5 CONTENTS
From First Steps to Success. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Competing at Top Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .
1
2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
011 - Dreev, Kiljava 1984 27 Dreev - Kaidanov, Moscow 1985..........................28 Dreev - Bareev, Tallinn 1986..........................30 Dreev - Gelfand, Tallinn 1986.......................... 34 Dreev - Kamsky, Pavlodar 1987..........................36 Dreev - Gelfand, Uzhgorod 1987 ..........................39 Dreey - Chekhov, Protvino 1988..........................40 Dreev - Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988..........................42 Baburin - Dreev, Gorky 1989............................45 Dreev - Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989 ...................48 Pliester - Dreev, New York 1989............................52 Ruban - Dreev, Tbilisi 1989 ............................54 Dreev - E.Geller, Moscow 1989.......................... 57 Aseev - Dreev, Lviv 1990...............................60 I.Novikov - Dreev, Lviv 1990.............................63 Dreev - D.Bronstein, Reykjavik 1990 .......................66 Dreev - Wedberg, New York 1991 ..........................69 Dreev - Malaniuk, Moscow 1991 ..........................73 Anand - Dreev, Madras 1991 .............................76 Nadera - Dreev, Manila 1992 .......... ',' ................78 Dreev - Gleizerov, Moscow 1992 ..........................81 Dreev - Sakaev, Moscow 1992 ..........................82 Tiviakov - Dreev, Podolsk 1992 .............., ..............84 Rogers - Dreev, BieI 1993 ...............................86 Lerner - Dreev, Rostov-on-Don 1993 ......................91 Dreev - Muhutdinov, St Petersburg 1993 ..................94 Galdunts - Dreev, St Petersburg 1993 ......................97 Gelfand - Dreev, Tilburg 1993 .........................99 Dreev - Golubev, Alushta 1994 ......................... 102 Adams - Dreev, Dortmund 1994 ..........., .............105 Dreev - Leko, Dortmund 1994 ...........................108 Dreev - Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1995 ........ ... 110 Dreev - Seirawan, Wijk aan Zee 1995 ................... 112 Dreev - KhaIifman, Linares 1995 ..................... 115 .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Dreev - Shirov, BieI 1995 ........... . . . . . ....... . . 116
6 36 37 38 39
Dreev - de Firmian, Biei1995 ........................117 Dreev - Milov, Biel 1995 .......................... 119 Dautov - Dreev, Yerevan 1996 .........................122 Dreev - Galkin, Elista 1996 ......................... 125 40 Dreev - Vaganian, Budapest 1996 ...................... 129 41 Dreev - Graf, Groningen 1997 ...................... 131 42 Sadler - Dreev, Groningen 1997 ...................... 134 43 Dreev - Kasparov, Linares 1997 ...................... 139 44 Dreev - Krasenkow, Kazan 1997 ...................... 142 45 Dreev - Svidler, Elista 1997 . . .................... 144 46 Dreev - Khalifrnan, Elista 1998 ...................... 147 47 Dreev - Rublevsky, Elista 1998 ......................149 48 Dreev - Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 1998 .................151 49 Balashov - Dreev, Samara 1998 ...................... 152 50 Timman - Dreev, Elista 1998 ...................... 154 51 Sasikiran - Dreev, Linares 1999 ...................... 157 Dreev - Svetushkin, Linares 1999 ...................... 159 52 53 Dreev - Grischuk, Ubeda 1999 ....................... 162 54 Tiviakov - Dreev, Ubeda 1999 ........ .. ................ 55 Semeniuk - Dreev, St Petersburg 1999 ..................167 Dreev - Khalifrnan, St Petersburg 1999 ................. 169 56 Wang Zili - Dreev, Shenyang 1999 ......................172 57 58 Dreev - Rublevsky, Las Vegas 1999 .......................176 59 Dreev - Chandler, Hastings 2000 ........................178 6 0 Dreev - B.Lalic, Hastings 2000 ........................ 180 Dreev - Huebner, Essen 2000 ...........................182 61 Dreev - Sax, Neum 2000 186 62 63 Dreev - Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 2000 ................. 187 64 Dreev - Zhang Zhong, Beijing 2000 ................... 191 van Wely - Dreev, New Delhi 2000 ......................193 65 66 I.Sokolov - Dreev, Dos Hermanas 2001 .................196 67 Dreev - Smirin, Dos Hermanas 2001 ................. 198 68 Atalik - Dreev, Sarajevo 2001 ...... ............... 200 69 Dreev - Tkachiev, Shanghai 2001 ......................202 70 Dreev - Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2001 ................ 206 71 Dreev - Banikas, Panormo 2001 ...................... 209 72 T.Nadev - Dreev, Yerevan 2001 ..................... 214 Dreev - Pigusov, Moscow 2001 ...................... 216 73 ':.'4 Dreev - Jobava, Moscow 2002 ...................... 219 5 Dreev - Pelletier, Biel 2002 .......................... 223 -6 Dree\' - Vallejo Pons, Biel 2002 ...................... 226 Dree\' - Kishnev, Chalkidiki 2002 ..................... 229 .
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
Dreev - Svidler, Chalkidiki 2002 ..................... 230 Dreev - Zagrebelny, Moscow 2003 ...... .... ........ 232 Dreev - Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 2003 ....... ........ 234 Dreev - Jakovenko, Togliatti 2003 .................. 237 Dreev - eu. Hansen, Esbjerg 2003 .................. 238 Dreev - Sasikiran, Esbjerg 2003 .................... 241 Dreev - Gallagher, Gibraltar 2004 ....................243 E.A1ekseev - Dreev, Moscow 2004 .................... 245 Dreev - J. Geller, Sochi 2004 ...................... 249 A.Kuzmin - Dreev, St Petersburg 2004 ................. 252 Volkov - Dreev, St Petersburg 2004 ................... 254 Dreev - Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 2004 .............. 258 Morozevich - Dreev, Moscow 2004 .................... 261 Dreev - Kulaots, Moscow 2005 ...................... 265 Dreev - Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 2005 .................267 Dreev - Minasian, Warsaw 2005 ..................... 271 Dreev - M. Gurevich, Warsaw 2005 .................. 275 Dreev - Sakaev, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005 ................ 277 Dreev - van Wely, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005 ............... 280 Dreev - Bareev, Moscow 2005 ...................... 282 Dreev - Bareev, Poikovsky 2006 ......................284 Bologan - Dreev, PoJkovsky 2006 ..................... 288 Yevseev - Dreev, Mo scow 2006 ..................... 290
Tournament and Match Results Index of Opponents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Index of Openings
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.294
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
298 299
From First Steps to Success I have chosen and commented on 100 games for this book and I have played them in a period of more than 20 years. These games are so different from each other that there will be some to everybody's liking - there are sacrifices, there are quiet moves, there are sharp tactical games as well as tough positional fights. You can also find instructive examples of how to play in the various stages of the game. In general, I have devoted a great attention to the openings and my comments about them are from the point of view of the contemporary theory. A chess professional's life is not only the games played over the board. You go to different countries, you visit various continents; you see picturesque places and ancient towns and you come into contact with chess-fans all over the world. In my notes to some of the games, I have shared with my readers (as much as the size of the book allows) my impressions of these journeys and encounters. While working on the story of my first steps in chess, it was as if I re-lived again everything I came through during all these times. Naturally, my memory is not perfect. I have had to omit many things also because this book is not an autobi ography, it is not memoirs, and it is supposed to be a collection of games. Still I
tried to tell in earnest about my development as a player, about my problems and
hardships (some of them due to the surroundings and some of them just personal). I have shared with my readers my joy about my victories in my first tournaments and I have told about people who have helped me and to whom lowe my deepest gratitude. I would like to begin my story with my early childhood. I was born 30.01.1969 in the city of Stavropol, but my family (my mother - Nina Michailovna, my father Sergey Sergeevich and my elder sister Tatyana) lived in Zheleznovodsk - a resort town, which seemed to me to be huge then (at present there are about 60,000 inha bitants there). My father (who is an engineering gradu ate) used to work in the town of Mineral Waters as the director of PTU (professional technical school in which people acquired high school special education). Later, he was given lodgment in the town of Zheleznovodsk and he had to quit his job as the director of the school, because it was too far from Mineral Waters town. My father (who was a strong first-grade player and he would have been at least a candidate-master if he had played competitive chess) loved chess very much
lamS
9 (Meanwhile,
he loves it now as well and he works as a coach in the Sports
School for children and juniors)
and
he read and stud ied He to
chess books. had decided introduce
his
children to chess. My sister Tatyana is older than me by two and a half
My mother and 1,1974
years and when she became eight
my father started teaching her chess. I was only five and a half then and my father had no intentions to start teaching me yet. My sister proved to be a very good chess student, though.
I (I had just become six years old). At some moment I sug
My father recalls how one day when he was studying chess with my sister, was standing around
gested a move, which proved to be not so bad after all. My father was pleasantly surprised, because in fact I � d not been taught the rules by anybody. My sister had some doubtless successes by then, but she was not really interested in chess. Therefore my father reconsidered the situation and he decided to try with me. We began working together and he was convinced immediately that
I was improving
rapidly, so we started playing chess games regularly. There were just a few chess coaches in Zheleznovodsk then. Meanwhile, there were plenty of excellent books about chess (published in a huge print runs) in those Soviet times. Therefore my father was teaching me not only moves, but also the chess notation so that I could read and study books on my own. I remember vividly how he was teaching me the chess notation. We had a chess board, but without files and ranks marked by letters and numbers - just light and dark squares. My father had prepared 64 pieces of paper with the indexes of the squares (aI, bI, (:1 etc.) and he placed them on each
square. Strangely enough I grasped the notation immediately. In fact later, when I started going to school in my first grade and I had to learn a poem or a story, I was not studying them word by word or line by line, but I was remembering the words and the lines in their entirety, repeating the poem and the story altogether. My par
ents used to be amazed and all that seems to be hardly believable even to me now, since my chess memory is too far from being perfect. Still, I am telling you this not to boast about my memory, but just to explain to you how that system with the 64
I remembered visually where every square was situ I understood the notation and if we present that sche matically then I was reasoning like this: the bishop goes from f1 to c4 and that was pieces of paper did the job
ated. Somehow gradually,
-
10 not because these squares were on the same diagonal. I learned the notation and I was already able to play games over from the books. I was very impressed then with the games of Alexander Alekhine and I recommend even now to the aspiring young players to study the chess inheritance of that outstanding Russian player. Later, my father decided to introduce me to some chess specialists who lived in Zheleznovodsk. We went at first to the home ofVasily TikhonovichVlasov who was an eminent chess functionary and who was the director then of the Chess Club of Sochi. That was not just a chess club - it was the Club which organized the famous Sochi International Tournaments (There were just a few International Tourna ments in the USSR at those times).Vasily Tikhonovich played a great role in the or ganization of these events and he was well-known in the chess world. He happened to be in Zheleznovodsk then and according to the whim of fate he became the direc tor of the Chess Club there, naturally it was much more humble than that in Sochi. So, we visited him at his home. He lived up the slopes of a mountain while we lived in the valley. I remembered how we were climbing roaming around. There was a huge Sanatorium in front of us (with more than 1000 beds) and my father pointed his hand in the direction of the Sanatorium and he said "Vasily Tikhonovich lives there... ". I was thinking then - the director of the club is supposed to inhabit a large house and that was certainly a big house. I was walking up there with delight and awe. It turned out however that
Vasily
Tikhonovich
lived much more modestly. So we met him and he tested me and gave me problems for homework. The he came to the conclusion that I was worth teaching. Accordingly, my father got me acquainted with all chess specialists re siding at those times in Zhe leznovodsk. After that .he
My father and I, 1976
worked with me intensely. Later, my father took me to the Chess Club. I remember how we went there, be cause I was reluctant to go and I resisted, but he took me there anyway. They were playing chess in that Club - practice, tournaments (at first without clocks, later with clocks). I was recording my games even when I was still six years old and I could not write regular sentences yet. I became a first grade player almost immediately and I was improving rapidly. I was noticed then and I made my debut in the Championship of the Stavropol region for adults, then I became the junior
11 champion of the region three times in a row and later I shared 1-3 places in the adult Championship of the region. Whenever I had nobody to play against, I went out to the park of Zhelezno vodsk. I used to sit on a bench in the park, I arranged the pieces on the board and I was waiting for some passer-by from among the tourists. In case somebody came around - my father asked him to play with me. Some people agreed, and I was accumulating practical experience. Later, they built a pavilion in the park and we could play with a clock there. My father co�sidered that experience useful and he kept finding sparring-partners for me - strong. players among the people conva. lescing in the Sanatorium. There soon happened something important for my chess-development. My fa ther got acquainted with a high-class chess player - master Vladimir Sergeevich Saigin - Byelorussian champion numerous times, since he lived there for years. He was also famous because of the fact that as a master he tested the then young Mikhail Tal and played a match with him. Those were the times when you could not become a master without beating another master in a match. Tal won that match after a tough fight, so Saigin could have asserted that he gave the green light to world-class chess to M. Tal himself. He did something like that for me too and I am tremendously grateful to him about that as well. I know that Vladimir Sergeevich and Mikhail Tal preserved an excellent attitude towards each other throughout the years. According to the whims of fate, Vladimir Sergeevich ended up at the Cauca sian Mineral Waters, in the town of Essentuki. My father asked him to work with me. They agreed on some financial conditions too. His work was paid indeed, but it soon became clear that he was teaching me not just for the money. In fact he told my father that money was money, but he would have never taken the job unless he had seen that it was worth it. It is a bit embarrassing for me to praise myself, but he had obviously detected something like talent in me and that had impressed him a lot. That seemed to motivate his enthusiasm while working with me; otherwise there was no other rational explanation.. I remember how I asked Vladimir Sergeevich a question when he came to us for the first time. I was really interested in the problem why in the position after 1.e4 eS 2.I2lf31t:lc6 3.d4 exd 4.lt:lxd4, Black was not playing 4... lt:lxd4 S:�xd4, followed by S...cS - ? It seemed to me that Black was winning a tempo like that. Now of course, I am a bit ashamed of a question like that, but back then I was really interested in that, since I was taught that it was essential to win tempi in the opening. Vladimir Sergeevich explained to me that not every win of a tempo was good and meanwhile in that position Black was not even winning a tempo, because he did not develop a piece, but he was just advancing a pawn. He gave me a lesson about weak squares and he told me that you should avoid compromising squares unnecessarily. I was really impressed and I understood that you were not supposed to push pawns just like that. I still remember well my sessions with Vladimir Sergeevich
-
they were tiring
not only for me - an eight year old boy, but also for him being an elderly man. They
were lasting sometimes for eight hours a day - at first in the morning, then we
�re having lunch and then we were working again in the afternoon. There was a riod (of about half a year) in which we were working quite often, like 5-6 times veek. He usually came to our place. Still, I remember once we went to his place rly in the morning and it was some holiday, or somebody's birthday. So, instead celebrating, Vladimir Sergeevich spent the whole day working with me, while ev {body around was having fun, drinking and eating. We were studying chess then ring the entire day and we went back home only late at night. I solved a colossal number of most interesting positions. V. Saigin helped me a . I felt that as a result of our work the quality of my chess improved considerably d I became a candidate master. We had competitions with a norm for a candi te master and I took part in a tournament like that when I was only 8 years old. I lyed there with quite serious adult opponents (first grade players and candidate lsters) and I fulfilled my first norm for a candidate master. I acquired the title er in the Championship of the region for men. I was playing often, numerous mes and I was also playing for the team of the Stavropol region in some zonal lrnaments - there was an entire system of tournaments then and if one wanted improve - there was never a shortage of tournaments. Our sessions with V. Saigin stopped at some moment. I do not remember why, t evidently something had changed in his life or mine-back then. The city of Zheleznovodsk was too far away from the actual chess centres and it came difficult to know how I was going to develop further. My father was won dering how to introduce me to the real "chess world". Fortunately for us, theAll-Union Chess School of Smyslov had some sessions in Kis lovodsk. That city was close to Zheleznovodsk and I went there with my father to join. The session was almost coming to an end, but still I was accepted and I was given some problems. I was asked to solve them and to send the solu tions by post. I solved the problems, of course some of them with mistakes, but in general it seemed that I had made a good impression on people and I became a member of the Smyslov School and I began to participate in every ses sion. I would like to say a few words about that school. It was organized with the all-union stu dents sporting club "Burevestnik". The Direc tor of the club was the eminent chess-function
Russia Youth Championship Saberemye Chelny 1979
ary Boris Naumovich Postovsky, who was the leader of the Russian National Team for a while
13 and later also of Team USA. His experience has been appreciated everywhere. Vas ily Vasilievich Smyslov was of course present at the sessions, but the main coaching chess work was performed by other coaches and there were simply brilliant special ists selected to work there. At first there was Yuri Sergeevich Razuvaev (I remem ber how he came and he had some lectures with us at one of the sessions, a bit later in the city of Podolsk, immediately after the end of one of Karpov's matches and he was an aide to Karpov then). Yuri Balashov was also often present at some of our sessions. Berezin had some lectures with us. I also remember the names of S. Kishnev, B. Zlotnik, G. Nessis, V. Faibisovich - all of them strong masters. We had many a teacher to learn something from. It was far from easy to join that school and later many of the "graduates" of that school became famous grandmasters: A. Khalifman, E. Bareev, V. Salov, V. Akopian, K. Aseev, I. Glek, M. Krasenkow,
E.
Pigusov, Y. Piskov, G. Serper...We were solving problems and we were also playing against each other. All that no doubt proved to be quite purposeful. Then, something very important happened in my life. When I was 10 years old, Mark Izrailevich Dvoretzky (he was also a very good player then, surprisingly for all but obviously not for him, decided to start working as a coach, and he became a brilliant coach, famous all over the world) came to Kislovodsk as a second to Nana Alexandria in her candidates match against Levitina. I was introduced to him, we had a look at some positions together, he asked me some chess questions and he gave me some problems to solve. Later he gave me some homework, too, and he went back to Moscow. I solved my problems and I did my homework and I sent the solutions to him by post.
"-
With Mark Dvoretzky, Zheleznovodsk 1983
14 That is how Mark Izrailevich Dvoretzky came into my life. My sessions with Vladimir Sergeevich Saigin continued to be tremendously important for me as be fore, but my work together with M. Dvoretzky became essential for me as well. I have to acknowledge that these two people taught me to play top-class chess. My father and I went to Moscow to work with M. Dvoretzky and we lived there with relatives or in hotels. We worked for a fortnight - this was something like a session. Mark Dvoretzky was working then simultaneously with me and Sasha Budnikov from Vladivostok. He had noticed his talent somewhere too. Sasha was a bit older than me and he was a member of the Smyslov School as well. 1 even had the feeling that Dvoretzky was somehow choosing between me and him, because it was obviously too strenuous for him to work simultaneously with both of us then. We lived 1600 kilometers away from Dvoretzky and we met only from time to time, besides our sessions were too expensive for us. After he decided that our work together was quite fruitful, we began to meet more often and we had some training camps together too. We used different possibilities for me to join in the sessions. I remember how I went to the First League Championship of the USSR and while Dvoretzky was helping Sergey Dolmatov there he worked with me during his free time. 1 was getting tuned to the world of top-level chess. In fact, Dvoretzky had his
own methods and he worked according to them. He told me immediately: "1 began
working with you in order to make a World Champion out of you!" 1 thought that to be absolutely unbelievable then, but his confidence proved to be contagious. It was already evident that he was not fantasizing - by that time Dvoretzky's pupils
Valery Chekhov, Arthur Jussupov and Sergey Dolmatov had already become World Champions. Gradually, we began to meet and work with Mark Izrailevich more and more often. I fulfilled the master norm at a tournament in the city of Grozny. The problem was not so much to make the norm but that there were so few tournaments with a master norm then that the real problem was to participate in a tournament like that! My fa ther went together with V. T. Vlasov to Moscow and he asked for an audience with Vera Niko laevna Tikhomirova, who was then the official head-coach of the Russian Federation. Vera Tikhomirova was quite famous for her rather peculiar character, she was always principled in her work and she was reluctant to favour anybody about anything, including herself. (In fact, 1 do not know anybody in the chess-world who would talk about her except with great re spect and even reverence!). My father and Vla soy explained to her the situation - that there was a talented young player who had nowhere to show his skills. There were some arguments
15 against, but Vera Tikhomirova decided to take a risk and she presented me with "a wild card" and I was included in the tournament of the Russian Young Mas ters. I played quite successfully in that strong tournament and I fulfilled the master norm when I was only 13 years old. I got the title not immediately, but a bit later when I was 14. The process of awarding the title took some time but still the fact of somebody making the norm at the age of 13 was somewhat shocking. Nowadays no one will be even surprised, because there are 13 years old grandmasters, but those times were quite different. There were not so many possibilities to show your strength, there were not so many tournaments (particularly international), it was too problematic to even go abroad and of course there were no computers available for preparation. If we have to make a comparison, for example with Garry Kasp arov - he made the master norm when he was almost 15 years old. I had my chances to go to the World Championship a bit later - the qualification tournament for the World Championship for cadets (juniors under 16) was held in Sochi and I was the youngest participant (I was not even 14 yet). The tournament
was quite strong and included V. Ivanchuk, B. Gelfand, E. Bareev, Art. Minasian, A. Shabalov, S. Savchenko. I tied for 1-2 places with Zhenya Bareev and I won several
very good games, with good quality at a high level. I do not remember what exactly the additional criteria were but it was decided that we had to play a match. I can understand the desire of the governing body of the Chess Federation to send to the Championship a more experienced player, the elder...and that was the last chance for Zhenya to become Under-16 World Cham pion. In the end, no matter' what, our match with Bareev was played at "his ter ritory" - in Moscow. I do not want to say that there were some intrigues and evil intentions, but the organization of the match was just terrible. I was not even given a hotel room and I lived with Mark Izrailevich at his home in Strogino. I slept in one of the rooms and Mark Izrailevich and his family slept in the other room. He had by then a little baby, who was pretty calm (I can understand that now, being the father of two daughters myself), but it could have woken up and cried in the middle of the night. I was supposed to eat at the Hotel Sport, which was situated on the other side of the enormous city of Moscow and naturally there was no reason to waste half a day in order to have lunch or dinner there. In the end, we managed to get some money for the coupons that we received for food. We played in the Central Chess Club. Zhenya studied and he lived in the Sports School and his road to the Central Chess Club was much shorter than mine from Strogino. It took me more than an hour to get to the Club, while Zhenya was there in about half an hour. I was not paying attention then to such trifles (I learned about that only later), but naturally, all that did not help me obtain a good result. After all this, I lost that match with a result of "-2" and Zhenya Bareev went to the World Championship. He played quite well there and he won it. I was already too strong by the following year and I was chosen to represent my country at the World Championship even without preliminary qualifying. That was
{ first
travel abroad and it was to the faraway country Colombia - to a town with
exotic name of Bucaramanga. It was a competition at that Championship between me and the quite talented nerican player Patrick Wolff. (Patrick became a grandmaster soon after and we
�
�t again at the Interzonal Tournament in Biel, where I beat him. Still, later we �t in New York and he beat me, but I see his name only rarely now. He has prob ly quit chess altogether...) During those times it was a great rivalry between the o countries, the USSR and the USA in everything, and particularly in sports. . erefore our chess competition had a special meaning.
III CAMPEONATO Para
.......r••
MUNOIAL DE AJEDRE Z
de 16 alios.
Game Dreev
-
Wolff
I beat Patrick in our game in the first half of the tournament and later I built a mfortable cushion of a lead so he could not catch up with me. Still, when it looked e there were no more rivals anymore and nobody could catch me, when there nothing to be afraid of - there suddenly appeared a player from Indonesia
lS
[.Wahl), who started the tournament from the fourth round and then he began ating everybody (He was playing like a machine!). There were not so many play ; anyway, so he came closer to the top and he started playing the participants that .ad just played against. So I was thinking "If he goes on like that, how will all that d?" He won, I thought, six games in a row, when he came to play against me. If I d lost that game, the difference would have become very small and it could have ded either way. Instead, our game ended in a draw after a balanced fight, and he ) failed to catch up with me. It would be interesting what might have happened if had started the tournament right from the very beginning. I do not know what is
17 happening with that player these days either, but back then he was just absolutely fantastic. The journey was also quite interesting and beautiful. It was my first travel abroad and it was in such a picturesque country. I was filled with impressions and it was all in such a wonderful atmosphere. It was very important for me to take first place, because any other place back in the USSR was considered to be a disaster. At the end, I made 10 out of 11 and I was 2 1/2 points ahead of the runner-up. That was how I became World Champion. Mark Izrailevich made good his promise. I had serious problems with my studies in high school, because I was going to tournaments every month. The governing body of the school was furious, since at those times it was absolutely unbelievable that somebody might just not go to
With Mikhail Tal Newspaper "Evening Moscow" Blitz, Sokolniki (Moscow 1982) school. Higher education was something sacred during Soviet times. Parents could be deprived of custody if their kids did not attend school. There were no other forms of teaching except regular school attendance and I had to convince some of the teachers that I would study on my own and later I would pass individual examina tions. For example, when I went to the tournament in the city of Grozny, and even after I came back having fulfilled the master norm, my father was reproached that he was impeding my education. There were similar accusations from the school, from the city council and the city Party committee, and even, what was really amaz ing, from the sports committee. The moment I went to the World Championship my father was totally cornered. They were quite adept at maltreating people during those times - he was called and reproached in the city Party committee as well as in other governing bodies. He had numerous difficult conversations and I did not
18 know about all that then, because my father had kept me protected from all this. Still, when I came back as World Champion, the situation changed overnight and the same people who almost wanted to take me away from my parents now had an entirely different attitude. I was accepted in the regional committee of the Party and I was officially congratulated. My name was noted in the Official Book of the Pioneers. (every Soviet schoolboy was a pioneer then...) During the next year 1984, when I became 15, I had the personal right to par ticipate in the next World Championship as the acting World Champion, and I did not need to pass through qualifying. The tournament was organized in France, in the town of Champigny, near Paris. The competition was considerably stronger than the previous year, and there were more participants, too - 40 players. The distance was a bit shorter - it was an 11 round Swiss system tournament. At the start, the American player S. Rachels (once again the representative of the USA!) showed a 100% result, but then he lost to me and later he lost to Vasily Ivanchuk as well. (Grandmaster Alexey Stepanovich Suetin was our coach at that tournament.) The fight for the first place between me, Vasily as well as V. Anand and J. Piket was quite tough and only the last two rounds clarified the situation. I was the only one among the leaders to win my game in the last round. Thus I made 8 1/2 points and took the first place. (V. Anand, V. Ivanchuk and J. Piket all remained half a point behind me.) That was how I became Under-16 World Champion for a second time in a row. After my second World title among cadets, in August of the same year I took part in the Under-20 World Championship in Finland. It was the first time in the his tory of these championships that a 15 year-old chess player was challenging much more experienced and famous players who were almost all 3-4 years his elder. Still, I managed to show a good result (10 points out of 13) and I was a whole point in front of the World Champion for the previous year Kiril Georgiev (meanwhile my rating was 200 points (!) inferior to his) and K. Torsteins. Unfortunately, I only won the silver medal, because the 19 year old Curt Hansen had half a point more than me. V. Anand was also a participant in that tournament. We played in the penultimate round in which I failed to materialize my positional advantage and the game ended in a draw. In the year 1985, at the age of 16, I made my debut in the Championship of the USSR for Young Masters (there were not such young participants in similar tour naments up to then), which was by that time a real test for the young and promising players in the USSR. Many of the participants there became grandmasters later. Among the players in the year 1985 there were A. Khalifman, J. Ehlvest, G. Kaid anov, I. Glek, I. Novikov, K. Aseev, V. Neverov, Z. Sturua...I began the competition with two victories and during the first half of the tournament I was among the lead ers and I shared 5- f"h places with a final result of "+ I" with Alexey Vyzhmanavin and Andrey Kharitonov, just a point behind the winner - Eduardas Rozentalis.
19 Here, I would like to deal with another subject for a while. Naturally, I cannot talk about earlier times, but during my years the state was helping chess consider ably. "The Soviet Chess School" was an entire system for the support and devel opment of chess. That did not apply necessarily to everybody, but in my case the support was quite significant. I was a member of the sports club "Burevestnik" and it was assisting eminent sportsmen and helping them in their travels, in competi tions, in their work with coaches. (I was often traveling with my father, he was paid for that and I received coupons for food.) Our city was famous for its Sanatorium and the people, who were resting there, needed entertainment. There was a whole system for that and one of the things was a simultaneous display by a strong chess
player. I began to give simuls when I was 8 years old. If I had the free time, I could
have given up to 10 simuls per day. We were paid very well indeed. This was hon est money for real work and the state had no qualms about that. In fact, I could make as much money in a month as the first secretary of the city committee of the Party. We received our money at one and a same place and he was really amazed - how was that possible? He received 250 rubles, while a 9-10 year old boy received 300 rubl�s? I did not know all the details, but there were rumours, and even legends going around. I did go sometimes with my father to the accounting office, and I signed the invoices. (I did not even have a passport then) That had always been interesting for me, because the accountants and the tellers were looking at me so strangely. Later, they started recognizing me, of course so, in the USSR - in a country, which was considered to be a socialist
Simultaneous display, Budenovsk 1979
one, and where there was no capitalism, it was official that a 10 year old could receive money for individual work (a bit creative, though). So, on one hand, there was a total absence of freedom in the country, but on the other hand, the state was providing colossal support for chess and chess players and the possibility for them to work without any obstacles. There were simultaneous displays in Sanatoriums and in villages as well. The title was also very important: a grandmaster could receive up to 100 rubles per simul.
20 (the average salary of an engineer was about 150 rubles per month) Naturally, no one could have simuls every day and there was a special office in Moscow where the available simuls were to be distributed about equally among the grandmasters. We had candidate masters who also had simuls. There were numerous sanatori ums and the simuls were distributed by the Chess Club. There was no animosity between the players about that. I did not have so many simuls then, because I had many tournaments, and I also had to attend my lessons at school. After I became Master of Sports of the USSR, World Champion and FIDE master (for my win at the World Championship) I was invited to work for the Sports School for children and juniors. I was working there with children; I was even given some elder, so that my work could have been more interesting and more effective, too. I think I worked there for a period of about half a year, and I received some salary from there as well. In general, I lived quite well during those times. My sessions with Dvoretzky continued. Mark Izrailevich had an excellent system of preparation, but it had (and it still has) a certain drawback, which he admitted, too. He did not work with open ings. Naturally, he could show you some not so fashionable schemes, and of course, he dealt with opening principles; nevertheless he either could not make a concrete opening repertoire for you, even in the sense of understanding in the so-called pre computer era, moreover in the contemporary sense of the word, or he simply did not want to. Dvoretzky was not an expert in the opening stage indeed, but he was always trying to attract spe cialists in that field to our training camps. There was a coach among them - Alexander Vasilievich Fili penko - whom I met at the all-union junior games in Tashkent. I was playing for the team of the Russian Federation there, and he was one of the coaches of the team. Alexan der Panchenko was the chief-coach. That tournament was an important competition. I remember, they gave us special costumes (whenever they did that, that meant that the event was something special), and even sneakers. We did not have so many contacts with Filipenko, but there arose a chess problem at some mo ment - I needed to play for a win \\ith Black in the exchange variation
With daughter Diana and A. Filipenko
21 of the Slav Defence and I was advised to ask him for help. He recommended to me something, I did not agree with him and we started analyzing and he proved to me
quite convincingly that I had been wrong. (It is an amazing thing, but I have won so many points in that variation and mostly thanks to the concepts and ideas of A. V. Filipenko.). I very much liked the way he was showing and explaining things and
I was really impressed. Later, when Dvoretzky asked me with whom I would like
to study openings and maybe even go along to tournaments with (he had so many pupils and other work too that he could not always travel with me to tournaments), I named A. V. Filipenko. That was how our collaboration started and it has contin
ued up to now. He came with me for the first time to a tournament at the Young
Masters Championship in Tallinn back in the year 1986.
After I turned 17 my good life was suddenly troubled and it was soon over. That
was the end of my junior chess years and there began a new period of my life. I was still not an adult, but I was not a kid or a junior either. My main coach at that mo ment - Dvoretzky told me that we had achieved a lot together, but it would be diffi
cult for us to develop any further, because we saw each other so rarely that it would be better to live closer together. He was a member of the military club (AAD Anti -
Aircraft-Defence for the region of Moscow) and he worked there and he tried to make me a member there too. That was how I ended up in Moscow. Later, it turned out that some people had made some promises to M. I. Dvoretzky, but they failed to do what was necessary. So it happened that I was in Moscow, but I was like an illegal person there. There was a system acting in the USSR then and it was called
"propiska" and according to it every person had to be registered and to live at a certain address. (That system has remained almost similar even today, but it is now called "registration".) I took my leave from Zheleznovodsk with the idea to be regis tered in Moscow. I failed however to register in Moscow (that was something quite difficult in those times and not everybody could manage a registration in Moscow by himself). I could see Dvoretzky only on Saturdays and Sundays. I was already
having problems not so much chess wise, but I had purely everyday problems in life. Dvoretzky had tried to arrange a place for me to live in Moscow, but that failed
as well. I had no relatives there except an aunt, but she lived in a shared lodgment and I joined to stay with her for a while. My parents were far away; meanwhile they got divorced by that time and my father was absolutely incapable of devoting to me
so much time and care as before. I was faced with having to solve problems that I had never encountered before. Dvoretzky was also unable to solve all my problems
as well and we had to interrupt our collaboration. We kept our good relations and we have preserved them until now too. It was about during those times that I was being stopped from going abroad.
Every time I received an explanation like: "We have failed to prepare your docu ments", but in fact that usually meant that I was becoming something like a player for "domestic consumption". As a rule, somebody else was going to a tournament
instead of me. The really warning bell for me rang when I was not even allowed to
22 participate in a tournament in one of the socialist countries (naturally, somebody else went there too...). It looked like some loss to me then, but later I went with Alexander Filipenko (and V. Ivanchuk too) to a training camp in Estonia to prepare for the World Championship, which was going to be held in Australia. Then it was once again the same story with"We have failed to prepare your documents... This �
time however, the situation was completely different, since my place was from the reserve of FIDE and no one could have replaced me. In fact I learned later that our Federation did not even understand that at the moment and they were trying to prepare the documents of another player. So, after I was not allowed to go to Aus tralia, it became clear that the almighty authority KGB had something against me as they were responsible for all travels abroad. I had numerous theories and specu lation why it was like that. It was possible that it was somebody's libel to blame (every anonymous slander was paid attention to in those times and that was totally destructive for society), or some anonymous letter by some malevolent person. In fact, I did not have any serious political dissension with the government when I was
15-16 years old and I was simply playing chess. It might have been connected with something else - for example I could have praised Fischer or Korchnoi in a conver sation and that could have become like a "death sentence" for me. There was a pe riod when some strange people, working for the state, were talking to us during our
training camps and they kept asking questions. I used to an&..wer them with what I thought at the moment, as I was young then. After so many years have passed, I received some information by chance and I remember a situation in which I was re ally tested for reliability - they asked me a direct question about: what my attitude towards Victor Korchnoi was (in fact his family name was not mentioned in the USSR, not even in the news about his match against A. Karpov). I answered defi nitely that my attitude towards his chess legacy is quite positive (naturally, I could not even imagine that I would play in tournaments with him many years later!) It was possible that answer might have contributed to the fact that I was not allowed to go abroad at that time. That should not have been the main reason, though. I still have no idea what the real reason was, even up to this day. So, I was not permitted to play tournaments abroad and those were difficult times for me, financially too. There were many reasons that I could not go back to Zheleznovodsk either. I was in a semi-legal situation and I was not registered any where. I had a friend - Alik Ehevich, he was a student then (he lives in Israel now) and he did not understand many things, but he helped me a lot anyway. We spent plenty of time together and I visited him at his home in Odessa. I had to make some money for bread and butter by playing blitz for pretty serious stakes sometimes. I remember Alexey Vyzhmanavin too, we were often playing blitz at the same time, we were giving huge odds, at first he did, then I etc. - with great handicaps. We lost sometimes but still we were winning most of the time. We had to do that; you have to make your living somehow. �aturally, I continued to play in tournaments and I was often in the process of qu�ing for something, though I could not go abroad anyway. It is quite sufficient
23 to remember the qualification tournament in Borzhomi where I took first place, so I had qualified once again for the Under-20 World Championship . Just like before, I did not go anywhere (Volodya Akopian was sent there instead of me and he took second place). At my age, in that country, nobody could have given me a hint about what was going on or helped me at that moment. I was left entirely on my own. When I became 18 years old I understood that I had better join the Army. I was advised to try to enter a special sports regiment, where sports people were not only soldiers, but they took part in competitions too. It was essential for the Army sport bosses to collect capable sportsmen - in the USSR every establishment had its own sporting club and teams and there were special competitions between the different establishments and there were special points awarded for all that. Still, the entire system of sports in the Army (just like the Army system itself) was so huge and clumsy that I failed to enter a sports regiment outright. At first I went to the Taman Artillery Regiment and I passed through the "young soldiers' preparation course" in a period of one and a half months and then I gave my solemn Army oath. Later, I was transferred to a sports regiment indeed and right on the next day, in an Army uniform, I went to the city of Pavlodar to participate in the semi-final of the USSR Championship. Later I lived in the sports regiment and that life was semi-martial , semi-civilian. I was in Lefortovo then. It was as if I was periodically discharged from the Army - you go out at 9 o'clock in the morning (and you become a civilian) and then you have to be back by 9 o'clock in the evening and you are again a soldier. Naturally, it was not like that every day. There were periods that I had to stay for a week or two with the Army and I had some fatigue duties too - the usual Army life. I was in fact lucky to be together with Maxim Sorokin, since he was responsible for a while for the library in the sports regiment and he was holding all the necessary keys. That was quite comfortable, because at 6 o'clock in the morning the usual Army activity started (sometimes it started at 5 o'clock as well) and there were all kinds of marching for mations, some running around and sessions of studying something (I believe even today that all ofthem were utterly senseless; of course nobody cared about any real combat preparation). Instead we managed somehow to sneak into the library and we slept for an extra hour on the sofa. Denis Bilunov was also in our sports regi ment (he is one of the founders ofthe Internet site - kasparovchess, he is quite close to G. Kasparov and he has been collaborating with him for a long time). I played in numerous tournaments while I was in the Army and I had to be inside the barracks in between them. It was not easy at all to go out though. The system was so gigantic and difficult to fight against: the organization which was holding the tournament had to send a letter to the Army chiefs (the so-called invita tion) and then the soldier had to be issued permission to go out. You could not even talk about any real preparation for a tournament during that time, because you did not know at all what would happen to you on the next day. There were times when
24 you could only sleep for 4-5 hours and you had to be up at 4 o'clock in the morning for some marching formation (for example, because the chiefs were not in a good mood, or because somebody did something wrong and we all had to pay for that).
Sometimes we had to take care of the snow and clean it during a massive snowfall
(that was not a very sensible thing to do either!), so there was no time or strength
to prepare for chess. I worked on chess a bit together with Maks Sorokin though,
whenever the circumstances allowed us to do that. There were not so many tournaments around and we wanted to go away all the time, so we used to invent some non-existing tournaments to take part in, for ex ample - "Championship of the Central Chess Club". It is well-known that the Central
Chess Club is situated in Moscow, but these "Championships" were held either in
Kuibishev (now - Samara), or in Gorky (nowadays Nizhny Novgorod) - all of them
big cities close to Moscow. In fact Alik Ehevich had managed somehow to acquire some blank forms with stamps on them from the Central Chess Club in Moscow. He used to send me to different cities and places with them. Naturally, that was all very dangerous, because I could have been caught and that would have meant seri
ous punishment and even imprisonment for me. It all ended well though, and often
when there were no real tournaments I had managed to stay away from the Army barracks thanks to those non-existing tournaments. After about half a year I was sent away from the sports regiment - there were some mishaps and all the sportsmen were sent to regular regiments. I was again
among common soldiers and I was not accepted so cordially. That was not "the
young soldiers' preparation course", where we were all of the same age; that was
the real Army where there were some very special relations between the different annual intakes of conscripts. There were numerous conflicts with the "old guys"
and some other rather unpleasant moments. Still, I managed to avoid somehow
the horrors that had been described in the media and they even seem to continue
now in the Russian Army. It all passed almost normally for me then, or maybe I was just lucky and I had been sent to a regular normal Army regiment. I did not harm
my health there and I acquired some useful life experience. Still, I wished at that
moment much more to play chess than to be in marching formations and to collect snow during a snowfall. The Soviet Army was not professional then and plenty of time was lost on all kinds of activities, which in principle had nothing to do with Army service. Later, things improved considerably and I was transferred to the sporting regi
ment of the "Dzerzhinsky - Academy" and there the attitude towards me (and some other sportsmen too) was more personal. I had some difficulties there too, but the
second year of my service in the Army passed for me relatively comfortably. I had no problems going to tournaments; I had the possibility to participate in training camps too and to work on chess as well. My duties in the Army in the year 1989
were much easier and thus my service was soon over and done with.
Competing at Top Level In the year 1989 I had my debut in the final of the USSR Championship. It was a
round-robin event with 16 participants. I had a 50 % result and I managed to beat Sergey Dolmatov in particular who happened to share 2-5'h places.
I had lost some momentum in chess even not so much because of my Army ser vice, but because I was not allowed to play abroad, since these travels were quite essential. It was practically impossible then, if you played only in the USSR, where there were so few international tournaments, to fulfill any norms for international titles. Meanwhile, every journey abroad in those times (and not only for chess players) was important also for your well-being. You could not make a lot of money outright (suppose 300 or 500 dollars per travel, often thanks to savings from your food and pocket money), but you could live on that money comfortably in the USSR for half a year.
I somehow came out of the list of the players "for domestic consumption" only after the intervention of the member of the Academy - Leonid Ivanovich Abalkin, who was the Director of the I nstitute of Economy and a world renowned scientist. He was also a famous politiCian and social functionary, and besides all that, he was the president of the Russian Chess Federation for a long period of time. During that time, Karen Sergeevich Agadjanyan was the chief coach and he was a good, kind and considerate man, who had done so much for chess. I decided to address him about the subject. He understood the situation and intervened. He asked member of the Academy Abalkin to clarify what the situation was. Leonid 1vanovich had the opportunity to contact some really powerful people then and once at a reception in the Kremlin he approached the Chairman of the KGB Krjuchkov and he asked him "What was all that about and was all that so serious ... ?" Krjuchkov made a promise to have a look into it and it turned out that it was not so serious as "to stop the oxy gen" for me. So finally, after the intervention of Leonid 1vanovich Abalkin, I went to play in the European Championship. I had earned that right once again in a qualifi cation tournament. I was just 19 years old then (I was still in the Army) and I began traveling abroad again - possibly that was already an indication of the forthcoming liberty. Times were already changing and the Soviet Union was in a period of dis solution. I went to Arnhem, in Holland, and I became immediately the Champion
of Europe. So, at the age of 20, because of all of my results, I was awarded the title of International Grandmaster.
26
Later, I played my candidates match against V. Anand, but I lost it despite the fact that I was the favourite. My results went down for a while after that. Gradually, I had my ups again and I managed to win several tournaments and I improved my position in the ranking table. My subsequent biography can be followed according to my participation in tournaments and in the notes to the games, which I have chosen to include in this book. I believe that it would not be so original if I say that I would like to hope that I have not played my best game yet. Still, the 100 games which have been present ed in this book, will probably give the readers an idea about what kind of a chess player I am.
Alexey Dreev
Moscow
April 2 0 0 7
27
Oll-Dreev, KiIjava 1984 A07
1
Oll - Dreev World Ch U20, Kiljava 1984
This game was played in the World Championship u nder 20 in Finland and I had written about it in the preface of the book. USSR was represented there by two partici pants - the highly talented Estonian player Lembit Oll (who unfortunately passed away too young...) and 1. We had to face each other in the middle of the championship according to the whim of tournament pairing and that loss precluded Lembit from fig hting for the top-places in the event. l.�fJ �f6 2.g3 dS 3.ig2 c6 4. 0 - 0 ig4 S.d3 �bd7 6.h3 White plays much more often here 6.�bd2.
logical too. It has some drawbacks though, since Black will manage to push eS sooner or later and he will ob tain certain space for piece maneuver ing. Meanwhile, White's light squared bishop does not have too bright pros pects, since it is restricted by Black's pawns ...
7
••.
e6
It is a bit early for Black to play 7 ... eS, because of: 8.f4 id6 9.fxeS liJxeS 1O.d4, followed by lUgel.
S.f4 i.d6 9.�d2 0 - 0 1 O .�fJ White has problems to prevent e6eS. Black can counter 1O.d4 with 10 ... c5.
1 0 ...eS H.fxeS �xeS I2.�d4 geS That is a useful move and it pre pares the retreat of the bishop to the fB-square, in case of liJd4-fs.
13.a4 as 14.i.e3 �g6 Black is threatening lS . . .�g3.
IS.'�d2 h6
6 . . .h£1!? White cannot capture now with a knight and that move seems to be quite sensible. After 7.1xf3 eS, followed by �cS, Black completes his development rather quickly and his position is ac tive. The price that Black must pay for all that is the two-bishop advantage. . .
16.gael That was a very careless move. White had to consider the possibility c6-cS, followed by dS-d4. Therefore, the logical reaction for him seemed to be - 16.c3.
7.exf3
16 ... cS 17.�f5 i.f8
This move is possible and quite
The move 17 . . . d4 looked to me
Game 2
28 rather dangerous i n view of: 18.ixh6 gxh6 19.tLlxh6+ wf8 20.tLlf5 Wg8 and here White had at least a draw, but he could also try to play for a win, capturing Black's b7-pawn.
18.g4 White had better continue here with: 18.Wfd1 Wfd7 19.Wff3 l3a6, with a complicated position.
18 . .Wfd7 .
Suddenly, my opponent was faced with serious problems.
19.b3? Lembit is oblivious to the danger and he simply defends his pawn. The situation would have remained quite unclear after: 19.f4 ! ? Wfxa4 20.g5 Wfd7 21.tLlxh6+ (or 21.tLlxg7 ixg7 22.gxf6 ixf6 23.ixc5 tLlh4) 21...gxh6 22.gxf6 Wff5.
19 ... d4 2 0 .i.f4 l3xeI 2 1.l3xel
A43
2 Dreev - Kaidanov Moscow 1985
My encounter against Grigory Kaidanov was in a round-robin tournament of category 8, which was or ganized by the Moscow Region Chess Club. (There was also a main tourna ment of category 13 and it was won by O. Romanishin.). . We lived and played in the Hotel "Kosmos" (The Moscow Chess Olympiad was played later there.). J. Dorfman won this tournament. I was not so successful in the event and I shared 7-11 places (among 14 participants), but still I played several interesting games. l.d4 tLlf6 4.tLlc3
2.tLlf3 c5 3.d5 e6
Black should manage to equalize in that line after a correct play. White's usual move here is - 4.c4.
4 ... exd5 5.tLlxd5 tLlxd5 6.Wfxd5 tLlc6
21 ... c4! That is the point! Now, White is already beyond salvation .. .
22.Wfcl cxd3 23.i.d2 Or 23.cxd3 l3c8.
23 ... l3c8 24.M1. dxc2 25.i.c4 d3 26.ha5 l:'lc5 27.i.d2 tLle5 �ow, Black's knight joins the ac tiOD \\ith a decisive effect and White is helpless , so he resigned. 0-1
7.i.g5 It deserves attention for White to try now the line: 7.e4 ! ? d6 8.�c4 �e6 9.Wfd3 �e7 1O.c3 , with a slightly more pleasant position for him.
7... i.e7 8. 0 - 0 - 0 tLlb4
29
Dreev-Kaidanov, Moscow 1985 The game Shereshevsky - Gusev, USSR 1977, followed with: B ... O-O 9.a3 bS? 1O.e3 �bB 11.�d3 c4 12.ixh7+-, but instead it was possible for Black to
It was quite interesting for Black to try the active move 17. . . bS. Here after: IB.f4 Wie7 (IB ...Wif6 19.eS!) 19 ..bbS �bB 20.�d3 dS 21.WigS (21.exdS? Wif6 22.c3
continue with 9 ... h6 and after 1O.�e3
Wib6 23.�d2 �xdS) 2 1 ...f6 2 2 . Wig3 dxe4 23.�c4+ �e6 24.fudB+ fudB 2S.Wib3 .bc4 26.Wixc4+ 'it>g7, Black would have
White has an only minimal edge. 9 .be7 Wixe7 1 0 .Wib3 d6 1l.e4 .
0-0 I had intended to counter 1 1. . .�e6 with the check - 12.�bS+.
12.a3 �c6 13.'itld5 gd8 14.'itlh5
an excellent game thanks to his passed pawn. After 17 ... bS, the only way for me to maintain the tension would have been the move - IB.Wih4.
18.f4 'itlg7 19. 'itlxg7+
g6 It seemed good for Black to try 14 . . .�e6, without being afraid of the exchange of the bishop after: IS.�gS b6 16.�xe6 (or 16.M �eS) 16 ... Wixe6 (or 16 . . .fxe6 17.f4) 17.WidS Wif6. The endgame is only slightly better for White after: 14 ... Wixe4 IS.Wixf7+ 'it>xf7 16.�gS+ 'it>e7 17.liJxe4 �e6 18.�e2.
15.'itlh6 �e5 16.�xe5 Following 16.liJgS? achieves nothing much.
16
f6,
White
Wixe5
•.•
, It would have been a mistake for Black to play 16 ... dxeS?, because of: 17.�xdB+ WixdB 18.�c4 and he would not be able to answer with IB . . . Wid4?, due to 19.�dl+-
17.,id3
In case of 19 .Wih4, I did not like Black's possibility: 19 . . . c4 20.i.e2 c3. 19 'it>xg7 2 0 .f5 gxf5 •••
There would have arisen a compli cated, but still approximately equal endgame with four rooks present on the board after: 20 . . .�d7 21.�c4 (or 21.�hf1 gxfS 22.exfS 'it>f6 23.�e4 �c6 24.ixc6 bxc6 2S.�f3) 2l...gxfS 22.�xd6 �e6.
21.exf5 ,id5 22.,ib5 ,ie4 In case of: 22 . . .�c6 23 . .bc6 bxc6 24.�hel 'it>f6 2S.g4 h6 26.�e3 dS 27. �c3 c4 2B.b3 'it>gS, the position re mains balanced. It deserved attention for Black to follow with 2 2 ... a6!?
23.ghel J.xf5
Black should have possibly avoided letting White's rook to the seventh rank. It was simpler for him to have defended with: 23 . . . dS 24.�d3 ixd3 2S.fud3 'it>f6. After 26.�h3 the posi tion is unclear, but White should also consider the possibility - 26.c3 ! ?
24.ge7 'it>f8?! This is already a serious mistake. The correct defence for Black was: 24 . . .dS 2S.�xb7 �e6.
17
•••
,ie6
25.gxb7 ,ie4 26.l3C7 .bg2 27. gd2 ,ie4
r
Game 3
30 Or 27 ... �f3 28.�c4 dS 29.gf2 �S 30.gfS.
it is the best(!), and I usually prefer the more modest first move l.d4. Still, in this game I was almost 100 % sure that my opponent was going to choose the French Defence. Evgenij Bareev was playing almost entirely that par ticular opening at that time and I had a very good idea about it, because I was playing it myself regularly. Natu rally, it was not a problem for me to play the position which arose in that
28.�d3!± The exchange of the bishops is es sential for White. Now, Black has nothing to protect his pawn-weak nesses with. White has a great advan tage now, despite his opponent's extra pawn. Black's defence is extremely difficult and he loses the game rather quickly...
28
.•.
game, since I knew it rather well. At the end, the following game turned out to be quite interesting from the point of view of strategy as well as theory.
1... e6 2.d4 d5 3.otle3 otlf6 4.e5• otlfd7 5.f4 c5 6.otlf3 otle6 7.�e3 exd4 8 .otlxd4 �e5 9.§'d2 ixd4 IO .ixd4 otlxd4 11.§'xd4 §'b6
�f3
Or 28 ...�xd3 29.gxd3±
29.�e4 d5 3 0.lU2 gae8?! Or 30 ... �hS 3U'lf5±
31.gxa7 �h5 32J�f5 �g6 33. gxd5 ge8 34.b3 gel+ 35.mb2 ge3 In case of 3S . . . gh1, White plays 36.gd2, threatening gd2-f2.
36.a4 gf3 37.gd2 gf4 38.a5 gb8 39.�d5 e4 4 0 .ga8 gxa8 41.ixa8 exb3 42.exb3 1- 0 3
i
I
ell
The variation that we are playing is well-familiar. Contemporary theory considers White's prospects slightly preferable; however as practice indi cates in the main lines: 12.119xb6 otlxb6;
Dreev - Bareev
1VijbS §'xd4 13.liJxd4, or 12.0-0-0
USSR Ch Under 20, Tallinn 1986
Wl'xd4 13.Elxd4, White is practically forced to enter an endgame in which it is quite problematic for him to prove that he has any real advantage if at
1.e4!? WelL I play that move very seldom, despite the opinion of the famous the oretician of the past - V.Rauzer - that
all. In case White decides to avoid the endgame with 12.WI'd2 (G. Kasparov's
31
Dreev-Bareev, Tallinn 1986 idea... ) he should consider the possi bility 12 .. :�xb 2 ! ?, after which the po sition becomes rather unclear and in the game Shirov - Bareev, Wijk aan Zee 2003, after 13J:!:bl 'lWa3 14.ttJbS 'lWxa2 IS.ttJd6+ �f8?! 16J�dl 'lWb2 17. �e2 \Wb6 18.c4 ! d4 19.�f3 as 20.0-0 d3+ 21.�hl, White had a powerful initiative. Still, in a later game against the same opponent - Shirov (Monaco 2003) Bareev chose IS ... �e7!? and Alexey failed to find anything better than : 16.'lWb4 as 17.ttJxc8+ �d8 18.'lWe7 �xc8 19J�xb7 �xb7 20.'lWxd7+ �b8, so that he forced a draw at the end.
12. 0-0- 0 !? This move seems to be quite logi cal, because castling long is an integral part of White's plan anyway.
12 'lWxd4 13.fucd4 �e7!? •.•
Presently, this move is regarded by theory as the most reliable for Black; nevertheless it was introduced into the tournament practice by Evgenij Bareev in this very game. According ly, I was faced with a novelty over the board, so I decided after some thought to follow with:
14.h4
White's possibilities at the same time and it is evidently the best. In case of 14 ... ttJb8, I was plan ning to continue with IS.hS!? myself, occupying additional space and seiz ing the initiative on the kingside. For example after: lS . . ttJc6 16.13d3 f6 17. 13g3 fxeS 18.13xg7+ �f6 19.h6 exf4 20. 13h4!? Black has a lot of problems to worry about. Now, after: 20 . . . ttJe7 21. M4+
IS . . .gxf6 16.fS) 16.�e2, his position re mains quite passive without any good prospects.
15.�e2 �b8 16.!M2 �d7 It was also worth considering the move 16 . . . ttJc6!? with the idea to counter 17.�bS with: 17 ... �d7 1 8.ixc6 ixc6 19.�e2 (Black's position is quite acceptable in case of: 19.13el �h6!?) and thanks to the move 19 .. .f6, Black's counterplay is good enough to equal ize. Well, I think that instead of 17.�bS, I would have played 17.�hdl !?, main taining somewhat better chances.
17.ghdl g6?!
14 h5!? •.•
This
blocking
move
restricts
r
-
-
----
Game 3
32 This is a serious imprecision. Ev genij did not have to be in a hurry with that move, since he practically de prives himself of any counterplay con n ected with the undermining pawn break fl-f6: now, in case that happens - Black will not be able to capture on f6 with the pawn. It would have been much better for him to have tried 17 ... a6, or 17...ic6, obtaining much more dynamic positions than the one he had in the game. Here, as a result of my opponent's mistake, I had a clear-cut plan for a solid positional bind on the queen side:
me to play 20.aS immediately, trans posing after 20 ... lLid7 21. i'b2 to the position, which was played later in the game.
2 0 ... lLid7 Evgenij fails to exploit the pos sibility to try to free himself from the positional bind with the move 20 ... aS!? Although after 21.lLibS lLid7 22.lLid4 lLic5, I would have preserved a slight but stable positional edge, it would have been much easier for him to defend a position like that.
18.b3! a6 Black is now forced to resort to only passive defence. It is too bad for him to follow with IS . . . lLic6?! 19.1Lie4 and White has an overwhelming ad vantage.
19.a4 ic6 It is too dubious for Black to play 19 ... lLic6? ! , because of 20.lLi e4. On the other hand, Black could have tried another defensive plan:: 19 . . . 1!dS! ? 20. i'b2 lLic6, which seemed to offer him much brighter prospects, because it would be very difficult for White to accomplish the blocking idea a4-aS with a black knight on the c6square, while his attempt to follow 2o .if3 lLic6, with the tactical varia tion: 21.ixdS exdS 22.lLixdS+ i'fS 23. lLib6 ig4 24.lLixaS 1!xaS 2S.1!el, would have made the game so sharp that Black would have obtained easily an active counterplay.
2 0 .�b2 It
was
much more precise for
21.a5! This blocking move fortifies White's positional advantage and Black is bound to remain very passive now.
21 ... ghb8 22.gd4 lLic5 It is not any better for Black to de fend with: 22 ... b6 23.1!al bS 24.lLia2, because White's positional advantage is obvious.
23.gb4 b5 24.gbd4 This move frees the b4-square for the knight. It is understandable that after: 24.axb6?!, following: 24 ... aS 2S.1!bd4 1!xb6, Black is not worse at all.
24... ga7 25.lLia2 gc7 26.lLib4 ib7 27 .tf3 lLid7 28.g1d3 •
33
Dreev-Bareev, Tallinn 1986
1a8 35.E:dd3 This move creates the straightfor ward threat - E:d3-c3.
35... E:d7! 36.E:d4 I was in a time-trouble, so I decid ed to repeat the moves. Of course, it would have been a blunder to follow with: 36.E:c3?, due to 36 ... d4.
36 E:dc7 37.E:f3! 1b7 38.E:dd3 d4? ••.
I have managed to improve my position considerably and my advan tage is indisputable. Black's position is passive indeed, but it is still solid enough and as long as there are rooks present on the board he has the poten tial to defend successfully. Therefore my plan is clear - I need to trade a couple of rooks and after that the cata strophic weakness of the dark squares in my opponent's camp will make his situation critical. Accordingly, Evgenij should do his best to try to prevent the realization of that plan.
Evgenij was also in a time-pres sure and he made a decisive mistake. He had to continue with: 38 ... gd7 and although after 39.E:c3, I would have maintained my positional bind - he could have resisted. Now, Black's de fence crumbles.
39.l'U2 E:d8 4 0.E:fd2 E:cd7
28 . . J�bc8 Black parries the threat Eld3-c3.
29.Ele3 tiJb8 3 0 .g3 tiJc6?! This move facilitates considerably my task to press the positional advan tage home. It was better for him to play 30 ... ltJd7, because in that case it is not immediately evident how I can proceed with the idea to exchange rooks.
31.tiJxc6+ !lxc6 32.1dl! It is essential to keep the c3-square free for my rook. After 32.c3? El6c7=, all my advantage would have evapo rated into thin air.
32 ... E:c5 33.�a3! E:5c7 34.�b4
41.c3! dxc3
and here Black de
cided not to wait for the evident line: 42.gxd7+ gxd7 43J'ixd7+ �xd7 44.@xc3 and the king and bishop end ing is hopeless for him (for example: 44 ...id5 45.@d4 @c6 46.b4 and Black is in a zugzwang - after the retreats of the bishop 46 ...ic4; 46 ... 1g2, or 46 ... ia2, White wins promptly with 47.g4, while in case of any king-move - White wins with 47.f5!), so Black resigned.
Game 4
34
4
E12 Dreev - Gelfand USSR Ch Under 20, Tallinn 1986
l.d4 tiJf6 2.tiJf3 e6 3.c4 b6 4.tiJc3 ib7 5.a3 d5 6.cxd5 tiJxd5 7.V;Vc2 c5 The move 7... tiJxc3 has always been considered as more reliable for Black, both now and even back then, when our game was played...
8.dxc5 ixc5 9.ig5 �c8 1 0 .gel h6 1l.tiJxd5!? In the game Kasparov - van der Wiel, Amsterdam 1988, White pre ferred 1l.ih4, which seemed to be more solid and trustworthy than the move in the game.
15.�xe5 ixb4+ 16.mdl tiJc6 After: 16... V;Vd7 17.axb4 (but not 17.e4? id6) 17... tiJc6, I would have to choose between the calm line: 18.V;VhS 'lWxdS+ 19.V;VxdS exdS 20.bS tiJeS 21.e3 (21.h3 g3) with a slightly better posi tion and the much riskier variation: 18.V;Vg7 'lWxdS+ 19. mel l"ld8 20.V;Vc3.
17J�xc6 It seemed interesting for me to play 17.'lWxg7!?, but after: 17... ixa3 (or 17... V;Vd7 18.axb4 'lWxdS+ 19.me1) 18.l"lc3 exdS 19.1"lxa3 V;VfS 20.e3 V;Vb1+ 21.md2 tiJaS, I did not see anything better for White than a draw by repetition of moves.
1l hxg5 12.b4 g4 13.tiJe5 gh5!? 14.�2N •••
That is a new move. In the game M.Petursson - K.Hansen, Borgarnes 1985, there followed: 14.V;Va4+?! tiJc6 lS.bxcS l"lxeS 16.tiJe3 l"lxcS and Black had the advantage.
17...�xc6?
14 ...!'!xe5! My opponent changes the situation in the game radically with this sacri fice. In case of: 14 ...hdS lS.bxcS bxcS 16.lLlxg4, White's advantage is so to speak - for free ...
Now, Boris makes a wrong decision in this rather complicated position. It would have been too dubious for him to try: 17...ixc6?! 18.tiJxb4 ia4+ 19. md2 as 20.tiJd3 'lWc2+ 21. me3 0-0-0 22.f3±, but following the surprising line: 17... 'lWd7! 18.l"lc7 (or 18.e4? ixc6 19.axb4 eM8 20.bS ib7 21.h3 g3! 22.V;Vc7 l"ld8 23.V;Vxd7 l:'lxd7 24.fxg3 exdS+) 18. . . 'lWa4+ 19J:k2 l"ld8 (19 ...ixdS 20.e4 l"lc8? 21.ibS!; 20 ... gd8 21.exdS l"lxdS+ 22.V;VxdS exdS 23.axb4=) 20.e4 i.e7 21.ic4 bS, Black would have obtained an excellent game.
35
Dreev-Gelfand, Tallinn 1986
18. tt'lxb4 0 - 0 - 0 + Or 18. . .�a4+ tt'ld3±
19.@d2 �xa3 20.
19.tt'ld3 f6 2 0 .'M>2?! It was stronger for me to play: 20.�f4 and if 20 . . . e5 21.�xg4+ @b8, then 22.f3. 20 ..e5 21.@el The move 21.f3 100ked weaker. .
Finally, I am solving the problem with the development of my kingside. 24 ..�e5 The variation: 24 . . . :i3c8 25.�d2 �e5 26.ia6, leads to the same position as .
in the game, but it deserves a serious attention for White to consider too: 26.ie2 ! ? �al+ 27.idl �xa3 28.'Llc2 !? If 24 ... a5, then 25.'Lla6+ @a7 26. 'Llc7+-, and White is threatening 'Llc7b5-d4.
25.ia6 That move is not bad at all, but pos sibly it would have been stronger for me to have continued with: 25.ie2! :i3c8 26.�d2 �al+ 27.idl �xa3 28. 'Llc2, or 28.hg4!?
25 :i3c8 .••
That is an only move for Black.
26.ed2 ixa6 21. e4 •.
That pawn-advance facilitated the realization of my material advantage considerably. My opponent could have pffered much tougher resistance after the move 21 ... @b8!, thus preventing White's threat to trade queens. Fol lowing that White would have had se rious problems to prove his advantage, mostly because of his lag in develop ment. For example: 22.f3 (or 22.h3 g3 23.e3 �d5; 23.f3 e4 24.fxe4 �xe4 25.�b4 :i3d4 26.�f8+ ic8) 22 . . . e4 (22 . . . gxf3 23.gx:f3 :i3xd3? 24.exd3 �xf3 25.ig2 ! +-; or 23 . . . e4 24.fxe4 �xe4 2S.'Llf2 �e3 26J�gl :i3c8 27.:i3g3!+-) 23.fxe4 �xe4 24.�b4 :i3d4 25.�f8+ .lc8 and although my chances would have been preferable, there would b e still a real fight t o follow. . .
22.tt'lb4 ed6 23.ecl+! @b8 24. e3
After 26 ... �al+?, I had the beau tiful winning line: 27.@e2 �xhl 28. �d6+ :i3c7 29.'Llc6! @a8 30.�xc7 ha6+ 31.@d2+-
27.tt'lxa6+ @a8 Or 27 . . . @b7 28 .�d7+
28. tt'lb4? ! This move is too hasty. Naturally, it would have been a mistake for me to play 28.a4?, because of 28 ... �a5 - and White's knight gets trapped. The cor-
36
Game S
rect move for him would have been 28.Elfl±
28
••.
a5?
That is a decisive mistake for Black. Boris failed to find in his time-trouble the correct defence 28 . . . g;,b7!, which would have created great problems for me to materialize my advantage. Now, in case of: 29.El£1 a5 30.WfdS+ (30. lLla2) 30 ... Wfxd5 31.lLlxdS ElcS! 32.lLlf4 Elc1+ 33.g;,e2 Elc2+ 34.g;,d1 :i3a2 3S.lLle2 :i3xa3, Black has an excellent compen sation for the piece. I had another pos sibility: 29.g;,d1! as 30.lLlc2 Wfb2 31.Ele1 Wfb1+ 32.Wfc1 Wfb3 33.Ele2 :i3h8! 34.f3 gxf3 35.gxf3 exf3 36.Elf2 :i3c8.
29.lLld5+- Wfal+ Or 29 ...g;,b7 30.g;,e2+-
3 0 .g;,e2 �xhl 31.c!DXb6+ g;,b7 32.tl'lxc8 g;,xc8 33.9c2+ The arising king and queen end game is extremely difficult for Black.
33 g;,d8 34.�xe4 �xh2 35. �xg4 �c7 36.ge6 •••
36.Wfd4 + ! ?
36 9c3? ! •.•
It was a bit better for Black to have defended with: 36 ...Wfc2+ 37.g;,f3 g;,c7.
37.9g8+ g;,c7 38.�xg7+ g;,b6
After the obvious mistake 39.Wff8??, Black makes a draw with the line: 39 ... Wfc2+ 40.g;,f3 Wff5+ 41.g;,g3 WfgS+ 42.g;,h2 Wfh5 + !
39
•••
a4 4 0 .ge7 g;,b5 41.�d7+
Here, the time-trouble was over and Black resigned.
C44
5 Dreev
Kamsky
SSth USSR Ch (112-final),Pavlodar 1987
This was the tournament (the USSR Championship semi-final), in which as I explained in the Foreword, I came to participate in the uniform of a Soviet Army private. I played well in the tournament though, and I qualifiedfor the Final. 1.e4 e5 2.tl'lf3 tl'lc6 3.c3 The Ponziani Opening is a quite rare guest in the contemporary tour naments ...
3... d6 This move is possible, but it is not principled. There arise some very complex positions after: 3 ... dS 4.ibS. I think that Black's best reaction is - 3 ... lLlf6 4.d4 lLlxe4 5.d5 lLle7 6.lLlxe5 lLlg6, with an approximate equality.
4.d4 �e7
39.g4
-
Dreev-Kamsky, Paviodar 1987
5 ..td3 It deserved serious attention for White to enter positions typical for the King's Indian Defence with d4-dS
37
18 WI'e8 •..
Black should worry about the pos sibility - ltJe3-dS.
(S.dS !? tLlb8 6.c4), or by first exchang ing the light squared bishops (5 . .tbS!? .td7 6.dS); but I preferred to preserve the tension in the centre.
5 g6 6. 0 - 0 .tg7 7.lll bd2 tLlf6 8.�.)c4 0 - 0 9.dxe5 •.•
In case of the immediate 9 . .tgS, it is good for Black to follow with: 9 ... h6 1O.ih4 exd4 1l.cxd4 gS.
9
•••
dxe5
9 . . . tLlxeS ! ?
1 0 ..tg5 h6 11 ..th4 lld8 12.WI'c2 g5 Black is forced to play that move, which compromises his position con siderably; otherwise the pin along the h4-d8 diagonal is too unpleasant for him. In case of 12 ... ig4, White can simply answer 13.ie2, followed by �e3 with tempo.
13 .tg3 tLlh5 14. tLle3 tLlf4 15.llfdl •
, It was also possible for White to continue with 1S . .tbS.
15 .te6 .••
Black could have tried here the ex change: 1S .. J''lxd3 16.llxd3 tLlxd3 17. exd3, but White's position would be dearly preferable, for example: 17... J.e6 18.WI'bS �b8 19.tLldS Wl'd6 20Jldl wb8 21.tLle3 a6 22.WI'e2 V9cS 23.tLldS (23.h4 g4 24.tLlh2 hS 2S.tLldS) 23 ... llc8 24.h4 g4 2S.tLlh2 h5 (2S ... f5 26.b4) 26.tLlfl.
16 .tc4 a6 17.a4 llab8 •
Or 17... ixc4 18.tLlxc4 Wl'e6 19.tLle3 �e7 20.a5±
18.b4 White is occupying space on the queenside.
19.h4 I could have continued the game without that move somehow, instead I could have played something calm er, but it seemed to me that I could not maintain my advantage only by exploiting the weakness of the light squares in Black's camp.
19 g4 2 0 .tLlh2 h5 2t.tlld5?! •••
I decided to change radically the course of the game, but that was prob ably in vain ... It would have been much more logical for me to have continued with the simple move 21.tLlhfl.
2 1 .b:d5 22.exd5 ttle7 23.WI'e4 ttlc8 •••
After: 23 ... c6! 24.dxc6 Wl'xc6 25. Wl'xc6 tLlxc6 26.f3 llbc8! 27.fxg4 tLld4, Black's position is excellent.
24 .ta2 ttld6 25. Wl'c2 b5 •
Gata prevents the move c3-c4, but he loses too much time while doing that. It seemed again quite acceptable for him to have played - 2S . . . c6
26.ttlfl ttlg6 Black had better follow with 26 ... bxa4 and if 27. .tbl - 27 ... V9bS !
27.ttle3 Wl'd7 2 8 .tbl lla8 •
r
Game 6
38 The move 2 8. .. e4!, would have led to a very unclear position.
29.�a2 �eS?! Black defends against the threat abS, but he relinquishes the initiative completely with his last move. Once again, his best move would have been 29 ...e4!
30 . .b:g6 fxg6 31.c4 �f7 Or 31...bxc4 32.lOxc4 lOe4? 33.d6! '
32.axb5 lOe4 Black's counterplay is evidently too slow.
would be unstoppable.
39 ...�xh4 4 0 .dxc7 13f8 41.g3 �f6 42.�d2 '
43.y;'d6 Naturally, the exchange of queens is in favour of White.
43 ...�f3 44.�d5 �f6 45.f3 It was also possible to try 4S.cS.
45 ... e4 46.�h2+ .ih6 47.f4 �al+ 4S.�dl �c3 49.�d2 �xd2 5 0 .�xd2 ig7 51.b6 The rest is quite clear without any comments.
51 ic3 52.�d7 ib4 53.b7 �aeS 54.a7 •.•
33.bxa6 That is the simplest decision for White. His passed pawns are much more important than Black's extra ex change.
33 lLlc3 34.Va3 lOxdl 35Jhdl �f6 36.b5 g5 37.hxg5 .•.
i j
I
37.d6! ?
37 �xg5 3S.d6 h4 •••
(diagram)
39 ..b:h4 It was much simpler for me to have followed with: 39.dxc7 13xdl+ 40.lOxdl hxg3 41.y;'xg3 and White's pawns
54 ic5 55.bS� .b:e3+ 56.'
39
Dreev-Gelfand, Uzhgorod 1987
D37
6 Dreev - Gelfand Uzhgorod 1987
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 d5 4.lLlc3 .ie7 5.ti4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 ixc5
B.�c2 White has here a calmer line at his disposal - 8.cxdS 'LlxdS 9.'LlxdS exdS 1O.a3 'Llc6 1l.id3 ib6 12.0-0.
B lLlc6 9.gdl •••
The other principled variation for White is: 9.a3 WfaS 10.0-0-0. 9 .. :�a5 1 0 .a3 .ie7 1l.lLld2 e5 12.ig5 d4 13.tl:lb3 WfdB (13 ...Wfb6)
14.exd4 I decided to try that seldom played move. White plays much more often here: 14.ie2 as 1S.'Lla4 h6 16.ixf6 ixf6 17.cS ie6, with a complicated position.
14 exd4 ..•
It is also interesting for Black to defend with: 14... 'Llxd4 1S.'Llxd4 exd4 16.'LlbS. Now after: 16 ...id7 17.'Llxd4 WfaS+ 18.Wfd2 Wfb6 19.ie3, the oppo nents agreed to a draw in the game Ivanchuk - Vaganian, USSR 1988. Meanwhile, Ivanchuk pointed out later that after: 19 ... ia4 20.b3 ixb3 2U!b1 'Lle4 2 2.E:xb3 'Llxd2 23.gxb6 'Llxf1 24.E:xb7 'Llxe3 2S.fxe3, White could have maintained the advan tage. Therefore, it deserved atten tion for Black to follow with: 16 ... ig4!? 17.fud4 ge8! 18.ie3 (this is the only move) 18. . . Wfb6 19.id3 ics 20.0-0 ixd4 21.ixd4 Wfd8 22.ix£6 gxf6 (or 22 ... Wfxf6 23.'Llc7) 23.h3 .ihs 24.ixh7+ \t>g7 2S.ie4 a6 26.'Llc3 ig6 and the position was approximately equal in the game Piket - van der Srerren, Lyon 1990.
15.ie2 lLlg4 16.ixe7 Wfxe7 17. lLldS In a game, which was played a year later - (Dreev - Kruppa, Frunze 1988) I deciejed to capture the pawn - 17.'Llxd4, but following: 17 ... Wfh4 18.g3 Wfh3 19.Wfe4 id7, Black had an excellent compensation for it.
17 IDl4 •••
r
Game 7
40 We played subsequently i n the same year another game in this line with Boris and there he continued with 17 . . :�eS! and after 18.f4 �fS ! , he had the advantage and he won that game. The only correct solution for White would have been: 18.�d2 :1'1e8 19.ttJf4, with mutual chances.
Possibly, Black had simply over looked that move . . .
18.g3 �h3 19.1Llf4 �h6 2 0 . lLlxd4
Protvino 1988
26 ... �xa3 27.@xf2 �e3+ 28.@el �xg3+ 29.@tl g6 3 0 .�h3 1- 0 7
D27 Dreev - Chekhov
I fulfilled a grandmaster norm in that category B - tournament in the town ofProtuino, near Moscow, with 2 0 ... lLlxd4 2U'lxd4 �e8 22.h4 B points out ofll rounds andl tiedfor Here, I failed to find the best move first place with grandmaster Valerij - 22.ttJdS ! , after which my advantage Chekhov ... would have been considerable. 1.d4 d5 2.lLlf3 lLlf6 3.c4 dxc4 22 ... �b6 4.e3 e6 5.ixc4 a6 6. 0 - 0 c5 7.id3 That is totally wrong! Black had cxd4 8.exd4 lLlc6 Now, Black can hardly rely on ob taining any compensation for the pawn.
better continue with: 22 . . .�f6 23.:1'1d2 ifS 24. �b3 �e4 2S.0-0 �fS.
23.c5! �a5+ 24.�d2
Black plays much more often here 8 ...ie7, not determining the place ment of the knight for the time being. Now, after 9.ttJc3, Black can play 9 ... b5, but in that case he must consider White's active possibility 10. ttJeS.
9.lLlc3 ie7 1 0 .ig5 0 - 0 ll.�cl
24 if5? •..
This is an incorrect combination in an already difficult position. Follow ing: 24 . . .b6 2S.0-0 bxcs (or 25 . . .�xc5 26.�xcS bxcs 27.:1'1c1) 26.:1'1d5, I would have the task to press the advantage of an extra pawn home. No w, White wins easily.
25. �xf5 lLlxf2 26.b4
1l ...b6 My opponent took a long time to make up his mind here and that nov elty was 0 bviously not the result of any home-preparation.
41
Dreev-Chekhav, Fratvina 1988 In a game, which was played much later (Dreev - Karjakin, Dos Herma nas 2003) Black equalized without too much of an effort with: 1l ... lOd5 12.h4 (It is much more principled for White to follow here with: 12.lOxd5 hg5 13.lOxg5 'lWxg5 14.lOb6 ElbB 15.'lWc2.) 12 ... h6 13.he7 lOcxe7;::
12 ..bf6 It also deserved attention for me to try to avoid exchanges - 1 2.'lWd2 and gfdl. I went for a forced tactical op eration:
12
•••
.bf6 13.lOe4
At first it seemed to me that the move 13.ie4 would guarantee my ad vantage: 13 ...ib7 14.d5 exd5 15.�xd5 ixb2 16J''lb l. However, Black is not obliged to capture on b2, but he can play instead 15 ... ElcB and he can still hold that position: 16.�xf6+ 'lWxf6 17. IWd7 ia8; White's position is evidently more active, just like before, but what he can do to turn that into something real remains unclear.
13 J.b7 .•.
Naturally, Black cannot capture on d4 - 13 ... lOxd4 14.lOxf6+ 'lWxf6 15.�xd4 'lWxd4 16.ixh7+; and if 13 ... id7, then 14.lOxf6+ 'lWxf6 15.ie4 Elac8 16.'lWd3 lOb4 17.'lWb3 and after the un avoidable move a2-a3, Black's b-pawn becomes an easy prey. Therefore 13 ... ib7 - is a practically forced move.
14.�xf6+ gxf6 It was worth for Black to capture with the queen - 14...'lWxf6 15.ie4Elac8 16.�e5 tll xe5 17.ixb7 Elxc1 18.'lWxc1, because after the best defence for him 18 ... lOg6, White remains with only a slight advantage.
lS.J.e4 Elc8 16.i:lc3 f5
17.�gS! IWxgS It is too bad for Black to play 17... h6, due to 1B.hc6 gxc6 (In case Black captures with his bishop - there fol lows the same reaction anyway.) 19.'lWh5 and here either: 19 ...hxg5 20. Elh3, or 19...Elxc3 20.'lWxh6 and White checkmates.
18.hc6 IWe7 19.dS hc6 If 19 ... Elfd8, then 20.'lWh5.
2 0 .dxc6 White's powerful passed pawn pro vides him with an overwhelming ad vantage.
20
.•.
Elfd8 21.IWe2
This move is hardly the best. The correct decision would have been - the recommendation of Mark Dvoretzkij - 21.'lWc1! with the idea to trade a cou ple of rooks after Eldl. Now, Black pre vents that quite reasonably. He would like to exchange queens, though ...
21 IWd6 22.IWe3 .•.
In view of what I have already men tioned - it would have been better to follow with 22.'lWf3.
22
•••
IWd4 23 .IW£3 EldS
Valerij has made a good use of my indifferent play and he has improved his position considerably.
24.gfcl Elc7 Black must still try to exchange
Game B
42 queens - 24 ... VNg4, in order to fight for the draw. His king is so vulner able that he has no chances to attack White's c-pawn effectively.
2S.h3 mfS
... but still fortunately, writing the move did not mean that I played it... !
4l.VNc2! This move just shuns all possible temptations!
41. . .md8 26.'?NhS! me7 27.trgS+!
or 4l.. .Ela3 42.Elc3
Black can counter 27.VNxh7, with
42.a4 �a4 43.c7+ mc8 44.ElgS This is the ultimate necessary pre-
27 .. Jk5 equalizing.
27 VNf6
cision. Black resigned.
•••
After 27 ... mf8 28.a3, there arises a peculiar zugzwang situation - Black has no useful moves left. Now, he loses a pawn by force and that practically spells disaster for him.
28.%Yf4 md8 29 .'i!rb4 VNe7 3 0 . VNxb6 as 3 1.Elc5 VNd6 32.trxaS Eld1+ 33.Elxdl %Yxdl+ 34.mh2 trd6+ 3S. mgl
D2 0
8 Dreev - R.Sherbakov
Qualifer for World Junior (Under 20) Borzhomi 1988
I have already mentioned this tournament too in the Foreword to White wins some additional sec this book. It was a qualification event onds in the time-pressure. for the World Under-2 0 Champion 3S ...VNdl+ 36.mh2 %Yd6+ 37.g3 ship), and I tookfirst place, but I did f4 38.VNc3 fxg3+ 39.fxg3 me7 4 0 . not go anywhere... b4 Ela7 l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4.�f3 (diagram) ib4+ The time-trouble is
How
It is much more fashionable here
should I continue? After 41.a3?, Black plays 41...Elxa3! with a draw. I was
over.
tempted to follow with the spectacular line: 41.c7? l':lxa2+ 42.VNc2, but after 4 2 ...VNxc5! Black again saves the day. I
for Black to follow with the captur ing 4 . . . exd4. Now, the transfer to an endgame after: 5.VNxd4 %Yxd4 6.tLlxd4, leads to an equal position. In case 0(: 5.tLlxd4 ic5!? 6.ie3 tLlf6, Black has a
wrote the move 41.c7 on my scoresheet
good game, because he can counter
43
Dreev-Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988 7.tDc3 with 7 . . . tDg4!?, while against 7.f3 he has the powerful argument 7. . . tDc6!. Following 7.�a4+ tDbd7 8.tDc3 0-0, Black's prospects, having in mind the threats tDd7-b6 and tDf6g4 are evidently superior. Therefore, White's only way to fight for the open ing advantage is the variation: 5.hc4 ib4 + ! ? 6.tDbd2 tDc6, which is connect ed with a pawn-sacrifice. Well, as con temporary practice shows, even then White's compensation for the pawn is sufficient, but the arising positions are rather complex and double-edged.
After 6.�xd4 �xd4 7.tDxd4 tDf6, Black has nothing to worry about in the arising endgame.
6 �e7!? ..•
This is the principled reaction by Black. Ruslan practically forces me to sacrifice a pawn for the initiative. The more modest move 6 ... tDe7 is not good enough to save Black from his prob lems as the tournament practice shows in the last several years. For example, the abovementioned game Topalov Kharlov, continued with: 7.hc4 tDbc6 8 .�e3 tDxd4 9.�xd4 �xd4 10.hd4 0-0 1l.a3 hc3+ 12.hc3 �e6 13.�e2 �b3 14.h4! ? and White maintained a stable positional advantage, because in that purely technical endgame the material ratio of a couple of white bishops against a b ishop and a knight for Black is a very powerful argument in favour of White.
7.hc4 �xe4+ 8.�e3!? No doubt, that novelty must have
5.lOc3!? With this move I avoid the standard modem tabia: 5.tDbd2 exd4 6.hc4 tDc6; as well as the not less fashion able scheme - 5.�d2 hd2+ 6.tDbxd2 exd4. Of course, this became possible mostly because my opponent had cho sen the line 4 ... �b4, and not 4 ... exd4. The move 5.lOc3!? is quite promising for White in this position and that can be proven by the interesting fact that 16 years later than our game with Elus Ian - the same move was preferred by Vesselin Topalov in his game against GM A.Kharlov in the World Champi onship in Tripoli (2004).
5 exd4 6.lOxd4 .•.
been a surprise for my opponent, since he failed to find the best defen sive plan over the board. Naturally, I cannot tell what improvement Ruslan Sherbakov must have found against the main theoretical line: 8. <,!;>f1 hc3 9 .bxc3, which used to be fashionable at that moment.
44
Game B
8 ixc3+?! •.•
This exchange i s hardly necessary and it seems to me to be anti-posi tional. He should have played instead the principled reaction 8 .. :�xg2!? and I had planned to counter that with 9.i>d2! . There arises a rather unclear position, in which White has a power ful initiative for two sacrificed pawns. It is quite understandable - why Rus Ian avoided that possibility. It is ex tremely difficult psychologically, par ticularly without any home-prepara tion to enter complications like that, while White's game would have been quite easy. His threats like �a4, �b3, Elg1 and �h5 are more than obvious; meanwhile the best defensive plan for Black is mildly speaking - rather un clear. Still, I believe that from the point ofview of theory, after 9 . . . tLlc6!?, or 9 ... i>f8!?, Black's prospects should not be inferior . . . . Similar intuitive pawn-sac rifices for initiative were often met in the games of the great Russian player - the World Champion number four - Alexander Alekhine and his chesslegacy is something I had studied quite thoroughly in my junior years ...
9.bxc3
In this very moment, the move 9 ... �xg2 is hardly any better that the line in the game, because in this case, besides 9.i>d'; (dnd White's initia tive compen' . . tes the two sacrificed pawns ... ) I would have had the even stronger argument - 1O.�h5!?, after which Black is practically forced to en ter the line: 1O ... �g6 (or 1O . . .�xh1+? 1l.i>d2+-) 11.�e5+ tLle7, but after 12. 0-0-0, White's initiative is very pow erful. For example, in case of 12 ... c6?, it is good for White to follow with: 13 ..tg5! f6 14.�d6! and Black has no satisfactory defence: if 14 . . . �xg5+, then 15.f4 �a5 16.Elhe1+-, while in case of 14 ...fxg5, there follows a spec tacular checkmate in five - 15.�d8+ ! ! i>xd8 16.tLle6+ i>e8 17.tilc7+ i>f8 18. Eld8+ �e8 19.Elxe8#. It is also too bad for Black to play: 12 ... .tg4? 13.Eldg1 tLld7 14.�f4+-. Therefore, he has probably nothing better than: 12... �f6 and after 13.�xc7, White regains his pawn and maintains his initiative. It is also possible for White to try here: 13.�xf6 !? gxf6 14 . .tf4 and his initia tive is quite dangerous notwithstand ing the absence of the queens on the board. 1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0 1Utel tLlg6?! My opponent is immediately in a very difficult position after that mis take. Even following: 1l...�h4 12.�d2, he would have had plenty of problems to worry about, but he could have offered some tenacious defence. Now, the developments are just forced: 12 .tcl! �g4 13 .ta3 gd8?! This move enables me to start a quite spectacular attack. Black could •
•
have tried to hold the position only
Dreev-Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988 by entering a very difficult endgame after: 13 ... �xd1 14J3axdl l3d8 15.ttJb5.
45 sign outright, because of the unavoid able threat of the "quiet' move - \t>gl h2! ! , with the idea to follow with g2-g3. Black is totally helpless against that threat. For example, in case of: 20 ... �d6 21.l3f5 ! , or 20 ... �e5 21.l3f5 ixf5 22.g3+ White wins .on the spot. I think I played quite well until that moment, but here I made a serious imprecision and although I did not let the win slip away altogether, my opponent had a chance to resist quite resiliently for much longer. . .
14 .hf7+ ! c;!}xf7 •
In case of: 14 . . . c;!}h8 15.�xg4 .bg4 16. l::l a bl, or 16.f3, I would have main tained an overwhelming positional ad vantage with material equality present on the board. 15:�b3+ C;!}f6 16.h3 �d7 17 l3e3 ! Black is beyond salvation after that strong move. .
17 'I19d5 •••
He can save the day neither with: 17 ... ttJf4 18 .l3ae1 �d5 19 ..ie7+ c;!}g6 20. gg3+ \t>h6 21 ..ig5+-; nor with: 17... �e5 18.l3ael ttJbc6 19.f4+-
1S.lU'3+ \t>g5 19.Jtcl+ c;!}h4
2 O .�g3?! 'I19xb3 21.ttJf3+ c;!}h5 22. gg5+ c;!}h6 23.gf5+ ttJf4 24.hf4+ g5 25 .ixg5+ c;!}g7 26 .axb3 hf5 27 .ixdS c5 2S.Jte7 b6 •
•
Or 28 ... ttJc6 29 ..ig5 l3e8. This end game without a pawn is still hopeless for Black despite the opposite coloured bishops present on the board. White can easily advance his connected passed pawns on the kingside, just like it happened in the game, though . . . There still followed:
29.�dl ttJc6 3 0 .Jtg5 geS 31.gd6 ttJa5 32.Jtf6 + c;!}gS 33.g4 Jte6 34. �g5 JtcS 35.f4 ttJxb3 36.Jte5 ttJa5 37.ttJe4 gfS 3S.ttJf6 + c;!}f7 39.ttJxh7 ggS 4 0 .ttJg5+ �e7 41.gh6 Jtd7 42. f5 ttJc4 43. f6+ c;!}fS 44 .1f4 ttJe5 45.ttJh7+ c;!}f7 46 ..ixe5 .ixg4 47. hxg4 �xg4 + 4S.c;!}f2 a5 and Black •
resigned without waiting for the quite evident follow-up - 49.l3h5.
9
D13 Baburin - Dreev
Now, the most logical final touch of my attack would have been the move - 20.'I19dl! and Black should better re-
56th USSR Ch (lh-final), Gorky 1989
There were Championships in ev-
Game 9
46
ery republic constituting a part of the USSR. In the Russian Federation (which later turned into Russia after the dissolution of the Soviet Union) there were Championships as well, but they hardly ever attracted the strongest players. There were not enough international tournaments however and grandmasters partici pated often in the Championships of the different republics, which among everything else were qualification tournaments for the Championship of the USSR. In November 1989, in the city of Gorky (now that city is named Nizhny Novgorod) there was organized the Championship of the Russian Federation as a round-robin with 14 participan ts. I took the bronze medal with a result 8 112 points "+4", half a point behind Semen Dvoiris. Alexey Vizhmanavin playedjust bril liantly and he became the Champion with 10 points. 1.d4 dS 2 .c4 c6 3.cxds cxds 4.tOc3 tOf6 S.tOf3 In case of S . .if4, White must con sider S . . . �b6.
5
..•
tOc6 6 ..if4 e6 7.e3
We have played one of the lines of the exchange variation of the Slav De fence. It looks like White does not risk anything in that position and after the attractive moves 7. .id3, or 7.h3, his prospects seem to be superior. Things are far from simple, though ...
Botvinnik at those times ... He was a player with an active positional style and he was just brilliant in his capa bilities to complicate some quite sim ple positions with Black, right after the opening, in order to play them for a win. I am going to quote a magnifi cent classic example of his treatment of that variation in a training game T.Petrosian - Botvinnik, USSR 1952, which followed with: 8 . .igS �b6 9.a3 h6 1O .ih4 gS 11..ig3 tOg3 12.hg3 .ig7 13.id3 �d8! 14.tOh2?! hS 1S,Ek1 .id7 16.tObS 'tt> f8 ! 17.tOfl g4 18.tOd2 eS and Black seized the initiative. .
8 ..igS -
White's other possibility here is 8 ..ieS.
8 �b6 9 .ibS •••
•
This move is no doubt the best for White and he is trying to create maxi mal problems for his opponent with it. V.Kron is his game with White against me in the same tournament tried
(diagram) This interesting move leads to a complicated situation and it was played and quite successfully at that
here 9.�b1, but after 9 ... h6 1O ..ih4 gS 1l.tOd2 tOg7 12 . .ig3 tOfS, he did not achieve anything much and later, following the dubious line: 13 . .ieS?! tOxeS 14.dxeS .ig7 1S.e4 tOe7 16.exdS exdS 17 ..ibS+ 'tt>f8 18.0-0 .if5, I even managed to obtain the advantage with
by the sixth World Champion Mikhail
Black.
7... tOhS
47
Baburin-Dreev, Gorky 1989 In case of 9.�d2, Black can coun ter with the standard reaction: 9 ...h6 IO.Ah4 g5 1l.Ag3 ttJxg3 1 2.hxg3 Ag7 and his position is quite promising. 9...h6 1 0 .Ah4 Ad7 It would have been a serious im precision for Black to follow with 10 ... g5, due to 1l.ttJeS! and White main tains a dangerous initiative - 1l ... ttJf6 12.Ag3.
15.dxe5 ttJf4 16.Ag3 ttJe6 17. 'l'Hxd5 lUd8
11. 0 - 0 Ad6!? After ll ... gS 12.hc6 hc6 13.ttJe5, White is clearly better. I had some compensation for the pawn and even if it had not been quite sufficient objectively from the prac tical point of view, White's game is much more difficult here.
18.'l'He4 18.a4!?
18 ... liJed4 19.a4 Af5 2 0 .�h4?! It would have been more reliable for White to try: 20.�e3 a6 2 1.hc6 bxc6, with some compensation.
12.e4 That is White's most energetic pos sibility. His alternative is: 12.ttJe5 he5 13.dxe5 g6, but it leads to an approxi mately equal position, because in case of 14.g4, Black has the powerful argu ment - 14. . .g5! 12 ... 0 - 0 I had i n mind a positional pawn sacrifice, while I played that move. Of course, it was possible to follow with the less risky line 12 ... ttJf4, but not 12 ... de4, because of 13.dS!
13.exd5 exd5 14.ttJe5 Axe5
It is too bad for Black to continue with: 14 ... ttJxeS IS.dxeS hb5, due to: 16.ttJxdS! �a6 (or 16 ... �cS 17.exd6 ixfI 18.�xhS) 17J!el+-
2 0 ... a6 21.Ac4 After: 21.hc6 bxc6, my position would have been even slightly better.
21 ...'l'Hxb2 22.liJd5 My opponent gave back his extra pawn and he evidently intended to seize the initiative with that active ma neuver.
22 ...Ae6 This is a very solid move. It was also interesting for Black to follow with: 22 ... b5 23J�a2 ttJe2 + ! 24.whl ttJxg3+ 2S.�xg3 �xeS (2S ...�d4 26. ttJf6+ wh8 27.ttJhS g6 or 26.ttJe3 bxc4 27.ttJxfS �xeS 28.ttJxh6+ Wf8 29.�f3 �d5) 26.axbS axbS 27.�xeS ttJxeS 28. !3xa8 !3xa8 29.hbS.
23.gabl 'l'Ha3 24.liJe3 gab8 25.M4
Game 10
48
My opponent was in a terrible time-pressure here and he made a grave blunder. The correct defence for him would have been: 25.l"lal �c5, but Black would still preserve the edge.
and that was a real holiday for chess then. Chess fans could watch the play of the grandmasters there (there was no Internet transmission yet!) and they could also participate in simul 25 hc4 26 .!Llxc4 Yfxa4 taneous displays and they could at tend chess lectures. I remember that the exhibition of the chess-computer "Mephisto" attracted enormous inter est. Naturally, nobody suspected then what tremendous level of playing quality the computers would achieve later! As far as I remember from the publications in the media, the tour nament was visited by at least 3 0 thousand spectators. All that seems almost unbelievable now. After 9 Now, White is helpless against the rounds Sergey Dolmatov took first threat tiJe2 and he resigned. place alone with 7 points. I had 1 1/2 This game proved once again the points out of the first 2 rounds and tremendous importance of the psy in the third round I played against chological factor in the fight over the Zurab Azmaiparashvili. After my board. White had an extra pawn in win in that encounter, the rest of my deed, but he had great difficulties de games ended in draws and Ifinished fending, instead of being able to attack with "+2", sharing 11th to 4 0 th places. or develop some initiative. l.d4 g6 2.e4 d6 3 .!Llc3 i.g7 4.i.g5!? •••
•
•
10
B07 Dreev - Azmaiparashvili
The idea of this move was popular ized in the past by the outstanding Es tonian grandmaster Paul Keres.
GMA Qualifer for World Cup Moscow 1989
The qualification tournament of the GMAfor the World Cup 1991-1992 was acknowledged at that time to be the strongest open tournament in history. There were 128 participants and 85 grandmasters among them. It was played in the cinema-concert hall "Izmailovo". The conditions for the spectators were just wonderful
4 .!Llf6 ...
49
Dreev-Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989 Black transposes to the Pirc Ufimzev Defence with this move. He has tried in the tournament practice some other a bit awkward moves like: 4 . . . c6, 4... a6 and 4...h6. It is not good for Black to play here 4 ...c5, since White can counter that with the excel lent recommendation of Paul Petro vich - S.dxcS �aS 6.id2 �xcS 7.lOdS! , and Black loses after 7...e6? 8.ib4 �c6 9.ibS+Actually, the position that we are discussing arises usually after the fol lowing order of moves: l.e4 d6 2.d4 lOf6 3.lOc3 g6 4.igS. GM Azmaipara shvili used to be the world-renowned expert of that opening at the time when this game was played. Only a few might not remember his famous victory with Black against Anatolij Karpov in the SOeth jubilee Champi onship of the USSR in the year 1983. Meanwhile, in our home-preparation with my coach 1M Alexander Filipen ko, we noted that despite the fact that Zurab played that opening often and quite successfully at that, this particu lar system, including the active move of White's bishop, had been tested ex tremely rarely, both after: l.d4 g6 2.e4 d6 3.1Oc3 ig7, as well as after the other move-order: l.e4 d6 2.d4 lOf6 3.lOc3 g6. On the other hand my coach was and continues to be a real connoisseur of that super-aggressive system... Ac cordingly; our preparation lasted for not more than 40 minutes, despite the fact that I was going to play it for the first time in my life . . .
5.f4 ! This i s White's most active move. In general, he plays more often here
S.�d2, but the positions arising after: S ... h6 6.ih4 (or 6.if4 gS 7.ig3 lOhS) 6 ... gS 7.ig3 lOhS, or 6.ie3 lOg4 7.if4 eS are favourable for Black.
5 c6 ...
It is too dubious for Black to try the seemingly active move S ... cS, because after 6.eS! White's initiative is very dangerous. Forexample in the gameA.Filipenko - M.Gurevich, Moscow 19B3, there followed 6... lOhS (It is worse for Black to play: 6 ... cxd4?, because of 7.exf6 exf6 8.�xd4 �e7+ 9.lOce2 1Oc6 1O.�c3 and his compensation for the piece is insufficient; after 6 . . . de 7.de, White maintains a clear positional advan tage; in case of 6 ... 1tl bd7, Black has no suitable way to avoid the forced line: 7.ed f6 8.ih4 ed 9.�e2 \!lfB 10.ltlf3 Itlc6 11.0-0-0 and White's position is evidently superior.) 7.dxc5 dxeS B.�xdB+ \!lxdB 9.0-0-0+ id7 1O.fxeS h6 11.ie3 (11.ih4!?) l1 ...heS 12.ltldS Itlc6 13.ltlf3 ig7 14.ibS lOf6?! (This is a mistake by Black, but his position is difficult anyway.) IS.lOxf6 M6 16.fld2 \!leB 17.flhdl �S 18.id4! flc8 19.hf6 exf6 20 .lOd4 and White's positional edge was overwhelming. Black cannot solve his problems in the opening with the inclusion of the moves: S ... h6 6.ih4 - and only then 6 . . .cS: 7.eS ltlhS B.dxcS Itlxf4! (It is too dubious for Black to continue with: B . . . dxeS 9.�xd8+ \!lxdB 10.0-0-0+ id7 11.fxeS heS 12.lOdS, because White is once again clearly better, due to the vulnerability of Black's king.) 9.exd6 gS 10.if2 . Contemporary the ory evaluates the arising position as approximately equal, but I think that
50
Game 10
is not quite correct, since Black's com pensation is not sufficient. Finally, in case of 5 . . . 0-0, Black should consider the possibility 6.e5!?, but still I believe that the most precise move for White is - 6.�d 2 ! . But not 6.ttlf3 c5! - and Black obtains an excellent counterplay, because he can counter 7.dxc5 with 7 ... �a5, and 7.e5 - with 7 ... cxd4 8.exf6 (8.�xd4 ttlc6) 8 . . . exf6. Following 6.�d2,
considered the move 9.0-0. However, after 9 ... �b6, tournament practice has shown that Black has no problems whatsoever.
Black's relatively best line is - 6 ... c6 (6 ... c5 7.dxc5) 7.ttlf3 b5 8.id3 and there arises a well-familiar theoretical position. The same situation arose by a transposition of moves in our game too, though ...
9.e5! This move is not a novelty yet, but still it was quite seldom played at the times .. .
9...b4 1 0 .ttle2 .bf3 It is worse for Black to follow with 1O ... ttld5 11.0-0 and White dominates in the centre.
11.gxfJ ttld5 12 ..tc4
6.�d2 In case of 6.ttlf3, White should worry about 6 ... m6 and here he must practically sacrifice a pawn in order to fight for the opening advantage - 7.�d2 �xb2 8.gbl �a3, obtaining after 9 . .td3 a quite sufficient compen sation for it, indeed.
6 b5 7. .td3 0 - 0 8 .ttlf3 J.g4 •••
Following some mutual tricks - there arose a well known theoreti
This is already a novelty. White had played before only 12.ed, or 12 . .th4, after which he never achieved any thing substantial. Black should not fear the move 12.0-0-0 either, at least because of 12 ...�a5!? The bishop move in fact opens a new page in the theory and that position is presently one of the most critical in this system of the Pirc-Ufimzev Defence.
12 ... a5 13. 0 - 0 - 0 (diagram)
13 ...�d7 GM
cal position on the board (it was a true
Azmaiparashvili was faced with a new idea i n the opening and he failed to find the best continuation. A
tabia in that opening then... ) and the
whole seven years (!) after our game,
main line for White here used to be
the talented 1M Igor Zakharevich,
51
Dreev-Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989
at the Russian Team Championship (Azov 1996), found against me the best plan for Black i.e. 13 .. .f6 ! 14.exf6 exf6 15.�h4 ih6 ! 16.M2 (White's at tempt at an improvement of the varia tion after the move 16.ig3, was in fact fruitless, because following: 16 ... ltJd7 17.h4 ltJ7b6 1B.id3 a4, in the game Kobalia - Zakharevich, Ekaterinburg 1999, Black had a very good game.) 16 ... ltJd7 17.h4 ltJ7b6 1B.id3 ltJa4. (M ter 1B .. JleB 19.wb1! White still has the initiative; later in the game Ulibin - Zakharevich Elista 1995, there fol lowed: 19 ... whB 20Jldg1 a4 21.h5 g5 22.fxg5 hg5 23.f4 ih6 24.Wa1 �d7? ! 25.c4! bxc3 26.bxc3 a3 27.c4 ltJe7 2B.d5 ltJa4 29.ltJc3 cxd5 30.id4! and White's threats were very dangerous. In case of 1 B ... a4 - when White's bish op is on the f2-square, that move is not so effective, while now it is possi ble - there follows: 19.h5 g5 20.ltJg3!.) In answer to 18 ... ltJa4, I played the at tractive move 19.h5?!, which suddenly proved to be a serious imprecision. After: 19 ... ltJac3! 20.hxg6 ltJxe2+, I al ready had to think about equalizing: 21.�xe2 ltJxf4 22.gxh7+ wh8; 22.�c4+ d5; 21.Wb1 ltJec3+ 22.bxc3 hf4 - and I was clearly worse. I managed some how to save that game, though, but
I am not so excited to think about it, mildly speaking... Still, I do not think that Zakharev ich's improvement has buried the whole system ... I believe that instead of 19.h5? ! , White can try 19.wb1!? with the threat h4-hS, while in case of 19 .. JlbB, White can proceed with his positional plan with the prophylactic move 20.wa1, removing his king to a safer place. White thus has once again the threat h4-h5 on his agenda and so he maintains somewhat better chanc es. By the way, I still think that the re ally important theoretical disputes in this system belong to the future. Now, let us go back to my game with Azmaiparashvili...
14.f5! This is an original plan - White ig nores the material losses and he begins attacking Black's king-shelter with his doubled f-pawns, which finally leads to success! 1 4 '?Nxf5 Black does not have much to hope for after 14 ... dxe5 - following 15.fxg6 hxg6 16.h4 e6 17.h5 ltJb6 1B.id3 �d5 19.wb1, White's attack is extremely powerful, as in the game Yakovich - Beim, Leeuwarden 1994. .•.
15.ltJg3!? White maintains his initiative with this strong move. Naturally, I saw the variation: 15 . .txd5 cxd5 16 . .txe7 �cB 17.hd6, but I did not like to surren der the initiative to my opponent...
15 '?Ne6 16.f4! .•.
I had sacrificed a pawn already... Now comes another one ...
16 dxe5 ••.
In case of16 ... h6 17.f5!? gxf5 18.if4,
Game 11
52 White's compensation for the two sac rificed pawns is more than sufficient.
17.f5! �d6 After 17... gxf5?! IB.ltJh5, White's attack is probably irresistible.
'ltlgB+-. His relatively best defence would have been the move - 19 .. .f5, but even then after 20.h4, White's at tack would have still been extremely dangerous ...
18.fxg6 bxg6
2 0 .ltJf5!
19.IMgl!
2 0 ...�e5 21.ltJxg7 ltJe3?!
That is a precise positional move, which helps White preserve all the ad vantages of his position. The straightforward attempt 19.h4, would have been much weaker, because of: 19 ... exd4 (or 19 ... ltJb6!? 2o.id3 'ltlxd4 21..te3 ltJc4) 20.gdg1 ltJe3 etc. . .
19
.••
exd4?!
This is evidently a miscalculation. My attack now is running unopposed, but it was hard from easy for Black to find the right move. He would not have saved the day, for example with: 19 ... ltJb6 20 . .td3 f5 21.ltJxf5! gxf5 2 2 . .th6 gf7 23.ixg7! (23 ..txf"5 'ltlxd4) 23 .. J!xg7 24.ixf5 ltJBd7 (Or 24... 'ltlf6 25.dxe5 'ltlxf5 26. 'ltldB+-; 24 . . . 'ltlxd4 25.gxg7+ Wxg7 26.'ltlg5+ WfB 27 . .te6 'ltlf4+ 2B.'ltlxf4+ exf4 29.!:�g1 and White checkmates unavoidably.) 25.fug7+ wxg7 26.'ltlg5+ wfB 27.!:!gl l!ieB 2B.dxe5 'ltld5 29.ixd7 + ltJxd7 (29 ... l!ixd7 30.gdl) 30.'ltlg6+ wd8 31.
It is quite possible that by playing 19 ... exd4, Azmaiparashvili had based all his hopes on that particular move. He could have prolonged his agony though, with the line: 21...�g7 22 . .th6. Now, his position crumbles like a pa per fortress ...
22 .,txe3 dxe3 23.'ltld3! �xg7 24 ..txf7! 'ltlh5 25.!:txg6 +. Black re signed. The move 25 ... Wxf7 will be coun tered by White with: 26.gf1+ weB 27.fuf8+ wxf8 2B.'ltldB+ wf7 29. �gB#
D47
11 Pliester - Dreev New York (open) 1989
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ltJc3 ltJf6 4.ltJf3 e6 5.e3 ltJbd7 6 .td3 dxc4 7.,txc4 b5 8 ..te2 ib7 9.e4 b4 10 .e5 bxc3 11.exf6 •
53
Pliester-Dreev, New York 1989 We are playing a well known varia tion ofthe Meran system.
and after it Black's position is at least equal. It was stronger for him to play
1l cxb2
14.ttJd2 ! and that would have led to a
I was in a fighting spiritthat day and
situation, which is practically impos
making that move I decided to enter
sible to be eval uated properly. Black
a very complicated and double edged
has plenty of possibilities - 14 . . . c5,
•.•
12 .fxg7 bxal� 13 .gxh8�,
14 . . .ia6, 14 . . . 0-0-0, 14 . . . �5xa2 , but
although that was connected with a
I like most Garry Kasparov's recom
variation:
great degree of risk. It was more solid
mendation 14 . . . �f5!?, although the
and reliable for Black to play: l1...iLlxf6
position remains quite unclear after
12 .bxc3 .td6, since he would have no
that as well . . .
problems concerning equality. Still, in
14 �xdl+ 15 .b::d l �f5 16. 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 17.d5?!
that case, (the position is rather sim ple) Black would have no chances to seize the initiative outright. . .
12.fxg7 bxal�! ? The calmer line : 12 . . . .txg7 13 ..txb2 , is not so good for Black at all, as con temporary tournament practice shows,
•..
•
My opponent sacrifices a pawn and that is risky. In case of: 17.�g8 .te7 18 .�g7 �g6, or 18 .�g3 iLl f6, Black has no problems at all. White has nothing to complain about either . . .
17...,td6!?
because his inferior pawn-structure guarantees White a slight positional advantage.
13.gxh8�
18.�d4? ! That is another quite important imprecision. Now, White cannot ob tain any sufficient compensation for That is an amazing position, since it is quite rare to see an opening varia
the pawn. It was better fo r him to follow with:
tion with four queens on the board
18 .�b2 �xd5 19 . .te2 c5 2 0 .:8bl, with
and that only on move thirteen ! . . The situation is tremendously complicated
some compensation, nevertheless he had a long way to go to prove it was
and unclear.
sufficient.
13 ... �a5+ 14 .td2
18 ...c5 19.�a4 �xd5 2 0 .,te2
That is not the best move for White
After 20.�xa7?! :8g8, Black would
•
Game 12
54 have a crushing attack and White would probably be defenseless.
f5. Entering after: 7... 0-0 8.e3 ILlbd7 9.�d3 !le8 10.0-0 ILlf8, the Carlsbad
2 0 J��g8 2U�d1 �e4 22.�xe4
variation would be less purposeful,
The exchange of queens is forced .
because despite the fact that Black's
•.
22
.••
he4
position is solid enough, the long
Now, the game enters the technical
term world-experience indicates that
stage of a realization of an extra pawn.
he would be still too far from equal
My opponent had only negligent prac
ity.
8.e4!?
tical chances to make a draw.
23.�g5 �d5 24.f3 f5 25.�xh7?
That is White's most active re
White loses quickly after that move.
source in his fight for the opening ad
Re had better defend with 25 .1Llt7, but
vantage. Black has no problems what
even after that his chances to save the
soever after: 8.e3 �f5 9.�d3 (In case
game were quite minimal indeed.
of 9.'lWb3 'lWb6, I believe that Black's
25 �e7 26.�a6+ �c7 27.�f4+ �M8 28.h4?! 1xh4 29.g3? hg3 3 0 .�g5+ �c7 31.�g2 M4 and White
position is already a bit superior.) not permit even the slightest hint of
resigned.
White's initiative in the line: 10 . . . 0-0
••.
9 . . . hd3 10.'lWxd3 ILlbd7! (Black does
1l.hf6 ! ? hf6 12.b4.) and Black equal izes easily after 11.0-0 0-0, as well as
12
D36 Ruban
-
Dreev
USSR Ch Under 26, Thilisi 1989
after: 11.�h6 ILlg4 ! ? 12 .�g7 !lg8 13.�e5 ILlgxe5 14.lLlxeS (or 14.dxeS 'lWc7 and Black is even better) 14 . . . lLlxeS 1S.dxeS 'lWc7.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 lLlf6 4.�c3 e6 5.cxd5 exd5 6.�c2 �e7 7.�g5
8 dxe4 •••
It is much worse here for Black to follow with 8 ... lLlxe4?!, due to 9.he7 �xe7 (but not 9 . . . 'lWxe7? 1O.lLlxdS+-) 10. lLlxe4 dxe4 1l.'lWxe4+ �f8 12.�c4 and White maintains a slight, but sta ble advantage.
9.hf6 hf6 1 0 .�xe4+ �e7 This is the most reliable answer. The move 1O . . . �f8 is more fashion able nowadays and it leads to compli cated, double-edges positions. Black has more chances to seize the initia
7 g6! • . .
tive after that, in comparison to 10 ...
This is n o doubt Black's best move,
'lWe7, but the risk for him to end up in a
which provides him with excellent
worse position is considerably greater
chances to equalize without too much
too.
of an effort, because of the threat �c8-
11.�c4 O - O ! ?
55
Ruban-Dreev, Tbilisi 1989 Black's other possibility here is 11 . . . Af5 12.�xe7+ �xe7 13.0-0-0 gd8 14.ghe1+ �f8, with an approximately equal position.
12. 0 - 0 It is more precise for White t o play here: 12.�xe7 Axe7 13.0-0-0 tLld7, entering a complex and roughly equal endgame.
to save the game in a variation with a pawn down - 19.tLlf6+ (It is too bad for him to play 19.Ac4, because of 19... �xe5 20.�xe5 tLlxe5 21.tLlf6+ �g7 22. tLlhS+ gxh5 23.13xe5 �f6.) 19 . . .tLlxf6 20. exf6 �xf6 21.Ac2, or 21.Axa4 �xb2. White could have tried here the seemingly passive line: 16 J�ac1 a4 17.Ac2 Ae6 18.gb1, which was leading to an approximately equal position and it would have been his most reli able continuation, indeed.
16 ...,ie6
12 'M>4! .•.
Now, my chances are not worse to say the least.
13.,ib3 i.f5 14.ti'f4 �d7 15.!Uel .s! This is a good positional move, which improves my set-up. The threat as-a4 is rather unpleasant for White.
16.g4 My adversary opted for this sharp Ed somewhat risky advance, which compromises his pawn-structure on the kingside. In case of 16.tLle4?! a4, Black ob tains a very good counterplay. Now, .tler: 17.tLlxf6+, then 17...tLlxf6 18.,tc2 eelS; if 17.d5, then 17... �g7, while Wowing: 17.tLle5, Black's simplest 4efence is 17. . . Axe5 (The position is llightly better for Black too after: 17 . . . b,7 18.i.xf7+ �h8 19.tLlxd7 �d7.) 18. ms ti'e7 and White will have to try
17 .be6 •
White should not expect any thing promising out of the variation; 17.�e6 fxe6 18.Axe6+ �h8 19.Axd7, because of: 19 ... �xb2 !? 20.�c1 (or 20Jlc1?! Ag7 21.�d2 �xd2 22.tLlxd2 gad8 23.Ae6 gfe8) 20 ...�xc1+ 21.�c1 gad8 22.Ae6 Axd4 23.tLlxd4 gxd4 and despite White's minute material ad vantage (he has a knight and a bishop against a rook and a pawnO, this end game is preferable for Black, because of his superior piece-coordination and his pawn-majority on the queenside. In fact, what was most important - the initiative would have been definitely on my side in that case. Black's com pensation for the pawn would have
Game 12
56 been sufficient too in the line: 19 . . .
dark square and it might turn later
'fie7 2 0 . ltJe5 'it>g8 2 1.'fid2 Elad8 2 2 .Eldl
into a juicy target after a move like
Elxd7 23.ltJxd7 'fixd7.
�g7-f8.
17 fxe6 18.�e3 Elae8 19.�e4 ig7 2 0 .Eladl �b6 21.�e5 �d5 •..
Black's position is already slightly
2 8.f7 29.
position
becomes
ex
better, because of the weakness of the
tremely difficult after that. He should
f4 -square in White's camp.
have played 30.f4 , preventing e6-e5 and although after 30 . . . �f8, my pros pects would have remained clearly superior, he could have offered some more tough resistance to the end of the game.
22.�a3 My queens,
opponent
wishes
compromising
to
his
trade pawn
structure on the queenside and that is easily understandable. With queens present on the board, after 2 2 . 'fie2
30
•••
e5!
ItJf4, threatening Eld8, White's posi
This move literally destroys White's
tion has no good prospects and its de
position. It is not quite all over yet, but
fence becomes extremely difficult.
he is practically beyond salvation . . .
22 Elf4 23.h3 �xa3 24.bxa3 Elxe4!?
After 31.dxe5 Elxe5 32 .Elxe5 be5,
It seemed attractive for Black to
the endgame with a bishop against
play: 24 . . . be5 25.dxe5 Elf3, but after:
a knight is easily winning for Black,
•.•
31.
26.Elbl Ele7 27.Elb3, he does not achieve
because of the chronic weakness of
anything substantial, while variations
White's a3-pawn.
of the type: 26 . . . Elxh3 27.Elxb7 Elxa3
31
28. ltJf6+ ItJxf6 2 9 . exf6, or 26 . . . Elxa3
Or 32.Elel?! Ele7 33.ltJc5+ 'it>d5-+
•••
'it>e6 32.dxe5
27.Elxb7 Elxa2 2 8 . ltJf6+ ItJxf6 2 9 .exf6
32 Ele7?!
ElfB 3 0.Elxe6 are quite unsafe for me,
I was in a serious time-pressure
•.•
mildly speaking . . .
here and I made a great imprecision,
25.Elxe4 �c3 26.Eldel
which provided my opponent with
Black fixes White's a3-pawn on a
had to follow with: 32 . . . Elb8 ! 33. ltJa5
good chances of survival. Instead, I
57
Ruban-Dreev, Tbilisi 1989 ga8 34.lLlb7 c;?;>d5 35.gf4 J.xe5 36.Elf7 cS and the victory would have been quite close in sight.
33.lLldS+ ! This is an excellent defensive re source!
33
•••
c;?;>d5 34.ge1 ixe5 35.gd1+?
Here, my opponent overlooked in his time-trouble the excellent oppor tunity to continue with 35.f4! and that would have provided him with a life line in the variation: 35 ... i.f6 (or 35 ... id6 36.Eldl+ c;?;>cS 37.Elc1+ c;?;>d5 38. gdl+ ) 36.Eldl + c;?;>e4(36... c;?;>c4 37.lLlxc6= ) 37.lLlxc6 Elc7 38.1Llh4 Elc3 39.Elel+. Presently, White's position is al ready lost, because he cannot bring into action his "roaming" knight.
35 ... c;?;>c5 36.gc1+ 36.Elel c;?;>d6 37.f4 if6 38.Elc1 c5-+, or 38.l'!xe7 J.xe7 39.1Llf7+ c;?;>d5-+
36... c;?;>d6 37.gxc6 +
Naturally, this position is winning for Black, since he has an extra piece for two pawns. I had to overcome some technical difficulties, indeed, mostly because I had to avoid the exchange of the rooks. In case I had allowed that - the position would have become im mediately drawish, despite my extra bishop. This is what my opponent had based his practical chances on. Still, generally speaking, what followed to the end of the game was in fact just a matter of endgame technique ...
46. c;?;>g2 h5 47.h4 c;?;>c6 4S.ge4 ic5 49.a4 id6 5 0 .ge6 ga5 51.gh6 c;?;>d7 52.c;?;>h3 ie7 53. c;?;>g3 c;?;>eS 54. ge6 gxa4 55.ge5 gg4+ 56. g3 C;?;>f8 5S.a4 if6 59.gf5 c;?;>g7 6 0 .a5 gg4+ 61.c;?;>h3 c;?;>g6 62.gc5 ga4 63.c;?;>g3 ga3+ 64.c;?;>g2 h4 65. c;?;>h2 ig5 66.gd5 if4+ 67.c;?;>h1 ga2!
Now, White is practically forced to give up a piece, since the line: 37.Eldl + c;?;>c7 38.h4 c5 39.Eld5 i.d4 is complete ly unacceptable for him.
37 c;?;>d7 3S.gc5 c;?;>xdS 39.gxb5 J.d6 40 .gd5 c;?;>c7 41.gd4 ic5 42. !xa4 gf7 43.f4 ie3 44.f5 •••
In case of 44. c;?;>e2, Black has the resource - 44 ... Elxf4 ! -+
44 ... gxf5 45.gxf5 gxf5+
But not 67 ... h3? 68.Eldl=.
6S.gb5 ic7 69.gc5 ixa5 7 0 .gb5 ic3 71.gc5 if6 72.gb5 ig5 73.gc5 c;?;>h5 74.gc4 J.f6 75.gb4 gd2 76.ga4 c;?;>g5 77.gb4 ie5 7S.gc4 J.f4 79.gb4 gd1+ S O .c;?;>g2 c;?;>g4 0-1 13
E97 Dreev - E.Geller Moscow 1989
This was a game with the legend ary grandmaster Efim Petrovich Geller in the Moscow International round-robin Tournament. I tookfirst place with 7 1/2 points out of11. Alexey Vizhmanavin remained half a point behind me. Efim Petrovich shared 34 places with V. Kotronias with 6 1/2 points out of11.
Game 13
58
l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5.�f3 0 - 0 6.ie2 e5 7. 0 - 0 �c6 8.d5 �e7 9.�d2 The line 9.b4 is more fashionable, but 9.�d2 is also critical.
9 a5 1 0 .!!bl ••.
White has played more often here the move 1O.a3, but I prefer 1O.l3b1, since he enjoys greater variety of plans after that (naturally, it all depends on Black's choice of move), while after 1O.a3, White is more or less bound to proceed only with the plan with h4.
1 0 ...id7 That is a relatively seldom played line. It is much more popular for Black to continue here with 10 . . . �d7, but ev idently Efim Petrovic, who is a world renowned expert on the King's Indian Defence, had a different opinion on the subject...
1l.b3!? The variation: 1l.a3 a4 12.h4 axb3 13.�xb3 b6 has been tested quite fre quently in the tournament practice, but I was reluctant to play it. It did not suit my style, since it was too risky. The move 1l.b3 !?, seemed to me to be more flexible and solid.
1l ... �c8
that moment. Its idea is to counter the standard 12.a3 with 12 ... lt'lb6 and after the thematic 13.b4 to continue with: 13 ... axb4 14.axb4 It'la4, as it was played in the game Langeweg - E.Geller, Am sterdam 1974, in which after 15.'.Wc2 It'lxc3 16.'.Wxc3 ih6!? Black equalized easily. All that emphasizes the fact that my opponent was well-familiar with the scheme with 1l ... lt'lc8. In fact, he was one of the main exponents of the entire plan connected with that line. I have managed, however to find the drawbacks of the move 1l ... lt'lc8 - it discoordinates Black's pieces a bit (the knight on c8 is awkwardly placed indeed ... ) and most of all - Black does not control sufficiently the e5-square in the diagrammed position! He can not support it with �f6-d7, because the d7-square has been occupied by the bishop. Therefore I continued with:
12.ib2!? This powerful positional move is a novelty! White refrains from the sche matic idea a3 and b4 and he is threat ening to develop a powerful initiative on the kingside by playing f4.
12 ... ih6 Naturally, Black is trying to prevent radically the pawn-advance f2-f4.
13.�c2 �h5?! This activity is not justified, since it weakens Black's kingside. He had better opt for the more mod est line 13 ... lt'le8, but even then I would have retained after 14.l3be1 a slight but stable positional advantage thanks to my superior piece-coordina That move was quite fashionable at
tion. We have witnessed a similar idea
59
Dreev-E.Geller, Moscow 1989 with the move IiJh5 in the famous game Spassky - Fischer, Reykjavik 1972, in which after l.d4 IiJf6 2.c4 e6 3.1iJf3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.liJc3 g6 7.liJd2 IiJbd7 B.e4 ig7 9.ie2 0-0 10.0-0 �eB 11.�c2, Fischer suddenly played 11. . . IiJh5!?, but his attempt had been much more justified in that position.
successfully, having neutralized the direct threats along the al-hB di agonal, but now he has new prob lems connected with the weakness of the e6-square. His position is clearly worse in a strategical aspect, despite the extra exchange.
24.i.c1 '§g7 25.tOd4
14 . .bh5 gxh5 15.f4!? That is the most active line for White; nevertheless it is connected with a positional exchange-sacrifice.
15 .bf'4 16.gxf4 exf4 17.tOe2 •••
25 tOg6?! .•.
My compensation for the exchange is no doubt quite sufficient, due to the vulnerability of the dark squares on Black's kingside. My bishop on b2 is extremely powerful, since it dominates the al-hB diagonal. White has seized the initiative completely and Black's defence, particularly in a tournament pme, is tremendously difficult.
17 �g5 18.tOf3 �h6 19.ic1 i.g4 ZO.tOxf4 '§f6 21.'§d2!? ..•
White protects his knight on f4 and be is threatening to deploy his bishop from cl to b2, in order to organize a dangerous attack along the al-hB di agonal. 2 1 liJe7 22.i.h2 Mt6 23.'§c3 f6 It looks like Black has defended •..
This is a serious mistake and it makes Black's situation quite difficult. It might look like blundering the ex change, but I believed Efim Petrovic had decided to give it back with the idea to simplify the position in the hope of equalizing after the transfer of his knight to the e5-square. Obviously, he had failed to notice that he would have serious problems connected with the vulnerability of his h5-pawn. He was understandably reluctant to de fend passively the position without any bright prospects after: 25 . . .�f7 26.ib 2 ! ? �h6 (It is too bad for Black to opt for 26 ... liJg6?, due to: 27.liJfe6 be6 2B.liJxe6 �h6 29.ic1 and White's position is easily winning.) 27.E1fl, but that would have been the least of evils, since his position would have re mained still defensible. 26.tOfe6 ixe6 27. tOxe6 �f7 28.
60
Game 14
�xfB l:'lxfB 29.J.b2 b6 3 0 .l:'lfl �e5 3t:�'h3 Now, the weak hS-pawn has be come the object of attack and White is threatening ElfS.
31
.•.
�g6
32.J.xe5 !?
That is the simplest way for White to press his great advantage home.
plest road to victory is : 39.�e6+ <;f{g3 (39 ... <;f{xh4 40.�f6+ <;f{g4 41.�f3+-) 40.�h3+ M4 41.�f3 +.
047
14 Aseev - Oreev
Zonal Tournament, Lviv 1990
32 fxe5?! •.•
That move speeds up Black's de mise. His relatively best choice would have been 32 ... dxeS. Indeed after: 33.ElfS �g4 34.�f3, he would not have saved his hS-pawn and most probably the game either, but still it would have been his most tenacious defence. Now, the arising queen and pawn endgame is totally hopeless for Black.
This game was played in the last round of the Zonal tournament and it was extremely important for both of us, since the winner was going to qualifyfor the next stage of the World Championship - the Interzonal tour nament. After my win against I.Novikov \ (see the previous game) I had 2 112 33.gxf8+ <;f{xfS 34.�cS+ <;f{g7 points out of three, but that was fol 35.�xc7+ <;f{h6 36.�xb6 �xe4 37. lowed byfivedraws (againstA.Shirov, AKhalifman, Y.Balashov, L. Yudasin, �xd6+ <;f{g5? This move loses immediately. In A Vizhmanavin). Before the last case of 37... <;f{g7, White's simplest round S.Lputian and L. Yudasin were line would have been: 38.�c7+ <;f{g6 leading and they had to play against 39.�xaS and his victory with three each other. Six players were follow extra pawns would be just a matter of ing them having half a point less... time. l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 �bd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 b5 S.J.d3 J.b7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .�a4 c5 n.e5 �d5 12. 0 - 0 cxd4
3S.h4+! and Black resigned. Af ter 38 ... <;f{xh4 (38 ... �xh4 39.�e7+-) White wins with: 39.�f6+ <;f{g4 40. �f3+, while after 38 ... <;f{g4, his sim-
We have on the board one of the
61
Aseev-Dreev, Lviv 1990 fashionable variations of the Meran system.
13.
lLldS 17.J.g3 lLl7b6 18.lLlxb6 11Nxb6 19. lLlbS!? J.a6 2 0.11Ne4! g6 21.lLld6 J.xd3 2 2J�xd3 J.xd6 23 .exd6, White re mained with a stable positional ad vantage. In case of: 13 . . .g6 14.11Ng4!?, White maintains his initiative and the game Razuvaev - Bagirov, Jurmala 1987 continued with 14 ... J.g7 and after lS.J.gS! lLlxeS ? ! 16.lLlxe6 ! ! Black came under a crushing attack. The move 13 ... J.e7 seems to be much more reli able than 13 ... lLlc7 and 13 ... g6, but still I believe that even then after 14.11NhS ! ? White's prospects are superior, be cause of his more active position.
14.J.b5+
13 . .
This is the most principled answer
fOr Black. He must accept the pawn sacrifice in this variation in order to obtain some active counterplay. Oth erwise White will have a powerful initiative in a position with material equality. It is just terrible for Black to play: 13. . . a6?, because of: 14.lLlxe6! fxe6 15.\WhS+ rne7 16.J.gS+ lLlSf6 17.exf6+
and White's attack was overwhelm
move lS ... J.e7? ! seems to be rather du bious because of the recommendation of GM A.Mihalchishin - 16.lLlc6 and White's positional advantage is more than obvious.
16.Y:Yh5 g6 17.Y:Ye5 The other popular line for White is - 17.11Ne2, but the move in the game is no less fashionable.
17... 11Nf6 18.
ing in the game Smagin - Sveshnikov,
�c7!; as well as 18.11Nxf6 ? ! lLlSxf6 19.
Sochi 1987. In the game Chernin - Kaidanov, Lviv 1987, there followed 13 .. lLlc7, which seems to be rather passive and no doubt it contradicts the spirit of the active Meran system and
J.gS J.g7, since his compensation for the pawn is practically non-existent in both cases. Black should not worry too much about the rarely played move - 18.
after: 14.11Ne2 J.e7 lSJ�d1 0-0 16.J.f4
J.f4. For example in the game Obuk-
.
Game J4
62 hov - A.Filipenko, Perm 1988, there followed: 18 ... J.e7 19.Elac1 a-a!? 20.bd7 Elxc1 2 1..ixc1 '?NxeS 2 2 .!':lxeS J.f6 and the position was approximately equal.
theless the vulnerability of the dark squares on Black's kingside still provides White with some hopes for a successful defence.
22.ti'd4?! 18 J.g7! •.•
Presently, this move enjoys the rep utation of Black's most solid and reli able line. Back then, when we played our game - that move was a novelty! Until this game, Black usually played here; 18 ...J.e7 19.J.h6 !?, or 18 ...h6 19. J.f4 ! ? ; and White had a good compen sation for the pawn in both cases.
19.ti'g3?! This is a very serious mistake. My opponent was faced with a new idea in a complicated theoretical position and he failed to find the best solu tion. His best line would have been: 19.bd7+ @xd7 20. '?Ne2, after which there would have arisen a complex double-edged fight. The contempo rary practice shows however - Black's prospects are not worse at all. 19
.•.
ti'd8 2 0 .�e5 he5 21.ti'xe5
0-0 As a result of White's mistake on move 19, his compensation for the pawn is already insufficient; never-
White should not rely too much on a favourable outcome for him in the endgame after: 2 2.bd7 '?Nxd7 23.J.h6 f6 24.'?Nxe6+ '?Nxe6 2S.Elxe6, because of 25 . . J:'lfd8! and Black's advantage is evident, because he can counter the attractive move for White - 26.Elae1, with the powerful argument 26 ... Elc2 !?, threatening J.b7-c6. I believe White's best move here was 22 .'?Ne2, maintaining the tension.
22 '?Nf6! 23.ti'xa7? •••
White was greedy to gobble Black's a-pawn, but that proved to be his deci sive mistake. After: 23.'?Nd3 J.c6 Black holds on to his solid extra pawn, but still it would have been a long road to its realization. Now, the placement of White's queen on the a7-square is so bad that his position quickly becomes totally hopeless.
23
•••
gc7 24.J.e3
This move is practically forced, since Black was threatening �f8-a8, trapping White's queen.
63
Aseev-Dreev, Lviv 1990
well: 36.E'!xf2 �c1+ 37.ltJf1 �xc5-+; 36.ltJc4 �c3.
24....tLc6 Generally speaking, I do not let the win slip away from my hands with this move yet, but my task becomes much harder after that. It was evi dently stronger for me to follow with: 24... eS! and White is almost forced to enter the variation: 2S.E'!ac1 E'!a8 26.E!xc7 E'!xa7 27.E'!xd7 ltJxe3 28.E'!xe3 (or 28.fxe3 �h4 29.E'!e2 �a6! 30.E'!xa7 .hbS 31.E'!f2 �e4-+) 28. .. �gS 29.g3 (29.�f1 �g2 !-+) 29 . . . �fS and the po sition is easily winning for Black.
25.a-xc7 ltJxc7 26.hc6 ltJe5 27. te4 ltJd5 2S.hd5 exdS 29.E'!adl leS 3 0 .ltJb6 White has nothing better. It is too bad for him to try 3 0.�d4? ltJf3-+. In case of30.E'!xdS, Black wins with: 30 ... �g4 31.E'!dd1 a-eS 32.g3 a-hS 33.h4 �e3.
3 0 ... ltJg4 31. ltJxdS �xb2 32 ..tLc5 le2 33.E'!f1 It would not work for White to de fend with: 33.ltJe7+
33 ...E'!d2 34.E'!xd2 a-xd2 3S.ltJe3 Black cannot save the game after: 35.ltJxb4 �f4 36.g3 �c4 37.�e7, due to 37 . ltJxh2 ! ..
3S ... ltJxf2! 36.ltJf5 Black's other possibilities lose as
36 ... ltJg4 37.ltJe7+
D43
15
Dreev Zonal Tournament, Lviv 1990
I.Novikov
-
There was a tremendous rivalry among the chess players in the for mer Soviet Union (starting in the 1940s - 1950 s). There were so many strong and talented players, that it had become unbelievably difficult to break through into the international arena. Now, instead ofjust one coun try, there appeared many differ ent independent countries and chess players can travel freely and they can choose where to live and they can even obtain the citizenship of other cou ntries. The players of the former USSR dominate in individual and in team championships as well. The situation was entirely different then. The Soviet Union was a separate zone for the World Championship. The qualification Zonal Tournament in 1990 in Lviv was played in 9 rounds according to the Swiss system and it
Game 15
64
had assembled a very powerful and balanced selection of participants. There were 28 players at the start and they werefightingfor 5placesfor the Interzonal Tournament. I started well; I had 1 Ih points out of 2 and I was playing with Black against Igor Novikov in the third round... 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.ig5 h6 6 ..bf6 �xf6 7 �b3 .
This variation was played back then by World Champions - Vasilij Smys lov and Tigran Pertrosian. The alter native is in fact the main line - 7.e3.
for White to have simplified the posi tion with 10.�xb4 (In case of 10.tLlc3 c5, or 1O.tLled2 c5, Black has no prob lems at all.) 10 ...axb4 11.tLlxf6+ gxf6 and the endgame is about equal. Evidently, my opponent had much more aggressive intentions and it was quite understandable. He did not play 8.e4!?, in order to enter a drawish endgame out of the opening, did he?
10 ... �f4 11.id3 White adheres to the idea of sharp ening the position. It seemed more re liable for him to have continued with: 11.�e3 ! ? �xe3 1 2.fxe3 and the game would have been complicated, but still roughly equal.
7 a5!? ••.
This idea belongs to GM Semyon Furman. Black plays more often here 7... tLld7 and 7... dxc4. The relatively low popularity of the move 7... a5!? is probably due to the fact that the aris ing positions are usually quite com plex and rather unclear.
8.e4!? My opponent chooses a double edged line. After 8.e3 tLld7, there arise much calmer positions in which the chances of both sides are approxi mately equal.
11 .. f5! .
Until this game, Black had played in the tournament practice only the line: 11...ie7 12.tLle5 h5 13.g3 �h6, which led to a slight advantage for White.
12.�g3 c5! Now, White's Idng is not complete
The game becomes much sharper
ly safe on the dl-square and after this move, which undermines White's cen tre, I have an excellent counterplay. It was too passive for me to follow with: 12 ... ie7 13.c5, because White
after that move. It was still not too late
would have maintained a slight, but
8 dxe4 9. �xe4 ib4+ l O .'itdl •..
65
Novikov-Dreev, Lviv 1990 stable edge, due to the weakness ofthe e6-pawn.
13.a3 It is too risky for White to play 13.d5?!, because after: 13 ... a4 14.Wc2 a3 !? Black's prospects are consider ably brighter.
13 a4 14.Wc2 .la5 •••
pair and the relatively unsafe place ment of White's king in the centre of the board.
15 .ld7 16.Wc2 cxd4 17.l2Je2?! •.•
This is already a more serious mis take after which Black seizes the ini tiative. It was better for White to have continued with: 17.Wc1, although even then, following: 17... Wxc1 + 18.�xc1 llJc6, Black would have been better, thanks to his excellent couple ofbish ops and his mobile pawn-centre.
15.Wxa4+ This is not good for White. The strongest move for him here is 15.llJe2 !?, but still after 15 ... Wd6! ? (It is worse for Black to play 15 ... Wg4?!,
17 Wg4
because of 16.llJe5! and White's ini
I was considering the retreat 17...
tiative is quite dangerous, as it was proved later in the game Novikov - Shirov, Alicante 199 2 . It continued with: 16 ... Wxg2 17.�g1 Wxf2 18.Wxa4+ llJd7 19. b4 cxd4 20.�xg7! Wf1+ 21.�c2 Wlxa1 2 2.llJxd7 b5 23.Wxb5 and Black
Wc7 as well, but it was not so pre cise, because after 18.llJexd4, White's chances are not worse anymore.
resigned ...This was a quite instruc tive crush, indeed! ) the position re mains rather unclear. Black's chances are definitely not worse and that was confirmed later in the game V.Popov - Lastin. Elista 2000: 16.Wxa4+ .ld7 17.Wc2 llJc6 18.dxc5 Wxc5 19.1lJc1 .ic7
•••
18.l2Jexd4?! That is not the best move for White, but its idea is quite understandable. Should he suffer - he must have at least a pawn to hold on to... It was better for him to defend strictly pas sively with - 18.�g1, but it was not easy for him to play like that from the point of view of psychology, because after 18 ... llJc6, Black would have been clearly better in a position with mate
20.llJb3 We7, because Black's compen sation for the pawn was sufficient. Now, my position seems to be
rial equality. Still, in that case White would have more chances to hold the
slightly better, because of my bishop
position. Mer the move in the game,
Game 16
66 his position becomes extremely diffi cult and I only had to be on the alert not to make a blunder in order to press my advantage home. 18 q)c6 •••
It is not any better for White to play here 19.h3?!, because of 19 .. :�xg2 and it is bad for him to follow with 20.1!g1, due to the forced line: 20 .. :�xg1+ ! 21. t'Dxg1 t'Dxd4 22:�b1 .ia4+ 23.b3 t'Dxb3 - and Black's victory is just a matter of time. It is also bad for White to try: 20.1!h2 WTxh2! 21.t'Dxh2 t'Dxd4 22.Wfh1 .ia4+ 23.b3 bb3+ 24.�c1 .ic3-+; while in case of: 20.�e2 t'Dxd4+ 21. t'Dxd4 WTgS, Black's great advantage is doubtless. 19 Ybg2 2 0 .�e2 tyg4 Black creates the deadly threat - t'Dc6-eS. 2U�hgl tyh5 22.gg3 White loses by force after: 22.1!xg7, because of: 22 ... t'DeS 23.t'Dbd4 t'Dxf3 24.t'Dxf3 .ic6 2S.1!g3 .ic7 and he has no satisfactory defence at all. 22 ... q)e5 23.q)bd4 q)xf3 24. q)xf3 In case of 24.fui3, Black's simplest winning line is - 24 ...WTg4 2S.�e3 .id8! ••.
24....ic6 25.b4 This is a desperate attempt by White to complicate the game, but he is beyond salvation anyway. After 2S.1!ag1, White wins with the simple 2S ....ic7-+ 25 ...,ixb4 26.axb4 gxal 27. tyb2 My opponent obviously had some hopes connected with that move, since he intended to capture my g7-pawn, but...
27... gg1! 28.tye5 It is understandable that 28.1!xg1 loses because of 28 ... WTxf3+; while 28.WTxg7 would not work, due to the spectacular strike - 28 . . .WTxf3+! 28... �g3 29.tyxe6+ �d8 3 0 . tyd6+ �c8 and White resigned.
16
E61 Dreev - D.Bronstein Reykjavik (open) 1990
There are not so many players of my generation who can brag about having played with the outstanding, legendary grandmaster David Ionov ich Bronstein. This game was played
67
Dreev-D.Btonstein, Reykjavik 1990 in the quite strong open tournament, which was organized immediately after the team match-tournament, in which the team of USSR (I took part in it, though...) took thefirst place, in front of the tea m of USA after some fiercefight. l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 .ig7 4.�f3 0 - 0 5.e3
This move seems to be too risky, but it is logical to assume that Black is provoking White quite deliberately. It looked more natural for my opponent to have continued with 9 ... c6 1O.a4 and White's position would have been only slightly better.
1 0 .�b5!? e4 I was playing that scheme quite of ten at that time. In case Black enters the Gruenfeld Defence with the move S... dS, then White plays 6 ..id2 and Black has great problems to accom plish the thematic move c7-cS.
5 ... d6 6.,ie2 �bd7 Black could have considered here also the plan with 6 . . . cS.
7.b4 e5 8 . .ib2 �e7 It is also interesting for Black to play 8 . . . exd4. In the game Dreev - Shirov, Lviv 1990, there followed: 9.�xd4 cS 10.bxc5 dxcS 11.�dbS �b6 12.�b3 lUg4 13.h3 lUeS 14.0-0 ,ie6 15J''1adl �h4 16.lUc7 lU exc4 17.lUxe6 tixb2 18.lUxf8 and here after I had cal culated that I had no chances to win the game in case of: 18 ... ltJxd1 19.�xg6 hxg6 20.Elxdl c4 21.�c2 Eld8, I offered a draw
and it was accepted.
9. 0-0 Ele8!?
That move leads to positions with a non-standard material ratio, but it is too late for Black to retreat. In case of: 10 ... �d8 11.dxeS ltJg4 (or 1l ... ltJe4 12 ..id3 ltJxeS 13 . .ixe4 ltJxf3+ 14.�xf3 .ixb2 1S.Elab1 ieS 16 ..ixb7; ll ... dxeS 12.ltJxe5 ltJe4 13.ltJd3), there follows: 12.exd6! .ixb2 13.Elbl .ig7 14.ltJxc7 and White's advantage is decisive.
1l.ltJxc7 exi3 12Jl.xf3 �b6 13.ltJxe8
It is a mistake for White to play 13.ltJxa8, because of 13 ... ltJxc4.
13 �xe8 14.�b3 �e4 15"\:�fdl •..
Game 16
6S
15... d5! Black manages to block White's pawns at the price of a pawn. I would have countered 15 ...if5 with the move 16J!acl.
lbf6!, White's chances to obtain an ad vantage are not so great at all.
21.b5
16.cxd5 f5 Black wishes to solidify the place ment of his knight on the e4-outpost with this logical move. In case of the attractive move 16 ...id7, White can play 17.b5, occupying additional space on the queenside, since Black cannot play 17....bb5? lS ..be4 ia4, because of 19.'I&d3. On the other hand, Black's last move has certain drawbacks, since now White has enough time to improve his position.
17.l"lacl 'l&f7 IS.l"lc5! This important resource enables White to fight for the advantage, since it is bad for Black to capture the rook on c5; meanwhile White is threaten ing the plan with a2-a4-a5.
IS ....id7 19.l"lc7 It looks like White goes astray from the right path, being tempted to oc cupy the seventh rank, instead of the seemingly correct line: 19.b5 ifS 20 .a4, but then after 20. . . a5!, the po sition remains quite unclear, for ex ample: 21.l"lc7 l"lbS 22 ..be4 fxe4 23.f3 exf3 24.l"lfl id6 25J!xf3 'l&eS! (or 25 ... 'l&e7 26.ia3).
19 ...l"lbS 2 0 ..ie2? ! Here, I overlooked a possibility, which was a bit risky and not so easy to notice: 20 ..be4 fxe4 2l.f3! (open ing the position!) 21...exf3 22.l"lfl and White's advantage is quite obvi ous.
2 0 ... �d6? After Black's correct response 20 ...
Now, thanks to Black's mistake, I had the possibility to begin imple menting the plan with the advance of the a-pawn. Black has great prob lems. 21 ... lbeS 22.l"lc5 ifS 23.a4 �cS Black regroups his forces without waiting for the move a4-a5.
24.f3 This is a quite purposeful move in deed, but White could have tried too the calmer line: 24.ia3 lbcd6 25.l"ldc1, followed by advancing the queenside pawns.
24...b6 Black should have avoided weak ening the c6-square. It was better for him to play: 24 . . . lbf6.
25.l"lc2 �cd6 2 6.h.3 l"ld8 27. l"lfl White is threatening e3-e4.
27...'I&e7 28.l"lel Black's position is very difficult now and he can hardly prevent the pawn-advance e3-e4.
2S ...'I&h4 29.g3 'l&h6 3 0 .ifl g5 31 .ib2? •
I have to admit that it is really dif-
69
Dreev-D.Btonstein, Reykjavik 1990 ficult for me to believe that I have played a move like that... Why not simply 31.e4! with an overwhelming advantage?!
31 ti'g6?! •.•
David Ionovich makes another mistake and that was probably be cause we were both in a time-trouble. After 31...lLlf6, the real fight would be just starting.
A70
17 Dreev - Wedberg New York (open) 1991
l.d4 c!Of6 2.c4 e6 3.c!Of3 c5 4.dS exdS S.cxdS d6 6.c!Oc3 g6 7.e4 ig7 S.h3 0 - 0 9.id3 That variation was just becoming fashionable at the beginning of the 90ies of the last century, while now it is one of the most critical in the Modern Benoni Defence.
32.e4! Finally White has pushed his cen tral pawn forward and Black cannot
avoid capturing it, while taking it loses as well.
32 fxe4 33.fxe4 �xe4 34.d6+ J.e6? •.•
My task would have been much more difficult after: 34... i>h8 3S.id3 �8xd6 36.dS+ i>g8 (or 36 ... ig7 37.ti'b4) 37.ia3 (or 37.ieS ti'f7 38. .Axe4 lLlxe4 39J:!xe4 if5 40J!c7 ti'xdS) 37... ti'f6 38.ixe4 lLlxe4 39J:!xe4 ti'al+ 4O.ic1 if5 41.ti'c4±
3s.ic4 hc4 36.ti'xc4+ i>g7? Or 36 ... i>h8 37.dS+ lLl4f6 38.l!f2 Jg7 39.l!e6+-
37.l!xe4 ltlxd6 37. . .ti'xe4 38.dS+
3S.ti'c7+ i>g8 39.ti'xdS ti'xe4 40 .ti'xgS+ 1-0
9 . . .l�eS This line leads to a tough positional fight in which White's prospects are slightly better, because of his space advantage. In case of: 9 ... a6 10.a4! l'!e8 11.0-0, or 1 O ...lLlbd7 11.0-0, Black has greater problems to equal ize in comparison to the move in the game, due to White's doubtless space edge. Black has great problems to find an acceptable game plan in similar positions. He has also difficulties to develop comfortably his light-squared bishop. His most active line (quite fashionable nowadays, though ...) is - 9 ...bS!?, but the game is quite forced i n that case. Tournament practice has shown in the last 15 years that Black m\lst play very precisely in the
Came 17
70 long forced variations in order to have chances to equalize. The theory of that line has developed tremendously in the last several years and Black often finds forced or semi-forced lines in which he manages to draw. Here is a typical example in which he has dem onstrated an excellent home-prepara tion - the game Beliavsky - Jobava, Khanty-Mansijsk 2 005, which contin ued with: 1O.hb5 ttlxe4 11.ttlxe4 �a5+ 12.ttlfd2 �xb5 13.ttlxd6 �a6 14.ttl2c4 !!d8 15.�f4 ttld7 16. 0-0 ttlb6 17.ttlxb6 �xb6 18.ttlxc8 !!axc8 19.!!b1 �b7 20. d6 �f8 21.�d3 hd6 2 2 .hd6 !!c6 23. !!fd1 �d7! 24.�a3 !!xd6 25.!!xd6 �xd6 26.�xa7 !!e8 27.a3 �d4 28.b3 !!e2 and despite White's extra pawn the posi tion is quite drawish. There still fol lowed: 29.�a8+ r;!}g7 30.�f3 !!a2 31. a4 c4 32.bxc4 !!xa4 33.�e3 and the opponents agreed to a draw.
1 0 . 0 - 0 c4 11.�c2!? The other possible line here for White is - 1l.hc4 - but it is rarely played in the tournament practice, al though after: 1l ... ttlxe4 12.ttlxe4 !!xe4 13.�d3 !!e8 14.�g5, or 13.�g5, White has good chances to obtain a minimal opening advantage without risking anything. Still, I believe White must connect his ambitions to obtain something real only with the variation 11.�c2 ! ? (diagram)
1l b5!? ..•
That is the most logical and evident ly best move for Black in this position. It is too passive for him to play 1l . . . a6, since after the obvious 1 2 .a4 White has a stable positional advantage, be cause the thematic pawn-advance for
Black - b7-b5 would be too difficult to accomplish. He would have problems to equalize after 1l . . . ttla6 too, because of 12.�e3 (It is also good for White to try: 12.�f4 ttlc5 13.!!e1 with a slight, but stable positional advantage for him.) 12 . . . �d7 (It is not any better for Black to defend with 12 ... ttlb4?!, due to 13.ttld2 !? with a powerful initiative for White; in the game V.Bagirov - Vasiu kov, Moscow 1991, there followed: 13 ... ttlxc2 14.�xc2 �d7 15.ttlxc4 �e7 16.�f4 ttlxe4 17.!!fe1 hc3 18.bxc3 �f5 19.ttlxd6 and White was clearly bet ter.) 13.a4 ! ? with a considerable posi tional edge for White.
12.ltJxb5!? This is the most principled line for White in his fight for the opening initiative. The lines 12.a3 a6 13.�f4 and 12.!!e1 a6 13.�f4 lead to compli cated positions with mutual chances.
12 ... ltJxe4 13.!!el It was also possible for me to con tinue with 13.he4 !!xe4 14.�g5! ? with a slightly better game, but I wanted to preserve my light-squared bishop.
13 . b6 . ..
Contemporary theory considers that to be Black's most reliable move. It is dubious for him to play 13 ... ttlf6?!, because after: 14J:lxe8+ ttlxe8
71
Dreev-Wedberg, New York 1991 lS."*'e2, White has a clear advantage. Black should not rely too much on 13 . . .f5?!, since following: 14.he4 fxe4 lS.lDgS J.fS 16.,,*,a4!? he has great problems to worry about, in view of White's threat lDbSxd6. At first sight it seems quite attrac tive for Black to try 13 ... lDxf2, but then after the practically forced line: 14JlxeB+ ,,*,xeB lS.lDc7! ,,*,e7 16.,,*,e1! fixc7 17. "*'eB+ J.fB 1B.J.h6, his position remains tremendously difficult. For example, in the game A.Rychagov Batsanin, Sochi 199B after: 1B ... lDd7?! 19.1DgS lDxh3+ 20.gxh3 "*'cS+ 21.l!Ifl fixdS 22.J.e4 Black was almost hope less. He had better defend with lB ... lDxh3+, but even then after: 19.9xh3 ficS+ (or 19 . . . lDd7?! 20.lDgS ,,*,cS+ 21.1!Ifl ,,*,xdS 22.J.e4 J.a6 23.,,*,xfB+!? JWB 24.hdS±) 20.l!Ig2 lDd7 2U'le1! J.b7 Black is practically forced to give up a piece, due to the threat ge1-e7! with a decisive attack: 22.,,*,xd7 hdS. White's chances, with an extra piece for three pawns, seem to be clearly p-eferable and he risks practically DOthing in a position like that.
opponent's knight on bS, but in case of 14 ... hbS 1S.axbS, White remains with a couple of powerful bishops and pres sure along the a-file.
14 .b:b5 ••.
What else?!. .. In case of: 14 ... lDf6 lS.gxeB+ lDxeB 16.,,*,e2 White has a considerable positional advantage.
15.axb5 lDc5 16.lDd2!? White maintains the initiative with that move. I would not have achieved much with: 16.l:ixeB+ ,,*,xeB. In the game Stohl - Wedberg, Gausdal 1991 Black played: 17.b6 a6 1B.J.f4 �S and he equalized easily.
16 l!bel+ 17.fixel c3 18.bxc3 .b:c3 19.9a3 .•.
19 ...lLb4 ! That is the only move, which en ables Black to hold the position, al though his situation remains clearly worse. Following: 19 ... J.g7?! 20.lDc4, I would have preserved a clear advan tage.
2 0 .ge3
That is a grave mistake and my initiative becomes quite dangerous after that. Black had better continue with: 22 . . . lDxdS!? 23 .J.b2 gcB! (It is too bad for him to try: 23 ... lDxe3?
Game 17
72
White loses a considerable part 24.'*'xe3, since he has no satisfac tory defence in sight, for example: of his advantage with that impreci 24 . . . tDxe4 2S. .b:e4 1:kB 26.'*,d4 f6 sion. It was much better to follow with 27.J.dS+ �g7 2B.'lWxb4+-, or 2S . . .J.cS 26.gg4!? 26 ...1f6 27.1e3 gc8?! 26.'*,c3 f6 27.J.dS+ �g7 2 8..b:aB 'lWxaB That attractive move is a clear mis 29.'lWxf6+-). Indeed, even after that, White can play 24.J.b3! (He achieves take and my opponent's position be nothing much with: 24.tDxd6 'lWxd6! comes evidently worse after it. It de 2S.EleB+ gxeB 26.'lWxeB+ 'lWfB 27.'lWeS served attention for him to try here J.c3 2B ..b:c3 tDxc3 29.'lWxc3 'lWd6=) 27. . . a6!? and I had not seen anything 24 ...tDxe3 (Or 24. . . tDxe4? 2S.gxe4+-; better than the line: 2B.bxa6 gxa6 24...tDxb3? 2S.gxb3 and Black is 29.g3, with only a slight advantage. helpless against the threat 'lWe2-d1.) 2S.tDf6+ and his compensation for the exchange is more than sufficient in variations like: 2S . . .�f8 26.'lWxe3 tDxb3 27.tD xh7+ �gB 2B.tDf6+ �f8 29.'lWh6+ �e7 3 0 .tDdS+ �d7 31.'lWf4 fS 32.'lWxb4 tDc5, or 2S ... �g7 26.'lWxe3 tDxb3 27.tDg4+ �fB 2B.'lWh6+ �eB 29. tDf6+ �e7 30.'lWe3+ �fB 31.tDxh7+ �gB 32.tDf6+ �fB 33.'lWh6+ �e7 34. tDdS+ �d7 3S.'lWf4 f5 36.'lWxb4 tDc5. Still, White's advantage is far from be 28.'lWg4! gc7 ing decisive in all these lines and there Black was losing after 2B ... tDd7? would have been a lot of fight left. due to: 29.gxcB 'lWxcB 30.1fS and he 23.gxe4 1c3 would be left with a piece down.
29.g3 'M>8? My opponent's position is hopeless after that move. He could have tried 29 ...J.g7, although his position would have remained clearly worse.
3 0 .h6
24.h4! Now, my kingside initiative is tre mendously dangerous.
24... �d7 25.h5 �c5 26.gc4
That is not the best move for me, but I still maintain a solid position al advantage. The optimal line for White here is: 30.hxg6 hxg6 (30 ...fxg6 31..b:g6! gg7 32 ..b:c5 dxcS 33.'lWe6+-) 31..b:g6! fxg6 32.'lWxg6+ 197 33.lWxd6 winning. I failed to see that variation in the time-trouble, though...
30 ...'lWxb5?
73
Dreev-Wedberg, New York 1991 T.Wedberg was also under time pressure here and he made a mistake too. After 30 .. .'�d8, he could have of fered some more resistance.
l.d4 f5 2.g3 �f6 3.,ig2 d6 4.�f3 g6 5.b3 ,tg7 6.,tb2 0 - 0 7. 0 - 0 h6 8.c4 �e8 9.�c2 �a6 1 0 .�bd2 c6 11.gael We are playing one of the most popular lines of the Leningrad system of the Dutch Defence.
31.ixc5 Now, Black loses by force.
31. ,te7 •.
He would have saved the game neither with: 31...�xc5 32.'�c8! +-; nor with: 3 l.. .dxc5 3 2.d6 �d7 33.�xc5 "fixc5 34J't!xd7+-. Black gets check mated unavoidably in both cases.
32.ixg6! fxg6 Black loses too following 32 . . . hxg6, in view of: 33.h7+ Iflxh7 34.�h3+ Iflg8 3S. .td4+-
33.�e6+ 1flf8 34.gb4 Elxc5 35. ftxb5 gxb5 36.�c8+ 1flf7 37.�h8 and Black resigned.
18
A87 Dreev
-
Malaniuk
58th USSR Ch, Moscow 1991
This game was played in the last championship of the USSR (which was organized according to the Swiss system) and I remember the game, because it received the prize as the best in the tournament.
11...�f7 This move seems to be too slow. It looks more reliable for Black to play: 1l ...g5 12.e4 (In case of 12 ..tc3, or 12.a3, Black can answer with 12 ... �g6 and the position would be ap proximately equal.) 1 2 ... ttJb4 13.'�c3 and the situation is quite complex and still not well investigated. We played that position with A.Minasian in a tournament in the Spanish town of Ubeda (1999) and after 13 ...fxe4 (The position is much more complex after 13 ... a5 ! ?) 14.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 15:�xb4 a5 16.'�a3 .tf5 17.d5 �f7 18.�e3 cxd5 19.cxd5 b5 2 0.hg7 �xg7 21 .�c1 Elac8 22.�el, my opponent failed to equal ize with Black and I obtained a slight but stabl e positional advantage.
12.,tc3! That is a powerful prophylactic positional move, preventing ttJa6-b4. Black fails to prevent the thematic pawn-break for White - e2-e4. The
Game 18
74 immediate move 12.e4, does not bring White anything, because of: 12 . . . fxe4 13.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 14. �xe4 ifS lS.�xe7 (lS.�e3? ! ttJb4) ls ...id3 16.�xd6 .ixfl
immediately after 16 ... cxdS?, because of 17.ttJxgS !. It is equally bad for him to continue with 16 ... Elae8?!. After 17.ttJd4, Black's position is so difficult
17.'ktixf1 Elad8 18.�e6 ttJb4 and Black's chances are not worse at all. 12 g5 In case of 12 ... ltJc7, it is possible for White to play 13.ttJh4!? with a danger ous initiative, since the threat e2-e4 is
that it is hardly defensible at all.
.•.
17.l"le6! After: 17.Ele3 fS 18.l"lfel Elae8 White is only slightly better.
very unpleasant for Black.
13.e4 fxe4 14.ltJxe4 Ad7 This is an imprecision. Black had better play 14 ...ifS. Indeed, after: lS.ttJxf6+ �xf6 16.�d2 Elae8 17.Ele3, White's position is clearly better, be cause of Black's backward e7-pawn.
15.ttJxf6+ exf6?! Now, that is already a serious mis take for Black. It is quite understand able from the psychological point of view that Vladimir was reluctant to play passive positions with a backward e7-pawn after: lS ...�xf6, or ls ...ixf6, but still that would have been the least of evils for him.
17...ltJc7 Accepting the exchange-sacrifice would not be good for Black at all, for example: 17... he6?! 18.dxe6 �e7 (or 18 ...�xe6? 19.1tJxgS!+-) 19.Y:ifS and White's initiative is very danger ous. In case of: 19 ... Elae8 20.ttJd2 ih8 21.ie4 ttJc7 (or 21...ttJb8 22.h4 ttJc6 23.'ktig2 Y:ig7 24.hxgs hxgS 2S.l"lhl ttJe7 26.Y:if3+-) 22.h4 Y:ig7 23.hxgS hxgS 24.'ktig2, Black's position is too difficult - now if: 24 ... Ele7 2S.Elhl Elfe8, then 26.ids! - and Black's po sition becomes completely hopeless. He is almost stalemated and he has no defence against White's deadly threat ttJd2-e4.
18.l"lxd6 '9'e7! 16.d5! 16 ... c5!
My opponent creates maximal dif ficulties for my task to realize my ad vantage. It would have been much worse for Black to have defended with:
That is Black's only move. He loses
18 ... ttJe8, because of 19J'le6! (The po-
White's initiative is very powerful now.
75
Dreev-Malaniuk, Moscow 1991 sition after: 19J'!xd7 �xd7 20J'!el �d6 21.l"le6 l"laeS 22 ..lth3 is quite unclear.) - and here Black is already forced to accept the sacrifice; otherwise he re mains a pawn down in a very bad posi tion. Still after: 19...,he6 2 0.dxe6 �e7 (or 2 0 . . .�xe6? 21.�xg5! +-) 21.�f5, White has a pawn for the exchange and a very dangerous initiative. For ex ample: 21...l"lcS 22J'!dl �d6 23Jlxd6! �xd6 24.�d2.
24.�g6! ! This excellent move consolidates my advantage. My opponent had great defensive problems and Vladi mir made the decisive mistake on his next move:
24
Black has two exchanges extra; nevertheless his defence is extremely difficult. For example the move 24... l"lfeS? loses immediately after 25.e7!, while following 24 . . .�e7, White has the resource 25 ..ltd5, after which Black is again practically stalemated, since he has no defence against the posi tional bind g3-g4, followed by �d2e4, threatening �e4-g3.
19.1"!xd7 �xd7 2 0 J�dl! l"!ad8 It is too dubious for Black to play 20 ... �d6? !' After 21.�f5 (threatening J.g2-fl and �f3-d2) Black's position is probably already defenseless.
21.b4! b6 White would have a clear advan tage after: 21...cxb4?! 22.,hb4 l"!feS 23.�d4.
22.bxc5 bxc5 23.d6! �e8
It is also bad for Black to play here: 24 ...�a4? ! 25.l"!d2 ! l"lxd626.�xg5!hxg5 27.l"!xd6 �xd6 2S . .ltd5+ l"!f7 29 . .hf7+ �xf7 30 ..b:f6 �dl+ 31.
25.tOxg5! My opponent's position crumbles after that move and he has no satisfac tory defence at all.
25 fxg5 .•.
Black loses too after: 25 ...hxg5, be cause of: 26.�h5+
76
Game 19
26.Bxh6+ 'it>g8 27. .idS+ gf7 28. BxgS 'it>f8 29 .bf'7 'it>xf7 3 0 .ixg7 •
White wins in case of: 30.ge1 Wxd6 31.Wh5+ Ms 32.gxeS+ gxeS 33.hg7+ cJle7 34.h4, as well.
30 liJxg7 31.Bxc5+- liJe8 32. Bhs+ 'it>f8 33.Bh8+ 'it>f7 34. BhS+ 'it>f8 3S.c5 Be6 36.lM4 gd7 37. Bh8+ 'it>f7 38.Bh7+ 'it>f8 39.l'U4+ .•.
Black resigned. game is rather interesting as well. Mo rozevich used to play it often and quite successfully some years ago.
19
Candidates (m/2), Madras 1991
7.liJf.J b6 8 ..id3 .ib7 9.Be2 c6 1 0 . 0 -0 liJd7 11.l'Uel Bc7 12.a4 as 13.c3 liJf8 14.Bd2 liJg6
This is an encounterfrom our can didates match. I was so very close to victory in that game, but unfortunate ly Ifailed to materialize my chances. There were numerous reasonsfor my demise in that match. One of them is closely connected with the specifics of the contemporary chess. Anand played very quickly as usual and he forced me into a time-pressure all the time. Naturally, I made plenty of annoying mistakes then... In fact, I failed to solve the problem with the time-trouble throughout the whole match... 1.e4 e6
My opponent failed to obtain any thing real out of the opening stage. Now, he had to take some measures against Black's possibility f6-f5, with out doing anything active on the king side.
e13 Anand - Dreev
The French Defence was my main opening weapon against 1.e4, at those times. . .
2.d4 dS 3.liJc3 liJf6 4 .igS dxe4 S.liJxe4 .ie7 6.ixf6
lS.b4 f5 ! 16.liJg3 Or 16.lDeg5 Wf4.
16 ...hst 17.bxaS
(diagram)
It was maybe worth for White to have avoided that exchange and to play instead 17.lDe2 immediately.
The move 6 ...if6 is considered to be the more solid, but the line in the
This is a purposeful prophylactic move, since I was reluctant to be in a
•
6 gxf6 •••
17...ElxaS 18.c4 'it>f8
77
Anand-Dreev, Madras 1991 hurry to push c6 c5 (l8 ... h4 l9.l£)e2 c5 20.dS if6 2 U� ab l). -
19 . .tfl .tf6 2 0 J�a3
23.g3? It was correct for White to capture that pawn - 23.gxh3! and that was leading to a rather unclear position.
23 ... c5 24.d5 exd5 25.cxd5 c4 Now, Black has the advantage thanks to the vulnerability of the h l a8 diagonal.
26.tiJc3 �c5 27.l�a2
32.tiJd4!? This move loses of course, but I have to admit - that was White's best practical chance in my time-trou ble. After the seemingly natural try: 32.lWxb7 lOc3! 33.lWxb6 EldS-+ 34.lWe3 Eldl 3S.tiJh4 Elb8 36.tiJxf5+
32 ...
27... tiJe7! Presently, Black's king is safe enough and he can exploit his knight in order to attack White's dS-pawn.
28.gab2? White's relatively best decision would have been - 28.l£)h4.
28 ... tiJxd5! 29.gb5 tiJxc3 It was much simpler for Black here to follow with: 29 . . JlxbS! 30J�xbS lWa3 3U'lxdS ! (or 31.l£)xdS lWxf3-+) 31... 1Ixc3 32.lWxc3 ixc3 33.Elxf5 Eld8!-+ 34,Axh3 M6.
3 0 .!hc5 tiJxb1 31.lWd7 gxc5 Or 3l...ixf3!? 32.ElxaS bxaS 33. .hc4 ihS.
This was a serious mistake. Black was winning instead with the calm and simple line: 32 . . .idS 33.l£)xfS+
33.�xb7 ixd4?! That was another mistake ... It was correct for me to finish him off with: 33 . . . l£)c3 34.lWxb6 lOxa4 3S.lWa7 ixd4 36.lWxa4 ElbB-+
34.�xb6+ f6 But not 34...
35.�xbl c3 3 6 .td3 •
(diagram)
36 ...c2? This move was connected with a miscalculation. Still, the win for me was already problematic, anyway. After: 36 . . .Elhc8 37.ic2, the position
Game 20
78
49.me2 mxh3 50.M3 ib8! 51.a7 .ixa7 52.M4 ie3 ! ! + 43 ... gxg1+ 44.mxg1 mg7 4S.a6 -
ibS 46.mh1 mgS 47.li?gl Here, I had nothing left to do - a draw was a draw. . . 47.g5 f5 48.g6 f4 49.g7 f3 50.a7= 47... mfB 4S.mh1 meS 49.gS f5
S O .g6 f4 Sl.g7 Ii?t7 S2.gSti'+ \f.>xgS 53.a7 ixa7 Draw. would remain absolutely unclear (37. �c2?! 1:le8 (or 37 ... 1:lb8 38.ixf5+ mg5 39.hb3 f5-+) 38.mfl (38.�1 c2) 38 . . 1:lce5 39 . .ixf5+ mg7-+ 40.�dl! .
37.ixc2 ghcS 38 ..b:f5+! gxf5 39.g4 gc1+ 4 0 ;t9"xcl gxf2 41.mh1 AeS 42.9g1 gg2
D47
20 Nadera - Dreev 30th Olympiad, Manila 1992
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3 .!Of3 '!of6 4.lOc3 e6 S.e3 .!Obd7 6.Ad3 dxc4 7.ixc4 bS S.id3 Ab7 9.e4 b4 10 . .!Oa4 c5 n.es .!OdS 12. 0 - 0 cxd4 13.lOxd4 .!OxeS 14.ibs+ lOd7 15.ge1 gcS 16. �h5 g6 17.ti'e2 •
43.a5! This is a beautiful and smart de cision. Anand plans to make a draw based on the motive of a stalemate. He had to overcome certain difficul ties had he played in some other fash ion. Objectively speaking, his position was not worse even then, for example: 43.�1+ mg7 44.a5 1:lxh2+ 45.mgl 1:lg2+ 46.mhl 1:lxg4 47.�b7+ (but not 47.a6? h248.a71:lg1+ 49.9xgl+hxgm+ 50.mxgl id4-+) 47 ... mg6 48.�c8=; 43.�xg2 bxg2+ 44.mxg2 mg5 45.h3 M4 46.a5 ib8 47.a6 ia7 48.i>fl mg3
We are playing one of the sharp variations of the Meran system. This position is well-familiar in the con temporary theory. White has the ini tiative for the sacrificed pawn, but Black's position is solid enough and his chances are not worse at all.
17...ti'e7 That is in fact the old line. Pres-
79
Nadera-Dreev, Manila 1992 ently, the move 17 ... a6!? is much more popular and fashionable and it pro vides Black with a good counterplay. Still, the more modest approach - 17... Be7 is quite reliable and White has not found yet any convincing way to prove his opening advantage.
18.Ag5!?
holm 19B9. It is much worse for Black to con tinue with 2 2 ... Ac6?!, because after the forced line: 23.Elxe2 hb5 24.lDc7 + �dB 2S.lDxbS, White's great advan tage is obvious.
23.ixd7+ �f7 24.ixc8 ixc8 25.�xe2
That is the most energetic line for White. He would not achieve much with IB.Bg4. Alexey Vyzmanavin played like that with White against me (Moscow 19B9) and there followed: IB ... lD5f6 19.Bh3 Ad5 20.Aa6 ElaB 21.Ag5 Ag7 22.Eladl 0-0. I managed to obtain a solid and reliable posi tion and White had a long way to go to prove that his compensation for the pawn was sufficient.
18...Bxg5 19.
The position has been simpli fied as a result of the forced devel opments and we have reached a rather complex endgame. Black has a pawn for the exchange. His couple of powerful bishops is quite danger ous for White in that open position and I believe Black's chances are not worse at all despite White's extra ex change.
25...Aa6+!? 26.�f3?! 19 ... tbg2+ ! That spectacular move i s the only one, which provides Black with a suffi cient active counterplay and the game t.ecomes forced after that.
20 .�xg2
That is a grave imprecision and Black seizes the initiative completely after that. White played better in the abovementioned game Sokolov - Shi rov, which continued with 26. �e3, but still after: 26 ...AbS 27.b3 .th6+ Black had an excellent compensation for the exchange.
26 ...Ab7+ 27.�g3 Ad5 28.b3 It is too bad for White to try 2 B.a3? here, because after: 2B ... Ac6 29.b3 bxa3, he can hardly save the game.
Game 20
80
2S id6+ 29.o;t.h3 .•.
As a result of White's inferior move 26, I managed to activate maximally my bishops gaining tempi. My oppo nent's knight on a4 is presently out of action and his king is not well placed on h3 either.
ic5 33.tLle3! Elxe3+ 34.Elxd5 l"lxel 35.Elxc5, because the endgame is. drawish.) 32.ltJe3 he3 33.fxe3 Elf3+ 34.lt7g2 (or 34.1t7h4?! h5 35.Eld2 o;t.h6 36.Elg2 ie4+) 34 ... Elxe3+ 35.lt7g1, or 32 ... ic6!? 33.Elgl (33.Elcl? Elf3+ 34. o;t.g2 Elxe3-+) 33 ... l"lxf2 and Black maintains better chances, but the fight is not over at all. Now, the game enters a stage in which I had to over come only some technical problems to materialize my extra pawn.
31 ... exd5 32 .o;t.g2 o;t.f6
29 . J'lf8 ! .
That is an excellent positional move, which consolidates my consid erable advantage. I am threatening to play o;t.g7, bringing my rook into the action along the f-file. The immedi ate move 29 ... o;t.g7?! would have been clearly premature due to: 30J'lxd5! exd5 31.Eldl and White would have good chances to equalize.
30 .lt:\b2 What else can White do? He is un derstandably reluctant to leave his knight on a4 throughout the entire game? !
3 0 ... o;t.g7 3Ulxd5?! This exchange-sacrifice is by far not the best line for White, since now he remains without a pawn and a suf ficient compensation for it. He could have offered serious re sistance only in case of 31.lt:\c4!. In deed, after 31...ic5!? (Black does not achieve much with: 31...Elf3+ 32.lt7g2
33.lt:\d3?! That move just si mplifies my task. White could have defended more tena ciously with 33.l"lcl, not letting Black's rook to the c-file.
33... l"lcS 34.l"le2 l"lc3 35.l"ld2 g5 36.h3 h6 37.lt:\b2 o;t.e6 3S.lt:\d3 a5 39.l"le2+ o;t.f5 40 .l"ld2 o;t.e4 Black improves methodically his position. White has no active counter play in sight and his position is hope less. Black's victory is already not a matter of technique, but a matter of time only ...
41.lt:\el d4 42.l"le2+ o;t.d5 43.l"ld2 M4 44.l"ld3 o;t.e4 45.f3+ o;t.d5 46. o;t.f2 White loses too after: 46.Elxc3 bxc3
Nadera-Dreev, Manila 1992
81
47.�f2, due to: 47 ...d3 48.tLlxd3 c2, winning for Black.
46 l'kl 47.�e2 .ig3 4S.tLlg2 �e5 49.gd2 .if4 50 .gb2 gc3 ••.
I have improved my position maxi mally and now the issue is settled qUickly.
51.tLlel The other moves are even worse for White: 51.tLlxf4 �xf4 + ; or 51. �dl -
gxf3
-
+
51 ge3+ 52.�f2 .ig3+ 53.�xg3 �el •••
The rook and pawn endgame is eas ily winning for Black. The game still followed with:
54.gd2 ge3 55.�f2 ge3 56.ge2+ wd5 57.geS gc2+ 5S.�g3 �a2 59. gdS+ �c5 6 0 .geS+ �b5 61. ftbS+ �e6 62.gcS+ �b6 63.gdS ftb2 64.�d4 �b3 65.gd6+ �b5 66.!Wt6 a4 67. gh5 a3 6S.gxg5+ wa4 69.ggS gbl and White re signed.
21
AS5 Dreev - Gleizerov
Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1992
The following game was played
in a Swiss system open tournament in memory of Alexander Alekhine, which was held in Moscow. It had attracted plenty of strong players and that was not surprising, because the prize fund was quite considerable even according to the contemporary standards. The first prize was not less than 20, 0 0 0 $, if I remember correctly and that was almost unbe lievablefor those times in Russia... International master Evgenij Beb chuk had a huge contribution to the organization of the tournament. He was a famous chess-functionary and it was a pity that he passed away re cently... This game turned out to be quite short at the end. My opponent loses so quickly only very seldom and he is considered to have a high level ofpo sitional understanding and an excel lently prepared opening repertoire. Unfortunately, he still needs a lot of work to realize his chess talent to its full extent...
l.d4 e6 2.e4 f5 The Dutch Defence is Zhenja's trademark opening weapon.
3.tLlf3 tLlf6 4.
4 ....ib4 5.1:!fb3 1:!fe7 It is also possible for Black here to continue with 5 ... a5.
6.g3 b6 7.tLg2 .ib7 S . O - O .b:c3
Game 22
82
19 .�c5 ttlc6, preserving some practical chances.
18...�d6? This is j ust a terrible blunder...
9.bxc3 This move is quite energetic, but it is a bit arguable. It is more solid for White, but somewhat dull, to follow with 9.�xc3 . . .
9 ttle4
19.1:!xd5! Bxd5 2 0 .l:!dl l- 0
•••
This move was not forced for Black, but he thus prevented White's eventual pawn-break c4-c5. Meanwhile, White has numerous other possibilities too. It can be recommended to Black to try instead: 9 ... 0-0 1 O.�a3 d6 11.c5 �e4 and the game would have remained quite unclear...
10.ttlg5! 0 - 0 11.ttlxe4 he4 Or l1...fxe4? 12.fi.a3 d6 13.�c2.
12.he4 fxe4 13.h3 c5
D49
22 Dreev - Sakaev
Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1992
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 c6 4.ttlc3 ttlf6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.i.d3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 8.i.d3 a6 9.e4 c5 10 .e5 cxd4 11.ttlxb5 ttlxe5 12.ttlxe5 axb5
Or 13 ... d6 14.�c2.
14.Bc2 d5 Black should not have held to that pawn. He had better continue with: 14 ... e3 15.fxe3 �c6 16.�f3, but White would still have some edge. Mean while, he is not forced to capture on e3, but he could have continued in stead with f2-f4, followed by �e4.
15.ad5 exd5 16.dxc5 bxc5 17. l:!adl l:!d8 18.�3 Now, it becomes clear that Black has failed to consolidate his position without giving up the pawn, His best chance would have been: 18 ... �e6
13. 0 - 0 !? This interesting line of the Meran system is named the Relshtab attack and it is even presently not as well
Dreeu-Sakaev, Moscow 1992 analyzed as the more popular varia tion 13.�b5+. At the moment that we played our game it was almost terra incognita ... Contrary to the long forced lines arising after 13.ib5, it leads to a complicated positional fight and the variations are much less forced.
13 §'d5 14.1Mle2 �b8 .•.
That move is not so often played as 14... �a6, which is considered to be critical by the contemporary theory, but I am not convinced that it is worse at all. It is much less analyzed though, that is for sure ...
15.J.g5! This is the only way for White to fight for the opening initiative. In case of: 15.a4 J.d6, or 15.f4 �e7, Black has DO problems whatsoever. 15 ...J.e7 That is of course quite possible, but I think that the fashionable move 15. . . .id6 !? seems t o be more reliable. After 16.f4 there arises a complicated posi tion wjth mutual chances. In the game Lautier - Bacrot, France 2000 there followed later: 16 . . . �d7! ? 17'!;ael 0-0 18.�f3 f5, with a rather complex situ mon in which Black's prospects were at least equal. I think that instead of 17.l"iael, it deserved attention for White to play 17.�e4!?, having in mind the variation: 17 ...1MlcS 18 .�d3 1Mlb6 19.f5, in which White would have a sufficient compensation for the pawn and some initiative.
16.gacl!
That is the best move for White and it enables him to fight at least for a slight opening advantage. In case of: 16.f4 0-0 17.gf3, the position would llave remained rather unclear.
83
16 . 0 - 0 17.�c6 gb7? That is a very serious mistake after which Black's position is hardly de fendable anymore. He had to continue instead with 17 ... 1Mlxg5!? obtaining a quite acceptable position. Now, after 18.f4 1Mlh6! 19.�xe7+ (or 19.�xb8?! �d6 20.�c6 .hf4=t) 19 ... �h8, he can counter 20.gf3 with the powerful ar gument 20 ... e5!? and Black's chances are not worse (But not 20 ... �b7? ! due to 21.gh3 1Mlxf4 22.gf1 1Mlg5 23.M6 h6 24.1Mlf2 !? gxf6 25.gg3 and White has a crushing attack. It is not good for Black either to try: 2 0 . . . 1MlhS?! in view of 21.�f1 ! ! and after 21...�b7 22.gh3 1Mlg4 23.�e2 his position is tremen dously difficult.). Indeed following 20.�c6 and 20... ga8 21.a3, White's position is preferable but not more ... .
.
18 f4! .
After that very powerful move my opponent comes into something like a zugzwang, despite the fact that the board is full of pieces, since he has no useful moves at all.
18 ...�c7? That move loses quickly by force. He could have still defended with 18 ... �h8!? and after 19.�xe7 gxe7 20.�eS! ib7 21.gf2 �g8 22.ixe7 �xe7 23.gc7
Game 23
84 Black would have remained with an exchange down without a sufficient compensation in an endgame. Nev ertheless he was not losing directly yet and he could have relied on some practical chances for a draw in the hope that I might go wrong in the real ization of my advantage. Now, every thing is over with in only four moves. There still followed:
19.�xe7+ gxe7 2 0 .ixf6 gxf6 2 1.fflg4+ g;,h8 22.fflh4 and Black re signed.
23
C07 Tiviakov - Dreev Podolsk 1992
We played this game in the town ofPodolsk, near Moscow, in a round robin, category 11, tournament - "Po dolsk Company Cup". It was orga nized by the local chess-club with the sponsorship of the Podolsk Company - one ofthefamous producers ofsew ing machines in Russia. The open ing ceremony was attended by some quite distinguished guests - the may or of the town and the World Cham pion Garry Kasparov. There were players of different generations par ticipating in the tournament - some eminent chess-veterans, like the fa mous grandmasters Vladimir Bagi rov, Aivars Gipslis, Eduard Gufeld and Igor Zaitzev. Sergey Tiviakov, Alexey Vizhmanavin and the author - we were the rating favourites. Af ter the drawing of lots, it turned out that I had to play against Tiviakov in the last round and before it I had 61/2
points together with S. Tiviakov and International master Georgij Geor gadze. We were leading the tourna ment with a whole point in front ci the rest of our rivals. We were dis cussing some opening variations with Sergey Kiselev (He had to play in the last round against Igor Arkadievich Zaitzev.). I have to acknowledge that some of the ideas of Sergey Kiseleo (He was a very talented chess-player. who unfortunately passed away too young. . .) proved to be very helpfulfor me in my last round game, thefollow ing day against Sergey Tiviakov.
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.�d2 c5 4.exdS fflxd5 5.�gfJ cxd4 6.J.c4 ffld6 .,; 0-0 �f6 8.�b3 �c6 9.�bxd4 �xd4 1 0 .�xd4 a6
This position is in fact a very popu lar tabia in this particular variation of the French Defence.
1l.b3 Myopponent has chosen a relatively calm positional line, which is not nec essarily fighting for a serious opening advantage. White's other possibilities here are: - 11.c3; 1l.a4; 1l.J.b3 - and they all lead to a complex positional battle. There is a forced line that is rather popular nowadays: lUlel V/ic7
Tiviakov-Dreev, Podolsk 1992 12.�b3 �d6 13.�fS hl2+ 14.i>hl 0-0 IS.lLIxg7!? and it leads to a very sharp double-edged position.
1l %Yc7!? 12.J.b2 �d6 13.h3 0 - 0 14.a4 •••
Thus seemingly standard move prevents Black's maneuver b7-bS, but it is imprecise and Black obtains a very good game after it. In case of 14.\'9f3?!, Black has the powerful ar gument - 14 . . . bS!, with an obvious advantage following: IS. �d3 �b7, as well as after: IS.\'9xaS �b7 16.%YxfS+ .txfS ! 17.�d3 eS. White's best move would have been 14.�d3, with approximately equal prospects. Now, in case of 14... bS, White can enter a rather compli cated position with IS. c4, or he can force a draw if he so wishes with: IS.lLIxbS axbS 16..txf6 gxf6 17.\'9g4+ i>hS lS.\'9h4 fS I9.\'9f6+ i>gS 20.\'9gS+ i>h8 21. \'9f6+.
SS would have been rather unpleasant for him. For example: IS.gadl e3! and if 19.fxe3, then 19 . . .ih2+ 20.i>hl lLIe4-+
18 ... %Ya5! But naturally not IS ... %Yc5?, in view of: 19.�3! \'9xd4 20.gfdl.
19.9dl! %Ye5 2 0 .g3?! This is already a very serious mis take. Sergey had better continue with 20.f4!? and although after 20 ... %YaS, (It was also interesting for Black to try: 20 . . . exf3!? 21.\'9xeS ixeS 22 ..b3 fxg2 23.ixf8 i>xf8 24.i>xg2 ILIhS and he would have a good compensa tion for the exchange.) my prospects would have been somewhat better, White could have preserved a quite defensible position. My advantage became considerable after the move in the game and I seized the initiative altogether.
2 0 ... lLIh5 14... e5! 15.�f3 e4 16.lLId4 I was planning to answer 16.lLIgs
with 16 ...�eS and if 17.�3, then 17... bS!-+
16 ...�d7 17.\'ge2 gae8 18.J.cl My opponent was practically forced to make that ugly unaesthetic move, since the positional threat - e4-e3 ! ?
Black cannot capture the h3-pawn due to: 20 . . . hl3? 21.if4 \'9c5 22.ixd6 \'9xd6 23.�e6!
21.\'9f1 J.c5! 22.c3 The move 22.�e3?, can be coun tered by Black with 22 ... �xg3-+
2 2... i>h8!? Now, capturing - 22 ... lLIxg3?! is
Game 24
86 far from clear: 23.fxg3 1Mfxg3+ 24.1Mfg2 1Mfxc3 25 . .ib2 1Mfxh3. I was considering the move 22 . . .b5!?, but then I decided to play with my king with the quite straightforward idea to try to break through White's position by advanc ing my f-pawn.
23.�g2 f5 24.�e2?! That is another grave mistake and White's position might be already beyond salvation after it. In case of 24.h4! ? , or 24.a5!?, White's position is evidently worse, but he can still hold on, because there is no decisive win ning line in sight for Black yet.
24 .ie6 25 ..if4
32.gd5 �xb3 33.lLld4 �c3 34. gel �d3 35.�xd3 exd3 36.M1 d2 37.�f3 J.xf4 38.gns gf6 39. gd5 h6! 4 0 .�xd2 ge2 4l.g;,gl .igS 42.f3 .ie3+ 43.g;,hl (if 43. <;!{fl, then 43 .. .l:'lf2 + 44.<;!{el �g6-+) 43 ... gg6 44.gd3 (after 44.lLle4, Black wins with 44 ... �gg2) 44 ... .if4 45.�tl geg2. White resigned in view of the unavoidable checkmate.
.•.
The other defensive possibilities for White are hardly any better: 25.lLld4 e3 26.lLlxc6 exf2+ 27.<;!{h2 bxc6; or 25.�e3 ixe3 26.fxe3 bs - and Black has a great advantage in both cases.
25 �xf4 2 6.gxf4 �e7 27 .id5 gf6 28.g;,hl gg6 .••
Now, White's position is practically hopeless, because of his vulnerable king and his weak kings ide pawns. The rest is so to speak a matter of technique. The game still followed with:
•
28 . . . �b6 ! ?
29.�tl .id6 3 0 .J.xe6
This victory enabled me to win the first place in the tournament without a tie (G. Georgadze drew his game and he was quite happy about that, because that was a grandmaster normfor him...). Later, I was awarded the prize for "Best Game in the Tournament" for my win against 1'iviakov.
Bl3
24 Rogers - Dreev Interzonal, Biel 1993
30
.•.
�xe6
In case of 30 ... bxc6, White can de fend with: 31.lLld4 .ix£4 32.1Mfxa6 c5 33.1Mfb5.
31.e4 �b6
I played quite well at the Interzon al Tournament in Biel. I only had to make two draws in the last two rounds in order to qualify. However, I lost in the penultimate round to Valery Sa lov and I thusfailed to become a Can didatefor the World Title...
l.e4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4 lLlf6 5.lLlc3 �e6 6 .ig5 .ie6 •
87
Rogers-Dreev, Biel 1 993
with approximately equal chances af ter: 7.hf6 gxf6 8.cS, or 7 exf6 8.cS. White would not achieve anything much with 7.llJf3, since after 7... llJe4!?, ...
I tried here a very seldom played move. Black usually continues with 6... e6 or 6 ... dxc4 and these moves are popular and solid. Naturally 6 . . . J.e6 seems to be rather strange, since the bishop is placed in front of the e7-pawn, therefore many players are quite skeptical towards that ap proach. For example, Mikhail Botvinnik considered that after 7.ii.x£6 gxf6 8.cS, or 7 ...exf6 8.cS, White was better, but tournament practice did not confirm that evaluation.
Black's counterplay is quite sufficient as contemporary tournament prac tice shows. It deserves attention for White to try 7.a3! ? and that it a move preferred by V.Topalov and M.Adams. In his game against me at the tourna ment "Kremlin Stars" Moscow (rapid) 1996, Garry Kasparov played like that against me. There, I did not check the well familiar theoretical line 7... �d7, (which is presently considered to be quite reliable) against the world champion, but I tried instead a novelty - 7... ig4 and after: 8.f3 ie6! ? 9.cS g6 1O.ibS ig7 1l.llJge2 0-0, I obtained a quite reliable and satisfactory posi tion.
In fact, strangely
enough,) nobody has proved yet how White can obtain any serious advan tage in that line. I chose 6 ...ie6 as a purely chess-weapon (that position is very complicated and it is not well an alyzed yet) and also because of some psychological reasons. I had never played before the variation with 6 ... J.e6 and I hoped that my opponent would not be well prepared for it. In general, that is what happened. I bad no problems in the opening and my adversary lost so much time on his opening moves that he was later in a time-trouble. 7.J.e2 That is a relatively calm line. There arise
more
complicated
positions
7 ... �a5! That is the best move for Black. Its idea is in case of the standard reaction for White in similar positions - 8.cS, to answer 8... llJe4!?, with a counter play, which would be quite sufficient to equalize completely.
8.llJf3 It is not dangerous for Black if White plays 8.ii.x£6 and I believe
Game 24
88 Black's simplest method to counter that is 8 ... exf6 ! ?, with an excellent counterplay. Here, in case of: 9.cxds .b:ds 1 O.�f3 �b4 11 . .b:dS (or 11.�e2+ It>f8! and Black's position is even slightly better) 11...�xdS, or 1O.lLlf3 O-O-O ! ? and Black's prospects are not worse at all.
8 dxc4 •.•
I did not like the move 8 ... lLle4, be cause of: 9 . 0- 0 ! ? lLlxc3 1O.bxc3 dxc4 (In case of: 1O ...�xc3 11.gbl, Black lags in development considerably and White has a very dangerous initiative for the pawn.) 11.1f4 and although objectively Black should not be worse, I did not wish to play a position like that. White would have the initiative, despite being a pawn down.
seems very good for White to continue with 1l.b3!? and White's initiative is again threatening. 1 0 �cl It deserved attention for White to try 1O.gel!? with a complicated dou ble edged position. Now, it is bad for Black to play 10 ... lLlxd4?, because of: 1l.lLlxd4 �xgS 12.lLlxe6 fxe6 13.�a4+ and his position would be hardly de fensible. Still, after 1O . . .h6!, the situa tion would have remained rather un clear. .
1 0 ... h6 1l.1d2 In case of: 1l.1e3 gS! Black has a good game.
9. 0 - 0
1l . .lLlxd4! .
9 .. gd8! .
It was too risky for Black to try 9... 0-0-0, due to 10.�cl! and White's compensation for the pawn would be more than sufficient. Here, in case of: 1O ... lLlxd4 11.lLlxd4 �d4, it is quite strong for White to follow with 12.b4! with a powerful initiative. That varia tion illustrates the danger of Black's lag in development. After 1O . . . lt>b8, it
That is the most precise move. Fol lowing 11...gS, White can enter the variation (It is practically forced for Black.): 12.dS ! lLlxdS 13.lLlxdS �xdS 14.�c3 f6 IS. �e3! and his initiative is quite sufficient to compensate his two-pawn deficit.
12.�xd4 gxd4 13.b4! �d8 14. 1e3 gd7 15.1dl That is a mistake after which White must still prove that his compensation is worth a couple of pawns. He had better play IS . .b:a7! and that would
Rogers-Dreev, Biel 1993 have led to a very complicated posi tion in which I thought that after IS ... gS, or IS ... g6, Black's prospects would not have been worse.
15 a6 .•.
16.b5?! This is another imprecision and this time it is quite serious, because White already does not have enough compensation for the sacrificed mate rial for sure. It was stronger for him to continue with 16.lLla4! and he would have preserved good chances to main tain the balance. 16...axb5 17.gbl g5 1S. gxb5 1J.g7
19.�a4! My opponent creates maximal problems for me to materialize my ad vantage by playing that move.
19... �e4 2 0 .1J.b6!? WfbS 21.gel �d6? Here, it was my tum to make a mis take and my position becomes sud denly dangerous ... I had to continue instead with: 21...�f4! 2 2.ie3 �f6, preserving a considerable advantage. 22. gb4! gc 7? ! It i s not better for Black to play here 22 ... iik8?!, because of: 23.gxe6! fxe6 24.ihS+ \!;>f8 2S.�xc4 and his posi-
89 tion remains nearly hopeless... The best chance was 2 2 ...1J.fS!?, obtain ing after: 23.lLlc5 gc7 24.1J.a4+ �f8 a slightly worse, but still quite defen sible position.
23.�c5?! White returns the favour ... After: 23.gxe6 ! ! fxe6 24.1J.hS+ �f8 2S.�c5 gxcS 26.1J.xc5, my position would have been tremendously difficult ...
23 ...gxc5 24.ixc5 Now, the move 24.gxe6 is not so dangerous, because Black is not Obliged to enter the variation: 24 ... fxe6?! 2S.1J.hS+, in which his posi tion is clearly worse, but he can play instead: 24 ... geS ! ? with an approxi mately equal game. The variation: 2S.1J.a4+ \!;>f8 26.gxd6 �xd6 27.gxc4 1J.f6 28.1J.c7 is not dangerous, because of 28 ... �a3! and White has nothing better than: 29.1J.xeS �xcl+ 30.gxc1 1J.xeS 310gbl �g7 32.gxb7, transfer ring into an equal endgame.
24 ... 0 - 0 25.m Now, Black has two pawns for the exchange and they are a quite suf ficient compensation. The prospects are about equal.
25 .. ,!'kS
Game 24
90
positional advantage is doubtless.
32 ... Ela5 33.a4 �d4
26.ixd6?! Here, my opponent overestimated his position and he decided to play for a win relying on his extra exchange. He had obviously ignored the power of Black's c-pawn ... Instead, he had better give back the exchange with the move 26.l''l x e6, entering after: 26 ... fxe6 27.ixd6! 'lWxd6 (or 27... exd6? 2SJ!xb7+-) 2SJ!xc4 gxc4 29.'lWxc4 a drawish endgame.
26 ...'lWxd6 27.fucb7 c3 Now, my reliably protected and far advanced c3-pawn provides me with a stable positional advantage. White's extra exchange is practically immate rial in that position. In fact, his defence is already very difficult and addition ally he did not have enough time ... 28.'lWc2 1d4 29.g3 gc5 3 0 .1e4
rllg7 31.1d3 1f6 I am improving my position me thodically. My adversary had to ad here to a waiting strategy, since he had no active counterplay.
32 .1e4 It is not any better for White to try: 32.a4? ! , due to: 32 ... gdS 33.!"!e3 1d4 and he has no good lines in sight. Now, after: 34.!"!e2 ixf2 + ! 3S.!"!xf2 gxd3, as well as following: 34.gel 1xf2+ 3S.'lWxf2 gxd3, Black's considerable
34.1c6? GM Rogers was in a desperate time-trouble here and he made a de cisive mistake. He had to defend with 34.l''l a l, but after 34 ... 1d7, I would have preserved a great advantage; nevertheless he could have still resist ed. Now, the game is quickly over.
34 .ti5 35.�c1 ..
Or 3S.1e4 EleS-+ 35.. Elc5 36.Elb5 It is not better for White to con tinue with: 36J:ldl 'lWc4 37.1bS (or 37.1d7 c2-+; 37.1g2 'lWxa4-+) 37... 'lWe4 3S.!"!bS !"!xbS! 39.!"!xbS 1h3 and Black checkmates unavoidably. .
36 ... fucc6 37.E!xffi �xa4 38.gd5 c2 39.Eld2 �b3 4 0 . Ele3 �b2 41.Elel !"!c5
Rogers-Dreev, Biei 1993
91
and White resigned, since he had no useful moves at all. In case of 42.ltIg2, Black wins with 42 .. .'�'b7+, followed by 43 ...ib2, while after 42J�de2 or 42 Jlf1, Black's simplest win is 42 ... 'M>3. That was a quite interesting game, although with numerous mis takes ...
The idea of the move 6 ...a6 is simple enough: in case of the retreat 7.ie2, Black follows with 7 ... tbb6 (or 7... b5 with the idea ic8-b7) and later he regains easily the d5-pawn, obtain ing even a slightly better position, because White is left with an isolat ed pawn. He cannot change much in that case by continuing with 7.ic4 b5 8.ib3 tbb6 (or B .. ib7). The straightforward move 7.hd7+ .
BIO
25 Lerner - Dreev Rostov-on-Don (open) 1993
l.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.exd5 tbf6 5.1b5+
seems to me to be anti-positional. White exchanges his important light squared bishop for Black's knight and after 7 .. .'�xd7!?, in order to try to protect his d5-pawn, he is practi cally forced to play 8.'M>3 (It is too dubious for White to try B.'�'f3?! here, since after B ...b5 9.tbge2 ib7 10.tbf4 �f5, Black is clearly better.), but then after B .. �g4! ? 9.ltIf1 (It is worse for White to continue with 9.g3, because that move compromises the light squares and it presents Black after 9 ... b5 with a very danger ous initiative.) 9 ... g6, or 9 ...b5!?, Black's compensation for the pawn is more than sufficient and what is even more important - he has the initia tive, while White is deprived of cas tling rights and his pieces cannot be coordinated easily. It is less energetic .
5 ... tbbd7! This is the best counter argument against the opening line, chosen by White (5.ib5), based on the idea to hold on to the d5-pawn. The other possibility - 5. . . id7 presents him after 6.ic4 with more chances to preserve his extra d5-pawn and as a result of that, with better prospects to maintain an
opening advantage.
6.tbc3 a6! This simple and logical answer pro vides Black with a good counterplay, contrary to the line 6 . . . g6, which leads to more complicated positions.
for Black to try the line: B ...b5 9.tbf3 ib7 1O.tbe5 �d6 1l.tbc4 �c5 12.tbe3, although it is obviously good enough for equality. For example, in the game Formanek - Khenkin, Antwerp 1995, there followed: 12 .. JldB 13.d4 �xd4 14.0-0 �c5 15.gdl g6 16.id2 ig7 17. gac1 0-0 18.tbe4 �b6 19.tt:lxf6+ i.xf6 20.ic3 gd7 and Black had balanced the chances.
Game 25
92 Therefore, there is no sensible al ternative to the variation, chosen by my opponent in the game.
7.�a4 gb8 8.hd7+ That exchange is practically forced, since it is quite obvious that 8.ie2 b5 cannot be good for White at an. 8 . . .�xd7!
played most often the move 1O.d4 (Af ter 1O.�ge2 gd8 1l.d4 if5, Black is better.), but following: 1O . . . gd8 1l.ig5 it5 12.ix£6 exf6, he never achieved any opening advantage.
10
�f5 1l.�g5
••.
1l ... gd8! 9.�xd7+ Strangely enough, entering the end game here for White is his relatively best decision. His prospects are very poor in a middle game with queens present on the board. For example, in case of: 9.�b3 �g4!? Black's initiative is more than sufficient to compen sate the pawn. Following 9.�f4 ga8 ! White fails to hold on to the d5-pawn, because now, after the relatively best move 10.�f3 (It is worse for White to play 1O.�f3?!, because of: 10 ... b5 11.lLlge2 ib7 12.�f4 �f5, with an overwhelming advantage for Black.) in the game Kengis - A.Filipenko, USSR 1985 there followed: 10 ... �xd5 11.�xd5 �xd5 12.0-0 e6 and Black had a slight but stable advantage.
9 ...,bd7 1 0 .d3!? Having in mind that I play this line for Black, my opponent had prepared a novelty here. Until that game, White
This is Black's most precise de fence. In case of 1l ...ixd3 12.0-0-0, White's chances would have been su perior, thanks to his lead in develop ment.
12.1xf6 This is forced; otherwise White cannot hold on to his extra d5-pawn. Now however, Black remains with two bishops against a couple of knights and that is a good compensation for the pawn by itself.
12...exf6 13. 0 - 0 - 0 That is an imprecision, although only slight. It is better for White to play 13.'�d2 !?, planning the maneuver �gl-e2-g3, with a complicated and approximately equal position.
13 ...�c5 14.d4?! This is another mistake and that time it is much more essential. White weakens the important diagonal - bl h7. It was definitely better for him to have followed with 14.gd2, or 14.\!{d2
Lerner-Dreev, Rostov-on-Don 1993 and his position would have remained quite defendable.
14 .id6 15 . .!tJge2 gc8 16.c.t>d2 c.t>d7 17.gcl g c4! .•.
I have the edge after that move. It is worth mentioning that it becomes very difficult to defend a position like that with White. Meanwhile, it is rath er easy for me to improve my position, for example with moves like - b7-b5, ghc8, or h7-hS, White's best moves are far from obvious or easy to find and his every imprecision might have grave consequences for him. Konstan tin Lerner again chooses not the best defensive line:
18.h3?! He could have still held the posi tion with: 18.b3 �c7 19.12Ja4 ib4+ 20.l2Jec3, but it was quite understand able that it was far from easy for him to make up his mind to play like that. White's position seems rather precari ous, due to the pin of the knight on c3, despite the fact that I could hardly profit anything substantial out of it. Now, Black seizes the initiative alto gether:
93 It is dubious for White to follow with 20.f4?!, because of 20 . . . h4 and it would not work for him to play 21.g4 ixf4! 22.l2Jxf4 �xd4+ 23.l2Jd3 l"lxd3+ 24.c.t>c2 ig6 25.';tlb3 �ee3-+
2 0 ....1g4 21.a3 b5 22.c.t>d3 g5! Black's pieces are totally dominat ing the whole board. White has no ac ceptable defensive plan in sight. My opponent became a helpless spectator of my decisive actions to the end of the game.
23.gcel White loses after 23.ghel?, because of: 23 ...gxh4 24.gxh4 if5+ 25.c.t>d2 M4+ ! 26.l2Jxf4 �xd4+ 27.l2Jd3 gxd3+ 28.l!ic2 �xd5+ 29.c.t>b3 l"lxel 30.gxel �d2 31.�e2 �d4 and the loss of a sec ond pawn is unavoidable.
23 ....1£5+ 24.c.t>d2 b4 25.axb4 fucb4 26.lticl geb8 27 .!tJdl J.g6! •
Black emphasizes his overwhelm ing positional advantage.
28.hxg5 fxg5 White is beyond salvation now and he has no satisfactory defence at his disposal.
18 ...ge8! The threat is - if4+
19.93 h5 2 0 .h4
29 .!tJec3 •
My opponent was trying to coor dinate his forces somehow, but that could not save the game.
Game 26
94
29
•.•
fucd4 3 0 .lLle3 as 3l.lLlc2
White was losing too after: 3U�d1 gdb4 32.gd2 a4 and there was no ac ceptable defence against the threat a4-a3.
3l .. J3C4 32J3e3 a4 33.gdl J.c5 34.grn g4 3S.ge3 gb3! and White resigned, because of the numerous threats against which he was totally helpless.
This was a good positional game in which I managed to exploit the al most unnoticeable minute impreci sion of my adversary.
26
ESl Dreev - Muhutdinov St Petersburg (open) 1993
The games against Galdunz and Muhutdinov were played at the open tournament in Saint Petersburg. I started with 7 out of 7 and I had guaranteed the 1st placefor me with a round to spare.
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 ,Ag7 4.e4 d6 s.rn 0 - 0 6.,AgS lLlc6 That is one of the possibilities for Black and it leads to a compli cated positional fight. Still, I think that after 6.,Ag5, the sharpest and no doubt the most fashionable lines for him are: 6 ... c5 7.d5 e6, or 6 ... a6! ? 7.Wd2 c5 B.d5 b5, in which it is much more difficult for White to fight for the opening advantage, than af ter the move 6 . . . lLlc6, played in this game.
7.lLlge2 a6 S.YlYd2 gbS
9.gcl! That is an interestind and new idea. White makes a useful waiting move and he prevents the thematic pawn-break b7-b5 in the process. He plays more often here either 9.d5 ttie5, or 9 ... ttia5, and that leads to compli cated positions with mutual chances, or 9.h4 with a very sharp and rather unclear game.
9 ...,Ad7 In case of: 9 ... e5 1O.d5, Black is slightly worse after: 1O ... ttie7 1l.ttig3, as well as following: 1O ... ttia5 1l.ttig3 - these positions are too passive for Black, since he has no active counter play in sight.
l O .dS This move is too straightforward. Some time later (see the game against Mikhail Golubev, played at the tour nament in Alushta in 1994) I played the more flexible move - 1O.b3 ! ?
lO ...lLleS Black's knight is rather unstable here. It would have been more reliable for Black to follow with 1O . . . ttia5 and in the game Mamedyarov - Cheparinov, Antalya 2004, there followed: 1l. ttig3 c5 12.,Ad3 b5 13.b3 bxc4 14.bxc4 !lb4 with a complicated, but quite accept able position for Black.
Dreev-Muhutdinov, St Petersburg 1993
1l.b3 ltJh5 That seemingly active move is an imprecision enabling me to seize the initiative. Black should have defended passively, having in mind the line: 11... ic8 12.f4 1C!ed7. The other active look ing move - 1l ... b5 is not any better, because after: 12.cxb5 axb5 13.ltJd4, White's initiative is quite danger ous. For example, in case of: 13 . . .b4?! 14.lC!cb5, he has an obvious advan tage.
95
13.ltJxh5 gxh5 14.�e2 ltJg6 15. exfS � 16. 0 - 0 �d7 17.ltJe4 h4 18.�d3 e5
19.94! This move consolidates White's great positional advantage.
19 .be4 .•.
12.ltJg3! White achieves nothing much with 12.f4, due to; 12 ... h6 13.�4 lC!xf4 14.lC!xf4 g5 and Black's chances are Dot worse.
12 f5 •.•
The desire of my opponent to play somewhat actively is easily under standable, but his last move seems to be anti-positional. He compromises his set-up considerably. Strangely enough, it would have been better for him to defend with 12 . . . lC!xg3, without being afraid of the attack along the h file after 13.hxg3. Well, after 13... !1e8 ! ? 14.�h6 �h8, or 14.�e2, White main tains the initiative indeed, but still Black's position would have remained quite defensible.
In case of: 19 ...hxg3 20 .hxg3, my opponent would be faced with seri ous problems. White would plan to regroup his forces according to the scheme - �h2, Wg2, !1hl with an at tack along the h-file.
2 0 ..be4 ltJf4 It is evident that Black's position is difficult from the strategical point of view, so my opponent is trying to com plicate things somehow. He hopes to have more practical chances to save the game by sharpening it.
21 .bh4 h5 22.�f5 gxfS •
Now, the exchange-sacrifice is in fact forced for Black; otherwis e after: 22 . . . 1We8 23.�g5 lC!h3+ 24.Wg2 lC!xg5 25.1Wxg5, he would remain a pawn down without any chances for active counterplay.
23.gxf5�xfS 24.g;.hl gf8 25.�c2 ltJd3 26.gcdl e4!? That is his best resource from the practical point of view. In case of 2 6...
Game 27
96 tOf4, he would have to enter an end game being an exchange down for nothing...
27.1g3! White is threatening now the sim ple move - fxe4, reducing the tension in the position considerably. Accord ingly, Black's next move is practically forced:
27 h4 28 .bh4 mt3 29.1g3 exf3 3 0 .Elgl f2 .••
•
That is Black's only possibility to regain the exchange. The position however, is simplified after that and that suits me just fine.
33.'ffe4 That is an unprecision for White. but it changes nothing in the evalua tion of the situation. It was better for me to play 33.a4!, preventing Black's counterplay on the queenside, con nected with b7-bS. Naturally, Black exploits the available opportunity to show some activity:
33 b5! 34.a4 bxa4 35.bxa4 mt5 36.EleU .c3 37.Elcl mt3 38.'ffg2 mt5? •••
Here, Black blundered in his time trouble, leaving his bishop en pris, since he overlooked White's spectac ular move 40. He could have played instead 38 ...\Wf5!?, with chances to offer some resistance. The move 39.�xc3?? would not work then for White, due to: 39 ... 'ffb l+ 40.\Wgl \We4+ 41.\Wg2 �fl#
31.'ffxd3 White is not falling into the trap: if 31.�gfl??, then 31...tOel! and Black wins, since White gets checkmated in the variations: 32 :�xf2 \Wxfl + ! 33. \wxfl l3xfl#, or 32J:ldxel fxel\W 33.Elxel Elfl+ 34.�xfl 'ffxfl# Now, Black loses by force: 31 fxgl'ff+ 32.E!xgl �h8 39.E!xc3! 'ffd l+ 4 0.\Wgl Elf! 41. The position has been simplified 1e5+t considerably and Black is a l>awn down Black resigned. He fails to cal> and his king's shelter is much less re ture White's queen, because in case of liable that that of its counterpart. It 41...dxe5, or 41... �h7, he gets check becomes quite difficult for Black to mated after 42. �h3. That was an in defend such a position, moreover in a teresting fighting game with an exqui time-trouble! site finish. ••.
Galdunts-Dreev, St Petersburg 1993
B3t
27 GaIdunts
-
Dreev
St Petersburg (open) 1993
l.e4 cS 2.�f3 �c6 3.ibS g6 4. 0 - 0 ig7 S.c3 �f6 6.!"lel 0 - 0 7.h3 Here, it is much more popular for White to play: 7.d4 cxd4 8.cxd4 dS 9.eS tLle4? and that is presently quite fashionable; nevertheless the move in the game was also a frequent guest in the tournament practice and it was modern too.
7... eS!? That is the most logical and the most principled answer for Black. The other most often played lines (7. . . d6 8.d4 cxd4 9.cxd4; 7... %%6; 7... dS; and 7... a6) are, I believe, not so reasonable for Black and they all present White with more chances to fight for the opening advantage, than after 7... eS!?
97 has not achieved anything promising out of the opening. In case of: 8.d3 d6 9.tLlbd2 �c7!? lO.tLlfl a6 Il.ia4 bS, Black will have no problems in the near future and his plans are already preferable. In fact, the position resem bles a lot, in its pawn-structure, one of the Chigorin variations of the Ruy Lo pez, except that it is now under much more favourable circumstances for Black. White's most active line here is - 8.d4. After the practically semi forced variation: 8 . . . cxd4 9.cxd4 exd4 lO.eS (or lO.tLlxd4?! �b6 ! 1l.tLlxc6 dxc6+) lO ... tLldS 1l.igS! ? �c7!, there arises a familiar theoretical position, in which Black has no problems what soever, as contemporary tournament practice shows convincingly.
8 ... dxc6 9.�xeS Otherwise the move 8 ..ixc6 be comes senseless. After 9.d3, I could counter with 9 ... �c7, defending my eS-pawn and my position would have been clearly preferable due to my bishop pair.
9 ... ge8 1 0 .f4 It is worse for White to play lO.d4 in view of: lO ... cxd4 1l.cxd4 (or 11.�xd4?! tLld7 12.f4 �c7+) 1l ... tLlxe4 and Black is better. Now, in case of: 12.!"lxe4 fueS, Black maintains a huge positional advantage as well.
l O ... �hS! 8 ..b:c6?! I have always been quite skeptical about such possible exchanges of the bishop for the knight in similar posi tions, since they all seem to me to be somewhat anti-positional for White. I even think that after 7 ... eS, White
I also considered the possibil ity lO ... tLlxe4; after: 1l.!"lxe4 f6, there would have arisen a rather complex position, in which my chances seemed to be at least not worse. Still, the move 10 ... tLlhS was stronger.
1l.d4 �h4 12.!"lfl
Game 27
98
12 .bh3! 13.gxh3�g3+ 14.mhl tfxh3 + 15.mgl .!Llg3
and Black would have a much better endgame.
I have more than sufficient com pensation for the sacrificed piece in this position. The most important point here is - I have the initiative. It is far from easy for White to defend that position, because of the unsafe situation of his king. 16 .!Lld2 Following: 16J�e1?!, I could have played: 16.. .'�� h 1 + 17.mf2 .!Llxe4+ 18. l!i>e3 1Wh4 and Black's initiative would have been tremendously dangerous. For example: 19.1!i>xe4 (Or 19J1h1?! \wf2+ 20.l!i>xe4 c4! and White has no satisfactory defence against the threat f7-fS with a checkmate; 20.l!i>d3 20 ... cxd4 and Black's attack is so pow erful that White is practically defense less.) 19 ...he5 20. l!i>d3 (or 20.dxe5? gxe5+! 21.mxe5 1We7#) 20...hf4 and Black has already three pawns for the piece and his attack is still quite men acing.
18.mf3 tfh3 19.mf2 .!Llxfl 2 0 . .!Llxfl cxd4 21.cxd4 f6 22 .!Llf3 lhe4 23 .!Llg3 He7 24.f5!
.•.
•
16 ...§'hl+ 17.mf2 (diagram)
17... tfh2+ That was not the best. I had better play: 17 ... .!Llxf1! 18.1Wxf1 (or 18 ..!Llxfl?! tfxe4 19 ..!Llg3 1Wd5+) 18 ... 1Wxfl+ 19.1tIxfl cxd4 20.cxd4 f6 21..!Llf3 fue4 22.fS gd8
•
•
This is a very strong move after which the game becomes quite un clear and most probably White is not worse anymore to say the least.
24...g5 25.'Ml3+ mh8 26 .id2 gae8 •
27.tfd3? My opponent had a quite difficult defensive task during most of that game and as a result he was in a des perate time-trouble. That can easily explain his blunder, after which his position becomes immediately hope less. It was correct for him to follow with 27J3hl!, after which in case of: 27...ge2+ 28 . .!Llxe2 1Wxhl 29 . .!Llg3, as
99
Galdunts-Dreev, St Petersburg 1993 well as after: 27... 1Wg4!? we would have reached complex positions with mutual chances. Now, the game is practically over rather quickly.
27 g4 28.�h1 �e2 + ! 29.�xe2 'ttxh1 3 0 .�el h5 31.�f4 h4 32.�e6 g3+ 33.lt>e2 g2 34. b3 ..•
.
the Dutch city of Tilburg was orga nized like that in the year 1993. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�£J �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 �bd7 6.1d3 dxc4 7..bc4 b5 8.1d3 1b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5 n.dS c4 12.1c2 'ttc7 We have reached one of the basic positions of the main variations of the Meran sysrem.
34 .ih6! •.•
That is the fastest road for Black to victory. 35.lt>dl .be3 36.'ttxe3 gl'tt and White resigned. It might be interesting to mention
13.�d4!?
My opponent chose a very seldom played line at those times (it is not so popular nowadays either ... ), avoiding the famous opening tabia, arising af that after Our game the variation: 1.e4 ter: 13.dxe6 fxe6. c5 2. �j3 �c6 3. 1b5 g6 4. 0 - 0 197 Back at the times in which we 5.c3 �f6 6.'i'l.e1 0 - 0 7.h3 eSf? 8.hc6 played our game, Black's main argu dxc6 9. �xeS 'i'l.e8 1 0/4, became prac ment against the line 13.tiJd4, was tically extinct in the top-level tourna considered to be 13 ...tiJc5, but the ment practice. move 14.b4 !? was already beginning to become fashionable. It was lead ing to an extremely complicated and 28 D48 double-edged position after the prac Gelfand - Dreev tically forced line: 14 ... cxb3 15.axb3 Interpolis Ck. 0.), Tilburg 1993 b4 16.tiJa4. After my opponent made up his mind to follow with 13.tiJd4, I Nobody is surprised nowadays' understoo d that in case I answer with with knock-out tournaments. The idea the usual move 13 ... �c5, I risked fac of organizing chess events according ing some home-preparation novelty to that system had been tested long in this line and even if my position ago. For example, the tournament in turned out to be acceptable, I would
Game 28
100 have to solve difficult problems over the board in a very complex situa tion. Meanwhile, my opponent would have been armed with home-prepared analysis, so at the end, after a relative ly short hesitation, I decided to choose a very rare line:
13 eS!? •••
avoiding complications and steer ing the game into a semi-closed posi tional maneuvering scheme. It is interesting to mention that 12 years after our game, the same sel dom played variation with the move 13.t2)d4, happened in the game Anand - van Wely, Monaco (rapid) and small wonder, Loek decided not to take his chances with the move 13 ... t2)cS, evi dently afraid of the line 14.b4!?, but he chose instead, just like I did, the move 13 . . . eS. Later, after: 14.t2)fS g6 lS.t2)e3 �c5. he reached a reliable and approx imately equal position.
what was more important he had the initiative...
16.'lWf'3 �f4 17.�xf7!? This is White's most principled ar gument in his fight for the opening ad vantage. Following: 17.hf4 exf4 18.V;\Ih3 (18. t2)g4? hS-+) 18 . . .�g7, Black is better; after 17.t2)g4 �g7 there arises a compli cated position, but I believe that Black is not worse at all, to say the least ...
17... c;t>xf7 18.g3 gS 19.9xf4 gxf4 2 0 .'iWhS+ c;t>e7! 21.V;\Ih4+ It is inferior for White to play here 21. V;\IgS+?! t2)f6, because he will re main to be the only one with problems to worry about. ..
14.t2)f5 g6 ls.�h6
21... 1t>f7
lS ... �hS!? This is a new idea. Black had tested before that only the move lS ... t2)g8 and in the game Szmetan - Morovic Fernandez, Buenos Aires 1992, af ter: 16.�xg8 �xg8 17.V;\If3 �d6 18.b3, White had just a slight advantage, but
It is too bad for Black to play 21... t2)f6?, dueto 22.ixf4! �g8+ (22... exf4? 23.e5+-) 23.�g3 and White has a great advantage, but still it is quite possible for Black to follow with: 21... It>e8 22.V;\IhS+ It>d8 and the position is complicated enough with mutual chances.
22.�dl?! This move involves a great risk for White. I believe that my opponent had better comply with the fact that he had failed to obtain any advantage out of
101
Gelfand-Dreev, Tilburg 1993 the opening and after: 2 2.1WhS+ It;>e7 23.1Wh4+, he could have presented me with a choice - to either agree to a draw by a repetition of moves after: 23 ... 1t;>t7 24.1WhS+ It;>e7, or to continue the fight in the quite unclear position after: 23 ... lt;>eB 24.1WhS+ It;>dB . . . Evidently, GM B.Gelfand had over estimated his position a little bit ...
22
•••
ggS+ 23.cj;lhl �f6 24.J.h5+
Here, at first I of course calculated the line: 24 . . . tDxhS 2S.1WxhS+ It;>g7 26Jlg1+ It;>hB 27.fugB+ It;>xgB 2B.id2 It;>hB, evaluating the position as rough ly equal. Later, after some serious thought, I decided to sacrifice the ex change in order to reach a very sharp position in which I hoped to confuse my opponent and to manage to seize the initiative:
nevertheless my light squared bishop was going to become a real monster!
3 0 .exd5 Once again, White had to accept that sacrifice as well, because after: 30.id2 tDf6, my position woul d have been clearly better. I would have a pawn for the exchange and the perma nent threat - itJxe4.
3 0 ... hd5 31.gfl if6 Black is threatening ghB.
32.�h7+ gg7 33.�h3 ie6! 34. �g2?! This is an imprecision, after which my initiative becomes extremely dan gerous. White had better play 34.1WhB!, and later either: 34 .. .l':lgB 3S.1Wh7+ gg7 36.1WhB ggB with a draw, or: 3S ... ig7 36.1Wh4 ghB 37.1Wf2 itB!?, with a rather unclear position.
24 gg6!? 25.hg6+ •••
White is now forced to accept the sacrifice, because in case of: 2S.l':lg1 itJxhS 26.1WxhS It;>g7, Black's chances are at least equal.
25 ...hxg6 26.gg1 ie7 27.�h6 ggS 28.f3 b4 29. itJe2 (diagram)
29 ... �xd5! After that capture, I was going to have only two pawns for a whole rook;
34... g5
Game 29
102
35.a3!? This is White's only chance to ac tivate somehow his position. In case of 35.tiJg1, Black's strong initiative is running unopposed; after 35 ... g4 36.fxg4 �xg4, White has no good de fence in sight, while in case of: 37.%Ve4 Y;Yd7 38.tiJf3, it is possible for Black to follow with: 38 ... %Vd3! ? 39.%Vxd3 cxd3 with an overwhelming advantage for him, because Black's three connected passed pawns are a much more pow erful argument in that position than White's extra rook.
40 .tiJd5 hd5 41.Y;Yd2 ic6 42. Y;Yxd7+ The exchange of queens does not save White at all.
42
•••
hd7 43.gxa6 i.b3 44.gf2
Or 44.�a7+ �e6 45.fu:g7 ixfl-+
35 g4 36 .axb4 id5 37.tiJc3 gxf3! •••
44 i.b4! and White resigned. Af ••.
ter 45.�a7+, Black wins easily with: 45 ... M6 46.�xg7 ixf2 47.�g8 id4 .
E81
29 Dreev - Golubev Alushta 1994
38.%Yf2? Here, my opponent made the deci sive mistake in the time-trouble after which he lost quickly. It was relatively the best for him to try that practically forced line: 38.%Vxg7+ ! ? ixg7 39.tiJxd5 %Vc6 40.�a5! (40.�d1?%Vg641.�glf2-+) 40 ... %Vg6 !? 41.�xf3 %Ve4 42.�g2 %Vc2+ 43.�f2 %Vxc1 44.�a6 %Vd1 and despite the fact that White would have been clearly worse in that case too, there was no quick victory for Black in sight.
38
•••
ib7 39.ga5 Y;Yd7!-+
This i s the best line for Black with the deadly threat - ih4.
This game was played in a round robin tournament, which was held in the town of Alushta in the Crimean peninsula. l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3.tiJc3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.ig5 tiJc6 7.tiJge2 a6 8.Y;Yd2 m,8 9.gcl! id7
103
Dreev-Golubev, Alushta 1994 That variation was played ayear ear lierin mygame against M .Muhutdinov, which was also a part of this book (see game 26). I played there the straifgt forward move - 10.dS.
1 0 .b3!? At the moment - that move as a novelty. 1O.b3! ? is a much more flex ible move than 1O.dS. Its idea is to respond n.d5, in answer to the seem ingly attractive 1O ... bS, after which Black is practically forced to enter the rather complicated and even risky for him position after 11...liJe5, since his knight is unstable there. The other retreats of that knight promise no good prospects for Black; for example: n ... liJa7 12.liJg3 c6 13. dxc6 .bc6 14.liJdS and White has a slight but stable positional advan tage. The pawn-structure resembles the Maroczy system in the Sicilian Defence, except that the situation is much worse for Black, since his knight is misplaced on a7. It is even worse for him to play 1l ... liJaS?!, because in that case after: 12.cxbS axbS 13.liJd4 �e8 (There is noth ing better for Black in sight; if 13 ... b4, then 14. liJcbS±) White can enter the following semi-forced variation: 14.liJcxbS! ? .bbS lS.liJxbS �bS 16.b4 gb7 (16 ... liJb7?! 17.a4 gb6 18.a5 �b5 19.9xc7+-) 17.bxaS with a great ad vantage for him.
1 0 ...bS ll.dS �eS After: n... b4 12.dxc6 bxc3 13.liJxc3 .b:c6 14.ie2, Black ends up in a pas sive position, without any good pros pects and he has no available plan to obtain an active counterplay.
12.f4 This move seems to be the most logical in White's fight to obtain an advantage in the opening. I would not have achieved much with: 12.cxbS axbS 13.liJd4, because of: 13 ... �e8 with a rather unclear position. Now, after 14.f4, Black can continue with 14 ... liJeg4 and he should not be afraid of15.h3, because of lS ... b4 with a good counterplay for him.
12 ... �eg4 13.�g3 h6 14..1b4 �h7 1S.h3 That obvious move is imprecise. Black's knight on g4 is not so well placed, so it is hardly worth for White to repel it. He should have simply con tinued his development with lS.ie2, preserving a slight positional advan tage thanks to his superior piece-coor dination. Now, the position becomes much sharper and quite unclear at that.
IS ... �gf6 16 ..id3 eS! My opponent obtains here an ex cellent counterplay after that strong move .
17.fxeS The position is complicated and double-edged after: 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.eS (White achieves nothing with 18.0-0,
Game 29
104 because of: 18 ... �xe4 19.he4 �xh4 with a better game for Black.} 18 ... dxeS 19.fxeS gS 20. exf6 �xf6 21.hgS hxgS 22.�xgS .tc6 and Black's compensa tion for the pawn is quite sufficient.
17 dxe5 18.�ge2 c6 . • .
It is too dubious for Black to play 18 ... �xe4?!, due to: 19.hd8 �xd2 20. hc7 flbc8 21..td6 bxc4 22 . .txf8 cxd3 (or 22 ... wxf8 23 . .tc2 cxb3 24.axb3+-) 23.hg7 wxg7 24.wxd2 dxe2 2S.wxe2 and he does not have a good compen sation for the exchange.
He is threatening now to sacrifice a piece on h3, under favourable circum stances.
22.ie3 gfS 23.dxc6 hc6 24. �d5 bxc4 25.bxc4 �e6 We were both in time-pressure at that moment.
19.if2 It is worse for White to play 19. O-O?! , in view of: 19 .. b4 20.�a4 (or 20 .�d1?! �xe4+) 20 ... �xe4 21.he4 �xh4 22.�cS flfd8 and Black is evi dently better. .
19 ... �h5
2 0 .ic5! This move forces Black to remove his rook away from the f-file. His plan is more than obvious: that is to push f7-fS and eventually also - f4, with the idea to follow with f3, so he needs his rook on the f-file. White's move - 2 0 . .tcS! impedes that plan. In case of: 20.0-0 f5 ! ? 21.ic5 flf7, Black has an excellent counterplay.
2 0 .. .l:�e8 21. 0 -0 �g5!?
26.g3 That is a good positional move. In principle, it might have been stron ger for me to have captured the pawn: 26.hh6, but I did not have enough time to evaluate correctly the position after: 26 . . .hdS! ? 27.exdS (In case of 27.hg7, Black can follow with: 27... he4 28.hf8 �xd3 and the position is approximately equal, while after: 27.cxdS ixh6 28.�xh6 �ef4, the su tuation is unclear.) 27 ... �cS, in which case Black has some compensation for the pawn. Having in mind the time trouble, it would be then much easier for Black to play that position, even if his compensation is insufficient, be cause his knight on cS has occupied the perfect blocking outpost. Addi tionally, he is threatening to advance his pawn-mass on the kingside with f7-fS.
26 ... �d4 27.�h2 �h7 28J:lf2 a5?!
105
Dreev-Golubev, Alushta 1994 This is an imprecision, since Black had better play 28 ...!"lb7with a compli cated position with mutual chances.
29J�cf1 !"lb7 3 0 .'?9c3
37.,ixg6+ ! That is the fastest way to victory.
37 �hS •..
Or 37. . . �xg6 38.'?9d3+ e4 39.'?9xe4+ It/g5 40.h4#
3S.'?9f3 �xg3 39.�xg3 !"lxa3 40 .id3, and Black resigned. He has no •
defence against White's numerous threats - 41.'?ge4, 41.'?9f5, or 41.!"lg7.
C07
30 Adams - Dreev Dortmund 1994
30
•..
V9bS
Now, Black makes a serious mistake in the time-pressure and his sutuation becomes desperate after that. He had to continue with 30 . . . lOe6, after which I would have preserved better chanc es anyway, because of the powerful placement of my knight on the d5outpost. Still, the position would have remained quite complicated with a lot of fight left.
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.�d2 c5 4.exd5 '?9xd5 5.�gf3 cxd4 6 ..ic4 '?9dS 7. 0-0
31.'?9xa5 !"lb2 ?! 32 . .ic1! !"lb7 33 . .ia3 !"la7 34.'?9c3 !"lcS 35.!"lxf'7 Black is already two pawns down without any active counterplay. His position is hopeless. There followed:
35 ...,ixd5 36.exd5 lOb5
This i s a well-known position i n a popular variation of the French De fence.
7... �e7N Now, that is already a novelty. I do not believe this move to be superior to the standard lines for Black (7... a6; 7... lOc6; 7 ... lOf6), but possibly it is not worse either. I chose that varia tion, (which was not yet analyzed at the moment the game was played), mostly because of some psychological
Game 30
106 reasons. I wished to introduce the ele ment of surprise and to force my op ponent to play an unknown position, avoiding his opening preparation in the well-familiar theoretical tabias. The development of the game proved that my experiment with the new idea - 7. ..tiJe7 was quite successful. Mi chael Adams lost his confidence in that unknown situation and his posi tion became quickly somewhat worse already in the opening stage.
8.�b3 Vlic7 9.Vlie2 tl:)fxd4
tl:)g6 1 0 .
It was more precise for White to play 10.tl:)bxd4, in order to counter 1O ... a6 with: 1l.iob3 ioe7 12.l::l el 0-0 13.iog5!? and to try to convert his lead in development into a slight opening advantage. My position would have remained solid enough in that case too, but I would still have some open ing problems to worry about.
1 0 ...a6 11.f4 1e7 12.f5 exfS 13. tl:)xfS 1xf'5 14.gxfS 0 - 0
on c4, the queen on c 2 and the rook on f5 are all placed rather unstably.
15.�d4 That is an imprecision. White had better continue with: 15.iod2 �d7!? 16.gafl tl:)f6 with an approximately equal position.
15... tl:)d7! This is a very good move, since this knight will be redeployed to f6 and it will be multi-functional there. It will cover the vulnerable spot - f7 and it will control the important e4 and g4squares.
16.1e3 That is another questionable move. n would have been more reliable for White to transfer the bishop to a more stable placement with 16.iob3.
16 ... tl:)f6 17.lfih1 This natural move is not the best either. It was stronger for White, just like on the previous move, to play 17.iob3. Now, I succeed in seizing the initiative.
17 gae8 18.Vlif1 .•.
My opponent has not obtained anything out of the opening. White's bishop pair is immaterial in this posi tion. The harmonious development of forces is much more important and some of White's pieces like the bishop
18... tl:)g4 Here, I played imprecisely too. It was much better to continue with 18 . . .ioa3 ! ? and White was practical ly forced after that to enter the line
107
Adams-Dreev, Dortmund 1994 19JbIT6 (White has great problems af ter 19.icl? ! , in view of: 19 .. Jle4 20.c3 13fe8 and Black has a clear advantage.) 19 ... gxf6 20.�f5 hb2 2U'lbl ie5 22.ih6 hh2, in which Black's posi tion would have been evidently supe rior.
19.J.gl J.f6 2 0 .c3 �e3 21.J.xe3 �e3 22.J.b3 �fe8 23.!U"3 �3e4 28 �ge4! .••
This move emphasizes the vulner ability of White's first rank.
29.�gl It would not work for White to de fend with 29.�f1, because of 29 . . . Elf4! and he would be completely defense less.
29 �e1 3 0 .ti'f2 fu:gl+ 3V;i;>xgl ti'e7 •.•
24.�f5? This seemingly active move is the decisive mistake for White. Michael bad to play 24.id5 !, with the idea to counter 24 .. J14e5, with 25.13f5!? and he would have good chances to equal ize. Now, my opponent ends up in a very difficult position by force.
24 . ..�e5! 25.�g3 It is not any better for White to play: 25.�h6+ gxh6 26JbIT6 �g4 27.ixf7+
25 ... �g4 Now, Black is threatening �f4, therefore White must give up the ex change.
26.�xg4 fu:g4 27.�h6+ gxh6 28.ti'xf6
Naturally, that endgame is hope less for White with an exchange down without any compensation. Still, there are queens present on the board and he preserves practical chances to cre ate some havoc on the board. There fore, my urgent task was to trade queens.
32.J.d5?! White could have offered a more te nacious resistance by playing 32.
32 ... ti'el+ 33.ti'xel �xel+ 34. c;t>f2 �e7 Now, after the position has been simplified, Black's win should not be so complicated anymore. The game followed with:
35.c4 c;t>g7 36.b4 c;t>f6 37.J.f3 b6 38.a4 a5 39.bxa5 bxa5 40 .c5 �e5 41.c6 c;t>e7 42.h4 c;t>d6 43.h5 �c5 44.c;t>e3 �c4 and White resigned.
108
Game 31
31
D82 Dreev - Leko Dortmund 1994
This game was played at the su per-tournament in Dortmund and then Peter Leko was still young and quite promising ... l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4 .if4 .ig7 5.e3 c5 6.dxc5 %Ya5 7 %Ya4+ •
.
Contemporary theory does not consider that line to be so dangerous for Black. Still, he must play precisely, because he has to defend an endgame with an extra pawn for White. The crit ical line for White is 7.!3c1!?, but I was reluctant to compete with Peter Leko (He was at that time already a great specialist of the Gruenfeld Defence...) in long and complicated variations of the type: 7... �e4 8.cxdS �xc3 9 .%Yd2 %Yxa2 1O.bxc3, or 7...dxc4 8.bc4 0-0 9. �ge2 %YxcS lO. %Yb3 �c6 11. �bS %YhS, therefore I chose a simple line trans ferring immediately into an endgame right after the opening. I wanted to avoid playing complicated unclear po sitions and I intended to fight in a tech nical, positional manner. This strategy proved to be successful in that game.
7 %Yxa4 8.�xa4 .ie6!? •..
That is an interesting, but rarely played move. In general, Black plays here: 8 ... 0-0, 8. . . lLle4 and 8 ...id7. (diagram)
9.ixb81? That was a novelty at the moment we played our game. Until then, White had usually tried: 9.!3cl 0-0 1O.lLlf3 !3c8, as well as: 9.cxdS lLlxdS 1O .ibS+ lLld7, but he had not achieved anything special after all that.
9 B:xb8 1 0 .cxd5 �xd5?! ••.
Strangely enough, that natural and even attractive move is a serious imprecision. It was obvious that af ter Peter was faced with a novelty on move nine, he failed to grasp on the board all the fine points of that posi tion, so he played the most obvious; nevertheless not the best move. I be lieved - Black had to prefer here: 10... id7! 1l.lLlc3 !3c8; and White would not manage to keep his pawn after: 12.c6 bxc6 13.dxc6 bc6, as well as follow ing: 12.lLlf3 :axcS 13.!3d1 0-0 - and Black's couple of bishops and his lead in development would be quite suffi cent to compensate the pawn.
1l..ib5+ 'it>f8?! That is again not the best for Black. He had better follow with: 1l...id7 12.bd7+ 'it>xd7 13.0-0-0 'it>c6 14.lLlf3 !3hd8, creating maximal difficulties for White to materialize his extra pawn.
109
Dreev-Leko, Dortmund 1994
12.l;cl! This move consolidates White's considerable positional advantage. Now, Black's compensation for the pawn is clearly insufficent.
12 ... a6?! Black again makes a mistake. Peter weakens the b6-square without anyne cessity and he simply sends my bishop to a more comfortable square. After: 12 ... �b4!? 13.a3 �dS !? (Black should not expect anything promising out of the variation: 13 . . . �a2?! 14J'ib1 �b3 lS.�f3; White is threatening 16.�d2 and the move lS ... a6 can be countered by White with 16.�b6! with a decisive advantage.) 14.�f3 �c6 IS.axb4 i.xbS 16.�c3 �c6, my opponent could have still offered tenacious resistance, de spite being a pawn down. Now, his po sition deteriorates quickly.
13.ic4 �b4
have a winning position, because af ter 17 ...bS, he would win with: 18.cxb6 l;xc4 19J'lxc1 !ixc1 20.b7, while Black would be defenseless against the threat - b8�.
15.�e2 �xa2 16.l;c4 �b4
as
17.�f3
Or 17. . .h6 18.l;al �b4 19.�b6+-
Peter succeeded in restoring the material balance, but his e6-square was so weak and his pieces were badly coordinated that Black's position was strategically hopeless. Now, the game enters a purely technical stage.
18.�g5 e5 19.�b6 �e8 2 0 .gal �c6 21.l;ca4 if6 22.�e4 rJ1f7 23.�c4 Black is bound to lose his as-pawn.
23 ...lThc8 24.�xa5 b6 In case of: 2 4. . .�xaS 2S.fuaS b6 26.
!ia7! Black's position is again doomed.
25.�xc6 l;xc6 14.iLxe6! Black had obviously overlooked that move.
14 fxe6 ..•
Black would not have saved the day with: 14 ... �d3+ IS.wd2 �xcl (or 15 ... �xf2 16.�c4 �xhI 17.�h3+-; IS ...l;d8 16.ib3 li'lxf2+ 17. We2 li'lxhl 18.li'lf3+-) 16.�c4 �c8 17.�f3 and White would
Game 32
110
26J�a6! Now, White is threatening b2-b4 and the win is already close.
26 .. J�c7 27Jbb6 !bb6 28.cxb6 gc6 29.ga6 gc2+ 3 0 .�d3 fucb2 31.b7! That is the fastest road to victory, since Black has no useful moves.
31. h6 • .
After 3l...gxb7, White wins with: 32. gxf6+ exf6 33.tt:ld6+ we6 34.tt:lxb7. 32.tt:lc5 e4+ 33.�xe4 and Black resigned.
32
D45 Dreev - Cifuentes Parada
V.Ivanchuk, V.Anand, V.Akopian and plenty of other super grandmasters play like that with Black. I have also tried that line numerous times ...
9.gdl b6?!
Instead of the move in the game - 8 ... ge8, contemporary theory rec Hoogovens Ck. 0.), Wijk aan Zee 1995 ommends the solid and completely re 1.d4 ttlf6 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 d5 4.ttlc3 liable system with 8. . .b6, in which af ter 9.gd1 Black follows with the quite c6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.�c2 1d6 This is the most popular position of natural move 9 ...�b7 with an approxi the so-called Anti-Meran system and mately equal position. Nobody has it has been played a zillion times in the tried here the seemingly unnecessary move 9 ... ge8, since the combination tournament practice... of the two systems (8 ... ge8 and 8 ... 7.�e2 That move is probably neither bet b6) looks a bit strange and completely ter, nor worse than 7.b3, 7.�d3 or awkward. In our game that position 7.�d2, which all lead Gust like the arose after a slightly different move move in the game) to a complicated order. Instead of 9 . . . b6?! it is better positional fight. The choice of moves for Black to play 9 .. :�e7 with a quite here is much rather a matter of style. satisfactory position as tournament After 7.g4, there arise sharp positions practice shows. with mutual chances.
7... 0 - 0 8. 0 - 0 (diagram)
8 ... ge8 This move is possible, indeed. Re cently, the more fashionable line is: 8 ... dxc4 9.hc4 a6 !? and it seems that Black has greater chances (in compar ison to 8 ... ge8) to equalize and even to seize the initiative. G.Kasparov,
Dreev-Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1995
1 0 .e4! That is the most energetic move for White. He emphasizes the fact that after the practically forced line: 10 .. . dxe4 11.�xe4 �xe4 12.Y;Vxe4, or 10 .. . �xe4 11.�xe4 dxe4 12.Y;Vxe4, the move gf8-e8 is evidently unnecessary and it is simply a waste of time. It is less energetic for White to continue with 1O.b3, because in that case after: 10 . . . ib7 1l.ib2 Y;Ve7 the chances of both sides would have been approximately equal.
111
17.ctg5 g6 Black saves the game neither with: 17. . .f5 18.ic4, nor with: 17 ...hh2+ 18.<;f;lh1 g6 19.Y;Va4 tZlb8 20.Y;Vh4 f6 21. �xe6 and White is completely win ning in both cases.
IS.Y;Va4 ctb4 I was planning to counter 18 . . . �c5 with: 19 .Y;Vh4 h 5 2o.hh5! gxh5 (or 20...f6 21.hg6 fxg5 2 2.Y;Vxg5+-) 21.Y;Vxh5 with a crushing attack.
1 0 dxe4 11.�xe4 ctxe4 12. Y;Vxe4 Y;Vc7 ..•
After 12 . . .ib7 13 ..tf4!? White maintains a slight but stable position al advantage. The move in the game is aimed at preventing the maneuver ic1-f4.
13.ie3! ib7 14.c5 That is the idea behind 13.ie3! . White thus prevents Black's thematic pawn advance c6-c5 and he obtains a considerable positional advantage.
14 bxc5 15.dxc5 ctxc5? ••.
That is a decisive mistake; since the c5-pawn is "poisoned" ... Black could have still defended with 15. . .if8!? and although my position would have still been clearly better due to his "bad" bishop on b7, but there would be a lot to fight for.
16.Y;Vc2! This is the best move for White and it leads to a practically forced varia tion after which his position is easily winning.
16 ... cta6 Black loses immediately after 16 ... tZld7?, because of 17.Y;Vd2 and he relin quishes a piece.
19.�d6! Y;Vxd6 2 0 .cte4 Y;Ve5 21.Y;Vxb4 The forced play is over and al though my material advantage is only minimal (a couple of pieces for a rook and a pawn), but my positional edge is overwhelming.
21 ... gedS 22.f4 a5 The exchange of queens would not save Black.
23.fxe5 axb4 24.ctc5 gabS 25. ic4 icS 26.g4 gaS 27.gfl (diagram) My pieces are completely dominant all over the board and my adversary has no counterplay whatsoever, so his position is completely hopeless. The game still followed with:
27... Wg7 2S.Wg2 ga5 29.Wg3 gaS 3 0 .h4 ga5 31.h5 gaS 32.hxg6
112
Game 33 Slav Defence - l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.lLlf3 e6, but with the inclusion of the moves a3 and b6. He then plans to build his game on the nuances arising in connection of the inclusion of these moves. Most probably, Y.Seirawan wanted to surprise me with the move 4... c6, avoiding in the process the well trodden theoretical paths.
5.lLlc3 d5 6.cxd5!? bxg6 33 .ig5 1- 0 That was a wellplayed game with out any imprecision or mistakes on my part. •
33
E12 Dreev - Seirawan
Hoogovens (k. 0.), Wijk aan Zee 1995
1.d4 lLlf6 2.lLlf3 e6 3.c4 b6 4.a3
I wished to clarify the situation in the centre with my last move. It also deserved attention for White to try 6.igS!? with a more complicated game. Here, after: 6... dxc4 7.e4! the transfer to a position resembling the Botvinnikvariation with: 7...bs 8.eS h6 9.ih4 gS l0.lLlxgS hxgS ll.i.xgS lLlbd7, should be favourable for White, since he has an extra tempo - his pawn is on a3 and not on a2. That provides him with a good chance to maintain his opening advantage, since the place ment of the pawn on a3 is no doubt in favour of White in the critical lines of the Botvinnik variation. In case of: 6 ... ie7 7.e3, there arise positions from the Queen's Gambit in which White is better.
6 ... cxd5 !? 4 ...c6 Y.Seirawan tries a very seldom played line on move four. I believe that the usual variations 4 ... ib7 and 4 ... ia6 are clearly better. Still, strangely enough, the move 4 ... c6 should not be defined as dubious, or bad. It is only slightly worse than 4 ...ib7 or 4...ia6. The idea behind 4 ...c6 is to counter the natural move s.lLlc3 with S... ds and to obtain a well known position from the
That is the most logical move; oth erwise 4 ... c6 is senseless, because af ter: 6 ... exdS 7.igS, or 6 ... lLlxdS 7.e4, White has the initiative and a slight advantage.
7.M4 a6 (diagram)
8.gcl! That is the best for White and now Black has problems develop ing his dark-squared bishop. If here 8. . . ie7?! (but not 8. . . 1d6? 9.i.xd6
113
Dreev-Seirawan, Wijk aan Zee 1995
In case of 1O.i.d3, my position would have been still better, but the move in the game is stronger. Now, the game becomes sharp and semi forced. Black should play very pre cisely to hold the position. l O ... gc8 It is too bad for Black to play: 10 ... axbS? 1l.ixbS gc8 12 ..!iJeS, since his situation is hopeless. 'fVxd6 1O . .!iJbS+-), then after: 9 . .!iJa4 id7 (or 9 ... bS 1O.ic7+-) 10 ..1c7 ixa4 11.V;lixa4+ V;lid7 12.V;lic2, White has an overwhelming advantage.
11.'fVa4 'Od7!
Presently, my adversary still finds the best defence. It is worse for him to try ll ... .!iJhS, since White has 12 ..!iJa7!? 8 ... ib7 9.e3 'Oc6?! and Black has plenty of problems to This imprecision enables me to worry about. For example: 1 2 ....!iJxf4 seize the initiative. Black cannot solve (or 12 ... bS 13.ixbS! ? axbS 14.V;lixbS±) his problems with 9 ... ie7 in view of 13.exf4 b5 14 .ixbS! ? axb5 1S.V;lixbS id6 1O ..!iJa4! (White has no more then (or lS ... gc7? 16 . .!iJxc6 'fVd7 17 . .!iJfe5+-) equality after: 1O . .!iJbS axbS 1U.c7 V;lic8 16. .!iJxc8 V;lixc8 17 . .!iJeS ixeS 18.fxeS 12.i.xbS+ .!iJbd7 13.if4 and following 0-0 19.V;lib6 and White has a consid 13 ... 'fVd8, he has to repeat the moves - erable edge, because the material ra 14.ic7 V;lic8 lS ..1f4 V;lid8 etc.) 1O ... .!iJc6 tio of a rook and two connected pawns (It is not better for Black to defend against two light pieces is clearly in his with: 1O ....1d6 11.'fVb3! ? ixf4 12.exf4 favour. .tlbd7 13.id3 0-0 14.0-0, because 12.'Oc7+ White's great positional advantage is It was also possible for White to quite evident.) 1l . .!iJeS .!iJxeS 12 .ixeS continue with: 12 . .!iJd6+ ixd6 13.ixd6 id6 13.ixd6 V;lixd6 14.V;lic2 and White .!iJxd4! 14.gxc8 .!iJxf3+ 15.gxf3 V;lixc8 has a clear positional edge. 16.md2 ! and his initiative compen sates fully Black's extra pawn.
12 gxc7 •••
l O . .!iJb5!
114
Game 33
13.ha6! That is the only way for White to fight for the opening advantage. It is worse for him to follow with: 13.hc7 1f1xc7 14.ha6, due to: 14 ... ttJdb8 ls.hb7 (or ls.ibs id6) ls. . .1f1xb7 16.0-0 id6.
13...ha6! In case of: 13 . . . ttJdb8 14.hc7 1f1xc7 15. ibs id6 16.0-0 0-0 17Jk3 �c8 18.�fc1, Black's position is quite pas sive and he has great problems con nected with the pin along the c-file. There is nothing decisive for White in sight indeed, but Black's defence is tremendously difficult, while White does not risk anything at all.
ttJf6, since the coordination of his pieces improves considerably.
2 0 ...exd4!? In case of 20 ... 'it>f7, White follows with 21.�fc1 and the threat �c6-c7 is quite unpleasant for Black and he can not parry it with 21...id8, because of 22.�c7! and White wins; or 20... 0-0 21.�xe6.
21.�fcl
14.hc7 1f1xc7 15.ful:c6 %lli7 16. ttJe5 ie7 17.b4! That is the only way for White to maintain his initiative.
17...f6!
21...'it>d8?!
Y.Seirawan is again beyond re proach - that is his only move to de fend successfully. It was too bad for him to try 17. . .ic4?, because after 18J!xb6! White would have a win ning position. Here, in case of: 18 ... 1f1xb6 19.1f1xd7+ 'it>f8 20.ttJc6, Black has no satisfactory defence in sight, for example: 20 ...hb4+ 21.axb4 g6, TO 22.1f1e7+ 'it>g7 23.ttJes+-
18.b5!
Following: 18.�xb6 1f1xb6 19.1f1xd7+ 'it>f8 20.ttJc6 1f1b7 21.1f1xe6, there arises a very unclear position, but I believe that Black's prospects (with an extra piece for three pawns) are not worse at all. 18 .. ..bb5 19.1f1xb5 fxeS 2 0 . 0 0 ! Black's defence is much easier af ter: 20.�xe6 exd4 21.0-0 'it>f7 22Jk6 -
My opponent had defended excel lently until his last move, but here he made a serious mistake and his posi tion became quite difficult. It might be already beyond salvation. His only possibility to continue the fight would have been the move 21...1d8. Indeed, in that case after: 22.�xe6+ 'it>f723 .�cc6 ttJf6 (or 23 ... ttJcS?! 24.�es) 24.e4! 1f1d7 (Black's situation is quite dangerous too in case of: 24 ...dxe4?! 2s.1f1c4 'it>f8 (or 2s ... 'it>g6? 26.1f1xd4 'it>f7 27.1f1c4 'it>g6 28.1f1xe4+ 'it>f7 29. �xf6!+-) 2s.exds, because White pre serves his initiative with a better game, but Black can still fight tena ciously. Now, he has nothing to counter White's dangerous onslaught with and his situation deteriorates rapidly.
115
Dreev-Seira wan, Wijk aan Zee 1995
Linares 1995
llJxc3 16.Wlxc3 Wlc7 17.llJd4 id7= I.Sokolov - Lobron, Debrecen 1992; 9... dxc4 1O.1xc4 llJh5 (Or 10 ... Wlxd1+ 1U'!xd1 b6 12.e4 �:1dB 13J;xdB+ llJxdB 14.e5 llJeB 15.�e2 ib7 16J;J:d1 h6 17. ie3 1xe3 1B. �xe3 �f8= Dreev - Va ganian, Tilburg 1993.) 11.1g5 ie7 12.1xe7 (12.WlxdB gxdB 13.ixe7 llJxe7 14.�e2 id7 15.llJe5 ie8 16.ghd1 llJf6= G.Agzamov - I.Zaitsev,Yerevan 1982.) 12 ... 'l!Nxe7 13.0-0 l'l:d8 14.Wle2 id7= P.Nikolic - Ki.Georgiev, Dubai 1986.
I have selected several interest ing games for this book which I have played againstAlexander Khalifman. We have played together in numerous tournaments. This game was played at the super-tournament in Linares.
Naturally, the exchange of knights is quite favourable for me. Sasha ad mitted after the game that he had un derestimated that move. Now, Black must prove that he has not compro mised his pawn-structure in vain.
1.d4 li)f6 2.c4 e6 3.li)f3 d5 4.li)c3 ie7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 hc5 S.a3 llJc6 9.ie2
1l...VU6 12.li)xc6 bxc6 13.�c2
22.exd4! gfS 23.a4! ig5 24. glc2 gf4 25.a5 gxd4 26.g3 l'l:dl+ 27.�g2 ga1 2S.axb6 llJbS Black loses too after: 2B ...Wla6 29.Wlxa6 l'l:xa6 30.b7 l'l:xc6 31.l'l:xc6 if6 32.l'l:d6 and he is completely helpless. 29.gd6+ and Black resigned.
D37
34 Dreev - Khalifman
1 0 .li)xe4 dxe4 11.li)e5!
13... e5 9 ... li)e4?! I played this variation often at that time. With his last move Sasha decid ed to avoid the fashionable lines. He had obviously prepared that line be forehand. See some other possibilities: 9 ... l'l:e8 10.ig5 ie7 11 .Wlc2 h6 12.ih4 dxc4 13.1xc4 llJd5 14.1xe7 llJcxe7 15.0-0
This is a novelty. It is weaker for Black to play 13 ... a5. He stops the the matic pawn-advance b2-b4 with that move, but White can follow with: 14.Wlxe4 Wlxb2 15.ie5±, but not 14. O-O? e5 15.ig3, due to 15... l'l:eB! 16. Wlxe4 (16.b3 16 ...if5 17.Wfh2 Wle7 lB. l'l:tb1 f6, Muse - van der Sterren, Alten steig 1991.) 1£5 17.Wlf3? (17.Wlh4 Wle6) 17 ... e4 1B.Wlf4 g5 19.Wlc7 l'l:e7-+
116
Game 35
14..ig3 M5 15. 0 - 0± 'i!re7 Or lS . . . aS 16.Wc3 !"lfeB 17.h4±
28.!"ldl h6 29.!"ld6 'i!rg5 3 0 .!"le6 f3 31 .ifl fxg2 32 .,ixg2 'i!rf5 33.'i!ra2 'i!rg4 34.!"ld6 !"lf5 35.'i!re6 g;.h7 36.h3 'i!rg5 37.g;.f1! !"lf8 38.,ixe4+ g;.h8 39.'i!re8 .ie7 .
16.b4 .ib6 17.c5 .ic7 18.!"lfdl .ig6 My opponent is reluctant to wait passively here and he tries to advance his f-pawn. That plan gets refuted, though . . . In case of IB ... !"lfdB, White can continue with: 19.a4 .ig6 20.bS fS (or 20 ...cxbS 21.axbS fS 22.b6 axb6 23.!"lxaB !"lxaB 24.cxb6 .id6 2S.Wc6 !"ldB 26 ..ih4+-) 21.b6 axb6 22.cxb6 .id6 23.aS! f4 24.a6 fxg3 2S.hxg3±
Or 39 ... 'i!re7 40.'i!rg6.
4 0 .'i!rxf8+! 1- 0
35
E81 Dreev - Shirov Biel 199S
19.'i!ra4! 'i!re8 Or 19 ... !"ladB 20 .Wxc6 fS 21..ih4+-
2 0 .b5 f5 Or 20 ...cxbS 21.i.xbS We7 22 ..ic6.
21.bxc6 f4 22 ..ih4 .if5
This game was played in the tra ditionally strong round-robin in Biel - Switzerland, which I managed to win. In general, the year 1995 was quite successful for me, since I also managed to win in January the tour nament in Wijk aan Zee, which was played according to the knock-out system. l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6 .ig5 c5 7.d5 'i!ra5 8 . .id2 e6 9.�ge2 exd5 1 0 .�xd5 'i!rd8 1l .ig5 •
•
23.!"ld71 That is White's strongest move. Black's kingside initiative has been practically parried.
23 ...,ixd7 24.cxd7 'i!rg6 25 .ie7 g;.h8 •
Or 2S...!"ltbB 26.ic4+ @hB 27 ..idS.
26 ..ixf8 !"lxf8 27.Wb3+-
It is also good for White to continue here with 27.Wxa7.
27 ... .id8 Or 27 .. .f3 2B.ifl fxg2 29.i.xg2 WfS 30.';!ihl+-; 27. . .Wc6 28.WbS.
1l...'i!ra5+? Black was just having a black-out... The usual line for him here was: 11 ... ie6 12,c2Jec3 ItJc6 13.Wd2 ItJd4; it was
117
Dreev-Shirov, Biel 1995 also interesting for Black to try: 11... h 6 ! ? 12.iiJxf6+ ixf6 13.ixh6 ixb2 14.h4 itJc6, with a rather unclear posi tion.
12.b4! �dS 13.bxc5 �aS+
the beginning of a correct regrouping offorces.
IS ...f6 19.�c3 That move protects indirectly the d6-pawn.
19 ... a6
There is nothing better for Black here. If 13 ... dxc5, then 14.e5+-
Or 19... 'lWxd6 2 0.itJb5+-
14.,id2 �dS Or 14. . .'lWxc5? 15.ib4 �xc4 16. itJd4+It was understandable that Black was in dire straights, but I had to play precisely to make a good use of that. I thought that I had to sacrifice the ex change in order to achieve something real after Black's serious mistake on move eleven.
2 0 .ti'b4 bS 21.,ie3! 21.ie2 �b6!
21. . . ttJd7 22.,ie2 �eS 23. 0-0 ,id7 24.f4 ttJf7 2S.,ic5 ! Once again, White regroups his forces in the correct fashion.
2S ... gcS Or 25 ... a5 26.'lWd4 b4 27.itJb5.
26.�d4+Now, Black's pieces are a sorry sight. Alexey understood that only White could improve his position and he tried his last chance.
26 ... gxc5 27.�xcS ,icS 2S.a4! That is White's simplest and most precise road to victory.
2S ...�xd6 29.�xd6 �xd6 3 0 . axbS �xe4 Or 3 O axb5 31.ixb5 itJxbS 3 2. itJxb5 fu:e4 (32 ....ia6 33.itJc7) 33.itJd6. .••
31.�xe4 �e4 32.gcl ,ifS IS.cxd6! �xdS 16.cxdS hal Or 16.. f5 17.,ic3 ! and Black's ini tiative is easily parried.
Or 32 ...ib7 33.bxa6 ixd5 34 ..if3.
33.,id3 ga4 34 ..ixf5 gxf5 3S.b6
.
17.�xal geS Or 17...'lWxd6 18 . .th6 1Wh4+ 19.�f2 (19.�dl 'lWa4+) 19 ...'lWc5+ 20.�g3 'lWd6+ 21.e5 (21. itJf4 f6) 21 ...'lWxd5 22.itJf4+-
IS.'lWd4! I could have tried to keep the extra pawn with the move 18 ..if4, but it was much more important to develop my pieces and not to relin quish the initiative. My last move was
White's pawns are absolutely unstop pable. Black resigned.
A70
36 Dreev - de Firmian Biel 1995
l.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�f3 c5 4.dS exdS S.cxdS d6 6.�c3 g6 7.e4 ,ig7 S.h3 0 - 0 9.,id3
Game 36
118
9 b5 .•.
This is the most principled line for Black. His other possibilities are - 9. . J:�e8 10.0-0 c4, or 9 ... a6, and White can counter that with a2-a4; meanwhile he can even allow his opponent to push b7-bs: 10.0-0 bS 11.if4 and the position remains complicated.
1 0 .ti)xb5 Recently, contemporary theory prefers capturing with the bishop: 10. ixbS lLlxe4 11.lLlxe4 �aS+ 12.lLlfd2 �xbS 13.lLlxd6 �a6 14.lLl2c4 and White maintains somewhat better chances.
1 0 ... �e8 11. 0-0 lLlxe4 12.�el a6 That is an important intermediate move.
13.lLla3 lLlf6 14.�xe8+ lLlxe8 15. ig5 if6 This is an imprecision for Black. Af ter the correct reaction lS ... �c7, tour nament practice has shown that White can hardly obtain any advantage. (diagram)
16.ti'd2 The idea of the subsequent maneu vers b�longs to GM Vladimir Epishin. His game against Vesselin Topalov (Las Palmas 1994) followed with: 16 ... ib7 17J'�e1 tLld7 18.ie4! (This is a very important move for White! ) 18 ... lLlb6
18.b3 igS 19.1LlgS lLlf6 20.lLlc4 and White has managed to solve his main problem - the defence of his dS-pawn and thanks to his extra space and the vulnerability of Black's dark squares he has the advantage.
16 ... lLld7 17.lLlc4 ib7 18.ie4 .ixg5 19.lLlxg5 lLldf6 2 0 .�el I did not intend to waste tempi for the retreat of my bishop and I brought my rook into the action. I had to consider my opponent's next move, though.. .
2 0 ...h6? This is the principled reaction for Black, but .. .it is a mistake. He has problems to find an acceptable alter native, for example in case of: 20 ... lLlc7, White has the powerful resource: 21.�f4! lLlcxds 2 2.�g3 and he has a dangerous initiative, for example: 22 ... lLlhS 23.'&b3 ic6 24.lLlxf7 1t>xf7 2S.lLlaS.
119
Dreev-de Firmian, Biel 1995
21.loxf7! This sacrifice is strong and quite correct too.
21 ... �xf7 22 .f!rxh6 ltlg7 Black loses the thread of the game ... In case of 22 ... iLlxe4, it is very good for White to continue with 23.�h7+! (but not 23.!"lxe4? .ixd5 24.�h7+-; 23 ... iLlf6 24.!"lf4 .ixd5 25.iLle3! �e6? 26.�xg6+-; 25. . ..te6? 26.�h7+
24.ge6! +- hd5 After: 24 . . . iLlxe6 25.dxe6, White has the deadly threat .tg6-f7, while in case of 24 ...�f8, White wins with he line: 25.!"lxf6 �xf6 26 . .ih7+
26.gxdS+ !"lxdS 27.f!rh4 1- 0 A70
37 Dreev - Milov Biel 1995
l.d4 ltlf6 2.c4 e6 3.ltlc3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ltlfJ g6 7.e4
We have entered one of the lines of the Modern Benoni.
7...a6!? Presently, this move is very fash ionable, but back in the year 1995, when we played our game, it was just becoming modern. It is quite dubious for Black to play 7... .tg4, because of: 8.�a4+! .td7 (or 8 ...iLlbd7?! 9.iLld2±) 9.�b3 and White
120
Game 37
obtains a clear advantage. The more popular move here - 7... ig7 is in a crisis nowadays, be cause after 8.h3 !? (White prevents the resource ig4, which is almost al ways favourable for Black in similar positions.) 8 ... a6 9.a4 0-0 1O.id3, White's position is evidently supe rior. Black has great problems to ac Black's queenside is not developed complish the thematic pawn-advance in similar pawn-structures - b7-bS. yet and that activity is bound to back In case of: 8 ... 0-0 9.id3 bS, White fire. It would have been more reason can enter the forced line: 1O ..txbS able for him to adhere to a waiting tiJxe4 11.tiJxe4 \MfaS+ 12.tiJfd2 \MfxbS strategy with - 12 ...\Mfb6, 12 ...ib7, 13.tiJxd6 \Mfa6 14.tiJ2c4 and it is quite or 12 .. J"!a7. Well, even in that case, I popular indeed, but as tournament believe White maintains a slight but practice shows lately, White does not stable advantage thanks to his harmo risk much in this position, while Black niously deployed pieces. must play quite precisely in order to 13.lOa4 J.d7 14.a3 It is rather dubious for White to fight for equality. The idea behind the move 7...a6 is continue with 14 ..txd6? !, because of: rather obvious: Black wishes to push 14 ....txa4 lS.\Mfxa4 \Mfxd6 16.eS \Mfd7! b7-bs. It looks like White can and and Black is suddenly clearly better. should prevent that maneuver with 14 ... a5 the natural move 8.a4. But in that case Black is in trouble after 14 ....txa4 after 8 ... ig4 !, contemporary tourna (In case of: 14 ...bxa3 lSJlxa3, Black's ment practice shows that Black ob pawns on a6 and d6 are so vulnerable that White's positional advantage is tains a good counterplay. 8.h3 b5 overwhelming.) lS.\Mfxa4 bxa3 16Jlxa3 Black has managed to push the tiJfd7 17.b4 and Black was evidently Sax, thematic move b7-bS, but he still has worse in the game Z.Polgar plenty of opening problems to solve. Aruba 1992. White enjoys a space advantage and Black cannot develop his pieces har moniously. -
9.J.d3 ig7 1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0 1l.M4 ge8 12.gel (diagram) This position arises practically by force after 7... a6!? and it is critical in that variation of the Modern Benoni.
12 ...b4?!
121
Dreev-Milov, Biel 1995
Black has an excellent counterplay.
15 .b:d6! •
That is White's best move, after which Black's position becomes quite difficult to defend.
15 c4 •••
This is not his best defence. He could have offered a more tenacious resistance with: 1S . . .ha4!? 16.%Vxa4 %Vxd6 17.eS %VxdS 1S ..ie4 %Vd7 19.%Vxd7 �bxd7 20.ha8 ElxaS 21.exf6 il.xf6, trying to save an endgame, in which Black would have a pawn for the ex change. It would have been far from easy then for White to press his ad vantage home. Now, he seizes the ini tiative completely.
16 .b:c4 �xe4 17 .if4 �a6 •
•
Black's position is tremendously difficult to defend after: 17 ...ha4 1S.%Vxa4 hb2 19.Elad1 ha3 20 . .ibS.
19 ... �xd6 This is relatively Black's best defen sive line; nevertheless he is already be yond salvation. In case of: 19...%Vxd6, I was winning quite easily after: 20.�b6 hb2 21.hf7+ ! cJJxf7 22.%Vb3+ .ie6 23.%Vxb2 ElabS 24.axb4 �xb4 (24... %Vxb4 2S.%VeS+-) 2S.i.h6! +-
20 .b:a6 .b:a4 •
It is totally hopeless for Black to play: 20 ... Elxa6 2 1.�cS Ela7 22.axb4.
2U�'xa4 l3xa6 2 2 .ig5! •
That is again the best move for White and now Black loses practically by force.
22 Jb(el+ 23.!hel tlIf5 •.
Or 23...%Vxb2 24.EleS+ �xeS 25. %VxeS+ .if8 26.i.h6+-
lS.d6!? %Vf6 It would not work for Black to try: 1S . . .ha4 19.%Vxa4 hb2, because of: 2o.hf7+ ! @xf7 21.%Vb3+ @f8 22.%Vxb2 and White's position would be easily winning.
24.geS+! �xeS 25.tlIxeS+ .if8 26 .ie7 h6 27.tlIxfB+ cJJh7 2S .ic5! •
•
This is the most precise line for White. The bishop is transferred to the a1-hS diagonal and Black comes immediately under a crushing attack.
2 S...g5 1 9 .ie3 ! That is White's most precise move. It is considerably weaker for him to continue with: 19.Elxe4?! Elxe4 20 ..ig5, since after: 20 ...%VfS 21.�b6 hb2, •
In case of 2S ...bxa3, White wins by force with the line: 29 ..id4 f6 30.%Ve7+ @gS 31.%VdS+ cJJf7 32.%Vc7+ @gS 33. %VbS+ @f7 34.tlIb7+ cJJgS 3S.%Vxa6. 2 9 .id4 f6 3 0 .tlIf7+ 'tthS •
Game 38
122
are: 1l.e4 ! ? 0-0 12.eS V!ie7 13.gge1, as well as: l1.ggc1 V!ie7!? 12.e4 0-0 13J:le1 and he tries to fight for a slight open ing advantage in both of them.
1l ... �e7 12.�c2 0 - 0
3ViJe5! This is a spectacular final strike. Black resigned.
38
D43 Dautov - Dreev 32nd Olympiad, Yerevan 1996
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 ..ig5 h6 6.J.xf6 �xf6 7.e3 �d7 8.J.d3 dxc4 9 .Axc4 g6 1 0 . 0 - 0 J.g7 •
It is insufficient for equality for Black to try 12 ... b6, because of: 13.J.bS! J.b7 (It is just bad for Black to play 13 ... cxb5?, since after 14.V!ic6, he has no satisfactory defence, in case of 14 ... ggb8, White wins with: lS.�d6+ 'ttf8 16.�xc8; lS ...'ttd 8 16.GGfc1+-) 14.ixc6 Elc8 15.ixd7+ V!ixd7 16.�c3! (Follow ing: 16.V!id3 eS!, Black's compensation for the pawn is more than sufficient.) 16....bf3 17.gxf3 and Black does not have enough for the sacrificed pawn.
13.J.b3 In case of 13.ggad1, it is good for Black to continue with 13 ... b6!, fol lowed by J.b7 and an excellent game for him.
13 e5!? •.•
This position is in fact the most popular tabia of the Moscow variation of the Slav Defence.
1l.�e4 White chooses here a rarely played line, which does not have the reputa tion of being too dangerous. The critical lines for White here
That move was a novelty at the mo ment the game was played. Black has no opening problems after it at all. He used to play before: 13 ... GGd8 14.!!ad1, or 13 ... Eld8 14.Elfd1; both these lines were no doubt completely acceptable for Black, but they were a bit passive.
14.ggfel
Dautov-Dreev, Yerevan 1996 The other lines for White are not so dangerous for Black. In case of14.lLlc3, or 14.lLlg3, Black can follow with 14... 'i!lh8! ? and he has no problems at all. After 14.B:adl, it is good for Black to continue with: 14. . .exd4 1S.exd4 lLlf6! ?, and his prospects are not worse to say the least. If 14.dS, Black can follow with: 14 ... cxdS Is.ixdS lLlb6 16.�b3 if5 17.'
14 'i!lh8! •••
It is less precise for Black to play here 14... 'i!lh7, because White can counter that with IS.lLlc3!?, in order to answer the attractive move for Black - IS .. .fS, with 16.e4!? and White's prospects are superior. In case of: 16... exd4 17.exfS, he is again slightly bet ter.
15.lLled2 Following: IS.dS cxdS 16.ixdS fS 17.lLlc3 e4 18.lLld4 lLleS, Black has a good game.
15 a:e8 ! ••.
That is the best move for Black. He is threatening eS-e4 and his prospects are already slightly better. White must defend very precisely.
16.lLlc4 e4 17.lLlfe5 lLlxe5
123 That move is a serious imprecision and my opponent has quite difficult defensive problems to solve after it. White could have preserved some thing close to equality with the follow ing semi-forced line: 18.lLlxe5 ixeS 19.d:��S �f5 20.e6 ! ? ixe6 (After 20 . . . fxe6 .:::J,V ?, the game becomes much sharper and Black might have some serious problems too, for example in case of 21 ...exf3 , White has the line: 22.e4 �g4 23.h3!? and Black is practi cally forced to enter the variation: 23 ... �S 24.g4 B:f8 2S.B:£1 '
18 ... if5 19.gadl a:f8 2 0 .lLld6?! Now, this is a grave mistake and Rustam's position becomes really difficult after it. It would have been much better for him after: 20.h3 ixeS 21.lLlxeS '
2 0 ....txe5 21.lLlxf5 gxf5 22.gd2 gad8 23.gedl 'i!lg7 24.V!i'c4 a:xd2 25.13xd2
18.dxe5?!
(diagram) That is a quite difficult position to defend for White, despite the fact that there remain opposite-coloured bish ops present on the board. Black's plan is very easy - it is connected with ad vancing the queenside pawns.
Game 38
124 c2 + 51. \t>c1 i.b4.
46 ...i.b4 47.�dl �aS 4S.�bl �a3 49.\t>e2 �a6 5 0 . \t>el ga3 51. \t>e2 �a7 52. \t>el \t>c5! 53. \t>e2 �a2 54. \t>dl \t>c4 I and my opponent, we were both in a time-trouble at that moment.
55.\t>cl? 25 �cS! .•.
Now, Black has the straightforward threat - b7-b5. .
26.a4 �c7 27.g3 a6 2S.i.dl It is not any better for White to de fend with: 28.a5 gd7 29.gxd7 �xd7 and his position is just hopeless, be cause of the vulnerability of his pawns on b 2 and a5.
2S ...b5 29.!:Vb3 !:Ve6 3 0 .!:Vc2 c5 31.axb5 axb5 32.b3 c4 33.bxc4 bxc4 34.�a2 \t>f6 35.!:VaS �cS 36. !:Va5 c3 37.�a2 h5!? 3S.h4 !:Vd6 39. !:Va6 gbS 4 0 . �xd6+ .b:d6
That was another serious mistake for White. He had better play 55.gel! and my task to materialize my advan tage would have been far from easy then. Indeed, I could have continued with: 55 . . .f4 ! ? 56.gxf4 f5 and White's defence would have been extremely difficult in that case too.
55... i.a3+? Here, it was my turn to make a mis take. After 55 . . . ga5 ! ?, White had only some purely practical chances left to save the game.
56. \t>dl i.b4 57. \t>cl? Now, White had to play again 57.gel!, creating maximal difficulties for me to press my advantage home.
57... ga5!? White is probably beyond salvation after that move.
5S.i.b3+ \t>d3 59.i.c2+ \t>c4 I was reluctant to venture playing the move 59 . . . \t>e2! in my time-trouble.
6 0 .i.b3+ \t>d3 61.i.c2+
It is too complicated for White to save that endgame.
41.i.c2 \t>e5 42.\t>f1 \t>d5 43.\t>el \t>c4 44.ga7 f6 45.�a6 gdS! 46.gal White was losing rather quickly in case of: 46.gc6+?! i.c5 47.gxf6?! gd2 48.i.d1 gxd 1 + ! 49.\t>xd1 \t>d3 50J3a6
125
Dautov-Dreev, Yerevan 1996
Meran" variation, because in case of 6.b3, Black has the powerful argu 61 .';tie2! 62.fucb4 @xf2 63 .tdl ment 6 ... .tb4!, with a good game for him. White is then practically forced to @xe3! 64.@c2 In case of 64.ixh5, Black wins with: play 7 ..td2 (As a result of 7.Wfc2 lLle4, 64 ... @d3! 65.gb1 f4. Black's position is at least equal, while 64 @f2 65 ..hh5 @xg3 66 .tdl after: 7. .tb2?! Wfa5 8.Wfc2 lLle4 9.gcl e3 67. @xc3 f4 68.gb6 gd51 69. Wfxa2, White loses a pawn by force.) and after 7...Wfe7!? (It is also possible .te2 Or 69.@c2 f5 70.h5 f3-+ for Black to continue with 7... 0-0 and 69 £3 7 0 .ixf3 @xf3 71.fucf6+ he obtains an approximately equal @g2 72.ge6 position.) Black has no problems at Or 72.h5 e2 73.ge6 It>f2 74.gf6+ all . I can quote here a classical exam It>e1 75.h6 @d1-+ ple of how to play that position with 72 @f2 73.gf6+ @el 74.@c2 Black. It was demonstrated by my coach - the international master Al and White resigned. He was understandably reluctant exander Filipenko. The game B.Kogan to play to the end of the variation: - Filipenko, Tashkent 1977, followed 74.lt>c2 e2 75JU8 gc5+ 76.lt>b2 It>d2 later with: B . .te2 0-0 9.0-0 dxc4 77.gd8+ It>e3 78.ge8+ It>d3 79J�d8+ 1O.bxc4 b6!? 1l.Wfa4 c5 12.lLle5 .tb7+ @e4 80.ge8+ ge5, in which the ap 13.lLlc6 ixc6 14.Wfxc6 gac8 15.Wfb7?! pearance of the new black queen was (or 15.Wfa4 cxd4 16.exd4 lLlb8! ?) 15 ... unavoidable. cxd4 16.exd4 e5 17.d5? ixc3 18.ixc3 Wfa3 19.d6 (19.gfcl lLlc5 20.Wfe7 gfeB 21.Wfd6 lLlfe4!-+) 19 . . .Wfxc3 and White D31 resigned. 39 Here the time pressure was over and there followed: •.
•
•
•.•
..•
•
•.•
Dreev
-
Galkin
Russia Ch, Elista 1996
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.b3 Grandmaster Artur Jussupow is the greatest specialist in that variation and it is still not analyzed so extensive ly. Its idea is to develop White's pieces according to the scheme .tb2, lLlf3, .td3 and to avoid the usual move Wfc2, which is hardly necessary for White in the plan with b2-b3 and .tcl-b2. After the habitual line - 5.lLlf3 lLlbd7 - White can only seldom manage to continue without the move 6.Wfc2, in the "Anti-
5 lLlbd7 ••.
This move is a bit passive and White manages to realize his idea in the opening after it and to avoid play ing the move - Wfc2.
Game 39
126 It is more active for Black to try: 5 ... ib4!? 6.�b2 �e4 7.Wc2 (In case of: 7.�ge2 c5 B.f3 �xc3 9.ixc3; or 7... Wh4 B.g3 Wf6, the position remains approximately equal.) 7... e5! ? and the situation is quite complex with mutual chances, Jussupow - Ivanchuk, Istan bu1 2000.
6.ib2 b6 7..id3 ib7 8.�:f.J ie7 9. 0 - 0 0 - 0
the game would have been approxi mately balanced. The move in the game is quite reliable too.
13.cxd5 exd5 In case of: 13 ... �xd5 14.�xd5, White has a long-lasting positional advantage after: 14... exd5 15.dxc5 bxc5 16.l'l:fdl, as well as following: 14 ... ixd5 15.dxc5 �xc5 16.b4 ixf3 17.gxf3 l'l:xd3 (or 17 . . . Wd6 IB.ib5 �b7 19.a3) IB.Wxd3 �xh2+ 19.
14.gfdl �8 15.�c2 gfe8 16.�1 a6 17.�e2 �e4!? This is Black's most active possibil
ity. It is worse for him to continue with
1 0 .�e2!? It is understandable that White's queen is much better placed on the e2-square in that scheme than on c2. His position seems to be slightly bet ter thanks to his more harmoniously deployed pieces.
17...i{B, because after: IB.�g3 �e4 19.dxc5 bxc5 20.ixe4!? dxe4 21.�g5, White maintains a clear advantage, since Black can hardly protect his e4pawn; the move 21.. :lWaB, would not work in view of 22.13 and he cannot play 22 ...exf3, because of the check mate on h7.
18.�g3 �df6
10 ... c5 lU�adl That is an imprecision. It is stron ger for White to play lU'l:fdl!?, with the idea to counter 11..:�fc7 with 12.l'l:ac1 and he maintains a positional pressure.
11 ...�c7 12.l'kl Here, I had to admit my mistake on move eleven, placing the 'wrong" rook on the dl-square.
12 J�ad8 •.
Black would have probably equal ized easier with the line: 12 ... dxc4 13.ixc4 (or 13.bxc4 l'l:adB) 13 ... a6 and
There arose a very complicated po sition with somewhat better chances for White.
19.a4!? That is an interesting plan and it leads to a very complex situation. I am
127
Dreev-Galkin, Elista 1996 threatening to push a4-aS and to dis rupt the homogeneous pawn-struc ture on Black's queenside. I would not have achieved anything with the stan dard line in this type of positions: 19.dxcS bxc5 20.tiJfs �fB 21. %lfa1 , due to: 2 1. . .d4! and Black would have an excellent counterplay. He can counter the attractive move for White 22.exd4, with the powerful resource 22 ...%lff4! and Black's initiative is very danger ous; now after: 23.tiJg3 tiJxf2 ! 24.c;t.xf2 tiJg4+, or 23.tiJSh4 tiJxf2 ! 24.c;t.xf2 tiJg4 Black's attack is quite powerful. Even after the relatively best line for White: 23.he4 he4 24.tiJg3 (24.tiJSh4?! gS 2S.dxc5 �d1+ 26.gxdl gxh4 27.M6 .txf3 2B.gxf3 h3! 29.%lfc3 �g7!-+) 24... hf3 25.gxf3 %lfxf3, Black maintains a clear positional advantage.
M2+ 23.c;t.fl he3-+) 20. . .�d6! ? 21. as hg3 ! ? 22.hxg3 c4 ! ? 23.bxc4 dxc4 24.hc4 (or 24.�c4 bS 2S.gc2 �d6) 24 ...bS 2S.�d3 %lfd6 and in both cases Black's compensation for the pawn would have been quite sufficient in view ofthe threat %lfh6.
2 0 .a5! ctJg4?!
It is too late now for that move. In case of 20 ...bxaS 2 1.dxcS, I would have preserved a clear positional ad vantage, but still that would have been his relatively best decision.
21.lUl �d6
Black's defence would not be any easier after: 21...bxaS 22.dxc5 hcs, because of: 23.�cS! tiJxc5 24.h:h7+ c;t.hB 2S.%lffS and White's attack would be so powerful that Black would hard ly be able to cope with it.
22.axb6
19 ...M8?!
This is a serious imprecision, af ter which White seizes the initiative completely. It deserved attention for Black to follow with 19...tiJg4!? and the position would have remained rather unclear with mutual chances for both sides. For example: 20.gfl (or 20.he4?! dxe4 21.tiJxe4 �4! 22.tiJg3 hg3 23.hxg3 i.e4 24.%lfa1 tiJxe3!+; 20.tiJxe4? dxe4 21.he4 �4! 22.hb7
22 . . .�h6 The other possible defence for Black - 22 ...%lfxb6 is not any better, because of: 23.h3!? ltJxe3 (It is too dubious for him to try: 23 ... tiJxg3 24.h:h7+ c;t.hB 2S.fxg3 tiJxe3 26. tiJgS, since Black's position is almost hopeless.) 24.fxe3 tiJxg3 2S.hh7+ c;t.hB 26.tiJgS and White maintains a very dangerous at tack after: 26 ... gd7 27. gxf7, as well as
Game 39
128 following: 26 . . .f5 27J:lxfS! 23.�fS ti'h5 24.h3 ti'xf5 Black's position is very difficult too in case of: 24 ... �gxf2 25J:l:xf2 ti'xfS 2 6.dxc5 ti'h5 27,glfc2.
25.dxc5 ! ! That is the fastest and the most spectacular road for White to vic tory. The simple line: 25.hxg4 '
25 ... �gf6 26.c6 ti'e6 After 26 . . .�c6 27.!'l:xc6, Black's position is hopeless. He is a pawn down and he has no active counter play whatsoever.
ning, but in that case there might re main a chance for me to fall into some trap in the time-trouble, like for ex ample: 3l...!'l:g5+ 3 2.l!i>hl �h5! 33.c8ti' �d7 ! ? 34.liJf3? fuh3+ 35.l!i>g2 ti'g6+ 36.lt>xh3 ti'f5+ 37.l!i>g2 ti'g4+ 38.l!i>h2 ti'h5+ 39.lt>g2 ti'g4+ and Black would have saved the day with a perpetual check.
31 . gfS 32.c7 �e8 .
.
In case of: 32 ... �xf3, White wins with 33.ie5! (But not 33.cxd8'h2? �g4-+) 34 ... ti'xg3+ 35.l!i>h1 'gl '
33.c8ti' gxf3 34.b8ti'
27.�d4 '
3 0 .gxh3 �e5 (diagram)
31.�f3 This is the simplest line for me. I believed, the move 31.c7 was also win-
Black resigned.
His counter attack is over now and White's colossal material advantage is indisputable! He has several extra
129
Dreev-Galkin, Elista 1996
Black had tested before only: 7... queens after all! The final position deserves a separate diagram, be .b:cS 8.if4 e5 (Or 8 .. 0-0 9.0-0-0 cause it is a quite rare occasion in the %Va5 lO.a3 /tJc6 11.b4 .b:b4 12.axb4 tournament practice in which White /tJxb4 13.id2+- Eingom - Vaganian, has three queens in a middle game! USSl% 1988; 8 ... %Va5+ 9.id2 'lWb6 lO.b4 This was an interesting tactical en ie7 11.a3 e5 12. /tJxe5 g6 13.cS;t; Ein counter. gom - Beliavsky, USSR 1987; 8 ... /tJa6 .
40
D37 Dreev - Vaganian European Club Cup (final) Budapest 1996
l.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�f3 d5 4.�c3 ie7 5.%Vc2 The idea of this order of moves is that after: 5 ... 0-0 6.cxd5 exd5 7.ig5, White can transpose to the Carlsbad variation.
5 c5 •..
This is the most energetic and the most principled move for Black. There was no definite evaluation of that vari ation at the time that we played our game.
9.a3 /tJg4 1O.%Vd2 0-0 11.b4±) 9 ..b:e5 ib4+ lO./tJd2 /tJc6 11..b:d4 /tJxd4 12. /tJxd4 0-0 13.e3 .b:d2+ 14.%Vxd2 /tJe4 15.%Vb4 %Vf6 16./tJf3 ig4 17.ie2 l%ad8 18.cS l%fe8 19.1%dl± Galliamova-Ivan chuk - E.Geller, Vienna 1993.
8.�xe5 a6 9.�a3 hc5 Black did not have to capture that pawn. Later, in the game Khalifman - Topalov, Dubai (rapid) 2002, Black found the correct reaction: 9 . . .0-0 lO.g3 %Va5+ 11.id2 %VxcS 12./tJd3 %Vc6 13.l%gl ifS 14.ig2 %Vc8 and he had a good compensation for the pawn.
10.�d3 ha3 Or lO ... ifS 1l.%Va4+.
1l.bxa3 0 - 0 12.g3! ge8 13.ig2 .ig4
6.dxc5 d4 7.�b5
14. 0 - 0 ! 7 e5!?N ••.
This is an excellent novelty and it provokes a new look at the entire vari ation with 5 ... cS. Or 7 ... /tJc6 8.if4 0-0 9. 0-0-0±
This move was quite unexpected for my opponent. White gives back his extra pawn, but he maintains a stable positional advantage thanks to the couple of active bishops and the pres-
Game 40
130 sure along the b-file. After: 14.f3?! if5 15.0-0 �c6, Black would have a quite sufficient compensation for the pawn.
14 .txe2 •••
Or 14.. .l:l:xe2 15.Yl!fb3±
15.l:'lel .txd3 16.fuLeS+ Yl!fxeS 17. Yl!fxd3 Yl!fel+?! It would have been better for Black to have played 17... �c6 and after 1BJ:l:b1, o r 1B.if4, my position would have been only slightly better.
lS.Yl!ffl �c3 19.l:l:bl �c6
22 J'!cS 23.J.b2 tOe6 24.J.h3 1!dS 25.�el ••
It deserved attention for White to try: 25.l:l:d1 ! ? Yl!fb6 26.ial±
25 �b6 26.c5 �c6 •.•
Or 26 . . .Yl!fxc5 27.�e6 fxe6 2B. �xe6+ rnhB 29.l:l:c1 Yl!fd6 30.�xd6 l:l:xd6 3l.f3±
27 .txe6 fxe6 •
It is a mistake for Black to continue with: 27...�xe6, because of 28.�xe6 fxe6 29.c6 e5? 30.c7 l:l:cB 31.�d4+-
2S.gdl
2 0 J�b3? Here, I overlooked an excellent possibility to increase my advantage, which however required exact calcula tions: 20.l:l:xb7! �a5 (That is Black's only defence. He was losing after: 20 ... �e5?, due to 21.l:l:b3+-) 21.ib2 Yl!fd2 22 .l:l:b4 E1e8 23.c5! l:l:e1 (or 23 ...d3 24.ix£6 gxf6 25.l:l:e4 l:l:dB 26.Yl!fa1 Yl!fg5 27.if3 f5 2B.1!a4+-) 24.l:l:xd4 Yl!fe2 (24 ... l'M1 + 25. rnxf1 +-) 25. 1!dB+ �eB 26.ic3 l:l:xf1+ 27.M1 Yl!fe6 28. �a5 h6 29.ig2 rnh7 30.c6+-
20 ...�a5 21.fuLb7 �dS 22J!bl In case of the not so good line for White: 2 2.l:l:xf7 22 ... �xf7 (22... l:l:bB 23.l:l:e7 l:l:b1 24.�e1+-) 23.�aB, Black's passed pawn becomes very powerful: 23 ... Yl!fc3 24.id5 d3.
2S tOe4! •••
Black's knight is headed for the g5-square and White must play ex tremely accurately. If: 2B...d3, then: 29.�e3 �d5 30.c6 �xc6 31.l:l:xd3 1!xd3 32.Yl!fxd3±
29.!!xd4 !!xd4 3 0 .txd4 tOg5 31. �e3 �f3+ 32.rnfl �d5 33.ic3 •
131
Dreev-Vaganian, Budapest 1996
33 e5? •••
Black had good chances for a draw in case of: 33 . . . �xh2+, but even then after the correct line for White: 34.<±>e2 ! (Or 34.<±>el eS=; 34.<±>gl �f3+ 3S.<±>g2 �d4+ 36.f3 �xa2+ 37.<±>h3 �c6 38.�e4 �d5=) 34. . .�xa2+ 3S. �d2 �c4+ 36.�d3, Black would have some serious problems, for ex ample: 36 . . . �xc5 (or 36 . . .�g4+ 37.f3 �xg3 38.�dB+ <±>f7 39.�d7+ <;!;>[B 40. �d6+ �xd6 41.cxd6+ - and ic3-e5; 36 ... �a2+ 37.<±>el±) 37.�dB+ �fB 38.�xfB+ <±>xfB 39.f3 gS (that is the only move for Black) 40.g4 hS 41.ie5 (Or 41.gxh5 g4 42.f4 g3 43.ie1 �g4 44.ixg3 �f6 4S.h6 �g4 46.h7 <±>g7=) 41...�xg4 42.fxg4 hxg4 43.<±>d3.
34.<±>g2 ! This paradoxical decision creates maximum problems for my oppo nent.
37..b:d2 <±>f7 38.ic3 .!lJc6 39. <±>h3 g5 Or 39 ... <±>e6 40.<±>g4 <±>dS 4l.f4 exf4 42. <±>xf4 g6 43.\i1gS+-
40 .<±>g4 <±>g6 41.f4
There still followed: 41 h5+ (Or 4l...exf4 42.gxf4 gxf4 43.<±>xf4 <±>f7 44. \i1f5 <±>e7 4s.if6+ <±>f7 46.igs+-) •••
42 .<±>f3 exf4 43.gxf4 g4+ 44.<±>e4 h4 45.f5+ <±>g5 46.f6 <±>g6 47.<±>f4 and Black resigned.
34 .!lJd4+? •••
Black lacks two pawns at the mo ment, but he should better wait with: 34. . . .!lJe1 + 35. <±>h3 .!lJf3 and it is not clear how White can win, for example: 36.g4 .!lJg5+ ! 37.<±>h4 (37.�xg5 �f3+) 37. . .h6!
35.f3 �xa2+ If 35 ... �xc5, then: 36.ixd4 exd4 37.�eB+ �fB 38.1WxfB+ <±>xfB 39.M2 <±>e7 40.<±>e2 <±>d6 41.\i1d3 \i1d5 (or 41... <±>c5 42.h4 <±>d5 43.hS+-) 42.f4 h5 43.h3 as 44.a4 g6 45.g4 hxg4 46.hxg4 \i1c5 47.g5 \i1d5 4B.a3+-
36.�d2 �xd2 +?! Black had more practical chances to save the game after a transfer to a king and queen endgame: 36. . .�dS 37.ixd4 exd4 3B.c6 �xc6 39.�xd4 �c2+ 40. \i1h3 �f5+ 41 .�g4±
D34
41 Dreev - Graf
FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.) Groningen 1997
This is the second game of my match against Alexander Graf He used to have a family name - Ne nashev then...) and it was played in the first knock-out World Champion ship. That was myfirst match, since I started fighting in the second round. The first game of the match ended in a draw and I tried there a novelty in the Meran variation (see my com ments to the game against M.Sadler, which was played in the next round of the Championship).
132
Game 41
This win in the second game en abled me to win the match and to qualify for the next stage. l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.�f3 �c6 6.g3 �f6 7 .ig2 .ie7 8. 0 - 0 0 - 0 9.dxc5 .ixc5 1 0 . .ig5 d4 1l.hf6 'lWxf6 12.�d5 'lWd8 13.�d2 •
16 ... 'lWe7?!N This novelty is not so good al though the idea of that move looks logical. Black does not wish to let White's knight to the cS-square. Evi dently, Alexander was reluctant to try the usual line 16 ... gb8, since after 17.�cS !? (I really intended to play like that...) White has a minimal, but very stable positional advantage thanks to his superior piece-coordination and Black's vulnerable d4-pawn. In case of 16. . . 'lWaS 17. 'lWb3 gab8 18.lLld6 Y:Ve5 19.'lWa3, White has again a slight long term positional edge.
17.�d5 'lWe5?
This variation of the Tarrasch De fence is well known in contemporary theory. Black's position is acceptable, but still I think White's prospects are preferable.
13 ... a6
That is already a serious mistake after which Black is clearly worse. He had to admit his mistake on the previous move and to go back with his queen - 17 ... 'lWd8, although after I8.lLlcS, White would have the initia tive and he would be clearly better. That would have been the least of evils for Black, though...
My opponent tries here a seldom played line, which is not so well ana lyzed. Black usually continues with I3 .. Jle8 and that seems to me to be more solid.
14.§cl .ia7 15. �f4! .id7 16.�e4
18.f4! This is an excellent move! That is the right way for White to maintain his advantage. The discovered check is not dangerous for him, as we are go ing to see later.
133
Dreev-Graf, Groningen 1997
lS
..•
d3+ 19.
That pawn-gobbling is not dubi ous at all. It is in fact a forced only move, enabling Black to continue the fight, despite being in a clearly worse position. He was losing af ter: 19 ... dxe2 20.lWxe2 IWb8 (20 ... IWd4 2 U!fd1+- ; 20 ... liJd4 21.lWd2+-; 20 ... lWe6 21.liJc7+-) 21.liJef6+ gxf6 22.liJxf6+ 'Ot>g7 23.liJxd7+-. It is also bad for him to defend with 19 ... lWd4?, in view of: 20.e3 IWxb2 21.lWxd3 and Black's position is hopeless, because of White's threats liJe4-gS and !3c1-bl.
20 .Ylxd3 j,g4! We have to admit that Alexander finds the best moves to create maxi mal difficulties for me to materialize my great advantage.
22 .Ylxd4 Naturally, that move does not lose the advantage altogether, but it enables Black to consolidate his de fence. It was much stronger for me to continue with 22.lWc2!, threaten ing to follow with 23.!3fd1 and 23.e3, trapping Black's queen in the middle of the board. H e has nothing better than 22 ... !3ad8!?, relying on the varia tion: 23.!3fd1 !3xdS 24.!3xd4 liJxd4 and although Black is definitely worse he can still fight. Still, instead of 23.!3fd1, White has a much stronger move - 23 .liJgS and Black practically cannot avoid entering the variation: 23 .. . g6 (23 .. fS 24.liJe6+-) 24.e3 1Wg7 (24 .. . IWh8 2S.!3xb7+-) 2S.!3xb7 and White's advantage is overwhelming. .
22 .ixd4 23.e3 j,a7 24.liJef6+ gxf6 25.liJxf6+ �g7 26.liJxg4 h5!? 27..ixc6 bxc6 .••
It is not better for Black to play: 27 ... hxg4?! 28.!3xb7 ixe3, because of: 29.!3b3! !3ac8 30.id7, since follow ing 30 . . .!3c7 (or 30 . . . !3cd8 31.ixg4) 31.ixg4, Black remains two pawn down.
2S.liJe5 .ixe3 2U!bl! IWd4 This is once again the only move for Black. He was lost after: 21...lWxe2? 22.liJef6+ gxf6 23.liJxf6+ 'Ot>g7 24. IWxh7+ 'Ot>xf6 2S.lWh6+ 'Ot>e7 26.!3xb7+ id7 27.lWxc6 and White's attack was crushing. In case of 27 ... lWe6 (or 27 ... !3fd8) White wins with 28.fud7+ !. It is also hopeless for Black to play 21... ixe2?, due to: 2 2 .liJef6+ gxf6 23.lWfS! and he has no satisfactory defence against the threat ig2-e4.
It is a quite difficult task to make a draw in a position like that in a practi-
Game 42
134 cal game. Of course, Black has some practical chances and White needs to play precisely to reduce these chances to a minimum.
gd4 39.tLld5 idS 40 .tLle3 gd3 41. gd5! �d5 42.<�Jxd5
29J�fel! Black's c6-pawn is not running away, so it is essential for White to im prove the placement of his rooks and to send Black's bishop to an inferior square i n the process.
29 id2 3 0 .ge2 ic3 31.gc1! id4 •.•
The transfer after: 31...heS 32. !:!xeS h4 (32 ... gfeS 33.ggS+! <±>fs 34.gxhS+-) into a rook and pawn endgame is a disaster for Black in view of: 33.ggS+ ! wh7 (33 ... <±>f634Jlxc6+-) 34JlhS+ Wg7 3S.gxh4 gfeS 36.gc2 and White's victory is just a matter of technique.
This endgame is an easy win for White after the trade of the rooks and he can try different methods too. Therefore, the rest of the game does not require any further comments.
42 Wg6 43.h3 ia5 44.We2 mg7 45.a3 idS 46. mf3 mg6 47.me4 f6 32. tLlxc6 if6 33.wg2 gfeS 34. 4S.� f5 49.tLle3 fxg4+ 5 0 .mxg4 a5 51.a4
35 ge6 •.•
•.•
D4S
42 Sadler - Dreev
Black would not achieve anything FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.) by pinning along the c-file after 35 ... Groningen 1997 gcS, since White can counter that with 36.gc2 and it is rather unclear what The result of this game was tre Black can do next. White is threaten mendously importantfor me, because ing to improve his position maximally thefirst encounter of that match had with the maneuver wf3-e4-fS and then ended in a draw, so the second game he will get rid of the pin easily with the had become decisive. The win here moves tLlc6-b4 or lDc6-d4 and Black's enabled me to qualify for the quarter situation would become even worse. final, but then in the tie-break I lost to
36.gc5 gd6 37.tLlb4 h4 3S.g4 Boris Gelfand.
Sadler-Dreev, Groningen 1997
13S
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�£J �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 �bd7 6.1d3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 8.1d3 1b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5 11.d5 �c7 Black's usual line here is - 1l ... c4.
The queen move seems to be quite attractive. This line became fashion able at the very beginning of the 90ies of the 20th century. White's standard reaction 12.'iWe2, after: 12 ...c4 13.1c2 1d6, leads to a different line (also well-familiar ... ) in which Black has no problems. In case of the immedi ate 12.1c2 ? ! , Black has a good coun ter argument and that is the move 12 ... 0-0-0!, after which White faces difficulties. For example, it is dubi ous for him to play 13.lDgS, due to 13 ... lDb6. After 13.dxe6, Black follows with: 13 ... lDeS! 14.'iWe2 lDxf3+ IS.'iWxf3 fxe6 16.1Wh3 't!;1bB and his position becomes even slightly better; if 17.'iWxe6?, then 17 ... ic8 . Accordingly, in case White intends to fight for the opening advantage, he should reduce the tension in the cen tre with:
12.dxe6 fxe6, and that already seems to be a cer tain compromise on his part.
13.1c2!?
There arose one of the most criti cal positions of the so-called Reynolds Variation. Black used to play before this game the move 13 ... c4, after which White could transfer into an endgame with: 14.lDgS lDc5 IS.eS �xeS 16J!el �d6 17.'iWxd6 ixd6 IB.1e3 0-0 19.E!ad1 !i.e7 20.ixcs ixcs 21.lDxe6 ElfcB 22.h3; but still the main line for White was - 14.lDd4!? Following 13 ... 1e7 14.lDgS 'iWc6 (It deserves attention for White to try IS.f4!?) IS.'iWf3 h6 16.'iWh3 hxgS 17.'iWxhB+ 't!;1f7 1B.'iWh3, White's chanc es are preferable. In my game against GM Evgenij Bareev (Elista 1996) I used a novelty - 13 ... 0-0- 0 ! ? and after 14.lDgS lDeS IS.'iWe1 1Wh6 16.f4 lDd3 17.'iWg3 c4+ IB.1e3 1c5 19.ixc5 lDxcS ! 20 .'t!;1h1 b4 21.lDa4 lDxa4 22 .!J.xa4 h6 23.lDf7 lDxe4, I had an excellent position. I was in a ti.me-trouble at that moment, so I
offered a draw. I remember I was afraid then of the move 24.'iWg6, but in that case Black can force a transfer into a clearly better endgame after: 24 ...lDf2+ 2SJ�xf2 'iWxf2 2 6.lDxhB ElxhB 27.'iWxe6+ 't!;1bB 28.1c6 1Wb6 29.'iWeS+ Vffc7 30.'iWxc7+ 't!;1xc7 31.ixb7 't!;1xb7. Earlier, I had tested that same posi-
Game 42
136
14.lDg5 tion in my game against GM M.Sadler The move 14 ... lt>e7? is unplayable, at the World Team Championship in Lucern (which was played sev because of 15.f4+14...lDfS eral months prior to the World FIDE This is Black's only move. Championship in Groningen). My op 15.f4 0 - 0 - 0 ponent played a much better move A.Nenashev played here 16.,*,e2, than E.Bareev - IS.,*,e2! and after 15 ... geB 16.f4 lDc6 17.lDf3! I had plenty of but after: 16...h6 17.lDf3 �4 18.eS problems to solve. Here, the line: 17... �!! 19.,*,xf3 �eS 20.,*,a8+ It>d7 lDd4 1B.lDxd4 cxd4 19.lDdl is not good 21.,*,xa6 �h2+ 22.lt>hl It>e7, I had a enough for Black to equalize. I played wonderful position. 17...gS!?, but subsequently I lost after: 16.t:iel!? That is Mathew's novelty! I had IB.eS! g4 19.exf6 gxf3 20.,*,xf3 lDd4 21.,*,hS. The position was complicated expected something of the sort, indeed, but still White's chances were though... clearly better. I had understood already that M.Sadler must have been perfectly up in anns against the variation with 13 ... 0-0-0, therefore I chose 13
••.
.ltd6,
trying a new idea, which was pre pared by me especially for that tour nament. Here, I should mention - this move could have hardly been a surprise for my opponent, because I had already 16 ...e5!? This was probably a nasty surprise tested that novelty three days earlier, in the previous round of the tourna for my opponent, at least because he ment, against GM Alexander Graf. went into deep thinking after that. Most probably he expected that I Naturally, M.Sadler should have expected that I was going to play 13 ... was going to play analogously to the .ltd6 once again. I thought that he was game Nenashev - Dreev: 16. . . h6?!. not going to have enough time for Here, it is dubious for White to con preparation and he would hardly be tinue with: 17.eS?! hxgS 18.exd6 ,*,xd6 able to manage to analyze thoroughly and Black's position is at least equal, such extremely complicated position. but after: 17.lDf3 �4 IB.eS! �cl Still, I must admit that M.Sadler had (IB ...�3? 19.�f4+-) 19.9xcl 19 ... prepared a good line, but later he failed lDdS 20.lDe4, White's initiative for the to find the best continuation and that pawn is very dangerous. led to his demise. M.Sadler decided to advance his a So, the game continued with: pawn:
Sadler-Dreev, Groningen 1997
17.a4!? This standard move turns out to be a serious imprecision in this situ ation. White could have entered the rath er unclear position after: 17.fxeS AxeS 18.lDf3 lDe6 19.1DxeS �xeS 20.1:%f5, or the more reliable line: 17.f5, which would have led to an approximate ly equal position in case of: 17. . . h6 18.lDf3 lD8d7=
17 b4 18.lDe2 •••
White has no compensation for the pawn after: 18.lDdS lDxdS I9.exdS exf4, as well as after: 18.fxeS AxeS 19.1DdS lDxdS 2 0.exdS AxdS! ?
137
20
•..
lDe6!
Black has seized the initiative, his pieces are very active and White has a serious problem with the defence of his e-pawn.
21.lDxe5 �xe5 22.EU'5 �d61 The centralization of Black's forces looks just threatening.
23.M4 It would have been preferable for White to defend with: 23.eS �c6 24.�f1, but even then Black's pros pects are superior after 24 ... lDe4.
23
••.
lDxf4 24.lDxf4
18 h6 19.fxe5 !xe5 2 o .lDf3 ••.
Sadler felt that things were going wrong and he offered a draw here. I had played rather quickly by that mo ment and I had spent very little time on my clock, while my opponent had been thinking a lot. Still, when I had a look at the chess-clock I noticed that I had about twice less time left than my adversary. It was amazing, but the electronic clock had gone out of or der ... Nobody knew at that moment what was going to happen in the game, but Mathew proved to be a real gentle man and he pointed out to the arbiter the correct time for each player...
This is the critical position of the game. GM Rainer Knaak pointed out in his comments that here the best for Black was: 24 ... b3 2S.l;dl �b6 26. ibl c4+ 27.g;,hl Axe4. Indeed, 24 ...b3 looks interesting. I think White must play 2s.Axb3 and after: 2S ...�d4+ 26.�f2 �f2 27.M2 lDe4 28.g;,gl, the position remains approximately · equal. There is another attractive possibil ity for Black - 24 ... Axe4, after which White has numerous moves to choose from: It is dubious for him to try 25. 1':lxf6? ! , because of 2S ... �d4+ (but
Game 42
138 not 25 ... �xf6? 26.�xe4 �d4+ - 26 ... It>b8 27.lDd5! - 27.�xd4 gxd4 28.lDe6 gd2 29.gcl±) 26.lt>hl �g2+ ! (or 26 ... iLc2 27.�e6 ! ; 26 ...�xf6 27.�xe4 It>b8 28.lDd5! �xb2? 29.gbl; 26 ... !'!he8? 27.l3e6; 26 . . .gxf6? 27.�e4 l3he8 28. lDe6 ! +-) 27.lDxg2 �xf6 and Black is better; White can also play - 25.gdl! ? �c6 26.gxf6 gxf6 27.l3xd8+ gxd8 28.�e4 �xa4 (28 ... l3e8 29.iLf5+) 29.lDd3 and the position remains unclear; It is also not easy to evaluate the position in case of 25.�e4!?, and 25 ... �d4+ 26.i>hl l3he8 (or 26 ... lDxe4?! 27.liJe6 �xb2 28.l3fl) 27.l3xc5+ �xc5 28.l3c1 lDxe4 29.l3xc5+ IiJxc5 30.�c1 i>b7 31.h3; as well as after 25 ... l3he8 !? 26.gxf6; As you can see - the position is extremely complicated. Presently, it seems to me that my most attrac tive possibility is the line: 24 . . .�d4+ 25.i>hl l3he8 26.gdl (26.lDe2 �e3 27.liJg3 �el 28.l3el lDd7 and the end game is better for Black.) 26 ...�xb2 (26" 'l3xe4 27.�f1±) 27J:1xcS+ i>b8 28.gbl (28J:!xd8+ gxd8 29.lDd3 �d4 30.�xb4) 28 ... �d4 29.�xb4 �xb4 30.l3xb4. However, I continued with:
mined the result of the entire match) against GM M.Sadler - a remarkable player and a true gentleman. No one can ever explain, without the involve ment of the mystical. .., how neither of us had noticed that after the move 26.lDe2 !±/+-, Black did not have the lifeline - l3d4 and as a result White wins the exchange, although I might still have had some chances to save the draw. . .
26 ... fucel + 27.1W2 fucd6 28. fucc5+ It>d8 29.lt>xel g5! That is the point! The forced line continues ...
3o .lDd3 b3 31.liJe5!? White plays quite enterprisingly. In case of: 31 ... bxc2?! 32.lDf7+ i>e7 33.lDxd6 i>xd6 34.l3xc2, Black's win ning chances are just minimal.
24 ghe8, •.•
having calculated a long varia tion, which happened in the game, though ...
25.�Ml fuce4?? After 25 ... �b6 !?, there would have arisen another complex position. (diagram)
26J�xd6?? Something quite mystical hap pened in that game (which deter-
31... liJd71-+
139
Sadler-Dreeu, Groningen 1997 This precise move guarantees Black's decisive advantage.
43
E81 Dreev - Kasparov Iinares 1997
32.liJf7+ �e7 33.liJxd6
It is too bad for White to follow here with: 33.l3c7? �xf7 34.ifS (34.h:b3+ �dS-+) 34 ... �6-+ and Black wins.
33 ... liJxc5 34.liJf5+ �f6 35.�bl
1.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3.liJc3 1g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.1g5 There arose the Zaemish variation ofthe King's Indian Defence.
6 ...a6
Black's main line here is - 6... cS 7.dS e6. G.Kasparov chooses a tricki er move order, which is well-familiar too.
7.�d2 liJbd7
The endgame is a technical win for Black now. White's g2 and a4pawns are under attack and Black's pieces are extremely active. He must be careful, though, because White maintains some drawing chances, due to the considerably reduced mate rial.
35...h5! 36.g3 liJxa4 37.�d2 �d5! This is the most precise move for Black. Now, White loses his b2-pawn and that leads to a winning endgame for Black. There still followed:
38.liJe3 �e6 39.�d3
It is evident that the passive move 39.�c1 is unsatisfactory for White, because after 39 ... �eS (with the idea to follow with �d4) Black wins easily.
39 ... liJxb2 4 0 ..ba6 �e5 41.�b5 �d4 42.h4 g4 43.liJg2 liJc4+ 44. .bc4 .bc4 45.liJf4 �f7 and White resigned.
8.d5!?
The other possibility for White is - 8.liJge2 cS. After 9.dS bS 1O.cxbS, Black has the resource 1O ...�a5 - that is the idea behind that move order.
8 ... liJe5!
In case of 8. . . cS?! you can see the idea of the move 8.dS: after 9.a4, Black has difficulties playing e7-e6, as well as b7-bS. Following 8 ... c6, White can respond simply with 9.liJge2.
9')�ld1
This move is a bit strange. The point is that after the natural line: 9.f4 liJed7 1O.liJf3 c6 (1O ... liJc5!?) I fail to stabilize the situation in the centre.
9 ... c6 1 0 .dxc6 bxc6 11.b3
Game 43
140 That pawn-structure is quite un
20
d4 21.ttle2 c5
•.•
typical for the King's Indian Defence. Neither side has any opening advan tage here and the position is quite complex.
1l '§a5 12.ttla4 •••
But naturally not 12.ttlge2? lDd3+ 13. �xd3 �xg5.
12
•..
�c7
Black could have entered the com plicated endgame after 1 2 ... �xd2+!?
13.ttle2 ttlh5 14.ttlec3 It was maybe better for White to play 14.ttlg3.
14 fS
The situation has been clarified. As a result of a series of imprecise moves in the opening, my position has be
•.•
come slightly worse. Black has a bish op pair and a powerful passed pawn in the centre. Additionally, G.Kasparov enjoyed a tremendous advantage on the chess-clock, while I was already entering a time-pressure. . . I still had some defensive resources, though. . .
22.ttlb2 a5 23.lMel .tfS 24.ttld3 a4 25.ttle5! axb3 26.axb3 M6 I case of 26 ... ElfbB. I had the excel lent possibility: 27.h4! Elxh4 2B.ttlxd4
15.exf5? !
EldB 29.�xb4 cxb4 30. ttlxf5 with some
I was afraid of the move f5-f4, but
compensation. The same line was ap
in case of 15.�e2 f4, White could con
plicable to the move 26 .. J1abB. After 26 ... Ela3 27.b4 �f6 2 8.�f2, it is
tinue with 16.c5 ! .
15 . . gx:f5 16.f4
not good for Black to play: 2B . . . ttlxf4?
16.�e2 f4.
29.ttlxf4 .txe5, in view of 30.lDd5.
.
16
•.•
ttlg4 17 .te2 h6 18 ..th4 d5! •
G.Kasparov seized the initiative here.
Therefore Kasparov preferred :
27 .b:f6 exf6 28.ttld3 ga3 •
This move forces White to play ttle2-
19 .ixg4
cl. On the other hand the knight on c1
•
It is also bad for White to follow
is not so badly placed, since I could
with: 19.0-0 d4, or 19 .cxd5 lDxf4 20.
have regrouped my knights, moreover
hg4 �e5+!
that Black's rook is misplaced on a3 as
19 fxg4 2 0 ••.
If 20.cxd5,
.
0
-
0
then
White cannot castle.
well. Accordingly, it was maybe worth 20 . . J3xf4
and
for Black to try immediately 2B ... ttlg7!? followed by h5-h4.
Dreev-Kasparov, Linares 1997
29.�ec1 �g7 3 0 .:i:1e2 h5 31.:i:1fel :i:1f7 32.�2 32.l2Jf2.
32 �a7 •••
I thought during the game that the move 32 . . . :i:1a8 was stronger for Black, but after 33.b4, I would have an ac ceptable game, for example: 33... cxb4 34.cS :i:1d7 35.�xb4 h4 36.�c4+ �h7 37.�b3.
33.�f2 h4 34.�e4 :i:1a6 It deserved attention for Black to try here: 34 . . ..b:e4 35.:i:1xe4 g3 with a rather unclear position.
35.�d3 1xe4 36.lhe4 :i:1a2 37. m,l h3 Or 37. . .:i:1d2 38.f5.
38.gxh3 gxh3 39.�f2 �a5 Or 39 . . .f5 40.:i:14e2 :i:1xe2 41.:i:1xe2 �a8 42.�xh3 :i:1a7 43.�f1 �h5 44.:i:1e6 :i:1a1 45J�e1=
40 .�d3?! I should have played here 40.:i:14e2. I have to mention that I played the second half of the game a terrible time-trouble (I had about a minute left for fifteen moves.). It is still diffi cult for me to imagine how I succeed ed to make so many moves against such a strong player under the cir cumstances (There was no time added
141 per move then... ), moreover that I had even managed to improve my position around move 40.
40 ... :i:1al?! After 40 ... f5 41.:i:1e5 :i:1a1, the posi tion is equal. The best for Black was: 40 ...�c3! 41.�xc3 dxc3 42.:i:14e3 �f5 43.:i:1xh3 (or 43.:i:1xc3 :i:1g7+ 44.�f1 :i:1g2 45.�3 !:!xh2-+) 43 ... c2 44.�d3 :i:1h7, with some advantage for him.
41.�f1 f5 42.:i:1xal �xal+ 43.:i:1el �a8 43... �b2= G.Kasparov played his last several moves in a time-pressure too. We were not recording the moves at that moment, so we had no idea whether the 40 moves of the time control had been completed. As a result, we played blitz a bit longer than necessary.
44.�xh3
44... :i:1a7! My flag fell at that moment and lat er it turned out that the time-control was over, so I had plenty of time to re consider the situation ... I understood that I would have great problems to realize my extra pawn, due to my vul nerable king. Therefore, I decided to force a transition into an endgame in which G.Kasparov managed to draw
Game 44
142 easily despite his one pawn deficit.
45.�g2 If 45.lLld3, then 45 . . .l::1 a3 46.�g3 Elxb3 47.Ele7 �a1 + 4B. �g2 �aB= In case of 45. �g1, Black plays 45... ga1 46.�f1 ga6.
45 �xg2+ 46.�xg2 ga3 47.ge5 fu:b3 48.gxc5 ge3 49.gd5. We .•.
agreed to a draw here.
D92
44 Dreev - Krasenkow European Club Cup (final) Kazan 1997
This game was played in the final of the European Club Cup and I be longed to the host team of the compe tition, since I was playingfor Kazan.
indeed in that case after 7.dxc5 ie6!? (Contemporary theory considers that move to be the most reliable.) B.lLld4 lLlc6 9.lLlxe6 fxe6 1O.e3, there arises a well familiar theoretical position in which I think White has more chanc es to fight for the opening advantage than in the lines after 6 . . . dxc4!? It is also possible for Black to de fend with 6 ... c6, but that move is not so often played, because after 7.e3, Black's position is solid indeed, but it is rather passive.
7.e4 ig4 8.he4 .hf3 9.gxf3 White cannot obtain anything much after 9.�xf3, due to 9 ... lLlh5.
9 ... c!Llh5 1 0 .ie3
1.d4 lLlf6 2.e4 g6 3.c!Llc3 d5 4.c!Llf3 ig7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.l:'lel This variation of the Gruenfeld De fence is very well known and it is also quite popular too until now.
l O ...e6
6 ... dxe4!? Michal chooses the most fashion able move, which leads to complicated double-edged positions. Among the other serious alterna tives for Black I have to mention 6 ... c5;
Here, my opponent decided to opt for a very old line, which had been tried often in the 70ies and the BOies of the last century. It is of course quite acceptable for Black, but I believe that it is stronger for him to continue with the move 1O ... e5!?, which has become quite modern in the last 5-7 years and it provides Black with an active coun terplay. The position is complicated and double-edged and his prospects are not worse at all after: 1l.dxe5 fixeS.
Dreev-Krasenkow, Kazan 1997 See the most interesting examples: 12.'lWxd8 l::!xd8 13.b4?! (or 13.lOe2 lOc6 and the game is quite unclear) 13 ... lOf4! 14.lOd5 (or 14.0-0 lOc6!) 14 ... lOg2+ 15.'itlfl lOxe3+ 16.fxe3 c6 17.f4 cxd5 18.ixd5 lOc6 19 .fxe5 lOxb4 and Black was even slightly better in the game Lputian - Ivanchuk, Elista 1998; 12.'lWb3 lOc6 13.'lWxb7 'lWf6 14.ie2 lOd4 15.lOd5 'lWh4 16.'lWb4 lOxe2 17. 'itlxe2 l::! ab8 and Black's initiative was at least good enough to compensate White's extra pawn, Dreev - Alter man, Elista 1998; 12.ih6 lOc6!? 13.,txf8 'lWxf8 14.lOe2 lOf4 15.lOxf4 .txf4 16J''lc3 lOe5 and Black had a sufficient compensation for the exchange in the game Rogers - Timofeev, Amsterdam 2005.
1l.f4 'lWh4 12.'lWf3 �c6 13.�e2 gad8 14.gdl
143 an even more meaningful novelty: 15.0-0!? (instead of the moves 15.a3, or 15.l::!gl), with the idea after: 15 ... l::!d7 16.l::!d 2 l::!fd8 17.l::!fdl to obtain a slight but stable positional advantage. It is also interesting to mention that a year later, at the Olympiad in Elista, that novelty (15.0-0!?) was tested in the game Lputian - Sutovsky, in which af ter: 17 ... lOa5?! 18.id3 c5 19.dxc5 ,txb2 20.,txa6! White obtained a great ad vantage. It might be quite possible that Michal Krasenkow had a very good idea about the strong move 15.0-0!?, therefore he had decided to avoid the theoretical move 14 ... a6.
15..\id3 c5 16.dxc5 hb2 17. O - O !? I would not have achieved much with 17.e5, due to 17... f6! and Black is not worse at all.
17 e5 18.f5 •.•
The arising position is also well known i n the contemporary tourna ment practice.
14... �a5N My opponent tries a novelty here, but it stilI does not solve all his open ing problems. Black usually played before 14...a6, but I was planning to counter that with
That is the critical moment in the game. The position is quite complex, but I believe White's prospects are su perior here.
18 ... �c6 This is an imprecise move, since Blackhad better play 18 ... g5!? 19.§d2 !? with only somewhat better position for White.
Game 45
144
19. .ic4 �f6?! That was also not the best. It was too dubious for Black to continue with: 19 ... �d4?! 20 .�xd4 .ixd4 21.1dS±j but it deserved attention for him to try 19 ... .id4 and his position would have remained quite defensible, although after: 2 0.fxg6 hxg6 2 1.�g2 ! ? White would be still better.
24 ... .hf2+ It is not any better for Black to defend with: 24 ... �xf2 + 2S.�xf2 1xf2+ 26.�xf2 �xe4+ 27.�e3 �d2 28. 1e6 �h8 29.Eld7 �fl+ (29 ... �c4+ 30.�e4 �d2+ 31.�dS+-) 30.�e4 �xh2 31.Elxd8+ �xdB 32.1d7 �g7 33. c6 �xc6 34 ..ixc6+-
25.Wg2 hc5 2 0 .Elxd8 ! It is not advisable for White to con tinue with: 20.Elb1?! 1d4 2 1.Elxb7, be cause of: 21...�aS 2 2.!:'1b4 �g4 with a good game for Black.
2 0 ... gxd8 21.fxg6 hxg6 22.gbl .id4? That is already a very serious mis take and Black can hardly hold the position after it. He had to play in stead 22 ... �aS! and although after 23.hf7+ �xf7 24.Elxb2 �xe4 2S.�xe4 iLlxe4 26.ElbS iLlc4 27.Elxb7+ he would remain a pawn down, but he would have still preserved some chances for a draw.
23.Elxb7 he3 (diagram)
Or 2S. . .�gS+ 26.�xf2 �g4+ 27. �xg4 �xg4 28.Elf4+-j 2S ... �g4+ 26. �xf2 �xe4+ 27.�e3+-
26.gxf6+ �h8 Or 26 ... �g7 27.!:'1xc6 ElfB 2B.!:'1c7+ 1e7 29. �e3+27.gxc6 gfB 28 .if7 �g5+ 29. �g3 and Black resigned. •
D2 0
45 Dreev - Svidler
Russia Ch (k. 0.), Elista 1997
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 �f6 4.e5 �d5 5.hc4 �b6 6 ..id3 �c6 7 .ie3 �b4 8..ie4 f5 9.exf6 •
Or 9.1f3? ! f4 1O ..ixf4 1fS.
9 . . exf6 .
That is the best move for White and Black's situation becomes hopeless af ter it.
We are playing one of the fashion able variations of the Queen's Gambit Accepted.
Dreev-Svidler, Elista 1997
10 .a3 In my later games, I preferred the move 1O.ttJc3 and I believed that White had greater chances to fight for the opening advantage after that move.
10
•••
f5 1l.axb4 .hb4+
This check used to be considered as the main line at the time that we played our game. In fact, it is stron ger for Black to play: 1l ... fxe4 and that move became more fashionable later. For example, in the game Ehlvest - Volzhin (Kochalin 1998) after: 12.ttJc3 ie6!? 13.ttJh3 id6 14.ttJgS ic4, Black equalized without any prob lems. Instead of 12.ttJc3, I tried with White against D.Adla (Internet 2002) the move 12.�hS+, but after: 12 ...g6 13.�eS+ mf7 14.ttJc3 hb4 1S.igS �e8 16.�xc7+ �d7 17.�g3 �g4, I did not obtain anything promising out of the opening. 12.ttJc3 fxe4 13.1ml5+ mfS 14.
145
White can enter the complicated vari ation after: 17.f3 ixc3 !? 18.fxe4+ mg8 19.ttJxc3 ixfl 20.�xf1, sacrificing the exchange. Indeed, that approach in cludes a certain degree of risk. Mean while, White can answer with a sim pler move and I like it much more - 17.�fcl!? I believe that White's compensation for the pawn is more than sufficient, because of his harmo niously placed pieces.
16.�xe4
16 �e8?!
�ge2
.•.
(diagram)
14 ie6 !? .••
This is an interesting novelty. Black usually played before 14 ...We8, but af ter lS.�h4, he still had some opening problems to solve.
15. 0 - 0 mg8 In case of: 1S ... �e8 16.�h4 ic4,
That is a serious mistake. It was more reliable for Black to play: 16 ... �dS 17.�h4 (or 17.ttJgS if7=) 17. . .�fS, with a complicated position, in which he has good chances to equalize. Now, I seize the initiative and Black's situa tion worsens very rapidly.
17.�xe8+ fure8 18.�fcl
Game 45
146 That move no doubt helps me pre serve a considerable positional ad vantage. It also deserved attention for White to try: 18J:'lxa7!?, not be ing afraid of the variation: 18 ...ic4 19.ttJ4g3 ia6, because after 20.1'kl ! ?, it was far from clear how Black could profit from the placement of his oppo nent's rook on a7.
18 ic4 19.ttJ2g3 idS •••
It is not advisable for Black to de fend with 19 ... a5? ! , because after: 20.ttJc5 id5 21.ttJd3! White maintains a great advantage in case of: 2 1.. .ttJc4 22.ttJxb4 axb4 23.b3 ttJxe3 24.fxe3 c6 25.e4, as well as following: 2 1...c6 22 .ttJxb4 axb4 23.!:'la7.
2 0 .id2! J.xd2?! It was better for Black to play 20 ... as, but even then after: 21.hb4 axb4 22.ttJcS, White would maintain a con siderable edge. Still, in that case my opponent would have offered a much more tenacious resistance than in the game. Now, Peter remains without a pawn by force in a very difficult posi tion and he only has some practical chances for a draw, relying mostly on my eventual mistakes.
24.dS! That is the best move for White, since he does not need to enter the fol lowing forced variation: 24.!:'lxc6 bxc6 25.!:'lxc7 r1le6 26,l;1xc6+ i'd5 27J::1 c7 i'd6 and despite the fact that he has three pawns for the exchange, win ning that position might turn out to be problematic.
24...J.xdS 2S.J!jxc7 r1le6? This mistake in the time-trouble speeds up Black's demise. He could have resisted more stubbornly with the move 2S .. J::1 d 8, but after: 26.ttJd4 l"lhe8 2 7.r1lfl, threatening ttJg3-fS and !:'la7-aS, Black would have hardly sur vived for long.
26.ttJd4+ r1ld6 27.ttJbS+ r1le6 28. ttJd4+ I decided to repeat the position a couple of times in the time-trouble in order to gain some time on the clock.
28
•••
r1ld6 29.�bS+
21.ttJxd2 ic6 22Jha7 r1lf7 23. ttJ£J! ttJd7
29 r1le7 .•.
Peter avoids the repetition - 29 ... 't!Ie6 and quite deservedly so. I had planned to counter that move with 30.�h5!, even before the repetition and Black had no defence against the numerous threats in that case. The
Dreev-Svidler, Elista 1997
147
move in the game does not provide my opponent with any chances to save the game either. There still followed:
3 0 .�fS+ 'it>f6 31.�e3 �b6 32.h4 1c6 33.�d4 �d5 34.�g4+ 'it>g6 35.h5+! and Black resigned. Peter decided not to prolong the purpose less resistance in an endgame with two pawns down after the practically forced line: 3S . . . 'it>xhS 36J:lxg7 gegS 37.gxgS gxgS 3S.�xc6 'it>xg4 (or 3S ... bxc6 39.�eS+-; 3S ... gxg4 39J::1 xb7+-) 39.fub7+-
46
D92 Dreev - Khalifman President's Cup, Elista 1995
This game was played in the semi fin al of the Presiden t's Cup. The first game ended in a draw. The winner of the second game would qualify for the Final.
l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.tLlc3 d5 4.tLlf.l ig7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.gcl dxc4 7.e4 c5 8.dxc5 �a5 9.e5 l3d8
tLlgeS IS. 0-0 ifS 16.gcdl ic2 17.gc1 if5 IS.gcdl ic2, the opponents shared the point. The idea behind White's move 14 is that now it does not WOI;k for Black to play: 14 ... lUxf2 IS.ghfl �g4, because of: 16.tLlc7 gbS 17.e6 with an edge for White and the routine line: 14 ...ih6+ IS.ltie2 hc1 16.gxc1 tLlgxeS 17.lUxeS �xeS 18. idS is obviously in favour of White. The move that Black played in the game (14 . . . tLlgeS) has a quite essential drawback. It enables White to trade the knights and that is clearly in his favour, because of his extra ex change.
This is the official theory. In fact,
14 ... tLlgxe5 15.�xe5 1xe5! Back in the past, when I found
it is stronger for Black to play as
the move 14.ltixd2 - that was about
V.Z\jaginsev did against me some time later (Dreev - Z\jaginsev, Es sen 200 0): 9 ... tLlhS. After: 1O .ie3 gdS 11.�d2 .txeS 12 ..txc4 �c6 13.�b3 e6 14.tLlf3 if4 IS.0-0 .txe3 16.fxe3 �xc5 17.tLle4 �e7 IS.g4, we agreed to a
coach A.Filipenko analyzed mostly IS ... lUxeS. Before this game however, we decided to refresh our analysis and we paid due attention to the move IS... .txeS as well.
a year before this game - I and my
(diagram)
draw.
1 0 .id2 �g4 11 . .txc4 tLlc6 12.�b5 l3xd2 13.�xd2 �xd2 + (diagram)
14. ltixd2!N In the game van Wely - Khalifman, Ter Apel 1993, following: 14.tLlxd2
16.'it>e3! That is the only move for White; otherwise he would not achieve much!
16 ...ifS Black complies with his fate. In
Game 46
148
is which White is better indeed, but the material is still equal. That game however, confirmed the old rule that "All rook and pawn endgames are a draw... " (Z.Tarrasch) ! ... Meanwhile, after the cold-blooded move 31.�e4! Black (as A.Khalifman said after the game too ...) would have hardly man aged to survive ... case he had followed with: 16 ...hb2 17.�bl, I would not h ave put my mon ey on him entering the final...
31... �xh6 32.�xh3 gxh3 33. gxh3 1f?g6 34.gxh4 1f?fS 35.);c4 gcS 36.�d4 );dS+ 37.lf?e3 );cS 3S. lf?d4 gd8+ 39.1f?c3 gcS
17.�c3 .td4 lS.�e2 heS 19. ghdl .td4 2 0 .h3 h5 21 ..td3
Or 39 . . . �dl 40.�f4+ �e6 41.�e4+ �d6 42.�d4+; 41.. . �f6 42.�e2 !
That is the beginning of an inte resting plan for me, which is not the only one available at all. Instead, it was more solid to continue with: 21.idS eS and for example - 22.b3, with an overwhelming advantage for White.
40 .b4 If?e5 41.geS+ If?d6 42.gfS f6 43.);a5
21. .te6 22 ..te4 .te5 23.�e3 g5 24.g3 .ixh3 25.�hl g4 26.�e2 .tgJ 27.�f4 �6 2S.hc6 bxc6 29.);eS h4 3 0 .);h5 If?g7 ••
43 gaS .•.
That is the best move for Black.
44.�d4 e5+ 45.�e4 �e6 46. ga6 fS+ 47.lf?e3 If?d6 48.a3 ghS! 49.�xa7 Or 49.bS ! ? �c8!
49 );hl 5 0 .);aS );bl 51.);dS+ If?e6 52.gd3 );el+ 53.lf?d2 );al 54. If?e2 ga2 + 55.lf?e3 );a1 56.gc3 �d6 31.);xh6? 57.f4 ga2 58.fxe5+ �xe5 59.1f?f3 That move was played as a result of gal 6 0 .);e3+ If?f6 61.�c3 �e5 62. the oncoming time-trouble and also gc5+ If?d6 63.);c3 of my desire to simplify the position. I had already dissipated the lion's It leads to a rook and pawn endgame share of my advantage, but still I in.•.
Dreev-Khalifman, Elista 1998 tended to play some more. .. Still, my opponent A.Khalifman was on the alert and he pointed out that after the move 63. . . r;!}eS, the position had been repeated for the third time... Draw. In the additional games, with a rap id time-control, Alexander made a draw with Black (and that again in a slightly worse rook and pawn end game, by a triple repetition) and then he beat me with White to reach the final. There he encountered Vassily Ivanchuk who won that match and won the tournament as well.. .
47
D2 0 Dreev - Rublevsky President's Cup, Elista 1998
This game was played in the President's Cup too. Meanwhile, in Elista preparations for the World Chess Olympiad were running atfull swing. City-Chess (consisting of cot tages for the teams and the players and playing - halls) was being built. The Casino had already been opened and everything was done so that the chess-players could enjoy losing their money, because on the casino tokens, besides the sum in US dollars, you could also see a chess-piece.
1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4.�fJ exd4 S.hc4 �c6 Sergey prefers recently the varia tion with 5 ...ih4+ for Black. 6 . 0 - 0 .te6 7.he6 fxe6 8.'Ml3 ed7 9.11*'xb7 gb8 1 0 .11*'a6 .td6 11. tlbd2 �f6 12.11*'d3 0 - 0 13.a3 My coach AFilipenko and I were
149 preparing for a long time an improve ment for White in this line and we thought that we had found the right path ...
13 ... aS In the first game of our match Ser gey replied here with: 13 ... �g4 and af ter 14.b3 �ce5 15.�xe5, he continued with 15 ...he5; following 16.g3 11*'f7 17.f4 �e3 18.�c4! �xc4 19.11*'xc4 (or 19.bxc4! ? id6 2 0.11*'xd4 !:lbd8 21.e5 ha3 22.11*'xa7±) 19...id6 20.e5 ie7 21. h4± I obtained some advantage (Dreev - Rublevsky, Elista 1998). It is therefore understandable why he avoids the move 13 ... tt:l g4 in this game and he goes for 13 ... a5. After some time, Sergey found an excellent counter measure against White's prophylactic plan, whose main idea is to restrict maximally Black's ac tive possibilities connected with some knight-maneuvers and then to exploit the advantages of White's position - 15... tt:lxe5! (This is a very important novelty!) 16.11*'xd4 tt:lg4 17.e5 (or 17.g3 tt:lxh2 18.e5 tt:lxfl 19.tt:lxf1 !:lxb3 20. exd6 cxd6 21.if4�; 18 ...11*'b5! 19.r;!}xh2 he5-+; 19.exd6 11*'xf1+ 20.tt:lxfl tt:lf3+ 21. r;!}g2 tt:lxd4 22.dxc7 !:lxb3 23.if4; 22 ...!:lb7 23.if4; 17...11*'e7! 18.11*'d3 tt:lxf2
Game 48
ISO and Black has the advantage) 17. . . ttJxeS lB.,ib2 !:'lbS! 19.ttJc4 (19.,ic3 !:'ldS 2 0.'?tIxa7 '?t1c6 21.ttJe4 !:'ld3 22 ..ixeS l"laB 23.ttJxd6 l"lxa7 24.ttJcB '?ticS; 19.!:'ladl !:'ldS 20.'?tIxa7 ttJg4-+) 19 ...!:'ldS 20 .'?tIe4 (20.'?tIh4 ttJd3 21.,ic3 !:'lf4 22.'?tIh3 ,ic5; 20.'?tIc3 ttJd3 21.ttJxd6 cxd6) 20 ... ttJd3 21.ttJxd6 (21.'?tIe2? ,icS 22.ttJe3 ttJxf2 ! ; 23.ttJxds '?tIxdS; 23.!:'lxf2 .ixe3 24.'?tIxe3 !:'ldl-+) 21.. .'?tIxd6 (2l...cxd6! ? 22.,ic3
bilities for an effective counterplay. I managed to exploit the advantages of my position rather quickly.
18 ...e5 Or IB . . . !:'lbS I9.eS l"lfbB 20.'?tIe4 '?tIdS 21.'?tIg4 g6 22.!:'lfdl.
l"lcB) 22.,ic3 '?tIb6 23.'?tIh4 ttJf4! 24.'?tIg4 (24.!:'lael '?tIxb3 2S.'?tIg3 !:'lf7) 24 ... !:'lf7 2S.l"ladl? (2S.!:'lael '?tIbS ! (or 2S ...'?tIxb3 26J:'lbl '?tIxc3 27J:lbB+ !:'lfB 2B.!:'lxf8+ \!txfB 29. '?tIxf4+) 26.a4 '?ticS) 2S . . . hS!-+ 26.'?tIf3 ttJh3 + ! Galliamova Rublevsky, St Petersburg 199B.
14.b3
19.
19 ... '?tIe6 2 0 .ttJcd2! This is an important part of my plan: the knight retreats temporarily consolidating the position in the pro cess and the rooks are exerting pres sure on the c-file.
2 0 ... !:'lb6 21.!:'lc5 !:'lib8 22J&fcl '?tIg6 23.
15.h3 Or IS.ttJc4?! ttJg4 16.h3 !:'lxf3 17.gxf3 ttJgeS IB.ttJxeS ttJxeS 19.'?tIdl ttJg6.
15 ... lLlh5 16.lLlc4 ,if4 Or 16 . . . ttJf4 17. .ixf4 .ixf4 18.eS.
17.g3 hcl 18.!:'laxcl Black's offensive has reached its dead end and he has no active possi-
This is a simple prophylactic - I am protecting the f2-square and Black is helpless against the triumphant march of White's knight to the c4-square.
24 ... h6 Or 24 ... '?tId6 2S. '?tIc4.
25.lLlc4 gbb8 26.lLlfxe5 lLlxe5 27.lLlxe5 '?tId6 28.gd5 '?tIe6 29.lLld7 ttJf6 3 0 .lLlxfS gxfS 31.l"lxd4 %Ve5 32.
Dreev-Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 1998
lSI
Strangely enough, E.Sveshnikov has preferred this strange looking move numerous times. Black's main defensive line here is - 8 ... lt) a6. 9.J.c5 lt)d7 1 0 .J.d6! In the game M .Sorokin - Svesh This is a game from the fourth round of the Championship of Rus nikov, Elista 1996, there followed: sia and in that year it was also a 1O.'lWd4 It)c5 l1.'lWcS b6 12.'lWa3 J.b7 Zonal qualification tournament for 13.lt)f3 It)e7 14J�dl It)c6 IS.lt)d2 'lWeS the World Championship. I made 7 16.lt)f3 'lWe4 17.lt)d2 'lWf4 18.lt)f3 Draw. 1 0 ...'lWg2 n.W 'lWg5 12.h4 points out of 11 and I tied fo r 5th_11 th places, half a point behind the win ners - P. Svidler, K.Sakaev, S.Shipov and A.Morozevich. Thefinal standing was decided only after the finish of all the ga mes and the calculation of the Bucholz coefficient when the gold medal and the title Champion ofRus sia was awarded to Alexa nder Mo rozevich. l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3. lt)c3 c6 Naturally, this is not the first time that I play against Evgenij Sveshnikov I had "borrowed' that idea during and he used to try every time with his my home preparation from the Dutch black pieces to profit from the fact grandmaster J.Piket. In the game Pik that I had been reluctant to enter et - van Der Werf, Netherlands 1998, the Slav Gambit. Here, in this game, I there followed: 12 . . .'lWaS 13.b4 'lWfS 14.'lWb3 liJgf6 IS.0-0-0 It)eS 16.'lWc3 had prepared the most principled line. 4.e4 dxe4 5.lt)xe4 J.b4 6.J.d2 It)f3 17.lt)f3 J.d7 18.lt)d4 'lWf2 19.13h2 It)e4 2 0.'lWd3 'lWh2 2 1..�h2 It)f2 2 2.'lWg3 tJd4 7.J.b4 'lWe4 8.J.e2 It)dI 23.'lWg7 1-0. E.Sveshnikov chose another way: 12 ...'lWf6 13.'lWb3 lt)e7 14.lt)e2 Or 14.J.b7? J.b7 1S.'lWb7 l3d8. 14 ... 0 - 0 15.lt)g3 liJe5 16.J.e4 It)5c6? This move loses by force. It would have been correct for Black to have de fended with: 16 .. Jle8 andlhadplanned to counter that with 17.0-0-0 and here it would have been bad for Black to play 17... lt)fS, because of: 18.J.f5! ef 8 ...c5!?
D31
48
Dreev - Sveshnikov Slst Russia Ch (swiss) St Petersburg 1998
Game 49
152
Or 26 ...,tc4 27. Wf4! 19.!:�hel f4 20 .lLle4 WfS 21.ie5? and 27.b3 White wins. The rest requires no comments at 17.hc6! bxc6 Black's relatively best chance is all. 27 !;g7 28.!;d6 gag8 29.gc6 17. . .lLlxc6. ic8 3 0 .!;f6 gh 31.�h5 gg5 32.�f7 18.lLlh5 Wf5 19.ie7 !;e8 !;5g7 33. �h5 gg5 34.�h6 g5g7 35. Or 19 ...We4 20.lt>d2. c5 !;e8 36.�h5 id7 37.�b2 1- 0 •..
49
BI 0
Balashov - Dreev Russian Cup (final), Samara 1998 This game was played in the round-robin tournament of the final for the Russian Cup. It coincided with the fa mous scandal of the year 1998 2 0 .lLlf6! gxf6 21.!;g1 It>h8 22. zoaa. The tourna ment made history 0 - 0- 0 ia6 with thefact that its prizejund dimin ished somehow in a magic way more tha nfourfold...
1.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 lLlf6 4.lLlc3 cxd5 5.cxd5 lLld5 6.lLlf3 lLlc3 7.bxc3 g6
E.Sveshnikov admitted after the game that he had been considering that position as quite acceptable for Black. He had overlooked the fol lowing powerful resource for White, though. . . : 8.d4 White has also tried here the move 23.�e3! !;e7 Black cannot save the day after: 8.h4, with which he attempts to punish 23 .. .!''l g8 24.Wh6 !3g6 25.!3xg6 fxg6 Black immediately for his last move. This does not bring White anything 26.!;d7. 24.Ml6 �g6 25.!;xg6 fxg6 26.h5 e5 promising, as the game A.Sokolov
Balashov-Dreev, Samara 1998
- Karpov showed and it was played as early as in the year 1987 in Linares. It followed with 8 ...i.g7 (That is Black's most principled answer, although he can try also 8 ... h6.) 9.hS lbc6 1O.!ibl Wlc7 1l.i.a3 iJS 12.!ibS a6 13.!ic5 Wld7 14.Wlb3 0-0 15.hg hg 16.i.c4 i.f6 17.d4 b5 18.i.d5 lbaS 19.Wld1 lbb7 and Black was better at the end. 8 � 9.i.d3 lbc6 1 0 . 0- 0 0-0 1l.i.e4 This is a new idea, with the inten tion to prevent Black's plan with b7 - b6. White plays more often here 1l.!ie1 and Black can counter that with 1l...b6, or with 1l ...i.g4. 1l J.d7 Now, Black changes his plan. I con sidered also the move 1l ...Wlc7, but I did not like the fact that I would not be able to play 12 ...b6 on my next move, because of 13.d5 lbaS 14.d6. 12J'!el Hc8 13.i.g5 !ie8 •••
•••
153 That is an imprecision. It deserved attention for White to play 15.Wle2. 15 lbc4 16.Yflb3?! Or 16.Wle2 i.e6. Possibly, White had to consider the line: 16.i.c4 !ic4 17.lbeS i.xe5 18.de (but not 18 .!ie5? f6 19.Wlb3 b5) and the game could have ended in a draw after all. Well, I had in mind the move 17... !ic7 too, with somewhat better chanc es for Black ... 16 b5 17.i.c4 Hc4 18.lbd2 It is quite dubious for White to fol low with: 18.Wla3?! !ia4 19.Wlc5 i.f6. It is extremely risky for him to play: 18.lbe5 i.e5 19.de (or 19.!ie5 f6) 19 ... !ig4! •••
•••
18 !ia4! That move is much stronger than 18 ... !ic7. 19.1be4 i.c6 2 0 .Hcd1? This is a mistake for White in a dif ficult position for him. After 20.lbc5, Black plays 20 ...!ic4, with the idea to follow with Wld8 - d5. 2 0 i.d5! 21.Wlb1 Now, it becomes clear that White cannot continue with 21.Wlb5, due to 2l...!ia5, followed by i.dSxe4 - and he loses his bishop on gS. 21 !ia2 22.lbc5 a6 •.•
14.Hc1 White's most logical reaction here seemed to be: 14.dS lbaS lS.d6 and I had intended to counter that with: 15 ... i.f6 16.i.xf6 (or 16.de i.e7 and Black is better) 16 ...ef. I believed that position to be better for Black as well. 14 lba5 15.i.d3 •••
.•.
.••
Game 50
154
D48
50 Timman - Dreev Olympiad, Elista 1998
33th
I tried an entirely new idea in one of the fashionable variations of the Meran system in this game against the world-famous grandmaster Jan Timman at the Olympiad in Elista 1998. This novelty was highly appre ciated by the experts of the Chess Informant and it was awarded a second place among the most impor tant theoretical novelties of the year.
Black's position is winning, but it still requires some precision. I was in a time-pressure, so I was trying to play the most reliable moves possible. 23.lLld3 lia4 24.lLlb4 �b7 25.f3 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlf3 lLlf6 4.lLlc3 tic7 26.tib3 e6 27.lial lic8 28.i.d2 e6 5.e3 lLlbd7 6 .i.d3 dxc4 7..b:c4 b5 8.i.d3 i.b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5 gal 29.lial tid6 It was even stronger for Black to n.d5 %Vc7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.i.c2 have played 29 ...%Vb6. 30 .�e3 e5 31.lidl ed32.�d4i.d4 33.lid4 tic5 34.lLla2 lie8 35.%Vdla5 36 .tid2 \tlg7 37.lLlc1 i.d5! 38.lLld3 tib6 39.h4 h5 40 ..t>h2 �c4 •
13 ...%Vc6 !?N I used to play before the moves 13 .. 0-0-0 and 13 ...i.d6 in this posi tion. The idea behind 13... %Vc6 is that I had managed somehow not to Black is preparing i.e7; meanwhile spoil anything in the time-trouble and he prevents the move e4-eS, because here, my position was already totally in case of 14.eS, he captures the pawn winning, thanks to the a-pawn. There 14 ... lLlxeS and lS.lLlxeS is impossible due to IS ...%Vxg2 - checkmate! still followed: 41.lLlf4 a4 42.%vf2. White sets J.Timman responded with: 14.i.f4!? up his last trap, as he is threatening lLlf4xhS 42 ...tif6 0-1 I have to mention that even after .
.
155
Timman-Dreev, Elista 1998
this game, my novelty - 13 ...�c6 was later after that game. Playing against played only very seldom in tourna L.Fressinet (Enghien les Bains 2003), ment practice. For example M.Sadler Lautier continued with 16.eS!. After: a bit later in the same year at the tour 16 ...ttJd5?! 17.ttJxd5 �xdS lS.gfd1 �c6 nament in Hastings played otherwise 19.i.g5! ttJb6 (or 19 ... .txgS 20.gd6! - 14.�e2 and after: 14... i.d6 15.ttJg5 �cS 21.ttJxg5 with an advantage for i.eS 16.f4 i.d4+ 17.Whl e5 lS.a4 .txc3 White) 20.l3xdS+ .txdS 21..txdS WxdS 19.axb5 axb5 20.gxaS+ i.xaS 21.bxc3 22.l3d1+ ttJdS 23.ttJgS Wc7 24.�g4 wb6 0-0 22.c4 b4 23.i.b2 he obtained a 2S ..txh7 and White was clearly bet slightly better position. Black had to ter. But as grandmaster Lutz recom continue however with 14...i.e7 with mended later, Black had better play: an unclear game, because he should 16 ... ttJh5 !? and if 17.i.d2 !? (or 17.i.e3 not be afraid of 15.e5 in view of 15 ... 0-0 18.i.e4 �b6), then 17... 0-0 IS. ttJdS 16.i.e4 ttJxc3 ... i.e4 �b6 (or 18 ... �c7 19.ttJg5 .txe4 K.8ashikiran in his game against 20.ttJcxe4 i.xg5 21..txg5 ttJf4 22.�e3 C.8andipan (Chalapathi 2 000) tried with an advantage for White) 19 .ttJg5 the move 14.l3el. Black answered with: i.xe4 20.�xe4 g6 and White is prob 14 ... l3dS 15.�e2 i.d6 16.ttJg5 i.b8. He ably only slightly better. could have also played 14... i.d6 with 16 0 - 0 17.gfel the idea to counter 15.ttJgS with 15... Or 17.e5 ttJh5. ic7!? 16.£4 0-0. 17 ttJh5 18.i.ct 14 gd8! It is rather dubious for Black to follow with 14 ... i.e7? ! 15.eS! ttJd5 16.i.e4. 15.�e2 ie7 •..
•.•
•.•
16.l3adl The specialists of that vanatlOn of the Meran system for White tried hard to find an improvement. Joel Lautier managed to do that five years
18 ... 1Wb6! It is bad for Black to play lS ... ttJf4? 19.ixf4 l3xf4 20.ttJdS! ; as well as IS... �c7? 19.�d7 1f 19.g3, then 19 ... ttJhf6 and Black is already slightly better. 19... gxd7 2 0 .ttJe5 ttJf6 21.ttJxd7 ttJxd7 22.e5 c4 23.ie3 'i:fc6 24.ie4 �c8
156
Game 50
After 32.lMlg4, I was planning to In case of 24 ... lMlc7?, White coun capture on f2 - 32 ... liJxf2 ! -+ ters with 25.lMlg4! 2S.J.c2 lMlc6 26.J.e4 lMlc8 27. White would not have solved his J.c2 problems with: 32.1Mlh4 3 2 ....bd4 Here, after lMlc7, the position would 33 . .bd4 M3 ! 34.gxf3 (or 34 . .bd3 have been repeated for the third time cxd3 35.gx£3 lMlc2) 34 ... 1'3(4. with a draw. 32... J.xd3? 27.. ,likS Naturally, I was also considering This move leads to a slight edge for capturing with the pawn - 32 ...cxd3. After 33 .1'3c1, I managed to see only: Black. 33 ....bd4 34JlxcB �xcB 35.'i;Yg4!, but I failed to notice the move 33 ...d2, which would have consolidated my advantage after: 34 . .bd2 1Mld7 35.l!xc5 lMlxd4 36.J.e3 lMlxb2. Accordingly, being in a time-trou ble and having overlooked 32 ... cxd3 !, I dissipated my advantage. Timman defended tenaciously: 33.lMlg4 l'3e8 34.h4 But not 34.liJe6?? M8. Now, my opponent should have 34 ... 1Mlb7 continued with 28.a3 !?, but even then Planning to follow with 35... lMle4. after 28 ... lMlc7! Black's position would 3S.b3! M8 36.hS Wlf7 37.l'3d2 still be slightly preferable. as Instead of that J.Timman played: 28.l'3d1? and that allowed me to push 28 ...b4! 29.1Mlh5 White saves the game neither af ter: 29.liJa4 1Mlc6, nor with: 29.liJbl b3 30.axb3 cxb3 31.J.d3 liJxd3-+ 29 ...liJd3 3 0 .liJe2 If 30 J!xd3, then 30 ... l!f5!-+ 3 0 ...J.e4! Now Black has an overwhelming positional advantage. Here, I had only several seconds 3l,otd4 J.cS left on the clock and I decided to offer Here, Black was winning immedi a draw, which was accepted by Tim ately after - 31...J.g6! 32.lMlh3 liJxb2 man. You should not forget that game 33.hg6 hg. was played in an Olympiad and after 32.J.xd3 an eventual mistake in the last few
157
Timman-Dreev, Elista 1998
moves of the time-control, not to even a trap after: IS... lI.'lc3 16.1/Nc2 1/NdS speak about the possible loss on time; 17.lI.'lf3 !;d8 18.ltle1 id4 (that was the that would have ended in a disaster for only move) and fortunately Black had the Russian team. After for example: saved his piece, but after 19.id2, I had 38.bxc4 .bc4 39.lI.'lc6 idS 40.lI.'lxaS serious problems to worry about. lat YNc7 41.lI.'lb3 1/NxeS, Black is naturally er, in the same year 1989 in Odessa, slightly better, but there is of course a in my game against V.Tukmakov, I lot of fight left. played: 15... 0-0 16.ltle4 id4 17.ltld6 ic6 18.ih7+ Iiixh7 19.1/Nxd4 f6 and my position was quite acceptable. In SI D47 the year 1994, while I was prepar Sasikiran - Dreev ing for my game against V.Epishin, I Linares (open) 1999 found out that Black had an excellent move here: Thefollowing game was not played IS ... YNc7! in the famous super-tournament, but This resource seems to be good in an ordinary Swiss open (although enough to equalize. quite strong, though ...J. I was feel 16J;'lel );ldS 17.ltle4 ,te7 1S.ltlg3 ing rather comfortably and I took the first place with +7... l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�c3 �f6 4.e3 e6 S.�f3 �bd7 6.,td3 dxc4 7.hc4 bS S.,td3 ,tb7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .�a4 cS H.eS ltldS 12.dxcS The other possibility for White is - 12. 0-0 cxd4. 12 . . .ltlxcS 13.ltlxcS hc5 14. 0-0 h6 lS.ltld2
I had played that position before. The first time it was against R.Dautov (Tbilisi 1989) and I had fallen into
lS ...g6! That is a standard plan for Black in this variation. He cannot castle, so he solves the problem with his king, by transferring it to the g7-square. 19.id2 In case White had played at first 19.1/Ne2 Iiif8 and only then 20.id2, he would not have allowed the line ltldS c3, which would have led to a very UD clear position. 19 .. 1iif8 I was also considering the move .
Game Sl
158 19 ... lLlc3!? Here, it is bad for White to play 20.�c2?, because of 20 ...�d7 2U!e3. Now, Black has the pleasant choice between: 21...�cS!? 22.bxc3 bxc3 ! ? 23.�xc3 �e3 24.�xe3 �xd3, with the idea: 2S.�b4 �dS 26.f3 �xeS and the move 21. .:�c6 !?, since White loses immediately after: 22 . .ltil lLle2+, or 22J!f3 lLle2!-+, while after the only possible answer - 22.f3, Black has plenty of attractive possibilities. Still, it is quite sufficient to look at the move 2 2 ... lLldS to understand that Black is clearly better. In fact, the right con tinuation for White is - 20.�c3! bxc3 2 1.�c2 and the position remains un clear and double-edged. Therefore, I chose the move 19. . . @f8.
2 0.�e2 wg7 2Ulacl �b6 22. gedl Sashikiran is playing a new move here. The abovementioned game against V. Epishin, followed with: 22. �c4 �d4 23.�b3 hS 24J'ledl �b6 Draw.
The position in the game is quite amazing with the fact that on the board we are having something like a mutual zugzwang. Each side has prob lems finding moves, which would not compromise his position ... Black can-
not play, for example: 22 ... �d4?, be cause of 23.Elc4, while in case of 22 ... Eld7, he must consider 23.�bS. Fortu nately for me, my a-pawn had no idea about all that, so I had a useful move, that did not spoil anything ... :
22 ... a5! 23.h3 White's h-pawn tried to imitate its counterpart... Pay attention to the fact that nei ther here, nor on the previous move, White could have played: 23.lLIe4?, due to 23. . .�d4; or 23.Elc4?, because of 23 ...�a6.
23 ... a4 24.�b5? White was so happy with the pos sibility to play something active, but this aggression led to his demise. It is of course quite difficult to recom mend moves like 24.@hl, but Black will have problems to create anything sensible, for example after: 24 ... hS, White plays +2S.lLIe4, while in case of 24 . . M7 2S.�bS. White's best bet was to continue waiting with the move - 24.�c4... -
24...�g5! White can hardly save the game af ter that move by Black.
25.ixa4 White loses following:
2S.�gS
159
Sasikiran-Dreev, Linares 1999 hxg5 26.ixa4 lLlf4 27.litfe3 litfa6 28. lhd8 l'lxd8 29.!b3 ixg2 30.M !a8-+
2S .ll:lf4 ! 26 .i\xf4 • .
•
exd4 S.ixc4 lLlc6 6. 0 - 0 .ie6 7. ibS ics S.tLlbd2 tLlge7 9.lLlgs YMd7 1 0 .tLlxe6 YMxe6 1l.lLlb3 YMd6
If 26.litfg4, then 26 ...lLld3.
26 ... .i\xf4
27.gc4 I had relied here only on the move 27.litfg4, after which Black could have played simply 27. . .!e5 with a tre mendous advantage; although it was also possible to continue with: 27... .bc1!?, without being afraid of the line: 28.lLlh5+ M8 29.litfxb4+ litfxb4 30.l'lxd8+ rile7 3 Hld7+ rile8! and Black was winning.
27 ... ixg3 2S.l'lg4 litfaS 29.l'lxdS gxdS 3 0 .i.bS Here, I could have won quite simply with the move 30 .. Jld5-+, but what I played in the game proved to be quite sufficient too:
3 0 ...YMxbS-+ 31.litfxbS gdl+ 32. YMfl ih2+ 33.rilxh2 gxfl 34.gxb4 .ids 0-1
We are playing one of the new and rather fashionable variations of the Queens Gambit Accepted. In my game with S .Rublevsky (Elista 1998) I tried here to improve White's play with the move 12.litfg4. The game continued with: 12 ... 0-0 13.if4 tLle5 14.ixe5 litfxe5 15.£4 and after: 15... d3 ! 16.rilh1 litfxb2, there arose a complex position in which Black's chances were not worse at all.
12.M4 YMxf4 13.tLlxcS 0 - 0 Now, it is not so precise for White to play 14.g3, as it happened in the game Stocek - Ashley, Budapest 1997, as well as in the rapid-chess game: Dreev - Svidler, Elista, 1997. Black retreated in both games - 14...litfh6, overlook ing the wonderful possibility to equal ize outright with 14... litfd6!, following with the idea - 15.lLlxb7 litfb4.
14.l'lcl S2
D20 Dreev - Svetushkin Linares (open) 1999
1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4 .!ilf3 •
That position was played for the first time in the game Granda Zuniga - Ibragimov, New York 1997, in which Black tried: 14... lLle5 15.g3 litfh6 16.£4 a6 17.!e2 b6 18.liJb3 d3 19.!h5 tLl5c6 2 0.i.f3 and White had a great advan-
Game 52
160 tage. In the later game on the same subject however, G.Giorgadze - Sve tushkin, Ubeda 1999, White preferred 17.�d3 and after: 17 ... lt:lxd3 18.llJxd3 l"iac8 19.1Wf3 b6 20.b4 lWe6 21.l"if2, he had some compensation and he later even won the game, however I would not venture to recommend that line to you. It deserves attention for Black to play: 14 ... l"ifb8, as he did in the game W.Browne - Kaidanov, Denver 1998, which continued with: 1S.g3 1Wh6 16.f4 a6 17.�d3 as and the position was quite unclear. Black tried a novelty here in our game and I considered it as quite du bious: 14 b6?!
That is what my opponent had re lied on, but after:
18J'�xc6! It:lxc6 19.hc6 it turned out that Black had to com ply (and for a long time at that!) with an inferior position. Now, he cannot play: 19 ... lWxd3 20.ha8 IWd2 2U'ld1, because White remains with an extra piece. Black played instead: 19 ... l"iad8 but once again he was faced with great problems. Well, I needed to play very precisely in order to materialize my advantage too. Here, for example, it would have been rather inaccurate for me to con tinue with 20.lWc4 (planning to ad vance my b-pawn). in view of 20 ... l"id6, followed by l"id6xc6. I answered with: 2 0 .1Wb5! IWf6 15.llJd3! After the exchange of queens: 20 ... Now, things look quite grim for IWxbS 2 1.hbS l"id6 22.l"ie7 c6 2 3.�c4, I Black in case of: lS ... lWd6 16.�c2 It:leS think I should win this position. 17.lWxc7 IWxc7 18.l"ixc7 It:lxd3 19.hd3 21.b4 l"ld6 22J3cl lWe6 23.Wc4 llJg6 20.f4 l"ifc8 2U'ld7 l"id8 2 2.l"ixd8 a5! l"ixd8 23.g3 l"ic8 24.l"idl and the end Otherwise, after the trade of game is lost for him. After lS... lWf6, queens, (Black's position might be White can follow with 16.f4. even more difficult with queens pres 15 lWxe4 16.l"iel ent on the board ...) Black can remain If 16 ...lWg6, then 17.lWf3. with a weak pawn on a7 and that spells 16 Wd5 17.lWa4 1Wf5! rather quick demise for him. •••
••.
•••
161
Dreev-Svetushkin, Linares 1999
24.b5 gfd8 25.�xe6 I was in some time-pressure here, so I decided to exchange queens, af ter all. Meanwhile, I had foreseen the possibility to go with my king to the d2-square.
25 !he6 26.c,t.f1 g6 27.�f3 ge7 28.�e2! c,t.g7 29.c,t.el gdS 3 0 .a4 gd6 31.c,t.d2 • . .
order to win the game and it consists of two parts. The first one - White needs to deploy his pieces on their ideal squares (The bishop must be placed on d3 and the knight on the eS-square.). The second part of the plan requires from White to create an additional weakness in Black's camp (there is one - the pawn on c7... ). Af ter that explanation I hope you wiIl understand much easier what is going on in the next few moves.
36.�dl ge7 37.gc4 gg7 38.f4 ge7 39.�f3 gg7 40 .gcl ge7 41.�dl gb7 42.�e2 gg7
31...h6 Suppose I am not going to criticize Black's move g7-g6, but Black's last move is obviously unnecessary, be cause his pawn-structure on the king side becomes much more vulnerable after it. He had better not push any more pawns (They only go forward, you know that, don't you... ?) and ma neuver with his rook along the d-file. My task to press my advantage home would have been much harder in that case.
32.�f3 g5 Black is persistent with his faulty strategy.
33.kh5 f5 34.g3 �f6 If 34 ...g4, then White plays 3S.h3 gxh3 36.�f3 ! and his advantage is de cisive.
35.i.f3 gg7 I only need to complete my plan in
43.c,t.el! This is one of the most difficult moves in our game. White's king had just been centralized a short while ago. Now however, the situation has changed. The knight, as I told you al ready, must go to the e5-square. If my opponent after that decides to capture gSxf4, then I will have to take with the pawn. Accordingly, my king must control some squares along the g-file. That is exactly the reason I am send ing it back to the kingside.
43 ... ge7 44.c,t.f2 c,t.g7 45.gc4 c,t.f7 46.�e5 c,t.f6 47.�d3 gg7 48.gcl ge7 49.h4!
Game 53
162
I was maneuvering with my rook in Now, White's pieces are perfectly placed. The first part of the plan has order to wait for the opportune mo been fulfilled. In fact Black "helped" ment to play ltJe5-g6. in the accomplishment of the sec 57... gd6 58.�g6 ond part, because he created another Mer: 58 ...l"le3 59.l"lxc7 l"lxg3 60. weakness on f5 himself. White's last i.c4, White wins, because of the check move is an attempt to clarify finally mating threat. the situation on the kingside. 58 ged7 59.�h4! gd5 6 0 . �xf5 49 . g4 This is the simplest... 60 . gxf5 6Ute6 gd6 62 .gxd6 exd6 63 ..hf5 cj;>xf5 64.cj;>d3 Black resigned. The king and pawn endgame is just lost for him. •..
.
.
..
D3 0
53 Dreev - Grisehuk Ubeda (open) 1999 Black will have to play that move sooner, or later. Here, I was consid ering the immediate move 50.h5, but I was afraid of the possibility - 50 ... l"lde6, followed by an exchange sacri fice on the e5-square. White's bishop on d3 would not be protected then and Black would be able to win an ad ditional tempo with the move l"le3. I preferred instead 50 .cj;>e2 - since my king could go to the centre once again. 50 gd5 51.lk6 l"ld6 52.ge4 gdd7 It was more resilient for Black to defend with 52 . . .h5, but even then af ter 53.gel, followed by �c4, cj;>d3 and i.b3 etc. White had to win the game easily. 53.cj;>d2 gd6 54.h5! gd5 55.lk6 gd6 56.gel gd5 57.l"le4 .•.
Thefollowing game was played in a very strong open tournament in the Spanish town of Ubeda. That tourna ment was played immedia tely after the Open in Linares and the great ma jority of the players had participated before that in Linares too. Some of them continued to live in the same ho tel in Linares and they used to arrive to the round in Ubeda by bus. Among the strongest players who partici pated in Linares, V.Bologan and A.Sokolov did not take part in Ubeda. Meanwhile, VAkopian had appeared and he became number one in rating at the tournament and he finished with 7 1/2 points out of1 0 . I made 8 1/2 points and I shared 1st-2nd place with grandmaster Konstantin Landa, who was the leader throughout the tour nament. I managed to catch up with him only at the end and before the
Dreev-Grischuk, Ubeda 1999 last round my tie-break coefficient (Bucholz) was better than his. There was a mishap though, almost all of my opponents lost in the last round. Meanwhile, K. Landa was almost losing his last round game against G.Giorgadze - he had less time on the clock, a difficult position and he was against a strong opponent a t that. Konstantin survived however and he won that Swiss Open event, thanks to his superior Bucholz. This was my first encounter with Alexander Grischuk, who was only 15 years old then and his talent was just striking (I had already written about that in the media). His play at that time was very impressive indeed.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ltlf3 c6 4:�c2 id6 This is a seldom played move and as we are going to see soon it has quite serious drawbacks. My next move will emphasize them:
163
6.,ih4 Naturally, not 6.,id2, because of 6 ... f5. 6 ... ltle7 7.,ig3! After: 7.e3 liJf5 8.il.g3 liJxg3 9.hxg3 fS, it is possible that White is still slightly better, but I wanted to obtain much more out ofthat position. Black's king shelter has been weakened, while the bishops will be soon exchanged. 7 c5 !? In case of some calmer develop ments, Black's compromised pawn structure enables White to rely on ob taining a considerable opening advan tage, for example: 7 . 0-0 8.e3. 8.dxc5 This is the best for White. I would not have achieved anything with 8.cxd5, because of 8 ... cxd4. White has no advantage either after: 8.e3 cxd4 9.exd4 liJbc6. 8 il.xc5 9.cxd5 �a5 Or 9 .. ib4 1O.liJbd2 (lO.liJc3!?) 10 ... ed 1l.e3 and White is better. .•.
..
•.•
5.ig5! In case of 5.g3, Black can enter a 1 0 . liJbd2 position from the Stonewall Dutch It is amazing, but that same po system with 5 .. .f5. sition happened in my game with 5 ...f6 Artashes Minasian, several days ear It is less precise for Black to play: lier in another open tournament in 5... ltle7 6.e3 f6, due to 7.if4+. the neighbouring Spanish town of
Game 53
164 Linares. My opponent offered me a draw then. We had spent about an hour and fifteen minutes on the clock on seemingly simple moves. I took an other 15 minutes, but I failed to find any clear way of obtaining any advan tage, so I agreed to a draw, moreover that draw enabled me to preserve my leading spot in the tournament. After the game we spent a long time analyz ing the foUowing position: 1O.lLlbd2
ment - 16.lLlh4.
14.Ae2 If White manages to castle, Black position will become critical.
14.. J:kS Here, Black seemingly considered that he had prevented White from cas tling.
ed lUkl lLla6 12.e4! and Black has problems. Still, after the natural reac tion 1l ... Ab6 12.e4 (It is not advisable for White to try: 12.WEc8 lLlc8 13J%c8 Ad8.) 12 . . . lLlbc6, Black is perfectly OK. Of course, it never entered my mind that I was going to have that same po sition on the board again so soon and
I had not made up any decision about how White was supposed exactly to fight for the opening advantage. Still, the ideas, which we had found in our analysis with Minasian, helped me solve that problem over the board. I understood that the move 1l.l"lc1 was unnecessary, moreover it was even harmful. Instead, it is much better for White to follow with 1l.e4, as it hap pened in the game, emphasizing the drawbacks of Black's position. I suspected that my young op ponent, who had also played i n that tournament, must have studied thor oughly the final position of our game with Minasian.
10
•••
exd5 11.e4 lLlbc6
Nevertheless I played:
15. 0 - 0 ! ixf2?! Now, Alexander had to comply un willingly with entering the endgame after: Is... lLlbds 16.lLlb3 WEb6 17.lLlxc5 l"lxcs, but even then following 18.WEb3! with the idea 18 . . .WExb3 19.axb3 a6 20.Ac4, he would have to solve plenty of problems.
16.lIxf2 l"lxc4 17.lLlxc4 WEdS In case of 17 ... WExds, White plays 18.l"1dl and Black's queen has no good squares to retreat to.
lS.lLld6 'itlfS 19.1Lle5 l"lgS After 19 ... Ae8, it is possible for White to continue with: 20.lLlxe8 WExe8 21.d6 lLlec6 22 .d7 WEe7 23.l"1dl.
2 o .lLlxb7Y9cS 21.lLlc5 Af5 22.gc1 lLlbd5
In case of: 11...dxe4 12.WExe4 lLlbc6 13.Ac4, Black has nowhere to castle. 12.exd5 lLlb4 13.WEc4 Ad7! After: 13 ...ifs 14.lLlb3 lLld3 Is.'itle2
time to make up my mind. At first, of
WEb 6, White has the powerful argu-
course I was considering to give back
(diagram) Here, I had a choice and I took a long
Dreev-Grischuk, Ubeda 1999
the extra material with: 23.lLlcd7 ixd7 24J�xc8 hc8 - and I would have had a clear advantage. I studied too the line: 23.ia6 �e8 24.ic4 �hS, but I failed to find any thing decisive. Finally, it just struck me: 23.i.b5! This is the best move. 23 �a8 It is evident - that is Black's only move. This is an excellent illustration of the theme of "domination". 24J�xf5! That is the right decision! This is a rare sight to witness - four white pieces and even one black in the middle are arranged picturesquely along the fifth rank! 24 lt)xf5 25.i.c6 •••
165 This move loses immediately, but even after: 25 ...�c8 26.lt)ed7! (but not 26.ixdS fxeS 27.lLle6 1t>e7 28Jk8 �xc8 29.heS? lLle3) 26 ... lt>e7 27.hdS lLlxg3 28 .!!e1 It>d6 (or 28 ... lt>d8 29.ixg8) 29.ib7 �e8 (29 ...�d8 30J�e6 1t>c7 31. !!c6# - this is a very beautiful check mate, indeed!) 30.�xe8 !i:xe8 31.hxg3 !i:e2 32.b3 !i:xa2 33.g4! White should gradually win. 26.ha8 It)e2 27.1t>f2 It)xcl 28. hd5 fxe5 29.lt)d7 It>e7 3 0 .hg8 It>d7 31.lt>e3 1- 0
B18
54 Tiviakov Dreev Ubeda (open) 1999 -
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.lt)d2 dxe4 4.lt)xe4 if5 5.lt)g3 i.g6 6.i.c4 e6 7.lt)le2 It)f6 8.lt)f4 i.d6
•••
25 lt)xg3 •.•
I had played that position before and I had encountered: 9.c3 lLlbd7 10. �f3 lLlb6 1U.b3 It)bd5 12.lt)xg6 hxg6 13.igs ie7 14. 0-0-0 b5 with a rather unclear game, (Rublevsky - Dreev, Elista 1998), as well as: 14.0-0 It)d7 1S.he7 �xe7 16. !!fe1 It)Sf6 17.a4?! �d6, with a better position for Black, Pedzich - Dreev, Linares 1999.
Game 54
166
Naturally, Sergey Tiviakov knew 13.0-0-0, because of: 13 ... cxd4 14. about these games, so he tried to con lhd4 i.e5. 13.dxc5 �xc5 14 ..1xf6 tinue in another fashion: That is an admission that his pre 9.h4 �c7 1 0 .�xg6 hxg6 11.�f3 vious actions were wrong and it is in �bd7 12.�g5? fact another mistake. White's position becomes even worse after that. He is possibly beyond salvation already. He cannot play: 14.�xb7 �b8 15.�a6 �b6 16. �a4 E:b4. It is also too bad for White to follow with: 14.�e2 hg3 15.fxg3 �xg5 16.hxg5 E:xhl. He could have tried: 14.i.e2 �xc2 15.0-0 �xb2, or 14.i.b3 �e5 15.�e2 �xg5 16.hxg5 E:xh1 17.<±>d2 �xa1 (18.c3 0-0-0) 18.�xb7 18 ... E:d8, but White's compensation is This position has also been tested insufficient after that too. into practice numerous times and His only correct defence could be: Black has always allowed White to 14.�b3!?, preserving some defen castle long. For example, back in the sible position. For example: 14 ...�c8 year 1953, at the tournament in Bu 15.i.d3 ! �e5 16.i.e2. charest, in his game against Isaak 14 �xf6 15.i.b3 0 - 0 - 0 Boleslavsky, the player with Black I was also considering here: 15 ... B.Sliwa chose: 12 . . .�a5+ 13.c3 0-0-0 �e5 16.�e2 �xb2 (if 17Jl:d1, then 14.0-0-0. Black has also tried here: 17.0-0-0 and Black is better) 17.�xb7 12 ... 0-0-0 13.0-0-0. �a1 18.<±>d2 i.b4! and Black wins. The I found over the board a simple move in the game however is at least counterstrike after which White's po that strong too. sition became immediately critical: 16.c3?! 12 c5! Here, Sergey should have thought This concrete approach was quite about playing: 16.0-0-0 E:xh4! 17. surprising for my opponent and he E:xh4 �g5 Cif 18.�e3, then 18:�xh4 took a whole 40 minutes on the clock. 19.�xa7? i.f4) 18.<±>bl �xh4 and I Possibly, he considered opening of the would have to work hard to material game as contrary to the spirit of the ize my advantage. position - he had the bishop pair after (diagram) all. Still, the tactical complications are 16 hg3! 17.�xg3 in favour of Black and he should al In case White had captured with ready think about how to save the the pawn 17.fxg3, I would have fol game; moreover it looks like it might lowed with: 17.. :�e5 18.<±>f1 �e4. 17... E:h5 be even too late for that. For example, it would not work for him to play Black's position is totally winning. •..
•.•
•..
Tiviakov-Dreev, Ubeda 1999
167
The material is equal, but White has no useful moves whatsoever. The rest of the game does not require any com ments at all: 18. 0 - 0 �Mh8 19.Wif3 gxh4 2 0 . g3 gh2 21.i.c2 g5 22.i.e4 g4 23.Wif4 eh5. White resigned.
55
B13
Semeniuk - Dreev Russian Club Cup, 8t Petersburg 1999 We played this game in the Rus sian Club Cup, where the team of "Khimik" (from the city of Bjelorech ensk), for which I was playing, became the Champion ofR ussia and I managed to achieve the best result on board one. The battle between the leaders of the teams was very tough indeed. The level of opposition corre sponded to category 13 and there were players like A. Khalifman (you will see my victory against him later), V. Zvjaginsev and S.Rublevsky.
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4. i.d3 .!Qc6 5.c3 (diagram) 5 ... Wic7!? This move prevents the develop ment of White's bishop to f4 and I
believe that is Black's most active and logical alternative against the exchange variation of the Caro-Kann Defence chosen by White. In fact, Black plays much more of ten in the tournament practice the variation: 5 ... lLlf6 6.M4 ig4 7.eb3 Wid7 8.lLld2 e6 9.lLlgf3 .bf3!? 1O.lLlxf3 i.d6, in which he does not have any se rious problems, but I think that in stead of the standard move 7.Wib3, White should start his fight for the opening advantage with the rarely played move 7.lLlf3 !? Now, in case of 7... e6 8.eb3! Wic8 (or 8 . . .ixf3?! 9.Wixb7 ixg2 1O.Wixc6+ lLld7 lU'igl±; 8 ...Wid7? ! 9.lLle5±) 9.lLlbd2 i.e7 1O.0-0, or7... a6 8.lLlbd2 e6 9.0-0 i.d6 1O.,bd6 Wixd6 11.Wic2, his position is somewhat better. 6.lLle2 The idea of that move is easily un derstandable - he wishes to develop his bishop with tempo to the f4-square. It has a certain drawback though; the knight is much more passive on e2 than on the f3-square. It seems at first sight that the move 6.ig5 is more active and logical, but in that case after: 6 ....!Qf6!? 7. .!Qd2 i.g4 8.lLlgf3 e6 9 .i.h4 i.d6 1O.i.g3 i.hS, Black has no problems at all, IIlescas
168
Game 55
Cordoba - Anand, Linares 1994. Black should not be afraid either of the line: 8.�bl (instead of 8.l2Jgf3), because he can counter that with 8 ... eS, reaching a complicated and approximately equal position, as well as with 8 ... e6; here, after 9.l2Je2 i.d6 !? Black's chances are at least equal, while following 10.l2Jg3, it is good for him to continue with 10 ... l2JhS !? and after: 1O.ixf6 gxf6 11.l2Jg3, he can play: 11 . . . 0-0-0!? with a slight ly better game. 6 i.g4 7.£3 i.d7!? It is also possible for Black to try 7...i.hS with a complicated position, but the move in the game is stronger. Its idea is to counter White's thematic move 8.i.f4 with the active 8 ... eS!?, just like it happened in the game. S.i.f4 eS!? This was a powerful move, since I was not reluctant to opt for a position with an isolated d5-pawn. 9.dxeS l2JxeS l 0 . 0- 0 i.d6 ••.
My opponent has not achieved anything much out of the opening. The position resembles a lot one of the variations of the French Defence - the Tarrasch system (l.e4 e6 2 .d4 dS 3.l2Jd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5), but White's situation is clearly worse, since his
f3-pawn does not beautify his posi tion at all, mildly speaking ... Black is already slightly better, but not more than that. 1l.lt>hl ltle7 12.ltla3 a6 13.ltlc2 0 - 0 14.ltled4 �acS lS.ltle3? That is a serious mistake after which White loses a pawn by force and his position becomes very difficult. After lS.�d2 Black's situation would have remained slightly better thanks to his superior piece-coordination. lS ... ltlxd3 16.hd6 ltlxb2 17.�3 In case of: 17.ixc7? ! ltlxdl 18.�axdl �xc7 19.�d3 �fc8, Black's victory is just a matter of time. 17... �xd6 1S.y,yxb2 White is already a pawn down, meanwhile his c3-pawn is very weak and he can hardly save the game. The encounter enters the technical stage of the realization of Black's advan tage. lS ...bS 19.�fel �feS 2 0 .�adl h6 21.�e2 �c5 2 2.�d3 ltlg6 23.ltlb3 y,ye7 24.g3? After that mistake, White's posi tion becomes completely hopeless. He had better defend with 24.!!d4, but that would have hardly changed the outcome of the game...
Semeniuk-Dreev, St Petersburg 1999
169
24 ... tt)e5 It was even stronger for Black to play: 24 ... ig4! 25.2:f2 (or 25.tt)d4 hf3+ 26. tt)xf3 �e4-+; 2S.�g2 .bf3+ 26. �xf3 �e4-+) 25 ... tt)e5 26.tt)xd5 (or 26.2:d4 i.xf3+ 27. �g1 �g5-+) 26 ... �e6 and White would have no satis factory defence in sight.
25.tt)xd5 �d6 26.2:d4 ic6 Black was also winning with the following forced variation: 26 ... tt)xf3 27.tt)e7+ �xe7 28 .Elxe7 Elxe7 29.2:d1 2:ce8 and White would be defenseless against the threats ic6 and 2:e2. 27.tt)f4 .txm+ 28.�gl �b6 29. l3f2 ib7 3 0 .tt)d2 �c6 I had here two extra pawns and a crushing attack, There still followed:
31.tt)d5 tt)g4 32.l3f3 l3el+ 33.tt)f1 gce8 34.�d2 �c5 35.l3f5 gle5 36. l3xe5 tt)xe5 37.�g2 tt)c6 and White resigned.
D92
56 Dreev
Khalifman Russian Club Cup, 8t Petersburg 1999 -
l.d4 tt)f6 2.c4 g6 3.tt)c3 d5 4.tt)f3 ig7 5.,U4 0 - 0 6.2:cl dxc4 7.e3 Until this game, whenever I had played against Alexander, I had tried only the move 7. e4 in this position.
7...ie6 8.tt)g5 id5 9.e4 h6 1 0 . exd5 h:xg5 1 1..ixg5 tt)xd5 12.ixc4 tt)b6 13.ib3 tt)c6 White has two possibilities here in this variation: 14.d5 and what hap pened in the game:
14.tt)e2
14 ...�d6 The Encyclopedia of Chess Open ings recommends the move 14... tt)aS. For example, that was played against me by Michal Krasenkow in our game in (8henyang 1999). One other game, played on that theme, witnessed the move 14 ... aS (G.Giorgadze - Avrukh, Bugojno 1999). Alexander tried here a novelty.
15. 0 - 0 e6 It deserved attention for him to play 1S .. .1''l ad8! ? 16.�c2, which hap pened in the game Bareev - Huzman, Bugojno 1999. After the move in the text, I took a long time on the clock, because I had a choice between 16.�c2 and 16.h4. I would have been definitely bet ter after: 16.�c2 l3ac8 17.l3fdl, with the idea to counter 17 ... tt)xd4 with 18.tt)xd4 ,bd4 19.he6 ! . Now, the line: 19 ...fxe6 2 0.�xg6+ �h8 21.�hS+ �g8 2 2.�g4 loses for Black. But even in case of: 19 . . . 'iffxe6 20.gxd4, should Black defend in the best possible way 20 ... 2:fe8! I still have superior chanc es after 21.h4, while capturing on a2 is extremely dangerous for Black, for example: 2l...'iffxa2 22.hS and if 22 . . . �e6, then 23.hxg6. Following 23 ... fxg6, then I can continue with 24.1"1h4
170 and my attack would be very power ful, while in case of 23 ...Yffxg6, then - 24.%Yd2, with the idea - l3g4. Still, I had decided to play the move 16.M...
16.h4 ltlxd4 17.ltlxd4
That is the critical position of the game. The aggressive move 17. . .hd4, probably looked to Alexander as un necessarily risky. During the game I also considered that White's initia tive would be running smoothly and unopposed. That is not quite correct, though . . . After 17. . . hd4, White has several possibilities: IB.hS hb2 19.%Yg4 (It would be rather dubious for White to follow with: 19.hxg6?! %Yxdl! 20.l3cxdl cS.). Here, it is a mistake for Black to play: 19 ... %Yd4 20.%Yh3 ixcl? 21.hxg6 %Yg7 22.�f6 %Yh6 23.gxf7+ l3xf7 24.Yffxe6 l3afB 2S.%Yg4+ @h7 26.�c2+. In stead, he should follow with: 19... .b:el 20. .b:c1. Now, it deserves atten tion for him to continue with: 20 ... %YeS! ? 21.hxg6 ltldS. If 20 ... %Yd3, then 21..b:e6 and after: 21...fxe6 22.%Yxe6+ @h7 23.%Ye7+ White forces a draw. Still, Black can try instead 21...l3aeB and White's attack ebbs away...
Game 56 The second possibility for White is - IB.l3xc7!? As Khalifman told me after the game, he was afraid of that move most of all. Here, after: IB ... %Yxc7 19.%Yxd4, it seems reasonable for Black to play: 19 .. ,l'!ad8 20 ..b:d8 l3xdB 21.%Ye3! with the idea to follow with: 21.. .%Ye7 22.g3 %Yf6 23.l3el Yffxb2 24.hS. On the other hand, Black has at his disposal the line: IB ...hf2+ 19.fuf2 %Yxc7 20.hS %YeS! 2 1.%Yg4 ltld7! and if 22.hxg6, then 22 ... ltleS 23.%YhS? Yffxf2+! and Black wins. Naturally, all these lines do not ex haust the numerous possibilities for both sides after the move 17....b:d4. For example, White can try lB. %Yg4!? - and he most probably re mains with a good compensation for the pawn. Is White better is something that remains unclear? Nevertheless, the move 17....b:d4 is clearly better for Black than what Alexander Khalifman played in the game .. .
17...%Yxd4? He had evidently evaluated wrongly the consequences of the transfer into an endgame, thinking that it might have been approximately equaL
18.l3xc7 %Yxdl 19.lhdl l3ab8 2 0 . if4! if6 If 20. . .l3fcB, then 21.l3e7; while in case of 20 ...hb2, White plays 21.l3c2 eS 22.�h6 . (diagram) 21.l3d3! Just before I played my move in the game, I decided at the last mo ment to have a look at the line: 21. a4. It turned out, however that after: 21... l3fcB 22.aS ltldS 23..b:dS i!xc7 24 ..txc7
171
Dreev-Khalifman, St Petersburg 1999 �k8 2S.Ag3 exdS 26J!xdS l"ic1+ 27.li>h2 gb1 Black equalizes easily.
After the move 29.f4 (fixing Black's g-pawn) Black's position would have remained quite difficult, but I would This is by far not an obvious move not be quite convinced to assert that it and it came as a surprise to many would have been completely lost. Nat people, including my opponent. I had urally, I had a look at that line too, but planned it already when I had played it seemed to me slightly unprepared. 20.Af4. 29 l"ic6! Khalifman was in a severe time 21 l"ifc8 Blackloses after: 2l. ...bh4? 22.AeS! pressure here, but he found the best gfc8 23.gh3 gS 24.g3, as well as after: practical chance. I would not like to 21...l"ifd8 22.l"ixd8+ .bd8 23.l"ixt7 li>xf7 say that I had foreseen all the conse 24. .bb8 1i.xh4 2S . .ba7. quences of that brilliant maneuver by 22.hS l"ixc7 Black, but I had felt intuitively that I In case of: 22 ... gS 23Jlxc8+ gxc8 did not let the advantage slip out of 24. .bgS .bgS 2S.E:g3, White has a my hands altogether. clear advantage. 3 0 .AdS gf6 31.f3 Ac1 32.g3 gS 23.hc7 gc8 24.hb6 axb6 2S. bxg6 gcl+ 26.li>h2 hb2 27.gd7 It was possible to leave the e6-pawn to Black for a while after: 27.gxt7+ 1i>xt7 28.E:d7+, but I did not like the idea to let Black's king away from the eighth rank. 27 fxg6 28.he6+ Ii>h8 (diagram) •••
•••
•••
I decided here not to force the issue. Generally speaking, it was not easy at all to choose the right move. For ex ample, I did not like 29. li>g3, because of 29 ... l"ic7 and Black repels my rook.
That move had become possible only because of the placement of Black's rook along the sixth rank; oth erwise White's king goes to the g6-
172
Game 57
square and the checkmate becomes unavoidable. Now, it might seem to you that White cannot improve his position in a decisive fashion, but that is an illu sion! 33.@g4 �e3 34J;xb7 gd6?! In case Black continues to keep his bishop along the e3-c1 diagonal with the move 34 . . .�c1, then for example after: 3S.gd7 �e3 36.a4 �c1, I have the possibility to play: 37.f4! gxf4 38.@gS. If 38 . . ,lU8, then 39.@g6, therefore Black's only move is - 38 ... �b2. Ac cordingly, White plays - 39.gxf4, fol lowed by fS, �e6, gd6 and he must win the game. After the move in the game, I had no problems to press my advantage home. 35.ge7 �d4 If 3S . . .ic1, then 36.ie6! . 36.�b3 �f6 37,gf7 �e5 Or 37 .. ,lk6 and 38.ltifS. 38.gb7 gd4+? Following38 ... gf6, White continues with: 39.ge7 �d6 40.gd7 �eS 41.gdS. Therefore, Black's more resilient de fence would have been - 38 . . .gc6. 39.@xg5 hg3 4 0 .gxb6 Alexander Khalifman lost on time in this winning position for White. 1- 0
57
ell
Wang Zili - Dreev Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shenyang 1999
The Chess Federation of China, thanks to the sponsor Mr. Tan Ch in
Nam, who was residing in Malaysia, but who was of a Chinese origin, was organizing early regular round-rob in tournaments with high-level par ticipants in different cities of China. The main purpose of organizing these tournaments was formulated by Dato Tan Ch in Nam so as to en able the strongest Chinese players to encounter the best chess players of the West and to let them accumulate experience and to improve their rat ings. From what we see now - how impressive the results of the Chinese players are, both men and women, it looks like that purpose has been achieved! This was my first participation in the tournaments for the "Tan Chin Nam - Cup " and I shared 1st_2nd place with Ye Jiangchuan, but his tie-break coefficient proved to be better than mine. l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.lOc3 lOf6 4,�g5 dxe4 5.lOxe4 �e7 6 .hf'6 gxf6 I had tried that capturing with the pawn before, as early as in my candi dates match in 1991 against V.Anand. The "regular" move 6 ... �f6 had been tested in my tournament practice nu merous times. 7.lOf3 •
Wang Zili-Dreeu, Shenyang 1999
173
13.�d2! 7. . . a6 This variation became popular This is the correct maneuyer for thanks to the efforts of Alexander Mo White after which Black's position. rozevich. It is amazing, but when I first which is presently quite suspicious saw that move, it seemed to me quite anyway, becomes even more critical. interesting, but still dubious. The rea White is preparing f2-f3, followed by son that I decided to play it, despite i.d3. Black's main problem is that he the fact that I had considered it quite cannot complete his development, due questionable, was that I was relying to his weakness on f5. His only plus is on the effect of surprise. Meanwhile, that his dark squared bishop has been I had evidently become the victim of deployed to the important diagonal the effect of advertising, which often al-hB. It is not so easy to exploit that makes us buy things that we do not advantage though, but as we are go really need, indeed ... Black's usual de ing to see later, that was what helped fence here is - 7 . . . b6. me come out of my difficult situation later. 8.c4 That move (preventing the advance 13 . . .i.g7 The move 13 . . .b5 would have been b7-bS) made me happy, because I con sidered the move B.g3 as the most dan rather premature in that situation. 14.£3 �f6 IS.i.d3 gerous, as it was played in (Frankfurt White is now threatening g2-g4. (active) 1999) against A.Morozevich IS ...bS! at first by Peter Leko and then by Black cannot wait anymore, so he Christofer Lutz and White had been has no other chance. victorious in both games. 16.h3 S . . .f5 9.�c3 cS?! This move is a bit slow; neverthe It was much better for Black to play here 9 . . .�f6, with the idea to follow less it is correct from the point of view with c7-cS. I could have obtained a of strategy. White is not trying to force quite acceptable game in that case, for the issue with the move 16.g4, or with example: 1O .�d2 cS ll.dS e5. 16.cxb5 and I was planning to counter 1 0 .dS i.f6 11.�c2 eS I2 . 0 - 0 - 0 these with 16 . . . c4! (Pawns are not so 0-0 important in similar positions, it is es sential to open the c-file.) 17.il.xc4 (or 17.lZlxc4 axb5 IB.lZlxb5 Ei:xa2) and here either 17 . . . lZld7, or 17 . . . axb5 IB.il.xb5 i.a6 and Black has an excellent coun terplay for the sacrificed pawns. It is evident now (after 16.h3) that Black cannot wait anymore. If it had been White to move in that situation, he would have played g 2-g4 and his position would have become practi-
Game 57
174 cally winning. I managed to find the only plan to distract White from the pawn-advance g2-g4. 16 b4 •••
the resource - 2 0. . . e4 21.fxe4 fxe4 22.he4 �xe4! 23.�xe4 �d7 24.�hf1 (or 24.d6 �eB 25.�xeB heB 26.d7 hd7 27.�xd7 �c6) 24 ... �d6. 2 0 .�hfl i.f8 This is again Black's practically only move. He has protected his c5pawn and he is threatening i.d7.
17.ti:Ja4 That is the most attractive variation for White. The position would have been quite unclear in case of: 17. .!De2 ! ? a5 IB . .!Dg3 (Or IB.g4 e4! 19.fxe4 a4, 21.d6! The careless move 21.g4, would with the idea to follow with b4-b3. Black has sacrificed some material have lost material for White after: 21... indeed, but his counterattack seems i.d7 22.ttJxa5 b3! 21.. .i.d6 22 .g4 quite dangerous.) IB ... a4. Or 2 2.ttJb6 a4 23.ttJxaB axb3 17 . . . a5 1 1S.mhl After 18.g4, I had considered: lB ... 24.�xb3 (24.axb3 ! ?) 24 . . . i.fB with an e4 19.fxe4 i.d7 20 . .!Dc5 �cB (20 ... a4!?) unclear position. 21..!Dd7 ttJd7 with an unclear position. 22 . . . e4 The move IB . .!Dc5 can be countered This is the only move. with IB . . . a4. 23.fxe4 f4 24.e5 he5 25.i.xh7 IS ... .!Da6 1 9 .!Db3 mhS I did not like here 25 ...l!ig7, because In case of 19.94, Black can organize a powerful counterattack with: 19 . . . of the possibility - 26.g5. i.d7 (but not 1 9 ... e 4 20.fxe4 �d7 2 1.e5! 26.i.f5 �xe5 2 2 . .!Db6) 2o . bfS ha4 2 1.�xa4 White has decided to enter an end e4 22 .�c2 b3 23.axb3 a4!? (or 23 ... game, because he was obviously not ttJb4 24.ttJxe4 �b6 2S.�f2) 24 . .!Dxe4 happy with the lines: 26.ttJbxcS ttJxc5 �b6 25.bxa4 �fbB 26.�d2 hb2 . 27.ttJxc5 a4 and Black has a good com 19 . . . �eS pensation; or 26.ie4 �a7 27.ttJbxc5 That is the only move for Black. (27.ttJxa5? ttJbB) 2 7 . . . ttJcS 2B.ttJc5 and White cannot play here comfortably the game is quite unclear. 20 .g4 once again, because Black has 26 ...hf5 27.�xf5 �xf5 2S.gxf5 •
.
Wang Zili-Dreev, Shenyang 1999
175
White has an extra pawn indeed, but he cannot play for a win anymore. He should not have problems to make a draw either ... Still, my opponent, who was playing quite well in the pre vious part of the game, started to play rather unconvincingly. I began to ac cumulate gradually small advantages and I managed to win that game at the end. 43.IM3 It is quite evident that Black cannot It was better for White to play 43.a3 protect all his pawns simultaneously. Therefore he exchanges the rooks. As immediately. a result of all that the importance of 43 ... gd6 44.'it>e2 his passed pawn increases consider This is forced, because in case of ably. 44.\i1c4, Black will follow with: 44 ... 2S gadS! 29. �axc5 �xc5 3 0 . gd2 45.'it>b3 a4. 44 ... 'it>e5 45.a3 gc6 46.'it>d2 �xc5 gxdl 31.gxdl f3 That is a serious imprecision. White Or 31...\i1g7 32.�d7. 32.gfl iJ.d4 33.�d3 ge3 34.\i1c2 would have maintained the balance \i1g7 35.c5 \i1f6 36.c6 iJ.b6 37.\i1d2 with the move 46.\i1d3. ge2 3S.\i1dl ge3 39.�el ge2 46 ... 'it>e4 47.gb3 bxa3 4S.�xa3 I was in a time-trouble here, so I 'it>xfS 49.gf3 'it>e6 5 0 .b3 iJ.dS 51. did not mind the repetition of moves. ge3 It would have been weaker for me to Or 51.�c4? a4 52.\i1c3 a3. play: 39 . . .£2 40J'lxf2 Elxh3 41.Elc2 iJ.c7 51...'it>fS 52 .gf3 'it>g6 53.�c4 iJ.c7 42.Eld2! and here the move 4 2 . . . Elhl? 54.'it>d3 gc5 55.'it>d4 gb5 56.ge3 fS would not work (the correct move is 57.h4 - 42 ... Elh8) 43.Eld7 iJ.g3 44.c7 Elxel White does not wish to defend pas45.\i1d2 Ele8 46.Eld8+sively . . . 4 0 .�c2 ge7 41.gxf3 gc7 42.\i1d2 57... 'it>h5 5S.ge7 iJ.dS 59.gf7 �c6 'it>xh4 6 0 .�d6 iJ.b6 61.'it>c3 gc5 •••
176
Game 58
62.�b2?
That is the decisive mistake. White could have still made a draw possibly with the move 6Vi Jc4, with the idea to follow with b3-b4. 62 ... �g4 63.liJc4 gb5 64.�c2 �f2!
Now, Black's position is technically winning. 65.gg7 �f3 66.gf7 gd5 67.ge7 f4 68.ge8 �e3 69.ga8 �e2 7 0 . ge8 gd3 71.gg8 gd4 72.liJxa5
here the move 6.tiJbd2 ! ?, which leads to complex situations. It is no doubt Or 72.Ele8 Elc4 73.bc f3 74.lt>b3 f2 the critical one in White's fight for the 75.Elf8 f1� 76.Elf1 1t>f1 77.lt>a4 �b6 opening advantage. 78.c5 �d8-+ Still, the move 6.�d2 has its pluses not so much in theoretical aspect, but 72 ... f3 73.tiJc6 ge4 0 -1 for mainly practical reasons. The po sitions, arising after 6.�d2 are much 58 D2 0 simpler than those after 6.tiJbd2 and White can fight for a slight opening Dreev - Rublevsky edge, avoiding complicated develop FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.) ments. Black does not have in that Las Vegas 1999 case any practical chance of seizing This game was played in the FIDE the initiative and he is forced to play knock-out World Championship. I basically for a draw. 6 ... hd2+ 7.tiJbxd2 \wf6 was in the "waiting list" at that mo That is a seldom played line, but ment and Ijlew to Las Vegas without even knowing whether I would play stiII it is quite possible. Black plays or not. Literally at the last possible much more often in the tournament moment, it turned out that plenty of practice the move - 7. . . tiJc6. 8 . 0 - 0 liJe7 9.e5 \Wg6 1 0 .tiJxd4 the participants in the main scheme dropped from the competition and I tiJbc6 1l.liJ2f3 0 - 0 12.e6! joined in the action . . .! reached the 1/8 final though, but then I lost my match against Michael Adams. l.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5 4.tiJf3 exd4 5.hc4 �b4+
(diagram) This is well-known theoretical po sition. 6.�d2
It is more popular for White to play
177
Dreev-Rublevsky. Las Vegas 1999 That is a very fashionable position in this variation of the Queen's Gam bit Accepted.
12 he6 .••
That is a novelty. Black's usual defence here is 12 ... fxe6. It is inter esting to mention that in his subse quent games, Sergey stopped play ing 12 ... �e6 and he preferred 12 ... fxe6. For example in the game Volkov - Rublevsky, Ekaterinburg 2002, af ter: 13J''le1 tiJxd4 14.tiJeS tiJf3+ lS.tiJxf3 tiJdS 16.ixdS exdS 17.�xdS+ �f7 18. �d4 ifS 19J1ac1 c6 20.a3 �f6, Black equalized.
13.tLlxe6 fxe6 14.l'�el @h8 I case of 14 ... E:ad8, I would have maintained better chances - in the mid dle game after lS.�e2, as well as in the endgame after: lS.E:xe6 E:xd1+ 16. E:xd1 �c2 17.ib3 �xd1+ 18.ixd1, since White's light-squared bishop has much better prospects in these positions than its opponent - the black knight.
lS.E:xe6 �g4 16.'!We2 tLlg6 Black cannot solve all his open ing problems with the move - 16 . . . E:xf3. After the practically forced line: 17.E:e4 tiJd4 18J:ixg4 tiJxe2+ 19.ixe2, there arises an endgame with better chances for White, because his bish op is stronger in that position than Black's knight. 17.h3 �f5 18.id3 tLlf4 19.hf5
tLlxe2+ 2 0 .E:xe2 E:xf5 21.E:dl (diagram) White has a leeway for his king now and his pieces are more active. All that guarantees him a slight, but stable positional advantage.
21. .. @g8 22.E:d7 E:f7 23.E:xf7 @xf7 24.tLlgS + @g8
That move seems to be somewhat passive, but even the more active lines for Black - 24 ... @g6 and 24 ... <±>f6, do not solve all his problems. For exam ple: 24 ... @g6 2S.tiJe6 E:c8 (In case of: 2S . . . E:e8 26.tiJf4+ @f7 27.E:xe8 @xe8 28.lLle6, Black is faced with a long and difficult fight for a draw.) 26.E:e3! and White has a powerful initiative; or 24 . . .@f6 2S.lLle4+ @f7 26.lLlcS and he is again the active side.
2S.E:e3! That is an excellent move, which improves considerably my tactical chances. White is threatening lLle6 and later, depending on circumstanc es: E:g3 or !"lb3. Black must defend ex tremely precisely.
2S !"ld8 26.tLle6 E:dl+ .•.
This is a mistake. Black had better play here 26 . . . E:d7!?
27.@h2
17B
Game 59
27 gd7 He is still defending stubbornly. It was much worse for him to play the seemingly active line: 27 .. j�d2, be cause of: 2B.E:b3 lUaS 29.E:f3 h6 30.E:fB + It>h7 31.b4 lUc6 32.bS lUaS 33.a4; or 28. .. E:e2 29.c!Llxc7b6 30.E:c3!? lUd4 31.E:d3 lUfS 32.E:dB+ It>fl 33.E:d7+ It>f6 34.g4 lUe7 3S.lt>g3 and White would remain with a clear advantage in both cases. 2SJ'lf3 gf7 29.lt>g3! That powerful move creates great problems for Black now. I would not have achieved much with the line: 29.E:xfl \!;>xfl 30.c!Llxc7 lUb4 31.tDbS tDxa2 32.c!Llxa7 It>e6 and despite the fact that Black would be a pawn down, he would preserve good chances for a draw, because of the active position of his king. •••
3 0 J'lxf7 It>xf7 31.c!Llxc7 c!Lld3 32. c!Llb5! c!Llxb2 33. c!Llxa7 �e6 34.c!Llb5 �d5? That move only speeds up Black's demise. It was more tenacious for him to defend with 34 ... lUd3. Now, the game ends up rather quickly. 35.c!Llc7+ �c4 It is hardly any better for Black to play: 3S ... lt>eS 36,£4+ It>e4 37.lUeB, be cause White's position is easily win ning. 36.c!LleS b5 37. c!Llxg7 c!Lla4 3S.f4 c!Llc3 39.f5 �d5 4 0 .�f4 ! c!Llxa2 41.f6 It>d6 42.�f5 c!Llc3 In case of 42 . . . lt>d7, White wins without any problems after: 43. lUe6 It>eB 44.lUc7+, since he remains with a couple of extra pawns. 43.c!Lle6 c!Lld5 44.f7 c!Lle7+ 45.�e4 and Black resigned. I managed to outplay a very strong opponent in this game in an only slightly better endgame for me. I ex ploited rather well his almost insig nificant imprecision at some key-mo ments of the fight.
D37
59 Dreev - Chandler Hastings 2000 29 c!Lle5? ! This is a very serious mistake and Black's position becomes quite diffi cult after it. His only chance to fight for a draw was: 29 .. J'lxf3 + 30.lt>xf3 lUb4; but indeed after: 31.lUxc7 lUxa2 32.c!LlbS (or 32.lt>e4!?) 32 . . . a6 33.c!Lld6 b5 34.lt>e4, I would have stm main tained a considerable positional ad vantage. •..
I took partin the traditional round robin tournament in Hastings (which has a long and glorious history and impressive traditions) at the begin ning of January in the year 2 0 0 0 . It was a part of the 75th International Chess Congress in Hastings. The Pre mier tournament in which I partici pated was ofcategory 13. There were
Dreev-Chandler, Hastings 20 0 0 1 0 players in the tournament and the two youngest participants - 16-year old American Irina Krush and the English player McShane (who be came 16 just during the tournament) did not have high ratings at all and they diminished the category of the tourn ament considerably, but they proved to be very tough nuts to crack. Emil Sutovsky came first and he played quite convincingly throughout the tournament. I shared 2nd_3rd place with Jonathan Speelman. I did not start so well in that tournament and after round 5 I had only 50 %. I man aged tofinish successfully though and I collected 3 1/2 points out of the last four rounds. I consider that tourna ment to be quite satisfactory for me from the creative point of view and I played several good games. I have selected two games played in Hast ingsfor this book - the game against M.Chandler (which turned out to be almost exquisite - technically) as well as my game from the last round against B. Lalic.
179
- Ki.Georgiev, Biel 1992 and: 15J"1a2 d4 16.e4 .ic7, Seirawan - Ki.Georgiev, Dubai 1986.
15... d4 Now, it is already weaker for Black to play: 15 ... !"1e8 16.!"1a2! and he cannot follow with: 16 . . . d4 17.tOxd4.
16.exd4 Or 16.tOxd4? .ixd4.
16 hf3 .••
It also deserved attention for Black to try the move 16 ... lM'd5.
17..bf3 lM'xd4 18 ..ie3! But, of course not: 18.lM'xd4? tOxd4 19.�b7 tOe2 + .
18 . . .lM'xdl 19.9fxdl he3 2 0 . fxe3
l.d4 tOf6 2.c4 e6 3.tOf3 d5 4.tOc3 .ie7 5 ..if4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 .ixc5 8.a3 tOc6 9.cxd5 tOxd5 1 0 .tOxd5 exd5 11 ..id3 .ih6 12. 0 - 0 .ig4 13.h3 .ih5 14.h4 a6 Black plays much more often here 14 .. .Ele8. Of course, the move 14 ... lM'f6, does not work, due to 15.g4 and after the trade of the bishops Black loses his d5-pawn. (diagram)
15 ..ie2 ! This is an important improvement. Until now, there have been games with: 15J"1c1 d4 16.g4 �g6 17.e4, Beliavsky
2 0 ... !"1fe8? That is White's first serious im precision and it is going to have grave consequences for him. He had bet-
Game 6 0
180
ter continue with: 20 ... !3fd8 21.hc6 (Or 2l.'it>f2 !3xdl 22 .!3xdl !3d8 with a possible draw.) 2l...bxc6 22.!3xd8+ !3xd8 23.!3cl !3c8 (Or 23 ...!3d6 24.!3c5, threatening !ta5.) - and White has a slight edge. 21.'it>f2 !te7 Just like before, Black had to de ploy his rook on the d-file - 2l...!3ad8, irrelevant of the loss of a tempo. 22.ixc6 bxc6 23.!td6 Or 23.!3acl? !3e6.
Black again overlooks his best chance to save the game - 29 ... !3d7! 3 0 .lte4 g6
31.lMc3! Now, the game has been practically decided, because Black's king has been cut off from his vulnerable pawns. 31 lte6 32.!3xe5+ 'it>f6 33.!313+ Itg7 34.'it>d4 !td7+ 35.ltc4 !3b8 36. !tc5 !tb6 37.�b3 !3d6 38.'it>a4 h5 39.h4 !td7 4 0 .�a5 !tb8 41.!3xc6, and White soon won the game. •••
23 !tc8?! Murray admitted after the game that he had intended to continue with the move 2 3 ... a5 here, but he noticed that he would lose a pawn in case of: 24.!3xc6 axb5 25.axbS!. Black's best chance here was 23 ... !3ae8: since as M.Dvoretzkij had taught me - passivity in king and rook endgames never ends up well. There might have followed: 24.!3xc6 !3xe3 2S.!3xa6 !3e2 + 26.Kpfl !3b2 ! 27.!3el !3c8 28.!3e2 !3bl+ 29.Kpf2 hS, or 24.!3el !3e6 2S.!3xe6 !3xe6 26.!3c1 - and White would have serious problems to mate rialize his advantage in both cases. 24.!tc1 !tec7 25.!tc5 'it>f8 26.e4 'it>e7 27.e5 f6 28.!3d3 fe 29.'it>e3 Itf6? .••
E81
60 Dreev - B.Lalic Hastings 2000
t.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 i.g7 I was a bit surprised with that move, because the King's Indian Defence is not a part of GM Lalic's opening repertoire. I had expected 3 ... dS. He must have been quite well prepared, because my exclusive interest towards a certain line of the Zaemisch system - (6.llJge2) was very well known ... 4.e4 d6 5.13 0 - 0 6.�ge2 a6!? That is a smart move. Now, in case of: 7..tgS cS 8.dS, Black sacrifices a pawn favourably with - 8 . . .bS 9.cxbS
Dreev-B.Lalic, Hastings 20 0 0 �aS. Therefore . . .
181
14.ie3 �h5
7.ie3 c6 The move 7. . . �c6 leads to the "Yu goslavian" variation.
S.c5!? �bd7 Black plays much more often here 8 ... bS.
9.!'!cl This is possibly a novelty. White usually played before 9.�cl.
9 . b6 .
.
My opponent probably decided against the natural move 9 ... bS, be cause of 10.b4! ?
1 0 .cxd6 exd6 11.�f4 c5?! Here, Black had to play ll ... bs.
15.�e6! But not: lS.�xd6 �cS! (or IS... �h4+? 16.g3 �xg3 17.hxg3 �xhl 18. M2) 16.�xd8 �xd8 17.g3 �xf4 18 . .ixf4 M4 19.9xf4 �d7 and Black's position is quite acceptable.
15 ... fxe6 16.ixh6 �h4+ 17.g3 �xg3 18.hxg3 �xhI 19.ixf8 �xf8
12.a4! White prevents the possibility b6bS in a radical fashion and he main tains an opening advantage.
12
..•
cxd4
Black had better continue here with 12 ... ib7, complying with a slight ly inferior position after, for example 13.dS! ?
13.hd4 ih6? I believe - that one and the next move is what Black had in mind, while he played the anti-positional move 12 ... cxd4. Just like before, he had to follow with 13 ... ib7.
At this moment my opponent sur prisingly offered me a draw. Evident ly Lalic had relied only on the line: 2o.M2 Ela7! 21.�xd6 ElV (It is worse for Black to play: 2 l . . .Eld7 2 2.�xb6 �h2+ 23.ig2 Eld2+ 24.�e2 Elxe2+ 25.xe2 �xg2 + 26.�f2.) with some chances for Black to equalize. My next move deprived him of his illusions.
2 0 .�d5! exd5 Black was already beyond salva-
Game 61
182
the tournament Julian Borowski and strangely enough - Zvjaginzev was the best again. He practically never fell out of the car and he showed the 2V1:YxdS+ il.e6 22:�xaS lMrxf3 best result on the track. I drove over 23Jk3 V:Yhl 24.1tff2! V:Yh2+ 2S.il.g2 the series of ten laps, as I thought quite fast, but. .. I ended up only sec il.h3 26.eS dxeS 27.l3c7! ond at the end... But not: 27.lMrdS+? liJe6. I had encoun tered Dr. Huebner 27 hS Black could have prolonged a bit several times over the chess-board his capitulation with: 27... .bg2 28. until then, but I had never beaten this V:Yxg2 lMrhS 29.lMrdS+ 'it>h8 30 .lMrf3 V:Yh2+ outstanding experienced grandmas ter. 31.'it>e3 V:Yh6+ 32.'it>d3. tion: 20 . . . lMrg1 2U�xc8 (21.liJe7+!?) 21...l"lxc8 22.liJe7+ 'it>t7 23.liJxc8 lMre3+ 24.i.e2 lMrg1+ 2S.'it>d2, or 20 . . .i.b7 2l. liJe7+ 'it>t7 2 2 . l"lc7.
. • .
2S.V:YO il.f5 29.V:YdS+ liJe6 3 0 . lMraS+ liJfS 31.lMreS. Black resigned. 61
D12 Dreev - Huebner Julian Borowski, Essen 2000
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.liJO liJf6 4.e3 il.f5 S.liJc3 e6 6.liJh4 il.g4 The other possible moves for Black here are - 6 ... il.g6 (see my game with S.Volkov, in which I was playing with White) and 6. . . il.e4.
7.lMrb3 lMrb6 This game with GM Robert Hueb ner was played in the second round of the all-play-all tournament, which was called "Julian Borowski Grand master Tournament" (after the name of the chess-sponsor and the owner of the company "Borowski GmbH - An tennen und Elektro-Technik'') and it was held there for the second time. Thefield was extremely strong, with out any obvious outsiders and my re sult of +2 proved to be good enough for sharing Ist-3rd place with Va dim Zvjaginzev and Klaus Bischoff Ac cording to the tie-break rules Va dim Zvjaginzev was declared the winner of the tournament and I took the sec ond place. It was quite amazing, but there was a carting - competition, which happened during the free day (after roundfive) in the carting - are na, which belonged to the orga nizer of
Black can also play now - 7 ... lMrc7.
S.h3 il.hS 9.g4 il.g6
1 0 .cS!? I was reluctant to play in the "stan
dard" fashion - 1O .liJxg6 hxg6 1l.i.g2, because I had understood, having in mind my previous experience against Dr. Huebner, that in order to win against him I had to play definitely in a non-standard way, not anti-posi tionally, though . . .
183
Dreev-Huebner, Essen 20 0 0
1 0 'lMc7 H.g5 lOg8 •••
In the game Calderin - Rausis, Elista 1998, there fonowed : ll . . .lOfd7 12.lOxg6 hxg6 13.f4 b6 14.cxb6 axb6 IS.1I.d2 cS 16.1I.g2 ttJc6 17.ttJbS \!;\rb7 18.e4 and White had the initiative. It seems to me however, that the move lS ... cS is too risky and it is also incon ceivable why White must play 13.f4 in the first place. In case my opponent had played ll ... ttJfd7, then I had in mind the line: 12.ttJxg6 hxg6 13.e4 ! ? b6 14.cxb6 axb6 lS.!g2 and White would have slightly better prospects. Still, the best move for Black here is 1l ... ttJhS, without being afraid for the future of his knight, because White cannot capture it in any way. For ex ample after: 12.ttJxg6 (ar 12.1I.e2 ie7 13.\!;\rdl .hgS) 12 . . . hxg6 13.e4, there arises a complicated position with mutual chances.
12.ttJxg6 hxg6 13.e4 1"!h4?! Evidently, that was the line that Dr. Huebner had relied on, having played 1l ... ttJg8 before, but it turned out to be a mistake. It is equally bad for him to try: 13 . . . ttJe7 14.1I.f4 ! \!;\rxf4 lS.\!;\rxb7 dxe4 16.ttJe2 ! - and White wins. In stead, he had better continue with: 13 ...b6 (or 13 ... ttJd7) and White would have remained in a somewhat better position.
14.exd5 exd5 (diagram)
15.ttJe2! Following that natural and strong move, the position should be doubt lessly evaluated as very unpleasant for Black. For example after: lS ... ttJe7 16.\!;\rg3 \!;\rxg3 17.fxg3 1"!e4! 18.1I.g2 l"le6 19.94!?, White is clearly better.
15
••.
ttJa6 16. 'lMg3 l"lh8
In case of 16 ... l"le4, Black's rook will be attacked with tempo and it also stands in the way of his own pieces.
17.if4 \!;\ra5+ Or 17 ... \!;\rd7 18.h4 ttJe7 19.1I.h3 ttJfS 20. \!;\rd3 l"lxh4 21.0-0-0.
18.i.d2 'lMc7 19.h4 ttJe7 2 0 .ih3 It is much stronger here for White to follow with 20.\!;\rg4 !. For example: 20 ... ttJfS 21.ttJg3 - and White has the two bishop advantage.
20
• . •
ttJf5 21 .hf5
Or 21.\!;\rd3 !? l"lxh4 22.0- 0-0.
21. gxf5 22.if4 \!;\ra5+? ••
The right defence for Black here is 22 ...\!;\rd7. Naturally, my position would have been much better after that any way, but still that move was obviously preferable to the one he played in the game.
23.>!Ifl
184
Game 61
23 i.e7 In case of 23 . . . 0-0-0, White can follow with 24.g6 !, for example: 24 . . . !"ld7 2S.gxf7 !"lxf7 (or 2 S. . . �d8 26.i.gS i.e7 27.lLlf4 iLxgS 28.lLle6; 26 . . .�c7 27.�e3 i.e7 28.lLlg3 ,hgS 29 .hxgS !"lxh1+ 30.lLlxh1+-) 26.�g6 and it is too bad for Black to continue with 26 ... !"lf6, because of: 27.�e8+ �d8 28. �xd8+ li>xd8 29.i.gS. •••
24.g6
not: 34 ... li>g4? 3S.li>e2 �xf4 36.iLxf4 li>xhS 37.!"lh1+ li>g6 38.!"lh8+-) 3S.li>e2 lLlxcS! 36.!"lg1 lLle6, I would have to fight for the draw in an endgame, which could have arisen in case of: 37.1i>f1 !"lg8 38.lLlxe6 �xhS 39.!"lxgS+ �xgS 40. lLlxgS li>xgS 4 1.li>e2. Therefore, after long calculations and deliberations I played: 31.�xf7+ li>xf7 32.hg7 if6 33.
hf6 \toxf6 34.!"lel !"lah8
This move is even better than 24.hS. 24 �d8 25.h5 \!!Id 7 26.gxf7+ •..
li>xf7 27.�g6+ li>g8 28.h6 !"lh7 29. i.e5 �e8 White would have countered 29 ... i.f8?, with 30.�xh7+. 3 0 . �xf5 �f7 I saw here that Black was losing immediately after: 3 0... !"lxh6 31.!"lxh6 gxh6 H3-3a 32 .�g4+ i.gS 33.f4.
35. !"lh3? !
Frankly speaking, I had considered the move played by my opponent as impossible, because of the queensacrifice - 31.�xh7+ li>xh7 32.hxg7+ li>g6 33.lLlf4+ li>gS? 34.li>e2. Later, after I had lost plenty of time calculating variations, I understood that it would not work, because instead of 33 . . . li>gS?, Black could play 33 . . . li>fS and after: 34.!"lhS+ i.gS (But naturally
Now, I made a serious mistake, having lost a lot of time on calculating the possible queen-sacrifice on move 31. Instead of the move in the game, I had better play 3S.lLlf4 . For example: 3S ... !"lxh6 (Or 3S ... lLlc7 36.lLlhS+! li>f7 37.!"lh3 !"lxh6 38.!"lf3+ li>g6 39.!"lg3 + ! ; 3 6. . .li>g6 37.!"le3 and White's attack is victorious.) 36.!"le6+ \togS 37.!"lhxh6 !!xh6 38.l';xh6 \toxh6 39.lLle6 b6 (Or 39 ... li>g6 40.lLld8 li>fS 4l.f3 ! lLlb4 42. li>e2 ! - 42.lLlxb7? lLlc2 ! - 42 . . . lLlxa2 43.lLlxb7 and White must be winning.) 40.lLld8 lLlb8 (or 40 . . .bxcS 41.lLlxc6 cxd4 42.li>e2) 41.b4 bxcS (or 41 . . .li>gS 42.bS cxbS 43.c6 lLla6 44.lLle6+ - ; 4l...bS 4 2.lLlf7+ li>g6 43.lLleS+ li>fS 44.f3 +-) 42.dxcS li>gS 43.bS cxbS 44. c6 lLla6 4S.lLle6+-
Dreev-Huebner, Essen 20 0 0
35 .. J�xh6 36.m'3+ �g5 37.tilg3 l"lf6 38.l"le5+ �g6 39.l"lb3 l"lh2 4 0 . l"le2 l"lf7 It seems interesting, but it is hardly advisable for Black to try: 4 0 . . . tilc7 4U:'lxb7 lLle6 4 2.l"ld2! ? 1"lh4 43.l"lxa7 tilxd4 44.1"la4. Here, the time-trouble was over and I understood that I would have serious problems to materialize my extra pawn . . .
41.�gl l"lh4 42.l"le6+ �h7 43. tile2 l"lg7+ 44. l"lg3 l"lf7 45.l"lee3
185
52 ... l"lg6+?! It is better for Black to play: 52 ... lLlxa2 53.dxc5 (or 53.l"lxb6?! 1"lxb6 54.lLlxb6 cxd4 55.lLlxd5 �g5 56.f4+ �g4 ! ) 53 ...bxc5 54.lLlxc5, but White preserves good winning chances in that case too. 53. �f3 tilxa2 54.dxc5 bxc5 55.
lLlxc5 l"lc6 56.tild3?! The move 56.l"lb5 was much sim pler.
56 ... tilc1 57.tilxc1 l"lxc1 58.�e3
58 ... !k4? I was planning to exchange the rooks, so my opponent had to try to organize some active counterplay.
45 ... b6! 46.cxb6 axb6 47.l"le6 I:!h6 48.l"lxh6+ �xh6 49.�g2 c5 5 0 .l"lb3 Or 50.f4 ! ? and if 50 . . .cxd4 51.l"ld3.
50 ... l"lf6 51.lLlc3?! It is better for White to play 5l.f4.
51... lLlb4? 51...c4 !
52.tila4 Now, I had seen that after: 52.a3 cxd4 53.lLla4 lLlc2 54.lLlxb6 d3 55.lLlxd5 d2 56.lLlc3 l"ld6 57.lLldl l"le6 58. Elc3, it looked like I was winning, but I thought that was too risky, so I did not play like that ...
The right defence for Black here is 58 . . . l"lc2 ! , preventing the move �e3-d4. Now, White has the choice between 59.l"lb8, with the idea to ad vance the b-pawn - 59.l"lb5 'it>g6 60.b3 and the move 59.'it>d4; nevertheless Black had some practical chances to save the game in all these lines.
59.l"lb5 l"le4+ 6 0 .'it>d3 1"lf4 61. l"lxd5 l"lxf2 62.b4 �g6 63.l"le5 'it>f6 64.l"lel l- 0 I have remembered that tourna ment not only because I managed to share 1-3 place in it, having played rather well indeed and to take second place in the carting-competition, but also with something that happened on my way home ...
Game 62
186
The point was that the closing cer emony of the Essen tournament was quite unusual. There was a concert, as a part of the program, of a bass vocalist and that was grandmaster Emil Sutovsky. I had listened to his performances before (for example at the Hastings tournament that same year, but the audience there were quite minimal.. .). Here, having a wonderful piano-player to accompa ny his singing, Emil demonstrated his brilliant musical talent and the pub lic were just delirious with pleasure. I was so thrilled with his wonderful interpretation of a Don Quihote aria that on the morning of the next day, when we were supposed tofty to Mos cow with Vadim Zvjaginsev, I still had in my mind the motif" "That is why, senorita, that is why The heart of Don Quihote is closed for others, La�a-��a-��a�a-��a-��a-� la ... So, I made a "long multi-move com bination, sacrificing plenty of mate rial... " and that was - having only two hours left until theftight, Iforgot in the taxi, which of course went im mediately from the Dusseldorf air port back to Essen ... , my bag with my computer as well as my passport and airplane ticket too...lt all ended well, though ... "
62
.ib7 5.tDc3 d5 6. .ig5 .ie7 7. �a4+ c6 8.hf6 hf6 9.cxd5 exd5 1 0 .g3 I played like this for the first time in my practice.
1 0 ... 0 - 0 11.i.g2 c5?! I believe that move to be imprecise. Black clarifies his intentions too early. It was better for him to try 1l ... 4:ld7, or 1l ... .ie7, followed by f7-fS (V.Korchnoi played like that. . . ) .
1 2J�dl! This is the correct reaction! In case of: 12.0-0 .ic6 13.�dl, Black's posi tion is acceptable.
12
•..
tDc6?!
12 ... �e7.
13.dxc5 hc3+ 14.bxc3 bxc5 15. 0 - 0 �a5? Sax should have been relying on that particular move. On the other hand, I think Black cannot save the game af ter the move in the text. Instead, he should have tried 15 ... Ele8 and I would have faced a choice between: 16.c4 d4 17.e3, or the immediate move 16.e3. I would have maintained a clear advan tage in both cases. Possibly, I would have preferred 16.e3, though . . .
E12 Dreev - Sax
European Club Cup, Neum 2000
l.d4 tDf6 2.c4 e6 3.tDf3 b6 4.a3
16.�c2! That is a very powerful move. Now, Black has no satisfactory defence
Dreev-Sax, Neu m 20 0 0
against the threat 17.�g5; moreover that his d5-pawn is under attack.
16...h6 In case Black defends his d5-pawn with 16 . . . �e7, then after 17.�g5 g6, White has 18.c4! !"lad8 (following 18. .. h6 19.�h3, White's knight goes to the f4-square) 19.cxd5 (It is also very strong for White to play 19.�a2!±.) �xd5 (or 20 ... �xd5? ixd5 20 . bd5 . 21.�e4±) 2 1. �e4! , threatening !"lxd5 and attacking the c5-pawn. Sax could have attempted to give up a pawn and to try to survive in an endgame, but he obviously did not like that possibility and he preferred to fight in the middle game.
17.l'�xd5 �xa3 18.l'�h5! I admit, I did not see that move im mediately and instead I calculated the variations after: 18.�c1 �xc1 19.!"lxc1 �a5 and 18 .�d2 �a5 19.�bl �b3, but I came to the conclusion that Black can hold the position in both cases.
187 rj;je7 22. �xg7 !"lg8, with an unclear po sition, but then I noticed the impor tant intermediary move:
19.!"lbl! Now, the point is that after:
19 ...!"lab8 (that is Black's only move)
2 0 .�g5 hxg5 21.�h7+ rj;jf8 22. �h8+ rj;je7 23.�xg7 and i n case of 23 . . . !"lg8, White fol lows with: 24.!"lxb7+ ! !"lxb7 25.�xg8 !"lbl+ 26.ifl, winning the game af ter: 26 ... �c1 27.�xg5+ �xg5 28.!"lxgS rj;jd6 29 .e4, as well as after: 26 ... �a1 27.�xg5+ rj;jd7 28.�d5+ rj;jc7 29.�xt7+ rj;jb6 30.rj;jg2 !"lxf1 31.�b3+. My opponent chose to defend in another fashion:
23 . . .ia8 and after
24.�xg5+ rj;jd7 25.�d5+ rj;jc7 (if 25 ... rj;je7, then 26.�e4+) he resigned in view of the line 26.�xt7+ !"le7 27.�f4 + �e5 28.!"lxb8.
18 ... !"lfe8 Following: 18 ... � d8 19.�g5 f5 20. hb7 �xb7 2 1./tJe6 !U6 2 2 .�c7, White has the advantage.
63
A65 Dreev - Peng Xiaomin
Tan Chin Nam Cup, Beijing 2000 The Cup of Tan Chin Na m, a fa mous chess-sponsor, was played in the year 20 0 0 for the sixth time (and for the second time with my partici pation). The tournament was already a category
16
event and it was even
very close to be category 17 (only 7 points short). There was tremendous
I had in mind here to counter the move in the game with the line: 19.�g5 hxg5 20 .�h7+ rj;jf8 2 1.�h8+
attention in the Chinese media. Hon orary President of FIDE F. Campomanes visited the tournament after
Game 63
188
an official invitation by the organiz ers. The previous year the tournament was played in Shenjan (I have includ ed my game against Wang Zilijrom that tournament in the book) and there were seven Chinese players then. This time it was balanced - there were five hosts andfive guests. Nigel Short was quite confident at the open ing ceremony that the Chinese play ers would dominate in the chess world after not more than 20 years, but he also expressed his hope that it would not happen in the next 10 years. One of the organizers said in his turn that he hoped that after the tournament the rating of the best Chinese players would improve and the tournament might be of an even higher category in the next year's Cup. The development ofthefight in the tournament showed that N. Short's hopes were a bit more justified, since the European players (V.Bologan, A.Dreev, N.Short and Al.Onishchuk shared pt_4th place. It was amazing, but just like in the previous year in Shenja n, I came second according to the tie-break coefficient. Frankly speaking, the climate there is quite difficult for Europeans: it is hot and humid and in addition you have to endure one of the greatest problems in Beijing - the smog. It was in fact much easier in Shenjan the previous year. The wonderful attitude, howev er, of the organizers towards the par ticipants and their kind consideration compensatedfor all that amply.
1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3. �c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.�ge2 c5 7.d5
e6 8 .�g3 exd5 9.cxd5
9 ... �h5 This is a new and quite rare varia tion of the King's Indian Defence and I had played it twice in my practice be fore that game. Black compromises his kingside pawn-structure considerably in order to obtain some counterplay connected with the pawn-advance fl f5 .
1 0 . �xh5 gxh5 11.i.d3 f5 12. 0-0 Black has tried in that position the move 12 ... ttJa6 too.
12 ... �d7 This is a relatively new attempt, but it is not a novelty. GM Viorel Bologan had played that quite natural move against me in the second round of the same tournament and I had answered with 13.ttJe2. Following 13 . . . c4! 14.i c2 we agreed to a draw, because I did not have any opening advantage at all. Af ter that game I understood that the maneuver ttJe2 was correct, but it still needed some preparation. According ly, I was quite happy when that same position had arisen once again on the board, because I had the possibility to check the correctness of that idea again in practice. ,
Dreev-Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 20 0 0
13.�c2 �e5 Now, (just like on the previous move) it is not good for Black to follow with 13 .. .f4, due to: 14.tUe2 �eS 1S.g3± and White maintains a great advan tage. 14.�e2!
Here, my opponent took a long time contemplating his decision. Black's pawn-weaknesses are slowly becoming a factor, particularly if he tries the typical idea for similar posi tions - 14 ...fxe4 lS.�xe4 �fS 16 ..bfS l':ixfS 17.tUg3. The move played by Black is quite interesting and it deserves an excla mation mark. 14 ... ygh4! This is not only an attacking ma neuver by Black's queen, but he also protects his weak pawn in the process. Now, Black is planning fSxe4, followed by �cS-fS. Meanwhile, I am going to mention that had he played: 14 ... fxe4 lS. .be4 and now lS... YGh4, then White would have had the powerful argu ment - 16.ygc2. 15.f4! Here, White has another possibility to fight for the advantage. 15... �c4
189 In case of lS ... tUg6, White can play 16.exfS and after: 16 ... hf5 (or 16 ... tUe7 17.tUg3) 17 ..bfS l':ixfS 18.�g3 �d4+ 19.i>h1, Black cannot follow with 19 ... l':ixdS, due to: 20.YGb3 tUe7 21.tUfS. 16. �g3 �xb2 It is obviously in favour of White if Black continues with: 16 ...fxe4 17..be4. 17.yge2 YGg4 This is a quite attractive move for Black. His other interesting possibility was 17... �d3 and here lS.eS! dxeS 19.tUxhS would have preserved the initiative for White. ISJ'lf3
lS h4 Now, in case Black follows with lS ... tUd3, then after 19.ygxd3 .ba1, the line: 20.�xfS .bfS 21.l':ig3 l:'laeS 22.exfS l':ie1+ 23.i>f2 l:'lxc1 24.l':ixg4+ hxg4 2S.f6 l':ifl 26.YGd2!?, leads to a clear advantage for White. Black how ever, has a smart intermediate check - 19 ...�d4+ and after: 20.i>h1 .ba1 21. tUxfS .bfS 22.l':ig3 l':iaeS 23.l':ixg4+ hxg4, he even seizes the initiative, be cause now White cannot capture efS, because of the vulnerability of his first rank. It is equally bad for White to .•.
190
Game 63
try: 20 ..te3 kxa1 21.lLlxfS ixfS 22.E1g3 �xg3 23.hxg3 E1ae8 and Black can counter 24. exfS with 24 ... E1xe3. On the other hand, White has the cold-blood ed resource 2 0 . @f1, which n eutralizes Black's tricky check and he maintains his advantage after: 20 ... �a1 21.lLlxfS �S 22.E1g3. If Black checks immediately - 18 ... id4+, then 19.ie3 (but not: 19.@h1 lLld3 20.�xd3 and Black's abovemen tioned idea triumphs once again 20 ... �a1 etc.) 19 . . .fxe4 (or 19 . . . .be3+ 20.�xe3 lLlc4 21.�c3 and if 2l.. .�g7 - 22.eS) 20 . .bd4 exf3 21.gxf3 �xf4 22 . .bb2 and White has the edge.
19.e5 dxe5 2 0 .h3! But n aturally not 20.ixb2?, be cause of 20 . . . e4; or 20.fxeS?, due to 20 ... �d4+.
20
..•
�g6 2 1.fxe5
21..bb2 e4. I had expected here White's posi tion to have been completely winning. I had seen Black's next move before hand, but I could not even believe that it was possible . . .
ing: 23. �xh4 �xal 24.lLlhS, but it did not appease me at all. Finally, after I saw that Black had at his disposal the intermediate move 23 ... if6, I gave up that possibility altogether.
23J�bl hg3!? In case of 23 ... hxg3, I would have answered quite comfortably with 24.�f4.
24 ..tf4 It seemed attractive for White to play 24.ib2, but after: 24 ... �d7 2S.�c3 E1ae8, he had no advantage whatsoever, while following: 26.fug3 hxg3 27.idl (with the idea ihS) Black had the wonderful resource - 27 . . .f4.
24 ...b6? Until now my opponent had played extremely well, but here he made a se rious blunder. After: 24 ... �4 2S.E1xf4 �d6 !?, I would have had some com pensation, but the outcome of the game could have gone either way . . .
2 1. . . lLlc4! 22.�xc4 he5
25.E1xg3! Naturally, I did not hesitate too much .. .
25 ... hxg3 26J'lb3 �f6 27'!·'lxg3+ @f7 28.'�e2! �h4? Here, I understood that the posi tion had remained quite unclear just like before. I was seriously consider-
Now, Black loses immediately. But even after the only possible defence - 28 ... �d4+ 29.ie3 �h4 30.�f3 !?,
191
Dreev-Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 20 0 0 he would have great problems and his attempt to trade the rooks - 30 ... l"lg8, after: 31..hfS l"lxg3 32.�e6+ @e8 33.�f7+ @d8 34.M4 �e6 3S.dxe6 �e7 36.�c7!, leads to a victory for White. 29.�e5. Black resigned.
vance, but it proved to be quite effec tive. Here, my adversary was faced with a dilemma - where to go with his knight on d7? In case of 9 ... tLlb6, I would have played: 1O.h3 tLlh6 1 1.�c1 eS 12.cS and Black's position would have been rather uncomfortable.
9 ... c!iJdf6 1 0 .h3 64
A81 Dreev - Zhang Zhong
Tan Chin Nam Cup, Beijing 2000
1.d4 f5 2.g3 c!iJf6 3.�g2 g6 4.c!iJf3 .tg7 5. 0- 0 0 - 0 6.b3 d6 7.�b2 c!iJg4!? The idea behind that move is rather simple - Black wishes to prepare the pawn-advance e7-eS, preventing in the process White's possibility d4-dS. Zhang Zhong had played like that be fore and I did not mind entering a po sition of that type at all.
8.c4 c!iJd7 My opponent played rather quickly until that moment. I had to spend a lot of time in order to find the correct continuation.
9.c!iJg5!
Naturally, it is not good for White to follow with: 1O .dS? eS! 1 1 . dxe6 tLlxh2. 10 c!iJh6 H.d5 c!iJt7 12.c!iJxf7 l"lxf7 Now, we can conclude: Black has failed to push e7-eS; accordingly the opening stage has ended in favour of White. ..•
13.c!iJd2 �d7 14.c!iJf3 Black would have liked to advance c7-c6, but he could not do that imme diately, because of: IS.dxc6 bxc6 (It is not good for Black to play 15 ... bc6, due to 16.tLlgS! .) 16.cS! dS 17.b4 and White's advantage is obvious. There fore, Zhang Zhong preferred the pas sive defence: 14 ... l"lfS although he should have consid ered the possibility 14 ... aS, in order to impede White's pawn-advance b2-b4.
15.b4 c6?! That was an imprecision. We agreed after the game with my partner that Black's best chance had been: IS ... aS 16.a3 c6, but even then White would have been slightly better.
16.dxc6 bxc6 This is possibly not the best choice either. After: 16 ...�xc6 17.�b3 �e8 18.a4, Black is of course worse, but that was definitely the least of evils. This was the only way for me to prevent Black's thematic pawn-ad-
17.c5 1Wb8 Black has no more good moves; in
192
Game 65
case of 17 ... dS 18.ie5, followed by a2a4 and b4-bS, his position remains a sorry sight. It is only slightly better for him to defend with: 17. . . dxc5 18.bxc5 and after :gb8, White can always coun ter with .te5.
18.cxd6 exd6 Or 18 ... �xb4 19.dxe7 �xe7 20.tLle5 and Black has great problems.
gS and White's queen has no good square to retreat to. The following line would not work for White either: 22.ixf6 ixf6 23.�xd6 :gxe2 2Ulfl ig7 25.�xd7? :gd8 and his queen gets trapped.
22.e3 This solid stabilizing move annihi lates Black's hopes of organizing some counterplay.
22... d5? That is Black's decisive mistake. His last practical chance was to try 22 . . . tLle4, but the evaluation of the position after: 23.ixg7 li>xg7 24.a4 is crystal clear in favour of White.
23.tLle5 White is threatening 24.tLlxd7 and 25.:gxc6.
23 .. J�e6 19J�bl! This is a strong move. It seemed attractive for me to try 19.�b3+, but the queen had to keep under con trol Black's d6-pawn. Additionally, the move in the game is not a loss of time, because Black now must defend against the threat b4-bS.
19
•.•
Black loses too after: 23 ... :ge7 24. tLlxc6 ixc6 25.ixf6 ixf6 26.:gxc6. He could have only prolonged his resis tance with the move 23 . . . �ad8.
24.tLlxd7 tLlxd7
a6 2 0 .�d3 �e8?!
Black had better try 20 . . . tLle4.
21.�fc).! White is threatening now 22.tLld4.
21. .. �b6 Once again, Black had to consider: 21.. .tLle4 2 2 .ixg7 li>xg7 23.�d4+ li>g8, with some chances for a successful de fence. Black's move in the game conceals a trap : if now 2 2.�xd6, then not: 22 ... �xf2+ ? 23.li>xf2 tLle4+ 24.li>gl tLlxd6 25.ixg7 li>xg7 26.:gdl and White wins, but: 22 . . . tLle4! 23.id4 �d8 24.�f4
25J�xc6! �xc6 26.hd5 �d6 27. hg7 tLlb6 Or 27 ... li>xg7 28.�c3+ .
28.he6+ �xe6 29 .tal �xa2 30 .�dl �c4 31.�d6. Black re •
signed.
193
van Wely-Dreev, New Delhi 2 0 0 0
D46
65 van Wely - Dreev FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.) New Delhi 2000
Vlic7. This move was considered to be quite reliable, but after: 12.ltJe4 ItJxe4 13.Vlixe4 ItJf6 14.Vlih4 cxd4 lS.id3! , White sacrificed a pawn and he ob tained a powerful. initiative. I had all this in mind, while I was preparing for that game, but then I thought "Why not simply capture cxd4?"
This is the first game of the third round of the knock-out stage of the World Championship. l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.e3 1l ... cxd4 12.exd4 e6 5.lLlf3 lLlbd7 6.�c2 �d6 7.�d3 The move 12 .!1xd4 seems to be rather unnatural for White. 0 - 0 8 . 0 - 0 dxc4 9 ..b:c4 a6 12 ... �c7 13.�d3 b 6 14.�e3! �b7 This is the key-move for the entire variation and its purpose is to prepare 15.�e2 b7-bS and to follow that with c6-cS. The immediate move 9 . . . bS is also possible. There is some difference be tween these two lines, though; some times after 9 ... a6, Black plays c6-cS without the preliminary move b7-bS. That is exactly what happened in our game.
1 0 .a4 White prevents the move b7-bS. His other possibility is: 1O .!1dl bS 11. ie2 etc.
10
..•
c5 1 U'ldl
That is an interesting moment. My opponent had already tested that po sition before against Garry Kasparov in a game played on the Internet. Gar ry continued in that game with 11 ...
White has found an interesting possibility not to lose tempi for the defence of his h2-pawn. Now, if Black is too greedy: ls ... ixf3 16.Vlixf3 ixh2+ 17.q;,hl id6, then after 18.g3 (with the idea to follow with I!Ig2, !1hl etc.), it becomes evident that the dominance over the h-file, the two bishop ad vantage and the passive placement of Black's pieces more than compensate White's sacrificed pawn. Black's posi tion is cramped, so he cannot remove his rook away from the a8-square, because his a6-pawn would be hang ing. Therefore, I think my next move is quite logical.
15 ... lLld5!? 16.lLle4?! White surrenders the initiative to
194
Game 65
Black with his last move. The correct
24.itJd4 is in favour of White.) 22. itJd4
decision for him would have been
11*'g6 23.h5 ! , followed by 24.itJd6. It
16J'lacl! and Black can choose be
would be bad for White to try: 20 .itJe5
tween: 16... itJxc3, 16 ... itJxe3, or 16... %Vb8.
lLlxe5 21.dxe5, due to 2 1 . . .!'ladS, with
16 tOf4! 17 .hf4 .hf4 18.g3 ih6 •••
•
White possibly thought that he can
the idea to follow with !'ld3.
20 ... 11*'d5!
somehow exploit the unusual place
After that move, it becomes clear
ment of the bishop on the h 6-square.
that White should be on the defence
One of his bishops is already absent
from now on.
however, moreover his rook cannot
21 .ibl gac8 22.gel gfd8 23. tOeg5 hg5 24.hxg5 tOfS 25.ge3?!
go to cl and his d4-pawn is isolated.
•
All these factors might lead to serious
It is understandable that White
fu
wishes to get rid of Black's pressure
problems for White in the nearest ture.
along the long as-hI diagonal and to
19.h4?!
preserve the queens on the board at
White does not even feel the dan
the same time. He has no time for that,
ger. He should not have wasted time
however . Instead, he had to contin
on scaring crows. He had instead to
ue with: 25 . .ie4 11*'xe4 26.11*'xe4 .be4
anticipate the move that Black played in the game, so it deserved attention
worse endgame.
27.!'lxe4, complying with a slightly
for him to try 19.!'la3.
25 ... 11*'c4! 19 �c6! .•.
This move emphasizes the vulner
This move seems to be more reli able than:
25 . . . 11*'a5 ! ? 26 . .ie4 �xe4
ability of the as-hI diagonal, which
27.!'lxe4 11*'xa4 2S.d5; moreover that I
arose as a result of the move g2-g3.
had in mind that there were plenty of
Black is now threatening fl-f5 .
moves left to the first time-control.
2 0 .ga3 White prevents the immediate ad vance 20 .. .f5, because he can coun ter that with: 21. d5 ! exd5 (The line: 2l.. .�xd5 22 ..ic2 fxe4 23.!'lxd5 exd5
26.11*'xc4 Otherwise White loses one of his pawns.
26 gxc4 27.b3 gb4 28.id3! I have to admit that Loek was play.••
195
van Wely-Dreev, New Delhi 20 0 0 ing quite enterprisingly! He found an interesting possibility to continue the fight.
2S ... a5 But not 28 .. J':'lxb3?? 29 .. bh7+.
29.ie4 ixf3 3 0 .gxf3 gxd4 Now, Black has an extra pawn, but his rook is stalemated. Frankly speak ing, I entered that position quite de liberately, since I considered that I would easily manage to free my rook from its exile.
31.gf4! That is the only way to enable White to occupy the d-file.
31
••.
gd6 32.gee4 gdl+!
This i s an important fine point! Af ter: 32 . . . ltJg6 33.Eld4 Elxd4 34.1:'lxd4, White's king is better placed on g 1 than on the h2-square. That i s why the intermediate check is so essential, just like every minute detail in chess!
3S.gb7+?! The idea to capture the pawn with a check was basically incorrect. He had better continue with 38.ib5 and after: 38 ... ltJf3+ 39.Wg2 1tJxgS 40.Elxb6 Elxb3 4Ula6, it would be still far from clear, because White's a-pawn would have remained to be very powerful.
3S l!ld6 39.ib5 l'!xb3 4 0 .f4 .•.
Now, the line: 40.1:'lxb6+ wc5 4U'la6, loses for White, due to: 41... fub5 42.axb5 wxb5 43.Ela7 a4 44.f4 ItJc6.
40
.•.
lLlf3+
After: 40 ... Elxb5 41.axb5 ItJc4 42 . fuf7 a4 43.Elxg7 a3 44.Elg8! (or 44. Elxh 7 a2) the position would have been unclear.
41.l!lg2 lLld4 42.gd7+ l!le5 43. ge7+ I!ld5 44.ie4+ I!ld6 45.gxt7 ge3 46.ia6
33.l!lh2 It is too bad for White to play 33.®g2? ItJg6 and he cannot continue with 34.Eld4.
33 ltJg6 34.gd4 gxd4 35.gxd4 I!lfS 36.gdS+ l!le7 37.gbS •..
It is weaker for White to try here 37.l"lg8, because of: 37... h6! 38.gh gh 39. f4 wf6, followed by e6-e5, or ItJg6-e7.
37 lLle5 •••
46
•.•
lLlf5? !
The immediate move 46 . . . Elc7 was stronger for Black. Then White would have been forced to play 47.ElfS with some chances for a draw.
47.1!lf2 I had overlooked that move, when I played 46 . . . tLJf5; accordingly I had just lost two tempi ...
47 fu:7 4S.gxe7 •..
Game
196 The only advantage of the move 46 . . .llJf5 is that now White cannot avoid the trade of rooks, because after 48. �f8 �c2+ he loses outright.
48 ... lt>xc7 Now, the position is almost equal . . .
49.�d3 g6 5 0 .g4 IlJd6 51.lt>e3 b5 52 .axb5 a4 53.lt>d2 This is the precise defence. White avoids the line: 53.lt>d4 a3 54.lt>c3 It>b6 55.lt>b3 IlJxb5, since he cannot continue with: 56.£5 gxf5 57.gxf5 exfS 58.hf5, because of 58 . . . llJ d4 +
66
qualifiedfor the liB-final. Veselin To palov was my opponent there. I won the first game with White, but then I lost the second and my adversary was luckier in the tie-break. I would like to remind you that V. Anand won that World Championship.
D43
66 I .Sokolov - Dreev Dos Hermanas 2001
.
53 ... lt>b6 54.1t>c1 lt>c5 Or 54 . . .llJxb5 55.f5=
55.lt>b2 e5 That was my only chance to play for a win. After: 55 . . . lt>d4 56.�f1 lt>e3 57.b6 It>xf4 58.lt>a3 It>xg4 59.lt>xa4 It>xg5 60.wb4 1t>f5 61.It>c5 1t>e5 62.�d3, White holds the position.
This game was played in a round robin tournament in the Spanish city of Dos Hermanas. That was my first participation in this traditional tour nament. That was its eleventh edition and the event had plenty of strong players taking pa rt, with approxi ma tely equal strength. Meanwhile, the tournament was objectively much stronger than its "official" cat egory 16, because the ratings of the young grandmasters were consider ably lower than their actual strength (The World junior champion under 1B Francisco Va llejo was playing, as well as, this tournament was the grandmaster debut of the 14 year-old Teimur Radjabov.) Miguel Illeskas had a very low rating at that moment too, but everybody knew how strong he really was. At the end, I sharedfirst place with 5 1/2 out of 9 with grand master I.Smirin, but I was awarded the trophy for the winner, because of my better "Berger" coefficient. l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.1lJf3 llJf6 4.1lJc3 e6 5.�g5 h6 6.�h4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.�g3 b5 -
56.lt>a3?? That is a blunder ... White could have made a draw in a problem-like fashion with: 56.fxe5 IlJxb5 57.e6 IlJc7 58.e7
56 ... e4 57.�fl IlJxb5 + 58.lYxa4 IlJd4 0-1 After this victory, I was White in the second game, made a draw and I
197
I.Sokolov-Dreev, Dos Hermanas 20 0 1 We have played the so-called "Anti - Moscow variation".
9.i.e2 i.b7 l 0 .h4 b4 Black's usual reply here is - 10 ... g4. At the time our game was played, the move - 10 ... b4, which leads to an entirely different type of position, was relatively new and not well analyzed. It had the reputation of a variation in which even the tiniest imprecision might end up in a disaster for White as well as for Black.
Capturing that pawn leads to an advantage for Black here, for example: 17.axb3 �a5+ IB.ttJd2 ttJexc5 19.ttJxc5 �xb5 2 0.ttJxd7 �xd7 21.ttJe4! fie7.
17 ... gxf3 18.c6 i.b4+ 19.i.c3 In case White interposes with his knight - 19.ttJc3, then after: 19 ... ixc6 20.i.xc6 fxg2 2 Ulg1 ttJxf2 ! ! 22.i.xd7 �xd7 23.�xd7 �xd7 24. �xf2 fic5, his position is lost too.
19 ... hc3+ 2 0 .bxc3 fxg2 21.!lgl b2! 22.gdl Or 22 .ttJxb2 ttJec5 ! ?
11. llJ a4 This is of course possible, but the move - 11.hxg5 is evidently stronger and it was played against me about a month later by grandmaster Suat Ata lik.
1l ... llJxe4 12 .i.e5 gg8 13.\Wc2 This is a novelty. That move is active indeed, but it is riskier than the one played in the game Xu Jun - P.Nielsen, Istanbul 2000, 13.hxg5 hxg5 14.i.xc4.
13 ... c5 14.i.xc4 It seems here much more natu ral for White to exchange pawns first with: 14.hxg5 hxg5.
14 g4 15.i.b5+ llJd7 16.dxc5 .••
(diagram)
16...b3! 17.�d3
2 2 ... �xh4! 23.�xd7+ �f8 24. �d4 bl �! ! The play is forced now and every tempo counts!
25.gxbl gd8 26.cxb7 gxd4 27. b8'IW+ gd8 2 8.'lWxa7 'lWh2 29.�e2 !ld2+ 3 0 .�e3 gg3+! 31.�xe4 gg4+ White resigned.
198
Game 67
E81
67 Dreev - Smirin Dos Hermanas 20 01
l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.�ge2 a6 7.ie3 �bd7 8.Wld2 c5 9.dxc5 That is a rarely played move; nev ertheless it is quite interesting.
additional space with the standard move 17. . . c4? ! , because White will counter that with: 18jk1 b5 19.b3 and his position is already clearly prefer able.
17... �d7 18.gel Wld6 Or 18 ... a5 !? 19.a4±
19.b4! cxb4 2 0 .Wlxb4 %Yb8 21. 0 - 0 ifS 22.%Yb2 ib7 23.a4 a5
9 ... dxc5 l 0 .!�Ml Wla5 It seems more restrained for Black to try 1O ... �c7, for example: 11. �f4 e6 12.�d3 �e8 13.�f2 f5 14.exf5 gxf5 15.f4 � df6 16.ie2 b6 17.if3 Ela7 18.0-0 ib7 19.Wle2 .ixf3 20.Wlxf3 �d6 2 1.ic1 liJf7 22.Elfe1 Ele8 23.Ele2 liJd8 liz Khenkin - Banikas, Bolzano 2000.
11.�cl Wlc7 12.�d3 b6 13.if4 24.�f2!
13 ... e5?!N This is a very important decision for Black. Instead, it was possible for him to try 13 ... Wlb7, as it was played in the game Luce - Morovic Fernandez, Copenhagen 1982.
14.ig5 ge8 Black wishes to deploy his knight to the d4-square via f8-e6.
15.ie2 �f8 16.�d5 liJxd5 17.cxd5 Now, it becomes evident that Black's knight will never come to d4 in this game. Meanwhile, he cannot occupy
With this powerful move White wishes to redeploy his pieces, placing them on the ideal squares - the bish op to b5 and the knight (depending on circumstances) - to g4 or to the d3square and his positional advantage will become decisive. Black's only possible counterplay here is: 24 ... ic5 but White has the resource:
25.ib5 Wld6 26.h:d7 Wlxd7
199
Dreev-Smirin, Dos Hermanas 2 0 01
27J�xc5! bxcS 28 . .!LJg4 ga6 That is Black's only possibility.
29 . .!LJh6 + This move is the best for White, but it is not so pragmatic; therefore I spent about ten minutes on it, which left me another ten minutes to the end of the time-control. The most natu ral line for White would have been: 29.lLlxeS �xa4 30 .�xb7 �d4+ 31.i>h1 �xeS 32.�xa6 �xgS 33.�xaS �e3 and his position would have been objec tively winning, despite some possible difficulties in the realization of the ad vantage. 29 @f8 That is again an only move for Black. After 29 . . . i>g7, White wins with 30.f4 f6 3l.fxeS+...
3 0 .f4 hd5 31.exd5 I was here in a time-pressure, so I was reluctant to play the move 31.fxeS, although I was calculating thorough ly the variation: 31...ie6 and here not: 32.lLlxt7 i>g8! (32 ...ixt7 33.e6 �d4+ 34.�xd4 cxd4 3S.ext7+-; 32 ... i>g7 33.lLld6, with the idea to counter 33 ... gaa8 with 34.gt7+), but 32.�f2 ! ib3 - defending against �f6 (32 . . . �d4 33.ie3), 33.e6! 33 ... ixe6 (33 .. . �xe6 34.�b2; 33 ... l"1axe6 34.�xt7+; 33 ... l"1exe6 34.�xcS+ l"led6 3S.eS) 34. �xcS+ �d6 (or 34 ... ge7 3S.�c3 �a7+ 36.@h1 i>e8 37.gd1) 3S.�c3+31 . f5 (diagram) ..
32.gdl?! This i s a typical time-pressure mis take. White was winning easily after 32.�b3! and if 32 . . .l"1d6 - then 33.lLlg4.
32 ...�xa4
Now,
the
fight
becomes fierce
again.
33.�cl gd6 34.h4! �b3 3S.�al gxdS 36.gbl White has lost almost all his pawns, but his pieces are deployed in the clos est vicinity to Black's king, so he has a great advantage.
36 �e3+ •.•
Or 36 ... �d3 37.i>h2 ! ?
37.@hl! If 37.i>h2 l"1d2 38Jlb6 Elxg 2 + ! 39. i>xg2 �e2=
37...�d4 37...�d3! ?
38.�xaS exf4? This is Black's decisive mistake. GM Smirin admitted after the game that he had overlooked in the time-trouble the fact that White's queen controlled the e1-square. Meanwhile, he had an only move - 38 . . . Eld7, enabling him to prolong his resistance.
Game 68
200
39.l�b7! �d7 4 0 .�xd7 �xd7 41. �XCS+ �e7
ing that in Bosnia and Herzegovina chess is regarded as one of the solid Or 4l...'it>g7 42.�c3+ . connecting threads with the world society and by organizing this tradi 42.�g8 1-0 This endgame i s a n easy win for tional tournament the country wishes White, because the h8-square is dark, to show its desire to maintain stabil for example: 42 . . . 'it>xg8 43.�xe7 �xe7 ity and to be integrated into the Euro 44.�e7 h6 4S.'it>gl 'it>f7 46 . .id8 'it>e8 pean system. 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 47.ic7 gS 48.hS 'it>f7 49 . .ieS. e6 S . .igS h6 6 ..ih4 dxc4 7.e4 gS 8.ig3 bs 9.ie2 .ib7 1 0 .h4 b4
D43
68 Atalik
-
Dreev
Sarajevo 2001
This game was played in the sev enth round of the traditional round robin tournament (It has been orga nized ever since the year 1957! ...J in Sarajevo. I had been already in Bos nia and Herzegovina in the autumn of the year 2 0 0 0 and I took part in a tournament in the town of Neum, situa ted at the Adriatic coast. Still, that was my first visit to the capital ofBosnia - Sa rajevo. It isjust amaz ing how popular chess is there. I was walking in the city and I often saw people playing with huge chess piec es directly in the streets. There were electronic billboards in the pedestri an zones of the city, informing people about the participants in the tourna ment. There were advertisements all over the city. There were numerous specta tors in the playing area in the Concert Hall of the Army Building. There was a n official reception for the pa rticipa nts in the tournament by the state government during the day off It was emphasized at that meet-
I mentioned already in my com ments to the game LSokolov - Dreev, Dos Hermanas 2001, that the usual reply for Black in that line of the "Anti Moscow" system is the move - 10 . . . g4.
1l.hxgS This is stronger for White than the move 11.ttJa4, against which Black has serious arguments at his disposal as my game against LSokolov showed. .iy playing the move 11.hxg5, White is aiming at a direct refutation of the variation with 1O . . . b4.
1l ... bxc3 12.gx:f6 The subsequent development of that variation showed that here it is much stronger for White to follow with: 12.bxc3 ttJxe4 13 . .ie5 �h7 (Black cannot solve his problems with the
201
Ata lik-Dreev, Sarajevo 2 0 0 1
move 13 . . . ltlxc3, which was played in the game Beliavsky - Sveshnikov, Metalska Trgovina 2002, 14.'lNc2 Itlxe2 lS.�xe2 Itld7 16.ixh8 hxgS 17J�h7 g4 18.ltleS ItlxeS 19.ixeS 'lNdS. Alexander Henrkovich played a wrong move with White here - 20J'lb 1 and after 20 ... cS, Black equalized. Beliavsky recom mended later, as the best for White, the line: 20.l'lah1! c5 21.l'lxf7 %Ye4+ 22.'lNxe4 ixe4 23.l'lf4; or 20 ... %Yxg2 2U'lxf7! 'lNxh1 22.'1�'g6+-) 14.'lNb1 'lNaS lS.ltld2 ! and after this move, which was played by grandmaster D.Rogozenko against A.Filipenko (Internet, 2001), it can be said that the entire variation with 10 ... b4 was doomed to oblivion. The game continued with: lS .. .fS (Or lS ... 'lNxc3 16.0-0; lS . . . ltlxd2 16.'lNxb7 %Yxc3 17.'lNc8+ �e7 18.�f6+ �d6 19. 'lNd8+ Itld7 20.ieS+ �dS 21.'lNxd7+ �e4 22.'lNxc6+ �fS 23JMl.) 16.gxf6 cS 17.ltlxe4 ixe4 18.ihS+ �d8 19.'lNxe4 'lNxc3+ 20.�e2+-
12
•.•
cxb2 13.l'lbl %Ya5+ 14.ltld2
Or 14.�f1 c3 lS.ltleS �a6!
14 c3 15. 0 - 0 .ia6 16.ltlb3 •••
In the game Yuferov - Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 2000, there followed: 16.ltlc4 'lNxa2 17.ltle3 - and the game was rather unclear.
16 ...%Yxa2 17.li)c5 ib5 18.%Yc2 %Ya3 That is the best reply for Black. It would not work for him to play the natural line: 18. .. ixcS 19.dxcS 'lNa4, because of: 20.'lNxc3 ixe2 2l.%Yd2! and White would capture Black's su per-important c3-pawn and later he would also regain his bishop thanks to the threat 'lNd6.
19.1'lfdl l'lg8!
This is an important resource for Black. Now, White must consider the possible exchange sacrifice - l'lxg3. It was not so easy for me to decide to play that move from the point of view of psychology, since I was losing my castling rights. Still, the rook was my only piece that I could have brought into action at that moment. I was far from sure that my king would be com fortable in the centre, but I knew that it would not be so easy for my oppo nent to exploit that effectively. For example, White would not be able to push d4-dS anytime soon, because of the placement of the knight on the cS square. In case of 20.ieS, Black can follow with 20 ... l'lgS. It seemed to me during the game that White's best possibility was - 20 .if4, but I was planning to counter that with 20 . . . l'lg6, provoking my opponent to play 21.eS, after which he would have problems to advance d4-d5 ever. Still, White captures:
2 0 .hb5 and he forces the issue. This move looks anti-positional, because Black now has in addition a passed pawn and his knight obtains access to the c6-square. Suat intended to rely en -
Game 69
202 tirely on dynamic factors, but he ig nored some specific nuances of the position.
2 0 ... cxb5 21.�e2 �b4 That move is much stronger than 21...a6, since now I have the addition al threat - �c4 .
22.c!oxe6 There is nothing else to recom mend to White.
22 ...�c4! This is the most precise reaction for Black. It was quite possible that the line: 22 ... fxe6 23.�hS+ �d8 24.dS eS, was also very good, but similar complications were more to the taste of the computer and much less to my liking...
23.tOc7+ �d8 24.�h5 Naturally, 24.�c2 was much bet ter here for White, but I had plenty of attractive possibilities in that case too. For example: 24 ... liJc6 2S.liJxbS (or 2S. liJxa8 liJb4) 2S . . . E:xg3!? 26.fxg3 �xbS 27.�xc3 E:b8; o r 24 . . . E:xg3 (This move looks even more powerful.) 2S.liJxa8 E:g6 and Black's knight goes to the b4-square.
24... E:g5 25.�3 E:xg3 26.�xg3 §xc7 27.�g8 tOd7 28.�xf7 §c4 Once again, this move with the
queen to the c4-square is the most ac curate for Black. 29.d5 �xe4. White resigned. In case of 30.E:el, Black plays 30 ... c2, while after 3 0. �e6, he wins with: 30 ... �xb1 31.E:xbl c2 3 2.�el E:c8.
We shared a place in the final standings in the tournament once again with I.Smirin, just like we did a month ago in Dos Hermanas. This time we had 5 1/2 points too, which proved to be sufficient to tie jor first place in Spain...Here, in Sa rajevo however, we only tied for 3rd - 4th place...Kiril Georgiev was the winner with 6 1/2 points, while Veselin To pa/ov was second, half a point behind him.
A65
69 Dreev - Tkachiev
Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shanghai 2001
l.d4 tOf6 2.c4 g6 3.tOc3 ,tg7 4. e4 d6 5.£3 0 - 0 6.tOge2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.tOg3 exd5 9.cxd5 h5 1 0 .,te2 h4 1l.tOfl tOh7 12.,te3 f5 13.exf5 We had almost the same position, except with the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and a7-a6, in our second addi tional game with Topalov (New Delhi, 2 0 00). There followed: (Accordingly, the numbers of the moves are in creased by one... ) 14 . . . gxfS lS.,tf4 liJd7 16.ixd6 E:e8 17.�d2 and after some unbelievable developments I even managed to win that game ... GM Tka chiev however, has an exquisite feel ing for the nuances of the \!ling's In dian Defence and he finds a new idea,
Dreev-Tkachiev, Shanghai 20 01 based on the fact that both a-pawns have not been touched yet.
13 .bf5 14.if2 b5! .•.
Now, you can see the difference. This move would have been impossible with pawns on a4 and a6 and White would have then an indisputable ad vantage after the transfer of the knight to the e3-square. Black is threaten ing now bS-b4. In case of: IS.liJe3? ! b4 16.liJa4? ! (It is better for White to play here 16. liJxfS.) 16 ... id7 17.liJc4, it is good for Black to follow with 17 . . . \1;\re7!? (It i s quite dubious for him to try: 17 ... \1;\reB?! IB.liJxd6 ixa4 19.liJxeB ixdl 2 0 . liJxg7 ixe2 21.liJe6, but he can consider instead 17 .. J�eB!? ) and after 18.Wfl, White would be in a criti cal situation after: IB . . .h3 19.93 liJgS. The position following: IS.ixb5 \1;\ra5 16.ie2 ixc3+ (or 16 .. J''1eB 17. \1;\rd2) 17.bxc3 \1;\rxc3+ 1B.�d2 ic2 19. �c1 ixd1 20.�xc3 ixe2 21.Wxe2 liJa6, should be evaluated as rather unclear, because of the vulnerability of the d5pawn, therefore I chose:
15.a3 although that might look like a compromise on White's part.
15 a6 .••
It is not advisable for Black to
continue with: IS ... b4 16.a'Xb4 ab4 17.�a4.
16.liJe3 liJd7
Now, White can already push:
17.g4! and Black is forced to capture en passant:
17 ...hxg3 18.hxg3 c4 19.liJxf5 Of course not 19.94, due to 19 ... id3. 19 gxf5 In case of: 19 ... �xfS 20.f4, the vulnerability of the light squares in Black's camp becomes worrisome. ..•
2 0 .wfl \1;\rf6? ! This natural move leads to consid erable difficulties for Black, since now he has no access to the f6-square with his knights. He had better play 20 . . . \1;\re7!?, or 20 . . . \1;\ra5 !?
21.f4! That useful move fixes Black's fS pawn and it creates a threat, which is far from obvious and small wonder Vlad overlooked it. . .
21. . . �ac8? ! Black has already great problems. He prepares liJcS with his last move, because after the immediate 21...�c5, Tkachiev naturally would have never liked the line: 22 .ixc5 dxc5 23.d6. In
Game 69
204 case of 21..J''lfe8 (defending against ixc4) it is good for White to contin ue with 22.'?Nc2, threatening l"lhS. It seems more logical for Black to follow with: 2l...l"lab8, with the idea to play next a6-aS and bS-b4 and to create some action on the queenside.White however, can counter that plan suc cessfully too, for example: 22.'it>g2 as 23.'?Nc2 b4 24.axb4 axb4 2S.ltJa4 c3 26.bxc3 bxc3 27.l"lac1 l"lfc8 (or 27... l"lbc8 28.�bS; 27...'?Nfl 28.ltJxc3! l"lfc8 29.�hS '?Nf6 30.'?Ne2) 28.l"lhS and he maintains his advantage.
play.My opponent thought quite jus tifiably that after 24.cll e 2!? his posi tion would have been rather difficult, but the move that I played in the game was at least that strong too...
24... l"lxb2 25.'?Nxh7+ 'it>f7 Unfortunately, there was no checkmate in sight - 26.l"le6 '?Nxc3.
26.'?Nh5+ Or 26.l:l:e6 '?Nxc3.
26... 'it>gS Of course not: 26...'?Ng6? 27.l:l:e7+-
27.cll d l! This is a very important move for White, because now the knight joins This move enables Black to orga the action via the e3-square. nize some counterplay along the b It is too bad for Black to play 27... file; otherwise he would not have that l"lbl, because of 28.l"le6 (White can possibility after his other lines. also try here the simple move 28.'it>g2; 23.'?Nh5 l:l:bS. while in case of: 28..id4 '?Nxd4 29.'?Nh7+ Vlad admitted after the game that 'i!ifl 30.'?NxfS+ cll f6 31.'?Nxbl '?NxdS, he he had still hoped that his mistake would have lost all his advantage.) would not have such catastrophic con 28 ...'?Na1 29.'?Nh7+ 'it>fl 30.'?NxfS + 'it>g8 sequences.I managed to find a clear 31.'?Nh7+ 'it>fl 32.'it>g2+- and Black cut plan to obtain an overwhelming cannot capture White's knight: 32... advantage. l"lxdl 33.'?NhS+, while in case of 32 ... 24.l"lel cllf6, White wins with: 33.l"lxf6+ 'it>xf6 I could have won a second pawn 34. '?Ne4, as well as with: 33.l"le7+ 'it>xe7 with: 24.'?Nxh7+ 'i!ifl 2S.l:l:hS l"lh8 26. 34.'?Nxg7+ l"lfl 3S.l"lel+. '?NxfS '?NxfS 27J'MS+ 'it>g6 28.l"lgS+ 'it>fl, 27. . . l"ld2 2S.ltJe3 but Black would have some counterIt is also possible for White to play
22 .hc4! bxc4
205
Dreev-Tkachiev, Shanghai 20 01 2BJ�e6 and after: 2B ... �al 29.�h7+ 'it>f7 30.�xf5+ 'it>gB 31.�h7+ 'it>f7 32. 'it>g2 the position is winning for him. Black must also consider the possibil ity 2B ... c3 !, but after: 29.iel c2 (He can also try the queen-sacrifice: 29 . . . �xd5! ? 30.�xf6 /{Jxf6 31.�e2 i!eS.) 30. �d2 cxdl�+ 31.�xdl �d4 3 2.�xd6 /{Jf6. his position would have been hardly better than the one he had in the game.
30 ... !!b5 31.!!dl It was even stronger for White to play immediately 31.a4, followed by �d5.
31 d5 ..•
Or 3l...ifB?! 32 .id4.
32.a4 Naturally, it would not work for White to continue with 32 .�xd5?, be cause of 32 . . . �c6.
32 ... dxc4 Black is now forced to give up the exchange; otherwise the game would be over after he loses his d-pawn.
33.axb5 axb5 34.�b7! �e6
2S
•.•
l:U7?!
Black played that natural move, overlooking the possibility - 2 B ... c3 !, after which strangely enough White does not achieve anything with the straightforward approach: 29.�h7+ 'it>f7 30./{Jxf5 �hB 31.i!e7+ (31./{Jh6+ MB 32 .�e4 /{Je5 33.�h5 �xh6 34.�f5 �hl+) 31 ... MB 32.�eB+ 'it>xeB 33. /{Jxg7+ �xg7 34.�xhB+ �xhB 35. �xhB+ 'it>e7. He has however, the move 29.g4 and after: 29 . . .fxg4 30.�h7+ 'it>f7 31./{Jxg4 �xf2+ 32./{Jxf2 �hB 33.�e4 /{Jc5 34.�e3, White is still better, but of course it would be too early to talk about victory.
29. /{Jxc4 !!xd5 30 .�f3! Now, Black's rook is so misplaced that White wins tempi for an impor tant regrouping of his forces.
35.!!el! That is more precise than the im mediate move 35.�xb5. 35 �d6 36.�xb5 c3 37.�c4 .•.
/{Jf6 Black is trying to obtain some coun terplay at the price of a pawn.
38.�cS+ !!f8 39.�xf5 �a6+ 4 0 . 'it>gl !!cS 41.�c2 �c6. This move allows White to inflict a deadly blow. Black would have more practical chances if he had defended with 4l...�c4. but White would have countered that with 42.�h4! , followed by f4-f5.
42.id4 �d5 43.1xf6 1xf6 44.
Game 70
206
ffg6+ .ig7 45.13eS+ 13xeS 46.ffxeS+ .if8 47.ffg6+ .ig7 4S.tieS+ .if8 49. 13h5! Now, Black is already helpless. 49 ... ffd4+ 5 0 .'it?g2. Black re signed.
A46
70 Dreev - Zhang Zhong
Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shanghai 2 0 01
This game isfrom the 7'h Cup - Tan Chin Nam. l.d4 �f6 2.�fj e6 3 .ig5 •
I wanted that day to go away from the most fashionable opening lines . . . The Torre Attack is an infrequent guest of the contemporary tourna ments. Naturally, it possesses its own theory and fine points. It is interest ing to quote here the notes that Rich ard Reti made more than 70 years ago about the move 3 . .igS, which had been played by Carlos Torre - " ... this is not an attempt by White to take the advantage in the centre, but it is just a solid piece development...That set up by White does not guarantee him any real advantages . . . his excellent development provides him with the possibility to inflict a mortal strike, in case the opponent makes even a slight mistake . . . " (R. Reti "Ein Lehrbuch des Schachspiels")
3 c5 4.e3 �c6 5.�bd2 b6 •••
My opponent is playing in the opening a bit carelessly. As a result, I had the possibility to change radi cally the contours of the game, which was quite rare for that type of posi tions.
6.�e4!? As usual, the game develops in the
following fashion here: 6.td3 te7 7.0-0 .ib7 8.c3, or 6.c3 .ib7 7. .id3 cxd4 8.exd4.
6 ....ie7 Black had tried, in one of the quite rarely played games in this variation, the move - 6 . . . cxd4 (Xu Yang - Enh bat, Sofia 1994), but White could have answered with the logical capture - 7.exd4!?
7 .ixf6 gxf6 .
Taking with the bishop on f6 is in favour of White after: 7. . . .ixf6 8 .dS! �b4 (In case of 8 . . . exdS, White has the pleasant choice between: 9.ffxdS 0-0 10. 0 -0-0 and another line, which might be even better: 9.�d6+ 'it?e7 1O.ffxdS.) 9 . dxe6 fxe6 1O.c3 iLlc6 1l.iLld6 + . The other possible capture - 9 . . . dxe6 10.c3 iLldS (or lO . . . ffxdl+ lUlxdl iLlc6 12 . .ibS .id7 13.iLld6+ rtle7 14. iLlxf7) 1l.tbS+ td7 12.ffa4, leads to a superior position for White as well.
S.d5 �b4 I spent a lot of time on the clock here. The move 9.d6 seemed to me to be too optimistic! I considered also 9.iLlc3, but I understood that White would fail to establish a complete con trol over the dS-square, for example:
Dreev-Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2 0 01
2 07
9 ...�b7 1O.�c4 (or 10.e4 fS) 1O ... bS. Therefore: 9.c4 f5
13 fxe4 14 .b:e4 f5 15.�d3 0-0 16.'fYc2 'fYd7 •.•
•
Or 16 ... exdS!? 17.liJxfS (17.cxdS �d7) 17 ...dxc4 18.�xc4+ mh8.
17.dxe6 'fYxe6+ 18.�f1 'fYf7 19. gel �d8 This move is practically forced.
Here, I had two probably equal in value possibilities to retreat with my knight - to c3, or to g3. In fact, it was far from obvious, which one was bet ter . . . After the retreat to the c3-square; the knight would have solidified my position, while coming to g3 would enable me to bring my knight into the attack later. The move 1O.liJg3 is a bit risky from the positional point of view, because the knight there has practical ly no free squares to go to; meanwhile Black has the bishop pair! On the oth er hand, I had already succeeded in compromising Black's pawn-structure on the kingside; while his knight on b4 is quite misplaced too . . . After some de liberations I played:
1 0 .liJg3 d6 11.a3 liJa6 12.�d3 liJc7 13.e4!? I had a difficult choice once again. It would have been a wrong deci sion to play primitively, by simply castling: 13.0-0 hS!? 14.dxe6 fxe6 lS.e4 f4 16.liJe2 eS; but I could have tried instead to capture on e6 at first: 13.dxe6!? fxe6 14.e4 f4 1S.liJhS eS 16.liJg7+.
2 0 .h4 That is an important resource for White! Now Black has to defend against the threat liJgS.
20
.•.
h6 21.h5
I already have the possibility to consider the maneuver liJf3-h4.
21 �d7 •••
It seemed to me that the line: 22.liJh4 hh4 23.l3xh4 l3ae8 24.l3xe8 liJxe8, was too primitive, so I contin ued with:
22.'fYd2! This move is rather unpleasant for my opponent now, because in case he tries to protect his h6-pawn, then my queen comes to the f4-square with tempo, attacking Black's d6-pawn. He is presently forced to continue with:
22
.•.
f4 23.liJe4 �e7
After 23 . . . liJe8, I had a simple move - 24.liJh4, but also I had the interest ing tactical possibility: 24.liJxcS ! ? bxc5
Game 70
208 2S.ie4 0,c7 (or 2S ... �xc4+ 26.c;tigl) 26.�xd6.
24.0,h4 .ixh4 2S.lW14 White's rook joins in the action now.
2S .. J�ad8 That is a logical try. Zhang Zhong is preparing the move d6-dS, which would not have worked immediately, because of: 2S . . . dS 26.cxdS �xdS (or 26 . . . 0,xdS 27.0,d6 �f6 28.i.c4 �xh4 29.i.xdS+ I!ih8 30.i.xa8 E:xa8 31.0,f7+ I!ig7 32.�xd7 �hl+ 33.c;tie2 �xhS+ 34.l!id2 �xf7 3Sj'le7+-) 27.0,d6 �gS 28.i.c4+.
26.g3! But not 26.0,xd6? �f6.
26 ... dS Now, White's rook has the possibil ity to act in its full force in the fight for the f4-square. After the capture 26 ... fxg3, I would have to choose between 27.�xh6 and 27J;!e3 �xf2+ 28.0,xf2 E:xf2+ 29.�xf2 gxf2 3 0 . 1"1g3+.
27.E:xf4 (diagram)
27... �xf4 My opponent decided here to give up his queen with the idea obviously to have some practical chances con nected with exploiting the X-ray d8-
d2 and the possibility to build up a fortress in the future. In fact, his move turned out to be a capitulation. After 27.:.�xhS, it would not have worked for him to play: 28.0,f6+? E:xf6 29.1"1xf6 �hl + 30. c;tie2 1"1e8+ 31.l!idl i.a4+! (but not: 3l.. .ig4+ 32.l!ic2 �xel 33.1"1g6 + ! ) . Capturing 28.cxdS, would have provided Black with at least a draw after: 28. . . �hl+ 29.l!ie2 �hS+ 30.l!ifl (White's attempt at avoiding sharing the point might have ended up in a disaster after: 30.f3 �h2+ 31.l!idl i.a4+! 32.c;ticl �xd2+ 33.l!ixd2 l"lxf4 34.gxf4 0,xdS). I would have however, the resource 28.!!h4! and following: 28 ... ih3+ 29.l!igl �f3 30.!!xh3 dxe4 31.!!xh6, thanks to the threat �gS, my position would have been winning. Instead, my opponent could have played 27. . . �xhS, having more tactical possibili ties at his disposal and my task to find the best moves would have been much more difficult. 28.gxf4 dxe4 29J3xe4 if5 3 0 . E:e3 �e6 31.!!g3+ 1!if7 32.�c3
hd3+ 33J�xd3 0,xf4 34J�xd8 13xd8 3S.�f3 13d4 36.l!igl I!if6 37. 1&b7 �xhS Black's attempt to obtain some counterplay with 37.. j!dl+ fails after:
Dreev-Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2 0 0 1
209
sometimes even contradict each oth er. Still, it seems to me that most of the contents of my article remain up 38.�xa7 Eld6 39.�c7 Ele6 4 0 .b4 to-date even now. Frankly speaking, I cxb4 41.axb4 �g7 42.bS �e8 43. had no idea whether my opponent had �d8+ @eS 44.�dS+ @f6 4S.cS studied my theoretical work before our game or not . . . bxc5 46.b6 �d6 47.�xcS 1- 0 One o f th e basic plans for Black against the 5.b6 system is - d7-d6, AS7 g7-g6, �f8-g7 and depending on cir 71 cumstances - capturing on b6 with Dreev - Banikas the queen, or with the knight. It is in European Club Cup, Panormo 2001 teresting, but still somewhat slow for I was playing for the club ofBosna Black to play: 5 . . .a5 6.4Jc3 �a6 - with (from Bosnia and Herzegovina) in the idea to develop quickly the light squared bishop and to trade it for its that European Team Cup. 1.d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.dS bS 4.cxbS white counterpart, preventing White's a6 S.b6 castling in the process. Still, tourna ment practice has confirmed that after White's energetic reply 7.f4!, followed by 4Jf3 and e2-e4 - the position is in his favour. My opponent chose the sharpest line, in which Black opens up the cen tre immediately: 38.@h2 �d2 39.@g3 4JxhS+ (or 39 ... 4Je2+ 40.lt>g4) 40.@g4 4Jg7 41.�f3+ and he loses his rook.
S ... e6 6.�c3 �xdS 7.�xdS exdS 8.�xdS �c6 I play that line regularly against the Volga gambit - White does not accept the pawn sacrifice and that leads to quite different positions in compari son to the line 5.bxa6. Some two years before this game, I had written a spe cial article on that subject, which was published in the German magazine Schach. I had shared with my readers my understanding of that variation in details i n this article. Naturally, chess theory develops permanently; fashion changes and evaluations of positions
GM H.Banikas had not played the Volga Gambit in any game before our tournament; nevertheless I had ex pected that variation as an eventual
210
Game 71
possibility. The point was that in the previous round, in the game Portisch - Banikas, that position had already appeared on the board. The eminent Hungarian veteran chose an unfa vourable line for White - 9 .i.gS �xb6 1O.�e4+ i.e7 11.�e7 ttJxe7 12 .�c2 (In case of 12.�xa8, Black can at least force a draw with: 12 ... �xb2 13Jldl �c3+ 14J�d2 �cl+.) 12 . . . �b8 (It also seemed good for Black to continue with the simple move 12 ... dS! ?, with an advantage for him.) 13.b3 - and af ter: 13 . . . c4 14.ttJf3 cxb3 IS.axb3 �xb3 16.�xb3 �xb3, Black remained with an extra pawn. I decided to follow my own rec ommendation from the article, so I played:
9.ttJf3 This is the best for White and now Black is practically forced to reply with:
9 ilb8 .••
have tested the move 1O . .td2 in several games and quite successfully at that. Therefore, I recommended it in my article and I made a conclusion there that although the move 1O.e4 (Natu rally, I analyzed thoroughly that move too in my article . . . ) was also possible, Black, as a rule after it, could manage to solve his opening problems. During the game, it came to my mind that my opponent should have been familiar with this p ublication and he might have been specially prepared for our game, so I decided to play 1O.e4, moreover that during the period af ter the appearance of the article I had succeeded in finding some additional possibilities for White in this varia tion. I still consider the move 1O.id2 up to the point in this line, though . . . 10 i.e7 1l.i.c4 0 - 0 12 0 - 0 .••
.
ttJa5 Black avoids the main variation (12 . . . �xb6 13.�hS d6 etc., White has also tried here 13.b3) and he contin ues with a seldom played line. The idea behind 12 . . . ttJaS is quite obvious - he wishes to repel White's bishop away from the a2-g8 diagonal. The drawback of that move is evident too - Black's knight is decentralized.
13.i.d3 ilxb6 14.�h5 ib7 In the game Lautier - Koch, France 1999, Black played an interesting
1 0 .e4 White's other possibility to fight for the opening advantage is the move 1O.i.d2 and one of its ideas is to place the bishop quickly on the c3-square, from where it protects the b2-pawn and it is aimed at Black's kingside. I
move - 14 . . . dS and after: IS.exdS g6 16.�h6 �xdS I7.�el �e6 18.�xe6 �e6 19.ttJgS �gS 2 0.�gS �d4 2 1 .i.d2 �xd3 2 2.�aS �a2 2 3.�el �d6 24.h4 f6 2S.�c3 i.f7 26.�e4, the opponents agreed to a draw.
15 .td2 ild6 .
Black has tested in practice 15 . . .
211
Dreev-Banikas, Pan ormo 2 0 0 1 �e6. Following 16.�fel, White's posi tion is preferable.
16J3adlN This is a novelty. In the game Arake lian - Sumaneev, Briansk 1995, White went back with his bishop 16.i.c2. I did not like to lose a tempo for the re treat of the bishop and I played a use ful move protecting it indirectly.
16... llJc6 17.i.f4 The most natural try here is 17.i.c3, but I did not like Black's possible reply 17 ... llJd4.
17 J3g6! ••
would have been too optimistic. Black has two good possibilities after that: 18 ... llJd4 19.1lJel h6 20.i.e3 !3b6, or 18 ... �xg2+ 19.<;!ixg2 g6, followed by llJc6-d4. Meanwhile, I should have played the move 18.�fel, protecting my pawn and preserving the threat e4-eS. Dur ing the game I thought that the con sequences of 18 . . . llJd4 might be quite unclear, but later in my home analy ses, I understood that after: 19. 1lJxd4 cxd4 20.a3, White's position should be better.
18 ... d6 Now, it seems that White's pieces are perfectly placed and his advan tage should be overwhelming. In fact, things are far from simple. For example, White cannot play 19.eS?, due to 19 . . . llJd4. I was considering the move 19.�fel, but Black could counter that with 19 . . . i.c8!. After White's only move 20.h3, Black redeploys his bish op - 20 . . .i.e6 and his position is quite acceptable. Here, I thought for a long time be fore playing:
19.h3
18.i.c4 That is an imprecision and it be came the reason that my opponent could have equalized the position, as we are going to see later. Naturally, the pawn-advance 18.eS
This move is motivated not so much by the need to ensure a leeway for the
212
Game 71
king, but to prevent Black's maneuver .ib7-c8-e6. Now, 19 ...ic8 is of course bad, for example, because of 20.eS. It looks like the position will soon be clearly in favour of White, particularly if Black does not play actively enough. My positional advantage seemed to be guaranteed and it was supposed to increase, since Black's bishop could hardly be redeployed. My opponent found here a wonderful possibility to avoid the positional bind: .
19 .. .'l;,YaS! White now obviously needs his rook on et, but unfortunately I had to lose a tempo for the move h2-h3. Here, after 20JUel, Black organizes some coun terplay after the knight-maneuver - 20 ... ttJb4. I did not have too much time left on the clock at that moment. My opening advantage seemed to be dissipating and I understood that I would fail to consolidate my position. Therefore I decided to act in a completely differ ent fashion:
2 0 ..ig5 lWdS The game is rather unclear after: 20 ...ixgS 21.ttJxgS �h6 22.ixf7+ �h8 23.lWe2 ttJd4.
21 ..ie3 lWaS 22 ..ig5 lWdS 23 ..id2 .if6
Here the move 23 . . . �a8 would have been senseless, because of 24 ..idS. In order for Black's battery to begin func tioning, he should remove his knight somewhere, but White has taken the b4-square under control.
24..id5lWaS 25 .ic3 ttJe7 26.ixf6 l3xf6 •
Black could have played here more calmly - 26 ... ttJxdS 27.exdS �h6! (This
is better for Black than: 27.. .1"lxf6 28.�fel.) 28.�gS �g6 and that might lead to a possible repetition of moves. Now, the fight becomes fierce again and its development is favourable for me ...
27.ttJg5 h6 2S .hf7'+ l3Sxf7 29. ttJxf7 l3xf7 3 0 .l3xd6 he4 31.l3fdl l3fS .
I had too little time left to be able to apprehend all the fine points of that tricky position, but I had the feeling that White's prospects should be pref erable.
32.l3d7!? I considered the other possibil ity too - 32.�e2!?, but I made up my mind to follow with the penetration of the rook.
32
•..
ttJf5 33.lWg6
Black has certain problems now. For example in case of 33 . . . �h8, White can continue with 34.�b6!? Possibly, Black had to try 33 ... �e8 ! ? The exchange o f queens becomes quite probable in many variations and that would lead to an endgame. Instead, H.Banikas tried to exchange queens outright and thus he in fact was mak ing me a present. I was in a severe time-trouble at that moment, sO . . . un-
Dreev-Banikas, Panormo 20 01
213
fortunately I did not accept it... :
also short of time. It would have been much better for him to follow \\ith T . i.d5 and after: 38.b3 lLld4 39.\!;'h2. the position would have been equal. Kow, White can collect three pawns for his knight after: 39,Ellxc5 lLle6 40.gxg7+ I!7xg7 41.,Elxd5 lLlf4 42.,Eld7+ M8 , but that would not change the correct evaluation of the position. . .
33 :""lc6? ••
.
.
38.gxc5 i.b5 39.ge7 gg6 Black had better play here 39 . . . ,Eld6.
40 .1!7f2 ,Eld6 34.'lbc6? Naturally, I saw the move 34J'l1d6, but I never connected it with the pawn-advance g2-g4 (attacking Black's knight. . . ) in the line: 34 ...�a4 35.g4!+- �b4 (or 35 ... �c2 36.gxf5 �el+ 37.l:'ldl) 36.gd2!. In case of 34 ... �5, White can follow with the simple: 35.�e6+ I!7h8 36.gd8+So, as you have already seen - the move 34.,Elld6 was winning quite eas ily.
White's rooks now are a bit mis placed, they are badly coordinated and they come under attack by Black's pieces. Therefore, my plan was to con solidate my position by exchanging a couple of rooks.
34 ...,txc6 35.gc7 lU6 36.£3 I was reluctant to continue with 36. gel, because of: 36 ... lLld4 37.,Elxc5 gg6, although it might have been quite rea sonable to play like that and to follow later with 38.g4.
36... l!7h7 That is an unnecessary loss of time. Black could have equalized with 36 ... lLld4! and if 37.b4 (It is better for White to play 37.l!7f2.) then Black would have the resource 37... ,Eld6! and it would be White who would have to worry about how to make a draw...
37.gcl lLld4?! That is already a serious impreci sion and the reason was that Black was
41.ge4! Now, Black cannot play : 41...lLle6 42.l'k2 i.d3, because of 43J%d2.
41... i.d7 42.h4 lLle6 43.gc2 1!7g6 44.me3 mf6 45.gd2 So, I managed finally to accomplish what I wanted - the rooks would soon be exchanged. Black's position without rooks would be extremely unpleasant and maybe even lost.
45 ... gxd2 46.mxd2 a5 My next plan included the follow-
214
Game 72
ing: I wanted to improve maximally the placement of my kings ide pawns and then to create a passed pawn on the queens ide. It is tremendously dif ficult for Black to resist that plan suc cessfully on both sides of the board.
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.�d2 dxe4 4.�xe4 �fS 5.�g3 �g6 6.h4 h6 7.�f3 �d7 S.h5 �7 9.�d3 hd3 1 0 .'�bd3 e6
47.b3 �c6 4S .gc4 �d7 49.>t>e3 >t>e5 5 0 .h5 >t>d5 51.g4 a4 Now, my task becomes much eas ier. Black's pawn-advance a6-a5 was more or less reasonable, but his last move just speeds up his demise. The rest is quite simple.
52 .gc3 axb3 53.gd3+ >t>c6 54. gxb3 >t>d6 55.gb4 �c6 56.a3 �g5 57.gf4 �e6 5S.gfS �eS 59. gaS �c6 60 .ga7 �c7 61. >t>f4 �d5+ 62.>t>g3 �c7 63 .f4 �d7 64.gb7 �d5 65.a4 �f6 Or 65 . . . lLlc3 66.a5 lLle2+ 67.lflf2 ILlxf4 6S.a6 �cS 69.gbS+-
11.�d2 The other possibility for White is - 11.�f4.
1 1 �gf6 12. 0 - 0 - 0 �e7 13.�e4 •..
White obtains no advantage with that move. He had better try 13.lflbl.
66.a5 >t>c6
13 . . . lLlxe4 14.Wxe4 ILlf6 15.We2 Or 66 . . .hg4 67.gb6+, followed by Wd5! 16.c4 6S.gxf6+-
67.a6 �e4+ 6S.>t>h4 �c5 69.gbS �xa6 70 .!':-lgS �c5 71.gxg7 �e6 72. gf7 >t>d6 73 .>t>g3 �eS 74.!':-lh7 �b5 75.!':-lxh6 >t>e7 76.fS �g5 77.gg6 �e4+ 7s.lflf4 �f6 79.h6 1-0 72
B19 T.Nedev - Dreev World Ream Ch, Yerevan 2001
Now, in case of 16.lflbl, Black can continue with 16 ... Wie4, as well as with 16 . . . lLlxh5, with the idea - 17.g4 ILlf6 IS.g5 Wie4 19.�e3 ILlg4.
16 .. :�e4 17.�e3 Here, after some deliberations T.Nedev decided to preserve the queens. Meanwhile, he should have considered more seriously the ex change: 17.Wixe4 ILlxe4 IS.�e3. (diagram)
17. . .b5! This game wasplayed in the World Team Championship and I remem bered it, mostly because that was the first time I studied thoroughly one of the most important variations of the Caro-Kann Defence, which I had nev er played before.
This move has already been test ed in a game between not so famous players and White reacted there with IS.lLle5!? Capturing - 18. cxb5?! is rather dubious, because of IS ... gcS.
lS.gh4 Wh7 Black's queen has occupied the va-
2 15
Nadev-Dreev, Yerevan 20 01
23 ... �fd8 24.lLlc5 �b8 Now, White's task to save the game becomes too difficult.
25.lLlb3 In case of 25.�d2, Black can answer with 25 . . . lLlb6 26.Wc3 hc5, followed by lLla4.
cant place of the "Caro-Kann bishop"; nevertheless it feels there quite com fortably. . .
19.1Lle5 �c8 2 0 .g4? White overlooks now his last chance to block the centre with the move 20.c5; still after 20 ... lLld5, Black's po sition is quite acceptable. This was relatively White's best decision under the circumstances.
25... We4! Now, Black's queen is already not so happy to be acting only as a bishop and it comes back to the centre.
26.gg1 lLlb4 27.lLld2 lLld3+ 28. I!Ic2 �xb2+ 29.1!Ic3 Or 29.l!Id1 l"lbl! - +
29 ... �b4+ 3 0 .Wxb4
20
.••
lLld5!
Black prevents White's possible counterplay after 2 0 ...bxc4 21.g5.
2U "lh3 bxc4 22 .Wxc4 0 - 0 23. lLld7?! White is trying to impede the move c6-c5, but he loses too much time while doing that. His best chance would have been the line: 23.Wc2 Wxc2+ 24.l!Ixc2 c5, but Black's prospects would have been superior anyway.
3 0 ...�c2 + 31.l!Ixc2 After 31.I!Ib3, Black has the pleas ant choice between 31...Wd5+ and 3 1 . . . lLlc1+ 32 .�xc1 Wd3+ 33.ma4 !"lxa2+.
31... lLlxb4+ 32.mdl
Game 73
216 Or 32.lflb3 \!;Vc2+ 33.lflxb4 l3b8+ and Black checkmates.
32
•.•
\!;vd3 33 .g5 ll'lxa2 0 -1 D37
73 Dreev - Pigusov FIDE World Chess Ch (k.o.) Moscow 2001
This game was played in the third round of the knockout FIDE World Championship in Moscow. Before the event, I had "studied" the tourna ment scheme and I had expected my opponent at that moment (naturally, in case I had reached that stage ...) to be the ex-world champion Anatolij Evgenievich Karpov. Surprisingly, he was sensationally upset by the young Chinese chess-prodigy Zhang Pengx iang, who later succumbed to Ev genij Pugusov. Evgenij can be noted for his solid, even bulletproof style of playing . In fact he loses only very sel dom . . . In this game I managed to intro duce a novelty, which was specially preparedfor the occasion ... l.d4 ll'lf6 2.c4 e6 3.ll'lf3 d5 4.ll'lc3 �e7 5.ti.f4 c5 6.dxc5 ixc5 7.e3 0 - 0 8.cxd5 ll'lxd5 9.ll'lxd5 exd5 1 0 .a3 ll'lc6 1 1.�d3 �b6 12. 0 - 0 d4
We have played one of the popular lines of the Queen's gambit. The posi tion on the diagram is one ofthe most fashionable in this variation.
13.\!;Vc2!? This move was a novelty at the moment in which that game was played. White had usually tried be fore - 13. e4 �g4 14.h3 - and he was not achieving much, according to the state of theory in the year 2 001. White is hardly obtaining much in that position even nowadays, because after: 14 ... �h5 15.g4 �g6 16.l3c1 l3c8 17.l3e1 f6!? 18.�c4+ ti.f1 19.ixf1+ l3xf1, Black equalized comfortably in the game Navara - Kasimdzhanov, Calvi a 2 0 04.
13 h6 . . •
It seems dubious for Black to try here 13 . . . dxe3?!, because White can answer that simply with: 14.fxe3 h6 15.l3ad1, obtaining an overwhelming positional advantage, or even enter the sharper line: 14.ixh7+ !? Iflh8 15.fxe3 g6 16.ll'lg5 �f5 17.\!;vf2 Iflg7 18.\!;Vh4 \!;Ve7 (18 . . . l3h8? 19.94 �d7 20.lLle6! +-) 19J'l:f3 ! ? and his attack becomes ex tremely dangerous.
14.e4 ti.g4 15.�d2 Presently, after the theory of the variation 13.\!;Vc2 !? h6 14.e4 �g4, has developed considerably, the move 15.lLle5 is at the focus of attention.
15
•..
l3c8 16.\!;Va4 (diagram)
16 �e6 •.•
It is stronger for Black to play here 16 . . . \!;vf6 !? and that was tried for the first time in a later game - Dreev Short, Hyderabad 2002, in which af ter: 17.�g3 lLle5 18.ixe5 \!;Vxe5, I failed
217
Dreev-Pigusov, Moscow 2 0 01
Black would not have changed much with the line: 28 ... a6 29.1I;\Id2 ixf3 30. l"lxf3 l"lc1+ 31.l"lfl l"lxf1+ 32 .�xf1, be cause my two powerful bishops and my superior pawn-structure would have provided me with a long-lasting positional advantage.
29.11;\1xf3 §c1 3 0 .§dl 11;\1c6 31.1I;\Ifl �xd1 32.1I;\Ixdl to achieve anything real out of the opening.
17 .ig3 .!OaS •
This was an imprecIsIOn. It had been more reliable for Black to defend with 17 . . . 1I;\Ie7, after which my position would have been only slightly more attractive.
18.:aacl .id7 19.1I;\Ib4 �e8 2 0 .f4 .!Oc6 21.1I;\Ib3 .!OaS 22.1I;\Ib4 .!Oc6 23. 1I;\Id6
The game enters here a purely tech nical stage after the trade of the rooks. It is extremely difficult for Black to defend a position like that. I have two great positional pluses - a bishop pair and a mobile pawn-tandem e4 and f4. Black has nothing to brag about at all, but still his position is solid enough and my task is to try to shatter it.
32 ....ic7 33.1I;\Id2 gS? Now, I have a minimal, but stable advantage and my position is much more dynamic. My opponent has problems to organize any active coun terplay and he is doomed to a passive defence.
23 ...�e6 24.1I;\IdS .!Oe7 2S.�xc8 1I;\Ixc8 26.1I;\Ib3 �c6 27.1I;\Idl .ig4 28. .!Of3 .ixf3
This activity was absolutely un necessary. Black had better adhere to a strategy of waiting with 33 . . .1I;\Ie6. Still, a move like 33 ...g5 is easy to un derstand from a psychological point of view. My opponent wanted to clarify somehow the situation, because he was evidently reluctant to just sit down and wait how I was going to gradually improve my position in the long run . . .
34.fxgS .ixg3 3S.hxg3
218
Game 73 Evgenij defends quite tenaciously, creating plenty of technical difficulties for me.
47.�e2 'lWc5 48.'lWg5 + 1t>f8 49. 'lWd8+ It>g7 5 0 .'lWd5 'lWe7 51.b4 M6 52.1t>f2 'lWe7 53.'lWd2 It>g6 54.'lWd4 �f6
35 'lWg6?! •.•
Here it was much stronger for Black to follow with: 35... hxg5!? 36.'lWxg5+ �f8 and I would h ave great problems to realize my extra pawn. My task h ad become much easier after my oppo nents last move and the game entered a technical stage of the realization on my extra pawn.
36.gxh6 'lWxg3 37.�e4 q)e6
55.'lWb2?! At that moment, both of us were in a desperate time-trouble. It was much better for me to continue with 55. \Wd2, or 55.\We3.
55 'lWd6 56. lt>e3 It>e7! 57.'lWd4? • • •
This was a terrible blunder in the time-pressure.
57... 'lWe7
38.
38 q)e5 39.'lWxd4 'lWf4+ 4 0 .�gl �h7 41.�e2 b6 42.'lWf2 'lWei + 43.�f1 'lWg5 44.g3 It>xh6 45. lt>g2 It>g7 46. 'lWf4 'lWe7 •.•
My opponent returned the favour. . . After: 57 ... \Wh6 + ! S8.�f2 \wh2 + 59.�f1 \Wxg3, Black's position would have been at least equal. Now, my chances have become once again preferable, but the realization of my advantage is connected with considerable technical difficulties.
58.lt>d2 q)e659.'lWd5q)e56 O. 'lWd4 q)e6 61.'lWe3 'lWd6+ 62.lt>el?! That is another mistake in the time trouble and my opponent thus ob tained quite good chances for a draw as a result.
62
••.
q)d4 63.�e4 'lWe5
Dreev-Pigusov, Moscow 2 0 0 1 One more imprecision i n the time pressure, because in case of: 63 ... %'fh6+ 64. %'fd2 %'fhl+ 6S.<�b2 %'fxe4, Black would have equalized easily.
64.%'fd3 �c6 65.'it>bl
�e5 70.'it>d4 'it>d6 71. 'it>e3 .tg6 ""!... .ill5 �e5 73.'it>f4 �c4 74.'tt>f5 i;e75.�e2 �d6+ Or 7S. . . �xa3 76.�d3 as 77.bS+-
76.'it>f4 �f7 77.g4 a5 78.b5 �e5 79 .'it>f5 �f7 8 0 .e5! �xe5 81.g5 �d7 82.g6 'it>f8 83.'it>e6 �c5+ 84.'it>xf6 �e4+ 85.'it>e5 �c3 86.�d3 'it>e7 87. �c4 'it>f8 88.'it>d6 �bl 89.a4 and Black resigned.
65 :�d4? ••
That was already the decisive blun der. Black could have offered a seri ous resistance only by preserving the queens on the board, for example in the variation: 6S ... %'fc7 66.idS �eS. Now, I exchange queens and the game is transferred into a technically win ning endgame " a bishop against a knight, with an extra pawn". I did not have too many problems to press my advantage home. The game still fol lowed with:
66. �xd4 �xd4
I believe that game was quite inter esting concerning the opening stage, as well as the great competitive ten sion involved... Later in the tournament I had to face VAnand...ln a match to enter the last 8, I succumbed 0 .5-1.5. That match was marked by a sad occa sion too...Just before it had started, my coach and invaluable assistant Alexander Filipenko received the sad news that has mother had passed away and he had to leave...
E81
74 Dreev - Jobava Aeroflot-open, Moscow 2002
Alexander Grigorievich Bakh (the director of the tournament) had an nounced several months before that in February 20 02 there would be a Chess Festival in Moscow with the huge prize-jund of us $150, 0 0 0 (very high top-prizes too) and many people were quite interested. Still, some journalists were doubtful that so many players might come to Mos cow in the winter (since it is really cold in Moscow then) and that the 67.'it>b2 �f3 68. 'it>c3 f6 69.�e2 tournament would be attractive for
Game 74
220
strong grandmasters. There were no special conditionsfor anybody - both grandmasters and amateurs were supposed to pay "a package-deal", which included an a irplane ticket with "Aeroflot", the hotel lodgment and the tournament entry-fee. Still, many strong gran dmasters were attracted by the big prizes, since Open tourna ments with similar high prizes were quite rare for Eastern Europe (and even for the entire "old world" too). I was absolutely convinced that the tournament would be organized on a top-level when after an absence from Russia of almost a month (Iplayed in a round-robin in Wijk aan Zee and then in the Team Championship of France) I came back to Moscow by plane from Paris. I saw then at the "Sheremetievo" airport an enormous bill-board with the sign - "Welcome to the Participants in the Interna tional Chess Tournament "Aeroflot - Open"!"... The tournament rules were tre mendously difficult - a time-control of } lh hoursfor the whole game with 3 0 seconds added per move. There were three days with 2 roundsper day and three days with Just one round per day. There were alsofour days in which the games were to begin quite early - that was at 1 0 o'clock in the morning. I h esitated a lot whether to participate or not because of these severe rules, but in the end I under stood that the role of a spectator at a tournament like that, organized in Moscow, would not be attractive for me. The temptation of the fight was too great to withstand. In the end I
made 6 points out of 9 and I shared to 2 0 th place, just half a point be hind the five winners - G.Kaidanov, A.Grischuk, A.Shabalov, V.Milov and AAlexandrov (according to the tie break coefficient the first place and the highest prize was awarded to Grigory Kaidanov). l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 S.f3 a6 6.Be3 c6 7.c5 6th
I like this variation particularly because White manages to reach a principally different pawn-structure, which is quite untypical for the King's Indian Defence.
7 ... 0 - 0 8.lLlge2 bS 9.cxd6 exd6 1 O .lLlf4 lLlbd7 11.�e2 �e7 There is no essential difference be tween this move and 1l . . .c5, as Loek van Wely played against me at New Delhi in the year 2001. I had the ad vantage there after: 12.0-0 �b7 13. �d2 �e7 lUladl �fe8 15.dxc5 dxc5 16.iLlfd5 iLlxd5 17.iLlxd5 %\Id6 18.iLlc3 �xd2 19J1xd2 Bc6 20.�fdl 13a7 2Uld6 13c8 22 .iLlxd5 �d5 23.136xd5, but a draw in that game was quite sufficient for me to win the match . . . (diagram)
12.�d2N The game Sakaev - Zemehman,
221
Dreev-Jobava, Moscow 20 02
15 lLlfd7 •••
It deserved a serious attention for Black to try 15 ... b4 - and after: 16.lLla4!? lLlxa4 17.Wxb4 lLlxe4 (or 17 . . . d5 18.Wxa4 dxe4 19.�h4 and the game is rather unclear) 18.fxe4 Wxe4, there arises an unclear situation. White has a positional alternative, though: 16.lLlbl c5 17.dxc5 dxc5 18.Wc2, with the idea to follow with lLlbl-d2. Duisburg, 1992 followed with: 12 .0-0 b4?! 13. lLl a4 lLldS 14.�cl lLlxf4 IS.ixf4 d5 16.e5 �b7 17.�d2 c5 18.lLlxc5 lLlxe5 19.ixb4 lLlc6 20.�c3 �c8 21.Wd2 �xd4+ 22.�xd4 lLlxd4 23 .Wxd4 Wxe2 24.Wd5 and White had an edge.
12 J.b7 13. 0 - 0 gfe8 14.gadl .•.
While playing that move, I had to consider also the line: 14...b4 (14... lLld5 15.�f2 ! and White's advantage was only minimal.) 15.lLla4 lLle4? 16. fxe4 Wxe4, but after 17.gf3, Black does not have a full compensation for the piece.
14
•••
16.gfel 16. Wc2! ?
16 gad8 • •.
H ere, once again it deserved a se rious attention for Black to play: 16... b4!? 17.lLlbl c5 18.a3! ? a5 19.�b5, with some initiative for White.
17.1Wc2 c5?! That natural move looks like a mis take to me. Black had better wait: 17... �c8! ?
18.dxc5
lLl b6 15.J.f2
This is a logical multi-purpose move for White. Its only drawback is that Black might play �h6 at some moment quite favourably. Meanwhile, that move is presently impossible due to lLlxg6.
18
•••
lLlxc5
In case Black captures with the pawn - 18 . . . dxc5, White follows with: 19.1Llcxd5 lLlxd5 20.lLlxd5ixd5 2l.�xd5 c4 and here his task is to destroy Black's pawn-chain on the queenside. The simplest way to do that is 22.a4, but it also deserves attention for White
Game 74
222 to try the immediate move: 22.b3 ! ? c3 23J'ledl f5 24.a4 fxe4 (or 24. . .bxa4 25.ic4 Ifih8 26.exf5) 25.axb5 and he maintains better prospects.
19.1iJfxd5 hd5 20 .liJxd5 liJxd5 2U:lxd5 liJa4 22.!':lb1! The attractive move 22 .�c6? ! , af ter: 22 ... ib2 23.�a6 liJc3, does not bring anything good to White.
22 .. .!':lc8 23.�d2 gc6 24 . .td1 White avoids the temptation again! Mer the spectacular variation: 24 ..Elxb5 axb5 25.ixb5 liJc3 26.bxc3 .Elb8 27.id4 id4+ 28.cxd4 d5 !, there arises a completely unclear position.
(after White attacks it with .Eldl) with if8, enables White to improve pa tiently his position, for example by ad vancing his h-pawn. It is equally bad for Black to try: 28 ... �d8 29 . .Eldl �f6 30 . .Eld6 .Elxd6 31.�xd6 �b2+ 32 .lfih3.
29.�d3 ! gb8 3 0 .a4 bxa4 31. .txa4 gc3! 32 .�d1 %Yb4 33.gxd6 gc4 34.b3 gd4 35.gxd4 hd4 36. �c2 That is the correct reaction for White! He must control the c and d files in order to prevent the activiza tion of Black's rook.
36 ...h7 37.gd1 %Yb6
24 ... gec8
38 .gd7! 25.g3 ! That is an important prophylactic move, since now White can capture on b6.
25 ...�c7 26.lfig2 liJb6 27.hb6 In case of 27. .Eld3?, White preserves his two bishop advantage, but after: 27 . . . liJc4 28.�e2 �e7, his pieces are forced to defend the b2-pawn losing their mobility.
27... �xb6 28 ..tb3 Now, W1lite is clearly better.
28 ... a5 Black loses a pawn after that move. The passive defence of the d6-pawn
Naturally, that move was quite at tractive, but I had already made up my mind to enter the variation with the march of the king. I had an extra pawn indeed, but it might not be enough to win the game at the end, so I had no more time to lose!
38 ... %Yg1+ Or 38 ... .Elf8 39.f4 �gl+ 40.lfih3 �f1+ 41.�g2 �a6 42.�f3± 39.lfih3 �f1+ 4 0 �g2 � a6 Or 40 . . . �c1 41.�d2 �f1+ 42.lfig4. 4UWd2 �f1+ Had Black known how all that might have ended, he would have preferred .
223
Dreev-Jobava, Moscow 2 0 02 the move 41...h5, but . . .then White has the resource: 42.f4 �fl+ 43.�g2 �a6 44.�f3.
42.�g4! h5+
Following 44 . . .�d8, Black loses after the exquisite line: 45.�h6 (45. �xg6?? !'!b6) 45 ... �f7 46.�d5+ �f8 47.�d6.
45.�d7+ �f8 46.�xg6! White's pieces are in perfect har mony: 46 ...�xf3 47.�g7 # . It is amaz ing, but even the bishop on a4 partici pates in the final attack. It was only a passive witness awhile ago; now it played a key decisive role in the attack, because it controlled the e8-square. Black resigned, since he had no de fence against the checkmate.
43.�g5! White must go forward! Black could have countered the tentative and humble move 43.�f4, with the immediate 43 ... �gl, with the decisive threat �a7-e3+.
43 . . .1b6 In case of 43 .1c5, White wins with: 44J'!t7! �f7 45.�f4. It would not work for Black to play: 43 ...�f3 44.!'!a7 �g4+ 45.�h6 b4, because White's queen comes to the rescue: 46.�g5! ..
Ell
75 Dreev - Pelletier Biel 2002
l.d4 lOf6 2.c4 e6 3.lOf3 1b4+ 4.1d2 a5
5.�c2!?
44Jhf7! That is the most precise line for White!
44 ... �xf7
This is an interesting line and con trary to the more popular moves 5.g3 and 5.lOc3, it is not so often played in tournament practice. I believe that it is not worse at all and it seems to be quite logical. In fact, White takes the e4square under control and he is threat-
Game 75
224 ening to occupy the centre with e2-e4 just in case, meanwhile the choice of his plans is quite flexible, concerning the possibility of fianchettoing of his light-squared bishop.For example, in case of S...dS, it looks good for White to follow with 6.g3!? with an excel lent position in a strategical aspect. It resembles one of the variations of the Catalan Opening, except that the situation is much more favourable for him, because Black's move a7-aS is not particularly useful in similar pawn structures ... Following S...O-O, White can play 6.e4!?, occupying the centre with clearly better chances.
S hd2+ 6,Fobxd2 dS ..•
That is a novelty, but it is hardly better than the usual move 6...d6, which is a frequent guest in the tour naments.
not very purposeful for Black either.
1 O . �eS �a6 11.l;fd1 I would not have achieved much
with Il.cS, because of: 11...bxcS I2.dxc5 �d7! and Black's chances are worse neither after: 13.c6 �xeS 14.cxb7 gb8, not in case of: 13.�df3 �xeS 14.�xeS �b4.
1l cS 12.cxd5 .•.
Following: I2.dxcS �xcS 13.cxd5 hdS, the prospects of both sides are about equal.
1 2. . .exd51? Capturing the pawn leads to a com plicated fight with a slightly better po sition for White.He would have main tained superior chances too in case of: 12...hdS 13.e4 1b7 14.dxc5 �xcS IS.gacl.
7.g3 1? I like this plan including the fian chettoing of the light-squared bishop and castling short subsequently.
7 . 0 - 0 8.ig2 b6 9 . 0 - 0 ib7 ..
13.b3 !? I was preparing the b2-square for my queen, in order to control the key d4-square.
13. . .'oMfe7 14. 'oMfb2 l3fd8 15J;ac1 �c7 16.�ec4 White has a slight positional advantage in that pawn-structure. It is a bit similar to some lines of the Queen's Indian Defence, but as I have mentioned before, the move a7-aS is
The calm move 16.e3, would have preserved a slight advantage for me.I decided to play that spectacular move, since I wanted to sharpen the game, although it was leading to a bit unclear position.
225
Dreev-Pelletier, Biel 20 02
16
•.•
1%a6?!
That awkward move enables me to improve my situation considerably. It deserved attention for Black to follow with: 16 ...dxc4 ! ? 17.ixb7 �ab8, with a complicated game with mutual chanc es.
17.�e3 g6 This is an impreclSlon, because my opponent compromises his dark squares on the kingside without any necessity. It was more reliable for him to defend with: 17 ... �e6 18.�f5 %Yd7, obtaining a slightly worse, but still quite acceptable position.
18.�f3 �e6 It is not better for Black to play: 18 ... a4, in view of: 19.bxa4 c4 20. �e5 with a considerable positional advan tage for White.
This move emphasizes the vul nerability of the dark squares on the kingside and it increases my pressure along the al-h8 diagonal.
22 ... �xg4 In case of 22 ... axb3, I was planning to continue with 2 3.dxc5!, after which my opponent would have very serious problems. For example, in case of: 23 ... �xg4 24.�xg4 h5 (White was threat ening a checkmate in two - 25.�h6 1Yf8 26.%Yh8 # ) 25.�f6+! 1Yf7 (25 ... lYf8 26.c6+-) 26.cxb6! my initiative would have been quite dangerous. Here, it is rather dubious for Black to play: 26 ... bxa2? ! , due to: 27.�c7 al%Y 28.�xe7+ IYxe7 29.�al 1::l x al+ 30.lYg2 d4+ 31. 'itlh3 and his position would be very difficult. White's knight is untouch able, after 3l...'itlxf6, White wins with 32.%Yxd4+ and Black loses unavoid ably his bishop. It is not any better for Black to defend with: 31.. .e5, since af ter 32.�h7! his position is hopeless.
23.�xg4 %Yg7?!
19.�h3!? a4 2 0 .ixe6 fxe6 21. �e5 1%da8 Simplifying the game with - 21... axb3 2 2 .axb3 �da8 23.�al �xal 24.�xal �xal+ 25.%Yxal - would have preserved for me a slight, but stable positional advantage thanks to the powerful knight on the e5-outpost. My opponent would be doomed to a pas sive defence then.
22.�5g4!?
This is a grave mistake. It was bet ter for Black to try: 23 ...h5 24.�e5 axb3 25. axb3 �a2 26.%Yc3. Indeed, in that case I would have preserved a slight positional advantage too, but Black would have at least activated his rooks.
226
Game 76
24.b4! That excellent positional move cuts off practically Black's queenside pieces away from the actions and White has a free hand to organize later a crushing kingside attack.
24 ... a3 2S.'fNd2 c4 26.�c3 My adversary's position is already close to hopeless from the point of view of strategy. His dark eS and f6squares are very weak and in addition his bishop on b7 is a sorry sight.
26 bS ..•
We were both in time-trouble here. Still, it is quite understandable that it is much easier to play that position with White under time-pressure, be cause I do not risk anything in that pawn-structure, while every mistake by my opponent would lead him to an immediate disaster.
27.�b1 That is a typical move for the time trouble and it is not the best, but it does not ch ange much in that posi tion.
My kingside attack is developing smoothly, while my adversary has no counterplay at all.
29 ...'fNe7?! That is another bad move for Black, played under a severe time-pressure. His position is strategically hopeless anyway, so White's victory is just a matter of time . . . The game still followed with:
3 0 .�£J �c8 31.c!l:ig4 'fNg7 32.�c1 hS 33.c!l:if6+ d>h8 34.�cc3 �ca8?! 3S.'fNf4 �c6 36.'fNeS �e8 37.�f4 �c8 38.d>h2 �ca8 39.g4 bxg4 4 0 .�xg4 �6a7 41.hS and Black resigned. 76
E12 Dreev - Vallejo Pons Biel 2002
1.d4 c!l:if6 2.c4 e6 3.c!l:i£J b6 4.a3 �a6
27. . . �c6?! This only speeds up Black's demise. It was better for him to try 27 .. .l'!fB.
28.c!l:ieS �e8
Pako plays the Meran variation quite often with Black, but obvious ly he had decided otherwise for this
29.h4
game . . . Meanwhile, he probably knew that I was playing one and the same line permanently against the Queen's Indian Defence. He must have thought that I had failed to repair that line af-
227
Dreev-Vallejo Pons, Biel 20 0 2 ter my game with V.Emelin (Aero flot-open 2002), in which I had not achieved any advantage with White whatsoever. Contemporary chess is becoming sometimes an exact science: to find a weak spot in the opening ar mour ofthe opponent, to analyze some opening line with "Fritz" and you can reach the desired result ... Still, it is far from easy to understand the essence of the opening strategy with such an approach, so that tactics might often turn out to be counterproductive... This is exactly what happened in our game...
5.'Mfc2 c5 6.d5 exd5 7.cxd5 g6 Here, Black can win a pawn with: 7 ... ib7 8.e4 'Mfe7 9.id3 tiJxdS 10.0-0 tiJc7, but that line is not popular for him at all.
S.if4
the line: lO ...bS 11.tiJxbS 0-0 12. tiJc3, but his compensation for the pawn was insufficient.
1 0 'Mfd7 1 1 .bd6 'Mfxa4 12.<�xa4 tLlxd5 13. 0 - 0 - 0 CiJe7 14.e4 hf1 15.ghxfl tLlbc6 16.tLlc3 .bc3 •.•
•
It is too bad for Black to castle, be cause of tiJdS. Until now, we were fol lowing the game Kasparov - Gligoric, Bugoino 1982 and there it was played: 16 ... Eld8? 17.CiJb5 �d7 18.if4 �xdl+ 19.�xdl 0-0 20.�d7 and White had a great advantage. So, the exchange of Black's bishop is practically forced.
17.hc gdS This position was played for the first time in the game Browne - Tim man, Las-Palmas 1982. Black's move in the game is considered to be his main defence. His alternatives are - 17. . . 0-0-0 and 17 .. .f6.
This is a rarely played move. The main line for White is - 8.4:lc3 �7 9.g3.
S ... d6 Or 8 . . .ig7 9.id6. 9. tiJ c3 ig7
IS.ie5N
1 0 .'t«a4+ The previous as well as the subsequent moves are practically forced. GM Lobron played against me in a rapid chess game during the last year
In my game against V. Emelin (Moscow, 2002), I played I8.ic7 and he countered that in the best pos sible way: I8 . . . �xdl+ I9.�xdl f6 20.e5 fe 21.tiJxe5 �f8 2 2 .tiJf3 Elf6, so the game was completely equal. Timman played: 18 .. .EKd7 19 .if4 f6. The move that I have chosen in this game chang es not only the character of the fight,
228
Game 77
but possibly the evaluation of the en tire variation.
18 13xdl+ 19.13xdl �xe5 2 0 . �xe5 f6 .•.
24.e5! f5 After: 24 .. .fe 25.ltJxe5+ me7, White has 2 6.f4!, preparing - 13c7.
25.lLlf6 lLle7 Black facilitates my task consider ably. He had to defend with 25 ... h6, with chances to offer some resistance, although even then after the move 26.f4, White is clearly better.
26.13c7 We6 27.f4 h6 28.13xa7 g5 That is Black's last attempt...
21.�d7! This is the road to White's advan tage. He cannot achieve anything much with: 2 1.lLlc4 lLlc8, as well as with: 2 1.lLlg4 13fB 22 .13d6 lLlg8.
21. . . mf7 In case of 21...f5, White has the strong argument - 2 2 . e5, or 2 2.lLlf6+, followed by e4-e5.
22 .13d6 lLlc8 Black had obviously relied on that very much. (But not 2 2 . . . 13d8, because White follows with 23.lLle5+, winning a pawn.).
23.13c6 13d8
29.lLlh5! This is the best for White, while the move 29.g3 is less precise. Now, it is impossible for Black to play 29 ... gxf4, due to 30.ltJg7+. I had calculated that line to the very end, though... : 3 0 . . . me5 31.13xe7+ @f6 32.13b7 13g8 33. ItJh5+ @g5 34J::lg7+.
29 ... lLlg6 3 0 . lLlg7+ Wd5 31.e6 Wd6 32.g4! This move is not only the most beautiful, but it is the most accurate too! White obtains two connected passed pawns and they are unstop pable.
32 ...gxf4 33.gxf5 fJ 34.fxg6 f2 35.13f7 13g8 36.e7. Black resigned.
229
Dreev-Kishnev, Chalkidiki 2 0 0 2 77
D39 Dreev - Kishnev
under a difficult test.
lS,.."flfxbS+
European Club Cup, Chalkidiki 2002
This game was played in the Euro pean Club Cup where I made my de but for the Russian club "The Nickel from Norilsk". We took second place, though. l.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�O dS 4.�c3 dxc4 S.e4 J.b4 6.J.gS cS 7.hc4 cxd4 8.�xd4 hc3+ 9.bxc3 "flfaS 1 0 .J.bS+ �bd7 1l.h£6 "flfxc3 + 12. 'il?fl gxf6 13.h4 "flfaS 14.l3h3
16.l3d3 ! ! After that brilliant move, Black's position, despite his extra piece, be comes absolutely critical. In case of the seemingly attractive line - 16.i>gl, Black could have defended with 16 ... "flfc5 and White would then have noth ing better than: 17.�d6+ i>e7 18.�f5+ i>e8 19.�d6+ forcing a draw by a per petual check.
16,.."flfb6 That is a well-familiar and quite popular position in the Vienna varia tion of the Queen's gambit. The criti cal line for Black here is 14 ... a6, but he can also play 14 ... 'iI?e7.
14,..eS? My opponent chooses a quite rare and as our game shows rather dubious move. At the moment our game was played, White used to counter 14 ... e5, only with the line: 15.ixd7+ i.xd7 16.�fS i.xfS 17.exf5 gd8 and Black had no problems after that. Still, our game continued with:
IS.�f5! This excellent novelty puts the whole seldom played line with 14... e5
The other lines for Black are hardly any better. He has no satisfactory de fence, for example: 16 ... iWa5 (or 16 ... i>dB 17.�d6 �a6 IB.i>gl+-; 16 ... i>fB 17.lLid6 iWa6 IB.iWb3+-) 17.iWb3 lLic5 I B.lLid6+ i>dB 19."flfd5 and White's at tack should be victorious; or: 16 ..."flfa6 17.i>gl and the threat 1:l:cl is impos sible to parry.
17.l3bl "flfa6 18.i>gl! Black is in a zugzwang and he has no useful moves. Now, the game is quickly over.
18,. .�xa2 Or IB ... 1:l:gB 19.9c1! "flfxa2 20.gc7 "flfe6 2 1.iWc1+-
19.13cl! bS Or 19. . .i>f8 2 0.gdc3+-
230
Game 78
2 0 .13c7 'iWa4 21.'iWc1 'iWa6 22.13d6 'iWxd6 23A:lxd6+ 'i!?e7 24.13xc8 and
- against Loek van Wely and Peter Leko.
7... dxc4
Black resigned.
That was a good game with a cer tain theoretical importance. Under standably enough, after that game the move 14 . . e5 in that line of the Vi enna variation, disappearedjrom the tournament practice. .
The other possibility here for Black is - 7 ... tLle4.
8.hc4 0 - 0 9.tLlge2 The development of White's knight to f3 (9. tLlf3) leads to the classical po sitions.
9 'iWxc5 1 0 .'iWb3 tLlc6 1l.tLlb5 'iWh5 12A:lg3 •..
78
D82 Dreev - Svidler
European Club Cup, Chalkidiki 2002
J.Piket played 12.ill c 7 against Loek van Wely. After 12 ... ill a 5, Black had a very bad position. He had better try 12 . . J�b8.
12 My games with Petr Svidler have always been quite principled and in teresting. Asfor the result, things are fluctuating. I managed to win my game against Petr at the European Club Cup as he was playing there for the French super-club NAO. l.d4 tLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.tLlc3 d5 4.�f4 �g7 5.e3 c5 6.dxc5 'iWa5 7.13c1
..•
'iWh4 13.tLlc7 g5
This is one of the three possibili ties that Black had at his disposal. The others - 13 .. Jlb8 and 13 . . . e5 - lead to complex positions as well.
14.hg5 I had prepared that novelty for my
This order of moves enables White to develop his knight to the e2-square. I noticed it while I was playing through the games of the Dutch GM Jeroen Piket. He played like that twice in the year 2001 at the Amber-tournament
game against Peter. The game Gret arsson - Schandorff, Gentofte 1999, followed with: 14.ill f5 !xfS 1S.!g3 ill d 4!
14 'iWxg5 15.tLlxa8 !d7 16.'iWxb7 13b8 17.'iWc7 13xa8 .•.
This looked like the most natural move for Black, but it deserved at tention for him to try 17 . . J lc 8 ! ? and if
231
Dreev-Svidler, Chalkidiki 2 0 02 1B.liJe4 - not 1B ... liJxe4 19.%Vxd7 l:'ldB 2 0.%Vxc6 %Va5+ 2 1.�f1 %Vd2 22.�e2, but 1B . . . %VfS !?, or 1B . . . %VaS + ! ?
l S .ia6! •
This is a very strong move. Still, it would be fair to admit - that position was mentioned by GM KIasenkow in his comments and he had evalu ated it as unclear. It seems to me that Black's situation as almost critical, for example it is too bad for him to play: 1B ... IiJb4? 19.%Vb7+-. After: 1B ... liJdB 19.0-0 liJe6 20.%Vb7, Black is clearly worse.
lS ... liJeS Peter continues with the forced play. He could have tried instead lB . . . %VdS! ?
19.%Vxd7 %VaS+
IiJxg7 (or 23 ... �xg7 24.%Vd4+) 24.gc7 l:'lfB 2S.l:'lxa7.
23.!"!c6 %VaS I saw that following 23 . . .%VbS, the next spectacular line would not work for White: 24.liJh6+ �fB 2S.l:'lf6?, be cause of 25 ... %Vxf1+. but it is quite sufficient for him to play the simple: 24.liJxg7 IiJb4 2S.liJfS (or 2S.liJxeB %Vxc6 26.%Vxe7) 2S ... liJxc6 26.liJxe7+ �g7 27.liJxc6.
24.liJxe7+ After 24.liJxg7 �xg7, I failed to find anything decisive, while I was calcu lating variations; for example after: 2S.%Vb7 l:'ldB 26.l:'la6, Black had the re source 2 6 ...%Vd2. 24 .. lPfS 2S.liJc8 .
Here, my opponent made the deci sive blunder:
2S...%Vb4? This move defends simultaneously against the threat %Vd7-b7, as well as against %Vd7-e7.
2 0 .b4! My opponent had underestimated this important nuance.
20 ... liJxb4 21. 0 - 0 Yfixa6 After 2l. ..liJxa6 22.%Vxe7, White maintains a clear advantage.
22.1iJf5 IiJxa2 As Peter told me after the game, he had evaluated that position as quite acceptable for Black. In fact, White has a great advantage. In case of 2 2 ... e6, White practically wins with : 23.liJxg7
Still, after my reply: 26.!"!c4! Peter resigned in view of: 26 . . .%Vxc4 (or 26 ... %Va3 27.l:'le4) 27.%Ve7+ �gB 2 B.%VxeB+ ifB 29.liJe7+ �g7 30.liJfS+ �g6 31.%VxaB+Black had an only chance that could enable him to try to hold the game
232
Game 79
somehow - 25 . . .'?;l/e5 and if: 26.§b7 ElbB 27.§xa7 - 27. . . Elb2 (but not 27 ... itJb4, because of 2 B.Elc5). Well, even then after: 2 B .itJb6 §e7 (this i s once again a n only move for Black) 29 .itJd7+ It
1 0. . 0 - 0 Vesselin Topalov at the FIDE World Championship in New Delhi played here in another fashion against me: 1O ...�h5, but after: Il.h3 O-O?! 12.c5 �e7 13.itJe5 It
1l.e5 ie7 12.itJe5 79
Dll Dreev - Zagrebelny Aerofiot-open, Moscow 20 03
l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Filf3 �f6 4.e3 a6 5.b3 ig4 6.�bd2 e6 7.id3 �bd7 8. 0 - 0 id6 9.ib2 I had played that position the pre vious time in the game (Dreev - Tim man, Wijk aan Zee 2002). My oppo nent chose the move 9 .. §bB and it looked a bit awkward, but it prevented the move itJf3-e5, meanwhile Black had at his disposal the c7-square in case White pushed c4-c5. .
9 ...§e7?!
Naturally, White's attempt to win a pawn seems rather dubious: 12.itJg5 h6 13.itJh7 itJxh7 14.bh7+ It
12 ... ih5 13.f4 That is the most natural move for White.
13 ...ig6 14.�xg6 hxg6 Now, White should consider the possibility itJf6-g4 (followed by f7-f5). In case of: 15.h3 itJh7 16.g4 f5, White cannot control the important f6square with the move 17.g5, because of his weakness on the g3-square. Therefore I played:
15.ie2
Now you know - that move is not precise, because of the abovemen tioned reasons. 1 0 .§e2
15 ... �h7 Possibly, Black had to consider the possibility of including the moves:
233
Dreev-Zagrebelny, Moscow 2 0 03 15...b6 16.b4 as 17.a3 - and only then - 17... li:lh7 (with the idea to follow with f7-f5). In that case, White would not be forced to play the move g2g4 (analogously to the moves in the game . . . ).
16.g4 g5 Here, the moves: 16 ...b6 17.b4 as 18.a3 g5, could have been included as well.
17 .ltd3 g6 •
The line: 17 ... li:lhf6 18.\';\Id1, leads to an advantage for White. Black intends to continue now with f7-f5 and White's next move is the most principled. . .
18.f5 gxf5 19.9xf5 e5
This check was obviously a great surprise for my opponent and he thought for over ten minutes on his only move. . .
22 lt>h8 •••
It is quite understandable that 22 ... lt>g7 is very bad for Black due to: 23.l:!xf7+ ! l:!xf7 24.vtfg6+ @h8 2S.\';\Ixf7 Ii:ldf6 (or 2S ... li:ldxeS 26.�fS) 26.l:!f1 l:!f8 27.l:!xf6.
23 . .ltf5? That natural move turns out to be a mistake as well . The correct move for White would have been - 23.\';\Id1! and Black can hardly save the game. For example: 23 ... li:lh6 24.if5 Ii:lxeS 2S.\';\IhS @g7 26.li:lf3+-, or 23 ... @xh7 24.\';\Ixg4 Ii:lxeS 2S.\';\IhS+ @g7 26.1i:lf3 f6 27.li:ld4+-
23
•••
li:lxe3 24.\';\Id3 .ixc5
After: 24 . . . li:lxfS 25.l:!xfS, Black is practically helpless.
25 . .hd7
2 0 .f6! This sacrifice leads to the opening of important "arteries", so that I do not allow Black to close the position.
2 0 . . . li:lhxf6 21.dxe5 Ii:lg4? ! It was better for Black to play 21... Ii:lxe5, but then after: 2 2.l:!fS Ii:lfg4 23.li:lf1 ! , I would have a serious initia tive for the pawn, while in the varia tion: 23 ... li:lxd3 24.\';\Ixd3 Ii:lh6 2S.\';\Id4 f6 26.l:!xgS+ 1ttf7 27J'l:g2 l:!g8 28.li:lg3 l:!g4 29.e4, White would maintain his advantage.
22 .lth7+ ! •
25
•..
li:lc4+?
Black cannot save the game any more after that mistake. He had how ever a wonderful defensive resource, which I found only after the game - 2S .. .f6 ! ! Now, it is of course a mistake for White to play 26.l:!fc1?, due to: 26 ...
234
Game BO
�xd7 27.E1xcS �g4+. It is also terrible for him to continue with: 26.e6??, be cause of 26 ... lLlg4+. White has no ad vantage in the variation: 26.E1xf6 E1xf6 (or 26 ... lLlg4+? 27.lt>hl lLlxf6 28.�h3 + lLlh7 29.lLle4) 27.exf6 lLlg4+ 28 .id4 �xh2+ 29.Ml lLleS 30.f7 E1f8 31.�g6 ixd4 32.�f6+ It>h7 33.ifS+ lLlg6 34. ixg6+ It>h6 3S.�xd4 It>xg6. Following: 26J::lfel 26... �xd7 (or 26 . . . lLlc4+?! 2 7.lt>hl lLlxb2 28.�h3+ It>g7 29.ifS 13h8 30. �c3) 27.13xe3 ixe3+ 28.�xe3 E1ae8 (It is worse for Black to play here: 28 . . . �g4+ 29.lt>hl E1ae8 30.13gl±) 29.lt>hl! (or 29.�g3 fxeS 30.ixeS+ It>h7 31.13el �fS), White might be still slightly better, but the position would have remained complicated enough. For example: 29 . . . lt>g8 ! ? (or 29 . . .d4 30.hd4 �dS+ 31.It>g1 fxeS 32 .�h3+ It>g7 33.ie3) 30J:'lgl �fS 31.E1g2 with the idea to fol low with �e3-gl.
Karjakin was anticipated with great interest. I shared l't_2nd place with 6 points out 019 with Alexander Ruste mov, but according to the Berger co efficient he was declared the winner of the tournament. l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3 .tb7 S.lLlc3 dS 6.cxdS lLlxdS 7 .td2 •
This flexible move was introduced into the 'top-level tournament practice by GM 5mbat Lputian.
7... lLld7 S.lLlxdS ixdS 9.�c2 cS 10 .e4 ib7
26.lt>h1+- lLlxb2 27.�h3 + It>g7 2S.E1f6 �xe5 29.�h6+ �gS 3 0 .tf5 I had reached that position three 1- 0 times in the several months preceding •
this game. In the first one, against Pe ter Leko, in the match "Russia against E12 The Rest of the World" after: 1l.13dl so cxd4 12.lLlxd4 a6 13.ie3 ie7 14.ie2 Dreev Tiviakov �c8 IS.�bl lLlcS 16.f3 0-0 17.0-0 Dos Hermanas 2 003 �b8 18.b4 lLla4 19.�c2 bS 2 0.E1cl id6 This was my second participation 21.g3, we agreed to a draw (Dreev in the traditional round-robin tour Leko, Moscow 2 002). nament. Just like in the year 20 aI, it In the second game, at the World was a category 16 event. I was only FIDE Cup, Vishy Anand played a dif number three with my rating of2690 ferent move - 13 ... bS, but the game at the start of the tournament. Alex also ended in a draw after: 14.f3 ie7 ey Shirov and Alexander Khalifman . IS.ie2 13c8 16.�d2 lLleS 17.0-0 0-0 were infront of me, because they both 18.b4 lLlc4 19.ixc4 bxc4 2 0.lLle2 had a rating of over 270 O . The par �xd2 21.13xd2 ic6 22 .lLlc3 1/2 (Dreev ticipation of the 12 year old Sergey - Anand, Hyderabad 2002). -
235
Dreev-Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 2 0 03 In the previous game, against Ana tolij Karpov, (Dreev - Karpov, Cap d'Agde 2 0 02), I had decided to try a much sharper move - n.d5. After: n . . . exdS 12.exd5 id6 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.liJg5 liJf6 15.bl ie5 16.liJf3 id4, I had no opening advantage and the position had remained quite unclear. Later, I had studied that position quite thoroughly and I found an inter esting possibility, so when my oppo nent played 1O . . . ib7, I advanced my d4-pawn once again ...
n.d5 exd5 12.exd5 id6 13. 0 - 0- 0 0 - 0
Therefore, I started with the mo\-e
- 15.�c3
15 ... liJf6 16.�c6 gb8 In case of: 16 . . . ixc6 17.dxc6 ElcB IB.lMfa4, Black has certain problems to worry about.
17.h4 My opponent had evidently under estimated that move.
17. . liJg4 .
That was Black's only move, since White was threatening liJf3-g5.
18.bl This useful move helps White pre pare liJf3-gS.
14.�b5!? This is the possibility that I had mentioned ...
14. . .h6 This move seems to be too slow, but it is quite logical, since Black takes the g5-square under control. White can counter the immediate move 14 . . . liJf6 with the powerful - 15.ig5. After 14 ... h6, in case ofthe straight forward reaction 15.h4 (in order to play after 15 . . . liJf6 - 16. liJg5) Black must follow with 16 ... ie5 and White does not achieve anything. If White tries 16.ic3, then Black can simply capture on d5 - 16 ... 'Llxd5.
18 ... ic8? Sergey told me in our discussion after the game that he did not wish to allow the move liJf3-gS and he relied a lot on his subsequent move g7-g6. In fact, the move IB . . . icB turned out to be his decisive mistake. Meanwhile, after IB . . . lMfc7, it would have been quite premature to talk about any real advantage for White. For example, here the move 19. 1iJgS, leads possibly only to a draw by a perpetual after: 19 . . . hxg5 2 0 .hxgS fS 21.gxf6 liJxf6 22.hf6 Elxf6 23.lMfh7+ fB 24.lMfhB+ etc. Therefore, I would have to look for some other possibili-
236 ties in case he had tried - 18..:�c7 . . .
Game BO After 19 ... �c7, White wins again with the help of: 20.li:lgS - 20 ... hxgS 21.hxgS fS 22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 23 . .ixf6 gxf6 24.gh6. Following 19 .. .f6, White should at first bring his queen into the attack 20.�g6 bS 21.Ii:lgS hxgS 22.hxgS li:leS 23.�h7+ I!;>o 24.gh6 and his advan tage becomes decisive.
19.!'Mel! This is an important preparatory move. I though that after: 19.1i:lgS hxgs 20.hxgS fS, White's attack was insufficient.
19. . .g6 Black can hardly save the game af ter his other possibilities either, for example if: 19 ... bS, then 2 0.li:lgS hxgS 21.hxgS fS 22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 23.�g6 (23. gh6!?) and if 23 ... b4, then 24.axb4 cxb4 2S.�d4 and Black is complete ly helpless against the doubling of White's rooks along the h-file after ge4, or gh4. In case of 19 . . .�d7, White can again answer with - 20.li:lgS hxgS 21.hxgS fS 22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 (22 . . . gxf6 23.�h7+ I!;>O 24.hd7 �xd7 2S.ge6) and 23.�g6. After: 23 ...�xc6 24.dxc6 ge8 (24 ... g0 2S.gh3; 24 ... �c7 2S.ge6 1i:le8 26.�h7+ I!;>o 27.ghel + .... ) 2S.gdl ge6 26.gh7 �c7 27.gdhl, White's position is win ning. Black's other possible defence is - 23 ... �c8 (threatening �d7-fS) - but after: 24.�xd7 �xd7 2S.ge6 (2S.hf6 gxf6 26.�h7+ I!;>o 27.�hS+) 2S ...�e7 26.1"le3 �e8 27.�fS �c8 28.�xc8 l!bxc8 29.1"lxe7 gO 30.gh8+, the endgame should be an easy win for White.
2 0 J�e6! he6 This is the only move for Black. 2 1.dxe6 f5 Once again an only move ...
22.h5 That is the necessary introduction to White's main idea. Now, it becomes clear that Black's hopes to consolidate his position with the help of the move �e7 are going to be in vain. The point is that in case of 22 ... gS, I had in mind the powerful argument - 23.e7! ! , opening the important a2g8 diagonal. After: 23 . . . .ixe7 24.gdl �c7 2s.�b3+ gO 26.�e6 �f6 27.gd7, Black loses. If Black captures the pawn with his queen - 23 . . . �xe7, I had the answer 24.�dS+ and followinge 24 ... I!;>h7 - 2S.gel, so that after every re treat of Black's queen, White plays 26.�e6 and Black cannot defend his fS-square and his position crumbles.
Dreev-Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 20 03 Therefore, Sergey played
22
•••
-
gxhS
14 . . . 'i!Vc7 But after:
23.gxhS
my attack was impos sible to be parried: -
23 :�e7 24.li:lh4 'i!Vxe6 2S.li:lxfS ieS ••
Or 25 ... gxf5 26.fuf5 ie5 27.'�e4.
26.idS l- 0
This is an interesting novelty. Black is preparing li:ld7-f6. In a game, which was played several days earlier in an other tournament (Dreev - Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 2003), Black followed with 14 ...h6 (I have chosen that game too as a part of this book. . . ). Information spreads in a flash in contemporary society and naturally my opponent must have known about that game. He made his next several moves rather quickly...
IS.ic3 gfd8 16.�bl li:lf8 81
E12 Dreev - Jakovenko
Russian Club Cup, TogliaUi 2 003
This game against young grand master Yakovenko was played at the Russian Club Cup. I competed there on board onefor the team "The Nickel of Norilsk". Our club had the highest . rating ofthe players, but we took only secon d place after the team "Ladja" (fro m the city of Kazan), which was headed by Sergey Ru blevsky. l.d4 li:lf6 2.c4 dS exdS 3.li:lf3 b6 4.a3 ib7 S.li:lc3 dS 6.cxdS li:lxdS 7.�d2 li:ld7 8. li:lxdS hdS 9.'i!Vc2 c5 1 0 .e4 ib7 11.dS exdS 12.exdS id6 13. 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 14.ibS!?
After 16 . . . llJe5 17.llJg5 llJg6 18.h4, White has the initiative.
17.'i!Ve4 Or 17.'i!Vf5!? a6· 18.id3 b5 19.1lJg5 (19.'i!Vg5 llJg6) 19 ...b4 20.axb4.
17. . .a6 18.id3 18.ic6 ! ?
1 8 . . .bS I9.'i!Vg4 li:lg6 2 0 .llJgS
238 Here, my opponent made a blun der:
2 0 ... b4? The right move for him would have been 2 0... .if4, after which he should be afraid neither of 2 1.ixg6, nor of 21.ltJxh7: a) 2 1..ixg6 hxg6 22 . .ia5 �xa5 23.�xf4 f6 24.�e3 (or 24.ltJe6 �xd5 25.�xd5 .bd5 26.ltJxc5 (26.�d6 �d2) 26 . . .�e8 and Black is even slightly better) 24 ... fxg5 25.�e6+ M8 (25 ... l!ih8? 26.h4 g4 27.h5 g5 2B.h6+-) 2 6.h4 (26.�d3 g4) 26 . . .g4 27.h5 .icB 2 8.�xg6 (28.�e5 �eB) 2B ... �c7 29.h6 �f7 30. hxg7+ �xg7 31.�c2 l!igB! (or 31.. .c4 32 .�h5 .ie6 33.�h7 �gB 34.�d4 �xd5 35.�xd5 .ixd5 36.�f5+ .if7 37. �c5+ l!ieB 38.�e5+ l!id7 39.�d5=) and if 32.�h5, then Black plays 32 . . . .ie6; b) 21.ltJxh7 b4 (Or 2l...l!ixh7 22.h4 .icB 23.�f3 and White has some com pensation for the material deficit and a powerful initiative.) 2 2 . axb4 (or 22.ltJf6+ gxf6 23 ..bf6 �d6; 22 . .if6 �xd5) 22 ... cxb4 23 . .id4 (or 23 ..ixb4 .ixd5 24 ..ixg6 fxg6 25.�xg6 �c6 26.�xc6 .bc6 27.�xd8+ �dB 2 B.ltJfB .ixg2) 2 3 . . .b3! (In case of 23 ... l!ixh7, White can continue with 24.h4 and he again has compensation and the ini tiative.). After the capturing 24.ixg6 - Black can counter that with 24 . . . fxg6 25 .�xg6 (or 25.�cl �f7 26.ltJf6+ gxf6 27. �xf4 �xd5) 25 ... �c2 and he remains in a slightly better position. Following 24 ..ic3, it is good for Black to play: 24 . . .�d7! 25.�xd7 �xd7 26.h4 .bd5 and his position is again supe rior. Therefore, White obviously should
Game 82 better continue with 2 1 ..ie4, pro tecting his d5-pawn. After 2l...b4 (or 2l.. ..ixg5 22 .�xg5 �f4 23.�xf4 ltJxf4 24..ia5 �d7 (24 ... .bd5 25 ..if3 .bf3 (25... �d7? 26.�xd5) 26.�xdB+ �xdB 27..ixdB ixg2 2B.�el) 25.�hel) 22.axb4 cxb4 23.id2, the situation re mains completely unclear.
21.h:g6 hxg6 2 2.�h4 bxc3 23. �hel ie5 24.�h7+ l!if8 25.�h8+ l!ie7 2 6.�xg7
My opponent had obviously over looked that move. Now, his bishop on e5 is pinned.
26 ... l!id727.�xf7 + l!ic8 2 8.�e6+ !id7 29.�e8+ !id8 3 0 .�xe5 The rest is quite clear without any comments -
3 0 ... \?;\lxe5 3U'!xe5 cxb2 32. l!ixb2 l!id7 33.ltJe4 �f8 34. l!ic3 �ac8 35.!ibl ia8 36.!ib6 1- 0
82
E12 Dreev - eu.Hansen
IBth North Sea Cup, Esbjerg 2003
This game was played in the cat egory 15 round-robin tournament,
239
Dreev-Cu.Hansen, Esbjerg 2 0 03 "North Sea Cup" in Esberg Denmark. That year the Cup had its lS'h edition, but it was still an anniversary, since the local chess union had its 1 0 0 year jubilee. I was in Denmarkfor thefirst time in my life, but I will remember for a long time these ten days, which I spent on the North Sea coast. We were accommodated away from the noise of the city, next to a big park, maybe with the idea to be better acquainted with the local flora and fauna. That was a wonderful and picturesque place! There were deer grazing over thefence without being afraid ofpeo ple and there were ducks swimming in the creek. There were some other animals too among beautiful shady alleys with attractive bridges and nice benches. It was difficult to imag ine a better place to have a rest any where. Meanwhile, the a tmosphere at the tournament and around it was quite warm andfriendly and the con ditions were just magnificent for the players as well as for the spectators. I would like to say again some kind words for the Director of the tourna ment, Brian Isaksen. There were three winners with the very good result of "+4" for such a short distance - the young players Luke McShane, Krish nan Saskirian and 1. My rivals were collecting their points mostly against the players at the bottom of the tournament table, while I had to win against the favou rites, since there was a point at which I had nowhere to retreat. So, my wins came at the end of the tournament. I will remember that event also with the fact that just after it my rating
had passed over the 270 0 mark for thefirst time in my chess career. I encounter Kurt very seldom on the chess board. I would like to re mind you that the strong Danish player was once the World Champion under 20, while I was only second ... l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3 .b6 5.1&c2 �b7 6.lLlc3 c5 7.e4 cxd4 8.lLlxd4 �c5 9.lLlb3 lLlc6 1 0 .�g5 h6 11.�4 lLld4 12.lLlxd4 �xd4 13.�d3 �e5 14.�g3 1&b8 15. 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 16.<;i?b1 d6 17.f3 �d8 18.,ixe5 dxe5 19.�e2
In my game against grandmaster Milos, at the World Championship in Moscow (2001), I had to face a similar pawn-structure. The doubled pawn is a serious defect of Black's position. It is not so easy to exploit that though ... but still:
19 . . .�c6 2 0 .�xd8+ 1&xd8 21.�dl 1&e7 22.1&d2 �c8 23.b4 wf8 24.wb2 �e8 Black is preparing to maneuver his knight along the route - f6-d7-b8-c6d4. It is far from easy for White to im prove his position without exchanging queens, so:
25.1&d6 1&xd6 26 .l!xd6 We7
240
Game 82 like Black's response - 29 ... aS!
29.c5!? That is White's only possibility to play for a win.
29 ...bxc5 3 0 .b5 gb8
27.1M2 That is the most natural move, but it was possibly more precise for me to play - 27.!'ldl.
27...g5 In case of 2 7... llJd7, White has the powerful resource 2 8.llJbS; therefore Black starts advancing his pawns, be lieving that would improve his posi tion ... You should always be very care ful about pushing pawns, though ...
28.'it>b3 I did not like the idea to push my own pawn - g2-g4 ...
28 ...h5
In case I manage to push my pawn to the as-square, my advantage would become overwhelming. Therefore Black must prevent that in different ways. Now, he would counter a2-a4 with a7-aS.
3l.'it>c4 llJd7 32.gdl It seemed that 32.a4!? might be a good move, but I was afraid that my advantage would disappear after it. Therefore I decided not to force the issue.
32 ...h4?! The move 32 .. J:lb6, does not solve Black's problems either: 33.a4 as (or 33 .. J3d6 34.l3xd6 �xd6 3S.aS) 34.bxa6 gxa6 3S.�b3 ga8 36.ibs llJb6 37 .lhe8 . �xe8 (37 ... gxe8 38.aS) 38.gd6 gb8 39.llJbS, and White maintains the ad vantage.
33.�f1 The move a2-a4!? deserves atten tion too.
33 ... f6?! 34.�e2 1'lb7 35.g3 hxg3 36.hxg3 1'lb8 37.g4 1'lb7 38.ghl I!?d6 39.1'lh8 1'lb8 40 .1'lh7 'it>c7 The time-trouble was over here and I finally decided to advance themati cally my pawn:
41.a4, This is the critical moment in this game. I did not see how I could im prove my position playing in a normal fashion. The most logical plan for me would have been to advance my a pawn, but in case of 29.a4, I did not
against which Black was complete ly helpless. His position was very difficult anyway and Kurt understood that his fate was doomed after passive defence, so he decided to fol low with
4l ... l!?b6
241
Dreev-Cu.Hansen, Esbjerg 2 0 03
following: 48 . . �X!)J -;').axb5 Iilb6 50. a7 c4+! 51.wa3 lilaB, Black makes a draw. .
48 �b6 •.•
Or 4B ... wb6 49.ib5 icB 50.wc4 Iilc7 51.a5+ and Black's kingside is de fenseless.
49.ib5 .b:b5 5 0 .�xb5 �a6 51. a5! Black resigned. 42.ge7! This move emphasizes the drawbacks of the move 33 . . .f6.
42 ... �a5 43.�b3 a6 44.ic4! That is the most precise move for White!
44... �b6 Here, I was reluctant to follow with the beautiful line: 45.bxa6 (or 45 ... Iild5+ 46J'1b7) and I played the much more reliable move -
45.ga7 ga8 That is Black's only defence.
46.gxa8 �xa8 47.bxa6 id7 In case of 47. . . wb6, or 47. . . lilc7, White wins with 4B.ib5.
48.a7 Fortunately for me, I avoided the trap. It looked like I was winning eas ily with 48.1b5 and if 48 . . .ic8, then 49..tc6, attacking Black's knight. But
83
E12 Dreev - Sasikiran
18th North Sea Cup, Esbjerg 2 003
This game was played in the pen ultimate round ofa round-robin tour nament. My opponent and L.McShane were leaders at that moment, while I was half a point behind... I.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.1ilf3 b6 4.a3 ia6 5.'l'!fc2 ib7 6. �c3 c5 7.e4 cxd4 8.�xd4 d6 9.ie2 �bd7 1 0 .ie3 a6 11. 0 - 0 ie7 12.gfdl 0 - 0 13.f3 gc8 14.�hl
This is a useful move, since White must watch about the possibility d6d5 all the time. Now, after 14 . . . d5, he has the line: 15.exd5 exd5 16.lilf5! and if 16 ... dxc4 - 17.ixb6!
14...'l'!fc7 15.gac1 'l'!fb8 16.ifJ.
Game 83
242 I had to prefer possibly the move 16.b4, but it seemed to me that the maneuver 11fic2 - f2 might turn out to be more important.
It was also possible for me to play 23.cxb6. The move in the game was the beginning of basically prophylac tic measures.
23 ih6 24.tLled4 g6
16 id8 17.b4 ic7 18.igl whS
•.•
.•.
This is with the idea to follow with gg8 and g5.
19.tLlb3 White should better prepare some active actions on the queenside.
2S.11fia2
19
dS? !
.•.
This move is a grave positional mis take. It would be logical for Black to continue with the active move 19 . . . g5; if he considered that move to be too risky, he had better wait for a while. . .
2 0 .exdS exdS 21.cS! if4 22. gbl Now, White controls firmly the d4-square and he has the possibility to create a passed pawn in the future, while Black cannot organize any seri ous threats on the kingside. Later in the game, I was trying to follow lines in which Black's possible counterplay was reduced to a minimum. My op ponent had obviously u nderstood that his position was terrible, so he started to play very qui ckly with the idea to exploit my time-pressure.
22
.!:lfeS 23.tLle2
.••
White wishes to capture on b6 with the idea to occupy later the c5-square. Of course, it would not work for him to play 25.c6 - after 25 ... tLle5 26.b5 axb5 27..b:b5 �a8, he would have problems with the c6-pawn.
2S . . . wgS 26.cxb6 ie3 That is practically a forced mea sure. . .
27.be3 .!:lxe3 2S.11fif2 gec3 29. bS Naturally, I could have postponed that move a bit, but I decided to force the issue, because I did not have so much time left on the clock ...
29. . .axbS 30 .tLlxbs .!:lc2 31.11fig3 That is the most reliable line. I could have also played 31.11fih4.
31 ... tLlxb6 32.tLl3d4 Here, I overlooked the possibility to win the exchange immediately with: 32.�d3! 11fixg3 33.hxg3 ga2 34.tLlcl, due to the time-trouble.
32 iaS
•••
.!:l2cS 33.tLld6 tLlhS 34.11fieS
Dreev-Sasikiran, Esbjerg 2 0 0 3 In case of 34 ... lOc4? !, White wins with: 3S ..bc4 dxc4 36.�e7 �Sc7 (or 36 .. J'!8c7 37.�xb7!) 37.lOc6!! and his material advantage is overwhelming.
.. , ..
a4 10eS 47.ib5 �c-
It is too bad for Black to � .p_ lLld6, because of 48.liJe6!
4S.�g2 It was high time I did that!
4S...lOxb5 49.axb5 �cS 5 0 .gd6 );e7 51.);dl );c4 52.�g3 J.b7 53.h4 �eS 54. �f4 � 55.h5 gxh5 56. gxh5 �eS 57.�g5 );cc7 5S.b6 );cd7 59.);xd7 gxd7 6 0 .gel+ �f7 61.);e6 gdS 62.gf6+ �gS 63.h6 J.aS 64. �f5
35.g4 I could have won a pawn here with 3S.IOxf7, but after: 3S . . .�xeS 36. lOxe5 IOc4, Black would have good chances to save the game. Therefore, I decided to repel at first Black's knight on hS. Still, it would have been the best for me to have played the simple move 3S.�el and after: 3S . . . �f8 36.lOxf7 �xeS 37.lOxeS, Black would not have the possibility 37 ... lOc4.
The further resistance of my op ponent could only be explained by the specific time-control.
35 ... lOg7 36.�f6 );fS 37.lOxf7 64 ...ib7 65. �e5 J.cS 66.f4 J.b7 39.�bS );cS 4 0 . 67.gd6 geS+ 6S.ge6 gbS 69.�d6 gfS 7 0 .f5 ia6 71.ge7 gbS 72.gg7+ �b4 �dS 41.J.a6. This move forces the exchange of �hS 73.�c5 gcS+ 74.);c7 );bS 75. queens. The time-trouble was over ga7 J.b7 76.lOc6 gfS 77.gxb7 d4 and my position was easily winning. 7S.�bS! 1- 0 );xf7 3S.�xb6 �fS
I had an extra pawn and a powerful knight on the d4-outpost. My opponent continued to play very quickly, while the time-control was "1 hour to the end of the game", after move 40. So, I did not have enough time; never theless I played quite well in the tech nical stage ...
41.. J'lcc7 42.�bS !''!f8 43.�xdS );xdS 44J!b6 �f7 45J!el );a7 46.
S4
ESt Dreev - Gallagher Gibraltar (open) 2004
My game against Joe Gallagher was played in an Open tournament with 90 participants. Nigel Short won solefirst place with 8 points out oflO
244
games. He had shared lSI_2nd place the previous year with V.Kotronias, but he had been second on the tie-break. Second place this time was taken by the Indian grandmaster Surya Ganguly (who had lost to Short in round 6). I finished the tournament without a loss with 7 out of 1 0 (that corresponded to my expected level of performance) and I shared 3,·d_5th place. I remember that journey with my lasting impressions at the sight of the Rock of Gibraltar and my ac quaintance with its famous inhabit ants - the tailless monkeys Barbary Macaques I Macaca Sylvanus, which were even depicted on the emblem of the tournament playing chess. l.d4 tZlf6 2.c4 g6 3.tZlc3 J.g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.tZlge2 c5 7.d5 e6 S.tZlg3 exd5 9.cxd5 h5 1 0 .J.e2 tZlh7 1 1.J.e3 a6 12.a4 h4 13.tZlfl
I had already played that position before - against Vesselin Topalov (the moves a7-a6 and a2-a4 had been included there) and against Teimur Radj abov (without the inclusion of the moves with the a-pawns) - I had won both games. My opponents played f7fS and after exfS, both of them cap tured with the pawn: gxfS.
Game 84 Grandmaster Joe Gallagher played a much more flexible move:
13... tZld7 14.J.f2 This move frees the e3-square for the knight and it prepares the move f7-fS at the same time. After the less flexible line 14.tLld2, White must wor ry about Black's possibility 14 ... id4 all the time.
14 f5 15.exfS gxf5 16.f4 l3eS 17. tZle3 J.d4 ..•
Black was obviously afraid not to be squeezed into a positional bind. Therefore, he was trying to change radically the type of the fight.
IS.tZlxfS This is the most principled move for White. He would not have achieved anything with 18.tLlc4, because of: 18 ... ixf2+ 19.Wxf2 tZlb6.
IS . .hf2+ 19.Wxf2 l3fB ..
Here, in case of 2o.ig4, it would be very strong for Black to follow with 20 ... tLleS; while the move 20.tLlxd6 would have led to a quite unclear po sition after: 2 0. . Jlxf4+ 21.if3 c4!?, or 21...tZleS!?
20 .g4!? hxg3+ 2 1.hxg3 It is understandable that I did not play g4, in order to capture on g3 with the knight...
Dreev-Gallagher, Gibraltar 20 04
21...E:xf5 22.E:xh7 I was also considering the following order of moves: 2 2 .id3 li.l df6 23. E:xh7 li.lxh7 (The line: 23 ... �xh7 24.g4 was just transposing to the game. . . ) 24.�g4+ �gS 2S.�xgS+ li.lxgS 26 ..bfS ixfS 27.fxgS, but I was afraid that it might all end in a draw. Objective ly speaking, that might have been White's best move order - you will understand why a bit later. . .
245 �e7, captures 32.E:xg8, then Black can make a draw with the move 32 ... �c3+.
22 ... �xh7 23.id3 28 ... E:g8? This is a mistake. Black could have saved the day only with the move - 28 ... �h 2!. After 29.�e7+ �g8 30.�xf6, Black forces a draw by a perpetual 30 ... �h3 + ; in case of: 29.�hl �xhl+ 30Jlxhl + �g7 3U';lbl bS 32.axbS axbS 33.li.lxbS E:a6, the draw is again the most likely outcome.
23 . . . li.lf6 Now, Black had a fantastic possibility at his disposal: 23 . . . �gS!? White can regain his material indeed, but only with the line: 24. �f3 �g7 2S.fxgS gxf3+ 26.�xf3 and there arises an endgame, which is already familiar to us, but in a slightly better situation for Black.
24.g4 c4! The move 24... �b6, would have been refuted by White with the line: 2S.gxfS c4+ (or 25 ... �xb2+ 26.li.le2 ) 26. �f3 cxd3 27.�hl+ �g7 28.�g2+ �f8 29.ggl.
25..bt'5+ .bt'5 2 6.gxf5 �b6+ 27.wf3 �xb2 28.�el In case White after: 28. li.le4 gg8 29.�hl+ �g7 30.gg1+ �f7 31.li.lxd6+
29.�e7+ gg7 3 0 .ghl+ �g8 31. �d8+ wf7 32.�c7+ Wf8 33:�c8+ 1- 0 B12
85 E.Alekseev - Dreev Aeroflot-open, Moscow 2004
It was again winter and I was again in Moscow at the "Aeroflot - Open ". That was the third tour nament in a row and it was becom ing increasingly popular and it was breaking more and more records. There were 370 players in the first tournament (in all the groups), while in the second tournament there were already 476 participants (including
Game 85
246
grandmasters). In 2 0 04, there were 650 players from 53 countries and some representatives of "The Guinness Book of Records" were in vited in order to note the official re cord - the participation of more than 160 grandmasters in a tournament. There were some grandmasters tak ing part at the drawing of lots con cerning the colour of the pieces in the first round in both the first and the secon d years. This time that task was assigned to the youngest grandmas ter, the 13 year old Magnus Carlsen. There were three ex-World Champi ons present at the opening ceremony - Vasily Vasilievich Smyslov, Bo ris Vasilievich Spassky and Anatoly Evgenievich Karpov as well as the multiple challengerfor the World title - Victor Kortchnoi and the widow of Mikhail Tal - Sally Landay with their son. With 7points out of9, 1st to 3rdplace was shared by Sergey Rublevsky (who won the tournament according to the tie-break coefficient), Rafael Vaganian and Valery Filipov. I had 6 1/2 points and I tied for 4th_16th place and I took 5th place on the tie-break. l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 ifS 4.c3 e6 5.ie3 'Il\Ib6 6. 'Il\Ib3 154
This seldom played variation of the Caro-Kann Defence has been intro duced into the tournament practice relatively recently - at the very end of the 20th century. There are not so many games played in that line and the theory is still investigating the poss ibiii ti es . . .
6 lLld7 7.lLld2 f6 .•.
This is the main line and the most principled too.
8.f4 g5!? White's pawn-structure under goes some changes after that move and Black thus succeeds in getting rid of White's e5-pawn, which cramps Black's pieces.
9.lLlgf3 It is bad for White to play 9.g3 here, because of: 9 ... gxf4 1O.gxf4 tLlh6!? (or 1O . . . ih6 ! ?) - and Black obtains a very good game. Following: 9.exf6, 'Black has the powerful argument: 9 . . . g4! - he takes the f3-square under con trol and he solves al his opening prob lems.
9 . gxf4 1 0 . .bf4 ih6 1l.1xh6 lLlxh6 12.exf6 lLlxf6 13.ie2 ..
The move 13.tLle5 is harmless for Black, thanks to 13 . . . l'lg8! ? In the game Smirin - Dreev, Moscow 2 002, there followed later: 14. tLl df3 tLlhg4 lS.tLlxg4 tLlxg4 16.h3 tLlf6 17.'Il\Ixb6 axb6 18.lLleS hS 19.a3 We7 and Black's position was superior. (diagram)
13. . . lLle4 Peter Leko in his game against Al exander Grischuk (Linares, 2 0 01) con tinued with: 13 . . . l'lg8 14.'Il\Ixb6 14.axb6 15. 0-0 tLle4 and he obtained a good position. White did not need how-
Alekseev-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 0 4
247 been about equal.
20
•..
�e7 21.!3fel
In case of 2 Ulae1, Black has the powerful resource 2 1 . ..e5 - 22 .a3 (or 22 .d:xeS Elxa2) 22 . . . e4.
ever to exchange on b6. For example, in the game Yudasin - Furdzik, New York 2003, h e followed with: 14.0-0 tLle4 1S.tLlxe4 �e4 - and there arose by transposition a situation from our game. After 16.g3, Black made a mis take - 16 . . . tLlfS and following 17.tLleS, White had the advantage.
14.lZJxe4 he4 15. 0
0 In case of lS.tLlgS, I intended to -
continue with: lS . . .iMlxb3 16.axb3 ifS, with the idea to follow with gg8 and the position would have remained ap proximately equal.
15
•.•
21. e5! ? •.
M y opponent had obviously under estimated this positional pawn-sacri fice.
22.dxe5 h5 23.ih3 h4 24.l;e3 hxg3 2 5.hxg3 All these moves were quite correct for both sides.
!3g8 16.g3 ltlf7!?
That was a n ew idea, although the move seemed to be quite attractive. Black must take the eS-square under control, in order not to become clearly worse.
17.ltld2 if5 18.'f:lfxb6 It looked quite enticing for White to play 18.ihS, but then after 18 ... iMlc7! (threatening gxg3) White would fail to occupy the eS-square, for example: 19.�xf7+ �xf7 and here it was bad for him to continue with 20.ltlf3, because of: 20 ... gxg3+ ! 21.hxg3 iMlxg3+ 22 .�hl gg8-+
18
•.•
axb6 19.ih5 ig6 2 0 .ig4
White is playing too optimistically. After 20.�g6 the position would have
25
.•.
llJh6!
Now, all Black's pieces will be de ployed very comfortably. Naturally, the rather nalve move - 2S . . . llJgS would have been a mistake.
26.a3 White can hardly continue the
Game 85
248 game without that prophylactic move.
26
.•.
if5 2 7.ig2 .tg4!
Black has repelled White's bishop away from the h3-c8 diagonal and now he deploys his knight on the f5-square creating some pressure and squeezing White's pieces maximally.
2S.:Bael Here it is essential that White can not play 2 8J1fl, due to 2B . . . IUf5 29.13d3 ie2 .
After the correct reaction for White 37.lUg2, Black can follow with: 37. . . 13fg8 3B.IUh4 1e4 (or 3B . . . 13xg3? 39. 13e3), but he must consider the possi ble exchange-sacrifice 39.13xe4. Prob ably, I would have preferred: 37. . . IUg4+ 3 B.ixg4 hg4 39.lUf4 if3, with somewhat better chances for Black. My opponent made a crucial mistake however:
37.:Bf2? :BhS!
2S A:lf5 29.M3 .thS 3 0 .ttlfl ••
White had more possibilities for a successful defence after 30.lt>h 2 . Now, I was thinking of playing 3 0 . . . b5, but White could have countered that with - 31.lt>f2 13 afB 32.if3. Therefore I made up my mind on following with:
30 :Baf'S 31.lt>h2 :BhS 32. lt>gl :BhgS 33.lt>h2 ••.
Suddenly, White's position becomes hopeless. The attempt 3B.E:efl, would not work, because of the spectacular refutation : 3B . . . lUg4+! 39.lUxg4 13xh3 ! 40.lt>xh3 13hB+ 41.lUh6 l"lxh6#. In case of: 3B.g4 IUxg4+ 39. lUxg4 hg4, White is again lost. Therefore White decided to give up the exchange: 38.!�1xf3 13xf3 39. lt>g2 13f'S 4 0 .
33 ... bS! That is one more important and useful try. White has more and more problems to find any useful moves at all.
IUc2 1Uf7 41.e6 lUeS 42.lUd4 ttld3 43.:Be3 1Uf2 44.g4 13xh3 4S.:Bxh3 IUxh3 46. lt>xh3 (diagram)
Here, thanks to an essential tactical nuance, Black's bishop can occupy the
Here, I had the choice between 46 . . . c5 and 4 6 . . .l"lf2. In case o f 4 6 . . . 13£2, I was winning after: 46 ... 13f2 47.b4 13a2 4B.g5 13xa3 49.lt>g4 13xc3 50.M5 (or 50.g6 M6) 50 . . . 13g3 ! (or 50 . . . 13d3
e4-outpost.
51.g6!) 51.g6 13g2 5 2 .lt>eS (White is in
34.ih3 ttlh6 3S.M2 13gS 36.lUe3 if3!
Alekseev-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 04
249
7 ttlxg4 .••
My opponent accepts the pawn sac rifice. The other possibilities for Black are - 7 . . . h6, 7 ...!b4 and finally the line, which is attracting more adher ents in the latest tournaments - 7. .. dxc4! ? 8.ixc4 eS 9.gS /DdS.
8.l:�gl ttlxh2 a zugzwang here ... ) S 2 ... Elxg6 S3.ttJfS+ 'it>d8 S4.'it>d6 Elg4. I had calculated all that, but I pre ferred the move in the game, because I was winning much simpler after that.
46 ... c5 47.ttlxb5 e5 5 0 .bxc5 bxc5 51.g5 d4 52.cxd4+ cxd4 and White re signed. Following S3.'it>g4, Black wins for example with: S3 . . .d3 S4.g6 d2 SS./Dc3 �f1 S6.g7 dlYlY+ S7./Dxdl �xdl S8.'it>gS Elgl + S9.'it>h6 M6.
GM P.H.Nielsen in his mini-match against Garry Kasparov (Reykja vik 2 004) preferred: 8 .. .fS 9.h3 /Df6 1O.�g7 /De4. H e equalized in the rapid chess game, but in the blitz-game he blundered in the opening and he lost.
9.ttlxh2 .hh2 1 0 .�xg7 YlYf6 11. gg2 It is more natural for White to play here 11.�h7, but the character of the game changes radically then - White regains his pawn, but he loses his ad vantage in development. For example, it is possible for Black to follow with: l1. . .a6, as it was played in the game
86
D45 Dreev - J.Geller Russian Club Cup, Sochi 2 004
Shirov - J.Piket, Monaco 1995, where after 12 .�h8 YlYh8, White played 13.e4, but he underestimated Black's re source 13 ... eS! and he lost quickly.
11 J.d6 ..•
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 ttlf6 4. ttlc3 c6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.YlYc2 J.d6 7.g4 This active move is becoming more and more popular lately.
12 .!d2 I had considered the move 12 .e4 to be rather premature, because Black
25 0
Game 86
had the excellent resource 12 ... �f4! neutralizing White's initiative com pletely.
12
b6
•.•
This move (which had not been played before) should be qualified as rather dubious; Black had better play 12 . . . lOfB.
13.e4! Now, it is the right time for White!
13 .if4 •••
That is Black's best h ere. It will not work for him to try: 13 ... eS, due to 14.exdS exd4 IS.lOe4.
14.cxd5 exd5
with: 18.lOe4 �f3! (or 18 . . . �e7 19.�f4) 19.13g3 !? �xe4 20 .�g2 �fS 21.dxc6 ixc6 2 2 .ixc6 b8 23.Elf3.
18.l3el+ d8 19.Elg5!
White is coordinating h is pieces.
19 .l'l:c8 .•
It deserved attention for Black to try here: 19 . . . h6 20.l3hS �g6, but even then after the correct response for White: 2 1. l3h 3 ! (or 2 1.Elh4 hS 22.id3 �h6 23.Elf4 lOf6) 2 l. .. hS 22.Elhe3 (oc cupying the e-file, with the idea to fol low with ifl-h3) his position remains very powerful.
2 0 .ih3 •
Having played 14 . . . cxdS, my oppo nent had to seriously consider White's maneuver lObS, after the preliminary 15 eS. The piece-sacrifice is clearly in sufficient for Black, for example: 14 . . . cxdS lS.eS lOxeS l6.dxeS �xe5+ 17.lOe2.
15.exd5 hd2+ 16.�xd2 .ib7
2 0 . . .l'l:c7
17. 0 - 0 - 0 ! I understood that after 17.dxc6 ixc6, my position was slightly better, but not more . . . Therefore, I decided to sacrifice a pawn for the initiative.
17. . . cxd5 Black is practically forced to ac cept the gift, since after: 17 ... 0-0-0, it is very strong for White to follow
This might be the best defence for Black, but it is still too passive. He could have tried for example the much riskier line: 20 ... Elc4 21.�e3 (The ex change of queens after 2 1. Elf5, should be favourable for White, but I was far from sure during the game that it would be sufficient: 21...�xd4 22.�xd4 Elxd4 23. Elxf7 lOcs 24.Elee7.) 21.. .Elxd4. Now, it looks like that move is impossible for Black due to 2 2.ElfS, but he has the surprising resource 2 2 . . . �e6! and after: 23.�d4 �el 24.i>c2 Elf8, White has the powerful move 2S.�a4 indeed, but Black has great chances for a suc-
2.51
Dreev-J.Geiler, Sochi 20 04 cessful defence. It i s quite possible that the calm move - 2 2 .<.t>b1, might turn out to be the most unpleasant an swer for Black, since he has a problem to find a good move ...
21.Wfe3 I could have played at first 2 U3fs and if 21.. .�h4, then 2 2.�e3.
21. ..ic6 2 2.gfS Wfh4 23.gxf7 <.t>cS 24.ggl! This is the decisive penetration for White. Maybe, Black could have coped with one white rook having penetrated on the seventh rank somehow, but he has no defence against White's dou bled rooks ...
24 ... h6 2S.gg6 Wfhs
27 ... b5 That is the co rrect decisiv!:; :[.: Black, because it is his only ch2.!!Ct' : : avoid the positional bind. Here, to tell you frankly, I had a: most lost my mind. I understood that I was winning, but I was seeing noth ing and my last minutes were ticking on the clock. When I had only sec onds left (well, the time-control was with thirty second added after every move ... , so I could afford that . . . ), I found a move, which was hardly the best, but it seemed to be quite practi cal . . . :
2S.gfS WfeS 29.<.t>d2 <.t>b7 After: 29 . . . b4 30./UxdS hdS, I had seen the important intermediate move 31.)3e5!, which was leading to a clear win for White. I must also add that af ter the game, in my home analysis, I found out that the line: 31.)3xdS Wfe4 32.�b3! would have brought me an easy victory as well.
30 .Wfd6! gdc8 31.gff7 b4 32 . Wfxb4+ It also seemed quite effective for White to play: 32.hd7.
26.ggg7 I was short of time here and I never suspected that Black had made a ter rible mistake on his last move, losing control over the g3-square. Naturally, the correct decision for White would have been 26.�g3! and because of the threats )3c6 and )3f5, Black could have already resigned. In case of 26 ...ia4, White has the "cold-blooded" answer" 27.f3.
26 gdS 27.Wfg3 ..•
Here, I had already noticed that move. . . !
32 ... <.t>aS 33. Wfe7 This was the simplest and probably the best move in the time-pressure.
33...WfhS 34.Wfd6 /Ub6
252
Game 87
Now, White can finish the game off in a spectacular fashion -
35.Wlxc6+! 1- 0 87
D47 A.Kuzmin
-
Dreev
57th Russia Ch (lh-final) St Petersburg 2004
This game against Alexey Kusmin was played in the semi:final of the Russian Championship. There were two semi-finals held that year (the second was in the city of Tomsk) ac cording to the Swiss system and the first three players in both of them were to qualify for the Super-Final. There were also some players with ratings over 270 0 invited person ally to the Super-Final (including V. Kramnik and G. Kasparov) as well as Anatoly Karpov. There were the so-called "white nights" during the tournament in Saint Petersburg. I did not know then if they had helped me somehow, but I started the tourna ment with 4 out of 4 and then I made 5 draws in a row. There was a really tough one against A.Khalifman. So, in the end I took a solefirst place, half a point infront ofV. Tzeshkovsky and V. Epishin. I have chosen two out of myfour wins therefor this book. l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.ltlc3 ltlf6 4.e3 e6 5.ltlf3 ltlbd7 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4 bs 8.id3 ib7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .ltla4 c5 n.e5 ltld5 12.ltlxc5 ltlxc5 13.dxc5 ixc5 14. 0 - 0 (diagram) I have played that position numer ous times before in my practice.
14. . .h6 15.ltld2 Wlc7 That move was not so favourably regarded by theory for a long time. Instead, Black had played: 15 .. 0-0 16.ltle4 .td4 17.ltld6, with slightly bet ter chances for White. .
16J�el ltle7 This move is a novelty. I used to play before - 16 .. Jlad8.
17.�g4 Here, my opponent took a long time on the clock and he avoided the main line - 17.ltle4 �xe5 18.�a4+ .tc6 (The move I S . . wfS seems to be too risky.) .
19 . .tb5. Now, Black has two possibili ties and it looks like they both lead to equality: 1) 19 .. J�cS ! ? (It does not work for Black to continue with: 19 . . ..txf2+? 20. wxf2 .txb5 2 1.�xb5+ �xb5 22. ltld6+)
20 .td2 .
0-0 21 . .txc6 It)xc6
A.Kuzmin-Dreev, St Petersburg 20 04
253
22 .Elacl �d6! 23.Elxc6 �xh2 + 24.'i!lfl �hl+ 2S.'i!le2 �xg2 26.ll'lf6+ gxf6 27.Elxd6 �e4+ 2B.Ml �hl+ 29.'i!le2 �hS+ 30. Wf1; 2) 19 ... 0-0! ? 2 0.iJec6 ll'lxc6 21. '8'xc6 ElacB 2 2.�a6 fS 23.�f4 '8'xf4 24.
that case with the line: 21.ll'lxcS '8'xcS 2 2.�e3 lilxe3 2 3.'8'xe3 '8'xe3 24.Elxe3 Eld2 2S.a3; therefore I preferred the move in the game.
�xe6+ wh7 2S.ll'lxcS ElxcS= Therefore, it looks like after: 17.ll'le4 '8'xeS, the game should practically end in a draw in case both sides play cor rectly throughout. Still, Black has an
I had some pressure here, but
additional possibility, which deserves attention - the positional solution - to counter 17.ll'le4, with: 17...�e4 18.�e4 Eld8 19.'8'a4 Ms.
17... gd8 ! This move just parries White's ac tive actions.
18.,ie4 That is a velY reasonable decision, but it would have been hardly bet ter for White to have followed with: IB.�bS+ MB 19.1l'lb3 iJef2+ 20.Wxf2
2 0 .bd5 gxd5 21.lilc4 '8'a6 22. b3 0 - 0 White's defence remained too solid.
23.�e3 be3 24. '8'xe3 lilf5 25. '8'e2 Elfd8 26.h3 Here, I had no real possibilities to improve my position. I could have tried only the transfer of my queen to gS, or of the knight to the c3-square. 26 �b7 27.Eled1 My opponent had decided here that the following set-up of his rooks would enable him to play a2-a3 at some moment, but he had overlooked some other factors .. Jt would have been more prudent for him to have defended with: 27.Eladl ll'ld4 2 B.'8'g4. ..•
27 ll'ld4 28.�g4 • • •
�b6+ 2 1.,ie3 '8'xb5 and here in case of 2 2 .ics, Black would have had the powerful argument 22 . . . Eld2 + !
18 '8'b6 19.'8'£3 • • .
28 f5! 29.exf6! •••
White accepts the challenge! This probably looked to him to be neces
Now, the most natural line for Black
sary, mostly because after: 2 9.�hS Wh7, he could have had serious problems. Indeed, Black would have been
would have been: 19 . . .iJee4 20.ll'lxe4 lilfS, but White could make a draw in
better, for example: 30.Eld2 �c7, with the idea to follow with lilc6 and White's
19 ,id5 •.•
Game 88
254 e5-pawn would be very weak.
29 ggS 3 0 .gxd4 •.•
39.<;!;>g 2 �xd2+ 40.<;!;>f3 , the outcome would be the same all over again.
34 ge2 3S.gfl gxg7
This is White's only move.
30
•.•
.••
gxd4 3V�xe6+ <;!;>h7 32.g3
Or 3 2 . liJe3? ge4.
32 ... �f3! Or 32 . . . gg6 33.�f5 gxf6 34.gel.
33.fxg7 Meanwhile the time-pressure was looming for both of us and I had al most complied with an eventual draw, by playing 33 . . . Elg3. Then, suddenly I saw the move -
33 ge4! ..•
36.liJaS That was something unbelievable ... It was evidently due to the time-trou ble. . . ! After the correct defence for White 36.h4, my position would have been slightly better indeed, but as our analysis with GM A.Kuzmin showed after the game - there was still a lot of fight left in that position. . .
36 gxa2 37.liJc6 ga6 38.Elc1 ga2 ••.
34.�d6? Alexey makes a serious mistake in the time-trouble! After the cor rect reply for h i m 34.liJe5!, I would have to be very careful and to force the draw immediately, otherwise I might have fallen into a big trouble. For example: 34 . . . �h5? 35.�c8 Elxg7 36.liJg4 �g6 37.Eldl+-. The only cor rect line for Black here is: 34 . . . Elxg3 ! ! 35.fxg3 �xg3+ 36.<;!;>hl gel+ (or 36 . . . gxe5 37.g8�+) 37.Elxel �xel + 38. <;!;>g2 �e2 + 39.<;!;>g3 �e3+ 40. <;!;>g4 �e4+ 4l. <;!;>h5 �e2 + . Still, the move 34. liJe5, was not my only possibility to make a draw. After: 34.�c8 Elxg7 35.liJd2 Elxg3+ 36.fxg3 �xg3+ 37.<;!;>hl Elel+ 38Jlxel �xel+
I was repeating moves here with the idea to reach safely the end of the time-control.
39.Elfl ga6 4 0 .gc1 Elf7 41.�cS gc7 42.�c2+ <;!;>g7 43.�b2+ �f6 White resigned. After 44.1iJb4, Black's simplest winning line is: 44 . . !kl 45.�cl Elal. .
D12
88 Volkov
-
Dreev
57th Ch Russia (l12-final) St Petersburg 2004
l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.1iJf3 tt'lf6 4.e3 �f5 S.tt'lc3 e6 6.liJh4
255
Volkov-Dreev, St Petersburg 2 0 0 4 This is the eternal question for Black - where to place his bishop, to g4, e4, or g6 . . . ? The move in game is the most popular for Black lately.
6 ig6 hxg6 .•.
7.1Wb3
1Wc7
8.ltlxg6
12.a4! That is the only way for White to create some problems for Black. My opponent would not have achieved anything with a calm development, since I could have always countered id2 with the move ltJc4.
9 g3 .
Sergey Volkov had played only the move 9.h3 in his previous games.
9
. ..
ltlbd7 1 0 .�g2
That was a surprise for me in a way.
I had expected either 1O.�d2, or the immediate move 10.cxd5.
1 0 ...ltlb6 The idea of that try is to clarify the pawn-structure and the plans of both sides.
1l.cxd5 But naturally not l1.c5 - because Black will counter that with Il..ltJbd7, followed by b7-b6.
1l... cxd5 I had a choice between that move and 11...exd5. I liked the move 11...
cxd5 much more, because first of all it simplified the position (sort of. .. ) and I thought at that moment that was in my favour, because of several rea sons. Meanwhile, after cxd5, White's bishop on g2 is not as effective as after exd5.
12 ...1Wc4!? I was also considering the simpler measure 12 . . . a6!?, which would have led to an equal position after: 13.e4 dxe4 14.ltJxe4 ltJxe4 15.�e4 ltJd5!. Still, after some deliberations I chose 12 ... 1Wc4.
13.1Wc2 White does not achieve anything good after: 13.1Wxc4 ltJxc4 14.'i!le2, due to 14. . . ltJa5.
13 ... a6 Or 13 . . . �b4 ? ! 14.a5 ltJbd7 15J:h4.
14.a5 ltlbd7 Frankly speaking, I liked the move 14 . . . ltJc8 much more during the game, since the knight had better prospects from that square. Finally, I chose ltJbd7 as the more reliable move, wjth out losing any tempi. The knight has some good prospects on the d7-square as weI! (although not so bright as on the c8-square ... ) and it can be rede ployed to the c6-square. 15.�d2 �e7
256
Game 88
Black's bishop has nothing to do on d6; moreover in some cases (in similar positions) the bishop is placed worse on d6 than on the e7-square, particu larly if White manages to advance e3e4 in the centre.
16.b3 Finally, my opponent has decided to castle.
16 %!Ic7 17. 0 - 0 0 - 0 18.YGb2 gfcS l9.b4 .••
This plan has some drawbacks too. It seemed more natural for White to try: 19J!fc1 %!IdS 20.tLla4 , with the idea to follow with b3-b4 and tLla4-c5; still after: 20 ...Elxcl + 2 1.Elxcl ElcS, Black manages to hold the position thanks to the numerous exchanges, for example: 2 2 .b4 1!xc1+ 23.%!Ixc1 tLleS 24.tLlc5 tLld6. This plan would have been much better for White, though . . .
21.tLlxe4 dxe4 22 .b:e4 ga7 •
Naturally not: �6 24J'lac1.
22 ... 1!abS 23.�f4
23.l:'lacl %!IdS 24. %l'b3 That is a witty possibility for White. The move 24.d5?, would have been very bad due to tLlf6.
24 tLlf6 •••
I could have also tried: 24. . .Elac7 25.1!xc7 1!xc7 26.hg6 tLlf6 (or 26 ... fxg6 27.ygxe6+ wh7 2S.Wh3+ wgS 29. We6+ wfS?! 3 0.%!Ixa6; 29 . . . wh7 30. Wh3=), transposing to the position that we played in the game.
25 . .bg6
In answer to 25.1!xcS WxcS 26J''lcl, I had planned: 26 ... 1!c7 27. 1!xc7 Wxc7 2S.�xg6 fxg6 29.Wxe6+ wh7 30.Wxa6 (or 30 .%!Ih3+ tLlh5 31.g4 %!Id7) 30 . . . Wc2.
25 J'lac7 . •
19 b5! .•.
Naturally, that was a quite attrac tive move, but I had to consider quite seriously the next reply of my oppo nent:
2 0 .e4 tLlxe4 Of course, I had seen that I could not play 2 0 ... %!Ic4?, because of: 21.exd5 exd5 22.tLlxd5! tLlxd5 23J;acl.
That is the correct decision. I had to admit that I wanted to play that move immediately. Then I decided to try to refute White's idea in a more radical fashion and I calculated for about 15 minutes the variations arising after: 25. . Jlxcl 26Jlxcl fxg6 27.Wxe6+ wh7 2S.%Vh3+ tLlh5 29 .g4 %Vd7 and here af ter 30.1!c3, Black had the possibility 30 .. ib4. Later, I understood that I -
.
257
Volkov-Dreev, St Petersburg 20 04 did not need to win material so much as to compromise my position and I gave up the whole idea, having come to the conclusion in the process that White's best reply would have been probably - 30J'lel with somewhat un clear position.
26.gxc7 gxc7 Now, White's game is much more difficult than if he had remained a pawn down and Sergey makes an im mediate mistake:
27..ibl
29 ... %!,g4!?
3 0 .%!'£3 hb4 31..id3 If 31..bb4 %!'xb4 32.%!'h5 %!'b2 33. �h7+ (or 33.�e4 l"lcl 34.�xd5 g6! 35. �f3 l"lxdl+ 36.%!'xdl exdS 37.�xd5 �al+ 3S.@g2 %!'xa5) 33. . .Ms 34.�e4 g6 35.�h6+ %!'g7 36.�d2 l"lcS.
31. %!'c5 32 .hb4 %!'xb4 33.%!'h5 �f6 34.%!'£3 �d5 35.%!'h5 �f6 36. %!'£3 %!'f8 37.h4 .•
Or 37.g4 �d5.
37... %!'c8 38.@h2 l'ld7 39.l'lcl %!'d8 4 0 .ibl •
White's problem is the vulnerabili ty of his b4-pawn and Black's potential to exploit that weakness. Therefore, it deserved attention for White to have tried to regroup his forces by rede ploying his bishop to g2, since it would have controlled the d5-square from there: 27.�d3 ! ? %!'xd4 2SJ'ldl t2)dS 29.�el (29.%!'bl!?) 29 . . .%!'g4 30.ifl and Black's chances would have been slightly better.
27 %!'xd4 28.gdl �d5 .••
4 0 . . . �d5 40 ... g6 ! ? That was my last move before the time-control and it was played in a mutual time-trouble. It would have been a real disgrace for me to have fall en into the trap: 40 . . .%!'xa5?? 41.�a8+ l"ld8 42.l"lc8.
41.h5
29 . .iel?! That was a serious imprecision. White did not have to retreat with his bishop and he had to try instead 29. %!'f3 .
29 ...%!'c4
This move was played after long deliberations. My opponent wanted to make my task of materializing my ex tra pawn really hard.
41 ... l'lc7 42.l'ldl %!'f6 I practically forced the exchange of queens with that move. Well, my pawns became doubled, but I had to trade queens, otherwise White's activ-
258
Game 89
ity would have compensated his one pawn deficit.
43.�xf6 gxf6 44.h6 It seemed at first sight that Black should not have any problems to turn his extra pawn into a full point. That might be possible indeed, but I had to play quite precisely, since White had some serious counterplay with his passed pawn.
to the end of the game with 30 seconds added after every move . . . ) in that case, than after S1. . . fxe6.
52.h7 +
44 13c5 45.g4 b4 46.13d4 •••
White protects his pawn indirect ly, since after 46 . . . l'laS, he can play 47.l'lc4.
46 ... b3 47. .ie4 b2 48.13d2 Now, my position is an easy win thanks to the dS-outpost. My knight is headed to that square and it will be placed there just like a volleyball um pire . . .
I understood here that after the seemingly "natural" move 48 ... l'lbS 49.ibl, I would have great problems to improve my position, so I played :
56. It>0 lLlc3 57.lt>e3 l'lh4 58.l'la7 lLld5+ 59.e5 6 0 .13xa6 13xh7 61.13a8 lLlf4+ 62.1t>0 (Or 62.lt>d2 1'lh2) 62 ... l'lf7 63.a6 lLld3+ 64.lt>e3 lLlxf2 65.a7 lLldl+ 66.lt>d3 13c7 67. b3 lLld5 70 .b3 l'lxa7 73.13b5+
48 ...fS ! 49.gxfS Or 49.ibl fxg4 SO.l'lxb2 fS!
49... lLlc3 50 .fxe6 13h5+! But of course Sl.h7+.
not:
SO . . .fxe6??
thought that after:
Dreev - Huzman 36th Olympiad Calvia de M allorca 2 0 04
51.
D91
89
51.../;Jxe4
S2.exf7+ It>xf7 S3.l'lxb2 1'lxh6, my posi tion would have been winning, but my opponent would have had more prac tical chances (particularly if you have in mind the time-control - 1 0 minutes
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3. lLlc3 d5 4.�g5 lLle4 5.�4 /;Jxc3 6.bxc3 dxc4 Now, the more fashionable and the more popular move is - 6. . . ig7.
7.e3 �e6
259
Dreev-Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 20 04
Black to try: 1l ... cS?! 12.if3 lLld7 (It is even worse for him to play 12 . . .idS, in view of 13.ixe7! and White obtains an overwhelming advantage.) 13.dS!? (After: 13.ixa8 Wlxa8 14.0-0 �dS, Black has some compensation for the exchange.) 13 . . .ifS 14.e4 gS lS.ixgS and White is clearly better.
12 . 0 - 0 c5 13 .ixc4 .ixc4 14. lLlxc4 cxd4 15.cxd4 ElcS 16.Wf3 lLlc6 17.Elfcl •
This position is very well known in chess theory. I believe that White's prospects in it are slightly better. I had found only one game of Huzman in the database in it, while I had been preparing for the game. That was a bit strange, because the Gruenfeld De fence was supposed to be my oppo nent's main weapon against l.d4.
The opening stage was over and I had a slight positional advantage.
17...e6
S.lLlf3 This is a solid positional move. There arise some much sharper posi tions (naturally, less clear too. . . ) after 8.Wbl. For example, the game S.Atalik - Predojevic, Sarajevo 20 04, followed with: 8. . . WldS ! ? 9.lLlf3 WaS 1O.Wlb2 lLld7 1l.ie2 lLlb6 12.0-0 lLla4 13.Wlxb7 and the position was quite unclear. S ig7 9J�bl b6 1O .lLld2 0 - 0 . . •
1l.�e2 The move 11.lLlxc4 here would have been slightly premature. Following 1l ... cS, Black's chances are not worse at all. For example, in case of 12 .Wlf3, he can play 12 ... lLld7 and it is too dubi ous for White to continue with 13.dS?!, because of: 13 ...ixc3+ 14.�e2 bS! 15J�xbS lLlb6 and he is clearly worse.
1l ... Wd7 I intended to counter 11...lLld7, with 12.if3, threatening d4-d5, seizing the initiative. It is not advisable for
18.�g3 I chose that move, although it de served attention for me to try 18.a4!?, with the idea after 18 ... lLle7, to fol low with: 19.1LleS ixeS 20.dxeS and White's position would have been su perior, thanks to the vulnerability of the dark squares in Black's camp. In case of 18 . . .f5 19.ig3, White would have maintained some edge too.
IS �fS 19.1Lld2 f5 2 0 .h4 lLlb4 • 21.Elc4 lLlxa2 ...
That capturing of a pawn seems to be a really risky business . . . It is much more reliable for Black to continue with: 21..Jlxc4 22 .lLlxc4 WldS, with an approximately equal position.
260
Game 89
22 J�b2 �cl 23J�bc2 �d3 24J�c7 8eS 25.g2c3! �b4 26.e4 Now, White's compensation for the pawn is more than sufficient.
26 gxc7 27.gxc7 gcS •••
my opponent's situation becomes ex tremely difficult. H e had to defend with 31...%I'e6 and despite the fact that my position would have remained clearly preferable, Black could h ave still resisted further.
2S.gb7!
32.�e4!
It is too bad for White to try 28.l"lxa7?!, due to 28 ... liJc6 and Black is clearly better.
2S 8c6
White's knight joins in the attack with a decisive effect and Black can al ready hardly save the day.
32 8eS
•••
.•.
I thought that my opponent had to consider here the possibility 28 ... �h6 ! ? and it would have led to a com plicated position with quite unclear consequences.
It was not any better for him to try 3 2 ... �e7. After: 33.%I'b3 fxe4 34J;xe7, Black's position is very bad.
33.�f6+ �xf6 34.ixf6 l3d7 35. l3xd7 %l'xd7 36.�b3+ %l'f7 37.�xb6
29.exf5 exf5 3 0 .l3xa7 �d5?! This is Black's first serious impre cision. White has excellent attacking prospects while the queens are still present on the board if you have in mind the not so reliable placement of Black's king. Instead, Black had better exchange queens with: 30 ... %l'xf3 31.liJxf3. I would have preserved somewhat better prospects i n that endgame too, but Black's position would seem to be quite defensible.
31.ie5 (diagram)
31 l3dS?! .•.
Now, after that second mistake,
I have managed to win a pawn and the endgame is just totally hopeless for Black. The game has entered a purely technical stage, in which I was not confronted with too many problems.
261
Dreev-Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 20 04 The rest of the game does not require any additional comments. There still followed:
37...Bd5 3S ..ie5 .ie7 39.BbS+ M8 4 0 .BeS Bt7 41.Bc6 Be7 42. Bc4+ Bt7 43.d5 .ie7 44.g3 q"f8 45.BcS+ BeS 46.Bb7 BdS 47.q"g2 q"eS 4S.Bc6+ Bd7 49.q"f3 Bxc6 50 .dxc6 .ic5 51.q"e2 q"e7 52.f3 q"e6 53.q"d3 .ie7 54.q"c4 h5 55.f4 and Black resigned.
6 ....id7
I am also choosing a VarIatIOn, which is played in tournaments much more rarely than the standard line for B60 Black - 6 ...e6. The variation 6... �d7 90 is still not extensively studied (Valerij Morozevich - Dreev Salov liked to play it, for example, 57th Russia Ch, Moscow 2004 among the strong contemporary play This game was played in the ers.) and that is why it seemed quite second round oj the Super-Final oj attractive (at least to me ... ) . I believe the Russian Championship with the that the move 7. . .�d7 is neither bet participation oj Garry Kasparov ter, nor worse than the standard an and all the best chess players in swer - 6... e6. I would also like to men Russia (with the exception oj Vladi tion that the 6 ...�d7 system had been mir Kramnik and Anatoly Karpov). used successfully during the 60ies of Garry Kasparov won that Super the last century by Leonid Stein, who Final quite convincingly, while the was one of the strongest players in the silver medal was awarded to Alexan USSR at those times ... der Grischuk. I took the bronze med 7.� e2 Contemporary theory prefers the al. 1.e4 c5 move 7.lM'd2 as the best for White in I had played the Sicilian Defence his fight for the opening advantage. ly very rarely until that tourna After: 7 ... l"lc8 8.0-0-0 !i:lxd4 9.lM'xd4 ent. lM'a5, there arises a rather fashionable 2.!i:lf3 d6 3.d4 !i:lf6 4.!i:lc3 cxd4 position which is sharp and double edged. �xd4 !i:lc6 6 ..ig5 Suddenly, Alexander decided to 7... Ba5 !? I force the exchange of White's dark the Rauze,r system, which had er been a part of his opening squared bishop for my knight on f6 ertoire before. He had usually pre with that move. All that leads to com ed 6.f3, or 6.�c4, or quite rarely plicated double edged positions. I could have played the calmer and 6.�e2.
2 62
Game 90
more reliable move 7... e6 as well. For example, after the attractive line for White - S.ttJdb5, Black obtains a quite satisfactory position followlng: S . . .illfb S 9.a4 a6 1O.ttJa3 illfc 7. After S.ttJb3 a6, or 8.0-0 a6, there arise positions, which are rather similar to the Scheveningen variation, but with an important difference White's bishop is on gS and not on the e3-square (like in the Sche veningen ... ). This circumstance should rather be in favour of Black, because the placement of White's bishop on gS is less stable than on the e3-square.
This is the usual move is similar po sitions. There arises a quite complex situation after: 12.ttJd5 0-0-0 (It is also possible for Black to follow with: 12 ... ElcS.) 13.exfS ixfS, or 12.exfS hfS, but all that has never been tested into practice.
8 . .hf6 gxf6 9.ttJb3 My opponent chooses a relatively rare line. White plays much more of ten here 9.0-0.
9 ...�g5 This obvious move is Black's only chance for some active counterplay.
1 0 .g3 I was not so much afraid of the move 1O.ttJdS, since after the simplest possible reply - 10 ... 0-0-0, Black's prospects are not worse at all. In the game: Short - Salov, Amsterdam 1991, there followed: 11.0-0 Elg8 12.g3 fS 13 .f4 illfg7 14.exfS hfS IS.if3 ig4 16.c4 hS 17.ixg4+ illfxg4 IS.lLle3 illfx dl 19.Elaxdl ig7 and Black was slightly better.
1 0 ...f5 11.f4 Now, in case of 1l . . . illfg6, White has the powerful resource: 12.ihS! illfe6 13.ttJd4 ttJxd4 14.illfx d4 ElgS IS.lLldS ! and Black's situation is clearly worse (Kupreichik - Mallahi, Ireland 2003). Therefore:
1l .'ffil6 !? 12.�d2 ..
12 ig7!? . . .
That is a novelty. The move that I am playing is quite useful by itself and it maintains the tension in the centre. In the game Romanishin - L.Stein, Odessa 1972, Black reduced the ten sion with 12 . . .fxe4, but after 13. ttJxe4 ig7 14.c3 ! , White's position remained slightly better.
13. 0 - 0 - 0 Naturally, it had been very attrac tive for White to castle. After that move, during the game, I was rather unhappy with my position...but that lasted as long as I understood how powerful my move fourteen would turn out to be... So, I have to tell you now that White's move 13.0-0-0?! is a serious imprecision. He had bet ter play: 13. exfS hfS 14.0-0-0 and the position would have remained ex tremely sharp and complex.
13 .. fxe4 .
It was also possible for Black to
263
Morozevich-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 0 4 play 13 . . . 0-0-0, but the move i n the
has a great advantage, thanks to the
game was stronger.
threats ItJ c6-b4 and 1'!fS-cB. It seems
14.�xe4
that the move 15.g4, would have been Alexander's best chance, because then he would have maintained greater chances to organize some active coun terplay, than after the relatively calm move that he played in the game:
15.%Ye3 Here, I had the temptation to play the seemingly attractive move 15 . . . 1;\\I e 6 (in order to deprive White o f the possibility to sacrifice his knight), but it would h ave lost immediately to
14
.•.
a5!
It becomes clear now that not White, but Black is trying to obtain the advantage! I lost plenty of time, while I was calculating that move, since I was ex
16.�c4!
15
...
0-0
Now, my bishop on g7 becomes so powerful that my positional advantage is doubtless.
16.a3
amining variations connected with
White should not let Black's pawn
15.g4 - that move and the lines after it
to be pushed all the way up to the a3-
were typically - trademark Morozev
square.
ich . . . I was convinced that after: 15 . . .
After 16.g4? ! a4 17.ltJbd2 a3 IB.b3
a4 16.ltJbc5 a3! 17.b3 �cB lS.ltJd3 ! ?
d5 19. 1tJc4 1tJb4 ! , or 17.ltJbc5 dxc5
(It i s too bad for White to play: IB.g5?
ISJlxd7 1;\\1e 6 19J "lxb7 1'!fbB, Black's at
1;\\Ig 6 19.�d3, because of: 19 . . . dxc5!
tack is probably unstoppabl e.
20. ltJf6+ hf6 2 1.hg6 �b 2+ 2 2 . wbl hxg6 and his position is just hope less.) lS . . . ltJd4, my prospects would have been superior. In fact, White has already prob lems to equalize. It is rather dubious for him to play: 15.ltJg5? !, due to : 15 . . . a4 16.ltJc5 �cS 17.ltJce4 a 3 IS .b3 f5 19. 1tJf2 1;\\If6 and Black's advantage is overwhelming. In case of 15.ltJbc5?!, it is good fo r Black to follow with: 15 . . . �h3! 16. ltJxb7 0-0 and his initia
16 . . .1;\\I e 6!
tive for the pawn is quite dangerous.
That is a very powerful resource for
The move 15.a4 for White is anti-po
Black - his queen enters the actions
sitional, because after 15 . . . 0-0, Black
with tempo, threatening d6-d5.
Game 90
264
17.lWd3 h6 I d i d not play here 1 7. . . a4, because
It looks like 19.1Llbd2 might be bet ter for White, but I was planning to
I understood that White was not
counter that with: 19 . . . ds 20.lUcS 'lWf6
obliged to play the immediate: 18.lUgS
21.\WbS ifS. Black is threatening to
'lWg6 19. 'lWxg6 hxg6 2 0 . lUd2 IUd4, with
capture on c2, as well as to occupy the
a much better endgame for Black, but
d4-square with his knight and the ma
he can follow instead with: 18.lUbcS!
neuver 1'la8-aSxcS - White's queen is
18 . . . dxcS and only then - 19.1UgS, so
considerably overburdened.
19 ... lLld4 2 0 .lLlc3 1'lfc8
that the position becomes completely unclear and White has serious counter
The move 2 0 . . . bS, would have been
chances. Therefore, I chose the move
senseless here, because White's knight
17 . . . h6
-
I had everything protected
and my opponent had all his problems to worry about.
18.@b1
will go to the b4-square via cl and a2, blocking Black's b-pawn.
21.lLlla2 White cannot solve his problems
It i s too dubious fo r White to play
with the move 2 U 'lhel. After 21...
18.if3 ? ! , because after 18 . . . a4, Black's
'lWfS ! ? (It is not so clear if Black plays:
initiative is quite dangerous, for ex
21..J'lxc3 22.'lWxc3 1'lc8 (or 22 . . . lUxe2
ample: 19.1Ubd2 'lWa2 2 0 .lUc3 'lWal+
23.'lWb4 !), because of 23 .ifl ! ) 2 2 . 'lWxfS
2 1 . lUdbi bS, with a strong attack. Or:
ixfS 23.id3 ig4 24.lUle2 e6 - Black's
19.1UbcS dxcS 2 0 . 'lWxd7 'lWa2 21.c3 1Ub4!
chances in the endgame are clearly su
22.axb4 a3 23J'ld2 (It is bad for White
perior.
to follow with 23 .bxa3, in view of: 23 . . . 'lWxa3+ 24.@c2 'lWa2 + 2S.@c1 'lWb3-+) 23 . . . cxb4 and Black's attack is just crushing. Even in case of the relatively best for White - 24.'lWd3, Black's ad vantage becomes decisive after: 24 . . . axb 2 + 2S.1'lxb2 'lWa3 26.@c2 1'lfc8.
18
•••
a4
21... lLlxe2 ! This is an inconspicuous move, but it is very strong, j ust like 17 . . . h6. It is important to understand that Black will manage to break White's defence with his bishops sooner or later. White will never succeed in building a block ade in any of the variations.
19.1Llcl
22 .lWxe2 'lWf6!
265
Morozevich-Dreev, Moscow 20 04 I t i s quite evident that after: 22 . . .
Now, Black's
pieces are
totally
�xe2 23.ltJxe2, the endgame is clear
dominant.
ly in favour of Black. Still, White's
27.M3
defence is even more difficult with
White has defended against the threat l"lxc3, but now Black's b-pawn
queens present on the board.
23.Ylre3?
enters the action with a decisive ef
Alexander was in a time-trouble
fect:
here and he made a serious mistake.
27 b5 28.Ylrcl e6
Ins tead, he could have resisted much
The pawn-break b5-b4 had been
more
tenaciously
with
the
move
23.l"ld2. I would have the possibil
.•.
prepared, but I decided to play a cou ple of prophylactic moves.
ity 23 . . . �e6 then and White's posi
29.!lel d5
tion would have been rather difficult.
White's position is hopeless, be
I would have doubled then my rooks
cause he is completely defenseless
along the c-file, maintaining a very
against b5-b4.
powerful positional pressure.
3 0 .!le2 b4 31.ltJxa4 bxa3 32. �a3 !la8 33 . .!tJb6
23 �e6 24.ltJb4 gc4 •.•
White cannot save the day with 33.b3, because of 33 . . . Elcxa4.
33 gxa3 34 .!tJxc4 dxc4 35.ge4 !la4 36.c3 YlrfS and White resigned. This game was acknowledged to be the best in the tournament and at the closing ceremony I received a spe cial beauty-prize delivered to me by the ex-World Champion Boris Vas silievich Spassky. •
..•
25.ltJbd5
27. . . axb2 28. Elhdl (or 28. @xb2
E32
91
It is not any better for White to play 25.Eld3, because after: 25 . . . Elxb4! 26.axb4 a3, Black's attack is over whelming. For example: 27.�f3 (or 27.'lWb6 axb2 28.'lWxb7 l"lal+ 29.@xb2 'lWxc3+ 30.l"lxc3 l"la2 + 31.@c1 hc3-+)
Dreev - Kulaots Aeroflot-open, M oscow 2005
l.d4 .!tJf6 2 .c4 e6 3 . .!tJc3 �b4 4. 'lWc2 0 - 0 5.a3 hc3+ 6.'lWxc3 b6 7.�g5 �b7 8.e3 d6
�f5
(diagram)
29.l"le3 'lWd4-+) 28 . . . �f5 29. Ele3 �e4 ! !
9 .!tJe2!?
- and Black wins. After 3 0.'lWxe4, he plays 30 . . . 'lWxc3 and if 30 .'lWg4
This variation has become fash ion
•
able quite recently, at the beginning of
- 30 . . . d5 and Black's advantage is de
the 21" century. The once more popu
cisive.
lar line 9.f3 leads to complicated posi
25 .bd5 26.l"lxd5 gac8 •.•
tions, in which as practice has shown,
Game 91
266
21.@b1 fs 22 .l"1d4 IUb3 23 .l"1d3 IUcs 24. l"1d4 IUb3 25. l"1h4 @g7 26.@a2 IUcS 27.Eldl, Vasily had somewhat better chances, but he failed to materialize his small advantage into anything real and the game ended in a draw after 42 moves.
2 0 .'it>e 2 ! ? This i s a new idea. White's position seems preferable, because of his supe Black obtains more than sufficient counterplay.
rior pawn-structure on the kingside and his more active king. Still, I think
9 ... tilbd7 1 0 .tM3 .b6 11.tile3
that after some precise defence, Black
I had chosen that calm and solid
has good chances to equalize. 2 0 .. J:!fd8 2U�adl @f8?!
move, understanding that the best that I could hope for was just a slight opening advantage. On the other hand, thus I was almost eliminating the ele ment of risk, because the position was simplified considerably. It would have been more active for me to have played the move 1 l .b4, but then the game would have become much sharper. In the game Kasparov - Grischuk, Greece 20 03, there followed: l l . . . cs 12.bs �b7 13.lUc3 a6 14.f3 and the position was rather complicated.
It . . d5 12 .Y:!fe2 he4 13.he4 dxe4 14.Y:!fe2 e5 15.Y:!fxe4 h6 16. �h4 exd4 17.Y:!fxd4 til e5 .
This move was quite possible, but I
That is Black's first imprecision. It was better for him to have defended with 21.. .fS and I would have great problems to achieve even a slight ad vantage.
thought that it would have been more
22.g4!
flexible for Black to have tried 17 . . .
White fixes with that move Black's
Wc7!? For example, h e equalized the
somewhat compromised pawn-struc
chances after: 1S.0-0 l"1fcS 19.1"1fdl
ture on the kingside.
Wc4 20 .e4 Wxd4 2U!xd4 lUeS 22 .f3
22 ... 'it>e7 23.h4 !:'lxdl 24.!lxdl !le8 25.f4 a6 26.h5
IUhs 2 3 .�e1 IUf4, Beliavsky - Grischuk, Tripoli 20 04.
I have improved my position con
18.hf6 Wxf6 19.Y:!fxf6 gxf6
siderably and my opponent had to
This position was tested in the
play very precisely. Instead, he made
game Ivanchuk - Kasparov, Greece
in fact a decisive mistake on his next
2 0 03 and there after: 20 .0-0-0 l"1fcS
move:
267
Dreev-Kulaots, Moscow 20 05
This is a simple and reliable move on the road to victory.
33 ... ttJxa3 34.ttJc5+ ttJxa6
li>e7 35.
Black has no counterplay whatso ever.
35 ... e5 36.�b4 f5 37.�d5+ Black resigned. In case of 37 ... rJie6, White wins easily with 38.g5, while af ter 37 . . . rJif8, his most direct road to the
26 b5? •..
win is the line: 38.gxf5 exf4 39. exf4 .
This activity was absolutely unnec essary. It was better for him to have played 26 . . . lDd7 and he would have preserved some chances for a draw,
D27
92
despite the fact that my position would
Dreev - Karjakin
have been clearly superior.
Dos Hermanas 2005
27Jic1! This was my third participation in the tournament in Dos Hermanas and knight endgame turns out to be (the previous times I was there were just hopeless for him. in 2 0 0 1 and 20 03). The organiza 27 li>d7 2S.ttJdl ttJe4 29J1:xcS tion wasjust perfect as always. There li>xcS 3 0 .ttJf2 ttJd6 31.li>d3 li>d7 were some other tournaments be 32.ttJe4 ttJc4 sides the main event. Infact, this was Black cannot save the game in the not just a tournament - it was a real king and p awn endgame either, for Chess Festival with an excellent orga example: 32 . . . lDxe4 33.li>xe4 rJie7 34. nization. Mr. Joaquin Espejo was the rJid4 rJid6 35.g5 and I was winning Director of the tournament, just like easily. every time I have been in Dos Herma nas. This year it was again a category 16 event although the players were new, almost halfof them, in compari son to 20 03. There were four play ersfrom the previous year - Alexan der Rustemov and I, the "host" of the field - the super-experienced player Miguel Illescas as well as one of the youngest grandmasters in the world - Sergey Karjakin. Teimur Radjabov was among the other participants. In 33.b3! Now, Black cannot avoid the ex
change of rooks and the arising king
•.•
Game 92
268
fact he had already played there too in 20 01. He beat S. Karjakin in the 5th round and then managed to preserve his lead until the very end, so T. Rad jabov won the tournament outright with the score of "+2". This game against Sergey Karja kin was played in the last round and my victory enabled me to share 2nd - 5th place in that quite strong tour nament. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.lZlf3 lZlf6 The Queen's Gambit Accepted is Sergey Karjakin's main opening weap on against the move l.d4.
4.e3 e6 5.hc4 a6 6. 0-0 c5 7.i.b3 This is one of the main lines for White. At the previous tournament in Dos Hermanas (2003), in the game against the same opponent, I had cho sen the not so popular move 7.i.d3, but I did not achieve anything out of the opening and the game ended in a draw.
bit different. Black takes greater risks here in that line, but his chances to seize the initiative are considerable too. Meanwhile, that variation has not been analyzed extensively yet.
8.a4 b4 9.lZlbd2 White can also play the immediate move 9.e4.
9 ... i.b7 The other possible line for Black here is the move: 9 ... i.e7, which is of ten played by GM Sergey Rublevsky - who is a renowned specialist of the Queen's Gambit Accepted. He played that variation twice at the tournament in Poikovsky (which was played a bit earlier during the same year 2 0 05), but he lost both games - after: 1O.e4 cxd4 11.e5 liJfd7 12.liJc4 liJc6 13.liJxd4 liJcxe5 14.i.f4 liJxc4 15.liJc6 iWb6 16. liJxe7 'it>xe7 17.i.xc4 i.b7, Alexander Grischuk played the move 18.iWb3 (White used to play before 18.iWd2.) and Black had suddenly serious prob lems to worry about.
1 0 .e4 i.e7 H.e5 lZlfd7 12.liJc4 0 - 0 13. .ic2
7 b5 .•.
One of the basic positions of the 7.i.b3 variation arises after: 7. . .liJc6 8.liJc3 cxd4 9.exd4 i.e7 1O.�e1 0-0 and here - 1l.i.f4, 11.i.g5, or 11.a3. In case of 7 ... b5, the game becomes a
I had reached that position in my game against Ruslan Ponomariov, who tried here 13 . . . liJc6. I continued with: 14.dxc5 liJxc5 15.liJd6, but after
Dreev-Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 20 05
269
lS ... b3 ! , Black had an excellent game
Sergey tries a novelty here. This
(Dreev - Ponomariov, Erevan 2001).
move is more logical than what Black
It is well-known that Sergey Karjakin
played earlier in the game: Banikas
worked together with Ruslan Pono
- Moutousis, Athens 2004: 18 . . ..icS
mariov, including also in his match
19.We4 lLld4 20 . .id1 !'lab8 21..id2 Wa7
against V. Ivanchuk.
22 ..ic3 fS 23.Wd3 !'lfd8 24.b4 !'lxb4
At the previous tournament at Dos
2S . .ixb4 .ixb4 26.!'lb1 as 27. lLld6 .ixd6
Hermanas, Sergey played the move
28 .exd6 lLlf6 29 ..if3 !'lxd6 3 0.!'lb7 WcS
13 . . . lLlc6 in his game against M.Ileskas and after: 14.Wd3 g6 lS ..ih6 !'le8 16.
31.We3lLldS 32.!'lb8+ @f7 33 .!'lb7+ @g8 34.!'lb8+ @f7 3S. !'lb7+ @ g8 36 . .ihS g6
dxcS (It also deserved attention for
37.WeS 1-0.
White
to
try
16.lLld6 ! ? )
16 . . . lLlxcS
19
•
.i dl
17.Wxd8 !'laxd8 18. b3, the position
19 ..ic2 ! ?
was about equal (TIles cas - Karjakin,
19 ... gad8
Dos Hermanas 2 003).
We have to admit that move was
Therefore, my opponent's response
the cause of Black's further probl ems
proved to be a surprise for me in a
in this game. He had to play instead:
way:
13
19 . . . !'lfd8, so that he could counter .•.
cxd4 14.Ybd4
20.!'la3 with 20 . . . lLlb4 21..id2 !'lab8
14.lLlxd4.
and he would have had a quite suffi
14 ...b3
cient compensation for the pawn.
This move is quite typical for this variation. It is bad for Black to capture immediately:
14 . . ..b:f3 lS.gxf3, be
2 0 .ga3! lLld4? Possibly, Black should have played h ere 20 . . .f6, which was not exactly
cause he fails to complete his develop
in the spirit of the position, but thus.
ment in a normal fashion, due to the
he would have somehow justified the
threat We4. It is too dubious for him to
move 19 . . . !'lad8. It would be weaker for
play 14 . . . lLlc6? ! , because of 1S.Wg4.
him to play 20 . . . lLlb4 (in comparison
15 .ixb3 .ixf3 16.gxf3 lLlc6 17. We3 Wc7 18.f4
to the line 19 . . . l'lfd8), because after:
•
21..id2 as 22 . .ie2! White maintains the advantage.
18 . . . lLlc5N
Game 92
270 2t.ttj d6! Sergey had obviously overlooked that move. 21 ttlf5 That was again not the best deci sion for Black. My young opponent continued to play too quickly even after he had made a serious mistake. So, he made another one as a result. It would have been more resilient for him to have defended with: 21... hd6 22.1Nxd4 fie7 23.1Nc4 as. 22.ttlxf5 exf5 23.�c3 a5 After 23 . . . 1NaS, White wins with 24.b4 1Nxb4 2S.fia3. It would have been the best for Black to have tried: 23 . . . 1Nb6 24.b4 1Ng6+ 2S.1Ng3. ••.
24.b3! The pin of Black's knight becomes deadly. My opponent had failed to anticipate the fact that he cannot unpin anymore. Therefore, now he is forced to only sit down and wait... 24 1Nb6 25 . .b3 l�k8 26.fif3 E:c7 27.gfcl gfc8 28 ..id5 �g6+ 29.i>hl �a6 That is also possible, indeed . 3 0 .h3 Now, the threat hcs is again on the agenda. I did not wish to play more solidly (for example 30.flg2, in order
to improve my position later. . . ), so that Black had the possibility to play 30 ... /tJe6, but then after: 31.he7 Elxc3 32.E:xc3 E:xc3 33.1Nxc3 1Nf1+ 34.i>h2 1Nxf2+ 3S.flg2 1Nxf4+ 36.i>hl hs 37.fla3, I would have won even quicklier, than if Black had just remained passive. 3 0 1Nb6 31.i>h2 The attractive move 31.e6 would have been a mistake. Naturally in case of: 31.. .f6 32.flxcS, followed by a dis covered check, White is winning eas ily, but after: 3l...fxe6 32.hcs fixeS 33 .1Nxe6+ i>h8 34.1NxfS (threatening fle4) Black has the defensive resource 34 ...!lf8. 3 1 . . i>f8 32.�c4 �a7 33.b4 axb4 34.,hb4 1Nb6 Black should not allow the move a4-aS, since he would not have the move 1NbS. 35JHc2 g6 36.1Nd4 i>e8 37.a5 1Nb5 Now, White has a winning combi nation: •.•
.
•••
..
38.a6! ttlxa6 39 .id6 I did not have enough time, so I played just like a "human player'. It would be much better and quicklier for me to have won the game with: 39.e6! f6 40 .fic6+ . •
Dreev-Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 2 0 05
39 ... �c5 In case of 39 .. J'1c5, besides the sim ple line: 40.�cS �xcS 4Ulb2, White also wins with: 40.�f7+ wxf7 41.e6+ WgB (or 4l...Wxe6 42.E:e2+) 42.l"lxcS.
4 0 .hc7 �c7 41.�b4 �a6 42. �b8+. Black resigned, because af ter 42 . . JkB, White has the resource - 43.�b7.
B07
93 Dreev
-
Minasian
6th European Chess Ch, Warsaw 20 0S
l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3 g6 4.ig5 ig7 5.f4 c6 6.�f3 This poison has been reached in my practice several times and I have always treated Black's possibility �dB-b6 quite seriously. I used to play before 6.�d2, in order to be able to parry that maneuver by castling long. In that case h owever, Black switched to the plan with the move b7-bS and that led to very complicated positions in which I had managed to win sev eral games. The move 6.�f3, no doubt presents White with many more pos sibilities in case Black follows with b7-bS, since White should not be in a hurry to play �d2 at all.
6 . . .Wb6?! Black has numerous troubles to worry about in the line: 6 . . . 0-0 7.Wd2 bS 8.�d3, as you can see in my en counter against Zurab Azmaiparash viii (Moscow 19B9) see game 10 . (diagram)
7.�d2! Some half a century ago, in the
game Ravinsky - Shamkovich, Len ingrad 19S7, White was afraid to sac rifice his b2-pawn and he chose the rather humble move - 7.b3. I feel like including this interesting game in its entirety here: 7 ... �g4 B.Wd2 dS 9.�f6 exf6 1O.exdS 0-0 11.�e2 l'ldB 12.h3 ixf3 13.�xf3 fS 14.l'ld1 cxdS ls.�xds 'We6+ 16.M2 �c6 17.�c7 �d4+ 18. Wg3 'We7 19.�xaB �eS 20.�dS �bB 2 1 . Wh2 g5 2 2.g3 gxf4 23.gxf4 �xf4+ 24.'Wxf4 'We2+ 2S.Wg3 whB 2 6.�c6 !3gB+ 27.Wh4 'We7+ 2B. whS 'Wf6 29. !3hg1 E:g6 30.E1d6 1-0. Besides 7.b3, White has tried 7.l'lb1 in this position as well. The move 6. . . Wb6 i s thus justified i n both cases, since 7.E:b1 deprives White of the pos sibility to castle long, while 7.b3 com promises White's queenside. We had discussed the idea behind the move 7.'Wd2, some 15 years ago with my life-long coach Alexander Filipenko, who had advised me not to be afraid to sacrifice that pawn (and not only it. . . !) . . .Still, I had never managed to play that variation in practice, so this was my first game in that line. The reason possibly being that not many players answer my l.d4 with 1 . . .d6, transposing to the Pirc Ufimzev Defence. Meanwhile, the line
Game 93
272 6 . . . Wb6 is quite seldom played as well. During the game I thought that the move 7.Wd2 was a novelty, but it turned out that it had been played be fore in some games of not so famous chess-players.
7 1.Wxb2 • • •
In case Black refrains from accept ing the pawn-sacrifice, then White can castle long on his next move and the maneuver 6 ... Wb6 will turn out to be quite senseless. For example, in one of the abovementioned games (Valko - Thuroczy, Nyiregyhaza 2003), there followed: 7 ...�g4 8.�c4 ixf3 9.gxf3 ttJh5 10.0-0-0 ttJd7 11.f5 h6 12 .�h4 g5 13.�f2 Wa5 14.h4 and White had an overwhelming advantage. 8.l::lbl 1.Wa3 It became familiar to me, while I was commenting this game for the book that the same position had al ready been tested in the game Duck stein - Grabler, Austria 1972, where White followed with the immediate 9.e5. I did not consider that move to be the best for White during the game and I preferred to continue patiently with my development, without going for immediate active actions: 9.�d3
White's powerful pawn-centre and his huge lead in development is evi dently a more than sufficient compen sation for the sacrificed pawn. It is ex tremely difficult for Black to defend a position like that in a practical game. His main problem is that he can hard ly castle - White then follows with e4e5 and the e7-square is immediately in ruins. Black's queen does not seem to help in the solution of that prob lems at all, because of the line: 9 ... 0-0 lO.e5 dxe5 1Uxe5 ttJd5 12.Elb3 Wa5 13.ttJd5 and White regains his pawn quite comfortably. 9 1.WaS Black wishes to bring his queen back to c7, in order to protect his e7pawn. This idea seems to be quite reasonable, but still it consumes too much time . . . 1 0 . 0 - 0 Wc7 Black has won his opponent's b2pawn at the cost of several tempi in order to return with the queen to its own camp. I had managed meanwhile to mobilize all my forces in the pro cess ... H.eS! This is the beginning of the all-out offensive. White should absolutely not slow down even for a bit, because he has practically nothing more to develop . . . H ... ttJdS 12. ttJe4 Here, I had a serious alternative at my disposal - capturing 12. ttJxd5 and after 12 ... cxd5 - 13.f5 . I understood that seemed quite attractive, but still I decided not to continue like that. The main reason was I thought that Black's defence would be easier in that case, •••
Dreev-Minasian, Warsaw 2 0 05
273
since his choice would have been con siderably reduced and additionally he would have obtained the c6-square for his knight.
12
f5
...
This is the critical moment in the game: Black allows White to sacrifice a piece and it leads to an extremely powerful initiative for him. It is not so easy to give a good advice to Black, though ...His other possibilities are hardly any better. For example, in case of 12 . . . 0-0, it is good for White to follow with 13.c4. Now, it is terrible for Black to play 13 ... itJb6? !, because of 14.exd6 exd6 and after the strong move 15.itJf6+, Black's position becomes hopeless: 15 ... Axf6 (or 15 ... Wh8 16.f5!) 16.ixf6 1iJ8d7 17.Ae7 l'le8 18.l'lbe1 and White is threatening Ae7xd6 as well as f4-f5. After: 13.. .f6 14.cxd5 fxg5 15.itJexg5, White's initiative is tremendously dangerous - if 15 ... cxd5 (Black has nothing better in sight. ..) then White can follow with: 16.itJxh7 ! ? Wxh7 17. itJg5+ wg8 18 .hg6, with a crushing attack. I believe that the position after the move 12 . . .f6, deserves a separate dia gram:
13.�f6 ! ! (This tactical strike is much more effective than the position al line: 13.Ah4 0-0 - the move 13 .. .f5, leads after White's response to a posi tion from our game - 14.c4 itJb6 15.c5 dxc5 16.itJxc5 itJd5 17.f5 gxf5 18.Ag3.) 13 ... exf6 (Or 13 ...hf6 14.exf6 itJxf6 15.itJxf6 + exf6 16.l'lbe1 +-; 13 ... itJxf6 14.exf6 exf6 15.1i*'b4! 0-0 16.itJxd6 - the placement of White's rook on bl has turned out to be quite handy! 16... b5 17.f5 and Black has great diffi culties.) 14.itJxd6+ M8 15.c4 (15.f5!?) 15 ... itJe7 16.itJg5 ! (This is more spec tacular, but White can also continue with 16.f5.) 16 .. .fxg5 17.fxg5+ wg8 18. 1i*'f4 itJf5 19.itJxc8 1i*'xc8 2 0.g4 ! + Black can hardly expect anything good to happen to him after: 12 . . . dxe5 13.fxe5. Now, in case of 13 ... 0-0, it is excellent for White to continue with : 14.c4 itJb6 15.�f4 ! ? 1i*'d8 ! (It is too bad for Black to try 15 . . .Ae6? ! , due to 16.itJf6+ ! wh8 17.itJg5 and White's attack is overwhelming.) 16.�h6 f6 17.�xg7 wxg7 18.exf6+ exf6 19.1i*'f4 and White remains with a clear po sitional advantage. Following 13 .. .f5, White can play: 14.exf6 exf6 15.�h6 0-0 16.c4 and his initiative is quite dangerous after: 16 ... itJb6 17.�f4 1i*'d8 18.itJd6, as well as in case of: 16 . . .�xh6
274
Game 93
17.�xh6 Itlb6 (or 17 . . . �f4? IB.ltlfgS+-; 17... ltlf4? IB.Itlh4+-) IB.gfel. It is also a disaster for Black to try: 12 . . .ifS? 13.exd6 exd6 14.!'�xb7.
Black's defence is extremely dif ficult after his other possibilities too. For example: 13 ... fxe4 14.ixd6 e3 IS.�el �dB 16.ltlgS, or 13 ... dxeS 14 . .td6 �dB IS.fxeS fxe4 16.ixe4 - and White's initiative is decisive in both cases. 14.ltlxd6+ 'i!?f8 15.ltJg5 This is to bring some more wind into the fire. . .
15 . b6 ..
White was threatening 16.!'�xb7.
13 .be7! •
Now, White's bishop is again the sacrificial lamb! I can organize a pow erful attack thanks to the precarious placement of Black's king. I had some other possibilities too; for example after 13.ltlf2, my compensation for the pawn would have been more than sufficient, but Black's situation would have remained much safer then and I did not even wish to write about that ... Sometimes, if you do not play a move like that in a game of yours, you might regret that during all your subsequent (1 hope - long . . . ) creative chess-career. Meanwhile, I do not share the conviction that only young players can play chess wen, with good and stable results, during the present 21't century. . . Therefore, I am always glad when I hear about the outstand ing successes of such tireless fighters like Victor Korchnoi and Alexander Beliavsky, who have never betrayed their creative credo . . .
13 . . . ltlxe7
16.�b4! That is an important resource for White, because now his queen joins into the attack. He is threatening 17.�b3.
16 . . .h6 The other moves for Black were losing even quicklier.
17.�3 Itld5 18.1tlgf7 ie6 White's attack is quite powerful after: IB . . . E1h7 19.1tlxcB �xcB 20.ltld6 �d7 (or 20 . . . �e6 2l.g4!+-) 2 1 .ic4 �e6 2 2 .ixdS ! �xdS (or 2 2 . . . cxdS 23.c4!) 23.�g3 �e6 24.c4, with the threat d4-dS to fonow. Black's best defence was IB . . . !'!gB, but then after: 19.1tlxcB �xcB (or 19 . . . �xt7 20.�a3+ ltle7 2 l.ic4) 20.ltld6 (This is the return of the "ghost" - be-
275
Dreev-Minasian, Warsaw 2 0 05 cause now White's other knight comes to the d6-square ! ; in case of 2 0.�c4 @xf7 - 20 . . . �e6 2 1.Itld8 - 2 1 .obd5+ cxd5 22 .�xd5+ @e7 23.�xa8 Itlc6 24.�xc8 �xc8 25.�fdl ltla5, the posi tion would have remained unclear.) 20 . . .�e6 (After: 20 ... �d7 2 1.�c4 �e6
Or 22 ... �g8 23.!Lxi5 ! :::' xi5 24.gxf5 gxf5 25.�e7.
2 2 .�a3, White's attack is again very powerful.) 21.g4! and White has a dangerous initiative (It is weaker for him to play the naturally looking line: 2 1.c4 ltle7 (or 2 1...ltlc7 2 2 .g4! ltle8 23.gxf5 gxfS 24. .bf5 obe5+ (24 . . . �e7 25.ltlc8) 2 5 . @h l �xd6 2 6.fxe5 �xd4 27.�e6+-) 2 2 .d5 (or 2 2 .�a3 ! ? Itld7 23.�a6) 22 . . . �d7 and White has some compensation for the piece indeed, but the position is quite unclear, for
resigned.
example: 23.dxc6 (or 23.�a3 �c7) 23 ... �e6 24.�a3 Itlbxc6 25.c5.
19.1tlxhS �xhS 2 0 . c4 1tle7
23.d5 Itlxd5 In case of 23 . . . ltlxe5, White's most direct road to victory is the intermedi ate move - 24.ltlb5.
24.cxd5 hd5 25.l�bdl
and Black
94
D47 Dreev - M.Gurevich
6th European Chess Ch, Warsaw 2 005
l.d4 li:lf6 2.c4 e6 3.1tlf3 d5 4.ltlc3 c6 5.e3 li:lbd7 6.id3 dxc4 7.b:c4 b5 S.id3 b4 This variation of the Meran system is named after the Swedish player Erik Lundin and it is becoming recently more and more popular in competi tions at the highest possible level. The lines 8 . . . a6 and 8 ... �b7 are no doubt sharper and more fashionable, since Black often enters rather unclear posi tions and he tries to seize the initiative early in the game. Still, the move 8 . . . b 4 i s quite reliable too and Black usu ally obtains solid and relatively simple positions, in which it is sometimes quite difficult for White to fight even for a slight opening edge.
21.g4! This is a powerful p awn-break, af ter which Black's defence crumbles ir revocably.
21. ltld7 22.W1a3! • .
This quiet but extremely effec tive move renders Black helpless, so he opts for trying his last practical chance.
2 2 ... c5
276
Game 94
9.�e4!? Contemporary theory considers that move to be White's best chance to obtain some opening advantage. In case of9.lLla4 cS! Black's task to equal ize is much easier. Following: 1O.dxcS lLlxcS 11.lLlxcSbcS 12.0-0 (or 12.ibS+ id7=) 12 .../Lb7 13.ibS+ �e7, or 13. We2 0-0, he has no opening problems at all. In case White plays 1O.e4, in stead of 1O.dxcS, then after 10 ... cxd4 11.eS lLldS 12.0-0, Black is not forced to continue with 12 . . .ib7 (entering a very complicated and double edged variation, which arises much more of ten after another move order: l.d4 dS 2 .c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.lLlf3 e6 S.e3 lLlbd7 6.id3 dxc4 7.bc4 bS 8.id3 ib7 9.e4 b4 1O.lLla4 cS 11.eS lLldS 12. 0-0), but he can opt instead for 12 . . . lLlcS, or 12 ... WaS!?, reaching relatively simple and reliable positions.
9 �xe4 1 0 .he4 ib7 11. 0 - 0 /Ld6 !? .•.
That line is quite fashionable lately and tournament practice has shown in the last several years that White has great problems to obtain even a slight edge in the opening. Great players like Grischuk, Bareev, Akopian and Lau tier play like that with Black . . .
13.id3 !? This is a novelty, which has never been tested before. Against Grischuk (rapid tournament, Mainz 2003) I continued with 13.a3, but after 13 .. .fS! 14.id3 cS, I did not obtain anything promising out of the opening and Black's position turned out to be even slightly better.
13 ... �f6 14.gdl It deserved attention for White here to play 14.e4 ! ? Now, after 14... ie7!?, there arises a complicated po sition in which I think White's pros pects should be slightly better.
14 ... c5 15.Wa4+ I would not have achieved much with: lS. dxcS gxcS 16.We2 O - O ! ?, or lS.We2 cxd4 16.exd4 (or 16.�bS+ �e7=) 16 ... h6. Black is not worse at all in both cases.
15 .../Lc6 16.ib5 hb5 17.Wxb5+ Wd7 18.Wxd7+ �xd7 19.a3 b3! That is the best for Black. Open ing of the position after: 19 . . .bxa3?! 2 0.gxa3, or 19 ... cxd4?! 2 0.axb4, IS obviously in favour of White.
2 0 .dxc5 gxc5 21 .id2
12 .Wc2 gc8
21 . . . lLle4?! This is a very serious mistake and White seizes the initiative completely
277
Dreev-M.Gurevich, Warsaw 2 0 05 after it. It seemed logical for Black to play here 21...a5 ! ?, not allowing White's bishop to come to the b4square and Black's position would have been quite acceptable after that.
22 .ib4 gdS •
In case of 22 . . . gc2, White has 23.ltld4! with an overwhelming ad vantage. It is too dubious for him to win a piece with the line: 23 . .bd6 Itlxd6 24.ltle5 + ? ! We7 25J'lxd6 @xd6 26.ltlxf7+ we7 27.ltlxh8, since after: 27 .. J'lxb2, he must already think about survivaL.
23.ltld4 .ieS 24.ltlxb3 hb2 2S. ElxdS+ exdS 26.Eldl Itlf6 27.ltlcS+ wc6 2S.ltld3 as 29.ltlxb2 axb4 3 0 . axb4 As a result of his mistake on move 2 1, my opponent has remained with out a pawn almost by force, but his king is much more active than its white counterpart and therefore the realization of my advantage is far from being effortless.
3 0 ... ElbS
We were both under time-pressure here. It was understandable that Black had some chances for a draw, despite being a pawn down. Sti1l, his defence (particularly in the time-trouble) was tremendously difficult. Therefore it was not surprising that he lost rather quickly.
34 ...We4 3S.h3 lab7 36.g4 hS 37.1tlf5 'it>f3?! This move only speeds up Black's demise. He could have still resisted with the move 37 ... !'lb4, but I thought that the variation: 38.ltld6+ @f3 39.g5, would not have left him too many chances to save the game.
3S.gS Itlh7 39. 'it>f1 g6 40 .ltlh4+ We4 41.Eld4+ 'it>eS 42.f4+ 'it>e6 43. wf'2 1tlf8 44.1tlf3 'it>e7 4S.ltleS Elc7 46.wf3 ltle6 47.Elb4 'it>d6 4S.Elb6+ 'it>dS 49.1tlxf7 and Black resigned. 9S
D31 Dreev - Sakaev
Word Cup, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005
It was more tenacious for Black to defend with 30 ... @b5 ! ?, hampering maximally White to press his advan tage home.
This game was played in the World Cup in the Siberian town of Khanty Mansyik and I managed to win there 31.ltld3 d4 32.ltleS+ 'it>dS 33.1tlf3 several matches in a row and to en ter the scheme of the last 16. At that Elxb4 34.ltlxd4 particular moment ofthe tournament however, we were both very tired as a result of our previou s marathon fights and that explains the numerous mutual mistakes in our encounter. 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.ltlc3 e6 4.e4 dxe4 S.ltlxe4 .ib4+ 6 ..id2 �xd4 7.hb4 �xe4+ S .ie2 ltla6 9 ..iaS!? •
This move is presently quite fash ionable. It has become even more
27S
Game 95
popular and modern than the well-fa miliar lines like 9.id6 and 9.ic3.
ous.) lSJlxd6 fxes 19.�e3 hs 20.idS+ �t7 21.E1f1+ �gS 22.ie7 tiJc7 23.E1d2! E1cS 24.id3 g6 2s.l3df2 �h7 26.id6 tiJa6 27.hes and Black came under a crushing attack.
1 0 .lLlt3!
9 f6!? .•.
I believe - that is Black's most re liable defensive line in this variation of the Slav Gambit. Not so long ago, it was considered that Black's most solid defence here was the following practically semi-forced variation: 9 ... �d7 10.tiJf3 tiJf6 11.'lWd6 'lWfs 12.tiJes 'lWxf2+ 13.�xf2 tiJe4+ 14.�f3 tiJxd6 lsJ!hdl �e7 16.cs liJxcs 17.ib4 b6 1SJ!ac1 tiJce4 19.id3 fs 20.he4 fxe4+ 2 1.�e3 cs 22.E1xcs bxcS 23.ixcs ieS 24.hd6+ �dS and Black's position should not be worse. For example, the game Yakovich - Galkin, Dubai 2001, continued with: 2s.b4 as and the op ponents agreed to a draw. Recently, the entire line was dealt a heavy the oretical blow in the game Grischuk - Shulman, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005, where instead of 16.cs, White played: 16.E1d2 ! ieS 17J'lad1 f6?! (Black's rela tively best defence here would have been the move 17. . . tiJfs, but I still think that after lS.E1dS - or even lS.g4!? lS ... E1xdS 19.hdS+ MS 2 0 .g4, White has more than sufficient compensa tion for Black's two extra p awns and his initiative is tremendously danger-
This simple move is much stron ger than the seemingly more active line: 1O.'lWdS+ �t7, since in that case after: 11.0-0-0 b6 12.ic3 es, Black's prospects are at least equal, while af ter 11.tiJf3, it is good for Black to play: 11.. .b6 12.ic3 tiJcs! 13.liJd2 'lWg6 and he ends up with a better game. For example, if 14.b4?! , then the line: 14 ... tiJe7!? ls.'lWxhS tiJd3+ 16.�fl (or 16.hd3 'lWxd3 17.�b2 �b7 lS.'lWxaS ixaS+) 16 ... tiJf4 17.g3 liJxe2 lS.�xe2 �b7 19.'lWxaS haS is evidently in fa vour of Black.
1 0 ...h6 11.�c3 c!Lle7 12. 0 - 0 0-0 13.l'lel e5
14.h4!? White's compensation for the sac rificed pawn is quite sufficient in that position, because Black's queen is rather unstable on the e4-square and his pieces are not well coordinated at all. The most important point is that it is much easier to play that position with White mostly because he has the
Dreev-Sakaev, Khanty-Mansyisk 2 0 05 indisputable initiative.
14 ...if5 15.§'a4 �c7 16J3adl �e6 17J3d6!? l3fd8 18.�d2 §'h4 19. l3xd8+ �xd8 20 .if3 �e6 21. §'a6
279 been acceptable in view of the vulner able light squares on White's king side.
26.§'xb6 �xe2 27.l3xe2 §'h3 28. f3?! That was a serious imprecision on my part and I lost a great deal of my advantage with it. The correct move was 28.a4!, after which my opponent would have nothing really to coun ter the march forward of my a-pawn with.
28 ...h5 29.a4 h4 3 0 .§'f2 My opponent had defended pretty well until that moment. I have pre served some initiative for the pawn in deed, but I still think that the chances for both sides are approximately equal here.
21. . . �g5 This is an imprecision and Black begins to have some problems after it. It was more reliable for him to play 21 . . . ltJd4, or 2l...ltJf4 with a very com plicated game and mutual chances.
That was another mistake for White. It would have been better to continue with 30.Elg2, preserving the edge. Now, Black has good chances for a draw.
3 0 ...hxg3 31.hxg3 id3 32.l3el §'e6 33.b5 cxb5 34.cxb5 l3c8 35. ib4 �d5 36.ia5 l3c2 Black's pieces are so active in this position that he has a full compensa tion for White's extra pawn. The final part of this game was played in a des perate mutual time-trouble. . .
37.b6?! gb2 38.§'d4!?
22.§'b7 ge8 23.ie2 �e6 24.g3 §'h6 25.§'xa7 I have managed to regain my pawn and now White is already better.
25 ... �d4?! That is already a grave mistake and Black loses a pawn after it without suf ficient compensation. It would have been better for him to protect simply his pawn with the move 25 . . . ltJc8, pre serving a quite defensible position. Then, in case of: 26.1!h'd7 gd8 27.1!h'xc6 ItJd4 28.1!h'c7 (or 28 .hd4? 1!h'xd2-+) 28 . . . ltJxe2+ 29J�xe2 Eld3 30.ltJfl i.h3, Black's compensation would have
After that surprising move, my op ponent had only a few seconds left on the clock and he simply lost his cold bloodedness and following:
Game 96
280
38 ... 'tYh3?? 39.'tYxdS+
he
re
h armless . . .
S... lLlbd7
signed. Still, in the diagrammed position
That is Loek's favo urite move in
Konstantin had the spectacular prob
answer to S.lWa4. It seems to be active
lem-like move - 38 . . . 'tYb 6 ! ! , which
and quite logical too, but r think that
would h ave equalized, since in that
the more modest line - S . . . c6 is more
case White would have been forced to
reliable.
enter the line: 39.lWxb6 lLlxb6 with an
6.e4 a6 7.,bc4 gb8 8.'tYc2 bS 9.id3 ib7
equal endgame.
It is also interesting for Black to try the variation: 9 ... cS ! ? 1O.�f4 gb6,
96
D24 Dreev - van Wely
Word Cup, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005
which is very rarely played in tourna ment practice. r believe that White's prospects should be somewhat better, due to the not so natural placement of
A game from the World Cup, in a match/or the 13 th - 14 th place in the final. l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 dS 4.lt:lc3 dxc4
Black's rook on b6, but still the posi tion seems to be rather complex and quite acceptable for Black.
1 0 .if4 gc8 H.dS!? lLlc5 12. 0 - 0 - 0 exdS 13.lLlxdS lLlxdS 14. exdS lLlxd3+ All that has been played in the game Tregubov - van Wely, Warsaw 2 0 05, in which after:
lS.gxd3 �e7 16.M
0-0 17.liJgS g6 18 .lWd2 �d6 19.@b 1 �f4 20.lWxf4 �dS, Black maintained equ ality.
IS.lWxd3 ! ? This novely had been especially prepared by me for that game and it created certain problems for Black.
S.'tYa4+!? White's
most energetic and
IS ...�e7 16.h4 no
doubt critical line here is: S.e4!? �b4 6.�gS, but after 6 . . . cS there arises a quite complicated, double-edged po sition, which has been tested by my opponent numerous times in practice.
r understood in my preparation that he had played it quite well with Black. Therefore, r decided to choose a not so sharp line, which was far from being
Dreev-van Wely, Khanty-Mansyisk 20 05 My opponent took here about forty minutes on the clock, but he failed to make the right choice.
16 �d7? ! •.•
That is a serious mistake, after which Black's position becomes very difficult. Why did he not play the seem ingly obvious move - 16 ... 0-0? I had prepared against that the line: 17.CDgS g6 (It is too bad for Black to try 17. . . bgS? 18.hxgS g 6 (or 1 8. . .h 6 19.9xh6 g6 20.h7+ 'i!lh8 2 1.�h6 �e8 2 2 .�d4+ f6 23.�g4+-), because of 19.�xh7! and White would have a crushing at tack.) 18.CDxh7! ? 'i!lxh7 19.hS, with a dangerous initiative for the sacrificed piece. Evidently, van Wely had seen that variation and he did not find anything better than the move 16 ... �d7? ! , which did not seem to be so natural. Still, my opponent had a good chance to de fend successfully if he had found the move 16 .. .f6! in the diagrammed posi tion. My prospects would be still bet ter then, but not more. Black plans to castle and I cannot prevent that, since after 17.�b3, he can follow with: 17. . . �d6 1 8.�hel+ 'i!l f7 19.�e3 and White is only slightly better.
17.lt."le5 �d6 IS.�f5! It."ld7 g6
0-0
19.
That is probably the best for Black. Loek is trying to complicate the posi tion somehow. In case of: 19 . . . �b4 20.lt."lxf8 l"1xf8 21.�gS, Black remains an exchange down in a relatively sim ple position and his practical chances to save the game would not be so great at all.
2 0 ..b:d6 cxd6+ 21.�c2 l"1xc2+ 22.'i!lxc2 l"1cS+ 23.'it>bl
Now, it is clear that Black's com pensation for the exchange is insuffi cent, but his bishop pair should not be underestimated. I had to play precise ly in order to materialize my advan tage.
23 .. J'lc7 24.lt."lbS! l"1c5 In case of 24 . . . �c8, White's simplest line is: 2S.lt."lc6 bc6 26.dxc6 �xc6 27. l"1c1 and winning that endgame is just a matter of technique. Naturally, Black wishes to avoid simplification.
25.l"1del! That is the best move and my op ponent cannot avoid the trade of the rooks anymore, so my task to realize my advantage is facilitated consider ably.
25 ...�f8 Or 25 . . . �c7 26.CDc6+-
26.lt."ld7 l"1cS 27.l"1cl! l"1xcl+ Black has to exchange rooks now. After 27 .. J�d8, White wins easily with 28 .lt."lb6 and there is no satisfactory defence against the threat - �c7.
2S.l"1xcl �e7 29.l"1el .b:h4 3 0 .g3 �g5 31.f4 th6 (diagram)
32.l"1e7 That is the final touch. White is threatening It."lb6 and Black cannot save his bishop on a7. My opponent
282
Game 97
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.iLlc3 iLlf6 4.e3 e6 5.iLlf3 iLlbd7 6.�d3 dxc4 7.h:c4 b5 8.�d3
could have resigned here, but he con tinued with:
32 ...g5 33.f5 �g7 34.iLlb6 g4 35. �c2 �f6 36.:Elxb7 �f4 37.gxf4 g3 38.iLld7+ �xf5 39.iLlf8 and finally
8 . . . a6
Black resigned .
That was a real surprise! Jenya had played i n our last game a somewhat passive, but reliable move 8 . . b4 and he managed to draw with Black without too much of an effort. In fact, I never understood why he chose this time a variation, which led to much more complicated positions. There were two possible reasons - he was ei ther afraid of my opening preparation, -
97
D49 Dreev - Bareev 58th Russia Ch, Moscow 2005
It can be said that our chess games with Jenya Bareev have always had something quite special about them... We are great rivals ever since we were kids. I had played a match with Bareev back in 1983 for the right to represent the USSR at the Under-16 World Championship. (I have writ ten about that in the Foreword to this book). Then, the elder and the more experienced Bareev won ...Presently, I do not feel anything extraordinary before our games with Ba reev, but still there are some shadows of the past hanging over our encounters on the board. . . This game was played at the Su per-Final of the Russian Champion ship which was held for the second time in 20 05.
.
or he wanted not only to equalize, but to play for a win at any rate. I was in clined much more to think that the second possibility was the right one, because his tournament situation was such as in case of his win against me, he would have had great chances to fight for winning the Championship.
9.e4 c5 1 0 .e5 cxd4 1l.iLlxb5 axb5 The other more "classical" line of the Sozin variation is the move
-
11...
iLle5.
12.exf6 gxf6 13. 0 - 0 �b6 14. �e2 It was still not too late for me to chicken out and to regain my pawn
Dreev-Bareev, Moscow 2 0 0 5 with the line: 14.�e4 �b7 1 5. .bb7 iWxb7 16.lLlxd4 �gS I7.iWf3, with equal ity. Naturally, all that was too far away from my plans . . . 14 ... �a6 15.a4 That is a seldom played move. White's main line here is - 15.�d1. It is amazing, but that position has been played by Bareev numerous times with White and Black as well . . .
2S3 that Black cannot castle, because of �h6, so he maneuvers with his queen discoordinating Black's pieces, more over White's bishop comes to the f4square with tempo. 18 ... �f8 19.,tf4 ttle5 2 o .1Wh5 Until now, my opponent had played almost instantly and he had an advan tage on the clock of about 50 minutes. Here he thought for about an hour and a quarter! Evidently, Jenya had real ized that things were far from simple and White's initiative was really seri ous.
15 ... ,tg7 That is a new move. Black's main line here is: 15 . . . lLlc5 16.axb5 �b7 17.�xaS+ .baS. In the older game of the two - Bareev - Shirov, Novgorod 2 0 ... 13c8 That move was a great surprise for 1994, there followed: IS.if4 id6 and Black had a wonderful position, but me; meanwhile White's initiative was later in the game Bareev - Karjakin, developing quite freely after Black's Beer-Sheva 2005, White reacted cor other possibilities as well, for exam rectly and that was: lS.lLlxd4. That ple: move was considered to be impos 20 ... lLlxf3+ 21 .1Wxf3 iWd5 (or 21... sible before, due to lS . . . iWd6, but af e5 22.�d2) 22.�e4 (Or 22 .iWxd5 �xd5 ter the brilliant computer discovery 23.�fcl �e7 24.�c6 �aS 25.�e4 �d7 - 19.b6 ! , Black managed to draw the 26.E!b6 �aa7 2 7.ibS ib7 28 .ixb7 game somehow, but White's position �axb7 29.�d6+ �dS 30 .�xb7 E!xb7 was clearly preferable. 31.a6 E!a7 32.ic5 E!a8 33 .i.xd4.) 22 ... 16.a5 iWd7 23.ic6 iWe7 24.iWd3 ! ? ; This seems to be the most princi 20 . . .b 4 2l..be5 fxeS 22 .ltJgS E!d7 pled move. 23J:lacl ! ; 16 ... 1Wd6 17.1We4 13d8 18.1Wg4 20 . . . iWd5 21.�e5 fxe5 2 2 . ltJg5 Eld7 White takes advantage of the fact 2 3.ie4 iWd6 24.�fcl.
Game 98
284 2IJ3ael It also seemed good for White to follow with the more positional ap proach 2U'1ac1, but I had decided to play for a direct attack. 21. .. gc5 2 2.b4 It seemed to me that the inclusion of that move was in my favour in case I had intended to continue as I did in the game. 22 gc3 23.,be5 fxe5 24.tLlg5 1!!e7 Or 24 ... Elc7 25.f4. ..•
25.f4! e4 White's attack remains very power ful, and Black can hardly parry it even after 25 .. .f5, for example: 26. hf5 exf5 2 7.fxe5 '
try 2B.Ele5, but the move in the game is stronger and simpler as well. 26 h6 Black must play that move sooner or later anyway. 27.tilf3 Now, White's knight is headed for the e5-square. 27 1!!xb4 28.tLle5 1!! e7 The line: 28 ... 1"1c7 2 9.�g6 ! , loses for Black for the same reasons . . . ••.
••.
29.�g6! b4 Black's light squared bishop finally enters the actions, but unfortunately it is already too late . . . 3 0 .hf7 hfl 30 . . .�xe5 3l.fxe5 hf1 3 2.1"1xf1+-. 31.�g6+ '
E12
98 Dreev - Bareev Poikovsky 2006
This game isjust one ofour numer ous encounters on the chess board with Jenya Bareev. He lost against me in the super-final of the Russian
285
Dreev-Bareev, Poikovsky 2 0 0 6 Championship (I have commented that game in the book too.). Therefore, despite the fact tha t he was Black, he was evidently in a very aggressive mood and he wanted to take his re venge. The opening variation that he chose confirmed that expectation. l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3 c5 5.d5 .h6
1 0 b5!? This is an interesting pawn-sac rifice. After the main line: 1O ... 'lWd7 11.,bd6 �xa4 12 .lLlxa4 It:lxd5 13. 0-0-0, Black must play very precisely in order to equalize. 1l.lLlxb5 0 - 0 12.lLlc3 'lWb6 13. gbl There are only a few games played in that line, but I have to mention that White has tried here mostly 13.id2. I do not like that move, though 13 ... lLlbd7 ••.
...
6.MJ3 I preferred that move, because I wished to enter a certain line. In case of the usual move 6.�c2, White must consider the vari ation: 6 ... exd5 7.cxd5 ib7 8.e4 �e7 9.id3 It:lxd5 and after 10 .0-0 lLlc7, his compensation for the pawn is sufficient, but that would have led to an entirely different type of po sition ... 6 exd5 7.cxd5 g6 S.if4 d6 9. It:lc3 ig7 1 0 .'lWa4+ ..•
14.e4 That is the correct decision for White. I lose my castling rights in deed, but I solve other problems in the process. The position resembles a bit the Volga Gambit, but with an es sential difference - the a-file is closed. If White manages to bring his king to safety, Black will have no compensa tion for the pawn; therefore he must act energetically ... 14 ixf1 15.1!ixf1 c4 This is an arguable decision. Evgenij frees in that fashion the c5-square for his knight, trying to seize the initia tive. It seemed to me quite interesting for him to try: 15 ... lLlhS, after which he could have obtained a very accept..•
Game 98
286 able game, for example: 16.�d2 ILleS 17.lLlxeS �eS 18.lLle 2 ! ? (After 18.g3 fS 19.exfS gxfS 20.'tYg2 '@b7, the game is quite unclear.) 18 .. .fS 19.exfS gxfS 20.lLlg3 ILlg7. 16.'@b4 Or 16.'@c6 '@d8 17.'@xc4 �e8, with a good compensation for Black. 16 '@d8 It was evidently stronger for Black to continue with: 16 . . . '@xb4 17.axb4 lLle8 18 .lLld2 and here either immedi ately 18 .. .fS, or 18 . . . lLlb6, followed by f7-fS .
18 li.:ld3!? Or 18 . . .�c8 19.�xc4 tL'lcxe4 20.�d3, with an edge for White. 19.�xd6 After 19.'@xc4 ILlxf4+ 20.gxf4 ILlhS 21.ILle2 !'le8, Black's counterplay is sufficient. •..
•••
19 li.:lh5! The queens are exchanged now and Black regains one of the pawns. The position is transferred into a compli cated mUlti-piece endgame. 2 0 .�xd8 ILldxf4+ 2 1.gxf4 li.:lxf4+ 22.'tYg3 li.:lh5+ 23.@g4 White controls the f4-square. If 23. @g2, then after 23 . . . li.:lf4+ the game might end in a draw. That could have been the most logical outcome of that encounter, but I decided to play more aggressi vely. . . 23 .l:�axd8 24.e5 f5 + I t seemed very strong for Black to play 24 .. .f6, but after 2S.lLld4! White is better. It deserved attention for Black instead to try 24 . . . !'lfe8!? 25.@h4 !'lfeS It is obviously better for Black to play immediately 2S . . . lLlf4. Jenya probably had overlooked that after: 26.1'�hdl ILld3 27.!':lxd3 (The correct line for White here is: 27.b3 ! ILlxeS •••
17.g3 The principled decision for White here would have been the move 17. �d6. After 17. .. �e8, I was calculat ing only the line: 18.eS ILlg4 19.e6 fxe6 20 .dxe6 (20.'@xc4 ILlb6) 20 ... lLlde5 and Black would have some compensation. I had completely overlooked the move 18J�e1!, since i n that case after: 18 . . . ILlg4 (or 1 8 .. .1'k8 19.h3) 19.h3 ILlgeS 20.�¥eS lLlxeS 21.ILlxeS �eS 22.'@xc4, White would be clearly better. 17 ... li.:lc5 18.@g2 Or 18.'@xc4 !'lc8 19.�e2 !':le8 20. ILld2 ILlhS, with some compensation for Black (or 20 . . . lLlfxe4 21. li.:lcxe4 fS 22.f3).
•.
Dreev-Bareev, Poikovsky 20 0 6 28.liJd4, with an unclear position.) 27 . . . cxd3 2 8J"ldl Elfe8, I would have lost one of my central pawns. 26.ghd1
287 Here, my adversary lost his sense of danger, so he avoided the repetition of moves and he played: 39 ... .td6 4 0 . cS
Now, there happened a very strange thing . . . Evgenij no doubt knew that he had to make one more move to the end of the time-control and he had approximately three minutes left to do that. Still, he could not make up his mind whether to play 40 ... gS+, 3 0 ....teS! or 4o . . . 1xcS. After 40 ... gS+, White's My king was in a cage here and king manages, like in a fairy tale, to Black could have forced a draw at any squeeze through Black's pieces. He moment. .. can win a piece indeed, but the evalu 31.
Game 99
288 99
B12 Bologan - Dreev Poikovsky 2 0 06
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 if5 4.lLIfJ e6 5.ie2 lLId7 6. 0 - 0 ig6 7.c3 lLIh6 7... a6. 8 ..hb.6 gxh6 9.�bd2
22.fxe3 ge8 and Black had a very good game. Still, while I was preparing for the game, it seemed to me that things were not so promising for Black after the undermining move fl-f6. He had to play extremely precisely in most of the lines in order to avoid ending up in an inferior position. The fact that Vio rei was obviously quite ready to repeat the way he played against Z.Isoria confirmed that evaluation. The move I chose, was leading to a much more complex position. 1 0 .lLIel This is a quite interesting maneu ver. White had also to consider the possibilities: 1O.c4, 1O.lLlb3 and 1O.h4. lO c5! Of course, that move is an integral part of Black's plan anyway, but after the maneuver of White's knight it is doubtlessly even stronger. •.•
9 ...ie7!? This is an interesting novelty. I decided to refrain from the standard plan here, including the undermin ing move fl-f6. Black usually opted for the immediate 9 .. .f6, as Z.Isoria played with Black against V.Bologan. The game continued with: 1O.lLlb3 ig7 11.exf6 V9xf6 12.lLlel eS 13.ig4 ifS 14.dxeS lLlxeS Is.ixfS V9xfS 16.lLld4 V9fl 17.f4 0-0 18.lLld3 lLlc4 19.9f3 gae8 2 0 .V9c2 ge4 and he obtained a quite acceptable position (Bologan Izoria, St Vincent 2005). Meanwhile, Black had also tried the move fl-f6, after the preparatory if8-g7 and cas tling. In the game Smikovski - Galkin, Internet 2 004, there followed: 9 . . . ig7 1O.gel 0 - 0 Il.ti:lfl f6 12.exf6 V9xf6 I3.lLlg3 e5 14.dxe5 lLlxe5 15.V9d2 gae8 16.gfl a6 I7.ti:lxe5 V9xe5 I8.gael V9f4 19.V9xf4 gxf4 20.if3 gff8 21.ge3 gxe3
1l.lLIb3? ! Black can counter ll.f4 with the powerful argument - l1...V9b6. In case of ll.lLld3, Black can also play 11 ... V9b6, but then White would have the strike - 12.c4 ! with great complica tions. Therefore, it deserved attention for White to come back with his knight to the centre.
Bologa n-Dreev, Poikovsky 2 0 0 6 1 l :flb6 12.dxc5 Now, it is bad for White to play: 12.'�d2 c4 13.ltJc1, because of: 13 . . . ItJxe5! 14.dxe5 �g5 15.'fld1 �xb2. 12 .bc5 Capturing with the knight on c5 is evidently worse, since Black's pres sure against his opponent's e5-pawn is thus reduced. 13.1tJf3 White has no advantage after the opening. In case of: 13.ltJc5 ItJc5, he has problems with the protection of his b2-pawn.
289
•.
• • •
13 �f8 !? Now, Black's bishop is redeployed to g7, via its initial square, in order to exploit the vulnerability of White's e5pawn. 14.a4 I was not impressed by that "active" move. You will see later that it only weakens the b4-square. White had better play the immediate - 14.c4. 14 a6 15.c4 Viorel is trying to provoke a lively piece-play as quickly as possible. I only needed to complete my develop ment and my position would be clearly better.
15... �e4! That is the right way for Black to hold on to the d5-outpost. I n case of 15 . . . dxc4, it is very good for White to continue with 16.ltJbd2! 16.a5 �b4 17.ltJbd2 l"ld8 This is a strong move. The tension in the centre has reached its peak. Af ter the "normal" line for Black: 17 ... 1i.g7 18.ltJxe4 dxe4 18.ltJd2, the posi tion remains approximately equal. You should not forget though, Black's pawns are doubled . . .
••.
..•
18.cxd5? ! Now, the position has been stabi lized and Black can calmly complete his development! It deserved atten tion for White to follow with: 18.�e1!? �xb2 (or 18 ... 1i.g7? 19.1tJxe4 �xe1 20. ItJd6+) 19.1tJxe4 (White would not
Game 1 0 0
290 achieve anything much with: 19.cxd5 obd5 2 0.�c4 �c6! .) 19 ... dxe4 20.gb1 �a3 2UiJd4 liJ c5 ! ? (It is clearly worse for Black to play: 21 ... �g7 22.liJxe6!? fxe6 23.�h5+ It>e7 24.�xe4 obe5 25. gfel.) 22.�d2 �a4 and Black is better. It is also interesting for White to try 18.ga3! and here after: 18 ... �xb2 19 .Elb3 �a2 20.gxb7 i.g7 (It is too dan gerous for Black to play: 20 ... �xa5? 2l.liJd4 liJxe5 22.�h5!.) 21.liJxe4 dxe4 22.liJd4 liJxe5 23.�b3 �xb3 24. liJxb3, White maintains good prospects on the queenside in that s harp endgame. Instead, Black could have followed with the more restrained line: 1 8 . . . liJc5 (preventing the move ga3-b3) 19.cxd5 bd5 20.�c2 �g7 2Uk1 liJd7. 18 h:d5 19.�c2 ig7 2 0 .liJc4 Black can counter 20.Ela4 with the powerful argument 20 . . . �c5 ! 2 0 ... 0 - 0 I managed already to evacuate my king, while White's initiative ebbed away and his pawns were quite vul nerable ... 2UUdl gc8 2 2.b3 It is more resilient for White to play here: 2 2 .ga4!? �c5 23.�c3 Elfd8. 22 liJxe5 23.liJfxe5 h:e5 24. Ela4 �e7 That was a n imprecision. I decided to play more "solidly", while I was choosing between that move and 24 ... �c3. The latter looks to me now much stronger. 25.�d2 ig7 (diagram) White's position seems to be quite difficult, but he could have resisted more tenaciously with: 26.liJb6 ib3 27.liJc8 gc8 28.gg4! id1 and here he ..•
..•
would have the surprising intermedi ate move - 29. �h6 f6 (That is the only move for Black, since 29 ... �f8 does not work, because of 30.�d3! ) 3 0.�d1 gc5 - and Black would have an obvi ous advantage. It would be h owever, rather difficult for him to tum it into a full point, because of the opposite coloured bishops present on the board and the vulnerability of the e6-pawn. 26.if3? This terrible move was played in a time-pressure and it became quite easy for me to press my advantage home. 26 h:t'3 27.gxi3 gfd8 28.�e2 �g5+ 29.1t>f1 �dl+ 3 0 .�xdl gd8 31.�c2 �h5 32.lt>g2 �g6+ ! This is the simplest for Black. 33. �xg6 hxg6 34.gb4 gd7 35. liJb6 gc7 36.liJa8 ic3 0 - 1 .•.
100
D23 Yevseev - Dreev Moscow 2006
This game was played in the tra ditional match Moscow - Saint Pe tersburg. It was preceded by a blitz tournament for the participants of the main event and I won it. Unfor tunately, I could not play in the first round of the compeh·tion and accord-
291
Yevseev-Dreev, Moscow 20 0 6 ing to the rules, in the second day I could not play on boards one or two. I was faced with the choice - to play with Black on board three, or to be with White on some of the lower boards. I decided to choose board three, because I wanted to try to take my revenge against Denis, who had beaten me a short while before that with White, in the first round of the Russian team championship ... 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tLlf3 tLlf6 4.�c2 dxc4 5.�xc4 ifS I had played S . . . ig4 in the game I mentioned. 6.g3 e6 7.ig2 tLlhd7 8. 0 - 0 ie7 9.tLlc3 0 - 0
time ago .. 1 O . .h5! This move is relatively new. That was the reason I stopped playing lO.e3 altogether. The idea behind the advance of the b-pawn is to impede the occupation of the centre by White with e3-e4. 1 l.�e2 It is too dangerous for White to ac cept the pawn-sacrifice: 11.�xc6 b4, since Black has a very good compen sation. 1l ...h4 12.tLlhl This move is a bit surprising, but it is quite sensible. (I used to play here 12.lU a4.). White lags in development now, but in case Black postpones the pawn-advance c6-cS, his position might become inferior rather quickly. 12 . Jk8 It was also possible for Black to try the immediate move I2 ... cS and if I3.lUeS, then I3 ... lUxeS 14.dxeS id3. 13.a3 a5 It deserved attention for Bla�k to play here I3 ... �aS. 14.axh4 axh4 I felt that the move 14 ... ixh4 would have been good enough to equalize, but I wanted to enter a more compli cated position. .
.
.
That is a well-known tabia in that variation. White can continue here with lO .a4, or lO.igs. It is also popular for him to play the move lO.�el, for ex ample: lO.�el lUe4 11.�b3 �b6 12.lUh4 ixh4 I3.gxh4. White only should not forget the famous trap: lO .�dI ic2 and in case his rook retreats (11.�d2), Black wins his opponent's queen with the move 1l ... lUb6. 1 0 .e3 This is the main line here. The e2square is freed for White's queen. I used to play like that with White some
Game 1 0 0
292
15.�bd2 That move was not so accurate, since White had better start with 15.b3, although even then after lS. . . cS, Black would have an excellent game.
15 c5 •••
Now, it becomes clear that White has problems to complete his devel opment.
16.b3 It is quite understandable that White wishes to mobilize his forces as quickly as possible, but he weak ens the c3-square with his last move. Black's knight heads for that outpost immediately. The tension in the centre would have been quite advantageous for Black after: 16.e4 ig6, while the move 16J�dl would have been sense less in view of 16 . . .ic2
play 20J"lfc1, with the following even tual developments: 2o ... Elxb3 21.�aS Elb2 2 2.1�·el c2 23.ltJc6 'lWe8 24.e4 (or 2 4.'lWc3 Elbl) 24 . . .ig4 2S.'lWc3 1'lb6 26. ItJxe7+ 'lWxe7 27.Elxc2=
20 exd4
•••
�xe5 21. �xe5 cxd4! 22.
Or 22.ltJc6 d3.
22 EkS .••
Black's rook goes back to the c8square just in time. The routine line: 22 ... !ixb3, after: 23.ltJc6 'lWd6 24.'lWc4, led to complete equality.
23.�c6 'lWd6 24.:i;a6 if6 25.ie4 It is too bad for White to play: 2S.ltJa7 'lWxd4 26.ltJxc8 id3!
25 ixe4 26.'lWxe4 .•.
.
16 �d5 17.ib2 �c3 lS .ixc3 ••.
That forced.
.
decision
was
practically
lS bxc3 19.�c4 ..•
Now, it seems at first sight that White has no p roblems at all. He only . needs to play - Elc1...
26 'lWd7! ••.
This move disrupts the harmony of White's pieces. Black's queen is head ed for the b7-square.
19
.•.
:i;bS!
This reply is very powerlul. Black creates immediate threats - in this case against White's b3-pawn.
2 0 .�fe5?! That natural move is a mistake too. It was still not too late for White to
27.Elfal 'lWb7 2S.b4 :i;fdS! It is quite sensible for Black to bring some reserves, while White's pieces are pinned.
29.b5 Or 29.f3 Eld6.
29 J;xd4 3 0 .'lWe3 Eld5 .•
293
Yevseev-Dreev, Moscow 20 0 6 It was even stronger for Black to play here the immediate move - 30 ... c2. I was calculating during the game the variation: 31.ttJxd4 ixd4 32.IWcl, but I saw that in case of: 32 ... ixal 33J�xal IWxbS, White had the resource - 34.IWxc2, therefore I played 30 . . .l''i: dS. Still, after the simple move - 32 ... h6!, the combination ofthe threats IWf3 and �xal, would have rendered White's situation completely hopeless. 31.);b6 After that move, I played quite im precisely. I was planning to continue with the correct reply at first - 31 ... IWd7, but then the move in the game seemed to me to be preferable. 31 . . . IWc7 32.ttJb4 Or 32.l"i:a7 �xb6. 32 ... �d4 That move leads to an endgame by force. Black had better opt for: 32 ... l"i:dd8 33.l"i:c6 �b7. 33.�xd5 .be3
Now, it is quite evident that Black has complicated his task consid erably, although victory is still within reach. 37... <;!teS 3S. <;!tfl Both kings are eager to join in the fight. 3S . . . <;!td7 39. <;!te2 <;!td6 4 0 . <;!td3 If 40.l"i:a7, then Black has the re source 40 ... l"i:c7. 40 ... <;!tc5 41.);a7 White has problems now to protect his bS-pawn and his counterplay is obviously too slow. 41. <;!txb5 42.ttJd4+ <;!tb6 43. l"i:d7 43.l"i:xf7 l"i:d8 43 .. J'!c7 44.);d6+ <;!tc5 45.);dS . •
45 ig5! 46J''lb S if6 47.);b5+ <;!td6 4S .!t:Ib3 <;!tc6 49.);bS l"i:a7 The rest is already easy. 5 0 .f4 l"i:a2 51.g4 h6 52.);fS );b2 53.g5 bxg5 54.f:xg5 ixg5 55 . .!t:Id4+ <;!td5 56.<;!txc3 l"i:xh2 57.);xf7 if6 5S.l"i:d7+ 'iPe5 59 .);c7+ 'iPd6. White resigned. •••
•
34.);e6! �xe6 35 .!t:Ie7+ <;!tfS 36. .!t:Ixc6 id2 37.);a2 •
294
Some of Dreev's Result of Tournaments and Matches
295
296
297
298 Index of Opponents Game numbers in bold indicate the games where Dreev was White Adams 30 Alekseev E. 85 Anand 19 Aseev 14 Atalik 68 Azmaiparashvili 1 0 Baburin 9 Balashov 49 Banikas 71 Bareev 3, 97, 98 Bologan 99 Bronstein D. 16 Chandler 59 Chekhov 7 Cifuentes Parada 32 Dautov 38 Galdunts 2 7 Galkin 39 Gallagher 84 Gelfand 4, 6, 28 Geller E. 13 Geller J. 86 Gleizerov 21 Golubev 29 Graf 4 1 Grischuk 53 Gurevich M. 94 Hansen Cu. 82 Huebner 6 1 Huzman 89 Jakovenko 81 Jobava 74 Kaidanov 2 Kamsky 5 KaIjakin 92 Kasparov 43 Khalifman 34, 46, 56 Kishnev 77
Krasenkow 44 Kulaots 91 Kuzmin A. 87 Lalic 6 0 Leko 31 Lerner 25 Malaniuk 18 Milov 37 Minasian 93 Morozevich 90 Muhutdinov 26 Nadera 20 Nedev 72 Novikov I. 15 Oll 1 Pelletier 75 Peng Xiaomin 63 Pigusov 73 Pliester 11 Rogers 24 Ruban 12 Rublevsky 47, 58 Sadler 42 Sakaev 22, 95 Sasikiran 51, 83 Sax 62 Seirawan 33 Semeniuk 55 Sherbakov 8 Shirov 35 Smirin 67 Sokolov 1. 66 Sveshnikov 48 Svetushkin 52 Svidler 45, 78 Timman 50 Tiviakov 23, 54, 8 0 Tkachiev 69
299 Vaganian 4 0 Vallejo Pons 76 Volkov 88 Wang Zili 57 Wedberg 17
Yevseev 100 Zagrebelny 79 Zhang Zhong 64, 7 0 d e Firmian 36 van Welly 65, 96 Index of Openings
Game numbers in bold indicate the games where Dreev was White A07 A43 A46 A57 A65 A70 A81 A85 A87
1 2 70 71 63, 69 17, 36, 37 64 21 18
B07 BlO B12 B13 B18 B19 B31 B60
1 0 , 93 25, 49 85, 99 24, 55 54 72 27 90
C07 23, 30 Cll 3, 57 C13 19 C44 5 Dll 79
D12 61, 88 D13 9
D20 8, 45, 47, 52, 58 D23 100 D24 96 D27 7, 92 D30 53 D31 39, 48, 95 D34 41 D36 12 D37 6, 34, 4 0 , 59, 73 D39 77 D43 15, 38, 66, 68 D45 32, 86 D46 65 D47 11, 14, 20, 51, 87, 94 D48 28, 42, 50 D49 22, 97 D82 31, 78 D91 89 D92 44, 46, 56
Ell E12 E32 E61 E81 E97
75 4, 33, 62, 76, 8 0 , 81, 82, 83, 98 91 16 26, 29, 35, 43 , 6 0 , 67, 74, 84 13
