]
maintain much pressure for the pawn. Nurkic's 5...c6 6.d4 d6 7.d3! More dangerous than
idea has been well-countered by Leventic. [ 7.f4 dxe5 8.xe5 e6 9.0-0-0 a5
14.exf6 xf6 15.ce5 f5 16.xf5 exf5 10.b1 d7 11.g3 f6= Pacual Arevalo-
17.f4 d6 18.a3 d5! Garrido Moreno, Spain 2002 ]
[ 18...xe5 19.xe5 dxe5 ( 19...d3?! 7...dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.g3!
20.xg7 g8 21.d4 is o n l y e q u a l)
The combination of the queen on g3 and the
20.axb4 xb4 21.xe5 maintains the extra pawn-wedge on e5 created difficulties for
pawn but leaves Black with loose-looking Black. The g7-square is under observation
structure. ] and the knight cannot come to f6 to defend.
19.xc6 xf4 20.ad1 f7 21.g3 e6 a6 10.f3 b4 11.0-0 xd3 12.cxd3
22.b4 b6 23.a4! White has to keepThe bishop pair is not really an important
hammering away before Black consolidates. feature here as the position remains fairly
a5! Temporarily giving back the pawn but closed. In particular, the bishop on f8 can only
obtaining the valuable c5-square to anchor b e d e ve l o p e d a f t e r p l a y i n g t h e h o r r i b l y
t h e b i s h o p . 24.d5 f6 25.bxa5 c5 weakening ...g6, so Black prefers to leave this
26.e1 he8 27.f1 g6 28.h4 a6 piece at home. Unfortunately Black's king
W ith everything now tidied up this simple thus stays in the centre. d7 13.e3 c5
move leads to a complete disintegration of 14.a3 f5
White's "position". 29.cd4 xd4 30.xe8 [ 14...0-0-0 fails to 15.xc5 xc5 16.fc1
xf3 31.d3 e5 32.d2 xa5 33.a2 h5 and Black will lose a pawn. ]
34.g2 f7 35.d8 b6 36.e2 xa4 15.fc1 d4
37.f4 g4 38.h8 e3+ [ 15...xd3 16.xc5 xc5 17.xc5 0-0
0-1 18.d4 would yield White a pleasant
positional edge. ]
16.d2 a5 By keeping the queenside under
426 B02 c o n t r o l B l a c k h o p e s t o g a i n t i m e f o r
Oral,Tomas 2549 development, but White is having none of it...
Pribyl,Josef 2409 [ 16...xd3 allows the strong blow 17.e6!
KB Czech Open (8) 26.07.2002 and ideas such as Ne5, Ng5 and Re1 lead
[Glenn Flear] to White winning material. ]
17.b4! Something has to give. Black's opening
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 e6 strategy is left in ruins. a6? Hopeless. A
[ 3...xc3! 4.bxc3 d5 5.d4 c5 could be a better chance was
ice for Black who would seek counterplay [ 17...cxb4 18.axb4 a4 19.c4 xd3
against the compromised white queenside, 20.xd4 b5 despite 21.e6!?
much as in a French Winawer. ] looking dangerous. ]
[ But not 3...b6?! which looks distinctly 18.bxc5 e7 19.xg7 f8 The game is won
dodgy despite Shabalov having played it for all intents and purposes. White now found
4.d4 d6 5.f4 g6 6.e3 g7 7.f3 0-0 a series of elegant blows to put his opponent
8.0-0-0 d7 9.e2 a6 10.h4 for instance out of hismisery! 20.c6! bxc6 21.ab1 a8
as in Mastrovasilis-Aliev, Baku 2002 yields 22.e6! fxe6 23.e5 d5 24.b7 f6
good attacking chances for White. ] 25.g5! xg7 26.e7+ d8 27.xc6+
4.xd5 exd5 5.f3!? A relatively recent idea. c8
The queen intends to pressurize the black [ 27...xc6 28.xg7+ e8 29.e7+ d8
kingside early in the game. 30.xh7+ e8 31.e7+ d8 32.xc6
430
etc. ] xc4 16.xc4 b5! 17.d4 xd4 18.cxd4

28.b4+ b8 29.xd5 xd3 30.xg7 b7 19.f3 a5! 20.b1 axb4 21.xb4 e7
exd5 31.e7 Oral's idea seems to create 22.xb5 c6 23.b2 hb8-+ winning ]
problems in the 3 Nc3 e6 system. 12...g7 13.e2 d6 14.cxd6 cxd6 15.h4
1-0 [ 15.f4? doesn't win a piece but blunders a
pawn: gxf4 16.gxf4 h4+ ]
15...d7 16.hxg5! The best.
427 B02 [ Here 16.f4?! doesn't achieve it's goal: gxf4
Posch,Werner 2175 17.gxf4 c6 18.h3 0-0-0 19.c2 f6
Baburin,Alexander 2495 20.fxe5 xh4+ 21.f2 xf2+ 22.xf2
Wien 1995 dxe5 and Black has three pawns and a
[Alexander Volzhin] strong attack for the piece. ]
16...xg5 17.h5 g6 18.h3! c6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 d5 19.g5? The losing mistake.
5.c4 e6 6.c3 [ White should try 19.f4! e4 20.f1!
[ After 6.d4 d6 7.cxd6 cxd6 suddenly we Now 21.f3 Kf3 22. Bd3 is an unpleasant
have a position from the 2.c3 Sicilian! ] t h r e a t , s o h6 is forced, and after 21.f3
6...xc3 7.dxc3 c6 h7 White has sufficient compensation for
[ 7...xc5 is too dangerous 8.g4! f8 ] the pawn. ]
8.f4 19...e4 20.xg7 f3+ 21.f1 h2+
[ After 8.f3 Black can take the pawn xc5 22.e1 f3+ 23.f1 xd4-+ 24.f3
, and 9.Qg4 is illegal now. ] [ White loses everything after capturing the
8...h4!? A very interesting idea of the Knight: 24.xd4 h1+! 25.g1 g2+
Romanian GM Mikhai Suba. This move wins a 26.e1 xg1+ 27.d2 xa1 ]
pawn by force, and white has to prove he has 24...xf3 25.f2 e5 Black is two pawns up
sufficient compensation for it. 9.g3 as well as having an attack, so the outcome of
[ 9.d2 xe5! That's the idea. 10.e2 g6 the game is beyond any doubt. 26.f4 0-0-0
11.xc7 xc5 12.g3 a4 13.h4 27.b5 e8 28.b1 d5 29.b4 c4 30.a4
Of course W hite has the initiative, but in b8 31.f3 e3+ 32.g2 xc3 33.xe6
Angelov - Suba, Varna 1975 he couldn't c8! 34.xd5 d2+
prove that it's worth a pawn. h5 14.f3 d5 0-1
15.b4 b6 16.d4 a6 17.d1 d7
18.c2 e7 19.0-0 c7 ]
9...e7 Now White has to choose which pawn 428 B02
(e5 or c5) to sacrifice. 10.b4 Potkin,Vladimir 2471
[ 10.e2 was tried once, but White had no Neverov,Valeriy 2541
c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e p a w n a f t e r xc5 St . Petersburg 2000
11.0-0-0 d5! 12.exd6 xd6 13.e3 a5 [Alexander Volzhin]
in Silva - Rakic, 1981, and now the effective
but not sufficient 14.d5?! led to a decisive 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5
advantage for Black: exd5 15.b6+ e6 [ Dan Heisman from the USA asked me
16.xa5 dxc4 17.b4 xb4 18.cxb4 xb4 about 4.a4!? This move is not played often.
19.f3 0-0-0-+ winning ] I believe Black should play a5 ( since after
10...g5 11.e3 xe5 12.d4!?N 4...d6 5.a5 6d7 6.exd6 cxd6 7.d4
[ 12.h5 was played in Schwarts - the space advantage on the Q-side secures
S o l o z h e n k i n , N e w Y o r k , 1 9 9 4 . g7! W h i t e t h e b e t t e r p r o s p e c t s . c6?
( O f c a u s e , n o t 12...xc4?? 13.xg5 is b a d i n vi e w o f 8.d5! xa5? 9.b4
and suddenly Black's queen is trapped!; an d W h it e wins a p ie ce . A f t e r 4 . . . a 5 I
12...h6 is also bad be cause o f 13.d4 think Black has good play since interpolation
with f4 to follow.) 13.xg5 f6 14.xf6 of the moves a2-a4 and ... a7-a5 should
xf6 Now White is in big trouble. 15.e2 normally favor Black. But of course, it would
431
be interesting to test this line in practice. )] 29.f3+ g5 30.h4+! h6 31.f7!
4...d5 5.c4 e6 6.d4 b6!? and Black is helpless: xb5 ( 31...e7
[ 6...d6 is possible as well, after 7.cxd6 cxd6 32.e6+ g6 33.f4+ ) 32.e6+ g6
the position is similar to an Alapin Sicilian. ] 33.f4+ g7 ( 33...h7 34.xg6+ g7
7.cxb6 axb6 8.e2 35.f7+ ) 34.f6+ mating Black's King. ]
[ White has also tried 8.f3 but this move 24.b4! White plays very inventively finding
didn't bring him any advantage in Machulski - new attacking resources. g6 25.c2 d3?
Gurgenidze, USSR, 1973: a6! 9.xa6 This allows White to win the piece back.
xa6 10.0-0 e7 11.c3 ab4 12.a3 [ 25...e6 is also bad in view of 26.b3 c8
0-0 13.e4 f5 14.c3 c6 15.d2 a6 27.c7 and White is winning ]
16.xd5 exd5 17.c1 c7 intending 18... [ In my opinion, Black should play 25...c8!
Ne6 and Black's chances are by no means 26.g3 e6 Now it's not easy for White to
worse. ] continue the attack although the position
8...d6 A novelty, according to my database, remains very sharp. ]
but in my opinion one of rather dubious merit. 26.bxc5 dxc2 27.d7+ g8 28.xb7 d8
[ I would prefer the old 8...a6 9.xd5!? [ 28...a5 deserved attention. Now White
( 9.xa6 xa6 is similar to Machulski- can't play the tempting 29.c6 in view of
Gurgenidze considered above.) 9...exd5 xb5 30.c7 xa1! and Black wins. ]
10.bc3 c6 11.0-0 e7 12.e1 0-0 29.ac1
13.g3 d6 and Black has a very solid [ 29.d6!? is worth considering: xd6 ( or
position. ] 29...bxc5 30.b3+ h7 31.e4 f5
9.0-0 b7 10.b3 dxe5 11.dxe5 d7 32.xc2 g7 33.ab1 and although the
12.g3! Now it's not easy for Black to game goes on White's advantage is beyond
complete the development of his K-side. any doubt.) 30.cxd6 xd6 31.ac1 h7
e7!? (intending 13...Nf5) 13.d4 c5 32.e4 and after winning the c2-pawn White
14.xe6!? A very interesting piece sacrifice. It has excellent winning chances due to his
leads to a sharp position which is difficult to extra pawn and the weak position of Black's
e v a l u a t e e v e n i n h o m e a n a l y s i s . fxe6 King ]
15.xe6 c6 16.e3 e7 17.h3 d4 [ By the way, the tempting 29.xb6? fails to
18.xd4 cxd4 19.a3! c5 20.g4 h5 xa1! 30.e6+ h7 31.xa1 d1+
21.f5 f7 22.b5 xe5 23.fe1 f6 32.e1 xe1+ 33.xe1 h6! and Black
[T h e t e m p t i n g 23...xa2!? wins. ]
was the alternative to the text, but here 29...xc5 30.xc2 h7! 31.e4 f7
W hite gets a very strong attack: 24.ac1! 32.e2 df8 Black has managed to complete
Intending a sacrif ice on the c5-square . his development and create pressure on the
( 24.ad1 i s b a d : a f t e r f6 25.b4 f2-square which secures him certain
doesn't work in view of g6! 26.xd4 gxf5 compensation for the pawn. 33.f1 g5
27.bxc5 d5! 28.cxb6 c5 and Black has 34.c4 h7 35.d4 g4! 36.e6??
a decisive advantage. ) A gross blunder in mutual time trouble.
A) 24...f6 25.xc5! xc5 26.e6+ f8 [ 36.f3! s h o u l d b e p l a y e d : f4
27.xa2 d3 28.g3! , threatening 29 Qb8 ( The tempting 36...xf3 37.xg4 xf2
and White has a decisive attack; doesn't work in view of 38.fxf2! and White
B) 24...d5 25.xc5! and White wins by wins on the spot: hxg4 39.xc5 xf2
force: xc5 26.e6+ f6 27.xa2 40.c7+ ) 37.e6! The only move. 8f6
xb5 28.e6+ g5 29.h4+ f4 30.g3+ 38.xg4 hxg4 39.e5 d6 and a draw is
f3 31.d5+ xd5 ( 31...xd5 the most likely outcome of this exciting
32.f5# ) 32.e2#; encounter: 40.fc1 e4 41.c4 f6 ]
C) 24...xg2!? Other moves are even 36...xf2! 37.xf8+ xf8+ 38.ff2 xc4
worse: 25.xg2 d5+ 26.g1 xb2 W hite resigned since he loses a piece. An
27.xc5! This blow here is as strong as it exciting game!
was in previous lines. xc5 28.e6+ f6 0-1
432
429 B02 22...xf8 23.f3 g7 24.g2 e7 25.ad1

Rose,M f7 Little by little, Black makes some headway,
Davies,Nigel R the plan is to double rooks on the f-file and
4NCL Birmingham 2001 fish around with the queen on h4. W hite's
[Nigel Davies] next move shows that he's hurting, it's difficult
to keep still against gradually increasing
Black has a good answer to the Chase pressure. 26.gxf5? xf5 27.e4 d5
variation in protecting his knight on d5 with Black's knight has been waiting a long time
both ...c7-c6 and ...e7-e6 and then f or t his. In t im e-troub le W hite crum bles .
undermining the c5 pawn with a later . ..b7-b6. 28.g3 f7 29.d2 hf8 30.d3 h4
In the following game I was faced with a rabid 31.f2 f4 32.b3 g4 33.g2 g5 34.f2
attempt at attack, but Black's position proved xg3 35.e4
very solid. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 0-1
4.c5 d5 5.c4 c6 6.f3 This looks like a
novelty, though it may not be very good.
[ The usual move is 6.c3 af ter which e6 430 B02
7.d4 ( 7.e4 b6 8.d6+ xd6 9.cxd6 0-0 Rozentalis,Eduardas 2570
10.d4 a6 11.b3 f6 12.e2 c8 Volzhin,Alexander 2556
was rather good for Black in Szabolcsi - Poland 2000
Knezevic, Budapest 1981) 7...b6 8.cxb6 [Alexander Volzhin]
axb6 9.ge2 a6 10.b3 d6 11.xd5
was agreed drawn in Rozentalis - Kengis, 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 xc3 4.dxc3
USSR Ch., Daugavpils 1989. Black stands This move contradicts the well-known principle
quite well in the final position. ] of capturing "towards the centre". But it has
6...e6 its points. White tries to gain an advantage in
[ I a ls o c o n sid ere d t h e imm e dia t e 6...b6 development, and maybe create pressure on
, but thought that W hite would play 7.c3 t h e d - f i l e . d6 5.f3 The main line. The
anyway and force me to go ( 7.xd5 cxd5 alternatives are harmless:
8.xd5 c6 would give Black terrific [ 5.f4 c6! 6.f3 dxe5! Now Black can
com pen sat io n) 7...e6 . In retrospect this recapture on d8 with the Knight, retaining
would have been a more accurate order of the possibility of castling. This is an
moves. ] important difference in comparison with the
7.d4 b6 8.cxb6 axb6 9.h3 a6 10.xa6 m a i n l i n e . 7.xd8+ xd8 8.xe5 c6
xa6 11.0-0 f5 12.c3 ac7 13.f4 xf4 9.0-0-0 f6 10.c4 f7 11.g3 e5 12.d2
14.xf4 e7 g6 13.c4 d6 14.b3 h6 15.f3 f5
[ At the time this was the only move I 16.b1 0-0-0 Black had successfully
considered, but given the solidity of Black's completed his development and had a clear
position he could also go more slowly with edge in Filipowicz-Chekhov, Warsaw 1990. ]
14...e7 . Now White gets some irritating [ 5.c4 c6! 6.f3 dxe5! 7.xd8+ xd8
play. ] Again this manoeuvre is good. Black
15.h5+ g6 16.h6 f7 completes his development easily. 8.xe5
[ And given my time over again in this f6 9.d3 e5 10.0-0 e6 11.b3 d6
position, I'd think about 16...f8 17.h3 12.e1 g5 13.e3 f7 14.f3 c6
g7 followed by castles. ] Again Black was clearly better in
17.g4 f8 18.h3 g8 Nezhmetdinov-Spassky, USSR, 1959 ]
[ Black could also try going to the queenside 5...dxe5
with 18...e8!? ] [ 5...c6 here is not so good as after 6.b5!
19.h6 f7 20.h1 b5 21.a3 f8 W hite is better as became clear several
22.xf8? The start of White's troubles. decades ago. The game Keres-Schmid,
[ He should keep the bishops on with Zurich 1961 continued: d7 7.e2 dxe5
22.g5 ] 8.xe5 xe5 9.xe5 c6 10.c4 b8
433
11.e4 e6 12.g5! h6 13.h4 d6 d6 11.d1 e7 ( 11...c7 12.xc6!

14.0-0-0 c7 15.d4 e5 16.c5 f6 xf4 13.d8# ) 12.xd6! ]
17.xf6 f4+ 18.d2 gxf6 19.hd1 [ 8...d7 is also not so good: 9.f4 c6
with a huge edge for White. ] 10.c4 ( T h e t e m p t i n g 10.xc6?
6.xd8+ xd8 7.xe5 e8 The critical doesn't work in view of a6! 11.a4 c5! )
position of this line. The plans of both sides 10...xe5 11.xe5 f6 12.g3 e5 13.0-0-0
are evident. Black would be happy to and W hite can follow up with f2-f4 at the
exchange as many pieces as possible, as a right moment, after which Black's King in
pawn ending will obviously be easily won for th e ce n t re o f t h e b o a rd m a y b e c o m e a
Black due to his pawn majority on the K-side, target. ]
while White's extra pawn on the Q-side will be 9.xd7 xd7 10.f4 c6 11.e2 e6 12.c4
useless. But there are still many pieces on c5 13.c3 e7 Now we can say that Black
the board and W hite can try to exploit the ha s e qu alise d . 14.d1 Now 15.b4 Bb6 16.
temporary lack of co-ordination of the Black Bd6+ is threatened so Black's next move is
piec e s. ( Re me m be r B la ck ca n't cast le ! ) forced.
8.b5+!? An attempt at an improvement. [ 14.b4 d6 is OK for Black ]
P re vi o u s l y W h it e h a d f a i le d t o g a i n a n y 14...a5 15.d3 hd8 16.e2 f6 17.h3
advantage. d7 18.a4 ad8 19.c2 xd1 20.xd1
[ The natural looking 8.c4 leads White e4 21.c2 e5!
nowhere: e6 9.f4 d6 10.g3 d7 [ Of course not 21...xf2?? in view of 22.f1
11.f3 b6 12.e2 d7 13.e5 f6 and the Knight is trapped. ]
14.xd7 xd7 15.0-0-0 e7 16.f3 xg3 22.c1 White still is playing for a win.
17.hxg3 c6 and Black was slightly better in [ 22.xe4 exf4 leads to an immediate
Tarrasch-Reti, Baden-Baden 1925. By the draw. ]
way, this was one of the first games with 22...d6 23.d3 h6 24.f3 f5 25.d1 f8
the Alekhine's! ] 26.b3 f6 27.c2 e4 28.f4
[ 8.e3 doesn't promise White any edge Here my opponent offered me a draw, which
either: of course was accepted as after
A) 8...f6 is less precise (although this [ 28.f4 g5 29.xd6+ xd6 30.xd6 xd6
m o v e i s v e r y co m m o n i n t o u r n a m e n t 31.fxe4 f4!? neither side can even think
practice) in view of 9.d3! c6 ( After about playing for a win After this game I
9...e5 White can immediately undermine strongly suspect that White can set Black
Black's pawn chain: 10.f4! e4 11.f2 f5 no serious problems in this line, although
12.g4! with the initiative.) 10.f4! e6 Black needs to play very precisely in the
11.0-0-0 b6 12.c4 b7 13.c5 b5 14.e2 opening. White's moves are not as harmless
e7 15.he1 f7 16.f2 a6 17.f3 as they may seem! ]
and White had a small but clear edge in ½-½
Radulov-Smejkal, Siegen 1970.;
B) 8...d7! 9.f3 e5?! ( I would prefer
9...e6 intending ... Bc5 or Bd6, with 431 B02
comfortable equality.) 10.0-0-0 f6 11.d2 Rudd,Jack 2291
c5 12.xc5 xc5 13.c4 c6 ( 13...e6 Palliser,Richard 2402
14.f4! ) 14.f4! b5 15.e2 exf4 16.f3! 4NCL Nottingham ENG (10) 01.05.2005
and White's initiative was very dangerous [John Cox]
in Listengarten-Bagirov, USSR 1974. ]
8...d7! 1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 fd7 4.e6
[ W h i t e ' s i d e a w a s t o p r o v o k e 8...c6? An objectively probably rather unsound gambit,
after which it's very difficult for Black to but one which suits Jack Rudd's
complete his development. Now the d6- swashbuckling style. fxe6 5.d4 c5 6.f3
square is unprotected which is important in c6 7.dxc5
many lines, for example: 9.c4 e6 10.f4 [ 7.b5 is the main alternative, fighting for
434
control of e5 and d4, and is the favoured comfortable play effortlessly. xc3 5.bxc3
move of this variation's strongest modern c5 6.f3 g4 7.e2 c6 8.h3 xf3
day supporter, Jonny Hector. The crucial 9.xf3 e6 10.0-0 c8= Karavade,E-
position arises after g6 8.e3 g7 9.dxc5 Mohota,N/Asian Teams Jodhpur IND 2003 ]
a5 10.0-0 , Hector-Sergeev, Berliner 1995, 4...d4
and Hector-Madsen, Copenhagen 1995. ] [ 4...c5 is provocative and not very good:
7...g6 8.h4 g7 Palliser isn't bothered about 5.d4 e6 6.f4 ( 6.e3! is almost certainly
preventing ...h5, and probably rightly: best. White can be very direct as Black is
[ 8...f6 9.b5 g7 10.h5 ( 10.f4 0-0 taking his time in the opening : g6 7.f3
11.xc6 e4 occurred in Lyublinsky- g7 8.h4 h5 9.c3 b6 10.g5 ) 6...g6
Mikenas, Moscow 1949, when 12.e5 xe5 7.e3 g7 8.d2 b6 9.h3 e6 10.f3 c5
13.xe4 g7 was about equal.) 10...xh5 11.g4 c6 12.g2 d7 13.c3 c8 14.f2
11.e3 d7 12.xc6 bxc6 13.d4 e7 15.d1 a5 16.0-0 ]
(J Petronovic-Marinkovic, Niksic 1997) ] [ 4...f6 was played in two old games of
9.e3N Kengis which still stand as the benchmark:
[ 9.h5 has been White's invariable choice 5.d3 g5 6.xg5 ( 6.f4 g6! 7.h4 e6
previously, although after xc5 10.hxg6 8.h5 xf4 9.xf4 g5 10.g3 c6 11.d4
hxg6 11.xh8+ xh8 12.d3 d7 both h6 12.exf6 exf6 13.b5 0-0 14.c3 e7
13.b5 (Guilbert-Komarov, Clichy 2001), Terentiev-Kengis USSR 1983) 6...fxg5 7.h4
and now xc3+ 14.bxc3 h8 , and 13 Bf4 gxh4 8.f4 g6 9.xh4 g7 10.d4 c5
Qf8 14 Bg3 Qh6 (Leitao-Milos, Santos Mario 11.d3 a5+ 12.f1 cxd4 13.xh7 xh7
Covas 2001), are promising for Black. ] 14.xg6+ d8 15.xh7 xe5 16.f3 c6
9...a5 10.d2 xc5 11.h5 d7 12.b5? 17.xd5 e6 18.f8+ d7 19.xa8
Black is doing fine here, a pawn up and about b5+ 20.d3 xb2 21.b6+! Vorotnikov-
to evacuate his king to safety. Neither Kengis USSR 1983 Black doesn't have
[ 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.xh8+ xh8 nor ] enough for the exchange ]
[ 12.h6 f6 worries him unduly, but the text 5.f3!?N I have seen 5 c3 and 5 d3 but not
is a weak move which is a little fortunate not this. Schmaltz argues that the Knight on e4
to lose at once. ] isn't running away-why attack immediately?
12...e4! 13.xe4 xb5 14.c5 xb2 c6 6.c3 g4 7.exd4 A small trap. xe5
15.0-0 c3 16.e2 c4 [ W hich Black avoids: 7...xd4 8.a4+!
[ 16...c8 was perhaps even more efficient, d7 9.xd7+ xd7 10.xd4 ]
but Black wants to force the queens off. ] 8.e2! d5 9.b5 It is getting very murky.
17.xc4 dxc4 18.ad1 c8 19.g5 f6 By contrast
20.hxg6 hxg6 21.fe1 Taking on e6 was [ 9.b5+ d o e s n ' t le a d t o m u c h : xb5
better, although Black should still win. e5 10.xb5+ d7 11.e5 ef6 12.xg4
22.f4 exf4 23.xf4 g4-+ 24.d6 0-0 xg4 13.f3 ( 13.0-0 c6 14.e2 gf6 )
0-1 13...c6 14.e2 e5 ]
9...0-0-0 10.c4 e6 11.d4!?
Already enormous complications fill the board.
432 B02 B l a c k h a s t o m a k e a j u d g e m e n t : g6
Schmaltz,Roland 2525 And he ducks the main issue. Probably it was
Gikas,Basilius 2270 impossible to calculate everything and he
Bundesliga 2002 intuitively rejects lines where his Knight ends
[Andrew Martin] up on h1. They do look good for White:
[ 11...xf3 12.gxf3 d3+ ( 12...xf3+
1.e4 f6 2.c3 d5 3.e5 e4 A line which 13.xf3 g5+ 14.e3 f3+ 15.d1
doesn't crop up very often but which I think is xd4 16.xd4 b6 17.c2 xd4
very playable for Black. Not however the way 18.d2+- ) 13.xd3 g3+ 14.e3 xh1
Gikas plays it here! 4.ce2 15.g2 g6 16.f1 ]
[ 4.d4 Less critical. Black obtains [ 11...d3+ 12.xd3 g3+ 13.e3 xh1
435
14.xa7+ b8 15.xe6 xe6 16.b5 c6 dxe5 19.bxc6 xc6 20.b3 b6 21.xf7
17.f4+ ] f8 22.g6 f6 23.xe5 xg6 24.xg6
12.d5 But so does this! f5 13.bd4+- e5 e8 25.0-0 xd4 26.fe1 e5 27.g4
14.xe5 xe2 15.xg6 xf1 16.xh8 c7 28.c3 xc3 29.xc3 d5 30.c4
xc4 17.xf7 xd5 18.e6 f5 19.xf8 b6 31.c5 e4 32.f5 d7 33.xd7
A Knight hurricane has left Black's position xd7 34.d1+ c7 35.e5 e6 36.c4
devastated. xf2 20.g1 xf7 21.g4 d3+ d8 37.c1 d5 38.xd5 xd5 39.e3+
22.e2 I think the best chance for 3...Ne4 is c6 40.f1 e5 41.g4 a5 42.c2
to follow it up with 4..f6. Both 4...Nc5 and 4.. . d7 43.xh6 d5 44.g4 e6 45.b2
d4 seem dubious. xa2 46.b4 b5 47.e3 c6 48.g3 a5
1-0 49.b1 b4 50.h4 gxh4 51.gxh4 b5+
52.g2 d3 53.b3 a1 54.h5 e2
55.h6 f3+ 56.g3 f6 57.d5+ g6
433 B02 58.xb4 axb4 59.xb4 xh6 60.b5
Sevillano,Enrico 2485 g1+ 61.f4 g4+ 62.e3 g5 63.b6+
Bego,Nick g6 64.b5 f6 65.e5 g6 66.c5 f5
North American Open (1) 2002 67.c6+ g5 68.c8 g4 69.d8 h3
[Andrew Martin] 70.h8+ g2 71.g8+ f1 72.c8 d5
73.c1+ g2 74.c3 d1 75.c2 e1+
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 76.f4 f1 77.e3 d1 78.b2 d3+
A question of taste this, I think. Perhaps there 79.f4 f1 80.a2 e1 81.g3 d2
are so many good lines against the Alekhine 82.a1+ e2 83.a4 b2 84.a3 c2
that the Chase Variation has been sent to the 85.e3+ d2 86.b3 c3 87.b2+ c1
back of the queue. Or and this is more likely, 88.a2 d1+ 89.f4 c2 90.a4 d2
in t h e ru s h t o f o llo w t h e gre a t a n d go o d 0-1 Lupi,P-Malbran,G/Buenos Aires 2002)
playing 4 Nf3 this aggressive little line has 7...cxd5 8.xd5 e6 9.xe6 xe6 10.cxd6
been forgotten. d5 5.c4 c6 6.c3 e6 g5 11.f3 xg2 12.g1 h3 13.g3
Played correctly this is a perfectly adequate f5 14.d4 d7 15.e3 e4 16.c1 g6
response. Black can attack the centre with ... 17.d2 h1+ 18.f1 d5 19.c7 g7
b7-b6 20.h4 f6 21.f4 0-0 22.b3 a5+ 23.d2
[ 6...xc3 7.dxc3 b6 ( 7...d5 8.cxd6 exd6 xd2+ 24.xd2 xb3 25.xb3 fxe5
9.exd6 xd6 10.f3 g4 11.e2+ e7 26.fxe5 xe5 27.xg7+ xg7 28.dxe5
12.e3 0-0 13.h3 h5 14.0-0-0 b5 ad8 29.e3 b6 30.d4 fe8 31.e2 h5
15.d3 d7 16.d2 c5 17.he1 xf3 32.d3 g5 33.e4 g4 34.d5
18.gxf3 e5 19.b1 c4 20.c2 f5 1-0 Mlensky,D-Svoboda,J/Znojmo 2002 ]
21.xc5 xc5 22.d7 fe8 23.ed1 g6 [ 6...a5 7.f3 ( 7.xd5 cxd5 8.d4 b6
24.a3 e5 25.a2+ h8 26.c7 b6 9.d2 bxc5 10.xd5 d8 11.dxc5 e6
27.dd7 xd7 28.xd7 e1+ 29.d1 12.f4 c6 13.f3 xc5 14.0-0 0-0
ae8 30.d2 xd1+ 31.xd1 xf2 15.c1 e7 16.a4 a5 17.e3 b8
0-1 Miele,R-Loviscek,M/Nova Gorica 2002) 18.d3 b4 19.xb4 xb4 20.c2 b7
8.g5 c7 9.cxb6 xe5+ 10.e3 axb6 21.d4 d5 22.b3 a8 23.f3 a4 24.fd1
11.f3 c7 12.g5 d5 13.xd5 e6 axb3 25.axb3 b8 26.f5 exf5 27.xd5
14.e4 g6 15.f3 g7 16.xb6 b7 xb3 28.c5 c8 29.d1 xc5 30.dxc5
17.c5 f5 18.d1 h6 19.xf5 d7 xc5+ 31.xc5 b1 32.c1 b6+ 33.f1
20.xg6+ d8 21.xe6+ c8 22.xg7 b5+ 34.g1 c5+ 35.xc5 xd1+
xa2 23.0-0 1-0 Watharow,S-Brockman,R/ 36.f2 g5 37.a5 d2+ 38.g3 g7
Melbourne 2002 ] 39.h4 h6 40.hxg5 hxg5 41.a3 d5 42.f4
[ 6...d6 7.xd5 ( 7.b3 d7 8.xd5 f6 43.a7 fxe5 44.fxe5 f7 45.f3 e6
xc5 9.c7+ d7 10.e3 xc7 11.d4 46.g4 f4 47.a6+ xe5 48.g6 d4
e6 12.e2 d7 13.f3 d5 14.d2 h6 49.f6 d6 0-1 Acosta,P-Bulcourf, C/Buenos
15.c1 g5 16.h3 g7 17.b4 b8 18.b5 Aires 2002) 7...xc5 8.b3 d6 9.ge2
436
dxe5 10.xd5 cxd5 11.xd5 e6 12.xb7 434 B02

xb7 13.xb7 c6 14.xc6+ xc6 Soloviev,Mikhail
15.0-0 c5 16.c3 d7 17.d3 ab8 Sharafiev,Azat 2294
18.e3 d4 19.xd4 exd4 20.a4 b4 Muhamedzjanov mem (5) 26.01.2007
21.b3 e5 22.c5+ d6 23.ac1 b5 [Andrew Martin]
24.e4+ d7 25.c5+ e7
1-0 Miserendino,A-Ligato,G/Olivos 2002 ] 1.e4 c5 2.f4 f6!? I have often wondered
7.d4 There are two other tries, but neither give about this particular move order as a try for
too much trouble e.g. Black, but in the rush to play 2..d5, it has
[ 7.e4 b6 8.d6+ xd6 9.cxd6 0-0 been somewhat overlooked. 2..Nf6 is very
10.d4 a6! ] playable and takes the fight to W hite
[ 7.g4 f5 8.g3 b6 9.cxb6 axb6 immediately. 3.d3 d5 4.e5 g8 5.f3 c6
10.ge2 a6 11.d3 e7 12.0-0 f7 ] 6.e3 White must now form a centre and the
7...b6 8.cxb6 axb6 9.g4 question is: what is the best way? 6 c3 and
[ 9.ge2 a6 10.b3 d6 11.xd5= ] then d3-d4 involves a loss of time and with
9...xc3 Seeing Ne4-d6+ coming up Bego Black's Bishop on c8 unimpeded, it is hard to
hastens to get rid of the Knight. 10.bxc3 a6! believe this will lead anywhere.
A f t e r . . . b 7 - b 6 , h e r e is B la ck' s n e xt id e a , [ For instance: 6.c3 g4! 7.e2 e6 8.0-0
reducing any hope of a White advantage to f6 9.e1 e7 10.a3 h6 11.c2 0-0
minimal proportions. This is hardly Sevillano's 12.h3 xf3 13.exf6 xe2 14.fxe7 xe7
concern. He just wants to have an interesting 15.xe2 ae8 16.d2 Lesny, S-Miklas, M/
position to play. 11.xa6 xa6 12.e2 c7 Slovakia 1998 ]
13.0-0 g6 One can understand that the [ So to 6.e2 which was played by Larsen,
Queen is worrying Black-this move looks but as with so many of his original ideas, his
ext re m e ly c o m m itt a l. I f W h it e cou ld ju st successes were due to his phenomenal
exchange those dark-squared Bishops now. I talent for the middle-game: h6 ( 6...f5!
recommend 7.0-0 e6 8.c3 b6 9.h1 h5 10.d4 h6
[ 13...d5 after which I think Black is fine : 11.bd2 g4 Sigrist, W-Dudas, J/Bern
A) 14.a4 d7 15.a3 ( 15.b1 a6! ) 2000 ) 7.0-0 e6 8.c3 b6 9.h1 e7
15...c5; 10.a3 d7 11.c2 Larsen, B-De Fotis, G/
B) 14.exd6 b5! 15.g5 xd6 16.c4 Aspen 1968 when ...0-0 and then a quick...
a3; f6 would be pretty satisfactory for Black. ]
C) 14.f4 g6 ] 6...g4 7.e2 e6 8.bd2 h6 9.f2 f5
14.g3 h5 15.f3 b5 16.e4 e7 10.0-0 h5 This is very satisfactory for Black
17.g5! He achieved his objective. Black is too, who even has some attacking chances on
no w c le a rly wo rse . 0-0 18.f6+ g7 the Kingside. Where is White's play coming
19.g3 h8 20.f4 The prelude to a nice from? Perhaps from preparing b2-b4, but that
combination which exposes all the defects in takes an age. 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 h4
Bego' s position. e8 21.f5! xf6 22.fxg6 [ Just 12...b6 ]
e4 23.xf7+ g8 24.xe7 xg3 [ or 12...e7 are both perfectly decent
25.xd8+- f5 26.g5 h4 27.xd7 h5 moves if you don't fancy the coming
28.d2 f8 29.c7 e7 30.f1+ f5 complications. ]
31.g7+ e8 32.xf5 exf5 33.g5 13.e1 e7 14.c4 d4 15.d2 g5!
Time and again we have seen that timid play I do like this move, reminding White that he
does not work in the face of attack. Instead, in may have castled prematurely, although it is
order to defend successfully counterplay must rather risky.. 16.g4
be created as soon as is humanly possible. In [ 16.f3 gxf4 17.xc6+ bxc6 18.e4 c8
this particular game Bego was outplayed- he ( 18...b6 19.xf4 ) 19.f3 f8 20.e4
didn't like that Queen on g4 at all. e3 21.xe3 fxe3 22.h5 a5 23.xf7
1-0 xf7 24.f1 e2 25.xf7+ d8 ]
16...h6 17.f3 gxf4 18.xc6+ bxc6
437
19.e4 c7 20.f3 b8 21.b3 f5 [ 5.dxc3 is considered the main line. ]
22.xf4 White's bit better structurally, 5...d5
although he will have to shift the Nf5 before [ 5...d6 6.b5+ d7
he can claim any real advantage. Quite rightly, A) 7.xd7+ xd7 is equal ( 7...xd7?!
Black continues his aggression. a5 23.ab1 allows the tricky 8.e6 when fxe6 9.g5
[ Overprotection with 23.ae1 was called for. e5 10.g4 is good news for White. );
W ith the Black King still in the centre B) 7.c4 e6 8.0-0 dxe5 9.xe5 c6
opening lines on the queenside with a4?! 10.h5 xe5 ( 10...g6 11.e2 g7
would be inappropriate: 24.bxa4! b2 12.f4 is roughly equal) 11.xe5 f6
25.b1 xa2 26.a1 b2 27.a5 d7 12.c7 b6 13.a4 d8 14.g3
28.a6 b6 29.a3 ] with equality, Kabisch,T-Kunin,V/
23...g8 24.e4 c8 25.h2 g6 26.g4 Schwabisch Gmund 2002. ]
He found away to distract Black's Knight. h6 6.d4
27.xh6 xh6 28.f4 h5 29.be1 f5! [ 6.exd6
30.f3 h7 31.a3 b8 32.b1 d7 33.f4 A) 6...xd6 7.d4 cxd4 8.cxd4 g4
g7 34.h1 g5 35.h2 f4! Very good! 9.b1 c7 ( 9...xf3? 10.xf3 c6
W hite has to survive a strong attack now. 11.c4 with excellent play) 10.h3 xf3
36.fe1 f8 37.b4 f3 11.xf3 c6 12.d5 ( 12.c3 is the calm
[ 37...cxb4 38.axb4 axb4 39.xb4 f3 a p p r o a c h o f f e r i n g W h i t e a n e d g e)
a ls o s e e m s p r e t t y st ro n g, b u t B la ck i s 12...d4 ( 12...e5+! is the right reply
probably to correct not to touch the when 13.e3 c3+ 14.d2 e5+
queenside whilst he is operating on the leads to a draw) 13.b5+ xb5 14.xb5
other flank: 40.g1 ( 40.c5 e3! 41.gxf3 xc2 15.0-0 one can already see the root
xf3 42.xe3 dxe3 43.g4 xg4 44.hxg4 of Black's problem because the queen is
d8 45.b2 A move which hints that a the only piece on active duty c7 16.d6
capture on b4 earlier might be wrong. h3+ xd6 17.xb7 c8 18.a3 f6 19.g4
46.g2 g3+ 47.h2 xg4 48.xe3 e6 and Black did not wait for the queen
g5 ) 40...c5 41.b2 gg8 42.gxf3 xf3 check forcing mate,1-0 Zaitsev,I-Maljutin,E/
43.g4 c6 44.g2 a8!! 45.h2 f4+ Moscow 1996.;
46.g1 a1+ ] B) 6...e6 7.d4 ( 7.b5+ d7 8.a4 xd6
38.e4 f4! 39.xf4 xg2 40.e4?? 9.0-0 0-0 10.d4 c7 11.a3 d8
[ 40.xf8 xh2+ 41.xh2 xe5+ 42.h1 12.e2 xb5 13.axb5 d7 14.fd1
e2 43.bxc5! was forced and may lead to a with equal chances, Brnas,A-Kovacevic,V/
draw: e7 44.f4 xf2 45.b7+ e8 Pula 1996.) 7...xd6 8.d3 c6 9.0-0
46.b8+ e7= ] c7 10.e2 h6 11.d2 d7 12.a4 c8
40...xh2+ An uneven game, but Black 13.d5 e7 14.c4 ( 14.dxe6 xe6
players might like to take a closer look at 2... 15.fb1 is about equal despite White's
Nf6 doubled c-pawns) 14...exd5 15.cxd5?
0-1 whoops, White is obviously not expecting
to have a piece trapped in the opening c4
0-1 Gromer,R-Bogdanovich,G/
435 B02 Untergrombach 1999. ]
Staeger,Pascal 2100 6...c6 7.f4 g4 The position resembles
Murey,Jacob 2490 an Advanced French which can arise after 1
Metz (5) 2003 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3 Nc6 5 Nf3. The
[Gary Lane] crucial difference is that in the French the
light-squared bishop is locked out of the game
1.e4 c5 2.f3 f6 3.e5 d5 4.c3 xc3 due to the e6 pawn, but here it does a good
5.bxc3 The idea is to build up a central pawn job undermining the defence of the d4 pawn.
formation with d2-d4. Admittedly, this line is a 8.e2 e6 9.0-0 e7 The grandmaster is
bit unusual in tournament play. wise just to complete his development before
438
trying to bite chunks out of W hite's pawns. central pawns W hite obtains a space
10.d2 0-0 11.e3 c8 12.ab1 b6 advantage. The main expert in this line is the
Safety first . If given time Black will play a Russian GM Evgeny Sveshnikov who
timely ...f7-f6 to break the extended pawn invariably plays it against the Alekhine's. d5
chain. 13.e1 xe2!? 5.c3 c6
[ Perhaps Murey is playing quick as usual but [ 5...xc3 is not good, as it helps White's
I suspect he could have made more of an d e v e l o p m e n t : 6.dxc3! d6 ( 6...e6?!
impression with 13...cxd4 14.cxd4 b4! is even worse, after 7.g4! c6 8.f3 b6
when the initiative is with Black. For 9.g5 e7 10.c6! dxc6 11.d1 d7
instance: 15.d1 xe2 16.xe2 c3 12.a6 Black is in trouble, Utiatsky - Bagirov,
17.d3?! ( 17.f3 f6 is slightly better for 1971 ) 7.cxd6 exd6 8.c4 e7 9.f4 dxe5
Black ) 17...b4 with the advantage. ] 10.xe5 0-0 11.xd8 xd8 12.f3
14.xe2 d7 15.f4 cxd4 16.cxd4 b4 with an obvious advantage for White. ]
17.a3 a2 It seems a strange place to put 6.c4
the knight but it will soon return to the centre [ L a t e r S v e s h n i k o v s w i t c h e d t o 6.d4
via c3. I think Black's edge is based on his a n d wa s s u cce ssf u l in so m e ga m e s . A
superior queenside pawn structure. 18.b3 recent example: d6 7.cxd6 exd6 8.f3
c3 19.g4 e4 20.f3 f5! e7 9.c4 c7 10.0-0 0-0 11.e1 d5
A nice intervention before Staeger can make a 12.d3 e6 13.c2 g6 14.h6 e8
serious attempt at attacking the king. 21.exf6 15.g3 b6 16.h4 with a strong kingside
[ 21.h5 e8 22.xe8 fxe8 gives Black attack in Sveshnikov - Stavrinovs, Latvia,
a very promising ending ] 1994. ]
21...xf6 22.h3 a4 Now that Murey feels 6...d6 7.b3 White has to play this move, if
his kingside is adequately protected he is free he wants to fight for the advantage.
to wreck havoc with the queen on the other [ After 7.xd5 cxd5 8.xd5 e6! 9.f3
s i d e o f t h e b o a r d . 23.h5 No prizes for dxe5! 10.b4 e4! Black is already better. ]
guessing the threat! h6 24.d1 One could 7...d7
argue this is a bit like resignation because the [ 7...dxe5 seems to be somewhat dubious,
attack has obviously failed. A rearguard action although in Sveshnikov - Palatnik, USSR,
is the right policy and against a lesser player 1974 Black managed to maintain the
White might have even sneaked a draw out of balance after 8.xd5 cxd5 9.xd5 e6
the position. Jacob Murey is just too good! 10.xb7 xb7 11.xb7 d5! 12.c8+
c4 25.f3 b5 26.f1 a6 27.d3 ff8 e7 13.c7+ f6 14.d4 c6 15.f3
28.c1 c3 The threat is ...Ne2+ followed by xd4 16.g5+ g6 17.xe5+ xg5
...Nxc1. 29.f2 f6 30.e3 xd3 31.xd3 18.0-0 xc5 19.f4+ h6 20.xf7+ h5
d1 Abandon the board is my advice to 21.b7 e7 22.xh8 ( 22.b4!? xb4
White. 32.c5 xe3 33.xe6 23.g4+ is a very interesting attempt to
[ 33.xe3 xd4 wins. ] continue the attack ) 22...xh8 ]
33...g4 8.xd5 cxd5?!
0-1 [ In Sveshnikov - Neckar, Bern 1992 Black
t r i e d t h e v e r y i n t e r e s t i n g 8...xc5!?
T h e g a m e c o n t i n u e d : 9.c7+ xc7
436 B02 ( In my opinion, even 9...d7!? 10.e3
Sveshnikov,Evgeny xc7 is possible, and White has to prove he
Knezevic,M has enough for a pawn.) 10.xf7+ d8
Dubna 1979 11.e3 d5 12.d4 e6 13.f3 g6
[Alexander Volzhin] and now according to Sveshnikov, W hite
s h o u l d p l a y 14.h4! g7 15.h5 xh5
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 16.xh5 gxh5 17.e6! with excellent
This is one of the sharpest attempts to prospects. ]
"refute" Alekhine's Defence. Advancing his 9.xd5 e6 10.xe6! This piece sacrifice is
439
the only way to fight for an opening advantage. pawn chain and intends Ba6 (not obligatory).
After the bishop's retreat Black has an 8.g4! White's play is consistent: pursuing
e x c e l l e n t g a m e . fxe6 11.xe6+ e7 the initiative at any cost. Now very interesting
12.xe7+ xe7 13.cxd6+ f7 14.d4 complications arise. bxc5 9.g5 e7
Let's consider this position. W hite has four 10.xe7 xe7 11.xg7 f8 12.f3 cxd4
pawns for the sacrificed bishop, but black 13.e2
dominates on the light squares. In my opinion [ By playing 13.g5? a3! 14.e4 b7
white is better, but he should play actively, 15.f6+ e7 White achieves nothing on
otherwise black will obtain a comfortable t h e k i n gs i d e , wh i l e h is q u e e n s i d e h a s
blockade. b6 15.f4 g6 16.f3 h6 already been destroyed. ]
[ 16...g7 17.g5+ with e6 to follow. Black 13...f5!
can't let white's pawns move! ] [ 13...f6 14.h6 ]
[ and after 16...h6 17.0-0 the bishop on f8 14.h6 g8 15.0-0 b7
definitely can't be happy! ] [ 15...dxc3 16.e3 ]
17.f5! 16.cxd4 d5 It's not easy to evaluate this
[ Black hoped for 17.0-0 f5 with a good position correctly. Black's King is slightly
position after Rfc8, Ke6 etc. So white breaks exposed, on the other hand White's king is
in the centre. ] hardly safe, as Black has pressure on the g-
17...xc1 18.e6+ xe6 19.fxe6+ xe6 file and the a8-h1 diagonal. So both players
20.xc1 After the complications white has a have chances in my opinion the position is
safe extra pawn and should win this prosaic balanced. 17.fd1 c6 18.e1 b8
endgame ac8 21.0-0 19.ab1 b6
[ 21.f2 may be more precise ] [ G r a b b i n g a p a w n i s s u i c i d e : 19...xb1
21...xc1 22.xc1 xd6 23.h4 e8 24.f2 20.xb1 xa2 21.b7 d8 22.b5 ]
d5 25.e1 f8 26.g3 f4 27.e5 e6 20.a4 d8 21.d2 a3 22.h6 e7
28.a5 a6 29.a3 d5 30.a5+ d6 23.b5?!
31.b4 c7 32.d5 f4 33.g5 h6 34.c5+ [ 23.d2 ]
d7 35.f3 d6 36.d2 xd5 37.c4+ 23...g7
e6 38.b5 axb5 39.xb5 b8 40.a4 c3 [ Maybe 23...b3 was even better: 24.d2
41.b6+ d5 42.e3+ e4 43.g4 h5 xa4 25.xb6 axb6 26.e3 b4
44.f6+ f5 45.d7 e4+ 46.f3 a8 and in my opinion, white's compensation for
47.b4 c3 48.c4 d8 49.c5 b6 the pawn is insufficient. ]
50.xc3 bxc5 51.xc5+ f6 52.c3 d4 24.h3 e7 25.db1 c6 26.xb6 axb6
53.a3 xh4 54.a5 d4 55.a6 d8 56.a7 27.a5 d5 28.f3 g5 29.g3 c3 30.a1
a8 57.f4 g5+ 58.e4 e8+ 59.f3 a8 e4 31.xh7 bxa5 32.b1?! Ever the
60.a5 g6 61.a3 f5 62.a6 e5 optimist, GM Sveshnikov overestimates his
63.a5+ f6 64.e4 e8+ 65.d4 a8 chances. He should take a draw by playing
66.c5 f5 67.b6+ f4 68.b7 xa7+ [ 32.xa5 g7 33.h8+ g8 34.h7
69.xa7 h4 70.b6 g4 71.a3 with unavoidable repetition of moves. ]
1-0 32...c8 33.e2 b7 34.h3? This time
trouble blunder loses at once, but Black is
already better anyway. c3 35.xb7 xe2+
437 B02 36.f1 xb7 37.g2+ c6 38.xe2 g4+
Sveshnikov,Evgeny 2575 39.f3 e4+ 40.d2 d5 41.h1 a2+
Solozhenkin,Evgeniy 2535 42.e3 b3+ 43.e2 b2+ 44.d3 a4
Russia 1998 45.d1 a3 46.c2 b5+ 47.c3 a8
[Alexander Volzhin] 48.a2 d5 49.b1+ c7 50.d2 a2
0-1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 d5
5.c3 e6 6.d4 xc3 7.bxc3 b6!
Black immediately undermines the W hite
440
438 B02 does that? ]

Tavoularis,Nicholas 2196 20...c5 I think Black is winning now, although
Cox,John J 2385 the finish was amusing. 21.e2 d7 22.b5
Gothenburg SWE 2005 d5 23.f3 gxf3
[John Cox] [ 23...c4 24.g5 cxb3 25.xd8 xd8
wins as well ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.c5 24.f2 h4 25.c4 xe5 26.f4 hxg3
I f i n d i t v e r y h a r d t o t a k e t h i s va r i a t i o n 27.xe5
seriously. W hite can't do this to his ligh t [ 27.xg3 g5 was the point of Black's last,
squares - can he? d5 5.c3 e6 6.c4 threatening ...Rxh2 ]
What one might call the pure Chase Variation - 27...gxf2+ 28.xf2 xe5 Black's five units to
6 d4 d6 leads to a c3 Sicilian and 6...b6 or 6... nil superiority around the enemy king ensures
Nxc3 7 bxc3 b6 to positions similar to those a qu ick en d . 29.h1 dg8 30.a5 g2+
arising from that opening. xc3 7.dxc3 c6 31.f1 d8 A lightweight game, but what am
8.f4 h4 I doing this for if not to show off my own small
[ 8...xc5 9.g4 g5 10.xg5 g8 a c h i e v e m e n t s , a n d a n y w a y i n r a t h e r a
was once the main line and has been the depressing month for the defence it's nice to
subject of a fair bit of analysis, albeit most show W hite getting mated in one game at
of it awhile ago, but this has now taken over. least. It may even suggest to some readers a
It leads to quite strange positions which way of meeting the Chase variation.
are deceptive for White: he can easily think 0-1
he's got a great position only to fall on his
face. ]
9.g3 e7 10.f3 439 B02
[ 10.b4 g5 11.e3 xe5 12.d4 Toothill,John
is really the only way for White to play, in Davies,Nigel R
m y v i e w, a lt h o u g h I d o n ' t f in d t h i s t o o 4NCL Birmingham 2001
terrifying for Black. The text leaves Black [Nigel Davies]
comfortable. ]
10...b6 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 An old line
[ 10...xc5 is certainly possible and favoured by Keres. White accepts some flaws
computers indeed recommend it strongly, in his pawn structure but in return obtains free
but I like the text. ] piece play. xc3 4.dxc3 d6
11.cxb6 axb6 12.0-0 h6 13.e2 g5 [ I ' m n o t s u r e I p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e 4...d5
14.d2 g7 Black's pieces are remarkably , despite it's solid theoretical reputation.
effective remarkably quickly. Having swapped After 5.f3 White's queen comes to g3 and
h is d -p a wn in e f f e ct f o r B la ck's a -p a wn , makes life uncomfortable. A recent game
W hite's structure is not too clever, and he Hector - Jessen, Copenhagen 2000 went g6
needs something to compensate for that. 6.d3 g7 7.g3 c5 8.f3 c6
15.b5 White is struggling to hold on to his g- after which I like 9.f4 (Hector castled short
pawn b7 16.a4 g4 17.xc6 dxc6! at this point) c4 10.e2 f5 11.0-0-0 ]
[ 17...xc6 18.d4 b7 wasn't nearly so 5.f3 c6 6.f4?! After this Black can
clear. ] transpose into what is probably a favourable
18.d4 h5 endgame.
[ 18...c5 19.xg4 xe5 20.b5 [ After the normal 6.b5 I was intending g6
was an alternative, and perhaps better. ] 7.f4 g7 but then 8.exd6 cxd6 9.d2
19.e4? f o l l o we d b y c a s t l i n g l o n g g i ve s W h i t e
[ 19.f4 was pretty much essential, with an i n t e r e s t i n g p l a y. B l a c k ' s c e n t r a l p a wn
unclear position. ] ma jo rit y will f in d it dif f icu lt t o a dva n c e
19...0-0-0 20.b3 whilst White's king will be well protected by
[ 20.e2 might have been better, but who the doubled c3 pawn. It blocks both the c-file
441
and the h8-a1 diagonal. ] 440 B02

6...g6 Vorotnikov,Vladislav V
[ In the light of experience I prefer 6...dxe5 Kengis,Edvins
7.xd8+ xd8 8.xe5 ( 8.xe5 f6 ) 8...c6 Tallinn 1983
with the game L. Huebner - Baburin, Berlin [Alexander Volzhin]
1992 having gone 9.0-0-0 f6 10.c7 g4
11.c4 e5 12.he1 e7 13.d2 e6 1.e4 f6 2.c3 This is not a very popular
and now W hite sacrificed unsoundly with move. But as we shall see, black has to solve
14.xe5 ] a lot of problems. d5 3.e5 e4 4.ce2!
7.c4 g7 8.e2 The knight on e4 is in danger! f6
[ A few White players have been tempted by [ The knight can retreat immediately: 4...c5
8.g5 not knowing that dxe5 9.xf7+ f8 5.d4 e6 but I doubt whether it is well
10.f3 exf4 11.d1 xd1+ 12.xd1 h6 placed on e6. One example from recent
just wins for Black as in Payrhuber - practice: 6.f4 g6 7.f3 c5 8.c3 c4 9.g4!
Ligterink, Stockholm (W orld Junior Ch.) A pawn attack is typical in positions with a
1969. ] blocked center. g7 10.h3 h5 11.g1
8...0-0 9.0-0-0 g4 hxg4 12.hxg4 d7 13.b3! c8 14.bxc4
[ According to my database this natural move dxc4 ( 14...xg4 15.d2! e6 16.g2
is new. Previously Black had played odd dxc4 17.b1 ) 15.f5! gxf5 16.g5! a6
moves such as 9...d7 and ] 17.g6 fxg6 18.f4 and black has a
[ 9...e8 ] hopeless position, Tseitlin - Bredemeier,
10.e6 fxe6 11.xe6+ xe6 12.xe6+ h8 1995. ]
13.g5 c8 14.de1 xe6 15.xe6 f7 5.d3 g5 6.xg5! White gives up his Bishop,
16.he1 h6!? An interesting pawn sacrifice. but gets strong pressure on the h-file. fxg5
17.d2 7.h4! gxh4 8.f4 g6 The sole defence
[ After 17.xe7 I i n t e n d e d g5 , leaving a g a i n s t 9 . Q h 5 9.xh4 g7 10.d4 c5
White's bishop stranded on e7. ] 11.d3 a5+ 12.f1! cxd4 13.xh7 xh7
17...g5 18.h4 g4 19.d4 14.xg6+ d8 15.xh7 xe5 16.f3 c6
[ I felt that 19.h2 e5 20.xh6 xh6+ [ 16...xf4 17.xf4 c6 18.f3 c7
21.xh6+ g7 22.e6 h8 would have 19.f8+ d7 20.e1 d6 21.d3 a6
given Black more than enough 22.e6 led to a big advantage for White in
compensation. ] Polovodin- Palatnik, USSR, 1978 ]
19...e5 20.f4 gxf3 21.xf3 xf3 22.gxf3 17.xd5 e6 18.f8+ d7 19.xa8 b5+
f6 23.xh6 xh4 24.h1 f6 25.xf6 20.d3 xb2 21.b6+!
[ The s pe cta cu la r 25.g7+ is refuted by [ 21.e1 xd5 22.f8 is only slightly better
xg7 26.xe7+ f8 27.xc7 h6 for White. ]
threatening ...Bg5+. ] 21...xb6 22.f3 b8 23.c3! The point.
25...xf6 26.g1 g8 27.xg8+ xg8 R b 1 i s a n u n p l e a s a n t t h r e a t . dxc3!
28.d2 f7 29.b3 g6 30.e3 g5?! The queen sacrifice is the only chance for
[ 30...a6 would have been better when Black black. 24.b1 xb1+ 25.xb1 Has anybody
still has some chances. ] seen such a position? Black has only one
31.f4 h6 32.xa7 f5 33.d3 xf4 minor piece for the queen, nevertheless the
34.a4 e5 35.c4 e4+ 36.e2 Setting up a fight is still ahead! c7 26.e4? It's difficult
blockade. c5 37.b6 e5 38.a5 f5 to believe, but after this move it is White who
39.e1 e6 40.f2 e5 41.e1 d5 has to fight for equality! Nevertheless...
42.cxd5+ xd5 43.c3 f6 [ 26.e1 should be played, although there
½-½ are some tricks, for example d5 27.g5?!
( 27.d1! is correct) 27...a5 28.e4 c2!
29.d2 c4+ 30.xc2 b6 leads only to
a draw ]
26...d5!! 27.h7
442
[ Of course, the bishop is taboo: 27.xd5 c2 9.c4 Setting up a favourable pawn structure in
28.xb7+ xb7 29.xc6+ b6! which Black is denied space in either the
and Black wins! ] centre or the queenside. b6 10.b3 f5
27...e6 28.g5 b4? It's a pity, this move 11.c3 d4 12.e2 d7?! The start of an
spoils a fantastic game! o d d -l o o k in g m a n o e u vr e b y B l a c k . I n m y
[ After the correct 28...a5! 29.e2 c4 opinion he should try to do something about
30.g4 b6 31.xb8+ xb8 black is better, his badly placed knight on b6. 13.h3 e8
although in my opinion a draw is the most 14.g4 g6 15.g3 h4 16.gxf5 xf5
likely outcome. ] 17.xf5 xf5 18.xh4 xh4 19.g4!
29.e2 b5 30.xe6+! Probably E. Kengis Effectively a winning move. White is better on
missed this blow. c8 31.xd5 xd5 both flanks and his bishops exert tremendous
32.f5 d7? pressure. e7 20.e4 f7 21.d2 af8
[ 32...b7 still led to a draw 33.e4 c6 22.a3 d7 23.g2 b8 24.b4! h8 25.f5
34.d4+ c5 and White can't take the c8 26.fxe6 xe6 27.xf7 xf7 28.f1
pawn: 35.xb5? c2 36.d2 b4 ] e7 29.e6
33.d4+ d6 34.xb5+ c5 35.a3 b4 1-0
36.b1! d6 37.g3 a6 38.f4 c7 39.f3
d4 40.c2+ xc2 41.xc2 The endgame
is easily won: White wins a bishop for the g-& 442 B03
h-pawns, and wins the game, as a8 is the Adams,Michael 2731
same colour as W hite's Bishop. So Black Santo Roman,Marc 2403
resigned. This is one the of most fantastic TCh-Nat1 Final (9) 09.05.2004
games I've ever seen. [Andrew Martin]
1-0
EFFORTLESS 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 It is hard criticize
441 B02 Black's choice at this early stage although
Zaichik,Gennadi recent results have been very bad with 5...
Dreev,Alexey cxd6. the precise problem is the Voronezh
Lvov 1987 variation, which Adams is about to use. The
[Nigel Davies] top players bore in on any weakness
remorselessly. That is why at the very top we
2...d5 may be the move which is most in the are reduced to a boring diet of Sveshnikov's,
spirit of the Alekhine, but it gives White a lot Najdorf's, the occasional Caro-Kann and 1...
of space on the kingside. As someone who e5. Anything else in this ChessBase era is
has played 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 3.Nf3 e4 as Black, considered inferior. Sometimes I am gad that I
this is something I'd like to play for White. 1.e4 am not on that level-I can still enjoy chess!
f6 2.d3 d5 3.e5 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0! 9.b3
[ 3.d2 c5 4.gf3 c6 5.g3 e5 The essence of White's plan is contained in
does not give W hite much hope of an this simple move. The Knight on b6 is
a d va n t a ge . ( 5...g6 and; 5...e6 are both rendered ineffectual and the time Black uses
main lines of the King's Indian Attack )] to regroup it will be more usefully spent by
3...fd7 4.f4 e6 White. It's hard to believe that Black can be
[ 4...c5 5.f3 c6 6.g3 ( 6.c3 b6 7.h3 that much worse with W hite's kingside
f6 8.d4 cxd4 9.cxd4 f5 10.c3 e6 development so retarded but no good way of
11.e2 fxe5 12.fxe5 Efimov - Bagirov, opening up the game has been found just yet
Sevastopol 1986) 6...b6 7.g2 g4 8.h3 at least, not at Adams' level. e5 10.dxe5
xf3 9.xf3 e6 10.c3 c7 11.0-0 0-0-0 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7 13.f3
12.a3 was quite promising for White in c6 14.c4 All well-known. White has a
Strikovic - Laketic, Yugoslav Team ch 1997 ] use f ul que e n sid e p a wn m a jo rity a nd t h e
5.f3 c5 6.g3 c6 7.g2 e7 8.0-0 0-0 easier development. He is solidly better. h6
443
Preventing Ng5 and perhaps the first step in 443 B03

the mobilization of Black's own majority. It Adams,Philip
takes ages though. Crocker,Philip J
[ 14...a5 should have been successful in Greater Cup Final 27.06.2002
th e f o llo win g ga m e b u t a s yo u will se e [Nigel Davies]
White played poorly:
A) 15.g5! I'm sure this was Adams' If nothing else, I hope my efforts on this site
intention. have resulted in Alekhine players learning
A1) 15...e8 16.b5! ( 16.d5 e4 that the have to recapture with the e-pawn
17.c7 exf3+ 18.xe8 fxg2 19.g1 against the exchange variation. Here's
b2! 20.c2 xc4 21.bxc4 xc5 another example of Black's sufferings against
22.c7 b8 23.d5 h3 24.e3 ) the Voronezh. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
16...e4; 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3
A2) 15...f8 16.b5 h6 17.e7 e8 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5
18.d5; 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7 13.f3 c6
B) 15.d5?! f6 16.g5 f5 17.xf6 14.c4 h6 15.0-0
xf6 18.0-0 ac8 19.e4 e6? [ After the game Adams felt that 15.e4!?
( He didn't calculate too well: 19...xc5! may have been more accurate. ]
20.xf5 gxf5 21.b4 c6 22.bxa5 e4 ) 15...f8 16.e4 e6 17.d6 d7?
20.b4 c6 Bujisho, B-Santo Roman, M/ [ 17...ab8 is better. Now Black gets into a
Belfort FRA 2004. ] real tangle. ]
15.e4 e8 16.0-0 e7 17.d6 f8 18.b5 b8?
18.xc8 Preferring the simple gain of the two [ After 18...d5 Adams intended 19.fd1!?
Bishops. If Adams can see a clear line he will after which xf3 20.gxf3 leaves Black very
go for it. tied up and under massive pressure. ]
[ Yet 18.fd1 also looks good simple 19.xb7! dxb7
centralization. a6 19.xc8 xc8 20.f1 [ 19...d5 20.xc6 xc6 21.a5
h7 21.d2 f5 22.f3 e6 23.xe6 xe6 also leaves White a good pawn up. ]
24.c4 Cherniaev, A-Hugentobler, P/ 20.xc6 c7 21.a4 f5 22.c6 d8 23.fd1
Silvaplana 2003. ] xd1+ 24.xd1 f7 25.d8 h7 26.xe5
18...xc8 19.d2 Heading for d6 perhaps? [ 26.a8 was a good alternative. ]
a5 20.b4 xc4 21.xc4 e6 22.fd1 26...xe5
White owns a nagging, small edge. He aims to [ Or 26...e6 27.xf7 etc. ]
push his c-pawn at the right moment. Black 27.xf8 e7 28.c5 c7 29.a8 g7
must stand tough, occupy d4 and hope to 30.xa7 xa7 31.xa7 c7 32.g3 f6
make a draw. d4 23.f1 d8 24.d2 33.d4+ e7 34.g7 h5 35.h6 d5
ed7 25.cd1 f5 26.f4! Undermining the 36.g5+ e6 37.f1 f3 38.e1 a5+
Knight. exf4 27.xf4 g5 39.d2 c7 40.b4 d5 41.e3 c4
[ 27...h7 28.e5! ] 42.d2 h4 43.a3 d5 44.f4 hxg3
28.e5! It is incredible how this simple move 45.fxg3 xf4 46.gxf4 d6 47.f2
completely blows the Black position away. By 1-0
simply removing the foundation of Black's
Knight, Adams achieves a winning position.
xe5 29.xe5 d5 30.c4 5d7 31.f2 444 B03
Ne3-c2 or Na5-b3 cannot be stopped. Amin,B 2631
1-0 Giri,A 2722
Reykjavik Open 2013 (8.3) 25.02.2013
[Tom Rendle]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6

5.b3 dxe5
444
[ I analysed 5...d5 6.f3 e6 last year in 2012 ]

Ibarra Jerez-Asis Gargatagli. ] 8.c3
[ 5...f5 was analysed in Conquest-Baburin [ 8.a3!? hasn't been played but it deserves
but I'll add in some recent developments a l o o k . B l a c k ' s b e s t i s p r o b a b l y c7
here: t h re a t e n in g c4 a n d a f t e r 9.e2 e7
A) 6.e6!? is well worth a look here xe6 the position is equal ]
( 6...fxe6 7.c3 c6 8.f3 is awkward 8...d3! Improving on the Thorhallsson-
for Black ) 7.xe6 fxe6 8.f3 c6 9.0-0 Mamedyarov game below.
g6 ( 9...c8 10.e1 d8 11.g5 g6 [ 8...c6 9.e2 g5 10.c2 d7 11.d2
12.d3 e5 13.dxe5 f5 14.b3 e7 12.e4 and White was much better in
and White was on top in Totsky, L (2498) - Thorhallsson, T (2455)-Mamedyarov, S
Dubois, J (2280) Cappelle La Grande (2709) Reykjavik 2006 ]
2008 ) 10.g5 d7 11.e1 9.f3
A1) 11...e5 is probably best and Black is [ 9.a3 e4+
defending adequately after 12.dxe5 ( or A) 10.e3 is interesting and sets
12.d5 d4 13.c3 f5 ) 12...xe5 13.f4 something of a trap but if Black is careful
f7 14.xf7 ( 14.e6 d8 ) he's doing well here xg2?! ( 10...c4!
14...xf7; is a much safer way to play the position -
A2) 11...d8 12.d3 ( 12.a4 with this included Black should be able to
putting pressure on another part of the g r a b t h e p a w n , e . g . 11.d1 xa3
board looks promising here) 12...h6 12.bxa3 xg2 13.f3 g6 and Black is
13.c3 xg5 14.xg5 and White had d o i n g w e l l) 11.0-0-0 xh1 12.f3!
enough compensation for the pawn, but ( instead 12.g5?? d7 13.xe6 g6
no more in Nun, J (2380)-Konopka, M 14.b5 c6 and Black was winning in
(2433) Zdar nad Sazavou 2008; Yurtseven, M (2088) -Bawart, M (2417)
B) 6.f3 c8 7.e2 c6 8.exd6 Rogaska Slatina 2011) 12...g2 13.b5
( 8.g3 got White nowhere in the and White is doing well - if Black tries to
Conquest-Baburin game after g6 ) 8...cxd6 hang on to all of the extra material he gets
9.c3 e6 10.0-0 a5 11.g3 xb3 into trouble after a6 14.g5 g6 15.h4
12.axb3 g6 13.c4 was about equal in d5 16.xf7! xf7?! ( 16...e7
Yankovsky, R (2314)-Ivanov, M (2090) St 17.bd6+ d7 18.a4+ c7 19.xh8
P e t e r s b u r g 2 0 0 9 ( perhaps White should and W hite has regained the rook with a
try 13.h4!? h5 14.c4 when it's a bit strong attack) 17.xd5 exd5 18.f6+
harder for Black to get his king safe. )] e8 ( or 18...g8 19.d6 xd6 20.h6!
6.h5 e6 and Black has to give up his queen to
[ 6...g6 looks wrong and indeed White is avoid mate. ) 19.e6 and White is winning;
d o i n g w e l l a f t e r 7.xe5 f6 8.e2! B) 10.e2 d7 ( 10...c4 again seems to
as it's too risky for Black to grab the pawn be the way to handle the position - Black is
as after xd4 9.f3 d6 10.c3 f i n e a f t e r 11.f3 d5 12.c2 xa3
White is too far ahead in development. ] 13.bxa3 8d7 14.f4 c5 ) 11.c2
7.dxe5 c5 xg2 12.g1 d5 13.f4 c6 14.h3
[ 7...a5 is a major alternative and now 8.a4 and White had a dangerous initiative for
a6 ( 8...d7 9.f3 c6 10.0-0 g6 the pawn. c7 15.f4 d5 16.c4
11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 c6 and now in xf4 17.xf4 c6 18.xg7 xg7
Skytte, R (2399)-Sulskis, S (2568) Borup 19.d6+ d8 20.g5+ e7 21.xg7
2009 W hite could've kept an edge wit h g8 22.xf7 g1+ 23.d2 g8 24.g1
13.c3! g7 14.f4 ) 9.c3 c5 10.a2 h8 25.g7 e8 1-0 Phadke, S (2245)-
d7 11.f3 bxa4 12.g5 e7 13.xa4 Minhazuddin, A (2419) Chennai 2011 ]
xa4 14.d1 d7 15.e3 and White has a [ 9.f3! is critical here but it's
dangerous initiative in return for a pawn in understandable that W hite wanted to
Rogulj, B (2430)-Fahrner, K (2378) Gleisdorf remove the queen from d3 immediately. Still,
445
the position seems about equal here after d7 32.f4 f6 33.a5! c5 34.c6+ f7
d7 10.a3 c6 11.c2 xf3! 12.gxf3 35.c2 White has done a lot of the hard work
a6 13.f4 and White's bad pawn structure here and is a safe pawn up but Black hangs
is counter-balanced by chances for play on in there and makes it very tough from here.
the kingside. If I had to choose I would a8 36.d8+ e7 37.c6+ f7 38.f2
rather be White here. ] 7a6 39.d8?!
9...xf3 [ 39.c3 c8 ( 39...f5 40.a4 ) 40.exf6!
[ 9...c4! seems more accurate here - Black was the way to play it - after xf6 41.e5+
has slightly the easier game after 10.xd3 g7 42.d6 the win should not be too
( or 10.d1 8d7 11.f4?! c5 difficult. ]
and Black is clearly better) 10...cxd3 11.f3 39...xd8 40.xd8+ e8 41.c6 g5?!
d7 ( or 11...c6 12.e3 d7 ) 12.0-0 [ 41...f5! and it's not so easy for White to
c6 13.d1 xf3 14.gxf3 c6 15.f4 0-0-0 breakthrough here as there's no way for his
and it's not easy for White to round up the king to enter the Black camp and h4 always
pawn on d3, meanwhile Black can consider going to be vulnerable. ]
a ...g5 break on the kingside. ] 42.hxg5 fxg5 43.fxg5 h4 44.xh4
10.xf3 d7 11.f4 a5 12.a3 c6 It should be winning again here but I guess
13.0-0-0 a6 A roughly level middlegame time-trouble caused problems at this point!
has been reached and we enter a period of d7 45.g6 A nice idea but it's unnecessarily
manoeuvring. 14.d2 a4 complicated
[ Giri rightly rejects the pawn grab [ 45.d4 xe5 46.c3 b8 47.f2 c6
14...xg2?! as after 15.ac4 xc4 48.g6 should be winning, although the pin
16.a4+! c6 17.xc6+ bxc6 18.xc4 on d4 makes it very tricky. ]
Black's queenside pawns are in such a 45...xc6 46.f6 h6 47.g7 xg7
mess that it's White that should be looking to 48.xg7 b4 49.g6 b6 50.a3 c6
win this endgame. ] 51.c3 a4+ 52.c2?
15.c2 d5 16.g3 h5 17.h4 g6?! [ 52.b3 should be winning after c5+
[ 17...b5! was a better option, both gaining 53.c2 a4 54.e8 ]
space on the queenside and preventing the 52...c5 Now Black has setup a blockade that
knight on a3 entering the game via c4. If ca n 't b e b ro ke n 53.d3 b2+ 54.e4
18.c4 then bxc4 19.axc4 db4 20.b1 xc4 55.f8+ b6 56.d6 xd6+
xg2 21.hg1 d5 ] 57.exd6 c5 58.d7 d6 59.e8 c7
18.e4 h6+ 19.b1 e7 20.c4 ac7 60.a4 An interesting game. Bc4 & Qh5
21.xc5 Amin has won a pawn but the definitely cause problems but Black managed
position remains murky and Giri does his best to equalised here before going wrong and
to increase the complications a3! 22.d6 having to pull off a good save for the draw.
axb2 23.xb2 b6 24.b3 ½-½
[ 24.f3 allows cd5 and with the knight
coming into e3 Black has excellent play
here. ] 445 B03
[ 24.e4 is one way to try and hang on to Andresen,Tarald
the e xt ra pa wn b ut Black ca n get goo d Gilmore,Alan
counterplay with a4+! 25.xa4 xa4 ] NAtlantic tt4 B08 corr9599 20.12.1995
24...xg2 25.hg1 d5 26.c4 c6 27.d4 [John Watson]
ad8 28.gd1 Black may have regained the
pawn but White has complete control over the 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
centre and b7 is weak. g7 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
[ 28...b8 leaves Black very passive but 9.f3 e7 10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6
th ere 's n o c lea r way th ro u gh f o r W hit e xf6 13.d2 e7 14.ad1 ad8 15.c1
here. ] e5 16.d5 d4 17.xd4
29.dxb7 xd4 30.xd4 xb7 31.xb7 [ The alternative to 17.xd4 , which we saw
446
in Moser-Baburin. ] up another pawn. ]

17...exd4 18.xd4 c8! I think that this is 1-0
best, maintaining the indirect pressure on d4
(...c6 and ...c5 may follow) and since the
variations work out well, I'll skip over 18...Bd7. 446 B03
19.d2 Black threatens 19...c5 with threats Andrews,Todd D 2298
that will win back material, so White should Schmidt,L R 2340
protect e2. USCL 2007 ICC INT (3) 12.09.2007
[ 19.h1 c5! will win some material back. ] [John Watson]
19...c6
[ This looks better than 19...e5 20.xf8+ The Voronezh again. Black is probably
xf8 21.g3 , for example, c6 22.dxc6 bxc6 theoretically okay, but for some reason he
23.e4! but there are holes in White's often ends up on the worse side of things. I'll
position that limit his advantage. ] cut-and-paste in some earlier notes to put the
[ Now 19...c5?! 20.f3 lets White theory in one place, with a few new ideas.
consolidate. ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.exd6 cxd6
20.b3 Taking the knight away from defence 5.c4 b6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0
of the kingside indicates that Black should be 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8
doing well enough. A more natural course 12.c5 6d7 13.f3 c6 14.c4 h6
would be This was see n in the game Luther-Pajeken,
[ 20.h1 , for example, h8 ( 20...cxd5 Dresden 2007 that we analysed two months
21.cxd5 e5 22.e3! ) 21.f3 xc3 22.d6 back.
. Still, e6 23.bxc3 xc4 24.xc4 xc4 [ The recent game Paschall-Bogdan, Arad
25.fe1 e6 is not clear. One problem for ROM 2007 went 14...b6? 15.g5 f8
Black is that W hite has all the chances in A) 16.ce4
such a position. ] A1) 16...h6 17.xf7 xf7 18.d6 d8
20...xc3?! 19.cxb6 ( 19.d5 b8 20.c6 );
[ 20...e5! would be more pointed, A2) 16...xc5 17.xc5 bxc5 18.d5
th re at en in g .. .Q h4 . T he n W h it e sh ou ld b7 19.xc5 h6 20.xf8 xg5
probably bail out and play 21.xf8+ ( 21.g3 21.c4!+-;
cxd5 22.cxd5 h3 23.xf8+ xf8 24.d6!? B) 16.ce4 DRAW?? It looks as though
xd6! 25.xd6 f1+! 26.xf1 e3+ White is winning material, and winning the
27.h1 f3+= ) 21...xf8 22.f1 h4 game outright, for example, ]
23.xf8+ xf8 24.g3 xg3 25.hxg3 [ 14...a5 may be the safest move, when
xg3+ 26.h1 h3+ , with a draw. ] 15.b5 was Hanley-Summerscale, London
21.xf8+ xf8 22.bxc3 cxd5 23.f1+ g8 2007. ( We've seen 15.e2 b6! is probably
24.cxd5 c7 25.f3! This gives up the c4 what Bogdan was thinking about; 15.g5
square, but preserving the d-pawn is more f8 16.e7 xc4! 17.xf8 xf8 18.bxc4
important. e5?! xc5 19.0-0 e4 "with ample compensation",
[ White maintains the advantage, albeit a Honfi - Varga, 1994.) 15...f8 ( A big point
less drastic one, after 25...e6 26.e3 f7 to look for improvements. 15...a6 16.e2
( 26...xd5? 27.xd5+ xd5 28.e6+ c6 17.d1 d4 18.xd4! exd4
h8 29.xd5 ) 27.d1 ] 19.xd4! xd4 20.xd4 and Ne4 will follow,
26.e1 d6 27.d4 Threatening c4-c5. with more th an e nou gh compe nsat ion .;
a3? 28.c5 xa2 29.d6 f7 30.e7 15...c6!? dares White to play something
[ Resignation is premature, yet a variation b e t t e r t h a n 1 6 B c 4 wi t h a r e p e t i t io n . I
like 30.e7 f6 31.xf6 gxf6 32.e4! believe this is analysed in the Forum, but
w i l l w i n i n t h e e n d , f o r e x a m p l e , d5 because the ChessPublishing site is down
33.h5! f5 34.f7+ f8 35.xd5 fxe4 just now, I'll have to verify that and check it
36.xe4 xd6 37.xh7 and White will pick out for next time!) 16.0-0 or 16 Ne4 and
White had some advantage. ]
447
15.e4 39...f6 40.e6 xe6 41.xe6+ f7

[ In the Luther game, White was better after 42.d8+ g7 Now White's kingside pawns
15.0-0 d4?! ( but 15...f8! should hold are h an gin g. 43.c6 xh5 44.g4 f6
the balance. )] 45.f3 h5! 46.gxh5 xh5
15...a5 [ 46...g4+ is more natural. Then 47.g2
[ 15...d4? 16.d6 xf3+ 17.gxf3 f8 xh5 48.b1 f6 49.xb4 f4+
18.g1! threatens Rxg6 and wins material or gives Black a lot of play. ]
better. ] 47.g4?
[ 15...f8!? 16.d6 e6 ( 16...e6 [ 47.b1 ]
17.xb7 db8 18.d6 b4 19.a3! xc4 47...g6 48.b1?
20.axb4 ) 17.0-0 and White plans Rfd1 with [ 48.d1 ]
a bind. But this is playable for the second 48...f6+ 49.f3 g4+ 50.g2 d5 51.f2
player. ] f5
16.e2 [ 51...c3 and Black might decide to play for
[ 16.b5 would resemble the idea above a win! ]
and c6 may be the best reply. Otherwise 52.d4+ e4 53.c2 g3+
it's hard for Black to get his pieces out. ] [ 53...c3! 54.e1+ f4 ]
16...f5 54.g2 d3 55.d1+ xc2 56.xd5 f4
[ 16...c6 is a little depressing and yet solid [ 56...b3 57.axb3 b4 secures the draw,
enough. Then 17.d6 f5!? 18.c4+ h7 but Black is trying to avoid R v B. In what
is a logical way to reorganise. ] follows, nothing happens. ]
17.d6 f8 18.0-0 c6 19.g3 Versus ...f4. 57.d4 d2 58.xg3 c3 59.e4 b2
f6 60.e2+ a3 61.f3 b2 62.e3 xa2
[ 19...e4 20.h4 de5! is unclear. ] 63.d3 b3 64.e1 c3 65.b1+ b2
20.c4+ g7? 66.d2 a2 67.h1 b3 68.h3+ c3+
[ 20...h7 21.f7 e8 is nothing special. ] 69.c1 c4 70.c2 b3+ 71.c1 e5
21.f7 f4 72.f3 c3 73.b1 e5 74.e3 c3
[ Obviously not 21...e8 22.xh6+ ] 75.e8 d4 76.c1 c3 77.c8+ d3
22.xd8 78.b1 e5 79.c5 d4 80.b5 c4
[ Another idea is 22.gxf4 exf4 23.xf4 81.b7 e5 82.c1 c3 83.d1 e5
, but the tricky d5! holds for a while. ] 84.d2 c3+ 85.e3 d4+ 86.e4 c5
22...fxe3 23.xc6 exf2+ 24.xf2 bxc6 87.xb3 xb3
25.b4 a5 26.xe5 ½-½
[ 26.a3 is simple and strong. Black would
ha ve a pa wn f o r t h e e xch a nge , b u t h is
position is too loose. ] 447 B03
26...axb4 27.b3 a5 28.xc6?! Arencibia Rodriguez,W 2526
[ 28.fc2 protects the c-pawn, and if e4 , Panjwani,R 2409
29.xc6 xc5 ( 29...xc5+ 30.g2 b5 50th Canadian Open 2013 (4) 15.07.2013
31.a4! ) 30.xb4 leaves Black no [Tom Rendle]
resource. ]
28...xc5 29.fc2 xc2 30.xc2 f5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
31.c1 e4 Now it's not so easy for White. 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
32.f1 c5!? 33.d4 0-0 9.b3 f5!? An unusual choice from the
[ 33.d5 ] young Canadian IM, avoiding the mass of
33...h3+ 34.e2 g4+ 35.e3 e7 36.h4 theory that occurs after 9...e5 (and to a lesser
[ 36.f3 is a good option. Time pressure ext en t 9 . . .Nc6) which a re b ot h an a lys e d
was likely a factor. ] extensively in the archives. 10.f3
36...g5 37.h5 d6 38.d5! d7 39.f1? [ 10.e2 is a logical alternative if White
[ 39.f3 would consolidate Black has d o e sn 't wa n t a l lo w B la c k t h e o p t io n o f
nothing special for the exchange. ] pinn in g his kn ight o n f 3 a nd given t ha t
448
White fails to get an advantage in the game 15.e2 f5 16.f3 c8 17.a3 f6 18.f2
perhaps this is White's best. c6 11.d5 h4 19.g3 g5 20.c2 c7 21.b4
( 11.f3 d5 12.c5 c8 13.0-0 transposes and White's play on the queenside gave
back to the game ) him a definite edge in Baklan, V (2647) -
A) 11...b4 and now White can be Nakamura, H (2670) Marseille 2008 ]
slightly better in a couple of ways: 12.d2 11.c5 c8
( 12.a3! seems to lead to a very pleasant [ 11...6d7 hasn't been played here but it's
position for White after a6 13.f3 c5 not completely silly, although after 12.xd5
14.d4 d7 15.0-0 and White is ready to c6 13.c4 e4 14.0-0 xf3 White can
play b4 with control of the centre and the give the pawn back with a good position
q u e e n s i d e .) 12...e5 13.dxe6 xe6 after 15.xf3! e6 16.c3 xd4 17.xd4
14.f3 c6 15.d4 d5 16.c5 c8 xd4 18.fd1 xc3 ( 18...xc5? 19.xb7
17.0-0 and White was a little better in l o s e s a p i e c e) 19.xc3 c7 20.b4
Pit ch e r, J (2 2 0 5)-P ola cze k, R (23 7 7 ) and White can play for a win at no risk. ]
Hinkley Island 2012 although Black later 12.e2 c6 13.0-0 g4! This definitely
went on to win.; Black's best option and it's not at all clear how
B) 11...e5 is Black's best option White gets an advantage in this position.
although I still like White's position after [ 13...e6 14.h3! leaves the bishop on f5
12.f4 ( 12.g4!? c8 13.f4 ed7 14.f3 rather short on squares and White is at least
isn't completely ridiculous but then again a little better after h5 15.d2 ]
there's no real reason why White should 14.b4! Other moves get White nothing
weaken his kingside like this.) 12...ed7 [ 14.h3 xf3 15.xf3 e6 and Black will be
13.f3 c5 14.0-0 bd7 15.d4 f6?! fine after ...N8e7 and ...Nf5 ]
( 15...e4! 16.xe4 xe4 17.f3 xf3 [ 14.e5!? is tricky but ultimately Black
18.xf3 a6 and Black is only slightly equalises after xe2! 15.xc6 ( 15.xe2
worse. ) 16.xf5 gxf5 17.c2 d7 e6 ) 15...bxc6 16.xe2 e6 17.d3 e7 ]
18.f3 fc8 19.b4! a6 20.b3 14...a6 15.e5 After this I'm sure Black is fine
and White was clearly better in Gavrilov, A but other moves do not promise White much
(2496)-Chetverik, M (2272) St Petersburg either
2012 ] [ 15.b1 e6 16.a4 xf3 ( 16...8e7!
10...d5 also seems to be fine here, for example
[ 10...g4 is played more often here. Black 17.b5 axb5 18.axb5 a5 19.d2 xe2
may have 'wasted' a tempo but White does 20.xe2 f5 and I see no reason why
not normally allow his knight to get pinned Black should be worse here, especially with
in this line so I guess it's a fair swap! 11.e2 ...e5 coming in the near future.) 17.xf3
e6 12.d5?! This has been played a couple 8e7 18.b5
of times but it seems to be a mistake ( 12.h3 A) 18...axb5 19.axb5 a5 20.e2 f5
seems logical here, forcing Black to take on 21.d2 e5 22.a4?! and now in Hou
f 3 but af te r xf3 13.xf3 c6 14.0-0 Yifan (2578)-Le Kieu Thien Kim (2291)
W hite is now threatening to play d5 and Beijing 2008 Black missed a big chance to
after d5 15.cxd5 exd5 16.e1 White has play ( 22.g5 f6 23.e3 is about equal)
a very pleasant position. The plan is 22...c4! 23.xc4 dxc4 24.g5 c3!
something like Qd2, Ne2 and then Bf4 or 25.c1 ( or 25.xc3 f6 and White loses
Bh6 to swap of Black's bishop on g7. ) h is b ish o p) 25...xd4 26.xc3 xc5
A) 12...exd5! 13.cxd5 ( or 13.xd5 c6 and Black has a safe extra pawn;
14.0-0 xd5 15.cxd5 e7 ) 13...8d7 B) 18...a5 19.g5 h6 20.xe7 xe7
14.0-0 c8 and Black has equalised, for 21.d3 fd8 and Black had at least
example 15.d4 xf3! 16.xf3 h4 equalised in Narayanan, S (2229) -
17.xg7 xg7 and Black has absolutely Nakamura, H (2651) Catalan Bay 2007 ]
no problems here.; [ 15.a4 is my computer's suggestion, with
B) 12...e5?! 13.0-0 xf3 14.xf3 a6 the possible threat of b5 and indeed White
449
may keep a minimal edge here after a7! 448 B03

16.fd1 e6 17.e1 xe2 18.xe2 8e7 Aroshidze,Levan 2390
a l t h o u gh t h i s p o si t i o n c a n h a r d l y b e a Chigladze,Iveri 2250
massive headache for Black who keeps a European GP Izmir (9) 2003
very solid position and still has the potential [Andrew Martin]
to play ...e5 later on. ]
15...xe2 16.xc6 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
[ 16.xe2 xe5 17.dxe5 e6 18.f4 d7 5.exd6 Still dangerous after all these years.
and Black's protected pawn on d5 means exd6
he shouldn't be worse here although [ 5...cxd6 is currently experiencing a crisis of
perhaps White can try 19.d2 with Ne2-d4 confidence in the positions after 6.c3 g6
with the slightly easier position. ] 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 ]
16...bxc6 17.xe2 e5! This break frees 6.c3 e7 7.d3!? A slightly offbeat system
Black's position and comfortably equalises. which nevertheless seems very dangerous.
18.d2 Black has to play very exactly. Development
[ 18.dxe5 xe5 19.h6?! fails to xh2+ is simple enough for White. He intends Nge2
( 19...e8 20.g4 e7 is also better for and b2-b3, hoping to deny Black's Bishop on
Black ) 20.xh2 h4+ ] c8 a sensible square. If Black is then reduced
18...e7 19.dxe5 xe5 20.d4?! to ... Bg4xe2, the two Bishops should then
[ 20.e2 was needed to hold the balance give White an enduring edge. 0-0
with the position looking very equal after f5 [ 7...c6 with the Bishop on d3, an early ...
21.f4 xf4 22.xf4 ] Nc6 b e co m e s m u ch m o re a cce p t a b le :
20...xd4 21.xd4 f5 22.d3 h4 8.e3
Suddenly W hite has to be careful here as A) 8...0-0 9.b3 f6 10.ge2 g4 11.f3
Black's pieces are clearly the more active. h5 12.0-0 e8 13.f2 b4 14.b1 a5
23.a3 fe8 24.fe1 d4! 25.xe8+ xe8 15.a3 a6 16.d3 c6 17.c1 d5
26.xd4 xd4 27.f1 b5?! A rather Much bette r timing by Black, who
negative move which quickly brings about a developed first before taking concrete
peaceful end to the proceedings. action. But I still think White has an edge:
[ 27...g7 allows Black to slowly improve his 18.c5! d7 19.g3 ( 19.f4! g6
po sit io n a n d pre ss in th e e nd gam e . O f 20.xg6 hxg6 21.e1 is correct, I think,
course White should hold the draw here but with a typical position for this variation.
it's still a little uncomfortable, for example Black has sniping chances against the
A) 28.d1 c2 29.e2! is probably W hite pawn structure, but with the two
W h i t e ' s b e s t b u t e v e n h e r e e4! Bishops, stability and the plan of Rb1, b3-
leaves Black better ( 29...xa3?! 30.d4 b4 etc, White has any advantage that is
c8 31.a1= ); going. ) 19...g6 20.f5 xf5 21.xf5
B) 28.g3 g5! 29.h3 h5 30.d1 f3 g6 22.xd7 xd7 23.a4 f5 24.b6
and Black is gaining control of the ad8 25.e1 c7 26.d2 e6 27.cd1
kingside ] h5 28.xa5 e7 29.d2 de8 30.d3
28.a4 xc3 29.xc3 e4 30.b5! axb5 g5 31.h4 f4 32.g3 c7 33.f4 g7
31.axb5 cxb5 32.c6 e8 33.c5 b4 34.xe7 xe7 35.e1 xe1+ 36.xe1
34.xd5 c8 35.b5 xc6 36.xb4 xe1+ 37.g2 f5 38.d7 xd4
9...Bf5 is definitely worth a look for Black 39.d2 e3 40.a5 xg3+ 41.h2
players wishing to avoid too much theory. xb3 42.d8+ h7 43.e8 h6
½-½ 44.e7 g7 45.b6 d4 46.xb7 d3
47.xc6 d2 48.d7 0-1 Pueyo Burell, D-
Peralta, F/V Open, Sants ESP 2003;
B) 8...d5?! But not this way! 9.c5 c4
10.xc4 dxc4 11.a4 0-0 12.xc4
That was simple enough. W hite tucks
450
away the pawn and goes on to win easily: [ 18...xg5 19.xg5++- h8 20.f6+ g8
g5 13.f3 xe3 14.fxe3 e7 15.e4 21.gxf5 xf5 ( 21...c8 22.g3 ) 22.xd8
b5 16.xb5 e6 17.d5 g6 18.0-0 axd8 23.xf5+- ]
e7 19.c6 g4 20.c5 c8 21.e5 19.xf6 xf6 20.gxf5 xd4 21.fxe6 f3+
g5 22.xg4 xg4 23.f2 1-0 Pilgaard, 22.xf3 xf3 23.f1 h4 24.exf7+ h8
K-Szieberth, A/FSGM September, 25.fxe8+ xe8 26.g5 White changed
Budapest HUN 2003 ] gea r half way th ro ugh a nd Black was lef t
8.ge2 c6 9.b3! One of the main ideas is gasping for air. I reckon the system with Bd3,
to reinf orce c4. 'A knight on b6 is always Nge2 and b3 is well worth playing. There are
badly placed' said Tarrasch. He would have chances of a clear strategical edge early on
been pleased with 9 b3! g4 One struggles to and the ideas just seem so easy to implement
find a better placement. 10.e3 and understand. Chigladze didn't do much
[ 10.f3? is less exact. h4+ ] wrong but he was blown away! Perhaps the
10...e8 11.d2 f6 12.0-0 d5 Szmetan method is the way to go for Black
[ 12...xe2 13.xe2 a5 14.ad1 d5 15.c5 but right now, to me, White has just posted a
d7 16.a3! f8 17.b4 axb4 18.axb4 serious threat to the Alekhine.
e6! This is probably the way to go. White 1-0
has an optical edge but as long as Black
keeps gnawing away at the White pawns he
should keep the balance. 19.f5 ( As 19.b5 449 B03
cxd4 20.xd4 xd4 21.xd4 xd4 Atalik,Suat 2551
22.xh7+ xh7 23.xd4 c6 is roughly De Firmian,Nick E 2551
equal, White plays for more.; 19.b2 a4!? Imre Mem San Francisco USA (1) 04.09.2002
20.xh7+! h8! 21.b1 xb4 22.a3 ) [Glenn Flear]
19...g6 20.xe6 xe6 21.a1 e7
A) 22.f4 ea6 ( 22...xa1 23.xa1 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
a6 24.b1 f5 25.b5 a4 26.e2 ) 5.f4 Not so fashionable these days but still
23.xa6 xa6 24.b5; one of the sharpest tries. W hite builds his
B) 22.g3 ea6 23.xa6 xa6 24.g5 centre so Black must react quickly not to be
xg5 25.xg5 c6 26.f4? Losing the swept off the board. dxe5 6.fxe5 f5 7.c3
plot. ( 26.d2 a4 27.b1 f6 e6 8.f3 c6 9.e3 g4!?
28.e2= ) 26...a4 27.b1 xb4 [ Mo re n o rm a l i s 9...e7 10.d5 exd5
28.xb4 xb4 29.h4 h5 30.f1 c6 11.cxd5 b4 ]
31.d2 e7 32.f3 d3 33.d2 e4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4
34.a2 g7 35.d2 f4 36.b4 f5 13.c5 d5
37.e5 e4 38.f3 e2 39.d2 xd2 [ 13...d7 is the preferred line in ECO B (4th
40.xd2 e2+ 0-1 Real de Azua, E- edition 2002) but De Firmian repeats this
S z m e t a n , J / L X XV I I ch - A R G , T r e s d e move despit e ECO considering it t o b e
Febrero ARG 2003 ] dubious. ]
[ 12...b4 13.b1 d5 14.c5 ] 14.xd5 exd5 15.d2 xd2+ 16.xd2 g6
13.c5 c8 14.h3 e6 15.f4! If Black were 17.f4
left alone, he could get on with ...g6, ...Bg7, ... [ 17.e3 (avoiding ...Bh6 for the moment) is
N8e7-f5 and some slow counterplay, but a recommended by ECO as in Myers-Hagerty,
rapid advance of the Kingside pawns exposes USA 1981 as a clear advantage to White.
just how passive Black's position is. 8e7 Presumably De Firmian has something up
16.g4 g6 his sleeve. Something such as 17...Ne7 18
[ 16...h4 17.f5 d7 18.f6 ] Bd3 h5 or even 17... f6 should yield food
17.f5 gxf5 18.g5! Excellent, stripping out for thought! ]
the d ef en ders . g6 There is really nothing 17...h6 18.e3 e7 19.d3 f5 20.xf5
else. Black is lost already: gxf5 21.hg1 d7 22.g3 ag8 23.b4
[ 18...h8 19.gxf5 c8 20.h1 ] So far as in Timman-De Firmian, Malmo 1981.
451
In the notes in Informator 82 Black's next ( 19...b4?! 20.xa7+! xa7 21.xb6 )

move is reco mmen ded by Timm an a s a n 20.f3 c5 21.xc5 xc5 22.fd4 xe5
improvement. xg3! 23.xe6 fxe6 24.e2 ed3+ 25.b1 ]
[ 23...g6?! 24.e2 f8? 25.g5! e6 15.c7+ f7 16.e6+ g6 17.e3
26.h5 h6 27.b5 gave serious problems for This position is definitely worth a diagram!
Black in the aforementioned game. ] Black has an extra rook but his queen is
24.hxg3 f8 25.b5 c6 26.a4 e7 27.h1 trapped, his queen's rook is en prise and
h5 De Firmian constructs an impenetrable neither bishop can develop. But the really bad
fortress. 28.f2 d8 29.e2 h6 30.f3 news is that his king is very 'mateable'! Rogulj
h8 31.e1 h6 32.h2 h8 33.b2 c8 must have underestimated his opponent!
34.bxc6 bxc6 35.a5 a6 Whit cannot e5?
breakthrough or invade. Black seems to be [ 17...f5! is recommended by Fritz as it
able to hold out against 17 f4. If indeed Black allows some luft for Black's king and avoids
has an answer to 17 Be3 then 13...Nd5 is OK immediately dropping the queen. This is the
but as it frankly doesn't really give Black any only way to try and justify 14...f6!? 18.g2?
winning chances, most players would do well xh2 ]
to investigate the main lines following 9...Be7. 18.g2 xg2
½-½ [ Now 18...xh2 is answered by 19.e4+ ]
19.xg2 xd6 20.g4! Threatening mate in
t w o . B l a c k l o s e s f u r t h e r m a t e r i a l . xe6
450 B03 21.xe6 d3+ 22.f1 he8 23.xb6
Bender,Ivan 2176 xe6 24.d5 f4 25.xb7 b8 26.xa7
Rogulj,Branko 2454 be8 27.f2 d3 28.d4 c5
Open Velika Gorica CRO (6) 27.06.2002 Black's pieces are finally in the game but
[Glenn Flear] unfortunately the White camp holds together.
29.xc4 xf2 30.xc5 xg4 31.f3 e2
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 32.h4+ h6 33.g1 g5 34.f5+ g6
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5?! Interesting or just 35.g3 2e5 36.c2+ f5 37.xf5!?
risky? A Ljubojevic speciality in his youth. 7.d5 Sacrificing a piece to tangle Black up. Then
e6 8.c3 exd5 9.cxd5 c4 10.d6! it's the a-pawn that wins the day. xf5 38.f1
[ Normal development by 10.f3 b4 ef8 39.a4 e3 40.xf5 xf5 41.d3 d5
11.xc4 xc3+ 12.bxc3 xc4 13.a4+ 42.a5 f4 43.c2 h3+ 44.g2 f4+
d7 14.xc4 b6 15.b5+ d7! 45.h1 d5 46.a6 f6 47.g1 e5
only leads to equality, Formanek-Shabalov, 48.a7 Rogulj's line is not for the faint-hearted
New York 1995 ] but despite his recent reversal's it may be
10...c6 11.b5 Not the only move to cause playable for Black.
Black some sticky moments as White probably 1-0
stands well after
[ 11.f3 g4 12.f4 g5 13.e4 gxf4
14.f6+ xf6 15.exf6 0-0-0 16.c1 451 B03
Pour-Burgess, Blitz 1994, and ] Bener,Anna
[ 11.f4 g5 12.e4 gxf4 13.f6+ xf6 Pushin,Vladimir
14.exf6 e6 15.h5 0-0-0 Zude-Buecker, USSR 1988
Germany 1987 ] [Alexander Volzhin]
11...h4+ 12.g3 e4+ 13.e2 xh1
14.g5 f6?! Rogulj tries to keep this line alive 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
with this outrageous novelty. In Fontaine- 5.f4 g6!? Another playable possibility for
Ro g u l j, Ho t e l O p a t ij a 2 0 0 2 ( t wo m o n t h s Black. This line is played rather seldom, but
earlier) Black was slightly worse after obviously it deserves more attention. 6.c3
[ 14...e6 15.d7+ xd7 16.0-0-0+ c8 g7 7.e3 0-0
17.g2 xg2 18.xg2 h6 19.e3 d7 [ T h e i m m e d i a t e 7...e6!? is worth
452
c o n s i d e r a t i o n : 8.b3 ( 8.c5 d5 better ]

l o o k s f i n e f o r B l a c k; 8.f3 0-0 [ 9.b3 is no good either since Black can
is a transposition to the main line.) 8...a5! exploit unp rot ecte d p osit ion of W hite's
9.a4 I don't like this move since the Knight on c3 and break in the centre: c5!
weakening of the b4-square gives Black 10.dxc5 6d7 11.cxd6 exd6 12.xd6
exc e lle n t c h a n ce s. Bu t it 's no t e a sy t o xe5! with good prospects for Black. ]
recommend for White a real improvement. 9...a5! 10.g5
a6 10.d1 b4 11.f3 d5! 12.cxd5 [ 10.a4?! a6 is similar to Kotek-Sergeev,
( 12.c5?! c4! is even worse for White.) here Black has also good prospects. ]
12...4xd5! 13.xd5 xd5 14.c2 xf3 [ 10.e4!? d5 11.eg5?! ( 11.ed2
15.gxf3 d5 16.c1 e6 and Black is is relatively better although the position after
clearly better due to his firm control over dxc4 12.xc4 c6 is quite OK for Black.)
the important d5 square and W hite's 11...dxc4 12.xe6 cxb3 13.xd8 xd8
exposed pawn structure, Kotek-Sergeev, 14.axb3 c6 and the endgame favors Black
1997. ] due to development advantage and firm
8.f3 control over the d5-square, Nikitin-Pushkin,
[ W h i t e h a s a l s o t r i e d 8.c5!? 6d7 USSR 1988. ]
( Of c o u rs e , t h e e n d ga m e a f t e r 8...dxc5 10...a4!
9.dxc5 xd1+ 10.xd1 6d7 11.d5 [ 10...f5? 11.e6! fxe6 12.c5 is bad for
is bad for Black.) 9.f3 ( 9.h4!? is worth Black. ]
considering. In my opinion this position is 11.xe6
c rit ic a l f o r t h e wh o le lin e a n d re qu ire s [ 11.b5?! doesn't look promising in view of
practical tests.) 9...b6 10.b4 b7 11.e2 d7 12.b4 c6 13.a3 f6! -by breaking
a5 12.a3 bxc5 13.bxc5 dxc5 14.dxc5 W h it e's ce n t re B la ck o b t ain s e xc elle n t
a6 with excellent prospects for Black, game. ]
Rogers-Loeffler, Wijk aan Zee 1996. ] 11...axb3 12.xd8 xd8 13.a3 c6
8...e6! This move introduced by IM Sergeev Just after the opening the opponents find
in his game vs Ivanchuk has revealed the themselves in a complicated endgame.
whole line which was considered as Black's Bishop on g7 is rather passive now as
insufficient before. it's restricted by White's pawn chain but after
[ Now it's too late to exchange the central ...f7-f6 at the right moment it will become
pawn as 8...dxe5 9.dxe5! is very strong dangerous piece. Now White has to parry the
here. c6 ( The endgame after 9...xd1+ 14...Nb4 threat. 14.0-0-0?!
10.xd1 is clearly better for White.) 10.b3 [ In my opinion, 14.c1 is better, after dxe5
g4 11.e2 xf3 12.xf3 d3 13.e4! 15.dxe5 d4 16.d3 c2+ 17.xc2
xb3 ( The pawn is taboo: 13...xc4?? ( 17.e2 is dangerous for White in view of
14.xb6 xb3 15.axb3 and White wins a xd3! 18.xd3 d8+ 19.e2 xe3
piece. ) 14.axb3 with huge edge for White, 20.xe3 xc4+ 21.e4 xb2 ) 17...xc4!
Matanovich-Darga, 1964. ] 18.e2!? bxc2 19.xc2 the position is
9.b3 Likely the only move. The alternatives balanced. ]
are insufficient: 14...a5! Now Black is clearly better. 15.c5
[ After 9.d2 dxe5 10.fxe5 c5! dxc5 16.dxc5 xd1+ 17.xd1
W hite's central pawns are a good target: [ 17.xd1 is even worse: bc4 18.c1
11.d5 ( 11.dxc5 6d7 is also good for d8+ 19.e1 f6! and White is in trouble. ]
Black. ) 11...f5 12.f4 e6! Ivanchuk- 17...bc4 18.d4 d8 19.c3 d5 20.b4
Sergeev, USSR, 1984, and White can't hold g5! By undermining White's pawn chain Black
the pawn centre, for example: 13.d6 c6 seizes the initiative. Now White has difficult
14.f3 d7 15.e2 g4 and Black wins problems to solve. 21.fxg5 The only move.
the e5-pawn ] [ 21.g3 gxf4 22.gxf4 h6 23.g1+ f8
[ 9.d5? g4 10.exd6 (forced) exd6 24.g4 d4 and Black wins. ]
, intending 11... Re8, and Black is clearly 21...xe5 22.xc4 xc4 23.e1 e6 24.h4
453
[ The rook exchange doesn't help White [ Here Alexander Volzhin looked at 9.b3
either as the bishop and knight endgame in Brener-Pushkin which leads to sharp and
after 24.xe5 xe5 25.g3 d4 unclear play after a5! ]
is very nasty for White. ] [ Note that is too late for White to change his
24...d5! 25.e4 mind and lash out with 9.d5? as g4
[ 25.c3 is bad as well: d2 26.e2 xe2 is now simply good for Black. ]
27.xe2 xb2+ ] 9...c5! Logical and necessary. Black has to
25...e5 26.f2 f8! Winning the c5-pawn. c o u n t e r a t t a c k i m m e d i a t e l y . 10.dxc5
27.c6 Desperation but White's position is very There begins a long forcing variation. Black
bad anyway: has to sacrifice a couple of pawns to break
[ 27.e3 xc5 28.xc5 xc5+ 29.b1 White's stranglehold on the centre.
c4 is hopeless as well. ] Meanwhile White has to take the material on
27...xc6 28.xf8 xf8 The rest is just a offer or else his e5 point will crumble,
matter of technique. 29.c4 d4 30.c3 gu a ra n t e e in g B la c k a g o o d ga m e . 6d7!
xh4 31.xb3 a5 32.d3 h2 33.g3 11.cxd6 exd6 12.xd6 xe5! The point of
g7 34.e4 g6 35.b4 c6 36.c5 d4 Black's play. He gets one of his pawns back
37.g4 e5! 38.e4 xg2 39.xe5 xg5 and shatters the white kingside structure.
40.xg5+ xg5 41.xb7 g4 13.xd8
White resigned as the h-pawn march decides. [ Naturally 13.fxe5? xd6 14.exd6 xc3+
0-1 would be embarrassing for White. ]
13...xf3+ 14.gxf3 xd8
[ Black doesn't want to give up his dark
452 B03 squared bishop with 14...xc3+? 15.d2
Bologan,V 2654 xd2+ 16.xd2 ]
Khairallah,F 2307 15.c1 c6 16.e2 The dust has settled.
41st Olympiad Open 2014 (5.29) 06.08.2014 W hite is a pawn up but his doubled pawns
[Neil McDonald] and Black's activity greatly complicate matters.
White has tried other moves here but they all
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 seem dubious. For example
5.f4 g6!? It seems like this alternative to the [ 16.f2?! e7! heading for f5 to nab
mainline is alive and kicking. The theory would W hite's important dark squared bishop.
be developing faster if White played the Four 17.e2 f5 18.hd1 xd1 19.xd1 xe3
Pawns Attack more often. 6.c3 g7 7.e3 20.xe3 e8 21.d3 Stopa, J (2460)-
e6!? Black tries to cajole his opponent into 8. Narciso Dublan, M (2532)/Montcada 2011
d5, but here Bologan resists. and now d8+! looks strong for Black e.g.
[ Black could also delay this move with 22.e2 h6 23.e3 e8 24.e4 g7
7...0-0 8.f3 ( but 8.c5!? might throw a planning 25...f5. ]
spanner in the works- check out Tom [ 16.e4?! b4 17.c5 Grabher, H (2228)-
Rendle's comments to Moser-Fier in the Ager, J (2223)/ Austria 2002 and now simply
archives. ) 8...e6 when 9.b3 xa2 gets Black's pawn back with the
would transpose to the present game. ] initiative after 18.xe6 fxe6 19.d1 b4
8.f3 20.e2 c2+ etc. ]
[ T o m a n a l y s e d t h e u l t r a - s h a r p 8.d5 [ 16.b5?! b4 17.c7 ( 17.a3 d3+
in Moser-Fier. His conclusion is that White 18.xd3 xd3 when b3 drops.) 17...xa2
h a s s o m e a d va n t a g e . H o we ve r , i n t h e ( 17...xa2 with better chances for Black. )]
messy counterattacking positions that arise 16...d4!
this isn't going to upset Alekhine fans too [ Instead Black could grab the pawn back at
much. ] the cost of his dark squared bishop with
8...0-0 9.b3 A slow move, but if left in peace 16...b4 17.f2 ( White is being crushed
W hite will continue with Rc1, Be2 and 0-0 after 17.a3? d3+ 18.xd3 xd3 19.d2
maintaining a huge space advantage. e8 etc. ) 17...xc3 18.xc3 xa2
454
However, I think White might have a very pawn is terminally weak, he has no passed
slight plus after 19.d3 xd3 20.xd3 b4 pawn, his rook lack activity and his bishop is a
21.b1 f5 22.d1 f7 23.d6 etc. There p o o r p i e c e . 22.fd1 c8 23.d3 e3
is no reason for Black to play like this when 24.b1 d4
the game continuation gives him at least [ Simply 24...xf4 was very good for Black. ]
equal chances. ] 25.e4 c6 26.f5 Bologan is fighting back.
17.b5 This turns out poorly but Black has He sells the f-pawn as dearly as possible by
the initiative in all lines, for example doubling Black's pawns and circumscribing
[ 17.f2 f5 18.hd1 xe3 19.xe3 the activity of his light squared bishop. gxf5
xd1 20.xd1 e8 21.f2 f5 27.d5 c7 28.b4
intending 22...Bd4+. ] [ It was better to activate the rook on b1 with
[ Or 17.e4 a5!? 28.b2! This would also guard the second
A) 18.c5 f5 19.xb7 d7 20.c5 rank. ]
e8! 21.e4 ( Awful for White is 21.xd7 28...d4 29.xe6 fxe6 30.c5 xf3
xe3 ) 21...xe4 22.fxe4 xe4 23.xd4 Black should be winning thanks to his passed
xd4 White is trying to survive, not exploit pawns, but it won't be easy. 31.d8+ f7
his extra pawn.; 32.bd1 e5 33.h8 g7 34.e8 f7
B) 18.f2 a4 19.b4 xe2 20.xe2 b5! 35.h8 f6 36.f8+ f7 37.a4 f4 38.a5
21.cxb5 xa2 and the passed a-pawn, e5 39.b5! Bologan makes use of all his
supported by the two bishops, is more resources in a desperate position. In the end
dangerous than White's b-pawn. ] he is just saved by his passed pawn. xc5
17...f5 18.xa7 40.b6 e7 41.c8 d6 42.b1 f3 43.a6
[ White does best to grovel with 18.f2 h6 bxa6 44.b7 f4 45.c6 b8 46.c8 d6
19.g3 ] 47.c6 b8 48.c8 d6 A real scare for
18...xa7 Bologan against a player rated almost 350
[ Black would have a decisive initiative after Elo points below him. If you give the game to
18...f6! e.g. 19.a4? ( But Black's onslaught a computer it will point out various missed
is also unstoppable after 19.d1 h4+ opportunities for Black in the endgame, but
20.f2 xa2 21.xd8+ xd8 or; 19.b6 Khairallah deserves credit for making it such
xa2! 20.xd8 xd8 with 21...Bh4+ a hard fight.
looming. ) 19...xa7 20.xa7 h4+ 21.f1 ½-½
e3+ 22.g1 d2 23.f1 f2# ]
19.xa7 f6 20.0-0
[ The best chance for White to survive was 453 B03
20.d1! but it's no surprise that Bologan Bologan,Viktor 2684
didn't see this quiet move when his king is Rozentalis,Eduardas 2628
being hunted. Black would have the TOP 16 GpB Mulhouse (6) 01.05.2010
pleasant choice between forcing a draw by [Gawain Jones]
re p e t i t i o n o r p u rs u i n g h is a t t a c k . h4+
( T h e w i n n i n g a t t e m p t i s 20...h4 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
when White's king has to walk a tight rope: 5.f4 The Four Pawns Attack. In my view, the
21.e2 g2 22.c2 xf4+ 23.e3 h3 most critical test of the Alekhine. Both sides
24.hd1 g5+ 25.e2 e8 26.f1 f4 m u s t h a ve a t h o ro u gh kn o wle d ge o f t h e
and the assault continues.) 21.e2 d4+ intricacies of the variation or they can quickly
22.e3 f5+ 23.e2 ( but not 23.e4?? run into trouble. dxe5
d4+ 24.e5 f6+ 25.xe6 d6# mate! )] [ 5...g6 In my opinion this allows White a
20...d4+ 21.h1 xa7 White's king has good game. A recent game did nothing to
escaped the centre and nominally a rook and alter my belief, 6.c3 g7 7.e3 0-0
two pawns is ample material for two minor 8.c5! 6d7 9.h4 Ultra-aggressive!
pieces. But Black's bishops are very strong ( I've also looked at 9.c2 followed by
whereas all is gloomy in White's camp: his f4 castling long which looks strong for White. )
455
A) 9...dxc5 10.dxc5 piece is stronger than the three pawns

A1) 10...e6 11.h5 e7 ( 11...g5 12.h6 here. )
h8 13.g4+- ) 12.c2 and I imagine A1a) 15.b3 Stopa, J-Sher, M
everyone would take White here.; Indianapolis 2009 allowed Black the
A2) 10...b6 11.f3 c6 looks very trick: xd4! 16.xd4 xe2 as
suspicious. If this is the best Black can 17.xe2 ( 17.xf7 is strongest but
hope for then I think 5...g6 will have to Black's doing well after c4! ) 17...d3
be consigned to the trash heap.; regains the piece.;
B) 9...b6 10.cxd6 exd6 11.f3! A1b) 15.d2 f6 16.ae1!
is terrible.; looks interesting here and rather
C) 9...e6 10.cxd6 cxd6 11.h5 c6 dangerous for Black who can grab a
12.hxg6 fxg6 13.d5 ( 13.f3 ) pawn two different ways but will be put
13...dxe5?! ( 13...a5 14.dxe6 b6 u n d e r a l o t o f p r e s s u r e . ( 16.h3
15.e7 xe7 16.d5 f7 17.xb6 axb6 allowed Black to complicate the
18.xd6 c4 is better for White but not position in typical Alekhine fashion with
yet all over.) 14.dxc6 xc6 gave Black xd4! Abel, D-Beikert, G Germany
nothing like enough for the piece. Bauer, 2008. )
C-Hug, W Switzerland 2001; A1b1) 16...xb4?! 17.h3 ( 17.g5
D) 9...e8?! This is simply too slow but I fxg5 18.xg4 xc5 19.xe6+ b8
haven't found a satisfactory route for Black 20.f5 i s u n c l e a r .) 17...f5
here, for example: 10.h5 f8 11.hxg6 ( 17...h5 18.xb4 xe3+ 19.h1
fxg6 Piscopo, P-Pesotskyi, V Rijeka 2010. leaves Black with severe problems
Here the most accurate win looks to be wit h h is kin g .) 18.xb4 xe3+
12.f5! when Black simply cannot deal with 19.h1 and I imagine the pressure
the attack. ] on the b file is simply too strong.;
6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 A1b2) 16...xe5 17.xe5 fxe5
This is the main line of the Four Pawns Attack. 18.d3
[ 9.e2 has also been tried, preventing A1b21) 18...d5 would leave the
Black's ...Bg4. A couple of recent games queen with too many difficulties
ran: d7 ( Perhaps Black should play following 19.f2! exd4 20.e4
9...e7 when after 10.f3 The position has f5 21.xd4 xd3 ( 21...xd4
t ra n s p o s e d b a ck t o t h e t yp ica l 9 . . . B e 7 22.xd4 xd4 23.xf5!+- )
positions which Jo hn W atson analyse d 22.xd5 xd5 23.e1
thoroughly whilst avoiding the most critical and White's extra queen promises
10.d5!? option.; 9...h4+ would attempt to him a clear edge.;
e x p lo i t W h i t e ' s m o ve o rd e r b u t I d o n ' t A1b22) 18...c6 19.h3 h5
believe it after the simple 10.f2 ) 10.f3 20.f2! exd4 21.c4 and Black
A) 10...0-0-0 It's very risky castling will quickly lose his temporary two
queenside here. 11.0-0 We have actually pawn ad vantage whilst W hite's
transposed back to Kotronias-Short in the attack is raging.;
archives. g4 ( N i g e l t r i e d 11...f6 A2) 13.f2 e7 14.a4 f6 15.xd5
but reached a pretty lousy position.) 12.c5 xd5 16.b4 fxe5 17.b5 xf3 18.xf3
d5 e4 Chkhikvishvili, M-Chighladze, I Tbilisi
A1) 13.xd5 xd5 14.b4 was Andrew 2010 and here White could have kept an
Martin's suggestion in the archives and edge with 19.xe4 xe4 20.fe1 d5
looks stronger. e4 ( 14...f6 15.h3 21.bxc6 xc6 22.xa7;
h5 16.b5 xd4 17.xd4 xe5 B) 10...d8 11.0-0 g4 12.g5!?
18.f2 xc5 19.xh5 xd4 20.e2 Forcing the following series of moves.
e4 21.c2! xf2+ 22.xf2! xc4 13.xf7 xe3 14.xd7 xd1
Novak, D-Bogut, Z Kastav 2002. h5 is 15.xd8+ xd8 16.xg4 ( 16.xd1
taboo due to the threat of Qxa7 and the xe2 17.xe2 e7 18.e4 might give
456
White a small edge but it's not much and f8 33.e3 b2 34.xd7+ f7 35.h6+
the presence of bishop vs knight would was a po we rf u lly pla ye d gam e b y th e
allow the stronger player more chances to Indian. 1-0 Das, S-Shivananda, B Delhi
outplay his opponent.) 16...e3 17.h3 2010. ]
c5 18.b5 cxd4 19.c7+! e7 20.e1 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4
g6 21.gxe6 xe6 22.xe6 h6 13.c5 d5 14.xd5 exd5 15.d2 xd2+
23.xd4 d8 24.f3 d1 25.e2 e3+ 16.xd2 So again we see this ending which
26.f1 b6 27.d2 xd2 28.xd2 seems rather important to the viability of the
xb2 29.c8 c7 30.xb7 xe5 31.h3 main line of the Four Pawns Attack. Recently
d1 32.e4 e3+ 33.f2 d4 34.f3 Black has come under pressure here as White
h6 35.c3 xc3 36.xe3 1/2-1/2 Farran can make good use of his bishop pair whilst
Martos, F-Narciso Dublan, M Sabadell p re p a r in g a qu e e n si d e p a wn st o rm . e7
2010, didn't give the GM playing Black Ro ze nt alis' ne w try. I n th e th re e arch ive
many winning chances. ] games Black has always tried
9...g4 [ 16...g6 but after 17.e3! he seems to be in
[ 9...e7 10.d5 Is the aforementioned some trouble. A couple of Grandmaster
critical line which received a recent outing. g a m e s i n 2 0 0 8 c o n f i r m e d t h i s : d7
exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 d7 ( 17...h5 18.b5 e7 19.g5+ e6
A) 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 c6 20.c3 h4 21.h3 e7 22.f4 f5 23.e2
A1) 15.g4 has been looked at a b6 24.b4 a5 25.a3 e7 26.g4 xg5
couple of times in the archives, when 27.fxg5 e7 28.f3 hd8 29.hb1 a7
h4+ 16.g3 xh1 results in crazy 30.d3 b8 31.b5 bxc5 32.dxc5 a4
co mp lica tion s - see K linger-Hernd l. 33.b4 a5 34.ab1 d8 35.d1 c6
( Meanwhile 16...f6? is an error which 36.b6 xc5 37.xa4 b8 38.a7+ e6
White should have taken advantage of in 39.a4 xe5 40.a5 d4 41.a6 and the two
P o m m e r e t - P h i l i p p e , a f t e r 17.0-0-0! connected passed pawns on the sixth were
see the archives for John's analysis. ); simply too strong for the king of bullet chess.
A2) 15.xc6 xd1+ 16.xd1 c2+ Pavasovic, D-Nakamura, H Austria 2008.)
17.d2 xe3 18.xe3 bxc6 19.d3 18.f4 e7 19.g4+ f5 20.xf5+ gxf5
and W hite's advantage is somewhere 21.ag1 h6 22.g3 ag8 23.e2 g6
between small and non-existent. Froewis, 24.h3 f8 25.h5 e6 26.b4 h6
G-Schroll, G Vienna 2010.; 27.xh6+ xh6 28.g1 f8 29.b5 e7
B) 13.f3 c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.e2 30.g3 b6 31.h3 f6 32.f2 b8 33.a4
following Dominguez's example as we a6 34.c6 axb5 35.axb5 h8 36.h4 f7
have seen before. 0-0 16.0-0 4d5 37.xf6 xf6 38.exf6 xf6 39.e3 a8
17.f2 xc3 Deviating from previous 40.e5 a2+ 41.d3 xh2 42.xd5 g2
ChessPublishing analysis but not changing 43.d7 1-0 Howell, D-Ramirez, A Gaziantep
t h e v e r d i c t . ( 17...c7 18.g3 xc3 2008 saw the Englishman grinding out the
19.bxc3 c8 20.d3 was seen in full point. ]
Dominguez-Almeida when W hite had a 17.b5+ I like this intermezzo check forcing
pleasant position.) 18.bxc3 c5 19.f5 Black t o play ...c6 a f te r wh ich b4-b5 will
xf5 20.xf5 d2 21.f3 ad8 22.c4 become more powerful. Bologan's play looks
a4 23.ad1 b2 24.xd8 xd8 l i k e a n i m p r o ve m e n t a n d t h e p o s i t i o n a l
25.d1 ( 25.d3! looks strong, the idea maestro Rozentalis, who relishes this type of
being tha t xe5 26.e1 f6 27.c2 position as White, is unable to hold it as Black.
c3 28.xe7 gaining the bishop pair for [ The previous time this position was reached,
rook and pawn, a definite advantage.) White tried 17.d3 g6 18.h4 d7 19.f6
25...b6 26.e6!? fxe6 27.e4 f6 g8 20.f4 f5 21.xf5+ gxf5 22.ag1
28.c2 g6 29.xe6+ g7 30.e3 d7? the same position as Howell-Ramirez except
A blunder but the position was already the bishop is placed on f6 rather than e3
extremely difficult. 31.g5! d4+ 32.h1 which strangely gives Black better chances
457
for the draw as he can exchange bishops e6 41.b4 is a textbook position which
whenever he wants. e7 23.xe7 xe7 looks difficult for Black but perhaps he can
24.g3 g6 25.e3 ag8 26.f3 hold the draw.;
and W hite eventually ground out the full B) 35...h7 36.g5 and White can start
p o i n t i n A b e r g e l , T - R i s , R H o o g e ve e n mopping up pawns. ]
2007. ] 30.c6! axb5 31.1h6+ xh6 32.xh6+
17...c6 18.d3 g6 19.b4 h6+ 20.c3 Thus White has sacrificed the exchange and a
d7 21.b5 Bologan's play is hardly subtle yet pa wn in a n e n d ga m e ye t h a s a p o we rf u l
he clearly has a very pleasant position. hc8 initiative. Bologan hasn't risked anything with
[ 21...b6 is a try to avoid being squashed. In his cavalier attitude to his pieces as Black's
general it's not good to open up the position pawn structure is so bad that the pawns are
when your opponent has the bishop pair but always likely to drop off. f6
of course all positions have to be calculated [ 32...e7 33.h4+ would force Black to
on their own merits. 22.ab1 and it appears give up his f pawn anyway as f8 34.b4
that Black must keep the tension as threatens 35.Bf6 and thus ( 34.f6 xc6+
( 22.bxc6+ xc6 23.b5 bxc5 24.dxc5 35.b4 xf6 36.exf6 g8 seems enough
c7= ) 22...bxc5 23.dxc5 cxb5 24.xb5+ for the draw.) 34...g7 is forced but once
c7 25.he1 leaves his king too loose. ] White plays 35.d6 the c pawn is simply too
22.h4! Opening up a second front and strong. ]
exploiting Black's previous. b6 23.h5 f8 33.xf6+ e7 34.b4 a1 35.h4
[ The fact that 23...h8 is the computer's top [ 35.xb5 b1+ 36.a6 d8 looks to hold
suggestion highlights his position's flaws. ] for Black. ]
24.hxg6 hxg6 25.h7 e6 26.a4 f5 35...b1+ 36.c3 c1+ 37.d2 c4
27.xf5+ 38.d6+ e8 39.xd5 4xc6
[ It wasn't necessary to break the tension yet [ 39...8xc6 40.d8+ f7 41.d5
and W hite could continue to pile on the and the central pawns would p rove to o
pressure with 27.f4 ] strong. ]
27...gxf5 28.ah1!? Bologan plays very 40.e3!?
d y n a m i c a l l y a n d p r e p a r e s a n e xc h a n g e [ 40.xb5 is safer ]
sacrifice. 40...c3+?! That rook should stay controlling
[ 28.d3 was entirely possible too taking a the 6th rank to slow White's pawns.
time out to improve the king's location. Black [ 40...b4 should have been played when it's
ca n gra b a pa wn wit h bxc5 ( 28...cxb5 not obvious that White's better, e.g. 41.b5
29.axb5 bxc5 30.a6+ is h o p e l e s s .) c3+ 42.f4 3c4 43.xf5 xd4 44.f6
29.dxc5 cxb5 30.axb5 xc5 31.h6+ d7 c6 45.f4 c5 46.xb6 d7
32.xc5 xc5 33.a5 but White is and the pawns are being slowed although
exceedingly active and likely to pick up both this is difficult to play as Black and I
d5 and a7 pawns. ] imagine Black was under a far bit of time
28...cxb5 29.axb5 a6 pressure, especially as it's move 40. ]
[ 29...bxc5 is critical when I presume 41.f4 d3? 42.e6 Rozentalis realises too
Bo loga n h ad pla nn e d 30.1h6+! xh6 late that the e pawn can go alone. There's no
31.xh6+ e7 32.dxc5 when, despite defence to 43.e7 and 44.Rd8. An impressive
being the exchange up, Black's position is en e rget ic disp la y f ro m B o lo ga n a nd t h is
very difficult as his pawns are so vulnerable endgame is looking difficult for Black.
whilst the c pawn is strong and W hite's 1-0
pieces coordinate well. h8 33.h4+ d7
34.d6+ c7 35.f6!?
A) 35...xh4 gives back the exchange
36.xf7+ d8 ( 36...b8 37.f8+ b7
38.c6+ i s h o p e l e s s .) 37.f8+ e7
38.xa8 c4+ 39.b3 xc5 40.xa7+
458
454 B03 455 B03

Boric,E 2292 Boroday,Sergey 2395
Rakic,Marija 2276 Moliboga,Vladimir 2295
17th CRO-chT 1w (3) 29.09.2008 Independence Cup, Kyiv (11) 2003
[John Watson] [Andrew Martin]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 Alekhine's Defence remains as controversial
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 as ever. Numerous White systems, generally
0-0 9.b3 c6 10.d5 e5 11.e2 f5!? involving steady, unspectacular development
[ W e lo o k e d a t 11...ed7 12.f3 f6 put the opening under serious pressure. But if
13.h3 with the idea Qd2 in K Lie-Es Lie, White tries full-on aggression from the very
Hamar 2007. White seems clearly better. ] beginning, he should be ready for occasional
12.f3!? A calm move, and not bad. But it's disaster! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
worth going back to look at options that we've b6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 f5 7.c3 e6
covered before: 8.e3 b4 9.f3 c5!? The Four Pawns isn't
[ 12.f4 g4 13.xg4 fxg4 14.ge2 f5 really the way to go Black just has too many
( 14...e5! is wo r t h a t r y) 15.0-0 h5?! reasonable ways to play. 9...c5 is just one of
( 15...e6!? ) 16.d4 f6 17.xf6 exf6 them. Boroday seems surprised and comes
18.d4 was superb for White in Skorchenko, up with a most unsuccessful novelty.
D (2460)-Tkachenko, G (2318)/Lugansk 10.d2?!N Just makes the White queen a
UKR 2007. See the Archives. ] target on the d file. White should play 10 a3:
[ 12.h3 and ] [ 10.a3 cxd4 ( 10...xc3+?! 11.bxc3 c6
[ 12.d2 are also attractive, as I pointed out 12.e2 c7 13.0-0 d8 14.e1 0-0
in that update. But Black plays 9...Nc6 with 15.g3 a5 16.g5 c8 17.h4 g6
something in mind. Perhaps ...Nf7 followed 18.xg6 fxg6 19.g4 xf1+ 20.xf1 e8
by ...h6/...g5/...f4 is his idea. ] 21.d5 exd5 22.cxd5 h6 23.d6 c6
12...h6 13.d2 h7 24.e7 1-0 Bielczyk, J-Meiklejohn, I/
[ 13...g5? 14.xe5 xe5 15.f4! gxf4 Groningen 1971) 11.xd4! ( 11.axb4 dxe3
16.xf4 xf4 17.xf4 is obviously terrific 12.c5 6d7 13.d6 c6 14.b5 c8
for White. ] 15.0-0-0 e7 16.g5 a5 17.xe7+ xe7
14.h4 18.xf7 axb4 19.xd7+ xd7 20.xh8
[ 14.xe5! dxe5 15.0-0 with the idea f4 bxc3 21.f7 0-1 Amate Tortosa, B-Suba, M/
16.c5 keeps White in control of the centre Villa de Albox 2002) 11...xd4 12.xd4
as well as the e4 square. ] xc3+ 13.xc3 a4 14.c1 ( 14.b4
14...bd7 15.h5!? xb2 15.d4 c6 16.xc6 bxc6
[ 15.xe5 xe5 16.b5 d7 17.d4 Ostojic, P-Marovic, D/Umag 1972) 14...c6
is logical, but W hite will have to find an 15.e2 0-0-0 16.0-0 g4 17.fe1 d7
effective plan. ] 18.h3 h5 19.d4 xd4 20.xh5 b3
15...xf3+ 21.d1 ac5 22.xb3 xb3 23.cd1
[ 15...g5?! 16.d4 w i t h t h e i d e a f4? hd8 24.xd7 xd7= Lochte, T-Blees, A/
17.e6 a5 18.c2+ g8 19.d2 Budapest 1990 ]
has no good reply. ] [ 10.e2 c6 11.0-0 xc3 12.bxc3 0-0
16.xf3 g5 17.b5 e5 18.e2 f4 19.d4 13.e1 g6 14.d1 cxd4 15.cxd4 e7
a6 This time Black has more squares to work Counterplay is gained by controlling the
with. 20.xe5 xe5 21.d4 xd4 22.xd4 central light squares e4 and f5. 16.b4 e4
f5 23.0-0 I still like White here, with the idea 17.g5 f5 18.c3 xe3 19.xe3 g6
of exchanging bishops and bringing a rook to 20.e4 xe4 21.xe4 c8 22.c1 c7
e6. Still, Black has kingside space and 23.c3 1/2-1/2 Parma, B-Hecht, H/Berlin
W h i t e ' s p a wn o n h 5 i s s h a ky, so m a yb e West 1971 ]
there's some counterplay. 10...c6 11.dxc5? A disgusting move but by
½-½ now I guess Boroday realised it was too late
459
for a2-a3: ( 7...xd3 8.xd3 looks rather

[ 11.a3 cxd4 comfortable for W hite; while we don't
A) 12.xd4 xd4 believe the tricky 7...xd4 can be good
A1) 13.xd4 xc3 14.bxc3 ( 14.xc3 for Black following 8.xd4 xd3 9.xd3
h4+ ) 14...h4+ 15.f2 e4+ dxe5 10.c5! xd4 11.xd4 exd4
16.e2 0-0; 12.cxb6 axb6 13.e2 White will follow up
A2) 13.xd4 xd4 14.xd4 xc3+ with Kd3, a4 and b3 and play on the light
15.bxc3 d7; squares when the extra piece will be more
B) 12.xd4 xc3 13.xc3 h4+ 14.f2 valuable than the three pawns.) 8.e4 e6
( 14.g3 e4 ) 14...e4+ 15.e2 g4 9.d5 a5 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 exd5
The analysis confirms Black's superiority. ] 12.cxd5 leaves White comfortably better.;
[ 11.g5 tries to buy time, but using the B) 6...e6 7.c3 was the course of the
same aggressive attacking ideas, Black miniature Jones, G (2593)-Baburin, A
quickly obtains the upper hand: f6 12.exf6 ( 2 5 3 9 ) B u n r a t t y 2 0 1 1 wh i c h G a wa i n
gxf6 13.e3 cxd4 14.xd4 xd4 15.xd4 annotates in the archives. ]
e5 16.e3 a4 17.c1 a5 ] 6...c6
11...a4 12.d4 [ 6...e6 7.e3 was looked at by Andrew
[ 12.a3 xc3 13.bxc3 a5 ] Martin in Collins, S (2408)-Baburin, A (2511)
12...xd4 13.xd4 a5 Ensuring that White 2005. ( But it's likely that Bromberger
is kept with his pieces on very uncomfortable intended to simply play 7.f3 which would
squares. 14.c1 Alternatives are bleak: transpose to the Jones-Baburin game. )]
[ 14.a3 xc3 15.bxc3 xc5 16.b2 c7 [ Meanwhile 6...dxe5 7.fxe5 e6 8.f3
17.e2 0-0 18.0-0 b6 ] would be quite likely to transpose to the
[ 14.d1 0-0-0 15.a3 xc5 ] mainline of the Four Pawns Attack after c6
14...d8 15.e3 xb2 16.g4 But this is 9.e3 ]
bleaker. Rather than face 16..Bxg4, W hite 7.e3 Bromberger again offers Teske the
resigns. Aself-inflicted fiasco! 9...c5 seems a option of transposing to the mainline.
playable method and, as we've seen, White [ It was possible to play the Five Pawns
only has to go slightly wrong for the game to Attack immediately with 7.g4!? but it does
blow up in his face. look a bit loose. Black would do well to drop
0-1 his bishop back - perhaps all the way to c8
as xg4? 8.xg4 xd4 9.d1 dxe5
10.fxe5 e6 11.f3 c5 12.e3 xf3+
456 B03 13.xf3 h4+ 14.f2 xf2+ 15.xf2
Bromberger,S 2513 xf2+ 16.xf2 didn't give Black anything
Teske,H 2550 like enough for the piece. Heymann, A-
TCh-AUT 1st Bundesliga 2012 (9.1) 20.04.12 Lantzsch, C Eberstadt 1995. ]
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] 7...g5?! Which Teske declines but this looks
to be asking too much from Black's position.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 [ 7...dxe5 8.fxe5 e6 9.f3 is again the
5.f4 f5 6.c3 This move order allows the mainline. ]
game continuation but that works out very well [ In a recent game Black tried to keep to
for White. unchartered waters with 7...g6 8.f3 g7
[ Previously a couple of games on 9.e2 0-0 Beliaev, V (2007) -Kotov, A
ChessPublishing have continued with 6.f3 ( 2 2 5 4 ) M o s c o w 2 0 0 9 b u t h e r e 10.c5!
Once Black has committed his bishop to the looks pretty miserable. ]
f 5 s qu a re t h e re 's no n e ed t o d e lay t h e 8.g4!
development of the kingside knight. [ Pre sum a b ly B la ck h a d a loo k a t 8.fxg5
A) Here if Black tries to play as in the dxe5 and thought the positions looked
game with 6...c6 7.d3 promising but White's pawn sacrifice is very
l o o k s c o m f o r t a b l e f o r W h i t e : g4 strong. ]
460
8...gxf4 After this we can't find enough [ 13...d7 would also fail to the game's
defensive resources for Black but his position 14.ge2 ]
is perhaps untenable already. 14.ge2 Threatening to bring the knight into
[ 8...d7 would give White a very pleasant t h e h o l e o n e 6 . h6 By this point Black
a r r a y o f c h o i c e s . P e r h a p s 9.c5 definitely has no defence:
is strongest. ] [ 14...h6 15.f4 xf6 16.e6+ xe6
[ 8...c8 was the best bet but 9.d5 a5 17.xe6 ]
( 9...gxf4 10.xb6 won't give Black enough [ 14...h7 15.f4 ]
for the piece.) 10.f5!? looks very promising [ and 14...e5 15.g1 h7 16.d3 xf7
for White with his huge space advantage. ] 17.g6 are all completely hopeless. ]
9.gxf5 fxe3 10.e6 c8?! After this Black is 15.g1 exf6
definitely lost. [ 15...f8 16.g6 picks up the bishop on h6
[ The computer tries to put up a defence with for starters. ]
10...g7 but we think White's attack is too 16.g8+ e7 17.xb8 axb8 18.c5
strong: 11.h5 A painful loss for Black. The Four Pawns
A) 11...f8 continues to be a critical test of the Alekhine
A1) or 12.h3 when both xd4 ( and Defence.
12...xd4 13.0-0-0 ) 13.g5 e5 1-0
14.g1 leave White with a decisive
attack.;
A2) 12.f3 xd4 13.xd4 xd4 457 B03
14.g1! and, with Rg8 coming next Bromberger,Stefan 2487
move, Black is defenceless.; Kremenietsky,Anm 2354
B) 11...0-0 12.f3 e8 13.g5 Gausdal Classics GMB (5) 12.04.2008
( 13.h4!? keeping up a strong attack is [John Watson]
also possible.) 13...h6 14.exf7+ xf7
15.xf7 xf7 16.xf7+ xf7 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
would at least allow Black to survive into 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
a n e n d g a m e a l t h o u g h 17.c5 dxc5 9.f3 b4 Black is always trying something
18.dxc5 xc3+ 19.bxc3 a4 20.g1 slightly off the beaten track to answer the
is still more pleasant for White. ] Four Pawns Attack. This move is entirely
[ 10...h5 would prevent the queen coming to logical in terms of development and deserves
h5 but 11.f3 is obviously very good for more attention, as Nigel Davies suggests. It
White. ] doesn't seem to quite equalise (or shouldn't)
11.exf7+ d8 but there's a enough play to keep things
[ Taking the pawn would lose instantly: interesting.
11...xf7 12.h5+ g8 13.f3 [ See this month and the archives for the
and it's pretty obvious the Black monarch traditional 9...e7 ]
won't survive. ] 10.e2
12.h3! Defending the pawn and thereby [ White shouldn't move too slowly merely for
preventing the Black queen getting out and structural reasons, for example, 10.c1 0-0
keeping the king stuck in the centre. h5 ( 10...g4!? ) 11.a3 e7 12.d5? ( 12.e2 )
[ 12...d7 13.f6! exf6 14.d5 leaves Black 12...exd5 13.cxd5 xe5! 14.xe5 e8
totally tied up - look at all his major pieces! ] and Black gets back at least most of the
[ 12...xc4 would give White options to material, with attack, e.g., 15.e2 h4+
finish off the game. The easiest looks to be 16.g3 xe5 17.d4 xe2+ 18.xe2 g5
13.f6 xb2 14.e2 xd4 15.fxe7+ xe7 19.e3 g4! 20.xg4 xe3 21.d1 e7 ]
16.xb2 h4+ 17.d1 f5 18.b1 10...d7!? This doesn't seem to fit that well
when Black's minor pieces are all dropping. ] with ...Bb4.
13.f6 b8 A really ugly move to have to play [ a) 10...a5 is one of the ideas of ...Bb4,
[ but 13...e6 14.d5 hardly helps. ] e v e n i f t h e t i m i n g i s u n c l e a r : 11.c5!
461
( 11.d2 h4+ 12.f2 f4 13.a3 xc3 [ 15...g6 16.c6! d8 17.xg6 hxg6
14.bxc3 0-0 15.0-0 g5 isn't too bad, but 18.a4 d5 19.b4 , and Black can't
the knights on the queenside look funny castle either way: 0-0-0?? 20.f3 ]
and White's bishops are a long-term asset. ) 16.f4 d5 Again, covering the light squares
A) 11...d5 12.d2 with advantage, I is in the right principle, but the kingside is
think. Black had to resort to bringing the v u l n e r a b l e . 17.g4 f5! 18.exf6 gxf6
k n i g h t b a c k w i t h c6 in Rohde- 19.f4!?
Shamkovich, New York 1976, when 13.0-0 [ 19.h6! 0-0-0 20.g7 c6 21.f1 f5
( 13.a3 xc3 14.bxc3 also looks good)) 22.f4 d7 23.g3! with the idea Nf3-e5 ]
13...0-0 14.g5 gave White a good game, [ 19.f1 f5 20.f4 ]
because Black can't like d7 15.xd5 19...e7?
xd5 16.a3 xd4 17.axb4 xe2+ [ either 19...0-0 ]
18.xe2 d3 19.e3 xf1 20.xf1 [ or 19...f5 20.h5+ d8 is playable. ]
at a ll, s o h e pro ba bly h as to p lay t h e 20.xf6! Obvious, but pretty the finish is nice:
weakening 14...f6.; xf6 21.f1+
B) 11...bc4?! 12.a4+! c6! covers a5, [ 21.g5+! xg5 22.c1+ f6 23.f4+
but Black's tightrope trick comes a little also wins ]
s h o r t a f t e r 13.d2! xd2 14.xb4 21...g7 22.h6+! g8
xf3+ 15.xf3 ] [ 22...xh6 23.f6# ]
[ b) 10...0-0 is a pretty good try: 11.0-0 23.f6 e4 24.f1
( 11.d2 seems to take the sting out of a5 [ 24.f1 (threatening Qf8+) f5 25.g5+
due to 12.b3 otherwise, White can castle g6 26.xg6 is mate in 2. ]
and play a3. Black should probably just 1-0
proceed with his development and he may
stand a little worse, but it's no disaster)
11...a5 12.d2 ( 12.c5 xc3 13.bxc3 458 B03
bc4 is praised by Davies, and is definitely Bryson,Douglas M 2385
playable, although I'd still rather have the Luther,Thomas 2535
bishops af ter 14.g5 ) 12...g6 13.e1 Olympiad Bled (3) 2002
( 13.a3; 13.c1 ) 13...c5!? 14.a3 [Andrew Martin]
Goldenburg-Ghizdavu, Graz 1972 and now
( 14.dxc5 d7 15.f3 xc5 16.d1 ) 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
14...cxd4! was an obvious and strong move: 5.f4 It's refreshing to see a Four Pawns
15.axb4 dxe3 16.bxa5 exd2 17.g3 d7 ] Attack although most strong masters prefer 4
11.0-0 a5!? In a sense this is the 'point', Nf3 or the Exchange Variation. Particularly
since annoying is 5 exd6 cxd6 6 Nc3 g6 7 Be3 Bg7
[ 11...0-0-0 and ] 8 Rc1 0-0 9 b3-I cannot see any way for Black
[ 11...0-0 are versions of main lines in which to equalize here. Perhaps subscribers can
it's unclear why the bishop is out there on help? Douglas Bryson is a very strong master
b4. ] of course but he plays for enjoyment rather
12.c5 than the professional grind..... for our viewing
[ Or 12.d2 0-0 13.c1 ( 13.c1 ) p l e a s u r e m a yb e . . . . dxe5 6.fxe5 c5
13...c6 14.a3!? xc3 15.bxc3 Fun for all the family in this line. Some recent
, when Black may simply have to play slowly, developments in the 'main line':
although he would like to keep chipping [ 6...c6 7.e3 ( 7.f3 g4 8.e3 xf3
away by f6 16.exf6 xf6 9.gxf3 e6 10.c3 h4+ 11.f2 f4
, when unfortunately 17.b3! threatens Nc5, 12.c5 d5 13.xd5 exd5 14.e2 0-0-0
and a4 18.d5 is awkward, or ( 18.g5 )] 15.0-0 f6 16.exf6 gxf6 17.h1 g8
12...bc4 13.c1 xc3 14.bxc3 b6?! 18.g1 g5 19.xg5 fxg5 20.d3 g7
A good move positionally, but Black should 21.d1 g4 22.e3 f7 23.fxg4 e8
be securing his king first. 15.h4! e4 24.f1 e6 25.f3 xd4 26.xd4 xd4
462
27.xd4 xe2 28.xd5 d8 0-1 Varavin, 27.c2 f5 28.b2 c3 29.xb5 c2 30.c5
V-Smirnov,I/V Autumn, Alushta UKR 2002 c8 0-1 Eaker,A-Popitz,A/40th Ann Open,
(28) ) 7...f5 8.c3 ( 8.f3 e6 9.e2 d7 Curacao AHO 2002 (30) ]
10.c3 b4 11.0-0 xc3 12.bxc3 a5 10...c6 11.f3 g4 12.f4 g5 13.e4
13.d2 c8 14.e1 c5 15.g3 g6 gxf4 14.f6+ xf6 15.exf6 0-0-0 16.c1
16.h4 cxd4 17.cxd4 h5 18.ac1 c7 All as given in NCO and a clear advantage to
19.h1 c8 20.e4 d7 21.d6+ W h i t e a c c o r d in g t o t h e a u t h o r -G r a h a m
1-0 Gajadin,D-Mensing,F/Olympiad, Bled Burgess/ Fritz-difficult to tell between the two.
SLO 2002 (21)) 8...e6 9.f3 g4 10.d2 However for a human with the clock ticking
e7 ( 10...xf3 11.gxf3 b4 12.0-0-0 a4 this position will never be easy and so it
13.g1 g6 14.g5 xc3 15.bxc3 e7 proves. e8+ A very interesting idea. Black
16.h6 d7 17.h3 a5 18.e2 a4 defers the capture on d6 to a more propitious
19.f1 a3+ 20.b1 xc4 21.c2 moment. It should not succeed but Bryson is
xc2+ 22.xc2 b6 23.c4 e7 24.c3 known for his addiction to time trouble-I can
0-0-0 25.h3 b8 26.e3 c5 27.dxc5 imagine him using up oceans of time around
a4+ 28.c2 xc5 29.xd8+ xd8 here threading his way through the minefield.
30.xc5 xc5 31.f1 d4 32.e2 d7 [ 16...xd6 17.xc4 he8+ 18.f1 e3
33.c3 h4 34.b1 xe5 35.c5 c7 19.b5 xf3 20.gxf3 c7 ]
0-1 Saed,K-Bjerring,K/Olympiad, Bled SLO [ 16...xd6 17.xf4 e6+ 18.d1 d5
2002 (35) ) 11.e2 h4+ 12.f1 0-0 13.c5 19.g5 b4 ]
xf3 14.gxf3 d5 15.xd5 xd5 16.g1 17.f2
f5 17.d1 ad8 18.f4 h8 19.g2 g5 [ 17.e2 xf3 18.gxf3 d4 ]
20.c3 e4 21.b4 gxf4 22.g1 f3 [ 17.d1 e3 18.h3 xf3+ 19.gxf3 xd6
23.xf3 f4 24.e2 g8 25.xg8+ xg8 20.xc4 d8 ]
26.b5 xg1 27.bxc6 xh2+ 28.d3 17...xd6 18.xc4 c5+ 19.f1 e3
xd1+ 29.xd1 bxc6 30.b3 f4 31.c4 20.c3 xc4 21.xc4 d8 22.e1
e4 32.b4 e1 0-1 Fongarolli, D-Mollero, It really isn't easy. Black's idea is to take on
M/10th Ducale Open, Genova ITA 2002 f2 and play Rd2 and whether White takes on
(32) ] f7 or not his King feels the heat and he can't
7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5 9.cxd5 c4 10.d6 activate the Rooks. I reckon Bryson saw the
[ 10.f3 b4 11.xc4 ( 11.g5 xc3+ drawing mechanism of the game and decided
12.bxc3 xd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.0-0-0 to bale out.
e7 15.xc4 bc6 16.hf1 e6 17.xe6 [ 22.xf7 d7 ( 22...f5 23.b3 d3+
fxe6 18.d4 xd4 19.xd4 c8 20.b2 24.e1 he8 25.f7! f8 26.d1+-;
d5 21.c4 b6 22.b3 f8 23.xf8+ 22...xf3! 23.gxf3 d2 24.g7 hd8
xf8 24.d2 e8 25.b4 c7 26.a5 This was almost certainly Luther's intention-
c6 27.b4 1/2-1/2 Pirrot,D-Tischbierek,R/ it's a mess.) 23.c4 xf3 24.gxf3 f8
74th ch-GER, Saarbruecken GER 2002 25.e6 d4 26.c1 ]
(27) ) 11...xc3+ 12.bxc3 xc4 13.a4+ 22...xf3 23.gxf3 d2 24.e2 d1+ 25.e1
d7 14.xc4 b6 15.b5+ d7 d2 26.e2 d1+ 27.e1 d2 28.e2
16.xd7+ xd7 17.d6 c8 18.e3 So much for NCO, Fritz and the like. A game
( 18.d2 a4 19.b1 b6 20.0-0 e6 with lots of ideas and a strong human
21.d4 d7 22.bc1 c5 23.f3 h6 element.
24.fe1 hc8 25.e3 b2 26.e1 a5 ½-½
27.c2 c4 28.ee2 cc5 29.f2 cb5
30.g3 b1+ 31.f2 f5 32.d4 xc2
33.e6+ fxe6 34.xe6 f5+ 35.e2 f7
0-1 Hallaeva,B-Kopinits,A/Olympiad w, Bled
SLO 2002 (35)) 18...xc3 19.xb6 axb6
20.0-0 0-0 21.ac1 c5 22.h3 h6 23.fe1
a8 24.xc5 bxc5 25.a1 b5 26.c1 c4
463
459 B03 and the Rook on a3 is a powerhouse, Greet,

Buescu,Neculai 2260 A-Carleton, J/England 2000. ]
Grunberg,Mihai 2405 12.b5
ch-ROM, ROM (1.2) 2003 [ 12.g5! is strong and White has a solid
[Andrew Martin] advantage e.g. f6 ( 12...f6 13.xf6 xf6
14.e1 c6 15.d5 d8 16.b4 e4 17.d4
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 e3 18.fxe3 xe3 19.d2 e8 20.f3 )
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.a4!? 13.e3 e4 14.d2 f5 15.b5 ]
Andrew Soltis once wrote a whole book on this 12...e4 13.g5?!
l i n e . 7 a 4 i s d i s r u p t i ve a n d a t t e m p t s t o [ 13.e1 is far less risky. ]
in t e rf e re wit h B la ck's n a t u ra l sch e m e o f 13...f8 14.f4 All very well but Black is able
development or at least slow it down. It's hard to split open the White King. f6 15.h3
to believe that the Alekhine Defence can [ 15.f7!? xf7 16.xd6+ g8 17.xe8
come under serious pressure from the xe8 18.d5 is flashy and unclear. Bit of a
advance of the a pawn. For starters, a4-a5 reprieve for Black I think. ]
improves the position of Black's errant Knight! 15...xh3 16.gxh3 e6 17.g3 f5
A central response is indicated from Black to 18.xd6 f8 19.e5 c6 20.xg7 xg7
offset all this activity on the flank, and then I 21.d5
think he will be OK. g7 8.a5 6d7 9.f3 [ 21.xb7 l e a d s t o d i f f i c u l t i e s : g5+
0-0 10.e2 22.h1 cxd4 23.c5 ( 23.b4 ) 23...ad8
[ 10.a3!? was a very odd choice in a recent 24.xe6+ xe6 25.c1 xc1 26.axc1
game f rom England. I'm no t sure that I d2 ]
understand what the immediate point is long- 21...xd6 22.dxe6 xe6 White's early
term there are some prospects along the aggression backfired he was far too keen to
third rank. f6 11.e2 d5! 12.0-0 dxc4 put Black away immediately. 23.d5 xd5
13.xc4 g4 14.e2 c6 Carleton 24.cxd5 d4 25.c4
respond ed correctly and now it's a [ 25.ae1 ad8 ]
Tarrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit 25...ac8 26.b3 f6 27.fd1 e5!
reversed with a4-a5 and Ra3 thrown in! 28.h1? Limp.
Quite a mouthful. Equally correctly, Greet [ 28.f4+ In a position such as this you have
takes the view that his position promises to take your chances. W hite missed exf3
nothing and provokes simplification. 15.a6 29.f2 and it is not at all easy for Black to
bxa6 16.xa6 b4 17.a3 a5 maint ain his a dvan tage. He has t o ho p
Greet, A-Carleton, J/Birmingham 2002. ] a ro u n d wit h t h e K n igh t : e2 30.e1
10...e5!? As per the programme but now that ( 30.d3 d6 31.ad1 f4 32.xf3 h5
White has obligingly pushed his pawn to a5 I 33.e3 g7 34.de1 fe8 ) 30...d6
want to attack with 31.xf3 d4+ 32.f2 fe8
[ 10...c6! In both variations Black is still keeping
A) 11.a6 b6 12.0-0 f6 ( 12...db8!? ) something but there is no guarantee that
13.h3 ( 13.e3 g4 14.h3 f5 ); over the board he would find some of these
B) 11.d5 xa5 12.a3 b6 13.0-0 ] tricky moves. ]
11.0-0 e8!?N Hoping to support the 28...f4 29.a4 e3 30.fxe3 fxe3 White puts
advance of the e pawn. up terrific resistance from here on in but he
[ 11...c6 12.d5 e7?! ( Maybe cannot save the game. 31.d6 e2 32.xe2
12...xa5!? 13.b4 xc4 14.xc4 e4 [ 32.e1 xc4! 33.xe2+ xe2 34.xc4
15.d4 c7! Deep Fritz shows Black xd6 ]
better. ) 13.a3 a6 ( 13...f5 14.g5 f6 ) 32...xe2 33.d7 c1! 34.xc1 xc1
14.b4 f5 15.e4 c7 16.c5 f6 35.c4 d6 Forced, in view of the threat of
17.fg5 d8 18.xf6+ xf6 19.e4 e7 Rc8. 36.xc1 xd7 37.g2 f5 38.b4 f4
20.b2 I don't like this for Black at all. 39.b1 d6 A Rook ending as passive as
White has attacking opportunities with f2-f4 this has to be lost for W hite. 40.g3 d4
464
41.h4 d5 42.h3 bishops clearly favours White. He intends

[ 42.h5 gxh5 43.f3 c4 44.e3 d3+ d4-d5 and the transfer of the Knight to e6.'
45.e4 b3!-+ ] [jw: Korchnoi went on to win] ]
42...d3+ 43.g4 h5+ 44.g5 g3+ [ 9...f6 probably isn't bad, but 10.h4!?
45.h6 c4 46.b5 b6! The White pawns has the idea Nh3 and Bg5 and things came
are ready to be taken. 47.axb6 axb6 48.b2 o u t we l l f o r W h it e a f t e r ( 10.c5 d7
c5 49.b1 xh3 The opening should have 11.cxd6 cxd6 12.d5 ) 10...e6 11.b3 d5
turned out bet ter f or W hite than it did . I 12.c5 c8 13.h3 b6 14.g5!
recommend 12 Bg5! and then I don't see how in Chernyshov - Kopylov, 1993. ]
Black equalizes. However, 10... Nc6! is better 10.c5! c4?! Vohlzin calls this a mistake
than 10... e5 and then the onus is on White to (see the next few notes). He suggests
prove something. As for the rest of the game [ 10...d7 (which looks resilient enough) ]
W hite lacked self-belief and played far too [ or 10...c8 , but where's Black's play in
passively at crucial moments when he HAD to that case after 11.d3 ? ]
go active. We've all been there I think. 11.f4
0-1 [ 11.d5? 6e5 12.f4 xe3 13.xe3
f5 ]
11...dxc5? This is the real mistake, and so
460 B03 was
Caruana,Fabiano 2594 [ 11...f6? 12.d5 4e5 13.e2
Genocchio,Daniele 2433 ( 13.e4! ) 13...g6 14.e3 xc3 15.bxc3
67th ch-ITA Martina Franca ITA (11) 04.12.07 f6 16.dxe6 xc3+ 17.c2 in Leyva-
[John Watson] Medina, Cuba 1994. ]
[ Better was the bold 11...g5! , although
In this game we see a very direct and White still holds a small edge after 12.h5!
aggressive challenge to the ...exd6 system. ( 12.g3? g4 13.e4 d5 14.e1 g5+ )
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 12...gxf4 13.d3 f5 14.d5 4e5 15.dxe6 ]
5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.e3 12.d5 d4 Now Black was probably feeling
[ 7.f3 c6 8.e3 0-0 transposes, which better, but: 13.dxe6! fxe6
is not to say that there are no options. ] [ 13...xf3 14.xd8 axd8 15.xf3
7...0-0 8.f3!? c6 and White wins. ]
[ 8...c6 is safer but a bit depressing. ] 14.xc4 xf4!?
9.0-0-0 e6 [ 14...xf3 15.xd8 xd8 16.xf3 xf4
[ The stem game (at least the most visible 17.xe6+ ]
one) was Korchnoi-Miles, Biel 1992, a game 15.e3! Avoiding any tricks. The rest is easy,
in t h e Arc hive s: 9...f5! ('?!' Volzhin, but I even if not perfectly played: f8
think that it's best) 10.g3!? ( 10.h3!; 10.c5 [ 15...g5 16.h3 ]
f4!? ) [ 15...f8 16.ge2 g5 17.f4 ]
A) A game E Berg-J Ericsson, Skara 2002 16.h3 f6 17.e4 g6 18.f4 h6
went 10...e6 11.b3 c8 12.ge2 a5!? 19.e2 b5 20.d3 f5 21.f3 c4 22.c2
13.a4?! ( 13.f4 f7 14.fd5 ) 13...f6 e8 23.d4 xd4 24.xd4 a5 25.g4 b8
14.f4 f7 15.h4 b4 16.h3 c5 26.g5 c5 27.d2 g6 28.h4 e5 29.f5
17.fe2 cxd4 18.xf5 e6 19.xe6+ c6
xe6 20.xd4 xd4 21.xd4 g6 1-0
and W hite has a slightly exposed king
witho ut e nough co mpensatio n f o r th e
exchange.;
B) 10...f4? 11.gxf4 f5 12.c5!
'Probably Black missed this. Now White's
advantage is undisputed.' - Volzhin d7
13.h3! 'The exchange of light squared
465
461 B03 open 1996. ]

Collins,Sam 2408 [ It is probably best to play 9.f3 but then
Baburin,Alexander 2511 after c5 Black is fine and has the enemy
4NCL 2005/2006 Division1 (4) 20.11.2005 centre under pressure. ]
[Andrew Martin] 9...c6N As usual, Baburin tries to put his
own individual stamp on the game. Yet He
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 tries to justify his early excursion, but the
5.f4 A lot of contributors on the forum have White queen is simply drifting further out of
been requesting games in the Four Pawns position.
Attack and so I will focus of a few of these [ 9...h4+! 10.f2 e4+ also looks very
this month. The Four Pawns should not be good. Far from cramping Black, the White
dangero us to Black in my view th ere are centre now starts to look vulnerable:
several good lines of play. f5!? By delaying 11.xe4 xe4 I think Black is doing fine
the central capture, Black tries to make it after 12.0-0-0 ( 12.f3 a4 13.a3 xc3+
difficult for White to place his pieces optimally. 14.bxc3 xc3 15.d2 a4 16.e1 g6
6.c3 17.c5 a6 18.c4 b2 19.e2 c6
[ 6.d3 xd3 7.xd3 dxe5 8.fxe5 c5 20.h4 e4 21.f1 d5 22.b1 a4
9.f3 e6 10.0-0 c6 11.c3 xd4 23.xb7 xd4 24.xc7 b3+ 25.c2 0-0
12.g5!? Platonov-Efimov USSR 1966 26.f3 fd8 27.d3 a5 28.g5 b3+
enters uncharted territory. ] 29.c1 xd3 30.xf7 f8 31.f1 c3+
6...e6 7.e3 Perhaps 7 Nf3 is more accurate, 32.d2 c4+ 0-1 Soria, A-Leskovar, M/Mar
so that if Black takes on e5 early and follows del Plata 1972 ) 12...xc3 13.bxc3 c5 ]
up with ..Bb4, White has additional options 10.f4?!
with his c1 Bishop. dxe5 8.fxe5 b4! [ 10.0-0-0 xc3 11.bxc3 e7 12.c5 d5
9.f3?! Original! Is White really intending to 13.d2 0-0 is better for Black. ]
castle queenside? I doubt 9 Qf3 is any good. [ Meanwhile 10.a3 would be answered by
White takes away the best square from his xc3+ 11.bxc3 0-0 12.g3 a5 13.g5
Knight on g1, albeit for an instant and d4 is d7 14.c5 d5 15.c4 e7 16.f3 b3
weakened. 17.d1 c2 when the White centre again
[ White had several other options, for starts to look creaky. ]
example: 9.a3 xc3+ 10.bxc3 c5 10...a4! The opening skirmishes have not
This jab at the centre is characteristic of the go ne t oo we ll f or Co llin s. His po sit io n is
v a r i a t i o n . 11.f3 ( 11.dxc5 h4+ alread y(o r sho uld b e) f alling apa rt . 11.a3
is simply awful for White.) 11...c6 12.e2 xc3
0-0 13.0-0 c8 and Black has good [ After 11...xb2?! 12.axb4 xb4
counterplay against c4 ] White has 13.d2! ]
[ 9.d3 c5 ( Black may well have more than 12.axb4 xb4 13.c1 e4!
one good option here as can be seen from [ 13...a4 also appears strong: 14.d2
the following game: 9...xd3 10.xd3 c5 ( 14.g3 xb2 15.xg7 f8 16.h6
11.f3 cxd4 12.xd4 c6 13.e4 0-0 h4+ 17.e2 e4+ 18.f2 0-0-0 )
14.xc6 bxc6 15.0-0 d7 16.xc6 xe5 14...c2+ 15.xc2 xc2 16.g4 0-0
17.e4 xc3 18.bxc3 c7 19.f4 c5+ 17.g5 d7 I think at this stage of the
20.e3 c7 21.c5 f5 22.f4 ac8 game Baburin saw the 'red mist' and was
23.d4 d3 24.e3 xc5 25.e5 e7 trying to f inish Collins off as quickly as
26.ab1 e4 27.b3 fd8 28.fb1 d5 possible. Yet 13...Na4 would possibly have
29.b7 xb7 0-1 Titzhoff, F-Wittje, B/ been better suited to this purpose. ]
Germany 2004) 10.a3 cxd4 11.axb4 xd3 14.f3 c5!?
12.xd3 dxe3 13.xd8+ xd8 14.b3 c6 [ Baburin gives 14...h6 15.h4 0-0 16.e2
15.f3 xb4 16.0-0-0+ e7 17.he1 a5 f6 but here White can limp on with 17.exf6
18.xe3 a4 19.xa4 xa4 20.bxa4 xf6 18.0-0 It's not pretty, but White is
hc8-+ Gunnarson-Agdestein, Reykjavik surviving. ]
466
15.e2 g5!? strong passed pawn and a superior King.

[ Baburin recalls his difficulty choosing Black must somehow get his Rook going, but
b e t w e e n t h e g a m e m o v e a n d 15...cxd4 Baburin never finds a way.... xe5 33.d6
16.xd4 c5 17.0-0 cd3 18.xd3 xd3 xd5+ 34.xe5 xc6 35.d4 b5 36.c5
19.g3 g6 20.cd1 0-0 I think he made a6 37.d6 e8 38.g7
a g o o d c h o i c e , b e c a u s e h e r e 21.b5! [ 38.f6! ]
looks awkward for Black to meet. ] 38...f5 39.e6 d7+ 40.d5 f7 41.c3
16.xg5 xg5 17.xg5 c2+! The point. b5 42.e5 g6 43.h4 a4 44.d2 c2
18.xc2 45.c3 d3 46.d2 One of those extremely
[ 18.f2 xe3 19.xd8+ xd8 20.xe3 annoying positions which cannot be won. f7
xd4 21.f3 d3+ 22.f4 e7 23.hd1 47.b4 e8 48.d6?! f4! 49.gxf4 f7
hd8 leads to a cheerless endgame for 50.e5 g6 51.e1 h5 52.f5 c3?
White and so Collins correctly chooses the [ According to Baburin the last chance lay in
only move which will give him counterplay. ] 52...a5 after which he gives 53.f6 g6
18...xg5 19.xg5 xc2 20.f3 g8 54.d5 ( 54.e6 a4 55.f7 xf7+ 56.xf7
Choosing the right move here is surprisingly a3 57.e6 a2 58.c3 xh4 59.d5=;
difficult. 54.f4 a4 55.g3 a3 56.b4 a2
[ The line 20...cxd4 21.xb7 b8 22.c6+ 57.c3= ) 54...f7+ 55.c5= ]
f8 23.h6+ g8 cannot be the right way 53.xc3 xh4 54.f6 c4 55.d4 f7
to proceed for Black. ] 56.c5 h5 One that got away from Black's
[ The ' safe' 20...b8 is answered by 21.d2 point of view. Returning to the opening 5...Bf5
g6 22.f6 g8 23.dxc5 and we have a seems one good way to play against the 4PA .
new f avou rite in t he gam e wit h Black's ½-½
rooks inactive. ]
21.xb7
[ Bad is 21.h4? cxd4 22.xb7 b8 462 B03
23.c6+ f8 ] Conquest,Stuart 2536
21...b8 22.c6+ f8 23.h6+ e7 Baburin,Alexander 2526
24.d5 Now that the Black Rooks have taken ch-IRL Dublin IRL 13.07.2008
up active positions White must go for the King. [Alex Baburin (www.chesstoday.net)]
exd5 25.cxd5 xb2 26.c1! Diagram b1?!
I played it too quickly. Thanks to Alex Baburin for letting me pilfer
[ Better was 26...a2! keeping the rook on notes f rom this game from Chess Today.
the 2nd rank. After 27.f1 Black can play Chess Today (chesstoday.net) is a daily email
a4! ] newsletter that Alex publishes, with
27.f2! tournament reports, annotated games, and
[ This is stronger than 27.0-0 d3 ] ot he r f ea tu res. A le x wa s in a f orc ed -win
27...c4?! In his notes for the excellent Chess situation with Black in the last round and
Today, Baburin mentions the variation relied upon his Alekhine's Defence, as usual.
[ 27...xg2+?! 28.xg2 e4+ 29.f2 xh1 It's interesting that he explains that Stuart
but then after 30.d6+ e6 31.d7! b8 Conquest, his opponent, had 'a horrid
32.xh1 xd7 ] tournament'. Only a few weeks later,
[ However, he does not discuss the Conquest just finished winning the British
m a t e r i a l i s t i c 27...a5! when Black single- Championship! I'll put Baburin's notes in
mindedly intends to push that pawn.! What q u o t e s , m y o w n w i t h o u t : 1.e4 f6!
is White to do? 28.e1 ( 28.g3 f6 29.e1 'Stuart himself often plays the Alekhine.' 2.e5
fxe5 30.xe5+ f6 31.e6+ f7 ) d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
28...a4 29.h4 h6! ] [ 'I saw Stuart playing 4.c4 b6 5.exd6
28.a3+ d8 29.xb1 xb1 30.b4 e4 but I was not worried too much about that
31.g3 g5 32.e3! This is tough for Black to line.' ]
win . W hit e h as excellent co ord ina tio n, a 4...b6 5.b3 f5! 'This is a clever idea by
467
GM Bagirov.' One main line is [ Baburin mentions the computer suggestion

[ 5...dxe5 6.h5 e6 7.dxe5 a5 8.a4 a6 19...d5!? 20.xc8 ( 20.xb8 xb8 )
with the idea ...Nc5, but Alex thought that 20...bxc8 and 'the a6-knight is lost, so
was too easy for White to play. ] Black gets better chances.' ]
6.f3 c8 7.e2 20.xb8 xd2 21.fd1?
[ Alex cites 7.h3 e6 8.g5 e7 9.xf7 [ 'When I played 13. ..Bxc2, I considered only
f8 10.g5 xc2 11.h5+ g6 12.h3 21.cd1 b4 22.d7 xd7 23.xd7 f6
xg5 13.xg5 d5 14.0-0 c6 15.c3 - Black can't lose this, but converting his
f7 16.a4 a5 17.a3 g8 18.ac1 d7 advantage into a full point may not be so
19.b5 db8 20.f4 a6 21.g4 ab4 easy.' ]
22.e3 e4 Sibarevic - Bagirov, Banja 21...b4 22.d7 xd7 23.xd7 xb2
Luka 1976 ] 24.b1 e4 25.bd1 f6 26.g4 xa4
7...c6 27.xb7 g7 28.h3 c8! 29.d7
[ And his own game 7...e6 8.g3 dxe5 [ Baburin gives 29.xc8 xd1+ 30.h2
9.dxe5 c5 10.c4 c6 11.a3 a6 f3!-+ ]
( 11...d7 12.f4 b8!? 13.a4 29...xd7 30.bxd7 a8! Black is winning
presumably favours White.) 12.0-0 c7 now. 31.d8 a6 32.c8 a4 33.dd8
13.f4?! ( 13.f4! 0-0-0 14.ad1 ) 13...0-0-0 e6!? 34.f1 a3 35.a8 b2 36.d1 c6
14.e3 f6 15.exf6 gxf6 16.f2 b4 37.e2 c7 38.d3 g5 39.d5 h6 40.a6
17.g3 d3 18.fd1 h5 19.d2 h4 e6 41.d3 e5 42.f3 c2+ 43.d2 xd2+
20.e2 h3 21.g3 h7 with a clear 44.xd2 f5 45.d3 h5 'Black has too many
advantage, Skytte - Baburin, Copenhagen pawns. His plan is simple - to place a pawn to
1999. ] g4 and then move his king to b7. Apart from
8.g3 zugzwang, White will also have to reckon with
[ Or 8.exd6 cxd6 9.0-0 ] ideas such as ...e4+!, fxe4 f3!, gxf3 gxh3.'
8...g6 Baburin gives this an '!' - he puts more 46.a5 f6 47.a6+ e7 48.c2 g4
pressure on e5. 9.f4 g7 10.d2 a5 49.h6 e4 50.xh5 g3 51.xf5
11.a4 b4 12.0-0 [ 51.fxe4 fxe4 52.h4 e5 53.b3 e3-+ ]
[ 'After 12.c1 I was going to play c5! ' ] 51...exf3 52.gxf3 f6 A smooth win.
12...0-0! 13.h4? 'White is planning 0-1
something like Bh6 and Nd2-f3-g5. He does
not mind sacrificing a pawn on the queenside,
but it turns out that there is more at stake 463 B03
than a pawn.' In fact, W hite is doing Daulyte,Deimante 2278
reasonably well after 13 Rac1, but a more Nguyen Thu Giang 2101
promising move is 38th Olympiad w (2) 14.11.2008
[ 13.f3! , intending xc2?! 14.xc2 xc2 [John Watson]
15.ac1 b4 16.exd6 ]
13...xc2 14.xc2 xc2 15.ac1 xd4!? This month's Voronezh Variation game has
[ 'I saw 15...f5!? and it took me a while to the same moral as so many before: both sides
decide which line to go for.' The opening have to know their lines by heart, especially
has turned out in Black's favour, mainly due Black. He goes wrong in the opening of too
to White's mistake on move 13. ] many games in which the opening is perfectly
16.xd4 dxe5 17.b5 exf4 18.xc7 all right according to theory. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
[ 18.xc7 f5 has the ideas ...Bf6 and .. d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6
Nd5. ] 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e5
18...b8 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7
[ Baburin mentions 18...xa4!? , and ] 13.c4 c6 14.f3 a5 15.e2 b6 16.b4
[ 18...xb2 19.xa8 xa8 20.c2 xa4 Certainly a tempting move, although it has
21.xe7 b5 would mobilise Black's pawns. ] been considered relatively harmless. c6
19.a6 d8 I think this is probably best. 17.b5 d4 18.c6 c5 In this surprising
468
position, White's wedge on c6 isn't sufficient 26.f4 dxc3?!

f o r a s e r i o u s a d va n t a g e , b o t h b e c a u s e [ 26...a7 27.xc7 xc7 28.a4 b8
Black's pieces are active and because the 29.b2! f5 30.c4 f7 31.a1 e6
move ...a6 will open more lines for him. 19.0-0 32.a6 ]
[ 19.a4? f5! and Black threatens both 20... 27.xc7 d5 28.xb6 xb5 29.c7 a8
Nbd3 21 Rd1 e4, winning and 20...Nxe2 21 30.fd1 f6 31.d4 e7 32.xc3 c8
Kxe2 Bd3+. ] 33.e3 b7 34.f4 f8 35.g4 b4 36.g3
19...a6 20.c4 xg4 37.b3 c4 38.b8 e8 39.e1 c6
[ The following is based on a John Cox 40.d6 xd6 41.xe8+
article on the Voronezh in New in Chess, 1-0
which he kindly sent me: 20.fd1 e6
A) jw 21.g5 axb5
A1) j w : a b e t t e r t r y s e e m s 22.xd4! 464 B03
exd4 23.xe6 fxe6!? 24.xb5 ac8 Davies,Nigel R
( 24...xa2 25.g4 f8 26.c7 c8 Sinha,K
27.xc5! bxc5 28.xe6 aa8 29.xc8 Calcutta 1990
xc8 30.c1 d3 31.xc5 d2 32.d5 [Nigel Davies]
e5 33.xd2 xc7 34.g3 ) 25.c7 d7
26.a4 dxc7 27.xc7 xc7 28.c4 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
w i t h a d v a n t a g e , f o r e x a m p l e , e5!? 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7
( 28...a7 29.b1 xa4 30.xa4 xa4 [ Here Black can try 6...c6!? in order to
31.b4 c3 32.c4! ) 29.b1 e4 prevent White from adopting the Bd3. The
30.xb6 d3 31.d1; drawback is that the knight can be driven
A2) 22.xb5 dc8 23.xe6 fxe6 away immediately, a game between Ara and
24.a4 cb3 25.b1 a5 26.d3 Artashas Minasian, Armenian Ch., Erevan
ab8 27.e4 axc6 28.b5 xb5 1 9 9 9 g o i n g 7.d5!? e5 8.f4 ed7
29.xb5 d4 30.b2 , about equal; ( and not 8...exc4? 9.xc4 xc4
B) 21.c7 dc8 22.xd4 exd4 23.xd4 10.a4+ ) 9.d4 e7! 10.xg7 f6
xc7 24.e3 xc3 25.xc3 axb5 11.g4 ( 11.h6 e7+ 12.d1 c5
26.xb5 xa2 27.d8+ g7 28.d4+ f6 gives Black very strong play for the pawn
29.g4 b2 ( 29...xg4 30.d6= ) 30.f1 because of the offside position of White's
b3 31.g5 xc3 32.xf6+ f7 33.xc3 queen.; 11.g3? is a blunder because of
e4 34.e5 c5 35.f4 xg5; h4 ) 11...xc3+ 12.bxc3 f6 with plenty
C) 21.bxa6 xe2+ 22.xe2 dc8 of compensation for the sacrificed pawn. ]
23.xc5 bxc5 24.xc5 xa6 25.xe5 7.d3 c6 8.ge2 g4 9.f3 h5 10.0-0
W hite settles for a draw. ( 25.c7 f8 g6 11.xg6 hxg6 12.d5 e5 13.b3
26.d8 d6 o n ly B la ck ca n win .) d7?! Unrealistically hoping for some play on
25...xe5 26.xe5 cxc6 27.d4 the kingside.
1/2-1/2 Carlsson, P (2473) -Logdahl, H [ 13...0-0 was better, intending ...Re8 and ...
(2237)/Sweden 2001/[Cox] ] Bf6. ]
20...e6?! 14.e3 f5 15.d4 h5 16.h3
[ I (jw) think that the following line is equal in Denying Black any hope of an 'attack'. The
general, even if I'm only giving a particular initiative starts to change hands. h4 17.e1
move sequence: 20...axb5! 21.xb5 e6 a6 18.f4 ed7 19.f3 h5 20.d4 f6
22.fd1 f6! 23.h3 ac8 24.xd4 exd4 21.xb6 cxb6 22.e2 g8 This was
25.a4 xa4 26.xa4 c7 27.b1 b5 o rigin a lly B la ck' s qu e e n 's kn igh t . 23.e3
28.xb5 xa2 29.b4 d5 30.xd4 xc6 0-0-0 24.xb6 f6 25.e4! e7
31.xc6 xc6 32.xc6 xd1+ 33.h2= ] [ After 25...xa1 White forces mate with
21.xe6 cxe6 22.a4 axb5 23.axb5 26.xd6+ xd6 27.e8+ d7 28.d8# ]
Black will be plagued by the protected passed 26.d4 f6 27.c6!
c-pawn. a3 24.h1 c7 25.xd4 exd4 [ 27.c6 bxc6 28.dxc6 threatens mate on
469
b7. ] 30...d2 31.f1 xd4 It's amazing how often

1-0 in t his varia tio n W h it e ju st f ind s h im s e lf
unable to defend this pawn. 32.xd4 xd4
33.xd5 c6 34.b4 e4 35.f4 g5 36.f5
465 B03 b5 37.f2 e7 38.a4 c3 39.a5 d7
Degraeve,Jean Marc 2569 40.a6?? Obviously this ending is a little more
Bauer,Christian 2636 comfortable for Black with his bishop and
ch-FRA Top 16 GpB (6) 02.04.2005 White's pawn weaknesses, but I would have
[John Cox] thought W hite ought to be able to put up a
decent fight. Not after this move, though! bxa6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6 41.xa6 d5 Oops - Black unveils his plan ...
A rare guest in the games of players of this Kc8-b7xa6 White can do nothing about this.
class, although many believe that this move is 0-1
not so bad as its reputation. 5.c4 b6
6.exd6 Rubinstein's 6 e6 is of course the
'refutation', although it is noticeable that this 466 B03
has never performed well statistically. exd6 Djurhuus,Rune 2484
7.h3 e7 8.c3 0-0 9.e2 f6 10.0-0 f5 Agdestein,Simen 2588
A tabiya of the exd6 Exchange, although in ch-Playoff Asker NOR (2) 09.07.2000
recent times White's h3 move is more usually [Carsten Hansen]
associated with a plan based on d5. 11.f4
e8 12.e1 This position was first reached in 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
Matanovic-Larsen, Palma 1968, in which 5.f4 f5 6.c3 e6 This move order isn't all
W hite continued with the normal Rc1. This that common, but it causes no harm for Black,
has two points - it enables White to meet ... a n d c a n e v e n g i v e W h i t e a f e w e x t r a
Be4 with d5, and it prepares Re1! The game opportu nities to make a f alse step . 7.f3
demonstrates why Degraeve's move is not so This is already a sign that W hite is unsure
challenging. b4 Formally a novelty, although about what is going on. The correct move is 7
of course White's last asked for this. 13.c1 Be3, after which 7...dxe5 8 fxe5 transposes to
xe2 The point: otherwise Black's last move one of the main lines in Alekhine Four Pawns.
wa s a s h o t in t h e d a r k . 14.xe2 d3 [ 7.e3 c6 8.f3 d5 9.c5 c4 10.xc4
15.b3 a5 16.e3 d5 17.c5 a4 18.b5 dxc4 11.a4 d3 12.d2 h4+ 13.g3
d7 19.xd7 xd7 20.g3 g6 21.g5 h5 14.xc4 was played in Koch-Boulard,
xg5 22.xg5 f6 23.f3 b8 A classy France 1989. Here Krizsany & Videki
move, regrouping the knight to its best square. recommend xc5 15.dxc5 f3 which they
The exchanges initiated by Black's 13th move give a s u n cl e a r, b u t in re a l it y B l a c k i s
have led to a type of ending quite typical for clearly better. But 14 Kf2 seems to improve
this variation, in which White's d-pawn is a on this since a move like 14... 0-0-0 leads
little tender and he has to be careful to avoid back to the actual game, which was better
becoming worse. 24.c3 xe1 25.xe1 for W hite after 15 Nxc4. Therefore Black
c6 26.e2 a5 27.a3 b5 28.xa4 sh o u ld pla y 7 . .. d xe 5 an d t ra nsp o s e a s
xb2 White's last few moves have committed mentioned above. ]
him to allowing this exchange of pawns, which 7...a6 8.d3 8 Be3 is still worth a try. xd3
is n o t r e a lly ve ry d e sir a b le . I n a n y ca s e 9.xd3 c5 10.dxc5?! Now White has
though Black was going to activate his rook already handed over the initiative to Black.
unpleasantly with the lift to the b-file via a5. [ 10.d5 can be met with exd5 11.xd5
It would take a better player than me to say dxe5 12.xe5 xd5 13.cxd5 c7
how White ought to have defended, but I can with a good game for Black. ]
say that he shouldn't have played 12 Re1! 10...xc5 11.e2 dxe5 12.xe5 f6!?
29.c3 f7 30.g4 This looks like a blunder, but I presume that
[ 30.xd5 b1 , of course ] everything has been coolly calculated by
470
Black. 13...c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.e2 This quiet

[ Alternatively 12...h4+ 13.g3 h3 14.b4 move had been played before a couple of
cd7 15.c5 xe5 16.fxe5 d7 17.b5 times, but not by anyone of quite Dominguez'
is better for White. ] calibre. W hite has rather tended to castle
13.h5+ g6 14.xg6 hxg6 15.xh8 d4 qu e e n sid e a n d go f o r it , b u t Do m i n gu e z
The point behind 12...f6. Now Black's queen doesn't see why he should stick his king right
and two knights are alone with White's king. in front of Black's knights and at one end of
16.e2?! White makes his own life more the open b-file, and it looks to me as though
difficult than it ought to be. he's right. 0-0 16.0-0 4d5
[ 16.f1 e4 17.xe4 xe4 18.xf6 ( or [ 16...6d5 is the most obvious alternative.
18.h3 xc4+ 19.g1 e4 20.g3 Souleidis-Stefanopoulos, Greek Champs
c5+ 21.f1 c4+ 22.e1 e4+ 23.f1 2 0 0 4 , h a d t h e n g o n e 17.xd5 xd5
c4+ with a draw by perpetual check.) 18.f2 c7 19.ac1 b7 ( 19...xe5
18...d3+ 19.f2 c5+ 20.e1 b4+ 20.xc6 xc6 21.xc6 b4 22.c4 )
21.f2 c5+ is also a draw. ] 20.fd1 xb2 21.xc6 xc6 22.xc6
[ However, 16.h3 is a different story, e.g. b4 23.d4 xa2 24.c7 ae8 25.b5
d3+ 17.e2 f2+ 18.xd3 d8+ a5 26.b7 b8 27.xe7 xb5 28.e6 f6
19.d5 xd5 20.xe6+ e7+ 21.c3 29.g3 g6 30.h4 h5 31.xh5 gxh5
d4+ 22.b4 d6 23.e1 b6+ 24.a3 32.c1 d3 33.a1 fe8 34.xf6 xe7
xc4 25.b3 d4 and the white majesty has 35.xe7 b6 36.h4 xe6 with equality,
to give up his armed forces to avoid mate. ] although clearly only a series of miracles
16...xc4+ 17.f3 d5 18.d1 d3 saved Black in this game. ]
19.g8? 17.f2 c7 18.g3 xc3 19.bxc3 c8
[ White's best defense probably was to be 20.d3 g6 21.e4 g4 22.f2 d5
found in the following line. 19.xd5 xd5+ By now W hite is obviously better, but to be
20.g3 f5 21.e3 e5 with great quite honest I don't know what to suggest for
complications. ] Black. He has one or two alternatives over the
19...e7 20.h7 c6+ Now the white king last few moves, but they only seem to be
m e e t s h i s f i n a l h o u r . 21.e2 xg2+ rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
22.xd3 0-0-0+ 23.c4 xd1 24.xd1 W hite has the more act ive pieces a nd is
e2+ clearly the one who is pressing, even if Black
0-1 does eventually discover an accurate
sequence to let him hang on. 23.c4 c3
24.xc6+- xe4 25.xe7+ g7 26.f4
467 B03 c5+ 27.f2
Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2658 [ The naive 27.f2 also looks pretty
Almeida Quintana,Omar 2452 p ro m i si n g t o m e , b u t D o m in gu e z m u s t
ch KO Santa Clara (2.2) 22.04.2005 have calculated deeply here. ]
[John Cox] 27...f5
[ 27...xf2 28.f6+ h6 29.f4+
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 and mate, of course. ]
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 f5 7.c3 e6 8.e3 c6 28.h4 f6 29.xf5+ gxf5 30.xf5 xe5
9.f3 e7 This has been Black's main 31.xe5 fxe5 32.e2 f4 33.g3 c3
defence to the 4PA for many years. In 34.xe5 xc4 35.f1 xa2 36.e7+ g8
Starting Out: Alekhine's Defence I opined 37.ff7 g4 38.f6 g6 39.g7+ xg7
firmly that 'if there is one defence to the 4PA 40.xg7+ f8 41.xh7 e8 42.xa7 e2
which is not going to be refuted, it is this one. 43.b7 c1 44.b2 f7 45.h8 e8
'....... 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 46.f2+ g6 47.b2 d3 48.d2 e3
d7 13.f3 49.d4 f3 50.f2 e5 51.g2 f7 52.h3
[ 13.e6 and ] h7 53.g4 A very worrying game for Alekhine
[ 13.b3 are alternatives ] fans. It's pretty hard to improve on Black's
471
play right from move nine..... 17...exd4 18.xd4 g5 19.a1 c5 20.f2
1-0 c2 21.de1 xf2! 22.xf2 e3
As in the notes to the game I presented last
month. 23.ef1
468 B03 [ Mark Morss ides extensive analysis (mostly
Dushin,Aleksandr Viktorovi 2440 shown below) to establish that Black has
Siewert,Wolfgang 2457 enough play after this. He suggests that
EU-ch65 sf08 email 2003 23.b3 might improve a bit, but I've checked
[John Watson] and extended his own line, concluding that
Black can undoubtedly draw, e.g.,
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 A) 23...f8?! 24.f3 xf3 25.gxf3 g5+
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 26.f1 d3+ 27.ee2 ( 27.e2 d4! )
9.f3 e7 10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 27...xf2 28.xf2 just doesn't seem to cut
xf6 13.d2 e7 14.ad1 ad8 15.c1 it, e.g., f4 29.g1!;
[ This is the almost universally-played move. B) 23...xf2+ 24.xf2 e8 25.g1
15 b3 has been played a few times and e3+! 26.h1 d3 27.d6 e5
likely deserves another look. I see only a (thus far Morss) 28.c1 d7 29.d2
few rather irrelevant games with 15.h1!? e3 30.xe3 xe3 31.g1 ( 31.h4 h5!
in my d ata ba se s, bu t I think it stron gly 32.g1 xe2 33.xe2 e6 ) 31...e6
deserves attention. The move is handy in 32.f2 xe2 33.xe2 xd6= ]
almost every variation (16 Qc1 might follow 23...f8 24.e1 f5?!
next, for example), and White sidesteps 15 [ M o r s s ' i m p r o v e m e n t i s 24...xc4!
Qc1 e5!? and removes the king from , f o r e xa m p l e , 25.xc4 ( 25.d6 xd6
awkward checks, while preparing Bg1 in 26.d5 xf2+ 27.xf2 e8 28.xc5
some lines.. A few sample lines would be xf1+ 29.xf1 e5 and Black is O.K.)
A) 15...h6 16.c1 intending ( 16.e1!? 25...xf2+ 26.xf2 xf2 27.d6+ f7
is a good option) 16...g5!? ( 16...h8 28.xf7+ xf7 29.c1 d3 30.d1 c4
17.b3 ) 17.d5! and White takes space and 31.b3 d7 32.bxc4 xc4 I think I've done a
the initiative; thorough enough analysis to prove that this
B) 15...xd4? 16.xd4 xd4 17.xd4 and the preceding is equal. Again, however,
c5 18.xc5!; it's hard to see where Black can scrape up
C) 15...d7 16.c1 ( or 16.e1!? fd8 the slightest winning chances after 24...
17.b3 ) 16...fd8 17.d5 exd5 18.cxd5 Nxc4!, which might dissuade some players. ]
b4 19.d4! ( 19.xb6 axb6 20.d4 25.f3 d3 Black went on to win a back-and-
g6 21.c4 ) 19...xd4 20.xd4 4xd5? f o r t h g a m e , b u t a t t h i s p o i n t , 26.b3!
21.de1 e6 22.g4 d6 23.e4 ] would preserve White's extra pawn and give
15...e5 This is probably worth an '!'. My earlier him good winning chances,
presentation has been improved upon by Mark [ , instead of 26.d1?! xf2+ 27.xf2 e5
Morss, and I've looked at the position rather 28.xd3 xe1 29.xe1 g5
deeply (I think!), coming to the conclusion that with a promising game. I think that 15...e5
Black is indeed O.K. An advantage of the throws a wrench into White's plans and may
move is that it's relatively forcing. Here's a get him to look in another direction (see my
few lines: 16.d5 d4 17.xd4 16 Kh1!?, for example). ]
[ An important option is 17.xd4 exd4 0-1
18.xd4 . Then c8! threatens 19... c5 with
threats that will win back material, so White
should protect e2. For some analysis of this
variation, see Andresen-Gilmore. 19.d2
. Then I think that Black has adequate play
f o r h i s p a w n , b u t o n l y b a r e l y s o . c6
, but that is not written in stone. ]
472
469 B03 22.hxg5 f5 23.xf7 xf7 24.xh7+ g6

Dzindzichashvili,Roman 2545 25.h3 e5 white is better ]
Alburt,Lev O 2560 17...f6 18.d6! xd6 19.cxd6
ch Parsippany (4) 1996 White is better because of the strong passed
[Alexander Volzhin] pawn and his annoying pressure on the f7-
square. d7
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 19...h6?! 20.xf7! xf7 21.xf7+ xf7
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 22.c7+ d7 23.xb7 with advantage ]
0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 20.a4! It's very important to keep the bishop
[ The immediate 11.c5 was tried once: 6d7 on c4 where it puts great pressure on f7 c6
12.c4 c6 13.f3 a5 14.0-0 xc5 21.fd1 a6
15.b4! xb4 16.d5 Chernyshov - Lucko, [ 21...h6?! 22.f3 d7 23.b5! fc8
1995, but I don't believe that this sort of 24.c4 with initiative ]
stuff can be good for White ] 22.f3 ad8
11...xd8 12.c5 [ 22...h6!? 23.h3 ( 23.e4 xe4 24.fxe4
[ 12.b5?! is too optimistic, as black obtains xe4 25.d7 c6 26.b6 f6 27.c2 )
excellent counterplay after c6! 13.xa7 23...fd8 24.d2 e4 25.f4 f8 26.f2 ]
d4! as was played in Chernyshov - Freisler, 23.xa6! d5 24.f2 with advantage h6
P a r d u b i c e , 1 9 9 2 . N o w W h i t e i s i n b i g 25.h4 fe8 26.c4 xd6 27.d3 d7
trouble. 14.xc8 xc8 15.xd4 28.cd1 ed8 29.e4! g7 30.c5 d6
I can't see any other way to save the a- 31.a5+- f8 32.b4 e7 33.e4 e3
pawn. exd4 16.a4 d3! 17.b1 ( 17.f3 [ 33...6d7 34.b5 ]
e8+ 18.d1 a7 19.xd3 ad8 20.c2 34.xd6 So as we can see, 9...e5 seems to
c6 21.f1 b4+ 22.b1 h6 ) 17...e7 be Black's best choice in this line. I believe by
18.d2 h6+ 19.c3 b5!! 20.axb5 g7+ a c c u r a t e d e f e n c e B l a c k c a n e q u a l i z e
21.b4 d5+ 22.cxd5 dc8 23.b6 c3+ completely here. But generally the statistics in
24.b5 a5# ] this line are miserable for Black. This attracts
12...6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 d4 White players, so one can expect plenty of
[ 14...a5!? is worth considering. 15.e2 new games in this line.
( 15.g5 f8 16.e7 xc4! 17.xf8 xf8 1-0
18.bxc4 xc5 19.0-0 e4 with ample
compensation, Honfi - Varga,1994.) 15...b6
16.cxb6 ( 16.b4 c6 17.b5 d4 18.c6 470 B03
c5 Despite the protected passed pawn Emms,John M
W hite is not clearly doing well - Black's Davies,Nigel R
knights are very strong.) 16...xb6 17.0-0 Redbus rd1 2002
( 17.b5 d5 18.xa7 f4 ) 17...b7 [Nigel Davies]
18.fd1 c6 19.b5 Zukauskas - Bandza,
Lietuva,1997. d5 20.xd5 xd5 21.c7 J o h n E m m s r e c e n t l y r e c o m m e n d e d t h e
ad8 22.xd5 xd5 with equal chances , E x c h a n g e V a r i a t i o n f o r W h i t e , a n d i n
as 23.xa7? xa7 24.c7 doesn't work: particular with the move 6.Bd3. I have played
e4 25.xb7 exf3 26.xf3 c5 ] this way myself, but also defended Black's
15.g5 f8 chances in my recent Alekhine book. So this
[ 15...xc5?! 16.xf7 d3+ 17.d2! game became something of a theoretical duel.
e6 18.xd8! xc4 19.bxc4 xc1 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
20.xb7 with advantage ] 5.exd6 exd6 6.d3
16.ce4 f5 17.0-0 [ After 6.c3 c6 the Bd3 set-up would not
[ 17.xf7!? is not bad either: xf7 18.g5 be possible. ]
h6 19.e6 g5! ( 19...f8? 20.xg7! 6...e7 Attempting to show that Black is OK
g4 21.e8+- winning-[Olsson- even without fancy move orders.
Zatterberg]) 20.h4!? e4 21.xg7 xg7 [ In Sulskis - Vasiukov, Moscow 2002, Black
473
played the immediate 6...c6 and stood The most direct move, threatening Nb5-c7.
well after 7.f3 ( 7.e2 b4 would deny [ Also f ro m th is m onth : 10.e3!? b4
W hite the possibility of retreating his 11.xb6 xb6 12.d2 ( 12.f3 0-0
bishop that he took advantage of in the 13.xc4 e8 ) 12...0-0 13.f3 ( 13.xc4 )
game. ) 7...e7 8.d5 b4 9.e2 a5 13...f5 14.xc4 d7 15.a3 c7?!
10.0-0 0-0 11.e3 f6 12.d4 e8 ( 15...xc3 16.xc3 fe8 ) 16.axb4
13.d2 d7 14.c3 c6 etc. ] ( 16.b5! ) 16...xc4 17.d4? xe5!
7.e2 0-0 8.bc3 c6 9.0-0 e818.xc4 xc4 19.0-0-0 a5 20.b5 a4
I advocated this sensible developing move in 21.d4 fc8 22.g4 d7 23.e1? ( 23.d2
d6! and Black stands better) 23...a3
t h e b o o k . B l a c k o c c u p ie s t h e e - f i le a n d
doesn't commit his minor pieces for the time (a n d win s) 24.bxa3 xa3 25.c2 d6
being. 26.e3 xb5 27.dd3 xg4 28.b2
[ 9...g4 10.f3 h5 11.f4 g6 12.xg6 axc3 29.xc3 xc3 30.xc3 d8
hxg6 13.d5 e5 14.b3 was slightly better 31.e5 f5 0-1 Blahynka-Markovic, Brno
for White in Djuric - Miles, Aegina 1993. ] CZE 2009. ]
[ For 9...f6 see Sermek - Zelcic. ] [ 10.f3 is the old main line, worked out in
10.b3 incredible detail in the books. Black
[ After 10.a3?! f6 11.e3 g6 12.c2 apparently stands well enough after b4
e7 13.g3 d5 14.c5 d7 15.b4 f8 , but you'll have to check the Archives! ]
Black had reorganised his pieces with an 10...e6 Considered best by Cox. The older
exc ellen t game in A tkinson - Fogora si, move is
G ro n in ge n 1 9 8 9 . E m m s' m o ve i s m o r e [ 10...c6 11.f3 ( 11.b5 h4+ 12.g3
natural, but nevertheless fails to set the e4+ 13.e2 xh1 14.g5 f6?! was
world on fire. ] shown in Bender-Rogulj in the Archives, as
10...f8 11.h3 b4 12.e3 c6 13.b1 d5 was the alternative e6 15.d7+ xd7
14.a3 a6 15.c5 d7 16.b4 c7 17.d3 16.0-0-0+ c8 but here 16...Nd5 should be
b6! Attacking c5 makes it difficult for White to tested, I think) 11...g4 12.f4 , and now
organise b4-b5. 18.b3 g5!? 13.e4 gxf4 14.f6+ xf6 15.exf6
[ 18.b5 bxc5 19.bxc6 b8 is nice for 0-0-0 16.c1 e8+ was Bryson, D -Luther,
Black. ] T Bled 2002 in the Archives. ]
18...e6 19.fd1 a6! 20.cxb6 xb6
11.f3 c6 12.e2
21.a4 xa4 22.xa4 d7 23.f4 g6! [ 12.b5 is critical: c8 13.g5 d7 14.a4
The equaliser. Black needs to preserve his ( 14.bd4 may be better) 14...h6 15.e3
bad, light-square bishop from exchange so as d5 Movsesian-Luther, Istanbul 2003 and
to cover the c6 pawn. 24.xe6 xe6 25.c2 neither Cox nor Martin (in the Archives)
d6 Neither side has an effective plan. comments upon the game's 16 Bf 2, but
½-½ White seems to have a nice advantage after
16 Qd2, or an even bigger one after
16.xa7! . Then db4 17.e2 g6 18.0-0
471 B03 g7 19.d2 leaves White a clear pawn
Esserman,Mark 2391 ahead. ]
Yermolinsky,Alex 2522 12...d7! Cox suggests this.
Copper State Int (4) 31.05.2009 [ 12...g6 was given by Martin, but Cox points
[John Watson] out that 13.g5 d7 14.f6 g8 15.g5
is basically winning. ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 13.a4 a6!?
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5 [ 13...b6 covers key squares. ]
9.cxd5 c4 The archives have some material 14.f4! g6
on this line, but I haven't shown a game with it [ 14...h6 is safer, but also slow. ]
yet. I'm a little surprised that Yermo would risk 15.g5?
i t v e r s u s a l o w e r - r a t e d p l a y e r . 10.d6 [ 15.g5 b6 16.0-0-0 retains the pressure
474
Black can try h6 17.f6!? xf6 18.exf6 19.fd1 e4 20.e1 ) 19.e1 f6
0-0-0 19.xc4 b8! with some counterplay, ( 19...de5 20.f3 b4 21.fxe4 xa2
although Black lacks full compensation. The 22.c2 b4 23.d2 a6 24.e2 fxe4
idea is 20.xe6 ( 20.he1! f5!? 21.xf7 25.f4 , but there are countless options
b4 22.a3! d3+ 23.xd3 xd3 here; 19...h7 20.f3 ) 20.f3 h7 21.d1
24.e5 ) 20...e3+ 21.d2 xe6 ] with some advantage.;
15...b5 16.xe6 fxe6 17.c2 g7! C) 17.d6 f5 18.c4+ h7
[ 17...dxe5 18.d7+! is messy. ] C1) 19.h4!? f6 20.d1 f4 ( 20...e4
18.0-0 0-0 19.g4 h8 20.d2 cxe5 21.d4 e5 22.e2 ) 21.c1 e4
[ or 20...dxe5 21.xe6 d3 ] 22.g1;
[ After 20...cxe5 21.xe6 d3 C2) 19.f7 e8 20.h4 ( 20.d6
, Black seems to stand well. ] d8!= ) 20...f6
½-½ C2a) a draw results from 21.h5 xh5
22.3g5+ hxg5 23.xg5+ h6
( 23...h8 24.f7 ) 24.f7+ h7
472 B03 25.g5+=;
FORUM Voronezh Bb5/..Nc6 C2b) 21.d6 d8 22.d1 f4
N,N C2b1) 23.c1 can lead to the same
[John Watson] key line, but also to a nice pawn sac
f o r B l a c k : e4 24.d2 ( 24.g1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 h5 25.e2 f3 26.gxf3 exf3
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 27.f4 transposes to my main line)
0-0 9.b3 e5 24...g4 25.f3 exf3 26.gxf3
[ In Horvath-Chetverik, I've examined 9...e6 a n d n o w C r a i g ' s m o v e h5!
and ] ( 26...c8 27.f2 ) 27.xb7 e8+
[ 9...6d7 ] 28.f2 e3 29.he1 ( 29.hf1
10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7 d4 ) 29...ae8 with excellent
13.c4 c6 14.f3 a5 15.b5 c6 compensation, a line I worked out in
16.e4 Here's the move that was suggested detail to a number of dead equal
to revive White's fortunes. Previously, we'd positions;
looked at C2b2) 23.d2 e4 24.g1! h5
[ 16.d5 ] ( 24...g4 25.f3 exf3 26.gxf3 h5
[ and 16.d1 ] 27.xf4 b6! is interesting, although I
16...f5 think W hite has the chances after
[ Mark Morss originally intended 16...d4 28.cxb6 axb6 29.h2! ) 25.e2 f3
here, but in a correspondence game, 26.gxf3 exf3 27.f4 xf4 28.xf4
someone found 17.c4! xf3+ 18.gxf3 b4 ( 28...c3+ 29.f1 d4
against him, when White's bishops seem to 30.b4! ) 29.a3 c2+ 30.f1 xa3
more than make up for his pawn structure. 31.d3 e6 32.h5 and Black is
Mark thinks that White is indeed better, and under considerable pressure, e.g.,
after f8 19.d6 e6 20.e2 xb3 33.hxg6+ g8 34.c1 d7
and Rhd1, for example, Black seems to be 35.h3 a5 36.xh6 ]
running out of ideas. ] 17.c4+ f8 18.eg5 f6 19.f7 e8
[ But my original instinct was to call White's 20.d6 e7 21.0-0 e4
bluff by 16...h6 , which was suggested by Ig [ a) Craig Evans analyses 21...f4 22.d2
and analysed by TonyRo. I'll mix in my notes g4 23.c3 xf3 24.gxf3 d4 25.g2
as well: e8 26.fe1 xd6 27.cxd6 d7 28.xd4
A) 17.c4 a5 18.e2 ( 18.d5 f6 exd4 29.b5 xd6 30.c7 ]
19.xf6+ xf6 20.d1 g7 ) 18...f5 [ b ) T h e b e s t l i n e s e e m s t o b e 21...b8
19.d6 c6 20.c4+ h7 transposes; and here's some fairly random analysis it
B) 17.0-0 f5 18.d6 e4 ( 18...h7 seem s t hat W h ite ha s a n e dge : 22.cd1
475
(to allow Bc1, maybe) ( 22.g5 d7!? 473 B03

23.fd1 h6 24.f3 g5 25.h4 g4 26.e1 Fish,Andrew
f4 27.d2 ) 22...e6 ( 22...h6?? 23.h4 ) Sharp,Peter
23.xe6 xe6 24.a3 e4 25.g5 4NCL 1999-2000 (4) 1999
( 25.d4 ) 25...e7 26.b4 e5 ( 26...h6 [Nigel Davies]
27.h3 ) 27.d4 h6 28.xe5 xe5
29.h3 g5 30.f4 exf3 31.xf3 with the White has often tried defending his d-pawn
idea f4 ( 31...g4 32.f4! ) 32.f2 ( 32.g3 ) with Bc1-e3 in this line, but here he must be
32...g8 33.h4!? f8 34.hxg5 hxg5 35.g3 ready to meet ...c7-c5. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5
fxg3 ( 35...h5 36.g4 ) 36.xf6 gxf2+ 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 g6
37.xf2 xd6 38.dxd6 be8 39.d7 7.c3 g7 8.e3 0-0
and White will win material ] [ Black has also played 8...c5 immediately
22.g5 d7 though here White has a dangerous lead in
[ 22...e5 23.c6! xc4 24.xc4 b6 d e v e l o p m e n t a f t e r 9.dxc5 xd1+
25.d1 h6 26.h3 g5 27.c1 a6 ( 9...6d7 10.e6 fxe6 11.f3 a5 12.c1
28.a3 xc4 29.xc4 f7 30.xe7 xe7 xc5 13.d4 e5 14.xe5 xe5 15.xe5
31.d6 e8 32.xf5+ f6 33.g3 d3+ 16.xd3 xe5+ 17.e2 left White
[Ig and Craig Evans] ] with the better pawn structure in Lasker -
[ 22...h6 23.xc8 ( 23.gf7 g4 24.f4 Sidney Bernstein, New York (Simultaneous
ge5 25.xe5 xe5 26.fd1 g5 27.xe5 Display) 1928) 10.xd1 6d7 11.b5
xe5 28.b4 ) 23...xc8 24.e6+ g8 a6 12.e6 e5 ( 12...fxe6 13.b4 )
25.f4 h7 26.d6 d7 27.fd1 ( 27.h3 ) 13.exf7+ xf7 14.h3 f8 15.e2 g8
27...e8 28.a3 ] 16.f1 when White was still a pawn up in
23.xb7 h6 24.h3 g5 . This is analysis by Mujagic - Neckar, Prague 1982 ]
Kam. At this point, I think the right move is 9.f3
25.fd1! (suggested by someone!) [ 9.d2 invites Black to play c5 under even
[ C r a i g E v a n s g a v e t h e s i m i l a r 25.cd1 more favourable conditions in Erturan -
when, mixing his analysis with mine, we get Eriksson, European U20 Ch., Patras 1999 ]
A) 25...e5?! 26.c6! xc6 27.a5 9...c5 10.d5?! Having first put the bishop on
xc4 ( 27...d7 28.c5 ) 28.xc6 xe3 e3, this makes little sense.
29.fxe3 and f5 hangs; [ But 10.dxc5 xd1+ 11.xd1 6d7
B) 25...f4 26.xf4 gxf4 27.xf4 e5 12.e6 ( 12.d5 c6 13.b4 e6 14.c7
28.d6 , again with 3 pawns for the piece b8 15.b5 cxe5 gave Black a good game
and pressure.; in Greiff - Johansson, Swedish Open Ch.,
C) 25...c8 26.d6 c7 27.b5 c8 Vaxjo 1992 )]
28.xd7 xd7 ( 28...xd7 29.d6 c7 10...g4 11.f4? And this belated attempt to
30.xf5 ) 29.d6 xd6 30.cxd6 f4 fortify e5 loses a tempo compared with lines
31.c5 with the upper hand. ] without the move Bc1-e3.
25...f4 I can't see anything better for Black. [ Borges - Sigrist, Sao Paulo Open 1995
[ 25...e5 26.d6 ] continued 11.xc5 xe5 12.h3 g3+
26.xf4! gxf4 13.f2 xf2+ 14.xf2 xf3 15.xf3
[ 26...xh3 27.d6 g4 ( 27...c8 with a reasonable game ]
28.xe7+ xe7 29.d6 e5 30.xc8+ 11...8d7 12.e2 b8! 13.e4 xf3
xc8 31.b4 e8 32.a3 ) 28.e1 e5 14.gxf3 xe5 Leaving Black a pawn up with a
29.b5 f7 30.xe7+ xe7 31.f3 go o d p o sit io n . W h it e tries t o com p lic a t e
with a very large advantage. ] matters by donating more material. 15.h6
27.xf4 e5 28.d6 and not only does e8 16.0-0-0 f6 17.e3 bd7 18.h4
W hite have three pawns for the piece, but d4 19.xd4 cxd4 20.xd4 e5 21.d2
Black's position is rather sad. OK, that was a f5 22.h5 xh5 23.h3 xf3 24.g2
bit patchwork, but it might be nice to have this g3 25.e4 g4 26.g5 df6 27.h4
all in one file! xe4 28.xe4 g1+ 29.c2 ac8 30.d3
476
b5 31.b3 a1 32.e3 bxc4 33.bxc4 19.c7 xe3 20.fxe3 a7 21.b4 b7
xa2+ 34.d1 a1+ 35.e2 e6 36.d6 22.fd1!? Black is tied up, so
b8 37.f3 e5+ 38.e3 ed8 [ 22.d5 makes sense (threatening Ne7+),
0-1 with the idea xd5? 23.xc8+ d8 24.c4
dd7 25.g5 ]
22...xd1+ 23.xd1 g4
474 B03 [ 23...d6! 24.d5 e6 keeps White's
Gara,Anita 2312 advantage limited. ]
Grunberg,Sergiu Henric 2300 24.h3 xf3 25.xf3 c5!? 26.d8+ f8
TCh-HUN 2008-9 (9) 01.03.2009 27.c8 d7 28.d5 Apart from his better-
[John Watson] placed pieces, W hite's queenside majority
can advance with effect. g7 29.e2?!
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 29.g4! d isco u ra ge s f5?! 30.gxf5 gxf5
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 31.e4 winning the light squares. ]
0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 29...f5 30.c6 a5?
[ I'm surprised that 11.c5 is so rare probably [ Black should try to draw a bishops of
players who are attracted to slow moves o p p o s i t e c o l o u r s e n d i n g a f t e r 30...e4!
such as Be3 and Rc1 like to get the queens 31.xa6?! ( 31.a3! ) 31...xa6 32.xa6
off. ] f6! 33.xf6 xf6 ]
11...xd8 12.c5 6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 31.b5 b7 32.b6 c5 33.c4 g5 34.c7
a5 15.e2 e7 35.e8+ h8 36.c8 xb6 37.d6+
[ 15.b5 ] g7 38.g8+
15...b6 16.cxb6 1-0
[ We saw 16.b4 in Daultye-Nguyen Thu
Giang from last year's Olympiad it
shouldn't achieve anything. ] 475 B03
16...xb6 17.b5 Gruenfeld,Yehuda
[ From the Archives: 17.0-0 b7 18.fd1 Ljubojevic,Ljubomir
c6?! ( 18...xd1+ 19.xd1 c8 20.b5 (izt) Riga 1979
d5 is fine according to Cox. Then White [Alexander Volzhin]
seems to get just a little something out of
21.d2 c2 22.d3 xa2 23.b4 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
, but then comes e4! 24.xe4 c4 25.e1 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5
cb6 and there's no more doubt about 9.cxd5 c4 10.f3 Main line. g4 11.d4!
equality. ) 19.b5 xd1+ 20.xd1 b4 xf3 12.gxf3 b4 13.xc4
21.d6 ( He re Co x cla im s t h a t 21.a4 [ 13.g4 is too optimistic xd5 14.xg7
"would have left White decidedly better."; f8 with advantage to black ]
21.c5 was played in K Martin-Cox - see the 13...0-0 14.g1 A very natural and strong
Archives. ) 21...c6 Yandemirov-Konnov, move, but not the only one!
Kazan 2008, and now 22.a4! is a good idea. [ 14.h6!? is very interesting
4d5 23.c1! d7 24.xb6! xb6 25.a5 A) 14...gxh6 15.e6 f6 16.d6 xc4 17.e7
c8 26.c7 is no fun. ] H o w s t r o n g wh i t e ' s p a wn s a r e ! ! ! e8
17...d5?! 18.g1+ h8 19.g4 f7 ( 19...f7
[ I n a n e a r l i e r u p d a t e w e s a w 17...b7! 20.xc4! ) 20.g8+! winning;
18.0-0 ( 18.xa7 d5 ) 18...d5 B) 14...8d7! the only move, as capturing
with apparent equality. ] the bishop loses by force: 15.g1 g6
18.0-0!? 16.e6 e5! is very messy ]
[ 18.d2 b7 19.c4 of Cioara-Hudecek, 14...g6
Pardubice 1998 probably favours White. ] [ 14...c7? leads to a quick mate: 15.e6 f6
18...a6 16.h6 xc4 17.xg7+ h8 18.g8+!!
[ 18...a6! improves. ] 1-0, Luboevich - Honfi, 1970 ]
477
15.g5 This move and the following rook 35.f4+ e6 36.c4+ f6 37.f3 b5
sacrifice are the only way to f ight for the 0-1
advantage.
[ 15.h6 is a mistake: this bishop is much
better than the rook! c6 16.e4 xe5! 476 B03
and black is already better 17.xf8 xf8 Hamdouchi,Hicham 2589
18.b5 c5 19.0-0-0 xc3 20.bxc3 Garcia 2465
xc3+ 21.c2 a1+ 22.d2 xf3+ KUTXA Donostia ESP (2) 08.07.2009
23.e3 xd5+ with an unstoppable attack, [John Watson]
Gibbs - Stewart, 1972 ]
15...c7 16.b3 c5 17.f4 xg1 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
Taking the rook gives white a strong attack, 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
but the alternative is worse: 0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8
[ 17...e8 18.f6 8d7 19.e4 xe5 12.c5 The normal move.
20.xg6+!! Nice, isn't it? ] [ Black won a recent miniature following
18.d6 c5! The only defence, as 12.b5 c6! 13.xa7 d4! 14.xc8
[ 18...c8 allows white to castle ( I wanted to xc8 ( or 14...dxc8 ) 15.xd4 exd4 16.a4
write "to castle queenside", but just in time I d3 17.d1?! d6! 18.xd3 f5 19.e2
realised that with one rook sacrificed white d4+ 20.f1 xb3 21.d1 xa4 22.g3
has no choice! ) with a strong attack, for b5 0-1 Chauca, J -Lima, J, Rio de Janeiro
example: 19.0-0-0 c5 20.e6 fxe6 21.e5 BRA 2009. ( because White loses another
d5 22.d7!! and white wins, as was pointed p a w n d u e t o 22...b5 23.cxb5? ad4
out by Bronstein ] 24.e2 xd3! 25.xd3 c1+ )]
19.e4 d4 20.d1 xb2 21.e6?! 12...6d7 13.f3 c6 14.c4 a5 15.e2
In such crazy positions one mistake is enough b6 16.a4
to lose a game. In my opinion, this move is [ 16.cxb6 xb6 17.0-0 b7 with equality is
such a mistake! I think white missed black's Yandemirov Alek, V (2461) -Konnov, O
next move, but in his defence, it's not too (2325)/Kazan RUS 2008 in the Archives. ]
difficult to blunder in such positions! 16...xc5 17.xc5 bxc5 18.xc5
[ 21.f6+ should be played. I analysed this We've seen this before more than once. e4
position and couldn't understand who was [ 18...b7 19.c7 d6 is also okay, only a
better! One variation: h8 22.d2 a1+ bit better for White after 20.0-0 ]
23.e2 If you are tired already, you should 19.d2 b7 20.c6!?
u s e t h is o p p o rt u n i t y t o t a ke a d r a w b y [ Maybe a conservative move such as 20.c2
repetition ( 23.d1 b2 24.d2 ) 23...c6 would keep more chances on the board. ]
24.h4 h5 ( 24...xe5+ 25.f1 h5 20...d6 21.0-0 f5?!
26.xh5+- winning ) 25.xh5 d4+ [ 21...e6 22.a6 d5 23.d1 is perhaps
26.xd4 xd4 27.f6+ g8 28.f4 f2+ a tad better for W hite, so more accurate
29.xf2 xf2 30.xg6 fe8 31.xf2 seems ]
with an unclear position! ] [ 21...b7! 22.c7 e5! 23.fc1 ac8
21...8d7! 22.e7 the rook is attacked, but 24.xc8 xc8 25.xc8+ xc8 ]
black has such a big material advantage, that 22.xe4 b7
he can easily ignore this! xh2! 23.exf8+ [ 22...xe3 23.fxe3 presents Black with a
xf8 24.xh2 White has nothing better, he few potential problems on the f-file, as well
has to go into an ending two pawns down.. as leaving him a pawn behind. This happens
xh2 25.f6+ g7 26.xd7 xd7 27.e7 in the game. ]
Hoping for counterplay after 28.Ba4, but b8! 23.f6+ xf6
28.f2 e5 29.c1 c5! The final finesse [ White has similar chances after 23...h8
in this excellent game! 30.d1 f6 31.xf6+ 24.c7 xg2 ( 24...xe3?! 25.fxe3 xg2
xf6 32.c4 d8 33.g3 a6 34.f1 e5 26.f2! ) 25.xg2 xe3+ 26.fxe3 d2
27.f3 xf6 28.xf7 ]
478
24.xf6 xe3?! wa s an alyze d in th is co lu mn , f ollo win g

[ 24...g7! 25.g5 d4 traps White's rook. Chernyshov - Freisler, Pardubice, 1992.
T h is h e lp s , a lt h o u g h B la ck ca n 't win i t White couldn't even get out of the opening. ]
without allowing W hite a favourable 12...6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 a5!?
exchange-down position with the bishop It takes a g time to master this system (the
pair: 26.c1 h6 ( 26...e8 27.c4 f8 Voronezh), and I certainly haven't. This move
28.a6!? ) 27.c7 d5 28.xf5 gxf5 seems a bit odd, releasing pressure on the
29.e3 b4 30.c5 d8 31.a5 b7 key d4 square and inviting b4, and yet it has
32.f3 g6 33.f2 and it's about even, but done reasonably well. Two other moves given
perhaps easier to play White. ] on ChessPublishing are:
25.fxe3 d2 [ (a) 14...h6 15.0-0 ( 15.e4 ) 15...d4
[ This allows the rooks in, but defending f7 a n d i n s t e a d o f 1 6 B xd 4 ? , I s u g g e s t e d
ties Black down: 25...d7 26.c4 f8 16.e4! xf3+ 17.gxf3 f8 18.d6 f5
27.g4! g7 28.1f4 , etc. ] 19.f4! with advantage. ]
26.xf7 d5 27.7f2 xa2 28.c4! a5 [ (b) 14...d4 15.g5 f8 16.ce4 f5
[ Or 28...xc4 29.xa2 xf1 30.xf1 ] 17.0-0 ( or 17.xf7!? - Volzhin ) 17...f6
29.b4! 18.d6! xd6 19.cxd6 Dzindzichashvili,
[ 29.a2!? c5 30.xd5+ xd5 31.fa1 R -Alburt, L (2560)/Parsippany 1996 ]
d7 32.a6 b7 33.1a3 ] 15.b5!? This may be best.
29...xc4 30.bxa5 xf1 31.xf1 e8 [ W e've seen 15.e2 b6 16.cxb6 xb6
32.f2?! This is passive. White should before, when Black has plenty of play, as
activate by well as ]
[ 32.b1! xe3 ( 32...e7 33.a6 and Rb7 ) [ 15.g5 f8 16.e7 xc4! 17.xf8 xf8
33.b7 a3 34.xa7 ] 18.bxc4 xc5 19.0-0 e4 "with ample
32...e5 33.a1 a6 Now Black's rook is compensation", Honfi - Varga, 1994. ]
active and White's tied down. 34.a4 f7 15...f8
35.f3 b5 36.h4 [ An attractive line is 15...a6 16.e2 c6
[ 36.g4!? ] 17.d1 d4 18.xd4! exd4 19.xd4!
36...h5 37.g4 hxg4+ 38.xg4 f6 39.e4 xd4 20.xd4 and Ne4 will follow, with
e5 40.f3 h5 41.g4 e5 42.f4 g5+ more than enough compensation. ]
43.hxg5+ xg5 44.a2 b5 45.a3 e6 16.0-0
46.a4 h5 White can't make progress. [ 16.e4 is also promising. ]
½-½ 16...h6
[ 16...e6 17.fd1 takes the file just in time,
and d4 is virtually refuted by ( 17...c6
477 B03 18.xd8+ cxd8 19.e4 ) 18.xd4 exd4
Hanley,James L 2213 19.g5! ]
Summerscale,Aaron 2493 17.e4 d7 18.xd7?!
Middlesex vs Young England (2) 10.07.2007 [ I like 18.e2! with the idea e6 19.d6 ]
[John Watson] 18...xd7 19.b4 c6 20.b5 e7
Black has just about equalised. 21.c4?
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 21.fd1 ad8 22.xd7 xd7 23.d6
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 e6= ]
0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 21...f5 22.c3
[ The immediate 11.c5 was tried once: 6d7 [ Now 22.d6 e6 favours Black. ]
12.c4 c6 13.f3 a5 14.0-0 xc5 22...c8 With the idea ...Ne6. Things have
15.b4! xb4 16.d5 Chernyshov - Lucko, gone very wrong for W hite. 23.a4 e6
1995, but I don't believe that this sort of 24.b1 d3 25.e1 d7 26.f1 g5
stuff can be good for White ] 27.c2 f4 28.c1 d1+ 29.e2? h1
11...xd8 12.c5 30.h3 f7 White is tied up and lost. 31.c6
[ 12.b5?! c6! 13.xa7? d4! bxc6 32.b6 axb6 33.xb6 b8 34.cb4
479
f5 35.a4 c5 36.c4 xc1 37.xc1 xb6 was Kaidanov's choice and resulted in
38.a5 a6 39.a4 f6 40.a3 d6 41.f3 rough equality after 0-0 9.f3 g4
d8 42.c4 xc4 43.cxc4 xa5 44.xa5 10.d2 d7 11.0-0 f5 12.b3 c7
xa5 45.a4 c3 46.d3 d4 47.e4 13.a5 Kaidanov, G-Leininger, R Dallas
g7 48.a6 h5 49.xh6 g3+ 50.d3 1996. ) 8...0-0 9.ge2 f5 ( 9...6d7
f5 51.h7+ g6 52.c7 e3 was another very recent attempt 10.0-0 f5
0-1 11.c2 g6 12.h1 a6 13.a3 b6
14.b3 c7 15.f4 exf4 16.xf4 g5
17.d2 xf4 18.xf4 Biti, O-Runic, Z
478 B03 Zagreb 2010 and it was clear White had
Hofmann,Paul 2382 w o n t h e o p e n i n g b a t t l e .) 10.b3
Khenkin,Igor 2632 Is the tabiya of this variation and W hite
ZDMI Open Dresden GER (4) 13.07.2010 should do well to study this position should
[Gawain Jones] he want to play 6.d5!?
C1) 10...a6 was essayed by none
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 other than top English Grandmaster
5.exd6 cxd6 John did a lot of work on the Mickey Adams although 11.0-0 d7
mainlines with 6.Nc3 but my eye was drawn ( 11...c5 12.c2 a5 13.f4 e4 14.e3
b y t h e f o llo win g ga m e in wh ich a st ro n g bd7 15.d4 f6 16.h3 and I prefer
Grandmaster was defeated with the more W hite with his control over the dark
unusual 6.d5!? which has only been played sq u a r e s. S h a b a l o v, A - D o r r, C U S A
235 times in Mega2010 compared to 3196 1994. ) 12.f3 c8 13.e3 ( 13.a4!? )
w i t h 6 . N c 3 ! g6 And Khenkin replies with 13...c5 14.c2 a5 15.d2 f6
another sideline. This is actually the move Landenbergue, C-Adams, M Garmisch
which 6.d5 was intended to dissuade. John P a r t e n k i r c h e n 1 9 9 4 w h e n 16.c1
Cox even gives 6...g6 a question mark but as gives White a small advantage. All these
we shall see things aren't so clear. positions resemble a Kings Indian more
[ 6...e5 is the mainline. 7.c3 than any 1.e4 opening.;
A) 7...f5 8.f4!? The most aggressive C2) 10...a5 11.0-0 a6 12.f4 d7
attempt. ( Instead 8.f3 e7 9.e2 0-0 13.e3 dc5 14.c2 f6 was rather
10.0-0 a6 11.b3 d7 12.a3 g6 co m p le x in Fo ssa n , E -Agd e s t e in , S
13.c1 c7 was Waitzkin, J-Stripunsky, Drammen 1994 but perhaps he should
A N e w Y o r k 1 9 9 8 wh i c h w a s a g r e e d have now played 15.fxe5 forcing xe5
dra wn a f e w m o ve s la t e r b u t h e re h e 16.a3 with an intriguing battle between
missed a chance with 14.xe5! xe5 Black's kingside attacking chances and
15.f4 d7 16.f5 when White has a small White's better structure.;
edge. ) 8...8d7 9.f3 ( 9.e2 C3) 10...8d7 has been Zelcic's choice
m i g h t b e m o r e a c c u r a t e a s t h e n c8 but he hasn't scored well. 11.0-0
would allow 10.g4! ) 9...c8 10.b3 f6 C3a) 11...e4 was his first attempt but
11.e2 exf4 12.d4 h4+ 13.f1 g6 after 12.c2
14.d2 was complex and had similarities C3a1) 12...f6 was Krasenkow's
to a King's Gambit! Czebe, A-Pesotsky, V attempt at an improvement but
Plovdiv 2008.; following 13.f4 ( 13.b1!?
B) 7...a5 8.f3 ( 8.d3 e7 9.ge2 with the idea of Nb5-d4 seems to
so as to be able to meet ...f5 with f4 is f avour W hite .) 13...exf3 14.xf3
the normal treatment.) 8...a6 9.e2 e5 15.f1 g6 16.b1 e8 17.h3
e7 10.0-0 0-0 11.b3 f5 12.e3 d7 d7 18.d4 he failed to beat his
13.d3 xd3 14.xd3 f5 and Black had lower rated opponent. Huschenbeth,
started to take the initiative. Fuellgrabe, N-Krasenkow, M Germany 2007;
T-Bagirov, V Berlin 1995.; C3a2) 12...e5 13.d4 f6 14.f4
C) 7...e7 8.d3 ( 8.e2 is unusual yet exf3 15.gxf3!? g6 16.f4 d7
480
17.h1 looks like a good Kings better for W hite by Martin and Baburin,
I n d i a n f o r W h i t e b u t xd4?! who observe that Black has no good pawn
18.xd4 f6 19.a3 was decidedly breaks. Landa, K-De Jonghe, B Belgium
loose. Biti, O-Zelcic, R Rabac 2003.; 2005. ]
C3b) 11...h8 12.b1 f4 Of course 7.d4 g8 So Black can no longer castle but
Zelcic realised that he was ceding the he will now gain time against White's queen in
e4 square forever but hopes to get order to gain some time in development.
enough activity to compensate. [ 7...f6 has been more common here for
However, I'm far f rom convinced... some reason but looks very ugly to me.
13.f3 c5 14.c2 a5 when I think 8.c3 ( 8.h4!? Hoffmann, P-Zrilic, B Rijeka
W h i t e s h o u l d h a v e t r i e d 15.b5 2010 was Hoffman's choice in a previous
( 15.a3 was played in Tazbir, M-Zelcic, ga m e , a ls o f r o m t h i s ye a r .) 8...g7
R Warsaw 2005, when a4 16.b4 b3 9.ge2!? ( I can't see anything wrong with
would have given Black decent 9.f3 ) 9...e5 10.dxe6 c6 11.d1 xe6
counterchances.) 15...d7 16.ec3 12.f4 xc4?! 13.xc4 xc4 14.0-0
with a more comfortable position. ] and Black's light squares were too
[ 6...e6 has also been played quite often vulnerable. Olesen, M-Andersen, P
wh en S h irov trie d t he in te restin g 7.a4!? Copenhagen 1995. ]
( Instead 7.c3 has been played in almost 8.h4 h5
every game that reached this position.) [ 8...h6 is the alternative way of defending
7...exd5 8.cxd5 e7 9.a5 6d7 10.f3 the h pawn. These positions are quite fresh,
0-0 11.e2 b6 I think Black will have to our main game being the first one in which
look for improvements here as 12.0-0 bxa5 a titled player has tried 6...g6 as far as I can
13.d2 b6 Shirov, A-Degraeve, J see. 9.c3 f5 ( 9...a6!? ) 10.f3
G e r m a n y 2 0 0 9 14.xa5! would have left Fazekas, M-Sull, G Hungary 2001 when
S h i r o v wi t h a p r o m i s i n g e d g e a s xb2 instead of 8d7 which allowed ( 10...g7
15.b5 a2 16.d4 looks pretty terrible for should have been tried when Black has
Black. ] decent chances, for instance: 11.e3 a4!
[ 6...8d7 was looked at in the archives by 12.xa4 a5+ 13.c3 xc3+ 14.d2
Andrew Martin and has attracted the xd2+ 15.xd2 b6 and Black is certainly
intention of Nakamura. no worse. ) 11.d4 ]
A) Instead 7.e3 was tried in the game 9.d2 Finally the novelty although to be
between the two strong young Americans. honest I quite like Black's chances here.
g6 8.d2 f6 ( 8...e5 9.b3 g4 [ The only other game to have reached this
10.d4 h6 11.b2 0-0 ) 9.c3 position that I can find was between two low
A1) Nakamura is trying to delay 9...g7 rated players. That continued with 9.d3
t o l e s s e n t h e i m p a c t o f 10.h6?! Miturova, M-Janouchova, M Sec u Chrudimi
but this would be premature as xh6 2008 but that appears to be an immediate
11.xh6 c7 12.c1 ( 12.b3 bxd5! inaccuracy as Black will be able to gain time
would exploit the dark square holes in on the bishop following a6 ]
W h i t e ' s p o s i t i o n .) 12...c5 9...a6 10.e2
looks comf ortable f or Black as c4 is [ Hoffmann is hoping to react with Bc3 to any
vulnerable.; ...Bg7 but due to the next note perhaps he
A2) 9...d7 I don't particularly like this should have played 10.c3 although after
move. 10.d3 g7 11.d4 0-0 g7 Black's completely fine. ]
12.ge2 e5 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.0-0 e5 10...c5
15.e3 was complex but I think White [ 10...a4! looks problematic for White who
must have had an edge. Hess, R- must sacrifice his b2 pawn although after
Nakamura, H Connecticut 2007.; 11.f3 ( 11.b3 g7 is the problem.)
B) 7.b3 f6 8.b2 g6 9.d3 g7 11...xb2 12.0-0 f5 I don't really see
10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 is given as a little sufficient compensation. ]
481
11.c3 g7 12.b4 allow ( 37.f1 is a winning try but Black still
[ 12.b3 was more circumspect. ] s e e m s t o b e d o i n g f i n e f o l l o w i n g h3;
12...ca4 13.c1 xc3 14.xc3 xc3+ 37.e4!? ) 37...f5 38.b6 ( 38.e1 xb1
[ 14...h6! would have left Black in control: 39.c1 g6 40.h3 a2
15.d1 a5! 16.bxa5 a4 17.b4 g7 is very complicated but certainly fine for
18.d3 xa5! ] Black. ) 38...xb1 39.h3 a2+ 40.h2
15.xc3 a5 16.b5 e5 17.g3 a4 18.a3 e5+ 41.g1 a1+ with a draw. ]
h4 37.b6 I'm not sure what Khenkin overlooked
[ 18...c5 immediately is more accurate as as it's easy to see that the b pawn is simply
t h e n f o l l o w i n g 19.e3 ( 19.f3 e4 too fast. a6
must favour Black.) 19...g4 and Black is [ 37...c8 38.h7+ picks up the queen. ]
doing well. ] 38.xf5 b3 39.b1 xb6 40.e3 a5
19.e3 c5 20.f3 f6 21.d2 41.xg5+ f8 42.e3 b2 43.f1
[ 21.d4!? might well be more accurate as An interesting line. Khenkin had no problems
then b6 doesn't look so convincing. ] after the opening and it looks like 6...g6!? is a
21...b6 22.b3 xb3? A surprising error by good response to 6.d5 despite its bad
such a strong player and shows that Khenkin reputation.
was having a bad day. 1-0
[ 22...d7 would still have left Black with a
p e r f e c t l y p l a y a b l e p o s i t i o n a s 23.g4
can be dealt with by f4= ] 479 B03
23.axb3! Now White can open up the position Horvath,Gy 2432
a n d t h u s B la c k' s is o la t e d kin g su d d e n l y Chetverik,Maxim 2305
becomes an important factor in the position. Zalakaros 2005
b8 24.0-0 g5 25.fa1 f8 26.b4! [John Watson]
Opening up the position so that White's rooks
can infiltrate and highlighting the problem with Chetverik has no less than 7 games in
Black's 22nd. axb4 27.a8 xa8 28.xa8 Informant using two moves other than the
g7 29.xb6 So now both players have overwhelmingly played 9...e5. I've bundled
passed b pawns but White's is more effective. them together, using the Informant notes but
g6 adding a few of my own. This is a good way to
[ 29...f4 30.e3 ] look over the material, even if it's clearly the
[ and 29...e4 30.e3 get Black nowhere. ] lazy way out for me! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5
[ 29...h3 might be the best source of 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6
counterplay, although W hite stays on top 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e6
after 30.e3 hxg2 31.b6 ] [ 9...6d7!?
30.e3 b7 31.xg8+ A) 10.h3 f6
[ 31.a7! b8 32.f1 followed by 33.Qb3 A1) 11.d3 d5 12.f3 ( 12.ge2 c6
and p icking up the b4 p awn looke d th e 13.0-0 Toenniges, T (2089)-Chetverik, M
simplest way to proceed. ] ( 2 3 1 4 ) / B a d W i l d b a d 2 0 0 7 b4!?
31...xg8 32.d3 f6 33.e1 14.b1 a5 - C h e t v e r i k) 12...c6
[ 33.g3! was the most accurate to give the 13.0-0 f5 ( 13...e6 14.g5!
White king some luft. ] , f o r e xa m p le , c8 15.cxd5 xd5
33...e4! Now Khenkin gets dangerous 16.xd5 xd5 17.e4 ) 14.xf5 gxf5
counterplay. 34.xe4 a1+ 35.b1 c8 15.e5 ( or 15.e1 ) 15...e6 16.f3
[ 35...b3 was the most accurate when, and W hite can be happy with his
although W hite is still better, I'm unsure pressure.;
whether he's winning any longer. ] A2) Perhaps the best order is 11.f3 d5
36.e1 f5?? Proof that it wasn't Khenkin's , and now I like 12.d3! , vs ... Ne4 and
day. ...Bf5 ( r a t h e r t h a n 12.c5 e4
[ Instead 36...g7 37.xb4 would now or, as in the Chetverik game,; or 12.e2
482
c6 13.0-0 f5 ); 14...c6 15.cxd5 exd5 16.d2 e8

A3) 11.g4!? e5 ( 11...c6!? 12.f3 h5 17.fd1 d7 18.e2!? c8 19.c5 8e7
13.g5 e8 ) 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.xd8 20.f4
xd8 14.g2 c6 15.ge2 h5 16.g5 [ White should play 20.c3! b4 21.f4
( 16.g5 b4! 17.0-0 hxg4 18.cd1 ac8? 22.b5 ]
e8 ) 16...e8 17.0-0 ( 17.e4 c7 20...b6 21.c3
18.0-0 e6= ) 17...d6 18.fd1 e6 [ Chetverik gives 21.b5 ad8 22.xd5
19.a4! with a nice advantage, f5 with counterplay. ]
B r a e u n i n g , R ( 2 3 4 0 ) - C h e t ve r i k , M 21...ac8 22.dc1 ed8 23.h3
(2314)/Bad W ildbad 2007. Notes by [ 23.b4 might keep some advantage. ]
Chetverik.; 23...d6 24.e2 h5 25.g4 White feels that
B) 10.e2 f6 11.h3 d5 12.f3 c6 he has to keep Black's knight out of f5. hxg4
13.0-0 f5 14.g4! ( 14.e5 dxc4 26.hxg4 d7 27.g2 Chetverik calls this
15.xc6 bxc6 16.bxc4 e4 17.xe4 equal. I still like
xe4 18.d3 xd3 19.xd3 d6=; [ 27.b4 , although White is only nominally
14.c5 e4 15.a4 h5 16.a3 e5!? better. ]
17.dxe5 xe5 18.d4 f6! 19.e1 27...f5 28.g5 f4 29.xf4 f8 30.d3 f5
ad8 Kiselev, G (2424)-Chetverik, M 31.b5 d6 32.xd5 xd5 33.xd5+
(2311), Russia 2007) 14...e6 , and here xd5 34.xc6 xc6 35.xc6 xb5
Chetverik recommends 15.e5!? dxc4 36.xd6 xb3 37.d8+ h7 38.d7 a5
16.bxc4 xe5 17.dxe5 d7 18.f4 ] 39.d5 g8
10.f3 d7 11.e2 c6 12.0-0 1-0
[ An exciting line is 12.h4!?
A) 12...h6 13.d2 h7 14.h5 g5
15.xg5!? hxg5 16.xg5+ g8 17.h6 480 B03
f6 18.ce4 ( 18.f4! looks better, with Hou,Yifan 2571
advantage I think) 18...xe4 19.xe4 Short,Nigel D 2663
d5 ( or simply 19...c6 ); Corus B Wijk aan Zee NED (4) 20.01.2009
B) 12...xf3 13.xf3 d5 14.cxd5 exd5 [John Watson]
15.h5 c6 16.hxg6 fxg6!? ( 16...hxg6
17.d2 e8 18.0-0 c8 19.fe1 Any Alekhine's Defence by a top-level player
- Chetverik but this is better than ..fxg6) like Nigel Short is worth seeing! 1.e4 f6
17.e2 ( 17.0-0! a6 18.e1 , now that 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
W hite has the bishop pair and the [ Versus 4.f3 , Short plays dxe5 5.xe5
weakness on e6 is established) 17...f6 c6 , when the recent game Navara-Short,
18.d2 ae8 19.0-0 d6 20.c5? xf3! W ijk aan Zee (Corus B) 2009 went out of
21.gxf3 Kulaots, K (2555)-Chetverik, M theory quickly: 6.e2 f5 7.g4 e6 8.f4
(2300)/Cappelle la Grande 2006 and here f6 9.d3 f7 10.0-0 a6 11.c3 e6
Chetverik recommends xd4!? 22.xd4 12.xd5 xd5 13.e3 e7 14.f3 d7
xe2 23.xe2 xd4 24.c2 g3+ with more or less equal play. ]
with a draw. ] 4...b6 5.exd6 exd6 Too bad we don't get to
12...xf3 13.xf3 d5 14.a4 see Short playing the more dynamic
[ a) 14.cxd5 exd5 15.a4!? ( 15.d2 ) [ 5...cxd6 ]
15...xa4 16.bxa4 c6 17.c5 e7 6.c3 c6 Short plays as Baburin does, to
18.b3 ( 18.g5! ) 18...b6 19.b5 prevent the irritating Bd3/Nge2 setup which
- Chetverik. ] has done so well for White. That arises after
[ b) 14.c5 c8 15.b4 a6 16.a4 c6 17.b5 [ 6...e7 7.d3 0-0 8.ge2 ]
axb5 18.axb5 a5 19.a1 ( I like simply 7.e3
19.e2 ) 19...e7 20.a4 f5 [ We previously looked at Zaragatski-Baburin,
wit h a p p ro xim a t e e qu a lit y, Do m a n y, M Kemer TUR 2007, which went 7.h3 f5
(2199)-Chetverik, M (2303)/Eger 2005. ] ( 7...e7 8.f3 0-0 is less committal) 8.e3
483
e7 9.f3 f6 10.b3 h6 , and here I 13.d4 a6 14.0-0 e5 This move creates
suggested 11.d3 xd3 ( 11...d7 12.0-0 weaknesses, but what should he do?
0-0 13.b1 xd3 14.xd3 is almost the 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.f3 with a big advantage
same ) 12.xd3 with a space advantage. ] for white in Chernyshov - Zoltek, Pardubice,
7...e7 8.d3 0-0 9.ge2!? 1992. ]
[ 9.f3 would avoid what happens next, but 12.f4 g4
it's not clear what the consequences are. ] [ 12...f7 has also failed to solve black's
9...b4 Now White's important light-squared
problems. 13.f3 ( intending Nd4 ) e5
bishop is exchanged, because it can't retreat 14.dxe6 xe6 Now the d6-pawn becomes a
to e2. 10.b3 xd3+ 11.xd3 c6 12.d5! target. 15.0-0 e8 16.d2 e7 17.ce1
Nevertheless, W hite claims some space in d5 Even this break doesn't help black too
return for the bishop pair. It's not so bad for much. 18.c5! Very typical: white controls the
Black, but he'll be the one who has to find d4 square and keeps the possibility of the
good squares for his pieces. e8 13.0-0 f8 m a j o r i t y a t t a c k o n t h e q u e e n s i d e . d7
[ 13...cxd5 14.xd5 xd5 15.xd5 c7 19.b5! Otherwise Black will transfer this
16.c3 e6 17.d2 c6 18.ad1
Knight to e4 via f6. a6 20.a4 ed8
is not yet equal. ] 21.xd7 xd7 22.d4
14.ad1 g4!? 15.d2 c8!? with an overwhelming positional advantage
[ 15...d7! has ideas of ...Ne5, and 16.f4 in V. Ivanov - Ukolov, Moscow, 1995. ]
a5 prepares ...Nc5. ] 13.d4
16.g3!? cxd5 17.xd5 xd5 18.xd5 [ 13.xg4 is not bad either: fxg4 14.ge2
d7 19.e2?! e5 15.dxe6 xe6 16.d4! The exchange
[ 19.fd1! c6 20.d4 g6 21.f4
of dark-squared bishops clearly favours
with the idea Bd4 keeps a grip on things, white. c8 17.0-0 e7 18.xg7 xg7
although W hite's advantage is hardly 19.h1 f5 20.d4 with an obvious
decisive after, say, e6 ] advantage for white, Moldovan - Bogdan,
19...c6 20.g5 e6 21.f4 e5
Romania, 1995. ]
Black has plenty of activity now. 22.g3 f5 13...e5 14.dxe6 xe6 15.f3 In my opinion
23.h3 a6 24.d3 e6 25.f4 e5 26.d3 this posit ion is simply bad f or B lack . e8
e6 27.f4 16.xg7 xg7 17.0-0 f7 18.d4+ f6
½-½ 19.fd1 ad8 20.g5 h6 21.xf7 xf7
22.xf6+ The endgame should be easily won.
xf6 23.f3 d7 24.d2 a6 25.cd1 e3
481 B03 26.e2 c8 27.f2 de7 28.h3 d5
Howell,James C 2525 29.cxd5 d6 30.d3 xd3 31.xd3 fe4+
Panchenko,Alexandar G 2480 32.xe4 xe4+ 33.f3 c7 34.g4 f6
Wichern-op Hamburgo (9) 1995 35.gxf5 gxf5 36.g3 c5 37.c3 a5
[Alexander Volzhin] 38.e3 g6 39.h4 h5 40.e5 f7 41.e3
f6 42.d4 b6 43.e7 f8 44.c7 f6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 45.c6 d7 46.xf6+ xf6 47.e5
5.exd6 cxd6 This move is much more So, as we can see 8.. .Nc6 ha rdly so lve s
popular than 5...ed, but it would be too easy Black's problems.
to draw any conclusions about the relative 1-0
strengths of the moves from that! 6.c3 g6
7.e3 g7 8.c1 A very clever decision: first
of all white develops his queenside
overprotecting the knight on c3. c6 9.d5
e5 10.e2 0-0 11.b3 8.Rc1 made this
move possible. Now 12.f4 is an unpleasant
threat. f5
[ 11...ed7 was played once. 12.f3 f6
484
482 B03 [ 25...b6!? should be preferred. ]

Ianov,Viktor 2460 26.b4 b6 27.c4 h7 28.e4 h6
Chekhov,Valery A 2500 29.c2 e7 It's not easy to find an adequate
Moscow (3) 1995 defence for Black.
[Alexander Volzhin] [ P r o b a b l y h e s h o u l d t r y 29...f5!?
as after the text W hite's advantage
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 becomes decisive. ]
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 30.c6! f6 31.c7 e1+ 32.h2 e5?!
0-0 9.b3!? f5!? An interesting attempt to [ 32...f3!? 33.g3 a5 34.b2 and Black is in
create counterplay. 10.f3!? Other moves Zugzwang e2?? 35.c1+ ]
are possible, also with a slight advantage for 33.xa7 e6
White. [ 33...f3+ 34.g3 e2? 35.c1++- mating ]
[ 10.h3!? h6 11.f4 e6 12.d5 f7 34.f7 e7 35.c4!+- xf7 36.xf7 f3+
13.e2 e8 14.0-0 e6 15.dxe6 xe6 37.g3 e2 38.f4+ h7 39.c7+
16.d4 xd4+ 17.xd4 c6 18.f2 [ 39.c7+ h6 40.xb6 f1 41.e3++-
Malisauskas,V-Kupreichik,V/Moscow/1994/0, winning ]
5/57/ ] 1-0
[ 10.d5 f4 11.d4 e5 12.dxe6 xd4
13.xd4 c6 14.d2 xe6 15.f3 e7
16.e2 d5 17.cxd5 ad8 18.0-0 xd5 ] 483 B03
[ 10.g3 c6 ( 10...e5 11.dxe5 dxe5 Ibarra Jerez,Jose Carlos 2535
12.xd8 xd8 13.c5 6d7 14.c4+ h8 Asis Gargatagli,H 2462
15.b5 a6 16.d6 f8 17.c6 ) 11.d5 XVIII Navalmoral Open (5.7) 07.12.2012
e5 12.e2 e6 13.dxe6 xe6 14.f4 g4 [Tom Rendle]
15.xg4 fxg4 16.ge2 Ardeleanu -
Grunberg, 1996. ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
10...f4 Already a rare choice compared to 4.c4 and 4.
[ 10...e5?! 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.xd8 xd8 Nf3 b6 5.b3 d5
13.c5 6d7 14.c4+ f8 15.g5 f6 [ 5...f5 was analysed in Conquest-Baburin ]
16.f7 e8 17.b5 with advantage ] [ 5...dxe5 is Black's main move here but
11.d2 c6 12.d5 e5 13.xe5! xe5 after 6.h5 e6 7.dxe5 White has good
14.e2 e6 15.dxe6 xe6 16.f3 d5 chances and in Thorhallsson, T (2455)-
17.cxd5 Mamedyarov, S (2709) Reykjavik 2006 he
[ 17.c5 d4! 18.e4 d5 ] went on to score a giant-killing win after c5
17...xd5 18.xd5 8.c3 ( 8.a3!? deserves attention) 8...c6
[ There are some other ways for white to get 9.e2 g5 10.c2 d7 11.d2 e7
a slight advantage, for example 18.0-0!? 12.e4 and White was obviously doing well -
xc3 19.xc3 xc3 20.xc3 b6 g5 just looks out of place here. ]
21.e1 but I doubt if it is enough for the [ 5...c6 is a worthy alternative here.
whole point. ] W hite's most interesting choice here is
18...xd5 19.b4 xf3 20.xf3 b2 6.e6!? and after ( 6.exd6 exd6 leads to a
[ 20...f7 21.0-0 f6 22.fd1 ] balanced game ) 6...fxe6 7.f3
21.0-0! A) 7...g6 8.g5 d5 was a better option
[ 21.xf8?! e8+! 22.d2 xc1+ 23.xc1 with a murky position arising after
d8+ 24.c2 xf8 ] ( 8...g7!? 9.xe6 f8 should also be
21...xc1 22.xf8 xf8 23.xc1 f7 investigated. ) 9.f3!
24.c4 f8 25.h4 White has a tiny A1) 9...xd4 10.f7+ d7 11.c3
advantage, as Black's King is slightly exposed. xb3 and White can either take a draw
However a draw is the most likely outcome of with 12.xe6+ ( or keep good chances
the game. h5?! Black voluntary weakens his with 12.axb3 ) 12...e8 13.f7+ d7
kingside. 14.e6+ e8 15.f7+;
485
A2) 9...d7 10.f7+ d8; out of useful moves and has to now solve the
B) 7...a5?! 8.g5 xb3 9.axb3 d5 problem of the bishop on f8. g6 13.bd2
10.0-0 g6 11.f3 f6 12.e1 e7 14.dxc5 xc5 15.b3 The opening has
here Black felt obliged to return the pawn definitely been a success from White's point
with c6 13.xe6 xe6 14.xe6 of view - Black still hasn't got castled and it's
and W hite had a good game in not easy to achieve here h5
T h o rh a lls s o n , T (2 4 5 5 )-Hja rt a rso n , J [ for example after 15...a5 16.d4 0-0?
(2628) Reykjavik 2005 ] runs into 17.xg6! fxg6 18.xg6+ h8
6.f3!? 19.xh6+ g8 20.g6+ h8 21.f4!
[ 6.c3 feels a little slow but it worked well in with a winning attack ]
Ya n k o vs k y , R ( 2 4 0 0 ) - T a yl o r, T (2 2 7 9 ) 16.d4 h4 17.e3 f8 This hardly solves
Beverly Hills 2011 after e6?! after blocking the problem 18.b2?!
in the c8 bishop Black is left in a bad French [ White should've taken the opportunity to
- the knight is hardly ideally placed on b6. gain more space with 18.a5 a8 19.h3
( 6...f5 is more logical and now 7.f3 e6 c7 20.b4 5a6 21.d3 and Black has a
8.0-0 c5 9.e3 c6!? gives roughly equal miserable position ]
chances ) 7.f3 e7 8.c2 d7 and here 18...a5 19.fe1 a8?!
9.a4! would've given White a very pleasant [ 19...h3! 20.g3 g8 would still have been
game ] better for White but at least here the pawn
[ 6.f3 has not really been tried but White on h 3 wo uld give B lack som e p rac t ic a l
should be a little better, for example c6 chances. After 21.2f3 h5 22.ad1 f8
( 6...f5 7.h4! d7 8.0-0 e6 9.g4 the position remains tense ]
and Black has problems developing on the 20.ad1 c7 21.e2 b8 22.c4!
kingside ) 7.0-0 g4 8.c3 e6 9.h3 h5 W hite starts to open the game up and of
10.a4 and White has slightly the better course his pieces are far the better
chances. ] coordinated here. h7 23.b5 c6
6...e6 7.g3 This sets Black some practical [ 23...h3 was still a better option ]
problems - how to develop the Bishop on f8? 24.f3 g8 25.h3 Finally White prevents the
c5 last of Black's counterplay and also prepares
[ 7...c6! is a sensible answer to this to bring the knight into the attack with Nh2-g4
problem. After 8.e2 e7 9.0-0 f5 g7?! There's no good reason to put the king
10.h3 Black can develop freely with e7 on the same diagonal as the bishop on b2
( 10...h4 also leads to a balanced game )] 26.h2
8.c3 [ 26.xc7 xc7 27.cxd5 xd5 28.xd5!
[ 8.dxc5 isn't dangerous as after 6d7 exd5 29.e6+ was already very strong but
9.f3 xc5 Black has no problems ] perhaps White didn't feel like take a risk in
8...a6!? such a strong position. After f6 30.e5!
[ 8...c6 is more logical - Black doesn't is crushing ]
need to worry about 26...d7 27.c3 b6 28.g4 xb5?
A) 9.e2 is probably best and now f6!? This brings an abrupt end to the game but
leads to interesting play af ter ( 9...c7 Black's position was already very unpleasant.
is safer ) 10.exf6 xf6 11.0-0 although I [ 28...g8 was more stubborn when one
probably prefer White here; possible continuation is 29.d6 f8 30.f3
B) 9.dxc5 as it can always be met with a8 31.f4 and Black is still completely tied
d7 ] up ]
9.f3 d7 10.c2 h6 29.axb5 b7 30.cxd5 xd5 31.xd5
[ 10...c7 11.0-0 g6 was probably a better and here Black resigned
option although W hite has a good game [ after 31.xd5 exd5 32.e6+ Black is losing
after 12.e1 g7 13.a3 0-0 14.g5 ] a lot of material - for example f6 33.e7
11.a4! Seizing space on the queenside and c7 34.xf6+ xf6 35.xf6 xf6 36.e8
preventing Bb5. c8 12.0-0 Black is running xe8 37.xe8 and the bishop can't be
486
taken due to mate on e5. ] isn't pleasant viewing for Black. W hite has
1-0 two bishops and substantially the more active
pieces Black's d8 knight being a particular
eyesore. I don't think Black can go on
484 B03 entering this endgame. 25.a4 f6 26.b4 a6
Illescas Cordoba,Miguel 2624 27.d7 g5 28.g3 h5 29.b5 axb5 30.axb5
Baburin,Alexander 2523 xa1 31.xa1 cxb5 32.xb5 g6 33.e1
15th ETC Gothenburg SWE (9) 07.08.2005 f7 34.d7 c6 A wee bit desperate, but
[John Cox] I 'm s u re p a ss ive d e f e n c e wo u ld n 't h a v e
helped either. Black isn't exactly threatening
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 to move any of his pieces. 35.e6+ g7
5.f4 The Four Pawns Attack has been the 36.b1+- xd4 37.xb7+ h6 38.xd5
weapon of choice for 2600 players against d8 39.c4 f5 40.e4 d4+ 41.b5
t h e A le k h in e j u s t re ce n t l y, a n d wi t h f a i r xe4 42.fxe4 xg3 43.hxg3 e5 44.e7
success, following the example of Kotronias A grim defeat for a great supporter of the
a n d p e r h a p s e s p e c i a l l y D o m i n g u e z i n Alekhine. All of a sudden the 4PA is looking
Dominguez-Almeida. dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 more menacing than it has done for many
7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 g4 years. Isn't Sveshnikov supposed to have said
O n e o f B la c k 's m o st re sp e ct e d syst e m s that one day the 4PA will refute Alekhine's
against the Four Pawns Attack. 10.e2 xf3 Defence? That day surely can't be upon us,
11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4 13.c5 d5 can it?!
[ 13...d7 14.b5 is an alternative, which is 1-0
usually regarded as a little better for White. ]
14.xd5 exd5 15.d2 xd2+ 16.xd2 g6
17.e3 Strictly a novelty, I think, although I 485 B03
know ECO mentions it with approval. White Ivanchuk,Vassily 2787
must be for preference in this endgame in my Carlsen,Magnus 2714
opinion. World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (13) 21.11.2007
[ 17.f4 h6 18.e3 e7 19.d3 f5 [John Watson]
20.xf5 gxf5 21.hg1 d7 22.g3 ag8
23.b4 xg3 was Atalik-de Firmian, 2002, in 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
which de Firmian managed to draw after 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7
losing a similar endgame to Timman the [ Baburin has played 6...c6!? , to avoid
previous year. ] Bd3, when 7.f3 g4 8.e2 e7 9.d5
17...f6 xf3 10.xf3 e5 11.e2 seems only
[ 17...e7 would be thematic of course, somewhat in White's favour. The game is
coming to f5, although one can see that just beginning. ]
t h e o m i s s i o n o f f 4 w o u l d g i v e W h i t e 7.d3 White has done well with this move
additional possibilities in the ending after over the past few years. c6 8.ge2 f6
an exchange on f5, especially of playing This bypasses
against the f5 pawn. Still I can't say that [ 8...0-0 9.0-0 f6 ( 9...e8 10.b3 f8 )
I'm wild about the positions arising after 10.c5! ]
the text either. ] 9.e3 0-0 10.b3
18.exf6 f7 19.b5 d8 The players agree [ Or 10.0-0 b4 11.b3 xd3 12.xd3
t h a t t h e e n d in g a f t e r B xc6 b xc 6 is t o b e g4 13.g3! and f3 will drive Black back to
avoided for Black. One can see that c7 is p a s s i v i t y . ( 13.f3 h5 14.g3 g6
going to be a long term problem, but Black h a s b e e n p l a ye d e ve n t h e n , f 4 - f 5 i s a
already has only a choice of evils, I fear. problem )]
20.d7 xf6 21.f4 e7 22.h3 c6 10...e8 11.0-0 g4 12.d2!
23.he1+ f7 24.d3 g7 After this very [ Or 12.c2 g6 13.d2 The point is that
natural sequence we can take stock, and it White avoids playing f3, which would only
487
encourage ....Bh5-g6. ] 486 B03

12...d5!? It's hard to find a good plan. Perhaps Jones,Gawain C 2593
[ 12...h5 13.f4 g6 14.xg6 hxg6 Baburin,Alexander 2539
15.e4 , but then Black has to cope with the Bunratty Masters (6) 27.02.2011
two bishops and a cramped game. ] [Gawain Jones]
[ The game Naiditsch, A (2581) -Timman, J
(2623)/Dortmund GER 2002 was annotated 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
by Glenn Flear on this site, and it clearly 5.f4 f5 I mentioned in the annotations of the
demonstrated that Black can't drift in the previous game that I saw Adam Hunt play the
opening in this line: 12...b4?! 13.b1 Four Pawns against Alex in an earlier round.
xe2 14.xe2 c5 15.a3 c6 16.a2! 6.f3
e7 17.h3 g6 18.d5 e5 19.c1 g7 [ That game continued: 6.c3
20.a4 bd7 21.c3 f5 22.g5 f6 A) 6...dxe5 7.fxe5 c6
23.xf6 xf6 24.e2 e7 25.f4! f7 A1) 8.f3 might be possible now that
26.xe7 xe7 27.e1 h4 28.e6 f8 Black has already committed his bishop
29.e2 d7 30.h2 a6 31.g3 f6 to f5.
32.g2 d8 33.e3 d4 34.g4! A1a) 8...b4 looks the critical test
and this break ensures W hite's clear 9.f2 c2 10.b1 b4 11.f4!?
advantage. This all seemed to grow ( 11.a1 c2=; 11.e6!? ) 11...xb1
organically out of the opening. ] 12.xb1 e6 13.e2 with interesting
13.c5 xe2 14.xe2 c8 15.fe1 8e7 compensation for the exchange.;
[ 15...d7 16.d1! and Bg4 follows A1b) 8...e6 9.d2 d7
anyway. ] 1/2-1/2 Farago, S (2292)-To, N (2375)
16.g4! g6 Budapest 2011.;
[ 16...g6 doesn't give the knight any future A2) 8.e3 e6 9.f3 would just
scope, for example, 17.ab1 b6 18.b4 transpose back into the mainline.;
bxc5 19.bxc5 b8 20.f3 xb1 21.xb1 B) 6...e6 7.e3 dxe5 8.fxe5 b4 9.f3
ce7 22.b7 with the initiative. ] c5 and Black seems to be fine. The game
17.e2 g7 18.ae1 f5?! 19.xf5 gxf5 is not yet available but, after talking to
Often Black can live with this pawn structure, Adam, he felt uncomfortable out of the
but here the dark squares are too weak and opening and eventually grovelled for the
Ivanchuk goes after them: 20.h6 xe2 half point. Hunt, A-Baburin, A, Bunratty
21.xe2 f6 22.xg7 xg7 23.d1! Masters 2011. Check Boroday, S (2395)-
Ivanchuk abandons the open file to cover his Moliboga, V (2295) Independence Cup,
only weakness. It's his knight that will do the Kyiv 2003 annotated by Andrew Martin
kingside damage. e8 24.f3! To cover e4. which shows what White has to avoid. ]
e7 25.g3 f6 26.e1 f8 27.e5 c6 6...e6 7.c3 Transposing to a position in
28.h5 g6 29.f4 f6 30.e3 which Carsten Hansen writes: "This is already
It's almost zugzwang. h6 31.g3 c8 32.f2 a sign that W hite is unsure about what is
No hurry. b6 33.h4 d8 34.h5 g6 going on. The correct move is 7 Be3, after
35.xe7 xh5 36.xa7 e8 37.xe8+! which 7...dxe5 8 fxe5 transposes to one of
xe8 38.cxb6 Black can't stop the pawn. f4 the main lines in Alekhine Four Pawns." I have
39.b7 fxg3+ 40.g2 A pretty finish. Amazing to confess to disagree. After studying the line
how accurate both players were in a Blitz above I couldn't find an advantage for White
game. a n d i n s t e a d t h i s s e e m s t h e b e s t wa y t o
1-0 progress. a6 8.d3 xd3 9.xd3 c5
Alex actually offered me a draw with this move.
We were both on 4/5, half a point ahead of a
group on 3.5 so a draw would guarantee first
equal but I wanted to try it outright. And I was
s t i l l i n m y p r e p a r a t i o n a f t e r a l l . 10.d5!
488
And this was my improvement. 16.0-0 and the d6 pawn is a major thorn in
[ 10.dxc5?! is looked at in the archives in Black's side.;
Djurhuus, R (2484)-Agdestein, S (2588) B) 12...e7 when a sample line could run:
Asker 2000 by Carsten Hansen in which 13.0-0 0-0 14.d1 b4 15.e3 d3
White had a disaster. However I don't think 16.ab1 e8 17.b3 dxe5 18.fxe5 xe5
this is down to his first nine moves. ] 19.xe5 f6 20.xc4 xc3 21.d6
[ 10.e3 was played against Baburin in an and White keeps an edge. ]
earlier game which is also interesting. b4?! [ 11...b4 12.e4 dxe5 13.0-0!
T h i s a p p e a r s t o b e a n e r r o r . ( 10...cxd4 and Black cannot take the d5 pawn due to
11.xd4 c8 looks more to the point the d file pin. ]
although 12.d1 xc4 13.exd6 xd6 12.0-0 0-0 13.e4 This was the end of my
14.f5! gives White strong play for the pawn.; analysis and I believed W hite should have
10...d5 is also interesting: 11.cxd5 c4 some advantage with his greater space but
12.d1 xd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.a4+ the position is fairly typical of an Alekhine.
d7 15.xc4 c8 16.b3 b4 c7
and Black's control of the light squares gives [ 13...f5 14.e2 c7 15.d1 and Black
him certain compensation f or the pawn would struggle to find counterplay. ]
although White should be better.) 11.e2 14.d1 e8? Baburin overlooks my next.
dxe5 ( 11...cxd4 might be the better move [ After the game Alex lamented that he
order. ) 12.fxe5 ( 12.xe5! cxd4 13.d1 s h o u l d h a v e p l a y e d 14...f6 However I
d3 14.xd3 xd3+ 15.xd3 c7 16.b5 believe White still has the advantage after
favours W hite.) 12...cxd4 13.xd4 c6 15.a4 ( 15.e6 f5 is the idea when Black will
14.f2?! ( 14.0-0-0! is m o re crit ica l.) have the f6 square for the bishop.; 15.b3
14...b4 15.0-0 xc3 16.bxc3 d7 is another idea.) 15...a5 16.e3 a6
with an unclear middlegame, Eames, R 17.f2 b4 18.b5 and I like White's
(2 3 1 1 ) - B a b u r i n , A ( 2 5 1 9 ) B i r m i n g h a m position. ]
2006. ] 15.f5! It looked like the pawn had to stay on f4
10...exd5 Alex played this after a long think to keep my centre but Black cannot take on e5
and was already getting a little low on time. due to d5-d6 therefore my pawns roll on and
[ Before the game I also looked at 10...b4 Black is probably already lost. h8
but 11.e2 dxe5 12.a3! is highly [ 15...f6 16.e6 is truly hideous as the bishop
unpleasant ] on e7 is terrible. ]
[ 10...dxe5 11.0-0!? ( 11.e4 exd5 16.f4
12.cxd5 c4 13.xe5+ e7 14.xg7 f6 [ The immediate 16.f6! is also very strong:
15.g4 is also good for White.) 11...exd5 gxf6 17.exf6 xf6 18.f5! d8 19.e4
( 11...exf4 12.e4 e7 13.dxe6 0-0 e8 20.fg5 xg5 21.xg5 f6 22.b3!
14.xf4 is great for White.) 12.cxd5 c4 with a crushing attack. ]
13.e4 and White regains the e5 pawn with 16...d8? And this natural move loses.
a definite edge. ] [ 16...d8! was necessary. I could still
11.cxd5 continue with 17.f6!? ( 17.a4 is still a clear
[ Carsten only looked at 11.xd5 when dxe5 edge. ) 17...gxf6 18.exf6 xf6 19.f5
12.xe5?! ( 12.0-0! may still favour White.) is very dangerous for Black. In particular the
12...xd5 13.cxd5 c7 is fine for Black. Of logical g8 can be met by 20.xd6! xd6
course computers have advanced hugely in 21.e4 ]
the past ten years and so mistakes are to 17.f6! Now this is completely winning. gxf6
be expected. ] 18.exd6 xd6 19.f5! I was pleased with
11...e7 finding this move. Now Black cannot defend
[ 11...c4 is an important alternative. 12.e2 the f6 pawn. xf4
A) 12...dxe5 13.xe5+ e7 ( 13...e7 [ 19...e7 20.e1 wins at least a piece. ]
14.xg7 f6 15.g4 appears to favour [ The fact that the computer feels that Black
White. ) 14.d6! xe5+ 15.fxe5 b4 is f o rce d t o p la y 19...cxd5 giving up a
489
piece highlights the huge problems he has. ] times recently. 10.c1 c5 11.a3 cxd4
20.xf6+ g8 21.xf4 Material is back to 12.xd4 c6 13.xf5 exf5 14.f3
level and Black's king is too vulnerable to ( 14.e2!? doesn't appear to have been
survive. d7 played but xd1+ 15.xd1 xe5 16.b5
[ It wa s im p o rt a n t t o se e t h a t 21...cxd5 e7 17.b3 gives White good compensation
22.xd5 xd5 23.g5+ h8 24.xd5 for the pawn he has the better structure,
wins a piece. ] bishop pair and Black struggles to develop.)
[ 21...d7 was necessary to survive more 14...g6 15.e2 h6?! Inventive but
than a couple moves but 22.e5 xd5 dubious. ( 15...g7 looks ok for Black.)
23.g5+ h8 24.f6+ g8 25.g4 h5 16.d1 e7 17.xh6 h4+ 18.f2 xh6
26.d3 will be mate shortly. ] 19.c5 d7 20.b5 e7 21.d6 dxe5
22.e5 e7 23.d6! and Alex resigned. 22.b4! and Black's position was very ugly.
[ 23.d6 xd6 24.xd6 xd6 25.g3+ h8 Bogut, Z (2451)-Sale, S (2400) Sibenik
26.xf7+ xf7 27.xd6 wins the queen. A 2010. ]
very pleasant first win for me against Alex 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4
and proof that the Four Pawns can also be 13.c5 d7 After this I was actually on my
dangerous for Black! I think the ball's in own but in fact I see it has been played more
Black's court at the moment to find a path often.
to equality. ] [ I investigated 13...d5 14.xd5 exd5
1-0 15.d2 xd2+ ( 15...f5 was tried against
me in round 8 of the Reykjavik Open (just as
this update was going to press). I trie d
487 B03 16.0-0-0 a5 Black has a cheap threat of ...
Jones,Gawain C 2593 Nb4xa2 but in the long run a5 has created a
Short,Nigel D 2658 weakness on b5 which could prove highly
Bunratty Masters (4) 26.02.2011 important. 17.d3 d7 18.a3 a4 19.f4
[Gawain Jones] g6 20.hg1 h5 21.f1! h6 22.h3
xf4+ 23.b1 e7 24.e6 0-0-0 25.exf7+
1.e4 f6 A slight surprise. Of course I b8 26.xg6 xh2 27.e6 and my f pawn
remembered annotating Nigel's game against proved decisive. Jones, G (2578)-
Peter Leko from last year but more recently S ve s h n i k o v, V ( 2 3 7 9 ) Re yk ja vi k O p e n
he's been doing very well with the Caro-Kann 2011. ) 16.xd2 in Bologan, V (2684)-
as we have seen. I couldn't decide what line Rozentalis, E (2628) Mulhouse 2010 and
t o p la y b u t n o t ice d t h a t A d a m Hu n t wa s came to the conclusion that Black has a very
playing the Four Pawns Attack against Alex tough task to hold the draw. ]
Baburin on board three. Considering it was 14.c1 I decided that this way of trading
the third round of the day and I suspected queens was logical and see that most players
Nigel was tired, the Four Pawns seemed a have agreed with me.
good choice. 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ I felt 14.d2 xd2+ 15.xd2 0-0-0
5.f4 dxe5 would be rather awkward here as Black has
[ Alex played 5...f5 against me in the last a lot of pressure against d4. ]
round which we'll examine next. ] [ In the archives I see 14.b5 given a note
6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 of approval but Nigel told me after the game
g4 This has been the choice of the higher that he had come to the conclusion that 14.
rated players recently. Qc1 was the most challenging. e7 15.0-0
[ W e l o o k e d a t 9...e7 10.d5 exd5 h4?! 16.xc6 bxc6 17.a4 0-0 18.ad1
in Velimirovic, D (2425)-Cmilyte, V (2514) ab8 19.xh4 xh4 20.f2 fd8 21.xc6
Marianske Lazne 2010 when I came to the Koch, J (2500)-Konopka, M (2425) Clichy
conclusion that 11.cxd5 is a better response 1993 being the relevant game when Black
than 11. Bxb6. ] had nothing to show for the pawn. Perhaps
[ 9...b4 has also been seen a couple of I'll t ry this next time ! Howe ver I'm sure
490
Nigel had an improvement prepared the only d5 ( 20...h6 21.f3 keeps everything
problem he told me was he couldn't under control.) 21.xd5 exd5 22.b3 e7
remember his analysis. ] 23.h4 and White has a very comfortable
14...xc1+ edge. It might be possible for Black to hold
[ 14...f5 15.b1 and Black cannot really but it's a thankless task. ]
avoid the queen trade. The rook is very 20...exd5 21.xd5 xd5?! Logical,
well placed on b1 to prepare b4-b5. ] especially in the third game of the day, but
15.xc1 0-0-0 16.a3 A slightly odd move but now Black struggles for the rest of the game.
I wanted to be able to play Be2-c4 without [ 21...g5! would have generated good
allowing Black to repeat with ...Na5. counter-chances. 22.f6 This seems best
Meanwhile I m ight a lso pre ss wit h b2-b 4 ( 22.e6!? fxe6 23.xe7+ xe7 24.xe6+
gaining even more space. b8 25.fxg5 xg5 26.0-0 f6 and Black
[ 16.f4 has been the most common and has equalised.; 22.fxg5 xe5 23.a2 h6
probably better but I didn't want to fix my 24.gxh6 xd5 25.xd5 xh6 26.g3
pawns yet. I believe White should have the de8 27.0-0 e3+ 28.h1 xc5 29.xf7
advantage here with more space and the xf7 30.xf7 e7 is likely to be a draw.)
bishop pair but he has to be careful as the 22...xd1+ 23.xd1 gxf4 24.xf7 xe5
d4 and f4 pawns are long term liabilities. g6 25.e6+ d8 26.c2 7g6 27.f5
is the move that concerned me when Black and I would have strong compensation for
will continue ...Bh6 followed by rerouting the pawn but Black also has his chances. ]
his knights as in the game with ...Ndb8, ... 22.xd5
Ne 7 a n d . . . Nb c6 wh e n b o t h p a wn s a re [ 22.xd5 is the alternative but I wanted to
somewhat vulnerable. ] delay the rook trade. ]
16...db8 I breathed a sign of relief here. 22...h6 23.h4 d7
[ 16...f6 17.f4 g6 18.b4! favours White. [ During the game I wondered whether
h6 19.b5 e7 ( 19...xd4 20.xd4 xf4 23...xf4 might be best although following
21.d1 xe5 gives Black three pawns for 24.xd8 xd8 25.e6!? fxe6 26.g2
t h e p i e c e b u t 22.c6 is very pleasant for White must have an edge. ]
White. ) 20.c6! bxc6 21.bxc6 b6 22.a6+ 24.f1
b8 23.exf6 ed5 24.e4 is very good [ I also considered 24.0-0 but I thought d8
for White. ] would be ok for Black. The main problem is
[ 16...g6 looks best. 17.e3 was my idea that now I cannot swap rooks easily as the
but as he was thinking it occurred to me that f1 rook is tied down to the f4 pawn. ]
( I should probably ignore Black with 17.c4 24...e8 25.f6 d8 26.b4 The opening
h6 18.d1 but e7 19.0-0 f5 20.fe1 has definitely been a success for White. Black
f4 certainly looks playable for Black.) is very passive and can only hope to grovel a
17...f6 is rather annoying as 18.f4 h6 draw. White's extra space helps but the main
is good for Black. You can see already how trump is the bishop pair. f8 So Nigel tries to
easy it is for White's position to go wrong. ] get rid of my bishop. 27.g2 e7 28.h3
17.d1 e7 18.f4 bc6 So Nigel has e6 29.xd7 Again I made this choice as it's
managed his typical knight manoeuvre for the the risk free continuation, keeping a definite
variation but White can stop Black taking any edge without any real chance of losing.
im p o rt a n t s q u a re s . 19.c4 g6 20.d5 [ The computer wants to play the illogical
I thought this was safest as, from a purely looking 29.f2 but trying to calculate ed8
s t r a t e g i c p o i n t o f vi e w, o p e n i n g u p t h e 30.xd7 xd7 31.d1+ e8 32.xd8+
position for the bishop pair and removing the xd8 33.xe6 fxe6 short on time and late
d5 outpost from Black, this change of at night isn't ideal. ( 33...xf6 34.exf6! fxe6
structure must favour W hite. However this 35.f3 e8 36.e4 f7 37.e5
allows Nigel a chance at equalising. and W hite wins as Black has less waiting
[ I s h o u l d h a v e w a i t e d w i t h 20.e2 moves. )]
which was the other move on my shortlist. 29...xd7 30.f5 gxf5 31.xf5 d8
491
[ Perhaps Nigel should have tried to generate B2) 40...c7 41.g5 d7 42.h4 e6
some counterplay on the queenside with 43.h5 e5 44.h6 xf6 45.xh7+- ]
31...b6 although it will still be similar to the 38.c3 g6 39.d4 bxc5
game. ] [ The computer prefers 39...e5 but I can't
32.d2 c6 33.h5 xf6 34.exf6 f8 see how it differs after 40.f5 ]
This was the position I was envisaging when I 40.bxc5 e5 41.f5
played my 27th move. Black is passively [ Of course I wanted to play 41.xd8 xd8
placed and the bishop is better than the knight. but after 42.d4 Otherwise Black can play
Also the c6 pawn is stuck on a light square ...Nd7 and his king reaches e6 before mine
while h7 is vulnerable so I decided a rook can get to e5. f3+ 43.e3 xh2 44.f4
trade would give me great chances. 35.h4 h5 45.g3 g4 46.xg4 hxg4 47.xg4
Preventing 35...Re4 and preparing Kd3, Re4. c7 and this seemed to be a draw to me.
b6 However the computer points out that this is
[ Nigel could have tried to activate his rook s t i l l a wi n : 48.f4 d7 49.f5 c7
with 35...e5 but I thought 36.g4 h5 50.e5 d7 51.a4 a5 52.f5 e8
( 36...g6 isn't playable as after 37.d4+ 53.g5 f8 54.h6 g8 55.h5! f8
White takes over the d7 square.) 37.g8 56.g5 and Black's in zugzwang as e8
e8 38.c8 should be good for White. The ( 56...g8 57.f5 h7 58.e5 g6
line might continue xh2+ 39.d3 h6 59.d6 ) 57.h6 d7 58.h7! e6
40.xb7 xf6 41.b5! cxb5 42.c6 f3+ 59.g7+- ]
43.d4 f4+ 44.d5 c4 45.d6 41...h5 42.h3 d7 43.xd7 xd7 44.c4!
when it looks like it should be lost for Black. ] [ The immediate 44.d3? is an error as now
36.d3 d5! 45.xd5 cxd5 46.d4 c6 47.h4 a6
[ 36.cxb6 axb6 37.g4 e6 38.a4 48.a4 a5 and this time White is in
is R y b k a ' s s u g g e s t i o n b u t I wa n t e d t o zugzwang. ]
c o n t in u e m y p l a n o f t ra d in g ro o ks a n d 44...d8 We already know that the king and
keeping his c6 pawn fixed. ] pawn ending is a win as long as Black cannot
36...c7 37.e4! The culmination of my plan. get his king to e6. Therefore I need to get my
d8+ king to e4 before trading rooks. 45.d3! c8
[ O f c o u r s e I h a d t o c a l c u l a t e 37...xe4 46.e4 b7 47.e5 c7 48.a4!
38.xe4 Keeping his rook tied down to the a7 pawn.
A) 38...bxc5 39.bxc5 g6 40.f5 h6 d7 49.h4 c7 50.f5 d7 51.g5 a5
41.g4 h4+ 42.e4 g6 43.h5 h8 52.e4 and White is winning as h5 drops. In
44.e5 a5 ( 44...d7 45.g4+ c7 fact I was very short on time by now and only
46.f5 a6 47.f4+- ) 45.xf7! xf7+ surviving on a 10 second a move increment
46.e6 g5+ 47.e7 and White has an and so stopped noting my moves but
easily winning king and pawn endgame.; eventually converted the whole point. It seems
B) 38...d7 Not forced but otherwise I to be that Black still has some problems in
don't see how Black gets his knight into this line and struggles to equalise.
the game. 39.xd7 xd7 40.f5 1-0
and Black ultimately can't defend against
Kg5, h4, h5 and Kh6xh7. The problem for
Black is I can triangulate with Ke5, f4, f5 i. 488 B03
e. Kam Lee Question
B1) 40...bxc5 41.bxc5 h6 42.h4 a6 Voronezh Alekhine Defence
( 42...h5 43.a4 a5 44.e5 c7 [John Watson]
45.f4! d7 46.f5 c7 47.g5+- )
43.a4 a5 44.e5 c7 45.f4 d7 Reader Kam Lee sent me a question about
46.f5 c7 47.g4 d7 48.h5 the line 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
e6 49.xh6 xf6 50.h5 and White b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7
wins.; 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 f5 "I was wondering if you
492
have any literature about this variation? I [ b) Perhaps the best move is simply
have read [a book] which shows that 10 g3 is 10...c6 : 11.g2 ( 11.d5 e5 12.g2
a big headache, but it seems Black is able to bd7! 13.ge2 c5 14.0-0 d7
attain dynamic play with [the variation below]. looks playable for Black) 11...e5 12.dxe5
I have analysed this variation with Fritz 7 [...] dxe5 13.xd8 xd8 14.c5?! ( 14.ge2 )
Do you know of other people who have 14...d7 15.ge2 e4! 16.0-0 de5
researched this line? I have checked the 17.b5 b4 18.g5? d7 19.a3 bd3
forum and the continuation with 9... f5 is not 20.c2 f8 21.e3 a6 22.bc3 g4
comprehensively discussed." First, I should 23.a4 xe3 24.fxe3 Rahal, M-Torrecillas
confess that 9...f5 has been neglected in this Martinez, A, Spain 2004 and Black was
column, by both me and my predecessors. It b e t t e r a f t e r 2 4 . . . R c 7 a n y w a y , b u t d8
keeps popping up as an alternative to the 25.b6 b8 26.b4 a5 27.b1 axb4
main line 9...e5, but has run into some 28.axb4 e6 shows the bishop pair at
serious problems. Let's follow Kam Lee's work. ]
analysis, into which I'll mix some theory: 10.g3 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.xd8 xd8 13.c5 f4!?
[ a ) A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t m o v e i s 10.h3 [ 13...6d7 14.c4+ h8 15.b5 c6
which hasn't been fully solved as far as I 16.d6 will win something. ]
can tell, for example, h6 ( 10...c6 11.d5 14.d2 6d7 15.c4+ f8
e5 12.e2 bd7 13.0-0 f6 14.f4 f7 [ 15...h8 16.b5!? ( 16.e4! looks very
15.f2 h5 16.h3 a6 17.a4 e5 18.dxe6 strong - a terrific outpost) 16...xc5 17.c7
xe6 19.f3 with a nice advantage, b6 18.xa8 b7 19.f3 xa8 (Black has
Fedorowicz-Shabalov, Tulsa 2008) 11.f4!? compensation) 20.b4 e4!? 21.fxe4 xe4
( 11.g3 c6 12.g2 e5 i s n ' t c l e a r) 22.h3 xh1 23.g5 Pavasovic-Bawart,
11...e6 12.d5 f7 13.e2 e8 14.0-0 Bled 1998 W hite stands better after c8
e6 15.dxe6 xe6 ( 15...xe6 16.d4 24.f7+ g8 25.d6+ ( 25.xe5+ f8 )
xd4+ 17.xd4 c6 18.f2 d7 19.f3 25...xc4 26.xc4 c6 27.gxf4 exf4
c5 20.cd1 should favour White) 16.d4 28.xf4 d5 29.b5! ]
xd4+ 17.xd4 c6 18.f2 with a limited 16.d5 Now Nc7 is impossible to prevent,
advantage, Malisauskas-Kupreichik, with the ideas of Nxa8 and the fork on e6. Mr
Moscow 1994. ] Lee suggests h6 , with indirect pressure on
[ b) Even 10.f3 f4 ( 10...e5?! 11.dxe5 d2. This might be particularly intimidating in
dxe5 12.xd8 xd8 13.c5 6d7 14.c4+ practice, but with the help of my computer,
f8 15.g5 f6 16.f7 e8 17.b5 ) I've come to doubt that this it's good enough
11.d2 , which appears fine for Black, has after 17.c7 f6
had some success for White, for example, [ I t w o u l d b e g r e a t i f 17...xc5
c6 12.d5 e5 13.xe5! xe5 14.e2 worked, because there are ideas of ..Rxd2
e6 15.dxe6 ( 15.f3!? ) 15...xe6 16.f3 and even ...fxg3 and ...g2! But it looks like
d5!? ( 16...d7 ) 17.cxd5 ( 17.c5 d4! ) W h i t e h a s t i m e t o p l a y 18.gxf4! b6
17...xd5 18.xd5 xd5 19.b4 xf3 ( 18...xd2 19.xd2 xf4+ 20.d1 xc1
20.xf3 V Ivanov-Chekhov, Moscow 1995, 21.xc1 b6 22.e2; 18...b5 19.xb5
and here Chekov suggests f7 21.0-0 f6 xd2 20.xc5! xa2 21.xa8 b7 22.f3 )
22.fd1 wi t h a li g h t e d g e , wh e n d8 19.e2 b7 20.g1 c6 21.xa8 xa8
( 22...d4 looks almost equal.) 23.xd8+ 22.d1 and Black lacks compensation. ]
xd8 should suffice to draw. ] 18.d1 e4 With some interesting-looking
10...e5 threats, but again, the calm response 19.gxf4
[ 10...h8 11.d5 e5 12.dxe6 xe6 is good: b5 (o r 1 9 . . . b 6 ) 20.cxb6 xd2
looks similar to the last note and ...Kh8 21.xd2 xd2 22.xd2 b7 23.f3
doesn't seem to help, e.g., 13.ge2 c6 , and White wins material, for example, axb6
14.g2 e7 15.d2 ad8 16.g5 f6 24.xa8 xa8 25.e2 xf4 26.h3 h6
17.xf6+ xf6 18.0-0 with a nice grip 27.d1 e7 , and if nothing else, 28.f2
Fressinet, L -Beudaert, X, Bordeaux 2005. ] c6 29.d5 b7 30.e4 dominates the
493
position. So 9...f5 still seems a bit dubious, move is good because all the alternatives
which is not to say that it can't be revived by are bad! 24.xb4 cxb2+ 25.b1
the right ideas. ( 25.xb2?? c8+ 26.b1 e4+ )
25...d5! 26.c4 f2! and I can't see any
way for W hite to make progress. 27.c8+
489 B03 f8 28.c4 f2 ]
Klinger,Josef 2495 24.e2!
Herndl,Harald 2325 [ After 24.e4?! interesting complications
ch Austria (4) 1985 could arise: xa2+ 25.c2 f2+ 26.b3
[Alexander Volzhin] xb2+ 27.a3 xb5 28.xe5 xe5
29.xa2 c4+ 30.b3 b5 with an unclear
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 position! ]
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 24...c7 25.e6+ h8 26.f1!! The point.
9.f3 e7 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 b4 Probably Black underestimated this move.
12.d4 d7 13.e6 The most dangerous Now the weakness of the back rank is
continuation. fxe6 14.dxe6 c6 15.g4 decisive. g8 It's difficult to find another
[ 15.h5+ g6 16.e2 ( 16.h6 h4+ square for the Rook:
17.g3 g5 ) 16...f6 17.c5 4d5 ] [ the exchange leads to a quick mate:
15...h4+ Black has to play this move which 26...xf1+ 27.xf1 h6 28.h3 hxg5
leads to wild complications- he has no choice! 29.e8+ h7 30.f5+ g6 31.xg6+ h8
[ 15...0-0 16.0-0-0 is simply bad for black. ] 32.h6+ g8 33.e6++- winning ]
16.g3 xh1 17.gxh4 [ and 26...c8 fails to 27.e8
[ White has tried 17.b5+ once, but Black with unavoidable mate. xa2+ 28.b1
found a sufficient defence: c6 18.0-0-0 0-0 xc3+ 29.bxc3+- mating ]
19.gxh4 h5! The only defence, as 27.f4! c8 28.xc8 xc8 29.c7!!
( 19...cxb5 lo s e s a t o n c e : 20.f5 f6 Another nice blow with the same idea: the
21.d4! ) 20.g3 cxb5 21.g5 ( Here w e a k n e s s o f t h e b a c k r a n k . xa2+!?
21.g1 is not good: f6 22.f5 xa2+! Other moves lose as well:
23.xa2 ac8+ 24.d1 f3+! ) 21...b8! [ 29...4d5 30.xd5 xd5 31.b1! xc7
22.e7 e8 23.xh1 xg3 24.hxg3 32.c1+- winning ]
and Black is slightly better, although White [ 29...a8 30.d7 g8 31.xa5+-
managed to hold the position in Velimirovic - winning ]
Kovacevic, 1984. ] [ 29...dxc3 30.xb6 xa2+ 31.c2 b4+
17...0-0 18.0-0-0 f6 19.b5 e5 32.b3 c2 33.xa5 c1 34.xc1 xc1
The alternatives are bad: 35.xb4+- winning ]
[ 19...f3 20.xf3 xf3 21.xf3 xf3 30.xa2 xc7+ 31.d2 g8 32.f4+-
22.xb6+- winning ] The endgame is easily won for W hite. c5
[ 19...c6 20.g5 e5 21.e7 fe8 33.e2 d5 34.b3! h6 35.g4 h7
22.f5+- winning ] 36.d3 b5 37.f5+ h8 38.e6 e5
20.g5! c5 21.e7 cxd4 22.exf8+ xf8 39.f8+ h7 40.f5+ g6 41.f7+ g8
23.xh1 During the previous ten moves both 42.xg6 d5 43.xb7 d7 44.e4 e5+
sides made the only moves. Now Black has 45.d2 d6 46.b5 g4 47.xa5 xh2
some cho ice, and he choo ses the wron g 48.d5+ g7 49.d3
move! a5? This move loses by force, 1-0
although White should play very accurately,
as there are some tricks. Let's consider other
possibilities:
[ 23...c5 is bad : 24.e6+ h8 25.e7
xa2+ 26.c2!! f2+ 27.b3! c7
28.d6! and White wins. ]
[ Black should play 23...dxc3! First of all this
494
490 B03 and I'm afraid I can't see why Ikonnikov

Kobalia,Mihail 2614 rejected it. The computer blithely tells us that
Ikonnikov,Vyacheslav 2560 15.d5 ( 15.a4 xd4 16.xd4 xd4
14th Monarch Assurance (5) 28.09.2005 17.xd4 xd4 18.xe7 xc5 19.xb7
[John Cox] ab8 is pretty equal too) 15...b4 16.f4
doesn't work because of xc3 17.xc3
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 xd5 18.xd5 xd5 , and that disposes of
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 both White's natural tries. ]
0-0 9.e2 Refreshing to see someone playing 15.dxe5 c6
a move that isn't b3 here. This is a bit of a [ It's not obvious that 15...xe5 was bad:
hybrid of the ideas of the Voronezh and the 16.f4 e8 17.xd3 cxd3 18.d2
main line: White is still well-placed to meet 9... ( 18.b3 d2 19.xd2 xd2 20.xb7
Nc6 with 10 d5 Na5? 11 b3 (this is the point a6 because 21.xa6? xc3 wins )
of Rc1, to defend c3 and allow this), and is 18...a6 19.b5 d7 , but White may be
refusing to allow ...Bg4 just as in the main line a b l e t o a rra n ge t o a b so r b t h e d -p a wn ,
he plays h3 to stop that, but is not protecting perhaps with f4 and Nd6 at some point. ]
c 4 a g a i n s t B l a c k ' s o t h e r t yp i c a l f r e e i n g 16.e6
m a n o e u v r e . d5 10.c5 c4 Exactly: the [ 16.f4 f6 17.exf6 xf6 gives Black a lot of
logical reply. As far as I know Ikonnikov has play once the knight cannot go to f4 the d3
never played the Alekhine before, but maybe bishop is there to stay and is a real bone
he's got a copy of the GW , because I see I in White's throat. ]
said airily there that this was 'the answer' to 16...fxe6 17.f4 d7 I think Black ought to
White's sequence. 11.xc4 dxc4 12.ge2 be fine here despite his somewhat ragged
Compared to the position which often enough pawns: his pieces are active. 18.b3 e5
arises after 7 h3 Bg7 8 Nf3 00 9 Be3 Nc6 10 19.ce2 xf4 A remarkable decision.
Rc1 d5 11 c5 Nc4 12 Bxc4 dxc4 W hite has Ikonnikov must have seen something wrong
lost the tempo h3, which probably isn't a great with the natural
matter, but has gained the chance to develop [ 19...ad8 , but I don't see what it was.
t h is k n i gh t vi a e 2 . I n ci d e n t a l ly, t h e n e w 20.bxc4 f5 21.xd7 xd7 doesn't seem
webzine chesschronicle.org carries an to be too frightening, and if not that then
excellent little article by CC IM M J Donnelly what? ]
advocating the new move 13 00 Bf5 14 Qa4 20.xf4
Bd 3 1 5 Rf d 1 an d n o w 1 5 . . .Q e 8 ! ? , wh ich [ Also a bit surprising: Kobalia abandons the
seems to equalise handily. My thanks to Phil Nf 4 no tion . 20.xf4 e5 21.xd3 cxd3
Adams for drawing this to my attention. f5 was certainly possible and the machine likes
[ 12...c6 13.0-0 e5 14.b5 exd4 it , wit h t h e p la n n o w o f 22.c4 fe8
15.exd4 e5 16.d2 b6 17.b4 cxb3 23.e4!? I've tried this out a couple of times
18.axb3 a6 19.d6 bxc5 20.e2 e6 and W hite does seem a little better,
21.xc5 with equality had been the initial although it's understandable why W hite
o u t in g f o r 1 2 N g e 2 in T u r o v- T . I v a n o v, steered clear. ]
Nizhnii Novgorod 1999, but Ikonnikov has 20...f7 21.g3 e5 22.c3 ad8
a different idea. I watched this game and I Round about here I had a look and thought
don't think preparation was involved on Black wa s do in g pret ty well, b ut K ob alia
either side, or if it was the players were manages to find some play. 23.b5 d5
certainly hiding it well. ] [ 23...cxb3 24.d6 xd6 25.cxd6 b2
13.0-0 d3 14.e1 A slightly limp plan, 26.xd3 bxc1 27.xc1 xa2?!
normally W hite plays Qa4 and Rfd1 in this ( 27...d8 is better although White is still for
variation. Kobalia just wants to threaten Nf4 preference.. ) 28.d7 favours White. ]
as soon as possible. e5 24.d6 b5
[ A curious moment. 14...c6 is far and [ Necessary after 24...b6 White gains the
away the most natural way to restrain Nf4 advantage with 25.h4 b8 , and now the
495
neat knight pirouette 26.xc4 bxc5 27.b2 12.d2 c6? He's making it up as he goes
e4 28.a4 ] along....it seems. Theory independent of the
25.xb5 xc5 26.bxc4 xc4 27.g4 last note runs :
xb5 28.xc4 White evidently stands slightly [ 12...g6 13.e1! c5 14.a3 ( 14.f4!?
better here but Black's well centralised army cxd4 15.xd4 c8 16.a3 c6 17.axb4
should be able to cope. d4 29.cc1 f5 xd4 18.xa7 c2 19.c1 c7 20.c5
30.h3 d5 31.c7 a5 32.h2 e6 33.e7 xb4!! 21.cxb6 xb6+ 22.h1 xa7
f4 34.xf4 xf4 35.g5 xf2 36.7xe5 23.xb4 e3! ) 14...xc3 15.bxc3 c8
d6 37.g3 f6 38.xa5 xg3+ 39.xg3 16.c1 e7 17.h4 cxd4 ]
d3+ 40.h2 g7 41.e2 h5 42.a3 h6 13.de4 Of course White isn't interested in
43.a2 f4 44.a4 h4 45.a8 d1 repetition. d7 14.g3 g6 15.f4 ad8
In TWIC the game ends in a draw here: in fact 16.h4! Unsettling the Bishop on g6 seems to
it continued for over another hundred moves be the key to this line. xc3 17.bxc3 a5
and the best part of three hours. They breed 18.f1 c6 19.h5 c2 20.g4!
them tough in Mother Russia, though, and the departure of the Bishop has uncovered a
Ikonnikov managed to hang on despite v e r y s e n s i t i v e s p o t . axc4 21.xg7+
having mislaid a pawn during the time Oh ! Qf6+ and Bh6 is not to be denied.
scramble. White seems to have pretty good 1-0
winning chances to me after 46 g3, but it
wasn't to be.
½-½ 492 B03
Kondenko,Alexey 2242
Volkov,Andrei 2209
491 B03 Voronezh FIDE Open (5.3) 16.06.2011
Kobese,Watu 2400 [Milos Pavlovic]
Bouah,Lyndon 2175
ch-Kempton Park RSA (8) 2003 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
[Andrew Martin] 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
9.f3 e7 10.e2 The Four Pawns Attack is
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 always a dangerous set up in Alekhine's, this
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 time White chooses a modest line but there is
9.f3 b4 I think I prefer this line without... still some play here. 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6
Nc6 thrown in (5...Bf5 etc) . xf6 13.d2 e7 14.ad1 ad8 15.c1
[ 9...b4 He changed his mind after the h8
coming debacle. 10.c1 c5 11.a3 cxd4 [ A recent idea to put pressure on d4 directly
12.xd4 c6 13.xc6 bxc6 14.f3 c7 is not that good: 15...g4 16.e4 c8
15.b5 cxb5 16.xb6 xe5+ 17.e3 17.xf6+ gxf6 18.h3 h5 19.fe1 b8
d6 18.d4 xe3+ 19.xe3 bxc4 20.f2 g7 21.h4 xe2 22.xe2 de8
20.xc4 0-0 21.0-0 e5 22.f2 fc8 23.d3 h8 24.de3 Piscopo, P-Sorbera,
23.b4 c7 24.d2 h6 25.g3 ac8 26.c5 G Forni di Sopra ITA 2011, although the
xc5 27.bxc5 xc5 28.f2 f6 29.h4 g5 game ended in a draw W hite is obviously
30.h5 g4 31.xe6 xc1 32.xf5 c3 much better at this stage. ]
33.d3 1/2-1/2 Bhawoodien,S-Bouah,L/ch- 16.h1 h6 17.h3 h7
RSA, Kempton Park RSA 2003 More [ Relevant: 17...g6 18.b3 a6 preventing
acceptable . ] c5 -B b 5 i d e a s 19.g1 d7 and now my
10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 a5 suggestion looks promising: originally in one
[ 11...xc3 is an older line. Perhaps there's game was played the more cautious:
no need yet to be so committal. 12.bxc3 A) 20.d3N xd3 ( 20...h5 21.e3!
a5 13.d2 d7 14.f4 g6 15.f1 c5 xd4 22.xd4 xd4 23.e2! xe2
16.b3 a4 17.xc5 c6 18.h4! 24.xe2 White is winning.) 21.xd3 c8
White's better here for sure. ] 22.dd1 with a small but in my opinion
496
lasting pressure as White's pawn structure xg2 63.c6 f6 64.c8 h3 65.h8 h2
is better than Black's.; 0-1
B) 20.fe1 f7 21.f1 e7 22.fe1
f7 23.f1 A draw was agreed in
Zilberstein, D -Baburin, A San Fransisco 493 B03
2007. ] Kornilovich,D 2166
18.g1 d7 19.fe1N An interesting idea. Deviatkin,Andrei 2512
[ Some earlier examples: 19.d2 fd8 XII TCh-1st League (6) 07.02.2005
20.fd1 e8 21.b3 e7 22.d3 xd3 [John Cox]
23.xd3 g6 24.f4 c5 25.e4 e5
A) 26.dxe5 g5 ( 26...xd3 27.xd3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
xd3 28.exf6 gxf6 29.xc5 This position 5.f4 g5 Oh yes indeedy! Deviatkin is a new
is also promising for White.) 27.xd7 xf4 name to me, but he has been playing the
28.xd8+ h7 29.xc5 looks winning for Alekhine in delightfully offbeat fashion lately
White; (1 e4 Nf 6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 Nf 3 Nb6 is
B) 26.xe5 xe5 27.xe5 c6 28.f4 another line he favours) and here becomes
cxd4 29.c5 f7 30.h4 df8 perhaps the highest-rated player ever t o
Simon, O -Velicka, P Cappelle la Grande venture this rather splendid move (unless
2002, here also White is better with the Pla n in c wa s o ve r 2 5 0 0 in 1 9 7 0 ? ). 6.exd6
simple 31.Bxd4. ] xd6 7.e2 The authorities are surprisingly
19...f7 20.c5 d5 21.b5 This is a key divided on the best way to ref ute Black's
id e a h e r e - b y p i n n in g t h e k n i g h t W h i t e cheeky 5...g5 but this certainly isn't it: the
prepares to control both the e-file and the e5- point of 6 exd6 was to play 7 c5 now when
square h5 22.d3? Going forward and Black plays 7...Qe6+ and now you can choose
then back is not to be recommended. - Hort thought 8 Qe2 was strong (probably
[ 22.h2! Is much more to the point, and in wrong - 8...Nd5 9 Qxe6 Bxe6 10 fxg5 Bg7 11
my opinion White can hope for something Nf 3 Nc6 1 2 Bb 5 Nd b4 is n ice f o r Blac k),
more then equality. e7 23.d2 a6 Davies gave 8 Kf2 (8...Nd5 9 Bc4 gxf4 10 Qf3
24.xc6 bxc6 25.e4 a complicated game c6 11 Bxf4 Qg6 unclear-Davies), I favoured 8
is ahead of us, but surely W hite has the Be2 (8...Nd5 9 fxg5 Bg7 10 Nf3 Nc6 11 Nc3
better chances here. ] 00 12 Qd2! is good for White according to me)
22...xd3 23.xd3 f5 24.dd1 g5 and unless my eyes deceive me Fritz likes 8
25.e4 g7 26.g3 g6 Black has easy Ne2 (No, I've no idea what he's thinking about
p l a y h e r e . 27.b1 xb1 28.xb1 f4 either). c5! 8.c3 xd4 9.xd4 cxd4
Black is already prepared to win a pawn that 10.b5 a6 11.fxg5
guarantees him a much better endgame, [ 11.xd4 g7 12.gf3 g4 13.e5 d7
which he was able to convert into a full point. is also fine for Black. ]
29.e4 xh3 30.e3 f4 31.b4 d5 11...e5 12.f3 g7 13.c5 d5 14.d6+
32.b5 d8 33.d2 h7 34.b3 c6 e7 15.xa6 bxa6 I believe I shall allow
[ 34...f6 35.e2 g4 ] myself an 'unclear' verdict. 16.0-0
35.e5 xe5 36.xe5 f6 37.c3 g4 [ White might have tried going straight for f5
38.e1 f6 39.e4 xe4 40.xe4 cxb5 with 16.h4 . Evidently if he can't make
41.xb5 ff7 42.h2 c6 43.b2 d8 something happen quickly he is rather likely
44.be2 d5 45.e1 fd7 46.c3 f5 to lose in the long run. ]
47.g3 g6 48.a5 b6 49.b4 bxc5 16...e6 17.d2 hd8 This is the trouble.
50.xc5 h5 51.b2 f6 52.b8 c6?! Black is just going to take on d6, and there's
53.e8 nothing much to be done about it. After that
[ 53.g8+ g7 54.e8 is not so clear. ] Black's small material investment doesn't
53...f5 54.f3 h4 55.e3 b7 56.c8? matter compared to his centre pawns, two
b1 57.xc6 e1+ 58.d3 xe4 59.e7 bishops and massive knight, while the e6
f7 60.xg5 g4 61.c5+ g6 62.e3 bishop keeps White's rooks out of the game,
497
since they can't get anywhere on the f-file and 494 B03
c6 is out of bounds on the c-file. 18.a5 xd6 Kortschnoj,Viktor 2575
19.cxd6+ xd6 20.d2 e3 21.fc1 d5 Miles,Anthony J 2595
22.c7 d3 I'm not sure about this. In Biel (12) 1992
conjunction with his next it's an [Alexander Volzhin]
understandable idea, but positionally it's
terrible. 22..Nxg2 or 22...e4 were alternatives. Some W hite players don't like the wild
23.ac1 c2 The plug, quite a trendy complications that are unavoidable in the
positional idea just now, but I'm not sure Fritz Four Pawns Attack. I can recommend them
isn't right that grabbing material with the following system. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5
[ 23...xg2 wasn't stronger. ] 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6!? Currently this
24.1xc2 White's always going to be worse harmless looking move is very popular. Black
after this. has two possible recaptures. Let's deal with 5...
[ 24.c4+ e6 25.c3 (Fritz) puts up a ed first. exd6 6.c3 e7 7.f3!?
much better fight, hoping to trade the dark- /\\0-0-0 A very interesting idea.
squared bishops and perhaps bring the king [ Of course, White can castle kingside: 7.f3
to f2 and knight to e3 to exchange the c2 g4 8.e2 c6 9.d5 xf3 10.xf3 e5
knight and establish a blockade on the dark 11.e2 0-0 12.b3 f6 13.b2 g6 14.0-0
squares. ] d7 15.g3 Dvoiris-Kengis Barnaul 1988,
24...dxc2 25.xc2 h6!? In the long run you with a slight advantage. ]
wouldn't think W hite can hope to resist the 7...c6
connected pawns and the two bishops after [ I can recommend trying 7...c6!? intending
this, but he still has some surprising and d5, for example 8.e3 0-0 9.0-0-0 d5!
instructive resources.. 26.gxh6 xh6 27.f2 10.c5 6d7 with 11...b6 to follow with
f5 28.c4+? counterplay. ]
[ 28.c7+ e6 29.f3 was much better 8.e3 0-0 9.0-0-0 f5?! After this game 7.Qf3
and thematic: White has to aim to drive the became popular, and several games have
pawns on the light squares and blockade been played in this line since. In this position
them on the dark. Since e4? 30.d4+ f6 Black has tried various different moves:
31.c5 e3+ 32.e2 turns in White's favour [ 9...f6 10.h4 e6 11.b3 d5 12.c5 c8
Black is forced into something like 29...Rc8 13.h3 b6 14.g5! with a clear edge,
30 Rc3 Bxf3, when 31 gxf3 gives W hite Chernyshov - Kopylov, 1993. ]
decent chances to survive. ] [ 9...e6 10.c5! c4?! ( either 10...d7; or
28...e6 29.e3 e4 Now Black is back on 10...c8 should be preferred) 11.f4 f6
track. 30.c7 12.d5 4e5 13.e2 g6 14.e3 xc3
[ 30.c3!? ] 15.bxc3 f6 16.dxe6 xc3+ 17.c2
30...xe3+ 31.xe3 xg2-+ 32.g7 f4+ and White was winning in Leyva - Medina,
33.d3 c6 34.c7 d5 35.g5 e8 Cuba, 1994. ]
36.b3 b5+ 37.d2 e4 38.a4 d7 39.h4 10.g3 f4? Consistent but bad. 11.gxf4 f5
f5 40.g7 h3 41.e2 e6 42.f2 h6 12.c5! Probably Black missed this. Now
A throwback to the good old days when White W h i t e ' s a d v a n t a g e i s u n d i s p u t e d . d7
used to go for the Alekhine and chaotic games 13.h3! The exchange of light squared
like this were much commoner - nowadays it bishops clearly favours White. He intends d4-
can all be a bit too much like the Caro-Kann. I d5 and the transfer of the Knight to e6. h8
hope to see more of Mr Deviatkin. 14.d5 cb8
0-1 [ 14...b4? 15.xf5 xf5 16.e4+-
winning ]
[ 14...a5 15.xf5 xf5 16.e4 f8
17.b4+- winning ]
15.cxd6 cxd6 16.xf5 xf5 17.ge2
/\\Nd4-e6 f7
498
[ 17...a5?! 18.e4 f7 19.e6 g8 [ 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 6xd5
20.d4 /\\Nf5+-winning ] 13.xd5 ( 13.xf5 xf5 14.xd5
18.hg1 0-0-0 ) 13...xd5 14.xf5 b4+
[ 18.d4 is not bad either. ] ( 14...0-0-0!? 15.d3 g6 ) 15.e2 0-0-0
18...a6 19.h5 16.d6+ xd6 17.xd5 f5 ]
[ 19.d4!? c8 20.e6 e8 21.b1 10...0-0-0
e5!? 22.h3 c4 23.d4 f6 24.xf6 [ 10...d8 11.0-0 g4 12.g5 ( 12.c5 d5
gxf6 25.h6+- winning ] 13.xd5 xd5 14.g5 xe2 15.xe2
19...e8 20.d4 c8 21.b1 ac5 d7 16.f2 d8= )
22.e6 f6 23.h3 fe4 A) Black must put his faith in the
[ 23...xe6? 24.dxe6 f8 25.g5 complications after 12...xc4!? 13.f2
/\\Rdg1+-winning ] ( 13.xf7 xe3 14.xd7 xd1 15.xd8+
24.d4 f6 25.xe4 xe4 26.e3! xd4 xd8 16.xg4 e3 ) 13...xd4!?
[ 26...c5 27.xf6 gxf6 28.f5+- ] 14.xg4 xe5 15.h3 e7 16.e3 h6
27.xd4 f6 28.xg7!+- winning 17.h5 g6 18.h4 c5 19.g3 xg5
[ 28.xg7? xg7 29.xf6 g6+ ] 20.xg5 ef3+ 21.gxf3 hxg5
28...e4+ A good memory and strong nerves are
[ 28...xg7 29.xf6 f8 30.d4+- required!;
winning ] B) 12...xe2? 13.xe2 xd4 14.xd4
29.xe4 xe4 30.e6 Straightforward xd4+ 15.h1 d7 16.ad1 xc4
technique. f5 17.f3 c6 18.ce4 d5 19.xf7 g8
[ 30...xf2 31.d4! ><Nf2 g8 ( 31...h3 20.fg5 h6 21.h7 b4 22.a3 a5
32.g3 f2 33.h3! /\\Rf 3+-winnin g) 23.xd5 exd5 24.hf6+ gxf6 25.xf6+
32.xg8+ xg8 33.c4+- winning ] d8 26.xg8 e6 27.f8+ e8
31.f3 f2 32.d2 h3 33.g4 h5 34.h4 28.xe8+ xe8 29.f6+ e7 30.xd7
g1 35.g5 e8 xd7 31.f6 d2 32.g4 d4 33.g2 d3
[ 35...g7 36.g2+- winning ] 34.f3 c1 35.xd3+ e6 36.b4 xe5
36.xh5+ g8 37.g2 e1+ 38.c2 e2+ 37.f3 c6 38.a4 b6 39.h4 b2 40.d7
39.xe2 xe2 40.e4! xf4 41.d2 d4 a5 41.bxa5 bxa5 42.a7 c3 43.h7
42.e3 f5 43.xd4 d2 44.e2 c1 45.a7
[ 43.xd4 xh5 44.f6++- winning ] 1-0 Hamalainen,S-Eriksson,J/TCh-FIN
1-0 2002 The last word has yet to be written
after 10..Rd8, but Black is only just
hanging on. ]
495 B03 11.0-0
Kotronias,Vasilios 2570 [ 11.d2 b4! ]
Short,Nigel D 2690 11...f6!? I think Nigel Short is trying to
Masters, Catalan Bay (5) 2003 surprise Kotronias with this rare continuation.
[Andrew Martin] Objectively, Black's concept is very dubious.
[ The more common 11...g4 also appears
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 bad: 12.c5! d5 13.xd5 xd5 14.b4!
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 e4 15.b3 xd4 16.xd4 xe2
9.f3 d7 A contributor to the forum asks 17.xe2 d3 18.a4 xe3+ 19.h1
about 9...Qd7. He doesn't like the forcing xe2 20.xa7 d2 21.a8+ d7
lines after 9...Be7 and prefers to enter a less 22.xb7 Minasian-Doncenk inasian-
played variation. 9...Qd7 attempts to step up Doncenk inasian-Doncenko USSR 1988
the pressure on d4 at the cost of an awkward Black is hemmed in and his King f ace s
Queen position. My feeling is that the line immediate peril. ]
works well if White tries to blast Black from 12.d5!? A sharp pawn sacrifice apparently
the board i.e. 10 d5?!, but after 10 Be2 Black originating from Mikenas, thus dating the
has serious problems to solve. 10.e2! variation!
499
[ Safest is 12.exf6 gxf6 13.d5 which leads 496 B03

to an advantage in all lines: g7 ( 13...exd5 Kupreichik,Viktor D
14.xb6! axb6 15.cxd5 c5+ 16.h1 Alburt,Lev O
e7 17.h4! g6 18.xf6 b8 19.b5 USSR Ch 1st League (16) 1978
xd5 20.a4 ) 14.b3! g8 15.f2 exd5 [Nigel Davies]
16.cxd5 b4 17.d4 h3 18.e6
( 18.f3 ) 18...xe6 19.dxe6 d3 20.xd3 A game between these two should receive
xd3 21.e1 ] top billing in the theory stakes. Kupreichik is
12...xe5 the leading exponent of the White side of this
[ 12...exd5 13.xb6 axb6 ( 13...cxb6 line, Alburt has championed the Black cause
14.cxd5 e7 15.exf6 gxf6 16.h4 g6 for many years. On this occasion an Alburt
17.xf6 ) 14.a4 ] experiment goes badly wrong. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
[ 12...e8 13.xb6 axb6 14.a4 a5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f4 dxe5 5.fxe5 f5 6.f3
15.b5! ] c5?! In conjunction with 5...Bf5, this looks
[ 12...f7 13.b3 e7 14.d6! cxd6 quite suspicious to me. Alburt tends to rely
15.xb6 axb6 16.exd6 xd6 17.b5 more on deep analysis than gut instinct, but
Taking the Knight on b6 helps to propel the sometimes the analysis can be flawed.
White attack. ] [ 6...e6 7.d3 xd3 8.xd3 c5
13.xe5 fxe5 14.a4! a5 15.b5 b4 leads to positions considered in the notes
16.d6! Black's problems are easily visible. to Vitolinsh - Smit. ]
Short is reduced to a disgusting move. a8 [ 6...c6 is interesting as after 7.a3 ( 7.d3
[ After 16...c5 White should concentrate on can be met by xd3 8.xd3 db4 9.e4
exchanging o f f the Bisho p on b4 which xd4 ) 7...e6 8.c4 b6 9.c3 g4
holds Black's position together. To that end 10.e3 there is a transposition into a line of
both 17.c1! and ( 17.g5 df8 18.d2 the Four Pawns Attack in which White has
look very strong. )] played the passive a2-a3. ]
17.c5 b8 18.f3 c6 UGH! Computer 7.b5+ c6 8.c4 c7 9.0-0 e6 10.xc6+
programs like Black but the reorganisation of bxc6 11.a4 d7 12.e3 Putting Black in
his position takes far too much time and White deep trouble. W hite wants to capture the
has a clear advantage now. 19.a3 e4 pawn on c5 and then occupy the d-file. a5
20.e2 b6 Had to come. Who could Black wants to cover c5 by bringing his knight
imagine Nigel Short with a Knight on a8! to a6. But if such artificial means are
21.cxb6 xd6 22.xd6+ xd6 23.ad1 necessary it's a very bad sign.
hd8 24.xd6 xd6 25.g4 d2 26.f2 [ 12...cxd4 13.xd4 hits both c6 and f5. ]
b7 27.c4 White's composure is 13.c3 a6 14.ad1 e7 15.dxc5 c7
particularly impressive. Kotronias 16.d6! Preventing Black from recapturing on
understands that the Knight on a8 makes the c5 by sacrificing the exchange. The massive
Black position very tough to manage. d5 passed pawn on d6 provides plenty of
28.gxf5 exf5 29.d1 b4 30.e3 g6 compensation. xd6 17.cxd6 d7 18.xa5
31.f2 Oh for a chance to get those Kingside 0-0 19.a4 b7 20.b6 d7 21.d4 e4
pawns moving. White moves to strip the board 22.b3 fb8 23.d4 c2 24.b6
of active Black pieces. xd1 32.xd1 c5 W inning back the exchange. The rest
33.b3 xb6 The Knight re-emerges... requires little comment, with Alburt continuing
34.xb6 xb6 35.g8! All the pawns drop, a bit longer than he should. xb6 25.xb6
one by one. If Black must shun the main line d3 26.c1 f5 27.exf6 gxf6 28.d4 g6
of the Four Pawns, i.e. 9...Be7,how about 29.xf6 f8 30.e7 xe7 31.dxe7 e8
another look at 9... Bg4 or 9...Nb4. To be 32.g5 b4 33.c5 h6 34.h4 d3
honest, I feel that the best days of 9...Qd7 are 35.xd3 xd3 36.b3 e5 37.f2 a8
long gone. 38.e3 e4 39.a4 b8 40.d4 f7 41.c3
1-0 g8 42.g1 c5 43.a5 g6 44.f2 xe7
45.xc5+ d7 46.b4 e2 47.b5 h5 48.a6
500
c8 49.e3 d6 50.d4 6...cxd4 7.xd4 c6 8.b5

1-0 [ As Black can probably equalise after this,
Kupreichik later tried 8.e4!? and after g6
9.c4 b6 ( 9...e6!? 10.g5 g7
497 B03 11.xe6 fxe6 12.0-0 b6+ 13.h1 0-0-0
Kupreichik,Viktor D gave Black interesting counterplay in Gipslis
Kengis,Edvins - Freisler, Pardubice 1996) 10.b3 g7
USSR Club Ch 1990 11.0-0 f5 12.f4 0-0 13.c3
[Nigel Davies] had a secure space advantage. ]
8...a5+
A n o t h e r A l e k h i n e e xp e r t t r ie s t o d e f u s e [ Kengis later suggested 8...f5 followed by
K u p re ic h ik 's p e t , a n d wit h s li gh t ly m o r e ...e6 as being a simpler route to equality. ]
success than Alburt from a theoretical point of 9.c3 xc3 10.xc6+ bxc6 11.d2! b5
view. Af ter 8.Bb5 it looks as if Black can 12.xa5 xd4 13.xd4 e6 14.0-0-0
equalise with 8...Bf5, which later sent [ 14.xc6 b7 15.d4 c5!?
Kupreichik off in search of an alternative 8th allows Black's bishops to become strong.
move. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f4 Kupreichik wisely opts to keep Black bottled
dxe5 5.fxe5 c5 6.f3 White has tried a up. ]
couple of alternatives, but without notable 14...d7 15.d3! c5 16.hd1! a4
success: [ Capturing the knight is too dangerous,
[ After 6.b5+ Bagirov recently played c6 Kengis giving the line 16...cxd4 17.xd4
and obtained good counterplay after c6 18.d8+ xd8 19.xd8+ e7 20.c8
( In Vitolinsh - Bagirov, Frunze 1979 he was e8 21.c7+ d7 22.xa7
under some pressure after 6...d7 7.xd7+ with 3 connected passed pawns and
xd7 8.f3 cxd4 9.xd4 e6 10.0-0 h6 ongoing development problems for Black. ]
11.a3 c6 12.d3 d7 13.c4 5b6 17.a3 d7 18.f3 c6 19.c4 e7 20.c7
14.bd2 a5 15.b3 e7 16.b2 c5 g5 21.d6 g4 22.xe7
17.e2 0-0 18.d4 ) 7.c4 c7 8.xc6+ [ The immediate 22.e1 would have been
bxc6 9.f3 g4 10.e3 cxd4 11.xd4 better. Now Black comes close to equality. ]
xd4 12.xd4 d7 13.c3 g6 14.0-0-0 22...xe7 23.e1 a5 24.d6 hc8 25.g3
g7 in Khalafov - Bagirov, Baku 1998 ] h5 26.d3 c7
[ White has also tried to transpose into a [ A m o r e a c t i v e t r e a t m e n t i s 26...e4!?
Four Pawns Attack with 6.c4 but here he a f t e r wh ic h 27.f4 f5 28.xh5 h8
h a s t o re c k o n wit h b4! when ot looks gives Black counterplay. ]
difficult for White to justify his play. Zapata - 27.f4 g8?! After White's reply, the h-pawn
Tal, Subotica Interzonal 1987 continued gets fixed on a light square.
7.d5 ( 7.a3 4c6 8.e6 xd4 9.exf7+ [ 27...h8 looks better, after which
xf7 10.f3 f5 11.e5+ e8 12.d3 28.xe6+?? fxe6 29.g6+ f7 30.xh8+
d6 13.f4 bc6 was good for Black in g7 wins the knight. ]
Afek - Dunworth, Oakham 1993) 7...f5 28.h4 h8 29.b3 d7 30.g3 a4 31.bb6
8.a3 ( 8.f2 e6 9.c3 c2 10.f3 a7 32.c2 c7 33.c3 Now it's getting
xa1 11.d3 xd3 12.xd3 e7 ugly. Black is tied up whilst W hite calmly
was too optimistic in Georgiev Kr - improves his position. a7 34.a6 b7
Solozhenkin, France 1996) 8...e6 9.a4+ 35.db6 c7 36.a5 h7 37.a8 c6
d7 10.xd7+ xd7 11.f3 exd5 38.g8 e4 39.bb8 c6 40.g5 e4
12.cxd5 xd5 13.c4 7b6 14.b5+ d7 41.gg8 c6 42.d2 d7+ 43.e3 d4
15.0-0 xb5 16.xb5 a6 17.c3 h6 44.bc8 e4+ 45.d3 d4+ 46.c3 d7
18.e4 e7 19.b3 0-0 20.a3 b4 47.xc5 d1 48.c7 f6 49.exf6+ xf6
21.xb4 cxb4 22.ad1 ad8 23.d6 d7 50.g6+ f5 51.c5+ e4 52.xh5 f3
24.d4 c8! 25.e4 ( 25.xc8 c5 ) 53.f6 h8 54.xg4 b8 55.b4 axb3
25...fd8 and Black was a good pawn up. ] 56.axb3 b1 57.d4 d1+ 58.e5 xb3
501
59.f6 g2 60.e5 g1 61.e3 f1+ squared bishop.

62.e7 b7 63.e5 a4+ 64.xe6 c2 [ Why not 15.e2! planning h3 and f4. With
65.g5 f8 66.e2 h7 67.a2 e8+ more space, White should keep the pieces
68.d5 d8+ 69.c5 c8+ 70.d4 b3 on for maximum effect. ]
71.a7 d8+ 72.c5 e4 73.d7 a8 15...fg4 Black has to rely on piece play
74.d4 b1 75.h5 g2 76.g4 b2 alone and this move does just that!
77.gg7 e2 78.ge7 g8 79.h6 g5 [ 15...xd3 16.xd3 g4 17.d2 a5
80.d5 xg4+ 81.xg4 xe7 82.f6 f7 might be a better way of playing the
83.d6 position. ]
1-0 16.h3
[ Again, more ambitious was to keep the d3-
bishop - after 16.f1!? White was probably
498 B03 afraid of xf2 but after 17.xe5 ( 17.xf2!
Landa,Konstantin 2562 g4-+ ) 17...h3+ 18.gxh3 xe5 19.ce4
De Jonghe,Bruno 2304 he would have the advantage. ]
Belgian Interclub Championships 2004/5 (8.1) 16...xd3 17.xd3 e5 18.c2?!
[Andrew Martin] [ 18.e2!? seems best, planning f2-f4. ]
18...b8 19.a4 h5 20.ad1 h4 21.f1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 21.ge4 f5 ]
5.exd6 cxd6 6.d5!? Rather an unusual move 21...f5 22.e2
which nails down the pawn on e7 and sets [ 22.e4 b5! ]
Black new and unwelcome problems. 22...b6! Clearly Black has counterplay now.
[ The line which made me switch to 5...exd6 23.e3! xb3 24.a1 bc8 25.d4!
is 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 Landa recognises that the game has changed
- White delays Nf3 (so Black can't develop and that he must now create confusion.
the bishop to g4), while getting ready to play [ Premature is 25.xf5?! gxf5 26.d4 g6!
d4-d5. ] ( 26...f3+ 27.xf3 xd4 28.xf5
6...8d7 transposes to the game. ) 27.b1 a3 ]
[ Both 6...e5 ] 25...f3+ 26.xf3 xd4 27.xf5 gxf5
[ or 6...e6 pay immediate attention to the 28.xf5 xc4
backward e pawn before W hite has a [ Perhaps 28...xc3 29.g5+ f8 30.h6+
chance to get his development into f ull g8= would have been a more pragmatic
swing. 7.c3 ( in case of 7.dxe6?! xe6 decision. ]
Black is already ahead in development.) 29.b1
7...exd5 8.cxd5 ( 8.xd5 xd5 9.xd5 [ 29.e4 b4! 30.g5+ h7 31.h5+
c6 ) 8...e7 Black should be happy g8= ]
enough with the outcome of the opening. ] 29...a3
7.b3 f6 8.b2 g6 9.d3 g7 10.e2N [ Inferior was 29...xb1+ 30.xb1 xc3
Landa finds a good move order. 31.xc3 xc3 32.xb7 Black will have a
[ 10.c3 0-0 11.ge2 bd7 12.0-0 c5 very tough time coping with White's a pawn
13.c2 a5 14.b1 d7 15.d4 c8 and at the same time his exposed King. ]
16.e1 Buenermann, V-Guenther, L/ 30.b2 c5?? Cracking, a typical scenario in
Muenster 1993 certainly looks better for club chess.
White too, who has more space, pressure [ 30...b4 31.a1 a3= was the way to
on the e file and the b5 square. ] go. ]
10...0-0 11.0-0 Baburin makes the key point 31.e4 b4?!
that Black has no favourable pawn breaks in [ 31...c8 32.g5+ f8 33.xd4 xd4
this position that is at the heart of his 34.xh4 f6 35.h8+ f7 36.h7+ f8
disadvantage. e8 12.bc3 bd7 13.d2 37.b3! is terminal. ]
a6 14.g3 e5 15.fe1!? White clearly 32.g5+
believes that he does not need the light- [ 32.g5+- ]
502
32...f8 33.h6+ g8 34.g5 xf2+ which is just as bad. ]

35.h1 6 d5 seems like a good practical bet 12...xd3 13.xd3 d7 14.c2
and W hite's ideas are easy to understand. Hitting the pawn on a4 again so as to force
Nevertheless, from an objective viewpoint 6... Black to commit. c5 15.ad1
e5 should be a good response, after which [ White keeps a simple advantage with
Black is OK. 15.b4! axb3 16.axb3 xa1 17.xa1
1-0 with the idea b4. ]
15...g5! 16.fe1
[ Or 16.xg5 xg5 17.cb5 d8 18.fe1
499 B03 d7 . White's advantage is limited now. ]
Leko,Peter 2755 16...g4 17.f3 xe3+ 18.xe3 d7
Ivanchuk,Vassily 2787 19.db5 e8 20.xe8+ xe8 21.e2 d7
Rapid Match g/10+10 rapid (11) 28.10.2007 22.e1 h5 23.d2
[John Watson] [ 23.e7 l o o k s a g g r e s s i ve , b u t xe7
24.xe7 f8 25.e3 c8 protects
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 everything. ]
5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.d3 23...c8 24.d4 f6 25.b4 axb3 26.axb3
Black needs to find a reliable way to play f5 27.e3 g6
against this move. c6 [ 27...a8 a good move here, since 28.cb5
[ A n o t h e r r e c e n t g a m e w e n t 7...8d7 d7! 29.xc7?? loses to a1+ 30.e1
8.ge2 0-0 9.0-0 e8 10.b3 c6 11.e1 xe1+ 31.xe1 xd4+ ]
f8 12.c2 h6 13.f4 f6 14.h3 28.ce2 h4 29.h3
with a clear advantage in space and [ 29.b4! ]
activity Fressinet-Drazic, Ajaccio FRA 2007 ] 29...a8 30.h2 h7 31.b5 c8 32.d4
8.ge2 a5!? xd4?!
[ The most common continuation here is [ Probably 32...d8 was the best Black
8...0-0 9.0-0 f6 or 9...Re8. ] could do. ]
[ 8...b4 9.b1 xc4?? fails to 10.a4+ 33.exd4 c6?
. Once Black has played ...0-0, this idea [ 33...g8 34.f4!
becomes realistic. ] A) 34...f8? 35.f5 h5 36.e1
9.0-0 a4?! Black gains space and finally is is a kind of zugzwang: a6 ( 36...e8
able to play ... Nb4 without worrying about 37.xe8+ xe8 38.xc7+ d7
Qa4 but this is awfully slow and can also 39.cb5; 36...g8 37.e7 f8
expose the a-pawn to attack. 38.xc7 ) 37.e4;
[ 9...b4 10.b1! xc4? still comes up B) 34...b1 35.e7 a6 36.e1 d3
short after 11.a3 c6 12.d5 , for example, 37.e3 b4 38.f3 attacks h4. ]
a7! ( 12...6e5 13.f4 d7 14.d4 ) 34.dxc6 bxc6 35.a7 a8 36.dxc6 d3
13.a4+ b5 14.xb5 d7 15.xc4 xb5 37.e7 f6 38.b4
16.c2 and Black can't castle. ] [ Easier is 38.d4 ]
10.e3 b4 11.d5 0-0?! 38...b2 39.a5 d3 40.c5 dxc5 41.bxc5
[ Better 11...xd3 12.xd3 , but White has c4 42.xc4 xc4 43.c6 a6 44.g1
space and harmonious piece placement, [ Or 44.c7! f5 45.c6 c8 46.d4 ]
whereas Black is hampered by that knight 44...d8 45.d7 e8 46.c7 e1+ 47.h2
on b6. Then d7 13.d4 0-0 ( 13...e5 c1 48.d6! b7 49.b5!? The effects of a
14.c2 targeting a4) 14.c2 a3 15.b4 rapid game are clear as the game proceeds.
is obviously better for White. ] [ 49.c6! wins on the spot. Now it takes
12.d4?! longer. ]
[ Natural, but not as good as 12.xb6! cxb6 49...c5 50.b6 c8 51.g1 c1+ 52.h2
13.b1 and after a3 and Nxa4 White wins a c5 53.b8 d7 54.d8 xb5 55.c8
pawn, unless Black tries a3 14.bxa3 xa3 xc8 56.xc8 g5 57.g1 g6 58.f2
15.xh7+ xh7 16.b1+ g8 17.xb4 d3 59.e3 f1 60.c2 f5 61.c5+ g6
503
62.f2 d3 63.c1 b5 64.e3 a6 xd8 14.c5 and Black has major
65.a1 c4 66.d4 b5 67.c5 e2 problems.;
68.d6 f5 69.e5 g4 70.f4 d3 71.e1 B2) Perhaps Black can exploit White's
g3 72.d4 c2 73.e6+ f7 74.h6 e4 slow 10 Be 2 b y 10...d5 11.c5 d7
75.xh4 xg2 76.h5 f6 77.e3 f1 12.xd5 db8! 13.c4 e6 14.c3!?
78.h4 h3 79.g5 g4 80.h5 xd4 15.ge2 f5 and White is only
1-0 very slightly better.;
B3) 10...d7!? 11.f3 f6 12.d5
b8 13.h3!? ( 13.0-0 and; 13.d4
500 B03 are more natural) 13...a5 14.0-0 d7
Leko,Peter 2749 15.d2 e8 To answer Bh6 by ...Bh8,
Ivanchuk,Vassily 2750 and perhaps to assist in ...e6 16.fd1
1st ACP World Rapid Cup rapid (4.4) 08.01.07 a6 17.d4 White has ways of
[John Watson] progressing on the queenside, and Black
can't undertake anything. The opening
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 has been a complete success for White.
5.exd6 cxd6 This is the riskier capture, which He converts after a tough defence from
has been more entertaining over the years h i s o p p o n e n t : c5 18.f3 c8
than 5...exd6. 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 19.db5! h5 (there isn't much else to
This, the Voronezh System, is still giving do) 20.xc5 xc5 ( 20...dxc5 21.d6 )
Black f its. Recent solutions seem a little 21.a4 c8 22.b6 c5 23.xa8
unconvincing to me. Check out recent and xa8 24.e3 xe3 25.fxe3 f5 26.c5
archived ChessPub games, a few of which are dxc5 27.d6 exd6 28.xd6 e6
cited here. 0-0 9.b3 White has cleared the 29.xb7 a7 30.xc5 a4 31.a5
a1-h8 diagonal so as to be able to play d5, xa5 32.xa5 axb3 33.axb3 f8
and in the meantime, 9. . .d5? 10 c5 is bad 34.c4 c5 35.f2 f8 36.c6 h4
because the pawn on b3 prevents ...Nc4. 37.f3 g5 38.e2 g4 39.hxg4 xg4
W hite's is an absurdly time-consuming 40.d5 c8 41.f1 f6 42.d2 a6
manoeuvre that neglects kingside 43.f4 xc4 44.xc4 xe3+ 45.e2
development, but its prophylactic purpose is 1-0. ]
typically modern, and no clear solution has 10.e2 a6 11.f3 d7 12.0-0 c8
appeared. a5!? An awfully slow move. 13.d2 a4 If Black has to play this
Ivanchuk is clearly trying to avoid the better- (threatening nothing), things have gone badly.
known lines. But what does the move 14.fe1
accomplish? [ 14.h6 was another good move. ]
[ H Contreras-Bermudez, Bogota COL 2006 14...axb3 15.axb3 e8 16.h6 h8 17.h4!
was a typical strategic win for White: 9...c6 e5?! This creates serious weaknesses,
A) 10.d5 e5 11.e2! is normal, although to be fair there weren't any attractive
i n t e n d i n g f 4 ( U n n e c e s s a r y i s 11.h3 options, for example,
as reported by JR in this column : e8 [ a) 17...f5 18.d3 ( 18.h5!?; 18.g5 d7
12.e2 e6 13.dxe6 xe6 14.f3 d5! 19.h5 ) 18...d7 19.xf5 xf5 20.g5
and Black was doing well in Socko- , n o t m e re ly a t t a ckin g t h e e -p a wn , b u t
Rozentalis, Warsaw POL 2006 ); preparing moves such as Re4. ]
B) 10.e2!? was seen in H Contreras- [ b) Also sad-looking is 17...g4 , when one
Bermudez, Bogota COL 2006. The idea is idea among several is 18.f4 d7 19.c5!
to play 11 d5 Ne5 12 f4 and not allow ... with the idea dxc5 20.b5 ]
Ng4: 18.dxe5 dxe5
B1) 10...e5 11.f3! ( 11.dxe5 dxe5 [ 18...xe5 19.xe5 dxe5 20.e4 forces
12.c5 is a standard idea, although c5 21.xc5 xc5 22.e3 and Rcd1 is
White's bishop may not want to be on too strong. ]
e2 ) 11...f5 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.xd8 19.g5
504
[ Or 19.e4 ] 11...f6 12.e3!? e8 13.d2 d5! 14.c5

19...f6 20.e3 c5 21.xc5 xc5 22.b4 c8 (intending ...Nce7 and soon, ...Nf5)
xc4 15.fe1 g6 16.xg6 hxg6 17.ad1 b6
[ 22...c8 23.c5 a8 24.e4 ] 18.cxb6 ( 18.f4!? ) 18...axb6= ]
23.xc4+ xc4 24.d5+ e6 25.xb7 11.b3 0-0 12.e3 e8 13.xg6 A different
Now W hite mops up. b8 26.c6 f7 approach. White will simply develop and use
27.d5 d6 28.c7 d8 29.ed1 xb4 his space advantage. hxg6 14.d2
30.a6 a3 31.c7 c8 32.xd6 xc1 [ 14.d5 e5 15.g3 f6 16.d4
1-0 also seems to secure some advantage. This
and succeeding choices for White all lead to
small advantages for him, but ones that
501 B03 are probably manageable for Black. Nothing
Leko,Peter 2749 ever gets out of hand. ]
Ivanchuk,Vassily 2750 14...f6 15.d5 Cementing his space
1st ACP World Rapid Cup rapid (4.1) 08.01.07 advantage. Otherwise Black will probably try
[John Watson] his 15...d5 16 c5 Nc8-e7 plan. e5 16.f2
[ Or 16.d4 ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 16...bd7 17.e4 h4 18.d4
5.exd6 exd6 The is considered the safer [ There are options on every move, most
recapture, with symmetrical open files. Black obviously 18.2c3 ]
still has to deal with White's space advantage, 18...f6 19.4c3
but if he doesn't mind defending that's not so [ It's not obvious which if any move is best,
bad. 6.c3 e7 7.d3 for example, 19.xf6+ xf6 20.g3 d7
[ 7.h3 0-0 8.f3 f6 9.e2 e6 10.d5 21.ae1 also maintains a limited
xc3+ 11.bxc3 d7 was the course of advantage. ]
Volokitin-Ivanchuk, Foros UKR 2006, a very 19...h7!? 20.ad1
nice win for Black which was annotated for [ Again, White might get some traction out of
this column by both John Cox and Jonathan 20.g3 f6 21.ae1 d7 22.g2 g5
Rowson (separately). If it works against a ( 22...g5 23.g1 ) 23.e4 ]
2660, Ivanchuk might be thinking, why not 20...a6 21.h1 e7 22.g1 ad8
against a 2750? ] At this point White has some extra space, but
7...c6 Black is well with drawing range. This in fact
[ Previously you saw 7...0-0 8.ge2 c6 occurs: 23.d4 d7 24.c2 f6 25.d2
9.b3 g4 10.e3 e8 11.d2 f6 12.0-0 e5 26.f4 xd4 27.xd4 h4 28.e2
d5 13.c5 c8 14.h3 e6? ( 14...xe2 ) hf6 29.d3 xe2 30.xe2 e8 31.f3
15.f4 8e7 16.g4 (White is already nearly c5 32.f2 h5 33.xh5 gxh5 34.e1
winning, as the pawns cannot be stopped) xe1+ 35.xe1 h7 36.g3 g6 37.g2
g6?! ( 16...b4 17.b1 h4 18.f5 c8 fe4 38.xe4 xe4 39.f3 f5 40.h3 f7
19.a3 19 or Bg5 ) 17.f5 gxf5 18.g5 g6 41.g4 g6 42.gxh5 gxh5 43.e3 e8
19.xf6 xf6 20.gxf5 xd4 21.fxe6 f3+ 44.d4 d7 45.h4 c6 46.e1 c5+
22.xf3 xf3 23.f1 h4 24.exf7+ h8 I t ' s n o t cl e a r t o m e t h a t W h i t e e ve r h a d
25.fxe8+ xe8 26.g5 1-0 Aroshidze- anything that should have actually led to a win
Chigladze, European GP, Izmir TUR 2003. A with perfect play, but it's also true that many
game like this shows how delicate the play players wouldn't enjoy playing the Black side.
can be in such a solid-looking variation. ] ½-½
8.ge2 g4 9.f3 h5 10.0-0 g6
[ Nigel Davies annotated the game Simons-
Baburin, 10th Monarch Assurance 2001 for
ChessPublishing: 10...0-0 11.b3 ( 11.f4!
g6 12.xg6 hxg6 13.d5 e5 14.b3 f6
15.b2 with a small advantage for White)
505
502 B03 b u t W h i t e h a s s o m e a d va n t a g e h e r e
Leko,Peter 2739 14.h2!? ) 14.xd5! xb2? 15.xf6+
Short,Nigel D 2696 xf6 16.b3 and the knight is trapped. ]
Corus A Wijk aan Zee NED (10) 27.01.2010 [ 9.f4 d7 10.e2 f6 11.0-0 0-0
[Gawain Jones] 12.d2 fe8 13.b3 h6 14.fe1 e7 15.a3
ae8 16.ad1 d5?! This just jumpstarts
1.e4 f6 Nigel plays another offbeat opening W h i t e ' s q u e e n s i d e p l a y . ( 16...h7
for us! 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 would leave Black very solidly placed but
exd6 it's hard to come up with an aggressive plan
[ More solid than 5...cxd6 ] for him. ) 17.c5! c8
6.c3 c6 7.h3 Deviating from the previous A) Missing the chance to play 18.xc7!
Hou Yifan-Short which John annotated last xc7 19.xd5 d7 20.xe7+
year. e7 8.f3 f5 This immediately hasn't ( 20.xf6+!? gxf6 21.d5 also looks a lot
been covered on ChessPublishing before. of fun for White.) 20...8xe7 21.d5 b8
9.d3 Leko's play is unusual in that he doesn't 22.c4;
develop his bishop to e3. This is a very quiet, B) 18.b4 e4? something had to be done
non critical move, happy to exchange light about Ne5 19.b5 d8 20.e5 xe5
squared bishops and just play the position 21.dxe5 e6 22.xe4 dxe4 23.g4
with slightly more space and try to outplay his was a quick defeat of the Kiwi IM who
opponent. Other moves which have been plays the Alekhine exclusively. 1-0
tried recently here: Steadman-Dive, Wanganui 2007 ]
[ 9.e2 0-0 10.0-0 f6 11.e3 [ 9.d5 immediately is very committal e5
A) 11...e8 12.c1 h6 ( 9...b4 10.d4 g6 11.a3 a6 12.e2
A1) 13.c5!? dxc5 14.dxc5 0-0 13.0-0 f6 14.b4 c5!? Black will
A1a) 14...xd1 get typical compensation and try to prove
A1a1) 15.cxd1 so Black's can't that W hite has overreached.) 10.d4
play ...Bxb2 with tempo hitting the ( 10.xe5!? dxe5 11.d3 xd3 12.xd3
rook. xc3! 16.cxb6 f6 is a saf e attempt at a niggling edge f or
( 16...xb2!? ) 17.bxc7 e7=; White. ) 10...d7 Rather obliging. He was
A1a2) 15.fxd1 d7 16.d2 evidently scared that ( 10...g6 would allow
is a f ractio n b ett er f or W h ite bu t 11.f4 at some stage but it cannot be played
shouldn't trouble Black unduly.; i m m e d i a t e l y d u e t o h4+ 12.d2
A1b) 14...d7; exc4+-+ when it's check on c4 so no time
A2) 13.b3 a5 14.b5 g6 for the retaliation check on a4.) 11.b3 0-0
( 14...e7!= would attempt to exploit 12.e2 c5 13.dxc6 xc6 1-0 Hossain-
W hite's perilous state of his queen.) Krylov, Moscow 2008 (48) and here 14.0-0
15.c5 dxc5 16.dxc5 d5 17.xd5 would give W hite a small edge with
xd5 18.xb7 ( 18.c4 d7 19.fd1 potential pressure against d6. ]
although it's hardly anything.) 18...b4 [ 9.e3 would transpose to a couple games
19.xc7 xa2 20.g3 xb2 of the Irish Grandmaster, and Alekhine
had become double edged but after a expert Alexander Baburin examined in the
series of inaccuracies by both sides the archives. ]
game ended drawn in Sai-Shivananda, 9...d7 10.0-0 0-0 11.b3 f6 12.e2
Chennai 2010 (35); Leko's really trying to do without Be3! fe8
B) 11...h6 12.c1 d5 The typical 13.g3 g6
Alekhine break but it doesn't work so well [ 13...xd3 14.xd3 would threaten the
h e r e a s h a d W h i t e p l a y e d ( 12...e8 knight jump on h5 and so g6 would be
would transpose to 11...Re8) 13.c5 necessary. Therefore Short decides the
( Instead 13.b3 was played in Kotrotsos- doubled pawns are better defenders in front
K a l l i o , K a v a l a 2 0 0 5 1 / 2 - 1 / 2 ( 7 1 )) of his king. ]
13...c4? fails to ( 13...c8 is necessary 14.xg6 hxg6 15.g5 I suppose this proves
506
that Leko was right not to develop his bishop the knight while 32.f4 is a strong positional
earlier as it can go in one movement to g5 but threat. ]
White can hardly claim any advantage here. 31.e1 f5 32.f2 White's managed to hold
An opening success and it seems like the on to enough of the position for equality. g7
Alekhine is in as healthy a state as ever. xg5 33.g3 f4 34.c2 h4 35.h1 xh1
16.xg5 d5 Time for the thematic break. Of 36.xh1 f5 37.xf5 Now the position is
course this forces Black to lose time with the dead le vel an d t he rem ain ing mo ves are
knight but it isn't really doing anything on b6 superfluous. xf5 38.h6+ g6 39.xf5
a n y m o r e a s b 3 a n d c 4 t a k e a wa y a l l i t s xf5 40.g4+ e6 41.e3 g2+ 42.f2
potential squares. Once W hite plays c5 he f4 43.e3 g2+ 44.e2 f5 45.g3
loses flexibility with his pawn structure and f4+ 46.e3 fxg4 47.fxg4 d7 48.f1
has lost control of the b5 square and c7 49.d2 e6 50.f3 b6 51.cxb6+
weakened the d4 pawn. 17.c5 c8 18.f3 xb6 52.d3 a5 53.c3 b5 54.a3
8e7 the knight continues its path to a more a5 55.e5 b5 56.d7 f4 57.c5
active square. 19.e2 h3 58.d3 g1 59.d2 f3+ 60.e3
[ 19.e1 f5 would force the knight to h4 61.e5 g2+ 62.d2 f4 63.f3
retreat as 20.xf5 xf5 only favours Black. e6 64.c3 a5 65.e5 b6 66.d3
He will be able to take over control of the e c7 67.f3 b6 68.c2 b5 69.c3
file and start to pressure the d4 pawn. ] ½-½
19...f6!? Showing that Black is starting to think
of more than the half point. 20.c3 g5
This was the idea behind Black's previous. 503 B03
Short tries to exploit W hite's slightly Li,Chao 2622
weakened kingside with the h3 pawn, Leko Garma,Chito 2347
would prefer that pawn back on h2. g6-g5 1st WMSG Rapid Team rapid (6) 15.10.2008
also opened a path for the knight e7-g6-f4 [John Watson]
w h i c h m i g h t c o m e i n u s e f u l . 21.d3
Stopping t he knight . f7 22.fe1 a6 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
stopping either queen or knight using b5 while 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
Black tries attacking although 0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8
[ 22...g4 immediately is also possible. ] 12.c5 6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 h6
23.e3 g4! More dynamic than The old 'main line', instead of 14...Na5, which
[ 23...f5 24.xe8 ( 24.xg5+!? fxg5 we ' v e l o o k e d a t q u i t e a b i t . I t wo u l d b e
25.f3 is also interesting with the important interesting to see what Li Chao2 has in mind
point that cxd4? 26.xd4! and the knight there. At any rate, he prepared well for 14...
c a n n o t r e c a p t u r e .) 24...xe8 25.a3 h6.
which is almost level. ] [ A sample line that I found in the main line of
24.h2 gxh3 25.xh3 h8 26.xh8 xh8 14...a5 is 15.b5 ( 15.e2 -see the other
Black takes control of the h file and White has Li Chao2 game in this month's column)
to start being very careful. 27.d1 g5!? 15...c6! (as pointed out and analysed by
The second pawn goes to g5. 28.e2 g6 Mark Morss) is 16.d1 d4 17.xd4 exd4
[ 28...f5! looks strong here as White would 18.xd4 ( This exchange sac for a pawn is
have an extremely unpleasant task holding White's only realistic chance 18.xd4 xc5
on. Again the d4 weakness cripples White 19.xg7 xd1+ 20.xd1 xg7= )
and this is exactly what Black is aiming for 18...xd4 19.xd4 b6 20.c6 b8 21.e3
in this line. ] d6 , and now instead of 22 0-0, 22.c7
29.f3 ce7 A) 22...c6? let's White exploit Black's
[ 29...f5 would stop White's next and keep l o o s e p i e c e s , f o r e x a m p l e , 23.e4!?
Leko very passive. ] ( actually, 23.f4! e6+ 24.d2!
30.g4! c6 and Rd1 is probably clearest) 23...e6
[ 30...f5 31.f2 is a more active square for 24.g5 d6 25.f4 f6 26.e4! e6
507
27.0-0 with a probably winning advantage; 504 B03

B) 22...a6! 23.f4 f6! ( 23...e6+ Li,Chao 2622
24.d2 is awkward, because ...Bb7 can Hoang Canh,Huan 2363
be met by Bd7) 24.g3 b7! 25.xa6!? 1st WMSG Blitz Team blitz (4) 13.10.2008
( 25.0-0 xc7! 26.xc7 c8 27.e5 f5 [John Watson]
a n d . . . Rxc 3) 25...xa6 26.d2 c8!
27.a4 ( 27.d1 c6 28.c2 6xc7 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
29.xc7 xc7; 27.c1 c6 28.d5 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
xc1 29.xc1 f8 ) 27...c6 28.d5 0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8
e6 29.c3 b7 30.d1 xd5 31.xd5 12.c5 6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 a5
c6+ 32.b4 6xc7 ] 15.e2
15.b5 This looks more promising than has [ 15.b5 is the other LiChao2 game. ]
previously been tho ught, and apparently 15...c6
somewhat advantageous. d4?! [ 15...b6 is treated at length in the Archives.
[ John Cox cites Arzumanian (2437) -Zubov, Then 16.a4 and 16 0-0 are critical. ]
(2 3 2 8 ) A l u s h t a 2 0 0 1 a s t h e wa y t o g o : 16.0-0
15...e4 16.d2 de5 17.xe4 b4 [ John Cox analyses 16.b5 , for example,
18.0-0 xa2 19.cd1 d7 ( Well played: f8 17.d6 e6 ( Cox: 17...h6 18.c4
ensuring the exchange of the c4 bishop by d7 would transpose to Yagupov-Ukolov:
19...xd1 20.xd1 g4 looks natural at wit h t h e t e xt B la ck t rie s t o a vo id t h is .)
first sight, but after 21.f3 xc4 22.bxc4 18.g5 xg5 19.xg5 d7 20.g4
White has the initiative.) 20.c7 ab8 Cox: An unusual idea: normally ...f5 is a
21.d5 xc4 22.df6+ ( jw: White still has move Black wants to play. f5 21.e2 h6
pressure after 22.bxc4 , for example, c6 22.c4+ h7 23.d2 ( 23.xc8 hxg5
23.f4 a8 24.d2 b4 25.fd1 ) 24.d6 was tempting, but Horvath believes
A) Cox says that 22...xf6 23.xf6+ g7 in the strength of his position.) 23...e7
24.xd7 ( jw: Black probably didn't like the 24.h4 e4 25.g5 e5 26.f4 e7
looks of 24.d4 ) 24...xe3 25.fxe3 27.xc8 xc8 28.d6 ee8 29.f7 e5
looks simpler and completely equal; 30.xe8 d3+ 31.e2 xc1+ 32.xc1
B) 22...h8 23.xd7 b2 24.d2 a8 xe8 33.c6 bxc6 34.xc6 Cox: I feel Black
25.ef6 b4 26.d4 1/2-1/2 A curious ought to hold this endgame, but he must
move: ( 26.xb2 xd7 27.xd7 xb2 have been in time trouble. a5 35.c7 g8
28.xh6 seems to win a pawn, and while 36.a7 d8 37.c7 c8 38.b7 d4
Black might have a bit of compensation it's 39.f3 e8 40.fxe4 xe4+ 1-0 Horvath, A
hard to believe this wasn't worth a try. )] (2497)-Sikula, V (2418)/Hungary 2002/
16.d6! xc5 [Cox] ]
[ But 16...e6 17.xe6 fxe6 18.0-0 16...h6
is awful, for example, f8 ( 18...g5 19.fd1 [ 16...d4 is probably better. An example
f8 20.e4 ) 19.fd1 b8 20.c4 ] with Cox's notes is 17.xd4 Pretty much
[ Probably Black missed 16...f8 17.h4! forced. The b4 pawn is en prise, and ( 17.b4
, winning material and leading to a huge a5 18.a3 axb4 19.axb4 f8 is not at all
advantage after xc5 ( 17...g5 18.g6 ) desirable: White cannot expect to get much
18.xg6 d3+ 19.xd3 fxg6 20.xg6 ] if the knight stays on d4.; For 17.c4?!
17.xf7 d3+ 18.d2 e6 19.xd8 see Fernandez Garcia - Nunez Lucero.)
xf3+ 20.gxf3 xc4 21.xc4 xd8 17...exd4 18.b5 After other knight moves
22.e2 Black can resign. b5 23.e4 f4+ Black has easy development with moves like
24.xf4 exf4 25.xf4 d6 26.d1 c6 ...Ne5 and Bg4 a6 This leads by force to an
27.d8+ h7 28.f7 e6+ 29.d2 g5 endgame which needs only a little accuracy
30.dd7 g6 31.xa7 h5 32.a4 bxa4 for Black to hold. An equally good alternative
33.bxa4 was ( 18...d3 when 19.xd3 xc5
1-0 20.xg6 hxg6 21.xc5 g4 is fairly forced,
508
and now Black has play for his pawn which 16...c8 17.b4
gives him equality, especially since White [ 17.d4 ]
cannot avoid either the rook coming in at d2 [ 17.d4 ]
or having his kingside pawns maimed by .... 17...b6 18.d4 e5 19.dxe6 fxe6 20.f3
Bxf3, for example; 18...f8 19.fd1 e6 b8 21.c5
20.c4 xc5 21.bxd4 g4 22.h3 xf3 [ 21.b5 axb5 22.dxb5 xb5 23.xb5 ]
23.xf3 e4 was another possibility which 21...bxc5 22.bxc5 e7 23.c6
also produces a very equal endgame: I've [ 23.e2 ]
continued this variation because the trick at 23...e8 24.c7!? Good enough, but
the end amuses me -) 19.bxd4 xc5 [ 24.d5! wins easily, e.g. ,
20.xc5 xd4 21.xd4 xd4 22.c7 A) but 24...xd5 25.xd5 xd4
Raetsky, A (2430)-Santo Roman, M (2394)/ ( 25...exd5 26.e6 ) 26.xe6+ f7
S a u t r o n F R A 2 0 0 4 a n d C o x g i v e s e6
27.xf7+ xf7 28.xd4 wins quickly;
23.f3 d2 with good counterplay. ] B) 24...exd5? 25.e6 xe6 26.c7 ]
17.fd1 f5!? Loosening. 24...xc7 25.d5 xd5 26.xd5?
[ But W hite keeps an edge af ter 17...f8 [ White's position is still dominant after
18.xd8 xd8 19.e4 c6 20.d6 ] 26.xc7! xc7 27.g5 f7 28.c1
18.g3!? w i t h i d e a s l i k e B d 8 a n d B g 4 . ( 28.d8
[ 18.b5 is good, with the idea f4 19.d2 is also good )]
e4 20.h4! ] 26...d7 27.c6?!
18...h7 19.d5 e4 20.d4 de5?! [ 27.b3! ]
[ 20...xd4! 21.xd4 e5 activates Black's 27...d8 28.g5 xd4 29.xe8 e5! 30.a4
pieces. ] f8
21.xc6 xc6 22.c7 xd1+ 23.xd1 [ 30...d5 ]
b8 24.c4 31.b3+ h8 32.xe7 xe7 33.c7 f6
[ 24.e8! e5 25.d6 ] White should still have a winning advantage,
24...b6? but this is a bit tricky. The details are not
[ 24...e5 ] important, but Black scrambles his way to a
25.cxb6 axb6 26.d6! b4 27.d8 c6 draw. 34.e2 c5 35.d3? e4 36.d1 f8
28.e8 e5 29.b5 d7 30.xb8 xb8 37.xc5 dxc5 38.e1 d4 39.xe4 xf2+
31.xb6 White's passed pawns are40.h1 f5 41.e5+ g7 42.e4 f5
monstrous. 43.xf5 xf5 44.a4 g3+ 45.g1 h5
1-0 46.h4 e2+ 47.h2 f4 48.xf4 xf4
49.c4 g5 50.xa6 gxh4 51.a4 g7 52.a5
e6 53.e2 d4 54.a6 c6 55.h3 f6
505 B03 56.xh4 e5 57.xh5 d4 58.g4 c4
Lie,Kjetil A 2536 59.g5 c3 60.d1 c5 61.f6 b6 62.g5
Lie,Espen 2404 b4 63.e6 d3 64.f5 b4 65.e6
ch-NOR Hamar NOR (4) 09.07.2007 d3 66.c2 f4+ 67.e5 h5 68.d3
[John Watson] g7 69.g6 h5 70.e4 a7 71.e3 b6
72.e2 g7 73.d3 h5 74.f3 a7
9...Nc6 against the Voronezh system has 75.g4 g7 76.g5 b6 77.f6 h5+
reappeared a few times recently (even in GM 78.e5 a7 79.d6 b6 80.d7 f4
play!). This game is an example of how that 81.g7 h5 82.g8 f4 83.e4 xa6
still seems to be a mistake. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 84.c6 a5 85.c5 a4 86.c4 e2
d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 87.f6 a3 88.d5 b2 89.e3 c1
6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 c6 90.d3 f4+ 91.xc3 e2+ 92.d3 f4+
10.d5 e5 11.e2 ed7 12.f3 f6 93.d4 e2+ 94.c4 f4 95.f1 d1
13.h3 d7 14.d2 e8 15.0-0 a6 16.fd1 96.d4 e1 97.e3 e2 98.f5 e6+
[ Or 16.fe1! Black's position is 99.e5 c5 100.b1 d3+ 101.d4 f2
prospectless. ] 102.h4 d2 103.g6 e2 104.h5+
509
d2 105.f3+ c2 106.g6+ d1 for example 24.e2 xe2 25.xe2 dxc3
107.f5 e2 108.e5 d2 109.g6 e2 26.bxc3 xa2+ 27.b2 f2 28.e1
110.h5+ d2 111.c4+ e1 112.e3 d5! and Black stays a pawn ahead;
d1+ 113.xd1 C) 16...0-0 17.0-0-0 ( 17.xc6!?
½-½ is a p o ssib le im p ro ve m e n t , e . g . c2+
18.e2 bxc6 19.xh4 xh4 20.gxh4
xa1 21.h3 c2 22.e7 fe8 23.c5
506 B03 and despite being an e xchange down
Luther,T 2556 White is clearly better. The knight on c2
Rozentalis,E 2622 is trapped and White's passed pawn on e7
TCh-AUT 1st Bundesliga 2013-14 (2.1) is very strong.) 17...xh1 18.gxh4 f6
[Tom Rendle] 19.b5 c6 20.g5 e5 21.e7 fe8
22.xh1 cxb5 23.f3 d3+ 24.c2
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 d6 25.d1 f2 26.xd6 xg4 27.d4
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 f6 28.h5 xe7 29.h6 d7 30.xf6
9.f3 e7 10.d5! This is considered the gxf6 31.g4+ f7 32.xb5 c8+
critical line of the four pawns attack. exd5 33.c3 g8 34.f4 d5 0-1 Grischuk, A
[ 10...b4 was tried by Rozentalis back in (2748)-Svidler, P (2726) Odessa UKR
2005 but 11.c1! ( instead 11.d4 g6 2009 ]
12.a3 a6 13.dxe6 0-0! gave Black 15...xd1+
dangerous play in Melnikova-Rozentalis [ 15...bxc6! is a little more risky but actually
annotated by John Cox in the archives.) seems to be a more accurate way of
11...exd5 12.a3 c5 ( 12...a6 13.cxd5 0-0 handling the position
14.b4 is obviously very comfortable for A) maybe W hite should settle for 16.a3
White ) 13.axb4 d4 14.xd4 cxd4 15.xd4 xd1+ ( 16...4d5?! 17.d3! is good for
b8 16.e2 gave White a clear advantage White ) 17.xd1 d8+ 18.c1 4d5
in Hector, J (2575)-Appel, R (2529) 19.xd5 xd5 20.c2 but Black is close
Dortmund 2011 ] to equalising here as well after g5!;
11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 d7 13.e6 fxe6 B) 16.f3 f8 17.e4 feels a bit more
14.dxe6 c6 15.xc6! This seems to be comfortable for W hite but perhaps this
White's best option to fight for an advantage position is OK for Black after the accurate
[ 15.g4 is very complicated but it seems d6! 18.e2 f6 19.d1 ( not 19.xh7
Black is doing OK here, at least f or the g6! and it's W hite who's in trouble)
moment h4+ 16.g3 19...6d5 ]
A) 16...f6? loses to 17.0-0-0 16.xd1 bxc6 We've reached the end of the
A1) or 17...xh1 18.f5 c8? opening phase and it seems to be that White
( 18...xd1+ 19.xd1 is completely lost has slightly the better chances. However, if
for Black ) 19.xg7+ with a mating Black manages to complete development and
attack; settle a knight on d5 he's going to be
A2) 17...6d5 18.xc6 bxc6 19.xd5 completely fine so White needs a good plan
xd5 20.c5 and White has an here.
overwhelming advantage; [ 16...c2+ 17.e2 xe3 18.xe3 bxc6
B) 16...xh1! seems to be most accurate 19.e2! is only a little better for White but he
17.0-0-0 0-0 18.gxh4 f6! 19.b5 e5 can certainly play for a win here with little
( 19...d5! 20.g5 e5 21.e7 f2 ) or no risk. ]
20.g5 c5 21.e7 cxd4 22.exf8+ xf8 [ 16...xc6 allows 17.xb6 axb6 18.d7
23.xh1 and now in Klinger-Herndl (from with a definite edge to White ]
the archives) Black could've obtained a 17.d2
g o o d g a m e w i t h ( 23.xd4 xa2+! [ 17.d2!? looks a bit strange but it may be
24.xa2 xb5 is at least OK for Black as the best try for an edge. A possible line is
25.xh1? loses to c6+ ) 23...a6! d8+ 18.c1 4d5 19.xd5 xd5
510
( 19...cxd5? 20.b5+ f8 21.hf1+ f6 507 B03

22.c5+ wins f or W hit e) 20.d2 d6 Luther,Thomas 2580
21.d3 xe6 22.he1 and White's two Pajeken,Wolfgang 2346
bishops should give him the better chances 8th ch-Euro Dresden GER (6) 08.04.2007
in the endgame although I suspect with best [John Watson]
play Black should still draw without too
much difficulty. ] W ith so many young players using the
17...f8 Voronezh system these days (perhaps
[ 17...0-0! seems more logical and I can see prompted by several authors'
no way for W hite to be better here, e.g. recommendations), it is appropriate to see
18.a3 4d5 19.xd5 cxd5! 20.xb6 cxb6 this month's games with the very main line.
21.xd5 ac8 and Black's activity is enough 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
for the pawn here. ] 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
18.a3 4d5 19.xb6 0-0 9.b3 e5 We saw other moves last month.
[ maybe White can try for a small advantage Really, this continues to be Black's best try.
after 19.xd5 xd5 20.d4 f6 21.f2! 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7
as it's a little awkward for Black to move 13.f3 c6 14.c4
here. Still the edge is only small if Black [ Another critical line was played in Bauer-M
plays b8! 22.c5! xb2 23.xf8 xf8 Grunberg, Dresden 2007. I'll just show some
with a draw being the most likely result. ] m o ve s b e ca u se t h e y d o n 't f o l lo w wh a t
19...xb6 20.a6 g5 21.e2 e7 seems to be best play: 14.e4 h6 15.d6
The game is heading for a draw, especially f8 16.c4 d7 17.0-0 e7 18.xc8
with the presence of the opposite coloured xc8 19.fd1 e6 20.d6 ed4 21.xd4
bishops. 22.d1 f6 exd4 and play was almost level. But White
[ 22...d5 23.e4 h6 is also just equal ] certainly had the better of it in the opening. ]
23.c2 xc3 24.xc3 ad8 25.c1 f5?! 14...h6
[ 25...d5+! 26.b3 d6 keeps the [ As far as I know, 14...a5 15.e2 b6
balance ] is still playable, at least in the line 16.a4
26.b3 c5 27.a2?! ( 16.cxb6 xb6 was covered in the game K
[ 27.g4! gives White real chances here, for Martin-Cox, annotated by Cox himself for
example g5 28.f1 d6 ( 28...xg4? this column.) 16...xc5 17.xc5 bxc5
loses to 29.b5! c6 30.xc6 c4 31.f7+ 18.xc5 b7 with the idea 19.c7 d6!
d6 32.e7 a5+ 33.a2 xc6 20.xa7?! xa7 21.xa7 e6
34.exd8+ xd8 35.d2+ e6 36.xa7 ) . It's interesting that the Repertoire for White
29.e7 e8 30.fe1 with an unpleasant book by Dzindzihashvili and Perelshteyn
position for Black to defend ] skip 15.. .b6 entirely. No one that I know of
27...dd5 28.ec2 xe6 29.g4 f4 has demonstrated an advantage after that,
30.xc5 xc5 31.xc5 If anything White but things ch ange pretty quickly in this
now has to be more careful but Luther holds variation. ]
the draw easily enough d6 32.g5 g6 15.0-0 White returns to calm development.
33.h4 d7 34.a5 e5 This move has been rare by comparison with
[ 34...xg4! 35.h5 e5 36.hxg6 hxg6 the more forcing
37.b7 should be a draw but White still has [ 15.e4 , whose assessment seems to
to show some good defensive technique ] swing between equality and a slight edge for
35.c8! Now it's just a draw f8 White. ]
[ 35...xg4 36.xg4 xg4 37.h5! draws ] 15...d4?! At first this looks like a way to
36.b7 f2 37.d5+ e6 38.d4 c5 force the pace with favourable exchanges,
39.c8+ e7 but White's reply does away with that illusion.
½-½ [ P Adams-Crocker, Manchester 2002 went
15...f8 (this seems adequate) 16.e4
e6 17.d6 d7? ( Davies suggests
511
17...ab8 , probably good enough for 508 B03

equality ) 18.b5 b8? 19.xb7! dxb7 Marechal,Andy 2258
20.xc6 c7 21.a4 f5 22.c6 d8 Rozentalis,Eduardas 2584
23.fd1 xd1+ 24.xd1 f7 25.d8 21st Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (3)
with a winning game. ] [Andrew Martin]
16.e4! White simply allows the doubled
pawns in order to occupy Black's interior 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
weaknesses. f8!? 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 c6!? It's quite unusual
[ 16...xf3+ 17.gxf3 f8?! ( 17...f8 to see Black playing ...Nb8-c6 before ...g7-g6,
18.d6 f5 19.b4 favours White, but not by so we may suppose that Rozentalis is
so much ) 18.d6 e6 19.xe6! fxe6 employing typical Open Tournament tactics of
20.b4 and Black has saved his material only giving a weaker opponent plenty to think
at the cost of a wretched pawn structure. ] about.. 7.e3 g6?!
17.xd4! exd4 18.d6 e6 19.fe1!? [ 7...f5 ]
[ 19.fd1! threaten Bxe6 and b6 20.b4 [ 7...e5 ]
bxc5 21.bxc5 doesn't seem to help 8.a4
matters. ] [ 8.d5! appears quite strong: e5 9.d4
19...b6 20.xc8 preventing ...Bg7 due to f2-f4. f6 ( 9...g8
[ A key option is 20.d5 b8 ( 20...bxc5!? 10.c5 bd7 11.f4 dxc5 12.e3 h6
21.xa8 xd6 gives a lot of compensation, 13.d2 g7 14.fxe5+- Hoang Ng Quang, N-
and may be best) 21.cxb6 axb6 22.xc8 Truong Dinh Vy/Vung Tau 2004) 10.f4 f7
bxc8 23.xc8 xc8 24.xe6 d8 11.d3 h6 12.ge2 0-0 13.0-0 f5 14.b4
25.xb6 xd5 26.f1 keeps White well on e5 15.dxe6 xe6 16.b3 d5 17.c5 c8
top with his two passed pawns, probably 18.a4 e7 19.b5 d7 20.ad1 fc8
winn in g b ut th is will st ill no t b e e asy if 21.b4 d8 22.c2 f7 Carlier, B-
Black advances his kingside pawns. ] Mollekens, R/Antwerp 1993 W hite
20...axc8 21.xe6! fxe6 22.xe6+ f8 maintained the advantage throughout.. ]
23.xc8 xc8 24.e1! White stays a pawn 8...g7 9.a5N I doubt this advance can cause
ahead without pawn exchanges or too much difficulty. W ith one move W hite
weaknesses. Compare e xp o se s h is p a wn a n d a t t h e sa m e t im e
[ 24.b4 a5! 25.c6 axb4 26.e1 e5 improves the position of Black's worst posted
27.d3 d6 28.c4 e7= ] piece! He missed his chance to playd4-d5!
24...f7 [ 9.d5 doesn't have the same impact as
[ 24...bxc5 25.d3 e7 26.xc5 xc5 before: a5 10.d4 xd4 11.xd4 0-0
27.xc5 ] 12.d1 d7 13.b4 b3 14.e3 e6
25.d3 b5?! 15.e2 exd5 16.xd5 xd5 17.xb3
[ 25...f8 26.b4 bxc5 ( 26...a5? 27.cxb6 ) ( 17.xd5 xa4 ) 17...f4 18.g3 xe2
27.bxc5 e6 28.e1+ d5 29.f4+ xc5 19.xe2 e8 20.d2 h3 Szurovszky, E-
30.xg6 b4! ] Braun, M/Heves 1999 ]
26.f1 e6 27.e1+ d7 28.e4 9...d7 10.f3 0-0
It's a question of technique now, although it [ 10...xa5! seems possible but obviously
takes a while. a5 29.e2 b4 30.d2 g5 exposes Black to risk. He's going to lose
31.e1 g4 32.h1 f6 33.e1 a8 34.c2 time. 11.e2 0-0 12.0-0 f6 13.d5
c8 35.b2 h5 36.a3 bxa3+ 37.xa3 g8 ( 13.a4 b6 ) 13...b6 White has some
38.a4 b8 39.e4 g7 40.e2 f6 41.g3 compensation with better development and
h8 42.b2 f6 43.xa5 c6 44.b4+ th e c6 squ are . All t he sa me it 's a lit t le
xc5 45.a6+ d5 46.xb8 d3 47.b1 surprising Rozentalis didn't take the pawn. ]
d4 48.d7 d8+ 49.b5 d2 50.c5 11.d5 Better late than never. xa5 12.a3
e7 51.b4 b6 13.b4 b7 14.d4 xd4 This is a
1-0 strange game. Surrendering the Bishop in this
manner should only be considered if
512
abs olu tely f orced. L et's see if Bla ck ca n 28.h6 d4! 29.xf8 xe2+ 30.f1 xf8
defend more economically: 31.xe2 gxf5 With an invincible knight and
[ 14...b8 15.c6 d7 16.f3 d8! lots of central pawns, Black wins comfortably
17.b5 c7 ( 17...bxc6 18.bxc6 xc3+ now. 32.a8+ g7 33.d5 e4 34.b3
19.xc3 c7 20.d3 ) 18.e2 bxc6 a7 35.d4 a4 36.xb6 c2+ 37.f3
19.dxc6 White has obvious compensation. ] e5 38.e3 g5+ Not a great game at all but
[ 14...e5 15.c6 e8 16.b5 interesting for the opening notes if nothing
is no solution. It's remarkable: maybe Black else. A typical Open Tournament melee.
has to take on d4. ] 0-1
15.xd4 f6 16.f4 a5 White would quite like
a p a wn o n a 3 t o u n d e rp in h is s t ru c t u re .
17.b5 He aims to get his Knight on c6. 509 B03
Another way, and one which I think is quite Martin,K 1953
effective is Cox,John J 2385
[ 17.e2 b8 18.a2! Black appears to be 14th Monarch Assurance (3) 26.09.2005
i n s o m e t r o u b l e i n t h i s p o s i t i o n : c7 [John Cox]
( 18...a8 B a c k a g a i n ! 19.0-0! e8
20.e1 ) 19.0-0! That was the nice thing 1.e4 f6 This was another Tiger-Heffalump
about 17 Be2. W hite can play simply and contest from the Isle of Man, in which Black's
re t a in h is p lu se s. e8 20.e1 axb4 follies form a neat counterpoint to his follies in
21.xb4 bc5 22.ea1 Black has very the Tiviakov game. My first bad move was to
little to do here. ] spend the morning hindering Richard
17...b8 18.d2 axb4 19.xb4 dc5 Palliser's preparation in the Najdorf rather
20.e2 d7 21.0-0 a8 22.b1 a6?! than doing anything useful. 2.e5 d5 3.d4
Ambitious, but Rozentalis has shown d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6
throughout this game that he is prepared to 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 The Voronezh.
give the opponent as much rope as it takes to Not usually Katie Martin's choice - I suspect
hang himself. I would have whipped off the the hand of Oldham 3Cs supremo and British
Rook on a3 without delay: correspondence champion Phil Adams, who
[ 22...xa3 23.xa3 f5 24.b2 a8 w a s a l s o p l a y i n g i n t h e t o u r n a m e n t . e5
Black is quite OK now. ] 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7
23.d4 c7 24.c6? This is a clear mistake. 13.c4 c6 14.f3 a5 15.e2 b6
White would have maintained a big advantage 16.cxb6 Right down the main line. Regular
after forum visitors - or better still purchasers of the
[ 24.xa6! xa6 25.xb6 bc5 GW - will know that I don't rate this quite as
( 25...xb6 26.xb6 ac5 27.b3 ) devastating as its reputation. I did a database
26.xc7 xc7 27.b6 For me this is a for CBM 105 (I think) which dealt with this
simple enough variation, so it is a surprise line: I won't repeat what I said there but White
that White did not play this way. Maybe he now has three other tries:
was short of time. ] [ 16.b4 c6 17.b5 d4 18.c6 c5 19.0-0
24...xc6 25.dxc6? a6 20.fd1 e6 21.bxa6 xe2+ 22.xe2
[ 25.xa6 xa6 26.xb6! was much better, dc8 23.xc5 bxc5 24.xc5 xa6
wh e n W h it e h a s ve ry go o d ch a n c e s o f 25.xe5 xe5 26.xe5 cxc6 27.d4
s a v i n g t h e g a m e : xb6 ( 26...xd5 1/2-1/2 was Carlsson-Logdahl, Swedish
27.xc7 xc7 28.cxd5 c5 29.xc5 Champs 2001. ]
dxc5 30.c4 h8 31.b7 c8 32.f2 ) [ 16.0-0 bxc5 17.e4 c6 18.g5 f6
27.xb6 xd5 28.cxd5 ( 28.xa6? e4! ) 19.c4+ f8 20.d5 b7 21.d2 a5
28...ac5 29.f2 What do you deserve was Naiditsch -Grunberg, Antalya 2004, in
out of a game of chess if you fail to take wh i ch t h e Do r t m u n d h e r o wa s a l re a d y
repeated chances? ] struggling for a draw. ]
25...xa3 26.xa3 a5 27.f5 xc6 [ 16.a4 xc5 17.xc5 bxc5 18.xc5
513
b7 19.c7 d7 ( 19...d6!? ) 20.xd7 better. Visually this is not an easy move to
xd7 21.0-0 a5 22.d1 e8 23.a4 d8 understand: the point is shown in a variation
24.b5 c6 25.f1 d4 26.xe8 xe8 like 4d5 22.xb6 xb6 ( 22...axb6
27.xd4 exd4 28.d2 was Dvoiris- 23.c4 ) 23.a5 d5 24.c4 : White just
Grunberg, Oberwart 2004, and precisely the wants to clear c4 for his bishop and get into
sort of thing Black needs to avoid. ] f7 in the way which is always in the air in
16...xb6 17.0-0 this variation. ]
[ The key game in this line with 16 cxb6 is 21...4d5
Varga-Llanos, Budapest 1998, which went [ There wasn't anything wrong with 21...xa2
17.b5 b7 18.0-0 d5 19.fd1 c6 : Black can rescue the knight easily enough,
20.xd5 xd5 21.c7 dd8 22.xa8 f or e xam ple 22.a1 d7 23.d6 c3
xa8 23.b5 d4 24.xd4 exd4 25.g5 24.xc3 e4 , but Simon Webb would advise
f6 26.d2 d5 27.c7 with another good Heffalumps against such adventures (this
example of what Black is trying to avoid (... may not look like much of an adventure to
Nd4 almost always promises more than it you, but when you calculate like me any
delivers in this line). However 19...Nxe3 20 tactical variation longer than three moves
fxe3 Rxd1 21 Rxd1 e4 22 Nfd4 Be5 (an tends to lead to an adventure). ]
improvement stemming from Finkel) gives 22.d6 c6 23.c1 f4 24.f1 xf3
Black a perfectly good game. ] Always a relief for the stronger player to
17...b7 18.fd1 c6 provoke a weakness like this, since he can
[ 18...xd1+ 19.xd1 c8 20.b5 d5 hope that if the compensating activity peters
21.xa7 ( 21.xa7 c2 22.d2 c1+ out he has something to play for in the end.
23.f1 f6 is much the same) 21...c2 25.gxf3 f8 26.xb6 axb6 27.c4 c5
22.d2 c1+ 23.d1 a1 gives Black at [ 27...xa2 28.xb6 e7 29.d7
least equality with the kind of play he often prevents Black from simply winning f2, so
seeks in this line by a sacrifice of the a- the choice between that and the text is a
pawn: the trouble in the present context is difficult one. ]
that 23 Rd1 is an immediate draw. ] 28.a4 d4 29.e3 a7 30.c6 g7
19.b5 Opening the above-mentioned 31.c4 d7 32.b4 h5 33.h4 Not clear this
database I see that I pointed out that White's was such a good idea: this pawn is all too
move order avoids the ..Nxe3 improvement on likely to drop off one day, and I suspect it was
Varga-Llanos and might be considered critical better to sit tight. a7 34.a5? A terrible
in the future. I was wrong of course, if 18... blunder just when Black's strategy of playing
Rxd1+ is indeed a good move. At the time of a series of improving moves and assuming a
the game however I was entirely oblivious of win would somehow present itself was
all this, and moreover had so far been beginning to hit the buffers: after 34 Bb5 or,
spending my time strolling around the room still more so, 34 Nc2 the outcome would have
between moves and waiting for my 400 point been very much in doubt, especially since
rating advantage to take effect instead of both players were in serious time trouble.
thinking, with the usual poor results. xd1+ bxa5 35.bxa5 xa5 36.c7 a7 37.xa7
This move was the product of 64 minutes' xa7 The two weaknesses at f2 and h4
agonised thought. 19...Nd5 is Varga-Llanos, should be enough for Black to win this ending
of course, not that I knew that at the time, but despite the wrong rook's-pawn/ bishop combo
I didn't fancy 19..Nd5 20 Rxd5 much. 20.xd1 and the opposite-coloured bishops, but as it
b4 21.c5 I like to boast that I have never happens White further spoils her position in
been worse out of the opening in the Alekhine, the scramble. 38.h2 c5 39.g3 a7
bu t o f c o urs e t his de p en d s u po n ca re f u l 40.d5 e6 41.f4 exf4+ 42.xf4 xf4
selection of what exactly is the 'opening'. On 43.xf4 xf2 44.g5 e3#
t h i s o c c a s i o n I s h a l l h a ve t o d e f i n e t h e 0-1
'opening' as ending after White's 21st, since
[ 21.a4 would have left White decidedly
514
510 B03 aggressive moves up until now, whereas his

McKinnon,Keith 2125 opponent has shown his peaceful intentions
Kraai,Jesse 2509 by o f f e rin g a d ra w b y re p e t it io n . I t is n o
4th Int Edmonton CAN (8) 21.12.2009 surprise that Kraai's sense of danger deserted
[Neil McDonald] him.
[ He should acquiesce in the draw with
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 30...d3 31.d1 ( If 31.g1 f2
5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.h3 0-0 8.f3 intending 32...Be3 looks risky for W hite.)
f5 9.e3 Evidently White hopes to prosper 31...c2 etc. ]
by avoiding Be2 for a couple of moves. A 31.d1! Forking the black queen and rook.
characteristic Alekhine counterattack in the xd1
centre based on d6-d5 and answering c4-c5 [ The only attempt to stay alive is 31...c1
with Nc4 is deterred if White can play Bxc4 in but 32.e8+ h7 33.e4+ is pretty awful
reply 'in one go'. The game Schubert-Kopylov for Black. ]
in the archives shows the effectiveness of 32.c8+! MacKinnon is after bigger game
such a plan for Black after White has played than the bishop on d1. h7 33.f5+ g8
Be2. c6 10.c1 e8 34.e4!! Excellently played. The threats
[ B l a c k c o u l d a l s o t r y 10...f6 include 35.Qc8 mate and 35.Qxf7+ followed
putting immediate pressure on d4. Then by mate on f8.
11.d5 ( 11.e2!? ) 11...e5 12.d4 g6 [ Instead Black would escape after 34.xd1?
13.b3 e8 14.e2 d3+! 15.xd3 xd4 g6 ]
16.xg6 xe3 17.xh7+ xh7 18.d3+ 34...f6 35.c8+ f7 36.d7+ f8 37.g6
g8 19.fxe3 h4+ 20.d2 d7 21.hf1 [ It's mate on f7 or on the back rank after
e5 22.f4 g5 23.cf1 ae8 and Black 37.g6 e7 38.c8+ ]
had strong pressure for his pawn in Jaenig, 1-0
R-Wohl, A/Bad Woerishofen GER 2008. ]
11.d5 MacKinnon gains space in the centre
and rules out any d6-d5 move for good. b4 511 B03
12.d4 g6 13.e2 c5 14.dxc6 xc6 Melnikova,Yana 2331
15.0-0 f6 16.e1? Rozentalis,Eduardas 2567
[ Instead White should consolidate with 14th Open Kavala GRE (3) 13.08.2005
16.b3 or ] [John Cox]
[ 16.db5 with a small advantage in either
case. ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
16...xe3? A positional sacrifice of a kind 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
played by greats such as World Champions 9.f3 e7 The main line of the Four Pawns
Petrosian and Kasparov, though they would attack. 10.d5
normally expect to gain a pawn in the bargain. [ 10.e2 is the quieter and less critical
The question mark isn't meant to dismiss an alternative. ]
imaginative idea, but rather to indicate that 10...b4 A discredited move which may or
Black had something simpler and better: may not be due for a revival following the
[ 16...xc4! 17.xc4 ( Or 17.xc6 xe3 ) Dominguez game given in September.
17...xd4 18.xd4 xe1+ 19.xe1 xd4 [ 10...exd5 is these days normally
and Black has a fairly useful extra pawn. ] considered virtually forced, the point being
17.fxe3 h4 18.xc6 bxc6 19.f1 g5 t h a t a f t e r 11.cxd5 b4 12.c1?
20.f3 e7 21.d4 d7 22.d1 e5 just leaves the d-pawn en prise, so 12 Nd4
23.xd6 xf3+ 24.xf3 xe3+ 25.h1 h6 and the deeply-analysed main lines of the
26.xc6 b8 27.c5 c2 28.f1 d3 4PA follow. ]
29.d1 c2 30.f1 xb2?? I guess this has 11.d4
happened to all of us. Black, who has much [ 11.c1 is also supposed to be good the
t h e h igh e r ra t in g, h a s m a d e m o st o f t h e main line being exd5 12.a3 c5 13.axb4 d4
515
14.xd4 cxd4 15.xd4 b8 16.xf5 21.e1 ae8 22.xf8+ xf8 23.b4!
xe5+ 17.e2 xf5 18.c5 d7 19.d5 cxb4 24.axb4 xe6 25.xe6 xe6
d8 20.c3 0-0 21.e3 e6 22.g4 f5 26.c5;
23.f3 f6 24.0-0 e4 25.xe4 B) 14...xf7 15.g4 c5 16.e6 g6
with advantage to White as in Velimirovic- with an extremely complicated position in
Marovic, Yugoslavia 1977. ] which Black has genuine chances for his
11...g6 12.a3 a6 pawn, for example. ( 16...h5 is worse:
[ 12...c5 13.xe6! fxe6 14.axb4 cxb4 17.xh5 xd4 18.d5 xd5 19.xd4
15.a4 0-0 ( 15...d7 is an insanely f4 20.e5 e7 21.0-0-0 ad8 22.g3
complicated alternative which generated, in xe6 23.h3 g5+ 24.xg5 xg5
Jon Speelman's phrase, 'pages of anarchy' 25.g2 )
all over the world after the game B1) 17.d1 i s a n a l t e r n a t i v e : e8
Ku p re ic hik -Gip slis, Mo sco w 19 7 2 . T h e 18.b4?! ( 18.e2 is more sensible, for
verdict is that White is probably better, but example xd4 19.xd4 c5 20.e5
if Black happens to have memorised the f5 21.d6 f6 22.f1 xe6 23.f8+
seven pages of analysis in Speelman's Best xf8 24.xe6+ f7 ) 18...xb4!
C h e s s G a m e s 1 9 7 0 - 8 0 ( i f yo u g e t t h e 19.axb4 xb4 20.c1 c5 21.db5 f5
c h a n c e b t w t h e n b u y t h is b o o k ) t h e n I 22.g3 xe6 23.c7 f6 24.g5
wouldn't give much for W hite's chances.) d4 25.e2 a4-+;
16.xb6 axb6 17.xa8 xa8 18.d6 B2) 17.0-0-0 e8 18.e1 d8
is the old main line which probably favours B2a) 19.d5 xd5 20.cxd5 xf1
White, although there have been dissenting ( 20...xd5 21.c4+- ) 21.hxf1 a4
v o i c e s i n t h e p a s t . T h e t e xt i s a l o n g - 22.e7 c4+ 23.d1 d3+=;
f o r go t t e n m o ve wh ic h wa s su p p o se d l y B2b) 19.b4 h5 20.d1 ( 20.h4
refuted by White's next. ] e7 21.g3 c5 ) 20...xd4 21.xd4
13.dxe6 0-0!? This is the idea. f4! ( 21...c5 22.e7 xd4
[ 13...fxe6 14.g4 and ] 23.exf8+ xf8 is probably good
[ 13...f6 14.c5 xc5 15.b5++- are given too )]
by various sources (for example Hort). ] 14...g5 15.d2
14.e2 These variations are scratching the [ 15.f2 c5 16.exf7+ xf7 17.f3 xc4
surface, but they are enough to make it clear was the alternative, and here I suspect that
that there is much to be discovered and that White retains at least some advantage. ]
Black has at the very least dangerous 15...xe3 16.xe3 c5 17.f3
compensation over the board. W hether it's [ 17.exf7+ xf7 18.f3 xc4 is similar
fully adequate we shall have to wait for further again I suspect that W hite would sooner
tests to see perhaps in a Dominguez- lose c4 than e5 and can claim a little
Rozentalis clash...... advantage here. ]
[ One cannot blame White for being terrified 17...fxe6 18.0-0 e7 19.ad1
when a much higher-rated player unleashed [ 19.b5 looks like the move. White ought to
a novel pawn sacrifice of this kind, but really threaten Nd6 before the a-rook has emerged
14.exf7+ has to be the critical move. I think from a8 (so that ...Nc8 disconnects the
Black's idea then is rooks), and she ought to do that from b5 not
A) 14...xf7 15.g4 c5 ( 15...c5 e4, because from b5 the knight both eyes
16.f3 f5 17.g3 d7 18.d1 e6 the a-pawn and sometimes prevents ..Nc7.
19.d5 is good for White) 16.0-0-0 e8 c7 ( 19...c8 20.ad1 c7 21.xc7
17.e6 e7 18.f3 ( 18.d5 xd5 xc7 22.g5+- ) 20.d6 d7 21.ad1 b6
19.cxd5 h5 20.h3 xd1 21.xa6 looks a fair bit better for W hite to me. In
bxa6 22.xd1 xd4 is not so clear) fact it's quite possible that White was right
18...xd4 19.xd4 c5 sees Black n o t t o g ra b t h e p a wn a n d h a s a c t u a ll y
managing to win his pawn back, but White played splendidly up to here. ]
gets a powerful initiative after 20.f2 f8 19...ad8 20.e4
516
[ 20.xd8 xd8 ( 20...xd8! ) 21.b5 the textbooks. Cafferty went on to write

c8 22.g5 xg5 23.xg5+- was still about the Alekhine, but I don't believe he
better. ] mentioned this game. ]
20...c8 21.fg5 f5 22.g4 xe4?? 8...b4?!
[ 22...g6 was necessary, with or without a [ In my view he should just take the medicine
preliminary exchange on d1. ] with 8...e7 Black's position does not
23.xe4?? inspire confidence after 9.f3 0-0 10.d3 ]
[ W h i t e m i s s e s h e r m o m e n t : 23.xd8
9.g4N A novelty over 9 Nf3, which is also
wins on the spot since xd8 24.f7 xf7 good. With 9 Qg4 W hite prevents ... Qh4+,
( 24...e8 25.xe4 is crushing) 25.xf7 Black's only threat, and hits g7. Not bad with
xf7 26.xe4 wins more material. ] one move! g6 10.a3 xc3+ 11.bxc3 h6
23...b6 For the remainder of the game White 12.f3 OK, Black is 2290 so a pretty strong
thrashes around cluelessly while Black player. Let's say he misjudged his opening
steadily improves. 24.g3 The knight on e4 is choice. The dark squares are creaking horribly
actually only in the way and White would have and there is very little counterplay to be seen.
done better to shift it with e7 13.d2 f5 14.f2 d7 15.h3 c5
[ 24.xd8 xd8 25.g5 h6 16.g4! e7 17.d3
26.f3
In this way she prevents ...Nb8-c6 by Bd3 [ 17.e4! looks very powerful. ]
and Qe4, and retains a slight advantage. ] 17...cxd4 18.cxd4 a5 19.e2! Why not.
24...b8 25.d3 c6 26.g5 xf1+ 27.xf1 The threat of Ne4-d6+ now has to be attended
d7 28.f2 8e7 29.d1 d4 30.h3 to. f6 20.e4 f5 21.d6+ f8 22.e3
g6 31.xg6 hxg6 32.e3 f8 33.g2? xe5 Desperate.
c6+ 34.e4 f5-+ 35.f1 xe5 36.f4 [ However, attempts to defend legitimately
xg5+ 37.f1 f5 a r e c r u s h e d : 22...g7 23.gxf5 xf5
0-1 ( 23...exf5 24.hg1 xe5 25.dxe5 xe5
26.g3+- ) 24.xf5 exf5 25.hg1 f8
26.h4+- ]
512 B03 23.dxe5 xe5 24.g3!+- b2+ 25.d2 e5
Milenkovic,Mladen 2338 26.gxf5 xf5 27.xf5 gxf5 28.xf5 xf5
Farago,Sandor 2290 29.af1 e7 30.xf5 d6
FSIMA March Budapest HUN (7) 11.03.2005 [ 30...ae8 31.g6 d8 32.d6+ c8
[Andrew Martin] 33.f7 b6 34.xb6 axb6 35.g1+- ]
31.d3+ e7 32.b1 d4 33.xb7+ e6
Coming up, a rare Four Pawns attack against 34.xd4 exd4 35.h5 ag8 36.xh6+
the Alekhine, with a novelty thrown in! 1.e4 xh6 37.xh6 g2+ 38.d3 xh2 39.xa7
f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.f4 e5 A one-sided game, but sometimes it's
dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 e6?! Have you necessary to show why a line is uncommon.
ever wondered why Black almost always goes What surprises me is that Black is a strong
7...Bf5 in this position? I must admit I haven't player, yet here he is punting a very poor
done so (until now) and developing the Bishop system. Oh well, one cannot get it right all the
on c8 would be my first thought here, not time!
wishing to block the pieces in. Yet several 1-0
have tried 7...e6?!, presumably to move White
off the beaten track. I just don't think it can be
a very good move. 8.c3
[ 8.f3 e7 9.c3 0-0 10.e2 f6 11.exf6
xf6 12.0-0 d7 13.e4 e8 14.fg5
xg5 15.xf8+ xf8 16.xg5 h6 17.e4
d8 18.d3 c8 19.f1 e7 20.b3 f8
21.e1 d7 22.f3 Ljubojevic, L-Cafferty,
B/Teeside 1972 is the game quoted in all
517
513 B03 24...g7 25.e3

Milliet,Sophie 2404 [ White is pushed back as 25.d1 allows
Mirzoev,Azer 2617 xe2! 26.xe2 xd4+ ]
Meister Open (2) 02.01.2010 25...xd2 26.xd2 d3 27.f2 h5!
[Neil McDonald] A far sighted and patient move- see move 27.
In some positions it is a fable to talk about the
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 power of the bishop pair, but here they really
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 do exert enormous power. 28.c1 xe1+
0-0 9.b3 c6! In my opinion this is a 29.xe1 b5 30.a4 c6 31.b4 d8
promising way to avoid the over-analysed 32.c5 f7 33.e3 So far White has
[ 9...e5 ] managed to resist the black bishops, but the
10.d5 e5 11.e2 f5!? The pawn structure intervention of Black's kingside pawns and
is now similar to a Leningrad Dutch mainline. t h e n h is ki n g i n t e n s if y t h e p re ss u r e . h4!
Thus Black has a backward pawn on e7 and a 34.c2 g3 35.hxg3 hxg3 36.f1 e6
hole on e6. On the other hand, the white 37.d2 xd2 38.xd2 f5 39.e2 g4
bishop is on e2, which is a worse square than 40.e1 d5 41.xg3 xb3 42.a5 c4
i t s t y p i c a l p o s t o n g 2 i n t h e D u t c h . 43.e1 f5!
Furthermore, there is no pawn on g3 as part of [ Black spurns to regain the pawn as
a fianchetto to deter a black kingside pawn 43...xe2+? 44.xe2 xf4 is only a draw.
advance. 12.f4 White decides to take It is be tt er to kee p on p rob in g with t h e
measures to prevent the further advance of strong bishops. ]
the black f-pawn. 44.f2 e4 45.g3 f8 46.g1 c5+
[ Instead 12.f3 was examined in the game 47.g2 d3 48.g4 White is understandably
Boric-Rakic. ] keen to get some counterplay, but it was
12...g4 13.xg4 fxg4 14.ge2 better to wait, say with
If nothing happens fast White can gradually [ 48.f1 Only when the black king went after
bu ild up an at t ack a gain st Bla ck's sta t ic the a4 pawn would it be time to start moving
weaknesses along the e-file. e5! Breaking up the kingside pawns. ]
t h e c e n t r e a n d s o g a i n i n g d y n a m i c 48...d5+ 49.f1 e6 50.g5 Now White's
counterplay. 15.dxe6 xe6 So the backward pawns are all fixed, with no expansive power,
p a w n a n d h o l e i n f r o n t o f i t h a s b e e n and Mirzoev will be able to pick off either the
transferred from the e-file to the d-file. The pawn on a5 or f4. d6 51.g2 e3 52.f2+
pawn on d6 is easier to attack than the pawn e4 53.e2 b4 54.d4 d7 55.f3
that was previously on e7, but as we shall see xa5 56.e5 e8 57.g3 f5 58.f3
Mirzoev is happy to offer it as a sacrifice in e6 59.c4 c3 60.e3 a5 61.e4 a4
order to energise his pieces. 16.0-0 e7 62.c5 c6+ 63.d3 d5 64.f8 e1
17.d4 h6! If Black is going to stay active 65.e3+ e6 66.f5+ gxf5 67.g6 e8
he has to avoid the exchange of his dark 68.g7 f7 69.c2 a5 70.d4+ f6
squared bishop. 18.d3 ae8 19.ce1 d8 71.b5 xb6 72.d6 g8 73.xb7 g5
20.b5? 74.d6 a3 75.f7+ xf7 76.xa3 f4
[ White is in too much of a hurry. Instead a 0-1
move like 20.a4 would keep some pressure
on the queenside. ]
20...a6 21.xd6? 514 B03
[ Better to sacrifice pride with 21.bc3 ] Minasian,Artashes 2600
21...xd6 22.c5 d5 23.cxb6 Thanks to Minasian,Ara 2480
the tactical trick Milliet has won a pawn, but ch Yerevan 1999
her pieces are loosely placed which allows [Alexander Volzhin]
Black to take over the initiative. f5 24.d2
[ After 24.c3 c8 the black rook can I n t h e l a s t A rm e n ia n Ch a m p io n s h i p G M
invade on c2. ] Artashes Minasian had to face the Alekhine's
518
twice. Both times he chose the Exchange 13.f3 f5 queenside castles will follow,
Variation, and twice his opponents preferred and for the cost of only a pawn Black has
5... ed. Both games are of theoretical a growing initiative. ]
importance. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 11...xc3+ 12.bxc3 f6 For the cost of only
4.c4 b6 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 c6!? a pawn Black has firmly seized the initiative.
A r e l a t i v e l y n e w i d e a . T h i s m o ve l o o k s White now has to solve some rather difficult
provocative, but it's by no means bad! The problems. 13.d2 c5 14.g5 The wise
idea behind the text is to prevent W hite's decision.
se tu p a s in th e p re vio us ga me (B d3 a n d [ 14.g3 f5 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 and Black has
Nge2). tremendous compensation for a pawn, and
[ A few rounds earlier Art Minasian had furthermore all his pieces are very active.
already played this position vs Nalbandian. Besides, White's King is seriously exposed. ]
His opponent went for 6...e7 but failed to 14...xg5 15.fxg5 f5 16.0-0-0 d3+
equalize completely. The game continued 17.xd3 xd3 18.c5! The only way to
7.d3 c6 8.ge2 g4 ( 8...b4 maintain the balance, otherwise W hite will
-this sortie leads Black nowhere as after lose both central pawns. xd5 Very solid.
9.b1 the c4-pawn cannot be taken: xc4? Now the draw is obvious.
10.a4+ ) 9.f3 h5 10.0-0 g6 11.xg6 [ 18...dxc5 is more ambitious, with a double-
hxg6 12.b3 and White is slightly better and edged position after 19.f4 c4 20.xc7
in due course quickly outplayed his xd5 21.e5 g8 although I prefer Black
opponent f6 13.e4 d5 This advance is here. ]
typical for such pawn structures but 19.cxd6 cxd6 20.h3 c8 21.f4 xf4
unfortunately it doesn't work here. 14.xf6+ 22.xf4 xc3+ 23.b2 c2+ 24.b3 f2
xf6 15.c5 c8 16.f4 d7 ( 16...d8 25.xd3 xf4
with the idea to castle kingside deserved [ The 4 Rooks ending is dead equal, so the
serious attention) 17.d2 h4 18.b4 a6 p la ye rs n o w a g re e d t o a d ra w. 25...xf4
19.a4 d8 20.b5 with a huge advantage. ] 26.xd6 0-0 Now it's possible to reach the
7.d5 e5 8.f4 ed7 following conclusion: it seems that in the
[ Of course, the pawn is taboo: 8...exc4?? Exchange Variation, (which is one of most
9.xc4 xc4 10.a4+ and White w ins a unpleasant lines for Black in the Alekhine`s),
piece. By the way, this idea often occurs in Black has found good ways after both 5... cd
different variations of Alekhine's. ] and 5...ed. Now it's White's turn to improve.
9.d4 Playing this move White hoped to put Undoubtedly White players will try to do so
the brakes on Black's normal development. and we will not wait have to wait long for
However an unpleasant surprise awaits him. new games in this line. ]
e7! Nevertheless! ½-½
[ Other continuations can hardly successfully
solve Black's problems: 9...f6 10.e3
e7 11.b5 d8 12.e4+ e7 13.xe7+ 515 B03
xe7 14.d4 f6 15.0-0-0 ] Moreno Carnero,Javier 2500
[ 9...f6 10.d3 e7 11.f3 0-0 12.0-0 Schulze,Ulrich 2333
and in both cases W hite has a small but Bundesliga 2004-5 (12) 12.03.2005
steady advantage. ] [John Cox]
10.xg7 White has no other way to justify the
Queen's sortie on the previous move, 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
otherwise after Black castles the Queen will 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
b e go o d t a r ge t f o r h i s m i n o r p i e c e s . f6 0-0 9.b3 e5 The main line of the Voronezh
11.g4 va r i a t io n . I ' ve r e c e n t l y f in i s h e d d o i n g a
[ 11.g3?? is just a blunder in view of h4 ] database for CBM on this position so I count
[ 11.h6 is also far from good as the Queen myself a bit of an expert just at the moment
is "off side" here: e7+ 12.d1 c5 the debate goes on but most people seem to
519
f ee l W h it e's do in g p re tt y we ll.. .. . 10.dxe5 whether the ...a6 he's spent it on is a benefit

dxe5 11.xd8 is another matter. ]
[ 11.c5 6d7 12.c4 is possible also, when 20...f5 21.f3 Extremely thematic in these
Rowson-Baburin, Port Erin 1999, saw the positions - White should not let Black from the
muc h-pra is ed no ve lt y a5 after which pawn duo e4/f5 (to say nothing of the threat of
13.ge2 ( 13.f3? e4 14.d4 xc5 ...f4). h7 22.b4 c6 23.a3 ad8
is the point) 13...c6 14.a3 d4 15.xd4 24.2c4 f6 25.b6 We've reached a very
exd4 16.xd4 e8+ gave Black good normal position for this line and W hite now
compensation for his pawn. However, Fritz demonstrates why ....a6 is not such a good
doesn't see why 15 b4 (with the point 15.. idea. e7 26.f1 g5 27.xg5 hxg5
Qxa3 16 Rb1 and 17 Bc1) isn't just good for 28.d2 g7 29.e1 Another thematic
White, and I can't see why he isn't right. In reorganisation - once he gets a grip like this in
my (present) opinion the old 12 ..Nc6 is this structure White normally wants his rooks
more sensible, although that isn't what I said on the d and e files, and puts them on
in Starting Out: Alekhine's Defence. ] different ranks (rather than 28 Re1 and 29
11...xd8 12.c5 6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 Rc d 1 ) t o f a c i l i t a t e l a t e r d o u b l in g wh e r e
[ 14.e4 is a testing alternative Black tried needed. f6 30.h3 c7 31.f2 d7
14 ...Nf6 with success in Kupreichik-Barthel, 32.d5+ xd5 33.xd5 f8 34.a4
1998, but usually he plays f8 15.d6 W hite is loosening his structure with this
e6 16.f3 cd4 17.g5 xg5 18.xg5 move and he didn't have to do it now, but
d7 as in Yagupov-Ukolov, Moscow 1996, presumably the players were becoming short
although this is really quite nice for White in of time. xb4? A decisive error after
my view. ] [ 34...e6 35.b5 e7 36.dxe5 xc5
14...a5 15.e2 h6 This move is not the 37.b6 c6 38.xb7 xb7 39.xe7 d2+
best in my opinion either 15...b6 (the best 40.g3 xb6 Black hangs on ]
regarded) or the calm 15...Nc6 as in Raetsky- 35.dxe5+- cd7 36.g4?
Sa nt o -Ro ma n Ro hd e 2 00 4 (whe re B la ck [ 36.e8+ f7 37.c4+ d5 38.d6+
equalised handily) are better. 16.0-0 f8 won decisive material at once White must
17.fd1 have been desperately short of time to miss
[ 17.e4 c6 18.d6 b8 19.a3! f5 this. ]
20.fd1 e6 21.b4 was a very well-timed 36...c6? Returning the compliment:
s e q u e n c e b y W h i t e in Hu n t - S ch n a b e l , [ 36...c2 37.1e2 d4 still gave chances
Oxford 1998 (19 Rfd1 Be6 holds up the a3/ of survival ]
b4 push). I'm not sure that wasn't a better 37.e8 xe8 38.xe8+ f7 39.c4+
order than what Moreno Carnero does. ] Another unpleasant defeat for Black in this
17...e6 18.b5 a6 I don't understand this variation, but Black didn't seem to know what
move at all. 18....Nc6 is obvious and normal he was doing in the line either theoretically or
with this particular move order Black might positionally. I'm not convinced by W hite's
also take the chance to exchange a pair of move order in the early middlegame either,
rooks with 18...Rxd1+ - this might be another but later he took control nicely before the
reason why Harriet Hunt's immediate Ne4-d6 slightly error-strewn finish.
was better than Carnero's 17 Rfd1: probably 1-0
W hite's rooks are both better pieces than
Black's at the moment. ...a6 is seldom a good
move for Black in these lines since it weakens
b6 and prevents a ...b6 break ever being an
option. 19.d6 d7 20.d2
[ 20.b4 c6 21.a3 was a thematic option,
although by playing Rfd1 before Nb5-d6
White has allowed Black to save the tempo
of ....Rb8 as compared to Hunt-Schnabel -
520
516 B03 these positions, for example 9.f3 0-0

Moser,E 2433 A) 10.d3 was played in Denisov, I
Fier,A 2595 (2300)-Khalifman, A (2637) Aix-les-Bains
18th Vienna Open 2013 (5.3) 21.08.2013 2011 but now I think Black gets a
[Tom Rendle] reasonable game with c6! with the threat
of . .. d xe 5 ( instead in the game White was
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 better after 10...e6 11.0-0 a6 12.e2
5.f4 g6!? This move is very rare and exd5 13.cxd5 ) 11.exd6 exd6 12.0-0
subsequently it hasn't featured on cxd5 13.cxd5 with roughly level chances -
ChessPublishing for many years, so here I'll it's not clear to me whether Black should
attempt to update the key lines! risk grabbing a pawn with xc3!? 14.bxc3
[ 5...dxe5 is of course the mainline featured xd5;
heavily in the archives. ] B) 10.e2 a6 11.0-0 g4 12.f2!
6.c3 and Black is lacking in counterplay
[ 6.h3 strikes me as rather odd and it was somewhat - he can win a pawn with xf3
well met by dxe5 7.fxe5 c5! in Brankovic, 13.xf3 dxe5 but after the thematic 14.f5!
D (2364)-Marinkovic, I (2448) Kragujevac I really like W hite's position with good
2013 which continued 8.d5 e6! 9.f3 attacking chances both on the kingside
( 9.d6? h4+ 10.e2 e4+ 11.f2 and also in the centre where he is
xe5 is clearly better for Black) 9...exd5 preparing to play c5. ]
10.g5! e7 11.xe7 xe7 12.cxd5 0-0 9.c5!
13.c3 8d7 and Black already had the [ 9.f3 is a safe option I suppose and White
better chances as White's central pawns are was a little better after
more of a weakness here than a strength. ] A) 9...0-0! is probably more accurate
6...g7 7.e3 e6 when Black should be OK after 10.e2
[ 7...0-0 a6 ( 10...c6!? ) 11.0-0 e6 12.dxe6
A) 8.g4? really doesn't work here dxe5 xe6;
9.fxe5 c5! 10.dxc5 6d7 11.f3 B) 9...g4 10.e2 xf3 11.xf3 dxe5
and now in Mladenov, P (2390)-Ninov, D 12.fxe5 xe5 13.c5 6d7 14.b3 b6
(2140) Blagoevgrad 2013 Black could've 15.c6 f6 16.0-0-0!? and White had
gotten a big advantage with the simple more than enough compensation for the
xe5 ( 11...a5!? i s a l s o s t r o n g) sacrificed pawn in Solomon, S (2397)-
12.xe5 xe5 13.g2 c6; Teichmann, E (2388) Canterbury 2010 ]
B) 8.c5! must be the critical test of 7...0-0 9...dxc5
and now [ 9...c8?! 10.f3 gives White a massive
B1) 8...dxc5 9.dxc5 6d7 10.c4 space advantage ]
is already very comfortable for W hite 10.xc5 0-0 11.f3!? A very aggressive
( 10.h4!? ); move, keeping the option for an early g4 open
B2) 8...6d7 9.f3 c6 10.d2 b6? b u t o b j e c t i ve l y I d o n ' t t h i n k t h i s i s b e s t
( 10...dxc5 11.dxc5 b6 12.d1 c7 although it works well in this game
13.b4 is still very pleasant for White) [ 11.f3! should be enough for at least a
11.d1? a real missed opportunity s l i g h t a d v a n t a g e h e r e , f o r e xa m p l e c6
( 11.cxd6 exd6 12.e4! dxe5 13.dxe5 ( 11...h6 12.d4! xf4 13.xf5 gxf5
and Black is in a lot of trouble here) 14.d4 is very promising for White) 12.d6
11...bxc5 12.dxc5 dxe5 13.xe5 c7 exd6 13.xd6 e8 14.e2 and White's
14.c4 f6 and Black had at least bishop on d6 gives him a lot of control ]
equalised in Valenti, G (2177)-Forchert, 11...8d7
M (2398) Bad Wiessee 2013 ] [ 11...h5!? 12.h3 h4 13.d1 and White's
8.d5 f5 control of the centre give him a definite
[ 8...c8 is probably more solid but I still advantage ]
think W hite retains a slight advantage in [ 11...e8! looks like Black's best option here
521
and he should have reasonable chances, for 23...a1+ 24.c2 8a2

example 12.g4 d7 13.0-0-0 c8 14.h3 [ also playable was 24...xf1!? 25.xa8
a4! 15.d4 c5! and Black's counterplay is f2 26.xf2 xf2+ 27.d3 xb2
coming just in time on the queenside. Still, and again Black has three pawns for the
White is possibly a little better after 16.f2 piece ]
but the position remains very complicated ] 25.f3 xb2 26.d8+! White must force the
12.f2 g5!? Fier plays a very interesting draw now as Black's attack is too strong on
piece sacrifice and it looks just about sound, the queenside f7 27.d7+ g8 28.d8+
even with time to analyse with the computer! f7 29.d7+ g8
Because of this I think White players should [ 29...f6? is too ambitious as after
probably stick to the safer 11.Nf3 13.g4 30.e8+ e6 31.xg7 a4+ 32.d3
[ 13.g3 e6 gives Black excellent play ] a3+ 33.e2 1a2+ 34.e1 e3+
13...g6 14.f5 xe5 15.e4 e6! 16.fxg6 ( 34...xf3?? 35.c4+ ) 35.d1 b2+
[ or 16.dxe6 xf5 17.xf5 fxe6 18.xe6+ 36.c1 xf3 37.b1! fa3 38.xh7
h8 19.d1 e8 20.xe8 axe8 21.e2 W hite remains a piece up and he is just
bc4! and despite only having one pawn for about holding on. ]
the piece Black's initiative is really ½-½
d a n ge ro u s h e re . W h it e will h a ve gre a t
difficulty finishing development and I think
most players would rather be Black here! ] 517 B03
16...fxg6 17.xb6! Moser,Eva 2405
[ 17.dxe6?! f6 18.h3 f3+ Baburin,Alexander 2545
is very awkward for White to deal with and I III EUICC Arvier ITA (7) 21.06.2007
wouldn't be surprised if White was lost here ] [John Watson]
17...axb6 18.0-0-0 exd5 19.xd5+
[ 19.xd5!? leads to the crazy variation This game (or at least the notes) surveys
xa2 20.e7+ xe7 21.c4+ h8 some of the basic 4 Pawn Attack theory. 1.e4
22.xa2 f6 when Black had three pawns f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.f4
for a rook and a big attack. A draw is quite dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
lik ely he re , f o r exam ple 23.d2 a8! 9.f3 e7 10.e2
24.b1 f1+ 25.c2 f6 ( not [ 10.d5 is the most critical option refer to
25...xa2?? 26.d8+ f8 27.xe5+ g8 previous games for its analysis. ]
28.d5+ f7 29.xf7+ xf7 30.e2 10...0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 xf6 13.d2
and White is easily winning) 26.b1 f1+ e7 14.ad1 ad8 15.c1 In the game
27.c2 f6= ] Dushin-Siewert I exam in e 15 K h1 !? . g4
19...xd5 20.xd5 xa2 21.b1 fa8 Mark Morss corrects me and points out that
Despite all the complications it seems the 15...Bg4, although Alekhine-expert Baburin's
position is still level here - amazing! 22.xc7 choice, is actually rare. In fact, in a
d3!? Correspondence game database, I have 45
[ 22...a1+ 23.c2 xd1 24.xd1 a1+ games with 15...h6 and only 26 with all other
25.e2 xg4 makes a lot of sense as well, 15th moves. Now 15... Kh8, 15...Rfe8, and
White has to be careful as Black already has 15...Rd7 all need to be investigated, but since
3 pawns for the piece but at least he can for many years 15...h6 has been considered to
start to develop his kingside finally with be the main one, I'll just stick to that one,
26.f3 and after b1 27.h3 xb2+ 28.d2 given the limits of space.
e5 29.g2 chances are still balanced ] [ I think that White tends to retain some
23.d2 advantage, although it's not easy to
[ 23.xa8? loses to xb2+ 24.a1 xh2+ d e m o n s t ra t e t h a t . A ga m e Zilb e rs t e in -
25.b1 b2+! 26.a1 d2+ 27.b1 Baburin, San Fransisco 2007 continued
xd1+ 28.c2 xf1 29.xd3 f8 15...h6
with ...Bc5 coming. ] A) 16.b3 is weaker af ter d7 17.d2
522
fd8; 518 B03

B) , but I like the move 16.f2 (!), which Movsesian,Sergei 2655
h a s t h e i d e a o f d 5 . F o r e xa m p le , f7 Luther,Thomas 2570
( 16...h8 17.d5! exd5 18.xd5; 4th IECC Istanbul (3) 2003
16...d7 17.d5 ) 17.b3 , and: d7 [Andrew Martin]
( 17...g6 18.d5 exd5 19.xd5 xd5
20.cxd5 e5 21.f4 g4 22.ff1 ) 18.h3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
fd8 19.g4 g6 20.f1 xd4 21.xd4 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5
xd4 22.xd4 xd4 23.xd4 xd4 9.cxd5 c4 10.d6!? A very sharp move,
24.e2 d8 25.g2+-; originally suggested by Boleslavsky. W hite
C) 16.h1 h8 17.h3 g6 18.b3 a6 hems in the Bishop on f8 at the cost of
19.g1 d7 20.fe1 f7 21.f1 e7 development. e6 Perhaps surprised, Luther
22.fe1 f7 23.f1 1/2-1/2 . This all finds a decent square for his other Bishop.
seems fairly logical, except that at the end Alternative ideas :
White has ( 23.d3! , for example, xd3 [ 10...c6 11.f3 ( 11.f4 e6 12.f3
24.xd3 g6 25.d2 with a comfortable d7 13.e2 0-0-0 14.d2 f6 15.exf6
advantage. The problem is that both sides' xd6 16.0-0-0 c5 17.xd7+ xd7
play is so flexible that you can't come to 18.e4 d4 19.xd4 xd4 20.fxg7 xg7
a conclusion based upon concrete 21.c5 xd1+ 22.xd1 1-0 Kotsur,P-
analysis, so there's plenty of room for Koniushkov,I/Smolensk 1997) 11...g4
disagreement. )] 12.f4 g5!? ]
16.e4 h6 17.h1 d7 18.fe1 fe8 [ 10...g6 11.f3 g7 Would be my choice.
19.xf6+ xf6 20.e5 xe2 21.xc6 White's centre seems ripe for collapse. ]
bxc6 22.xe2 e5 23.f4 e4 24.h3 h5 [ 10...f5 11.f3 c6 12.e2 b4
25.h2 e3 26.d3 f7 27.b3 e4 13.0-0! Although this variation has been
28.exe3 exd4 29.xd4 xd4 30.e5 recommended for Black the weakness at f7
d7 31.e1 g6 32.h2 e7 33.g4 c2+ makes me suspicious. ]
34.e2 xe5 35.xc2 xe1 36.gxh5 f7 11.f3
37.g3 g1+ 38.f4 g5 39.d2 e7 [ T h e i m m e d i a t e 11.b5 can be met by
40.d3 xh5 41.g4 g5+ 42.f4 g2 Alburt's d5 12.f3 ( 12.xc4?? h4+ )
43.a3 a5 44.e5 h5 45.d4 h4 46.e3+ 12...a6 ]
d6 47.c5+ d7 48.e4 g5 49.e5 g3 11...c6 12.b5 Continuing in the same
50.f5 xh3 51.d4+ c8 52.xg5 xb3 sharp vein. The question is whether White can
53.xh4 xa3 54.c4 b7 55.f4 a6 keep his game together without resorting to
56.e4 b5 57.c1 a4 58.d4 h3 such committal play.
59.b1+ b3 60.h1 b4+ 61.c3 c4+ [ 12.f4 Both g6 13.e2 g7 14.0-0 0-0 ]
62.b2 b4 63.h8 a3+ 64.a2 c2+ [ 12.e2 g6 seem fine for Black. ]
65.b1 xc5 66.a2 c2+ 67.b1 b2+ 12...c8 Indicating a willingness to sacrifice
68.a1 d2 69.b8+ c4 70.a8 d3 the exchange.
71.a2 c5 72.c8 b4 73.b8+ a4 [ 12...d5 isn't any good now : 13.xc4
74.b7 d2+ 75.a1 c6 76.b6 c4 xe5 14.xd5 xf3+ 15.xf3 h4+
77.xc6 b3 78.b6+ c2 79.h6 c3 16.g3 b4+ 17.c3 0-0-0 18.e3 xd6
80.a2 c1+ 81.xa3 c2 82.a2 d8 19.c2 c5 20.a3 a5 21.d2 b3
83.b3 b1 22.xb3 he8+ 23.d1 a6 24.c1 e3
0-1 25.xb7+ 1-0 Pazo Coustie,R-Nunez Lucero,
F/Santa Coloma 1994 ]
13.g5
[ Of course 13.c7+ xc7 14.dxc7 xc7
can only be good for Black. He has a pawn
for the exchange with more to come and ....
Bf8-c5 is a definite threat. ]
523
13...d7 14.a4 h6 15.e3 d5 16.f2 a6 22.f3 c5 was the stem game Volzhin-L.
17.bd4 The critical position of the game. Sveshnikov, USSR 1979 23.b3 xb2
Black must act swiftly lest Rc1 and a capture 24.d2 a4 25.e3 b5 26.xa4 xa4+
on c4 just wins a pawn for nothing. xe5! 27.b3 xb3+ 28.axb3 4c5
18.xe5 xd6 19.ef3 f4 was recommended at the time in the game
Compensation is evident. W hite has real W hite blundered with 23 h4? Qxa2+ and
difficulties getting his King to safety. 20.e2 should have lost. ]
b4+! 21.f1 0-0 22.xe6?! Opening the f [ 19...c5 20.e2 e6 21.g3 c4
file only seems to add to White's difficulty. 22.f3 a5 was Ilincic-Marinkovic,
[ 22.c1 f6 23.c2 d6 24.d4 Vrnjacka Banja 1989, in which Black also
tries to buy time for Kf2 etc. I'm not sure had some compensation. We can imagine
why Movsesian rejected this obvious that Movsessian (who has been playing the
continuation. ] Fo u r P a wn s r e c e n t l y) h a d s o m e id e a s
22...fxe6 23.d4 xd4 24.xd4 e5! against both of these moves, perhaps with
The only move, but good enough. Black sets the same Qd1, Rh2-e2 plan he uses in the
in motion a vicious attack, despite being a game. ]
piece down. 25.xe5 e3+ 26.g1 c2 20.d1 c4 21.h2 a5 22.f3 c5
27.c1 c5+ 28.f1 e3+ 29.e1 xg2+ 23.he2 h6
30.d1 e3+ 31.d2 cd8+ 32.c3 [ 23...a3+ 24.a1 b5 25.a4
xf3! 33.b4 Desperate courage under fire. defends, so Black's immediate play has
d5+ 34.b2 b3+ 35.a1 a3+ 36.b2 come to an dead end, as the text move
b3+ 37.a1 a3+ 38.b2 b3+ Dynamic! suggests, but that doesn't mean the game's
½-½ over. The text is useful in that it prevents
Bg5, which might be a handy resource in
connection with some dash by the d-pawn. ]
519 B03 24.d4 A very sharp solution leading to
Movsesian,Sergei 2624 forcing play. I don't see that White had any
Varga,Zoltan 2533 convenient way of improving his position
Extraliga CZE 2004-5 (5) 15.01.2005 available, so perhaps this was necessary, and
[John Cox] anyway of course it's fine if this move wins
directly: the question is does it? d5 25.e4
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 [ This was the idea, of course, not something
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 According to like 25.xd5 xd5 26.d3 xb2 27.xb2
Luther the last word was said on 7...e6 in his b6+ 28.b3 xd4+ 29.b1 xd6 ]
two games against Bryson and Movsessian - 25...xf4 26.b3 b4 A very critical choice:
annotated elsewhere on the site - and this the most obvious defence is
variation is no longer playable, although one [ 26...d5 when play is forced for a while:
must say that the same verdict has been 27.xa5 xd1+ 28.xd1 xa5 , and now I
pronounced on this variation before. The text think White can win, avoiding various false
is a tricky sideline, not widely known but quite t r a i l s , b y 29.c2 ( 29.ee1 c6= )
dangerous. 8.f4 g7 9.c3 0-0 10.d2 29...xe5 30.d7 d8 31.c8 e6 32.c5
In Starting Out: Alekhine's Defence I sang the ( 32.d5 c7 33.xc7 xc7 34.xa5
praises of 10 h3 here: a6= ) 32...f6 33.d6 xc5 34.xf6
[ 10.h3 e6 11.f3 exd5 12.cxd5 8d7 ( 34.xc5 e7 35.c8 c6 36.d5 )
13.b5! was Novak-Havas, Pula 2000. But 34...g7 35.xg6+ fxg6 36.xd8 c6
Movsessian heads straight for the main line, 37.b8 xd7 38.xb7 ce5 39.xa7
such as it is in this unexplored subvariation. ] and I should think White ought to be able to
10...e6 11.0-0-0 exd5 12.cxd5 g4 13.e1 win. ]
c4 14.h3 f5 15.g4 d3 16.xd3 cxd3 27.exc5 xe2 28.xe2 xe5 29.d5
17.xd3 a6 18.d6 c8 19.b1 b4N White has emerged from the complications
[ 19...c4 20.d5 a5 21.e7+ h8 with some advantage, but it's not clear to me
524
he's actually winning. b6 30.d3 14.h5 g5 15.f4 with the initiative,
[ 30.d7 bxc5 31.d8 xd8 32.xd8+ h7 A r izm e n d i -C a u l o , O Z. C O M B li t z 2 0 0 0)
isn't clear at all. ] 10...h5 ( 10...xe2 11.xe2 0-0 12.d2
30...xd3 31.xd3 d5 13.c5 c4 proved less clear in
[ 31.e4! f4 32.c6 d4 33.d7 e6 He n n i ga n -B u rg e ss , B i rm i n g h a m 2 0 0 2)
34.xd4 d8 looks more like it, but these 11.d2 Ardeleanu-Chetverik, Gyula 1997
things are easier with computers, of b4 12.f4 xd3+ 13.xd3 g6
course. ] 14.xg6 hxg6 15.0-0 0-0 16.b3
31...d8 32.d7 a4 33.d2 c6 34.c1 and White retains his space edge. ]
I don't think White really has any advantage 8.ge2 c6 9.0-0 f6 10.b3 Carefully
here, but you can imagine the players might played before committing the bishop to e3,
have been rather short of time.... a5 35.e2 thus avoiding the counterchances obtained in
f8 36.d1 e5 37.e3 b5?? the Hennigan-Burgess game. g4 11.e3
[ e8 12.d2 b4 13.b1 White retains his
I don't think White could have won after
37...g7 ] central predominance. Timman hunts f or
38.c3!+- c5 counterplay but W hite keeps control. xe2
[ 38...xc3 39.xc3 is the trouble of course 14.xe2 c5 15.a3 c6 16.a2! e7 17.h3
xd7 40.h8+ e7 41.e1+ d6g6 18.d5 e5 19.c1 g7 The position
42.b8+ c6 43.c1+ d5 44.d1+ e6 looks more like a King's Indian or Benoni.
45.e8+ wins the rook this was why the
White has the bishop pair and space but Black
queen had to stay covering c3. ] is well dug in and hopes for counterplay on
39.xh6+ g7 40.d2 c6 41.d3 f6 the dark squares. 20.a4 bd7 21.c3 f5
42.e4 xd7 43.xd7 xe4+ 44.d3 g2 22.g5 f6 23.xf6 xf6 24.e2 e7
45.d2 h1+ 46.d1 g2 47.b3 a4 25.f4! Space enhancement and denying Black
48.xb6 g7 49.a3 xh3 50.b4 g2 u se o f t h e e 5 -squ a re a re t h e m o t iva t in g
51.c1 e2 52.a2 g5 53.c5 g6 factors behind this key move. f7 26.xe7
54.a5 xb2 55.xb2 e6+ 56.a1 xe7 27.e1 White naturally takes the
A sad game for Varga but the jury is very opportunity to control the only open file. h4
28.e6 f8 29.e2 d7 30.h2 a6 31.g3
mu ch ou t o n t he line . I m u st sa y I d ou b t
whether it will ever be a good idea against a f6 32.g2 Patiently improving. d8 33.e3
2600 GM armed with computer preparation, d4 34.g4! The pressure on f5 brings the
but not many of us have that problem often, bishop more into the game and eventually
fortunately. f o rces Black t o ce de f u rt he r gro un d . f6
1-0 35.f3
[ 35.gxf5? h5! is annoying. After the text
Black has nothing better than exchanging
520 B03 pawns. ]
Naiditsch,Arkadij 2581 35...fxg4 36.hxg4 f8 37.e4 xe4
Timman,Jan H 2623 38.xe4 c3 39.c2 a1 40.e1 c3
Sparkassen Match (1) 13.07.2002 We sometimes overemphasise so-called "bad
[Glenn Flear] bishops" but here it's the superior minor piece
compared with Black's "bad knight". 41.g5!
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 b8 42.e2 f8 43.d3 Exchanging off
5.exd6 exd6 Considered the most solid, but Black's one good piece. xd3
potentially rather passive as we shall see. [ 43...b2 is met by 44.e7 ]
[ 5...cxd6!? is more double-edged. ] 44.xd3 d8 45.g3 a5 Blocking the
6.c3 e7 7.d3! One of White's better tries queenside and ready to challenge any rook
against 5... exd6. 0-0 invasion such as 46 Re7 by 46...Rf7. However
[ Otherwise 7...c6 8.ge2 g4 9.e3 W hite has another way of making further
f6 10.h3 ( simplest is perhaps 10.f3! h5 progress. 46.c2 f7 47.f5! A temporary
11.0-0 g6 12.f4 xd3 13.xd3 0-0 pawn sacrifice to get his king and bishop
525
working. gxf5 48.f4 f8 49.xf5 g7 ( 13.b3!? has several answers an odd-
50.h2 g8 l o o k i n g o n e i s a5 , thinking about ...
[ 50...f7 51.xh7 xg5?? 52.xf7+ ] Nb4 ) 13...xa5 . Then I don't know his
51.h6 f7 52.e6 f8 53.xf7! analysis, but play might go something like
Simplifying to leave White with the superior 14.c5! bc4 15.c1 ( 15.xc4 xc4
pieces in the rook ending. Zugzwang is close. 16.g5 xb2 17.b3 d3 is wild )
xf7+ 54.g4 e7 55.h4 d7 56.h5 15...xc3 ( 15...b5 16.a2 xc5
e7 57.e6+ d7 58.h6 17.dxc5 c6 18.e1 xc5+ 19.f2 )
[ 58.h6 b6 ( 58...f3 59.xh7 16.bxc3 b6 ( 16...b5 17.g5 c8
is hopeless as the g-pawn soon queens) 18.d2 c6 19.xc4 xc4 20.xc4 bxc4
59.f6 ( 59.e3 f5 struggles on) 59...e7 and it will be hard for White to overcome
60.f8 c7 61.h8 and wins. An excellent Black on the queenside) 17.a4! xa4
game. ] 18.xa4 b5 19.b4 a6 20.h4 g6
1-0 21.xg6 fxg6 22.f7 hg8 23.g4 de8
and Black is tied down, but the follow-up is
not evident.;
521 B03 B) the Forum has a nice game by 'brabo'
New Notes on 4 Ps Alekhine following 11...f6 12.d5! , which is almost
with 10...Qd7 11 0-0 0-0-0 certainly bad for Black, but also discussed
[John Watson] at great length.;
C) 11...g4 transposes to the main lines.
S e e t h e o t h e r g a m e ' Ne w A n a l ys is o n 4 Thus 9...Qd7 is sometimes preferred,
Pawns Attack with 10...Qd7 11 0-0 Rd8' for because the immediate 9...Bg4 allows
the complement to this game. As I say there, I another set of variations beginning with 10
received many notes about the 10....Qd7 Qd2, as well as avoiding an early c5. ]
variation f eatured in this game from Luis 10.e2 d7
Eduardo Neves Gouveia, to whom I will refer [ 10...xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4
as 'LENG'! I will include his analysis and that ha s b e en p la ye d a lo t a n d a n a lys e d a t
from the Forum, where he and Mark Morss length. I've looked at this with some very
have been contributing ideas to this line for a strong (titled) players and think that it's
long time, as I discovered wading through better for White (and potentially, torture for
many posts. In this game we see 10 Be2 Qd7 Black). ]
11 0-0 0-0-0. I'm putting their and my analysis 11.0-0
of 11...Rd8 in a separate game. Otherwise [ 11.c5 is also playable here Black avoids
this will get too crowded and unreadable. 1.e4 that with the 9...Qd7 and ... 0-0-0 move
f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 order. Of course that opens up other issues.
dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 There can f ollow d5 12.xd5 xd5
9.f3 g4 13.0-0 0-0-0 transposing to 12 c5.
[ 9...d7 opens another can of worms, but ( 13...e4 14.b3! intends Ng5 )]
it's worth noting that 10.e2 0-0-0 ( or 11...0-0-0 The other analytical game this
10...d8 11.0-0 g4 ) 11.0-0 month features 11... 0-0-0.
A) Here 11...b8 has been played very [ My game Stopa-Ramirez from last month
dangerous, so is the Four Pawns in went 11...xf3!? . I'll just quote my own
general. The main line in the Forum is 12 notes: Unusual in fact, I'm not sure if this
a4 a5 13 d5!, apparently (and perhaps not order has been played (well, I guess
too surprisingly?) good for W hite. Still, everything's been played). Black wants to
th ere are un an swered que st io ns. Fo r clarify the pawn structure right away, and
example, LENG (=Luis) suggests 12.a4 avoid Ng5 ideas. This is rare in comparison
b4 13.a5 (White gives away a pawn with two traditional moves, which I have put
without immediate compensation but 12... into another game, for the sake of clarity and
Bb4 looks sound enough otherwise in o rde r t o h igh light the co ntribu tio ns I
526
mentioned. 24.e1! Black's pieces have good scope,

A) 12.xf3!? xc4 13.f2 would be but White remains a pawn ahead. b8
played in the hope of ripping the position ( 24...xa2?? 25.g4+ ) 25.b4 a6
apart with an early d5. Black has plenty of 26.g3 ( 26.h4! enforces a favourable
options, but watch out for standard tricks simplification.) 26...c3 27.c1 d2
such as 0-0-0?! ( 13...b6 14.d5 xd5 28.cc4?! ( 28.b1! xa2 29.d1 )
15.xd5 exd5 16.g4 is unclear) 14.e2 28...g5 ( 28...d3! 29.xd3 xd3
b6 15.d5! xd5?? 16.xd5 exd5?? threatens ...Be3+, and 30.f2 c3
17.g4; 31.e1 d2! 32.g3 is only moderately
B) 12.gxf3?! has actually been the move better for White.) 29.h4 f6 30.h2
played here, perhaps out of habit, but N o w W h i t e i s i n c h a r g e a g a i n . g8
0-0-0 seems to justify 11... Bxf3, for 31.g4 ( 31.c6! h a s t h e i d e a b6
example, 13.c5 d5 14.f2 f6! 32.c5! d3 33.xc7+ xc7 34.e7+
with plenty of counterplay, especially since xe7 35.xe7+ ) 31...h5 32.xg8 xg8
15 f4 isn't available.; 33.e4 ( 33.c6! ) 33...f7 34.f3 g7
C) 12.xf3! It's hard to say what's best, 35.a4 d4 36.f4 f6 37.g3?!
b u t t h i s i s s a f e s t . 0-0-0 13.f4 ( White's attack is too strong after
( The other critical sequence is 13.c5 d5 37.b5!; or 37.e6! with the idea of Rb6.)
14.f2 , and if f5 , 15.exf6 gxf6 37...d7 38.xh5 h8 39.f3 xa4
, but instinctively, White looks better, and 40.e2 Time control, or he would have
Black had better move quickly.) 13...f6 played What follows is not very accurate,
Black is concerned and sacrifices a pawn. but W hite's win is a fair result:
Other moves are slow, e.g. , ( 13...b4 ( 40.xc7+! xc7 41.f4+ ) 40...d7
14.f1 xc3 15.bxc3 hf8 16.b1; 41.e6 f7 42.e4 g6 43.e5 g8
13...g5 14.e4 g8 15.d5! with the idea 44.f3 d8 45.f4 e8 46.f5 e7
exd5? 16.cxd5 xd5 17.g4 ) 14.exf6 47.f7 d8 48.f4 a8 49.f5 a7
gxf6 15.c5 d5 16.xd5 xd5 17.f3 50.d4 b8 51.f4 a8 52.f2 b8
d7 53.f5 a8 54.d4 c6 55.f4 a7
C1) 18.d5!? is attractive-looking, for 56.f7 e2 57.f3 e6 58.f5 c4
example, e5 ( 18...exd5?? 19.g4 ) 59.h7 ]
19.dxe6 ( 19.c6! xf3+ 20.gxf3 [ I b e l i e v e t h a t 11...f6 12.d5! is still
wi t h t h e i d e a xd5!? 21.d4 c5 considered good for White. ]
22.xd5 xe3+ 23.h1 exd5 24.d3 12.g5 is a fun move, going way back to
, presumably with some advantage due books by Alekhine authors Eales and Williams,
to Black's weak pawns and slightly loose Bagirov, and Graham Burgess. There is a
king, but a t lea st this is interestin g) tremendous amount of material on the forum
19...xe6 20.c2 yields a small on this and on the main move 12 c5, which is
advantage, based upon Black's pawn likely best
weaknesses. The tactics favour White by [ in p a rt icu la r , 12.c5 d5 ( 12...xf3
a h a i r a f t e r h6 21.xb7+! b8! 13.cxb6 xe2 14.bxa7! seems to favour
( 21...xb7 22.b4+ a8 23.xh6 ) White after xa7 15.xe2 ) 13.xd5 xd5
22.c6!? xc6! 23.xc6 xe3+ has been analysed at length, with many
24.f2; sidelines. A few possibilities: in the Forum,
C2) 18.f2 h6 19.xf6 g7 L E N G a n d M a r k M o r s s d i s c u s s 14.h3
20.xe6!? xd4 ( 20...xe6?? ( 14.b4 and between them they write a
21.g4 ) 21.e4 ( Or 21.e1 xf3+ t r e a t i s e a b o u t e4 , giving it a passing
22.xf3 ) 21...xf3+ 22.xf3 hf8 grade for Black) 14...e4 ( Mark Morss
23.e2 d5?! ( 23...fe8 24.b1 discusses 14...f5 , possibly better 15.c1
xe4 25.xe4 d3! 26.xd3 xd3 h6 16.c4 e4 17.c3 ) 15.c1
with the idea .. .Rd2 gives Black ( I n t h e F o r u m , 15.b3 gets another
counterplay, likely enough to draw.) pamphlet's worth of analysis. I gather the
527
consensus between specialist Mark Morss "might") make people to think twice about
and Luis is that Black stands okay... using 9 ... Qd7 10...000 and 11...Bg4.
maybe? ) 15...f5 16.g5 xd4 17.c4
c6 18.xf7 xc5 19.h2 b6 20.c3
, ultimately arriving at a limited advantage, 522 B03
although I'm not sure if that wasn't New analysis 4 Pawns Attack
countered with other analysis. This line is with 10...Qd7 11 0-0 Rd8
mostly forcing and therefore important. ] [John Watson]
12...xc4
[ 12...xe2 13.xe2 f6 ( 13...xd4 I received many notes about the 10....Qd7
14.xd4 xd4+ 15.h1 favours White, variation featured in last month's column from
with ideas of Nxf7, Rxf7, and in some cases Luis Eduardo Neves Gouveia, who is the 'Ig' in
Rad1 ) 14.exf6 gxf6 , and here White has a the ChessPublishing Forum on the Alekhine.
variety of moves: The indefatigable Luis I'll refer to him as 'LENG' below. He not only
Eduardo Neves Gouveia likes sent new analysis, but pointers to old analysis
A) 15.f3 and Rad1 is okay for Black, in the Forum, most of it by him and Mark
even if he's slightly cramped; Morss. I'll also expand upon my previous
B) 15.xe6 is apparently a bit better for analysis. For clarity's sake, because there is
White after xe6 16.d5 d7 ( 16...e5 so much material overall, I'm going to add
17.dxc6 d6!? 18.cxb7+ b8 19.g3 their analysis of 10...Qd7 11 0-0 Rd8 to my
he8 20.ad1!? looks good for White, notes from last time and move it into this
wi t h t h e id e a xe3+ 21.xe3 xe3 separate game, whereas the new analysis of
22.c5 ) 17.dxc6 xc6 18.b3; 11...0-0-0 will be in the 'New Notes on 4
C) 15.xf6 After 15 Rxf6, I'll simply give a Pawns Alekhine...' game. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
sample analysis: xd4 16.f2 e7 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5
17.f7 c6 18.c5 xc5 19.xc5 d2 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 g4
20.xe6 xb2 21.xc7+ b8 22.b1 10.e2 d7 11.0-0 d8 The idea of this
xc3 23.xc6 d7 24.c7! d3 move is to improve upon 11...0-0-0 in the 12
25.e1 wti d2?? ( 25...e8 26.xd7 Ng5 Nxc4 line because the king protects
xd7 27.e5+ c8 28.e4 d1+ central squares. 12.g5
29.f2 c2+ 30.f3 d1+ 31.g3 [ 12.c5 is also important, because in this
g8+ 32.h4 d7 33.g4 ) 26.e5 case it's not clear that Black wouldn't like to
and wins. ] be castled. I won't analyse it here, but I
13.xf7 e8 agree with theory and the Forum folk that
[ 13...xe3 14.xd7 xd1 ( 14...xd7!? Black stands all right. ]
15.c1 seems to come up a little short) 12...xc4
15.xd8+ xd8 16.xg4 xb2 17.xe6 [ 12...xe2 13.xe2 ( 13.xe2 xc4
xe6 18.xe6+ b8 19.b1 d3 20.d5 14.b3 xe3 15.xe3 xd4 16.xf7
with initiative ] c5 17.h1 f5 18.xc5 xf7
[ 13...e7 14.f2! xb2 15.c2 xd4 i s u n c l e a r) 13...xd4 14.xd4 xd4+
16.xb2 xe2+ 17.xe2 ] 15.h1 is supposed to favour White. ]
14.b5! Found by the computer. xe3 13.f2! (I think this was Estrin's discovery
[ 14...e7 may be met by 15 Bf2, with a [ 13.xf7 xe3 14.xd7 xd1 15.xd8+
limited advantage but the piece sacrifice xd8 16.xg4 e3! is unconvincing now,
15.xg4!? xe3 16.xe6 xd1 although White is not worse. ]
17.exc7+ b8 18.xe8 e3 19.xg7 13...xe2
xg4 20.e6 also looks interesting, since [ a) 13...e7 14.xf7 xb2 15.c2
Black has some loose pieces ] looks very promising for White. Here's some
15.xc7+ b8 16.b3 Conclusion by analysis:
'LENG': 'the move you have suggested, 14. A) 15...f5 16.xb2 xf7 17.ad1 ( or
Nb5! is really a good move and might (I said 17.g4 g6 18.d5!? exd5 19.ad1! )
528
17...hf8 18.g4 g6 19.d5!; cxb4 23.c7 In the end, White seems to
B) 15...xe2 16.xh8 xf1? 17.xh7!; retain the edge against 11...Rd8, but there
C) 15...xd4 16.xd4 xd4+ 17.h1 are still options to look into.
xe2 18.xe2! ( 18.xe2 xc3
19.xh8 d2! ) 18...d2
C1) 19.xc7 xe2?? ( 19...f8 ) 523 B03
20.d6+; Onischuk,V 2591
C2) 19.e4!+- ] Kovalenko,I 2643
[ b) There's also a strange move here that I'd Russian Cup Final 2013 (1.1) 12.12.2013
never seen. Even if it's not very good, which [Tom Rendle]
is extremely likely, it's worth seeing:
13...xd4?! 14.xg4 xe5 15.h3?! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
( 15.h5! g6 16.g3! ) 15...e7 16.e3 h6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
17.h5 g6 18.h4 c5 19.g3 xg5 9.f3 g4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 h4+
20.xg5 ef3+ 21.gxf3 hxg5 22.ae1 f5 12.f2 f4 13.c5 d5 14.xd5 exd5
23.g2 d6 24.e2 xg3 25.hxg3 f7 15.d2 xd2+ 16.xd2 So far we're just
26.f2 f6 and Black was holding in following the mainline. g6
Hernod, B-Bergdahl, A, correspondence/ [ 16...e7 was preferred in Bologan-
Sweden 1974. ] Ro ze nt alis (an alyse d by G awain in t h e
14.xe2 e7 archives) when White had the better position
[ 14...b6!? may be best, although 15.e3! after 17.b5+! c6 18.d3 g6 19.b4 h6+
t h r e a t e n s f 7 : xd4 16.xd4 xd4+ 20.c3 d7 21.b5! ]
17.h1 d7 18.ad1 c4 19.f3 17.f4
with the initiative. ] [ 17.e3! was Gawain's preference in his
15.xf7 notes to the Rozentalis game and I think this
[ 15.h5 xg5! ] is more accurate as it prevents Black playing
15...xf7 16.e3+ the setup outlined in the De Firmian game
[ LENG: 'Perhaps 16.xc4 hf8 (see note to Black's 18th)
A) jw: I gave 17.d5 exd5 18.b3 g8 A) 17...e7 18.d3! ( 18.f4?! h6
19.ad1 xf2! 20.xf2 c5 21.xd5 would transpose to Atalik-De Firmian)
( 21.xd5 xf2+ 22.xf2 f5+ 23.g1 18...h5 19.g5 is very pleasant for White;
xd5 ) 21...xf2+ 22.xf2 h8 B) 17...h5!? 18.b5 e7 19.g5+ e6
, at least =; 20.c3 h4 and now in Pavasovic, D
B) 17.ad1 g8 18.d5 'might work'. jw: (2597)-Nakamura, H (2704) St Veit 2008 I
Yes, this is better, and maybe White can think White's most accurate continuation
get a little something, but very little, after was 21.hg1! e7 22.xc6 ( 22.g4!?
xe5 ( 18...exd5 19.xd5+ xd5 is also good if White prefers to keep more
20.xd5 holds forth good promise the e- pieces on the board) 22...bxc6 23.xe7
p a w n i s a n a s s e t .) 19.b3 h8 xe7 24.g5 with a very unpleasant rook
20.xb7!? ( 20.dxe6 c6 ) 20...g4 and pawn ending for Black to hold ]
21.dxe6 xe6 22.xd8 xd8 23.e4 17...h6 18.e3 f6!? A novelty
xe4 24.xe4 xf2 25.xf2 ] [ Perhaps Black should aim for the fortress
16...g8 17.xc4 Here Luis says: 'I think setup in Atalik-De Firmian (annotated by
Black equalizes quite easily after your last line, Flear in the archives) after 18...e7 19.d3
namely after xd4 'Here is one possible line: f5 20.xf5 gxf5 21.hg1 d7 22.g3
18.ad1 c5 19 Bxd4 cxd4 20 Ne2 Qd5.' But a ag8 23.b4 xg3 24.hxg3 f8 but this is
better 19th move for White is 19.b4! b5 hardly an inspiring way to play as Black. Still,
[ 19...b6 20.xd4 cxd4 21.b5 d5 I don't see an easy way to break into
22.xd4 because c5 is now covered xc4 Black's position so this remains a tough nut
23.xc4 ] to crack. ]
20.xb5 xb5 21.xd4 xc4 22.xc4 19.h4 0-0 20.h5 fxe5 21.fxe5 xe3+
529
22.xe3 g5 23.h6!? This effectively isolates easily winning for White, e.g. h5 53.xd4
Black's pawn on g5 but it does allow Black h4 54.g2 g6 55.e5 f7 56.a6 e7
some counterplay at least with his next move 57.d5 f7 58.b6! and White promotes a
[ 23.af1! h6 24.g4 is unpleasant for pawn by force ]
B la c k wh o h a s n o ch o ice b u t t o g rim l y 48.e4 g5 49.b5! cxb5 50.c6 xh6
d e f e n d a n d h o p e f o r a d r a w w i t h g7 51.c7 c4+ 52.d3 d6 53.xd4 g7
25.e6 e7 26.b4 a6 but his position is 54.c5! c8 55.b7 e7 and Black
still solid so maybe he has OK drawing resigned without waiting for Kxb5 with an easy
chances although W hite can push on the win. A f anta stic grind f rom Onischuk bu t
queenside here with 27.a4! ] Kovalenko was holding a draw earlier on.
23...f4! 24.ag1 e4+ 25.d2?! That being said White definitely got the better
[ 25.d3! is slightly more accurate as now of the opening and these positions after 16.
after xd4 ( or 25...xd4+ 26.c3 g4 Kxd2 just look much easier for White to play
27.h4! and White regains the pawn with whereas Black is really just hoping for a draw
the better chances) 26.xg5+ h8 27.g4 in most lines.
xe2 28.xd4 c6 29.f1 Black is in 1-0
trouble as White is threatening to double on
the 7th rank with Rf7 ]
25...xd4! 26.xg5+ h8 27.g4 524 B03
No w i t s e e m s t h a t B l a c k s h o u l d b e O K , Parma,Bruno
however with the pawn on h6 a constant threat Schiffer,K
it's still Black who has to be the more careful ch Berlin-West 1971
in t his en dgam e . g8 28.xg8+ xg8 [Nigel Davies]
29.c8 f3+ 30.d1 xe5 31.xb7 d4+
32.e2 f7 33.g1 g6 34.a3 f6 Natural development is often the best policy,
[ I really like 34...a5! here, when I think Black but here it doesn't work. White's nonchalant
should draw fairly easily, e.g. 35.b4!? axb4 development of his knights allows Black his
36.axb4 xb4 37.xd5+ f6 38.g8 h4 counterplay. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
39.xh7 xh6= ] 4.c4 b6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 g6 7.c3 g7
35.b4 h4 36.f1+ e6 37.c8+ e7 8.f3 Opting for a policy of simple
38.b7 d4!? development, but Black is able to pursue
[ 38...e6 taking the draw by repetition was thematic counterplay in two different ways.
probably a more sensible approach, g4
although that's easy to say with hindsight! ] [ The immediate 8...c5 might be even better.
39.h1! g4 40.f3 f4 41.d5 g4 After 9.f4 ( 9.d5 is strongly met by g4
42.d2 e5 43.f1 g5 44.a4 h5?! , with my analysis running 10.f4 8d7
A first small error gives White a small chance 11.e2 b8 12.d6 0-0 13.dxe7 e8
to push with a good game f or Black) 9...cxd4
[ 44...g3! and Black should draw after 10.xd4 c6! ( stronger than 10...xd4
45.b5 d3+ 46.e2 e3+ 47.d2 d3+ 11.xd4 c6 12.xc6 bxc6 13.0-0-0
48.c2 c3+ 49.d2 d3+ ( 49...xc5 was slightly better for White in Zysk - Miltner,
50.g8 is risky for Black )] Bundesliga, Germany 1985) 11.xd8+
45.h1 xh1?! Possibly the losing move xd8 and Black's knight will be well placed
[ 45...f5 46.e4 f7 is good for White but on e6. ]
Black is hanging on here ] [ I f B l a c k p l a y s 8...c6 there is an
46.xh1 f6 47.a5 c6?! After this it's interesting reply in 9.h3 simply preventing ...
definitely losing but perhaps it was already Bg4 and leaving Black in a quandary as to
impossible to defend how he should create counterplay. ]
[ 47...g6 48.d5! xh6 49.b5 d7 9.c5
50.c6 b8 51.e4 g7 52.d3 [ 9.e2 is well met by c5 10.dxc5 xd1+
and with the knight trapped the ending is 11.xd1 6d7 12.e3 xf3 13.xf3 c6
530
etc. ] 16.0-0-0
9...d5 10.c4 e6 11.0-0 [ 16.a3 4d5 17.d3 xe3 18.xe3 0-0
[ If White tries to exploit the weakness of the 19.e4 g6 20.h4 e5 21.f3 f5 22.c4+
b 7 p a w n w i t h 11.b3 he would be g7 23.e2 xc4 24.xc4 b6 25.0-0-0
disappointed by xf3 12.xb7? ( 12.gxf3 ab8 26.d2 xa3-+ winning in Velimirovic
c6 gives Black powerful counterplay.) - Kovacevic, Yugoslavia, 1979. ]
12...xc3 13.xf3 d5 winning a piece ] 16...6d5 17.a3 xc3 18.xe6 ca2+!!N
11...xc3 12.bxc3 0-0 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 [ 18...a5 19.xg7+ d8 20.xd7+ xd7
c6 15.g4 a5 16.g5 d7 17.e2 b6 21.g4+ c7 22.axb4 a2+ 23.b1
The usual route to counterplay in this structure. xb4 24.c4 Velimirovic - Kovacevic,
It soon becomes apparent that White's attack Yugoslavia, 1978. ]
isn't going anywhere and his structural 19.b1 xe6! 20.xd8+ xd8 21.axb4
we a k n e s s e s a re s t a rt in g t o h u rt . 18.cxb6 xb4 22.e2
axb6 19.f3 a7 20.f4 c8 21.ad1 [ 22.h5+ f7 23.g4 g6+ 24.a1
c4 22.h4 c6 23.f2 a3 24.c1 c5 c2+-+ winning ]
25.f6 xf6 [ 22.e4 d1+ 23.c1 a2+-+ winning ]
[ There is a strong argument f or 25...f8 [ 22.g4 d5 23.e2 e4+ 24.a1 d5
keeping his bishop on the board. ] 25.c5 xc5 26.xe4 c1+ 27.b1
26.exf6 d6 27.h6 f8 28.g5 cxd4 xb1+ 28.xb1-+ winning ]
29.cxd4 a5 30.d5 h6 31.f4 exd5 22...f8 23.h5+
32.xd5 [ 23.g3 f5+ 24.a1 d5 25.b8+ f7
[ 32.xd5 xd5 33.xc4 brings about a 26.xa7 c2+ 27.a2 xe3 28.xe3
drawish major piece endgame. ] a8+ 29.b3 b8+ 30.c3 f6+ 31.c4
½-½ e6-+ winning ]
23...g6 24.e5
[ 24.a5 f5! 25.xa7 e5 26.f1 d5
525 B03 27.f3 g4 28.d4 xf3 29.xe5 xe2
Pegoraro,Giorgio 2185 30.c5 d3+-+ winning ]
Henderson,John B 2170 24...f5+ 25.a1 d5 26.b8+ f7
(open) Ischia 1996 [ 26...f7 27.xa7 c2+ 28.a2 xe3
[Alexander Volzhin] 29.xe3 a5+ 30.b3 b8+-+ winning ]
0-1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
9.f3 e7 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 b4 526 B03
12.d4 d7 13.f3 Pelikian,Jefferson 2414
[ 13.b3 c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.0-0-0 c7 Milos,Gilberto 2594
16.c4 xc4 17.xc4 xe5 18.he1 0-0 Itau Cup 450th Ann (4) 19.01.2004
19.a3 d5 20.xc6 xc6 21.xd5 xa3 [Andrew Martin]
22.bxa3 fc8 23.c5 xd5 24.xe5 xc4
25.b2 f6 0-1Tsarev - Palatnik, Kiev, OOPS! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f4!?
1989. ] A humorous deviation from the norm. White
13...c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.e6 must be fully aware that he can no longer
[ 15.a3 c5! 16.axb4 cxd4 17.xd4 0-0= ] transpose back into a regular Four Pawns
[ 15.0-0-0 0-0 16.f5 6d5 17.xe7+ Attack. I quite like
xe7 18.xd5 cxd5 19.a3 fc8+ 20.b1 [ 4.e2!? here, Romanishin's idea, retaining
c2 21.c1 ab8 Trkaljanov - Kovacevic, options with the f-pawn. ]
1979. ] 4...dxe5 5.fxe5 c5! Way to go! Black strikes
15...fxe6 hard at the over-extended White centre. 6.f3
[ 15...xe6 16.a3 4d5 17.xc6 c7 [ Clearly Pelikian knew about 6.c4 b4!
18.xe7 xe7 19.b5+ with advantage ] 7.a3 ( 7.d5 f5 ) 7...4c6 8.d5 ( 8.f3
531
xd4 ) 8...xe5 but it's hard to believe best. With so many good lines on offer against
that White can play for the advantage with the Alekhine, why play this rubbish?
the pokey 6 Nf3. ] 0-1
6...cxd4 7.xd4 c6 White's centre has
already been destroyed. 8.b5
[ I couldn't understand the following 527 B03
reference when I first saw it: 8.e4 g6 Pinchon,Henry
9.c4 b6 10.b3 f5 1/2-1/2 Georgiev, Timmermans,Daniel
K-Brochet, P/Paris 2003 What on earth is Val Thorens (4) 1989
Georgiev grovelling around to make a quick [Nigel Davies]
draw with a weaker player in a poor
opening variation? ] White habitually plays an early Nc3 in these ...
8...f5! Simple and good enough, since Milos g6 lines, but I have my doubts about whether
will emerge from the opening with an it has to be played early on. In this game we
excellent position and no weaknesses to see White focus on the development of his
speak of. kingside, but he should play Nc3 on his 11th
[ 8...a5+ is an over-elaboration: 9.c3 move, in my opinion. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5
xc3 10.xc6+ bxc6 11.d2 b5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 dxe5
12.xa5 xd4 13.xd4 e6 14.0-0-0 d7 [ In my book on the Alekhine I suggested that
Kupreichik, V-Kengis, E/Podolsk 1990 ] White may want to meet 5...g6 with 6.f3
9.c3 e6 10.a4?N An unsuccessful , but this could then transpose into the game
attempt to mix it up and very dangerous facing after g7 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 dxe5 9.fxe5 c5
a consummate tactician like Milos etc. ]
[ 10.g5 is relatively better, but White has 6.fxe5 g6 7.f3
no hope of advantage: e7 ( 10...a5 [ Another interesting way to fortify e5 is with
11.0-0-0 xb5 12.xb5 xd4 13.xd4 a queenside fianchetto. Binks - Cole, Bristol
h6 14.h4 a6 15.xd5 axb5 16.xb5 199 2 co nt in ue d 7.b3 g7 8.b2 c5
e4! 17.a3 g5 18.g3 c8 19.c3 c5 ) ( Black could also consider 8...0-0 9.f3 f6
11.xe7 dxe7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.xd8 , undermining the pawn chain at its head.)
fxd8 14.h3 a6 15.xc6 xc6 16.a3 b5 9.d5 c7 10.f3 g4 11.e2 0-0 12.h3
17.xd8+ xd8 18.d1 xd1+ 19.xd1 ( 12.bd2 m a y we ll b e e ve n b e t t e r .)
h5 20.b1 e7 21.c3 g6 22.d2 12...xf3 13.gxf3 and now e6 may be the
f4 23.e1 g6 1/2-1/2 Ankerst, M- best ( In the game Black was horribly
Horvath, C/Budapest 1992 A rather sterile cramped after 13...f6 14.e6 etc. ) 14.d6
game. ] d8 intending 15...Nc6 and with ...Qh4 and
[ Perhaps best of all is 10.xd5 exd5 11.c3 ...f7-f6 in the air. ]
a6 12.f4 axb5 13.xf5 b4 but Black 7...g7 8.e2 0-0 9.0-0
has the initiative. ] [ White can also play 9.c3 after which c5
10...db4! White may already be in great 10.d5 g4 ( 10...e6 11.0-0 transposes into
peril. 11.xc6+ bxc6 12.e3 the note to W hite's 11th move) 11.f4
[ 12.0-0 c5+ 13.h1 xc2 14.b3 b6 8d7 12.g5 xe2 13.xe2 maintains
is pretty much a disaster zone. ] th e e 5 p a wn wit h a cle a r a d va n t a ge t o
12...xc2 13.b3 d3! The Black pieces White ]
flood in for the kill. 14.d4 e7 15.a3 9...c5 10.d5 The only consistent move.
[ 15.e2 0-0 16.f2 c5 17.e3 fd8 [ After 10.f4 Black can ease his position
18.a5 e4 19.g3 d5 20.hf1 d7 with cxd4 11.xd4 c6 etc. ]
21.g1 c4 is disgusting for White. ] 10...e6 11.g5? In my opinion this is a
15...xb3! But this is even worse! 16.xb3 serious error.
c2+ 17.f2 xd4 18.ad1 xf3+ [ The natural move is 11.c3 after which my
A drubbing. W hilst 4 f4 isn't as bad as was analysis runs exd5 12.cxd5 g4 ( after
made out here, W hite can only equalize at 12...e8 the move 13.g5 is much more
532
effective ) 13.f4 8d7 14.d2! ( and not 'normal' move was

14.g5 xe2 15.xe2 xe5 , when the [ 17...xh1 18.f5 , attacking the queen,
knight on g5 hangs) 14...xe2 15.xe2 b u t a l s o t h e k n i g h t o n b 4 , s o : g6
e8 16.f3 xe5 ( probably better than ( 18...xd1+ 19.xd1! 4d5 20.xg7+
16...xe5 because 17.xe5 f6 18.ad1 xg7 21.h5+ d8 22.xd5 xd5
fxe5 19.e4 leaves Black with a bad 23.f7! e7 24.g5 e8 25.xg7 )
bishop ) 17.xe5 f6 18.f2 xe5 19.xd8+ xd8 20.xb4 gxf5 21.b5+
( 18...fxe5 19.h6 e7 20.ad1 c6 22.xf5 0-0 23.d3 xd3 24.xd3
also gives excellent compensation) 19.xc5 with material and attack. ]
with W hite for preference because of the 18.f5 So far, so good. Top players would
strong passed d-pawn. ] resign here. g6 19.c4?
11...e8 12.c3 exd5 13.cxd5 g4 14.d6 [ Over thinking? White is still well on top
c6 The e5 pawn is dropping, and White after this, but one of several easy wins is
never looks like getting enough compensation. 19.xd5 xd5 ( 19...xd5 20.xb4 gxf5
15.b5 xf3 16.xf3 xe5 17.h4 xb2 and everything wins, for example, 21.e2
18.b1 xa2 19.c7 d4+ 20.h1 ac8 h5 22.f4 0-0 23.e7! xe7 24.xd5
21.xc6 bxc6 22.f3 f6 23.xc6 f7 xd5 25.c4 )]
24.be1 d7 25.xd7 xd7 26.e7 g5 19...xe3 20.xd8+ xd8 21.xe3 xh1
27.g3 e5 28.e6 fe8 29.xe5 xe7 The only chance is to grab material. 22.e4?
30.dxe7 xe5 31.d1 e8 32.d7 c4 [ 22.f4! f8 (forced) 23.h6 and with the
33.xa7 c3 34.c5 d4 35.c7 f7 loss of the h-pawn, Black is hard pressed to
36.b3 e5 37.b7 xe7 38.xe7+ xe7 survive. He can do so by xc3 24.bxc3
39.a1 d6 40.g1 c5 41.f2 c4 d3+ 25.c2! e5 , when White will
42.g3 d3 43.e1 c2 44.b3 c3+ eventually win following 26.xh7! xc4
45.f2 d2 27.xg6+ e7 28.xc4 f2+ 29.b3
0-1 d5 30.g5+ f6 31.g7+ xe6
32.xc7 , but you can see that it's already
become messier. ]
528 B03 22...d4?
Pommeret,J 1923 [ It's surprising that Black finally has a
Philippe,Christophe 2407 chance to survive and misses it: 22...xe4
2nd Open Gap FRA (9) 19.04.2008 23.xe4 c6 , and White needs to play
[John Watson] accurately by 24.e7! xe7 25.a3 a6
26.xa6 bxa6 27.xc6+ f7 merely to
Okay, White is a low-rated player, but it isn't maintain some advantage. ]
often that we get to see a rare main line, and 23.c2! xc2 24.xc2? This is the turning
in fact he gets a completely winning position! I point.
include this game for fun but also to remind [ 24.e7! wins, because Qe6 follows, for
folks about the theory. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 example, d7 ( 24...e3 25.e6 xc4
3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 26.f6+ xf6 27.exd8+ xd8
7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 e7 10.d5 28.xf6+ ) 25.e6 (the end mate is
exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 d7 13.e6 threatened) e3+ ( 25...xe7 26.c8# )
fxe6 14.dxe6 c6 15.g4 h4+ 16.g3 26.xc2 ( or 26.d2 ) 26...xe4+ 27.b3!
f6?? For years this has been called a d3+ 28.xd3 xd3 29.xe3 a6
mistake (not even mentioned in Cox, 30.d4 , hitting d8 and h8. ]
justifiably), and Black should have known this 24...f8 25.c3?
if he was entering such a crazy line but it's [ 25.b3 ]
funny how one unfamiliar move can throw the [ 25.b4 keep an objective balance. ]
o p p o n e n t i n t o a t i z z y . 17.0-0-0 6d5 25...f2+ 26.b3 d6? By now the issue
An innovation, which is as good as anything, must be time trouble. Very strong was
since Black's position is absolutely lost. The [ 26...a6! ( s t o p p i n g N b 5 ) 27.e7! d6!
533
, when W hite's king has become too xb5 23.xb5 RR g7 24.a4 d6 25.c6
exposed and Black will at least get a solid ab8 26.a5 0-1 Piat,J-Beudaert,X/Creon
advantage. ] FRA 2004 ]
27.b5+? Last chance. White gets his 6...a5 7.d3 g6 8.f3 g7 9.e3 0-0
equality back at least after 10.c1!? Adds a peculiar twist to the game,
[ 27.h4 , threatening Qxh7, for example, but I don't think this is a happy square for the
e5 28.xh7 b6+ 29.a3 d6+ 30.b4 White Queen. She loses touch with b3 and
xb4+ 31.a4 c6+ 32.b5 ] the Bishop on d3 hangs in some lines.
27...c6 28.c4 b5 29.e2 a5 Maybe White [ 10.0-0 ]
ran out of time, but it's looking extremely good [ 10.b3 ]
for black, who must be winning now. So the [ 10.c3 ]
2400 wins after all, but what this means I 10...c6 11.h6 b4! The relevance of the
don't know! previous comment becomes apparent. 12.a3
0-1 xd3+ With a consequent weakening of c4.
13.xd3 f5 14.xg7 xg7 15.b3
[ 15.d1 xa4 ( 15...xb1 16.xb1
529 B03 xc4 )]
Prelevic,Mirko 2169 15...c8 16.a3 c7 Black has very simply
Dragasevic,Srdja 2308 attacked White at his weakest point, wasting
TCh-SCG 2nd Sutomore SCG (6) 13.09.2004 no time, and he has no defence 17.d5 xd5
[Andrew Martin] 18.d4 d7 19.g4? An incomprehensibly
terrible move.
Not many of the strongest Grandmasters play [ 19.db5 xb5 20.xb5 b4 21.0-0 e6
the Alekhine these days, which is a slight 22.c3+ g8 23.d1 is obviously still
surprise, as Black's chances aren't all that bad. much better for Black but White is playing. ]
Maybe they feel 1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 19...e5 20.h3 f4! 21.g1 xh3 22.f5+
Nf3 dxe5 5 Nxe5 c6!? is a little passive, I xf5 23.gxf5 xg1 I don't think 6 a4 or 6 h3
don't know. Perhaps it's time for a revival are improvements on the traditional move
certainly the Alekhine could still be moulded orders at all. Playing these small pawn moves
into a winning weapon with thorough in advance of the Knight developments cannot
preparation. Really, all you need is something be very good. What an awful game. It's meant
against 4 Nf3 and the Exchange Variation and to demonstrate that although the Alekhine
then you are in business. Here we see Black may well be in the background, it's still very
completely demolishing a strange try by White much alive!
the Alekhine reacts well to unusual treatment. 0-1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
5.exd6 cxd6 6.a4N I guess I've seen this
after 6 Nc3 but never before. Perhaps it will 530 B03
transpose to 6 Nc3 g6 7 a4, perhaps it should Prusikin,M 2555
do at least. Miralles,G 2472
[ 6.h3 is another odd move, quite normal in TCh-SUI 2013 (9.1) 13.10.2013
the context of the opening, but played at a [Tom Rendle]
peculiar moment. You will see that White did
not have much luck in the following game: 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6
g6 7.f3 g7 8.g5 Hey ho, he insists on 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
originality. e6!? 9.c3 ( 9.bd2; 9.b3 ) 9.f3 d7
9...d5 10.c5 6d7 11.b3 b6 12.b5 0-0 [ 9...g4 was seen in a couple of important
13.c6 f6 14.f4 e8 15.c1 a6 games in the archives: Jones-Short and
16.a4?? Awful. ( 16.a3; 16.a4 ) 16...b5 Bologan-Rozentalis but White was better in
17.0-0 xc6 18.xb5 axb5 19.xb5 both games after 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3
xd4 20.xd4 xd4 21.fd1 b6 22.c7 h4+ 12.f2 f4 13.c5! and Black players
534
seem to have been avoiding playing this at B2b1) 20.f5! leads to a more
GM level in the last couple of years. ] definite advantage, for example xf5
[ 9...e7 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5! was given 21.xf5 h6 22.d3 and Black is
as be st b y Gawain in h is no te s to b ot h forced into the weakening ( 22.ae1!
Bologan-Rozentalis and Velimirovic-Cmilyte is also simple and strong, keeping
and I've added in my thoughts as well as a everything under control) 22...g6
couple of recent games to his analysis: b4 23.h3 g7 24.c5 xe5 25.ae1
12.d4 and White is doing well;
A) 12...g6?! 13.b5+ f8 14.0-0 g8 B2b2) 20.xg5 xg5 21.b3
is clearly better for White after either 15.d6 xe5 22.c5 and White had
( or 15.f5 (G a wa in 's ch o ice ) xf5 excellent play for the pawn in Geske,
16.xf5 6xd5 17.d4 c6 18.c4 J (2383)-Schroll, G (2388) Jenbach
and despite having an extra pawn it's clear 2012 ]
that Black is in a lot of trouble) 15...cxd6 10.e2 0-0-0 11.0-0 e7?! This move is too
16.e6! f6 17.f3 d5 18.a3 c2 slow here. Although the alternatives don't
19.xc2 xc2 20.ac1 b3 21.d4 equalise for Black in my opinion they are
and Black is a pawn up but in a horrible definitely preferable to ...Be7
bind all over the board, in the long run [ 11...f6 12.d5 xe5 13.xe5 fxe5 14.a4
White should be winning here.; a5 15.b5! gave White an excellent
B) 12...d7 position in Kotronias-Short, examined by
B1) 13.e6 is interesting if somewhat Andrew Martin in the archives ]
less co nvin cin g fxe6 14.dxe6 c6 [ 11...b8 was played by Tony Miles and is
15.xc6 ( 15.g4 h4+! 16.g3 xh1 worth a look here although White should still
17.gxh4 0-0 18.0-0-0 f6 is obviously be better
ve ry c o mp lica t ed b ut W hit e d o esn 't A) 12.a3! may be more to the point, for
seem to be better here and there's no example f6 13.b4 fxe5 14.xe5 xe5
reason to go for this when 13.Qf3 leads 15.dxe5 xd1 ( 15...e7 16.b3
to a c omf ort able e dge) 15...xd1+ and W hite's attack on the queenside is
16.xd1 c2+ 17.d2 xe3 18.xe3 very promising) 16.axd1 e7 17.b5
bxc6 19.e2 0-0 and Black had fully and White has control of the queenside
equalised and went on to grind out the and Nd4 is awkward f or Black to deal
win in Videnova, I (2301)-Cmilyte, V with;
(2497) Gaziantep 2012; B) 12.d2 f6 13.exf6 gxf6 14.ad1
B2) 13.f3 c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.e2 g7 15.e1 g8 16.f2 h3
0-0 16.0-0 4d5 17.f2 h4 and Black had at least balanced chances
The first move that deviates from in Narciso Dub lan, M (246 8)-Mile s, A
previous ChessPublishing analysis but (2579) Cappelle La Grande 2000 ]
White is still doing well here [ 11...g4 12.c5 d5 13.xd5 xd5
B2a) 18.e4 xf2+ 19.xf2 e7 14.b4! and I like White's chances on the
20.g3 f5 21.exf6 xf6 22.g5?! queenside ]
( 22.d6! looks safe enough and 12.d5! This leads to a fairly forced variation
White's better pawn structure should and as far as I can see White is just clearly
b e e n o u gh f o r a sli gh t e d ge h e r e) better with accurate play exd5 13.xb6 axb6
22...h6 23.b3+ bd5 24.gf3 g4 14.cxd5 c5+ 15.h1 b4
25.ff1 ab8 26.a3 xa3 [ 15...e7 is not really any better after
( 26...e3+! 27.xe3 dxe3 16.d4! b8 17.cb5 with the nasty threat
was even stronger) 27.bxa3 b2 of Qa4 and Black can't do much here, e.g.
and Black was much better in Newrkla, xd5 ( 17...c6 fails to 18.d6! cxb5 19.xb5
K (2078)-Schroll, G (2400) Vienna c8 20.xf5 xf5 21.d7 c7 22.xf5
2009; and W hite is a pawn to the good with the
B2b) 18.g3! g5 19.e4 e7 better position) 18.xf5 xe5 19.a4 c8
535
20.ae1 and with a piece for two pawns and Pruisikin is not interested in the b6 pawn here
the better position White should be winning as he can pick up g6 and h5 if he wants c3
here ] 31.e2 g5 32.g6! g4 33.e4 c7 34.f5
16.e1?! This is enough for a slight edge but a8 35.e6 White's winning plan of Bf7,
there's actually a better move Bxe8 and Rf8 is completely unstoppable to
[ 16.d4! looks like a blunder because of Black decides it's time to resign.
xd4 ( 16...g6?! 17.xf5 gxf5 18.c4 1-0
is miserable for Black who has a shattered
pawn structure and no central control.)
17.xd4 c2 but White has the clever 531 B03
c o u n t e r t a c t i c 18.h4 xa1 19.xf5! Riedel,F
when the knight on a1 is terribly placed. Schnelzer,R
White is close to winning here, for example Hessenliga Germany 1994
b8 20.f4 hf8 21.b5 e7 22.c1 [Nigel Davies]
and White will soon have two pieces for the
rook. ] This game transposes into the 6...c5 7.d5 g6
16...g6 17.f3 h5 variation and features an interesting
[ 17...e7 is perhaps a slight improvement. alternative to the 12...Bg4 played in Volzhin -
The point is that after 18.a3 a6 19.b4?! Svechnikov. It certainly seems as if there is
allows ( instead 19.g4 xe5 20.d3 plenty of mileage in 5...dex5 and 6....g6, and
g7 21.xf5+ gxf5 22.xf5 and White is it has the benefit of avoiding the massive
at least slightly better as the pawn on d5 amount of 4 Pawns theory. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
gives W hite excellent central control and d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5
the knight on a6 is rather offside) 19...xe5 g6 7.c3 c5 Transposing into a line that is
with gain of time on the knight on c3 ] normally reached via a 6...c5 7.d5 e6 move
18.a3! a6 19.b4 f8 Black has been order. 8.d5 g7 9.f4 0-0 10.d2 e6
f o rce d b a ck bu t h is p ositio n is still solid 11.0-0-0 exd5 12.cxd5 e8!?
enough for the time being 20.e2 [ In the game Volzhin - Svechnikov Black's
[ 20.d4 also looks sensible to me simply 12...g4 w a s a n s w e r e d b y 13.e1
centralising and preparing Be4 ] followed by kicking the bishop on g4 with 14.
20...b8 21.f3 g7 22.b3 g4 h3. The text move sensibly intends to draw
23.ae1! The only move to keep control of e5 White's knight out to f3 before developing
xf3 the bishop. ]
[ Black would love to increase the pressure 13.f3 After Black's reply, the e-pawn is in
on the centre with 23...he8? but obviously trouble.
it drops an exchange to 24.b5 ] [ W h i t e c a n a l s o c o n s i d e r 13.e1
24.xf3 he8 25.e6! The only move to keep after which c4 looks interesting and double-
the pawn but it's a strong one fxe6 26.dxe6 edged. ]
d3? Up until now Miralles had been hanging 13...g4 14.b5 8d7 15.e6 Trying to mix it,
on but under a lot of pressure he makes a but there's no apparent compensation for the
decisive error in allowing the passed e-pawn pawn. fxe6 16.dxe6 xe6 17.g5 d4
to move forwards. 18.he1 c4 19.xe8+ xe8 20.e1 f8
[ 26...e7 leaves Black with little 21.e6 xe6 22.xe6 e8 23.xe8 xe8
counterplay but there are still reasonable 24.e2 g7 25.c3 a6 26.e2 h8
drawing chances after 27.d5 g5 28.e7 27.d3 f7 28.g3 e7 29.d1 e5
d7 although 29.e6! is definitely strong 30.e4 c8 31.c2 d6 32.d5 f5
h e r e a n d in t h e lo n g ru n W h it e s h o u l d 33.d1 d4 34.xe5 xe5 35.c4 g7
probably win here ] 36.g8+ h6 37.e4 g7 38.d5 b5
27.e7 c8 28.d5! White is happy to swap 39.d6 f6 40.f7+ g7
queens here and allow the e7 pawn to win the 0-1
game xd5 29.xd5 c6 30.f4!
536
532 B03 organic to calculate.) 15...a6 16.e2

Rigo,Janos b4 17.g5 f6 18.exf6 exf6 19.f4 e8
Andruet,Gilles 20.f1 e7 21.b6 e8 22.c3 c8
Wuppertal 1986 23.e1 xe1+ 24.xe1 g5 25.g3 f5
[Nigel Davies] 26.a3 c2+ 27.d2 xd4 28.d3 f4
29.f2 a6 30.xd4 xb6 31.cxb6 xd4
A radical way for White to prevent ...c7-c5 by 32.xd4 b7 33.a4 c5 34.d8+ f7
Black is to play c4-c5 himself, the 35.c3 c6 36.b3 f6+ 0-1 ]
disadvantage of this being that it makes a [ Another possibility is 9...e6 after which
'hole' on the d5 square. Can Black exploit this Brasket - Berliner, US Open 1959 continued
or will he suffer from permanent cramp? 1.e4 10.b3 xc3 11.xe6 fxe6 12.bxc3 d5
f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 13.f3 0-0 14.0-0 c6 15.g5 b6
dxe5 6.fxe5 g6 7.c3 g7 16.cxb6 axb6 17.c4 d7 18.ad1 f5
[ After 7...c6 White can adopt a similar with quite good counterplay. ]
plan with 8.c5 ( Moilanan - Olli, Finnish 10.bxc3 0-0 11.f3 b6
Team Ch., Aarno 1987 continued in [ Another interesting possibility is 11...c6
entertaining style with 8.e3 g7 9.h3 0-0 after which Olivier - Hauchard, Lyon 1995
10.f3 f6!? 11.e6 a5 12.b3 xe6 13.d5 continued 12.a4 a5 13.a2 b6 14.0-0
f7 14.xb6 axb6 15.b4 f5 16.c1 d6 and now b7 looks best ( in the game the
17.bxa5 g3+ 18.e2 e5 apparently forceful 14...a6 was met by
with compensation for the piece.) 8...d5 15.g5!? xf1 16.xf1 e8 17.f3 b8
9.c4 xc3 10.bxc3 after which the early 18.h3 h6 19.f3 h7 20.g5+ g8
commitment of the knight to c6 may inhibit 21.f3 h7 22.g5+ g8 23.f3 h7
Black's counterplay. ] 24.g4! f6 25.xh6 xh6 26.g5
8.c5 d5 9.c4 xc3 Opting for attack with a winning attack )]
rather than blockade, which would probably be 12.g5 b7 13.0-0 d5 14.xd5
my own choice. Probably too cooperative - with the queen on
[ Having said that, Shabalov - Chekhov, d5 Black can face the future with confidence.
Tashkent 1987 continued in interesting [ A better move is 14.b3 which should be
fashion with 9...c6 10.f3 0-0 11.b3 met by c6 ( and not 14...e6 15.xd5 xd5
a5!? ( Black offers a most interesting pawn 16.xd5 exd5 17.a3 which put him in
sac. 11...e6?! weakens the dark squares on serious trouble in Munoz Pantoja - Aguilar,
the kingside and led to a spectacular win for Mar del Plata 1993 )]
W h i t e a f t e r 12.0-0 b6 13.g5 c7 14...xd5 15.a3 c6 16.f3
14.cxb6 axb6 15.e4 a6 16.xd5 xf1 [ 16.b3 is better, as if Black exchanges
17.f6+ h8 18.xf1 exd5 19.h4 d7 q u e e n s wi t h xb3 White can at least tidy
20.h3 xf6 21.xf6 ae8 22.d6 e6 his pawn structure up with 17.axb3 ]
23.xe6 fxe6 24.xg6+ g8 25.xe6+ 16...xf3 17.gxf3 fd8 18.f4 e6 19.ab1
1-0, Zude - Majer, Hofheim 1995 ) ab8 20.cxb6? Little by little, White is making
A) Accepting the pawn with 12.xd5 cxd5 concessions, in this case presenting Black
13.xd5 looks very dangerous for White with an open a-file.
after a4 14.c4 b5 15.cxb6 a5 [ 20.e4 would have been more
( and not 15...a6 16.b7 a7 17.c5 ) argumentative. ]
16.e4 xb6 intending 17...Ba6.; 20...axb6 21.f2 a8 22.c1 a4 23.e4
B) 12.0-0 e6 13.xd5 xd5 14.xb7 da8 24.bb2 c4 25.fc2 a5 26.e3
xf3 15.xf3 ( After 15.xa8 I suspect f8 27.d2 a3 28.bc2 e7 29.f6+
t h a t B l a c k i n t e n d e d xd4+ 16.h1 g7 30.f1 f5 31.e2 c6 32.f2 e7
xg2+ 17.xg2 g4+ 18.h1 xe5 33.d3 b5 34.h4 f5 35.f2 e7
, though Crafty suggests that White can 36.e4 a3 37.e2 b4 38.e1 e7
get away wit h 19.xa5 h4 20.g2 The truly horrible threat of putting the knight
xh2+ 21.f3 etc. All a bit much for an o n d 5 d e c i d e s m a t t e r s . 39.d6 xd6
537
40.exd6 f5 41.f2 xd6 42.e5 f8 19.d1 xc5 20.xc5 xc5 and White
43.c5 e8 44.xc4 xc4 45.h4 d7 has no compensation for the pawn, although
46.g3 b6 47.e4 d5 48.e1 d6 Black has to play very precisely in order to
49.d2 b4 50.e1 bxc3 51.h4 f5+ 52.f3 parry White's threats: 21.d5 e5! 22.f4
c5 53.f2 c4 54.e1 b4 ( The alternatives are no better: 22.b4 e6!
0-1 23.f6+ g7 24.f4 xe2+ 25.xe2 xf6
26.bxc5 g4+ 27.f2 xd1 28.xd1 c8
and the rook ending is very bad for White;
533 B03 22.c7 g4 23.xa8 xe2+ 24.f1 c2
Rowson,Jonathan 2490 25.f3 e6 and after capturing the b3-pawn,
Baburin,Alexander 2590 Black's united passed pawns are
Isle of Man 1999 unstoppable, and 26.b4 d7 with Rc8 to
[Alexander Volzhin] follow is even worse for White.) 22...xe2+
23.xe2 g4+ 24.e3 xd1 25.xd1
There is quite a bit of interest in the exchange xb3 26.b1 c5 and Black has a
variation nowadays. As we concluded earlier, decisive advantage. ]
it's quite unpleasant for Black as he has no 17...xd4 18.xd4 xa3 White's position
active counterplay and W hite has had very looks bad but he finds some resources to fight
good results. But recently Black has found on. 19.f4! f6! 20.b5! b2 21.d6
new resources both with 5...cd and 5...ed. In It may seem that W hite has obtained
this first line Irish GM Alex Baburin, one of excellent prospects. However, Black had
leading experts in the Alekhine's, introduces a foreseen 1 move further! e6! Parrying all
very important improvement, and obtains a White`s threats and beginning the
clear edge! Now it's W hite turn to find counterattack. 22.d1
something serious, o therwise t his line is [ Grabbing the exchange allows Black to
hardly playable! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 obtain a strong initiative: 22.xe8 xe8
d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 Now it's problematic for White to complete
7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e5 10.dxe5 his development and coordinate his pieces.
dxe5 11.c5 6d7 12.c4 Up to now this is 23.h4 What else? Of course this is not to
a l l we l l k n o wn t h e o ry ( f o r e xa m p l e s e e attack, but just to complete development.
Dzindzikhashvili - Alburt). a5! A novelty, A) 23...xc4+ -this alternative is not bad
according to my database. This move seems either, although inferior to the text the
quite risky and ambitious, but it provides a following moves are forced for both sides:
good chance for Black to fight for initiative. 24.xc4 e4 25.c2 d2+ 26.g1
13.ge2 c6 14.a3 e1+! 27.h2 e5+! ( Hasty 27...f1+
[ The attempt to exploit the position of leads only to a draw after 28.xf1 xc2
Black's Queen doesn`t pay off 14.d2 xc5 29.xc2 xf1 ) 28.h3 ( If 28.g3 then
15.b5 (threatening Bf7) e7 16.c7 b8 e2 is very unpleasant, threatening Nf3
17.d5 h4 and although White has the check. ) 28...e3+! 29.fxe3 e4 30.xe4
initiative it's hardly worth a pawn. ] xe4 and Black's chances are clearly
14...d4! Very aggressively played again. better, as White has many pawn
Black tries to seize the initiative at all costs. weaknesses, both his rooks are passive
[ Of course, the pawn is taboo: 14...xa3?? and his King is exposed.;
15.a1 b4 16.a4 winning the Queen. ] B) 23...h5! 24.h6 xc4+ 25.bxc4
15.xd4 exd4 16.xd4 e8+ 17.f1 e2 and White's position is miserable:
Having the King lodged on the f1-square, 26.g1 xf2 27.h2 f4 28.g5 h6!
W hite can hardly be satisf ied with the and Black wins. ]
outcome of the opening fight. So White should 22...ad8 23.h4 xc4+ There`s nothi ng
find an improvement somewhere between wro ng wit h t his m ove , b ut I wou ld pre f e r
moves 13 and 15 (if one really exists!) heading for the endgame
[ 17.e2 is weaker xd4 18.xd4 xa3 [ 23...e5!? 24.xe5 ( The alternatives fare
538
no better: 24.c1 xc4+ 25.xc4 e6; [ 38...a8 39.da4 ]

24.d4 e4 25.xe6 xe6 26.xe5 39.b4 a8 40.d1 f6 In mutual time trouble
xe5 27.b4 b6 with a big advantage for White has outplayed his opponent, and has
Black in both cases.) 24...xc4+ 25.bxc4 excellent winning chances in the resulting
xe5 again with a big advantage, for Ro o k e n d i n g . 41.d7 af8 42.f4 6f7
example 26.b1 xc5 27.xb7 b8! 43.d6 b8 44.xc6 xb4 45.c8+ g7
and after the capture of the c4-pawn, Black 46.g5+ f6 47.c6+ e7 48.e5+ f8
will have a clear extra pawn while White's 49.c8+ g7 50.g5+ f6 51.c6+ e7
forces are still uncoordinated. ] 52.xa6 b8 53.h3 f8 54.h4 g7
24.xc4 e4? This hasty move misses an 55.c5 g8 56.g4 gb7 57.cc6 f7
easy win. 58.f5 d7 59.c3 db7 60.cc6 d7
[ 24...e6 was simple and good, intending to 61.g5 g7 62.c3 db7 63.h5 f7
play Ne4 (or Ne8) on the next move. I failed 64.ac6 a8 65.g5 b8 66.3c5 bf8
to find a way to maintain the balance for 67.b6 a7 68.f6+ g8 69.h6 a1
White: 25.h3 ( or 25.h5 e4 26.d4 70.g5+ h8 71.h5 f1 72.g5 g8
c3 and Black wins.) 25...e4 26.d4 73.h4 f5 74.g4 f1 75.bb4 h1+
( 26.f3 d2+ 27.xd2 b1+ ) 26...xd4 76.h4 g1 77.bg4 f1 78.f4 g1
27.xd4 xc5 and Black should easily win 79.f5 c1 80.h3 c7 81.h5 f7
the game. ] 82.e3 a8 83.fe5 ff8 84.h6?
25.xf7+ h8 26.f3 xd6 [ 84.e7 won easily: a1 ( 84...g8 85.f7
[ 26...d2+ also leads to a draw: 27.xd2 gf8 86.e8 g7 87.xa8 xa8 88.e8 )
xd2 28.f6+ g8 29.f7+ h8 30.f6+ 85.e1 xe1 86.xe1 and in comparison
g8 with perpetual, as White's attempt to with the game Black`s Rook is passive here.
play for a win with 31.g1 fails to e1+ White executes his winning plan (Re7, Kh6)
32.h2 f8 ] without obstacles. ]
27.cxd6 f8 28.e3 fe8 29.f3 e5? 84...a1 85.h3 g8 86.e7 g6+ 87.h5
Black doesn't feel the danger and continues g1 88.e8+ g8 89.xg8+ xg8
playing for the win, but now White takes the This position is well-known as a draw in the
upper hand. Here was the last chance to grab theory books. 90.a3 h1+ 91.g4 g1+
a draw by repetition. 30.h5! 92.f4 f1+ 93.g4 g1+ 94.f4 f1+
[ 30.g3 is not so good: f8! ( 30...xd6 95.f3 a1?! This inaccuracy doesn't change
i s w e a k e r : 31.xd6 xd6 32.xb7 the evaluation of the position as White can't
with excellent winning chances due to the make any progress.
extra pawn and weak position of Black's [ 95...xf3+! heads for an immediate draw
King. ) 31.d3 f6 and Black has little to 96.xf3 f7 Having missed this chance
worry about. ] here, Black grabs this opportunity a few
30...xd6 31.hxg6 xg6 32.h5! moves later ]
Now White's pieces find coordination and his 96.b3 f1+ 97.e5 e1+ 98.f4 f1+
c h a n c e s a r e b e t t e r d u e t o t h e e xp o s e d 99.f3 xf3+ 100.xf3 f7 101.f4 h6
position of Black's King, although I believe by 102.gxh6
accurate defence Black should be able to hold ½-½
on. e7 33.f5 g8 34.g3 e6 35.g2
a6 36.d4 c6 37.xc6 bxc6?
Panic reaction. 534 B03
[ 37...xc6 was correct, and although Sarakauskas,Gediminas 2449
White's Rooks penetrate the 7th rank, it's Baburin,Alexander 2523
n o t c le a r h o w W h i t e ca n m a k e f u r t h e r ch-EU Cork IRL (6) 27.03.2005
progress: 38.d7 b6 39.ff7 h6 [John Cox]
for example: 40.g7+ h8 41.h7+ g8
42.dg7+ f8 43.a7 g8 ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
38.a5 b8 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 c6 A bit unusual. Of
539
course 6...Be7 is the main move the early to reach this slightly different position. ]
knight development is usually reckoned a little 15.f4 White doesn't have a lot of choice but to
committal but Baburin is a great connoisseur allow his king to be forced to move
of this variation and has a new idea in mind. [ 15.cxd5 b4! 16.d2 gives Black a
7.h3 f5 An interesting move. It has been p l e a s a n t c h o i c e : d3+ ( 16...xd5
played before, but not by anyone within 300 17.xd5 xd2+ 18.xd2 xd5
ELO points of Baburin's strength. Curiously may be even stronger) 17.xd3 xd3
enough I was debating this idea in the 18.ce2 xd5 is pleasant for him ]
ChessPublishing forum with some other users 15...b4
only about three weeks before this game was [ 15...h4+ is the obvious alternative, for
played, and we didn't have anything like such example 16.f1 f6 17.c5 c8 18.g1
a concrete reason for the move as Baburin d7 , but I'm not very sure about this if
demonstrates. 8.e3 W h it e m a n a ges t o dise n t an gle him s e lf
[ 8.e2 b4 , of course, but this means that Black's pieces are not so beautifully co-
W hite cannot develop his pieces in quite ordinated either. ]
the sequence he would like: this is the point 16.c1
of Baburin's idea. ] [ 16.d2 c5 is quite effective, e. g. 17.fxe5
[ 8.f3? b4 9.e2+ e7 10.e4 d5 cxd4 18.xd4 dxc4 ]
11.cxd5 xd5-+ 12.a3 xe4 13.axb4 0-0 16...h4+ 17.f1 c5?! To be honest, I find
14.d2 fe8 15.a5 xf3 16.gxf3 xd4 this an extraordinary decision, since the line
17.e5 xb2 0-1 was Wippermann-Baburin, played in the game seems to lead to a
played two days later in the same winning position for White by force in a few
tournament: a curious way for a 2425 player moves, and meanwhile Fritz's obvious
to lose against a move he had presumably suggestion
prepared for, but at least demonstrates [ 17...f6 produces huge complications
Baburin's faith in his idea. ] A) 18.g4 : 18...
8...e7 9.f3 0-0 10.d5 A plan introduced A1) 18...c5 19.xd5 ( 19.g5 exc4!
by Ian Rogers - see Rogers-Loeffler, Dutch 20.bxc4 e7 ) 19...xd5 20.cxd5
Interclub 1995, and Rogers-Bagirov, cxd4 21.xd4 d6 22.g2 d7 23.f5
Bundesliga 1995. Neither game reached this fe8 24.b5 xf5 25.gxf5 xf5=;
exact position, but in both the same basic A2) 18...xc3 19.g5 e7 20.xc3 c5
pattern of play developed. 21.fxe5 cxd4 22.xd4 dxc4 23.bxc4
[ 10.e2 e8 11.0-0 f6 would lead to a is possible also;
fairly popular position, reached for example A3) 18...ed7 doesn't seem to be so
in Suetin-Vukic, Odessa 1975, but W hite good now better alternatives are 19.f5
has been swindled out of his options with ae8 20.f2 c5 21.f3! meeting xc3
his queen's bishop by the move order, and with 22.h4 seems to be good for
anyway this d5 plan is normally the idea of White.;
the early h3. ] B) 18.g1?! A bit lame the crucial move
10...e5 11.d4 g6 12.b3 c6 13.dxc6 is ed7 Of course these variations only
Normal in the Rogers plan W hite does not scratch the surface and I am sure they can
want to be left with a vulnerable pawn on d5 be improved upon, but it seems clear that
and either have to trade off the b6 knight for this was the way Black had to go. ]
his c3 one or give the b6 knight a role by 18.fxe5 cxd4 19.xd4 xd4 20.xd4
constantly attacking a weak d5 pawn after .... dxc4 21.bxc4 fd8 22.b5! A good move
cxd5. bxc6 14.e2 d5!? others are not so convincing and maybe it was
[ 14...e8 15.0-0 would transpose into this which Baburin underestimated a while
Rogers-Bagirov, but I imagine Baburin was back. d7 23.c5 White is clearly winning and
ready for the d5/Nd4 plan (this is normally the rest is not so interesting. d5 24.c6 e7
reckoned a drawback to the early ...Nc6) 25.c7 c8 26.g4 d3+ 27.f2 xb5
and with his move order may have intended 28.xc8 xc7 29.xa7 d5 30.d4 f6
540
31.e6 f4 32.b1 c6 33.hd1 A slightly 13.c1 b6 was hardly promising. ]
sad game, as Baburin introduced a new and 13...dxc4 14.a4 d3 15.fd1 e8 16.d5?
perhaps quite important wrinkle in this, which xc3 17.dxc6 b5 18.cxb6?
s e e m s t o b e h i s f a vo u ri t e b ra n ch o f t h e [ 18.xb5 b8 followed by capturing on b2
Alekhine, only to go astray in the is also bad, but now he doesn't have a good
complications. He was willing to repeat the line, square for his queen. ]
however, and this is a game whose opening 18...axb6 19.xd3
will repay careful study. The early move orders [ White may have missed the fact that
in this ..exd6 line are multifarious and tricky, 19.b5 is answered by a5 ]
and probably no-one knows them better than 19...xd3 20.d1 xb2 21.xd3 cxd3
Baburin. 22.d1 e6 23.d2 c1 24.xd3 xe3
1-0 25.fxe3 xc6 26.d7 c2 27.g5 h6
28.xf7 axa2
0-1
535 B03
Schubert,S 2256
Kopylov,Mihail 2520 536 B03
Oslo NOR (9) 30.03.2001 Sermek,Drazen
[Nigel Davies] Zelcic,Robert
Croatian Team Ch (1) 1994
In this game White prevents ...Bg4 with h2-h3, [Nigel Davies]
but uses precious time in the process. And
Black has a perfectly good square for his 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
bishop on f5. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.d3 0-0
4.c4 b6 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.h3 8.ge2 c6 9.0-0 f6 The most popular
f5 Possibly Black's most flexible move. move which applies pressure to the d4 pawn.
[ After 7...c6 8.f3 f5 White can play There are several alternatives:
9.d5 ( 9.e2 g6 10.0-0 0-0 11.e3 f6 [ For 9...e8 see Emms - Davies ]
12.c1 e8 13.d2 d5 14.b3 a6 10.e3 b4 11.b3
was equal in Hagesaether - Gausel, [ Emms' suggestion of 11.g3 is worth
Norwegian Open 2002.) 9...b8 10.e2 considering. ]
0-0 11.0-0 e8 12.d4 c8 13.d3 11...xd3 12.xd3 g4 13.f3 h5 14.g3
when W hite had the better game in g6 15.d2 h4 16.d5 Gaining the familiar
Kosintseva - Tomashevsky, Vladimir2002 ] space advantage, but Black's position is very
8.f3 0-0 9.e2 f6 Kopylov is an expert on solid. e8 17.ae1 d7 18.e2 xg3
the Alekhine, so his treatment is well worth 19.hxg3 a6 20.fe1 f8 21.d4 d7
studying. 22.e4 xe4 23.xe4 xe4 24.xe4 e8
[ Another reasonable plan is 9...c6 10.0-0 25.e3 xe4 26.xe4 f6 27.f2 f7
a5 after which Salimaki - Eriksson, Finland 28.g4 h6 29.e3 e7 30.xe7+ xe7
2002 went 11.b3 f6 12.e3 d5 13.c5 White has kept a small advantage right into a
6d7 14.a4 a6 15.d2 e8 16.fe1 minor piece endgame and Black still needs to
e4 with a promising position for Black play carefully to draw. 31.e4 a5 32.c5 g6
because of the latent weakness of White's d- 33.cxd6+ xd6 34.f2 e7 35.g3+ d7
pawn. ] 36.d4 c6 37.dxc6+ xc6 38.e1 b6
10.0-0 c6 11.e3 Leaving Black's knight on 39.d2 b5 40.f4 c6 41.a4 g6
b6 access to c4. 42.g3 f8 43.e4 e6 44.f5 d4+
[ W h i t e s h o u l d p l a y t h e s t a n d a r d 11.b3 45.g6 xb3 46.xg7 c5 47.xh6
after which d5 12.c5 c8 gives rise to a xa4 48.g6 c5 49.xf6 a4 50.e1
typical exchange middlegame. ] d3 51.c3 b5 52.g5 b4 53.g6 bxc3
11...d5 12.c5 c4 13.xc4 54.g7 c2 55.g8 c1 56.e8+ c7
[ After this things go from bad to worse, but
541
57.xa4 h6+ 58.f5 h5+ 59.f6 [ Morss gives 22.g2 f3 23.d6 c6 ]
½-½ 22...d6 This is a difficult choice, and perhaps
a go o d p la ce f o r B lack t o se e k e qu a lit y.
Another move that doesn't seem to fit the bill
537 B03 is
Shabalov,Alexander [ 22...e7 23.f3 ( or 23.g2 ) 23...e8
Analysis 24.e1 ]
[John Watson] 23.g2 e8 Superficially, here are a few
more possibilities.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 23...4xd5? 24.f3 ]
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 8.f4 g7 [ 23...a4!? 24.xa4 xa4 25.e3!? ( or
9.c3 0-0 10.d2 e6 11.0-0-0 exd5 25.f4 )]
12.cxd5 e8!? 13.e1 a6 14.f3 b4 [ 23...g3 24.f4 f8 25.f1 ]
15.g5! f6 Here, instead of 16 Bh4, I 24.axb4 cxb4 25.a2 xd5 26.xd5+
suggested 16.exf6 xe1+ 17.xe1 xf6 xd5 27.c4 c8 28.e3 g7
18.xf6 xf6 19.a3 And now Mark Morss [ 28...b5 29.xd5 xc4+ 30.b1 ]
correctly points out that I didn't address the 29.xd5 xc4+ 30.b1 c6 31.d1 a5
move f5 , looking only at 19...a5 and 19... 32.c1 c5 33.e3 Well, long analysis,
Na6. My excuse? I was at a coffeehouse you maybe wrong analysis. Probably both sides
can't leave these engines alone for a minute! can improve that's the normal course of things.
Anyway, Morss claims equality after 20.h3 B u t m y o ve r a l l im p r e ss io n is t h a t W h it e
[ 20.e2 doesn't seem to achieve enough, stands somewhat better going all the way
although it would be worth playing on. One back to exf6.
main line is d8 21.g4 xg4! 22.axb4
cxb4 ( 22...xe2 23.bxc5 xd5 24.xe2 )
23.e4 e5 ( 23...f5 24.xg4 xe4 538 B03
transposes 25.e6+ g7 26.g2 e5 Shabalov Four Pawns
27.f3 d6 28.b1 xd5 29.g5 c6 Analysis,Continued
30.f1 f8 31.d1 f6 32.b3 ) 24.xg4 [John Watson]
xe4 25.e6+ g7 26.g2 ( White could
play on aiming for a small advantage without 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
much risk: 26.g2 xd5 27.e1 c4+ 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 8.f4 g7
28.c2 xc2+ 29.xc2 f6 30.g4 ) 9.c3 0-0 10.d2 e6 11.0-0-0 exd5
26...c4+! ( 26...e5? 27.f3 c7+ 12.cxd5 e8!? 13.e1 a6 14.f3 b4
28.b1 xd5 29.g5; 26...e3+? 27.b1 15.g5 In previous columns, I looked at some
b3 28.f3 d4 29.d6 xd6 30.xb3 ) analysis in the Forum by Mark Morss, who
27.c2 ( 27.b1 xd5 28.f3 b3! ) has demonstrated the 'Shabalov line' in the
27...f4+ 28.b1 xd5 29.d3 d6 Four Pawns has more life to it than I gave it
30.e1 e8 31.xd5 xe1+ 32.xe1 credit for. I believe that, based upon previous
xd5 and even if White should play on (with analysis in this column, the line15...f6 16 exf6
33 Nd3, for example), it's very unlikely that u l t i m a t e l y w o r k s o u t i n W h i t e ' s f a v o u r
the game will end in other than a draw, (although there are always surprises!). But in
because the endgames are all drawn. ] t h e Fo ru m , Ma rk ca m e u p wit h t h e t ru l y
20...c8 21.g4 d7 So far according to courageous idea c7!? (or!!??), which dares
Morss, and the computer agrees. But now my W h it e t o p la y 16.d6 (not surprisingly, there
com pu ter f ina lly sto ps prod ucing in st an t are options, but let's stick with this one). Most
opinions and starts waltzing around from point players wouldn't get near this position, but it's
to point. After some investigation with actual b a s e d u p o n a c o n s i s t e n t t h e m e o f t h i s
direction from a human, I think the best line is variation, that White's king is more exposed
22.e2! , when White always seems to keep than Black's (...Bf5/...c4/...Na4, and freeing
some advantage. the g7 bishop are themes, among others), so
542
however scary the centre pawns look, White 32.c2+-;

has his own reasons to be afraid that the B1a2) 26...c5 27.g5 xa3
position will spin out of control. For all that, 28.h3! c5 29.xh7 a4
I'm a fan of these centralised pieces and my 30.h3 xc3+ 31.xc3 xc3
guess is that Black comes up a little short. 32.xc3 xc3 33.d7;
But I'm not sure! For those with some patience, B1b) 24.h4;
t h i s m i g h t b e f u n t o g o t h r o u g h : c6 B1c) 24.d4 [BEST?] d7 ( 24...c3
The point. 17.h6 25.bxc3 d5 26.d2 c5 27.b4
[ 17.a3 doesn't even threaten the knight (of a5 28.xc5 xc5 29.c2 );
course, it's much more complicated than B2) 23.d4 [Good, as are other moves]
that, but...). ] a4 24.d2 b5 wt i . . . N c 5 25.h4
[ 17.b5 xa2+! 18.c2 f5+ 19.b3 ( 25.e4 xe4 26.xe4 c5 27.e3
e6+ 20.c2 is at best a draw, and Black b3+ 28.c2 xd2 29.xd2 )
will probably want to try for more by b4+ 25...b7 26.c3 with e6: xc3
21.c1 c8 ] ( 26...a5 27.e6; 26...ad8 27.d4 )
17...h8 Mark's idea. 27.bxc3 ad8 28.b2 b3 29.d4
[ 17...f5 is also challenging, but ultimately d7 30.g3 dd8 31.f5 g7
White seems to come out on top. Here's a 32.xg7 xg7 33.h4 h8 34.e2
sample analysis: 18.a3 a6 (Stopping Bb5 g7 35.f3;
or even Nb5. Black can't simply wait B3) 23.h4 ac8 , and there are
because there will come Nh4 soon an d several good calm moves, but the direct
pieces will start hanging) 19.xg7 xg7 24.e3 looks very good, with the idea
20.d1 ( 20.h4 e6 21.e4 ec8! Bd4: d5 ( 24...c3 25.bxc3 d5
hangs in there ) 26.xb6 axb6 27.b2 and White's king
A) 20...e6 21.h4! h5! 22.e2 is safer than it deserves to be) 25.d4
with the idea Rhf1, and Black has a lot of and White is threatening Qh6 and can
tries that don't lose, but they all seem to otherwise build up slowly. ]
leave him worse, e.g., a2+! ( 22...b3 [ 18...f5 19.h5 a4 20.hxg6 xg6
23.g5 4d5 24.xd5 xd5 25.d3 ) 21.h4 a5 22.g4 d7 ( 22...b6
23.xa2 xa2 24.d3; 23.xg6+ hxg6 24.b5 xa2+ 25.c2
B) 20...c2 (!?) 21.f2 a1 22.d3 b4+ 26.b3 ) 23.ee4 b6 24.g3 e6
d7 23.he1 xd3 24.xd3 c4 25.dd1 25.a3 a2+ 26.xa2 xa2 27.b5 ]
b3+ 26.c2 with the idea Ne4. Naturally 19.a3 a6
there's plenty to look at here. ] [ 19...xf3 20.b5 ]
18.h4! g4! 20.f4
[ 18...e6 19.a3 a2+ ( 19...a6 20.h5 ) [ 20.e2 4d5 21.h5!? ]
20.xa2 xa2 21.h5 20...xf3 21.xf3 xf3 22.gxf3 4d5
A) 21...a6 22.hxg6 fxg6 and a silly but 23.xd5 xd5 24.f4 g7 25.xg7
fun line (and I think relevant) is 23.d3! [ 25.g5 h6 26.d7 hxg5 27.dxe8+ xe8
( 23.f4!? ) 23...c4 24.f4 b5 25.b4! 28.fxg5 should also suffice ]
cxb4 26.g5 f8? ( 26...d5 27.e4 ) 25...xg7 26.f5! ad8 27.h2! , a computer
27.xg6!! hxg6 28.xf8 xf8 29.xh8+; move that seems to do the trick. Naturally
B) 21...c4 (this cuts off the bishop, but there can be improvements anywhere, and I
what else?) 22.hxg6 fxg6 think that Mark has proven how versatile and
B1) 23.g5 wti Be7/Qh6 ac8 interesting this line can be.
B1a) or 24.e7 c3 25.bxc3 xa2 d5
26.b1
B1a1) 26...xc3 27.xc3 xc3
28.d4 ec8 ( 28...a6 29.h3
xh3 30.gxh3 ) 29.h3 xh3
30.gxh3 c4 31.xc4+ xc4
543
539 B03 [ 6...e7 was played in Emms-Davies in the

Shaw,John K archives but after 7.e2 0-0 8.bc3
Davies,Nigel R White has a slight edge in my opinion. ]
4NCL 2002 7.e2 g6! This looks to be a better setup for
[Nigel Davies] Black than the above Emms-Davies game
8.bc3 g7 9.e3 0-0 10.0-0 This position
In this game I practice what I preach with the has been reached a few times and Black has
e-pawn recapture, and might have gotten the tried a couple of different ways of equalising.
better of it had I remembered my own book! b4! This seems to just about equalise.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 [ 10...e8 11.d5 ( 11.c1 with a minimal
5.exd6 exd6! 6.c3 e7 7.d3 0-0 edge for W hite looks like the best option
8.ge2 c6 9.0-0 e8 10.a3?! here d5 can be met wit h 12.c5 c4
[ 10.b3 f8 was Emms - Davies, Southend 13.xc4 dxc4 14.a4 ) 11...e5 12.b3
2002 ] A) 12...g4 13.c1 ( not 13.h3?! xe2
10...f6 11.e3 g4 14.xe2 exc4 ) 13...h4 is a more
[ This is fine for Black, but after the game we am b it io u s way o f p la yin g - B la c k c a n
decided that 11...g6 was better as I gave in hardly be worse here;
my book, with Black intending ...Ne7 B) 12...xd3 13.xd3 was equal in
followed by .... Nf5 or ...Bf5. My opponent Lopez Martinez, J (2440) -Nogueiras, J
hadn't seen the book which is why he played (2482) Santa Clara 2004 ]
the somewhat dubious 10 a3. And [ 10...g4 11.f3 ( 11.h3 xe2 12.xe2
meanwhile I'd forgotten my own e8 13.e1 also gives White a tiny
recommendation.... ] advantage. ) 11...f5
12.c2 g6 13.h3 xe2 14.xe2 g5 A) 12.xf5 is obviously critical but the
It's important to eliminate White's bishop pair posit ion af te r xc4 ( 12...gxf5 13.b3
before they become dangerous. 15.d5 b8 is obviously better for White) 13.f2 gxf5
16.xg5 xg5 17.c3 8d7 18.ae1 14.d3 b6 15.xf5 f6 is still about
xe1 19.xe1 a6 equal.;
½-½ B) 12.b3 e8 13.f2 xd3 14.xd3
and W hite was the more comfortable in
Yildiz, B (2244)-Zhao Xue (2490) Nalchik
540 B03 2010 although Black's position remains
Shirov,A 2718 typically solid. ]
Appel,R 2525 11.b3 c6
Bundesliga 2012-13 (9) 23.02.2013 [ Black could grab the bishop with 11...xd3
[Tom Rendle] 12.xd3 c6 but after 13.d2 White can
always swap off Black's key dark-squared
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 Bishop with Bh6 and so his space
5.exd6 exd6 This is generally considered advantage is still the most important aspect
more solid than cxd6 so it's interesting to see of the position. ]
what the great attacking player Shirov has in 12.b1 d5 13.c5 d7 14.a3 a6 15.b4
mind against it. 6.d3 c7 16.d3 e6 This is an important setup
[ 6.c3 is the main move and it's been for Black in this line. Appel's position is very
examined many times on this site before. solid, he has pressure on d4 and ...b6, ...a5
Possibly it's a more accurate move-order gives him chances to liquidate on the
even for Bd3 and Nge2 as Black is less queenside. 17.d2 b6 18.ad1 a5 19.b5!
likely to play ...g6 here because of g6 7.f3 Otherwise White is in danger of being worse.
g7 ( or 7...g4 8.h3 xf3 9.xf3 ) b7 20.xd5 Finally the trademark Shirov
8.e2+ ( 8.g5!? ) 8...e7 9.xe7+ xe7 'Fire on the board' starts but here Appel has
10.g5+ with a comfortable edge for White ] things just about under control. bxc5
6...c6 [ 20...cxd5 21.c6 c8 22.cxd7 xd7
544
also looks fairly level although White does bedfellows. 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
have a space advantage on the queenside 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.e3 c6 8.e2
it's not clear this is of any real benefit. ]0-0
21.bxc6 [ Of course 8...f5 is natural enough, but
[ 21.dxc5 might keep the slimmest of
whereas Black will always have to castle
advantages after dxc5 22.bxc6 xc6 short, he might not need to place his Bishop
23.c4 c8 24.a2! on f5. 9.f3 0-0 10.0-0 f6 11.b3 a5
although Black
shouldn't have any serious problems here. ] 12.ac1 a4 13.d1 a3 14.b3 e8 15.d5
21...xc6 22.e4 a4 23.c1 b4 16.d2 a6 17.d4 ( 17.xb6!
cxd4
24.xd4 dc5 Suddenly White has to be
cxb6 18.fe1 d7 19.d4
very careful 25.xe6! The only move to keep is a n u n ste re o t yp e d wa y t o ha n d le t h e
the balance and it starts off a long sequence position and one which gives W hite the
of exchanges which takes us into an equal a d v a n t a g e .) 17...g6 18.db5 c5
endgame 19.xc5?! ( 19.fe1 ) 19...dxc5 20.d6
[ 25.f3?? allows xd4 26.xd4 b3 cxd6 21.f3 g5 22.xd6 xc1 23.xc1
winning a piece ] Oms Fuentes, L-Jimenez Albadalejo, M/
25...xe4 Barbera del Valles 2005 and now g5 ]
[ 25...xe6 drops a pawn to 26.b6 xd2 9.f3 g4 10.b3 f5!? Exactly the type of
27.xd2 ad8 28.xa5 although Black has move to confuse a weaker opponent, but
r e a s o n a b l e c o m p e n s a t i o n a f t e r b5
objectively, it is dubious.
29.fe1 d4 and a draw is still the most
[ Either 10...f6 ]
likely result ] [ or 10...e8 are superior. ]
26.xd8 11.0-0?!
[ 26.d3?! xf2! ] [ 11.d2! is easily the best move, after
26...xd2 27.xd2 fxd8 28.b6 b5 which White secures an undisputed edge:
29.fd1 ab8 30.xa5 b2 31.xd8+ f6 12.0-0 h6 13.d5 xf3 14.xf3 e5
xd8 32.b1 xa3 33.c4 d3 The dust 15.e2 bd7 16.ae1 ( 16.f4! is clearest:
has settled and the position is just a draw. g4 17.xg4 fxg4 18.ae1; 16.c2!?
White's back rank is too weak for any of the g4 17.xg4 fxg4 18.ae1 e5 19.e2
tactics to end in his favour. 34.e5 d5
h4 20.g3 ) 16...a5 17.b5 f7
35.g4 b2! 36.h3 d3 37.xb2 xa5 18.d3 c6 19.dxc6 bxc6 20.a3 a4
A relatively comfortable hold for Black in a 21.b4 g6 22.xh6 xh6 23.xh6 f7
solid line of the Alekhine. White is still yet to24.h7+ g7 25.xf5 gxf5 Oe, O-Carl
prove a real edge against exd6 and I sson, A/Randers 1973 The conclusion I
recommend trying other lines (the 4-pawns or draw from the examples above is that the
4.Nf3) Alekhine is slippery, difficult to get a grip on.
½-½ Against tacticians this type of 'confusing
play' works well, less so against strategical
players. ]
541 B03 11...f4 12.c1 f6 13.b2 h8 14.e4
Shukurova,Meihriban 2205 [ Again White misses his chance: 14.d5! ]
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2699 14...d5! 15.xf6 xf6 16.c1 ad8 17.c5
President's Cup (1) 04.05.2006 c8 Black has a very reasonable position now.
[Andrew Martin] His Knight comes to f5 and pressure is
created against d4. 18.d2 8e7 19.b4
1.e4 f6 Note that Mamedyarov is very f5! 20.cd1
happy to use the Alekhine against lower-rated [ 20.xf4 fxd4-+ ]
opposition perhaps that will be the future for 20...de8 21.fe1
this combative, but when the dust settles, [ White would normally advance his
slightly worse for Black, opening. The queenside pawns as quickly as possible, but
Alekhine and the Scandinavian are here he is struck downafter 21.b5 h4!!
545
A superb idea. 22.bxc6 ( 22.h1 a5!; was stronger. ]

22.xh4 xe2 ) 22...xe2 23.xe2 xf3 11.xc4 xc3+ 12.bxc3 xc4 13.a4+
24.e5 ( 24.gxf3 g6+ 25.h1 g2# ) d7 14.xc4 b6 15.b5+ d7
24...g6 ] 16.xd7+ xd7 17.d6 c8 18.d2
21...g6 22.h1 [ 18.e3 is m ore active b ut the n xc3
[ 22.b5 xf3 23.xf3 h4 24.xd5 g5 19.xb6 axb6 20.d2 a3 gave Black
25.xe8 xe8 26.e1 xe1+ 27.xe1 equality in Shirov - Shabalov, Riga 1986. ]
xd5 28.e8+ g8 29.xg8+ xg8 18...b5!
30.bxc6 bxc6 ] [ Probably even more precise than the older
22...a6 23.a4 h5 24.b5 axb5 18...c4 , first of all Black stops his
[ 24...h4 looks good again: 25.xh4 xe2 opponent from castling. ]
26.b1 xh4 27.xe2 e7 28.be1 f3 19.d4 d3 The fact that the draw was
29.gxf3 axb5 30.axb5 xf3 but I think agreed at this point confirms the view that this
Mamedyarov preferred the text because he position (the last word on the 6...c5 line) is
knew he was at least positionally better fine for Black.
anyway. There comes a point in the game [ The previous game in this line was MChess
where you just KNOW that you are going to Pro - Shabalov, Boston 1994 which went:
win as long as you don't take any risks. ] 19...d3 20.f2 d7 21.he1 he8
25.axb5 a5 26.e5 xe5! 27.xg4 22.a4 g6 23.a2 c5 24.f3 c4
xe1+ 28.xe1 xg4 29.f3 25.f4 h5 26.ae2 xf3 27.gxf3 a5
[ Regrettably for White 29.xa5 is answered 28.g1 g6 29.b1 b6 30.b4 xe5
by f3-+ ] , recovering the pawn with a good position.
29...g3+! 30.g1 Shabalov actually lost this game but this was
[ 30.hxg3 h5+ 31.g1 fxg3 32.xa5 only due to a subsequent blunder. ]
h2+ 33.f1 h1+ 34.e2 xg2+ ½-½
35.d1 xb2 ]
30...c4 31.fxg4 xd2 32.hxg3 f3
All still under control. 33.f2 e4+ 34.e3 543 B03
fxg2 35.g1 f2 36.a3 a2 37.b4 g5 Simons,Martin
38.d2 xd2 A mismatch, but still a good Baburin,Alexander
opening choice by Black. 10th Monarch Assurance (2) 30.09.2001
0-1 [Nigel Davies]
The words 'Voronezh Variation' have been

542 B03 st ri ki n g f e a r in t o t h e h e a r t s o f A l e k h i n e
Shulman,Yuri 2543 players and turned the once harmless
Baburin,Alexander 2598 Exchange Variation into an instrument of
Linklater Mem (11) 08.03.2001 torture. But Black has been fighting back with
[Nigel Davies] the simple 5... exd6, getting castled and then
figuring out where to put his minor pieces. It's
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 not quite the kind of chess some Alekhine
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5 players are used to, but it gives Black a very
9.cxd5 c4 10.f3 b4! The move which decent game. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
rehabilitated this line for Black - in the main 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 exd6 A sensible
line it leads to an endgame in which Black approach.
gets excellent positional compensation for a [ Baburin has evidently given up on trying to
pawn. prove that the Voronezh Variation ( 5...cxd6
[ 10...g4 11.d4 was played in the famous 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3!
B r o n s t e i n - L j u b o j e vi c g a m e f r o m t h e ) is OK for Black. It's not OK at all. ]
Petropolis Interzonal in 1973, though the 6.c3 e7 7.d3 c6 8.ge2 g4
theoreticians later decided that 11.Be2 Trying to get White to move his f-pawn.
546
[ In Sermek - Zelcic, Pozega 2000 White met 66.c3 d8 67.b1 e6 68.b4 c8
8...0-0 9.0-0 f6 10.e3 g4 with 11.h3 69.d1 e5 70.e3 d2 71.d1 f4 72.f3
and obtained the better game af ter h5 e3 73.e4+ d5 74.xf4 xd1 75.e2
12.d2 g6 13.b3 xd3 14.xd3 d5 White in turn shows considerable ingenuity in
15.c5 c8 16.b4 xb4 17.b1 etc. ] eliminating his opponent's last pawn. But he
9.f3 h5 10.0-0 0-0 11.b3 f6 12.e3?! throws the game away in what looks like time-
[ I prefer 12.d5 e5 13.b2 but then xd3 trouble. c3+ 76.xd2 e4+ 77.e2 c2+
14.xd3 g6 15.d2 d7 looks quite 78.d1
adequate for Black. ] [ It looks like a draw after 78.d3 ]
12...e8 13.d2 d5 Creating a different kind 78...h2 79.c1 a2 80.h4 d4 81.h3
of structure. Black rules out the possibility of c3 82.h4+ d3 83.h3+ c4
W h it e ga inin g sp a ce wit h d 4 -d5 a n d will 84.h4+??
reroute his b6 knight to f5 via c8 and e7. 14.c5 [ 84.h8 draws, because he can check
c8 15.fe1 g6 16.xg6 hxg6 17.ad1 Black's king away from the b3 square. ]
b6 Another instructive move. When White 84...b3 85.b4+ xb4
captures on b6 he leaves his opponent with 0-1
the more solid pawn structure. 18.cxb6 axb6
19.f4 g5 20.e3 a5 21.c1 d6 22.f2
f5 23.a4 ce7 24.g4?! Driving the knight 544 B03
from f5 relieves the pressure on the d4 pawn, Sjugirov,Sanan 2405
but weakens White's kingside in the process. Baburin,Alexander 2545
d6 25.h4 g6 26.h5 f8 27.d3 c6 III EUICC Arvier ITA (7) 21.06.2007
28.g2 a7 29.d1 c7 30.e3 g6 [John Watson]
31.g3 ce7 32.f1 d7 33.c2?
Allowing his kingside pawns to be shattered 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
makes matters worse. 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
[ W h i t e h a d t o p l a y 33.hxg6 , allowing 9.f3 e7 Check out the archives for
Black's f8 knight a nice square after xg6 ] alternatives on this and the last few moves. I
33...gxh5 34.gxh5 f5 35.f2 e6 can't see anything for Black that I have full
36.ec1 faith in. Fortunately, he has an incredible
[ White loses his queen after 36.xf5 f4+ ] number of options, and I'll bet at least one
36...c5 37.dxc5 bxc5 38.h1 ed4 key idea is yet to be discovered.
Attempting to exploit the weakness of White's [ William Martz used to play 9...d7 here,
king with a forcing sequence. But the 10.e2 d8 ( I think 10...g4 11.0-0 d8
endgame reached is far from clear. 39.xd4 works as well. In my days with the Alekhine,
xd4 40.xd4 xd4 41.g2 because of analysis with Martz, that was my
[ And not 41.xc5 h3+ etc. ] choice. I won some games but never could
41...h3+ 42.h2 xf3+ 43.xf3 xf3 make it work in th eory. Now that I loo k
44.f2 g4 45.xc5 Obtaining connected around, I recognise some of the notes in
passed pawns on the queenside. This is going the archives in the game Kotronias-Short!
to be close.... e5 46.c7 xh5+ 47.g2 Playable? W ell, maybe, maybe not but I
d4 48.b4 d3 49.b5 e6 50.g3 e4 51.b6 wouldn't bet that Black gains equality. )]
b4 52.b7 g7 53.c4 h3+ 54.g2 10.e2 Actually, this seems to be a very good
[ The point of Black's ingenious play is that move, perhaps better than its ancient
54.xg4 is met by h4+ 55.xf3 reputation. White avoids the line analysed by
, both winning the exchange and stopping John Cox in this column (see Dominguez-
White's passed pawn. hxc4 ] Almeida, Santa Clara 2005), which also looks
54...h4+ 55.g1 xb7 56.xg4+ g6 good for White but is highly unstable:
57.g2 h5 58.d2 d7 59.g3 hd5 [ 10.d5 (30 years ago we spent untold hours
60.f3 f6 61.e4+ e7 62.g5 e5+ and days on this move. Now the computer
63.f2 c4 64.xd5 xd5 65.d1 f5 would probably render a lot of that analysis
547
useless) 24...a4? ( 24...a8 a n d . . . N c 7)

A) An old line that might bear a new look is 25.xa4? ( Probably there was already
10...b4 11.c1 f6 12.a3 a6 time trouble. 25.xd5! xd5 26.c4 e4
A1) It might be simpler to play 13.d4 27.f2 doesn't look bad until you see that
, f o r e x a m p l e , fxe5 14.xf5!? Re2 is threatened and the knight is
( 14.xe6 xe6 15.dxe6 0-0! 16.xd8 trapped on a4. h5 28.e2 ) 25...xa4
axd8 17.d5! doesn't look bad either: 26.d3 1/2-1/2 Durao-Karolyi, Helsinki
xd5 18.cxd5 xd5 19.xa6 bxa6 1989. W hite was outrated by a few
20.xc7 etc. ) 14...exf5 15.b4! hundred points perhaps that's why he
Okay, that probably refutes 11...f6 ... didn't play on, although his advantage is
maybe!; limited. ]
A2) 13.g4!? xg4 14.g1 with a terrific [ (b) I don't know what to make of 15...g6
attack. Maybe Fritz could salvage that 16.h1 h8 17.fe1!? f7!? 18.f1! e8
one.; 19.g5!? , but I like White: e7 ( 19...xd4
B) 10...exd5 11.cxd5 b4 12.d4 d7 20.xd4 xd4 21.xd8 xc3 22.xc7
13.f3 c5 14.dxc6 bxc6 ( Maybe Black f6 23.e5! ) 20.xf6 (or a slow move)
should look into 14...xc6 or 14...Nc6. gxf6 21.f4 d7 22.e4 with a nice
Although W hite really should have an advantage. W hite went on to win in
edge, as theory says, it may not be all that Domnitz-Westerinen, Netanya 1969. ]
large ) 15.e2! 0-0 ( 15...c5 16.0-0 0-0 16.e4 h6
17.f5! ) 16.0-0 4d5 17.f2 , etc., and [ A strange move that sort of succeeded was
Cox thinks that W hite stands better - I 16...d7 17.fe1 ( or 17.f2 , for example
agree, although I should say that his word or almost any slow move. The rook is well-
carries more weight, since he knows a lot placed on f1) 17...h6 18.xf6+ xf6 19.h3
more than I ever will about these lines. ] ( 19.f1! ) 19...f5 20.a3 ( 20.f1! )
10...0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 xf6 13.d2 20...b6 21.c3 ( 21.f1! ) 21...e4
e7 14.ad1 ad8 15.c1 g4 22.h2 d7 23.d2?! ( 23.f1! ) 23...f5
The main move, although I have to admit that 1/2-1/2 Ronchetti-Laketic, Cattolica 2005. ]
it simply looks good for White. 17.h1 Almost any solid move seems to keep
[ (a) 15...e5!? has been tried, sacrificing a White's advantage here, e.g., a truly classic
p a w n a f t e r 16.d5 d4 17.xd4 exd4 game (played in 1938!) was
18.xd4 ( 18.xd4!? xd4 19.xd4 c5! [ 17.xf6+! xf6 18.a3 df8 19.b4 d7
20.e3 xe3+ 21.xe3 d7 is unclear, 20.de1 h8 21.c3 b6 22.d1!? f7
Lanc-W Schmidt, Brno 1975.) 18...g5 23.f2! (very often a good move in this
19.a1 (forced, but not bad, since it variation) h5 24.g3 and Black is pretty
influences the long diagonal) much lost, Asztalos-Nedeljkovic, Ljubljana
A) 19...c5! 20.f2 c2 21.de1 d2 1938. I would say that the year could be a
( 21...xf2!? 22.xf2 e3 misprint, but Asztalos goes back a long
is my computer's suggestion, although ways. ]
after the possible 23.ef1 f8 24.e1 17...d7 18.fe1 fe8 19.xf6+ xf6
xf2+ 25.xf2 e3 , simply 26.f1 20.e5 xe2 21.xc6 bxc6 22.xe2 e5
is okay ) 22.d1 xe1 23.xe1 f6 23.f4 e4 24.h3 h5 25.h2 e3 26.d3
24.xc5 xd1 25.xd1 (this is horrible [ White seems to have a fairly clear
f o r B la c k ! ) xc4 ( 25...fe8? 26.f1 ) advantage after 26.de1! g5 27.xe3
26.xf8 xf8 27.e2 d4+ 28.h1 ( 27.g4?! f6 28.xe3 xe3 29.xe3
e3 29.h3 and White went on to win in J xe3 30.xe3 xd4 ) 27...xe3 28.xe3
Koch-Boulard, France 1993.; xd4 29.e8+ f7 30.e1! f6 31.e5
B) 19...c2 20.xf8+ xf8 21.f1 d8 and 32 Re5+. ]
22.f3! c6 23.f1 cxd5 24.c5?! 26...f7!? 27.b3
( White has played about perfectly to this [ 27.exe3! xe3 28.xe3 xc4 29.xc7
point. 24.cxd5 is simple and strong) c8 30.b3 ]
548
27...e4 28.exe3 exd4 29.xd4 xd4 32.fxe6+ g7 33.c5 c7 34.b4 a5 35.a3
30.e5 d7 31.e1 g6 32.h2 e7 axb4 36.axb4 h6 37.c3 h4 38.c6 h3
33.g4?! c2+ 34.e2? xe5! 35.xc2 39.xh3 xh3 40.gxh3 b6+ 41.h1
xe1 36.gxh5 f7 A complicated ending has xb4 42.b1 d4 43.cxb7 xd5+ 44.g2
arisen. Black went on to win. 37.g3 g1+ 1-0
38.f4 g5 39.d2 e7 40.d3 xh5
41.g4 g5+ 42.f4 g2 43.a3 a5
44.e5 h5 45.d4 h4 46.e3+ d6 546 B03
47.c5+ d7 48.e4 g5 49.e5 g3 Smeets,Jan 2659
50.f5 xh3 51.d4+ c8 52.xg5 xb3 Reinderman,Dimitri 2608
53.xh4 xa3 54.c4 b7 55.f4 a6 ch Eindhoven (3) 13.06.2010
56.e4 b5 57.c1 a4 58.d4 h3 [Gawain Jones]
59.b1+ b3 60.h1 b4+ 61.c3 c4+
62.b2 b4 63.h8 a3+ 64.a2 c2+ 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
65.b1 xc5 66.a2 c2+ 67.b1 b2+ 5.exd6 exd6
68.a1 d2 69.b8+ c4 70.a8 d3 [ 5...cxd6 is the more aggressive try and I'll
71.a2 c5 72.c8 b4 73.b8+ a4 have a look at that in the next game. ]
74.b7 d2+ 75.a1 c6 76.b6 c4 6.h3 It is somewhat unusual to play this so
77.xc6 b3 78.b6+ c2 79.h6 c3 early but the game soon transposes back into
80.a2 c1+ 81.xa3 c2 82.a2 d8 previously chartered waters.
83.b3 b1 [ A recent game illustrated Black's ideas if he
0-1 is allowed to play ...Bg4. 6.c3 e7 7.e2
( 7.h3 is also possible here and would be
pretty similar to the game, i.e. Fedorowicz,
545 B03 J-Porper, E Calgary 2010.) 7...0-0 8.f3
Skorchenko,Dmitry 2460 g4 Otherwise there is no real point to
Tkachenko,Georgiy 2318 W h i t e 's 6 . h 3 9.0-0 c6 Typical Alekhine
Summer GM Lugansk UKR (10) 07.07.2007 play. ( 9...c5!?; and 9...c6 have both been
[John Watson] looked at previously on the site.) 10.b3 e8
11.h3 h5 12.e3 d5 13.c5 6d7 14.b4
A smooth win in Voronezh style. Isn't 9...e5 I feel that W hite should be a little better
forced after all? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 here with more space on the queenside but
d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 it's amazing how fast Black can break out.
7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 c6?! f6 15.b3 f8 16.fd1 e6 17.b5 d7
We've seen this move a few times recently, 18.ac1 c7 19.e1? xd4! A case in
but it still looks bad to me. 10.d5 e5 point! 20.xd4 ( 20.xd4 xe2 21.xe2
11.e2 f5?! 12.f4 xe2 would have dropped a pawn but was a
[ 12.h3 and ] le sse r evil.) 20...xd4 21.xh5 xe3!
[ 12.d2 are also very attractive. Black's 22.xd5 xe1+ 23.xe1 cxd5 and White
plan is mysterious, to say the least. ] had no real compensation for the piece.
12...g4 13.xg4 fxg4 14.ge2 f5 Nezar, M-Degraeve, J. Marseille 2010 ]
15.0-0 h5 6...c6 7.f3 e7 8.c3 f5 Transposing
[ 15...e6!? ] back to Leko-Short, a game which I
16.d4 f6 17.xf6 exf6 18.d4 investigated in my first update on here.
W ith total domination. W hite never lets up [ 8...0-0 was essayed by Thomas Luther but
from now on, even though both sides make t h i s a l l o w s : 9.d3 which seems to give
some technical errors. d7 19.d2 ae8 W h i t e a s m a l l e d g e . ( 9.a3 is likely to
20.ce1 a6 21.xf5 xf5 22.e2 c8 transpose to the game after f5 )
23.d4 d7 24.e6 f7 25.e3 fe7 A) 9...e8 10.0-0 b4 11.b1 c6
26.fe1 c5 27.c2 f7 28.f5 g5 29.h3! 12.e1 g6 13.a3 a6 14.a2 c7
gxh3 30.xh3 h8 31.he3 xe6 15.d5 c5 16.f4 f5 17.g4!? c8
549
18.d2 f5 19.g5 Gave White total control his c pawn.;

over the position. Areshchenko, A-Sergeev, B) 9...e5 10.xe5 I said this might be
V Alushta 2009.; an attempt at a niggling edge and Guerra-
B) 9...b4 doesn't pick up the bishop pair Mendez appears to confirm my view. dxe5
as 10.b1! is playable a5 ( 10...xc4? 11.e3 0-0 12.e2 e8 ( 12...d7
11.a3 c6 12.d3 would win the would have been more flexible as it's not
knight. ) 11.0-0 c6 12.e1 e8 clear whether the rook is better placed on
Boehnisch, M-Vasiukov, E Dresden 2007 f8 or e8 Black may yet want to break with
and here W hite's most accurate would ...f5. ) 13.0-0 d7
have been 13.a3 a6 14.f4 c7 B1) 14.d3 gaining possession of the
15.d5 with a comfortable advantage as light squares looks a little better f or
Black is rather passive.; White. xd3 15.xd3 c5 ( 15...a5
C) 9...f6 10.0-0 e8 Luther's is probably a better way of playing, with
improvement over his own play. ideas of a rook swing along the sixth
( Initially he tried 10...xd4?! but after rank when W hite is limited to a small
11.xd4 xd4 12.xh7+ xh7 13.xd4 edge. ) 16.e4 xe3?! 17.fxe3!
e8 14.b3 Naiditsch, A-Luther, T a n d W h it e h a s t a ke n co n t ro l o f t h e
Saarbruecken 2002, W hite had strong position.;
pressure on the dark squares.) 11.e3 B2) 14.d2 a6 15.ad1 e4 16.f4
( 11.b3 would be more in the spirit of Guerra Mendez, J-Aloma Vidal, R
White's setup as d4 still shouldn't be taken Balaguer 2010, and here, instead of the
b4 12.b1 c6 13.a3 a6 Jasny, S- plan adopted by Black of ....Bc5-a7-b8,
Sergeev, V Ostrava 2009 and although I'd prefer the simple d6 when Black
B l a c k w e n t o n t o w i n 14.a4!? has equalised. ]
looks interesting when I'd prefer W hite [ After 9.e2 I forgot to mention that Black
with his spatial advantage.) 11...b4 can try b4 as indeed Fridman played
12.b3 xd3 13.xd3 c6 and, although a g a i n s t m e a c o u p l e y e a r s a g o wh i c h
W hite must still be sitting pretty well, resulted in a quick draw after 10.0-0 c2
Luther successfully exploited his bishop 11.b1 b4 12.a1 1/2-1/2 Jones, G-
pair. Grzeca, P-Luther, T Dresden 2010. ] Fridman, D EU Championships Liverpool
9.a3 Deviating from Leko's 9.Bd3 which can 2008. Interestingly, however, the computer
be hardly critical although this move is rather thinks White can continue with c2 13.b1
rare. b4 14.e3!? sacrificing the exchange. I
[ 9.d5 I mentioned this committal attempt in recall Dave Smerdon saying something
my notes to Leko-Short and we've had a about this as a possibility. I wonder if we'll
couple of recent tests to add in. see any examples? Anyhow, it's obvious
A) 9...b4 10.d4 g6 11.a3 a6 Smeets wanted to avoid this repetition and
12.b4 0-0 13.e2 b8 ( 13...f6 14.0-0 thus played 9.a3. ]
c5!? was my suggestion which looks 9...0-0
adequate for Black.) 14.0-0 c5!? 15.b3 [ I'm not very impressed by the move 9...h6
( 15.bxc5 dxc5 16.f3 would favour which was played in an earlier game to
White with potential pressure down the b reach this position but it's probably not so
file. ) 15...f6 16.b2 cxb4 17.axb4 a6 bad. 10.e2 d7 11.d5!? e5 12.d4
and here instead of the speculative 18. h7 ( 12...exc4? drops a piece to
Rxa6!? which didn't really work out in: 13.xc4 xc4 14.xf5 xf5 15.a4+ )
Berbatov, K-Kukov, V Kyustendil 2010 13.0-0! accurately calculating that the pawn
W h i t e s h o u l d h a v e t r i e d : 18.c5 still isn't edible.
w h e n a f t e r a l l t h e e x c h a n g e s dxc5 A) 13...bxc4? 14.f4 is straightforward,
19.bxc5 xc3 20.xc3 xd5 21.xa6 when White picks up a piece;
bxa6 22.d4 xc3 23.xc3 d3 B) but 13...exc4?! is more complicated.
24.fc1 White has a small edge thanks to However Black runs into trouble af ter
550
14.a4! a5 ( 14...e5 15.f4 doesn't help) to fall foul of an attack on the light squares.
15.f4! when Black won't be able to ( 20.f5 h4 seems ok for Black. )]
extricate his knight from c4.; 16.c1 g6 17.d2 So White has the two
C) 13...0-0 14.b3 c5 15.dxc6 xc6 bishops and Black is rather passively placed.
Dovzik, J-Bednar, M Slovakia 2005 when Smeets slowly expands on the queenside
White had a small edge. ] whilst Reinderman can do nothing but wait.
10.e2 e8 This position must be completely d7
fine for Black otherwise the Alekhine would be [ Black should probably try to stake some
in a very bad state! It's interesting to see how hold on the position immediately with 17...d5
Smeets takes over. A textbook example as to when, should White push immediately with
how to treat these positions on the White side. 18.c5 ( 18.b3!? just holding for a moment, is
[ A previous encounter with 9. a3 continued: better for W hite.) 18...d7 19.b4 a6
10...h6 11.0-0 f6 12.e3 ( I daresay 20.a4?! a5! 21.b5 b4 Black would be
Smeets would have played in the same solidly placed. ]
fashion as the game with 12.f4 ) 12...e8 18.b3 ae8 19.fd1 d8 Smeets has zero
13.c1 g6 14.b4 e7 15.f4 c6 16.b3 weaknesses in his camp and thus
d5 17.c5 d7 18.fd1 f8 with a typical Reinderman is forced to sit and await events.
Exchange Alekhine setup. Lysak, I-Kosikov, 20.b4 a6 21.f1 d7 22.b5! cb8
A Kiev 2002. ] [ 22...axb5 23.cxb5 cb8 24.a4
11.0-0 f6 12.f4 The first new move. is rather similar to the course of the game. ]
[ 12.b3 has been tried a couple of times, 23.a4 c6 24.f4 f8 Black is being forced
including a game by another of Topalov's backwards and only a masochist could enjoy
s e c o n d s , Ch e p a rin o v. g6 ( 12...d7 playing Black here! 25.g3 d7 26.b1
13.e3 d5 14.c5 c8 15.b4 a6 16.c1 axb5 Perhaps Black should have continued
h6 17.e1 8e7 18.f1 e4! and Black sitting, as hard as that actually is in practical
started to take over. Stark, S-Khenkin, I chess. 27.cxb5! A somewhat surprising
Dresden 2010.) 13.f4 a6 14.c1 d5 recapture but the reason becomes apparent if
15.c5 c8 16.b4 8e7 17.b5 axb5 you look at the final position! c5 28.a5! e6
18.xb5 c8 19.g4!? was rather unclear, 29.d5
Cheparinov, I- San Martin, R Linares 2005. ] [ Continuing with 29.a6 looked extremely
12...e4?! And, as Reinderman refuses the strong but there's nothing wrong with the
exchange sacrifice in a couple of moves, this game continuation either. ]
move must be deemed a mistake, simply 29...d4 30.xd4 xd4 31.e1 de7
ceding the bishop pair and light squares. 32.h4 f6 33.a6 b6?!
[ 12...d7 would be the normal treatment of [ 33...d7 34.e6 is exceedingly
the position. I doubt Smeets had anything unpleasant but would at least allow Black to
in particular prepared but was happy to play on a little longer. ]
have slightly more space on the queenside 34.a2! c4?! And this loses at once to a
and hoped to outplay his fellow Dutchman. ] pretty finish.
13.xe4 xe4 14.e3 e8 15.d3 e7 [ Although 34...a7 35.e6 isn't much
[ 15...xe3 should probably have been tried better ]
as the course of the game just leaves Black 35.xe7 xe7 36.xf6! Deflecting the bishop
worse. However this seems dangerous for from control of a7 and thus Black cannot
Black following: 16.fxe3 xe3+ 17.h1 prevent a second queen from appearing on
xd4 18.xd4 xd4 ( 18...xd4 the board. A well played game by Smeets and,
could be stronger but W hite retains the while not changing the theoretical verdict,
i n i t i a t i v e w i t h 19.e1 f2 20.e7! teaches wannabe Alekhine players that they
with a powerful rook on the seventh.) 19.f3 must understand the positions very well as
c6 20.ae1 Black has restored rough even a frequent practitioner of the Alekhine
material parity but White's rooks dominate rated over 2600 got into a lot of trouble.
the position and Black has to be careful not 1-0
551
547 B03 8d7 13.e3 b8 14.e6?! ( 14.e2

Smith,Bry 2386 xe5 15.f1 ) 14...e5 15.exf7+ xf7
Shabalov,Alexander 2606 16.h2 exc4 Panarin, M -Polaczek, R
35th World Open (5) 02.06.2007 playchess. com INT 2005. ]
[John Watson] 10...e6 11.0-0-0
[ 11.f3 exd5 12.cxd5 g4 13.e2 e8
With this recent game I try to clarify what's 14.0-0 8d7 ]
going on in a Four Pawns Attack variation that 11...exd5 12.cxd5 e8!? My feeling is that
has attracted some followers. It is extremely this improves upon older theory.
delica te to hand le, yet ce rtain ly f a r f ro m [ In a previous ChessPublishing column,
refuted. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Volzhin annotated the game Volzhin, A-
b6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 Svechnikov, L/ Russia 1988: 12...g4
A funny combination of ideas. More common A) 13.e2 xe2 14.xe2 e8 15.f3
is 8d7 Volzhin likes Black. although I think
[ 7...e6 . By 7...g6, Black is saying: 'Do your that W hite can hold the balance by
worst!' and hoping that White's centre will sacrificing his e-pawn in the style of the
eventually become weak. This is King's Indian Four Pawns attack: 16.hf1
hypermodernism in the extreme, and is ( 16.h4 xe5 17.xe5 d7 18.xf7!?
still somewhat experimental. ] xe2 19.xd8 xc3 20.bxc3 xd8
8.f4 21.he1!? is unclear, but should be okay
[ 8.d3!? g7 9.e2 e6 10.d6 ( 10.f3!? for Black; 16.he1!? ) 16...xe5 17.xe5
exd5 11.g5 ) 10...h4+ 11.g3 h5 d7 ( 17...xe5 18.xe5 d7 19.d6!? )
12.f3 c6 13.g4 xg4 14.g1 h5 18.f2 xe5 19.xe5 xe5 20.xc5
15.f4 1/2-1/2 Milos-Lima, Sao Paulo 2005 unclear and probably balanced.;
but d7! looks strong. ] B) 13.e1 c4 ( 13...a6 14.h3 ) 14.h3
8...g7 9.c3 ( 14.h6 xh6 15.xh6 xd5 16.h3
[ 9.f3 failed in two games, but allowing ... f5 17.d1 xc3! 18.xd8 xa2+
Bg4 isn't necessarily bad: 0-0 ( 9...g4! 19.d2 xd8+ with a huge edge for
gains a tempo in some lines) 10.d3?! Black. ) 14...f5 15.g4 ( or 15.h4!? h5
( 10.c3 ) 10...g4 ( 10...e6 11.d6 f6 ) 16.f3 a6 17.h6 ) 15...d3! 16.xd3
11.0-0 8d7 12.e1 b8? ( 12...e6 ) cxd3 17.xd3 a6
13.bd2 e6 14.d6 ( 14.g3! xf3 B1) 18.d1!? c8 ( 18...xe5?
15.xf3 ) 14...f6 15.exf6 xf6 with unclear 19.xe5 g5+ 20.b1 xe5 21.f3 )
play, maybe in W hite's favour, Rafie, A- 19.b1 c4 20.e2 a5 21.f3
Polaczek, R /playchess.com INT 2004. ] a3+ 22.bxa3 xc3 23.c1 unclear;
9...0-0 10.d2 An important choice. White B2) 18.d6 c8 19.b1 c4
also has: ( i n s t e a d o f t h e u n c l e a r 19...b4
[ (a) 10.e2 e6 11.0-0-0 exd5 12.cxd5 20.d1 c4 21.h2 a5 22.f3 c5
, for example, e8 13.h4 of Movsesian-Francsics, Czechia 2005,
A) 13...8d7 14.f3 xe5 15.xe5 when I think that White is simply better
xe5 16.xe5 d7 ( 16...d7?? after 23.he2 23 or even Qa4; 19...c5
17.c7 ) 17.g3 f6 18.xf6 xf6 unclear; of Ilincic-Marinkovic, Vrnjacka Banja
B) 13...h5?! 14.g5! f6 ( 14...d7 1989 was also not completely clear after
15.f3; 14...g4 15.xd8 xe2 16.xe2 20.e2 e6 21.g3 c4 22.f3 a5
xd8 17.f3 8d7 18.e6 fxe6 19.dxe6 , b u t V o l zh i n t h i n ks t h a t t h i s is t h e
e5 20.xe5 xe5 21.d3 g7 we a k e s t o p t i o n , a n d i n d e e d , 23.c1
22.hf1 f8 23.b5 a6 24.xf8 xf8 holds everything together) 20.d5!?
25.d3 g7 26.f1 ) 15.exf6 xe2 ( I like 20.f3 b6 21.h2!
16.f7+ xf7 17.xd8 f2 18.h3 xh3 I wonder whether this whole line with
19.xh3 8d7 20.g5 ] 12...Bg4 and ...c4 is objectively sound.)
[ (b) 10.f3 g4 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 20...a5! 21.e7+ h8 22.f3 c5
552
( 22...xb2!? is worthy of I'd rather be Black after, say, d8 22.e5

consideration:) 23.h4? ( 23.b3 xb2 g7 ]
24.d2 is messy ) 23...xa2+! 24.xa2 20...xe8 21.xe8 c4
b4+ 25.b3! xd3 and White was [ 21...d3+ 22.c2! and there are no
probably lost but hung on to draw. ] particularly good discoveries. ]
[ Volzhin also notes the game 12...c4 13.f3 22.f7+
g4 ( 13...e8 looks better) 14.h6! xf3 [ 22.h6 d3+ 23.c2 ]
15.xg7 xd1? 16.f6! and Black soon 22...xf7 23.h6 d3+ 24.d1 This is all
resigned, Solomon-Kanikevich, Sydney right, but White needn't give Black options.
1991. ] [ 24.c2! leaves Black with pretty pieces,
13.e1 a6 14.f3 b4 15.g5! but facing an attack himself. Perhaps best is
This seems best to me. to bail out by b4+ ( or 24...g7 25.g5+
[ 15.d1 f5 16.a3 c2! has the idea of ... f8 26.xh7 b4+ 27.c1 d3+= )
Na1-b3 ] 25.c1 d3+ , etc. White can try 26.d1
[ 15.b5 d7 16.g5 looks similar, but e8 27.xh7+ g7 28.g5+ f8
then Black can play c8 ] 29.e6+ xe6 30.dxe6 xe6 , but Black
15...f6 16.h4?! White may sur vive with this has plenty of play. ]
move but he gives his opponent an array of 24...g7 25.g5+ f8 26.xh7+?
attacking ideas. A simple line that avoids too Now only Black can win. White had a draw by
much risk is [ 26.xh7! e8! ( 26...dxb2+ 27.e2
[ 16.exf6! xe1+ 17.xe1 xf6 18.xf6 e8+ 28.f1 ) 27.b3 ( or 27.e6+ xe6
xf6 19.a3 a6 ( 19...a5 is the ambitious 28.dxe6 xe6 29.d5 dxb2+ 30.c1
t r y s t i l l , 20.e2! (in t e n d in g R f 1 ) d6! f7= ) 27...e3+ ( 27...g4+ 28.c2
21.axb4 axb4 22.b1 f5 23.c2! b4+ 29.b1 f5+ 30.c1= ) 28.d2
seems to come up short for Black) 20.e2 f1+ 29.d1 e3+= ]
intending Rf1, and it's hard to believe that 26...g8 27.f6+ f7! 28.g5 h8!
W hite doesn't have something. Probably 29.fe4
Black should sacrifice a pawn by c4 21.f1 [ 29.ce4?? h6 30.g3 f4 ]
g7 22.g5! ( 22.f4 c5 23.xc4 xc4 29...e8 30.d6
24.xc4 is risky after b6 ) 22...d7 23.d6 [ 30.e2 dxb2 31.f3 d1!
h6 ( 23...c8 24.d5 ) 24.xc4+ xc4 leaves White in poor straits. ]
25.d5+ h8 26.xc4 c8 27.f7 ( or 30...dxb2+ 31.c2?? This loses.
27.d5 )] [ The best try was 31.c1 d3+ 32.c2
16...f5 b4+ ( 32...b5 33.d7! b4+ 34.b3
[ 16...4xd5!? looks at least adequate, for a5+ 35.b2= ) 33.d1 , and in several
example, 17.e4 ( 17.xd5 xd5 lines d6 will be enough of a diversionary
18.xd5+ xd5 19.c4 h6+! 20.b1 move to hold. ]
f5+ 21.a1 e6 22.exf6 e3! ) 31...xd6 32.xf5+ and White resigned
17...d7! 18.c4 c6 ] before 32...Nxf5.
17.b5?! [ 32.xb2 xe4 33.f4 xc3
[ 17.exf6 xe1+ 18.xe1 xf6 19.xf6 is a slaughter. ]
xf6 20.a3 a6 leaves Black a tempo 0-1
ahead of the note to move 16. ( or 20...a5 )]
17...a6 18.exf6? xe1+?
[ A serious error. Shabalov
unch ara cte ristica lly overlooks 18...axb5!
19.f7+ xf7 20.xd8 exd8 and White is
busted. Among other things, ...Bxc3 and ...
Nd3+ are threats. ]
19.xe1 xf6 20.e8+
[ 20.xf6 xf6 21.f1 is playable, although
553
548 B03 20.e4

Smolovic,Mile 2385 [ 20.xd5 xd5 21.g2 b3! 22.de1 c6
Drazic,Sinisa 2460 23.hf1 e6 ]
2nd League TCh-SCG, SCG (1) 2003 20...g4 21.d2 ae8 As long as Black is
[Andrew Martin] aware of the obvious Nf6 then he should just
be a pawn up for nothing. 22.d3 f5 23.gxf6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 xf6 24.g2 f3 25.xf6+ xf6 26.g5
5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.f3!? xg5 27.hxg5 xh1 28.gxf6 xe3
I think that the fangs of this once dangerous 29.xh7+ xh7 30.h2+ g8 31.xh1
i d e a h a v e n o w b e e n d r a w n . B l a c k h a s gxf6 The smoke clears and White's two
neutralised the Queen move. White's thought p a wn s d o wn . T h e r e s t o f t h e g a m e i s a
is to castle long as quickly as possible and formality. 32.d2 b3 33.c2 g3 34.d2
start a Kingside attack. He thinks that the c6 35.h4 d5 36.h2 g7 37.e2 f7
Knight on b6 will make it difficult for Black to 38.h2 a5 39.h7+ g7 40.h8 e6
counterattack effectively. It's also difficult to 41.a8 f5 Korchnoi's 7 Qf3 bothered Black
shift the queen from the intimidating post on f3. players for a while but I hope I have shown at
The problem is that White's attack also takes least two effective counters. At present White
ages to get into gear. c6 has to find another way to combat 5...exd6.
[ 7...0-0 8.e3 c6! is an effective counter Perhaps it's time to go back to the main line.
too. Black plans ...d6-d5! which will force a 0-1
concession i.e. c4-c5 and then Black prises
open the queenside with ..b7-b6! 9.h3 d5
10.c5 6d7 11.a3 b6 12.b4 bxc5 13.bxc5 549 B03
f6 14.e2 xc5 15.0-0 It was far too hot Socko,Bartosz 2630
to castle long now but the d pawn is a target. Rozentalis,Eduardas 2591
e6 16.fd1 a5 17.ac1 d7 18.f4 6th Amplico AIG Life Gp1 rapid (2) 17.12.2006
xa3 19.h5 e7 20.a4 b7 21.b1 [Jonathan Rowson]
ab8 22.f1 a8 23.bc1 g5 24.c3
xe3 25.xe3 g5 26.h3 f6 27.e5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
h6 28.c5 xc5 29.dxc5 e4 30.g4 5.exd6 cxd6 I suspect that this move tends to
f5 31.xf5 xf5 32.xf5 f8 33.e5 be welcomed by White players. To my mind it
xf2 34.a1 g4 35.d6 e3+ i s m u c h h a r d e r t o g a i n a n y e n d u r i n g
0-1 W illemze, J-Van der W erf, M/Essent advantage if Black takes with the e-pawn.
Open, Hoogeveen NED 2003 (35) ] 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3
8.e3 0-0 9.0-0-0 g5 10.h3 xe3+ Black's basic problem in this line, as if it is in
11.fxe3 h4 12.g3 g4!= Pretty efficient . the Alekhine in general, is the knight on b6. In
With the queens coming off only Black can be fact I would even say that the fate of Black's
better with the pawn on e3 sticking out like a position is tied to this piece- when the knight
sore thumb. 13.f2 does well, Black generally does well, as was
[ 13.xg4 xg4 14.e1 ae8 15.b5 e7 the case here. c6 10.d5 e5 11.h3
16.f2 f3 17.g1 a6 18.c3 fe8 I don't like this move, because if and when
is very nice for Black as is ] W hite plays f4 he will really have a lot of
[ 13.f4 xc4 14.xg4 xg4 15.xc4 weaknesses on his kingside, and if he doesn't
xh3 16.d5 ae8 ] play f4, then h3 doesn't have much point.
13...xc4 14.f4 b6 15.h4 f5 16.g4 [ 11.e2 is probably more accurate here and
a5 17.g5 b4 This has been a rather if Black plays f5 White has ( 11...e6!? 12.f4
hopeful pawn sacrifice by W hite. He hasn't ed7 13.dxe6 e7!? is then noteworthy,
gained too much momentum on the Kingside because Alekhine expert Baburin played it,
and must now attend to Black's threats when b u t i t l o o k s f i s h y t o m e .) 12.h3
he would much rather be getting on with the and I prefer White. ]
attack himself. 18.a3 4d5 19.fxd5 xd5 11...e8!? An interesting waiting move that
554
seems to be a novelty. 12.e2 e6 13.dxe6 12...f7 This just doesn't work out. Black
[ 13.f3 gives Black various options, of intends . ..e5, when his d-pawn will be well-
which xf3+ 14.xf3 e5 looks clearest, protected. The problem is space.
and comfortable. ] [ 12...g4 13.d4 xd4 14.xd4 d7
13...xe6 14.f3 d5! Socko must have 15.f3 b6!? may not be so bad then
thought this wasn't possible. 15.xd5 16.xb6 axb6 17.d4 c5 18.0-0
[ 15.xb6 xf3+ 16.xf3 axb6 ] keeps an edge. ]
[ 15.cxd5 xd5 16.xd5 is similar to the 13.f3 e5!? 14.dxe6 xe6 15.0-0 e8
game and seems to be equal. ] 16.d4
15...xd5 16.cxd5 a5+ 17.d2? [ 16.e1 with the idea d7?! 17.d4! ]
Far too ambitious. 16...d7 17.xg7
[ 17.d2 leads to an equal ending. ] [ Again 17.e1 is very strong. ]
17...xf3+ 18.gxf3 17...xg7 18.d4 f6 19.f3 b6
[ 18.xf3 gives Black pleasant options, but 20.h1!?
simplest is xd5+ 19.f1 a6+ 20.g1 [ White misses the trick 20.c5! dxc5 21.a4
ad8 with a commanding position. ] b4 22.xc5 c8 23.a3 b6 ( 23...xa3
18...xd5 Things have obviously gone wrong 24.d2 wins ) 24.e1 ]
f o r W h i t e . 19.e3 h5 20.d6 ad8 20...e7 21.xe6+ xe6 22.d5 xd5
21.c5 d5 22.d1 b6 23.b5 c3+ 23.xd5 e3 24.xf7? Throwing the
24.f1 f6 25.h4 a6 26.xa6 xf3 advantage away why exchange a terrific piece
27.e1 f5 28.xf3 xf3 29.h2 e5 for a horrible one? One good move is
30.g2 c3 31.e2 xe2+ 32.xe2 xe1 [ 24.xb7! xb7? ( 24...ae8 25.f3 )
33.xe1 f5 25.d4+ e5 26.fxe5 dxe5 27.c3 ]
0-1 24...xf7 25.d5+ f6
[ 25...f8 ]
26.fe1 ae8 27.xe3 xe3 28.g8 c7
550 B03 29.h8+ g7 30.d8+ e7 31.h8+
Stepanov,Nikolay 1774 ½-½
Tukhvatullin,Timur 2248
6th ch-PriFO Men (3) 25.01.2008
[John Watson] 551 B03
Stopa,Jacek 2461
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 Ramirez Alvarez,Alejandro 2533
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 UTD Invitational GM (5) 28.11.2008
0-0 9.b3 c6 If Black doesn't like 9...e5, he [John Watson]
often tries this move (9...f5 is also played, and
9...a5 is still another possibility). Although it 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6
frequently succeeds, I think that accurate play 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
should give White the better game. 10.d5 9.f3 g4
[ 10.e2 d5!? 11.c5 d7 12.xd5 db8 [ 9...d7 opens another can of worms, but
13.c4 b5! ( 13...e6 14.c3 xd4 it's worth noting that 10.e2 0-0-0 ( or
15.ge2 e5 is playable, but leaves Black to 10...d8 11.0-0 g4 ) 11.0-0 transposes to
deal with Ne4) 14.cxb6 axb6 and White will my long note to 11...Bxf3!? below. Thus 9...
have to cede a pawn in view of 15.a4 e6 Qd7 is sometimes preferred, because the
16.c3 xd4 ] immediate 9...Bg4 allows another set of
10...e5 11.e2 The normal move, preparing variations beginning with 10 Qd2, as well
f4 and preventing any piece from going to g4. as avoiding an early c5. ]
f5 12.f4!? 10.e2 d7 An ancient line, perhaps still
[ 12.h3 develops and covers key squares viable. My apologies for not explaining this
perhaps g4 13.xg4 fxg4 14.g5 l i n e we l l , b u t i t m i g h t t a k e d a y s . S o , i n
would follow. ] cowardly fashion, I'll refer you to the Forum,
555
where some amazingly detailed analysis has tells me that 14.b5! is a good move,
been done, in large part by Mark Morss and b a s e d u p o n xe3 ( 14...e7
an enthusiastic contributor 'Ig' from Lisbon, may be best met by 15 Bf2, but also the
whose real name I'd be happy to provide here p i e c e s a c r i f i c e 15.xg4!? xe3
if he sends it. He certainly deserves credit. 16.xe6 xd1 17.exc7+ b8
W hat I will do is try to give a some broad 18.xe8 e3 19.xg7 xg4 20.e6
overview and sketch an outline of moves, looks interesting, since Black has some
most of which are probably subject to loose pieces ) 15.xc7+ b8 16.b3 ]
improvement if you turn on your computers. [ b ) B i l l M a r t z s h o w e d m e 11...d8
I'll add just a few moves of my own. several decades back, and I played it in a
[ 10...xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ 12.f2 f4 few games. Back then there was no theory
ha s b e en p la ye d a lo t a n d a n a lys e d a t to speak of. The idea was to improve upon
length. I've looked at this with some very 11...0-0-0 in the 12 Ng5 Nxc4 line because
strong (titled) players and think that it's the king protects central squares. All this
better for White (and potentially, torture for eventually came under great scrutiny, and
Black). ] seems to have been given up, although I'm
11.0-0 n o t e xa ct l y su re wh y: 12.g5 ( 12.c5
[ 11.c5 is also playable here Black avoids is also important, because in this case it's
that with the 9...Qd7 and ...0-0-0 move order. not cle ar t ha t Black wo uldn 't like to b e
Of course that opens up other issues. ] castled. Everything in these lines comes
11...xf3!? Unusual in fact, I'm not sure if this down to specific, concrete lines) 12...xc4
order has been played (well, I guess ( 12...xe2 13.xe2 xd4 14.xd4
everything's been played). Black wants to xd4+ 15.h1 is supposed to favour
clarify the pawn structure right away, and White. ) 13.f2 (I think this was Estrin's
avoid Ng5 ideas. This is rare in comparison discovery ( 13.xf7 xe3 14.xd7 xd1
with two traditional moves: 15.xd8+ xd8 16.xg4 e3!
[ a) 11...0-0-0 is n o rm a l, wh e n 12.g5 is unconvincing now, although White is not
is a fun move, going way back to books by worse. ) 13...xe2 ( 13...e7 14.xf7
Alekhine authors Eales and W illiams, xb2 15.c2 is also promising, if unclear.
Bagirov, and Graham Burgess. There is a There's also a strange move here that I'd
tremendous amount of material on the forum never seen. Even if it's no no good, which
on this and on the main move 12 c5, which i s e xt r e m e l y l i k e l y , i t ' s w o r t h s e e i n g :;
is very likely best ( in particular, 12.c5 d5 13...xd4?! 14.xg4 xe5 15.h3?! e7
13.xd5 xd5 14.b4 e4 has been 16.e3 h6 17.h5 g6 18.h4 c5 19.g3
analysed at length, as well as sidelines. I xg5 20.xg5 ef3+ 21.gxf3 hxg5
confess not to have tracked these posts 22.ae1 f5 23.g2 d6 24.e2 xg3
down in a while, and it may take some time 25.hxg3 f7 26.f2 f6 and Black was
for you. But they are really great, and well holding in Hernod, B-Bergdahl, A,
worth it if you dare to enter such a wild correspondence/Sweden 1974.) 14.xe2
and arguably risky line ) e7 15.xf7 xf7 16.e3+ g8 17.xc4
A) 12...xe2 13.xe2 xd4 ( 13...f6 , and it's hard to imagine that W hite
14.exf6 gxf6 15.f3 and Rad1 is okay for doesn't stand better. ]
B l a c k , e ve n i f h e ' s s li g h t ly cr a m p e d) [ c) I believe that 11...f6 12.d5! is still
14.xd4 xd4+ 15.h1; considered good for White. ]
B) 12...xc4 13.xf7 12.xf3! It's hard to say what's best, but this is
B1) 13...xe3 14.xd7 xd1 safest.
( 14...xd7!? 15.c1 seems to come up [ 12.xf3!? xc4 13.f2 would be played
a little short) 15.xd8+ xd8 16.xg4 in the hope of ripping the position apart with
xb2 17.xe6 xe6 18.xe6+ b8 an early d5. Black has plenty of options, but
19.b1 d3 20.d5 with initiative; watch out for standard tricks such as 0-0-0?!
B2) 13...e8 , and here the computer ( 13...b6 14.d5 xd5 15.xd5 exd5
556
16.g4 is unclear) 14.e2 b6 15.d5! [ 28...d3! 29.xd3 xd3 threatens ...
xd5?? 16.xd5 exd5?? 17.g4 ] Be3+, and 30.f2 c3 31.e1 d2! 32.g3
[ 12.gxf3?! has actually been the move is only moderately better for White. ]
played here, perhaps out of habit, but 0-0-0 29.h4 f6 30.h2 Now White is in charge
seems to justif y 11...Bxf 3, for example, again. g8 31.g4
13.c5 d5 14.f2 f6! with plenty of [ 31.c6! h a s t h e id e a b6 32.c5! d3
counterplay, especially since 15 f4 isn't 33.xc7+ xc7 34.e7+ xe7 35.xe7+ ]
available. ] 31...h5 32.xg8 xg8 33.e4
12...0-0-0 13.f4 [ 33.c6! ]
[ The other critical sequence is 13.c5 d5 33...f7 34.f3 g7 35.a4 d4 36.f4
14.f2 , and if f5 , 15.exf6 gxf6 , but f6 37.g3?!
instinctively, White looks better, and Black [ White's attack is too strong after 37.b5! ]
had better move quickly. ] [ or 37.e6! with the idea of Rb6. ]
13...f6 Black is concerned and sacrifices a 37...d7 38.xh5 h8 39.f3 xa4
pawn. Other moves are slow, e.g., 40.e2 Time control, or he would have played
[ 13...b4 14.f1 xc3 15.bxc3 hf8 What follows is not very accurate, but White's
16.b1 ] win is a fair result:
[ 13...g5 14.e4 g8 15.d5! with the idea [ 40.xc7+! xc7 41.f4+ ]
exd5? 16.cxd5 xd5 17.g4 ] 40...d7 41.e6 f7 42.e4 g6 43.e5
14.exf6 gxf6 15.c5 d5 16.xd5 xd5 g8 44.f3 d8 45.f4 e8 46.f5 e7
17.f3 d7 18.f2 47.f7 d8 48.f4 a8 49.f5 a7
[ 18.d5!? is attractive-looking, for example, 50.d4 b8 51.f4 a8 52.f2 b8
e5 ( 18...exd5?? 19.g4 ) 19.dxe6 53.f5 a8 54.d4 c6 55.f4 a7 56.f7
( 19.c6! xf3+ 20.gxf3 with the idea e2 57.f3 e6 58.f5 c4 59.h7
xd5!? 21.d4 c5 22.xd5 xe3+ 1-0
23.h1 exd5 24.d3 , presumably with
some advantage due to Black's weak pawns
and slightly loose king, but at least this is 552 B03
in t e res t in g) 19...xe6 20.c2 yields a Sutovsky,Emil 2585
small advantage, based upon Black's pawn Varga,Zoltan 2540
weaknesses. The tactics favour White by a European Club Cup 1999
hair after h6 21.xb7+! b8! ( 21...xb7 [Alexander Volzhin]
22.b4+ a8 23.xh6 ) 22.c6!? xc6!
23.xc6 xe3+ 24.f2 ] Black's dubious experiment in the opening is
18...h6 19.xf6 g7 20.xe6!? xd4 brilliantly ref uted by former Junior W orld
[ 20...xe6?? 21.g4 ] Champion Emil Sutovsky. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
21.e4 d5 3.d4
[ Or 21.e1 xf3+ 22.xf3 ] [ The 4 pawns attack was not very popular
21...xf3+ 22.xf3 hf8 23.e2 d5?! last month, and I managed to find only one
[ 23...fe8 24.b1 xe4 25.xe4 d3! game of some importance. 3.c4 b6 4.d4
26.xd3 xd3 with the idea ...Rd2 gives d6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 f5 7.c3 e6 8.e3
Black counterplay, likely enough to draw. ] c6 9.e2 ( As we considered earlier, the
24.e1! Black's pieces have good scope, but most aggressive line and the only way to
White remains a pawn ahead. b8 fight for opening advantage is 9.f3 e7
[ 24...xa2?? 25.g4+ ] 10.d5 with wild complications.) 9...e7
25.b4 a6 26.g3 10.f3 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.b3?!
[ 26.h4! enforces a favourable A novelty (according to my database), but
simplification. ] of rather dubious merits. The idea is to play
26...c3 27.c1 d2 28.cc4?! 13 . c4 -c5 , b u t B la ck d o e sn 't allo w t h is .
[ 28.b1! xa2 29.d1 ] ( 12.exf6 xf6 is well known theory ( see
28...g5 Yudasin - Kengis), with balanced chances.)
557
12...a5! 13.a4 ( 13.c5 a4 also leads White this move. Actually, after the exchange of
nowhere. ) 13...b4! Now it's clear that light-squared Bishops Black has everything in
White's whole conception is wrong. Black order, and after the bishop`s retreat to b3
has many unpleasant threats (Nc2 or Bc2). W h it e ca n't castle. Ho we ve r W hite f in d s
14.e1? Looks ugly. Now all White's pieces h id d e n re so u rce s t o se ize t h e in it ia t ive .
are quite passive . ( 14.ac1 suggested 10.b3!! An introduction to the brilliant attack.
itself, with reasonable chances.) 14...fxe5 bxc5 11.g5! c4 The only move, its
15.dxe5 d7! After the retreat of White's drawback is that the a6-f1 diagonal is closed
Knight, the e5-pawn is very weak. 16.d1 now, and White can castle.
c8 17.f4 c5 18.a3 c6 Black already [ 11...e6? is just bad in view o f 12.f3
has a decisive positional advantage as all with decisive advantage: f5 ( 12...e7
White's pieces occupy miserable positions. 13.e4 ) 13.exf6 ]
The up and coming Brazilian youngster 12.f3! f6 13.exf6 exf6
converts his advantage into the win very [ 13...cxb3 14.f7# ]
convincingly. 19.b3 c7 20.b2 ad8 14.0-0! A very picturesque position. Now
21.xd8 xd8 22.d1 e4 23.f3 c5+ Black should decide which piece to grab.
24.e3 ( After 24.h1 xd1! 25.xd1 Unfortunately for him none of them can be
d3 with Nf2 to follow, Black wins all the taken! e7
house! ) 24...xe3+ 25.xe3 b6 26.d4 [ 14...cxb3 15.e1+ e7 16.xf6!
xd4 27.xf5 exf5 and White resigned, ( White can already win the piece back:
Gonzalez - Leitao, Sao Paulo 1999. ] 16.a3 d6 17.xf6 f8 18.xd6 xd6
3...g6?! Inviting a disaster. To play such 19.xd6 d7 20.xe7 , but the endgame
rubbish against a strong grandmaster is not is not so clear in view of e8 21.a3
exactly the best solution. Probably Black xe1+ 22.xe1 bxa2 23.xh7 d3
believed that the move order is not important and a2-pawn gives Black serious
here and hoped to play d7-d6 later. Of course, c o u n t e r c h a n c e s .) 16...f8 17.g7
W hite should play very energetically and and Black`s predicament is hopeless: d5
creatively to refute this provocative play. 4.c4 Ot he r m o ve s a re equ ally f u t ile : ( 17...b2
b6 5.c5! d5 6.c4 The transformation to 18.xh7! Qf8 mate is the threat and Black
the Chase Variation is quite the thing here, as can't parry it! d5 19.xf8+ d7 20.xd8+
g7-g6 in this line is just a waste of time and xd8 21.xb2 with huge material
weakens Black's position. As we saw earlier, advantage ( by the way only three moves
for example in the game Sveshnikov - before White was a piece down!); 17...d6
Solozhenkin, Black should undermine White's 18.e6 f7 19.g8+ and White wins: f8
pawn chain (...d7-d6 or ...b7-b6) prior to 20.xf8 ) 18.a3 c5 19.e6 c8 20.xf8
developing his kingside. c6 7.f3 b6 winning everything! ]
[ 7...g7 was the main alternative to the text, 15.c2 f5 The only move. The alternatives
but W hite obtains clear edge here by the lost quickly:
u n e x p e c t e d 8.xd5! Giving up the strong [ 15...fxg5 This move allows a brilliant finale:
Bishop White compels further weakening of 16.e1 f8 17.h3 f7 18.xg5
Black's position. cxd5 9.c3 e6 (forced) Now White's main threat is doubling Rooks
10.g5! Now Black is in real trouble. His (Re 3 , Ra e 1 t o f o llo w), so B la ck 's K in g
choice is quite unpleasant: f6 ( 10...a5 s h o u l d g o a w a y f r o m t h e e - f i l e . f8
is no better in view of 11.d2! Intending the 19.xe7! ( 19.xg6 is not bad either: xg5
Bishops` exchange (Bh6) after which White 20.xf7 wi t h a t re m e n d o u s a t t a c k :)
will totally dominate over the dark squares. 19...xe7 20.xg6 g8 21.f7+!!
h6 12.f6 xf6 13.exf6 d8 14.b5 c6 and Black has to give up the Queen to avoid
15.d6+ f8 16.e5 and Black's position being mated
is miserable.) 11.exf6 xf6 12.xf6 xf6 A) 21...g7 22.h6+ xf7 23.xh7+
13.b5 with an overwhelming advantage. ] e6 ( 23...f8 24.h6+ ) 24.g6+ d5
8.c3 xc3 9.bxc3 a6 Black hoped for 25.f5+ d6 26.f4+;
558
B) 21...xf7 22.xd8 and White won`t 553 B03

need Karpov's technique to convert the Szoen,Dariusz 2477
edge into the whole point. When I found Rozentalis,Eduardas 2599
t h is va ria t io n , I a ske d E m il if h e h a d DMP Ekstraliga (3) 08.09.2008
foreseen this line (especially 21.Bf7!!). [John Watson]
He answered that he intended to play 19.
Bg6, which is also good. This is correct, 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
but I like my variation more! ] 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1
[ 15...0-0 This natural looking move is losing c6 9.b3 0-0 10.f3!? We have seen
by force as well 16.xh7! Destroying the several games with 10 Be2, including this
position of Black's King. f7 The only move. month's Boric-Rakic contest. g4 11.e2 d5!
( 16...xh7 17.h5+ ) 17.xg6 xh7 Black resorts to a standard Alekhine plan he
18.xh7+ xh7 19.h5+ g8 20.h6 has everything in the right place for it. 12.c5
is hopeless for Black f8 21.g6+ h8 Virtually forced. c8 13.h3!? A slight waste
22.ae1 xh6 23.xh6+ g8 24.e4 of time, since Black was going to play ...Bxf3
mating Black's King. ] anyway. W hite plans to force the pace, as
16.e1 0-0 It may seem that Black is OK as we'll see. xf3 14.xf3 e6! Still the standard
he has castled and even managed to hold re o rga n iza t io n . . . N8 e 7 -f 5 sh o u ld f o llo w.
onto his extra pawn. However W hite`s next 15.g4!? White prevents ...Nf5 in advance, but
move proves this statement is far from true. at the cost of some weakness on the kingside.
17.e3! f6?! Missing White's threat. 8e7 16.e2 The problem is that Black
[ The alternatives to the text are: 17...h6 intends either ...f5 or ...e5, and it's difficult
18.xe7 xe7 19.xe7 hxg5 20.xg5 to prevent both. b6?!
with overwhelming advantage ] [ 16...e5! looks safe and sound. ]
[ 17...d6 i s a l s o b a d : 18.xh7! h4 17.0-0 c8 18.d2 d7 19.g2
19.xf8 xh2+ 20.f1 with a winning [ 19.b4 is also natural, for example, bxc5
position ] 20.xc5 e5 21.fc1 ]
[ 17...xg5 was absolutely the absolutely 19...b5!? 20.h6 xh6 21.xh6 f6 22.f4
only way to avoid immediate loss, but the f7 23.cd1 cf8 24.h4
endgame af ter 18.xg5 xg5 ( 18...d5 [ 24.fe1 is natural perhaps White will have
a l l o ws W h i t e t o wi n p a wn b a c k 19.xf5 a hard time breaking through, but Black
xg5 20.e6+ g7 21.xg5 can't undertake anything here. ]
with overwhelming advantage.) 19.xg5 24...c7 25.g3 d7 26.e3 h5!?
is difficult for Black despite his extra pawn. Black doesn't want to wait around for his e-
It's not clear how to develop his queenside, pawn to be targeted. 27.g3
while White's Rook is ready to penetrate to [ Perhaps better was 27.f5!? exf5 28.gxh5
the 7th rank. ] g5 29.h4! ]
18.xh7! No w t h e ga m e is o ve r . xh7 27...hxg4 28.hxg4 h7
19.h6+ g8 20.xg6+ g7 [ 28...e5!? 29.dxe5 xg4 ]
[ 20...h8 21.xf5 and Qh7 mate is 29.fe1
unavoidable. ] [ 29.g5!? ]
21.g5 Black resigned as after the Queen's 29...e5 30.dxe5 fxe5 31.fxe5?!
retreat W hite plays Re7 with unavoidable [ W hite needs to play aggressively: 31.f5!
mate. Really a great achievement by Emil gxf5 32.gxf5 g7 33.f1 is unclear. ]
Sutovsky! A very instructive exa mple f o r 31...xg4 White's kingside is weaker than
Black players on how the Alekhine's should Black's. 32.f1 hf7 33.e6 f6 34.e2
not be played! xe6?
1-0 [ 34...b4 35.xf6 xf6 exploits the weak e-
pawn without allowing the following activity
for White: ]
35.xf8+ xf8 36.f4+! xf4 37.xf4 e5
559
38.xd5 32.fe3 xe3 33.xe3 d4 34.cxd4 xd4

[ 38.xd5! xd5 39.xd5 gives more 0-1 Hanreck,A-Sherman,D/Islington 1972 ]
chances. The next few moves aren't optimal, [ 5...xe6? 6.xe6 fxe6 7.f3 c6 8.c3
and Black gets in trouble, but things peter d7 9.b3 g6 10.b2 g7 11.e2 e5
out in the end. ] 12.dxe5 e6 13.f4 f5 14.d3 e4+
38...b4 39.g2 g5 40.a3 gxf4 41.axb4 15.e2 xe2+ 16.xe2 d7 17.e6! f6
e3 42.d4 xb3 43.xf4+ e8 44.d4 18.ae1 0-0 19.d2 A different type of
a3 45.c6? c3 46.d6 c4 47.f1 g4+ game has arisen. The pawn e6 cuts the
48.f2 g6 Black position in half. d5 20.xg7 xg7
½-½ 21.e4 f6 22.g5 d8 23.c4 b6
24.he1 d5 25.cxd5 xd5 26.f4 c6 27.g3
h6 28.f3 c7 29.d4 b6 30.g4 c5
554 B03 31.g5 hxg5 32.fxg5 f8 33.c2 f5 34.h4
Theoretical c6 35.e3 f3 36.f4 f2+ 37.e2
ALEKHINE 4 Bc4,5 e6?! xe2+ 38.xe2 d8 39.c4 d4 40.f3
QUERY d8 41.xd4 cxd4 42.e4 dxe6
[Andrew Martin] 43.xe6+ xe6 44.d5 f7 45.e5+
1-0 Coudari,C-Richard,D/Montreal 1980 ]
Alec Aslett of Camberley asks: I was caught 6.exf7+ xf7 7.f3+ g8! If one is totally
out in a tricky variation of the Alekhine which I shocked, it is very tough to play such moves.
had never seen before e.g. 1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 Y e t I t h i n k 7 . . . K g 8 i s c o r r e c t , t o t a l l y
3 d 4 d 6 4 B c 4 N b 6 5 e 6 ! ? ? I f e l t uncompromising, and may refute W hite's
uncomf ortable because I had never even 'cheapo' attack. Black takes the centre!
considered this move and I lost miserably [ 7...e8 8.h5+ g6 9.b5+ d7
after 5...fxe6 6 Bd3. Can this move really be 10.xc4 e6+ 11.xe6 xe6 12.c3
any good? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 ( 12.f3 f5 13.c4 d7 14.0-0 g7
4.c4 b6 5.e6?! Well, Alec the short 15.e3 c6 16.c3 a6 17.a3 ae8
answer is NO, although there are some tricks 18.c5 c8 19.d5 e5 20.d4 c4
to negotiate. Black can either take or leave 21.xf5 gxf5 22.ab1 e5 23.dxe6 xe6
this Bishop: xc4! 24.cxd6 xc3 1/2-1/2 Berger,A-Wecht,H/
[ 5...fxe6! If he's going to decline the offer it's D a r m s 1 9 9 5) 12...f5 13.d5 d7
best to retain the light-squared Bishop. 14.e3 1/2-1/2 Nuenchert,E-Winter,I/Erfurt
6.d3 The only move to give chances. 1973 ]
( 6.b3 g6 7.f3 d5 8.0-0 g7 9.e1 8.d5+ e6 9.xc4 d5 10.d3 c5 11.f3
c6 10.c3 d6 11.g3 0-0 12.f4 xf4 c6 12.0-0 cxd4 13.xd4 e5 14.xc6
13.gxf4 xf4 14.e2 e5 15.xe5 xe5 bxc6 15.c3 g6 16.g3 g7 17.g5
16.dxe5 h3 17.e3 f5 18.d2 h6 e8 Two Bishops and the central pawns add
19.f4 xf4 20.f2 g5+ 21.h1 xd2 up to something tangible. White fights very
22.ed1 e3 23.g3 xg3 24.hxg3 hard but it is an uphill struggle. 18.fe1 f7
0-1 Peau,J-Levieux,P/Urcuit 1989) 6...c6! 19.xe5 xe5 20.xe5 h6 21.e3 h7
But this is very uncompromising! 7.h5+ 22.xh6 e8 23.g5 f5 24.h4 g8
d7 8.f3 e8 9.g4 d8 10.g5 h6 25.e3 e6 26.d1 xc2 27.d4 f6
11.xe6+ xe6 12.xe6 xd4 13.g4 28.xf6 xf6 29.h4 e6 30.h3 e7
e5 White can only fish around for tactics 31.b3 a5 32.a4 b7 33.c5 f7 34.h4
here-the central pawn mass covers Black's g8 35.d4 f5 36.g4 d7 37.g2 bb8
King. 14.0-0 g5 15.c3 e6 16.f5 g7 38.g3 e8 39.f4 e1 40.d4 c1
17.c2 c6 18.d2 c7 19.e4 d8 41.d3 e8 42.f4 c8 43.g5 h7
20.e3 h5 21.xh5 xh5 22.ad1 c4 44.f3 e5+ 45.f4 e8 46.g5 e6
23.c1 d5 24.d2 xd2 25.xd2 c5 47.d4 c2 48.d3 f7 49.f4 e1 50.f5
26.e2 e4 27.e3 b6 28.xb6+ xb6 gxf5 51.gxf5 g2+ 52.f6 h5 53.b6
29.f3 f4 30.ee1 exf3 31.xf3 he8 g7 54.c5 f7+ 55.g5 xf5+ 56.h4
560
f3 57.xf3 xf3 58.g3 h5 59.b6 f1 Black. ]

60.xa5 g6 61.g2 f7 62.b6 f4 17.f4
63.c7 f3 64.e2 f7 65.f4+ f5 [ 17.e3 a6 18.c3 e7 19.h4 h5
66.d6 d1 67.f2 f6 68.b8 e4 20.d3 d8 21.b4 0-0 22.ag1
69.e1 f3 70.d2 xf4 71.xf4 xf4 was also unpleasant for Black in Myers -
72.a4 g2 73.h4 f1 74.b4 a6 75.h5 Hagerty, corr. 1981 ]
g5 76.e3 xh5 77.d4 b7 78.c5 17...h6 18.e3 e7 19.d3 f5 20.xf5
g5 79.b6 a8 80.c5 f5 81.a5 e5 gxf5 21.hg1 d7 22.g3 ag8 23.b4
82.b6 d4 83.a7 d3 84.xa8 d2 85.a6 g6 De Firmian can be forgiven for thinking he
d1 86.b7 d5 So Alec, White is relying might hold this position. But W hite has the
on shock effect with 5 e6- you have two good edge because of the weak pawns, using this
ways to play now! factor to keep Black tied up. 24.e2 f8
0-1 25.g5 e6 26.h5 h6 27.b5 e7 28.a4
a8 29.b1 f8 30.f3 b8 31.d2 e7
32.e1 f8 33.a5 b6 34.b4 bxc5
555 B03 In playing the following sequence, de Firmian
Timman,Jan H might have missed the fact that White's 36th
De Firmian,Nick E move is possible. 35.dxc5 a6 36.bxa6!
Sigeman & Co (4) 15.06.2001 xc5
[Nigel Davies] [ 36...a8 is also bad after 37.a5 xc5
( 37...xa6 38.xc7 ) 38.c1 ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 37.xc5 xb1 38.a7 b3+ 39.f2 b2+
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 f5 7.c3 e6 8.f3 c6 40.e3 gg2
9.e3 g4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 h4+ [ 40...gg2 41.f3 sees an end to the
[ 11...d7 is another possibility, putting checks. ]
pressure on d4. ] 1-0
12.f2 f4 13.c5 d5
[ This doesn't have a great reputation but
B l a c k h a s b e e n e x p e r i e n c i n g s o m e 556 B03
d i f f i c u l t i e s a f t e r 13...d7 14.b5 Vajda,Le 2594
, Koch - Konopka, Clichy 1993 continuing Varga,Zo 2441
e7 15.0-0 h4 16.xc6 bxc6 17.a4 Great Hopes GM 2013 (2.2) 17.11.2013
0-0 18.ad1 intending just to take c6. ] [Tom Rendle]
14.xd5 exd5 15.d2 xd2+ After this
Black is slightly worse in a rather miserable 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 b6 A slightly
endgame. odd move, going to b6 before being 'pushed'
[ Black should probably keep queens on with with c4. It keeps a couple of options open to
15...f5 but even then the position looks a vary if White continues with 4.c4 but on the
bit better for W hite. Bogdanovic - Vukic, downside Vajda's reply seems to give White a
Yugoslavia 1973 continued 16.d3 ( 16.0-0 good game.
e7 17.e3 0-0 18.f4 f6 19.f3 ad8 [ 3...d6 4.f3 ]
20.g2 1/2-1/2, Bongers E. - Etmans M., 4.a4!
Dieren 1998 It (37) was also favourable for [ 4.c4
White in Bongers - Etmans, Dieren 1998.) A) 4...d5 5.c5! 6d7 6.c3 e6 7.f4
16...d7 17.f4 e7 18.g1 h5 19.f1 g6 ( 7.f3 b6 8.b4 is better for White. Black
20.h3 with an edge. ] can try to undermine the queenside pawn
16.xd2 g6 with a5!? but after 9.g5! e7 10.xe7
[ 16...e7 17.f4 f5 18.f3 d8 19.hg1 xe7 11.b5 a6 12.a3 White keeps a
g6 was the continuation of Nokso Koivisto - definite edge );
Raaste, Finnish Ch 1994 after which the B) 4...d6 Transposes to the mainline;
immediate 20.h4 looks unpleasant for C) 4...e6 5.c3 ( 5.f4!? continues in
561
Four Pawn's Attack style) 5...d6 6.exd6 at least equalised in Pavlov, M (2383)-
cxd6 7.e3 is similar to the mainlines and Zhigalko, S (2647) Alushta 2010 ]
a little better for W hite. Black has lost 5.a5 6d7 6.b4!? The game has certainly
the option of an early ...Bg4 though so I'd taken on an original look after only 6 moves
be very happy to be White here. ] but I'm not convinced this is the best move,
4...d5?! although there's nothing much wrong with it.
[ 4...a5 makes more sense to me here and [ 6.c4! looks critical here and Black already
now 5.f3 d5 ( 5...g6 is worth a look as has some real problems: c6 ( or 6...dxc4
well but perhaps Black players are afraid of 7.e6!? fxe6 8.xc4 f6 9.c3 g6 10.f3
6.h4! when it's already awkward to deal with g7 11.0-0 0-0 12.b3 and White regains
the positional threat of h5. h6 7.c3 g7 the pawn with a clearly better position)
8.f4 and White is somewhat better here. 7.c3 e6 8.c5! and Black will struggle to
Black can't castle in the near future because develop his queenside ]
of Qd2 and Black's kingside looks rather 6...e6 7.c3 f6?! The position looks like a very
precarious. ) strange French Defence but with White having
A) 6.exd6 cxd6 ( 6...exd6 might be safer a big space advantage on the queenside.
as W hite only has a minimal edge after Obviously Black cannot break with ...c5 so he
7.d3 e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.h3 ) tries ...f6 instead but this quickly backfires.
A1) 7.b5+ is also better for White d7 [ 7...g6 8.d3 g7 9.f3 f6 is possibly an
8.c3 g6 9.h4!? h5 10.g5 g7 improvement but W hite keeps much the
11.e2 c6 12.0-0-0!? c7?! ( 12...f6 better chances after 10.exf6 xf6 11.0-0
13.f4 ) 13.d5 e5 14.xe5 xe5 0-0 12.e1 as he has control over e5. ]
15.f4! and White was winning in Orak, L 8.d3! g6
(2317)-Katavic, B (2221) Sibenik 2010; [ 8...e7 leads to the same sort of thing
A2) 7.d5 e5 8.dxe6 xe6 9.b5+ after 9.f4! f7 10.f3 e7 11.0-0 a6
( 9.d4! is more precise and White is 12.e3 and Black's position is pretty
comfortably better after d7 10.b5 d5 miserable if not quite yet lost ]
11.f4 xb5 12.xb5+ c6 13.0-0 ) 9.f4 fxe5?! Another inaccuracy and one Black
9...c6 10.g5!? a n d n o w i n c4?! can't really afford
( 10...f5 11.f3 g6 12.xc6+ bxc6 [ 9...g7 10.f3 0-0 11.0-0 c6
13.xc6+ d7 is only slightly better for is just about playable for Black although
White. ) 11.xc4 xc4 12.0-0 4e5 White is better on all parts of the board after
13.f4 g6?! 14.d5 suddenly Black is 12.e2 a6 13.e3 e7 14.bd2 ]
in trouble f6 15.e3 h6 16.e4 e6 10.fxe5 h6?! A tricky idea but one that
17.bc3 xd5 18.xd5 0-0-0 19.b6 quickly backfires as White choose simply to
d7 20.ad1 ge7 21.f3 ( 21.c4! ignore the bishop
keeps complete control) 21...f5 22.ec3 [ 10...g7 is perhaps a slight improvement
xd5 23.xd5 g6 24.g3 g8 25.b5 but Black is still in a great deal of trouble
g7 26.c3 g5 27.xf5 e7 28.f7 after 11.h4! ]
d5 and a rather odd draw was agreed 11.f3!
in He n d r i ks , W ( 2 4 1 1 ) - P e s o t s ky, V [ 11.xh6?! h4+ regains the piece ]
(2371) Budapest 2008 - White is close to 11...xc1 12.xc1 0-0 13.h4! Black has
winning after 29.xd7 xd7 30.d3! castled into a massive attack and with his
xb6 31.xd6+ c8 32.xb6 gxf4 queenside totally undeveloped there is already
33.f2; no way to defend. The rest of the game is
B) 6.d3 g4 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 e6 simply a carve up from White's point of view.
9.g3 c5 10.b5+?! ( 10.dxc5! 6d7 f7 14.g5
11.c3 xc5 12.0-0 c6 13.b5 [ 14.h5! immediately is also very strong ]
a n d I p r e f e r W h i t e ' s c h a n c e s h e r e) 14...e7 15.h5 f8
10...c6 11.dxc5 d7 12.f4 d4 [ or 15...h6 16.hxg6! hxg5 17.xg5 f8
13.a3 f5 14.d3 xc5 and Black had 18.a2! and with the rook joining the fun
562
from f2 Black can safely resign ] 11...axb6 12.cxd5 b4 13.d4 g6
16.hxg6 xg6 17.xg6 hxg6 18.a2 This is now possible as the check can be
[ 18.f4 g7 19.h4 wins immediately ] blocked. Nevertheless other bishop retreats
18...g7 19.f4 Black has had enough and have also been tried.
throws in the towel. I don't think we'll see this [ 13...d7 14.a3 is now awkward to deal
line again in a hurry although things aren't so with as Black no longer has pressure on d5.
bad if Black chooses 4...a5. c5! This looks to be Black's best try.
1-0 ( 14...a6 15.e6 fxe6 16.dxe6 c6
17.xc6 xd1+ 18.xd1 bxc6 19.xa6
xa6 20.d7 Nagy, Z (2265)-Berta, T
557 B03 (2138) Hungary 2006 leaves Black in a
Velimirovic,Dragoljub 2425 somewhat unpleasant ending. )
Cmilyte,Viktorija 2514 A) 15.f3 a6 16.b4 xb4! ( 16...e7
Czech Coal Match (5) 24.11.2010 is far too passive.) 17.axb4 xb4 18.c1
[Gawain Jones] 0-0 19.e2 a3 20.d4 c5 21.c4
e8 gives Black reasonable compensation
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 d6 for the piece as W hite's king is
5.f4 Again we see the critical Four Pawns somewhat vulnerable.;
Attack and who would expect anything else B) 15.b3 a6 ( 15...0-0!? 16.axb4
from the aggressive legend playing White? xa1 17.xa1 xb4 18.e2 h4+
dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 19.g3 xc3+ 20.bxc3 e4 gives Black
9.f3 e7 good compensation.) 16.xa6 xa6
[ I e x a m i n e d t h e m a i n l i n e 9...g4 17.xc5 bxc5 18.0-0 ( 18.e6! fxe6
in Bologan, V (2684)-Rozentalis, E (2628) 19.0-0 keeping Black's king in the centre
Mulhouse 2010 which wasn't a great looks a better try for an edge.) 18...0-0
success for Black. ] 19.f3 g6 20.ae1 e7 21.e3 c8
10.d5 and in that game I said this was the 22.h3 1/2-1/2 Tabor, J (2310)-Matlak, M
critical test. exd5 11.xb6?! This is the older (2440) Prievidza 1987. ]
move and rather rare which has not been [ 13...c8 should be met by 14.d6! cxd6
previously covered on ChessPub. White gets ( Black should seriously consider the piece
rid of the pressure on d5 but in return he may sacrifice 14...0-0!? ) 15.b5+ d7 16.e6
find himself vulnerable on the dark squares. xb5 17.exf7+ xf7 18.h5+ g8
[ 11.cxd5 is usual and was investigated last 19.xb5 and White's on top. ]
time. b4 12.d4 g6?! ( I looked at [ 13...e4!? is an interesting idea that has
12...d7 a few months ago in the notes to only been tried once but looks to equalise.
Bologan-Rozentalis which is more logical 14.xe4 xd5
preventing the forthcoming check.) 13.b5+ A) 15.b5+! is necessary but seems to
f8 14.f3 this is a novelty but rather lead to a f orced draw. c6 ( 15...f8?
unconvincing. ( Instead 14.0-0 has been 16.0-0 xe4 17.e6+ g8 18.d7+- )
played in all the previous games which 16.d6+ xd6 17.exd6 xd4 18.e2+
looks extremely strong. g8 is forced due f8 19.d1 ( 19.e7+ g8 20.d7
to the threat of Ne6+ but now 15.f5 f8 c2+ 21.e2 g4+ 22.f2 f5+= )
16.xb6 axb6 17.a3 a6 18.e6 c5+ 19...c5 20.e7+ g8 21.f1 f8
19.h1 h6 20.e2 was already winning in 22.xf7 xf7 23.e8+ f8 24.e6+=;
Csirik, A (2271)-Farago, S (2263) Budapest B) 15.c3? xd4! 16.xd4 c2+
2009. ) 14...g8 15.d6 cxd6 16.exd6 17.f2 xd4 18.d5 a5 19.xc7+
( 16.e6! l o o k s s t r o n g e r) 16...xd6 d7 20.d1 xc7 0-1 Stips, F (1650)-
17.xb7? Grgic, N (1661)-Stadler, B (2112) Andreoni, G (1983) Bratto 2005. ]
Sibenik 2010 when f6 18.ce2 e5 14.d6? Velimirovic true to his nature continues
19.f3 a6! 20.c6 d8 21.0-0 h5 to play the most aggressive moves but this
22.f2 c4 23.f4 xd4! wins material. ] should have fallen foul to a counter sacrifice.
563
[ 14.a3 a g a i n s h o u l d b e m e t b y c5! c5! White's king is just too vulnerable.

15.b5+ f8 and Black is on top. Again 17.cb5 Neumann, M (2360)-Alingh Prins, J
W hite really misses the dark square (2060) ICCF corr 1989 when the simplest
protection afforded by the bishop. ] looks to be e4 18.g1 g5 19.f3 xf3
[ Therefore White should try 14.b5+ c6 20.xf3 xe5+ 21.f2 xb2+ 22.e2
( 14...f8 15.d6! cxd6 16.0-0 is again very f6 with an obvious decisive advantage.;
strong. ) 15.dxc6 0-0 16.cxb7 b8 16.gxh4? xh4+ 17.e2 a5!-+ )
This position is crucial to the viability of 12 16...g5! ( 16...c5 17.f3 c2+ 18.f2
Bxb6 (although already we have found an g5 19.d3 xa1 20.xg6 hxg6
equalising line for Black). W hite is 21.xa1 saw White successfully neutralise
temporarily two pawns up but b7 is dropping Black's initiative with good play f or th e
and his position is very exposed. 17.c6 exchange thanks to his monster d6 pawn.
( 17.ce2?! Reynolds, J-Gauthier, L Murey, J (2500)-Kovacevic, V (2560)
E n g l a n d 1 9 9 2 c5! keeping White's king Hastings 1982.) 17.axb4 ( 17.f2 xe5
stuck in the centre is very strong.) 17...xc6 18.f3 c5+ 19.d4 xd4+ 20.xd4
18.xc6 c7 19.d5?! ( White needed to f6 21.d1 d3+ 22.xd3 xd4+
find 19.f3 xe5+ 20.f1 although here 23.g2 xc3 24.bxc3 cxd6 25.xg6 hxg6
I'd take Black after fd8 as his position is by 26.xd6 xa3 27.xb6 Carlsson, A-
far the easier to play.) 19...h4+! 20.g3 Kuehnrich, H ICCF corr 1982 and Black
xc6 21.gxh4 Murey, J (2535)-Palatnik, S e n d e d a p a wn u p a l t h o u g h W h i t e h a s
(2460) Palma de Mallorca 1989 and here reasonable drawing chances.) 17...xg3+
the most accurate finish would have been 18.hxg3 xg3+ 19.e2 ( 19.d2 xa1
c4! 22.g1 fe8 when White's king is 20.xa1 f4+ 21.e2 xd4 also gives
completely naked. ] Black draw odds in the position.) 19...xe5+
14...h4+ Hardly bad but Black had a much 20.f3 h5+ 21.xh5 xh5+ 22.f2
stronger alternative. h4+ ( 22...h2+ 23.g2 xa1 24.xa1
[ 14...0-0! as played first by Kengis is a very xd6 25.ce2 xb4 26.xb7 d8
strong counter. 15.a3 cxd6 16.axb4 xa1 leaves a peculiar material balance. Black's
17.xa1 dxe5 leaves Black with a fantastic ro o k a n d f o u r p a wn s l o o k t o o u t we i g h
position. He is about to pick up a third pawn White's three minor pieces as White's king
for the piece, W hite's king is stuck in the is still insecure.) 23.g2 xa1 24.xa1
centre and Black has great play on the dark xd4 25.dxc7 g4+ 26.h1 e8 27.b5
squares. 18.f3 xb4 ( The direct 18...e4! h4+ 1/2-1/2 Flor Trejo, R-Rain, R ICCF
19.e5 d4 20.xg6 fxg6! would not email 2004 saw White survive but we can
have let New Zealand's sole GM escape.) hardly call this an opening success. ]
19.d1 f6 20.b3 f4 21.e2 16.d7+?! Playing this kind of position perfectly
Chandler, M (2500)-Kengis, E (2460) is basically impossible but nevertheless this
Jurmala 1983 and here c1+! 22.d1 gives Black back her clear advantage.
e3+ 23.e2 c5 24.f1 d8 would have Perhaps this gives White a clue - that these
been decisive. ] positions with such a vulnerable king should
15.g3 g5 Viktorija is trying to wrestle the not be tried.
initiative away from W hite but objectively [ 16.f2! was best when White takes the
W hite is now better. Perhaps she got her advantage although Black still has good
move order wrong and intended to play this on co m p en sa tio n . xe5 ( 16...0-0 17.f3
the following move. is the point.) 17.gxh4 0-0-0 ( 17...d3+
[ 15...0-0! has been tried in some 18.xd3 xd4+ 19.g2 xd3 20.e1+!
correspondence games. This position is truly is the difference to the game.) 18.f3 c5+
crazy and, even if W hite is somehow ok, 19.d4 xd4+ 20.xd4 xd6 21.f3
practically his position looks too loose to sees White successfully exchange queens
survive. 16.a3 ( 16.b3? Is a logical and thus he can start trying to utilise his
looking move but already a decisive mistake. extra piece. ]
564
16...d8 17.f2 xe5 18.gxh4 d3+! 558 B03

19.xd3 xd4+ 20.g2 xd3?! Vetemaa,Juri
Keeping the queens on is rather foolish. Shabalov,Alexander
[ 20...xd3 looks sensible as Black is now USSR 1986
actually material up! ] [Alexander Volzhin]
21.e1 So the difference between this position
and the previous one seen in the notes is that O n e o f t h e m o st in t e r e st i n g l i n e s i n t h e
Black is a pawn up rather than a pawn down Alekhine's is the Four Pawns Attack. Some
(after a subsequent capture on c7) while the experts believe it's the most dangerous for
d7 pawn gives the king some protection. h5 Black. But in practice White chooses it rather
[ 21...f5 might be a better method of infrequently, probably due to the necessity of
exchanging queens on g4 as e4 is also now knowing mountains of variations. 1.e4 f6
controlled. Following 22.h1 Black can 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.f4 dxe5
exchange into a great endgame with e4+ 6.fxe5 c5!? This move leads to a very sharp
23.xe4 xd1 24.exd1 fxe4 ] game. This is why it is often played by such
22.h1 d6 Of course Black is still clearly brilliant tacticians as Lubomir Ljubojevic and
be t t e r a n d t hu s we ca n sa y t h a t W h it e 's Alex Shabalov. Although a lot of games have
opening was a failure. I think 12 Bxb6 has been played in this line, the last word has not
seen its day. 23.d2 c4 been said yet. 7.d5 e6 8.c3
[ 23...f5! is more accurate. ] [ The seemingly strong 8.d6 has a tactical
24.g2 c6 25.e4 d5 26.ad1 xe4 refutation: h4+ 9.g3 e4+ 10.e2 xh1
27.xe4 The last few moves have let Black's 11.f3 White hopes to trap Black's Queen,
advantage slip as the d7 pawn now promises but Black has good chances to escape.
W h i t e d e c e n t c o m p e n s a t i o n . a4?! c6! ( 11...xc4 is bad, af ter 12.bd2!
And this throws away the rest of the xd2 13.xd2 g6 14.c2 c6 15.g2
advantage. b4+ 16.b3 the Queen is trapped)
[ 27...a5! would have kept Black on top. ] 12.bd2 d7! ( 12...d4 13.xd4 cxd4
28.b4! Perhaps Cmilyte missed this rather 14.f3 xc4 15.f2 e3 16.xe3 dxe3+
obvious counter. Now the Black rook finds 17.xe3 d7 18.c1 c8 19.xc8+ xc8
itself sidelined. b5?? And this loses. 20.xa7 xd6 21.b5+ e7 22.exd6+
[ 28...f5 was necessary when 29.g5+ f6 xd6 23.b6+ ) 13.f2 dxe5! 14.xe5
30.xh5 g6 31.e8+ xe8 32.dxe8+ xh2+ 15.g2 d4 16.d1 xd6 17.f1
xe8 33.e1+ f8 34.h6+ f7 Now the Queen really is trapped, but White
35.h7+ f8 36.h6+ would end as a h a s p a i d t o o h i g h a p r i c e f o r i t ! xg2+
draw. ] 18.xg2 xe5 with a decisive advantage
29.g5+! f6 30.d5?! for Black. Bent Larsen once opined that he
[ 30.e3! and Black cannot prevent Re8+ in didn't like lengthy variations, as they
the long term. c6 31.g1 g6+ 32.f1 always contain mistakes. I tend to share
f5+ 33.e1+- ] his scepticism, but sometimes we can't do
30...c6 31.e5 e6 32.d4 d6 33.g1 without them! ]
c6 34.g5+ f6 35.e3 8...exd5 9.cxd5 c4 The critical position.
Finally Velimirovic finds the win. c6 36.g1 W hite has a wide choice of continuations.
g6+ 37.f1 f5+ 38.e1 xe4 39.xe4 Besides the text, white has tried some other
a6 40.xb7 Despite the final result White's moves. 10.a3
position out of the opening was fairly lousy so [ 10.f4 b4 11.xc4 xc4 12.a4+ c6
I don't think we'll see much more of this rare 13.dxc6 xb2-+ leads white nowhere: black
attempt. wins ]
1-0 [ 10.d4 c6 11.e4 b4 12.a3 ( 12.d6
g6 with the idea of Bf5 is too dangerous for
white ) 12...4xd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5
xd5 15.xc4 c7 16.e3 e6
565
led to equality in Chokiltea-Luboevic,1971 ] played 3.f4 at this point, but after c5!
[ 10.d6 has been played very rarely, but is a Black gets a favourable variation of the 2.
very interesting move. One example: c6 f4 Sicilian (2...Nf 6 3.e5?!). ( In my view it
11.f3 ( 11.f4!? ) 11...g4 12.f4 g5! would be very dangerous to accept the pawn
the introduction to a brilliant combination as after 3...xf4 4.d4 g6 5.h4
13.e4 W h a t e l s e ? ( 13.g3 g7 White threatens to win Black's knight with h4-
and white's centre is in danger) 13...gxf4!! h5.; 3...d6 4.d4 would transpose back into
14.f6+ xf6 15.exf6 0-0-0 with a big the game. )]
advantage for Black in Paunovic -Mrserovic, 3...d6 4.f4 f5 5.f3 e6 6.d3 xd3
1982 ] [ Black has also tried 6...g4 but this looks
[ 10.f3 is considered to be the main line. prom isin g f o r W h ite af te r 7.0-0 dxe5
We'll see this move in the next game. ] ( 7...e7 8.h3 h5 9.e4 c6 10.c4
10...c5 The first achievement for black: white b6?? 11.exd6 f6 12.c5 Maciejewski -
cannot castle kingside. 11.f3 0-0 12.e2 Malek, Rzeszow 1977) 8.fxe5 c5 9.h3 h5
f5! Now queenside castling is very 10.c4 b6 11.e4 c6 12.d5 xf3
dangerous for white, but he has no choice, as 13.xf3 xe5 14.g3 with a strong attack
keeping the king in the centre is even worse. for W hite in Reeh - Ruehrig, German Ch
13.g5 d7 14.d2 h6 15.f4 a6 1987 ]
16.0-0-0 ac8 17.h3 a4! Black completes [ 6...g6 7.0-0 e7 8.c4 b6 9.c3 0-0
his development and begins a direct attack. 10.h1 c5 11.d5 exd5 12.cxd5 xd3
18.d4 White misses a fantastic blow, but he 13.xd3 left White with a massive centre in
is in trouble anyway. xd4 19.xd4 6c5 Pyhala - Salokangas, Tampere 1990 ]
20.xc4 b5!! Unbelievable! When I see 7.xd3 e7 There is a strong argument for
such moves I'm proud of how wonderful chess trying for some immediate counterplay:
is! Mate on b2 is threatened, and taking the [ 7...c6 envisages counterplay on the d-file,
Queen leads to mate in one 21.d2 after 8.0-0 B l a c k p l a y s d7 with the
[ 21.xb5 b3# ] intention of castling long. Reeh - Hartmann,
[ 21.xb5 b3# ] Bundesliga 1984-85 continued 9.a3 e7
[ 21.b4 b3+ 22.xb3 xc3+-+ winning ] 10.c4 ( 10.d1 dxe5 11.fxe5 0-0-0 12.b4
21...xc3 a6 13.bd2 f4 14.f1 xd4
[ 21...xc3 22.xc3 ( 22.bxc3 b1# ) won a pawn in Zichichi - Saidy, Venic e
22...b3+ 23.xb3 xb3 ] 1969 ) 10...b6 11.exd6 cxd6 12.b4 f6
0-1 13.bd2 a6 14.e4 d5 15.xf6+ gxf6
16.c5 c4 with a complex struggle in
prospect. ]
559 B03 [ B l a c k ' s o t h e r a c t i v e m o v e i s 7...c5!?
Vitolinsh,Alvis but after 8.0-0 c6 he must face a very
Shmit,Anatoly dangerous possibility in 9.f5!? . In Georgiev
USSR URS 1976 Kr - Petkov, Bulgarian Ch., Bankja 1992
[Nigel Davies] White won the exchange after ( the relatively
tame 9.c3 dxe5 10.fxe5 e7 11.dxc5
If W hite wants a relatively unexplored xc5+ 12.h1 ce7 13.e2 also left
attacking line against the Alekhine, he could White with a nice space edge in Kupreichik -
do far worse than try the so-called Vitolinsh Kaunas, Prague 1990) 9...cxd4 10.fxe6
Variation. Recently it has been championed by fxe6 11.g5 d7 12.h3 0-0-0 13.f7
the Belorus GM, Viktor Kupreichik. In this e7 14.exd6 xd6 15.g5 etc. ]
game we see a solid approach by Black, [ Black can preclude this f4-f5 idea by first
though one which may leave W hite with an e xc h a n gi n g o n e 5 . B u t in K u p r e i c h i k -
advantage in space. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 P u ra n e n , J yva s kyl a 1 9 9 1 W h i t e h a d a
3.d4 t y p i c a l s p a c e a d v a n t a g e a f t e r 7...dxe5
[ The South African amateur Arnie Witkin has 8.fxe5 c5 9.0-0 e7 10.dxc5 c6 11.h1
566
etc. ] e1 34.gxh5 c6 35.h6! f1+ 36.e4

8.c4 1-0
[ It is quite unnecessary to prepare this move.
In Maciejewski - Schmidt W, Polanica Zdroj
1 9 7 6 , W h i t e p la ye d 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3 560 B03
but after c5 10.c4 c7 11.c3 cxd4 Volokitin,Andrei 2660
12.e4 d5 13.cxd5 xd5 14.fg5 g6 Ivanchuk,Vassily 2731
Black had a good game ( 15.h3 is met by Aerosvit GM Foros UKR (8) 25.06.2006
h5 16.g4 g7 17.gxh5 h8 etc). ] [John Cox]
8...b4
[ Black should probably avoid trying to exploit 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
the 'omission' of a2-a3 by White and simply 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.h3 One way of
8...b6 Now he gets problems with his b- doing it Bd3/Nge2 is another system and
pawn. ] another way is Be2/Nf3, just allowing the pin
9.b3 dxe5 10.fxe5 b5 An attempt to take with ...Bg4.
control of some light squares, but it creates [ Korchnoi's 7.f3 is also an option. ]
serious weaknesses in Black's camp. 7...0-0 8.f3 f6 9.e2 A pretty common
[ 10...a5 is better, intending to meet 11.a3 position in which Black's next few moves are
with a4 ] invariably ...Bf5, ...Re8 and ....Nc6 (actually
11.cxb5 c6 12.d2 more often than not Black plays some or all of
[ According to Gipslis, White could also have these moves before ...Bf6) but Ivanchuk as so
played 12.a3 d5 13.xd5 xd5 14.bxc6 often has his own ideas. e6!? A novelty as
xc6 15.c3 with a good extra pawn. ] far as I can see, and perhaps rather a
12...d5 13.xd5 xd5 14.c3 v a l u a b l e o n e . 10.d5 It's surprising how
[ And here too White should probably be annoying it is to defend the c-pawn.
greedy with 14.bxc6 xc6 15.c3 cb4 [ 10.b3 d5 11.c5 c8 12.0-0 c6 13.e3
16.e2 etc. ] would transpose into a position which is
14...xc3 15.bxc3 cxb5 16.a4 bxa4 frequently met in the old main line where
17.xa4 c6 18.a6 d7 In addition to the W hite allows ... Bg4, with the difference
weakness of his a-pawn problems, Black's that then it is White's turn to move, since
king is now vulnerable. Black has played ....Bg4 (forcing b3) and
[ 18...b8 19.a4 c6 was better, when then been obliged to meet a later h3 with ....
Black is still on the board. ] Be6 for the reasons explained in Starting
19.0-0 f6 20.exf6 gxf6 Out: Alekhine's Defence (p. 116, for those of
[ And here 20...xf6 was probably a better you who very sensibly keep this magnificent
try. ] wo rk b y yo u r b e d s, a n d I a lso su gge s t
21.c4 hc8 22.fa1 c7 23.d5 d8 looking up the game Kurajica-Hort, 1971 or
[ Gipslis also analysed 23...c5+ 24.h1 so, to show why ... Bxf3 is not so good). ]
d8 25.a5! b7 26.dxe6+ xe6 [ 10.b3 a5 11.a4 a6 is also a bit
27.d1+ e7 28.e1 b6 29.xb6 xb6 annoying. ]
30.xb6 axb6 31.d4 as winning for White, 10...xc3+ 11.bxc3 d7
though here I should point out that f7! [ 11...f5 is clearly an alternative, and
32.xe6 ( 32.xe6?? a1+ ) 32...e8 indeed keeping d7 free for the moment has
saves the day. W as this Black's last an obvious appeal. ]
chance? ] 12.0-0 a6 13.g5 f6 14.e3 c5 15.e1
24.e3 xc4 25.dxe6+ e8 e8 16.f1 e7 17.d4 Everyone has
[ 25...xe6 26.d1+ wins a piece. ] played terribly natural moves up to here, and
26.d4 c5 27.g4 e5 28.f5 xe6 Black looks fine to me. This move and White's
29.xa7 xa7 30.xa7 d8 31.g2 next form a not terribly successful manoeuvre.
Bla ck 's po sition is t ru ly ho rrif ic. I n time - I'm afraid though that I don't really know what
trouble he cracks. h5? 32.d4 e4 33.f3 to suggest instead. Black's ominously solid
567
and it's not at all easy to say what W hite 40...hf5 , but there is no threat then ...Ne3
ought to play, although he shouldn't be worse. is met by Bg6+ winning in view of ...Qxg6
f8 18.b5 xb5 19.cxb5 ae8 20.a4 f5 Rf8+. ]
[ An alternative method of obtaining 41.f1
counterplay against W hite's queensid e [ 41.xh4 xh4! 42.a1 g3+ 43.g1
initiative was 20...f7 21.c4 e4 22.c2 e1+ 44.xe1 xe1+ 45.h2 e3
g6 23.c3 ( 23.a5 xc4 24.xc4 is very uncomfortable also I don't see a
xe3 ) 23...bd7 , but Ivanchuk's is more forced win but it's hard to see W hite
reliable, gaining eternal control of e5. ] surviving, especially since after any queen
21.a5 exchange the Black king will cruise in via e5
[ After 21.g3 probably Black reverts to the and d4. ]
m e t h o d o u t l i n e d i n t h e l a s t n o t e f7 41...e3 42.xe3 fxe3 43.e2 f5 44.a2
( 21...f4?! 22.gxf4 f7 23.c4 e4 24.c2 f4+ 45.g1 d4 46.h2 e5+ 47.f4
is not so good) 22.c4 g6 can lead to the xf4+ 48.g1 g3 49.d3 e4 50.e2
splendid tactical line 23.a5 xc4 24.xc4 d4 51.b1 d2 A classy game by
xe3 25.xe3 xe3 26.fxe3 xg3+ Ivanchuk: it's not easy to make Volokitin look
27.f1 xh3+ 28.g1 xe3+ 29.g2 so powerless. It's clear though that Black has
e4+ 30.f3 xc4 31.xf5 when Black an important new weapon in his armoury in
has a material advantage, but I'm not at all t h i s va r i a t i o n , a n d i f c o u r s e i t ' s a l w a y s
sure how easy he's going to find it to encouraging to see a player of Ivanchuk's
convert. ] class willing to play the opening.
21...f4 22.d2 xe1 23.xe1 bd7 24.f3 0-1
White comes to regret this, and it does look a
bit of a nervous reaction. .... f 3 certainly
wasn't a threat just yet. f6 25.c1 b6 561 B03
26.axb6 axb6 27.f2 h6 28.d4 g5 Volokitin,Andrei 2652
29.c4 f6 30.a1 I'm not sure about this Nogueiras Santiago,Jesus 2546
position. The computer slightly likes W hite 36th Olympiad (11) 26.10.2004
Ivanchuk makes it look like a forced win for [Andrew Martin]
Black. Obviously we need a Fritz-Ivanchuk
m a t c h u p yo u 'd s a y t h e t r u t h i s p ro b a b l y 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
somewhere in between since actually it's not 5.exd6 exd6 There has been a lot of interest
too hard to isolate where Volokitin goes wrong in t h e A l e k h i n e r e c e n t l y. T h e V o r o n e z h
in what follows. h5 31.a7 e7 32.c2 variation has been responsible for the decline
g3 33.a1 g5 34.h2 f7 35.g1 in popularity of 5...cxd6 although whether that
d7 36.h2 e5 37.f2 g6 38.d3 can be fully justified is debatable. So we see
h4 39.a7 e7 White to play and draw - another example of 5...exd6 here, a solid
only one move will do, I think..... 40.a8? move without especial pretensions. Black sets
..... and this isn't it: up a position which is difficult to break down.
[ 40.d1 xg2 41.xg2 e4+ 42.f1 6.c3 e7 7.h3 0-0 8.d3
xf2 43.xf2 g3+ is no better ] [ White usually develops his King's Knight
[ b u t t h e w a y t o d e f e n d w a s 40.a1 first: 8.f3 e8 ( 8...c5!? is an interesting
, s o a s t o m e e t gf5 by ( 40...xg2 strike: 9.d5 f6 10.d3 e8+ 11.e3
41.xg2 e4+ achieves nothing with f2 still xc3+ 12.bxc3 f6 13.c2 h6 14.a4
defended ) 41.xh4 when xh4 ( 41...xh4 a6 15.b1 b8 16.a5 d7 17.0-0 e5!
42.e4 is no better since the knight is 18.xe5 xe5 19.d2 c7 20.f4 e7
trapped ) 42.xf5 g3+ 43.h1 e1+ 21.c2 f8 Pavasovic,D-Varga,Z/
is only a draw - this is the point of covering Zalaegerszeg HUN 2004 Black has a
the first rank ] marked structural advantage but remains
40...gf5! cramped. If he can solve his development
[ No doubt Volokitin was expecting only problems he will surely be better.; 8...f5
568
9.e2 c6 10.d5 a5 11.b3 f6 12.b2 20.c5 ) 20.xh7+ xh7 21.g3 xh3+
c6 13.0-0 cxd5 14.cxd5 c8 15.c1 d7 22.g2 ]
16.d2 e5 17.d4 g6 Pavasovic, D- 19.f1 h4
Kantorik,M/Deizisau GER 2004 Once again [ 19...a5! opens up another front and as this
Black is cramped, the story of this line.) is a risk-free way of bringing the a8 Rook
9.e2 f6 10.0-0 f5 11.b3 c6 into the game I think it's the move I prefer.
( 11...a6!? 12.e3 c6 13.d2 h6 14.a4 After 20.e1 axb4 21.axb4 f6 22.c5
d7 15.a5 f8 16.a4 e6 17.b4 c8 f4 Black is alright. ]
18.c1 d5 19.b5 ac5 The manoeuvering 20.g3 f6 21.c5! It turns out that White does
o f t h e B l a c k K n i g h t s sh o u ld b e n o t e d . not have to worry too much about Black's
20.dxc5 d4 21.a6 bxa6 22.xd4 xd4 kin g sid e p re ssu r e . I n st e a d h e p la ys t h e
23.xa6 b3 24.b2 xc1 25.xc1 thematic queenside lever and Nogueira s
d4 Rainfray,A-Janev,E/BC Masters, Bois im m e dia t ely co m e s u n de r pre ssu re . g6
Colombes FRA 2003) 12.e3 d5 13.c5 22.g2 dxc5 23.bxc5 ad8 24.c2 h6
c8 14.a3 e4 15.b4 a6 16.b5 25.cb5 f6
( 16.d2 ) 16...axb5 17.xb5 a5 18.f4 [ 25...xb5 26.xb5 d7 27.d6 ]
e7 19.e5 c6 20.c3 g6 21.e1 e8 [ 25...c8 26.xa7 a8 27.ab5+- ]
22.d3 xe5 Kuba,G-Novkovic,M/TCh-AUT 26.xc7 xh3 27.xe8 Why not? xe8
2 0 0 3 A s l o n g a s B l a ck ca n re l ie v e h i s 28.e1 fg4 29.f4 xg2 30.xg2
p o s it i o n wi t h s u it a b l e e xc h a n ge s I a m The short-term threats against the White King
reasonably happy to recommend 5...exd6. ] could not compensate for White's queenside
8...e8 9.ge2 An unusual placement for the potential and Nogueiras went quickly down.
Kingside pieces, but quite effective. White is Black must solve this particular riddle.
trying to take the sting out of Black's Bishop Perhaps, as indicated, a well-timed .. .a7-a5
on c8. Let's say Black manages to exchange is the answer.
light-squared bishops. Then the f5 and b5 1-0
squares become weak. It's a counterplay
thing. g5 10.0-0 xc1 11.xc1 c6
12.a3 d7?! This seems to me to be the 562 B03
source of Black's problems. He has to aim for Volzhin,Alexander
exchanges and/or counterplay to ease his Svechnikov,Leonid
position. Thus Russia 1988
[ 12...g5 was indicated and now: 13.f4 [Alexander Volzhin]
( 13.e4 h6 14.c5 dxc5 15.dxc5 d7
16.b4 de5 ) 13...e7! ( 13...f6 14.c5! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
dxc5 15.dxc5 d7 16.d5 d8 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 8.f4 g7
17.c2 ) 14.d5 xd5 15.cxd5 d8 9.c3 0-0 10.d2 White prepares Q-side
16.c2 h6 17.h2 ] castling. The alternatives are:
13.b4 f6 14.c2 d7 Very modest. [ 10.d3 e6 11.d6 This tempting move is
15.fd1 e7 16.d5 g6 17.d4 not normally good for White as in all lines
W h it e h a s a s m all e dge bu t t he p o sit io n Black creates pressure against the e5-pawn:
should be manageable. h5 c6 12.f3 d7 13.e2 d4! 14.xd4
[ 17...f4 18.e1 ( 18.f1 a5 ) 18...a5 cxd4 15.b5 a5+ 16.d2 b6 17.b4
19.xe8+ xe8 20.f3 xd3 21.xd3 xe5 18.c5 xd3+ 19.xd3 c6 20.0-0
axb4 22.axb4 c8 23.e1 f5 e5 and Black was better in Ciuffoletti-Sedina,
doesn't seem too bad for Black although Saint Vincent 1998. ]
he's still a bit worse. After the W hite [ 10.e2 e6 11.f3 exd5 12.cxd5 g4!
Queen moves, the Bishop on f5 has limited Black creates pressure against the e5-pawn.
potential. ] 13.0-0 8d7 14.e1 xf3 15.xf3 xe5!
18.d2 e5 16.xe5 e8 17.f2 xe5 18.xc5 c8
[ 18...hf4 19.xg6 g5 ( 19...xg6 19.f2 xc3 20.bxc3 xc3 21.ad1 d6
569
and W hite has nothing for the pawn, Black's reply. Already after 20 moves both
Moraru-Grunberg, Bucharest 1999. ] players had consumed a lot of time.
10...e6 11.0-0-0 exd5 12.cxd5 g4! [ 23.b3 was obligatory: xb2 24.d2
[ 12...c4 is le s s p r e ci s e : 13.f3 g4 (the only move). a4 25.e3 b5 26.xa4
14.h6! After the exchange of dark-square xa4+ 27.b3 xb3+ 28.axb3 4c5
bishops Black ha s no counterplay. xf3 wi t h m u t u a l c h a n c e s i n a c o m p l i c a t e d
15.xg7 xd1 This move looses endgame. ]
immediately but after ( 15...xg7 16.gxf3 23...xa2+! Not difficult to spot but
Black's position is joyless anyway.) 16.f6! non et heless a tt ractive . 24.xa2 b4+
and Black soon resigned, Solomon- 25.b3! The only move as will become clear
Kanikevich, Sydney 1991. ] later. xd3 It may seem that gross material
[ 12...8d7 is no good either: 13.f3 e8 losses are unavoidable for White, but still I
14.e1 with a clear edge for White since h a ve m a n y i n t e r e s t i n g r e s o u r c e s . 26.h5!
Black didn't create pressure on W hite's The only chance to f ight. Now all W hite's
centre. ] pieces are hanging and in time trouble it's not
13.e1! Up to this I was following a book easy for Black to decide which one to take!
recommendation. I was quite satisfied with gxh5? Black miscalculates and misses the
the opening as according to the book "White win. In fairness it was not easy to find the
was clearly better". But my opponent had correct solution! Let's see the variations:
something in mind. [ 26...xe1 27.hxg6 fxg6 28.xg6+ g8
[ 13.f3 i s w e a k e r i n v i e w o f 8d7 29.e7+ h8 30.g6+ g8 31.e7+
intending 14...Re8 and it's not clear how and Black can't avoid triple repetition since
White can hold the e5-pawn. ] after f7 32.xe1 it is White who has
13...c4! This strong move which prepares a winning chances. ]
pawn sacrifice changes the evaluation of the [ Only 26...xf4! 27.hxg6 fxg6! was winning,
position. 14.h3 and W hite has nothing for the piece
[ Here 14.h6 is not good: xh6 15.xh6 ( B y t h e wa y , 27...xg6? is even losing!
xd5 16.h3 f5 17.d1 xc3! 28.xh7+! xh7 29.h1+ h6 30.g5+
( 17...d3!? is not bad either.) 18.xd8 g7 31.f5+ g8 32.xh6+ g7
xa2+ 19.d2 xd8+ with a huge edge for 33.f5+ g8 34.h7 d2+ 35.b4 c4+
Black. ] 36.a3 b1+ 37.a2 d8 38.g7+ f8
14...f5 15.g4 d3! 16.xd3 cxd3 39.xf7+ g8 40.h6+ h8 41.h7# )]
17.xd3 a6! Black is a pawn down but the 27.xh5 xf4
compensation is obvious: he leads in [ 27...xe1 was possible but it only leads to
development, his Knights are very active and a drawish ending after the forced 28.g5
W h it e 's K in g is u n saf e . No w 1 8 . . . Nb 4 is h6 29.d7! a5+ 30.a2 c6 31.xc6
t h r e a t e n e d . 18.d6 c8 19.b1 c4! bxc6 32.d8! xd8 33.xf7+ h7
Black already creates concrete threats. Now 34.xd8 d3 35.e6! xh5 36.gxh5 f6
White has to parry 20...Qb6. 37.c7 ]
[ 19...c5 as was played in Ilincic- 28.xh7+! Forced but strong! xh7 29.h1+
Marinkovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1989 is weaker: h6 30.g5+ g7 31.f5+ g6
20.e2 e6 21.g3 c4 22.f3 a5 By playing 26...gxh6 Black calculated this far
, although even here the position is not clear t h in kin g t h e f igh t wa s o ve r. Ho we ve r a n
at all. ] u n p le a s a n t su r p ri s e a wa i t s h i m . 32.h7!
20.d5 Forced but now White's King has no d2+ If White had played 25 Kb1 it would
defenders at all. a5! 21.e7+ h8 22.f3 n o w b e m a t e i n t w o ! 33.a4 xh7
c5 Black can't avoid perpetual.
[ 22...xb2!? is worthy of consideration: [ An attempt to play for a win is dangerous
23.xb2 b4 24.b3 c2+ 25.b1 xa2 for Black: 33...c4+ 34.b4 h5? 35.xh5
and the attack is very strong. ] xg4 36.xh6+ xf5 37.xf8 xe5
23.h4? To tell the truth I'd completely missed 38.d7+! f5 39.f6+ e4 40.c5+ e5
570
41.d7 and Black is in trouble. ] [ 21.c5 was played in K Martin-Cox - see

34.xh6+ g8 35.e7+ g7 36.f5+ g8 the Archives. ]
37.e7+ A very exciting game! 21...c6 22.c4?!
½-½ [ 22.a4! is a good idea here as well because
...a5 is not an option and 4d5 23.c1!
d7 24.xb6! xb6 25.a5 c8 26.c7
563 B03 is no fun. ]
Yandemirov,Valeri 2461 22...xc4 23.xc4 xa2 24.g5 e8
Konnov,Oleg 2325 25.e4 a5 26.d6 c3 Black has levelled
6th ch-PriFO Men (5) 27.01.2008 the game. 27.d2 a4 28.bxa4 xa4
[John Watson] 29.xe8 xc4 30.d8 f8 31.b8 c6
32.g5 f6 33.xf6+ f7 34.b7+ f8
I thought that White had a good game here, 35.b8+ f7 36.b7+ f8 37.d7+ g8
but Black can improve earlier, so it turns out 38.h4 h6 39.e3 d5 40.b8+ h7
that I haven't added much at all to what has 41.c5 f4 42.f8+ xf8 43.xf8 c1+
been said in the Archives! With care, Black 44.h2 c2 45.b7+ g8 46.xh6 xf2
e q u a l i s e s a f t e r 1 6 c x b 6 . M a y b e t h e 47.xf4 xf4
alternatives to that move beat re-examination, ½-½
and 14 Ne4 deserves another look. 1.e4 f6
2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6
6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e5 564 B03
The main move. Our other game features 9... Yudasin,Leonid 2475
Nc6. 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 Kengis,Edvins 2430
6d7 13.c4 c6 14.f3 USSR Minsk (15) 1985
[ Oddly enough, 14.e4 is underexplored in [Alexander Volzhin]
comparison with 14 Nf3. I think it has the
p o t e n t i a l t o b e m o r e f r u i t f u l t h a n t h e 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
conventional move. ] 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c6 7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6
14...a5 15.e2 b6 16.cxb6 In the end this 9.f3 e7 This is the main line. 10.e2
gets nowhere. Possible, but in my opinion it's hardly
[ There's a quick draw after 16.b5!? bxc5 consistent : after choosing the very sharp
17.g5 f6 18.d2 b7 19.c7 b8 Four Pawns attack white switches to slow
20.c4+ h8 21.e6 e8 22.c7= ] positional play.
[ In the Archives, John Cox has analysed [ 10.d5 is considered to be White's main
16.b4 ] weapon. See the next games for it. ]
[ 16.0-0 ] 10...0-0 11.0-0 f6! The correct plan: Black
[ and 16.a4 . I'm not quite sure that Black undermines White's pawn chain. 12.exf6
has full equality after the last two, but it's [ 12.h4?! is not good: fxe5 13.xf5 exf5
certainly close enough to be within drawing 14.d5 d4! ( W hite hoped for 14...b8
bounds. ] 15.c5 with ample compensation) 15.xd4
16...xb6 This position has been considered exd4 16.xd4 d7! Now Black dominates
equal. 17.0-0 b7 18.fd1 c6?! the dark squares. 17.h1 ( 17.a4 b5!
[ 18...xd1+ 19.xd1 c8 20.b5 d5 18.cxb5 d6! At the cost of only one pawn
is fine according to Cox. Then White seems Bla ck h a s go t a st ro n g kin gsid e a t t a c k
to get just a little something out of 21.d2 19.ae1 e7 20.d3 e5 21.h1 f4
c2 22.d3 xa2 23.b4 , but then comes 22.e2 ae8 23.c3 h4 Spielmann -
e4! 24.xe4 c4 25.e1 cb6 Kolle, Dortmund, 1928.) 17...c5 18.d3
and there's no more doubt about equality. ] g5 19.b5 ae8 20.xc7 e3 21.e6
19.b5 xd1+ 20.xd1 b4 21.d6 h6 22.xc5 xc5 23.c2 e4 24.g1
[ Here Cox claims that 21.a4 "would have b6 25.h1 f6 26.f3 xf3 27.xf3
left White decidedly better." ] g3+ Arakelov - Bagirov, 1960. ]
571
12...xf6 Now both sides have weaknesses [ 20.fxg5 ]

(d4 and e6). In my opinion the position is 20...fxg4 21.hxg4? h5! This turns the tide
about equal. 13.d2 e7 14.ad1 ad8 completely now W hite stands much worse!
15.c1 h6 16.h3 h7 17.fe1 h8 18.f1 22.g3
f7 19.h1 c8! Black improves the [ 22.gxh5?? g4 ]
position of his only bad piece. 20.f2 d6 22...hxg4 23.e2 gxf4 24.xf4 ae8
21.a3 e5 22.c5 exd4 23.xd4 xd4 25.fh5 f5! 26.xf5 xf5 27.xg7 xg7
24.xd4 xd4 25.xd4 f5 26.xd8 xd8 28.xf5 xf5 29.b5?! e4?
27.f4 [ 29...e6! , to cover h6 so that ...Be4 and ...
½-½ Qh7 can follow. ]
30.xc6 bxc6 31.f4?
[ 31.h6 g6 32.g5! ]
565 B03 31...g3
Zaragatski,Ilja 2471 [ Black wins with 31...h8! 32.h6 e6
Baburin,Alexander 2545 33.g5+ h7 ]
23rd ECC Men (7) 09.10.2007 [ or 31...e6 ]
[John Watson] 32.e5 g6?
[ 32...xe5! 33.dxe5 xe5 threatens ...Qh5
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 and ...Qf6-f3, so 34.e1 f6 35.xe4 dxe4
5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 c6 7.h3 f5 8.e3 is forced, when Black is winning. ]
e7 9.f3 f6 10.b3 h6 11.e2 33.f4! g2 34.e1!? f8 35.h2 f5 0-1.
[ 11.d3 xd3 ( 11...d7 12.0-0 0-0 [ I don't think that White should resign yet:
13.b1 xd3 14.xd3 is almost the 35...f5 36.g3+ ( 36.h8+? f7 )
same ) 12.xd3 leaves White with a solid 36...f7 37.f4! xf4 38.xf4
space advantage. Most players wouldn't with opposite-coloured bishops which should
want to play this kind of as Black, although give W hite some chances. Time trouble
nothing terrible should befall him. ] seemed to mar this game, but the opening
11...d5 12.c5 c8 13.0-0 0-0 14.d2 was very interesting. ]
8e7 15.e1?! 0-1
[ 15.h2! is a better way to mobilise the
pawns, as will soon become clear. Then
h7? ( 15...b6 16.cxb6 axb6 17.g4 566 B03
xg4 18.xg4 with the bishop pair) 16.g4! Zilberstein,Dmitry 2410
is very strong. ] Baburin,Alexander 2559
15...h7 16.g4!? g5? This is anti-positional 2nd Konig Mem 15.07.2007
in the extreme. [John Watson]
[ Neither 17 f4 nor 17 g5 are real threats, so
moves like 16...b6 ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
[ or 16...e8! are preferable. In the latter 5.f4 dxe5
case, 17.f4? is terrible following f5! [ The actual order of Olape-Baburin below
18.gxf5 xe3 and another pawn will fall. ] was 5...f5 6.c3 e6 7.f3 e7 8.e2
17.g2 ( a good result as Black was 8.e3 0-0
[ Now 17.f4! gxf4 18.xf4 is very promising, 9.e2 Yermolinsky-Baburin, San Francisco
because g5? 19.f1 ( 19.f3 xe3+ 2002! ) 8...dxe5 9.fxe5 0-0 10.e3 f6
20.xe3 g7 21.g2 ) 19...xe3+ 11.0-0 c6 12.exf6 xf6 a roundabout
20.xe3 g7 21.g2 leaves Black with way to get to the main line I don't see any
too many weaknesses. ] brilliant options for either side, at least
17...g7 18.f4 f5!? 19.f3 none that are listed in the books, but they
[ White is still on top, and better is 19.fxg5 might be worth searching for. ]
hxg5 20.xg5 xd4+ 21.h1 ] 6.fxe5 c6
19...d7 20.e2? [ Early on, Alex experimented with the line
572
6...c5 7.d5 e6 8.c3 exd5 9.cxd5 c4 if you really have to play 15...e5! and secure
versus Yuri Shulman in San Francisco 2001. a draw in a line where it is hard for White to
The game ended peacefully after the known go wrong. I guess versus Svidler as Black,
pawn sacrifice 10.f3 b4 11.xc4 xc3+ it's hard to complain! ]
12.bxc3 xc4 13.a4+ d7 14.xc4 ½-½
b6 15.b5+ d7 16.xd7+ xd7 17.d6
c8 Cox calls equal (based upon this
game?). 18.d2 b5 19.d4 ( 19.f2 567 B03
is the computer suggestion - isn't W hite Zubarev,Al1 2517
just better?) 19...d3 1/2-1/2 . ut again, 20 Aloma Vidal,Roberto 2388
Kf2 or 20 h4! with the idea Rh3 keeps an Acropolis Open (5) 13.08.2008
advantage, if not quite as convincing a one. ] [John Watson]
7.e3 f5 8.c3 e6 9.f3 e7 10.e2
0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 xf6 13.d2 Again, the Voronezh. This game demonstrates
The latest game in this line: 1/2-1/2 Svidler- how important concrete preparation is even in
Baburin, Bunratty 2008! e7 14.ad1 such an apparently 'positional' line. 1.e4 f6
[ The fact that Baburin had trouble scaring 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 cxd6
up winning chances in the following game 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 e5
m ig h t r e f le c t a g e n e r a l p ro b l e m i n t h e 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7
Alekhine: 14.c5 d5 15.xd5 exd5 13.f3 c6 14.c4 The most popular of
16.b5 d8 17.f4 e6 18.e5 e4 White's setups. Black goes into the main line.
19.xf6 xf6 20.e5 f4 21.f2 g5 a5 15.e2
22.d7 f6 23.g3 af8 24.af1 g2 [ We've looked at the odd idea 15.b5 c6!
25.gxf4 xf4 26.e6+ h8 27.f7+ 8xf7 before Black seems to hold his own. ]
28.xf7 h3+ 29.h1 g2+ 30.g1 15...b6 16.cxb6 xb6 A key position. 17.0-0
h3+ 31.h1 g2+ 32.g1 1/2-1/2 Olape, [ 17.b5 b7 18.0-0 ( 18.xa7 d5
B (2216)-Baburin, A (2580)/Bled SLO 2002/ was analysed by Cox in his New in Chess
The Week in Chess 418 ] Article about the Voronezh it seems as
14...ad8 15.c1 though Black has enough compensation, e.g.
[ I gave some analysis to the rare move , he gives 19.b5 c6 20.a4 e4 21.d2
15.h1 in my note s to Dushin-Siewert, e5 22.g5 f6 23.e3 d3+ 24.xd3
Email 2003. It may be W hite's best shot exd3 'by which time even the computer is
for advantage. ] c o n c e d i n g e q u a l i t y. . . ' I t h i n k t h e b e s t
15...h6 comment on this pawn grab is the fact that
[ In the same game, I looked at the move no W h ite h as ye t tried it. ') 18...d5!
15...e5! in combination with the analysis ( 18...c6 19.c5 is promising for White.
provided by Mark Morss. Black seems to Then e4 20.g5 d2 21.fe1 threatens
fully equalise, although it should be noted e4, but xa2?! 22.d6 clearly favours
that he has to accede to extremely dull White ) 19.d2 ( 19.g5 f4! ) 19...f4!
equality to do so, including a drawn e qu a lise s. I t se e m s t h a t W h it e 's m o ve
endgame. ] order doesn't matter if Black is careful. ]
16.h1 I suggested and analysed 17...b7 18.fd1 c6? Alekhine's is still
[ 16.f2 (!), which I think should give White considered an opening in which both sides
an edge. ] can play by instinct, but here you have to
16...h8 17.h3 g6 18.b3 a6 19.g1 d7 know your stuff.
20.fe1 f7 21.f1 e7 22.fe1 f7 [ 18...xd1+! 19.xd1 c8 20.b5 d5
23.f1 still seems critical, as Cox gives in his notes
[ And here I think that 23.d3! gives White to Martin-Cox, Port Erin 2005 in the Archives,
the advantage. So one issue here is whether, and we analyse d again in Yan demirov-
as a higher-rated player, you can afford to Konnov, Kazan 2008. You might want to
play 15...h6, even if it seems unpleasant, or check out those games and look for
573
improvements. 21.d2 c2 22.d3 xa2 xa6 46.h1 a2= ]

23.b4 , but then comes e4! 24.xe4 c4 44.b6 a5+! 45.c6 xa6 46.h1 a2
25.e1 cb6 and there's no more doubt 47.b7 c2+ 48.b6 b2+ 49.c7 f5?!
about equality. ] Trying to win, which could never happen here.
19.b5 d5!? This transposes into an earlier Maybe Black missed White's next.
game Va rga-Lla nos, bu t B lack ha s t o d o [ 49...c2+ draws. ]
something in the face of Nd6 and this time, 50.xh2 xb7+ 51.xb7 f4 52.c6 g5??
Nxa7 is also a threat. 20.xd5! xd5 21.c7 [ 52...e5! , as in any endgame book,
d4?! Not best, but prevents Black's king from being forced off
[ 21...ad8 22.xd5 xd5 23.g5 the file. 53.g2 ( 53.c5 f3 ) 53...f3
looks strong and ] 54.g5+ f4 55.xg6 f2 56.f6+ draws. ]
[ 21...dd8 22.xa8 xa8 23.b5! d4?! 53.c5 g4
( 23...f6!? ) 24.xd4 exd4 25.g5 f6 [ It's too late for 53...e5 54.e2+ f5
26.d2 d5 27.c7! was very good for 55.d4 ]
White in Varga, Z (2518)-Llanos, G (2437)/ 54.d4 g3 55.h8 f5 56.g8 f3 57.xg3
Budape st 199 9/. Black pa ssed p awn is f4 58.g8 f2 59.f8+
blocked and doesn't cause white any 1-0
problems, while the a-pawn becomes a
target for white pieces (Finkel) - indeed this
is precisely the kind of endgame Black must 568 B04
avoid in this variation. ] Adams,Michael 2729
22.xd4? This really doesn't achieve anything. Carlsen,Magnus 2714
Correct was World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (14) 21.11.2007
[ 22.xd4! c8 ( 22...exd4 23.xa8 d3 [John Watson]
24.d1 and wins ) 23.e3 d7 24.b5
xc1+ 25.xc1 looks a little dangerous for A very important line, with all kinds of options
White, but he holds onto his material and on move 7. I think that 6 Bd3 has more value
consolidates ] than supposed. This would be a good game
22...exd4 23.xd5 xd5 24.d2 h5 and notes to go over. And watch that two
[ 24...e6 with the idea ...Rc8 is simplest. ] bishops ending! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4
25.c4!? d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.d3
[ 25.c7 ] Not the most common move any more, yet it
25...xc4 26.xc4 d3?! may very well come back. Bd3 is thoroughly
[ 26...e8 27.f1 d3 is a better order. ] logical the drawback is that ...Nb4 comes with
27.f1 tempo in many cases. Now the players follow
[ 27.c7! with the idea e8 28.d7! ] the m ain line . d7 7.f3 There are two
27...d8 28.b4 d4 29.a4 d7 majo r alternatives, with game s involvin g
At some point Black should centralise his king Mamedyar, Carlsen, and Rozentalis, all as
via ... Kf 8-e7. 30.b5 f6 31.e1 e7+ Black. Briefly:
32.e3! xe3 33.fxe3 xe3+ 34.d2 e2+ [ (a) 7.xd7 is safe, when White probably
35.xd3 xg2 36.c7?! keeps only a formal edge. In the main line
[ 36.c2! has the idea g4 37.c8+ f7 below, Black's real disappointment will be
38.a8 ] the loss of positive chances, but there are
36...xh2 37.xa7 b2 38.c4 plenty of alternatives along the way: xd7
This is almost impossible to calculate, so I'll 8.0-0 g6 9.e1 ( 9.c4 f6 10.h3 g7
hit only the obvious points. Presumably Black 11.d2 0-0 12.f3 c7 13.e1 f5!?
should be okay here. h4 39.a5 h3 40.d7 14.xf5 gxf5 15.e3 ad8 16.c2 e6
h2 17.ad1 e4 and Black had quite a decent
[ 40...g5! ] game in Zhigalko, A (2505)-Rozentalis, E
41.d1 f7 42.a6 a2 43.c5 e6!? (25 82 )/ Ca pp elle la G ra nd e FRA 20 06 .)
[ 43...g5! with the idea 44.b6 a5+ 45.c6 9...g7 10.c3 0-0 11.g5 b6!
574
This dates back to Upleger-Loeffler, Bishop on g7 gives cause for concern.'

Bundesliga 2002-2003, which we'll follow. A [ j w: ] O f c o u r s e , B l a c k c a n d o b e t t e r
successor game was Cuijpers, F (2510)-Cox, probably 8...g6 should be looked into.
J (2418)/Amsterdam NED 2006, analysed Overall, my impression is that 7 0-0 yields
by Cox on this site .Previously ( 11...e8 a normal advantage for White, much like
12.d2 c8 13.c4 had been played, most openings. ]
after which W hite maintained the 7...7f6 8.h3 Preventing ... Bg4, which would
advantage. ) go well with Black's ...c6/...e6 setup. It is very
A) Cox's game continued 12.d2 e6 common to give up the bishop pair in those
13.a3 , and he suggests that putting one lines. b4 9.c4
rook or another on d8 was fine. Okay, then [ 9.e2 f5 10.a3 e6 11.0-0 e7
fd8 14.c4 c7 15.e3!? f4 16.c4 ( No one seems to like 11...d6; or 11...c7
is s olid f or Black, perhap s a bit more in these systems, and for the life of me I
comfortable to play for W hite after xc4 don't understand why!) 12.c3 bd5 13.c4
( 16...c5? 17.f5! ) 17.xc4 e6 18.h4 0-0 14.ce5 h6 15.c4 b6 was played in
. Black should be fine, however.; two games, notably Navara-Rozentalis,
B) 12.c1!? c5?! 13.e4 e6 14.xd5 Ermioni 2006, and Black came out with full
xd5 15.xe7 fe8 16.dxc5 c6 17.f3 equality. ]
b6 . Here 18.a3 looks like an 9...f5 10.a3
appropriate move, when e6! 19.d6 [ (a) 10.e5 e6 ( 10...xc2+?? 11.xc2
bxc5 20.f4 ad8 gives decent xc2? 12.xf7# ) 11.a3 d6 12.0-0 h6
compensation. ] ( 12...c7 is a good alternative) 13.c3
[ (b ) A n o t h e r se r io u s ch a l le n ge i s 7.0-0 bd5 14.c2 c7 15.d3? xe5
xe5! 8.dxe5 b4 ( 8...g6 was played in 16.dxe5 xd3 17.xd3 xe5 was Del Rio
Sutovsky, E (2674)-Mamedyarov, S (2646)/ Angelis, S (2490) -Conquest, S (2555)/4th
Gothenburg SW E 2005, and analysed on IECC, Ist anbul TUR 200 3, an alys ed b y
this site. I still think that White stands better, Andrew Martin on this site. ]
but I have a prejudice for space.) 9.e4 [ (b) Andrew Martin gives 10.b3 a5!
xd1 10.xd1 f5 11.a3 (according to ( 10...e6 11.a3 a6 12.0-0 is a natural
Finkel) continuation) 11.a3 bd5 12.c4 b6
A) 11...fxe4 12.axb4 is Cox's preference, 13.0-0 a4 14.a2 e6= . I'm not so sure.
citing Martin's analysis on this site White has space and active pieces and the
beginning with g6 . But instead of his 13 pawn on a4 can be weak after 15.c3 ]
Be3!? Bg7 14 Ra5, I think that 13.c3! 10...e6 11.c3 bd5 12.c2 e7
is better and more logical - if the e-pawns [ 12...d6!? ]
are exchanged, then W hite has the 13.e3 I think that this is an original
superior pawn structure. One sequence manoeuvre. It doesn't seem to alter the basic
might be g7 ( 13...f5 14.b5!? g7 characteristics of the position. g6 14.e5
15.bxc6 bxc6 16.a5 ) 14.xe4 xe5 0-0 15.0-0 xe3!? This helps White out a bit,
15.e1; because his knight was doing nothing and
B) 11...a6 12.f3 g6 13.d2 ( 13.e2 neither was the bishop on c1 this is a minor
g7 14.f4 c7 15.d2 e6 16.f3 ) point.
13...e6 14.e2 c7 15.f3 d5 [ 15...c7 ]
16.d4 g7 17.c4 f7 18.f4 16.xe3 d5 17.d2 c5 Thematic,
Sutovsky, E (2635)-Carlsen, M (2385)/ although you could argue that when White has
E CC , Re t h ym n o n G R E 2 0 0 3 . Ma rt in : the two bishops, the ... c6/...e6 structure is
'White's ad vantage grows. He's achieved more ideal. I don't know. 18.xg6 hxg6
nothing other than to show that his 19.dxc5 xc5 20.e2 f6 21.ad1 c7
position has more potential but that is 22.b3 ad8 23.c1
enough to put Carlsen under pressure. I [ 23.f3 is more forward-looking. ]
like White's extra space and the throttled 23...xd1 24.xd1 d8 25.xd8+ xd8
575
26.g3 15.b5 c8 16.cxb6 axb6 17.ac1

[ 26.f3 b6 27.f4!? . Maybe White has Barskij,V-Miroshnichenko,E/Polanica Zdroj
a little something to play for in these 2000 I daresay Mickey would have been
positions. ] delighted with such a position. The small,
26...b6 27.g2 c6+ 28.f3 d7 clear edge has materialised, based around
29.c4 a5 30.e2 d5 31.d3 c7 the poor Black Knights and W hite's
32.f3 f6 33.h4!? b6 34.e2 f8 nagging pressure on the c file. Against the
35.b3 d5 36.d2 Nothing much is great players, just one poorly posted piece
happening, but I still like White. f6 37.c2 is often enough to decide the game. ]
[ 37.f4 d6 38.e3!? ] 10.c3 e8 11.b3 e6!N Lending a hand to
37...d5 38.a3 c7 39.d3 f6 40.b4 ..d6-d5 a nd wh at a dif f icult move f o r th e
e7 41.e3 g8 42.d2 b6 43.e3?! average player to see!
[ 43.b5! and White's really getting [ 11...f5 is also playable: 12.e3 d5 13.c5
somewhere. ] c8 14.d2 e4 15.h2 8e7 16.g4
43...e5 44.g1 f8 45.d1 c6 46.d2 f5 17.xf6+ xf6 18.b5 a6
e6 47.e3 e7 48.e2 1/2-1/2 Dittmar, P-Komarov,D/Bratto 2001 ]
[ 48.b5! ] 12.e4 d5! The point of Black's play.
48...d5 49.c4 xe3 50.xe6 fxe6 13.xf6+ xf6 14.c5 d7 15.e3 f5
51.fxe3 e4! Now it should be drawn. 52.f2 16.d2 h6 17.fe1 f8 18.ad1 g5
f7 53.f1 f6 54.g4 g5 55.h5 e5 19.e5
56.e2 d5 57.d2 f6 58.c2 e5 [ 19.b4 g6 20.b5 d8 is not at all easy to
59.a6 d6 60.b7 g3 61.xe4 e1 assess. The computers like White but I am
62.d3 e5 63.f3 d6 64.c4 d2 not at all sure. He may sometime be
65.d3 e1 66.d4 d2 67.d3 finding himself defending over-extended
½-½ pawns. In a mini-match Adams will not push
his pawns this far unless he absolutely has
to and so settles for something more
569 B04 modest.. ]
Adams,Michael 2731 19...g6 20.xg6
Nakamura,Hikaru 2580 [ 20.g4 g7 21.b4 was an opportunity to
FIDE WCh KO Tripoli LBA (4.2) 27.06.2004 spice it up but Adams sticks to his
[Andrew Martin] uncomplicated agenda. ]
20...xg6 21.b5 e7 A draw and with it the
1.e4 Playing Black against Mickey is usually match. Otherwise White could play on with,
such an unpleasant experience that when we say 22 Bf1 at no risk to himself. I don't think
see someone take a quick draw off him, we sit this changes the overall assessment of 4...
up and take notice. f6 Especially with the N c 6 a s n o t b e i n g e s p e c i a l l y g o o d . F o r
Alekhine! 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6!? surprise outings only or when desperate to
5.c4 b6 6.exd6 win.
[ Obviously 6.e6 is still critical but to ½-½
embrace these wild complications is hardly
the right tactical move. W hen surprised,
the stronger player looks for the way to a 570 B04
small, clear edge. ] Adams,Michael 2699
6...exd6 7.h3 Porper,Eduard 2448
[ 7.d5 e5 is nothing special. ] Canadian Open (8) 18.07.2009
7...e7 8.e2 0-0 9.0-0 f6 [John Watson]
[ 9...f5 10.c3 f6 11.f4 d5 12.c5
c4 13.b3 4a5 is another way. The Black 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
Knights appear to be in a tangle but White's This isn't played much, but has been subject
pawns are not yet secure. 14.d2 b6! to recent analysis purporting to show that
576
Black is okay. 5.c4 b6 6.exd6 A safe try 13.fxe3 White threatens 14 c5. g5 14.d3
for a small advantage. g4 15.xg4 xg4 16.e4 d7 17.h3 g6
[ 6.e6 is the critical move. Then the main line 18.h2
goes fxe6 7.c3 g6 8.h4 g7 9.e3 [ 18.e3! ]
( 9.h5 e5 10.d5 d4 11.hxg6 g4 18...a6?!
or 11...Bf5 are apparently fine for Black, [ 18...b6! ]
according to practice) 9...e5 10.d5 d4 19.b4 b6 20.a3 d4 21.ad1 xd3
11.xd4 exd4 12.xd4 xd4 13.xd4 e5 22.xd3 b6 23.c1 fb8 24.g4
14.e3 ( or 14.dxe6 0-0 15.0-0-0 xe6 [ 24.d6 c6 25.a4!? with the idea c5. ]
16.e4 . The last word hasn't been spoken 24...f8 25.g3 e8 26.g5 c8 27.f1
about this line. )] a5? 28.b5?!
6...exd6 [ 28.b5! axb4 29.axb4 a4 30.d6
[ 6...cxd6 has been played as well. The wi t h a l a r g e a d va n t a g e W h i t e w i l l wi n
critical line is 7.d5 e5 8.xe5 dxe5 material or better. ]
, when White has tried various methods of 28...f6 29.gxf6 gxf6 30.d6 c6 31.c5?
attacking Black's pawn structure, for [ 31.f5 is still advantageous. ]
example, 9.h5!? ( 9.e3 ) 9...c7 31...xc5 32.d7+? Refusing to accept
10.a3 a6 11.d3 g6 12.h4 h6 13.g3 equality, Adams risks trouble. Better
g7 14.0-0 0-0 and Black has reasonable [ 32.df3 a7 33.xf6 g7+ 34.h4
prospects, Alavkin, A -Gorbushin, A, Perm d7= ]
1997. ] 32...xd7 33.d6 cxb5
7.e2 e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.d5 A direct move. [ Black should play on: 33...cxb5 34.d5!
[ 9.h3 has been common, for example, f6 ( 34.xb5 e7 ) 34...c4!? ( 34...a7
10.c3 f5 11.f4 e8 12.c1 h6 13.b3 35.e6+ f8 36.xf6? f7 37.d6 e7
a6 14.d2 d5 15.c5 c8 16.e3 8e7 38.xd7+ xd7 39.xd7 c3+ ) 35.f5
17.h2 e6 18.g4 g5 19.f3 g6 ac8 with advantage, in view of 36.xf6+
20.e2 g7 ( 20...a5 ) 21.g2 e7 22.f4 xf6 37.dxf6 d8 ]
gxf4 23.xf4 xf4 24.xf4 e8?! ½-½
( 24...d7! ) 25.f2 d8? 26.h4
1-0 Yudasin, L (2600) -Nikolaev, S (2375),
St Petersburg 1997. ] 571 B04
9...e5 10.xe5 dxe5 11.c3 c5 Adams,Michael 2699
[ 11...f5! is a natural move. The most Zhao Xue 2544
important other game I can find with 4...Nc6 Canadian Open (7) 17.07.2009
and 6 exd6 exd6 went 12.f4 ( 12.c2 ) [John Watson]
12...c5+ 13.h1 e4 14.b1 a5 15.b3
d7 16.c2 e7 17.d1 c6 18.dxc6 It's always important to see what a world-
xc6 19.e3 fd8 20.c3 d7!? class player does in a topical line. Adams
( 20...d7! ) 21.xc5 ( 21.b2 ) 21...xc5 leaves the main paths early and achieves
22.e3?! xe3 23.xe3 d2 24.fe1 g6 success. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
25.a3 d7 26.b4 axb4 27.axb4 b6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 7.0-0
with only a small edge, Rublevsky, S [ For 7.g4 , see Anand-Carlsen, Moscow
(2 6 1 0 )- Mo ro ze vich , A (2 6 2 5 ), Mo sco w 2007 in the Archives. ]
1996. ( 27...f6! was better )] 7...d7 8.g4!? In Vigus' book, he calls this
[ and 11...c6 , breaking up the centre, can't 'rather feeble'. At the least, Adams wants to
be too bad. Then White gets some get away from the main lines, 8 Nf3 and 8 Ng4,
advantage from 12.a4! cxd5 13.cxd5 a5 both dealt with in the Archives. xg4 9.xg4
14.e3 ] e6
12.e3! xe3 [ a) 9...5f6 10.f3 ( 10.g3 looks better)
[ 12...e7 13.d3 d7 14.b5! 10...e6 11.c3 e7 12.b3!? ( may be best
is awkward for Black. ] so 1 0 Q g 3 i s p a r t i cu l a r ly wo r t h n o t i n g
577
12.g3 ) 12...xe5 13.dxe5 d7 14.e1 White has acquired serious kingside chances.
a5 15.g3 0-0-0 16.b2 hg8 f6 21.f4 a5 22.e4
with counterplay, although White still has [ Or 22.g3! ]
the better chances, Bellaiche, A (2424)- 22...d7?! 23.g3 f5 24.e5 h4 25.f6+
Gozzoli, Y (2431), Evry 2003. ] xf6 26.xf6 f7 27.e5 d7 28.f4 e5
[ b) 9...xe5 10.dxe5 e6 11.c4 ( 11.d2 A bit desperate. On the other hand, Black
h5 12.e4 e7 13.f3 0-0 is fairly safe isn't going to get much for his e-pawn
W h i t e h a s a l i t t l e s p a c e) 11...b6 following
( 11...b4 12.d1 c7 13.c3 [ 28...f6 29.h6 g6 30.e3 ]
, with the idea xe5 14.f4 h5! 15.f3 29.dxe5 c5 30.e3 e6 31.g3 c7
f5 16.b5! a6 17.d4 ) 12.d1 c7 32.ed3 h6 33.d6 h7 34.f3 e7
13.e2 ( 13.e4 ) 13...d7 14.f4 e7 35.g2 c7 36.b4 c8 37.a4 fe7
15.c3 g5!? ( 15...0-0 looks safe and 38.d3 f8 39.e3 g8 40.f4 a6 41.c5!
ab ou t e qu a l) 16.g3 h5 17.h3 0-0-0 xc5 42.bxc5 e8 43.e2 f7 44.g6
18.e4 b6 19.a3 h4 20.h2 c5?! B la ck ca n 't m o ve , a n d Rd d 6 a n d e 6 a r e
21.d6+ xd6 22.exd6 d7 23.b4 e5 coming.
24.c5 a6 25.g4 with an obvious 1-0
positional advantage, Askarov, B (2421)-
Dergilev, I (2267), Tomsk 2006. ]
10.d1 572 B04
[ The only other game I know of is David, A Adams,Michael 2694
(2580)-Bauer, C (2599), Clichy 2004, Zhukova,Natalia 2462
featured in Cox: 10.c4 b4 11.xd7 xd7 8th Gibtelecom Masters (7) 01.02.2010
12.e4 d8 ( I like 12...c5! 13.a3 f5! [Gawain Jones]
14.e2 c6 , which fights back in the
centre and targets d4) 13.a3 a6 14.e3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
e7 ( 14...d6 ) 15.d2! 0-0 16.f3 f6 5.c4
17.fe1 fe8 18.d2 c7 19.a5!? [ 5.c4 b6 6.exd6 cxd6 would transpose
( 19.ad1 - White has space and some to the ...cxd6 Exchange variation ]
advantage ) 19...b6 20.c3 f8 21.ac1 [ 5.g5 is the older move but according to
c8 22.h4 h5 23.e2 d6 24.cc2 f8 John Cox it's rather ineffective after
and White isn't making any progress. ] A) The trick is that after 5...g7?!
10...5f6 A1) 6.xf7!? also looks possible xf7
[ 10...xe5 11.dxe5 c7 12.c4 b4 7.f3+ f6 ( 7...e6 8.g3 gives White
13.a3 c2 14.a2 d8 15.b4 h5 a pleasant attack ) 8.exf6 xf6 9.c3;
16.xd8+ xd8 17.e2 d4 18.d1 A2) 6.f3 is rather unpleasant;
with the idea Rd2 seems to favour White, if B) 5...c6 6.f3 ( 6.f4 g7 ) 6...f6 7.e6
not by a great deal. ] a5+ 8.d2 b6 ]
11.e2 e7 12.c4 0-0 13.c3 e8!? 5...b6
Black embarks upon a passive reorganisation. [ 5...c6 has also been examined in the
In these Caro-Kann/Slav-like positions, it's archives, most recently in the game
generally better to connect rooks and simplify, Zeberski-Rozentalis where Black achieved a
as in the David-Bauer game above. One way quick victory.
is A) 6.exd6 xd6 7.0-0 g7 8.e1
[ 13...c7 14.f4 xe5 15.xe5 b6 A new move for the site but logical 0-0
16.h3 fd8 ] 9.g5
14.d3 f8 15.f4 b6 16.ad1 ad8 A1) 9...e8 would leave the way open
17.b3!? for the c8 bishop;
[ 17.h3 g6 18.g3 ] A2) w h i l e t h e i m m e d i a t e 9...g4
17...a6?! 18.h4 6d7 19.h5 xe5 would probably be my choice
20.xe5 Black's queen is out of touch and A2a) 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 xd4
578
( 11...h6 12.d2 d7 is the safe opens up the c4 square, either to transfer
choice ) 12.c3 xc3 13.bxc3 f6 the knight from b1-d2-c4-e5 or else push
is rather messy; the knight back from d5 with a well timed
A2b) T h e l e s s f o r c i n g 10.bd2!? c4 push. a6 11.bd2 ( 11.c4!? f6
could also be considered of course.; 12.c3 ) 11...ad8 12.f1 ( 12.c4
A2c) 10.xd5 xd5 11.c3 c7 13.ce5 would be my choice when
( 11.xe7 e8 gives Black adequate I'd choose W hite but of course Black is
c o m p e n s a t io n f o r t h e p a wn , d 4 i s always solid.) 12...c5 13.g5 ( 13.g3
p r o b a b l y g o i n g t o d r o p s h o r t l y .) cxd4 14.xf5 gxf5 15.xd4 g6 )
11...xg5 ( 11...f5!? ) 12.xg5 13...h6 14.h4 g5 15.g3 and Black had
xd1 13.axd1 e6 looks equal.; successfully achieved some counterplay
A3) 9...e6 is the computer's although he has to make sure his king
suggestion but seems a little passive to doesn't come to regret his kingside
me 10.d2 d7 11.b3; e x p a n s i o n . W h e n i n s t e a d o f g6
A4) 9...e6 If Black has to play this then which featured in Bruzon Batista-
White has definitely gained as h3 is now Nogueiras Santiago, Ciego de Avila 2010
u n n e c e s s a r y . 10.b3 b5 A typical 1-0 ( I 'd p r e f e r 15...f4 with complex
response to stop c4 and cement the play. )]
knight on d5. 11.bd2 d7 12.c4!? 6.b3 g7 7.e2
( 12.e4 c7 13.d2 ) 12...bxc4 [ 7.g5 is a little more common. Some
13.xc4 c7 14.c1 a5 15.ce5 recent games ran e6
( 15.h4! looking at the vulnerable d6 A) 8.f4 dxe5 9.dxe5!? An interesting try
square, starts to change the evaluation and more positional than 9.fxe5 xd1+
from slight to clear edge White.) 15...a6 10.xd1 It's curious that the computer
was Rej-Wohl, Sydney 2010 when Black sligh t ly p re f e rs B la ck h e re , evid e n t ly
was struggling and although Alex won, because of the misplaced king, but
had Tomek found ( 15...xe5 16.xe5 Sutovsky (and I) prefer White. The bishop
b7 17.xd5 exd5 18.f4 on g7 is blocked out for the time being but
leaves Black with a chronic weakness on it can be rerouted through f8. However
c6. ) 16.xf7! once the bishop moves then f6 will prove
A4a) 16...xf7 17.xe6!! xe6 a l i a b i l i t y . T h e g a m e c o n t i n u e d d7
18.e2+ e5 ( 18...f7 19.xd5+; 11.c3 c6 12.ge4 8d7 13.e3 h6
18...d6 19.e7+ xe7 20.e6# ) 14.e2 g5 15.g3 d5 Simplifying the
19.xe5 xe5 20.xd5+ d7 position but worsening the Black pawn
( 20...xd5 21.c5++- ) 21.dxe5+-; structure and acknowledging he'll have to
A4b) 16...xf7 17.xe6 leaves Black suffer for the rest of the game. Perhaps
in dire straits, e.g. f8 18.e8 f5 ( 15...0-0-0 and waiting should be
( 18...d7 19.xf8+ xf8 20.xd5+ preferred.) 16.xd5 xd5 17.xd5 exd5
h8 21.e5 ) 19.e5 e6 20.xe6 18.d2 e7 19.f3 c5?! A pseudo-
xe6 21.xd5; act ive m o ve which o nly re sult s in h is
B) 6.0-0 g7 7.h3 ( 7.exd6 xd6 pawns being harder to defend. 20.c3 e6
8.bd2 is considered somewhat better for 21.ad1 and Black's position was
W hite according to John W atson in his unpleasant in Sutovsky-Reinderman, Wijk
annotations to Fedorchuk-Genocchio in a a n Z e e 2 0 1 0 ( 21.fxg5! picks up a
t h e a r c h i v e s .) 7...0-0 ( 7...dxe5 pawn );
was played by Rozentalis) 8.exd6 xd6 B) 8.f3 0-0 This is very rare as it castles
9.e1 f5 ( 9...d7 Svidler-Akopian straight into White's attack but
annotated by Glenn Flear when Black Reinderman is confident in Black's
developed the bishop to b7 never position. 9.h3 h6 10.f3 dxe5 11.dxe5
managed to f ully equalise.) 10.b3 c6 12.xh6 xe5 13.xg7 ( 13.g5
A normal move for this variation. W hite d3+ 14.cxd3 xb2 15.0-0 xa1
579
16.d2 'with a strong attack' is given by xf7 33.g5 e1 34.b4 f3 35.d4?
John Watson in the archives. It would be Black has let his huge advantage slip but
interesting to see how Reinderman this gives it all b ack an d more . ( Instead
planned on combating such an aggressive 35.c2 e2 36.c1 and White has
approach. ) 13...xf3+ 14.xf3 xg7 survived. ) 35...g6 0-1 ]
15.d2 f6 16.0-0-0 a5 and Black had 10...xb3
absolutely nothing to fear in Muzychuk, [ The other option is 10...d5 as the bishop
A-Reinderman, Wijk aan Zee 2010 ] isn't going anywhere so it's not essential to
7...0-0 8.h3 c6 9.0-0 a5 A new try for swap immediately. However I'm sceptical of
the site where both games f ocused on Black's chances. 11.e1 ( 11.f4 bc4
exchanging on e5 either immediately or with 12.xc4 xc4 13.b3 a5 14.d2 c6
9...a5 10.a4 thrown in. Colovic-Pesotsky and 15.h6 f5 16.xg7 xg7 17.h4 d7
Short-Timman are seen in the archives. I'll 18.ae1 gave White a pleasant advantage
give just the moves to the Short game without in Godena -Begovac, Switzerland 1996. He
annotations as it's definitely worth a look! can start attacking on the kingside while I'm
[ 9...a5 10.a4 dxe5 11.dxe5 d4 12.xd4 not sure how Black does anything but wait.)
xd4 13.e1 e6 14.d2 d5 15.f3 11...c6 12.f4 bc4 13.xc4 xc4 14.b3
c5 16.e4 b4 17.c4 b6 18.b3 a5 15.d2 b6 16.h6 f5 17.e2 c8
xc4 19.bxc4 e8 20.d1 c5 21.h4 18.ae1 d7 19.f4 c7 20.h4 fc8
b6 22.e3 c6 23.h6 h8 24.d8 b7 21.e6 fxe6 22.xg7 xg7 23.g5 h8
25.ad1 g7 26.8d7 f8 27.xg7 xg7 24.g4 h6 25.gxf5 hxg5 26.xg5 xh3
28.1d4 ae8 29.f6+ g8 30.h4 h5 27.xe6 1-0 Tiviakov-Aloma Vidal, Helsingor
31.h2 The start of a beautiful manoeuvre 2009 was a perfect attacking game by the
c8 32.g3 ce8 33.f4 c8 34.g5 Dutchman. ]
1-0 Short-Timman, Tilburg 1991. Black has 11.axb3 f5 I'd want to keep that pawn on d6
to watch out for the quick kingside attack so that Black can open up the centre with ...
which was employed in this game. ] dxe5 or with ...f6!? 12.e4
10.c3 [ 12.d1 was played in Svidler-De Firmian
[ 10.g5 d5 11.c3 f6!? true to his style, K a s p a r o v C h e s s 2 0 0 0 c6 13.g5
Nakamura goes for the most complicated Seeing as Black is planning on f6 anyway I
continuations. 12.f4 g5 13.g3 xb3 think this is too provocative. I'd prefer sitting
14.axb3 f5 15.h2 c6 16.d2 e8 the bishop on f4. d7 14.e4 f6! 15.f4?!
17.exf6 exf6 18.xe8 fxe8 19.f4 d3 fxe5 16.dxe5 when instead of
20.f2 h6 when Black had taken control in A) Finkel offers 16...xh3 17.g3 g4
Khachiyan-Nakamura, Las Vegas 2006 ] 18.exd6 exd6 19.xd6 xf3 ( 19...fe8!?
[ I suppose 10.e6 has to be investigated but GJ ) 20.gxf3 fe8;
B l a c k w a s c o m p l e t e l y o k a f t e r xb3 B) 16...g4 played in the game, ]
11.exf7+ xf7 12.axb3 h6 And I don't see 12...d7 So Black is passive but has a perfect
why W hite should be better here, there pawn structure and good potential to open up
doesn't seem to be a good way to exploit the centre if W hite gets carried away.
Black's king and Black has the two bishops Meanwhile e5 is a potential target. On the
and 'f' file. The old game De Firmian-Alburt, other hand White has more space and so can
Estes Park 1986 seemed to confirm that develop his forces more easily and so I'd say
opinion 13.c3 c6 14.e3 a6 15.fe1 chances are about balanced. White would like
f5?! 16.ad1?! ( 16.h4! ) 16...g5 to attack on the kingside but that isn't going to
17.d5?! And this just seems to give up a be so easy without a light squared bishop.
pawn xd5 18.xd5 cxd5 19.h4 g4 13.g3
20.h2 e6 21.g3 h5 22.c4 e4 23.d4 [ 13.g5 again allows f6! when the position
xd4 24.xd4 f6 25.e3 h7 26.f1 starts to open up for Black's bishop pair. ]
af8 27.d2 b5 28.a1 c8 29.cxd5 13...a6 14.e1 h6 Perhaps Zhukova was
exd5 30.xa6 c1 31.a7 g7 32.xf7 dreaming of playing ...g5 but I don't think this
580
move is essential and h6 is a potential 25.xh6! A good exchange sacrifice and

weakness so I would prefer something less Zhukova has to play very accurately now.
c o m m i t t a l . 15.h4 This plan doesn't prove xe1 26.xe1 f6 Otherwise 27.Ng5 was
very effective. winning. 27.exf6 xf6 28.e5 e8 29.g4
[ 15.c4!? grabs a bit more space when f5 30.xg7 xg7 31.h6+ g8
Zhukova shouldn't react with g5? as 16.h4 After a long series of forced moves for Black,
g4 17.h2 picks up the pawn. ] and top moves by W hite the position has
15...e6 16.e4 xe4! 17.xe4 dxe5 become critical for Zhukova. 32.e5
18.dxe5 d5 Now Black shouldn't have any [ I like the computer's suggestion of 32.h4!
problems at all and W hite has to watch out with the threat of h5 to gain access to f6
less e5 becomes a big weakness. 19.e2 with the subtle point that f7 33.e3!
b5 20.e4 and Black drops the exchange to Nh6 when
[ 20.xb5?! axb5 will only favour Black as she'll be a pawn down and still have the
the more pieces exchanged, the weaker e5 exposed king when you'd expect Adams to
will become. White needs to try to use that convert reasonably easily. ]
pawn to start an initiative on the kingside. ] 32...f7 33.h4 g5
20...d5 21.g4 Mickey declines the draw [ 33...g7 is best when Mickey has to repeat
offer c6 22.c3 d7?! It seems harsh to 34.h6+ g8 When the winning move
award this?!, especially as the computer likes s e e m s t o b e 35.e4 followed by bringing
it. However this doesn't help combat White's the quee n back to e3 so a s t o pla y th e
attack. knight fork. I presume both players were
[ It would make sense to take the open d file starting to get into time trouble at this point. ]
with 22...fd8 when she can try a5-a4 to 34.h6 e8
start proceedings on the queenside although [ 34...f8 would stop the fork on f6 but
she has to beware the plan used by Adams Zhukova can't defend after 35.xe6 h7
i n t h e g a m e . 23.f3 d5 ( 23...b5 36.f6+ ( 36.f6!? ) 36...8xf6 37.xf6
24.h4 is the same) 24.h4 g5 25.xg5! xh6 38.xh6+- when the extra two pawns
hxg5 26.xg5 ] are too much. ]
[ After studying the game for a while I've 35.xf5 Cashing in but Queen endgames are
come to the conclusion that it's here where notoriously tricky and the def ending side
Zh u k o v a s h o u l d f i n d a n i m p r o ve m e n t . always has good drawing chances. Therefore
W hite's plan of Nf3-Qh4 is dangerous so perhaps
22...b5 with the idea of exchanging queens [ 35.h4! gxh4 36.e4! was more accurate
looks strongest, e.g. 23.b4 ad8 24.f3 keeping the pressure up when in practice
c4 25.d4 The knight's been forced away this position must be impossible to defend. ]
from the kingside so now Black doesn't have 35...xf5 36.h5?!
to be fear being mated. d5 26.h4?! g5! [ 36.f6+ f7 37.xe8 xe8 picks up the
27.g3 xb4 28.h4 d3 29.hxg5 h5! exchange but would be difficult to convert.
a n d W h it e ' s a t t a ck h a s b e e n st o p p e d , The game continuation gives W hite less
leaving White with better chances. ] though. ]
23.f3 c5 24.h4 Suddenly Mickey has a 36...f8 37.h8+ e7 38.d4?!
dangerous attack. d3 [ 38.g7+ d6 ( 38...d8 39.f6 )
[ 24...h5 weakens the dark squares too 39.d4+ e7 would gain a move and
m u c h . A s a m p l e l i n e c o u l d r u n 25.g5 promise W hite some advantage after
xb3 26.ad1 a5 27.f4 a4 28.f6 c5 40.b4+ ]
29.g4! hxg4 30.hxg4 a3 ( 30...d7 38...d8 39.b4+ e8
31.xd7! xd7 32.h2+- ) 31.g5+- ] [ 39...d6 40.xb7 d7 and it's no longer
[ 24...g5? allows the typical 25.xg5! hxg5 clear whether White is even the one trying to
26.xg5 fd8 27.h7+ f8 28.h5 d7 win ]
29.h7+ e8 30.g5 f8 31.f6+ d8 40.xb7 d1+ 41.h2 f4+
32.ad1+- ] [ 41...a5! is the most accurate as 42.xc7?
581
is asking for trouble f4+ 43.xf4 gxf4 of 13.c3 and W hite wins: g4+ 14.f3
when only Black has winning chances. ] e3+ 15.e1 c2+ 16.f2 ) 13.xb8+
42.g3 d6 43.c4 b1 44.e4 d1! d7 A very unusual position with both kings
The mate threat forces White to take the draw. unsafe has arisen. I think White should take
45.xe6+ d8 46.f6+ c8 47.xa6+ a d r a w b y p e r p e t u a l : 14.b5+ c8
b8 48.b5+ a7 49.a4+ b8 50.b5+ 15.e8+ b7 16.b5+ c8 ]
a7 51.c5+ b8 52.b5+ Well defended 12...xa1 13.xb8+ d7 14.b5+
by Zhukova but Adams will rue not capitalising Again it's not clear if W hite has anything
on his big advantage. A success out of the better than perpetual.
opening f or Black though and as long as [ After 14.e2 h6 Black's chances are by
Black remembers that White's attack on the no means bad. ]
kingside is potentially strong and takes steps, 14...d8!?
he should be very happy. [ 14...c8 15.e8+ b7 16.e2
½-½ ( 16.c8+ ) 16...c6 17.f3 d6
and White's Queen is trapped! I can't see
the antidote against 18...Bg7. ]
573 B04 15.b8+ d7 16.b5+ It seems this line is a
Alekhine'S sufficient defence for Black although I
6.Qf3 suspect either side may improve here. All
[Alexander Volzhin] these lines need practical tests.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5

5.xe5 g6 6.f3 This line indeed looks quite 574 B04
interesting and I don't know why it's played so Almasi,Zoltan 2663
rarely. Let's analyse it. e6 7.c4 b4 De la Villa Garcia,Jesus Maria 2473
The only move. Pamplona 2000
[ 7...b6? is bad in view of 8.d5! ( 8.xb7 [Alexander Volzhin]
xd4 is not dangerous for Black as the
Rook on a8 is protected now.) 8...f5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
9.xf7! ( The immediate 9.g4! is not bad 5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.a4 dxe5 8.a5
either: g7 10.xf7 xg4 11.xg4 xf7 6d7 9.xf7+ xf7 10.g5+ g8 11.e6
12.e6+ with a clear edge.) 9...xf7 10.g4 e8 12.xc7 d8 13.xa8 exd4 14.0-0!?
and White wins the piece back and has an The latest development. In my opinion, this
undisputable advantage. ] move is more precise than the immediate 14.
8.xb7 xd4 c3. c6 15.c3 c5 16.b4 The critical
[ 8...c2+?! is worth considering as well position for the whole line. dxc3!?
(although it looks too risky). It leads to a [ In the game where 14.0-0 was introduced
very sharp position after 9.d1 xa1 (Gu ban ov-Ro man ovich , St. Pe te rsb urg
10.xa8 g7 11.d2 0-0 Just one line 1995) Black played 16...e6 17.b3 dxc3
(certainly not obligative): 12.xa7 xe5 18.xc3 cd4 19.c4 d7 20.e3
13.dxe5 c6 14.c5 d4 15.d3 g4+ A) 20...f5 was obligatory: 21.ad1 d6
16.f3 xf3 17.gxf3 xf3+ 18.xf3 xd3+ 22.b3 xc3 ( 22...xa8 23.b5! xb5
19.d2 c2 and Black's attack is very 24.xd6! exd6 25.xe6+ f8 26.xd6+
strong. ] f7 27.d5+ ) 23.c5! xa8 24.xd6
9.xa8 c2+ 10.e2 xe5+ 11.d1 exd6 ( 24...g7 25.b8! ) 25.xd6 e8
d4+ 12.d2 The few previous moves were 26.fd1! ( 26.xc3 is less precise in view
forced but now White has a choice: of h5! intending .. .Rh7-e7.) 26...a4
[ 12.xc2? i s t h e wo r s t : f5+ 13.b3 27.xe6 xb3 28.xe8+ f7 29.xh8
b6+ 14.c3 g7+ 15.d2 xb2 xd1 30.b8 and White's rook should be
and Black is winning ] easily superior to the Black minor pieces in
[ 12.d2 xa1 ( 12...xb2? is bad in view this ending.;
582
B) 20...xa8? A gross blunder. 21.xd4 Almasi-de la Villa and Blehm-Navarro White

xd4 22.ad1! Now Black can't avoid had a very comfortable edge in the endgame,
large material losses. f7 23.xd4 c8 where he could play for a win without any risk
24.b3 and Black resigned. ] of losing. Now it's Black's turn to find
17.xd8+ xd8 18.bxc5 c2 19.c3! im p ro ve m e n t s , a n d u n d o u b t e d ly we c a n
T h e o n l y m o v e , b u t a s t r o n g o n e ! xc3 expect some more exciting battles in this line
20.a3 in the future.
[ 20.a2!? as played in Blehm-Navarro Cia, ½-½
Avile s 2 0 0 0 m a y b e e ve n st ro n ge r: f5
21.c7 f7 ( 21...d3 is strongly met by
22.a3! and W hite wins: xf1 23.xc3 575 B04
e2 24.xc2 g4 25.b2 ) 22.d5 d4 Analysis 4...Nc6 in Alekhine
23.b4 xc5 24.xc2 e6 25.e3 b6 Kaissiber Recent Games
26.axb6 axb6 27.xc5 bxc5 28.e3 d3 [John Watson]
29.e1 and White has good winning
chances in the endgame. ] Here's some fascinating analysis supplied by
20...f6 21.c7 c6 22.d5 f7 23.xf6 Stefan Buecker in the Forum and elsewhere,
exf6 24.f3 Although the pawn on c2 gives b a se d u p o n m a t e ria l f ro m h is wo n d e rf u l
ce rt a in c o un t erch a nces, B lack is cle arly Kaissiber magazine, issues 19 and 20. It
fighting for a draw. h5 25.h3 h4 26.f2 f5 concerns the 'Haakert-Variation' of the
27.a6 bxa6 28.xa6 c8 29.h2 c7 A l e k h i n e . I h o p e t h a t I ' ve c o l l e c t e d t h e
30.d2 e5 31.dd6 d3 32.xf6+ g7 material properly for conversion into
33.g5 xc5 34.ac6 xc6 35.xc6 b3 ChessBase/PGN format at any rate, I've given
36.c3 d4 37.c7+ f8 38.xa7 e2! some of my own thoughts on the analysis and
Black defends very imaginatively. The Knight games. Many more details are to be found in
on e2 prevents the centralization of the White the issues mentioned above. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
King. 39.c7 g8 40.c4 f7 41.xh4 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6 5.c4 b6 6.e6
The only possible attempt to play for a win, fxe6 7.c3
c1 42.xc1 xc1 43.g4 e6 44.h7+ [ A n o t h e r im p o rt a n t m o ve h e re i s 7.e3
f6 45.h4 e2 46.g2 , which Buecker points out takes up 8 pages
[ 46.h5 deserves serious attention, as the in Juergen Fleck's article in Kaissiber 19!
endgame of Rook and two united passed Both that move and the h4-h5 idea
pawns vs a Knight and Bishop should be anticipate Black's ...g6/...Bg7 plan, and if g6
won for the Rook. ] 8.h4 g7 , you can make the case that
46...e5 47.a7 f4+ 48.g3 e2+ W hite's move Be3 is more effective than
49.f2 f4 50.a3 f6 51.a4 d5 Nc3, since it protects d4. Of course, that's
52.e4 c3 53.e1 d5 54.g3 f7 only the beginning of the story. ]
The endgame still looks very good for White, 7...g6 8.h4 g7 9.e3
but it's difficult to push the pawns and without [ White can also ignore the struggle for d4
doing this W hite can't make any progress. and attack directly, as in a fascinating game
55.a1 from this month's batch. Regez makes a
[ 55.f4 is strongly met by f6! ] point of deferring castling and playing ...e5
55...f6 56.a7 e3 57.a6 d5 58.a3 rather than walking into W hite's kingside
f7 59.a7+ f6 60.a5 f7 61.a6 f6 attack: 9.h5 e5 10.d5 d4 11.hxg6 hxg6
62.f4 e3! 63.f3 xg4 64.xe6+ xe6 12.xh8+ xh8
65.xg4 f6! Despite being a pawn down A) 13.d3 c6 ( 13...g4? 14.xg6+ f8
Bla ck eas ily h old s t he dra w in this p awn 15.xd4! ) 14.h4 ( 14.xg6+ d7
ending. Now we are able to draw certain is fine for Black) 14...d7!? 15.xg6
conclusions: undoubtedly the last word has c7 is unclear;
n o t b e e n s a i d ye t , b u t c u rre n t ly W h i t e ' s B) 13.xd4 exd4
chances seems to be pref erable. In both B1) 14.b5 c6!? ( 14...e5 ) 15.dxc6
583
bxc6 16.xd4 d7 17.d3 c5 18.b5 c o m p e l l e d t o p l a y d4! ( 21...f6

a6 19.c3 e6+; 22.0-0-0 d7 23.c5!; and 21...f7
B2) 14.d3 c6!? ( 14...c5! 15.xg6+ 22.xg4 give risk-free advantages to
d7 16.f5+ c7 17.b5+ b8 ) White, who has more than enough for an
15.a4! d7!? ( 15...cxd5 16.xg6+ exchange ) 22.b5 f6 ( 22...xc4?
d7 17.xb6+ xb6 18.h5! e5 23.xc4 xc4 24.d3 hits c4 and g6)
19.cxd5 ) 16.d2 e6 ( 16...g8 ) 23.xd4 exd4 24.e4 ( 24.e6+ xe6
17.dxc6+ bxc6 18.a5 b8 25.dxe6 e8 26.xg4 xc4 ) 24...f8
(Black stands satisfactorily here) 19.c5 25.0-0-0 g5+! 26.b1 f5 . This is a
g5 20.xb6 axb6 21.xb6+ c7 b i t o f a m e s s , b u t t h e s e c o n d p la y e r
( 21...d8! 22.f3 xc5 23.f8+ c7 seems to stand satisfactorily. Perhaps 16...
24.xc8 xc8 25.e7+ b8 ) g4 is the best course, albeit an unstable
22.cxd6+ xd6 23.xc8+ xc8 24.f3 one.;
b8 25.b3 g7 26.e4 h8 27.g3 D) 17.h5 Rf5!, ]
h2 28.f3 h6 ( 28...h5!= ) 29.d1 17.c5 c4 This is Buecker's idea.
a5+? 30.f1 g7 31.g1 h8 [ Fleck later decided that Black was in
32.c1 c5 33.xg6 f8? ( 33...xa2 serious trouble after 17...dxc5 18.xe5
34.b4 c4 ) 34.e2 e5 35.e4 h6? ( 18.0-0-0 a l s o l o o k s g o o d) 18...f7
36.b4! a3 37.xc5 1-0 Filev, G (2395)- ( 18...f6 19.xf6 xf6 20.h5 g4
Regez, M (2208)/Ohrid MKD 2009 ] is pe rh aps b et ter, bu t W hite sh ou ld b e
9...0-0 h a p p y wi t h 21.e4 f5 22.xf5 xf5
[ Another Regez game from the same 23.xc5 e8+ 24.d2 ) 19.0-0-0
tournament illustrates the idea of getting . .. , which indeed seems to be the case ]
e5 in before castling, but this time White has 18.c1
the centre under control: 9...e5 10.d5 d4 [ Buecker gives 18.xc4 xc4 19.cxd6
( 10...a5!? looks strange, but although cxd6 20.h5 f4 21.e4 f5 ]
Black can't capture on c4 yet, the future 18...dxc5 19.e2
threat to do so will influence the play, for [ 19.g3 d4 20.xc4 xc4 21.e3
example, 11.h5 c6 12.hxg6 hxg6 is worth a try. ]
13.xh8+ xh8 14.d2 e4!? , and the 19...e7 20.xf4 exf4+ 21.e2 d6
extended range of Black's bishop on h8 22.0-0
combines with central pressure to equalize) [ 22.xc5 is a good try, for example, d7
11.xd4 exd4 12.xd4 xd4 ( 12...e5 23.f1 e8 , and Buecker's most important
13.dxe6 0-0 may well be best) 13.xd4 e5 line is 24.h5 ( 24.d3!?; 24.e1 b5
14.dxe6 0-0 15.h5 f6 16.xf6 xf6 25.c2 e5 26.a4 c4 27.h3 g4
17.hxg6 hxg6 18.b5 and White gets into 28.c3 , and here e7 threatens the hard-
c 7 wit h t h e b e t t e r ga m e f o l lo win g xe6 to-stop ... f3, perhaps in conjunction with ..
19.xc7 af8 20.b3 Brenjo, S (2495) - Qh5. ) 24...b6 25.b4 ( or 25.c1! ) 25...a5
Regez, M (2208)/Ohrid MKD 2009. ] 26.d2 ( 26.d4 ) 26...e4 27.c2 f5
10.h5 e5 11.d5 d4 12.xd4 exd4 28.g1 c8 , when 29.e1 b4 30.h2
13.xd4 xd4 14.xd4 e5 15.e3 g5 favours W hite. In fact, this note requires
16.h6 f4 serious improvement for black, as W hite
[ Fleck later suggested 16...g4! intending has various moves which look
A) or 17.d3 f5; advantageous. ]
B) or 17.e4 f5 18.g5 f6; 22...xe2 23.e1 Buecker gives various
C) R a j T i s c h b i e r e k s u g g e s t e d 17.e2 alternatives, but by now it's likely that Black
with the ideas f5 ( 17...f5 18.d3 ) stands fine. h5
18.h5 . The latter line doesn't seem so [ 23...c4 24.xc4 xc4 25.e8+ f7
bad after g6 , and if 19.g5 f4 26.ae1 d6 27.h8 f6 28.xh7 f5
. T he W hite has th e coun te r 20.xg6+! 29.xc7 h8 with a double-sided game. ]
hxg6 21.g3 , when Black seems 24.xc5 xh6 25.xc7 f6 26.e6
584
[ 26.ac1! , when f5 27.e6 xe6 9.h4! g6

28.xd6 ( 28.dxe6 c8 ) 28...e8 29.dxe6 [ 9...e6 10.c4 b6 11.b3 g6 isn't out of
xe6 gains White a tempo, although it's still the question, but 12.c3 g7 13.f4 0-0
in Black's favour. ] 14.d3 retains a space advantage. This
26...xe6 27.xd6 e8 - Buecker space-for-solidity trade-off is characteristic
[ Actually, 27...d8! 28.xe6+ xe6 of the 4...dxe5 system. ]
29.dxe6 e8 is a still better course. ] 10.c4 b6 11.c3 e6 12.g3! This protects
the knight on h4 from discovered attacks, and
restricts the influence of a bishop on d6. The
576 B04 light square weaknesses don't count for much
Anand,Viswanathan 2799 because Black's light squared bishop will be
Carlsen,Magnus 2733 gone. e7 13.e3 c7 14.xg6 hxg6
Amber Blindfold rapid (7) 22.03.2008 15.b3! d8 16.fd1 0-0 17.ac1 e5
[John Watson] 18.d5 bd7 Black has to cover c5. Clearly
White has won the opening, since his bishops
Carlsen continues to play the Alekhine with are both influential, but it's not the end of the
4...dxe5 5 Nxe5 c6, so we'll look at a couple w o r l d y e t : 19.f3 c5 20.xc5 xc5
more games, unfortunately in Blindfold Rapid! 21.a3 b6 22.b4 e4! 23.e2 b7?
Both Karajakin and Anand win against him, [ 23...cd7 was better because of the
but Black gets playable positions out of the following mini-tactic: ]
opening. The problem is that he is always 24.xa7! a8 25.d6 xa7 26.dxc7 c8
s o m e wh a t wo r s e w i t h o u t m a n y p o s i t i v e 27.c5!? bxc5 28.b5 cxb5 29.xb5 xa2
chances. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 30.f1 (now it's obvious that White is winning)
4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 g5 31.a1 xa1 32.xa1 d8 33.cxd8+
[ The famous (due to the result) Topalov- xd8 34.c3 e3 35.f3 g4 36.f4 g5
Carlsen, Morelia/Linares 2008 went 6.d3 37.fxg5 h7 38.e4 e8 39.g2 g7
d7 7.xd7!? ( 7.f3 ) 7...xd7 8.0-0 g6 40.f1 e2+ 41.e1 e5 42.c1 xg5
9.d2 (modest, and allowing easy equality. 43.xc5 xc5 44.xc5 f5 45.xe2 f6
( 9.c4 is more natural) 9...g7 10.f3 0-0 46.e3 f7 47.d3
( 10...g4 at this point runs into 11.c3 0-0 1-0
12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 ) 11.e1?! ( 11.h3! )
11...g4 12.c3 c5 ( or 12...e5! 13.dxe5
e8 ) 13.e4 ( 13.dxc5 can be answered by 577 B04
xc3! 14.bxc3 xc3 ) 13...cxd4 14.cxd4 Anand,Viswanathan 2801
e6 and Black was already better. If only all Carlsen,Magnus 2714
Alekhines could work out so well! ] World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (1) 21.11.2007
6...d7 [John Watson]
[ 6...f5 was analysed two months ago
games by Carlsen versus Anand, Rublevsky, A n a n d e n t e r s i n t o a w i l d s i d e l i n e t h a t
Lupulescu, and Grischuk! Carlsen tries Kasparov either invented or popularised.
something different this time. ] Maybe it's the best way to get some
7.f3 7f6 advantage? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
[ We looked at 7...g6 8.c4 c7 9.c3 g7 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 An interesting
10.0-0 0-0 in this column (in a note to choice, because Anand has used 6 Bc4 in the
Anand-Carlsen, World Blitz 2008), where I past. f5 This move has become the main
recommended 11.f4 ] one by far.
8.0-0 f5 You can argue that this is a more [ 6...d7 is the serious option, played by
positive way to cede the two bishops than Mamedyarov and Miles, for example. The
[ 8...g4 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 as in our other usual, frustrating, response by W hite is
game Karjakin, S-Carlsen, M, Nice FRA simply 7.f3 , refusing exchanges. Since
2008. ] no one seems to playing Black here (and I
585
don't know why!), I'll content myself with a also had

ChessPublishing game and a few notes by [ 10.b3 xe5 11.dxe5 and it's unclear
John Cox: g6 8.c4 c7 9.c3 g7 wh o s e p o s i t i o n l o o k s s t u p i d e r ! W h i t e
10.0-0 0-0 11.g5 Miles had the position probably stands better. ]
after Black's tenth quite a few times, for 10...g6 11.c3 g7 12.e3 0-0 13.d2
example ( 11.f4 [jw: I like this simple line] b5! A typical light square grab via a pawn
c5 12.d5 e5 13.g5 f6 14.e3 f7 15.a3 sa crif ice . 14.cxb5 cxb5 15.xb5 xb5
f8 16.b1 e8 17.b4 b6 when Black 16.xb5 d5
managed to hang on in the complications [ Or 16...f6 17.h3 d5 ]
in Degraeve-Miles, Mondariz 2000, although 17.e2 c8 18.b3 f6 19.e5 e4!
th in gs lo o k a lit t le ro p e y a t th is p o in t .) These may not be the optimal moves, but they
11...e6 12.e3 f6 13.h3 b6 are all very logical. 20.b2 e6 21.g5! d6
On ly he re d oe s t h e gam e d e via te f ro m 22.h4 c3 23.g3 xe2 24.xe2 c7
Zarnicki-Miles, Oviedo rapid 1993, which 25.c1 a6+ 26.e1 fc8 27.xc7 xc7
went on ( 13...c7 14.d2 d8 15.fe1 28.f4 f8 29.g4 b4+ 30.d2 d6
h5 16.f1 b6 17.ad1 b7 18.c1 31.c3 g2! Threatening mate on f1 and
ac8 with approximate equality.) 14.b3 distracting W hite's knight from f6. 32.e3
c7 15.fe1 b7 16.ad1 fd8 17.f1 f3!? Again maybe best was
a6 18.a4 ab8 19.a3 b5 An extremely [ 32...e4 ]
typical break in these positions, although 33.c4 d5 34.xd6 xd6 35.xc7 xc7
played, like here, as a pawn sacrifice it is 36.a3 h2 37.e3 h1+?! Opposite-
naturally rarer. 20.g5 ( White cannot win coloured bishops seems to be the motif of the
the p awn d irect ly on acco unt o f 20.axb5 d e ca d e ! W i t h li t t l e t im e , t h e re ' s n o t t h e
cxb5 21.cxb5 xf3 22.gxf3 axb5 ) slightest chance of playing accurately. 38.d2
20...xg5 21.xg5 but now the attack on b1 39.xa7 b2+ 40.d3 b1+ 41.c3
e7 and b5 does force the win of a pawn. e6 e1+ 42.b2 e2+ 43.a3 Did you follow
22.axb5 cxb5 23.cxb5 axb5 24.xb5 that? g7 44.f4 b5 45.e5+ f8
Bauer, C (2641)-Mamedyarov, S (2646)/ 46.c5+ 1-0. Probably Black forfeited. An
Merida ESP 2005/ 'Black has compensation incredibly high-quality game under the
in the form of White's two weaknesses on d4 circumstances.
and b2 which ought to be enough to hold 1-0
the balance, although it's hard to believe in
more than that.' [jw: Black went on to win] ]
7.g4!? As played by Kasparov and Polgar. 578 B04
Our other two games feature 7 0-0. e6 8.c4 Arakhamia Grant,Ketevan
[ 8.f4 f6 9.d3 f7 10.0-0 a6 11.c3 Baburin,Alexander
xc3 12.bxc3 g6 was complex in J Polgar- 4NCL, West Bromwich 18.10.2004
Short, Bled 2002. This looks like fun! ] [John Cox]
8...c7
[ 8...b6 9.b3!? (a pawn sac) ( 9.a4!? a5!? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
10.c5 d5 11.c3 may give something, in 5.xe5 c6 The fashionable Miles variation.
view of d7 12.c4 , but who knows?) 6.d2 A rare try. Britain's best have been
9...f6! 10.d3 xd4 11.b2 d8 12.c3 stepping on Black with the alternatives just
a6 13.d2 c7 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 15.e3 lately:
f7 16.f4! b8 17.h4 e6 18.e4 [ 6.e2 g6 7.0-0 g7 8.f3 g4 9.e1
Kasparov, G (2838)-Short, N (2682)/Moscow 0-0 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 d7 12.c4 5b6
RUS 2002, and here Flear recommends the 13.c5 c8 14.c3 e5 15.e3 e7 16.d5
clever d5! with an advantage for Black. cxd5 17.xd5 f5 18.c1 h4 19.g3
The game was drawn. ] d8 20.b3 c8 21.xb7 xe3 22.xc8
9.g1!? d7 10.f3 This is the usual way to was Hunt-Skripchenko, Calvia 2004,
torture Black (avoiding exchanges), but White although it's fair to say that Black's play
586
throughout this game verged on the 16.g3 xd1 17.xd1 0-0-0 18.g5 c5
appalling: starting at the beginning, though, 19.xd8 xd8 20.xg7 was the chaotic
the idea of this old-style Miles variation (i.e. encounter Zapata-Grunberg, 2002, which
5... c6 and 6...g6 as opposed to the highly was shortly drawn. The game continuation
fashionable 6...Bf5) is to go ...Nd7, retreat swiftly makes apparent the merits of 10
the d5 knight to c7, and push c5.8...Bg4 Bd2! ]
does not fit into this plan at all this 10...b4+ A safer alternative was 10.. .Ne7,
manoeuvre is drawn from the Kengis system intending 11...Qd5 next. The text is tempting
(5...g6) but there White's bishop is on c4. but whether it is actually good is another
11...e6, 13...Nd5, and any one of several matter. 11.d1
moves on move 14 were also better, while ] [ 11.c3 leads to a comfortable advantage for
[ 6.d3 d7 7.xd7 xd7 8.0-0 e6 9.c4 Black af te r xc3 12.xf5 ( 12.a3 a5
f6 10.c3 e7 11.f4 0-0 12.e2 c5 13.xf5 exf5 14.0-0 d5 15.xf5 0-0
13.dxc5 xc5 14.ad1 b6 15.e5 c6 16.b4 c7 is similar.) 12...d5+ 13.e2
16.xf6 gxf6 17.xh7+ xh7 18.h5+ exf5 14.xf5 0-0 ]
was Adams-Maki Uuro, Izmir 2004. Normal [ 11.d2 xd2+ 12.xd2 b4 is also very
is 8...g6 rather than ....e6, as in nice for Black. ]
Stefansson-Gausel, Aarhus 2003. Having 11...e7 Again Black has alternatives, for
said that, it's not quite clear to me how example it's not clear at all that just 11....Qf6
England's finest intended to put Black to was bad. (12 Bxf5 exf5, or 12 c4 Nb6 13 g4
the sword if he played 11...Qb6 and grabbed Bxd3 14 Qxf6 gxf6 15 Nxd3 Be7 16 b3 Rd8).
the pawn on offer. There also might have But Baburin must already have had his next
been something to be said f or 10...Qc7 move in mind. 12.c3
rather than 10...Be7, securing the h2-b8 [ 12.g4 xd4 is bad, but now White is
diagonal (quite a common theme in this 5... hoping for 12...Bd6 13 g4 Bxe5 14 gxf 5
c6 system, by the way). ] when she stands well, for example, 14...Bf6
6...d7 7.df3 xe5 8.xe5 f5 9.f3 15 fxe6 fxe6 16 Re1. But Baburin has a
If White wants to achieve anything then she terrific shock in store. ]
really has to try to make something of her 12...0-0!? 13.g4 The critical moment in the
advanced knight in a hurry. Moves like 9 Bd3 game: with the text W hite admits that her
or 9 Bc4 leave Black able to develop opening has been a failure and settles for a
comfortably. An alternative is decidedly inferior position. After 13 Bxf5 Nxf5
[ 9.xf7 xf7 10.f3 Black then needs to 14 cxb4 Qxd4+ 15 Nd3 Rad8 White cannot
avoid e6 ( 10...g6 allows an immediate hold on to the knight, for example 16 Ke2 (16
draw with 11 Qg3+ and 12 Qf3, which might Kc2 Qc4+ is the same) Qc4 17 Kd2 Rd5 and
well be White's best idea, as the tempting double rooks. But the critical move had to be
11.g4 seems to fall short, for example xc2 [ 13.cxb4 , when to be honest I don't see
12.e2 a5+ 13.d2 a4 14.e6+ f6 that Black has enough compensation for his
15.g5 xd4 16.gxf6 e4+; 10...e6 piece, for example xd4 14.e3 xb4
is also a possibility although evidently White ( 14...d5 15.e2 xg2 16.d2 f6
has a considerable initiative, for example 17.f3 xf3+ 18.xf3 xd3+ 19.xd3
11.c4 g6 12.0-0 d6 13.xd5 cxd5 is hopeless) 15.d2 d4 16.xf5 xe5
14.f4+ c6 15.c4 ) 11.g4 b4 12.gxf5 17.d3 ad8 18.c2 Black has a lot of
xc2+ 13.d1 xd4 ( 13...Nxa1? 14 fxe6+ moves here and one can see that White will
just loses) 14.fxe6+ xe6 15.g4+ f5+ have to be careful for some time, but my
when Black's exposed king is the more computer seems to see off anything I try for
serious, for example 16.d2 g6 17.c4+ Black with some ease, f or example d6
d7 18.c3 c7+ 19.c2 g7 20.ad1 ] ( 18...d7 19.xh7+ xh7 20.xd7 d5
9...e6 10.d3 21.f3; 18...d5 19.f4; 18...d4 19.e2
[ 10.d2 b6 11.0-0-0 xd4 12.d3 a3 c5+ 20.b1 d6 21.c2 all look fairly
13.c4 xd3 14.xa3 f5 15.c4 g4 comfortable for White too) 19.e2 d5
587
20.d2 It may very well be that I'm not doing 42.g2 f6 43.e3 f5 44.c5+ f7
Baburin's idea any kind of justice here, 45.d2 xf4 46.d7+ g6 47.xa5 h2+
though - certainly Arakhamia must have 48.d1 h5 49.c6 h4 50.d8 h3
thought accepting the sacrifice was pretty 51.xe6 e3+ 52.xe3 52 Kc1 Bh6 was no
grim before settling for what happens in the better, and nor was 52 Ke1 Bg3 mate. xe3
ga m e . I t wo u l d b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o k n o w 53.g7+ f5 54.g3 e4 55.d4 d2+
whether this was preparation - on either side 56.e1 f2+ 57.xd2 xg3 58.e2 f2
- or an over-the-board punt. ] 0-1
13...xd3 14.xd3 d6 15.c2 d5
16.h4 b5 Always thematic in these structures,
securing the d5 knight, but especially here 579 B04
with the W hite king exposed on c2. 17.d2 Bauer,Christian 2641
c7 18.g5 I'm not at all sure about this, Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2646
giving f5 away. It looks more natural to me to 49th TCh-Honor Final (1) 10.09.2005
try 18 Rad1 and Kb1, but there's no doubt [John Cox]
that Black is better. c5 19.dxc5 xc5
20.e4 d6 21.ac1 c4 A notably cal m 1.e4 f6 Good to see Mamedyarov hasn't
solution. Black was surely also better after a been put off by the unfortunate loss to
move like 21..Rac8, but Baburin calculates Sutovsky given in September, and indeed he's
that in the ending White's pawn advances will b e e n d o i n g ve r y we l l wi t h t h e A l e k h in e ,
simply be weaknesses, and he also has a beating Harikrishna and Potkin besides this
specific idea for driving White's pieces into game and a couple of other draws and wins
p a s s i v i t y . 22.xc4 bxc4 23.b4 e7 against lower-rated players. 2.e5 d5 3.d4
24.b1 The threat was .... a5, but possibly the d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 d7
strange-looking 24 Na6 was a better chance 6...Bf5 is the more common way nowadays:
f or def ence. c5 25.f4 While here Fritz is the text is the way Miles used to play the
decidedly more taken by 25 Be3, which does variation. 7.f3 g6 8.c4 c7 9.c3 g7
at least unload White's pathetic bishop and 10.0-0 0-0 11.g5 Miles had the position
give birth to an e-pawn which can control d5 af ter Bla ck's ten th quite a f ew t imes , f o r
and f5 (at least it does if Black plays 25... example
Bxe 3 2 6 f xe 3 m a ybe h e sh ou ld n 't ? ) fd8 [ 11.f4 c5 12.d5 e5 13.g5 f6 14.e3
26.h2 a5 27.c2 f5 28.h5 d3 29.e1 f7 15.a3 f8 16.b1 e8 17.b4 b6
ad8 30.c1 d1 31.hh1 1d5 32.h6 when Black managed to hang on in the
I must say I don't understand this move, and complications in Degraeve-Miles, Mondariz
since Black eventually wins the game by 2000, although things look a little ropey at
taking the pawn on h6 and queening his own h- this point. ]
pawn, it's fair to say that whatever 11...e6 12.e3 f6 13.h3 b6 Only here
Arakhamia's idea was the game didn't does the game deviate from Zarnicki-Miles,
demonstrate it. It's always easy to sit tight in Oviedo rapid 1993, which went on
someone else's passive position, but either [ 13...c7 14.d2 d8 15.fe1 h5
repeating with Rh2 or even possibly Ne3 was 16.f1 b6 17.ad1 b7 18.c1 ac8
su re ly pref e ra ble . gxh6 33.gxh6 f8 with approximate equality. ]
34.h2 d1 35.xd1 And here 35 Rhh1 was 14.b3 c7 15.fe1 b7 16.ad1 fd8
surely necessary: after the text White loses a 17.f1 a6 18.a4 ab8 19.a3 b5
pawn an d t he game is ef f ective ly over. I An extremely typical break in these positions,
imagine that time trouble was affecting the although played, like here, as a pawn sacrifice
p l a y h e r e a b o u t s . xd1 36.b3 d6 it is naturally rarer. 20.g5
Decisive White's rook is outnumbered. 37.f2 [ White cannot win the pawn directly on
cxb3 38.axb3 xh6 39.e3 h1 40.c2 accou n t o f 20.axb5 cxb5 21.cxb5 xf3
h5 A classy manoeuvre, controlling f5 to get 22.gxf3 axb5 ]
the knight back into play. 41.c4 c7 20...xg5 21.xg5 but now the attack on e7
588
an d b 5 d o e s f o rce t h e win o f a p a wn . e6 580 B04

22.axb5 cxb5 23.cxb5 axb5 24.xb5 Colovic,Aleksandar 2493
Thus, but Black has compensation in the form Pesotsky,Vitaly 2371
of W hite's two weaknesses on d4 and b2 IX EICC Plovdiv BUL (8) 29.04.2008
which ought to be enough to hold the balance, [John Watson]
although it's hard to believe in more than that.
dc8 25.c1 b6 26.f4 a8 27.d6 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
a5 28.e7 d5 29.xb7 xf4 30.e4 5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.e2 0-0
h6 31.b1 ab8 32.f1 b4 [ 7...c6 8.bd2 0-0 9.h3 is Motwani-Tan,
By now Black has pretty good compensation: Tilburg 2000, to be found with notes in the
as usual the opposite-coloured bishops assist Archive. ]
the player who has made a positional 8.h3 c6 9.0-0 dxe5 I'm not sure how
sacrifice. 33.g3 h5 34.d3 d8 35.e5 meaningful the insertion of a4/...a5 is in these
a7 36.b5 b8 37.c3 f8 38.a1 f6 lines.
39.a7 a8 40.a6 d5 41.f3 c7 [ The outrageously famous game Short-
42.xa8 xa8 43.aa5 xb2 44.c6 c8 Timman, Tilburg 1991 (re-annotated by Alex
45.e2 xe2 46.xe2 d5 47.a6 b4 Volzhin for ChessPub)went 9...a5 10.a4
An excellent strategic decision the knight dxe5 11.dxe5 d4 12.xd4 xd4 13.e1
looked pretty on d5 but the best balance for e6 14.d2 and there are two examples:
Black is in fact rook and opposite-coloured A) theoretically important is Dimitrov-
bishops. 48.xb4 xb4 Whether White Marinkovic, Tivat 1995, the main game in
ought to lose this endgame with best play is C o x ' s b o o k : 14...d7 15.f3 c5
very hard to say but it's definitely not easy to 16.e3 e7 17.g5 c5 18.e4!?
hold it: if d4 goes the extra protection Black's I'm not sure that this does much. Better
f7 has compared to f2 makes a big difference. looks ( 18.c3; or 18.h4! c6 19.e3 e7
49.a4 e7 50.f3 c2 51.f1 g7 52.h4 20.h5 , which loosens up Black's kingside
[ 52.d5? c5 illustrates the point. ] a bit before shifting pieces over there.)
52...h5 53.e4 d2 54.e1 b2 55.c4 18...c6 19.h4 fe8 20.h2 b4!
b4+ 56.f1 a5 57.d5 This doesn't help, 21.xb4 axb4 22.a5 d7 23.g4 h5
but Black was all set up for ...Bb6 and ...Rd2. 24.f6+ xf6 25.exf6 f8 with equality.;
f5 58.d3 d2 59.e2 xd5 60.c6 e5 B) 14...d5 (as in the Short game)
61.c4 d1+ 62.g2 c1 63.d5 d1 15.f3 c5 16.e4! b4! 17.c4! b6
64.c4 e4 65.a6 b4 66.a7+ f6 18.b3! xc4 19.bxc4 , an assessment
67.a6+ d6 68.b5 d2 69.f1 g5 that Volzhin explains at length and that
70.e1 d5 71.c4 d4 72.hxg5+ xg5 you can find in the Archives. This is the
73.e2 h4 74.gxh4+ xh4 75.c6 g5 well-known king-walk game with Kh2-g3-f4-
76.c4 d5 77.f1 e5 78.b4 d8 g5. ]
79.b5 f4 Black is winning by now - the 10.dxe5 d4 11.xd4 xd4 12.e1 e6
king is just too snug here. 80.b4 a8 13.d2 d7 As opposed to Timman's ...Nd5
81.b1 a2 82.c4 c2 83.e2 d6 idea. The obvious point should be ... Bc6, but
84.d1 e5 85.b1 c5 86.b3 f4 87.f3 Black also uses the bishop to support his
c1+ 88.g2 g1+ 89.h2 e1 90.b2 queen: 14.f3 c5 15.e3 b5!?
d4 91.c2 e3 92.b5 d4 93.fxe4 f3 [ a) 15...a5 16.d2!? c5 17.e4!
94.h3 f4 95.e5 h1+ 96.h2 b1 has the idea Qh4 and Bh6, with the tactical
97.d2 e3 98.d3 b8 point c6 18.b4! ]
0-1 [ b) 15...e7 is like the Dimitrov game
(without a4/. ..a5): 16.ad1 h6 17.d2
fd8! 18.c3 c6 19.c5 e8 20.d4
keeps a small edge. ]
16.d2 c6 17.d4 a6 18.xc6 bxc6
19.c4!? This looks logical, trying to restrict
589
B l a c k ' s k n i g h t a n d d e n y i t a cc e s s t o d 5 A) 7...f5 The problem with this move is

nevertheless, that White may gain time on the bishop for
[ 19.ad1! d5 20.g5 masters the d-file a kingside assault. 8.bd2 a5 9.e2!?
and prepares c4 anyway. ] True to form, Sulskis goes his own way.
19...fd8 20.c3 d7 ( 9.a4 would be the automatic response
[ 20...h6! would stop Bg5, although White when I'd plump for White although Black's
still has a nice advantage with space and position is solid.) 9...a4 10.d1 d7
the bishops. ] 11.h3 h6 12.g4!? Don't say I didn't warn
21.g5 db8 22.ad1 c5 23.f3 b7 you. xd2+ 13.xd2 e6 ( 13...e4
24.e3 a5 25.e2 a6 26.e3?! is more logical but perhaps the Russian IM
[ 26.d4! must be good, heading towards was scared of 14.e6! xe6 15.g5 c6
the kingside, since every Black piece is far 16.f3 h6 17.xf7 d3 18.xd3 xf7
away from defence on the other side of the wh ich is m essy b ut I 'd p re f e r W h it e's
board! ] bishops. ) 14.h6 c4 15.c1 b5 16.b3
26...xb3 27.d7! f8 28.axb3 xe5? axb3 17.axb3 b6 18.g5 c6 19.f4
[ 28...ad8 forces simplification: 29.ed2 And W hite had taken complete control.
xd7 30.xd7 c8! 31.xc6! xe5 32.f4 S u ls ki s , S - Ch e t ve r ik , M . Ca p p e ll e l a
xb2 33.xc7 and White still has initiative, Grande 2006.;
but it's not an easy win. ] B) 7...g7 8.bd2 a5 9.0-0 0-0 10.e1
29.h6 g7?? a6 ( 10...g4 11.h3 xf3 12.xf3 e6
[ But 29...h8 30.xf8 xf8 31.xc7 13.g5 d7 14.d2 is given by Finkel
is pretty bad. ] and indeed I like W hite's prospects of
30.xg7 xg7 31.xe6 ad8 32.f6+ mating the Black king here.) 11.c2 c5
h6 33.e4! Mate follows. 12.a3 Preventing that a6 knight from
1-0 jumping back into the game. cxd4 13.cxd4
c7 14.h3 e6 15.f1 a4 16.h4! d7
17.h5 c8 18.g3 Resembled a French.
581 B04 White's kingside initiative should not be
Corrales Jimenez,Fidel 2590 underestimated but Black was probably
Nogueiras Santiago,Jesus 2570 doing ok. Almasi, Z-Varga, Z Heviz 2003. ]
45th Capablanca Mem Premier (3) 12.06.2010 [ 7.f4 was Smyslov's choice here and thus
[Gawain Jones] should also be considered.
A) 7...g4 was Varga's choice. That game
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 continued: 8.a4 e6 9.a5 6d7 10.bd2
5.c4 b6 6.b3 d5!? A speciality of the c5 11.h3!? A pawn sacrifice xf3 12.xf3
Hungarian Grandmaster Zoltan Varga, this c4 13.a4 ( 13.a6!? is an intriguing
move ha sn't b een co vered previo usly o n option forcing Black's knight to the wrong
ChessPublishing. The move is fairly rare and circuit. ) 13...xa5+ 14.c3 b5 15.c2
Finkel calls it a "dubious variation" in his b6 16.h4 h5 17.g4!? c6 18.g5
a n n o t a t io n s f o r Ch e ssB a se , b u t a ga m e and W hite's attack was worth far more
played between two Grandmasters has to be than the missing a pawn. Pedersen, D-
taken seriously. Perhaps with the problems Varga, Z Budapest 1996.;
Reinderman faced against Nisipeanu more B) 7...g7 8.c1 h6 9.c3 a6 10.0-0
players will be attracted to this more solid g4 11.bd2 c5 12.c2 c7 13.h3
move although after analysing this game I xf3 14.xf3 e6 15.dxc5! Another motif
can't say the line looks very rosy for Black. taken from the French, d4 is a superb
7.h3 White has tried various setups here but outpost for a White knight. xc5 16.e1
this move to prevent ...Bg4 is sensible. cd7 17.d4 g5 18.b5 c6 19.d6+
[ 7.c3 has generally been the choice of the f8 20.g3 and the former World
strongest White players and has potential to Champion had a very pleasant position.
transpose to the game. Smyslov, V-Segal, A Sao Paulo 1978. ]
590
[ 7.0-0 has been the most common option Bg4. ) 14...exf6 15.h4 g4 16.1h2 d7
when Varga has tried various replies. c6 17.xg4 xg4 18.e7 ac8 19.f1 fe8
( 7...g4 8.bd2 a5 9.c3 a4 10.c2 e6 20.h2 xh4 21.g3 h5 22.d1 xh2+
11.e1 c5 12.d3 cxd4 13.cxd4 c6 23.xh2 1/2-1/2 Rozentalis, E-Krasenkow,
14.h3 f5 1/2-1/2 Istratescu, A-Varga, Z M Gausdal 2007 was an interesting final
Herculane 1996 must be deemed a success positio n but I have a f eeling th e quee n
for Black.; 7...a5 8.c3 g7 9.c2 0-0 should really be stronger than rook, knight
10.g5!? h6 11.f3 g4 12.h3 xf3 and pawn here. ]
13.xf3 e6 14.a3 c5 15.e3 cxd4 8...g7 9.0-0 0-0 10.e1 I like this flexible
16.cxd4 c6 17.ac1 e7 18.d3 a4 move and I think this position is probably
19.e2 b4 20.b1 fc8 21.b5 critical to the viability of this variation for
Acs, P-Varga, Z Budapest 1996 was Black. His position is fairly solid but it's hard
unpleasant for Black who eventually to engineer any pawn breaks. Generally, in
regretted the weakness he made on his this type of position, Black tries for ...c5 but
tenth move.) 8.c3 g7 9.e1 0-0 10.bd2 here that will create a big hole on b5 which in
h8 11.f1 f6 12.exf6 exf6 13.g3 d6 turn might result in a knight on the super
14.c2 f5 15.b3 f4 16.f1 g4 17.h3 outpost on d6. Alternatively Black can play for
h5 18.d3 ae8 19.b2 c8 ...f6 but then he has to watch out for White
1/2-1/2 Byrne, R-Ljubojevic, L Buenos Aires razzing the h pawn down the board as the g6
1978 was an old game that was respectable pawn will prove very vulnerable.
for Black although White still holds an edge [ 10.c3 has been played in the past which
in the final position after 20.b4!? ] also looks acceptable providing the knight
7...a5 This is the logical way to play the drops back to e2. A couple of games have
position but Black has also tried without the continued: a6
pawn thrust. A) 11.e3 h6 I don't like this move.
[ 7...g7 8.c3 f5 Again I'm not totally sure Understandably Black wasn't keen to allow
a b o u t t h is m o ve a n d p e r h a p s Jo va n k a Qd2 and Bh6 but this really weakens both
should have tried playing as Sulskis did in h a n d g p a w n s . 12.e2 looks strong,
the 7.c3 note? 9.f4 ( 9.bd2 would be my when I'm not really sure what Black is to
suggestion, not fearing d3 as White can d o , f o r e x a m p l e : ( Instead 12.h2
always play 10.c2 ) 9...c6 10.0-0 0-0 was played in Lengyel, B-To Nhat Minh
11.a4 a5 12.c2 e6 13.b3 xc2 Budapest 2006.) 12...c6 13.d2 h7
14.xc2 c5 15.dxc5 d7 16.e1 c6 14.xa5 and White has an extra pawn.;
17.b4 a5 18.d2 ( 18.b5 e7 19.c6 bxc6 B) 11.f4 h6 Again I confess I don't like
20.a3 is a safer way of playing, although I this move despite the expert in the
d o u b t B l a c k h a s a n y r e a l p r o b l e m s .) variation trying it. Perhaps the idea is
18...axb4 19.cxb4 f6! The position reminds 12.d2 ( 12.e1 Heinatz, T-Varga, Z
me of certain lines of the Caro Kann but Budapest 1996.) 12...g5 13.g3 b4
Black's initiative is easily worth the but now 14.d1! and White will expel the
sacrificed pawn and indeed White can't hold knight from b4 followed by playing for f2-f4
on to the pawn anyway. Houska, J - when Black's king looks too vulnerable. ]
Golubenko, V Crete 2007. ] 10...a6
8.a4 [ 10...c6 has been tried by Varga when he
[ 8.c3 also resulted in a small White edge. reach ed t his position . Th e mo st recen t
g7 9.0-0 0-0 10.c2 a6 11.e1 c6 game co ntinued : 11.c3 ( 11.c3 a6
12.bd2 c7 13.f1 ( 13.b3!? 12.e2 c7 13.c3 e6 14.c2 f5
looks like an interesting alternative.) 13...f6 15.exf6 exf6 Borgo, G-Varga, Z Budapest
14.exf6 ( White could also wait before taking 1999 also looked strong for W hite when I
with 14.a4 whe n if B lack plays e6 would try 16.h4! loosening up Black's king.)
White can start aggressive proceedings with 11...a6 12.bd2 c7 13.f1 e6
15.h4! seeing as Black no longer has ... 14.h4 c5 15.h5 and I'd always pick White
591
as I like his dynamic chances. Agopov, M- [ 21...f5 is the computer's suggestion to stop
Varga, Z Budapest 2009. ] the h2 knight jumping into the game but not
11.e3 a pleasant move to play as it cedes the e5
[ 11.d2! has been tried before here and outpost and means that Black will be forced
i n d e e d i f B l a c k i s f o r c e d t o p l a y b8 to grovel for the rest of the game. 22.g5
as both players have done then this must be f6 23.xe6 xe6 24.f3 e4 25.xe4
an improvement for White. ( Perhaps 11...c5 dxe4 26.e5 would be a typical line which
was Black's intention, sacrificing the a5 isn't disastrous for Black but still
pawn although I'm sceptical that he has unpleasant. ]
enough compensation following: 12.xa5 22.g4 d6 23.g3 g7
c4 13.a2 b8 14.xb6 xb6 15.b3 [ My computer is enthralled by 23...xg3?
cxb3 16.xb3; 11...b4 12.xb4 axb4 but after a couple of seconds it changes its
13.d2 would also drop a pawn.) 12.c3 mind once it sees 24.fxg3 xg3+ 25.g2
( 12.e3!? can't be completely stupid as xf3 26.h2+- and there's no way out for
W h it e h a s a n e xt ra t e m p o .; 12.c1 the Black queen from its raid. ]
a la Smyslov would also attract my 24.g2 Very calm. White could have played
attention.) 12...c6 Smagin, S-Marinkovic, I Nh6 on either of the previous moves but first
Cacak 1991 and around here White started he gets everything ready and frustrates Black
l o s i n g t h e p l o t . I ' d a d v o c a t e 13.e2 into yet more waiting moves. e7 25.h6+
with a pleasant advantage. ] [ 25.h4!? continuing the same plan while
11...f6 ...c5 looks rather hard to achieve so forcing Black to calculate the consequences
Nogueiras goes for the other break in the of 26.h5 also looks strong. ]
position. 12.bd2 25...g8?! This has a tactical problem.
[ There's no need to release the tension and [ The king had to retreat into the corner
allow Black a bit more freedom with 25...h8 but the position is exceedingly
12.exf6 ] unpleasant after 26.h4! ]
12...c6 13.c3 c7 14.c2 e6 26.g5! xg5?! And this was the worst way
[ 14...f5!? looks interesting although of to take the piece.
course after this move White will always be [ 26...fxg5 was the lesser evil but Black's
better as he has more space and can slowly position is still unpleasant after 27.h6+
try and push Black backwards on both sides Of course this was the point of 25.Bh6+ g7
of the board. ] 28.xf7 xf7 29.xe6 but Black is still
[ 14...e6 is the other option and we've holding on after af8 30.1e3 at least
see n th is ide a in t he no te s to p re viou s temporarily. ]
moves. However, perhaps Black was scared 27.xe7 xe7 28.xe7 Now the rook on the
of 15.h4! which, as you'll have gathered by seventh is simply too strong. f8 29.xg5!
this point, looks like a good antidote to ...f6 xe7? This loses
once Black can no longer play ...Bg4. ] [ 29...fxg5 would survive a few moves longer
15.b3 Corrales Jimenez is content to take but the position should still be lost following
squares away from Black and slowly suffocate 30.e1 ( Not 30.xg5? when d8
him. The mark of a good player is knowing isn't so clear. )]
when there's no need to rush the position. 30.e3+ f8 31.xh7+ g8 32.h6 d6
d7 16.exf6 exf6 17.f1 f7 18.d2 33.xg6 e6 A well played game by White
Black's position is n ot a disaster but th e and I think Black has some problems in this 6...
problem is he's a bit cramped and lacks any d5 line and thus there are justifiable reasons
active plan. Anyone who has played why it's played much less frequently than 6...
practically knows how hard it is to come up Bg7.
with good moves when you cannot find a 1-0
useful plan. e8 19.e2 e6 20.ae1 f8
21.1h2 White's pieces start to amass like
thunder clouds in front of the Black king. c7
592
582 B04 quietly. Rxe6 isn't so terrifying when Black

Cuijpers,Frans Andre 2510 has a quick ..c5 available his problem in
Cox,John J 2418 Stefansson-Gausel was exactly that he
3rd ACT Amsterdam NED (9) 23.07.2006 couldn't get this move in and thus could
[John Cox] never open any lines for his rooks. ]
[ The machine instead proposes entering
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 murky complications with 12...f6 13.h4 e5
5.xe5 c6 The Miles variation, which we've , which looks horribly anti-positional to me
seen plenty of (and plenty of difference of a n d a l s o a p p e a rs a t f i r st s i gh t t o l o s e
opinion about!) on this site bef ore. 6.d3 material, but as usual the creature has
The dangerous move popularised by Sutovsky- some tactical resources, for example the
Carlsen, Rethymnon 2003. d7 7.xd7 obvious and 'crushing' 14.c4 f4 15.c5
[ 7.0-0 was Sutovsky-Carlsen. The c7 16.dxe5 fxe5 17.e7 f7 18.d6
straightforward text has been played by d8 19.xe5 xe5 20.xe5 can be met
Adams among other GMs, but I find it very with f6 when it is t simple, if at all possible,
hard to believe that W hite can hope for to demonstrate any advantage for White, e.
much by trading his active knight like this g. 21.c4 e6 22.xe6 xe6 23.e3
for Black's passive one. ] f4 24.c3 d3= ]
7...xd7 8.0-0 g6 13.a3 c7 At the time I thought this move
[ 8...e6 was the far inferior move played in was incredibly clever, aiming for 14 Nc4 c5 (of
Adams-Maki Uuro, Calvia, which I gave on course the immediate
this site last year in the notes to another [ 13...c5 loses to 14.c4 b4 15.xe7
game. Of course Black shouldn't wall in his ) Fritz however tells me it's rubbish and
d7 bishop like that. ] that placing a rook sensibly on d8 was called
9.e1 g7 10.c3 0-0 11.g5 b6 for. I should add that this was the last round
A new move, and actually I think quite a good and that the previous evening some - if not
one. all - of the British players in the event had
[ I discussed Stefansson-Gausel, Aarhus looked upon the wine when it was red to
2003, in Starting Out Alekhine's Defence. celebrate our last evening in Amsterdam, so
That went 11...e8 12.d2 c8 13.c4 if Black plays any good moves in this game
f5 14.e2 c7 ( 14...b5 15.e3 xe3 it was a m at te r of lu ck, as will be co m e
16.xe3 e5 was my proposal) 15.f3 ad8 apparent later on. ]
16.b3 e6 and now the thoroughly 14.c2
thematic 17.xe6 fxe6 after which White [ 14.c4 f6 15.f4 d7 16.e5
won handily ] was correct according to Fritz (this is why
12.d2 It's not terribly convenient to defend Black should have waited for Nc4 blocking
b2 the c-pawn before retreating his queen), and
[ 12.e2 h6 ] I must reluctantly admit that the horrid thing
[ 12.b3 fe8 , and ] has a point. ]
[ 12.c2 c5 (Black's main idea is to enable 14...ad8 15.a4 I didn't understand this move
either an ...e5 or ...c5 break quickly) all a lot at the time and I don't now, but since
have drawbacks of one kind and another in White wins the game by queening this pawn I
this last line 13.c4 c6 14.xd5?! xd5 dare say there's more to it than meets the eye.
15.dxc5 xc5 16.xe7? fe8-+ d7 With this move I had in mind ...f6 and ...
is an important tactical point. ] Bf7, a manoeuvre Black quite often employs in
12...e6 White's point with his last move was this type of position. I didn't see much point in
to meet stopping White's next move, although in fact
[ 12...c5 with 13.e4 when c6 fails to 15...a5 had a great deal to be said for it. 16.a5
14.xd5 xd5 15.dxc5 , but of course the [ If I remember correctly I was planning to
price is that now the b1 knight is obstructed, meet 16.c4 with c7 ( 16...f6! ) 17.h6
so B la ck f igures h e can con tinu e mo re f6 , thinking idly that White was trading my
593
worse bishop and that I would now have a 23.c4 c7 24.e3 f5 25.f3 e5 26.xa7
nice solid position, but in fact a continuation Objectively these last few moves of White's
like 18.ad1 f7 19.xg7 xg7 20.e4 form a rather rash adventure, although I'm not
would have rudely shattered my illusions. entirely sure what he ought to have played
White's set-up with the queen/bishop line-up instead at move 24. It may be that Black's
on c1-h6 is a bit unusual and I didn't kingside majority already does give him the
appreciate at all the difference this makes. ] better chances. e4 27.e2 g5?
16...f6 17.h4? [ T h e s i m p l e 27...e6 is more or less
[ A bit unfair to give my opponent a question winning since ...f4 and ...g5 is threatened,
mark when he's played so much better than the f-pawn cannot move and 28.h3 f4
me up to now, but this is altogether wrong. 29.h2 is too humiliating for words apart
As Cuijpers (a most charming opponent by from anything else Black might well take
the way) pointed out after the game, 17.h6 the exchange now that the h2 bishop is
was much be tter. After the trade of bishops under lock and key. ]
rook on e4 is a real nuisance for Black with 28.xc7 xc7 29.b5 e7 30.ab1 f4
the constant threat of Rh4 and Qh6 to deal 31.f1
with as well as the possibility of doubling in [ The computer is confident about the
the e-file. ] outrageous-looking 31.c5 humans (weak
17...f7 18.e4 fe8 19.g3 c5 ones like me, anyway) are afraid of shutting
Initiating ations which White might perhaps the quee n out f rom the def ence , not t o
have positioned himself better to meet over mention allowing ...e3 (the idea of the text is
the last couple of moves (my opponent had to stop this move, of course) but actually
overlooked that the move was possible at all there isn't all that much defending to be
in this position) . 20.dxc5 b5 21.a3 done and White is playing a6 in a minute .
W hite has a few tactical ideas with a6 and The game certainly goes on though after e3
then c6, but as far as I can see they simply 32.f3 e5 33.a6 bxa6 34.xa6 d2
don't work and he has nothing better than or such, especially with both players short of
allowing Black to recapture his pawn with a time. ]
good game. xc5 22.b4 c8 31...g6 32.c5? A dreadful and panicky
[ I don't recall consciously contemplating move, something sensible like
22...xc3 23.xc3 xc3 24.xb7 e5 [ 32.bd1 was much better and quite
at all, although this is quite good for Black possibly objectively good for White. So far
in fact he may well hold a clear advantage. this hasn't been one of Frans Cuijpers'
My mindset was that Black ought to keep better games, but Black pays for all with his
the queens and attack with his kingside next few moves. I just utterly failed to adjust
majority, while White's queenside majority t o t h e f a c t I wa s su d d e n l y wi n n i n g ( o r
would be fearsome in an ending. I suspect winning again, rather). This is a common
J o n a t h a n Ro wso n wo u l d d e sc r ib e t h i s psychological problem which I've noticed
scornfully as fabulation, but certainly it was bo t h in my o p po n e nt s an d m yse lf (a n d
pretty poor. Another way of looking at the indeed in other players' games), but it's
mat ter would have bee n t ha t t he f e we r more easily stated than cured. ]
pieces you have left the more serious it is 32...xc5 33.bxc5 e3 Winning. 34 fxe3 is
if some of them (e.g. the a3 knight and the 'forced' but of course it loses. 34.b3 c2?!
g3 bishop) aren't doing anything: [ This doesn't spoil anything but 34...exf2+
alternatively of course I could have resorted 35.xf2 d2+ 36.e2 exe2+ 37.xe2
to calculating the odd variation, although for h5 wins a piece fairly trivially at once -
the reason I mentioned that wasn't really particularly inept since exploiting the pin on
an option. Having said that the position is e2 like this was my one and only idea, but
about equal after Black's move, and with for some reason the h5 square fell outside
both of us beginning to get short of time my view - possibly the board was getting a
pretty tense as well. ] little fuzzy at the edges by this time. ]
594
35.a3 exf2+?? 583 B04

[ As Cuijpers pointed out afterwards, a Degraeve,Jean Marc
d i f f e r e n t i d e a a l t o g e t h e r w i t h 35...d1 Miles,Anthony J
wi n s m a t e r i a l s i n c e i f 36.xd1 xd1 Zonal Mondariz ESP (5) 07.09.2000
the e-pawn is decisive ] [Nigel Davies]
[ Alternatively I could have executed the idea
I had in the game correctly with 35...b2 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
, since 36.a2 exf2+ 37.xf2 d2+ 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 One of several quiet
38.e2 exe2+ 39.xe2 d3 ( or indeed moves which aim to keep the tiny plus
39...b3 ) leads to what I was hoping to conferred on him by the pawn structure. The
achieve in the game. )] following possibilities are similarly motivated:
36.xf2 d2+ 37.e2 exe2+ 38.xe2 [ a) 6.c3 g6 7.g3 g7 8.g2 d7 9.xd7
b2? By now this is a losing mistake, xd7 10.d2 0-0 11.f3 c8 12.0-0 h3
although in fact Black was still well in the left Black very comfortably placed in Shur -
game after Bagirov, Baku 1996 ]
[ 38...e4 I had even seen White's next [ b) 6.h3 looks innocuous but the idea is
move, but I somehow lacked the mental quite good when Black challenges the knight
drive to adjust and play something other on e5 White plans to drop it back and not
than my previously planned winning move (I have to worry about a pin. Jansa - Burkar,
had been thinking of 39 Ra2? Bd3, of Bonnevoie1999continued d7 7.f3 g6
course). Another quite common 8.c4 g7 9.0-0 0-0 10.e1 e6
psychological phenomenon, although with ( the immediate 10...b5 loses a pawn after
this one to be aware of it goes a long way 11.xd5 cxd5 12.c3 ) 11.b3 b5 12.g5
towards eliminating it - I hope, anyway. ] c7 13.bd2 b7 14.c4 bxc4 15.xc4
39.e1 xe2+ 40.xe2 xa3 41.c6! c5 16.c1 and now ac8 17.dxc5 xc5
An alert move instead of looks fine for Black. ]
[ 41.xa3 e4 , which I had - perhaps [ c) 6.d3 d7 7.xd7 xd7 8.0-0 g6
correctly - anticipated wouldn't be too bad 9.e1 g7 10.c3 0-0 11.g5 e8 12.d2
for Black. Now however 41....bxc6 42 Nxa3 c8 13.e4 f5 left White with nothing
Bf5 43 c5 is hopeless, and so is 41...Bb2 42 special in Macieja - Kuczynski, Polish Ch.,
cxb7 Be5 43 c5 Be4 44 Nd6, although it Warsaw 2001 ]
would have been nice to have noticed this 6...d7
last variation, which I didn't. Not a game [ 6...g6 7.c4 c7 8.c3 g7 9.e3 d7
for either side to be proud of, but I found 10.f4!? 0-0 11.0-0 xe5 12.dxe5 ( 12.fxe5
t h e p l a y a ro u n d W h it e ' s m o ve 1 7 ve r y c5 ) 12...xd1 13.axd1 f6
instructive - neither of us grasped at all was an equaliser in Dolmatov - Tseshkovsky,
tha t Blac k's g7 b isho p st ill ou gh t to b e Russian Ch., Tomsk 2001 ]
t ra d e d e ve n a f t e r . . . f 6 . I f yo u f in d t h a t 7.f3 g6 8.c4 c7 9.c3 g7 10.0-0 0-0
obvious then I'm afraid you may not get 11.f4 c5!? 12.d5 e5!? Giving White a
much out of this game, but even then I think passed d-pawn, but Black will blockade it with
Bla c k p laye d qu ite a go o d m o ve in t h e a knight on d6 13.g5 f6 14.e3 f7! 15.a3
opening. ] f8 16.b1 e8 17.b4 The position starts to
1-0 become very sharp with White trying to create
a breach before Black's knight settles in to d6.
This position could actually become
dangerous for White if he doesn't play sharply
Bla ck' s kin gsid e p a wn ma jority co u ld b e
advanced with great effect. b6 18.d2 d6
19.de4 f5 20.d6!? b7 21.bxc5 xe3
22.fxe3 f5 23.c6! xc6 24.c5! g7 25.b5
c8 26.b3+ h8 27.g5 xc5 28.f7+
595
g8 29.h6+ h8 30.f7+ g8 31.h6+ 34.h1 d5 35.hxg5 hxg5 36.hc1 b6
½-½ 37.d1 xa1 38.xa1 a8 39.xa8
1/2-1/2 Palac, M-Bauer,C/1/2 Coupe de
France, Senat FRA 2003 ]
584 B04 6...d7 7.f3 7f6 8.h3 On the ball
Del Rio Angelis,Salvador Gabriel 2490 pre ve n t in g . . . B g4 bu t Co n qu e st s e e s a n
Conquest,Stuart 2555 opportunity to take advantage of the Bd3. b4
4th IECC Istanbul (8) 2003 9.c4 f5! 10.e5
[Andrew Martin] [ If 10.b3 a5! 11.a3 bd5 12.c4 b6
13.0-0 a4 14.a2 e6= I guess he just
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 didn't want to move that Bishop again! ]
5.xe5 c6 6.d3 Slightly unusual but can't 10...e6 11.a3 d6 12.0-0! h6 13.c3
be too bad. The Bishop does rather bd5 14.c2 c7 15.d3? A move lacking
encourage Nb4 though. As stated last month, in confidence. I'm at a loss why he didn't
I prefer 6 Be2. Equalization isn't easy for prefer
Black. [ 15.e1 0-0-0 ( 15...d8 16.e2 0-0
[ 6.e2! Sensible development, no targets 17.b3 c5; 15...0-0 16.e2 ad8= )
and c2-c4 waiting in the wings. I like White's 16.e2= Although White has nothing to
options in this position. g6 7.0-0 g7 shout about the position is interesting and
8.e1 d7 9.f3 With more space, White there's plenty of play. Del Rio Angelis seems
naturally avoids exchanges. 0-0 10.f1 to give up a pawn rathe r desperately it
7f6 11.bd2 g4 12.c4 b6 13.h3 seems to me. ]
xf3 14.xf3 White hasn't done very 15...xe5 16.dxe5 xd3 17.xd3 xe5
much but there's no doubt about it: Black is Why not ? 18.e1 c7 19.c4 e7 20.b3
slightly worse. Black can try to target d4 but 0-0 21.f3 With the idea of Bxh6 but this is
th e Kn igh t o n b 6 is p a ssive a n d act ive easily parried. d7 22.b2 g6 23.g3
counterplay appears in short supply. c7 [ After 23.c3 centralisation will do nicely for
15.g3 ad8 16.f4 d7 17.b3 fe8 Black: e5 24.ad1 ad8 25.g3 fe8 ]
18.ad1 c8 19.a3 d7 20.xa7 c8 23...ad8 24.c3 e5 25.h4 f6! A typically
21.a3 d6 22.b3 e6 23.c2 a8 powerful defensive move by Stuart Conquest,
24.a4 h5 25.c1 ed8 26.b3 c7 putting paid to any thoughts of mate on the
27.g2 f6 28.g4 g7 29.f4 a5 long diagonal. 26.e3 a6 27.a3 fe8
30.e5 ac8 31.c5 de8 32.c4 28.e4 df8 White is thrashing around
1-0 Groszpeter,A-Hugentobler, P/3rd Zurich cre a t i n g ra n d o m a t t a ck s b u t t h e re is n o
Lake Plaza Open, Pfaeffikon 2003 Black coherence. He's simply a pawn down! 29.c5
has it all to prove after 6 Be2. Adherents of e6 30.e3 gf8 31.g4 h8 32.h5
this system would call 5.. .c6 ' flexible '. g8 33.g4 f7 34.b6
Well then, 6 Be2 is equally flexible. ] [ 34.xh6 f5-+ ]
[ 6.d2 d7 7.df3 In principle, any 34...d2 35.e3 h5 36.e4 d7
exchanges ease the Black position. xe5 White has been left with nothing to attack any
8.xe5 f5 9.d3 xd3 10.xd3 e6 more. Black begins the cleaning up procedure.
11.0-0 d6 12.g4 f6 13.d2 d8 37.a5 dc5 38.f3 d3 39.g2 g6
14.ad1 g6 15.e2 0-0 16.fe1 f5= 40.b4 e4 41.b5 axb5 42.cxb5 d4!
Compare this with the Groszpeter game. Payback! 43.bxc6 xc6 44.b6 d2
Black isn't cramped and hasn't surrendered 45.h1 e4 46.h3 f3 47.ed1 ce5
the Two Bishops. He's fine. 17.g3 e7 48.f5 xf5 49.xf5 c4 50.c5 e5
18.c3 fe8 19.c1 d6 20.a3 b5 21.d2 51.e7+ f7 52.b4 xe7 53.xe7 xe7
f6 22.e4 xe4 23.xe4 f7 24.f1 g5 54.dc1 d2! A nice game by Black.
25.a4 a6 26.a1 a8 27.ee1 b6 Evidently Del Rio Angelis is a player who
28.axb5 axb5 29.b3 ed8 30.e2 e7 thrives on inspiration. He had one moment
31.h3 h6 32.ec1 e8 33.h4 d7 only when he could have played rationally and
596
kept the position equal (15 Re1). Failing to 24.xg5 xd3 25.xc7 f5 26.e3
appreciate that cost him the point. As far as when, despite being the exchange down,
5...c6 goes I remain sceptical. I don't think White has a clear advantage thanks to
Black can equalize after6Be2! his activity and Black's weak king. Of
0-1 course Reinderman should have gone in
to this though. I notice that this is also
given by Tabanus on chessgames.com
585 B04 and was evidently Nisipeanu's deep
Dgebuadze,Alexandre 2537 preparation.;
Sadkowsky,Daniel 2255 B) 18...d7? This move is as good as
33rd Taminco Open (8) 20.07.2010 resigning. The piece had to be taken to
[Gawain Jones] see what the creative Romanian had in
store. 19.e3! xf7 20.h7+ g7
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 21.g5+ f6 22.e4+ f7 23.g5+
5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.a4 We haven't f6 24.f3 d6 25.g5+ f7 26.h6
seen this move since 2000 on here, although f8 27.e5+ f6 28.xg6+ e7
Volzhin believed it to be the most dangerous 29.xg7 f5 30.h6 d5 31.g4
for Black to face and has Kasparov's seal of 1-0 Nisipeanu, L-Reinderman, D Rijeka
approval. 2010 was a crushing victory and proved
[ 7.g5 is the main move when e6 8.f3 Jo h n ' s in t u i t i o n c o r r e c t a n d p e r h a p s
0-0 "This is very rare as it castles straight refutes 8...0-0. ]
in t o W h i t e ' s a t t a c k b u t Re i n d e r m a n i s [ I looked at this position earlier this year
confident in Black's position" was my when Mickey opted for 7.e2 in Adams-
comment when I investigated this position Zhukova seen in the archives. ]
last time. Evidently he had enough faith to 7...dxe5 The most uncompromising reply. The
repeat against Nisipeanu but that proved to following few moves are all forcing:
be f oolhardy. 9.h3 h6 10.f3 dxe5 [ 7...a5 was covered in Kasparov-Palatnik
11.dxe5 c6 12.xh6 xe5 13.g5 a n d G r i s c h u k - P o n o m a r i o v wh i c h b o t h
d3+ 14.cxd3 xb2 15.d2 xa1 16.0-0 c o n t i n u e d : 8.g5 ( Ni Hua played the
I mentioned up to this point last time when I straightforward 8.0-0 here and af ter 0-0
wrote: 'with a strong attack' is given by John 9.h3 c6 10.e2 dxe5 11.dxe5 d4
W atson in the archives. It would be 12.xd4 xd4 13.e1 e6 14.xe6 fxe6
interesting to see how Reinderman planned 15.d2 f5 16.f3 c4 17.b3 xe2
on combating such an aggressive approach. 18.xe2 d8?! 19.d2 d5?! 20.c4! d3
" Perhaps he missed John's suggestion? 21.xa5 was a pawn to the good in Ni Hua-
d4 17.de4 e8 18.xf7!! Li Wenliang Hefei 2010. ) 8...e6 9.f4
A) 18...xf7 After thirty minutes my A) 9...h6 was tried in a recent game.
c o m p u t e r c o m e s u p w i t h 19.f3+ 10.f3 c6 11.0-0 e7 12.c3
( 19.g5 e7 20.h7+ g7 21.f6 f8 ( 12.c4!? is a more direct approach.)
22.g5+ xf6 23.h4 d5 24.h7+ 12...d7 13.e2 c6 14.e3 d7
f7 25.xf8 xf8 gives Black too much 15.d2 with a complex game in prospect.
material for the queen.; 19.g5+ g8 Reinwald, P-Plat, V Rijeka 2010.;
20.xe6 xe6 21.xe6+ xe6 B) 9...dxe5 10.fxe5 c5 when Volzhin
22.xe6+ h7 survives the attack. ) considers
A1) 19...g8 20.g4 ( 20.g3 f7 B1) t h a n K a s p a r o v ' s 11.0-0
21.f3+= is the computer's immediate which allowe d xd4+ although I think
s u g g e s t i o n .) 20...f7 21.e1 f6 W hite is doing well here after 12.xd4
22.f3 would transpose to 19... Bf6; cxd4 13.xf7! ( Volzhin only considered
A2) 19...f6 20.e1! d5 21.g5+ 13.xf7 when 0-0 is ok for Black.)
g8 22.e4 f4 ( 22...e7 23.xe6+ 13...xe5 14.f4 with a strong
is of course hopeless.) 23.xf4 xg5 initiative.;
597
B2) 11.c3 to be a more accurate move was played in Almasi-De la Villa Garcia but
order cxd4 12.0-0 0-0 13.cxd4 c6 this seems an improvement.) 20...f5
14.f3 f6 15.c3! fxe5 16.g5 d7 21.c7 Blehm, P-Navarro Cia, M Aviles
17.dxe5 xe5 18.xe5 xf1+ 19.xf1 2000 and here instead of 21...Kf7, Black
d4+ 20.h1 xe5 21.d8! c o u l d h a v e t a k e n c o n t r o l w i t h ( 21.a6!?
with good compensation for the pawn. ] might be stronger in order to have a second
8.a5 6d7 9.xf7+! xf7 10.g5+ g8 way out for that knight but still I'd prefer
11.e6 e8 12.xc7 d8 13.xa8 Black with that powerful pawn on c2 and the
[ 13.e6 e8 14.c7 is of course a draw. ] bishop pair.) 21...e5! 22.d5 ( 22.b5
13...exd4 14.c3 We're still following Oral-De c6 23.a6 b4 is also good for Black.)
Firmian in the archives. 22...e6 23.xe7+ f7 24.xc2 xe7
[ 14.0-0 is the alternative and was Volzhin's when the two pieces outweigh the rook and
choice although it will probably only pawn. ]
transpose. This is investigated in Almasi-De 16.cxd4 xd4 17.e3 e5 18.d2
la Villa Garcia. ] [ 18.c3! looks strongest. The problem is
14...c6 that Black doesn't have time to win the
[ 14...c5 immediately was played in stranded knight on a8, e.g. c5 19.b5!
another fairly recent game. This doesn't f5 20.ac7 and White is material up,
se em as a c cu rat e a s th e ga me a s n o w although he must be accurate for a few
Black will be forced to capture on d4 with m o re m o ve s: d7 21.b4 c2 22.e1
the bishop. The game proceeded. 15.cxd4 cb3 23.xd4 exd4 24.a2 d3 25.e6+
xd4 16.0-0 c6 17.c3 e6 ( 17...h5!? xe6 26.xe6 and the d pawn is worth
lo o k s lik e a n im p ro vem e n t , e . g. 18.b5 something but not a whole exchange. ]
g4 19.c2 f5 20.c4+ e6 21.c2 18...f6?! Black switches between two
f5= being a possible repetition.) 18.b5 different plans.
b3 when instead of 19.Qg4 as played in [ He should have stuck to his plan with his
Cabrilo-Laketic, Kragujevac 2009, W hite 15th move and played 18...h7 Perhaps he
c o u l d h a v e i m p r o v e d w i t h : 19.d2 was worried about 19.e4 ( 19.c1!? b8
for example f7 20.xd4 xd4 21.a3 20.xd4 exd4 21.b4 is probably better for
e5 22.e3 with the advantage. ] W h ite bu t st ill ext rem e ly co m p lic at e d .)
15.0-0 h6 This deviates from 14...Nc5 in the 19...f8 20.c1 f5 21.g3 xa8
archives but is probably a case of forgotten 22.xd4 exd4 23.xf5 gxf5 24.f3
theory rather than a nuance. gives W hite a strong initiative as
[ These positions were fashionable 10 years compensation but the position is highly
ago but have been seen very rare recently. unclear. ]
White is the exchange up but will probably 19.c4?!
lo s s t h e k n ig h t o n a 8 wh i lst B la c k h a s [ 19.c1! is simplest when White will be able
d e c e n t c o n t r o l o ve r t h e p o s i t i o n . T h e to extricate his knight the following move.
question is whether, while Black takes time g4 can be simply dealt with by 20.f3 ]
to win the knight, W hite can drum up an 19...h5 20.a4?! I'm at a bit of a loss as to
initiative. It appears that most players have what this move achieves.
come to a consensus that Black is doing [ T h e i m m e d i a t e 20.e1 was stronger
well but perhaps Dgebuadze has found although the position is unclear after h7
something. The only other high rated 21.c1 f8 White's offside knight compared
encounter which wasn't covered already on to Black's strong knights (d4 and f4 soon)
chesspublishing continued: 15...c5 16.b4 promises Black decent compensation for the
( Playing like the game with 16.cxd4 xd4 exchange. ]
17.e3 is possible and my suggestion for 20...f4 21.e1 d3? A shame. Sadkowsky
White although he's a tempo down on the gets carried away against his Grandmaster
game. ) 16...dxc3 17.xd8+ xd8 18.bxc5 opposition.
c2 19.c3 xc3 20.a2 ( 20.a3 [ 21...d7 was better when White struggles
598
to ke ep equa lity, f or exam ple 22.xe5!? but his positions weren't inspiring. ]
fe2+! 23.xe2 xe2+ 24.xe2 xa4 8.0-0
25.xg6 e8! 26.xh8 Both knights are [ Playing the immediate 8.c4 has been
trapped in the corners! xa8 27.xa7 covered in the archives but I doubt it
xh8 28.b4 and Black's bishop pair are changes much. ]
m o r e re l e v a n t o n t h e o p e n b o a r d t h a n 8...g7 9.c4 5f6 An unusual retreat and
White's three pawns. ] Nisipeanu was probably regretting it in a few
22.xe5! This is the move Black missed and moves time. A problem for Black in this line
suddenly his position collapses as neither seems to be his light squared bishop which
knight has any support. xe1 struggles to find any activity.
[ 22...xe5 is even worse as White plays [ 9...c7 is the usual retreat, when a couple
23.xd4! xd4 24.xd3 and the knight is of recent games have continued: 10.c3
free as there's no discovered check 0-0
anymore. f6 25.xg6+ g7 26.d4! A) 11.e3 e6 12.d2 c7 13.ad1
would be final. ] d8 14.d5!? xc3?! ( 14...b6
23.xd4 xa5 24.d5 a2 25.xg6 had to be played although White's still on
So a successful W hite win but a shame for top after 15.c1 cxd5 16.cxd5 f8
Black who had a promising position. It seems 17.d4 ) 15.xc3 f4? And this just
that if Black remembers his theory in this loses. 16.xf4 xf4 17.dxc6 bxc6
crazy line then he has nothing to worry about. 18.e5 c5 19.f3 b8 20.c6 e8
The line with 8.Ng5 looks like a much bigger 21.xb8 xb8 22.a5 1-0 Radulski, J-
theoretical problem. Kukov, V Kyustendil 2010.;
1-0 B) 11.e1 f6 12.h3 fe8 13.f1 d6
14.f4 f5 Konguvel, P-Khusnutdinov, R
Delhi 2010 when the simplest looks to be
586 B04 15.e5 when White has a small edge.;
Efimenko,Zahar 2640 C) 11.f4;
Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter 2661 D) and 11.g5 have been investigated in
11th EICC Men (6) 11.03.2010 the archives - see Degraeve-Miles and
[Gawain Jones] Bauer-Mamedyarov.;
E) 11.h3 A slightly mysterious move
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 immediately but I don't think it changes
5.xe5 c6 This has replaced 5...g6 as the the assessment of slightly better for White.
mainline in the past few years. 6.e2 d7 a6 12.f4 ( 12.e3 is more sensible.)
[ 6...f5 is examined in the following game. ] 12...e6 13.e3 b5 14.c1 b7 15.a4
7.f3 b4 16.e4 and White was still a little
[ 7.0-0 has also been tried recently. xe5 better. Hou Yifan-Dimakiling, O Kuala
8.dxe5 f5 ( 8...e6 was Miroshnichenko's Lumpur 2010. ]
choice 9.d2 g6 10.f3 g7 11.c3 0-0 10.c3 0-0
12.g5 c7 13.e1 Potkin, V- [ Perhaps 10...c7 is better to avoid Bf4 but
Miroshnichenko, E bereg.ru 2003 when fd8 the positions are likely to be similar following
leaves Black the preferred side.) 9.d3 A) 11.e1 was tried in the only game I
xd3 10.xd3 c7 ( 10...e6 should have could find that reached this position. 0-0
been played, when I can't see anything 12.f1 e8 13.g5 f8 This position
wrong with Black's position.) 11.c4 b6 illustrates a problem I can see with 9...
12.e6! fxe6 13.d2 Jakimov, V-Bortnik, A N5f6, viz, I think c7 is a better square than
Alushta 2010 with a dangerous initiative for f8 for the Black knight as it prevents White
the pawn. ] from playing d5 whilst from both squares
7...g6 the knight can jump to e6. Black has also
[ In 2008 John annotated a couple of games been forced to play ...Re8 but after ... Ne6
o f M a g n u s C a r l s e n w i t h 7...7f6 the rook would prefer to be on d8. 14.h3
599
( 14.d5!? not allowing the f8 knight out 14.d2 h7 15.ad1

looks interesting.) 14...d7 15.b3 ad8 [ If White wants to advance his g pawn then
16.ad1 c8 17.g3 h5 18.g2 h6 he could do it straight away 15.g4!? hf6
19.e3 d7 20.d5! and White had taken 16.f4 d8 17.h3 when Black is struggling
over: Bojkov, D-Gvetadze, S Izmir 2006.; to find squares for his pieces. ]
B) 11.e3 0-0 12.d2 but at least here 15...d8?! This entraps his own queen. 16.g4!
Black could try for counterplay with g4 Ef imenko chooses the aggressive option
13.g5 ( 13.f4 e5 14.g3 is similar.) which he has accurately calculated.
13...f6 14.f4 e5 15.g3 although White [ 16.fe1 is simple when it's difficult to come
should stand somewhat better here. ] up with a good plan for Black. f5!? 17.c2
11.f4 A new move but very sensible. is nothing to worry about while Black is still
Efimenko takes control over the important e5 struggling to find squares for his pieces. ]
square and prevents Black from developing 16...hf6 17.f4 b6 A rather passive
his queen to c7. The position resembles an location for the queen.
extremely passive Scandinavian and thus we [ 17...a5 would be more actively located
can say has hardly been successful. but it fails to 18.b4! xb4 19.c7 e8
[ 11.h3 was the strongest ever woman's 20.a3 ( 20.b1 a3 21.b3 a6 22.c5
choice. b6 ( 11...c7 is more logical b5 isn't so clear; 20.g5!? may be even
although White has a comfortable edge after stronger. h5 21.a3 ) 20...xa3 21.a1
12.e3 d8 13.d2 ) 12.a4 f5 13.f4 b4 22.fb1 e4 23.xe4 xd2
c8 14.b3 d6 15.a5 c8 16.e5 24.exd2 leaves White winning. ]
d7 17.g4!? e6 18.xd7 xd7 19.c5 18.g5! Consistent.
b5 20.xb5 cxb5 21.fd1 a6 22.f3 [ 18.c5 xc5! 19.dxc5 xd2 20.cxb6 xb2
was a little better for W hite who was isn't so clear. ]
ultimately successful. Polgar, J-Visser, Y 18...h5 Black's position is hopeless after
Amsterdam 1990. ] this.
[ 11.e3 e8 ( 11...g4 should have been [ 18...hxg5 19.c5! is ve ry st r o n g . b4
tried as 12.g5 h6 13.h4 gf6 ( 19...xc5 20.xg5+ g8 21.dxc5
f o l l o we d b y . . . N h 5 wo u l d g i ve B l a c k a is now winning as xd2 22.cxb6 xb2
playable position.) 12.h3 e5 13.dxe5 xe5 loses to 23.d8+ f8 24.c4 ) 20.xg5+
14.xe5 xd1 15.axd1 xe5 was only a g8 21.c7 e8 22.c2 and Black must
little better for W hite. Fakhretdinova, M- sacrifice his knight to release his trapped
Gvetadze, S Moscow 2008. ] queen. ]
11...h5 It's hard to suggest a good plan for [ 18...g8 was strongest when I think
Black here as there are no targets to hit. W hite's best is 19.e4! when the threat of
[ 11...e8 12.e1 f8 13.h3 e6 20.c5 is hard to deal with. ( 19.c5 xc5
14.e5 leaves Black without many 20.dxc5 xd2 21.cxb6 xb2 is better for
options. ] White but gives Black decent
12.g5 h6 This gives White a target but counterchances. )]
Nisipeanu is famous for his play with the 19.gxh6 f6 20.e4
initiative which is noticeably lacking here. [ 20.a4 is also possible, continuing to
[ 12...e8 13.d2 hf6 14.ad1 chase the Black queen. a6 21.c7 e8
would have been rather pleasant for White. ] 22.c3 c5 23.d5 is terrible as Black's
13.e3 c7 pieces are so badly coordinated. ]
[ 13...e5 14.d2 f4!? is the computer's 20...xf4 21.xf4 White simply has too
suggestion which highlights quite how bad many pieces attacking Black's monarch. f8
Black's position is. I see no real [ 21...xb2 22.d2 b4 23.fg5+
compensation following ( 14...exd4 15.xd4 is no better. ]
e5 16.ad1 and Black has terrible 22.c5 xb2 23.c4 h8 24.fg5 xg5
problems on h6 and h5.) 15.xf4 exf4 25.xg5 f6 26.f7+ h7 27.fe1 e8
16.xf4 g5 17.d2 g4 18.e1 ] 28.g5+ h8 29.e6
600
[ 29.d6! was the most accurate finish as 15.0-0 f5

e5 can be dealt with by 30.xe5! ] [ 15...0-0 might be an improvement for Black,
29...b5 30.b3 a5 31.c7 a4 32.f7 e5 bu t t h is e nd ga me worse f o r h im in a n y
33.g3 An impressive game by the Ukrainian case. ]
w h o e x p l o i t e d t h e R o m a n i a n ' s p a s s i v e 16.f3 e4??
opening. I doubt ...N5f6 will be repeated at [ A b l u n d e r . B l a c k s h o u l d p l a y 16...0-0
the high levels as White achieves a pleasant a f t e r w h i c h 17.b2 a6 18.xc5?!
position without much effort. ( 18.d1 ) 18...bxc5 19.xb7 e6
1-0 leaves him without further problems. ]
17.xc5 xf3 18.d4 e5 19.xe5 f6
20.e1 fxe5 21.xe5+ f7 22.gxf3 hc8
587 B04 23.d7+ f6 24.b5 xc4 25.xb6+ g5
Ernst,Thomas 26.xh7 xc3 27.h4+ f5 28.f7+ e5
Bagirov,Vladimir 29.xg6 xa2 30.e7+ d5 31.d7+ e5
Open Helsinki (Finland) (9) 1992 32.xb7 xf3 33.b5+ d4 34.g4+ c3
[Nigel Davies] 35.g2 c4 36.bg5 a1+ 37.h2 f1
38.h5 f6 39.g3 d4 40.g4 e4
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 41.g6 1xf2 42.xf2 xf2 43.e6+ d5
5.xe5 g6 6.c4 At the present time this 44.e8 h2 45.g5 d6 46.h6 g2+
looks like the most dangerous continuation. 47.f6 f2+ 48.g7 g2+ 49.h8 d7
White takes bags of space, putting the onus 50.g8 h2 51.h7 e6 52.g7 g2+
on Black to find counterplay. b6 7.c3 53.f8 f2+ 54.e8 a2 55.g6+ f5
g7 8.e3 c5 56.f6+ g5 57.f8
[ The 'critical' line, but one which seems to 1-0
leave Black fighting for a draw. Alekhine
expert Alexander Baburin recently tried
8...0-0 9.c1 c5!? against Grischuk 588 B04
(Grischuk - Baburin, Torshavn 2000) with Ernst,Thomas
the game going 10.e2 cxd4 11.xd4 h6 Josefsson,Kenneth
12.a1 f6 13.g4 xg4 14.xg4 c6 Swedish Ch Sweden 1983
15.c5 e5 16.e6+ g7 17.d5 xd5 [Nigel Davies]
18.cxd5 a5+ 19.b4 a6 20.e2 d3+
21.f1 xc5 22.bxc5 and now a5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
l o o k s b e t t e r t h a n e x c h a n g i n g q u e e n s 5.xe5 g6 6.f3 e6
( in the game Baburin was much worse after [ In 'The Complete Alekhine' (1992) Burgess
22...xe2+ 23.xe2 b6 24.c6 f4 op ine d t h a t 6...f6 was probably necessary
25.d3 )] but then reconsidered this view in 1996
[ 8...c6 is a known concept, allowing ('New Ideas in the Alekhine Defence'). My
doubled pawns but eliminating the knight on view is that if Black has to play the ugly 6 ...
e5. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work f6 the Kengis variation would be put out of
after 9.xc6 bxc6 10.d2 a5 11.e2 a4 business. ]
12.d1 0-0 13.h6 was much better for 7.c4
W hite in Ivanov - Men, US Ch., Durango [ 7.c4 doesn't make much of an impression
1992. ] on Black's game and the queen starts to
9.dxc5 xd1+ 10.xd1 xe5 11.cxb6 look misplaced on f 3. Luther - Bagirov,
xc3+ Leningrad 1989 continued g7 ( 7...c6
[ Black should take the chance to double 8.0-0 d7 9.c3 g7 10.d1 xe5
White's pawns as after 11...axb6 12.d4 11.xd5 xd5 12.xd5 g7 was also very
xd4 13.xd4 White was much better in comfortable for Black in Sherzer -
Campora - Abreu, Las Palmas 1993 ] Panchenko, Chicago 1992) 8.0-0 c6 9.e1
12.bxc3 axb6 13.d2 d7 14.e2 c5 d7 10.xd7 xd7 11.c3 0-0 12.g5
601
fe8 13.h3 c7 14.d2 d5 15.xd5 589 B04

cxd5 when Black's position was already Fedorchuk,Sergey A 2671
slightly preferable ] Genocchio,Daniele 2416
7...b4 8.xb7 xd4! Open Conegliano ITA (5) 02.06.2008
[ Burgess and his trusty computer give award [John Watson]
it a '?!' and give some convoluted lines
based on 8...c2+ 9.d1 xa1 10.xa8 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
g7 11.d2 ( or 11.b7 - Fleck ) 11...c5!? 5.c4 c6 6.0-0 g7 7.exd6 xd6 8.bd2
, "all of which requires careful analysis". I'd Th is is a n o ld lin e t h a t h as a lways b e e n
prefer to skip the 'careful analysis' and go considered somewhat better for White. Black
down the pub. Taking on d4 feels right to tries to play as he does in the Caro-Kann and
me. ] other Alekhine lines, with a ...c6 centre. g4
9.xa8 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 d7 11.b3
[ 9.xb4 xe5+ 10.e2 d7 11.c3 g7 [ 11.e1 is the traditional and natural move,
12.0-0 0-0 13.e3 ab8 gave Black strong intending Bg5 in many lines. W ith Bb3,
play in Ziska - Flindtholt, Festuge 1991 ] White aims for c4 directly. ]
9...xe5+! 11...0-0 12.c4 5f6 13.e3 ad8
[ Burgess only gives 9...c2+ which feels all Now the key for Black, if he doesn't want to
wrong to me. I like my knights where they fall under a permanent bind is to get one of
are, bringing 'Dobbin' (the one on b4) back the freeing moves ...e5 or ...c5 in.
to c6 ke eps W h it e's qu ee n o ut of play. [ 13...b5!? , to secure the d5 square, is
Meanwhile Black will race ahead with the another strategy. ]
rest of his development - good 14.e1
compensation for the exchange as White's [ 14.e2 might be more accurate. ]
king is in the middle. This is the kind of 14...fe8 For example, here are the two
factor that materialistic computers tend to possible breaks:
underestimate. ] [ 14...e5 15.dxe5 xe5 16.xd6 xf3+
10.d1 4c6 11.c3 g7 12.e3 0-0 17.gxf3 xd6 18.xa7! with two bishops
13.b7 d8+ 14.e1 d4 15.d3 bc6 and a mobile queenside. ( 18.c5 d2
16.d5 b8 17.a6 h6 18.f1 xe3 19.xf8 xf8 with the ideas ...Rxb2 and ...
19.e1 f5 20.xf5 xf5 21.xe3 d3+ Bc5 gives Black full compensation. )]
22.g1 xb2 23.h3 d2 24.f1 e2+ [ 14...c5 15.dxc5 xc5 16.xd6 exd6
25.h2 d6+ 26.f4 17.c2 and Black's weaknesses on d5 and
[ 26.g3 xg3 is not an improvement ] d6 are a problem. ]
26...xf4 27.c5 e5 28.f3 xe3?? 15.g5!? This sets up an indirect attack on f7.
[ A jolly amusing way to draw a winning 16 c5 threatens.
position. 28...xg2+ butchers White on the [ 15.c1 with the idea Bf4 is another
spot and I could see the headlines in the approach. ]
Swedish newspapers. Ernst is a GM but I've 15...c5!? Good alternatives are
never heard of Josefsson. ] [ 15...c7 16.d2!? e5 17.d5 b6 , ]
29.hf1 xg2+? [ 15...f8 16.c5 c7 17.f3 e5 , and ]
[ Black may also be winning after 29...e5 ] [ 15...e6 . Perhaps White retains the edge in
30.h1 g1+ 31.h2 g2+ 32.h1 g1+ all these lines, but it isn't much. ]
33.h2 g2+ 16.a4 f8 17.dxc5 c7
½-½ [ Again, 17...xc5 18.xd6 exd6 19.c2
favours White, in part because Black can't
free himself by h6 20.f3 fe4? 21.b4
xa1 22.xa1 ]
18.e2!?
[ Or 18.c6 with the idea bxc6 ( 18...e5
19.e2 xc6 20.ad1 ) 19.f3 ]
602
18...xc5 19.c2 h6 20.f3 e5 21.ad1 simp ly a n a tt em p t to re ach le ss ma pp e d

Black has achieved a lot in the centre, but waters.
now faces the advance of White's queenside [ 8.g4 has been the main move
pawns supported by his bishop pair. investigated on the site in the past. e6 9.c4
[ 21.xc5 xc5 22.xe5 xc4 ] xg4 ( 9...5f6; and 9...b4 have been
21...e6! Looking at d4 and f4. looked at in the past.) 10.xg4 5f6
[ Instead, 21...a5 22.xc5! xc5 23.xe5 11.f3 d6 White has the bishop pair and a
xc4? 24.b3 b4 25.xf7+! picks up space advantage but Black is solidly placed
material. ] and has go t rid of h is problem atic ligh t
22.b4 e4?! This pawn and the d4 square squared bishop. 12.c5!? c7 13.b4 0-0
were anchors. 14.c3 Acs, P-Degraeve, J Remagen 2010
[ 22...f4 23.xf4 exf4 24.c5 gives White when fighting back in the centre with e5!
the advantage, but with plenty of play. ] would have given Black good chances. ]
23.d4 xd4 24.xd4 g4?! [ 8.f3
Clever, threatening mate and d4 but it loses A) 8...h6 has been tried by a few strong
material. Solid play by players recently. I believe the idea is that
[ 24...fe8 25.c5 d5 is preferable. ] White no longer has the Bg5 hit we see
25.xg4 xd4 26.xe4 c3 27.c5 a5 after 8...e6. 9.c4 must be critical. ( 9.a3
28.a3 xd1+ The score runs out here with a h a s b e e n t r i e d i n va r i o u s g a m e s b u t
'1-0'. Presumably the game continued for a Black's results have been reasonably
while and White eventually won. The advance successful.) 9...b4 10.a3 ( 10.c3!?
of p awns o n bo th sid es o f th e bo ard will c2 11.b1 b4 12.e3 xb1
create problems f or Black, and opposite- 13.xb1 is an exchange sacrifice that I
coloured bishops won't be relevant until more mooted in another line in this update which
material comes off the board. looks interesting, and indeed my computer
1-0 awards this position as .35 to W hite.)
10...c2 11.a2 xd4 12.xd4
( 12.xd4 xb1 13.a1 h7 did not give
590 B04 White enough. Kleinman, J-Pechenkin, V
Fedorchuk,Sergey A 2665 Toronto 2010.) 12...xb1 13.a1 f5
Shchekachev,Andrei 2546 14.f4 and White had decent
33rd Taminco Open (9) 21.07.2010 co m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e p a wn a n d wo n
[Gawain Jones] convincingly. Jones, R-Garcia, J Cardiff
2010.;
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 B) 8...e6 9.c4 If 9...Nb4 isn't any good
5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 In the previous game then there's no point to the preparatory a3.
we i n ve s t ig a t e d 6 . . . Nd 7 . T h is is B la ck' s ( 9.a3 d6 10.c4 f4 11.xf4 xf4
slightly more active choice. 7.0-0 12.c3 0-0 13.d3 g4 14.e2 e5
[ 7.g4!? was both Kasparov and Anand's 15.c2?! f5! gave Black a strong attack.
c h o i c e s e e n i n t h e a r c h i v e s . c8 Munguntuul, B -Zhao Xue Nalchik 2010.)
A slightly strange choice. ( Instead Short and 9...5f6 ( 9...b4 must be critical but
Carls en p la ye d 7...e6 which was rather after 10.a3 c2 11.a2 xd4 12.xd4
unclear after 8.c4 ) 8.c4 b4 9.e3 d7 xb1 13.g5 f6 14.xb1 fxg5 15.d1
10.xd7 xd7 11.a3 a6 12.c3 b6 I really like White's position.) 10.c3 d6
13.c2 b7 14.0-0-0 and White had a 11.h4 0-0 12.xf5 exf5 13.d3 g6
pleasant position. Rundgren, A-Rodvik, T 14.g5 gave White a small advantage.
Oslo 2010. ] Wyss, J-Tomazini, A Chur 2010. ]
7...d7 8.d3 This move has only been [ 8.g4 was Adams' choice which may give
played sporadically but the average ELO has W hite a tiny edge. xg4 9.xg4 xe5
been pretty high. Fedorchuk fails to get any ( 9...e6 was seen in Adams-Zhao Xue
advantage, however, and I wonder if this was analysed last year in which Mickey
603
eventually converted his small advantage.) 10.f4

10.dxe5 c8 11.e4 g6 12.c4 c7 [ 10.b3 has also been played but doesn't
13.d2 f5 14.xf5 gxf5 15.f3 e6 trouble Black. d6 11.d2 e5 12.b2
16.e3 e7 17.fd1 c5 and Black's exd4 13.xd4 0-0 14.f3 e8 15.e1
position was solid enough to hold the draw. when Black's pieces coordinate slightly
Sipos, I-Tomazini, A Chur 2010. ] better than White's. Borriss, M-Degraeve,
[ 8.c4 is another option which I imagine J Germany 2007. ]
might take off. b4 9.g4! A clever way to 10...b6 A new move but probably not an
defend c2 which has had a couple of tests improvement.
recently. e6 ( 9...c2 10.e3 xe3 [ I see nothing wrong with 10...e7 when
11.xe3 e6 seems playable. ) 10.e3 11.c3 0-0 12.f3 xd3 13.xd3 e5!
A) Taking the pawn looks too risky. 14.dxe5 xe5 15.e2 xf3+ 16.xf3
10...xb1 11.xb1 xa2 12.d2 b4 left Black comfortably equal although he
13.d5! a5 ( 13...exd5 Lupulescu- later went on to lose. Zhang Pengxiang-
Grunberg in the archives via the 8.Ng4 Grunberg, M Cannes 2005. ]
move order.) 14.dxe6 fxe6 Langer, M- 11.e3
Pechenkin, V Edmonton 2010 when [ 11.c5 would be a concrete try at an
15.c3! would have left White with the advantage although committal as it cedes
upper hand.; the d5 square. However I think that following
B) 10...g6 11.a3 a6 12.d5 e5 13.b4 d8 12.c3 e7 13.b3 c8 14.a4
c5 14.c3!? ( 14.b5 c7 15.g4 White has chances to convert his initiative
looks good for White.) 14...cxb4 15.b5 into some advantage. ]
c5 ( 15...c7 holds on. ) 16.d6 0-0 11...c7 Black has a typical Scandinavian or
17.d5 b6 18.b2 xd6? 19.xb6 Caro-Kann setup in which he is very solidly
xb6 20.xd6 xd6 21.xd6 ad8 placed. He has managed to get his bishop
22.fd1 1-0 Philippe, C-Green, A Hastings outside the pawn chain and I don't really see
2010. ] why he should have any problems here.
8...e6 [ 11...c5 looks the easiest to me when the
[ 8...a5!? might be possible to grab the b4 obligatory 12.dxc5 xc5 13.xc5 xc5
square although I think W hite retains a 14.a4+ e7 15.xc5+ xc5 reminds me
small something with 9.c4 b4 10.c3 ] of certain lines of the Caro Kann where
9.c4 5f6 And this is the most sensible Black must be ok although perhaps White
retreat square. still has a slight advantage thanks to his
[ 9...5b6 has also been tried but the knight queenside majority. ]
just gets in the way here. 10.b3 ( 10.f4 12.c3 d6 13.h3 0-0 14.c1
e7 11.c3 0-0 Nevednichy, V-Beudaert, [ Again, perhaps, White should play
X Creon 2004 and here White should have concretely with 14.c5 h2+ ( 14...e7
played concretely with 12.g4! g6 13.xg6 15.f4 is definitely something.) 15.h1
hxg6 14.a4 when White should be better xd3 16.xd3 f4 17.f3 e5 ( 17...xe3
although there's nothing particularly wrong 18.fxe3 is quite promising.) 18.xf4 exf4
with Black's setup either.) 10...a5 11.a4 but I doubt White has anything here. ]
b8 12.f4 ( 12.c5 d5 13.c3 14...ad8
le ave s W h ite a s f avo urit e .) 12...d6 [ 14...e5 15.c5 e7 16.dxe5 xe5
13.xd6 xd6 14.c5 d5 Pavlidis, A- would have promised Black easy equality as
Loeffler, S Plovdiv 2008 when White should 17.f4 xd3 18.xd3 xc5 leaves White
have retreated his queen to 15.d1 c8 wit h n o go o d d isco ve re d a t t a ck o n t h e
16.f4 e4 17.d2 when White is a little bishop. ]
better. ] 15.a4 a6 16.fd1 fe8 17.b4 b8
[ 9...b4 doesn't equalise: 10.xb4 xb4 18.b3 h6 19.a4 White has grabbed space
11.b3 c5 12.f4 b6 13.c3 on the queenside but it hasn't changed the
with a small but pleasant edge. ] assessment from equal. e5 Black decides
604
he's played all his preparatory moves and so pressure against W hite's remaining centre
plays the thematic central breakthrough. pawn and avoids shutting in the other bishop
[ 19...e4 would also have been fine for with e7-e6 7.0-0
Black. ] [ After 7.d2 it's best not to try for too much
20.d5 xd3 21.xd3 c5 as after f4?! ( Respectable are 7...d7
[ I think Black should take control over the and; 7...g7 ) 8.c4 e6 9.xe6 xe6
centre immediately and therefore 21...e4 10.f3 f6 11.b3 White had a strong
was stronger, when 22.e2 c5 shouldn't initiative in A.Grischuk-H.Nakamura, Beijing
leave him with any problems. ] 2012. ]
22.a5 7...g7 8.e1 This seems a little slow. Two
[ White should have exploited Black's alternatives should have been considered:
previous with 22.e4! as xe4 23.xe4 [ Firstly 8.f3 0-0 9.c4 c7 10.c3 g4
wh e n t h e b is h o p p a i r a n d li gh t sq u a r e The bishop help to put pressure on the d4
control is at least something. ] pawn. 11.e3 d7 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3
22...e4 23.e2 c7?! But this is the first real f5!? A strange move at first glance. However
error. it gains space and controls the e4 square. It
[ I see nothing wrong with 23...cxb4 24.a4 introduces the idea of f5-f4 which is
f4 and Black has the better prospects. ] consistent with the plan of undermining the
24.a4 e7 25.b1 cxb4? This is a curious d4 pawn. 14.d5 White decides to advance
blunder, I wonder what Shchekachev missed. the pawn out of harm's way, but now the
T h a n k s t o h i s p re vio u s e rro r h e 's u n d e r b l a c k k n i g h t g a i n s t h e e 5 s q u a r e . e5
pressure now but he had to sit tight with 15.f4 xf3+ 16.xf3 e5! and Black had
[ 25...b8 when Fedorchuk would have been equalised in Aveskulov, V (2526)-Baklan, V
forced to play accurately to get anything. (2627)/Kharkov 2009. ]
Perhaps Black was worried about 26.xc5 [ Alternatively 8.c4 c7 9.e3 0-0 10.f4
xc5 27.bxc5 xc5 28.c3 when the d d7 11.c3 e6 12.g4 xe5 13.dxe5
p a wn i s p o t e n t i a l l y s t r o n g b u t B l a c k ' s
f6 A typical Alekhine strategy: Black lets
position is hardly lost. ] White build a centre and then dismantles it.
26.c5! xc5 27.xc5 xc5 28.bc1 14.exf6 xf6 15.e1 g7 16.d1 c7
The bishop drops and so Black threw in the 17.xc8 axc8 18.b3 cd8 with balanced
towel. It seems that 6...Bf5 is currently doing chances in Vovk, Y (2546) -Miroshnichenko,
better than 6...Nd7 and 8.Nd3 won't change E (2667)/Cappelle la Grande 2009 ]
the assessment. I wonder, however, if we'll 8...0-0 9.f3 A typical retreat for White in this
see more of 8.c4!? while 8.Nf3 still causes p a wn c e n t r e . H e h a s m o r e s p a c e s o h e
Black some difficulties in finding equality. prefers not to exchange pieces. He
1-0 anticipates Black's Nd7 challenge to his horse
by returning it to f3 straightaway.
[ N o n e t h e l e s s 9.c4 might have set Black
591 B04 more problems. ]
Francisco,R 2281 9...f5 10.c3 White consolidates his d4 pawn
Zherebukh,Y 2625 and plans the manoeuvre Na3 and Nc4 to het
US Chess Masters 2014 (1.4) 28.08.2014 his horse in touch with the e5 square. But as
[Neil McDonald] we shall see Black can easily equalise or
more. d7 11.a3 c5 Black nibbles away at
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 the d4 pawn. Another approach was
5.xe5 c6 With his last two moves Black has [ 11...e5 which would free Black's game, but
eliminated the white e5 pawn and maybe reduce the tension too much for an
strengthened his control of the d5 square. ambitious player of Black. ]
White keeps a space advantage but the black 12.g5
position is a tough nut to crack. 6.e2 g6 [ There is a forcing line if White attacks d5
T h e k in gs i d e f ia n ch e t t o p r e p a re s t o p u t and b7 with 12.b3 namely e6 13.xb7
605
e4 14.b3 xf3 15.xf3 cxd4 16.cxd4 592 B04

xd4 and Black is doing fine as after Gallagher,Joseph G
17.xd5 c5 18.c4 xd5 19.xd5 exd5 Baburin,Alexander
20.d1 g7 he has pressure on b2 and 10th Monarch Assurance (6) 04.10.2001
21.xd5? would be bad for White after fd8 [Nigel Davies]
22.xd8+ xd8 ]
12...h6 13.h4 5f6! Black shows he also Led by the anarchistic GM, Tony Miles, Black
knows how to retreat a knight. He blocks an has been bending the rules a bit against 4.Nf3.
attack on e7 by the white bishop and clears In this game we see Baburin giving his 4...c6
the way to safely put his own bishop on e4. another try, which certainly dampens
This continues his plan of softening up the d4 Gallagher's attacking ambitions. Castling
pawn. 14.c4 e4 15.f1 queenside turns out to be very ill-advised. 1.e4
[ White would do better to centralise his f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
pieces and bolster d4 with 15.d2 c8 [ Baburin has been playing this a bit. It is a
16.ad1 ] similar line to Tony Miles' favourite treatment
15...c8 16.dxc5 White concedes the d4 with 4...dxe5 5.xe5 c6 . There is often a
point as the pressure was getting transposition if Black later captures on e5. ]
uncomfortable. xc5 17.xd8 Losing more 5.c4
ground. White would still have an active game [ Probably the most critical reply, gaining
after space in th e cen tre. W hite has s evera l
[ 17.d4 ] other possibilities of which 5.e2 and ]
17...fxd8 18.fd2 f5 19.b3 [ 5.c4 are the most common. ]
[ White loses material after 19.xe7 b5 ] 5...c7 The availability of the c7 square is one
19...d3 Black has liquidated the d4 pawn of the plus points of 4.. . c6. The danger is
and now acquires the bishop pair. 20.xd3 that Black might drift into a passive position
xd3 21.e5 b5 22.d4 a4 23.ef3 because he is not challenging White's centre
e6 24.g3 f8 25.b3 Now the white energetically enough. 6.exd6 exd6 7.c3
queenside pawns become more fragile. He g4 8.h3 h5 9.e3
should have made do with [ White played the aggressive 9.g4!? g6
[ 25.h3 ] 10.b3!? in McShane - Baburin, Kilkenny
25...e8 26.c4 b4 Notice how the advance 1998, and obtained a strong initiative after
of White's queenside pawns has opened up b6 ( I prefer 10...c8 , which would
squ are s t o B lack's da rk squ are d b ish op . probably have been Baburin's choice this
27.e3 time around. )]
[ Makes matters worse, but White is going 9...e7 10.g4 g6 11.b3 c8! 12.e2
downhill anyway after 27.ed1 e4 ] a6!
27...c5 28.d1 b5! 29.ed3 [ A clever move, avoiding the dangers of
[ White is going to be left with a feeble pawn 12...0-0 13.h4!? and preparing ... b7-b5
on c4 as 29.cxb5 allows a back rank trick: should W hite castle queenside. Actually
xd4 30.xd4 xd4 31.xd4 c1+ ] it's difficult to know where he should put
29...bxc4 30.bxc4 b6 31.e5 e4 his king after the weakening g2-g4. ]
32.b3 xd3 33.xd3 f6 White either gave 13.d2 d7 14.0-0-0?!
up or lost on time. In any case the c4 pawn is [ A very committal move, typical of
dropping. A good example of how a top player Gallagher's sharp style. But on this occasion
c a n p o s i t i o n a l l y o u t p la y a l o we r ra n k e d it misfires badly. I prefer 14.f4 , not worrying
opponent. about the loss of castling rights after h4+
0-1 15.f2 xf2+ 16.xf2 ]
14...d5 15.f4 f6 16.f5 f7 17.b1 b5!
18.cxb5
[ White has little choice but to open the a-file
as 18.c5 is met by xc5 19.dxc5 d4
606
etc. In the game we get a similar theme. ] no real attacking chances.

18...axb5 19.f4 c5! POW!! This bolt from [ T h e s i m p l e 10.0-0 should be preferred,
the blue sets in motion a powerful attack. although I doubt whether white has any
20.c2 advantage. ]
[ 20.dxc5 is strongly met by d4 ] 10...c6! After this unexpected and very
20...b4! 21.b5 strong move it is white who has to fight for
[ Gallagher tries to confuse the issue.
equality. Black's main target is the d4 square.
21.dxc5 bxc3 22.xc3 xa2 23.xa2 d4+ 11.xc6 Forced.
is a sample of the horrors that face White in [ 11.f3 g4 is even worse. ]
many variations. ] 11...bxc6 12.e5
21...xb5 22.xb5 cxb5 23.dxc5 0-0 [ 12.e3 e6! 13.b3 a4!? looks good for
24.he1 xc5 25.b3 d4 26.xc5 black. ( Maybe 13...c5 is even better. )]
Bailing out into a bad endgame. 12...xe5 13.dxe5 e6! 14.b3 xd1+
[ After 26.xc5 there follows xa2+ 27.c1 15.xd1 a4 Opening the a-file obviously
b3 28.xb3 xb3 etc. ] favours black. 16.e4!? It's not easy to find a
26...xb3 27.xc8 xa2+ 28.c1 fxc8+ good defence for white.
29.d2 d5 30.d3 d8 31.a1 xa1 [ 16.c5? is too optimistic in view of d5!
32.xa1 g2 33.h4 h3 34.g1 h5! 17.xa4 b4 18.d2 xa2! ]
Breaking up White's pawns. 35.gxh5 xf5+ [ Maybe 16.0-0 is the best chance, as the
36.d2 f7 37.c1 e6 38.c5 h8 ro ok e nd ing a f t e r axb3 17.axb3 a3
39.h6 gxh6 40.xb5 h5 41.b6+ f7 18.b1 xc4 ( 18...d8!? ) 19.xc4 xc4
42.xb4 d8 43.b7+ g6 44.b6 e8 20.bxc4 xc3 21.fc1! xc1+ 22.xc1
45.d6 d3 46.g5 f8 47.e3 c8 48.g5 seems to be holding. ]
c2+ 49.e3 e2+ 50.f3 e4+ 51.g3 16...axb3 17.axb3 f5 18.c5 a5 19.d3
f5 52.xf6+ e5 53.f2 e1 54.f6+ [ 19.b4 was possible, but Black is better
d5 55.f4 g6 56.g5 e4+ 57.g3 after a2 20.g4 e6! 21.xe6 fxe6
g4+ 58.h3 e4 59.f6 e3 60.f1 22.h3 b2! ]
e2 61.h1 e4 19...xd3 20.xd3! xe5+ 21.d2 d7
0-1 22.he1 xe1 23.xe1 e5 24.c3 f5 25.f3
f7 26.a1 e7 27.c2?
[ 27.b4! was better, and black needs to work
593 B04 hard to win the endgame. ]
Gallagher,Joseph G 2510 27...c5! 28.h5 f6 29.hxg6 hxg6 30.a8
Kengis,Edvins 2575 f8
Bern Berna 1992 [ 30...f8! was possible immediately. But in
[Alexander Volzhin] couple of moves black finds this idea. ]
31.a6 b6 32.a5 d7 33.a6 f6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 34.a8 f8! Straightforward technique.
5.xe5 g6 This move was revived by the 35.b4 cxb4+ 36.xb4 b6+ 37.c3
Latvian GM Vladimir Bagirov. His compatriot [ 37.c5?? d7+ 38.d5 d6# ]
GM Edvins Kengis is an old adherent of this 37...e6 38.g8 f7 39.c8 d6 40.h8
line too. 6.c4 A natural looking move, but in g7 41.e8 f6 42.g4 d8!? 43.xd8
the game black solved his opening problems xd8 44.gxf5 gxf5 45.c5 A very weak
very easily. move, but the endgame is lost anyway.
[ As 6.f3 e6 7.c4 g7 8.c3 c6 [ 45.d3 g5 46.e3 c5 /\\ Nb7-d6-/+ ]
9.0-0 d7 also doesn't promise white too 45...g5-+ winning 46.c4
much, ] [ 46.b4 c6+! ]
[ 6.c4 became very popular. We'll consider 46...c6! 47.b4 e6 48.d1
this move in subsequent games. ] [ 48.a5 xc5 49.b6 e6 ]
6...b6 7.c3 g7 8.f4 0-0 9.e2 a5!? 48...f4 49.a5 xc5 50.b6 e6
10.h4?! Quite a dubious move, as white has
607
51.xc6 d4+ establishes a leisurely advantage in space

0-1 which is difficult to shake off. e6 9.a3 h6
10.c4 5f6 11.c3 Milliet, S-Joanovits, M
National I, Clermont-Ferrand FRA 2003 ]
594 B04 6...d7 7.f3 Gallagher plays it quietly,
Gallagher,Joseph G 2515 relying on space , freedom of movement and
Wohl,Aleksandar H 2400 the ever-present menace of a well-timed c2-
4NCL, Telford (10) 2003 c4.
[Andrew Martin] [ 7.f3!? shouldn't trouble Black: xe5
8.dxe5 e6 9.0-0 g6! 10.c3 c7
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 11.d3 g7 12.g3 d4 13.e3 g4
5.xe5 c6!? An idea of Tony Miles, endorsed 14.xg4 xg4 15.f4 0-0 16.a4 fd8=
by GM Nigel Davies in his recent book on the Baron Rodriguez, J-Lezcano Jaen, P
Alekhine. Naturally there should be several Lanzarote 2003 ]
ways for White to get a small edge, although 7...b5!? trying to take advantage of White's
whether he can obtain more is very much Bishop in the most direct way. 8.b3 e6
open to question. The Black position is very 9.0-0 b7 10.bd2 c5 11.c4
solid. 5...c6 keeps options open for the Bishop [ 11.c3 c4 12.c2 c7 is quite in order for
on c8 and after c2-c4, Black's Knight can drop Black. ]
back to c7 if necessary, with ...Ne6 to follow. 11...bxc4 12.xc4 e7 13.g5
6.c4 The Bishop is a little on the exposed Gallagher sees a veiled tactic. This shot is
side here. As noted, I prefer 6 Be2. only the beginning. 0-0
[ 6.d3 d7 7.f3 e6 ( 7...7f6 [ 13...xg5 14.d6+ f8 15.xb7 e7
I prefer this move which doesn't block the 16.xd5 exd5 17.e1 ]
Bc8. 8.a3 g4 9.0-0 e6 10.h3 h5 11.c4 14.xe7 xe7 15.d6 xf3 16.xf3 cxd4
b6 12.e3 bd7 13.bd2 d6 14.c2 17.xf7 That was the point, a very sharp
0-0 15.g5 g6 16.xg6 hxg6= combinational idea. b6 18.ac1 ae8
Black's position is very reasonable. 17.de4 19.fe1 g6 Looks good, but Black could
xe4 18.xe4 e7 19.f3 f6 20.e5 have taken on f7 e.g.
e8 21.fd1 d6 22.ac1 f6 23.c5 [ 19...xf7 20.xe6 ( 20.xe6? xe6
f5 24.f4 e7 25.e5 b6 26.e2 21.xe6 xf3 22.gxf3 f7 23.ce1
1/2-1/2 Moreno Carnero, J-Lezcano Jaen, c5 ) 20...xf3 21.xb6+ xb3 22.xb3
P Lanzarote 2003) 8.0-0 e7 9.e1 0-0 e5 23.a3 5c6 24.f1 d8 25.e2
10.c4 5f6 11.c3 b6 12.f4 b7 A very unclear endgame has been reached
13.e2 e8 14.ad1 Black has play ed it where I slightly prefer Black. ]
passively and has allowed White to build up 20.c6 a5 21.d1 Basically Gallagher has
an ideal attacking position f8 15.e5 thrown down the gauntlet. W ohl is a very
g6 16.g3 c8 17.c2 d6 18.xg6 talented but somewhat lazy player-here he is
xg3 19.e5 f4 20.f3 h6 21.e4 being asked to work hard to get to the bottom
d8 22.c5 f8 23.d6 e7 24.xc6 of the tactics. f4
xc6 25.xc6 g6 26.b3 d7 27.f3 [ Again, taking on f7 was possible. I am not
g7 28.xf7 ae8 29.g5 d5 30.h3 sure why Wohl rejected this idea: 21...xf7
h6 31.xe6 f5 32.f4 xe1+ 33.xe1 22.cxe6 xe6 23.xe6 de5 24.xf7+
xd4 34.xd5+ h7 35.g4 1-0 Kovalev, xf7 25.b3+ f6 26.d1 d3 ]
A-Konopka, M TCh-CZE 2003 You can get 22.d6 Amazingly, the Knight has escaped
away with this type of stuff against weaker the death sentence. g5 23.f3 e5
players. When facing Kovalev, forget it! ] I think Wohl saw this position and just decided
[ 6.e2 f5 7.0-0 d7 8.f3 The quiet t o go f o r it wi t h o u t c o u n t in g t h e p i e c e s .
treatment. White will play c2-c4 in his own 24.g3! A thoroughly annoying resource.
good time. Interpretations like this leave me f6? He has been freaked out by the tactics.
doubtful about Black's idea. W hite Black can make it to a position which should
608
be drawn: 17.d1 d8 18.c1 fe8 19.e1 c5

[ 24...xg3 25.hxg3 xc6 26.xe8 xe8 20.h4 f6 21.h5 xe1+ 22.xe1 d3
( 26...a5 27.gxf4 xb3 28.c7 c5 W h i t e i s b e i n g p u s h e d a r o u n d . 23.e2
29.xe6 xe6 30.xe6 xf4 31.d6 xb2 24.e1 d3 25.d1 xc3 26.e7
White's a little better but with best play....) f8 27.g4 f4 28.f7+ xf7 29.d8+
27.gxf4 f7 28.a4! c8 29.c1 e7 xd8 30.xd8+ f8 31.c7 e5 32.xb7
30.xc8 xc8 31.f1 ] b8 0-1 Blatny, P-Baburin,A/North American
25.xe8+- xe8 26.d6 Suddenly Whit e Open, Las Vegas USA 2003 A game which
has it all under control. Grandmasterly skill or tends to confirm the suspicion that 6 c4 is
just a stroke of luck? d3 27.h3 e2+ a premature advance. ]
28.xe2 dxe2 29.e3 g6 30.xe6 xe6 12.xd4 0-0 If any strong player were
31.xe6+ f8 32.c4 xb2 33.xe2 offered Black's position before the game they
a1+ 34.f1 d4 35.d3 a1+ 36.h2 would take it. Black has active pieces, the
e5 He didn't wait for 37 Qf5+ Knowledge of initiative and a safe King to boot. 13.0-0-0
the opponent plays a crucial role. Gallagher's Hopeful. Black presses on with the initiative.
skill in this game lay in creating the type of a6 14.d3 fd8! 15.xf5 xf5
position which Wohl would play inaccurately, i. Once again we reach a structure where White
e. a violent tactical battle. As far as 5...c6 would much rather not have his pawn on c4.
goes I am not sure..... He can probably defend this position with
1-0 ca re f u l p l a y b u t t h a t is n o t f o rt h c o m in g .
Probably Gilliani just didn't like his position
and in that frame of mind one cannot play
595 B04 endless good moves. 16.c2?
Gillani,Tunveer MD 2277 [ 16.e2! is a better stab at defence: b5!
Baburin,Alexander 2527 17.g3 ( 17.h3 d6 18.g4 e6 19.cxb5
36th Olympiad (10) 25.10.2004 xe2 20.bxa6 xa6 21.b1 ) 17...f6
[Andrew Martin] 18.b3 e6 19.cxb5 xb3 20.axb3 cxb5
21.c3 ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 16...f4+ 17.d2
5.xe5 c6 Baburin is quite happy to play this [ 17.e3 xc4 ]
line against all comers. It seems solid but 17...xd4 THE VERDICT: 6 c4 is a poor
passive as I have remarked before. As usual choice.
with these limited variations, W hite does 0-1
better to build up slowly, gradually turning the
screw, rather than to attack immediately.
6.c4!? I'm not sure about this. Black seems 596 B04
OK in the complications. b4 7.e3 f5 Golubov,Saveliy 2344
8.d3 If this is the best that White has then Bortnik,A 2516
he had better look elsewhere. e5! 9.xb4 Somov Memorial 2014 (7.1) 20.05.2014
xb4+ 10.c3 a5 11.b3 [Neil McDonald]
[ 11.c1 is probably a mistake: xa2!?
Why not? 12.e2 ( 12.d2 a5 ) 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3
12...0-0 13.dxe5 d8 14.c5 b3! ] [ The variation examined in this game can
11...exd4N Black opens up the game to also arise via the move order 4.c4 b6
s a t is f y h is a c t ive p ie c e s. A n in t e r e st in g 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.h3 ( Here White
novelty from the Baburin laboratory! But Black has the option of 7.e3 which has caused
may well have more than one good move here Black problems- see the archives.) 7...g7
as another Baburin game shows: 8.f3 0-0 9.e2 c6 10.0-0 f5 etc. ]
[ 11...0-0 12.e2 exd4 13.xd4 a6 4...g6 5.e2 Unnecessarily passive in this
14.0-0 c5 The pawn on c4 sticks out like move order. We have seen a lot of examples
a sore thumb. 15.e5 ae8 16.g3 b4 of
609
[ 5.c4 b6 ( or 5...c6 ) 6.b3 Therefore White has to dissolve his strong
in the archives. ] c5 pawn. 17.cxb6 xb6 18.c5 h4
5...g7 6.0-0 0-0 7.exd6 cxd6 8.c4 b6 and Black had an active game in Bohm, H-
9.h3 A useful preventive move as after say Alburt, L, Wijk aan Zee 1980. ]
[ 9.c3 c6 10.e3 g4 The exchange 12.e3?!
on f 3 is unappealing for W hite. Already [ White might have tried to profit by cajoling
Black threatens 11...Bxf3 when if 12.Bxf3 B l a c k ' s b i s h o p t o f 6 w i t h 12.g5!?
Nxc4. 11.b3 d5 Black is going to play Bxf3 for example f6 13.e3 e4 14.h2 d5
so it makes sense to set up a solid light 15.c5 c8 16.g4 xg4 17.hxg4
squared structure in the centre. 12.c5 c8 and White has the bishop pair and a solid
13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 e6 15.d2 8e7 centre. The position is far from clear after
and Black's knight comes to f5 to put say 8e7 but perhaps Black would have
pressure on d4. He has scored very well in done better with 11...d5. ]
this variation, see for example Ducros Salva, [ Meanwhile 12.d5? e4 is best avoided by
A (2203)-Pinheiro, J (2371)/Palma de White. ]
Mallorca 2002. ] 12...e4 13.e1 d5 14.c5 d7 15.a4
9...c6 10.c3 f5 The most active square [ Instead 15.b5 might have been more
for the bishop now it is denied g4. 11.b3 active as the knight aims at the d6 square. ]
[ Instead 11.f4 was played in Nataf, I 15...e6! Clearing the way for the advance of
(2560)-Konopka, M (2441)/ Pardubice CZE his f-pawn. 16.c2 f5 17.d2 f6 18.g5?
2002- see the archives. ] Surprisingly enough, this might be the
11...e5!? This advance looks attractive now decisive mistake as it lets Black's pawns
that White has weakened himself along the rampage forwards on the kingside.
diagonal with 11.b3. It is hard to criticise a [ Golubov should have recalled
move when it leads to a sparkling attack with Nimzowitsch's teachings about prophylaxis
sacrifices, but as we shall see W hite could and set up a more permanent barrier to
have thrown a spanner in the works on his Black's f-pawn than his bishop on f4, which
next move. So maybe objectively speaking can be brushed aside. This can be done
the alternative pawn thrust with 18.f4! Then Black decided to open
[ 11...d5!? was to be preferred. For example l i n e s w i t h exf3 19.xf3 in Mamedov, N
12.c5 ( White has tried standing his ground (2392) -Badjarani, I (2368)/Baku 2001. Now
with 12.e3!? dxc4 13.bxc4 but Black can f4 20.f2 g5 threatening the h3 pawn and
undermine and then liquidate the hanging clearing the way for 21...Nf6 looks active
p a wn s wi t h a5 14.c5 d5 15.xd5 for Black. ]
xd5 16.a4 b6! as in Andreev, E- 18...f7 19.f4 g5! Exactly. This energetic
Rozentalis, E, Cappelle La Grande 2013.) pawn thrust breaks the blockade on the f4
12...d7 13.b2 ( here 13.xd5? xc5! square. 20.d6
is already excellent for Black.) 13...e4 [ After 20.xg5 f4 Black pawns are ready to
putting the bishop on e4 is a thematic idea strike against the white king's defences with
i n t h i s t y p e o f p a w n c e n t r e . 14.a4 21...f3. ]
He has to guard the d4 pawn again because 20...f4! Anyway! Black is positionally justified
of the threat of 14...Bxf3 and 15...Nxd4. in sacrificing the exchange as he will have an
( 14.xe4 fails as in the previous note to a enormous advantage in firepower where it
knight capture on c5: dxe4 15.g5 xc5 ) ma t te rs, na m ely o n t h e kin gsid e . 21.xf8
14...xf3 15.xf3 e6 16.d2 xf8 White has a knight on a4 no where near
( Instead White has tried to stop Black's next the kingside. There are no open lines on the
move with 16.d3 but Black was at least queenside to use to distract Black from his
equal af ter b8!? 17.fd1 b5 18.cxb6 o n s l a u g h t o n t h e o t h e r w i n g . 22.f3?
axb6 19.e2 c8 in Rozentalis, E-Appel, R, W hite is understandably keen to block the
Bundesliga 2006.) 16...b5! a key idea. The advance 22...f3, but in doing so he shuts in
wh i t e k n i g h t c a n ' t r e t r e a t a s d 4 f a l l s . his bishop on e2- his only minor piece that
610
was helping to defend his king. And as we neutralizes Bf4, whereas Bg5 seldom
shall see, the pawn that Black acquires on e3 achieves anything. 12.b3 Okay, but White
helps him to set up a mating net by depriving sort of drifts around in this game.
the white queen and rook on f1 access to the [ Now 12.c5 c7 13.f4 is also possible.
second rank. A better defensive chance was Then f5 at any point will activate Black's
[ 22.g4 though Black keeps up his attack bishop on c7, however, . ]
after xg4 23.hxg4 f6 ] [ Just clamping down with 12.f4 is a decent
22...e3 23.c3 Now the white queen joins her alternative. ]
knights in exile on the queenside. Black is 12...c7 13.h3
able to make some heavy sacrifices to remove [ Better looks 13.g3 0-0 ( 13...h5!? 14.c5
the flimsy cover in front of the white king. h5 e7 15.c4 i n t e n d i n g B f 4) 14.f4
24.b4 xh3! 25.b5 . Well, that's at best a technical point. It's a
[ After 25.gxh3 xh3 the threat of 26... Blitz game, after all. ]
Qg3+ 27.Kh1 Rf6 and mate along the h-file 13...0-0 14.b2 ad8 15.d2 fe8
is decisive. ] [ 15...c5! 16.fd1 ce4 17.xe4 xe4
25...e7 26.c6 bxc6 27.bxc6 f5! 18.e1 e7!? has ideas of ...Qh4. Black
It turns out White's bid for counterplay on the has the initiative. ]
queenside has merely brought the black knight 16.fd1 f4!?
into the kingside attack. 28.b5 [ Again, 16...c5 17.e1 ce4 ]
[ Even after a move like 28.c4 Black can 17.e1 e5 18.d5 xe3!? Giving up the dark
play g3 with the decisive idea of moving squares is a bit odd, but not bad. The
the bishop back from h3 and mating on h1. ] consistent move is
28...xg2! 29.xg2 g4 30.cxd7 h3+ [ 18...e4 , to use the e5 square. ]
31.g1 g3 Mate will soon follow. A splendid 19.fxe3 c5 20.ac1 b6 21.f1
a t t a c k b y B o r t n i k. I l ike t h e wa y B la ck' s [ 21.dxc6 bxc6 ]
sacrifices increased in size from a pawn, to 21...h6 22.h2 cxd5 23.xd5 xd5
the exchange, to a bishop. 24.cxd5 e4 25.c4 d6 26.a3
0-1 [ Eyeing the blockader. 26.c3 is the other
way. All this has been well-played, and I'd
guess the chances are level. The opening
597 B04 was interesting, especially Black's calm
Grischuk,Alexander 2715 treatment, and bishop on d6 (not e7!). The
Carlsen,Magnus 2714 rest is a yawner. ]
World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (38) 22.11.2007 26...e4 27.b4 xc4 28.bxc4 g6
[John Watson] 29.g3 a6 30.a3 d7 31.g4 g6
32.xg6 xg6 33.c5 a8 34.d2 e4
Another Ng4-e3 game! Not the most exciting 35.dd1 f6 36.a4 f7 37.a5 c7 38.d6
affair, but I like Black's method of reducing d7 39.c5 h5 40.h4 g6 41.e1 d3
White's chances in the opening. 1.e4 f6 42.ed1 e4 43.e1 f5 44.g3 c7
2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 45.d6 d7 46.c5 g6 47.ed1 c7
6.e2 f5 7.0-0 d7 8.g4 e6 9.c4 5f6 48.d6 d7 49.c5 b6 A break! Nothing
10.e3 g6 11.c3 In the note to our other much h as hap pened f or 25 moves or so .
game, Hague tried Black justifies everything tactically. 50.axb6
[ 11.d5!? versus John Cox, which may be axb6 51.xb6 a2 52.g1 b7 53.c5
premature. ] xd5 54.a1 e2 55.ae1 xe1 56.xe1
[ 11.c5 followed by f4 was given by my f5 57.a1 e4 58.f2 d7 59.a4+ f5
computer - that's hard to believe. See the 60.a7
note there. ] ½-½
11...d6! As indicated in the other games, I
prefer this active outpost. It also makes sense
on general grounds, because it prevents or
611
598 B04 g8 13.c3 g7 14.g3 xd4 15.d1

Grischuk,Alexander 2763 is very risky for Black) 12.h4 g7 13.c3
Kamsky,Gata 2746 0-0 14.e1 ]
40th Olympiad Open (9.1) 06.09.2012 [ 11.f4 if White was going to play this move
[Tom Rendle] then here seems to be the best time for it,
for example after g7 12.e3 White has
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 enough control over the centre to avoid ...
5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 7.0-0 d7 8.g4 c5 being a serious problem ]
I have to say I like this move, it seems to lead 11...g7 12.c3 c8
to a stable slight edge for White - in this game [ 12...xe5 13.dxe5 c8 also seems
though it looks like Grischuk is after more completely fine for Black ]
than that. ... 13.f4?! An attempt to hold on to the
[ 8.f3 , Ng4 and Nd3!? have all been advantage of the White pieces that only leads
covered in the archives ] to problems.
8...xg4 9.xg4 g6 [ 13.f3 b6 14.xc8+ xc8
[ 9...e6 10.d1 5f6 11.e2 e7 12.c4 is just equal ]
is slightly better for W hite and has been [ 13.xd7 xd7 14.h4 0-0 15.e4
looked at by John Watson in the instructive was probably White's best option although
(at least for White players) game Adams- Black doesn't have any real problems after
Zhao Xue ] e8! ( 15...fd8 16.g5! is a tiny bit
[ 9...7f6 10.f3 g6 11.d1 g7 12.c4 awkward for Black to deal with) 16.h6
c7 13.c3 0-0 14.e3 d7 15.h3 f5 f6 ]
16.f4 c8 17.ac1 d8 18.f3 e8 13...c5!
19.b4 b6 20.d5! and Black was struggling [ 13...xe5 was also worth considering
in Friedel, J (2505)-Ramirez, A (2577) Los 14.xc8+ xc8 15.dxe5 ( 15.fxe5?! c5!
Angeles 2010 ] is very comfortable for Black) 15...g5
10.c4 a n d it 's W h it e wh o h a s t o b e t h e m o r e
[ 10.e2 is pretty similar to 10.c4 but gives careful to maintain equality ]
White the option of recapturing on e5 with 14.e2
the Queen if Black plays Nxe5 but I'm not [ 14.e2 e6 15.dxc5 xe5 16.fxe5
really certain that it's an improvement g7 xc5+ 17.e3 xe5 18.d5 b8
( 10...xe5 11.xe5 f6 12.e1 g7 and although W hite has a lot of activity it
13.c3 e6 14.g5 0-0 15.d2 d5! should not be enough for the pawn in the
and Black equalises) 11.c4 5b6 12.f3 long-run. ]
0-0 13.a4 a5 14.f4 ( 14.c3 [ 14.xd7 xd4+! 15.f1 xd7 16.xd7+
should keep a slight edge) 14...c5! 15.d5 xd7 17.e3 e6 18.e2 hc8 19.g3
e8 ( 15...e6 16.dxe6 e7! gives Black e8 20.xd4 cxd4 21.xd4 xc4
excellent chances to equalise as Black 22.xe6 fxe6 leaves Black a little better
regain s the pawn af te r 17.exf7+ xf7 although White should hold the draw fairly
18.g3 xc4 ) 16.g5 c8 17.c3 comfortably ]
and White was better in Zhigalko, A (2566)- 14...f5
Gorovets, A (2408) Minsk 2011 ] [ 14...e6! is stronger here and now White
10...c7 has to be careful 15.xd7 ( 15.e3?! cxd4
[ 10...xe5 11.dxe5 c7 12.e4 e6 16.xd4 xd4 17.xd4 xe5 18.xc8+
13.e3 Is a slight edge for White although xc8 19.b3! xc4! 20.xg7 g8 21.d4
Black certainly remains solid it's hard for him b6 and White still has some work to do in
to get much activity. ] order to hold the ending) 15...xd7 16.d5
11.d1 A very logical move but I don't believe d4 17.xd7+ xd7 18.f2 b5!?
it to be the most accurate here and Black is pressing, the Bishop on g7 and
[ Instead 11.f4! seems to lead to a slight a Rook on b8 will cause W hite some
advantage after f6 ( 11...xe5 12.xe5 problems on b2 here. ]
612
15.g3 cxd4 55.e3 xe3 56.xf5+ xg3 The ending is

[ 15...0-0?! 16.e3 would leave White with now a theoretical draw but short on time
a comfortable space advantage ] anything can go wrong 57.e5 f2+ 58.e1
16.xd4 xe5 17.fxe5 e6 18.xe6 f4 59.e8 a2 60.d1 f3 61.e7??
Although this should be OK is does lead to a Now the rook can be forced onto the 6th rank
more difficult position for White which results in disaster
[ 18.b3! was better although it does [ 61.f8+ f4 62.d8 should still draw ]
sacrifice a pawn after c5 ( 18...xd4 61...d2+ 62.e1 d8! 63.f7+ f4
19.xd4 0-0 20.f4 c5 21.e3 Zugzwang - the Rook has to stay on the f-file
and White has some minimal edge) 19.e3 to prevent Bg3+ and so it's f orced onto a
xe5 20.f2 it's not possible for Black to worse square 64.f6
h a n g o n t o t h e p a w n a n d a l s o 0-0?? [ 64.f5 e8+! 65.d1 c8 wins ]
n o w l o s e s t o 21.c5 and the knight on e6 64...c8
drops ] 0-1
18...xe6 19.d5 b5! Kamsky finds the most
effective way to keep the pressure on 20.xb5
xc4 21.b3 xb3 22.axb3 a6 23.ba5 599 B04
d8 24.f2?! Grischuk,Alexander 2606
[ 24.f4 was perhaps a more accurate move Ponomariov,Ruslan 2630
and after 0-0 25.xa6 b8 26.a7 fe8 Torshavn op 3rd (5) 10.10.2000
27.c7 xb3 28.aa7 White's activity [John Watson]
should be enough for an easy draw ]
24...f7 25.g5 he8 26.e1 b8 27.a3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
[ 27.xa6 xb3 28.a2 seems more logical As far as I can tell from the written theory, this
to me - why not swap off one of the doubled variation is still in decent shape. 5.c4 b6
pawns? Nevertheless Black is better after 6.b3 g7 7.a4 a5!?
eb8 29.e2 8b6 ] [ 7...dxe5 has a better reputation: 8.a5
27...b5 Suddenly Grischuk is under real 6d7 9.xf7+ ( This sacrifice has appeared
pressure 28.e6+ g8 29.g3 b6! 30.e2 in many games with thorough analysis, but
h6 31.e3 xe6 32.c5 c6 it's not clear to me that W hite can't get a
[ 32...xe2+! 33.xe2 c8 was possibly little something out of 9.dxe5 , which as far
even stronger as now the pawn cannot be as I know hasn't been played. For example,
taken due to the pin on e8 ] xe5 10.xd8+ xd8 11.xe5 xe5
33.xe7 f7 34.b4 xe2+ 35.xe2 xb2 12.xf7 with the better pawn structure, a
36.a2 e5 Despite being a pawn down plausible continuation being f5 13.b3
White should have good drawing chances but a6 14.a3 c5 15.a2 ) 9...xf7
it's instructive to see how Kamsky secures the 10.g5+ g8 11.e6 e8 12.xc7 d8
full point from here. 37.d2 g5 38.b4 e6 13.xa8 exd4 . Black has always seemed
39.d3 f6 40.e3 e7 41.b2 h5 42.b5 to have enough compensation for the
axb5 43.xb5 g4 44.f4 f6 45.b7 a6 exchange here, and I don't think that will
46.h7 a3+ 47.e2?! change. ]
[ 47.c4 h4 is still strong for Black but 8.g5 e6 Lev Alburt specialized in this line.
W hite can create counterplay now wit h The earlier (and very old) old move was
48.h6! ] [ 8...d5 , when 9.f4 establishes a strong
47...a2+ 48.f1 d5 bind. ]
[ 48...xh2 was probably better but I'm 9.f4
guessing both players were down to almost [ The original try for refutation was 9.f3
30 seconds a move and the idea of bringing e7 10.e4 , but Alburt showed that dxe5
the King to f3 is certainly attractive ] 11.g5 b4+ held. Maybe this could use a
49.xh5 e4 50.h3 gxh3 51.xh3 d4 closer look! ]
52.h5 f2+ 53.e1 g2 54.f1 f3 9...dxe5 10.fxe5 c5 Attacking the base of the
613
pawn chain. 11.c3 cxd4 12.0-0 0-0 13.cxd4 23.d4! e7 24.e5 ) 23.d4 e7
c6 14.f3 24.b5 h7 25.xg7 xg7 26.e5
[ 14.e3 d5! is awkward for White. Now with a substantial advantage. ]
the battle centers around the d4-pawn. ] 15...fxe5 16.g5! d7 17.dxe5 xe5?
14...f6 Black has to move quickly, and now he [ The improvement that I give in my book is
a t t a c k s t h e f ro n t o f t h e c h a i n , t h e m o s t 17...xd1! 18.axd1 xe5 19.xe5 xf1+
common technique in the French Defence. 20.xf1 xe5 21.e3 , which I think leaves
[ 14...b4 15.g5 ( 15.c3 White somewhat better, perhaps not fatally
is also promising, especially with both e4 so to Black. At any rate, reader Luis
and b5 available.) 15...d7 16.c3 h6 Eduardo Neves Gouveia, who has been an
17.f6 xf6 18.exf6 d8 19.d2 xf6 excellent contributor, suggests that Black
( 19...h7 20.e5 ) 20.xh6 g7 21.h4 has
favours White. ] A) Luis Eduardo Neves Gouveia: 21...d5
15.c3 22.xd5 exd5 23.xd5+ ( 23.xd5 )
[ A promising pawn sacrifice, although White 23...h8 "and Black is holding". But this
has a very interesting alternative pawn doesn't look so easy, for example, 24.d4
sacrifice that may even be better: 15.exf6!? ( 24.b3!? ) 24...xd4 25.xd4 b8
xf6 ( 15...xf6 16.e3 d5 17.h6 e8 26.c4 f5 27.g4 c2 28.b3 h6 29.d5
18.c3 ) 16.c3! ( 16.e3 d5; 16.g5 b6 30.f2;
f5 threatens ..Nxd4 or ...Bxd4+) 16...xd4 B) 21...a6 and Luis gives 22.xb6 xb6
17.e3 , and it's not clear that Black can 23.d8+ f7 24.b5 c6 25.a7 c1+
equalize: 26.e2 b1 27.c2 xb2 28.d3 xh2
A) 17...xf3+?? 18.xf3+- and Bxb6; 'and three pawns for the piece - here I am
B) 17...d8 18.xd4 e5 ( 18...xd4?? not sure Black is OK but ...' Then W hite
19.xf6 xd1+ 20.xd1 xf6 21.xb6 ) should pla y 29.xc8 ( or 29.xc8 h5
19.e1 xd4 20.xd4 xd4 21.xd4 30.b5 b4 31.c4 xc4 32.xc4 g5
xd4+ 22.h1 and Black is too 33.c5 g1+ 34.d6 f6 35.b3 e5
uncoordinated to claim compensation.; 36.c3 );
C) 17...xb3! (the only way to preserve C) 21...xc3 22.d8+ f7 23.bxc3
material) 18.xb3 d5 ( 18...d7 and I said that the bishops are worth more
19.g5 e5 20.xe6+ xe6 21.xe6 than a pawn but Black can certainly hope
xf1+ 22.xf1 xc3 23.c7! b8 f o r s u r v i v a l . I w o u l d n o w a d d d7
24.bxc3 b6 25.d1 favours White, ( 23...d5 24.d4 )
although Black is not necessarily lost, and C1) acut e trick f ollows 24.e1 b6
the opposite-coloured bishops could prove 25.h8 g7? ( 25...f8 26.xb6 b8
helpful later ) 19.c5 27.c5 d7 28.d4 xb3 29.xh7+
C1) 19...xc3 20.bxc3 can lead to any is messy ) 26.xe6! xh8 27.d4+
number of lines, but I think that W hite and mates;
maintains some edge, for example, e8 C2) 24.f2 b6?! 25.c4 ( 25.d1 )
( 20...xc3 21.xc3 xc3 22.a3; 25...c5 26.h8! and Black is in trouble,
20...d8 21.ad1 ) 21.b5! ( or for example, g7 ( 26...h5 27.d4 )
21.ad1 ) 21...d8 22.ad1; 27.d4+ h6 28.f8! b7 29.f7!
C2) 19...e8 20.ae1 ( 20.d4!? e7 e4+ 30.e3 d6 31.g7+ g5
21.xg7 xg7 22.ac1 ) 20...xc3 32.h4+ xh4 33.f6+ g5 34.xh7+
21.e5! g5 22.xc3 gives plenty of g4 35.xe6+ f5+ 36.xf5+ xf5
compensation then d7 23.f7! xe5 37.xb7 xf6 38.xb6+ ]
24.xe5 xe5 25.xe5 xf7 fails to 18.xe5 xf1+ 19.xf1 d4+
26.d4 f8 27.g7+ e8 28.c5; [ 19...xe5 20.d1 d4+ 21.h1 ]
C3) 19...d8 20.ad1 xc3 ( 20...f8 20.h1 xe5 21.d8! c5
21.d4 ) 21.bxc3 xd1 22.xd1 h6 [ 21...a6 22.d1 ]
( 22...xc3?? 23.d8+; 22...f8 22.e4 b4 This makes it easy.
614
[ Or 22...f5 23.xb6 xe4 24.d1 h5 Black: 13.xf7 ( or 13.xf7 xe5 )

25.d8+ h7 26.f7 ] 13...0-0! ]
[ 22...c6!? 23.g5! d5 24.c1! e8 11...cxd4 12.0-0! 0-0 13.cxd4 c6 14.f3
( 24...d7 25.xe6 xe6 26.e1 e5 f6 The critical position of this line. 15.c3!
27.c7 xc7 28.xd5! ) 25.xd5 exd5 A very strong move. By sacrificing a pawn
( 25...xd8 26.xc8 ) 26.e1 d7 27.e7 W hite gains some important tempi for
f5 28.e1+- wins ] completing his development, and obtains a
23.g5 h8 24.f7 d7 25.xe6 xd8 dangerous initiative. Strictly speaking this
26.g8+! xg8 27.f7# move is not a novelty since it had been played
1-0 in a couple of earlier games, but its strength
had clearly been underestimated.
[ After the natural looking 15.exf6 xf6
600 B04 16.e3 d5 17.f2 f4 Black has
Grischuk,Alexander 2606 sufficient counterplay. ]
Ponomariov,Ruslan 2630 15...fxe5 16.g5! d7
Torshavn 2000 [ 16...e8 is the alternative to the text, but it
[Alexander Volzhin] doesn't solve Black's problems either. The
game Nimzo 7.32-Hiarcs 7.32, Computer
An interesting theoretical battle between two W orld Championship 2000 continued:
rising stars. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 17.dxe5 xe5 18.xe5 xf1+ 19.xf1
4.f3 g6 5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.a4! xe5 20.e1! d4+ ( or 20...g7 21.e4
The most dangerous line for Black. with a growing attack.) 21.e3! xe3+
[ T h e i m m e d i a t e 7.g5 has also been 22.xe3 e7 The only move since Black
played, but this move is not as strong since ca n ' t a ll o w 2 3 . Q f 6 : ( 22...d7 23.f6!
the addition of the moves 7.a2-a4 a7-a5 and the threat of 24.Rxe6 is decisive: f7
favours White, as we'll see later. ] 24.xe6 xf6 25.xf6+ g7 26.xb6 )
7...a5 This natural move is Black's most 23.b5! Exploiting the hanging position of
frequent choice. Black's Knight. b4 24.e8+ g7 25.f3!
[ 7...dxe5!? is a sharp alternative to the text. The Rook joins the attack. d7 26.f7+
We'll consider this move elsewhere. ] h8 27.f6+ g8 28.h1! f8 ( If
8.g5! We have already considered this line 28...xb3 29.f7+ h8 30.h3
in the game Kasparov-Palatnik, a brilliant win with unavoidable mate.) 29.xe6+ xe6
by W hite. This move still remains one of 30.xe6+ g7 31.e5+ g8 32.xf8+
W hite's main weapons. e6 9.f4 dxe5 xf8 33.h8+ e7 34.xh7+ and White
The only way for Black to obtain counterplay is is winning. ]
to challenge the centre. 17.dxe5 xe5 18.xe5 xf1+ 19.xf1
[ A f t e r p a s s i v e m o v e s l i k e 9...c6 d4+ The only move.
(as was played in Sutovsky-Reinemer, Port [ 19...xe5? l o s e s o n t h e s p o t : 20.d1
Erin 2000) White is clearly better due to his d4+ 21.h1 and White wins a piece, for
considerable space advantage: 10.c3 d7 example: g7 22.e3! ]
11.0-0 e7 12.e4 d5 13.c5 d8 20.h1 xe5 21.d8! I would like to remind
14.c2 c8 15.b3 b6 16.d3 f5 17.exf6 you once again of the importance of the fact
xf6 18.a3 d6 19.e5 8f7 20.c4 that Black's Knight on b6 is unprotected, which
with a huge edge for White. ] is due to the interpolation of the moves 7.a2-
10.fxe5 c5 11.c3! The most precise move a4 a7-a5. c5 It may seem surprising, but we
order. are still in the realms of theory! The
[ In the above mentioned game Kasparov alternatives are:
played 11.0-0 which is less precise, and [ 21...a6 Theory considers this move to be
Black could have exploited this inaccuracy best, and evaluates this position as better
by p la yin g xd4+! ( instead of 11...0-0? ) for Black. However this is far from true!
12.xd4 cxd4 with excellent prospects for A) 22.b5? was played in Zhukov-
615
P u s h k in , US S R 1 9 9 1 : d7 23.xe5 is very theoretically important. To be honest I

xe5 24.d1 xc3 25.bxc3 f8 can't see an improvement for Black after 15.
26.xb6 xb6 27.xd7 xb3 28.g1 Nc3! Black urgently needs to find an antidote
b6! and Black had good winning otherwise he will have to forget this line for
chances.; good. The only playable alternative in this line
B) 22.e1?! which was recommended in seems to be 7...dxe5 (instead of 7.. .a5) which
the comments to the above mentioned we consider in the game Oral-De Firmian .
ga me also le a ds W h it e n owh ere : f5! 1-0
23.xf5 gxf5 24.xe6+ xe6 25.xe6
xc3! 26.bxc3 xa4 and Black is fine:
27.xa6 bxa6 28.c4!? ( 28.xa5 b2 ) 601 B04
28...b2! 29.c5 a4 30.c6 a3! 31.f6 Groszpeter,Attila 2478
c4 and White has to fight for a draw; Pitschka,Klaus 2266
C) 22.d1! My improvement. After 22.Rd1 KB Czech Open (1) 21.07.2000
Black's position is very difficult. White is [Carsten Hansen]
threatening 23.Bxb6 Rxb6 24.Rd8 and it's
not easy for Black to find a defence as the 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
following variations prove: f5 ( 22...f8 5.xe5 d7!? This move was introduced by
23.xb6 xb6 24.d8 g7 25.a2 d7 the Danish Viking Bent Larsen in one of his
26.e4! and Black can't avoid vast candidates matches against Mikhail Tal. Tal
material losses; 22...a8 allows White to didn't dare to take on f7, afraid that he would
bring his Knight decisively into the attack: have to settle for a draw. However, for many
23.d5!! exd5 24.xd5 xb2 25.e5+ years Nxf7 was considered the refutation of
e6 26.xe6+ h8 27.f6! with a quick 5...Nd7, although this is no longer the case.
mate; 22...h6 is also not good in view of 6.f3 If White isn't up to the challenge of 6
23.c2! exploiting the weakening of the K- Nxf7, this is an excellent alternative. Videki &
side ) 23.xf5 gxf5 24.xb6 xb6 Krizsany consider this W hite's best option
25.d8+ f7 ( 25...f8 26.b5! a f t e r 5 . . . N d 7 . e6 7.g3 The positional
winning the Bishop on c8: c6 27.xc8! ) treatment. W hite can also opt for the more
26.b5! and again White wins a piece. ] aggressive 7 c4. e7 The NCO quotes the
[ Other possibilities are: 21...d5? 22.xd5 following line:
exd5 23.e1 and W hite is winning: f5 [ 7...c5 8.g2 e7 9.0-0 0-0 10.c4 5f6
24.xd5+ f8 25.e7+ e8 26.b5+ 11.e2 cxd4 12.xd4 c5 13.d1 b6
d7 27.f6+ and Black resigned in with equality. ]
Felsberger-Wach, 1991. ] 8.g2 0-0 This is considered an inaccuracy
[ 21...d4 is hardly good either, in view of by Videki & Krizsany, who claim that Black is
22.d1 b4 23.xb6! xb6 24.b5! equal after 8...b5.
and Black is completely tied up ] [ 8...b5 9.0-0 0-0 10.b3 a6 I don't like
[ 21...d6 is the only way to avoid this move a whole lot. Also 10...Bb7 can be
immediate loss, but Black's position is very considered 11.e1 c8?! too slow, correct
difficult anyway: 22.d1 d5 23.h4! f8 is 1 1 .. . c5 wit h a f a irly b ala n ced ga m e
24.xd5 xf1+ 25.xf1 exd5 26.xd5+ 12.g5! Given the fact that the majority of
h8 27.b3! and the differ ence in activity of the black pieces are located on the
the armies make the endgame very bad for queenside, it makes sense for White to try to
Black. ] grab the initiative on the kingside. An extra
22.e4 b4 Leads to a beautiful mate but incentive is that Black has weakened his
[ 22...c6 23.g5 is hardly an dark squares, and therefore an exchange of
improvement. ] the dark-squared bishops will be to White's
23.g5! h8 24.f7 d7 25.xe6! xd8 advantage. b4 12...Bd8!? allows Black to
26.g8+! xg8 27.f7# An excellent win by move on without making further
Alexander Grischuk! Without doubt this game concessions. 13.d2 c5? This is a very
616
unfortunate mistake. The correct way for behaviour. e6 I seemed to recall opining that
Black to continue is 13...Bxd2 14 Nxd2 c5, this was the way to go. 9.c4 5f6
and W hite is at best slightly better. 14.c3 [ Now that my computer points it out I
a5 15.dxc5 b4 16.c4 5f6 17.a3 b8 remember 9...b4 10.e3 xb1 11.xb1
18.d4 xc5 19.c6 bc8 20.e3 xa2 being something that concerned Mark.
1-0 McDonald,N-Nataf,I/London 1994 Mark wasn't sure the computer thinks this is
Oops! ] what Black should do, but the whole thing
9.0-0 c5 10.c4 5f6 11.c3 Deviating from loo ks rid iculou s to me . I do n't se e wh y
t h e N C O l i n e . cxd4 12.xd4 c7
Black shouldn't just develop. ]
This move is playable, although somewhat 10.e3 g6 11.d5
passive. [ Some insanity like 11.f4 had concerned me
[ A more active attempt to equalise is
before, but it's very hard to believe this:
12...e5 13.b3 a5 14.b2 d8
Black could just play d6 when 12.g4
and Black should not be any worse. ] seems to fail to c7 13.f5 xh2+ 14.h1
13.e2 e8?! e4
Black is playing overly I was toying vaguely with such lines
cautiously right now. 13...Rd8 is the correct when Ben played something else. I don't
move. 14.d1 f8?! Black follows the flow think the text is much good either, although
from his previous move. Preventing a Nb5 it's not as bad as I thought at the time.
from White is more important, and therefore W hite probably ought to admit he has no
14. ..a6 wou ld h ave been correct . 15.b1 advantage and just develop quietly. ]
15 Ncb5!? b6?! 11...c7 Of course Black doesn't capture on
[ 15...a6 followed by ...e5 is better. ] d5. After dxe6 fxe6 his rapid development on
16.db5 b8 17.e3 e5? the d and f files will more than make up for
[ 17...bd7!? admits that going to b6 was
t h e we a k e -p a wn . 12.c3 d6 13.h3
wrong, but Black has to do something to One of the with White's set-up, apart from the
contain White's queenside majority. ] fact that the Ne3 blocks his queen's bishop
18.c5 bd7 19.c6 bxc6 20.xc6
and king's rook, is needing to lose a tempo on
and White wins at least an exchange. The rest this move.
is played out with only one goal in mind. e7 [ 13.h4 h2+ 14.h1 e5 15.h5 d8
21.xa8 xa8 22.d6 e4 23.xc8 xc8 16.g1 h2+ 17.h1 e5 is how the
24.bc1 e5 25.g2 f5 26.d5 b7 machine thinks the game ought to end,
27.xf6+ gxf6 28.d5 h5 29.h4 g6 although I doubt many human players would
30.c8 g7 31.dd8 d7 32.c5 e3 have this variation in mind. ]
33.xf8+ xf8 34.xf8 e4+ 35.f3 13...0-0 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.d3 fd8
xf3+ 36.xf3 xb2 37.fxe3 xa2 38.e4 A bad move. I had some idea that doubling my
a1 39.g8+ h7 40.h8+ g-pawns was desirable inasmuch as it creates
1-0 luft without costing a tempo, but I was wrong.
15...Bxd3 was right, getting positions like the
game but with the h-pawn on h7. 16.xg6
602 B04 hxg6 17.c2 h2+ 18.h1 e5 19.d2
Hague,Ben 2300 c5 20.ad1 d7 21.c1 During the game
Cox,John J 2384 I was labouring under the impression that
4NCL Kavala GRE 23.10.2005 B l a c k w a s m u c h b e t t e r h e r e , a n d
[John Cox] consequently getting frustrated and spending
a lot of time when I couldn't find a way to
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 prove it. As usually happens this leads to over
5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 7.0-0 d7 8.g4 pressing although as luck would have it Black
The webmaster's splendid innovation from p l a ys t h e r i g h t m o ve s f o r q u i t e a wa y a
Kosten-Ferguson in the May update. As luck psychological misconception of this kind
would have it Mark Ferguson was sitting next generally has its expression in the form of
to me in this team match, so I was on my best bad moves sooner or later. ad8 22.xd7
617
xd7 23.d1 d8? Missing the moment. allows perpetual check starting with c6+
Correct was . I had been banking on this but White has
[ 23...xc3 , a thoroughly thematic move better. ]
which I don't believe I considered f or a 46...e8 47.c5 d7 48.c4 I think this is
second despite it being the entire purpose of a mistake. 48 Kc3 is better so that Black
m y . . B h 2 + - e 5 m a n o e u v r e . . 24.xd7 doesn't have a check. White is then ready for
( 24.xc3 fe4 25.c2 d3 26.f1 f4 a5, and I think he might very well be winning
27.g1 xc1 28.xc1 d2 ) 24...xd7 at all events I haven't discovered a convincing
25.xc3 fe4 26.c2 d3 ] defence. h7 49.a5 e6+ Now I think Black
24.xd7 xd7 25.ed1 d4 is OK. White cannot avoid perpetual without
[ I had been pinning my hopes on 25...d3 dropping a5. 50.d5 e2+ 51.c5 e3+
an d wh en I cou ld n 't m a ke it wo rk a f t e r 52.c6 c3+ 53.b7 xa5 54.xf5+ g6
26.xd3 xd3 27.d2 ( 27.e3 xc3 55.d7+ h6 56.c6 This is scary but Black
I began to lose my feeble grasp on the plot a has a resource. a3 57.d5 1/2-1/2
bit. )] [ 57.a6 c5 is simplest although I hadn't
26.e3 e5 27.b4 xe3 28.xe3 d3 seen this ( 57...e3 was my intention and is
29.b5 cxb5 30.cxb5 d4 31.g1? e4? a l s o a d e q u a t e s i n c e 58.xa7 e7+
[ Black misses his second one-move win of gives perpetual. )]
the game: 31...xf2 wins a pawn 32.xf2 ½-½
( 32.xf2 xc3 ) 32...xc3 ]
32.a4 b4 Black has no advantage any more
and it was definitely time to be thinking of 603 B04
making a draw, but adjusting in this way is Hoell,Jonas 2445
n e v e r e a s y . 33.ed1 g5 34.a2 g4? Kengis,Edvins 2575
Anything but this. Somehow the d5 square London 1991
had escaped my attention. 35.hxg4 xg4 [Alexander Volzhin]
36.d5 dxf2 37.xf2 xf2 38.xf2
xc3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.f3 d6 4.d4 dxe5
[ A f t e r w a r d s I t h o u g h t t h a t 38...e3+ 5.xe5 g6 6.c4 Currently the most popular
wo u ld h a ve b e e n b e t t e r, h o p in g f o r 3 9 continuation. c6
K x e 3 ? ? Q x c 3 + , b u t i n f a c t a f t e r 39.f3 [ As 6...g7?? is just a blunder: 7.xf7
xc3 40.a8+ h7 41.xa7 there is no xf7 8.f3+ black should protect the Knight
longer perpetual check and W hite has at on d5. Besides the text, ]
least some winning chances, and in fact I [ 6...e6 is possible. This move was played
think is probably winning. I would like to till it became clear that by playing 7.c3!
think I saw this at the time and forgot about g7 8.e4 xe5 ( 8...0-0 9.g5 ) 9.dxe5
it, but I can't be sure. ] c6 10.b3! ( Black intended to meet
39.xe4 c5+ 40.e2 f5 41.c6 e5+ 10.c5 with e3! , maintaining the
42.d3 g3+ 43.c4 f4+ 44.b3 balance. ) 10...xe5 ( 10...0-0 11.h6 e8
Black is in grave danger of losing this queen 12.c5 w i t h t h e a d v a n t a g e xe5?
ending whether he is actually lost I haven't yet 13.xe6 fxe6 14.d4 ) 11.b2 f6 12.xe5
been able to determine for sure. g3+?! fxe5 13.c5 White wins his pawn back and
[ 44...h7 was better than this, I think. After h a s a n o v e r w h e l m i n g a d v a n t a g e f7
a5 W hite is a t his most vu lnerable to a 14.xb7 d7 15.0-0 c6 16.a5 c5
checking sequence, as he has to protect a5 17.xd5 xd5 18.b4 d6 19.c4+-
and b5 as well as escape the checks, so it winning in Vlasak - Petanek, corr, 1990. ]
made sense to hide the king away at this 7.0-0 g7 8.e1 0-0 9.b3
moment to prevent cross-checks. ] [ In my opinion, 9.c3 deserves attention, for
45.f3 e5 46.c3 example: e6 10.d2 d7 11.ef3 c7
[ 46.a8+ h7 47.xa7 d5+ 48.c3 12.f1! c5 13.b3 ]
xg2 I f igu re d is a d ra w sin ce 49.b6 9...e6 10.c3 d7 11.f3 c7 12.xe6
618
Now this exchange is forced. xe6 13.b3 52...b5

b6 14.c4 [ 52...b5 53.xe4 fxe4+ 54.e2 b2!
[ I w o u l d h a v e p r e f e r r e d 14.bd2 55.a7 b1 56.a8 d3+ 57.e1 c3# ]
with equality. ] 0-1
14...c5! Black has an advantage in
development, so he should open files. 15.d5
[ 15.dxc5 dxc5 aiming at the d3-square 604 B04
(after Rfd8) is very good for Black. ] Hracek,Z 2612
15...c7 16.xe7 d6 17.e1 xd5 Appel,R 2525
18.a3 b6! N Bundesliga 2012-13 (12) 17.03.2013
[ 18...xc4?! 19.xc4 was played in Kengis [Tom Rendle]
- Tseshkovsky, Riga, 1981, with a
considerable advantage for White. The text 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
is much better, as the White knight on a3 5.e2 f5 6.0-0 dxe5 7.xe5 d7 8.f3
stays out of play. ] e6 This has all been seen before on
19.xd5 ChessPublishing but now we see a new move.
[ 19.h4 fe8! ><a2 ] 9.c4! Although this hasn't been seen in a main
19...cxd5 20.g5 h6! 21.d2 game it was suggested by Gawain in his notes
[ 21.e7 d o e s n ' t w o r k , a s a f t e r fc8 to Fedorchuk-Shchekachev as an
22.ad1 c6! ( treating f6, Kf7) 23.h4 f5 improvement over 9.a3
White's bishop is in trouble. ] [ 9.a3 was seen in the blitz game Rublevsky-
21...a4! 22.ab1 fe8! Carlsen but if 9...Nb4 in the game isn't a
[ 22...fd8 is bad, as it lets White annoy good move then a3 is obviously
Black's most active piece: 23.e4!= ] unnecessary. ]
23.f1 a6 24.c4 b5 25.e3 9...b4 This is critical but it's probably just
[ 25.ce5 e6 ] bad for Black.
25...ed8 [ 9...5b6 10.c3 is obviously very
[ The inaccurate 25...f4 removes all black's comfortable for White. ]
advantage after 26.f5!= for example, d3 10.a3 a6 Appel decides, probably wisely,
27.xe8+ xe8 28.xg7 xg7 29.b3 b6 not to invade with Nc2 but now the knight is
30.e1 and White has nothing to worry offside and W hite is just a lot better. Black
about. ] needs to look for a new way to handle this
26.ec1 f6! Black finds a very good square variation or abandon it all together.
for his Knight (e4). 27.c4 e4 28.c2 d3 [ 10...c2 11.a2
29.e1 e8 30.d2 d6! 31.e2 dxe3+! A) 11...c5?! has been tried here but no-
This exchanging combination spoils White's one has responded with the very strong
pawn structure. 32.fxe3 f5 33.f2 d4+ 12.dxc5 xc5 ( or 12...xc5 13.c3
34.d1 xc2 35.xc2 f5 Now Black's followed by b4 is winning for White) 13.b4
advantage is obvious. 36.a3 f7 37.b3 c3 and White is winning at least two pieces
38.f1 h5 39.h3 e4!? 40.xe4 xe4 for a rook;
41.cxb5? B) 11...xd4 12.xd4 xb1 13.g5! f6
[ 41.d3 would be more stubborn. ] 14.xb1 fxg5
41...axb5 42.d1 h6! 43.d3 e6 B1) 15.d1! "and I really like White's
44.e2 g5! 45.f3 h4 46.d2 f6 position" is where Gawain's analysis
47.a2 d5 48.a4 b4!-+ winning 49.a5 c4 ends and this indeed does seem to be
50.bxc4+ the right way to play. I can see nothing
[ 50.a6 cxb3 51.a7 e8 52.a8+ xa8 bet te r f o r B la ck t ha n e7 allowing
53.xa8 b2 ] 16.xg7 f6 17.h6 e7 18.h5+
50...xc4 51.a6 b3 52.a4+ ( or 18.d2 coming to e4) 18...d8
[ 52.a7 bxa2 53.a8 a1 ] 19.b4 and White is clearly better;
[ 52.a5 b2 53.a7 b1 54.a8 d1# ] B2) 15.b4 f6 16.e3?! ( 16.d2!
619
is a definite improvement) 16...e7 26.xe5 xe5 27.xe5 f8 28.b5 xd7

17.d2 g4 18.d4 e5 29.xd7 xd7 30.e2 c4 31.d6 c7
and the position was unclear in Alsina A fine game from Hracek which places this
Leal, D (2515)-Bas Mas, J (2258) line in some doubt for Black.
Donostia 2013 ] 1-0
11.c3 e7 12.d5! This a thematic
b r e a k t h r o u gh wh i ch t a ke s a d va n t a g e o f
W hite's lead in development and generally 605 B04
better coordination. Black is already much Hunt,Harriet 2385
worse. Skripchenko,Almira 2474
[ 12.e3 0-0 13.b4 c7 14.b3 f6 36th Olympiad w (12) 27.10.2004
15.e5 also gave White an edge in Milliet, S [Andrew Martin]
(2411)-Zhao Xue (2549) Istanbul 2012, but
it's not quite as the game continuation and There has been a lot of clamour for more
Black even went on to win this game in the Alekhine games here, so much so that John
end. ] Cox has been drafted in of f the bench to
12...c5?! This feels wrong - it gives away the supply them. My own personal view of the
d5-square and leaves the knight on a6 even Alekhine it's a bit of a gamble above, say,
more sidelined than before. 2400 level, but below that it's still a decent
[ 12...cxd5 13.cxd5 f6 is possibly Black's opening to play on a regular basis. Let us
best option although W hite is obviously examine a triumphant W hite win from the
better after 14.d4 Black can now at least recent Olympiad, where Harriet Hunt shows
play 0-0 15.e3 dc5 with some chances her strength. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
for counterplay later on. ] 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 If Black is reliant on
13.d3 xd3 14.xd3 b6 15.f4 0-0 5...c6 he will ultimately be disillusioned. All he
16.ad1 Hracek is playing very simply and not can hope for if White plays remotely sensibly
allowing Black any chances here. is a slight disadvantage at best. Miles
[ 16.d6!? was a more aggressive option and pioneered 5...c6 as a means of survival, not
it may be stronger, for example f6 17.e4 with any great vision of the idea becoming
A) 17...xb2 18.ab1 f6 19.g5! xg5 Black's main weapon against 4 Nf3. 6.e2!
20.fxg5 f5 ( 20...g6?! 21.c3! wins ) Quite OK. W hite settles for modesty and of
21.h3 h6 22.xe6 d7 23.xf8 xf8 course a slight edge. g6
24.c3 and White is a safe exchange up; [ 6...f5!? could well be Black's best here,
B) 17...h6 18.ab1 and White is in total as long as he or she is willing to withstand
control ] an immediate assault: 7.g4!? ( White could
16...f6 17.fe1 h6 18.e5 exd5 19.cxd5 settle for 7.0-0 d7 8.f3 ) 7...e6 8.c4
g5?! b6 9.b3 f6 10.d3 xd4 11.b2 d8
[ 19...b8! is a pretty depressing move to 12.c3 a6 13.d2 c7 14.0-0-0 0-0-0
have to play but at least the knight can now 15.e3 f7 16.f4 b8 17.h4 e6 18.e4
come and help out by blocking on d7. Still d7 19.h5 h6 20.g5 e7 21.g6
20.d6 8d7 21.d5! is very good for was the extraordinary course of Kasparov,G-
White. ] Short,N/Moscow 2002 ]
20.xg5 xg5 21.d6 ad8 22.e4 fe8 [ 6...d7 7.f3 g6 8.c4 c7 9.c3 g7
23.f4! f6 24.d7 10.0-0 0-0 11.e3 e5 12.e1 ]
[ 24.xb7 b8 25.xa7 is also just 7.0-0 g7 8.f3 Retaining pieces is
winning for White. ] extremely sensible given White's extra space
24...e6 25.f5! This picks up the exchange and White has the very pleasant prospect of
and effectively ends the game. xe5 c2-c4 coming up. g4 9.e1 0-0 10.h3
[ 25...e7? 26.g4! xe4 27.xf6+ gxf6 xf3 11.xf3 d7 12.c4 The position is
28.xe4 g7 29.d3 and Black can safely solidly, slightly better for W hite and is very
resign ] typical of many Alekhine variations,
620
notwithstanding all the propaganda. White has They don't go 7 Ng5 these days because of
two bishops and a potential queenside pawn Alburt's 7...e6. Let's see how Black should
majority. Black would normally combat these play:
trumps by activity, presumably looking to play [ 7...e6
...e7-e5 somewhere. It doesn't work out that A) 8.f3 More testing. e7! 9.e4 dxe5
way 5b6 13.c5! c8 10.g5 b4+ 11.c3 a5 12.f6+
[ 13...d5 14.xd5 cxd5 15.g5 e8 ( 12.f6 xf6 13.xf6 0-0 14.xe5
16.c3 is easy chess. Even if Black nullifies xe5 15.dxe5 d7= Alburt ) 12...f8
the pressure on e7 there's still the 13.d5 e4 14.g3 a6 15.dxe6 f5
queenside majority to worry about. ] 16.e7+ xe7 17.d5+ ( 17.g8+ e8
14.c3 e5 What else? 18.h6 xh6 19.xh6 e6 20.0-0 )
[ 14...e6 15.e4 ] 17...f8 18.e3 d7 and Black will
[ 14...c7 15.g5 e6 16.d2 are both slowly consolidate beginning with ...f7-f6.;
awful. ] B) 8.f4 Rigid. Black can break up the
15.e3 centre with the traditional thrust ...c7-c5.
[ 15.d5! looks very strong indeed xc5 dxe5 9.fxe5 c5! 10.0-0 0-0 11.c3 cxd4
( 15...cxd5 16.xd5+- ) 16.e3 a5 12.cxd4 c6 13.f3 f6! 14.exf6
17.dxc6 bxc6 18.xc6 ] ( 14.c3!? fxe5 15.g5 d7 16.dxe5
15...e7 16.d5! The classic break, with Black xe5 17.xe5 xf1+ 18.xf1 d4+
very passive. cxd5 17.xd5 f5 19.h1 xe5 20.e7 d7 21.e1 f5
[ 17...c6 18.b3! b8 19.ad1 22.e2 e8 ) 14...xf6 15.e3 d5
is a picture postcard for White. ] 16.f2 f4 ]
18.c1 h4 I have no useful idea to suggest 8.f4 f6 9.f3 0-0 10.c3 c6 11.bd2 g4
given that the d file is creaking: 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 I really feel that Black
[ 18...xe3 19.xe3 b8 20.a4 a6 should avoid this position. Counterplay is not
21.ed1 ] in evidence. He has tried to break up the
19.g3 d8 20.b3 c8 21.xb7 xe3 centre with ...f7-f6 but the White pawn chain
22.xc8 I very much doubt Hunt even broke is almost indestructible. Two Bishops lurk in
sweat in that game so it is clear that Black the wings waiting to be used and the Black
has some work to do here. Perhaps 6...Bf5 Kingside looks shaky. d7 14.0-0 f5
can be recommended as the best available Miserable. White has the later pawn lever g2-
try. g4! to aim for.
1-0 [ 14...a5 15.a4 fxe5 16.fxe5 d8 17.c2
e6 is a better way of organising the Black
pieces. Perhaps ...Rf 7 and ... Raf 8 will
606 B04 help matters. Obviously W hite still has a
Ishkhamov,Tigran 2260 very nice, easy-to-play position. ]
Chernin,Oliver 2205 15.e2 d8 16.e3 e6 17.ad1!
North American Open (3) 2002 Prophylaxis against a (much) later ...c7-c5
[Andrew Martin] ad8 18.h1 c6 19.h4 h6 20.g4! fxg4
21.f5!+- g5 22.xg4 About par for the
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 c o u r s e a f t e r 7 N g 5 d 5 ? ! B l a c k h a s t o
A variation eclipsed by concentrate on 7...e6 if he wishes to make
[ 4...dxe5 5.xe5 g6 ] this line work.
5.c4! b6 6.b3 g7 7.g5 That's how 1-0
they used to play it ! Instead,
[ 7.a4 ]
[ 7.e2 both pose Black serious theoretical
problems. ]
7...d5?! I don't like this move very much
because the Black position becomes cramped.
621
607 B04 24.e5 f8 25.h4!? xc3?! Why? This not

Jakovenko,Dmitrij 2735 only improves W hite's pawn structure but
Bu Xiangzhi 2685 lessons Black's grip on kingside squares.
IV RUS-CHN Match (7) 27.08.2007 26.bxc3 h6
[John Watson] [ 26...xa3 27.g4! will win material. ]
27.c1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 [ Or 27.f4! with the idea xa3? 28.c4 a5
5.xe5 c6 Black has been playing this ( 28...a4 29.b1 and Ra3. ) 29.b1
unambitious system for years, challenging and again Ra3 comes in conjunction with
White to make progress against his ultra-solid Rxb7. ]
setup. 6.c4 d7 7.f3 7b6 8.e2! 27...d7? Allowing a killing attack.
An interesting sequence. W hite has moved [ 27...h8 ]
his kn ight to e5 an d back aga in, a nd his 28.g4! The threat is Nxh6+, ...gxh6, and
bishop to c4 and back again. Yet Black's Bxh6 or Qh5, both winning.
knights are awkwardly placed on b6 and d5. [ White would be only slightly better after
[ As we saw in this column, 8.b3 g4 28.xd7? xd7 29.g4 h7 30.g3
9.bd2 e6 10.0-0 e7 11.h3 h5 12.c3 g8 ]
0-0 13.e4 g6 14.e2 d7 15.e1 a5 28...f5 29.xh6+ Anyway! gxh6 30.h5
16.a4 e8 17.c4 c7 Van der Weide-A f6 There's nothing else. 31.g3+ g4
Miles, Saint Vincent ITA 2000 was roughly 32.f3 e2 33.f1 f7 34.fxg4 f4 35.xf4
equal. ] e5 36.g6+ g7 37.e6+ f7 38.e3
8...g4 9.0-0 e6 10.h3 [ 38.g5! is quicker. ]
[ 10.c4? allows xf3 11.gxf3 , when White's 38...xf1+ 39.xf1 exf4 40.e5 xh4
bishops and centre provide some 41.xh6
compensation for his pawns, but probably [ 41.g6+ g7 42.xh6 ]
not enough, for example, ( 11.xf3 xc4 ) 41...f6 42.f5 df8 43.g5
11...e7!? ( 11...f6 ) 12.c3 f5 13.d5 [ The easiest line after 43.g5 is h7
h4 ] 44.xf6! xh6 45.xf8+ xf8 46.gxh6
[ 10.e5 allows Black the extra possibility of g8 47.c4 h7 48.d5 ]
f5 ] 1-0
10...h5 11.e5 xe2 12.xe2 Notice how
utterly safe W hite's setup is. He retains a
central pull while exposing nothing to attack. 608 B04
Black has fairly good development and is Karjakin,Sergey 2732
close to equality, but it's a bit bothersome. He Carlsen,Magnus 2733
decides to reposition those oddly-placed Amber Rapid Nice FRA rapid (3) 17.03.2008
knights. e7 13.c4 f6 14.d1 0-0 15.c3 [John Watson]
bd7 16.f4 e8 17.d3 White has a
standard space advantage and begins to eye One prodigy beats another, and even though
the kingside. a5 18.ad1 ad8 19.a3!? the Blindfold/Rapid format obviously pulls
This creates a few weaknesses. down the overall quality of the game, the
[ 19.g3 is crude but should be considered. ] opening seems modestly but definitely in
19...a6! 20.f3 White's favour. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
[ Again, 20.g3 makes sense, to force Black 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 d7 7.f3
into defence and avoid his next move. A 7f6 8.0-0 g4 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 e6
s a m p le lin e m igh t f8 21.g5 g6 Here we have a typical modern position with a
22.h4! ] ...c6/...e6 restraint structure by Black. But
20...b6! 21.c5 The only defence to c4. Now b e ca u s e o f t h e st ro n g b is h o p o n f 3 a n d
it seems that control of d5 should secure immediate expansion in the centre, White is
equality. bd5 22.g5 f8 23.g4!? fe8 able to prevent both of Black's freeing moves
[ Or simply 23...h8= ] ...c5 and .. . e5 while keeping his opponent's
622
pieces relatively cramped. This situation goes [ 35...g6! 36.f1 e7 hits c5, which can't
on for many more moves: 11.c4 b6 12.b3 be comfortably defended. ]
e7 13.b2 0-0 14.d2!? 36.df3 c3?
[ A more natural procedure would be 14.c3 [ 36...d7 ]
a5 15.a3 c7 ( 15...a4 16.c5 bd5 37.c4 d1+
17.xa4 ) 16.d3 fd8 17.ad1 [ 37...d5 38.xf7 xe5 39.g4
. But Karajakin wants to cover the key e5 puts pressure on Black, especially since
square. ] e1+ 40.h2! xc1? loses to 41.f8+!
14...a5 15.a3 c7 16.e2 fe8 17.g3 xf8 42.e6+ ]
ad8 18.g2 bd7 19.f3 b6 20.c2 38.h2 g6??
A l l o f t h e s e m o ve s a r e in t e l li ge n t o n e s , [ White stands well but isn't winning right
certainly no worse than one would get for a away after 38...d5 39.xf7 g6 40.e3
s i g h t e d g a m e ! I t ' s a m a zi n g h o w we a r e e1! 41.d4! 8xe5 42.f2 1e2 43.f8+
beginning to take this high standard of play h7 44.h4+ ]
for granted in Blindfold games. f8 21.e5!? 39.g5 c2+ 40.g2
[ 21.fe1 and 22 Rad1 is more patient. ] 1-0
21...g6 22.d3
[ 22.c5 c7 23.c4 d5 24.fe1
gives W hite space, and a normal 609 B04
advantage ] Karjakin,Sergey 2694
22...h5! Black's intention is to stop g4, but also Karttunen,Mika 2427
to prepare ...h4 and contest the f4 square. 23rd ECC Men (1) 03.10.2007
23.ad1 c7 24.f4! d6 25.e5 [John Watson]
[ or 25.d2 Black is still short of space ]
25...e7! Headed for f5. 26.c5 Alekhine's players are very drawn to these
[ in a normal game, you might consider solid positions without much space which
26.xf7!? xf7 27.c5 ] challenge White to make progress. But what a
26...xe5 27.fxe5 fd5 Black has a silly t h in g a ga in st a n a ggre ssive s p a c e -
beautiful outpost on d5 and White's bishop on grabber like Karjakin. W hite never lets go.
b2 is bad, but W hite is ahead in space and 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
can improve his pieces pretty much at leisure. I've never liked this variation, which takes the
Krajakin still has the better of it. 28.e2?! dynamism out of 1...Nf6. 5.e2!?
[ 28.d3 f5 29.c1! gets White's last bad [ White doesn't take the opportunity for 5.c4
piece into play and trains it against the c7 6.exd6 exd6 7.d3 . He's happy to
kingside. ] transpose into normal lines. ]
28...f5 5...c7!?
[ In view of what follows, probably more [ 5...dxe5 6.xe5 g6 is a decent option,
accurate is 28...h4 29.g4 g6 ] and 5...Bg4 brings us back to normal Flohr
29.d3 h4! 30.gxh4 b6?! Va riat io n ch an n e ls, if yo u ca n t o le ra t e
[ Better but also difficult for Black is those. ]
30...xh4 31.e4 followed by moves such 6.0-0 dxe5 7.xe5 g6 8.c4!?
as Rg3 and Bc1 ] [ 8.c4 deserves a look in view of e6
31.e4!? 9.xe6 xe6 10.f3! f6 11.b3 ]
[ W h i t e f o r e g o e s 31.cxb6! with an easy 8...g7 9.f4 Space. 0-0 10.c3 d7
advantage, for example, xb6 32.e4 11.e3 xe5 12.fxe5 c5 Too late. 13.d5!
de7 33.f2 followed by h5 and working xe5 14.xc5 a6 15.d4 Ouch! Black will
on the g-file. ] be squeezed to death, if his kingside doesn't
31...bxc5 32.dxc5 e7 fall first. c7 16.xe5 xe5 17.d2 d7
[ 32...de7 ] 18.ae1 ae8
33.xf5! exf5 34.xf5 xh4 35.c1!? [ 18...d6 ]
Right idea, wrong timing. h7 19.h1 b6? 20.g4 c7 21.d6! exd6
623
22.d5 xe1 23.xe1 xc4 12...b4?! Already Black's position starts to

[ 23...d8 24.xd7 , winning, in view of look poor. He has significant problems
xd7 25.f6+ ] developing the queenside properly:
24.xd7 c5 25.c6 xa2 26.h6 [ 12...0-0 13.c2 f6 14.e4 bd7
1-0 15.d1 ]
[ 12...b7 13.c5 d5 14.xd5 cxd5
15.c2 ]
610 B04 13.e4 f6 14.c2
Kasimdzhanov,Rustam 2652 [ 14.a3 a5 15.axb4 xb4 16.c2
Brochet,Philippe 2397 is simple enough too, with a weak Black
TCh-Nat1 Final (10) 10.05.2004 pawn on a5. ]
[Andrew Martin] 14...b7 15.f4
[ 15.a3 again looks very good. ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 15...xe4 16.xe4 g5?! He cannot think
5.xe5 c6 The Miles variation revisited. what else to play. Black may lunge forward
White keeps it simple. 6.c4! d7 7.f3 e6 with his f pawn, but frankly his position is bad
8.0-0 b5 9.d3 a6?! in any case:
[ The main idea of this line with ...b7-b5 is [ 16...f5 17.d3 g5 18.e5 0-0 19.c5!
s im ila r t o t h e S e m i S la v, in t h a t B l a c k d5 20.fe1 g4 21.d2 ]
develops the bishop to b7 and looks to [ 16...f5 17.d3 c5 18.d5! exd5 19.xf5 ]
effect ...c6-c5 at the earliest opportunity. So 17.e5 f6 18.xh7! g4 With the damage
9...a6 could be seen as time consuming if already done, he may as well lash out. I see
Black does not need to play this move, why no future in the following variations:
do so? 9...b7! 10.e1 ( I presume 10.b3 [ 18...d7 19.g3 g4 20.d2 c8 21.c5
b4 11.a3 a5 is Black's idea, dissuading c2- d5 22.e4+- ]
c4. ) 10...e7 11.bd2 0-0 12.e4 a6 [ 18...fxe5 19.xe5! c7 20.g6+ d8
H e f e e l s h e h a s t o p l a y . . . a 6 a n y wa y , 21.f7+ d7 22.ae1!+- ]
although White's plan of b3 and c4 has been 19.g5!! But this beautiful move seals
delayed. 13.c3 ( 13.g5 xg5 14.fxg5 Brochet's fate. White's queen will run rampant.
h6 15.f3 c5 16.c4 bxc4 17.xc4 e7 fxe5 20.xe6 d6 21.g6+ d7 22.c5
18.c1 cxd4 19.xd4 fd8 20.f1 a5 xe6 23.f5 The exposed King and ragged
21.e5 xe5 22.xe5 a6 23.xa6 pawns massively favours the Queen. d5
xa6 24.ed1 aa8 25.g3 b4 26.d4 24.fe1 ag8 25.xe6+ xe6 26.xe5+
ab8 27.b3 a3= Lutz, C-Luther, T/Essen d7 27.ae1 g7 28.f5+ d8 29.xe7?!
2002 ) 13...c5! 14.dxc5 xc5 15.xc5 [ 29.xd5+! w a s m u c h s t r o n g e r : cxd5
xc5 Black's position is absolutely fine. 30.e5 hg8 31.b8+ c8 32.b6+ e8
16.e2 c7 17.e5 f6 18.h5 xf2+ ( 32...d7 33.c6+ e8 34.c7 f5
19.xf2 fxe5+ 20.g1 e4 ( 20...f6 35.e5 ) 33.c7 f5 34.c6+ d7
21.xe5 xe5 22.xe5 ad8 was also 35.a8+ f7 36.xd5+ ]
pretty good.) 21.xe4 b6+ ( 21...ae8; 29...xe7? It looks like mutual time pressure
21...f6 ) 22.e3! f6 23.h3 c7 to me. Black has to try
24.h4 c6 25.d4 h6 26.g3 ad8 [ 29...xe7 30.xe7 xe7 31.xg4 c8
27.e1 d5 28.e4 e5 29.xd5+ xd5 32.f4 g8 although the kingside pawns
30.xe5 xa2 31.h3 f7 32.xh6 xb2 will surely win for White. ]
33.g6 h7 34.eg5 1-0 Murdzia, P- 30.f6 hh7 31.d6+ c8 32.g3 a8?
Luther, T/Cappelle la Grande FRA 2003 ] [ 32...g6 ]
10.b3! A good plan White nudges the Black 33.e4
Knight out of the centre, gaining both time [ I m m e d i a t e ly wi n n in g i s 33.d5 cxd5
and space. e7 11.c4 5b6 12.c3 34.xa6+ b7 35.e6+ b8 36.b6+-
[ Both 12.a4! and ] g6 37.xb4 and this time it will be the
[ 12.e2 deserved consideration. ] queenside that touches down. ]
624
33...b7 34.d5! cxd5 35.c6! xc6 36.xe7 importance. d7 15.f4 xe5 16.xe5
[ Or 36.xb4 b5 37.a4+- ] xe5 17.xe5 and White is clearly better. ]
36...xe7 37.xc6+ b8 38.xd5 e1+ 13.c3 cxd4 14.xd4 e6 15.e3 xd4
[ If 38...hg7 39.d6+ a7 40.xb4 ] 16.xd4! e6
39.g2 he7 40.g8+ b7 41.xg4 a5 [ The endgame after 16...xd4 17.xd4
It's remarkable how long the game continues d8 18.b5 e6 19.c7 e8 20.xe6
after this, but of course, Black has no chance. fxe6 21.xg7 xg7 is very bad for black. ]
42.h4 1e2 43.f3+ a7 44.h5 xa2 17.h4! White has found an excellent square
45.h6 a3 46.f6 b7 47.d4+ a6 for his queen, and it's not easy for black to do
48.h7 xh7 49.d3+ b6 50.xh7 xb3 the same. a5
51.g6+ b5 52.e8+ c4 53.c6+ d4 [ 17...c7 18.ad1 /\\ Nd5+/- ( 18.ac1 )]
54.b6+ c3 55.c5+ d2 56.xa5 b1 18.c5! xb3 19.axb3 c7 20.b4
57.g4 c2 58.c5+ d2 59.d4+ c2 N o w b l a c k ' s q u e e n s i d e i s i n d a n g e r . a6
60.c4+ d2 61.g5 b3 62.g6 b2 63.d4+ Adams wriggles frantically, sacrificing a pawn
c2 64.e4+ We can say that 6 Bc4 puts a for counterplay, but the W orld Champion
serious question to Black and that 9... Bb7 allows him no escape.
seems like the best chance in this difficult line. [ 20...fe8 21.b5 with a large advantage ]
1-0 21.f4 c6 22.xe7 d5 23.xd5 xd5
24.g4! It seemed Black had got good
counterchances, as White's queenside pawns
611 B04 had become vulnerable. But by this excellent
Kasparov,Garry 2795 move White takes control of d1for his Rook
Adams,Michael 2660 and re-coordinates his pieces. ae8
Linares 1997 [ 24...xb2 25.d1 c6 26.dd7 ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 25.d7 xd7 26.xd7 xb2 27.ad1 e4
28.d6 c8 29.xb7 The rest is easy. c3
1.e4 f6 I have always considered Michael 30.b1 c4
Adams to be a player with a somewhat Karpov [ 30...e2 31.b6+- winning ]
- l ik e s t r a t e g i c s t yl e . B u t s o m e t i m e s h e 31.c1! xb4 32.c6 d4 33.c7
chooses very sharp openings. Maybe he was A very impressive performance from the World
afraid of Kasparov's preparation against his Title holder.
usual 1... e5 and decided to surprise the 1-0
W orld Champion. It's not easy to do , as
Kasparov always seems to be well prepared!
2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 g6 612 B04
6.c4 c6 7.0-0 g7 8.e1 0-0 9.b3 d7 Kasparov,Garry
Adams deviates from the previous game. Palatnik,Semon
U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h i s s t o p s u s s e e i n g t h e Duagavpils 1978
improvement Kasparov had prepared against [Alexander Volzhin]
9... Be6.The text is an attempt to relieve
black's slight cramp by exchanging pieces. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
10.f3! White, who has a space advantage, 5.c4 b6 6.b3 a5 7.a4 g7 8.g5 e6
should avoid any exchanges. 7f6 11.c4 9.f4
c7 12.h3! Otherwise black starts [ 9.f3 is another possibility in this position. ]
pressurising the d4-square (Bg4, Ne6). Now 9...dxe5 10.fxe5 c5 11.0-0 0-0 12.c3
the bishop on c8 lacks good squares. c5 c6?! Black doesn't want to give White's
[ Another possibility was 12...b5 fighting for knight the c3-square after the exchange on
t h e d 5 s q u a r e . 13.e5 b7 14.c5! d4.
A typical move: The bishop on b7 is very [ In recent games Black has solved his
bad now, and control of the d5-square and o p e n i n g p r o b l e m s b y p l a y i n g 12...cxd4!
t h e we a k n e s s o f t h e d 4 - p a wn i s o f n o 13.cxd4 c6 14.f3 f6! One example:
625
15.exf6 xf6 16.e3 d5 17.f2 f4 25.xg5 f7 And now the point of the
18.c3 ( 18.bd2 deserves attention.) combination. 26.xf5!! xf5
18...h3+ 19.gxh3 xf3 20.xf3 xf3 [ After 26...exf5 White's e-pawn has a
21.d5 d4 22.xd4 xd4+ 23.g2 xf1 fantastic career: 27.d5 e8 28.e6 f6
24.xf1 xc3 25.dxe6 ( 25.bxc3 a6! 29.h7+ f8 30.e7+ ]
an d b la ck ha s n ot h in g t o wo rry a b ou t .) 27.xf5 exf5 28.d5 e8 29.h7+ f8
25...b4 26.e7+ g7 27.f8 ( 27.e8 30.xf5+ g8
xh3+ ) 27...xh3+ and a draw was agreed [ 30...f7 31.e6+ g8 32.g6 ]
in Shlepnev - Pushkin, corr, 1990. ] 31.h7+ f8 32.a3! c8 33.f3+ f6
13.e4! White is not forced to protect the d4 34.h3! g6 35.xf6+ xf6 36.e6+ e8
pawn at all! d7 37.xf6+ Really a champion's game
[ 13...cxd4 14.g5 d7 ( 14...c7 (although Kasparov wasn't World Champion at
15.cxd4 ) 15.f6+ xf6 16.xf6 dxc3 that time)!
17.c1 ] 1-0
14.e3!
[ 14.g5? is p r e m a t u r e , a s a f t e r b6
black has good counterplay, and a direct 613 B04
attac k do esn't ach ieve its goal: 15.f6+ Kasparov,Garry 2838
h8 16.f4 cxd4 17.h4 xf6 18.exf6 Short,Nigel D 2682
dxc3+ 19.h1 cxb2 20.a2 c5 vs. ROW Moscow RUS (6) 10.09.2002
and W hite has little to show for the [Glenn Flear]
sacrificed pawns. ]
14...e7 15.g5! Just in time! What's the 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
difference, you may ask. Now Black has no [ T h e e v e n e a r l i e r 3...c6!? is a bit
pressure on the d4-square,so White takes the provocative even for most Alekhine players!
f6 square under his control, and the pin on Despite Black's intentions to create new
the diagonal d8-h4 is also very unpleasant for problems and obtain an interesting game,
Black. So the weakening of Black's kingside after 4.c4 c7 5.c3 d6 6.exd6 exd6
(h6, g5) is forced. cxd4 7.e3 d5 8.f3 e7 9.b3 0-0 10.cxd5
[ As the immediate 15...h6 16.h4 g5 xd5 11.xd5 xd5 12.xd5 cxd5
fails to 17.xg5 hxg5 18.h5 13.d3 (in Sommerbauer-Zo.Varga, Poynter
with a winning attack, the text is forced. ] Memorial 2002) White had a nominal edge
16.cxd4 h6 17.h4 g5 18.f2 in a dull position. ]
[ Now 18.xg5 hxg5 19.h5 fails to xe5 ] 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 This early ... c6
18...g6 19.bc3 e7 Now Black intends move however requires some thought. There
f7-f5. 20.c2! Preventing Black's idea. b6 are some similarities with the Caro-Kann and
[ 20...f5 21.exf6 xf6 22.xg5 ] the Scandinavian, but here an early c2-c4
21.e3! White keeps his rook on the f-file and advance gains a tempo and space. 6.e2
prepares a sacrifice on g5 a6 22.f2 h8 [ 6.c4 c7 7.c3 7 this transposes from 4...
23.xg5! Thank you, Garry! This unexpected c6 5 c4 Nc 6 Nc3 dxe5 7 Nxe5 d7 8.f3
sacrifice created a masterpiece for all of us! looks more convincing than Kasparov's
Of course he had some easier ways to win. attempt White retains his space advantage
[ Probably Karpov would prefer 23.h4 gxh4 and Black doesn't find it easy to generate
24.g4 f5 ( 24...g6 25.h5 ) 25.exf6 counterplay. g6 9.g5 ( alternatively 9.e2
xf6 26.xf6+ xf6 27.xf6 xf6 28.e4 g7 10.0-0 0-0 11.e3 ) 9...g7 10.d2
d8 29.h7+ f8 30.b5! also with a 0-0 11.h3 f6 12.h6 e5 13.xg7 xg7
decisive attack but without sacrifices. ] 14.0-0-0 exd4 15.xd4 c5 16.e2
23...hxg5 24.h5 f5 7e6 17.e3 c7 18.xe6+ xe6
[ After 24...f6 25.xg5 fc8 26.h7+ f8 19.g4 and White had persistent pressure
27.ce4 all White's pieces participate in the Istratescu-Grunberg, Kavala 2002 ]
attack. ] 6...f5 7.g4!? Kasparov hopes to use his
626
advanced knight for this active thrust, but had no.1 (time trouble no doubt).
he really calculated the consequences of [ 43.e1 was necessary to cover g3 ]
B l a c k ' s n i n t h ? e6 8.c4?! Natural but 43...d7 44.d5 e7?
already rather committal. [ C h a s i n g t h e h - p a w n w i t h 44...g3!
[ 8.h3 is more solid but not exactly typical of must have been tempting but Short was
GK's style! ] p r o b a b l y p r e s s e d f o r t i m e 45.xf6!
8...b6 9.b3 f6! White now must shed a ( 45.xf6+?? gxf6 46.g7 e7 ) 45...xh5!
p a wn . K a s p a r o v o b t a i n s s o m e p l a y b u t 46.c3 e7! 47.xe7 ( 47.e5 xg6 )
Black's position is too solid for him to find a 47...xe7 48.e5 f6 with a clear (outside
way through. 10.d3 passed to boot!) extra pawn and a probable
[ 10.f3? xg4 ] win. ]
10...xd4 11.b2 d8 12.c3 a6 45.xe7 xe7 46.e1 d7 47.a4 b6
13.d2 c7 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 With Black's 48.e3 c6 49.d3 a6 50.e3 b5
king out of the centre it's not easy for White to 51.d3 bxa4 52.bxa4 b6 53.c2 d6
build any attacking chances. 15.e3 f7 54.d3 c8 55.c3 e7 56.e3
16.f4! White must limit Black's opportunity for W e're not the only ones who mess up our
expansion and hamper his opponent's wish to white's and spend the whole game playing to
develop his kingside. b8 17.h4 e6 18.e4 salvage a draw It even happens to the big
d7 guys (occasionally)!
[ 18...d5! 19.f3 ( 19.cxd5 cxd5+ ½-½
20.b1 dxe4 21.xe4 g6 22.f5 exf5
23.gxf5 f7 also leaves White "short" of
c o m p e n s a t i o n) 19...db4 would easy 614 B04
B la c k ' s t a s k , h e wo u ld t h e n b e c le a rl y Kengis Variation
better. ] N,N
19.h5 h6 20.g5 Going forward in order to [Alexander Volzhin]
open up the long diagonal. Kasparov uses his
temporary lead in development to keep Black 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
occupied. e7 5.xe5 g6 6.f3 This line indeed looks quite
[ 20...hxg5 21.fxg5 f5 22.ef2 gives White interesting and I don't know why it's played so
an extra tool a potential outside passed rarely. Let's analyse it. e6 7.c4 b4
pawn. ] The only move.
21.g6 e8 22.b1 b6 23.d4 c5 24.b2 [ 7...b6? is bad in view of 8.d5! ( 8.xb7
a8 25.g3 db8! Short lacks xd4 is not dangerous for Black as the
manoeuvring space, but is gradually getting Rook on a8 is protected now.) 8...f5
o rg a n i ze d . 26.he1 d7 27.f5!? exf5 9.xf7! ( The immediate 9.g4! is not bad
Releasing the pressure by simplifying, but the either: g7 10.xf7 xg4 11.xg4 xf7
extra pa wn is de va lue d af te r it b ecom e s 12.e6+ with a clear edge.) 9...xf7 10.g4
doubled. 28.xe7 hg8 29.f3 c6 and White wins the piece back and has an
30.xc6 xc6 31.e6! Kasparov decides undisputable advantage. ]
that his best chances lies in an ending. 8.xb7 xd4
[ The alternative 31.e2? ge8 32.f2 [ 8...c2+?! is worth considering as well
xe1 33.xe1 f3 is horrible. ] (although it looks too risky). It leads to a
31...xe6 32.xe6 c6 33.f2 c7 very sharp position after 9.d1 xa1
34.ee1 b8 35.c3 c8 36.c2 ge8 10.xa8 g7 11.d2 0-0 Just one line
37.xd8+ xd8 38.xe8+ xe8 (certainly not obligatory): 12.xa7 xe5
One factor in Black's inability to make 13.dxe5 c6 14.c5 d4 15.d3 g4+
significant progress is that his king cannot 16.f3 xf3 17.gxf3 xf3+ 18.xf3 xd3+
invade into the white camp. 39.d1 d7 19.d2 c2 and Black's attack is very
40.e3 e6 41.d3 d6 42.d5 e4 strong. ]
43.c7+? A surprising lapse from the World's 9.xa8 c2+ 10.e2 xe5+ 11.d1
627
d4+ 12.d2 The few previous moves were will make the black kingside shaky. And finally,
forced but now White has a choice: the advance e5-e6 has deprived Black of the
[ 12.xc2? i s t h e wo r s t : f5+ 13.b3 pawn move d6xe5 to gain space for his pieces
b6+ 14.c3 g7+ 15.d2 xb2 (his other pawn break, with c7-c5, has been
and Black is winning ] obstructed by his own Nc6 move. His pieces
[ 12.d2 xa1 ( 12...xb2? is bad in view are theref ore somewhat entombed in the
of 13.c3 and W hite wins: g4+ 14.f3 c e n t r e b e h i n d t h e i r p a w n f r o n t . 7.e3!?
e3+ 15.e1 c2+ 16.f2 ) 13.xb8+ White avoids developing his knight to c3. The
d7 A very unusual position with both kings line played in the game should be compared
unsafe has arisen. I think White should take with the sequence
a d r a w b y p e r p e t u a l : 14.b5+ c8 [ 7.c3 g6 8.h4 g7 9.e3 0-0 10.h5 e5
15.e8+ b7 16.b5+ c8 ] 11.d5 d4 12.xd4 exd4 13.xd4 xd4
12...xa1 13.xb8+ d7 14.b5+ 14.xd4 e5 15.dxe6 f6 and Black held a
Again it's not clear if W hite has anything draw in the game Kobalia-Narciso Dublan as
better than perpetual. given in the archives. Gawain Jones has put
[ After 14.e2 h6 Black's chances are by a lot of analysis into that game and it should
no means bad. ] be e xa m in e d in re la t io n t o t h e p re s e n t
14...d8!? game. ]
[ 14...c8 15.e8+ b7 16.e2 7...g6 Black has to develop his kingside, even
( 16.c8+ ) 16...c6 17.f3 d6 th o ugh t h e g6 p oin t b eco me s a ho o k f o r
and White's Queen is trapped! I can't see White's attack. 8.h4 g7 9.h5 e5 10.d5
the antidote against 18...Bg7. ] d4 A new attempt to solve Black's problems.
15.b8+ d7 16.b5+ It seems this line is a Perhaps it was inspired by 11....Nd4 in the
sufficient defence for Black although I Kobalia game given at move seven above. But
suspect either side may improve here. All there is an important difference in the
these lines need practical tests. positions, as we shall see.
[ Gawain discussed 10...e4 in the archive
game mentioned at move seven when he
615 B04 thinks 11.g5 is the best response for
Khalifman,A 2617 White. Gawain gives
Nosenko,A 2492 A) We should take a quick look at the very
18th Voronezh Master Open 2014 (7.3) risky lo okin g 11...xb2 12.d2 xa1
[Neil McDonald] 13.xa1 e5 so far this is Lau, R (2465)-
Fleck, J (2390)/Germany 1986 and now
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6 14.hxg6! looks very strong for White: f5
A bold move and quite in the spirit of the ( Or 14...xg6 15.g7! d7 16.xh7
Alekhine Def ence: a second black knight threatening mate on f6 looks winning for
entices the white pawns to advance to their White. ) 15.gxh7 bd7 16.dxe4
destruction. 5.c4 b6 6.e6!? Well, a white and W hite has a huge initiative as f6
pawn has certainly advanced to its destruction, can be met by 17.c5! dxc5 -or else the
but it's not clear that Black should rejoice. knight invades on e6- 18.xe5 etc.;
This is the sharpest response. Instead B) 11...e5 12.c3 f5 13.h6 f6
[ 6.exd6 is of course quite reasonable. ] 14.gxe4 0-0 15.xf6+ exf6 as played
6...fxe6 What has White gained for his pawn? in Sutovsky-Nguyen, Moscow 2007, and
Firstly, Black's light squared bishop is shut in, now he thinks 16.b3 is a simple way for
so there won't be a Bf5 or (the very annoying) White to keep an edge. ]
Bg4 move for at least a while. Secondly, the 11.xd4 exd4 12.xd4 e5 Because White
displacement of the f7 pawn to e6 means that h a s g a i n e d a m o v e f o r h i s i n i t i a t i v e b y
when Black decide to develop his other bishop o m i t t i n g N c 3 , B l a c k h a s n ' t y e t c a s t l e d .
wi t h g 7 - g 6 a n d B g 7 , t h e g - p a wn wi l l b e Therefore Black doesn't have time to play in
vulnerable to a quick h4-h5 pawn ram. This the style of the Kobalia game with a bishop
628
exchange on d4 followed by e7-e5. Thus he [ Black could have eased the pressure with
merely destroys his position if he plays 22...f6 challenging the strong white knight,
[ 12...xd4 13.xd4 0-0 ( or likewise and if 23.g3 h6 to stop his own knight
13...e5 14.dxe6 0-0 15.hxg6 ) 14.hxg6 being driven back by 24.g5. ]
Therefore Nosenko has to make do with 23.g5! Now 23... Nf 6 is p revented . f8
p la yin g e 7 -e 5 wit h o u t f irst e xch a n gin g 24.g4! and here the exchange of light
bishops on d4. ] squared bishops means that White's knight
13.e3! Khalifman avoids dissolving the w i l l n e v e r b e d i s t u r b e d b y . . . B f 5 . g6
centre as he sees he can maintain long term 25.xc8 xc8 26.hh1 f8 27.a5 a6 28.f3
pressure. After f7 29.b1 c5 Preventing the pawn break
[ 13.dxe6 e7 Black has good chances to 30.c5, which looked very threatening. But now
equalise despite his fractured kingside as Black has a weak pawn on d6 which is under
his pieces spring to life. For example 14.c3 the direct gaze of the white horse.
0-0 15.xg7 xg7 16.hxg6 hxg6 17.g4 [ Of course not 29...xf3 30.a7+ ]
f6! 18.0-0-0 xe6 etc. ] 30.df1 c7 31.b6! The exchange of
13...e7 14.c3 f5?! Here queens will facilitate an attack on the h7 and
[ 14...e4!? would activate the dark squared d6 pawns, as well as the 'tin opener' pawn
bishop. It looks the best try for counterplay, thrust b2-b4. e7 32.xc7+ xc7 33.h3
though White maintains an edge whichever cf8 34.fh1 f7 35.c2 Khalifman
side Black castles. For example 15.e2 f5 increases his advantage step by step. His
16.a4 ( Or 16.b3 0-0-0 17.a4 b8 king goes to e2 to defend f3 and so free his
18.a5 ) 16...a5 17.b3 0-0 18.hxg6 hxg6 rooks for the final onslaught. f8 36.d3
19.0-0-0 In either case White has the g8 37.e2 gg7 38.b4! White gets rid of
initiative but there is a big fight ahead. In t h e c 5 p a wn so t h a t h e c a n r a m B l a c k ' s
the game Nosenko loses rather tamely, defences with c4-c5 once he has tied down
without ever setting White any problems. ] t h e b l a c k p i e c e s o n t h e k i n g s i d e . cxb4
15.g4 Khalifman intends to squeeze the 39.b1 g6 40.xb4 f4+ 41.xf4 xf4
dynamism from Black's set up. First of all he 42.h1 c8 43.bb1 f8 44.h5 e7
secures the outpost square on e4 for his 45.h6 b8 46.bh1 ff7 47.1h5 c8
knight. d7 16.e4 f8 An awkward move, Dropping d6, but it was already hopeless as
but after after
[ 16...0-0-0 White has the pleasant choice [ 47...c7 White has the thematic
between winning the exchange with 17.g5 breakthrough with 48.c5 when if dxc5
or continuing his attack with ( 17.a4 )] 49.d6+ ]
17.e2 gxh5 18.xh5 0-0-0 19.a4! 48.xd6! xd6 49.xd6+ d7 50.xf7
White wants a stranglehold on both sides of xf7 51.c5 d8 and Black gave up as he
the board. b8 20.b3 c8 21.0-0-0 d7 has no answer to W hite's pawn centre. A
22.h4 positional masterpiece by Khalifman.
[ Instead 22.dh1 looks stronger as Black 1-0
has no good way to defend the h7 pawn. For
example h6 ( Black should prefer to fight on
a pawn down after 22...f6 23.xf6 xf6 616 B04
24.xh7 ) 23.g5! hxg5 24.xh8 xh8 Kobalia,Mihail 2637
25.xg5 and Black has no good way to Narciso Dublan,Marc 2530
b l o c k t h e a t t a c k o n h i s r o o k e . g . f6 11th EICC Men (3) 08.03.2010
( H e a l s o l o s e s m a t e r i a l a f t e r 25...f6 [Gawain Jones]
26.xf6 xf6 27.f3 or; 25...e8 26.h5 )
26.xh8 xh8 27.xf6 h1+ 28.d1 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
and Black will be t wo pieces f or a roo k A rare line but nevertheless important. Black
down. ] offers to transpose back into an Exchange
22...g8 Variation but with the knights already
629
committed on f3 and c6. 5.c4 b6 6.e6!? accurate to keep rooks on the board.)
This must be critical for the theoretical 12...hxg6 13.xh8+ xh8 14.c3
standing of 4...Nc6. John usefully provided was running well for Black until he
some Kaissiber analysis augmented by his erred with f5? ( 14...c5! and Black
own comments last year. I'll try to augment would have been doing well.) 15.xf5
those notes with thoughts of my own and gxf5 16.h5+ f7 Lagopatis, N-
recent games. Sigouros, I Agios Kirykos 2010, when
[ 6.exd6 has been played slightly more often t h e s i m p l e 17.xf5 would have left
a s W h it e , i f h e i s n o t re a d y, h a s b e e n White with a clear advantage.;
unwilling to go into the chaos of the mainline B2b) 11.g5 e5 12.c3 f5
and simply transposes into the alternate 13.h6!? f6 14.gxe4 0-0 15.xf6+
line. ] exf6 and here rather than the erratic
6...fxe6 7.c3 Unfortunately I do not have 16.Rh4!?, 16.b3 would have left White
access to the Kaissiber magazine but from with the u pper hand . Su tovsk y, E -
John's notes I presume this was the mainline. Nguyen, N Moscow 2007. ]
[ 7.e3 however, has also been mentioned 7...g6
and apparently takes up 8 pages in issue [ Immediately sacrificing the pawn back with
19! A couple of recent games proceeded: 7...e5 doesn't allow Black equality. 8.d5
A) 7...e5 has been played as often in the d4 9.xd4 exd4 10.xd4 f5?! ( Surely
past although I think White can hope for a 10...e5 was necessary, although this is
pull. 8.d5 d4 9.xd4 exd4 10.xd4 probably a better version of the lines we
e5 11.d2 ( 11.dxe6 xe6 12.c3 f6 have already examined in 7.Be3 for White.)
13.xf6 gxf6 left White with a small 11.e2 d7 12.h5+ g6 13.xg6+ hxg6
positional edge. Groenegress, W - 14.0-0 0-0-0 15.e1 f5 16.e6 c5
Horstmann, M Germany 1985.) 11...f5 17.e4 xe4 18.xe4 d7 19.g5
12.c3 e7 13.b3 ( The immediate was a recent advert for 6.e6.1-0 De Firmian,
13.d3 looks a little better for White as N-Johnson, E Parsipanny 2009 ]
Black lacks play.) 13...d7 14.d3 xd3 [ 7...d5 looks extremely ugly, e5 is a big hole
15.xd3 g5 and Black was close to in Black's camp while the e6 pawn is now
equality. Lau, R-Schroll, G Vienna 1998; backward. 8.c5 d7 When
B) 7...g6 8.h4 Of course this is always A) Instead 9.d3 was attempted in a
the way of dealing with ...g6. recent game. e5 10.g5 ( 10.xd5 f6
B1) 8...e5 9.d5 b4 ( 9...e4!? 11.xf6+ exf6 12.dxe5 g4 13.0-0
s h o u ld b e e xa m in e d a lt h o u g h a f t e r xe5 14.e1 would favour W hite.)
10.g5 e5 11.e2 I have a feeling 10...f6 11.xh7 e4 12.xf6+ exf6
W hite should have a way to keep the Giraldo, L-Monsalve, L Medellin 2009.;
advantage.) 10.a3 a6 11.g5 g7 B) 9.b5 looks logical to me. g6 10.xc6
Dos Santos, R-Garbarino, R Buenos bxc6 11.0-0 g7 12.g5 f6 13.e1
Aires 2010 was a recent example of this and W hite has total control of the
line when 12.a4! looked particularly position. ]
strong, for example: h6 ( 12...f6 13.a5 8.h4 g7 9.e3 Keeping control of the d4
xg5 14.hxg5 d7 15.d3 f7 square.
16.c3 gives White great play for the [ White can alternatively continue his attack
pawn. ) 13.e6 xe6 14.dxe6 0-0 with 9.h5 although currently Black is
15.a5 c8 16.c3 and Black's kingside standing satisfactorily. e5 10.d5 d4
looks too exposed.; 11.hxg6 hxg6 12.xh8+ xh8 13.d3
B2) 8...g7 9.h5 e5 10.d5 e4 ( 13.xd4 was examined by John Watson
B2a) 11.d4 was tried the most who came to the conclusion that Black is
recent time this position was reached doing ok. ) 13...c6 14.e3!? A new try.
bu t I p re f e r S ut o vsky's m o ve . e5 ( 14.h4 d7!? 15.xg6 c7 unclear is
12.hxg6 ( 12.d2 looks more given in the archives.; While 14.xg6+ d7
630
is nothing for Black to fear according to rather important to the future of the line for
Watson. ) 14...d7!? 15.xd4 exd4 Black.
16.xd4 c7 17.e2 c5 18.xh8 xh8 [ He investigated 15.e3 when the critical
19.d2 h4 20.b3 d7 and Black's king line appears to be g5 16.h6 g4 17.e2
run had given him the better chances and he f5 18.h5 g6 19.g5 f4 20.xg6+
went on to defeat his high rated opponent. hxg6 21.g3 d4 22.b5 f6 23.xd4
Belov, V-Sek, K Ulan Ude 2009. ] exd4 24.e4 f8 25.0-0-0 g5+ 26.b1
9...0-0 f5 A mixture of analysis by John and Raj
[ 9...e5 m a y t r a n s p o s e . 10.d5 d4 Tischbierek in which Black seems to be
( 10...b4 11.a3 a6 Kochetkova, J- standing satisfactorily but there's a lot of
Slacky, S Banska Stiavnica 2010 and here I potential for improvements for both sides. ]
like the look of 12.g5! when White has 15...f6 16.0-0-0
more than enough compensation.; 10...a5 [ E x c h a n g i n g i m m e d i a t e l y w i t h 16.xf6
wa s s u gge s t e d b y W a t so n b u t h a s n o t has also been tried and looks a little
received any practical tries.) 11.xd4 exd4 u n p l e a s a n t f o r B l a c k . xf6 17.hxg6
12.xd4 xd4 ( 12...e5 13.dxe6 0-0 ( 17.b5 xe6 18.xc7 Motwani, P-
is Watson's suggestion although White looks B r y s o n , D S t A n d r e w s 1 9 8 5 w h e n c8
to have the better chances, for example: looks simplest 19.xe6 xe6+ 20.d2
14.h5 e7 15.xg7 xg7 16.hxg6 hxg6 xc4+ should be a draw.) 17...hxg6 18.e7
17.g4 e8 18.0-0-0 xe6 19.e4 ) ( 18.e4 f4 was already agreed drawn in
13.xd4 e5 Lau, R-Fleck, J Germany 1984.) 18...e6
A) White can also keep the position closed ( 18...e6+ 19.d2 xe7 20.d3 f5
with 14.e3 but Black survived following 21.h6 looks pleasant for White.) 19.c5!
0-0 15.h5 g5 16.h6 f4 ( 16...g4 dxc5 Petrik, T-Slacky, S Banska Stiavnica
would transpose to the critical line given 2010 when 20.b5! to force Black to give
below. ) 17.b3 ( 17.c5 is given in the up control of the d6 square. c6 21.0-0-0!
af o re m e nt io ne d an a lysis.) 17...f6 e8 22.e4 f7 ( 22...f4 23.d8+- )
18.e4 ( 18.e2! f5 19.g3 d4 23.d8 d7 24.d3 would have picked up
20.h5 would have picked up a pawn.) material. ]
18...g6 19.d3 f5 20.f3 g4 16...xe6 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.f3 The first new
1/2-1/2 Kovar, V-Leutwyler, M Pardubice move of the game.
2009.; [ 18.e4 is not so effective as the knight
B) 14.dxe6 0-0 and here White deviated belongs on b5. xd4 19.xd4 g7 20.d3
with h8 21.e1 ae8 didn't really get White
B1) 15.h5 f6 16.xf6 xf6 17.hxg6 a n yw h e r e . Z a w a d z k a , J - K a r h a n e k , P
hxg6 18.b5 ( 18.e7!? is looked at in Frydek Mistek 2004. ]
the note to 16.Qxf6.) 18...xe6 19.xc7 18...g7 19.b5 g8 20.b3 Seeing as this
af8 20.b3 Brenjo, S-Regez, M Ohrid allows Black equality
2009 is given by W atson when W hite [ White should have tried 20.xf6+ xf6
has a pleasant edge.; 21.e1 f7 22.h4 with a small edge
B2) 15.c5 A new try but this doesn't a lt h o u g h B la ck s h o u ld b e a b le t o h o l d
tro uble Bla ck. dxc5 16.xd8 xd8 without too many difficulties. ]
17.b5 d5 18.e7 Heinatz, T- 20...xd4 21.xd4 d5!?
Leutwyler, M Graechen 2009 when the [ 21...a6! is the simplest route to equality as
s i m p l e s t a p p e a r s t o b e xe7 22.xc7 ac8 23.xd6 f6 picks up the
when Black has nothing to worry about. ] knight, although matters aren't so clear as
10.h5 e5 11.d5 d4 12.xd4 exd4 White gets three pawns for the piece. ]
13.xd4 xd4 14.xd4 e5 15.dxe6 22.cxd5 xd5 23.c4 c6 24.xd5 xd5
This is the first deviation from the analysis 25.c7 ac8 26.xd5 cxd5+ 27.d2
which John Watson put up on The endgame is better for White as he can
ChessPublishing last year. I think this is put pressure on d5 but was unable to convert
631
the full point. I think White had better chances [ 11.xg4 f6 is feeble, of course. ]
for an advantage with 16.Qxf6 which looks 11...f6 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.a4 In principle
unpleasant to hold. c5 28.c1 this structure is acceptable for Black, but
[ 28.b4! b5 29.a4 b6 30.a5 d6 White's lead in development is a bit annoying.
31.dh4 was the best chance when White d7 14.a3 An excellent move, bringing the
definitely has the advantage. ] knight to the ideal c4 square: more
28...xc1 29.xc1 d8 30.d2 f6 stereotyped efforts lead nowhere, for example
31.d3 e5 32.g4 d6 33.g3 a6 [ 14.c3 e6 15.f4 e7 16.ac1 0-0= ]
34.a4 xa4 35.bxa4 b6 36.c3 g5 14...e6 15.c4
37.d3 d6 38.d4 e6 39.d3 e5 [ 15.e3 was another move against which it
40.e3 f5 41.d4 e6 42.f4 gxf4 is not simple to equalise: something like
43.gxf4 f5 44.xd5 xf4 45.c6 e5 xa3 16.xa3 d5 17.ac1 b8 18.c2
46.b7 d6 47.xa7 c7 48.a3 c8 b6 19.fc1 e7 20.a4 0-0 might be
49.a8 the best try, but Black remains under
½-½ pressure. ]
15...c5 The twin threats of Ne5 and Nb6 are
awkward for example
617 B04 [ 15...d8 16.e3 c5 17.a5 cxd4
Kosten,Anthony C 2528 18.e5 d5 19.a4+ d7 20.xd4 ]
Ferguson,Mark 2395 16.a6 cxd4?? A mystery: Mark surely can't
4NCL Nottingham ENG (9) 30.04.2005 have imagined this did anything other than
[John Cox] lose almost at once, so why he rejected
[ 16...c8 is beyond me. After that I don't
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 see that W hite has anything immediately
5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 The modern way of decisive: 17.b5+ ( 17.d6+ xd6
handling the Miles variation, popularised by 18.xd6 cxd4 is fine for Black 19.d1 d7
German players and especially GM Thomas 20.b4 d8 is nothing for White.) 17...d7
Luther. 7.0-0 d7 8.g4N 7f6 repeats unless White wants to try 18.xd7+
[ Mark Ferguson told me after the game that xd7 19.e3 , which is slightly better for
he had considered the variation 8...e6 9.c4 him to be sure, but hardly fatal. ]
b4 10.e3 xb1 11.xb1 xa2 12.d2 17.b6 Maybe Black, most
b4 13.d5 and assessed it as 'scary' a fair uncharacteristically, had missed 17 ...Qc6 18
enough conclusion, for example after cxd5 Nxa8! Qxa6 19 Nc7+. axb6 18.xa8+ e7
14.cxd5 xd5 15.xd5 exd5 16.c3 19.b3 e8 20.a3+ f6 21.f3+ g6
prevents Black developing readily Fritz 22.g4+ f6 23.b2 A debacle, but to be
seems confident it can survive ( 16.f3 e7 fair it was Mark Ferguson's first time with the
17.xd5 0-0 18.xb7 b8= ) 16...g5 Alekhine (and last, he tells me), and as usual
17.f3 0-0-0 but I wouldn't be so sure. ] the problem in such circumstances is not
[ 8...e6 9.c4 5f6 10.e3 g6 knowing the existing theory but being able to
however, is the most natural way to play, re a ct a p p rop ria te ly whe n you r o pp o n e n t
and looks perfectly sound to me, for departs slightly from theory.
example 11.c3 ( 11.d5 c7 12.dxe6 1-0
fxe6 followed by a swift ...Bd6, ...00 and...
Rad8 gives Black very active play.) 11...d6
12.d5 c7 13.h4 h2+ 14.h1 e5
15.h5 0-0-0 is another try, with some
amusing complications (or an immediate
d r a w a f t e r 1 6 K g 1 B h 2 + ). I d o n 't t h i n k
Tony's no velt y is goin g to blo w Black's
opening away. ]
9.c4 xg4 10.xg4 xg4 11.cxd5
632
618 B04 c6 is usually preferred to 6...Be6 because it's

Krylov,Sergey 2409 thought that 7 Nc3! might cause Black some
Suder,Ryszard 2209 problems there. Matters are not so clear
ch-Euro IBCA (2) 15.08.2007 though:
[John Watson] [ 6...e6 7.c3 c6 8.e4 ( 8.f3 g7
9.e4 0-0 10.0-0 c7! Psakhis 11.xe6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 xe6 12.c3 d5= ) 8...c7! 9.xe6 xe6
5.xe5 g6 6.c4 c6 Whenever Black has to 10.f3 f6 11.b3 d5 12.xb7 xe4+
make this move I feel a little nervous, 13.e3 g7 14.xa8 fxe5 15.xb8+ f7
because it's hard to undertake anything. But 16.b4 xg2 17.0-0-0 exd4 It depends
W hite's approach is not as subtle as in on your view. Not everyone likes
Jakovenko-Bu Xiagzhi. 7.0-0 g7 8.e1 0-0 sacrificing material. ]
9.c3 e6 10.d2 d7 11.xd7 xd7 7.0-0 g7 8.e1 0-0 9.b3 e6
12.e4 b6 13.g5 [ 9...a5 Gaining space on the queenside.
[ 13.f3 h6 14.g3! ] 10.c3 e6!? ( I personally prefer 10...d7
13...f5 14.h3 h6 15.f3 d6 This doesn't 11.f3 7b6 12.a4 c7 13.g5 g4
seem so bad, even if W hite must have 14.bd2 c5 15.h3 xf3 16.xf3 e6
somewhat the better of it. 16.e2 fe8 and Black has an a cceptable position .)
17.e5 ad8 18.b3 f8 19.d2 c8?! 11.d2 d7 12.ef3 g4 13.h3 xf3
[ Here was a chance to grab some space 14.xf3 e6 15.a4 c7 16.d3 fe8
with 19...c5 , e.g., 20.dxc5 ( 20.f3 g5!? 17.g5 b6 18.c4 c7 19.h4 5b6
21.dxc5 bxc5 22.xd5?! xd5 23.xe7 20.g3 d8 21.d2 f6 22.c2 xc4
xh3! ) 20...xc5 21.ad1 d6 23.xc4 b6 24.b3 d5 25.ad1
. As usual, White maintains some edge. ] Boros, D-Schnelzer, R Budapest 2003 ]
[ A n o t h e r d e f e n s i v e m o v e w a s 19...b5 10.d2
, when 20.ac1 h7 21.c4! bxc4 22.xc4 [ 10.c3?! a5 11.a4 c7 12.a3 d7
exerts pressure upon Black's queenside. ] 13.f4 xe5 14.xe5 xe5 15.xe5 d7
20.ad1 b7? 16.e4 xb3 17.xb3 e6 18.d3 b6
[ Last chance for 20...b5 , when White will 19.g3 ad8 20.e2 c7 21.f4 d5
manoeuvre to put a knight on c5 and/or 22.xd5 cxd5= I don't think White should
open the c-file against c6. ] block his c pawn in this line. The options of
21.c4! After more than adequate preparation! c3 and/ or c2-c4 and d4-d5 are to important
c7 22.c5! bxc5 23.xf7 xf7 24.dxc5 to pass by. ]
f6 10...c7 The rationale is simple : with each
[ 24...d7 25.xf7+ xf7 26.a5! ] piece exchange comes a lessening of
25.c3 hitting d8 and f6. xd1 26.xf6 pressure.
xe1+ 27.xe1 xf6 28.b4 Winning a [ 10...d7 11.ef3 g4 ( 11...c7 12.c3
piece. d5 c5! 13.xe6 xe6 14.d5 c7 15.e4
[ 28...c8 29.b8 ] f6 16.c4 xe4 17.xe4 e6 ) 12.h3
29.xb7 e6 30.xc6 xf3 13.xf3 a5 14.g5 e8 15.c4
1-0 5b6 Bagirov ]
11.c3 d5? But this is an odd move. Why not
11...Nd7! 12.g4! Very good indeed. Now
619 B04 White has serious attacking chances on the
Lane,Gary William 2395 Kingside. a5 13.df3 a4 14.c2 xf3
Wallace,John Paul 2405 15.xf3 d7 16.h4 e6 Fiddle as he might,
41st Doeberl Cup (5) 2003 W alla ce ha s invited too many of W h ite's
[Andrew Martin] pieces into the danger area. Although . .. e7-
e6 was more or less forced, the net effect has
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 been to leave the Nc7 looking stupid. 17.g5
5.xe5 g6 6.c4 c6 The Kengis move. 6... f6 18.h6! a5 A desperate way of
633
defending his King. 19.h4 e8 [ 9...e6 was simpler, intending 10.h4 g6
[ He could flick 19...a3 in, but it will come to 11.xg6 hxg6 with a solid position for Black,
the same. Black's Rook gets trapped in mid- but nothing more. ]
board. 20.b4 d5 21.c4 d6 22.c5 d5 10.b3?!
23.e4 ] [ 10.d3 is a better way of preparing c2-c4.
20.e4! Lane is very direct, seeking to put After xd3 11.xd3 c7 12.c4
Black away before either of his knights get W hite highlights ...h7-h6 as a worthless
going. e7 21.e5 g7 Perhaps this is the move and executes the main positional idea
critical position. Wallace's move just loses. I of this variation. Possibly Ledger had his
give several defensive lines, but in all cases mind fixed on keeping the pieces on, but
White keeps the advantage: now Palliser starts to play very well and
[ 21...xg5 22.hxg5 f8 23.f4+- ] manages to exploit the position of the Bb3 to
[ 21...d5 Probably the best try. 22.ae1 ] gain equality. ]
[ 21...xe5 22.dxe5 xg5 23.hxg5 f8 10...e6 11.c4 b6 12.c3 e7 13.e2N
24.xa4 xh6 25.gxh6 d5 26.d1 ed8 [ Or 13.e1 0-0 14.a4 a5 15.f4 b4
27.ed4 ] 16.c5 ( 16.e2 ) 16...bd5 17.d2 c7
22.xe7 xh6 23.b4! d5 24.c4 xe5 18.xd5 xd5 19.xd5 xd2 20.xd2
25.dxe5+- a6 There's nothing left apart exd5 21.b4 e4 22.a3 axb4 23.xb4
from a few random attacking moves. Black is fe8 24.ae3 e6 25.d2 ae8 26.a5
finished. 26.d6 dc5 27.d4 f6 28.exf6 8e7 27.g3 f5= Slaby, J-Mirzoev, A/
e5 29.e1 exd4 30.xe8+ f7 31.e7+ Salou 2005 ]
xf6 32.g4 d3 33.g5+ White's attack hit 13...0-0 14.f4 a5! Exploiting clumsy position
very hard and all as a result of one inaccuracy of the Bb3. To prevent a5-a4 by a2-a4 means
: 11...Bd5. Instead 11...Nd7 would have led to to weaken the b4 square irreparably. White's
a typical Kengis position- White's a little better answer is simple and logical... 15.a3 e8
but Black has counterplay. [ 15...a4 16.a2 was definitely worth flicking
1-0 in. ]
16.fd1 a4 17.a2 bd7! Preparing ...Qa5.
18.b1 Admitting that the opponent has
620 B04 solved the problem of the light-squared bishop
Ledger,Andrew 2452 . xb1 19.axb1 a5 20.d3 White cannot
Palliser,Richard 2411 quite see how to proceed now that d4-d5 has
ch Scarborough ENG (10) 12.08.2004 been prevented.
[Andrew Martin] [ Perhaps 20.e5 was correct, after which
Notkin gives ed8 ( 20...a6?! 21.d3 )
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 21.d3 xe5 22.dxe5 h7 ( 22...xd3
5.xe5 c6 6.c4 d7 I must admit that I 23.xd3 d8 24.c2 d7 25.xa4
am perplexed as to the popularity of the line xa4 26.xa4 ) 23.g3 h4 24.g4 g5
with 5...c6. Black toils to equalize. Here, with 25.xg5 xg5 26.e3 and White has
6...Nd7 Palliser hopes to get rid of W hite's attacking chances. ]
imposing Knight on e5. No such luck! 7.f3! 20...h5! Pinning the Nf3 21.e1 f8?!
Correct! With more space, White keeps the [ Simply 21...b5! would have been
pieces on. W e go into a Caro position with satisfactory, obtaining d5 as an outpost. ]
White at least a little better. 7f6 22.h2 a5?! Black drifts. 23.e5 ed8
[ If 7...g6 8.0-0 g7 9.e1 0-0 10.b3 24.f4 6d7 25.g4
an d B la c k h a s p ro b le m s wit h h is ligh t - [ 25.g4 f6 26.h4 8d7 27.xd7
squared bishop. ] xd7 28.xh6 seems very dangerous
[ Or 7...7b6 8.b3 g4 though the indeed. ]
evaluation doesn't change - Black is slightly [ Meanwhile 25.g3 is met by xe5
worse. 9.h3 h5 10.0-0 ] 26.xe5 g6 ]
8.h3 f5 9.0-0 h6 Possibly [ A f i n a l a l t e r n a t i v e 25.d5!?
634
is also interesting: xe5 26.xe5 g6! 40...h7?

27.g3 ( 27.dxe6? xd3 28.exf7+ xf7 [ C o r r e c t i s 40...e8 in order to meet
29.xd3 xe5 ) 27...exd5 28.cxd5 cxd5 41.xh6 with xd1+ 42.xd1 xe5
29.ed1 White had enough to think about! ] 43.xg5+ xg5+ 44.xg5+ f7= ]
25...g5 41.xg5 hxg5 42.xd4 cxd4 Giving White
[ 25...g6 ] the chance to unleash a fine little combination.
26.d6! g6 27.g3 b6 28.c5 c8 29.h4 Can you see what happens next? 43.e4!!
[ 29.e5! was strong with the idea of xd6 xe4
30.cxd6 xd6?! ( If 30...f8 31.e4 [ 43...a7 44.xd6 g7 45.f5+ g8
and the white knights are very lively) 31.c4 46.h6 is crushing. ]
winning the exchange ] 44.f7+ h8
29...e7 [ 44...h6 45.g4# ]
[ The line 29...xd6 30.cxd6 ( 30.hxg5 45.g6+! xg6 46.hxg6 Mate is inevitable
f5 ) 30...f6 31.xf6+ gxf6 32.e4 f5 [ 46.hxg6 a7 ( 46...a7 47.f8# ) 47.g7+
33.c5 a7 34.xe6!? fxe6 35.xe6+ h7 48.g8+ An erratic game with a good
g7 36.h5 doe sn 't win d ue t o xd6! finish. As to the opening I am unconvinced
( e v e n a f t e r 36...f8 37.e7+ g8 by 5...c6. ]
followed by b7-b5 Black isn't lost) 37.e8 1-0
d8 ]
30.h5 f8 31.f4 Now White's advantage is
obvious as every piece is standing better than 621 B04
its counterpart. a6 32.ed1 b6 Weakening Lupulescu,Constantin 2566
the c6 pawn which White exploits immediately Grunberg,Mihai 2439
33.f3! bxc5 34.xh6 Victor Ciocaltea Mem (6) 11.03.2007
[ Maybe time trouble distracted Ledger from [John Watson]
the obvious 34.e5 xd4 35.xd4 cxd4
36.xd4 with numerous threats. ] I can't resist showing this game, annotated by
34...f5! Alexander Finkel in the New in Chess
[ After 34...gxh6 35.xh6+ and Nxf7 Yearbook, because it expands upon the line
White's attack is irresistible ] that we first saw in ChessPublishing a few
35.e5 gxh6?! years back. See also this month's Grischuk
[ In the event of 35...c4!? 36.e3 gxh6 game. Do you suppose Lupulescu pilfered the
37.xc6 d7 White's compensation would idea f rom this site? Or that it at any rate
have been questionable ] originated here? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4
36.g4! xd4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5
[ It's far too late for 36...c4 37.gxf5! cxd3 7.0-0 d7 So far, so normal. Then our
38.f6 xf6 39.xf6 d6 40.h2! b7 Webmaster Tony Kosten played (invented? I
( 40...h7? 41.f7 mating ) 41.xh6 can't tell from my databases) the creative
with a decisive attack ] move 8.g4!? , also used by Grischuk in this
37.gxf5 exf5 38.xf5 d6 month's column. e6 Probably the best answer,
[ After 38...xd3 it appears that mate is recommended by ChessPublishing Alekhine's
forced: 39.f7+ h8 40.g6+ xg6 guru John Cox.
41.hxg6 g3+ 42.fxg3 etc ] [ Tony had success in Kosten, A (2528)-
39.g3+ g5 Ferguson, M (2395)/Nottingham ENG 2005
[ If 39...h8 40.g6+ xg6 41.xg6 g5 following 8...7f6 9.c4 xg4 10.xg4
W h i t e h a s t o t a k e a p e r p e t u a l : 42.xd4 xg4 11.cxd5 f6 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.a4 ]
cxd4 43.xg5 hxg5 44.h6+ ] 9.c4 b4!?
40.f6! Ledger's ingenious play makes the [ Cox had a chance to play his own
opponent err s u g g e s t i o n 9...5f6 10.e3 g6
[ 40.xg5+ hxg5 41.xg5+ h7 42.e7+ versus Hague in Birmingham 2005. There
h8 43.xd4 cxd4 44.f6+ h7= ] followed 11.d5!? (Grischuk played simply 11
635
Nc3). My computer suggests the weird 11 622 B04

c5 followed by 12 f4! The ideas are to play Manca,F 2424
f5 (although it's hard to believe that by itself Sulskis,S 2586
that can be so dangerous) or Nc4. A messy Server24Chess 2012 (2) 03.06.2012
follow-up would be 12...b6 13 b4 a5 14 b5!? [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
c x b 5 1 5 c 6 , a ls o s u s p i c io u s -l o o k in g. I
suppose it's worth looking at. c7 12.c3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
d6 13.h3 0-0 14.dxc6 bxc6 5.xe5 d7?! This move is played quite
with something resembling equality. frequently by strong players but seems an
Alexander Finkel in NIC Yearbook 84 is odd decision. White can either force a draw
sceptical of 14 dxc6"?!" and thinks that or else get a very strong attack for the piece.
White's chances are not exhausted in this Here the strong Lithuanian GM playing Black
line. I'm not sure what he prefers, and I'd gets destroyed. 6.xf7 xf7 7.h5+ e6
guess that there's nothing for White in the 8.c4 And this is critical.
position. ] [ Instead White can force a draw with 8.g4+
10.e3! xb1 11.xb1 xa2 12.d2 b4 f7 seen many times, for example 1/2-1/2
13.d5! White certainly has a nice attack for the Leitao, R (26 29)-Fier, A (2570) Santo s
pawn. exd5 2010. ( 8...d6? 9.c4 is suicidal. )]
[ 13...cxd5 14.cxd5 xd5 15.xd5 exd5 [ W h i l e A n d r e w M a r t i n l o o k e d a t 8.g3
16.c3! (Finkel) looks tremendous for in the archives. ]
White. ] 8...5f6 9.d5+ d6 10.f7 e5
14.cxd5 c5? [ 10...b8?! has a very bad reputation due
[ 14...f6!? ] to 11.c5+! d7 ( 11...xc5 is far too risky.
15.xb4! xb4 16.dxc6 bxc6 17.d4 c5 White has a variety of ways to finish off the
[ 17...f8 18.fd1 c7 19.c4 and good game - one being: 12.e3+ d6 13.c3
luck, Black! ] e8 14.f4+ c5 15.e4+ b6
18.xg7 f6 19.g3?! According to Finkel, 16.e3+ a5 17.xe8 xe8 18.b4+
although I don't think it's a bad move. He gives xb4 19.b1+ a4 20.b5+ a5
[ 19.xf6! xf6 20.bc1 d7 21.f3 c8 21.d2+ b6 22.f1# ) 12.b5+ c6
22.f5 with a huge advantage. ] 13.dxc6+ bxc6 14.0-0 a5 15.d1+
19...e5 20.bc1 ( John Cox looks at 15.c4 in Mutschnik, I
[ 20.fd1! f8 21.bc1 b6 22.c4 xc4 (2408)-Pitschka, K (2212) Stuttgart 2005 but
23.xc4 is strong. ] the text is stronger.) 15...c7 16.f4+ b7
20...d4! 21.fd1 d8 22.c2 c5? when Hiarcs Opening Book gives 17.e2
[ 22...b6 (Finkel) ] b4 18.d2 xc5 19.e3 b4 20.a3
23.xd4 cxd4 24.f4 d7 21.c4 when White has a huge
[ 24.a3!? ] initiative for the piece. ]
24...g6 25.a3 e7 26.b5+ f8 27.f5 11.f4 c5 This is almost universally played to
[ 27.xe7+! xe7 28.c7+ f6 29.xa7 ] prevent 12.c5+
27...xa3 28.bxa3 e5 29.f6 g8 30.c5? [ 11...b6 was tried in Carrion Lara, L-Rijksen,
[ 30.e2! was still very strong, according to H Alkmaar 1985, the only game to diverge
Finkel. It's hard to disagree, especially since but 12.a3! looks winning. White threatens
d3 ( 30...g6 31.xd4! ) 31.xd3 xd3 both 13.Nb5+ and 13.c5+ followed by 14.
32.xd3 leaves White pawn and position Nc4+ ]
up. ] [ Perhaps 11...g5 is Black's safest although
30...g5 31.xd4 f3+ 32.f2 xd4 12.c5+ xc5 13.xe5 xd5 14.xd5+
33.xg5 d6 34.d3 e6 35.g3 h6 xd5 15.xc7 is obviously very
36.e3 c5 37.c4 d7 38.f3 xf6 comfortable for W hite and certainly not
A disappointing f inish f or W hite, but who what players are looking for when they try 5...
wouldn't play on in this position? Nd7?! ]
½-½ [ W h i l e t r a d i n g q u e e n s w i t h 11...e8
636
do e s n 't s a ve B lack a s 12.xe8 xe8 13...b6 And again Sulskis follows the main
13.c3 will pick up the e5 knight for free line but it's time to look for deviations.
and leave White a pawn up. ] [ 13...b6 has also been tried, and on current
12.c3 a6 13.b4 The strong Russian GM evidence looks to be Black's best. White has
Boris Savchenko has tried this position twice a few different ways to continue but perhaps
recently as Black but neither opponent has A) 14.bxc5+;
gone for this critical thrust. B) and 14.b5 are also possible. A battle of
[ One tried 13.d3!? when Boris should our computers (Houdini as White vs Rybka
have reacted with with Black) continued a5
A) Instead the erratic GM went down after B1) Hiarcs Opening Book gives 15.0-0-0
13...g6 14.b4 g6 16.b2 h6 17.xe5+ xe5 18.d6
A1) In the New in Chess Yearbook 103 f8 when its line ends. We've continued
Peter Boel gives 14...cxb4 15.a4 b6 with 19.f4+ xf4 20.xe7+ xe7
( 15...fg4 16.c5+ c7 17.h3 ) 16.c5+ 21.dxe7 e8 22.g3 h6 23.g2 a7
bxc5 17.b2 d7 18.c4+ c7 24.he1+ f5 25.d8 ( or 25.h3+
19.xe5 b7 "with attack for the g5 26.xc8 xc8 which is apparently
pawn".; also a draw.) 25...axe7 26.xe8 xe8
A2) He also gives a crazy line after 27.h3+ g5 28.xe8 xe8 29.e4+
14...b6 15.bxc5+ bxc5 16.b1 h6! h5 30.xc8 and the endgame's just a
17.b7! '"Threatening 18.Qxf6! and 19. draw;
Ne4 mate". He concludes his line with B2) 15.d3 g6 16.e4+ xe4
d7 18.g3 f8 19.xh7! a5 17.xe4 h6 18.xe5+ xe5 19.d6
20.xh6 xc3+ 21.d2 a1+ 22.b1 e6 20.f3 xc4 21.c6 xd6
d4 23.0-0 f5 24.b6+ c7 25.a5! 22.d1 xd1+ 23.xd1 ad8 24.d7
"wit h grea t at ta ckin g ch an ce s st ill" . hf8 25.g3 d5 26.f4+ xf4 27.gxf4+
Very intriguing analysis and this looks xf4 28.c6 d4 29.a1 xh1
like another critical test of Black's 30.xh1 f6 and Black can hardly be
suspicious opening.; worse anyway.;
A3) 14...c7 15.bxc5+ The game C) 14.b1 is the most promising. cxb4
c o n t i n u e d : ( And here he recommends 15.xb4
15.0-0! " wi n n i n g b a c k t h e N e 5 " .) C1) Instead Black should probably try
15...xc5 16.a4+ d4 17.0-0-0 h6 15...e6 16.e2 b5 when his position
18.xh6 xd3+ 19.xd3+ xd3 feels suspect but there's nothing
20.d1+ e2 21.d6 d7 22.c3+ completely clear. After an in-depth look
xf2 23.e4+ xg2 24.d2+ f3 we prefer 17.dxe6 ( 17.xb5 axb5
25.f2+ xe4 26.xf6 e6 27.f4+ 18.xb5+ c5 19.e3+ b4 20.d2+
d3 28.f3+ d4 29.e3+ c5 and White's attack is only enough
1-0 Boruchovsky, A (2333)-Savchenko, for perpetual.; 17.b2!? d7 18.c5+
B (2580) Plovdiv 2012.; xc5 19.xd7 fxd7 20.dxe6 c4
B) 13...g5 14.g3 h6 as was seen in 21.exd7 xd7 is roughly level.) 17...e7
Nosov, A (2372)-Kutynec, V (2281 Alushta 18.e4+! ( 18.cxb5 xf7 19.exf7 e6
2008. ] 20.a4 a5 is roughly level.) 18...c6
[ His other opponent played the non-critical 19.cxb5+ axb5 20.xb5+ b6
13.0-0-0? when he didn't have enough after 21.xe7 xe7 22.b1 xe4 23.xe5
g6 White's problem is that Black threatens c5 24.e2+ a7 25.0-0 xe6
1 4 . . . B h 6 w i n n i n g t h e q u e e n . 14.xe5+ 26.fc1 and White has a dangerous
xe5 15.d6 h6+ 16.b1 e8 17.d5+ initiative despite queens being off the
xd5 18.xd5+ f6 19.d3 exd6 board. Black will probably have to give
20.xd6+ g7 21.d5 f8 22.xc5 e5 back material with a rook to b8 when
0-1 G oikh ma n, V (226 1)-S avch en ko , B White has good winning chances in the
(2630) St Petersburg 2011. ] ending.;
637
C2) 15...c5? This fails to a very pretty ca n n o t su rvive . xe4 22.xe4+ c5
finish. 16.b1! xf7 17.a4+ d4 23.d6! etc. ]
18.f3 and Black has no defence to Rd1 15.g3 f5? This loses instantly.
mate, e.g. f5 19.d1+ d3 20.xd3 [ 15...h5 looks like Black's last try but again
e5 21.f1+ d3+ 22.xd3 e4 A) 16.bxc5+ is also strong: xc5 17.g6
23.f1+ d2 24.xd2# ] d4 18.c2 h4 19.c5+ d7 20.d1
[ 13...cxb4 14.c5+! cannot be advised: f3+ 21.gxf3 xc5 22.e5 d8
xc5 15.a4+ d6 ( or 15...d4 and Black's survived to fight on for a few
16.e3+ e4 17.c5+ f5 18.g4+ more moves but of course White's doing
exg4 19.d3+ e5 20.f4+ d6 very well.;
21.xb7+ xb7 22.e6+ c7 23.b6+ B) But 16.g6?! doesn't look as clear
b8 24.xd8 ) 16.b2 b5 17.d3 xb4 17.xg5 fg4 18.g6+ d7
winning back the piece with the advantage. ] ( 18...c7!? ) 19.xe5 xe5 20.e6+
[ 13...c7 is Black's final try to hold onto the d8 21.xe5 g8 22.e3 g7 23.d2
c 5 s q u a r e b u t 14.a4 b6 ( 14...cxb4 h4 24.f3 e5 25.e4 xd2+ 26.xd2
15.c5+ d7 16.e6+ e8 17.xe5 f5 and Black's equalised.;
xe5+ 18.xe5 xd5 19.c4 C) 16.d3 is probably just winning: h4
is very pleasant even if Black has 17.xe5+ xe5 18.0-0 d6 ( 18...d8
succeeded in exchanging queens.) 15.0-0-0 19.fe1+ d6 20.bxc5+ xc5 21.a4+
fg4 16.e1 and the pressure on Black's d6 22.c5+ c7 23.d6+ b8 24.b6
position is unbearable. ] and White regains his material with a huge
14.c1! This looks like it refutes Black's setup attack. ) 19.bxc5+ xc5 20.a4 d4
[ 14.0-0-0 was looked at by Alexander 21.c5+ c7 22.d6+ b8 23.dxe7 xe7
Volzhin in the early days of ChessPublishing 24.xe7 e8 25.d6+ xd6 26.cxd6
in Mysliwiec, E-Krzyzanowski, A corr 1995 ] and W hite's got an extra pawn and
[ while he also looked at 14.bxc5+ ] ongoing initiative in the endgame. ]
14...g5 [ 15...c7 16.d1 b8 17.a4 b6 18.d3
[ Black can try grabbing the pawn with g4 19.0-0 e8 20.xe8 xe8 21.de1
14...xb4 b u t f o l l o w i n g 15.d3 fd7 22.xb6+- and White regains the
Black doesn't have a good defence to the invested material with interest. ]
s i m p l e p l a n o f c a s t l i n g a n d R f e 1 . g5 [ 15...xb4 16.d3 transposes to 14...
( 15...b2 16.0-0 d2 17.e4+ xe4 Qxb4 ]
18.xe4+- is also hopeless.) 16.g3 h5 16.d3 Sulskis throws in the towel. He can't
17.0-0 h4 18.xe5+ xe5 19.f4+ gxf4 take the bishop as 17.Qe6+ wins everything. If
20.ce1+ d6 Predke, A (2436)-Danilenko, he drops back the bishop then again W hite
D (2307) Batumi 2010 when 21.e4+ xe4 simply castles and plays his rook to the e file,
22.xf4+ d7 23.xe4 and White's attack winning easily. This line looks extremely risky
is far too strong. The threat is 24.Rxf8 and for Black. Play it at your peril!
25.Qxe7 ] 1-0
[ 14...g6 also looks too slow 15.e2 c7
Prie, E (2470)-Nataf, I (2410) Andorra 1997
when 16.d1! is winning: h6 ( 16...f5 623 B04
17.xe5+ xe5 18.d6!+- is a very common Miles,Anthony J
theme. ) 17.e4+ xe4 18.xe5+ xe5 Pons,S
19.d6+- ] Andorra 1996
[ Whilst it's hard to believe Black can get [Nigel Davies]
away with 14...c7 True White can no
longer castle long but something like 15.d3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
g4 16.xe5+ xe5 17.h3 d7 18.0-0 5.xe5 g6 6.d2 For reasons known best to
must be winning, i.e. cxb4 19.fe1+ d4 himself, Miles awarded this move two
20.e4 a5 21.cd1 and Black's king excla m a tio n m a rks in I nf o rm a t or 6 7 a n d
638
splattered more exclamation marks over the 36.b4 cxb4 37.c5 b3 38.c6+ d6 39.c7
rest of the game. I suspect he was being ironic, b2 40.c8 b1+ 41.a7 b5 42.xa6+
especially in view of the fact that he later xa6+ 43.xa6 c6 44.f3 g5 45.a7
chanced sides. c7 46.a6 c6 47.a7 c7
[ A s u p p o s e d ly qu i e t a lt e rn a t ive i s 6.g3 ½-½
after which Plaskett - Hillarp, St. Hellier
1999 continued d7!? ( the 'rote' move is
6...g7 ) 7.f3 ( 7.g2 xe5 8.dxe5 c6 624 B04
9.0-0 g7 10.e2 e6 11.b3 c8 Motwani,Paul
12.b2 h3 was equal in Wolff - de Firmian, Pedersen,D
New York 1996.) 7...g7 8.g2 0-0 9.0-0 1980 Vordingborg 1980
c5 10.e1 cxd4 11.xd4 e5 12.a3 [Paul Motwani]
g4 13.f3 e6 14.c4 xf3 15.xf3 b4
16.xb7 bd3 with the remaining moves 2) W23: "c for charge!" P.Motwani-D.Pedersen,
being unfit for young eyes. Black won, but V o rd in gb o rg, De n m a rk 1 9 8 0 . A le k h in e 's
I'm not going to venture any kind of Defence, Code B04. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5
assessment. ] 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6
6...g7 [ 4...g6 happened in game W19. ]
[ 6...d7 7.xd7 xd7!? 8.f3 g7 5.c4 This case of "c for charge!" drives back
9.e2 d6 10.0-0 0-0 11.e1 c5 12.dxc5 Black's knight in the centre. b6 6.exd6
xc5 13.c4 b4 14.a3 c6 15.b4 [ Another idea is 6.e6!? intending xe6??
wa s a b i t b e t t e r f o r W h i t e i n R i c a r d i - ( or 6...fxe6 7.e3 with compensation for
Speelman, FIDE W orld Ch., Las Vegas White's sacrificed pawn, because Black has
1999 ] some development problems. ) 7.d5 ]
7.df3 6...cxd6 7.e2 g6?!
[ 7.c4 0-0 8.df3 c6 9.0-0 d7 [ 7...g4 looks better. ]
transposes into Nijboer - Vaganian ] 8.d5! e5 9.xe5 dxe5 10.c3 g7
7...0-0 8.c4 b6 9.e2 8d7 10.f4 xe5 11.0-0 0-0 12.e3 White enjoys superior
[ When Miles got Black in this position development and pawn structure, plus more
(Kofidis Kofidis - Miles, Agios Nikolaos 1997) s p a c e t o o . a6? Weakening the position of
h e p r e f e r r e d 10...c5 and got slightly the Black's knight. 13.b3 d7 14.c5 a5?
better of it after 11.d5 xe5 12.xe5 xe5 The losing move! 15.c6! bxc6 16.dxc6 c5
13.xe5 d6 14.f3 e6 etc. From this we [ If 16...f6 then 17.b6 costs Black his
can assume that 6 Nd2 doesn't refute the queen. ]
Alekhine after all. ] 17.d5 Black resigned, faced with the
11.xe5 d7 12.d2 xe5 13.xe5 xe5 imminent loss of his pinned knight.
14.dxe5 xd2+ 15.xd2 e6 16.c3 1-0
White's active king and control of terrain gives
him a clear edge. f6 17.f3 c6 18.he1
f7 19.a4 ad8 20.a5 a6 21.ad1 xd1 625 B04
22.xd1 d8 23.f3 f5 24.b4 d3 Motwani,Paul
25.c5 b3 26.e2 Tan,K
[ After this Black manages to draw. Eksakt Weekender, Holl 2000
According to Miles he should have f irst [Paul Motwani]
played 26.exf6 after which exf6 ( 26...xb2
27.xe7+ xf6 28.xh7 also wins for Deadly Dynamic Duo... W19: "Tales, Tilburg,
White ) 27.e2 followed by Rd2 and Bd1 will a n d T u rke y! " P . M o t wa n i -K . T a n , T ilb u r g
win. ] Eksakt Weekend Tournament, Holland 2000.
26...fxe5 27.d2 e6 28.e2 h5 29.h3 h4 Alekhin e's De f ence, Code B04. T urkey's
30.d1 d3 31.xd3 xd3 32.g4+ f5 coming early this year for all the players and
33.b6 xg4 34.hxg4 d7 35.xb7 c5! officials who are going to the W orld Chess
639
Teams Olympiad in Istanbul from October 27 t a c t i c a l t r i c k 9.xf7+ intending xf7

to November 13. It's a great honour to 10.g5+ followed by 11 Qxg4. ]
represent Scotland there, and my personal 9.h3 Now White does take a prophylactic
preparations for the big event have included measure to stop ...Bg4, which really is a
competing in July at the Staffordshire threat after Black has castled. h6?!
Millennium Congress---where my tally of four [ W19.1: 9...a5 looks better, although
wins, five draws, and no losses combined to Black may have been put off that move by
give a rating performance of 2605---plus the the fact that it also led to a quick White win
tough six-round Eksakt weekend tournament in the game P. Motwani-R.Dam, Groningen
at the stunning "Theater De Vorst" in Tilburg 1990. Of course that was ten years ago, but
from September 8-10. Prior to the start of play it's amazing to see how much information
on the Friday evening, I was as usual keeping people store in their computer databases
my head clear by taking in some fresh air nowadays! ]
outside the venue. Then my quiet thoughts 10.c3! This not only supports White's central
were interrupted in a highly unexpected yet pawn-chain, but also allows W hite's light-
most pleasant way by the greeting "Hi Paul" squared bishop to drop back to c2 if attacked
from Scotland's globetrotting Chris Morrison, by ... Na5. h7 11.h4! dxe5
whose work in Vietnam takes him practically [ "H for hunting!" is a favourite attacking
everywhere else too, including Holland on this motto of my Belgian friend Gorik Cools, and
occasion! In his hectic schedule, Chris loves i n t h i s i n s t a n c e 11...g4? causes no
to grab any chance he can get to play even a problems (except for Black!) because White
couple of games over-the-board, and indeed has the killing reply 12.g5+ ]
he had to settle for precisely two good tussles 12.h5! I'm honestly NOT one of those
in Tilburg because he was required to fly back annotators who can't stop showering his own
to Vietnam before the end of the weekend. moves with single or double "exclams"! I
No objections from the very efficient and at would give 12 h5 an '!' in any case because
the same time easy-going accommodating the move is a consistent and energetic follow-
organisers. They were more than happy with up to White's previous one. Also, quite a bit of
Chris's keenness and efforts to get to Tilburg calculation has already gone in to visualising
at all, and I think that Chris was quite satisfied and assessing the forthcoming sacrificial
too with his first-round victory followed by a sequence of play and its related variations. g5
second-round encounter with Willy Hendriks [ 12...exd4 is equally scary for Black
(the eventual tournament winner on 5.5/6) because he must reckon with responses like
which resulted in Chris losing only after a long 13.g5+ ( or my own preference of
and close fight. W illy Hendriks's sole draw 13.hxg6+ fxg6 14.e4 when White's
was with Black against myself in the final multitude of threats includes 14 Bxh6 Bxh6
round, when a win for me would have meant 15 Qd2. There are many possibilities which
outright first place on 5.5 points, and in that are both fun and instructive to analyse in
case Willy would have finished joint second on one's own time, but a recurring motif that's
5/6. Instead the roles were reversed, but I ce r t a in ly wo rt h m e n t i o n i n g h e re i s t h e
was still happy with my runner-up score of 5 general idea of Neg5+ and then after ...Kh8
p o i n t s , wh i c h i n c l u d e d a v e r y a t t a c k i n g t h e f o l lo w- u p N h 4 ( m e n a ci n g N x g 6 ) i s
penultimate round win against young Dutch sometimes much more deadly than Nf7+
talent Kevin Tan, who achieved an overall which "only" wins material. )]
ra t in g p e rf o rm a n c e o f 2 4 7 4 f ro m h is si x 13.xg5+! Yes, I know, there's another '!', but
games! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 after this move I promise to stop... at least for
g6 5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.e2 a while! hxg5
[ White's other options include 7.a4 or ] [ It was an offer that Black could hardly
[ 7.g5 ] refuse---even though he wanted to do so!
7...c6 8.bd2 0-0 13...g8 loses to 14.e4 hxg5 15.h6 h8
[ 8...g4? is simply bad on account of the ( or 15...f6 16.c2 which is analysed
640
further in part 'c' of the notes to Black's 22.d1 a1+ 23.e2 Black resigned in view
14th move below. ) 16.g6+ ] of 23...f5 24 Bf6+ Kf8 25 Qh8+ Kf7 and then,
14.h6 e6 One might have expected Black to for example, 26 Ng5+ Kg6 27 Qg7+ Kh5 28
move his attacked g7-bishop, so let's consider Qh7+ Kg4 29 Qh3+ Kf4 30 Qg3. I'll try my best
the options for shifting that piece:- to play like that for Scotland at the Olympiad
[ 14...xh6 15.h5 ( or first 15.e4 in T u rke y, b u t f or t h e m om e n t I 'd lik e t o
are "pretty horrendous for Black", to use a conclude my writings here by saying a big
typical Chris Morrison expression! )] " T HA NK YO U" t o a ll f rie n d s wh o h a v e i n
[ 14...h8 15.f3 g4 ( 15...g8 16.xf7 different ways encouraged me to continue
leaves Black facing terrible threats like 17 developing at chess. The "complete" list could
Qe4+, and; 15...f6 16.e4+ f5 17.xg5+ go on almost forever, but the following people
g6 18.h4 is a nightmare too)) 16.g5+ (in alphabetical order of their surnames) really
is crushing because of g6 ( or 16...g8 deserve a special mention for their much
17.e4 ) 17.xf7 xf7 18.e4+ appreciated input at various times within the
and then, for example, f6 ( or 18...f5 last 14 months or so: - David Anderton, FM
19.h7 (menacing 20 Rh6+) g7 20.h8 Cesar Becx, Neil Berry, IM Douglas Bryson,
xh8 21.xg4+ f6 22.h6# ) 19.g5+ Walter & Cecile Cardon, FM Lawrence Cooper,
xg5 20.xf7 f5 21.h5+ ] Jimi & Josiane de Melio, Suzanne de
[ W e c a n q u i c k l y d i s m i s s 14...h8 Vogelaer, Hugh & Moya Flockhart, Richard
on account of 15.h5 ] Furness, John & Nancy Glendinning,
[ 14...f6 15.e4+ g8 ( 15...h8 Jonathan & Keti Grant, John Henderson,
l o s e s i n s t a n t l y t o 16.c2 ) 16.c2 Marc Holsteyn, IM Stephen Mannion, GM
( b e t t e r t h a n 16.g6+ h8 ) 16...e8 Colin McNab, Hans & Heleen Moors, Chris
17.h7+ f8 18.e4 is, I believe, Morrison, Family Motwani, IM Jonathan Parker,
indef e nsible f or Black. Just look at th e IM Craig Pritchett, GM Jonathan Rowson, IM
congestion in his disorganised camp. A John Shaw, IM Johan van Mil,
computer would typically generate screeds " S ch a a kn ie u ws" t e a m , Hu g o " B o s s " va n
of variations, but the position practically Steenwinckel, WIM Erika Sziva, Walter Tonoli,
speaks for itself, and one could almost say FM Tim & Andree Upton, Jan & Hanny
that White is not even down on material if Verbrugge, Chris White, Norman & Ilse Young,
on e c o n s id e rs t h e e f f e ct ive n e ss o f h is Family Zeng.
a t t a c k i n g f o r ce s in co n t ra st t o B l a c k' s 1-0
dormant pieces. ]
15.hxg7+ xg7 16.e4 h8
[ If 16...f6 17.h5 h8 then 18.xh8+ 626 B04
xh8 19.xh8 xh8 20.xf6 is extremely Movsesian,Sergei 2747
simple and strong for White. ] Svidler,Peter 2726
17.xh8 3rd ACP World Rapid Cup rapid (2.4) 23.5.09
[ Why be overly flashy and less clear with [John Watson]
17.xg5 when instead the capture on h8 is
obviously good? ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
17...xh8 18.xg5 h1+ 19.d2! 5.xe5 c6 Here we go again, the main line at
It would be a bit harsh not to forgive me for the elite levels of play. This month's batch
this final '!' after a move which involves a rook went well for Black, as shown in this game.
sacrifice! xa1 20.h5 White's deadly duo 6.c4 We've seen several games in the
of main threats is 21 Bf6+ Kf8 22 Qh8 or 21 Archives with 6 Be2.
Qh6+ Kg8 22 Nf6. xb2+ 21.c2 c4+ [ Yu Shaoteng-Hou Yifan, Subic Bay PHI
[ 21...d7 ( o r N d 5 ) l o s e t o 22.h6+ 2009 continued 6.d3 (this deserves more
( 22.h6+ d o e s t h e j o b t o o) 22...g8 a t t e n t i o n ) d7 7.f3!? 7f6 8.h3
23.f6+ ( or 23.f6 ) 23...xf6 24.xf6 , preventing ...Bg4, although allowing the
followed by unavoidable mate at g7 or h8. ] following manoeuvre: b4 9.c4 f5
641
10.a3!? ( maybe 10.b3! is better, with [ 10.d3 has been suggested. ]

the idea a3, as I indicated in a previous 10...xe5 11.xe5 e6 12.b3 c7
u p d a t e . T h e n a5 11.a3 a4 fails to 13.e1 xb3 14.axb3 c5?! 15.e3?!
12.xf7+ xf7 13.axb4 -for notes on this [ 15.f3! xd4 16.d3 threatens Rxe7,
line, see Adams-Carlsen, Moscow 2007 in Qxb7, and Be3, for what it's worth (maybe
the Archives.) 10...e6 11.c3 bd5 12.c2 not much). ]
(an uninspiring square for the knight Black 15...b5! 16.c3 cxd4 17.cxd4 d5
stands about equal) e7 ( 12...d6 ) 13.0-0 Now Black is clearly better. 18.f3 e6
( 13.e3 is the main game Adams-Carlsen, 19.d3 ac8 20.ec1 a6 21.c4 d6
Moscow 2007 in the archives) 13...0-0 22.c3 xc3 23.bxc3 xb3 24.b1 d5
14.e3 g6 ( 14...xe3 15.xe3 b6 ) 25.f4 c4 26.a1?! e5 27.d2 xd2
15.e5 c5!? 16.xg6 ( 16.xd5 exd5 28.xd2 exd4 with a winning advantage.
17.e2 b6 ) 16...hxg6 17.dxc5 xc5 29.c4 c6 30.b4 e8 31.c5 h5 32.b1
18.xd5 xd5 19.xd5 exd5 20.f4 d4 d8 33.a3 d7 34.b6 d5 35.h4 f5
A) 21.b4 b6 ( 21...e7 22.cxd4 xb4 36.xf5 gxf5 37.c1 d3 38.d2 d4
23.b1 a5 24.d3 c8 25.d5 ) 22.c4 39.c6 xb6 40.cxd7 f6 41.e3 d8
and Black has to watch his c-pawn; 42.f1 f7 43.e1 e6 44.d2 xd7
B) 21.cxd4!? (this gives up the last 45.xd3 b5 46.f3 e6 47.d2 a5 48.c3
chance to f ight on more interesting is b6 49.b3 d5 50.c3 d8 51.d2 b4
xd4 ( 21...xd4 22.d2 ) 22.xd4 52.a4 c4 53.c1 b3 54.b2 f4 55.a3
xd4 23.ad1 ad8 24.d2 f6 f5 56.a4 xh4 57.xa5 e1+ 58.a4
25.fd1 xd2 26.xd2 d8 27.xd8+ c3
xd8 28.f1 a6 29.e2 f8 30.d3 0-1
f6 1/2-1/2. ]
6...g6
[ 6...d7 7.f3 7f6 8.h3 f5 9.0-0 e6 627 B04
is Shirov-Carlsen, Moscow 1997 from the Mutschnik,Ilia 2408
Arch ives t he b est m ove at t his po in t is Pitschka,Klaus 2212
probably 10.a3 , versus ...Nb4. ] 10th Open Stuttgart GER (5) 07.05.2005
7.0-0 g7 8.d2 [John Cox]
[ 8.e1 is the original move here, still played
in a majority of games, for example, 0-0 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
( 8...d7 ) 9.b3 5.xe5 d7 6.xf7 Bravo! I don't know Mr
A) 9...e6 10.c3 d7 11.f3 g4 Mu t sch n ik, b u t f e w h igh e r-ra t e d p la ye r s
( 11...c7 ) 12.bd2 ( 12.h3; 12.g5 ) confronted by their opponent's pet line prefer
12...e6 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 with an edge, taking him on with this sort of thing to the
Topalov-Ivanchuk, Monaco (rapid) 2002.; quiet 6 Nf3. xf7 7.h5+ e6 8.c4 5f6
B) 9...f5 10.d2 d7 11.df3 xe5 9.d5+ d6 10.f7 b8?! A dubious move:
12.xe5 a5 13.a4 c7 was about equal [ 10...e5 11.f4 c5 12.c3 a6
in Shirov-Agdestein, Bergen 2001.; is the main line of course, and the start of
C) 9...d7 10.f3 7f6 11.c4 ( 11.h3 ) enormous and unresolved complications. ]
11...c7 12.h3 c5?! 13.c3 cxd4 11.c5+ d7 12.b5+
14.xd4 e6 15.e3 xd4 16.xd4 [ Pitschka had previous here: 12.f4 e8
e6 17.h4 a5 18.c5! xb3 19.axb3 13.e6+ d8 14.e5 d7 15.c3 g5?!
c7 20.b4 a6 21.f4 , winning the e7- was Hiermann-Pitschka, Austria 1999 (1-0,
pawn, Kasparov-Adams, Linares ESP 37), and presumably he intended something
1997. ] else, perhaps the more sensible ( 15...g4
8...0-0 16.e2 f5 17.d2 and now either
[ Or 8...d7 with the idea 9.df3 xe5 Burgess' suggestion 17...g5 or 17...Ne5 18
10.xe5 0-0 11.e1 e6 ] 000 Nbd7 19 c6 with unclear play: Kopec-
9.df3 d7 10.h3 Sowray, corr 1990-2. )]
642
12...c6 13.dxc6+ bxc6 14.0-0 a5 15.c4 the Duke of Brunswick. Maybe there's
Probably better than 15 Rd1+ Kc7 16 Bf4+ something to be said for developing the other
Kb7, driving the Black king where it wants to pieces apart from your king and queen after
go. d8N all.
[ Black made a run for b7... 15...c7 16.b4 1-0
xb4 17.f4+ d8 ..but soon changed
course... 18.d2 bd7 19.b3 a6
20.xa6 xf4 21.b7 b8 22.xc6 e5 628 B04
23.e6 xc6 24.xc6 c7 25.fd1+ Mysliwiec,E
d7 in Hammar-D.Cramling, Swedish Krzyzanowski,Antoni
Champs, Lulea 1980, in which 26 Qa4 now corr 1995
would have been won back the piece with [Alexander Volzhin]
a devastating ongoing onslaught, since 26..
Ke8 27 Rd2 piles up on the unfortunate 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
knight. ] 5.xe5 d7!? 6.xf7!? xf7 7.h5+ e6
16.d1+ d7 8.c4 5f6 9.d5+ d6 10.f7 e5 11.f4
[ 16...bd7 is another try, of course, if the c5 12.c3 a6 13.b4 b6! This move
game goes similarly with 17.e3 g4 seems to be the only chance for defence.
18.e6 xe3 19.fxe3 xc5 20.c3 Alternatives are insufficient .
B l a c k c o u l d t r y a n d d e f e n d w i t h b8 [ 13...b6 14.b1! The rook will be very
, b u t t h e n 21.d3 b7 22.ad1 e5 active on the b-file. g5 ( 14...cxb4 15.xb4
23.a4 g6 24.f4! xf4 25.exf4 e8 c5 Both queen and rook are hanging, but
26.b3 h6 27.g3 is still very strong - the 16.b1!! xf7 17.a4+ d4 18.f3
knight is pinned just as effectively by the and next move the king will be mated (19.
threat of Rd8 mate as it was to the king. ] Rd1) ) 15.g3 h6 16.bxc5+ bxc5 17.b7!
17.e3 g4 Black must be lost - mustn't he?! Excellent! Now all white's pieces participate
- if the best he can do is exchange his only in the attack. d7 18.d3! e8 19.f5!!
de ve lo p e d m in o r p ie ce f o r W h it e 's le a st xf7 20.e4+ xe4 21.xd7# ]
effective attacker, but [ 13...cxb4 loses quickly to 14.c5+ xc5
[ 17...c8 18.c3 c7 19.b4 g4 20.f4 15.a4+ d6 16.b2 b5 17.d3 ]
e5 21.g5 also sees White increasing the 14.0-0-0
pressure decisively. ] [ 14.bxc5+ was thought to be a winning
18.e6 xe3 19.fxe3 xc5 20.c3 e5? move, but recent games have changed the
A feeble move, both overlooking the threat evaluation of this position: xc5 15.d1
and also making no effort to get Black's other a3! ( GM Vladimir Bagirov a leading expert
four pieces out. Fritz is convinced it's winning in the Alekhine's, in his book considers only
as Black and rather sweetly tries to prove it 15...f5 which is insufficient: 16.d3 xd3
with 17.e6+ c7 18.xe5+ d8 19.xd3
[ 20...xe3+ 21.h1 a6 , although I have The text is a decisive improvement.) 16.d3
to admit that the best my limited attacking c1+!! 17.xc1 xf7 18.c5+ c7!
skills can manage then with White is 22.a4 ( 18...xc5? 19.a4+ d6 20.b6 b8
a7 23.ac1 g6 24.c5 h6 25.xd7 21.f4+ e5 22.c4+ c5 23.xe5 g8
xd7 26.e6+ c8 27.xc6+ b7 24.f7 a8 25.e3+ b4 26.b3+ a5
28.c7+ b8 29.xa7 xa7 30.xe7 c8 27.b6+ a4 28.c5+- mating ) 19.f4+
31.d6+ ( 31.xh7 f8 32.xf8 xf8 d8 20.a4 f5 21.d4 e8 22.c4
33.xg6 ) 31...a8 32.d5+ b8 d8 23.0-0 c2 24.b6 e5 25.d6 xd6 1
with a draw: no doubt readers can do better. Wydrowski-Krzyzanowski,A/corr/1993/ ]
Now it's over. ] 14...cxb4! A very important novelty.
21.xd7+ xd7 22.d1 c7 23.xd7+ [ After 14...xb4? 15.c2! white's attack is
b6 24.e4 f6 25.h5 g5 26.h3 f4 unstoppable: b5 16.xe5+ xe5 17.d6!
27.d5+ All horribly reminiscent of Morphy -v- f5+ 18.d3 xd3+ 19.xd3 xc4
643
20.e1+ f5 21.d5++- winning in 15...e6 16.a4 xf3 17.xf3 8e7

Wierzbicki-Krzyzanowski/ corr/1994/ ] Now ...Nf5 and ...e5 are threats, but White's
15.a4 xf2 16.c5+ d7 17.xe5 e3+ at t a ck co m es ju st in t im e : 18.b5 a5
18.b1 xe5 19.b6+ c7 20.d6+ Watching over c4.
[ After 20.xa8+ b8 21.b6 g4 22.c4 [ Or 18...axb5 19.axb5 a5 ]
c3 it's black who attacks the king! ] 19.g5!?
20...b8 21.d7 xd7 22.xd7 a7 [ White should probably take the opportunity
After a long journey Black's king is safe. But to play 19.bxa6 bxa6 , which he loses later.
we cannot say the same about white's king. Although Black gets c6 for a knight, the b-file
23.d1 e4 Queen and knight are usually is useful and the pawn on a6 will be a target.
very strong as an attacking combination. 20.d3 ( Or 20.g5 )]
24.xa8 c3+ 25.c1 xd1 26.xd1 19...h6 20.xe7!? xe7 21.d3 fd8
xc5 27.d3 xa8-+ After the 22.bxa6 xa6! See the last note. Now
complications black is three pawns up and W hite's pawn on a4 will be a problem, and
should easily win. 28.f1 e5 29.e1 e7 B l a c k h a s c 6 a n y w a y . 23.b5!? c6
30.xg7 d8 31.e2 d5 32.d1 24.d6? A blunder. White leaves his centre
[ 32.xe7 xg2+ 33.e3 h3+ 34.f2 hanging. a7 25.b6
xh2+ 35.f1 g8 36.g6 f4+ 37.e2 [ 25.b5 xa4 ]
xg6 38.d8+ a7 39.d5 c6-+ 25...xd4!
winning ] [ 25...xd4 26.fb1 is advantageous, but
32...c5 So we can see that both sides have not as clear. ]
chances in the 5.. .Nd7 line. At the moment it 26.xc6 xa4! 27.b5? But Black will win
seems that black is doing well in this line. material anyway after
Take a risk and win! [ 27.c8 f8! ]
0-1 27...bxc6?!
[ 27...xf2+! 28.xf2 bxc6 picks up another
pawn. ]
629 B04 28.xd4 c8 29.g3? Now it's really over.
Narayana,Samy S 2229 White had to try
Nakamura,Hikaru 2651 [ 29.d1 or ]
Gibtelecom Masters (2) 24.01.2007 [ 29.g4 , both hopeless in the long run. ]
[John Watson] 29...e5 Ouch.
[ 29...xc5 30.xe6 is less clear. ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 30.b3
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.e3 g7 8.e2 [ 30.e1 xc5 ]
c6 9.c1 0-0 10.b3 f5 11.f3!? 30...f6 The rest goes smoothly. 31.g2 a3
[ 11.d5! is critical, especially in view of e5 32.c2 b8 33.d2 e4 34.c1 a2
12.f4 ( or 12.g4 c8 13.f4 ) 12...ed7 35.xe4 d4 36.xd5 xd5 37.c4 xc5
13.g4 xc3+ 14.xc3 e4 15.f3 38.c3 b4
with a solid advantage. ] 0-1
11...d5! Now Black has something to play for.
12.0-0
[ 12.c5 c8 13.0-0 g4 transposes. ] 630 B04
12...g4 13.c5 c8 14.b4 a6 This is all Nataf,Igor Alexandre 2560
standard strategy. W hether Black has Konopka,Michal 2441
completely equalised is unclear, but he's not KB Czech Open (round 7) (7) 25.07.2002
doomed to passive defence. 15.b1 [Glenn Flear]
[ 15.a4!? xb4 ( 15...e6!? 16.b5 ) 16.b3
a5 17.a2 xa2 18.xa2 and oddly 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6
enough, Black's weak b-pawn makes this 5.exd6 cxd6!? The most dynamic option.
about equal. ] 6.c3 g6 7.h3
644
[ Instead 7.e3 g7 8.c1 0-0 9.b3 and White had a clear advantage. ]
is the line that has been causing Black 19.fd1 e6 20.dxe6 fxe6 21.b5 xc1
some problems these past few years but 22.xc1 d5 Unlike in the previous note Black
ECO suggests a way that seems to get can now safely make this advance as Rc7 is
Black a decent game e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 not available and Nc7 no longer forks e6 and
11.xd8 xd8 12.c5 6d7 13.c4 c6 the rook on a8. 23.c7 xc7 24.xc7 b2!
14.f3 a5! 15.e2 b6! the key move. Ko no p ka dit ch e s h is sickly e 6 p awn a n d
( 15...c6?! 16.b5! f8 17.d6 e6 p r e p a r e s t o g o a c t i ve . T h i s f i r s t e n t a i l s
18.c4 cd4 19.g5 gave White a safeguarding the bishop. 25.f1
promising initiative in Mitkov-C.Toth, V. [ 25.xe6 e8 26.c7 e7 27.b5 d4
Toth Memorial 2000) 16.cxb6 ( 16.b4 c6 and because of the unfortunate placing of
17.b5 d4 18.c6 c5 19.0-0 a6 the white bishops, Black is not worse. ]
with suf f icient coun terplay f o r Black P . 25...f6 26.f4 f7! Again the knight is invited
C a r l s s o n - L o g d a h l , S w e d i s h t c h 2 0 0 1) to capture on e6 as the bishops are loose
16...xb6 17.0-0 b7 18.fd1 c6= again. 27.xe6 e7 28.d4 xd4 29.xd4
Zukauskas-Bandza, Latvian ch 1997 ] xf4 30.f3 g6 31.a4 Black has played a
7...g7 8.f3 0-0 9.e2 c6 10.0-0 f5 sensible game and has emerged with an extra
11.f4 pawn. White has some counterplay but after
[ 11.g5 h6 12.e3 d5 13.b3 ( 13.c5 c4 31...a5 Black should retain the advantage.
is unfashionable as it's considered OK for W as K on op ka in awe of h is h ighe r ra te d
Black. ) 13...dxc4 14.bxc4 a5 15.c5 opponent or just short of time?
bc4 16.f4 b6 L. Cooper-Burgess, ½-½
Birmingham 2000 gave Black suf f icient
counterchances and the game was soon
drawn. ] 631 B04
11...h6 12.d5 Navara,David 2602
[ 12.e3 Isn't this just an ugly move-order by Miroshnichenko,Evgenij 2599
White!? Even so d5 then transposes to the 5th IECC Playoff 5th (4) 30.05.2004
above note. ] [Andrew Martin]
12...a5 13.d4 A pawn sacrifice for active
play against a ropey black structure. axc4 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
14.b3 e5 15.xf5 gxf5 16.d2 5.xe5 d7 Still as provocative as ever.
The game has been following an old analysis 6.xf7!
of Vaganian who helpfully concluded [ 6.f3! e6 7.g3 e7 8.c4 Was played
"unclear". h7 17.ac1 g6 18.e3 c8! against me once by Vlastimil Jansa and
[ Presumably a prepared improvement. Nataf- seems like a risk-free way to a small edge.
Hudecek, Czech open (round 1) 2002 Of course, Black is still on the board. Instead,
continued 18...e5?! this leads to Black's 6 Nxf7 is as critical as can be and although
c e n t r a l p a wn s c o m i n g u n d e r p r e s s u r e White trips up in the coming game, Black
19.dxe6 fxe6 20.b5 d5?! ( 20...d5 still has some questions to answer. ]
c o u l d b e m e t b y 21.c7 but then d4 6...xf7 7.h5+ e6 8.g3! I prefer this to
is still messy e.g. 22.xa8 xa8 23.f4 the head-spinning complications after 8 c4
xf4 24.xf4 e5 with some practical even Mikhail Tal didn't go for it when
chances for the exchange. Perhaps White confronted by Larsen! So to 8 g3, just as
s h o u l d i n s t e a d t r y 2 1 R c 7 wi t h s t r o n g dangerous, keeping c2-c4 lurking in the wings,
threats along the seventh rank (Rxb7 and hoping to exploit the precariously placed
Bxh6 etc.).) 21.f3 d7 22.xd5 xb5 Knight in d5. In view of threats such as c2-c4
23.xe6 e5 24.d5 ae8 25.f7 e7 coupled with Bh3, Black's reply has been
26.xg6+ xg6 27.d3 material is equal thought to be forced. b5 Larsen's original
and White has clearly the better structure b6 intention, should 8 g3 have ever cropped up. I
28.c6 d8 29.d1 e6 30.c7 believe he would have breathed a sigh of
645
relief when it didn't. admits def eat. The evaluation of 5...Nd7

[ Can Black possibly get away with 8...g6?! remains unchanged: As a surprise weapon
It will be a roller coaster ride at best and I'm brilliant. Objectively dubious. Caught on the
not sure Black is coming off the fairground nose W hite should play it safe with 6 Nf3!.
ride alive: 9.h3+ d6 10.e2 7b6 Memory men can happily venture 6 Nxf7!
A) 11.xc8 which is good, but you have to know a lot.
A1) 11...xc8 12.e5+ c6 13.xh8 0-1
f6 ( 13...b4!? ) 14.d5+!;
A2) 11...xc8 12.e5+ c6 13.xh8
f6 14.0-0 xd4 15.c3 h6 632 B04
16.xc8 xc8 17.xh6 b4; Nijboer,Friso
B) 11.e5+ c6 12.xc8 g7!? Vaganian,Rafael A
13.xb7+ xb7 14.xg7 d6 15.0-0 Dutch Team Ch. (5) 03.03.2001
hg8 16.h6 f6 17.c3; [Nigel Davies]
C) 11.f4+ Other dangerous moves: c6
12.a4 a6 13.g2 e6 14.e5 ( 14.a5! 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
is very strong.) 14...d6 15.xh8 xh8 5.xe5 g6 6.c4 c6 7.d2 White intends
16.c3 ( 16.a5! again ) 16...d7 17.a5 to reinforce e5 with his other knight.
f4 18.gxf4 d5 19.d2 xf4 20.e4 [ He ca n a lso pla y 7.0-0 g7 8.e1
e7 21.c4 Berelovich, A-Neverov,V/ a f t e r wh ich B la c k e qu a lise d wit h d7!?
Cairo 1999 White has finally consolidated ( 8...0-0 9.b3 d7 10.f3 7f6 11.c4
h is e xt ra m a t e ria l a n d s t a n d s c le a rl y c7 12.h3 was better for White in Kasparov
better. ] - Adams, Linares 1997) 9.f3 7b6 10.f1
9.a4 c6 10.c3N A novelty no doubt g4 11.c3 0-0 12.bd2 c7 13.h3 xf3
prompted by the speed of the game. I run the 14.xf3 e6 15.g5 c5 in Huebner -
risk of being pilloried for annotating blitz Vaganian, Bundesliga 2001. ]
games but this variation is too interesting to 7...g7 8.df3 0-0 9.0-0 d7 10.d3
ignore. Let us see what ECO has to say: 7b6 11.b3 g4 12.c3 e6
[ 10.h3+ The point of flicking the check in [ Another possibility is 12...a5 , with similar
is simply to drive the King to d6, play to the game. ]
sidestepping the resource of our stem game. 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 d7 15.g3
d6 11.c3 ( 11.e2! e5 12.axb5 cxb5 White is s lightly better here, but it's hard work
13.0-0 Lukin-Arkhipov USSR 1979 is given trying to make something out of it.
in the latest edition of ECO. I don't know [ T h e r e i s a m a j o r a l t e rn a t ive i n 15.e1
what to make of the evaluation - slightly after which Kolev - Panchenko, Villalba
better seems the wrong description. I like 1996 continued in somewhat artificial vein
White's safer King and attacking chances, with a5 ( 15...b5 16.g3 a5 17.a3 e8
but some greedy citizens might take Black.) 18.h4 h5 19.g5 f6 20.d2 a4 21.a2
11...e6 ( 11...b4 12.f4+!? xf4 13.e4+ e7 was an earlier Panchenko game as
c7 14.a5+ b6 15.e5+ d6 Black against Kruppa from the 1990
16.xd6 exd6 17.xf4 xh3 V.Popov ) Ukranian Championship - no doubt he got
12.axb5 7f6 13.e2 e7 14.0-0 f7 the idea to play ...e6-e5 after this
15.e1 d6 16.xe6+ xe6 17.xe6+ encounter ) 16.a4 b6 17.c4 ae8?!
g6 18.f4 h6 19.f5+ h7 Theissen,H- 18.e2 d8 19.d2 and now e5? 20.xd5
Kubitza,G/Germany 1992 What a mess! ] cxd5 21.xd5 exd4 22.xe8 xe8
10...g6! A key defensive resource, securing 23.cxd4 b6 24.xd8 xd8 25.xa5
the key square f7 for his King. 11.h3+ f7 left Black a pawn down. ]
12.f3+ 7f6 White's attack is exhausted 15...a5 16.a4 e8 17.e1 b6 18.c4
already. 13.xc8 xc8 14.axb5 cxb5 c7 19.xc7 xc7 20.f4 ec8 21.ad1
15.xa7 xc3 16.bxc3 d5-+ b5 22.b3 f8 23.a1 d5 24.g3 a7
It's completely lost now and Navara sportingly 25.e2 ca8 26.f3 b7 27.f2 c7 28.g3
646
5b6 29.g2 xa4 I'm not sure Black 1991.;

s h o u ld h a ve d o n e t h is a s h is qu e e n sid e B) 10...c6 11.d2 a6 12.df3 f6
pawns are now split. He probably got tired of 13.d3 e6 14.e1 f7 15.e2 e8
waiting - and in any case this isn't much for 16.f4 ac7 17.c4 with a clear edge
White. 30.xa4 bxa4 31.xa4 b6 32.a2 was Mokry-Schroll, Vienna 1991. ]
a4 33.f4 d6 34.c2 b7 35.f3 f5 9.xf7+! This sharp w is the only way to fight
36.e2 f7 37.c4 d7 38.c5 c7 39.c3 for an opening advantage. The alternatives
ba7 40.ca3 f6 41.e1 e8 42.b3 are absolutely harmless:
d5 43.xa4 xa4 44.xa4 xa4 45.bxa4 [ 9.e2 0-0 10.dxe5 c5 and if anyone is
d7 46.b2 h5 47.c4 h4 48.f3 hxg3 better it is Black. ]
49.xg3 c8 50.b2 d8 51.f2 b7 [ 9.dxe5 xe5 10.xd8+ xd8 11.g5
52.c4 f6 53.e3 a6 54.e2 g7 e8 12.c3 h6 13.ge4 a6 14.e3
55.d3 b4+ 56.d2 d5 57.d3 b4+ g4 15.0-0-0 xe3 16.fxe3 f5 17.f2 c6
58.d2 18.d3 e5 and White had nothing for the
½-½ pawn in Nicholson-Khmelnitsky, Budapest
1990. ]
[ 9.g5 e6 10.xe6 0-0! 11.0-0 exd4
633 B04 12.a2 e5 and again Black is a healthy
Oral,Tomas 2540 pawn up as in Gavric-Khmelnitsky, Pula
Nicholas 2570 1990. ]
Reykjavik 2000 9...xf7 10.g5+ g8 11.e6 e8
[Alexander Volzhin] 12.xc7 d8! This move was introduced by
American GM Lev Alburt in the early nineties.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 This line had previously been discredited
5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.a4 dxe5!? because of a game in which Black had played
A v e r y s h a r p m o v e w h i c h l e a d s t o w i l d 1 2 . . . Q f 7 , b u t d id n o t ge t e n o u gh f o r t h e
complications. 8.a5 excha n ge . A lb urt 's mo ve is a signif ic a n t
[ 8.xe5 is harmless: xe5! 9.dxe5 xd1+ im p r o ve m e n t . No w W h i t e 's K n ig h t c a n ' t
10.xd1 c6 and in this ending Black has escape from a8. 13.xa8
no real problems: 11.a5 d7 12.e6 fxe6 [ W hite can take a draw: 13.e6 e8
13.xe6 de5 In this position the activity of 14.c7 as he did in Svidler-Khalifman 1995,
Black's pieces is ample compensation for his however White can hardly be happy with this
pawn weaknesses. 14.xc8 ( 14.b3 g4+ result. ]
15.e1 0-0-0 was Jelica-Sasu Ducsoara, 13...exd4 The critical position of this line.
Istanbul(ol) 2000.) 14...xc8 15.f3 d8+ 14.c3 c5 15.cxd4
16.d2 0-0 and Black's chances were by no [ The tempting 15.b4?! is too optimistic: e4
means bad in Pikula -Sutter, Biel 1996 . 16.b3+ e6 17.cxd4 c6! ]
( 16...c4!? is not bad either. )] 15...xd4 16.e3 An attempt at an
8...6d7 improvement.
[ 8...d5 is possible but the position arising [ 16.0-0 was played in Christiansen-Alburt
after 9.xe5 is similar to a position from the USA 1990, but this move didn't yield White
Kengis Variation (4...dxe5 5.Nxe5 g6 6.Bc4), even e qua lity! T he ga me con t in ue d : e5
b u t t h e p a wn b e i n g o n a 5 i s c l e a r ly i n 17.e3 ba6! 18.c3 f5! 19.c1
White's favour: 0-0 10.0-0 ( 19.b5!? deserves serious attention.)
A) Th e ac t ive 10...c5 is strongly met by 19...g7! 20.xd4 xd4! 21.b4?!
11.xf7! with a huge edge for White: xf7 After this inaccuracy W hite is in trouble.
( 11...xf7 is even worse in view of ( 21.xd4 exd4 22.b5 should be played
12.dxc5 e6 13.c4 ) 12.f3+ g8 and after xa8 23.xd4 f6 Black is
13.xd5+ xd5 14.xd5+ e6 15.e4 slightly better.) 21...d3 22.e2 d7
cxd4 16.g5 and White had a 23.c3 xa8 24.g4 b2! 25.c1 d3
comfortable edge in Nunn-Schroll, Vienna 26.xb2 xg4+ 27.g3 xf1 28.xf1
647
d4 and Black was winning. ] [ I like 7.f3! stepping up the pressure, for
16...e5 17.xd4 exd4 18.0-0 ba6
instance : e6 8.0-0 d7 9.c3 xe5
Obviously the Knight on a8 is trapped, but 10.dxe5 c7 11.xe6 xe6 12.e3 g6
B l a ck n e e d s s o m e t e m p i t o t a k e i t . T h e
13.e4 c8 14.f4 g7 15.a4
question is can W hite utilise this time Balzar,A-Birk, S/Germany 2003 W hite's
efficiently? 19.d2 e6 20.e1 f7 21.e4 advantage is obvious, but to win such a
d3 22.b4 xe4 23.xe4 g7 24.a3 d2 position is not so easy. ]
25.e2 e8 26.xe8 xe8 27.a2 xa8 7...d7 8.df3 e6
28.xd2 The progress of the game is typical
[ 8...xe5! appears logical, relieving the
of this line. Black has managed to win the cramp by exchanging. Then 9.xe5 e6
Knight o n a 8, bu t h as ha d to give up his 10.0-0 d6 11.e1 0-0 12.c3 c7
c e n t ra l p a wn . No w t h e re is a p p ro xim a t e
13.e2 ad8 Stefansson, H-Luther,T/
m a t e ria l e qu a lit y o n t h e b o a rd . W h it e i s
Malmo 2002 is as close to equality as Black
slightly for preference here, since the Black is going to get. ]
forces are uncoordinated and his King is 9.c3 d6 10.e2 0-0?! It is very hard to
slightly exposed. c8 29.d8 e6 30.h3 give this move an outright question mark but it
[ 30.d4+ is worth considering: g8 31.h3 does allow White an opportunity that, say
and Black can't grab the pawn on b4: e1+ [ 10...xe5 11.xe5 b6 12.b3 h4
32.h2 xb4 in vi e w o f 33.c4+ g7 or ]
34.d4! and Black can't avoid loss of
[ 10...h6 11.d2 ( 11.0-0 0-0 ) 11...c7
material: c6 35.e4! xf2 36.xe8 ] did not. ]
30...e5! Now Black is out of danger. 31.d5 11.g4! On the case immediately. Black is
c3 32.e2 xb4 33.xe8? A time trouble passive in the centre with no real chance to
blunder. break out, so this f lank attack is entirely
[ 33.e7+ w a s g o o d e n o u g h : f7
justified. xe5 12.xe5 xe5 13.dxe5 g6
( 33...h6?? 34.f8+ g7 35.f4+ g5 14.h4 h6 15.h5 h7 16.g1! I like the
36.xb4 ) 34.d8! and Black hardly has
directness of White's approach. Black is not
anything better than a draw by perpetual given even a single second's grace to
check: c1+ 35.h2 f4+ 36.g1
organise the defence. Potkin comes straight
c1+ ] through. b6 17.g5! xc4 18.xc4 d3
33...c1+! [ 18...d3 19.xd3 xd3 20.gxh6 g6
[ White resigned since he loses a piece:
21.g5 is awful for Black. ]
33...c1+ 34.h2 f4+ 35.g1 xd5 19.f4 hxg5 20.xg5 The presence of
36.d7+ f7 ] opposite-coloured Bishops only enhances
0-1 White's attack. d5
[ 20...f6 21.g3! c2 22.e3 f7 23.exf6
xf6 24.xf6 xf6 25.e2 h7 26.ag1
634 B04 f7 27.d4 is horrible again. Black is utterly
Potkin,Vladimir 2540 passive. ]
Kopylov,Mihail 2432 21.f3 fd8 22.e3 b5 23.b3
8th OIBM Bad Wiessee GER (7) 05.11.2004 [ I am not sure why White didn't choose
[Andrew Martin] 23.0-0-0! which seems like the most obvious
way. Black has very little defence on the
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 K i n g s i d e : f8 ( 23...g6 24.h1 c4
5.xe5 c6 Definitely the ' in move'. although I 25.xc4 xc4 26.hxg6 d3 27.gxf7+
am sure that is prompted by dissatisfaction xf7 28.h6+- ) 24.dg1 f5 25.xg7
with Black's other options rather than on e7 26.g5++- Maybe Potkin doesn't know
objective merit. Black is solid, but passive in the castling rule?! ]
this line and White has a number of ways to 23...f5 24.f2 That was his idea. d3
be slightly better. If that's your thing, fine! 25.xg7+! f8
6.c4 f5 7.d2 [ 25...xg7 26.g1+ f8 ( 26...g6
648
27.f6+ f8 28.xg6 will do. c2+ 8...g4

29.g3+- ) 27.b4+! ] [ Or 8...f5 9.0-0 e6 10.c4 b4 11.a3
26.g5 e8 27.f6 Such a game points up e7 Fiorito, F-Soppe, G/Tres de Febrero
the problems with 5..c6. Black is relying on 2003 and now I feel that White has a slight
novelty and a lack of published theory to a d va n t a ge a f t e r 12.f4! 0-0 ( 12...a5
survive. As we've seen in this very update, 13.b3 0-0 14.fd1 ) 13.b3
Black's position reacts well to the immediate Naturally these positions are manageable
as sa ult wit h 6 c4 ,b ut 6 Bc4 see m s mo re for Black although either ... c6-c5 or ...e6-
troubling. e5 seem a long way off. ]
1-0 9.0-0 e6 10.e1 e7 11.h3 h5 12.e5
xe2 13.xe2 0-0 14.c4 The first crunch
moment. Has Black equalized? I don't think so.
635 B04 He is solid, but lacks space and has no active
Quillan,Gary 2322 plan. f6 15.e3 bd7 16.c3 b4
Cox,John J 2311 [ 16...xe5 17.dxe5 d7 18.ad1 c7
4NCL 2005-06 (4) 20.11.2005 19.f4 fd8 20.e4 leads to a position
[Andrew Martin] reminiscent of a poor Centre-Counter. Black
can only make a draw at best by trading on
LISTEN TO W HAT THE PREACHER SAID the d file. ]
1.e4 f6 He writes about it enough. 2.e5 17.g5 xc3 18.bxc3 c7 19.ad1 c5
d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 [ 19...xe5 20.xe5 xe5 21.dxe5!
Taste. 5...c6 has plenty of miles left in the rather surprisingly gives a large advantage
tank. Please note the awful pun. I'm sure to White. The Rook comes to d7. ]
Tony would have approved. 6.c4 d7 20.d3 cxd4 21.cxd4 xe5 22.dxe5 d7
7.f3 7b6 23.d4
[ 7...e6 looks more sensible to me, keeping [ The direct 23.g3 looks promising: fc8
the Black Knights off the same circuit. After ( 23...h8 24.e7 fc8 25.h5! g6
t h a t m a y c o m e 8.0-0 b5 9.d3 b7 26.h6 g8 27.e4+- ) 24.h6 g6 25.g4
10.e1 e7 11.bd2 0-0 12.e4 a6 a6 26.e4 ab8 27.g5 b5 28.cxb5 axb5
13.g5 xg5 14.fxg5 h6 15.f3 c5! 29.d4 Black will be continually hampered
The break Black is hoping will bring him by his weakened King position. ]
sa lva t io n . 16.c4 ( 16.d6 c6 17.e5 23...fe8 24.h5 f8 25.h4 h6 26.f6
xe5 18.dxe5 g5; 16.xc5 xc5 [ 26.xh6 gxh6 27.xh6 g6 28.ee4!
17.dxc5 c7; 16.dxc5 c7 ) 16...bxc4 is the most accurate way of busting open the
17.xc4 e7 18.c1 cxd4 19.xd4 fd8 B l a c k K i n g . ( 28.h7+ f8 although
20.f1 a5 21.e5 xe5 22.xe5= th re a te nin g, d o es n o t le a d to a win f o r
Lutz, C-Luther, T/Essen 2002 ] White. ) 28...ac8 29.ef4! The point. An
8.e2! Gary Quillan doesn't play a great deal accident looms on f7. ]
these days, but he does play very solidly and 26...g6 27.ee4?!
properly. He presumes Black will shut down [ 27.xg7 xg7 28.xh6+ g8 29.ee4! ]
the a2-g8 diagonal and so stations his Bishop 27...gxf6 28.exf6 ed8 29.g3 f8??
as sensibly as he can. In my view Black is [ 29...xh4 was the remarkable get-out
struggling to prove full equality against this clause: 30.xh6 ( 30.xh4 f8 31.xh6+
plan. e8 32.f8+! d7 33.xf7+ c8
[ 8.b3 g4 9.h3 h5 10.0-0 e6 11.e1 34.xe6+ d7 35.e4 ) 30...d1+
e7 12.bd2 0-0 13.e4 f6 14.xf6+ 31.h2 xg3+!! 32.fxg3 d2+ 33.g1
xf6 15.c3= Casella, M-Taylor, T/Los f3+ 34.f1 h2+= It is very hard to see
Angeles 2004 leads to nothing for W hite. this variation over the board. ]
No t e t h a t t h e B ish op o n b 3 will a lm o st 30.xe6! fxe6 31.xh6+ f7 32.g7+!
certainly be repositioned on c2 in the coming e8 33.xc7
play. ] [ 33.xg6+ w a s e v e n s p e e d i e r : d7
649
34.h7+ c8 35.xc7+ xc7 36.f7+ P s k o v 1 9 9 8) 20...d7 21.e1 h5

d7 37.xe6+- ] 22.xb6 axb6 23.d3 c6 24.xe6+ h8
33...d7 34.c5 xh4 35.h5+ f7 25.g3 e8 26.h3 c5 27.b3 e5
36.xh4 d8 37.g4 d4 38.h5 xc4 28.h4 g7 29.f1 f8 30.c4 f2!
39.b5+ c6 40.g5 d7 Eventually a very 31.xc5 xf1+ 32.g1 xg1+ 33.xg1
exciting game. As far as the opening goes d4+ 34.f1 f6 35.g8 h5 36.c4 h4
Black was always a bit worse. 37.d3 g5 38.e4+ f5!! 39.d2+ f4
1-0 40.e2 xb2 0-1 Dueckstein , A-Fauland, A/
Austria 1989 The references suggest that
this is not a variation which is frequently
636 B04 used these days. 7 Ng5 is uncommon. ]
Radulski,Julian 2521 17.axd1 xe5 18.xe5 xf1+ 19.xf1
Laketic,Gojko 2479 xe5 I like Black here too. He's pawn up for
SCG First League m (6) 22.10.2005 the time being and the Knight on b6 plays a
[Andrew Martin] very useful role protecting the Rook on a8,
should the W hite Rook come to the eighth
Coming up a rare excursion into one of Lev rank. 20.a4 g7
Alburt's creative lines. Black is quite OK in [ 20...f7 might be marginally better,
this game out of the opening. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 keeping an eye on e6. ]
d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 5.c4 b6 6.b3 21.a5 d7 22.e4 b6
g7 7.g5 The older move, but I believe 7 [ 22...f8! was more accurate:
a4 to be superior. e6! 8.f4 dxe5 9.fxe5 c5 A) 23.d8 b6 24.axb6 ( 24.e7? a6+ )
Black is hoping that his central pressure will 24...axb6 25.d6 a6+ 26.c4 xd8
negate White's chances on the f-file and on 27.xd8 xd6 28.xa6 c5;
the kingside in general. 10.c3 cxd4 11.0-0 B) 23.e7 b6! ]
Humourous. Of course capturing on c3 is 23.xe6 a6+ 24.g1 f8 25.d5 c8
impossible. 0-0 12.cxd4 c6 13.f3 f6 26.axb6 axb6 27.a1 b5 28.a7+ d7
A necessary challenge, lest Bg5 comes and 29.e3 c7 30.a8 f6 The position looks
the dark squares start to creak. 14.c3 very drawish now. 31.xf6 xf6 32.h4
[ 14.exf6 xf6 gives White an undoubted [ 32.xb6 c1+ 33.f2 xb2 ]
positional advantage, but the Black pieces 32...xb2 33.f8+ g7 34.g8+ f6
are so active that he never gets the chance 35.f8+ e5! Going for it! 36.f3
t o r e a l i s e h i s e d g e . 15.e3 d5! [ 36.f4+ is tempting but I doubt White can
covering e6 if nothing else. 16.xd5 exd5 win after xd5 37.xc7 d4+ 38.h2
17.c3 g4 18.xd5 d6 19.c3 ae8 d3 Black's extra queenside pawn, the
20.b3+ e6 21.xe6+ xe6 22.e5 strong bishop and White's offside King give
xf1+ 23.xf1 xe5 24.dxe5 a5 25.d4 ample compensation for the exchange. No
xe5 26.xe5 xe5 27.a4 f5 28.d1 wonder Radulski didn't go for this! ]
f7 Bittencourt, J-Fier, A/Belo Horizonte 36...d4 37.xd4+ xd4 38.f6 d3
2 0 0 4 I t is c l e a r t h a t t h i s li n e d o e s n o t [ 38...c5 ]
trouble Black. ] 39.f2 d7 40.e6
14...fxe5 15.g5 d7 16.dxe5 xd1N [ 40.xb6 ]
A novelty however there is nothing wrong with 40...c4 41.e1?! The latter stages of the
16...Nxe5 , as you are about to see: game are without doubt affected by the clock.
[ 16...xe5 17.xe5 xf1+ 18.xf1 d4+ d5 42.e2 xf3??
19.h1 xe5 20.d8 ( 20.e7 d7 [ 42...f7 43.d2+ c4 ]
21.e1 f5 22.e2 e8 23.d6 f6 43.d2+ e5 44.xd7 h5 45.xh7 f4
24.e4 xb2 25.f3 c6 26.f1 h8 46.b7 Despite the final result, Alburt's 7...e6
27.g4 d4 28.c2 xe4 29.d1 f5 is holding up well.
0-1 Pupols, V-Alburt, L/USA 1987; 20.h4 1-0
d7 21.e1 f8 Morozov, D-Sabaev, S/
650
637 B04 (2484) -Gozzoli, Y (2429), Abu Dhabi 2004,

Reyniers,Pieter 2046 and Finkel points out 18.e5! ]
Marin,Mihail 2583 10...xf6 11.xf6 g8 12.dxe5 d4
XXVII Andorra Open (1) 18.07.2009 13.c3! Probably Marin was regretting his
[John Watson] opening choice. He may have expected
[ 13.f4 8d7 14.g5 , when Black may
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 already be slightly better, e.g., ( 14.h4
5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.g5 xe5 15.xh7?? f3+ 16.gxf3 h8 )
[ and 7.a4 ] 14...c5 ( 14...a5! 15.a4 c5 ) 15.c3 a5
[ 7.e2 are well-known alternatives. ] 16.a3 a4 17.a2 e4 18.xe4 xe4+
7...e6 Alburt's defence. 8.f3 19.d1 d7 and Black stood much better in
[ 8.f4 is the main option. ] Ljubojevic, L (2625) -Alburt, L (2565), USA
8...d7!? A sideline, perhaps meant to throw 1990. ]
off his much lower-rated opponent. [ Or 13.f4 c6 ( 13...xf4 14.xf4 a5
[ The famous main line is 8...e7 9.e4 15.a4 d7 16.0-0 c6 ) 14.xd4 xd4
dxe5 10.g5 b4+ 11.c3 a5 12.f6 15.c3 d7 16.e3 xb3 17.axb3 c6
( 12.f6+ f8 13.d5 e4 has been widely 18.0-0 d7 19.b4 b6 20.d4 e7 21.b5
tes te d an d is d yna mica lly equa l 14.g3 b7 22.a3!? ( 22.f4 a6 23.bxa6 xa6
a6 ) 12...xf6 13.xf6 0-0 14.xe5 24.f2 ) 22...a6 23.bxa6 xa6 24.xa6
xe5 15.dxe5 with a small endgame pull for xa6 25.a1 a8 26.e4 b7
White. ] wit h a p p ro xim a t e e qu a li t y, G e e n e n , M
[ 8...0-0 is almost never played: 9.h3 h6 (2329)-Cornette, M (2329), France 2003. ]
( 9...h5 10.g4 ) 10.f3 with the idea Bxh6 is 13...8d7 14.e3? White's big chance for an
difficult for Black: dxe5 ( 10...a5 11.xh6 upset goes by the wayside. He should have
a4 12.g5 dxe5 13.d2! axb3 14.de4! ) played either:
11.dxe5 c6 12.xh6 xe5 13.g5 [ 14.f4!? , for example, xf4 15.xf4 g5
( 13.xg7 ) 13...d3+!? 14.cxd3 xb2 16.e3 ( 16.g3! is still better: c5 17.h4
15.0-0 xa1 16.d2 with a strong attack. ] g4 18.b5 d8 19.d1+ d7 20.c3 )
9.e4 dxe5 10.f6+ 16...xe5 17.b5 d8 18.d4 bd7
[ 10.dxe5 is also good, for example, d4 19.0-0-0 a6 20.c3 e7 21.he1
( or 10...a5 11.f6+ xf6 12.xf6 g8 with an ongoing initiative, Hoff mann, M
but W hite still stands better af ter 13.a4; (2370)-Schulze, U (2400), Germany 1991. ]
10...xe5?! 11.f6+ xf6 12.xf6 g8 [ Or, be tt er yet , 14.g5! h6 ( 14...c6
13.h4 f5?! 14.c3 c6 15.g5 d4 15.e3! xe5 16.xe5 xe5 17.e4
16.xh7 e5+ 17.f1 g7 18.xg7 ed7 18.c4! c5 19.0-0-0; 14...xe5+
xg7 19.e1 d7 20.b5 and White is on 15.xe5 xe5 16.b5 with the idea d7
top, Van der Wiel, J-Hoeksema, 17.f4 f6 18.0-0-0+ ) 15.xh6 xe5+
Netherlands 1991) 11.bc3 ( 11.c3 xe5 16.e3! xe3+ 17.xe3 with a big
12.f4 followed by Bxc7 wins the dark advantage. ]
squares with some advantage, although this 14...xc3+!
isn't so clear.) 11...c6 12.0-0 ( I like the [ 14...xe3+ 15.fxe3 xf6 16.exf6 d7
looks of 12.e3! xe5 13.0-0-0 isn't so bad either. ]
with attack ) 15.bxc3 xf6 16.exf6 d7 17.0-0-0 c6
A) 12...xe5 13.g3 ( but 13.f4! ) 18.f3 d7
13...bd7 14.e3 b4 15.a3 a5 [ 18...g5! ]
, when White could keep the advantage by 19.he1
16.fd1 0-0 17.a4! threatening b4; [ 19.g5 ]
B) 12...xe5 13.f4 f5 14.g3!? 19...0-0-0 20.d4 g5 21.h3 g6 22.c4
a5!? ( 14...d4 15.e3; 14...c5 xf6 23.d3 h6 24.e5?
15.ce4 e7 16.g5 ) 15.xc7 d4?! [ 24.xa7 ]
16.f4 0-0 17.fe1 b5 Ramesh, R 24...d5! 25.de1 h4 26.xd5 xd5
651
27.e5 h6 28.f2 a4 Black has material winning ) 14.0-0 c7 15.f4+ with a strong
and attack. 29.b2 f4 30.f1 d5 31.a3 attack: b7 16.b3! ]
c4 32.e4 b5 33.xc4 xc4 34.xc4 [ 10...b6 is also insufficient. The following
bxc4 35.g3 e2 36.xa7 xg3 37.f2 line shows how difficult it is to defend this
f1 38.c1 h2 39.d2 xf3+ 40.e3 position: 11.c3 e8 12.f4+ d7
e5 41.g3 g6 42.f3 f5 43.a4 b7 13.e6+ d8 14.e5 d7 15.0-0-0
44.a5 e5 The previous moves were forced. Black is a
0-1 piece up, but white has ample compensation.
First of all, c5 is threatened, winning the
knight back. e8 (protecting the c7 square)
638 B04 16.d3! The queen exchange after ( 16.c5
Rozentalis,Eduardas 2585 f5 17.cxb6 xe5 18.xe5 axb6
Sokolov,Andrei 2565 simplifies the defence) 16...d6 17.c5 f7
Bern op Berna (5) 1992 18.e3 g5 19.g3 g7 20.b5 f5
[Alexander Volzhin] 21.he1 f6 22.cxb6 axb6 23.d6! wins ]
11.f4 Now 12.c5 is threatened, so black's
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 next move is forced. c5 12.c3
An old move, revived by Bent Larsen. 5.xe5 [ 12.dxc6? a5+ 13.c3 xc6-+
Now let's have a look at the provocative 5... is simply bad-black wins ]
Nd7.This is one of the most interesting lines [ 12.d2 in my opinion doesn't promise
in Alekhine's Defence. For many years this w h i t e t o o m u c h : g5! ( 12...e8??
move was considered to be bad, but this 13.e4+!+- winning ) 13.g3 g4 14.0-0-0
game ( at the very top level!) has proved that h6! ( theory considers 14...g8 15.e1
black's resources should not be g5 as the only defence, but my analysis
underestimated. d7!? 6.xf7!? As other proves that the text is even better) 15.e1
moves are rather harmless, this knight f8 16.xe5+ d7 17.e6+ e8
sacrifice is the only attempt to fight for the Is white's queen trapped? Not at all! 18.d6!
advantage. xf7 7.h5+ e6 The king exd6 19.xf6+ d7 20.xd8 xd8
has to go to the centre. and black has excellent compensation for a
[ 7...g8?? 8.xd5+ e6 9.xe6# ] pawn. ]
[ 7...g6 8.xd5++- winning ] 12...a6
8.c4 [ 12...d7? is a b l u n d e r 13.b5+ xb5
[ After some fiascos with 8.c4 white switched 14.e6+ winning ]
to 8.g3 but b5 9.a4 c6 10.axb5 g6 13.0-0-0
11.e2+ f7 12.bxc6 7b6 leads to an [ A f t e r t h i s g a m e t h e m o v e 13.b4
unclear position. Very few games have been became white's main weapon. W e'll
played in this line ,so here is a wide field consider it in the next game. ]
for future investigations. ] 13...g6! This is the point. 14...Bh6 is
8...5f6 9.d5+ d6 10.f7 threatened. 14.xe5+
[ The seemingly strong 10.f4+? fails to e5! [ 14.e1 h6!!-+ winning ]
11.c5+ ( 11.dxe6+ xe6 and after the 14...xe5 Black's king is brave isn't he? 15.d6
queen 's re trea t the king escapes to f 7) h6+ 16.c2 e8 17.d5+ What else?
11...e7 12.g5 e8-+ winning in xd5 18.xd5+ f6 19.d3
Andreev-Kharlamov, USSR 1981 ] [ A month later the game Rublevsky-
10...e5!? After considering different knight Hau ch ard was p layed . W hite p ref erre d
moves the conclusion is obvious: the knight 19.e4+ but also lost: g7 20.e5+ f7
should go to the centre! ( 20...g8?? 21.f6+!+- winning ) 21.d3
[ 10...b8 is bad: 11.c5+ d7 ( 21.dxe7 f5 22.d3 xe7 23.d6+
( 11...xc5 12.e3+ d6 13.a3! a6 xd6 24.xd6 ad8 25.c7+ d7 )
14.c4+ d7 15.d6! winning ) 12.b5+ c6 21...g7 22.f4+ g8 23.e1 f8
13.dxc6+ bxc6 ( 13...xc6? 14.0-0+- 24.g5 exd6 25.d5+ f7 26.xd6
652
xd5 27.e8+ f8 28.cxd5 c4 29.xc4 pawn. ]

b5 30.b3 g7 ( The last trap: 30...f5+?? 14.cxd5 xd5 15.xd5 cxd5 16.xd5
31.xf5 xe8 32.d6+ ) 31.xc8 c5 e6 17.xb7 c5 18.c7 b3 19.xd8
32.e7+ h6 0 -1. ] fxd8 20.ad1 Black has no compensation.
19...exd6-+ winning 20.xd6+ f7 f6 21.e5 xe5 22.xe5 xd1 23.xd1
T h e d re a m c a m e t ru e ! T h e k in g is s a f e !c8 24.f3
21.e4 c6 22.e5 d8 with the idea of ... [ Another idea is 24.a6!? c5 25.d8+
Bf5 and ...Rxd3 h7 26.d3+ g6 27.f4 ]
0-1 24...g5 25.d3 c5 26.g4 g7 27.f2
f5 28.e1 d4 29.e5! c1 30.e3! b3
31.xe6 e1+ 32.e2 fxg4 33.f2 c1
639 B04 34.d3 gxf3 35.gxf3 c5 36.g6+ f7
Rublevsky,Sergei 2676 37.f5 d1 38.c6 b3? A blunder, but the
Carlsen,Magnus 2714 g a m e w a s l o s t a n yw a y . 39.e6+ e7
World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (25) 22.11.2007 40.xb3 d2+ 41.g3 xb2 42.g8 h5
[John Watson] 43.c7+ f6 44.xa7 h4+ 45.h3 f2
46.d5 e5 47.e4 f4 48.f7+ e3
Another Blitz game. Rublevsky is incredibly 49.f5 g4+ 50.fxg4
well-prepared, so W hite's treatment bears 1-0
watching. Black will definitely have to find an
improvement. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.e2 f5 7.0-0 640 B04
The Kasparov/Polgar/Anand 7 g4!? isn't right Sarma,Venu 2382
for Rublevsky's style. d7 8.f3 Miroshnichenko,Evgenij 2680
[ T o n y K o s t e n ' s 8.g4!? is discussed in 2nd Mayors Cup (4) 03.05.2009
Lupulescu-Grunberg. ] [John Watson]
8...e6 9.a3 This idea (preparing c4 and
preventing ...Nb4 in response) has been used 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
in various positions, for example, on move 7, 5.xe5 c6 Arguably, this has become the
and on move 9 of the main line. e7 main line of the Alekhine Defence! I hope it
[ 9...c7 ] doesn't remain so, because I think of the
[ or 9...d6 would be more active, Alekhine as a romantic, counterattacking
preventing Bf4 and in some cases preparing opening, and this variation is a super-safe,
...Nf4. Black slips into passivity in this game, stodgy one. 6.c4 We've covered a lot about
s o m a y b e t h i s wa s a g o o d p o i n t t o d o 5... c6 over the past couple of years. The
something positive. ] game
10.c4 5f6 11.c3 h6 [ Dhar-Miroshnichenko, Mumbai 2009 from
[ 11...c7!? ] this month followed known paths by 6.c4
12.f4 0-0 13.d5! An instructive positional b4! 7.e3 ( 7.a3? xd4! ) 7...f5 8.a3
break. It's very hard to break down the ...c6/... d7 . White's knight is misplaced on a3,
e6 structure, used today in Defences like the and after 9.g4!? Black should have played
Caro-Kann, Scandinavian, Alekhine's, and simply e6 with a good game. ]
Slav (this column deals with 3 of these!). If [ A s w e ' v e s e e n i n t h i s c o l u m n , 6.d3
you get a chance to do so by playing d5, the is also played and is quite logical, aiming as
resulting activation of your pieces will usually it does towards the king and leaving the way
favour W hite because of his greater space. o p e n f o r c 4 . A g a i n , d7 should be
exd5?! a n s w e r e d b y 7.f3 , when Black has to
[ 13...cxd5 14.cxd5 e4 15.d4! xc3 decide how to organise his pieces. Adams-
16.bxc3 c5 17.f3 is unpleasant for Black, Carlsen, Moscow 2007 went 7f6 8.h3
but probably better than activating all of ( 8.0-0 g4 9.bd2 ) 8...b4 9.c4 f5
White's pieces. As it goes, Black gives up a 10.a3 (see notes to this game in the
653
Archives) e6 11.c3 bd5 12.c2 e7 White's bishop on b3 poorly placed for the
( 12...d6!? ) 13.e3 and perhaps White moment (later it goes to a4). ]
had a little something. ] [ 14.g5!? ]
6...g6 14...c7
[ 6...d7 7.f3 7f6 8.h3 ( maybe in [ 14...e5!? 15.e4! targets d6, but that
some of these positions White needn't be doesn't necessarily mean much after c7
so worried about ...Bg4, because he hasn't . Then maybe 16.g5 , having in mind Bh4-
committed his queen's knight. That is, 8.0-0 g3. ]
g4 9.bd2! e6 10.h3 h5 11.e1 ) 15.e4 e6!? It's often a bad sign when Black
8...e6 ( 8...g6 is similar to the main game; has to sit around, normally indicated by this
8...f5 9.0-0 e6 is Shirov-Carlsen Moscow move it is nevertheless a possible prelude to ...
2007 from an earlier update) 9.b3 e7 c5.
10.0-0 0-0 11.c4 c7 12.c3 b5 13.g5 [ An option is 15...h6 16.c4 bxc3 17.bxc3
( 13.e2 b7 14.d1 bxc4 15.xc4 ab8 ]
cd5 16.e5 wit h a n e d g e) 13...b7 16.c4 bxc3 17.bxc3 c5 18.a3 cxd4
14.e5 bxc4 15.xc4 b5 16.xc6? 19.d6!?
( 16.e2! d5 17.xe7 xe7 18.c1 ) [ Better 19.cxd4! 7f6 20.c5 ]
16...xc6 17.xb5 xb5 18.xb5 a5 19...d8 20.cxd4 7f6 21.xf6+ xf6
( 18...b8! f a vo u r s B l a c k) 19.a4 a6 22.c5 b5
1/2-1/2 Westerinen-Clemens, Velden 2009. ] [ And now 22...d7 23.b4 c8
7.0-0 g7 8.e1 0-0 9.b3 d7 10.f3 was equal. ]
Exchanges are not necessarily bad, but White 23.e5 d7? 24.d6? Missing or
needs to avoid a pawn on e5, blocking the e- underestimating
file and presenting a target. e8 11.h3 [ 24.xf7! xf7 25.xe6! xe6 26.xe6+
[ 11.c4 and 12 Nc3 is another setup I feel xe6 27.b3+ c4! 28.e1+ e5
that White has a small pull regardless. Now 29.xc4+ d5 30.a6+ f7 31.dxe5 ]
Black tries to prevent that: ] 24...xe5
11...b5 12.a4 b4 13.a5 Trying to isolate [ 24...f6 ]
Black's b-pawn from its support by ...a5, and 25.dxe5 a6 26.g4 c8 27.ed1 c3
incidentally depriving a queen or knight access 28.b4 c8 29.a4 c4 30.b3 c3
to b6. Perhaps the direct central advance 31.b4 c4 32.b3 xa4!? Brave, but he
[ 13.c4 promises more: c7 ( 13...bxc3 sh o u ld p ro b a b ly r e p e a t . 33.xa4 c3
14.xc3 is a nice-looking isolated queen 34.b6 d8 35.aa1 c6 36.b4 a8
pawn position in which W hite has space 37.ac1 dc8 38.xc6 xc6 39.b6 c2
and activity, but also queenside weaknesses 40.e1 c4 41.b7 h5 42.e3 c6
to attack, but covering up those weaknesses 43.xc6 xc6 With equality. I'll leave it at
via xc3 15.bxc3 is depressing) 14.c5! that, since some terrible mistakes (presumably
(this cedes to Black a permanent outpost on in time trouble) marred the rest , and th e
d5, but establishes lasting pressure in the players deserve better.
centre, prevents Black's pawn breaks, and ½-½
wins an outpost on d6 if Black moves his e-
pawn) f8! ( 14...f6? 15.e5
wins a pawn) 15.f4 ( or 15.e3 e6 641 B04
16.bd2 ) 15...e6! 16.e5!? xb3 Shirov,Alexei 2739
( 16...d5 17.xd5 xd5 18.bd2 ) Carlsen,Magnus 2714
17.xb3 d5 18.bd2 followed by World Blitz Moscow RUS blitz (16) 21.11.2007
doubling on the e-file. ] [John Watson]
13...a6 14.bd2
[ 14.c4 5f6! 15.f4 c5 is approximately Finally we get to the current 'main line' of 6
e q u a l t h e n 16.d5 gains space, but opens Bc4, although that can change at any minute.
the a1-h8 diagonal for Black and leaves I suspect that 6 Bd3 and 6 Be2 are equally
654
good. This game doesn't say much for 6 Bc4, 16.d3 should favour W hite's bishops)
at any rate. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 12.xg6 hxg6 13.c4 5f6 14.f4 a5+
4.f3 dxe5 5.xe5 c6 6.c4 In his article, 15.c3 0-0-0 intending ... e5, Zhang Zhong-
Finkel calls this the 'Strong Players' move. Yi Jiangchuan, Vuxi 2005 ]
d7 8.h3
[ 6...f5 7.f3! is a problem, when Black [ 8.0-0 g4 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 b6
has no easy way to level things in view of e6 hits c4 and d4, taking back one bishop. ]
8.xf7! ( 8.d3 is also possible) 8...xf7 8...f5 9.0-0 e6
9.g4 f6 10.gxf5 xf5 11.d2! [ 9...h6 is Palliser-Ledger on
with two bishops and more targets to aim at ChessPublishing, when Martin recommends
in an ending. ] simply 10.d3 xd3 11.xd3 c7 12.c4
7.f3 .Hard to argue with - W hite has his usual
[ 7.0-0 xe5 8.dxe5 e6!? ( 8...f5 ) advantages without his usual disadvantages!
9.b3 g6 10.e2 g7 11.d2!? f4 And ...h6 looks stupid. ]
12.e4 d4!= was recently played in 10.g5 This doesn't achieve much.
Popilski, G (2238)-Raznikov, D (2162)/ [ 10.b3 d6!? (yes!) 11.c4 e7 ( darn.
Kemer TUR 2007. ] 11...f4 is just as good) 12.c3 ( 12.h4 )
7...7f6 And together with 7... N7b6, he calls 12...h6 Kindermann-Loeffler, Bundesliga
this 'The critical Line'. 2006/7 and Finkel suggests 13.e2 ]
[ 7...e6 seems to be hanging in there, 10...e7 11.bd2 h6 12.xf6 xf6
however. Anand-Conquest, Calatrava 2007 White only has a space advantage in return
continued 8.0-0 e7 ( 8...b5 was seen in for the bishops, and it is shaky. I already
He rn a n d e z G u e rre ro , G - L u t h e r , T / Do s prefer Black. 13.c3 0-0 14.b3 c5 15.c2
Hermanas 2003 and Kasimzhanov-Brochet, xc2 16.xc2 c8 17.b3
French Teams 2004, both on [ 17.dxc5 establishes the normal Caro-Kann/
ChessPublishing ) French pawn structure 4:3 vs 3:2. I like
A) 9.b3 b5!? 10.e1 0-0 11.a4 7f6 Black. ]
12.e2!? ( 12.g5 is mo re p o in t e d) 17...c7 18.fe1 fd8 19.ad1 cxd4
12...b4 13.e5 b7 was Skripchenko, A 20.xd4 c5 21.2f3 d5 22.c4!?
(2456)-Conquest, S (2543)/Pulvermuehle Obviously weakening, although it's connected
GER 2004, which Martin assesses as with a simplification plan. d7 23.b5 b6!?
equal. Fair enough.; 24.e2? xd1+ 25.xd1 xf2+! 26.xf2
B) 9.e1 0-0 10.bd2 not bad, but e4 27.d4 xd4 28.fxd4 xf2
( 10.d3 is a nice alternative, with the idea 29.xf2 xc4 30.b3 c5 31.xa7?!
of c 4 t h e n b5 11.a4 b4 12.c4 bxc3 In light of the threat ...e5. Otherwise,
13.bxc3 gives White space and very active [ 31.a3 a5 32.dc2 e5! ( 32...b5
pieces. Maybe this explains why Black 33.f3 b4?! 34.c4 xa2 35.xb4
h a s n ' t b e e n p l a y i n g 7 . . . e 6 a s m u c h) isn't what Black was after. )]
10...b5! 11.f1 b7 ( 11...a5!? 12.e4 31...a5 32.c8 xa2+ 33.g3 b2
a6 was played in one game) 12.c3 c7 34.f4
13.a4 a6 14.e4 5f6 15.g5 fe8 [ 34.d6 d2 ( 34...e5? 35.c4 ) 35.6b5
and again, Black may have a very small e5 36.f5 d3+ 37.f2 xb3 ]
disadvantage, but it shouldn't be a 34...xg2 35.d6 d2 36.e3 h2
serious problem with good play. ] 37.xb7 xh3+ 38.e2 e5 39.f3 e4
[ 7...7b6 8.b3 ( see the Archive for 40.d2 f5 41.b4 f4! 42.d6 h2+ 43.e1
8.e2 in Quillan-Cox, 4NCL 2005-6. Andrew e3 44.f3 b2 45.b5 g5 46.e5 h5
Ma rt in a pp ro ve s of W h it e's trea tm en t .) 47.d3 b3 48.c5 b1+ 49.e2 h4
8...g4 9.h3 h5 10.g4!? (interesting but 50.e6 h3
not necessary) ( 10.0-0 ) 10...g6 11.e5 0-1
d7! ( 11...e6 12.h4 is a problem then
b4+ 13.c3 e7 14.h5 xb1 15.xb1 f6
655
642 B04 44.d4 b8 45.c5 b2 46.a7 a2

Short,Nigel D 47.b6
Miles,Anthony J 1-0
2nd IECC Ohrid MKD (13) 14.06.2001
[Nigel Davies]
643 B04
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 Short,Nigel D 2660
5.xe5 c6 6.c4 c7 Timman,Jan H 2630
[ Black has also played the naive-looking Tilburg 1991
6...b4 and perhaps it isn't bad. In fact even [Alexander Volzhin]
Michael Adams obtained very little out of
the opening in one game of his against 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
Burkart, Adams - Burkart, European Club Ch. 5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.e2!? We saw in
, London 1996 going on 7.e3 ( 7.a3? the previous game that black has very good
xd4 ) 7...f5 8.a3 d7 9.xd7 xd7 chances for equality after 7.Ng5. That is why
10.e2 g6 ( 10...e6 also looks very Nigel Short tries a relatively new move. c6
rea so na ble) 11.d5 g7 12.d4 c2+ 8.0-0 0-0 9.h3 a5 10.a4 dxe5 11.dxe5
13.xc2 xc2 14.d2 xd4 15.xd4 0-0 d4 12.xd4 xd4 13.e1 e6 14.d2
16.0-0 cxd5 17.cxd5 and now the d5 15.f3 c5 16.e4! with the idea of
immediate d6 would leave things fairly Qh4 and Bh6-> b4! It seems that Black has
even. ] obtained good counterplay: 17.Bd5 ed 18.
7.c3 d7 8.xd7 Qd5 Be6 gives black good compensation for a
[ Apicella - Miles, Linares zonal 1995 varied pawn because of his domination of the light
with 8.f3 g6 9.e2 g7 10.0-0 0-0 squares. But Nigel Short finds an excellent
11.e3 a6 ( 11...f6!? ) 12.a4 and now a5! positional idea. 17.c4! b6 18.b3! xc4
was the best ] 19.bxc4 This assessment may seem strange
8...xd7 9.e3 f5 10.g4?! Short loves to to you. White has an exposed pawn structure
throw his pawns forwards like this, though on the queenside, Black has a pair of Bishops.
very few other GMs would have played like B u t B l a c k h a s n o re a l wa y t o a t t a c k t h e
this. Miles reacts very energetically and well. doubled pawns. Even more importantly, next
c8 11.e2 e6 12.c2 b5! 13.f3 bxc4 move White will take the only open file (d-file)
14.xc6+ d7 15.a4 under his control, and after the unavoidable
[ 15.xa8 xa8 would have given Black exchange of the dark-squared Bishops White
excellent compensation for the exchange will dominate the dark squares. e8 20.d1
but now he is simply better. ] c5 21.h4 b6 22.e3! c6 23.h6 h8
15...c8 16.xc4 d5 17.xd7+ xd7 24.d8 b7
18.d3 b4 19.d2 0-0 20.0-0 xc3 [ Probably Black should give up his Queen
21.bxc3 a4 22.f4 f5?! 24...d7!? 25.d4 axd8 26.xc6 xc6
[ I prefer the immediate 22...c4 after which 27.f4 d7 28.g5 with reasonable
23.f3 ( 23.xc4 xc4 24.f3 fc8 ) chances to hold the position. ]
23...xd3 24.xd3 c4 25.b1 fc8 25.ad1 g7
is better for Black ] [ Grabbing the pawn costs a piece for Black:
23.gxf5 exf5 24.f3 c4 25.a4 xd3 25...xa4!? 26.e7! xf3 27.xa8 xa8
26.xd3 c4 27.a5 b8 28.e1 28.d8 a1+ 29.h2 xe5+ 30.f4 xf4+
With White's rook threatening to come into e5, 31.xf4 xd8 32.xd8+ g7 33.xa8
things are getting out of control. I blame 22... and White should win this endgame. ]
f5. f6 29.d5 e4 30.e3 b7 31.a6 d7 26.8d7!
32.b1 d6 33.b4 c8 34.d4 f7 [ 26.xg7? axd8 ]
35.d1 e8 36.e1+ d8 37.e6 e8 26...f8 Black must be careful, otherwise
38.c4 d6 39.xa7 xc4 40.xc4 xa7 tactical blows work:
41.xc8+ xc8 42.f2 d7 43.e3 a8 [ 26...xe5 27.xf7! ]
656
[ 26...e4 27.xf7! ] must try to chip away at and eventually

27.xg7 xg7 28.1d4 ae8 29.f6+ undermine the pawn on c3. c5 17.e2
g8 30.h4 h5 From now, only one White d5 18.f3 fe8 19.e3 ad8 20.ad1
piece moved. Which one do you think? The He rn a n d e z G u e rre ro , G - L u t h e r , T / Do s
king!!! 31.h2! c8? Timman misses
Hermanas 2003. ]
White's idea. 9.b3 b5!?
[ He should have tried 31...c8 But this
[ 9...0-0 10.c4 was obviously what Conquest
move takes pressure off the a8 - h1 diagonal was afraid of. W hite is clearly a bit better
a n d a llo ws 32.g4! Black is hopelessly lost. with chances of a Kingside attack. ]
In his comments in Informant-54 the winner 10.e1N
g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g v a r i a t i o n s : hxg4
[ 10.a4 b4 11.c4 bxc3 12.bxc3 There's a
( 32...xd7 33.gxh5 gxh5 34.g5+ h7 loose quality to the White queenside which
35.xh5+ g7 36.g4# ) 33.g5 g3+! gives Black every chance of counterplay. 0-0
( 33...xd7 34.h5; 33...b7 34.f3 ) 34.fxg3 13.e1 a5 14.a3 a6 15.c2 xa3
b7 35.e4 xa4 36.h5 xc2+ 37.f2 16.xa3 c7 17.c4 b4 18.c3 c5
gxh5 ( 37...f5 38.hxg6! ) 38.d3 e4 19.b5 b6 20.ad1 ad8 21.c2 xc2
39.d2 b1 40.d1 c2 41.7d2 xc4 22.xc2 f6 23.e5 xb5 24.axb5 cxd4=
42.d4+- winning ] Bologan, V-Conquest, S/Santo Domingo
32.g3! ce8 33.f4! c8 34.g5!
2002 ]
Excellent, Nigel! 10...0-0 11.a4 7f6 12.e2 b4 13.e5
1-0 A p i n p r i c k . b7= In comparison with the
Luther game mentioned earlier, White doesn't
have control over the position and, in
644 B04 particular, has to consider the implications of
Skripchenko,Almira 2456 the imminent ...c6-c5!. If White can establish
Conquest,Stuart 2543 and consolidate a Knight on d4, then I believe
II GM-Tage Pulvermuehle GER (9) 26.02.2004 he has prospects of a big advantage, but if he
[Andrew Martin] cannot then Black will equalize easily. 14.a5
a6 He shouldn't permit a5-a6! 15.d2 c5
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 16.df3 cxd4 17.xd4 c5 18.df3
5.xe5 c6 Remains a solid choice, although T h e r e y o u h a v e i t ! W h i t e s t a r t s t o g o
not especially ambitious. 5...c6 works best backwards and immediately Black's position
when White is desperate to win. 6.c4 d7 improves. c7 19.d2 ad8 A standard
7.f3 Refusing simplification must be the best deployment. I guess he leaves the Rook on f8
chance. purely to guard against a tactical attack on f7.
[ 7.e2 xe5 8.dxe5 f5 9.0-0 e6 20.c4 c8 Defending a6. 21.d3 e7
shows a simple Black plan in action. The White is trying hard to angle for a Kingside
exchange makes the defence easier and it's attack so Conquest increases his defensive
possible to see good squares for all the strength. 22.g5
black pieces now. ...Be7, ...Qb6, ...0-0, ... [ 22.ad1 g6 23.xg6 hxg6 24.e5
Rfd8, ...Rd7, ...and ... Rad8 would be my d5! 25.h3 fd8 is fine for Black. ]
line-up. 10.d1 h4 11.xd5? Poor. exd5 [ 22.c3 bxc3 23.xc3 ed5 24.d2 a8
12.f3 c5+ 13.e3 xe3+ 14.xe3 sees the Black queen moving away from the
xc2 Marijanovic, I-Tarakcija, H/Bizovac centre but she nevertheless has an
CRO 2004. ] influence on the game: ]
7...e6 8.0-0 e7 22...g6 23.xg6 hxg6 24.e3
[ 8...b5 is similar to the game. 9.b3 b7 An admission that she sees no way forward.
10.bd2 c5 11.c3 e7 12.e4 0-0 e7 A vague attempt to win by retaining
13.e1 a6 14.c2 5f6 15.g3 cxd4 pieces. 25.b6 d5 26.ac1 a8 27.c4
16.xd4 The solid occupation of d4 is what bxc3 28.bxc3 h5 Conquest's games are
gives W hite any edge that's going. Black always most interesting and he can usually
657
persuade his opponent to join in the fun. He 26...xa4 27.xe8 xe8 A case of the
engineers a messy position and then takes lower-rated player chickening out. ]
his chances. Here both players appear to be [ Thus the normal 11...d5 seems safest. ]
in time-trouble that is my only explanation for 12.xf3 f5!? Black seems to be relying on
the howlers that follow. 29.c4?? Exposing the this very sharp move to see him through. 12...
b4 square! f5 has good and bad things painted all over it.
[ 29.ed1 xf3 30.xf3 xf3 31.gxf3 Black threatens ..f5-f4 and if he is able to get
is roughly equal. ] ...e7-e5 at some point in the not too distant
29...c8?? f uture the advancing pawns might caus e
[ 29...xf3! is surely easy enough, time
White inconvenience. The defect is obvious:
trouble or not: 30.xf3 ( 30.gxf3 b8-+ ) B la ck we a ke n s t h e l igh t sq u a re s. I n o u r
30...xf3 31.gxf3 b4 32.ed1 xa5 ] featured game White is intimidated by the idea
30.b1 d6 31.ed1 c5?! of ...f4.
[ 31...xf3 appears good again: 32.xf3 [ 12...e5 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.c5! d7
xh2+ 33.f1 xf3 34.gxf3 f4 35.c5 15.xc6 bxc6 16.d6 is a good way to
This would be unclear if it were not for cxc5 tackle 12...e5. White's superior pawns give
36.xc5 xc5 37.xa6 xa5 38.d8+ him a distinct advantage. e4 17.ad1 e5
h7 I just don't like this position for White - 18.xd8 axd8 19.xe4 g4 20.f4 f5
in the long term Black will creep all over 21.d6 h6 22.c4 d4 23.d6 e8
him. ] 24.h3 xd1 25.xd1 e5 26.xe5 xe5
32.b2 c6 He has a love affair with this27.d7+- Pasko, A-Pervakov, S/
Bishop. 33.e1 d7 34.eb1 e8 35.c2 Dnipropetrovsk 2005 ]
f6 36.c7 d7 37.b6 a3 38.a2 d6 13.xc6?!N
The new time control really does have a lot to [ 13.d2! is critical, allowing Black to
answer for. Here we see two great players execute his ' threat'
just 'making moves'. 39.d1 c5 40.b1 A) All roads seem to lead to Rome for
c8 41.ab2 a3 42.a2 c5 White after 13...f4: 13...f4 14.xf4
Enough piddling around for one day and I A1) 14...xd4 15.ac1 ( 15.xc6 xc3
daresay a relief. You couldn't say that Black 16.xc3 bxc6 17.h6 f7 18.ad1 )
didn't have his chances! 15...e5 16.g5 d7 17.e4;
½-½ A2) 14...xd4 15.xb7 b8 16.e4;
B) 13...e5 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.d5+ h8
16.ad1
645 B04 B1) 16...e7 17.g5 f6 18.xf6+
Smolin,Dmitry 2191 xf6 19.xc6 ( 19.f4 e4 20.e3 ad8
Pervakov,Sergey 2149 21.c5 xd5 22.xd5 f7 23.c3
Tch-UKR Alushta UKR (2) 16.04.2006 f6= ) 19...bxc6 20.d6 g7 21.c5
[Andrew Martin] c8 22.c7+ e7 23.d7
Shlivinskas, M-Savko, A/Jurmala 1992;
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 B2) 16...e4 17.h6 xh6 1/2-1/2 Kafka,
5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g6 7.f3 g7 8.e3 G-Roberts, P/W est Bromwich 2004 A
0-0 9.e2 c6 10.0-0 g4 11.b3 xf3 slightly baffling decision as 18 Qxh6 is
[ 11...e8!? 12.c1 e5 13.dxe5 dxe5 clearly better for White! Thus I am not
14.c5 e4 is another approach, leading to convinced that Black is able to attain
simplification: 15.cxb6 exf3 16.xf3 xf3 equality in this line. ]
17.xf3 axb6 18.fd1 h4 19.a4 e5 13...bxc6 14.f4 e5! he has to play this move
20.f4 h5 21.g5 xg5 1/2-1/2 Kaps, D- before e7 gets nailed down. 15.dxe5 dxe5
Djuric, S/Rome 2005 W ith Odd, because 16.fxe5
22.xg5 c6 is better for White: 23.e3 [ 16.e1 f6 17.d1 was modest and
a5 24.d5 xb3 25.b1 c5 26.c7 equal. ]
( 26.xb6 xa4 27.xa8 xa8 ) 16...xe5 The good things about Black's
658
position come to the fore. He has a nice, [ Best was simply 15.xf6+! xf6 16.h6 ]
active Bishop, threats of ...Qh4 and if White 15...dxc5 16.d6?
trades queen a Black Rook arrives at d3. [ 16.e1! yields a serious attack after d6!
17.c2 h4 18.h3?! White does not seem 17.h6 xf3 18.xf3+ d7 19.g5! ce8
to be able to handle the pressure. 20.b4! , with an unclear position. ]
[ 18.g3 i s t e m p t i n g xg3 ( 18...f6! 16...e6?
kee ps Black 's ed ge .) 19.xb6 axb6 [ Here 16...h5! would have won some
20.hxg3 xg3+ 21.h1 h3+ 22.g1 material. ]
ae8 I would not like to defend the White 17.e5 xd6 18.xd6 e4 19.e5 0-0
position but maybe it's only equal. ] 20.c2 f5 21.h3 h5
18...g3 19.f3 h2+ 20.f2 f4-+ [ 21...xf3 22.xf3 6g5 23.xe4 xe4
21.xb6 axb6 22.d1 f6! It turns out that is only moderately in White's favour. ]
Bla ck doe sn't eve n n eed to e xtrica te his 22.g4 fxg4 23.hxg4 4g5 24.h2 h3+
Queen! 23.e2 ae8 24.g1 e6 25.c5 25.g2 g5 26.g3 hf4+ 27.xf4 xf4+
b5 26.fd3 h4+ 27.f1 fe8 28.h1 xe2 29.xe2 ae8 30.d1 d8
A game which perhaps gives a false 31.c1 h4 32.gxh5 f3 33.e1 h3
impression of Black's chances, but a warning 34.e6+ g7 35.e5+ h6 36.hxg6 e8
to White nevertheless. 37.d6 d8 38.gxh7+ xh7 39.c7+ h6
0-1 40.ae1 f6 41.e3 h4 42.g1
1-0
646 B04
Socko,Bartosz 2631 647 B04
Efimov,Igor 2442 Sutovsky,Emil 2635
24th ECC Kallithea GRE (1) 17.10.2008 Carlsen,Magnus 2385
[John Watson] ECC, Rethymnon (1) 2003
[Andrew Martin]
This game features an idea (...Nc7) which
quite a few players use when they despair of 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
the main lines. Even in the Alekhine's, there's 5.xe5 c6!? Miles played this move, Davies
such a thing as too backwards a placement, I rates it quite highly, I'm not so sure. Let's not
think, and surely White should come out with get on to the hero worship bandwagon quite
the better of it. This game illustrates one way so quickly. Black's move is passive although it
it can happen, although White goes wrong and ha s so me 'waiting ' va lu e. B la ck le ts h is
the opponents exchange errors. 1.e4 f6 Queen out, prepares a possible retreat of the
2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 c6 5.c4 c7!? Knight to c7 and takes a small portion of the
Even though the knight here eyes e6, and centre. However, I repeat, the move is
may even come there at some point, Black's passive. 6.d3 d7 7.0-0 As usual, best
pieces never seem to coordinate after this results are ob tained by pla ying f or small
move. I'd say that applies to most Alekhine advantages, by not overreacting. There should
Defence variations. 6.c3 g6 be more than one way to keep at least an
[ W h i t e g e t s a n e a s y e d g e a f t e r 6...g4 edge:
7.exd6 exd6 8.d3 ( or 8.h3 xf3 9.xf3 )] [ 7.f3! b5 8.0-0 e6 9.e1 e7 10.c3
7.f4 0-0 11.c2 7f6 12.a3 c7 13.g5 a5
[ 7.exd6 exd6 8.g5 is another route. ] 14.bd2 a4 15.h4 h6 16.g3 b7
7...g4 8.exd6 exd6 9.e2 e7 17.ad1 Timoshenko, G-Szieberth, A/
[ 9...g7 10.g5! xe2 ( 10...c8 FSGM September, Budapest HUN 2003
11.ce4 ) 11.xe2+ forces f8 ] (57) ]
10.h6 d7 11.0-0 f8 12.f4 e7 13.d5 [ 7.xd7! xd7 8.0-0 g6 9.e1 g7 10.c3
[ or 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 0-0 15.d5 ] 0-0 11.g5 e8 12.d2 c8 13.c4 f5
13...c5 14.e4 f6 15.xc5!? 14.e2 c7 15.f3 ad8 16.b3 e6
659
17.xe6 fxe6 18.e1 Stefansson, H- 648 B04

Gausel, E/ch-Nordic, Aarhus DEN 2003 Sutovsky,Emil 2696
(32). ] Finkel,A 2499
7...xe5 8.dxe5 b4 9.e4 xd1 10.xd1 TCh-ISR 2011-12 (11.1) 02.03.2012
f5 11.a3 a6 [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
[ He could take on e4 but Black is struggling
a little: 11...fxe4 12.axb4 g6 13.e3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
( 13.b5 cxb5 14.e3 a6 15.c3 g7 5.c4!? Potentially an important new idea from
16.xb5 xe5 17.d4; 13.f4 g7 Sutovsky - previously recapturing on e5 has
14.d2 f8 15.g3 f5 16.c4 ) been pretty automatic.
13...g7 14.a5 a6 15.c3 f5 16.h3 [ 5.xe5 c6 is the mainline and now after
h5 ] 6.c4 Black can play b4 if he wishes ]
12.f3 g6 13.d2 5...e4 The critical test of White's idea
[ 13.e2 g7 14.f4 c7 15.d2 e6 [ one of the points of the early c4 is that now
16.f3 ] 5...b4 can be met with 6.a4+! 8c6
13...e6 14.e2 c7 15.f3 d5 16.d4 7.d5 f5 8.a3 and Black isn't getting
g7 17.c4 f7 18.f4 White's ad vantage enough compensation for the piece ]
grows. He's achieved nothing other than to [ 5...f6 6.xe5 This leads to a typical
show that his position has more potential but slight edge for White - one idea Black could
that is enough to put Carlsen under pressure. consider though to mix it up would be c5!?
I like W hite's extra space and the throttled 7.d5 e6 although White's position looks
Bishop on g7 gives cause for concern. e6 comfortable after 8.f4! ]
19.f3 Keeping the pieces on with more [ 5...b6 6.xe5 g6 ( 6...8d7 7.f3
space. d8 20.e3 0-0 21.b4 a6 22.g3 was better for White in Bogut, Z (2440)-Sale,
xd1+ 23.xd1 d8 24.xd8+ xd8 S ( 2 3 8 0 ) Z a g r e b C R O 2 0 1 1) 7.c3
25.d4 The advantage persists. The threat is takes us back into more mainline Alekhine
Nb3, Bb6 and Na5 with the Black Bishops as positions that should be a little better for
onlookers. e8 26.b3 d7 27.c5 c8 White - it was covered a while back in the
28.b5! axb5 29.cxb5 cxb5 30.xb5 f8 archives in Gallagher-Kengis and it also
31.f2 g7 featured in a Grischuk-Baburin in 2000
[ 31...e6 32.a4! c6 33.b6 a7 which wen t ( 7.c5!? ) 7...g7 8.e3 0-0
34.e8! as a prelude to the capture on c8. 9.c1 ( 9.f4!? was perhaps a better way to
There is nothing that Black can do. g7 keep an advantage) 9...c5 10.e2 cxd4
35.xc8 xc8 36.d7+- ] 11.xd4 h6!? with an unclear position but
32.d7 f7 33.a4 xd7 34.xd7 e6 one that looks playable for Black in Grischuk,
35.b6 e7 This really is depressing for A (2606)-Baburin, A (2590) Torshavn FAI
Black. He's trapped in the jaws of the two 2000 ]
Bishops and even the W hite King seems 6.cxd5 exf3 7.xf3 c6? A logical move but
ready to join the assault: surprisingly it looks to be a serious mistake!
[ 35...e7 36.c8 e8 37.e3 h5 [ 7...g6 was probably best although White's
38.d4 b4 39.c4 e1 40.c5 h4 chances are preferably after 8.b5+ d7
41.d6+- ] ( 8...d7 9.f4 g7 10.g3 is awkward
36.a5 g5 37.e2 h5 38.c8 h4 39.xb7! for Black ) 9.c4! g7 10.c3
The a pawn walks through. I think this sums when W hite's doubled pawns are by no
up the line with 5...c6. Against an means weak and if f act severely cramp
exp erie nc ed op po ne nt , Black o nly ha s a Black's position. ]
passive existence to look forward to. 8.c4! cxd5 This is the start of a forcing
1-0 variation that looks to us to be winning for
White
[ 8...e6 was perhaps a necessary evil
although White is clearly better after 9.dxe6
660
xe6 10.xe6 fxe6 11.0-0 d5 12.g3 ] 14.d2 b5?!

9.xd5 e6 10.xb7 [ 14...a4+! makes an important difference
[ 10.e4 c6 ] to the game by forcing the pawn to b3 it
10...c7 ch a n g e s t h e e n t i r e a s se s sm e n t o f t h e
[ 10...xb7 11.xb7 d7 12.c3 position af ter 15.b3 b5 16.a4 b6
sim p ly le ave s W h it e a pa wn up f or n o t 17.xe6 fxe6 18.e1 d7 19.d5 exd5
enough compensation ] 20.f5+ c7 21.f7+ e7 22.xe7+
11.xc8?? It may be extreme to give this xe7 23.xe7+ b8 and in the game the
move a?? but it does seem to reverse the pawn was on b2 which allowed Sutovsky to
assessment from winning for White to at least play Ra3 and force resignation. This position
a clear edge for Black. is much less clear although I'd still rather by
[ 11.xa8! is winning after xc1+ 12.d1 W h it e a f t e r 24.a5! c7 25.b4+ b7
and neither of Black's options can save him 26.d4 with the threat of Ra4 ]
here, for example 15.a4! A crucial intermezzo before taking on
A) 12...b4+ 13.c3 e 6 t o b r i n g t h e r o o k i n t o t h e g a m e b6
A1) if 13...xb2 14.0-0 xc3 16.xe6 fxe6 17.e1 d7?! Now Black is
( 14...xc3? 15.c1 ) 15.b1 losing by force
picks up the b8 knight; [ 17...0-0-0! would've kept some chances to
A2) 13...xc3+ 14.bxc3 xc3+ 15.f1 f igh t o n a f t e r 18.c1 d6 ( 18...b7?
t h is m a y b e B la ck ' s b e st t r y b u t h e 19.xe6 d6 20.b3 and there's no way
doesn't have enough compensation for for Black to defend against the various
an exchange here; threats (mainly Rxc6)) 19.d5! exd5 20.e8+
B) 12...xb2 13.0-0! xa1 and now the b7 21.xf8 xf8 22.xf8 d7
simplest is probably 14.d2 followed by and W hite has a lot of work still to do to
N c 3 t r a p p i n g t h e Q u e e n ( 14.b3 convert the full point ]
is a l s o v e r y s t r o n g f o r e xa m p l e xd4 18.d5! exd5 19.f5+ c7
15.xb8 d7 16.c1 d8 17.c6 [ 19...d8 is more tricky but it's still lost after
with a powerful attack )] 20.xd5+ c7 21.f7+ e7 22.xe7+
11...xc1+ 12.e2 The odd thing is that xe7 23.xe7+ b8 24.a3 d8!
Black seems to have a choice of ways to be This move isn't available to Black in the
fine here c4+! game as there's still a pawn on d5 but White
[ 12...xh1 13.xa8 d6 14.xa7 0-0 can still force a win with 25.a5! xd2+
15.b7 d7 must be better for Black 26.xd2 xf2+ 27.d3 f1+ 28.d4
despite the temporary two pawn deficit as f4+ 29.d5 f5+ 30.c4 f4+ 31.b3
his pieces are much the better coordinated a n d t h e K i n g e s c a p e s t h e c h e c k s c7
and White's king is wide open. ] 32.e8+ c8 33.e2 with an easy win -
[ 12...c2+ is safe if unambitious as it leads the rook on a8 is still entombed. ]
straight to an ending after 13.d2 c6! 20.f7+ e7 21.xe7+ xe7 22.xe7+
14.ac1 xd4+ 15.e3 xd2+ 16.xd2 b8 23.a3! A fascinating game although not
xf3+ 17.gxf3 d6 which is likely to be a free from errors. I expect we'll be seeing more
draw although only Black can be pressing to of Sutovsky's 5. c4 in the future!
win such a position. ] 1-0
13.d1 The only move
[ 13.d3? xc8 simply leaves Black a
piece up ]
[ 13.e1? c6! 14.b7 xd4 is crushing ]
13...c6?
[ 13...xd4+ would've left Black clearly on
top after 14.c1 ( 14.d2 b4 ) 14...c5+
15.c3 c6 16.b7 ( 16.a6 b8 )
16...d4 ]
661
649 B04 going about this. ]

Sutovsky,Emil 2674 19.exf6 exf6
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2646 [ 19...xf6 was another possibility, with the
15th ETC Gothenburg SWE (5) 03.08.2005 idea of ....e5 ]
[John Cox] 20.e3 b6 21.a4 f5 22.ed1 fd8 23.xd5
xd5 24.a5 f6 25.f2 d7 26.axb6 axb6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 27.a6 d8 28.b4 cxb4 29.cxb4 d6
5.xe5 c6 6.d3 Sutovsky's idea from I think Black must have gone a little wrong
Rethmynon 2003 against Carlsen, which at somewhere over the last ten moves - either
the moment poses as much of a threat as that, of course, or else I was wrong and he
anything to Black's new-fangled method of never did get equality out of the opening -
handling the main line of the Alekhine. d7 since now it's quite clear that White does have
7.0-0 xe5 8.dxe5 g6N To me this creates a bit of pressure. These positions are very
a slightly odd impression in conjunction with ... hard to defend and in the end Mamedyarov
Nxe5. Black's g7 bishop is always in danger goes down, although I'm sure a Kramnik or a
of be in g b loc k e d o u t o f t h e ga m e in t h is Leko would have held on somehow: in fact
structure. Having said that though one can unless the score is wrong or I'm going mad I
see in this particular position that it is not think they'd have held on fairly easily. 30.e2
possible to develop the c8 bishop actively at f7 31.a7+ g8 32.a6 f7 33.a7+
the moment and for that reason it's certainly g8 34.b7 h5 35.d2 f6 36.e3 d8
tempting to keep e6 free for it. And to be sure 37.d2 f6 38.b5 White has to play this if he
Black looks to do pretty well in the game. wants to progress but now this pawn is weak.
[ 8...b4 9.e4 xd1 10.xd1 f5 11.a3 d4 39.b4 d5 40.d3 g1+ 41.c3
a6 12.f3 g6 13.d2 e6 14.e2 c7 d1?!
was Sutovsky-Carlsen, in which Black was [ 41...xb5 42.c4 xb4+ 43.xb4 xh2
ground down in this ending. ( 14...0-0-0!? )] lo o ks like a clea r dra w t o m e. I h ave a
9.c3 This obviously isn't the only move White nasty feeling I must be missing the point
might play. Taking more space with 9 c4 though: it seems unlikely a 2650 player
certainly wasn't inconceivable, although after would have missed this. The ending with h4/
9...Nb4 Black has gained a bit of time g3/f4 against h5/g6/f5 is won for White, by
compared with Sutovsky-Carlsen, and in this the way, although the p lay is n ot easy.
structure the weaknesses in the d-file which Kholmov showed in an article in
c4 creates can come back to haunt White if Shakhmatny Byulleten in the 1970's that
t h i n g s g o w r o n g l a t e r i n t h e g a m e . g7 W hite breaks through with g4 at the
10.e1 0-0 11.a3 appro pria te mo ment , as every Ru ssia n
[ 11.d2? xc3 would be poor of course, schoolboy presumably knows. But here
but there doesn't look too much bite in this Black even wins the f-pawn as well as far as
knight manoeuvre to me..... ] I can see. Possibly the players were being
11...e6 12.c2 c5 13.e4 d7 14.e3 hampered by some stupid modern time
ad8 15.xd5 xd5 16.xd5 xd5 limit. ]
17.xd5 xd5 I must say it looks to me as 42.h3 e3 43.e7 d5 44.g5 g1?!
though Black's done fine out of the opening No, I'm afraid I don't know why Black didn't
here. He's got one pawn on the same colour play 44... Rxb5 either. 45.c4 d2 46.f6
as his bishop, sure, but should he really be in f8 47.e5 h4 48.h7 f2 49.c3 d1
danger of losing this endgame? He does 50.h8+ f7 51.h7+ f8 52.e5 d2
though. 18.f4 f6 Black does need to break 53.c7 g1 54.c6 e7
the kingside pawn phalanx even though it's on [ 54...xg2 allows 55.d5 going to e6, of
the same colour squares as White's bishop, course. I think Black is gone by now, but
since otherwise his own bishop cannot take for whatever reason I don't think a detailed
an active part in the game. analysis of the moves would be of much
[ Possibly 18...g5!? was another way of merit. ]
662
55.xg6 c5 56.g7+ e6 57.g6+ e7 pawns. 22.a3 e7 Black's pieces cover
58.c3 c2 59.g7+ e6 60.g6+ e7 anything nasty against his king but now the c-
61.h6 xg2 62.d5 f7 63.h7+ g8 pawn simply falls. 23.e5 d5
64.h8+ f7 65.h7+ g8 66.xh4 g6 [ not 23...c8? 24.xg6! ]
67.e5 I suspect all this game teaches us is 24.xc6 g5 By losing the c-pawn Black can
that serious chess isn't meant to be played at least obtain some breathing room. 25.h4
with only a 30 second per move increment g4 26.d1 Forcing the exchange of
after move 40 or so, but Black perhaps queens. xd1
showed a good method in the opening. [ as 26...f5 27.d6 loses further material ]
1-0 27.exd1 xc6 28.xc6 e7 29.c4?!
[ Otherwise 29.c7! f5 30.e5
looks pretty good. ]
650 B04 29...f5 30.c7?
Svidler,Peter 2690 [ 30.e5 is less artificial ]
Akopian,Vladimir 2678 30...c8!
ECC Halkidiki GRE (6) 27.09.2002 [ 30...xh4? f a il s t o b o t h 31.d6 ( and
[Glenn Flear] 31.d5 )]
31.d5!? Liquidating the centre to eliminate his
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 main weakness. This temporarily gives back
5.c4 c6!? the pawn but unfortunately the black a-pawn is
[ 5...b6 is the most popular at this point. ] not so easy to pick off.
6.exd6 xd6 7.0-0 g7 8.h3 A promising [ 31.g3 fails to xd4 ]
continuation for W hite as Black's bishop is 31...exd5 32.xd5 xb2 33.a5 d4
denied it's most active square. 34.a2 fe8 35.g3 e2+?! Heading for
[ 8.e1 g4 is less worrying for Black. ] complications but White wriggles out. Instead
8...0-0 9.e1 d7 [ 35...e7! 36.d6 ( 36.xa7 b5 37.b7
[ 9...b5?! leads to the weakening of the c4- cxc7= ) 36...xc4 37.xc4 d7
square 10.b3 f5 11.a4 b4 12.bd2 a5 doesn't give White much. ]
13.e2 e8 14.c4 c7 15.ce5 d7 36.g2 c1 37.b1 b3 38.xa7 d2
16.xf7! xf7 17.g4 gave White a strong [ 38...xa3!? 39.xa3 d2 looks a better
advantage in S.Haslinger-Broomfield, Smith try. ]
& Williamson YM Millfield 2002 ] 39.c2 d4 40.b7 xb1 41.xb1 e5
10.b3 b5 11.bd2 b7 Now Black can 42.bc1 xc7 43.xc7 xc7 44.xc7 e2
meet a4 with ...a6, maintaining the pawn on 45.f3 a2 46.a7 h5 A common endgame
b5 and avoiding the weakening of c4. occurs which one intuitively feels (with the
However the bishop is rather passively placed. extra a-pawn) should be drawn. But Svidler
12.e4 c7 13.g5 e6 14.c4 bxc4 had other ideas... 47.a4 g7 48.a5 f6
15.xc4 5f6 49.a6 e5
[ 15...c5!? seems more critical but perhaps [ 49...e6 is more solid ]
Black didn't fancy his chances after the 50.e7+ f6 51.a7 e5?!
annoying 16.c1 ] [ 51...e6 52.e3 f6 53.a8 f5
16.xf6+ xf6 17.c1 h6 18.h4 ad8 looks a better try ]
19.b3 b6 20.c2 de8 52.e3 a3+ 53.d2 a2+ 54.c3 xf2
[ 20...c8? (to bolster the c-pawn) could 55.b7 a2 56.a7 f6? Black loses time as
even be met by 21.xf6 xf6 22.xe6! exposing the f-pawn so early offered White
for instance fxe6 23.xg6+ g7 24.xe6+ addition chances.
h8 25.g5! ] [ Even so, why not 56...e6 57.c4 f6
21.g3 b4 Both sides have three pawn 58.b5 f5 (?) ]
islands, but the difference is that W hite's 57.c4 a1 58.b5 b1+ 59.c6 c1+
pieces are bearing down open lines whereas 60.b6 b1+ 61.c7 a1 62.b8 f5
Black's are rather dormant behind his own
663
63.b4 is rather hard to regain the pawn at all.)

1-0 11.e1 b5 12.c3 a6 13.fe5 xe5
14.xe5 c7 15.a4 e6 16.d3 bxa4
17.xa6 xa6 18.xa4 b7 19.d3 aa8
651 B04 20.h4 h5 21.g5 b6 22.a2 d7
Tiviakov,Sergei 2678 23.e7 fe8 24.d6 b5 25.a1 d5
Cox,John J 2385 26.g3 c5 was Zapata-Nogueiras, Torre
14th Monarch Assurance (1) 24.09.2005 memorial 2003. Black was equal by now, but
[John Cox] the impression is that earlier W hite must
have had some method of retaining his
This game is something of a mismatch from edge. ]
the first round of the Isle of Man (digressing 10.xc5 A rather curious move:
for a moment, why on earth doesn't everyone [ 10.dxc5 xc5 ( 10...e5 11.g5
play in this event? It seems to me just about is good for W hite according to Fritz, and
p e r f e c t f o r t h e n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l. ) . I a m annoyingly it seems to be right) 11.xc5
showing it only to encourage Alekhine fans by a5+ 12.c3 xc5 was what I was
repeating Tiviakov's post-mortem comments. expecting. Black hasn't yet demonstrated
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5 equality here, although one might expect
5.xe5 c6 6.d2 I had half-expected this him to manage it shortly. Tiviakov told me
move since Tiviakov has played it against 5... he hadn't seen Black's last before, which
g6. d7 7.d3 Tiviakov (who like most just shows that he's not been using the 'get
Russian GMs in my experience was very civil new games' button on ChessBase enough
and a pleasure to play against) told me with recently, since Egin-Nogueiras from Calvia
some surprise after the game that he had 2004 had gone ]
spent an hour preparing against 5...c6 and [ 10.c4 5f6 I had 10...Nc7 in mind, but I
had found no advantage ("this is good opening, doubt it makes much difference White just
I think"). He had tried the text because he isn't well-placed at all for this development
thought that White could improve on 'some 11.d5 b5 12.de5 xe5 13.xe5 bxc4
game of Luther's' (Lakos-Luther, I assume). I 14.f3 0-0 15.d6 exd6 16.xa8 dxe5
did think of mentioning that he needed a copy 17.xd8 xd8 18.g5 f5 19.f3 d3
of my great work 'Starting Out: Alekhine's 20.0-0-0 h6 21.e3 e4 22.e2 d5
Defence', but desisted for fear of a patzers- 23.xd3 cxd3 24.he1 f5 25.f3 xe3
shouldn't-write-books rant along the lines of 26.xe3 f6 27.g3 c4 28.b1 d4
that Tiviakov subjected poor Eddie Dearing's 29.ee1 e3 (readers may wish to insert
rather inoffensive Dragon book to in New in their own smug 'Keenesque'
Chess. g6 The previously plugged GW hypermodernism-conquers-central-bastions
suggests that ...e6 and ....c5 is the easiest type cliché at this point) 30.b3 e2 31.d2
method, but at the board I had a different idea. e8 32.bxc4 b8+ 33.c1 c3 0-1 ]
The game Lakos-Luther had gone 10...xc5 11.dxc5 a5+ 12.d2
[ 7...e6 8.e2 c5 9.dxc5 xc5 10.xc5 [ 12.c3? loses to xc3 , of course ]
xc5 11.e4 e7 12.b5+ d7 12...f4 13.f3 0-0 14.0-0 xc5
13.xd7+ xd7 14.0-0 c6 15.e2 c8 Around here I began to get worried - why was
16.d2 0-0 17.fc1 b5 18.c3 xc3 a 2700 player letting me equalise so easily?
19.xc3 fd8 20.g4 f6 21.a3 c4 As a result I began to spend lots of tim e
when Black was already slightly better. ] worrying about what I was missing. The folly
8.f3 g7 9.e2 c5 This is the point, I think. of this approach to these Tiger/Rabbit
I t is im p o rt a n t t o p la y t h is b e f o re W h it e contests hardly needs emphasising: of course
castles. the Tiger is going to see more than you but
[ 9...0-0 10.0-0 a5 ( 10...c5 is no good now there's no point worrying about that if you do
s i n c e a f t e r 11.xc5 xc5 12.dxc5 he'll just have more time than you as well as
the hanging d5 knight prevents ..Qa5 and it being a better player. 15.b3 c7 16.c3
664
f5 I am quite sure my subsequent resistance

[ I had been rather dismissing 16 c3 because could be improved upon. At this point for
of 16...d8 but after a bit of contemplation I example the machine likes
decided 17.xf4 would not be in my best [ 22...g5 23.b4 e5 24.fe1 d6
interests. ] 25.a3 b3 when the b3 bishop causes a bit
17.xf4 xf4 18.xb7 I had hardly of a nuisance for White. ]
cons idered W hite 's grab bing this pa wn - 23.b4 c8 24.xc8 xc8 25.ac1
surely Black must have enough counterplay From here on Tiviakov manoeuvres his pieces
somehow? - and actually I think I was right - m o st d e f t ly - it i s wo r t h n o t ici n g h o w h e
Tiviakov described it afterwards as a good doesn't begin to push the pawns until his
sacrif ice. ab8 19.a6 Aiming to blockade pieces are optimally placed. This is quite
the a-pawn rather in the style of a variation of typical of these positions where one side has
the Dragon 9 000 d5 pawn sacrifice which I optical activity for a pawn but no real targets
learned in my childhood. Instead to at tack. a5 26.d3 a6 27.c2 d8
[ 19.f3 xf3 20.xf3 e6 is pretty much 28.cd1 bd6 29.c1 e5 30.b3 b6
a draw at once, e.g. 21.fd1 xb3 22.axb3 31.xd6 xd6 32.d2 c6 33.b3 a4
xb3 23.xa7 xb2 while ] 34.c4 d8 35.d1 b8 36.e3 f5
[ 19.f3 fd8 20.c1 c7 followed by ... 37.d5 c5 38.b4 a7 39.c4 e4 40.c5
a5 is also fine for Black. ] c8 41.c4
19...b6 20.e2 e6 21.c5 fb8? 1-0
Up to here Black has played rather well in a
monkeys-and-typewriters sort of way, but this
move totally misses the positional threat. 652 B04
Black had two much better moves. The one Tiviakov,Sergei
which Tiviakov pointed out after the game was Van der Werf,Mark
[ 21...c7 22.b4 ( 22.a4? xa6 23.xa6 ch Leeuwarden NED (4) 24.06.2001
c4 wins the queen while; 22.e4 [Nigel Davies]
was putting me off 21...Qc7 for no good
reason Black is fine after fb8 ) 22...xc3 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
23.ac1 e5 24.a4 'wins the exchange' - 5.xe5 c6 6.d2 White aims to maintain his
Tiviakov xa6 ( 24...xe2 25.xe2 d2 knight on e5, hoping that this will guarantee a
26.xb6 xc1 27.xc1 axb6 actually slight space advantage. But with a pair of
saves the exchange but this endgame is minor pieces exchanged this won't mean very
probably more trouble for Black to hold than much. d7 7.df3
the position without the exchange) 25.xa6 [ 7.d3 is another possibility, avoiding
xb4 26.xa7 xa2 'is a draw' - Tiviakov - exchanges and trying to inhibit either the ...
I expect this is true although I think White c6-c5 or ...e7-e5 pawn levers. On the other
might have tried a few dozen more moves hand it has a somewhat artificial look about
before calling it quits. ] it. ]
[ The other one is 21...d5 which certainly 7...xe5 8.xe5 g6 9.f3 e6 10.c3 g7
never occurred to me and I suspect not to 11.e2 a5 A typical space-gaining thrust.
White either. The point is that the threat of ... [ 11...0-0 12.d3 f6 13.g3 c4
Bxg2 is surprisingly difficult to meet. 22.d3 was the continuation in Dutreeuw - Loeffle,
g5 23.f4 xg2+ 24.xg2 xg2 25.xg2 Tanta City 2001 ]
xa6 might be as good as White can do but 12.0-0 0-0 13.d3 a4 14.a3 f5 15.e1
White is in no danger at all of being better xd3 Giving up the bishop pair to eliminate
here. ] the guy that controls the e5 and c5 squares.
22.d3 Once the knight comes to b4 Black's In the following play White tries to keep Black
p l a y a g a i n s t b 2 i s a t a n e n d . c7 tied down whilst gradually trying to weaken
Aro u n d a b o ut h e re a spo t o f d e p re ssio n Black's king position. Black wants to free his
overtook me, not to mention time trouble, and game with an ultimate ...c6-c5 or ... e6-e5 but
665
without allowing White's bishops to become dubious, but with the current move order, I
too dangerous. The position seems fairly well a m su rp r ise d L u k e d id n 't o p t f o r t o t a k e
balanced with White having a slightly greater advantage of white's early bishop move.
level of comfort. 16.xd3 e6 17.g3 b6 [ Not 4...d7?? when 5.xf7+ xf7
[ 17...b5 looks preferable, cementing the 6.g5+ wins in all variations. ]
position of the knight on d5 before preparing [ 4...e6!? would be my own preference,
...c6-c5. ] perhaps followed by a hippo, or just Ne7 and
18.h4 h5 Personally speaking I would avoid d5. That said, in the resulting positions I
this weakening and instead focus on playing . would much rather be White! 5.0-0! e7
..c6-c5. 6.e1 0-0! and now Fritz thinks White is
[ The immediate 18...c5 is bad because of already clearly better, but I don't think that
19.c4 e7 ( 19...f6 20.dxc5 xc5 means much- computers are not usually
21.xb7 ) 20.d5 , all if which points to 17... very useful on move 6! Personally I like the
b5 being an improvement. Even so we've flexibility in Blacks' position, especially the
got a tough game in prospect in which the fact that I can kick the bishop on c4 with d5
stronger player finally emerges triumphant. ] if I n e e d t o o p e n t h e p o s i t i o n . ( 6...d7
19.g2 fe8 20.e2 e7 21.g5 f5 o r s o m e o t h e r h e d g e h o g m o ve i s a l s o
22.ae1 a5 23.g4 hxg4 24.xg4 c7 worth considering. )]
25.g1 d7 26.c2 ea8 27.f1 c5 [ 4...g4? 5.xf7+ xf7 6.g5+ ]
28.dxc5 xc5 29.h5 gxh5 30.f3 f8 5.e2! The point. 5.Nc3 is not considered
31.d2 d5 32.e1 c8? Overlooking very dangerous, but now White will achieve a
W hite's 34th. 33.g2 f6 34.xa4! b5 stable space advantage with e5. 0-0
35.c2 c4 36.f3 g4 37.xg4 hxg4 [ 5...g4 6.e5 dxe5 7.dxe5 d5 8.0-0
38.xg4 c7 39.e4 c5 40.d2 h2 also looks more comfortable for White, but
41.f4 h8 42.d2 e7 43.xf5 xf5 at least Black won't have a problem with his
44.d6+ e8 45.g2 d5 46.xd5 exd5 light squared bishop. ]
47.xd5 h3+ 48.e1 e6+ 49.xe6+ 6.e5 dxe5
fxe6 50.e2 d7 51.f8 c6 52.d3 [ 6...g4 doesn't look promising. For
1-0 instance, 7.h3 h6 8.h4!? feels quite
dangerous. ]
7.dxe5 d5 8.h3 The position has
653 B04 transposed to an Alekhine! Anybody fond of
Tregubov,Pavel V 2556 m id d l e g a m e ki n g -m a rc h e s wi ll p ro b a b l y
McShane,Luke J 2609 recognise this position from the famous Short-
Bundesliga 2005-6 (9) 29.01.2006 Timman game involving Kh2-g3-h4-g5-h6 b6
[Jonathan Rowson] 9.b3 c6 10.0-0 d4 11.xd4 xd4
12.e1 a5 13.a4 d7?! I doubt that Luke
1.d4 was familiar with the theory, but this looks like
[ 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6 a strange attempt to improve on the more
5.c4 b6 6.b3 g7 7.e2 0-0 8.h3 conventional moves.
dxe5 9.dxe5 c6 10.0-0 is the game [ 13...e6!? has been suggested here which
position. ] I remember thinking was ludicrous when I
1...g6 2.f3 g7 3.e4 d6 4.c4!? first read about this game (I was 14). Why
A noteworthy move-order, leading to lines that would black voluntarily allow his pawns to
are often highly distinct from those where be doubled and his bishop on g7
white has already committed the knight to c3. (potentially) to be locked in (no f6 break)?
Pirc/Modern players should be careful here or Now I realise that it is not so simple
they might find themselves, as Luke did here, because Black gets a lot of counterplay on
transposing into an Alekhine! Hardly a fate the f-file and against the e5 pawn. However,
worse than death, but not ideal either. f6?! I still pref er W hite af ter 14.xe6 fxe6
It is p rob ably t oo much t o call th is move 15.d2 ]
666
[ 13...d7 was once played by Timman but move changes the spirit of the game to a
seems to give white an edge after Nc3-b5. ] Ce n t re -Co u n t e r . 8.exd5 xd5 9.c3
[ 13...e6 14.d2 d5 15.f3 c5 16.e4 ( 9.d1 is the computer's suggestion
b4 17.c4 b6 18.b3 xc4 19.bxc4 although e6 10.c3 xc3 11.bxc3
e8 20.d1 c5 21.h4 b6 22.e3 c6 xc4 12.xc4 d6 looks around level.)
( 22...f8 ) 23.h6 h8 24.d8 b7 9...e8 10.d1 f5 11.a3 d7
25.ad1 g7 26.8d7! f8 27.xg7 xg7 Vachier Lagrave, M (2682)-Fressinet, L
28.1d4 ae8 29.f6+ g8 30.h4 h5 ( 2 6 9 3 ) N a n c y 2 0 1 2 w h e n ( 11...a6
31.h2 c8 ( 31...c8 32.g4! ) 32.g3 should be preferred, with a roughly level
ce8 33.f4 c8 34.g5! Was Short- position. ) 12.xd5! xd5 13.b5 ac8
Timman, Tilburg 1991. ] 14.c4 e4 15.e3 and Black has to
14.e6 fxe6 15.xe6+ h8 16.c3 e5 watch out to stop his queen getting
17.b5! h4 18.xc7! Calling Black's bluff- trapped. ]
there is not enough compensation for the 5.0-0 Maxime continues to develop.
pawns. a6 19.xc8 af6 20.g3 b4 [ 5.b3 is the other main move here, in
21.f4 xf4 22.gxf4 xc8 23.d5 c5 prep arat io n f or B la ck's .. .d 5 . On e high
24.ad1 e6 25.fxe5 exd5 26.b5 e7 powered game continued f6 6.e2 0-0
27.xd5 h5 28.e4 h7 29.d6 g5+ 7.0-0 a5 8.a4 b6 9.d1 a6 10.e1 c7
30.h1 11.e5 dxe5 12.dxe5 d5 13.e6 fxe6?!
1-0 14.g5 f6 15.xe6 1-0 Kramnik, V
(2770)-Svidler, P (2727) Dortmund 2004 -
hardly an endorsement of Black's opening! ]
654 B04 [ Meanwhile 5.c3 would transpose to Getz,
Vachier Lagrave,Maxime 2682 N (2270)-Istratescu, A (2624) Hastings
Bacrot,Etienne 2706 2009 examined by Neil. ]
GP FFE 2nd stage KO rapid (2.2) 29.04.2012 5...f6
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] [ 5...d5 must be the critical test of White's
m o v e o r d e r b u t 6.b3! feels more
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.f3 d6 4.c4 comfortable for White.
Vachier Lagrave uses the line Howell A) 6...dxe4 7.g5 ( 7.e5!? might also
attempted against Aronian which Tom be possible.) 7...h6 8.c3 0-0 9.xe4
annotated recently. c6 c7 10.bd2 d7 11.f3 f5 12.e1
[ Later in the day Fressinet deviated with c5 13.dxc5 xc5 14.xc5 xc5 15.f4
4...f6 but didn't fare much better: 5.e2 and White was on top. Macieja, B (2538)-
0-0 6.h3 ( Tom looked at 6.e5 in Howell, D Czerwonski, A (2414) Plock 2000.;
(2633)-Aronian, L (2807) Berlin 2012.; While B) 6...g4 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 e6
6.0-0 was looked at in Topalov, V (2777)- Black's position would be fine could he
Mamedyarov, S (2742) Villarrobledo 2008 by complete his development smoothly but
John Watson.) 6...c6 ( 6...c6 here would B1) or 9.c3 e7 10.g5 0-0
be similar to the game but at least W hite ( 10...d7?! 11.exd5 cxd5 12.xd5! )
has committed his queen to e2. Perhaps 11.fe1 with very awkward pressure
therefore White should try 7.b3 ) 7.0-0 down the e file.;
A) Last year another quickplay game of B2) 9.exd5 cxd5 10.c4! e7 11.cxd5
the Frenchman's continued 7...e5 8.dxe5 xd5 12.c3 0-0 13.xd5 exd5
xe5 9.xe5 dxe5 10.d1 e7 11.c3 14.e3 is better for White. ]
c6 12.a4 h5 13.b3 ( Perhaps 13.f3 6.e5 d5 Now the position starts to resemble
is a slight nuance.) 13...f4 14.f3 f6 a n A l e k h i n e a n d a c t u a l l y i s m o r e o f t e n
w h e n B l a c k s h o u l d h a v e e q u a l i s e d . reached by that opening.
Vachier Lagrave, M (2710)-Gashimov, V [ 6...dxe5 is of course the alternative: 7.dxe5
(2757) Beijing 2011.; d5 w h e n t h e u n u s u a l 8.c3!?
B) 7...d5!? This looks new. Fressinet's l o o k s t h r e a t e n i n g . e6 Mai Dongqi-
667
Azmaiparashvili, Z (2671) Jinan 2005 when Perhaps this move isn't an error but Black's
White should try ( 8...xc3 9.xd8+ xd8 position does become difficult to play.
10.bxc3 d7 11.xf7 xe5 12.g5 [ 13...e6 can be met with 14.g5 ]
leaves Black with a rather draughty king.) [ but 13...g4!? 14.xe7 c6 15.e3 f5!?
9.g5 with quite a dangerous initiative. ] gives Black some play for the pawn.
7.e1 Vachier Lagrave keeps the tension. However we're not totally convinced. ]
[ John had a look at 7.exd6 in Fedorchuk, S 14.xf5 gxf5?! Actually this is the error but
(2671)-Genocchio, D (2416) Conegliano it's the na tural f ollow up to his previous .
2008 which is likely to reach fairly similar Unfortunately for Bacrot he doesn't have
positions. ] enough time to cover his kingside.
[ While Neil investigated 7.h3 in Zeberski, J [ The computer thinks Black is basically fine
(2400) -Rozentalis, E (2611) Warsaw 2009. ] after 14...exf5 but to a human this looks
7...0-0 very pleasant for White with an extra pawn
[ Perhaps Black should try 7...dxe5 8.xe5 on c3 in the long term as the extra f pawn is
which transposes to quite a common rather irrelevant. White might continue with
Alekhine line - check out the archives for a 15.f4! as xb2 16.d6 c8 17.b4
few games including Kasparov-Adams. ] followed by 18.Re2 will force Black to give
8.exd6 xd6 9.bd2 f5 In all these up his queen for rook and bishop. ]
positions Black looks fairly solid but W hite 15.e5! d8
always seems to have a small advantage. [ Perhaps 15...f6 is better although 16.d3
[ It makes sense to develop the light squared followed by swinging the rook across to h3
bishop before developing the knight but looks very good for White. ]
9...d7 is seen from time to time. 10.b3 16.h5
e6 11.e4 c7 12.c4 5f6 13.c3 b6 [ Starting with 16.e3! is more accurate as
14.g5 b7 and Black had a solid setup but d7 ( 16...e8?! 17.g3 ) 17.g3!
W hite must still be a tiny bit better. doesn't give Black enough time to play ...f6
Steingrimsson, H (2550)-Konopka, M (2454) and ...Rf7 as f6 18.h6 wins. ]
Germany 2010. ] 16...c6? Now Bacrot is totally lost.
[ 9...g4 is the main move: 10.h3 xf3 [ 16...d7 is b e t t e r b u t 17.xd7 xd7
11.xf3 e6 12.b3 b5 13.g5 d7 18.e3 f6 19.h3 h8 20.g3+ g7
14.h4 fe8 15.g3 f8 16.a4 a6 17.c3 21.h6 f7 22.e1 leaves White obviously
Korneev, O (2588)-Spraggett, K (2573) on top. ]
Torres Vedras 2011 and, although Black's [ Black's last chance was 16...e8 but
got a strong knight on d5 W hite must be 17.d3 is obviously very good for White. ]
better. ] 17.xc6 bxc6 18.e3 Now Black cannot
10.e4 b4?! This looks new and wrong. cover his king. f6 19.g3 h8?
[ Black should give up the bishop pair with [ 19...f4 was necessary although 20.g4
10...xe4 11.xe4 The position is very fe8 21.xf4 f5 22.xf5 exf5 23.g5
similar to the previous notes and Black can't should simply be lost. ]
be t oo m uch worse a f te r e6 ( Instead 20.f4 A couple of easy wins for Vachier
11...d7 was played in a previous Lagrave. Impressive, even if the games were
encounter but 12.xd5 cxd5 13.f4 b4 only rapid. It seems it's not so easy to
14.e3 e6?! 15.b3 a4 16.xb7 equalise for Black.
was much better for W hite. Hoffmann, M 1-0
(2458)-Appel, R (2481) Essen 2000. )]
11.xd5!? Although this works out remarkably
well we don't think it's strongest.
[ Instead 11.b3 followed by c2-c4 looks
very pleasant for White. Black will probably
have to take on e4 anyway. ]
11...cxd5 12.c3 b6 13.g3 e6
668
655 B04 37.h2

Van der Weide,Karel [ There is no longer a defence, as if 37.g1
Miles,Anthony J there follows xh3 ]
1st ch-Europe (7) 10.07.2000 37...xg2+
[Nigel Davies] 0-1
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5

5.xe5 c6 6.c4 Arguably White's most 656 B04
natural move. Zeberski,Jakub 2400
[ 6.f3 e6 7.c4 d7 8.d3 g6 9.0-0 Rozentalis,Eduardas 2611
g7 10.c3 0-0 11.d2 was Rabiega - 9th Amplico Life Rapid rapid (5) 19.12.2009
Loeffler, Austrian Ch., Melk 1999 and now [Neil McDonald]
a5!? looks like Black's most interesting
plan. ] 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g6
6...d7 This has been Tony Miles' choice at 5.c4 As Black hasn't put pressure on f3 with
this juncture. 4...Bg4 White can afford a more aggressive
[ 6...e6 has also been played but it looks a development of his bishop than 5.Be2. c6
bit clumsy. ] 6.0-0 For the moment Zeberski decides to
7.f3 ma in t ain t he p a wn o n e5 a s it give s h im
[ Exchanging knights helps ease the slight space advantage.
cramp in Black's position: 7.xd7 xd7 [ Instead 6.exd6 xd6 7.0-0 followed by
8.0-0 f5 9.d3 ( or 9.c3 e6 10.e2 d6 Re1 is a simpler way of playing it, when
11.d2 0-0 1/2-1/2, Kobalija - Miles, White has some pressure in the centre. He
Capablanca Memorial, Cuba 2000) 9...xd3 might for example gain time by hitting the
10.xd3 e6 11.c4 f6 12.d2 e7 black queen with Nbd2 and Ne4. ]
13.f3 0-0 14.d2 c7 15.fe1 ad8 6...g7 7.h3
16.e2 fe8 17.c3 1/2-1/2, Cao - Miles, [ Deterring a pin on g4 is consistent with his
Ohrid 2001 ] plan of supporting e5. Here also White has a
7...7b6 This followed by his next move small but care-free edge with 7.exd6 xd6
allows Black to develop his bishop to g4. 8.e1 ]
[ 7...7f6 8.h3 is not as good ] 7...dxe5 8.xe5
[ but 7...g6 is worth considering ] [ After 8.dxe5 the pawn might become a
8.b3 g4 9.bd2 e6 10.0-0 e7 11.h3 liability as Black can readily attack it with
h5 12.c3 0-0 13.e4 g6 14.e2 d7 his pieces: a bishop on g7, a queen on c7
15.e1 a5 16.a4 e8 Black is comfortably and a knight on d7, always watching out for
placed, which just about sums things up from a possible e5-e6 sacrifice by White. ]
a theoretical point of view. The rest of the 8...d7 9.f3 It makes sense to decline the
game is a tough scrap in which Miles comes exchange on d7 as it would unclutter the
o u t o n t o p . 17.c4 c7 18.g5 xg5 black position. 0-0 10.e1 e6
19.exg5 h6 20.e4 ad8 21.ad1 5b6 [ The alternative was to prepare the
22.b3 e5 23.g3 development of Black's passive bishop on
[ 23.dxe5 xe5 24.xd8 xd8 rather more c8 with 10...b6 when 11.b3!? intending 12.
than equalises because of the residual c4 lo o ks like a p lea sa n t a d va n t a ge f o r
problems on the e-file ] White. ( Instead playing aggressively with a
23...e4 24.h4 h7 25.h5 f6 26.xa5 lot of piece rather than pawn moves doesn't
a8 27.c5 seem very effective: 11.g5 7f6 12.e5
[ After 27.b4 there follows fd5 28.xd5 b7 13.d2 c5 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.h6 e6
xd5 29.b3 f4 ] 16.b3 c7 17.xg7 xg7 and Black
27...xa4 28.xa4 xa4 29.hf5 xf5 was well entrenched in Rabiega, R-
30.xf5 e6 31.b4 b6 32.c4 b5 33.b3 Vaganian, R/Germany 1995. )]
d5 34.e3 d7 35.a1 g6 36.h1 f4 11.c3 c5 12.g5? A tempting move as
669
whichever way Black chooses to block the 30...e5 31.g7+ ) 31.f6 and White
a t t a ck o n h i s qu e e n we a ke n s h is ga m e . should draw. ]
However, the black queen can runaway to a 17...xb2 18.e8+ f8 19.e5
powerful square on b6. [ Here 19.g5 loses the horse to c1+ ]
[ So far Rozentalis has been willing to repeat 19...c1+? In some ways this inaccuracy
one of his earlier games which went reflects credit on Rozentalis, as it indicates
12.xd5!? this exchange still looks like the t h a t h e wa s n 't j u s t r e l yi n g o n p r e - g a m e
critical move exd5 13.dxc5 xc5 14.e3 computer analysis to bag the win.
and now b6!? is a likely improvement, with [ Instead the fearless 'computer' move
ideas of Ba6 and keeping the option of Ne6. 19...f5! would end the game very quickly,
If then 15.Bd4 f6 etc. Instead Rozentalis as after 20.xf7+ ( Or 20.xa8 xa1
got ground down after he tried sacrificing a and the knight on b1, which is attacked twice,
pawn to escape from the pressure: is lost. ) 20...h8 White has no good way to
( 14...e4 15.bd2 e8 16.d4 f6 continue his attack, while a1 and b1 are
17.b3 h8 18.ad1 e6 19.xb7 b8 hanging, as is the knight on e5 to a Qc1+
20.xa7 xb2 21.c4 b8 22.xb8 and Qf4+ sequence. ]
bxb8 23.xe4 dxe4 24.xe4 xc4 20.h2 f4+ 21.g1 xh3! 22.xa8
25.xe8+ xe8 26.a4 e2 27.e1 e4 [ White could spoil the pretty finish with
28.c3 g8 29.d2 e6 30.b3 c4 22.xf7+ xf7 23.xf7 xf7 24.gxh3
31.xe6 xe6 32.c5 d5 33.a5 f7 t h o u g h t h e st r o n g G ra n d m a st e r wo u l d
34.a6 e7 35.a4 d6 36.b6 c6 undoubtedly exploit his extra pawn once c5
37.a7 c7 38.d4 f5 39.a8+ drops after c8 etc. ]
1-0 Macieja, B-Rozentalis, E/Warsaw POL 22...g5 23.g3
2006. )] [ T h e o n l y w a y t o p l a y o n w a s 23.f1
12...b6! Perhaps Zeberski underestimated but Black has an irresistible attack after
this move as W hite gains a dangerous xg2+ 24.e2 xe5+ 25.d2 f4+
looking initiative on the kingside. However, 26.c2 e4+ 27.b3 xf2 ]
whether through intuition or through 23...c1+ 24.h2 f1! Despite White' s
preparation with a computer, Rozentalis is extra rook he is powerless to prevent mate on
able to refute this misconception. g2. A fine, if slightly flawed, game by
[ Instead Black would have a poor game after Rozentalis.
12...f6 13.xd5 exd5 14.f4 etc. ] 0-1
13.xd5 Plunging into the life or death
variation.
[ T h e c a r e f u l 13.d2 should have been 657 B04
preferred, though 7f6 is then comfortable Zhigalko,Andrey 2505
for Black. ] Rozentalis,Eduardas 2582
13...exd5 14.e7 e8 15.xc5 xe1+ 22nd Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (9)
16.xe1 xc5 17.dxc5? [John Cox]
[ White might have scraped a draw with
17.e8+ f8 18.g5! threatening mate in 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 dxe5
two e6 ( Not 18...f6? 19.xf8+ xf8 5.xe5 c6 6.d3 d7 7.xd7 xd7 8.0-0
20.xh7+ etc. ) 19.xa8 xb2 20.dxc5 g6 So far the same as Cuijpers-Cox, but now
xa1 ( Black could speculate with 20...c1+ Zhigalko plays a more direct move than has
21.h2 xg5 intending 22...Kg7 and 23... usually been preferred. 9.c4 In fact as far as I
Bxc5. ) 21.xb7 xc5 22.xe6 fxe6 know this move has never been played before.
23.c8+ f7 24.xc5 xb1+ 25.h2 To me (and presumably all the other humans
b6 26.c8 ( The pawn endgame after who've had White in this position) it looks a
26.xb6 axb6 is at least unpleasant for little strange to weaken d4, but the computer
White. ) 26...xf2 27.d7+ f6 28.xh7 goes straight for it. f6 10.h3 A common
xa2 29.h8+ f5 30.f8+ e4 ( Or theme in this sort of position, playing against
670
the d7 bishop, but White is spending a lot of on the open files on the queenside with a
time. It was more natural to play something move like
like [ 24.b1 , but I suspect he failed to take
[ 10.c3 g7 11.e1 0-0 12.g5 Black's next move properly into
, but I don't think Black's in too much danger consideration at all. ]
- m a y b e h e s h o u l d e v e n p l a y g4 24...xe5! Excellent. It's scary but White is
, just for fun. ] never able to create any threats against the
10...g7 11.d2 0-0 12.f3 c7 13.e1 king or the e-pawn which Black is forced to
f5!? A shocking move, and the reason I'm weaken with his next move.
showing this game. The idea is known in the [ 24...f8 25.f3 would be much less good,
Caro-Kann Exchange, but there Black has a and would allow W hite to show some
pawn on d5 instead of c6 (and White's c-pawn compensation for his pawn. ]
is on c3). There one can see Black has more 25.xe5+ f6 26.b1 e7 27.f4 g7
influence in the centre and wins firm control of 28.g3 A big concession now it's very hard to
e4. Also with the centre closed Black has arrange f3 to remove the e4 knight, and if
more chance to do something down the g-file. White can't do that then he's always going to
I've never seen the idea in this structure be worse, if not lost. b6 29.bd1 de8
before, but Rozentalis, with his characteristic [ T h e i m m e d i a t e a n d f e a r l e s s 29...e5
positional originality, makes it look pretty good is the machine's suggestion, and this does
in the game. I suspect, by the way, that it seem to be very strong, but it's easy to see
wouldn't work half so well if W hite had a why a human would prefer a spot of
knight on c3 rather than f3 - the black knight manoeuvring first. ]
wouldn't get e4, and Black would have to 30.f3 g6 31.c1 c8 32.d5 White isn't
watch out for a d5 break (in the game this doing himself much good like this, but sitting
never really becomes an issue until it's far too still wasn't going to help either. e5 33.d6
late). 14.xf5 gxf5 15.e3 ad8 16.c2 gd8 34.a3 xc4 35.c1 xc1 36.xc1
e6 17.ad1 e4 18.c1 h8 19.f4 e7 f4 37.d7 fxg3 38.fxg3 d2
20.e3 g8 Both players have played a [ 38...c5 would have retained a greater
natural series of moves, and Black has all his material lead, but the text is more forcing
pieces where he wants them. I doubt White and easier in time trouble. ]
has any advantage at all - he has to defend d4 39.c3 g7 40.xd2
all the time for one thing, while Black has no [ 40.c7 xg3+ 41.h1 f3 wins ]
similar weak pawn, and for another it's not 40...xg3+ 41.g2 xg2+ 42.xg2 xd7
easy to do anything about the e4 knight. 21.a3 This ending should be winning and the rest of
[ 21.d2?? loses at once to xd4 but ] t h e ga m e s e e s a st e a d y a n d i n e xo ra b l e
[ 21.g5 was a very plausible option. Black advance. 43.c3 g6 44.g3+ f5 45.h4
can play the tactical line xd4 22.xd4 d4 46.h3 e4 47.c1 d3 48.e3 h5
xg5 23.xg5 xg5 24.xd8+ xd8 49.g2 a5 50.f2 b5 51.g8 a4 52.b8
25.xa7 but I think this ending is about as d5 53.g3 a3 54.b6 e5 55.f2 f5
good as W hite can do. Probably Zhigalko 56.e1 f4 57.c1 e3 58.xa3 f3 59.b2+
wanted more, but it looks as though he f5 60.c1 f2+ 61.e2 d1 62.xb5+
overestimated the game continuation. ] g4 63.b4+ g3 64.f4 e1+ A quietly
21...c5! Excellent and well-timed if White were original game, which reminds me somehow of
allowed b4 he might stand a little better. 22.b4 the young Nigel Short, who had a similarly
Still playing ambitiously White was in no great realistic approach to danger as Rozentalis
danger after shows with ...Bxe5!
[ 22.dxc5 , for example xb2 23.b3 f6 0-1
24.d6 xd6 25.cxd6 xd6 26.xd6
xd6 27.xb7= ]
22...cxb4 23.axb4 xb4 24.e5?!
White could still play for some compensation
671
658 B05 can get the move ...e5 in, his pawn on e6 will
Abdulyazanov,Malik 2361 remain a problem. 14.e1 c6 Rather passive.
Tukhvatullin,Timur 2248 The idea is to protect d5 and thus prepare ...
6th ch-PriFO Men (8) 30.01.2008 e5, but White is too well developed.
[John Watson] [ 14...a5!? 15.b5! xc5 16.g4 g6 17.g5
e4 18.xe4 dxe4 19.gxf6 exf3 20.fxg7
In general I don't like the line Black plays in xg7 21.xf3 is materially equal, but
this game (10...d5), but it continues to be White's bishops are very strong. ]
contested. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 [ Perhaps 14...c6 is best, but not equal
4.f3 g4 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 following 15.b1 ( or 15.b5 a5 16.a4 )
8.h3 It's a very complicated question whether 15...g6 16.d3 ]
this helps or hurts W hite's cause, but I 15.f4!? a5! 16.bxa5!?
suspect that doing without it is better. h5 [ 16.b5! is still a shot, based upon xc5
[ 8...xf3 9.xf3 is frowned upon because 17.e5! xe2 18.xe2 and White will
there's no comfortable way to defend b7: regain his material. ]
c6 ( 9...c6? 10.exd6 xd6 11.c5; 9...c8 16...xf3
10.exd6 cxd6 11.b3 c6 12.c3 [ 16...xa5!? ]
with space and free development )] 17.xf3 xc5 18.c1 e4 Almost an action
9.c3 White can play 9 exd6, but waiting of despair, giving away all the key squares.
doesn't hurt. 0-0 Black should play something more active, for
[ 9...dxe5? 10.xe5 xe2 11.xe2 xd4? example,
( 11...0-0 12.d1 c6 13.xc6 bxc6 [ 18...xa5 19.d6 bd7 20.xf8 xf8
14.f4 ) 12.d1 ( or 12.b5 d8 13.f3 ) wh e n W h it e st a ys a h e a d m a t e r ia ll y b y
12...c5 13.b4! xb4 14.b5 and both 21.xd5! exd5 22.dxc5 xa2 , but at least
Nxc7+ and Ba3 are threatened. ] there are opposite coloured bishops and a
10.e3 d5!? The radical approach. 11.c5 lot to play for. ]
6d7!? [ 18...bd7 19.d6 xa5 transposes ]
[ 11...xf3 is far more common, when both 19.xe4 dxe4 20.xe4 xa5 21.b3
recaptures are possible, but key is 12.gxf3 [ or 21.xe6 xd4 22.d6! d8? 23.b3! ]
c8 13.f4 21...xd4? But everything is falling apart
A) 13...g6? 14.f5! exf5 ( 14...gxf5 anyway:
15.b3 b6 16.h2 h8 17.g1 ) [ 21...d5 22.xb7 xd4 23.b4! ]
15.xd5! , etc.; 22.xe6+ h8 23.d6 a7 24.xf8 xf8
B) 13...h4 is also played. Theoretically it 25.f4
helps Black that the move h3 has been 1-0
played.;
C) 13...c6 14.f5 ( or 14.d3!?
with the idea xc5 15.dxc5 d4 16.e4! ) 659 B05
14...exf5 , and now 15.b3 might be Arakhamia Grant,Ketevan 2435
better than 15 Bf3 Bg5!, as in the Archives. Baburin,Alexander 2545
T h e i d e a i s s i m p l y b8 16.ad1 25th Liechtenstein Open (7) 17.05.2007
, which threatens d5. ] [John Watson]
12.b4
[ 12.b3 b6 13.ac1 is a natural Baburin seems to have faith in the Flohr move
sequence. ] 5...c6. That's a good enough reason to
12...f6!? investigate it. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
[ 12...c6 gets the pieces out. Then 13.b5 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 Various reasons are
a5 14.a4 c6 ( 14...xf3 15.gxf3 c4!? given why this is weaker than 5...e6, but none
16.xc4 dxc4 17.xc4 doesn't give serious o f t h e m a r e t o t a l l y c o n v i n c i n g . 6.0-0
compensation. )] Other, currently less popular, moves are still
13.exf6 xf6 Black covers e5, but unless he critical:
672
[ a) 6.c4 b6 ( 6...c7 is also playable) 15.f4 b4 16.e3 xc3!? (risky) 17.bxc3
7.bd2 8d7 8.0-0 ( 8.exd6 exd6 9.0-0 a5 18.f2 e7 19.ab1 g6 20.g3 b6
e7 10.e1 0-0 has the idea ...d5, and is 21.g2 and White had all the chances in
certainly playable.) 8...dxe5 9.xe5 xe5 Boensch, U -Bagirov, V, Berlin East 1979. ]
10.dxe5 f5 11.b3 e6 12.d1 c7 13...f5 14.c3
13.g3 0-0-0 14.b3 h5 A Greet-A [ White can also continue naturally by
Baburin, Birmingham 2006 previously cited 14.xf5 exf5 15.e3 In an older contest,
in ChessPub. ] this resembled our game: c5 16.h1 b6
[ b) 6.g5 f5!? ( 6...xe2 7.xe2 dxe5 17.xc5 xc5 18.c3 0-0-0 19.ab1
8.dxe5 e6 is better than its reputation, and ( 19.c2 g6 20.a4= ) 19...e6! 20.c2
in fact the choice of several strong players, d4 21.a4 ( 21.d3! g6 22.b4!
but is more defensive.) 7.e6! fxe6 8.g4 is more enterprising) 21...e6 ( 21...c5!
( 8.d3; 8.g4 ) 8...g6 9.d3 xd3 stops b4 ) 22.c2 d4 23.a4 d7 24.b4
10.xd3 has been debated for a long time. I a6!? 25.xa6 bxa6 26.bc1 hd8
think a plausible unique idea would be a6 1/2-1/2 Rakic, T (2455) -Knezevic, M
( 10...f6 11.xe6 d7 12.e2 (2490)/Maribor 198001 ]
is normal ) 11.xh7 ( 11.xe6 d7 14...0-0-0 15.xf5 exf5 16.e3 c5
12.e2 ac7= ) 11...a5+!? 12.c3 17.a4 xe3+ 18.xe3 b6 19.xb6+
( 12.d2 f4 13.e4 d5 is unclear) xb6 20.xb6 axb6 21.ad1
12...0-0-0 13.g5 d7! with a messy The endgame is rather dull. I'd rather be White,
position. ] but it's hard to believe in more than a tiny
6...xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.e2!? edge, and nothing much happens for a while.
Cox strongly criticises this defence of the d- Then White gets careless and the tables turn.
pawn, but it's played by a lot of strong players. S t ill, it t a ke s a f in a l, h o rr ib le b lu n d e r t o
In fact, 9 Qe2 (or sometimes 10 Qe2, decide things: d7 22.xd7 xd7 23.d1+
transposing) is played f ar more than any e6 24.d6+ e7 25.d3 a8 26.b3
other line in MegaBase, and occurred in the d7 27.a3 c7 28.f2 d8 29.e3 d1
last 6 games that I've seen with this line in 30.d3 h1 31.h3 e1+ 32.f3 h4 33.b3
international play. In theory White has been a1 34.a4 a2 35.d1 b2 36.d3 c2
thought to have better chances of gaining the 37.e3 d7 38.g4? e6 39.d3 g6
advantage by bringing his rook to e1, perhaps 40.d6+ e7 41.gxf5 gxf5 42.h6 c3+
preceded by Nd2. See this month's game 43.g2 g3+ 44.h2 xb3 45.xh4 b4
Se n f f -K ra s e n ko v. d7 10.c4 'Another 46.h8 xc4 47.b8 e6 48.xb7 xf4
mistake', says Cox, and indeed, this move 49.xb6 d5 50.a5 a4 51.a6 c5 52.g3
could wait. But it's not so bad. e7 11.g4!? c4 53.f4 c3+ 54.e3 xe5 55.d3 a3
Cox has a low opinion of this idea, to say the 56.h4 f4 57.c6 f5 58.h5 f3 59.xc3??
least: 'the great Botvinnik came up with the [ 59.e3 ]
moderately ludricrous idea of Bf3-g4-h3 in a 59...f2
game against Flohr at Nottingham 1936 (I 0-1
assume - charitably - that it wasn't
preparation).' Well, Bg4-h3 and f4 is simply a
plan - not great, but not bad either. And for its 660 B05
purpose, playing Qe2 and leaving the rook on Arnold,L 2340
f1 is appropriate. Rozentalis,Eduardas 2595
[ 11.d1 c7 12.f4 g6 13.g3 GM Augsburg GER (6) 01.01.2005
t ra n s p o s e s t o t h e n o t e t o t h is m o n t h ' s [John Cox]
Ibarra Chami-Fernandez Garcia game. ]
11...h5 12.h3 c7 13.f4 It's a matter of 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
timing, and this move will probably be played 5.e2 e6 6.c4 b6 7.c3?! I can't think
soon anyway. Here's another example: White meant to play this. Maybe he wanted to
[ 13.e1 (unnecessary) 0-0-0 14.c3 g6 play Bologan's idea 7 h3 Bh5 8 exd6 cxd6 9
673
Nc3 Be7 10 d5 and wasn't too careful about 661 B05

move order? If he wants to play that way (i.e. Aseev,Konstantin N 2575
delaying castling) exd6 is essential before Bagirov,Vladimir 2475
Nc3 for the reasons Rozentalis now Berlin 1990
demonstrates. dxe5 8.xe5 xe2 9.xe2?! [Alexander Volzhin]
Sitting here with a computer we can all see
that this just loses a p awn, but no doub t 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
White's spirit rebelled at the idea of fighting 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 8.h3 h5
for equality after something like 9.c3 0-0 10.e3 d5
[ 9.xe2 b4+ 10.d2 ( 10.c3 8d7 [ 10...c6 is not so good, as the position
is pretty easy for Black too) 10...xd2+ after 11.exd6 cxd6 12.d5 exd5 13.xd5
11.xd2 when Black can choose between f6 xd5 14.xd5 clearly favours white (the d6-
12.c5 d5 or just 11...N8d7. ] pawn is a weakness). ]
9...xd4 10.b5 b4+ 11.f1 d8 11.c5 xf3 12.gxf3!? This move became
12.f4 p o p u l a r wh e n it b e ca m e cl e a r , t h a t T h e
[ 12.g5 xg5 13.xc7+ e7 ( 13...f8 position after the text is a "tabiya" of the 4.. .
14.xf7 ) 14.xf7!+- was worth a glance Bg4 lin e . I t h as o ccu rre d in hu n d red s o f
but Black can spoil the fun with the calm 11... games, but it's still not clear if white should
Qc8. ] interpolate 8.h3 Bh5 or not. Both variations
12...0-0 13.h4 This doesn't have much effect, have their merits and drawbacks.
but Black is probably just winning anyway, [ 12.xf3 c4 13.f4 doesn't promise
certainly much better. a6 14.d1 e7 w h i t e a n y a d v a n t a g e . P l a y i n g b6!
15.d4 8d7 16.xd7 xd7 black undermines the white pawn chain and
[ 16...xd7 17.c2 d6 18.c5 d5 obtains good counterchances. The game
19.xd5 exd5 20.cxd6 is not so clear at all Lukin - Bagirov continued: 14.b3 a5
Rozentalis prefers to keep the initiative. ] 15.b4 c4 16.c1 c6 17.e2 a5!
17.xc7 ac8 18.f5 18.xc4 dxc4 19.a3 axb4 20.axb4 a6!
[ 18.g3 fd8 19.h5 is Fritz's idea, to bring 21.b5 b4! and black had the upper hand. ]
the rook in via h4, when it reckons White is 12...c8
only slightly worse. I suspect this was a [ 12...6d7 is bad, as the knight has no
better try t han t he text, wh ich le ads b y prospects here. After the text black intends
fairly forced steps to defeat. ] to transfer the knight to f5 via e7 ( after Bh4),
18...f6 19.xd7 exf5 20.e5 c6 21.d3 obtaining a comfortable blockade. W hite
fe8 22.f4 should play aggressively to prevent this. He
[ 22.xf5 f6 23.g4 xc4+ 24.xc4+ has a somewhat exposed pawn structure,
xc4 25.c3 xc3 26.bxc3 xc3 bu t t h e lat e n t p o we r o f h is bish o p p a ir
is surely a winning endgame for Black, but should not be underestimated. ]
opening up lines like this is hopeless with 13.f4 c6 14.f5 White takes the first
the king on f1. ] opportunity to break in the centre. It's a very
22...f6 23.xf5 xc4+ 24.g1 fxe5 interesting, but probably somewhat premature
25.xg7+ xg7 26.g5+ f7 27.f5+ decision. exf5 15.f3 This is the idea behind
e7 28.xe5+ d7 The game itself was 14. f5: the d5-pawn is defenceless. Now Black
rather one-sided, but I have included it for the has to find counterplay, otherwise he'll be
move order point in the opening. In smashed by W hite's strong central pawns.
combination with Libiszewski-Rozentalis, it g5! 16.xd5 f4! 17.xf4
seems to be the case that if W hite wants [ 17.c1 was tried once, but in my opinion,
Bologan's plan then 6 c4 Nb6 7 h3 Bh5 8 exd6 Black has nothing to worry about after 8e7
cxd6 9 Nc3 Be7 10 d5 may be his only 18.xe7+ xe7! , f or example 19.xc6
accurate move order - unless Rozentalis has bxc6 20.f3 e6 and Black has excellent
something up his sleeve against that as well. position, as 21.xf4 blunders a piece after
0-1 f5 ]
674
17...xf4 18.xf4 8e7! Very strong. After 37.xd5+ cxd5+ 38.f3 d4-+ winning ]
this excellent move White has no advantage, 37...e7! 38.d4
despite his extra pawn and massive pawn [ 38.f4 g6-+ winning ]
centre. Black intends Rb8 and only then to 38...h3! 39.f3
recapture on d4. [ 39.f3 doesn't help W hite, after e5
[ White is better after 18...xd4 19.xb7 Black should win . ]
b8 20.g2! xb2 21.g4! with a strong 39...d5 40.e7 xe7 41.f5 f6! 42.f4
kingside attack. ] e6 43.g3 e4+ 44.xh3 xf2+
19.b3 45.h4 d5 46.g5
[ 19.d2 d7 ] [ 46.g5 d3 47.h6 c1 ]
19...b8 20.e4?! White overestimates his 0-1
chances in the endgame. He should take a
draw by
[ 20.e2 d7 21.g4 d5 22.f4 662 B05
( White can't protect his d4-pawn, as Baklan,Vladimir 2571
22.d2 fails to xe5 ) 22...fd8 23.f3 Kosikov,Alexey I 2460
d7 24.g4 d5= , and triple repetition is Kiev 2000
unavoidable. ] [Alexander Volzhin]
20...xd4! The forthcoming endgame is good
for Black. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
[ On the other hand, 20...xd4? 21.g4! 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5
gives White a strong attack. ] e6 9.e1 d7 10.d2 e7 The games
21.xd4 xd4 22.fd1 fd8 23.d3? Gufeld-Goh and Cmilite-Zhukova show that
[ 23.d5 was better, although the position attempts to win the e5-pawn are too risky for
after e2+! 24.f1 xd5 25.xd5 xd5 Black. Therefore quiet moves such as the text
26.xd5 f4! 27.g2 f8 28.d1 e7 move or 10...Qc7 11. Nc4 N7b6 as played in
is quite unpleasant for White. ] Malakhov-Sedina seem to be the only
23...dc6 24.e6? White's position could playable possibilities for Black in this variation.
tolerate one mistake, but two in a row is too [ Black tried this move after 10...c7 11.c4
much! e7 in Krstic-Havas, Pula 1999, but this
[ After the correct 24.xc6 xd3 25.xd3 doesn't look good: 12.d6+ f8
xc6 Black still has to prove his advantage A) I would prefer 13.xd5 and Black has
is enough for a win. ] difficult problems to solve:
24...f5! 25.g2 xd3 26.xd3 d8 27.f4 A1) After 13...exd5?! White has a
g6! Now Black is planning Kg7-f6, and the e6- pleasant choice between 14.f5 and
pawn is in danger. 28.e1 g7 29.xc6 ( 14.xf7 xf7 15.e6+ with a huge
bxc6! edge in both cases. );
[ 29...xc6? allows White to escape: 30.e7! A2) 13...cxd5 14.f4 and White intends
e8 31.e6+ f7 32.xc7 xe7 to open files in the centre by playing c2-
33.xe7+ xe7 34.f4= ] c4 at the right moment, while Black has
30.g2 se ri o u s p r o b l e m s c o -o r d i n a t in g h i s
[ White can't prevent g5, as 30.h4 fails to forces. It's important that Black can't
d4-+ winning ] exploit the unstable position of White's
30...g5! 31.e2 f6 32.h4 gxh4! 33.f4 K n i g h t o n d 6 , f o r e x a m p l e : xe5
d4 34.f3 e4 35.xe4 fxe4+ 36.xe4 ( 14...f6? is bad in view of 15.b5 c4
The knight ending is won for Black, as he has 16.exf6 xf6 17.d4 and Black is in
a strong passed pawn on h4, and W hite's trouble. ) 15.xf7 xf7 16.xe5
pawn on e6 is about to fall. d5 with a huge edge for White.;
[ 36...g6! at once was even better. ] B) 13.c4?! A tactical oversight. xe5!
37.e2 Now Black has everything in order.
[ Of course, the pawn ending is lost: 14.cxd5 xd6 15.dxe6 xd1 16.xd1
675
d3 17.e2 fxe6 18.xe6 f6 19.c2 the statistics are very poor for Black. In many
xc1 20.xc1 e8 21.xe8+ xe8 lines White enjoys a small but steady edge,
22.e1+ d7 23.b3 h6 and a draw was while Black is compelled to passive defence
agreed. ] wit h o ut se rio u s ch a n ces o f co u n t erp la y.
11.c4! Cle arly B lack u rge ntly n eed s n ew ide as ,
[ White has also tried 11.f1 but this didn't o t h e r wi s e i t ' s t i m e t o s wi t c h t o a n o t h e r
give him any advantage: c7 12.c4 5b6 variation.
13.e2 0-0 14.b3 fd8 15.b2 f8 16.g3 1-0
bd7 17.g2 c5 18.ad1 xd1 19.xd1
d8 and Black managed to equalise in Van
den Doel-Baklan, Zagan 1995. ] 663 B05
11...0-0 12.a4 a5 13.d2 c7 14.e2 Becerra Rivero,Julio 2609
Although White hasn't got much here, it's not Yermolinsky,Alex 2522
pleasant to play this position with Black, since Foxwoods Open (8) 12.04.2009
he lacks active counterplay. fd8 [John Watson]
[ After the game GM Baklan recommended
14...b4!? 15.c3 e7 reducing the Black employs a known but rare idea involving
pressure on the a5-pawn and intending Nc5- ...a6. White plays too cautiously to gain the
b3, but in my opinion, 16.e4! is strong advantage, which he probably could have
enough and Black can't create any serious gotten with queenside expansion. 1.e4 f6
c o u n t e r p l a y : b5 ( 16...c5 17.c2 ) 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 e6
17.axb5 cxb5 18.e3! ] 6.c4 b6 7.c3 e7 8.h3
15.e4 b4 16.f4 c5 17.e2 d4 [ A similar setup followed in another
18.g3 ad8 Both sides moves are very Ye rm olin sky ga m e : 8.0-0 0-0 9.e3
logical. 19.d6! and: a)
[ 19.c3 xc4 20.xc4 c2 and Black is A) b) 9...c6 is a traditional main line.
OK, to say the least. ] This month's game 10.exd6 cxd6 11.d5
19...g5? A tactical oversight. xf3 12.xf3 e5 13.dxe6 xf3+
[ 19...d5 is wo rt h c o n sid e rin g : 20.b3 14.xf3 fxe6 15.g4 f6 16.ae1 c8
(forced) and only now g5! obtaining real 17.xb6 axb6 18.e4 f8 19.a3 a5
counterchances. The game could continue: 20.e2 af5 21.f3 f4 22.d1 xe4
21.xd5 xd5 22.g4 d2 23.ed1 c3 23.xe4 f5 24.h1 ( 24.b4!
24.xd5 exd5 25.f5 e6 26.f1 t h r e a t e n s t h e p a w n o n d 6 , a n d b5
i n t e n d i n g t o m a r c h h i s f - p a w n xe5!? 25.xd6 xd6 26.xd6 bxc4 27.xe6
( Black has to play actively as White's f7 28.e7+ f8 29.e3
tactical threats on the K-side should not be with a relatively safe pawn lead.) 24...d7
u n d e r e s t i m a t e d , f o r e x a m p l e 26...b5? 25.d3 b5! 26.b4 bxc4 27.xc4 d5
is bad in view of 27.h4! b8 28.xg7 28.d3 a4 29.g3 e5 and suddenly
xg7 29.f6 ) 27.h6+ f8 28.xf7 xf7 Black was more active in Kotsur-Neverov,
29.xe5 and White is only slightly better. ] Dubai 2009.;
20.h5! Surprisingly, after this simple move B) 9...a6!? 10.b3 d5 11.c5 6d7 12.h3
Black is hopelessly lost. He can't avoid large xf3 13.xf3 c6 14.a3 h8 15.g3?!
material losses. f5 Desperation, but Black's A strange idea. ( 15.d3 f6 16.exf6 xf6
position was already lost. 17.ad1 ) 15...f6! 16.exf6 xf6 17.c1
[ 20...g6 21.c3 d2 22.g4 and White (...Nxc5 was threatened and White can't
wins material. ] protect his centre, for example,
21.f7+ f8 22.c3 d2 23.h5 h6 ( 17.d3?? de5! 18.dxe5 xe5
24.cxb4 axb4 25.xe6 Black resigned. Now 19.e2 xf3+ 20.xf3 xc3; or 17.e2
we can draw certain conclusions. Obviously in xc5 ) 17...xd4! 18.g4?! c6
t h e M a i n li n e o f t h e A l e k h i n e 's B l a c k i s 19.xe6 d4 20.e4 dxe3 21.xd7
currently having serious problems - certainly xd7 22.xd7 e2 23.fe1 e5 24.g4
676
d3 25.xe2 xc1 26.xc1 b2 idea c6 16.d5! ) 15...d5 ( 15...xf3!?
27.d1 ad8 and Black went on to win in 16.xf3 d7 17.b3 e5 18.h5 g6
Zhao-Yermolinsky, Ledyard 2009. ] 19.e2 ) 16.fd1 (with the idea Nxd5) e5
8...h5 9.e3 0-0 10.0-0 a6!? The main ( 16...xe3 17.xe3 with ideas of Qxe6+,
point of this mysterious move is that in lines Nxd5, and/or Bg4) 17.xd5 ( 17.e4 bd7
with ...Bxf3 and Bxf3, Black can play ...Nxc4, 18.xd5 exd5 19.xd5+ h8 20.f4
since Bxb7 doesn't win a rook after ...Ra7. and Bxb7 is unclear) 17...exd5 18.xd5
This means that 11...Bxf3 is an immediate bc6! 19.b6 c7 20.f4 ae8 ( 20...g6
positional threat. Furthermore, in lines where 21.d7 ) 21.d5 d6 22.fxe5 xe5
Black plays ...d5 and W hite plays c5, the 23.xe7+ xe7 24.c4+ e6 and White
move ...a6 is useful in restraining b4-b5. has bishop-versus-knight, but this is
[ 10...d5 is the main line featured in John basically equal. ]
Cox' book. ] 14.e2 Not bad, but a little cautious.
11.exd6 cxd6 12.d5 [ 14.c5!? seems gives White some
[ 12.b3 always has to be calculated when a d v a n t a g e f o l l o w i n g dxc5 ( 14...c4
...a6 is played. Here White, who threatens 15.b3 xe3 16.fxe3 ) 15.c1 ( 15.d6!?
c5, may have some advantage: a) xd6! 16.xd6 xd6 17.e4 e7
A) b) In an earlier ChessPublishing game 18.xc5 c4! 19.xb7 xe3 20.fxe3
Hoepfl-Tischbierik, Osterburg 2006 we d7 21.a5 is at most nominally better for
saw 12...8d7 13.a4 W hite but now d6 is a threat) 15...c4
A1) 13...a5 14.ac1! combines the ( 15...d6 16.e4 c4 17.e2 ) 16.e4
ideas of Qb5 (with tempo versus h5) xe3 17.fxe3 with the idea f5 18.d6! ]
followed by c5, and c8! 15.b5 d5 14...8d7 15.c1 Slow.
16.c5 c4 17.xc4 dxc4 18.xc4 [ 15.a4 a5 16.b5 c8 17.b3 c5
xf3 19.gxf3 , when Black comes up a doesn't seem to scary, but White could try ]
little short in the natural line f6 20.f4 [ 15.b3!? f5 ( 15...c8 16.e4 f5
d5 21.g3 b4 22.d6 c7 17.c5! ) 16.c5 f4 17.cxd6 xd6 18.xb6
23.xb4!? ( 23.g2 ) 23...axb4 xb6 19.e4 with an irritating edge. ]
24.xb4; 15...c8 16.a4 xa4 17.xa4 c7!?
A2) 13...xf3 14.gxf3!? ( This occurred [ 17...f5! 18.f4? ( 18.b4 f4 19.d2 c5 )
in no less than 3 games! Is there 18...exf4 19.xf4 c5 20.a3 g5
s o m e t h i n g w r o n g w i t h 14.xf3 with good activity, open files, and White's
? A sample line would be c7 15.c5 interior weaknesses to jump on. ]
dxc5 16.a5 c8 17.xb7 xb7 18.a3! h6
18.xb7 a7 19.f3 cxd4 20.xd4 [ 18...f5 ]
c5 21.xc5 xc5 22.fd1 19.fd1
when you have to prefer White) 14...b8 [ 19.b4! intends c5: f5 ( 19...g5 20.c5 )
15.h1!? ( 15.fd1 is played twice in 20.f4 exf4 21.xf4 ]
the notes to that game) 15...g5 16.g1 19...c8 20.a4 c5
xe3 17.fxe3 h4 18.g2!? c8 [ 20...g5 21.xg5 hxg5 22.b4 e4! ]
and White had a small edge with 19 Kh2, 21.c2 g5 22.g4 xe3 23.fxe3 d7
but could also play 19 Ne4 or 19 Rag1.; This is about equal, and nothing changes that:
B) 12...c7 13.d5 8d7 14.dxe6! fxe6 24.b4 b6 25.e4 a8 26.f2 f6 27.f3
15.d4 xe2 16.xe6 xc4 17.xe2 c8 28.c3 a5 29.a3 axb4 30.axb4 a8
with a positional advantage. ] 31.b2 h7 32.g4 f6 33.f3 h7
12...xf3 13.xf3 e5!? I'm not convinced 34.g4 f6
that this equalises. The greedy ½-½
[ 13...xc4 14.dxe6 fxe6 might be okay:
15.e2 ( 15.b3 xf3! 16.gxf3 c7;
15.d4 xf3! 16.gxf3 d5 give Black
obvious compensation; 15.e1!? with the
677
664 B05 7xe2+ 37.xe2 b1 38.f4 b2+ 39.e3

Belkhodja,Slim 2489 e1 40.c3 g2+ 41.xg2 xg2 42.d4
Vaganian,Rafael A 2650 f4 43.gxf4 f5 Winning because of the
FIDE WCh KO Moscow RUS (1.1) 27.11.2001 mighty g-pawn. 44.c5 xf4 45.cxd6 cxd6
[Nigel Davies] 46.c7 d2+ 47.c3 xd5 48.xb7 g3
49.g7 f3 50.b4 axb4+ 51.xb4 d4+
Vaganian plays the standard 9...Nc6 after 52.b5 g2
which his opponent plays a simple line, hoping 0-1
for a safe space advantage. The endgame is
a superb illustration of how even an
innocuous looking position can be played for a 665 B05
win. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.c4 b6 4.d4 Bilic,Vladimir 2257
d6 5.exd6 exd6 6.c3 e7 7.f3 g4 Gavric,Miladin 2391
8.e2 0-0 9.0-0 c6 TCh-BIH Vogosca BIH (8) 09.06.2007
[ The traditional move, pressuring d4 but far [John Watson]
more gently than with 9...c5!? ]
10.d5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
[ The alternative is 10.b3 after which Borik - 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5
Gazik, Nove Zamky 1999 went f6 11.e3 e6 9.c4 This is considered completely
e8!? ( waiting for another move is more harmless, as the game seems to confirm. But
subtle than 11...d5 12.c5 c8 ) 12.c1 d5 it may have some poison in it, or at least pose
13.c5 c8 14.d2 h6 15.f4 8e7 s o m e s e r i o u s p r o b l e m s f o r B l a c k . e7
16.e5 xe2 17.xe2 xe5 18.dxe5 10.xd8+ xd8 11.e4!? Here the
d7 19.g3 g6 and with his e-pawn overwhelming choices are 11 b3 and 11 Rd1+,
about to fall, White sacrificed unsoundly with with underwhelming results: Black achieves a
20.xh6 gxh6 21.xh6 after which e7 100-point performance rating advantage. But
22.h5 xe5 was a simple defence. ] my computer raves about
10...xf3 11.xf3 e5 12.b3 g5 [ 11.d2! (11 Re1 Nd7 12 Bd2 transposes),
[ 12...xf3+ 13.xf3 f6 is similar, but and it may have a point: why chase the king
White would not be forced to put his bishop to a good square on c7, and why allow the
on b2. ] disturbing move ...Bb4 by Black? W hite's
13.b2 xf3+ 14.xf3 f6 15.ae1 d7 idea would be to hold the fort and then let
16.d1 e8 17.xf6 xf6 18.xf6 xf6 the bishop pair slowly get in place and have
Obviously this position is very drawish, but them work with a space advantage. The only
Vaganian sees no reason to agree a draw just game I see with White protecting his e-pawn
ye t . A n d t h e wa y in wh ich h e e ve n t u a ll y like this went d7 12.c3 g6 ( 12...c7
causes difficulties is very instructive. 19.c3 13.e1 a5 14.d2 c5 15.d1!
a6 20.f3 d7 21.f2? This careless move intends Bc2, Nf3, etc. Another computer
signals the start of White's problems. idea, although White has other ways to get
[ He should play 21.g4 a f t e r w h i c h e5 the advantage) 13.e1 a5 (with the idea of
22.g2 e7 23.e3 ae8 24.fe1 ...Bb4 and capturing on c3 and e5) 14.a3
looks equal. ] c5 ( 14...c5 15.d1! again, with the idea
21...e5 22.e3 a4 16.d2 c7 17.c2 e7 18.e4 18
[ And here 22.d1 is better. The following or g3 ) 15.g3!? ( A key juncture. This isn't
advance of Black's kingside pawns secures bad, but what is Black's response to
the position of the knight on e5 and allows 15.d2! ? Not 15...Bb6 16 Rad1 and Ne4,
Black to improve his king. ] but b6 16.ad1 ) 15...b6 16.g2 c5
22...f5 23.d1 e7 24.h3 ae8 25.e2 g5 17.d2 ( 17.h4!? b3 18.a2 c7 19.h5
26.g3 f7 27.d4 f6 28.c2 h5 29.e2 e7 20.d2 xd2 21.xd2 h6 ) 17...d3
g4! 30.fxg4 hxg4 31.h4 f3 32.d3 e4 ( 17...a4! ) 18.e2 e7 19.f1 ( 19.f3 )
33.b2 8e7 34.a4 a5 35.c3 e1 36.e2 19...hd8 20.f4 c5 21.e4 xe4
678
22.xe4 d7 23.f3 with a slight is simply bad: 16.gxf5 xf5 17.g4 ) 16.h4!
advantage, Travenec-Cibulka, Slovakia xe3 ( 16...xh4 is too dangerous 17.e4
1996. I find this idea very interesting! ] g6 18.f3 threatening Qh3) 17.xe3
11...d7 12.f4 c7 13.c3 intending Ne4, g5, Bg4 etc. with an
[ Or 13.d2 f5 14.f3 c5+ 15.h1= ] obvious advantage. ]
13...f5 14.g4 c5+ 15.g2 e3+ 15.g4! Playing this move white already should
16.xe3 xe3 17.f3 d2 18.d1 xc3 have calculated the consequences of his 17th
19.xc3 c5 20.c2 a5 move. e4 otherwise white will dominate on the
With no weaknesses and one open file, Black l i g h t s q u a r e s 16.g2 f6 17.b5!!
has equalised. Excellent! The rook sacrifice gives white a
½-½ strong attack.
[ Black's idea was to meet the natural looking
17.c1 with xc3+ 18.xc3 xd5! 19.c1
666 B05 xe3 20.xe3 a5+ winning a pawn for
Bologan,Viktor 2600 nothing. ]
Tischbierek,Raj 2500 17...xa1 18.xd6+ f8
Wien (open) 1996 [ 18...e7 doesn't help black too much:
[Alexander Volzhin] 19.xf5+ f8 20.0-0 Black is a rook up,
but his pieces are uncoordinated and his
Of course, some players don't like positions rook on h8 doesn't take part in the fight. So
with pawn chains, like we saw in the main line. we can talk about "material equality"! Now
Among the deviations from the main line the white intends to play f3, opening the f-file.
following idea of GM Victor Bologan is worth f6 21.g5! xg5 22.d4! Now it's
considering. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 impossible to protect the e6 square. c5
4.f3 g4 5.e2 e6 6.h3 h5 7.c4 b6 23.b4 bd7 wh a t e ls e ? 24.bxc5 xc5
8.exd6 cxd6 9.c3 e7 10.d5!N 25.f3! now white has a decisive advantage,
This natural move seems to be a novelty. Now for example: xe3+ 26.xe3 g8 27.fxe4
white obtains a space advantage and and black can't prevent e5, d6 etc. ]
prospects of a queenside attack. e5 11.e3 19.0-0 e5
xf3!? [ 19...f6 fails to 20.g5! xg5 21.h5 g6
[ 11...8d7 threatening 12... B:f3 12.g4 22.xg5 xg5 23.xg5 White has won a
( 12.d2 xe2 13.xe2 is not bad either pie ce back, and black's f orces are s till
f5!? 14.g4 f4 15.xb6 xb6 16.de4 uncoordinated. b8 24.f3 exf3 25.xf3
and white should be happy with his c8 ( 25...e5 26.f6 xf3+ 27.xf3
position. ) 12...g6 13.h4 h6 ( 13...h5 g8 28.e3 d7 29.d4+- winning )
14.g5 c8 15.b3 f5 16.d2 g6 26.b5 f7 27.f4 e8 28.xb8 xb8
17.de4 white is clearly better) 14.d3 29.c5 with advantage ]
xd3 15.xd3 f6 16.g1 with a big 20.xf5! Of course, white's knight is better
advantage for white. ] than black's passive rook! h5? This ridiculous
12.xf3 8d7 move is a waste of time, but black's position
[ From a positional point of view the is a lre a d y h o p e le ss. He h a s n o d e f e n c e
exchange of dark-squared bishops favours against f3 (or f4). The following variations are
black, unfortunately he has no time for it, as illustrative of black's difficulties:
w h i t e b r e a k s i n t h e c e n t r e : 12...g5? [ 20...g6 21.d4 xd4 22.xd4 f7
13.xg5 xg5 14.b5 d8 15.c5! dxc5 ( 22...g8 23.f4 g7 24.xe4 e7
16.d6 winning. ] 25.xg7+ xg7 26.f5+- winning ) 23.f4
[ Of course the pawn is taboo: 12...xc4?? e8 24.f5 g5 25.f6 f8 26.e3 h6 27.h4
13.a4+ ] h7 28.xe4+- winning ]
13.e2 c8 14.b3 f5 Otherwise white will [ 20...g8 21.f4 exf3 22.xf3 h6 23.d6
play g4, for example: f6 24.e7+ f8 25.xb7 b8 26.e4+-
[ 14...0-0 15.g4! g5 ( 15...f5? after g4 this winning ]
679
21.f4+- winning exf3 Black already has such an advantage in

[ 21...f6 22.g5 g6 23.h4 ] firepower in the centre that he can afford to
22.xf3 g8 23.d6 f6 24.g5 Excellent p la y ve ry a ggr e ss ive ly. 14.e3 c5
performance from GM Victor Bologan! 15.d4 cd3 16.d1 xd4 17.xd4 c5
1-0 18.c3 xf2 19.d4 b6 0-1 In 't Veld, D-
Zilverberg, J/ Maastricht NED 2007. ]
11...f4 12.e4 g6 13.e1 d8 14.g3?
667 B05 [ E s s e n t i a l w a s 14.a4! to prepare the
Breznik,Kristijan 2178 development of the knight to a3. Then
Rogulj,Branko 2453 A) After 14...c5 15.a3 Black has no
TCh-East 1st League (8) 07.11.2009 Nxe5 trick of the kind that occurs in the
[Neil McDonald] game as the two white rooks will be able
to protect each other if necessary.
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 ( But not 15.b4? b6! hitting both b4 and
5.e2 c6 6.0-0 f2, when 16.bxc5 xb2 is awful for
[ As Black is getting used to facing this move White. );
perhaps White should get back to B) 14...a5 15.a3 b4 16.c4!?
investigating the sharp 6.g5 For example Giving up the exchange for the initiative.
there is Jonkman-Krasenkow in the archives xe1?! ( Perhaps the simple 16...0-0
which went xe2 ( Or 6...f5 7.e6 etc. ) was called for when after 17.e2 b6
7.xe2 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.0-0 d7 10.c4 18.xb6 xb6 19.h4 e7 we have a
e7 with some advantage to White. ] typical scenario of White having space on
6...xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.b3? the kingside but Black controlling the d-file.
W hite's dark squared bishop is somewhat I think Black has the somewhat better
short of options and so Breznik intends to use chances. ) 17.xe1 0-0 18.a3 f5
it to defend e5. Thinking in the abstract this 19.exf6 xf6 20.d6 c8 21.g4
sounds like a good idea- the white queen, and W hite had strong pressure for the
rook and bishop will 'overprotect e5 in good exchange and went onto win in J.Houska-
Nimzowitschian style' as the phrase goes- but M.Cornette, La Roche sur Yon FRA
the problem is it doesn't seem to work! Once 2007. ]
the bishop goes to b2 the black knight on d5 14...c5 15.h4 0-0 He could already cash in
can exploit the undefended f4 square to reach with
g6, an d t hen th e e 5 p awn is su rprisingly [ 15...dxe5! but there's no need to hurry. ]
fragile. 16.h5 gxe5! It is somewhat ironic that
[ Nonetheless the critical line is probably White laid so much stress on defending the e5
9.d2 d7 10.e1 -see for example pawn with 9.b3 and 10.Bb2, but it is precisely
Vuckovic- Bogut in the archives. ] this manoeuvre that leads to the loss of the
[ Meanwhile White achieves nothing after pawn. 17.g2
9.c4 e7 the black knight has been pushed [ White has to give up his centre pawn for
back from the fine d5 square, but it has nothing as if 17.xe5 xe5 18.xe5 xe5
hardly been exiled from the game as it can 19.xe5 d4 when his two rooks are
join in an attack on e5 with Ng6 combined impaled by the bishop. ]
with Nd7. 10.xd8+ xd8 etc. when the 17...f5 18.f4 d6 19.d4 f7 20.a3
black king can sit happily on c7. So White g4 21.c4 c5 Not only attacking f2, but
should keep the c4 square for his knight, also threatening 22...Qxg3.
rather than block it with a pawn. ] 0-1
9...d7 10.b2 c7 11.e2
[ With his dark squared bishop absent from
the battle for key squares such as f4 White
can't afford any loose play. For example
11.c4? f4 12.e1 0-0-0 13.d2 g5!
680
668 B05 Now it's not easy for Black to complete

Cmilyte,Viktorija 2335 her development . c8 ( Unfortunately,
Zhukova,Natalia 2450 Black can't castle in view of 20...0-0 21.c6
Olympiad Istanbul 2000 f6 22.c5 winning the exchange.) 21.c6
[Alexander Volzhin] e5 22.c5 g5 ( 22...c7
is even worse in view of 23.d4! ) 23.b3!
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 xc6 24.b7 d8 ( 24...d8
5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 loses on the spot in view of 25.b4! c7
e6 9.d2 d7 10.e1 We have already 26.a5! ) 25.xe6+! fxe6 26.xg7
s e e n t h i s p o s i t i o n i n G u f e l d - G o h . b8!? wi t h a n o ve r wh e l m i n g a d va n t a g e f o r
An attempt at an improvement. White. ]
[ 10...c7 11.c4 b5 was brilliantly refuted 17.a3 White's compensation is massive and
in t h e a b o ve me n t io n ed ga m e : 12.xd5! obvious. Since Black has no possibility of
cxd5 13.d6+ xd6 14.xd5!! ] castling, her position is sliced in two, therefore
11.c4 b5 Now the above mentioned despite being two pawns down W hite has
c o m b i n a t i o n d o e s n ' t w o r k . 12.d6+ extra Rook to attack with. 7f6 18.b1 a6
This pawn sacrifice is forced but strong! xd6 [ Grabbing the third pawn is suicide:
13.exd6 xd6 14.b3 c5 15.c4! 18...xa2 19.a4 c8 20.b2!
An important novelty. By sacrificing a second and Black's Queen is trapped. ]
pawn White opens up the position, after which 19.c1! (threatening 20.Qc5) d7 20.b2!
her Bishops run riot. g8? A gross blunder after which White wins
[ 15.b2 as previously played is not so on the spot. Black missed White's main threat.
good: 0-0 ( 15...7f6 is weak in view of [ 20...7f6 is equally bad: 21.xd5 cxd5
16.d4! a3 17.xf6 gxf6 18.xd5 cxd5 ( 21...xd5 22.xg7 ) 22.b4 ]
19.xd5 0-0 20.xb5 ab8 21.d3 [ 20...5f6 seems to be the only move but
and White was winning in Koscielski-Jostes, Black's position is difficult anyway: 21.b3!
P o r z 1 9 9 3 .) 16.d4 d6 17.c4 bxc4 Switching the attack to the e6-square which
18.bxc4 5b6?! ( 18...5f6 is better in my cannot be defended: b8 22.xe6+! d8
opinion. White cannot really hope for more Th e on ly wa y to a void im m e d ia t e lo s s .
than winning b ack h is sa crif iced pawn : ( 22...fxe6 is bad in view of 23.xe6+ d8
19.xf6 xd1 20.axd1 xf6 21.xc6 24.e7+ c8 25.c1! b6 26.xc6!
ac8 22.d6 fd8 23.ed1 xd6 and Black is helpless.) 23.e7+ c8
24.xd6 f8 and the endgame is even ( 23...c7 24.d6+ d8 25.xb8 fxe6
slightly better for Black.) 19.c5! xc5 26.xe6 ) 24.xc6+ xc6 25.xc6 xb3
20.c1 ca4 21.xc6 b4 22.a1! f6 26.xb3 e8 27.e3 and White has a huge
23.cxe6 with a huge edge for White was edge in the endgame due to her pair of
Rhodin-Paulsen, Germany 1994. ] strong Bishops. ]
15...bxc4 16.bxc4 xc4 21.xd5 b8 Desperation but Black's
[ 16...5b6 is the alternative to the text: position is lost anyway.
17.e3! [ 21...cxd5 22.b4 and W hite wins: d8
A) To accept the sacrifice here is even 23.e7+ c7 24.ec1+ ]
w o r s e t h a n a m o v e e a r l i e r : 17...xc4 22.b3 Black resigned . This game is an
18.c1 h4 ( 18...xa2 is bad in view of excellent illustration of the strength of the
19.xc6 d8 20.xb6 axb6 21.d6 Bishop pair in an open position.
and Black is defenceless.) 19.xc6 d8 1-0
20.xb6 axb6 21.e4 e7 22.d4
and Black has no way to unpin the
Knight.;
B) 17...e7 Now White has several
promising possibilities: personally I would
play 18.c5!? d5 19.xd5 cxd5 20.c1!
681
669 B05 the dark squares around his king. 18.xf2

Dvoirys,Semen I 2562 18 Rc2, intending 19 Rcxf2 and 20 Bd5+ is
Zilberman,Yaacov 2488 probably better. h4
Open Dieren NED (7) 25.07.2000 [ 18...xb6 19.f1 h8 20.d5
[Carsten Hansen] is somewhat better for White. ]
19.d5+ h8 20.xf8+ xf8 As if by magic,
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 the white king seems awfully lonely on the
5.exd6 The Exchange Variation is all the rage kingside... 21.xc6 This is either a blunder or
right now. exd6 Taking back with the e-pawn a very risky attempt to play for a win.
tends to lead to more balanced positions, [ 21.e4 f4 22.g3 h6 23.h4 axb6
while 5...cxd6 leads to more dynamic is about equal ]
positions. 6.c3 e7 7.f3 0-0 8.e2 g4 21...bxc6 22.bxa7 g3 23.g1 xc3
9.0-0 c5!? A fairly new idea, which I only 24.f1 g8?!
have found one prior example of. The normal [ 24...c8! is the correct way forward. Black
move is 9...Bf6. 10.e3 is p o ssib ly in time trou b le a t t his p oin t
[ The stem game went as follows: 10.b3 c6 because his play appears very nervous. ]
or 10...Re8!? 11.d5 xf3 12.xf3 d4 25.f3 e1?! This is a somewhat feeble
(this is one of Black's ideas behind 9...c5!? - a t t e m p t t o g e t a win n i n g e n d g a m e . T h e
to play on the dark squares. Please notice s t r a t e g y b a c k f i r e s v e r y q u i c k l y i n t h e
how Black continues to play on this strategy. endgame that arises. The correct way for
) 13.e1 d7 14.g4 e5 15.h3 h4 Black to proceed is 25...Qe5 to keep control
16.e3 f6 17.h1 g6 18.xd4 d3! over the dark squares and keep White under
19.e3 xf2 20.f1 xe3 21.f5 b2 lo ck a n d ke y in a ve ry p a s sive p o s i t io n .
22.e2 h6 23.xb2 ae8 24.f3 g6 26.xe1 xe1 27.f7 h6?!
25.h3 g7 26.c8 e5 27.xb7 g5 [ 27...g3!? to maintain some mating threats
W hite is a full piece up, but see how on the white king looks worth considering. ]
everything is falling apart for the computer, 28.b7 f2 29.b4 h7 30.c5?!
while the German IM methodically picks up [ White tries to confuse Black who already
the material he has sacrificed. 28.c6 g4 has thrown away a clear advantage.
29.g3 f5 30.h3 h5 31.f1 f4 32.xe3 Otherwise 30.b5 cxb5 31.cxb5 a8 32.b6
xe3 33.d1 xb2 34.xb2 f3 35.hxg4 xb6 33.xb6 xa7 34.xd6 xa2
fxg2+ 36.xg2 e2+ 37.g1 xf1+ with a drawn endgame would have been the
38.xf1 xb2 39.gxh5 xa2 40.d7 b2 logical way for the game to end. ]
41.e1 xb3 42.d2 a5 43.f5 a4 30...a8! 31.b5?! White gradually repays
44.c2 b4 0-1 Comp Mephisto Milano Pro- Black for his past mistakes. cxb5 32.c6?
Loeffler,S/The Hague 1997 (44) ] White is making things worse for himself. Like
10...c6 11.b3 on the previous move 32 cxd6 was the way to
[ 11.d5 xf3 12.xf3 e5 13.b3 g5 go. xa7?? I guess we should have expected
is pleasant for Black, notice the theme of this. .. Black panics. The cool
strong knight vs. bad bishop ] [ 32...g3! 33.c7 ( 33.f7 d5 also wins
11...f5 This a very ambitious plan by Black. A comfortably. ) 33...e8 mates. ]
solid and good alternative is 11... Bf6 which is 33.c7 g6 34.xa7 c8 35.g1
about equal. 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 f4 and a draw was agreed upon.
[ Or 13...f6 14.dxc5 dxc5 15.xc6 bxc6 ½-½
16.c2 with a better game for White. ]
14.dxc5 fxe3 15.cxb6 exf2+ 15...Bf6 16
Rc1 exf2+ 17 Kh1 reaches the same position.
16.h1 f6 17.c1 e5! Rather than
worrying about taking the pawn on b6 which is
of no significance anyway, Black directs his
counterplay against White's only weakness -
682
670 B05 671 B05

Fedorowicz,John P 2509 Garcia Pantoja,R 2369
Baburin,Alexander 2580 Garcia 2457
Imre Mem San Francisco USA (8) 14.09.2002 XLIV Capablanca Memorial Open (6) 14.06.09
[Glenn Flear] [John Watson]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 There's a lot of action in this brief encounter.
5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 8.c3 0-0 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
9.h3 h5 10.e3 d5 11.c5 xf3 12.gxf3 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 Black goes into the
Considered the critical test for Black. Instead main line. 6...Nd7 is featured in our other 4...
[ 12.xf3 c4 is less challenging for Bg4 game, Ol Ivanov-Derbenev, Lipetsk 2009.
Black. ] 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.e2 d7
12...c8 13.f4 c6 14.b4 10.d2
[ A f t e r t h e m a i n a l t e r n a t i v e 14.f5 [ No one tried (noticed? Been able to
Black recently tried h4?! but following stomach?) my suggestion from an earlier
( 14...exf5 15.f3 is standard but Black has update, 10.d1 , after which I'll quote
yet to prove a totally convincing route to myself and add a few notes: " c7 11.c4
equality ) 15.d3 exf5 16.f3 6e7 e7 12.f4 g6 13.g3 This is supposed
17.h5 g6 18.xf5 c6 19.h1 ce7 to be a terrible square for White's bishop,
20.c2 f5 21.exf6 xf6 22.f4 although it serves its purpose of preserving
W hite retained the initiative in Von Bahr- the cramping e-pawn. And the rook is on d1,
Friberg, Skara 2002 ] usually a bad square. In fact, Cox says with
14...h4 15.b1 8e7 16.d3 g6 17.h2 emphasis that the rook does NOT belong on
[ 17.f3 f5 18.xf5 gxf5 19.h5 h8 d1, wanting to put it on e1 before doing
20.h2 g8!? 21.xf7 e8 22.xe8 anything else. I think that's true in most
axe8 is the earlier game Kindermann- cases, but in concrete terms the rook
Baburin, Germany 1997/8. Theory says prevents captures on e5 while discouraging
equal as the extra pawn is not relevant as ca st li n g qu e e n si d e . B l a c k m ig h t t r y t o
White's bishop is so bad. ] encourage an exchange on g6, for example,
17...f5 18.xf5 exf5!? In the game against e7 ( 13...dxe5? 14.h5! a5 15.d2
Kinderman Baburin recaptured with the other d7 16.e4 gives White more than enough
pawn. Here he shows an alternative defensive f o r a p a wn .; I did find this single example:
set-up. 19.g1 d7 20.f3 fd8 21.h5 13...0-0-0 14.c3 (I still like 14 Bh5) b4
e7 22.d1 a6 23.e2 h8 Black isn't 15.e4!? dxe5 16.c5! f5! 17.d6+
going anywhere, but W hite isn't really xd6 18.cxd6 xd6 19.xe5?! xe5
achieving a great deal either! ECO prefers 20.g3 g6 21.g2 e8 22.ab1 g4
White in these lines but I don't think Baburin 23.b4! e5 24.h3 f6 25.b5 Kuzmin, G
agrees! 24.c2 g8 25.a3 d8 26.g3 (2525)-Pribyl, J (2405), Ceske Budejovice
e6 27.a4 c6 28.b3 f8 29.b1 h6 1995 maybe W hite's a bit better, but it's
30.h4 g7 31.h3 h5 32.c1 e6 certainly not clear) 14.h5 0-0! ( 14...0-0-0
It looks to me that 14 f5 is the best hope for 15.d2 c5 16.f3; 14...h4 15.xh4
an opening advantage. xh4 16.c3!? xe5!? 17.e4 0-0
½-½ 18.d6 wit h u n cle a r co m p e n s a t io n)
15.d2?! ( 15.c3 ad8 16.f4
gives White an edge) 15...ad8 16.xg6
hxg6 17.e4 xe5 18.b4! with the idea of
c5, and xb4? 19.b2 xd1+ 20.xd1
d8 21.f1 . Perhaps the setup with Bg3,
Qe2, and Rd1 deserves more attention. ]
10...e7 11.b3? Perhaps simply missing the
reply. Better is
683
[ 11.e1 ] 4...g4 5.e2 c6 I've tried many systems

11...xe5! 12.xe5! against the Main Variation (4.Nf3) and this is
[ 12.xd5 cxd5 13.b2 c6 14.xg7 g8 one of them. It is called Flohr Variation, after
15.b2 f6 and you have to like Black's famous Czech GM Salo Flohr, who tried it
centre pawns. ] against Botvinnik. 6.c4
12...f6 13.g3 xa1 14.a3 White is an [ T h e r e i s n o t h i n g w r o n g w i t h 6.0-0
exchange and a pawn down, and though he but then the idea of Flohr becomes
may not have full compensation (almost!), apparent: xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6
there are some real chances. White has the two bishops, but this is hardly
[ 14.e4!? ] an asset here - the dark-squared bishop is
14...f6 15.e4 a5! 16.d6+ d7 limited by the e5-pawn, while the light-
17.c4 c7!? squared one is restricted by black pawns (e6/
[ 17...c3 is daring but consistent, with c6). The main features of this position are:
18.d6+ c8 19.xd5 exd5 20.b2 xc2 weakness of the e5-pawn and weakness of
21.xf6 gxf6 22.xf6 d8 23.d6+ c7 the d6-square. Chances are about equal, I
24.xf7 d4 a plausible follow-up. ] think. ]
18.d6 d8 19.d1 [ The most critical line is 6.g5 After xe2
[ 19.c5 ] 7.xe2 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 White has better
19...c8 20.a3!? c7 chances, as he has kept the knight rather
[ 20...e7 is ris ky a f t e r 21.xe7 xe7 than the light-squared bishop. That night is
22.d6+ d7 23.xb7 b4 24.c4 ] much more useful both in protecting the e5-
21.d6 d8 22.a3 c7 23.d6 pawn and occupying the d6-square. ]
½-½ [ Of course, poor is 6.h3 as taking on f3 fits
Black's plan: xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5
e6 ]
672 B05 6...b6 7.bd2
Greet,Andrew [ I usually faced here 7.exd6 exd6 ]
Baburin,Alexander 7...8d7 8.0-0
4NCL Birmingham (6) 15.01.2006 [ Also possible is 8.g5 xe2 9.e6 f6
[Alex Baburin (www.chesstoday.net)] 10.xe2 fxg5 11.e4 f6 12.xg5 xc4!
(Burgess) ]
1.e4 f6 Yes, I know... The Alekhine IS a 8...dxe5
risky opening, but at least this is the devil I [ Another popular line is 8...xf3 9.xf3
know! In any game I lost with this opening I dxe5 10.dxe5 e6 Again, Black's idea has
could always said where I went wrong, while been to get rid of one of the enemy knights. ]
in some Najdorf games I lost without having a 9.xe5 xe5 10.dxe5 This position was
clue about the source of my troubles! 2.e5 new to me. I had probably seen it in some
d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 books on the Alekhine, but during the game I
[ Of course, the Four Pawns Attack - 4.c4 did not have a clue how Black was supposed
b6 5.f4 is the most critical line. to play here... Which is not always a bad thing
( while t he Exch an ge Va riat io n - 5.exd6 - allows you to look at the position afresh. f5
is the most practical and theref ore very I think this is best.
p o p u l a r . I ' v e p l a y e d d o ze n s o f g a m e s [ I did not particularly like the position after
starting from this position (I usually reply 10...xe2 11.xe2 e6 But perhaps it's not
with 5. ..exd6 ) and the only thin g which too bad. For example: 12.b3 ( Bagirov in his
keeps me intrigued is my memory - I don't 1987 book gives 12.e4 "with advantage",
remember my games and have to work out clearly missing d4! ) 12...d4 13.b1
things again and again! I read somewhere d8 14.e4 d3 15.xd3 xd3 16.e3
that Emanuel Lasker dreamt of forgetting e7 17.fd1 d8 18.c5 d7 19.d6 f5
anything he had learnt. To me that comes 20.exf6 gxf6 21.c7 c8 22.f4 c5
naturally! )] 23.c3 d8 24.xd8+ xd8
684
Vogt-Cibulka, Stary Smokovec 1973. ] [ I expected 24.e2 Here I considered two

[ In some games Black tried 10...e6 ] ideas. First is the peculiar-looking move
11.b3 I don't like this move, which my h7!? - intending to blow up the White's
opponent played rather quickly. c e n t r e w i t h . . . g 5 ! . ( But I was leaning
[ Better was 11.g4 seeking the exchange towards 24...d4! which makes it hard for
of the light-squared bishops. ] W hite to untie his pieces. For example:
11...e6 12.d1 White spent 24 minutes on 25.d2 xe5! 26.d1 d3+ 27.xd3
this move, but I don't think it was best. xd3-+ )]
[ I think 12.g3 ] 24...xe5! I saw this move instantly, but then
[ or 12.f3 was preferable. ] nearly rejected it on false grounds. 25.fxe5
12...c7 13.g3 0-0-0 Because of the d3 26.f1 xe3+
pressure on g7, Black has troubles developing [ When I first looked at 24...Nxe5!, I only saw
the f8-bishop, so castling long seems natural. here 26...xe3 27.xe3 d4
14.b3 White needs this move if he wants to This is possible, but clearly not best for
relocate his knight. Black. ]
[ I am impressed that Junior suggests (at 27.xe3 d4! 28.e1 xe5!
least initially!) as the main move 14.f3 [ The line 28...xe3 29.xe3 xa1
xd1+ 15.xd1 xc4 16.e2 b6 is probably winning, but why settle for so
have computers lost all respect to little? ]
material? ] 29.f1
14...h5!? I spent 25 minutes on this move. [ Or 29.d1 xh2+ 30.f1 f4 31.f2
[ 14...b4 15.a3 gives Black nothing. ] e4 32.e2 h2-+ ]
[ I mainly looked at 14...c2 15.f1 b4 29...f4 30.e2 d4+ 31.e3 d2 32.d1
16.b1 I felt that he Black should be OK, xe2+ 33.xe2 b2+ 34.d2 e5
but could not see a clear plan. Computer Time: 1.51 - 1.52 Time control: 40 moves in 2
favours Black after d7 17.b2 f6 ] hours, 20 moves in 1 hour and 30 minutes
15.f1 allegro finish.
[ 15.f3 xd1+ 16.xd1 h4 17.xh4?? 0-1
xh4 18.xh4 xe5 ]
[ Probably better was 15.e3?! when ...h4
can be met with h2-h3. ] 673 B05
15...xd1 16.xd1 h4 17.c3 h3 Gufeld,Eduard 2480
That was my idea - to weaken the white king. Goh,Cheng Hong 2320
[ In fact, I completely missed a nice tactical Penang 1991
shot: 17...b4! ] [Alexander Volzhin]
18.g4 There is nothing wrong with this move -
it won't be easy for Black to get at the enemy 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
king. However, my opponent played this with 5.e2 c6 6.0-0! xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5
a wrong idea in mind. g6 19.g3 d7 e6 9.d2! d7 10.e1 c7 This natural
20.f4? That was his plan - to lock out the g6- looking move is a waste of time.
bishop after the eventual f4-f5. But W hite [ In my opinion, Black should try 10...e7
can't afford to weaken his position so much. intending kingside castling. It's not easy for
b6+! 21.e3 b4! 22.c1 c5 23.f2 White to prove his advantage. 11.c4 0-0
[ 23.xc5? xc5+ 24.f1 d4 is hopeless 12.d6? is strongly met by xe5! ]
for White. ] 11.c4! b5 This optimistic move allows a
23...d8 brilliant combination. Anyhow it's difficult to
[ M y f i r s t i n t e n t i o n w a s t o p l a y 23...f6 find a reasonable defence:
But I could not find anything concrete after [ 11...0-0-0 12.d6+ xd6 13.exd6
24.exf6 gxf6 25.e2 I must say that I and the d6-pawn is taboo: xd6? 14.c4 ]
missed the paradoxical idea f5! ] [ 11...7b6 is probably the best, although
24.f3? the position after 12.d6+! xd6 13.exd6
685
xd6 14.c4! xc4 15.d4! b4 White. ]

( 15...cb6 16.xg7 0-0-0 17.xf7 11.g4!?
with advantage) 16.g5! is very dangerous [ 11.e3 was played in Bologan-Tischbierek
for Black. ] and after xf3! 12.xf3 8d7
12.xd5! cxd5 Black obtained a solid position (although
[ Of cause 12...bxc4 is bad: 13.xc4 xe5 W hite is slightly better). The text is more
14.f4 d6 15.xe5 xe5 16.h5+- ambitious. It was introduced by Bologan
and after the bishop's retreat 17.Re6 wins. ] recently after his game vs. Tischbierek. ]
13.d6+ xd6 14.xd5!! The point. c8 11...g6 12.h4 h5
[ 14...exd5 doe sn 't h elp Black 15.exd6+ [ In Bologan-Agdestein, Yerevan (ol) 1996
d8 16.dxc7+ xc7 17.e7 ] where 11.g4 was played for the first time
15.exd6 c4 Otherwise the sacrifice on e6 B l a c k p r e f e r r e d 12...h6 but failed to
works: equalise: 13.d3!
[ 15...xc2 16.xe6+! fxe6 17.xe6+ f8 A) 13...xd3 14.xd3 c8
18.g5 f6 19.d7+- winning ] is the alternative but White is also better
[ 15...c6 16.xe6+! fxe6 17.xe6+ f8 here: 15.b3 xg4 16.g1 h5 17.xg7
18.g5 f6 19.xf6 gxf6 20.e7+ g8 and an attempt to create counterplay with
21.d7+- winning ] f5 is st ro n gly m e t b y 18.b5! f8
16.b7+- winning c6 17.xa7 White is two ( 18...e4 19.d4 is bad for Black as well.)
pawns up and should win easily. 0-0 18.f4 19.xe7 xe7 20.a3 e4 21.d4
fd8 19.ad1 b6 with a decisive advantage for White.;
[ 19...xc2 20.c1 ] B) 13...c8!? Black hopes to obtain
20.c3 Of course Black could play some more co u n t e rc h a n c e s o n t h e f - f i l e . 14.xg6
moves, but the outcome of the game is fxg6 15.d2 0-0 ( 15...xc4? 16.a4+
beyond doubt. winning the Knight.) 16.b3 f4 17.g5!
1-0 and White is clearly better: hxg5 18.hxg5
f5 19.e2 a6 20.de4 f3 21.e3
d7 22.0-0-0 dc5 23.h4! h3
674 B05 24.g3 d7 25.xh3 xh3 26.c2 f7
Hamdouchi,Hicham 2513 27.a3! g4 28.b4 xg5 29.xg5 xg5+
Baburin,Alexander 2591 30.b2 d7 31.ge4 and White won a
Saint Vincent 2000 few moves later. ]
[Alexander Volzhin] [ An attempt to seize the initiative with
12...e4?! l o o k s d u b i o u s : 13.g5 0-0
After the game Bologan-Tischbierek we came 14.gxe4 In Messa-Corvi, Italia 1997 Black
to the conclusion that this line is a good way f a i l e d t o p r o ve h e h a d e n o u g h f o r t h e
for White to deviate from Alekhine's main line. sacrificed pawn: e8 ( 14...xh4? 15.g5
This recent game confirms this opinion. 1.e4 winning the Bishop.) 15.d4! a6 16.h5
f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 b4 17.d1 xe4 18.xe4 c8 19.a3
e6 6.h3 h5 7.c4 b6 8.exd6 cxd6 a6 20.h6! f6 21.xf6+ xf6 22.xf6
9.c3 e7 10.d5! e5 gxf6 23.b3 and White has a decisive edge
[ 10...exd5?! is weaker since after 11.xd5 in the endgame. ]
0-0 12.0-0 White is clearly better due to his 13.g5 8d7 14.e3 The critical position for
strong Knight on d5 and the weakness of the whole line. c8
Black's d6-pawn. Now Black can't win a [ 14...a6 was played in Vescovi-Leitao,
pawn: xf3 13.xf3 xc4 in view of Itabirito 1998. Here Black also failed to
14.c2! e5 15.e4 (now 16.Nc7 is solve his opening problems: 15.b3 c7
t h r e a t e n e d ) ( Hasty 15.c7 gives Black 16.d3 0-0 17.e4 ( 17.xg6 was also
good compensation for the exchange: xf3+ possible: fxg6 18.d2 c5 19.e2
16.gxf3 c6 17.xa8 d7 ) 15...bc6 intending Kf1-g2 or even K-side castling and
16.xh7+ h8 17.f4 with a clear edge for then at the right moment Bxc5 and Nd2-e4
686
with an edge although the open f-file and [ 34...e5 35.xe5 xe5 36.xd5 xd5
slightly unsaf e position of W hite's King 37.xc5 dxc5 38.b1 is hopeless for
g i v e s B l a c k c e r t a i n c o u n t e r c h a n c e s .) Black. ]
17...xe4 18.xe4 g6 19.d2 c5 35.fxg3 xf3 36.xc5
a n d n o w s i m p l e 20.c2 ( instead of [ I wo u ld p r e f e r 36.e1 a8 37.e3!
20.c2 ) 20...a5 ( 20...ac8 21.b4!? cd7 and Black is in trouble: xh5 38.xc5 dxc5
22.b3 ) 21.b1 secured White a clear 39.d5 winning the b7-pawn. ]
edge. ] 36...dxc5 37.f4 xh5 38.e1 xe1+
[ 14...f5 was tried also but after 15.d2 g6 39.xe1 g6 40.a4? The last move before
16.de4 threatening Ng3, White is clearly the time control throws away the win.
better. Leonardo-Rodrigues Maceira 1997 ] [ 40.c4! preventing the bishop transfer to
15.b3 c5 16.g1!? bd7 17.b4! e4!? the a6-square should be played and after
Both opponents play very inventively and now f5 41.d5 c8 (the only move) 42.a4
very sharp position has arisen. Black can hardly hold the endgame. ]
[ 17...e4 deserved attention. ] 40...d3! 41.a5 b5 42.c7 a6
18.d2 d3+ 19.f1 xb4 20.dxe4 0-0 Black has built a fortress and now White can't
21.d4! Now it's clear that White has make any progress. 43.g4 g6 44.g5 c4
outplayed his opponent. White's centralized 45.d2 b4+ 46.c2 g7 47.d8 h7
pieces are well coordinated and after 48.f6 g8
capturing the h5-pawn W hite has good ½-½
chances for a K-side attack. e8 22.a3 a6
23.xh5 xc4 24.e2 c8!? Black tries to
complicate. 675 B05
[ A f t e r t h e n a t u r a l 24...c8 25.h5 Hoepfl,Thomas 2313
Black's position is very difficult, for example: Tischbierek,Raj 2466
xe4 26.xe4 ac5 27.g3! ch-GER Osterburg GER (8) 10.02.2006
By transferring the Knight to the f5-square [Andrew Martin]
W h i t e o b t a i n s a c r u s h i n g a t t a c k : xg5
28.f5 e5 29.f4! xf4 30.xg7! h2 A sharp tactical Alekhine's Defence game
31.g2 f6+ 32.f3! and White wins: where both sides have chances but Hoepfl
xf3+ 33.xf3 xf3 34.xe8+ ] makes a serious error in allowing Tischbierek
25.h5! The correct approach. White doesn't a passed pawn which ultimately wins him the
accept the sacrifice and just executes his plan. game. 1.e4 f6 Alekhine's Defence 2.e5
[ 25.xc4 xc4+ 26.g2 dc5! d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 Although not as
allows unnecessary complications. ] popular as it was in the 1970s and 1980s, this
25...f5 26.g3! A very strong manoeuvre. line is still played frequently by many
f8 27.e3! b6 28.xb6 cxe4 grandmasters such as Baburin and Sergeev.
Otherwise White wins easily: 5.e2 e6
[ 28...axb6 29.xc4 xc4+ 30.e2 ] [ 5...c6 is also frequently played. 6.0-0
[ 28...xe4 29.xc4 xc4+ 30.e2 xe2+ ( 6.g5 xe2 7.xe2 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6
31.xe2 axb6 32.xe4 - both lines are 9.0-0 e7 10.h5 xg5 11.xg5 c7
hopeless for Black. ] 12.c4 b6 13.c3 xe5 14.g4 0-0
29.xe4 xe4 15.fe1 1/2-1/2 Almasi - Zlatic, Budapest
[ 29...axb6 30.d4 is also very bad for 2005; 6.c4 b6 7.exd6 exd6 8.b3 e7
Black. ] 9.c3 d5 10.c5 6d7 11.0-0 0-0 12.f4
30.xa7 f5 After the exchange sacrifice e8 13.e1 xe2 14.xe2 b6 15.cxb6
Black has managed to activate his pieces but 1/2-1/2 Hansen - Baburin, Calvia Olympiad
of course White's material advantage should 2004 ) 6...xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6
be enough for the win. 31.d4! c5 32.g3 9.d2 d7 10.e1 b4 11.xd5 cxd5
xd5 33.g4 xg5 34.f3 xg3!? 12.g4 b6 13.xg7 0-0-0 14.c3 c5
Black tries his last chance. 15.g3 dg8 16.f4 g7 17.b4 e7
687
18.f3 hg8 19.g3 b8 20.e3 c7 [ 25...f6 26.c5+ d5 27.xe3 e5-+ ]
21.ac1 b6 22.xb6 xb6 23.a3 h5 26.e3 e5 27.4g3
24.c4 h4 25.e3 hxg3 26.hxg3 xe3 [ 27.4g2 is better but probably would not
27.xe3 dxc4 28.xc4 d8 29.d3 b6 have changed the result. ]
30.g2 and eventually White went on to win 27...be8 28.d2 f6 29.f4 fxg5 30.fxe5
with the extra pawn. Carlsen - Dannevig, f2+ 31.h1 dxe5 32.e3 f8 33.d3
Norway 2005 1-0 ] f4 34.xe2 f5
6.c4 b6 7.0-0 e7 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 0-1
[ 9.e3 is another popular move. c6
10.exd6 cxd6 11.d5 exd5 12.xd5 xd5
13.xd5 e6 14.d2 d5 15.c5 c8 16.b4 676 B05
f6 17.ad1 e8 18.a3 a6 19.fe1 c7 Ibarra Chami,Luis Fernando 2325
20.d4 xd4 21.xd4 ce7 22.f1 f5 Fernandez Garcia,Jose Luis 2467
Sutovsky - Berkes, George Marx Memorial 42nd Capablanca Mem Abierto (1) 18.05.2007
2005 1/2-1/2 ] [John Watson]
9...h5 10.e3 a6 11.exd6 cxd6 12.b3
8d7 13.a4 As the game goes, there's not much
[ 13.ac1 c8 14.d2 xe2 15.xe2= ] difference with Illijin-Horn, but in this game I
13...xf3 14.gxf3 b8 15.h1N will also concentrate upon the idea of 10 Rd1
[ 15.fd1 f6 ( 15...c7 16.ac1 fc8 (in the notes). 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6
17.e4 c6 18.a5 d5 19.axb6 dxe4 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3
20.f4 e5 21.dxe5 c5 22.e3 e6 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.e2 d7 10.c4
23.g3 c5 24.xe4 xb6 25.f4 d4 [ A strange-looking reorganisation with White
26.g4 d8 27.h4 f6 28.exf6 gxf6 making all 'bad' moves is 10.d1!? c7
29.h2 d6 30.g1 11.c4 e7 12.f4 g6 13.g3
Lekic - Stefanopoulos, Ikaros 1999 1-0) This is supposed to be a terrible square for
16.d5 bd7 17.e4 e5 18.c3 c8 W hite's bishop, although it serves its
19.b4 xe4 20.fxe4 g5 21.a3 a5 purpose of preserving the cramping e-pawn.
22.d2 xe3 23.xe3 c5 24.f4 exf4 And the rook is on d1, usually a bad square.
25.xf4 b6 26.h1 ce8 27.g3 xb2 In fact, Cox says with emphasis that the
28.f3 e5 29.h4 g6 30.g4 xa4 rook does NOT belong on d1, wanting to put
31.dg1 c5 32.h6 a4 33.h4 g7 it on e1 before doing anything else. I think
34.f4 d3 0-1 Kotliar - Yermolinsky, St that's true in most cases, but in concrete
Martin 1993 ] terms the rook prevents captures on e5
15...g5 16.g1 xe3 17.fxe3 h4 while discouraging castling queenside. Black
18.g2?! might try to encourage an exchange on g6,
[ 18.g2 c8 19.f4 e7 ] for example, e7 ( 13...dxe5? 14.h5!
18...c8 a5 15.d2 d7 16.e4 gives White
[ 18...xh3+ is probably Black's best option. more than enough for a pawn.) 14.h5 0-0!
19.h2 f5 ] ( 14...0-0-0 15.d2 c5 16.f3; 14...h4
19.h2 e7 20.ag1 g6 21.d3 e5 15.xh4 xh4 16.c3!? xe5!? 17.e4
22.e4? This allows Black some serious 0-0 18.d6 with unclear compensation)
chances. 15.d2 ( 15.c3 ad8 ) 15...ad8
[ 22.e2 is a much stronger move. c6 16.xg6 hxg6 17.e4 xe5 18.b4!
23.d5 ] with the idea of c5, and xb4? 19.b2
22...exd4 23.g4? xd1+ 20.xd1 d8 21.f1 . Perhaps the
[ 23.exd4 White has to go into this line even setup with Bg3, Qe2, and Rd1 deserves
t h o u g h i t i s n o t v e r y g o o d f o r h i m . f5 more attention. ]
24.xd6 xd4 25.c5+ h8 26.e6 10...e7 11.d2 White's idea is to play Bc3
e5 ] a n d R e 1 , t h u s n o t a l l o w i n g . . . B b 4 . g6
23...h6 24.g5 dxe3 25.b1 e2 12.c3 c7 13.e1 0-0-0 We've arrived at
688
the same position as Illijin-Horn, where Black and W hite's e-pawn will still fall in most
played 13...Nf4? 14.b4?! This just exposes lines. ]
White's position, but 14.d2?!
[ 14.a3 c5 15.ad1 xd1 16.xd1 [ 14.e4 g5 15.d2 ]
a4! is at least equal for Black. ] [ Or 14.e3! g5 15.d2 c5 16.e4 ]
14...e7 15.a4? Losing. As shown in Illijin- 14...g6 15.e2 0-0-0 16.b4 e7
Horn, this position is much more difficult for No w t h e t h re a t is a t r ip l e ca p t u re o n e 5
White than it at first appears. followed by ...Bf6. 17.g3?! White speculates
[ 15.a3 has the idea gxe5?! 16.xe5 better but not terribly attractive was
xe5 17.xe5 xe5 18.xe5 f6 [ 17.b2 f6 ( 17...b6 18.b3 d7
19.ee1 d3 20.c2 xa1 21.xa1 hd8 19.b2 repeats ) 18.exf6 gxf6 with the idea
. But here 15...a5! improves. ] 19.xe6?! de5! 20.d2 d7 21.xe7
[ 15.b2 looks best, as analysed in Illijin- xe7 and White is short of compensation
Horn. f6 ( 15...b6 16.b3 d7 because his light-squared bishop will have to
17.b2= )] be exchanged. ]
15...dxe5! Whoops. 16.a3 xf3+ 17...dxe5
17.xf3 f4 18.e2 f6 and Black went on [ 17...gxe5! 18.g2 h5 is still better,
to win. because it leaves the queenside protected. ]
0-1 18.e4 f6
[ 18...b8 ]
19.a4 d7!?
677 B05 [ Black should be more aggressive, e.g.,
Illijin,Neboisa 2290 19...h5 20.a5 h4 21.b5 hxg3 22.hxg3
Horn,Pascal 2320 d6! ]
Biel-C (2) 1990 20.a5 xc3?! 21.xc3 f5 22.g2 he8?
[John Watson] 23.b5! Suddenly White threatens 24 a6 with a
killing position. There's no good defence. b8
Another test of 9 Qe2. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 [ 23...a6 24.bxa6 bxa6 25.c5 b8
3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 26.ab1 , etc. ]
7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.e2 d7 10.c4 24.a6 bxa6 25.bxc6 xc6 26.xa6 d4
[ 10.e1 c7 11.c4 ( maybe 11.d2!? W h a t e lse ? 27.a2 e7 28.b5! xb5
would be more flexible) 11...e7 12.d2 29.c6 d4 30.a6+ d7 31.xc7+ xc7
g6 13.c3 transposes. ] 32.xa7+ c8 33.a6+ d7 34.a4+
10...e7 11.d2 c7 c8 35.b1 c7 36.b8+ An entertaining
[ Black can try to exploit White's move order game, but Black would have had no problems
by 11...g6 12.c3 g5!? ( 12...c7 with accurate opening play. Perhaps 10 Re1
13.e1 i s t h e g a m e) 13.e1 f4!? and 11 Bd2 is a better order.
( 13...0-0-0 is solid ) 14.c2 c5?! 1-0
( 14...g6 15.d2 e7 16.xg5 xg5
17.g3 and White has a slight theoretical
edge due to the bishops.) 15.b4! h3+ 678 B05
( 15...b6 16.d2 ) 16.f1 xf2 17.e2 Ivanov 2461
b6 18.c5 and Black will lack compensation Derbenev,Andrey 2408
for his piece. ] King's Gambit A (8) 30.06.2009
12.e1 g6 13.c3 Okay, now we're at the [John Watson]
basic position, which could have arisen by
various orders. f4? 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
[ I s e e n o t h i n g w r o n g w i t h 13...0-0-0! 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 d7!? I didn't know this
, for example, 14.a3 ( 14.b4 e7 15.b2 move, even though it's been played on a fairly
f6 17 -see Qb2; 14.d2? dxe5 ) 14...c5 high level. It's very logical to try to attack the
15.ad1 xd1 16.xd1 a4! 17.d4 c5! centre as quickly as possible. White's next is
689
critical. 13.c4 f4 ]

[ W e've seen 6...xf3 many times, and it is 12.c4 c7 13.c3 h6 14.e3 d5 15.cxd5
featured once more this month. ] xd5 16.xd5 xd5 17.f4!?
7.g5 This has scored very well, and so has [ 17.b4 e6 18.fb1 with attack. ]
[ 7.c4 even if it's not completely clear, for 17...e6 18.fe1 d6 19.e5 hf8 20.ad1
example, f5 21.g3 xg3 22.hxg3 d6 This looks
A) 7...c7 8.exd6 exd6 9.g5!? about equal - the weaknesses cancel out.
with the idea xe2 10.xe2+ e7 ( or 23.b3 h5 24.d3 f6 25.c2 f5 26.e2
10...e7 11.d1 0-0-0 12.c3 h6 f6 27.c2 a5!? 28.e5 d8 29.c5!
13.e1 f6 14.ge4 with White on top, b6 30.c4 g6 31.de3 d7 32.3e4 b7
Stanojoski, Z-Simovski, G Struga 2002) 33.a4 d5 34.b4 b5? This turns out to be
11.e1 ( or 11.h5 ); t o o we a k e n i n g . 35.axb5 cxb5 36.e2
B) 7...5b6 8.exd6 exd6 9.e1 ( 9.h3 xe5?
xf3 10.xf3 e7 11.b3 0-0 12.c3 [ 36...d6 37.xb5+ a8 , but this is sad. ]
wins the bishop pair and establishes a 37.xe5 b6
n ic e a d va n t a ge , Ja m ie so n -C o c o g n e , [ 37...a6 38.d5! ]
N o u m e a 1 9 9 5 .) 9...e7 10.g5!? 38.e3 c6 39.d5+ b7 40.dxe6 e8
( 10.c3; 10.h3!? xf3 11.xf3 41.c5 xe6?
h a s t h e i d e a xc4 12.c3 0-0?? [ 41...a6 42.d5+ b8 43.d6+ b7
13.e2 ) 10...0-0 11.xg4 xg5 12.f4?! 44.c5 is also hopeless. ]
f6 equalised in Fischvogt-Fischman, 42.d5+ c6 43.xe6
Columbus 1987. ] 1-0
7...xe2
[ An interesting try is 7...f5 8.g4! ( 8.g4
xg4 9.xg4 dxe5 10.f5 f6 11.xh7 679 B05
b6 is unclear) 8...h6 9.gxf5 hxg5 10.e6 Jonkman,Harmen 2425
7f6 11.xg5!? ( 11.exf7+ xf7 12.xg5 Krasenkow,Michal 2651
b6 13.c3! ) 11...a5 ( 11...fxe6 12.c4 Corus C Wijk aan Zee NED (11) 26.01.2007
c7 13.xf6 exf6 14.h5+ d7 [John Watson]
may favour W hite, but it mixes things up)
12.d2!? xd2 13.exf7+ xf7 14.xd2 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
with a pawn and clear advantage, Langrock- 5.e2 c6 6.g5!? This is the line that
Floegel, Germany 2002. ] originally deterred everyone from 5...c6. It has
8.e6!? Clever, but only been mentioned in passing on ChessPub
[ 8.xe2 dxe5 9.dxe5 e6 10.c4 c7?! (by Baburin, who calls it the most critical). The
( 10...5b6 11.c3 e7 12.f3 c7 main games with 6 0-0 have scored so well
13.f4 ) 11.d1 is the kind of position that that 6 Ng5 perhaps seemed unimportant. But
we've looked at before, with W hite to be t h e n o t e s i n t h is c o lu m n r e n d e r W h it e ' s
preferred. ] advantage unclear after 6 0-0. xe2
8...f6! [ For many years, the leading Alekhine player
[ Not 8...xd1?? 9.exf7# ] a n d t h e o r e t i c i a n wa s B a g i r o v, a n d h e
[ And 8...fxe6?! is a positional mistake: analysed 6...Bf5 at length. A wild recent
9.xe2 c7 Kaspersen-Aagaard, Denmark game went 6...f5 7.e6 ( 7.g4
1980 but instead of 10 f4, 10.c3 f6 is the important alternative, probably
11.e1 keeps Black bundled up. ] somewhat in W hite's f avou r) 7...fxe6
9.exd7+ xd7 10.xe2 fxg5 11.xg5 8.h5+!? ( 8.g4 ) 8...g6 9.g4! xc2!?
[ 11.c4?! f4 looks good for Black after 10.xc2 gxh5 11.xe6 d7 12.f5
12.xf4 gxf4 13.d5 cxd5 14.cxd5 g6 (threatening mate in 1! ) f6! 13.g5!?
15.c3 g7 16.fe1 e5! ] ( 13.0-0 ) 13...f7 14.d8+ xd8
11...0-0-0 ( 14...e8! 15.xd7+ fxd7 ) 15.gxf6 exf6
[ Better 11...f5! with the idea 12.e3 g6 16.xh5+ e7 17.c3 d7 ( or
690
17...e8= ) 18.f5+ c7 19.f4 d7 680 B05

20.0-0-0 e8 21.hg1 f7 22.d5 e5 Karjakin,Sergey 2727
23.xe5 dxe5 24.e4 cxd5?? ( 24...d8 ) Short,Nigel D 2655
25.xf6 The end. c8 26.b1 b8 Rapid Match Kiev UKR rapid (3) 04.05.2008
27.d7+ 1-0 Lehmann-Karrer, Zurich SUI [John Watson]
2006. ]
7.xe2 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 This much-tested This top-level game features the Flohr
position is probably satisfactory for Black, V a ria t i o n wit h 4 . . . B g4 a n d 5 . . . c6 . W h it e
who has the better bishop and pressure on e5 doesn't deliver a fatal blow, but he has the
to compensate for his deficit in space. better of it, and in general one has to wonder
Whether he fully equalises is another matter. if this variation is going to fade from the scene.
9.0-0 See the notes, for example. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
[ 9.c4? b4+ has the idea 10.d2 xg5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 6.0-0
11.cxd5 xg2 ] [ The solid approach. If you delve through
9...d7 10.c4 e7! This knight will pressure the ChessPub lishing Forum, you 'll f in d
White's e-pawn from g6, or in some cases go analysis from Mark Morss on the line 6.c4
to f5. 11.f4? Anti-positional, but more A) 6...xf3 7.xf3 b6 8.e6! ( or
importantly, tempo-wasting. 8.b3 ) 8...fxe6 9.g4 e5 10.e6!;
[ 11.d1 is the book move, considered a tad B) 6...b6 7.g5! (his '!') xe2 ( the old
b e t t e r f o r W h i t e a f t e r f5 ( 11...g6 7...f5 has more than one good answer
12.e4! with the idea gxe5?! 13.f4 g6 s e e m y e a r l i e r u p d a t e s )) 8.xe2
14.f5 ) 12.c3 ] . He conclude s that W hite stands very
11...g6 12.h5 It almost looks like White well indeed. In previous updates, I also
'missed' 11...Ng6! suggested that certain setups in the main
[ He doesn't have enough compensation line look promising for White. You wonder
after 12.e3 e7 ( 12...dxe5 13.d1 ) if lines like this survive simply because
13.f3 dxe5 ] t h e A le kh i n e d o e sn 't re ce ive e n o u g h
12...e7 13.g3 gxe5 14.e4 g6 attention. W e'll ha ve to wait f or more
15.e2 f5 16.f4 grandmaster tests in order to see what the
[ 16.ec3 g7 leaves Black a pawn ahead top-level players think, but I'm not
with the central majority to boot. ] optimistic for Black. ]
16...f7 17.ec3 g7 18.e1 e5 19.fxe5 6...xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.d2
dxe5 20.d2 0-0 21.f2 fd8 Black is White has played an astonishing number of
simply winning now. 22.c5 f8 23.b3 d3 moves here, such as 9 Qe2, 9 c4, 9 a3, 9 g3,
24.ed1 xf2 25.xf2 e5 26.f4 f7 9 b3, 9 a4, 9 Qd4, 9 Bh5, and 9 Nc3.
27.xd8+ xd8 28.d1 xd1+ 29.xd1 [ In a previous game I discuss the line 9.c4
c4 30.d2 d3 31.f2 xd2 32.xd2 e7 10.xd8+ xd8 , generally
d7 33.d3 xc5 34.xc5 d4+ 35.f1 considered harmless, in conjunction with
xc5 36.c4 f7 37.a5 b6 38.c4 11.d2! , after which I don't see Black fully
e6 39.e2 g5 40.d3 d5 41.d2 g4 equalising. ]
42.f1 f4 43.h3 f3 44.gxf3 gxh3 45.f4 h5 9...d7 10.e1 Here too various moves are
0-1 talked about in Archive games formerly
[ 10.c4 b5 11.d6+ was popular. ]
10...h6!? Deviating from mainstream theory.
Black prevents Bg5 (after, say, Ne4) and
prepares ...g5 in some lines.
[ In earlier columns you will see games with
10...c7 11.c4 ]
[ and 10...e7 , which ran into trouble after
11.c4! 0-0 12.a4 a5 13.d2 with some
advantage for White in Baklan-Kosikov, Kiev
691
2000. ] [ 24...xe5 25.e3 c5 looks better, but

11.a4 a5 12.g3!? I'm not sure what this move simply 26.d4 xd4 27.cxd4 has ideas of
is about. The most natural move is d5 (if allowed) or Bf3 with Qc3. ]
[ 12.c4 ] 25.e3 b8 26.a5!? c5 27.xc5
12...c7 13.c4 7b6 14.d4 [ Or 27.axb6 xb6 28.d2 xe5 29.f4! ]
[ The interpolation of a4 and ...a5 actually 27...bxc5 28.d2 xe5 29.xb8+ xb8
helps Black in the line 14.xb6 xb6 15.c4 [ 29...xb8 30.c4 is positionally winning.
b4 ] This last part of the game is impressive, in
14...xc4 15.xc4 d8 16.c3 b6 t h a t K a r a j a k i n swit ch e s t o t h e s e c le a r
B l a c k r e t u r n s t o a t t a c k t h e e - p a wn . H e themes that are independent of tactics. ]
doesn't seem to have any major problems 30.d1 c7 31.d6 xa5 32.xc6 f6
after 33.c8+ g7 34.b8 e7 35.b1
[ 16...e7 either ] [ Or 35.e5! ]
17.e4 d7 18.b4! Stopping ...Nc5. e7 35...d5 36.b7 xc3 37.a7 xb7
19.b1 h5!? Black grab s some kingside 38.xb7 e1+
space. White is probably better, on grounds 1-0
of territorial control, but
[ 19...0-0 20.f4 a8 is a plausible
alternative. ] 681 B05
20.e2 g6 Black feels that he should Kobalia,Mihail 2537
construct a safe kingside structure, with pawns Nalbandian,Tigran 2439
on the squares opposite that of own bishop. Moscow 1999
Although [Alexander Volzhin]
[ 20...h4 looks a bit crude, it also keeps
White from straying too far from the kingside. T h i s e xc e l l e n t g a m e wi t h a s p e c t a c u l a r
Perhaps Black wasn't happy letting White's Queen sacrifice is a good example of White's
bishop get to g4 followed by f4-f5. ] play in the Alekhine Main Line. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
21.bxa5!? The key decision of the game, and d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 e6 6.0-0
it seems a good one, at least in practical terms. e7 7.c4 b6 8.c3 0-0 9.e3 d5 10.c5
White both gives up c5 and the a-file, but his xf3 11.gxf3 c8 12.f4 We've already seen
attack along the b-file disturbs the equilibrium. this position in Ulibin - Morovic and suggested
[ 21.h4 may be objectively better, with this line as the most dangerous for Black. The
advantage. ] present game confirms that statement. h4?!
21...a8 22.b2 a7?! A sad decision, but [ 12...c6?! is inconsistent with the previous
[ 22...xe5 can be answered by the radical play. Now it is difficult to find good squares
23.xe5! xe5 24.a6! (perhaps Black for both Black's Knights. 13.d3 g6 14.b4
missed this) ( 24.xb7 0-0! 25.xe7 f5 e8 15.h1 f8 Now everything is ready
forks f3 and b1, although 26.g2 xb1 for a breakthrough. 16.f5! exf5 17.xf5!
27.h6 is still dangerous because of the a- g7 ( T h e b i s h o p i s t a b o o : 17...gxf5
pawn. ) 24...xa6 ( 24...bxa6 25.xc6+ ) 18.g1+ h8 19.h5 d7 20.g5 e7
25.xb7 a5 26.c8+ d8 27.xc6+ 21.f6+ xf6 22.exf6 with a quick mate.)
f8 28.b7! ] 18.h3 with a huge advantage, Gurgenidze -
[ Best is 22...b8! , when 23.c4 xa5 Suba, 1975. ]
24.d1! c7 25.e3 with the idea xe5 [ 12...a5? This careless move allows a direct
26.g2 is playable, but difficult for Black to b r e a k t h r o u g h . 13.f5! g5 ( 13...exf5
defend. ] 14.b3 ) 14.f4 h6 15.fxe6 fxe6 16.g4
23.a6! b6 d7 17.b3 c6 18.a4! and Black's
[ or 23...bxa6 24.e3 c5 25.e4 position is truly miserable, Shamkovich -
, for example, h4 ( 25...xe5? 26.f4 f6 Vukic, New York 1976. ]
27.b8 ) 26.f4! ] [ 12...c6 is best. We have already
24.e2 0-0 considered it in Ulibin - Morovic. ]
692
13.d3 g6?! Another inaccuracy. 682 B05

[ 13...f5 is obligatory here. White is clearly Kosintseva,N 2523
better on both sides of the board, but Ehlvest,J 2574
Black's defensive resources should not be UT Dallas GM Inv 2013 (5.5) 24.11.2013
underestimated. In my opinion, Black should [Tom Rendle]
avoid playing f7-f5, as the f5- square is
needed for one of his Knights, but the text 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
is even worse. It's main drawback is that it 5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 8.c3 0-0
doesn't prevent f4-f5! ] 9.b3!? Not quite a novelty but a very rare
14.f5! exf5 15.f3! c6 16.h1 h8 move indeed, and not once we've seen here
17.g1 Bf5 is unavoidable. a6 before. Obviously the idea is to over-protect
[ 17...e7 is not better in view of 18.h3! ] the c4 pawn so that if Black takes on f3 White
18.xf5! The Bishop is taboo, White wins his can safely recapture with the bishop. It also
pawn back maintaining a huge positional has the advantage of cutting out any idea
advantage. e7 Black might have of a quick ...d5 followed by
[ 18...gxf5 19.h6 g8 20.xg8+ xg8 ...Nc4.
21.g1 and Black has to give up his [ 9.e3 (or 9.h3 Bh5 and then 10.Be3) is
Queen. ] a l m o s t a l wa ys s e e n i n st e a d a n d I la s t
19.c2 Now White has a strategically winning covered this in Lahno-Gaponenko f rom
position as Black has no defence against the 2012. ]
doubling of Rooks on the g-file and f2-f4-f5 9...c6
with an unstoppable attack on Black's King. [ 9...dxe5!? is also worth a look 10.xe5
g8 20.h3 c7 21.g4! White plays very xe2 11.xe2!? ( 11.xe2 8d7 12.xd7
precisely. First he doubles his Rooks after this xd7 13.b2 and a draw was agreed in
Black can't meet f2-f4 with f7-f5 in view of Sott, P (2203)-Jorgensen, J (2277) Liberec
Rxg6. e7 22.ag1 d7 23.f4 ae8 24.f5 2010 - Black has no problems here after
d8 25.e2! Now all White's pieces are ad8 14.c2 c6 ) 11...xd4 12.b2 f4
taking part in the attack. After the transfer of but now in Bodnaruk, A (2425)-Schleining, Z
the Knight to f4, Black will not be able to hold (2340) Germany 2013 White would've had
the g6-square any more. b6 26.f4 g5 excellent prospects after 13.b5 a6
This move allows a brilliant combination, but 14.ad1 ]
Bla ck is los t a nyway. 27.xh7+!! xh7 10.e3
28.f6+ h6 [ 10.exd6 is obviously playable but it just
[ 28...h8 29.xg5 ] leads to a slightly inferior version of the 9,
29.h4+! gxh4 30.e6+ h5 31.d1# Be3 mainline for White after cxd6 11.e3
A n e x c e ll e n t a ch i e ve m e n t b y t h e yo u n g d5 12.c5 d7 and Black should be
Russian GM Mikhail Kobalija. Now it's possible completely OK here ]
to draw some conclusions. Both this game 10...d5 Ehlvest is happy to transpose into a
and Ulibin - Morovic prove that White should norma l p osit ion b ut I th in k t his mis se s a
avo id p la yin g 9 . h 3 B h 5 , as h e h a s m o re reasonable chance to equalise.
attacking resources, if the h3-square is left [ 10...dxe5! 11.xe5 xe2 12.xe2
vac an t f o r h is p ie ce s. In t his case Black ( 12.xe2?! xd4 13.h5 f6 and White
should be very careful, because White's main has some compensation for the pawn but
threat f4-f5 exists on every move. However by certainly not more than enough.) 12...xe5
accurate play Black can obtain a very solid 13.dxe5 xd1 14.axd1 fd8 with equality.
although quite passive position (see Ulibin - Perhaps Black wanted to keep more winning
Morovic). chances than this as this endgame certainly
1-0 looks quite drawish. ]
11.c5 d7 12.b4! The most testing move
here
[ 12.a3 is rather slow and after f6 13.exf6
693
xf6 I quite like Black's position ] [ 41.b1 is the best chance but Black is still
12...a6 much better after d8! avoiding a check on
[ 12...xb4?! 13.b1 c6 14.xb7 h 7 . P ra ct ica l ly sp e a kin g t h is is a lm o s t
is definitely a favourable swap for White ] impossible to defend as White with no active
13.b1 f6! If Black sits and does nothing then plan. ]
he risks just getting squashed on the 41...axb5 42.axb5 cxb5 43.a3
queenside 14.exf6 xf6 15.e1?! [ 43.xb5?? loses to c1+ 44.f2 e4+
This looks rather odd to me. The idea is to 45.e2 c3+ picking up the queen ]
play f4 and get control of the e5 square but as 43...f7! Black avoid the check and suddenly
the bishops are now getting swapped off this there's no defence to the slow advance of the
leaves White's light squares rather weak. b-pawn. W hite's position falls apart here.
[ 15.h3! h5 16.e1 e8 17.d2 f7 44.f2 e4+ 45.g1 g4 46.hxg4 h3!
18.a3 and the position is finely balanced. If 47.b2 h2+ 48.h1 g3
Black could get ...e5 in he'd be better but the [ 48...b4! is a cleaner finish as the pawn
d5 pawn is too weak here but on the other cannot be take here because of ...Nf2 ]
hand what is W hite's plan to be better? 49.xh2
Perhaps b5 is playable but then Black gets [ 49.g5+! is the only move to survive even
the open a-file and can also try ...Na5-c4 in a few moves but of course Black is easily
some positions. ] w i n n i n g a f t e r xg5 50.xb5 xg4
15...xe2 16.xe2 e8! 17.d3 f7 18.f4 although it still takes some accurate moves
g6! The best square for the queen and now here: 51.xb7+ g6 52.c6 xd4
W h it e h as p la yed f 4 sh e ca n n o t u se t h e 53.xh2 xe5+ 54.g1 and surprisingly
square for either of her knights. 19.d2 e7 it 's n o t so e a sy t o st op t h e c-p a wn . O f
20.e5 This leads to a slightly worse course the computer finds a very clever win
endgame so perhaps White should have just here with d4+ 55.h2 f4+ 56.g1
waited. c1+ 57.h2 e4! 58.c7 f6! 59.c8
[ 20.f2 f5 21.a4 is fairly equal although I f4+ 60.g1 d4+ 61.h2 h4+
wonder if Black can try h5!? here ] 62.g1 e1+ 63.h2 g4+ 64.h3
20...xe5 21.fxe5 xf1+ 22.xf1 f8 f2+ 65.h2 h1+ 66.g3 e4+ 67.f4
23.xf8+ xf8 24.c3 c6 25.a4 h5! f1+ 68.g4 ( or 68.e3 f2+ 69.d3
Black is only a tiny bit better but he has lots of d2# ) 68...f5+ 69.h4 h5#
options and we get to see a masterclass from Still, this isn't a line a human would ever go
Ehlvest here as he squeezes out a win. 26.h3 for as Black so White should definitely have
f5 27.f2 h7 28.h2 g5 29.f4 h6 tried this final practical try. ]
30.e3?! 49...e1+
[ 30.g3 holds the position together and 0-1
W h i t e s h o u l d b e d e f e n d i n g a f t e r e4
31.xh6 xh6 32.xe4 dxe4 33.g2
as Black's king cannot get into White's half 683 B05
of the board the position is just a draw. ] Lahno,K 2542
30...e4! 31.xe4 xe3 32.f3 f5 Gaponenko,I 2404
33.e2 h4 Black fixes a favourable pawn 72nd ch-UKR w 2012 (3.3) 27.09.2012
st ruc t u re on t he kin gsid e - su d de n ly t h e [Tom Rendle]
ending is clearly better for him. 34.g4 f7
35.g1 e3 36.f3+ e7 37.f2 f5 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
38.f3 f4+ 39.g1 g5 Black is in no rush 5.e2 e6 This remains Black's most popular
at all setup in the 4.Nf3 Alekhine 6.0-0 e7 7.c4
[ 39...c1+! 40.h2 g5 is even more b6 8.c3
accurate as White cannot defend with Qb2 ] [ 8.h3 would transpose to another game in
40.b2 g3 41.b5? This drops a pawn but this update, Smeets-Tjiam. ]
White is already struggling 8...0-0 9.e3 d5 Not Black's most popular
694
move and probably not best either. [ 12.f4 h4 13.d3 was analysed by
[ 9...c6 10.exd6 cxd6 11.d5 exd5 Alexander Volzhin in Kobalia, M-Nalbandian,
is a crucial position to the line and now T ( 13.h1 seems less to the point and in
12.xd5 ( 12.cxd5 xf3 13.xf3 e5 P a n a r i n , M ( 2 5 2 5 ) - L e o n t i e v, A ( 2 3 1 5 )
14.e2 ec4 15.d4 f6 16.b3! Voronezh 2011 Black was very solid after
gave W hite a small positional advantage e7 14.d3 g6 15.g1 h8 )]
in Kasparov, S (2504)-Neverov, V (2542) 12...c6
Lipetsk 2010) 12...xd5 13.xd5 ( 13.cxd5 [ 12...h4 was tried the only previous time
has hardly been played but seems enough the position was reached and now 13.f4
for an edge because of a nice trick after e7 14.d3 g6 15.f5! exf5 16.xf5
e5?! 14.xe5 xe2 15.xf7! xd1 c6 and here in Turkin, V (2285)-Vinokurov,
16.xd8 g4 17.e6 xe6 18.dxe6 f6 A (2394) Voronezh 2003 W hite could've
19.ac1 xe6 20.c7 and Black will have obtained a dangerous attack with 17.h5
an unpleasant ending to hold.) 13...e6 ( or 17.f4!? xb4 18.b1 c6 19.f3 )]
14.d2 ( 14.b5!? ) 14...d5 15.c5 c8 13.f4 White does not necessarily have to
16.b4 f6 17.ad1 e8 18.a3 a6 19.fe1 include this move, although it's a very
was slightly better for White in Sutovsky, E sensible one, gaining space on the Kingside
(2665)-Berkes, F (2617) Paks 2005 ] an d givin g t h e B isho p o n e 2 so m e e xt ra
[ 9...8d7 10.exd6 cxd6 11.b3 seems to options
me to be very comfortable for W hite, [ 13.b1!? simply planning a quick b5 was
although Black's results in this position are worth considering ]
OK. The game Cabezas Ayala, I (2355)- 13...f5?! This blocks up the Kingside but
Appel, R (2544) Vila Nova de Gaia 2010 leaves Black with little or no counterplay
continued with f6 12.h3 h5 13.e1 [ 13...d7 14.d3 d8! would be my
e8 14.d2 ( 14.a4! ) 14...bd7 15.ad1 preferred way of playing - Black can setup
( 15.d5!? ) 15...f8 16.b2 a6 17.d2 c8 a blockade on the Kingside with g6 and
18.ed1 h6 19.c1?! c7 20.dd1 b8 Ne7 although W hite will keep the slightly
and Black had obtained good chances, better chances. ]
although I've suggested a couple of 14.h1! b6 15.g1 This mini-operation to
improvements for W hite in the preceding put the rook on the half-open file makes sense,
moves. ] even if Lahno isn't planning an immediate
10.c5 Kingside assault g6 16.a4 a5
[ 10.cxd5!? deserves some attention in this [ is was no better to sit tight with 16...d7
position xd5 ( 10...exd5 11.e1! as White remains better after 17.b5! bxc5
gives W hite good chances for Kingside 18.bxc6 b8 19.dxc5 xc6 20.b5 d7
expansion ) 11.b3 and Black has to be 21.e2! ]
careful here. Perhaps the reason this isn't 17.b5! An excellent move that leaves White
played is c6!? and now grabbing the pawn clearly on top bxc5?!
i s r i s k y b e c a u s e o f 12.xb7 cb4 [ 17...a7! was a better option as now White
alt h ou gh a f t e r 13.xd5 xd5 14.a6 has more difficulty in breaking through on
it's not clear to me Black has enough the Queenside. One option therefore is to
compensation for a pawn here ] switch to a Kingside attack with 18.h5!?
10...xf3 ( 18.b3 is a sensible alternative) 18...f7
[ 10...c4 didn't solve Black's problems in 19.g2!? planning Qf3 and Rag1 with a
Hnydiuk, A (2431)-Tymrakiewicz, R (2294) dangerous attack ]
Krakow 2012 after 11.xc4 dxc4 12.a4 18.dxc5 d7
f5 13.exf6! xf6 14.xc4 and Black had [ 18...cxb5? 19.axb5 would simply leave
insufficient play for the pawn. ] W hite with connected passed pawns
11.gxf3 c8 12.b4!? Varying from the usual advancing down the board ]
12.f4 but this move also seems to keep Black 19.bxc6 xc5 20.b5 Black now has a truly
under pressure. miserable position with no counterplay and
695
Lahno calmly improves the position until it's chooses. It suits his solid yet off-beat style.
basically winning whilst Gaponenko can do 5.e2 e6 6.h3 A slightly unusual moment at
nothing but wait. f7 21.c1 a6 22.c7 wh ich t o pla y th is mo ve : n o rma lly W h it e
d7 23.b3 b4 24.gd1 g8 25.d2 would castle first. Possibly White wanted to
h8 26.c3 g8 27.d4 a7 28.xe6? adopt Bologan's plan (6 h3 Bh5 7 c4 Nb6 8
The right tactic but the wrong pawn exd6 cxd6 9 Nc3 Be7 10 d5) in which case he
[ 28.xf5! would've broken Black's needs both to get h3 and avoid 00, but
re s is t a n c e exf5 29.xa7 xa7 30.c8 Rozentalis has another idea. xf3 Attempting
xc8 31.xc8 xc8 32.xc8 with the to exploit the early h3. 7.xf3 c6
difference here being that g5?! here doesn't [ 7...dxe5 8.c4 is good for White, so Black
achieve anything as White can simply play has to make this move before he is
( 32...e6 33.g8! is also winning for 'threatening' .. . dxe5. ]
White ) 33.fxg5 xg5 34.d4 with an easily 8.0-0?! A slightly naive move. This exact
winning endgame ] position is surprisingly unexplored but
28...xe6 29.xa7 xa7 30.c8 xc8 [ 8.exd6 is 'correct' after which A Sokolov-S
31.xc8 xc8 32.xc8 g5! Suddenly Black Pedersen, Katowice 1993, continued xd6
has a few chances 33.fxg5 9.0-0 a6 10.d2 0-0-0 11.c3 c7
[ 33.h8 gxf4 34.xh7 xe5 35.g2 12.e2 g5 13.e4 h6 14.b4 g7 15.d2
wa s p r o b a b l y a m o r e a c c u r a t e wa y o f e5 16.b5 cxb5 17.xb5 b6 18.c4 f5
playing - the h-pawn should be enough to 19.g3 xd4 20.e3 c5 21.xf5 a6
give White the win. ] 22.a5 f6 23.xd4 exd4 24.ab1 xc4
33...xg5 34.d1 xe5 35.g2 e7 25.xb7+ xb7 26.xa6 1-0, but clearly
36.f3 d4 Black could do better with a sensible plan
[ 36...d6 37.b5 f6 would've put up involving castling kingside. ]
more stubborn resistance although W hite 8...dxe5! This is the point. Black now has a
has excellent winning chances after 38.h3 version of the Flohr-Agzamov system
f7 what else? 39.e1 ] effectively a tempo up. This position would
37.c4 d5 38.e1+ d6 39.d1? normally be reached by 4... Bg4 5 Be2 c6 6 00
A serious mistake, presumably under mutual Bxf3 7 Bxf3 dxe5 8 dxe5 e6, when W hite
time-pressure as now Black misses her big would understandably not usually play 9 h3.
chance e5? Since the Flohr-Agzamov line is perhaps a
[ 39...b6! leaves White fighting for equality. little better for W hite, the difference is not
Best is 40.e6 xc8 41.xc8 d5 enough to make Black actually better, but it
42.xf5 with a drawn ending. ] does eliminate all question of an opening
40.xd5 xd5 41.b8 b4?! 42.d8+ advantage for W hite. It is surprising that a
c4 43.8xd4+ b3 44.b1+ xa4? player of W hite's strength should know so
A final mistake which hastens the end little about the Alekhine as to be tricked in this
45.dxb4+! And the rook on a7 drops to a way. 9.dxe5 d7 10.e2 c7 11.e1
skewer down the a-file. If White had the move g3 in (both controlling
1-0 f4 and preparing Bg2 and perhaps f4) instead
of h3 then we would now have a position
which sometimes arose in an old-fashioned
684 B05 way of tackling the Flohr-Agzamov. Black's
Libiszewski,Fabien 2415 best move then is 11...Bc5 (see Ivanovic-
Rozentalis,Eduardas 2584 K o v a c e v i c , S u b o t i c a 1 9 8 4 , f o r a f i n e
21st Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (7) illustration of what Black is trying to do), and
[John Cox] that might well have been best here too. A
thematic alternative is 11. ..Ne7. Instea d
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 Rozentalis goes his own way. g6 This puts
Rozentalis has been playing the Alekhine a more pressure on e5 sooner, but the trouble
b it la t e ly, a n d t h is is t h e lin e h e u su a ll y with it is that it takes away Black's d5 knight's
696
usual square in this system. 12.c4 5b6 I know neither who nor when, but |I state this
13.c3 g7 14.f4 0-0 White is a little with certainty, for such is the way of chess
better here: Black's fianchettoed bishop is, as openings."
often in the Alekhine, not particularly effective ½-½
if White manages to hold on to e5. 15.b3 a5
16.e3 This allows Black a chance to free
himself. 685 B05
[ 16.ad1 , for example, would have Malakhov,Vladimir 2570
maintained White's edge. ] Sedina,Elena 2395
16...a4! Picking a moment when White cannot Porto San Giorgio 1999
reply b4. If the a-file is opened Black will be [Alexander Volzhin]
able to relieve his cramp by exchanges and/
or activate a rook along the file. 17.c5 d5 This game is further proof that the main line
18.xd5 cxd5 19.xa4 No doubt when of the Alekhine's is in crisis. 1.e4 f6 2.e5
playing 16 Qe3 W hite had relied upon this d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 6.0-0
move to prevent 16...a4, but it turns out that xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.d2 d7
he cannot maintain the c-pawn. a6 20.ac1 10.e1 c7 11.c4 7b6! The only move.
fa8 21.c3 White settles for immediate [ T h e e r r o n e o u s 11...b5? was played in
equa lit y: it s ee m s th at he h a s no wa y t o Golubev - Lehmkuhl, Hamburg 1999
arrange his pieces to defend the extra pawn 12.xd5 cxd5 13.d6+ xd6 14.xd5!
on c5, which can be attacked by all Black's Definitely Mr. Lehmkuhl is not a subscriber
army with the threat of ...b5 to boot. to this site, otherwise he should know the
[ 21.d4 c6 22.c2 b8 23.ee2 c8 game Guf eld-Goh, where this blow has
illustrates the problems. ] already been played! 0-0 15.xd6 xd6
[ 21.a3 f8 ( 21...c6 22.c3 xc5?! 16.exd6 fc8 17.c3 c6 18.f4 e8
23.xd5 exd5 24.e6 c6 25.exd7 xc1 19.g3 and White won easily. ]
26.xc1 xd7 27.c7 shows a trick 12.d4!?
similar to the game which White would like [ Theory considers 12.d6+ as the main
to use to defend his pawn, but Black does continuation here and I discussed this move
not have to allow this.) 22.h6 e7 23.g5 in the comments to Gufeld - Goh. However
f8 24.f6 c6 , for example, sees all now I have found an improvement for Black:
three results rapidly becoming possible. ] xd6 13.exd6 xd6 14.c4 xc4 15.d4
21...xc5= 22.xd5 xe3 cb6!? ( T h e t h e o r e t i c a l 15...b4
[ 22...xd5 23.ed1 ] is refuted by force: 16.e4! b5 17.xg7
23.xe3 xe5 24.xe5 xe5 25.c7 xa2 f8 18.xe6+! fxe6 19.b7! threatening
26.xb7 d3 27.d1 c5 Bh5 check and winning the Rook back, with
[ 27...xf2? 28.f1 ] decisive advantage.) 16.xg7 f8! 17.e5
28.c7 e4 29.g4 a1 30.xa1 xa1+ 0-0-0 - White definitely has compensation
31.h2 f8 An unexciting draw in a way but for a pawn, but it's not clear if it's enough.
the jockeying for position in the opening is The position requires practical tests. ]
interesting. Rozentalis specialises in finding 12...xc4 13.xc4 White is slightly better
unexplored byways like these with reasonable- due to the Bishop pair and space advantage.
looking non-committal moves, and perhaps On the other hand, Black's position is very
Burgess' defiant 1996 prediction is coming solid, with no weaknesses or bad pieces. But
tru e - " loo k in g in t h e cryst al b all I se e a in the further struggle he doesn't find a good
talented player looking at the position after 5... plan and begins to drift. 0-0-0
e6 and thinking 'this position can't be too bad [ The attempt to castle kingside doesn't work
for Black, there must be ways to make it work. 13...e7 in view of 14.g4! g6 ( if 14...0-0
' And he will work furiously at developing new 15.h6 winning the exchange) 15.h6
plans for Black, new move-order tricks to with obvious advantage for White. ]
avoid the bad lines and reach the good ones. 14.a3 a5?! Quite a dubious move.
697
[ Simply 14...e7 should be preferred. ] 6...e7 7.f3 g4 8.0-0 c6 9.b3 0-0
15.e4 e7 16.b1 b6 17.b4 b5 10.c3 f6 11.e3 d5 12.c5 c8
18.f4! hf8 19.g4! White outplays his This is all standard stuff, played hundreds of
opponent in a very instructive way. First of allt i m e s b e f o r e . 13.h3 White plays this more
he forces his opponent to weaken the frequently than other moves. Indeed, 13 h3
kingside. g6 20.h6 fe8 21.e4!
has been the choice of most grandmasters,
Keeping the c4-square under control and and it scores rather well.
co nt in uin g to rest rict B la ck's Qu ee n . f8 [ 13.b4 and ]
22.g5 h5 23.h4 d7 24.e2! a4 [ 13.d2 are the main alternatives. ]
[ 24...d5 25.c4 ] 13...f5 An interesting sideline, which hasn't
25.b3 Now Black's Queen is completely out
been played nearly as much as the main
of the game and has no moves at all (by the moves 13...Be6 and 13...Bxf3 (13...Bh5 is an
way, the Queen will stay here until the end of older move, now out of favour). W hite has
the game!). On the other hand it's funny that caused some problems versus those,
White can't attack and winit! e7 26.xe7
although not insurmountable ones. A few
exe7 27.h3! Very typical for Malakhov's
unannotated examples:
positional style: [ a) 13...xf3 14.xf3 8e7 15.g4 ( 15.b4
[ He doesn't pay attention to possibilities like f5 16.xd5!? xd4 17.b1 xe3
27.b5 a5 28.bxc6 bxc6 which weaken 18.xe3 xe3 Wang Hao (2610)-Berkes, F
B l a c k ' s K in g a n d g ive W h it e a t t a c ki n g
(2601)/Taiyuan CHN 2006, and here 19.fxe3
chances, but allow Black's Queen to enter gives some edge) 15...g6 16.d2 g7
the game. He just continues to strangle his 17.e2 d7 18.h6 xh6 19.xh6 f5
opponent! ] 20.e3? fxg4 21.hxg4 f7 22.g2??
27...e8 28.f4! af8
The final regrouping of 0-1 Baljon, C (2220)-Bohm, H (2410)/
White's forces. Now the f7-pawn becomes the Eerbeek 1978/MCD ]
main target. ed8 29.f3 c7 30.f4 f8 [ b) 13...e6
31.f6! Changing aim. Black has protected A) 14.g4 h6 ( 14...g6 15.e1 g7
the f7-square, but all his forces are 16.g2 b6 17.b5 6e7 18.b4 a5
uncoordinated so it's impossible to kee p 19.a3 a7 20.e2 axb4 21.axb4 ac6
material on level terms. a5 Desperation, but 22.b1 , about equal, De Firmian, N
B l a c k ' s p o s i t i o n i s l o s t a n yw a y . 32.xe6
(2 5 9 8 ) - L e zc a n o J a e n , P ( 2 3 9 9 ), L a s
It's time to harvest. axb4 33.f6 d5 34.e6 Palmas 1999) 15.b1 g5 16.d2 g7
xf6 35.xf6 Severe losses are unavoidable, 17.h2 8e7 18.f4 gxf4 19.xf4 g6
so Blac k resigned. A textb ook positiona l 1/ 2 -1 / 2 B a n a s, J (2 3 65 )-K n e ze vic , M
game! (2410)/Luhacovice 1973/MCD;
1-0 B) 14.e1!? b6 ( or 14...8e7 15.g4 g6
16.b4 a6 17.a3 d7= Arencibia
Rodriguez, W (2485)-Medina, M (2415),
686 B05 Matanzas 1995.) 15.a4 d7 16.c1
Mok Tze Meng 2308 e8 17.d2 xd4 18.xd4 xd4
Hernandez,G 2360 19.xd4 xe2 20.c3 e8 21.xd5
38th Olympiad (5) 17.11.2008 e7 22.d4 c6 23.c2 d5
[John Watson] 1/2-1/2 Marciano, D (2529)-Baburin, A
(2593), Germany 1999. It's fit to end with
This game illustrates an unusual move in one a Baburin game! ]
of the traditional main lines of the Exchange 14.c1 Although you might think that g4 fits in
Variation. It seems quite playable. 1.e4 f6 with White's plans anyway (he often tries to
2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 5.exd6 exd6 prevent ...Nf5), here Black's intention is ...Be4,
6.e2 when White's weakened kingside is an easy
[ 6.c3 e7 7.h3 is another popular target. Thus he tries slower methods.
approach. ] [ 14.d2 has been the other move here.
698
Because White will soon be threatening the [ 19.h1 g6! ]

favourable exchange Bg5 (after Rfd1, for 19...ac8
example), one of Black's most logical moves [ Or 19...e7 20.g5 xg5 21.xg5
is h6 ( 14...e8 15.a3 a6!? 16.ad1 xg2! ]
8a7 17.fe1 h6 looked a little strange, 20.g5 It's hard to find a good alternative.
Vymazal-Pakhomov (2449), Brno CZE 2007, a6?
although Black didn't stand badly) 15.ad1 [ Here Black could get a substantial
8e7 16.g4 g6?! ( 16...e6!; 16...h7 ) advantage with 20...xg5! 21.xg5 xg2!
17.e1!? ( 17.h4! threatens g5, and Black's 22.g4 ( 22.h5 g6! ) 22...h4 23.xc8
16...Bg6 doesn't allow the response 17... xc8 threatening ...h6. Black recovers his
Ng6 ) 17...h8 ( 17...e8!; 17...b6!? ) 18.f4! material with the better game: 24.c2 h6
e8 ( 18...e4?? 19.g5 ) 19.g2 ( 19.g5 25.f4 hxg5 26.xg2 xg2 27.xg2 gxf4
f5! ) 19...g8 20.f3 e4? 21.xe4 28.f3 g5 29.h4 gxh4! ]
dxe4 22.g5 e7 23.d5 b8 24.d6 21.xf6 gxf6 22.c3 cd8 23.f1
and Black was getting blown off the board [ 23.h2 g7 24.g4 xf3 25.xf3 fxd4
in Kurajica-E Pedersen, Kapfenberg 1970. ] 26.xd5 f5 is unclear. ]
14...e8 23...e7 24.g4 g7 25.d2?!
[ Or 14...h6 , for example, 15.h2 e6!? [ 25.h4! ]
16.g4 h4 17.f4!? 8e7 18.d3 f5 25...e6! 26.cd1 f4 27.xe4 xe4
19.xf5 xf5 20.f3 e4!? ( 20...b4! 28.d3 ee8 29.h4 g7 30.b1
21.a3 c2 22.f2 c6 ) 21.xe4 dxe4 Now Black should play 30...h5! with the better
22.xe4 e8 23.d3 h5! 24.e5 game. After this, the game is fairly level and
( 24.h2 b4 25.d2 d5 ) 24...xe5 then goes in White's favour for a long time.
25.fxe5 xe5 26.cd1 d5 with a double- Black comes back, but at move 116(!), he
edged game, Baron Rodriguez -Fontana loses the thread and the game. In general this
Sotomayour, Aragon 1998. ] is a very interesting and ambitious way for
15.d2 e4 Black to play a difficult line. e7 31.h5 h6
[ The player of the White pieces in the above 32.e1 c6 33.e3 e6 34.f5 e7
game switches to Black in this one: 15...h6 35.d1 xe3 36.fxe3 e6 37.f2 e7
16.h2! 8e7 ( 16...e6 17.g4 e7!? ) 38.d3 g8 39.g1 a5 40.h4 a8
17.g4 xg4 18.xg4 (with two bishops) 41.g3 g7 42.f1 e8 43.h1 h6
g6 19.g3 f8 44.f1 g7 45.f3 g8 46.g3 e8
A) 20.f3 e6 ( or 20...e7 ); 47.a3 d8 48.a1 a8 49.a2 g5 50.f2
B) 20.e2 e6 21.b4 ( 21.h4 ) 21...a6 e8 51.b2 a8 52.b1 e6 53.f3 h6
22.a3 g5 23.c3 g6 ( 23...e6 54.g3 g7 55.f1 e8 56.f2 b8
24.a2!? - the point of 22 a3!) 24.h4 e4 57.c2 h6 58.c1 g8 59.b1 a8
25.xe4 dxe4 26.d5 e5 27.e2 h5 60.b2 g7 61.b1 h6 62.a4 g7 63.b4
28.g2 d7 29.fd1 f5 with unclear axb4 64.xb4 a7 65.c2 h6 66.f3 f8
complications, F Gomez (2329)-Baron 67.e2 g7 68.b1 e6 69.d2 g7
Rodriguez (2431), Havana 2007. ] 70.c3 f8 71.a1 a5 72.b1 a7
16.fd1 73.f1 g7 74.f5+ xf5 75.xf5 c6
[ 16.h2!? -see the examples above. ] 76.f1 c7 77.b1 f8 78.d3 e7
16...8e7 17.g5?! (still too early) 79.a5 d7 80.b4 d8 81.c3 d7
[ 17.xe4!? dxe4 18.h2 d5 19.g4 82.b4 d8 83.f1 e7 84.a1 a8
h4 ( 19...h6 may be better, with the idea 85.a4 d7 86.b1 a7 87.b6 a8
20.xf6+ xf6; 19...e7 20.c4 ) 20.c4 88.b1 c7 89.f1 e7 90.e1 a8
looks ad vantage ous, wit h the idea of a 91.b1 a7 92.f5 d8 93.b3 a8
timely Ne5 ] 94.b2 c7 95.d3 d7 96.b4 e7
17...f5 18.xf6 97.c3 d7 98.d2 c8 99.a2 d8
[ 18.f4 ] 100.e2 e7 101.b2 e6 102.b6 d8
18...xf6 19.b5? 103.a6 bxa6 104.xa6 c7 105.f3 d7
699
106.d3 a7 107.f5 a4 108.b8 a7 this really gives W hite much. See
109.c8 e8 110.e4 dxe4+ 111.xe4 d7 Fedorowicz-Baburin in the archives.;
112.xd8+ xd8 113.xc6 a1 114.e4 C) 15.h2 8e7 16.b5 a5 17.d3
c1 115.b5 e7 116.d5 b1?? f5 18.c6 bxc6 19.xf5 exf5 20.a4
[ 116...d1= ] c4 21.bxc6 e8 and Black had
117.d3 d1 118.f5 c1?? equalised and even went on to have the
[ 118...d8= ] better of the draw against his much higher
119.c6 c3 120.d5 d8 121.d6 c1 rated opponent in Tiviakov, S (2654)-
122.c6 c3 123.h7 c1 124.g8 c3 Tischbierek, R (2422) Cape Town 2013 ]
125.xf7 c4 126.e6 c3 127.f5 c1 14...xc5?! A very tricky move but I think it's a
128.e6 c7 129.xf6 d6 slight mistake with best play
1-0 [ 14...f5 leads to more typical positions for
this line. White is a little better after 15.g1
h4 16.b4 a6 17.b3 but Black is very
687 B05 solid ]
Motylev,A 2676 15.dxc5 d4 16.e4?! This leads to a
Appel,R 2535 queenless middlegame in which White has a
Bundesliga 2013-14 (13) 04.04.2014 very slight advantage, thanks to his extra
[Tom Rendle] space, but Black should be OK after this.
[ 16.b3! seems to lead to a White
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 a d v a n t a g e a f t e r dxe3 17.fxe3 h4
5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 8.h3 18.e4! ( 18.xb7?! 8e7 19.xc7 fc8
Normally this is played on the next move (after 20.d7 d8 21.c7 ac8 22.b7 b8
8.Nc3 0-0) but I can see no difference in this 23.a6 xb2 and Black has a very strong
move order initiative) 18...b8 19.g1 xe5 20.g5
[ 8.c3 0-0 9.b3 I covered last year in g6 21.d1 and White has more than
Kosintseva-Ehlvest where I thought Black e n o u g h f o r t h e p a wn - e s p e c i a l l y wi t h
could probably equalise with c6 10.e3 Black's queen out of the game on h4 ]
dxe5! 11.xe5 xe2 12.xe2 xe5 16...dxe3 17.fxe3 xd1 18.axd1 8e7
13.dxe5 xd1 14.axd1 fd8 ] 19.g2 fd8 20.f2 f8 21.c3 b4
8...h5 9.c3 0-0 10.e3 d5 11.c5 xf3 [ 21...a6! cuts out any nonsense with Nb5
12.gxf3 c8 13.f4 c6 All very mainline so and I don't really see what W hite is doing
far 14.h2 h e r e . P e r h a p s 22.d3 h6 23.e4
[ 14.f5!? is another critical move here but is a little somethin g f or W hit e? But th e
Black gets reasonable chances in this line. e n d i n g a f t e r xd1 24.xd1 d8
The mainline according to Hiarcs opening is surely very equal ]
book (and unsurprisingly my engine agrees 22.a3 bd5 23.b5! a6 24.d4
with it!) goes exf5 15.f3 g5 16.xd5 f4 With this knight on d4 Motylev ensures the
17.xf4 xf4 18.xf4 8e7! and d4 is rooks will stay on the board for the
dropping. Black is at most slightly worse but foreseeable future and he expertly increases
this position needs further tests! ] the pressure from here b6 25.c6 b5 26.g4
[ 14.b4 but Black seems to be holding his b6 27.b3 g6?! I'm not sure White was
own here h4 ( 14...a6 is also solid but threatening f5 and now Black's knight on b6
maybe now 15.f5! is more dangerous than gets sidelined
on the previous move ) [ 27...bd5 was better although White can
A) 15.b5 6e7! ( 15...a5 16.d3 c4 slowly improve with 28.d2 Black should be
looks risky for Black but may be playable) fine if he sits tight ]
16.d3 f5 and Black's position is a hard 28.e4! e8 29.e3 Now f5 is coming - not
nut to crack; necessarily soon but whenever Motylev wants
B) t h e s l o w e r 15.b1 was covered by it to happen! Appel can do nothing but wait
Glenn Flear back in 2002, but I don't think and try not to weaken his position ab8 30.h4
700
bc8 31.c1 An interesting little move which has been

[ 31.f5! looks good already, but Motylev is in popular with the high-rated players who have
no rush ] taken Black's position in recent times. The
31...b6 32.c5 main idea is to threaten . ...Bxf3 Bxf3 Nxc4
[ 32.xe6! is probably stronger here but and so, Black hopes, force a resolution of the
White seems not to be interested in anything central tension without him needing to commit
that complicates the game. Still, W hite is to ...d5 as he does in the old main line, but
clearly better after fxe6 33.xe6 xc6 Black has some other ideas. 10.e3 0-0
34.xd8 xd8 35.fd1+ e8 36.h5! ] 11.b3 The main alternatives are
32...a7 33.fc1 h6?! A serious mistake [ 11.b3 when Black's idea is that after d5
which greatly strengthens White's next move ( 11...8d7 is another possibility) 12.c5
[ 33...h5 34.h3 bb8 and Black is still just the game is like the old main line but with ..
a b o u t h o l d i n g o n , a l t h o u g h 35.f5! a6 and b3 in. Black claims that his extra
is still strong ] move is more useful since he often plays ...
34.h5! gxh5 35.xh5 Now Black's position a6 to ho ld W hit e u p o n t he qu e en s id e ,
collapses f8 36.f5 exf5 37.exf5 xd4 whereas White's b3 is useless since he will
As good as anything at this point 38.xd4 normally play b4 at some point. There is
xf5+ 39.d3 b8?! 40.f1! d8+ 41.c3 something in this, but on the other hand the
g3 42.xf7+ g8 43.d7 e4+ 44.d4 usual ...Bxf3 is now ineffective since after
[ 44.d4 xc6+ 45.xc6 xd7+ 46.xe4 Bxf3 Black cannot play .. .Nc4 anyway, so
is completely hopeless ] p l a y u s u a l l y c o n t i n u e s w i t h c8
1-0 W hether the trade-of f f avours W hite or
B l a c k i s u n r e s o l v e d . ( 12...6d7
is also played )]
688 B05 [ 11.exd6 cxd6 12.b3 8d7 13.ac1
Motylev,Alexander 2665 c8 14.d2 xe2 15.xe2 g5 16.xg5
Yermolinsky,Alex 2570 xg5 17.e4 e7 18.c5
Aeroflot Open (4) 18.02.2005 Anand-Morozevich, Moscow rapid 1995, is
[John Cox] also a little better for White and is usually
considered the way to handle it for White.. ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 11...8d7 12.a4
5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.h3 I don't know why [ 12.exd6 cxd6 13.a4 xf3 would be Kotliar
high-rated players go on playing this move, -Yermolinsky, St Martin open 1993, in which
since for the reasons explained in Starting for some reason White now played 14 gxf3
Out: Alekhine's Defence it is better for White and not surprisingly lost. The text is actually
not to have it in if Black intends to play the a novelty, but Yermolinsky deals with it
main line (7 h3 Bh5 8 c4 Nb6 9 Nc3 00 9 Be3 easily enough. ]
d5 11 c5 Bxf3 12 gxf3 Nc8). Possible 12...dxe5 13.xe5
explanations in general are (i) White wants to [ 13.dxe5 xf3 14.xf3 xe5 15.xb7
play either 11 cxd5 or 12 Bxf3, two once- a7 shows one of the points of ...a6
fashionable but now uncommon plans (ii) although complications continue: 16.fd1
White doesn't like 7 c4 Nb6 8 Nc3 00 9 Be3 b8 17.a5 xb7 18.axb6 aa8 ]
Nc6, when he would rather have h3 Bh5 in as 13...xe2 14.xe2 xe5 15.dxe5
11 d5 exd5 12 Nxd5 Nxd5 13 Qxd5 then gains Perhaps White has a slight edge but it is very
a te mpo on h5 (iii) (ina pplica ble here a s manageable. c8 16.f4 d7 17.c3 c5
White has already castled) he wants to play 18.c2 a5 I find it a bit odd that White never
Bologan's 6 h3 Bh5 7 c4 Nb6 8 exd6 cxd6 9 found time for a5 - this looks like a positional
Nc3 Be7 10 d5 e5 11 g4!?. It must have been achievement to me - but probably he had in
either (i) or (ii), or else SOAD hasn't yet come mind forcing the coming structure change.
out in Russia and Motylev's having to soldier 19.d4 f5 White probably had it in mind to
on without it..... h5 8.c4 b6 9.c3 a6 play f5 himself: the knight on f5 would give
701
him dangerous play on the kingside. 20.exf6 (by transposition)

xf6 21.f5 e5 22.e2 c6 23.g3 f7 [ 7.0-0 e7 8.h3 ( 8.c3 leads to similar
24.h1 f8 25.f3 e4?! Up to here both positions without h3. It's not clear whom
sides seem to have manoeuvred sensibly, but that favours, according to John Cox) 8...h5
why Yermolinsky didn't just continue in the 9.c3 0-0 10.e3 ( 10.exd6 cxd6
same vein with something like 25...Rd8 I can't is the game )]
think, especially since the text is associated 7...cxd6 8.0-0 e7 9.h3 h5 10.c3 0-0
with an idea which just loses from an equal 11.e1 A relatively rare move, waiting to see
position in a move or two as far as I can see. what Black will do. c6
26.xe4 xf5? [ 11...a6!? is recommended, the idea being
[ 26...xe4 27.xe4 f6 was essential, that 12...Bxf3 13 Bxf3 Nxc4 will be possible,
when Black still has some compensation because the rook has a square on a7 after
with ...Re8 and ...Qb4 to come, but that 14 Bxb7.Then 12.d5 would be interesting:
wasn't what he played 25. ..e4 for. ] ( 12.a4!? xf3 13.xf3 xc4 14.xb7
27.xc5 xc5 28.g5! a7 15.f3 ) 12...xf3 ( 12...e5 13.b3 )
Whether Yermolinsky overlooked this move 13.xf3 e5 14.b3 f5 is double-edged, but
completely or miss-assessed the resulting White appears to stand better. ]
ending is hard to say, but either way White is 12.d5
now winning. xg5 [ 12.b3 is more common here. ]
[ 28...g6 29.e6 e7 30.xf5 gxf5 12...exd5
31.xf5 is unthinkable. ] [ 12...xf3 13.xf3 e5 eliminates White's
29.xf8+ xf8 30.d2 If Black had time to bishop due to the attack on c4, but leaves
co-ordinate his pieces he might put up a stout t h e e 6 - p a w n w e a k f o l l o w i n g : 14.dxe6
defence, but the queen picks up a loose unit ( 14.g4!? xg4 15.hxg4?! xc4 16.e2
first. gf5 Bronstein, L -Lida Garcia, Buenos Aires
[ 30...h6 31.xa5 f2 32.d8+ 1985 and c8! 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.xe6+
( 32.a8+? h7 33.xb7?? gxg2 xe6 19.xe6 f6 would favour black)
34.c7 g6! wins for Black since the 14...fxe6 15.xb7 b8 16.e4! bxc4
bishop cannot be kept off the h2-b8 A) 17.c2 with attack on h7 is complex,
diagonal. ) 32...h7 33.d3+ g8 34.e4 for example, h6?! ( 17...h4 18.e2 g6
defends g2 and wins, so Black is lost. ] 19.b3 b6 20.h6; 17...d5! 18.xh7+
31.xa5 f1+ 32.xf1 xf1+ 33.h2 d6+ h8 19.b3 c5 20.f1 b6 with the
34.g3 f2+ 35.h1 xb2 36.d8+ f8 idea ...Qh4) 18.b3 b6 19.f4 ed7
37.c8 b1+ 38.g2 g6 39.g4 c5 20.h7+ h8 21.xe6;
40.e6+ g7 41.g5 b4 42.f6+ g8 B) 17.b3 h4 18.f1 d5 19.b1 d6
43.a5 b3 44.f2 b4 45.e2 b3 20.h5 f5 21.f4 and White's pressure
46.d2 b4 47.e6+ 47...Kg7 48 Kc2 is the seems just a bit better than Black's. ]
zugzwang White is after. A strange game. I 13.cxd5
can't guess what Yermolinsky overlooked. [ Or 13.xd5 , which may be better for
1-0 White: xd5 14.xd5 (hitting h5) g6
15.a3 ( 15.e3!? b4 16.xb7 c2
17.d4 b8 18.xa7 a8 repeats;
689 B05 yielding a small advantage is 15.b5 c7
Najer,Evgeniy 2670 16.f4 ) 15...a5 16.f4 fd8 17.xa5
Yermolinsky,Alex 2530 xa5 18.b4 c6 19.ad1 a5 20.b5 e5
World Open Philadelphia USA (5) 04.07.2008 21.xe5 dxe5 22.xe5 xa3 23.f3
[John Watson] with a clear superiority, Rogic, D -Hribar, J
Ljubljana 1997. ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 13...xf3 14.xf3 e5 15.e2!?
5.e2 e6 6.c4 b6 7.exd6 A simple White decides to retain the bishop pair. c8
approach. W e've seen several games with 16.f1 a6 17.b3 bd7! 18.e3 c7
702
19.ac1 c5 20.d1 d8 21.f4!? have a nice space advantage to

[ 21.b4 is obvious, but perhaps also good, compensate for the outpost on d5. This
for example, cd7 22.b5 a5 23.a4 xc1 recapture leads to a solid position. ]
24.xc1 with more space. ] 14.e2 c6 15.c3 a6! Shifting to the
21...g6 22.g3 Restriction of the knight on g6, blockade square on e6, 16.d3
although it loosens White's king position. f6 [ 16.e6!? ]
23.f2 e8 24.b4 xe1 25.xe1 d7 16...c7 17.e2 e6
26.e4 e7 27.b5 [ 17...f6! ]
[ 27.xc8 xc8 28.c3 xc3 29.xc3 18.g3 g6!? To stop Nf5, yet allowing that
gives White the bishop pair. This is one of move might have been preferable to
those times where I need a very strong weakening the kingside.
grandmaster to assess whether the first [ 18...f6 19.f5! looks good for White
player h as s e riou s winn in g cha nces. I t probably ]
seems hard for White to make progress, but [ 18...e8 19.f5 df8 is the right way. ]
if he advances his pawns and centralises his 19.h6 e8 20.e1 Versus ...f6. Now a lot of
king, who knows? Maybe d8 30.e4 c7 manoeuvring takes place, with White always
31.c4 e7 is a logical reorganization, having a slight advantage because of his
when White has to beware of the simplifying pawn on e5. a5 21.e3 f8 22.xf8 dxf8
...Bb6. Then 32.b3 f8 ( 32...h6 33.a4 23.d2 a4 24.e2 a5 25.c3 b6
f5 34.c5! ) 33.a4! h6 ( 33...a5!? ) 34.a5 26.ac1 a5 27.1c2 b5 28.d3 a8
f5 35.c3 doesn't solve Black's long-term 29.a3 b3 30.c3 a6 31.e3 g7
problems. ] 32.e1!? This is getting too negative. Better
27...axb5 28.xb5 f6 29.xf6+ xf6 [ 32.e2 xe3 33.fxe3 ]
30.xc8 xc8 31.b4 h5 32...fe6 33.g5!? b6 34.xe6 xe6
[ 31...h5 32.h4 with the idea Be2 might 35.d1 d8! Switching to the kingside.
follow, when White may as well play on. ] 36.f1 h4 37.e2 g7?!
½-½ [ 37...f6!? w i t h t h e i d e a 38.exf6 f8!
would activate all of Black's pieces. ]
38.f3
690 B05 [ 38.c3= ]
Ni Hua 2681 38...e6 39.f4 a6 Somewhere hereabouts
Torre,Eugenio 2536 Black should play ... f5 and stop White on the
6th ch-Asia Cebu City PHI (8) 26.09.2007 kingside for the foreseeable future. 40.c1
[John Watson] b5 41.h2 ab6
[ 41...f5! ]
1.e4 A high-rated battle which demonstrates 42.e2
b o t h s id e s o f p la y ve rsu s W h i t e 's d 4 / e 5 [ 42.f5!? gxf5 43.xf5 with the idea xd4?
structure. f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 44.h6 ]
g4 5.e2 e6 6.h3 f5!? Black retains his 42...b3 43.c3 a6 44.g3 h5 45.f2
bishop for a while, but this doesn't seem to h6 46.d2 a8 White probably has the
improve upon the normal line best of things by a hair. Still, he only wins
[ 6...h5 7.c4 b6 8.exd6 cxd6 9.c3 because Black weakens himself: 47.e2 g7
, because after 6...Bf5, Black can't even get 48.d3 b5? 49.d1
rid of White's pawn on e5. ] [ 49.a2 and Nb4 was a good plan. ]
7.0-0 e7 8.d3 xd3 9.xd3 0-0 10.e4 49...e6 50.e3 h5 51.d2 xd3
d7 11.d1 b4!? 12.c4!? 52.xd3 h8 53.d2 d8 54.g4 c5
[ 12.a3! illustrates White's advantage, since 55.f6 h6 56.dxc5 xc5 57.b4
c6 ( 12...d5 13.g4! ) 13.c3 and wins. Black's queen was cut of f from
leaves him clearly superior in the centre. ] defence. e6 58.xb5 f8 59.d3 c5
12...d5! 13.cxd5 exd5!? 60.d4 e6 61.d2 c5 62.f5 e4
[ 13...xd5 is more natural, but White would 63.xe4 dxe4 64.g5 e8 65.e6?!
703
[ 65.fxg6 hxg6 66.f4! ] position, myself included.) 13.d2 g6

65...fxe6 14.a4 a5 15.ac1 b4 16.fd1 c6
[ 65...e7 ] 17.a2 xa2 18.xa2 d5 19.c5 d7
66.f6 e5 67.f7 e6 68.g4 e7 69.xe4 20.d2 b6 21.e5 xe5 22.dxe5 bxc5
g7 70.g1 h5 71.xa4 xf7 72.xf7+ 23.f4 f6 24.g4 fxe5 25.xd7 xd7
xf7 73.e4 c7 74.g2 d6 75.e3 26.fxe5 xe5 Hendriks,R-De Waal,M/
h7 76.h4 d7 77.f2 b7 78.c3 d5 Zwolle 1998 Black was not troubled. ]
79.e3 g7 80.a4 f6 81.f2 e6 82.a5 [ 12.d2 g6?! ( 12...d7; 12...a5; 12...d5
h1 83.f3 c1 84.b3+ f6 85.c3 13.c5 c8 are all ideas which Black can
a1 86.a3 c1 87.c3 a1 88.g2 consider. ) 13.ad1 is a good approach.
a2 89.a3 c4 90.f3+ White simply centralises. e7 14.e4 g7
1-0 15.g5 d7 16.fe1 f6 17.f4 f5 18.h3
xh3 ( 18...xf3 19.xf3 g5 20.h2 h4
21.h5 ) 19.xd6! xd6 20.gxh3 e4
691 B05 21.a5 Alvarez Solis,D-Fernandez Diaz, I/
Pedersen,O 2123 Asturias 1998, White will win this particular
Wohl,Aleksandar H 2399 battle of tactics because his pieces are
Open ch Oslo NOR (5) 07.04.2004 much more active. ]
[Andrew Martin] 12...d5! Now that the White Rook has moved,
White puts the ...d6-d5 plan into action and it
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 b6 is especially appropriate here. The point is
5.exd6 exd6 Since 5...cxd6 is experiencing that white usually answers ..d5 with c5 and
something of a crisis thanks to the Voronezh then a quick b3-b4. If then Black takes on b4,
variation ( 6 Nc3 Bg7 7 Be3 0-0 8 Rc1 etc) Rb 1 a n d R xb 7 wi n s b a c k t h e p a wn wi t h
attention is once again focusing on this solid interest. In this variation thanks to Rc1 White
move. There is nothing wrong with 5...exd6. loses a tempo. 13.cxd5
Black's choice of plans is limited, but as stated, [ 13.c5 c8 14.b4 8e7 15.b5 a5 ]
his position is very difficult to break down. 13...b4 14.h3 h5 He feels it's important to
6.c3 c6 7.e3 e7 8.f3 0-0 9.e2 retain the option of ...Bxf3. 15.b5 f8
e8 10.0-0 g4 11.b3 f6 Black has three 16.c4 c8 17.d6 cxd6 18.a3 xc4
plans in this position. Two are constructive, 19.bxc4 c6 Black has a fine position. The
the other cunning. He can aim to play ... d6-d5. pawn on c4 'hangs' and Black has two good
This is the usual idea. He can prod the White Bishops. 20.g4 g6 21.d5 e4 22.xf6+
pawn structure with ... a5-a4, although it's not xf6 23.g5 At least this way White got rid
clear what this achieves. Finally he may just of the Bishop pair but look at the price that he
wait, let White advance his Kingside pawns has had to pay! His King is wide open and the
and try to pick him off on the rebound. 12.c1 queenside weaknesses remain. It's very tough
I don't see the point of this meaningless Rook to handle this type of game over the board.
move. g6
[ Wohl had this position before: 12.h3 f5 [ 23...fe8 24.e1 h6! 25.xe4 xe4
( 12...h5 13.c1 h6 14.d5 xf3 15.xf3 26.g2 ce8 was a good way of
e7 16.e4 d7 17.b1 f8 18.h5 coordinating too. ]
eg6 Unique manoeuvering with the 24.f3 e4 25.g5 fe8 26.xe4 xe4
Knights. One would expect W hite to be 27.b1 b6 After this easy move, White is in a
better here but the Black Kingside is very mess. 28.b3?
carefully protected and at present Black has [ 28.c5 dxc5 29.dxc5 bxc5 30.xc5 c3
charge of the only open file. 19.e4 b2 31.d7 ee8 32.e3 xa3 wasn't too
20.cd1 h4 21.f5 e5 22.f3 f5 great for White either. But the text move is
23.g3 f4 24.d4 xd4 25.xd4 ae8 poor. ]
Delchev,A-Wohl,A/Metz 2002 Many players 28...a5
would be perfectly happy with the Black [ Wohl's move is a product of his talented but
704
lazy style. He undoubtedly saw 28...xd4! A) an entertaining miniature went

but probably couldn't be bothered to analyse 7...dxe5? 8.f3! (often not played) f6??
it too deeply. Why extend yourself when you 9.e6 d6 10.xd5 1-0 Varnusz, E -
don 't ha ve to ? 29.f3 xb3 ( 29...f4!? Ponyi, A/ Salgotarjan 1978;
30.xf4 xf4 31.b2 xc4 ) 30.fxe4 B) 7...e6 is doubtless best, when the
c3 31.f3 xc4 32.xb6 axb6 33.xb3 obvious 8.c4 b6 9.f3 d7 10.xb7?
d4+ 34.e3 c1+ 35.g2 c2+ 36.g3 ( 10.f6!? g8 11.xh7? dxe5;
e5+ 37.f4 e6 ] 10.exd6!? cxd6 11.c3!? ) 10...c6!
29.d3 f3 30.c3 ce8 White cannot 11.xc6+ xc6 collapses White's centre;
defend this position. 31.h2 f5 The attack C) 7...h6 8.f3 ( I saw only one game
commences and it is a very brief skirmish with 8.xf7! xf7 9.f3+ e6
indeed. 32.g1 f4 33.c1 xf2+-+ 34.g2 , and the best idea is probably 10.c4 dxe5
xd4 35.c2 xc4 36.d3 e5 37.f3 11.cxd5+ xd5 12.g4+ f7 13.c3!
d5 38.gf2 e2 39.a4 xf2+ 40.xf2 f3+ with an initiative that should translate into
5.... exd6 is very playable, particularly against some advantage) 8...c6! 9.c4 ( 9.e6
weaker opposition. The fangs of Korchnoi's g7 10.exf7+ xf7 looks perfectly
early Qf3 seem to have been drawn, and as playable due to Black's quick
you can see from this game, White may self- develo pme nt .) 9...b6 10.c3 g7
destruct given half a chance. 11.0-0 dxe5 12.dxe5 d4!? 13.e4
0-1 xf3+ 14.xf3 xc4 15.xb7 xe5
16.d1 b8 17.e4 0-0
and undoubtedly White has the superior
692 B05 position, but it's not much. ]
Popovic,Dusan 2556 7.e6!?
Zubak,Zeljko 2018 [ 7.g4 c8 is also unclear. 8.c4 c6 9.f3
15th Belisce Metalis Open (1) 21.03.2008 f6 10.exf6 exf6 11.e4 g7 12.0-0 ]
[John Watson] 7...xe6
[ 7...fxe6?? 8.g4 traps the bishop. ]
The variation played by Black here is unusual, 8.xe6 fxe6 9.g4 c6 10.h4!?
and perhaps accidental. After all, the rating [ 10.xe6 g7 11.0-0 a6 12.c4 dc7
differential is over 500 points. At first 5...g6 13.g4 0-0 favours White due to Black's
appears awful, and yet Black may be able to problems on the e-file, but the second player
escape with a normal disadvantage at any rate, has some activity, for example, 14.c3 d5
some normal themes occur in the notes. 1.e4 15.cxd5 xd5 16.e1 ac7 17.e4
f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 ( 17.e3 xe3 18.fxe3 e5 ) 17...b5!
g6!? An odd mix of systems with the two main with the idea of forcing Be3 and swapping. ]
moves ...Bg4 and ...g6 both represented. 10...h5?
White spots what he thinks is a flaw: 6.g5! [ Much better are 10...b6 11.xe6 g7 ]
This looks strong, and it seems to compare [ 10...g7 11.c4 c7 12.h5 d7 13.hxg6
well to similar systems. hxg6 14.xh8+ xh8 15.d3 f7!
[ 6.0-0 can't be bad, but doesn't punish and Black has excellent development. Both
Black's move order, e.g., g7?! ( 6...c6 ...e5 and ...c5 are equalising possibilities. ]
seems better, e.g., 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 dxe5 11.xe6 c7 12.c4?!
9.dxe5 db4 ) 7.h3 xf3? 8.xf3 c6 [ 12.h3 ]
9.exd6 xd6 gives White various ways to [ 12.b3 are both better, when Black's on
use his spac e advantage, f or example , the ropes he really had to put up with the
10.c4 c7 11.e3 ba6!? (versus Qb3) move h5, because after ...h5, g6 is so weak.
12.c3 , when White is on top of things. ] Now, however, he could reorganise. ]
6...f5!? 12...e6?!
[ 6...xe2 7.xe2 is natural but risky. Then [ 12...d5! 13.d3 d6 with the idea ...Nd7
Black needs to be careful: and ...0-0-0 was perfectly reasonable. ]
705
13.d3 g8 14.d2! Headed for f3 with a selected as the knight finds fresh life on
nice positional advantage. It turns into a big c5 while W hite's created a few holes in
squeeze, and Black never has a chance. his structure.;
ba6 15.c3 d7 16.f3 0-0-0 17.0-0 g7 B) 9.e3
18.e1 b8 19.b4 d7 20.a4 e7 21.b5 B1) C e n g i z a s k s a b o u t 9...e7
c5 22.a5 f7 23.b6 axb6 24.axb6 xb6 but White can deal with the threat and
25.b3 bd5 26.a7 b6 27.a4 b8 develop with 10.e2;
28.dxc5 b5 29.a5 f6 30.c6 xc3 B2) The simple 9...e7 is safest 10.c3
31.b7+ c8 32.a7 ( 10.e2 f6! is awkward to deal with.)
1-0 10...0-0 11.e2 f5!? 12.g3 g5
13.0-0-0 left Black with decent counter-
chances had W hite not accepted the
693 B05 draw. 1/2-1/2 Ginzburg, M (2455)-Garcia
Sahl,Bjarke 2391 Palermo, C (2484) Buenos Aires 2009.;
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2646 B3) 9...g6 This looks logical but creates
EU-Cup 21st Saint Vincent (6) 23.09.2005 a focus point for White's attack and so is
[Gawain Jones] not best. 10.c3 g7 11.0-0-0! 0-0
12.h4! and White had a very powerful
Reader's Question. A reader wrote in: 'My kingside attack. Tabak, S (2100)-
name is Cengiz Hasman. I recently became a Vanderwaeren, S (2299) Antwerp
member of ChessPublishing.com. I wanted to 1999. ]
ask you what the best line for Black to 8.a4 Sahl chooses to grab space on the
continue in the Exchange Alekhine (5-ed ed) queenside but White has a huge selection of
is. I have bought Timothy Taylor's Alekhine moves. I've added a quick overview.
Alert! but he does not give any lines after 6- [ 8.e3 e7 9.c3 c6
Nf3 Bg4. As Black, I would like to know if you A) 10.b3 0-0 11.e2 xf3 ( Again a plan
can suggest a good line.' I've had a look and with 11...f5!? should be considered but
decided that following Mamedyarov must be 12.d2 keeps control.) 12.xf3 g5
sensible. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 13.xg5 xg5 14.0-0 fe8 and it looks
b6 5.f3 Perhaps this isn't a big enough to me that Black's position is completely
mistake to let Black actually take the respectable although the computer gives
advantage but at least it makes it easier for White a nibble.;
him to complete his development and B) 10.e2 xf3! is a problem for White
generate play against White's centre. even if it's not quite enough to promise
[ 5.exd6 exd6 6.f3 is the more common B l a c k a n e d g e a f t e r 11.xf3 xc4
move order but it comes to the same thing. 12.xc6+ bxc6 13.a4 b6 14.xc6+
( 6.c3 not allowing Black to pin the knight d7 15.f3 0-0 16.0-0 c6=;
is generally played. In the Alekhine the c8 C) 10.d5?! Dynamic play but not
bishop is of ten a problem piece and so something that should concern the Black
White wants to keep it from having a good player. 0-0 11.xe7+ xe7 White has
square for as long as possible. )] gained the bishop pair but he's a long way
5...g4 6.exd6 exd6 7.h3 h5 behind in development.
[ C e n g i z a s k s m y o p i n i o n o n 7...xf3 C1) 12.e2 xf3! is again the problem;
which also seems possible. 8.xf3 c6 C2) 12.d3 f5! ( 12...xd4 13.xh7+
A) 9.d5 i s c o m m i t t a l : e5 10.e3 xh7 14.xd4 isn't so clear.) 13.0-0 f4
( 10.b3 e7 11.e2 0-0 12.0-0 f5! 14.c1 xd4 15.xh7+ xh7 16.xd4
13.c3 f4 sees Black with a fantastic xf3 17.gxf3 e2 and Black has a
knight on e5 and potential of a kingside fantastic position.;
attack. ) 10...e7 11.f4 Meszaros, T C3) 12.d2 f5! 13.0-0-0 xf3 14.gxf3
(2200)-Gombocz, Z (2110) Budapest 1996 f4 15.xf4 f7 16.g3 xc4 17.c2
when the retreat ed7! should have been b6 and White's structural weaknesses
706
look more relevant than the bishop pair. idea When 11.g4! is obligatory.
Sahl, S (2175)-Zhao Xue (2469) Khanty- ( 11.xb7? xf3 12.gxf3 xd4
Mansiysk 2010. ] is very good for Black.) 11...g6 12.c3
[ 8.d3 is the move which concerned him ( 12.xb7? is s t il l b a d e4! 13.bd2
b u t I f e e l c6 must be very reasonable. b8 14.a6 b4 15.xa7 a8
The pressure on d4 provokes W hite into traps the queen.) 12...b8 13.e3 0-0
9.g4 g6 10.c3 e7 but now the pawn when White's looking rather over-extended.
on g4 grants Black play for the rest of the He can win material with 14.d5 ce5
game. ] 15.xe5 xe5 16.f4 but h4+ 17.d1
[ 8.e2 is the most logical as the Bf3xb7 e8! leaves Black with fantastic
threat prevents Black's typical ...Bxf3 and ... compensation. ]
Nxc4. e7 9.0-0 0-0 10.c3 Rahman, S 10...xf3 11.xf3 e5
(2288)-Enkhtuul, A (2133) Narayanganj [ 11...b4 12.b3 a5 is a reasonable
2010 when rather than 10.. . Bg6 I'd prefer alternative. ]
c6 11.d5 ( 11.e3?! xf3!; 11.b3 12.b3 0-0
keeps the structure intact with a typical [ 12...bd7!? looks interesting as 13.xb7?
Alekhine position, i.e. f6 12.e3 e8 c5! 14.b5+ c6 15.dxc6 0-0
13.d2 h6 and Black will follow up with ... leaves the W hite queen trapped in by her
a5-a4. ) 11...xf3 12.xf3 e5 13.b3 own pawns. ]
xf3+ 14.xf3 d7 15.f4 f5!? 16.ad1 13.e2
f6 followed by ...Nc5, ...Qd7 and ...Rae8 [ 13.a5 bd7 14.e2 ( 14.xb7?
when I don't see any reason he should be is again a big error as c5 traps in the
worse. ] queen 15.b4? cd3+ ) 14...g5! 15.0-0
8...e7!? Tempting White to continue xc1 16.xc1 f5! would give Black good
queenside play. kingside chances. ]
[ 8...a5 makes sense preventing the White 13...a5! Fixing the outposts on c5 and b4.
pawn going any f urther when Black can White has the bishop pair but Black has the
make use of the b4 square. ] better long term chances with such
9.b3?! Too optimistic weaknesses in White's camp. The strong GM
[ 9.a5 was the logical continuation 6d7 playing Black must have been very content to
10.c3 0-0 11.e2 c5!? ( 11...e8 re a ch su ch a p o sit i o n in wh ic h h e c o u l d
would be normal.) 12.e3 c6 13.0-0 e8 outplay his lower rated opponent. 14.0-0 e8
14.dxc5 dxc5 15.a4 and White's extra 15.c3 ed7 16.c2 g5! This is always a
space would give him slightly better useful plan to remember. Either White has to
chances. ] give up his bishop pair advantage or else
9...c6 cr e a t e f u r t h e r h o l e s i n h i s c a m p . 17.f4?!
[ 9...xf3 10.xf3 c6 might be the better Probably the wrong choice as the bishop is
move order. It allows 11.e3 but b4 trapped in on c1.
12.a3 c6 and Black's queenside play [ 17.xg5 xg5 18.b5 d8 would keep
gives him good chances. ] rough equality as Black is tied down to the
10.d5 defence of c7. ]
[ 10.a5 17...f6 18.e4 d4+ 19.h1 f6
A) 10...xf3 n o w a l l o w s 11.axb6! 20.f3?! Sahl should have taken the
( Instead 11.xf3 d7 is no problem: opportunity to keep the knights on the board.
12.e3 f6 13.d1 0-0 14.e2 g5!= ) [ 20.g3 bd7 21.f3 g6 22.a3 e7
11...e4 12.bxc7 xc7 When White's is about equal. ]
structural edge promises him a small edge, 20...xe4 21.xe4 h6 22.d2?! This drops
i.e. 13.e3 xb1 14.xb1 f6 15.a4 a pawn.
0-0 16.d5 e5 17.e2 d7!? 18.0-0 [ However it wasn't easy to come up with a
c5 19.a3 a5 20.b4! axb4 21.xb4; go o d m o ve : 22.h7+ h8 23.f5 f6
B) 10...d7!? might have been Shak's 24.g4 e3 25.xe3 xe3 sees Black
707
taking control and exploiting all the 9...d7 10.e1 c7

weaknesses that White's cavalier opening [ In an earlier column, Volzhin analysed
created. ] 10...e7 11.c4! 0-0 12.a4 a5 13.d2
22...xb2! 23.h7+ h8 24.xb2? with some advantage for White in Baklan, V-
And White collapses Kosikov, A/Kiev 2000. ]
[ 24.ab1 d4 25.f5 f6 would leave 11.c4 7b6! When a 2650 player repeats
Black a pawn up but with the pressure on this solution, you feel that it's probably sound.
t h e k n i g h t i t wo u l d a t l e a s t b e h a r d t o [ For the third time in this column the reader
convert. ] can enjoy 11...b5? 12.xd5! cxd5
24...xc4! Obviously White overlooked this 13.d6+ xd6 14.xd5!! ]
tactical possibility but now another pawn 12.e2
drops. 25.c2 xd2 26.fe1 c4?! [ 12.d4 xc4 13.xc4 transposes. ]
[ 26...xe1+ 27.xe1 c4 was move [ Volzhin's analysis of 12.d6+ goes xd6
accurate so that c7 was still defended. ] 13.exd6 xd6 14.c4 xc4 15.d4
27.d3? cb6!? 16.xg7 f8! 17.e5 0-0-0
[ 27.xe8+ xe8 28.xc4 xh7 29.xc7 - 'White definitely has compensation for a
was W hite's last chance. c8! 30.xd6 pawn, but it's not clear if it's enough. The
( 30.xb7 c2! is ve ry d a n ge ro u s.) position requires practical tests.' ]
30...d8 31.c5 e4 32.d1 xa4 12...xc4 13.xc4 0-0-0 14.a3 h6
33.d4 and White still has some chances. ] A new, ambitious move, trying to attack on
27...b6 I'm not convinced these final moves the kingside! Volzhin suggests 14...Be7, which
are accurate. is solid-looking.
[ 27...e3! was possible as the knight [ But 14...a5?! 15.e4 e7 16.b1 b6
escapes: 28.b3 h4! 29.b5 g3 17.b4 b5 18.f4! hf8 19.g4! g6
30.e2 e4 31.g1 ( 31.ae1? f1! ) 20.h6 fe8 21.e4! worked out very
31...f5 with a winning endgame after the p o o rly in M a la kh o v- S e d in a , P o r t o S a n
exchanges. ] Giorgio 1999 ]
28.c1? 15.b4 g5 16.b2 h5 17.g3!? g4 18.g2
[ 28.xe8+ xe8 29.xc7 xa4 30.xd6 g7 19.e4! e7 20.a4! d2!? 21.f4!?
would still require a lot of play to convert [ 21.b5 should be considered. The opening
the extra pawn. ] is well over and the game takes a very back-
28...xe1+ and-forth course: ]
0-1 21...xc2 22.xf7 xb2 23.xg7 d8
24.ad1!? d5 25.g6 e7 26.b5 f8
27.bxc6?
694 B05 [ 27.f1 . This position is good for White. ]
Senff,Martin 2468 27...fxf2 28.xd5 exd5 29.g8+ c7
Krasenkow,Michal 2651 30.xd5 bxc6 31.c1 d7 32.xd7+
Bundesliga 2006-7 (11) 25.02.2007 xd7 33.e6+ e7 34.xc6 g2+
[John Watson] Black doesn't have quite enough to win here.
35.h1 xh2+ 36.g1 hg2+ 37.h1
Theory in this main line of the Flohr Variation h2+ 38.g1 bg2+ 39.f1 f2+ 40.g1
seems to have settled down a bit, and it's up fg2+ 41.f1 xg3!? 42.c7+ f6
t o W h it e t o s h o w s o m e t h in g. T h is ga m e 43.f7+
indicates that he has somewhat the better of it [ 43.e7?? h1+ 44.f2 f3+ ]
if Black goes for a lot - it's still unclear. The 43...g6 44.e4! b3 45.g1 bh3 46.e7
play after the opening is rather irrational. 1.e4 h1+ 47.f2 3h2+ 48.g3 h4+ 49.xg4
f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 g1+ 50.f4 f1+ 51.g4 g1+ 52.f4
c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 f2+ 53.e3 e1+ 54.xf2 xe4 55.e8
9.d2 xe8
[ 9.e1 d7 10.d2 transposes. ] ½-½
708
695 B05 13.xf3 e5 14.dxe6

Smeets,Jan 2609 [ 14.b3 is rare but definitely worthy of
Tjiam,D 2386 attention here, for example xf3+ 15.xf3
TCh-NED Meesterklasse 2012-13 (2.1) 6.10.12 e5 16.ad1 f5 17.c5!? and Black has
[Tom Rendle] some tricky problems to solve ]
14...fxe6
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 [ 14...bxc4?! does not solve Black's
5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.h3 In Lahno- problems 15.exf7+ h8 16.d4 xb2
Gaponenko White achieved a good position 17.e2 bd3?! ( 17...xf3+ 18.xf3 f6
by doing without this move. h5 8.c4 b6 was a better try although W hite is much
9.c3 0-0 10.e3 c6 A slightly unusual better after 19.xf6 xf6 20.xf6 gxf6
choice and I think with accurate play White 21.ab1 ) 18.xb7 b8 19.ab1
should now have a safe edge. an d W h ite h ad a win nin g a d van t a ge in
[ 10...d5 is the critical test as it's generally G ri t se n ko , A ( 2 3 1 7 ) -A b a so v, N (2 3 8 1 )
felt that this works better for Black now that Moscow 2008 although Black somehow
W hite has included h3. Play normally managed to hold a draw in the end. ]
continues 11.c5 xf3 12.gxf3 c8 13.f4 15.g4! This is an important position for the
and here we have a critical position: line - I don't see an easy way for Black to
A) 13...h4 would probably be my choice equalise here so W hite players should
as Black here 14.d3 g6 15.f5!? exf5 probably follow Smeets' way of playing.
16.b3?! ( 16.f3! was probably a more [ 15.xb7 b8 is unclear but looks at least
testing move) 16...e7 17.xb7 bc6 OK for Black ]
18.b5? a6! 19.d6 d7 and Black 15...exc4 After this White has more than
wa s wi n n in g in B r o n n i ko v, K ( 2 2 6 5 ) - one way to keep the advantage
Kovalenko, I (2567) Izhevsk 2011; [ 15...xg4 16.xg4 f6 might be Black's
B) 13...f5!? is another possibility, although best option, although W hite retains the
it does limit Black's counterplay on the be t te r ch a n ce s af t e r 17.fd1 ( instead
Kingside.; 17.ad1 c7 18.d4 c6 19.e4 g6
C) 13...c6 14.c2 ( 14.f5!? exf5 20.fd1 c8 wasn't so clear in Gopal, G
15.f3 ) 14...h4 15.a3 8e7 16.d3 g6 ( 2 4 5 5 ) - A h m e d , S ( 2 3 2 4 ) D h a k a 2 0 0 7)
17.h2 f6 18.e2 fxe5 19.dxe5 f5 17...g6 18.e4 c7 19.ac1! ]
and Black has an excellent game in [ 15...f6 16.b3 xg4 17.xg4 d7
Edouard, R (2634)-Kovalenko, I (2515) 18.e4 and White's advantage was obvious
Moscow 2011 ] in Vesselovsky, S (2379)-Holub, M (2061)
11.exd6! cxd6 12.d5 This is the critical test Ricany 2011 and in fact he went on to win
of 10...Nc6 quickly after c8?! 19.g5! c5 20.d4
[ 12.b3 is also an option and Black should d8 21.xf6 xf6 22.e3 a5 23.ac1
p r o b a b l y n o w t a k e t h e c e n t r e w i t h d5 e8 24.b5 d8 25.a3 ]
and after 13.c5 c8 ( 13...d7 16.xe6+ h8 17.xc4
also seems logical to me) 14.a3 xf3 [ 17.xb6! was also a good option. The
15.xf3 f6 16.c1 8e7 with balanced p o s i t i o n a f t e r xb6 18.g4
ch an ce s in B acalla o A lo n so , Y (25 80 )- is an unpleasant one for Black who probably
Hernandez Carmenates, H (2570) Havana have to defend for a long time with only the
2012 ] h o p e o f a d r a w a t b e s t . ( 18.a4!?
12...xf3 is also worth considering, aiming to gain
[ 12...exd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5 g6 even more control of the light-squares. )]
and now in Aronian, L (2551)-Anastasian, A 17...xc4 18.d4 White's advantage is
(2571) Yerevan 2000 White could have kept obvious here. The pawn on d6 is a long term
a pleasant advantage with 15.ad1 f6 weakness, as is the square on d5 in front of it.
16.d4! due to the long-term weakness of f6
the pawn on d6. ] [ 18...xb2? runs into 19.e2 f4 20.e3
709
a n d B la c k lo se s a n e xch a n ge wit h a4 retreat f5 is unstoppable.) 16.f3! c6

21.xf4 xc3 ] 17.b3 intending the sacrifice Nd5. I agree
19.d5 xd4 a n d b e li e ve t h a t W h it e h a s a d e c is i v e
[ 19...xb2 is more interesting on this move. advantage here. ]
White has a few ways of playing but the one 14.b5 a5?! I don't like this move ( by the
I like best is 20.g4! d3 21.xf6 gxf6 way, that was the last move of the Knight in
22.f3 and Black's tattered pawn structure this game!)
is likely to count against him in the long [ 14...6e7 should be preferred, and White's
run. ] advantage after 15.d3 f5 16.xf5 exf5
20.xd4 e5 21.ad1 Simple play from Jan, 17.f3 c6 ( 17...e7? just blunders a pawn
building up pressure on the d6 pawn. c6 after 18.h5 ) 18.a4 is minimal. ]
22.g4 f7 23.d2 d7 24.fd1 d8 15.d3! g6 And only now does White break
25.c3 e7?! in the centre. This is very effective, as Black's
[ 25...xg4 was probably a better try Knight on a5 is out of the game.
although Black faces a difficult task to hold [ 15...e7 doesn't help Black 16.h5 g6
after 26.hxg4 fd7 27.e4 d5 28.c5 17.f5! , and Black is in trouble. ]
e7 29.xd5 xd5 30.xd5 g8
16.f5! exf5 17.f3 c6 18.h6
and the presence of doubled pawns on the g- [ 18.h1 g5 19.g1 xe3 20.fxe3 e7
file give Black excellent drawing chances. ] /\\ f6~~ ]
26.e4! now the pawn drops for no 18...e8 19.f4! The point. White prevents
compensation and Smeets is quick to close the exchange of dark-squared bishops. Now
the game out df8 27.xd6 f4 28.g3 h6 the attack becomes unstoppable. e7
29.b3 f6?! 30.xb7 Simply another free [ Black could easily win the Bishop: 19...e6
pawn d4 31.c5 f7 32.e1 f3 20.h1 g5 21.xg5 xg5 but to protect
A last ditch attempt but of course White is not h is K i n g is a m u ch m o re d if f ic u lt t a s k !
i n t e r e s t i n g i n t a k i n g t h e r o o k 33.e5 22.xf5 g6 23.f4 The assessment of the
And with the Queens coming off the board position is clear: White has a decisive attack,
Black decided it was time to resign. A model an d t h e K n igh t is st ill st u ck o n a 5 . h6
game from Smeets that puts 10...Nc6 under 24.h5 g7 25.g1! h8 26.xg6 fxg6
question. 27.xg6 e8 28.f5 e7 29.g5+-
1-0 winning ]
20.h1 f8 There are lot of defensive tries
for Black, but I hardly feel that a profound
696 B05 analysis is necessary to demonstrate how
Ulibin,Mikhail 2570 difficult it is to resist the White initiative.
Morovic Fernandez,Ivan 2570 [ 20...f6 21.g1 h8 ( 21...fxe5 22.xf5
Las Palmas 1992 h8 23.xg6!+- winning ) 22.ae1 ]
[Alexander Volzhin] 21.g1 xh6 22.xh6 h8
[ 22...e7 23.g3 /\\ Rh3 ]
1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 23.e2! e7 24.f4 g8
5.e2 e6 6.0-0 e7 7.c4 b6 8.c3 0-0 [ 24...g8 25.h3 /\\ 26. Bf5 gf5 27. Qg3
9.e3 d5 10.c5 xf3 11.gxf3 c8 12.f4 e7 26.ae1 /\\ e6-> ]
c6 13.b4 I believe this move is much more 25.g3 f8 26.h4 e8
to the point than 13.f5. h4 [ 26...g5 27.xg5 g6 28.g3 h6
[ 13...a6 was played in van Riemsdijk - 29.g1+- winning ]
A l b u r t , 1 9 8 1 . 14.f5! exf5 15.f4! b8 27.ag1 /\\ Nh5 h6 28.e6! h7 29.exf7!
I can't see any other way to protect the d5- xf7 30.h3
pawn. Now according to Alburt's notes in [ 30.h3 h5 31.xh5! ]
Informant-32, W hite shouldplay ( 15...h4 1-0
doesn't work: 16.d3 8e7 17.h5 xb4
18.b1 g6 19.xf5 and after the Bishop's
710
697 B05 15...hd8?! A little sloppy.

Verbruggen,Samuel 1891 [ 15...c5! 16.e3 f4! is very strong. ]
Krasenkow,Michal 2660 16.xg6?
HZ Open Vlissingen NED (1) 04.08.2007 [ Last chance for 16.a3 ]
[John Watson] 16...hxg6
[ Or the clever 16...c5! White is in terrible
In this game White tests the queen exchange shape because he can't hold the key
that we recommended in the June column. squares. ]
Alas, the almost 700 -point rat ing sprea d 17.c3?! a5 18.f1 c5 19.d4?
between the opponents soon has its effect. But White is reeling anyway. xd4 20.xd4
Nevertheless, Black's play is a model of how d8 21.e3
to conduct the play. 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 [ 21.xc5+ xc5 22.c3 d4 23.c1
3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xe5 is also hopeless. ]
[ W e've seen 6.c4 b6 7.g5 xe2!? 21...d1+ 22.e2 e1+ 23.f3 d3
( 7...f5 ) 8.xe2 dxe5 9.dxe5 e6 24.e4 xf2+
and normal is 10 0-0, but the rarer ( 9...h6 0-1
10.e4 seems to favour White somewhat)
10.h5!? has done quite well after 10...g6
1 1 Q e 2 ! S t i l l , t h a t ' s o n l y a p o s i t i o n a l 698 B05
advantage, and it must have frustrated a Vuckovic,Bojan 2572
2 4 0 0 p l a y e r t o m i s s t h e s i m p l e c7? Bogut,Zeljko 2467
11.xe6! e7 12.xf8 , and White won BHTelecom Open (7) 16.05.2009
quickly in Varavin, V - Gavrjushin, O, Perm [Neil McDonald]
RUS 2007. ]
6...xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.c4 e7 1.e4 f6 2.e5 d5 3.d4 d6 4.f3 g4
10.xd8+ xd8 11.b3?! This move has 5.e2 c6 6.0-0 xf3 7.xf3 dxe5 8.dxe5
n u m e r o u s d i s a d va n t a g e s , b e s t s e e n b y e6 9.e1 d7 10.d2 c7 A critical
comparing my analysis in June's column, moment in the 6.0-0 variation. As you can see
which went in the archives, Black has tried several ideas
[ 11.d2! (or 11 Re1 Nd7 12 Bd2, here without finding a convincing way to keep
transposing), which stops ... Bb4 by Black reasonable chances. The game move seemed
and leaves open the interesting idea of Bd1. t h e m o s t p r o m i s i n g , b a s e d o n S e n f f -
If Blac k do esn 't d o so me thing, W h it e's Krasenkow, but it too is now under pressure.
b i s h o p p a i r w i l l g r a d u a l l y t a k e o v e r . 11.c4 7b6
Travenec-Cibulka, Slovakia 1996 continued [ Players are still falling for the 11...b5? trap:
d7 12.c3 g6 ( you can see my notes 12.xd5! bxc4 ( If 12...cxd5 13.d6+
on 12...c7 13.e1 there ) 13.e1 a5 xd6 14.xd5! -see the archives) 13.xc4
14.a3 c5 and now best was ( 14...c5 xe5 14.f4 d6 15.xe6? ( Instead
15.d1! ) 15.d2! with a definite 15.xe5 xe5 16.h5 is entirely crushing,
advantage. ] as if f6 17.xe6+ ) 15...0-0 ( the best
11...d7 12.b2 g6 13.e1 b4! c h a n c e , a s i f 15...fxe6 16.xe5 xe5
See the difference? 14.e4 e7!? 17.h5+ and White will regain the piece
[ 14...a5! threatens ...Bc7, winning a pawn, whilst keeping his extra pawn.) 16.b3
and 15.a3 ( 15.h5 c7 16.xg6 hxg6 f3+ 17.xf3 xf4 18.g3 e5 19.c3 a5
17.d2 e7 18.f3 ad8 is fine for Black. and Black, thanks to his near 100 point Elo
He can even consider ...c5, to prevent a advantage, managed to draw in S. Iermito-G.
piece from coming to d4 and plan ...Nb8-c6 Mahia, Buenos Aires ARG 2008. ]
himself. ) 15...c7 16.ae1 e7 12.d4
followed by ...Rhd8 is fully satisfactory. ] [ T h e S e n f f g a m e w e n t 12.e2
15.h5?! White should make luft with which amounted to a transposition after
[ 15.h3 ] xc4 13.xc4 ]
711
12...xc4 [ Or 24.b2 threatening 25.Be4 with a quick

[ White has a very dangerous initiative after win. ]
12...0-0-0 13.g5 f6 ( Or 13...e7 24...d4 25.e3 xe3
14.d6+ ) 14.exf6 xc4 ( Even worse is [ If 25...c4 26.f1 ]
14...gxf6 15.xb6+ axb6 16.xd5 xd5 26.xe3 e2+ 27.f1 xa1+ 28.xe2
17.xf6 ) 15.f7 db6 16.xd8 xd8 a3 29.d3+ Winning a piece is quite good
17.c3! etc. ] enough, though perhaps W hite's light
13.xc4 0-0-0 14.a4!? Vuckovic intends to squared bishop deserved the last word with
throw all his pawns forwards on the queenside. [ 29.d3+ e7 30.c7+ f8 31.d8+
This is a rather obvious attempt at an g7 32.f6+ h7 33.e4+ followed by a
improvement over the Senff game, which went quick mate. ]
[ 14.a3 etc. ] 1-0
14...h5 15.c3 e7 16.b4 g5 17.g3 g4
18.g2 If the game is to be decided by a
battle between wing attacks, W hite should 699 B06
com e up t rum ps e ve n if th e bla ck a tt ack Adams,Michael 2728
appears to be faster. This is because of the Carlsen,Magnus 2826
enormous strength of the bishop on g2 both 39th Olympiad Men (6.18) 27.09.2010
as a defender and an attacking piece. Even if [Gawain Jones]
Black breaks open the h-file and through
some astounding manoeuvre got his queen to 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.e5 h5 The North Sea
h7, there still wouldn't be a mate in sight. In Defence, so called after its founders Gerard
contrast, the apparently solid black queenside W elling from the Netherlands and Rolf
structure can become very brittle when it is Martens from Sweden. This wasn't what I
rammed with b4-b5. Incidentally, it is the expected when I glanced over at board 1. The
power of a similar fianchetto bishop which line seems to be to be most similar to the
makes openings such as the Sicilian Dragon Alekhine and Nigel Davies has analysed this a
attractive to many players. hg8 19.b5? fair bit in the archives. Black loses time in the
This proves very successful in the game, but opening but hopes to gain counterplay
perhaps a slower approach was objectively against W hite's extended centre. I'm very
stronger with say sceptical about the line but nevertheless the
[ 19.b3!? h4 20.a3 intending to drive choice of the W orld number one has to be
back the black knight with 21.c4 ] taken seriously. Before we look at the game
19...cxb5 20.xb5 xc3!? Not greed, but the match situation should be considered.
more of a desire to eliminate the c-pawn Magnus out rated Mickey on board 1 but we
before it can push the knight away with 21.c4. had a rating advantage on all other boards,
[ A l s o i n t e r e s t i n g w a s 20...a6!? particularly on 3 and 4 and thus Carlsen must
when White's queen is forced to a passive have decided that Norway's only chance was
square e.g. 21.b1 since ( 21.b3 xc3 him winning with Black, and, therefore, he
forces an exchange of queen unwelcome to considered playing an offbeat opening for
white as if 22.xd5? xe1+ )] better chan ces. Ironically the rest of th e
21.b3 d3?? An awful tactical oversight. match was drawn and thus this game decided
[ After 21...b8 the position would still be the match. 4.e2 Not obligatory but played by
full of fight- W hite has open lines on the m o st p la ye rs wh e n t h e y've re a ch e d t h i s
queenside, but Black has the d-file and can position.
always obstruct the bishop on g2 with Nd5. ] [ Stefan Bücker wrote an in-depth article for
22.xb7+! d7 chesscafe.com back in 2008 on the opening.
[ Black is busted as if 22...xb7 23.c4+ He amalgamated various analysis by
b8 24.xd3 and White is the exchange Welling, Martens, Hjorth and Bickford. One
up with enormous attacking chances. ] of his mainlines continues: 4.f3 d6
23.c2 c4 24.g2 A) 5.c4
712
A1) 5...dxe5 was tried in a recent game. but this was hardly an advert for the opening.
6.xe5 e6 7.f3!? The most Burmakin, V (2552)-Morozevich, A (2717)
aggressive although White should have Sochi 2005. ]
been better with a normal move like 7. 5.f3 Mickey plays it safe, a very sensible
0-0. f6 8.d3 xd4 9.b3 e5 10.c3 decision considering the match situation. To
g4 11.d5 d7 12.g4! g7 13.e4 sum up I'd say that taking the knight is rather
e7 14.g5 d7 15.xd7+!? foolish in practical games but 6.f4 looks like a
A very dramatic move which gives White good try for an edge. However Adams' move
fantastic compensation. ( However the is also good enough.
'boring' 15.gxf6 xf6 16.a4+ [ 5.xh5 must be critical but Deep Rybka 4
was just winning as c6 17.xc6+ bxc6 is fairly happy with Black's position. gxh5
18.xc6+ f7 19.xa8 picks up 6.xh5 dxe5
material. ) 15...xd7 16.gxf6 e8 A) 7.dxe5 d5! (Martens) 8.f3 ( 8.f3
17.fxg7?! But taking this knight appears c6 9.c3 Reinderman, D (2495)-
to be a mistake. ( 17.g5! regains the Bundgen, A Zwolle 1996 and here keeping
queen as there's no good response to the queens on with c5 gives Black good
18.f7 when White would still be on top.) practical chances.) 8...e4+ 9.e3 xc2
17...xg7 and the game eventually 10.c3 c6 11.g5 g6 12.xg6 hxg6
finished as a draw. Hillarp Persson, T 13.0-0-0 g7 14.f4 a6 15.h3 c7
(2538) -Andersen, J (2276) Copenhagen Westerinen, H (2430)-Heinola, K
2010.; Jyvaskyla 1992 and Black was only a little
A2) 5...c6 6.e2 g7 7.h3 f5 8.exf6 worse.;
xf6 9.c3 d5 10.b3 0-0 11.g5 B) 7.xe5 g8 and here I'll give some of
e6 The position reminds me most of a Bücker's analysis but without going into
French where White should have some too much detail. 8.e2! c6! 9.e4 f5
advantage thanks to use of the e5 10.h4 e6 11.bc3 b4 12.h5+
square but it's not the end of the world g6! 13.0-0 xc2 14.b1 f7 15.xf5
for Black.; xd4 16.xd4 xd4 17.e3 g4
B) 5.c3 dxe5! 6.e3! exd4 7.xd4 f6 18.xg4 xg4 19.b5 0-0-0! 20.xa7+
8.e2 h6 9.d1 d7 10.c5 (Wind) b8 21.fd1 d5 22.f3 b4 23.b3 c6
c6 11.g3 e5 12.h3! a5 13.d6 f8 24.a3 h4 25.b4 h6 26.f2 h5
14.d2 a6 15.xa6 bxa6 16.b3 is a long line given by Bücker in which
b6 17.g2 d7 18.xf8 xf8 Black eventually holds the draw although
Bücker, when W hite has the advantage White is still the one pressing. ]
thanks to his better structure and use of c5 [ 5.exd6 was tried by Ni Hua when he found
and d6 squares. He will win back either a6 himself with this position but this doesn't
or c6 and be very comfortably placed. ] seem critical. xd6 6.f3 f4 7.xf4
4...d6 This hasn't been covered on xf4 8.0-0 g7 Ni Hua (2533)-Heinola, K
ChessPublishing before but is in fact played (2181) Dos Hermanas 2004 was
more often and is the top choice of the respectable for Black who must have
computer. It appears that taking on h5 may equalised thanks to his bishop pair. ]
not be a serious threat. [ 5.f4 is given an exclamation mark by
[ 4...g7 was looked at in Lautier-Miles but Bücker. I'd pref er to be W hit e but here
this looks exceedingly passive. A more Carlsen would at least get his counterplay
recent GM encounter continued: 5.f3 d5 and unprepared this would be a foolish
6.c4 c6 7.c3 dxc4 8.xc4 e6 9.e3 option. c5 ( He considers 5...e6 6.f3
g7 10.d2 h6 11.d1 c7 12.h3 e6 g7 to be more reliable but this is hardly
13.xe6 xe6 14.0-0 c7 15.fe1 ba6 scary and White will have a fairly risk free
16.a3 d7 17.d5 cxd5 18.xd5 xd5 edge. ) 6.d5 e6 7.c3! and in all lines
19.xd5 xd5 20.xd5 e6 21.a5 W hite appears to be doing well. ( 7.xh5
and Black held the clearly worse endgame h4+ looks good for Black. )
713
A) 7...h4+ 8.f1 g3+ 9.hxg3 xh1 17...xf3+ 18.xf3 although this leaves
10.e4 gives White fantastic Black passive and struggling to do anything
compensation.; wh ile W h ite can slowly bu ild u p on t h e
B) 7...dxe5 8.fxe5 kingside. It is too difficult for the e7 knight to
B1) 8...exd5 GJ doesn't seem to have find a good location as any ...g6-g5 will give
been mentioned but looks to me like White a huge outpost on f5. A sample line:
Black's best. White should still be better d7 19.g2 b5 20.d3 b4 21.e4 a5
after both 9.xd5 ( and 9.xd5 e6 22.g5 and Black's position is miserable. ]
10.c4 d7 11.f3 g7 12.0-0 0-0 18.g2! Taking the opportunity to keep the
13.g5 f6 although Black is closing in b i s h o p p a i r . g5 While watching the game I
on equality.) 9...b6 10.a4 ( 10.g4!? ) thought this move was the downfall for Black
10...c6 11.a5 c7 12.b5 b8 but in fact it is already very difficult. At least
13.a6 when Black's position looks pretty here he prevents Adams from keeping both
ugly.; bishops but the light squares around his king
B2) 8...g7 9.f3 exd5 10.xd5 0-0 a re n o w ve ry vu l n e ra b le . T h e re ' s a ls o a
11.e3; question as to what Black should do if he
C) 7...exd5 8.xd5 g7 9.g4 dxe5 doesn't try this move.
10.gxh5 e6 11.c4 h4+ 12.f1 0-0 [ 18...d7 19.e4 h6 20.b1!? e7
13.h6 is messy but again White should 21.c1!? f8 22.b2 followed by Rbe2 and
have a clear advantage. ] Bb2 and W hite stea dily improves while
5...c6 6.exd6 exd6 This seems to be the Black must wait. ]
novelty. 19.xe5 xe5 20.e4 g7 An unpleasant
[ 6...cxd6 7.d5 is rather annoying for Black move to play but Black had to cover the h5
as there's no good square for that knight pawn. 21.d2 h6 22.f4! Dynamic play!
and following b8 I can't really believe that Adams correctly assesses that he will be the
W hite can have any problems against an one to gain access to the g file. gxf4 23.gxf4
opening in which Black has played Ng8-f6- f6 24.h2 h5
h 5 a n d N b 8 - c 6 - b 8 . 8.e3 would leave [ 24...h4 25.g1 f5 is the computer's
White with a very pleasant edge. ] suggestion. 26.g3 xg3+ 27.xg3 h5+
[ 6...xd6 has also been played but this 28.h2 h7 although here too Black is
looks like some sort of fishy ...Qd6 worse and will have to suffer, in particular to
Scandinavian. 7.0-0 f4 Ionov, S (2530) - defend the f5 pawn after 29.f1! ]
Hernandez Padron, S (2290) Alcobendas 25.g1 Logical play. h7
1994 and here 8.c3! xe2+ 9.xe2 g7 [ 25...h8 is a safer square although
( 9...a6 10.d5! ) 10.b5 d8 11.f4 Carlsen was understandably nervous about
wins material. ] leaving h6 unguarded. ]
7.d5 e7 8.c4 g7 9.c3 0-0 10.0-0 g4 26.cf1 g8 27.e2 g7 That Black knight
11.e1 e8 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 f6 looks really stupid and is not on a good circuit.
14.f4 So a normal looking position has 28.d3 h8 29.f3 b5 30.d1!
arisen but this can hardly be what Carlsen Strong rerouting. Now Carlsen has to create
was aiming for. W hite has more space and more holes in order to prevent a mate on h7.
th e bis h op p a ir a nd B lack ha s very lit t le bxc4 31.bxc4 h4 32.c2 f5 33.g6!
counterplay. d7 Black's only plan is to use Immediately exploiting the hole created by
the e5 square. Were that d5 pawn back on d4 Black's last. h7 34.fg1! e7
White would have a clear edge but here it's [ 34...fxe4 35.xe4 is mate in four. ]
probably only a slight one. Unfortunately for 35.g3 xg3+ 36.xg3 f7? And this
Black it's one in which he has to sit and wait. loses instantly.
15.c1 Not allowing Carlsen any opportunities [ Black could have lasted a few more moves
to confuse the issue with ... Bxc3. e5 16.b3 with 36...h5 but 37.f3 xg6 38.xf5
a6 17.g3 f5 g7 39.d3! leaves White a pawn up with
[ I think the bishop had to be taken. an ongoing attack. ]
714
37.d1! Covering the h5 square and now Nancy 2012 ]

Black has no way to prevent mate on the h 6...xb2 There's no going back - the pawn
file. ae8 38.xh6+ And Carlsen resigned as must be taken or White will simply castle and
it's forced mate. the queen will be badly placed on b6 7.b1
[ 38.xh6+ xh6 39.g5+ h7 40.h4+ a3 8.c4 f6 9.0-0
h5 41.xh5 xg1 42.xf7+ g7 [ 9.e5! appears to be the critical test of this
43.xe8 etc. A very strong showing by line, and now g4 ( 9...fd7 10.e6! fxe6
England's number one who skilfully 11.xe6 and it's clear that White has more
exploited Carlsen's unusual opening choice than enough for the pawn here) 10.g5
an d d em on s trat e d th a t Ca rlsen ca nn o t ( 10.b3!? a5 11.exd6 exd6 12.h3 f6
afford to take any liberties against him. ] 13.0-0 looks promising for White as well )
1-0 A) 10...dxe5 11.b3 a5 12.xe7! h6
( 12...xe7? 13.d5+ xd5 14.xd5
cxd5 15.h3 h6 16.b4+ e8 17.xe5
700 B06 and White has a winning attack) 13.g5
Akopian,Vl 2682 xg5 14.xg5 0-0 15.ce4! xd2+
Iordachescu,V 2583 16.xd2 exd4 17.e1 and Black is so far
15th ch-EUR Indiv 2014 (11.15) 14.03.2014 behind in development here it'll be very
[Tom Rendle] difficult for him to defend;
B) 10...d5 11.d3 f6 12.b3 a5
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.f3 d6 13.exf6 xf6 14.0-0 0-0 and now in Roy
5.e3 b6!? An interesting choice from Cho wd hu ry, S (2 39 4)-I orda ch es cu , V
Iordachescu - the move is somewhat unusual ( 2 6 0 3 ) V l i s s i n g e n 2 0 0 6 15.e1
but in fact he's played it before. The idea is to would've given W hite excellent chances
try and provoke 6.Rb1 from W hite, thereby despite being down a pawn ]
preventing 0-0-0. Akopian takes this on with 9...0-0 10.e5 This isn't as dangerous as on
the most critical line - simply sacrificing the b- the previous move, but of course Black still
pawn! 6.d2 has to be careful
[ 6.b1 is the safer option but now Black just [ 10.g5 bd7 11.f4 I don't really believe
drops the queen back to c7 (either this should work but it scored a major upset
immediately or in a couple of moves) and in t h e f o ll o win g ga m e : b6 ( 11...b5!
doesn't have to worry about White castling 12.d3 g4 is better for black) 12.b3 d5
queenside anymore. 13.f5 dxe4?! ( 13...gxf5! 14.exf5 g4 )
A) 6...f6 7.h3 bd7 8.e2 c7 9.a4 14.fxg6 hxg6 15.cxe4 bd5 16.e1
0-0 10.0-0 a6 11.a1 this just shows xe4 17.xe4 f5 18.g5 f6 19.xf5!
Rb1 isn't a move that helps W hite! b6 gxf5 20.e6 f7 21.c4 xe3 22.xe3 c5
12.d2 ( 12.d2 is more natural but 23.f4 cxd4 24.xf5 d3 25.xd3? ( 25.c5
White is only a little better at most after and Black is lost) 25...d6 26.h3 b6
b7 ) 12...b7 13.f4 c5 14.d5 e6 27.c5?! ( 27.c2! h8 28.e4 wins )
15.c4 exd5 ( 15...xe4! 16.xe4 exd5 27...bxc5 28.g4 f5! 29.h5 c4 30.xc4
17.exd6 c6! and I like Black's c8 31.b3 b6+ 32.h1 c4?
chances ) 16.exd5 fe8 with a fairly level ( 32...e3 and now White has to find the
middlegame in Asrian, K (2611)-Bologan, tricky 33.g5! f4 34.h4! as apparently this
V (2700) Warsaw 2005; is the only way to win!) 33.g5 c8
B) 6...c7 7.d2 b5 8.d3 d7 9.0-0 1 -0 S a n d u , M (2 2 8 8 )- Ch a t a l b a sh e v , B
gf6 10.h3 0-0 11.e2 c5! 12.c3 c4 (2596) Bucharest 2008 ]
13.c2 b6 ( 13...b7 14.g3 e5! 10...dxe5 11.xe5?!
seems to equalise fully for Black) 14.h6 [ 11.dxe5! was the correct way to recapture,
e5 15.g3 e8 16.xg7 xg7 17.bd1 with a dangerous attack after g4 12.d4
and White has a very slight advantage in a5
Tkachiev, V (2641)-Istratescu, A (2633) A) or 13.fd1!? setting the trap xe5?
715
14.xe5 xe5 15.d5! xd2 701 B06

( 15...d8?! 16.xe5 cxd5 17.h6 f6 Alekseev,Evgeny 2714
18.xd5 wins ) 16.xe7+ h8 17.xe5+ Onischuk,V 2576
f6 18.xd2 fxe5 19.xc8 xc8 20.xb7 Universiade Men (7.2) 14.07.2013
and despite material equality Black must [Tom Rendle]
resign;
B) 13.f4 ] 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.f3 g7 4.c3 g4
11...e6 Quite a rare move that hasn't previously been
[ 11...bd7! leaves White struggling to covered on ChessPublishing. Here we see
demonstrate sufficient compensation for the Alekseev with a very sensible antidote. 5.e3
pawn ] c6 We see Black's idea is to put pressure on
12.b3 d6 13.f4 d8 14.g5 c7 d4 and possibly play a quick ...e5. 6.b5!
15.xf6?! Akopian decides to play for the win I really like this way of handling the position
but he never really gets enough as Black's which takes some of the pressure off White's
position is so solid centre. Black's next move is almost forced as
[ 15.f4 taking the draw by repetition was there's a threat of d5.
probably a more sensible decision, but [ 6.e2 e5 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.xd8+ xd8
Akopian didn't want to 'waste' the W hite 9.d5 d7! and Black was very close to
pieces ] equalising in Danilenko, D (2395)-Anton
15...xf6 16.f4 g7 17.e4 b5 18.h3? Guijarro, D (2526) Prague 2012 ]
Faced with not enough for the pawn Akopian 6...a6
finds a creative way to keep the attack going, [ 6...e6 is possible as well I suppose but
but with accurate defence the attack doesn't White is very comfortable after 7.h3 xf3
quite work. f6 8.xf3 ]
[ White's idea is that after 18...bxc4 he has 7.xc6+
19.f5! exf5 20.f6+! xf6 21.h6 [ 7.a4 leads to nothing for White after b5
but even here Black can defend with h4! 8.b3 e6 and Black has a very playable
22.xh4 f6 23.xg6 e8! 24.f4 g7 position. ]
25.h5 e3 and Black should win ] 7...bxc6 8.h3 xf3 9.xf3 b8 This is a
19.f5?! This just doesn't work, but I suppose sensible option but if 10.e5! is strong then
desperate times call for desperate measures Bla ck n e e d s t o e xa m in e t h e a lt e rn a t ive .
[ 19.d3 fxe5 20.fxe5 xf1+ 21.xf1 Unfortunately they don't look great either:
and of course White doesn't have enough [ 9...e6 is perhaps Black's most solid option
for the piece - but Black still has plenty of but White is better after 10.0-0-0 ( 10.h4
work to do here ] straight away may be even more accurate)
19...gxf5 20.xf5 bxc4 21.fh5 c3 10...e7 11.h4 h6 ( 11...h5 12.g5!
22.xc3 fxe5 23.xh7 So White's attack is awkward for Black) 12.b1 b8 13.d3
has 'broken through' but there's no follow up a5 and now in Anton Guijarro, D (2490)-
and he's two pieces down. Iordaschescu Ma t e A d a n , C (2 2 7 6 ) Do n B e n it o 2 0 1 2
wraps up the game very easily. a6 24.d2 White could've obtained a strong attack with
exd4 25.a3 f7 26.f3 f4 27.h1 e3 14.h5! g5 15.g3 with f4 to follow shortly. ]
28.xg7+ xg7 29.a5 d7 30.h5 c1+ [ 9...h6?! makes little sense here 10.0-0
31.g1 g5 White resigns as he's had d7 11.e5! d5 12.a4 e6 13.c5 d8
enough by this stage 14.c4 f8 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.ac1
0-1 and Black's position had almost nothing to
recommend it in Galyas, M (2390)-Pirisi, G
(2271) Budapest 2006 - White went on to
win quickly. ]
10.0-0-0 Very logical but perhaps not best
[ 10.e5! is worth investigating here - Black
has to be very careful as there are plenty of
716
traps to fall into c5 ( 10...dxe5 11.dxe5 18.f4

xe5 12.d1 c8 13.xc6+ f8 14.0-0 [ 18.b6! b8 19.c6 xe5 20.c3 xe3
and White is obviously much better; 10...d7 21.fxe3 is definitely a little better for White.
11.0-0-0 is a better version of the game for The plan is to play a4-a5 and support it with
White as Black lacks the counterplay on the b4. Then the pawn on a6 will always need
b-file ) 11.0-0-0 cxd4 12.xd4 c5 constant looking after and the knight is
A) or 13.xc5 xe5 ( 13...c7?! fails to actually well situated on b6. ]
14.exd6! xc5 15.d7+ d8 16.xf7 18...dxe5 19.d2 0-0 Onischuk has pretty
h6+ 17.b1 f6 18.a4! b4 much equalised now but with pawn majorities
19.he1 with a winning attack. One nice on opposite sides the endgame remains very
line here is f8 20.e6 xa4 21.xf6 tricky. 20.e1 fd8 21.c4 ab8 22.b3
h6 22.b3 b4 23.c6! with a crushing b5 23.c3 bd5 24.g3 h6+ 25.b2 f6
attack ) 14.he1 c7 15.d4 f6 26.c6 d2! 27.e2 a5 Black has
16.xe5 dxe5 and although the position maxim ised th e act ivit y of his pie ce s an d
remains complicated White's better pawn s h o u l d b e a b s o l u t e l y f i n e h e r e . 28.a6
structure should ensure he has the better xc3+?! This releases the tension in a
chances.; favourable manner for W hite who can now
B) 13.e6!? f6 14.exf7+ xf7 15.xf6 use his knight again.
xf6 16.d5 g7 is only a little better for [ 28...f7 would've kept chances balanced
W h i t e a f t e r 17.xf6 exf6 18.he1 and indeed it's hard to see how White can
although Black's position is rather make any progress here. ]
uninspiring with the backward pawn on d6 29.xc3 d2?!
a long-term weakness. ] [ 29...c5 30.e4 cd5 31.c4 also wins
10...c8?! the pawn on a5 ]
[ 10...e6 was still needed to sure up Black's [ 29...8d6! was necessary here to keep the
centre although W hite retains the better material balance, although W hite has a
chances after 11.g4 e7 12.h4 ] slight edge still after 30.xd6 xd6 31.e4
11.d3?! d1 32.c3 Black should still hold the draw
[ 11.e5! is still strong, for example b7 here. ]
12.b3 h6 ( 12...dxe5 13.dxe5 xe5 30.c1 2d6 31.xa5 d4 32.e3 c6
14.c5! d6 15.e4 is very unpleasant for 33.b2 dc8 34.a4 f7 35.g4 h5 36.a7
Black, e.g. h6 16.d4 0-0 17.f6+! g7 hxg4 37.hxg4 h8 38.d3 e6 39.b7
18.d7+ f6 19.xf8 xf8 20.h4 hc8
and White is close to winning.) 13.g4 0-0 [ 39...h4 was needed so at least Black has
14.f4! and the knight on h6 is completely some counterplay here. White is obviously
sidelined and in danger of being trapped. ] much better after 40.g5 f4 41.d2 f3
11...b7 Now Onischuk should probably be 42.dd7 xg5 43.d1 but Black is at least
OK although he still has to find time to get fighting in this line. ]
castled. 12.a4 a8?! 40.e3 h8 41.d3 hc8 42.a5!
[ 12...f6 seems sensible here. If Black Now W hite is winning a8 43.b4 c4
castles he may even be better so critical is 44.b6+ d7 45.h3 ac8 46.d3?
13.e5 d5 14.exd6 exd6 15.b3 a8 A careless mistake that could've cost
16.xb8+ xb8 17.c3! b7 18.e4+ Alekseev the win
d7 but despite not being able to castle [ 46.a6! ]
Black seems to be only a little bit worse as 46...g5? But Black misses his chance
his king is actually safe enough on d7. ] [ 46...8c6! saves the game, e.g. 47.b7+
13.e5! Finally the central breakthrough ( or 47.b8 c7 ) 47...c8 48.xe7
although it's not quite as strong as it was xb4+ 49.c1 b8 and Black should be
before h6 14.c3 c5! This forces the able to stop the a-pawn fairly easily. ]
queens off into an acceptable ending for Black 47.b7+ e6 48.a6 a8 49.b5
15.xa8 xa8 16.dxc5 f5 17.cxd6 cxd6 Now the connected passed pawns are
717
unstoppable b4+ 50.c1 d6 51.e2 what follows is very ugly if you're a
c4 52.c3 c5 53.xd4 exd4 54.d2 e5 Gurgenidze fan... 16.xh5 gxf4 17.gxf4
55.cxd4+ exd4 56.f3 b4 57.a7 ac8 g8 18.e3 g7 19.g1 e6 20.d3
58.b8 c2+ 59.d3 8c3+ 60.e4 e2+ Threatening 21.Qh7 - and meanwhile Black
61.d5 xf3 62.a8 d3 63.a1 e5+ can't castle because f7 hangs. a5+ 21.d2
64.d6 e2 65.d4+ xa2 22.c3 c4 23.xc4 dxc4 24.e4
1-0 h8 25.d6+ e7 26.e2 b6 27.b4
e8 28.xf7+
1-0
702 B06
Almasi,Zoltan
Norwood,David 703 B06
(Bundesliga) 1994 (1) 1994 Anand,Viswanathan 2725
[Nigel Davies] Shirov,Alexei 2690
Dos Hermanas 1996
1.e4 g6 2.d4 d6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.e5 [Alexander Volzhin]
h5 6.f3 g4
[ In the game Bakre - McNab, York 2000 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.c4 d6
Black tried 6...b6 but after 7.a4 a5+ 5.f3 e6 6.ge2 b5 7.b3 a5 8.a3 a6
8.c3 g4 9.c5 c7 ran straight into the 9.d5 cxd5 10.exd5 e5 11.e4
unpleasant 10.e6 . ] We have already seen this position in J.Polgar
7.e3 - Shirov but now Black tries something new...
[ W hite can also play the immediate 7.h3 h6!? An interesting attempt to improve. Black
but then xf3 8.xf3 e6 leaves Black's prepares ...f7-f5 (of course, Black couldn't
dark-squared bishop on the superior g8 play it immediately in view 12 Ng5). 12.g4!
square. Lanka - Chernin, Rome 1990 The only move, otherwise White's pieces will
continued 9.g3 ( 9.d3 b6 10.e2 h4 be thrown back after ...f7-f5. Just one example
11.0-0 d7 12.b3 a5 13.c4 e7 14.e3 to illustrate the strength of Black's position:
f5 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.c3 b8 [ 12.h4 f5 13.d2 e7 14.a4 b4 15.h5
was OK for Black in Thipsay - Hickl, Calcutta g5 16.c4 0-0 17.b3 d7 18.xa6
1994 ) 9...b6 10.a3 e7 ( and not xa6 19.0-0 c5 20.c4 a8 and Black
10...xd4?? 11.e3 ) 11.e2 c5! 12.dxc5 is winning, Sargissian - Galdunts, Erevan,
xc5 13.b3 d7 14.e3 a5+ 15.d2 1996. ]
c7 16.d4 c6 17.c3 c5 with a very 12...f6 13.2g3 xe4 14.xe4 0-0
comfortable game ] 15.h3 The critical position for the evaluation
7...b6 of the whole line. f5!? Shirov is true to his
[ Norwood had previously enjoyed some style and chooses the sharpest continuation.
success with 7...e6 8.h3 ( Almasi probably Now the position becomes a mess.
intended 8.e2 , with similar play to the [ The alternatives are: 15...d7? is very bad,
game. ) 8...xf3 9.xf3 b6 , which makes i t w a s p l a ye d i n Z u l f u g a r l i - B o l o g a n ,
it difficult for White to avoid putting his king Nikolaev, 1995 where the game lasted only
on the queenside. ] three more moves! 16.xh6 c5 17.g5!
[ Personally speaking I would prefer simply f6 18.g7! and in view of unavoidable
7...h6 8.e2 f5 9.f2 e6 intending 10... mate Black resigned. ]
Nd7 and 11...c5. ] [ But 15...h7 deserves serious attention. In
8.b1 h6 9.e2 f5 10.f2 h6 11.g3 a l l a va il a b le p u b l i ca t io n s t h i s m o ve i s
d7 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 g7 14.e2 labelled with a question mark in view of the
Th is regrou ping is very n ice. W h it e ge t s f o l l o w i n g l i n e : 16.xh6 xh6 17.g5
everything covered and will eventually expand "and White wins". However I disagree. Let's
with g3-g4. e6 15.d2 g5 A desperate bid a n a l y s e t h i s p o s i t i o n : h8! 18.gxh6
for counterplay before he gets squashed. But The only move. ( 18.g1? c8 19.h4
718
g8 20.f6+ xf6 21.gxf6 d2+; [ 21...d7 22.e3 f6 should be

Of c o u rs e , W h it e ca n't p la y 18.xh6+?? preferred. ]
g8 and White's Queen is trapped! 19.f6+ 22.xf5 gxf5 White's bishop pair doesn't
xf6 20.gxf6 xh6 and Black has an extra seem too impressive now, but in a few moves
piece. ) 18...f5 and the situation is not clear we will see them start attacking Black's weak
at all! ] pawns. 23.g6 f8 24.e3 h8 25.0-0-0
16.gxf5 c8! The only move. Finally White has managed to evacuate his
[ T h e a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e b a d : 16...gxf5? King to a safe place. Now we can conclude
17.xh6 fxe4 18.xg7 xg7 19.g1+ White is clearly better. The bishop pair is very
mating ] strong here, Black's king is exposed and after
[ 16...xf5? 17.xh6 h5 18.e6+ Black's mistake on move 21 White dominates
also with a decisive advantage. ] the light squares. d7 26.e6 d8
17.g3 [ 26...c5 didn't make Black's life easier:
[ 17.xh6? is just a blunder in view of xf5 27.xc5 dxc5 28.d6! and the passed pawn
18.e3 xh6 and Black wins a piece. ] is very strong. ]
17...xf5!? This exchange sacrifice is the best 27.dg1 f4 28.a7! It looks strange, but the
solution in this position. The alternatives are Bishop is unassailable on a7. It controls c5
inferior: and can attack the pawn on d6 from b8 or c7
[ 17...gxf5 Opening the g-file looks very later. f6
dangerous and White has many promising [ 28...f6 29.g6!+- ]
possibilities: 18.g2!? ( 18.f4!? ) 18...h4 29.b1 e8 30.f5 f7 31.b6 f8
( 18...f4 19.e4 ) 19.g1 f7 20.d2 [ 31...xd5 didn't help Black much: 32.h2!
with Q-side castling to follow. ] f7 ( 32...e4 33.g6 e7 34.d4+- )
[ 17...xf5 is sim ply b ad : 18.xf5 xf5 33.hg2 g8 34.d8! xd8 ( 34...h5
19.xh6 ] 35.xf6! xf6 36.xf6+ xf6 37.xg8# )
18.g2!? 35.xg7 xg7 36.xg7 xg7 37.g6+
[ In Izmukhambetov - Bologan, Sevastopol, and White wins. ]
1997 White decided to accept the sacrifice. 32.g6 h5 33.e6 g5 34.xg5 hxg5
However this cannot be recommended: 35.d1! d7
18.xf5 xf5 19.g3 d7 20.e3 [ 35...xe6 36.dxe6 d5 37.a2 ]
and now the natural e4! gave tremendous 36.xd7 xd7 37.c7 f6 38.d3
compensation as all Black's minor pieces [ 38.d8! was more precise, according to
are very active and White's King is exposed, Anand: h6 ( 38...f7 39.g6 f8
for example: 21.xd6 a4 22.a2 xb2 40.e7 ) 39.xg5 xh3 40.f5 h5
23.b1 c3+ 24.d2 xd2+ 25.xd2 41.xd7 xg5 42.xb5 with a decisive
g5+ 26.e1 e3 and Black's attack is very material advantage. ]
strong. ] 38...c5 39.xb5 e4 40.b6 f8 41.xc5
18...a4 19.a2 f4!? Black's Rook is thirsting dxc5 42.e1! e3 43.fxe3 f3 44.xa4 c4
t o s a c ri f i c e i t s e l f b u t W h it e d o e s n ' t p a y 45.b5 h6 46.d7 f2 47.f1 c5 48.e4
attention to it! 20.c3! f6 49.b5 f4?! After this inaccuracy Black
[ Definitely nobody would like to play Shirov is absolutely helpless.
in the position after 20.xf4?! exf4 21.e4 [ He should try 49...f3 intending to take the
f5 22.0-0-0 b4! 23.axb4 a3! with a very h3-pawn and then to advance his g-pawn. ]
strong attack. ] 50.xc4 xe4 51.b5 e3 52.d6
20...h4 [ It's necessary to keep one's concentration
[ 20...h4!? is also worthy of consideration: u n t i l t h e v e r y e n d . 52.xf2??
21.h3 ( 21.xf4 exf4 22.e4 d7! ) spoils everything in view of e1+ ]
21...d7 22.e3 with mutual chances. ] 52...xd6
21.h3 f5?! A serious inaccuracy. Black [ 52...e1+ 53.d2 xf1 54.xf1 xd6
voluntarily gives up his strong bishop, 55.b4+- ]
weakening his light squares. 53.xf2 xh3 54.d7 g3 55.c2 g4
719
56.d2 c7 57.a4 g1 58.c6 so one would expect a plan such as Bd3,0-0,
[ 58.c6 g3 59.d1! xd1 60.xd1 ] Qe1-h4 to be critical but we will have to wait
1-0 and see. 10.e3 c6! 11.dxc5 dxc5
12.e2 xa5 13.e5 b6 14.e4 b7
15.d6 d5 There's no compensation for the
704 B06 p a w n h e r e . 16.g5 e7 17.ge4 f6
Armbrust,Florian The trad itio nal dism antling of t he c entre
Delchev,Aleksander 2560 begins. 18.xc5 xc5 19.xc5 bxc5
3rd Autumn Open (9) 2002 20.xa5 fxe5 21.fxe5 xe5 22.c4 g5
[Andrew Martin] 23.xf8+ xf8 24.f1 f4 Remarkably easy
for Black. I really do think that this new idea
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6!? has a future . The plan of ...c7-c5 is clear and
I have always enjoyed playing 4...a6 because easy to understand-meanwhile the W hite
it's very provocative. Black is living on the position is rather rigid. Fascinating.
edge and it's a question of whether he can 0-1
t im e h i s s t ri k e a ga i n st t h e W h it e ce n t r e
successfully before he gets blown away. Here,
Delchev shows something new. The normal 705 B06
plan for Black would involve ...b5,...Bb7,... Arngrimsson,Dagur 2239
Nd7 and a quick... c7-c5! . Meanwhile White Carlsen,Magnus 2484
tries to blast through with e4-e5! Interestingly, 21st Open Reykjavik ISL (3) 09.03.2004
Black dispenses with .. .b7-b5 altogether [Gary Lane]
5.f3
[ 5.a4 d7 The same plan as Delchev! 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6
6.f3 e6 7.e3 e7 Hedgehog-like. 5.f3 g7 6.c4 It seems logical to attack the
8.d2 0-0 9.g4?! c5! And here's the big queen but this continuation has rarely been
moment. 10.dxc5 xc5 11.e5 d5 played. The reason is that W hite tends to
12.xd5 exd5 13.xd5 xg4 14.e2 c8 prefer to develop his pieces with moves such
15.c3 dxe5 16.xd8 fxd8 17.xe5 xe2 as 6 Na3 or 6 Be3 before chasing the black
18.xe2 xe5 19.fxe5 e8 20.b4 d7 queen. e4+ The most direct move which
21.d4 xe5 22.xe5 xe5+ 23.d3 really tests W hite's early pawn push. It is
d8+ 24.c4 e3 25.ac1 f5 26.b5 worth remembering that Carlsen is a natural
axb5+ 27.xb5 c8 28.b6 exc3 player who a few months after this event
29.xc3 xc3 30.a5 b3+ 31.c5 b2 became the world's youngest grandmaster.
32.h3 f7 33.d1 e7 34.e1+ d7 [ 6...d8
35.d1+ c7 36.e1 c2+ 37.b5 b2+ A) 7.e3 f6 8.h3!? a cautious move to
38.c5 d7 39.d1+ e7 40.e1+ f6 co p e wi t h t h e p o t e n t i a l p i n o n g 4 0-0
41.d1 f4 42.d4 f5 43.c1 b5 ( 8...e4! should be considered to apply
44.a1 b3 45.h4 g4 46.h1 a3 pressure to the d4 pawn) 9.c3 cxd4
47.b1 xa5 48.xb7 h5 49.e4 xh4 10.xd4 a6 11.e2 fd7 ( perhaps
50.f7 g5 51.f6 h5 0-1 Orel,K-Bonnafous, 11...bd7 to speed up queenside
N/EuYCh G18, Peniscola ESP 2002 (51) ] development is better) 12.0-0 e5 13.b3
5...d7 6.c4 Already White seems to be at c6 14.d6 e8 15.ad1 with an edge
a lo s s . He s e e m s t o b e t ryin g t o p u n i s h thanks to the more active pieces, Klinger,
Delchev for omitting .....b7-b5. But 6 Bc4 feels J-Nemet,I/Zuerich 1991.;
wrong-probably 6 Bd3 is correct. e6 7.a4 B) 7.d5 h6 Black keeps the h8-a1
e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a5?! c5! First a Modern, diagonal open for his bishop and will later
then a Hippopotamus, now a Sicilian. And bring his king's knight into the game via
with White committing himself all the time. It's the f5 square. 8.c3 0-0 9.e2 f5
a bit early to say how White should respond. 10.0-0 e5 11.dxe6 xe6 with equal play,
A quick attack should be the order of the day M i c h a l c z a k , T - N e v e d n i c h y, V / S e n d e n
720
2003. ] e5 28.d8+ f8 29.xf8+! 1-0 Hanley,C-

[ 6...d6 7.d5 f6 8.c3 0-0 9.g3?! Dvorak,T/Millfield School 2003. ]
t h e e x t r a m o ve n e e d e d f o r a k i n g s i d e 11...c6 12.c1 White has v ague ideas of
fianchetto means that the white king is still playing Bf4 to harass the queen but it is just
stuck in the centre which will prove to be a harmless.
problem ( 9.e2 intending to castle is [ If 12.0-0 then f5 completes Black's
sensible. ) 9...e6 10.f4 ( 10.g2 exd5 development with a level position. This
11.cxd5 e8+ 12.e3 g4 when the pin should not be to White's liking because in
on the e-file gives Black excellent tactical the C3 Sicilian he is normally rewarded with
play ) 10...b6 11.d2 exd5 12.cxd5 a slight edge at least from the opening. ]
e8+ 13.e2 ( or 13.e2 f5 14.g2 12...g4 13.f3
e4 15.c1 xb2 and the game is over as [ 13.f4 c5 14.e3 h5 is roughly
a contest ) 13...e4 14.xe4 xe4 15.0-0 equal. ]
( 15.b1 is not advisable because h3 13...e6 14.f4 h5
traps the white king in the centre meaning [ 14...f5 to make sure the queen can back
t h a t B l a c k c a n a t t a c k a t h i s l e i s u r e .) on e6 after an exchange is an option when
15...xb2 Black is a pawn up but still has to 15.c7 ( 15.g4 c5 16.c7 ad8
activate his queenside before declaring 17.xe6 fxe6 is superior for Black because
hims elf win ner of the op ening skirmish W hite has weakened his kingside pawn
16.d3 xd2 17.xd2 e8 18.fe1 d7 cover ) 15...ad8 16.xe6 xe6 is equal. ]
19.ab1 b6 20.f4 xe1+ 21.xe1 b5 15.c7 ad8 16.xe6 fxe6 Carlsen has
22.e5 c4 23.e4 xe5 24.xe5 a6 double e-pawns but does that mean he is
25.d4 e8 Black is threatening ...f7-f5 and worse? I think every position is different so
has better position due to the extra pawn. you have to look at all aspects. White's bishop
Afek, Y-Berkvens,J/Amsterdam 2002 ] on e2 is restricted and the pawn on f3 just
7.e3 cxd4 I think it is a good idea to relieve gets in the way. This makes it difficult for
the tension in the centre especially because Arngrimsson to quickly target the e-pawns with
otherwise W hite would just play Nc3 his rook on the e-file. 17.0-0 d4 The knight
embarrassing the queen. 8.xd4 f6 9.c3 is influential on such a central square and it
e5 I suspect a lot of players would now be protects the e6 pawn from future attacks.
worried about losing their queen in such an 18.e1 f5 19.d1
exposed square. However, a careful look at [ Not 19.g3? because c2 forks the
the tactics should eliminate such a fear and rooks. ]
Black will aim to swiftly activate his queenside. 19...d7 I think Black has the better chances
10.e2 0-0 11.db5 White is still trying to in such a position because his pieces have
find a plan to make the most of the black good co-ordination. 20.e3 c5 Black is
queen being on e5, so finds this interesting making the most of White's passive play by
move. trying to invade with the knights. 21.f1 d3
[ I prefer 11.0-0 when at least White has got 22.b1
his king out the way before trying to create [ 22.d2 e5 23.b3? xb3 wins. ]
complications. For instance: c6 ( 11...d8 22...e5 23.f2 xf2 24.xf2 e3
is equal ) 12.xc6 bxc6 13.c1 f5 [ I like 24...h6 to activate the bishop in
14.d4 c7 Black resists the ending o rd e r t o t h re a t e n . . . B e 3 25.f1 c5
because with damaged queenside pawns, it 26.h1 xc4 is good news for Black. ]
will be White pressing for a win even though 25.e4 h6 26.f1 xe4 Sometimes a
accurate play will be sufficient to draw. decent attack is missed because one side
15.h4 fd8 16.fd1 ab8 17.b3 a5 thinks queen's are needed to force mate but
18.a4 e5 19.xd8+ xd8 20.f3 d3 this is clearly wrong. Here Black is content to
21.e1 c7 22.xd3 xd3 23.d1 xd1 enter the ending having calculated that he has
24.xd1 e4 25.c5 exf3 26.gxf3 h5? a strong initiative. 27.fxe4
( 26...h6 is likely to lead to a draw) 27.d7 [ Or 27.xe4 e3 when Black wins the
721
exchange. ] centre it's unlikely this can ever succeed. The

27...e3 28.xf8+ xf8+ 29.f3 rest of the game is predictable: Davies
[ 29.e1 allows f2 which easily wins. ] continues to play with due care and takes
29...xf3 30.gxf3 xf3+ 31.g2 f2+ W hite apart! f8 22.g1 c4 23.g4 f4
32.g3 xb2 It is time to start counting the 24.d4 e5 25.c3 e8!
pawns and Black has two extra which means [ 25...d5 26.g5 f5 27.xe5!! xe5 28.g6
W hite c an f etc h his co at . 33.d1 e2 g7 ( 28...xg6! 29.xg6+ h8 )
34.f3 e1 35.b1 d4 29.xh7+!! ]
0-1 26.g5 f5 27.f3 e6 Keeping the Bishop
out of d5 and securing the position against
any Qxg6 tricks. 28.e1 d7 29.g1 d5
706 B06 Preparations are complete. It is time to 'let
Baker,Chris W those truckers roll'! 30.h1 e4 31.g2 f7
Davies,Nigel R 32.f6 f3 33.xf3 exf3 34.xf3 d4
Crewe 1996 35.xf5 d5+ 36.xd5+ xd5 37.d1
[Andrew Martin] g7 38.f3 xf6 39.gxf6 f7 40.b3 cxb3
41.cxb3 c6 42.h3 h5 43.hd3 cd6
The following game is a real gem. White sets Davies made chess look easy. We know that
out his stall with a lot of hustle and bustle, this is not the case.
comes forward aggressively and is picked off 0-1
in an exemplary manner. The Black centre
towards the end of the game is a sight to
behold! 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 707 B06
e6 'Already a prophylactic idea against the Baki,Peter 2092
possibility of W hite playing f4-f5.The way I Ianov,Viktor 2381
see it is that if I prevent White from moving Marx Gyorgy Open (2) 15.06.2005
his f-pawn forward his Bishop on c1 will never [Andrew Martin]
be able to exchange itself off for my Bishop on
g7. And in that case my king keeps a vital 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.e3 a6
defender' GM Davies. 5.f3 e7 6.e2 5.d2 d7 6.0-0-0 White is shaping up for
d7 7.0-0 b6 As mentioned, thoroughly the big one. To play slowly with Black here
ap p ro p ria t e wh e n W h it e e it he r pla ys h is would be a crime. He has to start the action.
Bishop to e2 or castles short. 8.e1 b7 b5! 7.f3 b7 8.h4 h6 9.g4 Many, many of
9.h1 0-0 10.h4 Primitive. Black hits back your opponents will play this way. They just
with a show of strength in the centre. c5! stick the kingside pawns forward to gain space
There comes a time when the pussyfooting and dissuade Black from a later 0-0. The
must stop. Serious counterplay is initiated M o d e r n d e f e n d e r s h o u l d n o t f e e l
wi t h 1 0 . . . c 5 ! 11.e3 f6! Hitting e4, an uncomfortable facing this aggression. He
attack which is very difficult to meet. 12.ad1 must juggle the obligations of flexible defense
[ White's two other moves are not very good: and the preparation of counterplay, but that is
12.e5 f5 ] the intellectual challenge after 1...g6 . If you
[ 12.d3 c4! and so he has to rely on this cannot cope with this pressure, don't play the
Rook centralisation. However, Davies is not Modern!
to be bluffed and takes the pawn! ] [ 9.d5 h5 10.h3 c5 11.dxc6 xc6
12...xe4! 13.xe4 xe4 14.f5 White is 12.d5 gf6 13.xf6+ xf6 14.g5
getting desperate already. gxf5! 15.dxc5 c8 Black has very satisfactory counterplay
bxc5 16.g5 xg5 17.xg5 f6 18.e3 on the c file. He has a good version of the
c8! Carefully guarding against White's only Dragon. White has no breakthrough in sight
threat of Bxc5. 19.f3 g6 20.h5 f7 and the Knight on g5 is simply misplaced.
21.h3 Baker's whole game plan seems to be 15.d4 c7 16.xf6 xf6 17.d3 d7
based on checkmate. However, without a 18.f4 c5 19.f5 gxf5 20.exf5 f6 21.e6
722
xe6 22.fxe6 d8! 23.hg1 b6 24.f4 whittle away White's central pawns with 6...
e8 25.g3 c6 26.ge1 c7 27.g7 cxd4. ]
ce8 28.g6 hg8 29.h7 h8 30.g7 3...g7 4.f4 e6!? The argument is that if
hg8 31.h7 1/2-1/2 Koziak, V-Bezold, M/ Black can prevent f4-f5 White's dark-square
Neuhausen 2004 ] bishop will not be a great piece. Meanwhile
9...c8! An easy idea to remember. Black he intends to develop in true hippo style with
prepares ...c7-c5, with his Rook in the right ... Ne 7, . .. Nd 7, . .. b6 an d .. .B b7 a nd t he n
place. 10.g5 hxg5 11.xg5 c5 The second counterattack White's centre with ...c7-c5.
key move. It's a turbo-charged Hippo, [ I used to play 4...c6 until one rainy day
un re co gn is ab le f rom t he o rigin al b ea st . .
Velimirovic played 5.b5 against me and
12.dxc5 xc5 13.h3 b4! 14.d5 b3!! left me with little counterplay after ( 5.e3
Baki certainly didn't expect this one. All the f6 6.f3 0-0 7.d2 e6 followed by ...
good things about Black's position come into Ne7 will reach a similar set-up to 4...e6.)
play now. White may already be lost. 15.b1 5...a6 6.xc6+ bxc6 7.f3 f5 8.e5 h6
[ The variations are easy if White moves his 9.e2 e6 10.e3 0-0 11.0-0-0 d7 12.h3
queen. 15.e1 xd5 16.exd5 b8
bxa2 13.g4 etc (Velimirovic - Davies,
17.d2 b8-+ ] Vrnjacka Banja 1991). ]
[ 15.e3 bxa2 16.d2 xb2 17.xc8 5.f3 e7 6.e3 d7 7.d2 a6!? 8.d3
xc8!-+ ] [ Black's 7.. .a6!? was designed to make
15...xe4 Not that this isn't easy to
White's queenside less habitable by going
understand. All of White's kingside advances for ... b7-b5. Rajlich - Khechumyan,
are rendered irrelevant. 16.fxe4 bxc2+
Budapest 2001 went 8.0-0-0 b5 9.h4?!
17.a1 cxd1+ 18.xd1 c4 19.g2 f6 10.d3 b7! when suddenly Black
xd5 20.exd5 was threatening to win the e4 pawn with 11...
[ 20.xd5 c2! ] b4. ]
20...b6 21.e2 b4 22.c1 f6
8...b5 Whenever I play this move, I end up
Black might even castle in a minute. 23.h3 wondering if the b-pawn might not be better
Unless White plays this one. hxh4 24.e1 placed on b6 from where it supports ...c7-c5.
e4 25.c2 c5 White woke up and [ Gara - Khechumyan, Budapest 2001 varied
counted the pieces. A brilliant, short game by with 8...b6 9.0-0-0 f6 10.h3 b7 11.g4
Ionov. h6 12.hf1 d7 when White finally ran out
0-1 of patience with 13.g5 and did not stand
very well after hxg5 14.fxg5 h5 15.h2
c6 16.f2 0-0-0 etc ]
708 B06 9.0-0 f6 10.ae1 g4!? An unthematic
Baum,Bernd idea which I'm not sure I would repeat, Black
Davies,Nigel R gets the bishop pair but loses time.
Gausdal (1) 1993 [ In retrospect 10...0-0 looks more natural. ]
[Nigel Davies] 11.f5! xe3 12.xe3 0-0 13.g4 b4
14.d1 exf5 15.gxf5 d5 16.f4 f6
The Austrian Attack has always been one of An un f ortu nate nece ssity af te r which m y
Black's main worries. After an early career position starts to look very ugly. But it's still
with 4...Nc6 I switched to a Pirc transposition a tough fight in which my opponent comes
(4...Nf6) before discovering 4...e6!?. The idea second. 17.e3 c6 18.c3 bxc3 19.bxc3
is to make f2-f4 look like a mistake because it h8 20.h1 a7 21.g1 a5 22.exd5
blocks White's dark-square bishop. 1.e4 d6 xc3 23.b1 g5 24.g4 b7 25.d6 g8
2.d4 g6 3.c3 26.e4 d7 27.c1 b4 28.d5 xd6
[ W hite can also play the immediate 3.f4 29.dxc6 xb1! The kind of exchange sac
after which I've played g7 4.f3 c5 5.c3 that's ideal for your opponent's time-trouble.
( 5.d5 f6 6.c3 0-0 is an Austrian attack Direct threats are not necessary, you just need
with 5...c5.) 5...a5!? which threatens to t o s t o p h i m f r o m s o l v i n g h i s p r o b l e m s .
723
30.xb1 xc6 31.gf1 a8 32.g1 b8 This bold leap forward carries the enormous
33.c2 b4 34.c4 f4 35.a3 g4+ threat of 9 e6. f8
36.g2 xc4 Winning material and the [ If 8...e6 then Black must reckon on White
game. 37.xg4 xg4+ 38.f2 f4 39.e2 blasting open the position with lines like
e4+ 40.d3 a4 41.c3 e4+ 42.e3 9.d5!? exd5 10.e6 ]
e7 9.e2! This powerful move not only reinforces
0-1 the idea of playing e5-e6, but also
immediately threatens 10 Bxb5+! axb5 11
Qxb5+, winning Black's loose b7-bishop. b4
709 B06 10.ce4 f5? Black misses White's stunning
Beliavsky,Alexander G forthcoming tactical combination... 11.b5+!!
Hickl,Joerg c6
European Zonal, 2000 2000 [ 11...axb5 12.xb5+ echoes the line given
[Paul Motwani] in the previous notes at move nine. ]
12.c4! Black is in deadly double trouble at
W7: "Alexander The Great!" A.Beliavsky-J. c6 and f7. d7 13.f7! Menacing 14 Nxd6
Hickl, European Zonal Tournament, Pula 2000. or 14 Qxg7 in particular. cxb5 14.xg7 xe4
Modern Defence. 34 top players from Austria, 15.xe4 fxe4 16.f5!
Bosnia, Croatia, Germany, Israel, [ Black could fight on longer after 16.xh8
Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Slovenia, and h6 ]
Switzerland recently converged on the city of 16...gxf5 17.xh8 e6 18.d5 c7
Pula from April 11-22 to compete in a really [ 18...d4 19.e6+ uncovers a fatal attack
tough 11-round European Zonal Tournament, from White's queen towards d4. ]
wit h jus t a sin gle re st -da y. A lt h ou gh t h e 19.xh7 Black resigned, with his position in
ferocious field included 21 grandmasters and ruins and hopelessly behind on material.
ten IMs, a clear outright winner emerged: 1-0
Slovenia's 46-year-old super-GM Alexander
Beliavsky, with an impressive tally of five wins
and six draws. Beliavsky's sensational 8/11 710 B06
score put him a full point ahead of a runner- Berezovsky,Igor 2434
up Israeli trio, namely Lev Psakhis, Emil Almasi,Zoltan 2650
Sutovsky and Ilia Smirin. I particularly liked Bundesliga 2004-5 (3) 27.11.2004
Beliavsky's 19-move victory on April 19, which [Andrew Martin]
wa s c e r t a i n l y a " B l a c k W e d n e s d a y" f o r
Germany's GM Jorg Hickl playing Black, as 1.d4 IS BLACK REALLY EQUAL IN THE 150
he suffered the quickest loss of the entire ATTACK? If the evidence of this high-rated
tournament! 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.c3 g7 g a m e i s t o b e b e l i e ve d , B l a c k ' s t a s k o f
In general, the Modern Defence is not too defence in the 150 is eased. Almasi starts
popular amongst the world's very best players, regularly, with the Modern move-order and
probably because it allows White to establish the usual immediate queenside counterplay
a large spatial advantage. 4.f4 "f for forward!" but then flicks in ...e7-e6,which puts W hite
is a favourite attacking motto of mine. a6 almost at a loss for a move. . g6 2.e4 g7
[ W7.1: 4...c6 5.b5 also worked out well 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6! 5.d2 b5 6.d3 b7
for White in the game P.Motwani-C.McNab 7.a4
at the 1999 Scottish Championship, and in [ 7.f3 d7 8.a4 b4 9.e2 a5
preparing for that encounter, I found the comes to the same. ]
analysis on page 136 of "Nunn's Chess 7...b4 8.ce2
Openings" to be very useful. ] [ 8.d1 isn't '150' style, more positional, but
5.f3 b5 6.d3 b7 7.e5 I like this central is a good move nevertheless. White's point
thrust, which leaves Black's king's knight and is to relocate the Knight with f3 and Nf2,
bish op with litt le scop e . d7 8.g5!? reinforcing e4 and g4 rather than the Ne2-g3
724
path. a5 9.c3 f6 10.cxb4 ( 10.f3! 711 B06

would be more in keeping with the Berg,Emanuel 2593
positional treatment. Instead W hite goes Angskog,Kent 2271
f o r t a c t ic s :) 10...xe4 11.xe4 xe4 37th Rilton Cup (1) 27.12.2007
12.d3 d5 13.bxa5 c5 14.dxc5 xa5+ [John Watson]
15.f1 e6 16.c1 xa4 Kryvoruchko,Y-
Popovics,A/Hungary 2003 Black went on to 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
lose this game, but in the current position 5.h4
he stands better with a potentially safer King [ 5.d2 b5 6.h4 h5 is Berg's usual order,
and superior pawns. ] transposing. ]
8...a5 9.g3 d7 10.f3 e6!? 5...h5 6.d2 b5 7.h3 xh3!? Perhaps an
Almost waiting for White to reveal his hand. innovation, although very close to what I
11.c3 Still very normal for this system. bxc3 mention in the next note.
12.bxc3 gf6 13.0-0 [ H i l l a r p - P e r s s o n r e c o m m e n d s 7...f6
[ 13.h6 is the knee-jerk reaction but I must '!' here, with the idea ...Ng4, encouraging
say that I don't see too much for Black to 8.f3 bd7 ( here 8...xh3 9.xh3 bd7
worry about : 0-0 14.xg7 xg7 15.0-0 of Morrison-Benjamin, Philadelphia 1998,
( 15.b1 c8 16.0-0 c5 17.b2 c6 ) could even transpose to our game after
15...c5 16.ab1 ( 16.fe1 c7 ) 16...c6 10.0-0-0 ) 9.0-0-0 b7 10.g5 . Then Tiger
The 150 attack depends heavily on moves h i m s e l f p l a y e d 0-0 versus Berg, but he
such as Qg5,Nh4-f5+. Black's small advance analyses 10. ..e6 as well. ]
of the e pawn has taken a lot of the sting out 8.xh3 d7 9.0-0-0 gf6 10.f3 c6
of this approach. So to an extent, White has Logical and a little slower than usual for this
to switch tack. I don't see W hite winning va ria t ion . It 's p o ssib le t o ca st le , b u t t h e
the battle of the queenside and neither does normal move
Almasi. ] [ 10...c5!? allows 11.dxc5 dxc5 ( 11...xc5
13...0-0 14.fb1 b8 15.c2 c6! 16.b5 12.e5! ) 12.d5 ( 12.f4! prevents castling
[ 16.xb8 xb8 17.b1 a8 18.d2 because of e5, and e5 13.g5 0-0 14.g4
( 18.g5 h6 19.d2 b8 20.xb8+ xb8 la u n c h e s a s t r o n g a t t a c k) 12...0-0!?
seems about equal. ) 18...g4! ] 13.xf6+ xf6 14.xd8 fxd8 15.xd8+
16...a8! This is Black's better bishop and so xd8 16.c4! bxc4 17.xc4 with superb
it makes little positional sense to exchange. bishops. W hite won't immediately win a
17.h3 c6 18.e2 c7= 19.xb8 pawn, but in the long run the pressure will be
White has only a nominal advantage in space too great. ]
and heads for the draw. xb8 20.b1 xb1+ 11.b1 a5 12.g3!? This doesn't prove very
The average player does not play the 150 useful. White can keep a small advantage by
attack to exchange pieces and make a quick more pointed moves, for example,
draw so Almasi's method is very good. Note [ 12.d3 , and if b6 ( 12...c5 13.dxc5
the Black central pawns, hanging back and dxc5 14.e2! ) 13.e5 fd5 14.xd5 xd2
covering all the right squares ( f5 in particular) 15.xd2 xd5 16.f4 ]
By the way in the final position after 21 Qxb1 12...b6 13.d3 b8! 14.e2 b4!?
either 21 ...c5 or 21...d5! 22 e5 Ne8 are OK, [ 14...xd2 15.xd2 leaves White with the
in t h e l a s t c a s e i n t e n d i n g . . . c 6 -c 5 ! , wi t h normal bishop pair advantage, which is
counterplay. limited in this case. ]
½-½ 15.c1 a4 Black should have enough
counterchances here. 16.b3
[ 16.e2! a8 ( on the other hand, it's risky
for W hite to take the pawn after 16...0-0!?
17.b3 c7 18.xa6 a8 ) 17.hh1
may be a better order. ]
16...b6 17.e2!? a5
725
[ 17...0-0 ] and Black is struggling here and it's unlikely

18.g4!? 0-0 19.g5!? his King would ever be safe. As ever playing
[ 19.gxh5 xh5 20.c4 c5 is unclear ] these lines for Black against a lower rated
19...d7 20.f4 c5 21.e5 fc8?? player is gamble but now Bacrot cashes in
The advance e6 had to be stopped. on his opponent's mistake. ]
[ 21...e6 ] 12...b4 13.ce4 h6 14.f3 f6!?
22.e6 fxe6 Not a move the computer likes but this looks
[ 22...cxd4 23.exf7+ xf7 24.xd4 xd4 like a cle ver id e a t o u s 15.xf6+ exf6
25.xg6+! ] 16.xb4 c8 17.d2 b8 What an odd
23.xg6 f8 24.xh5 xg6 25.xg6 position we have here - it looks as if W hite
xb2 26.h5 f8 27.h6 should be better but what plan is there? Black
1-0 is going to play ...f5 and bring a knight to f6
and slowly improve and meanwhile there is
not a lot for White to do 18.c4
712 B06 [ 18.a5 was our attempt at an
Boguslavskyy,O 2467 improvement but still Black is doing fine after
Bacrot,Etienne 2705 f5 19.b4 ( 19.ae1 f7 ) 19...d7 20.b5
Schachbundesliga 2011-12 (15) 15.04.2012 axb5 21.axb5 0-0 22.f3 b6 ]
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] 18...f5! 19.b3 f7 20.fd1 h7 21.f1
f6 22.e2 g5! White has done nothing at
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 all for the last few moves and Bacrot is clearly
5.f3 b5 6.d3 This looks more critical than taking control 23.f4?!
moving the a-pawn here [ 23.a5 it was better to sit and wait a8
[ 6.a3 b7 7.d3 and ] 24.c3 and now Black must do some work if
[ 6.a4 b4 7.e2 have been examined in he wants to open the position up here ]
the archives by Andrew Martin ] 23...g4 Now the Bishop on b7 is a monster
6...d7 7.0-0 b7 piece! 24.a5 e4 25.c4 c5
[ 7...c5 was examined by Watson in [ 25...h5! was probably more accurate - after
Jovanovic, Z-Skoberne, J Nova Gorica 2007 all Bacrot doesn't need to rush here ]
- my feeling is that 8.dxc5 is promising for 26.a3 cxd4 27.xd4 e5 28.xd6?!
White here ] [ 28.fxe5 dxe5 29.d2 was a better
8.d2 gf6 9.e5! As usual this is not only defensive try although of course Black has
critical but timely - White can't delay as Black the better chances after c7 30.b3 f4 ]
is threatening b4 28...exf4 29.f2?! This leads to a swift
[ 9.a3?! c5 and Black has no real problems collapse
after 10.e5 dxe5 11.dxe5 g4 12.e6 fxe6 [ 29.xf4 c5+ 30.f2 xa5 is also very
13.e4 xe4 14.xe4 de5 with an equal strong for Black ]
game ] [ 29.a7! was the best try, at least forcing
9...g4 t h e r o o k t o a 8 a8 30.f2 f8
[ 9...dxe5!? is worth checking but White and n ow W h ite can try 31.xf6+ xf6
seems to have an edge anyway after 32.b4 with fighting chances ]
10.dxe5 g4 11.e6! de5!? 12.exf7+ 29...f8! 30.c5
xf7 13.ad1 0-0 14.e2 ] [ 30.xf6+ xf6 just doesn't work very well
10.e6 fxe6 11.g5 f8 White obviously has here with the Rook actively placed on b8 ]
good compensation for a pawn here but it's 30...xd6 31.cxd6 f3 32.d2 fxg2
surprisingly easy to drift in these positions - it 33.c4+ g6 34.d4 d8 35.f4?! h5
takes very accurate play to set Black serious After a risky opening from Bacrot he showed
problems here 12.a4?! his class and understanding in outplaying his
[ 12.e2! i s s t r o n g e r xe3 ( 12...f6? opponent in a complicated middlegame.
13.xb5+ picks up a useful pawn) 13.fxe3 0-1
f6 14.ce4 h6 15.f3 d7 16.fd2
726
713 B06 consequently about the future safety of his

Bohlke,Christian 2205 K in g . H e 's t i e d d o wn . S o B la ck o p e n s a
Krasenkow,Michal 2585 second f ront impeccable positional play.
Politiken Cup 25th (2) 15.07.2003 24.e2
[Andrew Martin] [ 24.xb5 b6 ]
24...b6 25.h1 a6 26.xf8+ xf8 27.d3
Whilst researching a book on the h4 W ith the idea of ..Rf3. 28.e2 f4
Hippopotamus system of defence for Black, I 29.d3 xe5!? Maybe not objectively best,
came across the unusual 4...e6!?, an example but almost certainly the move which will win
of which we will see in this game. Among the game most quickly. Instead
Grandmasters, Krasenkow has shown a liking [ 29...c6 would retain all of Black's
for this messy line. He chooses his opponents positional trumps and the game continues
carefully and generally plays 4..e6 when he with White grovelling. However I'm guessing
either needs to win at all costs or expects that that Bohlke was running into time-pressure
White might overreach. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 and so Krasenkow attacks him directly. ]
3.c3 d6 4.f4 e6!? 5.f3 e7 6.e2 30.dxe5?
Unchallenging and Black can be happy now. [ He had to find 30.xd5! exd5 31.dxe5
He can get on with his plan unmolested. The with counterplay. For instance: f2 ( 31...d4
first task is to hit e4. 32.b3+ g7 33.d5 ) 32.xd5+ g7
[ Clearly either 6.d3 or ] 33.b7+ f7 34.e4 g3 35.e6
[ 6.e3 are less respectful and therefore It's a very tough ask to find this idea several
more critical. ] m o v e s i n a d v a n c e . xh3+ 36.g1
6...b6 7.0-0 There was little danger that White and White seems to have enough to oblige
would castle long and go for the big attack the Black to take a draw. ]
bishop on e2 hardly lends itself to this 30...f2 Whereas now, White has nothing.
aggressive plan. 0-0 8.e3 b7 9.d2 d7 31.f1 f3 32.g2 g3 There's plenty
10.ad1 f6= With equality in my view , and more of this stuff in the book but it won't be
a position where the better player will win. out until the end of the year. In the end, I
White already has a slightly awkward decision have come to the conclusion that 4....e6 is
to make about the pawn on e4. 11.e5 g4 very playable. Something more for you to
12.h3 xe3 13.xe3 f5 14.f2 f6! think about!
Initiating dark-squared counterplay, which 0-1
makes perfect sense given that Black has a
bish o p o n g7 wit h ou t a n o p po n en t . 15.g4
e7 16.h4 xf3 17.xf3 d5 18.e2 g5! 714 B06
[ Whereas 18...c6 generally improving the Bologan,Viktor
position and letting out Black's Queen was Azmaiparashvili,Zurab
safe, here we have a much sharper European Club Cup, Crete (3) 25.09.2001
interpretation. The way to win games againt [Nigel Davies]
les se r op po sition is to con tinu ally give
them problems to solve. Never let them I found this game to be deeply impressive.
settle. I always tell my students to imagine Playing Black against a fellow GM,
themselves as the opponent: which move Azmaiparashvili throws his opponent on his
would they least like to have played against own resources as early as move 4 with an
them? I'm guessing that 18....g5 fits original queen move, thereafter transposing
squarely into this category. ] very neatly into a supped-up Gurgenidze
19.g3 fxe5 20.fxe5 g6 system. A game worth careful study. 1.e4 d6
[ As 20...c5 21.c4 might well open the game 2.d4 g6 3.c3 c6 The sign of a Pirc player
up in White's favour. ] who is bored with theory. 4.f4 b6!?
21.c4 c6 22.cxd5 cxd5 23.c3 b5! [ And this is a very interesting move by
W hite has problems on f4 and h4 and Azmaiparashvili. In last month's update I
727
ga ve s e v e ra l ga m e s wit h t h e st a n d a r d problem is that if this initiative is not extended

Gurgenidze move, 4...d5 ] into the middlegame, then the fact that d4 is
5.c4 n o t p ro t e ct e d b y a n o t h e r p a wn m a k e s i t
[ After 5.f3 Black can play g4 ] vulnerable to attack. f6 8.c3 d8
5...g7 6.f3 h6!? Dr Tarrasch would be [ 8...a5 is the main alternative. For
turning in his grave! Black develops his knight example: 9.0-0 0-0 10.e5 bd7 11.c4
in this unsteriotyped fashion, to keep the d8 12.f3 b6 13.e5 fd5 14.e1
pressure on the d4 pawn. Meanwhile it turns e6 15.e4 b8 16.c5 f5 17.d2
out the Azmai has plans to return to a d6 18.c1 h5 19.a4 d7 20.c4 c6
Gurgenidze type plan, but with White's pieces 21.a5 b6 22.xd7 xd7 23.xd5+-
on all the wrong squares. 7.b3 g4 8.e3 J. F ri e s Ni e ls e n -S . S ie b re ch t , H a m b u r g
d5! 9.e5 1995. ]
[ The point is that 9.exd5 is met by f5 9.0-0 0-0 10.e3
10.f2 xf3 11.xf3 xd4 with excellent [ 10.g5 e6 11.d2 c6 12.fd1 d5
play for Black. ] 13.h6 a5 and Black had the traditional
9...f5 10.f2 h5 I don't think I've ever seen play against the isolated queen's pawn in R.
such a good version of the Gurgenidze. I Neyer-A.Wojtkiewicz, Bern 1996. ]
really hate that bishop on b3. 11.d3 a6 [ 10.b3 is worth considering for White. ]
12.0-0-0 h4 13.e2 xd3 14.xd3 a6 10...e6 Black is keen to blockade the d5-
15.c3 c7 16.f1 e6 17.d1 White gets square so that in time he can undermine the d-
his bishop back into 'play'. h6 18.g3 hxg3 pawn. In the short-term it also stops Qb3.
19.hxg3 g5! Shredding the last remnants of 11.e5 d5 12.d3 c6 13.c5?!
White's central fortifications. 20.fxg5 xg5 [ 13.xd5 xd5 14.f4 ]
21.xg5 xg5+ 22.f4 xf4+ 23.gxf4 13...xe3 14.fxe3 xd4! 15.h1
xd1 24.xd1 d7 Now it's clear that Black [ 15.exd4 xd4+ 16.h1 xc5
is much better. He has a good knight against leaves Black two pawns up for nothing. ]
bad bishop, his king comes to the centre and 15...xe2 16.xe6? Obviously shocked by
he's first to the open files on the kingside. the loss of a pawn W hite loses a piece in a
25.g1 a5 26.e2 a4 27.dd1 h2 tactical mix up. xd1 White resigned in view
28.df1 ah8 29.c1 8h4 30.f3 4h3+ of 17 Raxd1 Nxc3 18 Nxf8 Nxd1 19 Rxd1 Kxf8
31.e2 e3+ 32.f1 f3 33.g2 h1+ when a quick count of the pieces reveals that
34.g1 h2 35.g2 g3+! The repetition of Black has an extra bishop.
moves was just a sham. This wins the 0-1
exchange. 36.xg3 xg3
[ 36...xg3 37.xg3 h1+ picks up the rook
on c1. ] 716 B06
0-1 Boskovic,Drasko 2434
Rakhmanov,Alexander 2584
11th EICC Men (10) 16.03.2010
715 B06 [Gawain Jones]
Bosch Porta,David 2230
Pavlovic,Milos 2505 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4
Andorra (2) 1999 [ 4.e3 a6 5.f4 is an alternative move order
[Gary Lane] to play the Austrian Attack. A recent game
went b5 6.f3 b7 7.d3 b4 ( 7...d7
1.e4 c5 2.f3 g6 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 xd5 was played in Delchev-Nakamura
5.d4 g7 6.e2 cxd4 7.cxd4 Just in case investigated in the archives.) 8.e2 f6
White is beginning to panic about having an 9.g3 deviating from the 9.e5 of Yu
isolated d-pawn, it is not a disaster. Indeed, it S h a o t e n g -A n n a b e r d i e v. bd7 10.a3
helps the other pieces to activate and White ( 10.c3 is more usual) 10...a5 11.c3 bxc3
tends to have a space advantage. The main 12.bxc3
728
A) 12...h5 is asking for White to break A) 6.f3 g4 7.e3 xf3 ( 7...d5!
through with either e5-e6 or f4-f5xg6. 13.f5 looks like a cute nuance to me (GJ) as
( 13.e5 g4 14.e2 also looks then dxe4 could be a threat. ) 8.gxf3 d5!;
promising.) 13...h4 14.fxg6! hxg3 15.b3 B) 6.d5 b4! and Rybka agrees that
( 15.gxf7+!? ) 15...fxg6 16.g5 b6 there's no way to trap that knight so White
17.e6 wins back the piece and displaces is rather over-extended. 7.a5 e6! 8.dxe6
Black's king.; xe6 9.f3 f6 10.d3 g4;
B) 12...0-0 So we have the typical battle C) 6.e3 f6 7.f3 0-0 8.e2 b6!
between W hite's big centre and Black's ( 8...d5 GJ is the computer's choice but it
efforts to undermine it with a well timed c5. encourages W hite to start pushing his
13.b1 b6 14.c4 ( 14.0-0 is rather kingside and so I'm not convinced. 9.e5
safer when I'd prefer to have White's extra g4 10.g1 h6 11.h3 f6 12.d2
space. ) 14...a6 15.c1 c5 16.dxc5 wh e n I ca n se e a b ig kin gsid e a t t a c k
dxc5 17.h3 a4!? 18.c2 b8 19.e2 arriving shortly.) 9.0-0 e6 10.h1 b7!
c3!? Black delights in putting the knight and Black has a solid position with good
on squares on which it's poisoned. 20.f1 chances to strike out. e4 is a weakness
b7 21.d3 a4 ( Maybe he should go and White has to watch out for either c7-
the whole hog with 21...a2!? ) 22.0-0 c5 or even f 7-f5!? challenging his big
c6 23.e5 e8 24.b1 h5 25.e2 centre. ]
( 25.xb8! xb8 26.f3! with ideas of e5 6.e3
followed by e6 or f5 looks extremely strong [ 6.a5!? is interesting to stop Black
f o r W h i t e .) 25...h7 26.xb8 xb8 developing his bishop to b7 as now b6 would
27.b1 c7 28.d2 xe5 29.fxe5 c6 be a major structural concession. However
30.h6 continued to be messy in Palac, M- in the game, Rakhmanov played differently
Chatalbashev, B Zagreb CRO 2010 which anyway. ]
ended in a draw in a few more moves. ] 6...d7 7.e5 Overly committal in my opinion. I
4...a6 5.a4 given as dubious by Tiger here had this position on the White side a bit over
and indeed he's never happy with this as a year ago.
W hite. This is due to the fact that often it [ I played the logical 7.f3 e7 8.d3
simply loses a tempo as Black was intending putting further pressure on the important f5
to play b7-b6, or at least not play b5 square. 0-0 e xt r e m e l y r i s k y ! ( 8...b6
immediately as then a2-a4 challenging the would be my choice on the Black side.)
structure sometimes gives Black problems. 9.g4!? I had lost the last game horribly to
White has also ceded control of b4 and thus another ChessPublishing author and was
the 5...Nc6 recommendation. l o o k i n g f o r b l o o d i n t h i s g a m e ! d5?!
[ 5.f3 b5 is probably the critical line of the Th is is t he wro n g pla n h e re a s B la c k 's
whole Tiger's Modern and you should be p o s it i o n so o n r e se m b l e s a n e xt re m e l y
ready for this if you want to play the early passive French. ( 9...c5! is the necessary
a6 Modern. ] break when I was intending to continue with
5...e6 Interesting, Black goes for an 10.d2 cxd4 11.xd4 c5
immediate Hippopotamus setup. I've written wi t h a n u n c l e a r D r a g o n ( D r a g a d o r f ! ? )
earlier in this update that I get worried playing position, but Black's chances certainly don't
Hippos when White has played f2-f4. This is l o o k w o r s e .) 10.e5 c5 11.h4 cxd4
because I find e6 to be a weak square in 12.xd4 c6 13.h5 e8 ( 13...g5 14.h6
Black's position and thus f4-f5 always has to h8 15.xh7+! xh7 16.d3+ g8
be feared. Nevertheless, if Black is accurate 17.xe6! was a fun line I remember
and takes appropriate measures, there calculating.) 14.hxg6 fxg6 15.f3 b4
shouldn't be anything particularly wrong with 16.g5 ( 16.d2 was simpler with a great
this. position. In the game I allowed him
[ 5...c6! is Tiger's suggested refutation. His c o u n t e r p l a y .) 16...d4! A good practical
lines run decision 17.xh7? Flawed ( 17.xd4 xe5
729
18.xe5 xe5 19.xh7 xd3+ 20.xd3 ( 17...exf5 18.dxe5; 17...gxf5 18.xe5

xd3 21.cxd3 g7 and I'm no longer going is an extremely strong knight) 18.h3 exf3
to mate him but at least I have an extra 19.xf3 d7!? 20.h4 ( 20.xe6 f6
pawn. ) 17...f8! Oops. Now I'm losing a lot with very reasonable compensation for the
of material I decided to go 'all-in'! 18.xg6!? pawn. ) 20...f6 is unclear but I like White's
xg6 19.e2 dxc3?! ( 19...dxe3 20.d1 chances with his pressure on e6 which I
e7 and the cold hearted computer says I think is more important than his own
have no compensation for the couple pieces misplaced king which he can improve with
I s a c r i f i c e d .) 20.h2 f8? 21.e2 g2-g3 and Kg2. ]
( 21.xg7+! xg7 22.f2 was actually 17...d7
winning for White as Black has no defense [ 17...0-0 would deter 18.g4 as Black can
to the rook swing.) 21...xg5 22.fxg5 xh7 now play h4 although this position is
23.g6 f8 24.c5 cxb2? ( 24...xg6 hardly clear either. ]
was necessary when the position is 18.g4!?
extremely unclear following 25.xb4 cxb2 [ 18.xf5 followed by Bh4 must also favour
26.h1 f8 ) 25.xf8!! Jones, G-Dragicevic, White. ]
D Q u e e n s t o wn 2 0 0 9 a n d m y o p p o n e n t 18...h6 19.h3 c6 20.h4 e7 21.xe7
resigned as bxa1 26.xg7 and he has no xe7 22.d2 f7 23.g2 0-0-0 24.e2
way to prevent Qh7 mate, despite the extra W hite has successfully completed his
p a i r o f r o o k s a n d k n i g h t ! A g a m e wi t h development and Black's pieces are hemmed
many mistakes but entertaining. ] in by that pawn on d5. Thus the reasoning for
7...e7 8.e4 Provoking d5 Rakhmanov's next to try and f orce som e
[ 8...d5!? also looks possible if Black wants co u n t e rp la y. c4! The square isn't actually
to keep his flexible structure ] adequately controlled. 25.c1!
9.g5 f5 10.f2 c5! 11.c3 If we compare [ T h e k n i g h t i s t o x i c 25.bxc4?! dxc4
this position to my game in the notes, we see 26.xc4?! xe5! and Black's pieces would
that Black has a much better version of a have suddenly come to life ]
French here. He's already developed three 25...b8 26.c2?! Overlooking Black's
pieces and the knight is looking strong on f5. creative next.
Meanwhile W hite's re ally going to regre t [ 26.f1 would keep White with the
having played a2-a4 as the e1-a5 diagonal is advantage as the knight would now have to
vulnerable. cxd4 12.cxd4 b6 Somewhat retreat. ]
risky 26...cxe5! Forcing White to take the cursed
[ 12...a5+ 13.d2 xd2+ 14.xd2 b8 knight. 27.dxe5
looks perfectly fine for Black but the GM [ 27.xe5 xe5 28.f4 ( 28.dxe5? d4+
was looking for more than this equality. ] d r o p s m a t e r i a l .) 28...c7 29.hf1
13.b3 f6 ( 29.xe5? is still not playable as after
[ 13...f8 14.d3 will probably transpose xe5 30.dxe5 d4+ 31.g3 xh1 32.xh1
after f6 ] d3 The tactics have resulted in giving Black
14.5f3 f8 Rerouting the bishop onto the a winning position.) 29...d7 and White's a
vulnerable e1-a5 diagonal 15.d3 b4+ pawn down. ]
16.f1 Looking more at this position I think 27...d4 This is the point. At the cost of a piece,
White is better. He has more space and Black Black's pieces suddenly come to life. The
may regret having played g7-g6 and his knight bishop on c6 looks directly at the king with ...
is misplaced on b6. I think this is more Bxf3 followed by ...Nxe5 as a threat. d4-d3 is
important than White's uncastled king but he also threatened regaining the kamikaze knight.
has to be careful and Black's position if of It's too late to save White's position. 28.eg1
course playable. fxe5 17.fxe5 The only move to deal with both ...Bxf3+ and ...
[ 17.dxe5 so that White can use the d4 d3
square would be my preferred recapture ] [ 28.g3 xf3 29.xf3 d3 is pretty much
[ whilst the most ambitious is 17.xf5! e4 game over. ]
730
28...hf8 Simple chess putting yet more them "en prise") and yet they both lose! You
pressure on f3. W hite's in dire straights to are invited to find those moves, and answers
escape. appear after the game B17. 5.0-0 e6 6.g5?!
[ 28...xe5 29.f4 isn't clear ] The bishop puts itself too far too soon into the
29.e1 enemy camp, where it quickly becomes a
[ 29.g3 xe5! now that f4 is covered target for Black's pawns to attack. e7 7.d2
30.xe5 c7! 31.e1 d5! 32.gf3 h6 8.f4?
xf3+! and Black has easily enough [ 8.e3 avoids being hit by ...g5. ]
remaining pieces to mate White. ] 8...g5 9.e3 d5 10.exd5
29...g5 30.d1 f4 simple chess again. [ 10.d3? loses material by force to dxe4
Rakhmanov intends to simply double on the f 11.xe4 f5 12.d3 f4 ]
file when W hite is powerless to defend f3. 10...exd5 11.d3 bc6 12.c3 f5!
31.h4 Boskovic desperately tries to release This case of "f for forward" threatens to trap
the pressure on f3 but the alternatives don't White's e3-bishop with 13...f4. 13.c2 0-0
help. 14.e1 Hoping to play f4 next, but Black gets
[ 31.c1 might be best with the idea to there first. f4 15.c1 g4 16.a4 e8 17.g3?
sacrifice the exchange but again simply e4 f3 Virtually sealing the fate of White's king.
32.c2 df8 33.f2 h5! and White can't 18.e3 h5 19.b4 White's queenside
move and must await his fate. At least it gestures are coming much too late, because
won't take long... ] h e i s s i m p l y l o s t o n t h e o t h e r wi n g . f5
31...xg4+ 32.h2 f8! 33.hxg5 f4+ 20.d2 h3 21.b3 xd3 22.xd3 f5
34.h3 h6 Black's play has been White resigned, having no proper answer to
impressively methodical in carrying out this the crushing threat of 23...Rh5. Solution to
attack. The d8 rook isn't yet doing anything so B17P1 4... Bg4? or 4... Nd7? both lose to 5
he opens up the h file. White can do nothing Bxf7+ Kxf7 6 Ng5+. If you want to be ultra-
about it despite his extra two pieces. 35.h4 precise, then it's also true that the bizarre 4...
xh4+ 36.xh4 f1+ A pretty game Kd7?? drops a pawn to 5 Bxf7 too!
although objectively White was better had he 0-1
n o t a l l o we d t h e s a c r i f i c e s . 5 . . . e 6 l o o k s
reasonable though, I couldn't find any way to
get an ad vantage a s W hite a nd seems a 718 B06
playable alternative to Tiger's 5...Nc6(!) I don't Campora,Daniel Hugo
like 7.e5 so if we see more games in this line Rocha,Sergio
I predict they will follow my play with Nf3. Santo Antonio (3) 1999
0-1 [Nigel Davies]
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 f6

717 B06 5.c4 bd7 The critical move, denying White
Bouroutzakis,Georgios the time he needs to reinforce the pawn on d5.
Agdestein,Simen 6.g5 Aiming to keep the extra pawn at the
Open, 2000 Kiel 2000 co s t o f t h e b i s h o p p a i r - b u t B l a c k g e t s
[Paul Motwani] compensation.
[ 6.b3 b6 7.f3 , as in Klovans -
Quick Tricks and Traps 1) B17: "W hite Gurevich, seems to give White a worry free
steamrollered by a stampede of black pawns!" edge. On practical grounds that would be
G.B ourout zak is-S.A gd est ein , K iel Op en , my personal preference. ]
Germany 2000. Modern Defence, Code B06. 6...b6
1.d4 g6 2.f3 g7 3.e4 d6 4.c4 a6 [ One of the highest level games in this
Reader's Challen ge B17P1 Instead of 4...a6, opening was Sadler - Turner, British Ch.,
there are two different developing moves Hove 1997 in which Black stayed a pawn
which activate black pieces (without putting down after 6...0-0 7.b3 b6 8.f3 d7
731
9.f4 c6 10.d6 exd6 11.xd6 g4 might as well play on. 31.f3 e6 32.d1 c4
12.xd8 axd8 13.h3 fe8+ 14.e3 e6 33.d8 xb5 34.axb5 b3 35.b8 b2
15.0-0-0 d5 16.xd5 bxd5 17.xd5 36.b6 f5 37.a8 xb6 38.xa5 b2 39.h3
xd5 18.g5 f6 19.xf6 xf6 20.f3 f4 40.a7 f6 41.c7 h6 42.a7 d2
etc. Black never really got going in this game 43.b7 g5 44.b6+ g7 45.h4 f6 46.h5
so he should force White to concede the two f5 47.g6+ f7 48.f1 d1+ 49.f2 h1
bishops. ] 50.xh6 g4 51.fxg4 fxg4 52.g6 f3
7.xf6 xf6 8.b3 0-0 I like Rocha's cool 53.gxf3
treatment in this game - he doesn't snatch at ½-½
forcing lines but relies on the natural strength
of his bishop pair to deliver compensation.
[ 8...c6 9.dxc6 xd4 10.xd4 xd4 719 B06
11.ge2 xc3+ 12.xc3 bxc6 13.0-0-0 Cheparinov,Ivan 2646
left Black worse and miserable in Aseev K - Sakaev,Konstantin 2633
Schulz, Erfurt 1991 ] 8th ch-Euro T/B (3.4) 15.04.2007
9.ge2 a5 [John Watson]
[ Black has not managed to develop
sufficient counterplay with 9...g4 10.f3 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6!?
f5 Palliser - Houska M, Witley 1999 going Here we go again. 5.f3 Maybe Whit e should
on ( 10...h4+ 11.g3 f5 12.0-0 xg3 play this instead of f4, because it's unclear
13.hxg3 e8 14.g4 left Black with zero how Black can attack e4 and d4 with real
compensation in Keitlinghaus - Siebrecht, effect. d7
Dortmund 1998) 11.g3 d7 12.d2 c6 [ 5...f6 is a pretty normal Pirc and may well
13.dxc6 bxc6 14.0-0-0 fd8 15.f4 a5 be best. Presumably ]
16.xf5 gxf5 17.a4 with very little [ 5...b5 6.d2 b7 is an option I have to
compensation for Black. ] prefer White, however. ]
10.a4 c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0 c7 6.d2 b5
Once again a cool wa y t o p lay it. Be f ore [ 6...e5 7.0-0-0 b5 8.dxe5 xe5 9.f4 g4
c o m m it t i n g h is b ish o p o n c8 , B la ck f irs t 10.d4 doesn't help matters. ]
applies more pressure to the d4 pawn. 7.h4!? Probing. T his is possible because
[ After 12...a6 13.e4 g7 14.c3 b8 White's centre is relatively immune to attack.
15.c5 c8 16.e1 Black had very little for [ Options include 7.ge2 ]
the pawn in Rasmussen - Bangsbro, Aarhus [ 7.h3 ]
1995 ] 7...h5
13.d2 [ 7...gf6 8.0-0-0 b4 9.ce2 a5 10.f4
[ This time roun d 13.e4 g7 14.c3 has the double idea h5 and e5. ]
is not such a convincing plan as W hite's 8.h3 c5 9.g5! Tricky, and it's a good
Ne4-c5 will not be threatening a bishop on square in any case. b4 10.e2 a5?
a6. Black gets good play with e5 15.dxe5 [ 10...h6 improves greatly, as we shall see,
xe5 16.g3 h3 17.e1 ad8 ] because it protects f7. ]
13...d8 14.e3 a6 Only now does the 11.d1
bishop come out. Black is no worse here and [ 11.dxc5! is good here but Black doesn't
W hite so on give s b ack t he pa wn . 15.fe1 catch it: ]
d5 16.f3 xc3 17.xc3 xd4 18.e4 11...c7? 12.dxc5 xc5?? Sakaev was
g7 19.xf6 exf6 20.ad1 xd1 21.xd1 having an off day and still suffers from chess
d8 22.f3 c5 23.d5 d7 24.c6 d2 b l i n d n e s s . 13.d5 whoops! White forks a8
25.c3 xc3 26.bxc3 d2 27.b5 c8 an d f 7 . Black cou ld resign , bu t prob ab ly
28.d3 c4 29.xc4 xc2 30.b5 xc3 doesn't want a 12-move loss on his record.
Black has a nominal extra pawn but will be h6 14.xa8 0-0 15.d5 a4 16.d4
unable to create a kingside pawn majority. Still, 16...e5 is met b7 17 Qb3.
he's got what chances that are going so he 1-0
732
720 B06 xf6 17.xh6 is clearly in White's favour,

Cubas,Jose Fernando 2448 with the idea xh4 ( 17...xh6? 18.c1 )
Leitao,Rafael 2601 18.xh4 xh6 19.c1 xh4 20.xh6 ]
Festival Internacional de Xadrez (8) 10.12.07 14...f6 15.c1 0-0-0 16.e2 b6
[John Watson] 17.xd8+ xd8
[ 17...xd8 ]
Here we have a standard Tiger's Modern 18.d1 e7 19.gxe6! fxe6 20.xg6 e8
versus W hite's popular Be3/f3/Qd2 plan. 21.xh8 Black too many weaknesses. a4
White plays one of the most critical lines, but A nice counterattack which also protects c5,
Black should have had a satisfactory game although it shouldn't work. 22.g5?
out of the opening. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 [ 22.c3! wins: xh8 23.d6! b7 24.xe6
g7 4.e3 a6 5.f3 b5 6.d2 d7 7.h4 xc3?! 25.xh6 e5 26.f4 ]
h5 22...xb2 23.f4?
[ In my notes to Cheparinov-Sakaev, [ 23.xb2 xb2 24.d8+ xd8 25.xd8
D r e s d e n 2 0 0 7 , I g a v e t h e l i n e 7...gf6 xd8 ( 25...a4 26.a5 ) 26.xb2
8.0-0-0 b4 9.ce2 a5 10.f4 with the and White's extra pawn should eventually
double idea h5 and e5. ] tell. ]
8.h3 b7 23...xh8 Threatening ... Nc3+. Now Black
[ 8...c5 9.g5! b4 10.e2 has a very big advantage. 24.d3 c4
is the Ch eparinov-Sakaev ga me. Black [ 24...f7!? 25.f6 g8! is strong. ]
sh o u ld t ry h6 ( 10...a5 11.d1 c7? 25.a3 f7 26.f6 f8?!
12.dxc5 xc5? 13.d5 w a s p l a y e d) [ 26...xf6 27.xf6 c5 ]
11.dxc5 dxc5 12.0-0-0 with the idea Nf4 27.xa4! bxa4 28.xh8 b4+ 29.c1
and Bc4. ] xh8 30.f6 e1+ 31.d1?
9.g5!? This is the usual idea behind White's [ 31.b2 c3+!? 32.xc3 xc3+ 33.xc3
insertion of h5/...h5. c5 is unclear. ]
[ 9...c8 10.0-0-0 c5 transposes to a game 31...e3+ 32.b1 b6+
Miladinovic-Hickl in 'Tiger's Modern': [ 32...d2! , trapping White's bishop, works
A) Tiger analyses 11.e5 cxd4 12.e6 fxe6 because W hite runs out of checks:
13.xd4 ( but 13.d3! f8 14.xd4 e5 33.xh8+ c7 34.e5+ d7 35.g7+
15.e3 ) 13...e5 14.e3 f8=; d6 36.f8+ c7 37.e7+ d7 38.c5+
B) 11.e2?! c7 12.b1 gf6 13.d5 b7 ]
e5 14.f4 b6 with roughly equal 33.c1 e3+ 34.b1 c3? Black has the
play. ] idea of ...Qb6+, mating, and ...Qd2, but now
10.dxc5 dxc5?! White has enough time:
[ 10...xc5! is perfectly okay. A sample line [ 34...d2 ]
is 11.d1 ( 11.0-0-0 c8 12.b1 ) 35.xh8+ c7 36.g7+??
11...h6 ( 11...b4 12.d5! ) 12.xb5 axb5 [ 36.e5+! draws. ]
13.xc5 0-0 14.d4 xd4 15.xd4 xa2 ] 36...d7 37.e5+ b7??
11.0-0-0 h6 [ Black wins after 37...c6 38.b8 d4 ]
[ Black is tied up, and 11...gf6 12.e5! 38.d6 c6 39.e7+
xe5 13.xd8+ xd8 14.xd8+ xd8 [ 39.g3 ]
15.f4 ( 15.xc5 fd7 ) 15...eg4 16.xf7+ 39...b6 40.d8+ a7 41.c7+ b7
e8 17.xh8 xe3 18.xg6 42.d6 a5 43.a3 e5 44.c7 d2
should favour White, who for the time being 45.xa5+ b8 46.xe5+ c8 47.c5+
is an exchange and pawn ahead. ] b8 48.e5+ a7 49.a2 xd1 50.xc3
12.b1 e2 51.b2 xg2 52.a5+ b8 53.d8+
[ 12.f4!? g4 13.e5 xe3 14.xe3 e6 a7 54.a5+ b8 55.d8+ a7 56.a5+
15.ge4 is a good alternative. ] ½-½
12...c6 13.d5 e6 14.f4
[ 14.xe6 fxe6 15.g5 f6 16.xf6+
733
721 B06 722 B06

Daamen,Ferry Danielsen,Henrik
Welling,Gerard Salmensuu,Olli
club Eindhoven 1988 Zt Munkebo (Denmark) (1) 1998
Of course White doesn't have to play 3.e5 and If Black adopts a Modern Defence move order
with 3.Nc3 he can hope to transpose into a he can meet 2.f4 with 2...d5. This is one of
Pirc Defence should Black play 3...d6. Not the joys of leaving your d-pawn at home. 1.f4
that there's much chance of W elling doing g6 2.e4 d5 3.e5
anything normal in the opening, with Black [ After 3.exd5 Black can offer a pawn
ge t t i n g h i s k n i gh t t o t h a t k e y h 5 s q u a r e sacrifice with f6 4.b5+ ( 4.c3 xd5
anyway. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 is f i n e f o r B l a c k) 4...d7 ( 4...bd7
This looks a bit wimpy, but even Khalifman may also be possible) 5.c4 g4 6.f3
has paid Black's opening this compliment. d5 xd5 7.c3 c6 8.h3 xf3 9.xf3 e6
[ Khalifman - Svidler, Moscow 1995 10.e4 d7 and Black had a solid game in
transposed into a Pirc after 3...g7 4.f4 d6 I Zaitsev - Komliakov, Orel 1994 ]
. W e llin g, a s u su al, give s t he gam e a n 3...c5
independent turn.... ] [ Black can also opt for a Gurgenidze type
4.e5 h5 5.e2 g7 6.h6 c5 7.f3 set -u p wit h 3...h5 , Hebden - Lobron, New
[ After 7.dxc5 there is d4 with similar play to York 1983 continuing 4.d4 h6 5.c3 c6
the game. ] 6.a3 b6 7.c2 g4 8.d2 e6 9.a4
7...c6 8.dxc5 d4 9.b5 e6 10.xf8 a5 10.e3 f5 11.f2 e7 with a super-
xf8 11.c3 dxc3 12.xd8+ exd8 solid position for Black. ]
13.xc3 g4 14.0-0-0 e6 15.h3 xf3 4.c3 Probably not the best, White should
16.xf3 xc5 17.xc6 bxc6 18.d4 g7 leave open the option of advancing his c-
19.hd1 hc8 20.c4 e6 At this point pawn.
White is slightly better, but he gets completely [ The usual move is 4.f3 c6 5.d4
outplayed in the endgame. 21.d7 f8 ( Black is doing well after both 5.b5 b6
22.a4 d8 23.c5 xd7 24.xd7+ e8 6.xc6+ xc6; and 5.c3 g4 6.e2 h6
25.c5 xc5 26.xc5 d7 27.c2 c7 7.d3 f5 Dimitrijevic - Root A, US Open Ch.,
28.b4 b6 29.b3 d8 The tables have 1994 ) 5...cxd4 6.xd4 e6 7.b5 d7
been turned, and suddenly it is Black who is 8.0-0 c5 9.c3 ge7 10.e3 b6
threatening to penetrate with his rook. 30.f4 11.a3 a6 12.xc6 xc6 13.b4 xd4
d1 31.c2 h5 32.h4 h1 33.g3 g1 14.xd4 xd4 15.xd4 xd4+ 16.cxd4
34.c3 g2 35.a3 a5 36.a4 g1 37.c4 a4 17.ac1 d7 left Black with the better
axb4 38.xb4 c5+ 39.c4 a1 40.d5? endgame in Myrstad - Ivanov M, Trondheim
White may have been in time trouble as he 1997 ]
manages to get his king into a net and has to 4...h6 5.f3 f5 6.b5+ d7 7.e2 e6
give up his rook to avoid mate. 8.0-0 xb5 9.xb5+ d7 10.xd7+ xd7
[ 40.b3 b1+ 41.a3 probably holds. ] Black is doing well, but even good positions
40...xa4 41.xc5 aren't immune to blunders. 11.b3 c6
[ After 41.d3 there is e6+ 42.d6 d4+ ] 12.b2 c8?? 13.xd5! And that's that,
[ and 41.e6 is answered by d4+ 42.e5 White wins a pawn. He can't take the knight
f6# ] because of e5-e6+. Black could have saved
41...e6+ 42.d6 d4+ 43.e7 xc5 himself much of the rest. g7 14.c3 fd4
44.xf7 d5 45.xg6 d3 15.xd4 xd4 16.e4 c7 17.c4 c6
0-1 18.xd4 cxd4 19.f3 d8 20.d3 f8
21.a4 b4 22.g4 h6 23.g2 b6 24.a5+
c6 25.a4 f8 26.f3 cd7 27.f6 c7
28.e4 cc8 29.b4 g5 30.f5 g7 31.h5
734
f8 32.f6 b5 33.axb6 axb6 34.xd4 xe4 19.d3 f5 20.d2 e7 21.d1
xd4+ 35.xd4 b7 36.d3 b5 37.a5 e8 22.df1 c5-+ Ineke, J-Geragousian, B/
bxc4 38.dxc4 d8+ 39.c3 d1 40.c5 Nijmegen 2002 ]
e1 41.g3 c1+ 42.d4 d1+ 43.c4 8...0-0 9.g4 O r i g i n a l c e r t a i n l y . d5!
e1 44.d3 d1+ 45.c4 e1 46.b3 This would be a classic response to White's
b1+ 47.a4 e1 48.h5 c6 49.a6+ flank action. Black prepares immediate
d5 50.b3 e3+ 51.c2 e2+ 52.d3 central counterplay. 10.exd5 xd5 11.g5
xh2 53.a8 h3+ 54.e2 xc5 55.bxc5 b6 12.a3 exd4 13.cxd4 c5 14.c4
c3 56.a7 xc5 57.xf7 xe5 58.d7 Already White is toiling just to keep his head
c2+ 59.d2 c3 60.b2 c7 61.f2 e4 above water. Black has blown open the centre
62.g2 f7 63.f2 d5 64.f1 e5 65.e2 at the right moment and the move g2-g4 looks
e6 66.g7+ d6 67.e3 f8 68.e4 h5 way out of place. b4! 15.c1 He couldn't
69.gxh5 g4 70.d2+ c6 71.xe5 bring himself to castle queenside yet this may
1-0 be the right move.
[ 15.0-0-0 cxd4 16.e7 xa2+ ( 16...d3!?
17.xf8 xa2+ 18.xa2 dxe2 19.xe2
723 B06 xf8 20.b1 d7 ) 17.xa2 e8
Dauth,Benjamin 2281 18.g5 ]
Paulsen,Dirk 2376 15...cxd4
ch-city Berlin GER (3) 11.04.2004 [ Black is much better after 15...c6! ]
[Andrew Martin] 16.e7 e5
[ 16...c6 17.xf8 xf8 18.d1 de5
1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6 I've always found it a little gives a dangerous attack. But Paulsen does
odd that Black can seemingly freak out with not want to fall back, even for an instant. ]
impunity in the Modern Defence but when 17.xb4 e8 18.d1
White tries to do the same he generally gets [ 18.xb6 axb6 19.d6 xc4 20.xc4 d3
the worst of things. Got to do with pawns I 21.xb6 xg4!! 22.fxg4 xa2 23.c8
t h in k . T h e B la ck p a wn f o rm a t io n is ve r y xc8 24.xc8 a1+ 25.d2 xh1 ]
flexible meanwhile with e4 and d4 White has 18...xf3+
already committed himself! The current game [ The computer indicates 18...xc4 19.xc4
sees White heading off the beaten track into e6 and White is in deep trouble. ]
jungle territory. I don't think that what Dauth 19.f2 e5 20.h3 d3+ 21.xb6 axb6
does can be BAD, but he certainly ends up 22.xd3 xe7 A storm has swept the board
with a poor position from the opening. 3.c3 leaving White in very poor shape. The Bishop
g7 4.d3 d6 5.e2 Slightly unusual. One on g7 is unopposed and the white queenside
would expect W hite to be thinking of f2-f4 looks shaky. 23.c4 e6! Ensuring that the
now. f6 6.f3?! My punctuation. White's queenside will fall apart. 24.xb6 xa2
formation leads to neither attack nor defence 25.b5 xb2-+ Mopping-up time. 26.d8+
so I don't understand what he wants from the f8 27.d5 g7 28.a4 d3+ 29.g3
opening? A weird position? OK, but then you xd5 30.xd5 e3+ 31.h4 e7+ 32.g5
have to be going somewhere. bd7 7.e3 bxe2 33.b5 g2 34.xd3 xd3
e5 Straightforward. The lack of forcing play White needs to go in with a plan against the
gives Black plenty of choice. 8.d2N Pirc/Modern, whether it be the positional
[ 8.d2 d5! 9.h3 0-0 10.0-0 e8 11.g3 squeeze or outright attack. What happened
c7 12.e1 b6 13.f2 b7 14.ac1 here was very half-hearted just shunting out
ac8 Liljedahl, L-Szabo, L/Gothenburg 1971 the pieces with no real aims. A good game by
Pretty patterns. Level. ] Paulsen who took energetic action at exactly
[ 8.0-0 0-0 9.f4 Changing his mind? g4 the right moment.
10.f2 xf2 11.xf2 f6 12.h3 e8 0-1
13.d2 d7 14.c4 b6 15.f1 xc4
16.xc4 exd4 17.xd4 xd4 18.cxd4
735
724 B06 better after 23.xd6 xh3+ 24.gxh3 xf3

Deepan,C 2518 25.xe5+ f6 due to his more compact
Akshayraj,Kore 2394 pawns. ) 23...h5 with unclear play. ]
ch-National A (4) 04.12.2009 22...xd8 23.c3 g6 24.e3 g4 25.hxg4
[Neil McDonald] xg4 26.h2 h5 27.xa7 d2 28.d3
[ Awkward f or W h it e is 28.xg4 hxg4
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f3 c6 29.e2 f4! ]
5.a4 White stops the expansion 5...b5 at the 28...f4 29.e3 g5! 30.h1
v e r y f i r s t o p p o r t u n i t y . f6 6.g5 [ Of course if 30.xd2 h3+ while after ]
An aggressive and natural move, but perhaps [ 30.g3 xd3 31.cxd3 f4! White is
it commits the bishop too soon: now Black bullied into an endgame that is bad for him,
knows that the bishop won't be going directly despite his extra pawn, due to the power of
to e3 in response to any pressure he exerts on the black rook on the seventh rank that can
d4. 'Waiting' with gobble up a couple of pawns. ]
[ 6.e2 or ] 30...g6 31.g3? Better to submit to a slight
[ 6.h3 are the preferred moves. ] inferiority after
6...a5! The black queen is in no danger of [ 31.f1 xc2 ]
being bothered by Bd2 and so takes up an 31...xd3 32.f4 Losing at once, but
energetic post where she supports the threat understandably he doesn't want to play the
of 7...Nxe4. 7.d3 bd7 8.0-0 0-0 9.d2 horrid endgame after
e5 10.fe1 e8 11.f1 f8! The knight [ 32.xg5+ xg5 33.cxd3 xf2 ]
heads for e6 where it increases the pressure 32...f2+ 33.g1 d8 34.fxe5 h3+
on d4 and also intends to exchange on g5 35.h1 d4
which would be positionally unwelcome for 0-1
White. 12.h3 e6 13.xf6 xf6 14.d5
W hite had relied on this trick to give him a
good game, but he is in for a surprise. d8 725 B06
15.xf6+ xf6 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.d6 Delchev,Aleksander 2648
It appears t the 6.Bg5 plan will triumph after Nakamura,Hikaru 2701
all as the e5 pawn looks indefensible. g7! TOP 16 GpA Mulhouse FRA (7) 03.05.2009
The trapper trapped: Black keeps his pawn on [John Watson]
e5. 18.a5
[ If 18.xe5 xe5 19.xe5 d4 20.ad1 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.e3 g7 4.c3 a6
xc2 21.e2 xe5 22.xc2 e6 5.f4
and White has loose pawns with both 23... [ Marcelin-Nakamura, Mulhouse FRA 2009
Rxe4 and 23...Bb3 threatened. ] didn't go as well for Black, but he could have
[ Or 18.xe5 d8 19.g4! xf2+! ( Not had some opening advantage: 5.f3
19...xd6? 20.xf6 xf6? 21.e5+ ) A) this month's game Emms-S Williams,
20.xf2 xd6 with a small advantage to Southend 2009 showed Black in a
Black due to the isolated pawn on e4. ] He d ge h og mo d e : 5...d7 6.d2 e6
18...f4 19.a3 g5! Given time White will 7.d3 h6 8.0-0 b6 9.e2 b7 10.g3
assume control of the d-file and begin to make e7 11.h3 f5?! (good grief!) 12.c4 ( or
his queenside pressure count. Therefore 12.fe1 ) 12...f6 13.d5 fxe4 14.xe4
Akshayraj creates a diversion on the kingside- exd5 15.xf6+ xf6 16.cxd5 d7
he wants to get maximum value f rom his 17.e4 0-0-0 18.xh6 ( 18.a4! )
excellently placed queen and knight. 20.ad1 18...xb2 19.ab1 a3 20.e3 f5
e6 21.d6 ad8 22.xd8 White gives up 21.d4 ( 21.g5! ) 21...xd4 22.xd4
control of the d-f ile. He wins a pawn, but c5 23.d3 b8 24.xc5?! dxc5
Black has huge counterplay once his rook and things are going poorly for White;
invades on d2. A safer approach was B) 5...b5 6.d3 b7 7.h3 d7 8.e2?!
[ 22.ed1 xd6 23.xd6 ( Black is slightly B1) 8...gf6! definitely more accurate,
736
and in fact White has to grovel a bit to 9...c8

defend his e-pawn: [ 9...xe4 10.xe4 h6 is also analysed at
B1a) or 9.d2 e5 ( or 9...c5!? 10.c3 length in Tiger's book he thinks it's
0-0 11.0-0 c7 ) 10.c3 ( 10.d5 0-0 satisfactory for Black. ]
11.0-0 c6! ) 10...exd4 11.cxd4 0-0 10.xb7 xb7 11.dxc5 dxe5 12.d5
12.0-0 c5 ( or 12...e7 13.f3 c5 ) xd5 13.xd5 c8 14.b6
13.a4 cxd4 14.xd4 c5 15.c2 b4 [ Black equa lise s af te r 14.fxe5 xc5!
with excellent play; 15.b6 c6 16.d1 h6 ]
B1b) 9.g3 h5 10.g5 c5 11.c3 14...xb6 15.cxb6 f6 16.0-0-0
cxd4 12.cxd4 a5+ 13.d2 xd2+ Tiger queries this, preferring
14.xd2 f8! 15.a4! ( 15.d5? 6h7 [ 16.fxe5! . 'when Black has to walk a fine
attacks b2 and threatens ... Nxg5 and line: d5 17.d4 0-0 18.a4 ( 18.0-0-0! )
...Bh6, winning a pieces; 15.hc1 18...xc2 19.axb5 axb5 20.0-0 b8 ]
e6 ) 15...bxa4 16.xa4 e6 16...g4 17.b7
17.xf6 xf6 18.b4 a7 19.e2 [ 17.he1 is probably worse. Mortensen-
g5! 20.d5 c5 21.fd4 e6!; Hillarp Persson, Danish TCh 2003 went
B2) 8...c5 9.c3 gf6 10.g3 h5 xe3 18.xe3 h6
11.d5! (since Black can't play ...c6) c4 A) 19.b7! b8 20.c3 xf4+ 21.b1
12.c2 c5 13.g5 h4 14.e2 h5?! 0-0 ( 21...f5! 22.c8+ f7 ) 22.g3! e4!
15.b1 ( 15.f3 ) 15...fd7 16.f4 e5 this is unclear;
17.f3 ( 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.0-0 ) 17...a5 B) 19.a3 xf4+ 20.b1 e4 21.d4
18.0-0 d8 22.c3 , a n d h e l i k e s xh2
B2a) 18...b4 19.fxe5 , for example, but the computer thinks that Black stands
xe5 ( 19...xe5 20.xc5 dxc5 better after ( 22...e3! )]
21.f4 h8 22.a4+ ) 20.xe5 xe5 17...b8 18.b6 f6?! The first deviation from
21.d4 ( or 21.d4 e7 22.f4 g5 Tiger's analysis! That goes
23.f5 ) 21...bxc3 22.bxc3 b8 [ 18...0-0 19.fxe5 ( 19.d7!? ) 19...xb7
23.f3 h5 24.c1; 20.d4 f6 , a lth ough ( 20...c8 with the
B2b) 18...b4 1/2-1/2. White stands idea...Nh6-f5, or 21.h3 h6+ 22.b1 e3
distinctly better after ] , looks fine )]
5...b5 6.d3 b7 7.f3 d7 8.e5!? 19.d8+ f7 20.d7 h6 21.g3 exf4
[ 8.e2 was analysed in an earlier update, 22.b1 e5 23.xe5+ fxe5 24.a7?
or to be sure, I quoted Tiger Hillarp Finally White slips up.
Persson's analysis from his book. He prefers [ 24.c5!
b4!? ( One of his games went 8...c5 9.dxc5 A) 24...g5 25.gxf4 exf4 ( 25...xf4
xc5 10.xc5! xc3+! 11.bxc3 dxc5 26.xe7+ f6 27.c7 h5 28.a7 )
12.e5 with some advantage for W hite) 26.e1 e8 27.exe7+ xe7 28.xe7+
9.d1 gf6! 10.f2 ( 10.d2 c5 11.e5 d8 29.g7;
d5 12.e6!? fxe6 13.g5 xd4!? B) 24...he8 25.f1 e6 26.c7
14.xh7 f8 15.xf8 xf8 16.xg6 c8 is awkward White would like to play gxf4
, and Tiger says that he's satisfied as Black. and Rf3-a3. ]
At any rate it's exciting!) 10...c5 11.c3 bxc3 24...e6! 25.hd1?
12.bxc3 0-0 13.0-0 e8 (versus e5-e6) [ 25.c7 d6 26.xb8 xb8 27.c8 xb7
14.ab1 c8 as I said then, I prefer White will probably draw. ]
in this position. ] 25...f3 26.c7 e4 27.dd7?? White's last
8...c5 few moves are almost certainly a result of
[ Tiger mentions both 8...h6 and ] time pressure. he8 28.a3 g5 29.h4 e3
[ 8...e6 as alternatives. ] 30.xb8 f2 31.a7 f1+ 32.a2 e2
9.e4 0-1
[ 9.g5 cxd4 10.e6 f5! 11.xf5 df6!
San Segundo-Hillarp Persson, Elista 1998. ]
737
726 B06 727 B06

Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2712 Duarte,Leonardo 2317
Kamsky,Gata 2732 Flores,Diego 2513
Sportaccord WMG Blindfold rapid (2) 14.12.11 80th ch-ARG Los Polvorines ARG (8) 15.9.05
[Milos Pavlovic] [Andrew Martin]
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 Coming up a game where Black employs an
The Modern Defence. 5.d2 d7 6.0-0-0 unusual move-order in the opening to what
Dominguez is going for sharp play which is should have been good effect. 1.e4 d6 2.d4
quite usual for him. e6 d7!? We soon transpose to a Modern-like
[ 6...b5 7.h4! h5 8.h3 b7 9.g5 e6 position but there are many cases when Black
Is like the main game but instead of having would want to respond with a Philidor. 3.f4 g6
a bishop on b7 Kamsky has a knight on e7 4.f3 g7 5.c3 c6 6.d3 b6!
10.f4!? h6 ( 10...b4 11.e2 gf6 12.f5 [ 6...e5 could certainly be termed ' thematic',
gxf5 13.exf5 e5 14.xb4; 10...e7 11.f5 although White retains the better game after
gxf5 12.exf5 gf6 13.fxe6 fxe6 14.d3 A) 7.fxe5 dxe5 8.d5 h6!? 9.e3
0-0-0 15.he1 Reinderman, D-Kabanof, N ( I think I prefer 9.dxc6 bxc6 10.e3
Dieren 2009) 11.d3 c5 12.dxc5 a5 when Black has structural defects which
13.xb5! axb5 14.xd6 b4 15.xe6 fxe6 cannot be repaired. Doubtless the position
16.xe6+ f8 17.xd7 h7 18.f5 a6 is unclear, for instance after e7 11.0-0
19.d6 bxc3 20.f6 xa2 21.d8+ xd8 gf6 ) 9...gf6 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.d2
22.fxg7+ xg7 23.f1+ f7 24.xh6+ g8 g4 12.g1 0-0 13.h3 gf6 14.e3
25.xa2 d5 26.xd5 xd5 27.xf7 xc5 h7 15.g4 e8 16.h4 c7 17.e2
28.g7+ h8 29.xg6 h7 30.e6 e6 18.g3 dc5 19.c4 d4
1-0 Wirig, A -Moussard, J Caen FRA 2011 ] 20.g5+ hxg5 21.hxg5+ g8 22.xd4
7.h4! h5 8.h3 This is a key idea b5 9.g5 xd4 23.h2 d8 24.xf7+ xf7
e7 Kamsky is aware of the f4-f5 possibility 25.e2 d2+ 0-1 Poliviou, E-Koukoufikis,
and plays elastically. 10.b1 b7 11.f3 A/Korinthos 2004;
b6 12.b3 At this point its is not obvious B) 7.dxe5! dxe5 8.e2 e7 9.f5
what White intends to do d7 13.g3! b4 with the initiative c5 10.c4 gxf5
14.e2 a5 15.h3! A very strong idea, now 11.g5 e6 12.xf7 Lalic has assessed
d5 is hard to meet. b5 16.xe6 fxe6 T u r n e r we l l a b r il l i a n t p l a ye r wh o o n
17.xe6 d7 o cca sio n ca n b e a lm o s t u n f o r giva b l y
[ 17...f7 18.xc7 d7 19.xa8 xa8 careless. xf7 13.exf5 xf5 14.0-0 e8
20.d5 c7 21.d4 ] ( 14...g6 15.xf5 xf5 16.f3+ g6
18.xg7 h7 19.d5 xg7 20.d4 a6 17.d3+ ) 15.xf5+ g8 16.e3 h8
21.g2 f7 22.h3+ e8 23.e6 g8 17.h5 e4 18.f1 e7 19.xe4 d7
24.g4 a4 25.h2 White has a strong attack 20.xh7+ xh7 21.h5+ g8 22.g5
c o m b i n e d w i t h p o s i t i o n a l p l u s s e s . f6 xg5 23.xg5 f8 24.d1+- 1-0 Lalic, B-
26.gxh5 gxh5 27.xc7+ xc7 28.e6+ Turner, M/Kilkenny 1998 ]
e7 29.xf6 axb3 7.c4
[ 29...xd5! 30.g6+ d7 31.f5+ c7 [ 7.e2 has been played and found wanting:
is less clear. ] gf6! ( 7...c5 is also fine: 8.c3 e6 9.0-0
30.cxb3 xd5 31.g6+ e7 10.e1 d5 11.e5 c4 12.c2 d8
[ 31.exd5? xe3 ] 13.h4 f8 14.g4 h5 15.g3 hxg4
31...d7 32.f5+ c7 33.xd5 xd5 16.xg4 f5 17.f2 e7 18.d2 d7
34.xd5 f1+ 35.b2 g2+?? 19.h1 h7 20.h4 0-0-0 21.h5 dg8
[ 35...a6 offers to repeat. ] Seiler, A-Jopek, E/Germany 1996) 8.c3 0-0
36.xg2 An impressive game by Dominguez 9.c2 e5 10.0-0 exd4 11.cxd4 c5 12.h1
1-0 cxd4 13.exd4 c5 14.f5 xd3 15.xd3
e8 16.fxg6 hxg6 17.e1 g4 18.e2
738
e5 19.xe5 dxe5 20.c2 g4 21.e1 728 B06

ad8 22.e3 xe3 23.xe3 Enders,Peter 2520
1/2-1/2 Hessler, M-Fischer, M/Germany Gallagher,Joseph G 2525
2003 Results like this can never satisf y Bundesliga 2003
White. ] [Andrew Martin]
7...e6 8.d5 So that the position does not
become blocked. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c4 g7 4.f3 e6!?
[ Instead White may encourage Black to The Hippopotamus rises once again from the
play...d6-d5 in two ways: 8.0-0 d5 9.e2 swamp. The 'three row' system is particularly
e7 10.e5 ] effective against White variations where the
[ 8.e5 d5 9.d3 e7 I have to say that in Bishops are committed early. 5.b3
either case, with . ...c6-c5 not too far away, [ 5.0-0 a6 6.a4 e7 7.f4 b6 8.bd2
the Black position seems perfectly b7 9.c3 h6 10.e1 d7 11.e2
playable. ] Black's position is as pretty as can be and
8...exd5 9.exd5 e7! Development above all now he feels he wants to go somewhere! g5
else and note the weakness of the central 12.e3 g6 13.d5 e5 14.f1 f4
dark squares. 10.e2 So White tries to cover 15.c2 f6 16.b4 0-0 17.g3 c8
his weaknesses. The natural response is to 18.f1 g4 19.d2 h5 20.c4 h4 21.e2
take on c6 but there I think the Black position 6h5 22.a3 a5 23.bxa5 xa5 24.b3
can spring to life: a8 25.a5 f6 26.ea1 bxa5 27.c5 h6
[ 10.dxc6 xc3+ ( 10...xc6 11.b5 d5 28.xf4 xf4 29.xf4 exf4 30.xa5 xa5
12.e2 0-0 13.c3 e8 14.0-0 f5 ) 31.xa5 f3 32.g3 hxg3 33.hxg3 e5
11.bxc3 xc6 12.d4 0-0 13.d3 c5 34.cxd6 xg3 35.d3 g7 36.fxg3
14.c4 f5 15.xf5 xf5 16.b2 ae8+ xg3+ 37.f1 h8 38.c3+ f6 39.xc7+
17.f1 f6 ] g6 40.e5+ f5 41.xf5+ xf5 0-1 Lund,F-
10...f6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.b3 e6?! Cherniaev, A/ Gibraltar Masters, Catalan
[ The main reason I included this game was Bay ENG 2003 (41) This type of game is still
to show you 12...a6! here, with s lightly the a revelation to me. It's not just shunting out
better prospects for Black. The move as the pieces that counts in an opening of this
played I do not understand fully. ] type-it's where you put them! ]
13.e3 5...b6
[ Why not 13.xe6 fxe6 14.xe6 d5 [ 5...e7 6.h4! ( 6.0-0 d7 7.e1 b6
15.d2 ( 15.e5 f8 16.d2 ) 15...xb2 8.f4 b7 9.d2 h6 10.c3 a6 11.a4
16.b1 xc2 17.g5 It is the Black King g5 12.g3 g6 13.h3 0-0 14.ad1 h8
who is in trouble. Very odd. ] 15.d3 e5 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.xe5
13...b7 14.d2 Has he a blind spot? xe5 18.e3 d7 19.d5 ae8 20.f4
[ Again 14.xe6 fxe6 15.xe6 is good. ] gxf4 21.xf4 h7 22.xh6 xh6 23.f6+
14...0-0 15.0-0-0 c5 g7 24.xe8+ xe8 25.c3 e7
[ And here 15...xb3 16.axb3 a6 17.b1 26.d5 xd5 27.exd5 f5 1-0 Daurelle,H-
ed5 ] Guilbert,H/Clichy 2002 (45)) 6...h6 7.c3
16.he1 f5 17.g1 c4 18.a4 d7 8.e3 a6 9.e2 f6 10.g3 b6
I wondered about a misprint until I saw 18 11.c3 b7 12.d2 h5?! Once moves like
Ba4. d5 19.g4 ab8 Black's opening is this appear on the board, I start to like White,
worth looking at but the play after 12...Be6 who has demonstrated focus and patience
can only be described as perplexing. in getting to this position. I prefer
0-1 ( 12...d7! ) 13.f3 h6 14.xh6 xh6
15.e2 h7 16.0-0-0 1-0 Enders,P-
Haskamp,S/ Bundesliga 2002 (49) ]
6.c3 b7 7.g5 e7 8.e2 h6 9.e3
d7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.h4 Enders throws
down the gauntlet. Black will be overrun by a
739
sacrifice on g5 if he doesn't take action in the m a y b e g o o d o n e l i n e w o u l d b e c7

centre. d5 12.exd5 xd5 13.xd5 exd5 14.xb8 xb8 15.e3 f6 16.b6 d7
14.e5!? This liquidation is a little surprising 17.c5 ) 13...xb8 14.d5 e6 15.e3
but perhaps after a long think he saw little h a s b e e n t e s t e d : gf6 16.c6 0-0
future in more direct continuations: , but here he continues
[ 14.h5 g5 15.c3 e8 16.c2 c5 17.d3 A) wh e n in s t e a d , 17.c4! looks more
c8 18.h7+ f8 No mate yet. ] p o i n t e d , a l t h o u g h a l a t e r g a m e we n t
[ 14.d2 a5 15.c3 a4 16.c2 h5 ] astray: e4 18.d6?! ( 18.a3! ) 18...d8
14...xe5 15.dxe5 xe5 16.xh6 e8 19.e3? ( 19.d1 retains the advantage)
17.f3 c6 18.g5 f6 19.f4 d6! 20.g3 19...xd6 20.xd6 b8 21.xc8 xc6
g7 21.c3 a6!= There is no reason now to 22.a7 xa7 23.xa7 d5
suppose that Black is worse. 22.d2 e6 with initiative, W esterinen, H (2386) -
23.xe5 xe5 24.c2 e2 25.g2 h5 Nithander, V (2301), Gothenburg 2006.;
26.g1 f3 The Hippo is enjoying great B) 17.xd7 xd7 18.fxe5 xe5
success these days and may well represent 19.g4?! ( 19.a3!? ) 19...xg4 20.xg4
the future of the Modern Defence. A refutation b5 with at least equality, Svensson, B
is nowhere in sight and the results just keep (2388) -Nithander, V (2301),
on coming in for Black. Gothenburg2006. ]
½-½ 13.xb8 xb8 14.fxe5 xe5
[ One game went 14...xe4 15.xe4 xe5
16.e1 with advantage. ]
729 B06 15.f4 0-0
Fedorovsky,Michael 2425 [ 15...h5?? 16.c6+ , but now ...Nh5 is
Pel,Bonno 2304 threatened. ]
19th Czech Chladek & Tintera A Open (7) 16.f3 b4
[John Watson] [ 16...e6? 17.e2 fd7 18.ad1 b6
19.e4 xf3 20.xf3 e5 21.g5 f5?
1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f4 a6 5.f3 22.d6 Karajakin-Hillarp-Persson, Benidorm
b5 6.d3 d7 This is Tiger's 2003. ]
recommendation. 7.e5 The usual move. 17.d5!?
[ Another idea is 7.0-0 b7 8.a4 ( 8.e3 [ Tiger likes 17.e2! and analyses it to some
c5 9.dxc5 xc5 is a common position) advantage in every line. ]
8...b4 9.e2 ] 17...xd5 18.xd5 An innovation! At least I
7...c5 think so. Malmdin-Hillarp-Persson, Sandviken
[ 7...b7 is the main alternative. ] 2004went
8.e4 b8 Tiger gives two main games in his [ 18.xd5 e6 19.e4 f5 20.e2 b5
book that begin in this position. 9.0-0 21.xb5 axb5 with complex play. ]
[ 9.e3 isn't as critical after b4 10.e2 c7 18...e6
11.c3 h6 ] [ 18...b5 19.a3!? ( or 19.d2 ) 19...bxa3
9...cxd4 10.xd4 dxe5 Sacrificing the 20.xa3 with the idea g4 21.e1! xd5
exchange this has occurred in many games 22.a5 , but this isn't much. ]
and is arguably the main line of the Austrian 19.b3 b5 20.a3 bxa3 21.xa3
version of Tiger's Modern (with f4). White is still the exchange up for a pawn, and
[ 10...b7?! 11.xb7 xb7 12.e6 fxe6 i t ' s n o t c l e a r wh e r e B l a c k i s g e t t i n g h i s
13.xe6 b6+ 14.h1 xc3 15.bxc3 co u n t e rp la y. g4 22.c4!? h5 23.h3
gf6 16.a4 is awkward for Black, according xb2!?
to Tiger, although bxa4 17.xa4 c6 [ 23...f6 24.d3 has the idea Bd1-f3 ]
18.b4 a5 with the idea ... Nf8 limits the 24.a2 e5 25.xb2 exf4 26.f3 g5
damage. ] 27.g1 f6 28.xh5 xh5 29.c5
11.c6 b6+ 12.h1 gf6 Black has levelled the material, but White's
[ Tiger's 12...b4 13.xb8 ( 13.a4 rooks and passed pawn are too strong. g3
740
30.d1 f5 31.c2 e6 32.d3 a5 33.c6 xd8 26.c6 a6 27.ab1 f8 28.b5
c8 34.c1 f8 35.c7 e7 36.a6 e4 a3 29.c2 c5 30.bxc5 xc5 31.xc5
37.xc8 xc8 38.d1 d7 32.c1 f6 33.b5 a8 34.c4+ g7
1-0 35.d5 a7 36.e3 a6 37.c7 h8
38.h4 f8 39.c5 f5 40.e7 e8
41.f7 1-0 Stefanova,A-Matveeva,S/FIDE
730 B06 W o rld Cu p S F w, Hyd era ba d IND 20 0 2
Fercec,Nenad 2500 (41) ]
Kljako,Damir 2260 8...gf6 9.h3
4th ZNG111 IM (7) 2002 [ 9.h6 is more critical. ]
[Andrew Martin] 9...0-0 10.a4 b4 11.e2 a5 12.c3 bxc3
13.xc3 One would expect a pawn recapture
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 but 13 Nxc3 is more subtle than it looks.
Undoubtedly the most popular idea these days Black's ideal pawn structure in the centre
at all levels. White's idea is very against this particular system is ...e7-e6,...d6-
straightforward- develop the pieces , strip out d5! and then if White blocks,...c6-c5!. if Black
the Bishop with Be3-h6 and then claim an can get those moves in he gets a very
advantage with the strong centre and chances pleasant game. Hence13 Nxc3 dissuading
of a kingside attack. Black has been suffering, this structure because of the possible hole at
a l t h o u g h we ' l l s e e t h a t 4 . . . a 6 i s a g o o d b5. Having stated that ,I don't believe Black is
response, ensuring satisfactory counterplay. worse here. He plays correctly to begin with.
c6 A move which has been cast to one side in a6 14.fc1 xd3 15.xd3 fb8 16.c2
favour of the sharper lines after 4...a6. b4 17.ac1 ab8 Which is weaker,b2 or
Nevertheless,4...c6 is playable in my opinion c6? 18.d2 b7 It looks like Kljako decided
although it allows White to dictate the early to play for a win around here -he could have
stages of the game. 5.d2 b5 6.d3 fallen for the trap e.g.
[ 6.f3 Works well here although 6 Bd3 is [ 18...xb2 19.b5 xc2 20.xc2 b7
more direct d7 7.a3 Setting a trap. b6?! 21.xc6 b6!= ]
( 7...a6 ) 8.d5! d7 9.dxc6 xc6 10.xb5 19.b3 e8 20.f4 e6 21.a2 b6 22.d5 c5
f6 11.d3 0-0 12.e2 fd7 13.bd4 [ 22...exd5 23.xb6 xb6+ 24.h1 c5
c7 14.h6 xh6 15.xh6 d5 16.h4!+- 25.f3 dxe4 26.xe4 xb3 27.b1 d4
dxe4 Giving up. The only chance was to put 28.c1 ]
the Knight on f8. 17.h5 exd3 18.hxg6 f6 23.c3 xc3 24.xc3 exd5 25.exd5 df6
19.f5 1-0 Pilgaard,K-Ahlander,B/1st It, 26.c4 a6? Baffling. This particular Benoni-
Klaksvik FAI 2002 (19) ] like position cannot favour White due to the
6...d7 7.f3 c7 In general Black should weakness of the pawn at d5. If Black takes on
wait as long as possible before playing ...Ngf6. b3 he cannot be worse e.g.
The question is : has he enough useful moves [ 26...xb3 27.xb3 xb3 28.xb3 xb3
to play in the meant ime? if Black f iddle s 29.d2 xd5 ]
around too much he can simply get crushed 27.d1 c7 28.c1 cxd5 29.b2 xf4
by White's massive central build-up 8.0-0 Looks as if time-trouble is coming into play.
[ 8.a4 b4 9.e2 a5 ( Possibly 9...b8 Black misses another clear route e.g.:
first. ) 10.c3 This would be a typical way by [ 29...xc3 30.xc3 d5 31.xa5 xa5
which White tries to open the position . b8 32.xf6 d4 ]
11.g3 h5!? 12.h3 gf6 13.0-0 e5 30.f1 6d5 31.f3 g5 32.g3 e6 33.f5
14.dxe5 dxe5 15.cxb4 xb4 16.c2 0-0 xb3 34.fxd5 xg3+ 35.h1 g4
17.fc1 d8 18.d2 b8 19.xc6 h4 [ 35...f4 36.xd6 ( 36.5d2 d5 )
( 19...xb2 20.c3 b4 21.c7 ) 36...xd6 37.xd6 xh3 38.d2 e8 ]
20.xh4 xb2 21.f3 b3 22.c2 b8 36.g5+ A game which went completely off
23.c7 Of course...h7-h5 has turned out to the rails at the end thanks to the time
be useless. a8 24.b5 e8 25.xd8 scramble-the last move is reminiscent of an
741
Internet Chess one minute fiasco. However, 732 B06

before that Kljako furnished ample proof that Filippov,An UZB 2615
Black can counter 4 Be3 safely using 4...c6, Benidze,D 2458
although 9 Bh6 in place of 9 h3 would have TCh-TUR Super League 2014 (2.6) 19.08.2014
been a more pointed test. [Neil McDonald]
1-0
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5
More adventurous than
731 B06 [ 4.e3 ]
Ferguson,Mark 2371 4...d7
Hodgson,Julian M 2605 [ Note that the move order in Shanava game
Masters Kilkenny IRL (3) 27.11.1999 mentioned at move seven below meant 5...
[Nigel Davies] c5 wasn't a possibility. It began 4...c6 5.d2
d7 6.f4 b5 7.f3 ]
Like his compatriot Tony Miles, Julian 5.d2 Filippov delays Nf3 as he wants to
Hodgson also took a shine to this openings utilise his f -pawn t o build a mobile pawn
and fared slightly better in this game. But his centre with f2-f4. A Hedgehog set up is less
position looked pretty disgusting before 20.d6. attractive for Black when W hite hasn't
1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.e5 h5 4.f3 d6 committed himself to Nf3 and can play f2-f4.
5.c4 d5 6.e2 g7 7.h3 e6 [ After 5.f3 h6 ( Instead 5...a6 6.d3 c5
I'm not quite sure why the knight is coming is the 5...c5 6.Nf3 a6 note below but with
here when f5 might turn out to be its best B d 3 f o r W h i t e r a t h e r t h a n Q d 2 . 7.dxc5
square. xc5 8.0-0 f6 is then Frolyanov-Graf in
[ As I stated in the notes to Lautier - Miles, the archives.) 6.e3 e6 7.d2 a6 8.d3
Black's best may be 7...c6 ] b6 Black set up a Hedgehog in Rublevsky-
8.0-0 g7 9.e3 0-0 10.c4 c6 11.c3 Kamsky, which is another archive game. ]
dxc4 12.xc4 c7 13.c1 e6 5...c6
[ A q u e e n s i d e e x p a n s i o n w i t h 13...b5 [ The immediate attack on d4 with 5...c5!?
14.b3 a5 leaves the c5 square weak after is logical as the white bishop is absent from
15.a4 b4 16.e4 ] de f e nsive du t y on e 2. I t d id well in t h e
14.xe6 xe6 15.b3 b6 16.a3 d8 following game: 6.f3 ( White could try for
17.fd1 c7 18.b3 b6 19.d5 c5 20.d6 a d i f f e r e n t t y p e o f g a m e w i t h 6.d5
Black manages to hang on after this, so it and nurture a space advantage with Nf3 and
might have been better to turn the screw Be2 etc. ) 6...a6 7.0-0-0 cxd4 8.xd4 b5
more slowly. 9.f4 As we shall see In the game Black is
[ 20.g5 h6 21.h4 looks strong to me. ] ab le t o t ake t he st in g ou t o f an y e 4-e 5
20...exd6 21.xd6 e8 22.d5 xd5 advance by sacrificing the exchange on c3.
23.xd5 a6 24.a3 c7 25.e4 e6 In the resulting position the move f2-f4 has
26.b4 a4 27.g5 xg5 28.xg5 ae8 merely weakened W hite's pawn structure
29.e6 fxe6 30.xe6 d4 31.e3 d7 and cut off the interaction of the bishop on
32.xe8 xe8 33.d3 g7 34.xd4 cxd4 g 5 w i t h t h e c e n t r e . ( More logical were
35.d1 d8 36.e1 f7 37.g3 b5 38.c1 9.h4!? or; 9.f3 b7 10.b1 ) 9...b7
a6 39.h4 d5 40.c5 e6 41.c1 f5 10.e2 a5 11.b1 c8 12.g4 xc3!
42.xf5 gxf5 43.f1 d3 44.d1 f7 t h e e xc h a n ge s a cr i f i ce d e f u s e s W h i t e
45.e1 e8+ 46.d2 e2+ 47.xd3 a2 attack. 13.xd7+ xd7 14.bxc3 xe4
48.d4 xa3 49.e5 f3 50.d2 g6 Black has a pawn, the two bishops and
51.a2 h5 52.xa6 xf2 53.a7 g6 counterplay against the fractured white
54.a6+ h5 55.a7 g6 56.a6+ queenside to compensate for the rook. On
½-½ the other hand he still has to be a bit
cautious as he is behind in development and
his king is sitting in the centre.
742
A) 15.e3 f5 16.he1 a3 ( but not [ White would win if he could get his rook to
16...f6 17.b3 a3 18.c5! ) 17.h3 the g-file to attack the weak point on g6.
b4! 18.cxb4 ( White loses after 18.xe4 T h i s c o u l d b e d o n e w i t h 19.h4!
bxc3 ) 18...xb4+ 19.b3 xb3+ for example b4 20.g4 bxc3 21.xg6+
20.xb3 e8 with a balanced position. f8 22.xg7+ with a massacre. ]
Black's bishops and compact centre make 19...xg7 20.h6 xd4! Benidze now has
up for the material deficit.; saving counterplay due to his passed pawn
B) 15.b3?! A needless decentralisation and his queen's potential threats against the
of the knight. c7 16.e3 xg2 17.hg1 white king. 21.xg6+ g8 22.h7 xe5
b7 18.a7? ( White should try 18.c5+ 23.dh1? It seems like Filippov's attack is
c8 19.xb7 xb7 though Black is going to be crowned with glory after 24. Rh8
d o i n g we l l d u e t o W h i t e ' s s p l i n t e r e d mate, but a nasty surprise is in store. He must
pawns. ) 18...c8 19.g3 f6 20.xf6 play
xf6 21.d4 d7 22.b3 a8 23.e3 [ 23.c4+! leading to yet another crazy
c8 24.d4 d5 White's inaccurate play variation: Black really would be mated on h8
has let his opponent build up a vicious after
attack on his king. 25.f5 b4! 26.b3 A) 23...d5! 24.xd5 cxd5 25.xd5+
( After 26.cxb4 xd4 the c2 point is e6 26.xg7+! xg7 27.xf5 exd5
hanging. ) 26...xb3 27.cxb3 bxc3 28.xd5+ f8 29.d6+ ( Here 29.xa8?
28.c2 a5 0-1 Osmanodja, F (2295) - fails to h6+ 30.b1 h3! 31.h1
Belezky, A (2454)/Dresden GER 2014. ] xh1 32.xh1 h3 But how could a
6.f4 b5 7.f3 gf6? Over the next two human player work all that out over the
moves Benidze seems to forget he is playing board? ) 29...g8 30.d5+ f8 31.d6+
a hypermodern opening and plays the and a draw by repetition.;
'classical' developing moves Nf6 and 0-0. In B) 23...xc4? 24.d8+ f8 25.xf8+
doing so he presents the white pieces with a xf8 26.h8# ]
ready made target. To be preferred were the 23...f1+! 24.xf1
moves discussed in Perunovic-Shanava in [ Alas for White he will be mated after
the archives, namely 24.xf1 e3+ 25.d1 ( or 25.b1 e1+ )
[ 7...b6 or ] 25...xf1+! 26.xf1 g4+ 27.xg4 d8+
[ 7...b4 ] etc. ]
8.d3 0-0?! 9.e5 e8 10.h4! With best 24...xf1+ 25.xf1 f4+ White resigned
play White's attack already looks decisive. h5 before suffering the indignity of being mated
Black would be ripped apart if he tried to trap by a knight with
White's bishop on g5, for example [ 25...f4+ 26.d1 xf1+ 27.d2 c4# ]
[ 10...h6 11.h5 hxg5 12.xg5 c7 0-1
13.hxg6 when the black king will soon perish
or ]
[ 10...f6 11.h5 fxg5 12.hxg6 h6 13.fxg5 733 B06
h5 14.e2! c7 15.h4 and the white Frois,Antonio
queen is ready to go to h5. ] Davies,Nigel R
11.g4! d'Or Cala d'Or 1986
[ A more positional approach with 11.e6 fxe6 [Nigel Davies]
12.xg6 ef6 13.0-0-0 was also very
strong for White. ] This games featured a similar concept to
11...dxe5 12.fxe5 hxg4 13.h5 gxf3 Godena - Davies but under slightly less manic
14.hxg6 conditions. W hite castled kingside and
[ Another way to win which gives Black fewer fianchettoed his king's bishop. 1.e4 g6 2.d4
defensive options is the immediate 14.h2! ] g7 3.c3 d6 4.g3 c6 5.e3
14...fxg6 15.0-0-0 b6 16.h2 f5 Chasing the knight on c6 is worse here than
17.h7+ f7 18.h6 f2 19.xg7? after 4.Nge2 Nc6.
743
[ 5.d5 e5 6.f4 d7 7.f3 c6 8.g2 generates a big attack ) 9.xd4
cxd5 9.exd5 xc3+ 10.bxc3 gf6 11.d4 A) 9...dxe5 10.c6 c7 11.a4!
b6 12.c4 c7 13.d2 f5 put White in ( 11.xe7!? xe7 12.xe7 b7!
serious trouble in Popchev - Davies, Albena 13.b4 ) 11...bxa4 12.xe7! xe7
1986 ] 13.xe7 b7 14.a3 with a clear
5...f6 6.h3 e5 7.dxe5 advantage;
[ After 7.ge2 Black can even play d5!? ] B) 9...xe5? 10.e4;
7...xe5 8.g2 0-0 9.ge2 b5!? C) 9...xe5 10.e4 a7 11.a4! b4
The patented pawn thrust by which Black 12.d5 b7 13.e1 , and again Black
takes the initiative. 10.0-0 has trouble getting his pieces out. ]
[ Capturing the pawn is very dangerous for 7...b4 8.e2 c5 9.c3 a5?! A very odd
W hite after, say 10.xb5 b8 11.xa7 m o ve , i n c o n s i s t e n t wi t h T i g e r ' s i d e a o f
b7 ] attacking the centre, Better was
[ 10.f4 is met by c4 11.d4 b7 [ 9...bxc3 10.bxc3 gf6 ]
with White's position looking shaky already. ] 10.0-0 b7 11.d2
10...b4 11.d5 xd5 12.exd5 c4 13.d4 [ 11.cxb4 is also good. ]
xb2 14.b1 a4 15.xb4 Maintaining 11...bxc3 12.xc3 d8 13.dxc5
m a t e r ia l p a r it y, b u t B l a c k is b e t t e r h e r e [ One good idea is 13.c4 e6 14.dxc5 xc3
because of his superior development. d7 15.xc3 dxc5 ( 15...xc5 16.d4 f6
16.ab1 e8 17.e3 a5 18.b3 b8 17.e5 ) 16.d6 ]
19.c4 b2 20.f4 b4 21.d4 f5 [ and 13.g5!? protects e4 while threatening
22.a3 e5 23.f3 xd4 24.xb2 e4 Nxf7. ]
25.e2 xg2 26.xg2 xd5 27.b7 d7 13...xc3 14.xc3 xc5 15.c4 f6
28.c4 c5 29.xc5 c6+ 30.h2 xb7 16.d4
31.e3 f3 32.g4 xg3+! 33.xg3 xe3 [ 16.e5 dxe5 17.xe5 0-0 18.b4
34.fxe3 xf1 35.g5 f2+ 36.h1 f1+ also yields some advantage. ]
37.h2 f2+ 38.h1 e1+ 39.h2 c3 16...0-0 17.e5 dxe5?
0-1 [ A crazy try, and a failure of calculation.
Perhaps Azmaiparahvili couldn't stomach
17...fd7 18.exd6 xf3 19.gxf3 exd6
734 B06 20.xd6 , but Black is in the game. ]
Frolyanov,Dmitry 2525 18.xc5 xf3 19.gxf3 c8 20.b4 d4
Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2632 The point? 21.xe7 Finishing the game. g7
8th ch-Euro Dresden GER (11) 14.04.2007 [ 21...h5 looks more natural, aiming at f4,
[John Watson] but 22.a2 f4 23.e4 threatens Nd6. ]
22.a2 f4 23.d5 xd5 24.xd5 c2
1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.g5 a6 25.ae1 Qxe5+ follows.
Why not? 5.f3!? White generally plays a4 1-0
when his knights are on c3 and f3. On the
other hand, it's tempting to develop rapidly. b5
6.d3 d7!? The normal move against f4, 735 B06
but here it unnecessarily gets in the way (see Frolyanov,Dmitry 2567
the next note). Graf,Alexander 2621
[ 6...b7 would prepare .. .Nf6 and ...b4, 17th Open Kavala GRE (8) 06.08.2008
forcing W hite to do something about his [John Watson]
centre. ]
7.a4!? W h it e 's o p e n in g in vo lve s co m mo n s e n s e
[ 7.0-0! c5 8.e5!? looks ridiculous, yet Black moves aimed at development and the
has real problems: cxd4 ( 8...b7? 9.exd6; acquisition of territory. Ignoring the game
8...dxe5 9.dxe5 xe5 10.xe5 xe5 result, it works reasonably well. 1.e4 g6 2.d4
11.f3 a7 12.fe1 b7 13.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 White chooses to
744
address the Modern Defence with piece play xe1 31.f4 e6+ 32.g2 xa2 33.f6
as opposed to pawn breaks. d7 xb2+ 34.g3 e2 35.d8+ f7
[ 4...f6 would be a well-known Pirc 36.xd6 e3+ 37.g2 xc3 38.xa6
Defence line. ] d2+ 39.g3 e3+ 40.g2 e4+ 41.g3
5.f3 a6 6.d3 c5 7.dxc5 xc5 8.0-0 b4 42.a7+ g8 43.b8+ g7 44.c7+
f6 h6 45.d6 e3+ 46.g4 g5+ 47.h3
[ 8...xd3?! 9.xd3 wins the two bishops, f5+ 48.g3 g5+ 49.h3 e3+ 50.g4
but W hite ends up too far ahead in e2+ 51.g3 e1+ 52.h3 f2 53.g4
d e v e l o p m e n t , e . g . , f6 10.ad1 b3 54.a3 g2+ 55.f4 b2 56.f8+ h5
with the idea e5. ] 0-1
9.e1 b5?! This takes too many liberties,
since Black needs to get his pieces out.
[ 9...0-0 was correct. ] 736 B06
10.d5! Gausel,Einar
[ Or 10.a4! b4 11.d5 ] Davies,Nigel R
10...xd5 11.exd5 a7 A well-timed Oslo 1988
defensive resource. Not only is e7 covered, [Nigel Davies]
but af ter ...Rc7, Black's pieces will have
flexibility as to how to develop. But White still A similar game to those against Godena and
has space and the better game. 12.c3 0-0 Frois, though in this one White played 4.Bc4.
[ 12...xd3 13.xd3 h6 ( 13...0-0 Whilst he can certainly do better than this I
14.d4 ) 14.e3 b7 15.d4 0-0 16.a4! don't believe this line is dangerous for Black.
bxa4 17.c6 c7 18.c1! e5 19.xa4 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.c4 c6!?
gives White play against the a-pawn. ] I first played this move as a teenager.
13.f1!? [ After 4...f6 the tricky 5.e2 was popular
[ 13.c2! keeps a straightforward advantage in the UK at that time and I did not want to
14 a4 might follow, or even direct attack: be involved in that particular debate. ]
c7 ( 13...h6! 14.e3 c7 15.d2 h7 5.e3 f6 6.h3
16.a4! ) 14.d2 b7 15.ad1 e8 [ 6.f3 is better. Byway - Nunn, England 1977
16.d4! ( 16.f4 a8! )] went 0-0 7.ge2 b6!? 8.b5?! b7
13...c7 14.d2 b7 15.h6 9.d2 a5 10.b4? a6 11.d3 c6 12.a3
[ 15.c4 bxc4 16.xc4 still looks a bit better e5 with the better game for Black due to the
for White. ] weakness of White's queenside. ]
15...e5! 16.dxe6?! It's under standable that 6...e5 7.dxe5 xe5 8.b3 0-0 9.d2?!
W hite doesn't want to leave Black with the [ In retrospect White should have continued
easy expansion by ... f5, but this gives him his development with 9.ge2 ]
some serious weaknesses. xh6 17.xh6 9...b5! 10.f3 b4 11.d5 xd5 12.xd5 c6
xf3 18.exf7+?! 13.b3 a5 14.a4 d5! 15.exd5
[ 18.gxf3 xe6 ( 18...fxe6 19.b4 a4 [ Had White seen what was coming, he might
20.xe6 xc3 21.h3! is unclear) 19.g2 have tried 15.e2 dxe4 16.f4 ]
c5! leaves White with the awful f-pawns. ] 15...c4! 16.xc4 xb2! 17.e2 h4+
18...cxf7 19.gxf3 xf3 20.g2 xf2 18.f2 xc4 19.b1
21.e3? [ White gets nothing for the exchange after
[ But 21.f1 xf1+ 22.xf1 xf1+ 23.xf1 19.0-0 xa1 20.xa1 xd5 ]
e7 leaves Black in command. ] 19...c3 20.xc3 bxc3 21.d3 e8+
21...f6 22.d1 a2 23.c1 a6 24.xc3 xd5+
[ 21...d7 with the idea ...Ne5 is very strong 25.d2 ad8
as well. The rest doesn't require any notes. ] [ 25...ad8 26.xd5 xd5+ 27.d4 xd4#
22.ae1 d3! 23.xd3 xg2+ 24.xg2 is a good way to illustrate the importance
f2+ 25.h3 f3+ 26.xf3 xf3+ 27.h4 of early castling. ]
f2+ 28.h3 f3+ 29.h4 f2+ 30.h3 0-1
745
737 B06 d a rk squ a r e d b i sh o p . 15.xb5 a5

Georgiev,Vl 2553 16.1c3 b8 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.d4
Caruana,F 2783 xb3 19.xb3 b4 20.g4
46th TCh-ITA 2014 (7.1) 04.05.2014 ( How could you resist such a move in a
[Neil McDonald] blitz game? Instead he should defend with
20.d2 though Black has obvious
1.f3 Black's formation in the game is more compensation for the pawn thanks to his
attractive once White has committed himself pressure on the queenside.) 20...xc3
with an early 1.Nf3 as the white f-pawn won't 21.bxc3 xc3 22.e3 xc2 23.h3 f8
be rushing at him anytime soon. d6 2.d4 g6 Due to the weakness of f2 White has no
3.e4 g7 4.c4 a6 Very logical. Black time to carry out an attack on the black
intends to gain time for the development of king. The best he can do is enter a bad
his bishop to b7 by hitting c4 with b7-b5. He endgame, which is no fun against Magnus.
avoids 24.xe6+ xe6 25.d4+ e5 26.xc2
[ 4...f6 and so sidesteps the sharp line c5 27.e1 a8 28.d3+ d4 29.e5 c4
5.e2 0-0 6.e5 which is discussed in the 30.f4 dxe5 31.e2+ d5 32.c3+
archives. ] e6 33.f4 e4 34.f2 c6 35.xe4
5.0-0 e6 Putting up a barrier to the attack on a2+ 36.g3 d5 37.f6+ d4
f7 and preparing a safe development of his 38.e6 xg2+ 39.h4 f3 40.g4 c3
knight to e7. Note that White isn't well placed 41.d6+ c5 42.d8 xg4+ 43.hxg4 c2
t o ra m t h e b la c k kin gsid e wit h t h e p a wn 0-1 Kramnik, V (2801)-Carlsen, M (2835)/
advance f4-f5, as the knight on f3 is in the Moscow 2012 ]
way. 6.e1
[ T h e i m m e d i a t e 5...b5 6.b3 b7 [ Here's another example of how lower rated
has been tried in some big name games: players can be positionally outplayed as
A) I know there's zero chance of 7.xf7+? W hite in the Hippopotamus set up: 6.e2
working in a game between Kramnik and e7 7.c3 0-0 8.a4 d7 9.e1 b6
Carlsen, but always make sure it doesn't in 10.bd2 b7 11.f1 ( White should get
your own games! xf7 8.g5+ e8 his bishop out of harm's way with 11.d3
9.e6 c8 10.xg7+ ( Or 10.d5 f6 ) and then expand on the queenside with 12.
10...f8 11.h5 gxh5 12.xh5 e6 b4. ) 11...c5 Already Black has the edge. His
and W hite doesn't have enough for the bishops are better placed than White's and
piece.; his centre pawns are more flexible. 12.g3
B) 7.e1 e6 8.a4 d7 9.g5 d5! breaking up the white centre and
( A n a l t e r n a t i v e a p p r o a c h i s 9.c3 creating a great post for his knight on d5.
intending moves like Qe2 and Na3 to put 13.exd5 xd5 14.e4 cxd4 15.xd4 c7
pressure on b5.) 9...e7 10.axb5 axb5 16.b3 c5 Now after the exchange on c5
11.xa8 xa8 12.d5 This looks very the white knight will lose its post on d4 and
threatening, but Black survives the B la c k' s b i sh o p o n b 7 wi ll co m e t o l if e .
onslaught and gets dynamic chances. A 17.xc5 bxc5 18.f3 f4 19.xf4 xf4
s l o w e r a p p r o a c h w i t h ( 12.a3 The rest of the game is a demonstration of
w a s p o s s i b l e .) 12...c5 ( Note that the superiority of the bishop pair in an open
12...e5 looks like a safe move as it blocks position. 20.c2 ab8 21.ab1 fd8
the centre, but it would leave Black without 22.ed1 d5 23.e1 c4 24.d3 c7
any counterplay. White could play to pick 25.e3 a2 26.a1 d5 27.ab1 c4
off the b5 pawn with 13.c3 etc. ) 13.d4 28.b4 b7 29.xd8+ xd8 30.d1
hitting both e6 and b5. h6 14.xe7 xe7 xd1+ 31.xd1 a5 32.a2 d7 33.e2
If you study Carlsen's games you'll notice c6 34.c2 h6 35.f3 White was caught
he is never afraid to take chances with his in a neat zugzwang position. The white
king's safety if it improves his strategic queen and bishop are tied to the defence of
prospects. He now has an unopposed a4 and ( 35.c1 loses to a back rank trick:
746
e4! when if 36.e2 xc1 ) 35...e3+ Exchanging his bishop on e5 makes matters
36.h1 xa4! 37.xa4 d2 38.g3 f2 worse, but hardly pleasant for White was
0-1 as mate follows on g2. Mammadov, Z [ 19.xe5 xe5 20.e3 d3 ]
(2453) -Smirnov, P (2626)/ Nakhchivan AZE 19...xd5 20.xe5 dxe5 21.exd5 c5
2014 ] 22.ed1 e4 The combination of a weak pawn
[ Meanwhile 6.g5 e7 was examined in on d5, outpost for the black knight on d3 and
the archives. ] mobile black e-pawn is too much for White's
6...e7 7.c3 0-0 8.b3 d7 9.bd2 b5 position to cope with. 23.d4 xd4 24.cxd4
Black takes away the c4 square f rom the [ W h i t e d r o p s t h e e xc h a n g e o n 24.xd4
white knight and prepares to use his wedge of b3 ]
queenside pawns to fight for the initiative. 24...d3 25.e3 f6 26.b3 xd4 27.bxc4
[ There is also a case for 9...b6 here to avoid bxc4 28.a4 b2 29.d2
creating a target on b5. However a [ It's hopeless for White after 29.d2
subsequent c7-c5 would then be A) when the obvious way for Black to gain
problematical as White could attack d6 with material is 29...f4 30.xb2 ( Or 30.xd4
Nc4 and maybe Bf4. Or W hite could play xe2+ 31.f1 xd4 ) 30...xe2+
10.c4 to deter ...c7-c5, followed by 11.a4 31.xe2 though White can fight on for a
to cement the knight on c4. ] while. More precise is;
10.a4 b7! Carunana insists on not being B) 29...fb8 after which White has no
bullied into good move, for example 30.xc4 xd2
[ 10...b4 when 11.a5 leaves him with a fixed 31.xd2 b1+ 32.h2 h8+ and mates:
weak pawn on a6 and White's knight has the 33.g3 e5+ 34.g4 f4+ 35.h3
c4 square again. ( But not 11.cxb4?! b8 h1# ]
when Black regains the pawn in an 0-1
advantageous way. )]
11.e2 b8 Still standing his ground on b5.
Note that Black avoids 11...c6 as he wants to 738 B06
use his c-pawn actively. Besides, it would shut Ghannoum,Marc
in the bishop on b7. 12.axb5 axb5 13.h4? Hillarp Persson,Tiger
I've seen lots of games where players like Internacional de Sants 2004
Michael Adams chip away at the opponent [Hillarp Persson & Andy]
with moves like a2-a4 and h2-h4 after
stabilising the position in the centre. This game is from 'Tiger's Modern ' - one of
Unhappily for Georgiev, the centre isn't fixed the best opening books I have read for quite
here. Caruana is able to focus attention onto some time! 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6
the d4 square, after which 13.h4 is seen to be 4.f4 a6!? 5.f3 b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5
a luxury White can't afford. 8.g5 cxd4
[ White could try for pressure on the [ To be fair Hillarp Persson points out that
q u e e n s i d e w i t h 13.c2 c5 14.b3!? 8...h6 is safer than the text and OK for
f o r e xa m p le c4 15.a5 a8 and now Black e.g. 9.e6 f6 10.dxc5 dxc5 11.e3
16.b3 or ( 16.g5 probe away at the black xe6 12.xe6 fxe6 13.xc5 d5
position. )] and Black has the initiative. ]
[ But W hite should avoid 13.xb5 xe4 9.e6 f5 10.d5
which is a good swap for Black. ] [ 10.exd7+ xd7 11.b1 ( 11.d5 h6;
13...c5 14.h5 c6 15.hxg6 hxg6 11.e2 e5 ) 11...e5 12.0-0 e7 ]
The pressure on d4 forces the dislocation of [ 10.xf5 df6! 11.e4 d5 12.f7 a5
White's centre. 16.d5 13.xd4 xe6 14.g5 h5 15.e3
[ Black has a fine queenside initiative after xc3+ 16.bxc3 gf6 17.xg6+ hxg6
16.dxc5 xc5 17.c2 b4 ] 18.xe6 c8 ]
16...exd5 17.xd5 c4! Creating a base on [ 10.f3 dxc3 11.b3 b6 12.c6+ f8
d3 for a black knight. 18.f1 ce5 19.f4 13.f7 d7! 14.xd8 xc6 15.xc6
747
f6 All as analysed by Hillarp Persson in 739 B06

the book and there is plenty more. Hair- Godena,Michele 2520
raising! ] Carlsen,Magnus 2450
10...c5 11.f7 xe6 12.xd8 xd5 Claude Pecaut Mem, Taormina (4) 2003
'It is not everybody's cup of tea to play a [Gary Lane]
position like this, but 'objectively' I believe I
am fine here. I control the centre and my 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6
pieces will soon find active squares. On the This is the latest fashion. Black wishes to
other hand. W hite f aces a scenario quite employ a kingside fianchetto to put pressure
opposite from Black's. If only he could get in on White's pawn centre. 5.f3 g7 6.a3
a2-a4 or exchange a few pieces...... Yeah, try cxd4 7.b5
me!' Hillarp Persson 13.0-0 xd8 14.b3 h6 [ An important move is 7.c4 which tries to
15.e1 prove that Black has no time for a kingside
[ 15.e1 is a big improvement, according to fianchetto by using his better development
Persson. ] to chase the black queen e4+ 8.e3 h6
15...0-0 16.a4 The players Hamdouchi and Kudrin had a
[ 16.xe7 fe8 17.h4 g4 18.e1 mini match in the contest for the FIDE world
Persson ] championship with this line: ( The natural
16...bxa4 17.c4 xc4 18.bxc4 g4 19.h3 move 8...f6? fails in spectacular fashion to
f6 20.xe7 fe4 21.b2 d7 22.h4 9.xf7+ when of course xf7 10.g5+
b7 23.a2 fb8 24.a3 b1 25.xc5 e8 11.xe4 is game over. )
xf1+ A) 9.cxd4 0-0 10.0-0 g4 11.xh6
[ According to Persson 25...f6 26.xf6 xh6 12.e1 f4 13.xe7 c6 14.xb7
xf6 27.xd4 h5 28.xa4 xf4 ( 14.e1 allows fd8 with tremendous
29.xb1 xb1+ 30.h2 e6 play. For instance: 15.d5 e5 16.xe5
was the best way. ] xf3 17.e1 g4 18.f1 xd5
26.xf1 dxc5 27.g4 f6 28.e1? and Black's pair of bishops are very
White blunders, in my time trouble.....Persson in f l u e n t i a l) 14...ab8 15.xb8 xb8
[ 28.g5 b1+ 29.g2 d8 30.xa4 a5 16.e2 ( 16.b3 xf3 17.xf3 xf3
31.a3 c1 32.b3 xc2+ 33.g1 c1+ 18.gxf3 xd4 19.g2 g7 gives Black
34.g2 h5!! 35.b8 a4 36.xd8+ f7 e n o u g h c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e p a w n)
37.d7+ f8 38.d8+ e7 39.g8 f7 16...xf3 17.xf3 xd4 18.b3 g7!
40.d8 a3 41.a8 d3 42.a7+ e8 19.b1 e5 when the attack on the h-
43.a8+ e7 44.a7+= since it's pawn means disaster for W hite,
dangerous for Black's King to come to the Hamdouchi,H-Kudrin,S/Tripoli 2004.;
third rank: d6?! 45.xa3 d2 46.d3+ B) 9.b5
c6 47.xd2 xd2 48.g3 xc4 B1) 9...0-0 10.d3 g4 11.xh6 xh6
49.f3+ b6 50.a8! ] 12.c7 it looks like White is easily
28...b1 29.xa4 xe1+ 30.xe1 h4+ winning but Black is rather resourceful
31.f1 g3 'Was that too strong for you? dxc3 13.bxc3 ( 13.xa8 cxb2 14.b1
W ell, some days I feel that way too. xg2 15.g1 h3 16.xb2 f4
Especially the line beginning 10 exd7+ needs is difficult to assess but I prefer Black
to be taken seriously and I cannot guarantee because White is always going to have
that White is not capable of improving on my problems protecting his king.) 13...xg2
analysis somewhere. It might prove to be 14.g1 h3 15.xa8 f4 16.e2 c6
lucky that Black has an alternative to 8...cxd4 17.b3 e6 18.a4 h6 ( 18...e5!
in the reliable 8...Nh6.' - Hillarp Persson. looks good for Black) 19.h4 xa8
Anyone interested in or currently playing the the material level is equal but White's
Modern should get this book immediately. king is stuck in the middle of the board,
0-1 Hamdouchi, H-Kudrin,S/Tripoli 2004.;
B2) 9...a6 10.cxd4 ( 10.bxd4 0-0
748
11.0-0 is roughly equal but Black still 16...e6 17.xa7 Finally, Godena finds time
needs to get his pieces into the game) to grab an extra pawn but in return Black has
10...0-0 11.c3 c6 12.b5 d6 plenty of play. f4 18.f1 d5
13.0-0 f5 at last Black can stop [ 18...d7 19.d4 xa3 20.bxa3 h3+
worrying about the safety of his queen 21.h1 is better for White because Black's
and get his pieces into the game 14.d2 attack has run out of steam. ]
xe3!? a double-edged move because 19.e3 xa3 20.bxa3 h6
B l a c k d e p r ive s W h i t e o f h i s p a i r o f [ Or 20...e5 21.xf4 exf4 22.b3
bishops but at the same time favours White. ]
s t r e n g t h e n s t h e d 4 p a w n ( 14...c7 21.b4 f5 One has to admire Black's
15.f4 d8 16.e5 ) 15.fxe3 c7 relentless drive to attack but it should not
16.d3 g4 17.g5 e5 ( 17...f5! succeed against accurate defence. 22.xe7
l o o k s r i s k y b u t a f t e r 18.c4+ e6 g4 23.h4? It seems a ploy to stem the
Black is fine) 18.c4 e6?! ( 18...e6 attack by offering to exchange queens but
19.ce4 e7 20.xe6 xe6 21.xe6 here it allows Black into the game.
xe6 is equal ) 19.ce4 e7? [ The threat of backrank mate with 23.d4!
( 19...d8 is necessary to keep an eye is a worry for Black: g7 24.xb7 xd4
on the d-pawn advancing) 20.d5! xd5 25.cxd4 with a winning advantage. ]
( 20...fd8 21.xe6 fxe6 22.d6 h4 23...xe3 24.fxe3 h3+! 25.xh3?!
23.d3 is go o d n e ws f o r W h i t e .) I suspect White is still in shock having ruined
21.xd5 ad8 Under closer his winning position so responds poorly.
examination the pin just doesn't work [ 25.h1 xh4 26.xh4 h5 27.f3
22.xe6 fxe6 23.xf8+ xf8 f2+ 28.g1 g4 is still a bit better for
24.xe6+! g7 25.d5 d7 26.d1 W h i t e b u t a f e w m o ve s a g o B la c k wa s
c5 27.xc5 c8 28.e6+ busted. ]
1-0 Hamdouchi,H-Kudrin,S/ Tripoli 25...xh3 26.gxh3 xf3 27.g2 xe3
2004. ] 28.xe3 xe3+ 29.f1 Carlsen is a strong
7...a6 8.e3 A little sneaky move which is player and can easily draw this opposit e
fairly normal in this line so W hite can take coloured bishop ending despite the pawn
back on d4 with the bishop. d7 9.xd4 f6 minus. b6 30.e2 c5 31.a4 f8 32.d3
10.a4 0-0 11.e2 e7 33.c4 d6 34.d5 f6 35.g8 h6
[ 11.xa7 f5 12.e3 c5 13.e2 fd8 36.h4 g5 37.hxg5 hxg5 38.h7 g1 39.h3
14.0-0 g4 offers sufficient compensation e5 40.b4 c5+ 41.c4 g1 42.b4
for the pawn in view of the active play ] c5+ 43.c4 g1 44.d3 f5 45.b4
11...xb5 12.axb5 c5 c5+ 46.c4 g1 47.b4 c5+ 48.c4
[ I prefer 12...c7 when play might proceed: g1
13.xa7 fd8 14.b6 ( 14.b6?! xd1+ ½-½
15.xd1 ) 14...xd1+ 15.xd1 xd1+
16.xd1 cd5 when White might be a
pawn up but the bishop on a7 might not 740 B06
move for the rest of the game so Black is Godena,Michele
better. ] Davies,Nigel R
13.0-0 fd8 14.a3!? The rook covers the Budapest Budapeste (10) 1993
b 3 s q u a r e b u t t h e p o si t io n i s e q u a l . f5 [Nigel Davies]
15.b1
[ If White does not take heed of the pin on This was the game which brought me my
the d-file by playing 15.h3 then fe4 second GM norm, needing a win at all costs I
intending ...e7-e5 is roughly equal. ] sharpened the play with 10...b5!?. 1.e4 g6
15...h5 16.e1 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.ge2 c6
[ Perhaps 16.a2! would cause Black more [ I have also played 4...a6 5.a4 and only
problems by targeting the a7 pawn. ] then ( 5.g3 b5 6.g2 b7 7.0-0 d7
749
8.a3 c5 9.e1 b8 10.e3 cxd4 11.xd4 741 B06

gf6 was fine for Black in Zilberman - Gopal,G 2558
Davies, Rishon Lezion 1994) 5...c6 Petrosian,TL 2641
but after 6.d5 the problem is that a later ... 21st Abu Dhabi Masters 2014 (9.2) 28.08.2014
c7-c6 will weaken the b6 square. I don't [Neil McDonald]
know if this is such a great problem, but I
prefer to avoid it if possible. ] 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
5.e3 5.d2 b5 6.0-0-0 White puts pawns on e4
[ 5.d5 e5 6.f4 d7 7.e3 gf6 8.g3 an d d 4, de ve lop s in d ire ct st yle , ca s tle s
0-0 9.e2 c6 10.0-0 cxd5 11.exd5 c5 queenside and tries to punish Black for his
12.f5 a5 13.d2 d7 14.a3 a4 lackadaisical development and his multiple
gave Black good counterplay in Klinger - pawn moves. Of course Black's set up is by
Davies, Budapest 1988 ] no means bad, but f ast development and
5...f6 6.h3 e5 7.dxe5 xe5 8.g3 0-0 seizing space is not to be laughed at either.
9.d2 e8 10.0-0-0 b5! I learned this kind b7
of pawn sacrifice from Leonid Stein's games. [ Instead 6...d7 7.h4 h5 is analysed in
There is no clear compensation, the objective Gopal-Smirin in the archives. ]
is simply to open the b-file 11.xb5 d7 7.h4!? Not bothering about the potential
12.e2 attack on e4.
[ Godena's original intention had been 12.f4 [ The more careful 7.f3 d7 8.h4 h6
but then he became concerned about the was seen in Nanu-Nevednichy. ]
line xb5 13.fxe5 xe5 14.d4 e7 7...b4 8.d5 xd5 9.exd5 f6 10.h5!?
15.xe5 xe5 with excellent compensation Pressing on with his attack. Here
for the exchange. ] [ 10.xb4 xd5 is a good swap for Black. ]
12...b8 13.f4 c6 14.f3 b4 15.a3 10...xd5
b7 16.e5 ab8 17.b3 [ A l t e r n a t i v e l y 10...xh5 11.h6
[ The alternative way to defend b2 is with ( White might consider 11.xb4 here.; After
17.a4 but then there would follow dxe5 11.g4 f6 12.h6 f8 the black king
18.fxe5 b5! af t e r wh ich 19.exf6 xf6 h e l p s h o l d t h e k i n g s i d e .) 11...xh6
20.b3 is met by xe3! 21.xe3 g5 etc. ] Black should edge his queen out to activity
17...dxe5 18.fxe5 xe5 19.ge4 a6! on the b-file, which also allows his king to
20.a4? The decisive mistake. e s c a p e t o t h e q u e e n s i d e : ( Note that
[ White had play 20.xf6+ first after which 11...f6? in the style of the game would lose
xf6 is forced. ] a piece here to 12.g4 g7 13.g5 ) 12.xh6
20...a5 21.xf6+ xf6! The difference. c8 13.e2 f6 14.e1 bd7 15.f3
Black's queen and bishop get lined up on the b7 16.h3 b5 17.e3 0-0-0
h8-a1 diagonal and carnage ensues. 22.d4 with unclear play. ]
d6! 23.b1 A despairing attempt to hold 11.h6 f6 Naturally Black avoids the bishop
things together. exchange as he would like to keep the white
[ 23.xe5 is answered by a3+ 24.b1 qu e e n o u t o f h is ki n gsid e d a r k squ a re s .
xb3 ] 12.c4 c6 13.f3 d7 14.hxg6 hxg6
[ and 23.b1 by xb3 ] 15.xd5 cxd5 16.xb4? A significant
23...xb3! 24.xe5 b6 mistake. After
[ After 24...b6 25.c3 I would have played [ 16.g5! in contrast to the game Black
a3 ] wouldn't be able to exchange along the h-file.
0-1 Therefore he would have to put his rook on
a passive square. For example Therefore
necessary is
A) This attempt to counterattack just loses
material after 16...a5? 17.xf6 xh1
18.xh1 xf6 ( 18...exf6 19.e3+ d8
750
20.h8+ ) 19.h8+ d7 20.xa8 xa2 41...xf2+ 42.f3 h2 43.f7+ e6
21.a7+ e8 22.h6 a1+ 23.d2 44.b7 f5 45.f7+ e6 46.b7 g1
e4+ 24.e2 and White must resign.; Black finds a way to get his f-pawn rolling by
B) 16...f8 but then the rook remains shut preparing a check on f2. 47.b4 f2+ 48.e4
out of the game giving White the initiative f4+ 49.d3 e4+ 50.e2 f2+ 51.e1
after 17.xb4 b8 18.d2 b6 19.b3 a2 52.f1 h2 53.h7 e3 54.h3 f4
a5 20.de1 etc. ] 55.b5 f5 56.b6 g4 57.h8 e2+ 58.f2
16...b8 17.a3 b6 18.e3 xh1! g3+
Here Black can saf ely get rid of his roo k 0-1
rat he r tha n mo ve it t o a p assive squa re .
19.xh1 b5! The queen's potential access
to e2 and f1 might be useful in the future. 742 B06
20.g5! g7! Tigran Petrosian, like his World Gopal,G 2572
Championship namesake knows which pieces Smirin,Ilia 2657
to exchange, which to keep on the board. He IND-ISR Match 2012 (10.3) 04.04.2012
has to maintain a guard on the h8 square. [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
21.e1 f6 22.d2
[ Bad for White is 22.xd6 xb2+ 23.d2 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
b4+ 24.xb4 xb4 as he is left with weak 5.d2
pawns. ] [ 5.h4 immediately is also possible but
22...e4! The exchange on e4 ensures that players generally wait for Black to play ...b5
Black's centre pawn mass will give him good before going for this - Black can now try f6
chances in an endgame. 23.xe4 dxe4 preventing h5 is a sensible option 6.e2 h5
uncovering an attack on g5. 24.e3 f5 and the Bishop is slightly awkwardly placed
Rather than enter an endgame where Black on e2 ]
has impressive pawns maybe he should keep 5...b5 6.0-0-0
the tension with 25.b3 [ Personally I would play 6.h4 immediately
[ 25.g3 to stop f5-f4 or lash out with ] and now h6 ( 6...h5 7.f3 d7 8.h3 b7
[ 25.g4 ] 9.g5 )]
25...d5 26.h1 f7 27.xb5 axb5 28.a3 6...d7 7.h4 h5 The problem here is White
g5 29.xg5? Now Black's centre pawns will has a very simple plan of Nh3-g5 now and the
advance like an avalanche. He had to hold knight is very difficult to shift. 8.h3 gf6
them back with [ 8...b7 9.g5 gf6?! 10.e5!
[ 29.g3 or ] is very strong for White because now
[ 29.c3 when his position remains A) 10...b4 was agreed a draw in
uncomfortable due to the potential Dominguez Perez, L (2719)-Bologan, V
dynamism of Black's pawns, but it should (2678) Khanty-Mansiysk 2011 but only
be defensible. ] because the result sent Dominguez
29...xd4 30.e3 f6 31.c3 c8 32.d2 through their knockout match. W hite is
e5 33.h7+ e6 34.b7 f4 35.a7 g8 basically winning after 11.e2! e4
36.b6+ f5 37.xb5 e3+ 12.e6! fxe6 ( 12...xd2 13.exf7+ f8
[ Good enough to win, but simpler was 14.f4 is mating ) 13.xb4;
37...xg2 38.xd5 g5 39.d1 e3 B) 10...dxe5 11.dxe5 xe5 ( 11...g4
40.fxe3 fxe3 41.xe3 -forced or the pawn 12.f4 is very unpleasant - Black's pieces
promotes- xe3 when the white king is tied a r e p r e t t y b a d l y c o o r d i n a t e d h e r e)
down to the first rank making the advance of 12.xd8+ xd8 13.xd8+ xd8 14.f4
the e5 pawn straightforward. ] fg4 15.d2 e8 16.fxe5 xe5
38.xe3 fxe3+ 39.xe3 xg2 40.xd5 and two pawns aren't enough for the piece
h4 41.d7 here. ]
[ The f2 pawn is indefensible as if 41.d2 [ 8...e6 is a sensible way of playing and now
g5+ ] 9.g5 e7 10.b1 b7 11.f3 b6
751
and Black had reasonable chances in and Black is under severe pressure ]
Dominguez Perez, L (2712)-Kamsky, G 12.e5! Obvious and strong b4
(2732) Beijing 2011 ] [ 12...h7 13.e6 wins at least an
[ 8...b6 also looks like a sensible move but exchange ]
so far it's not been played. I guess play 13.b1?! This keeps a clear edge but it's not
c o u l d c o n t i n u e 9.g5 f6 10.d3 best
when Black has to be on the lookout for e5- [ 13.e2 is more logical with a very strong
e 6 i d e a s s o g4 is a sensible move to attack after d5 14.e6 7b6 ( 14...7f6
consider ] 15.exf7+ h8 16.e3 ) 15.exf7+ h8
9.g5 16.g4! with what should be a winning attack
[ 9.e5! is usually the critical test of Black's (and extra pawn) ]
setup in the positions and now g4 10.e6 13...d5 14.e6 7b6 15.exf7+ h8 16.g4
fxe6 11.g5 This looks favourable for [ 16.e1! keeps more control - Black doesn't
White ( 11.d3!? ) 11...f8 12.f3! even have ..e5 with counterplay now ]
as usual W hite really needs to force the 16...e5 17.g3 exd4 18.d3?!
issue in these positions xe3 13.xe3 [ 18.d3! f6 19.d2 bringing the knight
and Black has real problems unravelling to the centre and threatening gxh5 ( not
here. ] 19.gxh5? f5! )]
[ 9.f3 seems a bit slow here for example in 18...e3 Now Black is doing OK again
Berg, E (2514)-Hillarp Persson, T (2474) although with limited time and a very complex
Umea 2003 b7 10.g5 0-0 11.f2 b4 position it's not surprising the rest of the game
12.e2 c5! 13.dxc5 a5 Black managed contains many more mistakes. 19.xg6 d3?!
to get a dangerous attack going bef ore Aggressive but inaccurate
White ] [ 19...hxg4! 20.fxg4 xg4 would've kept the
9...g4 10.f4 White really has to keep hold game about equal and very unclear ]
of this Bishop if he wants any advantage here 20.xd3 bc4 21.c3 hxg4 22.fxg4 xg4
[ 10.f3 xe3 11.xe3 e5! 12.dxe5 23.df1!
( 12.d5? h6 i s a w k w a r d) 12...xe5 [ 23.de1 should also win after bxc3 24.b3!
and Black has at least equalised ] c2 25.c3 and White is winning a piece ]
10...0-0?! After this Black quickly gets into hot 23...bxc3 24.xc3 d7
water [ 24...b8 25.h2 and White has everything
[ 10...c5 is more thematic and now 11.dxc5 covered ]
( 11.f3?! cxd4! 12.fxg4 dxc3 13.d5 25.f4 c6 26.e1 White has managed to
looks like a winning double-attack but in fact just about keep control and now Black tries
after 0-0 14.xa8 cxb2+ 15.b1 c7 one final trick.... xb2!? 27.xe3
16.d5 b6 followed by Bxg4/Na4 and [ 27.xb2?? ab8+ wins ]
Black has a serious attack going) 11...xc5 27...xc3 28.c2 h5 29.e6! Now White
12.f3 e5 with chances for both sides - just needs to check on h6 and it's all over g6
although I quite like Black's position with 30.f2?? A tragic blunder, Gopal finds one of
the strong Bishop on g7 ] the few rook moves that doesn't win and in
11.f3 gf6?! The game was played at a rapid fact allows a winning tactic for Smirin
time-limit so this accounts for a lot of the [ 30.c4! was the cleanest win - the Queen
mistakes - but still it's important to see how i s l o s t a s a f t e r xc4 31.h6+ h7
quickly a strong player gets into trouble in 32.xh7# perhaps White forgot about the
these lines as Black - I've never really seen Bishop on c2 covering h7? ]
the attraction of this way of playing for Black - 30...d3+! 31.d1
especially against a well-prepared player. [ 31.xd3 d4+ 32.c2 xe3+ picks up
[ 11...h6 was relatively best but White is the Queen with check ]
still much better after 12.h3 h7 13.g4 31...xf2+ 32.xf2
hxg4 14.g5+ ( 14.h5!? [ 32.xf2 xf7 and White has nothing ]
i s a l s o d a n g e r o u s) 14...g8 15.h5 32...xc2+ 33.c1 h7 34.d1 a4+
752
35.e2 c4+ 36.d1 xf7 37.h1 only removing the King from any danger on
I suspect White lost on time here although of the g file, but also preparing...Neg8, should
course it's time to resign in any case the need arise. I am very happy with th e
0-1 Black position here. He has enough space to
play with and there's also ...c6 and ... b5 if
White castles long. 12.0-0-0 b5! Or maybe
743 B06 even straightaway! W e now see the
Gordon,Stephen J usefulness of hitting e4. 13.cxb5
Martin,Andrew D [ 13.gxf5 gxf5 14.g1 f4 15.f2 bxc4
4NCL West Bromwich 09.04.2005 leaves White in a bit of a mess. ]
[Andrew Martin] 13...axb5 14.a3
[ I expected 14.b4 which I felt was more or
Another tale from the 4 NCL.... 1.d4 g6 2.e4 less necessary. However d7! 15.gxf5 gxf5
g7 3.e3 Quite an unusual move but there 16.g1 f4 17.f2 b8 quite clearly gives
is nothing wrong with it. W hite deliberately Black superior chances, thanks to his safer
delays Nc3 giving himself the option of c2-c4 King. In the game Gordon seems right off-
should a good opportunity arise. I had to slow colour and permits Black to muster a
down and try to find a good plan. d6 crushing attack. ]
[ The first ( and obvious) line to be 14...d7 15.g5 h5 16.g1 b4!
considered is 3...c5 4.c3 b6 5.d2 Opening up lines is par for the course.
I stared at this position f or a while and 17.axb4
d e c id e d t h a t t h is wa sn 't t h e righ t wa y. [ 17.b1 bxa3 18.xa3 b8 19.c3 f4
White's centre is securely protected. ] is t oo disgusting f o r word s bu t t he text
[ 3...d5! attracted more and I think this is move might even be worse! ]
wh at I 'll p la y ne xt time . Th e p oint is t o 17...b8 18.b5 fxe4! When one is ready to
expose the position of the Bishop on e3. commence a direct attack it is very important
Thus 4.e5 ( 4.exd5 xd5 5.c3 f6 to bring as many units into play as possible. I
seems quite OK too.) 4...h6! is logical, couldn't exactly see when and now, but I felt
with .. .c7-c5 to come. But I guess in the end that the options of ...Rxf1 and/or ...Nf4 could
I wa n t e d t o s t i c k wi t h t h e s p i r i t o f t h e be useful at a later stage ( if White survived
Modern and besides, I was happy to take on that long.) 19.fxe4 xb5 20.xb5 xb5
the Nc3, Be3, Qd2, Nf3 stuff. ] 21.c3 b4 No ...Rxf1 then, but the latter
4.f3 a6 Elastic. Black is waiting for Nc3. idea is put into immediate effect. 22.e2 f4
5.d2 c6! There is no need to be too 23.c2 c6!
passive. Black intends to play ... e7-e5 and [ 23...fb8 was the original intention, but with
why not! 6.e2 e5 7.d5 White's Queen and King on the same file
[ 7.bc3 f6 is just fine for Black, who will 23...c6 is much stronger. I think White's lost
answer 8.0-0-0 with the cold-blooded 0-0 ] now. ]
7...ce7 8.c4 So, the critical moment. We go 24.h4 cxd5 25.h5 xe2+ 26.xe2 fc8-+
into a King's Indian-type position where Black 27.d2 d4 28.h6 dxc3 29.hxg7+ xg7
has to be ve ry caref u l n ot to slip into a n 30.xc3 xc3+ 31.bxc3 xc3+ 32.c2
in f e rio r ve rs io n of t h e Classical syst e m . a1# White's opening idea of delaying Nc3
Importantly, he must not make any premature certainly has merit and Black must beware an
kingside commitments whilst the White King unfavourable transposition back into a poor
can still go long. f5! However, it's important to King's Indian. However, with flexible play as
put pressure on e4. This does not contradict displayed here, he should emerge from the
the last remark, because it's ...f5-f4 that really opening in good shape.
gums up the works. 9.bc3 f6 10.h3 0-0 0-1
11.g4 h8 'In this type of position one always
has to consider the fate on the Knight on e7.
Thus 11..Kh8! is a good, flexible move, not
753
744 B06 seem playable here and he won't have to

Gormally,Daniel 2479 worry being wiped off the board as
Shoker,Samy 2485 happened in our main game. ]
Uxbridge Int Alekhine (1) 13.02.2010 7.f4 h5 This is suggested as possible in the
[Gawain Jones] book but I find it hard to believe. True, Black
now has the g4 square to use, but playing so
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 provocatively is really encouraging White to
5.d2 d7 attack you immediately! 8.f3 h6
[ 5...b5 is similar to the Kramnik game seen [ 8...e5 was played in Van den Doel, E-
next but with Nf6 played instead of Bg7. Rudolf, H Bundesliga 2003 which was a
Tiger prefers the game continuation in his disaster for the second player after 9.dxe5
book but we've had a few high recent games dxe5 10.0-0-0 exf4 11.xf4 e7 12.e5
in this line and so I thought we should have 0-0 13.e6 fxe6 14.c4 was already pretty
a look. 6.a4 ( 6.d3 f6 I wonder if Black disgusting. ]
should delay this with either 6...Nd7 or 6... 9.0-0-0 If I'm to be fair I have to say that Black
Bb7. 7.a4 b4 8.ce2 a5 9.h6 0-0 10.h4 is far from lost here. However, playing this
e5 11.h5 xh5 12.f3 c6 13.g4 f4 position I would be very scared of either an e5-
14.xg7 xg7 15.xf4 exf4 was Bauer, C- e6 break or f4-f5 while his counterplay has yet
Todorov, T Vandoeuvre 2010 when the to start. b5 10.d3 g4 11.e5 This move
simple 16.xf4 would have given White a has to be carefully judged. On the positive
great position.) 6...b4 7.ce2 ( 7.d1 side it hems in the bishop on g7 and opens up
was seen in a note to the previous game.) the d3 bishop towards g6 with dangerous e5-
7...a5 8.g3 c6!? ( Tiger only considers e6 threats. On the other hand Black now has
8...d7 ) 9.f3 h5 10.d3 g4 11.g5 the light squares, d5 and f5 and if he can
h6 12.h3 c8 looks suspiciously slow for successfully coordinate his pieces then White
Bla ck . Th e ga me progre ssed wit h 13.c3 wi l l f e e l o ve r- e xt e n d e d . b6 12.hf1
bxc3 14.bxc3 d5 15.e5 h4 16.e2 f5 I don't think this is accurate as he doesn't
17.f4 a6 18.0-0 c7 19.ab1 f6?! manage to push f5 through.
It's hard to see how to create counterplay [ 12.g5 would delay moving the h1 rook
so maybe Black had to sit still as this just until we know where it's best placed. ]
worsens his position. 20.f3 e6 21.c2 12...d5
0-0 22.xf5 gxf5 23.xh4 was terrible for [ 12...f5!? is a typical way to slow White's
Black. Zhigalko, S-Tseshkovsky, V Tashkent attack with the neat idea 13.xf5 c4!?
2010. ] ( T h e s im p l e 13...gxf5 is also playable)
6.h4! This is supposed to be the most critical 14.d3 gxe3 15.xg6 fxg6 16.xg6+
test of Black's opening and given an d7 17.xg7 g8 18.xg8 axg8
exclamation mark by both Tiger in his book 19.g1 xd1 20.xd1 with dynamic
and by John in the archives. equality as they say. ]
[ Normally 6.f3 is played first but then after 13.g5 e6 This gives the bishop on c8 no
b5 7.h4 h6 could be played ] future.
6...h6 I don't like this at all, it seems far too [ 13...c4 14.xc4 bxc4 and I actually start
slow to favour Black. He's starting to get
[ 6...h5 immediately is more prudent. Tiger's p re ssu r e d o wn t h e b f ile a n d h a s t o t a l
mainline runs 7.h3 b5 8.g5 c6! 9.a4 control over the light squares. You can see
b7 10.e2 gf6 11.f3 0-0 12.0-0 why I said e4-e5 was double-edged. ]
when he considers that e6!? might be 14.de1 f8 15.d1 c4 16.e2
Black's best 13.d1 b6 14.axb5 axb5 Gormally has managed to defend the bishop
15.xa8 xa8 16.b3 bd7 17.f2 on e3 so that he doesn't have to give up his
giving the resulting position as unclear. I light squared bishop. c5 17.dxc5 gxe3
understand that Black doesn't want to cede [ 17...a5!? is more accurate not allowing
control of g5, but at least the positions White his attack. ]
754
18.xe3 xc5 It looks like Black is starting to [ I'd be tempted to go for 31.g2 forcing d2+
t a k e o ve r s o i t ' s t i m e f o r W h i t e t o f o rc e t o p r e v e n t 3 2 . Q g 6 + 32.xd2 xd2+
through his attack. 19.xc4 bxc4 20.f5! 33.xd2 xf3 34.e6+- Everything is
It comes later than expected but now White winning by this point though. ]
uses his development advantage to crash 31...c3 32.bxc3 dxc2 33.xc2 f5 34.a4+
through. Significant sacrificed material is An enjoyable game to annotate but not to play
required. xe3+ on the Black side. However his position was
[ 20...gxf5 21.xf5! White has to keep up playable had he not allowed the f5 break.
his aggression. exf5 22.e6 f6 23.exf7+ Nonetheless, I don't like 6...h6 and think the
f8 When the cool 24.d1! looks great for positions are easier for White to play as Black
W hite. He has dual threats of Re8+ and has to be constantly on the lookout for this
Qxd5 while e7 25.xe7 xe7 26.xd5! type of sacrificial attack.
b8 27.e1+ f8 28.e8+ g7 29.g8+ 1-0
mates ]
21.xe3 gxf5 22.xf5! More fuel on the fire.
White has to open Black's position at any cost 745 B06
o r h e will h a ve n o co m p e n s a t io n f o r t h e Greet,Andrew 2425
sacrificed pawn. exf5 23.e6 f6 Conquest,Stuart 2503
[ 23...fxe6 24.xe6 92nd ch Douglas IOM (8) 09.08.2005
A) 24...xe6 25.xe6+ and Black loses [Andrew Martin]
too much material to stave off mate. f8
26.xf5+ g7 27.e6 h6 28.e5+ 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6!
h7 ( 28...f6 29.e7+ i s s i m i l a r) 5.f3 It seems to me that many, many players
29.e7+ xe7 30.xe7+ when the are churning out this stuff EXPECTING an
queen picks up all the loose pawns.; opening advantage. Tiger Hillerp Persson's
B) 24...f6! is a very brave way of playing excellent new book on the Modern should help
for Black but maybe White has no more to dispel those illusions as well as my own
than to win back the material. 25.c7+ upcoming book on the Hippo. Black is in good
f7 26.xa8 regaining material equality shape after 4 Be3 and 5 Nf3. d7 6.c4
when I favour W hite with Black's loose F r e d R e i n f e l d w o u l d h a v e a p p r o v e d . e6
king position. ] Of course! Black shuts down the Bishop. 7.a4
[ 23...f6 24.exf7+ d7 25.e6! b6 8.0-0 e7 I suppose th ere are various
puts Black in all kinds of problems. scenarios where Black might benefit from
( 25.e8+ d6 isn't so clear.) 25...b8 leaving his Bishop on c8. I'm thinking of a
( 25...xf7 26.b6! with no defence to 27. variation where White plays d4-d5, Black ...e6-
Nc5 mate or at least picking up the queen.) e5 in response and then the Bishop is in pole
26.c3 c6 ( 26...xf7 27.e5!+- ) 27.f8 position to support ...f7-f5! But such lines are
xf8 28.c5+ b7 29.xf8 and material's rare White doesn't hurry to close the centre
level but Black's king still hasn't f o un d [ 8...b7 is of course, natural and probably
safety. ( In fact 29.xf8 is also possible as makes little difference at this stage:
Black's pawns are all stuck on vulnerable A) 9.d2 h6! An absolutely key move,
squares. )] preventing both Bg5, disrupting, and Bh6
24.f7 a5 25.xh8 Danny has regained a t a n y s t a g e . 10.e1 df6
the sacrificed rook and still has a decisive D e n yi n g W h i t e f 2 - f 4 a n d e g g i n g h i m
i n i t i a t i v e f4 26.e2 f3 27.gxf3 forward in the centre. 11.f3 ( 11.d5 e5
Black temporarily closes up the d1-h5 12.h3 e7 13.d3 g5 ) 11...d5
diagonal to stop the queen infiltrating but now 12.exd5 exd5 13.b3 e7 14.e2 f5
Black is even material down. b7 15.f4 g5 16.e5 0-0 17.c3
[ 27...xa2 28.g2! a1+ 29.d2 a5+ Dirr, U-Thiede, L/ Germany 2004 and now
30.c3 would also be time to resign. ] e8 gives Black a perfectly playable
28.e7 d4 29.f7 d5 30.d8 d3 31.d2 position.;
755
B) 9.e1 gf6 10.f4 0-0 11.f1 e8 is not quite as accurate. With the exchange
12.g3 c5 13.xd6 cxd4 14.xd4 c5 of queens comes relief for White. ]
I daresay both players were happy with 28.e3 xe3 29.fxe3 Sacrificing the
this result it certainly looks that way! ] exchange to try and get a bit of counterplay.
9.d2 h6 10.h3 b7 11.fe1 f6 [ 29.xe3 c8! leaves the Queen with no
I was commentating live at the British squares. ]
Championships on the game and it became [ After 29.xe3 g4 30.h3
clear at this point that Greet didn't have the G r e e t p r o b a b l y f o u n d ( 30.f3 c8 )
faintest idea what to do. White has arranged 30...c8 unattractive. He's worse, he's
his pieces in the usual pretty picture but what defending and he's got no time . ]
next? Seeing this and other similar games it's 29...c8 30.f3 g4 31.f1 xd1
clear to me that W hite has real problems 32.xd1 a5
placing his Bishops correctly against the [ I daresay with more time Conquest would
Hippo this is the key opening problem to solve. have settled for 32...xe4 33.xa6 g5 ]
12.f4 g5 13.h2 33.f2 f8 34.e2 g7 35.f3 d7 36.b3
[ 13.g3 would have least have saved a little h3 The concentration of force against the
time, but you could not say that the position White King is considerable. In every respect
is at all clear: g6 14.d5 e5 15.a5 b5 36...h3 is the correct move. 37.g3 h4
16.d3 h5 ( 16...g4 17.hxg4 c8! ) 38.e2
17.h2 hf4 ] [ 38.h1 e7 39.xh3 g6 40.g2
13...g4 Why not? Black takes the initiative. gh7-+ ]
14.hxg4 xg4 15.g3 g6 16.h2 h5! 38...xf3+ 39.xf3 h6 40.c4 e7 41.f1
A strong move and distinctly annoying for g4-+ 42.xg4 xg4 43.e2 f6 44.h1
Greet who finds himself on the back foot with gg6 45.f1 g4+ 46.d3 xf1 47.xf1
the White pieces after only 16 moves! What f6 48.e2 f3 49.e1 f5
advice can one offer apart from try to sit tight! 0-1
17.ad1
[ 17.xg4 hxg4 18.ad1 h7! gives Black
all the chances. ] 746 B06
17...f8?! This one was a shock to the Hansen,Per 2108
audience a move which nobody could Hillarp Persson,Tiger 2535
understand and particularly when Black has a 6th Gibtelecom Masters (3) 24.01.2008
very promising alternative: [John Watson]
[ 17...h4! 18.xg4 ( 18.xd6 xf2!
19.xf2 cxd6 20.f1 c7 ) 18...hxg3 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3
19.fxg3 c5! White creaks on the dark b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5 8.e4 b8 9.g5
squares. ] h6 10.xf7? This is self-destructive. A
18.e2 much more interesting move is
[ 18.xg4 hxg4 19.e2 h6 20.d3 g5 [ 10.e6 , wh e n a p o ssib le lin e is f6
de mo n st ra t es t h at B lack is st ill f u lly in ( 10...fxe6?? 11.xe6 a5 12.xg7+ f7
charge of the initiative. ] 13.h5! ) 11.c6+ f8 12.exf7 xf7
18...g5 19.f3 e7 20.h2 f6 21.f1 ( 12...cxd4 13.d5!? is fairly crazy) 13.dxc5
h4 Vast amounts of time were being eaten up ( 13.d5!? ) 13...h6 14.xf7 xf7 15.e2 ]
over these moves clear evidence that Hippo 10...xf7 11.e6 cxd4 12.exf7+
position are sometimes difficult to play. White [ 12.exd7+ xd7 13.e2 b6 14.g3 0-0
has problems: his King is in the firing line! 15.0-0 bc8 with an extra centre pawn and
22.h2 h6 23.f3 h7 24.h5 f6 superior position. The game is similar. ]
25.f3 g7 26.h3 Greet recognises that 12...xf7 13.d5 c5 14.f3 e6 15.b4
all he can do is not to weaken his position d7 16.0-0 f8 17.b1 g8 18.c3 e5
and wait for Black. ag8 27.d5 e5 19.c6 xc6 20.xc6 dxc3 21.bxc3 h8
[ 27...c8 28.dxe6 xe6 29.xe6 xe6 22.h1 c8 23.d5 a4 24.d2 exf4
756
This is pretty bad for White - the rest is not 4...h5

easy, because Black allows opposite- [ 4...d5!?
coloured bishops, but it's probably always A) 5.e5 has been tried here but it doesn't
under control. 25.b7 xc3 26.xc3 xc3 make much sense to me as Black got a
27.xa6 f3 28.b7 fxg2+ 29.xg2 c5 very comfortable game after c5! 6.dxc5
30.d3 xf1+ 31.xf1 e5 32.h3 g7 d4 7.a4 a5+ 8.c3 dxc3 ( 8...d7!?
33.e6 c7 34.d5 e7 35.g4 c7 9.b6 dxc3 was also worth considering)
36.e6 b4 37.h3 g5 38.f3 c8 9.bxc3? ( 9.xc3 was more sensible but I
39.h3 c7 40.f3 f6 41.b3 c1 still think Black has the more pleasant
42.d1 h5 43.f1 xd1 44.xd1 f4 position after c6 ) 9...d7 and White
45.e2 e5 46.c4 g5 47.b3 g4 48.d5 was already in a lot of trouble in Cao Sang
h6 49.e4 g5 50.d5 h4 51.e4 c1+ (2488)-Bauer, C (2629)/Dresden GER
0-1 2007;
B) 5.xd5 c6 6.e3 xd4 7.xd4
xd4 was played by Chernyshov back in
747 B06 2003 against Motylev and is examined by
Harutjunyan,G 2455 Andrew Martin in the archives. ]
Chernyshov,Konstantin 2561 5.f3
28th Cappelle Open (2) 04.03.2012 [ 5.g5!? was tried in another recent game
[Tom Rendle] but it seems a shame to me to take a square
t h e k n i g h t s e e m s b e t t e r s u i t e d t o b5
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 a6 I quite like this ( 5...f6 looks better as White gains nothing
move, delaying playing d6 and waiting to see with 6.e5 g4 7.e2 c6 8.0-0-0 d5
what setup White employs 4.h4 and the position is fairly balanced.) 6.a4 b4
[ 4.e3 b5 5.d2 was examined by 7.d5 b7!? ( 7...a5 looks too slow and
Gawain in Tirard, H-Bauer, C ] after 8.f3 c6 9.f4 f6 10.d3
[ 4.a4 is a quieter approach from White and and Black is lacking any control over the
may keep a minimal edge, for example d6 centre ) 8.c4 f6 9.f3 and White had a
( 4...d5!? 5.xd5 e6 is still an option for dangerous initiative in the game Babujian,
Black ) 5.e3 f6 for example see Meijers- L (2474)-Minasian, A (2525)/Yerevan ARM
Kengis in the archives ] 2012 although Black eventually went on to
[ 4.f4 is quite an aggressive way to meet 3... win a topsy-turvy encounter. ]
a6 and now d5!? is an interesting idea that 5...d6
was p la ye d a co up le o f time s la st yea r [ 5...b5 was played by Chernyshov
5.xd5 e6 6.c3 ( or 6.e3 xd4 7.d3 previously and looks to be more in the spirit
c6 8.f3 c5 9.c4 f6 10.e3 e7 of 3...a6. However perhaps he didn't fancy
with chances for both sides in Gabuzyan, H meeting an improvement after 6.a4 b4
(2394)-Minasian, A (2558)/Jermuk ARM 7.d5 b7 8.c4 ( 8.f4!? d6 9.xb4
2011 ) 6...xd4 7.f3 this looks too xe4 10.g5 b7 11.c4
a m b i t i o u s t o m e ( 7.xd4 is probably a is one dangerous line that he might've been
more circumspect way to play as W hite trying to a void) 8...e6 9.xb4 xe4
keeps a minimal edge after xd4 8.d2 which was perhaps a little better for White
c6 9.f3 a7 10.0-0-0 ) 7...c6 8.ge2 in Voitsekhovsky, S (2503)-Chernyshov, K
b6 9.d2?! ( 9.a3 ge7 is only a tiny bit (2567)/Voronezh RUS 2007 ]
b e t t e r f o r B l a c k a s W h i t e s t i l l h a s 6.g5 I must confess that I quite like these
problems getting castled.) 9...xb2 10.d1 lines where W hite gets a knight to g5 as it
w a s p l a y e d i n S v e s h n i k o v , V ( 2 4 0 7 ) - a lwa ys se e m s t o gu a ra n t e e ch a n c e s f o r
Fedorchuk, S (2618)/Presolana ITA 2011 Kingside play - however it's probably just
and now ge7! would've left White personal taste. f6
struggling to show any compensation for the [ 6...c6 was tried in a previous game and
pawn. ] then 7.e3 e5 8.dxe5 xe5 ( 8...dxe5??
757
9.xd8+ xd8 10.d5 would be 20.xe4 dxe4 21.c4+ h8 22.e2

something of a disaster) 9.d2 f6 10.h3 A crushing victory for White but Black players
e6 11.f4 f7 12.f3 e7 and here the need not despair: early d5 deviations as well
simple 13.0-0-0 would've given White an as Hippo structures involving an early ..e6
excellent position in Karpatchev, A (2477)- both give reasonable chances.
Kondenko, A (2254)/Novgorod RUS 1999 ] 1-0
7.c4 0-0 8.f4 b5 9.b3 The Bishop is
excellently placed here and, as we shall see,
Black has to be very wary of problems down 748 B06
the a2-g8 diagonal. b4 Hector,Jonny
[ 9...e6 attempting to block the diagonal and Gurevich,Mikhail
play a position similar to a Hippo would've Mariehamn Mariehamn (Sweden) (2) 1997
been more sensible. A possible continuation [Nigel Davies]
would be 10.0-0 b7 11.d3 bd7
12.ad1 b4 13.e2 e7 14.a3!? 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.e5
and I slightly prefer W hite here although h5 6.e3 h6
Black's position is solid. ] [ After 6...b6 White should choose
10.e2 b7 11.d3 a5? Black's sense of between 7.Na4 and 7.Rb1, as after 7.d2
danger seems to have deserted him xb2 8.b1 a3 9.d3 h6 10.ge2 e6
[ 11...e6 Chernyshov really should've taken he did not have enough for the pawn in
time out to blunt the Bishop although White Edelman - Chernin, USA 1990 ]
is better after 12.f3 ] 7.d2 g4 'Winning' the two bishops, not
12.e5! dxe5 that it's so important in such a position. White
[ 12...d5 is no better as after 13.e6 f5 can argue that his dark-square bishop is 'bad'.
14.xd5! xd5 15.e3 Nf4 is coming and 8.d1
Black's position is deeply unpleasant. ] [ In Marusenko - McNab, London 1993,
13.xe5 d5 W h i t e p l a y e d t h e c o m m i t t a l 8.0-0-0
[ 13...e6 14.f4 d5 transposes to the and after xe3 9.xe3 g4 10.f3 e6
note below ] 11.g3 a5 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 b4
14.f4 c6? After this Black is simply lost 14.b1 xc3 15.xc3 xc3 16.bxc3 d7
[ 14...e6! was the only chance and now Black was certainly no worse. ]
W hite has a lot of tempting options but I 8...f5 9.f3 xe3 10.xe3 e6 11.e2
don't see a convincing win. Perhaps best is b6 12.0-0 c5 13.a4
15.xd5 exd5 16.g4!? with a strong attack. [ W h i t e wa s p r o b a b l y t e m p t e d b y 13.c4
The pawn shouldn't be taken as after hxg4 but then cxd4 14.xf5 gxf5 leaves him no
( 16...bd7! 17.gxh5 e7 is a better try but time for 15.cxd5 because of d3+ ]
it doesn't look great for Black) 17.h5! fd7 13...cxd4 14.xd4 c5 15.b5+ f8
18.xg7 xg5 19.e3! White is winning 16.a5 c7 17.exf5 gxf5 18.b4 xd4+
because the Bishop is immune from capture 19.xd4 g7 20.a3 h4 21.c3 e7
as xg7 20.e6+ wins the Queen ] 22.g4 hxg3
15.xd5 cxd5 16.g4! Already Black has no [ And not 22...fxg4 b e c a u s e o f 23.f5
defence c6 . Also after Gurevich's move it looks as if
[ f or example 16...bd7 17.gxh5 xh5 White has a strong initiative. ]
18.xg6! fxg6 19.xg6 df6 20.xf6 23.xg3+ f8 24.ff3 c6 25.xc6 bxc6
xf6 ( 20...xf6? 21.e6 wins ) 21.h7+ 26.h3 g8+ 27.fg3 xg3+ 28.xg3 b8
f8 22.xh5 and White is two pawns up 29.c3 c5 The thematic counterplay comes at
with an attack ] last. What follows looks like a ferocious time
17.gxh5 xe5 18.dxe5 e4 What else? scramble, with White trying to give mate and
19.hxg6 f6 Bla ck' s kin g h e a d in g f o r t h e h ills . 30.f2
[ 19...xg5 20.hxg5 fxg6 21.xg6 cxb4 31.h3 c7 32.h4 bxc3 33.h8+
is also easily winning for White ] e7 34.f6+ e8 35.h8+ d7
758
You need nerves of steel to play like this! 2010;

36.xf7+ c6 37.xe6+ c5 38.xb8 B) 9.b3
xb8 39.xf5 b2 40.c8+ b4 B1) 9...a5 has been tried a couple of
There's nothing to be done about the advance times but I think White should be better
of Black's c-pawn. after 10.e6 ( 10.a4!? ) 10...xe6
0-1 11.xe6 fxe6 12.xe6+ h8 13.0-0
although the advantage is only small;
B2) 9...c6 10.0-0 ( 10.c3
749 B06 looks like a possible improvement to me,
Howell,David 2633 for example d4 11.xd4 xd4 12.f4
Aronian,Levon 2807 e6 13.e3 d7 14.0-0 was better for
Schachbundesliga 2011-12 (9) 05.02.2012 W hite in the games Tesik, C (2275)-
[Tom Rendle] Szablowski, P (2340)/ Budapest HUN
2011 and Enders, P (2485)-Huss, R
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.f3 d6 4.c4!? f6 ( 2 2 2 0 ) / B a d Z w e s t e n G E R 1 9 9 9)
5.e2 This strikes me as quite a 10...d4 11.xd4 xd4 with balanced
straightforward way to play as White - the idea chances was covered by Rowson in the
is to establish a pawn on e5 early on without game Tregubov-McShane ]
allo win g t he s wap o f Qu e e n s t h a t wo u ld 9.0-0 d7 10.d2 a5 The first new move
otherwise occur after dxe5 dxe5. It's comes from Aronian
interesting to see how the world no. 2 [ 10...c6 looks quite reasonable for Black e.
responds. 0-0 6.e5 g. 11.e1 ( 11.c3!? c7 12.fe1
[ 6.0-0 is perhaps a safer way to play for a is interesting but hardly a problem for Black)
small edge and now e5 ( 6...g4!? ) 7.dxe5 11...a5 12.c3 7b6 13.xd5 xd5
dxe5 8.d1 e7 9.b3 was featured in a ( 13...cxd5= is more solid) 14.e4 c7
top-level rapid game between Topalov and and Black was doing f ine in Riordan, C
Mamedyarov in the archives. ] (2270)-Ivanov, A (2565)/Foxwoods USA
6...dxe5 7.dxe5 d5 8.h3 2007 ]
[ 8.0-0! looks like a more critical test of 11.c3 7b6 After this White seems to get
Black's setup - the question is does White some advantage
have to be afraid of Bg4 - I think the answer [ 11...c6 might be an improvement but then I
is 'not really'. g4 ( 8...c6 9.h3 e6 don't see any reason not to have played it
10.g5 c8 was played in Sax-Palkovi and on move 10. Now White can try for an edge
now 11.b3 is slightly better for White) with 12.ad1 a4 13.a3 c7 14.fe1
9.bd2 b6 10.h3 ( 10.b3 c6 11.e6 a n d t h e p a wn o n e 5 i s s t i l l r e s t r i c t i n g
f5 with chances for both sides in Schlosser, Black's game somewhat ]
P (2511)-Bologan, V (2684)/Mulhouse FRA 12.xd5! David correctly judges that giving up
2001 ) 10...xc4 11.hxg4! xd2 12.xd2 the B isho p pa ir is the way t o play f or a n
c6 13.c3 d5 14.fd1 c5 15.d7 advantage
and White was on top and went on to win in [ after 12.xd5 xc4 13.f4 xd2
the game Hernandez, H (2473) -Arencibia, 14.xd2 f5 15.f3 c6 Black has
W (2516)/Yucatan MEX 2004 ] comfortably equalised ]
8...e6 12...xd5
[ 8...b6 is Black's main alternative and now [ 12...xd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.b3! fd8
A) 9.e6!? xc4 10.exf7+ h8?! 15.ad1 c6 16.c4 and White has a nice
( 10...xf7 is an obvious improvement space advantage and the Bishop on g7 is
11.xc4 h6! and I think Black's two still a problem for Black ]
Bishops and lead in development are 13.e4 I think the opening has been
enough for equality here) 11.xc4 c6 something of a success for Howell, especially
12.0-0 was better for White in Hebden, M against such an illustrious opponent. Aronian
(2556)-Mangione, C (2087)/Leicester ENG now does his best to cause complications and
759
in f act his next move of f ers a p awn . b4 a5 22.b3 b5!
14.xb4 Which David decides to grab [ 22...xe5 also wins the pawn but again
[ perhaps a safer option would be to leave Black is loathe to swap off his dark-squared
the pawn along and attempt to keep a slight Bishop 23.xe5 xe5 24.c3 is perhaps
edge with 14.ad1 c8 ( 14...xa2?! a little better for White ]
is far too greedy because after 15.h6 c8 23.e3 bxc4 24.c3 h6 Cutting out any
16.xg7 xg7 17.c5 b4 18.d4 Ng5 ideas White might've had 25.d2 b8
W h i t e h a s a ve r y s t r o n g i n i t i a t i v e a n d 26.ad1 c8 27.e4 a7 28.a3 f8
Black's pieces are rather uncoordinated) Perhaps preparing Rb7 without allowing Rd8+
15.a3 d5 ( not 15...xc2?? 16.d3 [ 28...b7 29.d8+ h7 30.xc8 xc8
a n d t h e k n ig h t is t ra p p e d) 16.g5!? 31.d8!? c7 32.d2 just looks equal
and with c4 coming Black would have some (White would be better but I see no plan at
tricky problems to solve ] all to improve the position) ]
14...axb4 15.fd1 c8 16.b5 c6 29.d5
17.xb4 d5 I would guess this was the [ 29.e2!? looks like a reasonable
position Black envisaged when he decided to alternative and now after b3 30.h4
sacrifice the pawn with 13...Nb4. My feeling is White is actually threatening to do
that White should be better but it's no longer something! b7 31.c2 and if Black isn't
so easy to suggest a plan and David has happy to repeat with Qb3 then I think White
definitely lost some of his earlier control. Still, has some edge here as both Nf4 and f2-f4
a pawn is a pawn..... 18.ed2?! are possibilities ]
[ 18.e1! was perhaps the critical test of the 29...b3 30.c3 David is happy to offer a
sacrifice and now there are a few options repetition and ask Aronian to come up with a
f5 was probably Aronian's intention and plan f5 Aronian declines the repetition but
now ( 18...c5!? 19.xc5 xc5 20.xc5 objectively after this White is better 31.e3!
fc8 21.b4 e6 and Black is following up aa8?! 32.e1?!
with Bf8 - still I hardly believe White isn't a [ 32.g4! now was the time to go for it - White
little better here after 22.c4 xf3 23.gxf3; suddenly seems to have a dangerous attack
18...c7 19.c4 xe4 20.xe4 is clearly after
better for White) 19.xe7! ( 19.a4 is safer ) A) 32...d3 33.e6! ( 33.e1 g7 34.f4
19...xe4 ( 19...fe8 20.h4 xe5 g5! i s n ' t s o c l e a r) 33...f6 34.e1
21.xe5 xe5 22.f6+ g7 23.xd5 is very unpleasant for Black;
xd5 24.e2 and Black's central control is B) 32...e6 33.h4 with f4-f5 looking
not worth a pawn) 20.d4 perhaps this difficult to stop ]
move was missed xe5 ( 20...f4 21.g3 32...h5! Now it's too late 33.h2
and Black will have to take on e5 anyway) [ 33.f3 was better, hoping for Ng5 and
21.xe5 xe5 22.xe4 f6 23.c3 a4 perhaps a tiny edge ]
and I guess Black should hold a draw but 33...g7 34.f3 b7 35.f4 h6 36.g1 a6
only White can be pressing here ] White has drifted over the last few moves and
18...c7 19.c4 suddenly Black's pieces are looking well
[ maybe it was time to offer the return of the coordinated and there's nothing for White to
pawn with 19.a4 a n d n o w a f t e r xe5 do but sit and wait. 37.d5 e6 38.f2
( 19...fd8!? keeps compensation) 20.xe5 g7 39.c3 b6 Aronian is a master at
xe5 21.c4 e6 22.f3! c7 23.e1 slowly increasing the pressure - Howell is
I prefer W hite as Black is a bit tied down forced to simply shuffle around and see if
and Black is missing his fianchettoed Black can breakthrough his defences. 40.h2
Bishop ] b3 41.e2 b6 42.g1 a5 43.f3 d8
19...c5! 20.b5 e6 Now Aronian seems to 44.xd8 xd8 45.f2 h4! 46.h2 d7
have equalised although to David's credit he 47.h1 b8 48.e4? The decisive mistake
fights hard and only starts to get outplayed [ David should tried passive defence with
around the time-control on move 40. 21.e4 48.e3 d4 49.c2 d3 50.c1
760
although it's pretty grim for White. Black has is strong. ]

a number of ways to increase pressure - 13...exd6 14.d2 The first new move.
perhaps Kf8, Qf5 and ...g5 or alternatively Yemelin-Mehmedovic, Neum 2002 went
just an immediate ..f6!? ] [ 14.ce4 xe4 15.xe4 , and both Tiger
48...d5! 49.e3 xe4 50.xe4 d4 a n d R yb ka 3 l ik e f5 with an advantage
51.c2 (centre pawns), in view of 16.xe6?? b6+
[ 51.xd4 cxd4 is easily winning for Black, 17.h1 d5 ]
the central pawns are far too strong ] 14...f5 15.ae1 d5!?
51...xf4 A pawn drops and the Bishop is [ 15...e8 is a simple alternative, about
finally let into the game 52.e2 g3 53.f3 equal. ]
d3 54.g1 d8 55.d2? a final blunder 16.h3 d4!?
but it was completely lost anyway [ 16...d6 ]
[ after 55.f1 d1+ 56.xd1 xd1+ 17.e5 A creative and eccentric odd move,
57.e1 g5 White is so tied up Black can with ambitious intent. But the obvious
choose any way to win he wants ] [ 17.e3! poses problems on the dark
55...xc2 Despite the result I think this Bc4, squares. ]
Qe2 system is a very sensible way to play - 17...c6 18.fe1! b6+
I'm not totally convinced that Aronian [ 18...xe5 19.fxe5 h5 20.g4
improved with his novelty. gives White excellent compensation. ]
0-1 19.e3 d4 20.f2 h6!? 21.f3 xe5
22.xe5 d6 23.e4
[ 23.e2! leaves g6 a target White should
750 B06 have some advantage in that case, in view
Humphrey,Jonathan 2330 of g5 24.fxg5 xe5 25.gxh6! ]
Hofman,Ron 2165 23...xe4 24.xe4 xf4! 25.xf4 xe5
12th Essent Open (2) 18.10.2008 26.xd4 g5 27.e4 e5 28.g3 xg3
[John Watson] 29.xg3 f5 30.e3
½-½
The players seem to know their theory, and
this game confirms the general verdict. 1.e4
g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 b5 751 B06
6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5 8.g5 h6 Safe. Hunt,A 2462
[ 8...cxd4!? 9.e6 f5! is a more exciting line Svidler,Peter 2749
that has been played by Tiger, with the idea Gibraltar Open (4.14) 27.01.2012
10.exd7+ ( 10.d5 c5 11.f7 xe6 [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
12.xd8 xd5 is Tiger's other sacrificial line,
which seems to give Black plenty of 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
compensation) 10...xd7 11.b1!? e5 5.f4 b5 6.d3
12.0-0 e7 'and White has some problems [ 6.e2 b4 can be seen in the archives in
d i s e n t a n g l i n g h i s p i e c e s ' . ( 12...h6 Nachev, S - Khismatullin, D ]
is also promising, I think )] [ 6.f3 allows Black the additional option of
9.f3 Apparently harmless. This is an ...b4 which was examined in 1-0 Slobodjan,
important juncture, for example, R - Azmaiparashvili, Z ]
[ 9.e6 f6 10.dxc5 dxc5 is a game from 6...b7 7.f3 d7
t h e b o o k t h e n 11.xb5!? is Rybka's [ 7...b4 has featured quite a lot recently here
suggestion, when c4! 12.exf7+ f8 13.f3 t o o a n d n o w 8.e2 f6 9.g3 0-0
b8 14.a7 cxd3 15.c6 is wild. ] ( 9...bd7 10.d2 a5 11.f5 gave White a
9...b8 10.e6 f6 11.dxc5 fxe6 12.0-0 0-0 dangerous initiative in Moiseenko, A
13.cxd6 (2715)-Komljenovic, D (2451) San
[ 13.e3 f5 14.xf5 gxf5 15.cxd6 exd6 Sebastian 2011) 10.d2 a5 11.f5 g4
is good for Black, because 16.a7 b4! 12.g5 c5 and now 13.f4 would've given
761
W hite a pleasant advantage in Xu Yuhua position has been reached. Black may have
(2484) -Li Chao2 (2619) Hefei 2010. ] two good Bishops and dynamic chances but
8.e5 h6 Svidler chooses a rare option here, White is still a pawn up and it's up to Black
possibly hoping for early complications to demonstrate adequate compensation in
[ 8...c5 9.e4 was covered in Smeets, J- this position - and that's easier said than
Siebrecht, S ] done! ]
[ 8...e6 has been covered in the notes 11...c7 Accurate play from Svidler
before and it does still seem that White is [ 11...0-0?! would be a mistake as now
better after 9.a4 b4 10.e4 so perhaps 8... 12.e6 is strong because of the nice line
Nh6 is the critical move in the line at this fxe6? 13.xh6! xf3 ( 13...xh6 14.c6!
time ] wins a piece) 14.xe6+ f7 15.xg7 xc5
9.e2 16.e3 xd3+ 17.cxd3 xg2 18.g1
[ 9.e4 hasn't scored well for White c8 White should be winning although there is
10.d3 0-0 11.0-0-0 c6 12.g5 b6 still some work to be done. ]
13.h4 d5 14.f3 b4 15.e2 a5 16.g3 12.e6!? an interesting try but it doesn't seem
a6 17.d2 c4 18.e1 f6 19.h3 a4 to lead to an advantage for White
20.b1 b3 21.cxb3 axb3 22.axb3 xe3 [ 12.e4 is worth a closer look although I
23.xe3 fxe5 24.fxe5 f5 25.xf5 xf5+ believe Black has good chances after xe4
26.c1 e6 27.g5 f7 28.h5 d3 13.xe4 xe5 14.0-0-0 0-0 and here if
29.e3 f5 30.hxg6 b1 31.d2 c2+ W hite is going to look for an advantage
32.e1 xg6 33.f2 a2 34.h5 xg2 either 15.b1 ( or 15.f4 should be
35.e2 xb2+ 0-1 Green, A (2203) - examined )]
Rowson, J (2591) Edinburgh SCO 2009 ] [ 12.0-0-0 is very likely to transpose to either
9...c5 the game or the above note after 0-0 ]
[ 9...b6 10.a4 b4 11.e4 was covered by 12...fxe6 13.0-0-0
Andrew Martin in Zufic, M-Nevednichy, V [ Given the way the game went perhaps
where Black didn't fully manage to solve White regretted not castling kingside 13.0-0
his opening problems ] g4 ( 13...0-0!? ) 14.e4 xe4 15.xe4
10.dxc5 dxe5N a critical new move which xb2 is very unclear ]
may go some way to rehabilitating the line for 13...f5 bringing the knight into the centre
Black [ 13...xc5 looks risky, for example 14.xc5
[ 10...xc5 11.xc5 dxc5 12.0-0-0 b6 xc5 15.e4 b6 ( 15...xe4 16.xe4
13.e4 xe4 14.xe4 0-0 15.d5 a7 0-0 17.xe6+ f7 18.h4 ) 16.d6+! ]
16.e3 fd8 17.g4 was good for White in [ 13...0-0 14.g5 causes problems for
Saric, I (2511) -Muse, M (2444) Sibenik Black ]
2008. ] 14.e4 very logical but things start to become
[ 10...0-0 was played in Suetin, A (2505) - quickly difficult for Adam
Sznapik, A (2325) Sochi 1974 but it doesn't [ 14.xf5!? exf5 15.d4 xd4 ( 15...f4+
seem to be as convincing as after 11.0-0-0 16.b1 xf3 17.f2! xd4 18.xd4 e5
Black doesn't have a better option than dxe5 19.xf3 looks promising for White) 16.xd4
here ( 11.e4!? also looks like a strong xc5 17.xf5 f4+ ( 17...gxf5 18.h5+
option for White )] f8 19.xf5+ g7 20.g5+ f8
11.fxe5 21.hf1+ wins ) 18.e3 and now Black
[ 11.0-0-0!? ] should swap Queens into a roughly level
[ 11.xe5! is Houdini's suggestion and endgame
indeed it will probably prove to be the acid A) 18...xf5? 19.hf1 c8 ( 19...h5
test of this line, for example xe5 ( 11...0-0 20.g4 ) 20.e5;
is likely to transpose) 12.fxe5 0-0 ( 12...f5 B) 18...xe3+ 19.xe3 0-0= ]
13.0-0 doesn't look convincing for Black [ 14.g5 is very dangerous and perhaps
either and I prefer W hite's chances after c r i t i c a l f o r e xa m p l e xc3 ( 14...xe3
c8!? 14.ae1! ) 13.0-0 when a critical 15.xe6 e5 16.xg7+ f7 17.xg6+
762
hxg6 18.xd7 c6 19.d2 xg7 20.e1 [ 22.g5 d4 23.h4 h6 ]

regains piece with edge) 15.xe6 e5 [ 22.he1 a5 23.c5 h8 ]
16.xf5 xb2+ 17.b1 f6 with huge 22...h8 23.he1?!
complications ( not 17...gxf5?? 18.h5#; [ 23.xf5 was the last chance to fight on but
17...xf5? or 18.c7+ )] Black is of course doing very well after xf5 ]
14...0-0 23...b6
[ 14...xe3 15.xe3 d5! also looks [ 23...a5 should also win quickly ]
promising for Black as after 16.h4 a5 24.d5 b4 25.xf5 this quickly leads to
Black's attack feels more dangerous ] mate but White is also lost after
15.b1 [ 25.e5 d6! 26.a5 ( 26.c5 xa4 )
[ 15.f2 d5 16.b1 would transpose to 26...xc4 ]
the following note ] 25...xa4 26.d4 xf5 27.d8+ f8
15...d5 16.a3? things go downhill from here - 28.xe7
Svidler quickly seizes the opportunity to play [ 28.xb6 a2+ 29.c1 h6+ 30.d2
a thematic b4 break and open up the a1# ]
Queenside 28...a2+ 29.c1 a1+ 30.d2 xb2+
[ 16.f2 was necessary here, although 31.e3 f2+ 32.e4 f4+ 33.d5 xd4+
White is basically having to find only moves 34.xd4 xd4# A fine game from Svidler
in order to survive a5 17.c4! ( 17.a3?! b4 who breathes new life into 8... Nh6, although
18.a4 b3! is strong for Black for example W h i t e p l a ye rs s h o u ld lo o k t o 1 1 . N e 5 a s
19.cxb3 xb3 20.c4 ab8; 17.b3 xe4 probably the best way to counter Svidler's
18.xe4 c3 ) 17...bxc4 18.xc4 ab8 novelty
19.xd5 incredibly this seems to end in a 0-1
d ra w b y f o rc e a f t e r ( 19.b3? loses to a
fantastic variation xb3+ 20.xb3 xb3
21.axb3 a1+ 22.c2 b2+ 23.d3 752 B06
xb3+ 24.d2 b4+ 25.c2 b8 Ibragimov,Ildar 2590
26.b1 a4+ 27.c1 h6+ 28.ed2 Zhelnin,Vladimir V 2490
a3+ 29.c2 a2+ 30.c3 g7+ Cup02 Moscow (8) 1998
31.d3 xc5+ 32.xc5 d8+ 33.e4 [Eric Prié]
d5+ 34.f4 h5! 35.g4 e5+ 36.xe5
xe5+ 37.xe5 xd2+ 38.e3 xe3 1.d4 d6 I know this is probably not the
39.e6+ f8 40.xe3 d4+ 41.f3 appropriate section but I feel "d-pawn
hxg4+; 19.d2 a3 ) 19...xb2! specials" players have a special approach to
( 19...xb2+ 20.xb2 xb2 21.xd7 the so-called "daring defences". So I wanted
and W hite has too much material for the to illustrate a part of my repertoire in this
Queen; 19...exd5 20.xd5+ h8 21.b3 update, profiting from the intimately linked
also seems to be better for White) 20.b3 themes presented in the previous games.
xb3 21.axb3 a1+ 22.c2 a2 23.xd7 2.f3!
d4+ 24.d1 a1+ 25.d2 a5+ [ 2.f4 is clearly inferior because of g6!
26.d1 a1+ 27.d2 a5+= ] And in this order of moves White will not be
16...ab8 and already White's position seems able to prevent a further advance of the
indefensible 17.f2 opposing e-pawn two squares against his
[ 17.c3 doesn't help at all after a5 18.f2 bishop. ]
b4 ] 2...d7 3.e4! g6 This game and the next
17...b4 18.a4 b3 19.c4 (supplementary) can be considered as
[ 19.c3 a5 ] introductory games. I will define everything,
19...xe4 20.xe4 xc5 Svidler calmly for instance what happens after 1...Nf6 2.Bf4
grabs a pawn and keeps an ongoing attack d6, 2...Nf6 and even 3...e5, in the next issue.
21.xc5 xc5 22.xe6+ other options are 4.c4! Would you believe this? I have found
no better 137 occurrences matching this position in my
763
database with still 73 games continuing g7? 14.fxe5 dxe5= Lalic, but 15.d4 0-0
And only 24 with 5.xf7+! I guess this is the 16.h3 h6 17.h4 Martin, looks
record for the shortest game in chess, with dangerous for Black to me.;
'sensible moves' from both protagonists. And A2) 12.g1 dxe5 13.h3 h6
although I remember I placed it in a rapid ( 13...gf6 14.xf6+ exf6 15.c6 f8= )
some years ago, I have forgotten where and 14.c6 f6 15.xd8+ xd8 16.xf6+
against whom, so I naturally picked up the exf6=;
most emblematic example, beginning with 1. A3) 12.d2 dxe5 13.c6 df6
d 4 a n d wi t h t h e s t r o n ge s t a ve r a g e E L O 14.xf6+ xf6=;
besides happily pushing Black to leave it at B) 11.e6 fxe6 12.eg5 f5! 13.e2
that! f8 with the idea of ...h6 and ...cxd4.;
[ 5.xf7+ xf7 6.g5+ e8 ( 6...f6 C) 11.exd6 f5! 12.f2 exd6 13.0-0
7.f3#+- ) 7.e6+- ] 0-0 14.dxc5 dxc5 15.xc5 xc5
1-0 16.xc5 xb2 17.b1 xd1 18.fxd1
fc8 19.d5 f6 Prospective Black
players should study this analysis carefully
753 B06 and decide whether this is the line for
Izoria,Zviad 2647 them. It may be the only way out. ]
Inarkiev,Ernesto 2602 10.dxc5!N A new move, after which it is
7th ch-Euro t/b (3.3) 16.04.2006 difficult to see a good continuation for Black.
[Andrew Martin] White logically opens the game, relying on his
better development to see him through. There
1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 d7 are plenty of alternatives:
5.f4 a6 6.f3 b5 7.d3 b7 8.e5 [ 10.d3 b4 11.xb7 xb7 12.e4 b8
A position which has been hotly debated since 13.xb7 xb7 14.e4 cxd4 15.xd4
the publication of ' Tiger's Modern, where the dxe5 16.fxe5 f8 17.c5 with a plus, Van
Danish GM more or less recommended Delft, M-Giddins, S/Amsterdam 2005. ]
Black's set up as the best way play against [ 10.e2 b4 11.xb7 xb7 12.d1 dxe5
the Austrian Attack. As usual in such sharp 13.dxe5 e6 14.f2 Krivec, J-Socko, M/
situations, Black's path to a good game has Athens 2004. ]
become narrower, as we will see in this game. [ 10.g5 b6 ( 10...b4 11.f3 b8
c5 12.xb7 xb7 13.e2 h6 14.xb7 xb7
[ 8...e6 was mentioned by Hiilerp Persson, 15.f3 cxd4 16.xd4 dxe5 17.fxe5 f6
but on the evidence of the following Hillerp Persson) 11.dxc5 dxc5 12.xc5
fragment, seems to lead to difficulties for xc5 13.xb7 d8 14.f3 b4 15.c6+
Black: 9.a4! b4 10.e4 b6 ( 10...xe4 xc6 16.xc6+ f8 17.a4 xa4
11.xe4 d5 12.d3 c5 13.dxc5 c7 18.xa4 h6 19.h4 xg5 20.hxg5 e6
14.e2! xc5 15.xc5 xc5 16.xa6 ) 21.d1 xd1+ 22.xd1 e7 23.e2 g7
11.d2 a5 12.b5+! By playing 24.b3 a8+- Pavasovic, D-Touzane, O/
straightforwardly, White has established a Leipzig 2002 ]
dominating position already. f8 13.e2 10...dxe5 11.xb7 xb7 12.d5!
e7 14.0-0 c6 15.xc6 xc6 16.c3 That's the main point! A favourable endgame
d7 17.fc1 bxc3 18.xc3 b4 19.b5 position emerges. xd5 13.xd5 0-0-0
4d5 20.c2 h6 21.ac1 g7 22.f5 [ 13...c8 14.b6 is very good for White. ]
exf5 23.xc7+- Morozevich, A- 14.0-0-0 e6 15.b6+ xb6 16.xd8+
Azmaiparashvili, Z/ Bugojno 1999 ] xd8 17.cxb6 exf4 18.xf4 c8 19.d1
9.e4 c8 f6 20.e5 g8 21.g5 Play has more or
[ 9...xe4 10.xe4 h6 is suggested in ' less been forced since 12 Qd5 and what a
Tiger's Modern, with the following analysis: cheerless position this is for Black. He's tied
A) 11.dxc5 g4! down on all fronts and if he comes too close
A1) 12.e2 dxe5 13.0-0-0 c7 to the advanced b pawn, the White Rook hits
764
the se ve nth ra nk. g4 22.xg7 xg7 gives Black the initiative, albeit at the cost
23.e4 e3 24.d6+ b8 25.d3 d5 of a pawn. I'm sure that this is a question
Black defends stubbornly with the very best of courage and judgement and that lots of
moves. 26.a3 xb6 27.xa6 d7 strong players would have captured that
[ 27...c4 28.xb5 b7 29.a7+! b6 pawn. ) 10...b6 11.c1 ( 11.xb4 )
30.a4 d6 31.a8 xb5 32.b8+ a5 11...b8 12.h6 a4 13.b3 h8?!
33.axb5 may have been the best chance, 14.h4?! ( 14.xf8 xf8 15.h4 This is such
but most unpalatable. ] a weird game.) 14...c5 15.h5 cxd4 16.hxg6
28.xb5 g5 29.a7 e5 30.a4 What can fxg6 17.xf8 xf8 18.c4+ e6 19.e2
one say apart from ' the extra pawn must win'? b6 20.d3 e5 21.g3 e6 22.g5 e8
g6 31.a5 c6 32.a6 e7 33.b6++- 23.h4 xf3 24.g1 h5 25.gxh6 h7
a8 34.c7+ a7 35.b5+ a8 36.a6 26.f1 c4 27.e2 xe2 28.xe2 f6
d5 37.b7 g8 38.a7+ b8 39.b7+ 29.fd2 e3 30.f3 xb3 31.axb3 b7
a8 40.c4 c8 41.a7+ b8 42.a8+ 1/2-1/2 Alvarado, N-Nisipeanu, L/It Resort
xa8 43.b3 c6 It is safe to say that Black and Casino, Decameron DOM 2003 I gave
chances in this line rely on Hillerp Persson's up trying to forecast the moves long ago.
suggestion at move 9. The result is even stranger. Isn't White still
1-0 clearly better after 32 Ng5+? I think the
overall quality of the variation with 6 0-0-0
is upheld by 7 Kb1 rather than 7 h4. ]
754 B06 7...a5 8.b1 b6 9.d3 h5! Key. Black
Janev,Evgeni 2420 halts the ambitious intentions of the h pawn
Todorov,Todor 2470 and prepares the entry of the King's Knight
BC Masters Bois Colombes (5) 2003 into the game. Now I start to like Black's
[Andrew Martin] flexibility. 10.h3
[ 10.ce2 xd2 11.xd2 f6 12.f3 0-0= ]
The battle-hardened Modern player will love 10...f6 11.f3 A bit routine. Once again we
this game. W hite sets out to give Black a co m e d o wn t o 'b o t t le ' (E n glish sla n g f o r
good thrashing, but his aggression is coolly courage). Todorov talks his opponent out of
rebuffed and in the end the counterattack the central advance.
triumphs. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 [ Thus 11.e5 is critical: fd5 ( 11...g4
4.e3 c6 5.d2 Seems that everyone plays probably what Black would have played.
this way these days. What is wrong with the 12.exd6 exd6 13.f4 0-0 14.xd6 d8
original recipe of delaying ...Nf6 for as long as 15.f4 b4 16.e2 e6 ) 12.xd5 xd2
possible? b5 6.0-0-0 I'm pretty that either 6 13.c7+ d8 14.xd2 xc7 15.g5 f8
Bd3 or 6 Nf3 are more dangerous for Black. 16.f4 d5 17.g3 ]
The text move reveals W hite's hand a little 11...xh3 12.xh3 fd7 13.f4 b4 14.e2
too quickly. d7 The Knight could well be on c5! This position would be a good example of
th e way t o c 4 ! 7.h4 As Black isn't remotely a n id e a l B l a ck p i e ce p l a ce m e n t . 15.dxc5
intending to castle I suppose 7 h4 can be seen xc5 16.d4 e5 17.fxe5 dxe5 18.xc5
as the beginning of 'space-gaining' operation. [ After 18.f2 h6 19.e1 c8 20.f3 0-0
I guess after 6 0-0-0 White hasn't really got Black has a very nice position indeed. ]
anything else to do that is the truth of the 18...xc5 19.c1 0-0 Finally. Now White
matter. has an uphill struggle to prove equality. Black
[ Possibly 7.b1! is superior. This small has the attacking plan of launching his a pawn
safety move will have to be played anyway- all the way to a3 whereas White will have to
White may as well see another move from defend for a while. Psychologically, Janev
Black before he further commits himself. b4 seems unable to cope with the thought of
( 7...b8!? intending ...Nb6-c4 is defence. 20.e2 d7 After ... Nd7-f6 Black
interesting.) 8.ce2 gf6 9.f3 0-0 10.g4 would have a clamp so.... 21.g4 But of course
( 10.xb4 b8 11.a3 b6 12.f4 c7 this is another concession. hxg4 22.xg4
765
f6 23.f3 h5! White can shift this Knight e6 a s a re su lt . Th is is th e clo sest ye t t o
but then ...Nf4 advances to an even more Thompson's original Hippopotamus concept.
powerful square. 24.e2 a5 Well-prepared. Of course Black is showing discretion
25.g3 f4 26.h2 a4 27.h5 a3 28.hxg6 because White's attacking possibilities have
[ T h e r e i s l i t t l e h o p e a f t e r 28.h6 been limited by his quieter approach. 7.g5?!
Black's attack is immediate: f6 29.h7+ Although a GM, Janosevic does not seem to
h8 30.e2 axb2 31.xf4 ( 31.hh1 understand what Black is trying to do. 7 Bg5
c6! 32.hf1 e6!-+ ) 31...exf4 32.xf4 presents Suttles with a valuable tempo!
e5 33.d2 xa2-+ ] [ 7.e1 c7 ( 7...f6 8.d5 f7 9.d4
28...fxg6 29.b3 highlights a possible drawback to Black's set-
[ 29.e2 fd8! 30.xd8+ xd8 31.b3+ up. One must watch the e6 square very
f8 32.h1 axb2 33.xb2 d2 ] caref ully indeed!) 8.a4 0-0 ( 8...e5
29...d5! All the tactics run in Black's favour seems very reasonable; as does 8...a5 ) 9.h3
here: 30.f5? Desperate. Maybe he was h8 10.c4 e5 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.e3 f5
short of time. 13.g5
[ 30.g4 appears to give more play but A) 13...f7! l o o k s b e t t e r : 14.e7
Black's attack is winning: c3+ 31.a1 ( 14.exf5 gxf5 15.e7 e8 16.g5
xd1 32.c4+ f7 33.xg6 d4+ 34.c3 xg5 17.xg5 f6 ) 14...e8 15.g5
xc3+ 35.b1 f3!-+ ] ( 15.a3 b6 16.b3 e6 17.xe6
30...c3+ 31.c1 xa2+ 32.d2 ad8 xe6 18.e2 d8 ) 15...xg5 16.xg5
33.e1 I guess that 6 0-0-0 is playable but I c5;
feel that Black can be encouraged if he sees B) 13...f4 14.e7 e8 15.d6 xd6
this move on the board. Now he has 16.xd6 f6 17.ed1 g7 18.a5 f7
something to aim at! The 4 Be3 system is not 19.a3 g5 20.d2 f8 21.a6 b6
so one-paced and White players should prefer was perhaps a little better for W hite in
the more elastic 6 Bd3 or, best of all, 6 Nf3! Jimenez Zerquera, E-Suttles, D/ Palma de
0-1 Mallorca 1970/IZT ]
[ Meanwhile 7.d2?! He wants to play Qc1
evading ...Ng4. e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.h3
755 B06 Motwani, P-Bischoff, K/Groningen 1980 and
Janosevic,Dragoljub now the immediate e7 ( 9...f6!? 10.c1
Suttles,Duncan f7 ) 10.c1 g8 11.d1 gf6
Belgrade (2) 1969 is reasonable for Black, although he has not
[Andrew Martin] been able to carry out his main idea ]
7...f6 8.e3 0-0 9.d5 f5?! One can only say
Let's take a look now at an obscure scheme that such situations present the vast majority
devised by Canadian Grandmaster Duncan of Black players with an excellent opportunity
Suttles, which as far as I know is unrefuted to to win the game. W hite is having to make
this day. There is no shame in studying and critical decisions all the time and he may well
restudying old games. They shape the g o w r o n g ( a s J a n o s e v i c d o e s h e r e ) .
present. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.f3 d6 Objectively, Black's whole idea looks dubious
4.c3 c6 5.e2 d7 6.0-0 h6!? to me, but it will always be a practical choice
This is the introductory move. Black intends ... and as such, deserves a goodlook
f7-f6 and ...Nh6-f7 and later he will expand in [ Instead 9...f7 10.d4 b8 11.d2 c5
the centre with either ...f6-f5! or ..e7-e5. Note 12.e6 xe6 13.dxe6 e5 14.f4
the timing of 6. .. Nh6. Suttles waited until is poor for Black. ]
White castled thus rendering h2-h4 unplayable. [ 9...c5! but 10.h3 f5 is the way to go if
But I'll try to show 6 a4 Nh6 is also possible, Black want to play ....f5. he cuts the Knight
allowing the dangerous 7 h4. f7 is a very good out of d4. ]
s qu a re f o r t h e K n igh t in su c h p o sit i o n s , 10.d4
cutting out Ng5 by White, indirectly defending [ 10.dxc6! bxc6 11.d4 e5 12.xc6
766
xc6 13.d5+ f7 14.xc6 d7 15.d5 That's what it's ultimately all about.
c7 gives Black compensation how much is 0-1
difficult to say. ]
10...xd4! Suttles was never dogmatic. If a
move had to be played, so be it! The point of 756 B06
10...Bxd4 is to try to shut down White's-light Jansa,Vlastimil 2500
squared Bishop and create an outpost on e5 Joksic,Sinisa 2340
for a Knight. 11.xd4 ch-Euro Seniors (7) 16.09.2004
[ 11.xd4 c5 12.e3 f4 13.d2 e5 [Andrew Martin]
14.c1 g5 ]
11...f4 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.c4+?! This is how to deal with the Hippopotamus.
[ 13.c4+ 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 d7
A) 13...g7 14.xc6 fxe3 15.xa8 b6 5.f3 a6 6.d2 The 150 Attack has filtered
( 15...exf2+ 16.h1 ) 16.d5 exf2+ t h r o u g h e v e n t o v e t e r a n J a n s a . h6!?
17.h1 xb2 18.b3; Certainly stops Be3-h6 for quite some time,
B) 13...f7 14.xc6 b8 15.c1 f3 although Bxh6 might be a possibility later.
may or may not be OK for Black the point W hite's approach shows great experience.
is that it is frightening for White to face at When confronted with slow, confusing moves
t h e b o a r d . ( 15...b6!? 16.b5 e5 such as 6...h7-h6 he does not overreact.
17.b3+ h8 ) 16.gxf3 de5 17.a4 Instead White builds his position and tries to
h3 18.d1 ] prevent his opponent from finding an active
13...f7 14.xf4 White has been suitably plan. 7.h3 Not at all in the same category as
confused. 6...h6. Later on W hite knows that to deny
[ but 14.c1 b6 15.b3 a6 16.e1 c5 Black g4 will be very useful indeed. e6 8.d3
is quite OK for Black. ] e7 9.0-0 g5?! Having come this far Black
14...e5 Obviously, Black now has serious feels he should be doing something and ...
counterplay. 15.xd6 exf4 16.ad1 g5 Ne7-g6 is the only idea he can see. Maybe
[ 16...f3 looks very dangerous. ] just ...b7-b6 was indicated, with the usual
17.xf7+ xf7 18.xc6 f3 19.g3 b6 rubbishy position which is difficult to assault.
20.d5 d7 21.d6 c4 When given the 10.ad1! I like this move very much
opportunity to do so, Black hits very hard in prophylactic development against a future
fact he keeps pounding away until Janosevic central pawn break. Added to which the Rook
falls over!. 22.b4 c8 23.b3 e5 24.e3 can be very useful in the centre, whether
h6 Something has got to give around the Black tries to go active or not. c6 11.h2!
W hite King. 25.d5 g4 26.xg4 xg4 Centralisation preceded the idea of f2-f4!
With the idea of ...Qh3. 27.h4 xc2 28.fd1 which ...g6-g5 only encouraged. I really don't
c8 29.e5 like Black's position at all. e5 12.dxe5
[ 29.d8+ f8! 30.xc8 xc8 31.c4+ Now the Rd1 is very useful. dxe5
h8 32.d4+ g7 33.xg7+ xg7 [ 12...xe5 13.e2 leaves the d6 pawn
34.c1 e6 35.c7+ f7 ] hanging. ]
29...e6 30.d8+ xd8 31.xd8+ g7 13.c4 c7 14.a4 g6 15.e2
32.c3 h5 33.f1 f5 A nice square, It could almost be a normal Modern position,
threatening simultaneously ...Qh3 and ...Qb1+. but not quite, thanks to that horrible pawn on
W h it e c a n n o t st o p b o t h . 34.d6 b1+ g5,weakening the light squares. W hite is
I cannot state that this particular idea is 100% much better. 0-0?
sound but it is certainly an interesting addition [ He just has to try and hang on, with
to Black's armoury in the classical Modern. A something like, say, 15...b5 16.b3 f6
murky position was all that a talented player 17.g3 d7 18.d6 xd6 19.xd6
like Suttles needed to try and win the game The queens have bee n exchange d an d
and crucially, to ENJOY the game of chess. there is the chance of salvation, although
White remains with a substantial edge. ]
767
16.g3 e8 17.g4 f6 18.xf6+ xf6 Black stands well enough. ]
19.a5! Fairly merciless. Black is being 7...c5 8.e1
squeezed on both sides. g4? You can sense [ Tiger analyses 8.dxc5!? dxc5 ( 8...xc5
he wants to end it all, one way or another. 9.d4 ) 9.a4 b4 10.e2 gf6 11.e5 d5
Elderly players cannot stand the tension for 12.e4 xe3 13.fxe3 b8 14.e6 fxe6
too long. 15.g5 e5 unclear. ]
[ 19...f4 would certainly have been tried by [ Hillarp-Persson gives 8.a4 '?!' b4 9.e2
a younger, more combative opponent, but it cxd4 10.exd4 b7 11.d2 gf6
is doubtful whether Black's problems are 12.xb4 b8 and 'Black will get the pawn
solved: 20.b6! e7 ( 20...b8 21.e3 back'. Then
g7 22.b3 e6 23.xe6 xe6 A) 13.g5!? h6! 14.de6 ( 14.gf3
24.d7 ) 21.c3 e6 22.d2 g4 23.hxg4 xe4 15.a3 xf3 16.xf3 d5 17.c3
xg4 24.c5! c7 25.d6 c8 26.b3 ] xe3 18.fxe3 b6= ) 14...fxe6 15.xe6
20.b6 e7 21.xh6 g7?? Collapse. c8 16.b3 h5=;
[ 21...f4 22.h5 xh5 23.xh5 gxh3 B) 13.c4! c8! ( 13...0-0 14.c6 xc6
24.c5! finishes the job rather nicely. ] 15.xc6 xb2 16.d4 b8 17.xa6 )
22.xg6 f8 23.h7 gxh3 24.h5 14.g5 ( 14.xc8+ xc8 15.d2 g4 )
I think this is just a superb performance by 14...xc4 15.xc4 e5 16.b3 xe4
White. It's not at all easy to find the way to 17.xe4 xe4 18.f3 b7= . These lines
crack Black's three rank position, but here are marginal, however, and Black may
Jansa encouraged Joksic to self-destruct by want to try a different move order. ]
simple centralisation and the active plan of f2- 8...b7 9.a4 b4 A lot of these Tiger's Modern
f4.Just the thought of f2-f4 seemed to be lines look the same but have slight differences.
enough. Here the a4/...b4 trade off is normal. 10.e2
1-0 cxd4
[ Or 10...gf6!? with the idea 11.g3 g4 ]
11.xd4
757 B06 [ 11.fxd4 gf6 12.f3 d5 13.d2 dxe4
Jovanovic,Zoran2 2557 14.fxe4 a5= ]
Skoberne,Jure 2436 11...gf6 12.g3 0-0 13.a5 e5!?
12th HIT Open A (9) 01.02.2007 [ A solid line is 13...c5 14.d2 b8 ]
[John Watson] 14.e3 d5 Having said 'A'... 15.g5
[ Possible is 15.d2!? b3!? 16.exd5 bxc2
1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.e3 a6 17.xc2 xd5 18.b3 c5! 19.xe5 e8
5.f3 b5 6.d3 d7 20.f4 xb3 21.xb3 b8
[ Tiger prefers the order 6...b7 ] with compensation in the form of the two
7.0-0 bishops and activity. ]
[ Because here he's a little worried about 15...c7 16.exd5 xd5 17.xf6?! xf6?!
7.d5 . There might follow b7 8.d4 e5!? [ B l a c k s t a n d s b e t t e r a f t e r 17...xf6!
A) 9.a4! c5 ( 9...b4? 10.a2! c5 18.xe5 h5! 19.xg6!? ( 19.xh5 xe5
11.dxc6 xc6 12.xc6 xc6 13.xb4 20.g3 xb2 ) 19...f4! ]
b7 14.c3 f6 15.f3; 9...c6 ) 10.dxc6 18.e4 xe4 19.xe4 e7 20.d2 ad8
xc6 21.e2
A1) 11.e2! xd4 ( 11...b4 12.d5 [ 21.h6 f6 ]
f6 13.xc6 xc6 14.b6 ) 12.xd4 21...c6 22.ed2 f6
f8! 13.axb5 axb5 14.xb5; [ 22...xc2!? ]
A2) 11.xc6 xc6 12.axb5 xc3+ 23.d4 exd4 24.xe7 xc2 25.f3
13.bxc3 axb5 14.0-0 xa1 15.xa1 [ 25.xb4 e5 26.ac1 f5 27.c7 f7
f6 16.f3 0-0; 28.xf7 xf7 at least equal. ]
B) 9.0-0 c5 10.dxc6 xc6 , an odd sort 25...d3 26.ac1 xb2 With an two extra
of Sicilia n ('Dragod orf ' like! ) in which pawns and an advanced passed one, the rest
768
is pretty clear: 27.c7 d2 28.f1 fe8 m o s t c r i t i c a l m o v e 12.e6!? ( 12.c3

29.xd7 xe7 30.xd8+ f7 31.xd2 a3 may keep a slight edge but Black is doing
32.d4 c3 33.f3 b3 34.b1 b7 OK after bxc3 13.bxc3 b6 ) 12...f5
35.db2 xa5 36.d2 c3 37.h3 a5 13.exd7 ( 13.eg5! deserves more
38.xb3 xb3 39.xb3 a4 40.c1 a3 attention here, for example b6 14.h4
41.a2 c2 42.b7+ e8 43.b4 b1+ and the knight on h6 is rather strangely
0-1 placed. Still after d5 the position remains
tense. ) 13...fxe4 14.xe4 xe4 15.xe4
xd7 and Black has almost equalised ]
758 B06 12.dxc5
Kanep,M 2512 [ 12.e6!? is also very interesting. Black has a
Iturrizaga,E 2650 few options here:
11th Gibraltar Masters (6.11) 27.01.2013 A) 12...f5 13.xd6! xf3 ( 13...exd6?
[Tom Rendle] 14.e7 ) 14.xf3 xd4+ 15.h1 b6
16.c4 is somewhat better for White
1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 a lt h o u gh t h e p o sit io n is ve ry u n c le a r
b5 6.d3 b7 7.0-0 here.;
[ 7.e5 is also critical and led to a quick win B) 12...fxe6?! 13.eg5
for White in the archives in Beliavsky-Hickl is very unpleasant for Black;
but Black's play can definitely be improved C) 12...d5! may be best and perhaps
upon: d7 8.g5 and now Motwani's t h i s w a s I t u r r i z a g a ' s i d e a ? 13.eg5
suggestion of e6 looks sensible for example ( 13.exd7?! c4 14.e2 xe4 15.xc4
( 8...h6 9.e6 f8 may also be playable d5! and Black is better) 13...f6 14.xh7
although I prefer W hite's chances after xh7 15.exd7 xd7 with an unclear
10.exf7+ xf7 11.xf7 xf7 12.e4 ) m i d d l e g a m e ( 15...c4!? 16.e4 xe4
9.d5 exd5 10.e6 e7 11.e2 fxe6 17.xe4 xd7 )]
12.xe6 c5! and the position is a complete 12...dxc5?! This feels like the wrong recapture
mess. ] to me
7...d7 8.e5 h6 [ 12...xc5 is better, swapping the inactive
[ instead 8...c5 is analysed by John Watson knight on d7 for White's well placed one on
in Kulicov-Gelashvili and he gives 9.e4 e4 13.xc5 dxc5 14.e3 and White's
as an alternative to exd6 which was played edge is small at best. ]
i n t h e g a m e . H i s l i n e c o n t i n u e s xe4 13.a5 d5 14.e2 c7 15.b3?! This is a
10.xe4 cxd4 11.exd6 gf6 12.dxe7 little slow
xe7 13.xf6+ xf6 and now I like his [ 15.c4! leads to comfortable White
s u g g e s t i o n o f 14.e1! ( 14.xd4 0-0 advan tage in all lin es, f or example c6
15.e1 b7 is not so clear) 14...e4 ( 15...e6 16.d6; 15...xc4 16.xc4 b7
15.d3 f5 and here 16.g5! 17.e1 ) 16.xd5 xd5 17.d1 c6
is very awkward for Black, e.g. 0-0 17.d2 18.c4 and White has control over the
ac8 18.xe4 fxe4 19.xe4 c5 20.c1 centre and c5 is going to be a long-term
and Black is struggling to prove enough weakness for Black. ]
compensation for the pawn ] 15...f6!?
9.a4 b4 10.e4 0-0 [ 15...f5 16.b2 e6 is more solid but I
[ 10...c5 11.c3 cxd4 12.cxd4 0-0 13.a5 suppose Iturrizaga was looking to
dxe5 14.dxe5 c8 15.b3 and White has complicate the game ]
a nice edge in Stefanova, A (2535)-Arun, K 16.c4 e6 17.exf6 xf6 18.eg5 e4!
(2291) Paleohora 2009 ] 19.xd5?! A mistake that hands the initiative
11.e1 c5 over to Black
[ 11...a5 is Black's other option as this point [ 19.xe6! wa s b e t t e r a n d a f t e r xe6
and now in Baklan, V (2612)-Grimberg, B 20.xe4 xc4 21.xc4+ h8 22.b1
(2357) Deizisau 2012 W hite played the xa5 23.e3 White has marginally the
769
better chances here ] with c3 to bolster the White centre but it's just
19...exd5 20.e6 f7 21.xg7 too slow as it allows Black to finish
[ 21.xf8? not xa1 and the knight is
development and get an easy game.
trapped on f8 ] [ 9.0-0 h6! was played in an important
21...xg7 22.d2 f5 23.d3 fd8 24.g4 game last year by Tiger Hillarp Persson, the
A risky move which later causes problems for main advocate of this line for Black.
Kanep. A) 10.exd6 exd6 11.f5! must be critical -
[ 24.e5 was safer ] Black is OK after 0-0 ( not 11...xf5?
24...h6 12.xf5 gxf5 13.e1+ f8 14.f4
[ 24...c4!? 25.bxc4 a7+ 26.h1 xd2 and Black is in serious trouble) 12.fxg6
27.xd2 e3! was a promising alternative hxg6 13.g5 f6 but I'd still rather be
for Black. ] White after 14.d5!;
25.h3 f7 26.ad1 f6 27.c1 ac8 B) 10.h1 0-0 11.e3 b4 12.e2 c7
28.e3 c6 29.c1 f6 30.e313.g3 cxd4 ( 13...g4!? 14.g1 cxd4
Black repeats the po sition once b ut he's 15.exd6 xd6 16.xd4 c5
obviously not interested in a draw here as he is also about equal) 14.xd4?! ( 14.exd6
xd6 15.xd4 should've been preferred,
h a s m u c h t h e b e t t e r p o s i t i o n . h5!?
A risky decision that quickly pays off as White with a balanced middlegame.) 14...dxe5
is unable to find the best moves in this tricky 15.c6 f6 16.xb8 hg4!? 17.f3
position 31.d2? After this White's position xe3 18.xe3 g4 19.f3 exf4
quickly collapses 20.xf4 e5 21.f3 xb8 and Black
[ 31.gxh5 is a little ugly but it should be tried.had a pawn and excellent play in return for
At lea st no w Bla ck's kin g com es un de r the exchange and went on to win 22.ae1
attack as well: f5! ( 31...gxh5 32.h2 xb2 23.b1 e5 24.c3 a5 25.cxb4
h8 33.g1 and White might even be axb4 26.a3 xg3 27.hxg3 e5 28.fc1
b e t t e r h e r e) 32.hxg6 xg6+ 33.g5! h5+ 29.g1 a6 0-1 Arvola, B (2358)-
and things aren't so clear anymore ] Hillarp Persson, T (2517) Oslo NOR
31...hxg4 32.hxg4?! 2013 ]
[ 32.xe4 was more stubborn but after dxe4 9...h6
33.e2 xd1 34.xd1 gxh3 35.c4 c6 [ 9...c7 also looks fine for Black ]
Black should be able to win in the long run if
10.c3 cxd4 11.cxd4
he can bring the knight on f7 into the game. [ 11.exd4 is a little more testing but then
( 35...f5 36.h2! )] wh y p l a y 1 0 . c3 ? B l a ck is O K a f t e r b7
32...h4! Suddenly it's all over 33.e2 g3+ 12.xb7 xb7 13.exd6 b6! 14.0-0
34.h1 g7 35.g1 h3+ White faces ( 14.dxe7?! xe7+ 15.f2 g4+ 16.g3
mate or the loss of at least a queen. f6 and Black has more than enough for
0-1 just one pawn. ) 14...xd6 ]
11...e6 12.0-0 b6 13.h3 f5 14.h2 b7
15.xb7 xb7 Karjakin's opening has been
759 B06 surprisingly unambitious and as a result Black
Karjakin,Sergey 2772 has at least equalised and Kamsky starts to
Kamsky,G 2714 press for an advantage. 16.g3
21st TCh-RUS 2014 (6.1) 12.04.2014 [ 16.g4!? e7 17.d2 h5 is a pawn for
[Tom Rendle] W hite but maybe the position is OK after
18.gxh5 xh5 19.g3 h8 20.c1 ]
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 16...xg3 17.xg3 The king is oddly placed
b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5 on g3 but with the centre solid enough the
[ 7...b7 8.e2!? is unpleasant for Black - ki n g i s f a i r ly s a f e f o r n o w. S t i ll , B la c k ' s
see Svidler-Lobron from the archives ] chances are preferable here as he has no
8.e4 b8 9.e2?! An odd novelty from weaknesses b6 18.e2 0-0 19.g5 dxe5
Karjakin - the idea seems to be to follow up 20.dxe5 d5 21.d2 fc8 22.ac1 f8
770
23.e4 e7 24.e3 56.e4+ f5 57.g3+ f4 58.f1 g4

[ 24.h2! makes a lot of sense I'm not sure 59.xa5 f3?? The knight was needed to
how Black makes progress here ] defend the White pawns
24...xc1 25.xc1 c8 26.d1?! [ 59...d7 wins, for example 60.xb4 g3
[ 26.xc8+ xc8 27.f3 should be OK for 61.xg3 xg3 62.a5 e5 63.a6 b8!
W hite as it's hard for Black to make 64.b5 ( 64.a7 c6+ ) 64...xa6 65.xa6
p r o g r e s s h e r e , e s p e c ia l ly s i n c e W h i t e e4 66.b4 e3 67.b5 e2 68.b6 e1 69.b7
currently has all the entry squares covered b4 with an easily won ending for Black. ]
on the c-file and after xe3?! 28.xe3 c2 60.xb4 d2 61.a5
29.d2! it's Black that has to be slightly [ amazingly 61.g3! also holds a draw after
more careful as White's centralised king is xg3 62.a5 f4 63.a6 g3 64.a7 g2
suddenly to his advantage! ] 65.a8 g1 66.b8+ f5 67.f8+ e4
26...c4 27.d4 c7 28.b3 c2 29.d2 68.a8+ d3 69.a6+ c2 70.c6+
c1 30.d1?! White tries to force a draw by b1 71.xe6 ]
repetition but Kamsky finds a nice tactic to win 61...xf1 62.a6 e3 63.a7 d5+ 64.c5
a pawn here f5! c7 65.c6 a8 66.b7 White is just in
[ 30...a3 is also clearly better for Black ] time to force the draw g3 67.xa8 g2
31.f2 68.b7 g1 69.a8 g2+ 70.b8 xa8+
[ 31.xc1 xc1 32.d2 xd2 33.xd2 71.xa8 e5 72.b4 d5 73.b7 e5
a3 34.f3 c1 35.e3 g5! 74.b5 e4 75.b6 e3 76.a8 e2 77.b7 e1
offers excellent winning chances for Black ] 78.b8
31...h4+! The start of a nice forcing line ½-½
32.xh4
[ 32.h2?! xf2 33.xf2 xf4 34.f3
xd1 35.xd1 d5 should be winning in 760 B06
the long run for Black ] Karjakin,Sergey
32...xf4 33.f3 d8+ 34.g3 xd1 Kotsur,Pavel
35.xd1 xd4 36.xd4 e2+ 37.f3 Kallithea 2002
xd4+ 38.e3 c6 The dust has settled [Andrew Martin]
and Black is a clear pawn ahead - but with
Karjakin's king the more active it's not at all 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.e5
clear if this is winning or not for Black. 39.d3 h5 It was David Norwood who tried to
a5 40.a4 b4 popularise this move order here in England.
[ possibly 40...bxa4 41.bxa4 f7 By leaving the Bishop at home on f8 Black is
is more accurate but this is a tough su p p o s e d t o ga in t im e la t e r o n wh e n h e
judgement call to make right at the time eventually gets around to ...c6-c5. So 3...c6
control ] can be seen as an attempt to reduce the
41.f4 h6 42.h4 f7 43.c5 e7 44.b7 power of the Austrian Attack. I personally
f8 45.c5 f7 46.b7 e7 47.c5 believe that Black achieves nothing from this
d8 48.g4?! move-order nuance what he gains on the
[ 48.e3 g5 49.h5! is a better defensive swings of the Austrian Attack he loses on the
try ] roundabouts of the Classical Variation, the
48...fxg4 49.xg4 f7 50.f4 g5+! line with an early Be3 and others .He gets
51.hxg5 hxg5+ 52.e4 Kamsky has shunted into positions where a quick ...c6 isn't
managed to make the most of his position and the best option. 6.f3 h6 7.e3 b6!?
now it seems to be winning for Black Quite a n in te resting ide a which K arja kin
[ 52.g4 xe5+ 53.xg5 c6 54.f4 criticizes in his annotations but isn't really
d6 55.e4+ d5 is winning for Black ] that bad. Positionally, Black tempts the white
52...d8 53.d3 c6 54.c4 xe5+ Knight to go to the edge of the board and
55.b5! Karjakin goes for the queenside retains balance in his position. Kotsur only
p a wn s a s t h e o n l y p r a c t i c a l c h a n c e f6 goes wrong later. 8.a4 a5+ 9.c3 g4
771
10.c5 c7? Here's the loss of time which such as 0-0,Rae1-e2, Rfe1 comes to mind
costs Black the game. It is very important that and if Black takes on e5 then the Rook on h6
he pla ys .. .e 7-e 6 a s soo n as possible t o will have to withdraw leaving g6 exposed. d7
stabilise the position. 18.d3
[ 10...f5 11.f2 e6! That's what I mean! [ 18.xg6? f6 ]
12.b3 ( 12.d3 d7 13.e2 c7 18...g7
14.0-0 c5 15.d2 e7 16.fc1 0-0 17.h3 [ 18...xe5 19.fxe5 0-0-0 20.0-0 ]
xf3 18.xf3 c4= 19.e1 h4 20.g4 19.0-0 xe5 20.fxe5 f8 21.a4!
g7 21.f3 h8 22.b3 b6 23.e1 Preparing a hot reception for the Black King
d8 24.d2 1/2-1/2 Jaracz,P-Urban,K/ should he venture to the queenside. And look
Plock 2000/CBM 78 (24); 12.xb7 b6 ) at that Rook on h6! c5 22.b3 In his revealing
12...b6 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 h4 15.d3 notes, Karjakin mentions an unusual
d7 16.0-0 e7 17.ab1 f8 18.d2 combinational possibility :
g7 19.e2 a5 ( 19...c5 is somewhat [ 22.xh4!!
better. ) 20.b4 c7 21.f3 b5 22.a4 a6 A) 22...xh4 23.b5+ d7 ( 23...d8
23.axb5 axb5 24.a1 b7 25.fc1 xa1 24.xh4 ) 24.xg6+ f8 25.xe6+-;
26.xa1 a8 27.xa8 xa8 28.xf5 gxf5 B) 22...c4 23.g5 cxd3 24.xh6 xh6
29.e1 h8 30.xh4 xh4 31.xh4 h6 25.xf8+! xf8 26.xg6 f5 27.f1
32.g3+ f8 33.f3 b6 34.g5 h5 d7 28.xf5+ exf5 29.e6 e8
35.e1 a4 36.h2 e8 37.g3 e7 30.h7!!+-;
38.d2 e8 39.f3 g6+ 40.h2 h5 C) 22...xh4 23.f4! h8 24.f7+ d7
41.e1 h4 42.d3 e7 43.c1 f8 25.b5+ c8 26.g7+- That would have
44.b3 e8 45.a5 d7 46.e3 c7 been very nice but after 22 b3 ,White is
47.g3 xg3+ 48.xg3 xc3 49.h4 d7 still overwhelmingly better. ]
50.h5 e8 51.xc6 f8 52.f3 g7 22...cxd4 23.cxd4 c3 24.d1 xd4
53.g4 fxg4+ 54.xg4 f5+ 55.g5 e4+ [ 24...c8 25.a6 c7 26.c1 xc1
56.h4 d2 57.g3 h6 58.d8 xh5 27.xc1 xc1 28.xc1 d7 29.c8+ d8
59.xe6 b3 60.f3 a1 61.c7 c2 30.c6 shows the extent of Black's plight,
62.e6 xd4+ 63.g3 c6 64.xd5 g6 who hardly has a decent move. ]
65.h4 g7 66.h5 d4 67.e7 f7 25.c1! b2 26.e3 h8 27.f2 xb3
68.g5 e6+ 69.xf5 g7+ 70.e5 28.xd4+- xd1+ 29.xd1 c8 30.df1
e8 71.f5 g7 72.c7 1-0 Luther,T- g8 31.xf8+ The Gurganidze System where
Gurevich,M/Cappelle la Grande 1998 ] Black plays for a light-squared blockade, is
11.h3 f5 12.f2 xf3 13.xf3 b6 very playable against the Austrian, with or
14.d3!N without an early ...Bg7. But, as graphically
[ 14.b3 h4 15.d3 e6 16.0-0 b7 demonstrated here, accuracy is required!
17.e2 a5 18.d2 e7 19.f3 c8 1-0
20.fc1 a6 21.c4 c7 22.b3 f8
23.c2 g7 24.e1 d8 25.c1 a4
26.bxa4 xa4 27.b1 dxc4 28.xc4 d5 761 B06
29.b3 1/2-1/2 Bologan,V-Badea,B/Sovata Kasimdzhanov,Rustam 2679
1999 ] Alber,Horst 2357
14...h4 15.e6! The world's youngest 15th Ordix Open rapid (3) 02.08.2008
Grandmaster is very fearless and 15 e6 is [John Watson]
indeed an excellent move. With this inspired
pawn sacrifice White cuts the Black position 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6
into two separate halves. Of course if Black Tiger Hillarp-Persson's system. The theory in
were allowed to play ... e7-e6 himself we his book is still well ahead of the practice.
would have reached a normal position. Now 5.f3 b5 6.d3 b7 Hillarp-Persson queries
Kotsur struggles. fxe6 16.g4 h6 17.e5 this move, preferring 6...Nd7 of the next game.
White has plenty of time to build up-a scheme 7.e2! f6 This is an innovation, and tries to
772
improve upon looking move to molest the queen with Na3-b5

[ 7...d7 8.e5!? ( or 8.e3! , when Tiger has been neglected in the past but is due for
gives b4 9.d1 gf6! as best, although he a resurgence of interest.
played 8...c5 9 dxc5! Nxc5 10 Bxc5 Bxc3+! [ There are plenty of alternatives: 8.a4+
11 bxc3 dxc5 with only a moderate d7 9.b5 f6 10.xd7+ bxd7 11.a3
disadvantage.) 8...c5 9.g5!? ( 9.e4 ) the knight emerges on a3 to help aid the
9...cxd4 10.e6 f5! ( 10...f6 11.xh7 ) q u e e n ' s r o o k t o j o i n i n t h e a c t i o n . 0-0
11.exd7+ xd7 with an unclear game, De 12.d1 a6 13.0-0 b5 14.b4 e5
Fi r m i a n - H i l l a rp P e r s so n , C o p e n h a g e n 15.xe5 xe5 16.f4 ( 16.d4
1996. ] looks like a decent alternative that gives
[ 7...c5!? is worth considering. ] W hite an edge.) 16...f5 17.g3 d5
8.e5 d5 9.xd5 18.b3 f4 19.fe1 e6 20.c2 xc2
[ 9.e6!? 0-0 ( 9...fxe6?! 10.g5; 9...f5!? ) 21.xc2 d5 22.e5 fc8 23.xg7 xg7
10.f5! frees White's c1 bishop to join the 24.e3 b6 25.d2 with equal chances, A.
attack. Then gxf5? 11.g5 is decisive. ] Negulescu-D.Vasiesiu, Bucharest 2001. ]
9...xd5 10.0-0 e6?! [ 8.e2 a popular reply allowing White to get
[ 10...0-0 11.e3 d7 ] o n w i t h d e v e l o p i n g t h e k i n g s i d e h6
11.a4! b4 Something has gone wrong for This is the point of Black's early fianchetto.
Black. He needed to challenge the centre The knight does not block the a1-h8
before this. 12.c3 diagonal and is heading for f5 to exert some
[ 12.c4 is also good. ] central pressure. 9.a3 c6 10.d4 0-0
12...0-0 13.e4 xe4 14.xe4 d5 15.e1 11.xc6 xc6 12.f3 c7 13.b5
Black's bishop on g7 is terribly placed, and he ( 13.0-0!? ) 13...a5 14.a4 a6 15.d4 d8
has nothing to show for his space 16.c1 ( 16.0-0 e5 17.b3 c7 18.e2
disadvantage. bxc3 16.bxc3 d7 17.h4 with equal chances) 16...g4 17.xg4
c6 18.g5 h6 19.f3 e7 20.g4 fb8? xg4 18.h3 d7 19.f4 ac8 20.0-0?
[ 20...h7 ] White finally castles but it is too late. xh3!
21.f5! exf5 21.gxh3 xd4 The pin on the c-file decides
[ 21...gxf5 22.xh6 g6 23.h5 ] the outcome of the game. 22.xd4 xd4
22.xh6 fxg4? 23.e3 d7 24.f5 c5 Black has a
[ 22...b6 23.g5 f6 24.xg7 fxg5 material advantage so it makes sense to
25.h8+ f7 26.h7 ] a ve rt a p o ss ib le a t t a ck b y e xc h a n g in g
23.xg7 xg7 24.f6+ h6 25.g5 b6 queens. 25.ae1 gxf5 26.h1 xe3
26.xf7+ h7 27.h4+ 27.xe3 e6 28.f2 c4 29.b3 e4
1-0 30.g3+ f8 31.fg2 h5 32.h2 e7
0-1 M.Grbic-P.Benkovic, Kragujevac 2000. ]
[ 8.d4 f6 9.a3 As usual the knight is
762 B06 developed with the intention of chasing the
Kiik,Kalle 2449 black queen. c6 10.b5 b8 11.c5
Pedersen,Steffen 2453 0-0 ( 11...a6 12.bd4 is about equal.)
ECC Panormo GRE (1) 23.09.2001 12.e2 b6 13.a3?! The bishop looks
[Gary Lane] misplaced on the side of the board. ( Or
13.e3!? g4 14.g5 is roughly equal.)
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6 13...d8 14.a4 b7 15.0-0 a6 16.bd4
A trendy line. The idea is to fianchetto on the xd4 17.xd4 c7 18.ad1 b5 19.c2
kingside and later play ...e7-e5. It is usually d5 20.f3 e5 21.b3 a5 22.c5 c6
barely mentioned in books. 5.dxc5 xc5 23.d3 e4! 24.xe4 xc3 25.bxc3 xe4
6.f3 gave Black strong pla y in V .Klyune r-A .
[ 6.e3 c7 ( 6...a5!? ) 7.xa7! xa7 Shchekachev, Duisburg 2000. ]
8.d4 is a nice tactic. ] 8...c6?! A natural move but on the evidence
6...g7 7.e3 c7 8.a3 This obvious of this game it will probably be thought of as a
773
mistake in future books. 9.b5 b8 h7

[ 9...a5 10.f4 e5 ( 10...f8 11.c7 [ Black wants to get the queens off with 18. ..
b8 12.b5 f5 13.xc6 bxc6 14.e6+ f6 the immediate 17...f6 loses to 18.xg6
xe6 15.xb8 with a winning advantage) xg3 19.xe7+ . White avoids this and
11.d6! wins ] clamps down on the possibility of ...c6-c5
10.d2 a6 11.f4 e5 12.d6+ e7 by pressuring d5. ]
Black has to give up castling straight out of 18.f3 ad8 19.ad1 f6?! After this Black
th e o p e nin g, which m e a ns it h as b ee n a gets into all kinds of trouble, but it's actually
disas ter f or Pede rsen . 13.xc8+ xc8 quite hard to find a good move. 20.c4 b6
14.e3 e4 15.g5 f5 21.a5 Threatening to win the exchange with
[ 15...f6 16.c2 b4 17.b3 bd5 c4-c5. de8 22.c3 h4
( 17...d3+ 18.xd3 exd3 19.xf7+ ) [ This is a rotten square for the queen, but
18.d1 c6 19.c4 hd8 20.d4 there isn't anywhere else. 22...d6 loses to
and White is much better. ] 23.c5 ]
16.d5 Now that the white queen has entered 23.e3 f6 24.f3 h5 25.h3 Threatening
the heart of Black's position it becomes clear g2-g4, which causes Black to give up a pawn.
that W hite has a tremendous attack. e5 e5 26.dxe5 fxe5 27.xe5 h4 28.c5 d7
17.c5+ e8 18.d1 c6 29.xd7 xe3 30.xf8+ xf8 31.xe3
[ 18...h6 19.e6 f6 20.b6 wins ] xc5 32.e8
19.e6 xd5 20.xg7+ f7 21.xd5 1-0
1-0
764 B06
763 B06 Kobalia,Mihail 2654
Klovans,Janis Welling,Gerard 2405
Gurevich Gibtelecom Masters (1.5) 24.01.2006
Cup Dnepropetrovsk (Ukraine) 1970 [Andrew Martin]
[Nigel Davies]
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.f3 d6 4.c4 e6
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 f6 I made the point in my recent book on the
5.c4 bd7 6.b3 b6 7.f3 g4 8.g3 Hippopotamus system of defence, that Bc4
f5 9.f3 g4 10.g3 f5 11.f3 systems were among the easier for Black to
[ 11.f3 draws by repetition, which might be combat. The Bishop on c4 is vulnerable to a
enough to put some players of f . But by pawn attack from Black and White often has
avoiding the repetition White keeps the freer to lose time as a result. 5.b3 e7 6.0-0 b6
game. ] 7.bd2 0-0 8.e1 c5 Why not? Black is not
11...bxd5 12.xd5 xd5 13.0-0 0-0 afraid of d4-d5 while the Bishop is still on c8.
14.e1 [ 8...b7 9.f1 d7 10.g3 c5 11.c3
[ Another game from this position went c8 12.h3 h6 13.e3 c4 ( 13...d5 14.e5;
14.h4 h5?! 15.g5 f6 16.d2 e6 13...cxd4 14.cxd4 f6 15.c2
17.fe1 d7 18.h3 ae8 19.e2 f7 lo o k s a t o u c h b e t t e r f o r W h i t e i n b o t h
20.ae1 g5? 21.xg5 fxg5 22.xg5 g6 cases. ) 14.c2 f5 15.exf5 exf5 16.f4
23.xe6 c6 24.xf8 xf8 25.c3 h7 f6 17.c1 f8 18.h4 xf3 19.gxf3 d5
26.g3 h6 27.xd5 cxd5 28.e7 h4 20.d2
29.c7 f6 30.xg7+ 1-0, Khachian M - A) 20...f4! promotes a very difficult
Barbu I, Bucharest 1993. Obviously Black position but one where Black has every
can play better than this but in any case chance to win thanks to his better pawn
his position is not very attractive. W hite position: 21.e4 ( 21.e2 f7 22.e4
has more space and it's difficult for Black b5 ) 21...e6;
to free himself. ] B) 20...h5?! 21.g5! f7 22.e6 7f6
14...c6 15.g5 h6 16.d2 d6 17.e5 23.d2 White has organised his position
774
c a r e f u l l y , b u t e v e n s o , a f t e r e8 765 B06

it will be difficult to break in. ] Kosten,Anthony C 2534
9.c3 Hague,Ben 2298
[ Thus 9.d5 e5! is fine for Black, who will 4NCL 2006-07 (7) 03.03.2007
play ...h7-h6 and ...f7-f5 shortly. ] [John Watson]
9...bc6 10.f1 h6 I would like to do without
this move if I could, thus When I was in the Flank Opening column, I
[ 10...cxd4 11.cxd4 b7 12.g3 c8 always used to cite Webmaster Tony Kosten's
came into consideration. Welling, in typical games with 1 c4. Now I've moved just in time
Hippo style, refuses to clarify the issue. ] to catch his 1 e4 games! This 17-move win
11.g3 a6 12.c2 cxd4 13.cxd4 c8 versus Tiger's Modern illustrates how
14.e3 c7 important it is to play exact move orders when
[ 14...a5 15.b3 f5! looks very interesting your position is cramped. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7
n o w, wi t h a c t ive p l a y f o r B la ck : 16.exf5 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 b5 6.d3
( 16.d2 fxe4 17.xe4 d5 18.c2 ac6 [ 6.e3 b7 7.d3 d7 is one of Tiger's
19.c3 d6 20.d2 f4! 21.xf4 xf4 main lines (such as there are any!). See the
22.xe6 xf3 23.gxf3 xd4 ) 16...xf5 note to move 7. ]
17.xf5 gxf5 18.f4 f6 19.d2 b7! 6...d7 7.e3 c5!?
The Hippo is an opening of good timing. [ 7...b7 is standard, when something
Black is passive only initially (or at least, similar to the game can happen after 8.0-0
he should be. No, let me rephrase that, he c5 9.dxc5 xc5 10.xc5 dxc5 11.e5
HAS to be) and then he must choose an , but the tradeoff of 0-0 for ...Bb7 allows
appropriate moment to break out. ] Black to contest the central light squares,
15.d2 h7 16.ad1 a5 17.b3 f5 for example, b6! 12.e4 xe4 13.xe4
18.b1 d7 19.h4 d5? The real mistake. h6! 14.c4 0-0 15.c1!? ad8 16.e2
Black must keep the centre fluid to head off f6! Stefansson-Hilla tefansson-Hilla
the Kingside attack: tefansson-Hillarp-Persson, Gausdal 1996.
[ 19...fxe4 20.xe4 b7 21.h5 xe4 Black had equalised and quickly gained a
22.xe4 gxh5 23.d3 g8 ] l a r g e a d v a n t a g e a f t e r 17.c3 fxe5
[ 19...b7 20.h5 g5 21.exf5 exf5 22.e2 18.xe5!? f5 19.cxb5 c4+ 20.f2!?
ac6 In either case, the game remains very e3 21.a4? ( 21.c6 axb5 22.xd8
unclear. ] xd8 , but Black is distinctly better)
20.exf5! gxf5 21.h5 But now Black has no 21...d4! ]
counterplay and must sit and watch. g6 8.dxc5! This looks like the best way to exploit
22.xg7 xg7 23.h5 h8 24.f4 Black's omission of ...Bb7. xc5 9.xc5
The dark squares are irreparably weakened. dxc5?!
c6 25.e5 cc8 26.e3 g8 27.g3 f6 [ Maybe it's not so bad to play 9...xc3+!
28.g4 h4 29.xh6 xg3 30.fxg3 here, since the bishop is about to be cut off
Games like this give the Hippo a unjustifiably on g7 anyway, and White will lack a dark-
bad name, although it must be said that three squared bishop to exploit the weaknesses
rows of pawns is not for everyone. aro un d g6 . T h e n 10.bxc3 dxc5 11.e5
1-0 ( 11.c4!? ) 11...b7 12.e2 h6!? 13.e4
xe4 14.xe4 0-0 looks sound enough.
Anyway, it must be better than 9... dxc5. ]
10.e5 This basic structure tends to favour
W hite, but the note to move 7 shows how
Black can get his fair share of the play. The
problem in this case is that without having
played ...Bb7 already, he can't hold the light
squares. b7 11.e4 xe4
[ 11...b6 12.xb7 ( simplest also
775
promising is 12.e2 ) 12...xb7 13.d5! may give him the better position. ]
xd5 14.xd5 0-0-0 ( 14...c8 15.a4! b4 6...g5 7.xg5
16.0-0-0 h6 17.d2 and Black can't get [ 7.h4?! makes less sense here as after f7
developed ) 15.0-0-0 e6 ( 15...b7 the knight is well placed on f7 and White has
16.g5! e6 17.c3 h6 18.ce4 )] over-extended himself. ]
12.xe4 c7 Probably not best, but there's 7...fxg5 8.d2 e6 A very solid move from
nothing really satisfactory because of Black's Rapport and one which suggest Black is doing
weak queenside pawns and lack of OK in this line.
development. 13.d5 c8 14.0-0-0 h6 [ 8...c5!? 9.xg5 c6 10.d2 ( 10.0-0-0!
Th is lo s es , b ut Bla ck ca n h ard ly su rvive is more promising for W hite, for example
anyway. g7 11.b1 0-0 12.f4! with Nf3 to come
[ 14...c6 15.xc6+ xc6 16.d5 c4 a n d a p l e a s a n t a d v a n t a g e f o r W h i t e)
17.hd1 c8 18.c5 is not pretty. ] 10...cxd4 11.xd4 b6 and Black was fine
15.d6+! exd6 16.exd6 d7 Versus 17 in Berg, E (2456)-Paulsen, D (2431) Mainz
d7+, but: 17.e5 2001 ]
1-0 9.h3
[ 9.0-0-0 would seems to be a little more
flexible here, for example e7 10.f4 0-0
766 B06 ( 10...gxf4 11.xf4 c5 is probably a better
Kotronias,V 2581 way for Black to play with chances for both
Rapport,R 2693 sides after 12.f3 0-0 13.h4 c6 ) 11.g3
41st TCh-GRE (6.1) 06.07.2013 and White is preparing a dangerous kingside
[Tom Rendle] attack with h4. ]
9...e7 10.f4 g4?! A rather odd choice from
1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 Rapport and one that quickly gets him into
[ 3.e5! is the critical test of the North Sea trouble
defence and it certainly seems better than [ 10...gxf4 \/I much pref er 11.hxf4 c5
the variation Kotronias chose. See Adams- 12.0-0-0 c6 and Black has at least
Carlsen (amongst other games) from the equalised. He also has the luxury of
archives. ] choosing to castle kingside into huge
3...d5 4.e5 complications or going queenside f or a
[ 4.exd5 doesn't promise any advantage: slightly quieter, more positional game. ]
xd5 5.xd5 xd5 6.c4 d6 7.e3 g7 11.f2 h5 12.h3 g3
and Black had already equalised in Massoni, [ 12...gxh3 13.xh3 c5 14.0-0-0 c6
M (2385)-Rapport, R (2654) Calvi 2013 ] 15.g4! and White has a dangerous kingside
4...e4 5.ce2 An important test of this line. initiative ]
White is threatening 6.f3 trapping the knight 13.xg3 c5 14.dxc5 xc5 15.b5+ c6
so Black's next move is forced 16.b4?! After this it's obvious that White won't
[ 5.xe4 dxe4 6.e3 g7 7.c3 0-0 8.e2 be castling queenside!
c5! and Black's pressure on the centre is [ 16.d3 b6 17.0-0-0 was much stronger
enough to compensate his doubled pawns. ] when Black has to demonstrate where his
5...f6 compensation for the pawn is. ]
[ 5...h6? 6.h4 and f3 on the next move will 16...b6 17.0-0 d7?!
win a the knight. ] [ Black should've gone for 17...0-0 18.e2
6.f3 e7 with reasonable compensation for the
[ 6.h4!? is still dangerous but it seems that pawn, especially with ...Nf5 coming. ]
Black is OK after fxe5 7.f3 d6 8.dxe5 18.c4 h4 19.h2 0-0-0 20.c5 c7
f5 9.g4 g7 10.f4 c6 with a rather odd 21.d3?!
position. Chances seem about level [ 21.xc6! xc6 22.e2 and not only is
although if W hite can find time to castle White a pawn up but his attack with a4 and
queenside his kingside space advantage b5 is coming very quickly. ]
776
21...xe5! This tactic brings Rapport back 61...c3 62.a1 b2 63.d3 xa1
into the game 22.xe5?! and W hite resigned. A bizarre end to the
[ 22.xd7+ xd7 23.c6! bxc6 24.ac1 game and one I can only imagine that resulted
and White has a very dangerous attack - for from Kotronias (or more likely both players)
example b7?! ( 24...e7 25.xc6 b7 being very short on time.
is a better try but White is clearly better after 0-1
26.b5 ) 25.c2 b8 26.c5+ c8
27.xe6 and White is winning ]
22...xb5 23.xg6 f6 24.xh8 e5!? 767 B06
A brave attacking decision from Black but Kozlov,Viktor Mihail 2340
objectively this doesn't really work Inarkiev,Ernesto 2545
[ better was 24...xf1 25.xf1 xh8 26.e2 Autumn III Alushta (13) 2002
h4 and Black's bind on the kingside give [Andrew Martin]
him reasonable compensation for a pawn. ]
25.f7 xf7 26.fxe5 xf1 27.xf1 g7 1.e4 g6 Another debacle coming up in the
28.xh5 xe5+ 29.f4 f5 30.g3 h8 Hippopotamus system. White cannot seem to
31.g2 d4 32.f3 b8 33.d3 acknowledge to himself that the Black position
[ 33.d5! d7 34.xc7 xc7 35.d3 is resilient and almost futuristic in its
an d wit h t he b ish o p exch a nge d of f t h e approach. 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
ending is a technical win for White. ] A quick...a6 seems to be an essential
33...e6 34.g1 a6 35.g4 d8 36.f2 component of the Black idea. If White goes a2-
e4 37.a4 g5 38.f1 e3+ 39.h2 e8 a4,he loosens himself and he cannot castle
40.c6?! queenside anymore ( at least with a clear
[ 40.f7! xa4 41.f6 e8 42.g3 conscience!) 5.a4 b6! 6.d2 b7 7.f3 e6
and with the king on g3 surprisingly safe He re we a re a g a i n a n d W h it e s it s t h e r e
this should be winning for W hite, for t h i n k i n g . . . ' W e l l , n o w w h a t ' ? 8.h3
example b5 43.d6+ a8 44.b6 g5 There are others :
45.xb5 axb5 46.f3 and White's [ 8.h4 h6 9.g4 This would certainly be
connected passed pawns will decide the interesting. ]
game in his favour ] [ 8.ge2 d7 9.g3 e7 10.g2
40...xc6 41.f8+ xf8 42.xf8+ c7 Meet ing f ire with f ire in a sense. Here ,
43.e7+ b8 44.f8+ c7 45.c5 xc5 W hite seems well poised to meet any
46.bxc5 c6 47.g3 d5 48.f3 g5 Black counterplay. ]
49.e2?! 8...f6 Breaking the rules assuming Black is
[ 49.f2! e7 50.e4 should still be good supposed to play ...Ne7 but Inarkiev has a
enough to win ] small trap 9.f2
49...a5 50.f3 f6 51.f4 c4 52.e4 [ 9.h6 xe4! that's it by the way.....
e7? 10.fxe4 h4+-+ ]
[ 52...d8 seems to hold the draw ] 9...0-0 10.d1
53.e5+? [ 10.h6 bd7 11.xg7 xg7 12.e2 e5
[ 53.c6! bxc6 54.e5+ c5 55.f3 f6 13.0-0 e7 Would be fine positionally for
56.g5 and White is winning ] Black of course. ]
53...xc5 54.f3 b5 55.axb5 a4 56.xd4 10...e7 11.g5 bd7 12.g4 e8
a3 57.c2 a2 58.f5?? Somehow White 13.h6+ h8 14.g4?! Don't like it at all.
miscalculates and throws away the draw as Kozlov should make a mental readjustment
well and get his King out of the centre as quickly
[ 58.d3 xb5 59.c3 f6+ 60.b3 a1 as he can.
61.xa1 xa1= ] [ 14.e2 ]
58...xb5 59.g5 c4 60.g6 f8 61.e4 14...c5! 15.dxc5 d5! Excellent play by
[ or 61.f6 c3 62.f7 h6 63.a1 Inarkiev and all because of the silly g2-g4.
b2 ] 16.exd5 exd5+ 17.e2 bxc5 A remarkable
777
turnaround. 18.0-0 d4 19.b1 d5 20.a3 15...xc3+

f6 The Hippopotamus system provokes play [ 15...a7! 16.0-0-0 b7 ]
not dissimilar to Fischerandom chess. You 16.xc3 b7 17.0-0-0
get thrown on your own resources very early [ 17.f2 would keep the rook on the a-file
on, ChessBase goes out of the window and for pressure on the isolated a-pawn. ]
the best player usually wins. Perhaps there is 17...fc8 18.d4 g7 19.hd1 e5
hope for our noble game after 20.b4 c6 21.h3 a5 22.b3 cb8
0-1 [ 22...d7 23.f4 a4 24.a3 still favours
White by a bit. ]
23.a3!?
768 B06 [ 23.xb8! xb8 24.f4 ]
Kritz,Leonid 2596 23...b4 24.f4 ab8
Zozulia,Anna 2347 [ 24...c4 25.xc4 xc4 26.d2!
Open Ancona SUI (5) 06.12.2007 with the idea Rda1. ]
[John Watson] 25.b3 a8 26.b2 fd7 27.fd5 xd5
28.xd5 b7 29.da1
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 [ 29.xe7!? b6! 30.d5 bc4+ 31.a2
5.d2 d7 6.f3 b5 7.h4 h5 8.h3 c5 xa3 32.xa3 gives White nicely-placed
9.g5 cxd4 pieces for the exchange, in particular the
[ 9...b7 would transpose to Cubas-Leitao. ] knight on d5. ]
10.xd4 xd4 29...c6 30.e3 c5 31.c3 c8 32.d2
[ Hanging by a thread, but playable e6?
nonetheless, is 10...gf6!? [ 32...bb8 . Black has to sit around. ]
A) 11.xf6 xf6 12.d5 xg5 ( or 33.c4 d5?
12...xc3+ 13.bxc3 0-0 14.xa8 c7 ) [ 33...bb8 34.xa5 d4 keeps the fight
13.xa8 f6 14.d5 xh4+!? 15.xh4 going. ]
e6 16.xh5! xh5 17.xd6 and White 34.d6 d8 35.xb7 xb7 36.exd5
has various positional problems but an xd5+ 37.c3 c5+ 38.b2 b4 39.c4
extra pawn, the latter of which is more d6 40.xa5
important; 1-0
B) 11.a4!? b4 12.a2 ( maybe best is
12.d1!? b8 13.c4 0-0 14.a5 )
12...a5 769 B06
B1) 13.xf6 xf6 ( 13...xf6 14.e5! ) Kukawski,M 2346
14.d5 xg5 15.xa8 f6 isn't so Petrosian,TL 2629
clear, given Black's bishop pair; Najdorf Mem Open A 2014 (1.9) 14.07.2014
B2) 13.c4 0-0 14.xf6 xf6 [Neil McDonald]
( 14...xf6? 15.xf7+ xf7 16.xf7
xf7 17.d5+ ) 15.e5 e8! 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f4 a6
(a computer move otherwise Black is The 'Tiger Modern'. Black expands quickly on
lost) 16.0-0-0 ( 16.exf6?! exf6+ 17.e4 the queenside leading to a highly complex
f5 18.d5 a7; 16.xf7!? xf7 fight. 5.f3 b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5
17.xf7+ xf7 18.exf6 xf6 19.c3 A critical position. Black is putting a lot of
e6! ) 16...h7! ( 16...dxe5? 17.b5! ) pressure on the white centre, but can he
17.exd6 xg5 18.xg5 exd6 succeed when his knight is still sitting on g8?
and Black stands well enough. ] 8.e4 b8 9.e3 c4!? A move with a bad
11.xd4 gf6 12.a4 The normal idea in this reputation due to the Graf game mentioned
l i n e , t o c r e a t e w e a k n e s s e s i n B l a c k ' s below. However it seems fully playable, which
queenside structure. bxa4 13.xa4 0-0 is good news for Black if he wishes to deprive
14.e2 c7 15.c3!? White of the chance to break open lines along
[ 15.c3! b8 16.b3 ] the d-file with d4xc5 or e5xd6.
778
[ Gawain analyses 9...b4 , which remains a would also be in trouble after

sharp and interesting line, in Mekhitarian- [ 20.g3 a5 clearing the way for his rook
Ahmadinia. ] 21.b3 df6 22.g1 g8 etc. ]
10.g5 This is the reason why Black's last 20...xf2 21.xf2 exf5 22.c3 a5 23.c2
move is supposed to be bad: White threatens bxc3?
to win at once with 11.e6. However, it might [ Simply 23...e6 is winning for Black when if
be better to play 24.h1 f6 etc. ]
[ 10.0-0!? and maintain White's attacking 24.xf5+ e6 25.f7+ e7 26.bxc3 g5
options. ] 27.b1?? Losing a piece. White might have
10...h6! Petrosian takes the sting out of 11. held on with
e6 by defending f7. Instead after the passive [ 27.c2 ]
[ 10...f8?! White built up an attack with 27...xg6 28.xg6 f8+ A decisive
11.f3 h6 12.0-0 in Graf, A (2642) - zwischenzug, after which Black can recapture
Siebrecht, S (2376)/Heringsdorf 2000. ] on g6 a piece up.
[ What Black mustn't do is waste a move 0-1
trying to force the knight away from g5. After
10...h6? White has three crushing
responses: 11.xf7 ( Instead 11.e6 fxe6 770 B06
12.xg6+ f8 13.0-0 followed by 14.f5 Kulicov,Oleg Anatolie 2403
w o u l d b e f a t a l f o r t h e b l a c k k i n g .; Gelashvili,Tamaz 2605
Alternatively 11.e6 hxg5 12.exf7+! xf7 9th Open Dubai UAE (2) 23.04.2007
b e t t e r t h a n t a k i n g o n d 7 . 13.fxg5 [John Watson]
and then 14.0-0, 15.Qf3 etc. is a winning
attack for White.) 11...xf7 12.e6+ xe6 This time things go better for Black. It may be
( Suicidal, but very bad for Black is 12...f8 that Black's 6th move is a good alternative to
13.exd7 xd7 14.0-0 etc. ) 13.d5+ f6 6...Nd7. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f4
14.e4+ f5 15.g4# ] a6 5.f3 b5 6.d3 b7 Given '?!' by Hillarp-
11.h4?! The critical test is Persson, since it doesn't immediately support
[ 11.e6 f6 but Black seems fine e.g. ...c5 as ...Nd7 does. On the other hand, he
12.exf7+ ( Also fairly harmless are White's doesn't show any way to get an advantage
alte rna t ive s 12.c6+ f8 13.d5 c7 against it. 7.0-0
14.xf7 xf7 15.exf7 xf7 and; 12.xf7 [ (a) 7.e5 is critical: ]
xf7 13.exf7+ xf7 ) 12...f8!? [ (b) 7.e2 may be best, according to Tiger,
Black declines to recapture straightaway on but d7 8.e5 c5 ( 8...h6 also led to
f7 as he sees he can pick up the pawn later equality in one game, and may be better)
on. Meanwhile he can use his knight on h6 9.g5 ( 9.e4 xe4 10.xe4 cxd4
more actively. 13.f3 f5 14.f2 b4 11.exd6 h6! , when Tiger says that 12 a4
15.d5 h6 16.h3 e6 with equal i s ' t h e o n l y m o v e ' , a l t h o u g h 12.eg5!?
chances. White should probably have gone b e a r s m e n t i o n) 9...cxd4 10.e6 f5!
for this line in the game. ] is a fantastic sacrifice that Hillarp-Person
11...b6 12.e6?! White keeps on pressing say that he's played a number of times, for
forwards but his position is getting weaker. example, 11.exd7+ ( 11.f7 a5 )
[ Black looks solid on the light squares after 11...xd7 12.d1 ( 12.xb5 axb5
12.a3 d5 13.f3 f6 14.h3 f5 15.f2 13.xb5 c6 is unclear) 12...e5 13.fxe5
h5 ] dxe5 14.a4 h6 15.f3 e4 with a double-
12...xe6 13.xe6 fxe6 14.h5 b4 15.e2 edged, crazy game in deFirmian-Hillarp-
d5 16.f2 g4! Black can ignore the Persson, Copenhagen 1996. ]
attack on g6 in favour of activating his knights 7...d7 8.e5 Obviously not the only move,
as his king will be safe on d7. 17.hxg6 hxg6 but possibly strongest. c5!
18.xh8+ xh8 19.xg6+ d7 20.f5 [ 8...h6!? 9.e4 c6 10.d5!? ]
White's position is beginning to fall apart. He 9.exd6
779
[ 9.e4 xe4 10.xe4 cxd4 11.exd6 gf6 c a s t l e w i t h 8.f1?! h6 9.b3 0-0
12.dxe7 ( 12.xd4 0-0 13.dxe7 xe7 10.xh6 xh6 11.e1 f4 12.cxd4 c6
14.xf6+ xf6 t r a n s p o s e s) 12...xe7 Black has to activate his pieces bef ore
13.xf6+ ( 13.xd4!? 0-0 14.xf6+ xf6 pursuing the white king 13.e3 d8 14.h4
15.f2 with some counterplay for Black) xd4 15.xd4 xd4 16.xe7 f8 17.e8
13...xf6 14.xd4 ( 14.e1 e4 15.g5 xc4 18.xc4 xc4+ 19.g1 b6
f5 16.d3 0-0 17.d2 ) 14...0-0 15.e1 with a winning advantage, Sveshnikov,E-Sax,
b7 16.c3 and it's not clear that Black has G/Bled 2000. ]
full compensation, but then again he might. ] 8...h6
[ 9.e3 ] [ 8...f6? allows 9.xf7+! with a clear
9...cxd4 10.e2 advantage ]
[ 10.e4 gf6 11.xf6+ xf6 12.dxe7 [ 8...dxe3 9.xf7+! f8 10.d8+ xf7
xe7 13.e1 e4 14.e2 f5 15.a4 0-0! 11.g5+ f6 12.xe4+ wins ]
is an unclear gambit. ] 9.cxd4
10...b6 11.dxe7 [ 9.b5 0-0 10.cxd4 ( 10.c7 dxe3
[ 11.a4! is more challenging. ] 11.d3 c6 12.xa8 exf2+ 13.f1 b6
11...xe7 Now all of Black's pieces control is much better for Black) 10...c6 11.h3
central squares. 12.f5?! White activates his f5 12.e2 xe3 13.fxe3 b4 ( Perhaps
pieces but is losing time. 0-0 13.f4?! c5! 13...h6!? ) 14.c3 c2 15.a3 xe2+
14.fxg6 fxg6 15.d2 xd3!? 16.xe2 c6 17.ac1 d7 18.b4 ac8
[ 15...f5 would demonstrate Black's 19.e4 f5 20.g3 d7 21.e4 f5
superiority. ] 22.g3 d7 1/2-1/2 Peredy,F-Flumbort,A/
16.xd3? Veszprem 2000. ]
[ 16.cxd3 d5 17.b3 ] 9...0-0 10.0-0 g4 White is concerned about
16...d5 17.e1 e3 18.xe3 dxe3 allowing ...Nf5 to put pressure on the d4 pawn
19.e2 and bishop on e3 so decides to exchange
[ 19.h1? xf3! 20.gxf3 f8 21.f1 g5! pieces 11.xh6?! I would be reluctant to give
and ... g4 follows. ] up the bishop because then Black will have
19...ae8 20.f1 f5 21.a3 a5 22.h1 good play but W hite has spotted a tactical
d5! 23.ae1 c8 24.h3 c4 25.b1 opportunity.
[ 25.b3 d5! 26.xe3 xe3 27.xe3 xc2 [ 11.b5 c6 12.e2 f5 Black has
with the bishop pair, passed pawn, and 7th easily equalised 13.g5 ad8 14.c3 e6
rank. ] 15.d5 c8 16.a4 xf3 17.xf3 cd4
25...b4 26.axb4 axb4 27.b3 b5 18.e4 h6 led to equal play in Chapman,M-
W hite is to tally t ie d up . 28.h2 xf1+ Depasquale,C/Mingara 2000. ]
29.xf1 e8 30.h2 d4 31.f1 xd3 [ 11.g5 xd1 12.xe4 g4 13.f3 c8
32.cxd3 b2 33.e1 14.g4 c6 15.ad1 b6 16.c2 b7
[ 33.xb2 xb2 with ...e2 and ...Bc3. ] with a level game, Anderton, M-Ramaswamy,
33...xb3 34.g4 e6 35.f1 b3 A/Edinburgh 2003. ]
0-1 11...xh6 12.e1 f5 13.xe7 Hupper has
won a pawn but it is a hollow victory because
now Black develops smoothly. c6 14.xb7
771 B06 [ Or 14.e1 xf3 15.gxf3 ad8 16.d5 e5
Kupper,Patrick 2285 17.e2 f4 gives Black a winning attack. ]
Pelletier,Yannick 2544 14...ad8 15.e2
Swiss Team Championships (4.2) 20.05.2001 [ 15.h3 xf3 16.xf3 xf3 17.gxf3 xd4
[Gary Lane] is double-edged ]
15...xf3 16.xf3 xd4 17.g4
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6 [ 17.e2 f3+!? 18.xf3 xd1+ 19.xd1
5.f3 g7 6.a3 cxd4 7.c4 e4+ 8.e3 a6 is not clear because White has enough
[ It is not so good to give up the right to material for the queen. ]
780
17...e4 18.xa7 Kupper is two pawns up [ 10...b5 can be answered strongly by

but I would rather be Black who has plenty of 11.e3! ]
tricks available due to his superior pieces. g7 11.g5! e6
19.b1 [ 11...0-0? loses immediately to 12.h5 ]
[ 19.b1?? xg4 ] 12.xf7!! This stunning sacrifice is designed
19...b5 20.a4 d4 A crazy looking to e xp o se B la ck' s kin g, a n d t o f o rc e t h e
position where the pieces are hanging loose unhappy monarch out into the open. xf7
around the board. 21.f3 xf2+ 22.xf2 13.exf5 xf5 14.0-0 e8
[ 22.h1 d3 23.xb5? xa7 is better for [ 14...g6 walks into crushing lines like
Black ] 15.xf5! xf5 16.h5+ f6 ( 16...g5
22...d2+ 23.g3 17.g4+ f6 18.xg5# ) 17.e4+ e7
[ 23.g1 e3+ 24.h1 xa7 with the 18.g5+ xg5 19.xg5+ e8 20.h5+
advantage. ] d7 21.f7+ e7 22.d1+ ]
23...e5+ 24.h3 xa7 25.xa7 15.xf5+ g8 16.e3 h8 17.h5 e4
The king on h3 looks rather sad and Black [ 17...f4 allows 18.xf4 exf4 19.xh7+!
really should go for it. fd8 xh7 20.h5+ h6 21.d3+ , with a
[ 25...g5! is also possible to add some winning attack for White. ]
control of the h4 square. For instance: 26.b4 18.f1 White's army is now fully mobilised,
f4 and White can give up. ] whereas most of Black's pieces are practically
26.f1 f5+ 27.g3 g5+ 28.h3 f5+ dormant on the back rank, and unable to
29.g3 g5+ 30.h3 8d4 The threat of p r o t e c t t h e i r t r o u b l e d k i n g o n h 8 . e7
mate is difficult to resist. 31.b8+ g7 32.g3 19.xe4 d7 20.xh7+!! Big Bogdan Lalic
h5 33.e1 f5+ 34.g4 xf3+ 35.g3 lands another power-packed punch on his
xg3+ d a ze d o p p o n e n t . xh7 21.h5+ g8
[ 35...hxg4+ 36.h4 f6# ] 22.g5 xg5 Black could do little else
36.xg3 xg4+ 37.f3 d3+ 38.e2 against the threat of 23 Qh7, as is confirmed
e4+ 39.f1 f3+ 40.g2 xe1 41.xf3 by the following variations.
a1 [ 22...xb2 23.f7 ]
0-1 [ 22...f6 23.xf6 xf6 24.h7+ f8
25.xe6+ xe6 ( 25...xe6 26.h6+ )
26.c5+ e8 27.g8+ f8 28.xf8# ]
772 B06 23.xg5 f8 24.d1 Black resigned, far
Lalic,Bogdan behind on material, and in view of 24...Rf7 25
Turner,Matthew Rxd7! Rxd7 26 Bxe6+.
Congress, 199 1998 1-0
[Paul Motwani]
W 5 8 : " P o we r - p a c k e d p u n c h e s f r o m B i g 773 B06

Bogdan Lalic!" 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 Lautier,Joel
4.f4 This case of "f for forward" constitutes Miles,Anthony J
the aggressive Austrian Attack. d7?! SKA Biel (3) 1996
[ The chosen move is more passive than the [Nigel Davies]
"normal" 4...f6 , and on his next move
Black continues to play in an Amongst the off-beat ideas tried by the late
uncharacteristically timid way. ] Tony Miles, the combination of a Modern and
5.f3 c6 6.d3 e5 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.e2! an Alekhine with 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Nf6 is one of
Black must keep guessing about whether the most bizarre. In this game it didn't turn out
White intends to castle on the queenside or too well, but that doesn't mean it can't be a
t h e k i n g s i d e . e7 9.f5 c5 10.c4! useful surprise weapon at club level. How
White directs pressure towards Black's frail many of us have to play Black against Joel
point at f7. gxf5 Lautier? 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.e5 h5
781
4.e2 g7 5.f3 d5 6.h3 h5 This looks a seems to get back into the game. However,
bit odd to me, though that could also be said his king is in the centre and falls into lots of
of Black's entire opening. mating threats which he somehow manages to
[ 6...e6 transposes into Ferguson - escape. It ends with a two knights v rook and
Hodgson in which both sides lost a tempo. ] pawns endgame and W hite holds on to the
[ To my way of thinking the 'normal' move in draw. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.f4
th is p o sit io n is 6...c6 which seems fairly A very unusual line to play against the Modern
indispensable in the long run anyway and that is not seen much in high-level chess but
leaves Black's options open. ] is occasionally brought out by grandmasters
7.0-0 c6 8.b3 a5 And this looks like a rook as a surprise weapon! d6
pawn move too far. Although the position is [ 3...c5!? 4.d5 d6 ]
fairly stable at present there is a limit to the 4.f3 d7 Not one of the most popular
extent to which Black can break the rules. moves here, but playable. 5.d3 c5
[ 8...f5 looks better, with a similar set-up to [ 5...h6 comes from the wilder shores of
Pacey - Day. ] t h e M o d e r n : 6.0-0 0-0 7.e1 c5
9.c4 a6 10.c3 c7 11.cxd5 xd5 Black is relying on this move for counterplay.
12.xd5 cxd5 13.g5 d7 14.d3 e6 8.dxc5 ( 8.f5 ) 8...xc5 9.c3 g4
15.f3 xg5 16.xg5 b6 The best 10.h1 f6 11.e3 xd3 12.cxd3 b6
chance in a difficult position. 13.h3 a6 14.d2 c8 15.fc1 d7
[ After 16...c6 there is 17.e6 ] 16.a4 fd8 17.b4 e8 18.b5 b7 19.h2
[ or if 16...e6 there follows 17.b5+ d7 c7= Somlai, L-Horvath, J/Hungary 1994 ]
18.e6 fxe6 19.d3 ] 6.c3 b6N 7.a3 cxd4 8.c4 c5 9.b4
17.xd5 c6 18.c5 xc5 19.dxc5 c7 10.cxd4 b5 11.b2?
Leaving White a pawn up for not very much. [ 11.a5 a6 ]
Miles puts up tough resistance but in the end 11...c3+
this proves futile. g7 20.fe1 d8 21.c4 [ 11...xd4 12.xd4 c3+ 13.d2
d5 22.b5+ c6 23.c4 d5 24.f1 xd4 and White doesn't really have
d7 25.ad1 e6 26.h4 c6 27.c4+ enough compensation for the pawn. ]
d5 28.xd5 xd5 29.xe7 xe7 12.d2 xd4 13.xb5 xd2+ 14.xd2
30.xd5 c8 31.c1 xe5 32.xb7 d8 g7 15.d3
33.f3 d2 34.c6 c7 35.d1 xd1+ [ 15.c6 b8 16.a3 b7 17.xb7
36.xd1 d6 37.e2 e7 38.c4 f5 xb7 ]
39.f1 d8 40.e2 e8 41.e6 e7 15...a5!?
42.g8 f8 43.d5 e7 44.d3 f4 [ 15...b7 is also good for Black and
45.c4 d6 46.e4 xh4 47.b5 d8 pe rh ap s le ss risky t ha n giving W hit e a
48.xg6 h4 49.e4 c7 50.a6 d8 passed b-pawn that may become handy
51.b7 c7 52.f3 d8 53.a3 later in the game. ]
1-0 16.b5 c5 17.b1?!
[ 17.e1 is White's best bet. b7 18.e5 ]
17...b7?! Missing a chance to get a clear
774 B06 advantage.
Lee Sang Hoon [ 17...e6! 18.c2 f6 19.e1 xa2-+ ]
Gilbert,Jessie 2098 18.e1 c8
1st International (5) 17.02.2006 [ 18...f6 19.e5 dxe5 20.xe5 fe4+ ]
[Andrew Martin] 19.c4
[ 19.e5 dxe5 20.fxe5 h6 ]
Played at the 1st Korean International Event, 19...xd3?
this is a wild game in the Modern Defence. [ 19...f6 20.b2 fxe4+ 21.xe4 xe4+
W h i t e g e t s h is p i e c e s i n a t a n gle a t t h e 22.d3 xb2 23.xb2 c5+ ]
beginning of the game but Black doesn't take 20.xd3 f6 21.xa5 xe4+ 22.xe4
advantage of this like she should and White xe4 23.xe4 c3 Things are getting
782
exciting now - White has a material advantage g7 7.d2 h6 8.e3 c6 9.0-0 d5
but it's quite difficult for him to get out of 10.exd5 cxd5 11.d3 By straightforward
being mated! 24.f5 gxf5+ 25.xf5 g8 means, White has established a edge, albeit
26.g4? in a very murky position. It becomes clear
[ 26.b2 c5+ 27.e4 f5+ 28.d3 e5 ] that Black doesn't really like his position. In
26...h6+ 27.g5 f6?? that case, why did he play the Hippo in the
[ 27...xg5! 28.xg5 ( 28.b6 f6+ 29.h3 first place?? f6 12.e5 d7 13.f3 c6
c5 30.g4 d7-+ ) 28...f6 29.h4 fxg5 14.b4 d7 15.xg6! b6?? ( 15...xg6
30.b6 gxh4+ 31.xh4 d7 32.b7 c7-+ ] 16.b5 c8 17.bxc6 xc6 18.e2 )
28.b6 xg5 29.b7 e3+ 30.h3 a7 16.xh8 xh8 17.b5 xb5 18.ab1 xd4
31.b8+ xb8 32.xb8+ f7 33.xg8 19.f2 a6 20.a4 xf2+ 21.xf2
xg8 34.b3 e5 35.g4 c2 36.a4 1-0 Ruiz Diez, J-Martin Juan, V/Aragon
c4+ 37.f5 f7 38.g3 xa4 39.bd2 d5 2003 ]
40.xe5+ fxe5 41.xe5 a8?! 5...g7 6.c3 e7 7.b3 This slow, nagging
[ 41...a3-+ stopping White from taking the approach is the preferred method of most
d-pawn and stopping the White knight from strong players when facing this confusing stuff.
getting into the game. ] White doesn't press too hard and relies on a
42.f3 d8?! good, solid centre and modest development.
[ 42...a5-+ ] His extra space and wider choice of plans will
43.g4 g6 eve nt u a lly ru n B lack ou t o f co u nt e rpla y.
[ 43...e8+ 44.xd5 e3 45.g1 f6 ] Rodriguez does not think so. He believes in
44.h4 d7 45.e6 d8 46.e5 d7 himself and his ability to keep the tension and
47.e6 d8 48.e5 h6 49.h5+ g7 50.g5 will try to outplay Leskovar.
f8 51.gxh6+ xh6 52.d4 d8 53.e6 [ 7.e3 0-0 8.d2 d5 9.d3 dxe4
d7 54.c5 d4 55.e4 10.xe4 f6 11.c2 b6 12.h6 b7
[ 55.xd7 d3 56.f6 d2 57.g4+ xh5 13.xg7 xg7 14.e5 d5 15.f3 ad8
58.e3= ] 16.f2 a6= Schaefer, G-Scheib, K/
55...d8 56.d3 xh5 57.e6 d6 Mehlingen 1999 ]
58.xd4 [ 7.e1 0-0 8.g5 h6 9.h4 b6 10.bd2
½-½ b7 11.e2 a6 12.h3 g5 13.g3 g6
14.e3 f6 15.ad1 h5 16.h2 hf4
17.xf4 xf4 18.f1 f5 19.g3 g6
775 B06 20.exf5 exf5 21.e6+ h7
Leskovar,Mario Leopoldo 2245 Duer, W-Kroell, J/Austria 2000 ]
Rodriguez Cespedes,Amador 2495 7...0-0 8.e1 b6 9.bd2 b7 10.f1 h6!?
1st Bautista Masters, Cipolleti (8) 2003 11.g3 c5 Finally Black plays an active move
[Andrew Martin] and now White has to show his hand. 12.h4
[ I qu ite like 12.e3 followed by Qd2 and
1.d4 d6 2.e4 d7!? It is perfectly possible only then h2-h4! a2-a4 must also come
to start a game this way although not many into consideration. ]
do. 3.f3 g6 The Hanham Variation of the 12...c7 13.h5 g5 I guess that was the point
P h i l i d o r i s a n o t h e r o p t i o n e . g . 3 . . . e 5 . of ...h7-h6 in the first place! 14.d3 ac8
R o d r i g u e z i n s i s t s o n o r i g i n a l i t y . 4.c4 15.c2 fd8 We have reached a genuinely
Black must not overlook the threat of Bxf7+ unclear position, quite conforming to the style
although some might. e6 So we will get a and the philosophy of the variation. There's
Hippopotamus after the initial banter. 5.0-0 no mate on h7 so by taking on d4 at the right
White has a very wide choice, both his pride moment, Black will always have counterplay.
a n d h i s p o s s i b l e d o w n f a l l . L o v e r s o f Leskovar decides to take action. 16.xg5?!
aggression might prefer 5 Bg5, as featured in [ 16.a4 g4! 17.h2 cxd4 18.xg4 dxc3
the following miniature. I know I do. 19.b4 e5 ]
[ 5.g5! Awkward for Black. e7 6.c3 [ 16.d1 a6 17.e3 b5 ]
783
16...hxg5 17.xg5 cxd4 I get the impression Benko. White shuts down Black's queenside
that Rodriguez knows his opponent very well ambitions before they take shape!
and has been tempting him all along . It's a [ Milov, another Grandmaster who favours
dangerous game to play but when it comes off originality, tried 7.h3 in a recent game. This
th e po in t is th ere f or t h e ta king. W hite 's is a useful move, preparing Be3: c5 8.d5
sacrifice is probably unsound. 18.e5 f8 ( 8.c3!? ) 8...b5 9.f4 Changing his mind?
[ 18...f8 ] c7 10.c3 b7 11.a4 a6 12.e3 e6
19.h6 c6 Milov, V-Sakaev, K/Panormo 2002 ]
[ 19...xh6 20.xh6 dxe5 21.h5 f5 7...c5 8.d5 c7 9.a3! The Knight aims for
22.g3+ fg6 ] c4, a dream square. b6 10.c3! a6 11.c4
20.f3 xh6 21.xh6? Too optimistic. White b8 12.e5! More thematic play. White forces
would have a better chance of getting through a critical advance. dxe5
something from the game after [ Black may lie back on the ropes, but there
[ 21.xe7 dxc3! 22.bxc3 d7 23.exd6 is no doubting White's superiority: 12...fe8
c5+ 24.f1 f4 ] 13.f4 b5 14.axb5 axb5 15.a5 d7
21...dxc3! 22.b4 d5 23.f1 d4+ 24.e3 16.e1 b4 17.e4 dxe5 18.e3 ]
[ 24.e3 xe5 ] 13.xe5 b7
24...h4-+ Black has won the battle for the [ 13...fxd5 14.c6 xc3 15.bxc3
initiative-his position was resilient enough to leads to brief complications which favour
wi t h s t a n d a n i m m e d i a t e a s sa u l t . 25.xf8 White: ( 15.e1 is n o t a s g o o d : d6
xf8 26.e4 d5 27.e2 a6 28.f2 16.xb8 3d5 ) 15...xd1 16.xd1 g4
xf2+ 29.xf2 dxe5 30.a3 f5 31.g5 e7 17.f3 xc3 18.a3 ]
32.e1 f6 33.h3 h8 34.f4 e4 35.g5 14.c6 xc6 15.dxc6 xd1 16.xd1 e6
e5 There's no clear way to the advantage 17.e2 Naturally preventing ... Ne6-d4! bd8
against this messy' three-rank' system and it's 18.e1 d5 19.c3 d6 20.f4!!
clear that White must be patient. Attempts to Just when you thought Black was getting back
demolish the Black position often meet the into the game, this excellent move strikes him
fate that Leskovar had to suffer. The Hippo down. The problem is clear to see the c6
remains a good way to play all-out for the win pawn is a winner. dxf4
against weaker opposition. It is very confusing. [ 20...exf4 comes to the same. ]
0-1 21.xf4 xf4 22.gxf4 e6
[ 22...f6 23.ad1 c8 24.xd6 exd6
was perhaps more tenacious 25.d1 e7
776 B06 26.f5! gxf5 27.f4 f8 28.f2 e8
Lima,Darcy 2535 29.e3 d8 30.d5! xc6 31.xf5 c7
Tristan,Leonardo 2225 32.xf7 h4 33.f8+ e7 34.b8 ]
American Continental (11) 16.08.2005 23.a5 b5 24.ad1 Forcing entry into Black's
[Andrew Martin] half of the board. The Bishop on g7 is
powerless. xd1
There is no obligation to use complicated or [ 24...fd8 25.xd6 xd6 26.c7 ]
a g g r e s s i v e m e t h o d s , a l t h o u g h t h a t i s a 25.xd1 h6 26.d7 xf4 27.c7
predominant feature of modern chess. Chill If you just want a game of chess against the
out with Darcy Lima who makes chess look an P i r c o r M o d e r n a n d n o t a t h e o r e t i c a l
easy game, with barely a tactic in sight. 1.e4 discussion, you could do a lot worse than try
d6 2.g3 Not so bad. f6 3.g2 g6 4.d4 the system that Lima does here.
g7 5.e2 0-0 6.0-0 This is a difficult 1-0
system for Black to handle because
counterplay comes slowly, if at all. Benko was
the one who used this system with success.
Note that W hite delays Nc3 that is an
interesting nuance. a6 7.a4 Still 'Ã la'
784
777 B06 778 B06

Limp,Eduardo Thelio 2480 Littlewood,Paul E 2396
Chemin,Vitorio 2309 Tiller,Bjorn 2390
IV Taca CC Brasilia BRA (5) 21.08.2000 Open Davis SUI (7) 06.08.2004
[Aaron Summerscale] [Andrew Martin]
1.d4 If you are looking for an interesting 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
of f b ea t way t o co m ba t t ho se a ggressive 5.d2 b5 6.f3 b7 7.d3 d7 8.a4 b4
King's In d ia n /G rü n f e ld pla ye rs, t he n t h e 9.e2 c5 If Black prefers an early ...a7-a6 to
f ollowing game may provide some of th e ...c7-c6 he gets to push ... c7-c5 in one go.
answers that you've been looking for. f6 The timing of this advance must be carefully
2.f3 g6 3.c3 g7 4.c2 This is an considered, lest the Black King gets caught in
interesting way to try and take King's Indian the centre, as happens here. So 9...c5 is very
and Grünfeld players out of their books. White risky, a lth o u gh it is f ully in kee p in g wit h
can hope to force Black into unfamiliar Tiller's uncompromising style.
s u r r o u n d i n g s . d6 Black sticks to his King's [ I prefer 9...a5 10.g3 ( 10.c3 bxc3
Indian structure, but the resulting position is 11.bxc3 gf6 12.g3 0-0 13.h6 c5!
more like a Pirc defence. 5.e4 0-0 6.e2 e5 is better timing.) 10...e6 11.0-0 e7
7.dxe5 Not the most energetic of 12.h6 0-0 13.fe1 c5 I reckon this is the
continuations, but against a King's Indian right pawn formation for Black out of the
player spoiling for a fight, a wise opening. The pawn on e6 keeps a white
psychological choice. dxe5 8.0-0 e7 9.e1 knight out of f5 and Black can look to play ...
b6 10.bd2 b7 11.f1 bd7 12.a4 d6-d5!, stabilising the centre. 14.c3 bxc3
The first indication that White is playing for 15.bxc3 cxd4 ( 15...d5!? 16.ab1 c7
the full point. Such queenside expansion is 17.f4 c8 18.d6 e8 19.dxc5 dxe4
awkward for Black to meet. h6 20.xe4 f5 ) 16.cxd4 c6 17.xg7
[ 12...a5 is worth exploring, and may have xg7 18.f4 b4 19.b1 e7 20.e5
been better, despite the weakening of b5. ] xf3! 21.gxf3 d5 22.g4 ac8 23.g2
13.a5 a6 14.axb6 cxb6 15.c4 It's always c4 Henson,J-Harper,B/Richmond CAN
good to take aim at weaknesses, such as b6 2004 Black has excellent counterplay. ]
and d6. h5 16.g3 f5 17.h4 An excellent 10.c3 bxc3 11.bxc3 c7 12.0-0 gf6
riposte, which takes most of the sting out of 13.h6 We've seen time and time again that
Black's kingside counterplay. f6 18.exf5 this is the correct way to play for W hite. As
gxf5 19.e3 Again highlighting the soon as the Black knight leaves g8,it's right to
weaknesses left by Black's kingside pawn go Be3-h6. Summarising the merits of this
advances. e4 20.d1 f4 21.c4+ h8 idea: 1) W hite strips out the fianchettoed
22.g4 Black has lost control of the kingside Bishop 2) The Black Kingside is weakened. 3)
light squares and W hite wins material by W hite has distinct attacking opportunities
force. c6 23.xe4 xe4 24.d5 h7 based on moves such as Ng3,Qg5, Nh4-f5,f4-
25.xa8 xa8 26.xd7 Black could already f5 etc. xe4 Tiller has absolutely no doubts
resign with a clear conscience. fxg3 27.hxg3 about taking such pawns. He wants to see
f8 28.e3 c2 29.a4 e2 30.g6+ what will happen.
1-0 [ 13...0-0 14.xg7 xg7 15.g3 e6
16.ab1 ab8 17.fe1 a5
was considerably safer, both in a practical
and theoretical sense. ]
14.xe4 xh6 15.xh6 xe4 16.g5 d5
17.f4 c4 18.fe1 This is what happens.
His King gets stuck in the middle, unable to
escape. Over the board, White has all the fun.
e5 19.dxe5 xe5 20.xg6! fxg6 21.f4
785
0-0-0 What else. 22.fxe5 dxe5 23.h4 d5 Black's plan is to play an eventual ...c6-c5
24.c4 b7 this is a position where all roads and the position of the queen on b6 does
lead to Rome as far as White is concerned: not really help (it often gets hit by a later
[ 24...h6 25.cxd5 hxg5 26.xg5 xd5 Na4). ]
27.f6! ] 8.a4 One of several ways to deal with the
[ 24...a8 25.h3+ ( 25.e6 c6 ) threat to the b2 pawn.
25...d7 26.xe5 xh3 27.xc5+ b8 [ Other possibilities are: a) 8.b3 g4 9.a4
28.b1+! b7 29.xh3 ] a5+ 10.d2 c7 11.c3 e6 12.d3 f5
25.h3+ d7 26.ad1 e8 27.f7 13.0-0 c5 14.dxc5 xc5+ 15.xc5 xc5+
Nothing moves and the threat of Nd6 is killing. 16.f2 c6 17.h3 xf3 18.xf3 h4
Tiller is a really strong, unusual and creative 19.h2 0-0-0 which led to razor-sharp play
player. It's nothing new: such players have to in Bauer - Chernin, Hungarian Ch., 1992 ]
obey their nature and occasionally suffer a [ and b) 8.b1 g4 9.e2 f5 10.f2 e6
terrible reverse. Forgetting armchair 11.0-0 d7 12.b4 c7 13.a4 b6
psychology and returning to the opening, 9... 14.c5 xf3 15.xf3 c4 with a good
a5 is satisfactory for Black. game for Black in Buchal - Chernin, San
1-0 B e rn a d i n o 1 9 9 2 . T h e s e t wo va r ia t io n s
clearly illustrate the advantage of having
the bishop on f8 it makes the later ... c6-c5
779 B06 very much easier. ]
Luther,Thomas 8...a5+ 9.c3 g4
Gurevich,Mikhail [ Gurevich slightly varies his treatment from
Cappelle la Grande (France) (3) 1998 his game against Sepp from Brugge 1995.
[Nigel Davies] O n t h a t o c c a s i o n h e p l a y e d 9...c7
and obta ine d a good ga me a f te r 10.e2
1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.e5 g4 11.0-0 f5 12.f2 e6 13.b4 d7
h5 6.f3 h6 7.e3 b6 14.c5 b6 15.b1 xf3 16.xf3 c4
[ In Khachian - Minasian, Armenian Ch., 17.e2 b6 18.d3 a5 , initiating
Yerevan 1999 Black rejected this automatic counterplay on the queenside. Luther had
attack against the b2 pawn and instead no doubt studied this game and come up
c h o s e t o d e v e l o p h i s g a m e w i t h 7...b6 with an improvement Gurevich in turn shows
, introducing the possibility of developing his little curiosity about what it might be. ]
bis h op with . .. B a 6 a n d le n d in g gre a t e r 10.c5 f5
support to a later ...c6-c5. The game [ Or 10...c7 11.h3 f5 12.f2 xf3
continued 8.d3 f5 9.0-0 xd3 10.xd3 13.xf3 b6 14.b3 h4 15.d3 e6 16.0-0
e6 11.e2 e7 12.c4 f8 13.cxd5 cxd5 b7 17.e2 a5 18.d2 e7 19.f3 c8
14.ac1 d7 15.c2 a5 16.fc1 a6 20.fc1 ( After 20.e1 Black defends the h-
17.a3 f5 18.d2 g7 19.g3 xg3 pawn with d8 ) 20...a6 21.c4 c7
20.hxg3 a4 21.e3 b5 22.c6 b7 22.b3 f8 23.c2 g7 24.e1 d8
23.h4 hc8 24.xc8 xc8 25.xc8 25.c1 a4 26.bxa4 xa4 27.b1 dxc4
xc8 26.xb5 xh4 27.gxh4 c4! 28.xc4 d5 29.b3 1/2-1/2, Bologan V. -
28.a5 ( 28.xc4 dxc4 followed by ...Nc7- Badea B., Romania 1999 Ch Romania ]
d5 would bring about a complete blockade.) 11.f2 e6 12.b3 b6
28...c7 29.h2 d3 30.g1 c4 [ I suspect that either 12...c7 or even ]
31.c5 b5 32.f2 e2 33.g3 xb2 [ 12...d8 would be better. ]
34.e1 xd4 35.b4 f2 36.f8+ h7 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 h4 15.d3 d7
37.xf7+ h8 38.f6+ h7 39.f7+ 16.0-0 e7 17.ab1 f8 18.d2 g7
with a draw by perpetual check. Minasian's 19.e2 a5 20.b4 c7
treatment is very interesting. ] [ And not 20...xa2 21.a1 b2 22.xf5
[ Black's other possibility is an immediate gxf5 23.d3 followed by 24.Rfb1. ]
7...g4 , which is actually a move I quite like. 21.f3 b5? 22.a4 Suddenly Black is in
786
terrible trouble W hite threatens to come in though this plan may be better left on the
down the a-file but when Black opposes rooks drawing board) 7.f3 f6 8.e2 0-0 9.h3
he can no longer defend h4. In view of this his c5 10.0-0 b8 11.e5 d7 12.exd6 exd6
last move looks like a serious mistake. a6 13.a2 b5 14.axb5 xb5 15.e4
23.axb5 axb5 24.a1 b7 25.fc1 xa1 and White was better in Antunes - Davies,
26.xa1 a8 27.xa8 xa8 28.xf5 gxf5 Portugal 1985 ]
29.e1 W inning a pawn for nothing. h8 [ Black can transpose into a Pirc with 5...f6
30.xh4 xh4 31.xh4 h6 32.g3+ f8 6.h3 0-0 etc. ]
33.f3 b6 34.g5 h5 35.e1 a4 6.d2 b7
36.h2 e8 37.g3 e7 38.d2 e8 [ In the game the bishop would have been
39.f3 g6+ 40.h2 h5 41.e1 h4 useful on its original diagonal, which
42.d3 e7 43.c1 f8 44.b3 e8 suggest s it m ight be be tte r to de lay it s
45.a5 d7 46.e3 c7 47.g3 xg3+ d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h 6...d7 and just set
48.xg3 xc3 49.h4 d7 50.h5 e8 about preparing ...c7-c5. ]
51.xc6 f8 52.f3 g7 53.g4 fxg4+ 7.h4 f6 8.f3 c5 9.d5 c7
54.xg4 f5+ 55.g5 e4+ 56.h4 d2 [ 9...h5 is well worth considering. I usually
57.g3 h6 58.d8 xh5 59.xe6 b3 like to encourage W hite to advance his
60.f3 a1 61.c7 c2 62.e6 xd4+ pawns, but in this case my position starts to
63.g3 c6 64.xd5 g6 65.h4 g7 look very dodgy. ]
66.h5 d4 67.e7 f7 68.g5 e6+ 10.g4 h5 11.g5 fd7 12.f4 0-0 13.ge2
69.xf5 g7+ 70.e5 e8 71.f5 g7 b5! It's now or never. Given time White would
72.c7 play Ne2-g3, Bf1-e2 and then sacrifice on h5.
1-0 14.axb5 b6 15.g3 e6 16.dxe6 fxe6
17.h3 e7 18.e2 d5 19.xh5?!
Tempting but unsound.
780 B06 [ White should have played simply 19.exd5
Manca,Federico 2393 exd5 20.0-0 after which d4 can be met by
Davies,Nigel R 2515 21.d2 xe2 22.cxe2 axb5 23.xa8
Open Saint Vincent ITA (2) 07.02.1999 xa8 24.f5! etc. ]
[Nigel Davies] 19...gxh5 20.xh5 8d7 21.e5 f5!
Giving up the exchange to slow the pace of
Against 4.Be3 I have played 4...a6 exclusively. W hite's attack. 22.xf5 exf5 23.g6 d4
The idea is that Black will expand on the 24.h7+ f8 25.g1 dxc3 26.g5 e4
queenside with ...b7-b5, ...Nb8-d7, and ...c5- 27.bxc3 c4 28.xa6 xa6 29.bxa6 xe3
c5 whilst leaving the king's knight at home to 30.h5 xe5
p re ve n t B e 3 - h 6 . Ma n y W h it e 's p re f e r t o 0-1
p r e ve n t t h is p la n wi t h 5 . a 4 , t h o u g h t h i s
reduces W hite's options in that queenside
castling is unlikely. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 781 B06
d6 4.e3 a6 5.a4 Martin del Campo,Roberto 2420
[ For 5.d2 see Szalanczy - Davies ] Hoang Canh,Huan 2363
5...b6 1st WMSG Rapid Team rapid (8) 16.10.2008
[ I've also played 5...c6 but I'm not sure [John Watson]
that Black's position is very good after 6.d5
( 6.f3 g4 7.e2 e5 equalises 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3
c o m f o r t a b l y .; In Haba - Davies, Polanica b5 6.e3 b7 7.d3 d7 This is the main
Zdroj 1989 I obtained interesting counterplay l i n e a f t e r 4 f 4 . 8.a4 This move occurs in
after 6.h3 e5 7.f3 exd4 8.xd4 f6 various places in Tiger's book, but I think not
9.g3 0-0 10.g2 d7 11.de2 b5!? etc. ) in this precise position.
6...a7!? (Hoping to support a later ... b7-b5 [ There is a note on 8.e5 in the Archives
by using the square created by 4...a6!, game Kosten-Hague. ]
787
8...b4 9.a2 a5 10.c3 [ 34...xh3+! ]

[ Or 10.0-0 gf6 11.e5 g4 12.d2 1-0
, about equal. ]
10...gf6 11.d5?! An odd move that reveals
the latent power of Black's pieces. 782 B06
[ 11.cxb4 xe4 12.0-0 was an alternative. ] Matsuura,Everaldo 2467
11...c6! 12.dxc6 xc6 13.cxb4 xe4 Scarella,Enrique Alejandro 2361
Now Black has achieved a 2-0 central Mercosur Cup 4th (10) 05.07.2001
majority. 14.b5 [Gary Lane]
[ A c o m p le x l i n e g o e s 14.xe4 xe4
15.d3 f5!? 16.d4! axb4! 17.e6 a5 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6
18.xg7+ f7 19.xf5 gxf5 5.f3 g7 6.a3 cxd4 7.b5 The knight
, and apparently Black stands better, but it's on b5 threatens Nc7 and prepares to take
not straightforward. ] back on d4 with the knight. a6 8.bxd4
14...b7 15.c3 0-0 16.e2 g4 17.d2 W hite simply takes the pawn back and
c5 18.c2 c8 19.h3 f6 20.0-0 h5 decides to transfer the battle from the opening
21.f2 e5?! This creates a weakness on d5 to the middlegame because now both players
a n d a c t iva t e s W h it e 's p ie ce s m o re t h a n carry on developing.
Black's. Better [ 8.e3
[ 21...d5! with the idea ...d4-d3 then Black A) 8...f6 is also possible: 9.xd4 h5
keeps his advantage. ] ( 9...0-0 10.xa7 e6 11.b5
22.fxe5 dxe5 23.ad1 c7 24.e3 e6 leaves Black struggling to prove his edge
Black has a beautiful kingside pawn mass but in development is worth a pawn) 10.xa7
no time to get it activated, for example, 0-0 11.xa6 ( 11.xc8 axc8 12.e5
[ 24...f5? 25.xc5 xc5 26.b3+ h8 is good for W hite) 11...bxa6 12.xc8
27.xc5 xc5 28.g5 , hitting e6 and f7. ] fxc8 13.0-0 ab8 14.ab1 a5 15.a3
[ Probably best is 24...f4 ] gave White the superior game although it
25.b3 hf4 26.b6 e7 27.xe6?! was eventually drawn, Khaetsky,R-
xe6? Moiseenko,A/Alushta 2002.;
[ 27...fxe6! threatens ...Nxh3+ and White B) 8...d7 The bishop attacks the knight.
h a s t o a l l o w i t , f o r e x a m p l e , 28.h2 It is also useful to have moved the queen's
( 28.d2 xh3+ 29.h1 xf3 30.gxf3 bishop because it means a future Nxa7
g5 or 30...Qb4) 28...e4! , with the idea will no longer have the get out clause of
29.e1 d5 30.xd5 exd5 31.e2 then taking on c8. 9.xd4 f6 10.a4 ( If
d6+ ] 10.xa7 then c7 is an attempt to cut off
28.xa5 Now Black needs something the knight's retreat 11.a4 b6 12.b5
concrete to counteract White's passed pawns, xb5 13.axb5 xa1 14.xa1 e4+
but White is solidly placed and stands much 15.e3 0-0 is double-edged; 10.xa7 0-0
better. c4 29.e3 11.xd5 xd5 12.d4 e5 13.e3 fd8
[ Or 29.d7 ] 14.e2 xe3 15.fxe3 c6 16.0-0 c5
29...fe8 30.d7 a8 31.fd1 h6 is about equal but Black needs to play
32.f2? accurately because of the pawn deficit)
[ 32.d2! e6 33.de4 threatens R1d6, 10...0-0 11.e2 xb5 Carlsen decides to
among other things. ] eliminate the Nxa7 factor once and for all.
32...e4! 33.1d4 e6 34.7d6? b3? 12.axb5 c5 13.0-0 fd8 14.a3
1-0. This is a Rapids game, and I suspect the White keeps an eye on the b3 square to
players were just blitzing off the moves as stop Black from deploying a knight there
Black lost on time. At any rate, W hite now f5 15.b1 White offers the exchange of
gets some advantage by 35 Nd2, whereas queens hoping that the ending will be
Black could have played better for him due to the pressure on the a-
file. h5 16.e1 e6 17.xa7 f4
788
18.f1 with the better chances thanks to B) 9...d7 I think this blocks in Black's
the extra material, Godena, M-Carlsen,M/ pieces which can lead to a passive
Claude Pecaut Mem, Taormina 2003. ] p o sit io n . Fo r i n st a n ce : 10.0-0 c7
8...f6 11.a4 0-0 12.g5 White has smoothly
[ 8...c5 9.e3 the threat of Nb5 in various developed his pieces and is no probing
l i n e s g i v e s W h i t e a s l i g h t i n i t i a t i v e a6 for weaknesses. In contrast, Black is still
( 9...f6 10.b5 e6 11.xa7 waiting to deploy his pieces on the
re wa r d s W h it e wit h a p a wn) 10.e2 queenside f6 13.e1 d8 14.e2 e6
( 10.b5! xd1+ 11.xd1 axb5 12.xc5 15.ad1 gave White e much better
gives White the advantage) 10...f6 11.0-0 chances due to his active pieces, Malbran,
0-0 12.h3 b6 13.b3 xb3 14.axb3 c6 G-Alonso,S/Escobar 2004. ]
15.d4 c7 16.c4 b7 with roughly equal 9...0-0 10.xd5 xd5 It is too easy to say
chances, Braun,V-Werner,D/Werfen Essen that the ending is equal because White can
2002. ] still mix things by taking on a6. However, I
9.b3 think Black should be content with such a
[ 9.b5+ tame reaction by White. 11.c4 b6
A) 9...d7 Black is content to offer to [ 11...ac7 is equal. ]
exchange White's active piece 12.xa6 bxa6 13.0-0 d7 the doubled a-
A1) 10.xd7+ xd7 11.0-0 0-0 pawns might be a pain but at least Black has
12.e2 the queen comes to e2 in order semi-open lines for his rooks such as the b-file
to co-ordinate the rooks and support the 14.e1 e6 15.f4 fc8 16.ad1 a5 17.e2
p r o s p e c t o f N e 5 d5 ( 12...c5 a4 18.a3 White stops the advance of the b-
is worth considering) 13.c4 dc7 pawn but now the c4 square is inviting for the
( 13...f6!? ) 14.d1 f6 15.e3 e5 black knight now that b2-b3 is no longer a
16.b5 e7 17.xa7 White picks up a problem. a6 19.h4 a7 20.h5 c4 21.h6
pawn but Black is relying on rapid Th e pa wn o n h6 m igh t he lp f u t ure tric k s
kingside pawn expansion to grab the associated with backrank mate but on the
in it ia t ive e4 18.e1 ( 18.d4 fe8 other hand Black might view it as a potential
19.e1 e6 20.b5 xd4 21.xd4 target in the long run. f8 22.c1 b7
f5 gives Black sufficient compensation 23.e5 xe5 24.xe5 c5
f or t he p awn) 18...f5 19.b5 e6 [ I like 24...f6 to push back white's pieces:
20.ac1 b4 21.a3 c6 22.f4 g5 25.ee1 e5 26.f3 g5 27.d2 f7
23.g3 gxf4 24.gxf4 f6 25.d5 g6+ favours Black ]
26.g2 h4 gave Black compensation 25.xc5 xc5 26.g5 e8 27.d2 d7
for the pawn and he eventually won, 28.f3 xd2 29.xd2 White would argue he
Krupkova, P-Jirovsky,M/CZE 1999.; has a passed c-pawn and the better position
A2) 10.e2 0-0 11.0-0 ad8 12.g5 but this is equalled by the influential pair of
g4 ( 12...h6!? offers equal chances) bishops c6 30.f1 f5 31.f3 b5+
13.xa6 ( 13.xe7 xf3 14.xf6 xg2 32.e1 d6 33.f6 f4 34.g5 d6
15.fe1 h3 16.f3 xf6 17.xf6 c7 35.f6 c6 both players are busy
is roughly equal) 13...bxa6 14.xe7 manoeuvring when one of them should be
e4 Black looks to be trouble but he is offering a draw 36.d4 xf3 37.gxf3 e5
banking on white's queen being 38.e3 f7 39.d2 e6 40.d3 f8
misplaced 15.e3 fe8 16.a3 d6 41.g5 d5 42.c4+ e6 43.e3 f4
17.xa6 the queen takes the doubled 44.b6 xh6 At last the h-pawn falls and
pawn but it was fairly useless anyway now is all downhill for White. 45.d8 f8
c4 18.b3 xe3 19.fxe3 xe3 46.e4 c5 47.a5 h5 48.c3 d6
20.ac1 xc3! 21.c6 c5+ 22.h1 0-1
xc1 23.xd8 xf1+ 24.xf1 xf3
25.gxf3 d5 0-1 Large,L-Berkvens,J/
Cappelle la Grande 2001.;
789
783 B06 6.b3 0-0 7.g5 An attempt at an

Matulovic,Milan improvement. White tries to prevent the setup
Botvinnik,Mikhail that was successfully used by Botvinnik in
Belgrad 1970 previous games (.. .e6 and ...d5). But now ...
[Alexander Volzhin] e7-e5 gives Black good play. h6! This move
is very useful for Black as we'll see later.
In the Modern Defence too White can choose 8.h4 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.bd2 c7
t h e Ho lm o v- li k e se t u p . T h e d e la y in t h e 11.c4 h5 That is why Black played 7...h6.
development of Black's Knight on g8 allows Now White has to lose a tempo to protect the
White to keep his Queen's Knight on b1 for a f4-square. 12.g3 f4!
while and to put it on the d2-square. The [ T h e n a t u r a l lo o ki n g 12...g4 fails to
f ollowing cla ssic game sh ows ho w Black 13.xe5! xe5 14.cxe5 f4 15.d2!
should react in this case. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 with a huge edge for White. ]
3.f3 d6 4.c4 f6 5.e2 c6 Here this 13.xf4 exf4 14.0-0-0?! A very risky
plan is the best. 5...Nc6 here is pointless as approach. White makes the same mistake as
W h i t e a l w a y s h a s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f in the game Medina - Botvinnik clearly
strengthening his d grip by c2-c3. underestimating the power of Black's dark-
[ 5...0-0 In my opinion it's slightly more squared Bishop.
precise to begin with 5...c6 and to castle [ To castle short was much safer and White
next move. 6.0-0 c6 7.b3 g4 8.bd2 should prepare it by playing 14.e5 ]
a5 9.a4 d5 10.e5 fd7 11.h3 xf3 14...g4 15.e5
12.xf3 e6 The critical position for [ 15.h3 xf3 16.xf3 d7 , intending ...b7-
evaluation of Black's plan. Practice proves b5 and ...a7-a5 is very good for Black. It's
he has good chances. The point is White's imp orta nt th at W h it e can 't win a pa wn :
B i s h o p o n b 3 h a s n o p r o s p e ct s a s i t ' s 17.d6 e5 18.xf4 fd8 Now the Knight
restricted by Black pawn chain. can't re treat in view of 19... Nd3+, an d
A) 13.g5?! was played in Gipslis - 19.d2 fails to f8 winning a piece. ]
B o t v i n n i k , 1 9 6 3 a n d a f t e r b6! 15...d7 16.e4 ad8!
White has an unpleasant position already. [ It's not so good to grab the pawn: 16...xf3
The threat 14...c5 destroying W hite's 17.gxf3 xe5 18.xe5 xe5 19.xe5
centre is very nasty. 14.a3 (protecting xe5 20.d7 , and White has ample
the Bishop) c5 15.c4 dxc4 16.xc4 cxd4 compensation. ]
17.e7 c8 18.d6 c6 19.b3 b4 17.xf4 xf3 18.xf3 b5 19.e3 xe5
20.g5 It may seem White has created 20.g3 a5 21.a3 h7 22.g4
dangerous threats (Nxe6) and has [ 22.f4 is worthy of consideration aiming for
sufficient compensation for the pawn but counterplay on the K-side.. ]
the following exchange sacrifice proves it's 22...h5 23.xe5 xe5 24.f3 g7
just an illusion. xc4! 21.xc4 xe5 25.he1 f6 The simplifications haven't
22.xe5 xe5 23.f3 f8 24.d1 g7 h e l p e d W h i t e a l o t . A l r e a d y I c a n c l a i m
25.e4 e5 26.g4 White tries to prevent ... Black's position is won. His attack will create
f7-f5 (after certain preparation) but after concrete threats very soon while W hite's is
this move his K-side is very weak and it's barely off the ground. 26.c3 c5 27.xd8
Black who will attack there. h6 27.c1 xd8 28.g3 c4 29.c2 b4 By destroying the
d8 28.c7 d5 29.f6+ xf6 30.xf6 p a wn sh e l t e r a ro u n d W h it e 's k in g B la c k
d3 31.c4 e4 32.c2 g7 launches the decisive attack. 30.axb4 axb4
, and White resigned in view of ( 32...g7 31.cxb4 b6
33.b6 f3 ); [ Maybe 31...a7 is more accurate: 32.b1
B) 13.c4 a6 14.g5 b6 15.a2 b4 a8 33.a3 xf2 34.e3 xh2
16.e7 fe8 17.d6 xa2 18.xa2 and White is helpless. ]
b3 and Black's chances are preferable, 32.d1 xb4?!
Matanovic - Botvinnik, Beograd 1969. ] [ It was better to keep rooks on the board
790
because Black's might be useful in attack: [ 8.c3 0-0 9.g3 c5 10.e3 g4
32...e8! ] Allen - McNab, London 1994, with
33.xd8 xb2+ 34.d1 xd8 35.d5 f6 excellent coun terplay f or Black in b ot h
36.e2 b6 37.f4 c3 38.e4 d4 cases. ]
[ 38...g1! was even more precise: 39.f5 8...f5 9.c3 0-0 10.b3 d7 11.g4 d6
gxf5 40.xf5 e3+ 41.f1 xh2 12.f2 c5! Counterplay! McDonald tries to
with an easy win. ] keep his grip on the position but his central
39.f5 gxf5 40.xf5 e3+ 41.f1 bulwarks are eventually swept asunder....
[ 41.d1 l e a d s t o m a t e a f t e r c3 13.e3 b6 14.d5 b7 15.xb7 xb7
Incidentally, the identical mating net 16.e2 cxd4 17.xd4 xd4 18.xd4 e5
occurred in Medina - Botvinnik. An 19.fxe5 e8 20.0-0-0 g5+ 21.b1 xe5
amazing coincidence! ] 22.f3 bc5 23.b4? This is a pretty horrible
41...g1+ 42.e2 xh2+ 43.d1 g1+ thing to do to your queenside. McDonald must
44.e2 e3+ 45.f1 xg3 46.h7+ f8 have thought that his next move was strong.
0-1 a4 24.c6 b5! 25.xd7 xc3+ 26.c2
xd1 27.xd1 e3 Threatening all sorts of
nasties against White's loose pieces. 28.d2
784 B06 ac8+ 29.c6 e6
McDonald,Neil R 0-1
McNab,Colin Anderson
(Open) Hastings (England) 1993
[Nigel Davies] 785 B06
Meijers,Viesturs 2486
1.e4 g6 2.d4 d6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.f3 Kengis,Edvins 2537
An interesting alternative to the habitual 5.e5. ch-LAT Riga LAT (6) 16.05.2005
White wants to use his pawn on f4 to give him [Andrew Martin]
a strong grip on e5, and hopes that the open
nature of the position will make Black's loss of 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6!
time (...d7-d6-d5) more significant. I think I can put a firm exclamation mark by
[ A similar treatment was adopted in Plaskett - this move now. 4..a6 is the system which best
McNab, Southend 1999 when White played deals with the '150 attack'. Queenside
5.h3!? (this cuts out the possibility of a later counterplay is prepared without delay. I still
...Bg4 by Black) dxe4 6.xe4 g7 7.f3 have a soft spot for 4...c6 that is well playable
f6 8.xf6+ xf6 ( 8...exf6!? is interesting, too, but Black has to be very precise. 5.a4
aiming f or a later ... f 6-f 5 and stopping Already W hite has been talked out of his
White's knight from coming to e5.) 9.e3 automatic kingside attack. He will now have to
0-0 10.c3 d7 11.e2 b6?! ca st le sh o rt . f6 So Black isn't too worried
( Black should play for ...c6-c5, say with anymore about the prospect of Qd2, Bh6 etc.
11...b6 ) 12.c4 and enjoyed a nice space 6.e2
advantage. ] [ Of course 6.d2 is still a force to be
5...dxe4 6.xe4 g7 7.c4 reckoned with. The following snippet shows
[ 7.c3 f6 8.xf6+ xf6 9.c4 0-0 10.0-0 h o w B l a c k m i g h t t a c k l e t h i s i d e a : 0-0
g4 11.e3 e6 was comfortable for Black ( 6...g4 7.g5 h6 8.h4 leaves the
in Komljenovic - Badea, Nereto 1998. In Knight looking misplaced.) 7.f3 e5 8.dxe5
this example Black managed to develop his dxe5 9.xd8 xd8 10.c4 c6 11.0-0 h6
light-squared bishop on a good square. ] 12.h3 e8 13.fd1 d4 14.xd4 exd4
7...h6 8.h3 15.d5 e6 ( 15...c6 16.b6 b8
[ Other possibilities are 8.e5 d7 9.0-0 is p la ya b le .) 16.b3 ( 16.xd4 xd4
0-0 10.c3 f6 11.e1 xe4 12.xe4 17.xd4 c6 18.e7+ g7! leaves White
d6 13.f3 f5 14.e2 c5 Borriss - Hickl, looking at 19.xd8 xd8 20.xc6 bxc6
Germany (Bundesliga) 1993 ] 21.xa6 d2 as his best shot. No wonder
791
he didn't go in for this line!) 16...f8= [ 15.c4 xf3 16.gxf3 a1+ 17.c1 h6
Lautier, J-Tkachiev, V/ Bordeaux 2000 (20) ] 18.e2 h5 19.c3 f4 20.xf4 xf4
6...0-0 7.h3N 21.c2 xc1+ 22.xc1 xc1 23.xc1
[ 7.d2 g4 time-consuming. ( 7...c6! xh3 ]
8.f3 e5= ) 8.xg4 xg4 9.h3 d7 [ 15.f1 Perhaps this is best, blocking the
10.h6 xh6 11.xh6 c6 12.f3 f6 back-rank skewer. xf3 16.gxf3 a1+
13.d2 b5 14.axb5 axb5 15.0-0 b4 17.d2 xh3! 18.xh3 xf1 19.e2
16.d5 b8 17.b3 e6 18.e3 d5 a1= ]
19.exd5 exd5 20.xd5 xh3 21.e3 [ 15.d3 xf3 16.gxf3 a1+ 17.c1 h6
c8 Gaponenko, I-Socko, M/Plovdiv 2003 18.e2 h5 is similar to the first line. ]
wasn't really satisfactory for Black, but I 15...a1+ 16.c1 xf3 17.xf3 h6
have indicated the point at which he can 18.e2 a6! he obviously overlooked this
improve. ] move when taking on b5 for the second time.
[ 7.f3 is the straightforward way: b6 8.0-0 19.c4 xc4 20.c2 xe2 21.xe2 xe4
b7 9.d2 e8 10.f3 c6 11.e2 d7 Game over. 22.f4?
12.h3 e6 13.c3 ad8 14.b4 h6 15.c1 [ 22.c4 xf2 23.f1 xc1+ ]
e7 16.b3 h7 17.b5 At last White 22...g3 23.e1 xf4 After 8 dxe5 I am sure
breaks the deadlock. b8 18.g3 c5 that Meijers was expecting to shake hands at
19.e5 dxe5 20.xb7 exd4 21.bxa6 dxe3 an early stage. 12...b5 introduced
Black can be satisfied after 22.fxe3 d5 ] complications into a situation where it
7...e5 A move on the flank deserves a blow in appeared that there were no complications to
the centre! 8.dxe5 be found and W hite just cracked. As far as
[ 8.f3 exd4 9.xd4 e8 gives White the the opening goes, you can be sure that 4...a6!
thorny problem of how to defend e4.10 Bf3 is the way to go for Black.
isn't ideal but may well be better than 10 f3 0-1
which doesn't mix at all with h2-h3. Meijeres
does not wish to have to think about this
and takes on e5, which cannot really worry 786 B06
Black. ] Mekhitarian,Krikor Sevag 2550
8...dxe5 9.xd8 xd8 10.d1 xd1+ Ahmadinia,Ebrahim 2436
11.xd1 c6 11th WUCC Men (6) 08.09.2010
[ 11...e6 12.f3 c6 13.c1 d8 [Gawain Jones]
14.d1 looks very equal indeed and I guess
if Black is playing for a win he has to try to 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3
find another role for his Bishop on c8 b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5 c5 This is a critical line
something which will lead to a more o f t h e s o c a l l e d T i g e r ' s M o d e r n . 8.e4
unbalanced position and not just trading on The computer's top suggestion.
the d file. ] [ 8.exd6 is considered dubious by Tiger.
12.f3 b5!? Quite unexpected. 13.axb5 exd6 ( 8...cxd4!? 9.d5 a7
[ In view of what follows, maybe 13.d3 b4 is an interesting alternative.) 9.a4 b4
14.d5 would have shown more common- 10.e4 c7 11.f5!? d5 12.eg5 e7
sense. ] 13.e2 f6 14.dxc5 0-0 15.fxg6
13...axb5 14.xb5 d4! Gomez, J (2527)-Machin Rivera, M (2229)
[ Perhaps Meijers only thought about Khanty-Mansiysk 2010 when I like xg6!
14...a1+ 15.c1 h6 16.d2 d4 16.0-0 e8 17.f2 g4 18.g3 xc5+
wh e n W h it e is d e f e n d in g h im se l f a f t e r ( 18...xg3 19.hxg3 f8 might be
17.c4 or ( 17.d3 )] simplest. ) 19.h1 a7 and Black's activity
15.e2? White has been completely thrown must promise him the better chances. ]
by the last move. He wants to maintain the [ 8.g5 is given an exclamation mark by
integrity of his pawn structure but ends up in T i g e r a n d i s h i s p r i n c i p a l l i n e . h6
an awful tangle. ( 8...cxd4!? is also considered. )
792
A) 9.f3 b8 10.e6 f6 piece. ) 18.xf5 xf5 19.xf5 f6

A1) 11.dxc5 fxe6 12.cxd6 ( 12.a4!? 20.f2?! ( 20.f4 should be preferred.)
might be a more critical test.) 12...exd6 20...dxe5 21.dxe5 xa4 22.exf6 exf6
13.0-0 0-0 14.ce4 xe4 15.xe4 23.f3 f5 The dust has settled and
f5 is given by Tiger.; Black should have a clear advantage
A2) 11.c6+ f8 12.exf7 c4 13.e2? thanks to his bishop pair and extra pawn
Videnova, I (2258)-Yordanova, S (2140) even if he later lost. Matsenko, S
Dupnitsa 2010 and here Black missed (2453)-Warakomski, T (2495) Olomouc
the chance to play f5! when White 2010.;
must give up significant material to avoid B2) 11.dxc5 xc5 12.xc5 xc5+
his queen being trapped.; 13.d4 xd4+ 14.xd4 d7 15.f3
B) 9.e6 f6 10.dxc5 xe6!? h6 16.a3 is a slightly unpleasant
R y b k a ' s s u g g e s t i o n . ( 10...dxc5 endgame for Black. 0-0 17.d3 a5
is t h e o n ly m o ve l o o ke d a t b y T ige r .) 18.axb4 axb4 19.a7 fd8 20.b3 f5
11.xe6 fxe6 12.e2 f7 13.a4 b4 ( 20...dxe5 21.fxe5 f5 looks to
14.e4 xe4 15.xe4 dxc5 16.c4 equalise. ) 21.xf5 xf5 22.g4 h6
d6 17.g4?! But Black was already fine. 23.h3 dc8 24.f2 f5 25.g5 ( 25.exf6
xg4 18.f5 e5! Perhaps White exf6 26.g2 would keep White with a
o v e r l o o k e d t h i s . 19.fxe6+ g8 nagging advantage.) 25...f7 26.e6
and Black had a pleasant position. d8 27.xe7 f8 28.d7 xe6
Hi n d e r m a n n , F ( 2 3 0 3 ) - A h m a d i n i a , E 29.e3 d8 1/2-1/2 Balogh, C (2628)-
(2436) Zuerich 2010. ] Almeida Quintana, O (2559) Pamplona
[ 8.e3 b7 9.0-0 h6 10.e6 fxe6 2010. ]
11.g5 xd4! A typical idea. 12.xd4 cxd4 9...b4 The computer favours White slightly
13.xe6 b6 14.e4 f5 15.4g5 e3 here but Black's results have been promising.
16.xh7 e5! and Black had a great The arrowhead d4, e5, f4 looks imposing but
position. Comellas Blanchart, J (2142)- he has to watch out for an undermining thrust
A lm e id a Q u in t a n a , O (2 5 5 9 ) B a d a lo n a when Black's pieces would suddenly come to
2010. ] lif e . W h ite also ha s th e problem t hat it's
8...b8 9.e3 These lines are extremely d if f icu lt t o a t t a ck wit h o u t we a ke n in g h i s
sharp and I believe they must be studied very central control as both f4-f5 and e5-e6
carefully before either side can feel weaken W hite's structure. Black also has
comfortable in the complications. decent counterplay on the queenside. 10.a4
[ 9.0-0 has been played more often. [ 10.e2 has been more common. h6
A) 9...cxd4 looks more accurate. 10.xd4 ( Tiger prefers 10...c7 ) 11.h3 ( 11.dxc5!
h6 11.a7 0-0 12.d1 b4 is the problem but perhaps g4 12.d4
( 12...b6+? is careless. 13.e3! c5 dxc5 isn't so bad.) 11...0-0 12.0-0 c7
Zelcic, R (2538)-Fahrner, K (2302) Pula 13.c3 bxc3 14.bxc3 b6 15.f2 b7
2010 when 14.xe7 just looks winning.) 16.xb7 xb7 17.dxc5 dxc5 18.d3 c4
13.a4 b7! 14.xb7 c7 15.exd6 19.e4 Schlosser, P (2579)-Thiede, L
exd6 16.xa6 xb7 17.e3 f5 18.f2 ( 2 4 4 9 ) H a l l e 2 0 1 0 w h e n I ' d g o f o r e6
bb8 gave Black active play for the pawn. when White is only a touch better. ]
Kovacevic, A (2543)-Hillarp Persson, T 10...c7 11.c3 This looks sensible supporting
(2586) Budva 2009.; the centre but appears to be a novelty.
B) 9...b4 10.a4 c7 [ 11.g5 was played in the only previous
B1) 11.c3 h6 12.g5 bxc3 13.bxc3 game to reach this position. h6 12.dxc5
0-0 14.e3 d8 15.f3 cxd4 16.cxd4 ( 12.e6 is T iger's su ggestion b u t f6
a5 17.f5!? was a typical crazy position 13.dxc5 xe4! looks very good for Black.;
for the line. gxf5 ( 17...xa4 18.fxg6 12.c3 might be best but 0-0 looks fine for
fxg6 19.exd6 e8 20.ae1 Black. ) 12...dxe5! 13.0-0 0-0 14.h1?!
leaves White with dangerous play for the f6 15.f3 exf4 16.g1 f5 left Black
793
with a fantastic position. Sadvakasov, D [ Instead 20.exf7+ h8 reaches a highly

(2538) -Nyback, T (2445) Bled 2002. ] complicated position. I analysed one line
[ 11.dxc5 dxe5 12.fxe5 xe5 13.0-0 g4 which ends in a slightly better endgame for
14.f4 e5 is given by Tiger. ] Black: ( 20...xf7 21.g4 e3 22.xe3
11...h6 12.0-0 b7 This requires Black to dxe3 23.xe3 is a complete mess but
be accurate. Black has the more vulnerable king.) 21.g4!
[ 12...bxc3 13.bxc3 0-0 looks like an easy b5! 22.xb5 axb5 23.gxf5 bxa4
equalising method. ] 24.xd4 axb3 25.axb3 b4 26.xc3 xf4
13.xb7 xb7?! 27.xg7+ xg7 28.fxg6 hxg6 29.g5
[ 13...xb7 should have been preferred xf1+ 30.xf1 f8 ]
when Black is near equality although 20...e5 21.e1 This just condemns White to
14.dxc5 bxc3 15.bxc3 f5 16.d4 dxc5 passive defence.
17.xc5 xc5 18.xc5 0-0 is somewhat [ 21.g4 should have been tried to force the
better for White thanks to his extra pawn. ] knigh t of f sid e bu t h6 22.h3 dxd7
14.h1? White misses his chance and now is still more comfortable for Black. ]
Black has the easier game. 21...bxd7 22.d3 f6 23.fe1 From here
[ Instead White could have exploited Black's the game has a lot of errors. Presumably the
d e l a y i n c a s t l i n g wi t h 14.exd6! exd6 sharp opening had lef t them both in time
15.dxc5! dxc5 16.cxb4! cxb4 ( 16...xb4 trouble. f7? This just blunders the important
17.xc5! xc5 18.c1 0-0 19.xc5 c3 pawn.
p i c k s u p t h e e x c h a n g e .; 16...0-0 [ Instead 23...c7 was clearly better for
is best although 17.xc5 f5 18.xd7 Black as that central pawn mass dominate
xd7 19.xd7 xe3 20.xf8 xf1 the board. ]
21.xf1 xf8 22.a3 xb2 23.a2 24.xc3! e8?!
leaves W hite a clear pawn up in the [ 24...dxc3 25.b6 b5 26.xd8 d4
ending. ) 17.c1 b8 18.c5 is catastropic 27.d1 c6 28.xc3 b8 29.fxe5 dxe5
for Black. ] 30.xf6 xf6 is a little better for White but
14...0-0 So Black has succeeded in manageable. ]
exchanging light squared bishops and getting 25.cc1?!
his king to safety. W hite's pawn structure [ 25.c4! was stronger with ideas of
looks impressive but it highlights the lack of rerouting the knight via b4 into d5 while the
that bishop and he has to be constantly on pressure on d4 slows any ...e4 ideas. ]
the look out for a timely exchange of pawns. 25...h5
[ 14...bxc3 15.bxc3 0-0 would be a more [ 25...fe7 threatening ... e4 would have
accurate move order, not allowing W hite kept Black with adequate compensation. ]
play down the c file. ] 26.a3?! This has the same idea as Rc4 but
15.c1 f5 16.f2 d8 weakens the b3 square.
[ 16...h6!? could also be considered as [ 26.c4! ]
17.g3 isn't ideal, creating further light 26...d5
squared holes. ] [ 26...b5! is a better square as it cannot be
17.e2 h i t b y t h e W h i t e k n i g h t s . 27.b4
[ 17.e6! might have caused Black some was evidently the reason Black declined this
discomfort as he cannot keep the e6 square move but no w ( 27.c2 e4 looks rather
defended. fxe6 18.e2 bxc3 19.xe6+ d a n g e r o u s .) 27...e4! gives Black good
h8 20.g5 xd4 21.f7+ ( 21.bxc3!? ) play. ]
21...g7 22.xd8 xd8 23.bxc3 xf2 27.c2 b8 28.b4 b7 29.c4 a5
24.xf2 f6 and White's extra exchange 30.c6 c8 31.d5
should mean something. ] [ 31.e6! is a touch more accurate. The
17...a5 18.b3 bxc3 19.e6 cxd4! knight isn't en-prise due to Qe8+ while h7?
A s t r o n g p i e c e s a c r i f i c e . 20.exd7?! 32.xa5 is now terminal. ]
Which should not have been accepted. 31...h7 32.b4 axb4 33.axb4 fc7 34.b5
794
W hite has now taken full control of the 10.0-0-0?! A case of castling' into it'. White
po sition b u t on e mo re su rp rise is lef t u s should be very careful about committing his
before the end of this game. e7 35.xd6? king to the queenside too early. b5 11.h3
[ 35.xe7! xd5 36.xc7 a2 37.xc8 xf3 12.xf3 h4! This time the blockade
xf2 is hard to analyse in time trouble but works, slowing down W hite's kingside play
38.cc1 leaves White clearly better as the b whilst preparing to take pot-shots at White's
pawn takes some stopping. ] king. 13.e2 f5 14.f2 c5 15.dxc5 xc5
35...xc6 36.xc6 xc6 37.bxc6 xc6 16.xc5 xc5 17.d4 b6 18.b1 b4
38.d5 c7 39.fxe5 fxe5 40.b2?! 19.xf5 gxf5 20.f2 a4 21.xb6 xb6
And White starts to drop the other half point. Black is better in this endgame, and we get to
Instead see some very fancy technique by Chernin.
[ 40.h3 c4 41.b5 c1 42.xc1 xc1+ 22.d4 a5 23.c4 bxc3 24.b3 b8 25.c1
43.g1 e4 44.c5 g5 should be a c4 26.a1 d2 27.xc3 xf3 28.xf3
draw. ] g8 29.f2 d7 30.a4 b5 31.c2 g3
40...c2 41.d3?! The knight is more active 32.b4 xb4 33.xa5 b7 34.a8 e3
here but also more vulnerable. 35.a3 d4 36.a4 e4 The weak pawns start
[ 41.d1 is a very passive option but White to drop. 37.d2 xf4 38.dxd4+ xd4
should hold the draw. ] 39.xd4+ c6 40.a2 b5 41.c4+ d5
41...d2 42.b3? And the final error. 42.xh4 xe5 43.a4 b8 44.c4 d5
[ 42.f3 c3 43.xe5 xe5 44.xe5 45.c3 f4 46.d3+ c4 47.f3 e5 48.a5
xf3 45.gxf3 xf2 46.d5 looks like it g8 49.f2 a8 50.c2+ d4 51.d2+
should be a draw, although I could of course e4 52.e2+ f5 53.b3 xa5 54.c4
be mistaken. ] a4+ 55.c3 d4 56.a2 d8 57.a4 f6
42...c3! 43.xc3 dxc3 44.e3 c2 45.c1 58.b4 c8+ 59.d3 g8 60.b2 e4+
xf2 46.g1 d2 A topsy-turvy game with 61.d4 d8+ 62.c3 e3 63.b5+ g6
chances missed by both sides but Black can 64.b4 g5 65.e4 f5 66.e7 f6 67.h7
be happy with his opening choice. e2 68.h6+ f7 69.h7+ f8
0-1 0-1
787 B06 788 B06

Meszaros,A Milov,Vadim 2410
Chernin,Alexander Segal,Anna 2180
Hungarian Team Ch 1992 Israel 1993
[Nigel Davies] [Alexander Volzhin]
1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 d5 5.e5 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.c4 d6
h5 In a closed position Black can afford the 5.f3 e6 6.ge2 The key position of this line.
luxury of playing long-term structural moves. Now Black has a choice between 6... Nf6 and
He is trying to set-up a complete blockade of 6...b5. f6 7.g5 bd7 8.0-0 0-0 9.b3
the kingside by controlling the f5 square the a5
idea behind ...h7-h5 is to inhibit a later g2-g4 [ 9...e7 is the alternative to the text, but
by White. 6.e2 White's most popular Bla ck h as a lso f a iled to e qu alis e he re :
choices are 6.Be3 and 6.Nf3, as illustrated by 10.ad1 h6 11.h4 e5 12.e3 e8
the next three games. 13.f4! exd4 14.xd4 xe4 15.xe7
[ White has also played 6.d3 but then h6 xd4+ 16.xd4 xc3 17.xc3 xe7
7.e3 b6 8.a4 a5+ 9.c3 f5 10.c5 18.xd6 The exchanges haven't made
e6 11.b4 c7 12.xf5 xf5 13.f2 a5 Black's defence easier. This endgame has
also gave Black counterplay in Ahn - Hickl, occurred in two of GM Nunn's games: f8
Eupen 1994 ] An attempt at an improvement over However
6...h6 7.f3 g4 8.e3 e6 9.d2 d7 it doesn't help much: ( 18...g7 19.f5! gxf5
795
20.xf5 f8 21.f3 e6 22.g3+ h8 41.g4 e3 42.f8 h6 43.f5 c1+
23.e4! with a huge edge, Nunn - Ehlvest, 44.h2 Mate is unavoidable, so Black
Skelleftea, 1989.) 19.d8! b6 20.a4! b7 resigned. A very good example of how to play
( 20...a5 21.fd1 b7 22.xa8 xa8 with three minor pieces against a queen.
23.d8 b7 24.b8 g7 25.e4! 1-0
is a ls o v e ry b a d f o r B la ck .) 21.d6!
threatening f4-f5, with a clear advantage,
Nunn - Fauland, Wien, 1991. ] 789 B06
[ I n m y o p i n i o n , 9...b5 is worthy of Motylev,Alexander 2630
consideration. ] Chernyshov,Konstantin 2540
10.h4 e5 11.ad1 exd4 12.xd4 e5 56th ch-RUS Krasnoyarsk (1) 2003
13.e2 b6!? Intending 14...Ba6, with ...c6-c5- [Andrew Martin]
c4 to f ollow. But W hite finds excellent
resources. 14.f4! a6 15.fxe5! The Queen 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 a6!? I must admit
sacrifice is forced but very strong. a liking for this cheeky move which commits
[ Otherwise White doesn't even have equality, Black to nothing and at the same time offers
for example: 15.d2? xf1 16.fxe5 dxe5 ] W hite to reveal his hand. It's particularly
15...xe2 Black has to accept the sacrifice. i n t e r e s t i n g wh e n W h i t e t r i e s t o p l a y a n
[ 15...dxe5 is bad in view of 16.xc6 xc3 Austrian Attack e.g. 4 f4 b5!. Black
17.e7+ h8 18.f2! xe4 19.bxc3 sometimes dispenses with ...d7-d6 altogether
xf2 20.xf2 with a decisive advantage. ] in favour of rapid Queenside play. The extra
16.exf6 xf1 tempo changes the game. As far as I know
[ 16...xd1 17.fxg7 xg7 18.f6+ the inventive Norwiegian Grandmaster Einar
is no better for Black. ] Gausel was the f irst t o try this idea . 4.h4
17.fxg7 xg7 18.xf1 Although Black has a White is provoked and plays a very menacing
material advantage he has difficult problems move indeed. Perhaps this is the only
to solve. White dominates the dark squares effective way to treat 3...a6 more or less with
ae8?! After this move the White initiative disdain! Meanwhile another recent game
progresses unimpeded. tends to suggest that if White DOESN'T act
[ 18...c5? 19.f6+ g8 20.a4 incisively, Black will obtain a reasonable
/\\ Nc6+- ] position:
[ 18...e5 should be played, after 19.f6+ [ 4.f3 d6 5.d3 d7 6.g5 h6 7.e3
xf6 20.xf6 xf6 21.xc6 a position with c6 8.d2 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.0-0-0 b5
very unusual balance of forces arises. In my 11.g4!? e7 12.h4 gf6 13.h2 b7
opinion White is better, but the fight is still 14.f3 0-0-0 15.f1 c5= This is not such
on. Black should try to play ... f7-f5 opening a bad position, but the psychological
files for his rooks. g7 ] pressure of playing White sometimes gets to
19.f6+ g8 20.xc6 c5+ 21.d4 e5 you. Loidl must have been feeling down
22.d1 Despite the approximate material about the result of the opening ( White has
equality Black's position is totally lost. White nothing) and continues to play insipidly.
can gradually strengthen his position while Result: Black gradually takes over. 16.g3
Black has no play in return. h6 23.h3 fe8 fd7 17.f2 e6 18.e2 dc5 19.h5
24.h1 h5 25.f1 c8 26.f3 f8 xd1+ 20.xd1 f8 21.f1 c7 22.ce2
27.d5 xd5 28.xd5 c7 29.f5 h7 e7 23.b1 d7 24.c3 g5 25.xg5
30.e3 d7 31.c3 h5 32.f6 The rest is xg5 26.ce2 b6 27.xb6 xb6
just agony. Sooner or later White will win the 28.g1 d7 29.g2 c5 30.1e2 ce6
f 7 - p a wn o b t a i n i n g a d e c i s i ve a t t a c k . b5 31.c1 c7 32.d2 b4 33.d1 a5
33.f1! Beginning the knight's transfer to the 34.e1 a6 35.f2 d8 36.xd8 xd8
g5 square via d2 and f3. c7 34.d2 b4 37.e3 e7 38.f1 f6 39.hxg6 fxg6
35.xb4 xc2 36.c3 g5 37.b3 d3 40.g2 b5 41.f1 c5 42.g2 ge6
38.f3 g8 39.xf7 g7 40.xh5 xe4 43.f1 g5 44.f2 b7 45.b3 bc5
796
46.e3 f4 47.f2 xe2 48.xe2 a4 Having started sharply, Chernyslov should
49.f1 a3 50.c4 h5 51.gxh5 gxh5 have been more consistent. ]
52.f5 ce6 53.g3 c5 54.h2 d4 15.h2 d5 16.f2! Now I start to like
55.xd4 cxd4 56.f1 h4 57.c4 h5 White. Those Kingside pawns give White a
58.g2 f6 59.e6 f4 60.f2 h7 big advantage in space and a greater choice
61.h3 g5 62.g2 h3 63.f1 xf3 of middlegame plans. f5 17.xf5 xf5
64.xh3 d2 65.g2 b1 0-1 Loidl, F- 18.xf5 gxf5 19.e6! Very good indeed! This
Ganaus, H/Open, Vienna AUT 2003 ] sharp advance causes havoc! fxe6
4...d5!? Black's opening play is very novel-on [ 19...f6 20.d2! fxg5 21.fxg5 0-0-0
those grounds alone he deserves a better 22.f3 doesn't really help Black. He still
fate! Alas... I'm reminded of the strange line 1 can't get his pieces out! ]
e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 d5!? and if 4 Nxd5 then 20.f3 e5 21.xe5 e6 Chernyshov tries
4.. .c6 or 4...e6 or 4 cxd5 Nf6 5 Bc4 Nbd7.... his best, but a short phase of simple, effective
The Modern Defence remains one of the last developm en t now f ollows whe re Mo tyle v
areas where original play can still flourish. shows who is in charge-complete charge!
5.xd5 22.c4 e7 23.e3 g8 24.d1 g6
[ Presumably 5.exd5 would be met by f6 25.xg6 xg6 26.f3 d8 27.xd8+
6.c4 b5 7.b3 b7 when Black has xd8 28.d2+ c7 29.d4 A calm move,
made excellent use of his extravagant third p la n n in g im p ro ve m e n t wit h B e 5 +, wh ic h
move. ] emphasizes to Black how helpless he is. e7
5...c6 6.e3 xd4 7.xd4 xd4 8.h5 30.c5 a5 31.a3 c8 32.b4 a4 33.e5 d8
d7 9.f4 g7 34.e3 e7 35.d4 d8 36.d3
[ 9...gf6 10.hxg6 fxg6 11.e5 d5 White improves at leisure. If nothing happens
12.xd5 cxd5 13.f3 c5 14.d3 f8 he will wander across to c4 with the King, play
15.e2 f5 16.e3 looks better for White. b4-b5 and win the a pawn. c7 37.xc7
I just think that Chernyshov didn't want to xc7 38.d6 The King heads for the bright
surrender the h file so keeps the option open lights on d4 and e5.
of ... hxg6 should White capture. ] 1-0
10.e5 b6 11.g4! He is trying to cramp all
t h e l if e o u t o f B la ck' s ga m e . O n e wo u l d
assume that Black could break up the pawn 790 B06
chain i.e. 11...g5, but it turns out to be not so Nachev,S 2429
easy: h6 Khismatullin,Denis 2599
[ 11...g5 12.f5 ( 12.f3! looks good gxf4 Open Moscow RUS (5) 31.01.2007
13.f5 xf5 14.gxf5 h6 15.d3 d5 [John Watson]
16.g1 ) 12...xf5 13.gxf5 gxf4 14.xf4
d5 15.h6 f6! ] This game is a good demonstration of the
12.g5 f5 13.d3 power of Black's fianchettoed bishops. I've
[ I prefer 13.h6! which seems to fit in included just a fraction of the theory in the
perfectly with W hite's game plan. Black's notes. In fact, some of these lines have been
position is indeed congested: f8 14.d3 analysed rather deeply, which isn't quite the
xe3 15.xe3 d5 16.d2 One or other idea when one plays moves like ...g6 and ...
of the Black Bishops can be activated, but a6! Such is the computer-driven theoretical
not both! ] world. 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3
13...g3 14.h6 f8?! a6 5.f4 Hillarp-Persson calls this a 'very
[ How is the position after 14...xe5 15.fxe5 common move order'. By waiting a move for f4,
xh1 16.e2 d7 17.e4 xe5 18.xh1 White avoids the normal Pirc variation 4 f4
0-0 ? It's a mess, where one has to make a Nf6. b5 6.e2!? This move has been played
subjective decision. Many would have gone remarka bly of ten. O ne idea is to oppos e
f or this-Black solves his proble ms wit h bishops along the diagonal by Bf3, after which
development and has two, good extra pawns. e5 can gain in strength. The main alternative,
797
also played in a number of games, is 23.d5 xb2 24.ab1 e5 25.e3 c8!?
[ 6.f3 b7 (threatening ...b4) 7.d3 d7 [ 25...h8 with the idea ...Rg8 ]
8.e2 b4!? ( Tiger suggests this and 26.c1 a4 27.b2 a3 Black's centralized
appends considerable analysis. One of his minor pieces and the e- and g-files give him
games went 8...c5 9.dxc5 xc5 10.xc5! the advantage. The rest of the game is a little
xc3+! 11.bxc3 dxc5 12.e5 with some erratic, but Black's nice attack nets him the
advantage for White) 9.d1 gf6! 10.f2 point 28.a1 e7 29.c2 d7 30.d3
( 10.d2 c5 11.e5 d5 12.e6!? fxe6 xa1 31.xa1 fe8 32.df4 f6 33.ab1
13.g5 xd4!? 14.xh7 f8 15.xf8 e5 34.d3 g7 35.df4 f6! Clearing
xf8 16.xg6 c8 , and Tiger says that the e-file and contemplating ...Ng4. 36.f3
he's sa tis f ie d a s B lack. At any ra te it's h8!?
exciting! ) 10...c5 11.c3 bxc3 12.bxc3 0-0 [ 36...g4 with the idea 37.g3? d4+! ]
13.0-0 e8! (versus e5-e6) 14.ab1 c8 37.g3 f7
, again with a double-edged game, although [ 37...g4! But Black dominates anyway. ]
I really prefer White this time. ] 38.f1 e4 39.h3 g4 40.c1 e5
6...b4!? Ponomariov's move. Perhaps better is [ 40...g7 41.d2 b2! 42.c2? xe2
[ 6...d7 7.f3 e6!? ( 7...e5! is Tiger's 43.xe2 b1+ 44.c1 xe2 ]
p r e f e r e n c e) 8.h3 e7 9.0-0 b7 41.b3 g6 42.g3 g8 43.f2 e5
with a solid position, A Sokolov-Bricard, 44.g3 xc4 45.e1 xf4 46.xf4 d3
Val d'Isere 2002. ] 47.xd6
7.d5!? A novelty! [ Also losing is 47.d2 xe1 48.xe1
[ Tiger makes a case for 7.a4 ] f6 ]
[ 7.b1 b7 8.f3 f6 9.d3 bd7 47...xe1 48.h5 Looking toward Qe5+
10.d2 0-0= Galkin-Ponomariov, Laussane xg2+ 49.h1 g6 50.e5+ g8 51.f4
2001. ] g4 52.h5 xh5 53.xh5 g1+ 54.xg1
7...a5 8.f2! f3+
[ 8.f3?? e6 traps the knight! ] 0-1
8...b7 9.f3 e6
[ 9...xd5 10.exd5 gives White space and a
bind, although his pawns aren't terribly well 791 B06
coordinated with his bishops ] Naiditsch,A 2718
10.e3 d7 11.e2 f5! Light squares! This Rapport,R 2691
blockades White's pawns (stopping f5), and 76th Tata Steel Masters (11.1) 26.01.2014
contains a dynamic idea. 12.exf5 xf3 [Tom Rendle]
13.fxe6 b7 14.exd7+ xd7 White has an
extra pawn, but Black's compensation should 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f3 c6
be obvious. He has two bishops, light square 5.e3 c7 In some ways it's refreshing to
control and useful central files. 15.0-0 f6 see Rapport playing such an interesting mix
16.c4 0-0! 17.g3 of openings in Elite events but against the top
[ 17.d5 e4! 18.c2 e7! ] players in the world this is obviously a big risk.
17...ae8 18.f5?! Perhaps not objectively [ 5...f6 6.d2 0-0 looks risky but in
correct. Still, it is hard to counter Black's Jonkman-Iordachescu it worked out well.
growing initiative. e4 19.d3?! You can find the game with analysis in the
[ 19.xe4 xe4 20.d5 gxf5 hits b2 and archives but I wonder if White should settle
threatens to attack with ...f4. Black has for a slight edge here with 7.h3 bd7
clearly won the opening. ] 8.d3 e5 9.0-0 ]
19...gxf5 20.d5 f7 21.f4 c5 [ 5...d7 6.d2 b5 is a more standard way
White's position is on the verge of collapse. to play this line and I covered this in Negi-
22.ge2 a6!? A good move, although Gashimov ]
[ 22...xf2! 23.xf2 cxd4 prepares ...Be4 6.d2 d7 7.0-0-0 b5 8.e5!? d5?!
or ...Re4. ] I can only think that Rapport missed
798
something in the tactics after 8...dxe5 counterplay d8

because having to play this move is a bit [ 19...f5 20.c4 h5 21.g5! h6
depressing. The bishop on g7 is now 22.ce6 xe6 23.xe6 is game over ]
permanently blocked and W hite's kingside 20.xh7 f5 21.c4 f8 22.g5 d5
play is much stronger than anything Black can 23.xd5?! This wins easily but the game
muster on the queenside. doe s carry o n a litt le lon ge r t han st ric tly
[ 8...dxe5! 9.dxe5 xe5 10.xb5! necessary
is the point but actually the position is not [ 23.ge6+ xe6 24.xe6+ f7 25.g5+!
so clear here after e6! ( not 10...cxb5? f8 26.d3 xh7 27.xh7+ f7
11.xb5 d7 12.a5 c4 13.c7+! 28.g5+ e8 ( or 28...f8 29.xg6 )
with a winning position for White) 11.d5 29.xg6+ d7 30.xg7 and Black should
xd5 12.xd5 c8! 13.a4 xf3 14.xf3 resign immediately ]
f6 and whilst White has maybe a slight 23...cxd5 24.ce6+ xe6 25.xe6+ f7
advantage is certainly all to play for from 26.xg7+ xe6 27.xg6+ f7 28.a6
here. ] White is two pawns up and still has the better
9.h4 a5 10.h5! b6 position - there's no way back for Black. b7
[ 10...b4 doesn't really help Black here as 29.a1 h2 30.g3 e6 31.a3 e7 32.xb3
after 11.b1 xa2 12.xb4 b8 13.c3 c7 33.c2
Black's attack is going nowhere and 1-0
White's advantage is obvious ]
11.hxg6 fxg6?!
[ 11...hxg6 makes more sense but White is 792 B06
still much better after 12.xh8 xh8 13.b3 ] Nanu,C 2520
12.a3 Nevednichy,V 2553
[ 12.b3 makes a lot of sense here to prevent 4th Limpedea Cup (4.3) 23.05.2012
an y .. .Nc4 ide as a n d b4 is well met by [Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle]
13.e2 xa2?! 14.xb4 b8 15.c3
and White is even threatening Kd2 and Ra1 1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
trapping the Black queen ] 5.d2 b5 6.0-0-0
12...b8 [ It's also possible to play 6.h4 immediately.
[ 12...c4 gives Black more chances for It's unclear which move order is better and
counterplay, e.g. 13.xc4 bxc4 14.b1 they are likely to simply transpose. However
( 14.g5!? might be more critical but still White does now have additional possibilities.
Black is just about OK after h5 ) 14...g4 A) I n t h i s p r e c i s e p o s i t i o n 6...f6
15.a1 xf3 16.gxf3 e6 and Black's isn't common but we can't really see why.
position is suddenly more solid than before ] 7.f3 ( Houdini offers the interesting 7.h5!?
13.e4! b4?! xh5 8.a4 ) 7...h6 8.a4 b4 9.ce2 a5
[ 13...xd2+ 14.exd2 is unpleasant for 10.g4 bd7 11.g3 and White's extra
Black because of the weaknesses on both space must give him something. Naiditsch,
sides of the board but it's a better chance A ( 2 6 4 1 ) - D l u g o s z, J ( 2 3 0 3 ) W a r s a w
than the game. ] 2005.;
14.c5 c4 15.xc4 dxc4 16.a4 B) 6...h6 7.0-0-0
Naiditsch has held off Black's attack and is B1) Against 7...b7 White can also try
now basically winning as Rapport is no nearer 8.f4!? ( While Emanuel Berg has
to using his kingside pieces. c3?! ventured 8.h3 a couple of times. );
[ 16...d8 was probably the only chance at B2) 7...d7 8.f4! h5 9.f3
this stage but White should still be winning has worked out very well for White in two
after 17.g5 d5 18.f4 with a rather a ll G M e n co u n t e rs . W e ' ve le f t b o t h
nasty threat of e6 ] games in the n otes. gf6 ( 9...b7
17.d3 cxb2+ 18.xb2 b3 19.c3! 10.g5 h6 11.e5 b6 12.d3 c8
Naiditsch doesn't even allow a tiny bit of 13.hf1 d5 14.ce4 0-0 15.f5 xf5
799
16.xf5 gxf5 17.g3 xe3 18.xe3 it's only been played a couple times.
f4 19.h7+ h8 20.d3 dxe5 [ 9.g4 has been White's most common and
21.dxe5 f6 22.g8 f5 23.e6 e8 was covered in the archives by Andrew
24.xf5 1-0 Ganguly, S (2627) -Svidler, Martin in Baki, P (2092) -Ianov, V (2381)
P (2739) Ningbo 2011.) 10.d3 b6 Paks 2005 ]
11.f5 gxf5 12.exf5 c4 13.e1 xe3 [ While 9.h3 has also been played a lot but
14.xe3 h6 15.g5 b7 16.b1 doesn't make as much sense when Black
g8 17.ce4 xe4 18.xe4 d5 still has control of g5. However White's plan
19.f3 d6 20.de1 d7 21.e2 is to drop the knight back to f2 when the
g4 22.b3 xg5 23.hxg5 c6 24.g6 lines aren't so different to 9. g4. e6 10.f2
af8 25.gxf7 xf7 26.e6 c7 e7 11.g4 d5!? 12.d3 c5! 13.xc5
27.xc6 1-0 Adams, M (2750)-Hodgson, xc5 14.dxc5 a5 with a very complex
J (2595) Southend 2001. ] game. Gaponenko, I (2437) -Hillarp Persson,
6...b7 T (2548) Reykjavik 2006 ]
[ We examined 6...d7 recently in Gopal, G [ 9.d5 was met with the odd looking h5!?
(2572)-Smirin, I (2657) New Delhi 2012. ] which worked out pretty well for Black after
7.f3 d7 8.h4 h6 Normally people play with 10.h3 c5 11.dxc6 xc6 12.d5 gf6
...h5 but this is a critical alternative. Black 13.xf6+ xf6 14.g5 c8 with a roughly
doesn't cede the g5 square and thus it's not level middlegame. Koziak, V (2475)-Bezold,
such a simple position for White to play. M (2455) Neuhausen 2004. ]
[ 8...c5 is a rare choice as it does nothing to [ One sample line we played out was 9.b1
prevent White's threat of h5. 9.dxc5 xc5 gf6 10.h3 c8 11.f2 c5 12.e5 dxe5
This position has been reached a couple of 13.dxc5 c7 14.fe4 when perhaps White
t im e s b u t f o r s o m e r e a so n n o o n e h a s has fractionally better chances but Black
played the logical 10.h5 which feels like it can't be unhappy either. ]
must be good for White. ] 9...g5 10.ge2
[ 8...gf6 is a little more common here than [ 10.d5 was played earlier this year in the
against the immediate h4 for some reason. only other game to reach this position .
A) 9.h6 was seen in a high rated However this is rather committal and
encounter but didn't challenge Black xh6 following e5 11.g3 ( 11.f4 immediately is
10.xh6 e5 ( 10...b4 11.ce2 c5 more critical although it's hard to believe
als o loo k s p ossib le b u t 12.e5 dxe5 that Black has too many issues after gxf4
13.dxe5 d5 14.e6 is very messy.) 11.d5 12.xf4 c5 ) 11...f6 12.f4 eg4 13.d4
e7 12.g4 b6 13.a3 fd7 14.ge2 b4 14.a4 c5 15.dxc6 xc6 16.xb4
c5 15.b1 0-0-0 16.c1 b8 17.b3 xe4 and Black had taken control and went
xb3 18.cxb3 f5 19.e3 fxe4 20.fxe4 on to win quickly. Nestorovic, L (2374)-
hf8 Here a draw was agreed Maze, S Chatalbashev, B (2570) Plovdiv 2012. ]
(2518)-Svidler, P (2765) Paris 2006.; 10...b6 This logical move looks best.
B) 9.g4 c5 ( 9...h5 10.g5 h7 11.d5 c5 [ Instead 10...b4 feels premature: 11.a4
12.dxc6 xc6 13.d4 xd4 14.xd4 a5 ( 11...b8 12.b3 also gives White an
resembles some sort of Dragadorf and edge. ) 12.c4! c6 13.c2 and White has
(therefore?)looks rather suspicious. strong central control while it's tough for
Spoelman, W (2424)-Koneru, H (2612) Black to generate counterplay. ]
W i j k a a n Z e e 2 0 0 8 .) 10.h5 g8 11.g3 e6 Taking possession of f5. The
W e don't trust this but already W hite's position now resembles a Hippo structure.
position is easier to play. 11.hxg6 hxg6 [ Again 11...b4 is too early. 12.b1 a5
12.dxc5 xc5 Heinemann, T (2450)- 13.f5 f6 14.d5 ]
Watson, W (2535) Germany 1998 when, 12.a3 Nanu cuts out ...b4 once and for all but
rather than 13.e5 13.g5 fd7 14.ge2 we feel this is probably inaccurate.
feels more comfortable for White. ] [ With 12.d3 White has decent chances at
9.h5 This looks rather logical but surprisingly retaining the advantage. e7 13.hf1 d7
800
14.b1 keeping Black under control pawns immediately should also be examined.
followed by a plan involving Nce2 and d5. [ 15.exf5 exf5 16.fxg5 ( 16.d3 g4
Oddly this position is almost zugzwang! is another unclear position where White may
Black has all his pieces on perfect squares have a small edge but it's certainly not clear.
and it's not easy to find him a move. Lashing Again we wouldn't mind having the Black
out with f5 ( Perhaps 14...g8 pieces with such good control over d5.)
is best although White could now exploit the 16...f4! 17.gxh6 fxe3 18.xe3 f6 19.b1
weakening of the h6 pawn with 15.f4!? gxf4 and W hite has three pawns for the piece
16.xf4 ) 15.d5! fxe4 16.fxe4 looks very and a safer king but it's not enough for us to
suspect. ] say he's definitely better. ]
12...e7 13.f2 Nanu waits. [ 15.fxg5!? is very interesting but looks to be
[ Breaking with 13.f4 is possible but gxf4 asking too much of W hite's position. f4!
14.xf4 d7 followed by long castling looks This was Nevednichy's point. 16.xf4 hxg5
fairly comfortable for Black. ] ( 16...e5?! 17.dxe5 hxg5 18.exd6 cxd6
13...f5 Risky. Nevednichy fights for the 19.xd6 xd6 20.xd6 xf2 21.c5!
initiative but weakens his own position in the and the complications have worked out well
process. f o r W h i t e .) 17.h6 xf4 18.e3 f8
[ 13...d7 was the safe option when we like 19.h5 g6 20.xf4 gxf4 21.h3 f6
Blac k 's po s it ion . His p ie ces all o ccu p y and Black must be at least fine. ]
good squares and there's a lot of dynamic 15...g4 16.d5!? The most dynamic way of
potential with various pawn breaks. ] playing the position.
14.f4 Nanu accepts the challenge and [ It's possible for White to wait with
suddenly the position becomes very concrete. s o m e t h i n g l i k e 16.b1 but it's not clear
[ 14.exf5 exf5 15.f4 was the alternative but what his plan is. Black can even try d5!?
following g4 16.d3 d7 we again ( 16...d7 is also possible when it's not
wouldn't be unhappy to be Black with his clear how White makes progress without the
light square control. ] d4-d5 break.) 17.e5 c4 and neither of us
14...0-0 We feel this is asking too much of would feel happy as White. ]
Black's position but it's still not 100% clear 16...exd5 Again Nevednichy goes for the
and we can't really call it an error. riskier of the two options. Again this may not
[ However 14...gxf4 is probably better be an error but af ter t his we switc h f ro m
15.xf4 ( 15.xf4 fxe4= is around level.) preferring Black's practical chances to
15...fxe4 Probably Black's best ( Although preferring White's.
h e c a n a l s o c o n s i d e r 15...0-0; and [ 16...fxe4! would have been a safer option.
15...e5!? ) 16.g4 g8 17.gxe4 xd4 17.dxe6 ( 17.xb6 cxb6 18.dxe6 d5
( 17...d7 18.xg7 xg7 19.f6+ f7 gives Black better chances with his bishop
20.xd7 xd7 21.xh6 g4 p a i r a n d h u g e c e n t r e .) 17...bd5
is also co mplicate d bu t 22.e2 xg2 when an interesting line runs 18.h4 xe3
23.hf1+ f6 24.d5! seems to promise 19.xe3 d5 20.xd5 xh4 21.e7 f7
W hite the better chances.; 17...f5!? 22.xc7 xe7 23.xa8 xa8 24.e2
could be best with a messy position.) 18.f4 and Black can hardly be worse. ]
xe3+ 19.xe3 f5 20.f3 ( 20.xd6+ 17.xb6 cxb6 18.xf5
xd6 21.xe6+ f8 22.xh6+ g7 [ 18.exf5 feels suspicious. Black could just
23.h8+ g8 and White can either draw transpose to the game while d4 19.ce2
with 24.Qh6+ or else play on with 24.d4 xf5 20.xf5 xf5 transposes to 19...d4. ]
although it's not clear he's better here.) 18...xf5
20...g3 21.f6+ f8 22.xb7 xf6 [ 18...xf5!? looks interesting but we think
23.h3 g7 24.d3 and the position is it's rather over-optimistic if W hite plays
still very complicated. ] a c c u r a t e l y : 19.exf5 d4 20.e2! f8
15.d2 Another queen move from Nanu 21.e1! xf5 22.d1 g3 23.xg4 xh1
th re a t e n in g t o t a ke o n g5 b u t t a kin g t h e 24.d3 and White regains the piece with the
801
advantage. ] 25.xb6
19.exf5 xf5 [ 25.he1! Just looks to be winning
[ Again Black had an interesting option in the immediately but the text isn't bad either. ]
shape of 19...d4!? 20.e2 xf5 21.g3 25...e6 26.b7
f8 22.d3 with a complicated position. It [ 26.xd6! looks simple and very strong f7
feels White should have some advantage 27.g6 and all Black's pawns are dropping. ]
thanks to Black's ragged structure and loose 26...e8 27.h7+ f8 28.g6 g8 29.d7
king but Black can generate quite quick [ 29.b7 could be more accurate ]
queenside counterplay, for example: d7 29...d8
The threat is ...b5-b4 and ...Qa4 The game [ 29...e6 was probably better but still
m i g h t c o n t i n u e ( T h e i m m e d i a t e 22...b4 30.c8+ g7 31.xa6 xg3 32.xb5
is also interesting but White probably has favours White with his queenside pawns but
s o m e a d v a n t a g e w i t h 23.f5! bxa3 Black can attempt something with ge3 ]
24.bxa3 d7 25.xg7 xg7 26.h4 ) 30.b7 xg3 31.xa6 e3
23.h4 b4 24.axb4 ( 24.f5!? ) 24...a5 [ A s a f i n a l a t t e m p t w e t r i e d 31...d4
25.b5 a4 26.f5 a3 27.bxa3 xa3 28.xg4 to complicate the issue but something like
h8 29.g6 and White's probably 32.a7 f6 33.he1 f3 34.xd4 f1
somewhat better but the position is 35.de4 is of course very good for White.
extremely complicated. ] We continued the line with xe1+ 36.xe1
20.d3 xc3? After a highly complex d5 to try and get some counter-chances
sequence where Black keeps going for the but 37.g1! f3 38.e3 g7 39.g1
riskier but playable option he finally goes too is simply winning. ]
far and plays a terrible move. 32.hf1+ g7 33.a7+ e7 34.d4+ e5
[ With 20...f8 Black is still well in the game, 35.f5 e3 36.xg4 If you compare this
e.g.: 21.de1 ( 21.b1 b4! 22.axb4 a5 position to that on move 24 we can see that
looks promising for Black.) 21...f6!? three Black pawns have dropped while he still
B l a c k p r e p a r e s . . . b 4 . ( The immediate has a terrible structure, note the bishop is still
21...b4 is also interesting: 22.axb4 a5 blocked in behind his d5 pawn. W hite still
23.b5 a4 24.e6 a3 25.bxa3 xa3 does not yet have a material advantage but
26.b1 a4 when Black has a strong the position isn't dif f icult to convert. h8
i n i t i a t i v e .) 22.hf1 b4 23.axb4 a5 37.ff1 g5 38.b4 e7 39.xb5 c7
and Black has strong counterplay. ] 40.a4 b8 41.f4 g7 42.f6 e7
21.xc3 xf4 22.g3 f3 23.d4 43.xg7+ xg7 44.d4 a8 45.a4 aa7
Black is currently two pawns up (with g3 en- 46.b3 e5 47.b2 e6 48.df4 g5
prise too) but his kingside is extremely loose 49.f8 d4 50.d8 d5 51.d1 g4 52.d6
and his structure is simply terrible. It's g8 53.a3 h4 54.g1
interesting to see how Nanu successfully picks 1-0
up all Black's queenside while retaining the
attack. g5+
[ 23...xg3 24.he1 is far too dangerous. ] 793 B06
24.b1 c8?! Black's final error. We're not Negi,Parimarjan 2631
sure what Nevednichy was thinking, surely it Gashimov,Vugar 2756
was more logical to bring the rook on a8 into Schachbundesliga 2011-12 (8) 04.02.2012
the game? [Tom Rendle]
[ 24...af8 is of course much better but
White should still be winning, for example 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.f3 d6
25.he1 ( 25.xb6 e7 26.de1 [ 4...d5 is Black's other setup and is covered
is also strong.) 25...c8 26.g6 and White in the archives. ]
d o m i n a t e s b u t a t l e a s t f o l l o w i n g xg3 5.e3 d7 6.d2 b5 7.d3 b7
Black can try and get some counterplay with [ 7...gf6 8.h3 c7 was looked at by
the g pawn. ] Andrew Martin in the game Hossain, E-
802
Rahman, Z/Dhaka 2005 ] [ 10.0-0 0-0 11.dxe5 dxe5 ( 11...xe5?!

[ 7...c7 8.0-0 b6 was tried in 12.xe5 dxe5 13.f3 e7 14.a4
Lenderman, A (2525)-Adu, O (2276)/New is a bit better for White as Black will have
York USA 2011. The idea is that the Bishop to work hard to make use of his Bishops)
may still come out to g4 so White logically 12.h3 e7 13.g3 is very close to equal
played h3 to prevent this but it's Black that has to be more careful.
A) 9.e5 looks very dangerous as well, for White would like to play c4 and Rac1 and
example g4 ( 9...dxe5 isn't good p u t p re ss u re o n B l a ck' s Q u e e n s i d e s o
because the tactics are in White's favour interesting is c5!? 14.b4 e6 15.a4 c7
after 10.xe5 xe5?! 11.dxe5 xe5?! 16.b2 White avoids a pin from a rook on
12.xb5! cxb5 13.d4 xd4 14.xb5+ d8 and keeps a minimal edge. ]
and Black won't get enough for the 10...0-0 11.xg7 xg7 Black has equalised
Queen ) 10.exd6 exd6 11.g5 comfortably enough and now Vugar goes
with a dangerous initiative for White; about trying to unbalance the position. 12.g3
B) 9.h3 f6 10.h6 0-0 11.e5 fd5 e8!? The idea of this move is to prepare a
12.xd5 xd5 13.fe1 dxe5 14.dxe5 central push but I suspect that after this White
e6 15.e4! and White had already built sh o u ld b e a b le t o c la im so m e e d ge wit h
up a clear advantage and a dangerous accurate play.
attack on the Kingside ] [ 12...c5! seems to be very comfortable for
8.e2 Negi comes up with a very solid way of Black - for example 13.0-0 ( 13.d5?! c4
playing but my feeling is that is doesn't set 14.c2 a5 with Nc5 to come and Black's
Black that many problems. space advantage on the Queenside should
[ 8.0-0 is critical and now a6 9.a4 b4 give him the better chances.; 13.xb5
10.e2 also doesn't look good after cxd4 14.cxd4
A) 10...a5 11.c3 bxc3 12.bxc3 gf6 xe4! 15.xe4 xe4 16.b4 otherwise
13.ab1 c7 ( 13...c8 might be an Q a 5 + i s a wkwa r d b8 17.a4 df6
improvement but still White is better after 18.0-0 exd4 19.xd4 b6 and White is
14.h6 ) 14.e5! d5 and now White under a lot of pressure )]
could've obtained a clear edge in 13.0-0 d5 A critical position has been reached
Bjornsson, S (2287)-Danielsen, H (2473)/ and it's essential that W hite finds the right
Bolungarvik ISL 2009 with 15.exd6! exd6 move, so I've examined a few alternatives
16.c4 b4 17.c5! with Bf4 to come and if here: 14.dxe5
dxc5?! then 18.f4 b6 19.e3+ d8 [ 14.fe1! was the best continuation and
20.fd1 is horrendous for Black; now:
B) 10...c5 11.g3 ( 11.dxc5 dxc5 A) 14...c5!? is an interesting pawn
12.ad1 c7 13.c3! sets Black more sacrifice although after 15.xb5 cxd4
serious problems in my opinion) 11...c7 16.cxd4 xe4 ( 16...dxe4 isn't as good
12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3 gf6 14.h6 0-0 b e c a u se o f 17.xd7! xd7 18.xe4 )
was fine for Black in Kosintseva, T (2497)- 17.xe4 dxe4 18.xe5 xe5 19.xe8
Milov, V (2669)/Moscow RUS 2009, d3 20.a4 xe1 21.xe1 c8
although White went on to win. ] Black's pawn on e4 and the weakness of
8...gf6 the pawn on d4 gives Black some
[ 8...a6 9.g3 c5 10.c3 gf6 11.h3 0-0 compensation but I still think W hite has
as played in Seletsky, G (2310)-Kuzmin, G the better chances af te r 22.c2! f5
(2469)/Alushta 2008 also looks a solid way 23.b3;
for Black to equalise. ] B) 14...exd4?! would be a typical mistake
9.c3 e5 Once Black has grabbed his fair because of 15.e5! e4 16.xe4 dxe4
share of space in the centre I think W hite 17.xe4 xe5 ( 17...dxc3? 18.xc3
should play dynamically because otherwise he g8 19.ad1 i s c r u s h i n g) 18.xd4
risks being worse. In this game Gashimov is when White's control of the dark squares
soon doing well. 10.h6 and well placed central knights give him a
803
clear edge; would be asking for trouble on the Kingside)

C) 14...dxe4 15.xe4! ( 15.xe4?! xe4 20...e5 with an obvious advantage for
16.xe4 c5 and Black is doing well) Black ]
15...exd4 16.cxd4 g8 17.ac1 18...xf3 19.xd8 axd8 20.gxf3 d5
and Black hasn't quite equalised in my [ 20...xf3+ 21.g2 h4+ 22.g3 f5+
opinion due to the passivity of the light- leads to the same thing as the game ]
squared Bishop. ] 21.b4
[ 14.ad1 gives Black a pleasant choice [ if 21.f4 then f3+ ( not 21...xc5 22.fxe5
between dxe4 ( and 14...exd4 15.xd4 cxe5 23.a4! when White should hold a
dxe4 16.c2 c7 17.b3 when Black is a draw in the rook and pawn ending.) 22.g2
pawn up but I W hite does have a h4+ 23.h3 f5 24.b4 d2 ]
potentially dangerous attack brewing with 21...xf3+ 22.g2 h4+ 23.g3 f5+
Qg5 ) 15.xe4 xe4 16.xe4 exd4 24.f3 d2 With the Rook on the 7th rank
17.xd4+ f6 18.b1 xd4 19.xd4 Black must be doing well and combined with
ad8 with an equal ending ] the vulnerability of his King Negi faced a
[ 14.xe5 dxe4 15.xd7 xd7 16.e2 difficult task to defend this position. Over the
c5! and the Bishop on b7 comes into the next few moves Gashimov expertly increased
game and White has some defensive work t h e p r e s s u r e . 25.a4! White has to play
to do to hold equality. ] actively
[ 14.exd5?! doesn't actually lose a piece but [ 25.a3?! g5 with h5 and Nh4+ ideas and
Black is still much better after e4 15.e5 White is in a lot of trouble ]
xe5 16.dxe5 xe5 17.dxc6 ( 17.c2 25...bxa4 26.fd1 c2 27.dc1 ce2
xd5 lea ve s B la ck a sa f e pa wn u p) 28.xa4 8e7 29.aa1 g5! closing the net
17...xc6 18.f4 e7 19.c2 d5 on the King on f3 30.d3 h4+ 31.g3?!
20.c1 e3 and Black is clearly on top ] [ 31.g4 was relatively best but Black has a
14...xe4 lot of interesting options here, i.e. h5+!?
[ 14...dxe4 was also possible and now after 32.xh5 7e4 when White is probably
15.exf6+ xf6 16.xe4 xe4 17.xe4 forced to sac. the exchange to avoid being
xe4 18.ad1 e7 the position is level. ] m a t e d wit h Nf 3 a n d Rh 4 33.g1 f3
15.xe4 dxe4 16.xe4 xe5 17.d4? 34.g4 e6 35.xg5+ xg5 36.xg5
[ 17.d4 was necessary and now after c5 and Black has reasonable winning chances ]
White has to be very careful 31...d7 32.d1
A) 18.xc5 xg2! 19.de6+ [ 32.c5 might've been a better try but still
( 19.xg2?! d5+ 20.f3 xc5 Black can double on the 7th rank or instead
leaves W hite's King ope n) 19...fxe6 go directly for the King with d6 33.h3 f6
20.xd8 axd8 21.xg2 d5 34.f1 f3+ 35.h2 h5! which must be
and Black has a slight edge in the close to winning ( 35...exf2+? is premature
endgame; because after 36.xf2 xf2+ 37.g1 f3
B) 18.d6! i s b e s t a n d n o w f6 38.e4 the pawn on a7 is dropping and
( 18...c4 leads to a draw after 19.xe8+ W hite's Q ue enside p awn s a re go ing t o
xe8 20.f5+ gxf5 21.g5+ f8 cause Black a real headache )]
22.h6+ g8 23.g5+ ) 19.xb7 c4! 32...c2 33.a5?? Negi makes a horrible
20.d3 cxd4 21.b3! ab8 22.bxc4 bxc4 blunder but his position was obviously rather
23.xc4 xb7 24.xd4 xd4 25.cxd4 unpleasant anyway.
d8 is very drawish indeed. ] [ 33.a3 h5! 34.h3 d6 and Black has
17...c5! This is the start of a forcing sequence excellent winning chances - the position is
of moves that leaves Black on top. The Bishop never going to be easy for W hite with the
on b7 only enters the game briefly but it does King caught in a mating net on g3. ]
a job weakening the White kingside 18.xc5 33...xc3 34.xg5+ g6
[ 18.xd8 was no better for example xf3+ 0-1
19.gxf3 axd8 20.fe1 ( 20.xc5?! xf3
804
794 B06 Having said that, White has to find the right
Nezhmetdinov,Rashid way to break in. How about preparing g2-g4!
Ujtelky,Maximilian 36.e1?! Time-trouble perhaps?
Chigorin mem (1) 1964 [ 36.d3 ]
[Andrew Martin] 36...xe5 37.dxe5 xc5 38.d3 a7
39.c2 c5 Black is right back in the game.
He re is an e xtra ord in ary ga me , in which 40.b4 c6 41.a3 c4 42.c5 xe5
Ujtelky goads one of the most feared 43.c1 h5 44.g3 ed7 45.xe6??
attacking players with the Hippopotamus. 1.e4 He just lost it psych ologically. Unable t o
g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.c4 e6 pierce the black pawn front, Nezhmetdinov
It helps to have a bishop on c4. 5.f3 e7 goes haywire with an unsound piece sacrifice.
6.h4 h6 Note the reaction. Black answers 7 And having provoked the mistake, Ujtelky's
h5 with g5. Whilst that might still be good for subsequent play is faultless. xe6 46.h6
White, most players would not want to commit df8 47.xf5 gxf5 48.e1 d7 49.xh5+
themselves this early. 7.f4 a6 8.e2 d7 e7 50.xf5 White has left himself with no
[ here, he could certainly try 8...b5 9.d3 plan B. d6 51.h5 a5 52.e5+ c6
bc6 with ideas of ...Nb4, . .. Nxd3 and ... 53.d1 c7 54.a1 b8 55.bxa5 b4!
Bb7. Maybe I'm the wrong type of guy to Su dd en ly it is W h it e who h a s so m e ve ry
play this slow stuff.... ] serious defending to do. 56.cxb4
9.a4 b6 10.d1 b7 Very pretty by White [ 56.h6 b3 57.h7 xh7 58.g6+ e6
a n d w h e r e t o g o f r o m h e r e ? 11.f1!? 59.xe6+ xe6 60.xe6+ d6 61.f7
He is b a f f l e d b y t h e la ck o f co n t a ct . f8 g5 62.g7 e4-+ ]
12.g1 c8 13.b3 d7 14.h3 d8 56...xb4 57.f3 ce6 58.a6 c5 59.e1
15.c4 c8 Black continues his d4 60.f6+ fe6 61.a5 b6 62.h6 d6
m a n o e u ve rin g, a l t h o u gh i n t h is c a se a 6 63.h7 c3 64.a1 c2 65.g6 h8 66.a7
needed to be defended. Ujtelky asks The contrast between the spread out White
Nezhmetdinov "what is your idea?" 16.b3 f6 position and Black's perfectly centralised
17.e1 f7 18.c1 c6 How should you formation is extraordinary. b2 67.h6
classify a position like this? Black is keeping e2+ 68.h2 c1 69.xc1 xc1 70.a5
White at bay. I personally find Black's play too c6 71.a6 e5+ 72.g3 b3 73.f4
passive in this game. 19.d2 d5 20.a5 [ 73.a8 xa8 74.xa8 xa8 75.h8
[ 20.exd5 cxd5 21.h5 g5 leaves nothing xh8 76.xh8 c6 77.f4 might have
clear at all. ] lasted longer, but the d pawn must win. ]
20...b5 21.f3 c7 22.d2 c8 23.a2 73...b2+ 74.h3 bc5 75.a8
h7 24.b4 he8 25.d3 f8 26.f4 W h ich Qu e e n sh a ll we t a ke f irst ? E it h e r
[ I think White missed a chance here: 26.e5 capture wins quickly.
f5 27.g3 d7 28.b4 The threat of a 0-1
kingside attack combined with White's ability
to stop ...c6-c5 makes the Black position
unattractive. For instance: f8 29.d2 g8 795 B06
30.d6 xd6 31.exd6 xd6 32.fe5+ ] Nunn,John DM 2605
26...xa5 27.e5 f5 28.d2 Shirov,Alexei 2690
[ 28.e3 g8 29.c5 d7 30.xd7 xd7 Germany 1996
31.c3 with the idea of Bc2 and g4, was to be [Alexander Volzhin]
considered. ]
28...b6 29.a1 h7? 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.c4 d6
[ 29...d7 ] 5.f3 e6 6.ge2 b5 7.b3 a5 8.a3 a6
30.a5 a7 31.xd8 xd8 32.d2 b7 Shirov believes in this setup and still employs
33.a5 a8 34.c5 c8 35.c3 f8 it despite terrible losses against Judit Polgar
The manoeuvres continue. He seems not to and Anand. 9.0-0?!
care one whit that he is the exchange down. [ 9.d5 was played in the above mentioned
805
games. Nunn deviates probably being afraid same thing. ]

of Shirov's preparation. However his 24...xf6 25.xc4 b6 26.c7 xb5
choice unlikely will have many supporters as 27.xd6 g7
Black now has easy play. ] [ 27...d8!? was not bad either. ]
9...d7 10.f4 e7 11.ad1 28.c1!
[ 11.e5!? was quite interesting as it would [ The unprotected first rank leads to White's
create some difficulties regarding Black's loss in the line 28.fa1?! b3! 29.xa5 b2!
d e v e l o p m e n t : d5 (forced) and now 30.xa6 b1+! ]
12.e3!? with a very complicated position. 28...d8! 29.c6
( 12.d1?! as was recommended in some [ 29.c5 b3 30.b2 a4 looks to be clearly
publications is strongly met by f6! 13.exf6 in Black's favour since the queen exchange
gxf6 and Black is fine. )] 31.xb5 xb5 32.a1 c8 is catastrophic
11...e5 12.g5 for White. ]
[ 12.dxe5 would be answered by xe5! 29...b3!
13.e3 f6 with excellent prospects for [ It wasn't too late to trip up: natural looking
Black. ] 29...a4? failed to 30.xa4 xc6 31.dxc6
12...gf6 13.d5?! A very dubious plan but I xe2 32.c7 c8 33.xb4 and it's only
don't know what to recommend W hite. c5 White who has chances to win. ]
14.a4 b4 15.b5 b6!? A very ambitious 30.b2 d3!!
move which leads to wild complications. [ But not 30...a4? which would fail to
[ T h e s i m p l e 15...xb5 16.axb5 b6 31.c3! xc6 32.dxc6 and White is better.
was good enough: 17.d3! a4 18.c4 After the text W hite's pieces are
and Black is slightly better. The text might uncoordinated, his back rank is still weak
objectively be even stronger. ] and 31... Rc8 is threatened. ]
16.d3! c4! 17.xc4 xa4 18.a1! 31.cb1? Being short of time Nunn loses
Probably Black had overlooked this strong immediately.
move. [ He had to try 31.xb3! and Black has to
[ Evidently he hoped f or 18.b1 c5! choose which piece to take. The following
, and W hite has to give up his important variations were given by Shirov:
dark-squared Bishop: 19.xf6 xf6 20.f3 A) 31...xe2 i s i n f e r i o r : 32.f3 e7
0-0 21.a1 fc8! 22.c3 d8! intending ... ( 32...g5? 33.c7 f8 34.xe5+ f6
Qb6 with a clear edge for Black. ] 35.c7+ h8 36.h4 d1+ 37.h2
18...xb2 19.b3 xc4 20.xc4 c8 xf3 38.xh7+ xh7 39.c7+ g8
21.d3 d8 22.c4! 0-0!? 40.gxf3 ) 33.c7 b2 34.e1! e8
[ Black could have obtained material 35.xa5 b5 and it's not clear if Black
ad va n t a ge h e re b y 22...bxc3 23.exc3 has realistic winning chances.;
xc3 24.xc3 xb5 25.xf6 xf6 26.fb1 B) 31...xb3! Only this move is correct!
d7 27.xa5 0-0 28.a7! but his piece s 32.xa6 a4 33.g3! e7! 34.c7
don't seem particularly comfortable. In any ( 34.a7 d6 35.a5 b8 36.a6
case White's activity yields him very good b6 ) 34...d6 35.b7 d1+! 36.f1
drawing chances. ] d4! In this position Black should
23.a2! A good idea. White intends Rf1-a1 definitely win due to his a-pawn but it still
obtaining full compensation for the pawn. But requires a good technique. ]
B l a c k h a d s o m e t h i n g i n m i n d . . . xc4!! 31...c8 32.a4
An unexpected blow! [ 32.d6 a4-+ ]
[ Variations like 23...xb5 24.cxb5 a8 32...c2! Now White can't avoid material
25.fa1 would just demonstrate White's losses. 33.xb3 xe2 The rest is easy to
positional power. But now Black's pawns are u n d e r st a n d . 34.f3 d3 35.d7 xe4
going to be really strong. ] 36.xf6 xf6 37.d6+ f5 38.f1 d3
24.xf6 39.d7+ f6 White resigned. Excellent
[ 24.xc4 b6 would eventually lead to the game! Shirov considers it as one of his best
806
achievements so far. xe5 As English Grandmasters like to say,

0-1 "queen and knight - they're all right!" Still,
Epishin does very well to win this position.
19.b3 c5 20.f6 e8 21.d1 e7
796 B06 22.f4 White should simply exchange queens
Okrajek,Alexander 2295 with an almost certain draw. b6 23.h1 g7
Epishin,Vladimir 2599 24.e1 g5 25.g3 f6 26.e4 f5 27.a4
8th Schloss Open (2) 23.03.2002 a5 28.f4?! b5 29.xa5 xf4 30.xf4 gxf4
[Nigel Davies] 31.a4 Superficially this looks good for White
because Black's kingside pawns are 'officially'
Epishin's play in this game should be of great weak. But the combination of the knight on e5
interest to exponents of the Scandinavian. and pawn on f4 has a cramping effect. b8
W hen W hite tricks him out of his favourite 32.axb5 cxb5 33.a7 f6 34.g1 d8
Gruenfeld Defence, with 1.Nf3, he transposes 35.f1 b8 36.g1 h5 37.f2 h4 38.e2
i n t o a f o r m o f S c a n d i n a v i a n , e v i d e n t l y g8 39.d5 d8 40.e4 d4 41.d3 b4
believing that the moves Nf3 and ...g6 make 42.a6+ g5 43.a5 f6 44.a8 f3+!
this position eminently playable for Black. 45.gxf3 f4 46.f8 d6 47.b8 c6
1.f3 g6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 48.h8 d4+ 49.f2 xf3 50.e2 d2
This transposition into a Scandinavian is a 51.g8 f5 52.h8 xc2
speciality of Epishin. Evidently he thinks that 0-1
with the W hite knight committed to f3 this
position is fine for Black. 4.c3 d6
[ Epishin has also tried 4...a5 , for example 797 B06
5.d4 g7 6.c4 f6 7.0-0 0-0 8.e1 Pacey,Kevin
g4 9.h3 ( 9.xe7 c6 10.e1 b4 Day,Lawrence A
recovers the pawn with advantage.) 9...xf3 Int Open North Bay Int Open 1996
10.xf3 b4 11.b3 c6 12.e3 e6 [Nigel Davies]
13.ad1 ad8 14.e2 b5 15.g3 a5
16.h4 c6 17.xc6 xc6 18.c3 a5 One suspects that the unorthodox Lawrence
19.c2 c4 20.c1 c6 was about equal in Day has a much better idea about how to play
Shchekachev - Epishin, Frankfurt 2000 ] these weird positions, and here he sensibly
[ Another idea worth thinking about is 4...d8 develops his bishop to f5. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6
5.d4 g7 6.c4 h6!? intending to bring 3.e5 h5 4.e2 g7 5.f3 d5 6.c3 c6
the knight to f5. ] 7.h3 f5 8.bd2 h5 9.h2 c7 10.df1
5.c4 f6 6.d3 Was White worried that a d7 11.e3 h4 Day plays in the most
two square advance of the d-pawn would turn interesting positional style, preventing White's
it into a target? expansion on the kingside whilst pursuing his
[ 6.d4 must be better after which Kharitonov - own development. Of course I'm not sure he
Epishin, Wijk aan Zee 2000 continued g7 would have had such success playing Black
7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 a6 9.e2 (Psakhis - against Lautier. 12.f3 e4 13.g5 f5
Epishin, Vlissingen 2000 was agreed drawn 14.f3 e6 He shuns the tacit offer of a draw
at this point) b5 10.d3 c6 11.d1 e6 by repetition! 15.g4 e7 16.g5 e4
12.e4 xe4 13.xe4 c4 14.e1 ad8 17.d2 xf3 18.xf3 f5 19.xe7 xe7
15.c3 d5 16.xd5 xd5 17.f4 d7 20.e3 c5 A lever in e style of the French
18.e2 fd8 19.e1 h6 20.a4 e6 Defence, which is the way that Black should
21.axb5 axb5 22.a6 b4 23.g3 bxc3 ultimately try to take the initiative. It's good
24.bxc3 1/2-1/2 ] to develop the pieces first though.... 21.xf5+
6...g7 7.0-0 0-0 8.g5 c6 9.e1 g4 gxf5 22.g5+ f8 23.0-0 d8 24.f4 cxd4
10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 bd7 12.e4 xe4 25.cxd4 b8! Of course. e knight is far better
13.xe4 e5 14.h4 ae8 15.d4 f6 on c6. Things get better and better for Black
16.dxe5 xg5 17.xg5 xe5 18.xe5 as White makes an ill-fated attempt to attack.
807
26.h2 c6 27.fd1 a5 28.g4 hxg3+ usual ) 7.c3 0-0 8.bd2 a6 9.0-0 b5
29.fxg3 e7 30.g5 b6 31.d2 c8 10.b3 b7 11.fe1 a5 12.c2 c5
32.ad1 a4 33.g4 c4 34.gxf5 xf5 13.dxc5 dxc5 14.ad1 b6 15.e3 c8
35.xd5 xd4 36.xd4 xd4 37.g2 g8 16.b4 ( 16.h4! might have made Black
38.h4 xg2+! 39.xg2 c6+ 40.f1 f3+ su f f e r I d o n't like to ca stle t o o e arly in
0-1 these setups.) 16...cxb4 17.cxb4 c6
18.a3 a5 19.xb6 xb6 20.c7?!
Missing Black's reply axb4! 21.xb6 bxa3
798 B06 22.e5 a2 23.b3 fc8 24.d4 xd4
Panchanathan,Magesh Chandran 2543 25.xd4 xe5 and the a2 pawn is too
Illingworth,Max 2289 strong 0-1 Roos, D-Krasenkow, M Chalons
Sydney Int Open (9) 11.04.2010 en Champagne 2010. ]
[Gawain Jones] 4...a6
[ 4...d7 is another different move order.
In this final game of the update I'll add various 5.c4 e6 6.e3 a6 7.a4 b6 8.d2 h6
new Hippo games. It is a difficult opening to 9.0-0 b7 All computer programs prefer
classify as it can arise from so many different White here, but that can be safely ignored.
openings. 1.f3 Indeed the top suggestion of my computer
[ My own success on the black side started here is 10.Ne1?!! followed by 11.Nf3. White
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 is ahead in development and has more
5.c4!? ok I'll play a Hippo:) e6 6.a4 b6 space but that's the nature of the opening
7.d2 h6 8.f3 e7 9.ge2 d5 and now White struggles to come up with a
I quite like this move. The main problem with plan as Black doesn't have any obvious
my opponent's position is that her light weaknesses. Meanwhile Black has lots of
squared bishop doesn't have a good square improving moves and can plan to expand on
to go to. 10.b3 bc6 11.h4?! and I fail to either flank. ( 9...e7 might be my preferred
see the point of this (and the next). I move order just so that if White plays as in
imagined she would castle kingside herself the game then the bishop is better placed on
as now there's no where safe for her king. c8. ) 10.d5!? e5 11.e1 gf6 12.f3 h5
Meanwhile I couldn't castle kingside anyway The position now resembles a Kings Indian.
as h6 is en-prise so I'm going long. b7 13.d3 c5 14.e2 c8 15.c3 xd3
12.g4 d7 13.exd5 exd5 14.f4 a5 16.xd3 d7 17.a5 b5 18.b4 h4
15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.ce2 c6 17.c3 h5 19.ac1 f6 20.g3 h3 21.h1 g5
18.e2 b7 19.d3 hxg4 20.fxg4 xb3+ gave Black decent chances on the kingside
21.cxb3 c6 22.f4 a5 23.b4 c4 while White's trying to crash through on the
24.f2 b8 25.he1 h6 26.f3 g5 other flank. Nyzhnyk, I-Ehlvest, J Reykjavik
27.hxg5 xg5 28.b1 c8 29.fxd5 2010. This is a sensible way of playing
xg4 30.xf7 h7 0-1 Dhar Barua, S- against a young well prepared opponent
Jones, G Canberra 2010 was exactly what who'll be on his own immediately rather
Black was hoping for from the hippo. ] than having the safety belt of 20 moves of
1...g6 2.d4 g7 3.e4 d6 4.c3 theory. ]
[ 4.c4 This move provokes e6 to block the 5.a4 A logical move but not when which
bishop's path to f7. 5.e2 ( 5.b3 e7 s h o u l d w o r r y B l a c k b6 This is a more
6.0-0 d7 7.e1 b6 8.bd2 b7 9.f1 accurate move order than
0-0 10.g3 c5 11.c3 cxd4 12.cxd4 c8 [ 5...d7 as after 6.c4 ( 6.a5!? c5 )
13.f4 e5 14.e3 exd4 15.xd4 e5 6...e6 7.a5! Black can no longer develop his
16.xe5 dxe5 17.c3 xd1 18.axd1 bishop on the long diagonal without
1/2-1/2 Speelman, J-Greet, A 4NCL 2010 experiencing some structural problems after
was another very comfortable game for White takes on b6. e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.e2
Black. ) 5...e7 6.f4 bc6!? A type of b5 10.axb6 cxb6 11.g3 b7 12.d3 b5
A c c e le ra t e d Hip p o ? ! ( 6...a6 would be 13.e3 e5 14.d2 exd4 15.xd4 e5
808
16.xe5 dxe5 17.c5 e8 18.fd1 c8 All the moves thus far have been pretty much
19.b4 Satyapragyan, S-Gelashvili, T Dubai forced since W hite sacrificed his piece but
2010. ] now White misses a chance 24.h4
6.c4 e6 7.h4 h6 8.e2 The first move [ 24.c2+! e4 25.c1 f5 ( 25...g8
deviating from Tiger's bible on the opening. 26.f4 is no better.) 26.f4 c8 27.e2!
He only investigates wit h a hu ge t hrea t of 2 8. Bg4 wh ile e6
[ 8.f4 e7 9.d2 d7 10.0-0 28.xc7 c8 29.g4! and the knight's
etc. Leaving the king in the centre to attack trapped as h6 30.xh6 xh6 31.g5+!
on the kingside looks like a logical xg5 32.h6! leaves the king running round
alternative. ] like a headless chicken. ]
8...e7 Usual [ 24.d3+! e4 25.e3 also looks good. ]
[ 8...f6 is logical seeing as White has just 24...e4
left the pawn undefended. 9.g3 ( 9.e5 [ 24...f5 seems forced 25.d5!? ( 25.d3
g4 has echoes of the note in the previous e4 26.xe4 xe4 27.xe4 xe4
game where Black played an early Nc6-b4.) 28.xe4 ae8 and Black has survived to a
9...b7 10.e2 c6 ] roughly equal ending.; 25.e4 g8 26.xe5
9.e3 d7 10.g3 b7 11.d3 xe5 27.xe5 ae8 28.e6! xe6
A typical hippopotamus has arisen and it's 29.xe6 fxe6 30.d7+ g7 31.g4
time to try and come up with a plan for Black. is very messy but at least Black's survived
W hite has quite a good setup against any to live on in the ending.) 25...g8 26.g4
plans on the kingside so I would probably look and White's big attack is ongoing, one light
at playing on the queenside. There's no need might run xd5 27.xd5 e4 28.xe4 d7
to rush, Black can wait to see how W hite 29.d3! A highly surprising queen trade but
intends to improve his position. f6 n o w W h i t e w i n s b a c k a p i e c e . xd3
[ 11...c5 12.c3 c7 looks reasonable. ] 30.xd3 ae8+ 31.e3 e5 32.f4 xg2
[ 11...0-0? 12.d2 h7 13.h5 g5 14.xg5 33.xf5+ g8 34.f1 g5 35.g4
hxg5 15.h6 is not recommended however ] and White's bishop pair and two pawns look
12.c3 d7 13.e2 0-0?! This move is more relevant than the extra exchange. ]
extremely risky. 25.d5! The pawn on f6 is doing a good job of
[ I ' d p r e f e r 13...g4 14.d2 h5!? stopping the h8 bishop from contributing to
( Playing in Kings Indian style with 14...e5 the game and now White offers an exchange
i s a l s o p o s s i b l e a l t h o u g h a f t e r 15.d5 to nullify the other bishop. d8
Black should delay an immediate f5 as [ 25...xd5 26.xd5 followed by 27.Bxe4 is
16.exf5 gxf5 17.d4! is unpleasant.) hopeless. ]
15.g5 c5 ] [ 25...c6 26.d2 c5 27.xh6 ( Playing like
14.h5 White has a ready made attack g4 the game is also possible 27.d5!? d8
[ Ideally Black would like to block up the 28.xe4 xd5 29.xd5 d7 30.b3 )
kingside with 14...g5? but 15.xg5! hxg5 27...xh6 28.e3+ h7 29.g5 g8
16.h6 h8 17.h7+! and you won't live for ( 29...c8 30.d5 g8 31.f4+- ) 30.f5+
long. ] h6 31.f4+ h7 32.g4!+- ]
15.d2 e5 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.c4 26.xe4 xd5 27.xd5 d7 28.e5
[ 17.hxg6 is also possible if you don't want to Not the most accurate way to finish off the
give Black the opportunity to block up the game
kingside, although as you'll see that also [ 28.b3! fe8 29.c2 g8 30.f1
gives White a great attack. ] is, with computer accuracy, the best way
17...g5 This doesn't work out but it's tough to to develop the attack as Black's knight on h6
o f f e r a n y b e t t e r s o l u t i o n s . 18.xg5! is dropping whilst he's helpless to stop the
Of course! A knight is a small price to pay to queen and two bishops and mountain of
open up Black's king. hxg5 19.xg5 h6 pawns delivering mate. ]
Otherwise 20.h6 was crushing. 20.d1 e8 [ 28.d4!? is a lso ra t h e r st ro n g. de8
21.f5! exf5 22.exf5 h7 23.f6 h8 29.e4+ xe4 30.xe4+ f5 31.xf5+
809
xf5 32.d7 Is clearly better for White. The 1-0 Turner,M-D'Costa,L/Scarborough 2001. ]
pawns muffle the extra piece in the corner 8.b5!? The latest try in this position looks
that's still just a bystander. ] logical to take back the pawn with the knight.
28...g4? This allows forced mate [ 8.b3 e6 9.xd4 f6 ( 9...e7!? )
[ 28...fe8 was forced when Black can 10.f4 0-0? Black is oblivious to the danger
continue to soldier on although 29.e4+ 11.xb8 xb8 12.c6 with a clear
g8 30.e7 xa4 31.f3! The king needs a advantage, Frangi, M-Dijon,J/ICCF Email
square a5 32.g6! and I would feel 2002. ]
extremely uneasy trying to defend the black [ 8.0-0 h6 9.a4+ d7 10.xd4 0-0
side. ] 11.g5 f6 12.ad1 c7 13.fe1
29.e4+ g8 30.g6+ An entertaining hack with a slight edge, Hasanova,E-Galliamova,
by White but Black didn't have any problems A/Varna 2002. ]
before his premature castling and I think the [ 8.cxd4 f6 9.a4+ c6 10.b5 0-0
hippo is still an underrated opening. 11.e3 a6 12.c3 b8 ( 12...b5?
1-0 is met by 13.xb5 ) 13.d1 b5 14.e2
b7 1/2-1/2 Kernazhitsky,L-Pisk,P/Tanta
2000. ]
799 B06 8...a6!?
Pavasovic,Dusko 2591 [ 8...f6 9.bxd4 0-0 10.0-0 c7 11.e2
Pikula,Dejan 2523 a6 ( 11...g4!? is worth thinking about)
Karadjordje Topola (4) 07.05.2004 12.b3 e6 13.e1 c6 14.xc6 xc6
[Gary Lane] 15.e5 when White has a space advantage,
P e l i k i a n , J - M a t s u u r a , E /
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6 BrazilTeamChampionship 2001. ]
5.f3 g7 6.a3 cxd4 7.c4 d8 [ If Blacks wants to appear in lots of
P ik u la is r a t e d o ve r 2 5 0 0 so o n e h a s t o newspaper chess columns he should try
re s p e c t h i s c h o ice t o re t re a t t h e qu e e n . 8...dxc3 and then resign after 9.xf7+ ]
Others: 9.bxd4 f6 10.a4+ c6
[ 7...e4+ this is the main alternative 8.e3 [ If 10...b5 Black does not win with a fork but
h6 ( not 8...dxe3? due to 9.xf7+ f8 will crash upon 11.xb5+ axb5 12.xa8
10.d8+ xf7 11.g5+ winning ) 9.cxd4 winning ]
0-0 10.0-0 f5 ( 10...g4 11.g5 xd1 11.xc6 bxc6
12.xe4 g4 with equal chances, Anderton, [ 11...d7? fails after 12.fe5 winning. ]
M-Ramaswamy,A/Edinburgh 2003.) 11.e1 12.e5 The knight dominates by attacking c6
xe3 12.xe3 f4 13.e5 e6 14.g3 f6 and f7. Already White is on top. 0-0 13.xc6
15.d5 exd5 ( 15...d8 16.b3 gives White f5
a slight initiative.) 16.xd5 c6 17.ae1 [ 13...b8 14.0-0 b7 15.a4 d6
e6 18.b5 xe5 19.xe5 xc4 20.xc4 is probably Black's best chance but White
ac8 21.b3 led to a level position in Ravi,T- still has an edge. ]
Shashikant,K/Chennai 2004. ] 14.0-0 c8 15.f3
[ 7...a5!? 8.xd4 f6 9.0-0 0-0 10.e1 [ It is tempting to grab another pawn with
e5 11.b4 c7 12.db5 e7 13.e3 b6 15.xa6 but White rightly realises that his
14.d6! White's lead in development is lack of development is a potential problem
enough to persuade him to seek an c7 16.f4 ( 16.f4 h5!; 16.e1! )
exchange of queens xd6 15.xd6 c6 16...e4 is sufficient compensation for the
16.g5 a6 ( 16...d7 17.ad1 ab8? pawns. ]
18.xf6 xf6 19.e4 wins ) 17.ad1 b5 15...c7 16.e1 e4 17.xf7+! h8
18.xf6 xf6 19.d5 d7 20.xf7+! [ Or 17...xf7 18.xf7 xf7 19.xe4
White jumps at the chance to play a tactical and Black should resign. ]
trick g7 21.b3 a7 22.c2 c7 18.e6 xe5
23.e3 e7 24.e4 f5 25.c5 [ After 18...xe6 19.xe4 White is just two
810
pawns up. ] didn't give W hite enough f or t he pawn .

19.xc8 xc8 20.g4 Pavasovic plays his Lenderman, A (2443)-Zlotnikov, M (2314)
trump card by undermining the defence of the Philadelphia 2008.) 8...exf6 9.h4 b6
knight. g8 21.f4 A nice touch because 10.e4 h6 and it's doubtful that Black has
Black is obliged to defend e4 allowing White any problems at all. Ulibin, M (2500) -Belov,
to improve his position before accepting more I (2430) Voskresensk 1990. ]
material. 7...b6
[ 21.gxf5 gxf5 22.h1 ( 22.f1!? ) [ 7...b4 is Black's other main try: 8.d1
22...g3+ 23.hxg3 xe1+ 24.g2 ] ( 8.e2 lo oks a b it clu msy.) 8...b6
21...b5 22.e2 a4 23.gxf5 gxf5 24.h1 W h e n a g a i n ( 8...a5 has been tried a few
1-0 times by Uzbek GM Dzhumaev 9.a3!? gf6
10.d3 bxa3 11.xa3 d5 12.f2 dxe4
13.xe4 looked more pleasant for White.
800 B06 Negi, P (2149) -Dzhumaev, M (2498)
Perunovic,Mil 2582 Mumbai 2004.; 8...gf6 9.d3 0-0 10.0-0
Shanava,K 2586 b6 was seen in Mitkov, N (2483) -
16th Neckar Open (7.1) 08.04.2012 Chatalbashev, B (2524) Bolzano 1999 when
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] 11.a3! looks strong, forcing some positional
c o n c e s s i o n o u t o f B l a c k .) 9.a3
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 looks tempting, although the only practical
Again we see a strong GM try this topical encounter we can find is h6 10.h4 bxa3
variation with the bishop hitting thin air! c6 1/2-1/2 Van der Sterren, P-Nunn, J
And as yet we haven't really covered this Groningen 1974. It looks as though White is
response. 5.d2 d7 doing pretty well here though. ]
[ Last time Gawain wrote 5...b5 8.d3
A) The more aggressive 6.f4 has also [ If White is worried about the bishop coming
scored very well and is f airly likely to out to g4 he could try 8.h3 . A fairly recent
transpose to the game: b4 ( 6...d7 g a m e c o n t i n u e d b4 9.d1 c5!?
would just be a inversion of moves.; while Despite winning the game, Black's opening
6...f6 7.d3 is seen in the archives.) choice isn't convincing. 10.c3 ( Again 10.a3
7.d1 b6 8.c3 f6 9.f2 bxc3 is also an option.) 10...bxc3 ( 10...f6
10.bxc3 0-0 11.d3 c5 12.f3 a5?! 11.xf6 xf6 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.xd8+
13.e5 dxe5 14.dxe5 was very good for xd8 14.e5 g7 15.cxb4 cxb4 16.e3
White. Dreev, A (2645)-Yrjola, J (2435) gives White a definite something.) 11.xc3
Yerevan 1996.; cxd4 12.xd4 d7 13.a4 c8 14.db5
B) 6.f3 h6 7.f4 f6 8.d3 g4 9.h3 xb5?! 15.xb5+ f8 16.0-0 and White
xf3 10.gxf3 bd7 11.0-0-0 a5 must have had a great position. Hossain, E
12.b1 b6 13.he1 fd7 (2531)-Bachmann Schiavo, A (2555) Dubai
when Black's pressure against the White 2009. ]
centre was probably enough for rough 8...g4
equality but in the end he too went down in [ 8...c4 looks too provocative - true Black
Hess, R (2590)-Ehlvest, J (2591) gets the bishop pair but he is delaying the
Philadelphia 2010. ] development of all his pieces for too long.
[ 5...f6 would transpose to a position seen 9.xc4 bxc4 10.0-0 b6 11.e5 d5
frequently in the archives. ] 12.a4 c7 13.c5 g4 Wang, P (2181)-
6.f4 b5 7.f3 Koeller, O (2224) Auckland 2004 when the
[ 7.e5 is a principled approach, attempting to current board one f or the New Zealand
punish Black for failing to develop his g8 Olympiad team should have opened up the
knight. However we don't think Black should queenside with 14.b3 with a huge positional
be too scared. f6 8.exf6 ( 8.h4 fxe5 advantage. ]
9.fxe5 dxe5 10.f3 a5 11.dxe5 xe5 9.0-0-0 Perunovic continues to follow the
811
computer's top line. Now the positions become square free when c4 13.e2 looks better
very double-edged, as is typical of castling on for White. ]
opposite flanks. 12...c4 13.xc4 dxc4 14.d5
[ 9.e5 has been tried a couple of times here From a human perspective this move looks
too but f6 again looks a good antidote. ] pretty forced as otherwise Black continues
9...b8 with ...Qd5 with control of the light squares.
[ P r e v i o u s l y 9...f6 has also been tried: c3! 15.d4
10.f5 ( 10.h3 is Rybka's suggestion [ Taking the pawn looks pretty scary: 15.bxc3
although xf3 11.gxf3 b8 12.f5 fd7 a5 16.d3 a3+ 17.d2 cxd5
looks rather messy.) 10...b4 11.e2 gxf5 White could try running with the king with
12.exf5 d7 ( Perhaps it was better to 18.e3 but one would rather be playing
defend the b4 pawn with something like Black. ]
12...fd5 although 13.h3 xf3 14.gxf3 [ 15.d3 would prevent the game
looks risky with Black's king stuck in the continuation but perhaps Black's alternative
centre. ) 13.g3 ( It looked possible to grab i s b e t t e r a n y w a y . a5?! ( 15...cxb2+
the pawn with 13.xb4 ) 13...h6 14.xf6 16.b1 cxd5 17.xd5 xd5 18.xd5
xf6 15.e4 d5 16.xf6+ xf6 h6 looks roughly level.) 16.dxc6! xa2
17.xb4 xf5 18.xf5 xf5 19.he1 17.bxc3 b3 18.c7 is winning for White. The
and only White had an initiative. Plaskett, difference between this and the game is that
J (2470)-Tkachiev, V (2455) London 1993. ] c2 is now protected. ]
10.e5 This is the most principled approach. 15...a5
Now ...f6 is too risky with a rook coming to e1 [ 15...cxd5 16.xd5 cxb2+ 17.b1
immediately. transposes to the previous note. ]
[ It was possible to prevent the knight 16.c4
jumping into c4 with 10.b3 but that leaves [ 16.b1 c5 17.c4 cxb2 transposes ]
Black enough time to complete his kingside 16...c5 17.b1
development with f6 ] [ 17.bxc3!? m i g h t b e p o s s i b l e b u t f6
10...d5 looks to be in Black's favour. ]
[ 10...c4 is another approach but then 17...cxb2 Black prevents White from
W hite could open up the centre: 11.xc4 manoeuvring his knight around to b3 via c1.
bxc4 12.exd6 xd6 13.e4 d5 14.he1 18.g3
f6 15.h4 f7 16.e2! With an advantage. [ At some point White should try breaking
White's point is that h6 can be met with t h r o u g h i n t h e c e n t r e w i t h 18.d6!?
17.e3 so that knight can't come to h6. ] Here the game might continue: e6 19.d5
11.hf1 h6 20.h4 exd6 21.exd6 f6 22.xf6
[ The only other time this position was xf6 23.ed4 with a crazy position! One
reached W hite tried the immediate 11.f5 p o ssib le lin e co n t in u e s: ( or 23.f5!? )
w o u l d l o o k s r a t h e r c r i t i c a l : gxf5 23...xd4 24.xd4 xd5 25.xd5 0-0
when instead of 12.df1 in Rojo Huerta, G 26.c6 a6 27.d1 b6 28.e7+ g7
(2355) -Iruzubieta Villaluenga, J (2410) 29.e5+ h7 30.xg6 fxg6 31.e7+
O r o p e s a d e l M a r 1 9 9 6 ( 12.b3! g8 32.e6+ g7 33.e5+ with a draw. ]
keeping control over the c4 square looks to 18...h6
favour W hite.) 12...c4 looks to be ok for [ 18...c8!? is another interesting alternative
Black. ] but W hite is better after 19.d6 ( Again
11...b4 19.f5!? looks dangerous.) 19...e6 20.d5
[ 11...c4 12.xc4 bxc4 13.a4 b5 21.xb5+ xb5 22.d2 ]
looks easier for White as his control of the 19.e4?! This looks to be an error.
dark squares on the queenside prevents [ Again 19.d6!? loo ks da ngero us : e6
Black's counterplay. ] 20.d5 exd6 21.d4! with a powerful
12.e2?! This lets White's advantage slip. initiative. ]
[ Instead 12.b1 was better, keeping the e2 [ While 19.f5! is perhaps strongest. A fairly
812
forcing line continues: b3 20.cxb3 b4 driven back into a passive position. The
21.d2! xc4 22.xa5 c1+ 23.xc1 game Geenen - Zilberman, Manila(ol), 1992
bxc1+ 24.xc1 xf5 25.xc5 with good co nt in ue d : b4 9.d1 a6 10.e3 d5
winning chances in the ending. ] 11.exd5 cxd5 12.c4 e7 13.cxd5 xd5
19...f5 20.d6 e3 21.xc5 xc5 14.c1 0-0 15.xd5 exd5 16.b3 e8
22.xc5 exd6 17.0-0 d7 18.e1 f6 19.b2 e4
[ 22...xd1 also looks likely to draw after 20.f4 a7 21.fd3 ae7 , and Black is
some crazy complications: 23.xd1 exd6 clearly better. ]
24.exd6 f6 25.e1+ f8 26.h3! c8 8...a6 9.d5! The correct approach: White
27.hxg4 xc5 28.d4 d5 29.e6+ f7 counters flank activity by action in the centre.
30.xg7 fxg5 31.e7+ f6 32.fxg5+ cxd5
xg5 33.e6+ xg4 34.d7 f5 35.d8 [ 9...b4?! is insuf f icient : 10.dxe6! fxe6
hxd8 36.xd8 xd8 37.xh7= ] 11.d1 d5 12.f4 e7 13.h3
23.fe1 dxc5 and Black's seemingly strong central pawns
[ Now it's too late to take the exchange: are in fact very good targets ]
23...xd1? 24.exd6+ f8 25.e7+ g8 [ 9...exd5!? deserves certain attention.
26.xd1 when the d6 pawn will net at least Black's ideas here are similar to those Nunn -
the exchange. ] Shirov: 10.exd5 c5 11.0-0 ( 11.a4
[ 23...xc2!? is interesting but not very is hardly good: b4 12.b5 xb5 13.axb5
sound: 24.exd6+ xe1 25.xe1+ f8 f6 14.c4 0-0 15.0-0 bd7 intending ...
26.e7+ g8 27.e5 and again the d Nb6, ...a4, with good prospects.) 11...f6
p a wn is m o re im p o rt a n t t h a n t h e e xt r a 12.g5 h6 13.h4 g5 14.g3 0-0 15.a4
exchange. ] b4 16.b5 e8 17.c3 f5 18.h4 f4
24.xe3 0-0 25.e7 fc8 26.h3 xf3 19.h2 Now White's Bishop is out of play.
An interesting game. White could have kept d7 20.hxg5 hxg5 21.h5 f6 22.h3
the advantage with 12.Nb1 when Black's e5 23.e6+ h8 24.xf6 xf6 25.fd1
opening would have failed to equalise. b8 and Black is clearly better. ]
½-½ 10.exd5 e5 Black has a nice pawn structure
in the center and if he manages to complete
his development he'll be better. So W hite
801 B06 should play very aggressively. 11.e4! c7?!
Polgar,Judit 2635 After this seemingly natural move Black's
Shirov,Alexei 2695 position is barely defensible.
Amsterdam 1995 [ O f c o u r s e , 11...f5? is bad in view of
[Alexander Volzhin] 12.g5 ]
12.c4! bxc4
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.c4 d6 [ 12...e7 is insufficient in view of 13.c5! ]
5.f3 e6 6.ge2 b5 The main line. 7.b3 [ and 12...d7 13.2c3 bxc4 14.a4
[ 7.d3 i s w e a k e r a s i t a l l o w s e5! leads to the same position as in the game. ]
with good prospects for Black, for example: 13.a4+ d7
8.e3 f6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.d1 bd7 [ 13...e7 14.2c3 ]
11.c1 0-0 12.b3 c7 13.h3 a6! 14.2c3 e7? Black wants to play ...Ngf6,
(intending ...c5-c4) 14.c5 xc5 15.xc5 completing development, but this move allows
d8 16.0-0 d7 17.e3 f8! Aiming for brilliant combination which leads to a forced
the d4 square. Black is already slightly win for White.
better. 18.e2 e6 19.c3 b7 20.c2 c5 [ Both 14...f5 15.g5 ]
21.g3 xd1 22.xd1 d8 23.xd8+ [ and 14...e7 15.f6+ xf6 16.xf6
xd8 24.f3 f6 25.e1 g5 1/2,Liss - are very bad for Black ]
Kanstler, Rishon le Zion, 1994 ] [ To avoid an immediate loss Black should try
7...a5 8.a3 either 14...h6 15.b5 xb5 16.xb5 f5
[ 8.a4?! is weaker because White's Knight is 17.d2 gf6 18.c6 ]
813
[ or 14...f8 15.c6 b8 16.a4! 7...d7 8.g2 b5 9.d1 b4 10.c4 bxc3

(intending 17 Nb5 Bxb5 18 axb5!), although 11.bxc3 b5 12.e2 a3! with excellent
in both lines White's advantage is beyond prospects for Black, as in Schneider-
any doubt. ] Wedberg, Sweden 1976 ]
15.xd6!! After this blow Black's position [ 6.g2 c5 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.ge2 g4
crumbles to dust. xd6 9.d3 xe2 10.xe2 b8 11.0-0 c8
[ 15...xd6? leads to a spectacular mate in 12.b1 f6 and Black's chances were by
the centre of the board: 16.e4+ xd5 no means worse in Sveshnikov-
( 16...e7 17.d6+ ) 17.xf7+ xe4 Azmaiparashvili, USSR 1983. ]
18.c2+ d4 19.e3#! ] 6...c6 7.c3 b5 8.g2 cxd5 9.exd5 c7
16.e4 xd5 Although this is already the fourth move of the
[ 16...b8 loses on the spot: 17.d6+ e8 Black Knight, W hite has no advantage in
18.xd7+ ] development at all. 10.e2 f6 11.0-0 0-0
17.g5+ df6 12.c4 b5! Now we can conclude that Black
[ 17...f6 18.d1 xd1+ 19.xd1 ] has managed to solve his opening problems
18.d1 b7 successfully. 13.cxb5 xb5 14.a4 c7
[ 18...e6 is no better: 19.d6! ( 19.d7+ 15.bc3
f8 is not so clear.) 19...f5 20.d7+! f8 [ 15.d4? i s j u s t b a d : cxd5! 16.xd5
21.d6 winning material: xd7 ( 21...xf3 xd5 17.c6 c7 18.xd5 b7
22.xf7#; 21...b1+ 22.d1 e7 23.xf6 ) 19.xe7+ xe7 with a huge edge. ]
22.xa8+ e7 23.xd7 ] 15...b7 16.b1 Preparing the advance of
19.d7+ xd7 20.xd7 h6? t h e b - p a wn . d7 17.b4 e6 18.dxe6?!
[ 20...b7 was more stubborn as White has A f t e r t h is i n a ccu ra cy B la ck o u t p la ys h i s
to find a rather difficult solution: 21.a4! h6 opponent very convincingly, and I have failed
22.b5! hxg5 23.a3+ d8 24.d6+ to find a real improvement for White later in
c8 25.c5 with a quick mate. ] the game.
21.d1! [ 18.f4 i s b e t t e r : e5 ( 18...fxd5
[ In view of unavoidable mate after 21.d1 19.cxd5 xd5 20.xd5 xd5 21.xd5
hxg5 22.d6+ d8 23.b5+ exd5 22.b5 is better for White.) 19.fe2
Black resigned. An excellent attack! ] h5 20.b5 f5 21.a3 with a very
1-0 complicated position. ]
18...xe6 19.xb7 xb7 20.f4
[ Too dangerous is 20.xd6?! fd8 21.e5
802 B06 ac8 ]
Raetsky,Alexander 2453 20...d5! 21.f3
Sakaev,Konstantin 2649 [ 21.cxd5 ad8 22.xf6+ xf6 23.g4
St . Petersburg 1999 d4! and Black's threats are very
[Alexander Volzhin] dangerous. ]
21...ad8 22.d1 e4! 23.ce2
If Black plays the Modern defence without an [ 23.cxd5? xf4 24.xf4 xd1+
early ...Ng8-f6, he has an additional possibility 25.xd1 c3 ]
in the Fianchetto system. 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 23...fe8 24.e3 xf4 25.xf4 d4! 26.b5
3.c3 g7 4.g3 c6!? This provocative d5 27.b3 c4! 28.bd3 c5 29.3d2
move seems risky, but modern practice proves d3 30.c1 c3 31.xd3 xd3 32.xd3
it to be viable. 5.d5 d4 6.b1 White has xd3 33.xd3
tried several different continuations here, but [ 33.xd3 e1+ 34.g2 xd3 35.xd3
none of them promise anything special, for a1 is also lost for White. ]
example: 33...xa4 The rest needs no commentary.
[ 6.e3 c5 7.d2 ( 7.dxc6 xc6 8.g2 34.d5 e4 35.d7 e7 36.d5 d8
f6 9.h3 0-0 10.ge2 is very similar to 37.c4 f6 38.b4 d4 39.c8+ g7
Djurhuus-Volzhin, considered elsewhere.)
814
40.c6 d1+ 41.g2 e4+ 42.h3 d5! take action against the centre by other means.
0-1 [ The other Tiger games I have with this
basic idea went 7.f3 b7 8.a4 b4 9.e2
c5 10.c3 gf6
803 B06 A) 11.h6!? was speculative but
Ramaswamy,Aarthie 2224 interesting after bxc3 12.bxc3 xh6
Georgiev,Kiril 2661 ( 12...xe4! 13.b2!? xh6 14.xb7
Gibtelecom Masters (3) 25.01.2007 ef6 ) 13.xh6 cxd4 14.cxd4 xe4
[John Watson] 15.xe4 xe4 16.0-0 e6! 17.g3 ef6
( 17...df6 ) 18.fe1 e7 19.ac1! f8
A Tiger System ...a6 potpourri. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 20.g5 h6 21.a5 e7 22.c6 0-0
g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 With the 4 Be3 23.xa6 xa6 24.xa6 b8 and White's
lines (and associated 150 Attacks) having a-pawn may give him a slight edge, P
become so popular, this is arguably the main Ca rlsson -Hillarp Pe rsso n, S to c kh o lm
line of Tiger's Modern Complex. Black's plan is 1999;
to continue with ...b5, ...Bb7, ...Nd7, and ...c5 B) 11.g3 h5 12.g5 d5?! 13.e5 e4
in some order, but of course his position is 14.f4 bxc3 15.bxc3 cxd4 16.cxd4
flexible enough to adapt to various plans of ( 16.e6 ) 16...a5+ 17.e2 f5 18.xe7!?
W hite's. Flexibility, however, doesn't not h4 19.xh4 f8 20.xf5 ( 20.c1! )
guarantee success. 5.d2 'By far the most 20...gxf5 21.hb1 c8 22.xe4? dxe4
common', but he say that the most aggressive 23.g5 d5 24.e6 c4+ 25.e1 xd4
move is 5 f4, whereas 5 Nf3 is important and 0-1 Von Bahr-Hillarp Persson, Sweden
dangerous. b5 2003. ]
[ The other Tiger-ish order is 5...d7 6.h4! 7...c5 8.c3 b7 9.g3 gf6 Pretty much
( 6.f3 b5 ) 6...h5 , when 'the most standard stuff. I think that it is about equal.
important' 5 Qd2 line goes 7.h3 b5 8.g5 10.h3 To what point? h5! 11.d5 c4!?
b7 9.0-0-0! , when gf6? 10.f3? [ 11...e5! is straightforward and good. ]
( The most instructive and typical move, so 12.c2 c5 Threatening ...h4. 13.f3 c7
it's good to see in spite of Hillarp Persson's 14.1e2 e5!? A daring and probably
inaccurate move order. In a later rapid game, foolhardy move.
Berg f oun d 10.e5! dxe5 11.dxe5 xe5 [ 14...h4 15.f1 a5 is another thought. ]
12.xd8+ xd8 13.xd8+ xd8 14.f4 ) 15.b4 White stands perfectly well after this,
10...0-0 11.f2 b4 12.e2 c5! 13.dxc5 but
a5 14.b1 dxc5 ( 14...xc5! is obvious, [ 15.dxe6! w i t h t h e i d e a fxe6 ( better
but good: 15.xc5 dxc5 with dangerous 15...xe6 16.d4 , when d5 17.xe6
attacking chances and the better endgame if fxe6 18.e5! is good. ) 16.f4! would call
n e e d b e , b a s e d u p o n t h e b i s h o p p a i r) Black's bluff, even after h4 17.e5! hxg3
15.g4!? ( 15.c1; 15.f4!? with ideas such 18.xg6+ and exf6. ]
as Bc4, Qg3, and some knight sacrifice or 15...cxb3 16.axb3 0-0 17.h6 cd7 18.0-0
other ) 15...e5 16.f4 fd8 ( 16...exg4 fe8 and now the rating-shock move...
17.fxg4 xg4 18.f3 xb2! 19.c4! 19.f4?? , and resigns. A sad finish. Instead,
is one possibility) 17.c1 c4 ( 17...hxg4! ) [ 19.f5 h8 20.h4 with the idea f4 was
18.gxh5 c3 19.hxg6 ( 19.b6! d2 a good plan, or ]
20.e3 ) 19...cxb2 20.gxf7+ xf7 [ 19.b4 , stop ...Nc5, although that wasn't an
E Berg-Hillarp Persson, Umea 2003, and immediate threat due to Bxg7 and Nf5+! . ]
here instead of 21 Re1, Berg blundered by 0-1
21.ge6?? b3 ( 21...xe4! ) 22.cxb3
bxc1+ 23.xc1 xe4 0-1. ]
6.d3 d7 7.ce2!? As far as I know this is
new, and it looks rather passive. White wants
to shore up his centre with c3, so Black has to
815
804 B06 M/Sunningdale ENG 2008. ]

Roberts,Danny 2047 5.bxc3 f6 Black has a marvellous position
Storey,Charles 2292 apart from the fact that his bishop is missing
London Classic FIDE Open (6) 12.12.2009 from g7. But in Modern/ Dragon positions the
[Neil McDonald] bishop is such a vital piece its absence alone
can be enough to condemn an otherwise
1.e4 g6 promising opening system. 6.d3?!
[ A Sicilian move order is 1...c5 2.c3 g6 [ More energetic was 6.e5 e4 7.c4!
3.f3 g7 4.d4 ] A challenging move as besides the
2.d4 g7 3.c3 c5!? An opening favoured immediate threat of 8.Qd5, Black's natural
by the inventive Canadian IM Lawrence Day. development with b7-b6 will often fail to
4.dxc5 Qd5. xc5
[ Instead 4.f3 is perfectly reasonable and A) Or 8.f3 e6 9.xe6 dxe6 10.e2
will almost certainly transpose to a Sicilian c6 11.f4 d5 12.e3 b6 13.0-0 a6
Main lin e. Howe ver, no t e very playe r o f ( Why not 13...b7 immediately?) 14.fd1
White will be happy about it- there are an c4 15.d4 0-0 16.g5 b7 17.f3 c5
awful lot of 2.c3 or 3.Bb5 players out there 18.xc6 xe3+ 19.xe3 xc6
who would be horrified at being tricked into Black look OK here but was outplayed in
a Sicilian Mainline. ] the endgame in Stripunsky, A-Day, L/
[ A positional approach is to seize space with Toronto 2000.;
4.d5!? for example d6 5.f3 f6 6.b5+ B) 8.f3 c7 ( More counter attacking
Black's natural plan is to try to advance on was 8...a5 9.0-0 c6 when 10.d5?
the queenside with b7-b5 therefore W hite fails to e6 ) 9.0-0 e6 10.e2 b6
does his best to prevent it or at least make 11.d4 c6 12.b5 b8 13.f4
it less effective. d7 ( Or 6...bd7!? ) 7.a4 And White had the initiative in Sadvakasov,
0-0 8.h3 a6 9.0-0 c7 10.c4 a6 D-Dougherty, M/Philadelphia 2006. ]
11.a5! b5 12.d3 xc3 13.bxc3 b5 6...a5 7.d2 xc5 8.f3 d6 9.b1
with a complex battle on the queenside in bd7 It's easy to see that Black has achieved
Llanes Hurtado, M-Eljanov, P/Lugo 2006. ] a more secure development here than after
4...xc3+!? Storey decides to eliminate the the alternative 6.e5 given above. Roberts is
white knight before it can do any damage. It is unable to find a plan to exploit his unopposed
easy to sympathise with this decision when d a rk squ a re d b ish o p a n d so o n f a lls in t o
you see the problems Black has after trouble. 10.b5? He should simply castle.
[ 4...a5 5.d2 xc5 6.d5! c7 11.c4 c5 12.f4 d7 13.b1 c6
A) Black has a quick disaster after White's foray with his rook along the b-file has
6...d6?? 7.b4 d4 ( If 7...c6 8.b5! ) allowed his opponent to build up pressure
8.xd4 xd4 9.c7+ d7 10.xa8 against the e4 pawn. 14.0-0?
c6 11.0-0-0 f6 12.f3 xe4 [ White has little to show for the pawn after
13.xd4 xd4 14.xd4 e5 15.b5+ 14.e5 dxe5 15.xe5 ( Or 15.xe5 xg2
e7 16.e1 f5 17.f3 c5 18.xc5 dxc5 16.g1 e4 ) 15...xe5+ 16.xe5 xg2
19.b3 1-0 Jones, G-Vincenzi, M/Pula 17.g1 h3 ]
CRO 2007.; [ But it wasn't too late to defend the e4 pawn
B) 6...a6 7.xa6 bxa6 8.b4 c6 indirectly with 14.b2 or directly with ]
9.f3 d6 10.0-0 f6 Black can't [ 14.d2 ]
c o m p l e t e h i s d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h o u t 14...fxe4 15.e1 e5 The black pawns now
conceding a structural weakness. 11.c3 st o r m t h e c e n t r e . 16.h4 f5 17.d4
e6 12.e1 xd5 13.exd5 b7 14.e2 A despairing effort to complicate matters that
0-0 15.xe7 xe7 16.xe7 xd5 leads to a quick defeat. exd4 18.f3 0-0
17.xg7 xe7 18.xf8 xf8 19.d1 19.fxe4 fxe4 20.h6 d8!
Black managed to draw this but it looked [ Not falling under an attack after 20...exd3?
pretty horrible for Black in Trent, L-Turner, 21.e7! ]
816
21.g5 a5 22.f6 c3 23.e3 10...b7 White is perfectly centralised but the
[ Also hopeless for W hite is 23.f1 f7 qu e s t i o n is h o w t o im p r o ve t h e p o s i t i o n
24.bd1 e6 intending 25... Rae8. ] further? If given time then Black will
23...xf6 24.xf6 f8 counterattack with ...b5 and perhaps ...c5 as
0-1 w e l l w i t h a g o o d g a m e . 11.d5!?
Sergei decides it's time for action in the centre
but Black seems to have a number of
805 B06 reasonable options here e5 I'm not sure I like
Rublevsky,S 2695 this as much as 11...b5 - Kamsky gets very
Kamsky,G 2725 close to equalising but in quite a blocked
29th ECC Open 2013 (5.1) 24.10.2013 position Rublevsky manages to out
[Tom Rendle] manoeuvre him and gain the upper hand.
[ 11...b5! is risky because it allows White to
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 d7 open things up a little but Black should be
[ after 4...h6 Rublevsky would probably have OK after 12.dxe6 ( 12.a3 is probably an
still retreated the bishop back to e3 here improvement but W hite has to be careful
w h e n a f t e r 5.e3 f6 6.h3 ( 6.f3 moving a pawn so near his king as Black
is more usual) 6...bd7 7.g4!? White won can potentially use it as a lever to open up
a nice game in Vallejo Pons-Maiwald which t h e qu e e n si d e wi t h . . . b 4 la t e r o n . exd5
I annotated last year. ] 13.exd5 b6 14.d4 0-0 15.xg7 xg7
5.f3 h6 6.e3 Rublevsky's idea is that by and chances are finely balanced.) 12...fxe6
provoking ...h6 it's harder for Black to castle 13.b1 c6 ]
kingside as after Qd2 the pawn on h6 will be [ 11...c5 might also be playable here
vulnerable. Kamsky switches from a Modern although perhaps W hite can reach a
setup to a Hippopotamus by playing ...e6 and favourable middlegame with 12.xc5! bxc5
playing the knight on e7. e6 7.d2 a6 8.d3 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.e5! d5 15.a4 c4
b6 16.c5! and Black has to go on the
[ 8...e7 is very similar but now in Lastin, A defensive ]
(2632) -Milov, V (2574) Istanbul 2003 White 12.g4 c5 13.e2 d7 14.g1 g8?!
choose to castle kingside rather than into [ it's possible that 14...0-0-0! 15.b1 b8
an attack with ...b5 but after 9.0-0 b6 wa s m o re a ccu ra t e . No w if W h it e t rie s
10.e2 ( 10.d5!? is perhaps more testing 16.e1 Black is ready to respond with g5!
when Black should try c5 11.dxe6 fxe6 and ...Ng6-f4 ]
with only a slight edge for White) 10...b7 15.e1! An excellent multi-purpose move.
11.c4 f6 12.c2 c5 13.d5 exd5 14.exd5 White is bringing the knight to d3 to exchange
0-0 15.h3 b5! Black had reached a Black's strong knight on c5 whilst also getting
satisfactory middlegame position. ] ready to play f3 and solidifying his centre. f6
[ 8...b5 may seem more aggressive but it 16.f3 e7 17.b1 b5 18.d3 xd3
allows White the option of 9.a4 b4 10.e2 19.cxd3!? An interesting decision, choosing to
a5 11.c3 and I prefer White. ] aim for pressure down the c-file
9.0-0-0 e7 10.he1 [ 19.xd3 looks more natural though and I
[ 10.h4! would be my choice here, trying to believe W hite should be better here as
provoke a weakness on the kingside. Black Black has no obvious place for his king. ]
h a s a c o u p l e o f o p t i o n s h e r e : b5! 19...c6
se e m s b e s t an d n o w ( 10...h5 11.g5! [ 19...h5! seems a better try here, resolving
and the knight is basically on an outpost on the situation on the kingside so Black can
g5 as Black never really wants to play ...f6 finally castle. After 20.g5 d7 21.c1 0-0
because it's so weakening to e6 and g6.) White is only a little better although he can
11.f4 b7 12.b1 reaches a very tense increase the pressure on the c-f ile with
middlegame position. Perhaps Black is OK 22.c2 and Rgc1 ]
here after b4 13.e2 a5 ] 20.dxc6 xc6 21.d4 exd4 After this White
817
is definitely better with Black's isolated pawn xg4+ 55.g5 f6 Black is holding the
on d6 an obvious target for White's pressure. draw still ]
[ 21...0-0?! is a tricky pawn sacrifice but it 51.f5 e4 52.c4 d6
doesn't seem to work after 22.xh6 xh6 [ 52...f6? now loses to 53.xh6 xg4+
23.xh6 b4 24.g3! h7 ( 24...bxc3 54.xg5 ]
25.h3 ) 25.h3 f6 26.c4+ h8 27.d5 53.f6+ f8 54.d5! e8 55.g2?!
an d W h it e is a p awn u p with a win nin g [ 55.e6! c7 56.c4 e8 57.d3
position. ] p u t s B l a c k i n t o z u g z w a n g s o n o w c7
22.xd4 d8 23.b6 b7 24.d2 xb6 58.xh6 is winning ]
25.xb6 d7 26.gd1 e7 27.a5! 55...d6 56.xh6?! This comes very close
Very logical play from Rublevsky, bringing to winning but Kamsky manages to scramble a
every possible piece to attack the pawn on d6. draw
Kamsky is forced into passive defence but he [ 56.d5! e8 57.e6 transposes to 55.
just about manages to hold on a8 28.b4 Be6 ]
e8 29.d5+ xd5 30.xd5 a5 31.e1?! 56...a4 57.bxa4 b3 58.d5 b2 59.a2 e4
This allows Black to bring the bishop to e5 in 60.b1 c3 61.c2 xa4 62.xg5 c3
a couple of moves after which he should be 63.f5 b1 64.xb1 xb1 A very unusual
holding the draw. ending has been reached where White is very
[ 31.c5! keeps up the pressure. After b7 close to winning with the 3 pawns and the
32.e3 b4 33.f4 Black is horribly passive. ] knight on b1 is a long way away but
31...c7 32.5d2 amazingly enough it seems there is no way
[ 32.xb5 fails to xd5! 33.xd7 e3 for White to win here. 65.g5 d2 66.g6 f3
34.d3 g2 35.c3 f4 36.c6 c8 67.g4 g8 68.f4 d4 69.g5 e6+
37.e3 and Black can force a draw with g2 70.h6 g7! 71.g5 e6+ 72.h5 f4+
38.d3 f4 39.e3 g2 ] 73.h6 e6 74.h5 f4+ 75.g5 e6+
32...e5! 33.g3 xg3 34.hxg3 b4 76.f5 d4+ 77.e4 e6 78.e5 g5
White still has a slight edge now but with only 79.d6 f8 80.d5 f3 81.e6 h4
one weakness to defend Black should be 82.g7+ g8 83.e7 g6+ 84.e6 h4
holding a draw here - but wait, this game is 85.e7 g6+ 86.e8 e5 87.g5 g6
just getting started!! 35.c4 ad8 36.c2 88.d7 e5+ 89.e6 g6 90.f5 h4+
a8 37.e5!? White might as well try the 91.e5 g6+ 92.e6 f4+ 93.d6 h3
Bishop vs Knight ending. dxe5 38.xd7+ And finally White accepts there is no way to
xd7 39.xd7+ xd7 40.xf7 g5 win 94.g6 f4 95.e5 xg6+ 96.f5
This ending should be a draw but the bishop h4+ A fantastic fighting game from both
is slightly the better piece in these endings players.
with pawns on both sides because it covers ½-½
long distances so much faster than the knight.
41.d3 b6 42.e4 a4
[ 42...d6! seems the right way to defend, e. 806 B06
g. 43.b3 a4 44.f7 a3 45.bxa3 bxa3 Rublevsky,Sergei
46.f5 a4 47.g6 c3 48.xh6 e4! D'Amore,Carlo
49.fxe4 xe4 50.g6 e5 and White Olympiad, 2000 2000
cannot make progress here ] [Paul Motwani]
43.b3 c3+ 44.xe5 e7 45.c4 xa2
46.f5 c3 47.g6 b1 48.f4 d2 2) W 26:"Russian in a rush to win!" S.
49.d5! The bishop prevents the knight from Rublevsky-C.D'Amore, Istanbul Olympiad,
getting back to e4 d6 50.f7 e7?! Turkey 2000. Modern Defence, Code B06.
After this White seems to suddenly be winning 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 a6
[ 50...gxf4 was needed to get rid of the pawn 5.f3 d7 6.a4 b6 7.c4 If White's other
on g5 51.gxf4 e7 was necessary and now bishop were still on c1 instead of g5, then a
after 52.f5 e4 53.c4 f6 54.xh6 big threat would be 8 Bxf7+ because of 8...
818
Kxf7 9 Ng5+ Ke8 10 Ne6 or 9...Kf6 10 Nd5. White will be rewarded with decent play after
However, even in the current game, things the exchanges on d4. The only thing is that
could happen to Black's f rail f -pawn... h6 Black ha s se en f urth er. 12.cxd4 xd4
8.h4 g5? Practically asking for trouble, and 13.xd4 xd4 14.h6 c5! The accurate
White is quick to dish it out! 9.xg5! hxg5 response to take away the pressure against
10.xf7+! xf7 f7.
[ 10...f8 11.xg5 ( or first 11.d5 [ 14...g7 is also possible and after 15.xg7
is also horrible for Black. )] xg7 16.ac1 White is struggling to justify
11.xg5+ f6 If the king retreats, then 12 his pawn sacrifice. ]
N e 6 w i n s B l a c k ' s q u e e n . 12.g4 15.b4 d8 16.ac1 b6 17.b5 e4
With a multitude of threats including 13 Qf5 or 18.h1
13 Nd5+. e5 13.d5+ g6 14.f4+ f6 [ 18.ce1? looks tempting but leads to a red
15.dxe5+ dxe5 16.h7+! IM Carlo D'Amore face after xf2+ 19.xf2 xb4 when the
resigned facing the unavoidable 17 Qg6. white queen has left the board. ]
1-0 18...b7 Black is clearly on top. His pair of
bishops are exerting considerable pressure on
the white position with the latest threat being
807 B06 checkmate in one. 19.f3 h4 20.cd1 a5
San Marco,Jean 2135 [ 20...xh6 21.xd4 releases the tension
Sokolov,Andrei 2540 but Black still has the much brighter
ch Paris (1) 1999 prospects. ]
[Gary Lane] 21.d2 e6 22.g3 h5!
0-1
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6
5.f3 g7 6.e2
[ 6.e3 transposes to the normal lines but 808 B06
does have the benef it of a sneaky trick Sapozhnikov,R 2298
against those who are careless. For Nagle,S 2412
example: cxd4 7.cxd4 h6 ( 7...f6 2nd DC International 2014 (6) 28.06.2014
8.c3 a5 ) 8.c1! is the amazing move [Neil McDonald]
which wins a piece by targeting c8 and h6. I
have seen a few games where Black has 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
p r o m p t l y r e s i g n e d a f t e r j u s t 8 m o ve s . 5.f3 d7 6.g4?! A natural pawn thrust, but
Perhaps even more remarkable are the four here a poor decision. Black hasn't committed
games played at international level, where himself to Nf6, and so g4-g5 won't gain time
White oblivious to the opportunity played 8 by harassing the black knight. Therefore Black
Nc3. ] is able to use the pawn on g4 as a means to
6...h6 close lines on the kingside, which is
[ 6...f6 is the standard move but the undoubtedly in his favour. More flexible was
grandmaster chooses a different [ 6.d2 for example b5 7.h4 h5 8.h3
continuation. Black wishes to add pressure when the white knight got to the strong g5
on to th e d 4 p a wn b y m an o eu vrin g t h e squa re in Ch ep a rino v-S aka ev- s ee t h e
knight to f5 while keeping open the a1-h8 archives. ]
diagonal. ] 6...b5 7.h4?! He could still play
7.0-0 f5 8.a3 San Marco decides to fall [ 7.d2 ]
ba c k o n a f a m ilia r p lan o f h a rassing t h e 7...h5! Now White must either block the
queen with Bc4. That ploy is more effective kingside or let his pawn front be broken up.
when a move has not already been wasted on 8.g5 A space advantage isn't a good thing if it
playing Be2. 0-0 9.c4 c6 blocks a player's initiative on the side of the
[ 9...d8 10.dxc5 c6 11.e2 ] board where he wants to attack. As a
10.b3 d7 11.f4 cxd4 It seems that co n se qu e n ce o f h is p a wn m o ve s o n t h e
819
kingside, White no longer has the chance to White has no way to arrange an attack on
play Ng5, putting his knight on a dominant the black king when his own monarch has
square. Nor can he ever play Qd2 and Bh6 to no safe haven. ]
exchange off Black's dark squared bishop as 13...cxd4 14.dxe6 dxc3 15.exd7+ xd7
a prelude to an attack on his king. White has 16.b3 d8 17.h3 c7 Positionally
spent three moves putting his pawns on g5 speaking White is lost. The black pieces are
and h4, but he'd be better off if they were still excellently placed to exploit the open lines in
on g2 and h2. the centre and there is nowhere safe for the
[ White would have got more play after white king to hide. 18.0-0 0-0 19.e2 c6
8.gxh5 xh5 9.d2 when at least there are 20.ae1 White has managed to complete his
open lines and he has stopped Black development but his kingside is riddled with
castling kingside. Still, Black has an active holes as a consequence of his rash pawn
game after c5 ] advances in the opening. d4 The pressure
8...e6! The black knight will be comfortably on f3 means that Black wins the bishop pair
deployed to e7. Black's hypermodern set up and a pawn. 21.xd4 g3+ 22.g2 xd4+
with a delayed Nf6 has worked brilliantly. 23.h1 xh4 24.h2 fe8 25.g3 xg3+
9.h3 White is unable to find a decent plan. 26.xg3 e3 Nagle puts his bishop on d2 in
The pawn structure suggests he should try to order to win control of the e-f ile. He also
smash through Black's defences with an f4-f5 prepare a breakthrough involving Rxd3 and,
pawn advance. However, Black is ready to after the recapture c2xd3, the pawn advance
counterattack with c7-c5 once he completes c3-c2. He is helped in this plan by the passive
his development, so W hite has no time to position of White's bishop on h3. 27.f4 d2
arrange the advance, and if he does achieve it 28.xe8+ xe8 Now White has to reckon with
his position is likely to fall to pieces before he 29...Re3+ followed by 30... Rxd3 and after 31.
can get at the well defended black king. In the cxd3 c2. 29.e5 e4 30.d7 xc2
game White embarks on a disastrous knight Black can ignore the fork as the passed c-
manoeuvre. pawn will cost White a piece. 31.f6+ f8
[ I t wa s s t i ll b e s t t o d e ve lo p wi t h 9.d2 32.xe8 xe8 33.b4 f5 There's no way to
and 10.0-0-0. ] stop the c-pawn. A triumph of hypermodern
9...e7 10.f2 b7 11.d3? Evidently this chess.
move is meant to hinder c7-c5, but as it can't 0-1
be prevented in the long term White is wasting
his energy and misplacing the knight trying to
delay it. 809 B06
[ The right move was still 11.d2 ] Schlosser,Philipp 2579
11...d5! Black is able to demolish White's Seul,Georg 2450
centre with a couple of hammer blows. 12.f2 Bundesliga 2007-8 (4) 15.12.2007
[ After 12.e5 c5 White is unable to stabilise [John Watson]
the pawns on d4 and e5 as Nf5 is looming. ]
[ Upon 12.exd5 f5 looks more precise Tiger's Modern is fun, but you have to know
t h a n t h e o b vi o u s r e c a p t u r e o n d 5 , f o r some exact move orders. Even then, a move
example 13.f2 ( Black has a big initiative like 6 e5 can be an uncomfortable surprise.
after 13.e2 e7 14.dxe6 xe6 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f4 a6 5.f3
as d4, e3 and f3 are all hanging.) 13...e7 d7
14.e2 xd4 etc. ] [ H i l l a r p - P e r s s o n ( T i g e r ) p r e f e r s 5...b5
12...c5! 13.exd5 , although generally players don't seem to
[ If 13.dxc5 xc3+ ( 13...a5!? ) 14.bxc3 notice the difference and the two moves
dxe4 15.fxe4 xe4 16.h3 0-0 transpose. ]
wh e n t h e d e st r u c t i o n o f W h i t e ' s p a wn 6.e5!
structure is of more significance than the [ Here Tiger likes 6.a4 wi t h t h e i d e a b6
exchange of Black's dark squared bishop. 7.c4! . 6 e5, as far as I know, is a new way
820
to try to exploit Black's move order. ] 810 B06

6...c5 The critical response, trying to decimate Sebag,Marie 2404
White's centre. Black might also consider Kosteniuk,Alexandra 2469
[ (a) 6...h6 , when Eu Womens Ch (6.9) 26.03.2004
A) better 7.c4! 0-0 ( 7...c5 8.dxc5 [Andrew Martin]
xc5 9.0-0 ) 8.0-0 b6 9.b3
with the idea g4 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3; 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.e3 a6
B) 7.h4!? c5 8.dxc5 xc5 9.h5 5.f3 b5 6.a4 An immediate challenge to the
is easily met by f5 ] black set-up which is only briefly mentioned in
[ (b) 6...e6 is awfully passive: 7.d3 ( 7.h4!? Hillarp-Persson's excellent recent book on the
h5 8.d3 ) 7...e7 8.0-0 b6 ( 8...d5 Modern. His comment: When White refrains
9.e2 c5 10.c3 ) 9.e4 d5 10.f2 c5 from 5 Qd2 there is no reason to play ...Nd7
11.c3 c6 12.e3 ] before ...b5 since after5 Nf3 b5 6 a4 b4 7 Ne2
7.c4! Aiming at e6 and f7. the b4 pawn is not under threat and Black has
[ Less effective is 7.dxc5 xc5 8.e3 f5 ] time to play ... Nd7. b4 7.e2
7...cxd4 [ 7.d5 must also be given close
[ 7...b6? 8.xf7+! xf7 9.dxc5 d7? consideration with a5 8.d3 d7 ( 8...c6
10.g5+ e8 11.e6 a5 12.xg7+ 9.f4 d7 10.0-0 e5 11.e2 gf6
f7 13.e6! ] 12.d2 0-0 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.c3 ) 9.0-0
[ 7...h6 8.dxc5 is the previous note ] b7 looking reasonable for Black, who plans
[ 7...b5? 8.xf7+ xf7 9.g5+ e8 ....Ngf6. ]
10.e6 a5 11.xg7+ f7 12.h5 gxh5 7...b7 8.g3 d7 9.d2 c5! When Black
13.xh5+ g7 14.e6 ] plays with an early ...a7-a6 he or she must try
8.g5 White is nearly winning already. h6 t o g o . . . c 7 - c 5 wi t h o n e t h r u s t wh e r e v e r
[ 8...b6 9.xf7+ f8 10.xd4 f5 possible. 10.d3 gf6 11.h3 d5!?
11.e3 c8 12.xg8 xg8 13.d5+ ] Pretty unusual. Black would normally castle.
9.xf7+! xf7 10.e6 a5 11.xg7+ f8 But I don't think that 11, . . ..d5 is a bad move
12.e6+ g8 13.xd4?! at all and takes advantage of the lack of cover
[ 13.xd4! gives a decisive advantage: on e4. 12.e5
dxe5? ( 13...f8 14.xf8 dxe5 15.fxe5 [ 12.exd5 xd5 13.h6 xh6 14.xh6
xf8 16.0-0 e6 17.e3 d8 18.h4; 5f6! is excellent for black, who plans either
13...b8 14.c4 xe6 15.xe6 c6 ...Bxf3 or ...Qc7 ]
16.e3 ) 14.d5! xd5 15.xd5 12...e4 13.xe4 dxe4 14.g5 cxd4
(threatening Nxe7) h6 ( 15...d6 16.0-0 e4 [ But here 14...h6! seems more accurate:
17.ec7 b8 18.e3 ) 16.0-0 h7 15.5xe4 cxd4 16.xd4 ( 16.xd4
17.xe7 e4 18.e3 ] xe5= ) 16...xe5 17.xb4 xe4 18.xe5
13...dxe5 14.b3 b4? Nevertheless, White ( 18.xe4?? c6 ) 18...xe5 19.xe4
is clearly on top after c7!= ]
[ 14...b6 15.e2 ] 15.e6! Leading to complications with a
15.0-0 e4 To prevent the opening of the f-file, crowded centre.
but this costs even more time. [ 15.xd4 xe5 16.xb4 d5 gives Black
[ W h i t e i s c l e a r l y b e t t e r a f t e r 15...b6+ no difficulty. ]
16.h1 g7 17.e2 ] 15...f5
16.e3 d6 17.xe4! xd1 18.axd1 f6 [ 15...c5!? ]
19.f2!? f5 20.c3 d6 21.d4 f7 16.xb4 e5 17.f4? Losing her way
22.c5 hc8 23.cd3 h5 24.h3 b5 [ 17.xd4 appears good for White:
25.e5+ e8 26.fe1 h4 A) 17...xd4 18.xd4 d3+ ( 18...f3+
[ 26...fe4 27.g4 hxg4 28.hxg4 xf2 19.xf3 xd4 20.xd4+- ) 19.cxd3 xd4
29.xf2 with Bh4 to follow. ] 20.dxe4 c8 21.e2! f6 22.f7;
27.xg6! B) 17...c6 18.xb7 xd4 19.0-0 ]
1-0 17...d5 18.xe5 xe5 19.f7 xg3
821
20.fxg3 811 B06

[ 20.xh8?? is suicidal: xf2+! 21.xf2 Shabalov,Alexander 2590
e3+ 22.e1 xg2 23.f1 f3 24.xf3 Burnett,Ronald 2440
xf3 Black's recently inherited massive CCA Vermont Open, Stratton Mountain 2003
centre does the trick. ] [Andrew Martin]
20...f8 21.0-0-0 d3! The action will take
plac e whilst th e W hite Kn igh t is re m ot e . If you have a taste for hair-raising grovelling
22.cxd3 exd3 23.he1 c8+ 24.b1 c4 then the Modern Defence is for you! 1.e4 g6
25.b6 xf7!? A typically pugnacious 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 Either this or 4
solution from Kosteniuk who is always looking Be3 are considered most dangerous these
for active and aggressive moves. days. By comparison the Austrian attack
[ Yet 25...d2! may be even stronger: 26.e3 seems stately! I would say 4 Bg5 is a very
( 26.e2 d3+ 27.a1 xa4# ) 26...f4 risky, committal move-that's why it appeals to
27.c3 e4+ 28.a1 xa4+ 29.a3 d4! Shabalov. White knows that he has to try and
30.xd4 xd4 31.b3 a4+ 32.a3 e4 take Black out directly in the opening or there
Naturally such a variation is dif f icult to will be major league weaknesses to look after.
calculate at the board.. ] In the opening stages Black must focus on d4
26.exf7+ xf7 27.e3 xa4 28.dxd3 and prepare queenside counterplay. I believe
a2+ 29.c1 c4+ Surprisingly there is no B u r n e t t c h o o s e s t h e b e s t p l a n . a6!
clear win here for Black, but Sebag's next Planning ...b7-b5,...Nd7,... Bb7....and the key
move shows that she is uncomfortable under strike...c7-c5! 5.d2
direct attack. 30.c3? [ 5.f4 b5 6.e2 b7 7.f3 I classify this as
[ 30.d2! was the only move: e4 31.c3 pussyfooting around. d7 8.ge2 c5 9.d5
d5+ 32.e2 a1 33.b3 xb3 34.xb3 b6 10.d3 d7 11.0-0 f6 12.a4 b4
g1 35.d2 xg2+ ( 35...e5!? ) 36.e2 13.a5 bxc3 14.axb6 cxb2 Already Black
g1 37.e1= ] has a fine game with considerable
30...f1+ 31.c2 e4+ 32.xe4 xg2+ counterplay. His strongest trump is the
33.b3 xe4-+ 34.c7 a5 35.xe7+ xe7 pawn structure and the plan is to negotiate
36.c7+ f8 37.d8+ e8 the early pressure and push the 'a' pawn.
[ 37...g7 38.d7+ h6 39.xa4 xa4+ 15.a2 b5 16.c4 xb6 17.b1 d7
40.xa4 g5 41.xa5 f4-+ ] 18.e5 c7 19.axb2 c8 20.e3 0-0!
38.xe8+ xe8 39.xa4 g5 40.b4 A p p e a ra n ce s a re ve ry d e ce p t ive h e re .
[ 40.b5 f4 41.gxf4 gxf4 42.c4 f7 21.xe7 e8 22.exd6 xd6 23.xd6
43.d4 g6 44.e4 g5 45.f3 f5 xe3 24.b3 xb3 25.xb3 a5 26.e3
46.h4 h5 47.b3 e5-+ ] h5 27.e8+ h7 28.e5 a4 29.d6 b8
40...f4! 30.c3 a3 31.xg7 xg7 32.c6 b1+
[ 40...axb4 41.xb4 h5! 42.c4 f4 33.f2 b8 34.e3 f6 35.d7 xd7
43.gxf4 g4 44.hxg4 h4!-+ ] 36.xd7 a2 37.xa2 b3+ 38.f2 xd7
41.gxf4 gxf4 42.bxa5 d7 39.e2 f5 40.d2 0-1 Fekri,W -Jasim,A/
[ 42...f3?? 43.a6= ] Golden Cleopatra, Cairo EGY 2003 A typical
43.a6 c6 A tough and complex game all the Modern win. Black soaks it up and then
way through. As far as 6 a4 goes, one cannot takes over the reins in the late
say that Black is troubled. middlegame. ]
0-1 5...b5 6.f4 d7 7.f3 c5
[ 7...b7 is playable too: 8.a4 b4 9.d5
xd5 10.exd5 gf6 11.xf6 xf6
12.xb4 xd5 13.b7 e6 14.c6+ e7
15.g3 b8 16.b3 b6 17.c4 c5 18.a5
b5 19.a4 c3 20.c4 cxd4 21.xd4
xd4 22.xd4 a8 Stevic,H-Smirin,I/4th
IECC, Istanbul TUR 2003 Eventually drawn
822
but everything clearly in order for Black at [ 5.a3!? cxd4 6.b5 a6 7.xd4 xd4
this juncture. ] 8.xd4 is a solid, sensible and dull antidote.
8.dxc5 xc5 9.e5 Shabalov understands Black has a plus score from this position,
that he is obligated to attack immediately. b7 but that has nothing to do with the
10.0-0-0 f6 And Burnett will play his full part. objective assessment of the position - Black
Black hits before White mobilises the Kingside. is generally the stronger and more
A sacrifice on b5 beckons-how else to justify ambitious player. My assessment is a tiny
White's position. 11.h4 dxe5 12.f2 c7 nibble for White. ]
13.fxe5 f5 14.g3 h6 15.xb5
5...g7 6.c4 Following a recommendation by
There it is! axb5 16.xb5+ f8 17.g5 Rozentalis. I am no longer convinced.
c8 [ T h e o l d l i n e i s 6.e3 cxd4 7.cxd4
[ It must have been very tempting to play wh e n B la ck m u st a vo id t h e o ld c la s s i c
17...b3+ h6?? 8.c1! ]
but I don't think it's working:
18.axb3 ( 18.b1 a5 ) 18...a1+
6...d8
19.d2 a5+ 20.e2 xb5+ 21.c4 xd1 [ The Archives show a game where a very
22.cxb5 xh1 23.b6 ] young Magnus Carlsen played 6...e4+ ]
18.b4 f7 19.xc5 xg5 20.xc7 xc7 [ The line's originator later faced 6...d6
21.d8+ f7 22.xh8 xh8 23.e6+ xe6 which offers White additional options. Still,
24.xc7 xc7 A forced sequence sees the Rozentalis' experience was no more
board wiped clean and an interesting pleasant than mine: 7.c3 cxd4 8.b5
asymmetrical endgame begins. If White could b6 9.f4 a6 10.e2 d7 11.0-0 d8
have his time again I am sure that he would 12.e1 ( 12.c1!? ) 12...d3! 13.xd3 xb5
prefer to have his pawn on b2. 25.c4+ e8 14.cxb5 c5 15.e3 f6 16.e5 0-0
Closer to the Queenside. 26.d1 xg2
17.b4 xd3 18.xd3 g4 19.d4 xd4
27.b5 a8 28.e6! Confining Black's King 20.xd4 xf2! 21.d2 e5 0-1 Rozentalis -
as well as pinning down the pawn on e7. Pruess, Cappelle la Grande 2007. ]
[ 28.a4 b6 29.b3 c3 30.d3 a5 7.d5 The logical follow-up.
31.c4 f1 32.d4 e5 33.d6 xc4 [ 7.e3 is possible, as long as White has an
A b rie f va ria t io n wh ich sho ws ju st h o w answer to c6!? T h e o n l y t r y i s 8.d5
difficult it is to get the pawns rolling. ] but I am not convinced. For example: xb2
28...c3! The blockading idea which keeps 9.bd2 xa1 10.xa1 d4 11.xd4
Black in the game. 29.d3 b4 30.d4 d6 cxd4 12.xd4 f6 When Black castles
31.a4 f4 32.a5 c7 33.c4 c5 34.d1 White's compensation for the exchange will
b4 35.b6 xa5 36.bxc7 xc7 37.d5 fade to an insufficient level. ]
A timely offer. After Bxd5 and ...e7-e6 only 7...e5! This strong novelty has not, as far as I
Black can be better. Fascinating chess, where can tell, been analysed in the Archives. It
Burnett gave as good as he got. makes White's 6.c4 plan rather unattractive.
½-½ 8.c3 e7 Black has ideas of ...Ne7-f5-d4 as
well as a kingside avalanche with ...f7-f5.
9.g5 White has many other moves to try, but
812 B06 the trend is downward. I will not return to this
Shaw,John K position (at least not with White!). f6 10.e3
Dreev,Alexey a6 11.e2
EU-chT (Men) 15th 02.08.2005 [ 11.d3 was later suggested, planning to
[John Shaw] take the knight on f5 before it gets to d4. 0-0
12.0-0 f5 Why not take the bishop pair?
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 g6!? ( I was scared of 12...f5 but maybe after
5.f3 White has various other tries, most of 13.c2 h6 14.e1 White can step out of
which have been analysed in the Archives. the way of the pawn storm.) 13.xf5 xf5
[ 5.dxc5 ] I like the bishops, as it is tough to imagine
[ 5.e3 ] the passed d-pawn rushing to glory. ]
823
11...f5 12.0-0 0-0 13.a3 d4 14.b4 f5 [ 8...f6 9.g3 ( 9.e5! was critical and
I won't get too involved with the rest of the White has the better chances here I think,
game as it is irrelevant and (from W hite's for example fd7 10.0-0 0-0 11.e1 a5
point of view) very ugly. 15.xd4 cxd4 12.h4 e6! 13.h3 and White's central
16.b5 d7!? space should give him the advantage but at
[ The greedy move was 16...d3 planning least Black is holding on for now on the
17.xd3 e4 ] kingside. ) 9...c5 10.dxc5 dxc5 11.e5 d5
17.c1 Allowing a complete positional 12.e4 c7 13.e2 0-0 14.0-0 c6
collapse. 15.f2 d4?! ( 15...fc8! because if
[ Maybe 17.d6 ] 16.xc5?! then xe5 17.fxe5 xc5
[ or 17.d6 but real improvements are and Black is at least equal; not 15...ac8?!
needed much, much earlier. ] 16.xc5 xe5 17.xe5 xc5 18.xc5
17...xb5 18.cxb5 c7 19.c4 h8 xc5 19.d7 and Black drops the
20.e1 d6 21.a4 ae8 22.b3 xd5 exchange ) 16.xd4 cxd4 17.xd4
23.xd5 xd5 24.c5 d6 25.b3 e4 and Black didn't have enough for the pawn
26.g5 f6 27.h3 f4 28.g5 d3 29.d1 in Vovk, Y (2549)-Czebe, A (2480)
e3 30.xd3 exf2+ 31.xf2 d4+ 32.xd4 Szombathely 2008 ]
xd4+ 33.f1 xe1+ 34.xe1 xc5 9.c3
35.bxc5 f5 [ 9.dxc5!? dxc5 10.0-0 should be a little
0-1 better for W hite but Black can try the
interesting h6! here when it's not obvious
how W hite should continue. I'd be very
813 B06 t e m p t e d b y 11.f5!? gxf5 12.exf5
Shomoev,A 2560 with Nf5-h5 coming but Black has
Bocharov,D 2602 counterplay still after g4 ]
Vladimir Dvorkovich Mem 2014 (5.8) 22.01.14 9...bxc3?! A definite error, White can make
[Tom Rendle] much more use of the b-file than Black
[ instead 9...cxd4 10.cxd4 ( 10.exd4 f6
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 11.e2 bxc3 12.bxc3 c7 is a little
b5 6.d3 b7 This is Black's critical setup awkward for White) 10...f6! is absolutely
against 4.f4 at the moment, it's not at all fine for Black, for example 11.e5 d5
obvious what White's best option is here, 7.e5 12.0-0 0-0 13.e1 c6 14.h4 e6
and 7.0-0 are both covered in the archives 15.h3 b6 and Black's pressure on the
and whilst I think the latter leads to a slight centre is enough to compensate for
edge, neither is completely convincing so here White's kingside initiative ]
we see Shoemoev take a slightly different 10.bxc3 cxd4 11.b1 c7 12.cxd4
approach. 7.a4 b4 8.e2 c5! [ 12.b3!? was also dangerous but Black
Putting immediate pressure on White's centre seems to be holding on after d7! 13.g5
[ 8...d7 9.c3 a5 ( 9...c5! again is a better h6 14.cxd4 ( 14.xb7?! xb7 15.xb7
wa y t o h a n d l e t h e p o s it i o n wit h o n l y a c5 16.xa6 xa6 17.b8+ d7
minimal W hite edge after 10.0-0 cxd4 18.xh8 xh8 19.cxd4 b3 and Black is
11.cxd4 ) 10.0-0 e6 11.f5! exf5 12.exf5 the one pressing ) 14...b8 ]
gf6 13.g5 ( 13.f4! is better, for 12...d7 13.0-0 Opening up the queenside
example 0-0 14.cxb4 axb4 15.b3 c5 ha s re a lly n o t h e lp e d B la ck a n d a lre a d y
16.fxg6 hxg6 17.xg6 cxd4 18.g5 e7 Bocharov is under a lot of pressure gf6
19.f5 and Black is really struggling here) [ 13...h6 14.d2 0-0 15.c1! xc1
13...0-0 14.fxg6 hxg6 15.e1 c5 16.h4 16.fxc1 a7 17.h3! leaves White in
and now in Spraggett, K (2601)-Siebrecht, S control of the queenside and Black's knight
(2453) Haarlem 2008 Black could've on h6 very offside ]
obtained good play with bxc3 17.bxc3 14.g3?!
c7 ] [ 14.g5! was much more incisive - the
824
threat of e5 is very difficult to deal with, for gets mated after 28.f5+ g5 29.h4+
example g4 30.e2# ]
A) 14...h6?! fails to 15.xf7! xf7 ( or 1-0
15...g8 16.e5! dxe5 17.fxe5 xe4
18.b3 and White again regains the piece
with a winning position) 16.b3+ d5 814 B06
17.exd5; Slobodjan,Roman 2525
B) 14...0-0 15.e5 dxe5 ( 15...c6 Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2632
is perhaps a better try but White is clearly 8th ch-Euro Dresden GER (7) 09.04.2007
better after 16.xb7 xb7 17.exf6 xf6 [John Watson]
18.f5 as the two pieces are more than
enough for the rook and pawn and White 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.e3 a6
still has an initiative) 16.fxe5 d5 17.b3 5.f4 As Tiger says, this is now a very common
c6 18.e4! e6 19.h3 I suspect this move order for White. But it's not directly in
final detail with 18.Be4 and 19.Qh3 was the Index of his book. b5 6.f3 b4
m i s s e d - B l a c k i s l o s t n o w a f t e r h6 [ 6...b7! is Ramesh-Hillarp-Persson,
20.xg6! fxg6 21.xe6+ h8 22.f7+ Amsterdam 2000: 7.d3 d7 8.e2!?
xf7 23.xf7 ] ( 8.0-0 ) 8...c5 ( Tiger likes 8...b4!? 9.d1
14...0-0 15.e2 e5 gf6 , to mix things up) 9.dxc5 xc5
[ 15...c6 16.d2 a7 17.h1 ( 9...dxc5 10.e5! ) 10.xc5! ( 10.0-0 c8! )
is also much better for White as Black can't 10...xc3+ ( 10...dxc5 11.e5 b6
really prevent 18.e5 ] 12.e4! ) 11.bxc3 dxc5 12.e5 h6 13.0-0
16.fxe5 dxe5 17.a3 fe8 b6 with unclear play, but satisfactory
[ 17...fb8 18.g5! leaves Black again chances for Black. ]
struggling on f7 ] 7.e2 b7 8.g3 h5 This looks fine at first,
18.fc1 Good enough but again White misses but Black is behind in space and development,
the strongest continuation and he misjudges White's attack.
[ 18.c4! and Black can't defend against the [ 8...f6 is more natural. ]
nice trick of 19.Bxf7+ for example exd4 ( or 9.f5! The rub. h4 10.fxg6! fxg6
18...f8 19.fc1 b8 20.xf8 xf8 [ 10...hxg3 11.gxf7+ xf7 12.g5+ e8
21.xe5 xe5 22.dxe5 e8 23.d5 13.e6 c8 14.xg7+ f7 15.f5!
and Black is completely lost) 19.xf7+ xf7 is practically winning on the spot, since xe4
20.a2+ ] 16.c4+! d5 17.g4! hits too many
18...b8 19.b2 a7 20.c4 f8? squares. ]
A final mistake that costs Bocharov the game 11.e2 e5 Best. A depressing line is
[ after 20...h6 Black is still fighting, [ 11...xe4 12.g5 f5 13.f4 with the
although White is probably still winning has idea Bd3. ]
to find some accurate moves 21.b3 xc1 12.dxe5 xe5!
22.xf7+ g7 23.xe8 xa3 24.xd7 [ 12...dxe5 13.xd8+ xd8 14.a3 a5
d6! 25.f5! a nice tough e8 26.dxe5 15.g5 gives White active pieces to aim
e7 27.h1 and White is winning although against Black's several weaknesses. ]
there is still some work to be done ] 13.d2!?
21.xf8 xf8 22.dxe5 xe5 [ 13.xe5 dxe5 14.xd8+ xd8 15.a3 a5
[ 22...xe5 is a marginal improvement but 16.g1! xe4 17.f3 xf3 18.gxf3 bxa3
it's obviously lost after 23.xe5 ( 23.d5! 19.0-0-0+! launches an effective attack for
is ever better ) 23...xe5 24.f2 ] only a pawn. ]
23.xe5 xe5 24.f2! I'm sure this was the 13...c6
move Black missed - suddenly he's losing a [ 13...xb2!? 14.b1 a3 15.f4 f6
piece by force ea8 25.b6 g7 26.f1 16.g5 h a s t h e i d e a xe4?? 17.xe4
xe4 27.xf7+ h6 28.f5+! xe4 18.d4 ]
[ Black resigned as he loses his queen or 14.ed4 xd4 15.xd4 xd4 16.xd4
825
f6? Black gives up a pawn and also looks to favour White.) 8...b7 9.g3
underestimates White's queenside pressure. c5 10.axb4 cxd4 11.xd4 bd7 12.e2
Instead, he should try h5 13.e5! h4 14.exf6 ( 14.e6!?
[ 16...f6 , and if 17.xb4 xe4 18.0-0-0 , is a p re t t y lit t le m o ve t h a t a ls o lo o k s
0-0 with the worse game, but at least even interesting.) 14...xf6 15.f1 There can't
material. ] be anything wrong with this move but now
17.xb4 0-0-0 18.0-0-0 Black at least gets an initiative for the
[ 18.a3 ] s a c r i f i c e d p i e c e . ( 15.gf5!? gxf5
18...f4+ 19.b1 f6 20.a3! h3? 16.xf5 would leave White a pawn up and
[ 20...xe4 21.xa6 xa6 22.xa6+ b7 with the attack himself.) 15...h3 16.g1
23.a3! is very strong, intending perhaps e5 17.gxh3 f8 18.fxe5 dxe5 19.b3
Rd3-b3. ] d5 20.g5 b6 21.f2 xf2+
21.xa6 hxg2 22.xb7+ xb7 23.hg1 22.xf2 xb4 23.c5 xd3+ 24.cxd3
h3?? White was much better but this loses c8 25.b4 xh3 26.g3 h5 27.a5
material. 24.b3+ Either Rd4-a4 wins, or 24... and W hite was a piece for pawn up but
Kc8 25 Qe6+ picks up the rook. somehow only drew. Andriasian, Z (2585)-
1-0 Bologan, V (2686) Belgorod 2010.;
C) 6...d7
C1) 7.a4 was given as White's safest try
815 B06 for an advantage by Tiger. b4 8.e2
Smeets,Jan 2669 C1a) 8...a5 was his own choice: 9.0-0
Siebrecht,Sebastian 2421 a6 10.xa6 ( 10.b5 e6 11.c4
TCh-NED Netherlands NED (6.2) 12.02.2011 e7 is given in the book but the
[Gawain Jones] young Indian's choice might be more
threatening.) 10...xa6 11.d3 a8
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 12.f5 ( Grabbing space with 12.c4!?
Another encounter featuring the Austrian looks interesting.) 12...c5 Narayanan,
A t t a c k a ga in s t T i ge r's M o d e rn . A h ig h l y S (2210)-Hillarp Persson, T (2535)
complex line and one in which it's important to R e y k j a v i k 2 0 0 8 w h e n 13.f4!
know your theory well on both sides of the looks dangerous to deal with.;
board. 5.f3 d7 C1b) 8...c5 Criticised by Tiger who
[ 5...b5 This is Tiger's preferred move order examines many other alternatives.
but is quite likely to come to the same thing. 9.c3 bxc3 10.bxc3 c7 11.0-0 b7
6.d3 12.h1 h6!? ( 12...c4 13.c2 gf6
A) He doesn't like 6...b7 because of 7. 14.e5 d5 gives Black good play on
a4 but instead a recent high rated the light squares.) 13.e1 This is not
e n c o u n t e r c o n t i n u e d 7.e5!? e6!? best. cxd4! 14.exd4 ( 14.cxd4 c5
( 7...d7 would transpose back into the is the point although W hite can get
mainline. ) 8.e4 xe4 ( The computer d e c e n t c o m p e n s a t i o n wi t h 15.dxc5
wants 8...d5 but this is starting to xa1 16.a3 f6 17.cxd6 exd6
resemble a bad French for Black.) 9.xe4 18.d2 ) 14...c5 15.c2 c8
e7 10.0-0 bc6 11.c3 0-0 12.e2 16.d2 g4 17.g5 h6 18.h3 e5!
d7 13.e3 d5 14.d2 f5 15.exf6 and Black had taken over the initiative.
xf6 16.xf6+ xf6 17.fe1 fe8 Medvegy, Z (2556)-Thiede, L (2450)
18.e4 Mchedlishvili, M (2630)- Trier 2010.;
Miroshnichenko, E (2684) Konya 2010 and C2) 7.e5 b7 ( I l o o k e d a t 7...c5
White was slightly for preference but Black in Mekhitarian, K (2550)-Ahmadinia, E
held on.; (2436) Zuerich 2010 which can be found
B) 6...b4 looks rather premature but was in the archives. )
the choice of the top Moldovan GM. 7.e2 C2a) 8.0-0 has been seen in a couple
f6 8.a3 ( 8.e5 d5 9.e4 c6 10.a3 of recent en cou nte rs. c5 ( 8...e6
826
9.e4 b6 10.e2 e7 11.c3 d7 White. Asis Gargatagli, H (2406)-Almeida
12.b3 b8 13.d2 xe4 14.xe4 Qu in ta na , O (25 41 ) Mo nt cad a i Re ixa c
0-0 15.ad1 fd8 16.b1 2010. ) 11.hg1!? ( 11.h4!? must again
Berescu, A (2476)-Manolache, M come into consideration.) 11...d5 12.xd5
(2544) Sarata Monteoru 2011 when c5 xd5 13.b1 0-0 14.c1 f5!? 15.h3 c6
gives Black good play.) 9.e4 xe4 16.d2 ab8 17.f1 dxe5 18.dxe5 fd8
10.xe4 cxd4 11.e6 Very tempting. 19.e3 e4 with a complex middlegame,
( 11.exd6 b6 when Tiger examines Haslinger, S (2529)-Muse, M (2448) Trier
b o t h 1 2 . f 5 a n d 1 2 . N e 5 b u t 12.a4 2010. ]
may be critical) 11...fxe6 12.eg5 [ 8...e6 is the other possibility when Ni Hua
f8 13.xd4 xd4+ chose 9.a4 b4 10.e4 xe4 I don't like
( T i g e r r e c o m m e n d s 13...c8 this move at all as now White has good long
wh i c h k e e p s t h e b ish o p b u t lo o k s term chances with the bishop pair.
rather passive and indeed is ( 10...e7 was McShane's choice and looks
n o n s e n s i c a l i f f o l l o w i n g 14.e1 preferable: 11.exd6 f5 12.dxc7 xc7
Black must take on d4. He could try e5 when practical examples indicate Black has
but 15.fxe5 xe5 16.df3 quite good compensation for the pawn. The
looks decidedly awkward.) 14.xd4 most recent example continued: 13.d2
f6 15.a4 h6 16.f3 b8 0-0 14.f2 d6 15.fg5 f6 16.xf6+
( 16...8d7 17.e1 f7 is perhaps a xf6 17.0-0 h6 18.f3 e4 19.xe4
better path attempting to complete xe4 20.e5 when the Aussie IM could
Black's development.) 17.axb5 axb5 h a ve t a k e n t h e c 2 p a w n a n d c e r t a i n l y
18.e3 h7 19.h1 d5 20.d2 wouldn't have been worse. Khenkin, I (2613)-
b6 21.e4 b7 22.d4 c7 W o h l , A ( 2 4 1 7 ) B a d W i e s s e e 2 0 0 9 .)
23.d3 with continued pressure for the 11.xe4 d5 12.d3 a5 13.0-0 e7 14.c3
pawn. D'Amore, C (2505) -Mack, W bxc3 15.bxc3 b8 16.e2 0-0 17.g4!?
(2282) Reykjavik 2011.; b6 18.ab1 and White's extra space gave
C2b) 8.e3 would transpose back to him a clear advantage. Ni Hua (2667)-Tan
the game. ] Zhongyi (2464) Hefei 2010 ]
6.e3 9.e4 xe4
[ The reason Tiger doesn't like this move [ 9...c8 is the alternative and was
order is that White can now play 6.a4 b6 Nakamura's option although White stands
( However 6...e6 looks playable to me.) well theoretically. 10.xb7 xb7 11.dxc5
7.c4 with a pleasant position. ] dxe5 12.d5 xd5 13.xd5 c8
6...b5 7.e5 b7 8.d3 c5 ( 13...0-0-0 was seen in Izoria, Z (2647) -
[ A n d r e w M a r t i n i n v e s t i g a t e s 8...h6 Inarkiev, E (2602) Kusadasi 2006 but here
in Zufic, M (2370)-Nevednichy, V (2552) 14.0-0-0 gave White a big advantage, check
Bosnjaci 2005. 9.e2 b6 ( 9...e6 10.a4 Andrew Martin's comments in the archives.)
b4 11.e4 f5 12.f2 h5 13.0-0 a5 14.b6 xb6 15.cxb6 f6 16.fxe5
14.h3 b6 15.eg5 and White was slightly ( 16.0-0-0 was White's choice in Delchev, A
for pref erence but Black's position was (2648)-Nakamura, H (2701) Mulhouse 2009
certainly playable until d5? when 16.xf5 annotated by John W atson but looks
simply won a piece as 17.Qb5+ is inaccurate.) 16...d5 17.d4 0-0 18.a4
threatened. Smerdon, D (2526)-Fernandez, xc2 19.0-0 This is given as a little better
D (2371) Khanty-Mansiysk 2010.) 10.0-0-0 for White by Tiger and indeed the b6 pawn
( 10.a4 is seen in Zufic, M (2370) - should give him better chances. However a
Nevednichy, V (2552) Bosnjaci 2005 looked recent encounter saw Black triumph: b8
at by Andrew Martin which worked out quite 20.axb5?! ( Supporting the b6 pawn with
well. ) 10...d7 ( 10...e6 11.h4 b4 12.e4 20.a5 must be good for White.) 20...axb5
f5 13.d2 xe4 14.xe4 d5 15.e1 21.a5 xb6 22.xb5?! This throws away
h5 16.xf5 gxf5 17.xb4 was good for the advantage. ( 22.xb6 xb6 23.a8+
827
f8 24.d1 xb2 25.dd8 wins a piece Aix-les-Bains 2011. It's always interesting
and gives great winning chances.) 22...d7 to see a player switch colours af ter a
23.xb8+ xb8 24.a1 c6 25.c3 h6 game and so this idea should be taken
26.a8+ g7 27.e6+ f6 28.c8 b4 seriously. ]
29.d8? e3+ 30.f1 f2+ 31.e1 c2+ 11...g4 12.g1
32.d1 c5 and Black finally had some [ 12.e2!? is a further option which has
winning chances and eventually exploited. been essayed in a couple of recent
Berzinsh, R (2427) -Townsend, M (2266) Correspondence games. dxe5 13.0-0-0
Daventry 2010. ] c7 14.fxe5 gxe5 15.f4 ( 15.d5 xf3
10.xe4 h6 Continuing to follow Tiger's 16.gxf3 0-0-0!? 17.f4 c6 18.f3 b8
analysis. 19.dd1 xd1+ 20.xd1 d8 21.xd8+
[ 10...c4?! takes pressure off White's centre xd8 was also satisfactory for the second
pre m a tu re ly. 11.fg5 d5 12.e6! fxe6 player. Hostinsky, J (2386)-Bjazevic, P
13.xe6 b6 14.xg7+ f7 15.c5 (2202) ICCF email 2007.) 15...c6 16.xe5
and W hite had a fantastic position ( The sacrificial 16.d6+ exd6 17.xd6
although somehow he failed to win. Zelcic, xc5 18.xd7 is completely fine for Black:
R (2554)-Muse, M (2446) Sibenik 2010. ] xd7 19.xe5+ xe5 20.xe5 hd8
[ 10...cxd4 also looks wrong: 11.xd4 dxe5 21.e4 c4 22.d1+ e8 23.d4+ e6
12.fxe5 f8 has been reached twice 24.h4 f5 25.xh7 e7 26.g7 d6
re ce n t ly b u t I st ill like Ni Hu a 's 13.fg5 27.b3 c8 28.d2 e4 29.f2 xd4
( 13.c5 as played most recently in To, N 0-1 Klapiszewski, T (2243)-Antonone, R
(2413)-Mitchell, M (2266) Budapest 2010 (2 2 5 3 ) I C CF e m a il 2 0 1 0 .) 16...xe5
also loo ks like a go od t ry.) 13...h6 17.xe5 xe5 18.b1 0-0 19.h4 h5
Ni Hua (2568)-Stryjecki, M (2441) Athens 1/2-1/2 Leone, F (2360) -Antonone, R
2001 and now 14.0-0 e6 15.xe6 fxe6 (2225) ICCF email 2009. ]
16.g5 d5 17.c4! bxc4 18.a4+ d7 12...dxe5 13.h3 h6
19.xd7+ xd7 20.ad1 leaves Black in [ 13...gf6 is Tiger's suggested
an unpleasant endgame. ] improvement. His line runs 14.xf6+ exf6
11.dxc5 And this is the critical continuation. A) 15.d5 was played in a practical
Anything which the theoretician Smeets plays encounter in which the first player was
twice should be taken very seriously. victorious. c8 16.0-0-0 b8 17.fxe5
[ However 11.e2 has also been tried a few fxe5 18.h2 xd5 19.xd5 f6 20.hd1
times recently, a novelty which Morozevich e7 21.g4 h6? ( 21...hd8 is fine for
came up with in 2003. Black. ) 22.h4! Oops. g6 has become a
A) 11...cxd4 i s c r i t i c a l . 12.xd4 f5 b i g w e a k n e s s . f7 23.d7+! xd7
13.0-0-0 xd4 ( 13...a5? 14.e6 fxe6 24.xd7+ e6 25.xg7 and White
15.xd6+! exd6 16.xe6+ d8 converted his advantage. Ong, K (2304)-
17.xg7 saw a strong GM getting into Tikkanen, H (2354) Gothenburg 2006.;
severe difficulties very early. Ibarra Chami, B) 15.d6!? also looks interesting.;
L (2436)-Almeida Quintana, O (2593) C) 15.c6 f8 ]
Mexico City 2010.) 14.xd4 0-0 15.hd1 14.c6 f6 15.xd8+ xd8? And this is the
wa s s e e n i n M o r o z e v i c h , A ( 2 7 0 2 ) - first new move but cannot be called a good
Chatalbashev, B (2534) Plovdiv 200 3 novelty.
when I think Black had a reasonable game [ Jan must believe in this variation for White
although I'd probably opt for White.; as he had played it earlier this year against
B) 11...0-0 12.dxc5 dxe5 13.fxe5 f5 F r a n c e ' s t o p r a t e d p l a ye r . T h a t g a m e
14.f4 ( T h e i m m e d i a t e 14.0-0-0 continued 15...xd8 16.c7 ( 16.xf6+ exf6
looks strong) 14...c7 15.0-0-0 f6 16.g4 17.a4 looks promising, keeping control of
fxe5 17.gxf5 exf4 18.fxg6 xc5 the d7 square and thus it will be harder for
19.gxh7+ and Black was in a lot of trouble. Black to get his final rook into the game.)
Chatalbashev, B (2602)-Buchal, S (2337) 16...c8 17.xf6+ exf6 18.b6 d7
828
A) 19.g4 was played in the first game to An accurate display by Jan Smeets but the
reach this endgame and might be better. final theoretical word has not been spoken in
c6 20.a5 he8 21.0-0-0 f8 22.d8 this line. We need to see more examples of
d6 23.d1 xc7 24.xc7 xc7 Tiger's suggestion of 13...Ngf6.
in Cuijpers, F (2485)-Chernin, A (2572) 1-0
Germany 2001. Here W hite could have
improved with 25.1d7+ c6 ( 25...b8
26.xe8 xe8 27.fxe5 fxe5 28.g5 816 B06
wins back the pawn and gives White great Spoelman,Wouter 2205
w i n n i n g c h a n c e s .) 26.d6+ b7 Hort,Vlastimil 2530
27.8d7+ c7 28.xc7+ xc7 Essent Open Hoogeveen (1) 2002
29.xa6; [Andrew Martin]
B) 19.0-0-0+ c6 20.a5 f5
Now Black's pieces manage to coordinate. 1.e4 g6 After 1 ...g6 is Black's defensive set-
21.d8?! ( Better looks to be 21.fxe5 fxe5 up can be interpreted in many different ways.
Krivec, J (2343)-Drummond, M (2236) For most players, that is the main attraction of
Q u e e n s t o w n 2 0 0 9 a n d n o w 22.he1 the Modern. Here we see veteran
sh o u ld be t h ro wn in t o p re ve nt B la ck Grandmaster Hort employing a 'rope a dope'
advancing his passed pawn with rough strategy facing a series of routine developing
equality. ) 21...h6! 22.hd1 xf4+ moves from his opponent. White is invited to
23.b1 e4 24.d4+ xd4 25.1xd4 assume the initiative and run aground against
xc7 26.xc7 xc7 27.8d7+ b6 the sturdy Black position. 2.d4 d6 3.e3
28.xe4 f5 29.ed4 he8 30.b4 e1+ g7 4.c3 a6 5.a4 b6 6.d2 b7 7.c4
31.b2 e2 and the Dutch GM was in d7 8.f3 e6 9.0-0
trouble. Smeets, J (2662)-Vachier Lagrave, [ 9.h4 gf6 10.d5 e5 ]
M (2715) Wijk aan Zee 2011. ] [ 9.d5 e5 10.g4!? ]
16.b6+! This is the problem. Black is unable 9...h6! An extremely annoying move to face
to get his king to c7 and thus cannot connect mainly because W hite feels he has to be
his rooks while the c6 pawn is a huge thorn in going somewhere with his position, but when
his side. c8 17.xf6 exf6 18.0-0-0! he starts to cast his eye around for a plan
Black is already lost as he cannot contest the struggles to find anything concrete.
d file. a5 Whichever central pawn he pushes liberates a
[ 18...b8 19.a5 b4 20.c7 a8 21.fxe5 Black Bishop. He would love to be able to
fxe5 22.d8+ b7 23.e1 leaves Black in move his Knight to e1 and plough through with
a complete bind and he must just wait whilst f4-f5 but that takes ages. Of course Black's â
all his pawns start dropping. f6 24.e4 Hippopotamusâ [] or â Frog â system attained
wins. ] full respectability in the Petrosian-Spassky
19.d5 a6 20.xb5 f5 21.d1 World Championship Match in 1966 . There it
One pawn has dropped and still Black cannot wa s d e m o n st ra t e d t h a t W h it e h a d t o b e
re l e a s e t h e s h a ck le s o n h i s p o si t i o n . e4 exceptionally patient and even cunning if he
22.g1 h6 23.e2 g3!? A nice try but wanted to get any advantage. Most opponents
unfortunately his position is already hopeless. aren't really up to it. 10.fe1 e7 11.ad1
24.d2 xe2 25.xe2 xf4 So material is f8! 12.d3 g8 I suppose if White does
back to parity but unfortunately that's the only nothing Black will eventually come to ...e6-e5
positive in Black's position. His rook on a6 is and ... f7-f5 after due preparation. Spoelman
completely cut out of the game while White's eyes the King heading for h7 and tries to get
rooks dominate. 26.d7 f8 27.a4 f5 his Kn igh t o ver to a id a K ingsid e a tta ck .
28.b7 h5 29.xa5 xa5 30.xa5 g5 13.e2 f6 14.g3 e8! 15.b4
31.b6 g4 32.hxg4 g8 33.a7 b8 Not sure W hite wanted to play this one but
34.c7+ xc7 35.xc7 xg4 36.f1 e3 Black was threatening ... Ng4 anyway.
37.a5 b4 38.b3 h4 39.xf7 f4+ 40.e1 Alternatives are not inspiring :
829
[ 15.b3 g4 16.h3 xe3 17.xe3 c5! material suffice it to say Black has rather
18.c3 h7 ] good results. ]
[ 15.c3 c5! ] 5...b5
15...a5 16.a3 d8 17.c4 Looks fine, but [ 5...d7 6.0-0 b5 but ( It's possible to
White weakens the square b4.Hort is on to c o n t i n u e w i t h 6...e6 but this must be a
this small detail in a flash. d7 18.h4 c6 somewhat worse version as White has not
19.b1 b4 20.b3 e5 Finally some sign of co m m i t t e d t o a 4 . 7.g5 I never see the
real activity f rom Black although with the point of this move as it simply allows Black
Bishop on b1 buried it feels to me as though t o g a i n t i m e wi t h h is Hi p p o se t u p . e7
W hite has already been totally outplayed. 8.d2 h6 9.e3 b6 10.ad1 b7 11.h3
21.dxe5 dxe5 22.c1 e7 23.d2 h7 was a typical Hippo position. Following f6
24.ed1 a6 25.e2 dc5 Attacking both 12.e5 fd5 13.f4 xf4 14.xf4 0-0
b3 and e4. 26.c3 xb3 27.xd8 xc1 15.e4 g5 16.f6+ xf6 17.xf6 g6
28.8d7 e6 29.xc1 c6 30.7d3 b4-+ Black had comfortably equalised. Ginsburg,
31.3d2 xc4 32.b2 e8 33.c1 e6 G (2537)-Muse, M (2448) Berlin 2010. )
34.a3 e7 35.d5 xd5 36.exd5 g4 A) Instead 7.e1 b7 8.f1 c5 9.g5
37.d6 cxd6 38.xd6 e4 39.h2 xh4 cxd4 10.xd4 gf6 looked like a fairly
40.xb6 d4 A remarkable little game which healthy Dragon position. Hellers, F (2598)-
should really have been concluded 15 moves Burwick, M (2229) Sweden 2011.;
ago. White's initial advantage in space and B) 7.a4 b4 8.d5 a5 9.c3
time seemed to evaporate and he was left B1) 9...e6?! would be similar to the
only with weaknesses. Spoelman was game but does allow W hite the
doubtless baffled - where on earth had he interesting possibility of 10.g5! f6
gone wrong........? ( 10...gf6 11.xf6+ xf6 12.h6
0-1 leaves Black in difficulties to complete
his development.) 11.f4 e7 12.h4
g5 13.xg5 fxg5 14.xg5 xg5
817 B06 15.xe6 h6 16.xc7+ d8 17.xa8
Stevic,Hrvoje 2611 b7 when rook and four pawns are
Nepomniachtchi,Ian 2729 about the same value as the three
12th ch-EUR Aix les Bains FRA (7) 28.03.2011 pieces but Black's loose king ensures
[Gawain Jones] White very good winning chances, i.e.
18.f3 xa8 19.d3 gf6 20.a6
I haven't looked at a pure Classical Variation e7 21.e5;
yet so decided to remedy that this month with B2) 9...c6 10.f4 bxc3 11.bxc3 e5
a look at some interesting recent games. (I 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.d3 c7 14.d2
e x a m i n e d 4 . . . a 6 l a s t ye a r b u t i t q u i c k l y gf6 15.a3 f8 16.c1 a6 17.c4
became a Hippo). 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 xa3 18.xa3 c5 19.f4! If Black had
d6 4.f3 a6 The young Russian chooses enough time to castle he would have
Tiger's Modern to create winning chances. I equalised. exf4 20.e5!? ( 20.xf4 0-0
like ...a6 from a strategic point of view but I 21.c3 is also very good for W hite)
get worried against f2-f4 setups as White can 20...xe5 21.c3 fd7 22.f3 f6
create a strong attack very quickly. However 23.xf4 b7 24.ae1 with strong play
against the Classical Variation this isn't an for the pawn but Black survived and
issue. 5.e2 The most critical. we n t o n t o win . B a ca lla o A l o n s o , Y
[ I looked at 5.a4 in Panchanathan, M (2543)- (2 46 7)-A lm eida Q uint an a, O (25 24 )
Illingworth, M (2289) Parramatta 2010 when Ciego de Avila 2010.;
Black normally plays a hippopotamus setup C) 7.d5! is suggested by Tiger trying to
with b6 ] exploit the hole on c6. ]
[ I can find six games in the archives with 6.a4 This is probably White's only dangerous
5.e3 so there's no need to expand on that try.
830
[ 6.0-0 has been the most common and is believe g5 10.g3 b7 11.d3 e6
Tiger's mainline. That continued b7 7.e1 12.e3 f6 can really be worse for Black
d7 8.f1 c5 when he considered 9.a4 who has great play.) 9...b7 10.d3 e6
to be best: b4 10.d5 gf6 11.g5 0-0 11.e3 f6 12.d2 a6 13.c4 bxc3
12.xf6+ xf6 13.d5 h6 with equality. ] 14.xc3 xe2 15.xe2 h5 16.g3 c5!
[ 6.a3 is hardly the most challenging an d Bla ck a lre a d y h a d a ne a r d e c is ive
response and allows Black easy advantage. Comp Gideon 2-Christiansen, L
development. One recent example (2560) The Hague 1994. ]
continued b7 7.0-0 d7 8.e1 c5 9.f1 8...e6 9.e3 e7 The first new move as far
cxd4 10.xd4 gf6 11.f3 0-0 12.e3 as I can see. I seem to recall that
c8 13.a4 b4 14.a2 Furman, L (2150) - Nepomniachtchi was moving quickly here (I
Hermansen, R (2219) Las Vegas 2010 when was playing a few boards away) indicating that
with d5! Black would have seized the h e wa s p r o b a b l y s t i l l i n h i s p r e p a r a t i o n
initiative. ] although he's famed for always moving fast
6...b4 7.d5 So far we have been following anyway.
another recent game of Stevic's but here [ 9...b7 was played in the only previous
Black varies. a5 e n c o u n t e r . 10.c2 f6 ( 10...e7
[ 7...b7 was played in the earlier game is likely to transpose to W hite's eleventh
from last December but exchanging b and a move alternative.) 11.e5 d5 ( 11...e4
pawns leaves Black with a vulnerable a6 12.d3 w o u l d f o r c e d5 which seems a
pawn. However following 8.xb4 xe4 co n ce ssio n .) 12.g4 h6 13.c4 e7
9.a5 f6 10.0-0 0-0 11.e3 c8 12.d2 14.0-0 d7 15.f4 f5 16.ad1 g5
b7 13.f3 e6 14.a3 e8 15.b3 bd7 17.c1 dxe5 18.d5!? e7 19.d3 d4
16.c6 Stevic, H (2621)-Bukal, V (2390) 20.xd4 exd4 21.dxe6 fxe6 22.g6+ d8
Z a d a r 2 0 1 0 h a d B l a c k g o n e f o r xc6 23.f4 with a strong initiative for the pawn.
17.xc6 b8 18.b4 bd7 Black would Fre ssine t, L (2 50 1)-Va isman , V (23 85 )
have been fine. ] Cannes 2000. ]
[ 7...f6 has been played once but 8.xf6+ 10.0-0 b7 11.e5!? Stevic tries to exploit his
forces Black to worsen his structure with space advantage immediately.
exf6 ( 8...xf6 9.h6 is again awkward.) [ 11.c2 is the alternative, playing in a
9.d2 a5 10.c3 bxc3 11.bxc3 0-0 12.0-0 quieter spirit when White could hope for a
f5 Wiemer, P (2089)-Pohl Kuemmel, J slight edge following d7 12.d2 b3!?
( 2 1 6 2 ) B a y e r n 2 0 0 4 w h e n 13.e5!? ( 12...bxc3 13.bxc3 0-0 is probably safer
would keep W hite's structural advantage but here White has a slight edge thanks to
although Black's position is still playable. ] more space.) 13.b1 0-0 14.a3 c6
8.c3 Undermining Black's queenside before 15.c4 b6 16.xb3 when Black has a
he can become fully coordinated looks very structural disadvantage and so should try to
logical. complicate the issue with f5!? ]
[ 8.0-0 b7 9.e1 d7 10.c4 gf6 11...dxe5
11.f4 0-0 12.c3 was seen in Dunne, A [ 11...bc6!? looks slightly odd but is worth
(2300)-Ashley, M (2500) Philadelphia 1998 investigating. ]
wh e n i t wa s p r o b a b l y t h e r i gh t t im e t o 12.dxe5
e xc h a n ge o n d 5 xd5 13.xd5 xd5 [ 12.xe5 can also be played although I feel
14.exd5 b6 15.b3 bxc3 16.bxc3 d7 d7 13.f4 0-0 should be fine for Black who
wh e n B l a c k 's p l a y d o wn t h e b f il e a n d can generate counterplay with ...c5. ]
a g a i n s t t h e d 5 p a wn c o m p e n s a t e s f o r 12...xd1 13.xd1 d5
White's pressure down the e file. ] [ 13...bxc3 is probably the critical test of
[ 8.g5 was the choice of an early computer White's 11.e5!? idea but White can drum up
program but doesn't make so much sense a strong initiative: 14.bxc3 d7 15.b5
a s f o l l o w i n g h6 9.f4 ( 9.h4 ( 15.d4 xe5 16.b5 c8 17.a3
would continue to prevent ...e6 but I can't also gives White decent compensation for
831
the pawn. ) 15...0-0-0 ( 15...c6 cedes the d6 looks very passive and I wonder whether
square and thus cannot be recommended [ 21.e3!? might have been a better try
16.f1 xe5 17.xe5 xe5 18.c4 c7 although W hite's structure does look very
19.d6+ xd6 20.xd6 f5 21.d1 ugly after xe3 22.fxe3 c5 ]
and despite Black's extra pawn he will really 21...c5 22.db1 xb1+ 23.xb1 a8
have to suf f er as W hite's pieces act so 24.g3?
much better on this board.) 16.a3 d5 [ 24.a1 looks passive but it was essential to
17.xd5 exd5 ( 17...xd5?! 18.ab1! b6 defend the pawn. ]
19.g5 wins material.) 18.e6!? ( 18.e7 24...f8!?
de8 19.xd7+ xd7 20.f6 xf6 [ 24...xa4 25.xa5!? was perhaps the
21.exf6 is around level.) 18...fxe6 19.g5 idea axc3 ( 25...xa5?? 26.b8+ f8
de8 when White has sufficient play for the 27.h6 would be unfortunate.) 26.b2 c5
p a wn b u t n o m o r e , i . e . 20.f7 hg8 looks like a clear extra pawn but White has
21.ab1 f8 22.xd7+ xd7 23.e5+ decent drawing chances. ]
c8 24.xf8 gxf8 25.b5 f5 26.e1 c6 25.d4
27.xa5 c7 when White has regained his [ 25.a1 should still have been played but
pawn but Black has now coordinated his b3 26.e1 c5 is of course better for
pieces while the rook on a5 is definitely Black but still White should probably be able
misplaced. ] to hold on to the draw. ]
14.b5+ 25...xa4 26.a1 db6! In principle Black
[ The computer prefers gaining the outside should keep as many pawns on the board as
passed pawn with 14.xd5 xd5 15.cxb4 possible to maximise his winning chances.
axb4 16.a5 when it considers that the a 27.b3
pawn promises W hite a slight edge [ 27.d6 c5 28.xc6 regains the pawn
a l t h o u g h f o l l o w i n g a l i n e s u c h a s d7 but b3 29.a2 xd2 30.xd2 a4
17.f4 h6 18.a6 g5 19.g3 e7 20.h4 31.a2 a3 is probably winning for Black as
c5 Black has dynamic equality in my view. ] the a pawn is so strong. ]
14...c6 15.f1 27...xc4 28.xa4 xe5 29.g2 b8!
[ 15.xd5 exd5 16.f1 d7 doesn't look This is always a useful idea to remember.
at all threatening. ] Nepomniachtchi cleverly f orces Stevic to
15...d7 capture on a5 with the knight when he will
[ Again 15...bxc3 should be considered have problems getting out of the pin. 30.xa5
16.bxc3 ( Sacrificing the pawn looks best. [ 30.d4 was a better practical chance
Instead 16.xd5 cxd5 17.bxc3 d7 although b2 31.c1 b1 32.f4 d3
18.b5 a6 leaves Black with a structural is of course very good for Black. ]
edge which will endure into the ending.) 30...a8 31.c4 c5
16...xc3 17.d3 d5 18.b3 c8 [ It was also possible to play 31...c5! 32.c3
19.a3 and White has compensation for the g7 when White wouldn't be able to get out
pawn but probably nothing more. ] of the pin on the a file. ]
16.c4 0-0 17.d6?! This is a major error. 32.c3 d3 33.a1 xf2 34.xc6 xa1
Stevic must have missed that Black's next 35.xa1 g4 White has escaped the pin but
was possible. only into a lost endgame. Nepomniachtchi
[ 17.cxb4 axb4 18.a5 a6 is simply level. ] made Stevic look rather weak in this game, a
17...bxc3! 18.bxc3 strong indication that Tiger's Modern is a
[ 18.xb7 fb8 would regain the piece with good winning attempt at any level! 36.e5
very good chances as the e5, c3 and a4 xe5 37.xe5 f5 38.f3 f7 39.h4 e7
pawns are so vulnerable. ] 40.g4 d6 41.c3 h5 42.gxh5 gxh5
18...a6 19.xa6 xa6 20.c4 b8 43.e1 e5 44.e3 d7 45.c3 e6
21.d2 Black has definitely taken over the 46.e1 e7 47.f3 f6 48.e3 d6
advantage as White is forced on the back foot 49.d3 d8 50.b4+ e6 51.e1 b6
to defend his pawn weaknesses. However this
832
52.e2 f4 2011.;
0-1 C) 5.d2 is a direct way of playing by
White but allows Black good counterplay.
b5 6.a4 ( 6.f4 was seen in the messy
818 B06 Shabalov, A (2590) -Burnett, R (2440)
Sukandar,Irine Kharisma 2325 CCA Vermont Open, Stratton Mountain
Jones,Gawain C 2653 USA 2003 looked at by Andrew Martin in
Queenstown Open (6) 20.01.2012 the archives.) 6...b4 7.ce2 d7!? 8.h4
[Gawain Jones] ( Grabbing the pawn looks dubious 8.xb4
c5 9.c3 gf6 10.f3 0-0 gives Black a
1.e4 g6 I have a few main defences to 1.e4: lead in development, while White's pieces
The Dragon - in its many different forms, a are pretty tangled up and so full
couple of Spanish's and occasional Caro compensation for the pawn.) 8...gf6
Kanns but Irene seemed well booked up on all 9.g3 c5 10.c3 h6 11.e3 bxc3
those lines. Having lost the previous game I 12.bxc3 g4 and the top French GM had
really wanted to bounce back and so the grabbed the bishop pair and was already
Modern seemed a decent choice definitely f or p ref erence. S poe lm an, W (2 42 4)-
risky but with good winning chances too. 2.d4 Bacrot, E (2700) Wijk aan Zee 2008. ]
g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5!? I'd never seen this [ 4...c6!? looks interesting here, attempting
mo ve be f o re a nd so I wa s o n m y own . I t to exploit White's early bishop move: 5.d5
looked strange to me as the bishop is firing ( 5.f3 g4 6.e3 is my computer's
into open space but I now sunk into thought suggestion but hard to believe that this
attempting to find a plan. h6 can remotely challenge Black.) 5...d4
[ 4...f6 would transpose to a more 6.b1!? c6 7.c3 b5 8.xb5 cxb5 9.b3
theoretical position and one where I thought a6 10.d2 f6 11.gf3 0-0 12.0-0 d7
the bishop achieved more. I've actually with a roughly level position, the bishop
played this way myself as White and think pair compensate for the slightly weakened
it 's quite a da ngero us lin e. T h is lin e is structure. Rohl Montes, J (2401)-Krasenkow,
covered in depth and featured this month M (2676) Mallorca 2004. ]
in Gashimov-Ivanchuk. ] [ 4...d7 prepares the ...c5 break. Following
[ 4...a6 has also featured quite heavily in the 5.f3 a6 we reach a position that could of
archives: course have been reached via a 4...a6 move
A) while 5.f3 is a slower, more classical order. 6.a4 resulted in a 16 move win for
setup. Generally I'm not afraid of these White in Rublevsky, S-D'Amore, C Istanbul
positions when White can't play f4 but he Olympiad, Turkey 2000 but of course Black's
may have a small edge. It certainly worked play can be improved. Check Paul
o u t ve ry we l l f o r h im in Fr o lya n o v, D Motwani's comments in the archives.
(2525)-Azmaiparashvili, Z (2632) Dresden ( while I can't believe 6.d3 can be a
2007, examined by John Watson.; serious test of Black's setup: Frolyanov, D
B) 5.f4 looks scary but White has to be (2567)-Graf, A (2621) Kavala 2008. Again
careful to prevent his centre collapsing. b5 you can check John Watson's comments. )]
6.f3 b7 7.d3 d7 [ 4...c5 immediately has similarities to the
B1) 8.e5! looks critical when perhaps game but with the subtle difference that the
Black should try fighting back at once bishop on g5 is hanging in some lines, i.e.
with f6 ( as 8...c5 9.e4 xe4 5.dxc5 a5 6.d2 ( During the game I was
10.xe4 seems to favour White. ); a bit worried about 6.d2!? when following
B2) 8.a4 b4 9.e2 c5 10.c3 gf6 xc5 Black's a tempo up on a rather
11.g3 a5 12.0-0 0-0 13.e2 bxc3 su s p e c t l in e in t h e H yp e r - A c c e l e ra t e d
14.bxc3 e6 with a typical complex fight Dragon (or the Sniper as one author has
in which Black triumphed in Salem, A co in e d it ). W it h t h e e xt r a t e m p o B la c k
(2511) -Mchedlishvili, M (2629) Dubai s h o u l d b e f i n e h o w e v e r .) 6...xc3!?
833
Gaining a structural advantage but giving up lit tle be tt er as he ca n t ry to explo it th e

the 'Dragon bishop' is always a bit weakening of the f5 square.) 9.c3 b5
dangerous. ( 6...xc5 7.d5 e6 8.0-0-0 10.f4! f6 11.d3 c7 12.f3 b5 13.0-0
d7 9.e3 c8 looked passive but and White had a good Benoni type position.
n o t h i n g i n h e r e n t l y w r o n g wi t h B l a c k ' s Vallejo Pons, F (2707)-Korobov, A (2647)
position and he soon took over the initiative Aix-les-Bains 2011. ]
in Okhotnik, V (2451)-Beliavsky, A (2652) 6.dxc5! The critical response.
Hu n ga ry 2 0 0 3 .) 7.bxc3 ( I think I prefer [ 6.f3 cxd4 7.xd4 c6 looks like a
7.xc3 xc3+ 8.bxc3 dxc5 9.a4 d7 comfortable Dragon as the bishop is
10.f3 c6 11.d2 d7 12.b5 c8 misplaced on h4. As it cannot come to d4
13.e2 f5 14.hb1 saw White successfully W hit e will lose f u rth er t ime moving th e
grind out the full point in a game between attacked knight on d4. ]
two strong Russians: Motylev, A (2649)- [ 6.d5!? is the other possible structure but
Inarkiev, E (2595) Tomsk 2004.) 7...xc5 here I hoped to exploit White's vulnerability
8.d3 d7 9.e2 gf6 10.0-0 0-0 along the a1-h8 diagonal. The computer
11.e3 a5 12.f4 g4 13.d4 e5! suggests the committal xc3+ 7.bxc3 a5
and Black was fine. Kurnosov, I (2602)- 8.d3 g5 9.g3 f6 with a highly
Ajrapetjan, Y (2490) Moscow 2009. ] complicated position. I think I'd take Black
[ Meanwhile 4...c6 would be a very sensible as it's not so easy to defend e4 and c3
way of playing too but does commit Black to adequately while also developing for White. ]
a setup he might not have been intending. 6...a5
This has actually been the most common [ 6...dxc5 7.xd8+ xd8 looked pretty
but Black's results in games between u n p le a s a n t . N o t o n l y will W h it e ga in a
Grandmasters has been terrible. One recent d e v e l o p m e n t a d va n t a g e t h a n k s t o m y
example continued: 5.d2 b5 6.f3 vulnerable king but he also has a
( The more aggressive 6.f4 has also scored positional advantage thanks to his light
very well.) 6...h6 7.f4 f6 8.d3 g4 sq u a r e co n t ro l , i n p a r t i c u l a r d 5 . W e r e
9.h3 xf3 10.gxf3 bd7 11.0-0-0 a5 Black's pawn back on c6 he would have
12.b1 b6 13.he1 fd7 when Black's fewer holes and thus fewer problems. ]
pre ssu re aga inst t he W hite cen tre wa s 7.b5+ Actually when I decided to go into this
probably enough for rough equality but in line I had forgotten that this check gives the
the end he too went down in Hess, R (2590)- White king the f1 square. Another long think
Ehlvest, J (2591) Philadelphia 2010. ] and a feeling of dread, I didn't want to have to
5.h4 defend another passive position against a
[ On the final night Anthony Ker, who has player rated over 300 points below, these
won the New Zealand Championships more Open tournaments can be very cruel!
t h a n a n y o n e e l s e , s u g g e s t e d 5.e3 [ 7.d2 xc5 with a highly playable
as an interesting alternative. White argues Dr a go n e s q u e p o s it i o n wit h t h e b is h o p
that the pawn on h6 could be a weakness misplaced on h4. ]
and certainly following Qd2 it might be tricky 7...c6
to castle. ] [ 7...d7 was the other sensible way to
5...c5!? Possibly too ambitious. I tried to d e f e n d a g a i n s t t h e c h e c k b u t 8.xd7+
exploit the bishop on h4 being a little offside xd7 9.cxd6 xc3+ ( Actually I had sort of
and transpose the position to a Dragon setup looked at this line before .. .c5 and then I
where I have a lot of experience. h o p e d t h a t 9...b4?! might be tricky to
[ Instead 5...c6 was selected in a fairly defend against. Black threatens both the b2
recent game between two top 100 GMs and pawn and ... Bxc3+ followed by taking on e4
again makes a lot of sense. 6.d5 d4 when the bishop on h4 hangs. However
7.d2 c5 8.d1 d7 ( 8...g5 9.g3 f6 10.ge2 xb2 11.0-0 keeps everything
10.f3 d7 would cut out Vallejo's choice in under control. Sure I can temporarily pick up
the game but here too White is probably a a piece with xc3 but 12.b1 a3 13.b3
834
regains the piece and leaves White with a 14.b1 looks better for White. ]
strong initiative.) 10.bxc3 xc3+ 11.f1 10.a4 I have to confess that I missed this
felt a little unpleasant to me, even if the move - a sign that my form wasn't there for
computer tells me Black's more or less ok much of Queenstown. Irene threatens a4-a5
with c8 It seems unlikely that Black will forcing the queen away and thus winning the
have many winning chances though. ] c5 pawn. 10.. .a5 is possible to defend but
8.ge2 Sensibly giving back the pawn. th en W h it e m ust b e b et te r t ha n ks t o h e r
[ 8.xc6+?! i s t o o g r e e d y bxc6 9.cxd6 eternal control of the b5 square. Luckily I
xc3+ 10.bxc3 xc3+ 11.f1 a6+ found the following strong idea. a6 11.a5?!
12.e2 d8 will likely regain the pawn with It's harsh to give this move as dubious but in
advantage. ] fact White seems to be in a lot of trouble once
8...dxc5 9.d5 This might be the start of she has won the queen.
W hite's problems. Irene is playing [ 11.xc6+ would be similar to 9. Bxc6
aggressively and hoping to completely refute although following bxc6 12.a5 is possible
my opening play, a strategy that almost paid a n d se e m s crit ica l. O n e lin e co u ld ru n
off but is of course risky. ( 12.d2 e6= should be fine for Black.)
[ 9.0-0 was safer when I thought White had 12...cxd5 13.axb6 dxe4 14.a5!? f6
a s ma ll ad van ta ge bu t B la ck's posit io n 15.xf6 xf6 16.xe4 xb2 17.xc5 b8
do e s n 't s ee m so b a d e it h e r. P e rh a p s I 18.a4 a3 19.c3 d7 20.d2 xa4
should have continued g5 10.g3 f6 21.xa4 c5 22.b1 xb6 23.xa6 d8+
11.f4 ( 11.c1!? is the computer's 24.e1 c5= and at the end of the
interesting offer.) 11...d7 followed by complications we're left in a level ending. ]
castling long with an extremely unclear 11...axb5! The whole point. In return for the
position. ] queen I'll pick up rook and bishop and an
[ 9.xc6+ bxc6 is of course also possible initiative.
and important to assess to work out who it [ There was no time for cold feet 11...c7
favours. Doubled isolated pawns are of 12.a4! and there's no way to defend c5.
course generally very weak and White can The pins keep Black completely bound up. ]
h o p e t o e x p l o it t h e m in t h e l o n g t e r m , 12.axb6 xa1+ 13.d1 g5! It's important to
perhaps by rerouting a knight round to c4. play as actively as possible. Should White get
However that it's at all easy to achieve and time to castle then she'll have a clear
Black has his trumps too. For starters the a d va n t a ge . 14.g3 f6 15.xc5 xe4
pawns aren't as weak as they look they 16.xb5?! During the game I was really
would be much more vulnerable if they were surprised by this move.
o n a n o p e n f i le . T h e y a ls o p r o t e ct t h e [ I felt 16.e3 was much safer but still I quite
important central squares of d4 and d5 - a liked my dynamic potential. I was planning
typical weak spot in the Dragon. The something like f5 17.0-0 b4!? to keep the
exchange has also given Black counterplay White knights from using c3 and therefore
down the b file and along the a8-f1 diagonal. she would still have problems coordinating
A typical fight between static and dynamic her pieces. ]
p la y , I p re f e r t h e d yn a m is m o f B la ck' s 16...0-0 Now it was Irene's turn for a long think.
position. ] She has a material advantage, queen and
9...b6 pawn for the rook and bishop, but ...Rd8 is a
[ I couldn't see a direct refutation of 9...d7 big threat. After the game I was very happy as
but I felt uneasy about it. I really didn't want my calculation around here was all sound.
to lose quickly and thought the game 17.c7!? Taking control of d8 but allowing a
continuation was safer. The pawn on c5 is different tactic.
d e f e n d e d i n d i r e c t l y a s 10.xc5 a6 [ 17.0-0 was of course the most logical and
wins back material. However it's not totally the move I needed something against when
clear even here as White has 11.b4 when I sacrificed my queen. Here I was planning
xb4 12.xb4 xb4 13.xd7+ xd7 d2! ( T h e i m m e d i a t e 17...d8
835
is also possible but 18.dc3 a5 19.xa5 time. ]

xa5 20.xe4 allows White to play on.) 20...d7 With rook, bishop and knight against
18.e1 d8 White is completely tied up. queen Black should be winning but there are
There's the threat of moving the knight a couple of things Black has to be aware of.
when there's no defence of the d1 knight First of all, while White can't actually win the
and it ca n't get o ut o f th e way a s e1 is cornered knight it's not easy to bring it back
undefended - one of the points behind ... into the game. Secondly W hite has some
Nd2. The other threat is somehow more tricks utilising the advanced b6 pawn. 21.d5
hidden as it requires a retreating move: ... e6 22.e4
Ra5 actually traps the queen! During the [ 22.f3 was my fianceé Sue's suggestion
game I thought the only defence to both and looks more accurate. White threatens
t h r e a t s wa s 19.c7 d7 For a moment Q f 1 b u t a g a i n a8 defends more than
Black's pieces look uncoordinated but the adequately. ]
t w o t h r e a t s s t i l l s t a n d . ( 19...a5? 22...a8 23.c1 a5!? I was very happy at
does still trap the queen but he gets two finding this move. Black has ideas of ...Rf5
rooks for it with 20.xa5 xa5 21.xd8 ) and ...Nf2 to bring the knight out. The rook
A) Trying to run the queen with 20.f5 also controls the d5 square and can now react
loses to f3+ 21.gxf3 ( 21.xf3 dxd1 to the Qxc6 ideas with ...Rb5.
wins everything.) 21...axd1 The other [ 23...a1 felt rather risky to me but the
rook this time, and White loses at least a computer has no fear 24.d2 ( 24.xc6
rook.; only loses a pawn here after bxc6 25.b7
B) 20.g3 The knight gets out of the way xc1+ 26.d2 g1 27.b8+ h7 )
leaving e2 for the queen and defending 24...a5 would actually be very similar to
against back rank ideas as the knight can the game. ]
d r o p b a c k t o f 1 . d4! Followed by ... 24.d3 d5 25.g4 a1+ 26.d2 e6
N4f3+ winning at least the exchange and a 27.f3 c8 Cutting out Qxc6 tricks once and
pawn. ] for all.
17...xd1+! Now f2 isn't defended this tactic [ Initially I had planned 27...a5 but 28.c5
works. 18.xd1 xf2+ 19.e1 didn't seem so clear. ]
[ D u r i n g t h e g a m e I t h o u g h t 19.d2 28.c1 a5 But now her knight has gone
was her last chance, so that there wouldn't passive I can activate mine. 29.b3 Both rook
be any back rank problems for White and so and knight are actually trapped in corners but
she could actually pick up the trapped knight. I was pleased I managed to calculate the final
However xh1 20.c5 xb2 21.g1 f5 course of the game.
22.xh1 a8 is still much better for Black. [ White still doesn't have enough time to win
Material is roughly balanced: queen versus t h e e n t o m b e d k n i g h t : 29.g3 c4+
rook, bishop and pawn but the bishop pair and White lacks a good square for his king
are very strong and the W hite king rather as I have lots of interesting forks available.
exposed. ] 30.c2 ( 30.d1 g4! ) 30...f5+! 31.xf5
19...xh1 20.c3 Irene plays sensibly and e3+ ]
controls the d4 square. [ Objectively 29.g4 was best although here I
[ Playing the same way as in the previous would h ave the tricky b1 ( 29...c4+
va ria t io n wit h 20.c5 no longer wins the 30.d3 xb2+ 31.c2 a3 32.e2 a4
knight as g4 21.g1 a8 threatens ... 33.xh1 a2+ would also be decisive.)
Ra1+ 22.d2 xb2 and the knight still 30.c2 c4! 31.d3 xg4! continuing to
can't be taken as 23.xh1 a1 traps the use the knight forks ]
queen. ] 29...d7 30.c2 c6 31.e3
[ 20.f1 Slowly plodding the king into the [ 31.d3 f2 would allow the knight to
corner doesn't manage to pick up the piece escape. ]
either as the rook quickly activates on the a [ 31.f1 e4+ 32.b2 ( 32.d2 xb3+ )
file., i.e. g4 21.g1 a8 and Black's in 32...b1+ 33.a3 xc3 is also hopeless. ]
836
31...f2! It seems strange to put the knight en- 19.d6 xc2 20.b7 c6 21.0-0 f5
prise but the tactics work for me. 32.xf2 22.exf6 f7 23.ac1 c4 24.b3 xc1
[ 32.b2 d1+ was the point and so Irene 25.xc1 d4 26.c8 1-0 Grischuk,A-
had no time to capture the rook. ] Bacrot, E/FIDE GP, Dubai UAE (3.2) 2002
32...e4+ 33.d2 (26) ]
[ 33.b2 b1+ 34.a3 xc3 is completely [ 7...e6 8.exd6 ( 8.0-0 e7 9.e1 b7
winning a nice point is that 35.e3 xb3+! 10.a4 b4 11.e4 d5 12.c5 xc5
36.xb3 c4+ again picks up the queen. ] 13.dxc5 a5 14.e3 0-0 15.d4 d7
33...xb3+ 34.e3 16.h4 f6 17.h3 f5 18.xf5 exf5
[ 34.xb3 a2+ 35.e3 xf2 36.xf2 19.d4 fxe5 20.fxe5 ae8 21.g3 e6
xc3 22.fe1 e7 23.c3 bxc3 24.bxc3 f4
leaves Black in a trivially winning
endgame with his extra two pawns. ] 25.g4 xe5 26.xe6+ xe6 27.xe5
34...xc1 35.xe4 xc3 On the surface it g4 28.e7 f7 29.e8+ f8 30.e7
looks like White has made progress. He has b8 31.f1 c6 32.g3 g5 33.g7+ f8
regained some material and is nominally only 34.xf4+ 1-0 Ponomariov,R-Bareev,E/FIDE
slightly down - rook, knight and two pawns for W Ch KO, Moscow RUS (5.4) 2001 (34))
the queen. However the big issue is that the 8...cxd6 9.d5 e5 10.a4 f5 11.g5 e4
king on e4 is actually in very real danger. 12.e6 xc3+ 13.bxc3 b6 14.e2 gf6
36.a2 15.axb5 b7 16.bxa6 xd5 17.d4 e7
[ In the post-mortem we had a quick look at 18.e3 b2 19.b5 hb8 20.d4 xb5
36.d5 b u t B l a c k h a s a t l e a s t c6
21.c4 b4+ 22.c3 xc4 23.xc4 xc4
followed by ...e7-e6+ and ...Rc6-c3 creating 24.a4 d5 25.a7 e8 26.f2 d3 27.c4
the same mating net. ] xc4 28.a3+ e6 29.hb1 d6
[ 36.e5 c5+ 37.d5 xe5 is no good 30.xb5 xb5 1-0 Kosteniuk,A-Meshkov,Y/
either as 38.xe5 d3+ wins the queen. ] Aeroflot Open, Moscow RUS 2002 (30) ]
36...e6! And Irene resigned as there's no way 8.e2 h6 9.a4! b4 10.e4 0-0 11.c3
to prevent either ...f7-f5mate or ...Nb3-c5mate.
The essence of the problem is the Black
A picturesque final position. Kingside. The Bishop on g7 is very cramped.
0-1 White has more space, better centralisation,
ample pawn breaks and the option of e5-e6
whenever he wants to take it. In short, a
819 B06 rotten position for Black. Lobron struggles
Svidler,Peter 2690 manfully to get his position together but he
Lobron,Eric 2500 fights against the tide. bxc3 12.bxc3 c5
Ordix Open Mainz (4) 2002 13.0-0 c7 14.e6! f6
[Andrew Martin] [ 14...fxe6 15.eg5 cxd4 ( 15...d5
16.xe6 xe6 17.xe6+ h8 is possibly
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.f3 best-still utterly uninspiring.; 15...xf3
b5 6.d3 d7 7.e5! b7 I believe it was 16.xf3 cxd4 17.xe6 xc3 18.b2 c6
Kotov who used to play like this with Black. I 19.xf8 xf8 20.xa6+-; 15...fb8
am sure that he would have enjoyed a special 16.xe6 c6 17.xg7 xg7 18.xe7+
pioneering feeling watching the opponent f7 19.f5+- ) 16.xe6 xc3 17.b2 a5
grapple with new problems. In the Chessbase 18.xg7! xg7 and take your pick... ]
era one has to be more careful. Earlier in the 15.eg5 cxd4 16.exf7+ xf7 17.e6
update we saw a new interpretation of this xc3 18.b2 a5 19.fxd4 Keeping the
system by Black. Lobron tries the older stuff pressure set to MAXIMUM. Naturally W hite
and gets wiped. could have taken the exchange :
[ 7...c5 8.e3 b7 9.e4 c8 10.xb7 [ 19.xf8 xf8 20.xd4 ]
xb7 11.dxc5 dxe5 12.d5 xd5 19...fe8 20.xg7 xg7 21.e6+ g8
13.xd5 c8 14.b6 xb6 15.cxb6 e4 22.f5+- There can be no coming back from
16.e5 xe5 17.fxe5 e6 18.c5 e7 here. g5 23.h4 h6 24.hxg5 hxg5 25.ae1
837
e5 26.e3 h7 27.xg5 The difference i s b e t t e r t h a n i t l o o k s . 6.d5 ( 6.f3

between success and failure hangs on a very is also possible but Black can force d5 with
fine line in the Modern Defence. g4 when 7.d5 d4 8.d3 xf3 9.gxf3
1-0 c5 was roughly balanced in Naes, F (2337)-
Eriksson, J (2414) Klaksvik 2003.) 6...d4
7.d2 c5 8.d1!? preparing to force the
820 B06 knight backwards was seen in Hodgson, J
Swiercz,Dariusz 2585 (2595)-McShane, L (2490) Southend 2001.
Bacrot,Etienne 2705 The computer recommends throwing in f6!
Schachbundesliga 2011-12 (13) 18.03.2012 9.h4 before playing f5 with the idea that
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] 10.c3 ( 10.exf5 xf5 11.f2 f6
i s e x t r e m e l y c o m f o r t a b l e f o r B l a c k .)
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5 10...fxe4! 11.cxd4 cxd4 gives Black great
This line is starting to become topical. a6 compensation for the piece. The pawns
[ Previously both of us have covered 4...h6 dominate White's pieces and make it tricky
when 5.e3 was looked at last month by for him to develop. ]
Tom in Vallejo Pons, F (2716)-Maiwald, J [ T h e i m m e d i a t e 5...c5 is also possible:
(2459) Trier 2012 ( while 5.h4 as played 6.dxc5 a5 7.d2 xc3!? Reaching a
against Gawain in Sukandar, I (2325)-Jones, good version of a so called Sniper style
G (2653) Queenstown 2012. )] position - Black regains his pawn on c5!
5.f4 Previously I wrote that this 'looks scary ( It's also possible to play while keeping the
but W hite has to be careful to prevent his bishop with 7...xc5 Normally this is scary
centre collapsing.' because of Nd5 and Be3 ideas but here the
[ W h i l e G a w a i n a l s o l o o k e d a t 5.d2 f4 pawn gets in the way.) 8.xc3 xc3+
and actually gave a game of Bacrot's. I've 9.bxc3 dxc5 10.f3 f6 11.d2!? e6?!
copied in the analysis from last time for Pavlov, M (2364)-Vajda, L (2541) Baile
completeness. b5 6.a4 ( 6.f4 was seen in Tusnad 2005 when White should have tried
the messy Shabalov, A (2590) -Burnett, R exploiting Black's last with 12.b1 b5
(2440) CCA Vermont Open, Stratton 13.c4! with an advantage. ]
Mountain USA 2003 looked at by Andrew 6.f3 b7
Martin in the archives.) 6...b4 7.ce2 [ 6...d7!? is an interesting move order, with
d7!? 8.h4 ( Grabbing the pawn looks the point 7.d3 ( 7.a4 is an attempt to
dubious 8.xb4 c5 9.c3 gf6 10.f3 0-0 exploit the loose rook b4 8.d5 c5?!
gives Black a lead in development, while At this point I feel Black really should start
White's pieces are pretty tangled up and so de ve lo p in g so m e p ie ce s, 9.c4 b7
full compensation for the pawn.) 8...gf6 Chatalbashev, B (2581)-Foisor, S (2359)
9.g3 c5 10.c3 h6 11.e3 bxc3 12.bxc3 Ascona 2007 10.e5! is starting to look very
g4 and the top French GM had grabbed dangerous; 7.e5!? would be the most
the bishop pair and was already for accurate if White is intent on reaching the
preference. Spoelman, W (2424)-Bacrot, E same position as in the game. Here 7...Bb7
(2700) Wijk aan Zee 2008. ] 8.Bd3 would transpose so Andrew Martin
[ while 5.f3 is a slower, more classical tried f6 against Alexander Shabalov in
setup. Generally I'm not afraid of these Ga u sd a l 1 9 9 1 8.h4 h6 9.d3 0-0
positions when W hite can't play f4 but he 10.e2 c5 when 11.e4 b8 12.0-0
may have a small edge. It certainly worked lo o ks li k e a p l e a s a n t e d g e .) 7...c5!
out very well for him in Frolyanov, D (2525) One game continued: 8.e5!? cxd4 9.e4
-Azmaiparashvili, Z (2632) Dresden 2007, a5+ when White gambled with 10.f2?!
examined by John Watson. ] which ultimately proved successful in Docx,
5...b5 The logical continuation for Black but he S (2384)-Gryson, W (2145) Gent 2009 but
has tried a couple of other tries. p ro b a b ly sh o u ld n 't h a ve b e e n . ( Instead
[ 5...c6 putting immediate pressure on d4 10.ed2 looks safer with reasonable
838
compensation for the two pawns after dxe5 unpleasant. ]

11.fxe5 xe5 12.xe5 xe5 13.0-0 )] 11.c3 Sensibly blocking the check.
7.d3 d7 8.e5 Last time I gave this move [ A p r e v i o u s g a m e c o n t i n u e d 11.f2?!
an exclamation mark and it certainly gives which is hardly necessary and hands Black
Black problems c5 some counterplay after cxd4 12.exd6 f5!
[ I suggested 8...f6 might be Black's best try W in a n t s, L (2 5 1 9 ) -H a u s ra t h , D (2 4 7 8 )
A) R e l e a s i n g t h e t e n s i o n w i t h 9.exf6 Belgium 2004 ]
doesn't look so threatening exf6 10.h4 11...cxd4 12.xd4 Recapturing the pawn
e7 11.0-0 0-0 12.f5!? g5 13.g3 b6 turns out to be a novelty but in truth W hite
and Black has a respectable position, has at least three options which grant him the
Rudolf, A (2207)-Zakar, D (1954) better chances.
Balatonlelle 2005.; [ 12.e6!? was played in a previous game
B) 9.e2!? is an intriguing sacrifice that t h a t g o t t h i s f a r fxe6 ( The computer
could be critical: suggests sacrificing the piece with 12...f5!?
B1) 9...dxe5 10.fxe5 xf3 ( or 10...fxg5 13.exd7+ xd7 but the counter sacrifice
11.xg5 ) 11.xf3 fxg5 12.c6 14.xd6!? exd6 15.b3 looks very
both look very dangerous too; dangerous.) 13.xd4 f8? A losing error.
B2) 9...fxg5 10.xg5 f8 Otherwise ( 13...b6 should have been played when
White can play 11.Nxh7 11.xb5+ axb5 Black gets to exchange queens after
12.xb5+ c6 13.xb7 with three pawns 14.xe6 e3+ 15.e2 xe2+ 16.xe2
for the piece and what looks a promising although White still has some advantage.)
position.; 14.xe7! Kanep is sharp-eyed and doesn't
C) 9.h4 h6 10.e2 ( Of course miss the opportunity. xe7 ( 14...xe7?
10.0-0 is a viable alternative.) 10...0-0 15.c6+ ) 15.xd6+ d7 16.6f5!
11.0-0-0 b4 12.e4 d5?! A horribly anti- With the threat of 17.Nb3+. White regains
positional move ( 12...b6 looks more in the material with interest and an ongoing
the spirit of Black's opening.) 13.c5 attack. Kanep, M (2452) -Mista, A (2510)
xc5 14.dxc5 c6 15.d4 a5 Hallsberg 2004. ]
Sermek, D (2517)-Thiede, L (2390) Bled [ 12.xd4 is also possible as dxe5 allows
2000 and here W hite could have 13.xe7! exd4 ( 13...xe7? 14.d6+ f8
m a i n t a i n e d c o n t r o l w i t h 16.b1 15.b3 is mating ) 14.b4 c7 15.d6+
with a clear advantage. ] d8 16.xf7+ c8 and White will pick up
9.e4 xe4 Logical but as the course of the the exchange with what should be the better
game proves Black is in need of game although it is rather messy. ]
improvements. 12...dxe5
[ Perhaps he could try 9...b8!? when White [ Perhaps 12...c7 was the better of the two
can force a slightly better queenless evils but 13.0-0-0 is obviously very pleasant
middlegame with 10.dxc5 ( 10.xb7 xb7 for White ( White can even consider
11.0-0 is also possible but at least Black 13.xe7!? here too ) 13...dxe5 14.fxe5
won't get mated in the opening.) 10...xc5 xe5 15.c5 with a fantastic initiative. ]
11.xb7 xb7 12.d5 xd5 13.xd5 13.d5 Initially I thought this a mistake but in
c8 14.0-0-0 but at least Black's still on the fact this is still fine.
board. ] [ However the simple 13.fxe5 would be very
10.xe4 And here Gawain wrote: '(This) strong d8 ( 13...b6 14.e3 would leave
se em s t o f a vo u r W h ite .' B lack ha s t o d o Black grave problems unravelling.) 14.xe7!
something or else W hite's extra space will Again this shot turns out to be very strong.
give him a very pleasant game'. Perhaps xe7 ( 14...xe7 15.0-0-0 with a decisive
Bacrot didn't read his ChessPublishing? a5+ attack. ) 15.d6+ f8 16.b7 c7
[ 10...b6 is also possible although 11.dxc5 17.xd8 xd8 18.0-0-0 e8 19.d6
( 11.xe7!? is interesting but it's hardly and Black is completely tied up. ]
ne c e ss a ry.) 11...xc5 12.d5 is pretty 13...d8 14.0-0-0?! But this throws away a lot
839
of the advantage. 16.xf6+ xf6 17.c6+ f8 18.fxe5

[ 14.xe7! The piece sac we've already when Black has a dire position. ]
seen a few times in the notes would again 16.c6?! Pinning the knight to prevent Black
have been very strong. xe7 15.xe5 from castling but an error.
xe5 ( 15...xe5 seems losing too, e.g: [ Here 16.fxe5! was simply winning
16.c5+ e8 17.fxe5 a4 18.c6+ f8 A) 16...g7 17.e6 e5 ( 17...fxe6
19.0-0 h6 20.c7 a8 21.ad1 ) 18.d6+! f8 19.xe6 with forced
16.fxe5 b6 ( 16...c7 looks losing, e.g. mate ) 18.exf7+ xf7 19.c6+ f8
17.d6 h6 18.f1! hf8 19.0-0-0 f5 20.c5 g8 21.xd8+ xd8 22.d1
20.xf5! gxf5 21.xf5+ e8 22.e6 e5 with an obvious overwhelming attack.;
23.xd8+ xd8 24.xd8+ xd8 25.e7+ B) 16...xe5 17.xf6+ exf6 18.c5!
e8 26.exf8+ xf8 with a winning and Black cannot get his king to safety or
endgame. ) 17.0-0-0 and Black's position bring his queen back and so is simply lost.
looks extremely precarious, for example: Perhaps Swiercz overlooked the f inal
e6 18.d4 h6 19.b4+ e8 20.d6! move. ]
xe5 21.e1 winning material. ] 16...b4 Bacrot attempts some counterplay and,
14...gf6? And Black errs in turn. at the same time, prevents White's threat of
[ B a c r o t h a d t o f i n d 14...c7! 17.Nc5
when he seems to be holding on: [ 16...b6 was also possible although the
A) 15.fxe5 xe5 ( The unnatural endgame after 17.xb6 xb6 18.xd8+
15...xe5 lo o k s wo rs e 16.xe5 xe5 xd8 19.fxe5 g7 favours White as the
17.c5 xc5 18.xc5 and White will bishop is passive and the f7 pawn rather
g a i n b a c k t h e p a w n w i t h a n e d g e .) vulnerable. ]
16.xd8+ xd8 17.xd8+ xd8 [ Bacrot could also have tried sacrificing the
18.d1+ c8 19.c5 Again White will piece with 16...xa2 although he shouldn't
ga in b a c k t h e p a wn b u t wi t h a wo rs e have enough compensation following
structure than previously and so Black 17.c5 0-0 18.xd7 exf4 19.d5 ]
shouldn't have any problems.; 17.fxe5 A move late. The tactics end up in
B) 15.d6+!? xd6 16.xd6 exd6 White winning Black's queen but grants Black
17.xd8 xd8 18.xd6 c7 looks ok for good drawing chances.
Black; [ 17.xd7 xd7 18.c5 c7 19.xd7+
C) 15.he1 feels critical when the xd7 20.xd7 xd7 21.fxe5 g7
pressure on Black's position looks 22.cxb4 c8+ doesn't look like so much for
cru s h in g bu t t h e silico n b e ast cla im s White ]
equality with gf6 And here [ But 17.he1! increasing the pressure on
C1) Instead 16.xf6 looks simply to Black's position looks very strong. Black's
draw xf6 ( Not 16...xf6 17.xd8+ best is probably to sacrifice the knight with
xd8 18.xd8+ xd8 19.eg5! 0-0 although again Black doesn't have
with a p leasant position .) 17.fxe5 sufficient compensation following ( 17...g7
( 17.xf6+ exf6 18.fxe5 xe5= ) 18.xe5; and 17...bxc3 18.fxe5! cxb2+
17...xe5 18.xf6+ exf6 19.xd8+ 19.b1 both look very good for W hite)
xd8 20.xd8+ xd8 21.xe5 fxe5 18.xd7 xd7 19.xd7 bxc3 20.xc3
22.xe5 with a drawn endgame.; exf4 21.c6 ]
C2) 16.xf6+ looks the most testing to 17...xe5 18.xe5 xe5 19.d6+ exd6
me xf6 17.fxe5 xe5 18.xd8+ Giving up the queen is necessary.
xd8 19.xd8+ xd8 20.xe5 xe5 [ as 19...f8 20.b7 g7 ( or 20...b8
21.xe5 e8 22.e3 and White's two 21.xd7 ) 21.xd8 xd8 22.d5!
pieces look superior to the rook and should be winning as Black has no way out
pawn but the computer's not convinced. ] o f t h e p i n . ( White should definitely avoid
15.xf6! xf6 22.xd7? when g5+ followed by a check
[ 15...xf6 was also losing to the simple on the light squares will pick up the rook. )]
840
20.he1 0-0 21.xe5 xe5 22.xa6 bxc3 should Black proceed with the scheduled
So W hite has won material (queen for rook queenside advance. This tends to lead to
and knight) but Black has managed to get his razor sharp games, with Black often fulfilling
king to safety and, with a strong knight on e5, his positional objectives but lagging behind in
can attempt some counterplay against development. Not a line for the feint-hearted!
W h i t e ' s s l i g h t l y l o o s e k i n g . 23.bxc3?! 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6
But this throws away most of W hite's 5.d2 d7
advantage. [ After the immediate 5...b5 6.a4 b4 7.d1
[ Instead 23.b3! was much stronger. Not Black has to def end his b-pawn with a5
o n l y d o e s W h i t e n o w h a ve c o n n e c t e d . By first playing 5...Nd7, Black prepares to
passed pawns but his king is also much defend it with a later ...Rb8. ]
safer blocked by the enemy pawn. I imagine 6.f3 The trendy way to play it for White.
Swiercz was scared of the potential of the [ After the old plan of 6.f3 b5 7.a4 b4
Black pawns but in fact Bacrot wouldn't be 8.d1 Black gets a good game with ( 8.d5
able to hold onto his d pawn as d5 24.b5 c5 9.dxc5 dxc5 10.f4 a7 11.0-0-0 e6
pins the pawn to the knight. ] 12.e3 xb2+ 13.xb2 f6+ 14.b1
23...c8 24.xd6 xc3+ 25.b1 e3 xf4 won a pawn for insufficient
26.c7 g7 27.a4 a8 28.a5?! After this compensation in Roobol - Davies, Haarlem
the momentum switches to Black. 2001 ) 8...b8 9.h3 ( 9.a5 c5 10.e2
[ 28.d5 would have maintained some c7 11.f2 gf6 12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3
chances but it's tricky to convert with such 0-0 was also excellent for Black in Yilmaz -
an open king ] Davies, Haifa 1989) 9...c5 10.a5 cxd4
28...b3+ 29.c2 b5 30.a1 a6 31.d1 11.xd4 gf6 12.e2 0-0 13.0-0 c7
d5+ Bacrot is happy to draw. as in Chandler - Davies, Hastings 1987-88 ]
[ I n f a c t , h a d h e s t a r t e d w i t h 31...c6 6...b5 7.a4 b4 8.e2
W h i t e wo u l d h a ve b e e n f o r c e d o n t h e [ 8.d5 can be met actively with gf6
defensive, e.g. 32.d8 f6! 33.d4 c6 ( 8...a5 is more cautious) 9.xb4 xe4
34.c4 bf5 when Black will pick up the a 10.a5 a7 11.b4 b7 12.b5 a8
pawn and can then try pressing risk-free as 1/2-1/2 Barczay,L - Davies, Budapest 1987.
35.c3 ( 35.a6? f1+ wins t he roo k) White's moves look forcing but they are not
35...d5+ 36.e2 e5+ 37.d1 d6+ making much of an impression. In the final
38.c1 d4 is too dangerous. ] position Black is better. ]
32.e1 c6 33.b7 e5+ 34.f2 8...b8 9.g3 c5 10.d3 cxd4 11.xd4
Here a draw was agreed as the a pawn is c7 Getting a kind of Sicilian in which White's
dropping when White won't be able to make pieces are not marvellously placed. Black can
any progress. White was almost winning from play more solid ly th an I do in this game .
the opening and we stand by Gawain's 12.0-0 h5!? 13.fc1 h4 14.ge2 gf6
previous statement that Black needs to come 15.c3 b3 16.f3 d5!? 17.exd5 xd5 18.e1
up with improvements to 8. ..c5 and perhaps e5 19.f2 0-0 Trapping the knight on d4.
even earlier. White gets a couple of pawns for it, but it was
½-½ never going to be enough until I blunder.
20.xb3 xb3 21.xg6 7f6 22.b1 b7
23.xh4 xb2 24.g5 h7 25.c1 e6
821 B06 26.d3 c8?? Letting White back into the
Szalanczy,Emil game. I had completely missed the reply.
Davies,Nigel R 27.xa6! xa6 28.xb2 e4 29.fxe4 xc3
Liechtenstein 1993 30.xc3 xc3 31.b5 a8 32.a5 xa1
[Nigel Davies] 33.xa1 xe4 34.f2 d5 35.f1 g5
36.e1 f3+! 37.gxf3 xf3 38.g3 h1+
5.Qd2 is the consistent approach with White 39.f2 c2+ 40.e3 e4#
hoping to exploit his lead in development 0-1
841
822 B06 e4 38.c8+ f7 39.g4 e2 40.e1

Thimm,Torsten g7 41.f3 e5 42.g3 h3+ 43.g2
Berelowitsch,Alexander 2540 f8 44.xe2 g5 45.e3 d5+ 46.e4
19th Muensterland Open (1) 2002 f2+ 47.xf2 xe4+ 48.xh3 g5 49.a6
[Andrew Martin] d4 50.g2 d5+ 51.g1 1-0 Shirov,A-
Azmaiparashvili,Z/FIDE GP, Dubai UAE (3.
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f3 a6 4) 2002 (51) ]
5.e3 b5 6.a3 Meek. Black is immediately 6...b7 7.d3 d7 8.d2 c5! The thematic
O K a f t e r a t im i d m o ve s u ch a s t h i s a n d counterstrike. 9.0-0 cxd4 10.xd4 gf6
Berelovich will show how dynamic his B la ck h a s o b t a in e d a ve ry go o d S ic ilia n
counterplay can become. Instead, White must Dragon-type position with White's Bishop on
continue developing rapidly :. Be3 misplaced. This game is such a good
[ 6.d3 d7 ( 6...b7 7.a4 b4 8.e2 f6 illustration of how: a) the stronger player can
9.g3 h5 10.e5 dxe5 11.dxe5 g4 12.e6 avoid early theoretical complications to obtain
f5 13.h4 e5 14.f4 d5 15.0-0 bc6 a sharp, interesting position b) How easy it is
16.e4 xe6 17.d5 d6 18.hxf5 gxf5 for White to stray into a poor position just by
19.xf5 f6 20.xg7+ xg7 21.xe5 playing 'natural' moves. Against an early and
xe5 22.e1 g7 23.f3 d8 24.xh5+ very provocative ... a7-a6 from Black if White
f8 25.f3+ f6 26.e3 xf3 27.xf3+ wants anything he must play very specifically
g7 28.g3+ f6 29.g6+ f5 30.g4+ indeed. 11.f3 0-0 12.ad1 c7 13.f2
f4 31.g7 e5 32.xe7 f3+ 33.g2 e5 14.de2 c6 If nothing else Black will
xh5 34.gxh5 g8+ 35.f1 g1+ 36.e2 push on with ...Rab8,...a5,...b4 etc 15.g4?
xa1 37.f7+ g5 38.g7+ f4 39.f7+ A sign of desperation-I don't think Thimm
e5 40.xc7 e4 41.e7+ f4 could see a plan so he lashed out. Naturally
0-1 Shirov,A-Azmaiparashvili,Z/FIDE GP, this is misguided. W hite's position is by no
Dubai UAE (3.2) 2002 (41)) 7.a4 b4 8.e2 means lost-he has to make a mental
gf6 9.d2 ( 9.c3 b7 10.g3 h5 readjustment though. Possibly just Kh1,Qh4
11.g5 c5 12.0-0 cxd4 13.cxd4 a5 and Bh6 was called for ,hoping for f4-f5 at
14.e1 0-0 15.d2 ab8 16.h3 e6 some stage. 15 g4 is silly and Berelovich is on
17.c1 fd8 18.b3 a8 19.c4 h4 it in a flash. d5! 16.g5 dxe4! 17.gxf6 xf3+
20.xh4 d5 21.xb4 xb4 22.xb4 18.xf3 exf3 19.fxg7 fd8 20.g3 f5
xb4 23.xb4 dxe4 24.a5 b8 It's not the quantity of pieces that count, it's
25.xe4 xe4 26.xe4 xb2 27.b1 the quality. I daresay Berelovich saw this
a2 28.c6 c2 29.xd7 xd7 30.f3 position before 15.. .d5 and went for it! The
a2 31.b4 f8 32.b7 a1+ 33.h2 pawn on f3 is worth at least a piece and the
xa4 34.d8 d6+ 35.g3 f8 36.g5 other little babies are about to join the show
b4 37.a7 b8 38.xa6 xd4 39.f6 21.h6 e5 22.de1 f6 23.a4 h4
b4 40.g2 d7 41.c3 b3 42.c6 e5 24.d2 f4-+ 25.f2 fxg3 26.hxg3 xg3+
43.h4 f8 44.g4 e7 45.h5 gxh5 27.f1 h3+ 28.g1 d4 29.e4 xe4
46.gxh5 a7 47.h6 b8 48.h7 h8 30.xe4
49.b4+ 1-0 Svidler,P-Piket,J/ Eurotel [ 30.xe4 g4+ ]
Trophy, Prague CZE (1.2) 2002 (49)) 9...b8 30...xe4 31.xe4 g4+
10.h6 xh6 11.xh6 b7 12.g3 c5 0-1
13.0-0 cxd4 14.xd4 b6 15.b3 c5
16.a5 c7 17.g7 e6 18.h6 g4
19.d2 e5 20.f4 c4 21.c1 d5 22.f5
c5 23.exd5 xd5 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.g5
xd3 26.xd5 a7+ 27.d4 de5 28.c3
d8 29.e4 f5 30.e2 xd4 31.cxd4
xd4+ 32.f2 e3 33.fd1 d3 34.f1
f4 35.xe3 fxe3 36.e2 f4 37.xa6
842
823 B06 11...xb7 12.xb7 a6 13.f3!

Thipsay,Praveen Mahadeo 2505 [ 13.f3?! as was played in Sinowjew -
Koshy,Varugeese 2415 Finkel, Budapest ,1993 is weaker in view of
India 1994 c5! and the Queen has no good squares
[Alexander Volzhin] to retreat . 14.b4 xb7 15.bxa5 fc8!?
and Black has excellent compensation as
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 This move all W hite's pawns are very weak. ( Simple
o r d e r i s v e r y p o p u l a r n o w a d a y s . 4.c4 15...xa5 was not bad either. )]
Preventing 4...d7-d5. 13...ad8 14.e2 The only move again.
[ After both 4.f3 d5 ] [ 14.h3?! c5 15.b4?? d3+ 16.xd3
[ and 4.f4 d5 Black can transpose to the xe5+-+ ]
Caro Kann. ] [ 14.e2? c5! 15.b4 d3+ 16.xd3
4...d6 xe5+-+ ]
[ Black can try 4...d5?! nevertheless, but this 14...c5 15.0-0! An important improvement.
move is quite dubious: 5.exd5 b5 6.b3 b4 [ 15.b4?! as was played before didn't help
7.ce2 cxd5 8.d2! Immediately exploiting White: a4! 16.0-0 (the only move) b3
the weakness of Black's Q-side pawns. 17.b1 xc1! 18.bxc1 xe5 and despite
A) 8...a6 is hardly an improvement. It being a pawn up White has to think about
was played in Sorokin - Poley, Katowice, equalising as all his Q-side pawns are weak
1992: 9.a3 bxa3 10.xa3 c7 11.a5 and Black's dark-squared Bishop is very
e6 12.d2 d7 13.f3 e7 14.e5 strong. ]
0-0 a n d n o w t h e s i m p l e 15.0-0 15...b3 16.axb3! This is the idea behind
( instead of the dubious 15.h4 gave White W h i t e ' s p r e v i o u s m o v e . T h e e x c h a n g e
a huge positional advantage as the a7- sacrifice is the only way to get an edge.
pawn is very weak. ); [ After 16.b1?! xa2 17.g5 d2
B) 8...a5 9.a3! bxa3 10.xa3 e6 18.xd2 xd2 Black's chances are by no
11.a4+ d7 12.xd7+ xd7 13.xa5 means worse, to say the least. ]
xa5 14.xa5 c6 15.c3 and White 16...xa1 17.d4 Now the forcing sequence
had won a pawn for nothing, Dreev - B. i s o v e r a n d i t s t i m e t o e v a l u a t e i t ' s
Schneider, EUCup, 1991. ] consequences. There is approximate material
5.f3 f6?! A dubious move. equality on the board but White's chances are
[ 5...e6 is the normal continuation. ] clearly better. Black's Rooks have no files for
6.e5! Only by playing this active continuation penetration and the Bishop on g7 is also
can White hope for an advantage. restricted. a6
[ 6.ge2?! e5 7.0-0 0-0 8.g5 bd7 [ 17...xe5? 18.c6+- ]
and Black has at least equal chances. ] 18.f4 d7 19.h3 fd8?! This tactical
6...dxe5 7.dxe5 d5 8.xd5 cxd5 9.xd5 mistake allows white to win the exchange
0-0 White has won a pawn but is slightly back.
lagging in development. The evaluation of this [ 19...b6 was better. White can play
p o s it io n h a s c h a n ge d m a n y t im e s b u t i s 20.a1!? intending b4-b5, Ra6. ]
c u r r e n t l y i n W h i t e ' s f a v o u r . 10.xb7! 20.c6 c8 21.e6! fxe6 22.b8!
Grabbing the second pawn is the best solution Definitely Black had overlooked this move but
here. in his defence it's not easy to foresee the
[ After 10.f4 c7! Black has good chances, Knight is able to skip such a long way off!
for example: 11.e6 xc2 12.exf7+ h8 xb8 23.xb8 b7 24.e3!
13.e2 xb2 14.d1 c6! 15.h4! [ The queen swap makes Black's defence
with a messy position. ] easier: 24.xb7?! xb7 25.f4 xb3
10...a5+ 11.c3 26.c1 a5 27.d1 a4 and Black is by no
[ 11.d2? is bad in view of xe5+ 12.e2 means hopeless. The tempting 28.d8+?!
xb2 13.xa8 xa1+ and Black is much f7 29.a8 leads to a forced draw after
better. ] xc3! 30.bxc3 b1 ]
843
24...xb3 25.xa7 f7 26.e1?! ( 7.xd4 xd4 8.h5 was played in

[ I would prefer 26.f3+ f6 27.e3 xb2 Motylev-Chernyshov in the archives and I
28.c4 with a huge edge. ] presume Tseshkovsky was happy to play
26...e5 27.b6 f6 this queenless middlegame.) 7...b5
[ After 27...xb2 28.c4 it's very difficult to ( 7...b4+!? is interesting with the idea
stop the c-pawn. ] that 8.c3 xc3+ 9.bxc3 xc3+ 10.d2
28.e2 d1+ 29.h2 b1 30.c7?! xa1 picks up the exchange.) 8.h5 d7
[ 30.e4!? was better: xb2 31.xb2 xb2 9.f3 d6 10.a4 b7 11.g4 gxh5
32.b4 with the c-pawn march to follow, 12.xh5 xb2 13.xb2 b4+ 14.f1
W h i t e h a s a c l e a r a d va n t a g e . I t g o e s xb2 15.e5 was a completely crazy
without saying that after a rook swap Black position and thus surely a success in
can't exchange queens as the bishop ending Naiditsch, A-Tseshkovsky, V Mosco w
is hopeless. ] 2005.;
30...d1? B) 5.e5 c5 Now the position resembles a
[ Black could have exploited White's Caro-Kann. 6.dxc5 d4 7.a4 a5+ 8.c3
inaccuracies by playing the simple dxc3 9.bxc3?! optimistic but this backfires
30...xb2! and White has only a tiny edge. ] ( 9.xc3 was necessary) 9...d7 10.b6
31.g3! Now the game is over. xc3+ 11.d2 ( 11.d2 xe5+ 12.e2
[ Black missed the text hoping for 31.xe5? xa1 13.xa1 xa1 14.xa8
h4! 32.f4+ e8! and White hardly has is simply a pawn up for Black.) 11...xa1
more than a perpetual: 33.xh4 xe2 12.f4!? A good practical decision but Black
34.a4+ d8 35.a8+ d7 36.a4+ should be completely winning. Cao Sang-
d8 ] Bauer, C Dresden 2007. ]
31...h5 32.xe5 g5 [ 4.f4 Is another critical try, with chances to
[ 32...h4+ didn't help either: 33.f4 g5+ transpose to an Austrian Attack. b5 ( 4...d6
34.e4 xe5 35.xe5 and White's King is would transpose to Tiger's Modern Austrian
in safety in the center of the board! ] Attack. ) 5.f3
33.f3+ g8 34.h4 A) 5...b4 6.e2 b7 ( 6...d5!?
1-0 looks fun ) 7.g3 h5 8.d3 h4 9.f1 e6
10.e2 was a strange hypermodern
position. White has been playing sensibly
824 B06 in the centre while Black has pushed his
Tirard,Hugo 2451 wing pawns! However it's not so clear that
Bauer,Christian 2607 B l a c k i s a c t u a l l y wo r se . S m i r n o v , P -
TOP 16 GpA Vandoeuvre FRA (3) 28.03.2010 Chernyshov, K Moscow 2007.;
[Gawain Jones] B) 5...b7 6.d3 c6 7.e3 f6 8.e5
g4 9.d2 d6 10.h3 h6 11.0-0 0-0
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 a6!? Minasian 12.e3 b4 and Black's unorthodox
and Chernysov both play this very frequently opening play had at least granted him
and Bauer is also happy to give it a whirl some good squares for his knights while
sometimes. I see Australian IM Alex Wohl has he can try to dismantle White's mammoth
started playing it too. Black's idea becomes centre, Neiman, E-Bauer, C France
very evident in this game he wants to delay d6 2007. ]
and concentrate on his queenside play. 4.e3 [ 4.f3 d6 again would be a Classical
The most popular move trying to develop Modern which I don't think should worry
some sort of 150 Attack. W hite has tried Black much. ]
numerous moves here [ 4.a4 has been played quite often, cutting
[ 4.h4!? was looked at by Andy Martin in the o u t t h e . . . b 5 i d e a s . d6 ( 4...b6
archives d5 This is another reason to delay I don't believe in this move. As a rule of
d6. thumb, I'm happy to play Hippo structures
A) 5.xd5 c6 6.e3 xd4 7.d3 once White has played Nf3 but if White can
844
play a swift f4-f5 then I think it's very risky. 7.d1 a5 8.c3 f6 9.f3 bxc3 10.bxc3
5.f4 b7 6.f3 e6 7.d3 e7 8.0-0 0-0 0-0 11.d3 e5 deviating from Tiger's 11...
9.f5 and I would start to feel uneasy about c5 or 11...Nbd7. 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.c4
White's position although Black's still doing bd7 14.b2 e7 15.d3 d8 16.c2
ok and actually went on to win. Ivanov, A- b6 17.b5 h5 18.e2 e6 19.c5
Moskvin, V Internet 2006.) 5.f3 ( 5.c4 g5 20.g4 h4+ 21.f2 f6 22.gxh5
c6 6.ge2 f6 7.g5 h6 8.h4 0-0 xf3 23.g3 c4 gave Black good
9.0-0 xe4! 10.xe4 d5 11.xd5 xd5 co m pe n sat io n f or t he p ie ce in a h igh ly
and Black had taken the upper hand Congiu, un cle ar p o sit io n Ku rm a n n, O -B au e r, C
M-Bauer, C Vandoeuvre 2008.) 5...d7 Switzerland 2010. ]
6.e2 c5 ( Playing a Hippo setup with 6...b6 5.d2 b7 6.d3 f6 7.h6 Sacrificing
makes sense here as there's no f4 break.) the e4 pawn is the most ambitious setup.
7.d5 gf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.a5 e8 10.f4 b5 [ 7.f3 would make sense to me. After 0-0
11.axb6 xb6 12.a2 was a favourable 8.ge2 d6 The position feels a little like a
version of a Benoni or Benko for White as Samisch Kings Indian. ]
he's traded his a pawn rather than his c. [ Generally White would prefer not to have to
Black's position should be ok but after g4 play 7.a3 and after d6 this is definitely a
13.d2 ge5 14.e3 he found his knight n o n c r i t i c a l li n e f o r B l a c k. I n f a c t , t h e
was in danger of being trapped and thus position is the same as Dominguez Perez-
f6 was necessary when White had the Kramnik except with the bishop developed
easier game. Graf, C-Wohl, A Bad Wiessee on g7 rather than knight on d7 which
2009. ] doesn't change the evaluation. ]
[ 4.g4 is a strange looking move but was 7...xh6 8.xh6 b4 So Black picks up the
played in a high power game. That e4 pawn and W hite has to decide the best
continued: b5 5.f3 b7 6.d3 d6 7.e3 way to get compensation. 9.d5
d7 8.e5?! White's moves have been [ 9.ce2 xe4 10.xe4 xe4 11.f3
strange already but this coupled with 4.g4 is another way to play f or W hite with
really doesn't work c5 9.e6 reasonable compensation as it'll take a while
A) Here 9...cxd4! would have been very to develop Black's pieces and there's no
strong 10.exf7+ ( 10.exd7+ xd7 way completely secure for his king.
and Black regains the piece.) 10...xf7 ( White can retrieve his pawn with 11.g7
11.g5+ e8 12.e6 xh1! 13.xd8 f8 12.xh7 but the central pawn should
xd8 14.xd4 xd4 15.xg6+ hxg6 be worth more than the respective h pawn. )]
16.xd4 e5 17.0-0-0 f3 and Black 9...xd5 10.exd5 xd5 11.h3!
has consolidated his extra material.; A very strong move. g2 is poisoned. e6
B) 9...fxe6 10.g5 xd4 ( 10...xh1 [ 11...xg2? cannot be recommended
11.xe6 c8 12.xg7+ f7 12.g7! f8 13.g5 xh1 14.xh7 d5
and I'm sceptical that White has anything 15.xf8+ d7 16.xf7 and Black's
like enough compensation for the rook.) position has collapsed. ]
11.xe6 xc3+ 12.bxc3 c8 13.0-0 12.g7?! It was important to keep the queen
gf6 14.e2 d5 and apparently they on h6 to control g5.
agreed a draw although White looks totally [ 12.0-0 would keep White with good
lost to me. 1/2-1/2 Mamedyarov, S- compensation as it's still not so easy to see
Minasian, A/Istanbul 2003. ] how best to develop Black's forces. f6
4...b5 13.c3 bxc3 14.bxc3 d6 15.fe1 d7
[ 4...d6 transposes to a normal position would probably be my pick with an
which will be examined in the next couple of intriguing battle in prospect. Black remains
games. Bauer has played this in the past but a pawn up but still can't quite complete his
this time goes for a more tricky idea. That development so White has good chances to
game continued 5.d2 b5 Tiger prefers attack. ]
playing 5... Nd7 first in his book 6.a4 b4 [ 12.f4 immediately is also possible b7
845
( 12...e7 13.xd5 exd5+ 14.f1 Still, we'll take what we can get. Topalov
lo o k s e x t r e m e ly d a n ge ro u s f o r B l a c k .) himself is one of the few top players to use
13.xg6!? f6! 14.f4 xf4 15.xf4 the Pirc/Modern - See this month's game. And
c6 16.c3 is roughly level. ] do you remember his classic game versus
12...f8 13.f4 g5! Now we see why the Kasparov in W ijk aan Zee 1999, one of the
queen should have stayed on h6. 14.xd5 most brilliant of all time? If not, you should
xd5 15.0-0 c6 16.xh7?! This changes look it up! 1.d4 g6 2.f3 g7 3.e4 d6
the position from a rough balance to a clear 4.c4 f6 This is a kind of hybrid Pirc/
edge for Black. Modern, although Black loses some
[ 16.c3 should have been preferred ] opportunities without White's knight on c3 (it's
16...xd4 17.xg6 This was presumably the easier for White to defend d4, for one thing).
reason White took on h7 but Black can safely [ 4...c6 is a typical Modern defence option. ]
ignore the bishop. xb2! [ and 4...c5 has done reasonably well over
[ O f c o u r s e n o t 17...fxg6? 18.ad1! the years, with the idea 5.dxc5 ( 5.c3 )
winning the queen as d7's on. ] 5...a5+ when 6.c3 xc5 . In an old game
18.h5 f6 so Black is still a pawn up. Minic-Timman, plat went 7.b3 e6 8.e3
White's lost his centre and given open lines c7 , and now 9.a3 gives White quite a
for Black to attack down on the kingside. It's de velo p me n t al lea d to com p e nsa t e f o r
clear that the last few moves have been a Black's central majority. ]
disaster for White. 19.e4 h8 20.e2 d5 5.e2 This system used to be relatively more
21.e3 d4 22.d3 c5 Black grabs space popular. In their old Modern Defence book,
in the centre. Look at the 'octopus' on d4! Keene and Botterill devoted 8 pages to the
Meanwhile Bauer decides his king is safe on setup. I'll fold in some of the older theory.
e8. 23.fd1 h4 24.a3 c4 25.f1 xc2 [ 5.c3 is a Pirc proper = 1..d6 2 d4 Nf6 3
another pawn drops. W hite gets a couple Nc3 g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Bc4, etc. ]
checks but it's not threatening, the king can 5...0-0 Maybe Black should strike back more
r u n t o g 7 . 26.c5 d8 27.ac1 b3 quickly: a)
Three connected passed pawns is not a good [ 5...c6 is interesting, with the idea ...Bg4:
omen for White... 28.g3 d4 29.c6+ f8 6.e5!? ( 6.h3 d5!? 7.exd5 xd5 8.0-0
30.xa6 g7 31.b6 a8 32.xd4 xd4 is double-edged; 6.c3 g4 7.e3
33.b7 xa3 34.h3 a7 35.b5 b2 with the idea 0-0-0 may keep an edge, in
An interesting game and a success for Black part because xe4 8.xf7+ xf7 9.xe4
although White had good compensation for seems to favour White.) 6...dxe5 7.dxe5
the pawn before 12. Qg7?!. Nevertheless, I g4 and Black is close to equality, in view of
don't see a good way that White can exploit 8.b5 ( 8.f4 d4; 8.e6 xe6 9.xe6
Black's unusual move order and it makes fxe6 10.xe6 d4!? or 10...Qd7) 8...d7
sense to try this as a way to confuse lower 9.f4 0-0 and .. .Ngxe5 is a theme, e.g.,
rated opponents. after 10.0-0?! ( A fairly random game went
0-1 10.c3 a6 11.c4 b5 12.b3 b4 13.a4
a5 14.0-0-0 e8 15.h3 b5 16.d2
xf2 17.xf2 xa4 18.c5 with ongoing
825 B06 complications, Vasiukov, E (2575) -Ribli, Z
Topalov,Veselin 2777 (2505)/W ijk aan Zee 1973) 10...gxe5
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2742 11.xe5 ( 11.xe5 d4 ) 11...xe5
XXIII Rapid Open rapid (5) 02.08.2008 12.xc6 xb2 13.xd7 xa1
[John Watson] with an edge. ]
[ b) 5...c6 is a safe move, played more than
Another Pirc/Modern Defence at the very top others. Af ter 6.b3 0-0 7.0-0 ( 7.g5
levels! W ell, it's really a Modern, and was tried by Matulovic versus Botvinnik!))
Mamedyarov may well have kept it in that 7...a5!? 8.c3 , White should have some
opening depending upon what Topalov did. advantage, but the whole game awaits. ]
846
6.0-0 e5!? A rather cooperative move, which 826 B06

has scored 0-5 in my database in the games Torhola,Simo
between at a 2400+ level. Was Mamedyarov Ahlback,B
already out of hisbook? corr. 1979
[ 6...c6 is a standard idea against Bc4, to [Nigel Davies]
play either ...d5 or ...Ne4. W hite would
probably respondby 7.b3 ] 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d5 Ahlback has
[ 6...g4 is also possible, with the idea 7.e5 been one of the main pioneers of this line,
( 7.h3 xf3 8.xf3 c6 but White having used it extensively in his
probably has some edge with his bishop pair correspondence games. But his treatment has
after 9.d1 e5 10.c3 ) 7...dxe5 8.dxe5 tended to be a bit offbeat, as we shall see....
fd7 ( 8...d5 ) 9.e6 e5 10.exf7+ h8 4.exd5
11.xe5!? xe5 12.xe5 f5 13.d2 h6 [ After 4.e5 (trying to make Black's bishop on
14.c3 h7 15.g4 with attack, Jansa- g7'bite on granite') Black gets strong
Gaprindashvili, Goteborg 1968. ] counterplay with c5 , f or example 5.e3
7.dxe5 dxe5 8.d1 e7 9.b3 The simple ( 5.f3 c6 6.b5 g4 7.e3 a6 8.h3
idea is to play Ba3, provoke ...c5, and win the xf3 9.xc6+ bxc6 10.xf3 was Laine -
d5 square. Others: Ahlback, corr. 1983 and now e6 intending ...
[ 9.g5 h6 10.e3 ] Ne7 looks fine for Black.) 5...c6 6.f4 h6
[ 9.c3 c6 10.a4 bd7 11.b3 7.f3 g4 8.e2 f5 9.f2 xf3 10.xf3
is also dangerous. ] cxd4 11.e2 f6 12.g4 e3 13.xe3 dxe3
9...c5!? 10.c3 c6 11.g5 d4 12.d3 14.exf6 xf6 Varjonen - Ahlback, corr.
[ White is also better after 12.xd4 cxd4 1976 ]
13.d5 d6 ( 13...d8?? 14.f3 ) 14.c3! [ 4.xd5 e6 ( 4...c6 5.e3 xd4 6.xd4
xd5 15.xd5 ] xd4 7.f3 g7 seems more solid to me)
12...g4 13.d5 d6 14.xd4 cxd4 5.e3 xd4 6.xd4 xd4 7.f3 g7
15.xf6 8.c4 was somewhat unpleasant for Black
[ 15.f3 immediately may be just as good, in Haila - Ahlback, corr 1994 - W hite is
because c8 16.c3 xd5 17.xd5 playing Bf4 next move and Black dare not
keeps Black tied down ] play ...c7-c6 because of the weakness of
15...xf6 16.f3 c8 17.c3 dxc3 d6. ]
[ Or 17...g7 18.cxd4 exd4 19.f4 4...a6 This amazing move was Ahlback's
with the idea e5. ] preference for years before he had a brief
18.xf6+ xf6 19.xc3 e6 20.d6 fd8 flirtation with the 'normal' 4... Nf6.
[ 20...ac8 21.b4 effectively gains a [ Even more recently Ahlback has veered off
tempo for White. ] t h e b e a t e n t r a c k a g a i n w i t h 4...d7
21.ad1 ac8 22.xd8+! can also be played, the game Ekmark -
[ 22.b2!? xd6 23.xd6 c5 ( 23...c6 Ahlback, corr. 1988 reeling on with the
24.d2 ) 24.xe6 fxe6 25.d2 f4! moves 5.a4 gf6 6.c4 b5 (obvious
is undoubtedly better f or W hite, but it's when you think about it!) 7.cxb5 xd5
unlikely that he can win. ] 8.c3 7f6 9.f3 0-0 10.c4 g4
22...xd8 23.xd8+ xd8 24.xe6 b6+ 11.e2 d6 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 ad8
25.f1? After maintaining the advantage so 14.a4 b4 15.e3 e5 16.dxe5 xe5
smoothly, Topalov gets careless. 17.b3 d3+ 18.f1 d7 19.xa7 7c5
[ 25.h1! xe6 26.c7! and White will win 20.c2 fe8 21.e2 xb2 22.xb2 xb2
a pawn for free, with very good prospects. ] 23.d1 e5 24.f4 xf3 25.xd8 xd8
25...xe6 26.a4 There's nothing much going 26.xc5 d1+ 27.e2 xh1 28.xf3 a1
on now and the players shook hands. 29.d5 xa4 0-1, Ekmark R. - Ahlback B.,
[ now 26.c7 is met by a6+ ] corr. 1988 ]
½-½ 5.e2
[ 5.c4 b5 6.b3 b7 7.f3 f6 8.0-0
847
xd5 9.e4 d7 10.e1 was also 827 B06

pleasant for W hite in, Hartung Nielsen - Vachier Lagrave,M 2758
Ahlback, Nordic Ch., Grenaa 1973 ] Iordachescu,V 2594
5...b5 6.f3 TCh-FRA Top 12 2014 (10.2) 02.06.2014
[ Another amazingly random Ahlback game [Neil McDonald]
reeled on with 6.a4 b4 7.a2 a5 8.c3
a6 9.b5+ f8 10.cxb4 xd5 11.f3 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c6 4.f3
axb4 12.0-0 f6 13.xa6 xa6 14.xb4 White waits for Black to commit himself to 4...
with Black a pawn down for very little in d6 before putting his bishop on e3, as he
Marjamaki - Ahlback, corr. 1979 ] wants to avoid
6...b7 [ 4.e3 d5 ]
[ In an earlier game Ahlback played the 4...d6 5.e3 b6 A speciality of the
eccentric 6...a7 7.a3 d7 8.f4 b6 Moldovan Grandmaster. He plans to disrupt
9.ge2 b7 (Black has to work hard to get W hite's normal build up with 6.Qd2 and 7.
his pawn back here) 10.e5 played the 0-0-0 by attacking the b2 pawn. It can't have
horrible f6? ( 10...f6 11.f4 0-0 12.0-0 come as a surprise to Vachier Lagrave, who
bxd5 seems more reasonable to me) incidentally is number 10 in the Live Chess
11.g3 xd5 12.xd5 xd5 13.xd5 Ratings as I write this. Has the French
xd5 14.0-0 (the weakness of e6 is fatal) Grandmaster prepared a sharp line against it?
c5 15.f4 xd4 16.f3 d7 17.ad1 6.c1!? In Akopian-Iordachescu, European
c8 18.d5 f5 19.e6 f6 20.d8+ Championship 2014, which Tom Rendle has
xd8 21.xd8+ f7 22.b8 (a hilarious analysed in the archives, White gambitted the
way to win the exchange - putting it on a8 is b2 pawn with
met by Nc7) xe6 23.xa7 c4 24.b3 h6 [ 6.d2 xb2 etc. Also possible is ]
25.xh8 1-0, Valve P. - Ahlback B., corr. [ 6.b1 though Black has achieved his aim
1967 ] of stopping White from castling queenside. ]
7.d6 This wins a pawn, but no doubt it was all 6...f6
part of Ahlback's cunning plan. The rest of the [ This isn't the first time Iordachescu has
game is utterly incomprehensible. faced this position. In an earlier game he
[ 7.ge2 looks like a good alternative ] tried 6...g4 which is a natural reply that
7...c6 8.dxc7 xc7 9.ge2 d8 10.d5 threatens 7...Bxf3 and 8....Bxd4. However,
b8 11.f4 e5 12.dxe5 xe5 13.c4 White has a couple of interesting replies,
xf3+ 14.gxf3 e5 15.0-0 bxc4 16.a4+ both of which are somewhat paradoxical:
f8 17.b4+ g7 18.xe5+ xe5 Instead
19.xb7 xd5 20.c3 I would definitely A) 7.d2!? the queen goes to d2 after all,
prefer to have the knight on the kingside (g3). as xb2?! 8.b1 a3 9.xb7
B u t t h i s i s c o r r e s p o n d e n c e c h e s s ! d2 is good for W hite. If Black declines the
21.ad1 g5+ 22.h1 xd1 23.xd1 f6 pawn, then W hite gets to castle
24.e4 h6 25.xc4 xf3+ 26.g1 e8 queenside.;
27.d4+ g8 28.d5 g4 29.c1 e5 B) 7.d2! I guess this was Vachier
30.e7+ f8 31.c6 d5 32.b4+ g7 Lagrave's idea. After
33.xe5 xe5 34.c5 f3+ 35.h1 e4 B1) 7...xd4? Black ends up in an
36.c3+ g8 37.d1 a8 38.f6 g5+ uncomfortable position as W hite can
39.f3 e6 40.d7 f8 41.b4 sacrifice a pawn for the initiative: 8.a4
1-0 b4 9.c3! xa4 10.xd4 f6
( The natural riposte 10...e5? loses to
11.c4! exd4 12.b3 b5 13.xd6+ )
11.c4 A sneaky point is that the natural
developing move d7 loses the bishop
after 12.h3 etc.;
B2) 7...f6 8.h3 c8 the bishop is lost
848
after 8...Be6 7.d5, while retreating to d7 [ White could try to keep a hold on the d5
deprives the black knights of a useful s q u a r e w i t h 15.axb6 xb6 16.a2
square. 9.f3 Back again, and White but after b7 17.dxc6 xc6 18.f3 d5
has achieved the useful move 8.h3 'for Black has broken out. ]
free'.; 15...bxc4!
C) 7.e2?! looks feeble, and Black was [ A Grandmaster won't allow White to control
doing fine after c5 Ramaswamy, A (2299)- the strategically vital d5 square after
Iordachescu, V (2633)/Port Erin 2004. ] 15...xc6 16.d5 xd5 17.xd5 ]
7.d3 0-0 8.0-0 bd7 9.a4 Here we see a 16.cxd7 b7!
good point of 6.Qc1 over 6.Rb1. Because the [ As we shall see Black prefers to give up a
rook is still on a1, White is able to gain space pawn rather than make the natural recapture
with a4-a5. c7 on d7 which hands over the d5 square after
[ Black could block White's queenside 16...xd7 17.xf6 xf6 18.d5 ]
advance with 9...a5 but instead he prefers 17.xf6 xf6 18.a4 xd7 19.xc4 fc8
to prepare to counterattack in the centre with 20.xc8+ xc8 Iordachescu has evaluated
e7-e5. ] the position correctly. White won't be able to
10.a5 keep his extra pawn due to the weakness of
[ Instead 10.h3 e5 11.dxe5 xe5 12.xe5 a5 and Black's pressure on the queenside.
dxe5 looks about equal, though Black has to 21.d3 c4 22.e3 d8 23.a1 g7
be a bit careful. For example 13.a5 d8!? There is no need to hurry. White has no good
( After the routine 13...e6 White has the way to hinder Black's plan of attacking a5
surprising sequence 14.c5 fd8 15.e3 which is seen over the next three moves. 24.f3
when the defence of a7 causes Black some c7 25.h1 d8 26.a7 Vachier Lagrave
problems. That would certainly have justified decides to force a draw by repetition. c8
the 6.Qc1 move.) 14.g5 e8 when the [ B l a c k a g r e e s t o t h e d r a w a s 26...c8
white bishop isn't that great on g5. ] 27.d5 gives White the initiative again
10...g4?! Black decides to drive the bishop because of his control of d5. For example
from e3 before advancing his e-pawn. xc2 28.3b4 xb2 29.e3 when the
Nonetheless I would prefer black rook is in trouble as xa5? loses to
[ 10...e5 as in the note above, when 11.dxe5 30.c6 ]
xe5 12.xe5 dxe5 looks about equal. ] 27.f2 d8 28.a7 c8 29.f2 d8
11.g5 e5 12.d5 This advance wouldn't have Perhaps this was not the most exciting game,
been attractive for White if Black had kept his but there were some interesting strategic
knight on f6 and played 10...e5 as after 11.d5 mo m e n t s. B la ck h a d t o p la y wit h f la ir t o
cxd5 12.exd5 he would be left with a fragile survive against his world class opponent.
pawn on d5. In contrast here 12...cxd5? 13. ½-½
Nxd5 would leave W hite with a knight on a
strong outpost square. gf6 13.c4 a6
14.e1?! 828 B06
[ Instead 14.d2 is well answered by c5 Vajda,Levente 2462
attacking e4 and with ideas of Bg4. Budnikov,Oleg 2331
However, ] World Junior Ch., (6) 23.09.1999
[ 14.d1 should be preferred for example [Nigel Davies]
cxd5 ( The white queen again emerges from
hid in g ont o a goo d ce ntre square af te r In this one W hite ra ther cooperat es wit h
14...c5 15.e3! ) 15.xd5 and his control Black's plan of blockade by blocking in his
of d5 gives White a small edge. ] queen's bishop with 5.f4. Black was doing OK
14...b5! Iordachescu stages a well calculated until he took the b-pawn, probably going a bit
break out bef ore W hite can increase th e too far in an already provocative opening. 1.e4
pressure with moves like 15.Nd3 and 16.Rd1 g6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 d5 4.e5 h5 5.f4
etc. 15.dxc6 g7 6.f3 c6 7.e2 g4 8.e3 d7
849
9.d2 f5 10.f2 xf3 11.xf3 h5 no w B la ck t a ke s t h e a d va n t a ge . ( 7.f3

Obtaining a position which is very much in the should be preferred when one line could run
spirit of the Gurgenidze system. 12.g3 e6 xe5 8.fxd4 a6 9.c3 c7 10.e2
13.e2 b6?! This pawn hunting expedition xc5 11.0-0 h6 although Black looks to
is not a bright idea, in my view. be doing fine.) 7...h6 8.d6+?! The logical
[ 13...b5 is more in the spirit of this structure continuation of the last move but White was
when both sides have chances. ] getting carried away. f8 9.h4 g5
14.0-0 xb2 15.a4 b6 16.a5 c7 17.c4 10.xc8 gxh4 11.xe7 gxe7 Fingerov,
dxc4 18.fc1 h6 19.xc4 0-0 20.c3 D (2405) -Rakhmangulov, A (2394) Odessa
fd8 21.e2 White has massive pressure for 2010 and Black was a piece to the good. ]
his pawn and it is very difficult for Black to [ 4.f3 can hardly be critical as again Black
gain counterplay. In desperation he soon m u s t h a ve g a i n e d s o m e t h i n g w i t h t h e
de c id e s t o give u p th e e xch a n ge t o f re e omission of ...c6. ]
himself. e7 22.b5 b8 23.d6 f8 [ 4.xd5 looks illogical but has the stamp of
24.b1 xd6 25.exd6 xd6 26.xb7 g7 approval of my Rybka. However following c6
27.b2 d8 28.a3 f5 29.bb4 c8 5.c3 xd4 6.xd4 xd4 even though
30.a4 d6 31.b7 h4 32.a6 hxg3 White can gain a temporary initiative I can
33.hxg3 e7 34.b4 c5 35.dxc5 d3 h a r d l y b e l i e ve B l a c k s h o u l d h a v e a n y
36.b3 d8 37.c6 f5 38.c7 d6 39.g2 problems. 7.c4 ( or 7.f3 xc3+ 8.bxc3
xa6 40.b8 d6 41.xc8 xc8 42.b8 f6 9.d3 bd7 10.a3 b6 11.0-0
1-0 a4 12.c4 d7 13.d4 e5 14.b3 c5
Kireev, V-Sakhabeev, R (2384) ICCF email
2009 and Black was fine.) 7...xc3+ 8.bxc3
829 B06 f6 9.f3 b6 10.a4 a6 11.d3 0-0
Van Haastert,Edwin 2419 12.g5 e8 13.e2 fd7 14.f4 c5
Martens,Martin 2431 15.xa6 bxa6 Meurs, T (2201) -Haast, M
TCh-NED Netherlands NED (6.5) 12.02.2011 (2194) Amersfoort 2010 and Black
[Gawain Jones] eventually exploited W hite's crippled
queenside. ]
1.d4 g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d5!? This hasn't 4...f6
b e e n lo o k e d a t o n C h e ssP u b lish in g t h i s [ 4...a6 is examined by Nigel Davies in
millennium so I decided to take a look:) Whilst Torhola, S-Ahlback B corr. 1979 - check
preparing for Kjetil Stokke I noticed he'd tried the archives. ]
this a couple of times recently. On the surface 5.c4
I thought there would be an easy way for a [ 5.f3 giving back the pawn shouldn't
risk-free advantage for White but it is in fact trouble Black. A high rated recent encounter
not so clear. Black sacrifices a pawn and continued xd5 6.xd5 xd5 7.c4
W hite can cling onto it if he wishes but he with W hite hoping to have an improved
must cede the bishop pair which gives Black Scandinavian. However the trade of knights
d e c e n t l o n g - t e r m c o m p e n s a t i o n . 4.exd5 has really favoured Black. The game
This is by far the most common and natural. c o n t i n u e d : d6 8.e3 c6 9.d5?!
[ 4.e5 is also interesting but Black can claim T h i s c e d e s t o o m a n y s q u a r e s . ( 9.e2
to have gained something as he can play ... should be preferred although Black is fine
c5 in one go. A recent game continued: c5 after e5 10.dxe5 b4+ 11.d2 xd2+
( It seems to be Black could also get away 12.xd2 xe5 13.xe5 xe5 14.0-0-0
with 4...h6 followed by 5...f6.) 5.dxc5 d4 0-0 15.he1 e6= ) 9...e5 10.c5 xf3+
6.b5 c6 ( 6...xe5 has been played in 11.xf3 d7 12.0-0-0?! Holding onto the
t h e p a s t b u t f o l l o w i n g 7.f3 g4 b2 pawn but now W hite's king is far too
Baci, V (2206)-Vozovic, O (2356) Pardubice v u l n e r a b l e . ( 12.d1 xb2 13.e2
2006 W hite can grab the pawn with should be preferred but of course Black is
8.bxd4! ) 7.g5?! An interesting try but better. ) 12...a4! Hitting a2 and threatening
850
Bg4. 13.f4 xa2 14.b5+ c6 15.d4 equa lised . Forsa a, E (2 2 99 )-St o kk e, K

xd4 16.xd4 0-0 17.dxc6 bxc6 18.xc6 (2401) Fredrikstad 2010. ]
b8 19.d5 a5 20.he1 b4 21.e5 [ 6.f3 is perhaps the most sensible looking
a1+ 0-1 Brunello, S (2507)-Skytte, R move and promises White a small
(2386) Denmark 2009. ] s o m e t h i n g . b6 7.b3 ( 7.b5+ d7
[ 5.b5+ is the other main option. bd7 8.xd7+ xd7 9.0-0 fxd5 10.xd5
( 5...d7 6.c4! is the typical idea when it's xd5 Iodo, A (2176) -Vozovic, O (2288)
much harder to regain the pawn.) 6.f3 0-0 Chisinau 2005 when perhaps 11.b3 0-0
7.0-0 b6 8.e1 Areshchenko, A (2566)- 12.c4 f5 13.e1 is a touch better for
Rak hm an gu lo v, A (234 3) A lu sh ta 2 00 3 White but can hardly be anything serious. )
bxd5 9.xd5 xd5 10.h3 c6 A) 7...a5 has been the most common 8.a4
resembles a typical Alekhine position but ( 8.a4!? is very interesting. bxd5 9.c4
White is probably a little better. ] b4 10.a3 a6 11.0-0 0-0 12.h3 d7
5...bd7 13.e1 c5 14.xc5 xc5 15.dxc5
[ 5...0-0 is seen in Yudasin, L-Vydeslaver, A and White had a definite edge. Gdanski, J
Beer-Sheva (Israel) 1992. ] (2512)-Nouro, M (2344) Myyrmanni
6.g5 This is the only way to hold onto the 1999. ) 8...0-0 9.0-0 bxd5 10.xd5
pawn for the long term but the bishop pair xd5 11.h3 h6 ( 11...c6 12.e1 f5
looks to give Black enough play to hold rough looks acceptable.) 12.e1 e6 13.e5 b6
equality. 14.f3 a6 15.d2 d6 16.ad1 c6
[ 6.b3 was Nigel's suggestion in the 17.c4! e7 18.f4 and White managed
archives. That game continued: b6 7.f3 to slowly increase his advantage. David, A
White tries to hold onto the pawn without (2529)-Govciyan, P (2430) Paris 2007.;
co n c ed in g t h e b ish o p p a ir b u t B lack is B) 7...0-0 8.0-0 a5 is likely to transpose
probably ok. g4 ( 7...a5 8.a4 g4 9.g3 to 7...a5.;
f5 10.f3 bxd5 11.xd5 xd5 12.0-0 C) 7...fxd5 8.e4 0-0 9.0-0 c6
Manso Gil, A (2332) -Sakhabeev, R (2413) 10.e1 c7 11.c3 and White must have
ICCF email 2007 is very similar but I would a small edge as the knight on b6 looks
p re f e r t o t h ro w in t h e a p a wn a d va n c e rather out of place. Rudolf , A (2293)-
myself. ) 8.g3 f5 9.f3 g4 10.g3 Stavrianakis, I (2243) Szombathely 2010. ]
f5 11.f3 W hite plays to win. bxd5 6...b6 Playing this immediately makes sense
12.xd5 xd5 13.0-0 0-0 14.e1 c6 to me as the check is nothing to fear.
15.g5 h6 16.d2 Klovans Janis (LAT)- [ 6...0-0 is also played frequently. 7.ge2
Gurevich Dnepropetrovsk (Ukraine) 1970 ( 7.f3 b6 8.b3 is similar to 6.Bb3 but
[ G M N i g e l D a vi e s ] wh e n B l a c k s h o u l d a5 9.a4 g4 10.f4 f5 11.xf6 exf6
p ro b a b l y h a ve c o n t i n u e d wit h ( 16.xd5 12.ge2 To, N (2413) -Brustkern, J (2256)
hxg5 17.b3 g4 is pretty messy but the Budapest 2010 and Black's compensation
bis hop pa ir give B la ck decent co unt er- for the pawn wasn't as obvious as in the
chances. ) 16...f6 when White has the game. ) 7...b6 8.xf6 exf6 9.b3 a5
slightly easier position but Black's position 10.a4 c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0 a6
is certainly not terrible. ] 13.d2 f5 and again Black had his decent
[ 6.f3 b6 7.b5+ ( 7.b3 long term compensation although W hite
would transpose to 6. Bb3 and should be eventually utilised his rating advantage.
preferred.) 7...d7 8.d6 c6 9.dxe7 xe7+ Saric, I (2580)-Stokke, K (2399) Pula 2010. ]
10.e2 f5 11.h4 0-0-0 and Black's lead 7.xf6 xf6 8.b3 a5 9.a4 0-0 10.ge2
in development gave him a great position. c6 Black accepts that he will have a pawn
Toufighi, H (2501) -Aleskerov, F (2289) deficit for the foreseeable future but can now
Baku 2010. ] put pressure on the d4 pawn and take control
[ 6.ge2 b6 7.b5+ d7 8.d3 0-0 of some light squares. 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0
9.0-0 fxd5 10.xd5 xd5 11.e4 c6 a6
12.f3 e8 and Black had comfortably [ For some explanations of the previous few
851
moves and a couple of alternatives check co n cr e t e t h r e a t b u t t h i s a l l o ws B l a c k t o

Campora, D-Rocha, S Santo Antonio liquidate and regain his pawn.
(Portugal) 1999 which continued 12...c7 [ Perhaps White could have waited with
and Black held fairly comfortably - check 17.h3 but it's not clear how White is to make
the archives. ] any progress without playing Ne4 as all his
13.e1 pieces are tied up. ]
[ 13.e4 looks like White's last chance to try 17...xe2 18.xe2 xd4 19.c3 xd1
and keep the advantage. g7 ( 13...xe2 20.xd1 c7 21.c5 Black has at least
regains the pawn but 14.xe2 xd4 15.c3 equalised with a strong square on d5 for the
e5 16.ad1 ad8 17.f4 c7 18.xd8 knight, long term pressure down the long
xd8 19.f5 gives White an edge.) 14.c3 e5 diagonal and play down the b file. 3...d5 is
( 14...d7!? preparing c5 and opening the b interesting and I don't see a clear cut path for
file. 15.e1 b8 16.b1 c5! 17.dxc5 c7 W hite to prove an edge. On the downside,
l o o k s l i k e r e a s o n a b l e c o m p e n s a t i o n .) Black must be happy to sit patiently and wait
15.c5 xe2 16.xe2 exd4 17.ad1 e8 for White to play for a win himself in certain
18.g4 Zdebskaja, N (2284)-Vozovic, O lines.
(2328) Alushta 2003 and W hite has ½-½
regained his pawn although following b8
19.cxd4 d5 the pressure down the b file
and on the d4 pawn holds equality. ] 830 B06
13...g7! Useful prophylaxis. Black can now Vlad,Decebal
break with ...c6-c5 without having to worry Barkhagen,Jonas
about Nc3-e4. Mamaia 1991
[ 13...c4 has been more common when [Nigel Davies]
14.b1 ( However the unplayed 14.e4!
gives W hite the better chances as xb2 White certainly has plenty of choice, but this
15.xf6+ exf6 16.d2 gives Black is not necessarily a good thing as
p r o b l e m s w i t h t h e k n i g h t o n b 2 . c4 demonstrated in this game. Vlad seemed
17.c3 d6 18.xc6 and White has a deeply insulted by his opponent's choice of
definite edge.) 14...d6 has given Black opening and probably vowed to impale him
decent counterplay. ] with 4.c4 and 5. f4. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.e5
14.c1 e6 15.e3 The first new move but it h5 4.c4 Vlad attempts to impale Black with
d o e s n ' t c h a n ge t h e e va l u a t i o n f r o m t h e a broad pawn centre, much in the spirit of the
general consensus of good compensation for Four Pawns Attack in the Alekhine Defence.
the pawn. But it turns out that the knight is far from
[ 15.f4 was played in the only previous useless on h5. d6 5.f4
game. b8 16.ad1 d5 17.f3 b4 [ 5.exd6 cxd6 6.c3 g7 7.f3 c6 8.h3
18.e4 xe2 19.xe2 xd4 20.xd4 0-0 9.e3 e5 10.d5 e7 made the knight
xd4 and Black had regained the pawn and on h5 look quite useful in Heggheim - Resoy,
even scored a big upset. Chatalbashev, B corr 1989 ]
(2541)-Paleologu, V (2156) Lugano 2006. ] 5...h6! 6.f3 dxe5 7.dxe5 c6 8.e3
15...a7 Martens continues his logical plan of xf4! A stake through the heart. White gets
putting pressure on the d4 pawn. punished for his over-expansion and neglect
[ However 15...d5! was actually strong of development. 9.xf4 d4 10.d1 xf4
here. 16.xd5 ( 16.xd5 exd5 is quite 11.c3 f5 12.c1 c6 13.f3 d4
similar.; 16.g3 might be better but b6 14.g3 xe5+ 15.f2 d4+ 16.e3 e6
is p le a s a n t .) 16...exd5! actually favours 17.f3 xe3+ 18.xe3 0-0-0 19.d5 g4
B la c k a s W h it e wi ll s t ru ggl e t o d e f e n d 20.d2 ed4 21.h3 e6 22.g2 f5+
against a doubling of rooks on the e file 23.f2 xd5 24.cxd5 b4 25.c4 xd5
followed by ...Qb6. ] 26.f1 b6 27.c5 d4 28.f3 c4
16.ad1 d7 17.e4 Now White has a
852
29.xc4 xc4 30.b3 e5 13.0-0 cxd5? Poor. Black must play
0-1 disruptively with
[ 13...b5! 14.b3 b4 15.e2 cxd5 16.c5
d8 and if 17.xb4 a6! 18.b5
831 B06 Black has xc5 19.xc5 a6 20.fe1
Vlassov,Nikolai 2492 xe3 21.fxe3 e6 with excellent counterplay
Zemtsov,Igor 2296 based on the two bishops and the open
Moscow open Moscow, Russia (8) 02.03.2005 White King. ]
[Andrew Martin] 14.b5 c7 15.c5 d8 16.xd5 d7
17.g5 c7 18.b3 e6 19.xf5!
1.e4 g6 2.h4!? An acquired taste. Vlassov As Vlassov remarks, W hite's considerable
evidently likes this idea of disturbing Black on advantage in development enables him to
the kingside and thinks that he will force a make this sacrifice. In return he gets a long-
c o n c e s s i o n . h5 Black stops the advance of lasting initiative. gxf5
the h4-pawn, but W hite gets a pretty good [ 19...exf5?? loses immediately after 20.d5
square (g5) for his knight. To dislodge that b8 21.f4+- ]
knigh t Black would have to make f u rthe r 20.g3 h7?! Out of the frying pan into the
weaknesses. Naturally there are other fire! Black should avoid any movement of his
responses by Black. King unless absolutely necessary.
[ I like 2...d5 3.exd5 f6 with an excellent [ 20...f6 is less easy to break down:
Scandinavian and there's also ] 21.h6 e8 ( 21...xh6 22.xh6 g4
[ 2...f6 3.e5 d5 4.h5 g7 with a bizarre 23.g5+ h7 24.xh5+ h6 25.ce2
form of the Alekhine. ] d7 26.d1 a5 ) 22.ce2 h7 23.f4
3.f3 c6 4.c3 d5 5.g5!? Original chess d8 24.xh5 xh4 25.xg7 xg7
and a move which stops ...Bg4 - White should 26.d5 ]
keep this knight alive! h6 6.d4 g7 7.e3 21.xh5 h8 22.e1 b6 23.e2 a5
b6?!N Very risky - Black gives up the centre 24.c3 An almost leisurely conduct of the
for the b2-pawn. But this is an overreaction attack, but in view of Black's retarded
typical of the belligerent player who has been development White has no need to rush. d6
surprised. Black wants to land the first blow! I 25.eg3 b5 Diagram The position is ripe for
think I prefer either of two other options: tactics: 26.e7! c6
[ 7...dxe4 dissolving the centre and creating [ After 26...xe7 27.xf5 Black has no
an outpost on f5 for the Knight. 8.cxe4 defence against Qh6. ]
f5 9.c4 0-0 10.f3 xd4! 11.0-0-0 27.xf8 xf8 White has got the exchange
xe3+ 12.fxe3 b6 ] back and continues his attack a pawn up -
[ 7...0-0 straightforward and if 8.d2 then B l a c k i s f i n i s h e d . 28.f4 This knight is
g4! 9.0-0-0 a5 10.b1 xe3 heading towards e5.
No way Black is worse. ] [ Vlassov mentions 28.g5! xc3 29.c1
8.exd5 xb2 9.ge4 f5 10.b1 a3 xd4 30.xf5! exf5 31.xf7 g7
11.d2 32.c6+- ]
[ 11.dxc6 xe3 12.fxe3 xc6 13.c4 f5 28...d6 29.d3 a7 30.g5 b4 31.h5+
14.b3 a5 15.g5 is pretty unclear. ] g8 32.e5 A sacrifice on f5 is threatened,
11...0-0 12.c4 a5 forcing Black to make the undesirable capture
[ 12...b5! i s b e t t e r : 13.b3 b4 14.e2 on e5. xe5 33.dxe5 e7 34.h6 h7
( It is tempting to lock the black queen on a3, [ 34...bxc3 35.h5 f6 36.xf6++- ]
but after 14.a4 d8 15.d1 xe3 35.cxb4 xb4 36.e3 f8 37.f4 c7
16.fxe3 cxd5 Black is OK - too many white 38.h5 All too easy. h8 39.g3 b4
pieces are busy with the black queen and 40.h6 e1+ 41.h2 xe5 42.f4
yet none of them is capable of taking it.) Rather an original effort! The author's
14...d8 putting pressure on the centre - at te nt io n was d ra wn to t his gam e by t h e
Black has decent play. Vlassov. ]
853
excellent 'Chess Today' newspaper. xf6 White must be very careful indeed
1-0 here. ]
9.xe5 f6 10.f2! Absolutely necessary.
the King scurries to what he hopes will be
832 B06 safety. bd7 11.xd7 xd7
Vysochin,Spartak 2551 [ 11...xd7 12.e5 0-0 might be better,
Moliboga,Vladimir 2322 intending ...f7-f6. ]
4th I.Platonov Mem (4) 11.01.2006 12.e5! h5 13.e4 White suddenly has a
[Andrew Martin] degree of control he could have only dreamed
about five moves beforehand. Moliboga did
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 c6 not play energetically enough. 0-0 14.d6!
Rare, but not as bad as its reputation I think. e8 15.g4+- f5 16.c5 fxg4 17.xd7
There are unanswered questions in the main xe5 18.e6+ h8
line after 5 Nf3. 5.h3 And so Vysochin hopes [ 18...xe6 19.xe6 gxh3 20.c4 h8
to have his cake and eat it! With 5 h3 white 21.xf8 xf8 22.xh3 ]
c u t s o u t . . . B g 4 a n d p r e p a r e s t h e u su a l 19.xe5 xe5 20.e6 g5 21.g2 f6
Austrian stranglehold commencing with 6 Nf3 . 22.fxe5 xe6 23.c4 Short and very sharp.
Black must react energetically or the Bishop The critical position arrives early and both
on c8 will be move bound. e5! 6.dxe5 sides are walking on a tightrope from move 6
[ After 6.f3?! exd4 Black is in time. White onward. I would prefer Black after both 8...
cannot capture on d4 thanks to ...Qh4+ ] Bg4 and 8... Qg3 but maybe that's just me.
6...h4+ 7.e2 dxe5 8.f3 e7 1-0
So he was improvising after all. One couldn't
have expected this position before the game.
I don't like White's game, I have to say but 8... 833 B06
Qe7 is not the right move. Instead, Black has Waddingham,Graham A
two other options: Davies,Nigel R
[ 8...g4 has been most common British Ch Southport ch70-BCF (10) 1983
A) 9.d6 d7 10.e3 ( 10.g3 xf3+ [Nigel Davies]
11.xf3 e7= ) 10...xf3+ 11.gxf3 gf6
12.d1 0-0-0 13.xa7 f8 ( 13...h5! ) In many ways the most difficult idea for Black
14.f2 xf4 ( 14...h5 ) 15.d2 h5 to meet is if White plays an early c2-c3, firmly
16.xf4 xf4+ Aveline, P-Wabant, P/ blocking my favourite diagonal. But here too
France 2004; Black is not without counterplay and in this
B) 9.hxg4 xh1 10.fxe5 d7 11.e6 g a m e W h i t e ' s i n d i v i d u a l p a t t e r n o f
( 11.d4 f8! 12.f2 e6 ) 11...fxe6 development left him with a very precarious
12.d6 0-0-0 13.e3 Lukov, V- position. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6
Kaikamdzozov, J/ Pasardschik 1977, when [ A n o t h e r i d e a w o r t h n o t i n g i s 3...f6
again Black missed the best continuation: after which 4.d3 0-0 5.f4 can be met by
xc3 14.bxc3 gf6; d5 6.e5 e4 7.d2 f5 8.exf6?! exf6
C) 9.e1 xf3+ 10.gxf3 e7 11.fxe5 etc. ]
( 11.e3 d7 12.d1 exf4 13.xf4 e5 4.d3
14.f2 f6 15.g2 h5 [ After 4.g5 I like f6 5.d2 c6 when
Seps, M-Skripchenko, A/Plovdiv 2003 0-1 6.gf3 can be met by h6 7.h4 g5 8.g3
(32) ) 11...xe5 12.e3 d7 13.d2 h5 gaining the bishop pair in return for
Itkis, B-Nanu, C/ Bucharest 1998 and now White's space. Barbero - Davies, Budapest
f6! would have been accurate, with 1987 went 9.c4 e6 10.c2 e7 11.0-0-0
advantage to Black: 14.f2 0-0-0 ] xg3 12.hxg3 d7 13.he1 g4 14.h2
[ Whilst researching this game I have also h5 with chances for both sides. ]
d i s c o v e r e d 8...g3! which also appears [ 4.f4 f6 5.e5 dxe5 6.fxe5 d5 7.f3
dangerous: 9.fxe5 b6! 10.g5 f6 11.exf6 0-0 8.c4 b6 9.b3 c5 10.dxc5 xd1+
854
11.xd1 6d7 12.e6 xc5 13.exf7+ h8 reached by 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 g6 3.d4 Bg7 which
14.c4 c6 15.e3 e6 was promising I ' v e s t u d i e d m y s e l f . 4.dxc5 xc3+
for Black in Fossan - Davies, Gausdal 1990 ] I t ' s h a r d l y d e s ir a b le t o g ive u p t h e d a r k
[ After 4.f3 f6 5.d3 0-0 6.0-0 squared bishop but it appears to be Black's
I think that an interesting and underrated best chance.
treatment is c5 after which 7.h3 ( 7.dxc5 [ Instead 4...a5 is more common but 5.d2
dxc5 8.e1 ) 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 c6 9.c3 xc5 6.d5! leaves Black having to play
e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.e3 e7 was about extremely accurately to survive. The only
equal in Lobron - Davies, Germany 1985. ] time I reached this position my opponent
4...c6 5.e2 This unusual development of didn't last long.
the knight is rather innocuous and after the A) 6...a6 is perhaps best.
exchange on e5 he may even be fighting for A1) 7.xa6 bxa6 8.b4 c6 ( 8...c4
equality. e5 6.dxe5 xe5 7.c2 f6 is better although 9.d3 xd3 10.cxd3
8.g5 h6 9.h4 g5 10.g3 h5 11.b3 b8 11.c3 xc3+ 12.bxc3
f6!? 12.a3 f4 13.xf4 gxf4 14.d4 leaves White for preference.) 9.f3 d6
g5 15.d2 g4!? Preventing White from 10.0-0 f6 11.c3 is Neil's suggestion
castling. in the archives and looks very good for
[ 15...xg2 16.0-0-0 gives him a dangerous White.;
initiative. ] A2) 7.f3 e6 8.c3 f8 9.xg7+
16.f3 h4+ 17.d1 d7 18.c2 0-0-0 xg7 10.c3 leaves White with a small
19.e2?! f5! 20.xf4 de8 21.ae1 h5 but pleasant edge.;
22.g3 d8 23.f2 b8 24.c4 fxe4 B) 6...b6 7.b4 c6 8.b5 b7 9.f3
25.fxe4 g4 26.g2 g5 27.d2 a5!? c6 10.c3 left White with a very
Intending to undermine the h8-a1 diagonal comfortable edge. W ells, P (2513)-
with ...a4 and ...a3. 28.h3 f6 29.f3 c5 Dougherty, M (2212) Hoogeveen 2005.;
30.d4 a4 31.e6 h6 32.xd7 xd7 C) 6...d6? 7.b4 d4 ( 7...c6 8.b5!
33.d3 c4 34.b3 a6 35.b1 hf8 is the point.) 8.xd4 xd4 9.c7+ d7
36.f5 d5 37.b4 g6 38.xd5 c5 10.xa8 That's a rook. If Black could win
39.de7 xe7! The start of a picturesque back the knight he would only be clearly
co m b in a t io n wh ich wins m ost of W hit e 's worse but there's no way to manage it.
pieces. 40.xe7 f2+ 41.xf2 xe4+ c6 11.0-0-0 f6 12.f3 xe4
42.d1 xh1+ 43.e2 e4+ 44.f1 13.xd4! xd4 14.xd4 and now it's two
h1+ 45.e2 e4+ pieces up! e5 15.b5+ e7 16.e1 f5
0-1 17.f3 c5 18.xc5 dxc5 19.b3
1-0 Jones, G (2518)-Vincenzi, M (2067)
Pula 2007. ]
834 B06 5.bxc3 a5
Williamson,Harvey 2469 [ 5...f6 HW: "The Computers want to play
Storey,Charles 2268 this move but Bh6 seems to be a strong
Sniper Challenge 29.03.2011 move." Last time this opening was featured
[Williamson, Harvey and Jones, Gawain] on the site Neil looked at another game of
the author's which continued
T h e r e h a s b e e n a h e a t e d d isc u ssi o n o n A) 6.e5 is Harvey's suggestion and also
Cha rle y Sto re y's n ew bo ok 'T he Sn ipe r'. s u g g e s t e d b y N e i l . e4 7.c4!
Harvey sent me the following correspondence with the threat of 8.Qd5. xc5 8.f3
challenge game with his notes, played in what A1) 8...c7 9.0-0 ( Harvey's idea of
I believe to be the critical test of the opening. 9.h6!? loo ks playa ble h ere t oo .)
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 c5 HW: "These 9...e6 10.e2 b6 11.d4 c6
1st 3 moves by Black are the moves that are 12.b5 b8 13.f4 "And White had the
the core of The Sniper Repertoire." I just want initiative in Sadvakasov, D-Dougherty,
to point out that the position can also be M Philadelphia 2006." - Neil;
855
A2) 8...a5 9.0-0 compensation due to White's pawn structure

A2a) 9...c6 is Neil's suggestion so but the weak b6 pawn is also a problem
that 10.d5?! can be met with while W hite 's bishop pair m ust als o b e
( 10.h6 still looks powerful, e.g. xc3 f avourable. S uf f ice it to say I would b e
11.d5 e6 12.fd1 and Black really extremely happy playing this position with
struggles to develop and so White has White:) ]
gre a t c o mp e n sat io n f o r t h e p a wn . [ The problem is that 7...xb4 8.cxb4 xe4
Black can try grabbing another pawn regains the pawn but also repairs White's
but xc2 13.h3! f5 14.g4! pawn structure and thus White's bishop pair
t o p r e v e n t B l a c k p l a yi n g . . . g 6 - g 5 gives him a very pleasant edge. ]
t r a p p in g i n t h e b i s h o p o n h 6 . c2 8.f3!? This only looks to have been played in
15.ac1 b2 16.b1 c2 17.dc1 correspondence chess. Harvey wants to keep
a4 18.b5 and White wins e4 solidly defended, in preparation against
material. ) 10...e6; Black's plan of ...b6 and ...Bb7. After
A2b) 9...xc3 10.d5 e6 11.d2 examining the line this looks the most critical.
a3 12.h6! and Harvey evaluates [ In a more recent game I chose the more
this position as winning for White as common 8.f3 c6 9.a4 e5 10.e3
Black can barely move.; ( 10.d4!? c6 11.e3 is also enough for
B) I b e l i e v e t h e i m m e d i a t e 6.h6 an edge. ) 10...b6 Jones, G (2430)-
was suggested by TopNotch on the Gonzalez Arribas, V (2297) Calvia 2006
forum.; when I should have chosen 11.xe5 xe5
C) 6.d3?! a5 7.d2 xc5 8.f3 d6 12.d4 xc5 13.xc5 bxc5 14.f3 d6
9.b1 bd7 and Black had the type of 15.b1 when White's bishops promise him a
position he's aiming for. Roberts, D (2047)- sm all ed ge b ut B la ck's p osit io n is f ully
Storey, C (2292) London 2009. ] playable. ]
6.d4 [ 8.d3 is another critical try:
[ In my first game facing this line, also A) 8...c6 9.a4 ( 9.a3 allows the
against Charlie, I played the sacrificial 6.d3 surprising shot xe4! although 10.e2
xc3+ 7.d2 xc5 8.b1 d6 9.b5 c7 d5 11.f3 f6 12.h6 is still better for
10.a1 f6 11.c3 ( 11.h6 White. ) 9...e5 10.a3 c6 11.f3 b6
should probably still be played although 12.e3 and White holds onto his extra
White's compensation isn't as obvious as in pawn with easy development.;
the previous note.) 11...bd7 12.f4 0-0 B) 8...b6 9.cxb6 axb6 10.e3 a6
13.e2 b6 14.0-0 any my compensation 11.xb6 c6 12.d4 d6 was seen in
was drying up although I somehow managed Pashikian, A (2466) -Istratescu, A (2587)
to win. Jones, G (2453)-Storey, C (2217) A n t a lya 2 0 0 4 wh e n 13.e5! looks very
Scarborough 2004. ] s t r o n g . B e l o w i s m y a n a l y s i s : c5
6...f6 7.b4! I have considered this critical ( 13...xg2 14.exf6 xh1 15.0-0-0+-
and the reason I haven't played this setup as and White's attack is too strong.; 13...dxe5
Black myself. c7 14.d8# ) 14.exf6 a4 ( 14...xb6
[ 7...c6 HW: "In his book Storey only gives 15.fxe7 xd3+ 16.cxd3 xd4 17.cxd4
Nc6 here. He says attempting to enter a b6 is clearly better for W hite but Black has
gambit line here is recommended for black." some drawing chances.) 15.b1! xd4
Harvey gives the following: 8.xa5 xa5 ( 15...xd3+ 16.xd3 xg2 17.d2
9.d3 0-0 10.e2 ( 10.a3 maybe even xh1 18.e1+- also leaves White with a
better for white. b6 11.cxb6 c6 12.bxa7 decisive attack.) 16.b5 xb5 17.xb5
xa7 13.c5+- ) 10...b6 11.cxb6 axb6 e4+ 18.d2 a6 19.a5 a4 20.fxe7
is the author's line. GJ - I would like to xa5 21.xa5 f1 22.e2 xg2 23.g1
point out that Deep Rybka assesses this d5 24.d8 and again Black is really
position as a clear extra pawn for White and suffering in the ending. ]
I have to agree with it. Black has some 8...c6 9.a3 b6 HW: "Now Storey enters
856
his b6 line which is a common theme in the move and it may lead to a draw." He gives
book." However Black has some alternatives: the line 21.h1 e5 22.d4 xd4
[ 9...d8 10.e3 e6 11.d3 h5 12.h4 HW : "I ran several test games here. The
f4 13.f2 0-0 14.e2 xe2 15.xe2 engines all prefer Bxd4. I thought this was
Keller, M (2210)-Hrvacic, P (1949) LSS the most drawish. I asked a couple of 2700
email 2009 and Black had nothing to show GM's and they both said Rxd4 looks best
for his pawn deficit. ] and that White is better but it maybe a draw.
[ 9...0-0 10.e3 e5 11.d3 d5 12.cxd6 " Nevertheless, Black's opening can hardly
exd6 13.g5 h5 14.e2 e6 15.0-0 be called a success. ]
c4 16.c1 d5 17.f4 xf4 18.xf4 21.c5 h4 22.h1 g3+ 23.g1 h8
xf4 19.xf4 ac8 20.fe1 dxe4 21.xe4 24.f2 f4 25.a4! HW: "Here I thought I was
and Black was really struggling in the ending. winning for sure." h5!
Ma n ae n k ov, V-Mon d ry, M (2 13 1 ) I CCF [ 25...h3 looks dangerous on the surface but
email 2009. ] White is in full control. Another game played
[ 9...h5 10.b5 b8 11.e3 f4 12.f2 o n t h e f o r u m c o n t i n u e d 26.h2 d6
b6 13.e2 e6 14.cxb6 axb6 15.ab1 ( 26...h5 27.c3 g5 28.a5 is given by
0-0 16.c4 b7 Van Leent, D (1873)-De Harvey when th e pa sse d a pawn is th e
Jesus, G (1700) Chessf riend.com 2005 most important aspe ct of the position .)
again saw Black with virtually nothing for 27.c3 g5 28.b6 b8 29.e3 g3
his pawn deficit. ] 30.a7 d8 31.b6 b8 was Williamson,
10.cxb6 xb6 11.h6! HW: "White is H-TN which was aborted at this point but
behind in development but black will not castle. W hite appears to be easily winning with
" b8 32.a5 ]
[ 11...g8 is the computer's top choice but 26.c3 g5 27.a5?! HW "This looks good
after 12.g5 it it likely to transpose to the but we exchange down to an endgame that is
game. ] very difficult for W hite to win. I moved too
12.e2 g8 13.g5 Black has a slight lead quickly, something a good correspondence
in development but his king is forced to remain player should never do."
in the centre while Harvey shows he can [ Instead Harvey prefers 27.e3 to which he
co mp le t e his d evelo pm en t wit ho u t ma n y gives two exclamation marks. HW : "I am
issues. a6 14.d4! Sacrificing the extra c o n v i n c e d t h i s w i n s . B u t wi l l k e e p m y
pawn to bring all of White's pieces into the analysis private in case Charlie ever wants
game when Black's king stuck in the centre a rematch!" ]
gives him a big headache. xf1 15.xf1 27...xa5 28.xa5 xa5 29.b6 h5
xd4 16.cxd4 xd4 17.d1 e5 30.xd8 xd8 White has won the exchange
[ 17...b4+ 18.xb4 xb4 19.d2 d8 but lost his strong a pawn and so Black has
20.b1 xb1 21.xb1 c7 allows Black decent drawing chances. However I believe
into an endgame level on material but the White should probably be winning as he has
bishop is so much better than the knight so many pawns left. 31.a1 e6 32.a4 e7
that Black is close to lost. ] Harvey writes that Black resigns here although
[ Black can also keep level material with I'm not sure if he did or simply overstepped
17...b6 but 18.e5 e6 19.f2 xe5 the time limit. Nevertheless this game
20.xa7 d8 21.h4 f5 22.d4! successfully illustrates the critical line against
a n d I d o n ' t t h i n k B l a c k wi l l b e a b l e t o The Sniper and shows that against accurate
survive with his king in such a perilous play Black struggles to equalise. Of course
position. ] that doesn't mean that the opening can't be
18.xa7 d8 19.e3 xh2 20.f2 h5?! tried as a surprise weapon, and the book
HW "I was quite happy to see h5 here as in might be very interesting unfortunately I don't
my analysis I had this as winning." have a copy myself.
[ Harvey considers 20...g5!? to be Black's 1-0
best bet. HW: "I spent hours looking at this
857
835 B06 A2) 17.e6 hxg5 18.exd7 xd7=;

Yu Shaoteng 2516 B) 15...c4 16.e4 7b6 17.f5
Annaberdiev,Meilis 2421 B1) 17...h6! when he may be better:
5th ch-Asian (6) 12.10.2005 18.f3 ( 18.exd6 exd6 19.h3 ae8
[Andrew Martin] 20.f3 c8 ) 18...e3! 19.xe3
( 19.exd6 exd6 20.xe3 xe4 )
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 19...xe4;
5.f4 A dangerous move which Black must B2) 17...dxe5? The real culprit. Black
meet very accurately indeed. I have given must face the wind and play the
extensive game references in the text so that combative 18.fxg6 hxg6 19.g3 xc3
you may get a better picture. b5 6.d3 b7 20.g4 xe4 21.3xe4 xe4 22.h4
7.f3 b4 fc8 23.h7+ f8 24.xe4 d5
[ 7...d7 8.0-0 c5 looks a better choice to 25.h4 f4 26.g5 f6 27.dxe5 fxg5
me, as recommended by Hillarp Persson. 28.xg5 xe5 29.xf4+ 1-0 Belkhodja,
Then 9.dxc5 ( 9.h1 c4 10.e2 b4 S-Dussol, P/ Montpellier 1991 ]
11.a4 xe4 12.xc4 gf6 13.a3 a5 ) [ 10...d7 11.0-0 c6 12.c4 bxc3 13.bxc3
9...xc5 10.xc5 ( 10.a3 xc3 11.bxc3 b6 14.c4 a5 15.c5 xf3 1/2-1/2 Popov,
xe4 ) 10...dxc5 11.e5 b6 12.e4 xe4 V-Kochyev, A/St Petersburg 1997 So the
13.xe4 h6 14.c4 0-0 15.c1 ad8 real truth about this variation is yet to be
16.e2 f6 was the game Stefansson-Hillerp told the evidence suggests though, that
Persson Gausdal 1996 with Black starting White's position is easier to play. ]
to develop counterplay. ] 11.c4! bxc3 12.bxc3 d7 13.b1 5b6
8.e2 f6 9.e5 14.g3 d5 He is getting far too fancy. Black
[ 9.g3 bd7 10.c3 bxc3 11.bxc3 0-0 should simply castle, take the medicine and
12.b1 b8 13.0-0 c5 14.a4 c7 15.h3 hope to swallow it!
c6 16.a3 c4 17.xb8 xb8 18.c2 e6 [ 14...0-0! 15.0-0 f6 ]
19.d2 f8 20.c1 b7 21.b1 d5 15.0-0 a5 16.e2 c8 17.f5! Quite right!
22.e5 e8 23.e1 g7= seems less Black is f idd ling around so much that h e
dangerous to Black. ] deserves to be punished. This thematic break
9...d5 10.f2 introduces all the White pieces into the attack.
[ 10.d2 is an obvious option: c5 11.c4 f8
bxc3 12.bxc3 cxd4 13.cxd4 0-0 14.0-0 a5 [ 17...gxf5 18.g5! ( 18.xf5 exf5 19.xf5
15.b1 a7 Svidler, P-Beliavsky, A/ a6 20.d3 xd3 21.xd3 c4 22.g5
Dortmund 1998 and now I wouldn't like to be is also very interesting.) 18...f8 19.b5+
in Black's shoes after 16.e1! ] ( 19.h5 g8 20.b5+ bd7 21.e3 )
10...e6N A novelty that does not fare 19...c6 20.h5 g8 21.d3 ]
especially well and which leads to a passive 18.b5+ c6 19.d3 c4 20.f6! h6
p o s i t i o n . I n p a r t i c u l a r , B l a c k n o w h a s 21.xc4 dxc4 And resigns before 22 Ne4 .
problems effecting the break ...c7-c5. To quote Keene and Botterill: 'the Modern is a
[ 10...d7 11.0-0 0-0 ( 11...c5 12.g5 fighting defence , based on counterattack' If
dxe5 13.fxe5 h6 14.xf7 xf7 15.e3+ Black times his counterplay wrongly he can
g7 16.xh6+ xh6 17.f7 g8 be crushed exactly what happened here.
18.d2+ g5 19.h4 f8 20.af1 xf7 1-0
21.xf7 cxd4 22.xd4 f4 23.hxg5+
xg5 24.xf4 1-0 Minasian, A-Stryjecki, M/
Cappelle la Grande 2003) 12.c4 bxc3
13.bxc3 c5 14.b1 c7 15.g5
A) Black can consider central action:
15...dxe5 16.fxe5 h6
A1) 17.e4 cxd4 ( 17...ab8 )
18.cxd4 ab8 19.d2;
858
836 B06 837 B06

Yudasin,Leonid Zakhartsov,Viacheslav V 2484
Vydeslaver,Alik Epishin,Vladimir 2579
Beersheeva Beer-Sheva (Israel) (1) 1992 54th ch Elista RUS (1) 30.04.2001
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 f6 Moving the d-pawn forward two squares is
5.c4 clearly more challenging than Okrajek's d2-d3.
[ 5.b5+ bd7 6.f3 0-0 7.h3 b6 8.0-0 But even so it looks comfortable for Black.
bxd5 9.xd5 xd5 gets Black's pawn 1.f3 g6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 xd5 4.d4 f6
back, though even here I prefer White after 5.c3
10.c3 d6 11.c4 b6 12.e1 Gofshtein - [ Keeping open the option of a later c2-c4
Vydeslaver, Beer-Sheva 1991 ] does not seem to be much of a threat either.
5...0-0?! After this Black struggles to regain 5.e2 g7 6.0-0 0-0 7.c4 d6 8.c3 c6
his pawn. intending ...Bg4 puts pressure on the d4
[ 5...bd7 is better, as in the next game. ] pawn. ]
6.ge2 bd7 7.b3 b6 8.f4 a5 9.a4 5...d6 6.e5 g7 7.e2 0-0 8.f4 d5
[ 9.a3 a4 10.a2 f5 11.0-0 d7 12.h3 9.xd5 xd5 10.0-0 c5 11.c4?!
is also possible after which Black weakened An unsound pa wn sacrif ice, but W hite is
himself with h5 13.e1 fe8 14.e3 h7 already experiencing some difficulties.
15.e2 h6 in order to try and get his pawn [ 11.dxc5 xc5 12.d3 a5 looks more
back in Renner - Kunze,Bundesliga 1991 ] comfortable for Black, due to the fact that he
9...f5 10.0-0 h6 has an extra central pawn. ]
[ Black also had a miserable time of it in 11...xd4 12.xd4 cxd4 13.fe1 xe5
Sorkin - Segal, Nethanya 1993: 10...d7 14.xe5 c6 15.ad1 f5 16.b3 fd8
11.h3 ad8 12.f3 h5 13.e3 c8 17.f3 ac8 18.d2 g5 Making room for his
14.ad1 d6 15.d3 xd3 16.xd3 f5 bishop on g6 in case of g2-g4. 19.a4 f6
17.f4 h4 18.e2 with Black still not 20.xc6 xc6 21.xd4 e5 22.e3 xd2
much closer to regaining the pawn. ] 23.xd2 xc2 24.c3 f7 25.d1 h5
11.e1 d7 12.h3 g5 The pawn minus and 26.d2 c1+ 27.f2 g4 28.g3 f1
White's threat of g2-g4 gets Black to weaken 29.fxg4 xg4 30.d8 f5 31.d2 e4
his kingside. After that Yudashin is able to 32.a3 e6 33.e2 c6 34.h4 f4+
de ve lo p a f ierce a tt ack. 13.h5 xh5 Sacrificing his extra pawn in order to drive
14.xh5 g6 15.d1 ad8 16.f4! W hite's king int o a net . 35.xh5 e8+
Prising open files after which Black's king is in 36.h6 h4+ 37.g7 g4+ 38.h6 g6+
trouble. gxf4 17.xf4 c6 18.dxc6 xd4+ 39.h7 f7 40.f2 c6 41.d2 e4
19.h1 xc6 With h6 hanging Black has to 42.d7+ e6 43.g7 xg2+ 44.g8 xh2
keep some threats going. But now he has 0-1
trouble with the e7 pawn. 20.g4 h5 21.g3
c4
[ 21...fe8 22.e6! fxe6 23.xg6+ 838 B06
would have been an attractive finale ] Zarnicki,Pablo 2535
22.xe7 c8 23.ae1 g7 24.1e6! c5 McShane,Luke J 2565
25.e4 f5 26.d6 xd6 27.xg6 e4 IV Final, ICC INT 2003
28.xg7+ h8 29.xe4 xe4 30.g5 [Andrew Martin]
1-0
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 e6!?
Spassky liked all this stuff-he even used it in
one of his W orld Championship Matches
against Petrosian.....with decent results.
Black's play is impossible to classify. It seems
859
heavily reliant on W hite overestimating his 32.f4 a5 Whereas this ending gives no
chances or launching a premature attack. advantage in material and is a complete draw
Surely if White builds up slowly he must retain with even Black for choice! My guess is that
a slight edge? Or maybe 4 f4 is already too both players were glad to end this scrappy
c o m m i t t a l ? ? 5.f3 e7 6.d3 b6 game. Objectively, 4...e6 seems to me to be
Flexibility above all. Black should not castle dubious-White just gets too much of the game
too early. 7.0-0 wi t h ve r y l i t t l e p r e s s u r e b e i n g m o u n t e d
[ 7.e2! is more incisive from where I sit. against his big centre. I quite like 7 Qe2 but
W hite keeps the option open of castling Zarnicki's 7 0-0 and 8 f5! seems good too.
queenside and he prepares e4-e5. Fischer's ½-½
upcoming play is original but he gets a very
passive game: a5?! 8.e5 a6 9.b5 xb5
10.xb5+ c6 11.d3 d5 12.a4 d7 13.b3 839 B06
0-0 14.a3 e8 15.0-0 c7 16.g4 c5 Zhao Jun 2608
17.c3 f8 18.h1 ec8 19.f5! Liu Qingnan 2501
White's play has been a model. c4 20.bxc4 ch-CHN 2014 Xinghua CHN (7.5) 18.03.2014
dxc4 21.e4 d5 22.xd5 exd5 23.e6 [Tom Rendle]
f6 24.exf7+ xf7 25.e5 g7 26.g5
e4 27.fxg6 hxg6 28.g4 c7 29.e6+ 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 a6 4.f4 b5 5.d3
h7 30.f4 1-0 Glod,P-Fischer,J/6th St b7 6.f3 d7 7.0-0 g7 8.e5 c5
Quentin Open, Elancourt FRA 2003 [ 8...h6 I covered in some detail last year
Compelling evidence that Black cannot in Kanep-Iturrizaga. Black won that game
simply potter around. ] but both sides could've handled the opening
7...d7 8.f5 Zarnicki changes up a gear. It's a better, overall I suspect W hite is slightly
stron g m ove, pu tting t he qu est io n t o th e better in that line. ]
whole Black set-up. exf5 9.exf5 f6 10.g5 9.e4
0-0 11.e4! Putting on the pressure. Black's [ 9.exd6 cxd4 ( 9...exd6?! 10.e4 xe4
move is forced. xe4 12.xe4 d5 13.xe7 11.xe4 is an improved version of the game
xe7 14.xd5 b8 15.fxg6 hxg6 16.c3 as Black can not ignore the threat on d6 now.
If this is the best that Black can get then White is clearly better after df6 12.e2
forget the whole thing! a6 17.e1 d6 e7 13.dxc5 xe4 14.xe4 dxc5 15.e1
18.b3 c6 19.c4 b5 20.d3 c8 21.e5 a7 16.a4! ) 10.e4! ( 10.e2?!
e6 22.c2 c5! McShane fights on valiantly. was better for Black in Kulicov-Gelashvili in
He must try to create some dark-squared the archives and Black can maybe even
pressure. The Bishop on g7 is the only piece improve on that game with c5! 11.dxe7
t h a t W h i t e c a n n o t c o n t e s t . 23.dxc5 xe7 12.g3 0-0 and Black is already very
Zarnicki is very concerned about his structure, comfortable )
no doubt the legacy of incessant blitz chess A) 10...gf6! 11.dxe7 xe7 12.xf6+
at the Internet Chess Club. Keep the pawn xf6 13.e1 ( 13.e1!? e4 14.f5!?
structure tight and run the other guy's flag out is worth considering if White doesn't wish
as the saying goes. to go in for the risky pawn grab) 13...e4
[ 23.f2 was interesting: cxd4 24.cxd4 14.e2 f5 15.a4 0-0 is a very unclear
fd8 25.e2! a6 ( 25...xd4 26.xd4 gambit, as noted by John W atson in his
xd4 27.c6 ) 26.f3 bc8 27.a4 ] annotations to the Kulicov-Gelashvili game.
23...xc5+ 24.f2 fc8 25.xg6 b4 Critical is 16.axb5 axb5 17.xa8 xa8
White has to be a little careful now. 26.ab1 18.xb5 h8 when I feel that, from a
[ 26.xc5 xc5 27.f4 bxc3 28.bxc3 practical point of view at least, Black has
xc3 29.xe6 fxe6 30.ab1 gives an enough compensation for the pawn.;
extra pawn but this ending is difficult to win. ] B) 10...e6 11.a4 b6 12.axb5 axb5
26...bxc3 27.xc5 xc5 28.bxc3 xb1 13.xa8+ xa8 14.e2 h6 15.e5!
29.xb1 xc3 30.e4 f6 31.d3 xa2 and White had a slight advantage in Leon
860
Hoyos, M (2528)-Machin Rivera, M (2359) xd6 23.f6+ g7 24.d7 winning an

San Sebastian Del Pepino 2014 ] exchange and soon the game ]
9...xe4 10.xe4 cxd4 11.exd6 e6?! 13...f5
The first new move comes from Liu Qingnan [ 13...g4!? is dangerous as well but
and although it works in this game I'm not perhaps White is a little better after 14.d3!
convinced in it's overall soundness. b6+ 15.h1 gxe5 16.fxe5 xe5
[ 11...b6 is currently Black's most popular 17.f3 0-0 18.h6 xb2! 19.xf8 xf8
move but I think White is somewhat better although all 3 results are definitely possible
h e r e , f o r e x a m p l e 12.a4 ( 12.e1!? ) in this position. Whether White is better or
12...exd6 13.axb5 e7 14.bxa6 0-0 not depends on if he can keep the pawn on
15.e1 and White was slightly better in d6 comfortably. ]
Amanov, Z (2382)-Liu, E (2291) Los 14.f2 xe5 15.fxe5 xe5 16.c3?!
Angeles 2011 ] A very logical move from Zhao Jun, deciding
[ 11...gf6 is probably best and is covered to be extra safe against ...Bd4 but it's just less
in t h e n o t e s t o K u l i c o v- G e l a s h vi l i a n d accurate than an immediate 16.Rd1 and the
Kanep-Iturrizaga. ] result is that the pawn on d6 becomes almost
12.e5 impossible to hold.
[ 12.a4 immediately looks good for White as [ 16.d1 0-0 17.g4! might looks risky but
well since Nh6 is now less effective it's definitely the best line for W hite, for
A) 12...b6 is better but after 13.e5! example after g7 18.d7 f5! 19.g5! c7
gf6 ( 13...d3+?! 14.h1 dxc2 15.xc2 20.e7 it's anyone's game right now. Black
only helps White - a nice point is that after h a s t o p l a y fd8 giving up the exchange,
gf6 16.e3 the bishop cannot be taken but of course he'll have excellent
due to xe3 17.xf6+ xf6 18.xd7 compensation ]
xd7 19.c7+ e8 20.c6+ f8 16...0-0 17.d1 c8 18.f4
21.xa8+ g7 22.xa6 and White is [ W hite should probably try 18.d7 c4
easily winning) 14.xf6+ xf6 15.axb5 ( 18...c7? 19.f4 xf4?! 20.xf4
xe5 16.fxe5 xe5 17.d7+! e7 leaves Black in lots of trouble since he
18.bxa6 and White has the better chances can't take the pawn on d7 due to Nf6+ at the
in this unusual middlegame although Black end ) 19.f3 although Black has no
is still just about OK after f6!; problems here after c7! and the pawn on
B) 12...h6 13.xd4 f5 14.xf5 exf5 d7 looks destined to fall at some point in the
15.c3 and Black really doesn't have not too distant future ]
much for the pawn ( or 15.g5!? )] 18...c4! 19.xe5 xe4 20.d4 e5 21.b6
12...h6 13.xd4 This allows Black to gain d7 22.c5 c8 23.c7?
time against the queen and justifies Black's [ 23.xc8+! xc8 24.d7 was White's best
idea chance - in fact a draw is the most likely
[ instead I pref er 13.a4! f5 14.e2 result after e1+! 25.f2! ( 25.xe1 xd7
( 14.g4!? could be strong as well, e.g. e3 26.xe5 d2 and Black's activity give him
15.xe3 dxe3 16.xd7 xd7 17.axb5 the better chances) 25...xd7 26.xd7
xb5 18.f3 0-0 19.xe3 xb2 20.c3 xa1 27.g4! h6 28.d8+ g7 29.g5
with a difficult position to assess. W hite's f5 30.c7 f6 31.d7+ g8 32.gxf6
king is open but the pawn on d6 looks more xa2 and White has enough to draw the
of a strength than a weakness and W hite ending. ]
is constantly threatening f5. I'd rather be 23...xd6?! This wins a pawn but gives White
White! ) 14...xe5 15.fxe5 xe5 16.axb5 some chances to hold the rook and pawn
b6! A key move, gaining a tempo with the ending
threat of 17...d3+ 17.d3 xd6 18.xa6 [ 23...e2! was much stronger as the pawn
xa6 19.bxa6 0-0 20.b4! and White has a on d6 is lost in any case and the rook is
slight edge since the pawn can't be taken very strong as usual on the 7th rank. Black
because of xb4? 21.a3 b8 22.xd6 should be winning here ]
861
24.xd6 xc7 25.xc7 xc7 26.f1 b4 easily believe that Black can never survive
27.xa6 e2 28.f2 e1+ 29.f1 xf1+ such a position and there are many out there
30.xf1 bxc3 31.bxc3 xc3 32.a5 e4 who do! One of the main points in showing
33.a4?! I don't know if the ending was this game is to demonstrate Black's resources,
holdable bef ore, but af ter this it's almost even when the W hite attack is as far
certainly lost - the rook is just very misplaced advanced as this. e5 Taking on h5 is right
on a4, blocking his own pawn out. 10.dxe5
[ 33.g4! aiming to prevent ...f5 gives White [ 10.hxg6 fxg6 11.dxe5 is the first line
some chances to hold the ending ] w h i c h h a s t o b e c o n s i d e r e d : dxe5
33...f5 34.a7 c1+ 35.f2 c2+ 36.g3 ( 11...xe5 is almost certainly better:
g5 The pawns are clearly unstoppable now 12.c5!? e8 13.f4 g4 14.e2 xe2
37.h4 gxh4+ 38.h3 f8 39.a4 f2 15.gxe2 c4 ) 12.d6 b7 13.h3! ]
40.b7 e3 41.b3 e2! 10...dxe5 11.g4
[ 41...e2 42.e3 f1! and Black threatens [ Whereas 11.hxg6 may transpose to the
43...Rh1 as well as promoting the pawn ] previous variation, there is also ]
0-1 [ 11.d6! to consider: xh5 12.xc6 b8
13.xb5 It is very hard to see any
compensation whatsoever for Black. ]
840 B06 11...c7
Zhigalko,Sergei 2490 [ After 11...b4 12.a4 a5 13.b3
Berkes,Ferenc 2596 White is dominating. The possession of the
World Jr Ch - Boys U20 (8) 17.11.2005 h and d files and the a2-g8 diagonal gives
[Andrew Martin] him a huge advantage. ]
12.hxg6 fxg6
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 c6 [ 12...hxg6? 13.h6 is game over. ]
The older move. W hat is wrong with it and 13.g5 h5 14.xb5! Initiating an excellent
why is 4...a6 preferred almost exclusively combination.
these days? Perhaps the answer lies after 5 [ 14.xb5 isn't a s good : cxb5 15.d5+
Qd2 b5 6 Nf3, although I remain to be h8 16.xa8 b6 17.xb6 xb6 18.d5
convinced that Black's chances are in any (or else Bb7) g3 19.g2 xh1 20.xh1
wa y in f e rio r t h e re . 5.d2 b5 6.0-0-0 a6 21.a3 b4 22.d6 bxa3 23.xa3
Fearless or stupid? In my view this gives b5 and Black has sufficient counterplay. ]
Black unnecessary chances. d7 7.h4 14...cxb5 15.d5+ h8 16.xa8 b7
[ Stein - Bronstein, Moscow 1961 USSR ch 17.xa7 a8 18.xd7!
continued 7.b1 b6 8.d3 a5 9.h4 h5 [ 18.xb5 is also possible, but after c6!
10.h3 b4 11.e2 xh3 ( 11...f6 12.f3 19.xd7 xd7 20.b6 comes xa2
0-0 13.h6 b3! 14.cxb3 a4 ) 12.xh3 e6 and not everyone would like to play the Fritz
13.f3 f6 14.g5 c7 with a complicated suggestion of 21.b4 now. ]
position. ] [ 18.d5 o n l y l e a d s t o e q u a l i t y : c6
7...gf6 Black's choice here is a question of 19.e7 c7 20.d5 ]
taste. Both players seem to having a small, 18...xd7 19.b6 g3 20.h2? He had to
u n wr it t e n c o n t e st a s t o wh o i s t h e m o s t make a choice for the Rook, but h2 seems like
f e a r l e s s . N a t u r a l l y B l a c k h a s p l e n t y o f the worse square possible.
alternatives which delay ...Ng8-f8, including [ Either 20.h4 c6 ( 20...f1 21.xg6
[ 7...a5 ] f8 22.f2! and the check on d2 is just a
[ 7...b6 ] fatal waste of time) 21.f2 f1 22.e1!
[ and of course 7...h5 I would choose any of f8 23.f2! b4 24.xf1 bxc3 25.xc3
these moves before ...Nf6 ] xa2 26.b1 a7 27.b3 ]
8.f3 0-0 A continuation of the same risky and [ or 20.h3 f1 21.f2 b4 22.b1 f7
uncompromising strategy. Black's options would have retained W hite's clear
were the same as before. 9.h5! White could advantage. ]
862
20...f1! Suddenly Black has useful [ 9.e6 is intimidating, but no more as long as
counterplay. 21.e2 xe3 22.xe3 b4 Black defends correctly. fxe6 10.g5 f8
23.d2 c6? 11.0-0
[ Fritz 9 suggests 23...c7! and if 24.b5 A) 11...f5! is a certain improvement.
( 24.b1 xa2; 24.d5 xa2! and maybe Black must get his Knight into the game
Black is suddenly better.) 24...a5 25.d6 and this is the right moment. For instance:
xa2 26.d1 leads to very unclear play. I'm 12.xf5 ( 12.f2 h6! 13.f3 xf3
baffled as to why Berkes didn't play this 14.xf3 xd4 15.c6+ f7; 12.e1
way. ] b4 13.a4 h6 14.h3 xe3 15.xe3
24.b1 d7! ) 12...exf5 13.d5 c5! 14.dxc6 xc6
[ 24.ce2! e6 25.b3 xb3 26.cxb3 15.d5 xb2 16.b1 a3 17.d4 e5;
is a simple variation which confirms the B) 11...d7 12.f2 f5 13.e4 d5
unevenness of this game. Perhaps the two 14.d3 d6 15.e2 b6 16.c3 d7
players were getting short of time it 17.e1 f6 18.c1 c8 19.b3 h6
certainly looks that way. ] 20.f3 g4 21.c5 xf2 22.xf2 0-0
24...f8 25.d5 c4! 26.d1 c5 23.e5 d6 Melnikova,Y-Zielinska,M/
The game turns. White is going backwards. D r e s d e n 2 0 0 4 a n d n o w 24.g1
27.d2 Timing is of critical importance in such a
[ 27.e2 xa2 28.d7 c6 29.c7 e6 sh a p p o s i t i o n . H e r e B l a c k j u s t g o t i t
30.e1 b6 leaves the White position wrong. ]
utterly stretched. ] 9...b6N A very logical novelty in that Black is
27...xa2 28.h3 d4 29.c3 bxc3 trying to control the squares c4,d5 and f5
[ 29...b3! is also very strong. ] which have been left in the wake of the pawn
30.bxc3 c4 31.d3 c5 32.e1 a6 on e5. I strongly prefer White's extra space
33.d2 b8 34.f4 b6 35.a3 c5 and feel that it should give him a comfortable
0-1 advantage.
[ 9...e6 has been tried, 'a la' Azmaiparashvili.
Black might be able to scrape his way to a
841 B06 playable game: 10.0-0-0 b6 11.hg1
Zufic,Miroslav 2370 f5 12.xf5 exf5 13.d5 c4 14.d4
Nevednichy,Vladislav 2552 dxe5 15.xe5 xe5 16.xe5 0-0
XI Open A Bosnjaci CRO (2) 04.01.2005 17.xg7 xg7 18.ge1 e8 19.xe8
[Andrew Martin] xe8 20.xe8 xe8 21.b4 d8 22.g3
d6?! ( 22...f6 23.d3 e7 24.d2
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 a6 c6!= ) 23.b2 h6 24.b3 Antal,G-Vajda,
5.f4 b5 6.f3 b7 7.d3 d7 Although L/Nagyka nizsa 2 003 It's OK f or Black I
I've played Black's position myself I don't suppose, just uninspiring. ]
really believe it. White has strong attacking 10.a4 White begins the business of opening
chances on the Kingside no matter how Black u p t h e p o s it io n f o r h is b e t t e r d e ve lo p e d
juggles with the moves. Black must be alert in pieces. b4 11.e4 0-0 12.0-0 a5 13.fg5
defence and have very steady nerves if he d7
wishes to play this line. 8.e5 h6 [ 13...f5 14.f2 d7 15.b5 c6 16.c4
[ 8...e6 9.a4 b4 10.e4 b6 ( 10...xe4 bxc3 17.xc3 xb5 18.axb5 e6
11.xe4 d5 12.d3 c5 13.dxc5 c7 another way.. I'm worried about the Bishop
14.e2 ) 11.d2 a5 12.b5+ f8 throttled on g7 but perhaps .... f7-f6 will
13.e2 e7 14.0-0 c6 15.xc6 xc6 liberate that piece . Nevertheless I am a bit
16.c3 d7 17.fc1 bxc3 18.xc3 b4 surprised that Nevednichy didn't take the
19.b5 Morozevich,A-Azmaiparashvili,Z/ chance to get his Knight off the edge. Black
Bugojno 1999 although Black managed an keeps the game very tense. ]
eventual draw. ] 14.b3 f6 15.f3 d5 16.d2 c6 17.g3
9.e2 [ 17.ae1! fxe5 18.fxe5 f5 19.c4 dxe5
863
20.dxe5 ad8 21.f2 leads to a very 842 B07

complex position. Although Black is still a 1 e4 d6 2 Nc3: Transpositions
little worse he is still well in the game after, Independent Lines
say, h8 ] [John Watson]
17...dxe5 18.fxe5 f5?!
[ 18...fxe5! 19.dxe5 ad8 20.c4 f7 Reader Michael Ridge puts in a request: "On
21.ad1 e6 is a good way of organising the 1 e4 ... ChessPub website, it would be
Black's pieces. I an not sure that I like this interesting to see some coverage of a
idea of freezing the centre at all. Once again repertoire based on the line 1 e4 d6 2 Nc3!? -
I am becoming worried about the fate of a handy line if you play the Grand Prix Attack,
that Bishop on g7. ] and often used by Nigel Short among others,
19.h1 b6 20.e1 e6 21.e2 f7 b u t r a re l y co ve re d in wo rk s o n t h e P irc /
22.h4 h6 23.g3 g5 Modern, which I know technically begins after
[ After 23...h7 24.h4 g5 It appears that 2 d4, but the upshot is that this whole move
B l a c k wi l l h a ve t o l o o s e n h i s k i n g s i d e order tends to fall through all the cracks. I
anyway. The imme diate sa crif ice on f 5 have the Bangiev CD which recommends this,
doesn't seem too effective so White must but it would be very interesting to see your
settle for 25.f3 ( 25.xf5 exf5 26.xf5 take on this move order. Obviously I'm not
g8 27.af1 c5 ) 25...c5 26.dxc5 xc5 asking for coverage of lines with an early ...c5
27.ed4 with an edge due to his strong which is just a GPA by transposition, but
Knight. ] instead what White should do if Black does
24.h4 g4 25.h2 ad8 26.xg4 not play ...c5 early on - when to transpose
S o m e t h i n g l i k e t h i s h a d t o c o m e . fxg4 into an Austrian Attack or whatnot - anyway,
27.xg4 Now Black has to plan a defence. It your thoughts on this would both be very
must be said that the pawn on e6 hampers interesting and fill a sort of gap in the opening
the rescue mission. So much for blocking the literature here, as far as I can see." [Back to
centre long ago. a6 jw:] I'm not sure that I can devote enough
[ 27...e7 28.f6 c5 ( 28...d5 29.af1 effort to single update game to fill a gap in
c6 30.f4 f5 31.xf5 exf5 32.g3 theory, and my luck with Bangiev lines has
xc2 33.h5 ) 29.xh6 xh6 30.xh6 been poor. But I notice that 2 Nc3, while not a
f5 31.g6 ] mainstream move, has been played steadily,
28.g3! Heading for an ideal square. xd3 through the years. It's most prominent
29.h5 g5 30.cxd3 e7 31.hxg5 xd4 practitioner seems to be Nigel Short, but he
[ 31...xd4 32.f4 hxg5 33.xg5 f5 uses it to aim f or other lines such as the
34.xg7 xg7 35.e3+- ] Sicilian Grand Prix or a main line Austrian
32.xf8+ xf8 33.xe6+ h7 34.f7+ Attack of the Pirc. One of my bigger merged
h8 35.f1 h4+ 36.g1 d4+ 37.f2 databases has 720 games with 2 Nc3 that are
a1+ 38.h2 xe5+ the fun will be short- independent of the Pirc, Grand Prix, Closed
lived. 39.f4 c5 40.f6+ h7 41.f7+ Sicilian, and everything else represented by
h8 42.f6 A game which confirms the another ECO code. Let me try to help with
Modern Defence as a masochist's paradise. some transpositional and independent lines,
Black has to put up with a lot of trench warfare, with the understanding that the play can head
and then when his small window of anywhere. I will stick mainly to 2500+ average
opportunity comes he has to take it or get ELO games to preserve my sanity. 1.e4 d6
rubbed out. 2.c3
1-0 [ Short has also played 2.c4 f6 3.c3
, which is the equivalent of 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Bc4.
This position is represented by 325 games
in one large database that I have. Short-
C a m p o r a , M o s c o w 2 0 0 1 c o n t i n u e d c6
( 3...g6 4.d4 g7 transposes to a normal
864
Pirc line ) 4.b3 e5 5.f4!? g4!? ( 5...exf4 28.c5 a6 29.cxd6 a4 30.c1 b6
6.f3 h6!? ) 6.f3 exf4 7.d4 h5 8.0-0 31.b1 a2 32.g2 g8? (but things
e7 ( 8...g5 ) 9.h3 were bad anyway) 33.h1 c4 34.c3
A) 9...xf3 10.xf3 g6 11.g4 ( or b3 35.b1 b2 36.d2 c4 37.c1
11.xf4 ) 11...g3 12.xf7+; 1-0 Short-Wahls, Bundesliga 1991. ]
B) 9...e6 10.d5!? ( 10.xe6! fxe6 [ b) 2...c5 opens plenty of options for White:
11.g5 xg5 12.xh5+ g6 13.g4 ) 3.f4 transposes to a Sicilian Grand Prix
10...cxd5 11.d4 f6 ( 11...g6 ) 12.xf4 Attack, but one in which Black has
0-0 13.exd5 ( 13.xd5 xd5 14.exd5 c o m m i t t e d t o . . . d 6 , wh e r e a s t h e m o s t
g6 15.f3 with two bishops and an frustrating and arguably best anti-Grand
advantage ) 13...d7 14.ce2 a6 Prix lines delay ... d6 in favour of a setup
15.c4 c5 16.c2 a5 17.g3! with ... g6/...Bg7...e6/...Nge7 and, at the
(as so often, the f5 square causes right time, ...d5. Instead, ( 3.f3 and 4 d4 is
problems for Black) b6 18.df5 ae8 an Open Sicilian, except in the case of e5
19.h2 ( 19.xe7+ xe7 20.d4! ) when 4.c4 e7 is a playable variant of
19...xf5?! 20.xf5 fe4 21.f3?! the Sicilian that goes 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3
( 21.xg7! xg7 22.d4+ f6 23.xe4 Nc3 e5 4 Bc4 Be7; 3.g3 is a Closed Sicilian
and White is winning) 21...f6 22.ae1 in which White has avoided 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3
e5 23.xe4! xe4 24.xd6 e6, which is still considered a respectable
and W hite destroys black's centre while defence )]
picking up a pawn. ] [ c) 2...g6 can go anywhere. An interesting
2...f6 The Pirc move, which very often game with notes by Romanishin went 3.f4
t ra n s p o s e s . T h e r e a re m a n y in t e r e st in g ( there are quite a lot of games with 3.h4!? )
alternatives: 3...g7 4.f3 c6?! 5.b5! f6 6.0-0
[ a) A game in which Nigel Short ( 6.e5?! dxe5 7.xe5 d7 8.xd7 xd7
experimented with 2 Nc3 went 2...e5 3.c4 9.0-0 0-0= ) 6...0-0 7.h1!? g4?!
( I'd also look at 3.d4 exd4 4.xd4 c6 ( 7...d7 ) 8.xc6 bxc6 9.d3 c5 10.e1
5.b5 with the idea d7 6.xc6 xc6 d7 , and Romanishin suggests 11.f5! e6
7.f3 , with the idea of developing simply, or ( 11...gxf5 12.h4 fxe4 13.dxe4 |^ ) 12.e5!
perhaps continuing with the aggressive Bg5 dxe5 13.fxg6 hxg6 ( 13...fxg6 ) 14.g5
and 0-0-0 ) 3...e6!? 4.b3 ( 4.xe6 fxe6 e8
5.f3 c5! prevents d4 again, 5 d4 cxd4 6 A) 15.xf6 xf6 16.e4 e7 ( or
Qxd4 Nc6 7 Qc4 is worthy of consideration) 16...g7 17.fg5 f6 18.h4+- )
4...c6 5.ge2 g6?! ( 5...f6 6.d4 xd4 17.xe5;
7.xd4 exd4 8.xd4 e7 9.f4!? 0-0 B) 15.h4!? Romanishin-Nijboe
10.0-0-0 is probably all right for black, but omanishin-Nijboer, Groningen 1993. ]
there's a little pressure on him) 6.d4! xb3 [ d) 2...c6 has been chosen by some strong
7.axb3 g7 8.d5 ( 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.d5 players, for example, 3.f4 d5
ce7!? ) 8...ce7 9.0-0 f6 ( 9...f5 A) 4.d3 dxe4 5.dxe4 xd1+ 6.xd1
10.d3! ) 10.d3 0-0 11.g3!? f6 7.f2 may even be slightly better for
(usually a dubious move when the squares White due his centre and excellent knight
f5 and h5 are covered here W hite is on f2. Since ...e5 tricks won't work while ...
anticipating a later ...f5) a6 ( for example, Ng4 ca n be m e t b y Nxg4 , W h it e ge t s
11...d7 12.b4 f5 13.exf5 gxf5 14.h5 ) smooth development: g6 ( 7...bd7 8.e5
12.b4 c6 13.g5! c8 ( 13...h6 14.xf6 d5 9.f3 ) 8.f3 g7 9.d3 ( 9.e3!?
xf6 15.fd1 cxd5 16.xd5 ) 14.dxc6 g4 10.xg4 xg4 11.0-0-0 ) 9...0-0
xc6 15.fd1 (W hite is in charge) h6 10.h3 fd7 11.c3 c5 12.c2
16.xf6 xf6 17.b5 axb5 18.xb5 c8 ( 12.e2!? b6 13.e3 ) 12...f5?!
19.b3 b6 20.c4 h4 21.a2 xg3 ( 12...b6 ) 13.e3 ba6 14.0-0-0 e6
22.hxg3 g7 23.g4! d8 24.a8 d7 15.exf5 gxf5 16.b1 d5 17.d4 e6
25.g3 e7 26.b4 c8 27.xc8 xc8 18.hg1 with much better placed pieces
865
an d t he th rea t o f g4 , W ah ls-Che rnin , isn't clear, but perhaps White gets a little
Tastrup 1992.; something because of his centre. ]
B) 4.f3 g4 ( 4...dxe4 5.xe4 d7 8.d3 c6 9.exd6 0-0
6.d4 gf6 7.f2!? ) 5.h3 ( 5.e2 ) [ 9...exd6 10.e2+ e7 11.xe7+ xe7
5...xf3 6.xf3 e6 7.d3 b4 8.a3 a5 12.d2!? and 0-0-0 looks interesting, but
9.d2 ( 9.g3 ) 9...e7 10.0-0-0 0-0 fine for Black. ]
11.g4 d7 with a strangely balanced 10.0-0 exd6 11.a4 g4
position, Reinderman-M Gurevich, Zwolle [ 11...a5! 12.a2 f5 13.e1 d7 ]
NED 1996. ] 12.a5 d7 13.a6 bxa6 14.d5
3.f4 Here just about everything has been [ 14.xa6 ]
played, e.g., 14...b6 15.h3 xf3
[ 3.d3 (75 games, but a horrendous record in [ 15...e6! ]
master play) ] 16.xf3 f6 17.g4 ae8 18.g5 d7
[ 3.h3 ] 19.d5 b8 20.c3 e7 21.xe7+ xe7
[ 3.b3 and the more natural-looking ] 22.xa6 b6 Short-A Sokolov, playchess.
[ 3.ge2 ] com INT 2004 and here 23.f5! gxf5 24.g2
[ and 3.g3 , for example, looks to favour White because of his bishops
A) 3...g6 4.g2 g7 can become a and pawn structure.
Closed Sicilian after 5.f4 ( 5.d4 0-0
6.ge2 is a Pirc ) 5...0-0 6.f3 c5 7.d3
c6 8.0-0; 843 B07
B) 3...c6 4.g2 bd7 5.f4 e5 6.d3 Adams,Michael 2694
exf4!? 7.xf4 e5!? 8.e2 e7 9.f3 Reizniece,Dana 2341
g4 Waitzkin-Ehlvest, New York 1994. ] 8th Gibtelecom Masters (1) 26.01.2010
3...g6 4.c4 This is kind of weird, almost a [Gawain Jones]
Pirc but not quite a normal one. More
conventional would be I was impressed with Mickey Adams' play here
[ 4.f3 g7 5.g3 0-0 6.g2 , and c5 in Gibraltar which he eventually went on to win
is the most natural move, transposing to a in the playoffs. Normally he's known to grind
Closed Sicilian. White has 'prevented' a Pirc, down his opponents but here he reminded
and gotten Black to play .. . Nf6 versus the everyone he can play aggressively too! 1.e4
Closed Sicilian, which is usually easier to d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.h3 c6 5.g4!?
play for White than against the systems with We've had this position with bishops already
...e6 or ...e5 and ...Nge7. ] developed on e3 and g7 in the archives but
4...g7 5.e5!? fd7 without them developed probably favours
[ 5...dxe5 6.fxe5 g4 7.d4 ( 7.e6!? f5! ) White. This is because the bishop may not
7...c5!? ( 7...c6 8.f3 h6 9.d5! ) 8.e6 h a ve t o go t o e 3 wh ile B la ck will a lm o s t
f5 9.d5 is obscure. Then the play seems to certainly play Bg7. This line is very rare and
favour White, for example, 0-0 ( 9...xe6 has hardly ever been reached. There are
10.dxe6 xc3+ 11.bxc3 xd1+ 12.xd1 actually two plans here for White he can play
f2+ 13.e2 xh1 14.f3 is hopeless) aggressively with long castles and attacking
10.f3 , and already 11 d6 is threatened, so on the kingside or more sedately with Bg2,
a p l a u s i b l e a c t i v e l i n e w o u l d b e a5 Nge2-Ng3 and 0-0 when it's an accelerated
11.d2!? b4 12.e2 xb2! 13.b1 fianchetto position. h5 Black attacks back
xc2 14.d3 xc3! 15.xc3 xc3+ immediately but this move means that any
16.f1 , when it's still hard not to prefer future f4-f5 will be a lot stronger as g6 is now
White. ] vulnerable.
6.f3 [ 5...b5 6.g2
[ 6.d4!? b6 7.b3 ] A) 6...b4 7.ce2 g7 8.e3 ( I like
6...b6 7.b3 c5!? 8.a3 while Black cannot defend with a5
[ 7...0-0 8.d4 c6 9.0-0 g4 10.e3 and so has to make a concession.) 8...b7
866
9.d2 a5 10.g3 h5 11.g5 fd7 12.h4 but I think it's a lot easier to play for White,
c5 13.f4 c6 14.1e2 and in this it's always nicer to attack the king and play
unclear position they agreed to a draw in with more space.
Rodriguez-Leitao, Santos 2006; [ 9.d3 is the alternative square with ideas
B) 6...e5 7.e3 ( 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.xd8+ of pressurising g6. ]
xd8 9.f3 bd7 10.e3 looks like an 9...b4?! I don't like this move. It's hard to put
in t e re s t in g alt e rn a t ive wh e n f 7 m igh t pressure on e4 and this just forces White to
prove vulnerable.) 7...g7?! ( 7...bd7 put another piece on the kingside to increase
immediately was required) 8.dxe5 dxe5 the offensive. 10.e2 d5 The only way to
9.xd8+ xd8 10.0-0-0+ c7 11.f4 target the e4 pawn but this allows W hite a
e8 12.f3 1-0 Rogic, D-Skoberne, J/ strong attack. 11.f5! Black's in trouble
Zadar CRO 2005 (31) ] [ 11.e5 is a calmer way of playing which
[ 5...e5 has been played but fails tactically to would exploit d5 and gives W hite a
6.dxe5 ( Instead 6.ge2 was played in 1-0 promising advantage but f5 is the most
S o l l e v e l d - P e l , H o o g e v e e n 2 0 0 2 ( 6 2 )) dynamic. ]
6...dxe5 7.xd8+ xd8 8.f3 bd7 11...f8
9.g5 e8 10.c4 and Black cannot hold [ 11...dxe4 12.h4 b6 ( 12...f8
on to the pawn. h6 ( 10...b4 11.xf7+ would transpose to the note to the next
e7 12.c4 h6 13.f7 h7 14.xh6 move ) 13.xe4 xf5 14.xf5 gxf5
xe4 15.0-0 Also puts Black in trouble) 15.xf5 d5 16.f1 has similarities to the
11.xf7 h7 12.g5 ( 12.xh6 xh6 game, White can be very happy here. ]
13.g5 Is probably a simpler path to the [ 11...gxf5 is initially the computer's top
advantage ) 12...b5 Black has to try and suggestion but after 12.exf5 White holds an
conf use the issue 13.e6 b4 14.e2 extremely pleasant position. White's knights
xe4 15.xd7+ xd7 16.xe5 xg5 can be placed on h4 and g3 and White can
17.h4 f7 18.xd7 xd7 19.e3 castle kingside safely when the h5 pawn is
White's better as Black's pawns are loose doomed and an f6 or g6 break is going to
and his pieces don't connect well. ] wipe out the Black king. ]
[ 5...g7 6.g2 0-0 7.ge2 e5 8.e3 b5 12.h4 dxe4
9.a3 b7 10.0-0 bd7 11.d2 a6 [ 12...gxf5 13.xf5 xf5 14.exf5
12.g3 b6?! Missing a cute tactic 13.dxe5 How can Black ever hope for an
c4 14.exf6! xd2 15.fxg7 xf1 acceptable position? I don't see how he
( 15...xg7 16.xd2 is also good for d e ve l o p s a l l h i s p i e c e s t o r e a s o n a b l e
White. The three pieces are more effective squares. ]
than the queen generally and here d6 is a 13.0-0
big weakness.) 16.gxf8+ xf8 17.xf1 [ 13.fxg6 also gives White a clear advantage
Again I prefer the three pieces to the queen xg6 ( 13...f5 14.g3 e6 15.e3
1-0 Vitolinsh-Hoerstmann, Porz (50) ] doesn't really help, W hite's pieces have
6.g5 fd7 7.f4! Mickey goes for it! It actually been restrained temporarily but h5 is going
rem ind s me of a f ew of m y game s in th e to drop when Black's position is likely to
G r a n d P ri x A t t a c k . W h it e m a y n o t m a t e collapse. White can take time out to castle
immediately but it's useful taking the extra queenside first if he wants too.) 14.xg6
space in the centre and on the kingside while fxg6 15.xe4 0-0 16.d3 followed by
the h5 pawn looks a bit stupid for Black. g7 Bd2 and 0-0-0 ]
8.f3 b5 13...gxf5
[ 8...0-0 is a bit risky. White doesn't have to [ 13...a6 14.xe4 hardly helps Black
attack on the kingside straight away but can xe2 15.xe2 xd4+ 16.g2 has picked
first develop his pieces. 9.e3 followed by up a pawn but Black's king cannot survive
Qd2, Bd3, 0-0-0 and f5. ] bd7 17.xc6 c8 18.f6+- ]
9.g2 Adams eyes up the long diagonal. The 14.xf5 xf5 15.xf5 g6
computer reckons the position is about level [ 15...e6 16.f2 d5 17.e3 ]
867
16.xe4 White is clearly better. Black's king is 6.f4

in trouble while White has the bishop pair and [ 6.g4 is also interesting but it doesn't seem
a better pawn structure. d7 17.d3 e6 so clear after h5!? 7.g5 fd7 8.g2 c5!
18.f2 This is a disaster for Black. If that pawn and Black has a comfortable game ( 8...b5?!
were back on b7 he'd have some hopes as 9.e5 a7 10.e6 fxe6 11.d3 f8 12.e4
then it would be easier to develop his f7 13.d5 and White was clearly on top in
queenside and have somewhere where the Bauer, C (2637) -Fressinet, L (2698) Caen
king could hope to be safe. Here, however, 2011 )]
the position is already lost and against as 6...0-0
strong a player as Adams, he has no chance. [ 6...b5 doesn't seem to solve Black's
e7 19.d2 a5 20.af1 opening difficulties either 7.e5 fd7 8.f3
[ White's spoilt for choice which target to go a7 ( 8...c6 9.d3 b7 10.ge2 c7
for 20.a3 would be another choice. ] 11.h4 b6 12.h5 8d7 13.hxg6 hxg6
20...f8 21.c3 a6 22.g3 h4 23.h5 14.xh8+ xh8 15.e6! was very strong in
h8 24.g6 f5 25.g7 xg7 26.xg7+ d8 Hracek, Z (2610)-Konopka, M (2445
Black's king never managed to castle. 27.g2 P a rd u b i ce 1 9 9 8) 9.d3 b4 10.e4
c7 28.c4 d5 29.xd5 A very easy was pleasant for White in Goloshchapov, A
victory for W hite and an interesting idea. I (2523)-Murshed, N (2435) Dhaka 2003 ]
think 5...h5 was the route of Black's problems [ 6...e6 is Vigus' suggestion on the forum,
which only helped White while the plan of 9... with the idea of playing Nb8-c6-e7, however
b4 and 10...d5 to strive for counterplay really this looks a little slow and W hite's space
backfired. advantage seems to guarantee a slight edge
1-0 after 7.f3!? c6 8.0-0-0 ]
7.f3
[ 7.f3 and a quick 0-0-0 is also possible ]
844 B07 7...b5
Adams,Michael 2724 [ 7...e6 is probably safer but White has the
Zhukova,N 2426 better chances still after 8.e5 ( 8.d3 c6
Gibraltar Open (1.3) 24.01.2012 9.0-0 is comfortable too) 8...d5 9.xd5
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] exd5 10.d3 ( 10.d2!? ) 10...c6 11.c3
dxe5 12.fxe5 f6 13.exf6 xf6 14.0-0 f5
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 a6 Petrik, T (2487) -Tkachiev, V (2664)
5.h3 this is Vigus' suggestion to meet Dresden 2008. ]
Kramnik's hybrid setup of Nf6/a6 without Bg7 [ 7...c6 looks odd but might be worth a
and it certainly works well in this game! gamble, for example 8.e5 ( 8.d5 a7
[ 5.d2 b5 6.f3 has been examined in the and Black can open things up with c6 or
archives, including the key game Naiditsch, even Nb5!? ) 8...h5 9.f2 f6!? ]
A-Kramnik, V ] 8.e5 fd7
5...g7 [ 8...h5!? might've been worth a try,
[ 5...b5 6.e5! causes problems for Black, e. especially given the lack of counterplay
g. fd7 ( 6...b4 7.exf6 bxc3 8.fxe7 xe7 Zhukova got in the game
9.bxc3 leaves White an (admittedly doubled) A) 9.d3 b7 ( 9...g3 10.g1 ) 10.g4
pawn up ) 7.f3 b6 8.a4 Vigus ( 8.d3 g3 11.g1 b4 12.xg3 bxc3 13.bxc3
g7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.g3 wasn't so c5 is unclear;
convincing in Cornette, M (2573)-Fluvia B) 9.f2 f6 10.exd6 ( 10.g4 xf4
Poyatos, J (2442) Montcada i Reixac 2009) 11.xf4 fxe5 with excellent chances for
8...b4 9.e4 f5 10.a5 d5 and now Black ) 10...xd6 11.a4! is probably better
11.xd6+! ( Better than 11.c4 of Rojas for W hite but at least Black can create
Keim, L (2453)-Peralta, F (2545) Badalona some attacking chances here ]
2009 ) 11...cxd6 12.xd5 just seems to win 9.d3 b6
a pawn ] [ if 9...b7 then 10.e6! fxe6 11.g5 f6
868
12.ce4 is awkward for Black although Bd5 demonstrating that 5.h3 is not to be
keeps the position messy ] underestimated. Black players should
10.e2 8d7?! this is just too slow and it examine options on moves 7 and 8 otherwise
gets ruthlessly punished this line may quickly fall out of fashion...
[ perhaps 10...c6!? should be tried, 1-0
although White retains good chances after
11.a3 b4 12.e4 d5 13.d2 bxa3
14.bxa3 ] 845 B07
11.0-0-0 Adamson,Robby
[ 11.0-0 of course this should also be good Ivanov,A
for White but Mickey can smell blood on the Reno 2007
Kingside ] [John Watson]
11...e6
[ 11...b4 12.e4 d5 13.h4 c5 14.dxc5 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7 4.f4 e5
dxe5 15.h5 exf4 16.f2 looks very strong 5.f3 Martin calls this the 'Pirc/ Philidor hybrid',
for White ] also known as 'the LION' . Remarkably, I see
12.h4 b7 184 games with it in my TWIC database. The
[ 12...h5 13.g4! hxg4 14.g5 and White's whole system doesn't inspire confidence in me,
attack is crushing ] and yet no real solution has been found. exd4
[ 12...b4 13.e4 f5 14.exf6 xf6 [ 5...e7?! 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 g4
15.xf6+ xf6 16.h5 is clearly better for 8.f4 ]
White ] [ 5...c6 has been suggested by Lion
13.h5 b4 14.e4 xe4 15.xe4 d5 advocates, but may not be that great: 6.dxe5
Zhukova tries to block up the position, but in ( 6.c4!? ) 6...dxe5 7.fxe5 g4 8.f4?
the absence of counterplay she can't expect ( 8.e6! fxe6 9.g5 ) 8...c5 with unclear
the Kingside to remain closed for long 16.d3 play. ]
c5 17.hxg6 hxg6 6.xd4! And 116 of those games reached this
[ 17...fxg6 18.dxc5 a4 19.g5 ] point.
18.g4 [ A recent game Alberola Mulet-Llorente Zaro,
[ 18.dxc5 is also winning but Adams is doing La Ro d a 2 0 0 8 re in f o rce d th e id e a t h a t
for the direct attack a4 19.c6 ] 6.xd4 is harmless after g6 7.e3 g7
18...e8 8.d3 0-0 9.g4? d5! 10.e5 ( 10.g5 xe4 )
[ 18...c4 traps a piece but to no avail after 10...c5! 11.exf6 xf6 12.e2 e8 13.f2
19.h2 e8 20.h7+ f8 21.f5! cxd3 cxd4 14.xd4 xg4 and Black soon won. ]
22.h6 xh6+ 23.xh6+ e7 24.g5+ 6...c6 For some time this has been considered
when White regains the piece and more ] the main line, but there are options.
19.h2 cxd4 20.xd4 c7 [ 6...c5!? was given some attention in the
[ 20...f8 covers h7 but simply f5 is Archives: 7.e5 ( 7.e3 g6 8.e5 e6
crushing ] 9.a4+ d7 10.b5 g4 11.xd7+ xd7
21.f5! the att ack crashes through exf5 12.xd7+ xd7 13.d2 f5! Ponomariov-
22.gxf5 xe5 23.xe5 xe5 Beliavsky, Bled SLO 1999) 7...e6 8.c4
[ 23...xe5 24.h8+! xh8 25.xh8# ] dxe5 9.fxe5 d7 10.e3 Cosma - Ianov,
24.fxg6 f6 25.df1! a typically accurate Bijeljina 2001 and Davies suggests b6
move from Adams, bringing another piece to 11.xb6 axb6 12.d1 d7 . ]
the attack d7 26.f5 f8 27.xe5 xe5 7.e3 It's a bad sign for Black that Christian
28.h3 a5 29.e1 d6 30.hf1! Bauer chose this line as White, since Bauer
setting up a pleasing finish plays the Lion. But there seem to be enough
[ 30.e6+ of course wins as well ] resources. d5
30...a4 31.e6+ xe6 32.h7+ f8 [ 7...e7 8.g4!? ( 8.0-0-0 ) 8...d5 ( 8...c5!?
33.xf6+ with mate to follow shortly. Overall 9.d2 xg4 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.g1 xe3
an impressive perf ormance f rom Adams, 12.xe3 b6 gives White a nice attack
869
with a better game overall, but Black is a enough for the exchange;
pawn up and White will have to take a little C2b) 12...0-0 13.g1 c7 14.g3
time to recover his pawn.) 9.g5 c5 bd5 15.xd5 cxd5 16.b5 b6
10.d3 dxe4 11.xe4 xe4 12.xe4+ 17.xc5 xc5 18.d4 c6 19.c3
e7 13.xe7+ xe7 14.d4 ( 14.d4!? and W hite has a nice positional
e8 15.f2 ) 14...xd4 15.xd4 c5 advantage, Sprenger-Galdunts,
16.0-0-0 d8 17.f5! h6 18.h4 and White Cappelle la Grande FRA 2002. ]
has a bind and some space, with a limited 11.xd5 cxd5 12.f5 f6 13.0-0-0 0-0
advantage, Shirov-Ftacnik, Senek SVK 14.g4!? A little ambitious.
1998. ] [ 14.g3 and Bg2 is a good alternative. ]
8.exd5 c5 9.d3 14...xe3+?!
[ A crazy line comes from 9.d2!? e7 [ Better is 14...e8 15.g5!? ( 15.xc5!?
10.d4 g4 ( 10...b6!? is safer and xc5 16.xd5 xf5 17.xf5 xf5
maybe better) 11.d1? ( 11.0-0-0! xe3! 18.gxf5 e4 19.d5 c8 ) 15...xe3!
12.e1 xd4 13.d1! xe1 14.xe1+ 16.gxf6 xd3 17.xd3 xf6 gives Black a
d8 15.e4 c5 16.dxc6 bxc6 17.xc6 pawn and bishop pair for the exchange, and
b8 18.d5 gf6 19.xf7 g6 with near- W hite's pawns are weak. That should be
equality ) 11...df6 12.h3? xe3 13.xe3 enough for equality, for example, 18.he1
e4 14.d3 h4+ and Black won shortly, d7 19.c3 g6 20.d4 d6 , winning
Cukuroglu-Gelashvili, Izmir TUR 2003. ] another pawn. ]
9...e7 10.d4 xd5 15.xe3 b6 16.e7+ h8 17.xc8
[ 10...b6! is a gambit that promises axc8 18.g5 c6 19.d3 c4
equality: 11.dxc6 [ 19...fe8 is slightly more flexible - the
A) 11...bd5? 12.cxb7 ( 12.xd5 xd5 knight might go to a4. ]
13.cxb7 xb7 14.e4+ e7 15.b5+ 20.d4 a4 21.a3 fe8
f8 16.xb7 xb7 17.0-0 and White [ 21...b5 doesn't do enough: 22.he1 b4
has two extra pawns) 12...xb7 13.b5+ 23.b3 xa3+ 24.b1 b6 25.h4 a5
xb5 14.xb5+ d7 15.xd5 xd5 26.e7 ]
16.f2 0-0-0 17.a6+ with a winning 22.he1 c6 23.h4 White's pawn storm
advantage, Bauer, C -Strikovic, Calvia begins. g8 24.h5 b6 25.xe8+ xe8
ESP 2005.; 26.xc4 dxc4 27.xb6!
B) 11...0-0 12.0-0-0 bxc6 13.g1 c7 [ 27.xc4 is also possible, but the queen
14.g3 d8?? ( 14...g4 15.e2 xe2 exchange is risk-free. ]
16.dxe2 ad8 17.d4 with some 27...axb6 28.d6 h6 29.gxh6 gxh6
advantage ) 15.db5! xd3 16.xc7 30.xh6 e4 31.xb6 xf4 32.xb7 h4
xd1+ 17.xd1 xg1 18.xa8 xa8 33.b5 No w W h i t e i s h o m e f r e e . g7
19.xg1 1-0 J Polgar-Khalifman, ? 1993; 34.d2 f6 35.a4 c3+ 36.xc3 xa4
C) 11...bxc6! 37.b4 a3+ 38.b2 h3 39.d5 e6
C1) 12.e2! looks best, unpinning the 40.d3 xh5 41.c4 h4 42.b3 f5 43.c5
e3 bishop, but Black is still okay: a6! h1 44.c6 f4 45.c3 h8 46.b5 f8 47.b6
13.d2 fd5 14.xd5 xd5 15.xc6 f3 48.b7 f2 49.c7 f1 50.c8+
( 15.f5! ) 15...xe3 16.xe3+ xe3 1-0
17.xa6 xc2+ 18.d2 xa1 19.xa1
0-0;
C2) 12.0-0-0
C2a) 12...a6! justifies Black's play:
13.d2 xf1 14.f5 ( 14.hxf1
c4! ) 14...c4 15.xe7 xe3
16.xe3 xe3 17.dxf1 xf1
18.xc6 xh2 19.xh2 0-0 20.h3
gives W hite something, but not
870
846 B07 24.f6 a3 25.f7+ f8 26.h6+ e7

Afek,Yochanan 2330 27.g5+ xe6 28.g4+ xf7 29.g5+
Van der Wiel,John TH 2531 e8 30.e6 d7 31.xb6 c8 32.f6
Open Dieren NED (3) 20.07.2000 e7 33.xg6 a1+ 34.f2 h4+
[Carsten Hansen] 1-0
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 c6

5.d2 bd7 6.f4 a5 7.f3 b5 847 B07
This is the natural way for Black to meet this Almasi,Zoltan 2663
set-up from White. However, the combination Marin,Mihail 2556
of the early ...Nbd7 and ...Qa5 doesn't seem 51st It Reggio Emilia ITA (2) 28.12.2008
to work so well. 8.d3 b4 9.e2 [John Watson]
[ 9.d1 has also been tried successfully, e.
g. d5 10.f2 dxe4 11.xe4 g7 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5
( 11...d5!? 12.c4 bxc3 13.xc3 b8 In this month's games, White scored 9 out of
14.xd5 xd2+ 15.xd2 cxd5 10 points from this position! Pirc players,
is fully playable, and it seems to improve beware. g7 5.d2 h6
over 11...Bg7) 12.0-0 b6 Again it appears [ 5...c6 (Vigus calls this 'Plan B') 6.0-0-0
that 12...Nd5 is the correct way for Black to ( White has also played. 6.f3; 6.h6 and;
continue 13.a3 bxa3 14.xa3 All of a 6.f4 ) 6...0-0 7.b1 b5 8.f3 ( 8.d3 b4
sudden it becomes clear that Black's 9.ce2 is a standard reorganization) 8...b4
position is anything but desirable b8 15.f5 9.ce2 a5 10.h4 h5 11.g4! bd7
( Here 15.xf6+ xf6 16.xf6 xf6 ( 11...hxg4 12.xf6 exf6!? 13.h5
17.b3 c7 18.xb8 xb8 19.c3 is very dangerous) 12.g3 hxg4 13.h5
looks ve ry good f or W hit e) 15...xb2 a4? 14.h6 h8 15.e5 ( actually, 15.h7+
16.xa7 b6 17.xf6 xf6 18.d6+! xh7 16.h2 wins immediately) 15...g7
exd6 19.e3+ e6 20.xf7! and now it's (? ? a m isprin t ) 1 -0 A ro sh id ze-Drlje vic ,
all over xf7 21.xe6+ f8 22.xd6+ Antalya TUR 2009. ]
g8 23.c4+ d5 24.e6+ f8 25.fxg6 6.h4 g5 7.g3 h5 This manoeuvre is the
b7 26.c8+ e7 27.e1+ 1-0 Kogan,A- standard one: Black secures the two bishops,
Roa Alonso,S/Madrid ESP 2000 ] which he judges to be more important than
9...a6 10.0-0 d5 11.e5 e4 12.e3 f5 the weakening of the kingside. That is
[ 12...b6!? ] pro b ab ly th e ca se , a lt h ou gh W h it e d o e s
13.a3 increase his lead in development. 8.0-0-0
[ The more direct 13.exf6!? dxf6 14.e5 [ Another game from this month went 8.c4
b6 15.xa6 xa6 16.a3 seems very c6 9.ge2 xg3 10.hxg3 , which is
unpleasant for Black ] better for White, for example, e5 ( 10...e6 )
13...b7 14.axb4 xb4 15.c3 b6 16.b4 11.b5!? exd4 12.xd4 d7 13.de2 a6
White wants to prevent Black from playing ... 14.xc6 bxc6 15.0-0-0 b8 16.f4 0-0
c5. The text move allows Black to put pressure 17.d4 e8 18.b3 a5 19.de1 gxf4
on the W hite queen side with . ..a5, but it 20.gxf4 and White stood well, Gomez
appears that Black has forgotten about two G a rri d o -L in a r e s N a p o le s, M e rid a ME X
much more important things: development and 2008. ]
king safety. a5 17.ab1 17 bxa5 Rxa5 is also 8...c6
playable, but simpler for Black to play against [ There's no reason to open the h-file until
than the text. c7 18.c4 e6 An argument forced to by 8...xg3 9.hxg3 , when c6?!
could also be made for 18...a4, which wastes 10.b5! a6 11.xc6+ bxc6 12.f4 gxf4
some time, but more importantly keep the 13.gxf4 g4 14.f3 gave White a lead in
position closed. 19.bxa5 xa5 20.cxd5 d e ve lo p m e n t a n d p o we r f u l ce n t re in C
exd5 21.xe4 fxe4 22.e6! Now White's Balogh-Nyback, Budapest 2002. ]
attack become irresistible. b6 23.f5! d6 [ But 8...d7 is a reasonable alternative,
871
intending ...c5. ] 30.g3 , he8 31.gxh4 xd3 is adequate. ]

9.ge2 29...he8?! The position is extremely complex,
[ A last example from this month: 9.e3 d7 and over the next few moves one feels that
10.e2 xg3 11.hxg3 e5 12.dxe5 xe5 time trouble is a factor. 30.d5?!
13.f4 g4 14.xg4 xg4 15.f3 xf3 [ Missing 30.a5! , when Nc6+ can really be
16.gxf3 , and again, White has space and stopped unless Black tries d7 31.dxe5
open lines, Alonso-Barrionuevo, Buenos ( or 31.hd1 ) 31...xe5 32.xd7! xa5
Aires 2008. ] 33.d5!? with a clear advantage. ( 33.c6 )]
9...d7 30...xg4 31.c5 bxc5?
[ 9...e6 might run into d5. ] [ Better 31...d7 32.a5 f5 ]
10.f3 xg3 Before Bf2 can be played. 32.a5?
11.hxg3 e6 12.f4 Aggressive, planning e5. [ 32.xc5 leaves White with a dominant
and perhaps a novelty. Vigus cites a game position and strong attack. ]
with 32...f5 33.b3+ a8?
[ 12.e3 f6 13.f4 e7!? , which clears [ 33...c8 followed by ...Nd4 gives Black a
c6 for a bishop and plans the occupation of lot of play. The king gets in trouble in the
d5 in the case of e5. The queen can go to corner. ]
g6. ] 34.d3 d4 35.b7 e2? 36.c3 a6
12...f6 37.xc5 c4 There is no defence. 38.d6+
[ Now 12...e7 drops the g-pawn, although c6 39.d7 xb3 40.dxe8 xe8 41.xc4
13.fxg5 ( 13.d5!? ) 13...hxg5 14.xh8+ xc4 42.xc6+ b8 43.axb3
xh8 15.xg5 g6 isn't so terrible. ] 1-0
13.e5 dxe5
[ 13...g6? 14.exd6 cxd6 15.b5 ]
14.fxe5!? 848 B07
[ 14.dxe5 is logical, maintaining attack on g5 Anand,Viswanathan 2770
and clearing e3 for White's queen. The text Chernin,Alexander 2615
allows Black to counterattack in the centre. ] European Club Cup 1999
14...e7 15.e4 0-0-0 16.2c3 f5! [Alexander Volzhin]
[ or 16...f6 ]
17.exf6 xf6 18.xf6 xf6 19.e4 f5 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 5.f3
White has a slightly better-looking position, b5 6.g4 h6
but his g-pawns are almost as weak as Black's [ Hungarian GM Alexander Chernin is one of
e-pawn, which might be liquidated anyway, leading experts in the Pirc. In fact, he had
freeing the bishop on d7. 20.c5 It may be already played the black pieces before in
best to keep this knight centralised for a while. this position in a game against Beliavsky in
d5 21.c4 d6 22.e3 e7 This is fine, Reggio Emilia1995, which continued 6...g7
but 7.d2 h5 8.gxh5 A rather unusual
[ 22...e5! 23.d5 d4 also looks good approach. ( A more normal way is 8.g5
enough. ] fd7 9.d3 b7 10.f4 b4 11.ce2 c5
23.g4 b8 24.e2 c8 25.d3!? 12.f3 with mutual chances.) 8...xh5
[ The natural move is 25.f3 , when c6 9.ge2 d7 I think Black can be satisfied
( or 25...b6 26.b3 b4!? ) 26.b3 a5!? with the results of the opening. 10.g1 c7
is interesting. ] 11.g3 ( 11.d5 b4 12.dxc6 bxc3 13.cxd7+
25...b6 xd7 14.xc3 b8 with tremendous
[ Or 25...c6 26.hd1 b6 ] compensation f or t he sacrif iced pawn .)
26.f3! g6 11...b7 12.0-0-0 a6 13.f4!? b4 14.xh5
[ Not 26...bxc5?? 27.b3+ ] ( 14.ce2 hf6 15.e5 g4 ) 14...xh5
27.b1 h4?! 28.e4 Now g3 is threatened, 15.e2 ( 15.b1 c5 16.d5 f6 ) 15...c5!
so Black tries to cover g6. e5 29.b3 ( 15...xh2 16.f5 ) 16.g3 h7 17.g2?!
[ On the less-than-obvious 29.dxe5 xe5 ( 17.f5 cxd4 18.xd4 e5 19.xb4
872
xh2 ) 17...a5 18.b1 b6 19.f5 g5! [ 28...e5 This move doesn't help Black
20.f2 ( 20.dxc5 a4! 21.cxd6 xb2 either in view of 29.e2! Now White wins
and it's difficult to parry ...Nc3.) 20...cxd4 by force: d7 30.xd4 cxd4 31.f6! e8
21.f6!? ( 21.xd4 xd4 22.xd4 f6 ) 32.g6! with quick mate: h3+ 33.g1 fxg6
21...xf6 22.xd4 xd4 23.xd4 c5 34.xg6+ xg6 35.xg6+ h8 36.h5+
with huge advantage to Black, although in g8 37.f7+ xf7 38.xf7+ h8 39.f8+
the time-trouble scramble White managed to h7 40.h6+ g8 41.f8# ]
salvage a draw. ] 29.xb2 xb2 30.f3! Excellent! White
7.d2 g7 8.h4 h5 9.g5 fd7 10.ge2 doesnâ []t need to waste a tempo capturing
b7 11.g3 0-0 12.f4 b4 13.d1 c5 that Knight. The text protects the h3-square
14.d5 The moves of both sides are very and keeps open the possibility of both pawn
natural and suggest themselves quite readily. advances (f5-f6 or g5-g6). Now the game is
b6 15.c4 bxc3 16.xc3 a6 17.xa6 over. xc3 31.f6! e8 32.g6! Now all the
xa6 18.e2 c8 19.f5 c7 white pieces (Queen and 2 Rooks) attack that
[ The natural looking 19...e5 is bad in view lonely Black's King while all Black's pieces
of 20.xh5! gxh5 21.xh5 and Black's are far away... xf6 33.gxf7+ Mate in 2 is
King is in trouble after unavoidable, so Black resigned. Wonderful
A) 21...xc3+ 22.bxc3 xd5 trying to game!
include the Queen in the defence 23.g6! [ 33.gxf7+ xf7 34.g6# ]
( 23.exd5 xf5 ) 23...f6 24.h6 1-0
and trouble follows with Rg1 and a quick
mate.;
B) The attempt to conjure up a 849 B07
counterattack also doesn't work: 21...b4 Anand,Viswanathan 2520
22.g6 fxg6 23.fxg6 c2+ 24.d2 c4+ Gurevich,Mikhail 2699
25.e2 and there are no more checks; 9th Corsica Masters (KO) rapid (3.1) 04.11.05
C) 21...d7 The alternatives don't help [Andrew Martin]
Black either: 22.g1 g7 23.f6 exf6
24.gxf6 xf6 25.xg7+ xg7 26.g5+ 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 It is rare indeed that
h7 27.xf6 g4 28.h6+ g8 someone is so bold to venture the Pirc
29.f2 ] against Anand. Perhaps Vishy was so
20.0-0 d7 It might look as if White is surprised that he decided to deviate from the
running out of ideas on how to continue the normal 3 Nf3. I don't know of any drawback to
attack. But Vishy finds an excellent blow! 3 f3 other then W hite must be prepared to
21.xh5! gxh5 22.xh5 b8 23.f2 e8 play different types of position. If pushes, I
24.af1 e5?! Until this moment both sides would vote to 3...d5 now, but there are plenty
have played very inventively and precisely. of other moves. 3.f3 g6 Gurevich insists on
But this plan of transferring Knight to ...c4 the fianchetto. Now he has to be prepared to
qu i c k l y l e a d s t o t h e c o l l a p s e o f B l a c k ' s play a King's Indian. 4.e3 c6 5.d2 bd7
position. [ 5...b5 6.c3 led to a very unusual position in
[ 24...a6! is much more to the point. the following game, not necessarily bad for
Black's Queen becomes very active and the Black at a ll: ( 6.a4! is more critical, taking
Knight is placed well on d7 for protecting the advantage of the Queen on d2: bxa4 7.c3
King. 25.g2 d3 ] b7 8.d3 bd7 9.ge2 g7 10.0-0 0-0
25.g2 c4 26.c1 d4+ 27.h1 11.xa4 e5 12.fa1 exd4 13.xd4 c5
Now it has become clear that Black's plan 14.db5 d5 15.exd5 b6 16.xa7 fxd5
was wrong. The "active" Knight doesn't really 17.xc5 e8 18.d6 h4 19.f2 xa7
attack anything while White is ready for the 20.xa7 d4 Pascot, J-Prioul, J/Bretagne
direct attack to roll over the Black King. g7 2004 This could well be a promising route
28.h6 xb2 Desperation, but I couldnâ []t for W hite.) 6...g7 7.a3 bd7 8.c2
find any real improvement: It's hard to believe in this time-consuming
873
manoeuvre. Of course, White is solid. c7 better capture: 14.xe4 ( 14.c2 h4+
9.e2 b6 10.b3 a6 11.h4 h5= 15.d1 f2+ 16.xf2 xf2 17.c1 e4 )
1/2-1/2 Ivanova, Y-Kariakina, M/Dagomys 14...xe4 15.d3 h4+ 16.d1 xg4
2004 ] 17.g1 h4 ]
6.c4 14.xc5 He takes his chance. h4+ 15.g3
[ 6.h3 g7 ( 6...e5 7.f2 is another dxc5
Knight wheel, this time on the other flank! [ After 15...h6 16.g2 dxc5 17.d1 f4
White gets nowhere again: g7 8.d5 cxd5 18.e2 White is holding on. ]
9.exd5 0-0 10.c4 h5 11.c3 f5 12.h3 16.g2
e7= ) 7.e2 e5 8.dxe5 xe5 9.f2 0-0 [ 16.b3 might be a useful zwischenzug:
10.a3 I just don't get these Knight moves h6 17.d3 ab8 18.d1 The Rook on
to the edge. White can afford one of Nh3-f2 b3 looks more impressive than the Black
or Na3-God knows where, but not both! d5 rook on b8. ]
11.0-0-0 e6 12.exd5 xd5 13.c5 d7 16...f5 The second wave of the Black attack
14.xf8 xf8 15.d3 c3 16.de1 commences. 17.exf5 e4?!
xa2+ 17.b1 c3+ 18.c1 b6 19.f4 [ Why not 17...gxf5 Black has threats:
d8 20.f3 a2+ 21.b1 xb2 22.xe6 A) 18.d1 e4 Now he gets the move for
xa3 0-1 De Ruiter, T-Piket, M/Netherlands free. 19.h3 g5 20.h5 xh5
1994 Very nice! ] ( 20...f4 21.e2 d6 22.h3 )
6...a6!? 7.a4 This is not quite a main line 21.xh5 e5;
King's Indian. In the Byrne system of the B) 18.b3 e3 19.f2 g4= 20.g2 ]
Samisch Variation, Black would normally 18.cxe4 ae8 19.fxg6
have played ...Bg7 at this point, not ...Nbd7. [ 19.e2 might have been clearer: xb2
There a2-a4 would be answered by ....a6-a5! 20.b3 d4 21.dxc6 bxc6 22.fxg6 hxg6
and ... Nb8-a6-b4! Gurevich can't do this now 23.xg4 xg4 24.d2 ]
and this is what prompts Anand to play a2-a4 19...f2 20.h3 xe4+? The last mistake.
himself. [ Black should prefer 20...xf1+ 21.xf1
[ 7.c3 c7 8.c1 g7 9.h3 0-0 xe4+ 22.d1 d4+ 23.c2 hxg6
10.f2 e5 11.d5 c5 12.g4 h5 13.h4 b6 although he is still worse. ]
14.e2 d7 15.b3 c8 16.g1 e8 21.xe4 A flawed game, but not without
17.d1 gave White his usual Benoni space opening interest and of course a game
advantage in Pfaffel, T-Szenetra, W / between two great players. Are we hunting for
Finkenstein 1998, although anyone who has crumbs when we consider blitz games in a
played these positions as Black will tell you theoretical column? The jury is still out on that
that the a dvantage is not at a ll easy t o one.
increase. ] 1-0
7...a5 8.c3 e5 9.d5 c5 10.a3 g7
[ The s tra nge 10...e7!? could well be an
option now, intending counterplay after .... 850 B07
Nf6-h5. I don't see any clear way for white to Aseev,Konstantin N 2545
g e t t h e e d g e : 11.h6 ( 11.ge2 0-0 Korotylev,Alexey 2415
12.g3 h5 ) 11...h5 12.g3 b6 ] Sankt Peterburg 1994
11.ge2 0-0 12.g4 xg4! This should be a [Alexander Volzhin]
brilliant idea, which Anand surely
underestimated. For the piece Black gets 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f3 f6
several pawns, a displaced White King and a 5.d3 0-0 6.0-0 c6 7.bd2 e5 8.e1
connected, advancing pawn chain. 13.fxg4 This modification of Dolmatov's system is
[ 13.xc5 xf3-+ ] worthy of consideration. W hite intends to
13...xg4 strengthen the d4 square by playing Nb3, and
[ In a rapid game one makes rapid decisions. it's important he avoids playing 7 h3 (aimed
Yet 13...fxe4! may well have been the against ...Bg4) which amounts to rather a
874
considerable weakening of the K-side. 851 B07

Russian GM Konstantin Aseev is the main Bacrot,Etienne 2705
adherent of this set-up. h5 Bologan,Viktor 2658
[ 8...d7 was played in Aseev-Hickl, 1st ACP World Rapid Cup rapid (1.3) 06.01.07
Munchen 1991. The game continued: [Jonathan Rowson]
9.b3! exd4 10.cxd4 a5 11.g5 f6
12.h6 e8 13.a4 b4 14.f1 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5
wh e n W h it e 's su p e rio r it y in t h e c e n t r e 5.xd8+ xd8 6.c4 e8 The highest
secured him the better chances. b6 15.h3 level clash in this line for a while, and Black
d7 16.bd2 g7 17.g5 c8 18.c4!? doesn't fare well. 7.g5 bd7 8.f3 d6
xc4 19.xc4 c6 20.c1 b8 21.f4 9.0-0-0 a6 10.a4! This seems right to me-
e6 22.f1 d8 23.c3 h6 24.d2 h7 there is no need to grant Black the space-
25.ce3 d5 26.e5 b6 27.c3 c8 28.b3 gaining ...b5. h6 11.h4 b6
e7 29.ec1 c7 30.h2! g5 31.g3 [ 11...h5!? might be an improvement here.
ec8 32.f4 f5 33.exf6 ( 33.f3 gxf4 Given time Black could even continue with ...
34.xf4 was not bad either.) 33...xf6 Nf8-g6 12.d5 f8? ( 12...b8!? ) 13.b6!
34.f3 g4 35.hxg4 xg4 36.e5 is one to watch out for though. ]
with a huge advantage for White due to the 12.d5 g5 13.xf6+ xf6 14.g3 xe4?
exposed position of Black's King. ] This looks wrong in principle. If you are going
9.b3! h6 10.e3 f6 11.g3! g4 12.e2 to keep your king in the centre and lose a lot
fe8 13.d5 b8 14.a4 a5 15.fd2! of time, the last thing you want to do is open
An important gain: the exchange of light- the centre.
squared bishop's clearly favours White. xe2 [ 14...g4 looks better, but Black will have to
16.xe2 b6 17.c1 d7 18.b4! deal with some sort of exchange sac
White has a clear edge. Black lacks ideas as 15.xe5 ( 15.xe5 xe5 16.xe5 xd1
to how to organize counterplay on the K-side 17.xf7+ e7 18.xd1 hc8 19.f3
while White has achieved a lot on the Q-side. and W hite is better, with two clear pawns
Now Black has an unpleasant choice: either to and some initiative for the exchange, but
play 18... axb4 19 cxb4 which opens the c-file nonetheless this looks preferable for Black
and gives White a dangerous passed a-pawn compared to the game.) 15...xd1 16.xd1
(after 20 a5) or to allow W hite to play bxa5 ( 16.xf7 e2! 17.xh8 xc4 18.e5 d7
(after Nb3) that creates a tangible weakness 19.exd6 xh8 20.dxc7 And White has a lot
on a5. e7 19.cb3 hf6 20.f3 h5 for the piece, but I imagine some players
21.bxa5 bxa5 22.c4 Now White wins the w o u l d p r e f e r B l a c k h e r e .) 16...f8
a5-pawn and can easily parry Black's looks playable. ]
desperate attack. f5 23.f2 hf6 24.bxa5 15.xe5 xe5 16.xe5 xf2 17.xf7
h5 25.c6 f7 26.d2 g5 27.c4 f4 28.a5 [ 17.xf7+ e7 18.hf1 xd1 19.g6+
g4 29.a6 h6 30.a7 h7 is even stronger, because White can take
[ 30...fxg3 doesn't help Black either: 31.xg3 the knight on d1 with check. ]
xd2 32.xd2 gxf3 33.g5+ intending Qf5, 17...xd1 18.xh8 g4 19.h3 h5 20.g4
with a decisive advantage. ] f2 21.f1 xg4 22.hxg4 xg4 23.f7
31.ab1 g8 32.f1 h4 33.b7 fxg3 e7 24.xh6 d7 25.f7+ d6 26.f5+
34.hxg3 f4!? 35.xc7 h5 36.fxg4 xg4 xf5 27.xf5 g4 28.g5
37.h2 hxg3 38.xg4 gxf2+ 39.xf2 1-0
g8+ 40.f1 The time trouble is over, so
Black resigned.
[ After 40.f1 h2 41.f3 Black has no
real threats. ]
1-0
875
852 B07 they plannin g 8 Bd3 c5 9 d5 (the move

Becker,Michael White mysteriously never seems to play!)
Van Liempt,Michael Nbd7 10 Nf3 c4 11 Bxc4 Qc5 and ...Qxf2+
Dutch youth tournament 03.01.2009 with some sort of plan to draw the
[James Vigus] endgame? Maybe I'll go into this another
time...'. ]
PLAN C. Finally we come to Black's most 4...g7 5.e3 0-0 6.d2 e8?!
radical reply to the 150 Attack: castling into it. [ I think Black should seize the opportunity to
After 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 W hite's critical b r e a k w i t h 6...e5! There is something
move is 6 0-0-0, preventing ...e5 and ...c5 appealingly romantic about the move 6...
and preparing an attack with f2-f3 and an Re8?!: it is as though Black were
advance of the kingside pawns. This announcing that he has placed the bishop
attacking setup for White, which deserves to on g7 in order to checkmate the white king
be known as the Argentinean Attack in o n t h e qu e e n sid e , a n d t h a t t h e b is h o p
recognition o f the games o f Arge ntinea n must therefore be protected at all costs
players such as Pilnik and Rossetto in the from being exchanged by Be3-h6. Perhaps
mid 20th century, is formidable. However, I not surprisingly I don't recommend that
have explored some exciting resources for you incorporate it in your repertoire. White
Black in the forthcoming book 'Dangerous must play extremely precisely to exploit
W eapons: The Pirc and Modern'. W ithout the move's slowness, however, so as an
giving too much away, it is astonishing how occasional weapon it has something to be
often Black's queenside attack overtakes the said for it. It was once chosen by a world
white onslaught on the kingside. Michael van champion, and it succeeds spectacularly in
Liempt kindly sent me the present game, the present game! ]
which reminded me of an approach for Black 7.c4
that I have not considered in the 'Dangerous [ White eyes up the f7-pawn, but this is
Weapons' book: van Liempt plays ...Re8 to White's first step in the wrong direction, as
preserve the bishop on g7. This loses a tempo the bishop runs into Black's natural pawn
and leaves Black a little cramped, but in the advances. Let's venture into some territory
notes I think I have shown that White's path to th a t e st a blishe d t he o ry p a sse s o ve r in
an advantage is narrow - albeit quite certain. contemptuous silence: 7.0-0-0!
I'd also like to mention that I have learned a A) 7...e5 8.d5! leaves Black's rook
lot about the Argentinean Attack from looking silly and prevents Black's key
discussions with Mark Nieuweboer (MNb on break with ...c6. The game J. Sanz-F-
the ChessPublishing forum). No doubt he will Prada Rubin, Lugo 1957, continued
find many improvements on the provisional thematically ( 8.dxe5 xe5 9.h4 a5!?
analysis below! 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 would be a sort of maverick justification
4.f3 of Black's play) 8...bd7 9.g4 f8
[ Another peculiar (or just old-fashioned) 10.h6 h8 11.h4 d7 12.ge2 b8
move-order: instead 4.e3 g7 5.d2 0-0 13.g3 b5 14.b1 a5 15.h5 b4
allo ws W hit e t o preve nt 6 ... e5 with th e 16.ce2 e7 17.f5! xf5 18.gxf5 b6
critical 6.0-0-0 , when c6 7.f3 e8?! 19.g3 c5 20.dxc6 xc6 21.b5 c5
would transpose to the note to White's 7th, 22.a4 d5 23.h2 g7 24.xg7 xg7
below, and the correct 7... b5 is analysed 25.fxg6 fxg6 26.f5+ gxf5 27.g1+
in depth in 'Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc h8 28.xc5 and White soon won.;
an d Mo de rn '. [n ot e f rom Jo hn W at so n : B) 7...c6
James pointed out to me that these games B1) 8.b1 b5 ( 8...a5 9.ge2 b5
don't include the order 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 c6 10.c1 b4 11.3e2 bd7 12.g4 c5
6 Bh6 Bxh6 7 Qxh6 Qa5, when he thinks 13.g5 h5 14.dxc5 dxc5? 15.g3
t h a t B l a c k h a s p r o b l e m s. H e sa ys ' ye t c7 16.xh5 gxh5 17.f4 was clearly
McNab and Nikolic still go into this, and are better for W hite in Pilnik, H-Sanz
876
Aguado, J/Madrid 1951/EXT 2003 (33)) direct: if White can manage to save two
9.ce2!? (a clever idea: ...Qa5 is tempi by omitting Kb1 and g4, this is
prevented, while the other knight will likely to speed up his attack considerably,
develop on the kingside) bd7 10.h6 e. g.
h8 11.h4 e5 12.h5 d5!? ( the solid B3a) 9...b5 10.h5
12...e7 is n o t so b a d f o r B l a c k) B3a1) 10...a5 is preferable in
13.hxg6 fxg6 14.h3 b6 15.g5 principle, keeping ...b4 as a 'threat' in
c4 16.e1 e7 and Black had reserve, but in this case the queen's
managed to achieve a dynamic balance lack of control of the fifth rank
in Gipslis, A-Smyslov, V/Baku 1961/URS- causes a problem, e.g. 11.hxg6 fxg6
ch (51); 12.e5!? ( 12.g5 e5 enables Black
B2) 8.g4 b5 9.h6 h8 10.h4 a5 to stabilise his position slightly, but;
B2a) 11.h5 b4 12.b1 a6 12.d3 e6 13.h3
( 12...xa2?! 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.xb4 or the immediate 12 Nh3 is f airly
was played in J.Wieweg-P.Sundstrom, u n p l e a s a n t f o r B l a c k) 12...b4!
S t o c k h o l m 1 9 9 3 , w h e n a5 13.e4 ( 13.b1! d5 14.d3
keeps Black in the game but just dxe5 15.g5 threatens kingside
15.a3 gives White a structural mayhem ) 13...xa2? ( 13...xe4
advantage ) 13.e2 ( 13.hxg6 hxg6? 14.fxe4 e6 15.a3 dxe5 16.xb4
14.xa6 xa6 was Masermann, H- xb4 17.axb4 a5!? is u n c l e a r)
Schneider, H/corr 1963, when 15.h2 14.xb4 d5 15.c4! a6 16.c3
threatens Bf8! - a nasty trap which is a4 17.b3 b5 18.exd6
basically the foundation of all Black's won for White in Sirotkin, V-Dubovik,
problems in the ...Re8, ...Bh8 line: it Y/corr 1967/MegaCorr4/[SB 6/68
means that Black must recapture with 157] (39);
the f-pawn, thus weakening the a2-g8 B3a2) 10...b4 11.ce2 ( or 11.b1
d i a g o n a l , a n d t h i s i s n e ve r r e a l l y e6 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.g5 bd7
s a t i s f a c t o r y) 13...c5 ( 13...bd7 14.e2 xa2 15.f4 f7 16.e5
is preferable, maintaining the Qa5's dxe5 17.dxe5 b6 18.e6! e3+
important influence on the fifth rank) 19.d2 xe6 , M. Askerov-G.
14.hxg6 ( 14.g5! ) 14...fxg6 C h u b e n k o , B a k u 2 0 0 0 , 20.h4
( this time Black might actually get t h r e a t e n s N xg 6 w h y h a v e n ' t w e
away with 14...hxg6!? ) 15.a3? c6 heard more of Askerov, who was
favoured Black in Berkes, F (2230)- only twelve years old when he
Bali, J (2365)/Budapest 1998: W hite p l a y e d t h i s g a m e ? !) 11...a5
should be willing to sacrifice his a2- 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.b1 bd7
pawn.; 14.c1! (this snug defence rules out
B2b) 11.b1 e6?! ( 11...b4 all possible counterplay against a2)
12.ce2 c5 13.g5!? is a common a6 15.xa6 xa6 16.g4 b5
theme in this line, and slightly better 17.h2 e5?! 18.ge2 h7 19.e3
for White, though the position remains df8 20.d5 c5 21.g3 g7
v e r y c o m p l e x) 12.d5?! ( 12.g5! 22.dg1 e7 23.g5 d7 24.e2
again looks good, though Black has c8 25.h4 c4 26.gh1 a5
some curious resources, e.g. fd7!? 27.h2 a4 28.xh7 xh7
13.d5 f6 14.d2 f7 15.h5 g5!? ) 29.xh7+ f8 30.f5 gxf5 31.exf5
12...cxd5 13.xd5 xd2 14.xd2 f6 32.gxf6 xf6 33.g6 f7
xd5 15.exd5 a6 16.e2 bd7 34.g5 d8 35.xf6 xf6 36.xf6
17.f4 b6 18.h5 ab8 19.h3 xf6 37.h8+ e7 38.xa8 b3
1/2-1/2 Belakovskaia, A (2385)-Everet, 39.xa4 1-0 was a game between
A (2290)/Bratto 199800; two very strong Russian players, S.
B3) 8.h6! h8 9.h4! is the most Solovyov-A.Potapov, Smolensk 2005.
877
Unfortunately this is all very with an isolated pawn there. a4 14.c4

depressing for Black.; [ 14.a2 b3! 15.cxb3 e6 is also hard for
B3b) 9...a5!? is an attempt to White to negotiate. ]
improve, (i) exploiting the queen's 14...d5! 15.d3
influence on the 4th rank to discourage [ 15.exd5 cxd5 16.b5 d7 maintains the
h4-h5 and (ii) keeping open the initiative - Black would be very happy to give
possibility of ... Be6 to attack a2 before up the pawn on b4 to open the way to b2. ]
the Nc3 trundles round to c1. W hite 15...exd4 16.xd4 c5 17.xf6 xf6
mu st n ow re act p re cise ly, b ut ca n 18.b5
certainly get a clear edge with 10 g4, [ Or 18.exd5 d7 intending ...Rb8, targeting
which is why this whole ...Re8 is not b2. ]
adequate: 18...b6! A very elegant sacrifice. van Liempt
B3b1) 10.h5?! xh5 11.ge2 d7 must have been glad that he'd safeguarded
12.g4 g7 must give White some his bishop with 6...Re8... 19.xe8
sort of compensation, but how [ Fritz finds the defence 19.c4! d7 20.f4!
exac tly does he pro ceed wit hou t . Even so, dxe4 21.d5 d8 22.xf6+
being able to play hxg6?; xf6 leaves Black a pawn up. ]
B3b2) 10.ge2?! b5 11.g3 19...bxa3 20.xd5 e6! 21.xa8 a2
( 11.g5 is better ) 11...b4 12.b1 22.ec3
B3b21) Black can counterattack [ 22.d2 was White's last chance to prolong
a g a i n s t b 2 w i t h 12...c5! 13.e5 the game, though a1 23.e1 axb2
( 13.dxc5 c6 14.cxd6 xa2 ) 24.xa4 c4! should catch the king in the
13...fd7 14.e6 xa2 15.exd7 crossfire. ]
xd7 16.h5 c6; 22...a1 23.d2 axb2 24.b5 d6+
B3b22) 12...e5 13.h5 25.d5 xb5
(W hite should take on e5 and 0-1
develop his bishop to c4, with an
edge) exd4 14.hxg6 fxg6
15.c4+?! e6 16.d3 bd7 853 B07
17.xe6+ xe6 was good for Beliavsky,Alexander G 2710
Black in Rossetto, H-Rodriguez, R/ Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2645
Buenos Aires 1959/MCD (44); Portoroz 1997
B3b3) 10.g4 b5 transposes after 11 [Alexander Volzhin]
h5 or after 11 Kb1 to the note on 7
0-0-0 c6 8 g4 above.; 1.f3 g6 2.e4 d6 3.d4 f6 4.d3 g7
B3b4) 10.b1! b5 11.g4! 5.0-0 0-0 6.e1 c6 7.c3 e5 8.h3 h5
, and W hite has transpose to the 9.e3 d5?! An interesting attempt from Black
edge offered by Belakovskaia- to solve all his problems immediately but
Everet' above. ] unfortunately it meets with a very nice
7...c6 8.ge2 e5 9.0-0-0 r e f u t a t i o n . 10.g5! This very strong move
[ It wasn't too late for White to change was an unpleasant surprise for Azmai who
strategy, for instance with 9.d5! intending had already played this position and
b5 10.b3 b4 11.a4 with a slight edge to equalized easily after Now very interesting
White. ] complications arise.
9...c7 10.h4 b5 11.b3 a5 12.a3? [ 10.dxe5 xe5 11.xe5 xe5 12.exd5
[ Now the pawns keep rolling. A better xd5 13.e2 f4! 14.f3 xd1 15.xd1
defensive setup was 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.a4 ,Magem Badals - Azmaiparashvili,
b4 14.b1 c5 15.c4 c6 Pamplona 1996. ]
with a balanced game. ] 10...f6 11.exd5 fxg5
12...b4 13.b1 White prefers to protect the [ 11...xd5 12.a3 h8 13.e3
a3-pawn with the knight rather than be left is clearly better for White. ]
878
12.dxc6 exd4 13.b3+ h8 14.cxb7 xb7 [ The correct 52...h4! led to an easy draw:
15.xb7 dxc3 16.xc3 xd3 17.ad1 53.c4 axb3 54.axb3 d6 55.b4 d5
f5 18.xc7 All these move s were forced. 56.c5+ d6 57.f5 e6 and White can't
White has won a pawn but it may seem that make any progress. ]
open f-file gives Black sufficient compensation. 53.xb3 h4 54.f3 e6 55.a4 f5 56.a5
However concrete variations prove that it's just g4?! An inaccuracy again.
a mirage. g4 [ 56...h6 is better, when after 57.a3 a6
[ The tempting 18...f4 doesn't help either in 58.a4 g4 it's a clear draw. ]
view of 19.e7! xh3+ 20.h2! 57.f2 h6 58.f5 f6 59.f1 h4 60.f3
and Black is in trouble: g4 ( The endgame g4 61.g3+ f4 62.g1 e3 63.e1+
after 20...f4+ 21.xf4 xf4 22.xg5 d2? Only this move is the decisive mistake.
is very bad for Black.) 21.xg7 h5 T h e f o l l o wi n g v a r i a t i o n s w e r e g i v e n b y
22.dd7! g5+ 23.g1 gxf3 24.ge7! 25 Beliavsky:
and Black has no defence against Qe5 ] [ 63...f4? 64.a1 a6 65.f6+- ]
19.hxg4 xg4 20.d7! Still all Beliavsky's [ 63...f2? 64.a1 xf5 65.a6 f8 66.a7
homework! Only this move justifies W hite's a8 67.a3! e2 68.xh3 d2 69.g4
combination begun on the 10th move, c2 70.f5 b2 71.a6 b3 72.e6
otherwise Black would play 20...Nf4 with a b4 73.d6! b5 74.a1 b6 75.b1+
c r u s h i n g a t t a c k . xd7 21.xd7 ab8 a6 76.c7 xa7+ 77.c6+- ]
22.a4 a5 23.g5! b5 [ 63...d3! The only move! 64.f1 e2
[ 23...xb2 24.xb2 xb2 25.xh7 fb8 65.f4 e3 66.a4 xf5 67.a6 f8 68.a7
26.g4! g7 27.f6! is hopeless for Black. ] a8 69.xh3 d3 70.g4 c3 71.f5
24.e6 e8 25.b3 e5 26.ac5? b3 72.a1 b4 73.e6 c5!! 74.d7
A clear inaccuracy. b6 75.b1+ c5 76.b7 h8!= ]
[ The natural 26.c7 won a second pawn: 64.e5 d3 65.a6 xa6 66.xh3
f6 27.xh7+ xh7 28.xb5 h2+ Now Black is helpless. d4 67.e6 a8
29.f1 and Black could easily resign. ] 68.g4 g8+ 69.f4 d5 70.a6
26...f6 27.dd1 c3 28.e3 b4 29.f3 [ 70.e1 cutting Black's King off on the e-file
xc5 30.xc5 xc5 31.xf6 g7 32.f3 is another winning method. ]
e7 33.d2 h5 34.fd3 h6 35.d4 e6 70...g1 71.f6 f1+ 72.g5 e5 73.g6
36.f3 g5 37.d6 g6 38.f2? After this g1+ 74.f7 b1 75.g7 g1+ 76.f8
inaccuracy the win becomes problematic. f5 77.f7 e1 78.g7 g1+ 79.h7
[ 38.h2! was correct, and if Black plays, as A very instructive Rook ending.
h e d i d i n t h e g a m e , h4 , White's King 1-0
penetrates to the g4-square: 39.h3 h5
40.xg6 xg6 41.g4 a4 42.d6+ g7
43.bxa4 and White wins. ] 854 B07
38...h4 39.6d5 gc6 40.xc5 xc5 Beliavsky,Alexander G 2615
41.e3 h5 42.d4 f5 43.c2 g4 Bezold,Michael 2485
44.e4 g5 45.c8 gxf3! Probably White Portoroz 1996
missed this blow. After this exchange the [Alexander Volzhin]
passed h-pawn secures Black good drawing
chances. 46.gxf3 This game shows how precise Black's play
[ White can't win the rook with 46.g8+ f6 should be in the opening. Any mistake even in
47.f8+ g6 48.xf5 i n v i e w o f fxg2 a side line can quickly lead to disaster. 1.d4
49.f8 g7 and the pawn queens. ] d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 a5 5.e5 e4
46...b5 47.f4+ f6 48.c6+ e7 49.f3 6.f3 xc3 7.d2 d5?! This continuation
a4 50.c3 h3 51.g3 h5 52.h2 axb3?! is known to be dubious.
Now it's Black's turn to be falter. Although this [ 7...f5 is the main line. ]
move doesn't throw away draw, Black must 8.xc3 f5?! Again not the best move.
play very attentively now. [ 8...e4+?! is also not good as the Queen
879
is clearly misplaced here: 9.f2 dxe5 [ 5...b5?! 6.e5! dxe5 ( or 6...fd7 7.exd6
10.fxe5 e6 11.f3 and White has a huge exd6 8.d5 b4 9.dxc6 bxc3 10.cxd7+
development advantage, Afek-Deketelare, xd7 11.b3 with a clear edge in Sokolov-
Vlissingen 2000. ] Zakharevich, Elista 1995) 7.dxe5 xd1+
[ 8...dxe5 does not solve the problems: 8.xd1 fd7 9.f4 g7 10.f3 f6 11.e6
9.dxe5 f5 10.f3 e6 11.c4 e4+ f8 12.xb5! xe6 13.xa7 b7 14.c4
12.d1 with initiative ] c7 15.f2 d5 16.xc6 xc6 17.xd5
[ 8...c5!? deserves attention, according to xd5 18.xd5 xa2 19.b5 winning in
Alexander Beliavsky. ] Jansa-Schlosser, Muenster 1992 ]
9.f3 dxe5 [ 5...g7?! 6.f4! 0-0 7.f3 bd7 8.e5
[ 9...e4+ is in White's favour: 10.d1 g4 h5 9.e2 h8 10.g4 g7 11.g2 dxe5
11.d3 xf3+ 12.c1 d5 13.gxf3 xf3 12.fxe5 b6 13.h6 with a clear edge for
14.f1 h5 15.b3 b6 16.d5 White in Jansa-Hoi, Gausdal 1991. ]
and Black is in trouble. ] 6.f4 b5 7.f3
10.c4! A very strong and well calculated [ 7.e5?! is premature in view of the typical
move. White launches a very strong attack. b4! 8.exf6 bxc3 9.bxc3 xf6 ]
d8 [ b u t t h e n a t u r a l 7.d3 is worthy of
[ 10...e4+ 11.d1 g4 was bad due to consideration. ]
12.b3 e6 13.xb7 xf3+ 14.c1 xd4 7...b4 8.b1 b7 9.d2 c7 10.d3 g7
( 14...xg2 15.c8+ e7 16.b4+ f6 11.e2 c5 Black can be satisfied with the
17.d8+ f5 18.g5# ) 15.gxf3 xc4 result of the opening all his pieces are well
16.c8+ e7 17.fxe5 ( 17.d1 ) 17...f6 placed and ready to attack the W hite pawn
18.b7+ d7 19.xa8 and White is centre. 12.c3
winning. ] [ 12.0-0?! leads to a Sicilian-like position
11.b3 e6 12.xb7 e7? Black had which is very good for Black: cxd4 13.xd4
obviously hoped to trap W hite's Queen but 0-0 ]
actually it cannot be done. 12...bxc3 13.bxc3 0-0 14.0-0 e6 15.g4
[ 12...d7 was relatively better, althoughb6 16.ac1 fd7 17.f2
Black's position is no good anyway: 13.xe5 [ 17.f5!? is worthy of consideration. ]
xe5 14.dxe5 e4 15.0-0-0! b817...ae8 18.g3 f5! A very instructive
16.xa7 a8 17.e3 d5 18.b3 xb3 multipurpose move. Black prevents W hite
19.xb3+- ] from launching a Kingside attack with f4-f5,
13.xa8 b6 14.0-0-0 0-0 15.xe5! d6 gets control of the important d5-square and
16.he1! xe5 Here Black resigned. opens the a8-h1 diagonal. 19.gxf5 exf5
[ After 16...xe5 17.dxe5 d7 White has 20.exf5
18.e3! securing a huge material [ 20.e5 doesn't help much: dxe5 21.dxe5
advantage. ] xe5! 22.fxe5 f4 23.xf4 g5 24.f5
1-0 gxf4 ]
20...d5 21.c4
[ 21.fe1 xe3 22.xe3 xe3 23.xe3
855 B07 cxd4 24.e6+ h8 is also insufficient. ]
Berezjuk,Sergej 2354 21...7b6 22.dxc5? Losing by force.
Stohl,Igor 2600 [ However, it's not easy to find a real
Presov 1999 improvement for W hite, for example:
[Alexander Volzhin] 22.fe1 xc4 23.xc4 a6 24.d2 xe3
25.xe3 cxd4 and Black is winning. ]
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 22...xc4 23.xc4 a6 Now Black wins a
5.h3 This line is rather dangerous for Black piece and the game is over. 24.cxd6 xc4
and he has to play carefully to avoid problems. 25.xa7 xc3 26.h2 d5 27.fe1 xe1
bd7! In my opinion, the best. In other lines 28.xe1 b5 29.c5 d4 30.xd4 xd4
Black has serious problems: The rest of the game is a matter of technique.
880
31.e4 xf5 32.d2 xd2+ 33.xd2 11...g6 12.f3 Double-edged play by White.
xd6 34.e6 d8 35.b3 c4 36.e5 The knight on h4 is not at all sure of himself,
f5 37.c5 xb3 38.axb3 d2+ 39.g1 but on the other hand Black is tied to the
d3 40.b4 xh3 defence of h6. b5 13.b3 b7 14.d5 d8
0-1 15.g3 c6 16.xf6+ xf6 17.d2 e7
18.xd8+ xd8 19.d1 e7 20.b6 c8
21.c7 d7 22.g2 h7 23.e3 h5 24.h4
856 B07 f6 25.e6 c5 26.d2 f8 27.xc8 xc7
Buckley,David 2232 28.h3 e7 29.e2 a7 30.c3 a5
Shaw,John K 2447 So far, so equal, but you can already feel that
4NCL/Div1/GUI1-BRI1 (5.116) 13.01.2007 at least psychologically Black is gaining the
[Jonathan Rowson] u p p e r h a n d . 31.a4?! As often happens in
such positions, the f irst player to initiate
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 e5 Does this line events spoils his position. Even if W hite is
really matter? I think so, simply because if fine after this, it is encouraging for the
White doesn't get any advantage from taking stronger player to see that the opponent is
now, Black has a move order to give him a restless. bxa4 32.a1 a3 33.bxa3 xe3
Hanham Philidor, which is at least very solid, 34.xe3 b7 Just an open file, but enough to
and possibly perfectly good. Moreover, most claim a small advantage, and note that this is
W hite players face this line so rarely that 30 moves after the queens were exchanged!
when they do, they are inclined to take on e5 35.a2 b1 36.d3 g1 37.g2 e6
on the grounds that they shouldn't be in any Now Black also has the more effective minor
danger and might conjure up an attack. It is piece. 38.b2 c5+ 39.c4 a4 40.b7+
precisely such players who should be careful, d6 41.h3 f5 When you are grinding out
because W hite's initiative often runs out of an endgame win, it is important to spot the
steam, and you are lef t playing an equal ma t e s in on e - yo u d on 't wa n t to le t yo u r
position against somebody very happy to have opponent off so easily.
the queens off. 4.dxe5 dxe5 5.xd8+ xd8 [ 41...xg3 42.d7# ]
6.c4 e8! As recommended in previous 42.g7 b6+ 43.b3 xg3 44.xf5 xf3
updates. It seems strange that Black can lose 45.xg6+ c5 46.a4 f2 47.e6 f4
so many tempi and the right to castle and still 48.h6 xh4 49.f7 c8 50.e6 xe4
be ok, but this might in fact be the case, and 51.xh5 d6 52.e7 e3 53.a7 b6
nobody has conclusively proven to the 54.e7 e4 55.e8 xc3 56.e6 b5+
contrary. 7.f3 Already questionable. 57.b2 d4 An impressive display by John
[ 7.f4 b4 looks comfortable for Black, but ] Shaw, showing why this seemingly submissive
[ 7.ge2 intending f3 and g4 should be li n e i s a ct u a l ly q u i t e a go o d wi n n i n g t r y
considered. ] against weaker players.
7...d6 8.g5 0-1
[ 8.e3 might be better here, because it can
be useful to have Ng5 later, perhaps
followed by f4. ] 857 B07
8...bd7 9.0-0-0 a6 10.h4 h6 11.e3 Byrne,Robert E
Given that John was no doubt playing for a Gipslis,Aivars
win, I wonder how we would have dealt with izt Sousse 1967
[ 11.xf6 xf6 12.f5 because now it is [Alexander Volzhin]
n o t e a s y t o k e e p t h e g a m e a l i v e f8!?
( 12...xf5 13.exf5 e7 is comfortable, but Now let's consider the Trompovski style Bg5
v e r y d r a w i s h a f t e r 14.d5+ xd5 sortie. This system is very popular now and is
15.xd5 ) 13.d5 xd5 14.xd5 f6 used by ma n y to p gran d ma st e rs: Dree v,
15.d2 and sooner or later Black will have to Almasi, Yakovich, Ulibin, Tiviakov etc. 1.e4
take the knight on f5. ] d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 c6 5.d2
881
b5 6.d3 g7 7.f4 White obtains a strong 858 B07

pawn centre, and his dark-squared Bishop is Caruana,Fabiano 2444
situated much more actively than in the 4.f4 Peralta,Fernando 2546
attack. 0-0 8.f3 bd7 This move is out of XXXII Open Badalona ESP (8) 09.07.2006
fashion, but it's far from bad. 9.0-0 b6 [Andrew Martin]
10.ae1 b4 11.d1 c5 12.c3 bxc3
13.bxc3 cxd4 14.cxd4 b7 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 f6 4.g5 g7
A clear inaccuracy. Black doesn't feel the 5.d2 h6! Virtually Black's only good move in
danger. this position, for the attack with Bh6 is just too
[ Later the game Byrne - Portisch was played, strong. It was Robert Byrne who played the
where Black improved with 14...d5! 15.e5 important games with 4 Bg5 all the way back
( 15.xf6 exf6 ) 15...e4! 16.xe4 dxe4 in the sixties and seventies now we see the
17.xe4 and proved he had enough for the system put to the test. 6.f4 g5 7.g3 h5
pawn: a6 18.f2 c4 19.b4 f6 20.h4 Hunting down the Bishop an absolute
b8 21.c5 b6 22.c3 c8 23.a5 necessity before h2-h4 strikes him down.
b7 24.e1 a8 25.g3 d5 26.xd8 8.0-0-0 d7
fxd8 27.xd5 xd5 28.exf6 and a draw [ 8...e6 9.ge2 d7 10.f3! worked well for
was agreed, as Black has sufficient White in the following game: xg3 11.hxg3
compensation for the pawn due to his strong b6 12.g4! Fixing the square h5. d7
light-squared Bishop. ] 13.g3 g8 14.e3 e7 15.b5 xb5
15.f5! White begins a direct attack. d5 16.xb5+ c6 17.e2 0-0-0 18.b1 b8
[ 15...gxf5 is very risky, as White obtains a 19.c3 c8 20.h5 h8 21.g3 g7
strong attack after 16.h4! ( The seemingly 22.h5 h8 23.g3= Tiviakov, S-Nyback,
strong 16.h6 fxe4 17.g5 e8 18.xg7 T Warsaw 2005 ]
xg7 19.h6 f5! is far from clear.) 9.e5 Pretty sharp. There are plenty of other
16...fxe4 17.f5! ] moves:
16.xf6! exf6 [ 9.ge2 e6 10.f4 leads to some of the
[ 16...xf6 17.e5 g7 is even worse for original games. ]
Black, after for example 18.e6!? ] [ 9.e2 xg3 10.hxg3 c5 11.d5
17.e5 c4 18.f4 c8 19.e6! e7 20.g4 Cannot be too dangerous for Black. I believe
g5 Forced, as there is no other defence in that dark-squared Bishop! a5 12.f4
against 21.ef with 22.fg to follow. 21.h4 h6 xc3 13.xc3 xc3 14.bxc3 f6 15.e1
22.h5 fxe6 23.fxe6 d6 24.e3 e8 f8 16.d3 g7 17.f3 g4 18.h4 d7
25.g6 xe6 26.f5 e4 27.xh6+ 19.c4 e5! 20.dxe6 xe6 21.e5 dxe5
[ 27.hxg5 w a s e v e n s t r o n g e r : fxg5 22.fxe5 d7 23.f5+ f8 24.hf1 b6
28.xh6+ xh6 29.xh6 d7 30.e5 Mestel, A-Miles, A/Hastings 1974 ]
g7 31.f7+! xf7 32.xf7 winning at [ 9.f4? has to be prefaced by Nge2: xf4
once. ] 10.xf4 gxf4 11.xf4 xd4 12.c4 f6
27...xh6 28.xh6 d7 29.hxg5 g7 13.b1 e5 14.e2 c6 15.f3 xf3
[ 29...fxg5 transposes to the line with 27.hg ] 16.xf3 e6 17.hf1 a5 18.xd6 exd6
30.f5! xh6 Now White has a technically 19.xf6 e5 20.h4 g8 21.g4 g6
won endgame due to his strong passed pawn, 22.f2 b6 23.a6 b8 Baekelant, R-
but Verduyn, F/Belgium 2005 ]
[ 30...ce8 31.h3 is even worse for 9...xg3 10.hxg3 dxe5 11.dxe5 xe5
Black. ] 12.f4 That's the idea! White sacrifices a pawn
31.gxh6 c7 32.c1 c3 33.h2 f7 to smash open the position. W hich is the
[ 33...c8 34.g6 ] weakest square in Black's position? Noticeably
34.h4 h8 35.h7 c4 36.fe1 c8 f7. Thus White should obtain good chances
37.g6+ g7 38.g3 h6 39.d3 c7 here. gxf4 13.gxf4 g7 14.f3 e6
40.c2 b5 41.f2 [ 14...c6 15.e5 c7 16.c4 xe5
1-0 17.fxe5 e6? ( 17...xe5 was both brave
882
and necessary.) 18.xe6 fxe6 19.de1 7...bd7?!

d8 20.e3 Bruzon Bautista, L-Cavatorta, [ 7...e6! was surely better because now
F/Saint Vincent 2004 Naturally, White went Cebalo gets to develop his Bishop to c4 in
on to win. ] peace. ]
15.f5 f6 16.g4 Why does he need to bother 8.c4!
with this? Black's King is ripe for the taking if [ 8.f3 also seems good. White gets to put
he just opens the position. serious pressure on Black's position due to
[ Thus 16.fxe6! was indicated, with a very the lag in his development. e8 9.b5 a6
dangerous attack: fxe6 17.b5! c6 18.e2 10.xd6+ cxd6 11.d2! b5 12.a4 b7
0-0 19.g3 b6 20.h5 g6 21.g4 d5 13.f3 c6 14.b3 e7 15.a5 b8
22.e5 ] 16.e3 bxa4 17.c4 bd7 18.xd6
16...b6 17.g5 hxg5 18.xh8+ xh8 hb8 19.c4 e8 20.xf7 h6 21.d2
19.xg5 d7 20.fxe6 fxe6 21.ge4 e5 b4 22.xd7+ xd7 23.xe5+ d6
22.g2 Too little, too late. Black gets to castle 24.f4 c5 25.a2 xe4 26.fxe4 xe4
long.... 0-0-0 23.f2 b8 24.c5 g5+ 27.g3 f6 28.d1 e2 29.f2+ b4
25.b1 c8 Two Bishops and an extra 30.c6+ 1-0 Nevostrujev,V-Zablotsky,S/
p a wn is a p r e t t y s u b s t a n t ia l a d va n t a ge .
Stade 2003 ]
26.xd8 xd8 27.d3 xc3
8...e8 9.f3 a6 At least he cut out the idea of
The advantage increases. 28.bxc3 g5
Nb5. 10.ge2 b5 11.b3 h6 12.h4 b4?
29.e4 a4 30.d4 a5 31.b4 c5 W ith a modest position one must play
B i g g e r a n d b i g g e r . 32.d6+ c7
modestly. 12...b4 is a pawn move too far.
9 e5 is dangerous. I'm not sure I see a clear Maybe
way for Black. [ 12...c5 was a better shot but White still
0-1 seems to be better after say 13.xf6 xb3+
14.axb3 gxf6 15.g3 e6 16.d5! ]
13.a4 b7 14.d2 c6 15.hd1
859 B07 White's edge grows. The problem is that Black
Cebalo,Miso 2527 can do nothing and must wait for the action to
Marzano,Carlo 2244 t a k e p l a c e . C e b a l o d e m o n s t r a t e s g o o d
Open A Bratto ITA (2) 21.08.2004 technique in his subsequent build-up, never
[Andrew Martin] giving Black a snif f . b8 16.f2 b5
17.g3! g6 18.f1 a5 19.b6! b5
1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 e5 Purely a 20.xd7 xd7 21.e3 e6 A bit too late.
question of taste. Some might shy away from 22.xe6 fxe6 23.c4+- b5 24.xd6+
t h e q u e e n l e s s m i d d l e g a m e . 4.dxe5 cxd6 25.xd6 e7 26.xa6 The endgames
W hy let him off by agreeing to a Philidor? are defensible but I recommend Black play ...
That's not such a bad opening at all. dxe5 Be6 early wherever possible, if only to get
5.xd8+ xd8 6.g5 d6 7.0-0-0 some pieces out! The fate that will befall him
[ 7.c4 e6 8.xe6 fxe6 9.0-0-0 e7 if he does not is graphically demonstrated
10.ge2 h6 11.h4 c6 12.g3 g5 here. Cebalo was allowed to dish out a lesson.
is roughly the type of endgame that Black is 1-0
aiming for. W hilst the doubled pawns are
potentially weak, they cover all the
important central squares and the Bishop on 860 B07
d6 is a sturdy defender too. Time and again Cerveny,P 2292
I have seen White lose patience in such a Umanec,F 2244
position and go on to lose. 13.f3 a6 14.h4 13th Marienbad IM (6.1) 22.01.2014
b5 15.f2 g4 16.e3 gxf3 17.gxf3 h5 [Neil McDonald]
18.hg1 af8 19.df1 f4 20.a3 hg8
21.d1 a5 Hasan,M-Islam,A/Dhaka 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7 4.f4 e5
BAN 2004 ] 5.f3 exd4 6.xd4 c6 7.e3 d5 8.exd5
883
c5 9.d3 e7 10.d4 b6 11.dxc6 [ Also crushing is 20...c4 21.b3 xf3
bxc6 12.e2 0-0!? This position is analysed 22.xf3 xd1+ 23.xd1 e4 ]
in Neiksans-Vachier Lagrave in the archives 21.f2 cxd4 22.xb7 xb7 23.xd4 e4
by Gawain where he gives analysis to show 24.he1 c6 25.d3 c4 26.e7 e8
that 27.h4 b7
[ 12...a6 doesn't work for Black. ] 0-1
13.g1 c7! Black wants to pin the knight on
d4 with Rd8, but
[ 13...d8 14.xc6 is a disaster, so first of 861 B07
all he defends c6. The black queen also Collins,Sam 2426
attacks the f4 pawn. ] Gormally,Daniel 2520
[ G a w a i n e x a m i n e s 13...b4 14.xc6 BCF-chT 1112 (4NCL) (2.16) 13.11.2011
xc3+ 15.bxc3 c7 and concludes Black [Sam Collins]
has good compensation, but putting the
queen on c7 straightaway looks a better way 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.d3 g6
of playing it for Black. ] If Black wants to avoid the line in the game,
14.g3?! The drawback to defending f4 with the simplest in my view is 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 and
this move is that White becomes vulnerable then 5...g6. 5.dxc5
down the long diagonal a8-h1 once Black [ It is notable that, in his game with Weber,
p la ys B b 7 . I n s t e a d I t h in k W h it e sh o u l d R o z e n t a l i s a c t u a l l y s t a r t e d w i t h 5.e5
develop with , reaching the lines under consideration after
[ 14.0-0-0 for example I would prefer pinning 5...dxe5 6.dxe5. Praxis is limited with this 5.
d4 with e5 move. An interesting recent example
A) After 14...bd5 15.g3!? looks good for continued h5 6.f3 cxd4 7.cxd4 dxe5
White. ( whereas Black got counterplay 8.dxe5 c6 9.0-0 g7!? . Not spending
after 15.xd5 cxd5 in Z.Erdelyi-E. time on ... Ng7-e6, Black creates immediate
Mensch, Budapest 2001. ); play against the e5-pawn. 10.h3 0-0 11.g4
B) 14...d8!? 15.b1 b8 ( Not ( 11.e1 b4 12.e4 xd1 13.xd1 f5!
15...xd4? you should only play a move gives Black adequate counterplay) 11...b4
like this if it wins something. Here after 12.e2 xd1 13.xd1 c2
16.xd4 c5 White escapes with 17.e5 A) 14.gxh5 launches into complications
so Black has given up his dark squared which seem to fizzle out to equality, for
bishop for nothing.; 15...g6? 16.db5 ) instance xa1 15.h6 h8 16.g5 c2
16.f3 d7 and Black keeps up his 17.xe7 e8 18.d6 xh3 19.c1 f5
initiative with 17...Nfd5 or possibly even 20.d1 xe5 21.xe5 ( 21.xe5 b4 )
17...g6 intending Bf5. ] 21...ad8 22.xc2 xc2 23.xc2 xd6;
14...d8 15.0-0-0 b7 Now White has to B) 14.a3 xa1 15.d2 f6
worry about Bxd4 followed by c6-c5. 16.f5 ( 15...d8! ) 16.exf6 xf6 17.c3 xc3
b4! The bishop moves to safety, opens the 18.bxc3 e6 19.xa1 ac8
wa y f o r c 6 - c 5 a n d i n t e n d s t o s m a s h u p with a playable endgame for Black in V.
W hite's queenside by taking on c3. 17.f3 I a k ym o v ( 2 4 8 3 ) - V . S k l i a r o v ( 2 2 0 6 ) ,
xc3 18.bxc3 e7! Threatening not only Alushta 2011 (1/2-1/2 in 69). ]
19...Qa3+ in combination with Nc4, which 5...dxc5
would be lethal to the white king, but also the [ If Black goes in for this line I think 5...d5
tactic that occurs in the game. W hite can't is a much more promising continuation. This
deal with both. 19.a5 c5 20.a3 was used a couple of times by Kjetil Lie -
[ The double attack on d4 and h1 is decisive though he lost both games I think he had no
after 20.xb7 xb7 while ] c o m p l a i n t s f r o m t h e o p e n i n g . 6.d2
[ 20.f5 xd1+ 21.xd1 e1 hardly helps ( 6.exd5 xd5 7.f3 xc5 left Black with
White ] a playable position, akin to those arising
20...c7 from the 2...g6 variation, in S. Agdestein
884
(2571) - K.Lie (2472), Sandnes 2005 (1-0 in h8 ( 20...g5 21.xf7 wins ) 21.xb7 c7
40). ) 6...g7 7.gf3 0-0 8.0-0 bd7 22.xc5 xc5 23.xc5+ g8 24.d6
9.exd5 xc5 10.c4 a6 11.b3 a4 Black resigned in M. Pap (2507) - C.
12.d6 exd6 13.bd4 b5 14.b3 c5 Sandipan (2656), Paleochora 2011. ]
15.c2 b7 and Black's activity full 8...c6
compensated for his slightly inferior [ 8...g7 has been tried in a couple of
structure in J.Shaw (2433) - K.Lie (2474), games, but White has not responded with
Mallorca 2004 (1-0 in 51). ] the logical 9.c4 b6 ( 9...a5+ 10.d2
6.e5 d5 b4 11.c3 is good for White) 10.e2
[ 6...h5 is the most common move here, with a solid advantage. ]
but White has no problems consolidating his 9.c4 de7 10.xd8+ xd8 11.c3 d7
e5-pawn. 7.h3 c6 8.f3 c7 9.e2 Black is really on the ropes here. 12.b5??
g7 10.a3 e6 11.0-0 g7 12.e1 0-0 A t e r r i b l e m o ve , s q u a n d e r i n g m y wh o l e
13.b5 b8 14.a4 with a solid advantage advantage.
for White in E. Rozentalis (2575) - U.Weber [ The path had already been shown by a c3-
(2406), Bad Wiessee 2011 (1-0 in 60). ] Sicilian specialist 17 years ago: 12.g5 a6
[ 6...fd7 7.e6 is D.Pavasovic (2581) - A. 13.0-0-0 g7 14.d2 h6 15.e3 dc6
Fauland (2427), Austrian TCh 2003 (1-0 in 16.hd1 d8 17.a4 c8 18.xd8+ xd8
32). Af ter fxe6 8.f3 c6 9.e2 g7 19.b6 dc6 20.xc5 xe5 21.xe5
10.h4! Black had a rotten position. Readers xe5 22.xc8 xc8 23.xb7
can check Gary Lane's coverage of this 1-0 D.Sermek (2520) - S.Mali (2290), Bled
game in the Archives. ] 1994. ]
[ As pointed out by Gary Lane in his notes, 12...xb5 13.cxb5 a6! 14.bxa6 xa6
6...c4 drops a pawn for very little 15.d3 a8 16.g5 g7 17.e4
compensation after 7.a4+ ] [ 17.f4 0-0 18.e4 b6 doesn't look better
[ 6...g4 7.b5+ c6 ( 7...d7 8.e6! for White. ]
wins on the spot.) 8.xd8+ xd8 9.xc6 17...xe5 18.xc5 d4 19.b5+ f8
bxc6 10.f3 f6 11.exf6 exf6 12.h3 e5 20.b3 f6 21.c5 d4 Given his opening
13.xe5 fxe5 14.e3 c7 15.d2 e6 position, Danny is happy to repeat moves,
16.0-0-0 c4 17.he1 d5 18.f3 though it was quite possible to play on here.
and a draw was agreed in M.Ragger (2434) - 22.b3 f6 Move orders are highly important
N.Stanec, N (2566), Gmunden 2005, but in this variation. After 5.dxc5, recapturing
clearly the black pawn weaknesses are gives Black a prospectless position but 5...
worth prodding. The two bishops don't count d5!? is interesting. Rozentalis' recent outing
f or muc h in such a structu re, since th e o f 5 . e 5 is a n a t t e m p t t o a vo id t h i s . . . d 5
white knight can blockade on e4 if defence, but 5...Nh5!? is a decent line. Of
necessary. ] course, neither side needs to go in for this:
7.e4 e6 W hite can keep his pawn on d4, while the
[ 7...c7 8.xd8+ xd8 9.f3 d7 simplest for Black is to chop on d4 before
was A.Jerez Perez (2416) - P.Kogan (2221), playing ...g6.
Arinsal 2011 (1/2-1/2 in 33), and now best ½-½
would have been 10.a3 followed by Be3
and playing a rook to the d-file. ]
8.f3 862 B07
[ 8.c4 leads to similar play. The attempt to Conquest,Stuart 2545
complicate with h4 backfires: 9.e2 b4 Lahno,Kateryna 2485
10.f3 d8 11.c3 8c6 12.g5 a5 Premier Hastings (7) 2004
13.f6 g8 14.0-0 and White has a total [Andrew Martin]
b i n d . A f t e r d7 15.a3 a6 16.b5
( 16.fd1 is also strong) 16...e7 17.fd1 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 c6
xf6 18.exf6 h6 19.d6+ f8 20.e3 I never favoured this move against the Byrne
885
Variation because it felt too much like sitting 20.b3 f5 21.0-0 fe8 22.ae1
on a knife edge. We must admire the bravery trying to clamp down on Black's
of the young woman. Stuart Conquest is no counterplay, might have been a sounder
slouch when it come to the attack! 5.d2 g7 choice. ) 15...xe7 16.h4 ae8 17.f2
6.f4 b5 7.d3 0-0!? And this is even more g5 18.g3 h5 19.h4 g4 20.fxg4 hxg4
bold, possibly an attempt even at this very 21.f5 e4 22.d3 h6 23.xe4 xe4
early stage to push Conquest towards his 24.f1 b6 25.g1 fe8 26.c1 c4
habitual time trouble. 27.f2 e3+ 28.xe3 xe3 0-1 Aleksic,
[ 7...b6 8.f3 g4 finds favour with me at N-Chatalbashev, B/Cutro 2000;
least, staying flexible with the King as much B) 12...a5 13.0-0-0 d7 14.f5 xf5
as anything and creating concrete 15.g3 e6 16.f4 dxe5 17.f5 d6
counterplay against d4. 9.e5! 18.fxg6 hxg6 19.dg1 exd4 20.f5 e5
A) 9...xf3 10.gxf3 ( 10.exf6 exf6 ) 21.xg7 e3 22.xe3 dxe3 23.d3
10...fd7 is much better.; xg7 24.xf7 h5 25.xg6+ 1-0 Dreev,
B) 9...d5? 10.xd5 cxd5 11.exd6 f6 A-Azmaiparashvili, Z/Moscow 1989. ]
12.h4 xf3 13.gxf3 e6 14.f5! 12...xd6 13.f5 d7 14.h4 7f6 15.h5
It's a pity W h it e f o llows t his mo ve u p xh5 16.0-0-0 e5!= Black has emerged from
incorrectly. gxf5 15.xf5 ( 15.g1! f7 the opening in good shape. White's attack is
16.c3 f8 17.e2 xd6 18.xb5 ) strong but by no means decisive and Black is
15...xd6 16.d3 ( 16.g1! ) 16...a6 a pawn up after all. Practical chances are
17.0-0-0 d7 18.hg1 f8 19.g3 b6 approximately equal. 17.dg1 h8 18.h6
20.de1 0-0-0 21.b1 b7 22.f4 e5 g8 19.b1 A small time-out.
23.dxe5 xe5 24.h4 d6 25.f5 c4 [ It was probably worrying Conquest slightly
26.h5 d7 27.e8 c7 28.xc4 bxc4 that he couldn't see a win after, say
29.d8 c5 30.xd5+ a7 31.g8? 19.xg7+ xg7 20.fxg6 fxg6 21.xh5
( 31.e6! ) 31...xg8 32.xg8 d4 33.b3 gxh5 22.xg7 xg7 23.g5+ h8
cxb3 34.xb3 c6 35.e6 d7 36.g3 24.dxe5 e7 25.xh5 f8 ]
b7 37.d6 a4 38.c1 xb3 39.axb3 19...df4 20.xf4 exf4
a1+ 40.d2 c3+ 41.d1 xf3+ [ 20...xh6 le a d s t o e qu a lit y: 21.xg6+
42.c1 e3+ 43.d1 e5 44.d3 xg6 22.xg6 xg6 23.fxg6 xd2
g1+ 45.e2 xg3 46.hxg3 g2+ 24.xh5 fxg6 25.xg6 g7!= So we must
47.d1 h5 48.c4 b6 49.b4 c6 assume that around here Lahno started
50.e1 b2 51.b5+ axb5 52.cxb5+ thinking of the win. ]
xb5 53.f3 c4 54.f1 h2 55.xf6 21.xg7+ xg7 22.fxg6 fxg6 23.c4 e7
xg3 56.f2 d4 57.d2+ c3 58.g2 24.e1 ae8 25.xe7 xe7 26.c1 a5
e3 59.g8 f4+ 60.g2 e4+ White is in the process of being outplayed!
61.h2 d2 62.g2+ e1 63.g8 d5 27.d5 d8 28.d4+ f6 29.xf4 xd5
64.g1 c5+ 65.h2 f1 66.g3 e5 [ Can't see anything at all for White after
67.h3 f2 68.g2+ f3 69.g1 h4 29...cxd5! ]
70.f1+ e2 71.g1 f2 72.g2+ f3 30.d4+ f6 31.c5 d6
73.g1 g3+ 0-1 Zimmerman, Y- [ 31...xf3 32.xa5 f8 33.xd5 xd5
Hoffmann, P/12th Donau Open, Aschach 34.c7 is difficult to win for Black in view of
GER 2003 A typical Open Swiss game the open King. However, after c5 35.h1
incorrect but interesting. ] h6 she could make a serious attempt. It
8.f3 g4 9.e5 b4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 looks like mutual time-trouble to me which
d5 12.exd6N Conquest must innovate! a prompts a premature end to the game. ]
After 12 Bc4 there are two conflicting views: 32.xa5 c5 33.xd5
[ 12.c4 ½-½
A) 12...d7!? 13.xd5 cxd5 14.exd6 f6
15.dxe7 ( 15.h4 exd6 16.xb4 c7
17.b3 a5+ 18.c3 ab8 19.c2 b6
886
863 B07 17.xc5 c4 when the threat of mate on

Dastan,B 2416 b2 wins th e wh ite queen .) 17...xf2
Laznicka,V 2681 18.xf8 c5 the white knight is trapped,
15th ch-EUR Indiv 2014 (2.52) 04.03.2014 and after White gives it up for a pawn or
[Neil McDonald] two with 19.e6 fxe6 20.e4 xe4
21.xe4 h8 22.xe6 the position
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7 4.f4 e5 remains double edged.;
5.f3 exd4 6.xd4 c6 7.e3 White has B) 16.b1 ab8 Black has pressure on
many options here, but this is probably the th e qu ee n sid e t o com p en sat e f o r t h e
critical move. d5 8.exd5 pawn. ]
[ Here 8.e5 tries for a slight edge in a quiet 14...c4 15.f2
position. The game move leads to huge [ If 15.e1 xg2 ]
tactical complexity. ] 15...b7
8...c5 9.d3 e7 10.d4 b6 11.dxc6 [ Even stronger was 15...xd4! 16.xd4
bxc6 12.0-0-0 a6!? This bishop move ( Black is also winning after 16.xd4 xg2
unleashes crazy complications, and only a 17.xc4 xh1 18.c5 e6 ) 16...b4
player who has prepared thoroughly with a 17.d1 c5 18.c3 a4 when White's rook
computer can be confident of finding his way on d4 has no safe moves. ]
thro ugh the m. In Adam son -Ivanov in th e 16.a4
archives 12...Ba6 is given as good for Black, [ Black also wins 'on points' after 16.e1+
indeed as gaining material by force, but in f8 17.d1 xb2 18.e6+ fxe6
fact W hite can still keep some sort of 19.xc5+ f7 20.xb2 xg2 ]
objective advantage. 13.d2 16...0-0-0 17.xf1 a6 18.d3 White can
[ White loses a piece after 13.xa6 xe3+ save his knight on a4 as
14.b1 xd4 when the flamboyant 15.b5 [ 18.c3 a3! gives Black a mating attack. ]
fails to the cold blooded 0-0! ] 18...xa4 19.c3 d2 20.d3
13...xf1 14.g1? It appears that White was [ Hopeless is 20.xd2 xd4 ]
sh o c k e d b y 1 2 . . . B a 6 a s h e qu ickly go e s 20...xd4 21.xd4 xd4 22.f5+ b7
astray. 23.c5 de4 Already two pieces down and
[ Firstly 14.hxf1 c4 threatening both the with more material dropping, White gave up.
queen and the bishop on e3 is an A convincing win for Black, but you need to
immediate disaster for White. ] analyse 14.Bf2 in depth if you are considering
[ It seems that Black will emerge the playing this line for Black.
exchange up after 14.f5 c4 for example 0-1
15.xe7 ( Or 15.xc5 xc5 16.d4 xd4
17.xd4 c5 18.xc4 xc4 19.d6+ f8
20.xc4 ) 15...xe3 16.xe3 xe3 864 B07
17.dxf1 xf1 18.xc6 xh2 19.xh2 Degraeve,Jean Marc
0-0 ] Kasparov,Sergey
[ White's best move is 14.f2! 0-0 15.hxf1 Open, 2002 Bethune 2002
( After the convoluted line 15.xc6!? b7 [Paul Motwani]
16.a5 xg2 17.hxf1 ad8 18.xd8
xd8 19.xd8+ f8 20.dd1 xh2 Mr Mo's game G6.16: "Degraeve digs grave
It is by no means easy to prove that the two for 'the other' Kasparov!" 1.e4 e5 2.c3 d6
white rooks are superior to the black queen. 3.d4 f6 I took the liberty of changing the
Nonetheless this looks to me White's best actual move-order, which was 1 e4 d6 2 d4
c h a n c e f o r a d v a n t a g e .) 15...c7 Nf6 3 Nc3 e5. 4.dxe5 Generally reckoned to
Finally after be not dangerous, but France's big GM Jean-
A) 16.e6 here Black has the amazing Marc Degraeve notches up a quick White win
reply b8!! ( rather than the miserable in the current encounter. dxe5 5.xd8+
16...fxe6? 17.xc5 ) 17.e2 ( Not xd8 6.g5
887
[ 6.c4 e6 7.xe6 fxe6 8.f3 d6 A) James says that 6...d5!? is possible'.
9.e3 e7 poses Black no serious Then a critical follow-up that seems good
problems. ] for W hite would be 7.xf6 ( 7.e5 e4
6...e6 7.f4 exf4 8.f3 8.d3 xg5 9.fxg5 is unclear )
[ 8.e5 h6 9.h4 g5 is an important A1) 7...xf6 8.e5 ( even 8.d2!? dxe4
resource for Black. ] 9.xe4 g7!? 10.c4 0-0 11.0-0
8...h6 9.xf4 bd7 10.0-0-0 c6 , although rather anti-positional, may
Simply assessed as being "equal" on page favour W hite slightly because of his
137 of "Nunn's Chess Openings" (NCO), but development and idea of Ne5) 8...g7
there's clearly still a lot of fight left in this 9.e2 ( 9.d2 0-0 10.0-0-0 ) 9...0-0
battle. 11.d4 c5 12.e2 e8 13.f3 10.d2 g4 11.d1 e6 12.e3 xf3
c8?! 13.xf3 d7 14.0-0 with a space
[ I would prefer something more active like advantage, but Black stands solidly.;
13...g5 , for example. In the game itself, A2) 7...exf6 8.exd5! cxd5 9.e2+!
W hite is allowed to get things all his own f8!? ( 9...e6 10.f5! gxf5 11.h4 0-0
way rather too easily. ] 12.0-0-0 ) 10.b5!? c6! 11.0-0-0 e7
14.e5! xd4 12.g3 and Bg2 with pressure on d5
[ 14...g4?? loses on the spot to 15.xe6 ] Black's king and g7 bishop are hard to
15.xd4 h7 Seemingly very passive, but coordinate.;
the 'alternatives' were also unattractive. B) 6...b5 Back to the Main Game: 7.d3
[ For instance, 15...g4 16.e4 c7? b6 8.e5 d5 9.exd6 f6 10.e2 0-0
walks into 17.xg4 xg4 18.e6+ ] 11.xd5 cxd5 12.dxe7 e8 13.h4 c6
16.e4 c7 17.d6 e7 18.hd1 hf8 14.0-0 xe7
19.g3 a5 20.h4 b6? A plausible-looking B1) a strange choice White may have
move, but Black has missed the forthcoming underestimated Black's next. Better was
stunning tactic... 21.f5! d7 15.d2!
[ 21...xf5 22.e6+ c8 23.d8# ] B1a) 15...xd4 16.xd4 xd4+
22.xg7 xd4 23.xd4 d8 24.f4 17.f2 xb2?? ( 17...a4 18.b3
Black now resigned, being a pawn down in a a3 19.xg6! ) 18.a5! winning,
hopeless position, especially with his f-pawn because Black's queen is threatened
being so frail, and the h-pawn about to be hit with Rb1, but Qd8+ is also
by Rf6. devastating.;
1-0 B1b) 15...g4 16.c3 b4 17.ae1
ae8 18.xe7 xe7 19.h3
and a pawn is a pawn;
865 B07 B2) 15.d1?! b4! 16.e1 ( 16.c3
Dobrov,Vladimir 2510 xd3 17.xd3 f5 18.d2 e4
Nikolic,Predrag 2623 with compensation) 16...xe1+ 17.xe1
10th EICC Budva MNE (10) 16.03.2009 ( maybe 17.xe1 xd3 18.cxd3!? f5
[John Watson] 19.b3 d8 20.b4 , but this isn't
forced ) 17...xd3 18.e8+ f8
This game contains no less than three high- 19.cxd3 b7 20.e3 c8 21.h3 d7
level wins for Black out of the 4 Bg5 system! 22.c1 e8 23.d2 b4 With White's
But the good news ends there... I've given weak pawns and Black's bishops, the
serious notes to all three because somehow second player has at least equalised.
Black needs to improve in these lines or return Black eventually won. ]
to the... h6/...g5 plan. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 5...c6 6.f4 b5 7.d3 0-0
3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.d2 [ Black got a poor opening but chalked up
[ In Dreev (2688)-T Petrosian (2623), Budva another victory after 7...b6 (Vigus gives
MNE 2009, White played 5.f4 c6 6.f3 this '?!', correctly) 8.e5!
bypassing Qd2 for the nonce. A) 8...d5 or
888
A1) or 9.xd5 cxd5 10.c3 ( 10.f3! ) [ 14.exf6 exf6 15.e5! xe5 16.dxe5
10...dxe5?! 11.fxe5 c6 12.e2 e8 17.c3 leaves Black's pieces
with advantage, as in a game quoted in awkwardly-placed and was easier. ]
Vigus; 14...fxe5 15.g4 xf4 16.xf4 exf4
A2) 9.exd6 xc3 10.bxc3 f6 11.h4 17.ae1
exd6 12.f3 0-0 13.0-0 and White is [ 17.xf4 f6 18.h6+ h8 19.e3
clearly for choice; has the idea of Rae1 with pressure. ]
B) 8...b4 9.exf6 bxc3 10.e3! f8 17...f6 18.h6+ h8 19.xf4 e6
11.fxe7? ( 11.bxc3! leaves Black a pawn 20.g5 a6 21.g3 d7?!
down, and worse if he gets greedy by b2 [ 21...b6 22.e5 ]
12.d1 xa2 13.fxe7 g7 14.c4! ) 22.h4?!
11...g7 12.bxc3 b2 Now Black has [ 22.xf8+! xf8 ( 22...xf8 23.e5 )
roughly equalized. 13.d1 xc3+ 14.f1 23.f1 e8 24.h4 f6 , and among other
xd4 ( 14...xd4 15.f3 ) 15.xd4 moves, 25.g4! restricts Black's knights and
( 15.g3! looks better, e.g., h6 16.e2 leaves them no good squares. ]
c5 17.h4 ) 15...xd4 16.f3 22...xf1+ 23.xf1 e8
( 16.e2; 16.e2 ) 16...c3! 17.f5?! d7 [ 23...b6! 24.e5 xe5 25.xe5 b8
18.h4 c5 19.e2? (White is falling still favours White, but there's no obvious
apart) ( 19.f4 ) 19...e4 20.fxg6 hxg6 way in. ]
( 20...g3+! 21.g1 h6 22.gxf7+ xf7 24.f3
23.c4+ d5 ) 21.f4 xe7 ( 21...d5! ) [ Or 24.e1! with the idea c8 25.h5! ]
22.d4 d7 23.f3 d5 24.xe4 dxe4 24...c8 25.b4?
25.e5 a5? ( 25...hd8 would have [ 25.e5! xe5 26.xe5 with the idea h5. ]
kept a large edge. As it goes, Black 25...a8 26.a3
f in ally b rings ho me t he p oint wit h his [ 26.c7 ]
bishop pair:) 26.xh8 xh8 27.f2 f5 26...a5 27.h2 axb4 28.axb4 a1
28.e3 b6 29.g4 f6 30.gxf5 gxf5 This piece provides some counterplay.
31.c3 e5 32.df1 h5 33.f2 d8 29.e3!?
34.d1 xh4 35.xf5+ xf5 36.xc6+ [ 29.e5 ]
f6 37.xd8 h3+ 38.f2 e3+ 39.g2 29...f8 30.f3 e8 31.f4 d1
e4+! 40.xh3 e2 41.d6+ g5 [ 31...e1! ]
0-1 Godena, M (2537)-T Petrosian, T 32.g4
(2623)/ Budva MNE 2009. ] [ 32.e5! e1 33.f4! ]
8.f3 d5 9.e5 h5 10.e2 32...f8 33.g2 f6
[ An alternative order for W hite is 10.h4 [ 33...e8 ]
h6 11.e2 f6 12.0-0 ] 34.e3! xg5 35.xg5 e8 36.e3 g7
10...f6 37.xe7 White is winning now, but tragedy
[ 10...g4 11.0-0 d7 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 strikes: a1 38.g5 a8 39.f6 e8 40.h5?
f6 14.h4 doesn't change things. ] The 40th move!
11.h4 h6 12.0-0 g7 [ 40.h2 wins. ]
[ 12...g4 13.h3 xf3 14.xf3 fxe5 40...xf6 41.gxf6 xh5 42.f7? f8 43.e2
15.dxe5 d7 16.e3! with the centre still [ White evidently missed 43.xe6? f4+ ]
intact. ] 43...f4+ 44.f3?
13.h3!? Rather unnecessary, since ... Bg4 [ 44.g3 xe2+ 45.xe2 xf7 46.e7
wasn't a threat. g7 47.g4 leaves a few chances because
[ 13.a4! is thematic, for example, bxa4 the knight on e5 will be so much better than
( 13...b6 14.b4! ) 14.xa4 d7 15.c3 the bishop. ]
b6 16.aa1 with a grip. ] [ It seems early to resign, but if Black plays
13...d7 14.h2!? White threatens Ng4, and 44.f3 g5! followed by ...Kg7 or ...Bxf7, it
maintains control of his centre. Nevertheless, won't be difficult to convert. ]
this complicates matters. 0-1
889
866 B07 g5 I don't like this move because the

Dolmatov,Sergey compromised pawn structure limits Black's
Eingorn,Vereslav S p o s s i b i l i t i e s . H o we ve r i t ' s n o t e a s y t o
USSR 1983 recommend a real improvement for Black.
[Alexander Volzhin] 13.xg5 hxg5 14.e3 f6 15.d5 b8
16.f3 e7 17.e2 g7 18.g4!?
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f3 f6 A typical method of preventing counterplay
5.d3 0-0 6.0-0 c6 The critical position of on K-side which is also very common in the
this line. Now W hite has to choose a plan. King's Indian. c6 19.c4 cxd5 20.cxd5 a5
The inventor of this variation, GM Dolmatov, 21.a3 c8 22.b4 d8 23.d2 a5 24.d3
prefers 7 Re1 and 8 h3. His games provide and White is clearly better. ]
White with a standard way of playing this line. 9.e3 exd4
7.e1 [ 9...a6 10.bd2 e8 11.d5 e7 12.c4 c5
[ 7.d5?! Although White wins a tempo this 13.dxc6 xc6 14.b1! A very instructive
move is not consistent with the ideas behind manoeuvre: the Knight aims for the d5-
his set-up because it opens the diagonal for square, a strong outpost in the centre of the
Black's dark-squared bishop. b8 8.c4 board. c8 15.c3 a5 16.d2 h5
g4 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 a6 11.c3 17.d5 f4 18.f1 xd5 19.cxd5
d7! All Black's minor pieces are very The poor position of the knight on a5 allows
active. 12.e2 ac5 13.d2 a5 14.ab1 one to evaluate the position as strategically
e6 15.d1 f5! , and Black seized the lost f or Black. b5 20.b4 b7 ( After
i n i t i a t i v e : 16.dxe6 e5 17.e2 f4! 20...c4 21.xc4 bxc4 22.c1
with an undisputable advantage for Black, White wins a pawn.) 21.a4! a8 22.axb5
Korchnoi - Sznapik, Luzern 1982. ] axb5 23.d3 a4 24.xa4 bxa4 25.a6
[ 7.b4 This move was introduced in early 90s c7 26.c4 a8 27.b6 b8 28.b5
and brought White many victories but it's no a5!? Black couldn't find anything better
longer considered dangerous for Black: than to give up this unfortunate Knight for
h5!? In my opinion, the best. Black intends nothing! But his position is lost anyway.
8...e5. ( 7...a6 is weaker, after 8.bd2 e5 29.xa5 xb5 30.xb5 xb5 31.c2 a3
9.a3 h5 10.b3 h8 11.d5 e7 12.c4 32.a1 and Black resigned, Dolmatov -
White has the better chances, Speelman- Gurevich, USSR 1982. ]
Crouch, Hastings 1992.) 8.b5 ( 8.e3 e5 [ 9...e8 was tried in Kuporosov-Sturua,
9.d5 e7 10.c4 f5 and Black's chances Helsinki 1992: 10.bd2 h6 11.a3 h5
should be preferred.) 8...a5 9.e1 c5 12.b4 f4 13.xf4 exf4 This pawn
10.bxc6 xc6 11.e3 e5 and Black's struct ure f avours W hite . 14.c4 e7
chances are by no means bad, as the game 15.b3 e8 16.d3 d8 17.bd2
Kortchnoi-Azmaiparashvili, Madrid 1996 (Black was threatening to win a piece by 17..
proved: 12.d5 ( 12.bd2 is strongly met by .b5) h8 18.e2 a6 19.ae1 b5 20.d5
d5!? with good chances for Black: 13.dxe5 d7 21.b3 a5 22.c4 axb4 23.axb4 b5
xe5 14.xe5 xe5 ) 12...a5 13.bd2 24.a5 b8 25.d2 with a clear edge. ]
d7 14.b3 c8! 15.xa5 xa5 16.c4 f5 10.cxd4 b4 11.c3 xd3 12.xd3
17.d2 c7 18.c1 fxe4 19.xe4 f6 Black has managed to exchange White's light-
20.b1 g4 21.h3 xf3 22.xf3 d7 squared Bishop, but the price is too high.
23.g3 c5 and Black is already slightly W hite has a strong pawn centre, and the
better. ] threat of e5 is very unpleasant for Black. e8
7...e5 8.h3 d7 13.e5! f5
[ 8...e8 was played in Dolmatov-Sturua, [ 13...h5? i s b a d i n v i e w o f 14.g4
Moscow 1992: 9.bd2 d7 10.c2!? h6 and White wins a piece. ]
11.f1 h7 12.g3 The position is very 14.b5! dxe5 15.dxe5 d7 The only move
s im ila r t o a R u y L o p e z. W h it e 's sp a c e again.
advantage secures him a lasting initiative. [ 15...e4 16.xb7 b8 17.c6
890
is hopeless. ] Svidler hasn't approved of this in the past in

16.d4! xe5 17.xb7 c5 18.f3 d7 his annotations and indeed it looks strange but
19.ed1 f8 20.f4 ee8 21.d5! e4 a lot of strong players have attempted this
22.h6!! An unexpected blow which leads to a se t up , ad m it t e dly m o stly in ra p id c he s s .
decisive positional advantage. f5 23.xg7 Normally Black delays developing the knight
xg7 in this setup so not to run into a quick Bh6 or
[ 23...xg7 24.c3 ] quick e4-e5 break but Kramnik is happy to
24.c3 ee8 25.d5+ e6 26.xf5! repeat the line which is a great
The simplest. W hite wins a pawn and commendation. 5.d2
liquidates to an endgame. gxf5 27.xd7 [ 5.f3 b5 6.d2 bd7 7.d1 An unusual
ad8 28.xg7+ xg7 29.xd8 xd8 decision but then what can you expect from
30.d1 xd1+ 31.xd1 Straighforward the erratic Russian? He evidently decided
technique. The endgame is easily won for that Black's attack would be too swift on the
White. f6 32.f1 e5 33.e2 f4+ queenside so he forgets a quick mating
34.f3 d3 35.e3 f4 36.g3 d5+ attack and plays in a slower style. ( 7.g4
37.e2 f4 38.f3 fxg3 39.fxg3 d4 40.g4 b7 8.g5 h5 9.ge2 c5 10.g3 cxd4
h6 41.h4 e7 42.e3 e5 43.h5 c6 11.xd4 e5 12.e3 f4! Resembled a
44.b4 Black is in zugzwang and is forced to Dragadorf, see my Dragon updates!
retreat. The rest is easy. e6 45.e4 f6 Amonatov, F-Timofeev, A Tomsk 2008. It's
46.f4 c8 47.f5 b6 48.xh6 d5+ not in W hite's interests to grab the pawn
49.g3 xb4 50.h4 d5 51.g5+ g7 with 13.xf4 exf4 14.xf4 as h6! 15.h4
52.f5+ f7 53.g6+ f6 54.g7 f7 55.h6 g7 16.0-0-0 e5 17.g4 c8!
g8 56.g5 h7 57.d6 Black resigned. and W hite's discomf ort is not worth the
1-0 pawn. ) 7...b7 8.h3 b6 I don't trust this
m o ve . I 'd p re f e r k e e p i n g t h e kn i g h t t o
su p p o rt t h e c7 -c5 b re a k. 9.e2 g7
867 B07 10.h6 0-0 11.xg7 xg7 12.e3 b4
Dominguez Perez,Leinier 2713 13.b1 e6 14.f2 e7 15.0-0
Kramnik,Vladimir 2790 was balanced Morozevich, A-Grischuk, A
19th Amber Rapid rapid (2) 14.03.2010 Moscow 2007. ]
[Gawain Jones] [ 5.a4 There's an argument for this move as
Tiger advocates a Hippo setup against an
1.e4 d6 early a4 but Black has already developed
[ A n o t h e r r e c e n t g a m e s t a r t e d 1...g6 his knight on f6 and so that isn't possible.
but soon transposed into the same position g7 6.h3 ( 6.a5 is only effective once the
after 2.d4 g7 3.f3 I prefer developing b8 knight has gone to d7. Here Black can
the queen's knight first to keep options of f3 develop with . ..Nc6 and perhaps .. ..Bg4.;
or f4. d6 4.c3 a6 5.e3 f6 6.d3 0-0 I a l s o m e n t i o n e d 6.d2 in my notes to
7.d2 g4!? ( Somehow I think 7...g4 Smeets-Kramnik.) 6...0-0 7.f3 c6
is more in keeping with Black's normal play 8.e2 e5 9.0-0 exd4 10.xd4 e8
in these systems although ...Bg4 is not 11.f3 e5 12.e2 had definitely been a
necessarily bad.) 8.h6 e8 9.xg7 xg7 successful opening for Black even if the
10.f4 e5?! ( 10...c6 would have been a game later went wrong. Erenburg, S-
better move order) 11.dxe5?! ( Overlooking Grischuk, A Rishon Le Ziyyon 2006. ]
t h e s t r o n g 11.xe5! dxe5 12.dxe5 [ 5.e2 was played in Smeets-Kramnik
picking up a pawn) 11...dxe5 12.e3 which I analysed a couple of months ago
( 12.xe5? loses a piece to d6 ) 12...c6 which was another opening disaster for
13.0-0 xf3 14.xf3 d4 and Black was White. ]
for preference and went on to convert. Yang 5...b5 6.d3 b7 7.a3
Kaiqi-Li Chao2 Ningbo 2010. ] [ 7.f3 bd7 8.a4 b4 9.ce2 c5 10.c3
2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 a6 I noticed bxc3 11.bxc3 g7 12.a5 0-0 13.h3 c7
891
14.0-0 e5 15.d5 c4 16.c2 c5 17.fb1 diagonal while White's f2-f4 only weakens his
c8 Black's position started looking like own king rather than having any aggressive
either a good Spanish or Kings Indian. It's potential. 18.e3 ae8 19.ad1 d5
educational to see how Grischuk won this [ 19...xe5 20.fxe5 xe5 looks like a clean
very quickly. 18.f2 d7 19.c1 b5 extra pawn to me as W hite doesn't even
20.d1 h5 21.b2 f5 22.a4 xa4 have the pressure on f7 that he achieves in
23.xa4 fxe4 24.c6 ad8 25.xc5 dxc5 the game. ]
26.fxe4 xc6 Oops! 0-1 Sprenger, J- 20.f2 xe5 21.fxe5 xe5 22.c4 e7
Grischuk, A Mainz 2007. ] 23.de1 d6 24.xe7 xe7 25.f6
7...bd7 8.f3 e5 Slightly unusual. Normally Dominguez seeks solace in the endgame a
Black plays the c5 break in these a6 Moderns. pa wn d o wn , h o p in g t h a t h is m o re a c t ive
[ 8...g7 would be my choice, hoping to pieces will allow him to hold the draw. xf6
tra n s p os e t o a ve ry go o d Dra go n st yle 26.xf6 a5 27.b6 e4 28.b5 d8
position once I break with c7-c5. 9.0-0 c5 29.d3 xd3 30.cxd3 xd3 31.xc5 d1+
immediately looks possible but Black has to 32.f2 d2+ 33.f3 xb2 34.xa5
correctly analyse ( 9...0-0 is safer ) 10.e5 Th is p o sit io n is n o w a b o o k d ra w a s t h e
dxe5 11.dxe5 g4 12.e6 fxe6 13.g5 queenside pawns are going to be exchanged
b6 which is messy but looks fine for leaving rook and 3 vs rook and 2. Kramnik
Black. ] t rie s b u t ca n 't q u it e ge t t h e f u ll p o i n t . A
9.0-0 It doesn't work well to allow Black to success for Black and yet more proof that any
capture on d4 so I think White should fix the mechanical plan for W hite involving simply
centre developing his knights and castling gives
[ 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.0-0-0 would be somewhat Black a very easy game. a2 35.a8+ g7
risky but the only way to play for an 36.a5 g5 37.b8 a4 38.g4 h5 39.h3 h4
a d v a n t a g e . ( 10.0-0 is a safe option but I 40.g2 f6 41.b5 a2+ 42.g1 b3
see no real reason why Black shouldn't 43.xb3 xa5 44.f3+ e6 45.g2 a2+
have comfortable equality. )] 46.g1 f6 47.f5 e2 48.f3 e4 49.g2
9...exd4! 10.xd4 f4 50.e3+ d5 51.a3 b4 52.f3 b2+
[ Perhaps 10.xd4 is more accurate but the 53.g1 b6 54.g2 e4 55.f2 c6
Cu b a n wo u ld h a ve h a d t o se e t h a t g7 56.h2 e3 57.g2 e6 58.f3+ d2
11.f3 i s p l a y a b l e a s a l t h o u g h c5 59.f5 e2+ 60.g1 e3 61.g2 e6
win s a p i e c e , W h it e ca n sa c ri f i ce wit h 62.d5+ e1 63.f5 e2+ 64.g1 e3
12.dxb5! axb5 13.xb5 0-0 14.xd6 65.g2 e6 66.f1+ d2 67.f5 d3
when White has three pawns for the piece 68.d5+ e4 69.f5 d6 70.f2 e3
and a temporary initiative which should be 71.f3+ d4 72.f5 e4 73.f2 e5
enough for rough equality. ] 74.f5+ e6 75.f3 d2+ 76.g1 d5
10...g7 11.a4 Forcing Black's hand but 77.g2 f5 78.gxf5+ xf5 79.xf5 xf5
Kramnik takes the advantage after a forced 80.f3 e5 81.e3 f6 82.f2 e6
series of moves. It's not easy to come up with 83.e2 f7 84.f3 f6 85.f2 g6
an alternative plan for White while Black can 86.g2 g7 87.g1 f6 88.f2
start atta cking e4 with . ..Re8 , c5-c4 an d ½-½
perhaps win the dark squares with an eventual
Nf6-g4xe3. b4 12.d5 c5! 13.xf6 xf6
14.xf6+ xf6 15.e5!? 868 B07
[ 15.b3 0-0 16.ad1 is a (boring!) Dreev,Alexey 2520
alternative but Black's bishop pair give him Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2560
any advantage going. ] Moskva Guam 1989
15...dxe5 16.xe5 0-0 17.f4 d6 [Alexander Volzhin]
So the opening stage has concluded and
Black has the upper hand with the bishop pair Before this game theory considered the 4.Bg5
and in particular play down the h8-a1 line as rather harmless, due to 8...Bg4. The
892
f o l l o wi n g g a m e h a s s h o wn t h a t W h i t e ' s 869 B07

resources should not be underestimated. 1.d4 Dreev,Alexey 2680
g6 2.e4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.g5!? f6 5.f4 Beim,Valery 2563
0-0 6.f3 c6 7.d2 b5 8.d3 g4 Ordix Open Frankfurt GER (10) 18.06.2000
The most popular line. 9.e5! b4 10.e2 [Carsten Hansen]
xf3 11.gxf3 d5 12.c4!
[ It's premature to castle queenside 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7
immediately as Black obtains good 5.f4 h6 6.h4 bd7 7.d2 c5 8.d5 a6
counterplay after 12.0-0-0?! a5 13.c4 9.f3 b5
d7 , intending 14... N7b6 15. Bb3 Qb5 [ 9...g5!? was tried out in Gofshtein-Chernin,
followed by a5-a4 ] Bastia 1998: 10.fxg5 hxg5 11.xg5 b5
12...a5 13.0-0-0 Now White is ready for the 12.a3 b4 13.axb4 cxb4 14.xf6 xf6
breakthrough f5 d7 Preventing White's main 15.a4 ( 15.d1 makes somewhat more
idea. However... 14.f5! xf5 sense b6 16.d3 ) 15...xe4 16.xb4
[ Later this position occurred in Yakovich - f5 and now instead of 17.b6? b8
B e i m , 1 9 9 3 . B l a c k p r e f e r r e d 14...dxe5 18.a4+ f8 19.c4 xb2! 20.xb2
but White obtained a very strong attack after c3+ 21.e2 xb2 22.a5 c8 23.e3
15.fxg6 fxg6 ( 15...hxg6 16.h4 ) 16.h4! xc2 when it is all over. White should have
The game continued: e6 17.h5 b6 played 17 c3 or 17 Bxa6, in both cases
18.d3 d5 19.b1 xf3 20.hxg6 h5 with somewhat better chances for W hite,
21.h6 e4 22.xg7 xg7 and Black although it is by no means clear. ]
resigned as 23.f4 wins easily. ] 10.e5 b4 11.a4 dxe5
15.g3 e6 16.f4 dxe5 17.f5! d6 [ The alternative for Black is to play 11...g8
[ Of cause, 17...gxf5 i s s u i c i d e : 18.hg1 but after 12.e2 g5 13.g3 gxf4 14.xf4
with Nh5 to f ollow, and Black has no c7 15.e6 a5 16.exd7+ xd7 17.xd6
defence against the threats on the g-file. ] xa4 18.e5 White has a fairly clear
18.fxg6 hxg6 advantage. ]
[ 18...fxg6 19.e4 d8 20.c5 12.fxe5 g4
with a large advantage ] [ Or 12...g5!? 13.exf6 xf6 14.xg5
19.dg1! exd4?! Now White wins by force. ( 14.a3 gxh4 15.axb4 cxb4 16.xb4 b8
[ 19...f5 is more stubborn, although White's 17.d2 e5 with a good game for Black)
attack is very strong after 20.h4!? ( or 14...hxg5 15.xg5 h5 ( 15...a5!? )
20.h6!? with Nh5 to follow. )] 16.xf6 xf6 17.e2 xd5 18.h6
20.f5! e5 21.xg7 e3 with a complicated struggle ahead. ]
[ 21...xg7 doesn't help Black: 22.h6 e5 13.e6 fxe6?! Once again 13...g5!? is a move
23.g5 e4 ( 23...e3? 24.xg6+ ) that has to be considered for Black. After the
24.xd5 cxd5 25.e1 winning. ] text move, the end comes swiftly. 14.dxe6
22.xe3 dxe3 23.d3 Now the g6-square de5 15.xd8+ xd8 16.0-0-0+ c7
becomes the main target. xg7 24.xf7! 17.xc5 By now it should be evident that the
h5 25.xg6+ Black resigned, as he is Black opening has failed: he is a pawn down,
mated in five. Brilliant attack! he is behind in development, his pieces are
[ 25.xg6+ xf7 26.f1+ e8 27.xf8+ not working together, and finally his king is
xf8 28.d8+ f7 29.g8# ] under attack... g5 18.g3 c6 19.b3
1-0 xf3 20.gxf3 e3 21.a5+ b6 22.c4+
xc4 23.xc4 c5 24.d5
1-0
893
870 B07 [ 21.xe2 is bad: xf4 22.c4+ d5 23.f1

Dreev,Alexey 2645 g5 24.b1 hxg6!? and Black's advantage
Zakharevich,Igor 2485 is obvious. ]
Russia 1996 21...ec3+!
[Alexander Volzhin] [ 21...dc3+? 22.bxc3 bxc3 23.c4+ d5
24.xe2 ]
A f t e r W h i t e ' s b ri l li a n t vic t o r y i n D r e e v - 22.bxc3
Azmaiparashvili Black had to look f or an [ 22.a1? xd1 23.xd1 ( 23.xh6
improvement. The following game shows that xf2-+ winning ) 23...g7 24.xh7 f5
Black has sufficient chances in this line. 1.d4 25.h1 a7-+ , parrying all the threats and
d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.f4 winning. ]
0-0 6.d2 c6 7.d3 b5 8.f3 g4 9.e5 22...xf4?? A terrible mistake.
b4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 d5 12.c4 a5 [ After the correct 22...bxc3 23.c1 xf4
13.0-0-0 f6! This is the novelty. 14.h4 h6 24.a3 ( After 24.gxh7+ h8 Black's King
15.exf6 exf6 16.f2 d7 17.h4 7b6 is safe ) 24...h6!? Black's advantage is
18.d3 a4!N beyond any doubt. ]
[ Previously Zakharevich chose 18...e8?! 23.e1 Now White's Queen is very active
( Ulibin â (+) Zakharevich, Russia,1995), (compared to the previous line where it was on
but failed to prove that this move is really a3).
necessary here. White got the upper hand [ The spectacular 23.xh7? doesn't work:
after 19.b1! h8 20.dg1 a4 21.h5 g5 xd2 24.dh1 f5! and Black wins. ]
22.fxg5 xg5 23.f4 h6 24.a1 d7 23...e8 24.g1! bxc3
25.c4! bxc3 26.bxc3 a3 27.c4 e7 28.d5! [ 24...xc3+? 25.a1 xd1 26.g7! g5
and won soon. ] 27.xd1 intending f4 and Qh5 with an
19.h5!? White chooses the sharpest unstoppable attack. ]
continuation. The alternatives are: 25.a1 h6 26.e4 d7 27.g3 e3
[ 19.b1!? h8 ( 19...dc3+?! 20.bxc3 28.h2 g7 29.xd5 cxd5 30.d3?
bxc3 21.c1! ) 20.h5 g5 with unclear play ] Missing Black's reply. Both players were in
[ 19.c4 ab6 and White hardly has time trouble already.
anything better than 20.d3 with a draw by [ 30.f2! was correct, and after the forced
repetition. ] b5 31.b1 e2 32.b7+ g8 33.xd6
19...ac3! 20.hxg6?! In contrast with xf2 34.d7+- White wins. ]
previous games, it is Black who is attacking! 30...b5 31.b1
But by playing the extremely risky text, White [ 31.xc3?! ab8! 32.c7+ g8 33.c3
wants to fight for the initiative at any cost. He g5!? 34.c2 e3! led to a very unclear
had other possibilities. game. ]
[ Of course, accepting the sacrifice is poor: 31...xd3! after this brilliant Queen sacrifice it
20.bxc3? bxc3 21.xc3 ( or 21.e1 b6 is White who has to save his skin! 32.cxd3
22.xc3 xf4+ winning ) 21...xf4 [ 32.b7+?! xg6 33.cxd3 xd4 34.b1
and Black wins the Queen. ] ( 34.h4 e4!-+ winning; 34.f2 e1+!!-+
[ Probably, 20.g3!? was the best: winning ) 34...ab8 35.b3 ( 35.xb8
A) 20...xa2+? 21.b1 ac3+ xb8+ 36.c1 b2-+ winning ) 35...a4
22.a1!? xe2 ( 22...g5 23.bxc3 ) and despite white's huge material advantage,
23.hxg6! xg3 24.xh6 and White's it's not so easy to find a good defence. ]
attack is very strong, or; 32...ab8! An excellent move again.
B) 20...xd1 21.hxg6 xb2 22.xb2 [ The hasty 32...xd4? loses by force:
g7 23.f5! with fantastic compensation.; 33.f2! e2 34.b7+! g8 35.xh6!
C) 20...xe2+ Other moves seems bad: e1+ ( 35...c2+ 36.xd4+- winning )
21.xe2 g5! 22.c4 h8 with mutual 36.xe1 c2+ 37.b2+- winning ]
chances. ] 33.xb8
20...xe2+ 21.b1! The only move. [ The natural looking 33.f4? even lost the
894
game! xb1+ 34.xb1 b8+ 35.a1 pressure on the h-file. There are possibilities
( 35.c2 b2+ ) 35...xf4 36.xf4 c2 of in vasio n wit h Qe 3-a 7 too which Blac k
37.c1 b1+ and the pawn ending is easily moves to stop. I should reiterate that statically
won for Black ] Black is fine-if the pawn structure remains
[ 33.c2 clearly is not an improvement: unchanged he has a better ending. W hite
xb1+ 34.xb1 xd4 35.b7+ xg6 m u s t m a k e t h e c h a n g e . b8 20.f1
36.b1 e2 and White is in trouble ] Just marking time. I'm not sure Dvoirys sees a
[ Besides the text, 33.a4 was good enough way forward. c5 21.d2 Of course not the
to draw: xb1+ 34.xb1 b8+ 35.a1 ending. c8 22.d3 b6 23.e2 e6!=
b2 36.h3 c2 37.d7+ xg6 38.e8+ Tkachiev has done enough to finally claim
g7 with a perpetual. ] equality, despite his unusual coming and
33...xb8 34.c2 xd4 35.f4 b2 g o i n g wi t h . . . N f 6 - g 8 - f 6 . 24.c1 e7
36.a4 c2 37.d7+ xg6 38.g4+ f7 Both players seem afraid to make any
39.d7+ g6 40.g4+ f7 41.d7+ positive moves. Perhaps both expected an
A very nice game despite the mutual imminent draw. I prefer
mistakes. [ 24...h6! and Black has good play in all
½-½ v a r i a t i o n s : 25.gxh6 ( 25.b3 xb3
26.cxb3 hxg5 27.hxg5 xh1 28.xh1
d4= ) 25...f6! 26.b3 ( 26.h5 g5 27.b3
871 B07 xb3 28.cxb3 d4 29.a5 b7=; 26.a5
Dvoirys,Semen I 2594 b7 27.e2 xd1 28.xd1 xh6 )
Tkachiev,Vladislav 2642 26...xb3 27.cxb3 f8 28.h5 xh6
Aeroflot Open (8) 24.02.2004 29.c3 b7 30.c1 d6 ]
[Andrew Martin] 25.e3 c5
[ 25...b7 ]
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.f3 c6 5.e3 26.c3 c7 27.c2 c8 With 27....Nc4
bd7 6.d2 b5 7.ge2 b7 Black plays available, retaining Rooks is an ambitious
traditionally, delaying ...Bf8-g7 as long as move. 28.f2 a5 29.f4 b4
possible. Dvoiris tries to show that this does [ 29...exf4 30.d3 he8 31.xf4 ]
not matter. 8.h6!?N 30.f5 Suddenly White is much better. Black's
[ 8.g4 is played more frequently. White initiative on the queenside has no real punch
usually waits for ...Bg7 before playing Bh6 whereas the Kingside chances lie exclusively
because it is a simple gain of a tempo. ] with W hite. In general, if the central pawn
8...xh6 9.xh6 e5 Tkachiev adjusts the structure vis-Ã -vis the Bishops is in your
central pawn formation to suit. By any normal favour, it's a good idea to trade down to an
positional yardstick he should be at least ending. d7 31.h3! h6 32.hd3 hxg5
e q u a l n o w . 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.c1 c5 33.hxg5 c6 34.f3 bxc3 35.xc3 c4
12.d3 xd3+ 13.xd3= The only reason 36.fxg6 fxg6 37.f3 b7 38.f7
White could have any advantage at all here The natural flow of the position leads to this
might lie in the exposed Black pawn structure. penetrative move. c7 39.f6! hc8
One could argue that the pawns on b5 and e5 40.xc7 xc7 41.xg6 a4
are targets. Maybe Black also has a small [ He could try to change things with 41...c3
problem with his King, although a quick 0-0-0 42.b3 a4 but after 43.d3 axb3 44.xb3
is possible. I personally feel that Black is fine b5 45.h3 there is no way for Black to get
and I would have expected either 13...Qe7! or his major pieces in. ]
13...Nh5, intending ...Qf6. g8? Sorry, but 42.e2 c3
this cannot be right. 14.e3 e7 15.0-0-0 [ 42...e8 43.h6 followed by the
a6 16.h4 f6 Is he going to castle short? promotion of the pawn was not attractive
17.g4 I think not. d7 18.b1 0-0-0 19.g5 to Tkachiev. ]
Standard play so far. W hite is nicely 43.b3 e8 44.d6 h5 45.xc7+ xc7
c e n t r a l is e d a n d i s p r e p a r i n g h 4 - h 5 wi t h 46.d3! No need for any heroics. As long as
895
White can solidify the pawn on g5 will do the the right to castle with no obvious
rest. d7 47.h1 xe2 48.xe2 g8 compensation) 9.dxe5 g4 10.e6! fxe6
49.g1 f6 50.g6 xe4 51.g7 d6 11.g5 with an easier position for White to
52.c4 xc4 53.bxc4 Not that impressive play although Black may still be OK after
by Black and ...Ng8 was particularly poor. A xe3 12.xe6 e5 13.xe3 xe3+
game of pawn structure in many ways. White 14.fxe3 xc3 15.bxc3 f7 ]
understood more and that's why he won. 8.e5!
1-0 [ 8.d3?! is too slow here, for example g7
9.h6 0-0 10.xg7 xg7 11.h4 b4!
12.e2 c5 and Black's play in the centre
872 B07 and on the queenside is much further along
Efimenko,Z 2657 than White's kingside attack. ]
Skoberne,J 2573 8...b4! The only move to avoid a serious
19th European Teams (9.7) 17.11.2013 disadvantage 9.e2
[Tom Rendle] [ 9.b5!? is very interesting here and it may
be the best try for an edge cxb5 10.exf6
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 xf6 11.xb5+ d7 12.xb4
5.d2 White has a lot of options here but it's ( 12.xd7+?! xd7 13.xb4 g7 14.a5
good to see an old-fashioned 150 Attack 0-0 gives Black a very dangerous looking
approach against this setup. initiative with two half-open files to use on
[ 5.h3!? with the idea of a quick g4 worked the queenside) 12...b8 13.xd7+ xd7
we l l i n S v i d le r - I va n c h u k a n n o t a t e d b y 14.c3! and Black should probably swap
Jonathan Rowson in the archives. ] queens here and after xc3 15.bxc3 b6
5...c7 Skoberne chooses an unusual reply I suppose with W hite's queenside pawns
th a t h a s n 't be e n a n a lyse d o n Ch e ssP u b being so vulnerable his advantage is
before. It's very flexible, basically waiting to minimal at best ]
see what setup White is going to adopt here. 9...d5 10.f4 e6
Obviously ...b5 will make a lot of sense if/ [ 10...xe3! seems to equalise here, for
when W hite castles Queenside but it also example 11.xe3 dxe5 12.dxe5 e6
keeps the option of a quick ...Nbd7 & ...e5 as 13.c4 ( 13.e2 g7 and White drops the
well as ...Ng4 in some positions. Efimenko pa wn o n e 5) 13...b6 and with the Black
chooses a very straightforward response. knight heading for d5 he is at least equal. ]
6.0-0-0 Already threatening a quick e5 11.xd5 cxd5 12.h6! Now White has a
[ 6.f4 looks tempting but after g4! 7.f3 definite advantage as after the bishops are
xe3 8.xe3 g7 White has no obvious exchanged Black has real problems on the
follow up and in the long run Black's two dark squares. dxe5 13.xf8
bishops are going to be very useful. ] [ 13.dxe5! is more accurate with a slight
[ of course White can play it safe here with e d ge a f t e r c5 14.f4 xh6 15.xh6
6.h3 g7 7.f3 bd7 8.a4 0-0 9.e2 d7 16.g7 0-0-0 17.d3 ]
but after e5! Black has pretty much 13...xf8?!
equalised. ] [ 13...xf8! looks strange as it drops a pawn
[ 6.f3 bd7 7.d3 would transpose to with check but actually Black is completely
K a s p a r o v - A z m a i p a r a s h vi l i c o ve r e d b y fine after 14.xb4+ g7 15.dxe5 xe5
Andrew Martin back in 2003. ] 16.xe5 xe5 ]
6...bd7 7.f3 b5 14.dxe5 xe5?! This leads to a very
[ 7...g7 allows 8.e5!? ( 8.h6 unpleasant endgame for Black
is also logical with a slight edge after 0-0 [ 14...a5 was better but I still like White after
9.xg7 xg7 10.h4 h5 11.g5 15.b5! a6 16.xd7+ xd7 17.he1
with the plan of f3 and a later g4) 8...dxe5 ab8 18.b1 although Black can try for
( or 8...g4 9.exd6 exd6 10.h3! xe3 counterplay with a4!? ]
11.xe3+ f8 12.d3 and Black has lost 15.xe5 xe5 16.b5+ d7 17.he1!
896
d6 18.xd5 xd5 19.xd5 0-0-0 xf7 and Black is surviving, according to
[ 19...xb5?! drops a pawn to 20.xb5 a5 Jerry Van Rekom and Leo Janssen in their
21.ee5 ( 21.b7! taking control of the 7th innovative book, 'The Lion, a Black Weapon'.
is probably even stronger )] Unfortunately, Abdulaziz is a lion with no
20.c5+ b8?! teeth. ]
[ 20...b7 also loses a pawn but Black has 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 g4 8.f4! Substitute
reasonable drawing chances after 21.xd7 ...c6 for ...Be7 and this move isn't playable
xd7 22.b5+ c6 23.xb4 fd8 due to ... Qd8-b6! c6 9.h3 Too late now. g5
as both his rooks and king are very active. ] [ 9...b6 10.hxg4 xb2 11.d2+- ]
21.e4 xb5 22.xb5+ a8 23.bxb4 [ 9...h6 10.d2! a5 11.0-0-0 b4
Now Black's king is stuck on a8 the ending 12.c4 xc3 13.xc3 xc3 14.bxc3 c5
should be lost. Efimenko quickly wraps up the 15.hf1 leads to a curious position where
game. d7 24.bd4 fd8 25.xd7 xd7 W hite has two sets of doubled isolated
26.e3 b7 27.d3! A slightly premature pawns and yet he has a clear advantage
resignation from Skokerbe here perhaps but thanks to his powerful dark-squared
there is no real defence to the simple plan of bishop. ]
b3, c4, Kc2-c3 and the gradual advance of 10.hxg4 Ermenkov has decided that he can
White's kingside pawns. beat this guy without thinking and do you
1-0 know what I think he's right! Against a
stronger opponent it would be necessary to
find
873 B07 [ 10.e6! fxe6 11.xg5 xg5 12.xg4 xf4
Ermenkov,Evgenij 2454 13.xf4 f8 14.h6 f6 15.h5+ g6
Abdulaziz,Mahmoud 2101 16.xg6+ hxg6 17.d1 ]
zt 3.1 Beirut LIB (8) 20.12.2004 10...gxf4 11.d2 b6 12.c4
[Andrew Martin] [ 12.0-0-0 e3 13.g5! f8 14.e2 g4
15.h4 xd2+ 16.xd2 xf3 17.gxf3
LI ON T AME R 1.e4 d6 2.c3 f6 3.f4 xg5 18.h5 h6 19.d4 g6 20.dh2
I've often felt that this is an awkward move- 0-0-0 ]
order for Pirc players to meet. One point might 12...c5 What a wimp. Of course Black must
be that after 3... g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 g3!, W hite take on b2 and after
can force play back into a Closed Sicilian [ 12...xb2 13.b1 a3 14.e6 fxe6
which Black might well not be prepared for. 15.xe6 d6 16.xd6 xd6 the position
Attempts by Black to avoid ...c7-c5 can be is not that clear. ]
rejected, since with simple moves e.g. Bg2, d3, 13.b3 xe5 14.xf4 c4
0-0, h3, Be3, Qd2 and an eventual f5, White [ 14...f6 15.0-0-0 xg4 16.c7!
obtains a strong attack. e5 4.f3 bd7 5.d4 is an incisive strike, meanwhile ]
But here we are back in that 'Pirc/Philidor [ 14...xf3+ 15.gxf3 is a pawn up, no comp
hybrid ( or the LION' as it's known in Holland) position for White. ]
and there's no pussyfooting around by White 15.xc4 xc4 16.0-0-0 e6 17.g5!
this time. Ermenkov goes straight for the most If Black does nothing White's plan of Kb1,e5
attacking line. e7?! I don't like this at all. If a n d Ne 4 -f 6 o r d 6 + wi ll b e cru sh i n g. . f8
Black's going to ignore the threat to e5 he'd 18.d4 e7 19.f5 e6 20.he1
much better play 5...c6!. Possibly most Perhaps he could do nothing after all. White
reliable is the capture on d4: just funnels his pieces into ideal positions.
[ 5...exd4 6.xd4 ( 6.xd4 c6 idea ...d6- g8 21.d5! Yes p lease . cxd5 22.exd5
d5,. ..Bc5.) 6...c5 7.d3 g4 8.f3 xe1 23.xe1+ d8 The Lion is an opening
g6 ] which can be unexpectedly different and this
[ 5...c6!? 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 g4 8.e6 after only a few moves. Nevertheless, results
fxe6 9.g5 de5 10.xd8+ xd8 11.h3 overwhelmingly favour White, and the trend
h6 12.f4 hf7 13.0-0-0+ e8 14.xf7
897
does not look set to change. [ Alternatives are worth investigation,

1-0 particularly Ponomariov's approach:
10...e7 11.h6 exd4 12.xd4 b4
13.ce2 c5 14.f3 c7 ( 14...xe4
874 B07 15.f4 ef6 16.fe1 Gelfand ) 15.f4
Farkas,Zsolt e5 16.xe5 dxe5 17.d5 xd5
Hansen,Lars Henrik Bech 2053 18.exd5 c4 Gelfand-Ponomariov Biel
ICCF Masterclass EM/M/197 20.06.2002 2000 ]
[Andrew Martin] [ 10...g7 11.axb5 cxb5 12.dxe5 dxe5
13.xb5! axb5 14.xb5+- a6 15.xa6
I am always on the lookout for xa6 16.xe5 c8 17.d4 xe5
correspondence games of interest. In a sense 18.xe5+ e6 19.b5+ d7 20.d5 c6
they are timeless. The following game 21.b4 e5 22.fd1 xd5 23.exd5 c7
features a novelty and also sheds some new 24.f4 c5 25.e1+ d8 26.b7 d4
light on Black's resources in the 150 attack, 27.e4 a5 28.h4 f6 29.b4 a1+
despite the final result. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 30.h2 e5 31.e3 c3 32.b6+ e8
3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 5.d2 b5 6.d3 33.c5 1-0 Kupreichik-Karasev Minsk 1976 ]
bd7 7.f3 Results have been very good for 11.dxe5 I quote Junior Tay: dxe5 Previously,
White using this particular line. His game plan W h it e used t o t ra nsf e r th e Nc3 t o g3 (t o
is ce rt ainly eas y to u nd ersta nd a ) Ra pid bolster the e4 pawn) before working on the
development. Quick castling. b) Be3-h6 as Black Queenside. GM John Nunn has shown
quickly as possible c) e4-e5 if possible d) a2- the virtues of such a plan in his clinical 1991
a4 if possible e) the Knight transfer Nc3-e2-g3, win over Gelfand in Munich. But now, Farkas
followed by an all-out Kingside attack. Or comes up with a violent solution instead!
some combination of these ideas. Black's 12.c4!!N
response needs to be accurate. Briefly stated [ Instead 12.e2 c5 13.g3 c7
he should: a) Delay the development of the Szabo, K-Resika, N/Paks 2001 is still a bit
Bf8 to g7 for as long as possible in order to better for white. ]
nullify the effect of Bh6. b) Play ...e7-e5 as 12...bxc3 He wants to be shown. Black has
soon as possible to erect central fortifications. two other possibilities:
c) Keep flexible with castling e5! 8.0-0 b7 [ 12...h6 13.e2 e7 14.g3 g4
9.a4 15.d3 xe3 It is not clear to me that this
[ John Emms prefers a more patient position is markedly better for W hite,
approach: 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.h3!? c7 despite what Deep Fritz says. ]
( 10...e7 ) 11.e2 c5 12.g3 d8 [ 12...g7 13.e2 e7 14.d6 xd6
13.c3 fd7 14.b4 a4?! ( Why not 15.xd6 xe4 16.xf7+ e7 17.d3
14...xd3 15.cxd3 a5 16.a3 g7 ec5 ]
with castles to come?) 15.b3 db6 16.c4 13.xc3 c7
xd3 17.xd3 xc4 18.a3 c8 19.d2 [ 13...xe4?? 14.b3 f6 15.xd7+- ]
e6 20.fc1 e7 21.xc4 xc4 22.xc4 14.xf7+! BANG! Of course 14 Ng5 was good
b2 23.xc6 xc6 Emms, J-Konings, F/ too. xf7 15.g5+ e8
Gent 2005 ] [ 15...e7 16.c4 e8 17.f7+ d8
9...a6 18.xf6+ e7 19.e6+ c8 20.f7 a5
[ 9...b4 is interesting here: 10.a2 ( 10.e2 21.xd7 xd7 22.c5 d2 23.xe7 xe7
exd4 11.exd4 c5 ) 10...exd4 11.xd4 c5 24.c5+ d6 25.xb7+ xb7 26.xb7+-
12.xf6 xf6 13.c3 a5 14.fe1 g7 Junior Tay ]
15.b5 0-0-0 16.e2 c7 17.a6 c6 16.c4 Two pieces up but no moves left for
18.b5 b7 19.a6 c6 20.b5 b7 Black. He has to offload some baggage. c5
1/2-1/2 Moldovan, D-Ghinda, M/Stara 17.xc5 xc5 18.xc5 e7
Zagora 1990 ] [ 18...h6 19.d6! d7 20.e6+ does not
10.ad1 b4N help at all. ]
898
19.d6 d7 20.b4 f8 21.fd1 b8 position of Black's King. The difference in
22.c5 a8 23.f3 xb2 24.xe5 the relative activity of all the pieces makes
A short, sharp, relevant and interesting game. Black's position indefensible. f6 17.d5
1-0 b4 18.e1! b6 ( 18...e5 is no better:
19.c1! d7 20.c7 ) 19.c1! d7 20.c7
h8 21.xb7 d8 22.a5 c4 23.d5
875 B07 xb2 24.c6! xc6 ( 24...f5 25.ee7 g5
Fedorov,Alexei 2659 26.f7 ) 25.xc6 f8 26.d7 h4 27.e6
Bologan,Viktor 2620 and Black resigned. ]
Belfort 1999 9.c3 e5 10.d5 Now the position is typical of
[Alexander Volzhin] a King's Indian.
[ 10.dxe5!? is also worthy of consideration.
1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 4.f3 f6 After dxe5 11.e3 There is some reason
5.d3 0-0 6.0-0 c5!? This move has had a for White to hope for an opening advantage:
certain rise in popularity over the last year he has an extra tempo in the symmetrical
and was played even at top level. Similar position and his bishops are more active
positions may also a rise f rom the Alapin than their Black counterparts (the Bishop on
Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bd3 g6 etc. g7 is clearly misplaced). e6 ( 11...h5?
) a n d t h e T o rre A t t a ck . 7.h3 The most 12.c4 d4 13.d5 e6 14.b3!
common reply. and W hite has huge edge: d4 Bad, but
[ 7.dxc5 dxc5 aiming for a minimal wha t's b ett er? 15.xd4 exd4 16.ad1
advantage deserves certain attention. The h8 17.xd4 h4 18.f3 xe4 19.fe1
similar idea is normal in Torre Attack after 1 f5 20.g4 and White wins, Nun - Trapl,
d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 g6 3 Bg5 Bg7 4 Nbd2 0-0 5 c3 Namestovo 1987.) 12.b5 a5 13.xc6
d6 6 e4 c5 7 dxc5! dxc5, but there W hite bxc6 14.c2 h6 15.a4 d7 and White
can put the bishop in an active position 8 is clearly better due to his superior pawn
Bc4! Nc6 9 Qe2 with chances of a serious structure, Smirin - Kempinski, Groningen
opening advantage (see for example the 1996, for example: 16.d2 fc8 17.b3 c5
game Speelman-Howell, Calcutta, 1996). 18.b2! b6 19.dc4 xc4 20.xc4
Although this idea here looks rather a6 21.ac1 ]
harmless, Black has to play very attentively: 10...e7 The plans for both sides are obvious:
8.h3 c6 9.e2 c7 10.e5 d5 11.e1 W hite will attack on the Q-side, trying to
e6 12.a4 ae8?! 13.a3 h8?! exploit the open c-file while Black will try to
Black's play is pretentious and bad. 14.c4 create counterplay on the opposite side of the
b6 15.f4 d5 16.cd2 xf3 17.xf3 board. 11.e3 h5 12.c1 f4 13.b5
with a clear edge for W hite, Danielsen - The moves of both players here are very
Kristiansen, Denmark, 1992. ] natural. a6 14.c7 b8 15.a4
7...cxd4 8.cxd4 c6 [ The tempting 15.a7?! is strongly met by
[ 8...bd7?! is less logical as the Knight t h e u n e x p e c t e d xh3! 16.gxh3 c8
doesn't create pressure against W hite's 17.b6 d7 and Black has a strong
centre. 9.c3 e5 10.e3 and it's difficult to attack. ]
find a suitable plan for Black. The game 15...b5!? 16.axb5 axb5 17.b4
Leko-Strikovic, Cacak 1996 continued: a6 [ I would prefer 17.xf4!? exf4 18.d2
11.a4! exd4 ( After 11...e8 12.d5 an d Black st ill ha s ce rt ain prob le ms t o
is very unpleasant.) 12.xd4 e8 13.c4! solve. ]
and Black has difficult problems to solve: 17...d7 18.xf4 exf4 19.e2 b6
xe4 ( Other moves are clearly insufficient: [ 19...b7 was safe and good. I can't see
13...c5? 14.e5!; or 13...b6?! 14.xf7+! anything better for White than a draw after
xf7 15.b3+ winning a pawn for nothing.) 20.xb5 xb5 21.xb5 b8 ]
14.xg7 xg7 15.xe4 xe4 16.xf7! 20.e5 dxe5 21.xe5 d6? A gross mistake.
White wins the pawn back and destroys the [ Black had an excellent resource: 21...xd5!
899
22.xd7 ( 22.xd5 e6 is good for Black.) h a s a cle a r e d g e , f o r e xa m p le : h8

22...xd7 23.xb5 d8 24.fd1 d6 13.e2 f6 14.0-0-0 g8 15.d2 f5
and draw is the most likely outcome of the 16.gxf5 gxf5 17.exf5 xf5 ( 17...xf5
game. ] 18.e4 ) 18.xf5 xf5 19.e4
22.c5! xd5?! Desperation. It's too late! and the open g-file and firm control over
23.xd5 e8 24.xf4! The Rook on c5 is the important e4 square makes Black's
really great! White has everything protected! position hardly defensible.;
d4 25.g3 a8 26.f3 xf3 27.xf3 B2) 10...c6 11.xe5! xe5 12.xh5
xb4 28.d1 xc4 13.0-0 e8 14.d1! f6 15.e2
1-0 b6 16.dxc6 bxc6 17.d3! (attacking
the d6-pawn and threatening 18 e5) g6
18.xd6 xd6 19.xd6 and White won
876 B07 e a s i l y, S h i r o v - S p e e l m a n , L o n d o n
Fedorov,Alexei 2500 1991. ]
Korotylev,Alexey 2430 5.dxe5 xe4
St.Petersburg 1994 [ 5...dxe4 is dubious as White has a nice
[Alexander Volzhin] way to obtain an edge: 6.b5+ d7
A) 7.e2 is weaker, as the position after
Although I can't claim that such a quiet line xb5 8.xb5+ fd7 is not clear at all:
gives White considerable opening advantage, 9.e3 ( 9.e6 fxe6 10.h3 c6 11.g5
the statistics of the ...g6 lines against c2-c3 e7 12.xe7 xe7 13.0-0 0-0
can hardly satisfy Black. That's why he has with mutual chances, Sharif-M.Gurevich,
begun to deviate from a normal Pirc with 3... Marseille 1988.) 9...c6 10.d2 dxe5
g6, finding other ways. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 11.xe4 d3 and Black is even slightly
3.d3 e5 4.c3 d5! In my opinio n this is the better, Jacobs-Andruet, London 1988.;
best possibility. Black exploits the drawback of B) 7.c4! g4 8.xf7+ xf7 9.e6+!
3 Bd3 which is the lack of control over d5 and xe6 10.xg4+ with a clear edge for
breaks in the center. W h it e. T h e ga me Do lm a t ov-K a ra s e v,
[ 4...c6 5.f3 e7 6.d5! b8 7.c4 USSR 1982 continued: f7 11.h5+ g6
leads to a position from the old line 1 e4 e5 12.d5+ g7 13.e2 c6 14.d4 g4
2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Be7 4 d4 d6 5 d5 Nb8 6 15.e6+ xe6 16.xe6 c5 17.0-0 f8
Bd3 Nf6 7 c4 which is considered as good 18.d2 d3 19.xe4 b6 20.g5 fe8
for White. One of the latest examples from 21.f6+ g8 22.h6 e7 23.ae1
top level: 0-0 8.c3 ae8 24.g5 f5 25.g7+! and Black
A) 8...c6 9.0-0 bd7 10.e3 a6 11.h3 resigned. ]
cxd5 12.cxd5 b5 13.a4! b4 14.b1 a5 6.f3
15.bd2 b7 16.c1 b6 17.b5 fd7 [ White could win a pawn here: 6.xe4 dxe4
18.b3 b8 19.c4 xc4 20.xc4 c5 7.a4+ d7 8.xe4 but Black's light-
21.c2 ( 21.xc5 dxc5 22.c2 square domination gives him tremendous
intending the manoeuvre Nd2-c4 is also compensation: c6 9.g4 h5 10.h3
very good for White.) 21...f5 22.xe5 d7! ]
dxe5 23.xc5 xc5 24.xc5 and White 6...c6 7.bd2 c5 This position is very
is winning, A. Ivanov-Negulescu, typical for the Ruy Lopez Open Variation: (1
Washington 1998.; e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0
B) 8...bd7 9.c2! h5 10.h3! Nxe4 6 d4 b5 7 Bb3 d5 8 de Be6 9 Nbd2 Nc5
( W h i t e c o u l d n ' t p l a y 10.xe5? 10 c3). The important difference is that Black's
immediately in view of xe5 11.xh5 Q-side pawns are still in their initial positions.
g4 and the queen is trapped. After the This clearly favours Black as in the Ruy Lopez
text Nxe5 is a real threat. ) the b5-pawn is a good target (White plays a2-
B1) 10...g6 is no better: 11.h6 g7 a4 in the right moment), and the weakness of
( 11...e8 12.d2 ) 12.g4! and White the c5-square is also rather important
900
especially after a knight exchange on d4. 877 B07

8.b5 Finkel,Alexander
[ 8.c2 is the alternative to the text. ] Maryasin,Boris
8...d7 Threatening 9...Nxe5. ChT Israel (4) 1997
[ 8...e7!? is also possible: 9.b3 xb3 [Gary Lane]
10.axb3 0-0 11.h3 b8!? 12.d3 c5
13.c2 h6 14.f4 b6 15.0-0 c6 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 Black wishes to avoid the
16.fe1 d8 17.h2?! ( 17.d2!? ) main lines. 3.d4 f6 4.d3 cxd4 5.cxd4
17...a5! 18.a3 White's Rook is forced to c6 6.e2!? A rarely played move but it is
occupy such a miserable position because worth investigating. The so called 'normal'
of the inaccuracy on the previous move. c4 move is Nf3 which is fine but Black can play
19.h7+ h8 20.b4 b3 21.f5 6...Bg4 instantly and try to undermine the
A) I would prefer 21...xf5! 22.xf5 e6 centre. With the text move 6...Bg4 is a waste
23.xe6 ( 23.c2 a5 ) 23...fxe6 of time as 7 f3 breaks the pin and helps White
and the endgame favours Black.; to achieve his desired pawn structure. White
B) 21...d4?! 22.e4! e6 23.e2 d3 has the option of castling kingside with a
24.h5 f8 25.g4 xg4 26.hxg4 g8 space advantage or even adopting a set-up
and although Black has a strong passed which is similar to the aggressive Samisch
pawn the position seems to be in White's va r i a t i o n i n t h e K i n g ' s I n d i a n D e f e n c e .
favour, as Black's king is in danger, A. Basically, White's plan is Nc3, f3, Be3, Qd2,
Fedorov-V.Fedorov, Moscow 1996: 0-0-0 and push the kingside pawns. The only
27.g5!? g6 28.f3 hxg5 29.xg5 d7 drawback is the open c-file which gives Black
30.d5 , threatening e5-e6. ] counterplay. g6
9.e2 [ 6...e5 7.d5 b8 8.bc3 e7 9.f3 ( 9.0-0
[ 9.0-0? blunders a pawn: xe5 10.xe5 intending f4 is a reasonable alternative.)
xb5 ] 9...0-0 10.e3 a6 11.a4 a5 12.d2 a6
9...a6 10.xc6 xc6 11.d4 d7 12.0-0 13.0-0 d7 14.c1 dc5 15.c4 b6
e6 The critical position for the evaluation of 16.d3 xd3 17.xd3 c5 18.c4 h8
this line. Although Black lags a bit in 19.ab1 d7 20.b3 f5 21.b5 f4 22.f2
development, the absence of his important g5 23.xd7 xd7 24.e2 d8 25.b5
light-squared Bishop doesn't allow White to e7 26.b4 axb4 27.xb4 c8 28.c4
create real threats. 13.d1 g8 29.a5 bxa5 30.a4 g7 31.xc5
[ 13.a4 was tried in Smirin-Chernin, dxc5 32.xc5 xc5 33.xc5 g4 34.e2
Groningen 1993: c5 14.xe6 xe6 15.f4 gxf3 35.xf3 f6 36.d1 c7 37.a3
d7 16.c4 f5 17.a3 d4 and Black's c2 38.c1 d2 39.h1 d8 40.d1
chances are by no means worse. ] c2 41.c1 d2 42.d1 1/2-1/2 N.
13...c5 14.xe6 xe6 15.c4 d4 16.e4 Praznik-R.Osterman,Bled 1999. ]
e7 17.a4 c7 18.f4 7.bc3 g7 8.0-0 0-0 9.h3!? e5
[ 18.f4 c6 19.b3 h5 intending ...h4-h3 is [ 9...d7 10.e3 a5 11.d2
good for Black. ] Th ese m ove s are a lm o st a u to ma t ic f o r
18...c6 19.d6+ A wise decision. Now the W hite. The bishops are employed in the
position becomes drawish. centre and the queen lends support to give
[ After 19.b3 0-0 I prefer Black. ] the option of playing Bh6 to deprive Black of
19...xd6 20.exd6 a5! 21.a3 d7! a key defender. fc8 12.a3 a6 13.b4
The best place for the King. 22.b3 he8 Sax quickly demonstrates the hidden
23.d3 b6 24.b5 g6 25.f3 h5 26.b3 benefits of W hite's position. He can push
ab8 27.e1 f6 Neither player can seriously Black back by advancing his pawns on the
play for a win, so draw was agreed. queenside and particularly in the centre.
½-½ d8 14.ac1 e8 15.f4 b5 16.e5 d7
17.d5 cb8 A very passive position for
black to cope with. 18.e6 fxe6 19.dxe6
901
f6 20.f5 c6 21.fxg6 xg6 22.xg6 14...a6 15.a4! c5 16.b4 xd3 17.xd3
hxg6 23.f4 e8 ( 23...e5 24.cd5 h4 18.f4!
c4 25.d3 ) 24.cd5 ab8 25.xf6+ [ 18.xd4? xh3! 19.gxh3 xh3+ 20.g1
exf6 26.xd6+- e5 27.d5 d8 g3+ 21.h1 xd4-+ 22.xd4 e5
28.e7+ f8 29.xg6+ g8 30.e7+ and the threat of Rh5+ wins. ]
f8 31.xe5 1-0 H.Sax-D.Baric, Bled [ 18.b2?! f5 gives Black excellent counter
1995. ] chances. ]
[ 9...d7 10.e3 b4 11.c4 b6 18...f5 19.ac1 g5?! This doesn't quite work
12.b3 e6 13.d2 d7 14.g5 f6 which suggests Black should try to hang on
15.xf6 xf6 16.f4 d5 17.a3 c6 with something like 19... Bd7 but it is already
A) 18.exd5! looks like a possible a difficult task. 20.xd6 fxe4 21.fxe4 d7
improvement: a5 ( 18...exd5 19.xd5 [ 21...xe4?! 22.xe4 xe4 23.g3 e8
and Black has no convincing 24.c7 d3 25.h5 b2 26.e7 d2
compensation for the pawn) 19.e4 f5 27.d6+- ]
20.2g3 wins; [ 21...xe4?! 22.g3! e3 23.xe3 dxe3
B) 18.e5 h4 19.h2 a6 20.a2 ac8 24.xh4 gxh4 25.f3+- ]
21.g1 a7 22.f3 h6 23.fc1 c6 22.c7 ad8 23.g3 This is logical but the
24.d1 fc8 25.f2 f8 26.g4 xc1 game can be more quickly wrapped up:
27.xc1 xc1 28.xc1 c8 29.e1 h5 [ 23.f3! allows White to win in style. f8
30.f6+ g7 31.g3 h8 32.b1 c6 ( 23...h8 24.f7 xe4 25.g3 g6
33.b3 h6 34.h4 h8 35.f2 e7 26.xd7+- ) 24.xd7! xf3 25.xd8++- f7
36.c2 c6 37.c5 d8 38.c1 d7 26.xf3+ g6 27.g3 xe4 28.d6+ h5
39.e1 g8 40.xg8 xg8 41.c3 29.e1 and the threat of g4+ and Ng3+ is
g7 42.e1 b6 43.c2 h8 44.a4 definitely the end for Black. ]
a5 45.d3 g7 46.g4 hxg4 47.hxg4 23...g4 24.f5! gxh3 25.e5 hxg2+ 26.xg2
b8 48.g2 d7 49.c5 c8 50.f5 g4 27.e6 Crushing. xe6 28.dxe6 xe6
exf5 51.gxf5 gxf5 52.e6 f6 53.g3 29.f4! h6
c6 54.h4+ g7 55.xf5 xe6 [ 29...xf5 30.xf5 xf5 31.xf5 f8
56.h7+ f6 57.xe6 b4 58.xf7+ 32.xb7+- ]
g5 59.g7+ 1-0 E.Grosse Kloenne-M. 30.d2 e8 31.h5 a2 32.xh6 e3
Schmidt,Muenster 1994. ] 33.xe3
10.d5 d4!? A calculated gamble in the 1-0
knowledge that if White exchanges on d4 it is
not so easy to round up the pawn without
compromising the position. 878 B07
[ If 10...e7 then W hite can try 11.e3 Finkel,Alexander 2415
with a similar position to a King's Indian in Oratovsky,Michael 2485
that he can soften up the Black queenside Israel 1994
with Rc1 and playing Nb5. It is worth noting [Alexander Volzhin]
that if Black ever gets around to organising
f7-f5 then White puts up the barriers with f3 I've received quite a few e-mails asking about
and will then if necessary take on e4 with the Czech Pirc and I have dedicated this
the pawn. ] up d a t e e xclusive ly t o t his line . T h is lin e
11.xd4 exd4 12.e2 e8 13.f3 d7 reached the peak of its popularity in the early
14.h1!? There is no rush to try and capture nineties, initially due to the efforts of players
the d-pawn so W hite avoids the pins from what was formerly Czechoslovakia: J.
associated with a future Qb6 by stepping into Pribyl, M.Pribyl, K.Mokry and others. Black
the corner of the board. achieved very good results and at that time it
[ 14.b3 c5 15.b2 b6 16.f2 a4 became a significant part of Vladimir
17.a3 c3 18.d2 and White is no Kramnik's opening repertoire. Later its
nearer to claiming the d-pawn ] popularity decreased when W hite found a
902
rather unpleasant way to set problems for 10.xh6 Forced. xc3+ 11.e2 xa1
Black, but definitely the last word has not yet 12.f3 Threatening 13.Qg7 Rf8 14.Qxf8+
been said . 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 c6 Kxf8 15.Bh6+ xa2 13.g7 f8 14.h6
4.f4! The most dangerous line for Black. Now d7 The critical position. It has been tested in
it's not good for Black to play 4... g6 in the two games. 15.g5! An important novelty.
spirit of the Classical Pirc, because the move [ 15.e1 as played in Suetin-Hodgson,
...c7-c6 is senseless here: as we already know, London 1991 is less precise: b6 16.f2
in the Austrian Attack Black should counter in b7 17.e6 fxe6 18.xh7 xf3+!
the centre with c7-c5. ( 18...0-0-0?! 19.xf8 xf8 20.xe7
[ 4.f3 is the main alternative to the text and is clearly better for White.) 19.gxf3 0-0-0
a f t e r t h e u s u a l g4 the same position 20.xe7 d5 and in this complicated
occurs as after the moves 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 position Black's chances are at least not
3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3. We'll consider this line next worse: 21.xe6 xd4+ 22.e3 h8
month. ] 23.f4 ( 23.h4 f8 24.xg6 c5
4...a5 The key position of the Czech System. is OK for Black) 23...d4+ 24.e3 h8
Now 5...Nxe4 is threatened, therefore White 25.f4 d4+ and a draw was agreed. ]
has a choice between three main lines: 5.e5, 5. [ 15.xh7 is weak: by winning the exchange
Bd2 and 5. Bd3. We'll consider all of them in back White loses the initiative: b6 16.xf8
turn. 5.e5 xf8 17.h6 a6 and White has nothing
[ 5.d2?! has also been tried, but this move for the pawn. ]
looks wrong. In Kramnik-Taborov, Belgorod 15...b6 16.e6! This is the idea behind White's
1989 Black had no problems in the opening: previous move. The alternatives are clearly
e5 6.f3 bd7 7.d3 exd4 8.xd4 g6 worse:
9.b3 c7 10.0-0 g7 and in this [ 16.xh7?! a6! 17.xa6 xa6+ 18.f2
complicated position (which is similar to a c4! 19.d1 xc2+ 20.d2 f5+
Classical Pirc) Black's chances are by no intending 0-0-0 ]
means worse. ] [ White also has another interesting
5...e4 6.d3!? p o s s i b i l i t y : 16.a1!? xa1 17.e6
[ 6.f3 is a more common option. ] but this fails to a2! ( But not 17...fxe6?
6...xc3 7.d2 g6 This move doesn't look in view of 18.xg6+ hxg6 19.xg6+ d8
good since the Bishop on g7 will be restricted 20.xe6# ) 18.exd7+ xd7 19.xf8 a6!
b y W h i t e ' s p a wn c h a i n , b u t B l a ck p l a n s 20.xa8 xc2+ 21.f3 xd3+ 22.f2
something unusual. xd4+ and White is in trouble. ]
[ Many commentators recommended the 16...a6! The only way.
Queen sacrifice: 7...xa2!? 8.xa2 xa2 [ Unfortunately after 16...fxe6 17.xh7!
9.f3 and this position was evaluated as Black's position is just hopeless, for
unclear, but I believe that White is clearly example: f6 ( 17...a6 18.xg6+! d8
be t t e r h e re a s it 's dif f icu lt f o r B la ck t o 19.xe6+ c8 20.xf8 xc2+ 21.e3
complete his development. ] xd3 22.xd3 xg2 23.f5 winning )
[ 7...c5! is more solid in my opinion: 8.bxc3 18.g8+ f8 19.h7! ( 19.xf8? a6
d5 9.f3 g4 with mutual chances in a winning ) 19...a6 20.xf6+ exf6 21.xf8+
complicated position occurred in Timman- d7 22.f7+ c8 23.xa6+ winning ]
Hodgson, Biel 1995. ] 17.exd7+ xd7 18.xa6 xa6+ 19.f2
8.bxc3! c4! 20.e1! A complicated position has
[ If 8.xc3?! xc3+ 9.bxc3 with equal arisen: Black has a slight material advantage
chances in a complicated endgame. ] but White has the initiative. fe8?!
8...dxe5 9.fxe5 [ 20...g8! 21.e5 ( Not 21.xf7 xf7+
[ If 9.dxe5 a6 intending ...Nc5 with very 22.xf7 gf8 23.xf8 xf8 winning )
comfortable play for Black. ] 21...ge8 with the idea of ...f7-f6 looks more
9...h6 This is the idea behind Black's p r e c i s e . W h i t e c o u l d c o n t i n u e 22.e4
previous move. Now wild complications occur. with unclear play. ]
903
21.g1 f6 22.e6 b4! 23.e2 b5 looks necessary to me when Black's

24.e1 a5?! A slightly strange decision. position looks fine.) 11.d5! e7 12.0-0
[ Repeating moves with 24...b4 looks more h8 13.d2 and Whit's extra space
to the point if Black has not seen a better gives him an advantage. Campora, D
idea. ] (2503)-Alvarado, N (2318) Decameron
[ The risky-looking 24...a5!? was also worthy 2003.;
of consideration. ] A2) 6...h6 7.h4 g5 8.fxg5 hxg5
25.e3 b4 26.h4! Taking the chance to ( 8...dxe5 immediately is probably a
improve his position. a5 27.c3 b1+ slight nuance as the bishop is worse
28.h2 f5 29.f7 d5?! placed on h4.) 9.xg5 dxe5 10.dxe5
Another inaccurate move which allows White xe5 11.xd8+ xd8 12.0-0-0+ bd7
to launch a very strong attack. with an interesting imbalance between
[ 29...a4?! was also dubious due to 30.g7! W hite's kingside pawns and Black's
d5 ( 30...f2 31.e4 winning; 30...g4 centre. It's easier for White to develop
31.d5 xh4+ 32.g1 xh6 33.e6+ his pieces but should Black succeed in
d8 34.dxc6 winning ) 31.e6! and Black is getting his queenside out he'll stand well.
defenceless: a3 32.f4! a2 33.d6 ] Shukh, N (2459)-Tseshkovsky, V (2564)
[ Both 29...g4!? ] Irkutsk 2010.;
[ and 29...h5!? were much better. ] B) 6.exd6 The calmer option. cxd6 7.f3
30.c4! O f c o u r s e ! h5 31.f4 xh4+ c6 8.d2 a5 9.e2 b6 10.h6 0-0
32.g1 g5? The last mistake. 11.xg7 xg7 12.d5 e5 13.d4
[ Black should have taken the e6 square bd7 14.0-0-0 and White had a definite
under control by 32...g4! though White's edge as e7 is a long term weakness while
attack looks quite strong after 33.d5 ] Black will miss his dark squared bishop.
33.c5+! A decisive blow. bxc5 34.e6+ Borgo, G (2414)-David, A (2587) Milan
d8 35.dxc5! xf4 36.d3+ c7 37.d7+ 2010. ]
Black resigned. 6.dxe5 g4 This is Vigus' suggestion.
1-0 [ 6...fd7
A) He prefers 7.e6! fxe6 8.d2! 0-0
( 8...e5 looks stronger to me (GJ)
879 B07 transposing back into positions similar to
Gallagher,Joseph G 2501 the mainline.) 9.0-0-0 Watson "and not
Karim,Ismael 2375 only does Black have trouble unwinding,
Gibraltar Masters (10.26) 03.02.2011 but White has multiple ideas like Bh6, Bc4
[Gawain Jones] and h4-h5".;
B) 7.d5?! can be seen in Gashimov, V
Joe was pleased with this game afterwards (2644)-Moran Llera, J (1976) Sanxenxo
and told me he tried it as he's faced some 2007 annotated by John. ]
problems in online blitz games on the Black 7.xd8+ xd8 8.0-0-0+!? And this is his
side! 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 new idea. He's happy to sacrifice the pawn
g7 5.e5 dxe5 without harming Black's pawn structure (i.e.
[ John suggested that Black should he doesn't throw e5-e6 in). However he does
investigate 5...fd7 but the text is the more manage a great lead in development and
c o m m o n . A c o u p l e o f r e c e n t g a m e s Black has to be careful. Objectively I don't
continued: think it gives W hite an advantage but it's
A) Instead White can keep his centre with easier to have the White pieces.
6.f4 although Black can generate [ 8.d1+ d7 9.e6 fxe6 10.c4 ( Both
counterplay with 10.e2; and 10.f3 are looked at by John
A1) 6...0-0 has been the most popular Watson in the archives.) 10...e8 11.f3
7.f3 f6 8.exf6 exf6 9.h4 b6 c6 12.0-0 ge5 13.xe5 xe5 14.b5
10.e2 c6?! ( 10...d5 c8 15.xd7 xd7 16.xe6 e5 17.f4
904
d6 18.h6 d8 19.g7 f8 20.xd6+ [ 10...h6 11.e3 c8 12.f4 ec6
1/2-1/2 Magem Badals, J (2535) -Chernin, A looks very passive but Black is solid and
(2645) New York 1998 was annotated by W hite does have to prove something as
Alexander Volzhin - check the archives. ] otherwise Black will be able to convert his
8...d7 extra pawn. ]
[ Perhaps 8...d7 is the better way to block 11.e3 c8 12.f4 bc6 13.e4 e6?!
the c heck. Pla ying as in the game wit h Karim was evidently worried about a knight
9.h3 gxe5 10.e2 ( 10.d5 jumping into e6 but this is too slow and White
m a y b e b e s t b u t i t c a n b e m e t b y c6! now takes over the advantage.
11.xe7 f6 12.xc8 fxg5 13.d6 h6 [ 13...b6 looks risky creating big holes on the
14.b1 g4 and Black starts to take over the light squares but 14.a6+ b8 looks fully
initiative although 15.f4! keeps the position playable for Black who can slowly continue
in dynamic equality territory.) 10...h6 with ...Rd 8, ...Bh6 f ollowed by pushin g
11.e3 c6 12.he1 e6 would allow Black W h it e 's p ie ce s b a ckwa rds a n d I'm s t ill
t o s lo wly u n t a n gle a n d st a rt t o t ry a n d sceptical White has complete compensation
utilise his extra pawn. ] for the pawn. ]
9.h3 This appears to be the novelty. 14.c5 e8 15.d2 f8 16.hd1
[ 9.e4 was played in a previous game and Simple chess. The Anglo-Swiss GM puts his
looks more logical. h6 10.h4 g5 11.e6 pieces on the best squares and doesn't allow
fxe6?! ( 11...gxh4! 12.exd7 xd7 Karim enough time to complete his
was a better approach as 13.c5 e8 d e v e l o p m e n t . xc5 17.xc5 d8?
14.xd7 xf2 is probably good for Black.) And this is the losing move. Karim overlooks
12.g3 b6 13.c4 c8 14.f3 c5 a pretty tactic.
Kadlec, B (1905) -Sorsak, J (2060) Slovakia [ The position was already awkward but
1998 when W hite could have claimed a p e r h a p s wit h 17...a6 Black can hold. The
c l e a r a d v a n t a g e wi t h 15.xd7! xd7 problem is Black's still extremely passive
( 15...xd7 16.d1+ e8 17.xe6 and White can choose whether to play very
wins material as both the g4 knight and Bd5 s l o w l y w i t h 18.b3 when it's not clear how
are threatened.) 16.d1! ge5 17.xe6 B l a c k m a k e s p r o g r e s s a s ( 18.xg6!?
a n d W h i t e w i l l e n d u p wi t h a d e c i s i v e is a cousin of the game continuation. hxg6
material advantage. ] 19.f4 b6 20.g1 g5 21.fxe5 xe5 22.d4
9...xe5 It's natural to bring the knight back and White will be able to regain the pawn
into the f old but now W hite has a decent with the better ending.) 18...b6 19.a3
initiative compensating for the pawn. keeps him under the cosh. ]
[ 9...xe5 might be better. Joe might have 18.h5! Getting the knight out of the way.
tried to continue as in the game with 10.e2 gxh5 19.f4
but h6! 11.f3 ( 11.xg4 hxg5 12.xd7 [ 19.xh5!? is an interesting nuance but the
xd7 13.e4 f6 14.c5 e8! 15.xd7 text is good enough. ]
d6 regains the knight with a clear 19...g6 20.xd7 xf4 21.f3 White has
advantage. This is the point of forcing ...c6 regained his piece and, although two pawns
so the bishop won't be defended.) 11...c6 down, is clearly on top. Black can still not get
12.xg4 hxg5 13.xd7 xd7 14.e4 g4 that a8 rook out of the game while W hite's
15.hg5 f4+ 16.b1 xg5 17.xg5 rooks and bishops completely dominate. He
h5! 18.xf7+ c7 19.he1 e5 can ch oose when he want s t o rega in his
and due to the knight being trapped on f7 pawns as Black's kingside is dropping. e5
W hite would have to try 20.xd7+ xd7 [ 21...h8 is the computer's ultra-passive
21.xe5+ d6 22.xg4 with a complex a p p r o a c h b u t n o w 22.e7 ( 22.f2!?
e n d g a m e b u t a s W h it e d o e s n ' t h a ve a is also interesting with ideas of Bh4xf6 or
passed pawn Black's rooks shouldn't be even Bg3 looking at Black's king.) 22...d5
worse. ] 23.xd8+ xd8 24.xd8 xd8 25.c4
10.e2 f6 and White wins the piece with a technically
905
winning endgame. ] [ 12.xd7+ i s u n i m p r e s s i v e : cxd7!

22.e7 c6 ( 12...fxd7 13.d4 g8 14.0-0 ) 13.g3
[ 22...f7 23.g3 e6 24.xf6 f8 25.e7 g7 14.0-0 0-0 It's a bog-standard position
e8 26.xh5 is also disastrous. ] and Black is absolutely OK. ]
23.xf6 T h a t ' s o n e b a c k . a5 24.xh7 12...dxc5 13.0-0 xb5 14.axb5 xb5
And the other. h5 is also dropping when the 15.e5 White needs to prosecute his attack
two connected passed pawns win easily for before Black can play .. Bg7 and 0-0 it really
White. b8 25.g3 e4 26.xh5 is as simple as that. Azmai is well aware of
[ 26.h1 e2+ 27.d2 ed4 28.xh5 the risk that he is taking but you should not
is an alternative to keep the bishop pair but play the Pirc if you do not want to tough out
the game is simple. ] this type of position. d8
26...xh5 27.xh5 a7 28.e1 e6 29.f5 [ 15...d7 16.d5 ( Maybe 16.e6 fxe6
g8 30.g5 a6 31.h4 d4 32.f6 xf6 17.e3 is more dangerous.) 16...b6
33.xf6 f3 34.xe4 xg3 35.b3 h3 17.b7 h6! 18.xa7 0-0 19.xa8 xa8
36.b2 b5 37.e3 a4 38.h5 axb3 20.g3 is rather unclear but in principle
39.axb3 c5 40.g7 c4 41.h6 cxb3 Black is alright he has to play a few
42.xb3+ accurate moves though. ]
1-0 16.ed4!
[ 16.e1 d5 17.xa7 h6 18.g3=
( 18.e6 fxe6 19.g3 b6
880 B07 is unconvincing. )]
Ganguly,Surya Shekhar 2574 16...e4 17.xb5
Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2679 [ I prefer 17.f4! cxd4 18.xe4 a5
It Pune IND (1) 03.09.2004 19.fd1 White's simply better developed:
[Andrew Martin] g7 20.xd4! White must keep Black's
Que en m ovin g to preven t ca st ling. d5
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 ( 20...b6 21.c6 c8 22.xa5 0-0
5.d2 b5 6.d3 bd7 I've already made 23.c4 ) 21.xd5 xd5 22.c6! ]
the point countless times that Black should 17...xd2 18.xd2 xd2 19.fd1
delay ...Bg7 and ...0-0 as long as possible in [ There's also 19.xa7 g7 20.c7+ d8
this variation, heading off the possibility of 21.e6 With the Black King still exposed
White's outright Kingside attack. 7.a4 White has plenty of chances. ]
[ Here's what happens if White does not 19...xd1+ 20.xd1 e6 21.a1 d7! 22.c4
s wi t c h t a c k : 7.0-0-0 a5 8.b1 b4 [ 22.xa7+ c6 23.c4 bxc3 24.xc3 g7
9.ce2 g4 10.f4 g7 11.f3 xe3 25.f4 f8 26.e4 seems rather better for
12.xe3 0-0 Amonatov,F-Torre,E/Bled White. ]
2002 Owning his da rk-square d Bishop , 22...bxc3 23.xa7+ c6 24.xc3 c4
Black stands well. ] Looks like a desperate attempt to get the
7...b4 8.ce2 a5 9.f3 c5!? As you can Bishop going. 25.xf7 b4 26.f4 c5
see, Azmai takes the idea of delaying ..Bg7 to 27.e4+ d4 28.g5+ d5 And now 29 b3
the logical extreme. would keep White on the right track, steadily
[ If 9...g7 then 10.0-0 0-0 11.h6! b8 pro gre ssin g t owa rd s t h e win. I n s t e a d . . . .
12.xg7 xg7 13.g3 White has the 29.g3?? And resigns before 29...Bd2.
usual edge although it may not amount to Confounding and annoying!
mu ch as th e gam e p an s o u t. A t ta ckin g 0-1
possibilities of f4-f5 and Qg5 oblige Black to
be very careful , but the position is
defensible. ]
10.dxc5 xc5 11.b5+ d7 12.xc5
He is fighting to keep the Black King in the
middle.
906
881 B07 [ 9.d5 grabs space but Black gets sufficient

Gashimov,Vugar 2761 play after a5 10.0-0 c6! 11.dxc6 xc6
Ivanchuk,Vassily 2766 12.exd6 xd6 ]
74th Tata Steel GMA (5) 19.01.2012 9...f6 10.exf6 exf6 11.h4 d5! Ivanchuk
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] takes a very sensible approach, simply taking
his fair share of the centre and asking
1.e4 g6 2.d4 d6 3.c3 f6 4.g5 g7 Gashimov to come up with a plan. 12.e1
5.e5 Gashimov clearly believes in this move [ 12.e5!? looks interesting but it will
as he has played it before but I have to say probably just transpose to the note below
that 5.Qd2 looks like a more testing approach after e7 13.d3 ]
fd7 Although dxe5 was long considered the 12...e7 13.g4? Perhaps Vugar was
m a i n l i n e t h i s m o ve h a s b e e n g a in i n g i n burdened by the expectation of an advantage
popularity, and I'm not surprised as it's by no with White because this is far too ambitious.
means easy to find an advantage for White With the centre still relatively open this just
here seems to be weakening.
[ 5...dxe5 has been covered in Gallagher- [ 13.d3 was more reliable with balanced
Karim and Gashimov-Moran Llera in the chances after f5 14.f2 c4 15.e1 c6
archives. ] 16.f3 ]
6.f4 13...c4! 14.xc4 dxc4 15.g2
[ since White gets nothing in the game [ 15.e2 xd4+ 16.f2 d6 17.b5 c6
perhaps the way to try for an advantage is 18.d4 d7 19.xc4+ f7 20.h3 b6
6.exd6 cxd6 7.f3 c6 8.d2 with a clear advantage to Black ]
and as Gawain previously commented White 15...b5 Chucky goes for the most aggressive
had a slight advantage in Borgo, G (2414)- approach, opening up lines all over the board
D a v i d , A ( 2 5 8 7 ) M i l a n 2 0 1 0 , a l t h o u g h for his more active pieces to exploit
Black's position is very playable here. ] [ 15...f5 may also be good but White does at
6...0-0 7.f3 b6 ...f6 is a more common least get good compensation with the pawn
move-order 8.e2 sac. 16.e2! xd4+ 17.f2 d6
[ 8.e2 is probably more critical but Black 18.fe1! ]
seems to be doing fine with accurate play, e. 16.xb5 this doesn't turn out well but
g. f6 9.h4 otherwise Black is just very comfortable
A) 9...dxe5! 10.fxe5 ( 10.dxe5 fxe5 [ 16.e2 b8 ]
11.d1 e8 12.fxe5 e6 with chances 16...b8 17.c3
f o r b o t h s i d e s) 10...h6 preventing [ 17.xa7 b7 and the knight is trapped on
Queenside castling ( 10...g5!? ); a7 ]
B) 9...c6 10.0-0-0 d5 11.b1 [ 17.a3 xb2 18.xc4 b4 19.ge3
was better for White in De la Villa Garcia, d5 and Black has an excellent position ]
J (2470)-Houska, M (2284) Lisbon 2001. ] 17...xb2 18.a4
[ 8.d3 has also been played a few times [ 18.e3 f5 19.e1 d7 20.xe7 xe7
but after f6 9.h4 fxe5 10.fxe5 dxe5 i s b e t t e r f o r B l a c k a s 21.xf5 a3
11.dxe5 c6 12.e2 d4 Black has at 22.e7+ h8 leaves White's position in
least equalised ] tatters ]
8...c6 18...b4 19.c5?!
[ there don't seem to be many problems for [ 19.c3 was better when Black can grab a
Black after 8...dxe5 either 9.fxe5 ( 9.dxe5 pawn with xg4 20.xg4 xa4 21.e3
f6 10.h4 c6 ) 9...f6 10.e3 fxe5 ( or d6 but at least here Black has a few
10...c6 11.exf6 exf6 ) 11.xe5 c6 problems to overcome with a misplaced rook
12.xc6 bxc6 when Black's active pieces and a weak pawn on c4 22.g2 ]
c o m p e n s a t e f o r h i s m a n g l e d p a w n 19...c3 20.e2?! this quickly leads to a
structure. ] Queen sacrifice but not a very successful one
9.0-0 [ 20.b3 b7 21.a3 xb3!? 22.cxb3 f5
907
admittedly looks terrible for White ] v a r i e t y o f g o o d m o v e s , e . g . , 13.0-0

20...c6 21.a3 e8! 22.xe8+ this appears ( 13.h4!? ) 13...c6 Karpatchev-
to be more desperation than anything else Berelovich, Smolensk 1992 and 14.e4!
[ 22.e3 xd4 23.ae1 a5 and Black is with the idea ( or 14.h6 ) 14...xb2
a pawn up with a better position to boot ] 15.c5;
22...xe8 23.axb4 xg4 24.f2 d8! A3) 10...c6 11.a4 ( or 11.e4 )
this accurate move stops Gashimov f rom 11...b6 12.b5 b8?! 13.xd7 xd7
getting any serious counterplay and Ivanchuk 14.h3 ge5 15.d4 with a clear
quickly mops up. 25.b3 xb4 26.xa7 a d va n t a ge , B I va n o vic- Ho i, P lo vd i v
xc2 27.c1 b8 28.a2 b4 29.a4 1983;
d5 30.c5 f8 31.ca1 c2 32.d3 b5 B) Not as clear but still promising is
33.c1 h3 34.a5 c4 35.1a4 c3 10.c4 xc3+ 11.bxc3 h6 ( 11...e8
An excellent game from Ivanchuk, showing the 12.h3! ) 12.c1 c8 13.e2 e5
Pirc can be a dangerous weapon even at the 14.b3 with superior activity and targets;
highest level. C) 10.e2 (again, there are other moves
0-1 that seem to keep some advantage, e.g.,
e5
C1) 11.f4 f7 12.f3 c6
882 B07 C1a) 13.e4 d6 ( 13...xb2
Gashimov,Vugar 2644 14.c5 d6 15.0-0 c8 );
Moran Llera,Jose Angel 1976 C1b) 13.0-0 d6 14.a3 e8
IV Open Sanxenxo ESP (1) 16.06.2007 15.fe1 a6 16.f1 d8 17.e5
[John Watson] xe5 18.fxe5 f7 19.f4 c8
20.d3 f8 21.e2 h6 22.g3 f7
Okay, White was outrated by his opponent by 23.de1 g8 24.a4 f5 25.e4
almost 700 points, but who's counting? A very b6 26.c3 d4 27.f2 f5 28.g2
interesting opening. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 d4 29.e4 fd8 30.ff1 f8 31.c3
3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.e5 dxe5 dd8 32.d1 h6 33.h4 xd1
The standard response. 34.xd1 xh4 35.h1 f5 36.g4
[ Maybe 5...fd7 should be looked at more h4 37.g3 f3+ 38.xf3 xf3
carefully. ] 39.g2 f8 40.f2 f7 41.h2
6.dxe5 fd7 e8 42.d3 g5 43.c4 b7 44.h3
[ 6...g4 is given '!' by Vigus and may be f3 45.c1 h5 46.gxh5 h8 47.f2
best, but not really convincing to me. The xh5+ 48.g3 g4 49.d4 h3+
lines with e6 for W hite seem like a worse 50.f2 e4 51.e1 c5 52.e3
version for Black of the similar King's Indian xe5 0-1 Bronznik, V (2405)-Held, P
lines I used to play, because there is no (2295)/Wuerttemberg 199800;
d y n a m i c c o u n t e r p l a y : 7.xd8+ C2) 11.f3 f7 ( 11...c8 12.xe5
( Compare the following line with 7 Nd5 c6?! xe5 13.xe7 c6 14.c5 and White
in our game: 7.d5?! c6! 8.xe7 a5+ is for choice) 12.0-0 ( 12.e3 ) 12...h6
9.c3 xe5+ 10.e2 d7! -Vigus ) 7...xd8 13.e3 c6 14.e4 (Black has major
8.d1+ ( even 8.e2 xe5 9.0-0-0+ d7 p r o b l e m s n o w ) d6 15.c5 b6
10.f4 ec6 11.c4 gives a lot of 16.xd7 xd7 17.c3 hf8 18.fe1
compensation, and there are other ideas ( or 18.b5 a6 19.a4 b5 20.c2 )
after; 8.0-0-0+ ) 8...d7 9.e6! fxe6 18...g5 19.c4 ( again, Black has real
. This is a key position: problems after 19.b5! a6 20.a4 b5
A) 10.f3 and: 21.b3 ) 19...xf3! 20.gxf3 e5
A1) 10...xc3+ 11.bxc3 c6 12.c4 21.e2 g6 22.c4?! f8 with the
c8 13.d4; mighty f4 square and good counterplay,
A2) 10...e5 11.xe5 xe5 12.c4 Asensio Lisan-Vidarte Morales, Barbera
e8 , and White seems to have a 1999. But obviously I don't like the looks
908
of this variation for Black. ] 23.a4 e4?! 24.xc6 d2 25.fe1

7.d5?! This wins so effortlessly that it's easy xb3 26.axb3 a5 27.c5 xb2 28.xa5
to pass it over. But in fact, I think that there xa5 29.xa5 d4 30.d3 a6 31.c6
are two better moves: b6? 32.cxb4 xd3 33.xd3 h5 34.g3
[ (a) 7.e6! looks quite strong: g5 35.e7+ g8 36.e5
A) 7...xc3+ 8.bxc3 fxe6 9.c4 ( or 1-0
9.h6! ) 9...c6 10.e2 f6 11.d1;
B) 7...fxe6 8.d2! ( two other moves are
8 Nf3 and 8.c4 c6 9.f3 0-0 10.e2 883 B07
Mezcua Coronil-Fuentes Reyes, Aragon Godena,Michele 2517
2003 ) 8...0-0 ( 8...b6 9.xd8+ xd8 Polgar,Judit 2711
10.0-0-0+ d7 11.e4 ) 9.0-0-0 38th Olympiad (8) 21.11.2008
and not only does Black have trouble [David Vigorito]
unwinding, but W hite has multiple ideas
like Bh6, Bc4, and h4-h5. ] Judit Polgar shows some rust as she takes too
[ (b) 7.f4 has done well in a couple of games. many liberties against her lower rated
I don't think it's much to brag about, but I'd opponent. 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 This move
rather be W hite: f6 (otherwise White may always seemed to passive to me. I understand
play Bh4) 8.exf6 exf6 9.h4 0-0 10.d5+ that it keeps pieces on the board and is less
h8 11.0-0-0 favoured White in Sisniega- theoretical than the main lines, but it seems to
Kuninheam, Mexico 1980. ] just give White an easy edge with simple play.
7...c6! 3.d4 f6 4.d3 c7 An unusual move.
[ 7...c6?! isn't like 6...Ng4 7 Nd5 c6! above: [ 4...g6 is well met by 5.dxc5 dxc5 6.e5 ]
8.xe7 a5+ 9.d2! xe5+ 10.e2 [ while 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 c6 is the normal
wit h t h e a d v a d n t a g e , K ivist o -G o rsko v, continuation. ]
Finland 1990 ] 5.f3 g6 6.0-0 g7 7.e1 0-0 Black has a
8.b5!? p a s s i v e P i r c - l i k e s e t u p . 8.f4 g4
[ Or 8.e6 de5! 9.exf7+ xf7 10.f4 e5 A typical method for outplaying a weaker
( 10...0-0!? 11.xc7 xb2 )] opponent is to create a minor piece imbalance,
[ I s u p p o s e t h a t W h it e sh o u ld t r y 8.e2 bu t W h it e will ha ve no com pla in ts a bo u t
, but it's not promising after 8...h6 or even securing the bishop pair. Black does not even
d4 9.e4 c6! 10.xd4 xe5! ] get any real pre ssure on W hite's centre .
8...f6!? 9.bd2 cxd4 10.cxd4 c6 11.h3 xf3
[ Good, but 8...h6! wins the e-pawn and puts 12.xf3 d7 13.e3 ac8 14.d2 b6
the burden of proof on White, for example, 15.f1 b4 16.d3! White does not want
9.h4 ( 9.xc6 hxg5 10.a4 c6 ) 9...g5 Black's kn ight com in g in to b 4 an d c2 . e5
10.g3 cxe5 11.xd7+ xd7 12.f3 This is not good, but it is difficult to offer
c6! ] Black advice. White has everything - space,
9.exf6 exf6 10.f4 ce5 11.xe5 fxe5 the centre, the bishop pair, and the initiative.
12.e3 0-0 13.e2 c6 With his two bishops, [ O f c o u r s e n o t 16...xb2 17.eb1
Black stands better, but he needs to activate trapping the queen. ]
them. 14.c4+ h8 15.0-0 b6 17.a3 a5 18.b4 d8 19.d5 e7
[ 15...e4! 16.c3 h4 clears e5 for the Black has a bad King's Indian now. Without a
knight. ] light-squared bishop it will be d if f icult t o
16.b3 f6 attack the kingside. Also ...f5 will weaken the
[ 16...c5! 17.c4 d8 18.d6 e7 ] l i g h t - s q u a r e s f u r t h e r . 20.b5!
17.c4 c7? 18.d6! xd6 19.xd6 h6 Another problem for Black - the queenside is
20.c3!? b5 21.f7+ h7 22.xe5 b4? weak. This move provokes Black into further
This gives up the queenside. Better weakening the light-squares. b6 21.a4 h6
[ 22...a5! 23.a3 a4 24.a2 e4! 25.xe4 [ If 21...f5 immediately, White has 22.g5
xe5 26.c3 f5 ] coming to e6. ]
909
22.b5!? 884 B07

[ White does not even want to allow 22.xa7 Goloshchapov,Alexander 2577
a8 23.b7 b8 24.a6 f5 with some Lahno,Kateryna 2472
counterplay. ] 73rd ch-UKR Kharkov UKR (1.1) 24.08.2004
22...f6 [Andrew Martin]
[ Black has been prevented from playing ... f5
f o r n o w , b u t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e 22...c7 FULL THROTTLE 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3
23.ac1 will force Black to move the d7- g6 4.e3 g7 5.d2 c6 6.f3 b5
knight anyway. ] The Pirc move-order means That Black is
23.d2 c7 24.ec1 b8 25.d1! more or less committed to delaying castling
I like such moves. By going back home, the and playing with ...c6 and ...b5. Nevertheless,
queen is ready to help fight for the c-file. The this is not such a bad approach there's a lot
control of the d1-h5 diagonal can be important of hype around about Be3 and Qd2. 7.g4 h5!
too. h5 I think this is good, interrupting White's plan.
[ Black gives up the c-file, hoping that the f8- 8.g5
rook will help her develop counterplay on [ 8.gxh5 xh5 9.ge2 d7 10.g2 b6
the kingside. After 25...fc8 26.a6 xc1 11.b3 a5 12.d1 c7 13.g3 a4
27.xc1 xc1 28.xc1 Black is totally seems very reasonable for Black, who has
passive. ] considerable queenside counterplay. For
26.xc7 xc7 27.c1 b8 28.d7!? f4 instance: 14.f2 d7 15.ce2 d5 16.e5
[ 28...f5 29.exf5 is one point behind Qd1 - f6 Zude,A-Espig,L/Plauen GER 2004 ]
B l a c k c a n n o t r e c a p t u r e wi t h t h e p a wn 8...fd7 9.f4! Very logical. White can't open
because the h5-knight hangs, while the kingside anymore so he maximises his
r e c a p t u r i n g w i t h ( or 29.e6+ h8 options in the centre. The defect is that it's yet
30.exf5 ) 29...xf5 runs into 30.xf5 xf5 another pawn move.
31.g4 ] [ After 9.h4 White's attack is blocked and he
29.f1?! This looks unnecessary, but it m u st f a c e qu e e n s id e co u n t e rp la y : b6
doesn't do any harm. b7 30.b5 f5 10.d3 0-0 11.f4 c4 12.xc4 bxc4
31.c4 a6? 13.ge2 d5 14.e5 g4 15.g3 e6 16.b3
[ This just hangs the queenside. It was better cxb3 17.cxb3 d7 18.a4 c7 19.0-0
to just defend the d-pawn with 31...d8 ] fc8 White is merely defending against
32.c6 b8 Black's impending ...c5 break. 20.fc1 f8
[ If 32...xc6 33.xd6 followed by 34. 21.h1 a3 22.b2 a5 23.f2 f5
Rxc6. ] 24.h2 b7 25.g1 c5! It could not be
33.xb6 fxe4 stopped for ever. 26.dxc5 xc5 27.d4 a4
[ This is just desperate, but 33...d8 34.c2 28.xc5 xc5 29.gc1 xf2 30.xf2 axb3
l e a v e s B l a c k a p a wn d o wn wi t h a b a d 31.axb3 xa1 0-1 Nitin,S-Sangma, R/
position. ] Chennai IND 2004 ]
34.d7 d8 35.xf8 xf8 36.g4 h5 9...b6 10.f3 0-0
37.d7 f6 38.d1 h7 39.xf4 exf4 [ Could Black have waited with any of
40.e6! xe6 41.dxe6 xc6 42.xd6 e7 10...a5 ]
43.xa6 g5 44.a7 f6 45.b5 g6 46.b6 [ 10...d5 ]
c6 47.c7 [ 10...b4 11.d1 a5 It's the eternal dilemma
1-0 when to castle. ]
11.d3 c7 12.a3 a5 13.e2 d5!
The longer Black left the central counterstrike,
the more menacing White's impending attack
would have been. I think Lahno has timed her
c h a l l e n g e we l l , b u t t h e s e p o s i t i o n s a r e
uncommonly difficult to play. 14.e5 h3
Very tempting, but I prefer
910
[ 14...g4! 15.h4 ( 15.0-0 c4 16.xc4 885 B07

bxc4= ) 15...c4 16.xc4 bxc4 17.f5 c5 Granda Zuniga,Julio E 2609
18.fxg6 cxd4 19.xd4 ( 19.gxf7+ xf7 Movsziszian,Karen 2536
20.xd4 c6 ) 19...xe5 20.gxf7+ xf7 XXI Open Benidorm ESP (9) 03.05.2008
21.g6 g7 22.0-0-0 xd4 23.xd4 e6 [John Watson]
( 23...xe2? 24.xd5+ ) 24.de1 ]
15.f5!? Going for it! A question from Felix Eickenbusch: while
[ 15.h4 c4 16.xc4 bxc4 17.f5 preparing for a club match against a Pirc
wa s a l e s s e x c i t i n g w a y, b u t p o s s i b l y player I noticed your comments regarding Mr.
equally effective. ] Vigus Pirc Inquiry (Update April 07) and the
15...g2 16.f2 xh1 17.xh1 c4 game Svidler-Ivanchuk (11/06). You
[ 17...gxf5 18.f4 c4 19.xc4 bxc4 recommended 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.
20.xh5 d7 21.g1 obviously gives Be3 c6 5.h3 Nbd7 6.g4!? as an improvement
White a very dangerous attack. The Black (alas I don't own his book). W hile
Rooks are helpless at present and there crosschecking the position I noticed a recent
seems little opportunity for them to show high-level clash in this variation transposing
any strength. ] from a queen pawn opening. I found the game
18.xc4 dxc4 19.f4 d7 20.c3! very interesting, yet it struck me as odd that
I really like this move calm in the face of the Movsziszian played b4 only on move 20. I'd be
storm. White recognises that he doesn't need glad if I could learn more of this game on one
to rush and instead extends his grip on the of the following updates. [jw: Here's a stab at it.
position. ] 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6
[ 20.fxg6 fxg6 21.e6 b7 22.xf8 xf8 5.h3 bd7 6.g4 Here's that g4 idea again,
releases the pressure prematurely. ] which appears in several orders. James Vigus
20...b6 has talked about this in this column. I think
[ 20...gxf5 21.xh5 c5 22.c2! e6 that Black needs to forget about the kingside
23.f6+ h8 24.e1 cxd4 25.g2! for a while and move on the queenside. Here
shows the extent of Black's plight. She can't he does so in the most radical manner. b5!?
get her pieces working! ] Risky, and maybe even stemming f rom a
21.f6! W hat a pawn chain! h8 22.c2 misconception, although Black is a terrifically
Sacrifices on g6 loom. e6 Hoping to defend strong player.
wi t h t h e Q u e e n a l o n g t h e s e c o n d r a n k . [ 6...a5 is safer then ...e5 can follow. The
23.xh5 immediate 7.d2 ]
[ It's not clear why White rejected either [ 6...e5 is also interesting after 7.g5 h5
23.xe6 fxe6 24.xg6+ g7 25.fxg7 8.d2 , White may have a slight advantage,
xg7 26.xe6+ h7 27.xc6 ] but he has to worry about Black's knight
[ or 23.xg6 fe8 24.xh8 xh8 25.g6 coming to f4 (sometimes with a pawn
fxg6 26.xg6 h7 27.xh7+ xh7 sacrifice), and that piece also assists against
28.g1 g8 29.g5++- both of which seem an f4 break. ]
very convincing. ] 7.g2
23...b4 24.f4 bxc3 25.bxc3 d5 26.h4 [ I wonder if Black's idea was 7.g5 b4
fb8 27.h5 xe3 28.xe3 c5 29.d5 ? B u t t h e n 8.ce2 xe4? fails to 9.f3
The pawn chain has to be seen to be , trapping the knight! ]
believed. exd5 30.xd5 d7 31.e7+ f8 7...e5 8.d2 b7 9.g5 h5 10.ge2 e7
32.hxg6 g7 33.f5 fxg6 34.xg7 11.b3!? Odd-looking, but the point is clear in
Games like this make one realise just how the note to Black's 12th. 0-0 12.h4 f5
difficult the Modern/Pirc Defence is to play. Not terrible, but is this the wrong side of the
Certainly it is absolutely crucial in the Be3/ board?
Qd2 variation for Black to delay castling until [ 12...b4! 13.a4 exd4 14.xd4 c5!
the last possible moment. 15.b2 b6 , and I prefer Black, but it's
1-0 double-edged. ]
911
13.exf5 gxf5 14.dxe5! xe5 15.f4 xf4 [ 5...c5 would transpose into a Sicilian
16.xf4 g6 17.e2 d5 Defence. ]
[ 17...xf4 18.xf4 d5!? 19.0-0-0
6.xf7+ The only dangerous move,
( 19.e6?! d6 20.xf8 e5+ ) 19...a3+ temporarily displacing Black's king at the cost
20.b1 looks safe for White and therefore
of the two bishops.
promising. ] [ 6.xe4 d5 7.d3 dxe4 8.xe4 c5 9.0-0
18.g3 d6 19.f4 Ugly, but after h5, the 0-0 10.c3 c6 11.h1 c7 was very
bishop can re-route via f2. e8 20.0-0 comfortable for Black in Eisinger - Mohrlok,
[ jw: There seems no reason to be shy: 20.h5 Bad Aibling 1965 ]
e7 ( 20...f8 21.0-0-0 e6 22.h3 ) 6...xf7 7.xe4 f8
21.d4 ] [ Black can also put the rook on e8, though
20...b4?! As Felix Eickenbusch indicates this leads to much the same sort of game.
above, this doesn't work out very well. Herzog - Sorsensen, Danish Ch., Hinnerup
[ Let me try to improve. An interesting1979 continued 7...e8 8.c3 g8 9.0-0
sample line might be 20...e7 21.ae1c6 10.d4 e6 11.eg5 f6 12.e3 h6
( 21.fe1 e3+ 22.xe3 xe3 23.h5 f8 13.e4 f7 with a solid game for Black. ]
24.f2 e7 25.d4 xe1+ 26.xe1; 8.0-0 g8 9.d4 Bringing about a position in
21.d4 may be best: f7 22.d3 e7 which White has more space and a superior
23.h3 c8 24.ad1 ) 21...e3+ 22.xe3 pawn structure. Black's bishops are not very
xe3 23.f2 e7 24.d4 xe1 25.xe1 useful at present. c6?!
b4 26.e3 xf4 27.xf5 f8= ] [ In Rivera - Black, Moscow (ol) 1994 Black
21.d4! d7 22.h5 e7 23.f3 c5 played a better move with 9...e6 but White
To prevent Nd4, but now Black has to cede still had the more comfortable game after
his best bishop: 24.e5 xe5 25.fxe5 e6 10.c3 d7 11.e1 f6 12.eg5 e8
26.g6!? 13.b3 e7 14.d2 etc. ]
I would say '!' for bravery, but it is
unnecessary when W hite has such a fine [ 9...d5 10.c5 b6 11.d3 gave White a
position. hxg6 27.h4! xe5? Too greedy, n ice o u t p o st o n e 5 in Ro m e ro - Ro ja s ,
and a real misjudgement. Spanish Ch., Torrevieja 1997 ]
[ 27...f7 was a tough defensive move, 10.c3 c7 11.e1 e6 12.eg5 e7
intending 28.f6 gxh5 ] 13.g3 d7 14.d2 f6 15.ae1 h5
28.ae1 g7 29.g5 Ouch. f8 30.e6! 16.h4 White has a very nice attacking game
Total domination. White wins. ad8 and comes within a whisker of victory. f6
31.h6
d4+ 32.h1 d7 33.f6+ g8 34.xg6+ 17.g4 xg5 18.xg5 f6 19.f5 gxf5
h8 35.f6+ xf6 36.xf6+ h7 37.g7+ 20.gxf5 e5 21.h1 Not as decisive as it
[ 37.g7+ xh6 38.f3 mates in a few. ] looks as Black has tricks based on getting her
1-0 queen to d5.
[ 21.dxe5 dxe5 22.g3 h8 23.xe5
looks strong. ]
886 B07 21...h8 22.e4 f7 23.xf6 xf6
Grigoryan,Meri 24.xf6+ xf6 25.dxe5 dxe5 26.xe5 d7
Ornstein,Petra 27.g5
European Womens' Ch., (6) 27.04.2001 [ Missing a strong idea in 27.c4 followed by
[Nigel Davies] 28.Bc3. ]
27...f7 28.f6?! This pawn gets in the way of
Grand Prix Attack meets the Pirc. White plays White's bishop.
the same moves as he might in the 2.Nc3 and [ 28.e3 is much better, intending 29.Bd4. ]
3.f4 line of the Sicilian, and asks Black if he 28...g8 29.h6 g4 30.g7+ g8
can do better than transpose. The first big 31.fe1 h6 32.h5 c5! Spotting the idea
question is about 5...Nxe4, as in this game. that White had missed. 33.h4 c6+ 34.h2
1.e4 d6 2.c3 f6 3.f4 g6 4.f3 g7 g2+ 35.h3 d7 36.xh6 d3+ 37.e3
5.c4 xe4 dd2 38.g3+ xg3+ 39.xg3 xb2
912
40.xc5 xa2 41.e5 g2+ 42.f4 f2+ 18.h3 f3 19.xf3 gxf3 20.g4 d7
43.g5 g2+ 44.f4 21.c2 g7 22.hf1 f8 23.e4 f6
½-½ 24.d6 cxd6 25.d5 e6 26.xf3 c8
27.xe7+ xe7 28.d5+ e6 29.xd6
e8 30.f8+ 1-0 Dreev, A-Illescas Cordoba,
887 B07 M/Montpellier 2002 I like this impressive
Hillarp Persson,Tiger 2510 game greatly. ]
Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2690 6...g5 7.f2 Taking on g5 or allowing an
Hotel Bali Stars, Benidorm (8) 2003 e xc h a n g e o f B is h o p s co m e s t o n o t h i n g .
[Andrew Martin] White's pawns give him a space advantage so
he must keep the pieces on. g6 8.h4 h6
1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.f3 A noble attempt to 9.c4 It's a similar method to the one Dreev
force the game off the beaten track. Many used. Black's pieces on the Kingside could
Black players would allow the game to drift turn out to be targets for the advancing White
into a Samisch King's Indian but pawns.
Azmaiparashvili has his own brand of chess. [ 9.g4 f4 10.g5 g7 11.bc3 h6
e5!? 12.xf4 exf4 13.d4 e5 14.xe5 dxe5
[ 3...g6 is the fianchetto treatment-quite 15.gxh6 xh6 16.d2 xh4 17.0-0-0 d7
playable as Black is willing to go into the 18.c4 a6 19.f2 xh1 20.xh1 f6
aforementioned King's Indian. 4.e3 g7 21.xa6 bxa6 22.d6 c6 23.a4
5.d2 bd7 6.d3 ( 6.c4 ) 6...c6 7.a4 e5 Grivas, E-Lagopatis, N/Serres 1990 ]
8.c3 White insists on originality. 0-0 9.e2 9...f5 10.bc3 0-0 11.exf5 gxf5 12.g1
e8 10.0-0 d5!= Rouzaud, P-Delgado Pico, h8 Obvious, but a move laced with cunning
L/Open Bali A, Benidorm ESP 2003 ] 13.g4?? And Hillarp Persson falls straight into
4.d5 e7 5.e3 the trap. White should delay this advance until
[ 5.d3 c6 6.c4 fd7 7.e2 g5 8.0-0 he removes his King from the centre. Any of
xc1 9.xc1 a5 10.bc3 the following moves are quite reasonable:
1/2-1/2 Giorgadze, G-Malaniuk, V/Forli 1992 [ 13.c2 d7 14.g3 df6 15.c5 ]
Shows how Black easily ditches his bad [ 13.a3!? ]
Bishop. ] [ 13.g3 ]
5...h5 Black prepares ..Bg5, activating his 13...fxg4 14.fxg4 xf2! 15.g5
dark-squared Bishop. f 7-f 5 will be the [ 15.xf2 is quite hopeless. xh4+ 16.g3
liberating pawn break. ( 16.g2 e3! 17.e1 xg4+ 18.h2
[ 5...0-0 6.d3 c6 7.c4 An Old Indian now? xg1+ 19.xg1 f4+ 20.g2 a6-+ )
Adams lashes out, quite against the spirit of 16...xg3 17.xg3 f4 ]
that slow def ence . b5!? 8.c3 bxc4 [ 15.gxh5 xh4 16.g3 h2! 17.ge4
9.xc4 b7 10.b3 c7 11.ge2 bd7 xb2-+ ]
12.c1 fb8!? 13.dxc6 xc6 14.xf7+ 15...h2 16.gxh6 xh4+ 17.d2 f5
f8 15.c4 xb2 16.d5 c5 17.0-0 But this is also a disaster zone. W hite has
ab8 18.a3 xd5 19.xd5 xd5 been obliterated on the strength of one small
20.exd5 Gelfand, B-Adams, M/Tilburg move. 18.c1 a6 There is no sanctuary for
1996 ] the White King so Black has all the time in the
6.e2 world to mobilize his pieces. White's virtually
[ 6.c4 a5 7.c3 a6 8.g3! is a typical a piece down thanks to the dormant Rook on
Dreev method, cutting out counterplay long a1. 19.b3 b4 Honing in on d3 but this is
before it arrives. White keeps an active plan li g h t wo rk f o r a n y d e c e n t p l a ye r . 20.b2
too with the later advance of his Kingside d3+ 21.a3 f2 Idea ...Qc5+ with mate to
pawns. g6 ( 8...g5 9.f2 g6 10.h4 h6 follow. 22.a4 a6 23.g5 b5 Enough is
11.h3 ) 9.d2 f5 10.exf5 gxf5 11.f4 0-0 enough. Going back to the opening I am not
12.h3 e8 13.e2 g6 14.0-0-0! f6 totally convinced that Black is f ully OK if
15.f2 g4 16.xg4 fxg4 17.fxe5 dxe5 W hite follows the Dreev recipe. The space
913
advantage conferred by the White pawns must moves 7.h3

surely count for something! [ 7.g5 0-0 8.h3 h5 9.e5 dxe5
0-1 A) 10.xe5!? xe2 11.xe2 would be
more testing as taking the pawn is risky:
xd4 ( 11...bd7 is very solid) 12.ad1
888 B07 c5 13.fe1 and Black has trouble
Hou,Yifan 2605 developing, meanwhile White can consider
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2747 a rook swing with Rd3-g3.;
Gibraltar Open (10.1) 02.02.2012 B) 10.dxe5 d5 and Black was already
[Tom Rendle] very comfortable in Kalmachevskikh, V
(2293)-Kabanov, N (2520)/Khanty-
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 c6 An interesting Mansiysk RUS 2011 ]
choice by Mamedyarov, again we see the [ 7.e3 0-0 8.h3 h5
Modern employed to try and create winning A) 9.g4!? g6 10.h4 strikes me as a
chances as Black (he needed to win to have more dangerous way of playing as the
a chance of winning the tournament). Hou pawn on e4 cannot be taken either way:
Yif an chooses a very saf e and solid line. xe4? ( 10...xe4? 11.xg6 xc3
4.f3 12.xe7+ ) 11.g5;
[ 4.f4 is probably the critical continuation and B) 9.a4 d5 10.e5 fd7 was fine for
has been thoroughly covered in the Black in Matuszewski, M (2317)-Biolek, R
archives ] (2441)/Olomouc CZE 2010 ]
4...g4 [ 7.e5 dxe5 8.dxe5 d5 ( 8...xd1!
[ 4...a5 is Black's main alternative here 9.xd1 d5 is a safer way of playing and
and now sensible is 5.d2 Black has basically equalised) 9.e4
A) 5...e5 was played in Llaneza Vega, M ( 9.xd5?! gave no advantage after cxd5
(2521)-Galego, L (2435)/Donostia ESP 10.c4 dxc4 11.a4+ c6 12.xc4 h5
2009 and Black held a quick draw after wit h e qua l cha nce s in A rkhan gelsky, B
A1) H o w e v e r I t h i n k t h a t 6.dxe5 (2 35 5)-Jan sa, V (24 94 )/G mu nd en A UT
gi v e s m o re p ro b l e m s f o r B l a c k, f o r 2007 ) 9...0-0 10.c4 b6 11.e3
example dxe5 7.c4 e7 ( 7...c7 is slightly better for White ]
8.g5 is awkward for Black) 8.d5 d8 7...h5 8.e5 This tends to lead to positions
9.xe7 ( 9.xf6+ xf6 10.0-0 where White has a very slight edge but it can
is also a little better for White) 9...xe7 often become quite drawish - although not in
10.0-0 and the two Bishops should give this game!
White some edge here; [ 8.e3 0-0 transposes to the note after 7.
A2) 6.d5 d8 7.xf6+ xf6 8.dxe5 Be3 ]
dxe5 9.g5 d6 10.c4 f6 11.xd6 8...dxe5 9.xe5 xe2 10.xe2 bd7
xd6 12.0-0-0 c7 13.e3 d7 11.c4 This allows Black to pretty much
where a draw was agreed.; equalise but I suppose Hou was happy to let
B) 5...c7 6.c4 with some advantage Mamedyarov takes risks here
for White ] [ 11.f4 0-0 12.d3 might keep the
5.e2 smallest of edges but I doubt any Black
[ 5.h3 h5 6.g4!? was looked at by Paul players are going to be losing sleep over
Motwani in the game Nyback-Puranen. ] this sort of position! ]
5...e6 11...xe5 12.dxe5 d7 This keeps the
[ 5...bd7 is Black's other main option and ga me in te re sting an d it 's su rprising h o w
now after 6.0-0 e5 7.e3 e7 8.h3 h5 quickly the game bursts into life
9.h4! g6 10.xg6 hxg6 11.a4 [ 12...xd1 13.xd1 d7 14.f4 0-0-0
White had a small but definite edge in Kraai, is at least equal for Black and maybe
J (2514)-Akobian, V (2610)/ICC INT 2011 ] Mamedyarov would've been better trying to
6.0-0 e7 Here White has tried a number of grind this position out as Black - still, you'd
914
expect it to end in a draw from here ] l e a d i n g t o l i q u i d a t i o n w o u l d b e hd8

13.f4 a5 23.xe5 fxe5 24.f3+ g8 25.xe6 xd1
[ 13...0-0 was perhaps better in hindsight, 26.xd1 e7 27.xc5 xc5 and now the
certainly it avoids the complications that White should force a draw with 28.d7 f8
h a p p e n e d i n t h e g a m e . A f t e r 14.d4 29.g3 f7 30.d8+ f8 31.d7 f7
Black still has to be careful as Qg4 is a little 32.d8+= ]
annoying. Still, it must be equal enough after 22...xd4+ 23.xd4 d7 24.xe6+!
c7 15.g4 h8! ] Hou Yifan wisely enters a balanced endgame
14.a3! An excellent practical decision from [ 24.fd1 would keep up some pressure but
Hou Yifan, showing she isn't just going to sit I'm not convinced it's enough for two pawns
around and passively play for a draw. after c5 25.f3 f5 although the position
[ 14.d4 d8 15.e3 0-0 is about equal remains very tense ]
but Black can try pressing, perhaps with 24...xe6 25.f5+ e7 26.xc7 he8
Rfe8, Nf8 and then doubling on the d-file. ] 27.b1 a7 28.bd1 f8?! This move feels
14...xe5!? Accepting the pawn sacrifice a little passive and White starts to get a small
must be critical advantage after this
[ 14...c7 would feel like admitting a small [ 28...e5! is better as taking the knight is
defeat ] b a d f o r W h i t e a f t e r 29.xe5?! fxe5
15.b4 c7 16.d4 f6 After this it feels like 30.d7+ f6 Black's active King ensures he
White has the easier game, if not an objective has no problems ]
edge 17.ad1 a5 29.b1 f7 30.c5 e7 31.d6 d7
[ 17...c5! was probably a better way to do it, 32.db4 h5 33.h4 h7 34.xh5
for example 18.xe5 xe5 19.d7+ f7 The position is a little more pleasant for Hou
20.g3 and now the position probably looks now and Mamedyarov has to be careful g8
scarier f or Black than it actually is cxb4 35.h4 a8 36.b6 g5 37.hb4 a7
21.axb4 ab8 and Black seems to be 38.b8 a1+ 39.h2 d5 40.xb7 xf5?!
holding on, White will have to play actively [ 40...a2! was more accurate and now the
to demonstrate sufficient compensation for game is likely to end in a draw, e.g. 41.d6
the pawn ] f3+ 42.g3 d4 and the nicest way to
18.e4 f7 19.g3 Perhaps this was a little draw here is with 43.xg7+! xg7 44.b7+
slow as Black just about gets away grabbing g8 45.b8+ g7 46.b7+ with repetition,
the second pawn o f c o u r s e n o t h6?? 47.f4+ h5
[ 19.c5 is the most solid option and now 48.h7# ]
axb4 20.axb4 ad8 21.c1! and with 41.d6
Black rather cramped I like W hite's [ 41.e7! would cause more problems I think,
compensation for the pawn ] it's not so easy to defend against Rbb7
[ 19.c1!? is very dangerous, for example doubling rooks on the 7th. Probably best is
A) 19...axb4?! 20.d3 bxa3 21.xe5 f2 42.h4 e1! 43.xe1 f3+ but after
and Black can't recapture the piece 44.h3! ( 44.g3 xe1 45.xf2 d3+
b e c a u s e o f fxe5 ( 21...a5 22.a1 is drawn ) 44...xe1 45.g3 e2 46.b6
and the piece is worth more than the 3 xg2 47.xc6 only White can play for a win
p a wn s h e r e) 22.xe5+ e8 23.d7 here ]
xd7 24.xd7 xd7 25.d1+ e8 41...a2 42.g4 Allowing a draw but I
26.xe6 and White should be winning suspect Hou was happy enough with that at
here; this stage
B) 19...d6 20.c5 f3+ 21.xf3 xf4 [ 42.h4!? f3+ 43.h3 g1+ 44.g4
22.d3 h6 23.h5+ e7 24.fe1 is a possible (if risky) winning attempt, and
and White has a very strong attack ] now d5 45.b2 d2 46.xa2 xa2
19...axb4 20.axb4 xb4 21.d4 c5 22.f4 47.g3 and White has the better chances in
[ 22.fe1 was also possible but I doubt the endgame but it still should end in a
W hite is bett er here. One possible lin e draw ]
915
42...f3 43.h4 h3+ 44.g1 a1+ 45.f2 Hedgehog position indeed! 20.e5 dxe5
a2+ 46.g1 A draw was probably the fair 21.xe5 fd8 22.xd7 xd7 23.f4 d4
result and it ended an impressive Gibraltar 24.e3 cd8 25.e2 4d6 26.xb6 xb6
performance from Hou Yifan (she tied for first 27.bd1 bd6 Black's edge is enduring
in the tournament with Short). thanks to his better placed pieces and the
½-½ pawn on b4,restraining W hite's queenside.
Feeling the game slipping away and getting
short of time, my impression is that Hunt
889 B07 becomes demoralised. 28.c1 a5 29.e2
Hunt,Adam xd1 30.xd1 c8 31.d3 a4 32.e2
Rahman,Ziaur d5 33.b3?
British Championship (5) 2003 [ 33.a3 bxa3 34.bxa3 c3 35.xc3 xc3
[Andrew Martin] 36.a1 f6 was better with White retaining
chances of a draw. ]
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 33...a3! 34.f3 g5 35.f2 f5 36.e1 f6
5.f3 b6!?N Provocative! 37.d4 f4 From now on, Black improves
[ 5...g4 6.d2 bd7 7.h3 xf3 8.gxf3 his position at will and Hunt is unable to hold
b5 9.0-0-0 a5 10.b1 b4 11.e2 g7 the game. 38.c4 e5 39.e2 d8 40.xf4
12.h6 xh6 13.xh6 b6 14.g7 g8 gxf4 41.g3 d2+ 42.e2 fxg3+ 43.xg3
15.h6 g5 16.e5 g6 17.xg6 hxg6 xe2 44.xe2 f4+ 45.f2 g5 46.d3
18.exf6 exf6 19.c1 0-0-0 20.b3 f5 c8 47.e1? White's Bishop stayed bad until
21.d2 f4 22.a6+ d7 23.he1 e8 the end! 5...Qb6 is a very provocative and
24.e2 f5 25.c3 h4 26.d3 xe1 interesting idea, although it is noteworthy that
27.xe1 bxc3 28.bxc3 xf2 0-1 Lukin,A- Rahman declined to repeat the move later on
Skytte,R/ Aarhus 1997/ ] in the British Championship against Motwani.
[ 5...bd7 6.a4 g7 7.e2 0-0 8.0-0 b6 0-1
9.e1 b7 10.h3 c7 11.a5 ad8
12.axb6 axb6 13.f1 b5 14.b4 a8
15.d2 fd8 16.h6 xh6 17.xh6 e5 890 B07
18.ad1 a3 19.e3 da8 20.h4 Ibragimov,Ildar 2590
Short,N-Beliavsky,A/Las Vegas 1999 ] Chekhov,Valery A 2520
6.b1?! Moscow 1998
[ 6.d2 xb2 ( 6...g4 7.a4 c7 [Alexander Volzhin]
8.g5 ) 7.b1 a3 8.d3 ( 8.e5
must be the critical test. )] This game shows very clearly the dangers
[ 6.a3 must also be considered. ] Black may be faced with. He plays his queen
6...g7 7.h3 0-0 8.d2 c7 Whilst Black's out early and so must be very careful not to
set-up seems perfectly normal, the Rook on find himself too far behind in development.
b1 sticks out like a sore thumb. This becomes 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 a5
especially apparent should White play a2-a4, 5.d3 e5 6.f3 g4 7.e3! The best move
which is quite normal in this type of position. in the position. Black has difficult problems to
9.h6 bd7 10.d3 b5 11.0-0 b7 solve here, and in my opinion, that's why this
12.xg7 xg7 13.fe1 b4 14.e2 c5! line is not played so often nowadays. exd4
Hunt has enacted the usual Bishop exchange [ In Shirov-Rivas, Manila 1992 Black
on g7 but in doing so has lost valuable time. preferred 7...exf4 but failed to equalise:
With his last move, Rahman constructs a very 8.xf4 b6 ( 8...xf3? is bad in view of
favourable pawn structure and leaves the 9.xf3 b4 10.0-0-0! xd4 11.b5!
White Bishop bad. Black's opening idea has and White wins; and immediate 8...b4?!
been completely successful. 15.g3 cxd4 is also hardly good in view of the simple
16.xd4 b6 17.g5 e6 18.f3 h6 9.a3! ) 9.e2! xf3 10.gxf3 xb2 11.b1
19.d2 ac8 A very favourable Sicilian/ xa2 12.xb7 a5+ 13.d2 d8
916
14.a1! a5 15.d5! with a growing attack. ] 22.e6!+- a5 23.ec1! d5 24.xd5
8.xd4 b4 9.e2! xd5 25.xf5 g6 26.h3 b8 27.c5
[ 9.xf6 gxf6 10.0-0 ( 10.d2?! xf3 de7 28.d7! d8 29.xb7+ a8
11.gxf3 d7 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 and Black's 30.xc6 and Black resigned. ]
chances should be preferred: White can't 13.e5 xe2 14.xe2 c5
attack Black's weak pawns while the pawn [ 14...f5 is bad: 15.h5+ g6 16.xg6 f7
on f4 is a real target, Kaminski-Ciemniak, 17.xh8 ( 17.h3!? ) 17...hxg6 18.e2
Lubniewice 1993.) 10...xb2 11.e1 b6+ c5+ 19.h1 d7 20.fd1 0-0-0 21.d4
12.h1 xf3 13.xf3 d7 In Ulibin- xd4 22.xd4 and White is a clear
Kramnik, Sochi 1990 White failed to prove exchange up for nothing, Kindermann, -
he had enough for the pawn: 14.b1 c7 Dorfman, Debrecen 1990. ]
15.h4 h5 16.c4 h6 17.g3 c5 15.f2 d7
18.e2 0-0-0 19.xh5 f5! 20.exf5 e7 [ There were no better alternatives: 15...f6
and Black seized the initiative. ] 16.h5+ g6 17.xg6 f7 18.f5 g8
[ The tempting 9.a3 is also harmless in view 19.f4 ]
of xd4! 10.xd4 xd1 11.xd1 bd7 [ 15...c6 16.xc6 bxc6 17.f5
with equal endgame. Voitsekhovsky- in both cases White had a big advantage. ]
Rublevsky, Russia 1991. 12.f2 0-0-0 16.xd7 xd7 The only move.
13.he1 b6 14.f3 g6 15.a4 a5 [ 16...xd7 loses by force: 17.xe4+ e7
16.b3 d5 17.exd5 fxd5 18.xd5 xd5 18.a4+ d7 19.fe1+ e7 20.xd7+
19.e8+ c7 20.a1 g7 21.e7+ d7 xd7 21.ad1+ e8 22.xc5 winning the
22.xd7+ xd7 and here a draw was Bishop. ]
agreed. ] 17.b4! An excellent idea. Black intends to
9...xe4 Black has to accept this sacrifice, evacuate his King to Q-side and therefore
otherwise it's difficult to justify his previous White opens files there without any delay. f5
play. 10.0-0! At the cost of only one pawn 18.ad1+ c7 19.d5! e6 20.fd1 c8
W hite has overwhelming development 21.e5 f7 22.bxc5 b8 23.b5+-
ad va nt a ge in a n o p e n p o sit io n. P ract ice All White's pieces are in action while Black
proves Black's defence is very hard. d5 has half an army undeveloped. It is not a big
[ 10...xc3 is ba d sin ce af t e r 11.bxc3!? surprise that Black is almost helpless here. a6
( 11.xc3 is not bad either: b6+ 12.d4 [ 23...c7 24.d7 c6 25.xc6
d7 13.e1 e7 14.g4! with a growing followed by Rf5 was absolutely hopeless for
attack. ) 11...a5 12.g5! Black's position Black. ]
is barely defensible. ] 24.d7!
11.xe4 dxe4 12.c3 e7 [ 24.b6 c7 25.xc7+ followed by Rf5
[ 12...xb2 was played in Glek-Pribyl, was also good enough. ]
Germany 1991 (by the way, the move 9.Be2 24...axb5
was introduced in this game). White quickly [ 24...c7? 25.d8+ c8 26.xc8+ xc8
obtained decisive advantage: 27.e8+ c7 28.b6+ d7 29.b8+- ]
A) 13.b1! xa2 14.xb7! 25.xf7 g6 26.d4 h5 27.d5 g8 28.c6!
i s g o o d a l t e r n a t i ve : exf3 ( 14...e7 A very precise way to open the 7th rank.
15.d2 ) 15.xf3 xf3 16.e1+ d8 [ A f t e r t h e c a r e l e s s 28.dd7? xc5
17.b6+ c8 18.c7#!; 29.xb7+ a8 White's win was too difficult,
B) 13.e1! f5 ( 13...exf3 14.xf3+ e6 if possible at all. ]
15.f5+- ->; 13...a3 14.g5 xe2 28...bxc6
15.xe2+- -> ) 14.a4! /\\ 15.Ne5 Be2 16. [ 28...xc6 was impossible due to 29.d8+
Re2+- d7 15.g5 ( 15.h4! c5 c8 30.e5+ ]
16.xg4 xc3 17.xf5+- ) 15...c5 29.dd7 e8 30.e5+ In view of the quick
16.xg4 xc3 17.xc5 xc5+ 18.h1 mate Black resigned.
f6 ( 18...fxg4 19.xe4++- ) 19.b3 1-0
0-0-0 20.ab1 d7 21.h3! e8
917
891 B07 which is the elementary Qd2/Bh6 that is used

James Vigus Pirc Inquiry in some variations of the 150 Attack). In two
N,N of our featured games from last month
[John Watson] Nakamura also included a4, perhaps
unnecessarily, and in one case that may have
James Vigus writes: I was very interested to been too many tempi to burn. Refer to that
read your first Pirc update on ChessPublishing, column. I think the basic plan of foregoing Be3
w h i c h g a v e m e s e v e r a l n e w i d e a s ( w e in favour of g4/Bg2 is essentially unique and
analysed Nakamura-Smirin slightly differently, prompted Elisabeth Vicary's question about it.
a n d I m u s t c o n f e ss t h a t 7 B xa 6 ! ? in t h e Of course, a database search almost always
Austrian Attack was new to me). I have so far finds some sort of predecessor game.
only had a chance to glance at your March [ Vigus mentions a third order used by GM
update, but am glad that you bring the Vajda: 4.h3 g7 5.ge2!? , and, for
important and little-known g4-line to attention. example, c6 ( In one game Vigus cites,
However, although it might be buried in the White got the advantage after 5...0-0 6.e3
middle of my book [jw: 'The Pirc in Black and c6 7.a4 a5 8.g4!; 5...b5!? has also been
W hite', my new Pirc Bible] and not easy to played, when after 6.e5 fd7 , he suggests
f in d via th e in de x, I h a ve in f a ct m ad e a 7.e6! fxe6 8.f4 b6 9.xb5+ c6 10.e2
special feature of the early g4--at the end of d5! . I doubt t hat White has any
the chapter on the 150 Attack. I dubbed it the advantage in that case, but I like the
"Archbishop Attack" (for reasons explained in unbalanced play that is created.) 6.a4 ( 6.g4
the introduction to the 150 Chapter), and b5 7.g2 might be looked at, with the idea
analysed it mainly in the form 4 Be3 c6 5 h3 b4 8.b1 0-0 9.a3 ) 6...a5?!
Nbd7 6 g4/6 a4 intending g3, which seems to Another tempo loss a5 was not to be feared.
be by far the most dangerous. Perhaps it 7.e3 a6 8.g4 and White has a nice
could even have warranted a small chapter to game, having played the normal g3-g4 in
itself, but my view was that this move-order one jump. ]
(inducing ...Nbd7 which is not necessarily 4...c6
helpful in a Fianchetto-type structure) makes [ Vigus doesn't like White's h3/g4 plan as
it part of the whole mo dern Be3 / h3/Qd 2 m u c h a f t e r 4...g7 5.h3 0-0 6.g4
complex. I hope you will find some more food , when he suggests d5 7.e5 e4 8.xe4
for thought in my coverage of this, and I'm dxe4 9.g2 c5! , improving upon a Vajda
looking forward to reading your notes more game with 9...f6?!. This shows one of the
thoroughly soon!' Thank you, James! It's great drawbacks to an early Be3 in conjunction
to get feedback from an author. I'll try to give with g4: it doesn't cover e4 or d5. I think
the reader a brief overview of what the book that this and Vigus' points that follow below
says with regard to the Be3/h3/g4 setup, are spot on. ]
c o n c e n t ra t in g u p o n m o ve o rd e rs a n d o f 5.h3 bd7 6.a4!? We are reaching the main
course skipping the details that are given to line in which Vigus thinks that the h3/g4 plan
illustrate them. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 is effective. If true, that militates against 4...
4.e3 This is the move that is associated with c6.
h3/g4 in James' Pirc book, which we'll now [ 6.g4! is a similar alternative that he also
d i s c u s s . I n t h e la st c o l u m n we f e a t u re d finds very bothersome. I think that is more
several games by Hikaru Nakamura, who I accurate, since ...b5-b4 doesn't achieve
think should be given credit for his rather much. See my suggestion on move 8. If
different idea: he avoids the move Be3 for these lines are difficult for Black, it again
some time in favour of a setup involving h3/g4/ indicates a problem with 4...c6 and 5...Nbd7,
Bg2 and/ in some cases Nge2. This could be instead of simply 4...Bg7. In the end Vigus
argued to 'save' a tempo with which to batten prefers the latter move (in spite of other
down the centre, although naturally Be3 has problems). I agree: ...c6 and ...Nbd7 at such
many advantages for other reasons (one of an early stage seems to limit Black's
918
flexibility. ] ( meets 12.g5 f8 13.xh7 xh7

6...g7 Vigus discusses a variety of 14.xh7 with g5 and decent
alternatives, none of which seem to fully coun terpla y) 12...c5 13.a2 g4
equalise. 7.g4 e5 8.ge2 e7 ( 13...cxe4 14.xe4 xe4; 13...e6
[ I think 8...d5!? should be considered before 14.xe6 xe6 15.0-0 g4 16.h4
W hite consolidates. It is a dynamic try, f6; 13...a5 14.0-0 ) 14.g5 e6
hoping to exploit the moves a4 and Be3, 15.xe6 xe6 16.xe6 xe6 17.0-0
which again, failed to cover e4 or d5. A maintains a pleasant edge for White;
pla u s ib le lin e wou ld b e 9.exd5 xd5 A2) 10...bd7 11.g5! ( 11.0-0-0 b5
10.xd5 cxd5 11.g2 e4 12.0-0 0-0 12.xb5 cxb5 13.xb5 c5 14.d6+
13.f4 f6 14.a5 h6 , when you suspect e7 , Ulko, J (2486)-Chekhov, S (2227)/
that W hite should have a slight pull, but Voronezh RUS 2007/ The W eek in
his kingside weaknesses seem to get in the Chess 658 (28), transposes to the note
way and he may not get even that. ] to Black's 10th, below, except that White
9.g2 White got a good game twice out of this has his pawn on h3 there) 11...f8
position he has the plan of simply castling 12.xh7 xh7 13.xh7 g5 14.h4
and preparing f4, for example, 0-0 10.0-0 b6 f4? ( n e c e s s a r y w a s 14...xg2
11.g3 b7 12.f4 e8 13.dxe5 dxe5 15.0-0-0 b5 16.b3 , but Black is
14.f5 with a stereotypical advantage, Y Visser- unlikely to survive this) 15.g7 e7
B Pel, Leeuwarden 2004. 16.e2 was winning for White in
Fedorchuk, S (2592)-Zozulia, A (2352)/
Tarragona ESP 2006/The W eek in
892 B07 Chess 618 (43);
Jansa,Vlastimil 2477 B) 9.0-0-0 g4!? 10.e2 bd7 11.e3
Hartoch,Robert G 2196 Cech, P (2420)-Sergeev, V (2434)/ Czech
World Senior Championship (2) 29.10.2008 Rep CZE 2006/The W eek in Chess 594
[James Vigus] b5 12.h3 xf3 13.xf3 b6 is fairly
solid for Black. ]
The name '150 Attack' reflects the contribution 8...bd7
of English players, but the Czech [ Black can try to transpose to 'b' in the
grandmaster Vlastimil Jansa was another of previous note with 8...e7 , though then
its successful pioneers in the late 1980s. This 9.f3!? bd7 10.h4 is one way for White to
game shows that even in his veteran years he keep up his initiative. ]
is still capable of treating the Pirc brutally. 9.f3 e7 10.h3 a6?!
We're onto 'plan B' for Black. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 [ This is too slow. Black must bite the bullet:
g7 3.c3 d6 4.e3 f6 5.d2 c6 6.h6 10...b5! 11.dxe5 ( White can't claim much of
xh6 7.xh6 e5 an edge in a quiet continuation such as
[ This is rather passive for Black, but may be 11.d3 b7 12.he1 0-0-0 13.e3 b8 )
necessary. 7...a5 8.d3 c5 used to be 11...dxe5 ( 11...xe5 ) 12.xb5 cxb5
standard, but John Watson has pointed out 13.xb5 c5 14.d6+ e7 15.g5 f8
b ig p r o b le m s f o r B la c k in t h e l in e 9.d5! 16.d2 (J.Seret-A.Mista, Cappelle la Grande
bd7 10.f3 ] 2004) b8! and now White's intended
8.0-0-0 17.hd1 re su lts in a d ra w a f t e r xb2!
[ 8.f3 tends to transpose, but a few 18.xb2 b4+ . Can anyone strengthen
i n d e p e n d e n t p a t h s a r e p o s s i b l e : e7 White's attack? ]
( I think 8...bd7 is more precise, with a 11.c4!?
likely transposition to our main game if [ Perhaps this was a prepared improvement
9.dxe5!? Black should probably reply xe5 ) o n t h e g a m e G . K a s p a r o v- T . R a d ja b o v ,
A) 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.c4 (this is a good Mo sco w (ra pid) 20 02 , which co n tinu e d
move order for White) 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.c4 b5 13.b3 a5?!
A1) 10...b5!? 11.b3 bd7 12.a3! ( 13...c5 , to eliminate the bishop on b3, is
919
a n i m p r o v e m e n t . A f t e r 14.d2 d7 A1a) 8.g3!? c5 ( 8...c8

15.hd1 0-0-0 16.e3 Black has some is normal and looks better.) 9.f4 e3+
hopes of equalising. Jansa aims to cut out 10.b1 c8 11.f3 g4 12.e2
this . ..Nc5 defence.) 14.a4 b4 15.b1 exf4?! 13.xf4 xf4 14.gxf4
a6 16.bd2 0-0-0 17.e3 , and Black's already gave White a clear advantage.
king didn't last very long ] S a n i k i d ze , T ( 2 5 3 0 ) - H a u s r a t h , D
11...b5 12.b3 b7 (2507) Muelheim 2011.;
[ 12...f8 13.h4 e7 14.g5 is not the A1b) 8.f4 exf4 9.ge2 d6 10.xf4
answer to Black's problems, ] h6 11.xf6+ gxf6 12.g3 e5
[ perhaps 12...a5 13.dxe5 xe5 13.cd5 c6 14.e3 e7 and Black
(avoiding transposition to Kasparov- shouldn't have any worries and
Radjabov with 13...dxe5) 14.a4 b4 15.b1 actually went on to win. His structure
xf3 16.gxf3 e6 is what Black should is compromised but so is White's and
have ventured to disturb the status quo. ] he will ha ve t o ma ke som e so rt o f
13.dxe5 dxe5 14.g5 f8 15.xh7 xh7 concession to deprive Black of his
16.xh7 g5+?! bishop pair. Bajarani, U (2409)-
[ 16...a5 17.a4 b4 18.e2 g5+ 19.b1 Sjugirov, S (2610) Chotowa 2010.;
xg2 is suggested by Lev Gutman as an A2) 7...c8 8.f4 ( 8.f3 bd7 9.h4
improvement (in the magazine 'Rochade h6 10.xf6 gxf6 11.h4 c6 12.e2
Europa', January 2009). This does provide c5 was all very comfortable for the
c o u n t e r p l a y a g a i n s t t h e e 4 - p a wn , b u t second player. Pap, M (2509)-Popovic,
20.g7 xe4 21.he1 0-0-0 22.g3 h4 D (2564) Vrnjacka Banja 2010.; 8.g3
23.e4 gives White enormous c5 9.xf6 gxf6 10.d2 Can, E (2500)
compensation for the pawn. ] -Kurmann, O (2452) Khanty-Mansiysk
17.b1 xg2 18.hg1 f3 19.xg6! 2010 d8 and White's best is probably
The rook swings round to d-file, since t o g i v e u p t h e f 2 p a w n w i t h 11.h3
recapturing on g6 would result in instant mate. xd2 12.xd2 xf2 but Black
0-0-0 20.gd6 f6 obviously can't have any problems.)
[ 20...c5 was the last chance, though 8...exf4 9.ge2 ( T h e f o rc in g 9.e5
21.h6 maintains White's grip. ] doesn't get White anywhere: h6 10.xf6
21.h4 b4 22.xf6 xf6 23.xf6 bxc3 gxf6 11.exf6 d7 12.ge2 c5
24.xd8+ xd8 25.bxc3 c5 26.f3 13.d4 xf6 and Black had picked up a
1-0 pawn. Kanovsky, D (2471)-Malaniuk, V
(2573) Prague 2010) 9...bd7 ( 9...d6
is also f ine f or Black. 10.xf6 gxf6
893 B07 11.d5 d7 12.exf4 c6 13.xe6
Jobava,Baadur 2721 fxe6 14.c3 c7 and Black had a
Shanava,K 2589 small advantage thanks to his superior
71st ch-GEO 2012 (1) 13.05.2012 structure. Dzhumaev, M (2495)-
[Gawain Jones & Tom Rendle] Khismatullin, D (2657) Voronezh 2010.)
10.xf4!? ( Perhaps 10.xf4
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5 is a better bid for an opening
5.xd8+ xd8 6.g5 a d va n t a g e .) 10...g4 11.d4 c5
[ Gawain looked at 6.f3 in 1/2-1/2 Vallejo ( 11...f2 looks rather dangerous but
Pons, F (2697)-Vachier Lagrave, M (2723) Black seems to su rvive , i.e . 12.xe6
Sestao 2010. ] fxe6 13.c4 xh1 14.xe6 d6
6...d6 15.xd6 cxd6 16.xd6 d8 17.e5 a5
[ 6...e6 has been the most common but 18.d2 c7 19.d5+ c6 20.e7+
A) 7.0-0-0+ is by far the most common c7 21.d5+= with a draw) 12.cb5
although it hasn't scored that well b6 13.xe6 fxe6 14.c4 e8
A1) 7...bd7 15.hf1 a6 16.a3 e3+ 17.b1
920
xf4 18.xf4 ge5 with equality. Jobava, B (2678)-Lazic, M (2459) Milano

Sutovsky, E (2657)-Akobian, V (2628) 2011. ]
Wijk aan Zee 2010.; [ 6...bd7 whilst relatively rare, has been
B) 7.f4!? might allow White some initiative the choice of a couple of GMs recently and
although nothing too serious: exf4 8.f3 looks very sensible. 7.0-0-0 c6 8.f3 ( 8.f4
B1) 8...c8 9.0-0-0 b4 ( 9...bd7 here doesn't look so good and White quickly
10.xf4 has transposed to quite a got into trouble: e7 9.f3 g4! 10.d2
common position where White's scored f6 11.fxe5 fxg5 12.e6 c7 13.exd7 xd7
decently. One recent high rated 14.c4 f6 15.d1 ae8 16.e1 e7
encounter continued: h5 11.g3 c5 and Black had coordinated his pieces and
12.d4 g4 13.d3 b6 14.h3 xf4 stood very well. Acs, P (2601)-Rogozenco,
15.gxf4 d7 16.e5 e7 17.e2 g6 D (2522) Hamburg 2010.) 8...e8 ( 8...c7
18.g4 c6 19.hd1 xg4 20.hxg4 9.c4 b4 10.he1 looks like White has
c7 21.f5 and White had drummed up s o m e t h i n g .) 9.c4 ( 9.h4 ) 9...e7
a big advantage. Vysochin, S (2558) - 10.h4 g4 11.g3 f6 and Black's
Khismatullin, D (2635) St Petersburg position looked fine and he went on to win
2011. ) 10.xf6 gxf6 11.d5 xd5 Lund, E (2398)-Strikovic, A (2564) Ascona
12.xd5 d7 and White had good 2011. ]
compensation for the pawn but the game 7.0-0-0 bd7 8.f3
never really left the draw zone. Shyam, [ 8.c4 is played more frequently but Jobava
S (2457)-Gagunashvili, M (2599) Dubai h a s a d if f e re n t squ a re p l a n n e d f o r t h e
2011.; bishop. ]
B2) 8...h6 9.xf4 bd7 10.0-0-0 c6 8...e8 getting out of the pins.
11.d4 b4 ( 11...c5 12.e2 e8 [ 8...a6 preventing White's next is seen from
13.f3 c8 14.e5 xd4 15.xd4 h7 time to time but 9.xf6+ gxf6 ( 9...xf6
16.e4 c7 17.d6 was already really 10.xe5 is the point.) 10.d5 g8 11.h4
unpleasant for Black in Degraeve, J g4 12.f5 xe4 Sethuraman, S (2529)-
(2588)-Kasparov, S (2475) Bethune Neelotpal, D (2458) Mumbai 2011 13.d3
2 0 0 1 . T h e g a m e c o n c l u d e d e7 and White's knights totally dominate. ]
18.hd1 hf8 19.g3 a5 20.h4 b6 9.b5!? A rare idea but, although it worked
21.f5 d7 22.xg7 xd4 23.xd4 well in this game, doesn't look as strong as
d8 24.f4 1-0 ) 12.e5! g4 13.xe6+ [ 9.b5 which seems to give White a
fxe6 14.e4 e7 15.e2 gxe5 modest plus:
16.c3 a5 17.c5 xc5 18.xe5 A) It's also possible to defend the pawn
e4 19.he1 gave White a strong with 9...e7 but the structure isn't so
initiative. Gharamian, T (2517)-Eliet, N d i f f e r e n t . 10.d2 h6 11.h4 b6
(2454) Charleroi 2007. ] ( 11...a6 12.xd6 cxd6 13.f3 b5 14.b3
[ 6...c6 is also seen regularly when Jobava gives White a definite plus with the bishop
tried 7.f4 in another recent game. p a i r i n wh a t r e s e m b l e s s o m e s o r t o f
( Again it's possible to castle first but Na jd orf . Be rescu , A (25 1 0)-B a de a, B
7.0-0-0+ e8 8.f4 bd7 9.fxe5 g4 (2489) Amara 2007.) 12.f3 e6 13.f2
10.e6 fxe6 11.h3 e7 12.xe7 xe7 fd7 14.b3 hc8 15.xd6 cxd6 16.b2
was certainly no better for White in Riff, J c5 17.b1 f5 18.exf5 xf5 19.c4 g5
(2505)-Pelletier, Y (2611) Clichy 2010.) 20.c3 also looked very pleasant for
7...exf4 ( 7...h6 is the computer's White. Dvoirys, S (2590)-Spasov, V (2540)
recommendation but 8.xf6+ gxf6 9.f5!? Biel 1993.;
gives White decent long term chances.) 8.e5 B) 9...xe4? 10.xd6! wins;
h6 9.xf4 fd7 10.c4 e8 11.e6 fxe6 C) 9...a6 10.xd6+ cxd6 11.d2 h6
12.xe6 b6 13.xc8 xc8 14.0-0-0 ( 11...b5 12.a4 b7 13.f3 c6 14.b3
b6 15.f3 and White had a very obvious e7 15.a5 and Black was already in
chance with his huge lead in development. some tro uble . Ne vost ruje v, V (25 10)-
921
Zablotsky, S (2410) Tomsk 2003.) 12.e3 19.d1 followed by advancing the queenside
b5 13.f3 c5 Timofeev, A (2658)-Hansen, pawns must be winning in the long term. ]
L ( 2 5 6 5 ) S k a n d e r b o r g 2 0 0 5 14.c4 19.b5+ b8 20.d1 c6 21.c4! xb5
again promises White a small nibble. ] Shanava hopes to salvage half a point in the
9...f8? Jobava's opening experiment works knight versus bishop position.
as Shanava blunders straight away. [ Likewise 21...c8 22.c3 c7 23.f3
[ In a previous game Black found the correct looks very grim. ]
way of playing with 9...a6 when we presume 22.cxb5 d8
J o b a v a p l a n n e d 10.xf6 ( Instead [ 22...c8+ 23.b1 c7 24.c1
10.xd7+ xd7 was totally fine for Black. isn't so different. ]
Burreh, H (1985)-Schulz, W (2158) Bad 23.c2 c7 24.a4 f8?! As the following
S o o d e n 2 0 0 4 .) 10...axb5 ( 10...gxf6 endgame is completely lost Shanava should
11.xd7+ xd7 12.d5 picks up a pawn.) have tried keeping the rooks on for a while.
11.xg7 g8 12.h6 Here Black has a 25.xd8 xd8 26.d3 e7 27.c4 d6
wide variety of moves that look adequate, 28.f4! g6 29.f5 h4 30.g4 f3 31.h3
o n e s u c h l i n e b e i n g b4 ( 12...f6; g6?! And this hastens the end.
12...xg2; and 12...a5 all look playable [ We tried defending Black's position with
too. ) 13.b5 xa2 14.b1 a6 15.h4 31...e1 but here too White wins with
c5 16.f3 d7 and Black certainly seems something like 32.d2 f3 33.b4+ d7
to be fine. ] 34.d5 g5 35.fxg6 hxg6 36.d6 g5
[ While 9...g4 was played in the other 37.b8 c8 38.xa7 b7 39.xb6 xb6
game to reach this position but 10.h4 a6 40.e6 when there are too many pawns for
Schmitt, T-Hauke, C (2235) Zell 1993 the knight. ]
11.xd7+ xd7 12.d5 f6 13.d2 32.a5 bxa5 33.c5+ d7 34.d5 g5
again feels more pleasant for White. ] 35.xa7 xh3 36.b6 f4+ 37.c5 d3+
10.xd7! xd7 38.c4 xb2+ 39.b5 A well played game
[ Presumably Shanava missed that 10...xd7 from Jobava but objectively 9.Nb5 looks a
allows 11.xe5! xe5 12.xf6 f4+ better try for an opening advantage.
13.b1 g4 14.f3 and Black is a clear 1-0
pawn down. ]
11.b5 Shanava has saved his e pawn but
loses a queenside one. f6 12.e3 e7 894 B07
[ Rybka prefers giving the c pawn with Jones,Gawain C B 2643
12...b6 but again White has a clear extra Reid,John 2151
pawn after 13.xd6 cxd6 14.xd6 e7 100th ch-GBR 2013 (1.1) 29.07.2013
15.hd1 ] [Smerdon, David]
13.xd6! cxd6 14.c7 A nice tactic bagging
the extra pawn. b6 15.xa8 d8 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 This move can be a bit
[ The computer toys with 15...b7!? 16.c7 annoying for a 2.c3 player as the structures
xe4 but following 17.b5 c8 18.c3 and idea s are ve ry dif f e rent to the usua l
we can't believe that Black has anything isolated queen's pawn positions of the
like enough play f or his piece f or pawn opening. Still, it's certainly inferior to 2...Nf6
deficit. ] and 2...d5, and I'm sure far more players
16.d2 b7 17.c4 xa8 18.xd6 would play 2.c3 if they could be guaranteed to
The o pen in g h as be en a big success f o r face 2...d6! 3.d4 f6 4.d3 g6 5.dxc5!?
Jobava who's gone straight into an endgame a A common idea in many of the 2... d6
pawn up. Obviously Black must have some variations, but I've never been a big fan. In
hopes of drawing but White executes the rest my opinion, White usually gets very pleasant
of the game flawlessly. c7 positions with natural moves in this opening,
[ Perhaps Black's king should stay in touch though objectively Black is okay.
with his kingside pawns although 18...e7 [ 5.f3 g7 6.0-0 0-0 7.h3 has all been
922
seen before. White has to be a little better [ Both 19...xc5 20.b1+- ]

of course, but Black will probably hit with ... [ and 19...xc5 20.b1 were no-go. ]
d5 soon to change the structure. Still, I 20.b1 g7 21.c2? Quite a strange move,
always prefer to have the centre and extra throwing away White's advantage. I guess the
space in these lines - and as a 2.c3 player, idea is to trap the black queen, but there's a
it's nice not to worry about losing my pretty obvious reply.
isolated pawn for a change! ] [ 21.e4! was far more active. Perhaps
5...dxc5 Gawain was worried about his pawn, but
[ 5...d5!? is another line, which is more xa2 22.f4 is absolutely huge. ]
effective in the 4.f3 variation. ] 21...d7? Throwing it back.
6.e5 h5 7.h3 c6 8.f3 c7 [ 21...a6! 22.d2 xd2 23.xd2 axb5
[ Black would have no reasons to complain 24.cxb5 cd4 ]
after 8...g7 with ...Ne6, ...Bg7, ...0-0 and ... 22.d2 a6 23.b3 cd4 24.fxd4 xd4
Qc7 to follow. ] 25.xd4 xd4 Now White's pumping again.
[ E n d g a m e p l a y e r s m i g h t p r e f e r 8...f5 26.fb1 c6 27.f4 e5 28.g3?
9.xf5 xd1+ 10.xd1 gxf5 when White This bishop turns out to be a hero, but
might have a little something due to the actually this move is a mistake.
better structure, but it's really not much. ] [ 28.e3! g8 29.g3 xc5 30.e4
9.0-0 d7? There's nothing concretely wrong is still close to winning. ]
with this, but Black starts to play aimlessly 28...e4?
a n d G a wa in h a s e n o u gh t i m e t o u s e h i s [ 28...g8= hits g3, and after 29.h2 xc5
development and space advantage to open the rook also has eyes on g2, so Black's just
things up. won a pawn. W hite probably has enough
[ Again, 9...g7 was possible, because even co mp e nsat ion bu t o bviou sly t h is is n o t
after 10.h6 e6 11.xf8 xf8 ideal! ]
the black king should be pretty comfortable 29.c1 e3 30.xe3! Of course! xc5
on g7. ] [ 30...xe3? 31.xe3 and the h2-b8
10.e2 h6 11.e6!? Always a nice move to diagonal rolls out the red carpet to White's
play in these lines. queen. ]
[ Still, 11.a3 was probably an even 31.f3 g6 32.b5 b6? 33.xc5+ bxc5
s t r o n g e r i d e a , a s a6 12.c4 34.b2
is very pleasant for White. Note that if ever 1-0
Black plays ...Bg7 he drops his h5 knight to
g4, while b5?? 13.d6+!+- is game over. ]
11...xe6 12.xg6 g7 Finally! 13.e4 895 B07
0-0-0 14.a3 White is significantly better: Karpov,Anatoly
he's just a couple of moves away from full Timman,Jan H
mobility, and Black is rarely happy if he's Motreal 1979
forced to castle queenside in these lines. d5 [Alexander Volzhin]
15.b5
[ 15.xd5 xd5 16.b4! was extremely I n p r e vi o u s g a m e s we h a ve c o n s i d e r e d
stro ng. If Bla ck d oesn't cap ture , W hit e different attacking lines for White. But many
follows with Be3 and the attack continues. players don't like the wild complications that
But the pawn is taboo: cxb4 17.cxb4 xb4 are unavoidable in those lines. I can
18.e3 and Black is completely busted. recommend them the Fianchetto system. 1.e4
However, over the next few moves Gawain d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g3 g7
d o e s n 't p la y e n e r ge t ic a lly a n d le t s h i s [ 4...c5 is premature: 5.dxc5 a5 6.cxd6
opponent back into the game. ] xe4 7.d5! and Black is in trouble. ]
15...b6 16.xd5 xd5 17.c4 5.g2 0-0 6.ge2 e5 7.0-0 The critical
[ 17.b4! again was close to winning. ] position of the Fianchetto system. a6 8.e1
17...d8 18.b4 e6 19.bxc5 a5 c6 9.h3 e8 10.g5! h6
923
[ Black is not ready for active counterplay as has achieved a decisive advantage, although
the White pieces are better coordinated, for none of his pieces have crossed the middle of
example: 10...b6 11.b1 exd4 12.xd4 the board! c7
c5 13.b4! cxe4 14.xe4! xe4 [ Of course, the pawn is taboo: 26...xb2?
15.xe4 xd4 16.f6+ and white wins. ] 27.eb1 trapping the Queen. ]
11.e3 c7 27.xa5 Straightforward technique. dd7
[ 11...exd4 is premature because of: 28.b4 e6 29.e3 c5 30.f5 d8 31.b5
12.xd4 intending Qd2 and Rad1 with h8 32.f2 c7 33.a4 b8 34.c4 a7
pressure on the d-file, and c5 fails to 35.xa7 xa7 36.e5 dxe5 37.xe5 a2
13.e5! h7 14.exd6 xd6 15.b4! a6 38.xc5 Black has nothing to hope for, so he
16.b5 cxb5 17.xb5 with a big advantage, resigned. A real masterpiece of positional
as it's difficult for Black to complete the chess.
development of his queenside. ] 1-0
[ Probably best is wait and see tactics:
11...h7 (this move necessary anyway) .
Now it's not easy for W hite to prove his 896 B07
advantage. For example, after the natural Kasparov,Garry 2830
12.d2 exd4 is possible, and Black is OK: Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2700
13.xd4 ( 13.xd4 c5 and now 14.e5 is Blitz Match, Crete blitz (1) 2003
i m p o s s i b l e) 13...c5 14.f3 d5! [Andrew Martin]
and the complications after 15.xc6 cxe4
16.xd8 ( 16.fxe4 bxc6 ) 16...xd2 Only a 5 mins/5secs game, but Kasparov is
17.xf7 xe3 18.xe3 d4 are dangerous Kasparov! 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6
for White. ] 4.e3 c6 5.d2 It's official- Kasparov plays
12.d2 h7 13.ad1 d7 Both sides have and likes the 150 Attack!
completed their development. White's position [ 5.f3 was an attempt to do without Qd2
is slightly better due to his space advantage, from the same match. a5 I don't think
but the Black position is very solid, as he has White could have done without Qd2 for long
no weaknesses. Karpov's play is very if Black hadn't played ... Qd8-a5 . Kasparov
instructive. He begins kingside action. First of sees a chance to exploit the exposed Black
all he strengthens the e4 square with g4 and Queen. 6.d3 e5 7.0-0 g7 8.dxe5 dxe5
Ng3, preventing any counterplay in the centre. 9.d2! c7 10.a4 0-0 11.c4 ( Just
14.g4! ad8 15.g3 c8 16.f4 b5 17.a3 11.h3! would have preserved a stable
b4?! This nervous move leads only to the advantage. Here we see the small
creation of weaknesses. 18.axb4 xb4 inaccuracies typical of rapid, even blitz
19.ce2! Black intended a5, Ba6 etc with chess ) 11...e6 12.e2 bd7 13.f3 fd8
some chances. Karpov prevents any 14.f2 b6 15.fd1 f8 16.f1 c5!=
counterplay. exd4 Black took his chance well and has clawed
[ After 19...a5 20.c3 White has an his way back to equality. 17.xc5 xc5
overwhelming advantage in the centre. ] 18.g3 xc4 19.xc4 a5 Kasparov, G-
20.xd4 a5 21.c3 a6 Now Black intends Azmaiparashvili, Z/Blitz Match, Crete GRE
Nc5 with pressure on the e4 square. 22.c2! 2003. ]
An excellent move. White once more protects 5...bd7 6.f3 c7
the e4-square and prevents Nc5. d7 [ 6...g7 is thought inaccurate because
[ 22...c5 23.b4 ] White can now play Bh6. I'm not convinced
23.f3! White intends the doubling of the that Black's position is so bad: 7.h6 0-0
major pieces on the d-file. e7 8.xg7 xg7 9.d3 e5 10.0-0 b6
[ Now 23...c5 is also bad due to: 24.e5 ] 11.a4 c7 12.fe1 b6 13.xb6 axb6
24.f2 e8 25.d3! b7 14.c3 e8 15.h3 e7 16.a4 h5
[ 25...b8 26.e5 ] unclear, Lutz, C-Kasimdzhanov, R/Batumi
26.a1! Winning a pawn for nothing. White 2001. ]
924
7.d3 e5 8.0-0 g4!?N White's hopes of a when short of time, this is a most
swift attack are dashed instead he has to uncomfortable prospect. ]
switch thinking mode to a more positional 19.e1 d8 20.d5!? The inevitable
game where cramping Black's Queenside or complications commence and Azmai just isn't
piling up on the d file will have to do. Yes, I up to holding on against Kasparov- he seems
know this nabs the Bishop on e3 but it slows p s y c h e d o u t . O b j e c t i v e l y, I b e l i e v e t h e
down Black's development. position to be OK for Black, but his King will
[ I prefer 8...g7 , a less time- consuming have to run the gauntlet-. d6
and very thematic move. In my view, White [ 20...b5 21.b4 d6 22.c7+ d7
struggles to prove any advantage: 9.dxe5 23.a6 c8 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.xf7 e6 ]
xe5 10.xe5 dxe5 21.b4 0-0?? Who would think that
A) 11.h6 0-0 12.xg7 xg7=; castling could be such a ghastly blunder!
B) 11.ad1 0-0 12.e2 b5! I think it's [ 21...b5! transposing. ]
important to prevent Bc4. 13.d2 ( 13.c5 22.e3! c5 23.xb7
d8 14.h3 e6= ) 13...e6 14.fd1 fd8 [ 23.xg4 was simpler: cxb4 ( 23...xe4
15.h3 h5; 24.xe4 cxb4 25.fxg6 d1+ 26.h2 hxg6
C) 11.a4 e6 12.a5 0-0 13.a4 d7 27.xc4+- ) 24.xe5 b5 25.fxg6 fxg6
14.b4 b5 15.c5 xc5 16.xc5 fd8 26.xf8+ xf8 27.f2+- ]
17.a3 d7 18.e3 f8 19.c3 c8 23...g3 24.e7 dd8 25.g5 h5 26.fxg6
20.c5 h6 21.aa1 cd8 22.fd1 fxg6 27.xg6+ h8 28.f5 e5 29.h6+
c4= Waitzkin, J-McNab, C/London 1998 ] g8 30.ef1 xf5 31.exf5 d7 32.f6
9.c4! g7!? Error-ridden, yes! Interesting, also yes! The
[ 9...xe3 10.fxe3 looks like some sort of way Azmai played provides another decent
Trompowski where White will enjoy pressure system for Black against this Be3, Nf3, Qd2
against f7. Unclear But surely the whole stuff.
point of ... Ng4 is negated if Azmai doesn't 1-0
take the Bishop. ]
10.dxe5 dxe5 11.xe5 xe5
[ 11...dxe5 12.c5! ] 897 B07
12.f4 d5 That was the point of his play. But I Kazhgaleyev,Murtas 2596
still feel very uncomfortable, maybe irrationally, Gallegos,Carlos 2452
with the black King hanging around in the ACP Blitz Prelim2 blitz (8) 13.04.2004
centre, 13.xe5 xe5 14.f4 h5 15.h3 [Andrew Martin]
dxc4 16.hxg4 White could have centralised
his Q u e e n b u t t h a t wo u ld a llo w B la ck t o 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.a4!
solidify on e6. The text allows more attack Some of you have written in asking for more
and the possibility of f4-f5. games with the Czech System. To be quite
[ 16.d4 e5! ( 16...f8 17.hxg4 xg4 honest recent results have been very bad for
18.xc4 0-0-0 19.e5 ) 17.fxe5 e6 Black so I have deliberately maintained a
18.f2 0-0 19.d1 fe8= ] distance. There are several awkward systems
16...c5+ that Black has to counter. 4 f4 is the obvious
[ 16...xg4 17.d4 f8 18.f5 ] one and here 4 a4! is another. Black's idea is
17.f2 xg4 18.f5 e5 Black hastens to reactive. He is waiting to see if W hite will
lock up the centre. He has two other decent commit to a particular plan and then he hits
defensive possibilities: back appropriately. 4 a4! meets fire with fire.
[ 18...g8 19.g5 h5 20.af1 d8 White makes a very useful move, commits no
21.h1 ] piece to a bad square and asks Black to show
[ 18...h5 19.fxg6 fxg6 20.af1 f8 21.g5 HIS plan. In our featured game, Gallegos goes
xg5 22.xf8+ e7 23.xa8 back into a Philidor-like position and he is
Azmai faces a protracted defence before he always slightly worse. e5
will be able to realise his extra pawn and [ 4...a5 5.f3 g4 6.e2 e6 7.0-0 d5
925
is a different interpretation. I feel that Black [ 14...b6 15.g5 exd4 16.xd4 fd7
is mixing and matching. It will be important 17.h5 Black has nothing to set against
to play ...c6-c5 quite soon and then the White's tremendous initiative. ]
move 4...a5 doesn't fit in at all. 8.e5 fd7 15.xd4 b6?
9.h3 h5 10.e3 a6 11.d2 b6 12.g4 [ If 15...e6 16.g5 e8 17.f5 e7 18.f6
g6 13.h4 b4 He's putting off ...c6-c5 Black is being shunted off the board. ]
for as long as possible but this isn't very [ 15...c5 16.xf6 gxf6 17.h5 e7
convincing. 14.xg6 hxg6 15.g2 e7 18.d4 d7 19.ae1 ]
16.f4 0-0-0 17.f3 c5 ( 17...h7 16.g5+- xe4 17.cxe4 d5 18.f2 xf4
is an option: 18.d1 dh8 19.h1 f6 19.g4 d2 20.ad1 We may forgive White,
20.c3 a6 21.c2 Long-term, White has it's a quickplay game.
all the chances.) 18.b5 a6 19.dxc5 [ 20.d3! c5 21.xc5 bxc5 22.ad1
dxc5 20.c3 Reminiscent of Short's line xc2 23.f4 f8 24.c1 xb3 25.xc5
against the Caro-Kann ( 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 xc5 26.xc5 d7 27.e2 ]
e5 Bf5 4 Nf3). Quite often there White gets 20...xc2 21.f4 Correctly playing for attack,
the two Bishops and a position where all given the time limit. c5 22.g4 xg4
Black can do is sit and wait. Few are up to 23.xf7+ h8 24.hxg4 e6 25.e3 xb3
the onerous task. b8 21.d4 c6 22.b4 26.f5 e7
axb4 23.cxb4 b6 24.bxc5 xc5 25.d2 [ 26...xa4 27.g6 hxg6 28.xg6
winning, Svendsen,B-Stava,J/Oslo NOR leaves the Black King wide open. ]
2004, Black lacked counterplay throughout. ] 27.xe7 xe3+ 28.h1 xe7 29.xe7
5.ge2 e7 6.g3 0-0 7.g2 e8 8.h3 The middle game was rather poor but I do feel
c7 9.e3 bd7 10.0-0 Black will search that White's opening play is worthy of close
for an object of attack and there is little to be scrutiny. The moves a2-a4 and b2-b3! drain
found. He cannot expand with ...b7-b5 that the dynamism from Black's position and then
has been stopped. He may attack e4 several the Kingside pawn advance follows on
times but White will always be able to defend naturally. An easy plan to remember and very
that square comfortably. Meanwhile the threat effective too! The Czech System is currently
o f a k in gs id e p a wn a d va n ce h a n gs o ve r under pressure.
Black's head. Black has no active plan. b6 1-0
11.b3 a5 12.g4! Making room for the Knight
t o c o m e t o g 3 . f8 13.g3 bd7
The trouble with these fast games is that one 898 B07
n e v e r h a s t i m e t o d e ve l o p i d e a s . B l a c k Khenkin,Igor 2550
needed some space to think his way through McNab,Colin Anderson 2490
the difficulties but here he has been pressured Koszalin 1997
to m ake 'a m ove'. 13 ...Nbd7 is p lanless. [Alexander Volzhin]
There were two other possibilities, but I still
prefer White in each: We considered the Fianchetto system against
[ 13...e6 14.g5 ( 14.d5! cxd5 15.exd5! the Pirc in the Karpov-Timman game. Now
c8 16.b5 d8 17.g5 fd7 18.e4 ) let's have a closer look at the line. 1.d4 d6
14...exd4 15.xd4 fd7 16.ad1 d5 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g3 g7 5.g2 0-0
17.exd5 c5 18.f4 d6 19.h4 cxd5 6.ge2 e5 7.h3 This is the most precise
20.xd5 xd5 21.xd5 xd5 22.xd5 move order.
e5 23.h5 ] [ After 7.0-0 c6 White can't play 8.e3
[ 13...d5 Ma yb e t h e be st sho t . 14.dxe5 because of g4 ]
xe4 15.cxe4 dxe4 16.xe4 d5 7...c6!?
17.d4 f4 18.f3 xg2 19.xg2 [ The old move 7...c6 gives White the slightly
Black has some play here. ] bet ter ch ances. Fo r e xam ple th e gam e
14.f4 exd4 Aseev-Zakharevich, Elista 1994 continued:
[ 14...h6 15.f3 b6 16.g5 ] 8.a4 exd4 9.xd4 e8 10.0-0 a6 11.a5
926
A) The breakthrough in the centre looks [ 22...xa1 doesn't help either: 23.xa1 h5
premature: 11...c5 12.e1 d5 13.exd5 24.f6+ f8 25.xh5! gxh5 26.h8+
xe1+ 14.xe1 xd5 15.xd5 xd4 e7 27.e3+ d7 28.h3+! c6
( 15...cxd5 16.e3 is also better for 29.c3+ with a quick mate. ]
White. ) 16.e7+ g7 17.a6! and White 23.h6! xa1
destroys Black's Queenside.; [ 23...c6 24.xh7+ f8 25.f3! g7
B) 11...b4 12.f4 a6 13.g4 h6 14.de2 26.xg6! d7 27.h3!! winning ]
c5 15.e3 c7 16.d2 d7 ( 16...c6 [ 23...g7 24.xh7+ f8 25.e1 c6
17.b3 xa5? 18.g5 hxg5 19.fxg5 h7 26.e7 e5 27.xe5 dxe5 28.xg6+!
20.d5 winning ) 17.f2 c6 18.g3 fxg6 29.f3+ f6 30.xg6 winning ]
ad8 19.fe1 First White strengthens the 24.c3!! Excellent! After the Rook sacrifice
e 4 - s q u a r e a s i n K a r p o v- T i m m a n d7 White plays a quiet move!
and now the simple 20.a4 ( instead of [ 24.xh7+ is premature as Black has f8
t h e d u b i o u s 20.g5?! ) 20...de7 21.c3 25.c3 xd5! 26.xd5 g5+!
xa4 22.xa4 c6 23.b4 secured White with a perpetual. ]
a huge edge. ] 24...xd5
8.e3 d7 9.0-0 exd4 10.xd4 e8 [ 24...xc3 leads to a beautiful mate:
The critical position of this line. 11.e1 25.xc3! h5 26.xh5 gxh5 27.d5 f6
[ 11.de2 is less accurate as it allows b5! 28.xf6+ f7 29.d5+ e7 30.g7#! ]
and in a complicated position Black has 25.xd5 f6 26.xh7+ f8 27.h8+!
go o d c h a n c e s: 12.a3 ( 12.xb5 xe4 Black resigned as he loses a Rook. An
13.bc3 xc3 14.xc3 b8 15.b1 c8 excellent game!
16.h2 a5 17.d5 b4 18.c3 xd5 1-0
19.xd5 b5 20.d2 xh3! and Black
won a pawn for nothing in Molvig-Sorensen,
Copenhagen 1995.) 12...b8 13.c1 c8 899 B07
14.h2 a5 with excellent prospects for Kobalia,Mihail 2537
Black: 15.g5 b4 16.axb4 axb4 17.xf6 Burmakin,Vladimir 2534
xf6 18.d5 g7 19.g4 b5 20.g3 c5 Novgorod 1999
21.b1 d8 22.d1 e5 23.xb4 h4 [Alexander Volzhin]
Prandstetter-Fritz, Berlin 1991. ]
11...c8 12.h2 e5!? A very ambitious This game proved once again that the line
plan which is also typical in similar positions with 4.Bg5 is one of the most dangerous set-
in the King's Indian. 13.g4! White prevents ups against the Pirc Defence. 1.e4 d6 2.d4
th e Ro ok 's t ra nsf e r to h 5 wh ere it wou ld f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.f4 c6 6.d2
create serious threats for White's King, and is b5
also ready to play f2-f4 next move. xg4!? [ A n o t h e r p o s si b i li t y i s 6...0-0 7.d3
A very interesting try, unfortunately it meets and now b6 is one of Black's best
wit h a nic e re f u t a t io n . 14.hxg4 xg4+ possibilities. The game Yakovich - Wang Pin,
15.g1 xe3 16.xe3 xd4 17.xd4 b5 Beijing 1997 continued with 8.ge2 ( after
18.d2 xb2 The previous moves for both 8.e5 d5 9.xd5 cxd5 10.c3 d7
sides were forced. Black has collected three 11.e2 e8 12.a4 f6 13.exf6 exf6
pawns for his piece, but by very energetic 14.h4 f5 Black had obtained a good
play W hite now proves his advantage. position in the game Romanishin - G.Kuzmin,
19.c1! b6 20.d5 d8 21.e5!! Tallinn 1979 since his Knight has the
The introduction to a brilliant combination. possibility of going to e4.) 8...e5 9.0-0-0
[ 21.xb6 axb6 is OK for Black as he will exd4 10.a4 c7 11.xd4 bd7 12.c3
win the exchange back on the next move b5 13.he1 b4 14.b1 a5 15.f3 c5
(22... Bxa1 or 22... Bh6) ] with good prospects for Black on the
21...xe5 22.h3! Now 23.Qh6 is threatened queenside. ]
as well as 23. Nxb6. b5 7.d3 b6?! Black's position can tolerate
927
either b5 or Qb6, but combining both of them 900 B07

asks for trouble. It's important that after b5 Kobalia,Mihail 2573
the b2-pawn is not hanging. 8.e5! Zakharevich,Igor 2523
[ 8.f3 g4 is unclear. ] Yekaterinburg 1999
8...d5 [Alexander Volzhin]
[ Bad is 8...dxe5? 9.fxe5 d5 10.xd5
cxd5 11.b4! and White wins a pawn (e7 or An exciting encounter in the Byrne variation
b5). ] by two leading experts. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6
9.xd5 cxd5 10.c3 dxe5 11.fxe5 c6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.d2 c6 6.f4 0-0
12.e2 b4 13.e3! Preparing to castle. 7.f3 b5 8.d3 g4
[ 13.h6 xh6 14.xh6 a6 15.xa6 [ T h e o l d m o v e 8...bd7 was played in
xa6 16.g7 f8 17.xh7 bxc3 18.bxc3 Ulibin - Joksic, Padova, 1999. In this game
b8 gives Black strong counterplay, as the W h it e h a s t rie d a ve ry in t e re st in g n e w
penetration of Black's Rook to the 2nd rank approach: 9.e5! ( 9.0-0 was played in Birn -
is unavoidable. ] Gipslis. Although White won this game, my
13...bxc3 14.bxc3 a6 15.f4 e6 16.0-0 comments prove Black had some
e7? The text move allows White to gain possibilities to equalize.) 9...b4 10.e2
some tempi. dxe5 ( 10...d5 is the alternative to the text,
[ 16...a5 was better but White has a very but it looks quite dubious: 11.exd6 f6
unpleasant initiative on the kingside after 12.dxe7 xe7 13.h4 e3 -this attempt
17.xa6 xa6 18.d3! c4 ( or 18...0-0 to obtain counterplay at the cost of a pawn
19.g5 c4 20.f4 ) 19.f2 0-0 20.g5 ] is parried by 14.f2! and if xg2+ ,then
17.ab1 c6 18.xa6 xa6 19.d3 0-0 15.f1 , winning a piece.) 11.fxe5 d5
20.c5 c6 21.g5 c8 12.h6! b8 13.h4! White takes advantage
[ 21...ae8 was losing immediately. 22.b7 of the fact he hasn't castled yet and begins
c8 23.f4 ] a very dangerous kingside attack. f6 14.h5
22.f4 b6 g5 This move is losing by force, but I've
[ 22...a5 was as bad: 23.b7 a7 24.xa7 failed to find a real improvement for Black.
xa7 25.e7 winning ] 15.xg7 xg7 16.e6 7b6 17.xg5! a6
23.e7 e8 24.xf8 xf8 25.d3!? ( The Knight is taboo: 17...fxg5 18.xg5+
[ An interesting idea: to transfer the Knight to h8 19.e5+ f6 20.xb8
the kingside although the direct 25.a4 c8 w i t h a d e c i s i v e m a t e r i a l a d v a n t a g e .)
26.a5 d7 27.b7 xc5 28.dxc5 xc5+ 18.xa6 fxg5 19.xg5+ White has 2 extra
29.h1 was good enough as well. ] pawns as well as a strong attack against
25...c8 26.bc1 c7 Black's King. The rest needs no comment.
[ 26...a4!? 27.f2 xc3 ( 27...xc3 h8 20.d3 f6 21.h6 g8 22.g7+!
28.f3 xa2 29.g4 ) 28.g4 e7 Ulibin converts his advantage into the full
was more stubborn, according to Mikhail point very convincingly. xg7 23.hxg7+
Kobalia. ] xg7 24.xh7+ g8 25.0-0-0 bf8
27.f2! a4 28.g4 xa2 29.f6+ h8 26.g3 xe6 27.dh1 f6 28.7h6 d6
30.f3 A decisive attack. Black's King will be 29.f5 d7 30.g4 f7 31.g5 g4 32.g6+
ma t ed so o n . c4 31.h3 h5 32.xh5+ e8 33.g7+ d8 34.e6+ e8 35.h8
Black resigned. , and Black resigned. ]
[ 32.xh5+ gxh5 33.g5 ] 9.e5 b4 10.e2 xf3 11.gxf3 d5 12.c4
1-0 a5 13.0-0-0 f6 14.exf6 exf6 15.h4 h6
16.g3!? Up to this move it's been well known
theory. W hite's last move is a novelty,
prepared especially for this game.
[ Zakharevich is a well-known expert in this
line and he had already played this position
vs Dreev. In that game W hite pref erred
928
16.f2 ,but after d7 17.h4 7b6 18.d3 s u r p r i s e a w a i t s h i m . b5! Excellent

a4! Black had seized the initiative. ] counterattacking resource. Black exploits the
16...d7 17.h4 7b6 18.d3 a4! poor position of White's King. White definitely
[ During his preparation White considered missed this blow. 37.b4
only 18...a4? This move is really bad here [ Unfortunately, 37.xf6 loses on the spot in
purely because the f4-pawn is protected! view of xf6+ 38.xf6 g7! and White is
19.h5 ac3 ( 19...g5 20.hg1 ) 20.hxg6! hopeless: 39.d3 xf6+ 40.b1 c3+
The position of W hite's Bishop made this 41.c2 xe4+ ]
mo ve p o s s ib le . xe2+ 21.xe2 xf4 37...a7! 38.d3 f2 39.d2 g8!
22.xf4! This is the difference in comparison the decisive move. W hit e ha s no thin g t o
wit h t h e a b o ve -m e n t i o n e d g a m e . xf4+ op po se t he pe n et rat ion of Bla ck's m ajo r
23.b1 and White obtains a decisive pieces on the 7th rank. 40.c3
attack. ] [ 40.xb5 d4+ ]
19.h5 g5! Black's excellent feel for the 40...xc3 41.xc3 g2! The rest is just
position enables him to find the drawbacks of agony. 42.xf6+ g7 43.xg7+ xg7
White's novelty. Having his Bishop on the g3- 44.f6+ h6 45.b1 c1! This nice blow is
square, White can't exploit g-file effectively. the logical result of Black's strategy. White
20.f5 a3 21.b3 With kings castled on resigned because of unavoidable mate:
opposite sides sharp mutual attacks are quite [ 45...c1 46.xc1 ( 46.xc1 xa2# )
usual. But here both sides have rather limited 46...d4+ So we can conclude that 8...Bg4
attacking resources, because both kings are is Black's best choice in the Byrne variation,
in safety behind their pawn chains. Now both wh e re B la ck c a n s u cce ssf u lly f igh t f o r
sides begin to manoeuvre, trying improve the initiative. ]
positions of their pieces. d7 22.f2 fe8 0-1
23.e4 a7 24.b1 a5 25.e1 ab8
26.a1 c8! 27.g1 a7 28.d3
Protecting the f5-pawn and threatening 29. 901 B07
B:d5 Q: d5 30.Nf4!, Ne6 to follow, so Black Kotronias,Vasilios 2598
has to prevent this. h8! 29.g4 bc8 Felgaer,Ruben 2580
30.c4?! White has clearly overestimated his 37th Olympiad (5) 25.05.2006
chances. [Jonathan Rowson]
[ White was afraid that after 30.c1 b5
he will have no active plan, but here Black 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5
also doesn't have many possibilities. In my 5.xd8+ xd8 6.c4 e6
opinion, this position is about equal. ] [ 6...e8 As I suggested last month, I think
30...bxc3 31.xc3 f4 32.b1 c7 this is a better move here. Indeed,
Now it's clear that White is in an A z m a i p a r a s h vi l i d e s c r i b e s 6 . . . B e 6 a s
u n c o m f o r t a b l e s i t u a t i o n . Hi s f o r c e s a r e 'passive' and I tend to agree with him. Once
uncoordinated (the rook's position on g4 looks yo u ge t o ve r t h e e xci t e m e n t a b o u t t h e
quite strange), and Black is threatening d6-d5 doubled e-pawns not being as bad as they
at the right moment followed by the look, there is not much to be said for
penetration of the rook down e-file. But in Black's position. ]
playing his 30th move White hoped for 33.d5 7.xe6 fxe6 8.e3 d6 9.f3 e7 10.ge2
cxd5 34.xf4 Nothing much wrong with this, but I prefer the
[ Other moves lose on the spot: 34.xd5 approach covered last month. The problem is
xd5 35.xd5 xe1! ] that the white's knights don't look bad, but
[ or 34.xd5 xe1 ] familiarity with this structure tells you that
34...gxf4 35.xd5 g7 36.c3 It may seem they want to be on d3 and d2, and it will take
that at the cost of the exchange W hite has them a while to get there now.
firmly seized the initiative and compelled [ 10.b1!? intending c3 and Nd2, and Nh3-
Black to passively defend. But an unpleasant f2-d3 (Vescovi). ]
929
10...a6 11.d1 h6 12.b3 c6 13.b2 that's not the full story. It all depends on style.
[ 13.c3 keeping Black at bay, looks better. ] If you are a tough defender, who is willing to
13...b4! Hassling White before he can settle wait for an opportunity or a player who wishes
down and build up pressure on e5. 14.d2 take the prospect of direct attack away from
hd8 15.c1 c6 16.a4 In general, I don't the opponent, then the solid Black position
think this move should be played until Black might well be for you. Or.....you are happy with
has played a5 himself because otherwise it a draw. Now this thing about drawing....At a
weakens b3(c3 will have to played) without lower level one might fling up one's hands in
gaining anything in return. horror at the thought of just playing for a draw,
[ 16.c3 a3 17.c2 xb2 18.xb2 d3 but I assure you that to have the Black pieces
looks awkward, until you see 19.c5+ f7 against a strong, experienced adversary is no
20.ad1 ad8 21.xd3 xd3 22.c2 easy task. So it's not all black and white and
when white keeps control, and a pair of who knows, the guy might overstretch. Black
rooks on(useful for creating play on the has won many games with this line when
queenside). ] White did just that! 6.c4! He should do this
16...d7 17.c3 b5 18.b4 o f c o u rs e . b4!? A new one on me. My first
[ 18.c2 b4 seems to give sufficient impression that it is more combative than the
counterplay. ] normal idea of just shoring up the centre. The
18...a5 19.axb5 axb4 20.c2?! Understand following fragment is pretty representative of
ably not ceding the a-file, but in fact W hite that approach:
should give the a-file in order to pin the knight [ 6...e8 7.f3 d6 8.g5 e6 9.d2
when it goes to a5. bd7 10.0-0-0 h6 11.h4 e7 12.xe6
[ 20.xa8 xa8 21.c2 a5 22.a1 fxe6 The famous doubled central pawns, so
looks like a serious advantage. ] common to this variation. W ell, they
20...a5 21.cxb4 xb4 22.d3 d6 certainly co ver a lot of squares. 13.c4
23.d2 c4 24.b4 Black has lots of moves b6 14.xb6 axb6 15.f3 b5 16.xb5
now. a3+ 25.b2 xa2 17.b1 a5 18.c4 ha8 19.c2
[ 25.xa3 xa3 26.c6+ e8 27.xd8 a4 20.b3 8a6 21.d3 Rublevsky I
a2+ 28.d3 c5+ 29.e3 xd8 30.b1 agitated over whether this was slightly or
allows the game to continue, but it is hard clearly better for White but that is not really
t o b e l i e v e W h i t e i s r e a l l y b e t t e r wh e n the main issue. Black has very little
Black's rook is so active. ] counterplay. ]
25...c4+ 26.c2 a3+ [ 6...e6 7.xe6 fxe6 leads to roughly the
½-½ same sort of game. ]
7.d2 e7 I guess Black is hoping that
playing his King to e7 in one move is a gain.
902 B07 8.0-0-0
Kotronias,Vasilios 2599 [ 8.f3 d6 9.h3 is relatively simple.
Skembris,Spyridon 2446 Whether White can expect anything this way
ch-GRE Athens GRE (9) 12.12.2004 is o pe n to d ou bt : e6 10.b3 bd7
[Andrew Martin] 11.0-0-0 c6 12.h4! Interestingly, White
does not take on e6 this time.
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5 A) 12...b4 13.f5+ xf5 ( 13...f8
5.xd8+ xd8 One might wonder at first 14.xe6 fxe6 15.e3 e7 16.f3 hd8
glance why Black should ever wish to go into 17.a3 ) 14.exf5 c5 15.he1 xb3+
this ending. His King is stuck in the centre 16.axb3 leaves the Black King looking
and W hite maintains the advantage of the pretty exposed.;
first move. He also seems to have a free B) 12...g6 13.g3 xb3 14.axb3 c5
tempo with 6 Bc4 that will put Black even more 15.g5 c7 ( 15...ad8 ) 16.f4 h6
at a disadvantage. There's no doubt about it, 17.xf6+ xf6 18.hf1 exf4 19.gxf4
Black's position appears prospectless. But ad8 20.de1 g7 ( 20...d4;
930
20...he8 ) 21.e5 he8 22.b4 e6 28.f8+ xg7 29.e6++- ) 21.e4! c7
Cools,G-Thiry,J/ TCh-BEL 2003 ] ( 21...f5 22.f6+ d6 23.g4 g6
8...bd7N 9.f3 c6 10.d5+! The fate of 24.g8 xg8 25.xg8 xa4 26.e6+
this move will decide the overall assessment c7 27.xh7+- ) 22.f6 h5 23.g8 xg8
of 6...Bb4. A couple of pairs of pieces are 24.xg8 f8 25.e7+ d7 26.f7 xf7
going to be exchanged, which you would 27.xf7 h4 28.b3 ]
have thought might favour Black, but at the 20...c6 21.fxg7! g4 22.h3 d5?
end of it all the Black central position loses its [ Just bringing the bishop back into play was
' t igh t ' lo o k an d h is K ing is o p e n . xd5 called for: 22...f5 23.f3 ( 23.g4 g6 )
11.exd5 xd2+ 12.xd2 cxd5 13.xd5 23...d6 24.xb7 d7 25.d4 e4
b6 14.b3 f6 15.he1 d8 So is this 26.b5 f6= It is clear that Skembris has
position equal or not? One thing is for sure been really unsettled by White's
White MUST attack because Black's King will unbalancing tactics. ]
be very well placed if too many pieces come 23.e5! Cutting ...Bf5 out, an important gain
off. 16.a4 a5 for White. f6
[ Frankly, I see nothing wrong for Black at all [ 23...d7 24.c4!! g8 25.hxg4 gxg7
after 16...f5! just getting the pieces out. 26.b5+ c7 27.xd7 xd7 28.g5+- ]
White can play f4 if he wants to: 24.hxg4 e8 25.f3+- Let's take stock:
A) 17.f3 ac8 18.f4 g4 19.f3 xd1+ W hite has a magnificent Bishop and three
20.xd1 xf3+ 21.gxf3 d6 22.fxe5+ extra pawns for an exchange. The g pawn will
fxe5 23.e2 c4 24.d1+ e7 25.d5 surely cost Black extra material. It's all over.
f6 26.a5=; h6 26.f5 g8 27.d4+ b6 28.xg8
B) 17.f4 g4 18.f3 xd1+ 19.xd1 xg8 29.f7 ac8 30.f5 c7 31.f6+
xf3+ 20.gxf3 d8+ 21.c1 d7 c5 32.xh6 b4 33.b6+ xa4
22.fxe5 fxe5 23.d5 ( 23.f4 f6 ) When you are totally lost, you can play in such
23...b6=; a fashion. 34.b1 e8 35.c3 d7 36.d6
C) 17.a5 d5 18.f1 e6 19.xd5 dd8 37.b3+ a3 38.c4# Summarizing, I
xd5 20.xd5 xd5 21.e3 e6 think the endgame isn't too bad for Black
22.d1 d8= ] overall, and that 6...Bb4 shows a new way to
17.f4 g4 18.fxe5!? The best practical try to play it. One must be quite content with a draw
win as demonstrated by the game. Kotronias though.
frightens Skembris with this move. 1-0
[ 18.f3 leads nowhere, as the last note
implies. Well, it leads to a draw. ]
18...xd1 19.exf6+ d7? Horrible. What on 903 B07
earth was going through his head? Aggressive Landa,Konstantin 2542
play with the King was called for and Black Korotylev,Alexey 2440
holds his own: Moscow 1999
[ 19...xf6 20.e6+ g5! 21.xb6 [Alexander Volzhin]
( 21.xd1 I'm guessing that this is why
Skembris didn't play ...Kxf6. d7 22.e4+ 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.f4
h4 23.e2 f8 24.e5 e8! A very ambitious attempt to combine the
j u s t i n t i m e .) 21...g4 22.xb7 d7 advantages of Dolmatov's setup the protected
23.e4+ f4 ] d4 square) and Austrian attack (a strong
20.e7+?! Mistake for mistake although at the pawn centre). f6
board this move must have looked pretty [ An attempt at immediate breakthrough in
good. the centre with 4...e5?! is premature: 5.dxe5
[ Deep Fritz shows 20.fxg7! to be better: g4 h4+ 6.g3 e7 7.exd6 xe4+ 8.e2
( 20...xc2 21.xc2 ac8+ 22.b1 g8 xe2+ 9.xe2 cxd6 10.a3! e6 11.b5
23.e6+ d6 24.xc8 xc8 25.e4+ d7 12.f5! gxf5 13.f4 f6 14.xd6
e5 26.g5+ f6 27.xh7+ g6 d5 15.0-0-0 e7 16.g2 xf4 17.xf4
931
c6 18.xb7 and White is winning, Norwood, 1989. ]

Portisch-Suttles, Siegen 1970. ] 8...xc5 9.c2 b6! Black exploits the
5.d3 0-0 6.f3 c5! Black has to attack drawbacks of White's set-up very convincingly.
White's centre without delay, otherwise White 10.0-0 a6 11.c4 d5! Breaking White's
will complete his development and launch center and taking the initiative into his hands.
dangerous kingside attack with 0-0, Qe1, e5 12.exd5 xd5 13.d1 e6 The pin looks
etc. 7.dxc5 bd7! By this unexpected unpleasant, but really W hite can't derive
temporary pawn sacrifice Black manages to benefit from it. 14.e5 Hoping to close the
solve all his problems. "monster" on g7! c7 15.a3 b4! 16.d2
[ 7...dxc5 This pawn structure (with a pawn xc2 17.xc2 ad8 18.b4 g5!
o n f 4 ) n o r m a l l y f a vo u r s W h i t e . J u s t 2 Another break in the center, now with even
examples to illustrate Black's difficulties: more disastrous consequences for W hite.
8.0-0 ( 8.e5 d5 9.e4 c7 10.e2 f5 19.d4 White can't hold the material balance:
11.d3 b6 12.c4+ e6 13.0-0 c6 [ 19.g3 gxf4 20.gxf4 f6 21.g4 xf4
14.a3 b7 15.b5 d5 16.d6 e7 is hopeless. ]
17.g5 d8 18.xb7 xb7 19.d1 c7 19...gxf4 20.dc6 Giving up another pawn in
20.d7 e8 21.d1 c6 22.d6 xd6 hope of creating counterplay. xd1+ 21.xd1
23.exd6 d5 24.xe6 xe6 25.xd5 xc4! 22.xc4 xe5 23.xe5 xe5
h8 26.xa8 1-0 Saidy - Sznapik, Lublin The slightly insecure position of Black's King
1973. ) 8...c6 9.e5 d5 10.e4 b6 doesn't compensate White for the loss of two
11.a3 c7 12.e3 a6 13.e2 d8 pawns. 24.e1
14.f2 d7 15.g5 h6 16.xf7 xf7 [ After 24.c3 Black wins by force: e3+
17.e6+ xe6 18.f5+ f7 19.fxg6+ g8 25.h1 e4! 26.d4 d8! 27.h3 f2+
20.f7+ h8 21.xh6 g8 22.xg7+ 28.g1 xd4! 29.xd4 e1+ 30.h2
xg7 23.e8+ g8 24.g7+ 1-0 Ree-van h1# ]
Baarle, Nederland 1972. ] 24...f5 25.d4 h6 26.e5
8.e2?! This move allows Black to seize the [ 26.c3 f6 is also bad for White. ]
initiative. 26...b1+ 27.e1 f5 28.e5 f6 29.h4
[ The alternatives are: 8.e3!? xc5 9.xc5 [ White could win one pawn back but the
dxc5 10.a3 c7 11.e5 d5 12.g3 d8 endgame after 29.xc5 bxc5 30.xc5 d8
13.e2 a6 14.0-0 g4 and Black's 31.e1 xb2 32.xa7 d2 33.a8+ g7
chances are by no means worse, Bareev- is hopeless for him. ]
Todorcevic, Belgrade 1988. ] 29...d8 Now the game is over. 30.xc5
[ 8.cxd6 exd6 9.0-0 ( 9.e3?! e8 bxc5! 31.c3 d1+ 32.f2 xh4+ 33.e2
10.bd2 d5! 11.e2 xe3 12.xe3 h1 White resigned.
f6 13.g3 f5 14.0-0-0 c8 with ample 0-1
compensation, Komljenovic-Todorcevic,
San Sebastian 1991.) 9...c5 10.c2
Other moves doesn't promise W hite any 904 B07
advantage as either: ( 10.e1 e8 11.c2 Landa,Konstantin 2610
xd3 12.xd3 xe4 13.xe4 f5 14.e3 Rudolf,Henrik 2315
xe4 15.e2 e7 and the strong light ECC, Rethymnon (2) 2003
s qu a r e d b is h o p s e c u re s B l a c k s li gh t l y [Andrew Martin]
better chances, Brustman - Segal, Manila
1992.; 10.e5 dxe5 11.xe5 g4 12.c4 BRUTAL 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6
xe5 13.fxe5 xd1 14.xd1 e6 15.a3 4.e3 c6 5.d2 bd7 6.f3 e5!?
xe5 with an equal endgame, Lodhi- We've seen all this sort of stuff before. Black
Norwood,Dhaka 1993.) 10...e8 11.bd2 delays ... Bg7 hoping that White will play Bh6
d7!? 12.d4 c8 13.h1 e7 14.f5 prematurely and tries to find constructive
fxe4 15.xe4 xe4 16.fxg6 hxg6 moves in the meantime. White in turn delays
and Black has good prospects, Hodgson - Bh6 until the right moment. 7.h3 g7
932
[ No-one famous seems to have tried the [ 5...xf3 is hardly to be recommended here,
immediate 7...e7!? so I will suggest it. for example after 6.xf3 e5 7.e3 a5
Some analysis: 8.0-0-0 ( 8.a4 g7 9.d3 8.0-0-0 e7 9.g4 White was already clearly
0-0 10.0-0 exd4 11.xd4 e5 12.e2 better in Aabling Thomsen, J (2314)-
e6=; 8.d3 g7 9.h6 xh6 10.xh6 Krasenkow, M (2628) Copenhagen 2010
exd4 11.xd4 c5 12.0-0-0 e6 13.e3 and in fact he went on to beat his much
0-0-0 ) 8...g7 ( 8...b5!? 9.dxe5 dxe5 ) higher rated opponent. ]
9.dxe5 dxe5 10.g4 0-0 Not sure about all 6.d3
this but it's worth a look. ] [ 6.g4 g6 7.e2! looks like a very
8.h6 0-0 9.xg7 xg7 10.0-0-0 e8 tempting option here for White a5 ( 7...e6
[ As Black's Queen is so ineffectual in the 8.g5 fd7 9.h4 was better for White in
game he could consider .. Qe7 now: Lahno, K (2557)-Reinderman, D (2581) Wijk
10...e7 11.g4 b5 12.g5 h5 13.dxe5 aan Zee 2012 so Black sacrificed a pawn
dxe5 14.e2 f6 ] with d5!? 10.exd5 cxd5 11.xg6 hxg6
11.g4 b5 12.g5 h5 13.e2! This is why 12.xd5 c6 but he didn't have quite
the 150 attack has such broad appeal. White enough compensation after 13.c3 a5
intends to root the defender out and go to 14.b5! xb5 15.c7+ d8 16.xb5 a6
work with the h pawn. Black's counterplay on 17.a3 xa3 18.bxa3 although the game
the queenside is a long way off. b6 14.g3 eve n t u a lly e n d e d in a d ra w.; 7...d5
xg3 doesn't solve Black's problems after 8.e5
[ 14...f4 15.dxe5 dxe5 16.xe5 e4 9.e6! fxe6 10.e5 a5 11.xg6
is a disaster for Black. ] hxg6 12.e3 and White has an excellent
15.fxg3 exd4 16.xd4 c5? position. ) 8.d2 a6 ( 8...b6
[ 16...e5 17.e2 e6 had to be played ca n b e se e n in Nyba ck-P ura n e n in t h e
and White's attack isn't so dangerous. The archives but in summary White is just doing
threat to e4 is illusory. ] well in these positions!) 9.e3 b6 10.g5
17.g2 xe4 18.f4! Now its tough for h5 and now in Alonso Rosell, A (2529) -
Black. f6 and f7 creak and Black can't defend Romero Holmes, A (2508) San Agustin 2012
both. d5 19.hf1 b7 20.xc6! White would've been clearly better with the
Very strong indeed. If the attack falters, White simple 11.0-0-0 ( instead after 11.a4 c7
wins all the endgames. e6 21.d4 ad8?? 12.c4?! e5! the position wasn't so clear )]
He gave up. 6...e6 7.g4 g6 8.g5
[ 21...g8 22.fe1 is enduringly passive, [ 8.e2 doesn't lead to much here as after
but it might be possible to defend. ] e7 9.d2 d5! Black has no problems ]
22.xe6+ After either capture on e6, White 8...fd7
takes on e4, winning. A sudden finish. [ 8...h5?! runs into 9.e2! and the knight
1-0 is in trouble on h5 ]
9.h4 d5 10.xg6 hxg6 11.g4?!
[ 11.f4 was a better option - planning to
905 B07 meet b6 with 12.exd5! xd4
Leko,Peter 2732 ( 12...cxd5?! 13.b5; 12...xb2?! 13.d2
Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar 2764 exd5 14.b1 a3 15.xb7 ) 13.e3 e5
FIDE GP Tashkent (2.4) 23.11.2012 14.dxe6 xe6 15.e2 followed by 0-0-0
[Tom Rendle] and White has an excellent game. ]
11...b6 Now Black is absolutely fine. 12.e2
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.f3 g4 a6 13.c3 dxe4 14.xe4 c7 15.f3
5.h3 b5! Mamedyarov brings his knight back to
[ T h e q u i e t e r 5.e2 was played against the centre where it will do an excellent job on
Mamedyarov earlier this year by Hou Yifan d6. 16.a4 d6 17.a5 b5 18.d3 d5
in a game I annotated in the archives. ] 19.xd5 cxd5 White may have the two
5...h5 bishops here but the pawn on g5 has lef t
933
behind some weak squares and that's enough 906 B07

compensation to ensure Black is in no danger Levin,Felix 2486
here. 20.a6 b6 21.h4 c8 22.g3 e7 Nolte,Christian 2111
23.e2 f8 24.f4 c4 25.h5 Schachtuerken-Cup A (2) 27.12.2009
[ 25.ab1!? was interesting and now d6 [Eric Prié]
sh o u ld b e e n o u gh t o h o ld e qu a lit y ( not
25...b5 26.b3 a3 27.a1! and the knight 1.f3 d6 2.d4 d7 3.e4! g6 4.c4! e5?
is a little awkwardly placed on a3 and the [ 4...h6 5.e5 With the idea e5-e6 and then
pawn on c3 cannot be taken because after Qd3 attacking g6 is quite strong, much like ]
xc3?! then 28.hc1! xc1 29.xc1 [ 4...gf6 5.e5 which makes ]
and suddenly there's an embarrassing check [ 4...e6 The only move, with the idea to play
on c8 to deal with )] a Hippopotamus implying a double
25...gxh5 26.xh5 g8 27.c1 fianchetto - an idea that can now be
[ 27.g3 xh1 28.xh1 xb2 29.h7+ t h w a r t e d b y 5.a4! Profiting from the
f8 30.d3 and Black should take a draw inappropriate black move order and
with g8 ( 30...e8?! 31.b5! directed against the couple Nd7/Bc8.
gives White a dangerous initiative) 31.h7+ ( 5.e2 g7 6.e5 e7 7.0-0 El Debs, F
f8 32.d3= ] (2480)-Rodriguez Vila, A (2521) Campinas
27...g6 28.g3 xh1 29.xh1 e5 2010 1-0(53)) 5...a6 6.a5 With the idea of
Now it's Black that has slightly the better castling kingside and an easy course of
chances but Leko is up to the defensive task. action for White. b5? 7.axb6 cxb6 8.e2
30.dxe5 cxe5 31.b5 c5 32.e3 e6 b5 9.xb5 ]
33.d1 c7 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.g5
[ 33...xg5 leads to a drawn endgame after [ 6.xf7+!! xf7 7.g5+
34.xd5 xe3 35.fxe3 c5 36.xc5 xc5 A) 7...e7 8.d5 df6 ( 8...e8
37.f2 f8 38.b4 ] 9.e6+ d8 10.f7+ ) 9.xe5+ d7
34.d3?! 10.e6#;
[ 34.f4! was best and White is comfortable B) 7...e8 8.e6 h4 9.c3! b4
after xb5 35.fxe5 c7 36.f2 ( 9...c6 ) 10.xc7+ f8 ( 10...f7
as the knight gets to g4 and the resulting 11.d5+; 10...d8 11.g5+ xg5
position should be a draw. ] 12.e6+ ) 11.0-0! b8 12.e6+ f7
34...e8! Suddenly White has to be very 13.g5+ g7 14.d5 h6 15.e6+
careful 35.f4 xg5! 36.f2 f7 ( 15...f6 16.g5+ xg5 17.xg5
[ not 36.fxg5 g4 37.f3 xe3 xg5 18.f4+ ) 16.g5 g4 ( 16...b6
and Black has good winning chances ] 17.d8+ e8 18.xe5+ ) 17.c7+ g7
36...xd3 37.xd3 e7 38.f3 Black has 18.f3 xg5 19.e6+ ]
an extra pawn but White has enough activity 6...e7?
to hold a draw with accurate play. f6 39.d4 [ 6...e7? 7.d5 ]
f7 40.h1 xa6 41.a1 c5 42.xc5 [ 6...f6 7.e3 ]
bxc5 43.f5! g5 44.xa7 f8 45.b4 7.f6! g8
W hite is happy to swap pawns as this just [ 7...xf6 8.xf7+ xf7 9.xd8 ]
brings a draw ending closer. c4 46.c5 8.g5
Black cannot allow the knight to reach e6 so 1-0
he must take on c5 and the rook and pawn
ending is a simple draw. xc5 47.bxc5 c8
48.a6 f7 49.a7+ g8 50.a5 e8
51.a7 c8 52.a5 e8 53.a7 c8
54.a5 With such a passive king Black cannot
play for a win so here the players agreed to a
draw.
½-½
934
907 B07 relevant to learning opening theory. g6 7.0-0

Looshnikov,Nikolai 2500 g7 8.d2 0-0 9.a4 b6 10.a5 bxa5
Gabrielian,Artur 2557 11.a4 b8 12.b3 cxd4 13.cxd4 b4
14th Master Open (4) 15.06.2010 14.xa5 xa5 15.xa5 e5 16.c4 exd4
[John Shaw] 17.xd6 h6 18.d2 xb3 19.c4 b6
20.e5 g4 21.f4
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.d3 c7 [ 21.xf7+ xf7 22.xc8 is messy but
A re la te d lin e t o th e syste m I sugge st e d promising for White ]
against 2.Nf3 a6 3.c3. White is not committed 21...gxe5 22.fxe5 xe5 23.f4 d3
to Nf3, Black is not committed to ...a7-a6. 24.g3 xc4 25.xc4 b4 26.d2 e8
5.g5 27.d6 b2 28.c4 c2 29.e5 b7
[ 5.f3 g6 6.0-0 g7 7.h3 is the closest 30.f3 d2 31.b4 d8
this variation has to a main line. For [ 31...xf3 was even simpler ]
e x a m p l e , a n o t h e r G a b r i e l i a n g a m e 32.xd2 dxd2 33.xd2 xd2 34.b1
continued: 0-0 8.e1 fd7!? 9.g5 c6! xg2 35.a4 d5 36.e4 d4+ 37.f1
10.d5 ce5 11.xe7 xf3+ 12.gxf3 xe4 38.bb4 d3+ 39.e1 e2+ 40.d1
h6!? Testing a suggestion of Piket in his c3
Informant annotations to Kramnik - Piket, 0-1
Wijk aan Zee 2001, although Piket awarded
it an!!. ( 12...e8 is also okay, as Inarkiev
has shown in one game) 13.xf8 xf8 908 B07
Black has good compensation on the dark Lopez Martinez,Josep Manuel 2550
squares. 14.d2 ( 14.f1 e5 was Piket's Gurevich,Mikhail 2635
line ) 14...e5 15.c4 e7 16.xe5 8th ch-Euro Dresden GER (6) 08.04.2007
xe5 17.f1 ( 17.h4!? f4 18.g2 xh4 [John Watson]
19.h1 g5+ 20.f1 ) 17...b5 18.a4 b4
19.c2 b8 20.c4 g7 21.ac1 xh3+ James Vigus brought my attention to this
22.e2 d7 23.b5 c8 24.cxb4 a6 earlier game, which he thinks is theoretically
25.c4 xb4 26.b3 h5 27.d2 h4 28.g1 critical (and who am I to argue!). Indeed,
f6 29.e3 g5 30.c2 a5 31.h1 h3 since he gives the general picture that Black
32.f1 e7 33.f4 d4 34.d3 g4 35.e2 is rather counter intuitively exposing himself
h4 36.e5 h5 37.exd6 f5 38.d7 b8 t o d ire ct a t t a ck b y p la yi n g t h is lin e , a n y
39.g3 d8 40.f3 xd7 41.d6 f6 change of moves or move orders is extremely
42.e3 h4 43.fxg4 xg4 44.xh3! important. That is, Black has good counterplay
xh3+ 45.xh3 xd6 46.d3 d4 on the queenside, and has survived thus far,
47.xd4 1/2-1/2 Khairullin - Gabrielian, but White's attack is presumably within a half
Sochi 2005. Black had most of the fun, but tempo or so of succeeding! 1.e4 d6 2.d4
White defended well. ] f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 g7 5.d2 0-0
[ 5.h3 g6 is another move order. ] As Vigus points out, ...Bg7 and ...0-0 is a less
[ 5.e2 is also logical. For example, g6 common combination of moves, even 'quite a
6.0-0 g7 7.f3 is a rock-solid way to start r a r e m o v e - e x c e p t a m o n g b e g i n n e r s
the game ] a n d 2 6 0 0 p l a ye r s ! ' 6.f3 c6 7.h4 h5
5...bd7 I guess the first question is whether this is
[ Black could pla y 5...g6 as taking on f6 n e c e s s a r y. B y a n a l o g y wi t h t h e D r a g o n
looks an empty threat. This would keep the Variation of the Sicilian, where White's attack
o p t io n o f a la t e r . . . Nf d 7 a s we ll a s t h e is slower than this (relative to Black's that is),
obvious Nbd7. ] one would certainly think it desirable to stop
6.e2 A new move. Once again, Black's non- h5. That doesn't mean obligatory, and this
forcing yet sound set-up has created a non- would have to be analysed in depth, but a
theory position where both sides can just play random few lines might be:
c h e s s . T h e r e s t o f t h e ga m e is t h u s n o t [ 7...e5 8.0-0-0 ( 8.g4 exd4 9.xd4 e6
935
10.h5 ) 8...a5 9.b1 e6 10.g4 exd4 23.hxg6 xh1 24.gxf7+ xf7 25.g8+
11.xd4 b5 12.a3 ] e7 26.e8# ]
[ 7...b5 8.ge2 ( 8.h5!? xh5 9.ge2 b4 16...xg7 17.g5 d8?
10.d1 and g4 also looks very strong; 8.g4 [ 17...f6 ]
h5!? ) 8...e5 ( 8...b4 9.d1 a5 10.h5 18.xd5?
bd7 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.f4 b6 13.a3 ) [ 18.g3 leaves Black no kingside defence.
9.h5 ] Perhaps White feared c3+ but 19.a1
8.0-0-0 b5! Certainly natural. xf1 ( 19...xa2 20.f5+ g8 21.xd8+
[ 8...a5 can be considered, to enforce ...e5, xd8 22.xe7+ h7 23.d3! ) 20.f5+
but 9.b1 ('threat' Nd5) e8 10.h6 g8 21.xe7+ h7 22.dxf1 ( or 22.f5
looks dangerous, e.g., e5 11.dxe5 dxe5 xa2+ 23.xa2 xd1+ 24.c1 gxf5
12.g4 . But often these primitive attacks can 25.bxc3 )]
be neutralized with the right move order. ] 18...xd5 19.f4 xa2+! These positions
9.h6 are obviously torture to play. Here
[ The positional method would be 9.d3 b4 [ 19...c4? 20.xh5+ f8 21.e6!
10.ce2 , wh e n d ire ct a t t a ck b y a5 is strangely killing gxh5 22.f5 f6 23.xh5
wouldn't do much after, for example, 11.b1 g7 24.xc4! c6 25.b3 c7 26.f7+
e6 12.a3 a6 13.f4 d7 14.c4 ] h8 27.d3 ]
9...b4 10.ce2 a5 11.b1 e6!? 20.xa2 d1+ 21.c1 b3! Suddenly it's
This allows White to close things up a bit on Black who is attacking. 22.xh5+ h7
the queenside, although it can hardly be too 23.cxb3 c6 24.b4?
bad. [ 24.b5! xh1 25.xc6 d8 looks very
[ The other appealing move in this type of s t r o n g f o r B l a c k , y e t 26.g3 holds:
position is 11...c5! when White should react ( o r p e r h a p s 26.f4!? g8 27.e6 )
quickly, perhaps by 12.g4!? ] 26...e1 27.h5 dd1 28.hxg6+ fxg6
12.c1 c5 29.xe7+ h8= ]
[ 12...bd7 ] 24...xb4?? A tragic mistake, but forgivable,
13.ge2 since it misses only one very subtle move.
[ Perhaps 13.d5 d7 14.g4 , when the Obviously
queen is cut off from the kingside. ] [ 24...xb4 threatens mate and forces
13...c4!? 25.c4 xh1 , so Black must have feared
[ 13...c4 is met by 14.c3 bxc3 15.xc3 26.xf7 , but ( 26.xe7?? a1+; 26.g3
c8 (versus d5), and White can play a4 ) 26...xc1+ 27.xc1 gxh5
positionally by 16.d5 ( or go for broke by wins, because 28.g5 a6! covers h6 and
16.g4 )] d3. Instead, ( 28...b6? loses to 29.e6 )]
14.e5!? 25.f4 This gives White the advantage with
[ 14.xg7 xg7 15.g5! It's funny: the h is p ie ce s ve rsu s t h e ro o k, p e rh a p s n o t
computer is rarely so untrustworthy as in enough to win. Eventually he does. xf4?!
these lines. But here it finds an odd move [ 25...f8 ]
(sometimes played in the Dragon, but not in 26.xf4 xe5 27.h5 g7 28.hxg6 xg6
this kind of position) that continues the 29.fd3 c4 30.f2 d4 31.e2 d2
attack while cutting off all counterplay. ] 32.e4 d1+ 33.c2 ad8 34.2c3 e1
14...dxe5 15.dxe5 d5? 16.xg7 35.g3 f4 36.h4 d3 37.xd3 cxd3+
[ 16.g5! Again! I'm not so sure that I'd even 38.d2 g1 39.f5+ f6 40.e3 e6
be inclined to play this move, and yet it 41.cd1 d7 42.b4 h1 43.f2 h8
practically wins outright. Nf4 and e6 are 44.e4+ e7 45.c5 c7 46.xd3 d8
immediate problems. e6 17.f4 xf1 47.e2 dd7 48.a4 b7 49.c4 d4
18.xg7 xg7 19.xh5+ h7 20.xd5! 50.e3 d5 51.b4 c7 52.c5 d1
and Nf6+ with h5 will be too strong, e.g., 53.d2 g1 54.g4 e1+ 55.f4 f6
exd5 ( 20...c4 21.f6+ g7 22.h5 h8 56.de4+ g6 57.g5 d1 58.a3 d4
23.e8+! ) 21.f6+ g7 22.h5 h8 59.d3 g7 60.e3 d5 61.dc5 g6
936
62.a1 g7 63.f4 d8 64.f6 g6 20...f7 21.g5+? I'm sure this is the move
65.a6 f5 66.a5 g6 67.g4 d1 W hite was counting on when he played 20
68.e5+ g7 69.g6 e1+ 70.d2 xe5 Re1?!. However, there is a big hole in his
71.fxe5 xg6 72.a1 f6 73.e3 f5 calculations. fxg5 22.fxg5 d7 Ooooops!
74.exf6 xf6 75.a6 e5 76.d3 d5 Th is is t h e mo ve W h it e m isse d wh e n h e
77.xe6 h7 78.f4+ e5 79.e3 g7 played 20 Re1. It's beautifully simple, but
80.a5+ d6 81.d3 c6 82.d4 b6 easy to miss. 23.f1+
83.e5 h7 84.c4+ b7 85.g5 a6 [ 23.a4 xd3 24.f1+ g8 reaches the
86.d5 g7 87.e5 b6 88.c4 c7+ same position as the game. ]
89.c5 h7 90.c6+ b7 91.e6 g7 23...g8 24.a4 xd3 25.gxh6 f4
92.b5 h7 93.a5 g7 94.b5 g1 26.e1 f7 27.f1 g8 28.e1 f5
95.e7+ a8 96.c6 a1+ 97.b4 a2 29.xe7 d5 30.e4 f7 31.xd6 h3+
98.c5 32.gxh3 xd6 Black has a small, but clear
1-0 advantage in the endgame, which he converts
after some time. 33.h4 f5 34.f4 f6
35.c3 g5 36.hxg5+ xg5 37.f3 g6
909 B07 38.a1 xh6 39.e1 b5 40.h3+ g7
Macieja,Bartlomiej 2538 41.e2 f7 42.g2+ h8 43.b2 f6
Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2675 44.g3 d5 45.e3 g7 46.h3 h5
1st ch-Europe (5) 07.07.2000 47.h2 f6 48.g1 g6 49.f2 xb3
[Carsten Hansen] 50.xf6+ xf6 51.f2 d5 52.e5 f4
53.g3 e6 54.h5 g6 55.e5 c4
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 c6 56.e3 c7 57.g4 e6+ 58.g3 f5
5.d2 b5 6.d3 bd7 7.f4 g7 59.e5+ f6 60.e3 d5 61.f3+ g5
With 7. ..Qa5 play will transpose to Beim-van 62.h2 h5 63.g3+ f4 64.g6 f5
der W iel that we have already examined. 65.h6 f6 66.h8 g8 67.g3 g5
8.f3 68.f3 g6 69.f4 g7 70.xg8+ xg8
[ 8.e5 b4 9.exf6 bxc3 10.xc3 exf6 0-1
11.h4 b6 is fairly balanced. ]
8...b6!? A new move, several other things
have been tried out, but apparently 910 B07
Azmaiparashvili didn't find these sufficient. Magem Badals,Jordi 2535
9.e5 b4 10.a4 a5 11.b3 d5 12.0-0 Chernin,Alexander 2645
0-0 New York 1998
[ 12...f6 13.h4 0-0 14.a3 fxe5 15.fxe5 [Alexander Volzhin]
leaves White clearly better. He has better
development and piece coordination. ] 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7
13.a3 f6 14.h4 h6 15.axb4 xb4 5.e5!? dxe5
Black decides, more or less forced, to [ 5...fd7 is the main alternative to the text.
sacrifice the exchange. Although this should Theory considers it dubious, but it's
be good for White, the positions that arise are premature to draw definite conclusions as
r e m a r k a b l y d i f f i c u l t t o p l a y wi t h W h i t e . only a few games have been played. One
16.xb4 xb4 17.e6 b8 18.b6 axb6 example: 6.exd6 ( 6.f4 is also worthy of
19.xa8 xe6 White is an exchange up, but consideration.) 6...cxd6 7.d2 0-0 8.0-0-0
the black position is quite solid, and the white c6 9.h4! Sacrificing a pawn White wins
p i e c e s l a c k c o o r d i n a t i o n . 20.e1?! some important tempi for a kingside attack.
This move looks logical, but in fact it's only xd4?! ( 9...xd4 is better, although White
making things worse. has strong attack for the pawn after 10.h5
[ Correct is 20.e1!? , intending Bc4, after e6 11.h6 ) 10.h5 a5 11.hxg6 hxg6
which the white pieces are beginning to find 12.xe7! g7 The sole defence against
each other again. ] Q h 6 w i t h a q u i c k m a t e . ( 12...xc3
937
13.h6 ) 13.xf8 xf8 Black has no ( t h r e a t e n i n g N f 3 + ) 13.h3 xe5

compensation for the exchange, the rest and White has little to prove for the pawn.)
needs no comment. 14.c4 e6 15.xe6 11...fxe6 12.g3 e3 13.d2 f5
xe6 16.ge2 cd4 17.xd4 xd4 and here I prefer Black. ]
18.h4 f5 19.a4 c5 20.g4 h6 21.f4 9...fxe6 10.c4 e8!
b5 22.e4 g3 23.d4 b4 24.e2 [ The alternatives are clearly inferior:
xe2+ 25.xe2 a5 26.b1 f8 27.f5 g5 10...c8 11.xe7 ]
28.d5 c8 29.f6 h6 30.h2 f8 [ 10...e5 11.xe6 c8 12.b3 ]
31.h1 e8 32.xg5+ and Black resigned, [ 10...xc3+ 11.bxc3 h6 12.xe6 xf2
Ivanovic - Borkowski, Pristina, 1976. ] 13.xf2 hxg5 14.f3 In all lines White has
6.dxe5 g4! Absolutely the only move. The dangerous initiative. ]
alternative is bad: 11.f3 c6 12.0-0 ge5 13.xe5 xe5
[ 6...xd1+ Now White gets an important The outcome of the opening is good for Black.
tempo for developing his rook, an obvious W hite definitely has compensation for the
drawback of Black's move. 7.xd1 fd7 pawn, but it's only enough for maintaining the
( 7...g4 is even worse in view of 8.h3 balance. 14.b5!? c8 15.xd7!
xe5 9.d5 and White wins, as was [ 15.xa7 xc4 ]
pointed out by Ron Birnbaum.) 8.d5! xe5 15...xd7
9.f3 d6 10.xe7! xe7 11.xc7+ d8 [ The alternative is not bad either: 15...xd7
12.xa8 b6 Now White's knight is in danger, 16.d1+ c6 17.xa7+ c5 18.xc8
but Black is still in trouble due to his pure xc4 and Black has everything in order. ]
lack of co-ordination. 13.c4 b7 14.e5! 16.xe6 e5 17.f4 d6 18.h6 Now White
with a huge advantage. ] wins back the exchange, and the position
7.xd8+ becomes completely equal. d8 19.g7 f8
[ The "active" 7.d5 leads White nowhere in 20.xd6+
view of c6! 8.xe7 a5+! and Black is [ 20.xd6+ cxd6 21.xf8 xf8
better, for example: 9.d2 xd2+ 10.xd2 Neither side can realistically hope to win this
e6 , threatening 11...h6 12.Bh4 g5, winning endgame, so draw was agreed. Thus we
the brave knight. ] can conclude that Black can successfully
7...xd8 8.d1+ solve his opening problems in this line. ]
[ 8.f3!? is worthy of considering: e6! ½-½
( After the immediate 8...xe5 9.xe5
xe5 10.0-0-0+ d7 11.c4
W hite's initiative looks very dangerous.) 911 B07
9.h4 xe5 10.g5 d7 11.g3 bc6 Magomedov,Magaram 2604
12.b5 , and White has sufficient Nikolaidis,Ioannis 2505
compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but Koszalin 1999
hardly more, as the game Raaste-Parma, [Alexander Volzhin]
1974 proved. ]
8...d7 9.e6 Besides the text, White has This variation is fairly complicated and routine
oth er po ssibilit ies, b ut no ne of th em are play can lead nowhere. Here White quickly
sufficient for achieving an opening advantage, finds himself without any good prospects. 1.e4
and maybe not even equality: d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 a5 5.d3 e5
[ 9.d5 I don't think that this move 6.f3 g4 T h e m a i n l i n e . 7.dxe5
particularly helps W hite. c6 10.b5 This continuation promises nothing special for
( 10.f4 f6 11.e6 fxg5 12.exd7 e6 ) White.
10...gxe5 11.f4 h6 12.h4 g4! [ 7.e3! keeping tension in the centre is
and White has to prove he has enough for best. ]
the pawn. ] [ 7.d2 sacrificing a pawn is another attempt
[ 9.f4 h6 10.h4 g5! 11.e6 ( 11.fxg5 to deviate f rom theory, but this move is
is just bad for White: hxg5 12.xg5 xh2! ha rd ly pro misin g. In K o tron ias-A d am s ,
938
Chalkidiki 1993 W hite failed to prove his e5 was very good for Black, Suetin - J.
initiative was worth a pawn: exd4 8.d5 Pribyl, Debrecen 1987;
d8 9.xf6+ xf6 10.0-0 d7 11.e1 B) 8...bd7 9.e1 xf3 10.xf3 0-0-0!?
(intending 12.e4-e5) xf3 12.xf3 0-0-0 11.f5 c5 with sufficient counterplay ]
13.b4! /\\ b5 d5! 14.e5! ( 14.exd5 cxd5 ) [ 8.f5 bd7 9.h3 xf3 10.xf3 c5
14...e6 15.f2 c5 16.bxc5 xc5 looks also good for Black. ]
17.b1? ( 17.e1 f5 18.b1 ) 17...f6! 8...xf3 9.xf3 exf4 10.0-0 bd7
After this strong move Black's advantage is The weakness of the dark squares in white's
beyond any doubt. 18.g3?! ( 18.f5 xe5 position and the bad placement of the knight
19.f4 e7; 18.exf6 xf6 /\\ Ne4 ) 18...fxe5 on c3 and bishop on d3 makes black's
19.fxe5 g6 20.g5 df8 21.f4 f7! position even better. 11.xf4
22.h3 hf8 23.h2? ( 23.e1 /\\ 24.Bh6 [ In the case of 11.xf4 e5 12.e2 c5+
R f 3 2 5 . g f 3) 23...b6! /\\ Bc7 24.h6?! 13.h1 d4 Black placed his pieces very
c7!-+ and in a few moves White resigned. ] comfortably on central dark squares. ]
7...dxe5 8.h3?! An inaccuracy which gives 11...e5!? A solid move.
Black slightly the better chances. [ 11...0-0-0!? was interesting. ]
[ 8.fxe5 fd7 9.f4 is critical for the 12.e2 d6 13.f3?! It was better to
evaluation of this line: b4! The only move. exchange queens heading for a worse but
( The alternatives are clearly insufficient: tenable ending. h2+ 14.f2 c5+
9...a3? 10.d2 xb2 11.b5 d8 [ 14...e5 15.f5 c5+ 16.e1
12.d6+ f8 13.b1; 9...xf3 10.xf3 was what White was hoping for. ]
xe5 11.xe5 xe5 12.c4 e7 15.e3 xe3+ 16.xe3 e5 17.g1 c5
13.0-0-0 d7 14.xf7+ xf7 15.xf7+ 18.d4?! A bad move. The pin of the Knight
xf7 16.xd7+ ) 10.0-0 is very unpleasant for white.
A) in the case of 10...0-0 White had the [ A f t e r t h e c o r r e c t 18.xc5 xc5
i n t e r e s t i n g 11.d5!? which could have White's position was not much fun but still
posed problems for Black: defensible. ]
A1) the game Huzman - Taborov, USSR 18...e5 19.b4 b6 20.f5? A blunder.
1989 continued with 11...cxd5 12.exd5 White missed the following reply but Black's
e7 13.h3 h5 14.h1 g6 15.xg6 advantage is beyond doubt anyway. eg4!
hxg6 16.c4 b6 ( 16...b5 17.d6 d8 N o w t h e g a m e i s o ve r . 21.hxg4 xg4
18.c5; 16...a6 17.a3 ) 17.b3 22.e1 xd4+ 23.h1 g6 24.f4 e5-+
( 17.e2? a6! /\\ Nd5 ) 17...8d7 Rest of the game is just a matter of technique.
18.e2 ae8 19.f2 d8 20.ae1 Black has a healthy extra pawn as well as a
c5 ( 20...c5 21.d2+- ) 21.g3 huge positional advantage: his excellent knight
with a big advantage; on e5 dominates White's bad Bishop. 25.d1
A2) 11...c5+ 12.h1 d4 ( 12...cxd5 0-0-0 26.b5 White tries to find some practical
seems to be better) 13.e6! fxe6 14.c7 ch a n ce s b u t B la ck e a sil y p a rri e s a ll t h e
a4 15.e7+ h8 16.g5!+- threats. cxb5 27.a5 a6 28.a4 xa4
A v e r y n i c e b l o w ! h5 ( 16...xd1 29.c3+ c6 30.f6 b8 31.xc6 bxc6
17.xf8+ xf8 18.f7# ) 17.xf8+ 32.xc6 a5 33.b1 a7 34.c5+ b6
xf8 18.f1 bd7 19.f7 f6 20.e5 35.e7+ b8 36.a3 d7 37.c4 hd8
and Black resigned, de Firmian-Miles, 38.e2 d2 39.f3 g5 40.cxb5 8d6
USA 1988.; 41.g4 f2 42.bxa6+ a7 43.h3
B) 10...xc3!? 11.bxc3 0-0 12.h3 xf3 [ 43.h3 h6! ]
13.xf3 xe5 14.g3 bd7 and Black 43...d1+ 44.xd1 xd1+ 45.h2 f4+
had obtained comfortable play, Dizdarevic- 46.g3 f2+ 47.g2 d2! Looks suspicious,
Weil, Wiesbaden 1993. ] but Black's calculation is precise: White has
[ Another possibility is 8.0-0 no perpetual. 48.e7+ xa6 49.a3+ b5
A) 8...exf4 9.xf4 bd7 10.h3 ( 10.e1 50.b3+ c6 51.c4+ d6 52.b4+ e6
is worth considering.) 10...xf3 11.xf3 53.c4+ f6 54.c3+ g6 55.c6+ g7
939
56.e5 h5 White resigned. 7...d5! Absolutely thematic. 8.e5 fd7

0-1 [ 8...c5! seems good to me. Black is blasting
open the game while the W hite King
remains in the middle: 9.exf6 ( 9.de2 d4
912 B07 10.exf6 xf6 11.d2 dxc3 12.xc3 xc3+
Mahjoob,Morteza 2478 13.xc3 h4+ 14.g3 b4 ) 9...xf6
Azmaiparashvili,Zurab 2679 10.f2 xd4 11.xd4 cxd4 12.xd4 e8+
FIDE WCh KO Tripoli LBA (1.3) 20.06.2004 13.e2 c6 I wonder why he didn't play this
[Andrew Martin] way? ]
9.f4 b6 10.b3 He had to prevent . ..c7-c5.
PIRC OR PHILIDOR? 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 c6 11.d3 8d7 But ultimately, Black
3.c3 e5!? Why not? The position with the a gg re s sio n o n t h e qu e e n s id e ca n n o t b e
qu e e n s o f f is n o t h in g sp e c ia l f o r W h it e . c o n t a i n e d . 12.f3 a5 13.a4 b4!
4.ge2 He probably saw the Anand game Well, I preferred the earlier stuff with 8...c5
below. e7 5.f3 but no w B lack h as a good po sit ion . I a m
[ After the sluggish 5.h3 Black achieves an baffled why White didn't castle now. 14.f2?
excellent position by expanding quickly in Sometimes I cannot understand what goes
th e c en t re : 0-0 6.e3 a6 7.a4 exd4 through a player's head at the board. Nor what
8.xd4 d5! The traditional freeing move in has ha ppe ned to th e E LO system as th e
open games, which is what this has cu rre n t rat in gs se e m inf la te d b e yo n d a ll
become. 9.exd5 xd5 10.xd5 xd5 recognition. White HAS to castle and just get
11.f3 xf3 12.xf3 c6 13.c4 f5 on with this messy game:
14.c3 ad8= 1/2-1/2 Rakesh,R-Koshy,V/ [ 14.0-0 h4 ( 14...xc3 15.bxc3 e7
Mumbai IND 2004 Oh, if playing Black was 16.h5 h6 ) 15.f2 h6 16.d4 c5
this easy all the time... ] 17.f5= ]
5...0-0 6.e3 exd4N A much-needed 14...c4 Getting on the case before 0-0.
improvement on the fiasco below. 15.xc4 dxc4 16.d2 e7 17.0-0
[ 6...c5? 7.d5 h5 8.d2 g6 9.0-0-0 a5 Finally, but the two bishops are about to have
10.g4 g7 11.g3 a6 12.h4 f6 a say.
A move which highlights how much quicker [ 17.xc4 f6 18.exf6 xf6 19.0-0 g4
the White attack is. Anand wastes no time 20.g3 e6 is ugly for White. ]
whatsoever. 13.g5 f5 14.f4! Opening up 17...f6! 18.xc4 fxe5 19.f5 f6 Black is
the game with the Black queenside looking just better thanks to the Bishops. He needs to
on. b5 15.h5 b4 16.b1 fxe4 ( After dislodge the Nc4 before matters can proceed
16...exf4 17.xf4 xa2 18.hxg6 hxg6 to a satisfactory conclusion. 20.g3 h5!
19.h2 f7 20.h7 it really is looking 21.xe5 xe5 22.xe5 xf5 23.d3
grim. ) 17.fxe5 d7 18.e6 e5 19.hxg6 Mission accomplished. White's best piece has
g4 20.e2 f3 21.xf3 exf3 22.xh7 been persuaded to go to an inferior square.
1-0 Anand,V-Azmaiparashvili,Z/Hotel Bali But the alternatives were unappealing too-the
Stars, Benidorm ESP 2003 A game which Black bishop on f5 is very strong indeed.
perhaps points out why Azmaiparashvili [ 23.g4 ae8! 24.xf5 ( 24.gxf5 xe5
never quite made it to the very top of world 25.d4 exf5 26.xf5 xf5 ) 24...xf5
chess, He has the talent but can't quite rid 25.gxf5 xe5 26.d4 xf5 ]
himself of his opportunistic, rather shallow [ 23.a2 xc2 24.xb4 axb4 25.xf8+
side. Of course anything even remotely half- xf8 26.c5 e8 27.e1 xa4 ]
baked against Anand just gets murdered. ] [ 23.ac1 ae8 24.g4 xc3! 25.bxc3 xe5
7.xd4 I Robot. 26.d4 d5 ]
[ I think Anand must have been intending 23...xd3 24.cxd3 f6 25.ad1 ad8
7.xd4 c6 8.d2 and White maybe has Fl a g d o wn . I s u p p o se W h i t e c a n p u t u p
an edge although I am perfectly willing to resistance after 26 Bb6 but 26...Rde8 just
accept that I am wrong about this. ] gives an ongoing advantage with no
940
cou nt erplay t o sp ea k of . All th e sa me , a c5 14.hf1 g8 15.g3 with some

slightly odd, premature finish, even though it compensation for the pawn but W hite
was a rapid game. sh o u ld h a r d l y b e b e t t e r . J o b a v a , B
0-1 (2707)-Pedzich, D (2418) W arsaw
2010.;
B) 4...e7 5.f3 ( 5.g3 would likely
913 B07 transpose back to the game.) 5...0-0
Malakhov,Vladimir 2712 6.e3 exd4 7.xd4 d5! 8.e5
Khismatullin,Denis 2659 B1) Andrew Martin's suggestion of
63rd ch-RUS Moscow RUS (9) 20.12.2010 8...c5! in the archives continues to look
[Gawain Jones] p r o m i s i n g . 9.exf6 xf6 10.d2
( 10.b3 d4 11.e4 dxe3 12.xd8
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7 These lines xd8 13.bxc5 d7 and Black's
of the Philidor are becoming really popular at bishops compensate for the possible
GM level. weakness of the e3 pawn.) 10...cxd4
[ Another couple of recent high rated 11.xd4 e8+ 12.e2 Wang Shuo
encounters started with 3...e5 4.ge2 (2228) -Popovic, D (2471) playchess.
A) 4...c6!? The knight is usually posted com 2005 and here xd4 13.xd4 c6
on d7. Here Black puts more pressure on gives Black a very promising position as
d4 but will find it harder to advance on the 14.xd5? xd5 15.xd5 d4
queenside while he also has to watch out picks up material.;
for d4-d5. B2) 8...fd7 9.f5 ( 9.f4 was looked at
A1) 5.f3 has been the most common but by Andrew previously in Mahjoob, M
Jobava chooses to outplay his opponent (2478) -Azmaiparashvili, Z (2679) Tripoli
in a drier position.; 2004. ) 9...b6 10.xe7+ xe7
A2) 5.d5 might be the critical test but 11.xb6?! ( 11.d2! looks the most
Black seems to be hanging in there. e7 promising as xe5 12.0-0-0 c6 13.e1
6.g5 c6 7.g3 ( 7.xf6 gxf6 8.g3 d6 14.b1 a6 15.e4 d8
f5 9.h5 h6 is very messy but looks 16.c5 gives White decent pressure for
reasonable for Black. ) 7...g6 8.h5 the pawn. ) 11...axb6 12.f4 c6 13.d3
A2a) 8...b6! keeps Black in the Sengupta, D (2558)-Neelotpal, D (2486)
game. 9.xf6+ gxf6 10.xf6?! New Delhi 2010 when f6! wins a pawn
( 10.c1 should be played but Black as 14.e2 fxe5 15.fxe5 d7
h a s d e c e n t c o u n t e r p l a y a f t e r f5 ) and the loose pawn drops. ]
10...xb2! 11.e2 g8 and Black 4.g3 This move order hasn't been featured
has the better prospects.; before on ChessPublishing but we soon return
A2b) 8...g4?! 9.xf6+ gxf6 to chartered waters.
10.xf6! xf6 11.xg4 and White [ 4.f4 is examined elsewhere in the update. ]
had a clear extra pawn but Black held 4...e5 5.ge2 This more flexible setup has
the draw. Motylev, A (2648) - become a popular way of facing the Philidor
Savchenko, B (2577) Krasnoyarsk in recent times. c6 A slightly different move
2007.; order than Svidler-Salgado but it soon
A3) 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.xd8+ xd8!? t r a n s p o s e s . 6.a4 Preventing Black from
( 6...xd8 looks logical. White can try to grabbing space on the queenside.
k e e p t h e k n i g h t p a s s i ve wi t h 7.d5 [ Instead Carlsen preferred 6.g2 but after
xd5 8.exd5 but f5 9.c4 f7 b5 7.a3 e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.h3 a5 10.g4
looks reasonable for Black.) 7.g5 e6 a6 11.g3 b4 12.ce2 Carlsen, M
8.0-0-0+ c8 9.xf6 gxf6 10.g3 c5 (2710) -Radjabov, T (2746) Biel 2007, it's
11.b5!? ( 11.f3 is much safer but Black o b se rve d t h a t d5! would give Black good
doesn't have any major problems after play. ]
d8 ) 11...xf2 12.xc6 bxc6 13.f5 6...e7 7.g2 b6 8.0-0 a6 9.h3 h5
941
Khismatullin follows Salgado Lopez's play 23.fxg3 b8= with an objectively equal
from the Olympiad which worked so well. position but I like Black with his huge e5
10.e3 b7 11.b4!? A new try. Generally knight that cannot be shifted. ]
W hite plays on the kingside in these [ I t ' s a l s o p o s s i b l e t o t h r o w i n 14...h4!?
structures but Malakhov decides to take Black first so that the pawn won't be hanging later
on the queenside. in the variation. 15.g4 b4 16.d5 xd5
[ I lo o ke d a t 11.c1 in Svidler, P (2731) - 17.exd5 a4 This looks the most
Salgado Lopez, I (2595) Khanty-Mansiysk straightforward. ( 17...a6 18.xb4 c7
2010. ] 19.e1 fc8 20.b2 and White has
11...0-0 12.b5 Consistent with the previous chances to take the upper hand.; 17...e4!?
move but I don't believe this should scare 18.xb4 xd5 19.c3 b7 20.d5 c7
Black. 21.xe4 fc8 22.c4 a6 23.d2 e5
[ It's possible to wait with 12.b1 c7 24.b1 and White has developed a
13.b3 when both sides are somewhat at definite edge.) 18.dxe5 xe5 19.c3 a2
an en-passe. Black would be a little foolish 20.cxb4 e8 and in my mind Black has at
to play a5 ( 13...fe8 should probably be least equality. ]
p r e f e r r e d .) 14.b5 as the b5 outpost 15.d5 A very sensible move but probably not
promises White decent play. fc8 15.ac1 very good. This is because Black can happily
cxb5 16.xb5 ( 16.axb5?! exd4 17.xd4 sit his bishop on a6 to keep his extra pawn
c5 and Black has many useful squares to and then utilise the c5 outpost for his knight.
p l a y w i t h .) 16...c4 17.ec3 xb3 Then he can use the open a file and semi
18.cxb3 exd4 19.xd4 c5 20.b1 open c file with a decent position. White will
and White stays on top as fxe4 21.xe4 struggle to come up with a challenging plan.
xe4 22.xe4 xe4 23.be1 d5 24.f3 [ 15.d2 is the computer's suggestion but
xg3 25.xe7 xf1 26.xf1 leaves Black following a6 16.d5 Black can ignore the
in an unpleasant ending. ] threat to the rook. xd5 17.exd5 ( 17.xa5
12...cxb5 13.axb5 axb5 Black's structure bxa5 18.exd5 h4 gives Black good play on
looks ugly but it's not easy to regain the b5 b o t h s i d e s o f t h e b o a r d .) 17...h4!
pawn while Black has decent pressure on and, if W hite can't take the rook then it's
White's centre. 14.b1 not clear what 15 Bd2 achieved. ]
[ 14.d5 blocking in the bishop looks tempting 15...c5 In the game Khismatullin declines to
but b4 15.a2 c5 16.f3 a3 hold on to his e xtra p awn an d still h as a
forces White backwards. ] pleasant position.
14...a5 Sensibly holding onto the pawn but I [ However 15...a6 looks promising after
think Khismatullin could have seized the something like 16.d2 c7 17.b4 ( 17.f4
initiative. h4! doesn't get anywhere as 18.g4 exf4
[ 14...b4! This forces White to play 19.xf4 gives Black another strong outpost
a c c u r a t e l y t o k e e p e q u a l i t y . 15.d5 for his knight.) 17...c8 18.fb1 c5
( 15.xb4?! d5! puts a lot of pressure on and it's not clear how either side advances. ]
White's centre.) 15...xd5 16.exd5 g5 16.c1
( 16...e4!? 17.xb4 xd5 18.f4 b7 [ It was possible to play 16.xc5 bxc5
19.d5 picking up the e4 pawn looks more 17.xb5 d7 18.c4= but this would
pleasant for W hite as the h5 pawn looks acknowledge that White's opening has failed
really out of place.) 17.d2!? ( 17.xb4 as he obviously has no advantage here. ]
xe3 18.fxe3 g5 gives Black strong 16...a3!? Black takes the opportunity to
kingside pressure.; 17.d2 xe3 18.xe3 activate his rook and creates threats along
a4 also favours Black as White is no the third rank. 17.xc5
closer to regaining the pawn.) 17...xd2 [ 17.1e2 would give Black the choice of
( 17...e4!? is also possible, liberating the repeating position with a5 or playing more
bishop. ) 18.xd2 h4 19.dxe5 xe5 actively with ( 17...a6 when White should
20.xb4 a6 21.fe1 xe2 22.xe2 hxg3 probably stick rather than regaining material
942
equality with 18.xc5 bxc5 19.xb5 xb5 Black had a couple of different ways to go
20.xb5 a8 as Black's queenside play about it.
promises him the better chances. )] [ 30...c8! 31.e3 d7 would give White a
[ 17.xb5 would allow the strong exchange headache how to defend the h3 pawn as
sacrifice xe3! 18.fxe3 fxe4 with strong 32.b1 xg2+! 33.xg2 xh3 34.d3
compensation after 19.e2 g5 20.xe4 g4 gives Black a huge attack. ]
xe4 21.d3 c5 22.d2 h4 as White's [ 30...f5!? is also interesting. 31.exf5 gxf5
kingside is feeling really ropey. ] 32.xf5 xf5 33.xf5 d7! 34.d3 g6
17...xc3!? Black feels he's taken the upper 35.e4 xe4 36.xe4 xh3 and again
hand and so keeps the position double edged. Black has a very good position. ]
[ 17...bxc5 18.xb5 a8 19.xd6 xd5!= 31.e3 b2?! Black keeps up his queenside
is simply level. ] play but again the kingside is vital.
18.b4 c4 19.e2 h4 20.c3 Both sides [ Black should have reactivated his bishop
start a long manoeuvring battle and don't with 31...d7 keeping an eye on g4. ]
really get anywhere but it's clear that 32.g4 a2 33.3f2! This blocks Black's
Malakhov's new idea hasn't really paid off. play and suddenly he has to be careful to
c8 keep equality. xf2
[ 20...d7!? 21.b3 b8 would keep hold [ 33...f5!? looks insane but looks to end in a
of the b5 pawn but again it's not clear how draw a f t e r 34.xb2 xb2 35.exf5 xf5
he is to proceed. However it's obviously 36.xf5 gxf5 37.xf5 xg3 38.e6 g5
Black who's trying to do something. ] 39.xe8 e2+ 40.f1 g3+ 41.g1= ]
21.d3 hxg3 Black decides to take the pawn 34.xf2 a7 35.e3 h8 36.f1!
as Malakhov was starting to threaten the f2-f4 Rerouting the bishop to d3 to stop Black's ...
break. 22.fxg3 a8 23.f2 c8 f5 break and suddenly Black has become very
[ 23...d7 24.g4 c5 25.h4 c8 passive. f6 37.g2 d7 38.d3 a1
26.e3 would allow White to start making 39.f3 f8 40.e2 c1 41.h4
p ro gre s s o n t h e k in g sid e a lt h o u gh t h e [ 41.xb5!? xb5 42.xb5 f5 takes an eye
computer actually prefers Black here and I off the kingside and allows Black to get
don't believe he should have any problems. ] s o m e a c t i vi t y a l t h o u g h t h e p o s i t i o n i s
24.d1 probably still level. 43.exf5 gxf5 44.d7
[ 24.a1 I think White should challenge on f7 45.xd6 xd6 46.xd6 fxg4 47.xf7+
t h e a f i l e . a4 ( 24...d7 would allow xf7 48.e6+ g7 49.xg4+ h6
25.xa8 xa8 26.d3 e8 27.g4 d8 50.e6+ and the game will end in perpetual
28.g5 h7 29.h4 and White has made with both kings so vulnerable. ]
definite progress.) 25.xb5 d7 26.e2 41...a1 Khismatullin fears his queen getting
a8 and White has regained the pawn but trapped but he needn't have worried.
Black's control of the a file keeps the [ 41...a8 trying to get some counter-
position level. ] c h a n c e s l o o k s a c c u r a t e a s 42.f1
24...d7 can be met with xg4! ]
[ Again Black could, and probably should, 42.e3 h8 43.c2 This is the start of the
have taken the chance to reroute his knight wron g plan a s Ma lakhov f orgets that th e
around to the c5 square. 24...d7 25.e3 k i n g s i d e i s t h e m a i n b a t t l e g r o u n d . a6
c5 26.f5 d7 27.f2 g6 28.xe7+ 44.a3 c8 45.xb5?!
xe7 29.bf1 g7 30.e3 f5 and Black [ 45.e3 g5! 46.hxg5 fxg5 47.xd6 f4+
has the better position. ] 48.gxf4 h3+ 49.h1 exf4 gives Black a
25.e3 g6 26.f2 e8 This looks rather strong KID style attack. ]
artificial and it's clear Black wasn't sure how 45...h3+?
t o c o n t i n u e . 27.bf1 g7 28.c2?! [ M i s s i n g t h e c h a n c e t o p l a y 45...g5!
Allowing Black the second rank is foolhardy. when White's king needs that knight back to
a2! 29.d3 h5 30.f3 a8?! keep it safe. 46.xd6 xd6 47.xd6 gxh4
The key play will occur on the kingside and 48.gxh4 xc3 and Black is obviously doing
943
very well. ] [ 7...b4! is more ambitious, but equally

46.h2 d7 47.e3 The bishop on h3 is effective: 8.ce2 a5 9.g4 b6 10.g3
both out of play and also gets in the way of h5 11.g5 fd7 12.h4 d5! The correct way
his own rook down the h file. g5 48.a2! to handle this particular central pawn
gxh4 49.gxh4 f4 50.g3+ Now it's structure. If W hite blocks the centre now,
White's pieces which have coordinated well note the perfect position of the Bishop on f8,
and it is Black's king which is extremely weak. supporting ...e7-e6 and ...c6-c5! 13.d3 e6
g4 14.b1 c7 15.1e2 a6 16.f4 c4
[ 50...g6 was probably Black's best when 17.e2 xe3 18.xe3 xd3 19.cxd3 d6
51.a7 xh4! 52.e2! defending the g4 20.ge2 b6 21.c1 d7 22.c2 b3
square. ( 52.xd7 xd7+ 53.g2 g4 23.axb3 a4 24.b4 xb4 25.exd5 xd5
54.xg4 xg4 55.g3 d1 56.xd6 26.xd5 cxd5 27.e5 0-0 28.c7 d8
xd6 57.xd6 f4 58.c4 e2+ 29.c6 e8 30.hc1 f8 31.c7 a3
looks like a draw to me.) 52...g4+ 53.xh4 32.xd8 exd8 33.b3 a2+ 34.a1 db8
xh4 54.xd7 xd7 55.xd6 and White 35.1c3 b4 36.c2 e1 37.xa2 xh4
has a clear advantage in the ending. ] 38.f4 f2 39.xa8 xa8+ 40.b2 e3
51.xg4+ xg4 52.f1?! And this is too 0 - 1 T o l n a i , T - C h e r n i n , A / A u s t r ia 1 9 9 4
slow and allows Black enough activity to hold Textbook play by Chernin. ]
the draw. 8.d3 b7 9.g4 c7 10.ce2!?N
[ Instead Malakhov should have played the White is lacking a clear target to attack and
immediate 52.a7! xd3 53.xe7+ g6 so he has to try to fond moves which
54.g3 d1 55.xd6 a8 56.f5 xb4 gradually improve his position. This is not at
57.g7+ h5 58.cxb4 and White's extra all easy as Black is well placed to respond to
pawn should be enough for the win. ] anything. W hat to make of 10 Nce2? W ell,
52...f5! Now the game peters out to a draw. W hite sidesteps . ..b5-b4 which must be a
53.a7 xh4+ 54.g1 f6 55.xd6 xd6 plus and he prepares g4-g5 and Ng3 so my
56.xd6 h3+ 57.xh3 verdict is that this odd-looking move is not too
[ 57.g2 f4+ and White should just repeat bad.
as 58.g3 h1 59.e7+ g6 60.b5 [ Kingside pawn advances are possible, but
h3+ 61.f2 d3+ leaves Black the one as I say, Black can cope: 10.g5 fd7 11.h4
trying for the full point. ] g7 12.h5 g8 13.f4 b4 14.ce2 c5
57...xh3 58.e7+ f7 59.d8+ g6 15.dxc5 xc5 16.xb4 a5 17.a3 xe4
60.exf5+ xf5 61.c4 c3 62.xb6 xc4 18.h2 c5 19.hxg6 hxg6= 1/2-1/2 Blasl,
63.d6 c6 D-Testor, S/Austria 2000 ]
½-½ [ 10.h4 0-0-0 ( 10...h5! 11.g5 fd7 ) 11.h5
g8 12.h3 g7 13.hxg6 hxg6 14.g5
e6 15.xb5 cxb5 16.xb5 d7 17.xa7+
914 B07 b8 Canfell, G-De Groen, M/ Sydney 1996
Matsuura,Everaldo 2462 although W hite went on to win this messy
Leitao,Rafael 2580 position. ]
71st ch-BRA Sao Paulo BRA (3) 15.02.2005 10...e5 A White piece has dropped away from
[Andrew Martin] the centre and so Black advances there.
Logical. 11.g5 fd7 12.h3 a6 13.b1
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 [ 13.f4 c5! 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.g3 h6!
5.d2 b5 6.f3 bd7 Black delays ... Bf8-g7 doesn't seem too bad for Black at all who
for as long as possible in order to dissuade is chipping away at the broad White pawn
White from playing Bh6.He may also castle front with all his might. ]
queenside. The effectiveness of this flexible 13...0-0-0 14.c3 d5 15.f2 c5! As White
s t r a t e g y h a s r a t h e r b l u n t e d W h i t e ' s loses this game on time almost without a fight ,
enthusiasm for systems involving Be3, Qd2 we m a y s u p p o s e t h a t t h i s p o s i t i o n w a s
and f2-f3. 7.0-0-0 b6 causing him some confusion. Black continues
944
with his excellent play, obliging White to make with

a d e c i s i o n . 16.c1 This is a very complex [ 8...c5 9.d5 bd7 (what else? Wouldn't
position with a wide choice of moves. I give most players be happy with W hite here?)
some alternatives to W hite's f inal choice 10.f3
without beginning to suggest which is best. A) At first my engine likes 10...c4 11.xc4
Let's agree that in all variations Black is very xe4 , but 12.0-0 xc3 13.g7 f8
much in the game. 14.bxc3 looks difficult for the second
[ 16.h4 h5 ] player. Perhaps this can be tried, although
[ 16.f4 exd4 17.cxd4 dxe4 18.xe4 White seems to keep the attack burning, e.
c4 ] g., f6 15.g5 c7?! ( 15...c5
[ 16.g4 dxe4 17.fxe4 h5 18.gxh6 f5 ] 16.b3 h5! 17.h6 xc3 18.e4 )
[ 16.hf1 h6!? ] 16.b5+ d7 17.fe1! 0-0-0 18.xe7
16...g7! 17.h4 b8 18.h5 a8 xc3 19.xd7+ xd7 20.xf8+! d8
Quite a clever way to run down the other 21.xd8+ xd8 22.ae1 etc.;
g u y ' s c l o c k . 19.h6 f8 20.g4 d6 B) 10...b5! (Vigus) 11.0-0!
The Pirc Bishop finds alternative employment. ( Simply developing his cited game went
21.dxc5 11.xb5 b8 12.xd7+ xd7
[ Possibly White is a little better after with ample play) 11...c4 12.e2 b4
21.he1 he8 It's very hard to tell. ] 13.d1 xe4 ( 13...a6 14.d4! c5!
21...xc5 22.f6 e7 23.xd5 15.e3! ) 14.xc4 and White's safer king
W h it e wa nt s so m e so rt o f cla rif ica t ion it is the most important factor. A forcing line
seems. xd5 24.exd5 xd3 25.xd3 f o r B l a c k w o u l d b e b6 ( 14...b7
xd5 Flag down, but with the two Bishops 15.e3 0-0-0 16.a3! ) 15.d3 ( 15.b3!?
and more compact pawns, Black has solved xd5 16.e1 ) 15...c5 16.e3 xd3
all his problems. I think games such as this 17.cxd3 xd5 ( 17...b7? 18.g7 f8
one and the Chernin example mentioned in 19.g5 0-0-0 20.xf7 ) 18.c4
the notes prove that Black's chances against with both the c- and e-files. Naturally Black
Be3 and f2-f3 are perfectly OK. This is not the has all kinds of options here. I just feel
Yugoslav Attack in the Dragon! that the whole line beginning with 7...Qa5
0-1 (and perhaps 6 Bh6!) is a bit depressing. ]
9.f3 b4 10.e2 b3+?! This merely
strengthens White's centre in order to make a
915 B07 fairly neutral bishop exchange.
Mirzoev,Azer 2551 [ Vigus cites D Pikula-D Velimirovic, Zlatibor
Movsziszian,Karen 2534 2006: 10...a6 11.0-0 xd3 12.cxd3
XVII Open La Pobla de Lillet ESP (4) 05.08.07 bd7 13.g3 e6?! (But Black stands
[John Watson] poorly in any case) 14.fe1 h5 15.g5
xg3 16.hxg3 ( 16.fxg3! ) 16...e7 17.e5
As usual, James Vigus Pirc book covers the af8 18.h4 and Black is pretty much
f o llo win g va ria t io n e xce lle n t ly. He re t h e busted. ]
course of the game with 8...b5?! confirms his 11.c3 a6 12.xa6 xa6 13.e5
assessment, yet I think Black needs some [ Naturally, 13.0-0 can't be bad either. ]
help even when he plays a better move. 1.d4 13...d5?!
d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 g7 [ B e t t e r b u t n o t i n s p i r i n g i s 13...dxe5
A major decision! 5.d2 c6 6.h6 xh6 14.xe5 ]
7.xh6 a5 8.d3 14.0-0 bxa2 15.c1 ac7 16.xa2 b5
[ Vigus is also worried about 8.d2 , when 17.e1 0-0-0!? 18.d2!?
bd7 9.f3 0-0 and ...e5 looks reasonable [ 18.xa7 xb2 19.c4 is also good. ]
if not yet equal. ] 18...a6 19.d3 c5 20.ea1 c4 21.f4 b6
8...b5?! The dubious mark stems from Vigus, 22.a5 White's game is overwhelming.
correctly. I wonder, however, about his line W hether what f ollows is accurate or not,
945
W hite never gives his opponent a chance: 6...b5 7.g4 b6 8.g5 h5!? You would
e8 23.h3 d5 24.c2 g8 25.e2 h6 think that 8...Nfd7 was better, having played ...
26.b3 g5 27.d2 g6 28.bxc4 xc4 Nb6. 9.d3 The immediate attempt to take
29.xc4 dxc4 30.f5+ b8 31.g3 b6 advantage of the offside Knight fails :
32.e4 a7 33.c5 g8 34.e4 db8 [ 9.f4 g7 10.e2 h6! 11.xh5 c4!
35.d7 b5 36.xb6 xb6 37.d5 A very important tactic which justifies ...Nh5.
The Pirc is ever-resilient, but this sort of thing 12.c1 xe3 13.xe3 gxh5 14.f3
makes a case for 4...c6. g4= ]
1-0 9...e6 10.ce2 e5
[ I once saw Beliavsky go 10...d5 in a similar
position. If W hite blocks with e5 he takes
916 B07 elasticity out of his pawn chain and Black
Molander,Riku 2290 can build a queenside attack gaining from
Lugovoi,Aleksei 2540 the Bishop still on f8. For instance: 11.0-0-0
Troll Masters (8) 2003 c4 12.xc4 bxc4 and Black has
[Andrew Martin] immediate pressure. ]
11.0-0-0 e7 12.f4?! I personally feel this
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 c6 move helps Black. He gets rid of his offside
[ 4...g7 5.f3 0-0 6.d2 a6 7.h6 g4 K n i g h t a n d t h e a b o u t - t o - b e B g 7 h a s a
8.e2 xf3 9.xf3 c6 10.e3 e5 splendid diagonal. W hite should play more
11.dxe5 dxe5 12.0-0-0 xd2+ 13.xd2 naturally with
fd8 14.hd1 xd2 15.xd2 d8 [ 12.g3 OK, I know this exchanges the
16.xd8+ xd8 A prospectless position for Knight too.... xg3 13.hxg3 g7 14.e2
Black, but Van der W iel ekes out a draw. White definitely has more of the play here. ]
17.d5 Jonkman,H-Van der Wiel, J/GMB, 12...exf4 13.xf4 xf4 14.xf4 g7
Wijk aan Zee NED 2003. ] 15.f3 g4 No way is Black worse now.
5.d2 16.e5
[ 5.f3 bd7 6.g4 is a dangerous move [ 16.g2 xf3 17.xf3 xd4 ]
order. White threatens, with g4-g5, to mess 16...0-0! 17.g2 Taking on d6 was poor:
up the Black Knights. h6 7.d2 b5 8.ge2 [ 17.exd6 e6! 18.g2 xf3 19.xf3
b6 9.b3 c7 10.g2 g7 11.h3 xa2 20.c3 c4 21.xc4 bxc4 ]
Laznicka,V-Guidarelli,L/Friendship A, [ With 17.df1 xf3 18.xf3 ( 18.exd6
Roznov CZE 2002. ] e6 ) 18...dxe5 19.e1 e6 20.b1
5...bd7 ( 20.xe5 xe5 21.xe5 xa2 )
[ 5...b5 6.d3 bd7 7.f3 20...g4!-+ not much better. ]
A) 7...e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.h3 b7 17...xf3 18.xf3 dxe5 19.xe5 xe5
( 9...e7 10.a4 b4 11.e2 20.dxe5 xg5+ 21.b1 xe5 22.h4
Baron Rodriguez,J-Bustamante Montoni,R/ The tactics have misfired. White has to rely on
Open, Pamplona ESP 2002) 10.0-0 g7 a caveman attack. He fails. c4 23.c3 e3!
11.a4 a6 12.e2 Ramesh, R-Valdes,L/ 24.xc6 ac8 Regaining the initiative.
Budapest 2002.; 25.a6 f3 26.c2 b4 27.h5 bxc3
B) 7...g7 8.h6 xh6 9.xh6 e5 28.hxg6 hxg6 29.b3 d2+ 30.c1 f4
10.dxe5 dxe5 11.0-0 Smerdon,D- 31.xg6 e4+ I prefer the Modern move
Timofeev,A/41st WJun, Goa IND 2002. ] order with ...g6 before...Nf6 because I feel
6.f3 that Black has better chances to tackle the
[ 6.f3 c7 7.a4 g7 8.c4 Rather than Be3 and Bg5 systems. Games like this one
8 Bd3 and a'150' attack formation W hite show the other side of the coin the Pirc move-
decides on a more aggressive but exposed order appears perfectly playable too.
square for this Bishop, Langer, M-Burnett,R/ 0-1
Rotary Open, Lindsborg Kansas USA
2002. ]
946
917 B07 A) White doesn't have anything for the

Morozevich,A 2731 exchange after 15.e5 xh1 16.exd6 b4;
Onischuk,V 2594 B) 15.d5 xd5 16.exd5 b6
FIDE World Rapid 2014 rapid (10.12) 17.06.14 17.xc5!? xd5! ( after 17...xc5
[Neil McDonald] 18.c3 there is a fork on c5 and h8.)
18.xd6 xd6 19.g2 0-0-0 20.e2
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 a6 5.f3 b4 with equality.;
White has often tried to avoid, or at least delay, C) 15.a3!? b4 16.axb4 cxb4 17.d5
f2-f3 in this opening scheme. For example in xd5 18.exd5 a5 19.b1 c5
the archives you can find with a slight advantage to White. ]
[ 5.d2 b5 6.d3 ( Instead 6.f3 15.d5
transposes back to the main game.) 6...b7 [ After 15.a3 0-0 ( 15...b4 fails to 16.axb4
7.a3 in Dominguez-Kramnik while ] cxb4 17.d4 when Black loses his b4
[ 5.e2 is Smeets-Kramnik and ] pawn. ) 16.f3 e6 keeping the white knight
[ 5.h3 is Adams-Zhukova. ] out of d5, Black has sufficient chances. ]
5...b5 6.d2 b7 In his game with Naiditsch 15...xd5 16.exd5 d6 17.e2
in the archives Kramnik preferred [ Black has good counterplay after 17.g2
[ 6...bd7 7.ge2 b6 ] c7 ( But not 17...b6 18.xc5 xc5
7.0-0-0 bd7 8.g4 Very direct play by 19.c3 with a fork familiar from the notes
Morozevich. He castles queenside as quickly above. ) 18.b1 b6 19.f2 0-0 20.e2
as possible and uses his pawns aggressively b4 etc. It is not at all easy for White to get at
on the kingside. Note that this approach is the black king despite the lack of defenders.
more effective for W hite in the Pirc rather His own pawns on g5 and h6 are blocking
than the Modern set up, as here there is a his attack. ]
target on f6 for the g-pawn. b6 As will be 17...c7 18.c3 b6 19.e4 True to his
seen, Onischuk has decided not to put up any dynamic style, the Russian Super GM
barriers against White's kingside advance. He sacrifices a pawn to gain the two bishops and
will let him play h5-h6 and chase Black's dark avenues of attack on the black king. xd5
squared bishop off the a1-h8 diagonal. He 20.xd6+ exd6 21.h3 0-0-0 22.f5 gxf5?
hopes that by 'forgetting' about the kingside Rather than damaging his pawn structure
and focusing all his attention on counterplay Black should have preferred
in the centre he will solve his opening [ 22...e4! for example 23.fxg6 fxg6 24.f4
problems. It ends in failure as in a rapid play hf8 25.e1 and White maintains pressure
ga m e a ga ins t a n im a gin a t ive pla ye r like to compensate for the pawn, but not more
Morozevich it's hard not to go astray in the as ( 25.xd6? fails to xd6 26.xd6 xd6
resulting tactics. Nonetheless Onischuk's idea 27.xd6 xf1+ )]
is interesting. 9.g5 fd7 10.h4 c5 11.dxc5 23.f4
The exchange on c5 ensures that Black won't [ The best way to maintain the attack was
have an open c-file for his rook. Besides, 23.a4! ]
White wants to utilise the d-file. dxc5 12.h5 23...he8 24.a3 b7 25.a5 a8
Having opened the a1-h8 diagonal and 26.ad3 e4
conceded the e5 square to a black knight with [ Naiditsch misses the chance to use his c-
his previous move, Morozevich rushes to pawn actively with 26...c4 27.d4 e4
strike a t th e g7 squ are bef o re B lack ca n when if 28.d2 c3 29.bxc3? ( Equal is
organise an attack with moves like Bg7, b5-b4, 29.xc3 xc3 30.bxc3 g8 ) 29...c5!
Qc7, Ne5 and Nc4 etc. g7 13.h6 e5 14.f4 suddenly gives Black the initiative- 30.xd5?
c7 Black completes his plan of evacuating a3+ 31.b1 a4 32.c1 xc3+
the kingside. He might have tried and mate follows on a2. ]
[ 14...d6!? which would have saved a 27.d2 c6 28.g3 c4
tempo if W hite had continued as in the [ Black could have held on with 28...ae8
game. For example 29.xd5 xd5 30.xd5+ xd5 31.xd5
947
f4 32.f2 c6 33.d1 d5 34.d3 8e5 Alternatives:

when his awesome pawns would give him [ In Kengis-Hausner, Luxembourg 1990
the b ette r of it af te r 35.xe4 ( 35.g1 B l a c k t r i e d 8...g6?! but failed to equalise:
keeps it unclear. ) 35...dxe4 ] 9.bxc3 d5 10.e2 xd3 11.cxd3 c5
29.c3 12.c4! An interesting pawn sacrifice allows
[ Stronger was 29.f2 ] W hite to obtain a huge development
29...f4 advantage and maintain the initiative. xd4
[ The last hope to save the game was 13.b1 dxe5 14.f3 d7 15.xe5 c7
29...d4! ] ( 15...c8!? deserves certain attention.)
30.xd5 fxg3 31.xc4 xc4 32.xg3 d8 16.e4! c6 17.xc6 xc6 18.c3 f6
33.d3! Black is temporarily a pawn up but 19.xb7 xe4+ 20.dxe4 h6 21.g3 f7
there is no good way to defend h7. Therefore 22.e2 hd8 23.d1 xd1 24.xd1
White will acquire a decisive passed pawn. and the endgame is very bad for Black. ]
a4 34.xh7 c7 35.b1 g4 36.f5 [ 8...e6!? This interesting blockade idea is
d7 37.f3 b6 worth considering: 9.xc3 ( 9.bxc3 d5!
[ Losing at once, but hopeless is also and now 10.c4 is hardly good in view of
37...b8 38.f6 c7 39.h7 ] b4 with good chances for Black.) 9...d5!
38.xd6+ the rook on g4 will be lost. 10.xf5 exf5! ( 10...xf3 11.xf3 exf5
1-0 12.d5 ) 11.xd5 ( 11.e2!? /\\ Nf3= )
11...cxd5 12.f3 c6 with balanced
chances in a complicated endgame, Purgin-
918 B07 Mih. Tseitlin, USSR 1987. ]
Motwani,Paul 2520 9.cxd3 d5 10.bxc3 dxe5
Adams,Michael 2640 [ If Black doesn't exchange Queens (here or
olm Moscow 1994 on the next move) 10...e6 , then 11.e2
[Alexander Volzhin] is very unpleasant, intending 12 Nf3, with c3-
c4 to follow. ]
Paul Motwani smashes one of the world's top [ 10...xf3 11.xf3 d7 12.e2 e6
players in typically brilliant style. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 13.hb1 b8 14.a4 e7 15.a5 0-0 16.c4
f6 3.c3 c6 4.f4 a5 5.e5 e4 6.f3 and again the endgame is very nasty for
xc3 7.d2 f5 8.d3!? The only way to Black, Palac-Rausis, Bordeaux 1990. ]
fight for an opening advantage. Alternatives 11.fxe5 xf3 12.xf3 e6 13.e2 d7
lead White nowhere: 14.hb1! Now Black is compelled to weaken
[ 8.c4?! is no good in view of b4! 9.xc3 h i s p o s i t i o n . b6 Relatively best. The
xc3 10.xc3 xc2 11.e6 d5 12.exf7+ alternatives are clearly insufficient:
xf7 and White has nothing for the pawn, [ 14...b5? 15.c4 a6 16.a4! , destroying
Mueller-Oratovsky, Saanen 1994. ] Black's pawn structure on the Q-side ]
[ 8.xc3 is also harmless: d5 9.xd5 [ and 14...0-0-0? is just a blunder in view of
cxd5 10.d3 xd3 11.cxd3 e6 15.g5 ]
This endgame looks similar to Motwani- 15.a4! Attacking Black's queenside which is
Adams, but indeed there is an important weakened by its lack of defenders. e7
difference. White has no pressure on b-file [ 15...a5 wasn't good due to 16.c4 e7
here and thus has no active plan at all. 17.d5!? exd5 18.cxd5 cxd5 19.b5
Black's chances are by no means worse, to with a huge advantage. ]
say the least. 12.e2 c6 13.0-0 b6 16.a5!?
14.g4 h5 15.h3 hxg4 16.hxg4 g5 17.g2 [ The routine 16.c4 was also better for White
gxf4 18.xf4 d8 19.af1 h7 20.b3 d7 but Black could keep defence by d8 17.a5
21.b2 b4 22.4f3 c7 23.c1 xc1 c7 ]
24.xc1 h4 and Black is already clearly 16...b5 17.c4 a6 18.c1! A very strong
better, Yudasin-Kiselev, USSR 1989. ] move. Black has managed to prevent
8...xd3 Not the best, in my opinion. penetration on the b-file, therefore W hite
948
switches to the c-file. The text prepares 19 26...e8

cxb4, with 20 Rc7 to follow. 0-0 [ 26...fxe6 27.cc7+- ]
[ There were some alternatives: 18...d8!? 27.xe8+ xe8 28.c7 fxe6 29.e7+ d8
19.a2 /\\cb5,Rac2 ] 30.xg7 e8 31.xg5 In spite of material
[ 18...b4 19.ab1 b8 20.b2 intending 21. equality Black's position is almost helpless.
Rc1-b1, and it's not clear how Black can a7
hold the pawn on b4 ] [ 31...c8 32.d2 c7 33.h4 f6
[ and another attempt to keep c-file closed: 34.c3+- ]
18...b8 19.cxb5 axb5 fails to 20.a6! a7 32.g6
21.e3 , and Black can't avoid 22 d4-d5. ] [ 32.h4!? was more straightforward. ]
19.cxb5 cxb5 20.c7 fd8 21.ac1 f8 32...h7 33.xe6 xh2 34.f3 h4?!
I t wo u l d s e e m t h a t B l a c k h a s d e f e n d e d [ 34...c7 was more stubborn, White should
everything but a very annoying surprise awaits h a v e p l a y e d 35.f6 with idea of Bd6 and
him. marching the g-pawn. ]
[ An attempt to obtain counterplay: 21...b4 35.e1 h1 36.g3+- d1?
fails to 22.b7 ab8 23.cc7 b3 24.c3 [ 36...b4 37.xa6+- ]
xb7 25.xb7 and Black's position is 37.h4+ d7 38.e7+ c6
hopeless. ] [ 38...d8 39.e1++- ]
22.d5! exd5 23.e6! Such sacrificial play 39.xe8 b4
looks especially attractive in an ending. f6 [ 39...xd3+ 40.e2 a3 41.e6+ b7
The pawn cannot be taken but this move can 42.b6+ a7 43.f2+- ]
hardly help solve the problems. 40.e2 Black resigned. Excellent play by Paul
[ 23...fxe6?! 24.d4 d6 ( 24...f7 Motwani!
25.c6 ) 25.xe6+ e7 26.xd8 xc7 1-0
27.g5+ e8 ( 27...d6? 28.f7++-;
27...f6? 28.xc7+ xd8 29.xg7+- )
28.xc7 h6 29.h4 g5 30.xg5 hxg5 919 B07
31.c6 following by Ke3-d4 with a huge Motylev,Alexander 2676
advantage. ] Kasimdzhanov,Rustam 2687
24.g5! h6 Corus B Wijk aan Zee NED (13) 01.02.2009
[ 24...d6 was impossible due to 25.exf7! [John Watson]
xc7 26.xc7 d6 27.b4 followed by
Ne6 checkmate! ] White is on a roll with 4 Bg5 against the Pirc.
25.xe7! Very energetic play! Here two near-2700s battle it out. Black plays
[ T h e s i m p l e 25.xf7 e8 26.f4 a reasonable system and nearly equalises.
could have secured a big advantage. ] But it seem to me that his position is more
25...hxg5 difficult to play than White's. 1.e4 d6 2.d4
[ 25...xe7 was t oo b ad : 26.b4+! e8 f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 g7 5.d2
27.c7! fxe6 ( 27...hxg5? 28.exf7# ) [ 5.e5!? shouldn't achieve anything, as
28.e7+ f8 29.xe6+ g8 30.xg7+ shown by fd7! 6.exd6 cxd6 7.f3 0-0
h8 31.g6 g8 32.xd8 xd8 8.d2 f6 of Campora, Seville 2009. ]
33.xa6+- and Black is helpless against the 5...h6 6.h4 g5 7.g3 h5 8.0-0-0 c6
a-pawn march. ] Last month we saw 8...Nc6 and 8...Nxg3 9
26.b4 This time- trouble move is enough for hxg3 Nc6 10 Bb5! here. I like the modest text
a win, but W h ite ha d mo re bea utif ul an d move better. One recent example with
qu ic k e r wa y a s wa s p o i n t e d o u t b y P a u l [ 8...c6 went 9.e3 xg3 10.hxg3 e6
Motwani: (last time we saw 10...Bd7, which doesn't
[ 26.cc7! e8 27.b4! xc7 28.exf7!! c h a n g e m u c h ) 11.f4 g4 12.h5!
e8 ( 28...e8 29.d7+ d6 30.xd6# ) with a nice advantage, De Groote-Hickman,
29.xe8+ xf7 30.e7++- winning a piece Caleta 2009. ]
and the game. ] 9.ce2!? A strange-looking move that has
949
several good points. A simple one is that has the idea 0-0-0 21.xf5 xg7 22.c3 )
Black can't play mindlessly with 9... Qa5 20...0-0-0 ( 20...xa2 21.b3! xg7 22.a4
followed by...b5, ...Be6 and the like. b6 xa4 23.bxa4 cxd5 24.d4 d7
A good, active move, pinning White's d-pawn 25.b5 ) 21.c3 xa2 22.b3 . Obviously,
and refusing to commit the queenside yet. White is less in control than he'd like to be
[ 9...d7 is a natural alternative. ] in that case. ]
[ So is 9...e6 , although 10.h4 g4 11.f4 20.c3 a5
is positionally attractive for White. ] [ 20...a1+ 21.b1 f5 22.h5
10.e5! with the idea g6?! 23.dxc6! bxc6 24.h3!
[ The natural-looking 10.c3?! can be met by a4 25.d4 intending Ra3. ]
10...Qa5, or even f5 11.f3 fxe4 12.fxe4 21.f3 f5 22.h4
e6 ] [ 22.h5!? g4 23.h4 xf3 24.gxf3 ]
10...dxe5 22...d8 23.a4 b6 24.e5
[ White's point becomes clear after 10...xg3 [ Or 24.d4 c5 25.e3 White is simply
11.xg3 dxe5 12.h5 ] winning in that case. As the game goes,
[ 10...c5 m i g h t b e b e s t , s i n c e 11.exd6 White's pieces are much better-coordinated
( 11.dxc5 dxc5 12.c3!? ) 11...exd6 and he slowly converts his advantage: ]
holds together pretty well. ] 24...f6 25.g3 g4 26.d4 d7 27.e2
11.xe5 f6 12.h4! bd7?! xg3 28.fxg3 c5 29.e6 xe6 30.dxe6
[ 12...e4 has the tactical point 13.e3 xd2 31.xd2 xe6 32.xa7 d6+
xf2!? 14.xf2 xe5 , b ut t he n 15.f3 33.c1 xg3 34.f3 e1+ 35.d1 g3
f6 16.hxg5 hxg5 17.xh8+ xh8 36.f3 e1+ 37.d1 b6 38.b7 a5
18.xg5 f6 19.h7 is strong, with ideas 39.b1 c4 40.c3 f8 41.b8+ g7
of Nxf6+ and Qg3. ] 42.c8 b4 43.g4 h6 44.c6 g5
[ Maybe 12...g4 is best. ] 45.e2 h4 46.xc4 a5 47.e4 c5
13.hxg5 e4 Black's point, but there's a 48.e6 h3 49.a2 b4 50.e3+ h2
special problem. 14.xg7! 51.e4 d6 52.c4 g3 53.b3 d7
[ 14.f4 xe5 15.xe4 is also possible, for 54.e6 c6 55.d5 c7 56.c4 d7
example, c4 16.b3 d6 17.f4 hxg5 57.e2 f2 58.d1+ g3 59.e3 f2
18.xh8+ xh8 19.xg5 f6 20.g8+ 60.c4 e5 61.a2 a4+ 62.b1 a5
d7 with the idea ...Kc7. This is complex, 63.d5 b5 64.d3 d8 65.c3 f3
but one feels that Black's bishops don't 66.xb5 b6 67.b3 c5 68.b2 b6
compensate him for a pawn. ] 69.c3 c5 70.e2+ g2 71.b4 c6
14...xd2 15.xd2 g8 16.gxh6 f8 17.h7 72.d3 g3 73.b5 b7 74.b4 e7
xh7 18.xh7 White is left with three pieces 75.d5
and a pawn for his queen, and the pieces turn 1-0
out to be secure. a5
[ 18...f5 19.h1 f6 ( 19...xg7?
20.h8+ ) 20.f3 0-0-0 21.h6 h8 920 B07
22.g3 safely keeps the material. ] Muzychuk,Anna 2533
19.d5!? Tricky, but unnecessary. White can Zhorzholiani,Meri 2135
play Maia Chiburdanidze Cup (1) 05.06.2009
[ 19.c3 , guarding the a-pawn, and if Black [John Watson]
tries to win a pawn back by f5 20.d3
g5 , he does so at the cost of his position Once again this month the 4 Bg5 Pirc showed
following 21.f4! xf4 22.e5 e3 23.f3 up in many games. After killer results in the
, e.g., f6 24.d1 and Black's queen is last few months (see the updates), Black held
trapped. ] his own overall this time. He did lose the
19...xa2 game before you, however. 1.e4 d6 2.d4
[ 19...f5! seems a better try. White keeps a f6 3.c3 g6 4.g5 The most dreaded
reduced advantage with 20.h4! ( 20.h5 move of 2009! c6 Other recent games:
950
[ a) 4...g7 5.d2 h6 6.h4 c6 7.f4 0-0 hanging. dxe5

8.0-0-0 h7 9.e3 g4 10.d2 g5?! [ 10...b4!? 11.exf6 bxc3 12.g7 f8
11.fxg5 xd4?? ( 11...hxg5 12.g3 e6 ) 13.fxe7 xe7 14.c4 cxb2+ 15.b1 f5
12.gxh6 e5 13.xd4 xd4 14.xd4 e5 16.he1+ d8 obviously favours White, but
15.f2 d7 16.g3 f5 17.h3 fxe4 there's a lot of play in the position. ]
18.c4+ 1-0 Fercec-Takac, Sibenik CRO 11.dxe5 g4 12.f4?
2009. ] [ T h e o b v i o u s 12.g7! is actually better
[ b) 4...bd7 5.d2 c6 6.f4 c7 ( 6...h6 because of the idea f8 13.e6! fxe6
7.h4 b5 ) 7.e5 ( 7.f3 ) 7...d5 8.0-0-0 14.xh7 and g6 hangs. ]
xc3 9.xc3 g7 10.f3 b6 12...b4 13.c4 dxe5?!
with easy development and equality, Sun [ The play is still unclear after 13...0-0 14.e6
Fanghui-Zhang Jilin, Subic Bay PHI 2009. ] b6 15.xg4 f5! ]
[ c) 4...h6 5.e3 c6 6.d2 b5 14.xe5 xe5 15.d5 f6??
is a technique worth noting. I'll use an old [ Better 15...cxd5 16.xe5 0-0 17.xd5
game to illustrate: 7.d3 g4 8.f4 ( or b6 18.xe7 , but White is well on top. ]
8.f3 ) 8...e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.g3 h5 16.xf6+! exf6 17.xf6 f8 18.g7 d7
11.f3 h4 12.xe5 xe5 13.xe5 f6 [ 18...xc4 19.he1+ ]
14.f4 h6 15.e2 xe5 16.fxe5 xd2+ 19.he1 0-0-0 20.xe5
17.xd2 with a small advantage, J Polgar- [ In view of 20.xe5 c7 21.xd7! ]
Lobron, Munich 1991. ] 1-0
5.d2
[ Also just played: 5.f4 g7 6.d2 0-0
( 6...h6 7.h4 h5 8.f3 xf4 9.xf4 g5 921 B07
10.g3! f6 11.xg5 hxg5 12.0-0-0 Naiditsch,Arkadij 2684
gives White an edge) 7.f3 b5 8.d3 b7 Kramnik,Vladimir 2790
9.e5 ( 9.0-0-0 ) 9...b4 10.e2 d5 Sparkassen GM (9) 24.07.2010
11.0-0-0?! ( White stands better after 11.0-0 [Gawain Jones]
f6 12.h4 ) 11...f6 12.h4 h6! 13.c4
a5 14.g4 d7 15.g5 g7 16.gxf6 exf6 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.e3 a6
Strohhaeker-Heinl, Ditzingen GER 2009 the Again Kramnik keeps faith with his weapon
game is level. ] that worked well against Smeets and
5...g7!? The most committal line. D o m i n g u e z P e r e z . 5.d2 b5 6.f3
[ One much-used sequence is 5...h6 6.f4 Naiditsch's new try.
g5 7.g3 h5 8.0-0-0 ] [ 6.d3 was played in Dominguez Perez-
[ 5...b5 is another normal move. ] Kramnik which I investigated in the
6.h6 archives. ]
[ 6.f4 0-0 7.d3 b5 8.f3 is Peng Xiaomin- 6...bd7
Gallagher from the Archives. ] [ 6...b7 Again Black has the choice
6...xh6 7.xh6 bd7 between developing first knight or bishop. I
[ B l a c k c a n a l s o p l a y 7...a5 8.0-0-0 wonder if Naiditsch would have continued
, and 8...Be6 or b5 ] with the same plan with 7.ge2 ( 7.h4 h5
8.0-0-0 a5 9.f3 b5?! 8.h3 bd7 9.a4 c6 10.g5 g7
[ 9...g4! 10.d2 ( 10.g7 f8 11.d2 is a position in which W hite has scored
df6 threatens ...Rg8) 10...b5 11.a3 0-0?! reasonably well and probably critical.; 7.d3
( 11...b8 12.h3 gf6 13.e5 b4 bd7 transposes to the 7.f3 note of
is double-edged) 12.h3 gf6 13.e5 b4!? Do m in gu e z P e re z-K ra m n ik. 8.a4 b4
14.axb4 a1+ 15.b1 d5 with some 9.ce2 c5 ultimately saw the strong
counterattac k, although W hite must b e Russian outplay his opponent. Sprenger, J
better. ] (2535)-Grischuk, A (2726) Mainz 2007, a
10.e5! White can't wait for ...b4, when after game I covered in the notes to the
the knight moves, both e4 and a2 will be previous Kramnik game.; 7.g4!?; and 7.a4
951
have also been tried.) 7...bd7 8.f4 compensation. ]

with a similar position to the game but of 14...h4+ 15.d1!? Naiditsch decides to run
course Black isn't obliged to play b6 ] with his king.
7.ge2 [ 15.f2 g5 wins back the pawn. 16.dxe6
[ I lo o ke d a t 7.d1 Morozevich, A (2755)- ( 16.0-0 exd5 17.h4 f5 is unclear but I
Grischuk, A (2715) Moscow 2007 and ] have a feeling Black would feel more
[ 7.g4 Amonatov, F (2625)-Timofeev, A comfortable.) 16...xg2 17.exf7+ h8
(2664) Tomsk 2008 in Dominguez Perez- 18.f1 xf3 is another messy position but
Kramnik. ] one in which Black's king looks the safer. ]
7...b6 8.f4 A unique position has [ 15.g3 h5 also forks one of the kingside
appeared which is rather unusual after such pawns and the d5 pawn. ]
few moves in an elite tournament. g7 15...xd4?! This move was condemned by
[ 8...b7 would prevent the German's plan most of the commentators.
although 9.a4 b4 10.d1 e5 ( 10...a5 [ 15...e8 was suggested by ChessVibes
11.d5 c6 12.dxc6 xc6 13.e5 fd7 14.e6 and indeed Black seems to have at least
also seems to favour White.) 11.dxe5 dxe5 enough for the pawn, e.g. 16.d2 exd5
12.xd8+ xd8 13.d3 fd7 14.b3 17.xd5 b8 18.c3 h5 19.c6 xe3!
and Black's a little worse. White can utilise and Black's initiative is very dangerous.
the c4 square and fracture Black's pawn 20.xe3 xb2 21.e8+?! f8 22.xc8?
structure with c2-c3. ] g5! and White cannot prevent mate. ]
9.a4 b4 10.cd5 bxd5 11.xd5 xd5 [ 15...e5!? is a slightly unusual looking move
12.exd5 An interesting position has arisen. At but also looks to give Black decent
first glance the d5 pawn looks vulnerable but compensation. ]
without any knights remaining on the board 16.xa6 e5!? This is basically a piece
it's hard for Black to put any pressure on the sacrifice and a good practical try. We have to
pawn. Meanwhile the d pawn does a good job admire Kramnik playing such entertaining
of preventing Black breaking out with either ... chess, even if it didn't fully work out for him.
c7-c5 or ...e7-e5. Kramnik decides to sacrifice [ 16...xa6 17.xd4 xd4+ ( 17...d8
the b4 pawn for counterplay. 0-0! 18.c1 and White's king seems safe
[ 12...b8 13.h6 xh6 ( 13...0-0 14.h4 enough. ) 18.xd4 e5 19.c3 c4
looks very scary to me.) 14.xh6 b7 would leave Black in an awkward endgame
15.c4 is clearly better for White. ] as the passed a pawn will cause him severe
[ 12...a5 13.b5+ ( again 13.h6 problems. ]
is an idea.) 13...d7 14.c4 bringing the 17.xc8?! Naiditsch takes the bait and takes
prodigal son on d5 back into the camp when the extra move. However ChessBase doesn't
I think W hite has the slightly better like this move and instead suggests
chances. ] [ 17.b5! which looks very strong. Their line
13.xb4 runs f6 ( I wonder if Kramnik intended
[ Now Black has time to defend against the s o m e t h i n g l i k e 17...b7 18.c3 xd5
direct 13.h6 with xh6 14.xh6 e5 19.cxd4 fb8 in order to keep the position a
15.dxe5 e8 and Black's completely fine. ] bit messier even if objectively this position
[ 13.c4!? is a safer option. a5 ( 13...e6 should be very good for White.) 18.xd4
14.0-0 gives White enough time to get his exd4 19.c6 h3 20.d2 ab8 21.c1
king to safety.) 14.h4!? would be much when White is almost winning thanks to his
more to my liking than the game super strong a pawn and safe king
continuation as it's the first player who has position. ]
the initiative although it's probably just a 17...fxc8 18.c3 ab8 19.c4 c5
personal preference. ] Kramnik becomes over-optimistic.
13...e6 14.c4 [ The straightforward 19...xb2 was offered
[ 14.dxe6 xe6 15.0-0-0 is possible by many commentators when it seems that
although c5 gives Black great Black's play is worth the sacrificed piece.
952
The prin cipal line run s 20.cxd4 cb8! 33.c2 f4 34.b3 f1 35.xf1 xf1+
21.c1 e4 22.c2 b1+ 23.c1 1b2 36.b2 and White's queenside pawns
with a draw as offered by ChessBase. ] should bring in the point but there's still
20.c1! A very strong retreat. White defends some hard work to do. ]
the b2 pawn and will pick up the piece next 30.b1 xe1 31.xe1 c3 32.xc3 e4
move. I wonder if Kramnik overlooked this 33.f1 xd5 34.a3
after all retreats are the easiest to miss in 1-0
ches s a s we n aturally look at the piece s
moving forward. e4 Kramnik is forced to go
into randomiser mode but Naiditsch defends 922 B07
well. 21.cxd4 exf3 22.gxf3 e8 Nakamura,Hikaru 2571
[ 22...b4 23.e2 and White's king will be Hickl,Joerg 2554
able to run either kingside or queenside Mallorca Trophy final blitz (1.2) 08.02.2004
depending which way Black takes on d4. [John Watson]
xd4+ ( 23...xd4+ 24.c2 c4+ 25.b1
and W hite has consolidated.; 23...cxd4 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.h3 f6
wo u l d k e e p t h e k i n g i n t h e c e n t r e b u t 5.g4 c5 It's hard to believe that this typical
24.e4 is very good for White.) 24.e1 Pirc/Sicilian solution isn't good. 6.dxc5 a5
bb8 25.f1 e8 26.d2 c4+ 27.f2 7.g2 xc5 8.ge2 0-0 9.0-0 c6 10.e3
e5 28.g3 and White's king looks loose a5 11.f4! But now we've something that
but I don't see anywhere to exploit it for might have arisen from 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3
Black and thus White has good chances to g4!?, also saving the tempo g4-g5. Of course,
exploit his extra piece. ] Black needn't cooperate in that case. e6
23.a3 12.d5 xd5? Now Black loses space and
[ 23.c2! Running to b1 looked the easiest. the bishop pair. Threatening ...Bxd5 by means
b4 24.c3 xd4 25.b1 would give of
White enough time to get secure. ] [ 12...fc8 was more apropos, for example,
23...b4 24.f1 xd4+ 25.c2 c4?! 13.c4 d7 14.f5 xd5 15.cxd5 ( 15.exd5
Following this White successfully consolidates ce5 16.b3 )]
his extra piece. 13.exd5 b4 14.c4 d7 15.a3 a6
[ 25...eb8 was the suggestion of 16.d4 Two bishops and space: "and wins...
ChessVibes, threatening to sacrifice on b2 ?". Of course the game isn't perfect, but that's
although 26.a2 xa4 27.xa4 xa4+ it for the opening. c7 17.c1 fe8 18.b4
28.b1 c4 29.d1 a7 30.c2 d8 19.h1 c7 20.e1 b6 21.g1
and W hite still has to play accurately but b8 22.d3 d7 23.e2 h6 24.f1 bc8
objectively he's winning. ] 25.g5 g7 26.h4 a4 27.h3 cd8
26.d1 f2+ 27.d2 e2 28.a2 xf3 28.fe1 a5 29.b5 xb5 30.cxb5 d7
29.e1 31.xe7 xe7 32.xe7 axb4 33.axb4 f8
[ 29.c1! c3 30.xc3 b3 31.b1! e4+ 34.f5 e5 35.fxg6 xg6 36.xb7 xb4
32.a1 would be the smoothest path. ] 37.f3 f8 38.h5 h4 39.g4 e1
29...b3+?! Kramnik's final mistake. 40.c7 g3 41.c2 e5 42.b6 b1
[ 29...f5+ 30.c1 c3! would have at least 43.c8 xc8 44.xc8+ g7 45.g4
complicated the issue a little. 1-0
A) 31.xe2? cxd2+ 32.xd2 c4+
would suddenly turn the tables.;
B) 31.xc3? f4+ 32.b1 e4+
33.c1 ( 33.a1? would give away the
whole point. d4! 34.c1 xe1 35.xe1
g4 ) 33...f4+ is drawn.;
C) 31.bxc3?? b1#;
D) 31.xe2! cxd2+ 32.xd2 c4+
953
923 B07 [ 19...b6 20.e3 h6 21.d6+- ]

Narciso Dublan,Marc 2465 20.d6 f7 21.d7 The referee steps in,
Garcia Castro,Pablo 2330 almost before a single punch has been thrown.
Cerrado CEMAR A, Mondariz (6) 2002 Re7 looms large. W ell as you saw it wasn't
[Andrew Martin] 100% clear but who goes in for these dry
endgames where there is little chance of a win
1.d4 d6 2.e4 e5 Hmm. Quite rare. To go in if the opponent plays even half decently?
for this line 1) You have to enjoy the Philidor 1-0
2) You cannot be unhappy in a slightly worse
ending or 3) You have to be willing to sacrifice
a p a wn ra t h e r d u b io u sly. No wo n d e r it 's 924 B07
unpopular. 3.dxe5 dxe5 Negi,Parimarjan 2597
[ 3...c6 4.exd6 xd6 Akshayraj,Kore 2400
is the aforementioned pawn sacrifice. Black 46th ch-IND National A (12) 29.12.2008
is a pawn down although this will not affect [John Watson]
some maniacs. ]
4.xd8+ xd8 5.c4 f6 And here is the 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5
slightly worse ending. Not lost by any means 5.xd8+ xd8 It's remarkable how well
but most of us would prefer to be White. Black has done from this position over the
[ 5...e6 Fu n n il y e n o u g h 6.xe6 fxe6 last year. In this month's batch, he scored 6.5
has also been played. I much prefer this out of 8 games! 6.c4
type of position when the White Knight has [ After 6.g5 In the recent game Petr, M-
committed to c3. For instance 7.f3 d6 Sabol, Litomysl CZE 2008, Black decided
8.bd2 and with Nc4 and b3, Bb2 as plan that gaining the bishop pair was worth the
e5 looks very weak. Summarising I think doubled pawns: c6 ( or 6...e6 ) 7.0-0-0+
Black's choice of move order isn't optimal if c7 8.f4!? h6 9.xf6 gxf6 10.fxe5 fxe5
he wants the ending. 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 11.f3 f6 12.h4!? e6 ( 12...c5;
e5 would be a better choice. ] 12...g4 13.e2 g8 ) 13.d3 d7
6.f4!? Very aggressive. Another way : 14.hf1 g8 15.e2 c5 with some
[ 6.c3 b4 7.d2 e7 8.ge2 bc6 edge ( or 15...c5 )]
9.a3 a5 10.0-0-0 e8 11.e3 xc3 6...e6
12.xc3 a6 13.d2 b5 14.d5 b7 [ 6...e8 is also doing well. Several leading
15.c5 xd5 16.xd5 c8 17.hd1 f7 players have decided to go this way. White
18.f3 he8 19.h3 g6 20.xc7 ed8 just doesn't have enough targets to play
21.d7+ xd7 22.xd7+ g8 23.d5 against, so his lead in development doesn't
d8 24.e7+ 1-0 Saldanez,J-Domingo,J/ mean much. ]
Jujuy 1999 ] 7.xe6 fxe6 8.f3 Computers all like White
6...d6 7.fxe5 xe5 8.f3 d7 9.c3 c6 here (doubled pawns), but if you just keep
10.e2 e7 11.f4 c5 making them play against good moves, they
[ 11...xf4 I think 12.xf4 g6 13.g3 e8 tend to grow disillusioned. bd7 Not bad, but
14.d2 was the best shot for Black. White perhaps not the best.
keeps his small edge but it really isn't easy [ 8...c5 is the usual move, reserving ....Nc6
to win these position where Black has such as a possibility. ]
strong control over e5 ] [ 8...b4 9.d2 xc3!? 10.xc3 bd7
12.xe5 fxe5 13.h5 e6 14.e3! xc4 is a terribly conservative interpretation,
15.xc5 g8 16.0-0-0+ e8 17.d2 asserting that the knights can protect
There's a simple problem of counterplay. g6 against any breakthrough that W hite can
[ 17...d8 18.xd8+ xd8 19.xa7 ] mount. In Lenderman-Bonin, Mineola 2008,
18.hd1 e6 19.h3 Running him out of Black simply curled up and reacted normally
useful moves. This one prepares Rd6 without to W hite's attempts with bishop-versus-
allowing ...Bg4 h8 knight. I'll include the whole game to
954
illustrate White's frustration: 11.h3 e8 unnecessary. exd5 22.cxd5

12.f2 d6 13.d3 f7 14.0-0-0 e7 [ 22.exd5! hc8 ( 22...d4 23.ae1 )
15.b4+ e8 16.d2 a5 17.c3 e7 23.dxc6 xc6 24.he1 f6 25.ad1 a7
18.hd1 hd8 19.b3 b6 20.b2 f6 26.g3! and Nf2 can be a useful move. This
21.c4 xd2 22.xd2 d7 23.a4 g5 is only mildly better for White, however. ]
24.e3 h8 25.b2 g6 26.a3+ e8 22...d4
27.c4 c5 28.c2 d8 29.xd8+ xd8 [ A simple solution is 22...hc8! with the idea
30.c1 h5 31.g3 h8 32.d1 f7 23.dxc6 ( 23.ac1 a6! ) 23...xc6
33.f2 d7 34.h3 g4 35.fxg4 hxg4 24.ac1 ac8 and Black has no problems. ]
36.f2 f6 37.c5 d7 38.d3 c6 23.c6 b6 24.xe5 Those 3 passed pawns
39.cxb6 cxb6 40.d2 c5 41.c3 c6 lo o k d a n g e r o u s! B l a ck a c h i e ve s a g o o d
42.e3 c7 43.b2 c6 44.d3 d7 blockade, however, and they never advance.
45.f2 f6 46.a3 d6 47.d3 d7 I t ' s n o t cl e a r wh e t h e r W h it e c o u l d h a v e
48.c1 f7 49.h3 gxh3 50.xh3 d6 organised that, but in any case he drifts and
51.f2 e8 52.g4 d7 53.e3 f7 finds himself in trouble: hf8 25.d3
54.h3 b5 55.axb5 xb5 56.g5+ f6 [ 25.hc1 b5 26.c4 is a safe course. ]
57.f3 d6 58.d2 b7 59.c3 d6 25...d6 26.ac1 a4 27.c4!? b5
60.b2 g6 61.g5 f7 62.a3 xg5 28.e3?
63.a4 f6 64.xa5 gxe4 65.xe4 [ T h i s w a s W h i t e ' s c h a n c e f o r 28.c7!
xe4 66.b4 c3 67.b5 , drawn. ] , wit h ch a n ce s , e . g. , d7 ( 28...xc7
9.e3 c5 10.e2 29.e5+ d7 30.e6+ d6 31.c6+ xd5
[ A sample variation after 10.xc5 would be 32.xc7 xe6 33.e1+ ) 29.e5 b6!?
xc5 11.h3 e7 12.0-0-0 hd8 30.c5! c3 31.d6 e4+ 32.e3 xc5
( it would be more interesting to avoid 33.xc5+ followed by Rc1. ]
exchanges, since the d-file is well-covered, 28...a3 29.d4? Wildly optimistic.
for example, 12...a6 13.d2 b5 14.hd1 [ 29.cc1 ]
b4 15.e2 a5 ) 13.xd8 xd8 14.d1 29...xc4 30.xc4 b6+ 31.d4
g8!? with the idea ...g5-g4. ] [ 31.b5 xd5! 32.exd5 f5 ]
10...e7 11.h3 This knight does little on e2, 31...xd5! Probably White simply missed this
f ro m wh e re it is cla ssically re stricte d b y whole idea. 32.exd5 f5 33.f4 e8 34.c4
Black's pawn on e5. a6 Really not necessary. e4+ 35.b3 xd5 36.e5 xf4 37.c1
If Black wants to play his plan from the game, c7 38.d7 d3+ 39.a4 b3+ 40.b5
it's a good time for bxa2 41.c5 d5 42.e1 b4+
[ 11...d4!? 12.hd1 , and ( 12.d1 hd8 0-1
13.c3 b6 ) 12...c5 looks a little risky, but
White can't exploit the position of the bishop
on d4. ] 925 B07
12.f2 d4!? Neiksans,Arturs 2503
[ 12...xe3 13.xe3 hf8 exact orders Vachier Lagrave,Maxime 2703
don't seem to be very important here. ] European Rapid Championship rapid (7)
13.cd1 b5?! Weakening. [Gawain Jones]
[ 13...hf8 is fine. 14.c3 xe3 15.xe3
e8 and ...Nd6 is one possibility. ] 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7
14.c3 xe3 15.xe3 c5 16.c4! b8 Black in te nd s t o rea ch a t yp ica l P hilid o r
17.d3 fd7 18.b4!? position but without allowing the queen trade.
[ Or 18.hc1! with advantage. ] 4.f4 And this is the critical test. e5 5.f3
18...c6!? The so called Lion. Unfortunately I don't have
[ 18...cxb4 19.cxb5 axb5 20.xb4 c8 ] the recent book but have tried to give my
19.bxc5 b4 20.f2 a5 21.d5+!? thoughts. exd4
An enterprising sacrifice, to be applauded, but [ 5...c6 is an alternative but doesn't look to
W hite is better to begin with and it's e qu a lise . A re ce n t co m p u t e r m a t c h u p
955
continued 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 g4 8.e6! shown Black can get enough counterplay.
fxe6 9.g5 de5 10.xd8+ xd8 11.h3 g4 9.g1 b6 10.xb6 axb6 11.h3
h6 12.f4 hf7 13.xf7+ xf7 14.d1+ h6 12.e2!? ( 12.g4 was Pete's choice
d7 15.c4 e8 16.0-0 c5+ 17.h1 b5 a n d i n ve s t ig a t e d in W e l l s, P ( 2 4 7 6 ) -
18.b3 f8 19.e5 e7 20.e4 Oratovsky, M (2481) Budapest 1999 by
and Black was rather passively placed. Nigel in the archives.) 12...b4+ ( 12...f6!
HIARCS-KALLISTO Leiden 2010. ] looks sensible when 13.exf6 gxf6 14.g4
[ Similarly 5...e7 looks to favour White. is unclear but Black can't be too
6.dxe5 dxe5 7.fxe5 g4 8.f4 c6 unhappy. ) 13.c3 e7 14.ed4 c5
( 8...c5 9.c4 0-0 10.e2 e8 11.0-0-0 15.g4 g8 16.h2 f6 and Black had
gxe5 12.b3 and Black still hadn't reasonable counter-chances. White erred
managed to develop all his forces. Conquest, here with 17.0-0-0?! and after xa2
S (2460)-Hodgson, J (2545) London 1991.) 18.b1 Cosma, E (2332)-Gara, A (2370)
9.h3 and White was clearly better - see Bucharest 2010 Black should have played
Ermenkov, E (2454)-Abdulaziz, M (2101) a4 to prevent 19.c4;
Beirut 2004 annotated by Andrew Martin. ] B) 8.0-0-0!? looks logical to me, keeping
6.xd4 flexible in the centre. c5 9.d3 e7
[ 6.xd4 was also played against the young 10.e5 g4 11.xc5 xc5 12.d4 h5
Frenchman in W arsaw. g6 7.e3 g7 13.h3 h6 14.f2 f5 15.g3 d7
8.d3 0-0 9.h3 c5 10.f3 e8 11.0-0-0 16.g1 0-0-0 17.g4 hxg4 18.hxg4 h6
d7 12.g4 xd3+ 13.cxd3 c5! 14.de2 19.f5 and White's extra space gave him a
Andriasian, Z (2585)-Vachier Lagrave, M decent edge. Debray, C (2362) -
(2703) Warsaw 2010 and here I like the look Vingerhoets, L (2057) Avoine 2010.;
of d5! 15.g5 d4 16.gxf6 xf6 and Black C) 8.exd5 This has been White's most
would have taken the upper hand. ] common, grabbing the pawn. c5 9.d3
6...c6 e7 10.d4 b6! This was John
[ 6...e7? allows 7.e5! when Black's W atson's recommendation. Black gets
position is already rather awkward. dxe5 good play for the pawn. ( The forced line
8.fxe5 c5 Makoli, P-Michalik, P (2455) 10...g4 11.f5! de5! 12.xe7 xd3+
P l o v d i v 2 0 1 0 9.a4! g8 10.e4 13.xd3 xe3 14.xc8 xc8
gives White a beautiful position. ] Moussard, J (2276)-Manouck, T (2330)
[ 6...c5 was looked at in Ponomariov, R Paris 2010 must be a little better for White
(2616) -Beliavsky, A (2618) Bled 1999 by as I d on 't belie ve Bla ck ca n h ave f ull
Nigel Davies. ] compensation for the pawn.; 10...xd5
7.c4 The most natural move putting pressure 11.xd5 cxd5 12.f5 definitely gave
on f7 but allowing Black the following White something Adamson, R-Ivanov, A
interesting pawn sacrifice. Stohl actually gave Reno 2007 check John's analysis in the
this a question mark. I think he was being a archives. ) 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.e2
bit dramatic but Black certainly takes over the C1) 12...a6! is given by John but
initiative. W h i t e i s b e t t e r wi t h a c c u r a t e p l a y .
[ 7.d2 allows b6 which is a fairly solid 13.d2 fd5 14.xd5 xd5 15.xc6
response. A recent game continued 8.0-0-0 ( 15.f5 "!" John xe3 16.xe7 xd2+
e7 9.h3 0-0 10.g4 e8 11.g2 f8 17.xd2 xe7 18.xa6 hd8
12.he1 xd4 13.xd4 and a draw was 19.ae1+ f8 20.c1 xf4 21.e4
agreed 1/2-1/2 Eppinger, G (2212)-Klundt, K leaves Black attempting to hold a
(2355) Nuremberg 2010 although I f eel rather unpleasant ending.) 15...xe3
W hite should have a little something still 16.xe3+ xe3 17.xa6 xc2+
as Black is rather passive. ] and here John overlooks 18.e2 xa1
[ 7.e3 has been the main try which has had 19.b7! 0-0 20.xa8 xa8 21.xa1
some recent tests. d5 when Black will still have to work for the
A) 8.e5 looks consistent but practice has half point.;
956
C2) 12...0-0 13.g1 b4 14.xc6 18.a3 c4 leaves Black with a decisive
xc3+ 15.bxc3 c7 gave Black good attack. ) 16...xc4 17.xc4 a6
compensation but here White committed wins the stranded e2 knight. ]
suicide wit h 16.0-0-0? xc6 17.f3 13...e7
a4 18.xa8 c4! with a decisive [ 13...f2! is critical and was played in the
attack Dukaczewski, P (2319) -Aharon, o n l y o t h e r g a m e I c a n f i n d . 14.xf7+!?
O (2199) Olomouc 2010. ] tempting ( but perhaps White should try the
[ 7.e5 dxe5 8.fxe5 c5 is generally simple 14.c3 when Black needs to find
considered to be fine for Black. ] h6! 15.g3 xh1 16.h5 f6 17.xf7+
7...d5 8.exd5 c5 9.d3 0-0 Natural but xf7 18.xf6 gxf6 19.xc5 g4 20.xh1
this allows White time to get his king to safety. xf3 21.gxf3 d5 and Black's on top.)
[ 9...e7+! looks best to me forcing a 14...h8 15.c4 e4 16.ed4 xd4
concession out of White. 10.f1 ( 10.e2 17.xd4 b6 18.c5 ( 18.xc6 c7
b6 11.xe7+ xe7 and Black regains 19.c5 xf7 20.xf2 xa2 ) 18...xd4
the pawn with a pleasant position.) 10...0-0 19.he1 e4 and Black had consolidated
and, due to White's lack of king safety and his material advantage. Zuse, K (2255)-Brix,
slight problem with development he already G (1990) Hockenheim 1994. ]
struggles to equalise. 11.d2 b6 12.e1 14.hf1 xd2? Vachier Lagrave had used up
c7 13.dxc6 bxc6 14.e4 xe4 15.xe4 all his energy in the Blitz tournament the day
xc4 16.xc4 b6 17.b3 a6+ 18.c4 before and here he misses White's powerful
e6 forced White to sacrifice the exchange counter.
with 19.xe6 but Black was clearly better [ 14...b6 was best when Black has good
a n d wo n qu ic kly in Ra h m a n , Z (2 3 2 0 ) - compensation for the pawn. The game might
Murshed, N (2520) Dhaka 1995. ] continue 15.ed4 ( 15.g3 xc4
10.dxc6 bxc6 11.d2 e8+ 12.e2 16.xc4 xd2 17.xd2 e6
After this it looks like Black should take the and the bishop pair and queenside pressure
advantage. looks quite pleasant for Black.) 15...xd4
[ Therefore White should sidestep with his 16.xd4 c5 17.d3 f5 18.e2 b7
king. 12.f1! c7 ( 12...h6! preventing when White has to walk a tightrope to keep
Ng5 should be played with decent equality. 19.a6 d5 20.c4 d7 21.b5
c o m p e n s a t i o n .) 13.e1 ( 13.g5! ) g3 22.hxg3 xe2 23.xd7 xd7 24.b3
13...xe1+ 14.xe1 b6 15.e5 xc4 xg2 25.e5 and White survived Black's
16.xc4 Shetty, R (2356)-Belkhodja, S pressure and has perhaps a nibble here. ]
(2506) Dubai 2002 and here e7 17.d1 15.g5! Neiksans is up to the task.
e6 would have resulted in an interesting Impressive calculation here, especially seeing
unbalanced position. Personally I'd pick as it was a Rapid game. Black cannot
Black as White will have to be very accurate su cc e ssf u lly d e f e n d b o t h f 7 a n d h 7 . f6
to have any hopes of converting his extra Black's best try.
pawn. ] [ 15...e4 16.xf7+ h8 17.xe8 xg5
12...e4! Now White has problems. 13.0-0-0 18.xd7 is hopeless. ]
[ 13.f1 Defends the f2 square but now 16.xf7+?! This is very logical but actually
W hite has problems with his king safety. offers Black a way out into a playable position.
xd2! 14.xd2 b6 15.c3 a6 16.xa6 [ 16.xd2 was far better when Black has to
xa6 17.c2 e7! Meszaros, A (2395) - take a time out to defend f7 and after f8
Sutorikhin, V (2335) Hungary 1994 and White can play 17.d4 with an extra pawn
White had no defence to the pressure down and pressure, a great position. ]
the e file. ] 16...h8?! The Frenchman was obviously not
[ 13.g5 has been tried a couple of times all there for this game and after this he isn't
but xg5 14.fxg5 b6 is unpleasant to given another chance.
d e a l w i t h a s 15.0-0-0 e5 16.b3 [ G i v i n g u p h i s q u e e n w i t h 16...xf7!
( 16.e4 is better but a6 17.xa6 xa6 was essential when the position is far from
957
clear. 17.xf7 xf1 18.h6+! ( 18.xf1 926 B07

e3+ 19.b1 xf7 and I prefer Black's Nepomniachtchi,Ian 2628
rook and two bishops to White's queen and Yudin,Sergei 2562
couple of pawns.) 18...gxh6 19.c4+ g7 Aeroflot Open (8) 24.02.2009
20.xc5 xe2 21.xf1 d7 leaves a very [James Vigus]
complex position. Perhaps White is a little
better as Black's king is vulnerable but it's 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.h3
a true battle. ] [ 4.e3 c6 5.h3 is the more usual route to
17.xe8 xf1 18.xc6 b7 our point of departure. Here Black usually
[ 18...e3+ 19.b1 d2+ 20.xd2 xd2 chooses between 5...b5?! (our previous
21.xa8 xf4 22.f3 would also leave ma in ga me ), 5 . .. B g7 (ou r cu rre n t m a in
White with a clear extra two pawns. ] game), and 5...Nbd7. In the examples below,
19.xb7 xb7 20.xf1 xg2 21.d1 we will see repeatedly that Black is most
The dust has settled. White has a clear extra successful at breaking the Archbishop's grip
two pawns and Black must be careful with his when he does not play ...Nbd7, which can
king. Vachier Lagrave fights well but already get in the way of a central counterattack.
his position is pretty hopeless. Obviously the Therefore after bd7 (intending to meet 6
following moves aren't perfect as it was just a f4 with 6...b5 7 a3 Nb6, securing the d5-
rapid game. f8 22.e6 square for the knight on f6 in case W hite
[ 22.g3! would keep both extra pawns. ] ploughs forward with e4-e5), the critical
22...e8 23.f5 xh2 24.b1 b6 m o v e i s s u r e l y 6 g 4 ! ( n e x t g a m e ) 6.a4
[ Lagrave should have taken the opportunity ( 6.g4 ) 6...g7 7.g4 0-0 (Black should
to bring his queen back into the game with probably try 7...e5 possibly followed by a
24...e5 ] quick ...d5, as John W atson suggests in
25.2f4! Now Black's queen is extremely 'James Vigus Pirc Inquiry') 8.g2 a5
offside. c8 26.c3 b8 27.d2 g1+ 9.ge2
28.c2 e3 29.d6 e8 30.d1 f2+ A) 9...d5 10.e5 ( 10.f3 dxe4 11.fxe4
31.b1 xf4 32.xf4 With every exchange e5 ) 10...e4;
W hite gets nearer an easy technical win. B) 9...c5 10.d5 e8 11.0-0 e5 12.f4
Ho we ve r, t h e prob le m a s f a r a s Black is c4 13.c1 e6 14.a2 d8 15.d3
concerned is that W hite can generate an exd5 16.xd5 b6 17.e3 was very
initiative much more easily. e2 33.g1 e4 good for W hite in Ninov, N (2526) -
34.a1 f6 35.c7! g8 36.a3 e8 Spielmann, A (2324)/Nancy FRA 2009 ]
37.f4 4...g7 5.e3 c6 White's peculiar move-
[ 37.xa7 is very easy. ] o r d e r m e a n s t h a t B la c k s h o u ld h a v e n o
37...f6 38.g5 e5 39.h1 e4 40.g1 qualms about 5... 0-0 here, since the plan of
e5 41.f4 e4 42.h4 e8 43.g5 g8 Qd2 and Bh6 is too slow in combination with
44.e6 e5 45.f1 e4 46.h4 f6 h3 to be troubling, and 6 g4 invites a quick
47.g5 f8 48.e6 b8 49.f2 a5 counterattack with 6...e5. 6.g4
50.a7 h5 51.g5 b5 52.f2 e8 [ 6 f4 remains critical here, and would be a
53.e6 a4? Now the knight drops. 54.f7 good topic f or a future update. If W hite
h6 55.c4 b8 56.xh5 e7 57.g4 e5 wants an Archbishop Attack, however, he
58.g2 d7 59.a2 e3 60.g3 b6 probably does best with Nepomniachtchi's
61.c3 An interesting tactical sequence just move-order, rather than the 6 a4 0-0 7 g4 of
ou t o f t h e o pe n in g b u t o bje ct ive ly 7 .B c4 L-D.Nisipeanu-P. Svidler, Ukraine 2007,
s h o u ld n 't c h a lle n ge B l a ck a n d s o W h it e annotated by John Watson in the archive.
should examine the alternatives. 6.a4 ]
1-0 6...b5
[ G a gu n a sh vili's su gge st io n o f 6...b6!?
has yet to be tested now 7 Qc1 is not a
particular concession for W hite, and
958
7.ge2!? xb2 8.g2 is a dangerous if 10.a4? a6 11.d1 b4 12.d2

unnecessary gambit. ] White must have been relieved that his
[ 6...a5 has been a very popular try in draw offer was accepted in Jones, G
practice. It puts the onus on Black to strike (2549)-McNab, C (2450) / Coulsdon
back rapidly in the centre (otherwise the ENG 20 08/ The W e ek in Che ss 72 0)
queen's excursion will have done nothing to 8...bd7 9.0-0 could quickly turn into a
hinder W hite's smooth development) and good version of the Fianchetto Variation
leads to sharp play: for White, who enjoys the 'extra' move
A) 7.d2 is designed to avoid the line 7 g4, while Black's queen lacks purpose
Bg2 d5!, and limited evidence suggests on a5. In Laine-Nippula, Black tried b6!
t h a t i t ' s p r o m i s i n g f o r W h i t e , e . g . h5 10.d3 ( perhaps 10.b3!? e6 11.g5
( 7...e5 8.ge2 b5 9.dxe5 dxe5 g8 12.d5 cxd5 13.exd5 f5
10.c5!? bd7 11.b4 d8 12.0-0-0 14.d2!? ) 10...e6 11.ad1 ( 11.b3
led to a storming attack for W hite in S. d5! ) 11...c4 12.d2 h5 13.g5 fd7
Williams-M.Gagunashvili, Hastings 2006, 14.f4 0-0-0 15.b3 exd4 16.xd4
but a5!? (Gagunashvili) seems to give xd4+ 17.xd4 xe2 18.xe2 xa2
Black enough counterplay I feel that in 19.d2 a5 20.a1 c5 21.xa7
principle W hite should maintain the c7 22.d1 and a draw was agreed,
c e n t r a l t e n s io n i n t h e s e p o s i t i o n s . . .; though even in the final position White
...though he must at the same time be on could look forward to an endgame with a
the lookout for Black's thematic ...d5 break, promising future for the 'archbishop' on
e.g. 7...bd7 8.f4 b5!? 9.g2? (9 e5!) g2, Laine, P (2203)-Nippula, T (2224)/
b4 10.ce2 d5 11.e5 e4 12.xe4 Finland 200103;
dxe4 13.g3 b6 14.b3 f6 15.1e2 B3) 7...d5! 8.e5 e4
0-0 16.xe4 d5 17.0-0 1/2-1/2 Efanov, B3a) 9.xe4?! dxe4 10.d2 c5
N (2348)-Pavlovski, Y (2263)/ Kazan RUS 11.dxc5 xe5 12.d4 xd4 13.xd4
2008/The Week in Chess 714; 7...b5 8.g5 0-0 14.b4? c6! - A.Ivanov;
b4 9.gxf6 bxc3 10.fxg7 cxd2+ 11.xd2 B3b) 9.d3 xc3 ( Black should
xd2+ 12.xd2 g8 13.f4 exploit the light squares with 9...a6!
W hite's spatial advantage gave him a 10.xe4 dxe4 11.xe4 e6 ) 10.d2
nagging edge in the endgame, Sibilio, M b5 11.xc3 d7 12.f4 was slightly
(2330)-Satta, V (2230)/Italy 1998/EXT better for White in Kudischewitsch, D
2002 (41) ) 8.g5 fd7 9.g2 b5 (2384)-Chernomordik, P (2305)/Tel
10.ge2 b4 11.d1 b6 12.b3 b7 Aviv 2002;
13.0-0 c5 14.b2 0-0 15.d3 B3c) 9.ge2 h5!? 10.xe4 dxe4
with a slight edge owing to Black's offside 11.gxh5 xh5 12.g3 xh3 13.xh3
que en in E. Mukha me to v-D. Ko njevic, xh3 14.gxe4 a6 15.f3 f5
Yugoslav Championship 1996; 16.0-0-0 0-0-0 was roughly balanced
B) 7.g2 in Ivanov, A (2460) -Christiansen, L
B1) 7...e6!? 8.ge2 c4 9.g5 g8 (2555)/USA 1989/Inf 48/[Ivanov,
10.c1 d7 11.b3 c7 12.f3 h6 Alexa] (34) ]
13.h4 hxg5 14.hxg5 xh1+ 15.xh1 [ 6...h5 7.g5 fd7 is an attempt to play by
e5 16.0-0-0 xb3 17.axb3 exd4 analogy to the 4 Be3 c6 5 Qd2 Nbd7 6 f3 b5
18.xd4 xd4 19.xd4 c5 line that Marin has recently analysed in
was rather enterprising from Black in depth in an article in ChessBase Magazine.
Leon Hoyos, M (2454)-Valdes, L (2401)/ One of his main lines is then 7 g4 Nb6 8 h4
Santo Domingo 20078 ext (79), but still a h5 9 g5 Nfd7 10 f4 Bg7, reaching something
little way from full equality.; very similar to our present line. However,
B2) 7...e5 8.ge2 ( releasing the there are two important differences: (i) White
t e n s i o n w i t h 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.d6 has 'saved' a tempo by missing out the
g i v e s W h i t e n o t h i n g , a n d a f t e r e6 possibly unhelpful move Qd2 (ii) the h4-
959
square is not occupied by a pawn, and so is play. ]

f r e e f o r a wh i t e k n i gh t . T h i s m i gh t n o t [ b) 9...c5!? is the move Black would prefer
necessarily be disastrous for Black, but to play with his bishop on b7, but 10.h5!
these factors did prove important in the ( 10.xb5 b6! ) 10...c6 11.f3 b4
game: 8.f4 b5 ( 8...0-0 9.f3 c5 10.d2 12.e2 leaves the bishop on g7 with a
cxd4 11.xd4 , Aleksandrov, A (2535)- h e a d a c h e , p e r h a p s b e s t a l l e vi a t e d b y
Poluljahov, A (2480)/St Petersburg 1996, g8!? ]
wasn't too promising for Black either) 9.f3 10.d5!?
(a sensible alternative to the 9 Bd3 of S. [ Continuing his policy of maximum space-
Rocha-M.Marin, Linares 1998, as given in gra b b in g. T h is is ce rt a in ly cr it ica l, b u t
TPIBAW) b6 10.b3 8d7 11.h4! b4 sometimes the Archbishop is most effective
12.e2 c5 13.f5! b7 ( 13...cxd4 14.xd4 when W hite reins himself in slightly, and
g8 is a better defence, but feels 10.f3 b6 11.b3 8d7 12.h5
uncomfortable) 14.fxg6 xe4 15.gxf7+ would have asked Black what exactly he is
xf7 16.g2 xg2 17.xg2 e6?! 18.0-0+ proposing to do about that Pirc prelate on
e7? 19.ef4 f8 20.dxc5 1-0 Ovetchkin, g7. ]
R (2515)-Abelian, A (2356)/Voronezh 20028 10...b4
ext ] [ 10...b6 11.dxc6 xc6 12.xb5 c4
7.g2 is another way to sacrifice a pawn, but Yudin
[ The sharp 7.e5 was P.Svidler-V. Ivanchuk, is probably right to jettison the sickly d6-
Spain 2006, annotated by Jonathan Rowson pawn rather than its healthy comrade on the
in the archive. W hite won that game b-file. ]
convincingly, but the opening wasn't 11.dxc6 xc6 12.b5
particularly clear. ] [ This is hard to resist, but classical
7...b7 principles would suggest occupying the
[ The only previous all-grandmaster square in front of a backward pawn rather
encounter to reach this position meandered than hurrying to capture the pawn itself:
sedately on with 7...fd7!? 8.f3 b7 12.d5! . This surely offers White some sort
9.0-0 0-0 10.d2 e8 11.ad1 c7 of edge, since attempts to break out with ...
12.e2 ( 12.h6 h8 13.g5!? h6 or ...f5 will make the kingside
, r e l e a s i n g t h e f - p a wn , m ig h t b e m o r e un in h a b it a b le f o r t he b la ck kin g, wh ile
incisive ) 12...c5 13.g3 cxd4 14.xd4 a6 White's own monarch could still choose to
15.h6 h8 16.f4 c6 17.c3 ac8 go to either side. ]
and equality, Sulskis, S (2582)-Postny, E 12...0-0 13.xd6
(2537)/Cappelle la Grande 20049 ext (49) ] [ The point of Black's play is that White's
8.g5! lone-raiding knight lacks retreat squares,
[ Against quieter play, Black, having guaranteeing Black good counterplay after,
cunningly refrained from ... e7-e5, can build say, 13.xd6 a6 14.f1!? ( or 14.e2
slowly up to the ...c6-c5 break, e.g. 8.d2 b6 ) 14...xf1 15.xf1 b6 ]
c7 9.a3 bd7 10.ge2 b6 11.b3 a6 [ 13.f3!? a6 ]
12.0-0 (Callet, E-Gallego, E/Paris 1993) 0-0 13...b6!?
13.f4 c5 with unclear play. ] [ Yudin's plan is to induce White to castle,
8...fd7 9.h4 e5 then offload a couple more pawns to get at
[ With a weakness on d6 and without any the king. Less risky was 13...a6! 14.c7
genuine pressure against d4, this break is ( 14.d1? axb5 15.xd7 xd7 16.xd7
double-edged for Black. He probably didn't fb8 is good for Black) 14...c8 15.d5
fancy the alternatives, though: a) 9...h5?! e8 : it looks strange to force the white
does not, of course, reach the sort of knight to d5, but more importantly Black now
kingside blockade favoured by Marin, since has access to d4. One sample line goes
10.gxh6 xh6 11.xh6 xh6 12.d2 h8 16.h3 d4 17.xd4 exd4 18.xd7
13.f3 leaves White with good central xd5! 19.xc8 e7 20.xa6 xe4
960
21.e2 , when the position has certainly not 927 B07

clarified! ] Nestorovic,Lazar 2207
14.0-0-0! Svetac,Nenad 2322
[ White probably didn't think too much about Spring Open Belgrade SRB (8) 30.03.2009
p l a y i n g ' s a f e ' w i t h 14.xd8 fxd8 [John Watson]
, when Black's position is quite harmonious
and both ...Nc4 and ...Nd4 come into the A pleasant miniature, and no comf ort f or
reckoning. ] Black's cause. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6
14...d4 15.xb4 4.g5 c6 5.d2 g7 6.0-0-0 c7
[ This time 15.xd8 fxd8 16.xd4 exd4 Aiming for ...e5. 7.d3
17.f4 ac8 was a more serious option for [ 7.f4 still looks annoying, for example, h6
W hite, but a coming ... Na4 should give ( 7...e5? 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.fxe5 fd7
Black enough for the pawn. ] 10.d6! ) 8.h4 0-0 9.f3 , but maybe
15...c8 16.xd4 exd4 17.xd4 c7 b5!? is better than in the previous game
18.c3? b e c a u s e o f 10.e5 b4! 11.exf6 bxc3
[ The natural defence, but it involves 12.xc3 exf6 ]
returning a pawn and allowing the black 7...e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.h6 0-0 10.h4!
queen to become active. 18.b3 f4+ This position is still difficult for Black. xh6
( 18...fd8 19.e2 ) 19.e3 ( 19.e3 c7 [ Some sample analysis after 10...e6!? :
invites a repetition, since 20.c3 c4 11.h5 ( 11.f3 ) 11...xh5
will be hard for White to negotiate) 19...e5 A) 12.xh5 gxh5 13.xg7 ( 13.g5?!
probably doesn't offer Black enough f6 ) 13...xg7 14.g5+ h8 15.f6+=;
compensation objectively, but this would be B) 12.e2! f4 13.xg7 xg7 14.f3
quite a scary prospect for White. ] f6 15.g3 h5 16.e2 f7 ( 16...f7
18...xd4! 19.xd4 17.xh5 gxh5 18.f3 a6 19.h4 )
[ If 19.xd4 fd8 the white king will be 17.xh5 gxh5 18.xh5 gives White some
dragged into the open. ] kingside chances. A typical crazy line goes
19...f4+ 20.c2 xf2+ 21.d2 g3 a6 19.f4 ad8 20.xd8 xd8 21.f5
22.b3? xa2 22.g4+ f8 ( 22...h8 23.xa2
[ Giving up control of the d-file is disastrous. xa2 24.xh7+! ) 23.h4 g8 24.h6
Instead 22.d6 g4 remains hard to d7 25.f3 c5 26.xf6 b3+ 27.cxb3
fathom, but who wouldn't take Black? ] xb3 28.g5+ h8 29.d2 d3
22...fd8 Remarkably, White's kingside is so 30.f8+ xf8 31.xb3 and White should
congested that he cannot avoid the loss of a win. ]
p i e c e . T h i s d o e s i ll u st ra t e t h e p o t e n t i a l 11.xh6 g4
danger W hite faces with the 'maximalist' [ 11...g4 (to prevent Nf3-g5) 12.f3 e6
approach of the Archbishop: those advanced 13.h5 bd7 14.g4 c5 15.h3 b5
kingside pawns confer a space advantage, but 16.g5 ad8 ]
also leave holes in their wake! 23.c4 e3 12.d2 f5? A terrible misjudgement,
24.h3 xg1 25.b2 a6 26.h1 e3 exposing his king. Perhaps
27.xd8+ xd8 28.c1 xc4+ 29.bxc4 [ 12...b6 13.h3 f6 is best, with White
g3 30.a5 b8+ 31.a1 xg2 32.b1 st i ll h a vi n g t h e a t t a ck f o ll o win g 14.g5
xb1+ 33.xb1 f1+ 34.b2 e2+ , with the idea h5. ]
35.a3 d3+ 36.b2 d4+ 37.a3 xc4 13.c4+?! Not the best exploitation. Better is
38.b4 g7 39.e5 e3+ 40.a4 xa2 [ 13.f3 f6 14.exf5 gxf5 15.g5+ g7
41.e6 b3+ 16.xf5 , or, still better, ]
0-1 [ 13.h5! f4 14.hxg6 hxg6 15.g3! ( 15.f3 )
15...e6 16.gxf4 exf4 17.f3 and Rdg1. ]
13...g7 14.h5 f4 15.hxg6 hxg6 16.f3
d7? Missing the winning sacrifice.
[ 16...e7! defends for a while, for example,
961
17.h4!? b5 18.b3 a5 19.dh1 f6 meet. On the other hand, f5 14.xe4!?

20.g5! d8 21.e2 a6 22.g3! a4 ( 14.h6 ) 14...xd2+ 15.xd2 fxg4
23.e6 ] 16.hxg4 xg4 isn't inspiring for White. ]
17.h7+! Whoops! A pretty shot that is easy 11...exf6 12.0-0 f5?!
to miss. f6 [ 12...xc3! 13.xc3 ( 13.bxc3 e8 )
[ 17...xh7 18.g5+ h6 ( 18...h8 13...f5 intends ... fxg4 or in some cases ...f4.
19.h1+ g7 20.e6+; 18...g7 Black has an edge. ]
19.e6+ )] 13.xe4 fxe4 14.f3 exf3
18.d6+ It's mate next move! ½-½
1-0
929 B07
928 B07 Nyback,Tomi
Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter 2693 Puranen,Jukka
Svidler,Peter 2736 Finnish Team Championship 2001 2001
Aerosvit Foros UKR (7) 25.06.2007 [Paul Motwani]
[John Watson]
W44: "Fine finish in Finland!" 1.f3 d6 2.d4
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.h3 g7 g4 The Wade Defence is named after
It's interesting that at the top levels players England's IM Robert Graham W ade, and
don't seem as worried that ...Bg7 allows Bh6 although the current game is not one of the
with an 'extra' tempo, as opposed to leaving better adverts for the system championed by
the bishop on f8 for a while with, say, 4...c6. B o b W a d e , d o n ' t b e s u r p r i s e d i f t h e
This leaves open the argument of whether 2... irrepressible man himself notches up some
Nf6 is too committal! Awfully unlikely, but the cracking counter-attacking victories for us
le a v in g it o n g8 f o r a wh ile give s u s t h e before 10 April 2002...when he'll be 81! 3.e4
Modern Defence, which has its own set of If we imagine replacing White's earlier d2-d4
advantages and disadvantages 5.e3 c6 with c2-c4, then a noteworthy possibility now
[ 5...bd7 with an early ...e5 is a very would be 3 Qb3!? intending 3...Qc8 4 h3,
different plan that yields a familiar setup after which 4...Bh5?? falls into the deadly trap
after 6.g4 e5 7.g2 c6 8.a4 0-0 9.ge2 5 Qb5+ followed by 6 Qxh5. f6 4.c3 c6
. We looked at this without the moves . ..0-0 [ 4...c6 5.e3 e6 6.h3 h5 7.d5 e5?
and Bg2 ha vin g b een playe d. I like th e ( 7...exd5 is relatively best) 8.g4! g6
tradeoff a bit for White, who has made ...d5 ( he's also in double trouble after 8...xf3+
less likely. ] 9.xf3 g6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.e5!
[ 5...0-0 transposes directly into analysis with the shattering Qxb7 coming) 9.d2!
from the Vigus inquiry in May. He thinks that leaves Black facing the terrible threat of f4
6.g4 d5 7.e5 e4 is satisfactory for Black then f5. ]
in that case, and that 5...c6 makes Black 5.h3 h5 6.g4! Black's light-squared bishop
more vulnerable to the g4 attack. ] is sent reeling f urt her backward s by this
6.a4 0-0 7.g4 This is another version of what particularly energetic case of g for "go for it"!
Vigus calls the 'Archbishop Attack', named g6 7.e2 a5
and analysed by Vigus and Simon Bibby. a5 [ W44.1: 7...e6 transposes to the game I.
The attack on e4 facilitates Black's next: Farago-V.Nevednichy, Bled 1992, where
8.g2 d5! 9.e5 the continuation 8.h4! h6 9.h5 h7 10.g5
[ White should consider 9.f3!? ] hxg5 11.xg5 was not pleasant for Black. ]
9...e4 10.ge2 f6 8.d2 White quickly stops his opponent's
[ 10...xc3! 11.xc3 f6 is more effective. ] fleeting threat of capturing the e4-pawn, and
11.exf6 now the bishop at d2 gives Black's queen
[ 11.xe4 dxe4 12.exf6 exf6 13.d2 cause for concern. b6 9.0-0-0 e6 10.h4!
threatens Nxe4, which is not so easy to Echoing an idea from the earlier notes at
962
move seven. h5 11.g5 g8 17.c1 fc8 18.d2 xb2 19.ge2 e5
[ 11...fd7 would have kept the knight a bit Maybe so, but this will be a rough ride.)
more in play. ] 17...e5 18.ge2 c4 19.b3 a3+
12.d5! White aims to prise open the position 20.b2 xb5 Mola,P-Sarno,S/63rd ch-ITA,
in order to get at Black's king and exploit the Arvier ITA 2003 ]
seriously under-developed situation of that 7...b5 8.f3 bd7 9.e5?! there were plenty of
monarch's almost dormant pieces. e5 13.e3 alternatives, all of which were better than the
c7 move chosen.
[ 13...c5 14.d2 is also horrible for Black, [ 9.g4 ]
who then faces threats such as Nc4 and/or [ 9.h6 ]
f2-f4. ] [ 9.h4 ]
14.d2! e7? This critically weakens the d6- [ 9.h3 ]
pawn, and W hite now acts very speedily to 9...b4! The thematic response, either securing
produce a fine finish to this game in Finland! Black the d5 square or forcing open the b file.
15.dxc6 bxc6 16.c4 c8 17.h3 a6 10.exf6 bxc3 11.xc3 xf6 12.xc6
[ 17...d7 also loses instantly, to 18.xd7+ Almost suicidal, as Black quickly develops a
xd7 19.xe5 ] massive attack along the open files. Parligras
18.xe5 dxe5 19.d7+ Black resigned, in obviously did not like his position, resolved to
view of 19...Qxd7 20 Rxd7 Kxd7 21 Qxa6. take everything on offer and try to tough it out.
1-0 [ What were his options? Few and far
between. Perhaps 12.d3 is possible, but
Black has the better game already. ]
930 B07 12...e6 13.c1 b8 14.h3 xa2+!!
Parligras,Mircea An idea which is spectacularly successful.
Jobava,Baadur [ Of course 14...a5 would also have given
Antalya 2004 Black a big attack at zero risk. ]
[Andrew Martin] 15.xa2 a5+ 16.b1 d5 With ...Rfc8
coming, every Black piece joins in the attack.
There now follows a breathtaking attacking White will not survive with his Kingside pieces
game by Black, demonstrating the potential of mere onlookers. 17.d3 fc8 18.d2 xb2+
the Pirc. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 Certainly the most dynamic follow-up.
4.e3 g7 5.d2 0-0 6.0-0-0 I believe that [ 18...b4 enables White to grovel: 19.a3
6 0-0-0 is already too committal. White has d8 20.a4 xc2 21.a2 xd4 22.a6 ]
plenty of good moves available e.g. Bd3,Nf3, 19.xb2 b8+ 20.b3 xd4+ 21.c3 b4!!
even h2-h3,before castling. Why not wait to Intended all along and a wonderful, study-like
see how the game develops? c6 7.b1 conception. Black rips the White King apart.
If White sets up his Be3/g5, Qd2 battery it's 22.a6
almost always best to play Bh6 as soon as [ 22.cxd4 a2+ 23.c1 xc6! ( 23...xb3
one can. Otherwise what is the point? Black isn't totally clear: 24.xb4 xb4 25.d2
has already made his own intentions clear with xd4+ 26.e1 b2 27.e2 b1+ 28.f2
..c7-c6 he wants to launch his b pawn forward, xh1 ) 24.xb8+ xb8 25.c3 c6
so to hesitate with 7 Kb1 seems wrong. 26.f4 a5 White can't move very much-the
[ M i n d y o u , i f 7.h6 Black gets good a pawn just walks. ]
counterplay anyway: b5 8.f3 ( 8.xg7 22...xa6 23.xa6 xb3+ 24.xb3 xa6
xg7 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 xd2+ 11.xd2 25.cxd4 e2! 26.e1 xg2 27.f2 xf3+
g4 12.f4 f6= ) 8...a5 9.b1 xh6 28.c4 a5-+ 29.g1 a4 30.d3 a3 31.d2
10.xh6 e6 11.a3 bd7!? Very sharp, e5 32.dxe5 c6+ We see many such similar
considering he could just have played 11... games in the Sicilian Dragon and King's Indian.
b4 12.d5 cxd5 13.exd5 f5 14.g4 b4 Defeat is the price of hesitation by White, and
15.axb4 xb4 16.gxf5 ab8 17.b5 th a t is wh y t he se B lack op e nin gs a re s o
( Fritz argues that White survives after popular. Attacks such as this one come along
963
less often for Pirc/Modern fans, so when the [ 11...xf3+ 12.xf3 c4 13.e4 ]
o p p o r t u n i t y a r i s e s i t H A S t o b e t a k e n . 12.a3 xf3+ 13.gxf3
Congratulations to Jobova on a wonderful [ 13.xf3 f8 14.e2 e5 ]
performance. 13...d7
0-1 [ 13...e5 14.e3 ]
14.e3 b6?! A timid response when action is
required. It also means that castling
931 B07 queenside is much more awkward because of
Pavasovic,Dusko 2581 the weakness on the light squares.
Fauland,Alexander 2427 [ 14...0-0-0!? is the answer to connect the
Austrian Team Championship (8) 11.10.2003 rooks and protect the king. 15.b5 e5
[Gary Lane] 16.xc6 bxc6 17.a3 ( 17.xa7+? b7
traps the unfortunate knight) 17...d5
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.d3 g6 and Black can fight on because it is not
5.dxc5!? This looks like a good idea but it is obvious how White should proceed when his
rarely played. own king is badly placed. ]
[ 5.f3 is considered the main line. ] 15.h5 gxh5 16.f4 c8
5...dxc5 6.e5 fd7?! A natural move to [ The big difference now is that 16...0-0-0?
attack the advanced e-pawn but it is walks into 17.a6+ b8 18.b5 ]
inaccurate. 17.b5 b8 18.0-0-0 Now that White has
[ 6...c4 7.a4+ d7 8.xc4 White is a go t a ll h is p ie c e s in t o t h e a ct i o n h e c a n
pawn up for nothing but complacency will smoothly step up a gear to accelerate the
cost his dear g4 9.f4 c6 10.e4?? attack. d4 19.cxd4 The easiest way to fend
a nightmare move f5 0-1 Huber, A-Gheng, off the attempt at counterplay. Others:
J/Wuerttemberg 2000. ] [ 19.xd4!? cxd4 20.xh5+ f8+- ]
[ 6...d5 is the usual reply when play can [ 19.xd4? cxd4 20.b1 xf4 21.xa7
continue 7.e4 c7 8.xd8+ xd8 c5 22.cxd4 c7 is still in favour of White
9.e3 ( 9.a3 d7 10.f3 g7 11.e3 but Black has active play. ]
e6 12.0-0-0 gave White an edge in 19...cxd4+ 20.b1 dxe3 21.xh5+ f8
Firman,N-Kuzubov,Y/Alushta 2002.) 9...d7 22.xd7 xf4 23.f3 The grandmaster is
10.f3 f5 11.exf6 exf6 12.a3 f5 13.c2 happy to enter a superior ending.
b5 14.0-0-0 White has a lead in [ 23.f3!? is the top move which maintains the
development which offers him more a t t a c k i n g o p t i o n s . F o r e x a m p l e : e2
attacking options a6 15.he1 the big threat 24.e1+- h6 25.xh6 xh6 26.c3
is Bg5+ e6 16.b3 c4 17.g5! e7 when the extra piece ensures victory. ]
18.xe6 cxb3 19.d4 1-0 Salai, L-Demeter, 23...xf3 24.xf3 exf2 25.f1 h6 26.c7
P/Nove Zamky 1999. ] e3 27.b7 b8
7.e6! A nice positional idea which helps to [ 27...xc7!? 28.xc7 f7 ]
create tactics later in the game because the 28.d3 xb7 29.xe6+ f7
black king will be vulnerable. This is because [ Or 29...e8 30.xe3 d7 31.xf2+- ]
the doubled e-pawns are a hindrance to Black 30.xe3 d7 31.xf2+ e8 32.c3
developing fxe6 8.f3 c6 9.e2 g7 [ 32.c3 d6 33.c8+ d7 34.xh8 xe6
10.h4 This is the standard way of exploiting 35.xh7+- ]
such positions. The fianchetto on the kingside 1-0
is hardly rock solid without the defence of the
f-pawn and it is up to White to try and create
further havoc.
[ It will all en ds in te ars af te r 10.xe6??
when de5 11.b3 xd3+ 12.e2 g4
the position is massively in Black's favour. ]
10...de5 11.e4 d6
964
932 B07 has some chances here but Granda Zuniga

Perez Candelario,Man 2568 quickly quashes any counterplay. ac8 19.f5
Granda Zuniga,J 2641 c6 20.f6 d8 21.f4 exf6 22.d5
XVIII Navalmoral Open (7.2) 08.12.2012 Creative play but Black has it under control
[Tom Rendle] fxg5 23.xg5 f6! 24.h6 f7 25.h3 e5
Now Black's play gets going and W hite's
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.f3 position quickly falls apart 26.h1 h7
I'm not a big fan of f3 this early on as it just [ 26...g5! was even stronger ]
signals your intent to Black who can choose a 27.f4 a5 28.e1 b8
setup accordingly. [ 28...f3 wins another exchange - it seems
[ 4.e3 or ] likely that at least one player was very short
[ 4.g5 are both sensible alternatives for of time around here. ]
players wishing to be aggressive ] 29.g2 It's not clear if White resigned here or
4...c6 5.e3 b5 6.d2 g7 7.g4 lost on time - either way Black is winning.
I don't really think this gives White anything 0-1
after Black's reply
[ 7.h4!? might give Black more problems
although the position is still balanced after 933 B07
bd7 8.h3 0-0 ( or 8...c7 9.g4 b4 Petronic,Jovan 2450
10.e2 c5!? ) 9.0-0-0 b6 ] Djuric,Stefan 2520
7...h5! 8.g5 fd7 9.a4?! This seems to give Jugoslavija 1998
Black a good game [Alexander Volzhin]
[ 9.f4 is a better try and can be found in the
archives in Goloshchapov-Lahno. Recently White sacrifices 2 pawns and the exchange
in Saptarshi, R (2389)-Peralta, F (2602) ju s t t o s e c u re a b l o c k a d e o ve r t h e d a r k
Barbera del Valles 2012 the game continued s q u a r e s . A t t h e c r i t i c a l m o m e n t b o t h
b4 ( 9...b6 was chosen by Lahno) 10.d1 opponents blunder but it is W hite who errs
c5! 11.c3 ( 11.f3 is perhaps an last... 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 c6 4.f4
i m p r o v e m e n t a n d n o w 0-0 12.a3 a5 5.e5 e4 6.f3 d5 7.d3 c5!?
with an unclear middlegame) 11...b7 [ 7...xc3 doesn't fit with Black's previous
12.d3 0-0 13.d5 bxc3 14.bxc3 a6 move: 8.d2 e6 9.e2 and so on ]
15.f3 a5 and Black was already better ] [ 7...a6 8.ge2 b4 9.0-0! ( White can't
9...b4 10.ce2 c5 11.f4?! This doesn't fit at grab t he p awn : 9.xe4 dxe4 10.xe4
all in this position in view of f5! 11.exf6 f5 and Black wins
[ 11.dxc5 was best and after xc5 12.d4 material: 12.f3 xc2+ 13.f2 0-0-0
0-0 13.xg7 xg7 14.xb4 b7 15.d2 E m m s - H o d g s o n , G r e a t B r i t a i n 1 9 8 9 .)
c6 Black has good compensation for a 9...xd3 10.cxd3 xc3 11.bxc3 g6 12.a4
pawn but probably no more. ] h5 13.h3 h4 14.a3 f5 15.fb1 c7
11...b7 12.g2 c6 13.h3 and now 16.a5! ( I n s t e a d o f 16.e3
[ 13.d1 may be best but where will White which was played in Motwani-Summerscale,
p u t t h e K in g n o w? A f t e r 0-0 Black is Edinburgh 1999: e6 17.a5 xa3 18.xa3
comfortably better. ] and White is only slightly better.) 16...e6
13...b6 14.dxc5 xc5 15.0-0 Black is 17.c5! as was pointed out by Paul Motwani,
clearly better and wins rather easily from here. se cu re d W hit e a clea r e d ge du e t o h is
a5! 16.b3 White won't have enough pressure on the b-file. ]
compensation for the exchange but it was still [ 7...f5? is just bad for Black due to 8.g4!
better than allowing the knight into c4 xc3 9.gxf5 e4+ 10.c3 ]
[ 16.c1 c4 17.a5 c7 18.d4 xd4+ 8.ge2?!
19.xd4 xe4 leaves Black a clear pawn [ According to Jovan Petronic, White should
up with a good position ] have tried 8.xe4 dxe4 ( 8...cxd4?! 9.xd5
16...xa1 17.xa1 0-0 18.f2 White still dxc3 10.xc3 xc3+ 11.bxc3 e6
965
12.e4 ) 9.xe4 cxd4 10.xd4 f5 could have been parried by b6 18.f5 d7
( 10...c6 11.e4 b4 12.d3 e6 19.e7 c5 and so on. ]
13.a3 ) 11.f2 c6 12.f3 b4 13.d4 16...dxc3
xc2! 14.0-0 d3 15.d1 c4 16.e3 [ 16...c6 17.cxd4 0-0 was also worth
with the better prospects ] considering. ]
[ In the case of 8.dxc5 xc3 9.d2 d4 17.xc3 0-0
10.e2 c6 11.bxc3 dxc3 12.xc3 [ It was impossible to neutralise the Bishop
xc5 White is probably also slightly by 17...d4 b e c a u s e o f 18.ad1 c6
better. ] 19.e4 d7 20.xc6 xc6 21.xd4
8...xc3 9.xc3 e6 10.d2 with the initiative. ]
[ The alternative 10.dxc5 18.d4! The only way to keep the Bishop
A) 10...d4? fails to 11.b5+! e7 active.
( 11...d7 12.xb7+-; 11...d8 12.d3 [ 18.e5 e7 19.ac1 c6 was too good
xc5 13.e3+-; 11...d7 12.xd7+ for Black. ]
xd7 13.xb7 c8 14.b4 d8 15.e2 18...d8!?
c6 16.a6 xg2 17.g1 h4+ [ If 18...c6 then the Bishop would be firmly
18.d2+- ) 12.d3 d7 ( 12...dxc3?? p l a c e d o n f 6 : 19.f6 with permanent
13.d6# ) 13.xd7 dxc3 14.b4! xb4 mating threats. ]
15.b5+- and White is winning as xc5 19.ac1! c6 20.xc6!! Excellent! itch
does not save him due to 16.a3!! xa3 would have been happy: White has sacrificed
17.d1 f5 18.d8+ f7 19.e8+ g8 2 pawns and the exchange for a blockade!
20.xe6# checkmate; bxc6 21.h4! In spite of Black's big material
B) 10...xc5 11.d2 was worthy of advantage the position is unclear as he is
consideration and it may promise a slight forced to continue a rather unpleasant
edge for White. ] defence. e7 22.c1! d7 23.h5
10...cxd4 Ambitious play. [ Of course White didn't sacrifice the
[ 10...c4!? looked quite good. After exchange to get it back by 23.c5? ]
A) 11.e2? w a s b a d d u e t o c6 23...e8 24.f5! Very energetic play! exf5
12.d1 ( 12.e3? a3!!-+; 12.f2? 25.xf5 b4? This inaccurate move leads to
b6 ) 12...b4! 13.xb4 ( 13.c3? the real trouble.
xd4! 14.g4 c2+ 15.f1 f8!? [ 25...f6!? was critical for the assessment of
16.c1 d4!-+ ) 13...xb4! 14.d2 White's idea. ]
c6+ 15.e3 xd4! 16.xd4 d2+ 26.e5 f6 27.e6+ g7
17.d3 ( 17.c5 b6+ 18.c6 a6 [ Of course not 27...h8?? 28.xf6+! xf6
19.c3 c8+ 20.d6 b7 21.xd2 29.xf6# ]
c6# ) 17...cxd3; 28.c7+
B) 11.d1 a4 12.c3 Black could [ 28.f4? allows Black to consolidate his
choose between a repetition of moves by army: e7 29.h6+ h8 30.e1 d7
( 12.b3? cxb3 13.cxb3 xd4 ) 31.c7 ae8-+ ]
12...a5 ( or 12...c6!? 13.e2 b5 28...f7?? A blunder which could have led to
with complicated play )] catastrophe.
11.b5 b6 12.g3! g6 The only move to [ Black's task was not so easy: 28...h6??
prevent 13. Nd6 Bd6 14. Qg7 29.e3+! g5 30.c5+- ]
[ 12...a6?! was suspicious: 13.d6+ xd6 [ 28...h8?? 29.c5 xb2 30.f1 g8
14.xg7! f8 ( 14...xe5 15.fxe5 f8 31.xg8 xg8 32.e7 f7 33.xf6 c1+
16.0-0-0 d7 17.h6+- ) 15.exd6 xb2 34.f1+- ]
16.0-0 with the initiative. ] [ 28...f7 was the only defence. White
13.0-0 a6 14.d6+ xd6 15.exd6 xd6 could have maintained the initiative by
16.c3! A) 29.xf6+ led to a repetition of moves
[ The attempt to exploit the weaknesses of after xf6 30.xf7 d4+ ( 30...xf7
d a r k s q u a r e s b y 16.h4 0-0 17.f6 31.xc6+ g7 32.xa8 d4+ ) 31.h1
966
h4+ 32.g1 d4+=; f5! A nice blockading move after which Black
B) 29.f4 e7 30.xf7 xf7 31.hxg6 has no further difficulties.
hxg6 32.f1 g8 33.xf6 d7 34.g5! [ After 13...c6 White would gain space on
f8 35.f4! and Black is still suffering. ] the kingside with 14.h3 h6 15.g4 etc. ]
29.h6+?? A terrible mistake. Until this moment 14.h3 h6 15.0-0-0 c6 16.e2 f7
White had played brilliantly and could have 17.e3 c7 18.ed4 e8 19.xe6+ xe6
been rewarded with the full point but now he 20.d4 g8 21.he1 dxe5 22.xe5 xe5
gains nothing. 23.xe5 xe5 24.xe5+ c8 25.c4 c5
[ White could have exploited the fact Black 26.c2 d8 27.d3
intersected the bishop rather than the rook ½-½
by a retreat of the queen: 29.f4!! and now
e7 i s n o d e f e n c e d u e t o ( 29...xe6
30.xf6+ xf6 31.xb4+- ) 30.xf6+! xf6 935 B07
31.h6+ g8 32.xf6+- ] Ponomariov,Ruslan 2723
29...g8 30.xf6 ae8-+ Now all Black's Felgaer,Ruben 2607
pieces are in play and his material advantage Young Masters (8) 10.02.2006
begins to tell. 31.h3 d2 32.xc6 e3+ [Andrew Martin]
33.h1 xh6 34.f1 e6! 35.f3 xh3
36.gxh3 d2 37.f1 d3 38.g2 e2+ This is a very interesting game played
39.f2 xf2+ 40.xf2 f5+ White resigned. between two young talents. It starts off as a
A very interesting and exciting game. Pirc Defence, but turns into a Benko-Style
0-1 game where Felgaer sacrifices a pawn for play
on the queenside. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.f3
F a vo u r e d b y m a n y v e r y s t r o n g p l a y e r s ,
934 B07 amongst them Kasparov and Dreev. It is often
Ponomariov,Ruslan 2616 used as a way to return to a Saemisch
Beliavsky,Alexander G 2618 Variation of a King's Indian, preparing to meet
ch-(team) Bled SLO (1) 08.11.1999 g6 with c4. c5 4.d5
[Nigel Davies] [ 4.c3 is also popular. c6 5.e3 e5
6.dxe5 xe5 7.f4 g6 8.b5+ d7
Whilst 6...c6 has been the standard choice for 9.xd7+ xd7 10.g5 e7 11.e2 d5
Black, he could have a good alternative in 6... 12.xf6 xf6 13.xd5 xd5 14.exd5 d8
Nc5. This was Belyavksy's outing with this 15.d2 xd5 16.0-0-0 g5 17.g3 xd2+
defence, and he holds a draw against the 18.xd2 xd2 19.xd2 d7 20.f4 e7
brilliant Ponomariov. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 21.e3 f5+ 22.f3 e8 23.d1+
3.c3 bd7 4.f4 e5 5.f3 exd4 6.xd4 1/2-1/2 Deviatkin - Solovjov, St Petersburg
c5!? 2005 ]
[ B y n o m e a n s a s p o p u l a r a s 6...c6 [ 4.dxc5 a5+ ]
, but Belyavksy's patronage is an interesting 4...e6 5.c4 b5!? 6.cxb5 exd5 7.exd5 e7
sign. ] 8.c4 bd7 9.e2 b6N A novelty, but a
7.e3 move which I would dub 'the most obvious in
[ The critical line may be 7.e5 after which the position' As long as White cannot play a4-
e6 8.c4 dxe5 9.fxe5 d7 10.e3 a5 quickly Black's Knight is on the right square,
was Cosma - Ianov, Bijeljina 2001 and now pressurising d5.
b6 ( in the game White had pressure after [ 9...e5 10.b3 a6 11.bc3 fd7 12.f4
10...c5 11.xc5 dxc5 12.d1 d7 h4+ 13.g3 f3+ 14.f2 d4 15.xd4
13.b4 e7 14.xe7+ xe7 15.d5+ cxd4 16.e1+ f8 17.e4 e7 18.xd4
etc ) 11.xb6 axb6 12.d1 d7 f5 19.b2 f6 20.xf6 xf6 21.d2
looks OK for Black. ] xb2 22.xb2 axb5 23.d3 b6+ 24.f1
7...g6 8.e5 e6 9.a4+ d7 10.b5 g4 d7 25.e7 xe7 26.xg7+ 1-0 Htun
11.xd7+ xd7 12.xd7+ xd7 13.d2 Htun Than-Moun Moun Latt/Yangon 1999 ]
967
10.b3 fd7 11.a4 f6 12.a2 e5 13.a3 936 B07

a6 14.0-0 exc4 15.bxc4 Rausis,Igors 2525
[ 15.xc4 axb5 16.xb6 xb6 ] Davies,Nigel R 2464
15...axb5 16.xb5 xc4 17.c2 e5 5th United Insurance (5) 23.02.2001
18.f4 [Nigel Davies]
[ 18.g3 0-0 19.e4 ]
18...g6= 19.g3 0-0 With a sigh of relief 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.d3 e5 4.c3 d5
no doubt. Black is fine now. 20.e4 f5 5.dxe5 xe4 6.d2
21.c4 xe4 22.xe4 e8 23.c4 d7 [ 6.xe4 dxe4 7.a4+ d7 8.xe4 c6
24.h1 e7 25.e2 c8 26.xe8+ xe8 9.g4 h5 10.g3 h4 11.h3 d7
27.b3 e7?! 12.xd7+ xd7 gives Black more than
[ 27...e2 28.g1 e7 29.xd6 d4 enough for his pawn. ]
would keep Black his edge. ] 6...c5 7.b1
28.d2 b6 29.e1 d7 30.a5 c4 31.b4 [ Rausis intended this as an improvement on
xd5 32.xc4 e7 33.d4 d5 34.b5 his game against Khalifman from Eupen
d6 35.b4 White is starting to get an edge, 1994. After 7.c2 c6 8.gf3 g4 9.0-0
xf4 36.xe7 xd4? e7 10.e1 d4 11.h3 h5 12.e4 d3
[ he should simply play 36...xe7 37.xd5 his bishop on c2 was 'en prise', the same
c8= and Black is fine. ] line with the bishop on b1 would clearly
37.xd5 c8 38.d7 b8? favour White. ]
[ 38...c1 is the best Black's got. 39.b4 7...c6 8.gf3 g4 9.0-0 d7 10.e1
e5 40.a6+- ] 0-0-0!? With the bishop on b1 I felt justified in
39.h4? Ponomariov doesn't take castling queenside, though this is not a plan
advantage of Felgaer's mistake and gives him for the faint of heart.
time to move his rook to f8 to protect against [ Black has safer alternatives in 10...e7
the back-rank mates. and ]
[ 39.g5! attacks Felgaer's queen and also [ 10...d8 ]
threatens the mate and both can not be 11.b4 d4! The point. 12.cxd4
protected. e5 40.d2+- is a clear win for [ During the post mortem an assortment of
White. ] ex-Soviets claimed that 12.b2 would be
39...f8 40.g3 d2 good for White. The following day Rausis
[ 40...f6 ] came back to say that he wasn't so sure.
41.a6 Ponomariov's a-pawn is very powerful. Black would reply with d3 13.xd3 dxc3
b4?! Not a great move but Felgaer is in 14.xc3 xd3 15.e3 but then d5
trouble whatever he plays. looks reasonable. ]
[ 41...g6 42.a7 b4 43.f1 ] 12...e6 13.a4 xb4 14.e4 xf3
42.a7 15.gxf3
[ 42.e8! b6 43.a7 xa7 44.xf8+ [ The line 15.xf3!? xe1 16.e3!?
xf8 45.xa7+- ] is a lot of fun until Black finds c3 17.b1
42...h5 xd4 18.xd4 exd4 etc. ]
[ 42...g6 ] 15...f4 16.b3 d5
43.d1 c5 44.d6?! [ I was also tempted by 16...g5 but then
[ 44.b8 xb8 45.axb8+ xb8 17.xc6 h3 18.xf4 gxf4 19.xb7+ b8
46.f5+- ] 20.h1 xe1 21.b5 just happens to
44...a8?? cover the threat of mate on f1. Back to the
[ 44...xd6! 45.xd6 b7 and there are drawing board. ]
still chances for Felgaer. ] 17.d2
45.c6 [ After the game Rausis preferred 17.c5
[ 45.c6 d8 46.a8+- ] but then Black has at least xc5 18.dxc5
1-0 c3 with light squares and an open d-file. ]
17...xd2 18.xd2 f5 19.exf6 gxf6 20.h1
968
f5 21.d3 b6 22.a3 b8 square anywhere on the board! Her other
With my opponent in desperate time-trouble I pieces are boxing her in, and she's too near
was trying to be ultra-sensible and make him the front line for comfort. There are also ideas
think. I didn't want to allow forcing sequences of a Ng4 and Nf2 fork. After Black has
which would buy him valuable clock time. ca p t u re d 1 0 . e xd 5 , I 'm le f t wit h a s im ila r
23.b3 d5 24.e3 hg8 25.c5 xc5 feeling about the pawn on f4 as in the King's
26.dxc5 f4 27.xh7 The final mistake. Gambit Falkbeer Variation: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.
[ 27.e4 xd3 28.cxb6 axb6 29.xf4 e5 exd5 e4- why on Earth is the white pawn on
is good for Black but White could certainly f4? In contrast, after the alternative line with 7.
play on. ] Be3 and 8.e5 the pawn on f4 is strategically
27...fxe3 28.xg8 e2 justified.
0-1 [ I n s t e a d a f t e r 10...cxd5 11.xd5
Black is struggling to show any
compensation for the pawn. ]
937 B07 11.g3
Roberson,P 2374 [ A t r i c k y a l t e r n a t i v e i s 11.g5!?
Laznicka,V 2686 Instead Black looks worse after
4NCL 2013-14 (9.132) 03.05.2014 A) 11...d6 attacking f4 and clearing the
[Neil McDonald] wa y f o r Nc5 . 12.e3 ( Black has typical
compensation for the pawn after due to
1.e4 d6 2.d4 f6 3.c3 bd7 his activity after 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.f3
[ Black often plays the move order 3...e5 b8 ) 12...xf4 13.d6 xe3+ 14.xe3
to avoid White's next move, so it is clearly a5 15.c4 b6 16.xf7+ xf7
a critical test of his set up. ] 17.xf7 xf7 18.he1 d7 19.g3 e8
4.f4 e5 5.f3 exd4 6.xd4 c6 7.d2 20.xe8 xe8 21.e1 g8 Black has
There are various other moves here for White survived the first wave of White's attack
w h i c h a r e a n a l y s e d i n t h e a r c h i v e s . d5 and seems OK here. If 22.e7?! f5
If Black plays slowly the threat of e4-e5 hangs is a dead end for White.;
over his head. Therefore he offers a pawn to B) 11...d8 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.c4 ]
activate his bishop on c5. 11...d8 12.g2 b6 13.he1 f8
[ In Neiksans-Vachier Lagrave in the archives An ambitious move. As we shall see Black
Gawain Jones mentions 7...b6 as being a intends to bring his rook via d5 into an attack
solid response, but he thinks that W hite on the white king and so wants his bishop out
might have something to build on in the of the way. Solid play looks more or less
endgame that is likely to arise after 8.0-0-0 equal for example
etc. Very slight inferiority with few winning [ 13...bxd5 14.xd5 xd5 15.e2 e6
chances isn't a problem for some players, 16.e5 dd8 17.b1 ]
but here Laznicka is playing to win. ] 14.e3 bxd5 15.xd5 xd5 16.d4 f5
8.0-0-0 17.c4 b5 18.e5?!
[ The immediate capture on d5 should lead [ You would have to be a cool customer as
to t h e s a m e p o sit io n in t h e ga m e a f t e r W hite to play the variation 18.xf6 c5
8.exd5 c5 9.d3 0-0 10.0-0-0 ] 19.e2 xc2+ ( Good for White is 19...gxf6
8...c5 9.d3 0-0 10.exd5 c7!? 20.d4 ) 20.xc2 xc2 21.e5 a5
An interesting idea. Black plans to regain the 22.xc2 xa2 23.c3 though it looks at
pawn with Rd8 and Nb6, unless White plays least OK for him. ]
d5xc6, when after b7xc6 the black pieces will 18...a5 19.d4?
have a lot of open lines. The white queen is [ It's too late f or 19.xf6 as Black has a
awkwardly placed on d3, shutting in the bishop winning attack after c5 20.e2 ( Or
on f1 and a target of attack by Rd8 or, in 20.b3 xc2 ) 20...xa2 21.d4 a1+
some cases with Ba6, after say a7-a5. In fact 22.d2 xb2 etc. ]
s h e d o e s n ' t s e e m t o h a ve a t o t a lly s a f e [ It was best for White to bail out with 19.c3
969
c5 20.xa5 xc4 21.d4 with equal 12.f4 d7 13.a4 a6 14.d4 xd4
chances. ] 15.xd4 c6 16.a5 d7 17.xg7 xg7
19...b4 20.c3 g4 21.d3 18.d4+ g8 19.f2 b6 20.axb6 xb6
[ Or 21.xf6 xa2 ( Also good for Black is 21.xb6 xb6 22.b3 c8 and Black's
t h e s i m p l e 21...gxf6 when both a2 and d1chances were better in Djurhuus-Volzhin,
a r e h a n g i n g .) 22.d3 ( White gets
Bergen 2000. ]
obliterated after 22.e5 xd1 23.xd1 7...c5 8.h3
xb2! 24.xb2 a3; while also insufficient [ White has also tried 8.d5 which leads to a
is 22.xg7 c4 ) 22...gxf6 and Black has a Benoni-like position, but here it doesn't look
huge attack. ] good for White as his Knight is misplaced on
21...xa2 22.h3 d7 e2. White's main plan is to break through in
[ B l a c k m i s s e d t h e n i c e m o v e 22...b6!
the centre of the board by playing e4-e5 and
when there is no good answer to 23...Bb4 the Knight is much better placed on f3 for
next move. For example 23.hxg4 b4
this purpose. Just one example: e8 9.a4
24.b3 a1# ] a6 10.e3 b8 11.d2 e5 12.b3 b5
23.b3 d5? 13.ae1 d7 14.axb5 axb5 15.h1 b4
[ Instead 23...f5 keeps up Black's strong 16.d1 g4 17.f4 e5 18.dxe6 fxe6
attack. ] 19.f3 e5 20.h6 b5 21.xg7 xg7
24.xd5 cxd5 25.xd5 e6 26.a5 a4 22.e3 c6 23.f2 a8 24.c4 bxc3
27.xa4? 25.xc3 a6 26.f4 b4 27.d1 d3
This game shows that if there are
any complications you should never give up 28.f1 xf1 29.fxf1 a6 intending Qa8
hope, no matter how bad the position and and I definitely prefer Black here,
strong the opponent. Timoshenko-Minasjan, USSR 1991. ]
[ White could have saved himself with the
8...b8! Black should postpone the pawn
resource 27.xg7! xa5 ( Black finds he is exchange and play ...Rb8 and ...b6 first. Only
t h e o n e b e i n g m a t e d a f t e r 27...xg7
then will Black take on d4 and complete his
28.g5! ) 28.xf8 xf8 29.xa5 xb3 development by playing Bc8-b7.
30.g5+ h8 31.f6+ g8 with perpetual [ 8...cxd4 9.xd4 is much weaker as normal
check. ] development of Black's Queenside is difficult
27...xa4 28.e2 c8 The game is over as if now: c5 ( or 9...a6 10.e1 b6 11.a4
the white queen moves to safety then b3 e5 12.de2 e6 13.b3 c7 14.e3
drops. 29.c7 d7 30.f5 xb3 ac8 15.d2 fd8 16.a5 bd7 17.ec1
0-1 b8 18.d5 xd5 19.exd5 e8 20.g4
c7 21.a4 c5 22.c4 e7 23.b4
cd7 24.xc8 xc8 25.c4 e4 26.c5!
938 B07 wit h a h uge ed ge in Do rf ma n -Ap ic ella ,
Rodriguez Talavera,Juan Carlos 2425 Cann es 1 989 .) 10.e1 a6 11.a4 e5
Gulko,Boris F 2615 12.b3 xb3 13.cxb3 e6 14.e3 d7
San Roque 1996 15.h2 ad8 16.e2 e8 17.d5 f5
[Alexander Volzhin] 18.g5 f6 19.c1 f7 20.xf6 xf6
21.c7 d7 22.exf5 gxf5 23.xf6+ xf6
After considering the lines where Black plays 24.xd7 xd7 25.d2 and Black was in
King's Indian type moves such as e5, we can trouble in Khenkin-Timman, Tilburg 1994. ]
conclude that W hite has a small but steady 9.a4
advantage there. In my opinion the line we [ 9.dxc5 xc5 10.e3 b6 is fine for Black.
consider here is much more promising for The game Luecke-Khalif man, Germany
Black. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 g7 3.c3 d6 1998 continued: 11.g4 b7 12.g3 fd7
4.ge2 f6 5.g3 0-0 6.g2 bd7 7.0-0 13.d2 e5 14.b3 c8 15.b5 a6
[ 7.h3 c5 8.e3 cxd4 9.xd4 e5!? 16.d4 c6 17.c3 c7 18.h6 xh6
10.0-0 c6 11.e3 This position may 19.xh6 e5 20.de2 e6 21.fd1 b5
occur in the Sicilian Dragon as well. b8 and Black got the upper hand. ]
970
9...a6 So which move (9...a6 or 9...b6) to 27...e5+ 28.h1 fxg5! White has no
prefer is entirely up to you - both are perfectly threats, so he resigned.
playable. 0-1
[ 9...b6!? is a good alternative to the text:
10.g5 a6 11.d2 e8 12.fe1 cxd4
13.xd4 b7 14.d5 e6 15.xf6+ xf6 939 B07
with very pleasant play for Black. The game Romero,A
Aseev-Khalifman, Vilnius 1997 continued: Insua Mellado,Jose Luis
16.a3 d7 17.h6 h8 18.b4 e5 (open) Alicante (Spain) (5) 1997
19.b3 a5 20.c4 xe4! 21.xe4 d5 [Nigel Davies]
22.xd5 xd5 23.h2 bc8 24.e2 g7
25.xg7 xg7 Black dominates the centre This time round Black temporarily keeps his
of the board while White's pieces occupy options open by castling short. 1.e4 d6
miserable positions. 26.aa1 b4 27.c3 2.c3 f6 3.f4 g6 4.f3 g7 5.c4 0-0
d3 28.ed1 cd8 29.c1 e4 30.e3 6.b3
f5 31.d2 e5 32.xd8 xd8 33.b3 [ This time 6.0-0 is bad because of xe4
f3+ 34.g2 d3 and White resigned. ] 7.xf7+ ( White has to play 7.xe4 d5
10.dxc5 8.d3 dxe4 9.xe4 ) 7...xf7 8.xe4 xf4
[ 10.a5!? is worthy of consideration. ] etc. ]
10...xc5 11.e3 b6 12.g4 More or less 6...c6
forced if White wants to avoid playing the ugly [ 6...c6 7.d4 d5?! 8.e5 e8 9.0-0 g4
f3. 10.h3 xf3 11.xf3 f5? 12.xd5!
[ 12.d4 b7 13.f3 allows e5! 14.b3 was winning for White in Kosten - Schlosser,
xb3 15.cxb3 d5 with advantage to European Team Ch., Haifa 1989 ]
Black. ] [ 6...c5 would transpose into a Sicilian
12...b7 13.g3 c8 14.d2?! Defence. ]
This passive move allows Black to seize the 7.d3 g4 8.e3 d7 9.d2 xf3 10.gxf3
initiative. d4 11.0-0-0 xb3+ 12.cxb3 Breaking t he
[ 14.g5 should be preferred: fd7 15.f4 b5 rules by capturing away from the centre. But
16.axb5 axb5 17.d4 with very this way makes it more difficult for Black to
complicated play. ] ob t a in co u nt e rp la y o n t h e qu e e ns id e . e6
14...b5! 15.axb5 axb5 16.h6 13.h4 Sounding the charge. f5 14.h5 e8
[ Now 16.g5?! doesn't work: b4 17.gxf6 15.e2 f8 16.hxg6 hxg6 17.d4 xd4
bxc3 and Black is better ] [ Avoiding the exchange of dark-square
[ and 16.xb5 cxe4 is also good for b i s h o p s w i t h 17...e5 is strongly met by
Black. ] 18.c3 intending 19.exf5. But now Black's
16...xh6 17.xh6 b4 18.d5 xd5 king becomes that little bit weaker. ]
19.exd5 b3! 20.c3 18.xd4 f6 19.e2 a5 20.b1 a4 21.b4
[ 20.cxb3 xb3 is also bad for White as his a3 22.b3 e7 23.d4 g7 24.c3 b6 25.d5
b2-pawn is very weak. ] e5 26.fxe5 xe5
20...a8 21.xa8 xa8 22.g5?! After White [ 26...dxe5 looks slightly more tenacious.
cuts off his Queen Black wins easily, as the Black probably overlooked the following
tactics don't work for White. e8! As we'll see sequence. ]
later it's important to protect the g7-square. 27.f4 f6 28.e5 dxe5 29.d6 c6
23.f4 a2 24.f5 xb2 25.f6 [ Or 29...xd6 30.g2 etc. ]
[ 25.fxg6 hxg6 26.h5 xc3 is hopeless 30.b5 c5 31.d5+
for White ] 1-0
25...xc3! Now the game is over. 26.h2
[ 26.fxe7 e3+ winning ]
26...exf6 27.h5
[ 27.gxf6 xf6 winning ]
971
940 B07 38.hh2 xa5 39.hb2 a6 40.a1 xa2

Romero Holmes,Alfonso 41.xa2 c6 42.h6 f8 43.c1 e7
Wortel,Marten 44.a3 xa3 45.xa3 a8 46.f3 xa3
7th Sonnevanck (5) 05.12.1998 47.xa3 b7 48.d6 e8 49.d8 c7
[Nigel Davies] 50.a8 b6 51.h4 With the remarkable
threat to sac on g6. It isn't easy for Black to
As 5...Nxe4 fails to equalise, Black has tried deal with this. c7 52.xg6 hxg6 53.h7
quieter moves. Here we see the stock in trade g7 54.xe8 xh7 55.xe6 b7 56.h4
Pirc move 5...c6. 1.e4 d6 2.c3 g6 3.f4 b2 57.f7+ h8 58.f8+ h7 59.h6+
g7 4.f3 f6 5.c4 c6 6.b3 g8 60.xg6+ h8 61.h6+ g8 62.h5
[ After 6.0-0 d5 , White would not be able to a2 63.g6+ h8 64.e8+ g7 65.e7+
maintain his duo of pawns on e4 and f4. ] g8 66.g6
6...a6 And now Black sets about eliminating 1-0
the bishop.
[ He has also played 6...0-0 7.d4 a6
( 7...a5 8.a4 b6 9.e5 e8 10.0-0 c7 941 B07
11.exd6 exd6 12.h1 g4 13.h3 xf3 Rusev,Krasimir 2479
14.xf3 d5 15.f5 gave White a strong Paunovic,Dragan 2535
initiative in Romero - Todorcevic, Leon IV Festival Figueira da Foz POR (5) 01.11.07
1991 ) 8.0-0 c5 9.e5 g4 10.h3 cxd4 [John Watson]
11.xd4 h6 12.f2 c5 13.e3 e6
14.g4 h8 15.ad1 b6 16.d5 a6 This game features an important ending that
17.fe1 c8 18.h4 looked very is White's main (only?) way of sidestepping
dangerous for Black in Surtees - Kosten, the newly-popula r Philid or Def en ce if h e
British Ch., Plymouth 1989, but Black went enters into the Pirc Defence (with 3 Nc3). So
on t o win b y virt u e o f b e in g a st ro n ge r far Black is doing fine: this month's batch
player. ] finished 4 points to 2 for him, with a 200-point
[ W i t h t h e b i s h o p o n b 3 a l r e a d y , 6...d5 performance rating edge for Black! Still, the
no longer causes the breakup of White's e4/ f o l l o wi n g h i g h - l e ve l g a m e wa s n o t v e r y
f4 pawn duo. On the other hand it does bring convincing, and I think Black overextended
a b o u t a r e a s o n a b l e G u r g e n i d z e t y p e with ...a6/...b5. 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 e5
po s it io n, t h e ga m e De ge n h a rd t - S e u l, 4.dxe5 dxe5 5.xd8+ xd8 6.c4
Dortmund 1992 being OK for Black after Usually played White has also waited before
7.e5 g8 8.d4 h5 9.e3 h6 10.0-0 committing, as in:
g4 11.d2 d7 12.e1 e6 13.d3 f5 [ 6.g5 e6 7.0-0-0+ bd7 8.f4 exf4
etc. ] 9.f3 c8 10.xf4 c6 with a comfortable
7.d4 c7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a4 b6 10.e1 d5 game, Gara-Srebrnic, Crete 2007. ]
11.e5 fe8 12.e3 White has a nice space 6...e8 There are two options here, one of
advantage and it's difficult for Black to get which is fairly new:
counterplay. Of course it isn't easy to break [ 6...e6 7.xe6 fxe6 has held up well in a
do wn B la c k ' s d e f e n ce s a n d a p ro lo n ge d couple of recent games. ]
manoeuvring game ensues. f5 13.e2 a6 [ 6...b4!? (to get the king to e7 quickly an
14.c3 e6 15.h3 e7 16.c2 c5 17.d2 interesting idea, although it probably doesn't
xe2 18.xe2 c4 19.g4 h6 20.g2 f7 fully equalise) 7.f3 ( 7.f3!? xe4 8.xe5
21.g5 g7 22.h4 d7 23.h5 f7 24.h2 f8 is unclear; 7.d2!? ) 7...e7 8.ge2 c6
h8 25.f2 a6 26.ah1 ec7 27.g3 9.a3 d6 10.e3 b5 11.b3 e6
ag8 28.d1 e8 29.b3 With Black's 12.xe6 xe6 13.c1!? ( 13.0-0-0 )
pieces huddled on the kingside, White opens 13...bd7 14.d3 b6 15.b3 fd7
up a second front. b5 30.axb5 xb5 31.b4 16.e2 a5 17.a4 b4 18.b1 c5 19.d2?!
b8 32.c1

Chess Publishing ECO B00-B99 - 2ed Vol.2 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chess Publishing ECO B00-B99 - 2ed Vol.2 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chess Publishing ECO : B00-B99

Echai the master Uploader

All friends who made the All in one Cbv

17.xe4 xe4 18.b5 xd1+ 31.xd1 c8 32.a1 d5 33.a7

noteworthy games in this line: W h it e's at ta ck h as ru n ou t of ste am a n d

afraid of choosing his own path through the 15 B00

[ 23...xc4 24.b4+- ] board. 17.f1 e5 The aforementioned break

reasonable results - here are a sampling of 24.e5+ c7 25.xa7+

A look at some of the alternatives, in dxc3 ) 7...xd2+ 8.xd2 ge7 9.xd4

A) 18...xc5 19.xc5 ( 19.g3!? 47.xf6 xa7 0-1 Meissner,H-Miles,A/

25.xg7 xf3 26.g3! and the win is getting 27 B00

order, I deem it to be an Owen's Defense. 32 B00

f o r t h is lin e . I t h a s o ccu re d ma n y t im e s, f5 The game K. Georgiev - Miles, Biel 1992

for example: 30.xe2 xe2 31.b1 b2 d6 32.e1 1-0 Golubev,M-Markowski,T/

41 B00 exciting game!;

28.xb6 g4 29.f1 f8 30.f4 h8 31.f7 missing White's 22nd. ]

crea te b a la nce by co un te r p un ch in g a t already had an unpleasant position. 19.e4

1.e4 b6 2.d4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5

48 B00 It is quite a popular system for black there.

continued xf3+ 6.xf3 f6!? ( 6...e7 gradually exposed. ]

31.c1 c6 32.d2 d4 33.b1 c6 7.e2

29.xa6 h2+ 40.f2 c5 41.e3 a4 42.f3 c4

winning ] b8 18.xd7 xd7 19.b5 ee7 20.c4

9.c4 e6 10.b5 e7 11.e2 a6 [ Necessary is 25...h6! but after 26.f5+

frequently recently but Black has to play 63 B00

62 B001.d4 b6 2.e4 b7 3.d3 e6 4.f3 c5

[ 7.e5 c4! ] g7 32.hxg5 hxg5 33.d3 a5 34.g3 f6

[ He was hoping for 25...axb5 26.xd4+ [ 29...g6 30.b3 d2+ 31.c2= ]

1.e4 c6 2.c3 f6 3.d4 d5 4.e5 g8 72 B00

[ Th e t em p t in g 18.xg6?! fails to c8! 73 B00

[ 5.dxe5 g4 6.f3 ( 6.d3 dxe5

10.d3 f5 11.exf6 xf6 12.0-0 c6 16...cxd4 17.cxd5 e5 18.e4 b8

q u e e n s i d e . 46.e8+ b7 47.e4 b6 28.bxc5 g6 29.c6 bxc6 30.dxc6 c7

83 B00 c3 42.a5 f1 43.f4 e4 44.b4 f6

26.xe7 xe7 27.e1+ e6 28.b4+ 85 B00

1999. ] c4 37.g1 e3+ 38.d3 xd5 39.g6+

88 B00 25.g2 f5 26.f4 f7 27.xf5+ d6

[ 10...d7!? ] move that locks the centre. Both 11...c6 and

11.exf6+ d7 12.fxg7 xg7 13.e4 40.a5+ g4 41.g1 a2

squared bishop is out of touch on h5. g7 from perpetual check.

[ 17.a5 is the critical move. knight. ]

4...d7 29.b4 h5 30.gxh5 g7 31.c5 e4

25.c1 xg2 26.h6 a7 27.d7 94 B00

Brazilian ch. 1996 ] 16.e3 ab8 17.c3 h5 18.e1 xb2

[ 28.b4!? ] probably would give more attention to

105 B00 106 B00

110 B00 A) 8...c6!? is the most critical, making it

112 B00 continuation stretches black hard to shake

development for the pawn ] e6 21.eg5? xc4! 22.e4 ac8

115 B00 h6 15.e1 c5 16.e3 f5 and again

1.e4 c6 2.f3 d6 3.d4 f6 4.c3 g4

bxc6 11.0-0 h6 12.g7 g8 13.g6+ d8 24.h5 h6

As we have seen in previous games Black's to avoid a quick loss.

129 B00 33.xb6 axb6 34.e3 d2+ 35.g3 g8

1.e4 c6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 xe5 4.f3 f6 130 B00

132 B00 133 B00

17.xc4 e5 18.e2 a5 134 B00

19.xb7+- winning ] correct continuation among many options:

13.d4 c5 14.f3 d8 15.g5 g6 139 B01

control. 141 B01

9.h3 142 B01

catastrophic ] rooks. h2 40.c6 f2 41.xe6 a7

immediate win. d4 It is tough to know who to prefer at