Attacking With 1.d4 - Dunnington

8/20/2019 Attacking With 1.d4 - Dunnington

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/attacking-with-1d4-dunnington 1/161



t

t

a

c

k

in

�

with

by ngus Dunnington

VRYMAN CHESS

Pubished by Evey Pubishes p, Ld



First published in 2001 by Everyman Publishers pk, rmerly Cadogan Boosp, Gloucester Mansions, 140A Shaesbury A venue, London WC2H 8HD

Copyright © 2001 Angus Dunningon

The right of Angus Dunnington to be identified as the author of his wor hasbeen asseed in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act988.

All righs reseed. No pa of this publication may be reproduced, sored in aretrieva system or transmied in any rm or by any means, electronic,elecrostatic, magneic tape, photocopying, recording or otheise, withouprior permission of he publisher.

riish Libr Cguig-i-Pubici DA caaogue record for this boo is avalable rom the Briish Libray.

ISBN 857 44 258 X

Distributed in Noh America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480,246 Goose Lane, Guilrd, CT 06437-0480

All oher saes enquiries should be direced o Everyman Chess, GloucesterMansions, 140A Shaesbury Avenue, London WC2H 8HD tel: 020 7539 7600 fax: 020 7379 4060email: [email protected]: www.everyman.u.com

The Everyman Chess Opening Guides were designed and developed by First

Ran Publishing.

EVRY CSS RS (formerly Cadogan Chess)Chief advisor: Garry KasparovCommissioning edior: Byron Jacobs

Typeset and edited by Firs Ran Publishing, Brighton.Production by Boo Production Seices.

Printed and bound in Grea Britain by The Cromwell Press Ltd., Trowbridge,Wiltshire.



CO N TE N T S

Bibliography 4

Pece

1 Queen's Gabit Accepted with 3 e4

2 Queen's Gabit Delid and Slav Deces 4

3 1 d4 2 c4: Black's Second Move Altetives

4 King's Inian and Beoni The Four Pawns Atk

5 Grnfeld Dence with 4 f4

6 Nimzo-Idian Dene with 4 f3 37 Dutch Defence 3

8 Other Dences 39

Inx of Complete Gaes



I

I

LI

OG

R

P

HY

Books

Te Mo Benoni, Kinsman (Everyman 2000)Te Queen's Gambit Accted, Ward (Batsford 1999)

Beating the King's Indian and Benoni, Vaiser (Batsford 1997)Queen's Gambit Declined, Sadler (Everyman 2000)Mo Defence, Speelman and McDonad (Everyman 2000)English Dence, King (Everyman 999)

Periodicals

InformatorChessBase MagazineTe Week in ChessChess

Btish Chess Magazine



P RE FAC E

It is signicant that a defnition of attack isas llows: to take the initiative in a ge. Ihad this in mind when selecting the openingsystems recommended in these pages, because the very nature of 1 d4 openings issuch that the kingside is by no means theonly sector of the board in which either sideis able to engineer attacking prospects. It is acommon misconception usually withyoung players that to attack is to pressureonly the opponents king (or the kings dences), but a weakness is a weakness, and byconcentrating on this or that vulnerablesquare or pawn in the enemy camp it is possible to win a game.

Nevertheless, you will notice anway that

thrughout the book the lines tend to bequite aggressive mostly with an emphasis onspace, fluid development, inducing weaknesses in the enemy camp, generating aninitiative etc. Above all, however, it is imrtant that a system is sound and that specicplans and features are relatively easy to un

derstand.In order to cilitate filiarisation with

major characteristics (structures, eas ofattack etc.) several of the systems involvesimilar plans rom White, and I have deliberately chosen variations that require certainmoves (and move orders) to be employed.Additionally, fr the sake of convenience,and to avoid consion, I have altered themove orders of several ges.

I must stress that this s not intended to bea watertight repertoire book, rather a toolwith which to help the reer open 1 d4 withcondence

For their thoughts and vice I would liketo thank fllow Yorkshireman Richard Pal

liser and Andrew Kinsman (an honoraYorkshireman since winning the 2nd WhiteRose Masters in 2000) .

Angus Dunnington,Castlefrd,June 2001

5



C H AP T E R O N E I

Quee's GambitAccepted with 3 e4

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e4Natural and popul, the QGA can be a

very solid system to ace. Black simply accepts the c4pawn and reacts accordingly toWhites chosen set up in the centre. Ratherthan allow Black restriction tactics aer 3f3 f6 4 e3 cS, r exple, when Whitecan easily se his attacking chances fade awayonly to be le wit soae pawn, wewill concentrate exclusively on the nononsense 3 e4. This immediately erects apotentially troublesome pawn centre thatBlack must contest early or dri into passivity. Games 12 see Black use knights to challenge d4 and e4 respectively, while Games 34 ature two contrasting approaches begin

ning with 3 . . . cS. In Games 56 Black adoptsthe traditional 3 . . .eS.

4 f3The kneejerk 4 dS is also possible when

4 . . .eS S f4 g6 6 g3 eS 7 xc4 f6 8

c3 d6 9 b+ f8 is not unlike the maingame. 4 e3 is natural, when 4 . . .f6 S f3 eS

6 dS d4!? 7 xd4 exd4 8 'xd4 c6 9 c3Game 1 cxdS 10 000 b4 11 xc4 xc3 12 bxc3

Van ely-V. Milov 00 has been assessed as unclear. The variaFrch League 1999 tion 5 c3 eS 6 dS aS 7 f3 d6! 8 a4+

_

d7 9 'xaS a6 pays very close attention to1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e4 c6

Obstructing the cpawn can be justied

here because White no longer has e2e3 toprotect the d4pawn. The immediate pressure is designed to induce a concession romWhite, while a ther challenge in the centrewith . . . e7e5 is planned.

Whites queen. Illescasadler, Lines Z1995 did much r the popularity of 3 . ..c6

when Black won aer 10 b? xe4 11d c3!, preventing the queens escape. Instead of 10 b White has 10 a4 xe4 1 1xc4 bS with chances r both sides. With 4f3 White avoids these complications in

7



Attacking with

avour of simpe deveopmet, hopig to bethe oe who beets most om Backs p. . . g 5 d5

This rcig advace seems to hod more

promise of a advatage tha the terativeS xc4.5 . .e5 6 f

Ag hite seects the most direct cotiuation . 6 d xf3+ g3 3 8 xc4eS ! is aother ie that typies the attractioto 3 . . .c6. 6 c3 teds to traspose to themain ie aer 6 .. .f6, but it aso ivitesBack to chaege the dS-pawn. Aer 6 . . .e6hite ca escape the pin ad create oe ofhis ow with a4+ d 8 e, whie Kparov-Deep Thought, ew York 1989 wet6 . . .c6 f4 g6 8 e3 cxdS 9 exdS e(9 .. .a6 has bee suggeste 10 d! xf3+11 gxf3 xf3 12 xc with the threat ofbS+. ow 12 .. .f6 ad 12 . . .a6 make sese,rather tha Deep Thoughts 12. .. d6, whichmet with 13 b f6 14 cS b6 1S a3e6 16 c! etc.

6 . . .g6The most sesibe move, puttig the ques

tio to the bishop. 6 . ..d3+ xd3 cxd3 8 xd3 and 6 . . .xf3+ gxf3 d 8 xc4simpy speed up hites deveopmet. Aer6 . . .xf3 White shoud avoid a4+? bS! 8xbS+ c6 9 a4 xe with advatage toBack and istead ow the course ofZ.Varga-Fochter, Agria 1 992, where hite

was happy to trade gxf3 d3+ 8 xd3cxd3 9 xd3 c6 10 c3 f6 1 1 0-0-0 cxdS12 bS+!? d 13 xdS! xdS (1 3 .. c8+14 c+ xc+ S xc xbS? 16 d8mate, or 13 .. .xbS? 1 c mate) 14 xd+�xd S xdS+ with a cear ead.7 e3

Aso see is g3, aer which Back capush his e-paw either one or two squares

a) . . .f6 8 c3 e6 9 xc4 exdS was thecourse ofXuJun-.ikoic, Begrade 1988.Aer 10 xdS!? c6 (10 ... xdS 1 1 xdSretais Whites pu) 1 1 a4! xf3 12 gxf3e 13 b3 0-0 14 eS d S d c8

8

hite essayed 16 xf+.

The game cotied 16 . . . e6 xf318 exd f8 19 b3+ f 20 0-0 and Backhad to wor about the d-pawn, athoughthis does seem preferabe to the bizarre16 .. .�xf e6+ �xe6 18 c4 (18 g4+�f 19 xd sighty fvours hite)18 .. .�f6 19 e4 �f 20 d6+ xd6 21xd6, e.g. 21 .. .f6 22 h4.

b) ... eS is a more atura approach, hop

ing to eave the g3-bishop cosed out of thegame. 8 xc4 ad ow

b 1) 8 .. .a6 defeds the oen use (rhite) bS-square but presets hite withthe oppouity to activate his other bishopwith 9 d6!? , e.g. 9 .. .cxd6 (to ded the bpaw ext move) 10 b3 e (or 10 . . . d1 1 gS h6 12 f3 h 13 c3 with goodpay r the paw) 1 1 c3.

b2) 8 .. .d6 keeps the positio cosed. 9b+ d (Costa suggests preseig theight-squared bishop with 9 . . .�f8!?) 10xd+ xd 11 c3 f6 12was payedi Timma-Lautier, ikZee 1994. owthe aggressive 12. . .hS ca be comrtabyhanded with 13 h4, so the game cotiued12 .. .0-0 13 c bS 1 c2 f8 1S d ! b416 e3 bS c4 with a advatage to

hite.ith e3 hite is abe to moitor thef-square as we as the queeside, ad thebishop is ee to chage ocatio.7 . . .e5



Aer 7 f6 8 c3 e6 9 xc4 exdS 0exdS d6 bS+ d7 Black is doing fineInstead 9 a4+ d7 0 xd7+ oers Whitegood chances:

a) 0 xd7 takes Blacks eye o e4 anddS d4 exdS 2 h3 cS 3 dbS d4 4hxg4 000 has been evalated as nclear btthe simple 4 c7+ looks good r WhitemyslovFontaine, Cannes 996 went xc4 exdS 2 xdS d6 3 d4 c6 4c3 deS 5 f d7 6 h3 f6 7 000cS and White was ready to get his kingsidepawns rolling, leaving him considerably better aer 8 f4 f7 9 g3 hS 20 a4 d6 2fS geS 22 e6 e7 23 acS xe6 24xe6 b6 25 e2 h7 26 h4 27 g4 cS 28gS

b) 0 xd7 aims to connect the rooksqicky Now xc4 exdS 2 000! ? 33 gxf3 eS 4 xdS! xc4 5 b6+ c66 xc4 gives White a clear advantage, bt2 c8 3 exdS d6 limits White to anedge Note that recaptring with the king

leaves the f7pawn nprotected, which iswhy KarpovLatier, Melody Amber (rapi997 went gS exdS 2 xf7 g8 3 f3e6 4 gS c6 5 000 with pressreagainst dS and on the light sqes in general8 xc4

Van W ely deliberately holds back hisknight rather than play the atomatic 8 c3f6 9 xc4, when 9 a6 0 e2 d6

d2 oers an exchange of Blacks moremobile bishop Play might continexe2 2 xe 00 3 00 d7 4 f3fc8 5 fd e8 6 b3 h6 7 ac h78 c2 cb8 9 dc bS as in AzmaiphviliPiket, Wijk Zee 993 Then 20aS eyes the c6sqare, secring White aslight advantage8 d6

ome players prefer to keep White ot ofbS with 8 a6 here ince the kings have yetto castle White now has a cople of plansavailable

a) AltermanNNikolic, Zagreb Z 993,

Qu een 's Gambit Ac cepted with 3 e4

White decided the enemy minor pieces onthe kingside made r attractive tgets: 9 h3d7 0 h4!? d6 hS 6e7 2 h6 gxh6and it was time r the kings to head to the

qeenside er 3 c3 g6 4 d2 e7 5000 000 It is true that the pawn sacricehas damaged Blacks structre, bt Blacksinlence on the dark sqares is significantConseqently White trned his attention tothe other wing: 6 b f6 7 e2 (now7 xh6 is okay) 7 dg8 8 d2 g4 9xa6?! bxa6 20 xa6+ d8 2 a8+ c822 c4 xe3 23 e3 d7 with an oddsitation in that, r the moment, Black cando little with his extra piece The game waseventally drawn aer White was able tomake inroads down the cle, bt it is interesting that the combination of the closedcentre (instigated by Black) and Whitesspace advantage afrd the rst player schlexibility

b) The more circmspect 9 will appealto most players Then 9 f6 0 e2 d6

fd2 leads to similar play to that in thenote to Whites 8th move shold Black tradebishops Instead KarpovVMilov, witzerland 997, contined d7 2 c3 003 c e7 4 bS 5 b3

Blacks qeenside expansion has le bothcS and c6 potentially weak bt there is thesal darksqare grip in compensation Attempting to alleviate the pressre with 5 c6looks sensible bt is, in act, what White is

9



A t t a c k n g w t h 1 d4

hoping r this te of sito, since er16 dxc6 xc6 17 aS Black leans thatoening the position ca leave him too vulneable on the lght squares, e.g. 17 xe4 18

xe4 xe4 19 f3 f5 20 d5+ h8 2 1xe4 e4, and now 22 fd poses seriousrobems. No doubt aware of such an eventuality Back stuck wth the strategy of concentating on the dk squares, exploiting theclosed cente to launch a kingside oensvewith 15 . f4 16 f3 h8 (16 . .. g5?) 17 a2g5

his nononsense thust is cosstent wththe general lan bt creates anothe lightsquare weakness on f5. White, meanwhile,has yet to make a concession on the kgside,pemtting hm to ther remnd his opponent of the holes on the other ank 18 c5g8 (18. g4 19 e2) 19 b4 g6 20 c2

g4 2 1 e2 ag8 22 fd (22 bxa6 c8 23b4 6h5 24 g3) 22 .. 6h5 23 g3 c8 24c6 (thee is no need to gve Bak what hewants with 24 gx4? g3 25 hxg3 xg3 26g3 xg3+) 24.. g5 25 f h6 26 c3!f6 27 d3 (agan 2 gxf4? h4 28 g2ex4 29 d4 f3 helps only Black) 27 . . h28 h4 gh3 29 dxe5 g7 30 xf4 xe43 1 e3 f5 32 xh6 h2+ 33 xh2 xf2 34

xg7 xg7 35 d4 1-0 An excellent instructive display om Kpov, highlghtngthe power of the tradtionaly under-ratedqueenside attack. Whte's knghts on c5 andc6 ceanly make ther resence lt

10

9 +In myslov-emkov, Rome 1 990, the r

me world chapion was in ghtng mood.Aer 9 h3 d7 10 h4 h6 1 1 h5 f8 12 h4e7 13 g4 White was dange of clampingdown on both sdes of the board Consequently Black ht out with 13 b5 14 b3 c615 c3 b4 but 16 dxc6 xc6 17 d5 e618 c 1 xd5 19 exd f8 20 a4+ d7 2c6 highlighted yet again how Blac needsto be carel on the light squares. The textleads ethe to an exchange of light-squaredbishops that is avourable to Whte or amisplacement of Black's kng9�

By now we are aware of the poblemsBlack can ce on the light squares and, wththe centre closed and a number of backpeces posted on the kgside, tucking thekng away on f8 s not too inconvenient 0 0-0

esbly optng r quick ad easy development. With Black's rooks stil waitng to

get acquanted the queenside will not be easyto defend Howeve, White successlly ehs kng n the centre readness theendng n I.Nikolaids-Valkesami, Moscowlympad 1994, at the sae time dressngthe possblity of any ture countelay onthe kngside 1 0 e2 f6 1 1 fd2 d7 12g3 h5 13 h4 g4 14 xg4!? xg4 15 b3b6 16 c3 a6 17 f3 d7 18 c4 e7 19

xd6 xd6 20 a4! g8 21 a3 b8 22xd6 cxd6 23 e2 f6 24 hc 7 25 b4hc8 26 b5 , and now 27 d llowedby sendig the knight to c4 to attk both b6and d6 kept Black busy, gving White time toswtch to the kgside ets

I like this idea of keeping the knight on b 1r a while. If Whte does not intend to oer

an exchange of bishops with e2 and f3-d2, then postng the queen's knght on d2supos the f3-knight whle stil protectinge4, thus eeing White's queen. If Black retreats his ishop aer an inevitable h2-h3 the



knight already has access to c4 while in theevent of . . .b7-b5 there is d2-b3-a5-c6 etc.

1 1 .. 5A logical llow-up to the lay thus far

the closed centre settig the scene r akattacks. Howeve White need ot worryabout the coming ofesive since he hasenough pieces either on or near the kingsideThe same cannot be sad of Black's densiveresources o the other wing.1 2 c 6 1 d h4 14 x 1 5x 5 1 6 Uc1 g4 1 7 l1

This is why White sent his king's rook tote c-le vacating f1 r the bishop in orderto provide the g2-awn with necessa extraprotection. There is a temptatio in this ndof situation to leave a ook nea the kng rdefensive puoses but here the f2-paw isnot a taget .

1 ha 1 °b b6 1 9 :c �g 0c1 e7 1 4 5 2 �1

A prophylaic measure woh remembering. An uwelcome major iece is sure tocome to the g-le soo when the h3-awnwill come under attack so White takes timeout to unin his g-pawn in advance Over onthe queenside Black is owerless on the lightsquares and as we will soon see rather pre

ciously laced on the dark squares.22 . . :g 2 d �h 7 24 c4

With his kingside quite safe White hasbeen able to conduct his queeside assaultwith little diculty culmiating in consider-

Qu ee's Ga bt A c c ep ted wth 3 e4

able pressure agaist b6 c7 and d6. I t is interesting that White's rooks quee knightand dk-squaed bisho combine to attackthese weaknesses while the remng bisho

lays an equally vital le in defending thekingside.

24 5 d6

Ironically it is the blockade of this awnupon whch Black's strategy s bed in thislie. Now the c7-b6-a5 awn chain is about

to be seriously undermined ad the oeningof the -g8 diagonal r the white queencauses Black her trouble.25 . . .cxd6

Black's queenside also falls apat aer25 . . .xd6 26 xd6 cxd6 27 xb6.26 xb6 :d 27 c7 e6 2 xe6?!

here is no doubt that White stands verywell aer the queen exchange but 28 c4

loos much strger e.g. 28 ...dS 29 xd5xg2 30 f4. Neveheless with an attackno loner a realistic pspect Blac's pieces picularly his rook look out of place onthe ngside.2 •xe6 29 :7c4

29 d7 llowed by a7 and b6 is oteasy to meet but White has anothe plan inmind.

29 . .6The rook rushes to re-enter the gae

0 :x!?

Desite this exchange sacrice workingout well fr White it would have been sim-

1 1



A tt ac kig with 1 d4

pler to try and exploit the existing advantage30 ••xb4 3 5

ach one of White 's pieces points to thequeenside whle three of Black's two ofthem notoriouly slow ts e far away3 d5 3 6 :t 33 7 34 xd5

x6 35 :x6 exd5 36 exd5 xd5

36 xd5 37 g537 c4 d+ 38 h

The smoke h cleed and Whites bish

ops are enough to give him a potentily decisive lead38 t6 39 5 g6 40 5 e 4

:x4 e5 4 3 d8 43 g5?

White should be winning without lkingr a second pawn A more icisive way touse the bishops and psed pawn is 43 d4e8 44 b7 �g6 45 a4 e6 (45 a8 46c2) 46 b4 etc

43 g6 4 xh4 d 45 b5 d3 46e6 xt 47 t5+ '6 48 8 g6 49

b6?

49 xg6 parts with the other bishop dlooks preferable eg 49 6g4+ 50 hxg4�xg6 5 1 b6+ �g7 52 �g3 e3 53 f3 d154 b4 ad White h psed pawns on bothflaks49 . 'h5 50 xt6 'xh4 5 xg6 e3 5

g4?It is time r 52 b4 since the e-pawn is going no rther aer 52 e2 53 e65 2 .d3 53 h6+ g5 54 e6 �t4 55

t6+ �e5 56 t8 e 57 e8+ t4 58

1 2

ta+ e5 59 :t+ e4 60 n Jxg+

6 h1 xg4 6 xg4 t3 63 'g e

64 h e 65 Je+ xe+ 66 �g3

YY

Game 2Miton-Sadvakasov

Continl Oen 2000

d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e4 t6

This time Black hits the e4-paw practicaly rcig its ace 4 c3 e5 promises White ittle4 e5 d5 5 xc4 6

The most obvious and the most populputting the question to the bishop It is asopossible to inser 5 c6 6 c3 ad now

a) 6 e6 h the nty threat of 7 xc38 bxc3 xc4 Hauchd-Coll Cappelle la

Grde 997 continued 7 b3 xc3 8 bxc3d5 when instead of the natur 9 f3White tried the provocative 9 e2 with aview to a early eviction of Black's bishopAer 9 xg2 10 g d5 1 1 c4 e6 12 dSxe5 13 dxe6 f3+ 14 f xd+ 15xd xg 16 a4+ c6 17 xg e6White had two good pieces r a rok butw running short of pawns Obviously such

lines require carel hadling om bothsides athough I'm not convinced 6 e6 isworh the touble in ay ce

b) 6 b6 7 b5 d7 8 f3 with a urther brnch





A tta c king with 1 d4

4 'xb3! d3 (taking on dS invites f4f5,trapping the bishop) 5 fd c4 6 dxe6"xe6 7 "c2 00 8 e4! and White is doing well

b) Black immediately went r the bishopin GiorgadzeNciso Dblan, Lines 999Aer 9 aS 0 c2 xc2 "xc2 e72 00 00 3 ad e8 White again pshedhis fpawn: 4 f4 dS 5 xdS 'xd5 6c3 c6 7 fS c4 8 c exfS 9 xfS"e6 20 f3 c6 2 e4 with a slight pll

If these lines e to yor liking it is worthtaking a closer look at 6 b3, bt make sreBlacks control of the d5sqe does notbecome a longterm pls To be avoided is 6e6? xc4 7 "a4+ c6 8 exf7+ �xf7 9xc4+ e6 etc

Retrning to the poplar 6 d3, Blackstk of achieving smooth development ismore problematic6 . . .c6

Dont expect too many opponents tooblige with 6 'xd4?? 7 bS+ d the qeen

is lost7 e3

It is a little nsa to see bishops ndingposts bere knights, bt here the idea is todeny the c8bishop an oting The helpl 7e2, r example, permits 7 g4, wherenow both fS and g4 remain navailable,hence the sggestion in the note to Blacksnext move

7 . . .This natra move is seen the most oenBlack aims to pnish Whites ncompromising bishop Two other strategies have alsobeen tried:

a) 7 e6 rather stbboly addresses theproblem of the qeens bishop Aer 8 c3Black h played a nmber of moves:

a) 8 ' d7 9 g4 0 h3 x

"xf3 e6 2 d 000 3 00 b4 4 e4w clely better r White in KorchnoiHbner, Tilbrg 987 Later, in Karpovvanchk, Reggio Emilia 99, Black improved with 9 . . 000 0 h3 b4 e2 fS

1 4

2 00 h6 3 4d5, and now 4 eeading r c5) gave White an edge

8 b4 9 e4 4d5 0 ge2 fS exf6 exf6 2 f4 w seen in hakedIbragimov, Berlin 997 White h an isolated dpawn that does seem well blockadedbt 0 fS h led to a positiona concessioninvolving a weakening of the ligt sqes inBlacks camp Aer 2 xf4 3 xf4Blacks attempt to redce his opponentspiece activity with 3 d6 4 xd6 'xd65 xb7 d8 met with 6 'hS+ f7 7 b5+ d7 8 "e2+ and White w a safepawn p

8 c4 9 e4 c8 is the odd corsechosen by Black in FrmanNoskov, Moscow 99 White is happy to allow the captre on e3 in these positions becase e3both spports the d4pawn and opens the fle, so Black h achieved less than nothingIn ct White strck immediately with 0 e6,which looks like a nice alternative to thecomrtable advantage that reslts om sim

ple development (eg 0 ge2)a4 8 dS is a consistent llowp to

7 e6 Then 9 f3 e6 0 00 slightly fvored White in aovHbner, EropeanTe Ch 989 Again White ignore thecentra bishop ntil sch time that an exchange on d5 can be cried ot in vorable circmstances With Black so involvedwith the d5sqe he h less inence in

other e and less room in which to manoevreb) With 7 g6 Black waits to determine the

tre of his qeens bishop However, Idont believe the anchetto is appropriatehere Aer 8 c3 g7 (8 b4 9 e4 fS0 xfS gxfS is an interesting way to se7 g6, athogh I dobt the damage toBlacks kingside strctre is worth the dS

sqe) 9 ge2 00 White h two avenesto exploreb) 0 h4 is a blnt yet eecve means

with which to demonstrate that g7g6 issimply too risky Faced with h4h5 Black



must seek counteayi the centre 10 .. .b41 1 e4 when Portisch-praggett, Wijk

Zee 1985 continued 11...:d5? 12 hS e6(12. . .xe3 13 e3 sees ony to strengthen

Whites centre, whie 12 . .. c5 13 hxg6 hxg6 14h6! xh6 15 xh6 g7 16 h2 maintainsWhites initiative) 13 'c1 :xe3 (13 .. .c5 14hxg6 g6 15 h6 is dangerous) 14 'xe3(14 e3!?) 1 .. .c5 (14. . .d5 15 xd5 xd516 hxg6 hxg6 17 f4 e6 is uncomrtaber Back but at et avoids the owin 15d5!

Now 5 .. .xdS runs into 16 hxg6 hxg6 17h3 e8 18 :xd5 :xd5 19 e6! , e.g.19 . . .f6 20 exf7+ �xf7 2 1 xg6+! �xg6 22f4+, or the esser evil 19 .. .'d6 20 d e621 xg6. Instead the game went 15 . . .xd516 xd5 xd5 17 0-0-0 e6 18 f4 e8(18. . .'c7 19 hxg6 hxg6 20 cxd5 exd5 21

:xd5 and White domines) d now 19 h6!h8 20 dS exd5 21 xd5 'e7 22 f4woud have given White a cer ead, e.g.22 ...f6 23 f5! etc.

Reurning to Blacks 1 1th move, 1 1 .. .c5h been suggested an improvement. Aer12 d5 f5 Back seems to be doing ne, sobest is 12 dxc5. Then 12 . . .'xd+ 13 :xdc4 14 f f5 15 xf5 gxf 16 �f2 +

17 �f3 vours White, so this eaves12 . . .c4 13 b3 :xe3 14 'xb4 a5 whenboth 15 'd4 f5 16 'xd8 xd8 17 d5(e.g. 17. . .xe5 18 g4) and 15 'a4 g4 16xb7 xb7 17 'xg4 xe5 ook promising

Queen's Gambit Accepted with 3 e4

r White.b2) 10 e4 expresses an interest in the

centre rather than a kingside attack.ITimman-Korchnoi, European Team Ch. 1997,

10 .. .b 1 1 'b3 a5 12 f4! paced a urthwhite piece within rge of the crucia d5-squre d consequenty e Bk struing.Aer 12 .. .e6 13 4d5 (13 . . .c6 1 d isvery peant r White) 14 d5 exdS 15xdS (1 5 xd5?? e6) 15 . . .a4 16 '2 a5(16. . .xd5 17 'xd5) 17 c4 :xc 18 'xcBack did not have enough r a pawn.8 . e4 f5

This is the thrust upon which Backsopening strategy is bed in this particuine. Black will not aow the bishop to remain in such a commnding position in themidde of the bord d, in order to ght rthis outpost, White must give up his ad

vanced e5-pawn. 8 . . .4d5 9 :c3 c6 10'!? provides White with a menacing setup, whie aer 8 . . c6 the game ader-haw,Ise of Mn 1994, continued 9 :d2!? e6 10gf3 d7 1 1 b3 xb3 12 'xb3 e6 130-0 e7 14 fd 4d5 15 d2 a5 16 d Back w missing his bishop.9 exf6

Of course White reses to give way, d

taking the pawn retains the advtage of themove.9 exf6 1 0 a3

The beginning of a compex and practicy rced sequence that Miton treats with

1 5



A tt a c k ig with 1 d4

some skil l. The chief atenatve is 10 c3 fSwhen the second pawn to land o fS puts thequestion to the bishop

a) Kapov-hort, Lnes match (3) 1992,

wet 1 f3 eepng eye on d ad tyngthe bishop down to the b7paw) 1 4dS12 e6 13 ge2 d7 14 00 0-0-0 Se wth a edge Whte urpsinglyBlack's bockade on dS s not secure tfrst apes, the logic 1S . g8 16 ge8 17 f4 xf4 18 xf4 gS 19 e g7meets with Cut Hansen's 20 xg7 xg7 2 1dS ad Whte stands bette The solid 1 . . .c6meits attenton In Zaja-Ganguly, IstanbulOlympiad 2000 White maged to emovehs oponent's ight-sued bshop aer 12h3 e6 13 00 d6 14 e 0-0 S gSc4 16 b3 f7 7 x xf7, but then 1 8a3 4dS 19 xdS xdS 20 xdS cxdS 21 f3 h4 w ne Black

b) Dpping back to b 1 s moe populIn fact 1 1 b 1 only tempoiy gnoes thedSsquae, a ater a2-a3 will oe the a2-

sue as an active long-ge post thebishop. Aer 1 1 . .4dS 12 f3 t s Black'stun to decide whee is best his king'sbshop.

b) mman-aov, FID Cnddatesmatch, gh Naga 1994 continued12 .d6 13 g d7 14 e2 e6 SeS, highlightg one o fthe potetial pblems Black cased by n ely push of the

f-pawn(s) the weakess of the eSsueAe 1 . .00 1 6 0-0 xc3 17 bxc3 xeS 8dxeS c6 19 d3 e6 Black could do witha bit of help on the dk sues but mustony be a shade wose

b2) 12 .b4 13 d2 e7 is desiged toeduce White's suot of the d4pawn andis better thn 13 . .0-0 14 xdS xd2 1 xd2 xdS 16 0-0 when the hole on eS is

signiict The we have 14 0-0 0-0 S e f6 16 a3 �h8 17 2 f4 1 8 eS Hbneulskis, uope Team Ch, Pula 1997.Black's occuaton of dS is looking less secue ad the eSsque s a genuine pblem

1 6

Consequenty he ow sought to geneatecomplcations with a he advance 1 8.. .f3,the pont being that 19 xf3 g4 20 e4x 2 1 xf3 xd4 22 d3 f6 is about

even. Instead the game went 19 xdS S20 f7 xf7 21 xdS f8 22 xf3 xd4(22 xd4 23 b4 cS 24 xd4 xd4 2c3 and e7 beckons) 23 c3 xc3 24xd8 xd8 2 bxc3 b8 26 e7 dWhte's lead ws sti l ntact.

Incidentally the immediate 12 . .e7 wageed dawn in Hebden-Dasko, VnjackaBaja 1991 Of couse thee is stil evehgto play Note that with the bishop stone3 t s tempting to ht it with . ff4 at somepoint, but then White's othe bishop comesto l on the b-h7 diagonal.1 0 . fS

Anothe one In ct Black's uncompmsng esponse is called s 10 . .4d?1 1 hS g6 12 xg6 hxg6 13 xh8 netsWhite too much matei r insufcientcompensaton, whle 1 ..e7 is hadly an

attactive move x

fxe4

Huzman gives this move a ' and it doeslook bette thn the tempting 11 . .xb4+ 12

c3 e4 1 3 hSwhen Black cn spend somuch time checking out 13 . .g6 14 eSthathe ovelooks 14 bSpicking u the bishopAe 13 . .f8 4 ge2 Black tends to bnghis ueen to e8 soon





Attacking ith 1

Mitons contribution to opening theo is infct quite ogic s the king is heading rthe reativey safe haven on c Backs king isno better and Back is a pawn down Bere

20 d2 had been payed when 20 xc3 2 1bxc3 c6! highighted the probem on the ee ad saw hite happy to make the drawin EhvestVozhin Koszain 1998.20 . . .c5

ith hites centre in danger of becoming suicienty soid Back strikes berehite h time to bng his kings rook to themidde of the bod21 Wc

As per pan 2 1 d6? cxd is going a ittetoo f and backfires on hite2 1 . . .xe3 22 xe3 cxd4 23 exd4

23 . . .d3Introducing other pin 23 . xd is

critica shoud Back be rad of 24 :dor wi h e hg on to see his bishopsdevour the knits? e er 25 g3 xc326 xc3! :e3 hite hs 27 :a24 g5+ e7

2 ..c8 25 c5 does not hep Back25 5+?

It is dificut to criticise hite since hiswhoe strategy h been wonder thus f

but the simpe 25 xg7 might we eaveBack with nothing to show r a two pawndecit In such a compex position with uncomrabe kings awkward pins ad thepresence of queens hite can be rgiven

1 8

r paying safe25. . .cS

25 . .b6 26 xb6+! b6 27 :xa8+ c7 28:a7+ picks up a second pawn.26 :d b6

Again the -pwn is safe 26 ... 'xd? 27 f5+ b8 28 f+ c8 29 g+ b8 30 g3+27 4

o doubt rcing the exchge of queensis what hite had in mind when turingdown the g7-pawn erier d under thecircumstnces this is understdabe However Back now poceeds to defend the ending very we indeed a situation that coudhave been avoided with 25 xg7.27 . . .xe4 2 x7+ Wxd7 29 xe4 30 c3 5 31 'd2

hite hs an extra pawn and ecent prs

pects of converting it but with the cockticking and a strong opponent the tsk canbe rather difcut. The game continued31 . . .d6 32 g3

32 h3 f4+ 33 d3 :e3+ 3 c is nothing r hite to be afraid of32 . JhS 33 h %h3 34 1 ?

3 d5 c6 3 5 e3 .34 . . .g5 35 e4 e7 36 d3 4 37 :

b5 3 2 :h 39 g4 :ha6 40 :hc 41 e5+ Wes 42 %c642 :c7 is more ambitious eg. 2 . a3 43

:e ! axb2 :b :3+ 5 c2 or 43 . . f3 �f8 45 :cxe7 g (45 . . a 6 :xa



xa 47 b 46 g5 a"47 h7+ �g848 xa xa 49 f6+ �f8 50 d7.42 . a3 43 :x a6 :x a6 4 bx a3 bx a3 45

c4 'd7 46 'c3 Y -Y

Blacks longrange bishop cries out agesaving duapurpose role.

Game]A talik-Gyimesi

Yugoslav Tm Ch. 1998

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dx c4 3 e4 c5

While it is quite logica to exploit Blacksely queenside pawn majority immediately,3...c5 invites White to continue with his teitorial claim in the centre.4 d5

4 f3 cxd4 5 "xd4 is a riskree viation, but we e concerned with the lesscomprmising push of the dpawn. Quitesimply White hopes to regain his sacricedpawn with an advanced centre, leaving hisopponent cramped.

4 . . . e6Black sets about deaing with the impor

tt d5sque head on. The next main gameatures the wild 4 . . .f6 5 c3 b5.5 lc3

5 xc4 tends to transpose aer 5 .. .f6 6c3 exd5 7 xd5 xd5 7 . . .xe4? waksinto 8 "e2. Alternatively 5 . . .ex?! 6 x isarey difcult r Black, since 6 .. .f6?

permits 7 xf7+!, and blocking the dlewith 6 .. . d6 runs into 7 e5! , e.g. 7 .. . xe5? 8xf7+ etc.5 . . ex d5 6 x d5

Maintaining a piece on d5 i s a key part ofour strategy here, r the sque cees to bea weakness r Black once White captureswith his pawn (unless this gives him a powerl psed pawn, of course).6 . . .e

Black does best to avoid 6 .. .f6 7 xc4e6 8 b3. x c4 x d5 8 x d5

Que en 's Gambit A ccepted with 3 e4

8 . . . e7

By f the most popul response toWhites threatened 9 xf7+. PetrosianRadulov, Plovdiv 1983 went 8 . . .d6 9 "h5'f6 10 f3 g6 and the exchange ofqueens did nothing to diminish Whites presence in the centre. Aer 8 . . .c6 9 xc6+bxc6 Blacks poor queenside pawns eworth ping with the bishop.9 lf3

It is a matter of choice whether White selects or e2 r his knight. The dierencebetween Ataiks choice and 9 e2 is that thelatter seeks to maintain maximum controlover the d5sque. Using e2 aso rules out apin aer .. .g4 since now White h f2f3 .Let us look at a few examples of how playcan go aer 9 e2.

a) 9 . . .d7 10 0-0 b6 11 c3 0-0 12

f4

1 9



Aacking wih 1 d4

Thi i tpica. hite i read to meet thechaenge to hi bihop with the upportingknight . Bk h tried a number o move inthe diagra poition.

a) 12. . .g5 hare the other bihop butpreent white with the cheek repone 13d6, the point being that the bihop i ein view o 13 ... xd6? 14 x7+ etc. However, Back c persevere with 13 . . .e7when hite h 14 e5 with the propect ohaving at et one rather ge bihop rightin the hert o Back poition. Aer14 .. .xd6 15 exd6 the new ped pawn canprove equa unwecome, the bishop overee both have o the board d 5 ...xd516 xd5 mere add to Bk probe.

12 . . .h8 rue out an nn buinewith x7+ and ee the pawn in caeBk eect to chaenge the remning centrepawn. I like 13 3 here, intending to meet13 . . .xd5 with 14 ad to sta in chge othe d5que. Com abregoCienteParada, Patja dAro Brcino 1994, went 13

h5 xd5 14 xd5 d6 15 e5 b8 6ad and Back w being puhed back. Ater 16 . . .'e8 17 'h4 e6 18 e e8 19 h3d7 hite truck with 20 6? gx6 2xd7 xe5 (2 1 . . .xd7 22 x6+ g8 23h6) 22 xe5 e5 23 ed, but aer23 . . .5 24 xb7 g8 waked into 25 c7??3. Thi i a pit becaue with b ar thebetter pawn tructure hite i ce better,

e.g. 25 dd7 g7 26 xa7 ag8 27 g3 .) 12 .. .6 13 d6 e7 14 e5 tranoe to a, whie hite ao h 13 eS?.Then 13 ... xd5 14 xdS g5 (... e7 15e6) 15 xg5 xgS 16 4 i precie whathite i ooking r. In KhaimanVuon,t Peterburg 1995, Back retreated 13 .. .e714 e4 xd 15 d d hite authorit in the centre w ti preent aer the

exchange o queen. Aer 15 ... g5 (undermining the upport o the eSawn) 16 e3 b8(16. . c4? 17 dS) 17 b3 e6 18 bSBacks queenide w tarting to creek.

a4) 12 .. .xdS 13 xdS d6 14 eS c7

20

5 c 6 16 e6 17 d xd5 wagreed drawn in Raui-Lev, upen 1997.hite went r more in Kacheihviipngenberg, ord 26 Te Ch., Roque

aenz Pena 1997, nding hie on the wato a odet ateria ead aer 15 e6? x416 e7 xh2+ 17 h1 d6 18 exf8' + x819 g3 . There owed 19 . . .h6 20 c 'c6 2 1 gS e6 22 ad h 6 23 e d824 x2 xd5 25 xd5 xd5 26 'b8+e7 27 'xa7 6 28 b6 � d now29 c woud have caued Back the motprbem

b) 9 .. .0-0 and nowb) 10 00 d7 11 c3 6 12 e3

xc3 13 bxc3 c7 c4 6

Zontakh-Mirkovic, ovak ikoic Mem.1998. hite bihop i too trong to be alowed to urive in thi kind o poition, but

aer 15 d2 xdS 16 cxd5 d7 7 4'd8 18 e e8 19 ac c8 20 c3hite w read to wing hi rook over tothe kingide, eaving Bk with the tandarddiea o being unabe to contet the drkqure.

b2) 10 e3 b6 1 1 00 c6 12 d2e6 13 e5 1 b4? xb (14 . . .c4 15xc4 xc4 16 c) 15 xb4 cxb4 16

xe6 e6 17 xe6+ h8 18 4 d3 9ad ad8 20 dS and the bihop pair voured hite in Granda ZunigaGender,Yerevan Opiad 1996.

c) 9 ... a6 10 00 c7 11 c3 0-0 2 4



and now 12 . . .xd5 13 xd5 transposes toa4 while Hertneck-Kalai Europen Cuptrbourg 1994 the knight travelled rtherwith 12 . . . e6. hen 13 e3 b8 14 a4 a6 15

b5 16 b6 xb6 17 b4! c7 1 8 bxc5xc5 19 d2 w enough to provide hitewith something to build on in the rm of hissupremacy in the centre. For the moment theapawn is irrelevant while hites grip on d his kngside pawn majority e relevantindeed.

Incidentaly 9 h5 looks ambitious butsoon peters out to equaity. d-J .HowellBritish League 1996 continued 9 .. .0-0 10f3 d7 1 1 g5 xg5 12 xg5 f6 13xf6 d gives 13 h4 aS+! 14 d2'a4 13 . . .xf6 14 0-0 and now instead of14 .. .xb2 15 ab f6 16 fc Blk chosethe safer 14 . . .b8! 15 ac b6.

ith 9 f3 hite intends to let the d5-sque look aer itself in some ces dropping the bishop back to c4 or b3 or tradingon e6 aer .. .e6. Mewhile hites knight

prtects d4 monitors e5 and is ready totrsfer to c4 (via d2 or e5 should an opsing piece need to be removed (or attke orthe -pawn aer a recapture on d5 advced.900 10 00

10 a6

Occionaly starting on the edge of thebod can be the most exible way to develop a piece and here the knight is able to

Que en 's Gambit Ac cepted ith 3 e4

drop back to c7 to contest the d5-sque orcontinue to e6 (-d4 or vance to b4. Ofcourse the b4-sque can be reached via c6but in a below hite puts a stop to this

aer 10 ... c6. Here e examples of ateatives to Gyimesis speciaity.a 10. . .c6 looks ine until one considers

that hite might well p with his excellentbishop if it means causing serious and permanent damage to Blks queenside pawns.Romero Holmes-Estremera Panos aamanca 1998 is typica of how hite shouldpatiently go about addressing his opponentsnew weaknesses aer 1 1 xc6 bxc6. hegame continued 12 e3 e6 13 c2 aS14 fc fd8 and now hite avoided 15xc5? xc5 16 xc5? d+ and exploitedthe position of his knight with 15 e5!

Notice that since doubling Blacks pawns

hite h directed his rces aganst c4 c5and now c6!. Additionaly hite is asoready to mobilise his kngside pawn majoritywith f2-f4.

b 10 .. .d7 1 1 e2 c7 met with 12 e5!in Beim-agman Aosta 1990. ith hisknight on f3 this centre/kngside expansionis aailable to hite. Aer 12 .. .b6 13 e4e6 (13 . . .g4 14 xh7+�xh7 15 e4+ 14

e Black migt consider placing his rookson d8 and e8 athough hites pieces pointto the kingside and the e-pawn provideshite with much room r manoeuvre.Black played 14 . . .ae8 15 g5 xg5 16

2 1





inltrate with his knight. However in.arga-Afek Budapest 1991 hite proie us with an interesting plan which inoles a positive retreat, namely 12 c4

e6 13 e2!? . he idea is to eventually exloit hites kingside pawn majority andextra space to generate play in the centre don the kingside. hould Black seek to avoidan unplesant ofensive with 13 ..x 14 hite will already have the d-fle dBlacks ight will be misplaced on c7. hege went 13 .. e8 14 c2 h6 15 fdb6 16 eS! d6 17 e3 ac8 18 f4 withthe by now familiar plan of -e5 and f2-f4. hites bishops perfrm a dual-purposetk in that they suppo the thematic adance of the kingside pawns while simultaneously monitoring the queensie in orer toslow down Blacks counterplay. It is surprising how quickly hites kingside pawns ctruble Blacks minor pieces d kingside ingeneral and aweness of this fct makeshites game so much easier to play. Here

the tempo f ame soon chged:18 ... c7 19 f2 g6 20 g4!? f6 21 xg6!g6 22 eS and Blacks third rank ws beginning to look a little suspect.

11 .c7

Keeping an eye on dS and preping toallenge the bishop ay by brining hisn to e6. Against 1 1 . .b4 it h been suggested that hite fllow up 12 xd8 xd8ith 13 gS!? which looks enough ra tiny

Qu ee 's Gambi t Ac cepted with 3 e4

pull. Black experiences some discom butwith queens of he hs resonable chces tosecure a level game. 1 1 . . . b6 agan meetswith 12 eS when s well s the usual out

post on c4 hite hs the f7-pawn in hissights. Aer 12 . ..f6 13 c4 c7 14 f3the prospect of the tempo-gaining f4 augments hites lead. hite should respond to12 . . . e6 with 13 d7 xd7 14 xd7 e.g.14 ... f6 15 fS g6 16 f g7 when both17 d ad8 18 gS and 17 gS!? fvourhite thanks mainly to the poor ight.1 2 dS

A queen trade does not necessily meanan end to uncompromising or aggressiveplay. In this cse hite judges that his evelopment advtage is suficiently signiicantto rmit him to keep the momentum goingand there is an impoant fctor to considerhere in that the natural recapture on d8 isthe inrior choice. Moreoer hites kingside pawn majority is no less mobile withouta queen on the board d while other pieces

remain the plan of a kingside ofensie willbe efective.1 2 . .dS

Gyimesi proposes the ostensibly less active 12 .. .xd8 s improvement. he reasoning behind this is that in the game Blacksight proes awkwdly placed on e6wheres on c7 at let the dS-sque is protected. herere by recapturing with the

bishop Black dends the ight and enstime to get his queenside in order no longerhaving to worr about 13 f4. Consequently13 e3 b6 14 ad f6 15 eS e7 16gS!? h been suggested s hites best trand it is true that the onus is stil on Black tokeep his opponents advantage to a minimum. However this looks prerable to thegreedy 14 . . . b7 15 eS xe4 16 d7 g6

17 xg6 hxg6 18 fd e.g. 18 .. .e6 19dS or 18 ...c8 19 xf7+ etc PerhapsBlack might consider 14 .. .e6 15 xe6xe6 with the intention of evicting hitesrook aer 16 d7 e8 17 fd f8.

23



Attacking ith 1 d4

3 f4Now Whit is happy to lur th knight to

6 wher it wil b a targt eentually rth f-pawn Forcing it om c7 also hands th

d5-squar back to Whit1 3 . . .e6Not that 13 . .d6? walks into a pin r

1 ad whn both 1 . b5 15 g5 (xploiting anothr pin) and 1 15 g5d7 16 a practically win r White1 4 g3

Whit hs a dlopmnt l th btterpics and th d5-squ holds more promisthan dos th d-squ fr Black Add tothis his potntialy more dangrous pawnmaority and th exchang of quns bcomes irreant.4 . . f6?

Black prooks the 5-pawn Othrs

1 . .d7 15 d5 c6 16 ad f6 17xc6 bxc6 1 5 x5 19 x5 d 20f3 ab (20 . .f6 21 c) 21 b3 is typicawith Blacks qunsid waknsss too big apric to pay r th outpost on d4

Th immdiate 1 . . d 15 xd oursWhit ar both 15 . . .xd4 16 d5 and15 cxd4 16 dS

Finally the attmpt to pretnd normal de

lopmnt is nough with 1 . . .b6?! 15 fd !b7 inits Whit to cemnt his grip on d5with 16 d5 ! whn th bishop is wondrlly positiond on g3 to ciitat th adanc of th dpawn in th nt of an x-

24

chang on dS Wors r Blak is 15 . .a6?16 5 f6 17 dS1 5 e5 �8

At frst glanc an odd looking mo butnow Blk can land his ight on d withoutx bing chck Ar th hsty 15 .d?r exampl Whit hs 16 xf7+ �f 17dS and now 17.. 2+ 1 �h xg3+ 19g3 pins th bishop! 15 . d2!? nds to binstigated 16 c 16. . 2 17 e5 7 1d 19 d6 las the rook punchingair and 16 ab1!? also oos good r WhitFirst 16 . .d?! 17 xf7+ �f 1 d5 2+19 �h xg3+20 g3 again backrs hil

16 . .x5 17 x5 d 1 dS rmindsBlack that half of his qunsid is still athom6 f4

Ar seing th black king mov awayom th 2-g diagonl and on to th flWhit is mor than willing to prmit thdoubling of his pawns if this mans claringth way r his rook

1 6. . d2?Ar this act of aggrssion Whits pawns

dominat Black should tr tsting his opnnts plan rgarss of th subsquent attention to his f-pawn 16 .x5 17 5 d2(17 . d4 1 dS) 1 f3! g5 (1 ..xb219 af g5 20 x7+ xf7 21 e6) 19x+! xf7 20 f

If Whit can kep Black undr prssurar taking on f7 th sacrifc will ha ben



ohwhile. Aer 20 .. .e8 21 xf7+ (21x? b5!) 21 .. .d8 22 h4+c7 23 d5!?xb2 24 f7+ b6 25 e6 Black's rook andbishop e still shut out of the game, White's

e-pawn is close to glory and Black's kingsi eawns e doomed. Black does have the can, but it lacks suppo. The other try is20 ... b5 21 xf7, when 21. . .d 22 xdxf7 23 d5 is good r White, a is 21 .. .b8 22 f4!? xf7 (22. . .e2 23 e6 b624 h5; 22 .. .xb2 23 e6 b6 24 g5) 23xd2+ e6 (23 . ..e7 24 e3) 24 f8, e .g.24.. .a8 (24 ...xe5 25 f4+) 25 e8+ f726 d8 e6 27 f4 c4 28 f2 b4 29 e3c3 30 bxc3 bxc3 31 d4 b7 (31...c2 32d6+ e7 33 c6) 32 d6+ e7 33 g5+�e8 34 e6+ f8 35 e7 d8+ 36 xc3xe4 37 xa7 etc.1 7 3!

Better than 17 c4 d4+ 18 h 1 e2 19d xe4 20 f xf4 21 xf4 xf4hich might give White an edge.1 7. . .xb2 1 8 e5 idS 1 9 f5 g5

19 . . .d4 20 xd4 cxd4 21 e6 e6 22e6+ f6 23 d6+ e8 24 ae1 and Whitebrings his final piece into play.20 e6

20 . . .xf3+

Or 20 .. .e4 21 e5 e2 22 ae! xe23 xe f6 24 exf7 e7 25 g4 b5(25 ...d7 26 g5; 25 .. .xg4 26 d6!) 26 g5c4 (26 . . . b7 27 gxf6 gxf6 28 f4 c4 29d 1 !) 27 c2! , and now 27 .. .g4 28 xg7+

Que en 's Gambit Ac cepted with 3 e4

xf7 29 g6+ hxg6 30 g6+ xg7 31 xe7+f6 (31...g8 32 e4 b8 33 d5+) 32f7+ e6 33 f8 and 27 . . . b7 28 d4dS 29 g6 hxg6 30 fxg6 c5 31 f win

r White.21 xf3 d2 22 if4 ld4 23 ie5 if6

Blk's rook is in danger of running out ofsteam, e.g. 23 .. .d2 24 c3 e2 25 d.24 ix6 gxf6 25 e 1 fxe6

Not 25 ...c4? 26 e7+ e8 27 a4+ d7 28g3 xa4 29 g8+ d7 30 xa8 etc.26 xe6 �e7

The king is not an ideal blockader.27 g3!?

27 h3 is more logical, e.g. 27. . .d6(27 ... c4 28 xh7+ d6 29 h8 cxb3 30 e28 xh7 c4 29 h8! e7 30 c2.27 . . . b5 28 lg7+ Wd6 29 gs �e7

White wins er both 29 .. . c4 30 e7 and

29 .. . b7 30 xa8 xa8 3 1 e7 c6 32 e6+.30 ic2! ld5 31 lg7+??

Whoops. White can get another passedpawn rolling er 31 xh7 e5 32 xe5e5 33 e4 b8 34 h4, eg. 34 .. c4 35 h5 b436 h6 b3 37 b3 cxb3 38 h7, or 34 . . .xe635 h5 f7 36 dS+ e7 37 h6.31 . . .�d6 32 e7 ie6 33 ie4 eS! 34

ixd5 ixd5 35 e2?

Again White ignores the h7-pawn: 35xh7! x 36 d+ e6 37 e+! draws.Now Black is in the driving seat .. .35 . . .c4 36 xh7 c3! 37 > f2 ?

Another in a series of mistakes th at fea-

25



ttacking ith 1

tur in th rst of th gam undrstndablin such a complx nding Corrct is37 c!! 3 3 b 39 h6 c2 0 xf6+�d7 1 x2 2 a6 b3 3 xa7+c6

c d638 e3Excllnt Whit cs cts nd is pr

pard to part with his onc mighty -pawn38 . c5?!

3 x7+ 39 x7 x7 0 d+ d61 h a5 2 h5 x2! 3 x2 b3 xc3bx 5 b2 7 6 g f7 7 �xa2 g7 b3 h6 9 a f5 with a draw39 f2 xa2

A good try Instad 39 aS 0 xf6 x21 f wins r Whit40 xa2 b3 4 h5+?

Wrong rook! 1 aS+ wins 1d6(4 1 �b 2 xa7 c2 3 d2 c b7+3 5 ; 1 �b6 2 b2 3 b3+aS d3; 1c6 2 3 c2 3 d2;1c 2 h mat) 2 a6+ d7 3xa7+ �6 b7 b2 5 �d3 c 6

+ !4 6 4 2 a6+?

2 a! b2 3 d+ x7 c5 f+5 �f4 b 6 b b3 7 � �d34 2 xe7 43 h7+ 8+??

Th final blundr Whit still h work

do ar 3 �d+! �d3 c2 sinc hrar 5 Black can qun his pawn I

ha a ling that Whit should ha a winsomwhr but thr is ways th simpliing 5 d6+ �c 6 c6+ �b 7 cc7 ! b7+ �c 9 xa7 �b 50 ab7+c 5 1 xb3 c ' 52 c3+ xc3+ 53 xc3 3 c2 45 xa 7 0

Ar 5 �g 6 ag7+ f 7 b7g hc7 and 5 7 6 a+ 7x+ x c7 (or �) frly

simpl whil th othr tr 5 d+ is mtby 6 + (6 �g 7 ag7+ f b7 g 9 hc 7 f5 7 a+ 9 �xf6! �g 50 g7+ �f 51 f7+mats

26

Game 4

SkvlbrgiovRussn h. 1999

4 5 2 c4 xc4 3 e4 c5 4 5 f6 5

c3 b5

Bie but ntirly logical! Black protctshis xtra pawn and thratns to undrminth dnc of Whits -pawn by attking

th ight with b5-b Of cours th b5-pawn itslf is not fn but hit shouldrrain fom ting it g 6 xb5?! + 7c3 x d2 xd2 9 xd2 a6 10f3 d7 11 2 g6 and Black ws bttrKorchnoi-Lindingr Wichrn 19976 f4

6 5 h th right look but is lss ctithn akas choic Ar 6 b 7 xf6 bxc3

bxc3 Black should play d7! whn 9 a (9 fx7 x7 10 xc b6 b5+d7 is n r Black) 9 xf6 10 f 'b61 1 xc d6 is qual Instad xf6?! 9xc d6 10 2+ inits Black into annding in which Whits surior pawn ructur counts r somthing whil BacrotPric Corsica (rapi 1997 continud 'aS 9 'd2 f6 10 xc d7 11 f3

b6 12 2 c 13 0-0 b7 1 d d 15'f with a dlopmnt lad r Whitwoh a pawn (or two) Black chos15 xd5? rathr th th bttr 15 xdSand soon paid th pric 16 'xc xc3 17



:xd8+ xd8 18 f xf3 19 2! c7 203+ d 2 1 c b6 22 b!? c7 23:b e8 24 xdS xdS 25 xdS.

With 6 f4 White simply bings a pecet

a good squae and pepaes to add weight tobS in the event of .. .b5b4 by hitting thecsqe. Consequently Black hs theeways of dending bS bee attacking thenight.6 .. . ia6

As a6 may well be the best squae thebishop especially s om here the c4pawnis given added potection s well the bSawn this elatively recent idea is a pomising teative to the outwdly more aggessive pin (see below) .

Othesa) 6 .. . aS is poula.a) 7 a4 is bette than its reutation, al

though ae 7 . . .xe4 White should ignoe 8bS xc3 9 xaS xd 10 xd d7 1 1xc4 b6 12 b3 b7 13 f3 xdS invou of 8 ge2 d6 9 axbS b6 10

xd6, e.g. 10. . .exd6 11 g3 e7 12 xc400 13 0-0 f6 14 c2, BeliavskyKamsky,Linaes 1993, o 10 . . .xd6 11 g3 g6 12xc4 g7 13 00 00 14 ge4, with a slightedge White n both cses despite the absence of his dksquaed bishop.

) Agan 7 eS cies out to be played btshould be avoided. Ae 7 . . .e4 8 ge2a6 9 f3 b4! 10 e4 d3+ 11 g6!!

Blk was having all the n in GelfandAnd, Linaes 1993.

see flo wing diagram

Thee llowed 12 b3 g7 13 bxc4 xf414 xf4 xeS 15 2 b4 16 a4+ (16a4 d 16 .. .xa4 17 xa4 xa 18xcS 00 d by now Blk was winning.Late, in BeliavskyComp Fitz 4, lovenia

(apid) 1996, White tied 12 e6 f2 13 e xh 14 a4 fxe6 1 bS b4 16 c . Thisdoes look like an impovement and is wohhe investigation, but White h to be atlet s cael Black in this line, so it

Qu e e n 's G a mbi t A c ce p t e d wi th 3 e 4

makes moe sense to settle 'a o a4',both of which see supeio ayway.

a) 7 f3 sensibly bolstes the cente anddenies Black use of the g4square. Now7 . . . gS?! hs been seen occsionally but thepawn is too much to pay Black's sbsequent Benkostyle activity e 8 xgS.Ove on the queenside 7. .b4 is well met by 8 a4+. The main line is 7 . . .hS 8 2 d79 f4

VyzmanavinAzmaishvili, Bgs1994. Ae the rced 9 . . .g6 (9 . . .hf6? 10eS) Vyzmanavn poposes 10 eS h6 11ge2 with the theat of sng a piece bylaunching the gpawn. Black's best s the

obvios 1 1 . .. b4, e.g. 12 e4?! b7, so Wadsggests 12 a4 with an evaluaton of ncle. Inste the game went 10 e2 g7(10. . .b4 1 1 a4! is a eply given by Ftacnik)1 1 e b4

2 7




and now hite preferred the thematic 12a4 to 12 e4 b7 13 xc4 b6 14 b3in view of 14. . d8. hen the retreat12 .. . b6 works out well r hite aer 13e4 a6? 14 e6! fxe6 15 dxe6 xe6 16xc5 or the lesser evil 13 .. .b7 14 xc4.However Black might consider 12 ... d8 13e4 0-0 when the consistent 14 g4 meansparting with a couple of pawns fr the pieceaer either 14 . . .xf4! 15 xf4 b6 or

15 . . .xe5. Neveheless in these complexpositions the extra piece tends to be moreusel than pawns. If this is not to Blacksliking ds clever 12 . . .a6!? is a realisticpossibility rcing the exchange of queenson Blacks terms. he game itself continued12 . .xa4 13 xa4 a6 14 g4 xf4 15xf4 b5 16 b3 xa4 (16. . .xe5 17 bxa4xe5 18 0-0-0 c3 19 b5+ f8 20 h3 d8

21 h2 and both sides had chances of making something of their respective materialgain.

a4 7 d2 is most successul in the line7 . . . b4 8 e5 bxc3 9 xc3 e .g 9 .. .a6 10 exf6exf6 11 b3 e7 12 xc4 d6 13 e2 0-014 0-0 with a pleasant position r hite inhirov-Kramnik Lines 1993. However8 . . .g4!? 9 e6 f6 is stronger r Blk than

it irst appes and will be just inconvenient to hite e5-e6 has been r Black.Another possibility to consider is 7 . . .e5 8 f4bd7 9 f3 d6 with a view to establishinga grip on the dark sques. All all I prer 7

28

f.

b 6 . . .a6 guds b5 with a lowly pawnrather than bringing out a piece. Aer 7 e5b4 8 exf6 bxc3 9 bxc3 Black h tried threemoves:

b 9 . . . 10 c gxf6 1 1 xc4 h5 12f3 d7 13 0-0 b6 14 c7

Legky-Peric Maine 2000. he diagramposition is hdly any better fr Peri thanhis game against Bacrot above. he ft that

an can ind himself in trouble so elyillustrates how Blacks game-plan can so eily fall apa in the 5 ..b5 viation. In fctaer 14 . ..a7 15 d6 exd6 16 e+ e6 17xb6 xb6 18 b d8 19 xe6 e6 20xe6+ f7 21 dS g7 22 h4 Blackssituation was embrsing enough to resignat once.

b2 9 .. .d7 10 a4 b6 1 1 e7 xe7

12 xc4 b2 13 c d6 14 e3 b8 15 0-0 16 d3 f5 17 0-0 and Black fcedwith the prospect of f3-c4 w muchworse in Mkeluk-Jue Buenos Aires1989.

b3 he same players reached the sameposition in a tournament in Acusso 199 1.hen Black tried 9 . . .gxf6 10 xc4 d7 11a4 g7 and hite endeavoured to justi

his ely queen soie with 12 c6!? a7 13b 0-0 14 d6!? exd6 15 xd6 e5 16xe5 e8 17 e2 e5. hites light-squecontrol is enough to leave him comablybetter er 18 0, but he decided to take the



strateg her by sarfcing the exchange and bagging a coupe of pawns in the rocess! aer 18 xcS c 19 dS e 20e4 d8 21 0-0 b 22 xb xb 23

xa6 a 24 c4 d 25 g3.7 e5

ith the e4-sque not avaiabe to Backhis thrust makes more sense. Now Backust decide whether to retreat or me acounter.

The aternative is . . .fd!? and now:a 8 e6 b6 (8 .. .f6 9 xc4! bxc4 10

a4+ fd 11 xb8 9 exf+ �xf 10 f3is compex indeed. hite shoud competehis deveopment as quicky possibe.

b 8 a4 b4 9 bS xbS 10 bS b6 1 1e6!? f6 1 2 g3 g6 1 3 e2 1 4 f3 a

Chess shoud be un and both sides cancaim to be having a good time in this strange

Qu ee 's Gambit Ac cepted with 3 e4

position.c 8 f3. This ooks a bit too sensibe

comped with a and b! Aer 8 9 e4b6 10 d6 8d 1 1 e2 owed by cas

ting queenside hite h compensation rthe pawn.8 e6!?

Pawns ceainy have a ot to do in thisviation! Amaingy hite doesnt bothercapturing the ight on f6 and despite hisown ight coming under re insteadeects to pay his sitional cd by disptingBacks kingside deveopment. Bere investigating the impications of this thrust et usconsider what happens aer 8 exf6 bxc3 9bxc3 . Instead of 9 .. .exf6 10 d6 Backs best is9 ... gxf6 10 b . Then . .d a4 c812 xc4 xc4 13 xc4 b6 14 e4 d15 d d8 16 f gives hite a sight puas the dS-pawn is (r the moment safe e.g .16 . xdS (16 .. .fS c2 xdS? 18 eS c4 c3 18 xd xe4 19 xa7. Khaifman-Ponomiov European Cup 2000 saw

a more interesting course: 10 .. .g 1 1 g4(1 1 xc4 xc4 12 a4+ d 13 xc4b6 11...xdS 12 e2 e4 13 xb8+xb8 14 xb8 b+ 15 d 0-0 16 cc8 f4 and now er . . . b (1. . .e518 d2 xc?? 19 d8+ 18 aS b 19c b2! 20 e2 eS 21 xeS eS 22 g4f8 23 0-0 fS and hite w in a degree oftroube.

8 xe6?!8 . . .aS !? cries on norma and rcesthe exchange of queens with 9 a4+ as 9exf+ �xf 10 e4 xe4 1 1 f6 12 d6c3 is good r Back e.g. 13 bxc3 b3 or 13 xa8 cxb2 14 d b3+ 1 5 d2 bx 16xaS a xb8 xaS+ 18 d2 xf .Aer (9 a4+ 9 . . .xa4 10 xa4 xdShite shoud eave his pawn on e6 1 1 h3

c3 12 bxc3 xf 13 xf bxc3 14 xcSofering comnsation r the pawn in therm of Backs probems with veopment.A typica continuation might be 14 . . .e6 15xe6 d 16 0-0-0 f6 e.

29



Attacking with 1 d4

Back still nds to so out his kinidebut Whit is nning out of pics to mhis bind pay, and this gnral fctor maks Blks most attrti option s longas h can hold his position togthr bxc3on th othr hnd, cannot b rcommnd,as 9 a+ bd7 10 xa6 xdS (10 cxb211 b 6 12 dx6) 11 xd7+ xd7 120-0-0 is dcisi, g 12 cxb2+ 13 �xb2 c3+1 �c c2 S xdS! ( S b?? cxd' + 16

�xd c3+) S xdS 16 bS+9 a4+ d7?

A mist is undrstandabl in such acomplx situation (and so arly in th gam) Ar 9 bd7? 10 dx6 bxc3 1 1 xa6 cxb212 d Back is in troubl, whil 9 fd7 10dx6 bxc3 11 bxc3 b6 12 xc xc 13xd7+ xd7 1 xc gis White a dnitadantag thanks to th fwr pawn islands

and mor scur king position (ar 0-0)Instad of blocking the chck Blacks bst is9 �f7! 10 dx6+�g (10 �x6? 11 xb)1 1 bS 12 xc b7 with a rymessy position ind In th main gamBlack has nothing to show r th unwcom isitor on 61 0 dxe6 x4 x

Back cannot hang on to th ra pawn

and, unik th ariation with 9 �! in thprious not, his pics ack hmony . . .b5

I suspct that Bks bst chanc is inreturning th pawn as llows 11c3 12

30

bxc3 xf 13 �xf dS Th squnc1 1 e 12 f3 b 13 xa 1 xcc6 works out r wll r hit, who canmaintain th qunsid prssur with S b3!aS 16 dS c6 17 c1 2 xc c6

Ununatly r Back th attmpt to rie som of th pressur with 12 dS 13g3 a6 fails to 1 b3!, with th ntythrat of d Ar th txt Blk must osth second c-pawn1 3 c1 d5 1 4 xc! xc 1 5 xc4xf4 1 6 xf4

Th diagram position is a good ad rth disrupti plan with S-6, rgdlss ofBlks possibl impromnts earlir Whith a points lad to add to th 6-pawn, andboth sids nd to gt thir kingsid picsinto th game

1 6 . . .g5 1 7 c4 g7 31 h!? g 19 2 is anothr way to kpWhit wll in control, though with such agood position it is diicult to aoid a ergood nding1 8 . . .e5

1 g fais to aoid a clarly wors position ar ithr 19 a6 gxf3 20 xc6 g221 g d 22 xg2 xb2 23 xb or 19

xg xb2 20 �2, whil 1 xb2?! 19a! S 20 xb2 xc 21 xc gisWhit two grat knights r a rook1 9 xe xe5 20 d3 d6 21 h4!

A nic way of conncting th oks



2 • gxh4 22 kxh4he h7-pawn makes a f more attractive

tphy than the one on b422 a5 23 xh g8 24 g3 000 25e2 26 h4 g6 2 e4 g5 28

d5 29 d �6 30 3 a 3 d25 32 2 xd2+ 33 >xd2 i5 343 id6 35 f4 a4 36 g5 a3 3 5 8

3 f6 0

Game 5Sakaev-Rublevsky

Yugolav Team Ch 1999

d4 d5 2 4 dx4 3 e4 e5 4 3 exd4he immediate check hs had less success

than the main game hites eiest route tovantage is fllows: 4 b4+ 5 d2xd2+ 6 xd2 exd4 7 xd4 when hiteintends to win back the (c4- pawn withore space Aer 7 f6 8 c3 e7 9 fe6 10 xe6 xe6 1 1 d4 c6 12 xc4hite h the added bonus of a potentially

sel bisp ad Black usually plays7 e7 8 f3 f6 9 xc4 0-0 10 c3

hite is slightly better thnks to his securee4-pawn which aords him more room ranoeuvre and keeps Black on his toes with

the constant menace of an advance andentrally located pieces Grospeter-ZsuPolgar Hungian Ch 199 1 went 10bd711 0 (1 1 f5 c5 12 g5? g6 is ine frBlack 1 1 d8 and now instead of 12 e3?!

Que e 's Gambit Ac cepted with 3 e4

b6! 13 b3 c5! 14 de2 c4 when hiteloses his grip on dS best is 12 e2! e5 13 e3 and hite maintains the lead

ith 10 c5 Black dresses the centre on

his own terms concentrating on d4 InAndersson-eirawan ilburg 1990 Blackce up with an interesting way of dendingd5: aer 11 de2 d8 12 e3 e6 13xe6 e6 14 0-0 c6 15 ad b6 Blackhad pawns covering both d4 and d5 In facthite resoed to the same method to maintain a slight lead replying with 16 e5 d5 17 e4 f7 18 f4 xc3 19 bxc3! when the d6-sque became more signiicant now th d5could be protected with the move c3-c4 ifnecessary5 ix4 i+ 6 d2 6

he stubborn 6 c5 spends valuable timeprotecting the d4-pawn and also cuts of thebishop on b4 ulypa-Holerbuhl rln 1998continued 7 e5 h6 8 0-0 0-0 9 b3 f610 h5 e8 1 1 f4 e6 12 xc4 13 xc4b5 14 e5 e6 15 d6 f8 16 and

hite ws winning Im sure there e improvements but this is not the way r Blackto play 00 6

a 7 e7 is one of two tries with thequeen Aer 8 b3 g4 9 bxd4 e5hite is given the oppounity fr a nice albeit temporary queen sacrifce: 10 xe5!xd 11 xf7+

ukmakov-Avner orld U26 e Ch

3 1



Attackng th 1 d4

1966 Now 11�d 12 xd will soon sBlack down on points so Anr playd1 1 �f 12 6+ 'x6 13 x6 2 but1 f7 xf 15 �xf �7 16 b3 f6 17

xh xh 1 f3 l Whit with xtrapawn and th bishop pairb) 7 'f6 borrows an ida om anothr

position (ar 6 d2 xd2+ 7 bxd2 c6 00) but looks too risky hr As Wdpoints out Whit can alrady scur a slad by string th gam to a nding with b3 g 9 bxd xd 10 'xd xf3 1 1'xf6 xf6 12 gxf3 tc Howr 5 iscrying out to b playd g 'g6 9 h'g 10 df3 6 1 1 h3 ' 12 d3 'd513 gS

Now 13 'xS!? 1 h 'd5 15 'd7 16 xc6 bxc6 17 x6 6 1 xd000 19 a!? xd 20 3 was compli

catd in BnschCho Hall 197 whil1 xd las Whit with much th halthir pawn stuctur that outwis th pawndcit From th diagram position TimmanT al Candidats playo 195 wnt 13 71 d7 15 x6 x6 16 xc6+ bxc617 'xd d 1 a cS 19 'c2 and now19 b6 20 g5 7 21 x7 x7 22f5+ d7 looks n only om Whits sid

of th bod Ta trid 19 d 20 b! d21 f5 x5 22 (thratning 23xg7+) 22 f 23 b2 'xf5 24 'xf5h2+ 25 xh2 xf5 26 ad d5 27 xdScxd5 2 c d Blacks yt to b dlopd

32

pics wr th dcisi fctor ncidntally20 b6 2 1 f g6 22 g5! highlightsBlacks problm g 22 'xgS (22 h6 23 66 2 d6+ Timm) 23 'xc6+ d7 26 Trauth) 2 6 25 ad 'xfS(25 f6 26 x6+ �d 27 xxd7 2d) 26 xd7+ (26 xd7 26 �f 27a! 2 bxaS x (2 a7 29 d+ �f730 'xc7+) 29 'd+ f7 30 d7+g6 3 1 g 32 + h6 33 h tc

c) No bttr is 7 h6 b3 g 9d g 9 5 10 xd! xf3+ 1 1 gxf3xf3 12 xh6 'd7 13 5+ 10 KorchnoiMstroic arao 1969

d) 7 xd2 oluntarily surrndrs thbishop d cilitats Whits dlopmnt xd2 g7 9 g5 5 10 b3 h6 11 fhxg5 12 5 00 13 xg5 6 1 x66 15 xf+ xf 16 'g4 'f7 17 f'g6 1 h is not untypic g 1 c6 19h5 x5 20 f xh5 21 'xS nd Blacksoon rsignd in Xu JunArdiansyah Jaka197

) Th main altrnati to Rublskyschoic is 7 6 x6 6 whn 9 b3has bn sn a numbr of tims nd las toa bttr gam r Whit but prr th thmatic 9 b3 with prssur agnst 6 and b7Thn TouzanPinkus Gna 1996 shouldsr as a wning to Black of th dangr ofhanging on to pawns at th cost of dlopmnt 9 x?! 10 xd2 5? 1 1 a b

12 g5 'd7 13 xc6! xc6 1 'f7+ d15 6+ �c 16 c 10Rturning to 9 b3 Blak quickly snt his

king to th qunsid in AmadoHGciaZat 1972 9 d7 10 c4 000 1 1 g5f 12 5! x5 13 xb itting f)13 g6 1 ac With most of his picsor on th kingsid Black h obious dnsi prblms Th gam continud

1 �b oping to impro on 1 c6 155! 16 xg6 hxg6 17 xd Florianliwa Gyula 1965) 15 aS 'c 16 c5 �a17 fc c6 1 'xd4 S 19 a4 f 20xf xf4 2 1 xc6! bxc6 22 xc6 d7



(22. . .b7 23 c7 b6 24 c8+ xc8 25xc8+ �b 26 d7+ �a6 27 c6 23 a6b8 24 bS+ (24 c7 xc7 25 xc7 �xc726 xa7+ �d8 27 xg7 fvours the queen

24. . .b7? 25 eS+ �a8 26 c7 b6 27c8+ xc8 28 xc8+ 1-0.ith 7 . ..f6 Black ticipates the aggres

sive advce of the enemy e-pawn aerhich the dS-sque becomes available.hite r his p nds himselfwith the e4-sue aer e4-e5 so he should be happy tocr on with the pl.8 e5 d5 9 b3

eeking to establish imposing knightn d4 with the capture of Blaks extra pawn.Also possible is 9 , when 9 . . .xd2 10x2 e6 11 bS de7 12 gS has beencnsidered good r hite since Forintosol Rubinstein Memorial 1968: 12 .. .dS13 xd4 d7 14 xc6 xd 15 dxc6 16 c4 d the two bishops wereenugh r advantage. More recentlyBlack has kept his bishop. Aer 9 . . .e7 10

b3 e6 1 1 xb7 12 bS+ �f8 13a6 Black has been more inconveniencedth hite. Therere the most populchice is 10 .. . when 1 1 a4+ is slightlyorse r Black aer either 11...c6 12xd4 (12 bS!? b6 13 xc6+ bxc6 14xd4 12 . . .b6 13 xc6 xa4 14 xd8xd8 15 f4 or 11...c6 12 bS 13 xd4.9 b6

9 ...0 10 bxd4 10. . .xd4 11 xd4(1 1. . .b6/e7? 12 xf7+ helps hite while10 ...b6 1 1 xc6 xd 12 xd bxc6 13b3 merely sadled Blk with wek queenside pawns in B.Ahlder-ahlstromRodeby 1997.10 ig5 ie7 1 1 ixe7 xe7

It might be more accurate to recaptureith the knight here: 1 1 . . .xe7 12 d3 d

no:a 12 .. .fS 13 d4 xd3 14 xd3 accelerates hites development.

b 12 .. .00 13 bxd4 g6 14 e g4 153 xf3 16 x f4 1 7 e4 illustrates a


key dierence between the two sides nelyhites unchallenged bishop. hether Blaktrades queens (17 . . .xd 1 8 axd c6 orallows his opponent more space the bishop

mkes life dicult. C.Hsen-Lautier Groningen 1995 continued 17 .. .c6 18 c2 h6 19ad bdS 20 h4! b6 21 d hitewas gradually creeping d.

c 12. . .g4 13 bxd4 edS makes sense.hen 14 h3 c be met with 14. . .hS maintaining the pin. G.imoshenko-Matulovic rnjacka Bja 1990 w agreed drawn aer15 b3 00 16 e4 but there is obviouslymuch to play r. he pin on the dhS diagonal hinders hite aer a rook comes tothe natural post on d but hite h morespace d the better bishop.

d Cu Hsens experience of this linewith Black saw him play 12 . . .g6. hen 13d4 gives Black three choices one ofwhich he should avoid:

d Not surprisingly 13 ...xeS? runs intotrouble with Blacks king still in the centre.

he simple 14 e f6 15 e2 bd7 16 nets hite a piece.

d2 13 .. .0-0 14 f4 d 15 d2 adds tohites territorial superiority.

d3 13 .. .f4 puts the question to thebishop. Now d proposes 14 e4 withthe opinion that hites central supremy iswoh something. He does seem to have apoint as the bishop is excellent the middle

of the bod. Instead FtacnikC.HsenYerevan Olympiad 1996 llowed a morecomplex course: 14 bS+!? c6 (14. . .d7 15g4! is not uncommon theme 15 (15 xc6 bxc6 16 xc6+ d7 17 xa8xa8 18 f3 00 brings about uncle situation in which hite has a rook d twopawns r two pieces and now rather thletting himself be drawn into complications

that voured hite aer 15 .. .h3+? 16 h3cxbS 17 g3 (1 7 xbS 0-0 1 8 d6 gS+ 19g3 xg3+ 20 hxg3 xh3 21 fc is preferable r hite according to Ftacnik17 .. .0-0 18 ad Black should have played

33




S gS when it is not cle whether hitehas anhing substantial Of course it wouldbe simpler to opt r ds sensible 14e4

1 2 i5 id7Blk did nothing to prevent the doublingof his pawns in ilder-Laic lgrade 1988the idea being perhaps that er 12 0-0 13xc6 bxc6 14 xd4 e6 1 5 dS thenew c6-pawn sups the bishop Howeverer 16 f4 fe8 17 ac ! eeping eyeon both cS and c6 17 18 fd4 a4 19f e6 20 bd4 g6 21 e3 ad8 22xdS this inevitable capture on dS le Blackwith signicant weaknesses er all1 3 ix6 ix6 1 4 d4

Freeing the f4-pawn opening the d-hSdiagonal and denying Black an immediateexchge of minor pieces on f31 4 d5 1 5 g4

his is the kind of position hite shouldbe more th happy to play in this variationith Black about to cstle sho hiteskingside pawn majority takes on more signicance and the eS-pawn sees to highlight Blacks potential problems on the darksques The rst matter r Black to dressis the attack on his g7-pawn

1 5 00Black prers to commit his king berehis g-pawn Aer 1S g6 16 fe 00 17 f d7 18 h6+ �g7 19 gS! Black ws already under pressure on the dk sques in

34

Kspov-Hbner kelleea orld Cup1989 he ge continued 19 f6 20 exf6+xf6 21 e7+!? (21 d4!? f7 22 ad alsolooks goo 21xe7 22 fS+ xfS 23

xe7+ f7 24 eS+ �g8 2S cS c6 andnow 26 e4 again homes in on f61 6 4

hites strength lies in his general mening presence on the kingside From a psychological point of view Blk tends to feel alittle ill at ese when his king already lacking in defensive options fces advcingenemy pawns 16 xg7+?! on the otherhd looks nice but leads to ending thatis better r Black if yone er 16 �xg717 fS+ �h8 18 xe7 xb3 19 b3 8etc1 6 g6

16 xb3 17 f c+ 18 �h g6 19b3 dS is given s uncle by BeliavskyCeainly it mkes sense to improve Blacksknight which mk no valid contribution tothe ge over on b6 Then 20 ac b4 21

cd tempts Blk into 2 1 xb3? 22 xdSwhen 22 xdS drops the queen to 23e7+ 2 1 ad8 22 d3 d 21 c6 22 d3(22 e4 23 g3 keep the ge rollingwhen hites obvious pull on the kingside isoset by structural weaknesses on the otherflk1 7 ae1

17 f d7 18 h6+ �g7 19 g xb3

20 b3 d8 21 f+ �h8 22 e7 dws okay r Black in okolov-HbnerEurope e Ch 1989 In MichaelsenPutbach Hburg 1991 19 f6 20 exf6+xf6 soon turned sour r Black: 21 d4e8 22 g4 8 23 fS cS 24 g6 cxd4 2Sf7+! d hite won1 7 4 1 5?

From a practical point of view this i s a d

cent choice in view of hites f superiorpresence on the kingside1 ix1 1 9 6

19 d7 20 g d 21 xf �h8 22f4 d the net closes in on Blacks king eg



.. .g8 3 h6.20 h4 fe

ere or on the next move Black mightexploit the extra rook to give up his queen

tus liing some of the pressure fom hisng e.g. 0 .. .c4 1 a3 xe+ xefe8. Nonetheless aer 3 e3 the prospect of a mate threat on g7 is a consttor r Black.21 a3 f 22 e! 4

ot ... e6? 3 xf f7 4 f3 etc.oever . . .xe6 3 xe6 e6 4 xff7 is not cle.23 e7 xe7 24 fxe7 'e 25 5 d5

2 fFor the price of a pawn it is safe to say

tat hite has ample compensation in therm of the dk sques d the protectedpsed pawn on the seventh rk behindhich hite enjoys much space.

2 d7

If Black sits back hite has hh4 eitherhreatening to advce her or inducingthe concession . . .h7-hS.27 xd7 'xd7 2 f5!

his thematic turn of events deseesore th a draw.28 . gxf5 29 'g5+ �h 30 f+ rg

31 e3! f3! ?Aer the alternative eo hite rces adecisive ending: 3 . . .f4 3 gS+ h8 33eS+ g8 34 e8+ xe8 3S xe8+ xe836 xe8+.


32 'g5 + �h 3 3 'f+ �g 3 4 gxf3?

34xf3! is imperative when 34.. .d1+3Sf + 36 g3 d6+ 37 xd6 cxd6 38c3 allows hite to retain winning chces.

Now hite has nothing better th perpetual.34 e 35 'g5+

3S f4 d+ 36 f d+ draws.35 .�h 3 "f+ �g 37 ' g5+ h

��

Game 6Kasparov-Anand

inar 1999

1 d4 d5 2 4 dx4 3 e4 e5 4 f3 exd4 5

x4 Not entirely satised with the ...b4+

lines QGA specialists have turned to themore flexible text. 00

Aer 6 b3 Black should return to6 . . . b4+ when 7 d e7 8 xb4 xb4+

9 xb4 xb4 10 xd4 cS 11 a3 cxd4 1b4 f6 13 d e6 was probably a shebetter r Black in amer-o Hburg196S. . e

he main line. Others:a 6 .. .e7?! 7 b3 is not easy r Black to

meet d three moves have been tried:a 7 .. .e6 8 xe6 e6 9 xb7 b4 10

bS+ d7 1 1 a3 ct be right r Black.BereovskyPrestel Boblingen 1998 sawhites queen continue to cause Black problems aer 11...c6 1 hS+ g6 13 e 0-0-014 gS! xgS S xgS h6 16 aS e717 ac b7 18 c4 a6 19 a4 etc.

Black did no better in olkovuorukov molensk 1997: 7 . . .f6 8xf7+ f8 9 gS d6 10 f4 1 1 eS c+

1 h g4 13 hS f+ 14 xf xc+S d e8 16 f xgS (16 ... cS 17f7+ d8 18 xg7 f8 19 xh 17 h+10.

a3 7 .. . is best when 8 xf7+ f8 9

35



A t tac kig with 1 d4

a4 c5 10 xg8 xg8 11 e5 c6 12 f4e6 13 d2 was uncomable r Black inJakab-Nguyen hi hanh An Budapest1998 On the whole 6 e7 looks suspect

b Nenashevs 6 f6 has some strongfllowers so it must b taken seriously Aer7 e5 the attacked knight has used both d5d e4:

b 7 d5 8 xd4 xd4 9 xd4 e610 c3 xc3 1 1 xc3 xc4 12 xc4trades a w pieces but leaves Black laggingbehind in the development stakes In factLewandowskaBycnska Konin 1990 demonstrated how quickly this ftorbecomedecisive as 12 d7 13 g5 c6? 14 e6! e615 ad c8 16 already produced awin fr hite

b2 Less compromising d more convincing is 7 e4 8 e c5

he eagleeyed might notice that the diagram position resembles the Open viationof the Ruy ope! Remember that hite isstill a pawn down here so attacking play iscalled r Consequently 9 g5 is a gd wayto sta the next phase 9 e7 10 xe7 xe7 1 1 xd4 xd4 12 xd4 e6 13f !? d8 14 e3 00 15 c3 16 h3 wasslightly advtageous to hite herbkov

kripchenko Lautier M Ce Cup 1999 hisextra space d kingside pawn majority afrding him easier ge

9 d7 is more popul hen dNenashev Met 1995 went 10 a3 e6 1 1

3

b5 c5 12 c b6 13 e4!? 00 14 h4xg5 15 xg5 xe5 16 xh7 f5(16 xc4? 17 f6+ gxf6 18 h5 17 xf8with complications that fvoured hite

However d himself has said that there isroom r improvemen here d perhapsinseing 1 h6 is woh considering

ith 10 bd2 hite intends to send theknight to the kingside d this looks like alogical plan while 10 b4 is diferent again10 xb4?! is rather greedy eg 1 1 e6! xe612 e5 d6 13 h5 g6 14 f3 d10 e6 1 1 b5 cd8 12 bd2 gave hite asignifict development lead in NotkinNenashev Cappelle la Grde 1995 However ds proposed 11 a5 deseesrher tests7 ib5

he major alternative is 7 xe6 e6 8b3 d7 when 9 g5 0-00! 10 xe6 e81 1 xf8 xf8 12 a3 f6 13 f3 hg8 14d2 g5 15 ae which gave hite a pull inHeneckermek Austri League 1999

desees uher tests but the main line involves 9 xb7 b8 10 a6 f6 Black has apassed pawn but it c be easily hdledwhile a closer look at the diagr positionreveals weaknesses on , c6 c7 e6 d e5o compensate r the structural shocomings Black has active pieces d open les rhis rooks (aer 00 1 1 bd2 d now

a b4 12 d3 xd2 (12 0 13

c4 c5 14 d2 e5 15 ac e6 16 !x 17 xc5 was poor r Black in NajerGaari Krasnod 199 13 xd2 xb214 ac when hite has succeeded in creating initiative

a Byovsky-Lev Herliya 1998 continued 14 0-0 15 c5 g4 16 h3! d6!(16 xf3 17 xf3 h2 met with 18 a3xd2 19 fc d6 20 g3 in KarpovXu

Jun Beijing [rapidplay] 1998 17 xc6 xc618 xd4 x (18 b6 19 c3 xd4 20xd4 x 21 hxg4 fvours the threepieces 19 hxg4 a4 20 d3 xe4 21 xe4xe4 22 g5 a4 (22 c4 23 a a8 24



a6 23 c8 24 c6 d hite was ablet contain Blacks pawns: 24 a+ 25 h2 26 xe6 a4? (26 f7 27 a6 a4 is better27 e7 a3 (or 27 a3 28 f4 28 c3

(28 f8 29 xg7 30 xh 29 xg7+h8 30 eS d hite wona 14 d6?! keeps the rook out of cS

but the price is to leave the king in the centreer 15 c4 e5 16 xeS xeS 17 a4+!bS 18 a3! xd2? 19 xc7 the cost hasincreased (eg 19 g8 20 d6 A lesserevil is 17 d7 18 f4 bS although hite a cle advtage aer both 19 xd4 d19 xbS xbS 20 xc7

b ith 1 d6 Black concentrates oneS rather th removing the d2kniht Againhite returns the queen with 12 d3 aerhich 12 00 13 h3 eS (13 b4?! 14 c414 c4 leads to the llowing position:

Blacks centre pawns e blockaded de eS-pawn is under pressure he contrasting roles of Whites knight (c4 d Blacksbishop suggest that hite benets mostom their continued involvement

b CHansenchandorff Dish Ch1999 witnessed a brief skirmish in the centrem which hite emerged with a cle le:14 b4 15 b3 bdS 16 d ! xe4 17

eS xeS 18 xeS e6 19 xd4 b42 c4 b6 21 b3 xc4 22 e ! e8 23xc4 xc4 (both 23 xc4 24 xa7 d23 cS 24 dS xdS 25 cxdS d4 26 f3d6 27 xe8+ xe8 28 e3 xdS 29


e ve good r hite d now 24 dbb8 25 e3 le Black with the inriorminor piece d isolated albeit passed cpawn

b2 14 h8 15 d2 e6 both supposthe eSpawn and avoids y trouble on theg8 diagonal However both c6 and c7 nolonger have the protection of the queenConsequently in NotkinMkov RussiClub Cup 1998 hite quickly turned to thecle: 16 a b4 17 a3 xd2 18 cxd2!xb2 19 c4! d8 (19 xc4 20 xc4d8 21 xc 20 xc7 f7 21 xa7 dhite had the upper hd (eg 2 1 d6 22cS

Let us return to the position aer 7 bS:

For his pawn decit hite has easier development d pressure against the d4-pawnhe kingside pawn majority might prove

extra troublesome r Black in the event ofxc6 b7xc6 inflicting doubled pawns onBlack d by subsequently establishing aknight outpost on c4 eectively immobilising the defenders queenside7 i5

7 d7 is a somewhat negative responseto the pin Aer 8 xd4 ge7 9 c3 xd410 xd4 c6 1 1 d d6 12 e3 0 13

f4 hites unttered pawns gave him theadvtage in CaiafasRuenacht orldeam Ch Lucerne 1985 bd2

hite is spoilt r choice here Others:

3 7




a 8 b4!? keeps up the momentum. Blackshould be content with his one pawn lead8 . . .xb4?! 9 xd4 d7 10 xc6 bxc6 11c2 d 1 0. . .xc6 1 1 xc6 xd 12 xd

bxc6 are both pleast r hite accordingto ard.Aer the more sensible 8 . ..b6 hite c

continue his hassment of the bishop orimmediately occup the long diagonal withhis own.

a 9 b2 ge7 10 xd4 00 11 xc6xc6 12 xc6 xd 13 xd bxc6 14 d2 15 a3 was agreed drawn in elermek Mitropa Cup 1995 hites bpawngiving Black a convenient tget. Instead 10xd4 0-0 1 1 c5 was tried more recently inBeliavsyherbkov Niksic 1996 The intis that aer 1 . . .xc5 12 bxc5 a6 13 xc6xc6 14 c3 hite is looking to post hisknight on d5 and a rook on b althoughBlacks position is perfectl ne. the geBlak ped with his bishop a little too eelwith 14 .. . e7 15 d5 xc5 16 xc7 ad8

17 xe6 e6 18 b3 when the new weakness on 6 had ceainl not improvedBlacks prospects.

9 a4 a6 10 xc6+ bxc6 1 1 b2 d6is unclear whereas 9 .. .aS 10 bx x 11g5 seems to suit hite more hen1 1 ...d7 (1 1. ..d7 12 e5 13 f4 c614 xe5 xg5 15 f4 g6 16 c4!? cxb5 17xb6 xb6 18 xg 12 d2 ge7 13

xe6 i s probabl best met with 13 .. .e6 14c4 a8 d now a draw results om 15e5 d6 16 c4 d7 or hite c tr 1 5a3 with obvious compensation r thepawn. Aer 13 . .. xe6 14 c4 xb5(14 . . .a8 15 xb6 cxb6 16 xd4 15 b5xc4 16 bxc6 xc6 17 g4! Black is underpressure e.g. 17 . ..0-0 18 h6 g6 19 xf8xf8 20 c8+ g7 2 1 a8.

b ith 8 g5 hite clel intends toremove the bishop on e6 but Black must beceul as 8 . . .e7?? 9 xe6 e6 10 h5+picks up the other bishop. 8 . . .d6 seesonl to help hite augment his desired intia

38

tive aer 9 e5 xe5 10 e while 8 . . .f6 9e5 d5 10 xe6 e6 1 1 g4 e7 12 d2has been suggested as vourable r hite.his leaves 8 .. .e7 when 9 f4 looks logical

mobilising hites kingside pawn majoritbere Black has completed development.c 8 c2 b6 9 a4 10 xc6+ bxc6 1 1

xc6+ d7 evens the score. Now 12 c4e6 13 c6+ d7 d so on is a wa to endthe game peacell. Otheise 12 c2keeps the ge going although 12 . . .e7 13a3 0-0 14 c4 c6 15 d b4 16 b3c5 was approximatel equal in an elAnand Monaco (lindfol 1997.

Of these three alternatives to 8 bd2 Iprer 8 g5.8 d

A theoretical novelty at the time bringingthe queen into the game suprs the pinnedknight d prepes to quickl castle queenside thus presenting Black with oprunit to use his passed pawn to the ll.8 ... ge7 9 g5 d7 (9. . .d7? 10 xf7

x 1 1 h5+ 10 xe6 xe6 1 1 b3 dnow 1. ..b6 12 xd4 xd4 13 xd4 gavehite a pull (ishops v. knights in PiketAnd ijk a Zee 1999 while 1 1 .. .d612 f4! xf4 13 xc5 has been evaluatedas slightl better r hite. hen the kingsideoers Blacks king the better protection as13 . .000 14 b3 vours hite so 13 . . .0014 c is normal when in return r the

pawn hite has a pull on the queenside dthe mangs of assault with his kingsidepawn majorit .9 e5!?

Consistent with hites game-pl. Anatural reaction to the queens rival on d6is 9 c4 xc4 10 xc4 ge7 11 e withthe idea of soening Black up on the lightsques by pushing the epawn. In Tunik

Nachev Aratovsk Memorial 1999 Blackaddressed this possibilit b ywa compromising his light sques with 1. . .f6 onlto see hite cr out the vce regarless.Aer 12 e5! ? xe5 (12 .. .e5 13 g5 leaves



hite two pawns down but with obviouscopensation on the light sques 13 f40 (13 .. .7g6 14 xe5 e5 runs into 15xe5 xe5 16 h5+ 14 xe5 e5 15

g b8 16 xe5 g6 17 xg6 xg6 18xg7 he8 19 g3 hite had won back hisgbi pawn(s with interest thks to hispotentially powerul bishop pair. ith thetext hite decides to atually use his epawnn the bod rather th sacrice it immeately in order to create a space vtagead control two key sques in Blaks hlf ofe bod.9. d5 1 0 g5!

oming in on Blacks good bishophich sueys both halves of the bod ome6.10 000

Blacks king comes under fire on theueenside but with his kngside still laggingbehind the centre is hdly ideal place inhich to remain r too long e.g. 10 . . .d811 c4 when . . . xe5 12 xe6 e6 13

e is typi of the knd of breakthroughite is lookng r. he moe circumsct11...d7 12 xe6 e6 13 e4 improvesbut the problem remains of what to do withthe king as castling sho is out of the question now that hite looks so menacing onis side of the bod.1 1 4 d7 1 2 xe fxe 1 3 !

penings involving a gbit usually apan tend to require urher oers in order

Que e 's Gambit A ccepted with 3 e4

to exe mimum pressure onthe opnent.Ap fom afrding the aggressor the luxu of remaining in the driving seat it is alsoimpot om a psychological persctive

not to allow the opponent to feel he h successlly weathered the storm.1 3 x

Black hopes to bolster the kings dencwith his bishop on b6. aking the secondpawn with the bishop looks less desirableaer 13 .. .xb4 14 b3 e8 15 b etc.13 ...b6 gives the ge a dierent feel aer14 b3 e7! 15 xe6+ b8 16 f3 xb417 xb4 xb4 18 g514 b3 d 5 1 5 e4 b

Aer 15 ... c6 16 b b6 17 xe6+b8 18 xc5 xc5 19 e ! hites longrge pieces e well woh the investedpawn whether Black see to relieve some ofthe pressure with 19 .. .c3 20 g5 e8 2 1f7 or retreats 1 9. . .e7 20 a4 etc.1 a4!

If hite is to make a breakthrough it is

imperative that he rces a structural concession om Black.1 . .a

16 ... a6 17 a7 18 g5 f8 19 fcputs Black under considerable pressure onboth the b- d cfles.1 7 d+!

Now we see the main point behindhites previous move the cpawn is now

the sole dender of the bishop permittinghite to ld his knight on d6.1 7 rb

17 . . .cxd6 18 xdS exd5 19 xb6 dxe5 20d2 trsposes to the main ge aer20 ...b8 while 20 .. .e7 21 a7! c6 22fc is uncle. And prers to keep theenemy queen out of .

1 xd5 exd5 1 9 d2

hreatening 20 x etc.1 9. xd 20 'xb dxe5

Blacks collection of extra pawns has nowgrown to three d if he c suive theattack on his king there will be no stopping

39




the cluster in the centre.

21 f4Another thematic attempt to mke the

most of both hites development advtage d his potentially decisive commd ofthe dk sques. As well as holding the centre pawns together the e5pawn prevents thebishop fom coming to the sensitive h2b8diagonal. Kaspov ofers alternativemeans to deal with the e5-pawn in the

eqully direct 2 1 which has the bonusof simultaneously threatening to bring therook into the ge with the capture of thepawn. Then 21 . ..e8 fails to 22 xe5! xe523 f4 et. ending over the caval with21 . ..e7 22 xe5 c6 is sensible when 23f4! a8 24 b he8! ? 25 xd5 e+ 26xe xd5 sti ll leaves Black defending butat least a pair of rooks has le the ena.

2 1 fActive dence. 2 . . .e4? closes out thebishop only temporarily since 22 f5 e3 23e 1 succeeds in getting the bishop to theappropriate diagonal yway. 21...e7 22e5 c6 23 e6 (23 ab 1 d 23 xa5 cbe considered 23 . . .xe6 24 ab d7 25f4 a8 26 c7 looks pratically winningr hite at rst glance but aer 26 . .d8

27 xaS+ a6 or 27 xd8 e3+ Black isholding on.22 fxe5 e4 23 ixa5

23 f4 c6! 24 e6+ a8 25 x+ a6is equal.

40

23 . . .d3 24 e?!Kaspov oers 24 b4! as the best win

ning t with the llowing position:Here he gives the llowing viation:

24 .. .de8 (24 ... c8 25 b6 25 b6 26! e7 (26 . ..xe5 27 a6 e7 28 a7+! 27 b3 xe5 28 a6 e7 29 b7 when29 . .xb7 30 f8+! xf8 3 1 a8+! xa8 32 a3+ b8 33 xf8+ is a good adve rchess.24 'd 25 'xd+ Id 2 e7 I 27

xf xf 2 d1 e 29 i % %

Aer 29 . . .g8 30 xd3 c7 31 xd5xe7 32 h5 h6 33 c3 hite has an edge.

Cocuo

Holding back the queens knight is a exibleway to swer the provocative 3 . . .c6(Ge 1 but in general it is impot toremember that hites kingside is quite solidin this line providing sucient condence toenable hite to get to work on the queenside. he light sques in picul can be a

problem r Black. In Ge 2 youngMitonsexperimental treatment of 3 . . .f6 lookspromising since hites king is equally comable on the queenside in the trendy rcing sequence that might well leave Blacksimply a pawn down. Ge 3 sees todemonstrate that the d5-sque d hiteskingside pawn majority continue to be keycontributors to hites dired intiative even

when the queens have le the bod whilethe complexities of 5 . . .b5 in Ge 4 will bebetter understood with time d a wdon blit ges. hat is evident fomGe 4 is the crippling eect of hites e6pawn. hites kingside pawn majority alsoplays a vital role in Ge 5 this time thedk sues oering hite something tobite on aer the trade of the relevt bish

ops. Finally I prefer Kaspovs energeticplay in Ge 6 to 7 xe6 as the latter optioninvolves a ceain ount of containmentbere hite is able to exploit Blacks morestatic pawn structure.



I

CH AP T ER O

Quee's GambitDeclied ad Slav Defeces

1 d4 d5 2 4 Game Lautier-011

Tainn/Pau 1998

hether Blak suppos the dSpawn with2 ...e6 or 2 . . .c6 I am recommending thathite continues consistently with 3 c3Th e Queen's Gbit Declined c be a -

1 d4 d5 2 4 e 3 3 ftough nut to crack and Black has a numberof versatile systems designed to steer the

ge to old-style equality. In recent yeshe Exchge Viation has become atack oriented weapon picully the moreversatile version chacterised by hitesholding back the g-knight. Consequently 3c3 ts in well here and Ge 7 illustratesho both the use of the e2sque r theknight d the f3-sque r the pawn comine to pose Black more problems th the

automatic f3. he Tarrasch Dence atured in Game 8 requires hite to adopt akingside chetto in he quest r vage aer which Blacks isolated dSpawnbecomes the cus of attention. Blacks bestresults in the uncompromising Mshallbit (Ge 9 tend to come against theless well preped d with uninhibited playhite has no shoage of activity r his

pieces. Finally r the supersolid lav(e 10 it is woh delving into the pastr a line that is sound d oers hitechces to reach positions in which Black isnot without ceain problems.

An alternative here is 3 . . .e7.

his was reasonably popul r a while.Clely Black wts to prevent gS but thef4-sque is also ne r the bishop. 4 cxdSexdS 5 f4 and now Blacks options involvethe cpawn.

a 5 .. .f6 6 e3a 6 . . .fS 7 ge2 0-0 8 g3 e6

(8 .. .g6 9 h4 h6 10 hS h7 1 1 d3 xd312 xd3 cS 13 0-00 with an edge r hitein Cheov-Zaitsev Protvino 1988 9 d3

4 1




cS xcS xcS c6 2 c d4 1 3bS b6 4 e4 was a shade better r Whitein LautierMarciano French League 999.

a2 6 .. . 7 d3 cS 8 f c6 9

a2 9 . . .g4 dxcS xcS h3 andnow two games of V.Milov show how tohandle the white pieces. . . .xf3 12 ' xd4 3 e4 e7 4 fd b6 5 g3 86 fS dxe3 7 xe3 cS? 8 xg7! xe3(8. . .�xg7 9 h6+ 9 'xf6 eS 2 f

xf2+ 2 �h xf 22 ' d4 23 f c7 24 'xh7+ �f8 25 c4 d8 V.MilovToth Liechtenstein 996. InV.MilovKnoppert Tilburg 994 Bl instead played . . .hS?! but er 12 g4! g63 xg6 hxg6 4 gS d4 White could haveplayed 5 a4! fr a safe win of the d4pawn.

a22 9 .. .c4 c2 g4 ( . . .hS 1 eS

f6 2 gS! g6 3 xh7 eS 4 xf8 xf815 dxeS e6 6 xg6 g7 17 f4 with a 5ingside pawn majority H.OlafssonEinarsson Reyjavi 988 1 h3 hS 12 g4g6 3 eS looed nice r White in VymanavinG. Timosheno Iruts 986

b 5 .. . c6 6 e3 fS 7 g4. Here we see a typical battle of wills as Blac is ready r theadvance of Whites pawn(s yet White is ea

ger to push too. Theory prers White asthe fllowing examples suggest.b 7 . . .g6 8 h4!b 8 . . .xh4?! allows 9 b3 b6

xh4! xh4 xdS e.g . . ..a6 2 'a4.

42

b 2 8 . . .h 9 gS d6 ge2 a6 1 xd6 'xd6 soon cleared of into an endingin KpovPortisch Linares 989: 2 f4c7 3 e2 b4 14 'd2 e7 5 f3 e6

16 ce2 xf4 17 xf4 'xd2+ 18 �xd2e4 19 xe4 dxe4 2 0 2 cS!d 22 xdS xdS 23 hc hd8 24 b4�c7 25 �e2! a6 26 exf3+ 27 �x andWhite had an edge which was eventuallyconverted.

b 13 8 .. .h6 9 f3 d7 d3 xd3 xd3 gf6 2 g ' was played inKnRaicevic Athens 1992. Aer shadowboxing with 13 d2 f8 4 e6 5 eS' d8 16 h d6 White finally castled: 7 xeS 18 dxeS d7 9 f4 dcS 2c2 with an interesting ge in prospect.

b2 7 .. .e6 8 h4!?b21 8 ... xh4 9 b3 b6 (9. . .gS h2!

xg4? xb7 e7 2 xa8 xe3+ 3e2 'xf2+ 4 �d2 and Bla soon ran outof ste in VaiserDi Havana 985 e7 e f6?! ( . . .d6!? 12 d3

e7 with a pawn to compensate r Blacspassive position 12 gS fd7 13 g6 xeS 4xeS f6! (4 . . .g6 5 xg7 g8 6xh 15 xh7 !

We are llowing GuloLputian Glen

dale 994. It is not oen that we see castlingwhen an enemy piece is so close to g8! 6g3 g6 (er 6 . . .fS 7 0 xg6 8h2 White i s reay to double on the hfile7 h2 �f7! 8 and now 18 . . .d7! 9



Que e 's Gambit Dec lie d ad Slav Defeces

4 7 would have le Blac only slightlyorse Instead 18 h8?! 19 xh8 xh8 204! w clearly better r White

b22 8 d6 White has gained a tempo

re compared with the Exchange Variationi which the bishop arrives on f4 via gS 9h3 e7 10 d3 h6 11 f!? g6 12xd6 xd6 13 f4!? xf4 14 exf4 f6 150 was a demonstration of direct, aggressiv play from White in Y aovichArldi,alle dAosta 2000

b23 8 cS is a thematic central strie tocounter the flan attac Then DautovLputian, Istanbul Olympiad 2000, saw a newida om White: 9 eS!? f6 10 xb8xb8 11 gS e7 12 g2 h6 13 ge2 hxgS14 xgS xh+ 15 xh xgS 16 a4+andhite emerged om the eriment with thesperior position4 cxd5 exd5

4 xdS leads to the emiTarrasch aer5 4 xc3 6 bxc3 cS 7 f3 Blac has twooves aer 7 cxd4 8 cxd4

a 8 c6 9 c4 and now 9 bS opingr 10 xbS?? aS+; 9 b4+ leads to b,blow 10 e2 b4+ 1 1 d2 leaves th bSpawn looing oddly placed Bacrotorchnoi, Albert (match 1997, is a good

illustration of how White should use the dpawn: 1 1 xd2+ 12 xd2 b8 13 dS! exdS14 exdS e7 (14 aS 15 e3+ e7 16c3 f6 17 xbS+! 15 d6 fS 16 dow 16 d7 17 g4! piles on the pressure,

with 17 h4 18 e3+ winning r Whiteaer either 18 e6 19 d7+ �f8 (19 xd720 xh4 20 cS+ �g8 21 xa7 (thratening 22 xb8!, or 18 �f8 19 e7+, when

White pics up the night The alternative17 h6 leaves Blacs rces embarrassinglysituated aer 18 e3+ �f8 19 h3 etc

Korchnoi tried 16 00, when 17 d7! b7(17 a6 18 00 18 00 f6 19 f4 a6 20g4! preped to tae the ge into the nextphase with a crippling exchange on f6

b 8 b4+ 9 d2 xd2+ (9 aS 10b xd2+ 1 1 xd2 xd2+ 12 �xd2 helpsWhite 10 xd2 00 11 c4 c6 12 00with a couple of sple lines:

b 12 b6 13 ad b7 14 c8 15dS aS 16 d3 exdS 17 eS!

White has good attaing prospects17 c4 18 f4 b2? fails to 19 xh7+!

�xh7 20 gS+ �g6 (20 �g8 2 1 h4 e822 h7+ �f8 23 e6 is fnal 21 h4 c4 22hS+ �xhS 23 g4+ �h6 24 h2+ 10 AvruhDon, Lost Boys 1998, or 21 xd 22 h5+�h6 23 e6+ �h7 24 xd8 cxd8 25xd de8 26 fS+ �g8 27 d7 a8 28 f4d8 29 xa7 d4 30 xb6 d3 31 e3 10DGurevichMassana, ew

Yor 1985 In

enintraeter, Reclinghausen 1996,

White set his ingside pawns rolling aer17 c6 18 d4 h6, when 19 f4 c6 20fS e6 21 d6 xd6 22 exd6 xd6 23�h d8 24 e3 g6 25 fS!? �g7 26 fept up the pressure

43




b2 12 .. .eS 13 dS aS alters the pawnstructure. Then 14 xe5 e8 15 d4 xe516 'xeS xc4 17 d4 bS !? 18 a4 d6 is farom clear. I prefer 14 ac f6 1 5 'b4 b6 16

e2 b7 17 d2 cS 18 b3

19 c4a6 20 'c2 hites queen is busy bt it isthe dSpawn that counts here 20 . . xb3 2 1axb3 c8 22 'd2 xe2 23 'xe2 with anadvantage to White according to Alterman.5 g5 c

5 . . .b4 6 e3 h6 7 h4 00 8 d3 cS 9ge2 highlights an advantage of keeping thknight on g as now its partner is oeredusel support. The same can be said aerthe insistent 7 . . gS 8 g3 e4 eg 9 ge2c6 10 xc3+ 11 xc3 xc3 12 bxc3f 13 h4 g4 14 c4 d7 15 e2 hS 16 00MiroevBayrov Baku Cup 1999 'c2

Preventing ...fS. e7

Also seen are the llowing:a 6 . . .g6 7 e3 fS 8 b3 b6 9 f e7 10

g4 e6 11 h6 f8 12 xf8 �xf8 13ge2 d6 14 f4 bd7 15 000 AltermanParker London Lloyds Bank 1994 isexactly what White is lookng r.

b 6 .. a6 7 c7 8 e3 e6 9 h4e7 10 d3 g6 11 ge2 g7 12 ! 00 1300 with the usual pull r White in view ofthe constant threat of e3e4 KruppaFaibisovich Chigorin Memorial 1999

7 e3 lbd7 d3 0-0Black has also traded bishops here:8 . . .hS 9 xe7 'xe7 10 ge2 g6 11 000b6 12 g3 g7!. KasparovAnderssonReykjavik 1988 continued 13 �b d7 14c 000 15 a4 xa4 16 xa4 �b8 1 7c3 b6 18 a6 while Timmhort FIDECandidates (match 1993 saw 18 withan nteresting struggle ahead in both cases.

9 lge2 e 1 0 0-0Natural and the most pul but not theonly choice.

a Even if castling short is the plan it ispossible to keep Black guessing here with 10

44

fa With 10 .. .cS Black immediately chal

lenges the centre now that e3 is less securealthough the advance of the pawn does

leave dS weaker. Aer 11 00 Black can either take on d4 or maintain the tension. . .. cxd4 12 xd4 f8 13 ad h6 14 h4a6 15 �h 1 gave White a pleasant edge iPVgaRemling Budapest 1994. The isolated dpawn and Whites more hmoniousdevelopment more than make up r the e3pawn.

ReindermanVan der terren Dutch Ch.1998 continued ...b6 12 ad b7 andnow White elected to play against the hanging pawns aer 13 dxcS bxcS 14 bS

Whites bishops attak the defndingknights and therere exert considerablpressure on Blacks centre pawns. Black

traded in one target r other: 14 . hS 15xe7 'xe7 16 xdS xdS 17 xdS ' xe3+18 f2 hf6 and now 19 xd7 xd7 20xd7 ed8 21 a4 d2 22 'e4 'xe4 23e4 xb2 24 c3 ab8 25 b3 xf2 26�xf2 c4 27 d b2+ 28 �f3 ofers thebetter chances to the two pieces. InsteadWhite played 19 d3! e6 (19 . .e7 20g3 20 g3 ab8 21 xd7! xd7 22 e2

' c6 23 fS! when aer 23 . . .xe2 24 'xe2'b 25 ' d2! f6 {25 . . .f8 26 e7+ �h827 d8 c4 28 c8! 26 gS {26 b3 e8 27xg7! ! �xg7 28 gS+ �f8 29 xcS+ �g830 gS+ �f8 31 xb8 xb8 32 xf6 is



Qu ee 's Gambit Declie d ad Slav De fec es

stron 26. . .e8 27 b3 e2 White shouldave secured a near decisive lead with 28h6+ h8 (28 .. . f8 29 xcS+ 29 xf7+g8 30 'eS! etc.

Rturning to the diagr position Blacight try 14 .. .a6 1S a4f8!? withdrawingt ro om the efile and in doing sotng his eye of the e3pawn in order toupin the d7night. The point of attacingites bishop rst is to hit it again aer 16f4 b6. However 17 xf6 xf6 18dS! xdS ( 18. . .xdS 19 xdS xdS 20xcS 19 xdS xa4 20 xa4 xb2 21c2 is clearly better fr hite.a 10 ... bS convinces White that queenside

ctling involves some ris but of course thisis ot a problem and Blacs rigid pawnstrcture is a readymae tget. Cru Lopearcia Gome panish Ch. 1994 is typical1 1 00 'b6 12 h3 a6 13 a4 b4 14 d8 Sa4 resulting in weesses r Blac on b66 and cS.

10 ... ' 11 00 h6 12 h4 cS looed

rher loose in Urdayuare Merida 1997.er 13 ad cxd4 14 xd4 eS S xf6!xf6 16 b3 ' d8 17 bS the dSpawn about to drop.

a4 10 .. .f8 transposes to the main ger 1 1 00 but White can also play 11 h4.:

a41 1 1 .. .h 12 f2 h4 13 g3 e7 14g4 f6 S gS 6d7 16 h4 gives the ge a

slightly dierent flavour to 10 00.yshovsyMurugan Gausdal 1991 sawlac get to wor on the queenside 16 . . .bS17 g3 b6 18 f!? d6 19 f xfS 20xfS c4 2 1 e producing a situation inich both sides have chances. ote thathites ig is not pooly placed with g2 adcent square. Meanwhile Bla despite thect that his ing is fced with two avancing

emy pawns still has a pretty solid sitionand prospects of counterplay on the queenside.

a42 In P.VargaGogniat Ambassador1998 White did soon castle llowing up

with an instructive deployment of his dsqued bishop 11...g6 12 f2 d6 1300 a6 14 ad 'c7 S h!? e6(1S. . .xh2 1 6 g3 16 g

It is tempting albeit occasionally unwiseto spend time sending a piece to an unconventional square. However in this case g isquite usel and safe! because h2 is protected and as we shall see the extra coveroered to the d4pawn afrds White the

thematically desirable plan of central expansion. There llowed 16 . . .a8 17 e4! dxe418 e4 and here the hanging pawns are extremely well supported and consequentlytroublesome r Bla who is denied the useof the squares cS dS eS and fS.

b White can also play 10 000

The minor problem here is that Blac isnot slow in generating an attac so Whitetends to switch to positional pla on the

45




queensde! Aer 10 . . .'a 11 b b 12g3 Blac qucly goes on the oensve butthe prce s the hole on c.

b 12 . . .b8 13 ce2! {the begnnng of

an mportant nght manoeuvre 13 . . .b6 14c a6 1 f �f8 16 g4!. No16. . .xg4 17 hg puts Bla n trouble. Forexample 17 .. .xh2 runs nto 18 h6+ gxh6{18. . .h8 19 xf7+g8 20 xh7+ 7 21'g6 mate 19 d8+, as does 17. . .gf6 18h6+ h8 19 xf7+ g8 20 xf6 xf6 21g. Fnally 17. . .df6 18 h3 h6 19 f4 g20 g3 leaves the nght stranded on g4.Consequently WardFant, Gausdal 1993,contnued 16 ... c 17 xf6! gxf6 18 dxcxc 19 d4 xd3 20 'xd3 b4 21 hgb7 22 'b! xb 23 xb c8 24 d4b6 2 d3 and Blac as severely hpered by the fur pan slands.

b2 12 .. .h6 13 xf6 xf6 14 ce2 d71 c ac8 16 b3 b6 17 c e6 18c favoured Whte n WdPer, Guldfrd 1991 . Aer 1 8. . .d7 19 xe6 e6 20

'e2 f6 21 h b4 22 h4 c 23 xf6+xf6 24 4 c4 2 g6 ed8 26 g Whtesattac had ganed the most momentum.

b3 12 . . .f8 taes Blacs eye of the csquare. hrovWedberg, tocholm 1990,tnessed a ondel nght manoeuvre: 13ce2! b6 14 c d7 1 f d8{1. . .xf 16 xf g6 17 h3 e4 18xe7 xe7 19 f4 s good fr Whte 16

eg3 17 xf6 xf6 18 h d8{18. . .xf 19 xf6+ g6 20 xf a6 21h4 19 d6! e6 2 0 b7 c7 21 c (verynce 21...d6 22 xf6+ xf6 23 e8 24e4 and Whte, havg assumed control of thequeensde, pressed fard n the centre.1 0 f

Blac adopts the standard set up th thenght droppng ba to dend the h7pan.

No Whte cn play on the queensde th12 ab 1 reparng b2b4, r exple, bute are gong to concentrate on the theme ofexpanson n the centre {threatened or execute nvolvng an early f2, the possblity

4

that s a ey dference hen developng thenght on e2 nstead of f.

10 . . .h6 removes the pan om the frnglne of the queen and bshop but restrcts

Bla slghtly n that the g6square s nologer avalable aer 1 1 f4 f8. Whte cancontnue as per plan th 12 f3, hen12 . . .e6 13 e c? ! s an attempt to justBlas play that s best replaced th themore sold 13 ...d6. .Ivanovgnatev, Chgorn Memoral 1997, contnued 14 ad.Then 14. . .b6 1 xf6! xf6 16 dxc xc17 h7+ h8 18 b4 a6 19 xd s goodr Wte, e.g. 19 .. .g6 20 xg6 g6 21 ' xg6g7 {21...g 22 c7 22 xb6! etc. Instead Blac played 14 . . .c4 1 f f8?!{1 ... a6 16 e4 dxe4 17 e4 b had to beplayed, although th 18 g3 Whte suma menang stance 16 f4 e6 17 xe6e6 18 h3 6d7 {18. . .'b6 19 e4 8d720 g3 b4 21 exd xc3 22 bxc3 exd 23 and Whtes rang bshops domnate,and no 19 g3 'a 20 e4 ould have le

Whte clearly better.1 1 f3

1 1 ie

One of several ssblties.a Aer 11...h 12 xe7 xe7 13 e4

dxe4 14 e4 g4 1 e! ad8 { 1 . . .c? 16d 16 e4 Whte had the advantage nvanchuYusupov, Canddat match, Bssels 1991 . If 16 .. .e6 Whte has 17 d6, e.g.17 . . .xd6 (17 .. .xe2 18 xh7+ 18 exd6



Qu ee 's Gambi t Decli ed ad Slav De feces

xd6 19 xh7+. Instead the ge ent16. . .g6 17 ad ! f8 {17 . . .xe2 18 xe2hf4 19 c4 18 h3 xe2 19 xe2 hf42 c4, and no Blac should have played

2 .... 14 . . . e6 s an mprovement areevAhlander, Naestved 1988 gavecances to both sdes aer 1 f2 f6{1 ...c 16 d xd 17 exd cxd4 18xd4 1 6 h3 ad8 17 af g6!.

b 1 1 .. .g6 12 h 1 e6 13 h4 b6 s bettr than 13 . . .g7?! 14 f2 c? 1 dxc xc16 h4! hen Y aovchBaburn, Vorone1988 ended 16. . .xe3 17 xf6 xf6 18x g 19 c7 h3 2 0 c3 10. akaevNitn, molens 2000 contnued{13 ...b6 14 ad b7 1 c ! , the pontbng that apart om dendng the e3panhte also protects the e3sque, n antcpaton of e3e4 dxe4, e4 g4. Then, th theueen on c nstead of c2, Whte ll notav to orry about the nght r on e3.ere lloed 1 ... h 16 xe7 xe7 17e4 dxe4 18 e4 ad8 19 c4 th a cle

advantage t te accordng to Baburn.e plan s e4e lloed by sendng anght to d6.

c 1 1 .. .a just loses tme, e.g. 12 h6{12 ... g4? 13 b4 d8 14 xe7 xe7 1g4 13 b4 b6 14 a4 c7 1 f4 d616 xd6 xd6 17 e4 dxe4 18 e4 and againte has succeeded n launchng the ean.

11...c s premature. 12 xf6 xf6 13dxc xe3 14 ad e6 1 e4 d4 16 bd 17 xd3 e7 18 d6 b6 19 c6!,oetcAbramovc, Yugoslav Ch. 199 son exple of ho Whte can explot theeened pan. 12 b d7 13 xd7xd7 14 ad c4 1 xf6! xf6 16 e4 dxe417 xe4, VaserC.Flear, French Team Ch.1998, s another.

e 1 1 .. .g6 12 ad and no the llog e possble:e 12. . .h6 13 xf6 xf6 14 xg6 g6

1 e4 g 16 e e7 17 f4 gxf4 18 xf4 f819 g6 xf + 20 xf 1 e6 2 1 e2

KasparovBa, Kasparov Grand Prx2000. Blac has the bshops but Whte has anght frmly ensconced in enemy terrtory,another ready to support t and the ffle.Aer 21...d7 22 h4 e8 23 g3 Baburnrecommends 23 . . .d8 n case ths bshopcomes n handy. Barua played 23 . . .f7?! 24xe7+ xe7 hen 2 f e6 26 d6g6 27 c3 xd6 28 exd6 xd6 29 a3b8 30 e7 as very good r Whte.

e2 12 .. .h 13 xe7 xe7 14 e4 dxe41 e4 e6 16 e brngs about anotherstuaton n hch White threatens to use d6as a jucy outpost r a nght. In Y aovchAhlander, tocholm 1999 Blac tred toundermne ths plan th 16 . ..c?!, but 17 !g4 18 e6! as strong, e.g. 18. . .e6 19xg6 hxg6 20 xg6 h4 {20 . . .xe2 21 d621 f7+ h8 22 d6. Aer 18. . .f6 19 e4

f8 {19 .. .e6 20 d6! f7 2 1 g d7 22xh7 the smplest route s 20 e7+x 21d6 e 22 xf6+ xf6 23 xf6 xf6 24xc etc.1 2 ad 1 :c 1 3 �h 1 h

The dea behnd Whtes prevous movecan be seen aer 13 . . .c 14 dxc. Frst14. . .xc?! no longer pns the epan, soWhte s able to play 1 e4 dxe4 16 e4 th

advantage. Ths leaves 14 . . .xc hen both1 b d7 {1 .. .8d7 16 d4 16 xd78xd7 {16. . . xd7 17 e4 17 b3 (lloedby f4 and 1 a4 a6 16 b fvourWhte. Best seems Lauters on suggeston,

4 7




namely 13 . . . g6. Then 14 e4 dxe4 e4g4 16 c c! s a thematc stre atWhtes centre that seems to secure Bla adecent game, eg. 17 b ' c7 18 f4 cxd4

19 xe8 dxc3 20 b cxb2 21 xb2 xf422 xf4 'c2 23 xc2 xc2 24 d2 xd22 xd2 c, hch as nce fr Blac nGuloturua, Elsta Olympad 1998, or 17e cxd4 18 xd4 xd4 19 xg6 xe 20f4 c 21 xh7+ h8 22 e4 cd8 23c d6 24 d2 xf4 2 'xf4 e thequalty n adlerAsrn Las Vegas 1999Fnally 17 d gves aay the esque.1 4 h4 a

Blac ants to rule out b bere pushng hs cpan.1 5 f4

Note that the arrval of the pan on a6 ntroduces the possblty of xf6!? xf6

16 e4 because 1 6. . .dxe4 17 e4 xd4 can bemet th 18 xa6 bxa6 19 xd4 hen19 . a 20 xe6 gves Whte an edge aer20 . .xe6 2 1 f or 20 .xe6 2 1 d7. If themanoeuvrng n the man ge s not to yourling then ths rcng lne s promsng.1 5 . . .d7

No 16.. . g s a genune threat. Aer . . . c 16 dxc xc 17 b Bla ll have

problems th the nely solated pan.1 f2

Remember that the ga7 dagonal s ausel home r ths bshop n the f3varaton. From f2, fr exple, the bshop

48

supports the d4pan (aer e3e4 and salso safe om hassment, hereas 16 g3e6 17 xe6 xe6 18 e4 h ether gvesBlac tme, n the case of 19 f2 f4, or

gves hm counterplay on the dar squaresaer 19 e xg3+ 20 hxg3 c etc1 . .d

16 .e6 17 xe6 xe6 18 e4 s stdrd.

Whte threatens to march on th e4-eand f3f4f etc. Consequently Bla has to

ays of addressng matters n the centre:a 18 .. dxe4 19 fxe4 g4 20 d!? cxd(20 .. .xf2+? 21 'xf2 hts f7, hle 20 . . .d721 g s a shade better r Whte 21 exdd7 22 h7+ h8 23 d4 s an nterestngtransrmaton, the poston no havng amuch more open nature. Then the cray23 . .c7 runs nto 24 xg7+! xg7 2xf7+! h8 26 d6! xd6 27 g6 e 28

g8 etc.b 18 . .c 19 dxc xc (19 . .d4 20 e 20e d7 21 f4 and Whtes moble majorty sunder ay.17 'd2

Toyng th the dea of e3e4 by protectng the nght.1 7 c7

Doublng the guard on f4. 17 .. .xf4 18

exf4 does not dage Whtes pans, ratherncreases ther attang tental, snce f4flloed by suprtng d avcng the gpan could soon unsettle Blas ng. Notethat n the meantme the pan covers e4.



Qu ee 's Gambi t Decli ed ad Slav De feces

1 g1 !

Ths tme Whte taes te out to protecth2 n order to free the f4nght1 . . .b?!

It s sgnfcant that Whtes cm manoeuvrng has nduced a dubous reacton omBlac. Ths queensde expanson s desgnedto provde Blac th some actvty henWhte nally gets round to pushng hs epan, but the creaton of a resh eakness

on c means that Whte can no changeplans. Others:

a Agan 18 . . .xf4?! 19 exf4 s ncorrect,e.g. 19 .. .e6 20 f f4 21 b and e3 scomg.

b 18 .. .e6 19 xe6 xe6 20 e4 s alsohat Whte s atng fr, e.g. 20 f4 21 c2 (2 1 'f2!? 2 1 . . .dxe4 22 e4 g4 23de etc.

c Aer 18 .. .e7 19 2 Whte s readyto execute the desred push:c 19 . . . b s slhtly dferent to the man

game n that Whte has already dropped hsnght bac to e2. Moreover 20 e4 b4 21 exe 22 dxe bxc3 23 xc3 demonstratesthat . .e7 does not mx ell th advancngthe bpan, as both 23 . . .xe 24 d4 e62 xa6 and 23 . . .xe 24 c ee8 2

xa6 see the roo movng agan.c2 19 .. .ce8 s consstent th the prevous move. Then 20 e4 dxe4 21 e4 xe4 22xe4 xe4 23 xe4 xe4 s an nterestngexchange sacrfce that should be dealt t

energetcally by Whte 24 d! g4 2 c3e7 26 de concentratng on open lnes togve Whte an edge.

c3 19 .. c?! does not hold Whte ba: 20

e4! and no 20 . . .cxd4 21 xd4 8h7 22exd ns a pan as 22 . ..xh2? loses, e.g. 23xh7+ xh7 {23 ...xh7 24 f4 24 xf6gxf6 2 d6. Then e have 20 . .dxe4 21 fxe4cxd4 22 xd4, e .g. 22 . . .e 23 xf6! gxf624 d d8 2 xe7+ xe7 26 xh6 etc.1 b 1 !

Hghlghtng the leblty of the system.Blac has had to atch out r e3e4 rmuch of the ge but hs latest attempt toundermne Whtes control of the e4squarepresents Whte th a second opton. Consequently the text ees the d3square r thenght n order to closely montor Blacseess on c. Meanhle the pan,ostensbly there to add eght to eventuale3e4, provdes valuable protecton to e4 partcularly usel no n the event of .. .bb4.

1 . :cdLauter suggests 19 .. .e6 20 d3 g,

pontng out that th 20 Whte retansa slght edge.20 c 1 !

Remember that 18 . . .b neglected the c6pan as ell as the csque, so Whte mproves a roo bere relocatng hs night. 20d3 als nto 20 . . .f.

20 . 'b20 ... b6 eeps an eye on the cpan butplaes the queen on a more vulnerablesque, e.g. 21 e4!? b4 22 a4 b 23 e'xa4 24 exf6 and our attenton s brught toBlas ngsde.21 ce2

Agan Whte s n no rush, the tt eepngan eye on c6. Instead 21 d3? ! f! maes

l a lttle easer r Blac.21 . .

Part of the plan, perhaps, but Lauters21 . ..e7 s prerable.22 d3 e

49



A tta ckig with 1 d4

ensbly contrbutng to the struggle rc.23 if2

Excellent play om Whte. Havng seedts purpose on g the bshop s rey to challenge ts opposte number n Whtes quest totae control of the ey csque, er hhthoughts can return to more aggressve matters.23 . . . a5

The only logcal ay to avod the comngtrade of dsqued bshops s to vacate theh2b8 diagonal 23 . . . b6 24 g3 f8 andBlac contnues to hold c. Hoever, thebacard c6pan and the hole ont of tare longterm eaknesses and, n evadngcapture, Blacs bishop has had to retreat,hereas Whtes no enjoys more eedom.23 . . .xh2?! s too desperate. Whte stands

much better aer ether 24 xb4 d6 2xa6 or 24 f4 g4 2 e.4 ig3 :c 25 l5!?

Whte has a nce dea n mnd. 2 e!? sanother se suggeston of Lauter. The plans to transfer the nght om e2 to f. Aer2 . . .xe 26 dxe! h7 27 f4 Whte does,nally, manage to release the ingsde pans.Blacs best s then 27 . . .hf8 28 d4 hen

Whte has the mangs of an ntatve. Anexample of ho qucly thngs can go rongfr Blac s 27. . b6 28 f eg 29 cd8 30 xd7 %xd7 3 1 h4.25 . . .lxc5 2 xc5

50

Whte s able to eep a pece on c ratherthan a pan thans to the pn on the h2b8diagonal. It s true that he has gven up theleble nght n the process, but dong soa ey defender has also been elmnated. Aslong as Whte maes sure to have morepeces controllng c t s necessary to fcects and be llng to part th one or tohtherto loyal seants.2 e7

Ignorng the attac on the apan n order to apply pressure to Whtes usual eaness n the f3system, the e3pan.27 ixd

27 %x? %ce8 and then 28 f2? thdras om the h2b8 diagonal to permt28 . . .b6 29 %a4 c etc.27 . . .'xd 2 lg3

o f so good r Whte, ho has suc

ceeded n nnng the csque. Blacs onlycounterplay les n httng the e3pan.2 . . .:ce 2 e1

Wth an undsputed advantage on thequeensde Whte need not be obsessed thachevng e3e4. Lauter gves 29 e4 dxe4 30e4 xe4 3 1 xe4 %xe4 32 xe4 %xe4 assteerng the ge to equalty. This exchangesacrfce should be borne n mind hen en

gneerng the central push.2 . . 'f4?

Bl ntates complcatons that areclearly to Whtes advantage. Once aganBl appears to lose patence, overestmat



Qu ee 's Gambit Declied ad Sla v Defeces

ng hs chances n the complcatons. Morecrcumspect s 29 .. .c7 hch eeps Whteslead to a mnmum.30 le4!

Whte s happy to go along r the rde. 30f ! auter s also good, e.g. 30 ... ' c7 3 1ec h 3 2 c2! h4 33 a4 e6 34 'c2c8 3 ' f2!30 . . . lxe4

30 . . .'h4 s clearly better r Whte aer

3 1 xf6+ 31 d6 3 1 .. .xf6 32 xaS hen32 . . .f4 33 a8! ntroduces a ne and mportnt pn.31 fxe4 'd 32 xa5

Not 32 e? xe, but 32 exd! cxd 33xaS s a decent opton (agan 33 .. . f4 runsnto 34 a8!.32 . . . dxe4 33 c5

Returnng to the strongpont to cut the

communcaton beteen Blacs queen andthe b4pan.33 . . .:e

Aer the sensble 33 ... b8 Whte mproves hs bshop th 34 c2 lloed by3 b3.34 ec1 !

34 ' xb4? ls the pn on the le only toal nto a ne one on the f8 dagonal,

thus leavng Bla ee to play 34 .. .h! . Theb4pan s not gong anyhere so f Whte sto convert the hardearned stonal avtage he must mae the most of the csquehle eepng an eye on the ingsde.

34 . . xc5 35 xc5 f5

Notce that Bla concentrates on theingsde, the ea n hch Whte s morevulnerable.3 g3

Agan 36 'xb4 s somehat celess, asthen 36 . . .f 4 gves Blac chances of at leastmang hs presence lt ne Whtes ng,e.g. 37 c3 3. . .g5?

Too btous, although ndcatve ofBlas geplan snce surrenderng the csquare. 36 .. .b8 37 c2 e6 38 b3 xb339 b3 b! s the most uncompromsngcontnuaton, fghtng r the square thatBla neglected more than tenty movesearler! Incdentally aer 36 .. .f4?! 37 gxf4g4 th calm 38 g ! leaves Bla th lttleto sho r the pan, and there s stll the

matter of the a b4pan.37 'x eNo 37 .. .f4?? loses to 38 g+.

3 c2

Tdy play. The trcy 38 xe4?! ors fBlac falls r 38 ... e4 39 xg+, but38 . . .f7! 39 xf xe3 ofers Blacunnecessary counterplay.3 . . .d5 3 b3 f4 40 'b

Threatenng 41 xd.40 xb3 41 xc! 'f

Or 41...'d 42 g6+ <f8 43 b3 e344 xh6 etc.42 'xb3+ h 43 'b 1 -0

5 1




43 .. .h7 44 c7+ e7 4 d6, or Having already sacriiced a pawn Blac44 .. .h8 4 g6. has wasted no time with 12.. .g. With this in

mind White replies in ind, distrting Bl,Game 8 opening the bile and maing way r the

Pelletier-Chandlerbishop to come to the ah8 diagonal.Maid Beach Club 1999 13 . . .xb4 14 b2 g4 (14 .. .b8 1 d

_

__

_

__

_

txdS 16 .xh8 txe3 17 fxe3 lxh8 18 'd3

1 d4 d5 2 4 e 3 3 5

4 xd5 exd5Befre continuing with the main line it is

woh investigating the tric 4. . .d4. thissystem Blac sacrifices a pawn r rapid development and the prospect of an attacagainst Whites ing, since the main line seesthe ings settling on opposite sides of theboard. The fllowing sequence is practicallyfrced: xd4 c6 6 d exd 7 xdd7 8 e3 f6 9 d! lacing the queenwhere it is least exposed 9 . . . c 10 3

e7 11 e2 000 12 00 g! 13 b4!

52

does not give Blac enough r the exchange 1 d4. Blac has three moves inthis position.

a 1 .. .xd4? 16 xd4 helps White, e.g.16. . .c (16 ... b? 17 xa7! xc3 18xb xb2 19 f+ xc 20 xc+mates, while 16. . .b8 17 d e4 18 e+nets White material 17 d! xd 18 fc!with the fllowing lines:

a 18 .. .b6 19 xd b 20 xg+ b821 e+ d6 22 c8+! xc8 23 xd6+.a 18 ...c7 19 xc (19 xc xc 20

xc hg8 2 1 d3 19 .. .e6 20 e he821 xc7+ xc7 22 c 1.

Best is 18 .. .hg8 19 xc+ c6 20xg+ b8 21 e+ xe (21 .. .a8? 22

xd 22 xe+ a8 (22 ... c7 23 xc6bxc6 24 b + a8 2 xc 23 , whenWhite has an era pawn and the bishop pair.

b 1 .. .b8 16 cb a6 (16.. . e? 17b3 hg8 18 ab c8 19 xa7! e4 20dc6+ 1 0 Illescas-Rodrigue Vargas, Catalunya 1996 17 xc6+ xc6 18 d4 d 19d3 hg8 20 a4 e4 21 f e6 22 xb4 xf d now in VlasinCech, Cech

League 1992, White could have safely played23 xa6.c 1 .. .h d now:c 16 cb b8 17 a4 a6 18 xc6+

xc6 19 xf6 e4! ! is very dangerous frWhite, e.g. 20 3 xe3+ 21 h xe2 22xb4 gxf3 23 f+ a8 24 c7+ a7 2gxf3, when KrushKapnisis, World U18 Ch.Oropesa del Mar 1999, went 2 .. .hg8 26

g d3 27 ab xf3 28 d+ b8 29xb7+ xb7 30 b+ b3+ 01 . 26 d+does not help in view of 26 .. .b6 27 f2 xd428 b+ a8! .

c2 16 b1 ! loos to be the best move r



Que e 's Gambi t Decli ed ad Slav De feces

Whte f there are no decent mprovementsn c . For example 16 .. .xd4 17 'xd4f? rebounds on Blac aer 18 ' c+ c(18. . .�b8?? 19 f+ 19 'xc+ xc 20

bc, as now both 20 . . .�d7 21 fd+ �e7(2 1. . .�e6 22 c+ 22 d+! xd 23 xdxd 24 xh8 and 20 .. . �b8 21 b e722 e+ wn r Whte, whle 20..d2 meetswth 21 a4. Meanwhle the standard16 . . . �b8 17 cb s b, above, wth Whtehavng b and Blac . . .h7h.5 f3 g3

Thans to the anchetto Whte s able toexe constt pressure on the dpawn,whether or not the d4-square becomes avalable. . .f

The man lne. Blac can also close thecentre wth 6 . . .c4 when Whte should play

the thematc 7 g2 b4 8 00 ge7 9 e4.Rentroducng tenson n the centre putsBlac on the defensve. In fct there s agood chance that the centre wll soon openup, leavng the g2bshop very powerul onthe long dagonal. Whereas n the man geWhte blocades the dpawn wth a nghton d4, here t s Blac who tends to blocedWhtes assed d4-pawn.

a 9 .. .dxe4 10 xe4 00 (10 . . .g4 11 a3a 12 f4 00 13 d6 c7 14 xb7 'b8was played n eovNogueras, Vna1982 , Whte ganng clear advantage wth d xb7 16 dxc6 ' xc6 17 e xg2+ 18

�xg2 xd 19 d 8 20 d 11'c2!.

a 11...g4 12 'xc4 xf3 13 xf3xd4 (13 .. .xd4 14 'b3 14 g2 s very

good r Whte due to the lghtsquaredbshop. Gual PascualMosaleno, Petana2000 saw an nstructve mstae rom Bl:14 . . .c8? 1 xb4 c2 16 f6+! gxf6 17g+ g6 18 b 1 and the bshop par alones decsve.a 11...xd4 12 xd4 'xd4 13 d

'e 14 'xc4 gves Whte a pull.a3 11...f 12 h4! attacs one lght

squed bshop and unlehes another.a31 12. . .'xd4?! 13 xf xf 14 d

e 1 d! e6 16 f4 s clely betterr Whte.

a32 12 .. .xe4 13 xe4 xd4 (13 ...g6 14h6 e8 'xc4 14 d d Whte sactve.

33 The n soon peters out r Blac ter 12 .. .xd4 13 'xc4 e6 14 'xb4 c21 'a4 xa 16 g f6 (16 . . .b 17 xe7

'xe7 18 'd 17 e3 b 18 'a6! c8 19'xb etc.

a34 12. . .g4 13 g g6 (13 .. .g6 14' xc4 'xd4 1 'xd4 xd4 16 xb7 14d! ce h3! d7 16 xg6 hxg6 17e4!

Mosalenoemenov, Alushta 1994.Whte threatens 18 h4. There llowed17 .. .f6 18 e6 c8! and now 19 xf8 fhas been assessed as uncle but loos good

53




fr Whte aer 20 d4, whle 19 e3 e820 ad! would have led to a clear advantage.

Aer 12 .. .c8 13 f6+! gxf6 the best

Black can expect s to be consderably worsefllowng 14 xf xd4 1 xd4 'xd4 16xb7 b8 17 d as 14 ... xf? loses, eg.1 'xf xd4 ( 1 .. .' xd4 16 e4 16 g+h8 17 d c 18 e3. Therefre13 . . . h8 s frced, aer whch 14 xfxf 1 'xf ' xf6 16 'xf6 gxf6 17 e3fd8! 18 fd ! s very good r Whte.

b Wth 9 .. .00 10 exd xd Black hopesto mantan a hold on the dsquare. Then,nstead of the automatc 1 1 xd Whte has1 1 g ' a (1 1. ..f6?! 12 xd 'xd 13e 'b 14 a4 a6 1 xc6 bxc6 16 d2was unpleasant r Black n TregubovMoskalenko, Alushta 1994 and only then 12xd 'xd 13 a 14 e 'b 1 a4 a6 16 xc6 bxc6, when TmoshchenkoTsetl n, Palma de Majorca 1989 saw Whteturn hs superor rces nto somethng more

tangble aer 17 ' c2!? e6 18 ab819 f '6 20 xc4 'xd4 21 xe6 xb222 e3 xc2 23 xd4 xc+ 24 xc e62 xc6 etc.7 g2 e7 00 0-0 g5

Concentratng on the dpawn by montorng a key dender. xd4

Alternatves are nror. 9 . . .c4 10 ee6 1 1 xc6 bxc6 12 b3 ' 13 a4 fd8

54

14 e3 c 1 dxc xc 16 xf6 gxf6 17xc 'xc 18 'h gves Whte a clear advtage accordng to NCO. In reply to9 . . . e6 Whte nstgates a frcng lne that

leads to a superor endng: 10 dxc xc 1 1xf6 'xf6 12 xd 'xb2 1 3 c7 ad8 14' c!

Black has n o tme to prevent xe6, aerwhch the weaknesses on the lght squesgve Whte somethng to am at: 14 . . .'xc 1

c e7 (defendng the gsquare 16xe6 e6 17 c4 wth a dcult defensvetask ahead r Black.10 xd4 h

Takng the pressure o the f6-knght andlng the pn n antcpaton of . . .f8 tocle the ele r the rook Also seen s10 ...e8 when 1 1 ' a4 d7 12 ad requres careul play rom Black. 12 . . .a? 13

'c2 'c8 14 'd2 h3 1 db xg2 16xg2 e4 1 7 xe4 dxe4 18 xe7 xe7 19 f4 led to the kind of advantage Whte enjoys n the Catal n A.hneder-Leski, Corsca (rapdplay 1997 Fle.Cooper, BrtshCh. 1988 was also poor r Black aer12 . . .h6 13 f4 c 14 xc6 bxc6?! 1 e4!,but the lesser evl 14. . .xc6 would have reduced Whte to a slght but endurng edge.

1 1 e3At rst f4 mght seem lke a more sutablesque, but Whte needs to pay attenton tod4 n order to exe maximum pressure onthe solated pawn.



Que e 's Gambit Declie d ad Slav De feces

1 1 ePreparng to drop the bshop bac to f8,

when the roo s well placed on the ele. Ofcourse 1 ...g4 s almost dentcal to the

man game, but aer 12 'a4! Whte has alttle more flexblty n that he has not yetcommtted hs roo(s. Then:

a 12 ... d7 d now 13 xd! ? has beenquestoned r gvng up the tradtonallympoant bshop, but n ths case 13 .. .xd14 xd d8 (14. . . xd 1 xc6 'xc6 16 xg4 1 xc6 bxc6 16 c3 b6 17 fd'c8 18 xb6 b6 19 'f4 just seemed lea ree pawn n ALastnPotn, Moscow1999.

b 12 .. .a 13 ad ! c8 14 xd xd1 f c4

TalZhdov, UR Ch. 1972. Anothersrmsh surroundng the dpawn. In ft t

s not untypcal of the Tarrasch to see Whtewn (or Blac lose/sacrce the dpawn atthe cost of the lght-squared bshop or a perod of nconvenence. Whle t s necessaryto properly analyse these sequences over theboard t s useful to remember where ceanpeces e at ther most lnerable ere thedm anght and the g4-bshop. Tal contnued 16 'b xf 17 xd a6 18 'xa

' xa 19 xa c8 d then tded up ncelywth 20 d e6 2 1 d2 b4 22 dd c223 e7 24 d4 b 2 e3 a 26 e4 etc.1 2 : 1

Roos belong on open les.

1 2 ieHghlghtng a ndamental problem wth

Blacs pawn n that ths rm of protecton both obstructs the roo d leaves Bl

open to a well tmed xe6, n turn ntroducng resh problems on the lght squares.However, as we have already seen, falng toprovde d wth sucent suppo c elylead to the pawn fallng. Neveheless I prefer the consstent 12. . .f8, when Kpovs13 s a sensble move that s the rst stepof a relable route to a plus r Whte. Playmght contnue 13 .. .g4 14 h3 e6 1xc6! bxc6 16 d4

We llowng KpovIllescas, Leon1993 The capture on c6 leaves Blac wth abacwd pawn and a wea csquare and stherere another common feature of theman lne T arrch. Kpovs latest s dected

aganst 16 . . .c (see below but n any case thebshop stands well on d4 and now the epawn s ree. In fct Blac c t 16 . . .cbecause 17 xf6 'xf6 18 xd xb2drops the bpawn, but then 19 c7 ad8 20e e7 21 a! has been evaluated asgvng Whte a cle lead. Anand consders16 . . d7 17 b4 to be excellent r Whte, and16 .e4 17 xe4 dxe4 18 c xc 19

xc d 20 b4 clps down on the csquare. Ths leaves 16 . . .d7 17 'd3 h7 18e3 ! (shadowng the nght ratherth gettng careless wth 18 e4? c, when 18. . .g19 xg hxg (19 .. . xg 20 e4! g6 21

55



A ttac kig with 1 d4

fd 20 fd (not 20 e4 dxe4 21 xe4xh3! 20 .. .b8 2 1 c2 gves Whte a longterm structural lead. Instead Illescas stoodworse aer 18 . . .d6?! 19 fd e6 20 b4!.

One to remember s 19 ... e7 20 xd! cxd21 xd, as s 19 . . .f8 20 xd! cxd 21xd e 2 2 xa8 xa8 23 xa8 xa8 24d4 xd4 2 xd4 xh3 26 g4 h 27gxh, when Whte has good rooks d toomany pawns.1 3 a4 'd7 1 4 :d1

Both sdes have completed developmentand the game contnues to revolve oundthe dpawn and surroundng sques. Wehave another example here of how attkngplay s not exclusve to crushng sacrfcalmatng combnatons or kngsde pawnstorms. A look at the dagr ston showsthat the squares c, c6 and d are covered by

every sngle one of Whtes peces except thekng! It s ths frm of attackng chess thattends to be overlooked and, consequently,underestmated at club level. From a theoretcal vewpont Blk s only slghtly worsebut practcally t s another matter, partcularly at club level. Blks ne tucks the kngaway n case Whte takes on e6 and seeks toopen up the lght squares.1 4 . .�h 1 5 b3 :ad

Black has d well protected now, but thesame cannot be sad of the neghbourngsquare.1 5 x5 1 7 x5 g4 1 d2

5

Earler n adler-Chdler, Brtsh League1997, Whte decded t was tme to cle awaya w peces: 18 xd xe2 19 xc6 xd20 xd7 e 1 + 2 1 g2 xa4

22 xe xd7 23 xa7 c6+ 24 gd2 2 e2 d3 26 e3 d2 27 e2 d328 e3 e4 29 xe4 xe4 30 d2 xd231 xd2 and adler went on to conve theendng, although at ths nt Whtes lead snot great. It s understandable that Pelleter

prers to avod wholesale exchanges untlthe tme s rght. Thus f Whte has beenncreng the pressure on Blacks centre and,durng the last few moves, on the darksques, so there s no reason to beleve thatWhte cnot try r more th edge nthe endng.1 . . 'f

In vew of what happens ne ths must be

wrong. Black could try hs luck defendng atypcally unpleast Tarrasch endng aer18 . .b6 19 e3 e 20 'xd7 xd7 21xd xd 22 xd xd 23 xd xe2,but 24 c7 looks strong. Perhaps, now thatcrcumstces have changed slghtly, Blackshould smply put the kng back on g8. Atleast ths adds protecton to the pawn rlater possbltes such as the one mentoned

above.1 f3 ! ?

A move r whch Black s prepared, ofcourse, but Whte calculates that the ensungcomplcatons are n hs fvour.



Qu ee 's Gambit Declied ad Sla v Defeces

1 . . .d 4 20 xd4 xd4 21 xd4 e

Ths s the pont of Blacs play For theprce of a pawn Blac has elmnated a powerful bshop n the hope of explotngWhtes newly lnerable dar squares, andthe remanng bshop s loced out of thege on g2 Ununately r Bl Whte sothese free of structural weaesses andnevtale exchanges reduce Bls attacngpotental

22 d1 b5Throwng more el on the re snce both

a7 and g4 were attaced as well as the roo23 xa7 'e3+ 24 �h1

Resng to bac down Whte needs onlyto weather the storm to emerge wth a decsve advantage25 b5 a 2 xf7

Here s another reason why the ng couldhave come bac to g8 Agan Blac can now

bounce of the queen, but the pawns areaddng up and Whtes rces e hardly passve2 . . . e

Aer 26 h 27 c4 xe2 28 a3! bxa329 xe2 xe2 30 bx3 the dust settles toreveal a safe two pawn lead r Whte, eg30 e8 31 c3 c2 32 b 1 etc27 g xa2 2 f1 xb2 2 7!g 30 xe xe 31 b1

31 d6 loos good, eg 3 1 e 32 b631 . .xb1

31b3 puts up more resstance32 'xb1 d5 33 b3 d

33 c7 34 xb4 does not alter the result34 e4 b 35 xd5 3 'd3 f237 e5 b3 1 -0

38 d8+ xd8 39 xd8+ �h7 40 d3+g6 4 l e7+ �g8 42 c+ s comng

Game 9Wells-Korneev

Ube 1996

1 d4 d5 2 4 e 3 3 4 e4 dxe4 5xe4 + d2 xd4 7 xxe4+ e2

Less common than 8 e2 but equallyplayable, the text s also not generous because Whte gets to eep the gpawn ftn ths lne t s the g7-pawn that tends to

drop, aer whch Whte ams to mae hspresence felt on the dar sques MewhleBlacs queen c be dcult to evct andWhtes ngsde dcult to develop Aer 8e2 Blac has a number of moves . . . d7

Others:a 8 c ps wth a pawn n order to pr

vde Blac wth some breathng space and

fcltate the development of the queensdeAer 9 xc c6 10 d6 ge7 11 f4!?xf4 12 xf4 b6 13 3 e 14 dWhtes bshop par guatees advantgeThe untouchable darsquared bshop s a

5 7




strong pece.b 8 .. .e 9 ' a6 10 f8!

Ths move whch s by no means rare nthe Marshall hghlghts Blacs lnerablty on the dar squares. The bshop s safe 10 .. .xf8?? allows mate on d8. Already apawn up, moblsaton wth 10. . .e7 s preferable to materal as 10 . . .' g6 s passve andgves Whte tme to moblse. The postonaer 11 xg7 g 12 f6 e6 has been

assessed as gvng Blac counterplay. It ste that the second player enjoys a development advantage but he s stll susceptbleon the d squares, and wth 13 'd6! f(13 . . .g6? 14 d 14 'xe 'xe 1 xexc4 16 g3 Whte enters the next phaseof the game wth the superor prospectsthans to hs majestc bshop and Blacswea ngsde pawns.

c 8 .. .e7 9 '! and now:c 9 .. .c 10 000! 00 11 xc woredout well r Whte n GeorgadeCru Lope, an ebastan 199 1 . If now 1 1 .. .'xc+12 ' c3 ' xc3+ 13 xc3 bc6 Whte wnsmateral n vew of 14 b! e8 1 xe7etc. Instead Blac tred 1 1 . . .bc6 12 d4xd4 13 xe7 e 14 xf8 xf8 1 f3 ' c616 d3 e6 but aer 17 b1 Whte was an

exchange up r no compensaton.c2 9 .. .d7 10 f3 'h+ 1 1 g3 'f6 12c3 c 13 e4 'x 14 g2, LputanPavasovc, Cannes 1996 gves Whte a cleadvantge accordng to NCO.

58

d 8 .. . a6 s the most popular move.Then 9 c3 e7 10 xg7 presents Blacwth the choce of savng hs ro or threatenng to wn the one n the opste corner.

d 10. . .b4

Ths s ceanly n the sprt of ths lne.Thans to Whtes bacwardly developedngsde Blac entean the possbty ofchecng on d3 nstead of c2 and, consequently, Whte mght have to suer some

dscom n order to hg on to y booty.Ironcally the stuaton soon became ratherpeacel n Hauchard-Neves, World U26Team Ch. 1993 1 1 'd6 d3+ 12 f 13 'xd3 'xd3+ 14 xd3 xg7 leavngWhte wth the more actve ng to go wthhs better pawns. I would serously consdercallng Blacs blu wth 1 1 xh8 when therecommended 1 1 .. .e closes the bshop out

of the game and renews the threatenedchec(s. Two moves sprng to mnd rWhte. The drect 12 xe (ntendng12. . .d3+ 13 xf2 14 'b3 xh 1f4 f [1. . .g4 16 c7] 16 'xb7 d+17 e s thought to favour Blac aer12 . . .f!, one lne oered beng 13 c3c2+ 14 'xc2 'xc2, wth Blacs actvtytppng the balance n hs vour, albet tem

porly f Whte c wae the remnngpeces. However Whte seems to be able tothrow a small but annoyng spanner n thewors by rulng out ...d( + , namely 13c7. For example 13 . . .c2+ (1 3 .. .d3+ 14



Que e 's Gambit Decli ed ad Slav De feces

d2 xf2 1 'b3 14 d2 xa 1 'xasees Whte mantan a decsve materal leadand more mantly Blacs rcesdrastcally reduced. An mprovement s

14. . . d3+ 1 c xa 16 'xd3 xd3 17c3 g6 18 e2, but then Whte has anera pawn plus the better poston. ometmes an opponents sacrce puts us underso much pressure that we rget how muchcan be returned n order to successullyweather the storm and stay ahead on nts,and here s a good example of how a wholeroo can be too much a prce to pay.

12 d6 s best accordng to Chehov, although 12 .. .c2+ 13 d2 f 14 d d81 xd8+ xd8 16 c + (16 g3 'f+ 17c3+ d+! 16 .. .d4!? 17 xd4 'b + 18d2 xb2+ 19 e 'c3+ 20 e2 xc+21 e ends n a draw, as does 14 g3'f+ 1 c3 d+! 16 cxd 'd+ 17 b3xa + 18 a3 c2+ 19 b3 a + -

Gome EstebanIllescas, Lsbon Zonal1993.

d2 10 . ..g8 s normal, when 11 d4leads to a very slght edge r Whte n theendng, e.g. 11...'xd4 12 xd4 c 13 c3b4 14 xb4 cxb4 1 g3 d7 16 g2c6 17 00 000 18 fd xg2 19 xg2c6 20 f4 and Whtes more compactpawns gave hm some chances n RendermanKharlov, Leeuwarden 1994. WellsKnaa, Bundeslga 1996, saw the Marshall

expe try 1 1 c3. There llowed 11 .. .e 12 d6 f 13 d ! ? g6 14 f6 e6 1 f3'h+ 16 xh4 xh4 17 g3 f6 18 f2f7 19 e4 ad8 20 xd8 xd8 21 e2c 22 f4. It s mpoant to remember thatthe absence of Blacs darsquared bshopfrds Whte promsng longterm prospects, and the poston s a good llustratonof how a well tmed thematc streon

the game r the extra bshop. There smore to attacng chess than gong r mateor decsve materal gan here Whte smplyconcentrates on a colour complex wthwhch hs opponent wll have problems de

fendng, and the subsequent advantagegradually taes on decsve propoons. Thege contnued 22 . . .f 23 g3 exf4 24h f3 2 gxf3 d6 26 d! xd 27

xd e6 28 xf6 f 29 c3 xc4 30c2 d4 31 xh7 x2 32 e3 b 33e b4 34 f4 c6 3 g6+ e7 36g7! 37 e4 bd4 38 h4 e6 39xe6 xe6 40 f4 41 f+ d7 42 f3e7 43 f4 10. The power of the darsqued bshop n ths exple s not untypcal of endngs n the Mshall.

'd a5

Not surprsngly Blac wants to nowwhere the bshop wll resde. 9 . . .c 10 c3and Blacs ne move determnes theplacement of the ng.

a 10 .. .e7 1 1 0-00 f 12 'd2 00 13g3 wth another brch:

a 13 .. .'h4 14 xf exf 1 g3 g4(1. . .'e 16 h3 ' g6 (16 . . .'f3 17 g 17g4 and Whte had succeeded n onng lnesr hs peces n GrgoreDanlov, Buchest

1998.a2 13 ... c6 14 xf exf 1 e2 f6

16 g e8 17 d8 f6 18 d2 (18 g3c7? 19 xe8 18 ... xg2 19 e !?

FleBryson, Hastngs 1993/94. Blacs

sole developed pece s the queen d there san unwelcome vstor on Blacs bac ran.In these stuatons the ct that Whte tralsby two pawns has lttle relevce because thss more than compensated r by other fc

59



A tta c kig with 1 d4

tors. Note also that Whtes play thus far sbased on ndng optmum posts r hspeces, n so dong hopelly restrctngBlacs frces. Aer 19 .. .b (19 .. . c6 20

' d ! and f3 s comn 20 f b7 21exe8 xe8 22 xe8+ 23 'd8 ' h 1Whte nshed off ncely wth 24 e7+ g62 xg7+! 10. Agan Blac ce unstuc onthe dar squares.

b 10 .. .gf6 1 1 00-0 c6 12 g3 g813 f3 e7 s another try, the reasonng bengthat the ng mght be as safe on e7 as t s ong8. GorgadMatla, Nalecow 1989 sawthe usual patent buld up om Whte: 14f4 b6 1 d3 a6 16 e xe 17 xead8 18 e2 and Blac had problemsguardng d6 and g7. Aer 18 . ..'a4 Whtecould have played 19 xd8 xd8 20 'xg7e8 (20 .. .d7 21 'g+ e8 22 d 21'xh7 'x2 22 c2 ' a+ 23 b 3 2+ 24b2 wth a ne wnnng poston.1 0 a3 e5

Consstent wth the plan of dealng wth

the mghty bshop. Instead the greedy10 .. .'xc4 grabs a second pawn at the cost ofmore tme aer 1 1 c3 'h4 12 e2/ d3fllowed by 00 ad etc. Alternatvely 1 1' g3 practcally frces 1 . . .g6, when Blacsdar squares could hardly be any ugler.1 1 'd2

Whte has obvous compensaton r thepawn n the event of 11 000 'xd6 12

xd6 gf6 13 c3, but t seems more logcal to leave the queens n play snce Blac sthe one who s loong to releve the pressure. Moreover there s stll tme to be ganedby httng Blacs exposed queen.1 1 .5

Closng the door r now, but Whtesambtous bshop wll have ts day. 1 1 . ..gf6meets wth the same response.

1 2 f4 'e4 1 3 0-0-0 gfAgan Blac s not tempted nto doublnghs spols. Ths tme 13 . . .'xc+ runs nto 14c3 'd4 1 'xd4 cxd4 16 b d8 17xd4, when f8 s threatened and the com

0

ng d6 s strong.1 4 3 ' 1 5 e2 0-0

Blac can nally el a bt more relednow that hs ng has und a safe haven,

whch would not be the ce were the queento retu to enemy terrtory wth 1 . . .'xg2,when 16 hg ' xh2 17 xg7 soens Blacup on the dar squares and leaves Blacsng n the centre.1 f3 'b 1 7 g4 b

Wth lttle n the way of legal moves Blacoers the cpawn n return r some freedom of movement. However, Whte prersto contnue turnng the screw n order toeep Blac n a defensve, negatve mode.1 a4 '7 1 d

19 xc d7 20 b6 'xc 21 xa8 salso good r Whte.1 . .xd 20 xd fd7

20 ...e8 21 d2 d7 22 xc s decsve.21 hd1

Now t s Whtes turn to rese a pawn,

albet r derent reons! 21 xc xc22 xc restores materal equlbrum butothese Whte stands much better.21 . . .:a 22 x5

Fnally.22 xd 23 xd x5 24 x5 :e25 b a4 2 �d2

Whte domnates.2 . . .

Or 26 ...d7 27 e3 and xb7 s n the



Qu ee 's Gambit Decli ed ad Slav De feces

a.27 �c3 �f7 2 h4 �e7 2 c5 d7?

A mistake in a poo position. Imative is29 . . . although Black c do little but wit

mattes to get wose.30 xe6+ �d30 . . .xe6 3 1 d mate.

31 xe+ �xe 32 d4 b 33 g5fxg5 34 fxg5 g6 35 d5 c6 36 f6d7 37 g g4 3 d 5

38 xh7 f7 39 b4.3 . .�d7 3 e4 �e6 40 c2 a3 41 b4e5 42 c5 f3 43 e4 xh4 xb7h5 45 b5 �d7

4S . . .f3 46 c8+ dS 47 b4.46 c6+ �c 47 b6 f3

47 . . .f3 48 b7+ c7 49 e+.4 e7 1 -0

when we ind ouselves back to the dawingbod. I ecommend bypsing the idiculousamount of theoy euied to lean just oneline in fvou of (3 c3 f6) 4 g. This is

one of those fectly natual moves that oneis supised not to see moe oen. Despitebeing used om time to time by stong playes 4 gS lacks the histoical clout d theoetical clout o ind a place in a supeGMsepeoie but mee moals picullyclub playes it h a numbe of attactions.3 . f6

3 . . .e6 4 e4 entes the Mshall Gbit(Ge 9). Black also has othe altenatives:

a) With 3 .. .eS Black takes the oppounityto stike at d4. Best is 4 dxeS d4 S e4 °+6 xeS 7 g3. Beginnes ae uged toavoid exposing the ueen to attk so ely

the game so what is Black aiming to achieveGame 10 hee? To lean this we need only look at the

B Vladimirov-Fuchs d4pawn which is waiting e2e3 aeSochi 1966 which Black will cle the cente of pawns

d exploit the open position with easy de-

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 c3

The solid lav Defence like almost allopenings fatues both inteesting and dullvaiations. The poblem White in choosing how to meet the lav is the incedibly

lengthy pocess of getting acuainted withthe tactical positional and structual inticacies of the main lines . Then thee is the mate of tansposing to othe openings such asthe emilav (e.g. 3 f3 f6 4 c3 e6)

velopment. Note that White oo i s losingtime with the ueens knight. Now 7 . . .cS 8f3 c7 9 e3 dxe3 10 xe3 f6 11 d3e7 12 00 00 le Black in the unenviablesituation of being a couple of moves behindin open symmetical position in turuaMinasian Panomo 1998 . Black hung on tod4 in AgestHecto Malmo 1993 : 9 . . .c610 exd4 cxd4 (10 ...xd4 11 xd4 cxd4 12

d3) 1 1 d3

1




Blak must already be carel. For example 11...b4 12 xb4 xb4+ 13 <f andWite treatens 14 ' a4+ and 14 xd4(13 . . .c5 14 b4!) wile 1 1 . ..f6 12 00 e7

13 g5! 0-0?! ( 13 .. .6 14 5e4 0-0 15 xf6+xf6 16 5 llowed by launcing the fpawn is good r Wite) 14 5! g6 (14. . .h6?15 xf6+ xf6 16 7 15 xf6+ xf6 16f4 is awkward r Black to deal with. Instete game went 11...d6 12 00 ge7 13c2 g4 14 g5! h6 15 5e4 b4(15 ... 0-0? 16 x6! or 15 ... f4 16 h3 ! d717 h5! xd2 18 'xd2 00? 19 ef6+!) 16h3 (16 c5! ?) 16 ... d7 17 c5 ! and Blacks kingwas a problem in view of 17 . . .0-0 18 x6!f5 (18. . .gx6 19 f6+ <h8 20 'c g8 21xg8 <xg8 22 x6 f5 23 c4+) 19 d6gx6 20 etc.

The most reliable conuion r Blk is7 . . .f6 8 f3 ' d6 9 c2 when 9 . . .c5 10 e3c6 11 00-0 should be avoided e.g.1 1 .. .g4 12 d3 xf3 (12 ... 0-0-0 13 f5+xf5 14 xf5 d7 15 exd4 was a cle lead

r White in Herrai-Rios pain 1995) 13gxf3 00- 14 e4 with a grip on the lightsquares or 1 1 . . .e6 12 exd4 xd4 13 xd4cxd4 14 e3 a6 15 c5 'xa2 16 b5+d7 17 xd4 0-00 18 b4 P.VgaKovacova Balatonbereny 1993. Theory fvours 9 ...e7 and now I believe the sensible10 f5 xf5 1 1 xf5 will grow in popularity particularly since the main line 10 0-00

0-0 1 1 e3 dxe3 12 e3 c7 13 c3 has notbeen doing badly r Black aer 13 . . . c5. InchandorfMa Politiken Cup 1999 Blksimply missed his light-squared bishop:11...a6 12 g3 g6 H c2 c5 14 f4 d815 0-00 e6 16 e5 a5 17 <b c5 18 e3dxe3 19 e3 00 20 h3 ad8 21 c3 'c722 e5 and White had the initiative.

b) 3 .. .dxc4 also seeks to proft om the

fct that White has brought the queensknight out irst the point being that in certain lines Black can win a tempo aer . . .b7-b5-b4. Whites most aggressive response is 4e4 when the gamec tke one of two paths.

62

b) 4 . . .b5 5 a4 b4 (5 .. .'aS 6 d2 b4 7a2 e6 8 xc4 f6 9 'c2 bd7 10 c!a6 11 b3 wit an edge r Wite Lengel-Rukavina ombor 197 4) is quite com

mon when 6 a2 f6 7 e5 dS 8 xc4tends to lead to a balanced position aer8 . . . e6 9 f3 e7 10 0-0 b7 1 1 d2 a5 etc.However a relatively recent fashion is themore attack minded 6 ce2!? e6 7 3 f68 g3 a6 9 g5!? It is true tat White isyet to win back the gambit pawn but bytransfrring the knight over to g3 immediately White has been able to establish a menacing spe advantage on the kingside and adecent centre.

b ) 9 . . .e7 10 e5 dS 11 xe7 xe712 e4 00 13 c5 c3 14 xa6 cxb2 15b has been evaluated as clearly better rWhite e.g. 15 . . .c3 16 'c2 xb 17 xbxa6 18 xa6. Also good r White was 10xf6!? xf6 11 c in Halkias-GrofenVlissingen 2000: 1 1 .. .c3 12 bxc3 xf 1 13<xf c5 14 h5 00?! 15 xf6+ xf6 16

dxc5 bxc3 17 e5 'f4 18 xc3 c6 19 g3'b4 20 'c2 fd8 21 <g2.b 12) 9 ...'aS is more doubleedged. Aer

10 e2 bd7 {10 .. .b3+ 1 1 d2 b4 12 000-0 13 c is interesting while Hbner prposes 10 .. .c3) 11 00 c3 12 xa6 cxb2 13b7! bxa' 14 'xa d8 15 xc6 h6 16xf6 gxf6 17 d5 White seems to haveenough fr the exchange and 11..e7 12

c c5? bners 12. . .b6 13 e5 c8 isuncle) 13 d5 exdS 14 e5 went wrong rBlk Ovsejevitch-P. Varga Hungar 1999.Gelfand-Human Ramat Aviv 2000 saw thediference between the two pawn structuresgrw aer 1 1 . ..h6!? 12 xf6 gxf6 (12 .. .xf613 c clearly fvours White according toGelfand) 13 'c b6 14 d2 when14. . .00-0 (14 . ..d8 15 xc4 xc4 16 xc4

'c7 17 d h5 [Hbner] improves rBlack) 15 xc4! xc4 16 xc4 c7 17 dwas complex. Blacks bishops should compensate r the structural shortcomings onboth sides of the board.



Que e 's Gambit Declied ad Slav De fec es

b) 4 . . .e5 leads to a queenless milegethat beneits White thanks to the extra presence in the centre resulting rom the sequence 5 f3 exd4 6 xd4 xd4 7 xd4

and now:b 1) 7 ... b5 8 a4 b4 9 d f6 10 f3 a611 f4 c5 1 f5 00

White has more than enough pieces to attk the cpawn so Black will be le with apotential weakess in the shape of the re

maining cp w ecent exples e 13c g6 14 g3 c3 15 xc fd7 16 cxb4xb4+ 1 d xf 18 xf 19 fe3b6 0 b c5 1 ec4, Gome EstebanGranados Gome, Barcelona 000, and 13d6 xd6 14 xd6 c3 15 bxc3 xf 16xf a6 17 cxb4 xb4 18 e3 fd8 19dc4 d7 0 e, Bernal MoroAvilaJimene, Barcelona 000, with an enduring

pull r White in both cases. This kind ofadvantage requires patience rom White andcondence in technique rom Black.

b) 7 .. .c5 is played with a view tocompleting development rather than hanngon to te pawn. Portischady, an Antonio197 is typical, with White having the moreactive pieces to accompany the extra spacethat the epawn provides: 8 e3 f6 9

bd7 10 xc4 00 11 f b6 1 b3e8 13 hd d7 14 ac etc.Now it is time to turn to 3 ... f6.

4 jg ?

A glance at the diagram position reveal acompletely normal set up om White, 4 g5introducing the possibility of doublingBlks pawns and occupying the same diagonal as the blk queen while ignoring thestandof in the centre in good old QueensGambit style. One of the most importantfctors in chess is thwaing the opponentsplans, and Whites choice here has the psy·chological plus of ruling out Blacks main

lines as ely the urth move.4

It is interesting that the majority of clubplayers I tested with 4 g5 also proposedthis kneejerk reaction to the bishops arrival, yet theorys albeit halfheaed recommendation is 4 . . .dxc4 Perhaps the logic behind 4 .. .e4 is based on the beief thatWhites sudden change of direction requirs

the se flexibility fom Black, while thefct that g5 is an tive move could besuficient to distract Black om the gameplan on the queenside. Aer 4 . . .dxc4 5 a4Black has a number of choices.

a) Aer 5 . . .f5 the Trompovsky treatment with 6 xf6 exf6 7 e4 looks okay rWhite, but 6 f3 !? has a lot going r it. Borrowing an idea rom one of the main lines,

White prepes to erect a solid pawn centreand subsequently exploit a space advantage.Aer 6 .. .e5 7 dxe5 'xd+ 8 xd fd7 9 e4e6 10 f4 White is considerly better, while6 . . .e6 7 e4 g6 8 xc4 llowed by 9 ge

63




and 10 00 is passive r Black. A key dierence between this speciic move order andthe main line with 4 f3 is that there is noneed to lose time vaating the f3sque since

here the knight is still on g.b) 5 .. e6 6 e4 h6 7 xf6 xf6 8 f3 b49 xc4 00 10 00

P .CramingEkstrom, Katrineholm 1995.White has more space, more fluid development and the superior centre. Back has the

bishop pair but is slightly crped. Passiveplay by Black will see White advance e4e5and then use the e4square r general purposes and the bh7 diagonal to threatenmate. Consequently the game continued10 . . . cS 1 1 e5 d8 1 dS (1 a!?) 1. . exdS13 xdS (13 xdS e6 14 c c6 givesWhite an advantage akin to the QGA)13 .. .c6 14 h3 with chances r both sides.

Black must decide what to do with the b4bishop, which at the moment pays ittle pin the game other than to threaten .. .xc3.

c) 5 .. .aS is the book move, threateningthe bisop and pinning the knight.

c) 6 f3c ) 6 .. .f 7 d!? e6 8 h4 b6 9

e3 was played in FyllingenGausel, Oslo000. Aer 9 .. .xb 10 c b4 11 c

bd7 1 b aS 13 xc4 xc4 14 xc4a6 15 b3 b6 16 xb6 b6 17 xb6xb6 18 xb6 a7 19 xf6 exf6 0 �e�d 1 hb �c7 Black had returned thepawn(s) but now stood slightly worse vi

64

of Whites more mobile kingside pawns.c1) 6 ... e4! does appe to be Backs

safest treatment of 4 gS, as ong 7 dis not answered by 7 . . .xc3?! 8 xc3 d5,

when VanhesteDekker, Dieren 1990 continued 9 d bS (9 . ..fS 10 f3) 10 b3! ? cxb31 1 e4 and Back w walking on very thin icein terms of the ight squares and was laggingbehind in development. The accurate7 xd 8 xd produces a balanced gameaer 8 .. .eS! 9 xc4 b4 10 xeS xb 1 1c b4 1 d xd+ 13 d 00 14e3, when White (who eventually ground outa win) had good pawns, a wel placed kingand a central presence, and Blk the bishoppr.

ince 8 . .eS is not exacty obvious Blackhas also tried 8 .d7 9 xc4 gS, but then10 g3 e6 11 g b4 1 00 00 13 b31e7 14 gave White a pleasant sitionthat has numerous similarities with the Catalan in TranDippe, Nuremberg 1999.

c) 6 d

c1) 6 ... eS 7 e4!? b4 8 d6+ �e7 9dxeS xd+ 10 xd xd+ 1 1 �xd g41 d7 13 e3 d8 14 �e dxeS wasagreed drawn in Vlov, Goricke 000. Otheise White h the sober 7f3 exd4 8 xd4 eS 9 e3 cS 10 f31e7 11 xc4 00 with an even game,ChristiansenDonaldson, Philelphia 1987.

c) 6 ... b6 7 e3 (7 3 fS 8 e3 xb

9 xc4 c 10 c xc+ 1 1 xc g6le White with ess than a pawns worth ofcompensation in T aimanovveshnikov, 4 stUR Ch. 1973) 7 .. .xb 8 b a3 9xc4 e6 10 e4 d6 f3 c7 1 00 andBlack had invested a lot of time r the pawnin HallErnst, wedish Ch. 1998.5 xe4

Introducing an imbalance in the pawn

structure.5 . .dxe4 6 d2

And absolutely ot 6 e3?? a+ when thebishop is about to drop.6 . . if5



Qu een 's Gambit Declin ed an d Slav De fenc es

Others.a) 6 . . .d7 7 e3 h5! ? is typical make it up

as you go chess an approach with whichwe have all been too well acquainted at one

time or another! To be fair Back doesthreaten to trap the bishop with 8 .. .f6 etc. 8h4 g6 9 f4!? c5 10 e g7 11 d5 b6 1c3 f5, TosicMisailovic, Kadovo 1994.Both players in fact, have coped we witthis line, as can be seen from the strategiclook of the respective pawn structures. Thegame continued 13 e c8! 14 h3 d6ust in time) 15 �f ' 16 ac a6 17'c and the prospect of Black either losingtouc with the e4pawn or having to pawith his darksquared bishop is enough tokeep White on top. Notice that the f4pawnfits in we in this exampe.

b) 6 .. .g6 7 3!? g7 8 d f5 9 e3 0010 e c5 11 e4 xe4 1 c3 f5 wasapproximately even in Ramonieiro Gonale, Garcia Memorial 1998. Instead of 8d White can consider 8 000 (or 7 000)

lowed by mching the kingside pawns.7 e3

White opts to simply send the it to to keep an eye on the potentially weak e4pawn. The alternatives e ceainly od rthought.

a) 7 000!? is interesting, e.g. 7 . . .d7 8 e3f6 9 h4 e5 10 f3

NeiMnatsakanian, Yer 1965. White isnot worried about opening the b 1h7 diag

nal r Blacks bishop because this piece canbe comrtably dealt with, aer whichBacks king should come under pressure.10. .. exf3 1 1 f3 exd4 1 exd4 e7 13 h3 !

and the e6square was a cause fr concern tolack.b) 7 f4! ? is ostensibly illogica but in actal

fct positionaly desirabe, this Bnsch speciality is designed to srrond the e4pawn andclamp down on the e5sque. The f5bishop, too, plays a p in the jsticion offf4, a uture retreat to g6 might alow f4f5.

b) BnschKucnski, Rubinstein Memorial 1987 saw the centre pawns cominginto contact: 7 .. .f6 8 h4 e6 9 e3 c5 10 d5a6 11 e c7 1 g3 g6 13 000 (13dxe6 'xd+ 14 �xd f5) 13 .. .'d6 andWhite had a pul. Another plan r White is1 c3 lowed by e and the threat ofgg4.

b) In nschJ.Hoath, udapest 1987,Black sensed that stereotyped pay would

lead to a disadvantage and hit out with7 ...d7 8 e3 h6 9 h4 g5?! 10 g5 e5, butaer 11 e hxg5 1 g3 g7 13 000g4 White coud have punished this with 14' c!.7 . d7 8 e2

8 f3 ' c7 9 e h6 10 h4 ex3 1 1 3had the desired efect in VanhesteFinegod,Dieren 1990. Aer 1 .. .e5?! (1 1 . .. 1 e4

g6 13 000 f6 14 h3! White was welahead.8 . . .h6 h4 g5

This is a popular move because with thepawn on g6 the f5bishop (which protectse4) lacks a retreat sque, and Whites bishopon the h4d8 diagonal restricts acks development. The downside to . . . g7g5 is that itpresents White with a tget, making a wel

timed hh4 a probem r Black.1 0 g3 g7 1 1 c3 00

1 1 . . .e5 can le to simi play to the maingame but tanecLungu, Moscow Olympi1994 took a diferent course when White

65




pushed: 1 d5 00 13 h4! 'f6 14 hxg5 hxg515 000 fd8, and now White rced a nedecisive queen trade with 16 dxc6 bxc6 17'd6! when Blacks weak pawns were his

downfall.1 2 ie2 e5 1 3 :d 1 exd4 14 exd4 c5 1 5d5 e5 1 6 00 :es 1 7 d6

Now Black is too busy weighing up theimplications of a well prtected passed pawnright in the heart of his position to consideranything else. Add to this the new potentiabase on d5, and White is back in chge.1 7 d7 1 8 h4

It is always worth keeping an eye on alsectors of the bod as it is oen easier tomake progress in one ea by temporilyopening a new front of attack in another. this case White returns to Backs 9th mover a resh tget. Also possibe is 18 'dS b619 b5, e.g. 19 .. .e6 0 'xe4 f5 1 'd5e6 'd xc4 3 xc4 xc4 4 c7xf 5 xf and the d6pawn is no ess ofa problem.

1 8 g4 1 fe1 h7Note that 19 ... 0 x ex 1

dS creates a second protected passed dpawn but fvours White because Blacks f5bishop is unable to help in the defence of thedrk squares.20 e3 b6 21 xe4

2 1 .g6

1...xc4 xc4 xe4 3 'b3 cearsthe eie r Whites gain, e.g. 3 .. .xe+ (or

66

3 . . .f8 4 b5) 4 xe g6 5 e7.22 id3 ixe4

...e5 does not hep: 3 xe5 xe5(3 . . .xe5 4 'f4) 4 g3! etc.23 ixe4 f5 24 ixa8 xe3 25 :xe3d4

5 . f4 6 xf4 xf4 7 e7 ' d8 8e4+ g8 9 d7! is winning r White.26 h5 ixe3 27 hxg6+ �xg6 28 fxe310

ocuoThe Exchange Variation of the QGD (Game7 is a useul system that is also easy to play.With pieces posted on and pointing at the kingside, Whites set up with f keepsBack busy by introducing the ssibility ofcentral expansion with e34e5 etc. The f3pawn also rues out the simpiing ...e4and defends the g4sque, too. As r theweakened e3pawn, White can drop thebishop bk to f where, whie defending (ong 1 if appropriate), it contributes to the e34

push by oering ditional prtection to thed4pawn. Whites attacking play against theTarrasch (Game 8) may not be directed atthe king, but the pressure against the d5pawn and Blacks queenside in general issuch that White has a fluid game om themoment the target is created aer 4 cxd5. InGame 9, as ong as White does not worryabout the odd pawn or two there is much

n to be had in the Mashal Gbit, thansin no smal pa to the ely absence ofBlacks much missed darksqued bishop.Rapid development is paramount, and it isnot unusual to see Whites grip on the darksquares tu into a longterm sitional bindas the game progresses. The antilav 4 g5outined in Game 10 is primily aimed atsteering the game into litte chartered terri

tory in order to present Black with practicalproblems rom the word go. I doubt that thepopuar 4 .. .e4 is Blacks most precise answer, but the system itsef is perfectly playabe however Blk reacts.



I

C HAPT ER T HR EE

1 d d5 2 c: Back'sSecod Move Ateratives

1 d4 d5 2 c4This chapter deals with the less popul a

ternatives to . .. e6 and .. .c6. While not enjoying the same kind of reputation, thesedefences can, however, be dificult to copewith r the unwary. In Game 1 1 we see arecipe against the Albin CounterGambit (1

d4 d5 c4 e5) that ofers an interesting alternative to the automatic early kingside ianchetto, while Game 1 features a simpeand effective idea that somehow managed togo deces without being discovered. Finallyin Game 13 we come to .. .f5, with whichBlack hopes to either conuse White or entera QGD without the traditional probempiece on c8 .

Game 11Golin-Mengarini

N York 1991

bishop becomes more appropriate or, alternatively, it might be possible to post thebishop on the ha8 diagona with the moreaggressive gg4. Another interesting optionis 5 which tends to transse to the maingame but can also have independent signicance. Apa fom defending b4 White toys

with the simple ia of expanding with bb4in anticipation of Black castling queenside.a) 5 . seems rather automatic Now

three moves have been tried.a) 6 e3 stakes an immediate claim r the

centre, e.g. 6 .. .g4 7 e d3 8 'xd3 ' xd39 xd3 000 10 e xf3 11 gxf3 xe51 d c6 13 c3 le Bk a pawn downr nothing in PolGaleev, Vienna 1995.

6 g5 e7 7 h4!? was seen in Karpovtoma, Kosin (simu) 1997. Whiteshould not be able to get away with suchmoves as hh4 aer accepting a gambit-

pawn in the opening, but this illustrates the1 d4 d5 2 c4 e5

The problem with the Albin CounterGambit is that accurate play gives White agood game however he reacts.3 dxe5 d4 4 f3 c6 5 bd2

I prefer this to the traditional 5 g3 , whichis also good r White. With the exible textWhite rerains om making the anchetto incase alternative development of the

general nature of the game in the AlbinCounterGambit, namely th White suersinsuficient inconvenience r his booty.Aer 7 .. g4 8 bd h6 9 f4 d7 10 e3dxe3 1 1 fxe3 the usally desirabe option toctle queenside is no longer a realistic possibility with the pawn on since White woudthen be able to open lines r attk with bb4. This is one of the reasons behind 5

67




Consequenty Bk payed 1. . .d8 1 b3b6 and now White casted long: 13 000 f614 exf6 xf6 15 c5! ? e6 1 6 c4 xc4 xc4 and White was close to winning.

6 bd g4 (note that this positoncan arise in the main game aer 6 .. . PachmanPlachetka, Luhacovice 1968 continued h3 e6 8 g3 d 9 g c5 10g5! ge 11 00 00 1 �h ad8 13 f4f5 14 de4 a

White has good prospects even withoutthe extra pawn, his kingside being exceent.Aer 15 g4 h4 (1 5 .. .e3 16 xe3 dxe3 1c and Black has simi prblems with hand the light sqes in general) 16 d3! thedeady threat of f6+ rced a rtherconcession rom Black, and the sequence16 .. .f5 xe6 fxe4 (. . .xe6 18 g5 and19 d5+) 18 xf8 exd3 19 xd dxe 0

dS+ �h8 1 e resulted in a decisiveadvantage r White, the game ending 1 . . .d3 e6 f 3 d d4 4 e5 e8 5xd3 xe 6 xe 10.

b) 5 ... e6 6 bd (again this position canbe reached via the main game aer 5 bde6 6 and Black must decide whether ornot to allow bb4:

b ) 6 .. b3 d 8 b 000 9 b4!

arrJossien, Bethune 1999) . Whites thrustis an important idea to remember. By exerting more pressure on the d4pawn with thequeenside fianchetto White induced .. .000rom Black, fcilitating the creation of a

8

queenside attack with what is essentialy anobvious pawn break. There owed 9 ... b410 g3 ( 10 b4 is more to the int) 10 . . .h311 b4 xf 1 a8+ b8 13 a!? (the

simple 13 xf is enough to keep Whitefirmly in te driving seat) 13 . . .c6 and nowWhite got a bit excited and pushed with 14c5 g 15 c4 e8 (15 .. .e6 16 b6+�c aS xh 18 d5+ �d 19 xb8 !xb8 0 c+ �e8 1 xb8+ �d b6+ �e 3 xd4) 16 a �c ( 16 ... �d xd4) a5 �d 18 xb c8 19xb8 xh 0 d6+ c 1 a8 e e8 10. I am sure there is room r improvement om both sides in this ge, butit does demonstrate that Whites attackingchances e as good as acks in this openg.

b) 6 .. .d accepts the inevitabe. Aer b4 ge we have a uher brch: 8 b5 a59 a4 b6 10 b a6 1 1 xd4 b5 1 cxb5g6 13 xe6 xe6 14 e3 was already winning fr White in I.FaragoBercy, Budast

1968 lack resigned aer 14 . . .xe5?? 15e4) . More recenty White payed 8 b3 inVohinRewit, koernes 199. Aer8 g6 9 bxd4 xc4 10 xc6 xc6ack had insuficient compensation r thepan.5

g4

The most aggressive move. Others:a) 5 .. .e6 is the major alternative. Then 6

transposes to b in the note to Whitesh move. Instead White can elect to sortout matters in the centre with 6 b3 xc4 bxd4. White still has a material ead andthe d4pawn h been eiminated. Here aretwo spe continuations:

a) .. .xd4 8 xd4 xd4 9 xd4 d810 c e 1 1 e3 xf 1 xf c6 13 f4and White llowed up with �e, dc3

and then contested the dile to begin theending with a valuable extra pawn in GuimardPiaini, Argentina 1938.

.. . c5 8 e3 xf 9 xf d 10xc6 xc6 11 d b6 1 c g6 13



1 d4 d5 2 c4 : Black 's Sec on d Mo ve Al terna tives

c! DevlanFurhof, Rilton Cup 199.ow 13 . . .xg 14 a4+ �f8 (14 ... c6 Sxc6) S e4 d8 16 b4+ e7 17 gh3 18 gS h 19 e6 was winning r

Wite.b) S .. .f6 is the kind of gambit inspiredmove you e sure to come up against in thistype of opening. Aer 6 exf6 Back can recapture with either piece.

b 1) 6 .. .xf6 prepes to caste queenside.7 g3 g4 8 g 0-0-0 9 h3 fS 10 00 isTeichmannMieses, Berlin 1910, but thecourse of the game is still relevant today. Thequeen is no better on f6 than d7 or e7.Moreover Back must also take into countthe possibility of gS in these positions. Inthe game Back threw his kingside pawnsd, but to no avail, 10 . .. gS 1 1 a4 hS1 e ! successully sidestepping . .. gSg4 aswell as unleashing the gbishop. Aer1 .. .ge7 13 g4 (13 .. .e6 14 e4!xe4 S cS) 14 h4 xd3 S ex fS 16e4 �b8 Whites undisputed vantage h

ittle to do with his extra pawn.b) 6 .. .xf6 7 8 b3! . Yet again we

see this idea of homing in on the d4pawn, atheme that is responsibe r the recentpoplarity of S bd. BurmakinHalser,Gra 1997 went 8 .. .e6 9 d3 f7 10bxd4 xd4 11 xd4 cS 1 b3! b613 e3 0-0 14 xd8 d8 S xb6 cxb616 e3 , and Whites points le had doubed

to two pawns.c) S ... fS 6 b3 (6 g3? b4) 6 ... b4+ 7d and Black has the familiar problem ofthe insecure d4pawn.

d) S . . .b4 6 xd+ 7 xd helps onlyWhite, e.g. 7 .. .g4 8 b3!? b8 9 gge7 10 0-0-0 Marshallhowalter, UA Ch.1909. A number of players are yet to enthis lesson nearly a century later.

6 a3By now we e well aware that nudgingthe apawn fard comes in very hdy rlater.6 e7

Putting the eSpawn in lacks sights andcearing the way r the king to caste. WhenWhite has not deployed his bishop on gBacks queen does not have to reside on the

h3c8 diagona.7 h3

Without the trtional threat of (er gg3 and g) ...g4, ...d7 and ...h3Blacks bishop struggles r a worthy role.White already knows that his opponents

queenside provides him with a target in theshape of the b7pawn (not frgetting moreserious attacking options should Black ctleqeenside), so daying the commitment ofthe kings bishop with the use S bd d6 is quite ogical. jh5

7 .. . xf3 8 xf3 0-0-0 has also beenpayed, aer which White is garanteed an

advantage with 9 d3 (9. . .xeS 10 fS+), 9f4 and 9 gS, e .g. 9 .. .f6 10 exf6 gxf6 1 1f4 e4 1 d d3 1 3 e3 xc4 1 4 exd3f7 S e ge7 16 0-0 etc.8 a4

Threatening 9 xd4.8 .000

Ironically lack has sriiced a pawn tothen ind himself coming under attack, and

herein lies the problem. It is true that Whiteis yet to get his kingside in order but, r themoment, his king is safer than lacks. �b8

Dending the apawn bere b4bS

9




comes. 9 .. .xe5 10 xe5 'xe5 1 1 g4 is verygood r White according to Ftacnik. Hegives the ine 1 .. .g6 1 f3 ' e4 1 3 'xa7d3 14 e3 to support this reasonable as

sessment but does not mention 1 . . .d3 .However, once White addresses the attkon his rook and the subsequent ...dxe hisdual threats against h5 and a7 put him backin the driving seat, e.g. 1 a dxe 13 g!g6 14 'xa7 c6 15 b ' d6 1 6 'a8+ �c717 ' aS+ b6 (17 ... �b?? 18 e5) 18 'a7+�c8 19 a6+ �c7 0 c3 and, with theknight defended, Whites next wil be 'a7+owed by xb6.1 0 g4

Another ature of this paicular system.White is afrded the luxury of being able topay with a more cavalier style on the kingside because his attack is already under way

on the other flank.1 . . . ig6 1 1 ib2 xe5Restablishing meria equilibrim, alit

temporarily to Bks lnerle backrank.1 2 xe5 'xe5 1 3 f3 e4 1 4 ixd4!

The point, since aer 14. . .xd4 15 xd4Black cannot take on either d4 or h 1 in viewof the mate on e8 . Consequently White re

mains with his extra pawn intat as well asenoying play against Blacks king.1 4. c5

Opting to tuck the king away in the coerrather than weaken a6, c6 and the ha8 di-

70

agonal with 14. . .b6, when 15 d is verygood r White.1 5 e+ �as

1 6 ig2Of course there is nothing wrong with the

simpe plan of linig up the bishop on thesame, cle diagonal upon which Blks kingstds, and the text prepes inally tocaste. However, 16 d is another reminderthat Blacks back rank is cause fr concern,

e.g. 16 ...xd+ 17 'xd and Blacks king isalone on the qeenside!1 6. . .f6 1 7 00 xc4

Aer 17 .. .'xe 18 'b5 acks queenstands on an awkward square because thethreatened 19 d4 clears the way r ' xb7mate. locking the diagonal does not help,e.g. 18 .. .e4 19 ae 'd3 0 e3 'c(0 ...' d7 1 xf6) 1 xf6 f6 e , or

18. . .e4 19 ae 'd3 0 h4. Nevertheess the text hdly contributes to Blackschances of fending of the attack.1 8 fc1 e6 1 bxc5

With his king under ire and seriouslylacking in the dence department Blackcannot expect to suive much longer.1 . d7 20 id4

A nice win results rom 0 d4! 'xe5 1

c6 ( 1 .. .bxc6 'xc6+ mates).20 . . .e40 .. .b 1 c6.

21 e5!The beginning of the end.



1 d4 d5 2 c4 Black 's Sec on d Mo ve A lterna tives

21 xc5 22 c5 ix c5 23 xe4 Jxd4

24 xb7+ �xb7 25 c6+ �b8 26xc5 10

Game 12San Seundo-alleo

Linar 1997

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 xd5 4 e3 e55 c3 b4 6 d2 xc3 7 xc3?

In the good old days 7 bxc3 w universaly payed. The text expoits the ing pinon the d-file to ensure that a piece ands ond4, aer which White should stand betterde to his bishop pair lack wi miss hisdark-squed bishop).7 exd4

In Matamoros-Insua Mellado, eville000, Bk side-stepd the issue with 7 . .. e4,keeping the centre closed. Ununately rBlack aer the ambitious 8 e g5 9 h4 f610 g3 g4 1 1 b3! f5 1 c4 d6 13 d5 e514 d4 f7 15 b5+ the bishops had taken

over none8 e2

The point. Thanks to the pin Back is indanger of surrendering his bishop r nothg.

8 g4?Introducing an uncompromising reationthat is typical of Chigorin fans. Black enoysmore spae and development d aready hsan extra pawn, so this attempt at disruption is

logical. The maor alternative is to developthe other knight on f6 or e7.

a) 8 .. .f6 9 xd4 and now:a) 9 . .e4?! 10 b5! gives White a ce

advantage. A same ine is 10 . . .xd+ 11xd 0-0 1 xc7 xc3 13 bxc3 g4 14xa8 xd 15 xd xa8 and Black was aawn down in Costa-Baumhus, Gelsenkirchen 199 1.

9 . . .g4 10 a4 d7 11 b5 alsodrew attention to te c7-pawn in ememaHeisel, Germy 1998. Aer 1 1 .. .0-0 Whitecoud have played 1 x+but instead contined the theme with 1 f4!? e8 13xg7 g8 14 c3 g4 1 5 f3 etc.

Even 9 . ..00 runs into 10 b5! e.g.10 ... g5 1 1 xc7 (1 1 h4!? is popuar butcommittal) 1 . . .g4 1 b3 ad8

k has a developmen le in return r

the pawn but Whites position is quite sounow 13 xb7 c5 14 h3 e4 seems riskyfr White but 15 b5! d6 16 dS! throwsa spner in the works. Not surprisingly ittook a computer to discover this tidying resource, which leads to ending in whichWhites points ead is decisive aer16 . . .xd5 (16. . .e6 17 xc6!, or 16. . .d717 d) 17 xd5 xdS 18 hxg4 xc3 19

bxc3.a4) 9 .. .xd4 10 xd4 xd4 1 1 xd4 0-01 c c6 is typical of how Blacks wilingness to trade is too accommodating whenWhite is in possession of the bishop pair.

7 1



A tt ack ing with 1 d4

TChristensen-Charles, uncoast 1999 continued 13 e e6 14 b3 15 c3 e616 f3 d5 17 8 18 �f e7 19 e4b6 0 b4 and Whites advantage was begin

nng to take shaeb) 8 ge7 9 xd4 wih a her branch:b ) 9 xd4 10 'xd4 'xd4 11 xd4

0-0 1 c4 e8 13 0-0-0 c6 14 c3 f515 he e5 16 f f6 17 e4 e6 18 f4,Brukov-eman, Chgorn Memorial 1998Black has the same roblem as in a4

b) 9 0-0 Now he sfest roue o a defnite edge is 10 xc6 'xc6 1 1 'd4 g6 1d3 f5 13 xf5 xf5 14 'f4 d6 150-0 when Whte enoyed he suerior mnoriece in KNikolaidis-Miladinovic, Aegina1996 However, Im sure youre wonderingwhat haens f White hits the c7awn!Ceainly 10 b5! ? g5 leaves he knightless actively laced on e7 than f6 (e4 is unavailable, r examle), and n HeneckHermann, Munch 1998, Whte elot hisdierence: 11 h4 h6 1 xc7 b8 13

d5! e6 14 f4 fd8 1 5 h5! rcng heexchange of queens

Reurning to 8 g4, by inroducing a inof his own Black refses to gve way in hecentre and threatens to reinrce hs gri byctling queenside Therere White s ractically rced nto comlicaions that requrecarel handling om both layers f3 xf3

By far the most exctng connuaion, done hat we are hay o go along withThere are several alternatives, eh leading tovarying degrees of diiculty r Black

a) 9 e6 lacks consstency Black ishardly osed to exloit ff3 here Aer 10xd4 the line 10 0-0-0 1 1 ' a4! ge7 1xc6 xc6 13 b5 s good r Whie, Mastrokoukos and AndTzermaianos oering

the variation 13 a6? 14 xc6 xc6 15 xc6 bxc6 1 6 xg7 hg8 17 f6 d3 18g xe3+? 19 �d, traing the rook Instead 10 xd4 1 1 xd4 results in he nowfamiliar ending in which Black will nd his

72

oonents bishos dicult to handle However, he more tesng 1 1 xd4!? f6 1 a!looks ineresting eg 1 d7 13 c c614 d d6 15 c8 16 b4 e7 17

d3 with a romisng lead, when 17 f518 e4! d8 19 d hels Whte increase hisadvantage in view of 19 xd4 0 b5+

b) 9 d7 also makes little sense eg 10xd4 f6 1 1 'b3!? 'xb3 1 xb3 b6 1300-0 0-0-0 14 a6+ �b8 15 d ge7 16hd e6 17 e4 wih long-erm rosecshat White conveed in Tunkem, Rssia 1996

c) 9 f6 10 xd4 0-0-0

It almos aears tha Black can get awaywith his cavalier lay, but White has a vesrong move n 1 1 a4! Then 1 1 xd4 1xd4 xf3 13 gxf3 xf3 14 g g4 15xg4! xg4 16 xa7 'h 17 �d 'xh+

18 c3 sends Whites king o c3 but leavesBlacks in more danger whle 1 d7 1xc6 xc6 13 xa7 nets Whe a sfeawn This leaves g5 1 xc6 'xe3+13 e he8, when chandorKeldsen,Dansh Tem Ch 0 saw Whie comably deal with the threat down the e-le: 14c! e4 oth he lnes 14 bxc6 15 xf6gxf6 16 g4, and 14 xf3 15 f5+ are

winning easily r White) 15 e4 xe4 16xd8 xe 17 d! c5 18 xf7 h5+ 19�f xf7 0 f 'd6 1 'f5+ e6 e 10

d) 9 d8 10 xd4 xd4?? 1 1 xd4



1 d4 d 2 c4: Black s Se co nd Mo ve Al terna tives

lack has been unished r leaving hebisho on g4 with he loss of material, thelesser evil being 1 1 .. . xd4 1 xd4 xd4 13exd4.

e) 9 .. . g5 10 exd4 d7 1 1 d5! unlehesthe bisho and argets the g7awn..Pedersen-J.Andersen, Aarhus 1999 wen1 1 .. .ce7 1 h4 g6 13 h5 g5 14 c !with a clear advantage to White.1 0 gxf3 'xf3 1 1 xd4

For he momen a least White is bes advised to kee his dark-squared bisho in lay.11 xd4!? is ustied aer 11...xh 1 1xg7, e.g. 1 ... xh 13 a4! f6 14 xh8000 15 g4+ b8 16 d etc. Howeveraer the sensible 1 1 . . .xd4! 1 xd4 xh13 xg7 00-0! 14 xh8 xh Whie musbe careul. For instance 15 d4? fails o15 . . . h 16 e f6 17 g7 (17 h3+

g4) 17. . .g4! when lack is on the warath. The only move is 15 g7, e.g.15 ... h4+ 16 g3 (16 g3? h6!)16 ... b 17 f xb 18 c b6 wih aosition that favours Whie bu is less omising than in the main game.1 1 . . .'xh1 1 2 xc6 f6

Ruling out xg7. It might be more accurate to irst lay 1 . . . xh! ? as 13 .. .xg7?

loses to the rk on g3 . Therere 13 g4f6! is best when 14 xf6 gxf6 15 ef8 16 b4+ g7 17 g f8 18 bdraws, while 17 xb7 leaves Whies queenoo far om he vulnerable king r my lik

ing. Instead 14 xg7! h 15 d g8 16 xf6 xf6 17 xf6 bxc6 18 c its therook and bishos against wo rooks. lacksextra awns are weak but he hawn is

assed, and Whie h only hree le. Neverheless Whie eectively has an extra iece,which should ti the balance in his fvour.Another ossibility is 1 .. .bxc6 13 xg7xh when Whie ativaes the queen bereaking he rook. 14 f3 e7 1 5 xh8 d816 c3 has roved successl, e.g. 16 ... d517 e4 h 18 e d6 19 h3 g5 0f g6 1 f5 xf5 xf5 e6 3 xg6 hxg6 4 f3 c5 5 e5 a6 6 andWhite evenually won in KrallmnHeisel,undesliga 1997. I refer aburins 14 g4with he idea of meeting 14 ...d8 with 15d

In aburinJ.Cobb, ritish Ch. 1999 ex

chges led to a winning ending r Whiteaer 15 .. .xd+ 16 xd d6+ 17 d4 f618 xh8 e7 19 d3 xd4 0 exd4 h5 1e h6 g6 h 4 3 g7 f7 4 xf7xf7 5 h6 e6 6 f4 ec.1 3 a5

Also good is 13 e5 with a view o rading queens and relying on the two bishos inhe subsequent ending. Here are two tyical

exmles:a) 13 ... e4 14 d4 00 15 0-00 xd4 16xd4! c5 17 c3 ad8 18 xd8 xd8 19c4 LugovoiTerasi, Finland 1998. Notsurrisingly lack ued down he assivity

73



A t t a c ki n g w it h 1 d4

that llows 19 f8 but 19 . .dS? 20 �xf7 21 e4 b5 22 xd5+ �f8 23 e5 sawthe bishops dominate the entire board.

b) 13 . .0-0 14 f3 xf3 15 xf3 d5 16

d4 8 17 �f2 was played in EhlvestMertanen in the same event. he poblemr Black in these endings is the rather inefctive knight which combines with therooks less well th its opposite numberworks with the rook and bishops.1 3 xh2

Othersa) 13 . .0-0 14 xf6 gxf6 15 g �h8 16

0-0-0 fd8 17 d3 didnt do Blacks king

any vou in Galisky-Protko Po1999

b) 13 .e4 might be best 14 d4 0-0 150-0-0 b6 16 c4 xd4 17 x4 givingWhite the usual bons of superior re wer. 4 4+ c6

1 5 0-0-0

Improving both king and rook makesmore sense than 15 xc6 g3+ 16 �e2h2+ (16. 0-0 17 e5 g 18 xg4 xg419 e7+ �h8 20 d4) 17 �d3 0-0 even fWhites kng is safe on d3. 5 0-0

Black preferred 15 . .c7 in AverkinBatkiants Krasnodar 1998. White immediately made sure that his opnents king wasto stay in the centre r the time being 16b4 an now 1 6. . .dS? lack still hproblems with his king aer 16. . .e7 17

74

xe7+ �xe7 18 xb met with 17 xd5cxd5 18 b5+ �d8 19 xb7+ �c8(19 . .xb7 20 d6+ �c8 2 1 a6 xa6 22xa6+ �d7 23 b7+ and the queen and

bishop have n while the rooks have yet tostir) 20 d6+ �b8 (20 . .�d8 21 xf7+xf7 22 d6+ �c8 23 a6+) 21 a6+ b622 c4 1-0

The deadly check on eS will be a ttingtestament to the power of the bishop par

15 . . .h6 worked out okay r Black inKoniushkov-Dubinsky Russia 1997. Aer16 xb7 0-0 17 d6 d 18 f gS 19xS? cxS 20 d4 8 White was rcedinto 21 xg7+ xg7 22 xg7 xe3 23xe3 �xg7 24 xdS hS 25 f4 h4 26 �d2and a draw w reed Borowing Averknside 16 b4 looks good e.g. 16 . . .xe3+? 17d2 b6 (17 . . .d 18 d6) 18 e + �d8

19 e7+ �c8 20 h3+ etc. his time16 .. dS is even worse r Black 17 xdScxdS 18 bS+ d8 19 xb7+ c7 20 cS+�xb7 21 xdS+ �c7 22 e5+ �b6 23d4+ �c7 24 d7+ and mate.1 6 jxf6!

Parting with the good bishop is woh ithere if it means damaging the pawn cover inont of Blacks king.1 6 gxf6 7 x7

Opening the b-le is not a problem rWhite. Another option is 17 d3 8 1 8g4 �h8 19 f3 h4 20 c4 as in Pereyra-Myc WorldunorCh 1997. his lk



1 d4 d 2 c4 : Black s Sec on d Mo ve Alt erna tives

rather romising in view of the weaknesseson f6 and h7. The game went 0. . .g8 1d6 g3 f g4 3 xh4 xh4 4g! ? f8 5 c4 xc4+ 6 xc4 and he

extra knigh eventuay roved too much rack.1 7 . . .ab 1 a6 e5 1 a3

Dending b and e3 and suoing bohc5 and d6. Noe tha acks extra awns sit into ur grous! are irreevan a hemoment, three of hem busy keeing heking comany.1 . . fe?

Negecting the f7-awn. The esser evi is19 . . . be8 0 d3.20 g 1 + h 21 d6

21 . .e71. . .xe3+?? xe3 xe3 3 xf7

mate.

22 c4 g?. . .f8 is necess. Then Whie swichesto the h-e: 3 h ! e.g . 3 .. .d7 (aer3 . . .xe3+ 4 xe3 xe3 5 xf7+ ackmust take the knight as 5 . . .g7 6 g+mates) 4 d3 f5 5 xf5 xf5 6 xf5and the three ieces wi have the uerhand.23 xf7+ xf7 24 xg+ �xg 25

xa7 e 26 a4Thanks to the in Whie wins the race.2 6 . . . h5 27 d2 h4 2 �e2 h3 1 -0

and ack resigned rather than wai r 9f.

Game 13V . lvanov-Rausis

Moscow 1994

1 d4 d5 2 c4 5

a) Less ouar and ess sound is . . .f6.Then 3 cxd5 xd5 4 e4 f6 5 c3 e5 iswhat ack is waiing r and shoud therere be avoided, so the atien 4 is thebes way to make something of Whies eracentre awn. Aer 4 . . .f5 5 b3 ack hastried two moves:

a) 5 .. .c6 6 c3 xc3 7 bxc3 b6 andnow in MuharovIin, evastoo 000Whie sough an immediate decision with 8e4!

Then the esser evi is 8 ... d7 with a siabe advanage r White but Iins 8 . . .xe4?

a east sees o iustrae wha can befaack if an unohodox dence is mishanded: 9 b5 (threatening 10 e5) 9 . . .f6 10e6 d5 11 xd5 xd5 1 c4 xf3 13gxf3 0-00 14 xc6 xd4 15 dS and theiece by far ouweighed the awns.a 5 ... e6 6 c3 c6 7 e4! xc3 8 exf5! is

ceary beter r White hanks to he bishoair and subsequent ay on the ight sques.

b) Another quite rare attem to muddythe waters is . .. c5. Then 3 cxd5 and now:b ) 3 . . .xd5 4 f3 c6?! 5 c3 d8 6

d5 and acks exerimen had been rightyunished in zeta-Martinez Vidosoa, P

7



A tta ck ing with 1 d4

lona 000. 4 .. .cxd4 5 c3 ' 6 xd4f6 imroves, although 7 b3 c7 8 g3,r examle, is leasant r White.

b) 3 .. .f6 4 dxcS xdS 5 d! Whies

lan is to gain an advantage by develoing athe exense of the queen with f3, c3 andc etc. The attemt to avoid this with5 . . .e4 leads to a clear lus r White aer 6f3 eS (or 6 . .. xcS 7 e3 c6 8 c3 xd9 xd!) 7 c3 xc3 8 xc3 xd+ 9xd f6 10 b4 odgorny).

. . .fS is designed to develo the bishoactively bere suoing dS with ...e7e6,the c6square oen le ree r the queensknight. Instead of allowing such a se u bymeeting Blacks second move with rouinelay, this game aures an uncomromisingreatmen by White.3 cxd5

Now 3 .. .' xdS? ! breaks a golden rule anddeseedly loses time and sace aer 4 c3so Black frst eliminates the knigh bererecaturing on dS.

3 . . .xb1 4 'a4+ !

By no means an obvious ossibility, thischeck hrows a small sanner in he works.4 . . .c6

Now that Black has already arted wih

his bisho (and the dS-awn) the exchangeof queens is sure to benet White. 4 . . . d7 5'xd7+ xd7 6 xb gf6 7 f3 b6 8 e3bxdS regains the awn but does not alerthe fct that White has a 1 awn maoriy

76

on the cenre files to add to the denite advantage of he bisho ar. nkiov-Trka,weden 000 is a good exmle of how aient lay hels Whie nuure his lus: 9

e6 10 d3 e7 11 e4 b6 1 00 00 13e3 fd8 14 fc

Blk should setle r a crmed bu solidosiion here wih 14. . .c6, when Whie continues to build u the ressure. Instead Blackstruck out with 14. . .cS, bu aer 15 dxcS

xd3 16 cxb6 axb6 17 c7 ad8 18 esoon und himself a awn down. 4 .. .c6 alsoinvites 5 dxc6, when 5 ...xc6 6 xb givesWhite an edge. However, the treatmentadoed in he main gme can lead to comlex lay hat is near winning r Whiteshould Black be temed into mixing it elyon.5 xb1 'xd5 6 f3

I like this move. It is erfecly natural owant to erec a good centre around whichWhite can mobilise his suerior rces (wobishos) . Passive lay om Black will ineviably allow Whie to generate a healthy itiative, challenging the centre will oen lin rthe bisho air and as we will see tingo usti the queens early central ostingwih tacics backres on Blak.

6 . . d7One of a number of moves available.a) 6 .. .fS is a dubious attemt to kee

Whites e-awn a bay. However, with hislighsqued bisho no longer around to



1 d4 d 2 c4: Black s Sec on d Mo ve Al terna tives

hel the cause Black i s oorly reared r abatle on the ligh squares. ConsequenlyWhite should carry on anyway 7 e4!

7 . . . e4 8 c4 b5 (8 .. .fS 9 c f6 10e looks uncomale r Blak, while 10g4 and 1 1 gS is woh a try) 9 xdS bxa4 10xe4 f6 11 c a3 1 bxa3 ad Whiesbishos are ust as efecive wihou queenson the board.

b) 6 .. .bS also mees with 7 e4. Then:

b ) 7 . . . bxa4 8 exdS cxdS 9 bS+ d7 10c6 c8 11 xdS as in BarsovRausis,U ntergrombach 1995 , again fvours thebishos.

b) 7 .. .d8 8 d sees both queens return to base bu, whereas Whie h a roudcentre Black has an odd queenside and nolighsquared bisho. Aer 8 . .e6 9 3 f6 10e3 White has more sace beter awns

better centre and the bisho air.c) Belovs 6 . . .e5 !? is sensible. Aer 7 dxeSBlack has ried two moves:

c) 7 .. .d7 8 f4 and now Black shouldbe only slightly worse aer 8 .. .xe5 9 dor 9 e4. Instead .vanovkatchkov, Chigorin Memorial 1997, wen 8 .. .c5 9 e4!d8 (9 . . .xa4 10 exdS, and 10 ... cxdS?? losesto 1 1 b5+) 10 c4 e6 1 1 g3 cS 1

h3 and Black had insuicient comensation r the awn. Black did manage o disrut Whites king, but only at he cost ofsubecting his own to a similar te: 1. . .bS 13c3 14 a3 b4 15 c4 bxa3 16 bx3 xa3

17 xc6+ f8 18 c4 e7 19 a4 b0 f and White had ust managed o keehis advantage intac.

c) 7 .. .xeS 8 f4 fS 9 d a6 re

quires aience om White who h edgeaer 10 e3 c5 1 1 c4 e6 1 g3 whenhe kingside rces are ready r acion.

d) Now we come to he teming 6 .. .f67 e4 xe4?!

Wih Whites rook standing alone on b

7 . . .xe4 is understadable, but rather thanhe automatic 8 e4 White should rst mea oint of highlighting his undisuted suremacy on the light squares with 8 c4!.This gains a vital temo on the queen andinroduces dangerous ossibilities involvingthe otenially vulnerable f7awn aer8 fS (8 . . .xd4?? 9 xf7+) 9 e4 xe10 e when three imoant moves must

be addressed:d) 10 ... b 1 1 b3! bxc4 1 b7 e6 1300 urs ou well r White aer eiher13 . . .xe 14 xf7+ d8 15 b7, LorscheidVan der Raaf Ostend 199, or13 . e7 14 xa8 00 15 xa7, Lorscheidtromer, Bundesliga 199.d UmskayaPoliakova, Russian

Womens Ch. 1996, coninued 10 .. .xg11

g e4 1 b3 d7 (1 . . .xb 1 3 xb7,e.g. 13 . . .f 14 xf7+!? d8 15 f4) 13xf7+ d8 14 a eS 15 e3 b 16d xe3 17 xe3 g6 18 c c7 19ad and the iece was more eective than

7 7



A tta ck ing with 1 d4

the awns.d3) 10 .. .xb is even more un aer 11

b3!

Now Kishnev-Pronold, Munich 199went 1 1. ..fS 1 xb7 a+ 13 d b614 c8+ 10 in view of 14 . .d8 15 +.Insead 1 1 .. .bS kees Whites queen out ofb but aer 1 d3 a 13 00 Blacksqueen is traed and White might anywayinltrate with his queen on f7. Finally

1 1 . . .d7 1 d3 a 13 0-0 is an irrelevanimroveent on 1 1 .. .bS.

With the sober 6 .. .d7 Black gransWhite his wish with a view to challengingwith a timely . .. e7-e5. d6

Desite its recommendation by a couleof commentators I would steer clear of7 . . .b6 8 exdS xa4 9 dxc6 bxc6 because

10 dS! again exloits Blacks vulnerability onthe light squares White has a deinite lusaer 10 . ..d7 1 1 c4, and 10. . .e6 1 1 dxc6b4+ 1 d xd+ 13 xd 000+ is toogenerous. e2

8 e3 eS 9 e transoses. However, ifWhite i s not in the mood to see Black lant aawn on eS he can do so himself e.g. 8 eS! ?

g6 9 a e6 10 e and he rice rWhites extra sace and the two bishos i sBlacks knigh outost on dS. e5

The idea behind laying 8 e rather th

78

8 e3 is to be ready to meet the modest8 . . . e6 with 9 f4, when 9 . . .b 10 xb4xb 1 1 c3 gf6 gives Black the traditional assive but solid set u. Evenually

aer bringing his kingside ieces into thegme White migh consider ushing his bawn in order to oen he queenside r hisieces, hus reminding Black who rules theligh squares. In his kind of osition Blackshould reain om ring his remaining rthe knight, as then Whites bishos woulddominate. e3

+9 .. .gf6 10 d b 1 1 xb4 xb

1 f 000 13 g3! was the course of KishnevRausis Moscow 1987. Even with such asound structure Black nds himself underressure on the light squares, his time the

h3-c8 diagonal the source of activity rWhites uncontested bisho. Aer 13 ... exd414 xd4 eS 15 h3+ c7 16 f4 he817 e6+ e6 18 xeS+ Whie was well ono. This examle and Whites undeniablelead in the main gme suggest that erhasBlack should not exchange queens. In fctBelov rooses (9 . ..gf6 10 d) 10. . .c7as an imrovemen on KishnevRausis,

above, and there seems nothing wrong wihthis lan. Of course it does no aler the assessment of he gme being in Whites fvour, bu Blacks queen can contribute tolay on he dark sques in an eo to make



1 d4 d 2 c4 Black s Se co nd Mo ve Alt erna tives

u r the deciency on he other colourcomlex.1 O x x+ 1 1 2

11 c3 gf6 1 c4 0-0 13 e l

lowed by bringing the kings rook to d isequally good, guaranteeing White the beterchances as the ending aroaches.1 1 e 1 2 dxe5

Avoiding 1 d f5 13 c3 00 14 ch8 when Black enoys too much activiy.1 2 xe5 1 3 d4

1 3 0-0Black refers to kee his king in ront of

Whites kingside awn maority, dDonevsroosed 13 .. 0-0-0 runs the risk of walkinginto an attack should White launch his minority.1 4 g4?!

White lans to use the f5square but this is

dealt with quite comably by Blak, whoges the time to draw the sting ou of Whitesbishos. Belovs 14 e desees a t.Combining 15 hd with f3f4 and ostinghe bisho on will ose Black roblems,and the reemtive strike 4 .. .f5 does notdiminish Whites ull aer 15 e5 5 16xf5 5 17 h3 according to Belov. Theadvantage of the bisho air requires a

tience in that the scoe of the bishos tendsto gradually increase during the course of thegame. As long as there awns on both ankshe defender will not have an easy task.1 4 dS 1 5 e2

White must dend the d3-square beremoving his knight. Consequently Blackwases no time imroving his ieces.1 5 c5 1 d1 d

That Whites strategy beginning wih 14g4 is indeed fulty is demonsraed by thefct that here Black has he otion of accenuating his inuence on the dk squ with16 ...g5!?. Then 17 b4 b6 18 f5 7g6 isnot clear while 17 f5 xe3+ 18 xe37g6 looks even. Note that the rash g-g4ractically invied this idea by creating a holeon f4. Of course the text s sensible, too,rearing to me his resence fel on the dle.1

17 f5 xe3+ 18 xe3 5+ 19 gxf5ad8 0 xd7 xd7 oers Black gooddrawing chances.1 1 8 5 x5!

Better than 18 .. . 7g6?! 19 xd7 xd7 0d df8 1 a4! when Black is too assive.1 9 gx5 adS 20 xd xd?

Whoos! Forced is 0. . .xd7 1 dxe3+ xe3 e7 wih an edge to White.21 x ax 22 4 1 0

Ununely r Blak er . .d3+ 3e3 the knigh has nowhere to hide.

oncuonGme 1 1 suggests that the Albin CounterGambits bark is considerably worse han its

bite. Moreover White seems to have themos un engineering an attack aganst theking, and Blacks rather transent oeningsequence makes Whites task eier! In Gme1, like the secre of a magicians rick nallyrevealed, recauring on c3 with he bisho isobvious aer the in on the le has beenointed out. Routine lay leaves Black withnothing to show r the removal of the dark

squared bisho, yet White is better rearedr the comlications. Rausis d iends nolonger have the success they once enoyedwith .. .f5 (Gme 13) because the less orthodox lines are simly unsound.

79



C H APTER FOUR

King's Idian and Benoni:The Four Paws Attack

1 d4 t6 c4 g6 3 c 3 g7 4 e4 d6 5

f4

It is viualy impossibe to deny Backsome so of counterplay in both he KIDand the Benoni, even if Whie is no intenton choosing an atackng sysem My initiaseection of he Four Pawns Attac was no

in fct, based upon the ct tha it h a reputation r being very aggressive, and nor wit because the sae ine can be adoptedaganst both dences athough this is convenient r a of us I was atracted o it because it is possibe to approach the openingactivey without having to go overbod, thevery presence of Whie's imposing cenreproviding enough r Blk to worry abou

In the K move order Back's ses ineis undoubtedly the man ine wih 9 g4(and 9 :e), which is dealt with in Game14. Due to the respective pawn sructuresmuch of the game revoves around White'sever-presen advance e4-e5, which White isoen happy to make even a the cost of apawn his thrust is also a major characeristic in he line with 9 . bS (Game 15) heequay ambitious but more reiabe 7 b5 ofGame 16 ams r Benkoype play, while inGame 17 Black hods bak the cpawn togive the game a dierent feel atogether.Game is a pure Benoni, Black aowing a

80

most annoying check on b5 .

Game 14Baias-Minasia

Yeran Zol 2000

1 d4 t6 c4 g6 3 c3 g7 4 e4 d6 5

f4 0-05 . .g4 speeds White's development, eg.6 e2 xe2 7 xe2 and now

a) 7 . 00 f3 c5 9 dxc5 dxcS 10 e5fd7 1 1 00 c6 12 d vours White.Note that 9 .aS? does not work here 10cxd6 xe4 11 xe4 xc3+ 12 �f andWhite is winning aer 12 f6 1 3 dxe7 e14 xb7 a6 15 d2 etc. Vser assesses 9

d5 e6 10 e5 exd 1 1 exf6 :e 12 g7 xe2+13 xe2 unceb) 7 c6 e5 ( d7 9 e5) 9 dxeS

dxe5 10 fxe5 g4 1 1 g5 is good r Whitesince 11..c 12 d5 cxe5? runs into 13h3, eg. 13 . .h6 14 f4 g5 15 g3 xf3+ 16xf3 e5 17 c3, or 13 . . xf3+ 14 xf3e5 1 5 c3 Black's esser evil is 12 . . 0-0 130-0 :e 14 f6? cxeS 15 e7+ xe7 16xe7 e6 but here i s ceny not enour the exchange.6 f3 c5

a) 6 . e5? 7 dxe5 dxe5 xd :xd 9xeS is poor r Back, eg 9 . xe4 10



King s Indian and Beno ni Fo ur Pa wns A tta ck

xe4 f6 11 xf6+ xf6 1 f3 (or 1d), or 9 a6 10 e3!

b) 6 bd7?! 7 eS e8 8 cS ! uses Whitesridabe centre awns to the u ke

brisKaesis Greece 1994 continued 8 c6 9e3 b6 (9 dxcS 10 dxcS a 11 3!) 10cxd6 exd6 11 c4 bS 1 b3 b6 13 0-0wih a signicant sace advantage and grion the centre

c) 6 g4 7 e3 fd7 8 h3! xf3 9xf3 eS 10 dxeS dxeS 11 fS c6 1 000d4 13 f c6 14 g4 a S gS fd8 16 h4was ore un o Whites side of the boardin GekDaanovic, Begrade 1988 d5 e 8 e2 exd5 9 cxd5 g4

The aor aternative is 9 e8 teingWhite into he wid 10 eS We wi concentrate on the ore sober but no ess coroising 10 d

a) 10 a6?! 11 a4 weakens the b6-squarea) 1 bd7 1 0-0 c4 is best et with

he sensibe 13 h , eg 13 cS 14 eS!dxeS S eS xeS 16 xc4 e8 (16 fS 17

f4) 17 gS h6 18 h4 ce4 19 xe4xe4 0 g3, YroaVaiser, ochi 1984when 0 xdS? (0 hS Yroa) 1 xf7!turned out we r White

a) 1 g4 ooks too bunt, 1 c4! being enough to kee White on to:

a 1) 1 fS 13 xg4 g4 14 eS (14 00! ?xc3 S bxc3 xe4 16 b3 is interestin14 dxeS S 0-0 exf4 16 xf4 d 17 h

d7 18 d6 f8 19 d f6 0 ae,chidtAeer, Gerany 1994a) 1 xc3? 13 bxc3 xe4 14 0 and

now the recoended ine is 14 fS S aSf6 16 b (16 b6!? a7 17 d3 e8 18c4 owed by ining the queen and bishoon the a-h8 diagona is another good an)16 xc4 (16 c7 17 d3 e7 18 b6a7 19 c4) 1 7 xc4 xaS 18 e xc3 19

b!? e3+ 0 h e4 1 e whenWhites ore acive ieces get the vote Thegae PenziasMashian, Te Aviv 1993 is agood iustration of the robes Backight exeence aer arting wih he dark

squared bisho: 14 h6 S aS fS 16 d3e8 17 b6 a7 18 e d7?! 19 xfSgxfS 0 c4 xb6 1 axb6 a8 b d73 h f6 4 h4 f8 a3! f7 6

g3+ h8 7 g6 e8 8 xe8+ xe8 9xf6+ 10 b) 10 bd7 11 0-0 c4 is siiar to a

bu without he weakness on b6 1 a4 cS13 f3 b6 14 eS dxeS S eS xeS 16 xc4e8 (16 fS 17 d6 b8 18 bS e6 19e3 b3 0 xfS! xd 1 e7+ h8 xd and he ieces do ore than the queenaccording to Geiov) 17 d6 e6, CheinGranda Zuniga, Buenos Aires 199, when 18dS is roising

c) 10 a6 11 0-0 c7 is the ain inending a decent hoe r the knight ratherhan autoaicay aying a7-a6 Aer 1a4 a6 13 f3 b8 14 aS! d7 S e bVaisers 16 db! secures White a usConsequeny 1 b6 is fvoured, with achoice r Back aer 13 e b8 14 f3

c) 14 a6 1S c4 bS achieves the desiredexansion bu gives Whie wo roisingotions

) 16 axbS axbS 17 aS d7 18 eS b419 exf6 bxc3 0 g7 cxb was the enteaining course aken in Barrett-Povah, British

League 1999 Ununaey the gae wasagreed drawn aer 1 xb xb c4b4 3 xd6 xe+ 4 xe xf4 S eSb4 6 e4 e8 7 h3 c4, but Kinsmansuggests 6 e with the nice idea of 7

8 1



A tta cking with 1 d4

xf7! �xf7 8 e7+!c1 16 xd6 s the other good move

Kozul-Marovc, Toronto 1990 went16 'xd6 17 e5 'd8 18 d6 e6 19 axb5

axb5 0 exf6 xf6 1 d5 d White enoyed nitatvec The sold 14 a6 makes more sense,

when Whte has to decde where to put thed-knght

c 1 oth Kinsm d Vaser prefer 1 5db 1, d ths mpressve regroupng looksgood fr White, eg 1 5 d7 16 a3 c4 17cb5! xb5 18 axb5 c3 19 b 1 cxb 0xb xb 1 xb as n Malich-Tringov,araevo 1965, when 1'f6 could havebeen met wth d ( xd5? 3 e5 !llowed by returnng the knt to the ld,c4, d preparing e4-e5

c Recently attention has retued to 15f 1 avchenko-cherl, undesliga 000,contnued 15 xf 16 �xf! ? a6 17 bd7 1 8 e b5 19 b4 bxa4 0 'xa4 b5 1d cxb4 xb4 c5 3 'c ' e7 4

eb 1 and Whtes knght eventually lodgedon c6 (va d4 Let us return to 9 g4

Wth ths d (usually 10 bd7 lackust about completes development whle

obseing the oen crtcal e5-square1 0 00 d

Others:a 10 x3 s premature 1 1 x bd7

1 g4!? h6 13 h4 h7 14 g5 s typical, when

82

Arenciba-aron, Mresa 1996 contnued14 a6 15 e3 b5 16 'd b6 17 b3 b4 18e xa 19 xa 0 g3 a4 1 bd7 e5 dxe5 3 f5 d Whte had amplecompensation r the exchge

b 10 e8 asks fr trouble according toVaser, who proposes 11 e5!

b 1 1 fd7?! 1 e6 e6 13 g5 xe14 xe f8 15 dxe6 c6 (15 xe6? 16'd5 'd7 17 f5 gxf5 18 f4 16 f5 and

White s chpping away on the kingsdeb 1 1 dxe5 1 fxe5 xf3 (1 fd7 13g5 f6 14 exf6 xf6 15 ' d favoursWhte 13 xf3 xe5 14 f4 e8 15 'b3'b6 16 'xb6 axb6 s Vaser-Guyard, Aubeilliers (rapidplay 1993 Now 17 c7!fd7 18 fe ! wraps up a clear advantage,eg 18 a6 19 d6 xe1+ 0 xe xc3 1bxc3 xc7 dxc7 c8 3 e7 xc7 4

d5 etcc lack gets no tme r queensde expson aer 10 a6? because Whte charsdown the mddle of the board: 1 1 e5! dxe51 e5 fd7 13 e6 e6 14 g5! xe 15'xe, Vegh-Dambacher, Haarlem 1994Aer 15 e5 16 e3 xf1+ 17 xf f6 18e6 Whte was well on top

d 10 fd7 avods the -g4-g5 pl

seen n a d unleashes the g7-bshopVaser oers the nterestng 1 1 b5!? wththe fllowng possbltes:

d Aer 11 b6 1 a4 a6 13 c3Whte benefts most rom the shadow-



King 's Indian an d Beno ni Four Pa wns A tta ck

boxingd 1 1 'b6 1 a4 c4+ 13 �h xf3 14

xf3 cS S 'e favours White, eg1S xa4 16 xa4 'xbS 17 xc4 with a

grip on the light squaresd3 In reply to 11f6 Vaiser suggests1 eS !? without going y uher In ct heappears to be on the right track once again,since the natural 1 dxeS 13 fxeS xdS(13 e8 14 gS 14 c4 b6 walks intoS xf7+!

Then 1S �xf7 16 gS+ �e7 (16 �g817 xf8+ 'xf8 18 'xg4 17 'xg4 xf+18 �xf is excellent fr White in view of18 'd3+ 19 �f, when 19 'xbS?? losesto 0 'e6+ �d8 1 f7+ �c7 d6+1 1 e 1 e

Natural d best , activating the rook din so doing nipping in the bud (fr the mo

ment, at least y ideas White might have ofe4-eS Again 11a6? is punished by 1 eSand, again, 11 xf3 is too accommodating,V aiser-Al Modiakhi, Tunis 1997 tuing outgood for White aer 1 xf3 e8 13 e!?c7 14 a4 a6 S ' e e8 16 e3 etc1 1 e8 is best met with 1 gS! xe 1 3xe, eg 13 a6 14 a4 c7 S 'd3 f6 16b3 bS 17 b hen Whites grip on the po

sition was enough fr an advtage in Chabon-Degrve, Meribel 19981 2 h3 xf3 1 3 xf3 a

Played to guartee b7-bS since 14 a4c4! is ine fr lack Of course lak has

alternatives to the text, the most popularbeing 13 a6, below

a The immediate 13 c4?! is not quiteright here as White is able to use the d4-

square r his bishop, eg 14 e3 'aS(14 a6?! S d4! b 16 e 1 d4 c(1S e7 16 b4! 16 b4!

Now Vaiser alyses 16 cxb3 17 axb3'b4 18 a! 'b 19 e! 'xb3 (19 d70 xcS dxcS 1 3 0 xcS 'xd 1

d dxcS eS d7 3 b ed8 4 e6e6 S dxe6 f6 6 xd8+ xd8 7 e7 andWhite emerges with the better prospectsKomarov-trwski, el 199, continued16 'xb4 17 b ' aS 18 bS ' a6 insm prefers 18 a3 19 xcS d nowinstead of 19 dxcS? 0 eS d7 1 d6 ab8 a4 b6 3 dS lack should have played19 xe4! 0 xe4 'xbS, when aer 1

f! (1 xd6? xe4 xe4 'b6+1 ' a6 e the minor pieces have morepotential

b 13 8 14 �h a6 S a4 c4 16 e3fvours White aer either 16 'aS 17 d4cS 18 xcS xcS 19 eS dxeS 0 eS d71 e6, Cebalo-Zelenika, Pula 1999, or16 cS 17 xcS xcS 18 eS dxeS 19 eSd7 0 e6 , Vaiser-erelovich, Groningen

1993c 13 h 14 e3 h4 S �h h7 16'c gS? ! is a fairly recent attempt by lackto fight fr the dark squares on the kingsideCebalo-Kruppa, udapest 1999, continued

83



A tt ac king with 1 d4

17 g4! gxf4 18 xd7 'xd7 19 xf4 bS 0ad f8 and now, with g6-eS a threat,White carried out a thematic sacrifce: 1 eS !dxeS (1xeS xeS xeS 3 xeS

dxeS 4 f is also good fr White gwith superior pieces and structure 13 a6 14 a4d 14 b8 S bS 16 axb6 xb6 17

e leaves the a-pawn weaker than the bpawn

d 14 c4 is the main idea, r aer Se3 aS White can no longer meet cSwith the cheeky rk on b4 thanks to theinseion of the moves a7-a6 d -a4Consequently I prefer 16 �h cS (16 e717 e 8 18 d4 cS 19 eS! fd7[ 19 dxeS? 0 eS fd7 1 d6] 0 e6! fvours White according to Vaiser 17 xcS'xcS 18 eS dxeS 19 eS d7 0 e4 'b41 e6

Whites advance in the centre has culminated in one of the pawns coming fce toface with one of the kings protectors

d1 Flear-Drabke, Aosta 000 went1eS exf7+ xf7 3 g4 ad8(3 eS 4 e6+ is d, below, with extra move r both players 4 e6 xe6S dxe6 xd 6 exf7+ �xf7 7 axd

xb 8 d7+ and White went on to successully attack the kingd lacks best is 1 e6 g4 eS

3 xe6+ �h8 with a balced position1 4 e3 b5

84

he point (14 c4! is a in the previousnote 14 ac8! is inconsistent VaiserKindermn, iel 199 1 saw immediate punishment in the shape of kingside expsion:

S g4! h6 16 h4 bS 17 gS hxgS 18 hxgS h719 g4 cd8 0 eS! dxeS 1 fS e4! g6fxg6 3 e6+ etc1 5 a3

1 5 One of three moves, the best of which is

probably b, belowa 1S ac8?! 16 f a6 (16 c4! 17 a4!17 g3 b6 18 eS dxeS 19 eS fd7, din Elbilia-Grivas, Yerev Olympiad 1996,the Four Pawns specialist turned down 0e6!, this familiar push presenting lack withobvious problems on the light squares

b 1S b6 is the most impot move,depending on how lack deals with 16 eS

b 16 dxeS?! 17 eS xeS 18 xcSxe+ 19 'xe e8 0 'f and lacksqueen did not look too happy in LalicZapata, Elista Olympiad 1998

b 16 fd7!? is interesting ikasKotronias, Korinthos 1998 produced someenteaining play: 17 e6 c4 18 exd7 xe319 xe3 xe3 0 'e d8 1 'xbS b8 c6 xb 3 c b6 d now instead

of acquiescing to a draw with 4 c8 b8S c6 b6 White bravely sacriiced hisqueen with 4 bS! ?, but aer 4 xc6 Sdxc6 Kinsms S f6 6 c7 'xd7 7b7 'xbS 8 c8' + �g7 looks good fr



Kng 's Indan and Ben on Four Pa ns A tta ck

lack. However, 0 'd3 is worth considering, when anikasAgnos, Greece 1997 wasalready very good fr White aer 0 . .c4?1 e. Agnos ofers the fllowing im

provement 0 . . b4 1 bS xb ebxa3 3 xe3 a 4 e8+ g7 5 xa8a' + 6 h f6

The accompanying assessment is understandable unclear, but despite the fatthat lack has two queens I believe White is

well on top aer 7 xd6. White h a rokan a knight fr the second queen d thed7-pawn is one step away rom doublingWhites tally. Add to this the threat of 8e8+ and lacks queens seem out in thecold on the queenside.

b3) 16 .. .c4 is the recommended continuation. Then 17 exf6 xf6? should beavoided, e.g. 18 d xb 19 e4! d4+

0 h ' d8 (0. . .xd 1 xaS xa xd g7 3 xd6 etc.) 1 'c c4 c3 fS 3 gS xe 4 xe xa3 5 e! and lack is welcome to the queensidesince it is on the other flank that Whitethreatens to decide. Instead lack plays17 ...xe3 18 xe3 xe3 19 g7, when19 .. .fS 0 'd ae8 1 f 3e7 g4! isgood fr White according to Vaiser, which

leaves 19 .. .ae8 0 fS!? and the onus is onlack to defend his kingside and tame themor peces.1 6 ax x 1 e2

A new alternative to 17 ' c b6 18 f

fd7 19 e d4 0 h xf 1 xf,Lautier-mirin, Cap dAgde 1996. There llowed 1..c4 e 3 g4 f6 4d xg4 5 hxg4 d7 d now 6 a4!

cS denies lacks knight use of the c5-square d secures White the better chcesaer 7 g5.1 6 18 2 d 1 9 a3! ?

19 c trsposes to Lautier-mirin inthe previous note. Whites deployment of the

rooks along the ranks is woh remembering,with the kings rook being paicularly flexible in that as well as defending the b-pawnit c also play a pt in aggressie orationson the kingside by fcilitating the e4-e5 advce.1 9 c4

Embarking on a natural but suspect sequence fom which White emerges with a

clear lead in the subsequent ending. Whiteslast eyes the b3-square as well as protectingc3, so continuing the theme with 19 .. .c4 mustbe investigated. Ununately fr lackpushing the c-pawn rees the d4-square frWhite in addition to c5 fr lack, thus enabling White to plt his bishop in the mddleof the board with 0 d4, in so doing challenging its oen inuential opposite number.

The other downside (r lk) of the arrivalof the bishop on d4 is Whites increased control of the crucial eS-square, d aer0 . .xd4+ 1 xd4 cS eS b3 3e3 Whites grip on the centre outweighs

85



A t t a c k ing with 1 d 4

Blacks queensde lay yng to hold backthe tde wth 2 1 . f6 neglects e6, e.g 22 g4'es 23 e6+ <g7 24 xcS xc5 25 bS .20 b a5 2 •d xb2?

Wth Whtes oston steadly mvng(note that Whtes ces are ceeng wad) Black looks smlng comlcatons22 exb2 c4 2 xc4 ec8 24 a2

xc4 25 xa5 xc 26 xa7 xa7 27

xa7 c5 28 b+ g7

Whte an exta awn d the bshoa and should wn qute comably omhee Blacks only hoe s to dum u somecountelay on the dak squaes whleWhte s bsho s temarly away om theacton on a. Howeve, a key oblem Black s the d6-awn, whch cuently holdsthe oston togethe and holds back the dS

awn.2 c d4+ 0 �2 e 1 g3 c2+

2 lg2 g5

A good actcal decson that eventuallyha the desed sychologcal efect oWhte. fxg5 d4 4 4?

34 c6 eS 35 b8 b2 36 xd6 xd637 xd6 xe4 38 d7 xgS 39 g4 etuns

the awn but kees Whte n the dvng seat.4 c 5 xc5 xc5 36 d4

7 c6 e 8 xc lxc f e5

40 ib 6 4 gx6+ �x6 42 d7 64 f5 �g7 4 g4 6 45 �g7

86

46 g4 47 g5 xg5 %-%

Game 15Chernyshov-Semeniuk

Russian League 19991 d4 f6 2 c4 g 3 c g7 4 e4 d6 5

f4 0-0 6 f3 c5 7 d5 e6 8 le2 exd5

cxd5 b5

Ths s anothe of those moves that looks

nteestng om Blacks pont of vew but,ultmely, oes ony Whte a leant me.Obvously the am of the ovocatve thusts to counte Whtes fmdable lookngcente wth aessve lay on the queesde9 . .a6? 10 a4 e8 11 d2 gves Whte a vouable veson of the system wth 9 e8(see Game 14), and Whte can also consde10 eS a well a 10 0-0 bS 1 1 eS.

9 .. bd7 10 eS dxeS 1 1 fxeS g4 s unclea so Vse oposes the sensble 10 0-0e8 1 1 c2? (1 1 d2 tasoses to 9 .e8)whch leaves the ght on n ode tokeep Black busy weghng u the consequences of e4-e510 e5

hee s no nt gettng sde-tk wthethe catue on bS whch, of couse, s

what Black s hong f when Whte cananyay get on wth the lan of llng downthe cente Moeove the bS-pawn s notgong anwhee and thus emans a tget 0 dxeS



King 's Indian an d Ben oni: Four Pa wns A tta ck

10 fd7 is a maor aternative that is essrisky than the choice in the ma game ThenFroovs 11 exd6 a6 1 fS is inteesting dby no mes nappropriate, but Whites most

reiabe route to an advtage must be toactivate the kings bishop 1 1 xbS! dxeS 10-0

a 1 'b6 13 a4!a 13 a6 and now the simpest way to

stay on top is 14 eS xeS 15 xeS xeS

16 h6 7 17 when White was doing we in Peng-Xie Jun, FID Cdidatesomen 1997

13 exf4 was payed in Lautier-Rogers,Yerevan Oympiad 1996 Then White payed14 xf4 but coud have caused ack considerabe probems with 14 d6 In fact Lautier had prepared this ine fr Kasparov rthe V (Amsterdam tournament earier in

the year, but now automaticay recapturedon f4 when fced with the same position!V aiser gives the flowing exampe of payaer the strong 14 d6: 14 a6 15 a 'b7 16c4 c6 1 7 dS! deS 18 xeS xeS 19xf4 xb 0 b1 f 1 e7+! xe7 dxe7 fe8 3 d

b 1 a6 13 a4! xbS (13 c4 14 d6gives White a cear advtage d 13 'b6 is

a , above 14 axbS e8 15 d6! is quite unpeasant fr ack as 15 e4? fas to 16xe4! {16 xe4 17 ' d d 15 exf4 16dS makes the most of the d6-pawn14 exf4!? 15 xf4 b6 16 e 8d7 has

been evauated as slighty fvouring White,whie V aiser recommends 16 eS Aso possibe is 16 eS !? to eiminate lacks potentiay trubesome bishop d rhaps home

in on the c6-square (aer 16 xeS 17xeSc 1 b7 was seen in Papaioannou

Peng Xiao min, Word Under U6 Ch 1998The bishop does nothing on b7 to counterWhites influence on the ight squares, d inthe game 13 e exf4 14 xf4 f6 15 d6!?c6 16 gS was aready diffcut r ack1 1 fxe5 g4 1 2 g5!

Aso payed is 1 f4 but the attack onthe queen packs more punch k has threechoices here1 2 b6

Worse is 1 'aS?! 13 0-0 xeS (13 b414 e4 h6 15 e7! e3 16 'd xf 17

xf 1 f 18 f6+ �h8 19 h4 c8 0'd3! d White comes crashing in on g6 14d6 bd7 (14 b7 15 e7, or 14 e6 15xeS xeS 16 3 15 e7, d now instead of 15 b4? 16 xf8 �xf8 17 xeS!xeS 18 'dS b8 19 d7! (19 xd7 0'd6+ 1-0 ronznik-Maz, ratisava199, ack c imit his situation to beingcearly worse with 15 b7

1 f6 is the other move Then 13 exf6xf6 14 ' d! guarantees White a very comabe game, eg 4 e8 15 0-0 b4 16 a4xgS 17 xg5 e3 18 f7 'h4 {18 xf19 xf ' e7 0 h6+ �h8 1 f3 19

8 7




xc5, when Back was strugging in CebaoArmda, Bed 1999, or 14 f5 15 0-0 b416 d d7 17 f2! xf2 18 xf2 d the-pawn was sti a probem fr Back, em

kov-Tasic, Cnes 19891 3 00 xe5?a 13 h6?! 14 e7 e3 15 d2 c4 16

h e8 17 d6 i s poor fr Backb 13 d7 14 e6 e6 15 dxe6 'xe6

(15 c4+! 16 h is c, beow, whie15 df6? runs into 16 e7 e8 17 xb5xe7 18 d5 16 xb5 b8 17 c7 fvours White

c Best is 13 c4+ 14 h a6 15 d6 e616 d4 xe5 17 e7 (eg 17 c8 18xe6 e6 18 d5! and 14 f6?! 15 exf6xf6 16 d6 give White a cear advtage,whie the aw 14 f2+? 15 xf2 'xf2 16xb5 ! wi soon see Whites materia investment reap rewards Instead 14 d7 15 e6e6 16 dxe6 df6! (16 ' xe6? 17 xb5b8 18 fd4 d5 19 xg4 xg5 20 e6+h8 2 1 d6 17 e7 e8 18 d4! d7 is the

recommended continuation that is, in fact,probaby Backs most accurate way of hding the whoe variation Kaidanov ofersthe fowing: 19 xb6! axb6 20 d4 h6 21x6 xf6 22 dxb5 xe7 23 xc4+ h7

Opinion differs here, with Whites eadrging rom sight to cear depending onthe commentator White does miss the darksquared bishop but there is extra pawn any case if this is the best that Back c

88

hope r in the 9 b5 ine d to reach thediagr position requires a ceain degree ofaccuracy (om both payers, remember then White shoud be happy

Returning to the main game, White has lhe un aer 13 xe51 4 xe! xe5

14 c4+ fais to improve Backs ot aer15 h xe5 16 e7 e8 17 d6, when thethreat of 18 d5 is too much1 5 e d

15 e8 16 d6 xc3 (16 e6 17 c6 18 d5 17 bxc3 c6 18 f3 e6

Meszaros-Beaska, Ceske Budejovice1999 Now aer 19 f6 White rues the darksquares Insead the ge continued 19 d5c4+ 20 �h c5 2 1 xe6 e6 22 f3xe7 23 f7+�h8 24 f6+g8 25 'xe6+�h8 26 'f6+ g8 27 f7+ h8 28 f6+

g8 29 d7 ed8 30 'f7+ h8 3 1 ae f5(31 xd7 32 ' f6+ g8 33 e6+ 32 e8+xe8 33 dxe8 + xe8 34 xe8+ g7 35d7+ d White went on to win1 6 d6 b

16 c4+ 17 �h b7 18 xc3 19bxc3 e5 20 xb7 xb7 2 1 d4, CoboAeagaPerez Perez, Hava 1965, is typicaThe open f-fie mes that Backs rook is

tied to f8, and White wi take it when theime is right1 d5!

An improvement on 17 f3 �g7 18xb7 xb7 19 xf8+ xf8 20 e2 c4 21



King 's Indian and Benoni: Four Pawns A ttack

ad which w good r White inJimenezMedina, Malaga 1966.1 7 . ixd5

17... c6 18 f3 �g7 19 c7 b6 20

xa8 xa8

Gorelov-Vasiukov, Moscow 198 1. Whitessuperior frces are woh more th the sacriiced pawn, and 2 1 xb7 xb7 22 e2keeps White in the driving seat.1 8 xd5

The queen is just as powerful on dS as theknight, with the pressure on the pinned fpawn beginning to tell. Now the bockadingknight can be attacked with g4, so Blackrees the eS-square.1 8 .x2

Grabbing another pawn bere cementingthe bishop on d4. However, it is on the lightsquares that the battle will be won. Note tha

the -pawn efectively cuts the board in two,and Whites bishop is such a nuisce on e7that there is no question of giving it up r arook just yet.1 9 Jab1 id4+ 20 �h1 a6 21 a4! ?!

2 1 . . .e 22 axbS a 23 bd (or 23f4!?) and White threatens to take on d4.22 :xf7!

White can get away with this because his

rces far outnumber Blks on the kinide.22 . . .xf7

22 .. .fc8 23 f8+ �g7 24 'f7+ �h6 2Sg+ �xgS 26 f4 mate.23 ic4 a7

23 .. .eS 24 xa8+ �g7 2S xf7 �xf726 f+ �e6 27 f6+ �d7 28 ' dS wins rWhite, while 23 .. .c8 24 'xf7+�h8 2S e6is cuains fr Black in view of 2S . . . b7 26

xd7 xd7 27 f6.24 ' xf7 �h8 25 :e1 ig7

Or 2S ... b6 26 dS! xdS (26.. . c8 27f6+) 27 xdS d he -pawn will have isday.26 idS! 1-0

Aer 26 .. .xd8 27 e7 mate is frced.

Game 16Lautier-Shirov

Belgrade 1997

1 d4 lf6 2 g6 3 lc3 ig7 4 e4 d6 5

4 0-0 6 lf3 c5 7 d5 5

Aggressive, perhaps, but White experi

ences less inconvenience here th in theBenko proper. Consequently the menace ofe4eS has more significce.8 cxb5 a 9 a4 axb5

Others:a) Equaly popuar is 9 ... e6, adding to the

tensio. White replies 10 e2 d now:a) 10 .. .axbS 1 1 xbSa ) 1 . .a6 12 xa6 xa6 13 dxe6

fxe6 14 0-0 is a Benko gone wrong r Black:14 ...dS S eS e8 16 gS e7? 17 xdS!1-0 MichaelsenBinnhoefer, Berlin 1993 , isone to remember.

a12) 1 1 .. .a6 12 0-0 b4 13 dxe6 e6 1 4

89




eS is ceary better fr White, whie CebaoRudof, Nova Gorica 2000, continued13 xe6 14 �h c7 S fS!? gxfS 16 exfSxfS 17 f4 fd8 18 d2 b6 19 h4

d, by retg the pawn, White w rmyin the driving seata1 3 Aer 1 1 exdS White ignores the dS

pawn d pays 12 eS! with exceengame, eg 12 e8 13 xdS b7 14 c4c6 S e3! dxeS 16 xS d6 17 e7+xe7 18 ' xd6, Piskov-avon, UR Ch1987 A esser evi is 12 dxeS 13 eS e4(13 g4 14 xdS 'xdS S xdS is a direct trsposition to a2, beow 14 xdSxc3 S xd8 xd8 16 bxc3 b7 17 gc8 18 f4 xf3 19 gx c6 20 �f2xeS 21 he, Priehodavejkovsky,Mihaovce 1989

a2 10 exdS 1 1 eS! dxeS 12 fxeS g4(12 e4 13 'xdS xdS 14 xdS axbS Se7+ �h8 16 xc8 xc8 17 d3!? fS 18exf6 xf6 19 xbS and White had extrapawn in utter-Krahenbuh, wiss League

199S ) 13 'xdS xdS 14 xdS axbS SxbS

Remember that this position c aso bereached from a 3 Thanks to his passed apawn White is doing ver we Aer

S xeS 16 xeS xeS 17 h6 g7 18e7+! h8 19 xg7+ �xg7 20 xc8 xc821 �d2! c6 22 �c3 White was areaymaking his presence fet on the queenside(unike Back on the other ank in Fear-

90

Nevednichy, Creon 1999 Aternativey1S d7 16 b6 a7 17 xd7 xd7 isanother way to snare Backs ight-squaredbishop Then 18 e6!? e6 19 0-0 geS 20

gS persists with the theme, KipiMninen Tampere 1996 resuting in a neardecisive ending 20 e8 21 e3 g4 22f7 (22 xcS 22 xe3 23 xd7 f8 24xg7+ xg7 2S xe6+ �g8 26 xf8 xf827 bS ec

10 b7 1 1 0-0 axbS 12 xbS exdS13 exdS simpy eaves Bak a pawn down rnext to nothing Typica of what tends tohappen are 13 bd7 14 fS! eS S xeSdxeS 16 g6 g6 17 g, Bikas-Agopov,Europe Junior Ch Tainn 1997, d14 b6 S g6 hxg6 16 g c7 17 xf6xf6 18 'd2 a6 19 xa6 xa6 20 f4,as in PiskovFriedrich, Berin 1990 Morereceny Back tried 13 a6 in FearLka,Montpeier 2000, though 14 fS c7 S c4a6 16 d3 c8 17 g6 g6 18 b3 shoudhave been enough to keep Back strugging

b 9 ' is aso payed 10 d2! b4(10 e6?! 11 dxe6 xe6 12 e axbS 13xbS is comabe r White 1 1 c2 c4(1 1 axbS 12 xbS d7 fvours White, butBack shoud avoid 12 a6? 13 eS, eg13 g4 14 a2 12 eS! with a herbrch:

b 12 dxeS? 13 eS g4 (13 fS 14a2! 14 e4 b3 S xc4 xc4 16 xc4

xeS 17 xeS xeS 18 c3 was a cearpawn in Cientes Parada-V der Weide,Dutch Ch 1998

b2 Instead 12 fS 13 2 cS 14xc4 xdS S xcS dxcS 16 c axbS 17xbS improves athough Im sure that thisis not what Back is ooking r!10 xb5 a

Better th 10 a6 11 eS e8 12 0-0

b4 13 'e2 c7 14 c4 b7 S d,Bikas-Karner, Word U18 Ch 1996 Whitehas had time to suppo both dS and eS dhis materia ead is intact1 1 d2



King 's In dian an d Ben oni Four Pa ns A tta ck

1 1 xb5

Another consistent move typica of theBenko Back hopes that doubing Whitespawns and trading a pair of rooks wi easehis defensive task

a 11e6 12 dxe6 e6 13 0-0 dS chaenges the centre but again has ess punchth is usua in the Benko GustafssonKapischka, Bundesiga 1999 continued 14gS 'b6 15 e5 e8 16 'g4 c7 d Back

was too busy defendingb 1 1 'b6 12 0-0 c4+ 13 �h xbS 14

bS xa 15 'xa bd7 16 ' e cS 17'e2 d3 18 e3 'b7 19 d4 was goodr White in Bagaturov-Kuzmin, Enakievo19971 2 ax5!

The bS-pawn proves to be stronger th itooks

1 2 xa1Hazais 12 bd7 13 0-0 e6 14 dxe6 e615 'b3 is worse than the game continuationMackova-Koys, Czech eague 1997, wasunpeasant fr Back aer 1 5 e8 16 gSf8 17 xa8 ' xa8 18 b6 etc1 3 xa1 b6

Or 13 bd7 14 0-0 and Back has tried acoupe of moves here

a In Vaiser-Nataf, French eague 1996White met 14 'b8 with 15 ' e !, the e square being use in that both e2 and h4are then avaiabe Aer 15 e6 16 dxe6 (16'h4 exdS 17 eS is Vaisers suggestion

16 fxe6 17 eS hS 18 exd6 'xd6 19 g3Back remained a pawn down with nothingto bite on

b 14 b6 15 'e! 'c8 16 'e2 (this

ime Whie uses the e-square, ticipatingthe coming pay on the ight squares 16 e617 dxe6 'xe6 18 a fd7 19 'd3 b8 20a7 h6 21 fS! gxfS 22 exfS 'f6 23 f4 e524 xeS dxeS 25 a6 d White had thefamiiar advtage and bonus pawn in PengKachii Gersinska, Bundesiga omen199814 00 bd

14 e8 15 'e! c7 16 'h4 xb5 17xbS 'xbS 18 'xe7 was exceent frWhite in Nogueir-, Graz 19841 5 e1 !

With such a presence in the centre Whitedoes not miss his queens rook Apt romthe obvious threat to press home the centrasupremacy with e4-e5 Back must aso keepin mind how to defend shoud White essay adirect kingside oensive beginning with

'h4 15 'a6 ooks fne but es to equaity,eg 15 b8 16 a e8 17 ' xb6 xb6 18a7 �f8 19 b3 when 19 c8 20 d7 b621 a7 was agreed drawn in Bikas-Agnos,Greek Ch 1996

1 5 Keeping eye on the dS-pawn in orderto dissuade White rom e4e5 Droppingback to b7 aso vacates the b6-square r aknight (thus ading to Backs concentration

9 1



A tta ck ng wth 1 d4

on d51 e 5! ?

16 f5 works out ine r White aer16 gxf5 17 h4 but 16 g4! 17 h4

de5 taes contro of the e5square However 16 h4! ooks stronger than the textThen aer 16 b6 17 f5 azai the e5square is not readiy avaiabe to Back, and16 e6 17 dxe6 e6 18 g5 e8 19 e5 dxe520 ce4 is an expe of how White canpie on the pressure with just a few aggressivemoves, eg 20 h6? 21 d6 hxg5 22 g5d5 23 gxf6 xf6 24 xf6 xf6 25 "xf6xd6 26 "xg6+ f 8 27 h6+ e7 28 g5+f (2 d 29 "f7+ 29 "h7! b 30e7+! "xe7 3 1 h8+ f7 32 "xb81 xd5

16 dxe5 17 e5 xd5 18 e6 7b6 19ex7+ x 20 "e6 c7 21 e2 is sightyworse fr Back in view of the persistentvunerabiity on the ight squares1 e

The point White combines an intration

on the ight squares on the kingside with apan of steering the ge to an ending usinghis passed pawn on the other wing1 b 1 8 ex+

18 f5 gxf5 19 g5 f6! 20 xh7 xh7 21 h4+ g8 2 2 3 i s good r ony a share ofthe spois aer 22 "c8 23 h3 "xe6 24"h7+ f7 25 h5+ g8 26 "h7+, or 23g3 xe6 24 xg7+ xg7 25 h6+ f7 26

h5+1 8 x 1 9 g5 id4+! 20 h1 5?!

Better to keep the queen out of e6 with20 f6, when 21 "e4 a8 (21 e5 22 f5 22xd5 xd5 keeps Bks head above water21 e+ �h8

Regardess of where the ng goes Whitesknight wi have some n Aer 21 g7 22e4! White sets up a pin on the ong diago

na and paves the way r the knights entryto e6 Aer 22 e5 23 e6+ h8 (23 f624 d8 24 g4 f6 25 f5 White turns thescrew on the kingside but must then be cefu himsef on the ha8 diagona, whie

92

22 "a8 23 e6+ g8 24 xd4 cxd4 25"xd4 is just ceary better r White22 + g 23 d8

An enjoyabe move to pay!23 8

23 "d7?! 24 xd5 "xd8 (24 xd5? 25f7+ h6 26 f5+ 25 xe7!24 c g8?

A mistake in a dicut position 24 "f8?aso hands White a decisive advantage: 25xd5 xd5 (25 xd5 26 26 g4! 4(26 c7 27 d 27 "e4 d5 (27 7 284 28 f3 f6 29 xf4 g5 30 xd4cxd4 31 e5 The correct course is24 xc3 25 xc3+ (25 bxc3!? f825 xc3 26 bxc3 f8 according to Hazai,athough 27 "xe7+ "xe7 28 xe7 7 29f5! ? ooks promising r White with the bpawn oitering on the ih rank25 'xg8+ xg8 2 xd5 xd5 2 b!

Fieen moves aer riving aone inBacks haf of the bod the pawn perrmsthe utimate sacriice in order to ure the

knight away rom the dence of e2 xb 28 xe+ 29 x5 gx5

30 c3 �e 31 e1+?!

Heping Back to centraise his ng Hsuggests tying Bk down with 3 1 g4 g4 32f5+31 �d5 32 g4?! xg4 33 5

Now Back can use the knight rather thanthe king to dea with the psed pawn With

this in mind 33 e7 is caed r, when itecan sti entertain hopes of winning33 d 34 e 35 g2 h5 3g3

Preventing 36 h4 but wang into an annoying check3 e4+! 3 xe4

Aer 37 f4?! xc3 38 bxc3 xc3 39g5 c4 40 xh5 d4! 41 xg4 c3 42 e2

c4 Back appes to be quicker, whie f6xf6+ 41 xf6 h 4 shoud be at et a drawr Back3 xe4 38

38 xd4?! cxd4 39 f6 40 f2 h4!



King 's In dian and Ben oni Four Pa ns A tta ck

draws: 4 1 f7 g3+ 42 hxg3 hxg3+ 43 �xg3 (43�e g2 43 d2 44 f8' d'38 . ix6 39 x6 d5 ! 40 �h4?!

40 b3 ! offers better chances Backs most

accurate course being 40 d4 41 �f2 �d3 42e7 h4! 43 �e (43 xh4? �c2 43 xc5g3+ 44 hxg3 hxg3+ 45 �xg3 �c3 46 b4 d343 g3! 44 h3 g2! 45 �f2 �c2 46 xc5 (46xh4? d3 47 gS �xb3 48 h4 c4 49 hS c3S h6 d2 S h7 d 46 d3 47 e3 �xb348 �xg2 �c2 49 �f3 d2 S xd2 �xd2 S 1�g4 �e3 S2 �xh4 �f440 . d4! 41 xh 5 3 42 �g5 d3 43

c3 c4! �5 �e2 45 �xg4 % %

Aer 4 S d2 46 xd2 �xd2 47 h4 �c248 hS �xb2 49 h6 c3 S h7 c2 S 1 h8' +�b 1 White cannot mae progress S2 b8+ �a S3 'a7+ �b S4 'b6+ �a SS'cS �b S6 �4 �a S7 'c3+ �b S8 b3+ �a ! eaves a repetition or staemateaer S9 ' xc2

Game 17

Rausis-McShaneHtings Prier 1997/9

1 d4 6 2 c4 g6 3 c3 ig 4 e4 d6 54 0-0 6 3 6

In recent years a number of D fanshave taken to deveoping the knight in thisfhion In this pticuar variation thejustiication is quite ogica since Backsbishop is not impeded and both c7cS and e7eS are sti possibl .

are sti possibe e5!?

A promising ateative to the more usua7 d3 and 7 e2 which opponents wi be

expecting and thus be best prepared rAttacking the knit d putting the eS andd6pawns face to face aso h the advtageof giving Back a few choices to considerover the next few moves d more than oneof these can ead Back into diicuties . .d

Best Others:a 7 dxeS? ! 8 eS and now:a 8 hS!? 9 e3 f6 10 e2 g4 gives

White an edge and ooks ike the most appropriate owup r Back athough herethe a6knight h a ess promising ture thanBack woud have hopeda 8 d7 9 f4 and White is ceary

better aer both 9 f6 10 e6 b6 1 1 dS and9 cS 10 dS Even the esser evi 9 b6 10h3 f6 1 1 'd2 cS 12 exf6 xf6 (12 exf6 1300-0) 13 h6 e8 14 0-0-0 w not too

appeaing r Back in VokacPetrov Komercni Banka 1997

8 e8 9 e2 aiser recommends 9cS !? 9 f6 10 f4 The probem with7 dxeS is that it makes the f4sque avaiabe and therere heps White maintain theheath centre LeitaoIvanovic YerevanOympiad 1996 went 10 cS (10 eS 11xeS f6 1 2 00 cS 1 3 dS 1 1 dxcS '

(11'xd+ 12 xd xcS 13 dS 12e3 ! eS 13 0-0 e4 14 ' dS+ e6 S 'xe4xcS 16 'h4 and White enjoyed both superior pawn structure and deveopment

b In contrt to a 7 hS tgets the f4pawn Movsesian gives 8 e2 h6 9 g3! f610 00 dxeS 11 fxeS xc 12 xc h3 13e sighty better r White In BLaicHebden Iona Tech Mters 1998 Back t

pushed his cpawn: 8 cS 9 dS h6 10 g3and now in a bid to justi ping his minorpieces on the edge of the bod Back hit outin the centre with 10 e6 athough aer 11dxe6 xe6 1 2 exd6 g7 1 3 0-0 h3 1 4

93



A tt ac king ith 1 d4

f6 15 f xf 16 xf e8 17 eSe6 18 '3! b8 19 bS Whites extrapawn w sti intact

c Aer 7 e8 8 e3 g4 9 h3 xf3 10

'xf3 White h more space and is ready tocte queenside befre aunching the hpawn However, Vaisers 8 h3 is good because White aready h more than his fairshare of the board and now Back h aprobem with his queens bishop8 ie2

This is the most frequent owup to 7e5 , but there is an argument r the bruta 8h4 !? Of course there are no prizes r guessing what White h in mind! Ceary Backmust reat energeticay in the centre in orderto avoid being bown away on the kingside

a 8 dxe5a 9 dxe5 dcS 10 e3 keeps White in

charge of the centre and Backs knigts ooka itte tiicia Vaiser beieves 10 f 11d4 d7 12 e2 is good fr White, eg12 f6 13 xfS 'xd+! (13 'S? 14 xc5

xcS 15 d5+ e6 16 g4 14 xd gxf5 15e6 ! xe6 6 d3 MohedGeenen, EistaOympiad 1998 , continued 10 g4 1 1 e2f6

Back h good counterpay according to

Vaiser, but this sessment w not borneout in the ge 12 d4 e5 13 e5 xe214 'xe2 xe5 15 0-00 e8 16 h5 andWhite had a dangerous kingside ofensivea Vaiser prefers the more consistent 9

94

fxe5, unehing the queens bishop we smaintaining a presence in the centre In facthe backed up this caim over the boardagainst Desbonnes, French League 1998, but

faied to get the desired initiative aer 9 c510 f4 cxd4 1 1 xd4 b4 12 c a5 13e3 c5 14 e6 xe3+ 15 xe3 e6 16 h5gxh5 17 xh f etc Vaisers proposedimprovement is 12 000!, athough thisneeds tests and Back is not without chanceson the queenside aer 12 ' a5, r exampeFood r thought, and in the meantime Ibeieve that with 9 dxe5 White is abe to hodon to the advantage

b 8 c5 is a thematic response, owingthe rue that a fank attack shoud be metwith a centra counter

b 9 e6 e6 10 h5 cxd4 11 xd4 ismessy but Rodriguez VargMagem Baas,panish League 1991 w soon over rWhite aer 11 e4? f6 12 egS h6 13hxg6 hxg5 14 xgS e5 15 e5 'aS+ 0-1

b2 9 d5 endeavours to keep the centre

cosed, aowing White to meet 9 dxe5 with10 h5, eg 10 exf4 1 1 xf4 f6

Now 12 eS!? xhS 13 xh5 gxh5 eadsto what ooks ike a sit edge to Back aerVaisers entertaining 14 d3 xe5 15

'xhS!? xc3+ 16 bxc3 f5 17 g5+ h8 18e+ f6 19 d6 d7 (19 g8 20 xf6+exf6 21 xf6+ g7 22 'd8+ g8 23 'f6+g 20 dxe7 'xe7 21 xf6+ xf6 22xf6+ g8 Perhaps White shoud opt r



Kng 's Indan a nd Beno n Fo ur Pa ns A ttack

the simpe 14 'xhS with compensation rthe exchange in the rm of a nide initiative and better pieces Instead V aiserPetit,French League 1992, continued 12 hxg6 g6

13 ' d2 f 14 d3 ( 14 h6!? 14 h xfS (S h2 S xf (S xf4 16 g416 e3 and White h comnsation r thepawn More recenty in KahnGHoath,Budapest 1996 Back tried 14 xd S'xd3 bS aiser suggests 1S e6 andS hS and now 16 gS required ceudefnce For expe 16 b4?! 17 'e2bxc4? 'e6+ �h 19 xh7+! wins rWhite 19 xh7 20 'h3 d3+ 21 �d2xc3+ 22 bxc3 �g7 23 'xh7+ �f6 2 4 e4+�fS 2S h3+ �xf4 (2S �xe4 26 ' f3+ �fS27 c7+ �gS 2 'e3+ 26 f+ �xe4 27'e6+ eS 2 e+ �f4 29 xeS+ �g4 30e4+ Back payed 16 'b6 when Whitesbest is 17 cxbS b4 'c4 c2+ 19 �d2xa 20 d6+ �h (20 e6? 21 'xe6+ �h22 xh7! 21 dxe7 aiser8 c5 9 exd6 exd6

Equays 9 cxd4 10 xd4 (10dxe7? 'xe7 xd4 b6, eg 12 00? d

a 10 exd6 1 1 dbS 'h4+ 12 g3 'h3 13f e+ 14 �f2 'fS w payed in Vokacpisa, Cappee a Grande 99S Now Sxd6 ' cS+ 16 �g2 is a sae pawn rWhite, who pans 'dS

b 10 b6 !? 1 1 0-0 'xd6 12 e3White sti h a greater infuence in the

centre and Backs knights e poorb 12 d?! 13 dbS 'xd 14 dxd+ S xd e6 16 b3 accentuatesWhites e Bks queenside is paicuyvunerabe

b2 12 'b4?! 13 'xb2 is king rtroube: 14 cbS d S : cS 16 b'2 17 d3 and Knaak anayses 17 'xf2+ xf2 xd3 19 'xd3 f 20 'b3 xb

2 1 'xb xc4 22 'b4 and White emergeson topb3 Aer 12 'cS 13 e4 'c7 14 'b3

White threatens d4bSxa7 when the b6knight is hanging (a recuing theme in these

positions A spe ine is 14 d S bS'c6 16 xa7 'xe4 17 f3 'xe3+(17 'xc4 xc ' xe3 d4 19 ' xd4xd4 20 xc xc 2 1 xb7

b4 12 e6 is sensibe and eads to anedge r White, eg 13 b3 fd 14 cbS'b S 'e owed by d In repy to14 'cS White h S 'e since 1S xd416 xd4 xd4 17 'f2 and 1S xd4 16' f2 ad 17 ad rebound on Back1 0 00

The natura 10 dS invites Back to mke are trade of his bishop r a knight, thepoint being that aer 10 xc3+! 1 1 bxc3 fSthe cosed position is more suitabe rBacks knights than Whites bishops Moreover a we timed b7bS coud prove uncomrtabe r White and d7-f6e4 isnot ey to dea with The text keeps Backguessg1 0 es

10 b6 prevents Whites next Then 1 1dS xc3 12 bxc3 fS is sti on but at et

here Backs knight is rther away om thee4sque, a actor that shoud add weight toan saut on the ight sques invoving f3gSe6 etc In ummerscaeikiran, BritishCh 1999, Back chose to keep his dksqued bishop, pting with the other oneaer 1 1 g4 12 h3 xf3 13 xf3 fS HereWhite h not been sadded with a permanent queenside weaess and the e4sque is

not a probem, but Back sti h the use ofan infuentia bishop on the ong digona, sothe chances e roughy even 10 f6 1 1 e transposes to Leitao-JPog in the noteto Whites next move1 1 5! ?

Pushing the fpawn introduces an interesting way to treat the position that is, in ft, keeping with the genera spirit of the varia

tion 1 1 dS f6 is LeitaoJ Pog, ao Pauo1996, when 12 h3 c7 (12 e4!? 13 a4a6 14 d3 b4 S b saw Backsknight sette on b4 Meanwhie Back hadpans r her other knight, securing the e4

95




square with 15 .. .S 16 xS gxS Now 17h4 'd7 18 a3!? with the idea o c3e2(g3) and swinging the rook across thethird rank should have met with the immedi

ate 18 . .. e4 with chances r both sides.1 1 cxd4Eventually Black will be le with an iso

lated pawn but 1 1 . .. gxS 12 gS voluntily damages Blacks kingside pawns1 2 d 5

1 2 cBringing the knight back into the ld,

which Black has no time r aer 12 . . .eS13 xd4 due to the weakness o the 6square.1 3 fxg6 hxg6 1 4 g5 f6

Black seeks to relieve some o the pressure by reducing Whites attacking rce,rather than rther compromise his dences

with 14.. .6 15 h4.1 5 xf6+ xf6 1 6 xf6 xf6 1 xd4

g5Mh.Beker Jensen, &W Mters 1998,

went 17 .. .'eS 18 3 e6 19 xe6 xe620 b3 ab8 21 e 1 ' cS+ 22 �h 1 and Blackhad the se structural problem in themain ge but this time w acing a bishop opposed to a knight.1 8 if3 e6 1 9 d5

White can hit the d6pawn immediatelywith 19 bS! because 19 .. .4 20 �h e2?ails to 21 g3 and 20. . .e3 2 1 'd2 d3 222 merely leaves Blacks pieces awkwdly

96

placed.1 9 e!

Not 19 ..e3+? 20 �h xd4 21 xe6xd 22 x7+ �g7 23 d etc.20 f3 'f6 21 xe6

21 'd2 4 should also be better rWhite.21 'xe6 22 e1 'f6 23 xe 'xe24 'd4! e6 25 b3

ensible play h resulted in Black havingto dend a slightly worse position, Whitesknight enjoying the lexibility that a bishoplacks.25 6 26 4 c8 2 d1 f5

The rook looks psive aer 27 .. c6when it h been suggested that White switchronts with 28 h4!?.28 e1 'c?

With the d6pawn the main cus o attention Black takes his eye o the equallysensitive square. With this in mind28 . . d8! is necessary.29 'f6!

Threatening to iniltrate with e7, henceBlacks next.29 :U8 30 d4 c8 31 h3 'd8 32

e! b6 33 �h2 'c5 34 e4!?Now the threat o h4 means that Blacks

queen must stay within range o e5. Consequently White can toy with the idea o harsing the queen with b3b4, r exple.34 b5

An error in an anyway dicult position.35 cxb5 xb5 36 xb5 b 3 d4c2 38 g4 e8? 39 xd6 'c 40 h4

xd6+ 41 'xd6 1 -0

Game 1I Sokolov-T opalov

Wk n Zee 1996

1 d4 f6 2 c4 e6 3 c3 c5 4 d5 exd5 5cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 f4 g

Others lead to an inrior game r Black.a) 7 .. .a6?! 8 eS and now 8 . ..' e7? 9 3

g4 (9 . . . g7 10 h3) 10 e2 d7 1 1 exd6



King 's In dian and Benoni Four Pa ns A tta ck

xd6 12 g5! xe2 13 'xe2+ e7 14ce4 (V aiser) is clearly better r White.GuseinovZaichik, Volgodonsk 1983 , went8 . . .d7 9 3 g7 10 e4 dxeS d6+

�8 (11...�e7 12 xc8+ xc8 13 e2) 12e2!? c7 (12 ... ex4 13 x4 6 14 g3'xb2 15 b is bad r Black Kapengut)3 xc8 'xc8 14 eS xeS 15 xe5xe5 16 h6+ g7 17 'd '5 18 ' c3!and Black w in trouble.

b) 7 .. .e7?! 8 3! and now 8 .. .xe4?drops a piece to 9 'a4+.

c) 7 .. .g4?! 8 'a4+! d7 9 'b3 'c7 103 and e4e5 is coming.8 b5+

Now Black will have problems to overcome one way or another.8 bd?!

There w a time when both sides seemed

content to try their luck in the llowingcomplications but, in recent yes, Black hprerred to block with the other knight.Aer 8 .. .d7 9 a4 Black can throw in thecheck on h4 or develop normally.

a) 9 .. .'h4+ 10 g3 and now:a) 10. . .' e7 1 1 3 00 12 00 a6 13

e b4 14 puts the bishop on a lexible post. Then 14 . . .e8 15 bS 6 16 eS

d5 (16. . .dxe5 17 d6) 17 xd6 is clearlybetter r White, while 14 . . .b6 15 a3 b716 c4 a6 1 7 h3 ac8 18 e3 d8 19 2' 8 le Black too psive, unable to breakout with ...b6b5, in YusupovPekarek,

Bundesliga 1993.aWith 10 .. .'d8 Black avoids any prob

lems on the eile but h spent two movesust to rce a slight weaening o Whites

kingside. In OlssonPsakhis, Moscow 1989the extra time proved more signiicant thang2g3 aer 11 3 00 12 00 a6 13 c4!?b6 4 e2 g4 15 g5! xe2 16 'xe2.Also possible is 13 e2 e8 14 �g2!?, addressing the potential weak points on thengside while exploiting the itional spe.

b) 9 .. .00 10 3 is more popular.b) 10. . .a6 11 e2 is a natural reaction

rom Black when the bishop stds provocatively on bS, but now Black inds that hisqueens knight is a problem and, consequently, the development o his queenside ingeneral. In order r the b8knight to seelight Black h to move his other knight r athird time! 1 . . .e8 12 00 8 is too tiicial. PeturssonPerenyi, t John 1988 went 13e5! bd7 14 gS dxe5 15 5!

Whites thematic sacrice is designed tohinder Blacks rces (pticully the g7bishop) with his own pawn, in ont o whichWhite h an excellent outpost on e4. Thegame continued 15 .. .6 16 g4 b5 17 b5c4 18 e3 h6 19 ge4 xe4 20 xe4 and

Blacks queenside exertions had made matters worse. This leaves the more sensible1 1 .. .6 12 00, when 12 .. .g4 3 e e814 e5 x3 15 x3 dxe5 16 eS d7 17e6, with a cle advantage to White in Lau

9 7



A tt ac king ith 1 d4

tieranner, Bad Zwesten 1999, is neveheless preerable r Black to 12 . .. c7? 13 eSe8 14 e6! xe6 15 c4 'e7 16 dxe6 c617 5 c7 18 gS, which w close to win

ning r White in KparovCuijpers, WorldJunior Ch. Dortmund 1980. Black shouldavoid .. .a7a6 while the knight is still on b8.

b2) 10 .. . a6 is a considerable improvement, with a choice o b4 or c7 r theknight aer 1 1 0-0.

b2 1) 1 .. .b4 is given a ?! by Kinsman,who oers the common-sense arment thaton b4 the knight not only does nothing toacilitate the desired . .. b7b5 ( it does romc but i and when this can be played italso obstructs ...b5b4. Whites best is 12e! a6 1 3 in order to have the bishopkeeping an eye on bS rom the se haven on, in so doing leaving the eile clear to support a uture e4e5. Aer 13 .. .e8 14 h3 615 c4 White toys with the e4e5 pushwithout having to wor out being hit with. . .b6, while 14 .. .' c7 15 e3 might leave

the queen poorly placed on the cle. Inste14 .. . b8 15 e3 b6 16 2 b7 17 c4a8, Komarov.Kovacevic, Msy 1993, iseible but rather slow. Whites e4e5 ismore likely to succeed th is .. .b6b5.

b22) 1 ...c7 hits the bishop and supports ...b7b5 while still monitoring the dSpawn in ce o e4e5. 12 d3 hite isadvised to keep his bishop r now, and with

unavailable this is the most suitablesquare) and in AagrdReinderman, Groningen 1998 , White carried out an instructivereorganisation o his rces aer 12 . ..e8: 13h b8 14 d2 6 15 c4 b6 16 3a6 17 e3 d7 and now 1 8 ae ! wouldhave j ustiied leaving the other rook on 1 .12. . .a6 is more usual, e.g. 13 e b8 14 with the better prospects r White, or the

tricky 14 eS b6 15 5 dxeS 16 g6. Gulkoavon, Lvov Z 1978. This is an appealing linesince Black can eily go wrong. Gulko gives16. . .hxg6? 17 gS 6 1 8 h7! xh7 19'h4+ g8 20 xg6 7 21 h7+ 8 22

98

h6. Instead the ge continued 1 6. . .g617 gS d6 18 h4 cxd5? ! 19 ad c420 xdS cxd3 (20 . . . xdS 2 1 xg6 ' cS+ 22h hxg6 23 e 21 e7+ h8 22 xeS!

S (22 .. .xeS 23 xg6+) 23 xS xeS 24xeS 7 10. More recently 18. . .e8 led toan even quicker win in Ovodtellwgen,Groningen Young Mters 1999, aer 19e4 'xdS 20 6+ x6 21 xg6! 1-0.However, with 18 .. .bxdS! Black suives,e.g. 19 c4 e6 20 ad 'c6 when theonus is on White to demonstrate enough oan initiive r the two pawns. O course theposition er 14 eS is rich in possibilities, dthere is always the reliable 14

Finally 8 .. .d7 is seen only occionallybecause it seems worse than 8 . . .bd7. Crying out to be played is 9 eS when 9 . . .dxeS 10xeS hS 11 3 00 12 xd7 xd7 13 g4xeS 14 gxh5 x3+ 15 x3 h4+ 16 xc3 17 bxc3 'c4+ 18 2 gave Black insuicient compensation r the piece inWdQuillan, British League 2000. Alterna

tively 9 .. .hS 10 3 00 1 1 xd7 'xd7 1200 rded White a wonderul, advancedcentre in Hillarp PerssonValgardsson, Reykjavik 1998.9 e5

Obvious and best.9 dxe5

9 ... hS? 10 e6 e6 (10 ... h4+ 1 1 d4 12 ' e) 1 1 dxe6 'h4+ 12 g3 xg3 13

3 'h3 14 'xd6!.10 xe5 h5

10. . . e7? 11 ' e2 is a bkward step rBlack.1 1 e6 h4+

1 . . .e6? 12 dxe6 00 13 3 looks terrible r Black. This time there is another pinon the d7knight 13 . ..d6 14 'xd8xd8 15 e7 d6 16 gS e6 17 0 a6 18

xe6 bS 19 c7 c8 20 3xb5 ei)wins r White. 13 . . .x3 h been tried.Then 14 'x3 eS (14 . . .xc3+ 15 bxc3eS 16 e4 6 17 e7! ' xe7 18 0-0 is excellent r White) 15 dS h4+ 16 g3 ' e7



King 's Indian and Ben oni Four Pa ns A tta ck

runs into 17 gS!, e.g. 17 . . .6 (7. . .xe68 d8+ 8 19 00) 8 x6 x6 19 xe6 20 d8+ 10 WessmanMelgosa,Tunja 1989. Vaiser oers the ge imon

ciniCuso, co. 1989 an exple o howto deal with 13 . . .d4. There llowed 4exd7 xd7 15 gS e8+ (15. . .b6 16b3+) 16 e2 4 17 x4 x4 1 8 d5x3 19 gx3 e5 20 c3 and Black certainly did not have a rooks worth o compensation!

1 2 g3

Believe it or not 12 �d2!? h been playedhere and it even seems to give White thebetter ge. However, since the main line isdiicult r Black we might have to wait awhile bere the plan o sending the king tothe queenside grows in populity.1 2 xg3 13 hxg3 'xh1

13 . . .xg3+? 14 �d2 xc3+ 15 bxc3 g2+16 e2 xd5+ 17 �c2 xe6 18 xe6+ e619 h6!? in FechtBetker, corr. 1989leaves White with a decisive advantage according to Vaiser.1 4 e3!

Keeping the pin is prerable to 14 exd7+.1 4 xc3+

14 ... 00 15 exd7 xd7 1 6 xd7 ae8 17

xe8 xe8 w seen a w times in the ely1980s. Then 18 e2 d4 (18 .. .h6 andnow Kinsman gives 19 � xe3 20 g2)19 0-00 xe3 is P.Littlewood-Noood,Commonwealth Ch. 985, when 20 c2!

would have put White well in ront, e.g.20 . . .xg3 21 ge2 h6+ 22 �b g2 23a4! onikowski), or 23 d6 with a clearadvantage to White according to NCO.

14 ... e6? is weak on account o 15 dxe6 0016 exd7 xd7 17 xd7 ad8 1 8 b3+ �h819 000.1 5 bxc3 6

15 ...e4!? is an impot alteative. Ater 16 3 x3 17 x3 e6 18 dxe6 thege KalininKonev, corr. 1991 continued18 . . .00 19 h6! !. Then 19 .. .e8 20 000xe6 (20 .. .6 21 xe8 xe6 22 a4x2 23 e5! is excellent r White) 21 c4b6 22 g5! wins r White, while aer19 . . .x 2 d1 ! xc3 (20 .. .8 21 e7 d722 ex8+ 8 23 c4+) 21 exd7 xd722 xd7 a6 White h 23 !, the bishopsbeing too powerul. Later in K.UrbanCiemniak, Polish Ch. 1993 Black improvedwith 18 . . .a6 19 exd7+ xd720 xd7+ �xd721 xc5 �c6 22 e3 ae8 23 �d2 e4 24d4+ �d5 25 �d3 c8 26 c2 ce8 27

b , although the two pieces gave White aclear advantge.16 exd + xd 1 xd + �xd 18

'b3!

A new move at the time, this is an im

provement on 18 3 and 18 a4+ b5 19g4+ 5 20 3 with an ending in whichBlack tends to have decent chances. okolovs idea, in contrt, is to keep the queenson the bod, ctle queenside d then ho

99



A tta cking ith 1 d4

to highlight the plight o Blacks king.1 8 b5 1 9 0-0-0

Vaiser preers this to 19 xcS °g2.1 9 heS

Natural but perhaps not best. Anothersuggestion is 19 .. .ac8, gainst which Ftnikproposes 20 a3 20 . . .°e4 2 1 xcS, whileokolov gives 20 d6 c4 2 1 c2 he8 22 °2S 23 3. Both these lines e good rWhite. However, a possible improvement is19 ... hc8 !? 20 °a3 e4 21 xcS whenFtacnik believes White is clely better aer21 . . .c4 22 d4 (22 b4! ?) 22 .. .b4 23 a4+bS 24 xbS+ bS 2S b2 etc. This reasonable sessment led Kinsman to oer21...°g4 with the idea o restricting theknight to g . Then instead o Kinsmans 22d6 e4 I preer 22 2, e.g. 22 . . .b4 23a4+ e7 24 e2! (24. .xe2? 2S e).20 xc5 c8?!

This leaves the a6pawn unprotected andis justiiably criticised by both Kinsman andV aiser. They suggest 20 . . .g2 with the inten

tion o doubling on the eile aer 21 d6 e622 b4 ae8 etc.21 d4 g2

21...c4 22 e2 3 23 4 and theknight is heading r d3 with both cS and eSin its sights. 21 . . .e4 threatens to take on d4,so White should l the pin on the cle with22 b.22 3!

Underlining the problem with 20 . .ac8by htting the a6pawn.22 'xg3 23 'x6 xc3+

There is nothing else. 23 ... gS+ 24 c2g2+ 2S d2 ails to 26 e2! since26 . . .xe2? loses to 27 xbS+.24 b2

Not 24 xc3? xc3+ 2S b b4+ 26c2 °c4+with a draw. However, 24 b ! is

simpler, e.g. 24 . .b3+ 2S a 24 ccSBlack c at let go down with a ight

ter 24 . . .g2+ 2S xc3 (2S a? xdS)2S ...c8+ 26 d3 ° c2+ 27 e3, when Ftac

100

nik gives the llowing: 27 . ..e8+ (27 .. .xd28 xbS+ d6 29 e2) 28 4 +(28 .. .xd 29 xbS+ d8 30 b6+ e7 31c+ d8 32 b8+ d7 3 3 b7+ d8 34

b6 mate) 29 g3 °gS+ 30 2 °h4+ 31 4+ 32 2.25 'xb5+ d6

2S .. . e7 26 d6+! xd6 27 e+ 8 28xe8+ xe8 29 c (okolov) .26 �1 ! 3

26 . e? 27 b4+, or 26 .. .h 27 c+!xcS 28 b6+.2 b2 'c5

27 ... a7 28 3.28 6+ �d

28 ...c7 29 d6+.29 '4+! 1 -0

The inale will be 29 . . .d8 (29 . . .c7 30d6+) 30 6+.

ConcuonDespite the Ds reputation I would recommend that Black stick to lines dscussed in

Game 14, namely 9 .. .g4 and 9 .. e8. Obviously Blk h potential o play on the le,the a-h8 diagonal and the queenside in general thanks to a pawn majority there. As rWhite, the menacing dSpawn is eger to beunlehed aer the oen crucial e4eS thrust,but the threat o this advance alone isenough to keep Black on his toes. 9 . .bS inGame S cannot be correct and it is a strange

choice when Black is clely not in a positionto make this work when ced with Whitesrampging centre pawns. As r 7 ... bS (Game16), Black hopes r Benkostyle activitywithout subjecting White to the usual inconvenience in such positions, while it is up toWhite to decide how to react to 6 . . .a6(Game 1. The ely lank attack can haveabulous results, but be preped r Black to

have chances, too. The pure Mode Benonigets an outing in Game 18, and sees toremind us why my players opt r themove order with 2 . . .e6 3 3 cS in order toavoid this extremely dangerous system.



C H AP T E R FV E I

Grfed Defecewith 4 f4

1 d4 6 2 c4 g6 3 c3 d5 4 4

Another counterpunching deence, hereBlack invites White to build a large centre(aer 4 cxd5 xd5 5 e4 etc) in order to lateruse it r target practice Contesting the centre with c7c5 is almost automatic rGrneld players o ever level, the being

to add weight to Blacks g7bishop Therere our system involves a rapid mobilisationo the queenside rces, beginning with theimmediate development o the darksquaredbishop with 4 4 A major ature in thellowing ges is the delay o Whites kingsknight, usually with a view to using the e2sque (to support the oen pinned c3knight) In Ge 19 Black ctles bere

challenging the centre, while Ge 20 seesthe immediate 5 c5 In anticipation o thecoming central skirmish White llows 4 4with 5 c! ? in Ge 21

active role, aer which the d4pawn can bebolstered with e2e3 As we shall see in thischapter, 4 ilitates an ely entr into thege o the queens rook, which is wellplaced on the cile Moreover, by ignoringthe knights bere bishops general ruleWhite is ree to post his kings knight on

either e2 or 3, whichever is the most appropriate whe the time comes This lexibility isan important characteristic o this variationand, I believe, an underestimated advantgeover the more popular 4 3, 5 4 system4 g 5 e3

The actual move order w 5 c 00 6 e3c5 . 0-0 6 c 1 c5

Again we see the thematic response, ghting ire with ire in the centre despite thepresence o Whites rook on the soon toopened cile 6 dxc4 7 xc4 bd7 8 3

.b6 9 b3 c6 10 00 does nothing to makeGame 19 White pay r the luxur o having his dk

B Lalic-J Polgar squed bishop in play opposed to beingYan Olympd 1996 walled in on c by the e3pawn Nor is 6 c6

_

__

_

. wh at Black wants, e.g. 7 f3 ig4 8 'b3!?1 d4 6 2 c4 g6 3 c3 d5 4 4

Rather than build an imposing pawn centre only to see Black seek to undermine itthroughout the opening (and middlege),White gives his own darksqued bishop an

x3 9 gx3 ' d7 10 h4 e6 1 1 eS whichw comrtably better r White in LukacsKolbus, Budapest 1996 White can also playin more sober hion with 8 h3 x3 9' 3, enjoying extra protection o the e5

1 0 1



A tta ckin g with 1 d4

sque d not having to worr about the b2pawn since 9 . . .b6 10 c2 holds nicely. dxc5

7 cxdS? cxd4 8 xd4 (8 exd4 xdS

vours Black) 8 .. .xdS! d 9 xdS?? loses to9 . . .xc3+ etc. a5

The ili queen soie i s the most natural choice available to Blk but not the mostaccurate. Aer 7 . . .dxc4?! 8 xd8 xd8 9

xc4 Black will have problems regaining thepawn, bu the slightly odd 7 . . .e6! is in ctthe move that causes White the most inconvenience. White should avoid opening thelong diagonal r his opponent by trading ondS d instea opt r the mobilisation o hiskingside. 8 c6 9 e2 e4 is typical,and now 10 d4 leaves the centre burstingwith possibilities:

a) 10 . . .xd4 1 1 exd4 xc3 12 bxc3 dxc413 0-0 d 14 3 can only be slightly advtageous r White, who can lodge hisrooks on b 1 d e 1. In KraidmMoberg,Gausdal 1996, Bck challenged the cSpawn, perhaps prematurely 14. . .b6?! S c6!c8 16 c7 d7 17 e e8 18 xdSxdS 19 a4 d Black was under pressure.

b) 10 .. .xc3 11 bxc3 aS 12 00 ad813 xe6 e6 is T.PaunovicDjuric, Liosia1998 . Giving up the lightsqued bishop ra knight in this ashion is good only whenthe added support o the centre helps gener

102

ate counterplay r Black. This is not thece here because the central conguration isyet to be decided d, in the metime,White has a tget in the shape o the b7-

pawn. 14 b3! xcS S cxdS exdS 16'xb7 d the queen was sae in enemy territor: 16 . . eS 17 gS b8 18 d7 6 19x6 x 20 c4! (soening Black up onthe light sques) 20 . . .d4 2 1 d+ xdS 22cxdS with extra pawn.8 cxd5

White doubles his pawn collection.8 dS

As per pl. The other move to consideris 8 .. .e4. Then 9 ge2! shuts in the bishopin vour o cementing Whites grip on thepinned knight. Aer 9 . a6 White has twopromising continuations:

a) 10 excS 1 1 and now 1 .. .d712 d4 6 13 e4 d7 14 e3 e8 Se2 d6 16 00 le White a cle pawn upin EslonChiburdidze, eville 1994. InEslonInsua Mellado, eville 1994 Black at

least addressed the pawn decit by muddying the waters with 11...eS 12 g3 e4 13d4 ex 14 gx3 e8.

On rst impressions the plan seems tohave worked r Black, but the calm S �2

h6 16 4 e4+ 17 xe4 xe4 18 g2 e819 c3! saw White emerge in control, pushing Black back aer 19 .. .d7 20 b4 ' d8 2 1c2 c8 22 xc8 xc8 23 t 'e7 24 e4etc.



b) 10 a4 xa4 1 1 xa4 d7 12 c6bxc6 13 dxc6 b4 14 d4 was equally eectve r Whte n P .NkolcLauter, MelodyAmber (rapd) 1999.9 c4

Better than 9 d2! xdS 10 c7 (10xdS xd2+ 1 1 �xd2 xdS+ vours Blk)10 .. .xc7 1 1 xdS xdS ! 12 xdS e6 13d2 c6 when Black s way ahead n development and ceanly not wthout an ntatve n return r the sacrced exchange.TolushBotvnnk, URCh. 1939, went 1 4d d8 S c aS+ 16 d2 dS! 17e2 xcS 18 c3 xc3 19 bxc3 xc3 20b2 a3 21 b c3 22 b2 andthere was no respte r Whte, 23 b 1 (23xb7 c+ 24 �e2 c4+ 2S � xd2 26xc4 eS+ 27 �g3 xe3+!) 23 . . .xa2 24xa2 + 2S d2 a 26 d3 xb+ 27xb 1 eS soon leadng to a decsve advantage r Black.9 xc5

9 ... e6 nvtes 10 e4, the pont beng that

Black has m ..t_Ten 1 1 ge2 xcS 1200 d7 13 gS leads to a poson n whchWhtes peces e more eectvely placed,wth Blacks less co-ordnated. However, thss a lesser evl than 1 1 .. .x2! 12 a4! xa413 xa4 xh 1 14 dxe6 whch was thecourse ten n PnterK.Allen, ThessalonkOlympad 1988. Blacks materal lead s onlytemporay, the ge contnung 14 .. .e6 S

� ! 8 16 �g 2 17 e3 (17 �x2 gS)17 .. .eS (17. . .g4 18 xe6+, or 17 . . .e4 18xe6+ �h8 19 dS) 18 x2 2+ 19�2 x2 20 �g3 6 21 ac3 �g7 224 c6 23 xe6+ and Whte eventuallywon.

Another opton r Whte s 10 b4! xb41 1 b3 xb3 12 xb3 , e.g. 12 .. .xdS(12. . .xdS 13 d e6 14 e4) 13 xdS xdS

(13 . . .xdS 14 d e6 S e4) 14 xb8!xb8 S xdS xdS 16 3 xa2 17 �e2wth a pull r Whte n Mlchat, Yugoslava 1947.1 0 b3

Grnfeld Defence with 4 f4

Tdy play om Lalc. Also possble s Pnters 10 b3 ! a6 1 1 a4 bd7 12 e4 (12 d6! )12 . . .aS 13 d2 cS 14 c2. Both ths andthe ge contnuaton suggest that Black

does not have enough play r the pawnonce Whte establshes hs pawns on e4 anddS. Nonetheless ...aS remans a populgeneral theme n the Grneld at all levels.1 0 c6 1 1 f3 a 5 1 2 0-0

What s the te o the dpawn

1 2 Ununately r Black 12. . .xb3 13

xb3 xdS als to 14 d xc3 S xc3aS 16 c7!. Consequently Black s letrng to obtan play by exeng pressure onWhtes centre n order to generate somethng on the dk sques, relyng on thelongrange bshop.1 3

Thus Black h made the most o herstuaton, the text rcng Whte to addressboth the threat to te the e4-pawn and theoverloaded queen, whch deends both b3and 3 (n the latter ce to avod doubledpawns).1 4 c7!

ecurng an advantage at the cost o surrenderng the darksqued bshop. In rt,

o course, Whte gets to hang on to hs extra,healthy pawn.1 4. .ixf3

4 ...xb3 S xb3 xb3 16 b3 d717 g3 x 18 gx3 gves Black nothng

103




r the pawn, White s new pawn seing tosupport the centre.1 5 xa5!

Not S x xb3 16 b3 d g3

xb3.1 5 xa5S .. .xd 16 xb4 xb3 b3.

1 6 xf3 d7Blacks prospects would be ine were it

not r the pawn decit. Whites bishop doesnot enjoy the se eedom the one on gbut his other pieces e ne and, while cSand eS might oer Black something, a pawnis a pawn. t Whites next mes way rthe pawn to irst deny Black use o eS dsubsequently, aer e4eS, to close out Blacksbishop.1 7 e3! Jac8 1 8 f4 c5 1 9 xc5 xc520 e5

Aer 20 c xc3 21 bxc3 b6 White ha bishop and Black a knight. Instead Lalicpreers to keep his knight and rustrateBlacks bishop.

20 x3 21 ax3 f6

Whites secure knight protects the dSpawn, both seing to te Blacks rooks. Black is going to win eedom r her bishopit is necessay to challenge the eSpawn, oth

eise White will centralise his rces including the king and consequently dominate the bod.22 Jce1

Resing to b e drawn into 22 e6 S 23

104

d cS when Black goes on the oensive.22 Jc5 23 g3 fxe5 24 fxe5 e6

Another attempt to undermine the restrictive eSpawn, this time using the rook along

the rank to meet 25 dxe6 with 2S .. .xeS. Bynow it is cle that the eSpawns role in demoting the bishop to spectator status is a keyctor in Whites winning strategy, henceWhites next.25 4! c4 26 dxe6 e8

26 .. .xb4 2 e e8 28 dS xb2 296+ x6 30 ex6 � 31 d trades oneadvantage r other.27 f7 k6

This time 2 .. .xb4 runs into 28 dSxb2 29 6+ x 30 ex, e.g. 30 .. .b631 g+ �h8 32 c8 33 g8+! xg8 34g8 + �xg8 3S e. Nor does 2 ... xe6help: 28 xb xeS (28 . . .xeS? 29 xg+)29 �g2 a6 30 bS! aS 3 1 a etc.28 Jx7 Jcxe6 29 Jxa7 Jxe5 30 Jxe5xe5 31 �g2

A voiding the rk on d4 and entering the

nal phe o the ge. The exchange o apair o rooks and the cleance o Blacksqueenside pawns has brought about an ending in which Whites decisive lead shouldeventually be conveed. The ge continued:31 S 32 5

Again White is content with a clearcutwinning pl.

32 xc3 33 xc3 Jx5 34 �f3 Jc5Or 34 ... b3 3S c b2 36 h4 d2 3�e4 g2 38 �4 e2 39 �gS 2 40 g4 etc.35 Ja3 c4 36 �e3 h5 37 �d3 g4 383 �f7

38 ...h4 39 b4!.39 J4 g5 40 Je4!

Cutting o Blacks king. The ge endedas llows:40 Jd5+ 41 �c2 g5 42 c4 Ja5 43�3 �f6 e2 h4 45 �4 a1 46

gxh4 1 + 47 �a5 a 1 + 48 �6 1 +49 �c6 gxh4 50 c5 �g5 51 c2 h3 52�d5 �f6 53 Jc3 1 -0



Grn fe/d D e fenc e with 4 .f4

bS 17 a2 8 resulting in uncle posiGame 0 tion. The battle is on between Whites terri

nkiov-Konopka torial, central supremacy and Blacks queenrco 000 side pawns and pressure on the cle. As

1 d4 f6 2 c4 g6 3 c3 d5 4 f4 g75 e3

The immediate S c is dealt with inDreevLeko (Ge 21).5 c5

Typical o this uncompromising dence.Black is happy to heighten the tension with astand-o in the centre, the aim being to clethe long diagonal r his bishop. For S .. .00see LalicPolg (Ge 19).6 dxc5 a5

The average Grneld an loves to play. . .c7cS llowed by ...aS, the pin and theprospect o ...e4 (unleashing the bishop)and ...d8 quite diicult to resist. For hispt, White must also continue with his strategy o queenside development. c1

dxc47 . . . e4 is the major alternative, when

White has two choices:a) 8 cxdS xc3 9 d2 pins a black knight

on c3 ! Then aer 9 .. . xa2 10 bxc3 Black

decides the te o the queens. 10 .. . aS 1 1c4 d7 12 3! (12 e2 xcS 1 3 00 0014 d4 d7 is level) 12 . . .xcS 13 eSeliminates Blacks annoying bishop13 . . .xeS 14 xeS 6 S 3 d7 16 00

usual with balanced chances iliarity withthe position will pay dividends.Instead o returning the queen to Black

can trade: 10 .xd2+ 1 1 xd2 d7 12 b00 13 xd7 xd7 14 e4 and the strugglerevolves ound Whites central pawn ms.

The danger r Black in the diagram position is that the pawns might close out thebishop pair whilst mching down the mieo the bod, the semi-closed nature o thegame suiting the lone knight. Kaspov oers the llowing viation, in which Blackexploits the ct that Whites limited inuence on the light sques comes om thepawns on e4 and dS: 14 .. .S S eS e6 16 c4

8 17 c6 bxc6 18 d6 gS 19 xgS xeS 20cS g7 21 4 h6 22 e7 cb8 23 3 b2+24 c2 b4 2S eS xeS 26 eS aS. Notsurprisingly the assessment is uncle!

b) 8 ge2 is sensible, highlighting the signicance o holding back the kings knight.The 3sque might cover eS well as d4,but rom e2 the knight oers valuable suppo to the pinned and consequently o

troubled c3knight Understandably Blk isnot without options here.b ) 8 . .xc3 9 d2! and White prepes

to post a second knight on c3. Aer 9 . .eS 10g3, llowed by xc3, both dS and e4 e

105




available, while a sple line such 9 . . .0010 xc3 dxc4 1 1 xc4 'xcS? 12 bS !,when White threatens 1 3 c7 and 13 7+,illustrates how easily Black can ind himsel

in trouble . The rooks potential on the cleis a key element in this viation.b2) The natural 8 ... eS?! backres aer 9

xeS! xeS 10 ' xdS, e.g. 10 . .. xc3+ 11xc3 xc3 12 'eS+ �d7 13 xc3, or10. . .c6 1 1 ' xe4 S 12 'h4 b4 13d4 xd4 14 exd4 c2+ 15 �d, whenBlack has little to show r the two pawndecit.

b3) 8 .. .c6 9 cxdS b4 looks menacingbut Whites extra protection o c3 is nedecisive, e.g. 10 a3 a2 1 1 b4! c3 12xc3 xc3+ (12 . . .xc3 13 bxaS xd 14bS+ keeps White well ahead) 13 xc3xc3 14 ' d4 'xa3 15 '8+ �d7

Neither king is pticully comable,with Whites threened with immedie mateon c 1 . However, White has the move and, is oen the case in situations with mutualthreats, this decides: 16 c6+! bxc6 17 dxc6+�xc6 18 'e8+�d5 (18 . . .�b6 19 'd8+�c620 'c7+ �dS 2 1 'c4 mate) 19 'd8+ �e620 c4+ �S 21 00 and now there e noprizes r guessing who h the more vulner

able king!Returning to 11 b4 HergottKudrin,Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988, continued . ..'xa3 12 xa2 'xa2 13 6 14 e40-0 15 e! ' a3 16 ' d4 h 17 xg7

10

xg7 18 a 'b3 19 c 'c2 20 g ! andthe threat to trap the queen with 21 d3proved too much r Black.

b4) 8 .. .dxc4 is best. Then 9 'a 'xa4 10

xa4 d7 1 1 ec3 xc3 12 xc3 a6 13xc4 xcS 14 00 00 oers Black decentprospects o equality, although Whitesslightly more active pieces do guantee apersistent pull.8 xc4 0-0

Despite the ct that 8 . . .'xcS?? 9 bS! isgiven in numerous places as giving White adecisive advantage the capture on cS is notthat uncommon at all levels! Blacks immediate problem is his queen, which is beingindirectly attacked at the moment in view othe threatened 10 x7+ which White alsohas aer 9 .. .00. Therere aer 9 .. .'b4+ 10�! we rive at the llowing position:

Now 10 .. .00 1 1 a3 'aS 12 b4 llowedby picking up the rook aer 13 c7 is eilywinning r White, which leaves us with10 . . .a6. This does deend c7 and seems tobring Whites menacing play to a standstillbut, in ct, Blacks queen is not much saeron b4 than cS. LeitaoVan Wely, Lost Boys1998 saw 1 1 a3, when the top GM probablyrealised that 1 1 . . .'aS runs into 12 c7+!

xc7 13 xc7 'xc7 14 x7+ picking upthe queen yway! Instead aer 11...'xb212 b 'xb 13 'xb 0-0 14 3 15' a2 cS 16 eS e6 17 3 d8 18 g4White was soon on his way to victory. I



dont like recommending lines on thestrength o possible traps or amusing combinations, but i Van W ely (d other titledplayers) can walk into this, then Im sure

8 xcS?? will be played again, paicullywhen we consider that this is a normal ideain this deence9 ge2

9 3 leads directly to the line in whichWhite preaces S 4 with 4 3 Here,owing to the speciic order o moves, weconcentrate on using the e2sque Whilee2 is not stronger than 3, there e subtle dierences in how the ge might develop and, rom a psychological point oview, the onus is on Black to appreciate this9 xc5

1 0 5An interesting alternative to the more

usual 10 b3 when Black has tried threemoves:a) 10 eS?! tends to be a thrust that Black

plays because he can The problem, ocourse, is that the consequent weening othe dS-sque plays into Whites hands, moreso when both knights have access to c3 After 11 gS c6 12 x6!? x6 13 e4e7 14 2c3 g7 S a4 h8 16 00 S

17 dS d8 18 cS White w mingprogress in Hoang Than Trang-Piankov,Budapest 1994

b) 10 aS 1 1 0-0 and now:b ) 1 1 bd7 12 d a6 13 a4 eS 14

Grn feld D e fenc e with 4 f4

dS! xc4 1S xe7+ h8 16 xc8 xe317 xe3 c8 18 xc8 xc8 19 xb7netted White a sae pawn in TimoshenkoPelletier, Ubeda 1998 Instead 12 cS 13

b xbS 14 xbS e6 S e xc4 16xc4 e6 17 3 a6 18 bd4 d8 wasagreed drawn in LagunovKonopka,Bundesliga 1994, but GM Rowson proposes18 c7 with an advantage to White

b2) 11c6 12 d e6 13 bS eS 14g3 e4 d d2 16 d3 b4 17xd2 xbS 18 c4 b6 19 a3 c6 wasthe interesting course o Hoang ThanhTrgAGa Hungian League 199SAgain the dSsque beckons, and with 20c3 d8 21 dS 22 h4! d7 23'e2 White w able to create an initiative

c) 10 c6 1 1 bS h 12 g3 h4 13c7 and now there e two ways o dealingwith the 4-bishop:

c) 13 gS!? ) 14 xgS is the simplest, 14 xgS

S xa8 d7 16 'xb7 b8 (16 aS+ 17

b4 xb4 18 00 c6 19 c7 a3 20 S!xa8 21 xe7 is good fr White) 17 c7xa8 18 a6 having been sessed uncle, which seems reasonable Also possibleis 17 a6 xa8 18 e2!? with the idea omeeting 18 c8 with 19 bS d 20 00and Whites rooks e in control PerhapsBlack should head r the ending with18 aS+ 19 xaS xaS 20 c7 c6 21

3 3 22 gx3 e6c 12) Black experiences more diiculty ater 14 S!? This pesky knight looks like awinner, since aer 14 S S g3 e4 163 d4 (16 aS transposes) 17 x+!x (17 h8 18 e4 xb3 19 xb3) 18x7+ x7 19 xe4 and 1S g4 16 xa8aS 17 bS xc4 18 xc4 d3 19 xg4xbS 20 xg White emerges with a points

lead However, matters e less cle aerS aS 16 b 'e4 17 xaS ad8, although 18 0-0 is awkwd r Black thanksto the rather comical gS-pawn Finally, thege Gretssonchandorr, Nordic Grand

1 0 7




Prix 1999 wnt 15 .d4!? 1 6 xd4 ' 4+ 17f ac8, whn Whit w fctivly arook down Th altrnativ 16 'xb7 hbn taggd with a ? and accompanid by

16 . .ab8 17 xa7 '4 18 xd4 xg2 19f 4 ( 9 g4 20 c5) with an attackfr Black, but Whit sms to b doing bttr than n ar 20 5 x5 21 x5.

c2) 13 . .5 springs to mind mor radilyThn 14 f5? xf5 is difrnt bcausthr no possibl attks on th f5bishopand g5 is availabl to Blacks qun. InPiskovDvoirys, Podolsk 1992, Black had adangrous initiativ ar 14 h6? 6 15xa8 g4 16 c7 d4! 17 a3 f5 18d5 gx3 ! . Krasnkov blivs this to ban ndorsmnt of 13 .5 and gos on tovaluat th position ar 14 x5! x5 15xa8 d7 as giving Black compnsation rth xchang Howvr, this apps somwhat optimistic in viw of 16 c7 c8 172, whn Black cnot xtract noughom th pin, .g. 17 .. .8 18 xb7 ' d8 (or

18. . . d6 19 b3 8 20 f4! xc7 21 'b7! d8 22 5 x5 23 00 and Black is anxchang down fr nothing) 19 'xa7 xc720 00.

Whit has too many pawns and a rook r

two pics1 . . .e6Black can b frgivn fr string cl of

10. . . b4+ 11 f bcaus th qun is running sho of brathing spac.

108

In ordr to worry th qun Whit has rlinquishd th right to castl, in itslf a significant concssion Consquntly Blacklooks to b holdng his own vn ar losing th qun.

a) Krasnkov liks 1 . . .4 12 a3 d2+13 g xb2 14 c2 xc4 15 xb2 xb2whn Blacks knight picks up a rook andbishop r th qun. Manwhil Whitsrmaining rook is stuck in th cornr on th

wrong sid of th king. D FirmianWol,w ork 1987, continud 16 c2 a6 17bd4 5 18 'xb2 c5 19 h4! d3 20 b5xf4 21 xf4 xf4 22 h5 3 23 3 withchancs r both sids

b) . . a6! 12 a3 xb2 13 b xb 14xb b5 15 xb5 is also fibl, as long Black nds 15 .. .xa3! whn 16 xb8?runs into 16 .. 4 17 a 18 c b2

(Dydyshko). Instad DydyshkoBgun,UR 1990 continud 16 b2 16 ..a8 175 c6 1 8 xc6 bxc6 19 h3 and a drawwas agrd.1 1 3

Whthr or not Whit should jump intoc7 is a difcult mattr to judg Hr, rxpl, 11 c7?! xc4 12 xa8 a6!rbounds on Whit.

1 1 . . .xc4 1 2 xc4 f5 1 3 lg313 c7 ms mor sns now (and onth nxt mov) but th position is qual ar13 . .c6 14 xa8 a5 tc.1 3 . .d7 1 4 0-0 lc6 1 5 d1 c8



Thus f th qun is rsponsibl r athird of th n movs playd by Black,Whit having dvlopd with tmpo to bginth middlg with modst but dnitprssur thanks to th pin on th cl andBlacks subsqunt structural waknss.1 6 ld4! d8

Black can avoid bing saddld with a brokn qunsid with 16 . .xd4 but ar 17dxd4! th b7pawn drops

1 7 lxc6 xd 1 + 1 8 xd 1 xc6 1 9 e4e6 20 3 a5

In an othis lvl position Whit h acomabl advantag in viw of th ytgt on c6. Black is without countrplay.

21 h4?!An odd mov dcision. Whit shouldclly b attacking on th qunsid onlyto ti Black down br switching anksEvn if this is Whits intntion th timing

Grnfeld Defence with 4 f4

sms inappropriat, so prhaps th txt isdsignd purly r psychological rasons,rminding Black who holds th lad. vrthlss 2 1 h3 is prfrabl r th tim bing,

dnding g4 wll

crating an scapsqu on h2.2 1 ld7 22 c2 c5 23 e3 d8 24d1 ? !

Whits approach to this g is hdlystraightd. Hr th simpl 24 xcSwoud b th logical culmination of Whitsqunsid play, bt th Bulgarian GM prfrsto prolong his opponnts discom byallowing th liability to rmain r th timbing In ct th rst of th g is a continuation of this thm, with Whit lookingto dmonstrat that th dirnc btwnth qunsid pawns is dcisiv.24 6 25 c2 d4 26 d2 le5

Whit might bgin to rgrt his cual approach ar 26 ...x3! 27 xd7 d4 28xd8+ xd8 whn th advantag is slippingaway

27 le2 lc6 28 g5 f6 29 f4 e5 30e3 <f7 31 c1 xe3

Avoiding this xchang puts th onus onWhit to m progrss. ow Whits doubld pawns dfnd d control d4 and dSrspctivly32 fxe3 l4?

Corrct squ, wrong pic33 a3 lc6 34 + �g7 35 xd8?!

Mor to th point is 35 dS! , onc againcsing on th cpawn. Howvr, Whit isabl to prov his point anyway thanks toBlacks now gling wasss on , cS anddS35 lxd8 36 lc3 le6 37 la4 d6 38

d5 a638. .xdS altrs nothing, .g 39 xd5 c7

40 d6 6 41 d7 �f7 42 xc5 d8 43 b4

tc.39 �f2 1 -0I suspct that Fathr Tim might hav

caught up with Black, although in th diagr position Black is almost in zugzwang.

109




6 g5 h6 7 h4Game 21

Dreev-Leko

Wijk n Zee 1996

1 d4 lf6 2 c4 g6 3 lc3 d5 4 f4 g7

5 c1By activating h is qunsid as quickly

possibl now doing without 2-3 as wllas f3 Whit prpars r a cntral skirmish5 . .lh5

With Whit yt to vn disturb his kingsid Black sts about dnying th bishop itsdsird outpost 5 00 6 3 trsposs toLalic-Polg (G 19), whil an altativis 5 dxc4 Thn Whit can justi his movordr with 6 4, whn 6 cS is th only wayin which Black c challng th othisrmidabl cntr Ar 7 dxcS ' 8 xc4Black should avoid 8 x4? 9 ' d, whichlavs 8 0-0

ow 9 S!? rquirs prcis play omBlack 9 g4 10 , 9 4 10 'a4! 'xa41 1 xa4 d7 12 dS! ; and 9 hS 10 d2xS 1 1 f3 all clly bttr r Whit,so Poischunn, trnal play-o Budapst 1987, continud 9 fd7 10 f3 xcS

(10 c6 1 1 6) 1 1 00 c6 12 d 6 13b4! xb4 14 x7+ �h8 15 d2 ad8 16x6 6 (16 x6 17 c4) 17 a3! 'xa318 xcS a6 19 xg6+ hxg6 20 c2 andWhit had th bttr of a complx position

1 1 0

It is mor appropriat to kp th bishopactivly placd rathr th drop back to d2 Itis tru that on f4 th bishop td up withth rook to x prssur on c7, but by chasing it to anothr diagonal Blacks knight nolongr protcts (d 4)7 dxc4

olving th problm of th standof inth cntr Br invstigating Blks othr

option in this sctor lt us look at what happns of Black continus to hass th bishop:a) 7 gS is not inconsistnt but Black must

b cl whn contmplating such a committal altration to his kingsid pawn structur, pticully whn castling qunsid isnot a ralistic possibility In fct with 8 3!Black is practically rcd to rtrat, sinc8 gxh4 9 'S is awl Thrr ar

8 f6 9 g3 c6 Black has an alrady inrior vrsion of th lav hits dark-squdbishop is usually shut in by th 3pawn)with th addd inconvninc of wrkingsid pawns Rogoznko-Muntu, Buchst 1992 illustratd this wll: 10 d3dxc4 11 xc4 00 12 f3 f 13 00 bd714 '2 4 15 fd d Whit with simpl, patint play had th advantag In ct

ar th trad of Blacks light-squd bishopr a knight Whit vntually managd to linup his bishop and qun on th b 1-h7 diagonal

b) 7 cS , as usual in this opning, count



rs th challng to Blacks pawn with attack on its opposit numbr. Howvr, 83 cxd4 9 xd4 dxc4 10 xc4 00 11 dS!sts a claim r cntral trritor, rminding

Black that his knight on th dg of thbod is f lss ctiv than th bishop itst out to nulli. In Dydyshko-ovik, Katowic 1992 Black trid to justi his playthus f by sing his stratgy through, rathrthan vntually accpt a loss of tim by rturning th knight to f6. Indd ar11...d7 12 f3 gS 13 g3 xg3 14 hxg3g4 15 h4!? (15 d4 looks snsibl)15 . . . S 16 b3 'b6! 17 00 d7 Blackskingsid failtis wr mor or lss ofst byhis wll placd knight and th bishop pair.8 e3 e6

Bginning a stubborn cpaign which isdsignd, quit simply, to hg on to thxtra pawn. It is on snsibl to gt on withdvlopmnt in ths circumstancs, butBlacks ida apps to b an ctiv on.8 . . .00 was th mor accommodating ap

proh of ral Europ Tam Ch.1999. Ar 9 xc4 c6 10 g2 (in this c10 is natural) 10 .. .d7 1 1 00 b6 12b3 dS Whit wnt r a modst butlong-trm dg with 13 xdS cxdS 14 c3f6! 15 xf6 xf6 16 'f3 6 17 'f4 hS18 bS. It is tru that Whits g is asirto play thks to his slightly suprior picsd prsnc on th c-l, but accuracy is

calld fr in ordr to maintain any winningchancs . Prhaps instad of bringing about asymmtrical pawn structur by taking on Whit should considr 13 4 with a viw tolodging th knight on cS and fllowing upwith a latr 3-4.9 e2

Mor thratning th th routin 9 f3,Whit puts th knight in his sights. How

Black rsponds is down to choic.9 f6This is consistnt with th ovrall plan of

dfnding th c4-pawn and rsing to rlinquish a hold on th cntr. ot surprisingly

Grn feld D efen c e with 4 J 4

Black can again call his opponnts blu byhitting out with his loyal cpawn: 9 ...cS 10xhS cxd4. Thn 1 1 ? ! dxc3 ! 12 'xd8+xd8 13 xb7 cxb2 14 d+ c7 15 xa8

d8! is bst avoidd sinc Blacks passdpawns woh at last th sacricd rook,.g. 16 4 (16 b c3 17 4 fS)16 .. .f 17 xf gxfS 18 b c3 19 f3 c220 2 cxb' 21 xb c6 tc. Consquntly, usupovtohl, Bundsliga 1995continud 11 xd4 gxhS 12 g2 g4 13h3! x2 14 'x2 c6 15 0-0 'xd4(15 ...xd4 16 'xhS and 17 f with compnsation r th pawn) 16 'xhS and nowinstad of 16 .. .00?! 17 ! 'd6 18 dS' g6 19 ' f3 with a cl vtag to Whit,Black should hav playd usupovs proposd 16 .. .' S 17 'f3 'd4 limiting Whit,who njoys th mor sound pawn structur,bttr pics and a dnit initiativ r thpawn, to a slight advantag.1 0 f3 c6 1 1 e5

Ftacnik prrs this to 11 00 00

(11...bd7!?) 12 S bS 13 b3 cxb3 14 b3a6 15 'c2 which w agrd drawn mJ.HoathFogi, Zalos 1994 .1 1 b 1 2 f4!?

Ftacnik gos as f as to giv this blunt

looking push a ! . Mayb this is optimisticbut it is logical to bolstr th strongpoint onS, providing th bishop with a r-rout possibility back on f2/ g3. Cainly Blacks rcnt forts hav concntratd on th qun

1 1 1




sde, so n ths resect Whte should be lookng to the other k r aggressve deas 2 d

12 .. b4 s temptng but draws wted attenton to both c4 and cS (and b4), eg 13a4 e4 14 xc4 xc4 S xc4 and thenght on e4 s less usel th t looks d2

Dendng the e3awn, suortng the4-pawn d thus prearng e3-e4, hence

Black's ne. xc 4 bxc

Furthe enorcement of Whte's centreHowever, Leko's suggeston of 14 xc3?

deserves tests. hen 14 dS S 0-0 d7 16b3 xeS 17 eS cxb3 18 b3 0-0 19 f3rentroduces the threat of e3-e4 Leko oers19 gS 20 g3 c8 wth the r onon thatWhte has comensaton r the awn

4 d 5 c2he stggle r the e4-square cotnuesS 0-0 gves Black tme r 1S d7 f6

Bere grabbng the g2-awn Black sesbly chases away actve pece (unless Whtemes the mstae of unhngg hs ownknght aer 16 xf6? exf6).1 6 f2?

I have a feelng both players were alreadyaware of the ge was to end at ths ont Otherwse Whte h another oton n 16g3, ntendng to meet 16. . xg2 17 gdS wth 1 8 xc4 bxc4 19 xg2 d7 20 e4

1 1 2

when Whte has a menng awn centre andgood development r the awn In vew ofBlack's possblty n the man game o the19th move ths vaton should be nvestgated urther 6 xg2 7 g1 d5

17 . .dS 18 e4 e6 s messy d comesdown to tte. Whte s clely the aggressorand has much the easer game n terms ofsace and choce, but Black s a pawn u 8 xg2

No doubt the ont of the revous selecton 8 xg2 f h

Black ca try r the wn wth 19 . xh2,eg . 20 g4 (20 xc6 h4) 20 .h3 21e2 hS, whe 22 h hxg4 23 xh3 gxh3sees Whte unnng out of eces, whle 22xf6+ exf6 23 d5 kees up the ressure butat what cost?20 g4 g2

Denyng Whte's quee the use of the e4-sque, although 20 .xh2 s also possble

here2 f h 22 g4 g2 2 f % %

Concuion

Game 19 Black overestmates pressure onboth the -e dagonal and the d-fle to ndherself enterng the mddlege wth nsucent compensaton r a awn he fat thatone of the world's leng playedo ths

explans why 4 f4 ca be so efectve atmere mortal level, snce such a course tendsto be almost blndly fllowed accordng tothe gene prncles of the Grnfld, dmore care s requred om Black here. WhenBlack delays castlng n order to acceleatethe same queensde tvty (Game 20) theres a chnce that Black's queen can becomeexosed, though t would aear that s s

not such a roblem r Black as Whte wouldlke. Ge 21 features an nterestng departure n that Black tres to punsh Whte'sfalue to str the kngsde. I susect Blackdoes best not to be temted nto . . hS.



C H AP TE R S IX

Nimzo-dia Defencewith 4 f3

1 d4 6 2 c4 e6 3 c3 4 3With 3 .. . b4 ack is happy to pa with a

bishop in ordr to infict stctura damagon Whit ar taking on c3 I rcommndthat Whit ignor this thrat, caing acksbu with th uncompromising 4 , thimmdiat advantag bing that th 4

squ on th point ound whichacks countrpay rvovs is arady outof bounds r ack. If ack is not propryacquaintd with th ky sitiona aspcts of4 thr is a gnuin dangr of driing intoa trriby passiv position, whn Whit is to xpand in th cntr, opn ins d tth bishop pair rign.

In Gam 22 ack coms out fighting,

sking to xpoit th obvious wakning ofth dk squs causd by f2f3 by makingway fr th qun to com to h4 Gam 23transposs to a in of th misch in whichack tris to dispt Whits qunsidpawns, and in Gam 24 ack mpoys thrisky poicy of uring Whits pawns rwdbfr striking on th dk squs.

d5 5

ack continus to concntrat on his opponnts waknd dark squs. Knights on

th rim not aways dim, th txt rasing th qun d monitoring g3 to addwight to th chck on h46 3

For m this is th who point of th 4 viation. It is t that th atrnativ 6 g3dnis ack his chck, but w happy tos acks qun trav ound th bod at

rthis y stag of th gam.Game 22 a 4+ 1 2

SakaevGusenov Th knight is w pacd on f2, whr itDoha 1993 dos not obstct th othr pics d is

rady to oprat on ithr fk.1 d4 6 2 c4 e6 3 c3 4 3 c5 5 xc4 8 e4 xc3+ 9 xc3 xc3+ 1 0

1 1 3




d2

In chss, in i, vrything has a pricOf cours w dont ncssariy assign thsam vau to crtain fto unaty,this is what maks if intrsting A gc atth diagram position is nough to givu twocontrasting approhs ack puts matriaahad of dvopmnt (and inconvninc),whi Whit is intrstd ony in gtting hispics working togthr as quicky as possi

b oth argumnts hav thir ogic, so asusua it is a mattr of tast d sty1 0 d4

Th most popu choic, aving thqun in th hart f nmy trritory Thcntra position on sms justicationnough, but d4 ds hav its probms Ltus hav a ook at th atrnativs

a) 10 . S is simiar to th main in but

dos not pin th d2bishop Th point isthat 1 1 c xdS 12 c3 mts with 12 d4,so Whit dos bttr with 11 c whnack has two ways to protct cS

a) Ar 1 1 . d6 12 g4 thr is a urthrbranch:

a ) 12 f6 13 f4 d4 14 c4 b2 15gS (with ths consistnt attacks Whit hopto fnd a way in) 15 . fd7 16 dx6 is typica

of what might happn Whit dos sm tob making progrss, g. 16 . b6 (16 fx617 c3 a3 18 xd6 b6 19 xcS) 17c2 a3 (17 d4 18 bS+ c6 19 and c3 is comin 18 c3 x6 19 xd6

1 1 4

8d7 20 xg7 g8 21 f6 xf6 22 gxf6b4+ (22 3+ 23 2 c8 24 c 23d2 b 1 + 2 4 2 b+ 25 3 d7 26xcS c8 27 a3 Of cours such a innds tsting, but ack can asiy nd himsf in troub

a2) 12 f4 1 3 c3 gS 14 h4

ow 14 g6 15 dx6 x6 (1 5 00 16 8 17 d2! 6 18 xd6 c6 19bS) 16 xd6 c6 17 f4 d Whit has

rmidab kingsid pawns Thn 17 d418 xcS b6 19 dS ss ack os his matria advtag d sur on th dksquars in th procss 19 6 ns into 20xc6+! xc6 21 hS xg4 (21..h6 22 gS)22 xg4 xg4 23 bS d7 24 h6, dar 19 6 20 xd4 xdS 2 1 xd5 xd422 c4 anothr pic coms undr r:22 + 23 2 b7!? 24 xf3 xdS+ 25

4 xc4 26 xc4 with two xcnt minor pics r a rook. 17 cd4 kps thcSpawn but sti avs f4fS ooming. Ar18 h3 ! f6 19 fS gS 20 xf6 gf3+ 21xf3 xf3+ 22 2 g+ 23 3 gxf6 24xf6 th rrt knit wi soon drop, whi19 d8 20 g3 f8 21 S+ hits g7

14 h6 is sighty dirnt in that ar15 gS g6 16 dx6 (16 . .x6 17 xd6 c6

18 f4 xgS 19 d3 6 20 fS h6 21d2) 16 00 17 7 8 18 d2 ack has18 . hS Thrr Whit shoud continu17 xd6, whn 17 6 18 xcS is uncard th natura 17 x6 18 f4 is tricky r



ack. 18 . . .d4 19 xcS + 20 �2 hSoss to 2 1 xf8+! �xf8 22 b4+ �8 23xc8+ � 24 h3+, d 18 ... d8 invits 19 xb8 xb8 20 hS). Th is avs 18 ... fS 19

gxf6 d8 (19. . .gxf6 20 fS) 20 fS xd6(20 .. . h6 2 1 +! �xf7 22 6+ x6 23 xd8 xc + 24 d) 2 1 g6, .g. 2 1 .. .hxg622 g7 xg7 23 g d7 (23 .. .c6 24 S)24 c4+ with pntiul pay r th pawn, or21...gxf6 22 gxh7+ �xh7 23 xf6 dacks kingsid is bar.

) 1 . . .b6 mts with th sam rspons,namy kingsid xpansion. 12 g4 d now:

a21) 12. . .f4 13 c3 g 14 h4 h6

Hr ack dos not thratn to cos with. . .S. Morovr th S-squar is not dndd. Consqunty Whits kingsid prospcts ar improvd. Hr is a samp variaton: S d2! f6 16 gS gS 17 g4 g6 1 8

hS ! and Whit achivs his goa. Taking onhS ss th qun d knight continu thirtroubd rationship ar 18 .. .xhS 19S ! (ttr than th awkward 19 dx6 c6)19 ... h6 20 dx6 dx6 2 1 g4 g6, whn22 bS+ is too much r ack (22 .. .�7 23d). No hp is 18 .. . f7 19 h6 g8 20 hxg7xg7 2 1 xg7 xg7 22 xh7 f8 23 h2g6 24 hS . Not that acks doomd

qun has takn tn movs to rach f8!a22) In KnkinKhomov, Voskrsnsk1990, ack was ss advnturous, choosing12 . . .f6. Howvr, this sms a bit too accommodating sinc Whit is r to aunch

Nimzo-lndian Defence with 4 f3

his kingsid pawns. 13 f4 c7 14 gS g8 Sc3 �f8 16 d6 d8

acks qun, having takn six of th sixtn movs, rturns to bas. Whits powr darksquard bishop has no oppositionand th spac advantag is normous, but his two pawns down. Uncar is a ir assssmnt! Ar 17 d2 h6 18 b2 h7 Khnkin stppd up a gar: 19 g6! ? g6 20 gf6 21 xg6 8 22 g f7 23 d3 d

Whit had succdd in giving his picsmaximum activity.

b) 10 .. . f6 is sn ss on. Again ackopts to monitor th kingsid, whr Whitps to mak his prsnc t. 1 1 g4 f4 12gS! ? is uncompromising poicy, causingth qun furthr inconvninc. ack wihav difcuty on th dark squars whthror not h accpts th atst pawn or.

b ) 12 ... 13 c g6 14 c3 d6S xg7 g8 16 d4! a6 (16 . . .b6 17 g4)17 c3 ors Whit xcnt prospcts rth pawn, as th owing variations iustrat. 17 .. .b6?! ooks too sow, .g. 18 g4�7 19 h6 f8 (19 . . .8 20 f6+ �f8 21c3 trsposs as 21 . . .S prmits 22 g7+!�xg7 23 fS+ tc.) 20 g7 8 2 1 c3!f4 (21...S 22 fS+) 22 f6+ xf6 23

gxf6+ �d8 24 xf7+ and k is stgging.17 . . .xdS maks mor sns, putting to goodus acks coction of pawns. Thn 18g4 �f8 19 f6 d4! (1 9. . .h8 20 xdS) 20xg8 �xg8! (20 .. .dxc3?! 21 f6 S 22

1 1 5



A tta cki ng with 1 d4

xh7+ �g7 23 f6) 21 d2 22 �f2 7 prpars to bring th bishop d rookinto th gam Whits king is no bttr thits countrpart d ack has two pawns r

th xchang, but th bishop pair hav ongtrm potntia Whit c mak sow but surprogrss with 23 f4 c6 24 b ! c7 2Sd3 d6 26 c2 activating his rooks bradvancing ithr th or fpawn {or vnh4-hS)

b2) 12 xgS waks into a pin but at tkps th knight on f4 With back qunnow on th kingsid Whit c turn to thothr fank, and ar 13 c S 14 xcSa6 S xa6 bxa6 16 d8 ack stinds to dnd accuraty In FahimiGottschich, chonck 1996, h faid to doso, capituating ar 17 d6 g6?? 18 aSInstad th sobr 17 0-0 18 xS g6 offrs ack a dcnt gam His xtra pawn isirrvant and thr ar th usua probmson th dark squars {c7 is wak), but Whitskingsid structur is not ida 17 aS is a

worthy atrnativ to th tricky 17 d6 Ar17 d6 18 c6+ d7 19 xd8 xc6 20c7 d7 21 xd6 f6 22 �d2 givs Whitan dg

c) Th most qunty sn atativ toth gam continuation is 10 a3, hoping tomak a nuisanc of th qun on th qunsid rathr th worry about Whits invitab initiativ on th kingsid

c) 11 S traps th knight on hS but1 1 b2! 12 4 xS 13 c3 xdS 14 c2 00 S d c6 saw ack succssyrgroup d in HochstrassrCbao, Cn1996, whn th ur pawn advtag vntuay tod

c2) Th immdiat and consistnt 1 1 g4f6 12 gS was sn in Esonvia, Java1992, th point bing that 12 hS 13 f4 g6

crats rthr waknsss on th darksquars In th gam 12 g8 13 g S 14g3!? b2 S b d4 16 c highightdth probms ack can run into with hisqun

1 1

Ar 16 a6 {16 d6?? 17 c3 a4 18bS+) 17 c3 a4 18 xS Whit soonwon

c3) 1 1 b 1 has a stamp of approva omVadim Miov Whit aims to gain mor timat th xpns of th back qun d h iscontnt to av th knight on hS In fct inakaauskasCbao, Graz 1994, ackbrought th knight back into pay: 1 1 f612 c2 a6 13 bS c4 14 xc4 xdS S

xdS 00 16 00 d6 17 c3 fS 18 b3 dnow th ssr vi 18 cS 19 f4{19 c2 20 xf6 gxf6 2 1 c) was bttrth Cbaos 18 xa2 19 a c2 20 b2fc8 21 c6! b 22 d4 101 1 c1 exd5

Consistnt with acks pawngrabbingpoicy In tnsigmund, ttta 199 1ack addd to th tnsion in th cntr with

1 1 fS but ar 12 c3 a4 13 gS 00 14xh c2 S d2 xdS 16 d3 b2 17 h had much ss compnsation th inth main in In ct Whits considrabdvopmnt ad in ths positions ctivy ngats th dfndrs xtra pawnsTh gam continud 17 c4 18 d b6 193 !? cxd3 20 xdS 6 21 c7 xa2 22xa8 c6 23 d d4 24 00 g6 2S h6

dS 26 c7 dx4 27 4 d ack dciddnough was nough otic om this xamp that th payr with th xtra pic tndsto njoy mor activity th onus bing on thdndr to wathr th storm My pay



on th back sid of this variation simpy kat th points tay (i a pic is worth thrpawns rathr th th situation as a who1 2 c3 a4 1 3 g5

ow it is Whits turn to snd his quninto nmy trritory, but this tim th arrivais ss wcom ack must addrss thprobm of what to do about hS, dS S dg7 Of cours it is impossib to dfnd ath waknsss

1 3 0-0Th most natura, tidy choic, doning

th knight in favour of concntrating on hispawn mass ot surprisingy in this aradycompx position, a coup of atrnativsds our attntion

a) 13 d4 is prmatur in viw of Whitsnw option aong th h rk, namy 14 xcS! An improvmnt on 14 d2, this

chang of dirction ignors th dim knightand instad announcs two fsh thrats,frking c8 and d4 ow 14 dxc3 1S xc8+7 16 cS+! fowd by 17 xhS is asimp rout fr Whit, whi 14 c6 Sd2 f6 16 bS b6 17 xc6! is anothrxamp of a quick knockout brought aboutby acks wayward qun his avs14 c6 S xd4 00 whn, instad of th

automatic 16 g4, Whit shoud prpar ctiv dpoymnt of his rook with 16b! In VMiovOrn, Isra 1993 acksnt his qun ovr to th kingsid with16 g6 in viw of 16 d6? 17 b f6 {not


17 g6?? 18 h8 mat!) 18 g bd7{18 h8?? 19 xf6) 19 bS, whn ack iscaught in th ring in, or 16 a6? 17 g4 f618 b6 c7 19 xf6 tc In th gam ack

fund himsf undr grat prssur ar 17b

Th immdiat thrat is 18 xh athough ack has mor than twomovrs toworry about Miov givs th owing insto iustrat this 17 f4 snds th knight to

6 in ordr to protct g7 Howvr, Whitsinitiativ is such that th kingsid onsiv isasy to conduct 18 3 6 19 h4 f6{19 hS 20 g4 dos not hod bk th tid) 20hS f7 21 h6 g6 22 g4 7 23 S! S 24xS f7 2S b4 With 17 f6 ackhops to aviat th prssur on th ongdiagona with minima oss of tim Thnpay might continu 18 d3 c6 19 3 d6

20 g h6 21 f4 d now 21 hS 22h4 g6 23 f4 f6 24 xh gS {24 xgS2S c4+, or 2S xf6+) 2S c4+ is a nicrmindr of th bt frc of th bishoppair Th circumspct 21 h8 is ncssary,whn 22 xd6 6 23 d2 ad8 ssWhit mrg with th suprior positionar 24 a2 or 24 g3, thks in no smapart to his wondr darksquard bishop

Orn fund 17 c6 18 d2 dS!, corrcty avoiding 18 d6 19 g h6 20xg7+!, 18 f 19 g4! g4 20 dS+ d18 h6 19 g4 f6 20 gS, g 20 a6 21 ch7 {21 8 22 gxh6 xh6 23 xh6 gxh6

1 1 7




24 h5 f6 25 c4+ h7 26 d2) 22 gxh6' xh6 {22 . . .gxh6 23 g4) 23 'xh6 gxh6 24g4 8 25 xh6+ f8 26 g, or20 . . .hxg5 21 xgS h6 22 hg . Unrtu

naty r ack now without vn a matria ad to as th pain thr was no rspit: 19 xdS h6 20 d3 ! {thratning 21 g4f6 22 S) 20 .. .fS? ! {20 . . .6 21 g4 f6 22h3! ad8 23 f4 'h7 24 00!?) 21 00{intnding 22 xfS f 23 xfS xfS 24xf 'xf 2 g4 g6 26 'dS+) 21...f4{2 1 . . .7 22 S) 22 d6 ' f7 23 c2! h7{23 .. .'xa2 24 S) 24 g4 6 2S S+ h826 d3 f 27 xh6!. Th gam ndd27 .. .xd3 28 xf7+ xf7 29 xd3 c7 30d {30 g6 30 .. .7 31 b4 c632 g6! g8 33 10.

b) Rturning to th position ar 13 'gS,anothr try rom ack is 13 .. .d6 14 xhS d4S d2 6. acks rasoning fr not casting is that th king wi b sr on thqunsid. In MarinVhi ach, Ross 1992ack did not mak th bst of this p.

Thr owd 16 2 c6 17 00 000 18c. Wih acks xtra pawns mpoydmry as protction fr th king it is ogicato assum that th pic dficit bcomsmor mportt. Pting his rooks on th and cfis wi faciitat Whits qust to xpoit his irpowr. Prhaps this had somthing to do with acks dcision to us hisqunsid pawns mor positivy athough

18 ... c4 19 f4! f6 20 d a3? 21 g4brought abpt nd to th gam anyway(whn th c4-pawn gos so dos y hop ofsuiva) . Of cours 20 .. .a6 kps th gamgoing, but 2 1 fS 8 22 g4 d7 23 2 isth frst stp in th procss of hating {orbockading) th pawns in prparation frmaking assaut on acks outnumbrdarmy.1 4 'x5

14 xdS f4 S xcS dS 16 bS 'c217 00 dx4 18 ac 2+ 19 x2 'x220 'S f6 21 'd5+ h8 22 x4 turndout w fr Whit in th gam Machtt

1 1 8

Cords, Grmy 1996, but I much prfr tosimpy tak th pic d st about dismting acks position.1 4 d4 1 5 d2 d6

It hps ack that h sti has a ightpawns bcaus this rstricts Whits pics,d stabishing th soid custr of pawns inth cntr ts in w with th gnra p offstrating Whits stratgy of making thxtra pic t. ack aso has two connctd

passd pawns. On th downsid thr is adangr that Whit c mor or ss ignorth pawn mass d gnrat suficint activity yway, or wors immobiis thpawns as w as hav initiativ!1 6 e2 c6 1 7 0-0 e6 1 8 c1

Whit adopts a patint poicy, monitoringth nmy pawns d in som ways vnchanging ack to us thm fr aggrssiv

purposs. ot that at th momnt thpawns on cS d d4 do a good job of pnning in th darksquard bishop. In imtsv-hishkin, widnica 1999 Whit frst gavhis opponnt somthing to think about onth kingsid: 18 f4 (sinc Whit has a kingsid majority it is iky that advc wirsut in a concssion om ack) 18 .. .f6 19f!? ab8 20 bS 'c2 21 '2 a6 22

c b2 23 c4 xc4 24 'xc4+ h8 2S 1 b6 26 ab 1 d8 27 a4 d Whitwas bginning to tak contro.1 8 6

Prhaps ticipating f4, athough in



gnra ack should rain om wakningsquars. In this cas th txt compromissth ight squars sighty, as now a changon th a2-g8 diagona cnot b ignord, as

was sn in th prvious not.19 ld3 le5 20 l2It is not car what th knight can achiv

on this tour othr than ur acks pawnsrward (if so this is a cray p!). Othrwis 20 f4 f7 21 ' fS actualy dos somthing constructiv, with dS in Whits sightsd th option of chipping away at ackskingsid by pushing th hpawn.20 a3 21 ld1

2 1 c4 ' a6.21 . aeS 22 4 d5?!

acks ast fw movs hav bn adingup to this chg of gar. Howvr, th d6pawn has bn itray) th fundation ofacks imprssiv cntr, d opning thposition vn a itt improvs th prospctsof Whits pics. Lss ambitious but morprcis is to sit tight d av Whit to do

th work, oud invov ithr positiv action on th ngsid or a rgroupingon th qunsid.23 l2 d3 24 exd5 xd5 25 n

ack sti has thr pawns r th pic

but, thanks to th advcd -pawn, h njoys ss infunc on th dk squars thbfr.25 5

Ar 25 .. .c4 26 'd4 f7 27 4 Whit


sts about containing th pawns, improvinghis pics and concntrating on th darksquars.26 4

Evicting th knight d in turn undrmining acks protction of th d3pawn.26 lg6 27 5! c4 28 d1 ?!

Having rasond that h c surround thpawn Whit fais to spot th ss subt 28xd3! xd3 (28 . . .d8 29 c3) 29 'dS+h8 30 'xd3 'xd3 3 1 xd3 which picksup on pawn d thratns othrs, .g.31...d8 32 xg6 xd2 33 4 c4 34 c6a6 35 a4 b2 36 b7 tc.28 .dS 29 c3 a6 30 3?

This tim thr is no xcus r not takingth pawn 30 xd3 is virtuay dcisiv.30 .d4?

30 .. .dS is bttr bcaus 31 'xd3 waksinto 31 . ..xg2.31 xd3 d5 32 3 d6 33 xg6

33 3!.33 . xg6 34 e3 e6 35 3 d5 36

g3 c4 37 d3 e6 38 ad1As so on happns in ths situations

th payr with two or thr pawns r apic asiy nds up dfnding his pawns atth cost of ky squars or vn sctions ofth board. Consqunty th xtra pic bcoms mor vidnt. Prfct pay is noongr rquird rom Whit to convrt hisadvtag.

38 . e4 39 d6 5 40 lxe4 xe4 412 x4 42 x4 x4 43 xc5

Whit is winning.43 cS dS+ xdS 45 xdS+ �7

46 d4 xd4 47 xd4 a6 48 �2 �gs

49 �e3 �7 50 c3 g5 51 �d4 �e6 523 5 53 �c5 g6 54 �6 1 -0

Game 23

Yakovch A .SokolovMoscow 1990

1 d4 l6 2 e6 3 lc3 4 3 d5 5

a3 xc3+ 6 xc3

1 1 9




Rathr th wast a tmpo by droppingth bishop back (s th nxt main gam)ack strs th gam to th amisch Variation Hr Whit is happy to invst a tmpoin rturn r th bishop pair d xtracntr pawn Th attraction r k is irysmooth dvopmnt and th possibiity ofpay against th c3pawn d th c4-squar6 c5

Th thmatic approach, incrasing th

tnsion in th cntr saf in th knowdgthat dxcS crats a third cpawn r WhitAn intrsting atrnativ is 6 c6!? whichcontradicts th gnra that our pawnsshoud b pacd on th opposit cooursquars to th bishop Howvr, now thcaptur on dS can b mt with cxdS toopn th c (on of th idas bhind6 cS) which, combind with b7b6 d

changing bishops on a6, is a dsirab positiona pan Add to this th Quns Gambitpoicy of dxc4 and 75, d 6 c6 is byno mans iogica vrthss th spcicmov ordr rds Whit som dom inth cntr d, vn if th ida provs to b aviab atrnativ to th usua 6 cS, it is notth most natura option to spring to mindAr 7 c2! ack has trid thr movs

a) 7 dxc4 8 4 bS 9 a4 bd7 10 a3c7 1 1 2 a6 12 S dS 13 d6 dWhit had past compnsation in thrm of commd of th dark squars andmor spac in th cntr d on th kingsid

120

in MoskankoVhi ach, Parnta 1999b) 7 b6 ooks prmatur if k is un

to us th a6-squar Ar 8 cxdS cxdS 9 4b7 (9 a6?? 10 xa6 xa6 11 a4+) 10

bS+! c6 11 a4 dx4 12 4 00 13 Sd 14 f3 h6 15 0 c7 16 2! b717 c4 c 18 d2 7 19 a3 things hadgon bady wrong r ack in akavudasin, tPtrsburg 1997 Whit h morspac on a onts

c) 7 0-0 is bst, snding th king to stybr choosing a p Thn 8 cxdS ! cxdS 94 dx4 10 4 S 1 1 dS! aS (1 1 8!?prpars f5) 12 d3 bd7 13 f3,Khnkin-Rozntais, undsiga 2000 ow13 x4?? oss: 14 x4 fS 15 xfS xf16 xfS xc3+ 1 7 2 xa 1 8 6+ f819 gS tc 13 8 is a rasonab continuation, th ida bing to us d6 d cS racks bockading knights Ar both 14d2 d6 15 c4 c7 and 14 a4 d6 15 a3c7 Whit has mor aggrssiv pics dony on cpawn to worry about but ack is

quit soid Instad th gam wnt 13 14 00 c 15 c4 g4 16 3 ac8 17d2! fd7 18 fb c7 19 a4 hS 20 g6 21 2 f6 22 f3 b6 23 b dack was undr prssur Prhaps ack cconsidr parting with th scond bishop with16 x, athough it sms that in gnraar 6 c6 acks stratgy is basd on hoding back pawns as opposd to sking coun

trpay7 cxd5 xd5Without doubt th most common mov,

but 7 xdS! ? is rasonab 8 3 d now:a) 8 fS 9 2 with two vrsions of th

sam thm:a) In Far-Dunworth, ritish Ch 1989

ack mt 9 c6 10 g4 with th spcuativ10 xg4?! 1 1 fxg4 h4+ 12 d2 4 13

g xh2 but Whit und amusingrarrgmnt to av ack rgrtting thsacric 14 aS 15 d ack hassom prssur pus a coup of pawns r thpic, and Whits pics ar yt to s y



ositiv) action Howvr, with a rativysoid wa of pawns in th cntr Whit isnow rady to start pushing th nmy rcback, d ar 15 00 16 g3 h6 17 g2

a6 18 x4 dx4 19 � ! b3 20 bxc 2 1 xc cxd4 22 cxd4 ac8 23 xc8xc8 24 5 c6 25 �f2 th pic wasmor signicant than two pawns

) 9 c4 10 g4 d3 improvs, but 11g3 xf 1 2 �xf c6 1 3 4 dx4 1 4 4 d7 15 h3 0-0 16 b5 17 f4 18 f5was cary bttr fr Whit in Vadimirovzabo Octobr Rvoution 1967

b) Th suprior 8 c7! is nic d xib 9 d3, r xamp, invits 9 cxd4 withth thrat of a nasty chck on c3 I ik 92!?

b ) 9 c6 10 f4 00 11 d3 8 1200 7 13 g4 cxd4 14 cxd4 g6, Gagouba, panish Lagu 1994 Thn 15 g2 isth ogica owup to g2-g4, prping toaunch th hpawn, ar which th g6-knightbcoms a tgt Thr is aso th bonus

that th knight protcts th 3-pawnb2) Mor rcnty MoskalnkMitkov,itgs 2000 continud 9 cxd4 10 cxd4 fS1 1 g4 c2 12 d2 h6 13 a4! h7 14 a3d ack missd his dksqud bishop8 dxc5

8 a5

8 f5 is th othr mov, cy dirctd at24. Ar 9 h3 ack has thr options.

a) 9 .d7?! 10 c4 h4+ 1 1 f2 f6 12


g5!? xg5 13 cxd5 xd5 14 xd5 7(14 c6? 1 5 4!; 14 .c6 15 6+) 15 4c6 16 b5 f8 17 0-0 000 18 c4 Whit a c pawn up in Dronstin-Dy,

udapst 1961b) 9 .00 10 f4b 1) 10 c6?! 1 1 xd5 xd5 12 f4 6

13 3 aS 14 d3 xc5 15 2 ad8 16�f2 was about vn in ArncibiaD oAngis, Guirmo Gcia Prmir 2000,but this soon chgd ar 16 . 7?! 17d4! xd4 18 cxd4 c8 19 ab b6 20hc xc 21 xc c8 22 c7 a8 23a6 c8 24 d3 d7 25 h3 f8 26 �2f6 27 g4! tc Of cours ack tnds to havprobms on th dk squs in this opning, but trading quns dos not ncssyhp th dndr Morovr if this xchgrpairs Whits pawns ar th rcapturc3xd4, thn Whit with th bishop par isth most iky to bnt

b2) 10 7! 1 1 xd5 xd5 and Whitshoud rsist th tmptation to tak a scond

pawn in fvour of 12 f4 xc5 13 d4 aS 14 3 c6 15 d2 6 16 2 c817 00

TothLngy, Hungi Ch 1971 Thisposition is w baancd, Whit hoping to

mak somthing of th dk squs d thbishop pair, ack concntrating on th cWith this in mind ack trsrrd hisknight to (sti protcting 5, but now d6 isaso s), thus xrting mor prssur on

1 2 1



A tta kg wth 1 d4

both c4 and c3 Whit rplid with -a4 toput his rook on , dfnding th c3-pawnand facilitating Whits qunsid play

c) Ar 9 a5 10 4 4 11 gS!?

Whit sks to opn lins fr hi s pics, g1 1 xc3+ 12 d2 (12 xcS?? 13) 13 x4, or 1 xc3 12 d4 bS+13 d2 xd2+ 14 xd2 d4 1S c3 bc616 x4 Consquntly ola-Rtn,Hlsinki 1986 saw Black frustrat this planwith 3 12 d4 0-0 13 x3 c6 14d2 d8, but S d3! xc3 16 c dS17 xh7+f8 18 xa5 xa5 19 f2 x320 x3 was dcisiv9 e4 e7

This knight not th on on b8 is hing fr a5 Lt us hav a look at th nurous altrnativs:

a) 9 xc3+ is th bginning of a jouyto th kingsid, although this is in Whitsfavour sinc 10 d2 11 2 7 12c bc6 13 c3 gS 14 h4 h6 1S d4xd4 16 xd4 0-0 17 d2 xd2+ 18 xd2

gav Whit an dg in Dljanovic-vovic,ugoslav Ch 1989 tructurally Black is nbut thr th usual worris on th dksqus It is also impoant to rmmbrthat th cS-pawn accntuats Whits grip onth dk squs

b) 9 xc3 initiats a practically rcdsqunc that ls to an xcllnt nding rWhit: 10 d2 c6 1 1 b2

a4 12 xa5 xa5 13 xg7 g8 14

122

h6 d7 S f2 c8 16 2 xcS 17d4 7 18 3 a6 19 2 and Black wasstggling in Gnov-ikolov, Bulgian Ch1991

c) 9 c7 10 d4 f6 (10 00?! 11 b4c6 12 xa5 xa5 13 f4! a6 14 d68 S bS c6 16 xc6 bxc6 17 S witha assiv bishop on d6, Gutan-IFago,Hastings 1984/S) 11 b4! c6 12 xa5xa5 13 b d7 14 2 a6 S 3,Ulibin-Hulak, Pula 2000 Whits qunsidpawn ajority dos not look too halthy dnor do a w squs in this sctor Howvr,in ordr to rstor atrial quilibriu bywinning th cS-pawn Black is rquird toxpnd a cain ount of ti, duringwhich Whit should b abl to gnr somso of onsiv on th qunsid Thistnds to involv th b-fil In ct in thisg Whit turnd th ostnsibly wak cpawns to his advantag with an instructivpic sacric: S 0-0 16 f4 17 bSlacks knight sms to b as uch of a

liability on a5 as it is a nac to Whit)17 fd8 18 2 c7 19 d3 ab8 20 b2c6 21 c4! d7 22 hb c8 23 dS!xdS 24 cxdS a8 (24 f4 d 24 d2 wrthratnd) 2S d2 b6 26 cxb6 b6 27xb6 d7 28 c bS (28 8 29 cS)29 xbS b3 30 c7 d4+ 3 1 f2 xbS32 xbS xa 33 bb7 and Whit soonwon

9 f6! ? 10 3 0-0 1 1 b3 fd7 hasbn rcomndd as a good lin fr Blk,th point bing to mt 12 a4 c7 13 with th snsibl sacric 13 b6! 14 cxb6b6, whn Blacks dvlopnt lad oror lss ngats th xtra pawn Inst Whithas two othr options which both involvgiving back on of th c-pawns

d) 10 b3

d) 10 c6 11 b d7 12 xc6xc6 13 b4 a6 14 2 0-0 S f4 wasplasant r Whit in Katav-Tavadi,UR 979 Apa ro th d6-squWhits bishop kps a rook o th b-l



Manwhil th c3pawn controls d4 and clatr nudg d to rduc Blacks controlof th light squs and introduc th possibility of 2-c3-bS (or in som circum

stancs sacriic on dS as in c abov)d12) 10 .. .xcS accpts th or. Thn 1 1bS+ bd7 1 2 xcS xcS 1 3 3 fd7scurs th cS-squ fr Black Howvrwith so many pics still on th bod twoof thm bing Blacks as yt undvlopdrook and bishop on th qunsid it is syto ovrstimat this outpost at th xpnsof othr factors. Branicki-Makczyk Lodz19S4 continud 14 2 �7 1S d4 g6

Black prpars to vict th knight with. .6-S. 16 0-0-0 a6 17 �c2! 1 8 b3 619 c4 and Whit was wll on top.

d2 10 b1 0-0 1 1 b xc3+ 12 �f2 isan intrsting ida using th qun to accl

rat Whits dvlopmnt. V.MilovMagrramov Brlin 1993 saw Whit forc aqun trad with 12 . . .S 13 b2 13 .c7(13 . . .f4 14 2 gS S h4 h6 16 ch [16. . .g6 17 hS! xh 18 c6] 17 g4S? 18 f4) 14 d6 ning an dg ar14 ...8 S xc7 xc7 16 b3 c6 17 f4.1 0 e3 00

10. . .xc3+ 11 �f2 plays into Whits

hands th king quit saf tuckd in on f2paicully whn xchang of quns ison th cds). Again th cS-pawn is as mucha strngth as a waknss on rson bingthat it rstricts Blacks b7-pawn which tnds

Nimzo-dia Defee with 4 f3

to b attackd down th bl. In GolodPushkov Moscow 1991 Whit irst gaindtim on th qun br oring a trad1 1 . ..bc6 12 2 aS 13 ! (mor prcis than 13 d2 xd2 whn th bishop nolongr ts up with th cS-pawn to prvnt.. . b7-b6) 13 .. .x + 14 x S 1S c3 6and now Whit dmonstratd othr us ofth cS-pawn by homing in th juicy d6-squ with 16 bS 0-0 17 d6, in turnhitting b7. Thr fllowd 17. . .f8 18 bd now th attmpt to brak out rhr thrmain passiv rboundd ar 18. . .b6 19a6! aS 20 hd bxcS 21 xcS xb 22xb 1 with a wondrl position fr Whitdspit th symmtr.1 1 3 c

Th qun tnds to drop back to c7 atsom stag and can prov to b an unrtunat squ if Black mistims th capturon cS. Othrs

a) 1 . ..c6 12 h3 d7 13 bS a6?! 14xc6 bxc6 S b4 c7 16 0-0 17 d4

a6 18 fd fd8 19 d6

akav-Ivov Thssaloniki 1996. Whithas a positional lad to add to his not insigniict xtra pawn.

b) 1 1 .. . is prmatur and hands ovr th

dS-squ on a plat ar 12 c4 .g.12 ... a6 13 2 c6 13 ... xcS 14 b4!and th rcd 14. . .xb4 rpairs Whitspawns [in this cas S b4 looks strong butusually cxb4 fcilitats Whits play on th

123



ttackng wth 1 d4

qunsid by opning th c-l] r whichBlack hs no compnsation) 1 b xc515 b5! with anothr rson why can b aproblm squar fr th qun. Malaniuk

Toln Kcskmt 199 continud15 . . .xb5 16 xb5 6 17 d5 d 1c 19 �f2 and Whit had fantstic bishops.1 2 h3 ec6

Black prfrs pic play to hunting downth pawn. 12 . . .d7!? 13 f2 xc5 1 cb6 (1. . .a6 15 xc7 xc7 16 c5 17d6 a6 fvou Whit whthr or not htaks on a6) 15 xcS xc5 16 xc5 bxc5altrs th pawn structur but bnts Whitar 17 b! athough 17 d3?! a6 1xc5 xf 1 19 xf i s n r Black.1 3 1 e5 1 4 f2 a5 1 5 a4!

Ming way fr th rok to com to bSand tmpting Black to pay 15 ... d7.1 5 e6

15 . . .d7?! 16 bS 6 17 00 a6 isBlacks ida but now th b6-squ is too

wak. ArncibiaFranco Havana 1990 wscarly bttr r Whit ar 1 2 d7 19b ac? 20 c6! bxc6 21 xa6 b 22 7 b 23 h a 2 2 whnWhit und nw pasturs on th kingsid(f3f is ctiv).1 6 e 2

With a l th action ovr on th qunsidit sms mor logica to ca on thr br

daling with th kingsid so th immdiat16 b5 !? is a worthy candidat.1 6 d7 1 7 5 6 1 8 0-0

1 b!? dsrvs considration againconcntrating on mor prssing mattrs bfr castling.1 8 7

Introducing an intrsting drawing possibility that Whit sms contnt to go aong

with. Black aso has two othr rasonablmovs.a) 1 ... 19 fb h6 20 g3 bxcS?

(20 .. .b7! is ncssary whn 21 d3 bxc522 f b6 23 c2 d7 2 x5 xbS 25

124

xb5 rsults in a slight matrial imbalancethat givs chancs to both sids) 21 xbxb 22 xb+ xb 23 �h7

In Arncibia-Lobron Manila Intrna1990 Whit opnd a nw ont with 2 f!whn 2. . .c (2 .. .c 25 g b6 26h) 25 fS! x3? (25 .. .d6 26 f d7 277 c 2 h b3 29 g 'c6 30 f6xf6 31 xf6+ xf6 32 'xf6 gxf6 33xcS s a lssr vil athough Black is strug

gling in this ndin 26 6 ws th bginning of th nd. 26 .. .6 loss ar 27 hSg5 2 g6+ �h 29 xh6+ h7 30 f+'g 31 'f6+ g7 (31...�h7 32 h3) 32d+ g 33 d3 whil th gam nishd26 . . .b6 27 x b+ 2 d xd 29g+ �g6 30 f + ! .

b) 1 .. .!? 19 c! lows th samlogic s th prvious lin shadowing Blacks

rook. Thn 19 ...b7 20 cxb6 xb6 2 1 bd6 22 xb6 c6 23 3 transposs toth not to Whits 23rd mov blow whi19 .. .c6 20 d3 fvours Whit.

c) 1 . .a6? is asking r tubl on th dksquars 19 xb6 xb6 20 cxb6 xc3 21d.19 cx6 ax6 20 d6! 21 x6

c6 22 e3 S 23 a5

Agring to split th point. If Whit wantsto kp prssing r th win thn 23 c 1 is asnsibl way to continu .g. 23 . . .xb5 2xb5 b7 25 c. With xclnt pics andno ral waknsss Whit has crtainly don



okay out of the dea, the pawns beng pvided wth good suppo and, consequenty,Back's rooks eegated to contbutng tothe bockade.

23 . . .5 24 Wx5 s 25 W YYGame 24

PrudovG .Sah tova

USSR 1991

d4 6 2 c4 e6 3 c3 4 f3 d5 53 e7

5 .. . xc3+ transposes to Game 23 . HereBack opts to keep the bishop on the boadnow that White's dk sques have beensghty compomsed by 4 f3. 5 .. .d6 tsposes to the main game.6 e4

Whte eects an mpessve ookng cente,

whch Back needs to addess one way oanothe.6 de4

Othesa) he maor atenatve s 6 . . .c5 when 7

cxd5 exd5 8 dxc5 gves the game a deentchaacte. Back has two options.

a) 8 . . .xc5 s the most popu, one ea-son beng that 5 . . .d6 mght have been

played nste of 5 .. .e7, thus ung out 'a,beow. Back has eady moved the bshopthee tmes but the cuent post hghightsthe downsde to the 4 f3 system, namey thepotenta weakness of the g-a7 dagonal. In

Nimzo-lndia Defence with 4 f3

ths case the pce Bk pays r opening theposton s the d-pawn e 9 e5 fd7 10ixd5 11 f4 when the ustfcaton ofBk's pay s to pevent Whte om ctng

kngsde 1 1. . .xg 12 x

a ) 12 . . .h4+?! 13 g3 xh2 14 g2!•xg2 15 xg2! (15 xg2 c5) 15 . . .c5 16e3 s ceary bette Whte, whose daksquaed bshop domnates. Now 16 . . .b6 17xc5 bxc5 18 a4 d7 19 c2 b8 20

0-0-0 and 16. . .bd7 17 b4 ae poor rBack, so henkin-Be, Voskresensk 1990contnued 16. . .b3 17 :d h3 (17. . .c618 c4 ca5 19 d5) 18 :c xf 19xf c6 20 b5! ad8 21 d6!? (21xd8 xd8 22 xa7 xa7 23 xa7 s apawn) 21...a6 (21...d7 22 d3 ca5 23xa 22 c3 ca5 (22 . . .baS 23 b4) 23b6 d7 24 d5 1-0. Note that 15 xg2

bings the rok nto the game convenentyong the second ank.a12) 12 .. .b6 s consstent. Aer the

ced 13 h Gelfand-psky, Lnares1990 saw Back come a coppe on the dksquares 13 . . .c5?! 14 b4 e6 15 a4 c716 e3 c6 17 d6! xd6 18 exd6 e8 19f2 d7 20 c5 xc5 2 1 bxc5 and Whte'sexta pawn was both potected and passed!

Y aovch-P Co, Cordoba 1991 tk aderent couse when Back managed todum up abet temay compensaton13 . . .c6 14 b5 ! d4 (14 . . .d4 15 c4b6! [1 5 . . .c5? 16 b5! xc4 17 xc4] 16

125



A t t a c ki n g w i th 1 d4

xd4 xd4 transposes) 15 xb6 xb6(er 15 . .b6 16 b c5 17 Je3 c2+18 f2 Jf5 19 d Whites sm but neardecisive materia ead is intact) 16 Jd3 d8

17 e3 . UnrtunateyrBkthere is nousel discovered attack on the d-e, whicheaves Black a pawn down. In ct the gamenow ended 17 . .b3 1 8 d1 xd3 (a nice tryom Back that amost desees to work) 1 9xd3 f5 20 e4 a 21 Jxb6 b6 22e2 Jxe4 23 d4 1-0. Assuming there areno big improvements r back in these exampes it is reasonabe to assume thWhites discom on the g1-a7 diona isworth a pawn here.

a2) 8 . . .d4 is the other t, Bak ryig onthe d-pawn to both prvide spe and hinderWhites deveopment Again the cost is apawn and, again, this seems ike too big aprice in the absence of concrete advantages.Of course White must take time out with 9a4 0-0 10 b4 but 10 . . .b6 11 cxb6 b6 12d2? d6 13 Jd3 c7 14 e2 bd7 15

b2 le White a paw up with a nice andtidy positon in Hauchd-Rodrigez, antiago 1990. I m sure there e better ways rBlack to pay but not to the extent that sucient compensatio can be demonstrated.

b) 6 .. dxc4 is rather passive but not toobad r Back. Aer 7 Je3 (directed agaist . .c7-c5) Back h chaenged the centre wthboth pawns.

b ) 7 ...bd7 8 Jxc4 e5 woud be ewere it not r the wted moves with Bsbishop and the e-pawn. In Gutman-Mand,Gadenbach 1992 White sensiby expoitedhis deveopmet ed to secure a advantageaong the ines of the QGA 9 ge2 0-0 100-0 a6 11 a2 exd4 12 xd4 c5 13 Je3e5 14 f4 b5 15 xd8 xd8 16 cd5xdS 17 xd5 with a superior version of

the traditiona edge.b2) 7 .. .0-0 8 xc4 bd7 9 ge2 c5 100-0 a6 1 1 e5 e8 12 f4 c7 13 dxc5 xc54 b4 and, not surprisingy considering theaicia ature of Backs pay, White en-

1 26

joyed a considerabe space advantage inV.Miov-Ricdi, Buenos Aires 1996.

c) oo passive is 6 . 0-0 7 cxd5 exdS 8 eSe8 9 f4, athough White shoud then becontet with the extra breathing spe herth aunch a rash kngside attack.7 e4 e5

he point Whites next is rced andgives away the c5-sque.8 d5

his time Back has succeeded i ceingaway the g -a7 diagona without having todoate a pawn to the cause However,Whites centre is soid and prvides her withmore room in which to manoeuvre, and ifBacks hoped r activity does not y materaise the resuting middegame wi bepayed uder crped coditions. CeyBack intends to stick a piece on c5 soon

(usuay the restess bishop), the question iswhether this shoud be preced with theprecautionary .. .a7-5.8 c5

Wtig no time. Back plans to strike bere White is abe to consoidate.

a) he more sitiona approach is 8 . . .a 9Jd3 0-0 10 f3

a) 10 .. bd7 11 0-0 e 12 b (12

h Jd6 13 b c5? 14 b5 b8 15 g5h6 16 h4 e7 17 d2 d 18 Je2 a619 c2 g5? took the dark-sque theme a bittoo f i Moskaenko-Khomov, Begord1990) 12 .. .f8 13 b4 g6 14 c5 h5 15 Jc4,





ttacking ith 1 d4

th d-squar whthr or not Whit plays 12dxc61 0 f2+

Equly popul is 10 d7 whn Blk is

contnt to s th rmova of th bishop ifthis mans a good knight ca take its plac1 1 b f2+ 12 2 Thn 12 bS 13 h3 bxa1 hxg is an infrior vrsion of th gamthough th options dont sm any bttr

a) 12 fS 13 h3 1 hxg g3 15 g!f6 16 xg 17 h3 and Whit wilsoon mrg a pic up th king wl protctd as it travls wst

b) 12 d 13 xd xd 1 xd

Matri is an important ctor andWhits xta pawn does com in handy butWhit also has mor spac th bishop parand consquntly considrable powr onth dark squs Onc Whits king nds a

mor scur rsting plac ths advantagswill combin to prov dcisivb ) Aonso proposs 1 h!? 15 xg7

f2+ 16 with an sssmnt of unclaer both 16 dS+ 17 �c3 and 16 f17 d fS 1 gS 19 x+ dS+20 <c3 fS 2 1 e2! Howvr withBlacks king doing no bttr than its opposit numbr and Whits ability to play on

th dk squs at will I s no concrtvidnc of compnsation r th twopawns

b2) 1 0-0 15 b2 (th natural homundr th circumstancs but 15 h3! ? gf6

128

16 gS is also goo 15 gS 16 h3 gf6(16 gS!? 17 cS) 17 ! 1 <dand Black h nithr th trritory nor thuidity with which to troubl Whit Anothr problm r Black is Whits normous qun sinc a trad rducs Blackspotntial countrplay and dos nothing tolimit Whits dk-squ contrl1 1 e2 b5

It is almost as if this latst instalmnt isplayd only bcaus it adds to th bizrnatur of th gam! Th altativ is1 .d 12 xd xd 13 xd 0-0 1 h3h Ooi Chrn E-Paramswaran Calcutta

1997 Ar 15 g3! xg3 (1 5 h 16 g2!and thr is no dcnt discovry r Black)16 hxg xg 7 <d2 1 g c6 193 d+ 20 <c3 fS 2 1 b3 Whit w simply a pic up dspit Blacks orts1 2 h 3

Ther is no nd to allow Back hops ofcountrplay with 12 cxbS d7 13 b3 a6Instad th txt guants that Whits thr

cntr pawns rmain intact1 2 . bx 1 3 hxg g3

Bst This tim 13 d?! xd xd15 xd xg 16 <f2 is clly bttr frWhit 13 cS on th othr hand rquirsmor prcis play om Whit 1 xac6(1 d7 15 aS! e7 16 xc7 or 15 b616 c3) 15 b d 1 6 xd xd and now17 gS! This limits th scop of blks qun

and kps Whit in th driving sat g17 7 (17 0-0 1 <f2 fS [1 7 sblow] 19 S cxdS 20 f! 6 21 cS or1 f6 19 g6!) 1 �f2! x?! 19 b3 fS20 d2 0-0 21 c2 (2 1 g 22 2)22 xc2 xc2 23 h! 2 3 with acl vantag to Whit or 1 19 d2!S! 20 2 { akovic-Hrrera anta Cla1990) 20 fS! 21 gxf6 xf6+ 22 f3 g

(22 x? 23 a) 23 b3 whn Whit isslightly bttr1 ,h3 1 5 x exf 1 6 d4 f6

16 0-0 17 h was playd in RaicvicRuban Pula 199 whn 17 . gS? 1 h6!



xg4 19 �f2 f6 20 eS �g7 21 h2 322 f3 d7 (22 c6? 23 d3) 23 d3was excellent White 17 f6 impoves,with 1 8 f2 and 18 cS the candidate moves

f White 7 h4! 0-0 1 8 �d2 c5!? 1 9 c3

19 xcS is also possible, Blacks idea being to gain time with 19 gS 20 :h2 xg4 21d3 d7 22 d4 xf3 23 gxf3 aS+ 24e2 :ab8 etc 9 d7 20 d3 6 2 h1 b8 22

c2

The b3-sqe mst be potected22 ea 23 h5!

Coveing eS and givingu a cle as to whyWhite has dobled oks on the h-file evenae 20 h62 3 . . f?

23 :b6 is necessary, defending along thethid ank24 g 5!

his pawn beak gaantees a way intoBlacks kingside

24 fxg524 hxgS 2S eS g4 26 h4 does not keep

White at bay25 xh6!!

With all of Blacks pieces idling on theback ank this kind of sacice is ways going to be on the cds, paiclaly withWhites ces so gessively posted25 . gxh6 26 x6

White is winning

Nimzo/di Defece with 4 f3

26 b6

Othesa) 26 e7 27 h8 28 e :b6 29

e6+! xe6 30 dxe6+ xe6 31 eS mate

b) 26 f 27 h8+ �f7 28 exfS :b6 29f6c) 26 e7 27 h8+ 28 xgS �e8

29 :xf8+ �xf8 30 h8 mate 26 :b7 27 h8 28 :h7 + xh7

29 xh7+ f8 30 h8+ � 3 1 e+e) 26 f7 27 h8 aS+ 28 �d e7

29 e :b6 30 g7 + d8 3 1 :xb6 g4+32 xg4 xb6 33 xa427 h8+ �7 28 h7+! x7 29

x7+ �8 30 h+ �7

30 e7 31 g7+ d6 32 eS xeS 33xeS+ d7 34 xa4+31 7+ �s 32 + � 33 h7+??

% - %

Missing 3 3 eS+, eg 3 3 :xeS (33 �e734 g7+ �d6 3S +) 34 xd8 g4 3Sc7 e7 36 xcS etc

ConcuonThe line in Game 22 comes down to taste both sides Tempted by a cople of pawnsBlack sends the qeen on a shoppng speethe cost of acceleating Whites developmentand, ltimately, a piece The poblem Black is vlneability on the dk sqesonce the bishop has gone and, while the exta pawns do a good job of ing ove the

cacks in the cente, I get the eling thatBlack is then waiting White to nd a wayof ptting the exta re powe to se Thenate of the viation in Game 23 seemsmoe diiclt Black to handle than White, as an intended positional pawn sacice on the qeenside can easily leave Black apawn down Howeve, White mst te cenot to low Black a dawish bind Blacks

plan fls shot in Game 24 a nmbe ofctos come into play in game, and whatWhite loses in a mispled king is moe thanmade p in tems of space and contol ofthe cente

129



I

C H AP T E R S EV E N

Dutch Defece

1 d4 f5Bcaus th lins i n which Whit opts r

an ly kingsid fanchtto or Black acrtain amount of tim and xibility, I prfr to tak on th Dutch on my own trms.Consquntly th hypr-aggrssiv kingsidattack chactrisd by mting .. .g7-g6 by

immdiatly launching th h-pawn is ntrtaining yt ctiv wapon, as can bsn from th xpls fund in G 25.Against .. . 7-6 G 26) it is logical toattnd to th cntr with 3 c3, cusing onth ky 4-squ. This has th advantag ofputting th onus on Black to dal with mattrs in th cntr and, whil Whits advantag might b minimal rom a thortical,

fashionabl prspctiv, in practical trms Ibliv it is qually wohy of a plac in anyplayrs moury as th g3lins.

Game 5

ar which Black hs a numbr of movs.a) 4 .. .g6?! 5 xf6 xf6 givs th gam a

Trompovsky fl . In Zakhvich-Dukhov,ovgord 1995, Whit soon tgtd Blackskingsid pawns: 6 3 g7 7 d3 0-0 8 g2c6 9 h4!? 8 10 h5 d7 (th f6-pawn obstucts both th knit and th bishop) 1 1

c2 f8 1 2 hxg6 hxg6 13 g4! g4

Zsinka-Timoscenko Black's kingside is falling apar. 14 Jxg6Bup 1989 7 15 f4 d7 16 h7+ �f 17 g6

_

lxg6 18 . xg6+ �f8 19 0-0-0 and White 1 d4 f5 2 c4 f 3 c3 g

Occasionally Black plays 3 ...d6 first, prhaps waiting for Whits rply bfr committing to a kingsid fianchtto. ot thatthis position can also b rachd via 1 d4 d6(s Gam 29). A good rspons is 4 g5,

130

was in th driving sat.

b) 4 .. .6 5 4 4 6 xf6 xf6 7 x4h6! (7. . .d8 is somwhat passiv) 8 7 9 d3 0-0 10 0-0 c6 1 1 1 d7 12c lads to a balcd sition, with Whithaving mor sp and Black th bishop pair.



D u t c h D e f e n c e

c) 4 . . .lbd7 5 ' c2 g6 6 e 4 fe4 7 lxe4 whereas White has no such pr oblem s to

g7 8 f3 ovecome.

Whte has sted aggessively d hasmade a play on the lght sques. If Black safaid of coming unde pressue on the kngsde he should tade knghts mmedately, asn c2', below.

c ) 8 . . .c6 9 g3! (sensby avodng theexchange) 9 . . . aS+ 10 d2 c7 1 1 d3 e12 gS! f8 13 dxeS dxeS 14 000 wth a

postional plus to add to the le in development, on-aldano, Buenos Aies 1995.

c2) 8 .. . xe4 9 xe4 f6 10 c2 c6 11d3 f 12 00 (12 xf aS+) 12. . .d713 00 was the more thoughtlcontiuaton n Lkavsky-Banas, Batislava1993, when Whte could have taken a slghtedge with 14 xfS gxfS 15 ad .

c3) 8 .. .cS 9 c3 00 10 e2 aS 1 1 d2

b6 12 dS g4 13 00 deS 14 xeSxeS 15 xg4 xg4 16 h6 f7 was uncle n Blov-Topov, Candas 1992.4 4 ?

Being able to play in such a audaciousfashion d get away with it s a luxuy, butthis less than subtle thust is a pefectly playable and dangeous weapon against thewould-be Lenigrad Dutch. The plan is to

beak up Black's kngsde as qucy possible even at the cost of the exchange. Notsurpisingly White has good ptical chances ths ne. Blk tends to wak on th ce ntems of the oen cumblng kngside

4 d64 . . .g7?! s seen oen, moe o less clig

Whte's blu. As the owng examplesdemonstate ths can be a sky policy.a) 5 e4!? e4 (5 . . .d6) 6 h5 xh5?! 7 S

S 8 xhS+ f8 9 h6

Whte has enough the exchange.a) 9 . ..e6 10 xe4 e7 1 1 f3 dS,

Vdeki-Lenz, chei Memoal 199 1. Now12 xg7+ xg7 13 cxdS looks dicult Black. Istead the game went 12 egS?! f613 xg7+ xg7 14 eS h6 (14. . .c6 15e xd4 1 6 xh8 c2+ 1 7 d xa18 xh7+ f8 19 g6+ e8 20 ! andWhte wns, e.g. 20 .. .cS 21 geS �f8 22d6 ad g6+ is comin 15 g d now15 .. .g8 (not 15 . . .f8 16 g4+ ¢h7 17

d3+) would have kept the game gog, although Whtecqucky bng hs ok oveto the kngsde va d3.

a In Zsnka-Reineme, Obea 1995,Black's ng was in eed of compan ae9 . . .d6 10 xe4 d7 11 xg7+ xg7 12 gS+ ¢f8 (12 . . .¢£ 13 e2 g8 14 h6)13 000 etc.

b) 5 hS attacks Black's defences as eay as

the h move. Black must weigh up theconsequences of White pushng to h6 olanding Black with a backwd pawn andvulneable gS-sque ae hxg6. O shouldBlack rule out both possblites by cepting

1 3 1





Whte had got what he wted bt was oys ghty better thaks to the extra sace adseror resece o the ght sqares5 h

5 e4 s the other cosstet ow to 4h4, stckg to the strategy of soeg Baku o the ght sqares 5 e4 6 hS xhS 7g4! (7 xh ghS xhS trasoses to thea gae) 7 f6 gS fd7 9 xe4 g710 e2 c6 1 1 f4 f8 12 e3 aS 13d2 c7 14 e2! xd4 15 000

ketMalauk, Lvov 198 Whte hasobvos coesato r the two aws the shae of good eces, ore sace adBacks severey dsrted deveomet5 . . .xhS

5 g7 eads back to b3 the ote toBaks 4th ove6 xh5!

he pot Aga 6 e4 s ossbe, whe6 e4 7 hS s the a game IsteadBack h 6 f6 7 d3 eS gS f4 9 f3bd7 whch rodced a alost oraosto uerscaleWal, LodoMO 999 It s ot cear that Whte heogh r the aw, althogh Back doesack sae ad wll strggle f Whte ca oees

6.

. g5 7 4For the exchage Whte s abot to caseBacks kg soe aor coveece ad,coseqety, a seros deveoet robe

7 . . .fx4

Others


a) 7 e6 teds to eet 8 xhS wth 9 xfS d7 etc herere Whte

refers 8 e2

hs way Whte s garteed to settethe back kg Back h tred three oves

a) 8 f7 9 xhS xhS 10 xh5d711 f3 c6 12 gS e8 13 h3 a6 14exfS! c7 15 e6 b 16 f4 wth the

usa bd WegNlsse, tru 1997a 8 e4 9 xhS d7 10 dS! f 1 1

g4 hes Whte to the ght sqares bt sot bad r Back as t ght ook

) d7 ad ow both 9 dS f7 10xh g6 1 1 exfS xh 12 xhS g7 3d2 a6 14 ge2 g 15 h3 f6 16f4 e 17 000, Weg,Aa,Vede 1995, ad 9 h3 c 10 gS g8

11 exfS h6 12 dS xgS 13 xgS h6 14h4 h7 15 d3 f8 16 xh, Hostesse, Copehage 1991, saw the oreces eoy ch ore tvty

b) 7 g7 8 xhSb) f8 9 f3 e 10 h4b2) 8 d7! 9 f3 e8 10 xf d8

ooks ke the board h bee set p correcty bt s a sesbe try o Bk to hel

the strggg gsde Whte h a aw rthe exchage ad shod cocetrate ocastg qeesde ad postg hs ecesotay Eve Backs tk of tay coectg rooks s a evabe oe

133



Attacking with 1 d4

ixh 5+ 7 9 h3+ e6 1 0 xe4?10 dS! is more to the point, e.g. 10 ...e7

(10 . f6 1 1 xe e 12 d3) 1 1 xeand Blak is yet to stabiise. In the game

Back is gien time to hod the positionsteady.1 0 e7 1 1 e3 g 1 2 000 °

Notwithstanding Whites possibiity onmoe ten, the diagram position representsBacks sensible general treatment of the sys

tem, with the king sey tucked in behindthe centr pawns and no genuine weakesson the ight squares. On the downside Bkh hary any space in which to carry outwhat are awkward manoeures, none of thepieces h access to a decent outpost d therooks are a ong way om getting quaintedon the crowded back rnk.1 3 f3 7 1 4 3 c 1 5 ih2

The queen cannot share a diagona withBks bishop indenitey so White switchon his own terms.1 5 • c6 1 6 c5?

Black stil needs o get his rooks into payso White might consider improing (16 a3,fr example) befre making a commitmentin the centre.1 6 . . .5 1 7 c3 a6 1 f4 i 1 9 a3

ince the chief positional ustication ofWhites system is to estabish superior piecepacement to accompany the signicant deelopment lead it makes itte sense to thenoluntarily wa io a pin with the gredy 19

134

xh7, e.g. 19 .. .f6 20 e2 e7 21 hg7 nd White is haing to dend.1 9. f6 20 c2 e 21 a4? g6

22 xg6 hxg6 23 ig3 g8?23 ...h7! prtects c7 and sees Back naly

begin to get into the game, the materia eadthus growing in signicance.24 xc7

24 . . ixc7 25 6+ Now aer 25 .. .�d 26 xa xg3 27

g3 the dpawn is se.26 7+ cS 27 6+ 2 +

cS Y-Y

If the precise regrouping that is requiredom Back in this ine can pe dicut rstrong payers I imagine the cub payer wibe e in dire straits when fed with such anaggressie, nononsens attack.

Game 26Kpinskirbrczyk

Polish h. 2

1 4 e6 2 c4 f5

This is a good point at which to hae abrief ook at Backs alteaties made possibe with this particuar moe order.

a) 2 .. .b+ 3 c3 transposes to the

Nimzo er 3 .. .f6. Othersa) 3 .. .xc3+ bxc3 saes White a tem(a2a3) on normal ines, and now the Dutchtreatment with .. .fS rds White n interesting possibiity in the shape of the aggres



siv 5 4!? 4 6 hS+ g6.

ot vry subtl play, I agr, but quit fctiv nonthss. Whit has two movs.

a) 7 S f6 8 gS f8 9 h4 d6 10"g3 "d7 11 2 "f7 12 h3 c6 13xf6 "xf6 14 gS 7 15 x4 dWhits xtra spac was nough r dgin .okoov-Romr Homs, Mania Oympiad 1992.

a12) In Garcia Iundain-Romro Homs,

Lon 1992 _cmsation ar 72 f6 8 f3! xf3 9 xf3 d6 10 c2 71 1 d3 tc.

) 3 .. .cS 4 dS xc3+ (4. . d6 5 4 f6 6d3 bd7 7 g2 S 8 0-0 xc3 9 xc3and Back did not vn hav doubd cpawns to play against in Korchnoi-Barcza,ochi 1966) 5 bxc3 is othr attmptto do without ...f6. Howvr, Whit c

sy ignor th thrat to th c3-pawn with 64! Bst r Back is 6 . . .f6 as 6 . ..xc3+oss too much tim ar 7 d2 S 8 d3llowd by f3 tc. Thn 7 d2! d6(7 .. .x4? 8 g4 xd2 9 xg7 f8 10�xd2 d Whit thratns g-f3-g5xh7) 8 0-0 9 2 8, and now 10 gS! xdS1 1 xf6 dx4 12 c2 gxf6 13 xd6 is unclar, whi Dorfm suggsts that Bk

avoids th cripping of his ngsid pawnswith 10. . .g4.b) Apart om th chck Back c also

pay th English Dnc with 2 . . .b6, aimdat unsttling Whit by mploying virtualy

D u t c h D e e n c e

y ms (usualy ...f7-f5) to strik at thbroad cntr ar 3 4 b7. Th gam cgt vry compx vry quicy if Whit ovrstimats his chcs, so I rcommnd sup

porting th -pawn with 4 c2 whn Bkinvariaby pays 4 .. .h4 5 d2! b4 6 d now:

b ) 6 .. .g4 hops r thwakning 7 g3,but Whit dos bttr to giv up th right tocast. 7 �f! fS 8 h4 9 xfS d hrKing, in his xcnt book Eglh Dce,alyss th owing: 9 . . .xfS 10 xfS c61 1 4+ x4 12 x4 f6 suggsting thatBack has som compnsation in th rm ofdvopmnt. This sms rasonab, but Idoubt it is worth a pawn ar 13 2, rxamp. H also invstigats 9 . . .c6 10 6dx6 1 1 2 0-0-0 but dos not considr thss compromising 1 1 dS! , which puts Backon th dfnsiv in viw of th mnacingchck on a4, .g. 11...xdS (protcting thbishop along th rk but in so doing opning th -i) 12 cxdS S 13 bS+ �d8 14

!, or 12 .. .c7 13 b5+ �d8 14 4 witha car advtag to Whit in both casssinc Back has nothng to show r thpawn d his ng is no bttr th Whits.

Lvitt-Ehvst, w ork 1994 wnt9 . . .xd4, whn Lvitt coud hav payd 10a3 ! with much th bttr gam, .g. 10 ... cS1 1 b3 tc

b2) 6 .. .fS is th main mov, whn 7 gf3

prsnts a rthr brch.b21) 7 ...g4 8 0-0 xd2 9 xd2 c6 10f3 h4 11 c3 givs Whit dg arithr 1 1 .. .f6 12 S h4 13 f4 h6 14 f3or 1 1 .. .f6 12 b4 (12 dS! ?) .

b22) I n rpy to 7 . .hS King mntions 80-0 f6 9 xfS xd2 10 xd2 g4, with accompying assssmnt of uncar romKngis. In fct this ooks ik intrsting

approach r Whit r th thmatic 1 1 dS!Arady a pawn up, Whit shoud b prpard to rturn on in ordr to frustratBlk on th ong diagonal, whil y hropning of th postion bnits th bishop

135



Attacking with 1 d4

pair. Ar 1 1 .. .xdS 12 + f 13 2!Whit procds with dlopmnt at th costof th qun with 1 whn Backskingsid attack disappars and it is his own

ng that is poorly pacd. Atrnatiy1 1 . . .a6 12 h3! h 13 6 dx6 1 a+f7 15 ! and 13 . . .b 1 xd7+ r notto b rcommndd r Back.

b23) 7 .. .xd2+ xd2°g is sn mostfqunty rsuting in a compicatd position ar 9 S xg2 10 0-00

Thn 10. . .x? dos not work in iw of1 1 hg xd3 12 xd3 acks qunis wking on thin ic r 12. . .'xf2 13 f3)13 g3 g6 1 xg6! whn Whit was aray winning in Vuaic-L Bancq LondonLoyds Bank 199 1 . Instad Back must pay10. . . 1 1 2 whn thr is a dcision tomak s to which knight to bring out rst.

11...c6 12 xc6 xc6 13 dS b7(13 ... xdS 1 cxdS xdS 15 xc7 gisWhit a cr adantag acording to ECO1 hS+ g6 ws sn in Rmingr-RogrsPhiadphia 196 whn 15 c3 woud habn dcisi .g. 15 . ..f6 16 xf6 f 17g7. 1 1 . . .f6 h don rsonaby okay rBlk. Howr 12 hg looks morfrWhit. First 12 .. .x runs ino th uniky

13 h6! .g. 13 .. .'xh2 (13 .. . gxh6?? 1hS+ 13 ... g6 1 gf xh2 15 g 1xg7 g 15 xf6 xg 16 hS+! xhS17 xg n Plktt and Tisda) andBlack is in troub (17. . .h6+ 1 gS h3

13

19 f2 'f2 20 f6!) . This as 12. . .'xh2whn King ors th lowing 13 h 1'xf2 1 h6! 3 15 df g3 (15 . . .xh16 xf2 xf2 17 xg7 1 d g 19xf6 g 20 f faours Whit .g. 20 .. .d621 g g2 22 3) 16 hg h2 17xg7 g 1 d 19 hS+.

Thn 19 .. .7 20 f7+ d6 21 f3 andWhit is winning. King dos not mntion19 . . .d whn Whit wins with 20 f6+!

xf6 2 1 xg+ xg 22 + 7 23 +f6 2 g+ or 23 . . .d6 24 f7+ �c6 25'a+.3 tc3 tf6

I rpy to 3 . ..b Whit hs two choics.a) c2 f6 5 d2 0-0 6 3 is Kmpin

skis approach his gam against OstrowskiFrydk Mistk 1997 continuing 6 . . .b6 7 xc3 xc3 b7 9 f3 10 d3 a 11

2 with a plsant position r Whit.Backs problm hr is that Whits bishopsar not propry containd making it awkward r Bak to contst th cntr withoutopning th gam too much and thrrsir r Whit to xpd.

b) !? ads to a in th not to Blacksscond mo r 4 . . . xc3+ 5 bxc3. Thisas . . . 5 g (5 'hS+ f!?) whn

5 . . .f6 6 xg7 g 7 'h6 g6 'h4 c69 g2 d5 10 g dxc 1 1 0-00 w uncar in abo-Grob Vinna 197 whi5 . . .7 6 'x f6 is sr and approximaty n.



4 f3! ?Aga Whte has a ess cottal oto,

aey 4 c2a) 4 d5 ts a sto to e24 he 5 f4

c6 6 e3 gves Whte a dte edge thetoewal set er ether 6 e7 7 d3e4 ge2 00 9 g4! (the sober 9 00 se) 9 h4 10 g3 �h 1 1 f4 a6 12 c7 13 000, whe Whte ooked oreg MtoKger, Wod or ChYereva 2000, or 6 d6 7 xd6 xd6 d3 e4 9 xe4 e4 10 , as RyskDsk, Ka 1992

b) 4 b6 ooks to otor the e4sqareo a dstce LogovDra, Aratovsky Meora 1999 wet 5 e3 b7 6 f3 c57 dS ! whe the cearace 7 exd5 cxd5xd5 9 xdS xd5 10 xf5 voredWhte

Retrg to 4 f3, the teto s ot toatoatcay ay r e2e4, rather to coverthe e4sqare atcato of b4ad/or a qeesde achetto ro Back

(whe the og dagoal s shorteed adWhtes bsho eed o oger rotect g2)4 5 d2 0-0 6 3 xc3

6 e7 aows 7 e47 c3

akg te to recatre o c3 wth thebsho ts we wth f2f3 because theoyg e4 s ot ssbe Addtoaly,the bshos resece o c3 dssades Back

fo chaegg the cetre wth c7c5 or e7e5, yet these are atral er the exchage of Backs darksqared bsho7 b6

Deste oog erfecty atral thequeesde achetto h bee crtcsed ths osto he alteratve s to cocetrate o the cetre, eg 7 d6 e3 e 9 c6 10 d3 e5 1 1 e2

We are owg the gae Kesk ezerov, Rto C 2000 Back has scceeded stakg a ca the cetre btst be carel ot to eash hs ooets bshos Whtes exbty s sch that


t s ossbe to cte o ether se hege coted 1 1 e4 12 c2 b5! 13 cxb5e7 14 e4 xe4 15 xe4 e4 16 d5!xb5 17 f4 ad Whtes bsho had coe

to er a8 e3 b7 9 •d2 5 0 3

Fro h3 the kght ca go to f2 (addgto Whtes cotro of e4) as we as f4 0 4 3 c6 2 0-0 5 3

e

Havg coeted hs eoe Whtes ready to sh hs eaw order to go othe oesve, a skrsh the cetre keyto rest oeg es r the bshos(whch both ot toward Baks kBacks bsho has o ostve ece othe gae ad he s ot we ed to feadvacg aws 3 b3

Cosstet Urtatey r Back ttakes too og to geerate ay eectve ayo the qeesde, whereas Whtes ge sqte easy to codct4 c2

Now 15 e4 w k ore ch sce after 15 e4 16 e4 Whte threates toeh the qee ad bsho wth e4e5 Ofcorse, Whte s gog to oe wth e3e4

ayway, ad er 14 dS 15 cxd5 Back wst be ht wth 16 e4 Faced wth a evabe stato Back seeks coteray 4 c5 5 d5!

Cosg ot Bks bsho ad accett

1 3 7





C H AP T E R EIG HT

Other Defeces

ot all ur dncs in this chaptr njoyth sam v of popularity ong top GMs,but th mor varid tasts of cub, agu,and wknd chss, fr instc, count ra mor lv paying d in th ral chssword Morovr, th bttr opningsrputation dos not ncssariy m that it is

mor dificut to mt This is th cas withth Bnko Gambit, r xp, which is thsubjct of Gam 27 ummrscals 4 f3 isalmost unhard of yt it is a prfcty viabatrnativ to th popuar 5 f3 In fct I prr 4 f3 out of th two Th Budapst (G28) has ost much of its spark at intationalv, d hr w ook at a in r Whitthat is strong and un Th Modrn has to b

takn sriously sinc it is so cosy ratd toth ngs Indi Consqunty in Gam 29,whr w also invstigat Backs trnativsto 2 g6 ar 1 d4 d6, w mak us of aggrssiv approh that coms in hdy in anumbr of situations

Game 27Summerscale-Mannion

Scoish Ch. Edinrgh 19991 d4 6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 b5 4 3

ot vn mntiond inNu� O-

grow in popuarity ovr th nxt fw yarsTh fact that th w prpd ummrsc,amongst othrs, has workd with 4 f3 is indicativ of th variations soundnss Obviousy Whit ps to rct a cntr withpawns on f3, 4 d dS, a stratgy vry simiar to th systm with 5 f3 Howvr, th

dirnc hr is that by dcining th gambit (missing out th movs 4 cxbS a6) Whitprocds with dvopmnt without prmitting Back th tradition qunsid countrpay Of cours Back is not put undr yimmdiat prssur, but th a- is not availab d Whit, by addrssing th cntr soquicy, is rady to c a chalng invoving 7-6

igs, I am sur this mov wi continu to 4 bx

139





ael 1997 Black tied to tun the move odeto his advantage wit 7 . d4 8 exf6 xf6 9e2! e6 10 5 a6 1 1 xe6 fxe6 12xc4 d5 13 e2 e5 with a wall of pawns

the piece Howeve, mateiall speakingBlk has onl wo pawns the knt, dnow 14 3 ! , peventing 14 . c4, would haveeen quite pomising White

c) 6 . . 7 7 xc4 xd5 8 xd5 (8 exd5h4) 8 . . exd5 9 exdS d6 10 ge2 e7 10-0 0-0 12 g3 g6 w ne Black inGaiel-T aggatz, Geman 1997, ut 8 xdSmakes moe sense, using d5 an oupost6 ixc4

hite chose to post a knight on c4 inChenosvitov-Boehle, Dotmund 1993 Ae6 a3 g6 7 e2 g7 8 c3 0-0 9 xc4a6 Black did not like the look of this piece,hough the knight's eplement povedeven stonge: 10 e2 xc4 1 1 xc4 d712 f4 8 13 0-0

13 . 4 14 e2 c7 15 a3 8 16a2! 6 17 5 and hite was simpl toostong on the light squaes, which Blacklacked suicient pla in compensation6 . . . g6 7 le2 ig7 8 0-0

The automatic 8 c3 is anothe ssiilit Reshevsk-Est, Lugano 1987 coninued

8 . 0-0 9 0-0 a6 10 5 fd7 1 1 ec36 12 e2 8d7 13 a4 and Black was alittle tied up on the queenside Whites studcente ules out an attack on the epawnand Black's pieces ae not popel pled to

Other Defences

challenge with . .e7-e6. Ae 13 ..8 14 c8 15 a4 7 16 a3!? (16 xd6? exd617 xa6 xa6 18 xd7 d4) 16 . . 8 173 hite h succeeded in moe than just

aming Blk's Benko queenside itions

Notice hat the impessive -f3-e4-d5pawn chain needs minimal suppot and afds White space in which to opeate onoth sides of the oad. Black, meanwhile,does not enjo the desied pla in the moe

open position that oen esults om 4 cx5a6 Thee llowed 17 . e5 18 d4 c7(18 xf3 19 x x3 20 xa6 xc321 x3 x3 22 xc3 xc3 23 h6 is notoo clea ecause Blk has a ook and twopawns two ishops, ut White's piecesae active 19 xa6 cxd4 20 x8 x8 21e2 and Blk w stuggling Instead of9 a6 Black should conside eithe knight

to d7 llowed evicting the ishop omc4, a logical plan that exploits the natual'ut in ct aici placement of hite'sknights.8 . . 0-0 9 lec3!?

I like this set up. Cleal hite wants aknight on , ut this does not mean that theole should was go to the queen's knight.The c4-squae is also imtant and hite is

advised to monto cup it with moe ththe ishop, and this can e done with a3(which so coves 5).9 . . lbd7 1 0 a4

White judges that the 4-squae is a pice

4



Attacking with 1 d4

woh payng n retu r the constt mene of a4-a5, er whch the oen usel b6-square s no onger avalabe to Blk.1 0 • • bS

Introducng the possblty of ...b4 tocontest the c4-square. Whte carres on wthhs queensde strategy.1 1 a3

Notce that as wel as ncreasng Whtesgrp on bS whch Blk cnot realstclycover wth .. .aJ-a6 because ths creates a target and leaves a potental hole on b6 er a4-a5 the knght ona does not get n the wayof the dark-squed bshop, whch Whte sholdng back unt an apprprate post becomes appent.1 1 . teS

Prepng a typca Benko moeuvreamed at (eventuay) sendng the knght tob4 or even leavng t on c7. The other vtage, of course, s that the g7-bshop now hasmore ght on the long dagon.1 2 c2 c7 1 3 ig5

Tyng Blk don to the newly pnn e7-pawn.1 3 . . .te?!

Once Whte retreats hs bshop the kntsees no other purpose on eS than as a

tempo-ganng tget r the f3-pawn. IfBack wants to keep Whte busy 13 . . .6 14e2 a6 s okay, when 15 abS justesWhtes patte of development on thequeensde and resuts n a pull n the mddle-

142

game er the sensble 15 .. .d7.1 4 ie2 a6 1 5 f4!

A wel tmed attk th swtes attentonto the kingsde beore Backs vcngknghts become a probem. Now retreatngwth 15 .. .d7 gves White tme r 16 abS!(threatenng xa76 etc.), so Back keepsgong fard.1 5 . . .tg4 1 6 ixg4 ixg4 1 7 f5! ?

Havng lured the bshop nto the heart of

hs kngsde Whte cuts of the escape ute,ntroducng the thre of h2-h3, when thebshop has nowhere to run.1 7 gxf5 1 8 h3 ih5 9 exf5 f6

Not a great way to save the strandedbshop snce ts parner s now ocked away.Beng reduced to cosng n the tradtonaypower bs hop s every Benko playersnghtme, but preacng ...V-f6 wth

19 . . .d4+ runs the rsk of leavng Backskng wthout the necessary protecton. Forexampe aer 20 h 6 21 h6 b4 22' e4 e8 23 'h4 Whte wns as 23 .. .f7 24' g4+ s nal, whie 2 1 .. .e8 22 'd3! threatens both 23 'xa6 d the dey check ong3.20 ie3 d7 21 c4

Thanks to Whtes clever knght deploy

ment oth c3 and c4 oer rect outposts, afctor that Blk mmedatey hopes to address.21 • 22 'd3 lfbS 23 ae1 c 24

ic1 if7



With his qunsid wll prtctd Whit isabl to njoy a considrabl spac vantagthat givs him much mor th his r sharof rdom both in th cntr d on thkingsid. Black has wasss on 6 d 7and his onc mighty darksquard bishop isawl (th othr bishop is not much bttr).In ordr to conv his advantags Whitnds to stp up a gar d nd an ctivplan.25 la5?

Ar 25 f2 llowd by doubling on thil Blk is rducd to psivity. Th t isaggrssiv but prhaps prmatur.25 d4! 2 g3 �hS?

Undr th circumstcs, of cours, Blk a Bnko xp can b rgivn r bliving that vrything has gon wrong, particularly as Whits last mov homs in on

th pinnd, disgrd bishop. Howvr, rbttr or wors Black has to hit out with26 . . .xdS! whn Whit nds to ind abrakthrough. 27 h6 8 28 xdS xdS,r xampl, sms to hold r Black.27 c

ow Whit gts what h wants.27 eS 2S xd4 cxd4 29 e2 'xa4

30 f4 xd5 31 xd4 b5 32 'f2 a5

33 f4 Ar 33 . . .xf4 34 'xf4 Whit is wll ontop. Th problm r Blk apt ommatrial down! is that h is playing withouthis g7-bishop.

Other Defeces

34 e xe 35 xe d3 3 f1

Whit is winning. Th invitabl outcomis a mattr of tim d tchniqu.3 ' c5 37 xd3 xc1 + 3S d1 xb239 dxd gS 40 d2 41 �h1 ifS42 d4! b7 43 g4 xg4 xg4

b1 + 45 �h2 'bS+ 4 'g3 b5 47'f2 bS+ 4S g3

ow that Whits king position has bntidid up it is tim to us th xtra rook.4S a4 49 a b5 50 aS �g7 51'c2!

Thratning 52 xa4.51 'b3 52 xb3 axb3 53 bS �f7 54

xb3 ihTh bishop nally njoys dom, but

now th gam is ctivly ovr bcaus throok is too strong.55 �g2 d2 5 �f3 h5 57 d3 ic1 5S

d4 g5 59 h4 c1 0 g4!Crating a passd pawn.

0 xg4+ 1 xg4 e 2 �e4 ih 3g fS 4 5 exf5+ 5 �xf5 1 -0

Th Budapst Gambit is tricky and dsignd to bully Whit rom th vry bginning. I am rcommnding 4 f4 bcaus ifBlack insists on mixing it Whit ultimatly has th most n, whras Blacks mostprcis lin givs Whit th bishop pair d acomabl vtag.

Game 28Stohl-Socko

MK Caf Cup 1999

1 d4 f 2 c4 e5 3 dxe5 g4

Lss sound is 3 .. .4, whn 4 is ongood mov.

a) 4 .. .b6 5 b7 6 bd2 6 .. .fS 7xf6 xf6 8 g3 cS 9 g2 '7 10 00

1 1 b3 00 12 b2 c6 13 ' c2 , Flarpinlli, Asti 1997, d 6 .. .cS 7 b4 6 8b2 g6 9 'c2 g7 10 3 00 11 2 812 00 , Caposciutti-Toulzac, MontcatiniT rm 1998, both l Whit with xtra

143



Attacking ith 1 d4

pawn r nothing) 7 xe4 xe4 8 g3 c6 9g2 xeS 10 d4 x3+ 1 1 ex3 c6 120-0 e7 13 h6!.

This must have been an unpeant surprise r Back in Ricardi-Perez Pietronave,Oivos 1993 .

b) 4 .. .c6 S d6 6 c2! cas Backsbu

b 1) 6 .. .dS 7 e3 is ceary better r Whiteaer either 7 . . .g4 8 cxdS 'xdS 9 c4

'a5+ 10 b4! xb4+ 1 1 b4 xa 12 xe4xf3 13 gx xeS 14 b , or 7 . . .e6 8e2 e7 9 0-0 0-0-0 10 d S 1 1 b4 dxc412 bd2! as in Yoa-Hamdouchi, MiaOympiad 1992

b2) 6 ... 7 c3 and nowb21) 7 . . .g3 8 e4 xh 9 exS dxeS 10

e3 e7 11 e4 0-0 12 d3 d Whitenay coects the knight aer 0-0-0.

b22) 7 .. .x2 8 xfS xh 9 e6! e6 10xe6+ e7 1 1 dS h6 12 g3 gS 13 g2aso gave White two uicy pieces r a rokReshevsky-Bisguier, New York Rosenwad19SS.

c) 4 . . .h4 S g3 hS 6 g2c ) 6 ...xeS 7 c2 6 8 3 is typica.

Bk oses too much time. Van Wey-Abu,New York 1994 was pretty aw r Back

aer 8 .. .hS 9 c3 e7 10 h3 c6 1 1 e4 d612 b4 etc.c2) In repy to 6 .. .cS 7 c3 c6 White

got greedyGyimesi-Kahn, Budapest 1995,but his opponent resigned ur moves ater

144

8 4 d6 9 b e6 10 f3 g6 1 1 e4 S?(to be air, resigns is an option in any case)12 h 1-0.4 4 +

An indication that we r some reworks.

a) 4 .. .gS is ustied in terms of the Budapest spirit i not r accuracy. Back seeks toregain the awn with a chetto, but the(vountary) damage to the kingside is too biga price to pay. S g3 g7 6 3 c6 7c3 (7 h4!? is aso enough r vtage,but this is simper) 7 .. .gxeS 8 xeS

a) 8 .. .xeS 9 e3 d6 10 h4 h6 1 1 b3 0-0

12 hxgS hxgS 13 d e6 14 bS! S SxeS xeS 16 d4 gave White a naggingedge in Korchnoi-Yukhtm, UR Ch.19S9.

a) 8 .. . xeS? ! 9 xeS xeS 10 d4 d61 1 cS 6 (1 1. .. 0-0 12 0-0-0 e6 1 3 e3 g414 d2!) 12 d 0-0 13 cxd6 xd6 14 xd6cxd6 S e3 e6 16 xd6 d8 17 xd8+xd8 18 e2 c4 19 xc4 xc4 20 b3

eS 21 �e2 and White was on his way tothe point, Buthaupt-Preuss, Germy1998.

b) 4 ... c6 S 3 b is Backs mostsensibe course, when I prer to deny Bkthe satisction of creating uncear situation aer 6 c3 xc3 7 bxc3 e7 8 dS etc. Instead 6 bd2 is bad news rBack, who is practicay rced into deend

ing a position king in counterpay.b) 6 .. .6 7 exf6 x6 8 e3 xb2 9 e2d6 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 b3 6 d now Geizerov-Bosch, Cappee a Grde 1996 sawWhite earn himse a cear vtage er 12cS! c3 13 c eS 14 xeS dxeS S g3g6 16 c2 17 c3.

b2) 6 .. .e7! 7 e3 gxeS 8 xeS xeS 9e2. is a common eature in gambits r

one side to return the materia r teative advtage. In this case Back is sightybehind in deveopment d the b4-bishop isawkwardy ped in the event o a ture a-a3 d subsequent queenside expansion om



White. As we will see in the examples thatllow, the c4pawn has a major role to playin this variation, oen used as a batteringram to disrupt Blacks pawns. 9 . .b6 looks

premature since aer 10 0-0 xd2 1 1 'xd2White cnot be denied a clear advantage,e.g. 1 1. . .b7 12 b4 a (12. . .d6 13 c5! dxc5 14bxc5, intending 14. . .'xc5 15 ac e7 16c3) 13 c5! b4 14 xb4 0-0 15 fc ,Larev-Plesec, Berne 1994, or 1 1. ..d6 12 e4!b7 13 f3 0-0 14 g3 f5 15 exf5 xf5 16 f4c6 17 ae as in Fedorowicz-hain, NewYork 1991.

9 . . .d6 10 0-0 d7 11 (11 b3 a4)1 ...xd2 12 'xd2 f6 concentrates on thee5-square. In Ivanchuk-Epishin, Terrsa199 1 White went r the thematic queensidepush: 13 b4 d8 14 h5+ f7 15 c5! b516 fd d5 (16 .. dxc5?? loses a piece to 17 xd8+) and now 17 a4 is the simplest wayr White to stay in the driving seat

The main line runs 9 . . .0-0 10 0-0 with theowing possibilities:

b21) 10 . .g6 hopes r the greedy 11xc7?? d6 but aer 1 1 g3 Blacks lot hnot been improved. The consistent ..d6removes Whites frmidable bishop but 12xd6 ' xd6 13 e4! is very pleant rWhite, e.g. 13 .. 'xd 14 d d6 15 c3d8 16 f4 c6 17 d2 f8 18 e7 19f2 when White is ready to her increethe territoria advantage by vancing pawns

on both flanks. Alternatively, White is lsohappy to keep the queens on the board:13 ... e7 14 c3 6 15 d4 d6 16 d8 17 f4! with severa pluses r White inPetuson-Bresti, Moscow Olympi 1994,when White was invited to demonstrate hisidea aer 1 7 . f5 18 e4 e4 19 f5! h4 20 f6gxf 6 2 1 xe4 etc.

b22) 10 .. .d6 11 b3 b6 12 c5 13

xc5 bxc5 (13 .. .dxc5? 14 d5 g6 15 xa8 xf4 16 f3) 14 b4 and now both14. . .d7 15 f3/g4 and 14. . .cxb4 15 b4b7 16 ' d4 e diicult r Blk

b23) 10 .. . 11 b3 a4 12 a (er

Other Defeces

12. . .b3 13 b4 xa 14 'xa the b3-pawn soon drops) 13 d4 b6 14 b5 d615 c3 e8 16 d5

Rogozenko-Moldov, Ciocatea Memorial 2000 17 d4 d7 (etter is 17 . . .c6 18d3 e5 19 c2 athough White is wellahead) 18 d3 c5 19 c2 e6? (19 .. f6)and now White missed 20 f6+! gxf6 21h6! d7 22 h4 e6 23 xh7+! xh7 24g5+! g8 25 xf6 g7 26 h6 and

matesb24) 10. . .xd2 11 xd2 d6 is the most

popular continuation, when White has a fewmoves that guarantee a long-term le. Quitelogica is 12 fd !, e.g. 12 . . .b6 13 b4 b7 14c5! Whites thematic advance exploits hissupremacy on the dk squares. Then14 . .dxc5 15 bxc5 'xc5 16 ac e7 17 c3 g6 18 'xc7 'xc7 19 xc7 sees the

bishop pair dominate, while 15 ...bxc5? 16 b2 g6 17 h6 gxh6 18 'xb7 leavesBlack with awl pawns and a knight that isno match r the bishop. In Rogers-Dreyer,Auckland 1992, Black stood considerablyworse in the ending er 15 .. .g6 16 d7!'xd7 17 xd7 xf4 18 exf4 ac8 19 cxb6!b6 20 c a8 21 c4. The problem rBlack in this line is that Whites bishops have

too much power, the dksquared bishopbeing pticularly strong because it cnot chalenged. Consequently any oning of theposition is sure to benet White, henceWhites eagerness to break open the queen-

145



Attackin g with 1 d4

side with c4c5, even t the cost, beit tem-porary, of pwn. Neveheess this is rellythe best tht Back cn hope fr in the 4 f4vition, s the continution in the mingme, despite being rther exciting, is worser Bk.5 d2 d6?

The beginning of wht seems to be n un-reible line. With S . . .c6 Bck returns tothe ser wters of b in the note to Blcksurh move.6 exd f6 7 h3! xf2?!

The (dubious) point of the vrition,inititing complictions tht vour ony

White. The terntive is 7 . . xb2 8 ba3 9 b3 S 10 c7 c6 11 3 e7when GleizeovRitov, Berlin 1996, swWhite build on his ead with 12 e3 f6 13c !? d7 14 'c3 f6 S VxS xS 16b c3 17 d 6 1 8 d c6 19 e4 b2 20 d6+ e7 21 fS+ e8 22 d6+e7 23 xc8+ hxc8 24 d6+ e8 2S c2eS 26 cS. Im sure there is improvement

r Bck here, but er the tenth move thedecit is two pwns!8 �xf2 ixh3

A glnce t the digram position suggeststht Blk is doing well, with White's king

having being flushed out. However, practicehs shown tht this is not the case, sinceWhite is able to consolidate d sume con-

tr.9 g3! ixf1

146

9 ...cS+!? 10 e3 gS hs lso been seen.BeikeChtlbashev, World U26 Ch. 1994was soon close to winning r White: 1 1 e4xb2+ 12 e2! x (or 12 . . .xe2+ 13xe2 gxf4 14 xcS e3+ S xe3 cxd6 16xb7 d7 17 f3!) 13 xh3! xh 14b2! 00 15 f6+ h8 16 xgS c6 17g4+ 10.1 0 lxf1

10 dxc7!? c6 1 1 xf is lso good frWhite, when Blck should void 1 . .xd212 Vxd2 gS 13 e3+! , e .g. 13 . . d7(13 . . .f8 14 cS+) 14 + c8 S d3' e6 (S .. .eS 16 d8+! xd8 17 cxd8 +

Vxd8 18 xd8+ xd8 19 xeS) 16 xgS,or 13 ...e7 14 e xe 15 xeS Thelesser evil is 1 1. . 00! 12 e4 xb2 13 Vb1 !nd the c7pawn wi be probem.1 0 . . .'d4+

10 ...x2 1 1 ' xd2 gS 12 dxc7 c6 1 3e3+ trsposes to the previous note, whie10 .. .cS+ 1 1 g2 cxd6 12 e4 puts Blackon the defensive.

1 1 �g2 ixd6 1 2 b3!

Now it is White's tur to tivate hisqueen. White is no onger pwn up butdevelopment is much better d B ck hasony two pieces in the game. From b3 the

queen tt b7, but ther e is also other poss ibility in thea. In fct Bk needs to bever cr efl here jus t to ern the right to dend poor position!1 2 .d7?



I the case of the oe ccuspect1 f4 White h 13 ! b6(13 d loses to 14 Je4 ad S Jd 14 a3! to cut ff the ki Ae 14 cS S

e3 f8 16 "f! f6 17 e4 d7 1 8 Jd "c7 19 fS Blk s clely wose13 e3 'e5

13 4 14 cS! 4 c5 e7

14 cS S f7 d8 16 cS cS(16 cS 17 °x 17 f3 e 18 fe6 19 "7 8 0 h7 ws WhteKoaovChatalbashev, t Raphael 1998,was eve wose Blck e 14 cS : Sf7 d8 16 c4 °e4 (16 "e7 17d6 cd6 18 cS! 17 f3 e6 1 8 d6cd6 19 d 101 5 'xf7+ �d 1 6 Jf4 'xb2

A attempt to ipove o uecalezabolcs, Fech Leue 1996 That aewet 16 e 17 f d3 18 e! dWhte s ea w 18 f6 (18 e819 e7! e7 0 8 e8 1 S f6

7 d 3 f3 19 fe c8 0e8 e8 1 e8 d8 e7 d( f6 3 c7 ate 3 f3 10 7 ab1 'd4 xb7 f 1 9 'c4

Oe to tade quees whe o the of

sve s dcatve of the sze of Whte'slead The c7paw ad the le ae lfedificult Black It s ioc that Blk'sow k s ude pessue e the eeetcst which saw Whte's coe to f

Ot he r De f e nc e s

1 9 . •'x

19 f4 0 xf4 d 1 d4! 20 xc4 xc5

0 Jc8 1 c6 fails to allevate the pes

sue21 d+ �es 22 xc7 e 23 xe7+

�xe7 24 Jd6+! �f7 25 e5+ �gs 2

xf xf

6 J8 7 d727 d5 c 2 a5 c7 29 �3

The sees of echaes has esulted ed whch Blk s a assed pawdow ad aso qute passve Whte's ookad kht ae vely post ad the k saleady p way up the boad The saecaot be sad of Black's ces Coseuetly Black t hs luck a ook ed29 . .d7 30 xd7 xd7 3 e4 �f7 32

4 �e6 33 g4 b7 34 �f4 t7+ 35 �g5

�d6 36 d5+ �e 37 5 b7 3 �f4c7 39 e5+ �d6 40 a5 t7+ 41 �e3

�e 42 a3 d7

Whte c od to be patet because thee is wi The est is a atte oftechque43 5 h6 4 a5 b7 45 h5 d7 4

e 5! d 1 ?

4 Jc7 polos the ae, Whte

pess llows 47 d4 d7 48 e4e7 49 6 Jb7 S a4 c7 S Jb7 Sc6 d7 S3 6 e8 S4 a6 c7 SS dSetc47 xa7 �xe5 48 xg7 e1+ 49 �d3

1 4 7




a1 50 a7 'f4 51 a4+ �g5 52 c2

e1 53 d4 eS 54 a4 bS 55 a5

1-0

1992. Aer 1 1. ..b6 12 dS! xb2 13 gSf6 14 h6 xa (14 . ..e8 S b) S xf8<xf8 (S .. .eS 16 h6) 16 " xa <f7 17d2 d7 18 f4 White had compensation r

Game 29 th e pawn. Black can also resist the urge to Volzhin-Kakageldyev attack White's queen and instead use d7 fr

Calut 1996 his b8-knight, e.g. S . . .g 6 g bd7

1 d4 d6 2 c4 g6

2 .. .fS 3 c3 f6 is covered in Game 2S .This leaves two others

a) 2 .. .eS is not unusual these days. Whitehas a few choices, the least interesting bengto trade queens (3 dxeS dxeS 4 xd8+), whileaer 3 3 e4 4 gS fS Black tends to havemore un th White. Consequently manyplayers settle r the space advantage thatresults rom 3 c3 :

a) 3 .. .exd4 4 xd4 c6 S d g6 6 e4g7 7 d3 les to 2 1 ' below.

2) 3 .. .f6 is the Old Indian Defence. Either Black is content with a rather passivegame in the lines with . . .e7 or the intention

is to transpose to theK. 3 . . .eS 4 e4!? andnow:

21) 4 .. .exd4 S xd4 d thanks to thegrip on dS White enjoys a space advantage.ample set ups: S . . .c6 6 d g6 7 d3!?g7 8 ge2 00 (8. . .eS 9 b3) 9 c2, and6 .. .e6!? 7 g6 (7 .. .eS?! 8 d4) 8 h3g7 9 e3 0-0 10 e2 d7 (10 .. .eS 11d2) 1 1 00

.okolov-Marin European Team Ch.

148

(6 .. .g7? 7 eS dxeS 8 xd8+ <xd8 9 dSbd7 10 0-0-0 <e8 11 xc7+ was embarrsing in Guliev-Filip, Hollabrunn 1998) 7d2 g7 8 f3 0-0 9 h3 e8 10 f2 cS1 1 e2 a6 12 d d7 13 00 with an edger White, Douvenelm Dutch League1994.

22) 4 ...bd7 f4!? . Once again this aggressive move cts acrss Black's pls. ThenS .. . exd4 does nothing to exploit White'squeen aer 6 xd4 e7 7 f3 0-0 8 e2c6 9 e3. Instead Flear-Anic, Montpellier2000 continued S . ..e7 6 f3 c6 7 e2 0-08 0-0 exd4 9 xd4 cS 10 f3 b6 11b 1 2 e3 e8

It is understandable that Black wants toexe pressure on White's centre, bt nowWhite went on the oensive with 13 b3 !when Black was the one with problems onthe g -a7 diagonal.3 lc3 .g7 4 e4 c6

The most aggressive. Others:a) 4 . . .d7 aims to reh a King's IndianDence on Blak's terms. However, ratherthan the accommodating S f3 eS, whenBlack can choose e7, f6 or even h6 r the



g8kght I rcommd th compromsg S f4

a S . . .cS s qt re. 6 dS xc3 7 bxc3gf6 8 d3 aS 9 b3 bS 10 cxbS a6 1 1

b6! xb6 1 2 a3 x3 13 xa3 c4 14 c2d7 S d2 wth a dge r Wht Hbrpsky Bdslga 198 1.

a 5 . . .S 6 S dx5 7 dS

Ths s how th g ormally cotsbcas Black th has the cSsqar at hs

dspos. Now w hav othr brach scBlack has trd two ways of devlopg.

a21 7 . . .g6 8 2 00 d ow 9 h3!s a ce mov Frst Black s dd the possblty of sdg a kght to 4 as th hSsqar s coverd but thr s also h3f2comg wh Wht cras th ptctoof th 4-paw dfds g4 ad prpars toht th 5paw ad cotst the cSsqar

wth N(f2d3. Add to ths th obstctdrook o f (r 00 ad ths s a ectvway of tg . . .g6. CetesBosbmWjkaZ 199 1 wt 9 . . 8 1 0 a S 1 1g5 f6 12 3 7 13 a4 b6 14 f2wth th ttr gam r Whte. Ths mprovd to a dcsv advatag r 14 .. .fS1 d6! .

a22 7 . . .h6 8 f3 00 9 2 6 (9 . . .fS!

s too agr was demostratd Ado .Krstas Esbjrg 1986 10 gS f6 1 100 f7 12 h4 7 13 xf5! gxfS 14 �hd7 15 b3 d Wht stood bttr crossth bod 10 h3 f7 ad ow Vasr

O t h e r D e f e n c e s

Todorcvc Frch Lage 1994 llstratdhow Wht c cot Blk o th kdad xpd o th othr k 1 1 g4! b6 123 c5 13 b4 b7 1 4 cS! 15 a3

lk s dgr of gttg pshd othe bod. I th g Blk bok out wth15 . . .fS 16 gxf5 gxS bt Whte rtd hslad r 17 g! <h8 18 c b4 19b4 bxcS 20 bxc5 h6 21 x3 22x3 tc.

b 4 .c6 ca so b mt wth 5 f4! . Thatomatc play leavs Blk too crmpd sotho's rcommdato s to ht th d4paw wth 5 . .. b6 wh 6 s trstg.

b 6 .dx5 7 cS! d8 8 eS f6 9 x6xf6 10 2 vord Wht GrgorNkolavsky UR Ch. 1971. Black trd10. . S ! bt hs stato worsd r 1 1dxS xd 1 2 xd d7 1 3 e4 x5

14 d6 <d7 15 2.b2 6 .. h6 ms ss wh 7 f3g4 s clar cordg to ECO. IstadKochAlbr chock 1988 wtssed magatve da om Whte 7 h3! f5 8f3 g3 9 g a6 10 <f2! x 11xf 1 2 <g d Wht h sccdd castlg by had' wth hs mprssvpaw ctre stll tact! Thr llowd

12 . . .dxS 13 5 6 14 b3 ad8 15 2d7 16 3 17 4 wth a bcdgam. If Wht ca mata th broad pawctr ths way th 7 h3 gts th odover th sal 7 f3 .

149



A t tac king with d4

c) 4 . .. eS is n ppuar a y eve,mny because Whie s abe rce advanageus queeness middegame in whichBk is reduced dending. Cnsequeny,

raher han e Bk ge away wih n having prepare ..e7eS, I sugges he spier SdxeS dxeS (S ...xeS?! ses ime, e.g. 6 f3g7 7 g ec.) 6 d8+ xd8 7 f4!

This s he ny mve rube Back,and ceainy he mve h ens dissue

ms pepe m uay paying his viain in e rs pace. It is rue ha Wiemigh end up wih an ised epawn, buhis is a smal price pay r eeciveiniiaive. Le us briey invesigae hw paymigh prceed fm he diagram psiin.

c ) 7 . . .e6 8 f3 d7 9 e2 e7 10 00c 1) 10 .. .c6?! precs dS bu negecs d6.

CeaMargunic, Craa 199S cninued

11 e3 e8 12 a1 h6 13 h3 ef4 14 xf4gS S d6! c8 16 g3 e7 17 d4!?x4+ 18 xd4 g6 19 dS!. It is impran remember a he absence f queensdes n precude ggressive pay. The diagram psiin is ypica f Whie's iniiaivein his ne. Back's hpes f dancing undwih he knighs are dashed. 19 . . .cxdS 20exdS df8 21 e4! e7 22 cS! (hreaening

dge he ishp n d6) 22 .. .f4 23 xf4g 24 c8 2S b4 26 hS! h7(26 ... axb4 27 xf7+ d8 28 dxe6) 27 dxe6xe6 28 a3 and Whie was winning.

c 12) 10 ...h6 is he bk' mve, er

5

which 1 1 d ! causes a few prbems. ubaAzmaparashvi, Reykjavik 1990 wen1 1 .. .exf4 12 xf4 gS 13 g3 g6 14 d2 c6S d4 d4+ 16 xd4 �e7 17 d6+ �f618 f+ �g7 19 cS! b6 20 cxb6 axb6 21 a3deS 22 b4! bS 23 d c8 24 a4 bxa42S xa4 d Whie was si n p.

c2) 7 . ..d7 8 f3 c6 9 e2 f6 10 00h6?! (10 .. .�e8 11 g3 h6 12 �g2 f7 13e3 f8 14 b6 S a3 e7 16 ec 17 c2 xe3 18 xe3 hS 19 b4 issighy beer r Whie accrding ECO)1 eS xeS 12 xeS eS 13 b4!? e6 14bS f7 (14. . .c7 S bxc6 bxc6 16 a4! d

cS beckns) S g4!.

We are wing CuchNrd, Briish League 1998. Back is in ig rube, e.g1S ... xc4 16 d1 �e7 17 xc6 xc6 18a3+ �f6 (18 .cS 19 xcS+ �f6 20 f+!

xf 21 f1+ gS 22 xf7 xg4 23 xg7ac8 24 b4 c4 2S a3) 9 f+ xf1(19 .. gS 20 e2 xe2 21 xf 20 xf<g 21 e2! hf8 (21...h6 22 e+) 22c+ h4 23 f3 gS 24 g3 (peemand McDna. Insead he game wen1S .. .xg4 16 xf7 f8 17 g+ c8 18e7! h6 {18 . . .xe7 19 xe7 d Bk isied up) 19 d6 e3+ 20 h 6 21 cS

22 xeS e8 23 f6 c3 24 xc3cxbS 2S xh7 26 f e6 27 e c428 c6! bc6 29 c7+ d8 30 d1+ d 3 1g3! 10 (3 1 ..xe4 3 2 xc6).

c3) 7 .. .c6 8 f3



c31) 8 g4 9 eS and now Atik gives9 xeS 10 e2!? xf3+ (10 e6 1 1 gS)1 1 gxf3 e6 12 gS!? f6 (12 f6 1300-+ c8 14 e3) 13 00-0+ llowed by

14 h4 (whichever way the king ges) with theusual pu r White Agaist 9 x 10gxf3 xeS Atalik prooses th e sensible 1 1e3 , when er 0-00( + ) Whites bishosguaranee a comabe gme

c32) 8 d4!? 9 f2 when White has thebetter chances, e g 9 xf3 10 gxf3 c6 11e3 f6 1 2 d e8 1 3 h4! h6 14 e2e7 5 eS xe3+ 16 xe3 eS 17 c!f7 18 d6 e8 19 hS , GorbatowNnelli,Porto an Giorgio 2000, or 9 exf4 10 xf4e6 11 g3!? d7 12 d c8 13 d3e7 1 dS!

ader-Ehlvest, FE Wod Ch, Gninge 1997 Now 1 xdS 5 cxdS cS 16

xd3+ 7 xd3 eaves White ree tocome to the cle, so Ehlvest layed14 e8, when 15 eS cS (15 c6 16 f6)16 f6 xf6 17 exf6 was not easy r Bck5 d5 d4

The provocative 5 eS loses time adhelps White raden his centre aer 6 f4d7 7 f3 etc6 e3 c5

6 eS? ! 7 ge2 xe2 8 xe2 wates vauab tie d therere gives it soudup, eg 8 f6 9 0-0 0-0 10 b! e8 1 1cS fS 1 2 f3 7 ge2

Other Defences

By f the ost popu d prt of thegrand p if Back gets his way Bth aterntives benet only White7 ib6

) 7 eS 8 dxe6 xe6 9 d2 f6 10 0-0 1 1 0-00 and Back lacked the usuattacing chances that go with the weaknesses o dS ad d6, Crouch-Ruotanen, Jyvkyla 199

) 7 xe2? ! i s hdly in the sirit of thevariaion 8 xe f6 9 0-0 10 °d2 e81 1 gS a6 12 f4 hnidr-Petr, Caelle laGrde 992 Whies kingid oensive isaready happening8 id2

Just as sound as the main line, the textavids he copexities tht Black is hoingr om the ose, mly 8 a4 + 9d a6 (or 8 xd4 cxd4 9 a4 aS 10

d2 c7 etc) Moreover er 8 d2 Blackh an unpesat choice etween attemptingduious complicion or setting r rherssive middegame8 . ld7

a) 8 g4? 9 ! is inerir versio fthe mn game r Bk aer 9 d7 since9 xf3? seems to oe 10 a! 6(10 °b4 1 xd4 °xd 12 xd2) 1 1

xd cxd4 12 xd4 xd 13 xd4 adnow Timman-les, Hastings 1973 wnt13 f6 14 cS + 15 c3 dxcS 16 eSg4 17 d6 peelman gives the owing13 °xa4 14 xh8 15 f2 xe4 16

1 1





pawn rollr n AIvanov-Kakalyv, Sifropol 19899 . . .5

Th iea bh 9 b 1 was emonstrat

in Y akovich-Pinhro, Santo Antonio 1999Black hit out ith 9 f5 only to see Whitinor hi an respon wth th ore poerful 10 b4! No 10 f4 1 1 xf4 cxb4 12c2 xe2 13 xb6 c3 14 �x2! x215 4 ins r White so Black oc aanas ruc to parn ith the shopcnight unr navourable circustancs10 x2 11 xe2 f6?! (11.f4 12 xf4cxb4 13 b5 f6 14 3 d8 is f oi r Black) 12 bxc5 xe4 13 xb6x2 14 xb7 xc4 (14 c8 15 x7+!�x7 16 cxd6+ �x6 17 c5+ �e 18 �x)15 xc4 xc3+ 16 �e2 dxc5 17 xc5 Whit soon convd his nitiaive1 0 l d 1

White's brf stop o the ay to haslurd Black's a-pan ard, thus takingso f th stig out of Black's thatic

quensi xpnsion nvolvin -a6, b7-5 etc1 o . . .txe2 1 1 ixe2 f6 1 2 h3 0-0 1 3

0-0 4 1 4 :b1

Eteraini the pla of b2-b4 as ell asprtctin the b-pan i prpaio rthecoin h6 Black is struling to latch onto a reasonable plan1 4. .a5 1 5 ih6 e8 1 6 xg7 �xg

1 f4White's g s easy to conuct, th nsie pans bin to b pushe Manwhile, Black rushs to enrat soth onthe qunsie1 7 . . .c7 1 8 e5 b5

Nw both ses are on the onsive, butBlack has th trational prble that, byenition, his qunside attack is lss nac

in tha the chr ae at his kn's efnces19 cxb5 xb5 20 exd6 exd 21 ixb5

xb5 22 5!

With Whit's qun just n stp aay


o h6 the thrat of 23 f6+ i s enouh torce a cocessio o Black22 . . .f6

Blac os not hav tie r 22 b4? n

v of 23 f6+ �h8 4 h6 8 25 f4The t creats a hole on e6, r whchWhit no takes ai23 fxg hxg6 24 :be1 :t1

24 . a8? 25 x8 xe8 26 f425 e6?!

25 :f4! 4 26 h4 5 27 h4 looksoo25 . :f8?!

As is on the c both playrs re toobusy actin out thir rspectiv roles of attckr an fnr to e on th lookout rpositive tatives r Blak 25 3! istracts Whit26 d3! xc3 27 bxc3 :d7 28 c4 'd8

29 3!

Black's weaknsss on a4, 6, f6 an ultiately 6 cannot b equatly protct29 . . .a7 30 g3 d7 31 h4! :e7 32 5

:xe

32 5 33 f6! 33 'xg6+ �h8 34 '6+ g8 35 dxe6

1-0

Game JO

Pribyl-Vokac

Lazne Bohdnec 1994

1 d4 c5 2 d5 e5

153



A tta ckg wth 1 d4

The Cch Benoni results om 2 .. .f 3c4 eS 4 c3 d S e4

Blacks plans involve either ...e7 or akingside anchetto.

a) S .. .e7 g3! with a couple of examplesa) .. .a 7 a4 0-0 8 g2 e8 9 ge2

d7 10 0-0a) 10. . .b8 11 d2 g 12 aS g7 13

a4 hS 14 b4 h4 S c cxb4 1 xb4cS 17 xcS dxcS 18 c3 h3 19 h 1 f 20

d3 d 2 1 f4 with the usual space advantage in Avrukh-Paehtz, Bonnevoie 1998.a2) 10 .. g 1 1 h g7 12 'd2 f 13

h3 h8 14 e3 d7 S c! fS 1 d3f 17 18 e2 b 19 h 20h2 e4 21 e4 f 22 b4, Forintoschussler, Gausdal 1981. The theme hasalready begun to take sha White gets oomuch space.

a2) .. .0-0 7 g2 e8 8 ge2 gS is anapproach similar to the one in the maingame, but here, too, White is ready 9 f4! andnow

a2 1) 9 .. .exf4 10 gx h4+ 1 1 g3 fS 1200 e4 13 cxe4 d7 14 d2 df SgS c7 1 fS favoured White in CrouchC.Cobb, ewpo 2000. It is also woh investigating 12 eS? dxeS 13 eS f4 14 0-0

g3 S xf8+ xf8 1 hxg3, when LacrosseLuciani, Imperia 199 continued ·

1 ...e7 17 hS g8 18 e4 g 19 xghxg 20 xg+ g7 21 h and Blak wasin trouble.

154

a22) 9 .. .h 10 0-0 g4 1 1 e3 d7 12d2 b

Benko-Huguet, Las Palmas 1972. Havingtried, unsuccesslly, to trade dark-squaredbishops, Black now threatens to challengethe one on g2. Whites next is designed tomonior b4, cS, eS and f4 ur key squaresin the Cch Benoni. 13 c h3 14 d3xg2 S xg2 ' e7 1 ae d7 17 ' e2g 18 fS xe3 19 xe3 h8 20 c7 21

b4 and White dominated.b) Against S . .. g I recommend restrictingBlack with an early g2-g4, an approach onthe flank that has more justiication againstthe committal Cch Benoni set up than theD, one reason being that in this ce Blkcannot counter with . . .c7-c. h3 g7 andnow

b) 7 g4 a 8 d3 00 9 gS d7 10

f3 bS d2 bxc4 12 xc4 bS 13 d2'c7, Mitenkov-Maljutin, Moscow 199.Blacks queenside break has given White thec4-square. 14 0-0 xc4 S xc4 bd7 1b3 b 17 e2 fd7 18 ac f 19 e3d8 20 g2 h4 21 d3 f 22 e2 gSand now 23 f4! exf4 24 xf4 xf4 2S xf4eS 2 xeS! eS 27 xf8+ 'xf8 28 fd8 29 'f2 'e7 30 'f le Black stg

gling in view of the weaknesses on a and d.b2) 7 e3 00 8 g4 a 9 ge2 c7 10g3 . This really does clamp down on the fSsquare. In Banikas-Bakhtad, EuropeanJunior Ch. T1997, Blksoughttivity



o the qeeside with 10 d7 11 bS!,bt aer 12 cbS b8 13 b bS 14bS bS 15 b4 White had gaied ostro the clearg of the ble

3 e4 d6 4 c3

4 c4 trasposes to the Cch Beoi(where Black h yet to ove the kigskight bt, tha to the oissio of White is abe to leave ot c2c4 The pot sthat dS does ot eed etra protectio here,

b7b5 ca be addressed with a2a4 adWhite h the c4square available r a pieceAdd to ths that White has saved a ove dwe see why this optio is attractive oe4 e7

A traspositio results o 4 f6 Thetet toys with the idea of rst tradig darksqared bishops o gS, bt the aggressive f2f4 cts across this pa Others

a 4 e7 seds the kight to 6 to keepa eye o both f4 ad eS The dowside rBlack is that the ght teds ot to be secre o g6 ad the fSsqare ca be a problem seAderse, Daish Ch 1963 is agood llstratio of how White shold deawith 4 e7 Aer S e2 g6 6 g3 ! e7 7h4 a6 8 f3 0-0 9 c7 10 a4 b8 11c4 b6 White had covered the f4sqare,

threateed to dsodge the g6kight ad wow ready to oer a theatic echge ofhis ow with 12 g4! There llowed12 e8 13 c8 c8 14 e3 h6 S fSh7 16 hS h8 17 e3 f8 1 8 bS d7


( 18 bS 19 bS leaves Backs pawstructre lookig paicularly pleasat 19a7 dS 20 dS 7 d White ally cided to ctle, wth a clear vate

b With 4 g6 Black hopes to get the bestof boh worlds with a peael rote to aKigs Idia positio S f4! ees iedate pressre o Blacks cetre d the darksqares, requirg precse play ro the defeder st to keep White at bay

b 1 5 f6 ad ow 6 f3 llowed by e2ad ives White a cole lead, whilethe oosese 6 h4 was see i ErstGapridhvli, Grige 1999 With orespace it is logical r White to lach a qickassalt o Blacks brittle kgside paws, thethreat of chig o with h4hS idcg areactio o Black 6 hS The 7 fS! (7f3 is oral 7 gfS 8 e2 h6 9 hSe7 10 efS c 1 1 c w eteraiig,wth perhaps the better proscts r White,althogh failiarity with this variio is pot

b2 5 g7 6 eS eS 7 f3 is a litteawkward r Black, the bishop ot a idealpiece to be stadg o eS VeghBsch, tIer 1987 cotied 7 g4 8 bS d79 0-0 f3 10 f3 e7 1 1 a4

The diaa positio illstr the icalicoveiece Black ca eperiece Thebishop h the u viabl tsk of secrigeS, Black is laggig behid i developetad the fle belogs to White Moreover

155



A tt ackig with 1 d4

11 . . .gf? walks into terrible pins aer 12gS, so Black sought to relieve the pressurewith 1 .. .a 12 xd7+ 'xd7 when 13 S! f14 a4 d8 S b le White in charge.

b3) S .. .exf4 xf4 h 7 g3 f andnow 8 bS+ is the most testing move. Then8 .. .f8 9 f3 obviously fvours White e4-eS will be dificult to meet) but is the lesserevil compared to 8 . . .d7 9 xd xbS 10xbS ' S+ 1 1 c3 xe4 12 ' e2 fS,E.Rotshtein-Mosionzhik, World enior Ch.1999. This game ended 13 f3 d7 14 0-00-0-0 S xe4 he8? 1 e7! xe7 17d+ c7 18 'xe7 f8? 19 'xd8+ 1-0.

c) 4 .. .a is also well met with S f4, e.g.S ... exf4 xf4 e7 7 f3 g 8 g3 e79 eS dxeS 10 xeS 00 11 xg hxg 12e2 h4 13 'd2 e8, AzmaiparashviliRashkovsky, trumica 199S. ow the direct14 0-0-0 is excellent r White, providing thepassed -pawn with plenty of suppo andmaking the otheise desirable .. .xg3 lessattractive thanks to the open h-ile aer the

recapture hxg3.5 f4

Chekhovs thrust mounts an early ofensive, undermining Blacks grip on the eSsquare as well as keeping Blacks bishop out

of gS (r the moment) . It is also possible tothrow in the check on bS to see how Blackreacts. S bS+ and now:

a) S .. . d7 f4 exf4 7 xf4 gf 8 f300 9 0-0 a 10 xd7 xd7 1 1 eS was only a

156

shade better r White in Volkov-Mlakhov,Minsk 1997.

b) S ...f8 gives up the right to castle butleaves Whites bishop punching air on bS.Again White can push his fpawn: f4 exf4 7xf4 g 8 d2 xf4 9 'xf4 a 10 d3f 1 1 ' g3 d7 12 ' e7 13 0-0 gf14 ae and the familiar plan of e4-eS isenough r an advantage, prompting Blk toblocke with 14. . .eS when S xeS xeS{better than S . . .dxeS 1 a4!) 1 xeS dxeS17 a4 d7 18 c4 b8 19 c ! reventing19 . . .bS) 19 .. .b 20 21 b a 22 b4gave White a queenside initiative inK.GeorgievGheorghiu, European Te Ch.1992.

Interesting, but I prefer the more flexibleS f4, waiting to see when and where thebishop oins the game.5 exf4

a) S .. .a ignores the stand-o in the centrein fvour of queenside expansion. Lobronvanovic, Reggio Emilia 1984 went eS

dxeS 7 a4 f 8 f3 g4 9 e2 xf3 10xf3 0-0 11 0-0 e8 12 e3 d7 13 g4!df 14 aS! d 1S a4 and Whites pawnswere easier to maintain than Blacks.

b) S .. .d7 f3 a 7 a4 gf 8 e2 0-09 0-0 b8 10 bS 1 1 b xb and now,instead of inflicting structural damage onBlack with 12 eS, White opted r a stranglehold in Petursson-Lubisavlevic, meder

evska Palanka 1984: 12 fS! ? h 13 d2!. Thishighlights how the availability of the c4-square and the open fa diagonal givesWhite a superior version of the ...b7-bS,xb xb scenario. 13 ..b4 14 xaxa S xa c4 1 c cS 17 e2 fd718 xc4 b8 19 xcS dxcS 20 xeS andBlack was being over-n.6 xf4 f6

ettling r standard development, although there are alternatives:a) Black can still seek to trade bishops

with .. .gS!?, when White has a choice:a) 7 d2 xf4 8 xf4 a {8 . . .f 9



'g3) 9 e! e7 0 f3 d7 1 1 0-0-0. o . .xe! ? looks ik the best ay to takthe pan, eg. g3 f6 3 x e 14d6 6 'xg7 g8 6 'h6, or . . f8!?

3 xS "x 14 xe dxe a4, itha denite dvantage to White in both caseshariyzdnov-alhov, Ekatnburg 996continued 1 .. .dx?! 1 g3 f6 ( . .gf63 d6 6 14 gS f 15 c4 0-0 16 hfand 14. . .g4 1 d5 xg3 6 c7+�f8 17hxg3 b8 8 c4 are poor r Black) 13 d6 g6 14 d xg3 5 hxg3 �f8 6 gS h617 c7 b8 8 c4, and Black as in direstraits, 18 . .hxg 19 xh8 df6 0 5 g4 f e8 7 adding to his prblmsin vie of th threat of 3 6! 6 4xg8 mat

a 7 xg g 8 f3 e3+ 9 xe 0 xe rids th game of to bishops and quens and eavs each side ith abackwad pawn Hoever, White has morespace nd superior deveopment hich issuicient r a ead, .g. 10 . .d7 1 00

h6 1 b f6 3 4 f7 4 Pribychian, Berin 99, hen 14 . .e7 (4 a6avoids the lloing but eakens b6) a6bxa6 6 xa6 xa6 17 xa6 hb8 8 b3gave White target on a7. Back frd orsein Gomez Esteban-J.Gonzales, Barbera996 0 . f6 (the e-square is not the mostimpoant fctor here) 1 b! d7 da6 13 c4 b 4 b6+ d8 x8

d7 16 b6 e8 7 a4 etc.b) 6 . .a6?! is a luxury Bk cn i ord, aWhite dos not necessarily nd the bsqur to maintin his ead nd thre is notime r ...b7-b ith Blacks ngside sti athome. 7 f3 g4 8 xf3 9 g3 isintersting. Then 9 . .h4+ 0 g3 'g 1 1g f6 1 d 'xd+ 3 xd2 xg3 4hxg3 givs Whit rmidable pans, so

HuzmanBoim, Rmat Aviv, continud9 . f6 0 'd e7 1 g3 0-0 1 d!g6 13 c3 e 4 f (4 f4? 4 xf4 h4+ 6 g3 xg3+ 7 hxg3 xh+)4 hS 5 f4 h4 6 e hxg3 7 hxg3 x

Oer Defences

18 0-00 and Blk ironically ith the esquare scure had caus r conce on theh-.

c) 6 . .f6 7 f3 g4 8 b5 �f8 9

xf3 10 x e7 h b6 00d7 has b evauated as uncr, athoughWhits era space, the bishop pair d thef-e should more than compnsat Blackscontrol of the e-squre.7 f3 00

If Black nts to use his ight-squedbishop he shoud do so no 7 . . g4!? 8b+ bd7 9 h3 3 0 xf3 00 1 1xd7 xd7 1 000 e8 3 e dxe 4xe d6

Hodgson-Ler, osco 987. Againthe d-pan is th cus of attntion. Aer he xeS 16 xe d6 17 4 x4 18'xe4 fe8 Whit coud have kpt up the

pressure ith the natural 9 d68 d2 bd7

Th ida bhind 8 d is to met 8 .. g4ith 9 because aer 9 . . dxe 10 xe ison, hile 9 .. .h 0 exd6 is possibl sincethe bishop on f4 is dnded. Play mightcontinue 0 .. xd6 xd6 e8+ xd6 3 00-0f4 14 c4, or 0 . . .xf4 4 xf3 dx7 xe7+ 3 d h 14

ith the btter game r White.9 e29 !? is oh considering, hn White

can llo up by cstling qunsid. Pribylschoice is more patient White prepares to

1 7



A ttc king with 1 d4

castle sh thus prvidng his r with areadyme useul utpst n the fle.anwhle Blac is le t we up the cnsequences f th e4e5 advace as well the

psitinal signficace f blcading wth apiece n eS and the eventual arrival f apawn ar an echag and the recaptur. . .d6e5.9 . . .6 1 0 4 g4 1 1 0-0 ge5

A mprtat decs. Clampig dwnn th eSsquar wth 1 . .. f6 slves neptental prblem (weaeng e6 t d sbut leaves White e t the queensdthans t th thematic 12 ! when a turetrasfer f a ight t c4 will mtor btth invitng b6square ad the d6pawnwhil ...b7b5 b6 leaves Blac with aislatd apawn.1 2 xe5

Whte rces an alteratn in the pawncguratn bere Blac has tme t cnsldate wth ...f6.1 2. . .xe5

If Blac s t suer structurally e at leastwants t se Whites darsquared bishp utf the gam.1 3 xe5 xe5 1 4 5!

As sn as the cSpaw lses its natural

prtectn White prevents supprt by the bpawn n the prcess creating a new targt th rm f the b6square With the passeddpawn t eep an eye n as well as b6 andthe ewly islated cSpawn Bls gme is

158

nt easy.1 4. . .g5

14 ... d7! has been suggested the smplepint beng t eliminate the nght as sn it lnds n a4 er which the bishps fppsite clur mae liing the blce rgenerating play in anther sectr prticallyimpssble. Obvius and best is 1 5 d6 g5with a psitn that has been assessed asunclear It is true that Bla has th bshppar nd gd cntrl f the dar squaresbut hw thes fatrs ca be used etheraggressvly r t cpe wth the pwerl dpawn Whites utpst n d ad the squares

b6 c7 ad e7 is a anther matter.1 5 e1 b5?!

Blac endeavurs t drum up sme activity at the epense f rther damage t hisqunside pawns. Aga 15 . . .d7 mit imprv but 15 . . .e3! 16 �h d4 17 dseres nly t put the bishp in truble1 6 x6 xb6 1 7 4 h6 1 8 3!?

18 c5 3 s ne t avd.

1 8. . .b8 1 9 �h 1 t4 20 g3 2 2 1 1

21 f2 ls sensible. Fr the mmentWhite seems happy t see his pieces cmeunder attac cdent that Blacs divdedpawns wll eventually prve dcisve.21 . . .3 22 ff3 f5

2 . . .b4 is a lgical cntinuatin fBlacs harassment plcy. The 23 ab3

d7 ad 23 3 g4 see the bishps cmeut n tp s White shuld drp bac tither (t defend the bpawn in atcipati f c5 r a when 23 .. .f5 shuld bemt with 24 e5 rather than allwng cmplcatins with 24 c3 e4 25 f8 f8 26cb4 f2 etc.23 xc5 ?

23 .. .b2 24 a6 g6 has been suggested

as giving Blac enugh r te pawn. wevr tang the b2pawn permits the ghtt race ver t the ngsde r densiveduties wth tmp 25 d3 b7 26 f2beng clearly bettr r White. rever this



mght not be necessary, as the calm 25 dgves Black somethng to worry about, e.g.25 ... g4 2 d3 xe2 27 xe2 etc.24 :xa6 :6

24 ...f 25 xf gxf 2 b3 does nothelp Blacks cause, e.g . 2 . .. c8 {2 .. .b 27d) 27 xb4 xc5 28 b8+ and 29 d.25 :x6 x6 26 td7 a7 27 txfSfxe4

Black has und the best try.

2S te6!?28 b3 f2 29 g xe2 30 e s an

other opton but, not wantng to be greedy,Whte prefers to have a say on the lghtsquares.2S . . .exf3 29 xf3

Apart rom being two pawns up Whitehas three connected passed pawns lks epawn should pose few problems) . All that s

now required to conve ths advantage intothe ull point is to deal wth Blacks lghtsquared bshop and thus tdy up on the ngside.29 . .f2

29 .. .h 30 g2.30 g5 f5 31 e4

3 1 e4! ? e3 32 d3 should be enoughto presee excellent wnnng chances.

3 1 . . .h6 32 xf5 xf5 33 te6 d2 ?!33 . . .e4 should be tried, although aer 34c3 d 3 5 �g2 e3 Whte can even bale outnto a winnng queen endng wth 3 f4xf4 37 gxf4 xf4 38 e2 etc.

Other Defeces

34 �g2 e4+ 3 5 f3 35 .. .xc2 3 f8+ �h7 37 xg7 mate.

36 c3 d6

Agan 3. . .xb2?? allows mate.37 d3

Another possblty s 37 e4 llowed bybrngng the ng round to d3 .37 . . . c1 3S e7 39 g6

39 h4 covers g5 and threatens 40 d! etc.39 . . .a7 40 h4

40 c2 e3 41 f2.40 . . . d2 41 d3 e1 ! ? 42 f3 e4 43fS+!

43 xe4?! 'f2+.43 . . .�h7 f5+ �gs 45 h5 xc3 46s+ �h7 47 f5+ �gS 4S xe4 7

49 tc5 ! ? x 50 x x 51 te4g6 52 g4! �f7 53 �f3 gxh5 54 gxh5 a3 55 �f4 2 56 �f5 d4 57 td2

f6 5S tc4 h458... g5 59 d.

59 te5+ �es 60 �e6 1 0

ConcuonThe system wth 4 f3 aganst the Benko{Game 2 s most dentely undeated at alllevels. By resng to be drawn no an earlysrmsh aer 4 cxb5 a Whte denes Blacksome of the annoyng counterplay that attracts players to the Benko, yet wth thesaved move Whte wastes no tme renrcng the centre. It is easy r Black to mstak

enly play along the lnes of the {4 cxb5 a) 5f3 variation only to learn of the derenceswhen t s too late. In Game 28 Black paysthe prce r nsstng on complcatons, buteven the more sober line leads to a comable lead to Whte. The psychologcal advantge of havng an uncompromsng lne reyr Blacks more plausble optons aer 1d g {Game 29) s impoant as theory

tself. otce how an early f2-f4 can consderably undermne Blacks desred development pattern. Ths s also a major feature ofGame 30, where Blacks chef game plannvolves removng dark-squared bshops.

159



1

ND EX O F COMP LET E G AM ES I

Atalik-Gyimesi, Yus T O. 1 998 1 9BanikasMinasian, Yl' 2000 80CheyshovSemeniuk, Russ L 1999 86DreevLeko, WjkZe1 996 1 1 0GoldinMengarini, N Yo 1 991 67InkiovKonopka, A 2000 1 0 5vanov.V Raus is, Mo 1994 75

KasparovAnand, Lir 1 999 35KempinskiGrabarczyk, Polh O 2000 134Lalic.BPolgar.J, YlO 1996 1 01Lautier0, Talln/Pa 1998 4 1LautierShirov, l 1997 89MitonSadvakasov, l 2000 1 2PelletierChandler, M h Club 1999 . 52PribylVokac, Laz 1 994 1 53PdnikovaSakhatova.G, USSR 1991 125

RausisMcShane, Hast 1997/98 93SakaevGuseinov, 1 993 1 13SakaevIbragimov, Russ O 1999 2 6SakaevRublevsky, Yus T O 1 999 3 1Sa n SegundoGallego, Lr 1 997 71Sokolov.1Topalov WjknZe1 996 96StohlSocko, MK f C 1999 143SummerscaleMannion, Sh O Ed 1999 139Van WelyMilov.V, F L 1999 7Vladimirov.BFuchs, So 1966 6 1VolzhinKakageldyev, 1996 1 48WellsKoeev, U 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57YakovichSokolov, Mo 1990 1 19ZsinkaTimoscenko, Bpt 1989 130

1 60



Attacking With 1.d4 - Dunnington

Documents