Baltic_Defense_to_the_Queen_Gambit.pdf

::liOLIOT

£CA C I V I C A SAR£z zo Invent. N. � 6 00 Anno

Chess Digest, Inc

Copyright © 1 993 Andrew Soltis All rights reserved under Pan American and International Copy right conventions. ISBN: 0-87568-228-6 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tapes, mechanical photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior and current permission from the pub lisher. AUTHOR: Andrew Soltis EDITOR: Ken Smith COMPUTER TYPESETTING: Kenneth Artz COVER: Elaine Smith PROOFREADER: Sid Pickard FINAL PREPARATION & DIAGRAMS: Kenneth Artz PUBLISHER: Chess Digest, Inc. ®, Inc., 1601 Tantor, Dallas, Texas 75229 Send the publisher $2.00 for the New Chess Guide that catalogs every chess book for general sale in the United States. You are given publishers, page counts, notation, and critical reviews. Also included is a free Chess Improvement Course for Beginners up through Master level players.

��':,.:c.., ) �.��}:) .'r,

.....

"'

_,

.� Y..

�_, ��

-�/_,_

't-.·.'·'"\

�·&-�""

THE BALTI C DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT

3

INTRODUCTION

Anyone who has faced the Queen's Gambit ( l .d4 d5 2.c4) has regretted playing the move regarded as the best way of declining it. The rea"ion is that after 2 ... e6, Black's bishop is hemmed in by his own pawn and therefore completing development may take another 1 2 to 1 5 moves. In the past, many of the great ma"iters have tried to solve the problem posed by 2 ... e6: How to get that bishop on the board? Jose Capablanca popularized a freeing maneuver involving a later ... dxc4 and ... Nd5 so that his queen, when it reaches e7, can promote the ... e6-e5 advance. Emanuel Lasker found another way of doing this, involving an early ... Ne4. Siegbert Tarrasch discovered that by ... c7-c5 Black will tempt his opponent into playing cxd5 -- thereby isolating Black's d-pawn but also allowing the c8-bishop to spring to life by way of ... exd5 ! And another generation led by Alexander Alekhine and Max Euwe tried to avoid 2 ... e6 altogether by playing the Slav 2 ... c6. There is another school of thought entirely. This school, which has had a number of adjunct professors over the years, believes that Black should solve the bishop problem first, with 2 ... Bf5, before solidifying his center with ... e7-e6. A surprising number of this school's members have hailed from the Baltic nations of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Among them are Vladas Mikenas and Paul Keres, who played in the 1930's and '40s, followed by Vladimir Bagirov and the modern generation that has included Alexi Shirov and Igors Rausis. While there have been a number of others who have contributed to the theory of 2 ...Bf5 (Roberto Grau of Argentina, Nikolai Nimev of Bulgaria, Bent Larsen of Denmark, Vladimir Malaniuk of Russia)

4

INTRODUCTION

we feel justified in giving this overlooked variation a name -- the Baltic Defense. And we believe it has been unjustifiable overlooked. (Try and find it in the $20 books that survey all the openings in one volume.)

Gall iamova-lvanchuk vs. Levitina, Manila 1 992 l .d4 2.c4

d5 BfS

Played by Wilhelm Steinitz in the first official World Champion ship match -- back in 1886 ( ! ) . 3.Nt3 4.Qb3

e6

Since Black has solved the c8-bishop problem at move two, White does not have the usual confidence in a Queen's Gambit Declined that he will emerge from the opening with an advantage just by playing simple moves. He needs targets to attack and the only obvious one here is on b 7. 4...

Nc6!

THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT

5.cxd5 6.Bg5

5

exd5

The Black b-pawn is often en prise for several moves of this variation. But as soon as White plays Qxb7 Black replies ... Nb4, threatening a minimum of a "perpetual check" to the queen ( ... Rb8/Qxa7/... Ra8). 6... 7.Qxb7? ! 8.Na3 9.Qxa7

Be7 Nb4! Rb8! Ra8

Now 1 0.Qb7 is met by 10 ... Rxa3! and 1 1 ...Nc2 + . Generally, when White gets an advantage in the Baltic Defense it happens in a quiet position. When the position becomes tactical -- White should watch out. Here White, one of the world's strongest women's players, is almost lost with the White pieces -- and not even ten moves have been played. 10.Bxe7 l l.Kd2

Nd3 + !

Or 11.exd3 Qxe7 with check and 12 ...Rxa7.

6

INTRODUCTION

II...

12.Qxa8 13.exd3

Nxe7 Qxa8 Qa5 +

And Black had a substantial advantage (although later errors led to a draw).

MOVE ORDER There are, in fact, many, many little traps for White to fall into in the Baltic Defe nse. But before we get into the more specific analysis, a point should be made about move order: there are three ba�ic ways of getting into the Baltic Defense: (a) l .d4 d5 2.c4 BfS (b) l .d4 d5 2.N f3 BfS (c) I .N f3 d5 2.d4 BfS The first order appears in the games of dedicated Baltic Defenders and takes the greatest positional risks. However, if you don't feel you can trust the analysis in Chapters Four and Five, you can still save the Baltic Defense for those games which begin like (b).

THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT

7

Why would someone begin a game with White like that? There are a variety of rea�ons, including fear of the Albin Counter Gambit (which 2.Nf3 averts) and a desire to play the Colle (2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3), which 2 ... Bf5 discou rages. In any event, you can save the analysis of the first three chapters of this book for those occa�ions when your opponent plays the conservative 2.Nf3. A third possibility arises when an opponent starts the game with LNG and then, when he sees that you are going to play classically with l...d5 , decides against a true Reti Opening (2.c4) or King's Indian Reversed (2.g3) and escapes into a queen- pawn opening with 2.d4. Then 2 ... Bf5 surprises him further. You will find this move order occurring in several fine games played over the years by Paul Keres, Bent Larsen and others. Their opponents are often surprised into passive opening play:

Voorema-Keres, Tallinn 1971 l .Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.Bf4

d5 Bf5 e6 c6

White's fourth and fifth moves are the essence of conservatism - and this troubles Black not at all. A� we'll see, White has to put some pressure on the light squares, such a� b7 or d5, to have any hopes of an advantage in the Baltic Defense.

8

INTRODUCTION

5... 6.e3 7.Ne5?! 8.Be2 9.Bxe5 1 0.0-0 l l.Bxd6 12.c5!? 13.f4

Nffi Nbd7 Be7 Nxe5 0-0 Bd6 Qxd6 Qe7

Suddenly White has made a major decision. He will advance his b-pawn to open a file while preventing ... e6-e5 by Black. This succeeds only if he can keep all the dangerous files closed. 13... 14.Bd3?

Nd7 b6!


9

15.cxb6 Now White realizes that the intended preservation of his pawn chain -- with 15.b4 a5 16.a3 axb4 1 7.axb4, would lose a piece to 1 7 ... Rxa 1 and 1 8 ... Bxd3. The White pawn advance to c5 is a powerful positional stroke, as we'll see i n Chapter One. But if Black can counter with a well-timed ... b7-b6, all bets are off-- as Chapter Two will show. 15 ... 16.a3 17.Ne2 18.Ng3 19.Bxc4

axb6 b5! Nb6 Nc4!

No better is 1 9.Bxf5 exf5 20.Nxf5 Qe4 and Black regains the pawn favorably. With his b2-pawn under permanent attack White now becomes desperate. 19... 20.e4!? 21 .Qc2 22.Qxc4 23.a4 24.a5

bxc4 dxe4 Qb7 Qxb2 Rfd8 h5

One pretty line runs 25.a6 Rxd4! 26.Qxc6 Rd2! and even winning the rook with check will not save White. 25.Ne2 e3! 26.Ra2 Bd3! 27.Qa4 Qb5 28.Qxb5 cxb5 29.Rfa 1 Ra630.g3 Bc4 3l.Rb2 Rda8 32.Ra3 Rxa5 33.Rxe3 Ra1 + 34.Kf2 R8a2 35.Rxa2 Rxa2 36.Kf3 Kf8 37.Nc3 Rxh2 38.1'5 exf5 White Resigns

10

INTRODUCTION

We'll be examining the specific lines of the Baltic Defense in this order:

Chapter One: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly Chapter Two: 2.Nf3, Main Line Chapter Three: White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3. Chapter Four: The Grau Gambit, 2.c4 Bf5 3.Qb3 !? Chapter Five: White dissolves the center with 3.cxd5

Editor's Note: Tum to the Table of Contents on the last two pages. Go over it again and again and again until you have mastered all the variations. Then you are ready to learn the following analysis.


11

CHAPTER ONE: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly

l.d4 2.Nf3

d5

As noted earlier, 2.c4 Bf5 3.Nf3 is another way ofreaching the main

lines below. 2... 3.c4

BfS

If White avoids the Queen's Gambit --with developing moves such as 3.Bg5 or 3.Bf4, Black will be under no immediate pressure until after he has completed development with ... Nd7/ ... Ngf6/ ... e7-e6 and ... Bd6. 3 ...

e6

This solidifies pan of Black's center and avoids the ope n center problems that hat arise in Chapters Four and Five. In one of the 1 983 Women's Candidates matches, Nona Gaprinda�hvili suprised Irina Levitina with 2 ... Bf5 --so much so that White meekly continued 4 e3?!. Then 4 ... e6 leads to a harmless Slav. But if Black imists -- as

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 - BUT QUI ETLY

12

Gaprinda�hvili did -- the position can remain independent with 4 ... Nc6!?. See Illustrative Game 1 . 4.Nc3 There are many non-threatening methods for White to complete his development. A typical alternative is 4.Bf4 c6 5.e3 Nd7 and now 6.Bd3 Bxd3 7.Qxd3 Ngf6 8.Nf3 Be7 with a scant advantage to White at best. Inoffensive is 4.Bg5 and 4 ... Be7 5.Bxe7 Qxe7. Black does not mind leaving himself with a ''bad" bishop in such positioffi as long as the bishop is outside his center pawn wall. After 6.Qb3 c6 7.e3 Nf6 8.Nbd2 0-0 9.Be2 the move 9 ... a';! ? reduces any queenside hopes of White. In Ftacnik-Bronstein, Tallinn 1 98 1 the game liquidated after 10.a3 a4 1 1 .Qc3 Ne4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Nd2 c5 ! 14.f3 exf315.Nxf3 Nc6 into a quick draw. We now have two paths, one positionally natural, (a) 4 ... c6 -- the other, double-edged (b) 4 ... Nc6!?. Right now, the latter seems pref erable.

(a)

4 5.Qb3! ...

c6

Without this move the position declines into a semi-normal Slav Defeffie, which promises very little for White. For example: (a) After 5.Bf4 Black can simply reply 5 ... Bd6 6.Bxd6 Qxd6 with quite a bit more freedom than the comparable Orthodox Defeffie position with a bishop still on c8. After 7.c5 Qe7 8.e3 Nf6 9.Be2 Ne4 and ... Bg4, the position is even.


13

More combative is 5 ... Nf6 and now 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Be2 Be 7 8.0-0 Qb6 9.cxd5 ? ! Nxd5 ! is the way Keres used to equalize. Similarly, 6.Rc l Nfd7 7.Qb3 Qb6 8.c5 Qxb3 9.axb3 White has his usual slight edge but in a recent game lvo Nei with the Black pieces, got the edge with 9 ... h6 10.h3 Be7 l l .e3 0-0 1 2.Be2 Rac8 13.0-0 Bd8 14.b4 a6 15.Nd2 Re8 16.Nb3? e5 ! 17.Bh2 Bc7. (b) 5.e3 Nf6 6.Be2 is similarly too conservative. Black can develop aggressively with 6 ... Bd6 and eventually ... Ne4 as in Illustrative Game 2. Malaniuk once took time out for 6 ... h6 and then 7.Qb3 Qb6 8.c5 Qc7. Black should be equal once he gets ... e6-e5 but somehow White won after 9.Qa4 Nbd7 10.b4 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Qb3 e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15 .Nb5 Qe4 16.Nd4 Qxh1 17.Nxf5 (Zakharov Malaniuk, Bryansk 1975). (c) 5.e3 Nf6 6.Bd3 and now 6 ... Bg6!? 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.Qe2 Bb4 9.Bd2 a5 and in Seirawan-Larsen, Las Palmas 1981 Black was soon equal with 10.Bxg6 hxg6 11.cxd5 exd5 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 0-0 14.Neg5 Re8. (d) 5.Bg5 and now 5 ... Nf6 6.e3 Qb6!? was tried in Anikaev Malaniuk, Riga 1982 which was promising for White after 7.Qc l Nbd7 8.c5 Nbd7 9.Bf4 Qc8 10.h3 h6 1 1 .b4!. But simpler is 6 ... Be7 followed by castling and ... Ne4. (e) 5.g3 is a Catalan with little bite. After 5 ... Nf6 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.0-0 the typical reply is 7 ... h6 to preserve the bishop but perhaps better is just 7 ... dxc4! followed by 8 ... Bb4 to control e4. 5...

Qb6

14

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUIETLY

Rarely seen is 5 ... Qc8, probably because of 6.Bf4 and 7.Rc 1 , intending 8.cxd5 and 9.Nb5. The text is more natural since 6.Qxb6? only lets Black breath easier (see Illustrative Game 3). Neither player wants to i nitate the queen trade here because it will open a file for an enemy rook and allow the enemy to use the forward b-pawn as a battering ram. 6.c5!

Qc7

On 6 ... Qxb3 7.axb3 White's b-pawn is achi ng to run forward. How quickly that pawn can wreak havoc is shown by 7 ... Nd7? 8.b4 a6 9.b5 cxb5 1 0.Nxb5 (Illustrative Game 4 ). Black must try to stop this with somethi ng like 7 ... Na6 but then 8.Bf4 f6 9.e3 Nb4 1 0.Kd2 and the Black knight is offsides at b4 because 10 ... a5 allows l l.Bc7!, and 10 ... e5 is refuted by l l .dxe5 Bxc5 1 2.Na4! (Boleslavsky), but not 1 1 .Bg3 g6 1 2.Na2? Nxa2 13.Rxa2 dxe4 1 4.exd4 Bh6 + 1 5.Kc3 Ne7, Shipman-Soltis, New York 1 99 1 .

7.Bf4 ! White does not need 7.g3 to support 8.Bf4 because now 7.Bf4 Qxf4 8.Qxb7 wi ns the queenside.


15

N evenheless, you may very well fi nd yourself facing 7 .g3 N d7 8.Bf4 Qc8 some day. Then 9.Nh4 Ngf6! is an improved version of our main line below ( 10.Nxf5 exf5 1 1 .Qc2 g6 and even ... h7-h5 to prevent White from playing g3-g4 ). 7

.•.

Qc8

The queen has lost time but Black has reduced pressure on the center. Bear in mind that this position -- with colors reversed -- occurs in the London System ( l .d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.NtJ Qb6 6.Qb3 and now 6 ... c4 7.Qc2 Bf5 8.Qcl has often been played). It is Black, who has ... b7-b6 and ... e6-e5 in reserve, who seems to have the best chance of opening the position favorably. For example, 8.e3 Be7 9.Be2 Nd7 and if l l .Qa4 to hold up l l ...b6 Black can try Tukmakov's suggestion of l l ... b5 and 12 ... a5. An old Bronstein game once went 8.a4?! (why?), Nf6 9.h3 b6! and then 1 O.cxb6 axb6 l l .Qxb6 N a6 gave Black fine play. After 1 2.e4 dxe4 13.Ne5 Nb4 14.Nxc6 Nd7 15 .Qxb4! ? the middlegame clarified in Black's favor.

8.Nh4! This catches the bishop. Normally such an exchange only helps fonify Black's pawn structure -- and sometimes ends up weakening White's. But here, for example, 8 ... Bg4 9.h3 Bh5 10.g4 the move 10 ... Be7 leads after 1 1 .Bg3 ! to a fine game for White. 8...

Ne7

Tukamakov recommended 8 ... Bg6 but 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.e4! helps White along nicely. Then 1 0... Nf6 l l .exd5 Nxd5 1 2.Nxd5 cxd5 13.0-

16

CHAPTER O N E : WHITE PLAYS 2.N13 - BUT QUIETLY

0-0! or 1 2 ... Nxd5 13.Bxb8 Qxb8 ( 13 ... Rxb8 1 4.Qa4 + ) 1 4.Bb5 + Kd8 15.Qf3 Qc7 1 6.b4 as Boleslavsky pointed out back in 1 95 1 . For 8 ... Nf6 8.Nxf5 exf5 see Illustrative Game 6. But what about 8 ... Be4! ?. This is the recommended move (with colors reversed ) in the London System. After 9.Nxe4 dxe4 White's knight is offsides and threatened by 1 0... Be7 ( l l.Bg3? g5 !). This bears testing. 9.Nxf5 The trick behind Black's last move was that 9.e3 can be met by 9 ... Ng6!, denying White the two-bishop advantage ( 10.Nxg6 Bxg6 or 1 0.Nxf5 Nxf4 since on 1 1 .Nxg7 + Bxg7 1 2.exf4 Black has 1 2 ... Bxd4 ). 9... IO.e3

Nxf5 Nd7

l l.Bd3 Black's game appears more solid than it really is. It is too early to start thinking about the queenside because l l ...b6 is met by 1 2.Qa4! bxc5 13.Ba6 Qd8 1 4.Bb7! with advantage.


17

To fortify his pawn structure, Black tried 1 1 ... g6 1 2.0-0 Bg7 in Tukmakov-Baburin, Helsinki 1992 but after 13.Bxf5 ! gxf5? ! 1 4.Ne2 he had problems on both wings and after a few more errors ( 14 ...Nf6 1 5.f3 Nh5? 1 6.Bd6 Bf8 1 7.e4!) he was doomed. More hopeful is 13 .. exf5 with play along the e-file, a� in Illustrative Game 5. .

Unless Black can improve his play significantly -- such a � with 8 . Be4 or later 13 ... exf5 -- he should look more closely at the alter native system, 4 ... Nc6!? ..

(b)

4 ...

Nc6

l .d4 2.Nf3 3.c4 4.Nc3

dS BfS e6 Nc6

So far, there has been relatively little experience with this odd looking setup, but a convincing White strategy has not materialized.

18

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3

--

BUT Q U I ETLY

5.Bf4 White would like to pin Black's knight with 5.Bg5 Nf6 with a later exchange on f6. But Black will reply 5 ... Be7! 6.Bxe7 Ngxe7 7.e3 0-0 followed eventually by ... Ng6/... dxc4 and e6-e5. A little too cute is 5.Bg5 Be7 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bf4 and then 7 ... Nf6 8.Be5! ? i n order to play Bxf6. This was Shirazi-Soltis, Marshall C.C. Championship 1992, which led to equality after 8 ...Bb4 9.Rcl 0-0 1 0.Bxf6! Qxf6 1 1 .e3 Rfe8 1 2.Bb5 Rad8 13.0-0 Bg4 and ... Ne7/... c7-c6. 5.. . 6.e3

Nffi Be7

Black can afford simple developing moves in the absence of d irect White pressure against the queenside. As usual in such positions, Black will eventually capture on c4 followed by ... Nd5 or ... e6-e5. 7.Rcl 8.8e2

0-0

We are following Andersson-Kovacevic. Bugojno 1984, in which Black temporized before clarifying matters with ...dxc4 and ... Nh5xg3. See Illustrative Game 8.


19

ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES

( 1 ) Leviti na-Gaprindashvili, Lvov 1 983 l.Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.e3

d5 BfS e6 Nc6!?

Against such an innocuous move as 4.e3, Black might have just played 4 ... c6. 5.cxd5 6.Bb5! 7.Nc3 8.0-0 9.a3

exd5 Bd6 Nge7 0-0 a6

This relieves a bit of the queenside pressure, but it wao;; time for Black to reorganize his pieces with 9 .. Nb8! and 1 O... c6. .

IO.Be2 l l .Nh4 12.f4!

Qd7 Be6

20

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 - BUT QUIETLY

One of the problems of the Baltic Defen.'''e -- a" with many variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined -- is that the pawn structure becomes set after cxd5/ ... exd5 and Black's centralized pieces can't easily break into the enemy camp. White, however, does have pawn action planned-- b2-b4 on the queenside to stop ... c7-c5 and something like f4-f5 on the kingside. (But White hurries matters now.) 12... 13.Bd3 14.1'5? 15.Bd2 16.Qe2 1 7.Bxa6

ffi Nd8 Bf7 b6 c5! Ndc6

Now protecting the weak f5 and d4 pawns is difficult ( 1 8.Nf3 Nxf5) so White returns to the offensive. 18.Bd3! 1 9.Nb5 20.Nf3 2 1.Bxe3 22.Nxe5 23.Nd4

cxd4 Be5 dxe3 Rfe8 Nxe5


21

Alexey Yermolinsky, then second to Levitina, recommended 23 ... Nc4 24.0£2 Nc6 25.Bf4 N6e5 a" leading to dynamic equality. 23 ... 24.Qxd3 25.Racl 26.Bf4 27.Qg3 28.b3 !

Nxd3 Nc8?! Nd6 Nc4? Kh8

Black's whole conception of the last several moves was based on this move not being possible. Since it is (28 ... Rxa3 29.Nc2; 28 ... Nxa3 29.Rc7) White begins to push the enemy back all over the board. 28... 29.a4 30.Rc3 31.Qh4 32.Rfcl 33.Qg3 34.h3

Ne5 Re7 RaeS Bg8 Rf8

RfeS

White's position was so good that he could maneuver and repeat moves before threatening 35.Bxe5 fxe5 (35 ... Rxe5 36.Rc7) 36.Nc6. 34... 35.Nb5 36.Rc7 37.Nd4 38.Bxe5! 39.ffi! Mate on g7 looms.

Qb7 Nf7 Qa8 Ne5 fxe5

22

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT Q U I ETLY

39 40.Nf5 4l.Nxe7 ...

gxffi

Be6 Black Resigns

Black had better as shown in the notes.

(2) Salo-Grau, Stockholm (Olympiad ) 1 937 l.d4 2.Nf3 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.e3?! 6.Be2 7.0-0 8.b3 9.Bb2

d5 BfS e6 c6 Nffi Bd6 Nbd7 0-0 Ne4

This kind of position, arising out of the Slav (2 ... c6 ) Defense, offers White little chance for a serious edge. In fact, Black, with ... Qf6-h6, has the more aggressive thoughts. 10.Nxe4

dxe4!?


l l .Ne5 12.f4 13.Nxf3?

23

Nffi exf3

White's last two moves play into the enemy hands. Better was 12. Qc2 or, ( after 12.f4) 13.gxf3. 13... 14.Qd2 15.h3 16.Rxf3

Ng4 Be4 Bxf3 Nh2!

The rook, not the knight, is the endangered species on the kingside now. 17.Rf2 18.Bd l 19.Rf4

Qh4 f5 Ng4!

Now 20.hxg4 fxg4 2 l .Rxf8 + ? (else 21 ... Bxf4 and 22 ... g3 ) Rxf8 and mates. ,

20.Rf3 Nffi 21 .Bc2 Ne4 22.Qel? Qxel + 23.Rxel Nd2! (see next diagram) And si nce 24.Rf2 Bg3 costs the Exchange, White struggled on with: 24.Rf4!? 25.Rf3 26.gxf3

g5! Nxf3 + Rad8

24

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2. N13 -- BUT QUI ETLY

After 23...Nd2!

27.Re2 28. Rg2 29.Re2 30.Kg2 3l .c5

h6 Kf7 Ke7 Kd7 Bc7

It's merely the absence of an open file that keeps the game going. Once Black has prepared ...g5-g4, it's all over. 32.Bd3 hS 33.Bc4 g4 34.f4 gxh3 + 35.Kxh3 RgS 36.Rg2 Rg4 37.Be2 Rxg2 38.Kxg2 Rg8 + 39.Kh2 BaS! 40.Bc l Bel 4l .a3 h4 42.Bf3 Rg3 43.Bg2 Bf2 White forfeits (3) Basescu-Soltis, New York 1 99 1 l .d4 2.Nf3 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.Qb3 6.Qxb6? 7.Bf4

dS Bf5 e6 c6 Qb6 axb6 Nffi


8.Nd2 9.Rcl

25

Nbd7 Be7

Black actually has a slight edge in pawn structure, thanks to 6.Qxb6, and will eventually be able to use it with ... dxc4 followed by ...b6-b5b4. White, on the other hand, believes in his pawn center. 10.13 l l .e4 12.fxe4 13.a3?

0-0 dxe4 Bg6

White realizes that the opening of the center will benefit Black and that's why he avoids 1 3.e5 Nh5 1 4.Be3 c5 ! ( 15.g4 cxd4 1 6.gxh5 dxe3 or 1 5.dxc5 Bxc5) . But the center is going to open one way or another. 13... 14.dxe5 15.Be2 16.0-0 1 7.Rcd1 1 8.Nb3 19.Rd2 20.Rfd1 2 1.Rxd2?

eS! Ng4 NgxeS Rfe8 Bf6 Rad8 Nf8! Rxd2 Ned7!

26

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUI ETLY

This wins a pawn (22 ... Bxc3) and with it the game. I n a bid for compensation White drops the Exchange. 22.Na4 23.Bd6? 24.Nc3 25.Bxf8 26.Nxd2 27.Kf2 28.Kf3 29.b4 30.Kf2 3l .Bxd3

Rxe4 Bg5! ReS Bxd2 Kxf8

Nc5 Nd3 Ne5 + Bd3 Nxd3 +

Now the a-pawn is doomed. 32.Kf3 f5 33.Nb3 Nel + 34.Kf2 Nc2 35.Nbl Ra8 36.c5 Nxa3 37.N l d2 bxc5 38.Nxc5 Ke7! 39.Nxb7 Rb8 40.Na5 Kd6 41.Ndc4 + Nxc4 42.Nxc4 + Kd5 43.Ne3 + Ke4 44.Nc2 c5 White Resigns


27

( 4) Ornste in-Kauppala, Jarve npaa 1 985 l .d4 2.Nf3 3.c4 4 Nc3 S.Qb3 6.c5 7.axb3 8.b4 9.b5 lO.NxbS l l .Nc3 12.Bf4 .

dS 85 e6 c6 Qb6 Qxb3 Nd7? a6 cxbS ReS Ngffi

White has a simple win ni ng plan now of b2-b4-b5 and there is not much Black can do about it. 12... 13.e3 14.N xe4 IS.NeS

Be7 Ne4 dxe4

In view of 15 ... Nxe5 1 6.Bxe5 0-0 17.Bc4 and b2-b4-b5 touchdown. Black's sacri fice now is desperation, but appropriate desperation.

28

CHAPTER O N E: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUI ETLY

15 ... 16.dxc5 17.g4 18.Ke2 1 9.gxf5 20.Bh3 2l.Kf1 22.Kg2!

Nxc5!? Bxc5 Bb4 + Ke7!? Rhd8 Rd2 + Rcc2

The king is safe on g3 and White remains at least a piece ahead. 22...Rxf2 + 23.Kg3 ffi 24.Rhfl Rxh2 25.Radl ! fxeS 26.8g5 + 27.Rd7 + Ke8 28.fxe6 BaS 29.Re7 + Kd8 30.Rf8 + mate

KJ7

(5 ) G. Garcia-Larsen, Linares 1 98 1 l .Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.Qb3 6.c5 7.g3 8.Bf4 9.Nh4 lO.NxfS l l.Qc2 12.Rd l

d5 BfS e6 c6 Qb6 Qc7 Nd7 Qc8 Ngffi ext'S g6 hS!?

Bent Larsen likes to advance his h-pawns but here it seems a bit too exotic. Perhaps he didn't l ike the looks of 12 ... Be7 1 3.Bh6. Or perhaps he was anticipating 13.Bh3 with 13 ... h4.


29

White now begins an interesting but doomed plan to bring his bishop to h3 and then open the diagonal with e2-e4.

13.13!? 14.h4 1 5.Bh3 1 6.0-0 1 7.e4?

Be7 0-0 ReS Bd8!

Unsound. White should have continued 1 7.Rael but 1 7 ... Bc7 would have been a good answer. 1 7... 1 8.fxe4 19.Nxe4 20.Bg2 2l.d5

dxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 ReS

30

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.N13 -- BUT Q U I ETLY

On anything else, Black consolidates with 2 1 ...Nf6. 21... 22.8xd5?! 23.Qxc5 24.b4 25.8xb7 26.Khl

cxd5 Qxc5 + Nxc5 Ne6 Bb6 + Nxf4!

This saves the Exchange (27.Bxa8 Ne2 28.Bc6 Nxg3 + 29.Kg2 Nxfl 30. Bxe8 Ne3 + ) and ends resistance quickly. 27.Rxf4 Rab8 28.Bd5 Bc7 29.Rc4 Bxg3 30.Rgl Re3 White Resigns

(6) Flohr-Mikenas, Soviet Championship 1 95 1 l .Nf3 2.d4

d5 BfS

"A fully possible continuation," was Isaac Boleslavsky's less-than revealing comment in the tournament book. He agreed with Flohr's earlier comment in the he tournament bulletin that 3.c4 e6 4.Qb3 Nc6 5.c5 waiOi best. 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.Qb3

e6 c6 Qb6

"A poor move, since the exchange on b3 is disadvantageous to Black," Boleslavsky added. "After 5 ... Qc8 a typical position oft he Slav Defense is reached."

T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT

6.c5 7.Bf4

31

Qc7 Qc8

8.Nh4! "Much stronger than the mistaken developing move 8.e3," the Soviet G M commented. Surprisingly, the effect of 8.Nh4 was more or less forgotten after this game. 8... 9.Nxf5 IO.e3 l l.Bd3

Nf6 ext'S Be7 N h5?

Boleslavsky recommended 1 1 ...Na6. The more natural 1 1 ...0-0 invites 1 2.0 and 1 3.g4! with a line-opening attack. But after the text, 12.Be5 f6 can't be played because of 13.Bxb8! and 14.Be2. 12.Be5 13.h3! 14.g4 15.Bxg7!? 16.gxf5

0-0 g6 Ng7 Kxg7 Bh4

32

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.N1 3 - BUT Q U I ETLY

Clearly 1 6 ...gxf5 was to be avoided. Now Black is hoping he can mount a counterattack on e3 and f2 (while stopping h3-h4-h5 ).

17.Qd l ! 18.cxb6 19.Qg4 20.Ne2 21.Kfl

b6 axb6 Qd8 Qe7

This meets the threat of 2 1 . ..Qxe3 and gives White time for the assault on g6. 21... 22.Nf4 23.Rgl 24.fxg6 25.Bxg6 !

Nd7 Kh8

Rg8 fxg6

And si nce 25 ... Nf8 26.Qh5 is quite lost, the game drew to a close with ... 25... 26.Nxg6 + 27.Qxg6

hxg6 Rxg6

Nf6


28.Rcl !

33

Rf8

Or 28 ... Rc8 29.Qh6ch Qh7 30.Rg6! Ne4 3 l .Rcxc6 and wins. 29.Rxc6 Nh7 30.Rg2 Bffi 31.Qg4 Qb7 32.Qe6 Qa6 + 33.Kgl Ng5 34.Rxg5! Bxg5 35.Qe5 + Bffi 36.Rxffi Rg8 + 37.Rg6 + Black Resigns

(7 ) Shipman-Soltis, New York 1 99 1 l.d4 2.Nf3 3.c4 4.Nc3 5.Qb3 6.c5 7.Bf4 8.e3 9.Rcl? I O.h3 l l.Be2 12.0-0

d5 BfS e6 c6 Qb6 Qc7 Qc8 Nd7 Ngffi Be7 0-0 b6!

34

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3- BUT QUI ETLY

This is what happens when White has delayed queenside action ( 1 2. Qa4) and allows Black to strike fi rst. Now the best policy was to keep matters closed with 1 3 Na4. 13.cxb6?! 14.Nh4?! 1 5.13 16.Nxg6 1 7.e4 18.exd5?

axb6 Be4 Bg6

hxg6

Qb7!

Logic suggests that his bishops need an open position, but this isn't the way to do it. Black is now able to seize the e-file. 1 8... 1 9.a3 20.Bd3

exd5 Rfe8

20... 2l.dxc5 22.Kh1 23.Bxe3 24.Qdl 25.Ne4?

c5 Bxc5 + Be3! Rxe3 d4!? Nc5!


35

So that 26.Nxc5 bxc5 and 27 ... Qxb2 is threatened. 26.Nxffi + 27.Bb5 28.Rel 29.b4 30.Rxe3 31.Qel 32.Rc2

gxffi

Rd8 Qe7 Ne6 dxe3 Nf4 Qe5

Here or on the next move Black could have played the paralyzing 32 ... e2. 33.a4 Kg7 34.g3 !? Nxh3 35.Kg2 Ng5 36.Re2 QfS 37.Rxe3 Qh3 + 38.Kgl Rh8 39.KJ2 Qh2 + 40.Kfl ReS! 4l.Bd3? Rei! White Resigns

(8) Andersson-Kovacevic, Bugojno 1 984 l .Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Nc3

d5 BfS e6 Nc6

36

CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3- BUT QU IETLY

It's worth noting that GM Kovacevic often plays the London System ( l .d4 d5 2.Bf4) as White, but usually with c2-c3 rather than Nc3, as he does here, with the colors reversed. 5.Bf4 6.e3 7.Rcl 8.Be2 9.0-0 1 0.a3

Nffi Be7 0-0 a6 h6

What is going on here with beginner's moves like 8 . a6, 9 h6 and 1 O.a3? Actually, they each have a purpose (to prevent Nh4xf5 or keep an enemy piece off b4 or b5) . But they reflect a mutual reluctance to change the pawn structure. ..

10... l l.Bxc4 12.Bg3 13.hxg3 14.Qe2 IS.Rfd l 16.d5!

...

dxc4 NhS Nxg3 Qd7 Rfd8 Qe8

White has a slight edge thanks to Black's vulnerable points along the c-file. 16... 17.Bxd5 18.Bxc6 19.Nd5

exdS Bd6 Qxc6 QbS!


37

Black has calculated that the endgame is more than tenable.

20.Qxb5 21.Nd4 22.13 23.fxg4 24.Nxb5

axbS Bg4! c6! cxdS Bxg3

And since b2 and a3 are a� weak as d5, a draw is soon agreed: 25.Nc3 Be5 26.Rxd5 RxdS 27.Nxd5 Bxb2 28.Rbl Bxa3 29.Rxb7 Ra4 30.Rb8 + Kh7 3 1 .Rb7 Draw

38

CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3 -- MAIN LINE

CHAPTER 1WO: 2.Nf3

--

Main Line

If Black can meet quiet play with a bit of eccentricity (4 ...Nc6), perhaps White needs more direct approach. The ''book refutation" of the Baltic Defense is the focus of this chapter. l .d4 2.Nt3

d5 BfS

Black's last move is the traditional antidote to the Colle attack (2 ... Nf6 3.e3 and 4.Bd3). After 2 ...Bf5 3 .e3 Nf6 White gets little from 4.Bd3 Bg6! (better than 4 ... Bxd3 5.cxd3 ! ) 5.Ne5 e6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 and 7 ... c5. 3.c4 After l.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 some grandmasters believe the best move of al l is 3.NtJ! transposing exactly into this position, so this subvaria tion has particular significance. 3 ...

e6

VladirnirTukmakov has suggested 3 ... Bxb 1 ! ? without further com ment. In fact, that move wa" played nearly a century ago by Carl Walbrodt (e.g. 4.Rxb 1 dxc4 5.Qa4 + c6 6.Qxc4 e6 with the kind of position that would later be called a slightly inferior Slav Defense). Black can also handle the position the way Frank Marshall did in the 1920s, keeping the center fluid with 3 ...Nf6 (and then 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Qb3 e6 or 4.Qb3 Nc6 5 .Qxb7?? Bd7! and 6 . Rb8/7 ... Nb4). ..


39

But solidifyi ng the center with 3 ...e6 is the move that puts White to the test. 4.Qb3! There is no reason to exchange on d5 here since White wants to retain the possibility of c4-c5 ! . See the note to White's fifth move below. Also, 4.e3 agai n leads to little for White. The first edition of ECO gave only 4 ... Nf6 but 4 ...c6! , creati ng a Slav, looks natural-- and quite equal. Note that 4.e3 N f6 allows White to play a delayed 5.Qb3 after which 5 ... Nc6 is more or less forced. This allows 6.c5 Rb8 7.Bb5 ! with advantage or 6 ...Qc8 7.Bb5 Nd7! 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 g6! as in an old Colle-Nimzovich game. White does better in the last line with 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qa4! NebS 1 0.b4 preservi ng his two bishops. 4...

Nc6

Here the road divides as White makes a crucial choice. Since 5.Qxb7 once agai n gets him into trouble by way of 5 .. Nb4 White's .

40

CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3

-

MAIN LINE

most interesting tries involve moves that prevent .. Nb4 . Specifically, (a) 5 .c5 and (b) 5.Bd 2. We 'll examine them separately. .

(a) Locking the center with 5.c5 5.c5! This closes the diagonal of Black's f8-bishop and prepares Bb5/Ne5 in addition to renewing the 6.Qxb7 threat. In contrast, 5.cxd5 ?! exd5 leaves Black fairly well off. In the 1948 World Championship Tournament, Mikhail Botvinnik won a key game from rival Paul Keres with 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Bxe7 N gxe7 8.e3 Qd6 9.Nbd2 (not 9.Nc3 Nb4 10.Rc 1 Bd3 ! ) 0-0 10.Rc1 a5 ! but it wasn't the fault of Black's opening play. Black can also try to compl icate the game with 6 ... Qd7 7.Nc3 f6 8. Bf4 Nb4 or 8 ... Na5 or even 8 ... g5 followed by queenside castling. 5...

Rb8

After Minev's 1977 article on 2 ...Bf5 was reprinted in Shakmatny Bulletin, a number of Soviet masters began to experiment with the system. In the playoff match of the 1 978 Soviet Championship, Josif Dorfman added a new wrinkle mentioned in the article: 5 ... Qc8!?. There followed 6.e3 Nf6 7.Bb5 Nd7!. This safeguards against Ne5 at the cost of a pawn: 8.Qa4 Be7 9.Bxc6 bxc6 1 0.Qxc6 0-0 1 1 .0-0 Rb8 12.Qa4 Bd3 13.Re 1 e5 and the game, against Boris Gulko, was eventually drawn.


41

6.Nc3 There is not much benefit to be had by locking in the c l-bishop with 6.e3. Then 6 ... Nf6 looks natural, since Bg5xf6 is out of the question. There was even an old Kostic game that went 6.e3 f6 7.Nc3 Nge7 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 and reached eventual equality -- although 9 ... Nxc6!? would have been much more interesting. The chief alternative here is 6.Bf4 which stops 6 ... e5. Then 6 ... Nge7 7.Nc3 a6 will transpose back into our main line. Meanwhi le, 7.e3 a6 8.Qa4 Ng6 9.Bg3 Be7 leads to a new set of problems for both sides. After 10.Nbd2? 0-0 ll.Rcl Bf6! Black gets ... e6-e5 in and that is usually enough to equalize. It seems that White should keep Nc3 and Rdl in hand to deter the Black e-pawn. See Illustrative Game 1 1. Nevertheless, Black's best answer to 6.Bf4 may be 6 ... a6 (waiting and preventing Bb5 or Nb5) 7.e3 Nf6!? and then 8.Nc3 Be7 as in the note to Black's seventh move. 6 ...

a6

42

CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3 - MAIN LINE

This anticipates the greatest dangers in the position (Bb5) while preserving the option of ...Nf6-e4/...Be7-f6 as well as ...Bf6/...Nge7. Compare this with 6...Be7, which has two useful ideas behind it: ...Bf6 and ... Nge7 or the kingside expansion of ... g7-g5 after White plays Bf4. However, this neglects the queenside problem and after 7.Bf4 g5 8.Bg3 g4 9.Ne5 Bf6 10.Qa4! Nge7 1l.Nxc6 Black's queen side is a mess but he has tactical chances. See Illustrative Game 9. On the other hand, Keres' 6 ... e5? (based on 7.Qxd5 Qxd5 8.Nxd5 exd4 9.Nxc7 + Kd7) was dealt a serious blow by Lajos Ponisch at Wijk aan Zee 1971: 7.e4! exd4 8.exf5 dxc3 9.Bb5 Bxc5 10.0-0 Nf6 1l.Qxc3 with a big edge.

7.Bf4 Since the bishop is bound to become vulnerable on this square - to ...Nf6-h5 or ...Bf6 and ...Nge7-g6 --White sometimes inserts the escape clause of 7.h3 (or 7.Bf4 and 8.h3). But that turns out to be a wasted move or, worse, an invitation to invite a charge of the Black g-pawn. See Illustrative Game 10.

7...

Nge7

Here's a question that has never been resolved: what is a better policy, 7...Nge7 or 7...Nf6? After 7...Nf6 8.e3 Be7 Black has a minor threat of 9...Nh5 -- minor, but it should be respected because 10.Bg3 Nxg3 and 1l...Bf6 will allow him to eventually push the e-pawn.


43

White can anticipate the challenge to his bishop with 9.h3. But then 9...0-0 and Black has 10...b6 coming up. For example, 10.Be2 b6 ll.Qa4 Qd7 12.Bxa6 Ra8 or 10.Qa4 b5!?. On the other hand, 9.Be2 Ne4 is also available although after 10.Nxe4 Bxe4 it is not clear where Black's play is coming from. See Illustrative Game 12 for a sma�hing White victory.

8.e3 9.Bg3

N g6 Be7

Because Black has two pawn levers,White can not load up against one of them. For example, IO.Rdl would discourage ...e6-e5. But it makes 10...0-0 ll.Be2 b6 very appealing (12.cxb6 Rxb613.Qa4 Nb4).

10.Be2 In Flohr-Terpugov, Soviet Championship 1950White tried1O.Qd1 Qd7 11.Bd3 but his edge was microscopic after 11...Bxd3 12.Qxd3 0-0 13.0-0 f5!.

1 0... 1 1 .0-0

0-0 Qd7

44

CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3

-

MAIN LINE

This is untested analysis. Black's main idea is 12...b6!. On 12.Qa4 Black probably can't take time out for 12...Ra8 and 13...Rfb8 because of 13.b4 Rfb8 14.a3 with firm control of the queenside. But 12...b6 13.Bxa6 Ra8!? may be possible (not 13...bxc5 14.Bb5). Besides closing the center with 5.c5White has another method of threatening the queenside and we turn to that now:

(b) Retaining Options with 5.Bd2

Botvinnik endorsed this move after playing it in his 1954 title defense against Vasily Smyslov. A tricky alternative is 5.Bg5 so that 5...Be7? can be met by 6.Qxb7! Na5 (or 6... Nb4) 7.Bxe7! Black's alternatives include 5...Qc8, 5...f6 and 5...B b4 + . Minev points out a game that went 5...Bb4 + 6.Nc3 dxc4 7.Qxc4 Nf6 8.e3 h6


45

9.Bh4 Be7 10.Be2 0-0 ll.Rcl in White's favor, but suggests 7 ...Qd5!? as an improvement. But Shirov's 5...Nxd4! looks best, since 6.Nxd4 Qxg5 7.Qa4 + c6 leads at best to equality for White (8.Nc3 Ne7 9.Rdl g6 10.cxd5 exd5 ll.Nxf5 Nxf5, Sorokin-Shirov, U.S.S.R. 1988).

5...

dxc4!?

Here 5...Rb8 may, in fact, be better, with play similar to that of section (a). The text was played by Smyslov with play proceeding:

6.Qxb7 7.Qb5! 8.Qa4 9.Na3

Nge7 Rb8 Rxb2

Here Botvinnik pointed out the intriguing Exchange sacrifice 9..Rxd2!? which offers substantial compensation after IO.Kxd2 e5 or 10.Nxd2 Qxd4 ll.Rdl c3 12.Ndc4 Qc5.

9... 10.Nxc4 l l .e3

Qd7 Rb8 Nb4

46

CHAPTER TWO: 2.N13

-

MAIN LINE

Unfortunately ll...Nd5 allows White to consolidate his structur ally superior position with 12.a3!

12.Qxd7 + 13.Bxb4 14.N ce5 +

Kxd7 Rxb4 Ke8

In the Botvinnik-Smyslov game cited above, White continued 15.Bd3 f6 16.Bxf5 Nxf5 17.Nd3 Rb6 18.Ke2 Ba3 19.Nd2 and Rhbl, eventually making his material count. However, a� Botvinnik pointed out, Black should solidify a posi tion for his knight at d5 with 16...exf5!, after which he is only margin ally worse.

ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES

(9) Fine-Grau, Stockholm (Olympiad) 1937

l.d4 2.Nt3 3.c4 4.Qb3

dS Bf5 e6 Nc6


5.c5 6.Nc3 7.Bf4 8.Bg3

47

Rb8 Be7 g5!? g4

Not as risky as it seems, since White has little access to the kingside now. Black is willing to accept the doubling of his c-pawns.

9.Ne5 IO.Qa4 l l .Nxc6 12.b3 13.e3 14.Be2 15.0-0

Bffi Nge7 bxc6 0-0 Qd7 N g6 Bg5

Here's Black's problem: He has some active pieces but the king side and center are closed in a manner that keeps his queen and rooks from complementing them. He would like to shoot his h-pawn up the board butWhite is making steady progress on the other wing ( 16. Qa5 Rfc8 17.Ba6; 16...Bd8 17.Qxa7).

16.Qa5 1 7.dxe5 1 8.Rad l !

e5!? Rfe8


48

White has 19.e4 (or as it turns out Ne4) just in time. This is a recurring danger to Black when he hurries ...e6-e5: His d5-pawn then falls under immediate pressure.

18... 19.Ne4! 20.Nxg5 2 1.Qxc7

Be6 Qe7 Qxg5

Black's position, which looked reasonable a few moves ago has suddenly collapsed.

2l. . Rec8 22.Qa5! Nxe5 23.Ba6! Rd8 24.Qc7 Black Resigns .

( 10) Piket-Bareev, Dortmund 1992

l.Nt3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Qb3 5.c5! 6.Nc3 7.h3

d5 81'5 e6 Nc6 Rb8 Be7


49

This is designed to preserve the bishop (Bf4-h2) and eliminate all risks of ... g7-g5-g4. At least, almost all such risks.

7... 8.Bf4 9.e3 10.Be2

Nffi a6 Ne4!

On 10.Nxe4 Bxe4 ll.Be2 0-0 and 12...Bf6, Black has an easy game.

1 0... l l.Bh2 12.Nxe4? 13.0-0-0

gS!? hS Bxe4 b6!?

White's last two moves have been quite compromising. Now 14.Qa4 Qd7 15.Qxa6 Bxf3 16.gxf3 bxc5 is promising for Black.

14.Nd2 15.Bxa6 1 6.Qa4

Bg6 bxc5 0-0!

Based on 17.Qxc6Rb6 18.Qa4 Qa8 19.Bb5Qb7! with a devastating attack.

50

CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3- MAIN LINE

17.dxc5 18.Nb3

Qd7

Black was quite prepared to sacrifice the Exchange (18.Bb5 Rxb5 19.Qxb5 because of 19...Nd4! 20.Qxd7? Ne2 mate). Now he gets to post his rooks at a8 and b4.

18 ... 19.Qa3 20.Rd2 2l.Kdl 22.Nd4 23.Qa4??

Rb4! Ra8 Ra7 Qe8 Bxc5

A gross error in what has become a difficult position. White resigned before Black could snap off the queen. But 23.f4 Rxd4 24.Qxc5 Rxd2 + was also lost. (11) Anikaev-Vaganian, Moscow 1982

l .Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Qb3 5.c5 6.Bf4 7.e3

d5 BfS e6 Nc6 Rb8 Nge7 a6

Here 8.a3 gives Black enough time to achieve ...e6-e5: 8...Ng6 9.Bg3 Be7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 e5 12.dxe5 Bxc5 13.Nc3 Be6 as in Polugayevsky-Vaganian, Moscow 1981.


8.Qa4 9.Bg3 I O.Nbd2 l l .Rcl ?

51

N g6 Be7 0-0

White this time has geared up to stop ... b7-b6. He is taking many precautions based on the assumption that Black can't open the center -- or won't do anything with an open center when he does open it.

1 1... 12.Be2 13.Nb3

Bffi! e5 e4

Suddenly it's Black who has a space advantage and a clear plan of . f7-f5-f4.

..

14.Nfd.2 15.Qa3 16.Na5 17 .N xc6 18.0-0 White is playing without a queen.

Bd7! BgS f5 Bxc6


52

18... 19.exf4 20.Bxf4 21 .Rcd l 22.Qc3

f4! Nxf4 Bxf4 Qg5 Bd7

Target: g2.

23.Nb3 Rffi 24.Nal e3 25.fxe3 Bh3! 26.813 Bxe3 + 27.Khl Rxf3! And Black won.

(12) H. Olafsson-Knezevic, Neskaupstad 1984

l.Nf3 2.d4 3.c4 4.Qb3 5.c5 6.Nc3 7.Bf4 8.e3 9.Be2

d5 BfS e6 Nc6 Rb8 Nffi a6 Be7 Ne4

THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QU EEN'S GAMBIT

53

This is often an equalizing move when White does not have an immediate plan. The difference is that this time he does.

I O.Nxe4 1 1.0-0 12.Qc3 13.Rfdl 14.Ne5!

Bxe4 0-0 Bf6 Qe7

14... 15.d.xe5 1 6.b4 17.exf6 18.Bg3 1 9.a4 20.t3 2 l.b5 22.axb5

Bxe5 h6 f6 Rxf6

Rbt8 Qf7 Bf5 axb5

Black's worst nightmare has come true: The queenside pawns can advance further.

22... Nb8 23.c6! bxc6 24.bxc6 Rg6 25.e4 dxe4 26.Ra8 Black Resigns

54

CHAPTER THREE: WHITE PLAYS 2.c4 AND 3.Nc3

CHAPTER THREE: White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3

Instead of pressuring the target at b7, White can also go after d5 with a combination of Qb3 and Nc3. This leads to trappy play that should not be unwelcome to Black.

l .d4 2.c4

d5

In this, the most natural move order, Black is risking a bit more than after 2.NtJ Bf5, since his center is not yet secure and can be dissolved with 3.cxd5 (which we'll examine in Chapter Five).

2...

BfS

There are no waiting moves at Black's disposal that will readily allow him to play this move later. For example, 2...c6 (the Slav Defense) 3.Nc3 Bf5? walks into 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Qb3! hitting both b7 and d5.

3.Nc3


55

Now, it seems, Black does not have enough time to protect both b7 and d5 before 4.Qb3 makes one of them indefensible.

3 ...

e6!

Anything else leads to a major White advantage.

4.Qb3 Naturally, 4.Nf3 would have been Chapter One all over again - and some analysts, such as Nikolai Minev, have called that White's best option. The text has been given a question mark -- by Latvian master Valentin Kirillov in the Riga-ba�ed "Shahs" magazine -- and a "?!" - by Minev in the Bulgarian "Shakmatna Miscl." It is not quite that bad.

4...

Nc6!

But this is why it's not very good. On 5.Qxb7 Nxd4 Black has . ..Rb8 and a big knight check corning up. Black's d-pawn now proves surprisingly invulnerable:

5.cxd5

exd5

56


Watch out: This position is mined with Black traps: Now 6.Nxd5? is met by 6...Be4! andWhite is in big trouble (7.Nc3 Nxd4 8.Qa4 + b5! and White resigned in aWest German miniature). White can temporarily sacrifice a piece with 7.Qe3 Qxd5 8.f3 but after 8...Nxd4 9.fxe4 Nc2 + 10.Kt2 Qc5! he doesn't get the piece back. Of the other moves: (a) Not much better is 6.Qxd5 Qxd5 7.Nxd5 because of 7...0-0-0 with advantage to Black's development. (b) Again 6.Qxb7? Nxd4 runsWhite into trouble (7.e4 Rb8! and wins). (c) 6.e4 has been analyzed by the Russians with published analysis that give: 6...dxe4 7.d5 Ne5 8.Qxb7 and 7.Qxb7 Nxd4 8.Bb5 + a-; "unclear." But in the first line 7.. Nb4 is better than 7...Ne5. And in the latter line 8 ...Nxb5 9.Nxb5? Bb4 + or 9.Qxb5 + Qd7 is not at all unclear.

6.Nt3 Black was really threatening 6...Nxd4 now. The gambit 6.Bf4?! Nxd4! 7.Qa4 + Nc6 8.0-0-0 Nf6 is insufficient. One of the many miniatures that have arisen from such position was Bryansky Komarov, Kiev 1983. It ended with 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.e4 Bb4 1 1.exd5? Qe7 12.dxc6 Qc5 + ! White resigns. This was the shortest game played in the tournament, a Soviet Youth Championship in which the adolescent


57

contestants included names like Gelfand, Bareev, Khalifman, Dreev and Epishin -- and the winner was the little-known Rustem Dautov. And 6.Be3 is a clumsy way of defending the d-pawn because it invites a later ...Na5-c4. For exampl e, 6.Be3 Nf6 7.g3 Na5 ! 8.Qd l c6 9.Bg2 Nc4 with an excellent game for Black (Illustrative Game 13). 6...

Bb4

Black must avoid 6 ... Nb4? which, because of the exchange of pawns at move five, is bad here because of 7.e4 !. Then 7 ... dxe4 8.Ne5 Be6 9.Bc4 gives White a powerful attack. For example, 9 ... Bxc4 1 0.Qxc4 Nd3 + l l .Nxd3 exd3 1 2.Qb5 + Qd7 13.Qxb7! and White retains his advantage fol lowing 14.0-0 Be3 and Rad 1/Rfe l (Zaltsman-Shipman, World Open 1 983). Similarly, 10 ...Qe7 1 1 .0-0 f6 and now 12.a3 maintains an edge. The main alternative here is 6 ... Nf6, which once again dares White to play 7.Qxb7? (7... Nb4 ). The problem with 6 ... Nf6 is the p inning effect of 7.Bg5 !. Vladimir Malaniuk has had a good deal of experience as Black with 7 ..Na5 8.Qa4 + c6. One of his opponents played 9.Bxf6 gxf6 1 0.e3 but

S8


achieved nothing more than dynamic equality after 10...a6 11.Nh4 Bg6 12.Be2 b5 13.Qd1 Nc4 (eventually drawn). More accurate is 9.e3 and now 9 ...b5!? 10.Bxb5 is Illustrative Game 14, in whichWhite gets three good pawns for a piece. Safer is 9...a6.

7.Bf4 White often decides to give up his bishop on f6 to avert ...Nf6- e4, so this bishop move may be a waste of time.White got a small edge in Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1979 with 7.a3 Bxc3 + 8.Qxc3 Nf6 9.Bg5 and then 9...0-0 10.e3 h6 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Be2. (Yet Black won. See Illustrative Game 15).

7...

aS

We are following Speelman-ShoTt, Hastings 1989 which went 8.a3 a4! 9.Qd1 Bxc3 + 10.bxc3 Nf6. Here 11...Ne4 is coming up (ll.Bb5 0-0 12.Bxa4?! Ne4). Speelman continued 11.Bg5! h6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.e3 0-0 14.Bb5 Ra5! 15.Be2 Ne7 and after ... Ng6 held a very small edge forWhite.

ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES

(13) Shakins-Rause, Latvian Team Championship 1985 Although not involving a trap, this game shows how quickly Black can develop an overwhelming initiative with relatively simple moves (14-22).


l .d4 2.c4 3.Nc3 4.Qb3 5.cxd5 6.Be3?

59

d5 BfS e6 Nc6 exd5

As noted above, this walites the bishop on a square from which it

is soon driven.

6... 7.g3 S.Qdl 9.Bg2 I O.Bcl l l.e3 12.Nge2 13.0-0

Nffi Na5! c6 Nc4 Bb4 0-0 Qd7? Qe7

After this indecisiveness (in place of 12 ...Re8 and 1 3 ...h5! ), the benefit of moves 6-9 is lost. But Black still stands well and, what's more,White hasn't a clue.

14.a3 15.Qb3

Bd6 a5

60


16.a4 1 7.Khl 18.Ngl ?

Rfe8 h5!

Imagine that White's bishop is on g5, and not c l. Then, he might be equal.

18... 1 9.gxh4? 20.Nf3

h4 Ng4 Bxh2!

Of course 2 1.Nxh2 Qxh4 and resignation is in order.

21.e4 22.Bg5 23.Qxc4

dxe4 Qc7

T his is the face of desperation.

23... exf3 White Resigns ( 14) Schneider-Malaniuk, Yalta 1982

l.d4

d5


2.c4 3.Nc3 4.cxd5 5.Qb3 6.Nf3 7.8g5

61

BfS e6 exdS Nc6 Nffi

Here 7...Bb4 8 a3! favors White more than usual.

7... 8.Qa4 + 9.e3

NaS c6 bS!?

It's not clear what Malaniuk has against 9 ..Be7, since 10.b4 Nc4 l l .b5 cxb5 is harmless. .

lO.BxbS!

cxbS

62


l l.QxbS + 12.Bxffi ! 13.Qxd5

Bd7

gxffi Rb8

Simpler is 13 ...Be7 and castling. White has material compensation for his piece, but his pawns are not likely to count before an endgame.

14.0-0 15.Qh5 1 6.Nd5 1 7.Rfcl !

Be7 0-0 ReS

The threat is 18.Nc7 winning material.

1 7... 18.b3 19.Nh4 20.Nxb4 21.Nf5 22.Nh6 + 23.Qxh6 24.Rxc8

Nc6 ReS Nb4 Bxb4 Bf8 Bxh6 Bf5 Qxc8

A curious decision, virtually agreeing to a draw.

25.Qxffi 26.Qg5 +

Qc3 Draw

( 15) Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1979

l .d4 2.c4 3.Nc3

d5 Bf5 e6


4.cxd5 5.Qb3 6.Nf3 7.a3 8.Qxc3 9.Bg5!

63

exd5 Nc6 Bb4 Bxc3 + Nffi

This follows a familiar policy, seen in the Queen's Gambit De clined and some Nimzo-Indian variations. White, having lost control of e4, acts to prevent it becoming a Black knight outpost. 9... 10.e3 l l.Bxffi 12.Be2

0-0 h6 Qxffi Rfc8

This looks like the WTong rook, since he needs one for the e-file (and his 1 6th move admits as much ). Black will correct his pawn structure with an eventual ... c7-c6, leaving White with one play: the minority attack. 13.0-0 14.Rfcl 15.b4 16.Nel !

Ne7 c6 N g6

64


Black's best chances naturally lie on the kingside and this preven tive move anticipates ...Bg4 and ... Nh4 while aiming to bring the knight to d3 and perhaps c5 or b4. 16... 1 7.a4 18.b5 19.Qa5 20.Bd3 21.Qc3

ReS Re6 Rae8 Qe7 b6

White ha" the typical advantage resulting from a minority attack. 21... 22.Nxd3 23.axb5 24.Qb3 25.Rc2 26.Ne5 27.Rxa7?

Bxd3 cxb5 Qd7 Rffi Nh4 QfS

27... 28.Rac7?

Nxg2!


65

Not willing to see if there's more than a draw from 28.Kxg2 Rxe5 !, White turns the tables 1 80 degrees. 28... 29.f4 30.Rc8 31.Rxe8 + 32.Re2 33.Qdl 34.Qd3 35.102

Nh4 Qe4! Rfe6 Rxe8 Ra8 NfS Ra l + Qhl !

This looks like the product of time pressure. 36.Rc2 37.Ke2

Qgl + Qg2 + mate

66

CHAPTER FOUR: THE GRAU GAMBIT

CHAPTER FOUR: The Grau Gambit

None of the previous variations of the Baltic Defense, a� tactical a� they may seem, will prepare you for the sharpest line of them all, the neo-Aibin Counter Gambit introduced by Roberto Grau of Argentina. l .d4 2.c4 3.Qb3

d5 BfS

Usually the reason an early bishop move by Black is dubious in the closed openings is because of the retribution wreaked by Qb3 at some point. This suggests that for the Baltic Defense to work it must pa�s the test of the earliest possible 3.Qb3. 3...

eS!

This was Grau's gambit idea. It is a vast improvement upon 3 ... dxc4? after which 4.Qxb7 Nd7 5.Nc3 gives White a clear positional edge. One example of this was Forintos-Sahovic, Reykjavik 1 982 which went 5 ... Rb8 6.Qc6 Rb6 7.Qxc4 Ngf6 8.Nf3 e6 9.e3. White's edge wa�


67

obvious after 9 ... QbB 10.Be2 Rb4 l l .Qc6 Rb6 1 2.Qc4 Rb4 13.Qa6! Rb6 14.Qa4 Rb4 1 5.Qa5 c6 1 6.a3 Rb7 1 7.Ba6 and 1 8.()-0. Keep this in mind: this is what happens when Black's initiative evaporates and he is left to deal with numerous positional problems. 4.Qxb7 It's a funny how theory becomes established alii 'book." A typical example: Svetozar Gligoric won a 1 97 1 game with 4.cxd5 exd4 5.Nf3. The game went 5 ... Be4 6.Nxd4 and now 6 ... Qxd5 7.Qe3 favors White. So there followed instead: 5 ... Bxd5 7.Qe3 + Qe7 (7 ... Ne7 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Nxc6! Bxc6 1 0.Bd2 seems to favor White) 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Qxe7 + Bxe7 1 0.Bg5 Be6 1 1 .e4 c6 1 2.Nxe6. This walii widely accepted as a key variation of the Baltic Defense and demonstrated how White, while avoiding all risks, can aliisure himself through forcing play of a superior endgame. But the improvement of 5 ... Bc5 ! alters matters radically. Then 6.Qc4 Nd7 7.Nxd4 Qh4! leads to easy equality for Black. The real test of5 ... Bc5 is 6.Nxd4 Bxd4 7.Qa4 + after which 7 ... Nc6! 8.dxc6 b5 9.Qxb5 Ne7 is a dangerous attacking line. For example, 10.Nc3 Rb8 1 l .Qc4 Be6 1 2.Qd3 ( 12.Qa4!?) Nxc6 13.e3 Nb4 14.Qe4 0-0! 1 5.exd4 Re8. Perhaps IO .. Bc2 is even better. .

An example of this line, Trobat-Rausis, Andorra 1 990, went 10.e3 Rb8 1 1 .Qe2 (else Black captures on b2 with something) ()-0! 12.exd4

68


Nxc6 13.Qd 1 Re8 + 14.Bd3 Qxd4 and Black soon had a won en dgame. 4

••.

Nd7!

Creating a kind of Albin Counter Gambit in which the moves Qb3xb7 and ... Bf5/...Nd7 have been inserted. Clearly, Black's moves have been more useful than White's. If White continues in Albin style, with 5.dxe5? ! d4 he quickly gets a bad position (6.Nf3 Rb8 7.Qd5 Bb4 + 8.Nbd2 c5 ! ? as in Illustrative Game 1 6). 5.Nc3 On 5.cxd5 Black maintains his initiative with 5 ... Bxb 1 6.Rxb 1 and then 6 ... Rb8 and ... Bb4 + . More conservative, at first examination, is 5.Nf3. But then 5 ... Rb8 6.Qxd5 Bb4 + is OK (7.Bd2? Ne7! and wins as in a 197 1 English game, Webb-Sinclair). Better is 7.Nfd2 but following 7 ... Ne7 8.Qf3 exd4 Black can hardly complain.


69

7.Bf4 Probably better is 7.e4!? after which 7... Bxe4 allows 8.Nxc7 + and 9.Qxe4. The tactical 7 ... Nc5 leads to all sorts of complications, such as 8.Nxc7 + Bxc7 9.Qc6 + Nd7 10.exf5 Ba5 + 1 1 .Kd 1 Ne7 12.0±3 0-0 13.Bf4 Qb6 with Black better, or 8.Qc6! Bd7 9.Nxc7 + Qxc7! 1 0.Qxa8 Ke7 1 1.Qd5 Nf6 ( Miles-Gobet, Geneva 1 986). Best of all may be the simple 7 ...Bg6 which renews Black's ideas of 8 ... Rb8 and 8 ... Ne7. 7... 8.Nxf4

Bxf4 Ngffi

Here 8 ... c5 anchoring the pawn at d4 and gaining queen access to the queenside, is inexact because it allows the White knight back to d5 with threats of Qxa8 and Nc7 + . See I llustrative Game 17. 9.0-0-0 And now Goldin-Klaric, Palma de Mallorca 1 989 went 9 ...c5 1 0.±3 Rb8 1 1 .Qa6 Qc7 12.g3 Qe5 when Black must be OK (Illustrative Game 18).

70


ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES

( 1 6) Litinskaya-Rause, Kiev 1 984 l .d4 2.c4 3.Qb3 4.Qxb7 5.dxe5? 6.Nt3 7.Qd5 8.Nbd2 9.e6

d5 Bf5 e5 Nd7 d4 Rb8 Bb4 + c5!

Otherwise 9 ... Ne7 traps the queen. The game now begins to look like a rout. 9... 10.Qd6 l l.h3 12.Qa6 13.a3 14.b4

fxe6 Ngffi Ne4! 0-0 Ba5!


71

This is a semi-desperate but apparently sound bid to break open the center and free White's pieces. Both 14.bxa5 and 1 4.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Qxe6 + are threatened. 14 ... 15.Nxe4 16.Qxe6 + 1 7.Qxe4 18.Qe5

cxb4 Bxe4 Kh8 Nc5!

White is obviously lost on 1 8.Qc2 b3 + so he might the knight into b3. 18 ... 19.axb4!? 20.Kd l 2I.e4?! 22.Ke2

a�

well allow

Nb3 Bxb4 + Nxal dxe3 + Qc8

It's over in seconds now. 23.fxe3 Qxc4 + 24.Kf2 Qxcl 25.Bd3 Qxh l 26.Kg3 Bel + White Resigns

( 1 7) M i kh alevsky-Basin, U.S.S.R. 1 990 l .d4 2.c4 3.Qb3 4.Qxb7 5.Nc3 6.Nxd5

d5 BfS e5 Nd7 exd4 Bd6

72


7.Bf4 8.Nxf4 9.Nd5

Bxf4 c5 Rb8!

Black is willing to allow a discomforting check in order to retain the great pawn at d4. IO.Nc7 + l l.Qxa7

Kf8

Clearly l l .Qd5 Qxc7 12.Qxf5 Qa5 + and 13 ... Rxb2 is unaccept able. 1 1... 12.Nb5 13.Qa6 14.Qa4

Ne7 Nc6 Rb6 Nb4


73

The threats of 15 ... Nc2 + and 15 ... Ra6 are immediately decisive. I S.Rcl 16.Qdl 17.Qd2 1 8.e4

Ra6 Rxa2 Qa5 Rxb2!

White resigns in view of 19.Qxb2 Nd3 + .

( 18) Goldin-Klaric, Palma de Mall orca 1 989 l.d4 2.c4 3.Qb3 4.Qxb7 5.Nc3 6.Nxd5 7.Bf4 8.Nxf4 9.0-0-0

d5 BfS e5 Nd7 exd4 Bd6 Bxf4 Ngffi c5

Black can now castle and quickly develop an attack with . Qa5. His queen maneuver in the game only helps White find a tactical device. .

1 0.13 l l.Qa6 12.g3

.

Rb8 Qc7?! QeS

White now manages to break the hammerlock on the center.


74

13.e4! 14.Qa3 15.Bd3 16.Qc3!

dxe3 0-0 Rb4

There is safety both i n numbers and in endgames. Now 16 Qxc3?! 17.bxc3 is probably an unsound exchange sacrifice. ...

16... 17.Rxd3

Bxd3 Ne4!?

Concerned that the e-pawn is being surrounded, Black offers to play an endgame with a very active rook against two knights. The threat of 1 8 Nf2 forces matters. ...

18.Qxe5 19.fxe4 20.Nxd3 21.Kdl 22.Ke2 23.Kxe3

Nxe5 Nxd3 + Rxc4 + Rd8 Rc2 + c4!

If all the queenside pawns are exchanged off, White has winning chances. But the text gives Black, if anyone, the better chances.


24.Nf2 25.Nf3 26.Rcl 27.Ke2 28.Rc2 29.Ndl 30.Kd3 31.Nxc3

75

Rxb2 Rxa2 Ra3 + c3 ffi ReS a5 a4

After this Black's progress is stopped and a draw is reached through exhaustion of ideas. 32.Rc I Rb3 33.N d4 Rb4 34.Ral Ra8 35.Nc2 Rb.3 36.N d4 Rb4 37.N c2 Rb.3 38.N d4 Draw

CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH 3.cxd5

76

CHAPTER FIVE: White Dissolves The Center With 3.cxd5

This has become something of a main line of the Baltic Defense, particularly with 5.Kxb 1 below.White gets the two bishop advantage and the superior center -- but somehow can't seem to prove any advantage of significance.

l.d4 2.c4 3.cxd5

d5 Bf5 Bxb 1 !

It is essential for Black to avoid 3. . Qxd5 4.Nc3 which would cost him a prohibitive amount of time and center control. .

The natural move here, or course, is (a) 4.Rxbl but this is rarely played.We will also examine two other possibilities -- (b) 4.Qa4 + and then 4 ... c6 5.dxc6 as well as (c) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.Rxbl.

(a)

4.Rxbl


n

The initiative that Black o btains with his next move turns out to be lasting. He can then continue with ...Nc6 and ...0-0-0, which in many calies will doom the d4-pawn.

4...

Qxd5

Another benefit of 3...Bx b 1 is that the a2-pawn is hanging. Defend ing it via 5. b3?! is no way to o btain an edge and might give Black the upper hand after 5...e5. IfWhite is going to gambit the pawn he should simply continue 5.Nt3 Qxa2 6.Qc2 followed by 7.e4. But here again Black is in no rush to grab such a pawn. He can use his knights effectively with 5...Nc6! and 6...Nf6, followed by ...Nxd4 or ...Ne4.

... .

r.:&'§ • • � .... �

. •••• • • � • . .. . ...

•

• • • . ..... . . . fB'i � . . • � • • • • ?�

��

�;.- � �

f$� � u n. �

• � a�� 5.a3 On 5.Qa4 + Black might try Minev's suggestion of 5... b5 6.Qa5 e5! intending 7...Nc6. However, the ea11iest way of equalizing against the check is 5...Nc6. Then 6.Nt3 allows the key tactical idea in this variation: 6. ..e5! with prospects such as 7.dxe5? B b4 + 8.Bd2 Qe4! and the threats to the

78

CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES T H E CENTER WITH 3.cxd5

rook and queen (9 ... Bxd2 + ) force 9.Qd 1 0-0-0 followed by 10... Bxd2 + and wins. Better, after 5.Qa4 + Nc6 is 6.e3 and then 6 ... e5 7.b4 0-0 8.Nf3 exd4 9.Bb5 a� in Alexandrov-Svidler, Alma Ata 199 1 (9 ... Nge7 10.00 Kb8 l l .Rd 1 a6 1 2.Be2 Qe6 13.b5 ! with a winning attack). If Black is going to accept such a sacrifice he should be prepared to continue 9 ... dxe3 ! and then 10.Bxc6 exf2 + l l .Kxf2 Qxc6 when he is at least temporarily two pawn.� ahead in the endgame. 5... 6.Nf3

Nc6

Here 6.e3 looks better because of the idea of 6 ... 0-0-0 7.Ne2 ! and 8.Nc3. If Black may has to defend with 7 ...Qh5 ! ? 8.Qc2 Qg6 a� in one recent game (see Illustrative Game 1 9), then 6.e3 must be consid ered an improvement. One possibility for Black is 6 ... e5 ! ? but even in the line above he can do better with 7 ... Nf6 (instead of 7 ... Qh5) 8.Nc3 Qg5 ! a� in Crouch-Shirov. 6... 7.Qc2!

0-0-0

Not 7.e3 e5 when Black is already a bit better. Now Yermolinsky Malaniuk, Rostov 1 975 went 8.Be2 exd4 9.exd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4 Qxd4 l l .Qc2 Nf6 and 1 2 ... Qe4 denied White adequate compensation. 7... 8.Nxd4 9.g3

Nxd4 Qxd4


79

White has much better compensation than in the note to his seventh move. Now the Russian player Fadeev used this variation twice at Uzhgorod 1985. Both games went 9 ... e6 10.Bg2 Qc5 1 1 .Qa4 a6 and now Khuzman obtained reasonable chances with 12.0-0 Nf6 1 3.b4 Qc4 14.Be3. But Smirin got the worst of it after 12.Be3 Qb5 13.Qc2 Nf6 14.0-0 Qf5 15.Qc3 Nd5 .

(b)

4.Qa4 + l.d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 +

d5 BfS Bxbl

The check rudely interrupts Black in the process of equalizing. At one time it was thought that it wa� 4.Qa4 + that refuted 2 ... Bf5. Now 4 ... Nd7 5.Rb 1 Ngf6 has been suggested, by Nikolai Minev, without further analysis. After 6.e3 Nxd5 7.Nf3 Black's pieces are not a� lively as in section (c) below. Black can also try this idea with queens off the board: 4 ... Qd7 5.Qxd7 + Nxd7 6.Rxb 1 Ngf6. Clearly, Black will regain the d5-pawn and achieve material equality. However, White's light-squared bishop is not restricted in any way and he can obtain an edge with 7.Nf3 Nb6 8.e3 Nbxd5 9.Be2 e6 10.00 Be7 1 1 .Ne5 and 1 2.Bf3 as in Euwe-Tylor, Pistyan 1926. These positions should be compared with variation (c) below in which Black's queen offsets the power of the bishop. 4...

c6!

80


This appears to develop Black's game and liquidates White's fine d4-pawn for no reason. However, the exchange on c6 serves to free the board for the appearance of White's excellent bishop pair -- one of whose members may take up residence on b5. For 5.Rxb 1 , see subvariation (c) below. 5... 6.Rxbl

Nxc6

This appears to equalize, according to analysis by Alexey Shirov in Informant 52. Surprisingly, 6 ... e5, which sets the transparent 7.dxe5?? Bb4 + trap, can get Black into hot water after 7.Bd2! Once Black regains his pawn the position may resemble a bad version of the Albin Counter Gambit. For example, 7 ... exd4 8.Nf3 Qd5 9.g3 Bc5 1 0.Bg2 Nge7 1 1 .(}-0 and now 1 1 ...0-0? 1 2.Ng5! Qd7 13.Nxh7! worked perfectly in a Soviet game, Vaulin-Fadeev, Yevpatoria 1 985. Black does better with 7 ... Qxd4 8.Qxd4 and now 8 ... Nxd4 9.e3! favors the bishops, according to Shirov (9 ... Nc6 1 0.Bb5 Rc8 l l .Nf3 Bd6 12.Bc3 f6 13.Nd2 or 10 ... Bd6 1 1 .Bxc6 + ! bxc6 12.Nf3 Ne7 13.e4 ).


81

But 8 .. exd4 !?, an idea of Malaniu k's seems OK. Black will play ... Bc5-b6, securing his center pawn and queenside. .

6...

Qxd4!

Black gets the same kind of endgame as in the last note but with ... e7-e6 instead of ... e7-e5, which concedes too much light-square terrain. But the text leads to an endgame in which White, at least at first, has the better chances. More in the free-wheeling spirit of the opening is 6 ... Qd5 ! ? and then 7.Nf3 e5. More testing is 7.Bd2 after which 7 ...e5?! 8.dxe5 0-0 9.Bc3 ! is unsound, and so is 7 ...b5? ! 8.Qb3 Qe4 9.Rcl Nxd4 1 0.Qc3, but 7 ... Qe4! ? and probably 7 ... 0-0-0 aren't. That leaves only 7.Bd2 Nf6 and now not 8.e3 e5 9.Ne2 with advantage to White but 8 ... Ne4!? 9.Nf3 Nxd2 1 0.Nxd2 e5 l l .Qb5 Qd7 12.d5 Bb4 1 3.Rd l 0-0-0! ?. 7.Qxd4 Shirov gives 7.b4 e5 8.a3 as being unclear. 7... 8.Nt3

Nxd4

After 8.e3 Black plays 8 ... Nc6 9.Bb5 Rc8 followed by ... Bd6 and ... Nge7. A quick draw was seen in Kishinev-Svidler, Copenhagen 1991 with 10.Bd2 a6 l l .Ba4 b5 12.Bd l e6 1 3.Rc l Bd6 and 14 ... Kd7.

82


8...

Nc2 + !

White's initiative is too great after 8 .. Nxf3 + 9.exf3 or 8 Nc6 9.b4 followed by 1 O.e3 and 1 1 .b5. .

9.Kd l

...

Nb4

And according to Shirov, chances are equal ( 10.Bd2 e6 1 l .e3 a6).

(c)

S.Rxbl l.d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + S.Rxbl

d5 BfS Bxbl c6 QxdS


83

6.Nf3 This reasonable move may be a slight inaccuracy because it gives up the opportunity for Ne2-c3 ! . Both moves may involve the sacrifice of the a-pawn. For example, 6.e3 Nd7 7.Ne2 Nb6 and now 8.Qb3 Qxb3 is harmless while 8.Qc2 Qxa2 9.N c3 Qe6 1 O.b4 offered White good play in a 1 982 Soviet game (Illustrative Game 20). 6...

Nd7

Now the game begins. Black appears to be threatening 7 ... Nb6 after which 8.Qc2 Qxa2 is now a somewhat dubious gambit because there is no Nc3 and because 8.Qb3 Qxb3 is an equal endgame. White's choices here include: 7.a3, 7.e3 and 7.Bd2.

(cl )

7.a3 l.d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + S.Rxbl 6.Nf3 7.a3

dS Bf5 Bxbl c6 cxdS Nd7

A modest move that solves the ... Qxa2 problem once and for all. 7... 8.e3

Ngffi

84


After 8.Qc2 Black has enough time to play 8... e5! and then 9.e3 e4 ! (not 9 ... exd4 I O.Bc4 ). See Illustrative Game 22, won by Rausis. 8...

e6

Another Rausis game went 8 ... Qe4 9.Ra 1 e5 and then 1 0.Bd2 N c5 ! with a strong attack ( l l .Qd 1 exd4 1 2.Nxd4 0-0-0 13.f3 Qe5). 9.8e2 More enterprising is 9.Qc2 and I O.Bc4 or IO.Bd3, and castling. But White must be aware of another, quite dangerous Black strategy. If White castles too quickly he invites a bayonet-like attack on the g-pawn. For example, 9.Qc2 Bd6 I O.Bd3 Qh5 !? and now 1 1.0-0? allows l l ...g5 ! . The threat of 12 ... g4 is powerful and in Sakayev- Akopian, Sochi 1 986, White decided to look for compensation with 1 2.e4 g4 13.Ne5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Bxe5 but never achieved any. 9...

a5

This restrains White on the queenside (no b2-b4-b5) and takes away a major enemy plan. A quite reasonable alternative is 9 ... Bd6 and I O ... e5 or 1 0... Qh5. 10.0-0

Bd6

And with ... e6-e5 corning up, Black should have a comfortable rniddlegame. See Illustrative Game 2 1 .

(c2)

7.e3


l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxbl 6.Nf3 7.e3

85

d5 BfS Bxbl c6 Qxd5 Nd7

We should take note of 7.b4 Ngf6 8.e3 which transposes into our main line below. 7

•••

Ngffi

Not 7 ... e5? 8.Bc4 which favors White. But 7 ... Nb6 forces either a more questionable pawn sac (8.Qc2 Qxa2) or 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 e6 with unclear chances. I n fact, 9.axb3 was the final move ofTimoshenko-Malaniuk, Lvov 1988 -- since the players immediately agreed to a draw. 8.b4 9.Qc2

e6

Now Hofstein-Fadeev, U.S.S.R. 1984 went 9 .. a5! 10.Bc4 Qe4 1 1 .Bd3 Qg4 and White must sacrifice a pawn. After 1 2.0-0 axb4 13.Bd2 there were chances for both sides for Black seems to be doing quite well. .

(c3)

7.Bd2 l .d4 2.c4

d5 BfS

86


3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxbl 6.Nf3 7.Bd2

Bxbl c6 Qxd5 Nd7

This is the best White can do with this bishop because 7.Bf4? is a blunder, hanging a piece to 7 ... Qf5 ! . Almost unexplored is 7.g3 after which 7 ... Nb6 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 e6 leads to an even game in Christiansen-Senador, Manila 1992 ( 10.Bd2 Nf6 1 1 .Bg2 Be7 12.0-0 0- 0 13.Ra 1 Nfd5 14.Rfcl Bb4 ! ). 7...

Ngffi

Here 7 ... Nb6 was unavailing because of 8.Qa5 ! offering to enter an ending slightly favorable to the bishops (although one can be eliminated by 8 ... Nc4 9.Qxd5 cxd..'i 10.e3 Nxd2). Worth investigating is 7 ... Qe4! ? with the idea of 8 ... e5. 8.e3

e6

Not 8 ... e5? because of 9.Bc4 Qd6 1 0.Qb3 or 9 ... Qe4? 1 0.Bxf7 + . In other words, Black has to be very careful about further loosening of the light-colored squares.


87

9.Bc4 Not 9.Bd3? because of 9 ... Nc5 ! A 1 98 1 Malaniuk game went 9.Qc2 Ne4 1 0.Bc4 Qf5 1 1 .Bd3 Ndf6 12.0-0 Bd6 but it was clear that White had very little from the opening. After 13.Be 1 Qd5 14.Rd1 a5 15.Khl Bb4 16.Ne5 Nd6 1 7.Bc3 0-0 1 8.a3 Bxc3 19.bxc3 Nc8 Black won a nice game. 9... I O.Qdl

QfS

Otherwise, 1 0 ... b5 or IO . . Qxb 1 + ends the game. .

10... 1 1 .0-0

Bd5 0-0

Time to take stock. White seems to have the superior center and holds the two bishops. But his only clear plans are the advance of the e-pawn -- a neat trick here -- or of the b-pawn. As long as Black controls d5 and e4 he should be OK. And his future includes ... e6e5-e4. With 12.Bc3 Ne4 13.Bd3 Qd5 White achieves nothing. A better try is 12.Re 1 playing for 1 3.e4! Nxe4 14.Bd3 winning material


88

(14 . Nxf2 15.Bxf5 Nxd l 1 6.Bd3 traps the d l -knight). However, 1 2 ... Ne4 13.Bd3 Qd5 keeps control. See Illustrative Game 24. .

.

ILLU STRATIVE GAMES

( 1 9 ) Supatashvili-Lyegky, Leningrad 1 989

l.d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Rxbl 5.a3 6.e3 7.Ne2! 8. Qc2

d5 815 Bxbl Qxd5 Nc6 0-0-0 Qh5 Qg6

This forces an endgame in which Black's king position is safe but he lacks th he normal cou nterplay in light-colored squares. 9.Qxg6 1 0.b4 l l .b5?! 12.Nc3 13.Bc4 14.a4 15.Be2

hxg6

Nffi NbS Nbd7 e6 Nb6 Nbd5

Just in time . Since Black can retake now on d5 with a pawn improving his pawn structure sufficiently -- he is nearly equal.

-


16.Nxd5 1 7.g3 18.0-0 19.Rb3

89

exdS Bd6 Ne4 fS!

Suddenly White has no obvious targets and it is Black -- with g6-g5-g4 -- who has the threats. 20.13 2l.Bd3 22.Rf2 23.Rg2

Nffi Rh3

Rdh8 Kd7!

Preparing to protect the f5 pawn with his king so he can push the g-pawn. 24.a5 25.a6 26.Ba3! 27.Bxd6

Ke6 b6 gS cxd6!

After 27 ... Kxd6 28.Rc3 and 29.Rc6 + , White stands well. 28.Rc3 g4 29.f4 g6 30.Rc7 R8h7 Draw

90


(20) Ohotnik-Malaniuk, Yalta 1 982 l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxb1 6.e3 7.Ne2 8.Qc2! 9.Nc3 10.b4

d5 BfS Bxb1 c6 Qxd5 Nd7 Nb6 Qxa2 Qe6

Now, for example, 10 ... a6 (to stop 1 1 .b5 ) 1 1 .Ne4 and 1 2.Nc5 or just l l .Be2 followed by 1 2.0-0, 13.Rd 1 and 14.Bf3 offer obvious compensation. 10... l l .b5 12.bxc6 13.Na4 14.Qxa4

Nffi Qd7 bxc6 Nxa4 Ne4!

Threatens the fork at c3 and in so doing, denies White the oppor tunity of 1 5.Ba6 and 16.Rb7. 15.Rb6! 16.Ra6 17.Bc4 18.0-0

ReS e6 Rc7

The a-pawn is just weak enough to provide compensation but just strong enough to be won only at the cost of a drawish liquidation.

THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN 'S GAMBIT

18... 19.Qc2 20.Bb2 21.e4 22.Bc3 23.Bal 24.Rdl 25.Bxa6 26.Bc3 27.Ba5 28.e5 29.Qxc6

91

Be7 Nf6 0-0 Rb8 Bb4! Rb6 Rxa6 Bf8 Qe8 Rd7 Nd5

White regains the pawn but after Black's next move he finds it hard to defend d his d-pawn and make progress at the same time. 29... 30.Qxe8 31 .Rbl 32.Bb5

Rd8 Rxe8 Bb4!

Or 32.Bxb4 Rb8 and 32.RxlJ4 Nxb4 33.Bxb4 Rb8 34.Bc3 Rb l + 35.Bfl Rb2 and the a-pawn is active enough for Black. 32...

Rb8

92


33.Bc6 34.Rxb8 + 35.Kfl

Bd6! Bxb8 Bc7!

Although this exchanges White's bad bishop, it is sufficient to draw. White's king has no point of entry now. 36.Bxc7 Nxc7 37.Ke2 Kf8 38.Kd3 Ke7 39.Kc4 g5 40.g3 h6 41 .f4 gxf4 Draw (2 1 ) Remlinger-Soltis, Chicago 1 992 l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxb1 6.Nf3 7.a3 8.e3 9.Be2 10.0-0 1 l.N d2

d5 81'5 Bxbl c6 Qxd5 Nd7 Ngffi e6 a5 Bd6

This stops the freeing l l ...e5?? because of 1 2.Bc4. 1 1... 12.Bf3 13.g3 14.Qc2 1 5.Nc4 1 6.e4

Bc7 Qd6 0-0 Rfe8 Qe7 b5!?

T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT

17.Ne3 18.e5 19.Qxc6 20.Nxd5 2l.Qxb5 22.Bxd5 23.Qxa5 24.8g2

93

Bb6 Nd5 Bxd4 exd5 Nxe5 Rab8 Qd7 Nd3

Now the attack on f2 appears overwhelming (25.Qd2 Rb3! 26.Qxd3? Bxf2 + ) . 25.Be3! 26.fxe3 27.Rbdl 28.Bd5!

Bxe3 Rxe3 Re2 Qh3!

A more or less forced piece sacrifice that ensures a perpetual check -- but no more. 29.Rxf7! 30.Kfl

Qxh2 + Kh8


94

31.Rxd3! 32.Rd l 33.Kgl 34.Kfl 35.Kgl 36.Kfl

Rbe8 Qh3 + Qxg3 + Qh3 + Qg4 + R2e3!

Black had to find a dark square to attack and it is g1 (via 37 ... Rg2 and 33 Rg 1 + ) . . .

.

37.Qd2 Rg3 38.Kf2 Qh439.Rh l ! Rh3 + 40.Kgl Rei + 41.Rf1 Rxfl + Draw

(22) Peshina-Rausis, Daugavpils 1 990 l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxbl 6.Nf3 7.a3 8.Qc2

d5 Bf5 Bxbl c6 Qxd5 Nd7 Ngffi e5

White's loss of time has cost him the chance to play 9 Bc4. Now 9.dxe5 Nxe5 1 0.Nxe5 Qxe5 l l .Bd2 can be safely met by l l . . Qe4 or 1 1 ... Ne4. .

9.e3 10.Nd2 l l .g3 12.Bc4

e4 Be7 0-0! Qf5


13.13 14.fxe4 15.Nb3 16.Bxe3

95

Qh5 Ng4 Nxe3! Qf3

Now to preserve the extra piece White must try 1 7.Kd2 18.Rbel 19.Be2 20.Kd3

Nffi b5! Nxe4 + QfS

21.Rhfl 22.Rf4 23.Rxe4

Qg6 Rae8 Bb4!

This wi ns back at least a rook. 24.Bf3 Bxel 25.Qe2 f5 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.Qxel f4 + 28.Kd2 Rxe3 29.Qxe3 White forfeited The next two games should be compared with one another because of their similar development and because of the outcome of the Ne5 ! ? sacrifices.

96

CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH J.cxdS

(23) Knaak-Pfretzschner, East German Championship 1 984 l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxbl 6.Nf3 7.e3 8.Bd2 9.Qc2 I O.Bc4 l l.Bd3

d5 Bf5 Bxbl c6 Qxd5 Nd7 e6 Ngffi Ne4 Qf5 Ndf6

Black will maintain the e4 outpost at all costs. 12.0-0 13.Ne5! 14.dxe5 15.f4 16.Bel

Bd6 Bxe5 Qxe5 Qd6

White has reasonable compen.� ation in the form of dark-squared bishop and the prospects of breaking the e4 outpost.


16... 17.Rdl 18.Rxd3

97

Nc5 Nxd3 Qe7

If the queen goes to c7 then White would put the bishop on c3. But now: 19.Bh4! 20.Rb3 21.e4 22.e5 23.Khl ?

Rd8 Rd7 Qd6 Qd4 +

An error which should allow Black to seize the edge with 23 ... Ne4!. Correct was 23.Bf2 Qe4 24.Qc l !, retaining compensation.

23... 24.Rxb7!

Nd5? Nb4

Now Black is quite lost (24... Rxb7 25.Qc6 + Rd7 26.Qc8 + ). 25.Rb8 + 26.Qc3!

Rd8 Black Resigns

Because of 26 ... Qxc3 27.Rxd8 mate. (24) Taylor-Soltis, Chicago 1 992 l .d4 2.c4 3.cxd5 4.Qa4 + 5.Rxbl

d5 BfS Bxbl c6 Qxd5

98

CHAPTER FIVE: WH ITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH 3.cxd5

6.Nf3 7.Bd2 8.e3 9.Bc4 10.Qd1 1 1 .0-0 12.Re1 13.Bd3 14.Bcl ?!

Nd7 Ngffi e6 QfS Bd6 0-0 Ne4 Qd5

White's faith in the two bishops is justified if Black opens the game prematu rely ( 14 ...Ngf6 1 5 .Qc2 c5 ? 1 6.dxc5 Bxc5 1 7.Bc4 and 1 8.b4). 14... 15.Qc2 1 6.Ne5!?

Ndffi Rfc8!

Offering a plan as in the previous game. Alternatives such as 1 6.b4 a5 or 1 6.Nd2 Nxf2 ! were certainly unattractive. 16... 1 7.dxe5 1 8.exffi 1 9.Qxd3 20.fxg7

Bxe5 Rd8 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rad8


2l.Kfl

99

fS!

Black must make the remaining bishop inferior to the knight. His initiative is bound to run out of energy (2 1 ...Nd2ch 22.Bxd2 Rxd2 23.Re2) so Black must find a different way to win. 22.Ke2 23.13 24.b3 25.Rb2 26.Rd2 27.Bxd2 28.Rcl 29.g3?

Kxg7 Nffi Kf7 e5 Rxd2 + Ke6

Rg8

An unlikely error, which allows Black to establish a hold on e4.

29... 30.Rc4 31 .Bel 32.fxe4 33.h3 34.Ra4?! 35.g4 36.hxg4 37.gxf5 + 38.Rc4 39.Rc2

hS e4! Rd8 Nxe4 c5 a6

hxg4

Rh8 Kxf5 bS Rhl

Preparing to run White out of moves (40...Kg4 4 1 .Kd3 Kf3). 40.Ba5 4 1 .Kd3

Rh2 + Nt2 +

1 00


42.Ke2 Or 42.Kc3 Nd 1 + 43.Kd3 c4 + ! 44.bxc4 bxc4 + 45.Rxc4 Nb2 + .

Ng4 + 42... Ne5 + 43.Kd3 44.Kc3 b4 + White Resigns

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . . ............................................................ ......... 3 Galliamova-lvanchuk vs. Levi tina, Manila 1 992 ............. 4 Move Orders ......................................................... .............. 6 (a) l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 (b) l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 (c) l .Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5 Chapter One ............... ....................... ................... . .......... 1 1 White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 (a) 4 ... c6 .................. . . ................... . . . . . . . . ...... ............ ........... 1 2 (b) 4 . . .Nc6 . . . . ............................ . . . . . . . . . ................................. 1 7 Illustrative Games ............................... . . . . ..... ...................... 1 9 ( 1 ) Levitiana-Gaprindashvilli, Lvov 1 983 ...................... 1 9 (2) Salo-Grau, Stockholm Olympiade 1 937 .................... 22 (3) Basescu-Soltis, New York 199 1 .......................... ......... 24 (4) Ornstein-Kauppala, Jarvenpas 1985 .......................... 27 (5) G. Garcia-Larsen, Linares 1 98 1 ....... .......................... 28 (6) Flohr-Mikena", Soviet Ch. 1 95 1 . . . . . . ........... ............... 30 (7) Shipman-Soltis, New York 1991 ............................... 33 (8) Andersson-Kovacevic, Bugojno 1984 ........................ 35 Chapter Two ............................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ........................ 38 2.Nf3 : Main Line l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Qb3 ! Nc6 (a) Locking the center with 5.c5 ..................................... 40 (b) Retaining Options with 5.Bd2 . . . . . . . . . ........................... 44 Illustrative Games ...................... ........................................ 46 (9) Fine-Grau, Stockholm Olympiade 1 937 ......... ......... 46 ( 1 0) Piket-Bareev, Dortmund 1 992 . . . . . .......... ................... 48 ( 1 1 ) Anikaev-Vaganian, Moscow 1982 .......... ............. . . . . . . 50 .

.

.

.

( 12) H . Olafsson-Knezevic, Neskaupstad 1984 ................. 52 Chapter Three .............. . . ..................................................... 54 White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3 l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.Nc3 e6! Illustrative Games . . . . . . . . . ................ ...................... ............... 58 ( 13) Shakins-Rause, Latvian Team Ch. 1985 ................... 58 ( 14) Schneider-M alaniuk, Yalta 1982 .............. ................. 60 ( 1 5 ) Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1 979 . . ....................... ........ 62 Chapter Four . . . . . .............. .................. ...... ............................ 66 The Grau Gambit l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.Qb3 e5! Illustrative Games ...... ......... .................... .................. ........ 70 ( 1 6) Litinskaya-Rause, Kiev 1984 . . .. ...... ........................... 70 ( 17) Mikhalevsky-Ba�in, U.S.S.R. 1990 . . ........................ 7 1 ( 18) Goldin-Klaric, Palma de M allorca 1989 .................. 73 Chapter Five ..................................... ......................... ........... 76 White dissolves the center with 3.cxd5 l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.cxc5 Bxb l ! (a) 4.Rxb 1 76 (b) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.dxc6 ...................................................... 79 (c) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.Rxb 1 ...................................... ................ 82 Illustrative Games . . . . . . . . . ....................... .......... ....... ............. 88 ( 19) Supatashvili-Lyegky, Leningrad 1984 ...................... 88 (20) Ohotnik-Malantiuk, Yalta 1982 ................................ 90 (2 1 ) Remli nger-Soltis, Chicago 1992 ........... .................... 92 (22) Peshina-Rausis, Daugavpils 1990 ............................. 94 (23 ) Knaak-Pfretzschner, East German Ch. 1 989 .......... 96 (24) Taylor-Soltis, Chicago 1992 ...................................... 97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NOTES

Baltic_Defense_to_the_Queen_Gambit.pdf

Recommend Documents