Winning with the Dutch - Bellin.pdf

WINNING WITH THE DUTCH

ROBERT BELLIN

The Dutch Defence is a popular attempt by Black to seize the initiative against 1 d4. Once a prime weapon in the hands of such players as the great World Champion Alexander Alekhine, the Dutch

IS

. agmn 1n

the theoretical spotlight, thanks to the efforts of several young Grandmasters, among

Also in this series Winning With the Grunfeld Andros Adorjon and Jeno Dory Winning With the Queen's Indian Zolton Ribli and Gabor Kolloi

them Britain's Nigel Short.

Other Botsford opening books This book concentrates on the main winning plans for both sides, giving complete coverage of the Dutch Defence. Strategic ideas, including the most recent developments, are all clearly explained. Robert Bellin is an International Master and winner of the British Championship in 1979. He is the author of several successful books.

This series by top authors deals with openings that have been extensively played and analysed at Grandmaster level. The material is based around complete games which illustrate the possibilities for each side.

Botsford Chess Openings 2 Gory Kosparov and Raymond Keene The Sicilian for the Tournament Player Eduard Gufeld Car o-Kann Defence Alexei Suetin French Defence Alexei Suetin The C omplete Pirc John Nunn Najd orf for the Tournament Player John Nunn The Sicilian Pelikan Evgenny Sveshnikov

For further details of these and other Botsford chess books, please write to: B. T. Botsford Ltd,

4 Fitzhardinge Street, London WlH OAH

Winning With the Dutch ROBERT BELLIN

B. T. Batsford Ltd, London

First published 1990 ::D Robert Bellin 1990 ISBN 0 7134 5760 0 A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, by any means, without the prior permission of the publisher Typeset by Lasertext, Manchester and printed in Great Britain by Dotesios (Printers) Ltd, Trowbridge, Wilts for the publishers, B. T. Batsford Ltd, 4 Fitzhardinge Street, London W 1 H OAH A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK Adviser: R. D. Keene GM, OBE Technical Editor: Ian Kingston

Contents Introduction 1

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6

v 1

2

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... lLlc6

13

3 4

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... •e8

25

Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems

33

5

Hort-Antoshin Variation

48

6 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4 ) The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5 8

9

57 66

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3

77

2 lLlf3 and Others

88

j])The Classical Variation

95

11 The Dutch Indian

105

12 Classical System: Auxiliary Variations

115

13 Alekhine's Variation: 6 ... lLle4

123

14 Ilyin-Zhenevsky System

133

15 Classical Stonewall

150

16 Stonewall with . . . .td6

177

Introduction Welcome to the very special world

The process of rehabilitation

of the Dutch Defence! This most

began in the 1920s, spearheaded

versatile of defences to 1 d4 boasts

by World Champions Alekhine

several positive features: it is for

and Botvinnik, and gradually con

cing (White cannot prevent you

tinued until the point was reached

playing your defence, as is the case

in the 1951 World Championship

with, say, the Nimzo-Indian); it

match where it was employed by

rules out radical strategic simpl

both players. Despite this zenith,

ification (as occurs, for example,

the Dutch was subsequently once

in the Queen's Gambit Declined

again overshadowed throughout

when White plays the Exchange

the sixties and seventies, this time

Variation); and it does not permit

by exciting developments in the

early

other major defences. Now at long

major

material

simpl

ification (which happens in stan

last it seems that the Dutch's time

dard lines of the popular King's

has come as more and more top

Indian and Gri.infeld Defences).

players have become aware of its creative and combative potential.

So how on earth is it that even now the Dutch Defence is some

The resurgence of interest during

thing of a secret? The reason has

the eighties has sown a seed which

its origin in the nineteenth century,

will surely develop as we go into

when

the last decade of the twentieth

the

massively

influential

century.

world champion Wilhelm Steinitz ('the founder of modern chess')

This book summarizes the curr

dogmatically dismissed the Dutch

ent state of all the major variations

after a couple of crushing victories

of the

over Zukertort in the 1872 title

addition

Dutch Defence and, in

match. His pedagogical pre-emi

aims, is intended to provide a

nence was such as to eclipse the

useful and reliable basis for com

fact, for example, that the no less

petitive preparation right across

to its purely didactic

legendary Paul Morphy had regu

the spectrum from club to inter

larly used the Dutch with success.

national

The result was that the defence

illustrative games on which each

went under a cloud for gener

chapter is based, including classics

ations.

from the turn of the century as v

level.

The

annotated

l'i

Introduction

well as modern masterpieces, have

ical) Leningrad and (mainly posi

been selected for their exceptional

tional) Stonewall are currently the

instructive value regarding typical

most popular and successful.

plans,

stratagems

and

tactics.

This book is selective in that

Those who are new to the Dutch

poor lines for Black have generally

would be best advised first of all to simply play through the games without worrying too much about the detailed opening notes. This will enable the reader to find quickly

which

variation

most

appeals and obtain a basic 'feel' for it before proceeding to a more technical examination of its theor etical nuances. One of the great advantages of playing the Dutch is that it is really several different defences in one: not only are there the three major variations-the Leningrad,

been omitted (although, of course, not all of them, as it is as essential to know what is bad and does not work as to know what is good and does), but the assessments and opinions given are intended to be objective. In addition to present ing a distillation of current know ledge of the Dutch I have also sprinkled a few totally new sugge stions here and there which the brave reader may care to try out. It is m y hope that those who work through this book diligently

Ilyin-Zhenevsky and Stonewall

will acquire the information and

but also other interesting lines

understanding

such as the Hort-Antoshin, the

able to step out successfully on the

necessary

to

be

hybrid Alekhine, and the Dutch

creative and very rewarding path

Indian. Of these, the (mainly tact-

of 'Winning With the Dutch'.

Acknowledgements My thanks are due to Bob Wade

Cubitt for his painstaking proof

for providing the friendliest of

reading.

research facilities and to Clive

1

Leningrad Main Line: 7

.

.

.

c6

The Leningrad Variation is char

turous player seeking challenge

acterized

and excitement.

by

the

fianchetto

of

Black's KB which produces a curi ous kind of Dutch/King's Indian hybrid. The fact that Black has left his e-pawn unmoved makes communication between the wings more difficult, but on the other

The introductory moves are as follows:

I

2 3 4

very sound. Since it is virtually

5 6

obligatory sooner or later to play

7

hand keeps his central structure

d4 g3

f5 lLlf6

..tg2 lLlf3

g6 ..tg7

o-o

c4 lLlc3

o-o

d6 c6 (1)

... d6, Black always has to keep an eye on the sensitive e6 square. In general, White will concentrate his attention on the centre and the queenside whilst Black will monitor the centre and develop counterplay on one or both flanks. Not

surprisingly,

the

resulting

middlegames are often extremely complex, both strategically and tactically. Battle may often be con

The basic idea of this move is

ducted on several fronts simul

to free the square c7 for the queen

taneously

and

sometimes

the

from where it can support the

whole board can be ablaze with

advance ... e7-e5. In addition, it

action. All in all, then, the Lenin

controls d5, blunts the action of

grad is tailor-made for the adven-

White's KB on the long diagonal

2

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6 .

.

and creates the option of exerting

Experience has shown this to be

direct pressure on the queenside

White's most effective approach.

by ... -.. b6 or, occasionally, ...

The positive aspects comprise rul

-..as. As there is no immediate

ing out the formation of a mobile

threat, White's range of response

black e- and f-pawn duo (thanks

is very wide, although only the

to the possibility of capturing en

immediate advance of the d-pawn is generally thought to offer White chances of an opening advantage.

passant), exerting pressure on c6

and particularly the weakened e6, gaining space and providing an

main

efficacious post for the knight at

move in detail we briefly note

d4. The quid pro quo for these

Before

considering

the

some alternatives:

gains is Black's increased control

(a) 8 .l:el lLle4 9 -..d3 lLlxc3 10

of the dark squares, particularly

be eS II e4 -..as 12 i.gS (thus far

cS, and the opening of the long

Holmov-Bannik, USSR Ch. 1962)

diagonal for his KB.

12 ... dS! 13 cd fe 14 -..xe4 cd IS -..c2 e4=.

The

strategic

problems

con

fronting Black have been tackled

(b) 8 b3 aS 9 i.b2 lLla6 10 -..c 2

in various ways over the years but

-..c7 II .J:ad l eS 12 cS ( Pachman

only two approaches have stood

Gerusel, Mannheim 197S) 12 ...

the test of time and these will

e4 13 cd -..xd6 14 lLleS lLlb4 1S -..b l

be examined via the introductory

i.e6 with a promising position for

moves 8 ... i.d7 and 8 ... eS. The best of the rest, 8 ... -..as, caused

Black. (c) 8 -..c2 -..c7 (8 ... �h8 is

considerable

havoc

amongst

a useful alternative, e.g. 9 i.gS

White players until the discovery

i.e6 10 b3 lLlbd7 II .!:ad! dS 12

of 9 lLld4 -.. cs 10 i.gS! (with the

lLleS lLle4= Belyavsky-Yusupov,

point 10 ... -..xc4? 11 de be 12

± ±) fol

Reykjavik 1988) 9 e4 fe 10 lLlxe4

i.xf6 i.xf6 13 lLlxc6!

i.fS (or 10 ... lLlxe4 -..xe4 i.fS

lowing which the line rapidly van

12 -..h4 eS 13 de de 14 i.h6

ished from international compet

lLla6 IS .J:ad l .l:ae8 with balanced

ition.

chances;

Gofstein-Bikhovsky,

USSR 1977) 11 lLlh4 lLlxe4 12 i.xe4 e6 13 i.e3 lLld7 14 lLlxfS ef IS i.g2 lLlf6 16 .l:ab l and a draw was agreed in Starck-Liebert, E. German Ch. 1962.

8

d5

Ribli-Mestel London 1986 I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lLlf3 i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6 8 d5

Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6

.td7 ( 2)

8

W'xb3 II ab ttJxc6

=

3

S. Webb

Larsen, London 1973) 9 ... ttJa6 10 a3 cd II cd l:l.c8 12 lL!d4 ttJc5

2

13 l:l.dI ttJfe4 14 lL!xe4 fe! and with ... .ta4 in the air White is in dire straits. (b) 9 c5!? (although crude, this tactical

lunge

should

not

be

treated lightly) 9 ... de 10 l2Je5 and now not 10 ... .te8? II W'b3 W'b6 12 de+ W'xb3 13 cb! but 10 ... �h8 defusing such possibilities Although comparatively little explored, the indications are that

after which Larsen has opined that 'Black may be in good shape'.

this is a sound treatment with

(c) 9 lL!d4 W'b6 (simultaneously

potential for further development.

reinforcing c6 and priming tactical

The main idea of the variation is

discoveries on the lL!d4 by, for

to renounce ... e7-e5 in favour

example, ... ttJe4) 10 e3 l2Ja6 II b3

of a containment strategy in the

(after II l:l.bI a game Palatnik

centre coupled with action on the

Gulko, Kiev 1973, went II ... lDc5

queen's wing. There are marked

12 b4 l2Jce4 13 lL!a4 W'c7 14 f3 lL!g5

similarities with the 7 ... W'e8

15 e4 ttJf7 16 ttJe6 .txe6 17 fe

variation,

the

major

difference

l2Je5 18 ef gf 19 W'c2;;!;;; failing an

being that here the queen is usually

improvement on this, II ... l2Jc7

deployed directly into the action

comes into consideration, e.g. 12

via ... Wb6.

de be 13 b4 e5 with complex play)

9

l:l.bl

II ... lDc5 12 .tb2 a5 13 l:l.bl (the

Awarded an exclamation mark

position is now the same as the

by Ribli himself, this deferment of

column with the exception that

ttJd4 has the effect of deterring ...

Ribli substituted W'd2 for e3; it is

Wb6 (on account of .te3) and

noteworthy

enables White to get by without

Black plays the idea recommended

that

in

this

game

playing e3 (see note (b) below). It

by Ribli) 13 ... W'a6! 14 a4?! (smo

seems that the rook move does

thers Black's projected counter

indeed have a legitimate claim to

play with a timely ... a4 but at the

being the most precise.

high cost of accepting consider

Other tries:

able queen's wing vulnerability) 14

(a) 9 W'c2? (9 W'b3 W'b6 10 de

... Wb6! 15 l:l.el l:l.ae8 16 l2Jce2

4

Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6

cd 17 cd .l:l.c8 (Black displays an

11

..tb2

a5

admirable flexibility of thinking)

12 13

•d2

.b6

18 l2Jc3 l2Jfe4! (suddenly, Black is on top) 19 l2Jcb5 l2Ja6 20 ..tfl l2Jb4 .l:l.c5! 22 l2Je2 ..txb2 23

3

.l:l.xb2 .l:l.fc8+ 24 l2Jbc3 .l:l.xc4! 25

B

21 ..tc4

l2Jd4 ( 3)

be .l:l.xc4 26 l2Ja2 •c5 27 l2Jxb4

ab 28 h4 l2Jc3?! (tempting, but it allows White unnecessary coun

terchances; 28 ... •a5! 29 •d3 b3! 30 .l:l.d1 .l:l.b4 with ... ..txa4 and ... l2Jc5 to follow was a surer method of turning the screw) 29 l2Jxc3 be 30 .1:1. xb7 ..txa4 31 •d3? (misses the opportunity to muddy

Both sides have deployed their

the waters by 31 •a1! with the

forces harmoniously and a rich

possibility

threats

middlegame is in the offing. Many

against the enemy king) 31 ... c2

more practical trials are needed

of

creating

32 .l:l.c1 �f7 + + 33 h5 .l:l.c3 34

before any worthwhile assessment

hg+ hg 35 'ir'd2 •a3? (the wrong

can be made but there seems no

way; correct was 35 ... •c4 when

priori reason for the resources of

the threat of ... .l:l.d3 forces White

a

Black's position not to be adequ

into the hopeless ending following

ate to meet whatever demands

36 .1:1. b2 .1:1. d3 37 .1:1. bxc2 ..txc2 38

White makes upon them.

.l:l.a7! •xct +?

Our present example carried on

(Black would have retained real

as follows: 13 ... .I:!. adS?! (Black's

•xc2 •xd5) 36

winning chances by 36 . . . .1:1. d3

plan of centralising the rooks fails

•xc2 ..txc2 38

.l:l.xa3 .l:l.xa3 39

to accomplish anything; clearly,

.1:1. xc2 .1:1. d3, but now with precise

this is the point to look for an

play White escapes with a draw)

improvement-Ribli

37 •xc1 .l:l.d3 38 �g2! .l:l.d1 39

possibility of 13 ... •a6 intending

noted

the

•a3 c1(•) 40 •xa4 .l:l.g1+ 41

... a4) 14 .l:l.fd1 .l:l.fe8 15 e3 e5 16

�f3 g5 42 .l:l.a8 •d1+ 43 •xd1

. de ..txe6 (the weak a-pawn would

.l:l.xd1 44 .l:l.a5 g4+ 45 �e2 .l:l.bl

prove a liability after 16 ... l2Jxe6

46 e4 !-! Spiridonov-Akesson,

17 l2Ja4!) 17 l2Jxe6 .1:1. xe6 18 l2Ja4!

Polanica Zdroj 1981.

9 10

b3

l2Jxa4 19 ba (White has accurately l2Ja6

assessed the open lines and diag

l2Jc5

onals for his pieces to be more


important

than

the

... c6

5

structural

which 10 ... e4! leaves Black with

weakness incurred) 19 ... 'it'a6 (or

a centre whose dynamic potential

19 ... 'it'c7 20 .td4) 20 .td4 �e4?

at least balances its vulnerability.

(allowing a surprising and decisive liquidation;

20

mandatory

and

...

.l:ld7

(b) 9 e4 cd (9 ... c5 is also fully playable) 10 cd �a6 11 ef (11

have

.tg5? h6 12 .txf6 'itxf6 13 ef gf

enabled Black to put up a stiff

left Black with all the play in

defence

of

Tsvetkov-Kotkov,

21

RSFSR 1957) 11 ... gf 12 �h4

.txe4 .l:lxe4 22 .txg7 �xg7 23

gives a complicated position with

c5!

chances for both sides.

resisting

with

would

was

good

White's

chances

pressure)

(cleverly creating a deadly

passed pawn) 23 ... .l:ld7 (23 ... d5

Bulgaria

.txe6 ( 4)

9

24 .:. b6 followed by 25 'it'b2+ and 26 .l:lxb7 is also hopeless) 24 cd

4

.:. xa4 25 'it'c3+ �h6 26 'it'f6 'it'e2

w

27 'ite6

.l:lxa2 28 .l:lfl

.l:lg7 29

.l:lbe1! 1-0.

Uhlmann-Vaiser

Szirak 1985 1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .tg2 g6 4 �f3 .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 �c3 c6

A position of major importance

8 d5

in the theory of the Leningrad

e5

8

Long established as the most popular choice here, this move constitutes

Black's

most

con

variation. Both pawn configurations have now been broadly established and

sequent and challenging response

because

to White's advance of the d-pawn.

characteristics they are of crucial

9

de

A logical capture which pro cures White the better pawn struc

of

importance

their in

contrasting

determining

the

respective strategies to be adopted. From the static point of view,

ture. Alternatives forfeit any real

White's structure is clearly super

prospects of obtaining an opening

ior as it is compact and without

advantage:

(a) 9 de be 10 b3 is an unimpress

ive suggestion of Simagin's after

weakness whereas Black's is not only

generally

loose

but

also

suffers from a particular defect in

Leningrad Main Line: 7 .

6

. .

c6

the vulnerable d-pawn on a half

te's retreat) II 'tt'c2 tt:lb6 12 tt:la4

open

file. Consequently,

(better 12 b3 d5 although Black's

must

make

the

most

Black of

the

position is still promising) 12

0 0 .

dynamic potential of his position

tt:lxa4 13 'tt' xa4 'tt'e7 14 'tt'c2 (the

deriving from his good central

queen is misplaced) 14

0 0 .

d5 15

and kingside attacking

cd tt:lxd5 16 a3 .:. ad8 17 tt:lc4 f4!

chances (the positive concomitant

and with development completed

control

of Black's unruly pawn structure)

and

plus free and active development.

Black advantageously begins to

The battle lines, then, are clear:

attack on the king's flank; Etruk

White will pressurize the d-pawn

a

strong

central

position

Holmov, TU Spartakiad 1965. (c) 10

and seek simplification in order to

..tf4

(misguided since

highlight the intrinsic weakness of

Black is now relieved of the major

Black's pawns, while Black will

weakness in his position) 10

endeavour to generate sufficient

..txc4 11 ..txd6 .:. e8 12 tt:le5 ..te6

pie

13 'tt'd3 tt:lbd7 14 tt:lxd7 tt:lxd7 (14

�activity

to offset his struc

tural Inferiority.

10

b3

Experience has shown that only

0 0 .

... 'tt'xd7 also comes into consider ation) 15 .:. fd1 'tt'f6 16 f4! .:. ad8 17 ..tc7

.:. c8 18 ..td6 with an

two methods of defending the c

invitation to repetition suiting the

pawn leave White any real pro

nature of the position; Aronson

spects of fighting for an advantage

Hasin, Moscow 1956.

from the opening-10 b3 and 10

tt:la6 (5)

10

'tt'd3-which we shall examine in

Black wisely prefers develop

detail in the context of complete

ment to material grabbing by 10

games. It is worth noting some

... tt:le4 which gives White a choice

alternatives for the light they shed

of

on how Black's pieces can co

e.g. 11 tt:lxe4 ..txa1 (the irresolute

operate in non-critical situations:

II ... fe was fittingly punished in

(a) 10 tt:lg5? (a baseless offer) 10

Kjarner-Etruk, Parnu 1967, by 12

advantageous

continuations,

... ..txc4 II b3 ..tl7 12 ..ta3 tt:le8

tt:ld4 ..tl7 13 ..txe4! 'tt'e7 14 ..tg2

13 tt:lxl7 .:. xl7 14 .:. c1 tt:la6 15 h4

c5 15 tt:lc2 ..txa1 16 tt:lxa1 tt:lc6 17

tt:lc7 16 e4 f4 and Black is well

tt:lc2 (a typical position in which

placed with a pawn to the good;

White's control of the vital al -h8

Ribli-Sax, Hungarian Ch. 1971.

artery into the heart of Black's

(b) 10 tt:ld2 tt:lbd7 (this rare but

king's position and iron grip on

effective placement of the knight

the centre outweigh

points up the inadequacy of Whi-

material deficit) 17

0 0 .

the

slight

h5 18 ..tb2

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6

�h7 19 Wd2 a5 20 a4 1Db4 21 !LleI! (heading for another weak ened dark square in the vicinity of

7

5 w

the enemy king-g5) 21 ... :adS 22 �f3 d5 (at last a vestige of counterplay, but it arrives too late) 23 1Dg5+ �gS 24 cd 1Dxd5 25 �e4 ..teS 26 l:dl ..tc6 27 Wh6 �f4 (a despairing mercifully

cuts

Junge which

short

Black's

agony) 2S WhS+ �f7 29 Wg7+ �eS 30 l:xdS+ 1-0. On 30 ...

that Black's set-up is more than

�xdS 31

resilient enough to deal with crude

Wxe7+

�xe7 32 gf

White exchanges into an easily

attempts to over-run it.

won ending, whilst 30 ... WxdS

(b) II ..te3 We7 12 l:cl lDc5 13

31 We5+ leaves Black with no

..td4 ..td7 (13 ... a5 gives Black

satisfactory answer.) 12 Wxd6 (12

a perfectly acceptable game) 14

..tg5 Wc7 13 Wxd6 is also good

Wd2 1De6

as is the more complicated 12

Vaganian-Knezevic,

1Dfg5!? Wd7 131Dxd6 l:dS 14 ..tf4

15

..txf6

(thus

far

Leningrad

1977) 15 .. . ..txf6! 16 :fd11Dc5

of Plaskett-Vincent, 19S3) 12 ...

is assessed as unclear by Makary

..Wxd6 131Dxd6 ..tcS (13 ... b6 14

chev; White's plan fails to impress.

..tg5 ..tf6 15 ..txf6 :xf6 16 iDeS

(c) 111Dg5 ..tcS! 12 l:b1 We7

:n 17 �g5 :e7 IS 1Dxe6++

(12 ...1Dg4 may be more precise;

:xf6 16 lDxcS1Da6 171De7+ �f8

tinued 131Da4 We7 14 b4 lDc7 15

IS1Dxc6 be 191De5 ± Syre-Pahtz,

b5 c5 16 ..tf4 and in this obscurely

Malich) 14 ..tg5 ..tf6 15

..txf6

E. German Ch. 1975.

11

Adorjan- Vaiser, Szirak 19S5, con

balanced position the gladiators agreed a draw) 13 Wc2 h6 (the

..tf4

A relatively recent attempt to inject fresh problems into the pos

immediate

13

. . . lDc5?

would

allow 14 b4 with b5 to follow and

ition, probably born of Jack of

advantage to White) 141Df3 lDc5

satisfaction

15 ..ta3 ..te6 16 l:bd1 :adS with

with

the

prospects

offered by the alternatives: (a) II ..ta3? Wa5! 12 Wxd6? :res 13 ..tb21De4 141Dxe4 ..txb2 15 1Deg5 :adS+ +; this line of Taimanov's serves to

illustrate

fully satisfactory play for Black; Petrosian-Knezevic, Banja Luka 1979. (d) 11 ..tb2 (certainly the most natural follow-up) II ... We7 12

Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6

8

.

Wc2 d5 13 cd lL!b4! 14 WcllLJfxd5!

eluded as follows: 15 .tel 'iie7

15 lLJa4 :adS and with his devel

(15

opment

pieces

:f7?! (the situation is too volatile

actively placed Black can look to

to permit this ideal doubling on

the future with confidence; Sche

the f-file; the prophylactic 17 ...

completed

and

0 0 0

..tf5!) 16 lL!d4 .id7 17 a3

eren-V. Kovacevic, Thessaloniki

tL!e6 might be the best way of

01. 1984.

drawing the sting from White's lLlh5!

11

Quite in the spirit of the Lenin grad, Black parries the attack on the d-pawn with a counterattack.

12

.id2

:ae8

is

a

natural

and

good

enough alternative) 18 b4 ab 19 ab tL!e6 20 tL!f3! g5 21 g4! (it was

necessary to prevent

12 .ig5 would be hazardous, e.g. 12

intended b3-b4-b5, though 17 ...

0 0 .

g4) 21

0 0 .

tL!f6 22 h3 h5?! (precipitate: 22 ...

Wa5 13 tL!d4 W'xc3 14

:d8 preparing succour for the

tL!xe6 W'xal 15 W'xa1 .ixa1 16

perennial weakling seems more in

tL!xf8 .ih8! 17 tL!e6 :e8 18 ttJf4

tune with the needs of the position)

0 0 .

tL!xf4 19 .ixf4

:xe2 20 .ixd6

23 gh g4 (23

tL!xh5 24 lLJe4 ±)

0 0 .

:xa2 and White is struggling (21

24 hg lLJxg4 25 tL!e4 d5 (on 25 ...

b4 :d2! or 21 :e1 ..td4!).

..te5 comes 26 Wd3 :g7 27 h6!

12

tL!c5

:g6 28 lLlxd6 lLlf8 29 c5 :

30 tLJf5 ± according to Uhlmann)

13

Wc2

a5

14

:adl

f4!?(6)

x

h6

26 cd cd 27lLJc5! (avoiding Black's

trappy idea 27 'iibl

: xd5 .ia4! 28

..tc6 29 :a5 :xa5 30 ba

lbd4 with good counterchances) 27

0 0 .

:c8 28 :xd5!? (fearlessly

ambitious!) 28

0 0 .

(the best try; 29

b6 29 :fd I lLlf6

0 0 •

..te8 30 W'g6!

is good for White and 29 ... be 30 :xd7 Wxd7 31 :xd7 :xd7 32 .ih3 skewers Black's position) 30 :e5 be 31lLJg5 f3? (in time trouble, Black fails to find the amazing This belligerent thrust signals the

beginning

of

a

mutually

difficult middlegame replete with

saving

grace

Uhlmann: 31

pointed

0 0 .

out

by

cb! 32 Wg6! lLJg4!

33 lL!xf7 Wh4!! 34 lLJh6 +! lLJxh6

problems and prospects for both

35

sides. Our illustrative game con-

37 �hi

:xe6 lLJg4 36 ..tb2 Wxf2+ Wh4+ with perpetual


check!) 32 ef! nfffi 33 :del cb 34

. . .

c6

9

A logical continuation of the

Wg6 .te8 35 Wbl .txh5 36 nxe6

mobilization

Wc7 37 ne7 'ilfc2 38 Wxb4 .tg6

which immediately brings press

n 17 40 nxl7 .txl7 41

ure to bear on the weak spot in

pin) 42 ... nc4 43 Wb8 Wf5 44

We also note one poor and one

39 lLle6

t2Jxg7 �xg7 42 .tb2 (a deadly ne4 �g6 45 Wd6 .td5 46 .txf6

net+ 47 �h2 nc6 48 Wg3+

Yusupov-Barbero

Mendoze 1985 I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lLlf3

.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6 8 d5 e5 9 de .txe6 10

This protection of the c-pawn with a developing move seems the most natural.

lLla6

Black does best to get on with his development as quickly as possible especially as it carries with it a threat to drive away the white queen and thereby win the c-pawn.

11 7 8

.tf4 (7)

forces

important alternative: (a) 11 �d4?! (it throws instruc light

on

the

idiosyncratic

nature of the Leningrad that this natural centralization is out of keeping with the needs of the pos ition) 11 . .. .tl7 12 b3 d5! 13 .ta3 ne8 14 nfdl de 15 be WaS 16 ..td6 lLlc5 17 Wc2 lLlce4 18 lLlxe4 lLlxe4 and White's disadvan

Wd3

10

White's

Black's camp.

tive

1-0. Hard fighting!

of

tage is rapidly assuming decisive proportions;

Grooten-Perez

Garcia, Wijk aan Zee II 1986. (b) 11 lLlg5 (this hunting of the minor exchange demands precise handling by Black) 11 . . . ..tc8! (the most challenging response; it is not entirely out of the question to allow White to implement his strategy, e.g. 11 ... We7 12 .tf4 nad8 13 nadl

lLlg4! 14 lLlxe6

Wxe6 15 e4 lLlc5 16 ef gf 17 Wc2 lLle5 18 b3 Wg6, Fridstein-Luti kov, Moscow 1958, and although White has the two bishops and much superior pawn structure, his position is to some extent all dressed up with nowhere to go, while Black has a pair of frisky knights champing at the bit to join in the general plan of harassing White's king) 12 .tf4 (on 12 ndt

10


.. . c6

h6! 13 tt:lf3, Black should eschew 13 ... ..te6? 14 Wxd6 Wxd6 15 :xd6

..txc4

16

tt:le5

17

..tfl

X w

..txh6! ± lvkov-Sahovic, Zemun

1982, in favour of 13 ... tt:le4! 14 tt:lxe4 fe 15 Wxe4 ..tf5! 16 'it'h4 (or 16 We3 tt:lb4) 16 ... g5 17 Wh5 'it'f6 with excellent compensation) 12 ... lLlh5! 13 :adI (it has long been established that 13 Wxd6 lLlxf4 14 Wxf4 h6 15 tt:lf3 g5 gives Black sufficient play for the pawn, e.g. 16 Wet

..te6 17 .:tdl; thus far

forceful 13 ... ..tf5 began a sequ ence ending in fatal organic dislo

Ch.

cation in Vukic-Kaizauri, Skara

1956, and now Simagin gives 17

1980: 14 We3 ..txb2 (14 ... •b6!?

1 We7! 18 b3 .:tad8 as best) 13

is unclear according to Vukic) 15

... lLlxf4 14 gf h6 15 tt:lf3 .:tf6 16

.:tadl .:te8 16 Wd2 Wf6 17 e3 ..ta3

.:td2 tt:lc5 17 Wc2 We7 18 tt:ld4

(something is wrong when such

Simagin-Hasin,

.

Moscow

.

..td7 with chances for both sides

moves are necessary) 18 tt:ld4 ..tb4

in a difficult position; Garcia

(18 ... g5? 19 ..txd6!) 19 We2 ..td7

Palermo-Ivkov, Havana 1986.

II

20 h4 lLlc7 21 Wb2! c5 22 Wb3! a5 23 tt:lc2 a4 24 Wd3 ..tc3 25 ..txd6

tt:le4!?

Amongst the various options at

tt:la6 26 ..txb7 .:ta7 27 ..te5! 1-0.

Black's disposal at this point, this

The scattered black forces are

mettlesome attempt to seize the

pitiful in their disarray; a drastic

initiative makes the most favour

reminder of the indispensable need

able impression.

for harmony and coordination.

As a safety net, there is always

14

We3

the solid, if craven, antithesis to

A necessary improvement on 14

the text-ll ... tt:le8. But one

Wc2? after which 14 ... ..tf5 15

senses that should such moves

Wd2 (15 Wet intending to answer

ever be required it would be better

15 ... tt:la4 by 16 b3 looks relatively

to switch variations.

best) 15 ... tt:le4 16 We3 (16 Wet

12 13

tt:lxe4 Wxe4

fe tt:lc5 ( 8)

Black augments the cohesion of

is preferable although after 16 ... Wb6 Black maintains strong press ure) 16 ... :e8 17 Wa3 Wb6 18

his forces with tempo gain. By

.tel d5 gives powerful play for

contrast,

the pawn; Nordstrom-Niklasson,

the

apparently

more

Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6 .

paid off after 20 ..te3!? (20 Wxc5

Swedish Ch. 1974.

simplifies into a level ending after

..txc4

13

II

The animated middlegame we

20 ... Wxd2 21 lt:lxe2 Wxe2 22

are about to embark upon is teem

Wb4! Wxb2 23 Wxb2 ..txb2 24

ing with possibilities and clearly

:bl) 20 ... lt:\e4? (a pity that in

offers vast scope for new discover-

the labyrinth of variations such as

ies.

20 ... :xe3? 21 fe ..th6 22 lllf5!

15

.l:tadt

Black loses his way; 20 ... ..tf8 21

:es

Again, counterattack is the best

Wxc5 ..txd6 22 Wxd6 :xe3 23

policy since 15 ... ..td5 16 lllg5!

fe

brings Black into difficulties.

correct with good chances of hold

..txfl 24

..txfl

Wxe3+ was

16

Wet

..txe2

ing the position) 21 :d7 c5 (the

17

:xd6

WaS

point of Black's play, exploiting

Of course not 17 ... Wb6 18

the pin on the rook but there is a

20

surprising riposte ...) 22 :xg7+?

..txfl and all White's pieces are

(... which White misses!; 22 :e1!

poised for a concerted assault on

cd 23 :xg7+! �xg7 24 ..th6+!

..te3

:xe3

19

Wxe3

..txfl

�[7 25 Wf4+ lllf6 26 ..td5+!

the black king.

18 19

..td2 lt:ld4

Wb5 Wd3 (9)

would have sewn matters up in spectacular style) 22 ... �xg7 23 lllxe2 Wxe2 24 :el Wh5 25 ..txe4 (in time trouble, White plays safe and transposes into a slightly fav ourable endgame in preference to the more accurate but less clear cut maintenance of pressure by 25 Wc2) 25 ... :xe4 26 ..th6+ Wxh6 27 Wxh6+ �xh6 28 :xe4 :g8 29 �fl :g7 30 �e2 :d7 31 h4 �g7 32 :e5! b6 33 :e6 �f7 34 :c6 �e7 (34 ... :e7 +!) 35 h5! ±

The combatants have traded

�f7?! (35 ... gh 36 :h6 �d8 was

blows with accuracy and imagin

the simplest) 36 hg+ hg 37 f4

ation, creating a position of con

�g7 38 �e3 �f7 39 b3 �g7 40

tinuing complexity and approxi

�e4

mately equal chances. In the game,

41 ... :e7 42 �g4 :d7 43 �h4

White's

tactic

of

continually

adding fuel to the flames finally

�f7

41

�f3 (41

�e5! ±)

:d2 44 :c7+ �f6 45 :xa7 b5? (45 ... �f5

had

to be played) 46

12

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6 .

.

.l:l c7 (46 .: aS was more precise) 46 . . . c4 47 .l:l c6 + ! �f5? (47 . . . �f7 would have obliged White to play more delicately) 48 .l:l c5 + �e6

49 .l:l xb5 c3 50 .l:l c5 c2 5 1 b4 g5 + 52 fg .l:l d4 + 53 �h5 .l:l xb4 54 .l:l xc2 1 -0.

Leningrad Main Line : 7

2 1 2 3 4 s 6 7

d4 g3 ..tg2 ttlf3 0-0 c4 ttlc3

fS ttlf6 g6 ..tg7 0-0 d6

0

0

0

ttJ c6

ation is Black's least soundly based option positionally-either the knight goes offside or the pawn structure becomes compro mised-but it frequently leads to fearsome complications and it would clearly be premature to believe that the last word has yet been said. Before proceeding with our examination of the major continu ation 8 d5 we will briefly look at some alternatives: (a) 8 Wc2 e5 9 de de 10 .:td l ..td7! II ..te3 (not II ttld5? e4! 1 2 ttlxf6 + ..txf6 1 3 ttle I ttld4 1 4 'ilt'd2 ..ta4! 1 5 b 3 ..txb3! and White has lost material; Bertok Ghitescu, Reggio Emilia 1 968/69) 1 1 . . . e4! 1 2 ttld4 ttlg4 1 3 ttl xc6 (after 1 3 ttle6? ttlxe3 1 4 fe ..txe6 1 5 .:t xd8 .: axd8 1 6 ttld5 ttle5! the queen proved no match for Black's well coordinated pieces in Peev Nikolaevsky, Varna 1 968) 1 3 . . . ttlxe3 1 4 'ilt'cJ 'ilt'e8 1 5 'ilt' xe3 ..txc6 and Black may look to the future

ttlc6 ( 1 0 )

10 w

This provocative knight devel opment simultaneously puts pressure on d4 and prepares . . . e7-e5 and intentionally aims to goad White into the space-gaining but committal advance d4-d5 fol lowing which two entirely different types of game arise according to which way the knight jumps. It is generally agreed that this vari13

14

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lLlc6

with confidence thanks to his bishop pair and cramping e-pawn. (b) 8 b3 li:le4 (the immediate 8 . . . e5 has to reckon with 9 de de 1 0 ..ta3) 9 ..tb2 e5 1 0 de li:lxc3 II ..t xc3 W'e8! 1 2 W' c2 de 1 3 W'b2 W'e7 14 .rHdl g5 + 1 5 .:t d5? (the prospect of being buried under an avalanche of black pawns panics White into a faulty manoeuvre) 1 5 . . . ..te6 1 6 : b5? a6 1 7 : xe5 ( 1 7 .:t xb7 ..tc8 + + ) 1 7 . . . li:lxe5 1 8 li:l xe5 c6 with a decisive material Welsh-Alexander, advantage; Cheltenham 1 954. d5 8

Botvinnik-Matulovic

USSR v Rest of the World Belgrade 1 970 8

li:la5 (II)

11 w

With this sideways swipe at the c-pawn Black begins a plan which bears a close affinity to the Panno variation of the King's I ndian Defence. The intention is to secure

the wayward knight's position by . . . c7-c5 and then proceed with . . . a7-a6 and . . . b7-b5 thus gener ating counterplay against c4 in particular and on the queen's flank in general. In addition, there some times arise possibilities of striking in the centre with . . . e7-e5. As in the Panno, however, there is the perpetual problem that should Black's initiative dissipate without anything concrete being achieved then the errant knight may become a liability of decisive pro portions. 9 li:ld2 This manoeuvre, known from the Panno, is probably White's most reliable method of damping down Black's activity. There are several playable alternatives : (a) 9 b3 (an interesting exchange offer which clearly gives White strong positional compensation if accepted) 9 . . . li:le4 (9 . . . c5 would be the sensible way to decline if preferred) 1 0 li:lxe4 ..txa l II li:leg5 c5 1 2 W' e l ..tg7 1 3 ..td2 b6 1 4 e4 li:lb7 1 5 e f gf 1 6 W'e2 with approximately balanced chances; Udovcic-Gufeld, Leningrad 1 967. (b) 9 W' a4 c5 10 de li:l xc6 ( 1 0 . . . be II li:ld4 c5! is interesting) II .:t d l W'a5 1 2 W'xa5 li:lxa5 1 3 li:ld5 li:lxd5 14 cd ..td7 with full equal ity; Vladimirov-Gastonyi, Lenin grad v Budapest 1 96 1 . (c) 9 W'd3 c5 (parrying the

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lll c6

threatened 1 0 b4) 1 0 b3 (after 1 0 tt:lg5 a 6 II e 4 b5 1 2 c b ab 1 3 tt:lxb5 fe 14 lLl xe4 lLl xe4 1 5 ..txe4 ..ia6 16 a4 c4, Dely-Gufeld, Debrecen 1 970, or 1 0 ..id2 a6 II : ac t l:.b8 1 2 b 3 b5!, Paldan- Pedersen, Danish corr. Ch. 1 973-4, Black succeeds in stirring up adequate counterplay) 10 . . . a6 II ..i b2 l:.b8 1 2 : ae l b5 1 3 .t a l be 1 4 be : b4 (the immediate 1 4 . . . lLlg4!? merits investigation) 1 5 lLld2 lLlg4 1 6 a 3 : b8 ( 1 6 . . . lLle5 1 7 'ilt'c2 : xc4!? is quite a reasonable exchange sacrifice) 1 7 11t"c2 ..id7 1 8 e3 lLle5 19 lLle2 11t"e8 20 l:.b l ..ta4 2 1 11t"a2 11t"d8 22 f4! and having beaten off Black's initiative in instructive fashion White is on the way to gaining the upper hand; Yugoslavia Nikolac-Bertok, 1 969. c5 9 10 a3! Indirectly preventing . . . e7-e5 which against other moves is gen erally Black's best method of cre ating counterplay as the following examples show : (a) 10 b3? lLl xd5! II ..i xd5 + e6 1 2 lLldb l ed 1 3 11t"xd5 + �h8 1 4 ..tf4 l:.e8 1 5 ..ixd6 ..ie6 and White is in trouble, e.g. 1 6 11t"d3 'ii b6 or 16 11t"xc5? b6 1 7 11t"a3 .txc4. (b) 10 l:.b l e5! II de ..txe6 12 b3 d5 1 3 ..ia3 (steering for equality with 1 3 cd is the prudent

15

course) 1 3 . . . l:.c8 1 4 lLla4 b 6 1 5 b4 c b 1 6 ..txb4 de with excellent compensation for the sacrificed material; Pinter- Bjelajac, Pernik 1 978. (c) 10 11t"c2 e5! II a3 (II de ..txe6 1 2 l:.d l 11t"e7 1 3 b3 lLlc6 leaves Black actively placed, e.g. 14 ..ib2 lLld4 1 5 11t"d3 f4! 1 6 gf ..if5 1 7 e4 ..ie6! and the coming . . . lLlf6-h5xf4 gives a strong attack; J. Piket- M . Gurevich, Lucerne 1 989) 1 1 . . . b6 1 2 b4 lL:lb7 1 3 ..i b2 We7 1 4 l:.ael lLld8 1 5 e3 lLlf7 and having usefully redeployed the problem knight Black's prospects are fully satisfactory; Vaganian Tal, USSR 1 970. 10 ..id7 11 11t"c2 A voiding the trap II b4? cb 1 2 ab lLlxc4! 1 3 lLlxc4 11t"c7! after which Black regains his material and assumes the initiative, e.g. 1 4 11t"b3 l:.fc8 1 5 lLl a 5 11t"xc3 1 6 11t"xc3 l:.xc3 1 7 lLlxb7 l:.b3 and White is in difficulties. 11 11t"c7 Once again preventing b2-b4 by utilizing the sensitivity of c4. a6 12 b3 The central advance 1 2 . . . e5 leaves White an indisputable pos itional advantage after 1 3 de ..ixe6 14 .t b2 and so Black is forced to fall back on the alterna tive wing demonstration plan. It appears, however, that here too

16

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . tt:lc6 .

.

White can maintain the upper hand. 13 .tb2 bS (I 2) 12 w

14 �d1! Although at first sight Black's position looks active enough, this subtle retreat begins a sophi sticated plan, first employed by Botvinnik in the analogous Pan no K ing's I ndian position in a cel ebrated game versus Geller in 1 952, which brilliantly highlights the deficiencies of Black's set-up. In essence, the idea is to post the bishop at c3 simultaneously surveying the hobbled horse in Black's camp and clearing a path for the tour �d l -b2-d3-f4 by its more fleet of foot white counter part. Once a white knight establ ishes itself on f4 the weakness of e6 may become a real problem for Black. be 14 Can Black improve hereabouts? .Z:.ab8 15 be ..tcJ 16 lL!g4

Black seeks to relieve the press ure by means of exchanges. While this may indeed be the best policy, the defender must beware of drop ping his guard as forces are reduced because White's advan tage is of a particularly insidious and persistent nature as the pres ent game well shows. 17 ..txg7 �xg7 18 W"c3 + The queen takes over on the key c3 square menacing both flanks simultaneously. 18 �g8 .Z:.b7 19 �b2! .Z:.tb8 20 �dJ 21 .Z:.ab1! Appreciating that as the rooks disappear so too do Black's chances of counterplay. Moreover, the exchanges accentuates the superior activity and coordination of White's minor pieces. .Z:.xb1 21 .Z:.xb1 + 22 .Z:.xb1 23 �xb1 W"b6 �f6 ( 1 3 ) 24 �d2

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . llJc6

While to the inexpert eye it may appear that an amicable hand shake is j ust around the corner, in fact the real fighting is j ust about to begin! Space considerations do not permit us to follow the further vicissitudes in too great detail (especially since White unfortun ately strays from the consistent course quite soon) but hopefully this will not prevent the reader from drawing the unavoidable if unpalatable conclusion that those wishing to play 8 . . . li:l a5 must either come armed with a big improvement or be prepared for a long and arduous defensive task. Still, at the end of it there may be a half point waiting, even against a world champion! 25 h3! <1;>17 26 cli>h2 li:lb7 27 e4 fe 28 li:lxe4 li:ld8 29 li:lg5 + (29 li:lf4! would have set Black greater problems; as it is, he is freed from having to defend the li:lf6 and this permits him to regroup) 29 . . . cli>e8! 30 li:lf4 li:ll7 3 1 li:lfe6 li:l xg5 (with the exchange of the problem QN Black's defens ive prospects improve enor mously) 32 li:l xg5 W'b I ! 33 i.e4 W' a2! 34 cli>g2 ..tf5 35 ..bf5 gf 36 W'd3 h6 37 li:le6 li:le4 38 W'f3 W'xc4 (38 li:lf6!) 39 W'h5 + d7 40 W'xf5 li:lf6 4 1 li:l xc5 + cli>e8 42 W'g6 + cli>d8 43 li:le6 + cli>d7 44 li:lf4 li:lxd5 45 W'xh6 (45 W'f5 + cli>c6 46 W'xd5 + W'xd5 47 li:l xd5 cli>xd5 48 cli>f3 e5 should be 0 0 0

17

drawn) 45 . . . We4 + 46 �h2 W'e l 47 li:ld3 W'c3 48 W'g6 W' xa3 49 h4 (49 g4 W'c3 50 g5 was a stronger but riskier winning attempt) 49 . . . W'c3 50 h5 W'f6 5 1 W'g4 + e6 52 W'a4 + �e7 53 W' xa6 W'f3? (53 . . . W' f5 collecting the h-pawn was correct) 54 Wa7 + �d8 55 W'h7 li:lf6 56 W' h8 + cli>d7 57 W'g7 + c6 58 h6 li:lg4 + 59 cli>g l "it'd! + 60 cli>g2 We2 6 1 cli>h3? (61 W'c3 + �d7 62 W'd4 li:lxh6 63 W'g7 + �c6 64 W'xh6 W'xd3 65 W'xe6 would have preserved winning chances) 61 . . . li:l xh6 62 W'xh6 W' xd3 63 W' xe6 W'fl + !-!. Ribli-Barber

Lugano / 985 1 d4 f5 2 g3 li:lf6 3 ..ig2 g6 4 li:l f3 ..ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d 6 7 li:lc3 li:lc6 8 d5 li:le5 8 Although current fashion in the Leningrad has focused attention on . . . c6 systems (and 7 . . . W'e8 in particular) at the expense of 7 . . . li:lc6, aficionados of uncompro mising play ensure that the knight move still appears from time to time albeit almost invariably in the form of this centralizing variation. The basic point at issue is whether the assortment of tactical and attacking chances Black acquires after White· captures the knight (presently considered the main

18

LeninKrad Main Line: 7 ...

lLlc6

continuation) are sufficient to off set the positional drawbacks. The last word on this question has yet to be said despite the recent trend of games going in White's favour : any system capable of dealing Karpov one of the most crushing defeats of his career must have rather a lot going for it. 9 t!Jxe5 The critical response, but there are also two worthwhile alterna tives : (a) 9 ttJd2 (of course not 9 b3? t!Je4 and Black wins material) 9 . . . c6! 1 0 h3 (against 1 0 b3 I recommend 1 0 . . . cd 1 1 cd t!Jh5! intending 1 2 ..tb2 f4 with active play on the king's wing) 10 . . . W b6 I I ttJa4 Wc7 with a promising position for Black; Taimanov Vinogradov, Leningrad Ch. 1 946. (b) 9 Wb3 is only just beginning to be explored and deserves respect, as witness the following defensive fiasco : 9 . . . t!Jed7 1 0 ..te3 ttJc5 I I ..txc5 (in ECO this capture is mentioned in a note and evaluated with a laconic·= ', quite erroneously, as we shall see) I I . . . de 1 2 t!Jg5! .l:l b8 1 3 Wa3 a6 1 4 Wxc5 b6 1 5 W b4 h6 1 6 t!Jf3 b5 1 7 t!Je5 1 -0 Seira wan- Pellant, 1 983. The best antidote to this is 9 . . . t!Jxf3 + ! 1 0 ef (or 1 0 ..txf3 ttJd7 I I ..te3 t!Jc5 and the removal of a pair of knights makes it far less attractive for White to capture on

c5, failing which Black's position is fully satisfactory) I 0 . . . e5 I I de ..txe6 1 2 .l:l e l Wd7 1 3 f4 c6 1 4 ..te3 Wf7 1 5 Wa3 ..txc4 ( 1 5 . . . .:. fd8!?) with a very healthy equal for ity Black; Pilnik Tartakower, Paris 1 954/55. 9 de ( 1 4 ) 14 IV

The modified pawn structure delineates the respective spheres of action : for White, the centre and queenside; for Black, the cen tre and kingside. 10 Wb3 A multi-purpose and sensible move which puts pressure on b7, sets up a vis-a-vis along the important a2-g8 diagonal, and prepares to bring a rook to the d-file. Apart from the centrally consolidating I 0 e4, the other tenth moves hardly encompass the same breadth or depth of efficacy although one or two of them nevertheless pose Black some deli cate problems which, perhaps, have not yet entirely been solved :

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . l0c6

(a) 1 0 f4? e4 + 1 1 ..te3 tt:\g4 1 2 ..td4 e5 1 3 ..tc5 b6! 1 4 ..txf8 •xf8 (Vinogradov) with more than adequate compensation for the (probably temporary) sacrifice of material. (b) 10 .:te l ?! e4 is fine for Black. (c) 10 Wc2 permits untroubled liquidation of Black's structural weakness by I 0 . . . e6. (d) 1 0 ..tg5?! tt:'Jd7! leaves the bishop flailing. (e) 10 c5!? e4 ( 1 0 . . . e6 looks safer) I I *'b3 �h8 1 2 .:td l *'d7?! (artificial to say the least) 1 3 ..te3 c6 14 f3 cd 1 5 tt:\xd5 tt:\xd5 1 6 fe fe 1 7 : xd5 ± on account of the superior pawn structure and que enside pressure; Cramling-G. Flear, 1 983. (f) 10 b3!? e4 I I ..ta3! .:tf7 ( I I . . . tt:\g4!?) 1 2 f3! ef 1 3 ef f4 1 4 .:te l with a clearly more harmonious position for White; Dlugy-Gal lego, World Jr. Ch. Sharjah 1 985. e6 10 Ribli assesses 1 0 . . . �h8 I I : d I as ;;!; , but it may be worth while further investigating the plan of leaving the centre pawns untouched, e.g. 10 . . . h6 I I : d 1 �h8 1 2 c5 g5 1 3 ..td2 e4 1 4 .te l a6 1 5 *'a3 *'e8 1 6 b4 ..td7 1 7 W b3 tt:\g4 with good kingside attacking prospects for Black; Siekansky Hawelko, Polish Ch. 1 989. II .:td l ed If this seems too risky then the

19

playable I I . . . *'e7 i s available, e.g. 1 2 ..tg5 (;;!; R i bli) h6 1 3 ..txf6 ..txf6 1 4 e4 (thus far Schmid Menvielle, Tel Aviv 01. 1 964) and now ECO recommends 1 4 . . . : b8 with an evaluation of equality. Clearly, there remains much to be properly worked out here. 12 tt:'Jxd5 c6 13 ..tg5!? A startling new idea. Older analyses had only considered the attacking attempt 1 3 c5 which fails after 1 3 . . . cd 14 ..txd5 + tt:\xd5 15 .:txd5 We8! as White has no useful discovered check. 13 cd The offer cannot be declined because after 1 3 . . . •as White plays 14 tt:\e7 + followed by cap turing on c8 and then b7 with advantage. �h8 14 ..txd5 + 15 ..txb7 ( 1 5 ) 15 8

The point of White's combi nation is now revealed : to bring about an approximate, heterog-

20

Leningrad Main Line:

7 . . lLlc6 .

eneous balance of queen and pawns versus rook and two minor pieces. Such positions are notori ously resistant to generalization and necessitate concrete appraisal, and here lies the nub of White's discovery-that the black pieces are lacking in coordination and a useful plan whereas White's pawns can be rapidly mobilized and made into a real threat. IS ·�Wxd l + Perhaps Black can improve at this juncture. It's true that 1 5 . . . .td7 is unplayable on account of 16 .txa8 "it' xa8 1 7 .txf6 .txf6 1 8 .l: xd 7, but 1 5 . . . .l: b8 immediately enables the a-pawn to be saved, e.g. 1 6 .l: xd8 .l: xd8 1 7 .l: d l .l: g8! (not 1 7 . . . : xd l ? 18 "it' xd 1 .txb7 1 9 .t xf6 .t xf6 20 "it'd6 ± ± ) 1 8 "it'a3 .l: xb7 with conspicuously better chances than in the game. 16 : xd l : b8 .txb7 17 "it'a3 1 7 . . . : xb7? 1 8 .txf6 wins for White. 18 .txf6 .txf6 19 "it'xa7 With the capture of a third pawn the situation has clarified in White's favour. Although there would still be considerable techni cal difficulties to overcome against the most stubborn defence, the game illustrates well just how difficult it is to manage the maximum resistance in practice :

1 9 . . . .ta8 20 b3 .l: bd8 2 1 : xd8 .l: xd8 22 f3 e4 (22 . . . �g8 was mandatory) 23 "it'f7! .td4 + 24 �g2 ef + 25 ef .tg7 26 "it'e7 :rs (on 26 . . . .l: d2 + 27 �fl .tc6, 28 "it'c7! wins material) 27 b4 (once the pawns start rolling there is no hope) 27 . . . h5 28 b5 �g8 29 b6 .tf6 30 "it'e6 + �g7 3 1 c5 .l: d8 32 c6 .l:d2 + 33 �fl f4 34 b7 1 -0. Karpov-Jacobsen

USSR v Scandinavia, junior match 1 968 1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lt:lf3 .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc6 8 dS lt:le5 9 lt:lxeS de 10 e4 ( 1 6 )

This central advance both fixes Black's front e-pawn (and thereby deadens the KB) and provides White with a means of opening up the position at an opportune moment. It has long been consid ered the best continuation despite its tendency to produce formi-


dable complications. 10 f4 This bold thrust nails Black's colours to the mast and commits him to an all out assault on the enemy king. Although present day interest has focused almost exclus ively on this uncompromising attacking line, there does exist a quieter alternative which certainly deserves mentioning and that is I 0 . . . e6. There are two main ways for White to meet this central challenge : (a) 1 1 .-b3 ed (should Black suddenly experience a change of heart and a craving for complica tions, then 1 1 . . . f4 is still available with the usual unclear conse quences) 1 2 cd �h8 ( 1 2 . . . ltJe8 1 3 ef gf 1 4 d6 + is promising for White) 1 3 ..te3 f4!? (the staid 1 3 . . . ltJe8 brought Black a draw in Tartakower-Aiexander, Hastings 1 953/54) 14 ..tcS : es 1 5 : fd 1 b6 1 6 ..ta3 ..tg4 1 7 f3 ..td7 1 8 gf ltJ hS 1 9 ltJe2 ef when Black is not without chances on the kingside to offset White's undoubted central supremacy; Uhlmann-Espig, E. Germany 1 972. (b) 1 1 ef ef (the untested 1 1 . . . gf has its points) 1 2 ..te3 (Gheorghiu's bald 1 2 *'b3 ± has yet to be confirmed in practice) 1 2 . . . e4?! (looks premature here; ECO has suggested 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3 j_c5 : e8) 1 3 ..td4 : e8 1 4 : e l

7 . . lllc6 .

21

b6 15 f3 ± and the game opens up to White's advantage; Collins Sherwin, New York 1 952. 11 b3 The right idea but insuffici ently energetically executed-the bishop needs to be fianchettoed in order to find worthwhile develop ment, but equally the q ueen requires an active station and therefore 1 1 b4 (reserving b3 for the queen) has become the major continuation. We shall examine that move in the context of the next game and note the other eleventh turn possibilities here : (a) 1 1 gf ef ( 1 1 . . . ltJh5!? 1 2 f5 ltJf4 also gives compensation for the pawn) 1 2 ..t xf4 ( 1 2 eS leads to strange positions tending in Black's favour, e.g. 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3 e6 ltJeS 1 4 .-b3 f3 1 5 ..th3 b6! with . . . ..ta6 in the air) 1 2 . . . ltJxe4! 1 3 ..tg3 (or 1 3 ltJe2 ltJd6! with balanced prospects) 1 3 . . . ltJxg3 1 4 hg e6 and Black has overcome his opening problems; Hodakowsky-Hiibner, Aibling 1 965. (b) 1 1 c5 gS 1 2 *'b3?! �h8 1 3 lObS?! (having blocked his b-pawn White has difficulty forming a plan) l 3 . . . c6 1 4 ltJc3 .-es 1 5 .- d 1 ..i d 7 1 6 b 4 :d8 1 7 ..t b 2 ltJg4 + Black has completed his develop ment and is ready to proceed with the kingside attack; a perfect example of how Black should

22


7

. .

. ll:\c6

build up the position when left undisturbed; Wells-Hansen, World Jr. Ch. Kiljava 1 984. (c) 1 1 f3?! (pusillanimous prophylaxis) I I . . . c6! 1 2 de "ir'b6 + 1 3 � h I be (keeping control of the important d5 square) 14 b3 g5 1 5 ..ta3 �17! 1 6 gf gf 1 7 ti'la4 "ir'c7 1 8 "ir'e l l::t g8 and Black can be well satisfied with his share of the chances in a difficult position for both sides; Hjartarson- Plaskett, Hastings 1 985/86. 11 g5 12 f3 White is concerned at the possi bility of the g-pawn advancing even further. 12 "ir'd6 13 g4 h5 ( 1 7) 17 w

A sight to gladden every Lenin grad player's heart! One glance suffices to show that White's strat egy has failed miserably and allowed Black to create a deadly kingside attack. The further course of the game is extremely instruc-

tive: 14 h3 hg 1 5 fg (acquiescing to the opening of the h-file would be tantamount to resignation) 1 5 . . . .id7 1 6 a4 "ir'b6 + 1 7 �h2 �f7 18 .if3 l::t h8 19 �g2 l::t h4 20 aS "ir'c5 21 ..ta3 "ir'e3 22 "ir'e 1

( 18)

22 . . . .ixg4! (having this u p his sleeve was the reason Black allowed the queen to be driven into the enemy camp with its exchange apparently inevitable excellent calculation!) 23 hg (23 ..txg4 ti'lxg4) 23 . . . ti'lxg4 24 l::t h 1 l::t x h I 25 "ir'xe3 ti'lxe3 + 26 �xh I g4 (despite the reduction in forces, White is still in trouble due to the powerful connected passed pawns) 27 .ie2 f3 28 .1c5 (not 28 .td 1 ? f2 and . . . l::t h 8 mate will follow) 28 . . . .th6 29 l::t e 1 b6 30 .txf3 (or 30 .txe3 .1xe3 3 1 .1 xf3 l::t h8 + 32 �g2 gf+ 33 �xf3 ..td2- + ) 30 . . . be 3 1 .i d 1 �g6 32 ti'lb5 .tf4 33 l::tx e3 (if 33 �g1 then 33 . . . g3 followed by . . . l::th8h2 etc.) 33 . . . ..txe3 34 ti'lxc7


tlh8 + 35 �g2 tlh4 36 a6 ..tf4 37 �gl g3 38 ..tf3 .l:t h2 39 ..tg2 ¢;f7 40 �fl tlh6 41 �e2 tlb6 0- 1 .

7 . . . ll\c6

23

/9 w

C. Hansen-J. Kristiansen

Esbjerg 1 984 I d4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lL!f3 .ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lL!c3 lL!c6 8 d5 lL!e5 9 lL!xe5 de 10 e4 f4 II b4 g5 With the centre locked, both sides pursue their respective flank initiatives with great energy. It would be quite wrong for Black to meddle with the centre, e.g. I I . . . e6 1 2 .ib2 ed 1 3 ed .if5 1 4 :le t and with the inevitable arrival of the knight at e4, Black will find himself at a significant positional disadvantage. 12 :lei A somewhat enigmatic move, not exactly forced, which passively vacates f1 for the bishop in the event of a . . . g4 . . . f3 pawn storm, and actively observes the e3 square (see the note to White's fifteenth in Farago-Poutiainen below). 12 a6 A necessary preparation for the transfer of the queen to the king side, simply preventing lL!b5. An u ntested alternative plan is 1 2 . . . g4 1 3 c5 f3 1 4 ..tfl h5, though such a'n approach lacks flexibility. 13 ..tb2 'ilt'e8 ( 1 9 )

An attractive, rich position of clearly drawn battle lines which should have no trouble attracting supporters for both sides. Pract ical experience so far is extremely limited, and many more tests will be required before a trustworthy judgement can be advanced. 14 c5 Optimally priming White's pos ition for various breakthroughs. An earlier game, Farago- Poutiai nen, Budapest 1 975, went 14 :le i lL!g4 1 5 : c2? (looks natural enough but lands White in dire straits; 1 5 f3 was subsequently pro posed as an improvement, the idea being 1 5 . . . lL!e3 1 6 tlxe3! fe 1 7 g4! with superb positional com pensation for the material deficit, but Black can also improve with 15 . . . 'ilt' h5! with obscure play) 1 5 . . . -.. h5 1 6 h 3 f3 ! 1 7 ..txf3 (White suddenly finds himself between Scylla and Charybdis : 1 7 hg ..txg4 1 8 ..tfl : f6 would be fatal) 1 7 . . . -..x h3 1 8 'ilt'd3 lL!xf2! 19 tlxf2

24


.

. .

lllc6

( 1 9 �xf2 W'h2 + 20 �e3 : xf3 + 2 1 �xf3 g4 + 22 �e3 i.h6 19 W' xg3 + mate!) 20 �fl i.h3 + 2 1 �e2 g4 0- l . A very instructive miniature, played with panache. i.d7?! 14 With the laudable aim of devel oping the queen's rook, but unfor tunately White can throw a tacti cal spanner in the works by 1 5 c6! be 1 6 de i.xc6 1 7 lt:ld5 when the soft underbelly of Black's position has been dangerously exposed. In fact, in the game this opportunity to seize the initiative was missed, and the proceedings took an entirely different course, albeit one still full of points of interest and instruction. Presumably, 14 . . . lt:lg4 must still come into consideration, and Kristiansen himself has noted 1 4 . . . W' f7 as a n improvement. 15 : ct ltd8 16 a4 W'f7

Threatening to unleash the black forces by . . . lt:lg4. 17 gf! An economical way of cutting dead Black's f-file pretensions. ef? 17 Black has spotted an amazing idea which seduces him into this inferior capture. After the obvious 1 7 . . . gf, there would be real pro spects of creating play along the g-file, but as it is Black's dreams of attack fade away before they get going: 1 8 e5! lt:lxd5! 1 9 i.xd5 e6 20 i.e4! (after the natural looking 20 i.f3 comes 20 . . . i.c6 2 1 W'e2 lt d2!! and Black wins!) 20 . . . f3 2 1 � h 1 W'h5 22 lt e3 lt f4 23 i. xf3 : xf3? (the last chance was 23 . . . g4) 24 lt xf3 g4 25 lt:le4! (with this fine defensive move all Black's tactics are foiled and White assumes the initiative) 25 . . . gf 26 W'd4! W'h4 27 �td l J:H8 28 lt g l lt f4 29 W'xd7 lt g4 30 W'xe6 + 1 -0.


3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d4 g3 ..tg2 lLlf3 0-0 c4 lL\c3

f5 lLlf6 g6 ..tg7 0-0 d6 'li'e8 (20)

.

.

.

'ife8

Occasionally the queen also finds useful employment on r7 putting pressure down the f-file and attacking the c-pawn, and from time to time we will see the queen deployed at g6 or h5 after the advance . . . h6 and . . . g5. 8 d5 The familiar method of prevent ing . . . e5 and probably best. At any rate the alternatives do not look particularly threatening to Black, e.g. : (a) 8 e4 fe 9 lL\g5 lL\c6 1 0 ..te3 ..tg4 I I 'ii' d 2 'ii' d 7 and Black's active development assures him a satisfactory game; Afifi-Yusupov, Tunis 1 985. (b) 8 l:tel 'li'rl (of course not 8 . . . lL\e4 immediately because of 9 lLlxe4 fe I 0 lL\g5 ± ± ) 9 b3 lL\e4 10 ..tb2 lL\c6 I I l:t c l h6 1 2 l:t fl (in order to threaten capturing on e4; 1 2 d 5 lL\b4 would leave a2 tactically vulnerable) 1 2 . . . lL\xc3 1 3 ..txc3 e5 with full equality; Gavrikov Malanyuk, USSR Ch. 1 986.

It seems strange now to think that it wasn't really until the 1 980s that this typical Classical Dutch move was transplanted to the Len ingrad and worked up into a coherent system. From e8 the queen supports the advance . . . e7-e5 and also helps prepare, in conjunction with the QB, to con test the centre by . . . c7-c6. 25

26

Leningrad Main Line: 7 . .

.

"i1t' e8

(c) 8 lt:ld5 lLlxd5 9 cd 'it'b5 1 0 lLl e I (Black has a fine game after 10 'it'b3 'it'xb3 I I ab c6 1 2 ..ig5 .:te8 1 3 .:t fc l e6 14 de ..ixe6; Zukhovitsky- M ih. Zeitlin, USSR 1 986) 1 0 . . . lLla6 ( 1 0 . . . a5!?) I I e3 ..id7 12 lt:ld3 c5 1 3 de ..ixc6 14 ..ixc6 be 15 'it'b3 + lH7 16 'it'xb5 cb 1 7 ..id2 e5 Balashov M alanyuk, USSR. Ch. 1 986. (d) 8 'it'b3 lLla6 9 ..ig5 c5 1 0 ..ixf6 ..ixf6 I I .:t ad ! ..ig7 and after this prophylaxis against e2e4 (which would now be answered by f5-f4) prospects are balanced thanks to Black's possession of the two bishops; Lerner- Malanyuk, USSR Ch. 1 986. (e) 8 b3 (a useful waiting move hoping to show that Black's threatened advance of the e-pawn is actually loosening and opens the position prematurely) 8 . . . lLla6 (this standard treatment is the most solid; 8 . . . e5 9 de de I 0 e4! lLlc6 I I lLld5! has indeed been shown to favour White) 9 ..ib2 (9 ..ia3 c6 1 0 'it'd3 .:t b8 I I e4 fe 1 2 lLlxe4 ..if5 1 3 lLlxf6 + ..ixf6 1 4 'it'e3 b5 gives a dynamic balance; Kishnyev- Bukhman, Budapest 1 989) 9 . . . ..id7 10 d5 c6 I I .:t e l h 6 1 2 e 3 .:t c8 1 3 lLld4 'it'f7 with a typically rich position for both Kasparov-Malanyuk, sides; USSR Ch. 1 988. 8 lLla6 The most effective method of =

developing the queenside given that White's d-pawn advance ceded Black control of c5. 9 lLld4 The most natural follow-up to the previous move, but there is also a case for trying to throw Black's plans out of gear by pre paring a rapid advance of the b pawn, e.g. 9 .:t b I ..id7 1 0 b4 ( I 0 lLld4 would transpose to Tukmakov - M . Gurevich below) 10 . . . e5 I I de ..ixe6 1 2 lLld4 ..ixc4 1 3 . .ixb7 .:t b8 14 ..ic6 ± since White has simultaneously downgraded Black's pawn struc ture and turned the stranded a6 knight into a real liability; Ruka vina-Cvitan, Yugoslav Ch. 1 986. 9 . . . c6 looks a sensible attempt at improvement. 9 ..id7 ( 2 1 ) 21 w

Necessary preparation for the advance of the c-pawn which forms an indispensable link in Black's counterplay. Essentially, White must now


decide whether to concentrate operations in the centre or on the q ueenside, and accordingly our illu strative games will feature the continuations 10 e4 and 10 l: b l . I n addition to these the follow ing examples are also worth not ing : (a) 10 e3 c6 I I b3 (a game Gavrilov-M. Gurevich, USSR 1982, continued interestingly with II l: b l tiJc7 12 b4 cd 1 3 cd l: c8 1 4 a4 tiJa8 1 5 "it'b3 and Black is uncomfortably cramped; I I . . . l:t b8 looks more precise) I I . . . tiJc7 1 2 .i b2 c5 1 3 tiJde2 (as the game goes, White gets into difficulties over the weakness of c4 and so 1 3 tiJf3 with a later re routing to d2 was preferable) 1 3 . . . b5 1 4 "it'c2 l: b8 ( Black has a pleasant initiative while White has nothing to do) 1 5 l: ac l (exacer bates the problems of the position; either 15 l: ab l or 1 5 cb should have been played) 1 5 . . . be 16 be tiJg4! 1 7 .ia 1 tiJe5 1 8 tiJd 1 .ia4 19 "it'd2 tiJxc4! and Black has won a sound pawn in very instructive Belyavsky-Malanyuk, fashion; USSR Ch. 1 983. (b) 10 b3 (this move has much in common with 10 l: b l but here White chooses to forgo b4 options in favour of a different placement of the rook) I 0 . . . c6 I I .ib2 tiJc7 12 l: c l ( 1 2 "it'd2 merits attention, e.g. 12 . . . c5 1 3 tiJf3 a6 14 : ae l

. . . "ilfe8

27

b5 1 5 "it'd3 l: b8 1 6 .ia 1 h6 1 7 tiJd2 tiJg4 1 8 e3 ± since the sting has been taken from Black's and White counterplay is ready to push through in t he centre; P. Stefanov- Marasescu, Romanian Ch. 1 983. Perhaps Black should prefer 1 3 . . . : b8 and possibly dispense with . . . a6 altogether.) 1 2 . . . : b8 1 3 "it'd2 c5 14 tiJf3 a6 (Kremenetsky considers 14 . . . b5 1 5 cb tiJxb5 1 6 tiJxb5 l: xb5 1 7 .ixf6 .ixf6 1 8 "it'c2 intending tiJf3-d2-c4 to be ;t, but this is hard to credit given the open nature of the position and Black's bishops) 1 5 "it' c2 b5 1 6 tiJd2 e5!? 1 7 de .ixe6 1 8 .i a I ( 1 8 e4? would allow the characteristic and instructive tactical blow 18 . . . be 1 9 be fe 20 tiJcxe4 l: xb2!) 1 8 . . . "it'e7 1 9 1!4 f4! (a typical side stepping response to White's tor tuously prepared central advance) 20 tiJd5 (of course not 20 gf? tiJh5 when the black squares around White's king are irreparably weak ened) 20 . . . tiJfxd5 2 1 cd .id7 22 .ixg7 "it'xg7 23 tiJf3 .ig4 and with transition to a classic good knight versus bad bishop position imminent Black's winning chances are good; F. Lengyel-Kremenet sky, Satu-Mare 1 983. R. Hernandez-Chemin

Cienfuegos 1 981

t

(

· d4 rs 2 g3 tiJf6 3 ig2 g6 4 tiJf3

28


.

..

Wle8

..tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 ltlc3 -.es 8 dS lt:Ja6 9 ltld4 ..td7 10 e4 Such rustic applications of the pedagogues' panacea for dealing with the Dutch-play e4-rarely prove really threatening as long as they are met precisely. Generally speaking, White does better to promote strategical complexity rather than clarify matters with an early showing of his hand. Nevertheless, any logical opening up of the centre is always an acid test of Black's defensive resources and needs careful handling. lt:Jxe4 10 Of course Black can j ust as well capture with the pawn as long as transposition to the column is effected by exchanging knights as well; failure to do so leads to grave problems for Black, as shown by Thessaloniki I vkov- Bischoff, Open 1 984: 10 . . . fe 1 1 lt:Jxe4 c5? 1 2 lt:Je6 ..txe6 1 3 de lt:Jc7 1 4 lt:Jxf6 + ..t xf6 1 5 -.e2 .l:l. b8 1 6 a4 lt:Ja6 1 7 h4! and with h5 to come, Black's fragile kingside defences will soon be ripped apart. fe II lt:Jxe4 ( 22) 12 ..txe4 An important tabiya for the 7 . . . -.es variation, containing an interesting mixture of structural and dynamic pros and cons for both sides. White's advanced d-

22 8

pawn assures him a spatial advan tage and he is without structural weakness, his pieces can develop freely and the half-open e-file beckons for major piece oper ations; the pride and joy of his position at the moment is the beautifully centralized knight which is particularly happy to be keeping e6 under surveillance. By comparison, Black is cramped and suffers from a problem e-pawn, none too sturdy kingside and the e6 weakness in the heart of his position. To offset these static deficiencies, Black has active pieces and useful lines to operate along in the half open f-file and h8-a 1 diagonal as well as pro spects of creating play in the centre and/or on the queenside by appro priate pawn pushes. c6 12 This appears to be Black's most reliable continuation judging from the evidence so far. The alterna tives :


(a) 1 2 . . . c5?! 1 3 de? ( 1 3 lLJe6! lo oks unpleasant for Black; cf. Ivkov-Bischoff, note to Black's tenth above) 1 3 . . . be 14 .l:t b 1 .l:t c8 1 5 .te3 Wf7 1 6 We2 e5 1 7 lLJb3 4Jc7 1 8 .tg2 d5 with promising dynamic possibilities for Black in a complex position; Schmidt-Gri gorov, Prague 1 985. (b) 1 2 . . . 4Jc5 1 3 .tg2 a5 1 4 .tg5 W f7 1 5 W d2 .txd4 1 6 W xd4 e5 1 7 Wc3 with a clear positional superiority for White thanks to the bishop pair; Van der Sterren Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984. 13 .te3 Not 1 3 de? be transposing to Schmidt-Grigorov above. lLJc7 13 c5! 14 Wd2 Now that lLJe6 is no longer possible Black is happy to stabilize the centre so as to launch a flank initiative. b5 15 lLie2 .tf5! 16 cb Forcing White to retreat since exchanging would irretrievably weaken the d-pawn. 17 .tg2 W xb5 ( 23 ) Yet another demonstration of the versatility of the e8 placement of the black queen! It is interesting to observe how Black has usurped the initiative despite White having apparently played only natural and sensible looking moves. Note that White has failed to develop

7

. . .

-. e8

29

23 w

any play at all against Black's sensitive e6 and e7 points whereas Black has both isolated White's d pawn and created a target of the b-pawn by opening up the b-file. 18 lLic3 Wd3 Proceeding in instructive safety first style denying the opponent any chance of attacking on the kingside. W xd2 19 .l:tfdt h6 20 .l:txd2 Preventing counterplay against the e-pawn by .tg5 and rooks to the e-file. Now White is reduced to passive defence while Black can gradually apply the pressure with every chance of a positive outcome as indeed was the case in the game : 2 1 .l:t c l .l:t ab8 22 .tfl .td7 23 .tc4 .1:t b4 24 b3 .1:t fb8 25 a3? (precipitates the end, although continued passivity would have to contend with the undermining advance of Black's a-pawn; White ought to have . gone fishing in muddy waters by 25 4Je4 with

30


...

WeB

sacrificial possibilities on c5) 25 . . . J::tx b3! (a typical and instructive exchange offer to batter down the defensive wall) 26 i.xb3 l::tx b3 27 lt:le2 a5 28 i.d4 i.f8! 29 l::tb2 a4 30 J::t x b3 ab 3 1 J::t b l c4! 32 J::tc l lt:lxd5 0- 1 . White i s helpless against the black pawns, e.g. 33 lt:lc3 (33 l::txc4? i.b5) 33 . . . lt:lxc3 34 i. xc3 i. b5 followed by . . . i.g7 and the blockade is broken. Ryshkov-Zarubin Leningrad I 983 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lt:lf3 i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 W'e8 8 d5 lt:la6 9 lt:ld4 i.d7 10 J::tb 1 A useful move side-stepping the veiled attack from Black's KB and introducing b4 options into the position. 10 c6 The only sensible continuation at this juncture. One final warning against . . . c5 when it can be answ ered by lt:le6 : 10 . . . c5? I I lt:le6 i. xe6 1 2 de W'c8 1 3 lt:ld5 lt:lxd5 14 cd c4 1 5 i.g5 J::te8 16 e4 fe 1 7 i. xe4 W'c5 1 8 i.e3 W'b4 1 9 W'g4 lt:lc7 20 h4 (with this Black's fate is irredeemably sealed) 20 . . . J::t f8 2 1 h5 lt:le8 22 hg h6 23 W' h4 lt:lf6 24 i.f3 lt:le8 25 i.xh6 l::t xf3 26 i.xg7 �xg7 27 W'h7 + 1 -0 Burger-Dlugy, 1983. b3 11

The immediate double step advance of the b-pawn appears to have tactical objections, e.g. I I b4?! (or similarly I I de be 1 2 b4?! lt:lxb4 1 3 l::t xb4 c5 1 4 lt:ld5 cb 1 5 lt:lc7 W'c8 1 6 lt:lxa8 lt:le4 1 7 i.xe4 fe 1 8 i.g5 J::tf7 1 9 lt:lc2 W' xa8 20 lt:l xb4 i.h3 + Kara sev-Cherepkov, Leningrad 1 983/ 84) I I . . . lt:lxb4 1 2 l::t xb4 (perhaps 1 2 a3 is worth consideration) 1 2 . . . c5 1 3 J::tx b7 cd 1 4 lt:lb5 W'c8 1 5 J::tc7 (or 1 5 l::tx a7 W' xc4 1 6 l::tx a8 l::txa8 17 lt:ld4 l::txa2 18 e3 lt:le4 ± ) 1 5 . . . W' b8 1 6 J::tc6 lt:le4! 1 7 i.xe4 i.xc6! 1 8 de fe and Black's material advantage should be decisive; M ilut-Armas, Romanian Ch. 11 lt:lc7 ( 24 )

I I . . . l::tb8 merits careful con sideration here as it could quite easily turn out to be the most precise move. Cebalo-Jacimovic, Pula 1 985, continued 12 i. b2 lt:lc7 1 3 b4 (perhaps too forcing; 1 3 e3 would be normal) 1 3 . . . e5! 1 4 de


tZ:lxe6 1 5 e3 W f7 1 6 W b3 lL!xd4 1 7 ed and now instead of 1 7 . . . b5 Black could either bring about a stable equality by 1 7 . . . ..te6 1 8 d 5 cd 1 9 cd ..td7 or try for more by 1 7 . . f4!? 12 ..tb2 This looks natural enough but it has the drawback of allowing Black to get on with his plan unhindered. Alternatives: (a) 1 2 b4 (with the black knight's retreat the tactical problems have disappeared) 1 2 . . . e5 1 3 de (both 1 3 lLl b3 cd 14 lL!xd5 lL!cxd5 1 5 ..txd5 + lL!xd5 1 6 W xd5 + ..te6 and 1 3 de ed! 14 cd W xd 7 1 5 lLla4 lL!e4 1 6 ..t b2 b5 are in Black's favour) 1 3 . . . lL!xe6 1 4 lL!b3 (better to support the k night by 1 4 e3) 1 4 . . . lL!g4! 1 5 ..t b2 lL!e5 (Black has neatly highlighted the drawback of the b4 advance-the weakening of c4-and has achieved a per fectly viable position) 1 6 lL!d2 a5?! (rather than spurring White on with his plan he should make him think twice by playing 16 . . . a6) 1 7 b5 lL!c5 1 8 be be 1 9 lL!a4! and White's position is the more purposeful; Tukmakov-M. Gure vich, USSR 1 982. (b) 1 2 e3 (creating an alternative retreat for the knight) 1 2 . . . c5 1 3 lL!de2 b5 1 4 cb lL!xb5 1 5 lL!xb5 .i.xb5 1 6 ..t b2 Wfl = 1 7 .C. e l lL!e4 1 8 ..t xg7 W xg7 1 9 .C. c 1 a5 20 lLl f4 ..td7 21 Wc2 lL!f6 22 Wd3 0

...

jte8

31

.C. fb8 23 lL!e6 ..txe6 2 4 d e .C. a7 2 5 .C. c4 Wf8 26 e4 fe 27 ..txe4 We8 28 Wd2 t-t Adorjan-Grigorov, Prague 1 985. (c) 1 2 de be 1 3 b4 e5 14 lLlb3 We7, with chances for both sic;les in a complicated position, is a suggestion of Tukmakov's. c5 12 13 lLlf3 The knight is not well placed on c2, e.g. 1 3 lLlc2 .C. b8 ( 1 3 . . . g5 intending play on the kingside comes into consideration) 1 4 e4 (the point of leaving the bishop's diagonal clear) 1 4 . . . b5 1 5 e5?! (over-optimistic) 1 5 . . . de 1 6 d6 lLle6 1 7 lLlxb5 ..txb5 1 8 de Wxe7 19 cb (thus far Szilagyi-Armas, Tatabanya 1 985) 1 9 . . . lL!d4 20 a4 .C. fd8 and Black dominates the centre. 13 .C. b8 14 lLld2 b5 15 cb White has decided to leave his e-pawn untouched for as long as possible and therefore has to deal with the threatened . . . b4 in more radical fashion. Both 1 5 e3 and 1 5 e4 were alternatives worth atten tion with balanced chances. 15 lL!xb5 16 lL!c4 g5 With the centre stable and some progress already made on the queenside Black now turns his attention to the opposite flank.

31


...

WeB

.i.xb5 17 lL!xb5 18 11fc2 Erroneously egging Black on. Much safer was 1 8 e3 in order to be able to open the e-file in the event of Black still pushing on with . . . f4. f4 ( 25 ) 18

Removing the sting from e5. de 24 e5 25 .:. ret e4! (26) 26 w

25 w

Black has made considerable progress and is clearly in the driv ing seat. 19 1Wf5? Merely a waste of time. h6 19 20 gf .i.d7 gf 21 1Wd3 22 e4 White pins his hopes on coun tering Black's kingside attacking chances by central action but this turns out to be misguided. 11fh5 22 23 f3 .i. b5

Black has neatly thwarted Whi te's counterplay and now passes to decisive action on the kingside. The game concluded : 26 fe .i.xc4 27 be (27 11fxc4? f3 28 d6 + �h8 29 de f2 + 30 �xf2 lL!g4 + + 3 1 �g3-3 1 �e2 lL!e5 + costs the queen-3 1 . . . 11fxh2 + ! 32 �xg4 .::. f4 mate) 27 . . . lL!g4 28 1Wh3 11fg5! 29 .i.xg7 11fxg7 30 e5 l:.xb 1 3 1 l:.xb 1 lL!xe5 3 2 � h 1 f3 3 3 .i.fl .::. f6? (Black loses his way; simply 33 . . . �h8 with 34 . . . l:.g8 to follow would quickly wrap things up) 34 'lieS + �h7 35 .i.h3 1Wf8 36 11fxc5 l:.f4 37 l:.b7 l:.xc4 38 11fe3? (38 l:.xe7 + ! �h8 39 11fe3! keeps matters unclear) 38 . . . 11ff6 39 .i.fl l:.h4 40 l:.xa7?? l:.xh2 + 0- l .

4

Leningrad : Miscellaneous Systems

I n this chapter we review various White alternatives to the mainline sequence 1 d4 f5 2 g3 t!Jf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 t!Jf3 .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 t!Jc3. Working backwards, we shall simply note our rec ommended responses where the deviations are no more than modi fications of previously encoun tered plans, but those incorporat ing new strategic concepts will be examined in greater detail in the context of complete games.

27 w

ations, attempting, in the first case, to exploit the lack of control of e4, and in the second the weakening of the a 1 -h8 diagonal: (i) 7 . . . t!Je4 8 .t b2 t!Jd7 9 "it"c2 and now instead of 9 . . . t!Jdf6 10 t!Jbd2 e6 1 1 t!Je 1 t!Jxd2 1 2 "it"xd2 "it"e7 1 3 t!Jd3 ;t (Petrosian- Kaiszauri, Vil nius 1 978) Black should prefer the immediate 9 . . . e6, e.g. to t!Jbd2 t!Jxd2 1 1 "it"xd2 "it"e7 and he is poised to play the liberating . . . e6-e5 when appropriate; (ii) 7 . . . e5!? 8 de de 9 "it"c2 (evidently, the prospect of being pinned precludes

Seventh move alternatives (after 6 . . . d6 (27 ) ) I n addition t o the classic knight development 7 t!Jc3 White has also experimented with the following possibilities : (a) 7 b3 This flexible move may comfortably be met by the stand ard 7 . . . c6 with essentially similar play to the main line but of greater i nterest are the following continu33

34


the capture on e5) 9 . . . e4! I 0 : d I "fle7 I I lL!d4 c5 1 2 lL!b5 and now not 12 . . . lL!c6? 1 3 .tf4 ± (Ban giev-Lutikov, USSR Navy Ch. 1 970) but 1 2 . . . a6! with fine pro spects for Black. (b) 7 b4 e5! 8 de de 9 .tb2 e4 10 lL!d4 "fle7 I I "flb3 �h8 with chances for both sides. (c) 7 d5 By advancing in the centre immediately White cuts out Black's main line option of 7 . . . lL!c6. The simplest response is 7 . . . lL!a6 8 lL!d4 .td7 9 lLlc3 "fle8 transposing to Chapter 3. Botvin nik has claimed that 10 lL!b3 leaves the position slightly in White's favour, but this contentious assess ment has yet to be upheld in practice. One additional example of play : 10 : e l lL!c5 I I "flc2 c6 1 2 lL! b3 lL!ce4! 1 3 lL!xe4 fe 1 4 ..be4 "flf7! (the veiled threat against f2 enables Black to regain his pawn with advantage) 1 5 .te3 cd 1 6 cd : fc8 1 7 "fld3 lL!xe4 1 8 "fixe4 .tf5 1 9 -.h4 .txb2 + Prakhov -Bert holdt, Bad Salzungen 1 960.

Early b3 fianchetto White may opt for a quick queen side fianchetto at almost any stage. All Black's standard responses remain valid but the most distinc tive counter features an intriguing Leningrad/Stonewall hybrid.

Portisch-Smyslov

Portoroz 197 1 I d 4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 .tg2 g 6 4 lL! f3 .tg7 5 b3 0-0 6 .tb2 d 5 ( 28 ) 28 w

This bold advance signals a rad ical departure from the standard Leningrad strategies. In place of the usual quicksilver centre and fleet-footed piece play, we have a locked pawn front which slows the mid-board battle considerably and sees both sides jockeying for optimum positioning behind their own lines before engaging in hand to hand combat. Comparison with the standard Stonewall shows that it is easier for Black to develop his pieces in the Leningrad version since in general there is less central congestion and in particular Black's Q B, usually the problem piece, finds useful deployment at e6. One suspects that the Lenin grad Stonewall could well prove to be a major growth area in the future development of the Dutch


Defence. e4 7 e6 8 ..te6 0-0 With this immediate develop ment Black declares himself unconcerned at the possible k night sally which White chooses to implement. The preparatory 8 . . . 'it>h8, enabling the bishop to drop back to g8 if attacked, is an alternative and equally valid approach. 9 li:lg5 ..tf7 10 li:leJ 'ili'e8! A key move in Black's plans; from f7 the queen will not only protect d5 but also maintain the pressure against c4 as will be seen. h6 11 'ili'dJ 12 li:lxf7 'ili'xf7 13 f3 A direct and natural-looking continuation which aims to open up the centre as rapidly as poss i ble. Black's resources are also fully adequate to meet immediate play on the queen's wing, e.g. 1 3 cd cd 1 4 'ili'b5 e6 1 5 li:la4 li:lc6 1 6 tL:lc5 li:le4! with excellent central counterplay. li:lbd7 13 14 e4 ( 29 ) It appears that Black is in immi nent danger of being rolled up in the centre, to his permanent spatial disadvantage, but there is a hidden weak spot in White's position which Black uncovers

35

:!9 8

with considerable effect. Thus hindsight indicates that White should have played 14 cd li:lxd5! (not 14 . . . cd 15 e4 ± ) 15 li:l xd5 1 hd5 with balanced chances according to Portisch. 14 de! li:lb6 15 be Now all becomes clear; the weakness of the white c-pawn, and subsequently the c4 square, enables Black to seize the initiative and generate long-term pressure on the q ueenside. 16 e5 1 6 d5 would be no better for then the other knight would swing into action on the e5 and c5 squares after 1 6 . . . li:lfd7. 16 li:le4 .l:tad8 17 .tel 18 .l:t b l li:ld7! Sim ultaneously increasing the pressure on the white centre and parrying the threat of 19 .l:t xb7 on account of 1 9 . .. . li:lxc5. b5! 19 d5

36


The knight has no intention of vacating its powerful outpost. If now 20 cb then the white d-pawn would come under attack after 20 . . . lLJdxb6. lLJxc5 20 de 21 a6 ( 30) Wc2 30 w

White's proud-looking centre of the previous diagram has been shattered and it is merely a matter of time before the remnant straggler at c6 is ripe for the pluck ing. Rather than exit prosaically White attempts to muddy the waters with a pawn offer which at least allows him to dream of counterplay down the long diag onal. Black's play, however, is las er-accurate to the last, and it is the white king which becomes exposed : 22 f4 ..bc3! 23 Wxc3 lLJ xe4 24 ..txe4 fe 25 a4 Wd5 26 ab ab 27 ..tb2 .I:H6 28 ..ta I Wc5 + 29 �h i Wxc6 30 : bd l e3 + 3 1 � g l : d2 3 2 : xd2 ed 3 3 W b3 : d6 34 Wc3 e5! 35 : d l (the attempt to keep the diagonal open

would meet with an elegant refu tation : 35 fe d l W 35 ed Wh I + ! 37 �xh 1 Wxfl mate) 35 . . . Wc5 + 36 �h i We3 37 fe : d 3 0- 1 . A s an addendum t o this fine game let us also note a more recent variation of the same theme which provides much interesting food for thought. Yusupov-Malanyuk, USSR Ch. 1 98 7 : I d4 f5 2 g3 lLJf6 3 ..ig2 g6 4 b3 ..tg7 5 ..t b2 0-0 6 lLJf3 d6 7 0-0 c6 8 lLJ bd2 � h8 9 c4 d5!? (electing for the Stonewall formation even at the cost of a tempo!) 1 0 lLJe5 ..te6 I I lLJd3 lLJ bd7 12 : c l ( Malanyuk gives 1 2 f3 W b6 1 3 e 3 c5!? as unclear) 1 2 . . . lLJe4 1 3 lLlf4 ..t f7 1 4 cd cd 1 5 f3 lLJd6 1 6 e3 ( 1 6 e4? W b6!) 1 6 . . . Wa5 1 7 lLJd3 ( 1 7 ..ic3 W b6 leaves the bishop misplaced) 1 7 . . . : ac8 (Black has completed his develop ment harmoniously and has no problems) 1 8 We2 Wa6 19 : fe 1 : xc l 20 : xc 1 : c8 2 1 : xeS lLJxc8 22 a4 and now instead of 22 . . . lLJd6 23 ..ifl Wc6 24 Wd I �g8 25 �f2 Wc7 26 W c 1 W xc l 27 lLJxcl which left White a tiny edge which he worked hard to exploit before agreeing to a draw on move sixty, Malanyuk proposes 22 . . . e5 23 de lLJ xe5 24 ..tfl lLJxd3 25 ..ixg7 + �xg7 26 Wxd3 Wxd3 27 ..txd3 lLJe7 28 ..ib5 a6 29 ..td7 �f6 as Black's surest path to the draw. That one of the foremost modern connoisseurs of the Lenin-


grad should be ready to adopt Stonewall formation a tempo down, yet nevertheless equalise without difficulty against a player of Yusupov's calibre, bodes well indeed for the future of the Lenin grad Stonewall.

�he

Sixth move alternatives 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 liJO .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 ( 3 1 ) 31 w

Some succinct suggestions for meeting the various offbeat alter natives to the natural 6 c4 : (a) 6 d5 is met most simply either by 6 . . . c6 7 c4 d6 transposing to chapter 1 or 6 . . . lt:la6 7 c4 d6 as in 7 d5 above. (b) 6 c3 d6 (6 . . . d5 is feasible) 7 1fb3 + e6 8 lt:l bd2 (Black is certainly happy to oblige with a Stonewall after 8 lt:lg5 d5 since White will lose time) 8 . . a5 9 a4 lt:la6 10 l:te 1 lt:le4 with pleasant prospects for Black; Kavalek Ciocaltea, Caracas 1 970. (c) 6 lt:lc3 is best answered by 6 . . . d5 with a favourable Stonewall

37

because the standard 6 . . . d6 can leave Black facing tricky problems in the centre after either 7 l:te 1 or 7 1fd3. (d) 6 b3 - see Portisch-Smys lov above. (e) 6 lt:lbd2 d6 (apart from 6 . . . d5 other experimental byways also beckon for those of an adventur ous disposition, e.g. 6 . . . c6 7 b3 a5 8 a4 lt:la6 or even 6 . . . lt:la6 immediately) 7 c3 (7 l:te I lt:lc6 8 e4 can be met either simply by 8 . . . fe 9 lt:lxe4 lt:lxe4 1 0 l:t xe4 .tf5! or more enterprisingly with 8 . . . f4!? with complex play) 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 l:t e 1 (other moves are no better, e.g. 8 W b3 + �h8 9 d5? lt:la5! 1 0 Wa3 c 5 with a favourable main line position, or 8 b4 a6 9 Wb3 + e6 1 0 .t b2 �h8 I I c4 e5! with balanced prospects) 8 . . . e5 9 de lt:lxe5!? (Black posits that the removal of this pair of k nights will promote his attacking prospects; 9 . . . de I 0 e4 f4!? with unclear play also comes into consideration) 1 0 lt:lxe5 d e 1 1 e4 f4!? This typical pawn sacrifice gives Black plenty of chances. The game Kaplun-M. Gurevich, USSR 1 983, illustrates the potential dangers to the white king : 12 lt:lc4 (on 1 2 gf follows 1 2 . . . lt:lh5! and the weakness of the f4 square coupled with the vulnerability of the h2 and 12 points plus easy access of the black forces to the kingside all add up

38


to an onerous defensive task for White) 1 2 . . . fg 1 3 hg 'W/e7 1 4 b3 l:te8 1 5 ..ta3 'W/f7 1 6 'W/c2 aS (a good move which sets up the possibility of a timely . . . a4 initiat ive stealer) 1 7 lLle3 ..te6 1 8 l:[ ed 1 (the natural 1 8 l:[ ad I would land White in trouble after 1 8 . . . a4) 1 8 . . . ..tf8! (shrewdly trades the passive K B for its active counter part and simultaneously gains the rooks access to the f-file) 1 9 ..txf8 l:[ xf8 20 l:td2 h5 (whereas piece play alone would be unable to breach the defences the humble footsoldier can perform wonders, as we shall see) 2 1 c4 (attempting to pressurize the one weakspot in the black camp - the e-pawn) 2 1 . . . lLlg4 2 2 lLlxg4 ..txg4 2 3 l:t d 5 'W/ e 7 24 'W/ b2 l:[ ae8 (inviting the rook to wander offside in search of booty) 25 l:[ fl c6! 26 l:[ xa5 h4 27 b4 (hoping to get the rook back into play via a3) 27 . . . l:[ f7 28 f4? (28 f3 was mandatory when the struggle is still in progress whereas now Black clearly gains the upper hand) 28 . . . h3! 29 ..th 1 (29 : xeS? hg + + or 29 ..tf3 'W/d7! + ) 29 . . . ef 30 gf l:[ ef8 3 1 'W!d2 ..te6 32 l:[ f3 'W!h4 33 l:[g5 ..tg4! 34 'Wif2 h2 + ! (glorious and decisive self-immo lation!; if now 35 �fl then 35 . . . 'W/xg5 36 fg l:[ xf3 wins) 35 'W/ xh2 'W/xh2 + 36 �xh2 ..txf3 37 ..txf3 l:t xf4 38 ..tg2 �g7 39 a4 l:[ f2 40 l:t c5 l:[ c2 41 �g3 l:t c3 + 0- 1 .

Fifth move alternatives l . d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lLlf3 ..tg7 There are no specially indiv idualistic fifth moves available to White which will not transpose elsewhere, but it is worth noting the following instructive example: 5 lbc3 0-0 6 h4?! c5 7 d5 d6 8 0-0 (stamps White's flank gesture as a sham) 8 . . . lLlh5! (eyeing the weakened g3 and clearing the bishop's path) 9 e3 lLld7 1 0 'Wie2 lbe5 1 1 ..td2 l:[ b8 1 2 a4 a6 with the advantage over the entire board; note how White's only positive plan, playing e4, is ruled out on account of the extra strength lent the reply . . . f4 by White's sixth; thoughtless Bobekov- Lutikov, Bulgaria v RSFSR 1 958.

Karlsbad Variation: I d4 f5 2 g3 lbf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lbh3 First played back in the 1 923 Karlsbad tournament, this vari ation still commands respect today. The rationale behind the knight's lateral development stems from the light square sensitivity in Black's formation, especially the almost invariable weakness of e6. By manoeuvring the KN to f4 White pressurizes this Achilles' heel in particular and the white squares in general, since the K B remains unblocked. Not infre-


q uently, White augments his strat egy by developing the queen to b3, simultaneously eyeing b7 and l ooking down the a2-g8 diagonal at e6. Black's counter strategy may well seek to utilize White's dimin ished control of e5 as well as a tempo-enhanced pawn advance on the kingside ( . . . g5). Sikhov-Korchnoi

USSR Student Team Ch. Liningrad 1 950 I d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .i.g2 g6 4 lZlh3 .i.g7 ( 32) 4

5

c4

There are some interesting alter natives to this standard approach: (a) 5 d5!? attempting to restrict Black's options is an idea which has yet to be properly explored. One example: 5 . . . d6!? 6 �f4 c5!? 7 h4 0-0 8 h5 "ife8 9 hg hg 10 lZld2 lZla6 I I �f3 lZle4 with chances for both sides in a sharp position, Solmundarsson - Padevsky,

39

Siegen 01. 1 9 70. (b) 5 c3 c6! (anticipating the queen's development to b3, block ing the attack on b7 and preparing to oppose queens) 6 �d2 (in Toth Knezevic, Italy 1 973, a balanced and very difficult position arose after 6 a4 d6 7 "it"b3 e5 - 7 . . . "it"b6 would be ineffective here on account of 8 "if a2 - 8 de de 9 �a3 lZla6 I 0 .i.e3 "ife7 I I �c4 �d5) 6 . . . d6 7 �f3 "ifc7 8 "it"b3 "it"b6 9 �f4 "ifxb3 10 ab �e4 I I �d3 .i.e6 Geller-Gufeld, Kis lovodsk 1 968. (c) 5 0-0 0-0 6 lZlf4 e6!? (this method of circumventing White's usual strategy certainly deserves further investigation) 7 c4 d6 8 "it"b3 lZla6 9 lZlc3 c6 1 0 %1 d l "ifc7 (with a harmonious development behind his flexible pawn structure Black can be satisfied with his position) I I e4?! (mis-timing the key central advance as Black shows in an instructive sequence) I I . . . fe 1 2 lZl xe4 lZl xe4 1 3 .i. xe4 e5! 1 4 de �c5 1 5 "ife3 �xe4 1 6 "if xe4 .i.xe5 + . Bereft of the pro tective KB White's king is prey to the black bishops on an open board; we have been following the exemplary miniature. P. Nikolic Bjelajac, Novi Sad 1 982, which concluded thus : 1 7 "ife2 .i.f5 1 8 �d3 .i.d4! 1 9 .i.f4 : ae8 20 "it"d2 c5 21 �b4 .i.e4 22 �c2 .i.xb2 23 .i.xd6 "iff7 24 :e I .i.c3! neatly =

40


desperate White's refuting attempts to distract the black pieces; White resigns. 5 0-0 d6 lt::l c3 6 Black proceeds in keeping with the main line strategy already out lined in Chapter 1 . Once again 6 . . . e6!? comes seriously into consideration (see P. Nikolic Bjelajac above). Two further examples: 7 0-0 (7 lt::l f4 followed by h4 is a sharp alternative) 7 . . . d6 (7 . . . •e7 lands Black in difficulties after the positional pawn sacrifice 8 d5 e5 9 d6! • xd6 10 •xd6 cd I I lt::l b 5 and Black's mobilization is severely hampered, Taimanov- Liebert, Rostov 1 96 1 ) 8 b 3 c6 9 •c2 ( 9 .i.a3 can also be answered by 9 . . . a5 but not 9 . . . •a5?! 1 0 • c 1 .C. d 8 II b4 when Black is cramped; Ree-Hi.ibner, Wijk aan Zee 1 975) 9 . . . a5 1 0 .i.a3 lt::l a6 1 1 .C. ad 1 •c7 1 2 lt::l f4 lt::l b4 1 3 • b 1 e5 and with the liberating . . . e5 thrust Black secures equality; A verbakh Gulko, USSR 1 976. Another logical response to White's system which has hardly been played at all yet is 6 . . . lt::l c6!?, e.g. 7 d5 lt::l e 5 8 b3 lt::l f7 9 .i.b2 e5 10 de de 1 1 •xd8 .C. xd8 and Black has no difficulties; Osnos- Legky, Lvov 1 984. 7 lt::l f4 Alternatively:

(a) 7 0-0 is considered inexact because Black may reply 7 . . . e5 8 de de 9 • xd8 .C. xd8 10 lt::l d 5 .C. d7! (necessary on account of the twin threat of capturing on c7 immediately and on b7 after II lt::l e 7 + and 1 2 lt::l x c8) with good prospects of containing White's initiative according to theoretical works. Personally, I find Black's position here unappealing and would prefer 7 . . . e6 or 7 . . . c6. (b) 7 d5 is generally held to be the most precise continuation as it prevents . . . lt::l c6 and enables . . . e6/e5 to be captured (en passant). More importantly, it means that after 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 e5 9 de Black cannot try 9 . . . lt::l a6 because of 1 0 .i.f4 and i s thus compelled t o play 9 . . . .i.xe6 after which White has 10 •b3! •e7 I I lt::l g 5 .i.f7 (II . . . .i.c8 1 2 e4! ± ) 1 2 lt::l x f7 .C. xf7 1 3 .i.f4 lt::l a6 1 4 .C. ad 1 lt::l e8 1 5 • a3 when Black is under fierce press ure; Ree-Rakic, Maribor 1 980. In the search for better defensive methods the following come strongly into consideration: (b 1) 7 . . . lt::l g 4!? is an interesting suggestion of Dolmatov which has yet to be tested in practice. (b2) 7 . . . lt::l a 6!? 8 0-0 .i.d7 with similar play to Chapter 1, e.g. 9 .C. e l c6 1 0 e4 fe I t lt::l xe4 lt::l xe4 1 2 .C. xe4 lt::l c 5 with plenty of possi bilities for Black in a roughly equal position.


(b3) 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 ..td7!? 9 W'b3 ( Dolmatov notes the very unclear variation 9 c5!? de 1 0 W'b3 W'b6 I I de + W'xb3 1 2 cb W' b6 1 3 ba(W') �c6 1 4 lt:la4 W' b4) 9 . . . W' b6 10 .te3 W' xb3 1 1 ab c5 1 2 lt:lf4 lt:la6 13 lt:le6 : fc8 1 4 lt:l xg7 �xg7 1 5 lt:la2? (it would have been better to play to open up the centre by 15 ..td2 intending e4) 1 5 . . . b5! 1 6 cb ..txb5 1 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc7 + White's doubled isolated b-pawns are a lasting liability; Zaichik-Dol matov, H arkov 1 985. 7 c6 d5 8 e5 9 de lt:la6!? At the very least this is a super ior move-order to the commonly played 9 . . . W'e7 after which White may choose to obtain the prefer able position by the simple means of 10 : b1 !? ..txe6 (now 10 . . . lt:la6 would be met by 1 1 b4 threat ening 1 2 b5) 1 1 lt:lxe6 W' xe6 1 2 00 lt:la6 1 3 b3 with the bishop pair and sounder pawn structure; Legky-Machulsky, Tallin 1 985. 10 ..te3?! This simplistic move, hoping to prevent . . . lt:lc5, meets with a vig orous rebuff. After the more natu ral 10 0-0 lt:lc5 H arding notes 1 1 : e 1 ( 1 1 b4 lt:lce4) 1 1 . . . g5 1 2 lt:lh3!? ( 1 2 lt:ld3 lt:lce4) 1 2 . . . h6 1 3 e4 ..txe6 as adequate for Black (which it certainly is) and 1 3 . . . lt:lcxe4 as worth checking (which

i t m a y be). 10 11 0-0 12 lt:ld3 13 ..td2 14 b3

41

W'e7 g5! lt:lg4! ..t xe6 lt:lc5 ( 33)

33 w

Black has energetically pushed back the white pieces and wrested the initiative. As the game pro ceeds we see Black convert his superior dynamism into a tangible queenside pawn majority whilst White's attempts to counter in the centre are contained by the bulwark knight on e5. A final effort to undermine the knight by removing its KB protection is crisply refuted by an exchange sacrifice. 1 5 h3 lt:le5 1 6 lt:l xc5 de 1 7 W'c2 : ad8 1 8 : ad 1 f4! 1 9 lt:le4 h6 20 ..tc3 : xd 1 2 1 W'xd 1 b5! 22 cb cb 23 W' a 1 ..tf7 24 : d 1 b4 25 ..t b2 c4 26 be ..txc4 27 :d2 �h8 28 lt:ld6 ..tg8 29 ..te4?! fg 30 fg W'e6! 3 1 �g2 ..th7 32 ..txh7 �xh7 3 3 W'bl + �h8 34 e4? g4! 35 lt:lf5 : xf5! 36 ef W' c6 + 37 �g l

42


(37 �f2 'jj' f3 + 38 �gl 'jj' e 3 + 39 n f2 ll'ld3 would result in a lost king and pawn ending) 37 . . . ll'lf3 + 38 �f2 ll'lxd2 39 .txg7 + �xg7 40 'jj' xb4 'jj' b6 + 4 1 'jj' xb6 ab 42 hg ll'le4 + 43 �e3 ll'lc3 44 �f4 �f6 0- 1 .

Fourth move alternatives 1 d4 f5 2 g3 ll'lf6 3 .tg2 g6 ( 34)

Other fourth moves pose no danger to Black : (a) 4 ll'ld2 ll'lc6!? (reacting to the fact that the d-pawn is now undefended; 4 . . . d5 is also emin ently playable) 5 d5 (on 5 c3 Black may either revert to the trusty 5 . . . d5 or experiment with 5 . . . e5!? with the idea 6 .txc6 be 7 de ll'lg4 8 ll'ldf3 'jj' e 7 9 .tf4 .tg7 I 0 'jj' d4 c5 I I Wd5 n b8 when the threat of 1 2 . . . .tb7 puts White in a quandary) 5 . . . ll'lb4!? (an interest ing departure from the usual . . . ll'le5) 6 c4 (the original course taken by Szabo-Gheorghiu, Budapest 1 970, clarified in Black's favour after 6 ll'lc4 c6! 7 d6 b5! 8

.td2 be 9 .txb4 ed 1 0 .txd6 .txd6 II 'jj' xd6 'jj' e 7) 6 . . . a5 7 a3 ll'la6 8 b4 .tg7 9 n b l 0-0 1 o ll'lgf3 ab I I ab c5! Gheorghiu. (b) 4 ll'lc3 d5! 5 .tg5 c6 and in comparison with similar vari ations arising from 2 .tg5 White's KB is passively placed. (c) 4 h4 is less outre than it appears at first sight, but not surprisingly fails to challenge Black's equanimity, e.g. 4 . . . .tg7 5 ll'lh3 d6 6 d5 (6 c3 c6 is fine for Black, cf. 5 c3 in the Karlsbad Variation) 6 . . . c6 7 c4 e5 8 de .txe6 9 ll'ld2 'jj' b6 10 0-0 0-0 I I ll'lg5 n e8 and in this balanced position White's h4 advance begins to look superfluous; Olafs son-Alexander, Amsterdam 01. 1 9 54. =

Systems with c4 and .tg5 Systems where White combines .tg5 with c4 are best implemented via the move order I d4 f5 2 c4 without fianchettoing then KB. That Black has an easy time of it when White plays .tg5 in the context of a main line fianchetto is well illustrated by the game Usachi-Stein, Ukraine Ch. 1 957, which went I d4 f5 2 c4 ll'lf6 3 ll'lc3 g6 4 g3 .tg7 5 .tg2 0-0 6 .tg5 c6 7 'jj' d 2 d6 8 n d l 'jj' c 7 9 ll'lf3 ll'lbd7 1 0 0-0 ( 1 0 d 5 meets with tactical problems after 10 . . . ll'lb6 I I b3 cd 1 2 cd ll'le4! 1 3 ll'lxe4 fe


1 4 tt:ld4 tt:lxd5 1 5 ..t xe4 tt:lc3 etc.) t O . . . e5 I I de de 1 2 ..ih6 ..t xh6 J 3 'ii x h6 e4 1 4 tt:ld4 tt:le5 and Bl ack's advanced pawn chain and well posted knights give him the better position thanks to his king si de attacking chances.

Smyslov-Belyavsky

Sochi 1 986 I d4 f5 2 c4 tt:lf6 3 tt:lc3 g6 4

..ig5 ( 35 )

lines while W hite's development remains difficult to complete) 9 . . . : f5! 10 ..th4 be I I ..t xc4 + d5 with a positional advantage to Black; Kelecevic-Rajkovic, Yugoslavia 1 973. ..ig7 4 'ii d2 5 Nor are other moves to be feared : (a) 5 ..txf6 ..t xf6 6 e4 fe 7 tt:lxe4 0-0 8 ltJf3 d6 9 ..te2 i.f5 1 0 ltJ xf6 + ef I I 0-0 c6 Sokolov Shahovic, Yugoslavia 1 973. (b) 5 e3 c5 6 ..td3 d6 7 ltJf3 0-0 8 0-0 ltJc6 9 d5 ltJ b4 10 a3 ltJ xd3 I I 'ii x d3 ltJd7 1 2 i.f4 h6 1 3 h3 a6 (with the more purposeful piece coordination plus the latent power of the bishop pair Black has the superior prospects) 14 a4 b6 1 5 .ig3 g5 1 6 : a b l 'ilfe8 1 7 b4 'ii h5 1 8 ltJe2 (Black now carries out an imaginative manoeuvre designed to stifle any queenside counterplay in order to be able to concentrate on the king's wing undistracted) 1 8 . . . a5! 1 9 be be 20 ltJd2 ltJb8 2 1 f4 ltJa6 22 ltJf3 ltJb4 and Black is firmly in control; Lerner- Belyavsky, USSR, Ch. 1 984. 5 c5! This central challenge also has the virtue of freeing the queen for action. While Black should avoid 5 . . . h6 6 ..ixf6 ..hf6 7 e4 which leaves him with a rickety kingside =

When White has ..ig5 in mind he must play it straight away and not preface it by tt:lf3 : 4 tt:lf3 ..ig7 5 i.g5 0-0 6 'ii d 2'?! (this is the real culp rit although other moves also leave Black free to carry out his basic plan unhindered, e.g. 6 'ilfc2 d 6 7 e3 c6 8 ..te2 'ii a 5 9 0-0 e5 and White certainly cannot lay claim to any advantage; Baum b ach- Babrikowsky, E. German Ch . 1 976) 6 . . . tt:le4! 7 tt:lxe4 fe 8 li:lg I b5! 9 e3 (9 cb a6 gives Black co n t rol of the centre and open

43

44


in the face of a strong central preponderance, there may be a valid alternative in S . . . lZ:Jc6, e.g. 6 h4 (6 l:t d 1 h6 7 ..ixf6 .i.xf6 8 lLlf3 d6 9 e4 eS is equally satisfactory for Black) 6 . . . h6 (not exactly forced) 7 ..txf6 .i.xf6 8 e4!? (8 lZ:Jf3 d6 9 e4 eS 1 0 de de 1 1 'it'xd8 + ..ixd8 could easily find White rueing the disappearance of his QB; Koblencs-Lutikov, Lativa v RSFSR 1 9SS) 8 . . . lZ:Jxd4 9 ef lZ:l xfS 1 0 ..id3 with attacking chances in return for the pawn. de 6 6 dS is a serious alternative which awaits testing in practice but 6 lZ:Jf3?, erroneously noted as good for White by Belyavsky and Mikhalchishin, is in fact a dreadful mistake on account of 6 . . . lZ:Je4! 6 lZ:la6 6 . . . -.as? 7 ..t xf6 .i.xf6 8 lZ:JdS puts Black in trouble. 7 .i.h6 Proceeding with one of the cen tral ideas of this system - the exchange of Black's potentially powerful KB. Another approach would be to develop and keep Black out of the key central squares : 7 lZ:Jh3 lZ:JcS 8 f3 0-0 9 e3 d6 10 .i.e2, with a rich position which Belyavsky and Mikhalch ishin contentiously assess as slightly in White's favour. 7 .i.xh6 Black dismisses 7 . . . 0-0 cor-

rectly reckoning that his king will be safer in the centre than on the kingside. lZ:Jxc5 8 'ihh6 lZ:Jh3 9 9 f3 -.as 10 0-0-0 bS 1 1 cb a6 1 2 e4 ( Belyavsky and Mikhalchishin) would produce mutually difficult complications. -.as 9 10 0-0-0 ( 36) 36 8

b5! 10 In such positions material is of little consequence in the race to get to the king first. 11 lZ:Jg5? Too optimistic; consolidation by 1 1 cb a6 1 2 b6! -.xb6 1 3 f3 : b8 1 4 -.d2 0-0 1 S e3 was in order. 11 .i.b7! Bringing dS under control and thus avoiding variations such as 1 1 . . . b4? 1 2 -.g7 : f8 1 3 lZ:JdS lZ:JxdS 14 lZ:Jxh7 lZ:Je6 l S -. xg6 + and wins. 12 -.g7

Leningrad• Miscellaneous Systems

There is no time to take the pawn, e.g. 1 2 cb lt'Jce4 13 lt'Jcxe4 _txe4 14 lt'Jxe4 lt'Jxe4 + Belyavsky a n d M ikhalchishin. : rs 12 13 lt'J xh7 Consistent but quite hopeless alth ough the white position was beyond salvation anyway. lt'Jxh7 13 b4 14 -.xh7 15 lt'Jd5 Trying to gain time by the mate threat to organize his defences; 1 5 'i' xg6 + �d8 1 6 lt'Jd5 -.xa2 wins easily for Black. ..txd5 15 :l. xd5 d6 16 b3! 17 �b1 A decisive thrust j ust as White had seemed to have wriggled out. : b8 18 ab With the entry of the rook the attack becomes irresistible. 19 -. xg6 + �d7 -.el + 20 : x£5 lt'Jxb3 21 �a2 0-1 An impressive miniature against a former World Champion.

45

too limited to have hammered out any definitive paths. (a) 3 g3 g6 4 ..tg2 ..ig7 5 tt'lc3 0-0 (naturally, this opening sequence is flexible) 6 e3 d6 7 d5 (7 lt'Jge2 e5 equalizes immediately) 7 . . . e5 (of course, other methods familiar from the main lines are also applicable here) 8 de c6 9 lt'Jge2 ..txe6 1 0 b3 -.c7 I I ..i.b2 a5 12 -.c2 lt'Ja6 and Black has an easy game; Vidmar jr.- Fuderer, Yugoslav Ch. 1 95 1 . (b) 3 lt'Jf3 g6 4 e 3 J.. g7 5 ..i.e2 d6 6 0-0 lt'Je4!? (utilizing White's Jack of control of e4 to uncover the K B and support the vital . . . e5 advance that way) 7 -.c2 0-0 8 lt'Jbd2 lt'Jxd2 9 ..txd2 e5 I 0 de de again with complete equality; Trifunovic-Grob, Zurich 1 954. 3 tt'lc3 g6 ( 3 7 ) 37 w

Other variations with c4 (I d4 f5 2 c4 lt'l f6 ) No ne of these lines has any theor etical bite and are therefore rarely seen. Consequently, the examples presented here should be taken as just that since experience is as yet

4 tt'lf3 There have also been experim ents with Jess natural continu ations : (a) 4 f3 (employed once by

46


Korchnoi, so not to be taken lightly) 4 . . . ..tg7 5 e4 d6 (5 . . . fe immediately looks preferable) 6 ..td3 (6 e5!? requires a better response than 6 . . . de 7 de "it'xd 1 + 8 �xd 1 lt:lh5 9 f4 ..te6 I 0 lt:lf3 ± Korchnoi-Lombardy, Lone Pine 1 979) 6 . . . fe 7 fe?! (7 lt:lxe4 appears necessary, but what comment is that on 4 f3?) 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 lt:lf3 ..tg4 9 ..te3 0-0 10 0-0 e5 t I d5 lt:ld4 with a beautifully flowing pos itional advantage; Boros-Kus minich, USSR t 957. (b) 4 e3 ..tg7 5 ..te2 0-0 6 h4?! d6 7 h5 gh (an interesting decision, certainly not forced) 8 ..txh5 e5 9 ..te2 (thus far Hodos-Savon, USSR Ch. 1 962) 9 . . . c5! with chances and problems for both sides. (c) 4 "it'c2 ..tg7 5 e4 fe 6 lt:lxe4 0-0 shows clearly that brute imple mentation of the supposedly advantageous e4 advance can eas ily backfire and merely put White's development out of kilter. 4 ..tg7 Now there are a number of contrasting plans available : (a) 5 "it'c2 0-0 6 e4 fe 7 lt:lxe4 lt:lxe4 8 "it'xe4 d6 9 ..te2 lt:lc6 t O 0-0 ..tf5 I I "it'h4 e 5 t 2 ..tg5 "it'd7 with full equality; Nemet- Matulo vic, Yugoslav Ch. t 972. (b) 5 e3 0-0 6 b4!? (routine development cannot bring White any advantage, e.g. 6 ..te2 d6 7

0-0 and now Black may choose according to taste between 7 . . . c6 8 "it'c2 lt:la6 9 l:l d l "it'e8 tO b3 e5 = Larsen, or 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 9 lt:ld4 c5 = ; similarly, 6 ..td3 d6 7 0-0 lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 also gives balanced play) 6 . . . b6 7 "it'b3 c5 8 a3 e6 9 ..te2 "it'e7 10 0-0 d6 I I ..tb2 lLl bd7 1 2 l:l ad l lt:le8 and Black's flexible pawn structure and lack of weak points offset White's slight spatial edge in a mutually difficult position; Quint eras-Sax, Wijk aan Zee t 973. (c) 5 ..tf4 d6 6 h4 (6 "it'b3 c6 or 6 . . . e6 should both be perfectly adequate for Black) 6 . . . lt:lh5 (the most consequent riposte to White's provocative strategy) 7 e3 lt:ld7 (after the natural 7 . . . 0-0 White can bring tactical succour to his set-up by 8 c5!) 8 d5 lt:lxf4 9 ef e5 1 0 de lt:lc5 and this analysis by Vukovic leaves Black with excellent prospects.

The tacit prophylaxis of 2 . . . lLlf6 There is a simple reason for prefer ring 2 . . . lt:lf6 to 2 . . . g6 : to a vert the blitzkrieg attacks launched by 3 h4. These are dangerous for Black in all forms : I d4 f5 2 c4 g6 3 h4, or 2 lLlf3 g6 3 h4, or even 2 g3 g6 3 h4. Theory considers that White has at least sufficient com pensation for the exchange offer which generally occurs on h5 (after a . . . lt:lf6, h5 lt:lxh5, l:l xh5 gh


sequence) and in practice the defensive problems are extremely taxi ng. Here is one warning example : 1 d4 f5 2 c4 g6 3 h4 ti:lf6 4 h5 ti:lxh5 5 Jl xh5 gh 6 e4 d6 (6 . . . i.g7 7 ..W xh5 + �f8 8 1 hf5 + �g8 9 8f3 1t'f8 1 0 1t'h5 1t'f7 I I 'it' h4 i.f6 1 2 i.g5 ± Polovdin) 7 'it'xh5 + ;t>d7 8 1t' xf5 + e6 9 1t'h5 c6 (9 . . . jt"f6 1 0 ti:lf3 ± ) 1 0 ti:lc3 'it'e8 1 1 ..W h2! ± �c7 1 2 i.f4 ti:ld7 1 3 ti:lf3 b6 1 4 0-0-0 �b7 ( 1 4 . . . i.b7 1 5

47

�bl ! enables the rook to go to c I should i t be required, and points up the long-term passivity of Black's position and his inability to undertake anything positive) 1 5 i.xd6 ti:lf6 16 i.xf8 1t'xf8 17 ti:le5 i.d7 18 d5 cd 19 ed ed 20 ti:lxd7 ti:l xd7 2 1 ti:lb5 ti:lc5 22 1t'c7 + �a6 23 cd �a5 24 b4 + �xb4 25 ..W g3! ti:l a4 26 Jl d 4 + �a5 27 ..W b3 Jl c8 + 28 �d 1 1 -0 Polovdin-Kovalev, USSR 1 982.

5

Hort--Antoshin Variation

The Hort-Antoshin variation is a close relative of the Leningrad and transposition during the first few moves frequently occurs. Here, though, everything is subordi nated to forcing through the . . . e5 advance, natural development included, and consequently Black's strategy demands sophi sticated positional insight and a well-developed sense of danger in order not to backfire. We shall examine three games covering the main replies at White's disposal: first, where White avoids the kingside fianchetto, and then in turn the fianchetto both with and without c2-c4.

38 w

lenged, Black's intention is to fol low up with . . . •c7 thus support ing the . . . e7-e5 advance. •c2 5 Proposing to cross Black's plans by advancing his own e pawn first. Other possibilities: (a) 5 e3 •c7 6 d5 (White cannot afford to be casual: 6 ..td3 e5 7 e4 f4 concedes Black a significant spatial advantage on the kingside Etruk-Antoshin, USSR 1 962) 6 . . . e5 7 de ..txe6 8 lt:ld4 ..td7 9 ..td3 g6 I 0 b3 lt:la6 I I ..t b2 ..tg7 1 2 0-0 0-0 with a balanced position; Khouk-Hort, Leipzig 01. 1 960. (b) 5 ..tg5 lt:l bd7 6 e3 is best

Antoshin-Hort

Moscow 1 960 I 2 3 4

d4 c4 lt:lc3 lt:lf3

rs lt:lf6 d6 c6 ( 38 )

This last is the characteristic move of the variation; unchal48

Hort-A ntoshin Variation

met by 6 . . . g6 and not 6 . . . e5?! wh ich facilitates an opening up of the position before Black is able to cope, e.g. 7 de de 8 W' c2 e4 9 .':J d4 li:le5 1 0 0-0-0 W'e7 1 1 f3 ef 1 2 gf "W f7 1 3 f4! ± instructive play; K otov-A. Zaitsev, Sochi 1 967. (c) 5 g3 will transpose to Gavri k o v - Psakhis below. li:la6 5 a3 6 White would not be able to operate comfortably with threats o f . . . li:l b4 constantly in the air. g6 6 Simultaneously promoting the development of both bishops. fe 7 e4 li:lxe4 8 li:lxe4 9 W' xe4 .US 10 W' h4 Hoping to exploit Black's weak ened kingside. In Robatsch-Anto shin, Sochi 1 974, White kept his q ueen centralized and a mutually difficult struggle developed after 1 0 'llt' e 3 ..tg7 1 1 ..td2 0-0 1 2 ..tc3 CiJc7 1 3 ..te2 b5 14 b3 aS 1 5 a4 b4 1 6 ..tb2 W'd7. ..tg7 10 II ..te2 ( 39) ..tf6 An ambitious move which con si derably increases the tension. F ourteen years later Antoshin pre fer red to pursue equality through s irn plification : 1 1 . . . e5!? 1 2 'tit xd8 + l:txd8 1 3 ..te3 ed 1 4 .h d 4 ..t f7 1 5 ..txg7 ..txg7 1 6

49

_19 B

li:ld4 tt:lc5 1 7 0-0 d5 18 b4 tt:\e6 = Smyslov-Antoshin, Sochi 1 974. c5 12 W'h6 W'a5 + 13 ..tg5 14 �n ..txg5 cd 15 li:lxg5 Thus Black, temporarily at least, has an extra pawn but the position remains totally unclear and capable of going either way. It seems likely that White's following queen manoeuvre is not the best: 1 6 W'g7 W'e5 17 W' f7 + ..td7 1 8 li:lf3 W' f4! ( 1 8 . . . W'e4 1 9 .:t d 1 .:t af8 20 W'g7 gives Black problems) 1 9 W' d 5 (since now 1 9 .:t d 1 would fail against 1 9 . . . d3!) 1 9 . . . d3! 20 ..txd3 (not 20 W'xb7 + ? tt:lc7 2 1 ..t d 1 .:1. hb8 2 2 ..ta4 + �d8 2 3 W'c6 .:1. b 6 snaring the queen) 20 . . . ..txd3 + 2 1 W' xd 3 .:t hf8 22 .:t e l .:l. ac8 (Black i s clearly o n top) 23 b3 li:lc5 24 W'e3 e5 25 li:ld2 li:ld3 26 W' xf4 .:t xf4 27 .:t e2 .:l. af8 28 f3 li:lc1 29 .:t e4? (collapses immedi ately; 29 .:t e3 would have hung on longer) 29 . . . li:lxb3! 0- 1 .

50


Gavrikov-Psakhis

USSR Ch. 1 985 1 2 3 4

d4 g3 .i.g2 c4

f5 tt:lf6 d6

The usual range ofless orthodox methods is available : (a) 4 tt:lh3 c6 5 c4 Wc7 (simply 5 . . . e5 is also playable) 6 tt:lc3 e5 7 0-0 .i.e7 and as White does not have the c4-c5 possibility as in the analogous main line Black is able to complete his kingside development satisfactorily. (b) 4 tt:lc3 lLl bd7 5 tt:lh3 (5 e4 fe 6 tt:lxe4 tt:lxe4 7 ..be4 tt:lf6 8 .i.g2 c6 and Black has no worries) 5 . . . e5 6 0-0 ed 7 W xd4 J... e 7 8 b3 c6 9 J... b 2 d5 10 e3 0-0 with approximately equal chances in a rich posJtton; R. Byrne Gheorghiu, Varna 01. 1 962. (c) 4 d5 e5!? 5 de tt:lc6 6 tt:lh3 J... x e6 7 tt:lg5 J... g8 8 0-0 and in this entirely satisfactory position for Black several continuations deserve trying, e.g. 8 . . . Wd7 or 8 . . . d5, but 8 . . . h6? is mistaken since 9 lL\0 Wd7 10 tt:ld4 har monizes the white forces and leaves Black at some disadvan tage; Kottnauer-- Davie, Dundee 1 967. 4 c6 4 . . . e5 is not unthinkable but as yet there are no practical

examples. 5 tt:lf3 Somewhat more precise than developing the queen's knight first, since 5 tt:lc3 gives Black the additional possibility of playing 5 . . . e5!? immediately, when White's chances of gaining an advantage are minimal, e.g. 6 de (or 6 e4 Wc7 7 ef J... xf5 8 lL\0 .i.e7 and Black is quite OK, M ikenas-Cherepkov, TU Ch. USSR 1 97 1 ) 6 . . . de 7 W xd8 + �xd8 8 lL\0 e4 9 tt:lg5 �e8 10 f3 h6 I I tt:lh3 ef 1 2 .i.xf3 tt:l bd7 1 3 tt:lf4 tt:lc5 1 4 b3 �17 = Bannik-Antoshin, USSR Ch. 1 957. Wc7 ( 40 ) 5 40 w

6 tt:lc3 Alternatively : (a) 6 0-0 e5 7 de de 8 Wc2 Cien (Romanishin-Antoshin, fuegos 1 977) 8 . . . e4! is given as unclear by Botvinnik. (b) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 J... b2 tt:lbd7 9 Wc2 g6 1 0 tt:lbd2 .i. h6!? 1 1 Wc3 e4 with a mutually difficult


position; Krause-Sydor, Dort m und 1 976. (c) 6 d5!? is a surprising gambit which gains time and opens up the position at the cost of an important central pawn. Practice indicates it deserves respect: 6 . . . cd 7 cd tt:lxd5 8 0-0 tt:lf6 9 tt:lc3 !iJc6 (one suspects Black could profitably seek an improvement here) 10 ..tg5 e6 I I .C. c l (better than 1 1 ..txf6 gf 1 2 tt:lb5 "fle7 1 3 n e t d 5 1 4 tt:lfd4 a 6 1 5 tt:lxc6 be 1 6 lLld4 c5 1 7 tt:lxf5 "fld7! when the black infantry dominate the centre; Spassov-Jankov, Primor sko 1 972) 1 1 . . . i..e 7 1 2 tt:lb5 "fld7 1 3 ..txf6 gf 14 tt:lfd4 d5 15 tt:lxe6! and Black is lost; Baranov-A. Zaitsev, !-final TU Ch. USSR 1 965. e5 6 0-0 7 Other continuations promise lit tle : (a) 7 c5?! clarifies the centre to Black's advantage, e.g. 7 . . . e4 8 cd ..txd6 9 tt:lg5 (or 9 lLld2 ..te6 10 e3 h5 I I tt:le2 h4 1 2 "flc2 tt:la6 13 a3 "flf7 with Black clearly in con trol; Opocensky-Antoshin, Lei pzig 1 965) 9 . . . h6 10 lLl h3 tt:la6 I I a3 "flf7 12 f3 ef 1 3 i.. xf3 ..te6 1 4 ..tf4 .C. d8 1 5 0-0 tt:lc5! and again Black is clearly on top; Gol ovko-Antoshin, USSR 1 970. ( b) 7 e4 prematurely picks a t a ctical fight where Black's

51

resources are more than adequate : 7 . . . fe 8 tt:lg5 ..tg4 9 "Wi b3 ed 1 0 tt:lcxe4 tt:lbd7 1 1 h3 lLl xe4 1 2 i.. xe4 13 "flc2 "fle7! 14 tt:lc5! 0-0 ..td7 1 5 ..txh7 0-0-0 and Black soon broke through on the kingside; Hofmann-Nevole, corr. 1 969/70. (c) 7 de permits Black's KB to take an active part in the proceed ings and thereby enhance his pro spects of equalizing, e.g. 7 . . . de 8 e4 (better than 8 0-0 ..t b4! 9 "flc2 0-0 10 a3 ..te7 I I e4 f4!? 1 2 gf ef 1 3 e5 tt:lg4 with a typical sharp Dutch position where White's king is likely to be in the greater danger; l gnatiev-Chechelnitsky, Moscow 1 964) 8 . . . i.. b4! 9 ef (9 "Wi b3 tt:la6 10 0-0 fe I I tt:lg5 ..txc3 1 2 "WI xc3 ..tf5 is fine for Black; Karasev-Cherepkov, Leningrad Ch. 1 974) 9 . . . ..txf5 10 "flb3 lLla6 I I 0-0 and now instead of I I . . 0-0-0?! which was shown to be good for White in Farago- Bokor, Hungarian Ch. 1 967, after 1 2 ..te3 ..tc5 1 3 ..t xc5 lLl xc5 14 "fla3 tt:la6 1 5 tt:l b5!, Black should prefer short castling, I I . . . 0-0, when the activ ity of his pieces goes a long way to offsetting the isolated pawn. 7 e4! Experience has shown that this is Black's best try. It is instructive to note the drawbacks of the alter natives : (a) 7 . . . ..te7 8 c5! (White could .

52


also get the better of it with 8 de de 9 e4 obtaining an improved version of note c above) 8 . . . e4 9 cd .txd6 1 0 lt:leS! .te6 ( 1 0 . . . .txeS 1 1 de ..- xeS 1 2 .tf4 gives White a strong initiative in return for the pawn) 1 1 f3 .txeS 1 2 de ..- xeS 1 3 fe fe 14 .tf4 ..-cs + 1 S � h 1 lt:lbd7 1 6 : c 1 ..-hs 1 7 ..-d6 and Black is in dire straits; Udovcic- Lombardy, Zagreb 1 969. (b) 7 . . . .te6 8 dS! .td7 9 e4 fe l O lt:lgS .te7 1 1 lt:lgxe4 lt:la6 ( 1 1 . . . 0-0? 1 2 cS! is dreadful for Black; Kozma-Marsalek, Czecho slovakia 1 962) 1 2 .te3 and with a spatial advantage, more active pieces, and firm control of the central blockading square, e4, White's positional superiority is indisputable. Let us note that it is only here that we join our game properly as it actually arose via the move order 1 lt:lf3 fS 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 d6 4 d4 c6 S 0-0 ..-c7 6 c4 eS 7 lt:lc3 e4. Such transpositions are a common occurrence. 8 lt:lg5 This has supplanted 8 lt:le I in contemporary praxis although the inadequacies of the retreat have yet to be shown over the board. The following is known : 8 lt:le l .te7 9 f3 ef (attempting to hold the e4 point gets Black into trouble after 9 . . . dS 10 cd cd 1 1 .tf4) 1 0

ef (Korchnoi preferred t o capture with the bishop: 1 0 .txf3 0-0 1 1 lt:lg2 lt:l bd7 1 2 .tf4 : f7 1 3 b4 lt:lf8 14 bS lt:lg6 1 S be be but could claim no advantage in a complicated Korchnoi-Antoshin, pos1t10n; Moscow 1 9 6 1 ; Antoshin analysed l 3 cS lt:lf8 1 4 dS - Black must always be alert to this sudden pawn rush - 14 . . . lt:lg6 1 S cd .txd6 1 6 .txp6 ..- xd6 1 7 de ..-cs + 1 8 � h 1 1 be = as the weak nesses cancel out) 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 lt:ld3 .te6?! (simply 1 1 . . . : e8 intending . . . lt:lbd7-f8 looks a better try) 1 2 b3 lt:l a6 1 3 : e 1 .tf7 14 .th3 g6 1S lt:lf4 ..-d7 16 dS lt:lc7 17 .t b2 and White's position is a picture of positional superior ity thanks to his spatial advantage, and pressure on the a 1 -h8 diag onal and down the e-file, particu larly of course e6; Udovcic-Anto shin, Yugoslavia v USSR 1 964. 8 h6 This preludes an aggressive solution to Black's problems. It may be that a purely defensive approach will suffice to hold the balance : 8 . . . .te7 9 f3 ef 10 ef (Botvinnik has suggested 10 lt:lxf3; it is interesting to mull this over with the note on 8 lt:le1 in mind) 10 . . . o�o 1 1 : e 1 lt:la6 1 2 a3 : e8 1 3 b4 h6 1 4 lt:lh3 .td7 I S ..-d3 .tf8 with equality according to Botvinnik, although Black would be wise to maintain his vigilance;


Qanov-Knezevic, Skopje 1 967. l!Jh3 9 jkf7 This collected an exclamation ma rk from Gulko and although it co uld well be Black's best the alternative may also be playable: 9 . . . i.e6 10 d5 i.f7 1 1 f3 cd ( White obtained a clear advantage in Yusupov-Yermolinsky, Tallinn 1977, after the unsuccessful pawn offe r 1 1 . . . l!J bd7 1 2 fe fe 1 3 l!Jxe4 cd 1 4 cd l!J xe4 1 5 i.xe4 1Wc5 + 1 6 �h l ) 1 2 cd 1Wc5 + 1 3 �h 1 ef 1 4 ef l!Jxd5 1 5 : e 1 + i.e7 1 6 tL:la4!? 1Wc7 1 7 l!Jf4 l!J xf4 1 8 i.xf4 0-0 1 9 : xe7 1Wxe7 20 i.xd6 1Wd8 2 1 i.xf8 1W xf8 and Black holds the balance; Razuvayev- Mama tov, Frunze 1 979. g5!? 10 d5 ( 4 1 ) 41 B

In the game where 9 . . . 1Wf7 was i n troduced Black continued with a les s radical strategy : lO . . . cd 1 1 cd li:l a6 (also ! from Gulko) 1 2 f3 ef 1 3 i. xf3 ( ;t Gulko) g5! 1 4 i.g2 'i' h 5 15 l!Jf2 i.e7 16 i.e3 0-0 1 7 .t d 4 (Gulko eschews the win of

53

a pawn by 1 7 l!Jb5 i.d7 1 8 l!J xa7 : ae8 1 9 i.d4 even though he evaluates it as ;t ) 1 7 . . . i.d7 1 8 e4 11t'xd 1 1 9 : axd 1 l!J b4! 20 :d2 fe 2 1 l!Jfxe4 l!Jxe4 22 i. xe4 : xfl + 23 �xfl : f8 + 24 �g2 b6 and the ending should be tenable; Gulko-Antoshin, Moscow Ch. 1 98 1 . One important aspect of the text move is that it prevents White capturing on f3 with a piece because of the . . . g4 fork. ef 11 f3 12 ef c5 Black's play is consistently bold; Black locks the centre in prep aration for the k;ng taking up residence there. On rerlection, this is not so surprising since a return to 'normal' chess by 1 2 . . . i.e? 1 3 : e 1 0-0 1 4 b3 would leave White all the trump cards of space, development and coordination as well as making Black's advanced kingside pawns look as much a self-inflicted weakness as a van guard of aggression. �d8 13 : et + 14 b4!? Correctly seeking to open up the position since then the lack of communication between the black rooks could prove serious. 14 l!Ja6! The right response; on 1 4 . . . cb there might follow 1 5 ltJ b5 l!Ja6 (not 1 5 . . . l!J bd7? 1 6 i. xg5!) 1 6

54


.i.b2 lbc5 1 7 'W'd4 .i.e7 1 8 .:. xe7! and it all falls apart. lb xc5 15 be lLl f2 16 ..td7 .:t b1 .i.g7 17 Black has marshalled his defences carefully and is optimally poised to counter any offensive and further reduce White's advan tage. In the game White failed to find a really testing plan and a draw was shortly agreed : 1 8 lbd3 b6 19 lbb5 ( 1 9 lbxc5 de! 20 a4 lbe8 21 lbb5 ..txb5 22 ab lbd6 is unclear, White's domination of the e-file being offset by Black's mag nificent knight) 19 . . . ..txb5 20 .:t xb5 lLlfd7 2 1 f4 g4 22 ..te3 lLlxd3 23 'W' xd3 .:t e8 24 .:t bb 1 .:t c8 t-t . Probably, White was nagged by a feeling that he could have done better and was happy to call a halt. After, say, 25 a4 lbc5 26 'W'a3 'W'c7 White would still have no clear method of break ing through. Gheorghiu-Tal

Moscow 1 971 1 d4 r5 2 gJ lL!f6 3 ..tg2 d6 4 lL!f3 c6 5 0-0 'W'c7 ( 42 ) 6 lbbd2 White aims to threaten to advance his e-pawn as quickly as possible and thus for the time being at least postpones c4. Other systems dispensing with c4 have also been played :

42 w

j

(a) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 ..t b2 e4 (8 . . . lb bd 7 invites the dangerou� pawn offer 9 e4!? lbxe4 lO lbbdZ lbxd2 1 1 'W' xd2 e4 1 2 lb h4 lLlf6 1 3 .:t ad 1 threatening 1 4 'W' g5 wit powerful pressure - Fuchs) 9 lbd4 ..te7 10 lbd2 a6! (threatening . . c5) 1 1 e3 0-0 1 2 f3 c5 1 3 lbe2 ef 14 .i.xf3 lbc6 and Black has equalized at least; Gligoric-Kava lek, The Hague 1 966. If White is attracted by the idea of the queen's fianchetto then it is probably best effected on move five in order t o1 hinder . . . e5. The attempt by Black to throw a spanner in the works by 5 b3 'W'a5 + does not quite come off, e.g. 6 lLl bd2 e5 7 de de 8 0-0 e4 9 lbc4 'W'd5 10 lbd4 g6 1 1 ..tb2 .i.e7 1 2 f4 0-0 1 3 lbe3 'W'f7 1 4 c4 ;t Vukic- Knezevic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 967. (b) 6 lL!C3 !? is another prom1smg method of initiating direct action in the centre. A major incon venience for Black is that trans positions to a Stonewall leave the

Hort-AIItoshin Variation

queen poorly placed and vulner a ble to attack. Normal reactions can backfire badly: 6 . . . e5 7 de d e 8 e4 ..i b4 (by analogy to note c to White's seventh but here Whi te ' s development is better and he ca n strike faster in the centre; 8 . . . fe 9 tt:lg5 ..ig4 is relatively best) 9 ef 0-0 (or 9 . . . ..i xf5 1 0 tt:lxe5! ..t xc3 1 1 be 'iWxe5 12 l:te I tt:le4 1 3 .he4 ..ixe4 1 4 'iWd4! ± ) 1 0 tt:lh4 !Lla6 1 1 g4 'ilt"e7 12 g5 ..ixc3 1 3 be !Lle8 (thus far Krogius-Otstavo kov, USSR 1 965) 14 'ilt"g4! and Black has problems, e.g. 14 . . . g6 1 5 f6! ..txg4 16 fe l:t f7 1 7 ..ia3 or 14 . . . tt:ld6 15 ..ta3 c5 16 ..id5 + � h 8 1 7 tt:lg6 + ! etc. Thus it seems that Black does best to opt for 6 . . . g6 with Leningrad-type lines in mind. 6 g6 The hidden sting concealed in the apparently innocuous devel opment of the QN becomes clear if Black innocently proceeds with his plan : 6 . . . e5? 7 de de 8 lll c4! and there is no satisfactory reply, e.g. 8 . . e4 9 ..if4 or 8 . . . tt:lbd7 9 !Ufxe5! tt:lxe5 10 ..tf4 ± . d5 7 l:t e l As usual, the Stonewall for mation proves the best way of keeping the lid on things. 8 c4 8 !Ue5 immediately should be ans wered as in the game and not by 8 lll b d7?! 9 lll df3 ..ig7 1 0 .

0 0 0

55

c4 ± since 10 . . . tt:lxe5? 1 1 de tt:lg4 1 2 cd cd 1 3 'iWxd5 loses a pawn for nothing, Bilek-A. Zaitsev, Debrecen t 970, and Taimanov's recommendation of 10 . . . de is also unappetizing. ..ig7 8 0-0 tt:le5 9 tt:le4 llld f3 10 II ..if4 ( 43) 43 B

�

Clearly, thi s a Stonewall which has gone very wrong for Black. White has an iron grip on e5 and has almost completed his development whereas Black's que enside has yet to wake from its slumbers. On top of that, the unhappily placed black queen must move again in view of the threatened discovered attack. That Black manages not to lose this position is a tribute to the resilience of the Stonewall for mation -- but it helps also to be a former world champion. The game concluded as follows :

56


l l . . . "it" b6 1 2 "it"c2 a5 (necessary restraint of the avalanche which would occur after, say, 1 2 . . . ..te6 1 3 c5 "it"d8 14 b4) 1 3 c5 "it"d8 1 4 h 4 ttld7 1 5 b 3 l"Lldf6 1 6 a 3 ..td7 1 7 "it"cl (lucky for Black that White did not think of this earlier) 1 7 . . . ttlg4 (Black's first active move of the game . . .) 18 % Hl ( . . . and it is

enough to cow White into curbmg his ambitions; 1 8 ttlxg4 fg 19 ttle5 would still leave White all the chances) 1 8 . . . ttlef6! -!--! . For the first time Black has the semblance of an acceptable position and one can well understand both parties being pleased to terminate the proceedings.

6

Staunton Gambit: 2 e4

The Staunton Gambit clearly con stitutes one of the most radical and critical challenges to the fun damental soundness of the Dutch Defence. White posits that the gambitting of his important cen tral pawn will best enable him to highlight the negative aspects of Black's first move - that it does not contribute to development, and exposes the king - by getting an advantage in development and mounting a k ingside attack. H ap pily, the Dutch passes this crucial test with flying colours, and the Staunton Gambit is consequently rarely encountered in contempor ary praxis. rs t d4 fe ( 44) 2 e4 As Steinitz wisely observed, the o nly way to refute a gambit is to acce pt it, and that is especially tr ue where an important central pawn is on offer. lL!c3 3 Obviously W hite's most natural

continuation. The artificial alter natives can easily bring White into difficulties : (a) 3 lL!d2 lL!f6 4 g4 d5! 5 g5 lL!fd7 6 f3 e5! 7 fe .te7! (stronger than 7 . . . "W' xg5 8 lL!gf3 "W' h 5 as played in Bisguier-Bronstein, Goteborg 1 955, when 9 ..tg2! would have brought White some play) and White is paying the penalty for flouting the elementary principles of opening play, e.g. 8 h4 0-0 9 lL!gf3 ed 1 0 ed lL! b6 + . (b) 3 f3 e5! 4 de lL!c6 (4 . . . d5!? certainly deserves attention) 5 "W'd5 "W'e7 (Black could also con sider turning the tables with the 57

58


gambit 5 . . . ..tb4 + 6 c3 liJge7 7 -.. xe4 d5) 6 f4 d6 7 ed cd 8 ..t b5 ..td7 9 liJc3 liJf6 and Black's active position and strong e-pawn guar antee a promising middle game. liJf6 3 Now White must choose between the two major continu ations 4 f3 and 4 ..tg5, which we shall examine in detail in the following illustrative games. In addition, there is the unjustifiably wild 4 g4?! which is rarely risked nowadays: 4 . . . h6! and by main taining his knight on f6 Black assures himself of an advantage no matter how White continues : (a) 5 h4 d5 6 ..th3 liJc6 7 ..tf4 g5! 8 ..te5 (8 hg hg 9 ..txg5 courts disaster, riz. 9 . . . ..txg4 10 f3 l:t xh3! I I l:t xh3 ..txh3 1 2 liJxh3 -.. d 7 13 liJf2 0-0-0; Yermolinsky Safarov, Leningrad 1 977) 8 . . . ..te6 9 f3 -.. d 7 1 0 -.. d2 o-o-o + Byrne and Mednis. (b) 5 f3 d5 6 g5 (or 6 ..tg2 e5! 7 de liJxg4! + Kuzminikh, while 6 ..tf4 e6 7 -.. d 2 ..td6 8 0-0-0 ef 9 ..txd6 cd 10 liJxf3 0-0 leaves Black with an extra pawn and good prospects; Menchik-Sultan Khan, Cambridge 1 932) 6 . . . hg 7 ..txg5 ..tf5 8 ..tg2 (after 8 -.. e 2 liJc6 9 0-0-0 -.. d7 1 0 ..txf6?! ef I I fe de 1 2 liJxe4 0-0-0 + White has restored material parity at the cost of positional inferiority; Gasz tonyi -Szilagyi, Hungarian Ch.

1 953) 8 . . . e3! 9 liJge2 liJc6 1 0 a3 e6 I I ..txe3 ..td6 and once again we observe White regaining his pawn but remaining with a con siderable positional disadvantage; Tyroler-Araiza, 1 928. (c) 5 g5 hg 6 ..t xg5 d5 7 -.. d 2 (7 f3 transposes to note (b)) 7 . . . ..tf5 8 0-0-0 c6 9 f3 liJbd7 1 0 ..tg2 -.. as and White has nothing to show for his pawn deficit; Radu gin-Kubbel, Leningrad 1 934. (d) 5 f4?! d5 6 ..te2 (6 g5 hg 7 fg liJh5 8 ..te2 g6 =t ) 6 . . . g6! 7 ..te3 h5! 8 g5 liJg8 9 -.. d 2 e6 1 0 f5 (allowing Black t o blockade with his knight would be hopeless) 10 . . . ef I I liJh3 c6 1 2 liJf4 -.. d 6 and despite White's nice blockade, two healthy extra pawns should be good enough to win; Szabo Aiexander, Amsterdam 01. 1 954. (e) 5 d5?! e6 6 g5 (6 de d5 + ) 6 . . . hg 7 ..txg5 ..te7 8 ..txf6 ..txf6 9 liJge2 d6 I 0 ..tg2 c6! I I de d5 1 2 cb ..txb7 White's attempt to gain space in the centre has com pletely backfired leaving Black with a huge strategical advantage in the form of the bishop pair and central pawn mass; Benediktsson Kristjansson, Reykjavik 1 968. Gulko-M. Gurevich

USSR Ch. 1 985 1 d4 rs 2 e4 fe 3 liJc3 liJf6 4

f3 ( 45 )


The purest form of the gambit. Experience has shown that captur ing this pawn gives White at least sufficient compensation in devel opment and attacking chances, and therefore we shall concentrate on the most critical method of declining. 4 d5 By securing the advanced e pawn Black hopes to obtain a free and easy development while placing some constraints on White's. 5 fe White gains nothing from delay ing this capture, and indeed atte mpting to get by without it can easily lead him astray, e.g. 5 ..tg5 ..tf5 6 -.. d 2?! (6 fe de tra nsposing to the game is correct) 6 . . . tt:lc6 7 .i.b5 e6 8 fe de 9 d5? (a mistaken conception; 9 tt:lge2 was better although it is true that Blac k would be very comfortably placed after simply 9 . . . .i.e7) 9 ed 1 0 .i.xf6 -.. xf6 1 1 tt:lxd5 · · .

59

-.. x b2 12 tt:lxc7 + �f7 13 .i.c4 + �g6 and White is on the brink of Krause-Tartakower, defeat; Luxembourg 1 936. 5 de .i.g5 6 Serves to discourage various . . . e5 thrusts. After 6 .i.c4, for exam ple, Black has the pleasant choice between 6 . . . e5!? 7 de (7 tt:lge2? ed 8 tt:lxd4 .i.g4! is just bad for White, but 7 .i.g5 ed 8 tt:lxe4 -.. e 7 would produce obscure complica tions) 7 . . . -.. x d 1 + 8 tt:lxd 1 tt:lg4 with easy equality, and 6 . . . tt:lc6 7 tt:lge2 e5!? (or Black could equalize by 7 . . . .i.f5 8 0-0 -.. d 7) 8 .i.g5 (8 d5 tt:la5 ) 8 . . . ed! 9 tt:lxe4 .i.b4 + 10 c3 de 1 1 ttJ4xc3 -.. xd 1 + 1 2 .C. xd 1 tt:le4 and Black remains a pawn to the good with the endgame fast approaching (analysis by Kovacevic). .i.f5 ( 46) 6 =

46 w

7 tt:lge2 In order to solve the problem of the development of the king's

60


knight and pressurize the advanced e-pawn as quickly as possible. Whether it it is White's best continuation, however, remains to be established. The alternatives are as follows: (a) 7 "ife2?! lZlc6 (7 . . . -.xd4? 8 -. b5 + ) 8 .bf6 (8 0-0-0?? .tg4) 8 . . . ef 9 0-0-0 .td6 1 0 lZlxe4 0-0 1 1 lZlxd6?! (meets with a surprising rejoinder, but in any case Black has a very comfortable game) 1 1 . . . cd! 1 2 -.f2 -.as 1 3 .tc4 + �h8 1 4 lZle2 lZlb4 1 5 .tb3 .:t ac8 + Black's queenside attack is becoming very dang erous; Ed. Lasker-Alekhine, match, Paris 1 9 1 3. (b) 7 -.d2 ?! e6 8 h3 .td6 9 00-0 h6 1 0 .txf6 -.xf6 1 1 .tc4 lZlc6 1 2 lZlge2 0-0-0 1 3 : hfl lZla5 1 4 .t b5 -. g5 1 5 lZlf4 a6 + a useful example of how Black can proceed when White does nothing in par Arbakov-Gieizerov, ticular; Saratov 1 9 84. (c) 7 .tc4!? lZlbd7!? (7 . . . lZlc6 is generally featured as Black's best continuation with the main line running 8 lZlge2 -.d7 9 0-0 e6 10 -.el 0-0-0 I I .:t d l lZla5 1 2 .tb5 c6 13 .ta4 lZlc4 - Taimanov suggests 1 3 . . . .td6 14 d5 -.e7 with an unclear, roughly balanced position : a game Schultz-Wille, E. Germany 1 957, went 1 4 d5?! .tc5 + 1 5 � h i .te3 1 6 de -.c7 with wild complications, while

Minev has recommended 14 .t b3 with lZlg3 to follow, again with approximate equality in a mutu ally difficult position) 8 lZlge2 lZlb6 9 .tb3 -.d7 10 0-0 e6 1 1 -. e 1 00-0 1 2 .:t d 1 c6 1 3 lZlg3 .tb4 1 4 .txf6 g f 1 5 lZlgxe4 with chances for both sides in a sharp position; Danner--Strobel, Austria 1 969. 7 e6 .te7 8 lZlg3 Black also obtained an advan tage in the game Martinez-Byrne, Nice 01. 1 974, after 8 . . . .t b4 9 .tc4?! lZlc6 1 0 0-0 -. xd4 + 1 1 -. xd4 lZlxd4 1 2 .txf6 gf 1 3 lZlcxe4 .txe4 1 4 lZlxe4 f5 1 5 lZlg5 lZlxc2!, but White could improve at move nine with, say, 9 -.d2. h6! 9 -.d2 10 .te3 There is no joy for White in 1 0 .txf6 .txf6 1 1 lZlcxe4 -. xd4 1 2 lZlxf6 + -.xf6 1 3 0-0-0 0-0 + . 10 lZlbd7 11 .te2 Chernin and M. Gurevich analyse 1 1 lZlxf5 ef 1 2 .tc4 .td6! 1 3 .te6 g6 as clearly in Black's favour, 14 .t xh6 being well met by 14 . . . -.e7 with . . . 0-0-0 to follow. lZlb6 ll -.d7 12 0-0 Simply 1 2 . . . .tg6 would have avoided the sequence which fol lows and left Black clearly in control.


l: g8 13 �hS Understandably fearing the sac rifices which could follow 1 3 . . . 0-0 b ut unnecessarily so according to Chernin and M. Gurevich who a nalyse 14 �xg7?! � xg7 1 5 .txh6 + �h7 1 6 W'g5 ( 1 6 .ixf8 .:t xf8 + ) 1 6 . . . l: g8 1 7 W'h4 l:t g6 and there is no good continuation of the attack. .ixf6 14 �xf6 + IS .ihS + ! g6 16 .ie2 By forcing Black to weaken his kingside pawns White has set up the double threat of g2-g4 and �xe4. 16 W' g7! A clever tactical counter, utiliz ing the latent heavy piece power on the g-file. 17 .ixh6?! Gives Black an easy time of it. For better or worse, it was practically mandatory to brave the perils of 1 7 g4 0-0-0! 1 8 : ad l (not 1 8 gl'? gf + 1 9 �f2 .ih4 mate) 1 8 . . . h5! .ixd4 + 17 W' h8! 18 �ht 19 .if4 On 1 9 g4, Black could reply 1 9 . . . 0-0-0 20 gf e f and White would be hard pressed to cope with the th reat of . . . .ie5 and . . . g5. �0 19 eS ( 4 7 ) 20 �b5 With this, White's temporary

61

47 w

mttJattve grinds to a halt and Black slowly takes control of the whole board. 21 .ie3 a6 l: g7 22 �c3 23 : f2 : h7 W'e8 24 g3 W'c6 25 .ifl With his q ueen optimally re grouped Black is poised for the decisive assault. �d7! 26 W'e2 Naturally, Black denies his adversary the glimmer of hope which would follow from the dou ble capture on c3. Instead, the knight is sent over to claim control of g4. 27 �dl �f6 28 c3 .ig4! : xr6? 29 Abject capitulation; 29 W' e l .if3 + 3 0 �gl .ib6 3 1 .ixb6 W'xb6 32 �e3 g5 with . . . g4 to follow would doubtless end in the same result, but at least it would require more effort from Black to

62


secure it. .i.xe2 29 .i.f3 + : xc6 30 White's fate is sealed; the end came quickly : 3 1 �g 1 .i.xe3 + 3 2 lLl xe3 be 33 .i.xa6 + �b8 34 : n : d2 35 : f2 : xf2 36 �xf2 : xh2 + 0- 1 . Shchumitshev-Shaposnikov

7th USSR corr. Ch. 1 967-9 1 d4 f5 2 e4 fe 3 lLlc3 lLlf6 4 .i.g5 ( 48) 48 8

This is the classical continu ation used by Staunton himself. In essence, White hopes to recover the pawn whilst maintaining a central superiority rather than make a real gambit of it. 4 lLlc6 Inaugurating lively piece play in the centre of the board, making use of the fact that should the knight be chased to n (via e5) it will attack the bishop. An alternative defence which is becoming increasingly popular is

4 . . . e6 which we have covered in Chapter 8, page 78. Note, how ever, that Black is unable to hang on to the pawn as in the 4 n variation because of the following refutation : 4 . . . d5? 5 .i.xf6 ef 6 "ifh5 + g6 7 "if xd5 pocketing one pawn immediately with a second soon to follow. 5 d5 All the alternatives are very pleasant for Black : (a) 5 .i.xf6?! ef 6 d5 (6 .i.c4?! f5 7 lLlge2 lLla5 8 .i.b3 lLlxb3 9 ab .i.e7 is hopeless for White) 6 . . . lLle5 7 lLl xe4 f5 with a fine game for Black. (b) 5 lLl h3?! g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7 0-0 d5 8 .i.xf6 ef 9 .i.xd5 .i.xh3 10 gh f5 + Taimanov. (c) 5 .i.b5 a6 (5 . . . g6 comes into consideration) 6 .i.xc6 be 7 "ife2 e6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 9 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 0 tt:Jn 0-0 and now whether White opts for the aggressive 1 1 0-0-0 or the prudent 1 1 0-0, Black's bishops and central pawn mass provide satisfactory middlegame prospects. (d) 5 n e5! (given that it is too risky to accept the pawn, the text move is the most logical way of declining: Black stakes a claim in the centre and entrenches on the dark squares) 6 d5 (White achieves nothing by 6 de lLl xe5, e.g. 7 Wd4 d6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 or 7 fe d6 8 tt:Jf3 .i.g4) 6 . . . lLld4 7 lLl xe4 (the dark


squ are weakness would be more e vi dent after 7 fe j_e7 8 j.c4 d6 9 t2Jge2 tt:lg4!; Barda-Rossolimo, Hastings 1 949/50) 7 . . . j.e7 8 �xf6 j_xf6 9 Wd2 (or 9 c3 tt:lf5 t O Wd2 d6 1 1 j. b5 + j_d7 1 2 � xd7 + 'it' xd7 1 3 tt:lh3 0-0-0 Wexler-Adler, Mar del Plata 1 952) 9 . . . 0-0 10 0-0-0 d6 1 1 c3 t2Jf5 with balanced chances; Stockholm H orberg-Larsen, 1 966/67. 5 tt:le5 6 Wd4 Alternatives are not as good : (a) 6 f4?! tt:lf7 7 W d4 g6 8 tt:lxe4 �g7 is fine for Black. (b) 6 f3 tt:lf7 7 j_xf6 (relatively best; 7 j_e3 ef 8 tt:lxf3 g6 9 j_e2 � g7 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 tt:ld4 c6! as in van Seters-Rossolimo, Beverwijk 1950, and 7 j_f4 ef 8 tt:lxf3 c6 9 .tc4 cd 1 0 j_ xd5 e6 1 1 j_b3 .tb4 as in van Seters-Donner, Beverwijk 1 95 1 , both leave White with nothing to show for the pawn) 7 . . . ef 8 tt:lxe4 f5 9 tt:lg3 g6 gives Black an active and promising position. (c) 6 j_xf6 ef 7 tt:l xe4 f5 8 tt:lg3 g6 9 We2 We7 10 0-0-0 tt:lg4! hands B lack the initiative in short order; Alzate-Nilsson, Havana 01. 1 966. 6 tt:lf7 ( 49) 7 j_xf6 E xperience with the alternatives st ro ngly suggests that White is Well advised to cede the bishop

63

49 w

=

pair rather than lose time: (a) 7 h4 c6 8 0-0-0 (8 j_ xf6 gf 9 'it' xe4 cd 1 0 tt:lxd5 e6 1 1 0-0-0 j_g7 =t ) 8 . . . W b6! 9 j_xf6 gf 1 0 'it' xe4 W xf2 1 1 tt:l f3 j_h6 + 1 2 � b 1 'it'e3 1 3 'it'a4 W f4 1 4 W b3 a5 and in an interestingly unbalanced position Black's bishop pair, potentially powerful central pawns, and dark square play give him the better of it; Yudintsev M artinov, !-final USSR corr. Ch. 1 964/65. (b) 7 j_ h4 g5! (stemming from Simagin, the time and activity gained from this bold thrust far outweigh the weakening of the kingside) 8 j_g3 j_g7 9 0-0-0 c6! (again we see this important little move which not only challenges White's last central pawn but also lets the queen into play) 10 tt:lxe4 (White is left with a similarly bleak ending after 10 d6 W b6! 1 1 tt:lxe4 'it' xd4 1 2 .l:txd4 tt:lh5 1 3 ll d l tt:lxg3 14 hg ed 1 5 c4!? b5! 16 cb d5; Matsukevich-Cherepkov, Lenin-

64


grad 1 963) 10 . . . • b6! (exchanging queens is the correct strategy; Black thereby diminishes White's attacking prospects while enhanc ing his own positional advantages) I I �xf6 + ..txf6 1 2 • xb6 ab 1 3 �b1 d6 1 4 a 3 l:t a5 and Black has taken charge; Potter--Jezek, corr. 01. Final 1 959/60. ef 7 �xe4 8 If White does not capture the pawn immediately then Black holds it temporarily in order to return it for positional gains : 8 0-0-0?! f5! 9 f3 ..td6! 1 0 fe ( 1 0 • xg7?? J.e5) 1 0 . . . J.e5 1 1 •d3 f4 12 �f3 0-0 with a firm blockade on e5, + ; Kenez-Borisenko, corr. 1 958. f5! 8 The most forceful continuation and probably best. 9 �g3 Black would meet 9 �c3 in the same way. g6 9 M aking maximum use of the marvellously placed knight on f7. 10 0-0-0 The ultra-sharp 1 0 h4 ..th6 1 1 h5 looks more threatening than it actually is on account of 1 1 . . . •e7 + ! breaking the flow of White's attack (but not 1 1 . . . 0-0? 1 2 hg hg 1 3 d6!). A game Gudmunsson Donner, Amsterdam 1 950, saw White try I I d6 (after I 0 h4 ..th6)

but Black emerged on top after 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 ..tc4 J.g7 1 3 •d3 J.xb2 1 4 l:t b 1 •f6 15 � 1 e2 ..te5 1 6 de ..t xc7. 10 J.h6 + f4 11 Attempting to gain some dark square control; 1 1 � b 1 0-0 leaves Black with at least equal prospects. 11 0-0 12 �f3 ..tg7 13 .. d2 b5! 14 �d4 �d6 (50) 50 w

Variously evaluated as 'equal' or 'unclear', it nevertheless seems fairly evident that Black's pro spects are the more promising in this unusual and difficult position. The major handicap of White's setup is that he has no equivalent, either literally or figuratively, to the powerful black-squared bishop on g7 which gives energy and purpose to the black position. 15 c3 Obviously White dare not cap-

Staunron Gambit: 2 e4

t u re the pawn immediately ( 1 5 axb5? l0xb5 1 6 R.xb5 : b8 with . . . a6 and breakthrough on b2 to follow) so he primes the threat by blunting the bishop's action along the a l -h8 diagonal. IS 1:1 b8 16 tO b3?! aS! In trying to slow Black's attack White has inadvertently acceler ated it! The rook pawn thrust ina ugurates a forceful and instruc tive sequence which wrests a lasting initiative and positional dominance. : as 17 l0xa5 18 b4 1:1 xa5! ..tb7 (51 ) 19 ba

65

With the white monarch's pawn cover shattered beyond repair and the black KB rampaging unop posed down the long diagonal, White's queenside is ripe for the plucking and his fate practically sealed. Despite desperate defensive efforts, in the end White could find no answer to the concerted action of the black forces : 20 • b2 • as 2 1 • b4 ..txd5 22 R.xb5 l0 xb5! (22 . . . : b8 23 a4!) 23 •xb5 c6 24 •c5 : b8 25 : xd5 (25 c4 • b7 is crushing) 25 . . . cd! (not falling for 25 . . . 1:1 b5? 26 • xb5 cb 27 1:1 hd l with good chances of holding on) 26 1:1 d l d4! 27 tOe2 •e4 28 •c4 + �h8 29 •d3 • b7! 30 1:1 d2 de 3 1 l0xc3 'i/c7 32 1:1 c2 •xf4 + 33 � d l •xh2 3 4 • e 3 d 5 35 'i/12 d4 36 lObS d3 37 l::t c7 • xc7! 38 l0xc7 1:1 b l + 39 �d2 1:1 b2 + 40 �e3 .td4 + 41 �xd4 1:1 xf2 42 �xd3 : xa2 43 a6 f4 44 �e4 g5 45 �f3 �g7 46 �e4 �g6 0- l .

The Queen Bishop Attack : 2 .tg5

7

The bishop sortie aims t o disrupt the normal development of Black's kingside : 2 . . . e6 is prevented, and 2 . . . lLlf6 permits 3 ..txf6, down grading the black pawn structure in a relatively closed position where the two bishops at best offer problematic compensation. Consequently, the two recom mended variations we shall examine avoid the structure damaging exchange by postpon ing the development of the knigh t : t h e restrained 2 . . . g 6 and the ambitious whiplash 2 . . . h6 3 ..th4 g5.

52 w

. . . lLlf6, ..txf6 exchange, whilst also observing the eternally important e5 square directly as well as x-raying the long diagonal in general and the weakened b2 spot in particular. Note that there is no inconsist ency here in recommending 2 . . . g6 while counselling its avoidance in favour of 2 . . . lLlf6 in the Lenin grad (see p. 46) since the bishop's presence on g5 gives Black the important additional resource of being able to answer an h-pawn thrust of h4-h5 with . . . h6, ..i

Kouatly- VI. Kovacevic

Thessaloniki 0/. 1 984 1 d4 rs 2 ..tgs 2

g6 (52)

Fianchettoing the bishop enables Black to capture on f6 with a piece in the event of a future 66

The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5

retreats g5, thus keeping the king side sealed. h4 3 I ncreasing dark square control and introducing a possible rook pawn rupture form an important part of White's strategic pro gramme despite the extra defens ive counters deriving from the exposed bishop. There are valid alternative treatments : (a) 3 ll:lc3 �g7 (3 . . . d5 trans poses to Chapter 8) 4 e4 (delaying this advance brings nothing, e.g. 4 lLif3 lLif6 5 �xf6 �xf6 6 e4 fe 7 lLi xe4 d5! ) 4 . . . fe 5 lLixe4 d5! 6 ll:lc5 (nor does retreating promise White any advantage, e.g. 6 lLig3 liJc6 7 c3 ll:lh6!? 8 Wd2 ll:lf7 with balanced chances in a complex position, or 6 lLic3 ll:lc6 7 �b5 4J h6!? 8 �xh6 �xh6 9 Wf3 �e6 again with mutual chances and problems; M. Simic-Knezevic, Smederevska Palanka 1 977) 6 . . . b6 7 4Jb3 lLi f6 8 lLif3 0-0 9 �e2 •d6 10 0-0 4Jbd7 with active possibilities for Black; Mik. Zeit lin-Ivanenko, Central Chess Club Ch. 1 984. (b) 3 ll:ld2 �g7 4 c3 (a game Bergrasser- Larsen, Monte Carlo 1 967, went 4 e3 li'lf6 5 ll:lgf3 d6 6 .tc4 ll:lc6 7 c3 a6 8 h4 4Je4 ) 4 . . . h6 5 .tf4 d6 6 e3 e5 7 de de 8 .tg3 We7 9 f3 .te6 and Black has a space advantage and the

67

more positive position; Kuttner Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969. (c) 3 e4 fe 4 ll:lc3 lLif6 5 f3 ef 6 ti:lxf3 J.. g 7 brings about a vari ation of the Staunton Gambit con sidered to offer balanced pro spects. 3 J.. g7 (53) 53 w

=

=

4 e3 Other paths: (a) 4 ll:lc3 c6 (again the trans position to Chapter 8 by 4 . . . d5 is available; ECO suggests an immediate 4 . . . h6) 5 Wd3 d5 6 0-0-0 lLif6 (6 . . . WaS is an active alternative worth attention) 7 .t xf6!? J.. x f6 8 f4 b5 9 ll:lf3 with an interesting middlegame in prospect : White holds the knights in a blocked position but Black has attacking chances on the queenside; Rajkovic- Kovacevic, Yugoslavia 1 975 . (b) 4 h5 h6 5 .tel (anywhere else the bishop would just be a nuisance) 5 . . . g5 (this instructive sequence sees Black thwart

68

The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 i.g5

White's ambitions on the h-file and turn the tables in the battle for the initiative on the kingside) 6 'it'd3 e6 7 e4 d6 8 ti:lf3 f4!? 9 e5 ti:le7 10 ed cd 1 1 ti:lbd2 0-0 12 c3 ti:lf5 and Black can look to the middle game with confidence; Gipslis- Reize, Leningrad 1 960. h6 4 With the bishop's line of retreat blocked, Black seeks to use it as a target to aid expansion in the centre. 5 d6 ..tf4 ti:lc6 6 ..tc4 Naturally Black avoids 6 . . . e5? which would leave him with a displaced king and problems with developing after 7 de de 8 ..tf7 + �e7 9 'it'xd8 + �xd8 10 ..tg3 ti:le7 1 1 ti:lc3. e5 c3 7 With other factors being equal, this advance always solves Black's opening problems and often gives him the more promising position. 8 ..tg3 'it'e7 The vis-a-vis with White's king means that . . . f4 is threatened. 9 ti:le2 ti:lf6 10 f3 I n order to be able to preserve both QB and h-pawn in the event of . . . ti:lh5. ..td7 (54 ) 10 Black has the more harmonious development and the strategic initiative thanks to his mobile

kingside pawns. a4 11 Hoping for a compensatory initiative on the other flank . 11 0-0-0 Possibly premature as it permits White to force Black's QN away from the centre and provoke a slight weakening of the queenside pawns. Of course, such a rich position contains several feasible plans, for example immediate kingside expansion with 1 1 . . . g5, or possibly opening the e-file by 1 1 . . . ed and only then castling (so that e5 would be available to the knight in case of d5) followed by vigorous action on the king's flank. 12 d5 ti:lb8 13 ti:la3 a6 'it'e8! 14 ..tf2 Subtle prophylaxis designed to hamper a charge by the b-pawn. 15 ..tb3 g5 e4 16 ..tc2 'it'e7 17 ti:lg3

The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .t.g5

Correctly avoiding the tempting 1 7 . . 'W'e5? which would hand the init iative to White after 1 8 ll:Jc4 wxd5 1 9 'W' xd5 ll:J xd5 20 fe fe 2 1 lL:lh5! : df8 18 'W'd2 This somewhat mysterious rook move brings the piece into play while reserving e8 for the queen. 19 0-0-0 That it is high time to remove the king from its increasingly peril ous position in the centre is well illustrated by the combinative refutation of 1 9 b4?: 19 . . . ll:Jxd5! 20 'W'xd5 .ixc3 + 21 �e2 gh 22 lLlh5 .ixa 1 23 : xa 1 .ic6 24 Wc4 'W' g5 25 ll:Jf4 ef 26 gf .ixf3 + ! with a decisive advantage (V. Kovacevic). 19 gh At first sight this self-splitting of his pawns seems strange, but further inspection reveals that without this capture it is difficult for Black to open lines and make progress on the kingside. 20 ll:Je2 Taking with the rook would allow Black to move his knight wit h a discovered attack. 20 'W'e8 21 ef ll:Jf4 ll:Jh 7 (55 ) 22 gf Having created a weakness on f3 Black manoeuvres his knight to bri ng it under pressure. lLlg5 23 .ixh4

69

.

24 'W'f2 Given White's next, the immedi ate 24 'W'e2 may have been prefer able. a5! 24 In order to bring the inactive knight back into play. 25 'W'e2 ll:la6 ll:Jc5 26 ll:Jb5 Consequent, but 26 . . . : hg8 first was probably more accurate. 27 b4?! Typical time-trouble lashing out; 27 .if2 was more circumspect with a lot of hard fighting still to come. 27 ab 28 cb .ixb5 Simultaneously trading White's most threatening piece and shat tering his queenside pawns. 29 ab 'W'e5!? 30 : d4 Not 30 be? which would allow Black to run amok on the black squares: 30 . 'W' b2 + 3 1 �d2 'W' b4 + 32 �c l .ib2 + 33 � b 1 .

.·

70

The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 1Lg5

..tc3 + . lll d7 30 31 lll h5 White is understandably con cerned to remove Black's pressure on the long diagonal, but he was probably wrong to forego the obvious 3 1 lll g6, e.g. 3 1 . . . 'it'e8 32 lll xf8 when Black would do best simply to recapture by 32 . . . ll xf8 with plenty of tactical chances, rather than allow 32 . . . ..txd4 3 3 lll x d7 etc. when t h e fact that f5 i s unprotected makes things awk ward. 31 f4! Undermining the d4 blockade which is preventing infiltration down the diagonal. 32 lll xg7 Even in time-trouble White does not fall for 32 lll x f4? ll xf4! 33 ll xf4 'it'b2 + 34 �d l 'it' a l + 35 �d2 i.c3 + 36 �d3 llle 5 mate! Now at least White is unlikely to fall prey to a mating attack . . . immediately, anyway! 32 'it' xg7 33 ll hd1 Again, 33 ll xf4 'it' a l + 34 i. b l 'it' a 3 + 35 � d I ll xf4 3 6 e f lll xf3 would be asking for trouble. 33 ll e8!? Black is relentless in his deter mination to get amongst White's dark square weaknesses. 34 ll xf4 'it'c3! ll d3 35

Not 35 e4? llle 5 when the rook is out of play and the black cavalry become dangerous. 35 'it' a l + 36 i.b1 36 �d2 would allow a deadly switch to the opposite flank by 36 . . . 'it'h I ! with 37 . . . lll e5 to follow. 36 llle5 37 ll b3 ll hg8 38 ..tf2?! Sorely pressed by the clock, White fails to spot 38 i.e 1 intend ing to transfer the bishop to c3 and drive out the menacing queen. In this case, 38 . . . 'it'a4 keeps up a multitude of tactical tricks. 38 lll h3 39 ll h4 lll g 1 40 'it'd1 It would be fatal to invite the enemy's heavy guns to occupy the home base back rank by capturing the frisky horse : 40 ..txg l ? ll xg l + 4 1 �c2 ll eg8 4 2 ll h2 'it'a4 and White is hopelessly tied up. 40 lll gxf3 41 ll xh6 ll g2 42 'it'c2 ll eg8 ( 5 6 ) With this, Black's domination is complete and the outcome no longer in any doubt despite tough resistance : 43 ll h l (of course not �b8 44 43 ll h7?? ll g l + ) 43 'it' b2 'it'a4 45 ll a3 'it'xb5 46 'it' a l 'it'c4 + 47 ..tc2 llld 3 + ! (gaining a vital tempo to break White's 0 0 0

The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5 56 w

counterattack) 48 l::txd 3 J::txf2 49 ..Wc3 b5! 50 .ib3 (it would be worse to give Black a passed pawn and leave the b-pawn exposed to a frontal assault by the black king after 50 'ifxc4 be 5 1 l:l. c3 ll::l e 5 with the king march to follow) 50 . . 'if xc3 + 5 1 l:l. xc3 ll::le 5 52 .ic2 l:l. g3 53 l:l. e 1 � b7 54 .id3 �b6 55 .ie2 l:l. h2 56 � d 1 l:l. h4 57 l:l. b3 l:l. g8 58 �d2 l:l. h2 59 �c1 .::t gg2 60 �d1 l:l. h4 6 1 �c1 .::t gh2 62 �d 1 .::t h8 63 l:l. a3 .::t 2h4 64 �c2 (saving the pawn would leave White open to attack from both flanks: 64 l:l. b3 .::t a8 65 �c2 .::t a2 + 66 �c3 l:l. h2 with fierce pressure) 64 . . . .::t xb4 65 �c3 l:l. hh4! (dashing White's last hope : 65 . . . J:l. e4?! 66 .txb5! � xb5?? 67 J:l. b l + �c5 68 l:l. a5 mate) 66 .::t a8 l:l. he4! (Black sets his own trap : if now 67 J:l. ea l there comes 67 . . . l:l. xe3 + 68 �xb4 c5 + 69 de ll::l xc6 mate) 67 J:l. b8 + �c5 68 J:l. c 1 ll::l c4 69 .id3 l:l. xe3 70 J:l. b7 l2le5 7 1 �d2 + (White would lose

71

both rooks after 7 1 J:l. xc7 + � b6 72 � xb4 lt::l xd3 + followed by 73 . . . ll::l x cl + etc.) 7 1 . . . �d4 White resigns, as he must acquiesce in simplification to a technically lost ending after 72 .tfl J:l. b2 + 73 J:l. c2 (73 � d 1 l:l. e 1 + ! and mate in two) 73 . . . ll::l c4 + 74 .txc4 J:l. xc2 + 75 �xc2 be. This sub stantial game, packed with incid ent, is a good example of the rich middlegames which typically arise in this variation. Magerramov-A vshalumov USSR 1 987 I d4 f5 2 .ig5

.

2 3

.th4

h6 g5 ( 5 7 )

57 w

Played not i n the naive expect ation of trapping the bishop but in order to develop the K N without it being captured, thereby saddling Black with doubled f-pawns. The danger for Black is that the rapid advance of his kingside pawns may

72

The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .i.g5

leave him weak on the black squares after a typical h4 thrust and . . . g4 response. It then becomes of paramount import ance whether Black can achieve the advance of his e-pawn to e5 so as to prevent White obtaining control over the key f4 square. 4 .tg3 Not forced; the simple transpos ition 4 e3 tl:\f6 5 .tg3 is equally playable. Violent attempts at refutation come unstuck : 4 e4? .tg7 5 Wh5 + �f8 6 .tc4 d5 7 ed tl:\f6 8 Wf3 gh with a winning material advantage; Barnes Krause, Omaha 1 959. It is quite shocking that as recently as 1 983 Taimanov could be giving 3 . . . g5 a question mark and saying that 4 e4 is good for White through being ignorant of the existence of 4 . . . .tg7 (he considers only 4 . . . tl:\f6? and 4 . . . d5?). 4 tl:\f6 This is certainly the most natu ral move here although it has yet to be definitively established whether it is also the most accur ate. Examples of the alternatives : (a) 4 . . . .tg7 5 e3 d6 (5 . . . tl:\f6 would return to the column) 6 h4 (checking on h 5 would involve White in an unwarranted loss of time) 6 . . . g4 (the variation 6 . . . tl:\f6?! 7 hg hg 8 l:t xh8 + .txh8 9 tl:\h3! g4 1 0 tl:\f4 ± is a good illustration of what Black should

avoid) 7 tl:\c3 e5?! 8 de de 9 W xd8 + �xd8 1 0 0-0-0 + .td7 1 1 .tc4 and White's easy, active develop ment contrasts starkly with Black's sluggish mobilisation and difficulties along the d-file; Lpu tian- Mik. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985. (b) 4 . . . d6 5 e3 tl:\f6 6 h4 l:t g8!? (this bold attempt to avoid . . . g4 deserves further investigation) 7 hg hg 8 .tc4 (this rather simplistic approach tends to leave White with insufficient pawn presence in the centre to be able to affect matters there; Bareev has noted 8 c4 intending to attack f5 by .td3, Wc2, and d5, as a more challenging plan) 8 . . . e6 9 tl:\c3 a6 (prepares his next by preventing tl:\b5) 1 0 a4?! (mis-reads Black's intentions) 10 . . . d5 1 1 .te2 .td6 1 2 .te5 tl:\c6 1 3 f4 g4 14 .td3 �f7 with a very comfortable position for Black; D. Ilic-Bareev, Vrnjacka Banja 1 987. 5 e3 Persisting with the original intention of exchanging QB for KN by playing 5 .ie5 looks rather artificial and should not cause Black any trouble, e.g. 5 . . . .tg7 (5 . . . e6!? with the idea of answer ing tl:\c3 by . . . i.b4 is an interest ing alternative) 6 h4 g4 7 e3 d6 8 i.xf6 i.xf6 9 .ic4 and now Black should open the queen's path to the flank by 9 . . . c6, with a complex and quite promising

The Queen Bishop Arrack : 2 i.g5

middle game in view, rather than p erm it White to diminish the posi tio n's dynamism by exchanging queens after 9 . . . e5 1 0 tt:Jc3 c6 1 1 de de 1 2 W xd8 + � xd8 1 3 0-0-0 + �e7 1 4 f3 when Black's l agging development is again cause for concern (cf. note (a) to Black's fourth above); Sideif Zade--Avshalumov, USSR 1 987. .i.g7 (58) 5 58 8

6 tt:Jd2 Nor have the alternative treat ments so far explored given Black any difficulties : (a) 6 lLJc3 d6 7 .i.d3 tt:Jc6 8 tt:Jf3 c6 9 'We2 (9 .i.b5 enabled Black to build up a crushing queenside attack quickly in Arkhipov-Mik. Zeitlin, Protvino 1 985, after 9 . . . �d7 1 0 We2 a6 I I .i.a4 We7 1 2 0-0-0 b5 1 3 .i.b3 b4 1 4 lL:l b 1 tt:Ja5 1 5 h4 g4 16 lL:lfd2 .i.b5 1 7 Wei c5) 9 . . . We7 1 0 .i.b5 (in view of th e threatened . . . e5 White has little choice; Black's position is already better) 10 . . . .i.d7 I I h3

73

a6 1 2 .1a4 b5 1 3 .i.b3 lLJa5 1 4 a 3 lL:lxb3 1 5 cb .i.c6 (this transfer ence to the long diagonal high lights Black's white square domin ation of the whole board; in the further course of the game White is unable to find any counterplay while the enemy forces mass for the final assault) 1 6 : c 1 0-0 1 7 o-o .i.b7 1 8 b4 wn 1 9 tt:Jd2 Wg6 20 Wd3 .:. f7 2 1 f3 h5 22 lLle2 .i.h6 23 .:. f2 h4 24 .i.h2 .:. af8 25 lL:lc3 Wg7 26 : eft g4 27 fg fg 28 hg tt:Jxg4 29 : xn : xf7 30 e4 ..te3 + 0- 1 . Smooth, very smooth! Tis dall-Kristiansen, Denmark 1 983. (b) 6 ..td3 e6 (a game Wheatley Bellin, England 1 98 1 , went 6 . . . d6 7 tt:Jd2 tt:Jc6 8 c3 e5 9 h4 f4!? I 0 hg hg I I : xh8 + ..txh8 1 2 ef ef 1 3 ..th2 We7 + 1 4 We2 lLlg4 with a small but distinct advantage for Black; 9 . . . g4 would avoid simplification and leave Black with fine prospects) 7 lL:le2 d6 8 f3 We7 9 c4 e5 1 0 lL:lbc3 0-0 1 1 de ( I I 'Wc2 ed 1 2 ed tt:Jc6 would be in Black's favour) I I . . . de 1 2 e4 (after the more fluid 1 2 Wc2 play might go 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 lLJc6 1 4 a 3 fe 1 5 .i.xe3 lL:ld4!? with chances for both sides) 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 c6 14 c5 ..te6 1 5 'Wa4 wn with entirely satisfactory play for Black; Damljanovic- M. Gurevich, Baku 1 986. 6 d6 Preparing the e-pawn's advance.

74

The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5

7 h4 White must challenge the black pawns in this manner as otherwise he simply concedes that Black has gained space at no cost. g4 7 A necessary reaction as White is threatening to exchange pawns and rooks and then play ttJh3 advantageously weakening the black pawn structure in the same way as already noted in the 4 . . . �g7 line. h5 8 Otherwise the black knight could occupy this square to useful effect. 8 ltJc6 Development aimed at enforc ing . . . e5. 9 �b5 Development aimed at retard ing . . . e5. 9 �d7 10 ltJe2 a6 This is dubious as it gives White the chance to get his knight to f4 from where it can exert a powerful influence on Black's position. The immediate I 0 . e5 would lead to a complex game with balanced chances after for example I I de de 1 2 ltJc4 ( 1 2 �xc6 � xc6 1 3 �xe5 could be answered simply by 1 3 . . . � xg2 1 4 n h2 �c6 or more ambitiously by 1 3 . . . tle7, but in both cases White's light square debility presents obvious play for . .

Black) 1 2 . . . 0-0! 11 �a4 White goes along with his opponent's assessment instead of challenging it by I I � xc6 �xc6 1 2 ttJf4 tid7 1 3 c4 e6 1 4 ltJb3 after which Avshalumov evaluates the position as slightly m White's favour. 11 e5 12 c3 Capturing on e5 would lead to lines similar to those in the note to Black's tenth. tle1 (59) 12 59 w

Black's forces are generally more harmoniously coordinated for effective central action, and the black queen is functionally posted in a way difficult for her white counterpart to emulate, while the advanced g-, f- and e-pawns infuse the black position with dynamic potential. 13 tibl?! 0-0! Correctly perceiving that the threat to double the c-pawns is

The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 J.g5

ill usory since after 1 4 .txc6 be 1 5 de de Black's prospects o n the li gh t squares more than outweigh the damaged pawns. 14 .tb3 + ?! Even so, this inconsistent play is misguided, as Black now gets to ut ilize all the positive aspects of his position without any drawbacks at all. �h8 14 15 .th4 W'e8 Underlining the fact that the aggressive h-pawn can also become vulnerable. de 16 de 17 lLlg3 e4! Now that White's K N has been removed from its observation of f4 to fulfil defensive duties, the time is ripe to cramp White's position fu rther and prepare to swing the QN to eS when the weakness of d3 will cause the white monarch considerable embarrass ment. Blackis now clearly in control. 18 �ft 18 .txf6 would save the h-pawn b ut leave White's position lifeless and inevitably doomed. 18 lLlxh5 19 �g1 Thus White has managed to re move his king to relative safety an d activate his K R at no greater ex pense than a pawn. lLlxg3 19

75

20 .txg3 .te6? A miscalculation. Simply 20 . . . lUeS was indicated, leaving White in dire straits. 21 .txc7 .txb3 After 2 1 . . . W'd7 22 .tf4! (pre venting any breakthroughs on the black squares) Black cannot capture on d2 without leaving the QB en prise while on 22 . . . .txb3 White recaptures with the knight. .te5! 22 lLlxb3 Black adjusts well to the changed circumstances and tries to use his better coordination to whip up attacking chances. 23 .txe5 lLlxe5 24 lLld4 Taking the h-pawn would be a fatal error opening the way to the white king. 24 �g7 25 g3 �g6 26 W'c2 W' f7 h5 27 �g2 With this the writing is on the wall and even with time-trouble looming Black is unlikely to go wrong. The end came as follows : 28 .:. ad I (28 W' b3 was the maso chistic way to prolong the inevi table) 28 . . . .l:t ad8 29 a4 .:t h8 30 b3 �g5 3 1 c4 lLlf3 32 �fl .:t d 7 33 W' c 3 .:. hd8 3 4 �g2 W'f6 35 W' b4 h4 36 gh lLl xh4 + 37 .:t xh4 �xh4 38 .:. h i + �g5 39 lLle2 .:t h8 40 .:t xh8 W'xh8 41 lLlf4 g3!

76

The Queen Bishop

Attack: 2 .i.g5

Freeing g4 for the k ing enables Black to proceed with . . . n d l without being harassed by the

knight check on e6; with his swindle chance gone White resigned.

The Queen Knight Attack : 2 ttJc3

8

queenside play evolving from advancing the c-pawn in favour of central and kingside activity coupled with rapid piece deploy ment. As in the Queen Bishop Attack, White hopes to damage Black's pawn structure by captur ing the KN on f6 with his bishop when it cannot be recaptured by a piece. Experience has shown that the doubled f-pawns thus inflicted on the black position are a con siderable liability obliging Black to play extremely precisely in order to obtain a satisfactory pos ition. Clearly, therefore, it makes sense to prevent White carrying out this strategy if at all possible and that, indeed, is the common factor in our two recommended defences.

This i s the sister variation o f the Queen Bishop Attack and indeed could reasonably be called the Queen Bishop Attack Deferred as the k night development is almost invariably followed by 3 ..tg5. Black has only two replies which counter the threatened 3 e4 : 2 . . ttl f6 and 2 . . . d5. We shall examine a promising recent offshoot of the first of these, and the latter in its entirety. 1 d4 f5 2 lbc3 (60) .

riO B

Kouatly-Tseshkovsky Wijk aan Zee I I 1 988 1 d4 rs 2 lLlcJ

T his logical move renounces 77

78

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lll c3

tt:lf6 2 3 e6 i.g5 Known for more than a century, until recent years this move had always been considered weak since it allows White to play e4. Many of these earlier games saw Black quickly castling kingside and being crushed by direct attack as a result, whereas the modern strategy looks to effect the much safer long castling. The reader may care to note that the response previously con sidered standard here, 3 . . . d5, allows White to implement his primary aims mentioned in our introductory comments by 4 .txf6. 4 e4 The g-pawn thrust makes more sense here than in other positions; indeed the only example com monly cited from practice, Hort Holacek, Havirov 1 97 1 , produced a preferable position for White after 4 g4 .te7 5 gf ef 6 .tg2 tt:le4 7 .txe7 Wxe7 8 Wd3 tt:lxc3 9 Wxc3 d6 I 0 tt:lh3. Naturally, this is far from being the last word on the variation, and the search for alter native defensive methods might well profitably begin by examining 4 . . . .tb4. fe 4 5 tt:\xe4 The most natural continuation, but two other moves come into

consideration: (a) 5 f3 offers a gambit in the Staunton mould which certainly brings White compensatory attacking chances after 5 . . . ef 6 tt:lxf3 .te7 7 .td3 0-0 8 h4!? setting up threats of taking on f6 and then h7, but 5 . . . e3!? 6 .txe3 .t b4! looks a good way of declining. (b) 5 .txf6 Wxf6 6 tt:lxe4 W h6! (Black is in charge of the dark squares) 7 .i.d3 (7 g3 is a sensible attempt to obtain some grip on the black squares which Black could answer either by the straightforward 7 . . . .i.e7 or the interesting 7 . . . ..t b4 + !? 8 c3 .i.e7 when White would be unable to retreat his knight to c3 in the event of a subsequent . . . d5; 7 tt:lf3 was played in a drastic miniature Laird-Finlayson, 1 982, which went 7 . . . d5 8 tt:leg5?! tt:\c6 9 W d2 i.d6 10 .td3?! tt:l b4! I I .tb5 + c6 1 2 .te2 Wg6! 1 3 0-0-0?? .tf4 0- 1 ) 7 . . . d5 8 tt:lg3 .td6 9 tt:lf3 0-0 1 0 0-0 tt:\c6 I I .l: e l a6 1 2 c3 .td7 1 3 b4 .1: ae8 and Black's possession of a black-squared bishop more than offsets his inferior pawn structure; M ileika Liebert, Riga 1 96 1 . 5 .te7 6 .txf6 Capturing this way is the most forceful as it permits White to keep up the momentum. Time, Black's

The Queen Knight Allack: 2 lLlc3 best response to the alternative h as yet to be established. After 6 8 xf6 + ..txf6 7 h4! capturing on g 5 would bring Black an inferior ending following 7 . . . ..t xg5 8 -w h5 + g6 9 -. xg5 -.xg5 10 hg, t hus Black must seek other ways. A game Veresov- Pohla, Vilnius 1 972, went 7 . . . 0-0 8 ..td3 -.e7 9 "We2 �c6 10 c3 d5 I I f4 ..td7 1 2 0-0-0 with clearly better chances for White. There is clearly no need for Black to declare his hand in castling so quickly, how ever, and amongst various poss ible improvements 7 . . . -.e7! springs immediately to mind. ..t xf6 ( 6 1 ) 6

-. h5 + 7 Introduced by Knaak, this aggressive continuation has super seded the older, straightforward d eve lopment of 7 �f3. That this q u iete r variation is not without venom is powerfully and instruc tively illustrated by the famous brilliancy Ed. Lasker-Thomas,

79

London 1 9 1 2 : 7 . . . b6 8 ..td3 ..tb7 9 �e5 0-0 10 -.hs -.e7? I I -.xh7 + !! �xh7 1 2 � xf6 + + �h6 1 3 �eg4 + �g5 1 4 h4 + ( 1 4 f4 + !) 1 4 . . . �f4 1 5 g3 + �f3 1 6 ..te2 + ( 1 6 �fl !) 1 6 . . . �g2 1 7 .a h2 + � g 1 1 8 �d2 mate! Persuasive evidence that Black's safest way of meeting 7 �f3 is to remove the king to the queenside : 7 . . . -.e7 8 ..td3 �c6 9 c3 b6 1 0 -.e2 ..t b7 I I 0-0-0 (if White castles kingside then Black should follow suit since the white forces are better placed to launch flank attacks, whereas homogeneous castling enhances the importance of Black's centralization) 1 1 . . . 0-0-0 1 2 : he ! �b8 and Black's harmonious and weakness-free position is entirely satisfactory; Menchik-Flohr, Hastings 1 933/34. g6 7 -.e7!? -. h6 8 Whether this latest try is the most accurate remains to be established, but it does appear to be more logical to threaten to preserve the KB before being com mitted to a particular queenside development (see Fedorowicz Leow below). Other experience so far : (a) 8 . . . �c6 (acceptance o f the pawn gives White too strong an initiative after 8 . . . ..txd4? 9 0-0-0 ..tf6 I 0 h4 etc.) 9 0-0-0!? (the · seminal game Knaak- Ftacnik,

80

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3

Trna va 1 980, went 9 et:lf3 et:lxd4? 1 0 et:lxd4 ..txd4 l l 0-0-0 ..tf6 1 2 h4 'We7 l 3 et:lxf6 + 'Wxf6 1 4 h5 .l:t g8 15 ..td3 and Black was i n bad shape; Knaak gives 9 . . . 'We7 l 0 lZl xf6 + 'W xf6 l l 0-0-0 b6 as slightly in White's favour, while it should be noted that l l . . . d6 in this line would transpose to the column game) 9 . . . b6?! (while Black can hardly afford to fall further behind in development by grabbing the d-pawn, the immedi ate 9 . . . 'We7 would probably transpose to the column) 1 0 et:le2 'We7 l l 'We3 (threatening 1 2 d5) l l . . . ..tg7 12 lt:l 2c3 ..tb7 (the positionally appalling 12 . . . d5 was mandatory) 1 3 d5 and Black is in trouble; Fedorowicz-Leow, Philadelphia 1 986. (b) 8 . . . b6 9 et:lf3 ..tb7 1 0 ..td3 'We7 l l 0-0-0 lt:la6 ( l l . . . et:lc6? 1 2 'Wf4) 1 2 c3 ..tg7 l 3 'We3 0-0-0 1 4 � b 1 et:lb8 1 5 .l:t he l et:lc6 with approximately equal chances (cf. Menchik- Fiohr above); Ash Yusupov, Winnipeg 1 986. Thus we can conclude that if Black succeeds in setting up the Ash - Yusupov I Menchik - Flohr type position then his chances are satisfactory, but he must be alert against White's tactical trumps particularly the d5 breakthrough. 'W xf6 9 et:lxf6 + et:lc6 10 0-0-0 11 et:lf3 d6 ( 62)

Thus Black keeps the white pieces at bay with his small pawn centre while preparing to complete his development by 1 2 . . . ..td7 and 1 3 . . . 0-0-0. After, say, 1 2 ..tc4 ..td7 1 3 .l:t he l 0-0-0, Black has no real problems as the e pawn is easily defended by . . . : deS, and he can then think in terms of ejecting the white q ueen either by et:lc6-e7-f5 or et:lc6-d8f7 followed by mobilizing his king side minority and increasing the pressure along the half open f-file. Most of the positions arising from this variation are in fact a kind of mirror image Sicilian where White's attacking chances have been diminished by the loss of an important bishop. Food for thought! Doubtless with some such con· siderations in mind, White decided to give up a pawn in order to keep the black monarch in the centre, but his initiative comes to nothing and in regaining the pawn White

The Queen Knight Arrack: 2 l!Jc3

permits a decisive counterattack. ed 12 d5?! 13 .tb5 .td7 .l:!. hel + 14 1 4 .txc6 be! 1 5 .l:!. he l + �d8 would leave' Black's king quite safe beh ind the solid mass of pawns. ti:Je7 14 �xd7 15 .txd7 + .l:!. ae8 16 ti:Jd4 17 .. h3 + The apparently powerful rook incursion 1 7 .1:!. e6 would only help Black after the simple retreat 1 7 . . . • n threatening 1 7 . . . c5 and 1 7 . . . ttJfS. ti:Jf5 17 18 .I:!. xeS .I:!. xeS .l:!.e7 • xh7 + 19 20 .. h3 White has counted on this pin to hold the balance but failed to spot Black's knockout counter punch coming. 20 .. g5 + 21 �bl •d2! 22 .. o There is nothing better; 22 '*'d3 w ould lose a piece after 22 . . . W' xd3. 22 .l:!. el Speedily concluding the assault on the opponent's back rank: W hite resigns. Halifman-Legky

USSR 1 987 d4

f5

2

ti:Jc3

81

d5

Putting the Stonewall stopper on White's e2 -e4 is especially valid when the c-pawn is blocked from joining in the central struggle. Note that 2 . . . g6? would expose Black to the most virulent form of the h-pawn blitzkrieg after 3 h4! (cf. Chapter 4, p. 47). 3 logS ( 63 J 63 B

M uch the most popular choice in contemporary practice, but Black must also know how to handle the tricky alternatives : (a) 3 g4 ti:Jf6! 4 gS?! (4 h3 looks relatively best) 4 . . . ti:Je4 5 ti:Jxe4 fe 6 f3 .US and White's unorthodox aggression has clearly backfired; Spielmann - M ieses, Berlin 1 920. (b) 3 e4 de 4 f3 (4 .tgS g6 5 .tc4 J.. g7 6 tLlge2 tLlc6 + Visier Castro, Costa Bra va 1 977) 4 . . . eS!? is a typical central counter which suffices to bring Black at least equal chances, e.g. 5 de 'ilt" xd I + 6 �xd I (L)d7 7 tLld5 �d8 8 fe fe 9 .tf4 lLlc5! 10 tLle2 tLle7

82

The Queen Knight A ttack : 2 liJc3

I I lLidc3 lLig6 with the initiative; Beyen-Zwaig, Nice 01. I 974. (c) 3 ..tf4 is a routine developing move which poses no threat, e.g. 3 . . . lLif6 4 e3 e6 5 lLib5?! (mistakenly attempting to utilize the one special point of his third move) 5 . . . lLia6 6 a4 (artificial, but 6 c4 ..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLie4 is also fine for Black) 6 . . . ..te7 7 c3 0-0 8 ..id3 c6 9 lLia3 lLib8! 1 0 lLif3 lLie4 I I 0-0 lLid7 and Black can enter the middlegame with confidence; V. Raicevic- Psakhis, Troon 1 984. (d) 3 f3 attempts straightforward occupation of the centre but Black can counter with a lightning infan try charge which effectively turns the tables : 3 . . . c5! 4 e4 e5! 5 de (alternatives are even less palat able, e.g. 5 lLi xd5 cd and White has problems with e4; 5 ..tb5 + ..id7 6 ..txd7 + lLi xd7 7 lLixd5 cd 8 lLie2 fe 9 fe lLifg6 + again due to the weak e-pawn, Pomar-Larsen, Spain I 975) 5 . . . d4 6 ..ic4!? (other moves leave Black in control without a fight) 6 . . . lLic6!? (according to Taimanov, 6 . . . •as 7 lLie2 de 8 lLixc3 gives White a strong attack, but this certainly needs confirmation in practice) 7 lLid5 lLixe5 8 •e2 lLixc4 9 • xc4 ..id6 1 0 ..if4 lLie7 with a fully satisfactory position for Black; Rossolimo- Pelikan, Argentina I 959. 3 g6

The usual response, but there are alternatives, hitherto barely explored, which are of potentialJy crucial significance : (a) 3 . . . c6 4 e3 g6 will in all likelihood transpose to lines similar to the column, while other tries have been shown to lose too much time with the queen in one case : 4 . . . •d6?! 5 ..id3 e5?! 6 de •xe5 7 lLif3 •c7 8 lLid4 •n 9 •D ± Ghinda-Stanciu, Roman ian Ch. I 978, and too much time with the knight in another : 4 . . . lLid7 5 ..td3 lLidf6 6 lLige2 e6 7 f3 h6 8 ..tf4 g5 9 ..te5 ..ig7 I 0 e4 lLie7 I I .d2 ..id7 I 2 0-0-0 ± Polugayevsky- Liebert, Rostov I 96 1 . The logical follow-up to 3 . . . c6 is 4 . . . • b6!? with the point that gambitting the b-pawn would be dubious in a closed position, while direct methods of deahng with the threat would make queen side castling either less attractive or impossible. That would leave 5 a3, after which at the very least Black would have acquired the additional option of answering 5 . . . lLid7 6 ..id3 with 6 . . . e6. There is clearly much here that remains to be investigated. (b) 3 . . . h6!? is an obvious and critical move which has been almost totally ignored. Since 4. ..ih4 would appear to involve White in unacceptable material loss after 4 . . . g5 5 e4 ..ig7 (cf.

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lL!c3

Ch apter 7, p. 72), the whole ra ison d'etre of White's system seems to be called into question. In the only top class example of it so far, White replied 4 ..tf4 and after 4 . . . lZ:lf6 5 e4!? (acknowledg ing that normal methods give White nothing) 5 . . . fe 6 f3 ..tf5 7 fe de 8 ..tc4 e6 Black had obtained a slightly improved version of a Gambit vanatton Staunton already considered completely sat isfactory for Black; Ligterink Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984. h4 4 This advance of the h-pawn is the keystone of White's strategy : strategically, it reinforces the play on the dark squares, while tact ically it readies the h4-h5 rupture. ..tg7 4 e3 (64) 5

The usual move, opening the qu een's path along the d l -h5 di ago nal. Alternatively, White rna y opt for immediately intensify i n g his dark square play and pre-

83

paring long castling by 5 Wd2. This continuation contains hidden venom and Black must tread warily to avoid the many pitfalls as the following vanatiOns demonstrate: 5 . . . c6 6 lZ:lf3 lZ:ld7?! (natural but inaccurate; 6 . . . h6 is necessary, with fair chances of maintaining the balance, although it is clear that Black's task is the more onerous, e.g. 7 ..tf4 lZ:ld7 8 0-0-0 lll gf6 9 lZ:le5 lZ:le4! I 0 lZ:l xe4 lZ:lxe5! and by precise play White is prevented from building any advantage) 7 h5 h6 (were White now to retreat the bishop then all would be fine in the black camp after 8 . . . g5, but instead White sacrifices a piece for a dangerous attack) 8 hg! hg 9 : h7! .=. xh7 (forced, after 9 . . . ..tf6 or 9 . . . �f8. simply 1 0 lZ:lxg5 is crushing) 10 gh lZ:lgf6 I I W xg5 �f7 ( I I . . . �f8 puts up stiffer resistance although Black clearly remains under immense pressure after, for example, 1 2 W h4! �f7 1 3 e3) 1 2 Wxf5 lZ:lb6 1 3 lZ:le5 + � f8 1 4 Wf4 and Black's defensive task is hope less; Vaganian-Knezevic, Dubna 1 973. White has also occasionally experimented with 5 lZ:lh3 but this should not cause Black undue problems after simply 5 . . . lZ:lf6 threatening an early . . . lZ:le4. 5 ..te6 · This initially strange-looking

84

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 tt'Jd

move is aimed at shoring up the kingside defences, a useful task for the otherwise torpid QB. A good example of the type of attack White can whip up if this prophy lactic manoeuvre is omitted is pro vided by the game Bareev-Dreev, Soviet U20 Ch. 1 98 3 : 5 . . . c6 6 ..td3 (6 h5 would be premature because after 6 . . . h6 the sacrificial continuation 7 hg hg 8 .:1. xh8 ..txh8 9 'it'h5 ..tg7 would be insufficient) 6 . . . �f6 (the equally unwary 6 . . . �d7 would run up against 7 �f3 � gf6 8 h5 �xh5 9 ..txf5 with powerful kingside pressure, but it is still not too late for 6 . . . ..te6, e.g. 7 �f3 �d7 8 h5!? �gf6 - to provoke the sacrifice here would bring disaster after 8 . . . h6? 9 hg! hg 1 0 .:1. xh8 ..txh8 1 1 � xg5 �f8 12 g7! ..txg7 l 3 'it'h5 + �d7 1 4 �xe6-9 h6 Black need not fear the simplify ing 9 hg hg 1 0 .:t xh8 + ..txh8 1 1 �e2 ..tl7 1 2 �f4 �e4 - 9 . . . ..tf8 1 0 �e2 ..tl7 with an interesting position where White has cashed in his initiative for a spatial advan tage on the king's wing, the advanced outpost of which (the h pawn) could one day turn into a liability; chances are approxi mately equal; Palatnik-Legky, Tallinn 1 985) 7 h5!? � xh5 8 .:1. xh5 gh 9 'it'xh5 + �f8 1 0 �f3 'it'e8 1 1 'it'h2 e6 1 2 0-0-0 (for the exchange, White has lasting pressure due to

the superior coordination of his forces and the vulnerability of t he black king) 1 2 . . . �d7 l 3 g4! fg 1 4 � h4 �f6 1 5 f3 'it'h5?! 1 6 'it'f4 'it'l7 1 7 'it'd6 + 'it'e7 1 8 'it'g3 �e8 1 9 fg .:t g8?? (cracking under the pressure, but in any case it is difficult to imagine Black surviv ing in the long run) 20 ..txh7 .:1. h8 21 �g6 'it'd7 22 �e5! 'it'c7 23 ..tg6 + �e7 24 .:t fl .:tf8 25 'it' h4 b5 26 ..td3 1 -0. This exchange sacrifice attack plays such an important role in this variation that it is worth quot ing one further example, this time arising from 5 . . . �f6 : 6 h5!? � xh5 7 .:t xh5 gh 8 'it'xh5 + �f8 9 �f3 ..te6 1 0 ..th6 �d7 1 1 ..txg7 + �xg7 1 2 'it'g5 + �17 1 3 'it'h5 + �g7 1 4 'it' g5 + �17 1 5 'it' h6! (having demonstrated who is in charge White turns the screw) 1 5 . . . .:t g8 (there is no other way of meeting the threatened 1 6 �g5 + ) thus far we have followed Vaiser M. Knezevic, Havana 1 985, where White decided to restore material parity by 16 �g5 + .:1. xg5 1 7 'it' xg5 thus giving Black much needed time to develop and coordinate his pieces, something which would not have been at all easy to achieve after the more ambitious 1 6 'it'xh7 + ! �e8 1 7 'it' h 5 + ..t l7 1 8 'it' xf5 ± . 6 �£3 The most natural continuation,

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 l0c3

a lt h ough alternatives such as 6 8 h 3 and 6 'ii' f3 will doubtless be ex p lored in the future. c6 6 It is difficult for Black to get by wit hout this reinforcement of the d- pa wn, e.g. 6 . . . l2ld7 7 h5 h6 8 hg! hg 9 : xh8 .txh8 1 0 l2lxg5 8f8 1 1 'ii' h5 .i.g7 1 2 l2lxe6 l2lxe6 13 •xf5 'ii' d 6 14 l2lxd5 and the horde of white infantry has every chance of marching to victory; Palatnik- Fadeyev, Ukraine Ch. 1 984. .tf4 (65) 7 1'>5 B

By vacating g5 for the k night, White indirectly prepares the h pawn thrust. The straightforward 7 .td3 occurred in VI. Kovacevic K ristiansen, Plovdiv 1 98 3, which provides us with a good example of how Black should respond in the event of an exchange of rooks a lo ng the h-file : 7 . . . l2ld7 8 h5 ll:l gf6 (as is so often the case, Black da re not allow the passive bishop sacrifice 8 . . . h6? 9 hg! hg I 0 .1:1 xh8

85

.txh8 1 t l2l xg5 l2lf8 1 2 g7! .i.xg7 1 3 'ii' h5 + �d7 14 l2lxe6 with a crushing advantage) 9 hg hg 1 0 : xh8 .txh8 1 1 l2le2 (not I I 'ii' e 2 l2le4! + or 1 1 �e2 'ii' b6 with . . . c5 in the air) 1 1 . . . .tf7 1 2 l2lf4 l2le4 1 3 �e2 and now instead of 1 3 . . . l2lf8?! 14 'ii' h 1 .tf6 1 5 .i.h6 l2le6 1 6 g4! ± as happened in the game, VI. Kovacevic gives 1 3 . . . .tf6 1 4 .txf6 ef 1 5 'ii' h 1 'ii' e 7 16 'ii' h6 l2lf8 1 7 c3 producing an unclear position with chances for both sides. 7 l2lf6 8 h5! l2l bd7! Acceptance of the offer would lead Black into the usual defensive morass : 8 . . . l2lxh5 9 .l: xh5! gh 1 0 l2lg5 .i.g8 1 1 'ii' xh5 + � f8 1 2 .i.d3 e6 l 3 g4 h 6 1 4 l2lf3 ..t f7 1 5 'ii' h3 with lasting pressure; Halif man-Lerner, Kubishev 1 986. 9 h6 The sacrifice being declined, there is really very little else for White to do apart from pushing back the bishop and gaining space. We have already seen from the note to White's seventh that exchanging along the h-file brings nothing. .tf8 9 10 'ii' d 2 .tf7 11 e6 (66) l2le5 This is an appropriate moment to take stock of the situation. Whi te's advanced h- pawn means that

86

The Queen Knight A ttack: l lt)d

17 18 19

..txd6 0-0-0 g5

W xd6 e5 �d7?! (67)

67 w

Black is somewhat cramped on the kingside, but equally the blocked position ensures a fair degree of safety for his king. Black's central grip is satisfactory and there are prospects for creating counterplay on the queen's wing. All in all, chances are nicely balanced. 12 f3 Naturally, White seeks to open up new fronts either by g4 or e4. 12 ..te7 13 g4?! This impetuosity should have backfired; completing develop ment by 1 3 0-0-0 was correct. 13 �xe5 14 ..txe5 fg 15 fg 0-0 16 .tel ..td6?! Black misses his opportunity. Halifman points out that 16 . . . �d7! 1 7 ..tg3 ..tg5 would have given Black a slight advantage, while 1 7 ..tg7 .l:l e8 1 8 0-0-0 ..tg5 would also leave White poorly placed to create active play.

The knight is exposed to attack here and would better have been tucked away by 1 9 . . . �e8 with good defensive chances. 20 e4! Energetically opening up the centre the better to expose the inadequacies of Black's setup. 20 b5 To chase the knight away from c3. 21 ed b4 22 �e4 W xd5 23 ..tg4! Astutely breaking Black's coun terplay by fingering the weak spot in his position. W xe4 23 There is no real choice; 23 . . . ..te6 24 ..txe6 W xe6 25 d5 is crushing, while 23 . . . W xa2 24 Wxb4 .l:l ab8 25 Wa3 W xa3 26 ba ..td5 27 .l:l he l also leaves Black in a bad way.

The Queen Knight Attack: :Z tLlcJ

24 .i.xd7 ll ad8 Black's prospects in the ending a ris ing after 24 . . . -.xd4 25 -.xd4 e d 26 .II xd4 would be grim. -. xeS 25 de : hel -. as 26 27 b3! cS Of course, 27 . . . -. xa2?? would Jose instantly to 28 -.d4, and 27 . . . .i.d5 28 Jl e7 would also be dreadful. 28 �bl A voiding the trap 2S -.d6 .:. xd7! 29 -.e5 (29 -. xd7 c4 would give Black dangerous chances) 29 . . . -.a3 + 30 �b I .i.xb3! 3 1 ab .:. df7 when Black is still fighting.

87

28 -.c7 29 c4! With this the white queen finally gains access to the long diagonal thus compelling Black to shed a pawn and enter into a hopeless end game. The technical part con cluded as follows : 29 . . . -.g3 30 -. b2 -.c3 3 1 -.xc3 be 32 �c2 � h8 (pathetically underlining Black's plight) 33 : f1 .i.gS 34 l:. xf8 Jl xf8 35 �xc3 li dS 36 .i.g4 : e8 37 lld7 a5 3S lla7 : e5 39 : xa5 Jl xg5 40 .i.d7 Jl g3 + 4 1 �d2 ll g2 + 42 �e3 : g5 4 3 : as .:. e5 + 44 �d2 g5 45 .i.c6 1 -0.

2 ttJf3 and Others

9

This chapter provides selected recommendations against the less important second moves at White's disposal after the intro ductory 1 d4 f5. Only 2 l2Jf3 has any real importance, although some of the others can be dang erous if not met precisely. A

pinning the knight by .i.g5, are ruled out. H owever, if Black wishes to play a Leningrad Variation then 2 . . . lt:lf6 is necessary since 2 . . . g6 3 h4 is too risky (see p. 47). After 2 . . . lt:lf6 3 .i.g5 (other moves permit Black to carry on in normal Lenin grad fashion) Black has the inter esting possibility 3 . . . lt:le4, after which White has tried the follow ing : (a) 4 .i.f4 c5 (naturally, 4 . . . e6 is also satisfactory) 5 c3 "ii b6 6 "ii b3 "ilf xb3 7 ab d6 8 e3 .i.e6 9 ..tc4 .i.xc4 1 0 be lt:lc6 and Black has no difficulty holding the bal ance; Radev- Knezevic, Leningrad 1 960. (b) 4 h4 c6 5 c3 "ii b6 6 "ilfc2 d5 7 .i.f4 e6 8 lt:lbd2 .i.e? 9 lt:lxe4 fe 1 0 lt:le5 0-0 1 1 e3 c5 with an equal position where White's advanced h-pawn looks out of place; Pietzsch- Larsen, Dortmund 1 96 1 . (c) 4 .i.h4 g6 5 lt:l bd2 lt:l xd2 (5 . . . .i.g7 comes into consideration)

2 l2Jf3 2

lLlf3

e6 (68)

68 w

If Black intends playing a Class ical System, then there is much to be said for preferring 2 . . . e6 over 2 . . . lt:lf6. By this means White's most promising lines, based on 88

2 lOfJ and Others

6 iWxd2 .tg7 7 c3 d6 8 e3 lLld7 a nd Black's game is entirely satis facto ry; Eising-Besser, Aibling ! 96 5. 3 .tf4 Nor do other moves bring White any advantage : (a) 3 .tg5 .te7 4 .txe7 'fi xe? 5 :Ll bd2 (or 5 e3 lLlf6 = , but not 5 . . . 'fl b4 + 6 lt:lc3 'fl x b2 7 lLl b5 Wb4 + 8 c3 'fla5 9 lLle5 with strong threats as shown in Vellner Duckstein, Vienna 1 959; 5 lt:lc3 G f6 6 e3 d6 7 .tc4 c6 8 a4 a5 9 0-0 0-0 and Black has nothing to fear, Haygarth - Bellin, British Ch. 1 978) 5 . . . lLlf6 6 e3 b6 7 .td3 (or 7 .te2 .tb7 8 0-0 0-0 9 c4 d6 10 b4 lt:lbd7 = Lasker-Barry, Cam bridge Springs 1 904) 7 . . . .t b7 8 c3 c5 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 .ll e 1 d5 1 1 lt:le5 lt'J bd7 12 lLl xd7 lLlxd7 1 3 f4 g5 and Black's kingside initiative fully compensates for his slightly inferior bishop; Robatsch-Duck stein, Graz 1 96 1 . (b) 3 c3 .te7!? (playing a waiting game in order to prevent White's QB attaining its most active devel opment on g5) 4 'fl c2 d5 5 ..tf4 12lf6 6 e3 0-0 7 :Lle5 lt:lbd7 8 lLld2 12l xe5 9 .txe5 .td6 10 lLlf3 .td7 I I ..td3 'fle8 with totally satisfac t ory prospects; Chen De- Bellin, Sh anghai 1 98 1 . (c) 3 d 5 ..td6!? (Black secured ro ughly equal chances by 3 . . . ed 4 W xd5 d6 5 c4 lt:lf6 6 'fld l .te7

89

7 lt:lc3 c6 8 g3 0-0 9 .tg2 lt:le4 in Silva Rocha-Bolbochan, Rio de Janeiro 1 938) 4 de de 5 lLl bd2 .tc5 6 b3 lLlf6 7 e3 0-0 8 .tc4 lt:lc6 9 0-0 �h8 1 0 .t b2 'fle7 ( 1 0 . . . a6!?) 1 1 'fle2 e5 1 2 .tb5 e4 1 3 .t xc6 be 1 4 lt:le5 .td6 and Black's kingside threats put White on the defensive; Karoly-Karlsson, Gausdal 1 987. (d) 3 g4? fg 4 lLle5 'fl h4 5 e4 g3 + White's gambit has back Bogolj ubow- Hasenfuss, fired; Kemeri 1 939. lt:lf6 3 4 b6 e3 Of course, either 4 . . . .te7 or 4 . . . d5 may also be played. 5 lLlbd2 ..tb7 6 .td3 6 h3 was answered challengingly by 6 . . . .td6!? in Baumbach Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969, giving Black a fine game after 7 .txd6 cd 8 .td3 0-0 9 'fle2 lLle4. .te7 6 h3 7 Black's last move contained the positional threat of . . . lLlh5 gain ing the bishop pair. 7 0-0 8 c3 The double-step brings nothing, e.g. 8 c4 lLle4 9 0-0 d6 1 0 'flc2 lLlxd2 I I lLl xd2 'fle8 with excellent kingside play in the offing. 8 c5 (69) White's bulwark centre is con tested by a pincer formed by

90

2 fi:JjJ and Others 69

8

w

2 d5 2 3

d5 de

e5!? d5

This direct attempt to exploit the d-pawn's advance should suffice to equalize. 2 . . . lLlf6 is also good, of course. C Black's bishop pawns. Both armies are harmoniously stationed and the stage is set for a complex strategical battle. Given the dearth of practical experience with this position, one can merely observe that after the natural 9 0-0 Black probably does best to immediately occupy his advanced outpost by 9 . . . lLle4, after which t o -.c2 lLlxd2 I I lLlxd2 -.e8 would be a simpli fication enhancing the positive aspects of Black's positiOn, namely, the raking QB and king side attacking prospects. The attempt to bring e4 under control by 9 -.c2 runs into trouble through a vis-a-vis with Black's QR on the c-file : 9 . . . lLlc6 1 0 ..th2 J:[ c8 I I a3 (parrying the threat of . . . cd and . . . lLl b4) I I . . . lLla5! (threatening to establish a massive white-square bind by 1 2 . . . c4) 1 2 de (White must close the c-file) 1 2 . . . be 1 3 c4 lLlc6 1 4 0-0 "it"e8 with a clear positional superiority for Black; Alterman Bellin, Biel 1 987.

Dr Krejcik's Gambit: 2 g4 2 3

g4 ..tf4

fg

Probably White's best try. The alternatives: (a) 3 h 3 g3! and by returning the pawn Black deprives White of the open h-file and leaves him with a statically weak kingside. This is why White first develops his bishop. (b) 3 e4 invites sharp counters such as 3 . . . e5!? and 3 . . . d5!? both of which could well be good for Black. An example of the latter went 4 e5 ..tf5 5 lLlc3 c5 6 ..t b5 + lLlc6 7 ..txc6 + be 8 lLlge2 e6 + (Callinan-Saidy, USA 1 968). In addition, 3 . . . d6, as in the column, is also eminently playable. (c) 3 ..tg5 has little point and could be met by 3 . . . lLlf6 4 ll:Jc3 d5 5 -.d3 c6! 6 0-0-0 g6 7 e4 lLl xe4! 8 lLlxe4 de 9 -. xe4 -.d5 + . 3 d6 � 4 e4 c6 5 -.d2 On 5 lLlc3, Black can support

l liJj3 and Others

the advance of his e-pawn by 5 . . . -was. 5 lt:ld7 lt:lc3 6 e5 ( 70) 70 w

An obscure position, sorely in need of practical trials. It is obvi ous that much remains to be expl ored in this crazy gambit. D

2 h3 2

h3

This apparently timid move conceals aggressive intentions. As in the preceding variation, White plans to gambit the g-pawn but here the opening of the h-file will be automatic since Black has no opportunity to decline as in note (a) above. Given its successful introduc tion by no less a figure than K orchnoi, it is surprising that this quirky continuation has so far sin gularly failed to attract any fo llowers. Moreover, it is clear that Black's best response has yet to

91

be worked out.

2 lt:lf6 As well as this natural move Black could also consider 2 . . . d6 and 2 . . . d5. 3 g4 3 lt:lf3 would bring about H aik M. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985, (which actually arose via the move order 2 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 3 h3) where Black failed to find a good defence: 3 . . . d6 (3 . . . d5 4 c4 e6 5 lt:lc3 c6 comes into consideration) 4 g4 g6 (after 4 . . . fg 5 hg .txg4 White could play 6 lt:lg5 or 6 'W'd3 with compensation for the pawn in an unclear pos ition) 5 lt:lc3 .tg7 6 'W'd3 lt:lc6? (6 . . . c6 is much better) 7 d5 lt:le5 8 lt:lxe5 de 9 gf and Black is in dire straits due to 9 . . . gf failing to l 0 -. g3. 3 fg Although acceptance of the gambit is clearly the acid test, there is much to be said for declin ing, e.g. 3 . . . d6 4 g5 lt:le4 5 ..tf4 c6! 6 f3 -.as + 7 c3 e5 with a wild game which could easily go in Black's favour. 4 hg lt:lxg4 e4 5 d6 ( 7 I ) White has obvious compens ation for the pawn in his control of the centre, free development and open h-file. The demands on the defender are considerable and allow no margin of error. The inaugural game for this variation, ·

92

2 ttJj) and Others

Korchnoi- Kaenel, Biel 1 979, car ried on: 6 .ig5! g6 (6 . . . c6) 7 f3 �f6 8 �c3 c6 9 1t'd2 .ie6 1 0 0-0-0 �bd7 I I
2 1t'd3 2

1t'd3

An outre move which flouts the principles of good opening play but is redeemed by its strategic grounding. White simultaneously threatens the f-pawn and prepares e2-e4 thus compelling Black to adopt a Stonewall formation. Happily for the Dutch Defence

this is no bad thing, and the clumsy placing of White's queen assures Black of a very playable game. d5 2 A classic illustration of what Black must not allow is provided by Fairhurst-Dreyer, Dublin 1 957, which went 2 . . . g6 3 e4 fe 4 1t' xe4 �f6 5 1t' h4 (the queen is powerfully posted here) 5 . . . .ig7 6 �f3 b6 7 �c3 c5 8 .ih6 0-0 9 .ixg7 �xg7 1 0 0-0-0 and Black will experience great difficulty in subduing the active white pieces. 3 g3 Best. More rustic schemes of development leave White pass ively placed, e.g. 3 .i.f4 e6? (3 . . . �f6 is correct) 4 �f3 (Black's unsuspecting third move could have been exploited by the consist ent 4 1t'g3! �a6 5 e3 c6 6 .ixa6!? 1t'a5 + 7 �c3 1t'xa6 8 .id6 or 8 .ie5 - with total positional control) 4 . . . �f6 5 e3 .id6 6 .te2 (pusillanimous in the extreme; 6 c4 was necessary) 6 . . . 0-0 7 �e5 c5! 8 c3 �c6 9 �d2 1t'c7 10 �df3 �fd7! I I �xd7 .ixd7 1 2 .ixd6 1t'xd6 1 3 0-0 c4! 14 1t'd2 b5 1 5 �el g5! 1 6 f4 g4 and the black infantry have enveloped the board; Semmering Kmoch-Alekhine, 1 926. �f6 3 e6 4 .ig2 5 c4 .i.d6 Simply 5 . . . .ie7 with a later

2 &uf3 and Ochers

. . . tt:lc6 would also have its points. 6 .!Llf3 0-0 7 0-0 c6 .td7! 8 bJ 9 .taJ .te8 10 .txd6 W' xd6 11 eJ .!Llbd7 .th5 ( 72) 12 .!Llc3

available) 23 �h8 24 l:[ f3 1: g8 25 �h2 .td7 (the versatile bishop reverts to a more familiar role as mainstay of the queenside) 26 .th3 l:[ g6 27 �h l (unhappy with the constant possibility of .!Llg4 + hanging over him, the white k ing withdraws only to run foul of the advanced cavalry) 27 . . . : bg8 28 l:[ g2 l:[ xg3! 29 l:[ gxg3 1: xg3 30 t! xg3 .!Llf2 + 3 1 �g2 .!Llxd3 (a degrading demise for her majesty who moved not once since her optimistic emergence at the beginning of the game) 32 l:[ xd 3 tt:le4 0- l o 0 0 0

0 0 0

F Black has a very comfortable position; his putatively bad bishop is more effective than its theoret ically good counterpart, and since the centre is solid and White has yet to generate play on the queen's wing, he can think in terms of developing his initiative on the k ingside. The game Gavrikov Psakhis, Tallinn 1 983, continued 1 3 tt:ld2 tt:le4 1 4 f4 l:[ ac8 1 5 c5 W'e7 1 6 b4 g5 I 7 a4 gf 1 8 ef tt:ldf6 ( Black's minor pieces are much the m ore active) 1 9 l:[ ac l b6 (prophy lax is to nip White's play in the b ud) 20 tt:lb3 l:[ b8 2 1 .!Lla2 .te8 22 : c2 h5 23 h4 (creates lasting weaknesses, but otherwise Black will constantly have . . . h5-h4

93

2 e3 2

e3

Such self-limitation instantly forfeits any prospects of obtaining an opening advantage. Black may respond more or less according to taste; the line given is analogous to that against 2 .!Llf3. 2 .!Llf6 e6 3 .td3 Tolush-Alexander, Hastings 1 953/4, went 3 d6 4 tt:le2?! (a spiritless deployment which bears no comparison with the natural 4 tt:lf3) 4 . . . e5 5 de ( Black also had an easy time of it in Colle Nimzowitsch, Baden-Baden 1 925, after 5 c4 c5 6 0-0 .!Llc6 7 ttJ bc3 g5 8 de de 9 tt:lg3 ·e4 I 0 .te2 .td6 I I tt:l b5 ..te5 12 W'xd8 + �xd8 0 0 0

2 li:Jj3 and Others

94

1 3 .l:l d l + �e7) 5 . . . de 6 0-0 ..tc5 7 lLlg3 g6 8 ..tc4 "ile7 and Black's chances are already super ior thanks to his space advantage on the kingside and concomitant attacking prospects. 4 lLld2 Of course, White would be better advised to play a quick lLlf3 coupled with c2-c4. 4 c5 4 . . . d5 is also possible but the text move is more elastic. lLlgf3 lLlc6 5 0-0 b6 6 ..ie7 ( 73 ) c3 7 73 w

Black may look to the future with confidence. In Stahlberg-

Keres, M unich 01. 1 936, White inconsistently continued with the sharp 8 e4?! and paid the penalty after 8 . . . cd 9 cd lLlb4 10 ..i b 1 ..i a 6 1 1 .l:l e 1 lLl d 3 1 2 ..ixd3 ..txd3 1 3 ef ..txf5 14 lLlc4 .l:l c8 1 5 lLlce5 0-0 when he has merely managed to lose the bishop pair and obtain an isolated d-pawn. G The remainder Of the 28 moves available to White on his second move only one (2 ..ih6??) is absolutely unplay able, although it would not be easy to survive after 2 �d2? either. Those moves apart (and perhaps also 2 "ii d 2 which merely gets in the way and presents a target), the advantage of playing first allows White the luxury of being able to make a dubious move and get away with it. When faced with unorthodox opening play, Black generally does best to stick as much as possible to his preferred development scheme in the know ledge that natural moves are usu ally the best.

10

The Classical Variation

This chapter covers those vari ations which arise when White (temporarily at least) avoids the kingside fianchetto and instead follows up his opening move with the direct, classical development of 2 c4 and 3 tt:lc3. That this approach is rarely seen in contem porary master praxis is testimony enough to the adequacy of Black's defences. t rs d4 c4 2 e6 Of course, Black may equally well play 2 . . . tt:lf6. The text move order has been chosen in order to take into account the possibility t hat Black might transpose into the Dutch via the sequence I d4 e6 2 c4 f5. 3 tt:lc3 The usual assortment of offbeat alternatives do not cause Black any trouble : (a) 3 g4? fg 4 e4 (4 h3 g3! 5 fg c 5 ! 6 d5 ..td6 + ) 4 . . . e5! 5 d5 (5 de tt:lc6 +) 5 . . . ..tb4 + (simply 5

. . . tt:lf6 is also good) 6 tt:lc3 .txc3 + 7 be d6 + ECO. (b) 3 e4? fe 4 tt:lc3 tt:lf6 5 f3 .t b4! (rapid development is even better than allowing White the slight compensation he would obtain in return for the pawn) 6 .tg5 c5 7 de (7 d5 ed 8 cd 0-0 is also good for Black) 7 . 0-0 8 .ri e l 'flc7 9 .txf6 .rl xf6 1 0 fe 'fl f4 I I tt:lf3 'fl xe4 + and White is in dire straits; Freiman-Model, USSR Ch. 1 927. (c) 3 e3 tt:lf6 4 ..td3 (after 4 f4 b6! 5 tt:lf3 .tb7 6 ..td3 g6! 7 0-0 .tg7 8 tt:lc3 0-0 9 'fle2 c5 Black has fully equal prospects; analysis by Pachman) 4 . . . d6 5 'flc2 (it is inadvisable to ignore the threat ened advance : 5 tt:le2?! e5 6 tt:l bc3 tt:lc6 7 d5 tt:le7 8 e4 W t Dubinin Riumin, USSR Ch. 1 934/35) 5 . . . g6 6 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 7 0-0 e5 8 de de 9 .te2 e4 I 0 .rl d I 'fle7 l l tt:ld4 tt:le5 with excellent prospects for Black; Pachman. . (d) 3 tt:lf3 is evidently replete . .

95

96


with transpositional possibilities; here we shall merely note some of the more individualistic pathways : 3 . . . lLl f6 4 e3 (4 d5 .tb4 + 5 .td2 -.e7 6 ll:lc3 c6! 7 de de 8 a3 .td6 9 e4 e5 is good for Black, Vasyukhin-Kolobov, Moscow Ch. 1 965) 4 . . . b6 5 .td3 J.. b 7 6 0-0 .te7 7 ll:l bd2 (or 7 -.e2 0-0 8 b3 -.e8 9 .tb2 d6 l O lLlc3 -.g6 1 1 lLle1 ll:lbd7 with complete equality; Pfeiffer-Matulovic, Oberhausen 1 96 1 ) 7 . . . 0-0 8 -.c2 d5 (a note worthy method of parrying the e4 threat) 9 cd (on 9 lLle5 Black will continue with 9 . . . c5 and . . . ll:lc6) 9 . . . lLlxd5 10 a3 c5 t t de .txc5 and Black's active centralized pieces balance the chances; H. Frydmann-Tartakower, Lodz 1 927. lLlf6 ( 74 ) 3

model games we shall summarize these alternatives as follows : (a) 4 e4? fe transposes to note 'b' to White's third move. (b) 4 -.c2 .te7 (a game from the world championship match, Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1 9 5 1 , dem onstrated that 4 . . . .t b4 is not entirely satisfactory for Black after 5 e3 0-0 6 .td3 d6 7 lLle2 c5 8 a3 .t xc3 + 9 lLl xc3 ll:lc6 tO de de I I b3 .td7 1 2 .t b2 ll:le5 and now instead of preserving the bishop with 1 3 .te2?! as was played in the game, Botvinnik has pointed out that 1 3 0-0-0! lLlxd3 + 14 .l::txd 3 leaves White the better chances) 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 e4 (White should be content with either 6 e3 or 6 g3) 6 . . . fe 7 lLl xe4 ll:lc6 8 lLlxf6 + (not 8 .td3 lLl b4 9 lLlxf6 + �h8!) 8 . . . .txf6 9 .te3 e5 = l O d e lLl xe5 1 1 lLlxe5 .t xe5 t 2 .td3 -. h4 t3 g3?! -.h5 1 4 o-o d6 t 5 f4 .tf6 t 6 .l::tfe 1 .th3 with some advantage for Black; Pachman Larsen, Havana 01. 1 966. (c) 4 .tg5 .te7 (4 . . . .tb4 also comes into consideration) 5 e3 (White achieves nothing by 5 .txf6 .txf6 6 e4, e.g. 6 . . . fe 7 lLlxe4 0-0 8 lLlf3 d6 9 .td3 lLlc6 ) 5 . . . 0-0 6 .td3 (long castling produces double-edged positions, e.g. 6 -.c2 -.e8 7 ll:lf3 d6 8 0-0-0 lLlc6 9 d5 lLlb4 t O W'b3 lLla6 1 1 de lLlc5 1 2 -.c2 lLlxe6 t 3 .th4 lLlc5 t4 lLld4 W'h5 t 5 .tg3 a5; Polu=

This i s the main tabiya of the Classical Variation and just about every possible fourth move has been tried at one time or another. Before proceeding with our two


gayevsky-Guimard, Buenos Aires 6 . . . b6 7 lL!f3 (Harrwitz Morphy, Paris 1 858, went 7 lL!ge2 _i. b7 8 0-0 lL!h5! 9 .txe7 W xe7 1 0 lL!g3 lL! xg3 1 1 hg d6 = ) 7 . . . .i.b7 8 0-0 We8! 9 We2 lL!e4 ( Botvinnik has suggested 9 . . . ..Wh5 1 0 e4 lL!c6! producing a rich and unclear position) 1 0 .i.xe7 lL!xc3 (this important zwis chenzug was made possible by Black's eighth) 1 1 be W xe7 1 2 a4 .i.xf3!? (this bold and interesting capture has been universally critic ized in favour of 1 2 . . . lL!c6 1 3 .l:tfb l :t abS with a consensus evaluation of = ) 1 3 W xf3 lL!c6 1 4 : fb 1 : ae8?! (but this i s where I would point the finger; by playing 14 . . . g6! instead Black could not be prevented from achieving the vital . . . e5 advance) 1 5 Wh3 :t f6 (and here Alek hine's recommen dation of 1 5 . . . g5 is more to the point) 16 f4 ± Black's e-pawn has been prevented from advancing while the white counterpart will shortly do so to considerable effect; Capablanca-Tartakower, New York, 1 924. (d) 4 e3 b6! 5 .td3 (Najdorrs 5 �e2 .tb7 6 .tf3 is most simply answered by 6 . . . .txf3 7 W xf3 l2lc6 with approximately even cha nces, while Fraser-Steinitz, Dundee 1 867, demonstrated that unambitious opening play by White enables Black to adopt a

t 962)

97

typically flexible setup guarantee ing pleasant middlegame pro spects : 5 lL!f3 .tb7 6 .te2 We7 7 .td2 lL!c6 8 :t e l g6 9 Wc2 .tg7 = ) 5 . . . .t b7 6 lL!f3 (6 f3 is an important alternative, best met by 6 . . . g6, when Dus-Hotimirsky Maroczy, Carlsbad 1 907, saw Black equalize after 7 lL!ge2 .tg7 8 Wc2?! lL!c6 9 a 3 e5; ECO gives 7 lL!h3 .tg7 8 0-0 0-0 9 e4 ;t , but 8 . . . c5!, exploiting the decentralized white knight, is more logical) 6 . . . .tb4! (Black increases his control of e4) 7 .td2 (nor has Black any problems after 7 0-0 .txc3 8 be 00 9 a4 lL!c6 10 lL!d2 d6; Rubinstein Maroczy, Teplitz-Schonau 1 922) 7 . . . 0-0 8 Wc2 (Black has an extremely comfortable game after 8 0-0 d6 9 a3 .txc3 1 0 .txc3 lL!e4) 8 . . . a5 9 a3 .txc3 10 .txc3 lL!e4 1 1 0-0-0 d5 (utilizing the fact that White dare not countenance a further weakening of the king's pawn cover by b2-b3 to obtain a second central light square base for his pieces) 1 2 lL!e5 lL!d7 1 3 lL!xd7 W xd7 1 4 .te l de 1 5 .txc4 .td5 with fine chances for Black; Flohr- Bondarevsky, USSR Ch. 1 95 1 . (e) 4 lL!f3 b6 5 e3 .t b7 6 .td3 ..t b4 transposes to note (d). (f) 4 f3 .t b4 5 .td2 0-0 (not 5 . . . c5 6 a3) 6 a3 .te7 7 e3 c5 8 .td3 lL!c6 9 lL!ge2 d6 1 0 Wc2 .td7 1 1 0-0-0 a6 12 g4 b5, with a typical

98


opposite wing castling maelstrom of a middlegame to come, was the course of Volovich-A. Zaitsev, match, Moscow 1 962. Clearly there remains much to be discov ered here. It should be noted that Black may, of course, transpose to a Stonewall in many of these variations should he so prefer. Maroczy-Tartakower

Teplitz-Schonau 1 922 1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 tt:lc3 tt:lf6 4

a3 ( 75 )

75 B

..te7 4 0-0 5 e3 d5 6 ..td3 c6 7 tt:lf3 Sidestepping an instructive error easily made by inexperienced Stonewallers : 7 . . tt:le4? 8 cd ed 9 W'b3 and the double attack on d5 and e4 makes the proud black knight untenable. 8 tt:le4 0-0 W'c2 9 White unsuspectingly continues with natural-looking routine moves which surprisingly rapidly lead him into a passive and vulner able position. 9 tt:le5 followed by I 0 f4 would stabilize White's kingside and produce an equal position. 9 ..td6 10 b3 tt:ld7 11 : f6 ( 76 ) ..tb2 .

76 w

This modest looking move is logical enough given that the major theme of the Dutch is con trol of e4 and that the move . . . ..tb4 often plays a vital role in Black's efforts toward this end. By switching to the Stonewall, however, Black can simul taneously maintain control of e4 and highlight the lack of bite behind the a-pawn advance.

Tally-ho! Black has sighted his quarry and is after it without further ado. It was this game which established the rook manoeuvre


as the most effective method of pursuing the attack in such opti mum conditions. An alternative idea, noted by Tartakower, would be . . . li f6 followed by . . . g7-g5g4. .ll fel 12 Preparing to shore up the defences. 12 .ll h6 Threatening the bishop sacrifice on h2 followed by . . . li h4. 13 g3 li f6 14 ..UI White would dearly like to reposition his knight at f1 by 14 �d2, but this would allow the devastating sacrifice 14 . . . �xf2! 15 ..t>xf2 .ll xh2 + 16 ..t>g 1 (or 1 6 ..t> f3 e5) 1 6 . . . ..txg3 and 1 7 . . . li h4. 14 g5 15 .ll ad1 At first sight it seems incredible that there can be anything seri ously wrong with White's position given that all of his pieces are developed and occupy sensible looking squares while most of Black's queenside is still asleep. Two key factors supply the answer : king safety and purpose. That the white monarch is in grave danger is clear enough, but even that might not be decisive if only his forces were actually doing something - which they mani festly are not. And therein lies the

99

overriding problem : whilst White's army is optically plaus ible, functionally it is impotent. 15 g4 16 �xe4 Forced, since once again 1 6 �d2 would allow the decisive knight offer 1 6 . . . �xf2 1 7 ..t>xf2 .1:1. xh2 + 1 8 .tg2 ..txg3 + ! 16 fe 17 �d2 ( 7 7 )

17 .ll xh2!! A glorious conception, which Reti, writing in 1 933, described as '. . . a type of combination without precedent . in the literature of chess'. The astonishing and distin guishing feature is that Black does not follow up his heavy sacrifice with a forcing sequence, but calmly completes his development, thus leaving his opponent all the time and choice in the world with which to organize his defences! li xf2 + 18 ..t>xh2 19 ..t> h 1 ! The best defence. After the 0

100


obvious 1 9 .tg2, Black plays neither 19 . . . 'it' xg3 + nor 1 9 . . . .txg3 + 20 �h i 'it' f6! 2 1 J:l. e2 .tf2! 22 J:l. xf2 'it' xf2 etc., but rather brings up extra firepower by 1 9 . . . lt:lf6! after which White is helpless, e.g. 20 'it'c3 'it' xg3 + 2 1 �g l 'it'h2 + 22 �fl lt:lh5 23 lt:lxe4 (otherwise there follows 23 . . . .td7 and . . . J:l.f8 + ) 23 . . . de 24 d5 e5 25 de lt:lg3 + 26 �f2 .te6 and wins (analysis by Tartakower). 19 lt:lf6! Naturally, Black does not relin quish the pin on the knight which is a key factor in the successful prosecution of his attack; after 1 9 . . . 'it' xg3 2 0 lt:l b l the white queen would be able to transfer to the kingside immediately. 'it' xg3 20 J:l. e2 lt:lb1 21 lt:lh5 .td7! 22 'it'd2 With remarkable sangfroid Black goes about completing his development. J:l. f2 23 Against the natural 23 'it' e l Tar takower gives 23 . . . 'it'f3 + 24 J:l. g2 'it'h3 + 25 �g I J:l. f8 26 lt:ld2 .tg3 27 J:l. xg3 'it' xg3 + 28 'it'xg3 lt:lxg3 29 .tc3 lt:lf5 30 J:l. e l h5, and the pawn mass advances threaten ingly. 'it'h4 + 23 .tg3 24 �g1 The Soviet Grandmaster Rago zin suggested 24 . . . g3 as possibly

an even stronger continuation of the attack, e.g. 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 and Black threatens either 26 . . . J:l. f6 and . . . J:l. h6 or 26 . . . J:l. f3 followed by . . . lt:lf6 and . . . lt:lg4. 25 .tc3 White is obliged to give back some material in an effort to break the attack, for, as Tartakower pointed out, after 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 26 'it'e2 J:l. f3 27 .tc3 .td6 28 .t e l g3 2 9 lt:l d 2 'it'g4, an incredible position arises where White, despite his great material superior ity, is powerless to prevent Black carrying out the decisive knight regrouping . . . lt:lh5-g7-f5. It would, however, have been better to give back the exchange by 25 J:l. h2 .txh2 + 26 'it'xh2 'it'g5 27 .te l g3 28 'it' h l ! when the final outcome would remain a moot point. 25 .txf2 + 26 'it'xf2 g3 27 'it'g2 J:l. f8 Black finally completes his development and at the same time threatens 28 . . . J:l. f2 29 'it'h l J:l. h2 trapping the queen. 28 .tel ( 78 ) J:l. xfl + ! 28 Tartakower crowns his attack with another beautiful sacrifice! 29 �xfl e5 30 �g1 .tg4 31 .txg3 On 3 1 J:l. d2, Black liquidates

The Classical Variation 79

78

8

8

into an easily won ending: 3 1 . . . ed 32 ed ..tf3 3 3 .txg3 li:Jxg3 34 "iW h2 "ihh2 + 35 : xh2 li:Je2 + and 36 . . . li:J xd4. 31 li:J xg3 32 .C. e 1 li:JfS 33 "it" f2 WgS 34 de After taking such a buffeting i t is hardly surprising that Maroczy's resistance finally snaps. Not that the better 34 �fl would have altered the result; Tartakower gives 34 . . . Wh5 35 "it"gl ! W h4 36 li:Jc3 li:Jg3 + 37 �g2! li:Jh 1 ! 38 �fl "iW f6 + with mate in two. 34 i.£3 + lLlg3 + 35 �n 0-1 One of the greatest attacking games of all time! ..

I

101

K. Grigorian-Balashov USSR Ch. 1 974 d4 fS 2 c4 e6 3 li:Jc3 li:Jf6 4 The

g3 ( 79 ) fianchetto

updates

the

Classical Variation into the modern approach, inviting vari ous transpositions. Although play able, it is hard to commend this move order by White as it permits Black to enter one of the most reliable versions of the Dutch Indian. ..tb4 4 Of course, Black may also choose 4 . . . i.e7, or 4 . . . d5. .id2 5 It is natural to prevent the doubled pawns but not obligatory; for 5 ..tg2 see Chapter 1 1 , p. 1 06. 0-0 s The normal continuation and probably best, although it is worth noting the course of the game Vark-Keres, Parnu 1 9 7 1 , where Black successfully provoked novel strategical complications: 5 . . . li:Jc6 6 a3 ..te7 (6 . . . .txc3 7 .t xc3 li:Je4 leads to equality) 7 d5!? li:Je5 8 Wb3 ..tc5 9 .ig2 We7 lO li:Jh3 i. b6 1 1 li:Ja4 li:Je4 1 2 .tb4 d6 1 3 li:Jxb6 ab 1 4 li:Jf4 0-0

1 01


and Black had no reason to be dissatisfied with his prospects. d6 .1g2 6 .1xc3 tt:lf'3 7 tt:le4 .1xc3 8 Black has implemented the standard procedure in such pos itions : remove White's protection of e4 by the exchange . . . .1xc3 and then occupy the outpost with the knight. ..-c2 9 This time White must attend to the threatened capture since hand in hand with the appearance of doubled pawns would go the dis appearance of the compensatory bishop pair. tt:ld7 9 The correct way to develop the queen's knight; from d7 the knight can either support the advance . . . e6-e5 or reinforce the outpost by . . . tt:ld7-f6. Note that here 9 . . . tt:lc6 would be mistaken as it would allow White to open up the centre, downgrade Black's pawn structure and disrupt the flow of his development after I 0 d5! The consequences of this response must always be weighed very care fully whenever Black is contem plating playing . . . tt:lc6. 10 0-0 tt:ldf6 ( 80) 10 . . . -.e7 is also eminently playable after which a game Flohr-- Botvinnik, match 1 933, meandered to a correct draw via

80 w

I I lHd 1 tt:lxc3 (now that White's KR has been developed the retreat .te l preserving the two bishops is a real threat) 1 2 -.xc3 tt:lf6 1 3 tt:le l e5 1 4 de de 1 5 :d2 e4! 1 6 tt:lc2 .1e6 1 7 : ad I : adS 1 8 tt:le3 : xd2 19 : xd2 g6 20 .1ft : d8 2 1 : xd8 -.xd8 2 2 tt:lc2 1-! . .tel 11 An ambitious and controversial idea : can the bishops really be worth the disruption visited on the white position by this retrograde manoeuvre? The answer to that is evidently closely bound up with matters of taste and personal pre ference, but I for one would be very happy as Black to see such a move appear on the board. .1d7 11 In contrast to White's sophistic ation Black continues his develop ment with rustic simplicity. :dt 12 I t i s interesting to note that after this ECO evaluates the position as ;t , an assessment with which it is


not at all easy to agree. The rook move is explained through dissat isfaction with the immediate 1 2 ad2 ..tc6 and therefore White prepares to advance his d-pawn. -.e8 12 The queen is much more effec tive here than on e7; now she is poised for activity on the king's flank whilst also glancing prophyl actically to the queenside ( 1 3 b4?? ..ta4). e5 13 d5 Invariably the right response in such situations : the position is kept closed thus mimmizmg White's bishop pair, the knight on f3 is denied access to d4, and Black creates a healthy, mobile pawn duo on f5 and e5. ttJc5 14 ttJd2 It stands to reason that Black will not readily acquiesce in exchanges which would only serve to relieve the congestion in White's camp. 15 0?! While this gives luft to the con fined cleric and prepares the additional central pawn advance e2-e4, it also weakens the king's defences. The most logical conti nuation is 1 5 b4 ..ta4 16 ttJ b3, although after 16 . . . ttJxb3 1 7 a b ..td7 White's impaired pawn structure is a considerable hindr ance to his normal queenside play. a5 15

16 17

..tf2 b3 (81 )

1 03

b6

81 B

f4! 17 Having secured his position on the queenside Black now signals the attack on the opposite flank. 18 e4 This advance is dictated by the necessity of preventing Black from decisively deflecting the f-pawn from guarding g4, e.g. 1 8 e3 fg 1 9 h g e4 20 ttJxe4 ttJcxe4 2 1 fe -.h5 and 22 . . . ttJg4. -.g6 18 Immediately utilising the cover inadvertently provided by the e-pawn. 19 1He 1 In order t o provide further protection for g3. 19 rg 20 hg h5! A multi-purpose move which fixes White's pawns, prepares a breakthrough by . . . h4, and frees h7 so that the KN can be optimally re-positioned. In the meantime

/ 04


White's passive forces can do no more than await the storm. lLl rt 21 lLlh7 lLlg5 22 i.e3 23 i. xg5 An inglorious end for the prelate of once grand pretensions. "it'xg5 23 24 Wd2 Wf6 25 lLle3 Since Black can always prepare . . . h4 at his leisure White does not bother to postpone matters by 25 "iff2. 25 h4 26 g4 The position must be kept closed at all costs. 26 g6 27 .:t b1 A forlorn gesture at queenside expansion. 27 .:t f7 .:t e2 28 28 a3 a4 29 b4 lLl b3 and 30 . . . lLld4 would only add to White's

troubles. 28 29

i.h1

.:t af8 "it'g5 ( 82)

82 w

A more perfect outcome for Black's strategy is hard to imagine! The outcome is no longer in doubt, and it is something of a blessing in disguise that White makes a blunder in time-trouble which puts a mercifully swift end to the proceedings. lLlxe4! 30 lLld1?? 31 fe "it'xg4 + 32 .:t g2 .:t rt + 33 �h2 Wh3 mate

\

11

The Dutch Indian This continuation often pro duces positions which have much in common with the Nimzo lndian and Queen's Indian hence the designation Dutch Indian. After the check Black must choose between two radically different courses: either to seek enhanced prospects of equaliz ation through simplification (the early exchange of a pair of minor pieces), or to interpret the check as essentially a spoiler operation designed to prevent the best deployment of White's pieces, albeit at the cost of a tempo. Both approaches appear to be viable, but the latter has come increas ingly into favour in recent years. Before going on to consider White's two main replies, 5 tt:ld2 and 5 ..td2, we note how Black should meet 5 tt:lc3. This move allows Black to bring about a kind of Samisch Variation of the Nimzo-Indian . defence where White has tamely tucked away his

After the introductory d4 J fS 2 c4 e6 White may choose to revert to the fianchetto variations by playing 3 tt:lf6 g3 ..tg2 4 . . . in which case Black may either lead into the major variations with 4 . d5 or 4 . ..te7 (for which see Chapters 1 2- 1 6), or take advantage of the weakness created on the a5-e 1 diagonal by White's second move and deliver check with the bishop : 4 ..tb4 + r 83 ) .

.

. .

IU w

1 05

106

The Dutch Indian

KB on g2 instead of developing it aggressively on d3 as is normally the case. Thus the logical response is 5 . . . ..txc3 + 6 be 0-0 7 lt:lf3 d6 S 0-0 lt:lc6 (probably the surest route to equality; Meulders Short, Brussels 1 9S7, went S . . . 'fle7 9 ..ta3 ltJ bd 7 1 0 lt:ld2! c5 1 1 e4 fe 1 2 lt:l xe4 lt:lxe4 1 3 ..txe4 and now the precise 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 would leave White with only slightly the better of it) 9 'll c2 (or 9 ..ta3 .l:l. eS 1 0 'flc2 e5 1 1 de de 1 2 .l:l. fd l ..td7 1 3 lt:l h4 'lieS with level chances; de Winter-Spassky, Lugano 01. 1 96S) 9 . . . e5 I 0 de lt:lxe5 I I lt:lxe5 de 12 ..ta3 .l:l.f7 13 .l:l. ad 1 'lieS = White's active pieces and bishop pair offset the weak pawns; Colon-Spassky, San J uan 1 969. Botvinnik-Larsen Leiden 1 970 1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lt:lf6 4 ..tg2 ..t b4 + 5

lt:ld2 ( 84 )

114 B

By parrying the check

m

this

fashion White hopes either to obtain the bishop pair 'for free' (i.e. without suffering doubled pawns as in 5 lt:lc3), or to oblige Black to lose time withdrawing the bishop to the safety of its own lines. However, Black can utilize the indirect disadvantage of the knight's placement at d2 - the diminished control of d5 as a result of the queen being blocked - to develop the QB actively in fianch etto without having to face a timely d4-d5. These factors tend to balance out, producing rich middlegames of considerable stra tegic complexity. 5 0-0 This natural move has been accepted as the norm for many years, but nevertheless may well not be the most precise. The reason for this assertion is to be found in the note to White's ninth move where a recent game has cast serious doubt on the validity of Black's setup. It may well be that by playing 5 . . . a5!? (always a useful move), with the intention of fianchettoing before castling, Black can circumvent the prob lems posed by this latest White improvement. For example, after 6 lt:lf3 b6 7 lt:le5 .l:l. a7 S 0-0, in addition to S . . . ..tb7 Black may also play S . . . ..txd2!? 9 'fl xd2 (a standard recapture, hoping to develop the bishop at b2 on

The Dutch lndian

the long diagonal; 9 ..txd2 is no better) 9 . . . d6!? with many promising possibilities. This certainly deserves testing in p ractice. 6 l!Jf3 Expending a tempo on 6 a3 all ows Black instant equality after 6 ..txd2 + 7 ..txd2 d6 8 l!Jf3 fke7 9 ..tc3 l!Je4. Nor does 6 l!Jh3 seem appropriate, e.g. 6 . . . d6 7 0-0 e5 8 Wb3 ..txd2 9 ..txd2 l!Jc6 1 0 de de I I ..tb4 l!Jxb4 1 2 W'xb4 tt:le4! 1 3 ll ad l fkf6 1 4 f4 ..te6! + thanks to his better coordinated forces; Opocensky-Keres, Prague 1 937. aS 6 It is instructive to note the way straightforward play backfires on Black after 6 . . . d6 7 0-0 ..t xd2 8 .- xd2! W"e7 9 b4 e5 10 de de I I .t b2 e4 1 2 l!Jd4 (White's control of the dark squares is evident) 1 2 . . . l!Ja6 1 3 b5 l!Jc5 1 4 ..ta3 and Black is suffering; Furman-Anto shin, Voroshilograd 1 955. By contrast, the immediate 6 . . . b6 is a very playable alternative : (a) 7 0-0 ..tb7 8 a3 (8 W'c2 a5 9 tt:le I ..txg2 I 0 l!Jxg2 l!Jc6 I I l!Jf3 .�e7 1 2 a3 W"e8 1 3 d5 l!Jd8 1 4 n d I a4 1 5 ..te3 l!Je4 produced an unclear and difficult position for l both sides in Bertok- Larsen, Vin ..txd2 9 W'xd2 k ovci 1 970) 8 tt:lc6 10 b4 l!Je7 I I ..tb2 (in Popov- Makarychev, Amsterdam . . .

0 0 •

107

1 1 1974, Black cleverly exploited

the light square weaknesses in his opponent's camp which arose via I I a4 a6 1 2 l!Je I ..txg2 13 l!J xg2 b5! 14 cb ab 1 5 a5 l!:led5 16 f3 l!:lb6! + ) I I W'e8 1 2 a4 W"h5 1 3 a5 ..te4 and with a firm grip on e4 Black has no problems; Sokolov-Cvetkovic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 962. (b) 7 l!:le5!? (clearly more chal lenging than castling) 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 ..tb7 9 l!:lb3 ..te7 1 0 a4 l!Ja6 I I a5 W"c7 1 2 ..t g5 d6 1 3 l!Jd3 c5 and Black's elastic disposition of his forces should prevent White's slight spatial superiority and initiative from growing; Stein Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 . The text move not only restrains queenside expansion by White but also provides a flight-square for the rook so that after a subsequent . . . b6, l!Je5 sequence Black will not be obliged to play . . . c7-c6 as in the example above. 0-0 b6 7 8 tOeS ll a7 ( 85 ) The point! l!Jd3 9 Perhaps it is not too surprising that White has recently discovered a big improvement on this volun tary retreat, but it is surprising that the improvement is yet another voluntary retreat! The astonishing 9 lOb I ! provides a prime example of reculer pour 0 0 .

J OB

The Dutch Indian

Dutch dream of such positions!) 12 fe 1 3 lLlxe4 li:la6 14 ie3! W'e8 ( 1 4 li:lc5 1 5 lLlxc5 i.xc5 ixc5 be 1 7 li:ld3 ± ) 1 5 d 6! 16 (even better than the 1 5 lLlc3 ed 1 6 lLlxd5 i.xd5 1 7 i. xd5 + �h8 1 8 lt e 1 i. b4 1 9 i.d2 ± of Shab alov-Naumkin, Norilsk 1 987) 1 5 li:lxe4 ( 1 5 cd 1 6 li:lxd6 i.xd6 1 7 W' xd6 i.xg2 18 �xg2 ± ) 1 6 de W'xe7 1 7 W'xd7 W'f6 1 8 li:lc6 li:lec5 1 9 W'd2 i.xc6 20 ixc6 e5 21 i.g2 and with two bishops on an open board plus the better pawn structure, not to mention Black's queenside exiles, White's positional superiority is massive. After that it is a relief to note 9 li:ldf3 which brought White no advantage in J. Watson-Gins burg, US Ch. 1 982 : 9 ie7 (again, there is a threat to trap the bishop by to c5) to lLld3 (a game Portisch-K ristiansen, Luzern 01. 1 982, went 10 b3 li:le4 1 1 a3 ib7 1 2 i b2 i.f6 1 3 li:ld3 and no wJ with 1 3 . . . c5 Black could have transposed to the column game) 10 . . . ib7 1 1 lLlf4 lLle4 12 h4 W'e8 1 3 ie3 if6 14 .:. c t li:lc6 with balanced chances. 9 ib7 This position is evaluated as equal by Larsen. 10 lLlf3 1 0 li:lxb4 ixg2 I I �xg2 ab would give Black excellent 0 0 •

0 0 .

0 0 .

sauter : redeploying the knight to c3 transforms White's strategy at a stroke as it instantly puts the crucial advance d4-d5 back on the agenda. Not only that, but from c3 the k night also observes b5 thus giving Black some cause for concern over his eccentric rook. The following con vincing example strongly suggests that a satisfactory answer to this imaginative innovation by the Soviet player Shabalov is likely only to be found by reconsidering the introductory sequence (see note to Black's fifth). After 9 lLlb I !, Gelfand - K naak, Halle 1 987, went 9 i.e7 (with nothing left to capture, the bishop is menaced by to c5 and I I a3) 1 0 li:lc3 i. b7 I I d5 W' c8 (Black's plight is made manifest by the way the natural 1 1 . . . d6 1 2 li:lf3 e5 falls foul of 1 3 li:lg5 ic8 1 4 li:le6 i.xe6 1 5 de c6 1 6 e4 stirring up play in the centre which he is ill prepared to meet) 1 2 e4 (those who play against the mieux

0 0 .

0 0 .

0 0 .

The Dutch Indian

counterplay along the a-file and l on g diagonal especially after the arrival of the queen on a8. tO J.. e7 ll:le4 b3 tt J.. f6 J.. b2 12 c5! a3 13 There is no point in playing for . . . e5 with so many white pieces t rained on it, so Black contests the centre with the aid of his c-pawn. ll:lc6 e3 14 lLlfe5 ( 86 ) 15

1 09

and the useful c5 square securely in Black's hands. 18 tic7 tic2 19 J.. c6 f3?! 20 The beginning of a faulty plan which exacerbates White's prob lems; simply 20 l:l ad l was in order. 20 ll:lc5 ..tg5 lLlf4?! 21 ..te3 + ll:le2? 22 f4! (87) �ht 23 87 w

15 cd! very a instigates Black important and instructive alter ation of pawn structure which brings his pieces to life. lLlxe5 ed 16 de 17 J..e7 a4 18 White is concerned that his c p awn migh t be undermined at so me future time by . . . a5-a4, but the cure is more debilitating than the disease as it leaves his queen side pawns permanently crippled

This advance nearly always spells trouble for White. No mat ter how he reacts his king is bound to become less secure. 24 ll:ld4 This is criticized by Larsen, albeit without attempting to suggest an improvement. It takes a skilful trading of advantages to show the deficiency of the text move. 24 fg lLlxc6 25 Not 25 hg? ti xe5! and the threat of 26 . . . tih5 + prevents White

1 10

The Dutch Indian

doing damage with a discovered attack by the knight. de 25 1kf7 26 hg 27 .th3 The queen check must be pre vented. l:t d8! 27 This clever switch exploits the bishop's desertion of the f-pawn and enables Black to dominate the d-file since the attempt to contest it by 28 l:t ad l l:t xd l 29 1k xd l would be unacceptable after 29 . . . l:t d7. 28 .tc3 l:t ad7 An extremely satisfying conclu sion to the manoeuvre begun twenty moves ago with 8 . . . l:t a7! 29 l:t a2 There is nothing active for White to undertake. 29 l:t d3 Larsen points out that 29 l:t d l 30 1ke2 l:t l d 3 3 1 l:t c2 ll'lxb3 also came into consideration. 30 b4 ab 31 .txb4 1kh5 32 1kh2 1kxe5 With the fall of this pawn and the continuing central dominance of the black pieces White's fate is sealed. The game concluded as follows : 33 f4 1ke4 + 34 1kg2 1k xc4 35 .txc5 .txc5 36 1k xc6 (White is fighting hard, his temporary sacrifices having prod uced opposite coloured bishops) 36 . . .

l:t e3 37 l:t af2 �h8 (37 . . . h6!) 3 8 1kg2? (the last chance lay in 38 l:t f3! l:t e2 39 l:t 3f2 l:t e4 40 l:t d2) 38 . . . h6 39 .tg4 1k xa4 40 l:t e2 e5 4 1 l:t a2 1kc4 42 l:t c2 1k b4 43 .tf5 ef 44 gf l:t e l 45 l:t e2 l:t xfl + 46 1k xfl l:t f8 47 .te4 1kd4 48 �g2 1if6 49 f5 1kg5 + 50 � h l 1k h4 + 5 1 �g2 l:t d8 52 .tc2 l:t d4 0- l . M. Gurevich-Dolmatov

USSR Ch. 1 987 1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 ll'lf6 4 .tg2 .tb4 + 5

.td2 (88)

88 8

This natural move has long been White's most popular choice. Theoretically speaking, the exchange of dark squared bishops should work to White's advantage unless Black can rapidly achieve the vital . . . e6-e5 advance. 5 .te7 The idea behind this paradox ical retreat is that the incon venience caused White by luring

The Dutch Indian

the bishop to d2 will adequately off-set the tempo loss incurred. At the same time, Black ensures that a more complicated struggle will ensue than would be the case after the disappearance of the bishops. If Black prefers the simple life, then 5 . . . 'ike7 is a reliable alterna tive which promises good chances of equality as the following vari ations show : (a) 6 l2lh3 0-0 7 0-0 ..txd2 followed by . . . d6 with full equal ity. (b) 6 ..tc3 0-0 7 a3 ..t xc3 + 8 8xc3 d6 again with an easy game for Black. (c) 6 l2lc3 0-0 7 l2lf3 d6 8 0-0 ,hc3 9 ..t xc3 l2le4 1 0 'ii c 2 l2ld7 brings about Flohr- Botvinnik, match 1 933, given in Chapter 1 0, p. I 03, note to Black's tenth. (d) 6 'ii b3 ..txd2 + 7 l2l xd2 0-0 8 l2lgf3 d6 9 0-0 e5 I 0 c5 + �h8 I I cd cd 1 2 de (after 1 2 e4 fe 1 3 de de 1 4 l2lg5 l2lc6 1 5 l2lgxe4 8d4 Black's pieces are very active; Peterson-Uusi, Parnu 1 960; Heb ert has suggested that 1 2 'ii a3 gives White the advantage, but t his seems unlikely, e.g. 12 . . . e4 1 3 l2le5 'ii d 8!? 1 4 l2lec4 l2lc6 and Black should be OK) 1 2 . . . de 1 3 tLlc4 ( Heberg-Spraggett, Toronto Open 1 985, went 1 3 e4?! l2lxe4 1 4 tUxe4 fe 1 5 l2l d 2 l2lc6 1 6 ..txe4 � h3 :t ) 1 3 . . . l2lc6 14 'ii c 3 e4 1 5 tUfe5 l2lxe5 1 6 'ikxe5 'ikxe5 1 7 l2lxe5 =

Ill

..te6 with Black for choice; White ley-Bellin, England 1 976. (e) 6 l2lf3 ..t xd2 + ! 7 W xd2 d6 8 l2lc3 e5 9 dxe5 (9 0-0 e4 ) 9 . . . dxe5 1 0 e4 (Gulko-Speelman, Amsterdam 1 989) and now Black's most natural move is I 0 . . . l2lc6 ( 10 . . . fxe4 I I l2lg5 l2lc6 is also possible) when Black's free devel opment offsets the vulnerability of his e-pawn. l2lc3 6 White can also fight for an advantage with other moves : (a) 6 ..tc3?! 0-0 7 l2ld2 d5! (the Stonewall is the best formation for exploiting White's substitution of bishop for knight on c3) 8 l2lh3 c6 9 0-0 b5 10 b3 a5 1 1 'ii c 2 a4 and Black's position is already preferable; Sliwa-Sebestyen, Sopot 1 95 1 . (b) 6 l2lf3 0-0 (6 . . . d6 is more precise, avoiding the possibility of 7 d5!) 7 0-0 d6 8 l2lc3 We8 9 Wc2 (it is interesting to note that with the bishop on d2 White is unable to adopt the normal procedure against the Ilyin-Zhenevsky since now after 9 l:t e l Wg6 10 e4 fe 1 1 l2lxe4 l2l xe4 1 2 l:t xe4 Wxe4 1 3 l2lh4 the d-pawn would be en prise) 9 . . . Wh5 10 e4 e5 I I de de 1 2 l2ld5 ( 1 2 l2l xe5? fe is good for Black) 1 2 . . . l2lxd5 1 3 ed (the inferior 1 3 cd gives Black active play after 1 3 . . . ..td6 1 4 l:t fe l l2la6 1 5 ef ..txf5 1 6 'ikc3 ..th3!; Shelotshilin-,Shesto=

1 12

The Dutch Indian

porov, corr. 1 955) l 3 . . . ..tf6 1 4 ..tc3 ll:Jd7 and W hite has a mar ginal positional edge; Szabo Bronstein, Budapest 1 950. (c) 6 Wb3 c6 (6 . . . 0-0 comes strongly into consideration as 7 ll:Jc3 would transpose to the col umn game, whilst 7 ..txb7 ..txb7 8 W xb7 ll:Jc6 9 ..tc3 l:l. b8 10 W a6 ll:Je4 clearly offers compensation for the pawn) 7 d5 cd!? 8 cd e5 (both 8 . . . ed? 9 ll:Jc3 and 8 . . . ll:Jxd5 9 ..t xd5 ed l O ll:Jc3 leave White clearly better) 9 ll:Jc3 d6 1 0 ll:Jf3 ll:Jbd7 (of course not l O . . . 0-0? 1 1 ll:Jxe5!) 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 ll:Jg5 ll:Jc5 1 3 Wc4 h6 14 b4 ( 1 4 ll:Je6 ll:Jxe6 1 5 de e4 is in Black's favour) 14 . . . ll:Jcd7! 1 5 ll:Je6 ll:Jb6 16 Wb3 ..txe6 1 7 de d5 with complicated play perhaps somewhat favouring White; Sosonko-Abramovic, New York Open 1 986. 6 0-0 (89) 89 w

(a) 7 ll:Jh3 d6 8 0-0 e5 9 d5 h 6 1 0 f4 e4 produced a difficult game for both sides in Kmoch-Judovtc, Leningrad 1 934. (b) 7 e3 d6 8 ll:Jge2 c6 9 0-0 �h8 10 b4 e5 1 1 d5 cd 1 2 cd ll:Jbd7 1 3 l:l. c 1 ll:Jb6 1 4 Wb3 ..td7 and Black has almost imperceptibly taken control of the game in instructive fashion; White suffers from inac tive minor pieces, a sensitive d pawn and incipient light square weaknesses; Cobo-Larsen, H av ana 1 967. (c) 7 ll:Jf3 ll:Je4 (7 . . . d6 would transpose to note (b) to Whtte's sixth; adopting a Stonewall for mation would allow White to take advantage of the position of the bishop on d2 by 7 . . . d5 8 0-0 c6 9 .-c2 We8 10 a3! Wh5 1 1 ll:Ja2 ll:Jbd7 1 2 ..t b4 bringing about the strategically favourable exchange of dark squared bishops; Flohr Szabo, Moscow-Budapest 1 949) 8 0-0 ..tf6 9 Wc2 (9 ll:Jxe4 brings no advantage, e.g. 9 . . . fe 10 ll:Je5 d6 1 1 ll:Jg4 ..txd4 1 2 ..txe4 e5 1 3 ll:Je3 ll:Jd7 Nogueiras- Murey, Luzern OJ. 1 982) 9 . . . ll:Jxd2 1 0 W xd2 d 6 ( 1 0 . . . d 5 might contain White's advantage more success fully) 1 1 e4 fe 1 2 ll:J xe4 ll:Jc6 1 3 l:l. a d 1 with a clear positional superiority for White; Griinfeld Spielmann, Vienna 1 935. c6 7 This dynamic continuation con=

W b3 7 This queen sortie is more forcing than the alternatives :

The Dutch Indian

cedes White some structural ad vantage in return for active piece play in the style of the Lenin �rra d Variation. 8 dS! d6 Black must beware of the hid den dangers along the a2-g8 diag onal; thus 8 . . . e5?? loses to 9 d6! ,i xd6 10 c5 + . 9 de tt:la6 10 tt:lh3 This mode of development leaves the KB unhampered and thus permits White's minor pieces to work at maximum efficiency. 10 tt:lcS 11 ..-c2 tt:lg4 The best way of meeting the threat to the f-pawn as 1 1 . . . .i. xe6 1 2 b4 would be awkward. 12 0-0 aS Securing the c5 square and generally restrammg White's q ueenside pawns. .i.xe6 13 b3 14 tt:lf4 .i.d7 ( 90)

With the opening almost over,

113

i t i s time t o take stock. White's pawn structure is somewhat sounder but the black infantry secure a share of the centre and provide the foundation for king side action whilst restraining enemy ambitions on the opposite wing. Piece coordination in general is roughly balanced. Although the white prelates cur rently enjoy slightly greater scope than their counterparts, the suc cess of Black's diversionary check in deflecting White's QB from its natural long diagonal is quite not able. Black's major problem is to find a suitable deployment for the queen. IS tt:ld3 tt:le6 ..-c7?! 16 e3 The course of the game shows that Black should have sent his queen to the king's flank by 16 . . . ..-es intending to cover the weak b6 square with the KB, viz. 1 7 tt:la4 .i.d8 . l:l. a d 1 .i.e8 17 Heading for the h7-b 1 diag onal, this redeployment is consist ent with his sixteenth. 18 tt:le2 gS Depriving the white k nights of the use of f4 as well as building long-term attacking chances. 19 li:ld4! A classical central counter to Black's wing demonstration. 19 li:lxd4

1 14

The Dutch Indian

20 ed h6 With the action of White's QB opened up, the g-pawn needs sup port so that the knight may retreat to f6 if attacked. 21 : del ..tg6 22 f4 This g1ves Black tactical chances due to the weakening of the g l -a7 diagonal. Dolmatov indicates 22 :t e6 as a safer way for White to keep in control. 22 ..tf6 23 d5 : ae8 24 �hl ..td4 be 25 de 26 'W' c l ! ( 9 1 )

By keeping e3 under control and thus introducing h3 as a threat White's advantage becomes clear.

Even so, Black's position contams many tactical resources and the game provides a perfect example of how to muddy the waters when things go wrong: 26 . . . :t e4! 27 fg (27 h3 lLl f6 28 fg lLlh5 would be awkward to meet) 27 . . . hg 28 ..txg5! (28 ..txe4? fe would give Black a dangerous attack) 28 . . . 'W'h7 29 h4 : feB 30 ..tf3! (gives the king air and thereby prepares the decisive consolidation lLlf4) 30 . . . lLle3 3 1 ..txe3? (a mistake in time pressure; this was the correct moment to simplify by 3 1 ..txe4! lLlxfl 32 ..txc6 lLlxg3 + 33 �g2 lLle4 when White would clearly be on top) 3 1 . . . ..txe3 32 'W'b2 f4! + (with the undermining of his h pawn White's king becomes extremely vulnerable) 33 lLlxf4? (the decisive error; 33 gf :t 4e7 was relatively best) 33 . . . ..txf4! 34 : xe4 (34 ..txe4 ..txe4 + is crush ing) 34 . . . ..txe4 35 gf 'W'xh4 + 36 �g l (36 �g2 fails to the neat 36 . . . 'W'g4 + 37 �h2 ..txf3 38 :t g l :t e2 + ) 3 6 . . . ..txf3 3 7 :t xf3 :t e l + 38 : fl : xfl + 39 �xfl 'W' h I + and the queen is lost, so White resigns.

12

Classical System : Auxiliary Variations

This chapter deals with various rare deviations by White from the main introductory sequence to the Classical systems. Accurate defence by Black generally results in interesting middlegames with balanced chances. I d4 f5 2 g3 liJf6 3 e6 ..ig2

Blackburne's variation, named after the British grandmaster who introduced it over a century ago. Developing the knight this way avoids blocking in the KB and prepares liJh3-f4 putting pressure on dS and e6. Furthermore, White is ready almost immediately to carry out the important advance e2-e4, supported by f2-f3 if neces sary. On the debit side, the dimin ished control of eS makes it easier for Black to advance his own e pawn, possibly with gain of tempo (should the knight be on f4) or positional advantage (should the knight remain offside on h3). Other fourth moves are rela tively innocuous : (a) 4 e3 ..te7 5 liJe2 0-0 6 0-0 d6 7 b3 eS 8 de de = Euwe- R. Byrne, New York 1 95 1 . (b) 4 ..ig5 ..te7 (as usual, 4 . . . dS is a safe alternative) 5 ..txf6 ..txf6 6 e4 0-0 7 f4 fe 8 ..txe4 d5 and Black's KB provides the basis

Reshevsky- Botvinnik The Hague 1 948 4

tiJh3 ( 92 )

115

1 16

Classical System: A uxiliary Variations

for strong counterplay on the dark squares; Coho-Pritchett, Siegen 01. 1 970. (c) 4 lt:lc3 d5 (invariably the best response when White develops the QN in front of his c-pawn) 5 lt:lf3 c5!? (an aggressive approach; the usual Stonewall formation might in fact be more suitable) 6 0-0 lt:lc6 7 de (a game Mestrovic-Sines, Yugoslav Ch. 1 968, produced a mutually difficult position after 7 ..tf4 a6 8 lt:la4 c4) 7 . . . ..t xc5 8 a3 0-0 9 b4 ..te7 lO ..tb2 W' b6 with satisfactory play for Black; Tartakower-Treybal, Hamburg 01. 1 930. (d) 4 lt:ld2 d5 ( Black probably does best not to allow White to play e2-e4; 4 . . . c5!?, while usually not good, may be feasible here; 4 . . . lt:lc6 5 c3 d5 6 lt:ldf3 ..te7 7 lt:lh3 lt:le4 8 lt:lf4 0-0 is a strategically rich alternative; Ftacnik-Bellin, H as tings 1 980/8 1 ) 5 lt:ldf3 ..td6 6 lt:lh3 0-0 7 lt:lf4 lt:le4 8 lt:ld3 W'f6 9 e3 lt:ld7 1 0 0-0 g5 with fine play for Black; Forintos-Szabolsci, Hung arian Ch. 1 972. 4 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 c4 6 d6 M uch more logical than a 6 . . . d5 Stonewall formation which gives White improved chances of obtaining an advantage, e.g. 7 lt:lc3 c6 8 W'b3 lt:la6 (8 . . . W'e8 9 lt:lf4 � h8 1 0 lt:ld3 lt:le4 1 1 f3 lt:lxc3 1 2

·�txc3 lt:ld7 1 3 b3 is assessed as only ;;!;; by Petrosian, but it seems to me that Black's prospects are extremely bleak) 9 lt:lf4 �h8 1 0 lt:ld3 lt:lc7 1 1 ..tf4 lt:lce8 1 2 c5 and White is clearly in charge; Capablanca-Botvinnik, Hastings 1 934/35. lt:lc3 7 This natural developing move must be best. Less forceful conti nuations allow Black an easy time of it: (a) 7 lt:lf4 c6 (blunting the bish op's diagonal and taking control of d5) 8 lt:lc3 e5 9 de de lO lt:ld3 W'c7 and Black has an excellent Hort-Antoshin type of position; Nemet-Djurasevic, Yugoslavia 1 950. (b) 7 W'b3 c6 8 lt:ld2 a5 (8 . . . e5!? is an interesting and good alternative, e.g. 9 c5 + d5 lO e3 W'c7, or lO de lt:lg4) 9 lt:lf4 a4 1 0 W'c3 W'c7 1 1 e4 e 5 1 2 d e d e 1 3 lt:ld3 fe 1 4 lt:lxe4 ..tf5 with active piece play; Forintos--Farago, H ungarian Ch. 1 965. (c) 7 b3 W'e8 8 ..t b2 ..td8 9 lt:lf4 e5 1 0 de de 1 1 lt:ld5 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:l bc3 c6 1 3 lt:lxf6 + lt:lxf6 14 W'd6 lt:ld7 1 5 lt:la4 .:. f6 and Black has a solid position plus kingside attacking chances; U dovcic-Alexander, Belgrade 1 952. These examples clearly demon strate that a soundly executed . . . e6-e5 advance invariably brings

Classical System: Auxiliary Variations

Black full equality. 7

-.e8 ( 93 )

\13 w

The immediate 7 . . . e5?! con demns Black to a cheerless defence in the ending arising after S de de 9 -. xdS ..txd8 (9 . . . .I:.Xd8? 1 0 tZJd5) 1 0 b 3 l2:\a6 1 1 ..ta3 ll e8 1 2 tZJb5, a s was shown i n the game. E. Vladimirov-Psakhis, USSR 1 9S5. 7 . . . c6 may be an acceptable alternative, e.g. 8 e4 fe 9 l2:\ xe4 e5 I 0 de de 1 1 l2:\ hg5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\xf6 + gf 1 3 l2:\e4 -. xd 1 1 4 ll xd 1 ..ig4 1 5 f3 ..if5 with full equality; Olafs son- Ivkov, Birmingham 1 95 1 . e4 8 and Consequent active, although some of the alternatives can lead to even more complex p lay : (a) S b3 should simply be met by the usual S . . . c6 rather than 8 . . . l2:\c6?! 9 d5 or 8 . . . e5?! 9 de de I 0 l2:\d5 .idS 1 1 ..ia3 when White has the initiative. (b) 8 -.b3 c6 9 d5!? cd 10 cd e5 I I l2:\g5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\e6 ..ixe6 1 3 de

117

!Llc5 1 4 -.c2 e4 1 5 f3 d5 with a complex, double-edged position; Fesche-Schmeisser, K uortone 1 976. (c) 8 l2:\f4 is probably best answ ered by Keres's recommendation 8 . . . g5 9 l2:\d3 -.g6 which has yet to be tested in practice. After the standard 8 . . . c6, White can use tactical means to gain a positional advantage : 9 d5! e5 10 de be 1 1 l2:\fd5! lll x d5 1 2 l2:\ xd5 .idS 1 3 b3 .i.b7 14 l2:\c3 and Black's pawns are decidedly shaky; Taulbut R umens, London 1 977. fe 8 l2:\f4 9 Against the immediate recap ture 9 l2:\xe4, I recommend 9 . . . !Llxe4 l O .i.xe4 e5! 1 1 l2:\g5 .i.xg5! (the consequences of 1 1 . . . h6 1 2 l2:\h7 are not a t all clearly in Black's favour) 1 2 .i.xg5 !Llc6, and the harmony of the black forces offsets White's bishop pair. c6 9 l2:\xe4 l2:\xe4 10 e5 II .i.xe4 12 l2:\g2 1 2 de would isolate Black's e pawn, but after 1 2 . . . de 1 3 l2:\d3 (otherwise Black's K B will occupy the a7-g 1 diagonal) 1 3 . . . .i.h3 14 lle1 l2:\d7, Black's dynamic compensation can easily become more than sufficient. 12 l2:\d7 13 l2:\e3 ( 94 )

1 18

Classical System : A uxiliary Variations

94 8

13 eel Introducing a simplifying manoeuvre which completely equalizes. Keres notes that t 3 . . . llJf6 1 4 .tg2 e4 1 5 d5! c5 1 6 .td2 followed by .tc3 is in White's favour. 14 1fxd4 llJe5 f4 15 Covering the weakness on f3. 15 llJg4 16 llJxg4 .txg4 Black may look to the future with confidence on account of White's weakened king's position. The game concluded as follows : t 7 : e t .tf6 t 8 1fd3 ( 1 8 1f xd6? : d8 t 9 1fa3 .td4 + 20 � h t 1fh5 would give Black a dangerous attack) 1 8 . . . 1fh5 1 9 .td2 : fe8 20 : ab l ? (20 : e3!) 20 . . . : e7? (20 . . . : e6! was better) 2 1 .tb4 : ae8 22 .txd6 : e6 (perhaps Black had intended 22 . . . : xe4 23 : xe4 : xe4 24 1f xe4 .tf5 25 1fel .td4 + winning, and only now noticed that 25 1fe3! turns

the tables on account of 25 . . . .txbl 26 1fe6 + , and it is Black who is mated) 23 : e3 : xd6! (a temporary sacrifice to force t he draw) 24 1f xd6 : d8 25 1fc7 1fc5 26 : e t : c8 27 1f xb7 .td4 28 �f2 .txe3 + 29 : xe3 1fd4 30 1fb3 1fd2 + 3 1 �gt 1f c l + 32 �f2 1fd2 + 3 3 �g l 1fc1 + !-! . Botvinnik-Bronstein World Ch. ( 1 ) 1 95 1 t d4 r5 2 g3 ttJf6 3 .tg2 e6 4 5

c4 llJc3

.te7

Some interesting nuances can arise when White plays 5 llJf3 and delays castling after 5 . . . 0-0, for example : (a) 6 llJc3 d5 (a game Bogo ljubow-Alekhine, World Ch. 1 9 34, went 6 . . . d6 7 .tf4 1fe8 8 : c 1 llJc6 9 d5 llJd8 1 0 llJ b5 1fd7 I I 1f b3 a6 12 de llJxe6 1 3 llJc3 llJxf4 1 4 gf �h8 = ) 7 llJe5 c6 8 .tf4 1fe8 (Selezniev-Model, USSR Ch. 1 927, went 8 . . . llJ bd7 9 1fc2 llJ xe5 I 0 de llJe4 I t llJ xe4? fe 1 2 .td2 .tc5 1 3 f3 1f b6 1 4 00-0 e3 and White was in trouble) 9 1fb3 � h8 10 0-0-0?! ( 1 0 0-0 =) 1 0 . . . llJ bd7 I t h 3 llJ xe5 12 .t xe5 llJd7 1 3 .tc7 b6 and with . . . .ta6 to follow, Black has the better chances; Se1ezniev Riumin, USSR 1 927. (b) 6 d5!? .t b4 + (ECO gives 6

Classical System : A uxiliarr Variations

. . . d6 7 de lZlc6 8 lZld4 lZlxd4 9 -w xd4 c6 and . . . .txe6 as equaliz i ng, but I for one do not find this co nvincing) 7 .td2 'fle7 8 0-0 .txd2 9 'flxd2 eS 1 0 d6! (a deep p ositional pawn sacrifice) 1 0 . . . cd? (it would be better to remove the queens by I 0 . . . 'fi xd6 I I 'flxd6 cd 1 2 lZlc3 lZlc6 1 3 .l:tfd I lZle8 14 :t d2, as indicated by Robatsch, b ut even so White has good com pensation) I I lZlc3 lZla6 1 2 'figS! dS (or 1 2 . . . g6 1 3 lZlh4 �h8 1 4 'W xg6!) 1 3 lZlh4! � h 8 1 4 lZlxfS 'fl f7 1 5 cd with a crushing advantage; Buenos Robatsch-Jamieson, Aires 01. 1 978. It seems to me that until a reliable antidote is found to Robatsch's 6 dS, Black should refrain from castling on move five and effect a simple transposition according to choice. 5 0-0 ( 95 ) 95 w

e3 6 It is important to be au fait with t he alternatives :

119

(a) 6 e4 fe 7 lZlxe4 dS! (both 7 . . . lZlxe4 8 .txe4 dS 9 .td3 and 7 . . . d6 8 lZle2 'fie8 9 0-0 are good for White) 8 lZlxf6 + .txf6 9 lZlf3 cS 10 0-0 cd I I lZlxd4 de 1 2 .te3 lZlc6 1 3 lZlxc6 be 1 4 .tcS : f7 I S 'it' xd8 + .txd8 and with pressure to come against White's b-pawn, Black has no problems; Boutte ville-Duckstein, Le Havre 1 966. (b) 6 d5 .tb4 (better than leav ing the bishop locked behind the pawn chain after 6 . . . eS 7 lZlf3 d6, although that is also playable) 7 .td2 (7 'flb3 awaits testing) 7 . . . eS 8 e3 d6 9 lZlge2 a6!? (intending to weaken the dS pawn by attack ing its support) 10 'fic2 'fie8 I I f3 bS! 1 2 'flb3 ( Botvinnik- Bronstein, World Ch. 1 9S I , ninth game) and now simply 1 2 . . . .txc3 1 3 lZlxc3 be 1 4 'fixc4 'flf7 would give Black excellent play thanks to the dual threats of I S . . . c6 and I S . . . aS combined with . . . .ta6. (c) 6 .1g5 d6 (6 . . . c6!? is possible, with 7 .txf6 .txf6 8 e4 'fl b6 leading to unclear play and 7 lZlf3 dS bringing about a Stone wall) 7 .txf6 (7 lZlf3 lZlbd7 8 0-0 eS is fine for Black) 7 . . . .txf6 8 e4 fe 9 lZlxe4 lZlc6 I 0 lZle2 eS with a position assessed as unclear by Garcia- Palermo. This whole line awaits further practical tests. (d) 6 'flb3 (usually known as the Anti-Stonewall Variation, for obvious reasons; cf. Chapter I I , p.

1 20

Classical System : Auxili�ry Variations

1 1 2) 6 . . . c6 (Black's best response has yet to be established; 6 . . . a5!? 7 lLlf3 - 7 ..t xb7? a4 costs material - 7 . . . d6 is natural and sensible, while the gambit continu ation 6 . . . c5!? 7 d5 e5 8 e4 d6!? 9 ef ..t xf5 1 0 -. xb7 lLlbd7 certainly offers some compensation in return for the pawn) 7 d5 d6 (7 . . . e5?? 8 d6 will win the bishop) 8 de lLla6 (cf. Gurevich- Dolmatov, p. 1 1 0) 9 lLlf3 lLlc5 10 -.c2 lLlfe4 I I lLld4 lLlxc3 1 2 be .i.xe6 1 3 lLl xe6 lLlxe6 1 4 0-0, and it seems that White's bishop pair and open lines outweigh the weakened pawns; Euwe-Opocensky, Venice 1 948. Thus Black's defences currently stand in need of reinforcement in this variation, but, with so much yet to be explored, this is a task which may be approached with optimism. The text-move, first played in Staunton-Horwitz, London 1 8 5 1 , and re-introduced i n the present game, aims for flexible and har monious development, but has the big strategic drawback of allowing Black to achieve . . . e6-e5 without difficulty. d6 6 A much more logical reaction to White's restrained development than adopting a Stonewall for mation, although that was Botvin nik's response when Bronstein confronted him with the psycho-

logical ploy of usmg the same variation. c6 lLlge2 7 e5 0-0 8 In notes to this game, Botvinnik himself observed, 'Black has achieved a good game . . . White has already lost his opening advantage'. The immobility of the knight on e2 is particularly not able. d5 9 Gaining space at least; other moves bring nothing: (a) 9 e4 lLl xe4! 10 lLlxe4 fe 1 1 .i.xe4 ..th3 + (b) 9 de de 1 0 -. xd8 l hd8 1 1 e4 lLl a6 = . -.es 9 10 e4 Bolstering the centre rather than ceding it by 10 de be I I lLl b5? which would get nowhere after 1 1 . . . -.d7 and 1 2 . . . ..tb7. -. hs 10 11 ef Hoping to use e4 for his pieces at a future date while also defusing dangerous attacking ideas based on . . . f5-f4. 11 ..t xf5 (96) 12 f3 Bringing e4 under control with tempo gain due to the fork threat g3-g4. The dangerous tactical thrust 12 c5 (based on the fact that 1 2 . . . de? 1 3 -.b3! is very strong for White) can be satisfactorily

Classical System : A uxiliary Variations 9fJ w

countered by 1 2 . . . ..th3 as Bot vinnik's following instructive vari ations demonstrate : (a) 1 3 de lt:lxc6 1 4 •b3 +
121

all the black pieces are more actively placed than their white counterparts. 14 cd •d2 15 cd 1 5 lt:l xd5 is better, with approxi mately even chances after 1 5 . . . lt:lxd5 1 6 cd, but not 1 6 •xd5 + ..te6 1 7 •xb7? •d3 winning a piece. ..td8 15 An excellent regrouping, but it would have been preferable to preface it with 1 5 . . . h5 keeping White contained on the kingside. 16 :t act M issing the chance to play 16 g4 ..td3 17 : fd I ..ta6 IS lt:lg3 with increased activity. 16 lt:lb5 lUeS gets nowhere. 16 ..ta5 17 g4 Better late than never. Bronstein points out that 1 7 :t fd 1 runs up against 1 7 . . . lt:l b6 1S g4 lt:lc4! 1 9 gf •xf5 and 20 . . . lt:lxe3. 17 ..td3 18 :t fd 1 ..tc4 •c2 19 White understandably seeks salvation in the ending, but even so Black's pressure persists. 19 • xc2 lt:lb6 :t xc2 20 21 :t cd2 ( 9 7 ) 21 ..ta6 M issing the favourable liqui dation 2 1 . . . ..txe2 22 : xe2 ..txc3

1 12

Classical System : A uxiliary Variations

23 ..txb6 ab 24 be g5, with a winning position according to Bronstein. 22 ..tf2 lL:lc4? In time-trouble, Black not only forgoes the above line once again

but also misses 22 . . . e4! threaten. ing 23 . . . e3 24 ..txe3 lL:lc4, thUs obliging White to play 23 g5 ef 24 ..txf3 lL:l fd 7 when Black is still clearly in control. 23 l: c2 ..tb6 ab 24 ..txb6 l:el! 25 With this, White is out of the woods. lL:le3 25 26 l: d2 lL:lc4 lL:le3 l: c2 27 28 l: d2 lL:lc4 White claimed a draw by three fold repetition.

13

Alekhine's Variation : 6 lt:J e4 .

.

.

Alekhine's Variation is reached after the moves 1 d4 rs g3 2 lt:lf6 3 .i.g2 e6 i.e7 4 lLlf3 5 0-0 0-0 c4 lt:le4 (98 ) 6

thoroughly tested by him in other games played that same year. Black's main idea is to preserve his option on d-pawn placement as long as possible: 'It is generally in the interests of the second player to delay as long as logically poss ible the advance of his d-pawn in this opening, so as to keep the choice between the two points, d6 and d5' - Alekhine. Another important point is that the early advance of the KN vacates f6 for the KB which can thus exert pressure along the h8-a I diag onal. The potential dangers of delay ing the development of the queen side make considerable demands on the accuracy, sophistication and resourcefulness of the second player, but for those able to rise to the challenge Alekhine's variation provides a viable and intriguing alternative to the established classical lines.

98 w

This provocative move was i n troduced by the great former World Alexander Champion Alekhine in his game against Samisch at Dresden 1 936, and 1 23

1 24

A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . lCJe4

Capablanca-Alekhine

Nottingham 1 936 7 W b3 This move has its logic: White pressurizes b7 and makes d 1 free for the rook. Its main drawbacks are that the queen is somewhat exposed to harassment by Black's minor pieces and the QB is deprived of development in fian chetto. Other uncommon lines also fail to upset Black's equanimity : (a) 7 �e 1 d5 8 f3 �f6 9 cd ed 1 0 �d3 b6 1 1 i.e3 i.d6 1 2 �c3 c6 1 3 l: c 1 W'e7 14 W'd2 i.a6 1 5 i.f4 � bd7 1 6 i. xd6 W' xd6 with a fully satisfactory position for Black; Flohr-Aiekhine, Pode brady 1 936. (b) 7 �fd2 d5 8 cd (White is concerned to cover the weak d pawn) 8 . . ed 9 �c3 c6 1 0 W'c2 i.f6 and Black has no problems whatever; Incutto-Emma, Buenos Aires Ch. 1 972. (c) 7 W'c2 i.f6 (as is frequently the case, Black may perfectly well produce a Stonewall by 7 . . . dS) 8 �c3 (the seminal encounter Samisch-Aiekhine, Dresden 1 936, went 8 l: d 1 d6 9 �bd2 � xd2 1 0 i.xd2 �c6 1 1 i.c3 W'e8 1 2 dS .txc3 1 3 W' xc3 �d8 14 de �xe6 1 5 �d4 �c5 with equality; 8 � bd2 would transpose to the second featured game) 8 . � xc3 9 be (9 0

0 0

W' xc3 c5 would leave White's d4 more sensitive) 9 . . . d6 10 e4 �c6 1 1 ef ef 1 2 l: e 1 � a5 1 3 W'd3 cS with a difficult and roughly equal game where White's greater activ ity is tempered by his structural weakness; Foltys-Aiekhine, Prague 1 9430 7 i.f6 Alekhine observes that this bishop placing '. . . is strong both for attack or defence'. l: d 1 8 W'e8 8 . . . We7 is an equally good alternative. �c6! 9 �c3 10 �b5 A contentious sortie, disparaged by Alekhine but lauded by others. Although it may not bring White any advantage, it can equally do no harm to force Black to retreat his bishop. In any case, it is cer tainly better than the superficially attractive 10 d5 which would invite the troublesome 10 . . . �aS. 10 ..td8 11 W'c2 According to Capablanca, he should have preferred 1 1 d5 �a5 1 2 W'c2 c6 1 3 de and 14 �d6 with the better chances. However, that would only be true if Black recap tured with 1 3 . . . de, whereas 1 3 . . . be would produce an unclear position charged with strategic complexity. d6 ( 99 ) 11

Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4

12 d5 Alekhine's observations on this advance are very instructive : 'In the majority of cases the exchange involved by this move is in White's favour. It gives him control of the square d5 . . . but in this particular position White has already lost too much time with his queen and knight, thus permitting Black to complete his development and to take advantage of the open e-file'. lLl b4 12 This manoeuvre occurs q uite often; by attacking the enemy queen Black gains the time for optimum repositioning of the knight. lLla6 13 'it'b3 14 de Naturally, White cannot allow Black to advance . . . e6-e5 which w ould instantly deaden the white position while giving Black a dangerous mobile pawn d uo and a strong initiative on the king's wing.

1 25

14 lLlac5 15 lLlxe6 'it'c2 16 lLlfd4 Simple development by 1 6 ..te3 a6 1 7 lLl bd4 was preferable. 16 lLlxd4 17 lLlxd4 ..tf6 18 lLlb5 Causing even less inconvenience than the first time; 1 8 ..te3 was still indicated. 'it'e7 18 a6 19 ..te3 20 lLld4 ..td7 : ae8 21 : ac l 22 b4 b6 23 lLlf3?! This knight's inability to keep still ought to have cost White dear. After the correct 23 'it'b3 the chances would be approximately even. lLlc3! 23 The direct 23 . . . g5 would also generate strong threats, but the text move throws the enemy camp into even greater disorder. 24 : d3 ( 1 00 ) f4? Beginning an hallucinatory mis calculation. The straightforward 24 . . . ..ta4 25 'it'd2 lLle4 26 'it'el g5 would have left Black with a big, perhaps decisive, positional advantage according to Alekhine. 25 gf ..tf5 ..txd3 26 'it'd2 c5? 27 ed Black persists in the delusion

Alekhine's Variation:

126

6

. . 0,e4 .

/00 8

that he is winning two exchanges when in fact he is losing three minor pieces for two rooks. After 27 . . . lt:la4 28 d4 (or 28 lt:lg5) White's generally active position and Black's wayward knight would give White more than sufficient compensation for the exchange, but Black would not be entirely without hope. After the move played, the life goes out of Black's position and against Capablanca there is no hope. 28 .lhc3 .ixc3 11H6 29 1t'xc3 Retaining the queens would also be hopeless. 30 'tfxf6 gf f5 31 lt:ld2 3 1 . . . cb 32 .id5 + rJ;g7 33 lt:le4 is no improvement. a5 b5 32 33 lt:lfl rJ;f7 rJ;g6 34 lt:lg3 35 .if3 : e7 36 rJ;ft rJ;f6 37 .id2 rJ;g6

38 a4 Black resigned. There is nothing to be done about the winning plan given by Capablanca : White plays .ic3 followed by h2-h4-h5; Black must respond with h7-h6 and rJ;h7; then comes .if3-g2h3 forcing . . . : e7-f7 after which Black can only oscillate his king between h7 and g8 while White posts his king on f3 and manoeuvres the knight to d5; in this position Black must protect the b-pawn, but whichever way he does it the check on f6 by the knight is decisive. Ree-Bronstein

Budapest 1 977 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3 .ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lt:le4 7

lt:lbd2 ( J OJ )

This immediate challenge to the advanced cavalry is evidently a critical continuation. Its drawback is that the QB is blocked in and the

Alekhine"s Variation : 6 . . . 0.e4

necessity of solving this problem li mits White's flexibility. Conse quently, the continuation 7 b3 suggests itself, with practical experience so far indicating that Black must react carefully : 7 . . . ..H6 8 .tb2 (a game Cebalo Pytel, Liege 1 980, saw White obtain an edge after 8 "if c2 c5 9 .t b2 cd 1 0 lt:l xd4 lt:lc6 1 1 lt:lxc6 be 12 lt:ld2 d 5 1 3 .txf6 .C. xf6 14 e3; one wonders if Black was correct to eschew the natural 1 3 . . . "ifxf6) 8 . . . b6 (both 8 . . . c5 and 8 . . . d5 come into consideration, as does 8 . . . a5 which produced a position teeming with strategic complexity after 9 a3 lt:lc6 10 lt:le5 lt:le7 1 1 f3 lt:ld6 1 2 "ifd3 b6 1 3 lt:ld2 .tb7 i n Andersen-Bronstein, M unich 01. 1 958) 9 lLl bd2 .t b 7 10 lt:le5 d6 1 1 lt:ld3 "ife7 ( l l . . . c5 1 2 e3 is worth testing) 1 2 "ifc2 lt:lc6 1 3 e3 lt:lxd2 1 4 "if xd2 lt:ld8 1 5 d5! ..bb2 1 6 "if xb2 e5 1 7 f4 e4 ( 1 7 . . . lt:lfl is rather better) 1 8 lt:l b4 a5 1 9 lt:lc2 .ta6 2 0 lt:ld4 and Black's position is cramped and passive; G aprindashvili-Gurieli, match, Tbilisi 1 980. .tf6 7 Once again, Black may adopt a Stonewall formation : 7 . . . d5 8 b3 l2Jc6 9 .tb2 .td7 1 0 lt:le5 ( 1 0 e3 is less committal, with a mutually difficult game) 10 . . . lt:lxe5 I I de c6 1 2 lt:lf3 "if b6 1 3 "ifd3 .C. ad8 with fine prospects; Rovner-Hasin,

127

!-final USSR C h . 1 956. 8 "ifc2 Natural and logical, but the forthright capture 8 lt:lxe4 poses a much more radical challenge to Black's opening. After 8 . . . fe 9 lt:le5 d5, experience has shown that the immediate attempt to open the centre by 1 0 f3 backfires on account of 10 . . . c5 1 1 .te3 ( I I lt:l g4 .te7! 1 2 fe de is good for Black) I I . . . .txe5 1 2 de d4 1 3 i.e I lt:lc6 ( 1 3 . . . e3 straightaway has to reckon with the conse quences of 1 4 b4 which may never theless go in Black's favour) 14 f4 e3 1 5 b3 "ifb6 and Black's extra ordinary pawn chain severely hampers the communication between White's Hanks; Vagan ian-Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 . Subsequently 1 0 lt:lg4 was success fully employed in Didishko Yuferov, USSR 1 9 76, bringing an edge after I 0 . . . .te7 I I .tf4 c6 1 2 "ifc2 lt:ld7 1 3 f3 ef 1 4 .txf3 "ife8 1 5 .C. ae l . It remains to be seen whether the possible improve ments I I . . . c5 or 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 will sustain the viability of Black's set up. 8 dS It is essential for Black to main tain a grip on e4; meekly exchang ing the knight by 8 . . . lt:lxd2 9 .txd2 d6 l O .tc3 "ife8 1 1 e4 gives White an advantageous llyin Zhenevsky-type position (see

1 28

A lekhine's Variation : 6 . . liJe4 .

Chapter 1 4). 9 b3 M uch the most natural. Black met 9 .l:t d 1 in traditional Stonewall manner in the game Borisenko Korchnoi, U SSR 1 965: 9 . . . c6 (9 . . . tt:lc6 is also playable) 1 0 tt:l fl tt:ld7 1 1 b3 g5 1 2 .i.b2 We7 1 3 tt:le 1 W g7 1 4 f3 tt:ld6 with a mutually difficult game. 9 c5 ( 1 02 )

This rapid sharpening o f the central conflict is characteristic of Alekhine's Variation. Black trusts that his pieces will become sufficiently active to balance any loosening of his pawn structure. The relatively restrained 9 . . . tt:lc6 once again provides a service able alternative as demonstrated in Farago- Pytel, Bagneux 1 980, which went 1 0 .i.b2 aS (typically restraining the white queen's wing and providing a possible later white-square softener in . . . a5-a4) 1 1 e3 .i.d7 1 2 a3 We7 ( 1 2 . . . g5!?) 1 3 .1:t ac I and here Pytel rec-

ommends 1 3 . . . .l:t fc8!? preparing to answer 1 4 tt:le5 with 1 4 . . . .i.e8 and then play on the queenside. 10 .i.b2 Acquiescing in the dissolution of his own pawn centre in the hope of saddling Black with structural weakness. To this end White is successful, but it turns out that the secure foothold in the centre and active piece play provide more than enough compensation. Other tries : (a) I 0 e3 is recommended as best by Bronstein which he feels should conserve White's opening edge; this has yet to be tested in practice. (b) 1 0 .i.a3 cd 1 1 .i.xf8 W xf8 1 2 cd ed is a somewhat exotic variation, again emanating from Bronstein, which he evaluates as slightly in Black's favour; this also remains to be confirmed in prac tice. (c) 10 cd ed (not 10 . . . cd 1 1 .i.b2 tt:lc3 1 2 tt:lxd4!) 1 1 .i.b2 cd 1 2 tt:lxd4 W b6 1 3 tt:l2f3 tt:lc6 1 4 .l:t a d 1 .i. d 7 1 5 e 3 .l:t ac8 \lnd although White has an iron grip on d4 Black's pieces are extremely active; Bukic-Barle, Yugoslav Ch. 1 976. 10 cd 11 .i.xd4 White fared no better with the alternative capture in Fine-Alekh ine, A VRO 1 936: I I tt:l xd4 tll c6 1 2 tt:l xe4 fe 1 3 .l:t a d l Wb6 1 4 tt:lxc6

Alekhine's Variation : 6 .

. .

liJe4

1 29

be 1 5 i. xf6 : xf6 and the upshot

wins.

of all the exchanges has been to

17 i.f7 18 lLld4 1 8 : ac t would invite the awk ward pin 1 8 . . . ..th5. 18 lLJeS 19 lLJ xe4 This is q ueried by Bronstein but his proposal of 1 9 'W'fl hardly seems any better after 19 . . . lLlg4. fe 19 b6! 20 'W'bS A quiet move of high class avoiding the overimpetuous 20 . . . lLld3? 2 1 : xd3! ed 22 'W' xd 3 with excellent prospects of holding the draw, or 20 . . . ..te8? 2 1 'W' xa5 'W' xf2 + 22 � h l ..th5 23 : fl 'W'xe3 24 : xf8 + :xf8 25 'W'xd5 + and White turns the tables. : act lLJd3! 21 : c2 22 Now 22 : xd3? would come unstuck against 22 . . . ..te8! 23 'W'a6 'tt' x f2 + etc. : c8 22 : c5 23 : dd2 i.e8 24 'W'a6 i.d7! 25 h3 Black naturally wants nothing to do with the premature 25 . . . : xc2 26 : xc2 lLlxf2 27 'W' b7! but instead strengthens the threat by planning 26 . . . i.c8 27 'W'a7 : xc2 28 .:. xc2 lt'Jxf2 and the h-pawn is en prise. 26 : xeS White feels obliged to liquidate

give Black a powerful centre and strong pressure on f2. 11 lLJc6 'W'xf6 12 i. xf6 13 cd ed 14 a3 aS! Preventing the expansion on the queen's wing which would enable the QN to find useful work via b3. 1S 'W'd3 ..te6 : ad8( 1 03) 16 e3

The right rook. Although at present the play is all in the centre or on the queenside, the massive presence of the knight on e4 ensures that the kingside will one day come to life. 17 : fd 1 Bronstein supplies t h e following v ariation to show that White can not afford to ignore the growing pressure on the d-file : 1 7 : fc 1 d4 1 8 ed lLlxd4 1 9 lLlxd4 : xd4 20 lLl xe4 fe 2 1 'W'e3 : d 3 22 'W' xe4 W' xf2 + 23 �h 1 ..td5 and Black

Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4

/30

to the ending which, however, rapidly proves untenable. The middlegame following 26 f4 .i.c8 27 -.a7 -.d6 28 .i.fl lLie l would scarcely be more palatable. be 26 .ll xf6 27 -. xf6 .ll b6 28 lLic2 .i.c6 29 f3 de 30 fe a4 31 lLial White's quietus. 32 b4 cb 33 ab .ll xb4 .ll b2 34 lLic2 0-1 Huerta-Nogueiras

Santa-Clara 1 980

as tantamount to a refutation of Black's play. The present game, however, has been instrumental in revising that assessment, and at the time of writing the ball remains quite clearly in White's court. 7 ..tf6 -.c2 8 Not 8 lLid4 c5! 9 lLic2 lLid6! with the initiative (Simonovic- Kostic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 946), or 8 lLifd2 lLixd2 9 lLixd2 e5 tamely handing Black an easy game ( Haugli-Gau sel, Gausdal 1 990). 8 lLia6!

( 105 ) 1 05 w

I d4 f5 2 g3 lLif6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 lLif3 i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lLie4 7

d5 ( 104 )

104 8

This advance, which simul taneously gains space and pre vents Black shoring up the knight with . . . d5, was long regarded

White's queen move prevents 8 . . . e5 because of the crafty retreat 9 lLie1 winning a pawn. In the debut game with 7 d5, Reshevsky Suesman, US Ch. 1 938, Black tried 8 . . . a5 but was overwhelmed after 9 lLI bd2 lLic5 (9 . . . lLixd2 is relatively better but White still keeps the upper hand after 1 0 i.xd2 d6 1 1 e 4 fe 1 2 -.xe4 lLia6 1 3 ..te3; 10 lLixd2 also comes into

Alekhine"s Variation : 6 .

consideration) I 0 e4 fe I I .!Dxe4 .!Dxe4 1 2 Wxe4 ed 1 3 WxdS + �h8 14 .!DgS We8 I S .i.f4 and White's massive positional superiority is virtually decisive. The only real alternative to the text move is 8 . . . d6 intending to answer 9 .!De I .!DeS I 0 .!Dc3 eS I I e4 by I I . . . f4 stirring up complications, while I I b4 .!Dcd7 1 2 : b I would also not be without counterchances. The knight move has several plus points : it continues Black's development, it prepares tactical harassment of the white queen, and it reinforces Black's growing pressure on the dark and queen side squares weakened by the advance of White's d-pawn. 9 .!Del This is unsuitable here and leads White into difficulties. As a poss i ble improvement, Nogueiras mentions 9 .!Dbd2, but Taimanov is of the opinion that Black stands well after 9 . . . ed I 0 cd We7 and himself suggests that White should investigate either 9 .i.e3 or 9 .!Dc3. It is hard to believe that these moves will bring White much joy, particularly the positionally inept k night move. .!Db4 9 Causing mischief in the best tradition of knights developed on a6. 10 Wd1

. .

Ci:Je4

131

I f 1 0 W b3 o r W a4 then 1 0 . . . a S will prime a further tempo-gaining attack by . . . .!DeS. a5 10 11 .!DeS f3 12 .!Dc3 d6 13 c6! l:t bl Cleverly using tactical means to pursue his positional ends. e4 14 14 a3 founders on 14 . . . ed! 1 S ab ab when Black regains his material with advantage. 14 ed 15 ed cd l:t e8 16 cd Takes the newly opened file and prevents the QB going to e3. 17 a3 Wb6! ( 106) 106 w

18 �hl 18 ab ab 19 .!De2 .!Dd3 + 20 � h i .!Df2 + 2 1 l:t xf2 Wxf2 would be fatal. 18 Wa6! Black continues to manoeuvre with great verve. and exploits his initiative to the utmost.

132

A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . 0.e4

:a 19 1 9 a b a b would certainly not ease White's defensive task. lt::l bd3 19 lt::l xd3 20 lt::l xd3 21 .l: e2 ..td7 .l: xe2 22 ..tfl lt::l xcl 23 -. xe2 .l: xcl? 24 A grave inaccuracy j ust when it was beginning to look as if the worst of his troubles were behind him. By interposing 24 -. xa6 ba 25 .l: xc l White would have kept his disadvantage to a minimum after 25 . . . .1: b8 26 .l: c2 .1: b6. -. xe2 \ 24

.l: c8 25 ..txe2 The combined pressure from the c-file pin and the dominating bishop pair leave White scant hope of saving the game. With time-trouble approaching Black concludes the proceedings as elegantly as he began them: 26 .l: c2 b5 27 ..td3 .l: c5 28 �g2 g6 29 f4 �f8 30 ..tf2 b4! 3 1 ab ab 32 lt::l a 2 ..ta4! 33 : e2 ..td4 + 34 �f3? (a time-induced blunder, but there could be no doubt about the final outcome even after the best play 34 �g2 ..td l ! 35 .l:d2 b3! 36 lt::l b4 ..th5) 34 . . . ..td l 0- 1 .

14

Il yin-Zhenevsk y S y stem the centre and on the kingside. Experience suggests, however, that by judiciously mixing prophylaxis against . . . e6-e5 with preparation for e2-e4 himself, White can manipulate the strategical battle in his favour. Even so, Black's resources, tactical in particular, are considerable, and are quite capable of yielding the one or two improvements in key areas which would be sufficient to challenge the current assessment. We shall examine the material under the broad divisions of 7 b3 (in conjunction with lt:lbd2) and 7 lt:lc3 when Black has the choice between 7 . . . •es and 7 . . . a5.

The Ilyin-Zhenevsky System is established by Black's sixth move in the sequence 1 d4 rs lt:lf6 g3 2 3 e6 ..tg2 lt:lf3 4 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 d6 ( 1 07) 6 c4 / 07

w

Goldberg-Ilyin-Zhenevsky

Named after the Soviet master who developed and refined it dur ing the 1 920s and 30s, this is Black's most direct attempt to force through the advance of his e-pawn. Left unhindered, the basic plan of . . . •eS, . . . ..td8 and . . . e5 guarantees Black lively play in

Leningrad 1 932 7

b3

Although the fianchetto devel opment is an important weapon in countering Black's plans, it requires vigorous support in order 1 33

/ 34

1 /yin-Zhenevsky System

to be effective. This game shows just how easily an optically attractive and apparently har monious development can turn out to be functionally inadequate. Of White's other seventh moves, only 7 b4 has any independent significance. This attempt to pep up the fianchetto needs to be coun tered energetically lest White obtain too much space too quickly : 7 . . . e5! 8 de de 9 tt:Jxe5 (9 "ii' b 3 e4 would produce a complex balanced middlegame) 9 . . . "ii' x d 1 1 0 .lhd 1 ..txb4 1 1 ..tb2 c6 1 2 tt:Jd2 tt:Ja6 1 3 tt:Jb3 ..te6 with reciprocal chances; Djaja-Duck stein, Gloggnitz 1 970. "ii' e8 ( 1 08) 7 1 08 w

8 tt:J bd2 A refinement designed to reserve the possibility of answer ing 8 . . . ..td8 with 9 ..ta3 which would paralyse Black's position at a stroke. It suffers though from the drawback of diminishing con trol of d5, thus permitting Black's

QN to join the central battle immediately without being exposed to the push d4-d5 which would downgrade the black pawn structure. Thus White's best eighth move is the simple 8 ..tb2 ruling out 8 . . . tt:Jc6 on account of 9 d5. After the correct response 8 . . . a5 (a typical all-purpose waiting move) White can transpose to variations considered later by 9 tt:Jc3, or carry on with 9 tt:J bd2 satisfied at having gained a tempo over the column game. The game Averbakh-Boles lavsky, Zurich 1 953, provides a good example of likely develop ments in this latter case : (8 ..tb2 a5 9 tt:J bd2) 9 . . . tt:Jc6 10 a3 ..td8 1 1 tt:Je 1 e5 1 2 e3 ..td7 1 3 tt:Jc2 ed 14 tt:J xd4 ( 1 4 ed f4!) 14 . . . tt:Jxd4 1 5 ..txd4 ..tc6 ( Black has a very comfortable position) 1 6 tt:Jf3 ..te4 1 7 tt:Je l b6 1 8 a4 tt:Jd7 1 9 tt:Jd3 g5! (denying the knight access to d5 via f4) 20 tt:Jcl tt:Je5 (20 . . . ..tf6 was a better way to strengthen Black's position) 2 1 _be4 fe 22 ..txe5 "ii' x e5 23 "ii' d 5 + "ii' xd5 24 cd (the exchanges have helped White considerably, but accurate play enables the position to be held without much difficulty) 24 . . . tt b8 25 tt d 1 b5 26 g4 ..tf6 27 tt a2 ..te5 28 �g2 :n 29 ab tt xb5 30 tt a4 ..tb2 31 tt xe4 !-! (in view of 3 1 . . . ..txc I 32 tt xc l tt xd5).

Jlyin-Zhener:sky System

8 ll:lc6 9 ..tb2 ..td8 This subtle retreat uncovers the support from the queen which is necessary to effect the strategically vital . . . e6-e5 advance. Black is able to get away with such 'unde veloping' because of the generally closed nature of the position and the somewhat sluggish disposition of White's forces. 10 -.c2 Alternatively, 1 0 ll:lel e5 12 e3 would parallel A verbakh- Boles lavsky above, while 10 J:l. e l takes away protection from the king and also enables Black to utilize the possibility ofthreatening a . . . ll:ld3 fork, e.g. 1 0 . . . e5 I I e4 f4! 1 2 d5 ( 12 gf lLlh5 would be extremely risky) 1 2 . . . ll:lb4 1 3 -. b 1 (thus far a game Shatskes-Neishtadt, Moscow 1 963) and now by 1 3 . . . fg 1 4 hg c5 Black could secure the centre in preparation for pursuing his attacking ambitions on the kingside. Note also that 10 ..ta3 ..te7 instantly renews the threat of . . . e5. e5 10 11 de White hopes to distract Black from the kingside by opening up the centre. Closing the centre would be a positional error freeing Black to concentrate on building his attack, e.g. I I d5 ll:le7 1 2 J:l. ae l • h 5 1 3 e4 ll:lg6 and already the

1 35

storm clouds are gathering over White's king; Lisitsin- Ilyin Zhenevsky, USSR Ch. 1 93 1 . de 11 e4 ( 1 09 ) 12

12 fe This simple move brings Black open lines galore and obvious attacking chances for no more than acceptance of an isolated pawn. It is a measure of the inad equacy of White's opening that Black also has the option of sacri ficing a pawn for a more complex type of attack based on establish ing a knight on f4 : 1 2 . . . f4!? l 3 gf lLlh5 1 4 f5 (an attempt to limit the activity of the black pieces) 1 4 . . . lLlf4 1 5 � h i ..tf6 1 6 a3 g6 1 7 fg -.xg6 1 8 J:l. g l � h 8 1 9 ..th3 -.h5 20 ..txc8 J:l. axc8 21 l:l. g3 lLle2 22 l:l. g2 l:l. g8 23 l:l. xg8 + l:l. xg8 24 -.dl lLlf4 25 -.n : d8 26 : d l ll:ld3 2 7 ..tc3 ..th4 2 8 lLlxh4 -. xh4 0- 1 Budo-Ilyin-Zhenevsky, USSR Ch. 1 93 1 .. Although White's defence was rather feeble, the

136

llyin-Zhenevsky System

impression remains that this type of attack must be very difficult to withstand in practice. Thus despite the fact that Ilyin-Zhenevsky played 1 2 . . . fe after 1 2 . . . f4, it would probably be mistaken to deduce from this that he consid ered the capture superior. Both approaches are valid and the cho ice is largely a matter of personal preference. 13 lt:lxe4 Wh5 14 lt:lxf6 + White is understandably anxi ous to remove the potentially very dangerous K night but in so doing he relieves Black of the problem of his back rank bishops and encourages occupation of the out post on d4. .ixf6 14 15 lt:ld2 .ih3 lt:le4 .:t ad8 16 17 f4? A panicky attempt to force mat ters which backfires in spectacular fashion. The prudent 1 7 f3 would have been much more appropri ate. lt:ld4 17 18 Wfl? ( 1 1 0) Compounding the previous error; the uninviting 1 8 ..ixd4 was essential. ef! 18 .lhf6 19 lt:lxf6 + 20 ..id5 + On 20 ..ixd4 comes 20 . . . fg 2 1

1 10 B

W xg3 : g6 etc. : xd5! 20 Shattering White's dreams of 20 . . . � h8? 2 1 .ixd4 fg 22 Wxf6! 21 cd fg We2! 22 W xd4 0- 1 A fittingly elegant coup de grace with which to conclude this won derfully instructive miniature from the Master's own hand.

Flohr-Sokolsky Semi-final USSR Ch. 1 953 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3 .ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7

lt:lc3

It is not surprising that this active and natural development poses Black far more serious prob lems than the previous variation. 7 We8 The standard and most expl ored continuation; other possi bilities will be examined further on.

Jlyin-Zhenevsky System

.l:lel 8 White's most direct procedure, aiming to open the centre with e2e4 as quickly as possible. 8 li.Je4!?( 1 1 1 )

This obstructive occupation of e4 is probably the most promising of Black's less explored paths in the classical Ilyin-Zhenevsky. That such relatively fresh ideas need to be investigated is plain from the well established main lines where Black is reduced to trying to hang on for a draw. For example, 8 . . . 'ifg6 9 e4 fe 10 li.Jxe4 li.Jxe4 1 1 .1:1 xe4 li.Jc6 ( 1 1 . . . 'if xe4 1 2 tt.Jh4 traps the queen) 1 2 'ife2 J.f6 1 3 J.d2 e5 1 4 de li.Jxe5 (in the famous game Aronson-Tal, USSR Ch. 1 957, the 'magician from Riga' typically sought com plications by 1 4 . . . de 1 5 J.c3 .US 1 6 li.Jh4 J.xh4 1 7 .l:l xh4 .l:l ae8 1 8 'ife3 h6 19 b4 'iff6 20 b5 �d8, and although he was rewarded with the full point some moves after 2 1 J.d5 + ? � h8 22 f4? eP.

137

23 'ii' d 2 'ii' b6 + ! 24 J.d4 'ii' g6 25 'if xf4 �h7 26 'if xc7 J. b 1 !, simply 21 c5 would have underlined Whi te's positional supremacy on the queen's wing in complete safety) 1 5 li.Jxe5 J.xe5 16 J.c3! J.xc3 1 7 be c6 1 8 .1:1 e 1 (another line is 1 8 .l:l e7 J.g4 19 f3 i.f5 20 .l:l xb7 i.d3 2 1 'iff2 J.xc4 22 .l:l xa7 .l:l xa7 23 'ifxa7 c5 with compensation for the pawn because of White's uncoordinated pieces; M atulovic Minic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 959) 1 8 . . . i.d7 ( 1 8 . . . J.f5 1 9 .l:l e7 ..td3 20 'if b2) 19 'ife3 .l:l fe8 20 'ifd4 i. f5 2 1 .l:l xe8 + .l:l xe8 22 .l:l xe8 + 'if xe8 23 h4! 'ifb8 24 c5 de 25 'if xc5 ..te6 26 a4 ..tf7 27 a5 a6 28 'ife7 and White went on to squeeze out a win in Bukic-Maric, K raljevo 1 967. Even with improvements, such barren positions would hold little attraction for warriors of the Dutch. 9 'ifc2 The most natural method of disputing control of e4. Alterna tively: (a) 9 li.Jd2 li.Jxc3 10 be e5 1 1 c5 is Konstantinopolsky's artificial looking suggestion. (b) 9 'ifd3 can hardly be better than the column move, but in Cvetkov- Hermann, Halle 1 954, Black incurred a slight disadvan tage after 9 . . . 'ii' g6 lO -'.f4 li.Jc6 1 1 .l:l ad l �h8 (certainly not essential) 1 2 tt.Jb5 ..td8 1 3 �d2

1 38

J lyin-Zhenevsky System

tt:l xd2 1 4 'it' xd2 a6 1 5 tt:lc3 ..tf6 1 6 d 5 tt:ld8 1 7 de tt:l xe6 1 8 tt:ld5. (c) 9 tt:l xe4 de is sharp and critical: 10 tt:ld2 (in Martin- Piaz zini, Argentina 1 954, the tactics following I 0 tt:lg5 d5 1 1 cd ed 1 2 'it'b3 c6 1 3 tt:lxe4?! 'it' f7 1 4 ..tg5 ..txg5 1 5 tt:lxg5 'it'xf2 + 16 � h I 'it'xd4 went i n Black's favour; 1 3 f3 is better) I 0 . . . d5 I I f3 ..tf6!? ( I I . . . ef 12 ef tt:lc6 also merits attention) 1 2 fe ..txd4 + 1 3 e3 ..t b6 1 4 cd ( Bertok-Milic, Yugos lav Team Ch. 1 958, went instead 14 ed ed 1 5 ..txd5 + �h8 1 6 tt:lb3 c6 17 ..tg2 tt:ld7 18 tt:ld4 tt:le5 1 9 b 3 ..tg4 20 'it'd2 and now 20 . . . l:t d8 would have been the best way to augment Black's dang erous compensation) 1 4 . . . ed 1 5 ed tt:ld7 (Black's active pieces and the many weaknesses in White's camp provide fine play in return for the pawn) 16 tt:lc4 tt:le5 1 7 tt:lxb6 ..tg4 1 8 'it'd4 ab 1 9 ..td2 c5 20 de l:t d8 21 ..tc3 l:t xd4 22 ed 'it'f7 23 l:t xeS 'it' f2 + + White's attempt to break Black's initiative by giving up his queen has not been successful; Bilek- M ilic, Gotha 1 957. 9 'it'g6 ( 1 1 2 ) 1 0 b3 White must decide how to develop his QB, an important question which will determine the shape of the middlegame. The fianchetto declares an intention to

concentrate on the centre in stark contrast to the important alterna tive 10 ..te3 which renounces central play in favour of a space-gaining pawn storm on the queenside. The encounter Olafs son-Korchnoi, Hastings 1 955/56, provides an excellent illustration of typical play for both sides : ( I 0 ..te3) tt:lxc3 (White is threaten ing I I tt:l xe4 and 1 2 tt:ld2 with advantage; note that I 0 tt:lxe4 fe I I tt:ld2 loses instantly to I I . . . e3) I I 'it'xc3 ..tf6 1 2 b4 ( 1 2 l:t ad l tt:lc6 1 3 'it'b3 e5! is fully acceptable for Black) 1 2 . . . tt:lc6 (this appears somewhat more precise than 1 2 . . . l:t e8 1 3 c5 e5 1 4 cd cd 1 5 de de 1 6 l:t ac l tt:lc6 1 7 b5 tt:ld8 1 8 l:t ed l tt:lf7 as in Furman-Boleslavsky, semi-final U SSR Ch. 1 954) 1 3 b5 tt:ld8 14 c5 tt:lf7 (White's spatial advantage is clear, but the knight on f7 helps both to cover potential entry points along the d-file and ensure that the central counter punch . . . e6-e5 cannot be pre-


vented) 1 5 cd cd 1 6 lLld2 e5 1 7 de de 1 8 .idS e4 1 9 ..id4 ..ixd4 20 '!W xd4 ..ie6! 2 1 ..i xe6 (it would be risky to take the pawn, e.g. 2 1 _i xb7 ll ad8 22 'if c3 lLlg5 with . . . f5-f4 to follow) 2 1 . . . 'if xe6 22 tt ec l l:t ad8 23 'ifc4 l:td5 24 lLlfl ad6 25 'ifb3 l:t e8 (25 . . . lLlxb5?? 26 l:t c5) 26 a4 f4 27 l:t d l l:t xd l 28 '1W xe6 + l:t xe6 29 l:t xd l g5 30 l:t d 5 h6 �-! . 10 lLl xc3 Deflecting the queen away from its observation of e4 and on to the sensitive a 1 -h8 diagonal. 11 'if xc3 ..i f6 12 ..ia3 Black would be entirely satisfied with 1 2 ..ib2 lLlc6 1 3 'ifd2 e5 1 4 d e de. 12 lLlc6 13 ..id7 l:t adl 'ifcl a5 ( 1 1 3 ) 14 1 /3 w

15 d5 Having completed his develop ment White proceeds with the cen tral breakthrough only to find that

139

it accomplishes very little. tLl b4 15 ..ixe6 1 6 de 17 'ifd2 Against 1 7 lLld4 the retreat 1 7 . . . ..ic8 would be surprisingly effective in renewing the threat on the a-pawn. f4! 17 l:t c 1? 18 This passive prevention of 1 8 . . . lLlc2 merely loses a tempo as he can find nothing better than to accept the pawn sacrifice later on anyway. The f-pawn is immune : 1 8 'ifxf4? ..ic3 or 1 8 gf'? ..ih3 1 9 lLlg5 ..ixg2 20 �xg2 h6. After 1 8 ..ixb4 a b 1 9 'ifxb4 Black could choose between 19 . . . b6 20 a4 fg 2 1 hg h5 and 1 9 . . . fg 20 hg ll xa2 21 'ifxb7 'iff7, in both cases with active pieces, the bishop pair, and attacking chances in compens ation for the pawn. 18 fg h5! 19 hg Single-mindedly pursuing the storming of the white monarch's citadel. ab 20 ..ixb4 h4! 21 'if xb4 22 lLl xh4 ..i xh4 'if f6 23 gh Not 23 . . . ..ih3? 24 'ifxb7, but Sokolsky notes that both 23 . . . l:t f4 24 l:t c3 and 23 . . . b6 24 'ifc3 came into consideration. l:t xa2 l:t fl 24

/ 40

Jlyin-Zhenevsky System

25 'it' xb7? Loses quickly, but the line given by Sokolsky as relatively best is also unpleasant: 25 c5 d5 26 'it' xb7 : xe2 27 ..txd5 'it'xh4 28 ..txe6 + tt xe6 29 'it'd5 tt f6. tt xe2 25 'it'd4! 26 'it' xc7 Black bludgeons away the last line of defence in a mercifully swift onslaught. 27 'it' e7 27 tt cd 1 would not deter Black: 27 . . . : fxfl! with mate i n three on acceptance of the queen. 27 tt fxf2 28 �hl ..th3! Black throws in the kitchen sink as well, dashing White's last hope of 28 . . . tt xg2?? 29 'it'e8 + �h7 30 'it'h5 + with perpetual check. White resigns. Csom-Szabolcsi

Hungarian Ch. 1 972 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lll f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lll f3 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lllc3 'it'e8 b3 ( 1 1 4 ) 8 This elastic continuation makes for a sophisticated positional bat tle where White hopes to outfox his opponent by virtue of greater flexibility of position. White's remaining eighth moves are mostly minor and of a more rustic character: (a) 8 e4?! fe (8 . . . lll xe4 is more

ambitious) 9 lll g5 d5 10 cd ed 1 1 'it'b3 c6 1 2 lll gxe4 �h8 1 3 lll c5 b6 1 4 lll d 3 ..ta6 1 5 'it'd ! lll bd7 with excellent play for Black; Purdy-Koshnitzky, match 1 9 34. (b) 8 b4 'it'h5 (Taimanov rec ommends 8 . . . e5 9 de de 1 0 lll d 5 ..td8 I I ..tb2 e4 ) 9 'it'b3 �h8 I 0 c5 lll c6 1 1 b5 lll d 8 1 2 ..ta3 lll f7 gives a mutually difficult posttwn; Vaganian-Andersson, Groningen 1 968/69. (c) 8 'it'd3 'it'h5 9 e4 e5 1 0 de de 1 1 lll d 5 lll c6 1 2 lll x e7 + lll xe7 1 3 lll xe5 fe 14 'it'c3 ..th3 with attacking prospects on the light squares; Steiner-Duckstein, Vienna 1 969. (d) 8 ..tf4 c6 9 'it'b3 lll b d7 1 0 a 4 a 5 1 1 lll g 5 e 5 1 2 ..te3 W h5 with a very tense and complicated position; Szily-Farago, H ung arian Ch. 1 967. (e) 8 ..tg5 lll e4 9 ..txe7 ll\xc3 1 0 be 'it' xe7 and White's pieces show little dynamism to offset the doubled pawns; Rossolimo-Pach=

Ilyin-Zhenevsky System

rnan, Beverwijk 1 950. (f) 8 W'b3 �h8 (8 . . . c6) 9 ..tf4 0 c6 1 0 lL!b5 ( 1 0 d5 lL!d8 1 1 de t;Jxe6 would bring the black k ni ghts to life) 1 0 . . . .td8 1 1 d5 8e7 1 2 de ..t xe6 1 3 lL!fd4 .td7 1 4 lt:lc3 lt:lc6 with very satisfactory play for Black; Palfi-Schneider, Budapest 1 952. (g) 8 e3 has little independent significance and may be met according to taste. (h) 8 lL!e 1 invites 8 . . . e5 which Black may either play or prepare as he wishes. (i) 8 W'c2 is a much more important continuation than the foregoing; after Black's most active reply, 8 . . . W'h5 (taking advantage of the fact that White can no longer profit from a manoeuvre of the type e2-e3 and tzlf3-e1 proposing the exchange of queens) White has three main possibilities: ( 1 ) 9 .tg5 h6! 10 .txf6 .txf6 I I e4 lL!c6 1 2 lL!b5 wn 1 3 : ad 1 (t hus far Olafsson-Kan, Nice OJ. 19 74) and now by advancing . . . e6-e5, either immediately or after 1 3 . . a6 1 4 lt:lc3, Black would get an equal game. (2) 9 e4 e5 10 de de 1 1 lt:ld5 ( both 1 1 lt:l xe5? fe and 1 1 .tg5 tt:lc6 1 2 : fe t f4! are good for Black) 1 1 . . . lt:lxd5 1 2 ed ( 1 2 cd ..t d6 1 3 ef .t xf5 1 4 W'b3 lt:ld7 1 5 ..t e3 h6 leaves Black with a solid .

141

centre and t h e initiative on the kingside; E. Richter-Skalicka, 1 934) 1 2 . . . ..tf6 1 3 c5 e4 1 4 lL! e 1 lL! d 7 1 5 .tf4 lt:l e 5 and Black's play is the more purposeful; Kozlov USSR skaya-Kakabadze, Women's Ch. 1 97 1 . (3) 9 b 3 (let us note i n passing Geller-Milic, USSR v Yugoslavia 1 957, which saw the whole board in turmoil after 9 b4 lL!c6 1 0 b5 lL!dS 1 1 a4 lLln 1 2 ..ta3 g5 1 3 : ad l f4) 9 . . . a5 (secures b4 as a blocking outpost in the event of White's QB moving to the a3-f8 diagonal) 10 .t b2 ( 1 0 ..ta3 lL!a6 1 1 d5 e5 12 lL!xe5? lL!b4 + demon strates the usefulness of . . . a5, and 10 e4 merely loosens the white position after 10 . . . fe 1 1 lL!xe4 e5 1 2 de de 1 3 ..t b2 lL!c6 14 : ae l ..tg4!) 1 0 . . . lL!a6 1 1 : ae 1 c6 1 2 a3 .td8 1 3 e4 e 5 1 4 de de 1 5 lL!xe5 lL!c5 with compensation for the pawn; Flohr-Kotov, USSR Ch. 1 949, went 16 b4? lL!cxe4 1 7 lL!xe4 fe 18 c5? .te6 1 9 .txe4 lt:l xe4 20 : xe4 .td5 and the white-squared bishop dominated the board. There is a forced repetition by 16 ..tf3 W' h 3 1 7 .tg2 etc., and Taimanov has suggested that White may play for the win by 1 7 ef .t xf5 1 8 W'd l . a5 8 White's basic idea would be seen in its clearest form after 8 . . . .idS? 9 .ta3 paralysing Black's

1 42

1/yin-Zhenevsky System

position. Similarly, the standard 8 . . . -.h5 runs up against 9 ..ta3! x raying the now undefended bishop and preparing a favourable alter ation of pawn structure: 9 . . . a5 (Black's best bet might be the consistent 9 . . . g5 10 e3 .1:1. f7 1 1 c5 ..td7 1 2 ll:ld2 -.xd l 1 3 .l:l. axd l d5 1 4 ll:lf3 .l:l. g7 1 5 ll:le5 ..te8; Kozma Bhend, M unich 01. 1 958) 10 d5! and the centre is opened up to White's advantage as 10 . . . e5? loses to I I ll:lxe5. 9 .l:l.e1 Once more maximizing flex ibility : whilst introducing the possibility of e2-e4 White is also waiting to see how Black plays before committing his QB. The simpler 9 ..t b2 ll:la6 10 e3 c6 I I -.e2 ..td7 12 e4 fe 1 3 ll:lxe4 -.h5 would bring about a standard type of position where White has greater freedom but Black's set-up is very resilient and not without counterchances on both sides of the board. 9 -.g6 By analogy with other positions it could be that 9 . . . ll:le4 deserves further investigation. 10 ..ta3 As in the old 8 .1:1. e I main line White could also continue 10 e4 fe 1 1 ll:lxe4 ll:l xe4 1 2 .1:1. xe4 ll:lc6 1 3 -.e2 although the extra pawn moves would ease Black's task somewhat.

10 ll:la6 This typical edge-development serves several functions : generally restraining White's queensi de ambitions, protecting the c7 weak spot, and last but by no means least, avoiding central congesti on (. . . ll:l bd7) or offering White a target ( . . . ll:lc6, d4-d5!). 11 e3 Flashy manoeuvring by I I lLJe5 -.e8 1 2 ll:ld3 would allow 1 2 . . . e5, while I I d5 would also be ineffective because of I I . . . ll:le4! The move played secures the cen tral dark squares and can hope to lull the opponent into the inatten tive I I . . ..td7? 1 2 ll:le5! 11 ll:lb4 12 ..tb2 ( 1 15 ) .

1 15 B

Having accomplished a good deal behind the scenes on the a3f8 diagonal, the bishop retires with honour in order to eject the tres passer on b4. c6 12 Construction of an elastic,

1/yin-Zhenet•sky System

de fen sive pawn wall is an integral pa rt of Black's strategy in such positi ons, but here White can util i ze the opposition of queen rooks to make immediate and important spatial gains and therefore the pre li minary 1 2 . . . ll b8 would be p referable. tt:la6 13 a3 ab 14 b4 ..td7 15 ab Wh5 16 W b3 17 tt:ld2 White inconsistently opts to prepare the central advance e3-e4 before completing his queenside action; 1 7 b5 cb 1 8 cb tt:lc7 1 9 tt:ld2 ( 1 9 d5 intending 1 9 . . . tt:lcxd5 20 .{)xd5 tt:l xd5 2 1 tt:ld4 'iW f7 22 ..txd5 ed 23 ll fc l is interesting) 19 . . . d5 20 f3 was the correct way to preserve White's strategic initiat Ive. 17 d5! The delayed transitiOn to a Stonewall formation is an important weapon in Black's pos itional armoury. Here, there is also the concrete point of opening up an attack on b4. 18 b5 ft)b4! ( 1 1 6) Astute tactical exploitation of White's lapse on the seventeenth; it may well be that this possibility had escaped White's attention. 19 tt:la2 Sensibly taking immediate steps t o eliminate the frisky intruder.

1 43

1 16 w

Simply defending d3 by 1 9 ..tfl looks suspiciously passive, whilst the blunt 1 9 ..ta3?! would fall foul of 1 9 ll xa3! 20 'ilt' xa3 lbg4 2 1 h 3 tt:lxf2! with a vicious attack. tt:lxa2 19 20 ll xa2 ll xa2 21 'ilt'xa2 tt:le4 2 1 . . . ..t b4 would have obliged White to meekly hold the balance by 22 .te l tt:le4 23 be be 24 Wc2. fe 22 tt:lxe4 ..txc6 23 be 24 c5 g5 Inaugurating an extremely brash plan which was probably unnecessary in view of the attract ive alternative 24 . . . .idS intend ing to activate the bishop on the b8-h2 diagonal. 25 ..tc3 g4 26 ll f6 ll b l ..tf8 27 WaS + 28 ll h6 Wc8 29 ll xb7 Naturally, White is only too

1 44

Ilyin-Zhenevsky System

happy to make the trivial material investment required to clear the path for his dangerous c-pawn. ..txb7 29 'ihh2 + 30 1t"xb7 lH6 31 �fl h5? 32 ..-b8 The delicate equilibrium of opposite flank play would have achieved a fitting finale in the variation 32 . . . ..- h6! 3 3 �gl :n 34 c6 ..-f6 35 .tel ..-e7 36 ..ta5 ..-f6 etc., but Black mistakenly plays for a win, not appreciating that the self-incarceration of his queen paves the way for an imaginative and amusing finish : 33 ..-e5! ± ± ..tg7 34 c6 : xf2 + 35 �xf2 ..txe5 36 de h4 37 c7 h3 (37 . . . ..- xg3 + 38 �fl h3 is no improvement : 39 c8 ... + �h7 40 ..-d7 + �h8 4 1 ..-e8 + �g7 42 ..-e7 + �h8 43 ..-rs + �h7 44 ..-n + �h8 45 ..-h5 + �g7 46 ..- g5 �h7 47 ..t h 1 ) 38 c8 ... + �g7 39 ..-d7 + �g6 40 'ii'xe6 + �h5 4 1 ..- f5 + �h6 42 ..- f6 + �h5 43 ..- h4 + 1 -0. Suetin-Rashkovsky

Sochi 1 9 73 1 d4 f5 2 g3 il:lf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 il:lf3 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 il:lc3 7

il:le4!?( 1 1 7)

In view of Black's theoretical difficulties in the accepted main lines of the Ilyin-Zhenevsky,

this neglected byway certamly deserves deeper investigation. The similarities with Flohr-Sokolsky above are evident and there are also instructive and informative parallels to be drawn with Notaros-Maric below. 8 ..-c2 Other moves are unlikely to worry Black, e.g. 8 ..td2 ..tf6 9 ..-c2 il:lxd2! or 8 il:l xe4 fe 9 il:ld2 d5 10 f3 ..tf6 with a supeno version of the analogous variatio of note 'c' to White's ninth move p. 1 38. il:lxc3 8 9 • xc3 After 9 be Black could transpos to an acceptable Alekhine vari ation by 9 . . . ..tf6 1 0 e4 il:lc6 iJ1 unable to find anything better. ..tf6 9 10 b3 Two other moves have been played : (a) 1 0 b4 il:ld7 (clearly, alterna tives await testing, amongst them


1 45

. . . c5) I I .i.b2 c5 (thus far vonRashkovsky, USSR 1 974) Sa d now 1 2 W b3 leaves White an so mewhat the better of it. (b) lO .i.e3 �c6 1 1 .C. ad l We7 12 b4 �d8 1 3 Wb3 �f7 14 c5 and now it should not prove too difficult to improve on the loosen ing 1 4 . . . g5?! 1 5 �e1 j; of Hasin Simagin, USSR Ch. 1 956. 10 �c6 11 .i.b2 ( 1 1 8 )

positional superiority to decisive proportions : 1 6 . . . .i.g5 1 7 f4 .i.f6 1 8 e4 fe 1 9 .C. xe4 ( Black's sickly e pawn is completely pinned down) 1 9 . . . .i.d7 20 �e5! (an amusing echo) 20 . . . .i.xe5 (the ignomini ous 20 . . . .i.c8 would leave Black doubly shamed and still struggling after 2 1 .i.f3 and 22 Ci::J g4) 2 1 de d5 22 .C. ee I .C. fe8 23 .i.a3 .i.c6 24 .i.xe7 .C. xe7 25 cd (the rest is basic technique and best passed over in silence) 25 . . . .C. ad8 26 d6 .i.xg2 27 �xg2 .C. ed7 28 W b4 Wf5 29 .C.d2 a5 30 W' xb7 cd 3 1 W'c6 d5 32 W'c2 W'fl 3 3 .C. c l d4 34 W'e4 d3? 35 .C. c3 h6 36 .:t cxd3 l hd3 3 7 .C. xd3 .C. xd3 38 W' xd3 W b7 + 39 �h3 W h 1 40 W'c4 �f7 41 f5 Wf3 42 W'xe6 + �f8 43 Wc8 + �e7 44 We6 + �f8 45 � h4 h5 46 Wc8 + 1 -0.

Obviously, Black should now seize the opportunity to play the thematic 1 1 . . . e5 after which his position would appear to be com pletely satisfactory. Instead, in our game there occurred 1 1 . . . .i.d7 1 2 .C. ad 1 We8 1 3 Wd2 Wh5 1 4 .C. fe I (Suet i n recommends 1 4 e 3 j; and notes that 1 4 d5 ed 1 5 cd �e5 1 6 � xe5 de 1 7 d6 c6 would be unclear) 14 . . . Ci::J e 7 1 5 Ci::J e 5!? .i.c8? ( 1 5 . . . .i.g5 16 f4 de 1 7 de .i.c6 1 8 fg f4! was the way to make a fight of it) 1 6 Ci::J d 3 ± after which White instructively increased his

Notaros-Marie

10

Novi Sad 1 974 1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 �f3 .i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 Ci::J c3 7

a5 ( 1 1 9 )

B y taking b4 under control Black not only impedes queenside expansion by White but also pro vides protection for knight forays to that square. The critical main line feat ures a pawn sacrifice by Black in return for active piece play, but with the refinement of White's defences has come the


1 46 1 19 w

growing suspicion that the com pensation is insufficient. Unless an improvement can be found this attractive variation seems doomed to oblivion. 8 tt e1 Other continuations make fewer demands on Black's resources, e.g. : (a) 8 'ilfc2 tL!c6 9 e4 (Smyslov Filipowicz, Bath 1 973, went 9 a3 e5 10 d5 tL!b8 I I tLlg5?! c6 1 2 tt d l and now 1 2 . . . tLl g4 would have been more active than the 1 2 . . . tL!e8 played) 9 . . . fe 1 0 tLlxe4 e5 I I de de 1 2 tL!fg5 (Tomovic- Maric, Yugoslav Ch. 1 956, saw 1 2 tt d l 'ilfe8 1 3 tL!xf6 + ..txf6 1 4 ..te3 Wh5 1 5 ..tc5 tt e8 with Black's kingside chances at least as important as White's central pressure) 1 2 . . . tLlxe4 1 3 tLlxe4 tbd4 14 W d 1 ..te6 1 5 b3 ( Pytei Bednarsky, Poland 1 97 1 ) and now Pytel gives 1 5 . . . a4 1 6 ..t b2 ab 1 7 ab tt ax 1 + . (b) 8 b3 tL!a6 9 ..tb2 c6 1 0 Wc2

..td7 1 1 : ae 1 ( 1 1 e4 permits the interesting tactical counter 1 1 . . . tL!b4 1 2 We2 fe 1 3 tLlxe4 tLl xe4 1 4 W xe4 e5! with the strong threat of 1 5 . . . ..tf5) 1 1 . . . b5 1 2 tL!d2 be 1 3 tLlxc4 tt c8 1 4 e3 ..te8 1 5 We2 and White's prospects are perhaps slightly the more positive in this mutually difficult middlegame; Vilela-Rantanen, Tallinn 1 979. This particularly rich example will repay careful examination. It seems likely that a search for Black alternatives and improvements will be rewarded. 8 tL!e4 Once again we see the knight blockade White's attempted advantageous opening of the centre. 9 tLlxe4 This capture changes the character of the game completely. White's basic aim is to induce . . . d6-d5 and then uncover the resulting weakness by means of f2-f3. The drawback is the danger of the white pieces remaining bottled up while Black's gain in mobility. The best move, 9 Wc2, is exam ined in the following game. 9 fe d5 10 tL!d2 11 f3 ef 12 tLlxf3 The d-pawn is too weak to alloW 1 2 ef ..tf6 etc.

llyin-Zhenevsky System 12

c S ( 1 20)

Faced with this challenge to his centre White has no time to settle to quiet exploitation and occu pation of e5. ed 13 cd 14 .te3 c4! This pawn has a bright future. 1S lUeS lt:lc6 be 16 lt:l xc6 17 b3?! Priming the long-awaited advance e2-e4 by 1 7 .tf2 was the correct continuation; neglecting this positional imperative, White falls inexorably into passivity. 17 c3! ( 1 21 ) I!/

147

18 "it" c 1 Hastening t o pluck t h e irritating thorn from his flesh, but it turns out not to be so easy to accompl ish. 1 8 "it"c2 .tf5 would be worse. 18 "it" b6 19 .l:t d l .tg4 20 .tn 20 "it" xc3 .t b4 2 1 "it"d3?? .tf5 would be tragi-comic curtains, and 2 1 "it"c2 .l:t ae8 likely as not the beginning of the final act with the black pieces in full cry. 20 "it"b4 21 .l:t d3 c2! 22 "it"xc2 The white position has turned septic and a radical solution must be attempted. 22 .tfS 23 "it" xc6 .t xd3 �h8 24 "it" xdS + 2S ed .tf6 .l:t ae8 .l:tc1 26 With this it becomes clear that despite a temporary rallying the case is terminal. The final throes : 27 .l:t c4 "it"e1 28 .tf2 "it"d2 29 "it"g2 .tg5 30 d5 .1:[ xf2 0- 1 .

w

Kavalek- Bednarsky Skopje 0/. 1 972 1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 4 .tg2 e6 4 lt:lf3 .te7 S 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 aS 8 .l:te1 lt:le4 9

"it"c2 ( 1 22 )

Natural and clearly strongest.

148

llyin-Zhener:sky System 11 fe e5 12 W xe4 With the strong threat of 1 3 . . . ..tf5. 13 g4! Boldly controlling f5, albeit at the cost of some weakening of the kingside. ed ( 1 23) 13

9 lLlc6 There are three other possi bilities: (a) 9 . . . d5 produces a rather poor Stonewall. (b) 9 . . . lLlxc3 10 "it' xc3 ( 1 0 be also gives chances of advantage) I 0 . . . lLlc6 I I e4! d5 ( I I . . fe 1 2 : xe4 ..tf6 1 3 ..tf4 is relatively best but cedes White an unde niable positional superiority) 1 2 ed! ..tb4 1 3 Wd3 ed 1 4 ..tg5 lLle7 1 5 c5! ..txe 1 1 6 : xe l : e8 1 7 We2 � f8 1 8 lLle5 with massive compensation for the exchange; Shashin-Korzin, semi-final Moscow Ch. 1 966. (c) 9 . . . lLla6!? will transpose to the column in all likelihood. 10 lLlxe4 lLlb4 11 "it'b1 Consistency is essential; in Raicevic- Maric, Bar 1 977, White wavered with I I Wc3?! which encouraged the energetic response I I . . . fe 1 2 lLld2 d5 1 3 f3 c5 1 4 e3 e5! + . .

1 4 a3 M uch stronger than the recap ture with the knight which lets Black drum up counterplay, e.g. 14 lLlxd4 ..t h4! 1 5 : fl (the game Reshevsky-Larsen, Santa Monica 1 966, was drawn by repetition after 1 5 ..te3 : e8 1 6 Wf4 : rs 1 7 We4 etc.) 1 5 . . . : e8 1 6 Wf3 : rs 1 7 Wh3 h5 1 8 lLl f5 hg 1 9 W'xh4 ..txf5 20 ..tg5 Wc8 (or 20 . . . We8 2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 ..td5 + ..te6 23 "it'xg4 Havsky-Karasev, Lenin grad Ch. 1 968) 2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 : fd 1 lLle5 with approximately even chances; Podzielny- Bellin, Win· terthur 1 974. lLla6 14


Larsen has mentioned the moves 14 . . . lL!c6 1 5 lL!xd4 ..th4. 15 W xd4 1 5 lL!xd4 is inferior on account of 1 5 . . . lL!c5 1 6 Wd5 + �h8 1 7 h 3 c6 1 8 W h5 ..tf6 when 1 9 ..te3 fails to 19 . . . g6 20 Wh6 ..tg7. 15 lL!c5 16 h3 lL!b3 ( 1 24 )

Other attempts appear equally ineffective: (a) 1 6 . . . ..tf6 17 W d 1 (b) 1 6 . . . ..te6 1 7 W c 3 ..tf6 1 8 Wc2 a 4 1 9 ..te3 lL! b 3 2 0 .l:l. ad l tLla5 2 1 lL!d2 and Black has very

1 49

little to show for the pawn; Kava lek-Jamieson, Buenos Aires 01. 1 978. 17 � h8 Wd5 + .l:l. b1 18 a4 ..td2 19 Stopping . . . .l:l.a5 and . . . h 5 softening up White's kingside. ..tf6 19 20 ..tb4 'iWe8 21 e4 Black's temporary initiative has ground to a halt and with normal play White will simply consolidate his extra pawn and win. This explains the last desperate fling by Black before bowing to the inevitable: 21 . . . ..te6 22 W xb7 c5 23 e5! de 24 ..tc3 .1:1. b8 25 We4 'iWf7 26 g5 ..te7 27 'iW xe5 .1:1. b6 28 .1:1. bd I ..td8 29 .1:1. d6 ..txc4 30 g6! hg 3 1 .1:1. xd8! .1:1. xd8 32 lL!g5 W f8 33 'iWe4 1 -0. It must be admitted that it is very difficult to imagine this variation being rehabilitated.

15

Classical Stonewall Black's central spatial parity, stra tegic initiative on the kingside, and adequate queenside prospects provide sufficient compensation for ceding White permanent con trol of e5. This is the nub of the ongoing debate on the viability of the Stonewall formation.

'Stonewall' is the descriptive term for the craggy pawn configuration . . . f5, . . . e6, . . . d5, . . . c6. This creation of a rock-solid pawn barr ier is essentially aimed at stabiliz ing the centre in order to free Black's hands for play on the flanks. Early interpretations of the Stonewall often saw this in its crudest form : Black would leave the centre and queenside to take care of themselves and throw everything into a va ba11que offensive on the kingside. This would typically be built up by occupying the e4 outpost with the KN, shifting the heavy pieces to the h-file by means of . . . -.d8-e8h 5 and . . . l:H8-f6-h6 and further mobilizing the infantry by . . . g5. Such an attack can be very dang erous, and constantly figures in Black's plans, although nowadays it is likely to be deferred, if not abandoned, in favour of central and queenside action. This modern interpretation posits that

Non-fianchetto Stonewall Practice has shown that these lines tend to favour White, particularly when his QB is developed outside the pawn chain, thus Black should probably prefer the more flexible type of development seen in Chapter 1 0. This variation has produced many horror stories for Black, but none more instructive than the following game which is the classic warning of the inevi table consequences of chronic dark-square debility. Schlechter-John

Barmen 1 905 d4 ! 50

f5

Classical Stonewall

c4 2 e6 3 lLic3 d5 As indicated above, 3 . . . lLif6 is more promising. 4 .H4 There are also two rather dubi ous gambit continuations : (a) 4 g4?! fg 5 e4 de 6 'Wxg4 (or 6 lLixe4 ..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLif6) 6 . . . lLif6 7 'W g3 lLic6 + Shainswit Breitman, Tbilisi 1 9 6 1 . (b) 4 cd e d 5 e 4 d e (5 . . . fe?? 6 'Wh5 + ) 6 ..tc4 lLif6 7 lLige2 ..td6 8 ..tf4 lLic6 9 0-0 and although White has some compensation for the pawn it should not be too difficult for Black to improve on M oscow Shersher-Natapov, 1 955, which saw 9 . . . ..txf4 I 0 lLixf4 lLixd4 I I lLicd5 lLixd5 1 2 lLixd5 lLie6 1 3 'Wb3 and Black is in danger due to his inability to complete his development and get his king into safety. 4 c6 5 e3 6 lLif3 ( 1 25 ) 125 8

151

There is little point for White in deviating from this promising natural development, e.g. 6 ..td3 ..te7 7 lLige2 0-0 8 h3 (White's plan is to castle queenside and open lines on the other wing by g2-g4) 8 . . . lLie4 9 'Wc2 lLid7 I 0 f3 lLixc3 I I lLixc3 lLif6 1 2 0-0-0 de (a typical procedure; Black abandons the centre in order to gain time for a pawn storm on the flank) 1 3 ..t xc4 b5 14 ..td3 a5 with a double-edged position; Polugayevsky- Ufimtsev, Moscow 1 955. 6 ..td6 A fundamental positional error. In this position Black gets nothing whatsoever in return for the further weakening of his already sensitive dark squares in contrast to the fianchetto variations where White either has to accept a weak ening of his king's position (from the capture sequence . . . ..txf4, gxf4), or loss of time (the Botvinnik ..ta3 variations). It is, however, difficult for Black to equalize completely even after the correct 6 . . . ..te7, e.g. 7 ..td3 0-0 8 0-0 (8 lLie5 helps Black sim plify : 8 . . . lLibd7 9 0-0 lLixe5 t o ..txe5 lLig4! I I ..tf4 g 5 1 2 ..tg3 ..td6 1 3 ..txd6 'Wxd6 14 g3 e5 and Black's opening worries are past: Timman-P. Nikolic, Niksic 1 983) 8 . . . lLie4 . (that White can gain an advantage by force against

/52

Classical Stonewall

this natural move is strong testi mony to the inadequacy of this particular Stonewall pos1t10n; note that the equally normal 8 . . . lLl bd7 is also unplayable on account of 9 cd forcing 9 . . . cd because of the undefended f-pawn) 9 ..txe4! de (9 . . fe lO lZ'le5 lLld7 1 1 f3 ef 1 2 .:t xf3 ..tf6 1 3 e4 is no improvement) lO lZ'le5 lZ'ld7 (a pawn hunt of the bishop fails tactically: lO . . . g5 1 1 ..tg3 f4? 1 2 ef gf 1 3 Wg4 + etc. o r l O . . . �h8 1 1 f3! g5 12 ..tg3 f4 1 3 fe! fg 14 Wh5! and Black cannot survive) I I f3 lZ'lxe5 1 2 ..txe5 ef 1 3 W xf3 with complete control. 7 ..td3 Wc7 8 g3! The question of how the black squared bishops disappear is a vitally important one; if Black can be forced to capture on f4 then White will recapture with the e pawn and enjoy pressure against e6 and total domination of e5. 8 0-0 9 0-0 lZ'le4 10 Wb3 Threatening to take twice on e4 after I I cd ed ( I I . . . cd?? 1 2 lLl b5). �h8 10 ..txf4 11 .:t acl Understandable given the vari ous threats generated by the vis a-vis of rook and queen on the c-file, but really anything is prefer able to the self-imposed lifelong .

structural inferiority brought on by this move. 12 ef Wf7 13 lZ'le5 We7 14 ..txe4! Excellent technique; White liquidates his doubled pawns and enhances his prospects of obtain ing a good knight versus bad bishop situation. 14 fe 15 f3 ef 16 .:.eel Wc7 17 Wa3! The dark square domination begins; normal development by 1 7 . . . lLld7 i s ruled out because of 1 8 We7. 17 �g8 lZ'la6 18 .:. xf3 19 b3 Wd8 20 c5 White has no objections to par rying the indirect threat to his d pawn by this space-gaining advance. lZ'lc7 20 21 ..td7 Wb2 Wc2 We7 22 .:. en 23 .:r. ae8 24 g4 ..tc8 .:t h3 25 Forcing a further, and ulti mately fatal, weakening of the black squares. 25 g6 26 b4 H olding the centre in a vice-like

Classical Stonewall

grip White is free to expand on the flanks in preparation for a breakthrough on either side according to the disposition of Black's defences. 26 Wi'f6 l:t e7 27 l:t hf3 a6 28 a4 29 tt:Jd1 A regrouping to cover f5 and facilitate immediate occupation of the weak black squares to be fixed by g5. 29 l:t g7 30 tt:Je3 Wi'e7 31 g5 i.d7 32 tt:J3g4 .te8 Black's wretched position is utterly passive, like some helpless creature encoiled by a python and gradually being squeezed to death. 33 lLl h6 + liP h8 Wi'd8 34 Wi'e2 35 tt:J5g4 i.d7 tt:Je8 36 Wi'e5 Wi'c7 37 l:t h3 37 . . . We7 38 W b8 would be an embarrassing way for the queen side to drop off. 38 tt:Jf6 ( 1 26 ) The culmination o f the first part of White's strategy, with his pieces optimally entrenched on the weak b lack squares. Wi' xe5 38 Forced; 38 . . . Wi'd8 39 tt:Jxh7 wo uld win immediately. J:re7 39 fe

153

126 B

tt:Jxf6 40 l:t hf3 Again, there is no option because of the threat to penetrate to the eighth with mate. l:t xf6 l:t xf6 41 42 ef l:t e8 43 tt:Jf7 + �g8 44 tt:Je5 Having acquired a protected passed pawn on the sixth as a result of his middlegame pressure, Schlechter appropriately begins the final phase with a thematic re-occupation of e5. 44 l:t d8 45 �g2 �f8 46 h4 .te8 47 �f3 i.f7 48 �f4 Of course, the king is brought up as far as possible before com mencing the final breakthrough. �e8 48 l:t b l 49 �f8 Black's helplessness is truly pitiful. 50 b5

/54

Classical Stonewall

Black resigns. After 50 . . . ab 5 1 a b ..te8 52 be ..txc6 5 3 lt:lxc6 be 54 �e5 White would finally reap material rewards for his masterly display of sustained strategic domination. Karpov-Spassky

Candidates match 1 974 d5

d4

The variations with e3 fre quently arise via transposition. c4 2 Although White generally develops the QN on c3, as in our featured games and variations, this is not obligatory as the following examples show: 2 lt:lf3 c6 3 c4 e6 4 e3 f5 and now : (a) 5 ..te2 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3 fle7 8 ..tb2 lt:lbd7 9 lt:le5 0-0 1 0 lt:ld2 g5?! (a risky attempt to complicate; I 0 . . lt:le4 I I f3 lt:lxd2 12 flxd2 lt:lxe5 1 3 de ..tc5 is the solid way to equalize) I I f4 gf?! ( I I . . flg7 or I I . . . lt:le4 immedi ately are both better) 1 2 ef lt:le4 1 3 lt:lxe4 fe?! ( 1 3 . . . de was relatively best) 14 fld2 lt:lf6 1 5 c5 ..tc7 1 6 b4 ..t d 7 1 7 a 4 lt:le8 ( 1 7 . . . �h8) 18 l h3! and White stands better over the entire board; Speelman Seirawan, candidates match, Saint John 1 988. (b) 5 ..td3 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3 fle7 8 a4 0-0 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10 lt:lxa3 lt:le4 ( I 0 . . . ..td7!? intending .

.

the transfer to h5 via e8 comes strongly into consideration) 1 1 lt:lc2 lt:ld7 1 2 fie I a5 1 3 lt:ld2 b6 1 4 f3 lt:lxd2 1 5 flxd2 lt:lf6 1 6 l:Hd t ..ta6 with just a tiny edge to White; Korchnoi-Yusupov, Montpellier 1 985. 2 e6 lt:lc3 c6 3 4 f5 ( 1 27 ) e3 1 27 w

f4 5 The so-called Double Stonewall in which White creates a fixed, balanced pawn structure in the centre and on the kingside in the hope of being able to make some thing of his more active c-pawn placement. Practice indicates that Black should have little difficulty in holding the balance. Nor do other moves hold out much hope for White of achieving an opening advantage, e.g. : (a) 5 lt:lh3 lt:lf6 6 ..td2 ..td6 7 flc2 0-0 8 0-0-0 fle7 9 f3 de 10 e4 fe I I lt:l xe4?! ( I I fe is better but also entirely satisfactory for Black

Classical Stonewall after I I . . . e5 1 2 ..txc4 + �h8) I I . . b5 1 2 lt:lxd6 W xd6 1 3 f4 lt:la6 14 ..te2 c5 and White is in trouble; Bronstein-Botvinnik, World Ch. 1 95 1 . (b) 5 i.d3 lt:lf6 6 Wc2 ..te7 7 8ge2 0-0 8 f3 �h8 9 i.d2 lt:la6 I 0 a3 lt:lc7 with approximately equal chances as Black is well placed to initiate a pawn storm on the queenside in case White castles there; Burger-Saidy, US Ch. I 965/66. (c) 5 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 (the more experim ental 5 . . . ..td6 6 i.d3 Wf6 also comes into consideration as shown by Osnos-Novotelnov, Leningrad 1 956, which went 7 b3 tt:Je7 8 ..t b2 lt:ld7 9 Wc2 0-0 1 0 h3 and now, instead of 10 . . . �h8?! as played, I 0 . . . de I I i.xc4 b5 with . . . e5 to follow would have whipped up promising counter play) 6 ..td3 i.d6 (more active than 6 . . . ..te7 while 6 . . . lt:le4?! invites the sharp retort 7 g4!) 7 b3 0-0 8 i.b2 lt:le4 9 Wc2 lt:ld7 1 0 00-0 ( 1 0 0-0 l:lf6 would be very risky; cf. Maroczy-Tartakower, p. 99) 1 0 . . . a5 I I h3 with a sharp battle of opposite wing attacks to come. The game Zak-Holmov, semi-final USSR Ch. 1 9 5 1 , showed that White cannot save a tempo by I I g4?! because of I I . . . tt:Jxc3! I 2 i.xc3 fg 1 3 lt:le5 ( 1 3 ..txh7 + �h8 1 4 lt:le5 lt:lxe5 1 5 de i.a3 + 1 6 �b I Wh4 and the f-pawn falls) .

/ 55

1 3 . . . lt:lxe5 1 4 de i.a3 + 1 5 � b I W h4 with advantage. lt:lf6 5 ..te7 6 tLlf3 0-0 i.e2 7 tLle4 0-0 8 Wc2 9 9 tLle5 achieved nothing in Tukmakov- Lerner, Cheliabinsk 1 980 : 9 . . . tLld7 10 tLlxe4 fe ( to . . . de?! 1 1 g4 brings unpleasant tension to Black's centre) 1 1 tLl xd7 i.xd7 1 2 ..id2 a5 1 3 l:l. c l b6 14 ..tg4 i.d6 Black's queenside counterplay is under way. lt:ld7 9 10 b3 ( 1 28 ) 1 28 B

tLlxc3?! 10 It certainly looks misguided to exchange the stallion on e4 for the colt on c3. Both 10 . . . l:l. f6 1 1 a4 b6 (Botvinnik) and 10 . . . tLldf6 1 1 tLle5 ..td7 intending . . . i.e8-h5 ( Kotov) are acceptable. It W xc3 lt:lf6 12 tLle5 ..td7 13 a4 tLle4?!

156

Classical Stonewall

Seeking the exchange of light squared bishops by 1 3 . . . ..te8 1 4 ..ta3 ..th5 i s a more sensible procedure. ..tf6?! 14 1t'd3 Yet another inaccuracy which allows White to improve his pos ition; 14 . . . ..te8 was still prefer able. .l:l. e8 15 ..ta3 16 ..th5! Compelling Black to weaken his pawns. g6 16 ..txe5 17 ..tf3 Given that Black's game is rapidly going downhill anyway, this otherwise crazy concession of the black squares at least has the merit of gaining the necessary tempo to prevent White opening lines by g2-g4. h5 18 de! 19 ..txe4! Correctly eliminating Black's only good piece. Despite the rema1mng bishops being of opposite colour, W hite retains a vast positional advantage due to the superior activity of his position in general and his bishop m particular. 19 fe Opening a file for the white rooks would be suicidal. 20 1t'd2 �fi 21 a5 .l:l. h8 To try and discourage line-

opening on the kingside. .l:l. h7 22 ..td6 ..tc8 23 1t'b4 The qualitative difference between the bishops could not be greater. 24 .l:l. a2 �g8 25 h3 a6 25 . . . h4 would enable White to open the g-file with deadly effect. ..td7! 26 g3 This offer of a pawn in order to bring the QR into play is Black's best chance. ..te8 27 1t'xb7 .l:l. aa7 28 1t'b4 .l:l. ab7 29 .l:l. g2 .l:l. bfi 30 1t'c3 31 ..tc5 g5 Spassky is doing his best to complicate matters. 32 ..tb6? An inaccuracy which keeps Black's hopes alive. This was the right moment to play 32 cd! oblig ing Black to recapture with the c pawn (32 . . . ed? 33 f5! is crushing) thus opening a route of invasion for White's heavy pieces. 32 1t'd7 33 cd ed Now Black has f5 under control and this means that White must permit the opening of the h-file in order to make progress. 34 g4 hg 35 hg gf 36 ef .l:l. h4

Classical Stonewall 37 f5 38 e6 39 'W'g3? In mutual time-trouble Karpov chooses the wrong method of par rying the threatened . . . .l:t h l + and . . . 'W'f4 + . 39 'W'e3! makes a crucial check on g5 available, e.g. 39 . . . .l:t h l + 40 �f2 .l:t l h3 4 1 'W'g5 + .l:t g7 42 'W'd8! and Black's resources are practically exhausted. .l:t h l + 39 'W'b4! 40 �f2 'W'e3 41 Here the game was adjourned and analysis established that White should accept the repetition 41 . . . .l:t l h3 42 .l:t g 3 .l:t h2 + 43 .::!. g2 .1:t 2h3 44 .1:t g3 etc. since 42 '1ifg5 + .l:t g7 43 'W'd8 cS! gives a counterattack at least sufficient to draw. Thus, draw agreed. Standard Stonewall The standard Stonewall begins from the following diagrammed position : 1 d4 f5 2 lLlf6 g3 3 .i.g2 e6 4 lLlD .i.e7 0-0 0-0 5 c4 6 d5 We shall examine White's three major schemes of development in t urn: Petrosian's 7 lLlbd2

!57

Botvinnik's 7 b3 the Classical 7 lLlc3

Petrosian's 7 lLl bd2 Benko-Guimard

Buenos Aires 1 960 I d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lLlf6 4 .i.g2 .i.e7 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 0-0 d5 7

lLlbd2 ( 1 29)

129 B

Introduced and popularized by Petrosian, this flexible variation generally aims to cover eS by means of the manoeuvre lLlf3-e5d 3 and lLld2-f3. The knight on d3 is also handy for supporting a space-gaining march by the b pawn. Black needs to find the right balance between disputing control of eS (by . . . lLl b8-d7, . . . lLlf6e4-d6-f7, and . . . .i.e7-f6) and pursuing the traditional kingside attack. Other seventh moves to note : (a) 7 cd (this premature release of the central tension improves Black's pawn structure and

/ 58

Classical Stonewall

increases the range of his QB) 7 . . . ed 8 lt:\c3 c6 9 l:. b l 'ii' e 8 (9 . . . a5!?) 1 0 �f4 tt:l bd7 I I b4 a6 1 2 'ii' b3 o;t>h8 1 3 tt:la4 lt:\e4 1 4 tt:lc5 �f6 15 'ii' c2 l:. g8 16 tt:lxd7 �xd7 1 7 tt:le5 g5 18 �c I tt:ld6 and Black has successfully impeded White's minority attack whilst preparing a kingside attack; Panov�Chis tiakov, M oscow Ch. 1 938. (b) 7 'ii' c2 (a very flexible move which will normally transpose to the major lines) 7 . . . c6 (the exper imental 7 . . . lt:\c6 failed to impress in Lengyei� Spassky, Moscow 1 97 1 , which saw 8 a3 a5 9 b3 �d7 1 0 lt:\c3 �e8 I I cd lt:\xd5 12 �b2 �h5 1 3 tt:la4 'ii' e 8 14 tt:lc5 �xc5 1 5 de 'ilt'e7 and now, instead of 1 6 tt:le5? f4! + , 1 6 e4! ± would have highlighted the deficiencies of Black's position) 8 �f4 'ii' e 8 (8 . . . �d7 9 tt:lbd2 �e8 also comes into consideration) 9 lt:\bd2 'ii' h5 10 l:. ae l tt:lbd7 I I tt:lg5?! (an inter esting idea which does not quite come off) I I . . . tt:lg4 1 2 h4 'ii' g6 1 3 D e5! with massive complications not unfavourable to Black; Soko lov- Berkovich, USSR 1 973. 7 c6 7 . . . b6 intending to contest the centre by . . . c7�c5 is a totally different plan providing much food for thought, e.g. 8 b3 c5 9 �b2 (the black pawns would be full of dynamism after 9 cd ed 1 0 d e be) 9 . . . �b7 1 0 l:. c l lt:\c6!

(improving on the seminal . . . b6 game, Petrosian� Tolush, USSR Ch. 1 958, where Black went wrong with 10 . . . lt:\a6? I I tt:le5 'ii' e 8 1 2 e3 l:. d8 1 3 'ii' e2 �d6 1 4 tt:ldD tt:le4 1 5 tt:ld3 'ii' h5 1 6 l:. fe l ± ) I I e3 l:. c8 12 'ii' e2 tt:le4 1 3 l:. fd l 'ii' e 8 1 4 d e ( 1 4 cd e d 1 5 tt:le5 has been recommended as a better try) 1 4 . . . b e 1 5 tt:le5 tt:lxe5 1 6 �xe5 �f6 1 7 lt:\0 'ilt'e7 1 8 'ii' b2 l:. fd8 with healthy prospects; Grefe�R. Byrne, US Ch. 1 977. 7 . . . lt:\c6 has a better chance of being playable here than after 7 'ii' c2 (see above), e.g. 8 e3 tt:le4 9 a3 a5! and having prevented the opponent's queenside expansion Black can turn to continuing his development by . . . �d7�e8. 8 'ii' c2 'ii' e8 ( 1 30)

I n addition to this normal move, and 8 . . . b6 which was played in the next game, Black has a noteworthy alternative in the multi-purpose prophylactic 8 . . . a5!?, e.g. 9 tt:le5 lt:\ bd7 1 0 tt:l d 3

Classical Stonewall

(after 1 0 lLldf3 Black exchanged his way to equality in Malich Mariotti, Skopje 01. 1 972, by I 0 . . . lLlxe5 I I lLlxe5 ttJd 7 1 2 .tf4 lLl xe5 1 3 .t xe5 .td6) I 0 . . . lLle4 I I lLID ttJd6 1 2 b3 lLifl! 1 3 .t b2 1ie8 1 4 e3 �h8 1 5 lLlfe5 lLl fxe5 1 6 de b6 1 7 0 ttJc5 1 8 lLlf4 .ta6 with a fine game; Spassov-Bellin, Albena 1 979. 9 lLle5 ttJbd7 It would be a grave error to ignore the centre and stake every thing on a kingside assault, as this first of two instructive examples clearly shows : 9 . . . 1ih5 (prema ture) 10 ttJdO lLle4 1 1 ttJd3 g5 1 2 tZ:lfe5 ttJd 7 1 3 0 ttJd6 1 4 b3 .l:l.f6 1 5 h3 lLlfl 1 6 .t b2 lLldxe5 1 7 de .tt h6 1 8 .tt ae l f4 1 9 g4 Wg6 20 Wc3 .tt h4 2 1 e3 and by opening the centre White exposes the lack of coordination in the black camp; Doda -Scheparets, Prague 1 9 56. 10 ttJdJ It is generally in the interests of the player with more space to a void exchanges. �h8 10 The second warning against intemperate attack ing : 1 0 . . . g5 I I lLIO lLle4 ( Flohr's I I . . . h6 is better) 1 2 b4! Wh5 1 3 .tt b l .tt f6 14 b5 f4 ( 1 4 . . . .tt h6 1 5 h3 brings Black to a grinding halt) 1 5 gf g4 16 lLlfe5 J: h6 1 7 h3 gh 1 8 .tO h2 + 1 9 � h I Wh3 20 .te3 and again Black's initiative has dried up leav-

/59

ing White in complete control; Szabo-Duck stein, Bamberg 1 968. 10 . . . lLle4 is quite acceptable, however, with a likely return to the column after I I ttJO �h8. It lLif3 It is nearly always mistaken for Black to exchange his Stonewall knight for no reason as happened in Petrosian-Cardoso, Leipzig 01. 1 960 : I I b3 lLlxd2?! 1 2 .txd2 �h8 1 3 e3 .td6 1 4 cd ed 15 .t b4 and with the exchange of black squared bishops White's queen side minority attack is ready to roll with effect. It lLle4 ttJd6 12 .tt bt 1 2 . . . a5 first comes into con sideration. 13 c5 lLlf7 14 .tf4 Bringing the bishop into play clearly has its attractions but the disadvantage is that Black can attack it with gain of tempo. 1 4 b4 would be consistent. 14 .tf6 15 1ic3 Keeping control of e5. 15 g5 16 ii..c7 ( 1 3 1 ) A fertile and mutually difficult middlegame awaits the players. The present game unfolded as fol lows : 1 6 . . . J: g8 ( 1 6 . . . We7 has its points) 1 7 ltJ�5 ttJdxe5 1 8 de i.g7 19 Wd4? (this innocent cen-

1 60

Classical Sto11ewal/

/31

8

tralization turns out to be a serious error which Black punishes with great energy and accuracy) 19 . . . 'W'd7 20 .ta5 (20 .td6? lL!xd6 2 1 cd 'W' xd6!, exploiting White's undefended queen, shows the tac tical inadequacy of his nineteenth move) 20 . . . b6! 21 cb ab 22 .txb6 .ta6! (capturing on a2 would be premature because of : a l seizing the file, but now that becomes an auxiliary threat to the undermin ing of the e-pawn) 23 lL!c5 'W'c8 24 f4 gf 25 gf .txe2 26 : f2 .th5 (the QB arrives at its traditional outpost via an unconventional route) 27 a4 (this passed pawn is now White's main asset) 27 . . . lL!d6! 28 a5 lL!e4 29 lLlxe4 fe 30 b4 .th6 3 1 f5'? (inappropriate aggres sion based on a flawed conception; 31 'it> h I was necessary) 3 1 . . . ef 32 e6 + .tg7 33 : xf5 .tf3! (avoiding the messy complications of capturing the queen in favour of placing yet another threat over White's head) 34 :g5 'W' xe6 35

.txf3 .tf6! 36 : xg8 + : xg8 37 ..tg2 : xg2 + ! 38 'it>xg2 'W'g4 + 39 � h i 'W'f3 + 40 �g l 'W'g4 + 4 1 �h i 'W'f3 + 4 2 �g l .txd4 + 43 .txd4 + �g8 (the smoke has cleared leaving Black's queen dominating the insecure pieces) 44 : e l 'W'd3 45 .tc5 �f7 46 : a t e 3 47 a 6 'W'g6 + ! 4 8 � h i 'W'f6 0- 1 . Material loss is unavoidable, e.g. 49 : c l e2 (threatening 50 . . . • fl + ) 50 � g2 .. g5 + . Portisch- Radulov

Budapest 1 969 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lL!fJ .te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 6

c6 ( 132)

An important nuance of move order which is mainly aimed at avoiding the trade of black squared bishops which occurs in Botvinnik's Variation (6 . . . d5) 7 b3 etc. The deferring of structural commitment is a generally useful concept which arises quite regu larly in the Dutch (cf. Alekhine's

Classical Stonewall Variation), and this particular application is probably the most successful. Attempts to take advantage of this move order have so far been unconvincing: (a) 7 c5 b6 8 cb ab (8 . . . "thb6 also comes into consideration) 9 tt:lc3 .tb7!? intending . . . c5 and protecting c6 in readiness to eject a tt:le5 by . . . d6 looks promising for Black, and 9 . . . tt:la6 aiming to place the QN on d5 via b4 or c7 also seems playable. (b) 7 b3 a5! 8 .ta3 (Black is very active on the queenside after 8 c5 b6 9 cb Wxb6) 8 . . . .txa3! 9 tt:lxa3 We7 1 0 W c l ( 1 0 c5?! b6! is good for Black) 10 . . . d6 (the advantage of restraining the d pawn now becomes apparent) 1 1 W b2 tt:lbd7 1 2 tt:lc2 e5 and Black's opening has been a complete suc cess : Kelecevic-Bellin, Eerbeek 1 978. (c) After 7 tt:lc3 or 7 tt:lbd2 Black may transpose to the Stonewall having circumvented Botvinnik's simplification. 7 Wc2 This keeps the strategic guessing game going. b6 7 This is playable, but 7 . . . a5 is a more resolute continuation, intending to answer 8 b3 by 8 . . . tt:la6 with all sorts of intriguing possibilities to come. 8 tt:lbd2 d5

161

Of course, e2-e4 must b e pre vented. 9 tt:le5 .tb7 10 tt:ld3 The knight is extremely well placed here, looking at both flanks as well as the centre. 10 tt:lbd7 Declaring himself ready to answer 1 1 tt:lf4 with 1 1 . . . �n. but 10 . . . .td6 may be preferable. 11 b4 Beginning an energetic pawn advance on the queenside which gains useful space and leads to the opening of a file for the rooks. 11 : e8 This seems superfluous and should be replaced by an immedi ate 1 1 . . . .td6. .td6 12 a4 tt:le4 13 ttl f3 be 14 c5 A voidance of this exchange would entail living with the const ant threat of b4-b5. 15 be .tc7 16 .tf4 The now familiar formula of removing Black's best bishop. 16 .txf4 17 gf! This effectively puts the centre under lock and key while White furthers his queenside initiative. Wc7 17 18 tt:lfeS tt:lef6 Not relishing being left with a

162

Classical Stonewall

bad bishop against a good knight as was on the cards. 19 lUb1 aS?! It is understandable that Black should want to activate his bishop but this preparatory move ( 1 9 . . . ..ta6? 20 tt:Jb4) seriously weakens b6 and also presents the a-pawn as a target. The best chance was 19 . . . tt eb8 hoping to exchange some pieces and hang on. 20 tt:Jxd7! Portisch instantly sets about removing the defenders of b6. 20 tt:Jxd7 21 tt:Jxe5 tt:Je5 22 fe n ebS ..ta6 23 n b6 24 n ab1 n b7 25 -.d2! Forcing Black into an unpleasant exchange. 25 n xb6 26 cb! The introduction to a decisive infiltration manoeuvre. -.b7 26 27 -.xa5 ..tb5 27 . . . ..txe2? would permit an amusing conclusion : 28 -.xa8 + ! -. xa8 29 b7 -. b8 30 ..tfl ! followed by the victorious march of the a pawn. 28 -. b4 n xa4 28 . . . ..txa4 would lose in more predictable fashion : 29 n a t ..ib5 30 n xa8 + -.xa8 31 -.e7! -.ai + 32 ..tfl h6 33 b7 ..txe2 34 -.xe6 +

�h7 35 -.xf5 + g6 36 -.n + and mate next move. 29 -.d6 �f7 ( 1 33 ) 1 33 w

30 e4!! A stunning and very instructive breakthrough. Despite the paucity of pieces, Portisch mounts a fero cious and irresistible assault on the black king. 30 -. xb6 30 . . . fe? 3 1 ..th3 is instantly decisive, but the most beautiful variation would have occurred after 30 . . . de, viz. 3 1 d5! ed 32 ..th3! g6 33 -.f6 + �g8 34 ..txf5!! gf 35 �hi ..te2 36 ngt + ..tg4 37 -.xf5 etc. The sweep of the attack from the queen's flank through the centre to the kingside is remarkable. After the text move everything is simple and the game ended : 3 1 ef -.a7 (3 1 . . . ef 32 e6 + �f6 33 e7 + �f7 34 -.d8 ± ± ) 32 -.xe6 + ..t;>f8 33 ..t xd5 cd 34 n xb5 n xd4 35 -.c8 + 1 -0.

Classical Stonewall

Botvinnik's 7 b3 Kasparoy-T. Petrosian

Niksic / 983 1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 J.g2 lLlf6 4 lLlf3 J.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7

b3 ( /34 )

Given Black's general dark square debility in the Stonewall, the primary positional logic behind the intention to exchange black squared bishops by J.a3 is clearly impeccable. Interestingly though, it turns out that the immediate implementation of this strategically desirable goal detracts from its strength (another vindication of Nimzowitsch's dic tum that the threat is stronger than the execution). There is no great mystery here : basically, it is simply that the early exchange simplifies Black's defensive task both conceptually, by removing st rategic complexity, and phys ically, by giving him more space to work in. Nowadays. therefore, Botvin-

1 63

nik's variation is rarely seen in its pure form, and 7 b3 tends to be employed for its general usefulness and concomitant flexibility, wait ing to see Black's reaction, and usually transposing elsewhere as it is a common denominator in both lL! bd2 and lL!c3 variations. 7 c6 With this standard response Black declares himself unafraid of the threatened exchange. Alterna tively, two contrasting methods of avoiding simplification and pro moting strategic complexity are also available : (a) 7 . . . lL!c6 8 J. b2 (Black can answer 8 J.a3 by either 8 . . . J.xa3 9 lL!xa3 'fke7 or 8 . . . lL!b4!?, but it could be that the as yet untested 8 . . . lLle4 is even more attractive) 8 . . . J.d7 (8 . . . lLle4 is also worth attention, e.g. 9 lLlc3 J.f6 I 0 e3 lLle7 I I 'fke2 J.d7 1 2 lL!e5 J.xe5 1 3 de J.c6 1 4 l:l. fd I and although White has an edge earlier improvements for Black could well exist; A. Mikhalch ishin- Eingorn, USSR Ch. 1 985) 9 lL!c3 (Schmidt-Spassky, Buenos Aires 01. 1 978, went 9 lL!e5 J.e8 10 lL!d3 J.f7 I I lL!d2 a5 with a rich middlegame in prospect) 9 . . . J.e8 1 0 lL!g5 J.f7 I I e3 'fkd7 1 2 lLlxf7 l:l. xf7 1 3 lL!a4 b6 1 4 l:l. c l J.f8!? (White obtained an unpleasant central spatial super iority after 1 4 . . . lL!d8 1 5 lL!c3 : f8

1 64

Classical Stonewall

1 6 f3 lLlf7 1 7 e4 in Polugayevsky Spassky, Tilburg 1 983) 1 5 'it'c2 lLlb4 1 6 'it' b l lLle4 1 7 l:tfd l .l: d8 1 8 a3 lLlc6 1 9 lLlc3 lLlf6! 20 b4 lLle7 21 'it' a2 g5 22 a4 ..th6 and both sides have their chances and prob lems in a difficult opposite wing attack situation; Law-Bellin, Commonwealth Ch. 1 985. (b) 7 . . . b6 8 ..tb2 ..tb7 9 lLl bd2 c5 (contesting the centre with pawns rather than pieces as in the previous example) 10 e3 lLlc6 l l 'it'e2 .l: c8 1 2 : a c t lLle4 1 3 .l: fd 1 'it'e8 (White will not find it easy to gain an advantage from this complex position; his pieces are generally well placed but he lacks a strong central outpost corres ponding to Black's on e4) 1 4 de be 1 5 lLle5 lLlxe5 16 ..txe5 ..tf6 1 7 lLlf3 'it'e7 1 8 'it' b2 .l: fd8 1 9 cd?! .l: xd5 20 ..txf6 'it' xf6 2 1 'it' xf6 gf 22 : xd5 ..txd5 and Black stands somewhat better as his pieces are working in concert on the important queen's flank; Grefe Hyrne, U S Ch. 1 977 (also cited on p. 1 58; note the transpositional possibility). 'it'c2 8 Not surprisingly, Kasparov rejects simplification in favour of maintaining maximum flexibility. It should be noted that the white queen is usually best placed on c2 from where, amongst other things, it keeps an eye on Black's f-pawn

in the hope of being able to induce a favourable cd cd exchange. Black has tried various methods of reacting to 8 ..ta3 but the following two lines are probably the most satisfactory : (a) 8 . . . lLlbd7 9 'it' c 1 (or 9 ..txe7 'it' xe7 10 'it'c2 lLle4 1 1 lLlc3 lLld6 1 2 lLla4 b6 1 3 cd cd 14 .l: fc l ..t a6 1 5 'it' b2 : fc8 1 6 e3 'it'd8 = ; an example of when the opening of the c-file does not favour White as Black can easily contest its control; Gligoric- Mariotti, Nice 01. 1 974) 9 . . . lLle4 10 lLlbd2 (or 10 ..txe7 'it' xe7 l l e3 b6 = ) 10 . . . ..txa3 1 1 'it'xa3 b6 1 2 .l: ac l ..tb7 1 3 .l: fd l 'it' f6 14 cd ed and Black's strong central position and poten tial kingside play balance out White's queenside pressure; Szabo-Botvinnik, Budapest 1 952. (b) 8 . . . ..td7 (very solid) 9 'it' c l ( 9 ..t xe7 'it' xe7 1 0 'it' d 3 J.. e 8 l l lLl bd2 lLle4 l 2 lLle5 lLlxd2 1 3 'it'xd2 lLld7 1 4 lLld3 ..th5 1 5 'it'e3 : ae8 gave Black very sound equality in Antunac-Smederevac, Wijk aan Zee II 1 970; similarly, 10 lLlbd2 here would gain no advantage after 10 . . . ..te8 l l lLle5 lLl bd7 1 2 lLldf3 .l: d8) 9 . . . J.. e 8 1 0 lLlg5 (in Buenos Uhlmann-Guimard, Aires 1 960, Black obtained the advantage by tactical means, beginning with a typical double attack on White's d- and c-pawns, after 10 lLlc3 lLl bd7 l l lLlg5 ..tf7

Classical Stonewall 1 2 f3? ..txa3 1 3 1ha3 de! 14 be ltJb6 1 5 -.c5 ttJfd7 1 6 ltJxf7 -.f6!; simplification by 10 ..txe7 -.xe7 1 1 -. a3 -.xa3 1 2 ltJxa3 as in Salov-Short, Barcelona World Cup 1 989, gives White nothing after 1 2 . . . ..th5 1 3 l: fe 1 ltJbd7) 10 . . . ..tn 1 1 ttJd2 ttJ bd7 1 2 ttJxf7 l: xf7 1 3 ..txe7 -. xe7 1 4 -.c3 (thus far Reshevsky-Gligoric, match 1 952) and now 1 4 . . . l: e8! to prime a possible advance of the e-pawn, gives Black completely satisfac tory play. It should be noted that 8 . . . ..txa3 9 ltJxa3 does not leave the knight offside as might appear to be the case at first sight, but in fact helps it on the way to control ling e5 via ltJa3-c2-e 1 -d3. 8 ..td7 ( 1 35 )

This move, b y which the Q B prepares to thread its way through to an active position on the king side, was awarded an exclamation mark by Kasparov in his notes to the game.

1 65

9 ..tb2 The consistent continuation. Alternatives look unlikely to unsettle Black : (a) 9 ltJe5 ..te8 1 0 ..ta3 ..txa3 1 1 ltJxa3 ltJbd7 1 2 ltJd3 g5 with a typically balanced position; Geru sel-Troger, West Germany 1 968. (b) 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10 ltJxa3 -.e7 1 1 -. b2 ..te8 1 2 ltJe5 ( 1 2 ltJc2 ..th5 would oblige White to counter the x-raying of e2) 1 2 . . . g5 1 3 ltJc2 (P. Nikolic notes 1 3 f3 ltJ bd7 1 4 e4 fe 1 5 ltJxd7 ..txd7 1 6 fe ltJxe4 as slightly in Black's favour) 1 3 . . . ltJbd7 1 4 cd (this i s a further example of simplification easing Black's defensive task) 14 . . . ed 1 5 f4 (revealing White's idea - to solidify the centre and eventually proceed with a minority attack on the queenside) 1 5 . . . ltJg4!? (preferring to maintain the tension rather than clarify matters by a line like 1 5 . . . gf 1 6 gf ltJe4) 1 6 -. c3 a 5 1 7 : ae I (threatening 1 8 ltJxg4 fg 1 9 e4) 1 7 . . . gf 1 8 gf ltJdf6 1 9 -.h3 �h8 20 -. h4 ltJg8 2 1 -.g3 (exchanging queens would give Black somewhat the better ending) 21 . . . ltJ8f6 (21 . . . h5 would be one way of playing on) 22 -. h4 (it would be an error to weaken the kingside : 22 h3? ltJh5 23 -.o ltJh6 and Black can follow up with . . . l: g8 and . . . -.h4) 22 . . . ltJ g8 23 -.g3 ltJ8f6 t-!, T. Petrosian-P. Nikolic, Plovdiv 1 983.

1 66

Classical Stonewall

..te8 9 lZ:Ie5 10 The right moment to resposi tion the knight in order to better control the dark squares and pre pare to threaten e4. I 0 cd cd would be a mistake not only on account of the exposed position of the queen on the c-file but also because Black would be able to profit from the option of develop ing his QN on c6. 10 lZ:Ibd7 lZ:Id3 II Of course, White has no interest in exchanging this valuable piece. II ..th5 ( 1 36) 1 36 w

Completing the manoeuvre begun on the eighth move. 12 lZ:Ic3 A natural enough move but Kasparov subsequently thought he ought to have preferred 12 lZ:If4 ..tl7 1 3 lZ:Id2 intending lZ:If3, and claimed a slight edge for White. 12 ..td6 A typical move to increase the

bishop's scope and improve the cover of e5. 13 f3 This has the positive effect of making e4 a constant threat but markedly deadens the K B. ..tg6! 13 Not only directly discouraging e2-e4 but also lining up 1 4 l:t ae 1 ?! f4! + . 14 e3 l:t c8 15 'We2 The queen is understandably uncomfortable with the double x raying of c2. l:t e8 15 And this opposition of rook and queen serves to prevent 1 6 e4 which would run into problems after 16 . . . e5! The immediate 1 5 . . . e5?! would be premature, allowing White to settle down to quiet exploitation of the dark square weaknesses in Black's camp following 16 cd ed ( 1 6 . . . cd? 1 7 lZ:I b5) 1 7 ed cd 1 8 'Wd2. a6 16 'Wf2 Once again activating the possi bility of playing . . . e5. 17 l:t acl 'We7 Having protected c3, White could meet 1 7 . . . e5?! by 1 8 cd cd 19 de lZ:Ixe5 20 lZ:Ixe5 ..txe5 21 f4 with some advantage according to Kasparov. 'Wf8 l:t fe1 18 As with White's fifteenth, Black provokes and then side-steps a

Classical Stonewall queen-rook opposition. 19 .l:l cdl ( 1 3 7 ) 137 B

Kasparov points o u t that the opening of the position by 1 9 e4?! de 20 fe e5! would be slightly to Black's advantage. 19 de After a phase of sophisticated strategic fencing, reflecting credit on both antagonists, it is clear that the tension could not be main tained much longer, and therefore Black decides to force matters with a sequence aimed at exploiting White's relatively weak c-pawn. 20 be c5 21 .HI White must protect the pawn indirectly as it would be too dang erous to allow Black to mobilize his queenside pawns by 2 1 d5?! ed 22 cd b5. .ifi! 21 Activating the threat against the c-pawn which could not be taken immediately: 2 1 . . . cd? 22 ed ll xc4 23 lll f4 with a double attack on c4

167

and e6. cd 22 lll a4 b5 23 ed This time the pawn is taboo because of 23 . . . ll xc4? 24 lll d c5 ± . ab 24 cb lll ac5! 25 Preferring to otTer a pawn rather than permit Black to stifle the game with a blockade on d5 after 25 lll c 3 b4 26 lll b 5 ll:ld5 27 ll:le5 ll:l7b6. b4!? 25 Black has it in mind to turn the tables with his own activity gaining pawn sacrifice. Kasparov analyses 25 . . . ll:lxc5 26 de .ixc5 27 ll:lxc5 'tt' x c5 28 'ilt' xc5 ll xeS 29 .l:l e5! as giving at least sufficient compensation for the pawn. 26 llcl 'ilt'e7 Her majesty echoes the opening manoeuvre of her QB. 27 .ih3 'ilt'd8! A voiding weakening f6 by 27 . . . g6? which would be strongly met by 28 ll:lxb4. 28 ll:lxb4 'ilt'a5 29 ll:lc6 Playing to keep the initiative at all costs. Hanging on to the pawn by 29 ll:lxd7 tt::l x d7 30 a3 would leave Black in little danger given his well coordinated and active pieces and White's structural weaknesses (obviously Black would not allow 30 . . . ..txb4? 3 1 a b 'ilt' xb4 3 2 d5! ± ).

1 68

Classical Stonewall

'tt'xa 2 29 30 �xd7 �xd7 d5! 31 Freeing the QB and preventing the blockading and consolidating . . . 'tfd5. 31 'tfxd5 32 .i.c5 : ed t In time trouble, Petrosian has insufficient time to evaluate 32 . . . .:l xc6 33 .l:l. xd5 .:l xc l + 34 .i.xc l ed 35 ..tb2 g6! which was pro bably better, and instead liqui dates to a positionally slightly inferior ending, albeit one which should be tenable. 33 .:l xd5 ..t xf2 + ed 34 �xf2 35 ..txf5 � b6 There i s n o way t o hold o n to the exchange; 35 . . . �e5? loses after 36 �e7 + ! .:l xe7 37 .:l xc8 + ..te8 38 ..ta3. �xc8 36 ..txc8 The smoke has cleared leaving an indisputable advantage to White. Even so, it is quite astonish ing that Petrosian does not man age to hold on to the draw in the final part of this well contested battle: 37 ..ta3 h6 38 .:l b 1 .l:l. e6 39 �d4 .:l a6 40 ..tc5 �d6 (40 . . . .:l aS!) 4 1 .:l b8 + �h7 42 g4 .:l a4! 43 �e3 �c4 + 44 �f4 g5 + ? (weakening everything; 44 . . . �d6 45 : b6 .:l c4 46 .:l xd6 .:l xc5 47 .:ld7 �g8 48 h4 was much better, leaving White in evident control

but a long way from the win) 45 �g3 .:la2 46 .:l b7 �g6? (missing the opportunity to counterattack with 46 . . . �e3! 47 ..td6! �g6 although 48 h4 would preserve White's chances) 47 �f5 .:l a6 48 h4! gh 49 �xh4 + �g7 50 � f5 + �g6 5 1 ..td4 1 -0. 5 1 . . . �d6, the only way to try to save the bishop, loses to 52 � xd6 : xd6 53 f4.

The Classical 7 �c3 Botvinnik -Smyslov

World Ch. 1 958 1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 �f3 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7

�c3

c6 ( 1 38 )

1 38 w

I t is not surprising that the natural 7 �c3 is White's oldest and most explored continuation. Clearly, the knight is generally more active on c3 although it takes longer for it to be able to control e5, a manoeuvre which is usually accomplished via the route �c3e2-f4-d3 . Whilst the broad strategic out-

Classical Stonewall lines naturally remain the same, there are a few opening wrinkles with which Black needs to be fam iliar in order to be sure of obtain ing a playable game. To conclude these introductory comments, it is interesting to note that the actual move order of the present game was 6 . . . c6 7 iUc3 d5 - to avoid Botvinnik's 7 b3, of course - thus providing the high est possible level of endorsement for the validity of 6 . . . c6. 8 .1g5 There is a vast array of alterna tives which need to be mentioned, but the student may take comfort in the fact that the fundamentals underlying Black's response remain much the same in all cases: (a) 8 iUe5 iUbd7 9 'W'b3 (not 9 llJd3? de 1 0 iU f4 iU b6 1 1 e4 e5! 1 2 de 'W'xd1 1 3 l:txd 1 tLlg4 + ) 9 . . . iUe4 10 cd iUxe5 1 1 iUxe4 cd 1 2 de fe 1 3 ..te3 b6 with full equality; Filip-Szabo, Gothenburg IZ 1 955. (b) 8 'W'd3 iUe4 9 iUe5 iUd7 1 0 iUxd7 (supporting the knight by 10 f4?! leads to trouble : 10 . . . llJxe5 I I fe b6 1 2 e4 ..ta6 1 3 b3 llJxc3 14 'W' xc3 b5 + Black has stolen the initiative with his typical QB pressure along the a6-fl diag onal; Nielsen-H usak, corr. 1 960) 1 0 . . . ..txd7 ( 1 0 . . . 'W'xd7 intend ing a queenside fianchetto may well be better) I I f3 iUxc3 with

169

roughly even chances; Griinfeld Teplitz-Schonau Tartakower, 1 922. (c) 8 ..tf4 'W'e8 (8 . . . iUe4 is perfectly playable) 9 'W'd3 (the c pawn cannot constantly be left unprotected, e.g. 9 l:t b I iU bd 7 1 0 b4? de! 1 1 'W'c2 a 6 1 2 a 4 b 5 1 3 iU g 5 iU b6 :t ) 9 . . . 'W' h 5 1 0 iUe5 iU bd7 I I f3 g5 12 iUxd7 ..txd7 1 3 .1e5 (thus far Budo-Chistiakov, USSR 1 950) 13 . . . ..te8 and the arrival of the bishop on g6 will prevent White lightly advancing in the centre, whilst the kingside counterplay ensures a mutually difficult game. (d) 8 'W' b3 �h8 (a precautionary measure, but Black could well choose either 8 . . . iUe4 or 8 . . . b6) 9 iUe5 (9 .1f4 is best met by 9 . . . b6) 9 . . . iU bd7 1 0 iUxd7 (or 1 0 cd ed 1 1 iUxd7 iUxd7!) 1 0 . . . iUxd7! 1 1 l:t d 1 iUb6 1 2 cd ( 1 2 c5?! iUd7 would leave Black free to counter with . . . e5 or . . . b6) 1 2 . . . ed 1 3 iUa4 iUc4 1 4 iUc5 (thus far Capablanca-Botvinnik, Moscow 1 936) and now Black should forgo the structurally weakening . . . b6 in favour of 14 . . . 'W' b6 with a fine game. (e) 8 l:t b I (with the clear inten tion of a queenside pawn storm) 8 . . . �h8 (perhaps the simplest way of meeting White's plan is 8 . . . iUe4 9 'W'c2 iUd6!?, with the ideas 10 c5 lt)f7 preparing the . . . e5

Classical Stonewall

1 70

counterpunch immediately, and 1 0 cd ed when the k night on d6 is excellently placed, particularly with regard to the potential white square weaknesses on White's queenside) 9 cd (forfeits any hope of an opening advantage, but nor do the alternatives promise much : 9 c5 tt:le4 I 0 'tt c2 tt:ld7 intending . . . i.f6 and . . . e5 = ; 9 'tt c2 tt:le4 10 b4 tt:ld7 I I c5 i.f6 = etc.) 9 . . . cd! 1 0 i.f4 tt:lc6 I I tt:le5 (not I I lbb5 lLlhS + ) 1 1 . . . ..td7 1 2 .l:l. c l .l:l. c8 ( Black has a very easy game) 1 3 'tt d 3 lLih5 1 4 i.d2 i.d6 1 5 tt:lxc6 ..txc6 1 6 'tt f3 'tt e 8! and although White's position is solid there is little for him to undertake whereas Black is free to operate on either flank; Keres-Botvinnik, Moscow 1 948. lLibd7 8

( 1 39) 139

w

9 e3 White's intentions are clear: to exchange first QB for knight, thus reducing Black's attacking paten-

tial, and then central pawns (cd ed) in order to stabilize the position for a minority attack on the queen side (opening the c-file would be asking for trouble as Black is in no position to contest its control). This is a fundamentally sound plan which must be countered with a well judged blend of defence and aggression if Black is to obtain a playable game. Other examples : (a) 9 cd ed 1 0 .l:l. b l (or 1 0 e3 when both 10 . . . h6!? and 1 0 . . . lLie4 come into consideration) 1 0 . . . aS! and Black's game is per fectly satisfactory. (b) 9 'tt c2 lLib6 (apart from the interesting text move, Black has the solid 9 . . . lLle4 and the chal lenging - risky! - 9 . . . h6!?, e.g. 10 i.xf6 lLl xf6 1 1 lL:Je5 i.d6!? 1 2 lLig6 .l:l. f7 1 3 f3?! �h7 1 4 lL:Je5 i.xe5 1 5 de lL:Jd7 1 6 f4 'tt b6 + 1 7 �h I lLic5 with an obscure position) I 0 c5 lLibd7 I I b4 tt:le4 1 2 ..txe7 'tt xe7 1 3 e3 e5 with approximately equal chances; Nei- Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 963. (c) 9 'tt d 3 lL:Je4 (9 . . . h6!?) 10 i.xe7 'tt xe7 I I 'tt e 3! (the queen is well placed here after the exchange of bishops) I I . . . b6 (it could be that Black should seek an alterna tive here) 1 2 lLlxe4 fe 1 3 lLid2 ..ta6 14 cd cd 1 5 f3 with a slight pull Donner- Larsen, White; for Leiden 1 970.

Classical Stonewall

9 'iWe8 Botvinnik prefers 9 . . . �e4. A game Eingorn-Abramovic, Bor ! 986, saw yet another approach : 9 . . . h6 10 ..txf6 ..txf6 I I cd ed 1 2 �e2 a5 1 3 �f4 'it'e8 14 'it'c2 g6 1 5 l2:ld3 'it'e7 and although White enjoys some initiative Black may have confidence in his bishop pair and generally solid position. �h8 10 'iWc2 II �e2 The knight begins its journey to control e5 from d3. Of course, I I cd ed 1 2 'iW xf5?? lZle4 is not possible. II h6 ..txf6 12 ..txf6 13 cd Not obligatory, as the opening of the position after 1 3 � f4 de 1 4 'iW xc4 e5 1 5 de � xe5 1 6 �xe5 ..txe5 17 'it' b4! �h7 18 .:t ad ! would be t o White's advantage thanks to his active pieces. ed 13 14 �f4 g5 15 �d3 ( 1 40 ) The knight has arrived, and the battle lines for the coming middle game are clearly drawn : White will operate in the centre and on the queen's flank while Black will seek attacking chances on the king's wing. Theoretical assess ments of this (type of) position tend to give White a slight edge,

171

140 B

but even should this be true the further course of our model game shows that Black is always liable to pounce at the least slip: 1 5 . . . .t!. g8 1 6 'it'c3 ..te7 1 7 l2Jfe5 lZlf6 ( Black's last two moves make one wonder about Black's twelfth) 1 8 f3 .ie6 1 9 lLlc5 ( 1 9 b4, with a4 and b5 in mind, seems more promising) 19 . . . ..txc5 20 'iW xc5 (permitting a further simplification after which most of Black's problems are behind him and he can start to think about his counterattack; 20 de ;t was better) 20 . . . �d7 2 1 �xd7 'iW xd7 2 2 .t!. ae l .t!. g7 2 3 .t!. f2 b6 24 'it'c3 'iWd6 2 5 .t!. c2 ..td7 26 b4 (White begins to go wrong; there is no longer much to be achieved on the queenside and it would have been better to distract Black with play in the centre by 26 e4) 26 . . . h5! (the attack finally begins!; this is in fact an excellent example of a late middlegame pawn storm, typically following a period of drawing the sting of

1 72

Classical Stonewall

White's early initiative) 27 �h 1 (again, 27 e4 was better) 27 . . . h4 28 gh (28 f4 .l:t h7!) 28 . . . gh (28 . . . .l:t h7 29 e4 'ilt'f4 also came strongly into consideration) 29 f4 .l:t ag8 30 .H3 .i.e8 3 1 'ii' d 2 'ii' h6 32 'ilt'e2 h3 33 .l:t cc l .l:t g2! 34 .bg2 .l:t xg2 35 'ilt'f3 (the decisive mistake; 35 'ilt' fl would probably have been sufficient to hang on, e.g. 35 . . . .i.h5 36 .l:t c3! .i.g4 - 3 7 e4 was threatened - 37 e4! fe 38 .l:t ee3 .i.f3 39 .1:t xf3 ef 40 .1:t xf3 'ilt'h5 4 1 .l:t xh3 'ilt'xh3 42 'ilt' xg2 'ii' d 3 with a very likely draw) 35 . . . 'ilt' h4! 36 b5 ..th5 37 'ilt' xg2 (37 'ilt'fl .l:t f2) 37 . . . hg + 38 �g1 c5 0- l . A consistently executed and charac teristic attack on the light squares. Flohr-Botvinnik Match 1 933 1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 ll:lf6 4 lLlf3 .i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 ll:lc3 c6 8

b3 ( 1 41 )

141 B

With the knight already devel oped this move has little purpose

beyond simply preparing to com plete development by fianchetto ing the QB. In his notes Botvinnik remarked, somewhat severely per haps, that the move has a serious defect in that it weakens f4. As we shall see, however, that certainly turns out to be the case in this game. 8 Black commences the tra ditional transference of the queen to the k ingside, a procedure which lacks in subtlety compared to today's positional interpretations of the Stonewall. Nevertheless, when White fails to find the correct response this plan can be crushing as the present game is intended to show. Nowadays, both of the follow ing continuations are considered superior to the text move : (a) 8 . . . a5 (this position fre quently arises through use of 6 . . . c6) 9 ..t b2 lLle4 1 0 e3 ll:ld7 1 1 'ilt'c2 ll:ld6 1 2 lLle2 .1:t e8 1 3 lLlf4 ..tf8 1 4 ll:ld3 lLlf1 (a radically different approach to the old-fashioned kingside hacking!; Black has har moniously protected his one weakness and retains the flexibility to operate over the entire board) 1 5 .1:t fd 1 b6 and with the imminent development of his QB Black can look forward to a rich middlegame with balanced chances; Ungu reanu-Bellin, Moscow 1 977.

Classical Stonewall (b) 8 . . . lLle4 9 .i.b2 lLld7 1 0 tt'c2 ( 10 lLle l .i.f6 I I f3 lLlxc3 1 2 .txc3 de! 1 3 be e5! is excellent for Black) 1 0 . . . .i.f6 and in the absence of practical examples there is a theoretical consensus that this position offers approxi mately equal chances. 9 .i.b2 lLlbd7 lO Wd3 Botvinnik considers this to be slightly less exact a placement for the queen than c2. His suggestion that White should aim to equalize matters by playing I 0 lLlg5 .i.d6 I I f4, however, tends to leave Black with rather the better of it after I I . . lLlg4 1 2 Wd2 lLldf6 1 3 h3 lLlh6 (Biryanis-Tal, USSR 1 9 5 1 ) as his pieces are more effec tively placed to take action on the kingside. WhS 10 The queen takes up her com mand post from where she will direct kingside operations. Note also the f-pawn is protected so that cd can be answered by . . . ed. 11 cd White wants to move his KN but dare not do so immediately because of the sequence ( 1 1 lLld2 or lLle I ) . . e5! 1 2 cd e4. This line strongly supports Botvinnik's contention that the bishop is mis placed on b2, and that the queen should be on c2. ed II .

.

1 73

The exchange of pawns in the centre has helped Black by open ing up the path of his QB. 12 lLld2 White's position is already beginning to look a little un comfortable - he appears to be doing nothing while Black is gradually building up his attack. lLle4 12 13 f3 The attempt to gum things up by 13 f4 intending lLld2-f3-e5 would come unstuck after 1 3 . . . lLlxd2 1 4 W' xd2 lLlf6, and whereas the black knight is surveying e4 its white counterpart is very far from being able to occupy e5. 13 lLlxc3 f4! ( 1 42 ) 14 .i.xc3 142 w

The 'Dutch' pawn itself delivers a thematic attacking blow which instantly puts White's king's pos ition under severe pressure. Con sider White's predicament : the pawn cannot be captured because the arrival of a black rook on the

1 74

Classical Stonewall

h-file would be terminal, while advancing the g-pawn would create grave dark square weak nesses and invite . . . h5. There remains only the passive holding operation chosen in the game. J.. d6 15 .l:l. fe1 16 lt:lfl .1:1. 17! This little move is of the utmost importance to the successful pro secution of Black's attack. It is born of the fact that the natural 16 . . . lt:lf6 is not good since White could reply with 1 7 J.. d 2! attack ing the f-pawn, and if 1 7 . . . fg 1 8 hg and the bishop would cover important squares on the c l -h6 diagonal. Now if White marks time Black has the option of bring ing his knight to the kingside via f8, all the time keeping control of f4. 17 e3 If 1 7 e4 then 1 7 . . . de! 1 8 'it'xe4 ( 1 8 fe?? f3) 1 8 . . . lt:lf6 is very strong. 17 fg Now that White has weakened f3 and blocked the c l -h6 diagonal this exchange is the best continu ation. 18 lt:lxg3 After 18 hg Black would have the pleasant choice between 18 . . . .l:l. xf3 !, 1 8 . . . 'it'g5 and 1 8 . . . lt:lf6, all roads leading to Rome. 18 'it'h4 tt:�n tt:�r6 19 20 .l:l. e2 J.. d7

'it' g5 J.. e l 21 J.. xg3 22 J.. g3 23 lt:lxg3 Or 23 hg lt:lh5 and White would have to advance with 24 g4, laying himself open to the can-opening . . . h5 after the retreat of the knight, as 24 �h2 fails against 24 . . . lt:lxgl h5! 23 The final phase of the attack commences; White is hard pressed to meet the threatened march of the h-pawn, winning a piece. 24 f4 'it'g4 .l:l. f2 25 This allows Black t o administer a rapid and pleasing coup de grace; 25 .l:l. fl would have held out longer. h4 25 26 J.. f3 26 h3 'it'e6 (not 26 . . . 'it' xg3 27 .1:1. f3) 27 lt:lfl lt:le4 is also hopeless for White. 26 hg Gaining a decisive material advantage. 27 J.. xg4 gf+ 28 �g2 28 � xf2 lt:l xg4 + would enable Black to attack and win the epawn . lt:lxg4 28 h3 lt:lf6 29 �xf2 30 lt:le4 + 0-1 3 1 �g2 J.. x h3 + and the

Classical Stonewall bishop is immune on account of the knight fork. Smejkal-Larsen

Leningrad

IZ

1 9 73

I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 tt:Jf6 4 tt:Jf3 ..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 tt:Jc3 c6 8

..-c2 ( 1 43 )

1 43 B

A natural and elastic follow-up to 7 tt:Jc3, placing the queen on its best square, from where it observes Black's f-pawn, thus preventing 8 . . . tt:Jbd7 because of 9 cd cd 1 0 ..tf4 with a marked advantage. tt:Je4! 8 8 . . . ..-e8 must reckon with Chekhover's 9 ..tg5 after which Black can easily find himself in an inferior Botvinnik-Smyslov type of position (see above) if he tries to do better than the direct trans position by 9 . . .t h8 10 e3 tZJ bd7 etc. The text move is natural and good. tt:Je5 9 A game Bolbochan- Najdorf, .

1 75

M ar del Plata 1945, went 9 ..te3 tt:J bd7 10 tt ad 1 ..-e8 ( 1 0 . . . ..td6!?) 1 1 tt:Je5, and now, as is often the case when the possibility exists, Black should have captured the knight on e5, with level chances. tt:Jd7 9 fe 10 tt:Jxe4 In his notes, Larsen gave 1 0 . . . tt:Jxe5 1 1 tt:Jd2 tt:Jf7 1 2 tt:Jf3 b6 as an equality-securing variation deserving attention. 11 ..tf6 ..tf4 This looks right, but 1 1 . . . ..tg5 might also be worth consideration. 12 tt adl White would have done better to play 1 2 tt:Jxd7 ..-xd7 1 3 tt a d 1 ;t according to Larsen, rather than permit an alteration of pawn struc ture which helps Black to equalize. 12 ..txe5 tt:Jxe5 13 ..txe5 14 de ..-e7 15 ..-c3 ..td7 16 f3 ef ..-c5 + 17 ef 18 tt d4?! This self-pin and the active black queen are the source of White's later troubles, and there fore 1 8 ..-d4 was better, although the ending after 1 8 . . . ..-xd4 + 1 9 tt xd4 c5 20 ttd2 d4 would be fine for Black. 18 aS 19 f4 ..-a7 20 f5?!

1 76

Classical Stonewall

This assault on Black's pawn centre turns out to be much too optimistic and only succeeds in weakening White's own e-pawn. 20 .l:l ae8! Seeing through the incredible trap 20 . . . c5 2 1 .l:l xd5!! ed 22 ..txd5 + �h8 23 e6 with f6 to follow. 21 cd If White escapes the pin by 2 1 �h l , then 2 1 . . . c5 becomes playable since 22 .l:l xd5? now fails because of 22 . . . ed 23 ..txd5 + �h8 24 e6 ..txe6! etc. 21 cd 22 �h1 .l:l c8 23 W'd2 .l:l c2! How White must have regretted his 1 8th move! 24 W' xc2 W' xd4 25 W'c3 W' xc3 26 be .l:l c8 The ending is very much in Black's favour due to the opponent's split queenside pawns. .l:l c5 27 .l:l d 1

Naturally, Black has no interest in 27 . . . .l:l xc3? 28 fe ..txe6 29 ..txd5 �f7 30 ..txb7 ..txa2 3 1 ..td5 + with a drawn ending. ..t xe6 28 fe 29 �g1 �fi 30 .: d3 .: b5! 31 .l:l d2 a4 32 a3 In time trouble White is under standably alarmed at the prospect of . . . a3 and . . . .: b2, but his only chance was to rush the king to the centre by �f2-e3 when t here would still be some slight hope of salvation. As it is, Larsen seizes the opportunity to obtain a passed a-pawn and makes no mistake in shepherding it home : 32 . . . .: b3 33 ..txd5 .: xa3 34 c4 .: b3 35 �f2 a3 36 �e2 .: b2 37 .: xb2 ab 38 ..te4 ..txc4 + 39 �d2 ..ta2 0- l . An excellent example o f t h e pawn structures arising after captures on both e5 and e4 and the technical type of game following multiple minor piece exchanges.

16

Stonewall with

From the mid-eighties onwards there has been an explosion of interest in playing the Stonewall with . . . .td6 instead of . . . .te7. The advantages are obvious: the bishop is more actively placed on the b8-h2 diagonal, covering e5 and looking towards the white king, and the queen can usefully take up the vacated e7 square. The disadvantages are rather less apparent, especially since the logi cal attempt to profit from the exchange of black-squared bish ops with .tf4 (cf. Schlechter-John in Chapter 1 5) has been shown to be much less dangerous for Black than was once thought. The starting position for the variation arises after the following moves : d4 1 f5 e6 g3 2 tLlf6 3 .tg 2 tLlf3 4 With this particular move-order White may consider deferring tLl f3 in favour o f c4 i f h e is particula rly

.

. . J.. d 6

concerned to avoid the . . . .td6 variations. A recent example : 4 c4 dS (Black has the option of playing the Dutch Indian instead) 5 tLlh3 i.e7 (persevering with 5 . . . .td6?! would enable White to exchange the black-squared bishops by 6 i.f4 without incurring any struc tural weakness) 6 0-0 c6 7 'ilt'c2 00 8 tLld2 .td7 9 tLlf3 tLle4 I 0 tLleS .tf6 I I b3 (thus far P. Nikolic Short, Belgrade 1 987) and now Nikolic gives I I . . . cS! 1 2 e3 tLlc6 as best, with an unclear position. It is because of such possibilities that the . . . .td6 variations fre quently arise via transposition, with White already having com mitted himself to tLlf3. 4 d5 c4 c6 5 6 0-0 .td6 ( 1 4 4 ) A s i n the standard Stonewall. White has a large choice at this juncture. Apart from the moves covered in our featured games, the following also merit noting : 1 77

1 78

Stonewall with . . . i.d6

(a) 7 tt:lc3 ttJ bd7 8 Wc2 tt:le4 9 .ll b l (thus far Dubinin-Novo telnov, USSR 1 948) 9 . . . a5 with a typically rich middlegame in the offing with chances for both sides. (b) 7 'Wc2 tt:le4 8 tt:le l ?! (a mis guided attempt to take advantage of the early advance of Black's knight; 8 tt:lc3 tt:ld7 would trans pose above, and on 8 b3 Black could try 8 . . . 'Wf6 9 ..tb2 tt:l bd7) 8 . . . tt:ld7 9 tt:ld3 (9 f3?! tt:lxg3! 10 hg ..txg3 with I I . . . 'Wh4 to follow would give Black a very dangerous attack --- a good illustration of the advantages of having the bishop on d6!) 9 . . . 'Wf6! (forcing White to lock in his QB in order to protect the d-pawn) 10 e3 h5! (utilizing the fact that he has post poned castling; Black is now assured of a strong attack no mat ter how White responds) I I f3 tt:lxg3! 1 2 hg ..txg3 1 3 tt:lf2? ( 1 3 f4 'Wh4 1 4 .ll f3 ! ..Wh2 + 1 5 .tfl h4 1 6 .ll xg3 was the best hope) 1 3 . . . g5! with a fierce attack which

Black brought to an energetic and beautiful conclusion in Gofstein K upreichik, USSR 1 979 : 1 4 e4 de 1 5 fe g4 16 ef 'W h4 1 7 .ll e l 0-0 1 8 .ll xe6 tt:lf6 1 9 .ll e2 tt:le8!! 20 f6! .ll xf6!! 2 1 .ll xe8 + ..tf7 22 ll e2 ..tf5 23 'Wd2 .ll e8! 24 .ll xe8 Wh2 + ! 25 ..tfl ..td3 + ! 0- l . An inspired game which provides much food for thought. (c) 7 c5 is probably best met by 7 . . . ..te7 intending to challenge the advanced pawn with . . . b6 and also . . . a5 in case White supports it with b4. Kotov-Bondarevsky

Moscow 1 936 7

tt:lbd2 ( 1 45 )

The main idea behind this move is to increase the control of e5 by transferring the QN to f3 after shifting the K N to d3 via e l . 7 0-0 Of course, it is also possible to play 7 . . . tt:lbd7 8 'Wc2 tt:le4 before castling.

Stonewall with

8 b3 Black had no problems what ever after 8 'ilfc2 lZlbd7 9 cd cd 1 0 b3 'ilf e 7 I I ..t b 2 b 6 1 2 e 3 ..t a 6 1 3 .:t fc l lZle4 in Gheorghiu-Yusu pov, Luzern 1 985. 8 'ilfe8 9 lZle1 After the straightforward 9 ..t b2 Black should be careful about rushing to h5 with the queen: 9 . . . lZlbd7 10 lZle5 'ilfh5 (I 0 . . . lZle4!) I I e3 'ilfh6 12 'ilfe2 lZle4 13 lZlxe4 fe 14 lZlg4 'ilfg5 1 5 f3 and White succeeds in opening up the position before Black is quite ready; Fine- Bondarevsky, Moscow 1 937. lZlbd7 9 lZle4 lZld3 10 'ilfh5 11 lLlf3 lZlf4 12 Gaining a tempo which must shortly be returned. Similarly, Black would answer 12 ..tf4 with 1 2 . . . ..te7 and then hit the enemy bishop with . . . g5. •n 12 g5 13 'ilfc2 'ilfh5 14 lZld3 .:t f6 lLlfe5 15 .:t h6! f3 16 h4 17 Unhappy that he would be obliged to return the piece after 1 7 fe de White tries a remedy which turns out to be more dang erous than the disease.

. . i.. d6 .

1 79

lZlxg3 17 18 hg appears blissfully White unaware that he is walking the edge of a precipice; 18 ..txg5, keeping the approaches to the king closed as long as possible, was essential. 'ilfh2 + 18 .:t h4 19 �f2 .:t xd4 20 .:tg1 An uncommonly sprightly rook! 'ilfh4! 21 ..tb2 lZ:le4 + 22 ..txd4 23 �e3 After 23 �fl ..t xe5 24 ..txe5 lZlxe5 25 fe lZlg4 White is faced with mate and loss of his queen. If White was still hoping to show that the black attack had been too extravagant he is soon disabused of that illusion. There now follows a stunningly beautiful mate in five. f4 + ! 23 lZlxf4 'ilf f2 + 24 'ilr' xd4 + !! 25 �d3 ..tc5 + 26 �xd4 lZlxe5mate! 27 �d3

( 1 46) The final tableau seems the work of a magician. Belyavsky-Bareev

USSR Ch. 1 987 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 .3 ..tg2 lZlf6 4 lLlf3 d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6 I

Stonewall with . . .i.d6

I 80

.

7

..tf4 ( 1 4 7 )

1 47 8

16 f3 lL!d6 17 : d2?! lL!xc4 18 liJxc4 de 1 9 "it"xc4 lL!d5 and the powerful knight plus attacking chances assure Black the better game; -!-final Zamikhovsky-Panov, USSR Ch. 1 952. This is a good illustration of how Black can pro ceed if White is slow in playing positively. (b) 9 lL!e5 lL!bd7 10 e3 lL!xe5 1 1 fe liJg4 1 2 lL!d2 ..td7 1 3 h3 liJh6 14 f4 ..te8 1 5 �h2 �h8 1 6 "it"e2 g5 1 7 fg "it"xg5 1 8 "it"f2 ..th5 = Black's 'bad' bishop is every bit as good as White's; Belyavsky Salov, match, Vilnius 1 987. (c) 9 lL! bd2 lL!bd7 (9 . . . ..td7 intending the transfer to h5 is possible) 10 :t e l lL!e4 1 1 e3 "it"e7 ( I I . . lL!df6 1 2 lL!e5 ..td7 1 3 f3 gave White an edge in Groszpeter-Smagin, Zenica 1 987) 1 2 lL!xe4 de! 1 3 lL!d2 c5! 14 lL!b3 b6 15 de ( 15 f3 is a better try) 1 5 . . . lL!xc5 1 6 lL!xc5 be 1 7 "it"a4 :t b8! 1 8 b3 : b6! 19 "it"a3 e5 + Black's QR is ready to switch to the king's flank; Kalinichev-Giek, USSR 1 987. 8 ..txd6 "it"xd6 9 "it"c2 b6 With this, Black's idea behind not exchanging on f4 becomes clear: he is trying to treat the position as a kind of Botvinnik Variation in the standard Stone wall, where the queenside fianch etto often procures equality for .

Clearly the most direct chal lenge to Black's set-up. 0-0?! 7 An error, although it takes Belyavsky's copybook play to show exactly why. Black's best continuation is 7 . . . ..txf4 8 gf 0-0 with good chances of equalizing, thanks to the damage inflicted on White's king's pos ition, as the following examples show: (a) 9 "it"c2 lL!bd7 to e3 "it"e7 I I lL! bd2 lL!e4 1 2 a3 :t f6 1 3 :t fd l :t h6 1 4 lL!fl lL!df6 1 5 lL!e5 ..td7

Stonewall with . . . i.d6 Black after the exchange of black squared bishops. 10 lL!a3! Priming a possible foray to b5, an essential element in White's fight for an opening advantage. Black would have little difficulty after quieter methods, e.g. 1 0 lL! bd2 -'. b 7 1 1 .: ac 1 lL! bd7 1 2 .C. fd 1 .l:. acS 1 3 'if a4 'it' bS, and with . . . c5 in the air the game is quite level. 10 lL!a6 Black sees the need to protect c7 : 10 . . . -'.b7 1 1 cd cd 1 2 lL! b5 'it'd? 1 3 'ifc7! .l:. cS 14 'it'xd7 lL!bxd7 1 5 lL!d6 .l:.c7 1 6 .: fc I -'.c6 1 7 .l:. c2 and Black's position i s very uncomfortable indeed. II .: act -'.b7 cd 12 cd 13 lL!b5 'ife7 14 'ifa4 Note how useful it is for White not to have played b3 as in Botvin nik's variation. 14 lL!e8 Deciding to remove the power ful knight on b5 which is exerting troublesome pressure on the que enside, especially a7. lL! ec7 .l:. c3 15 lL!xc7 lL!xc7 16 17 h3!! A truly profound conception. Instead of doubling rooks and continuing with his play on the queen's wing White discerns the

181

possibility o f commencing action on the opposite flank, and the seed of this tiny pawn move is destined to grow into a flourishing attack. : res 11 Interestingly, Black's best course lay in the reciprocal 1 7 . . . a6 aiming to bring the knight to d6 via b5. 18 g4 g6 It is understandable that Black does not want to accept the struc tural weakness arising from 1 8 . . . lL!eS 1 9 gf ef 20 .: xeS -'.xeS 2 1 lL!e5 lL!f6, but that might have been the lesser evil. 19 gf gf 20 lL!e5 lL!e8 21 .l:. g3 + �h8 22 �h2 lL!f6 23 .l:. g l .l:.c7 Bringing extra protection to f7 in order to be able to play his next move and chase the enemy queen away. After 23 . . . a6 White would transfer the queen to the kingside with gain of tempo : 24 'it'b3 b5 25 'it'e3, with a strong attack. 24 -'. f3 -'.c6 Not 24 . . . lL!e4 25 -'.xe4 de 26 'ifxa7! .: g8 'if b3 25 26 -'.h5! The final assault begins. 26 W f8 Forced. 27 .lhg8 + lL!xg8

Stonewall with . . . i.d6

1 82

28 'ii' g3 Her majesty arrives to lead the troops to victory. 28 ..tb5 28 . . . ..te8 would lose to the prosaic 29 ..txe8 'ii' xeS 30 lL!g6 + winning the exchange. lL!f6 29 'ii' h4 There is nothing to be done, e.g. 29 . . . .ll g7 30 .ll xg7 �xg7 3 1 'ii' g5 + , or 29 . . . ..te8 30 ..txe8 'ii' xe8 3 1 lL!g6 + �g7 32 lL!e7 + . 30 ..tfi! 1 -0 An elegant final blow : the knight is en prise and lL!g6 + for king king and queen is threatened; Black must therefore protect the knight with a queen move, but after 30 . . . 'ii' e 7 comes 3 1 'ii' xf6 + ! 'ii' xf6 32 .ll g8 mate.

Belyavsky-Yusupov

USSR Ch. 1 987 I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 lL!f6 4 lL!f3 d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 1 48 B

b3 ( 1 48 )

As with Botvinnik's variation in the standard Stonewall, this move aims to exchange the dark squared bishops, whilst avoiding the structural weakening follow ing 7 ..tf4 ..txf4. It is currently the most popular continuation. 'ii' e7 7 The natural way of preventing ..ta3. 8 ..tb2 The best move at this juncture has yet to be determined. There are many candidates: (a) 8 c5 ..tc7 9 ..tf4 .txf4 1 0 g f b6 ( Polovodin suggests 1 0 . . . lL!bd7 as a preliminary to playing for . . . g5 by . . . h6 and . . . .ll g8) 1 1 'ii' c2 be 1 2 'ii' x c5! 'ii' x c5 1 3 de lL!a6 14 .ll c I lL!e4 1 5 lL!e5 lL!exc5 1 6 lL!xc6 ..td7 1 7 lL!e5 and White has some advantage due to his queenside pawn majority and potential occupation of the block ading squares e5 and d4; Polo vodin-Giek, USSR 1 986. (b) 8 a4 (insisting on the exchange of bishops at the cost of slightly compromising the queen side pawns) 8 . . . a5! 9 ..ta3 b6 1 0 lL!e5 ..t b 7 I I ..txd6 'ii' xd6 1 2 lL!d2 0-0 13 cd cd 14 .ll c l lL!bd7 with a completely satisfactory position for Black; Joksic-Klinger, Zurich 1 987. (c) 8 lL!e5 0-0 9 ..tb2 (9 lL!d3 b6 10 ..tb2 lL! bd7 I I lL!d2 a5 12 .ll c l ..tb7 Flear-Short, Wijk aan =

Stonewall with . . . i.. d6 Zee 1 987) 9 . . . ..td7! 10 "ti'cl ..te8 I I ..ta3 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:ld3 ( 1 2 lt:lxd7 eases Black's task : 1 2 . . . W xd7 1 3 lt:ld2 ..txa3 1 4 "ti' xa3 ..th5 1 5 %He I lt:le4 1 6 W b2 .tt ad8 = F. Portisch- Knaak, Balatonbereny 1 987) 1 2 . . . ..th5! 1 3 .::t e l .tt ae8 and Black's forces are very com pactly and harmoniously grouped ( ); Dizdar-Knaak, Halle 1 987. (d) 8 lt:l bd2 b6!? 9 lt:le5 ..tb7 1 0 ..t b2 0-0 I I .::t e l a 5 ! 1 2 e3 lt:la6 with a typically complex and bal anced position; Petursson-Short, Reykjavik 1 987. (e) 8 lt:lc3 0-0 9 ..tf4 ..t xf4 1 0 g f ..td7! I I lt:le5 ..te8 1 2 Wc2 lt:lbd7 ( 1 2 . . . lt:le4 is an excellent alternative) 1 3 cd ed 14 "ti'xf5 lt:le4 1 5 "ti'h3 lt:lxc3 1 6 "ti' xc3 .tt xf4 gives roughly equal chances. (f) 8 ..tf4 ..txf4 9 gf 0-0 10 lt:le5 ..td7! I I lt:ld2 ..te8 1 2 .::t e l ..th5 1 3 .tt c3 lt:lbd7 1 4 ..tf3 ..txf3 1 5 lt:lxd7 "ti'xd7 1 6 lt:lxf3 ll:le4 and here, as is frequently the case in similar situations, Black has excel lent prospects since his attacking possibilities against White's weak ened kingside are far more important than White's absolute control of e5 and queenside play; Kouatly-Smagin, Trnava 1 987. 0-0 8 Two examples which indicate that the queenside fianchetto is a good alternative : 8 . . . b6 9 "ti' c l 0-0 (the alternative i s t o keep the =

183

king in the centre in readiness for an ending : 9 . . . ..tb7 1 0 ..ta3 lt:l bd7 I I ..txd6 W xd6 12 "ti'a3 "ti'xa3 13 lt:l xa3 ri;e7 1 4 .tt ac l lt:le4 1 5 .tt fd I .tt fc8 1 6 lt:le I c5 = AI burt Short, Subotica 1 987) I 0 ..ta3 ..tb7 I I ..txd6 "ti'xd6 1 2 "ti'a3 c5 1 3 de be 1 4 lt:lc3 lt:l bd7 1 5 .tt fd l ? ( l 5 e3) 1 5 . . . f4! (the 'Dutch' pawn strikes!; now the white kingside finds itself under restraint, await ing attack) 16 .tt ac l a6 1 7 ..th3? (a poor idea which exacerbates White's difficulties) 1 7 . . . .tt ae8 1 8 .tt c2 h6 1 9 lt:la4 lt:le4 20 cd ed 2 1 ..txd7? "ti' xd7 2 2 lt:lxc5 lt:lxc5 23 .tt xc5 .tt xe2 24 lt:ld4 fg! 25 fg (25 lt:l xe2 gf + mates) 25 . . . "ti'f7 0- 1 H. Olafsson-S. Agdestein, Reykjavik 1 987. After 26 lt:lxe2 "ti'f2 + 27 1; hI d4 + the ·bad' bishop comes good! 9 lLlc3 Alternatively: (a) 9 Wc2 ..td7 I 0 lt:le5 ..te8 I I lt:ld2 lt:l bd7 1 2 f4 (as a rule, Black is instantly OK after this) 1 2 . . . ..th5 1 3 cd?! cd 1 4 "ti'd3 .tt ac8 1 5 .tt fc I ?! ..ta3! and i t i s Black who takes charge of the open c-file ( + ); Ree- Pie terse, Amsterdam Open 1 986. (b) 9 lLl bd2 b6!? (9 . . . ..td7 heading for h5 is perfectly playable here too) 10 lt:le5 ..tb7 I I e3 a5 1 2 a3?! ( 1 2 .::t e l = ) 1 2 . . . lLl bd7 1 3 a4 .tt ac8 1 4 "ilt"e2 ..ta6 1 5 .tt fc l .tt fd8 1 6 "ti' e l (it was necessary to

1 84

Stonewall with . . . .i.d6

seek to keep the balance by play ing 1 6 f4) 1 6 . . . ..txe5! (an instruc tive capture; in the closed position White's bishops are more of a handicap than an advantage) 1 7 de lLle4 + Renet-Yusupov, Dubai 01. 1 986. 9 ..td7 ..te8 10 lLle5 lLld3 11 Criticized by Yusupov who pre fers 1 1 e3. lLlbd7 11 12 e3 g5! Yusupov is of the opinion that Black now stands somewhat better. It is true that Black's minor pieces are more purposefully pos itioned. 13 a4 With ideas of exchanging bish ops by 1t' c l and ..ta3. 13 ..tg6 1 3 . . . ..th5 1 4 1t'c1 lLle4 would be a good alternative, but Yusu pov decides to provoke the centre deadening f4 first. 14 f4 Naturally not 1 4 1t' c 1 ? f4. 14 ..th5 15 1t'cl lLle4 16 fg It is remarkably difficult for White to find a meaningful plan and he therefore decides on this capture in the hope of obtaining f4 for the use of his knight.

16 lLlxc3! Very precise. 1 6 . . . 1t' xg5 1 7 lLlxe4 followed by lLlf4 would improve White's prospects. ..te2 17 1t' xc3 ..txd3 18 J:t fel 1t' xg5 19 1t' xd3 of series clever Black's exchanges have left him i n pos session of the last remaining knight, a real advantage in a closed position where White's bishops languish with nothing to do. Black's bishop is also well posted for supporting an attack on White's king and so Belyavsky decides to exchange that as well. 20 ..ta3 ..txa3 lLlf6 J:[ xa3 21 22 -. n h5! Placing the threat of a future . . . h4 over White's head. 23 1t' f4 White judges that his best chances of salvation are to be found in the endgame. 23 1t' xf4 24 gf 24 ef would make Black's e pawn backward and vulnerable but also weaken the white d-pawn and leave Black the break with . . . h4. 24 �f7 25 J:t a2 J:t g8 26 �h1 According to Yusupov, 26 a5 should have been played.

Stonewall with . . . .i.d6

26 .1:1 g7 .1:1 ag8 27 ..tfJ 28 .1:1 g2 .1:1 xg2 29 ..txg2 a5 With the fixing of White's que enside pawns and the fact that e3 needs to be guarded there is nothing left for the first player to do but sit and wait. 30 c;t>gl A voiding 30 ..tf3?! h4 3 1 .a g I ? .a xg l + 3 2 lt>xgl lLlg4 winning the e-pawn because the ending after 33 ..txg4 would be comple tely lost. h4 30 31 lt>fl lLlg4 32 h3 lLlf6 33 c;t>fl .1:1 g3 The rook gratefully takes up residence on the weakness created by the knight. Black has made real progress, but he is still a long way from winning. 34 c5 34 .a b I aiming for b4 at a suitable moment was probably the best chance. lLle4 + ! 34 fe ( 1 49) 35 ..txe4 A fascinating rook ending has begun where Black displays great mastery in extracting the full point from his positional advantage: 36

1 85

149 w

.a h l lt>e8 37 .1:1 g l (seizing the opportunity to activate his rook; if White remains passive then the king will go to the queen's wing and prepare . . . b6) 37 . . . .a xh3 38 .1:1 g7 .1:1 h2 + 39 �fl (not 39 .1:1 g2 .a h l 40 .1:1 g l .a xg l 4 1 �xg l b6! 42 cb �d7 followed by . . . c5 decisively creating a second passed pawn) 39 . . . .a h3 40 c;t>f2 .a h 2 + 4 1 lt>fl .1:1 b 2 (after a repetition in time trouble Black once more picks up the thread) 42 .1:1 xb7 c;t>d8! 43 �gl : e2 44 b4 ab 45 a5 .1:1 xe3 46 a6 �c8 47 .a xb4 .1:1 a3 48 .1:1 b6 e3! 49 : xc6 + �d7 50 .1:1 d6 + �e7 5 1 f5 ef 52 .1:1 xd5 .a xa6! 53 c6 (after 53 .1:1 xf5 .1:1 g6 + 54 �fl .a f6! the split pawns win the king and pawn ending) 53 . . . .1:1 xc6 54 .1:1 xf5 .a g6 + 0- 1 . Black magic!

Winning with the Dutch - Bellin.pdf

Recommend Documents