Khodarkovsky - The Gruenfeld Defence Revealed - Batsford 2003

Transcript

The Grϋnfeld Μ ichael Defence Revealed Khodarkovsky B.T.Batsford Ltd, London First published ίη 2003 © Michael Κhodarkoνsky 2003 ISBN 0713488271 Βήtίsh Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. catalogue record for this book is aνaίlable from the Βήtίsh Library. Α ΑΙΙ ήghts reserνed. Νο part ofthis book may be reproduced, by any means, without Ρήοr permission of the publisher. Ρήnted ίη Great Britain by Print and Design (Wales), Ebbw Vale for the publishers, Β.Τ. Batsford Ltd, The Chrysalis Building Bramley Road, London, W 10 6SP Creatiνe An imprint of ChrysalifBooks Group plc Distήbuted ίη the United States and Canada by Sterling Publishing Co., 387 Park Aνenue South, New York, ΝΥ 10016, USA Α BATSFORD CHESS ΒΟΟΚ Seήes Editor: Daniel Κing Contents lπtroductίoπ 5 First Steps 7 Heroes and Zeros 15 Strategy 51 What's Hot 79 Tricks and Traps 103 Τest 122 Your Skill Test Your Skill - Solutions 132 Details 145 Defιnitions of Symbols Before the Fight 174 175 Introduction The author of an opening book tries to lift a veil οπ the opening's secrets, illustrating his ideas with the best games, ΟΓ game (ragments, he can fιnd. Every author is hoping that his work will be understood and appreciated by his readers. Moreover, he hopes to see aπ increase ίπ popularity of the opening among chess players ο( all leνels. The author ο( this book is πο eχception. The book is not set out ίπ the traditional way, describing the opening ίπ strict order, line-by-line, system-by-system. Here, each chapter is presented as a separate thematic article. However, the end result will hope(ully be that you have a more conceptual approach to the opening you have decided to play. The book starts quite literally with 'First Steps', running through the basic moves, and the basic motivation of the opening. Then comes 'Heroes and Zeros'--great wins (and losses!) with the opening. Ιπ this chapter you ννίll fιnd thoroughly aπalysed games, and the thoughts ο( players who have enriched the theory of the Grunfeld De(ence. Here Ι would like to thank my (riends Garry Κasparov, Boris Gulko, Leonid Shamkovich, Gennadi Zaitchik, and Sam Palatnik (or their eχclusive contributions to this book. 'Strategy', gives an overνiew of two ο( White's main systems, looking at the principle lines and theoretical battlegrounds. 6 lntroduction 'What's Hot' takes you through some of the (currently) most popular Iίnes ίπ the Grϋnfeld, offering the latest theoretical ορίηίοη οη these crucial systems. Ιη 'Tricks and Traps' Ι show how strategy and tactics combine to achieve the ultimate goal-winning the game. Απ important element of each opening book is a set of test positions. LΠ 'Test Your Skill' there are severaJ different types of position to anaJyse. Alongside the usual tactical problems, there are also more compleχ situations that test your strategic understanding. (Don't worry, there is also an answers section.) Aπd fιnaJly, if you can't fιnd the anaJysis of some theoretical the descriptive part of the book, don't hesitate to look at 'Details', where lίsts of νariations are displayed with assessments. Iίnes ίπ Before you read οπ, Ι would lίke to quote Grandmaster Boris Gulko, whose remarks characterise the Grϋπfeld Defence perfectly: 'If White plays precisely and logically, he should get an adνantage; while for Black to get a good game he must rely οπ occasional tactical chances. Fortunately, such 'occasions' occur quite often'. Michael Khodarkoνsky, New Jersey, 2003 First Steps Ι doubt if the Austrian chessplayer Ernst Grϋnfeld (born 21.1 1.1893, died 3.4.1962) could have imagined that an idea he created ίη the early Ι 920s would still, to this very day, be at the height of opening fashion. The new opening strategy developed by Grϋnfeld was as radical as the emerging Modernist movement ίη wider society. Grϋnfeld belonged to a younger generation of chess theoreticians who were looking for different methods of development to the orthodoxy of Steinitz and Tarrasch. Right from the start, Grϋnfeld enjoyed considerable success with his opening experiment. According to my records, this was its fιrst trial a serious game. Α. Becker White Ε. Grϋnfeld BIack Vienna, 1921 Ι d4 lbf6 2 lbf3 g6 3 c4 i.g7 4 lbc3 d5 5 cxd5 lbxd5 6 e4 lbxc3 7 bxc3 c5 8 i.e2 ο-ο 9 ο-ο cxd4 Ι Ο cxd4 lbc6 Ι Ι i.e3 i.g4 ίη 8 First Steps 12 d5 ~e5 13 :bl ttJxf3+ 14 gxf3 .i.h3 15 :Xb7 .i.xfl 16.i.xfl Wd6 17 .i.xa7 .i.e5 18 h3 Wa3 19 ~e3 :fb8 20 :Xb8+ :Xb8 21 ~c4 'fIc3 22 .i.b3 'fιIc7 23 Φι2 .i.f4 24 .i.d4 .i.e5 25 ~e3 'I2-'h One might question some of the moves (by both sides), but all ίπ aII, a game with a remarkably modern feel to it. The following year, 1922, Grϋnfeld employed his opening to beat, among others, Aleχander Alekhine. Grϋnfeld's creation greatly enriched opening theory and gave birth to new ideas and strategies. The asymmetric positions that arose were full of eχcitement, with dynamic plans and sharp tactics. These characteristics stimulated chess gladiators such as Alekhine, Botνinnik, Smyslov, Fischer and Κasparoν to include the opening ίη their repertoire. Οη the other hand, some of their counterparts such as Spassky, Κarpoν and Kramnik were strong adνocates for the white side of the opening. The most crucial tests of the Grϋnfeld Defence took place during the battles between these players, eleνating this complicated opening to the highest leνel of popularity. Today, you can fιnd thousands of games where players of different strengths and rating have enjoyed playing the Grϋnfeld Defence. Ι hope you ννίll enjoy it too. Let's start by First Steps 9 examining the fιrst moves and proceed step by step into the sophisticated labyrίnth of this exciting and often controversial opening. Ι d4lbf6 This is a characteristic move of many 'Indian' openings. The aim is to control the central squares e4 and d5 -without occupying them. 2 c4 g6 Black deliberately delays a conflict ίη the centre and prefers to develop the bishop οη g7, throwing a laser beam down the long diagonal. 3lbc3 d5 This is exactly what Ernst Grϋnfeld fιrst demonstrated ίη 1921. Before that, Black always pushed his pawn just one square to d6 and played another complicated opening-the Κing's Indian Defence. Advancing the d-pawn two squares strikes at White's centre and provokes a conflict right at the beginning of the game. Over the years, White has developed ΙΟ First Steps many ways to meet the opening, but let's begin by looking at the most principled continuation. White seizes the centre. 4 cxdS ttJxdS 5 e4 The eχchange of pawns aIIows White to win the preliminary battle ίη the struggle to control the centre. But wiII he win the war? S... ttJxc3 6 bxc3 ~g7 The bishop places itself οη the desirable long diagonal ίη readiness for the neχt strike. White has been aIIowed to occupy the centre with his pawns. According to Tarrasch's school, White should simply stand better. However, this is classic gueriIIa waήare. White's army occupies the centre of a city. Black could engage ίη hand to hand combat but, fearing heaνy casualties, instead hides out ίη safety ίη the surrounding hiIIs and snipes at the sitting target below. This must have seemed a radical approach ίη the early 1920s when the trench waήare of openings such as the Queen's Gambit Declined and the Ruy Lopez was de rigeur. 7..te3 First Steps ΙΙ White, for his part, supports the centre to meet Black's attack. 7 lί'Io and 7 ~c4 are aJso popular moνes. 7 ... c5 This is a typicaJ Grϋηfeld position. As indicated aboνe, Black didn't giνe υρ the centre for fun-he wants to attack it. The pawn οη c5, aJong with the queen and the long range bishop, attack the d4 square. The real struggle for the centre has begun. a1Vd2 ο-ο Black has completed the deνelopment οί his kingside, and maintains pressure oνer the centre. For many professional players this position doesn't need explaining-they continue to play and anaJyse it without thinking. But both sides are making assumptions. LΠ this kind οί position there are ιννο big questions that need clearing up. (Ι) Can White capture the pawn οπ c5? (2) ννίll Black be oνerrun by pawns ίί White pushes the d-pawn? Ι showed this position to one οί my students who asked me, 'Shouldn't White take the pawn οη c5?' Ιί White plays 9 dxc5, then Black has at least ιννο strong moνes, either 9 ...1Vc7 ΟΓ Ι2 First Steps 9 ... 'ii'a5, Let's look at the latter. The queen puts pressure οπ all three of White's isolated pawns οπ the queenside. White must defend the pawn οπ c3: Ι Ο IΣc Ι (Ι Ο .td4 IΣd8! threatening ... e5) Ι O... IΣd8 (Black is already assuming a dangerous initiative) 11 'i'b2 l2Jd7 (11 ... l2Ja6 is also good) 12 .tb5 (12 'ii'b4 'ii'xa2 13 .tc4 a5!) 12 ...a6 13 .txd7 .txd7 14l2Jf3 .tb5. Whi~e is unable to castle, and Black's pieces are dangerously active. Ιπ some Grunfeld positions White is able to capture the c5 pawn and get away with it, but those occasions are rare. Even when it results ίη the gain of a pawn, it usually does not compensate for the breaking of the central pawn duo and the exposure of the isolated pawns οη the queenside. ΥουΊI see plenty of examples later οη ίη the book! Now let's deal with what happens if White attempts to overrun Black with the central pawns. 9 d5 Black's pieces do not feel more cramped after this pawn push. Οη the contrary, the diagonal of the g7 bishop has lengthened, and the e5 square is now aνailable for a piece. Besides, Black can chip awayat the d-pawn and, ίη so doing, open some lines. First Steps 13 9 ...e6 Black highlights the vulnerability of White's centre. Now if White plays Ι Ο dχe6, then after Ι O... ~χθ6 Black has a perfect eχample of the Grϋnfeld bishop pair, raking across White's queenside. 9 .....a5 is also strong. 10 ~xcS "c71 White cannot take the rook 11 iιχf8??, because of 11 •.. i.χc3! 11 ~d4 White cannot tolerate the bishop οπ g7. Ι 1... ~xd4 12 "xd4 White has been able to centralise the queen and take control over the long diagonal. Very nice, but compare the position of the two kings. 12... exdS 13 exdS ~fS 14 First Steps Not one of White's kingside pieces has entered the game, and his king is ίπ the firing lίΠθ οπ the e-file. We can already state that Black's opening strategy has prevailed. NaturaIIy, White does ηοι need to occupy the centre ίπ this way, but this is the crucial test of the GrUnfeld. If Black is not careful he ννίΙΙ be squashed off the board. ΗοννθνθΓ, experience proves that it is far easier to snipe at a centre than to maintain ίι. This practical 'truth' lies at the heart of the Grunfeld's popularity. Heroes and Zeros When fιrst studying an opening Ι lίke to begin by looking at the games of strong players, ίη other words, the ones that show the best understanding of the system. Before looking at the detail of νariations, Ι think it is good to get an idea of how an opening is used. That is the aim of this chapter. ΒΥ looking at the wins and losses of the greatest exponents of the Grϋnfeld, we can discover the true flavour of the opening. These are all beautiful games. Moreover, at the time they were played, they all made a signifιcant contribution to the theory of the opening. There have been many great Grϋnfeld players-Botνinnik, Fischer, Korchnoi and Smyslov are four striking omissions from this chapter-but ίη the end Ι decided to make a highly personal selection by choosing games played by my friends and colleagues. This gave me the unique opportunity to ask for their comments, which they have given especially for this book. I'd lίke to express my appreciation for their help. Among these games Ι have included some fιηθ victories by White-it is important to see what you are υρ agaίnst when playing the Grϋnfeld. And who knows, you might have bought this book with the express aim of defeating the Grϋnfeld the next time you face it! We begin with a White victory. The winner is Gennadi Zaichik-a Grandmaster, originally from Tbilίsi, the capital of the Georgian Republic. He was fιve times national champion, member of the Georgian national team ίη the 1992, 1994 and 1996 chess olympiads, and winner of many international tournaments. He now resides ίη Philadelphia, USA, and was the 2002 U.S. Open Champion. Ι6 Heroes and Zeros G. Zaichik White Ι. Dorfman BIack USSR Cup, 1984 Ι d4 4.)f6 2 c4 g6 3 4.)c3 dS 4 4.)13 JJ..g7 5 JJ..gS 4.)e4 6 JJ..h4 4.)xc3 7 bxc3 dxc4 8 e3 i.e6 At the time, Black's last moνe was considered the main line ίη this νariation. It is based οη the following: 9 4.)g5 JJ..d5 10 e4 h6 11 exd5 hxg5 12 JJ..xg5 'iί'xd5, when Black has successfully solνed his opening problems, and White has yet to proνe the correctness of the pawn sacrifιce. 9 'ί'ib Ι 'If Ι remember correctly, here Ι thought for about 20 minutes, and Ι found an idea which Ι belieνe was a noνelty then. The whole idea is based οη the geometry of the queen. Besides the obνious threat to the b 7 square, White is taking control oνer the central square e4, which reopens the threat of Ι Ο 4.)g5.' (Zaichik). 9 ... cS?! Heroes and Zeros 17 'Black responds with the standard attack οπ White's centre, characteristic of most variations of the Grunfeld Defence. lπ another of my games, against Vitaly Tseshkoνsky, USSR Cup, 1985, Black employed the move 9 ... b6, and after 10 ~g5 i.d5 11 e4 i.b7 12 i.c4 ο-ο 13 'ii'b3 'i'e8 14 i.d3, White had a slight advantage.' (Zaichik). It is interesting that the above mentioned game is missing from many books, but also from the Ροweήul multi-million game ChessBase database. Ι would lίke to add to Gennadi's comments that instead of Ι 1... i.b7, as Tseshkoνsky played, it was suggested later that Ι 1... h6 12 exd5 hxg5 13 'ii'b5 'ii'd7 would equalise. 10 it'xb7 ο-ο Ι Ι i.xe7 This is the best continuation. It is dangerous to take the rook with Ι Ι 'i'xa8 ίη view of Ι 1... 'ii'b6, with two possible threats: 12 ... 'i'b2 ΟΓ 12 ... ~c6. Here is just one of numerous νariations: 12 'ife4 'ifb2 13 'ii'b Ι 'ii'xc3 + 14 ~d2 cxd4 15 'iί'c Ι dxe3! 16 'ifxc3 i.xc3 17 0-0-0 i.xd2 + 18 Φb2 ~c6 with a very strong attack. Ι 1......a5 12 IIcl lDd7 13 i.xf8l1xf8 14 i.e2 IIb8 15 "'c6 18 Heroes and Zeros 15 •••cxd4 lη this complicated position. Black did not select the best continuation. He should playeither 15 ...'iixa2 ΟΓ 15 ....:b2. so as to hold White's king ίη the centre. 16lΔxd4 The game ηονν follows a practically forced νariation leading to an endgame ίη which White must just be patient and cautious to realise his adνantage. 16 ••. ~xd4 17 exd4 'iWg5 The last big trick. Ο! course. it's bad for White to castle. 18 ο-ο. because ο! 18 ... ~d5. and Black is winning. 18 ':dl ':b6 19 'ii'a8+ ':b8 20 'iWc6 ':b6 21 'iia8+ ':b8 22 'iWf3 .i.d5 23 'ίi'ι3 'ii'xg3 24 hxg3 .txg2 25 ':g Ι ~d5 26 f3 ':b5 27 ':d2 lΔb6 28 Φf2 h5 29 ':c Ι! Φf8 30 ~d Ι ! White brings the b3 square under control before adνancing the a-pawn. Απ excellent example ο! restricting one's opponent before making progress. 30 ••• ~e7 31 a4 ':a5 32 ':b2 .tc6 33 ':Μ ~d6 34 ':al g5 35 .te2 h4 36 gxh4 gxh4 37 ':h Ι ':h5 38 .txc4 lΔxa4 39 .txΠ ':f5 40 d5 .td7 41 .te6 .txe6 42 dxe6 lΔxc3 43 ':e Ι lΔd5 44 ':xh4 a5 45 e7 ι-ο Leonid Shamkoνich is οηθ ο! the wisest of all Grandmasters. Οη June Ι. 2003. Leonid ννίll turn 80. He belongs to the 'old' school ο! chess. but Leonid's brilliant discoνeries throughout his career make him a respected contemporary theoretician. He was a second to Mikhail Tal ίη 1965. and to Leonid Stein ίη 1972. He ννοη Russian Championships ίη 1954 and 1957. Heroes and Zeros 19 as well as numerous international tournaments, including the U.S. Open ίη 1976 and 1977, He participated ίη the Interzonal tournament ίη 1979, and was a member of the U.S. team ίη the 1980 Chess Olympiad. Grandmaster Shamkovich is the author of many theoretical works, including The Grϋnfeld Defense co-authored with Jan R.Cartier, published ίη Dallas, USA, 1997. According to another 'hero' of this book, Boris Gulko, 'The magnifιcent combination by Leonid ίη this game is one of the brightest ίη chess history'. J. Fedorowicz White L. Shamkoνich Black New York, 1980 Ι d4 ltJf6 2 ltJf3 g6 3 c4 i.g7 4 ltJc3 d5 5 cxd5 ltJxd5 6 e4 ltJxc3 7 bxc3 c5 8 i.e3 The alternative, 8 1ιb Ι, preventing the development of the bishop οη c8, has become more popular ίn recent years, but Black has suffιcient counterplay after 8 ... 0-0 9 i.e2 -'a5. 8 ... iιg4!? 20 Heroes and Zeros Shamkoνich considers that this moνe giνes Black better chances than 8 ... 0-0, ίπ νiew of possibilities such as 9 'ii'd2 i.g4 Ι Ο ':c Ι i.χf3 11 gχf3 lbc6 12 h4!. The bishop intends to eliminate the knight the pressure οπ White's centre. 9 ':c Ι 'ii'a5 Ι Ο 'ii'd2 οπ f3, intensifying i.xf3 This is better than Ι 0 ... 0-0 Ι Ι lbg5! with the better game for White, as played ίπ Portisch-Korchnoi, candidates match, Bad Kissingen, 1983. Ι Ι gxf3 lbd7 12 d5 b5 Ί originated this plan at the board. Ιπ answer to the methodical response 13 c4, Ι had prepared 13 ... b4, threatening 14 ... i.c3. ΜΥ opponent rightly declined this continuation and found a creatiνe way of building an imposing pawn centre.' (Shamkoνich). 13 f4 ':d8! Heroes and Zeros 21 Here it is importaπt to play the correct order of moνes. The standard 13 ... 0-0? would be incorrect because White could immediately begin a strong attack with 14 h4!. The text moνe aims a shadowed attack agaίnst the queen and White's centre. 14 c4 b4 IS eS White is trying to lίmίt the power of the fιanchettoed bishop, but Black has aπ outstanding counter-thrust. Ι S..• gS! 16 ~h3 White, ίη his turn, prepares to meet 16 ... gχf4 with 17 ~χd7+! :χd7 18 i.χf4. 16 ..• e6 17 :gl If 17 dχe6, then 17 ... llJχe5. 17 •••gxf4 18 .uxg7 18•.• llJxeSI·· 22 Heroes and Zeros 'ΜΥ opponent probably only calculated the foIIowing: 18 ... fxe3 19 'iixe3, and then for example, 19 ... b3+ 20 'ίt>fl b2 21 1Ie Ι 'iib4 22 dxe6! b Ι ='ii' 23 1Ixb Ι 'ii'xb 1+ 24 'ίt>g2 'ii'b7+ 25 ~g3 with an unclear position. But Ι surprised him with my last move. Now not only is the knight threatening a fork οη f3, but the rook is performing well, thanks to the move 13 ...1Id8: (Shamkovich). 19 Φe2? 19 ~fl was correct, although after 19 ... 'ii'a3! 20 ..txf4 'ii'xh3+ 21 'ίt8>e2 'ii'f3+ 22 'ίt>fl "i!i'd3+! Black would have been much better anyway. The text move allows Black to demonstrate an elegant and decisive tactical firework. 19...fxe3 20 'ii'b2 If 20 fxe3, then 20 .. :ii'a6!. 20 •••1Ixd511 Beautiful chess! 21 cxd5 Heroes ond Zeros 23 White has πο choice but to accept this rook sacrifίce, as 21 ~χe3 would be met by 21 .....:td-4!, and 21 fχe3 by 21 ...'i'a6 with a clear advantage to Black. 21 .••ifa6+ 22 Φxe3 'i'd3+ 23 'i1;f4 Ι6! Α subtle touch ίπ the middle of the attack. Black threatens 24 ...'i'f3 mate. 24 'i'b3lίJg6+ 25 :'xg6 e5+ 26 Φg4 h5+ 27 Φh4 ife4+ ο-ι The grand fιnale: 28 Φg3 h4 mate; while 28 .tg4 and 28 :g4 are both mated by 28 ... hχg4+. 'Pay attention to the treacherous role played by the rook οπ h8--up to the last moves it was out of the battle.' (Shamkovich). Απ absolutely briIJiant game! Garry Κasparov is the 13th World Champion ίπ the history of chess (1985-2000). He remains the no. Ι player ίπ the world οπ the rating list. Κasparov became the youngest ever World Champion at the age of 22. Ιπ 1989 he was the fιrst chess player ίπ the world to break the 2800 rating barrier. Since then he has maintained his position as the highest rated player ίπ the world. Κasparov has won more 24 Heroes and Zeros 'super' tournaments than anyone else. Garry's ability to generate new ideas has enriched many openings, including the Grϋnfeld Defence. Anatoly ΚaΓpoν is the 12th World Champion ίη the history of chess (1975-1985)-Κasparov's predecessor. Ιη his long and successful career, ΚaΓpoν has won around 150 international tournaments. Anatoly has always been prepared to take οη the Grϋnfeld with the white pieces. Ιη 1992 he wrote a book Beating the Grϋn(eΙd, published by Batsford. The following game was played ίη the uncompromising fight for the 1986 World Championship title. For those of us spectating, it was a truly breathtaking and unpredictable encounter. Ιη fairness to the art of chess, it makes perfect sense that the players shared not only the point, but the briIIiancy prize as well. Α. ΚaΓpoν White G. Κasparov Black World Championship, London, 1986 Ι d4 lL:ιf6 2 c4 g6 3 lL:ιc3 d5 4 i.f4 i.g7 The variation with 4 i.fo4 is a slightly old-fashioned method of development-though Κarpov's espousal of it ίη this match Heroes and Zeros 25 provoked a reviνal ίη interest. It is generaJly regarded as a solid, bullet-proof continuation for White. 5 e3 cS 6 dxcS 'ili'a5 One ο! Black's strategies here is to eχert pressure along the a5-e Ι diagonal, eχploiting the fact that White's bishop is ηονν disconnected from the queenside. 7 :Cle~ 1~C4 ο-ο 9 tDf3 'ίWxc5 10 .i.b3 This is better than Ι Ο tDb5 'iί'b4+ Ι Ι tDd2 tDd5, ΟΓ Ι Ι 'it>e2 .i.e6! with favourable positions for Black. Ι 0 ••• lbc6 11 ο-ο 'iί'a5 12 h3 .i.f5 13 'iί'e2 Ιη game 9 of this match, ΚaΓpoν tried 13 tDd4 .i.d7 14 'iί'e2 tDχd4 15 eχd4, with even chances. 13 ••• tDe4 14 tDd5 With the simple threat ο! 15 .i.c7. 14 ••. eS 26 Heroes and Zeros 151:.xc6!? Welcome to the show. This attractive and surprising exchange sacrifιce initiates unpredictable tacticaJ complications. Black's position comes under extreme pressure. It is unclear who wiII benefιt after 15 ... bxc6 16 tΔe7 + Φhθ 17 ..txe5 ..txe5 Ι θ tΔxc6 ..th2 +! 19 tΔxh2 ~d2. Κasparov prefers another way to resist. 15 ... exf4!? 16 1:.c7 ..te6 17 ~e Ι ~b5 18 tΔe7 + Φh8 19 ..txe6 Ι nstead , 19 exf4? would be refuted by 19 ... tΔg3 20 fxg3 'iWb6+. 19 ...fxe6 20 'iWbl tΔg5 21 tΔh4 tΔxh3+ Black could have hit the safety net with 21 ... fxe3! as after 22 tΔhxg6+ hxg6 23 tΔxg6+ Φgθ 24 tΔe7+ would be a draw. Instead, Κasparov pushes the accelerator to the floor. 22 Φh2 'iWh5 23 tΔexg6 + Α merry dance with the knights! Heroes and Zeros 27 23 •.• hxg6 24 'ifxg6 24 ...'iWe5 Α creatiνe resource, threatening the rook and a discoνered check. It forces White's neχt moνe so as to stop a counterattack by Black's well-coordinated pieces. 25 I:Z.f7 .uxπ 26 'iWxf7 ttJg5 Black returns the eχtra piece and the game drifts towards the safety zone for both players. 27 ttJg6+ <ίf;h7 28 ttJxe5 tΔxf7 29 tΔxf7 <ίf;g6 30 ttJd6 fxe3 31 ttJc4 exf2 32:xf2 It could be said that Black, with his bishop against a knight, has a more pleasant endgame, but at this leνel, such positions are almost always drawn. ]2 ... b5 3] ttJe3 a5 34 ~g3 a4 35 ':c2 :f8 36 Φg4 .ιd4 37 :e2 .i.xe3 38 ':xe3 ':12 39 b3 ':xg2 + 40 <ίf;O ':xa2 41 bxa4 II2-ΙΙz 28 Heroes and Zeros Boris Gulko is the only Grandmaster who has been able to the prestigious 50viet Championship (ίη 1977) and the υ.5. Championship (ίη 1994 and 1999). For many years Boris has been a member of the υ.5. national team. He has ννοη numerous international tournaments. and qualίfied for severallnterzonals. Ιη 1994 he played a quarterfinal candidates match for the World Championship against Nigel 5hort. Gulko is regarded as one of the most knowledgeable Grandmasters with his οννη views and interpretation of theory. Boris included the Grίinfeld Defence ίη his opening repertoire a few decades ago. and has used it with success ίη his tournament encounters. ννίη Α. Yusupov White Gulko Blαck Hastings. 1989 Β. Ι d4 lί)f6 2 c4 g6 3 lί)c3 d5 4 cxd5 lί)xd5 5 e4 lί)xc3 6 bxc3 J.g7 7 J.c4 ο-ο Slί)e2lί)c6 9 ο-ο b6 10 iιg5 .ib7 11 'ifd2 'ii'd6 12 :adl!? υρ until the last move. the players were following the most popular theoretical line. At the time. this rook move was a novelty. νarying from the standard νariation beginning with ι:r ι ~ ο,-ι2):ac Ι . ',--, ..1 Heroes and Zeros 29 12••• lt::Ja5 13 ~d3 c5 Black employs the standard approach ίη the Grϋnfeld Defence: attack the centre as quickly as possible, using the long range paίΓ of bishops, and keep the pressure οη the c4 square. 14 d5 14••• e61 'It wouldn't be wise to remove the pressure οη d4 by pushing the c-pawn further. White obtains a favourable position after 14... c4? 15 .tc2 e6 16 dxe6 ~xθ6 17lt::Jd4!?, ΟΓ 17lt::Jf4 ~θ5 Ι θ lt::Jd5.' (Gulko). 15 c4 ~a6 ~)~c2 Ι> i 1-\) Defending the pawn with 16 1Ic Ι doesn't look good ίη view of 16 ... exd5 17 cxd5?! ~xd3 Ι θ 'ii'xd3 (5! 19 f3 (19 lt::Jf4 fxe4 20 'ii'xe4 1IaeB 21 lt::Je611f5) 19...fxe4 20 fxe4lt::Jc6, and the knight reaches an excellent outpost οη e5. 16...exd5 17 exd5 30 Heroes and Zeros 17...'iid7 'It is absolutely necessarγ to control the a4 square. It would be a mistake to play the natural 17... %:tae8?, because of 18 SΙd2, ΟΓ 18 'ir'a4 with adνantage to White.' (Gulko). 18lL\g3 18.••%:tae8 The only move. If 18... lL\b7?, then 19 lL\f5 gxf5 20 SΙxf5 'ii'd6 21 ~xh7 + Φh8 22 %:td3, with a clear adνantage (or White. 19 SΙd2 'Now 19 lL\f5? doesn't work, because ο( 19 ...gxf5 20 SΙxf5 'ir'd6 21 ~xh7 + 'ίt>h8 22 %:td3 SΙc8, taking control of the h3 square with a decisive adνantage. Instead of the text move, White could have equalised the position with 19 %:tfe Ι 11xe Ι 20 %:txe Ι %:te8' (Gulko). 19 ...lL\b7 20 lL\e4 lL\d6! It is best for Black to force the trade of knights. Playing adventurously with 20 ... f5 would rebound: 21 lL\g5 lL\d8 22 h4. Heroes and Zeros 3 Ι 21 t2Jxd6 'ίWxd6 22 ifa4?! 'ΜΥ opponent overestimates his position. He should continue 22 ':'feli.c8, with equality.' (Gulko). 22 ... Sιc8 23 ifxa7 i.e5! ΑΙΙ of a sudden, Black has developed a dangerous attack οη the kingside. It is not easy to fιnd a way to hold this position. For example, Black is winning after 24 i.h6? Sιxh2 + 25 Φh Ι i.f4 26 i.xf8 'ii'xf8 27 Φg Ι ifh6 28 g3 Sιg4; ΟΓ 24 g3? i.h3 25 i.h6 'ίWf6; ΟΓ 24 h4!? i.d4!. Artur also didn't fιnd a good reply. 24 h3?! 'Ιη fact there was a defence: 24 (4! i.d4+ 25 'it>h Ι i.d7 26 ':'b Ι b5 27 ifa3 ':'a8 28 ifb3 b4 29 '6'c2 i.a4 30 '6'c Ι i.d7 31 ifc2 with a draw by repetition.' (Gulko). 24 ... i.d4! Now there is 25 Φhl ηο way to prevent a damaging sacrifιce οη h3. 32 Heroes and Zeros 'White does ηο better with 25 ,*,a3 ~xh3 26 ~χg6 (26 gxh3 'ilfg3+ 27 Whl ,*,xh3+ 28 Wgl ~e5 wins) 26 ... ~χg2! 27 ~xh7 + Wχh7 28 Φχg2 :g8+ 29 ~h Ι :e3! 30 ~χe3 '*'g6 31 '*'d3 (5 mating.' (Gulko). 25 .. :it'f6 26 ~e3 Of course, there were alternatives, but Black is winning ίη all cases: 26 'ilfc7 ~e5 27 ,*,c6 ,*,h4; ΟΓ 26 (4 '*'h4 27 ~el :xe Ι 28 :dxe Ι ~χh3; ΟΓ 26 Φh2 ~χh3! 27 gxh3 (27 Wχh3 :e5) 27...•f3. 26 ... i.xh3 27 ΒΥ ~xd4 cxd4 the way. 27 ... ~χg2+ is just a draw. 28d6 Avoiding the forced losing line after 28 gxh3 'i'f3 + 29 Φh2 :e5 30 :gl 'i'χf2+ 31 :g2 'i'f3 32 'i'a4 (32 ~c2 'i'f4+ 33 Φhl :fe8 wins) 32 ...:h5! 33 :g3 ,*,f2+ 34 :g2 '*'f4+ 35 :g3 :g5 36 :dg Ι h5. 28 ...:e5 Heroes and Zeros 33 ΗοννθνθΓ, Black is stίll winning. 29 f4 :e3 30 'ifb7 'ifh4 31 Φg Ι 3l ...~xg2 Α nice touch. 32 'ifxg2 :g3 33 ~e4 :Xg2+ 34 ~xg2 'iff6 35 d7 'ifd6 36 f5 'ifxd7 37 ~d5 'ife7 38 :13 'ife5 39 :dfl g5 40 f6 :e8 41 Φh Ι g4 42:f5 'ife3 43 :h5 :e5 44 :h2 d3 45 ~xf7+ cJ;xf7 46 :xh7+ cJ;g6 47 f7 Φxh7 48 f8='ii 'iih3+ Ο-Ι Vladimir Tukmakov is a Grandmaster from Odessa. He became known to the world of chess after he took second place behind Bobby Fischer ίη the famous tournament ίη Buenos Aires, 1970. He took second place ίη three Soviet Championships ίη 1970, 1972, and 1983. The last οηθ was the 50th USSR Championship ίη which aJl the great Soviet players participated. Vladimir has ννοη many international tournaments, participated ίη lηterzoηaJ tournaments, and was a member of the Soviet national team that ννοη the European Team Championship. Tukmakov is a νθΓΥ dynamic 34 Heroes and Zeros pIayer with great sporting quaIities and fιghting spirit. The Grϋnfeld is one of the main openings he has employed throughout a Iong and successfu! career. At the time this game was played, it had an important theoretical νalue. The so-called Prins νariation ίη the Russian System (7 ... ltΊa6) originated by ν.RagΟΖίn ίη the 1930s, had almost been forgotten until employed by Κasparoν ίη his matches against Κarρoν ίη 1986 and 1987. Α. Belyaνsky White V. Τukmakov Black USSR Championship, 1989 Ι d4 ltΊf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltΊc3 d5 4 ltΊo iιg7 5 'i'b3 dxc4 6 'ifxc4 ο-ο 7 e4ltΊa6 8 iιe2 It is interesting to note that Tukmakoν was confιdent enough to play this νariation οη seνeral occasions. During the same tournament, the 1988 Soνiet Championship, held ίη his (and my) natiνe city of Odessa, he successfully proνed his superiority ίη this double-edged νariation. For example, ίη Georgadze-Tukmakoν, instead of the text moνe, the Heroes and Zeros 35 Georgian Grandmaster tried 8 'ifb3, and the game continued: 8 ...c5 9 d5 ~I Ο 'iWxb6 axb6 11 ~c4 e6 12 dxe6 .i.xe6 13 .i.xe6 fxe6 14 ο-ο lbb4 15 h3 lbd7 16 %:td Ι lbc2 17 %:tb Ι lbd4 18 lbe Ι lbe5, with the initiative (Ο-Ι, 35). Let's look at some of the other moves employed by White at this stage. Tukmakov himself played 8 e5 against lνan 50kolov ίη Yugoslavia, 1991, and after 8 ... lbd7 9 e6 lbb6 Ι Ο exf7 + Wh8 11 'iWb5 :i~ 12 .i.f4 c6 13 'iWe2 .i.c4 14 'ife4 ~d5, both players had chances to play for a ννίη. Aπd fιnally, Boris Gulko played 8 'ifa4 ίη his fιght against Ilya Gurevich ίη the υ .5. ίη 1991, achieving a favourable position for White after 8 ... c5 9 d5 'ifb6 Ι Ο .i.xa6 bxa6 Ι Ι ο-ο e6 ~§%:td Ι .i.b7 13 .i.g5 exd5 14 exd5 'iWxb2 15 %:tab Ι 'ifxc3 16 %:txb7 %:tfb8 17 %:txb8+ %:txb8 18 d6. 8 ... c5 9 d5 e6 10 ο-ο Απ alternative continuation was demonstrated ίη the game Piket-Timman, Amsterdam, 1995: Ι Ο Jιg5!? exd5 Ι Ι lbxd5 @exd5 'iί'b6) 11 ... .i.e6 120-0-0 .i.xd5 13 %:txd5 'ifb6 36 Heroes and Zeros 14 .tχf6 'iiχf6 15 e5 'ii'f5 16 .td3 .c8 17 :d6 lίJb4!? 18.te4 :b8 ~Φbl b5 20 'iie2 c4 21 a3lίJd3 22 .tχd3 cχd3 23 'ii'χd3 b4! with a dynamic position where both sides had chances. Ι O... exd5 Ι Ι Ι exd5 1.•. .tf5 Ιπ the game Piket-Κasparoν, Amsterdam, 1995, Black preferred@ ..:e8, coming under pressure after 12:d Ι .tf5 13 d6! h6 14 .tf4 lίJd7 15 :d2 lίJb4 16 'ii'b3 .te6 17 .tc4 lίJb6 18 .tχe6 :χe6 19 lίJa4 :e4. After the game, ννοπ by Piket, Κasparoν suggested that Black could obtain a winning position by playing 19 ... lίJχa4!? 20 'ii'χa4 lίJc6 21 :c Ι g5 22 .tg3 .d7 23 :χc5 g4. But ίπ my joint analysis with Grandmaster Leonid Shamkoνich, we found that White could play instead 23 h3! b6 24 b4! lίJe5 25 'ii'd Ι cχb4 26 :c7 with the better chances. 12.tf4 Ιη this position White has also played 12 .te3, Grandmaster A.Mikhalchishin recommends responding with 12 ...'ii'b6 Heroes and Zeros 37 15' 1; J !J)b3 11e8. although after 14 11ad Ι ti:)e4 15 ti:)xe4 :Xe4 (of course. not 15 ... .i.xe4. because of 16 ti:)g5! .i.f5 17 d6 with winning chances for White) 16 'ilc Ι. White is slightly better. 12~ •• ti:)d7! \j Ι ;; This is the fruit of Tukmakov's analytical work. prepared especially for this tournament. This innovative plan allows White to enter into a sharp tactical skirmish once he pushes the pawn to the sixth rank. White could of course select the more solid 13 11fd Ι. with a possible continuation such as 13 ... ti:)b6 14 'ilb3 ti:)b4 15 11d2. but the following move looks so attractive that Belyavsky couldn't resist. 13 d6!? ti:)b6 14 'ilb3 ti:)b4 15 11ac Ι .i.e6 16 'iia3 Tukmakov commented after the game that White should retreat with 16 'ild Ι. and considered the position unclear after 16 ... ti:)6d5 (16 ... .i.xc3 17 bxc3 ti:)xa2 18 11c2 ti:)a4 19 'ild2) 17 ti:)xd5 ti:)xd5 18 .i.g3 .i.xb2 19 11xc5 ~3 20 'ir'c2 ti:)xe2 + 21 'iixe2 .i.a3 22 11c3 .i.b4 23 11c2. 16...ti:)c4 17 .i.xc4 .i.xc4 18 11fd Ι b6 19 ti:)e4 .i.d5! 38 Heroes and Zeros The bishop pair, ίπ combination with the knight, trap White's queen ίπ an offside position. It's a common scenario ίπ this νariation. 20 tΩfg5 Wd71 Here's the girl! ΑΙΙ Black's pieces are now working ίπ harmony. 21 ..id2 tΩxa2 22 :a Ι h6 23 tΩc3 tΩxc3 24 ..txc3 ..txg2 25 ..txg7 1;xg7 26 Φχg2 hxg5 27 Wg3 :fe8 Playing 27 ...g4 was also good enough, but at this point it's just a matter of taste. 28 'iί'xg5 :e4 29 h3 :ae8 30 :a3 :8e5 31 Wg3 :e8 32 :13 a5 33 :d5 :4e6 34 :f4 :d8 35 Wb3 Wc6 36 'iί'f3 :d7 37 Φgl :exd6 Ο-Ι The fall of the d-pawn leaves White with πο choice but to resign. Heroes and Zeros 39 Ι would like to add to the ideas described ίπ the previous game with the following encounter between Jan Timman and Garry Κasparov. J. Timman White G. Κasparoν 8Iack Sarajevo, 1999 Ι d4lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4lbf3 iLg7 5 'iWb3 dxc4 6 'ii'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 lba6 8 iLe2 c5 9 d5 e6 Ι Ο ο-ο exd5 11 exd5 iLf5 12 iLe3 12...'ii'b6 The same continuation as ίπ the preνious game. These νariations are cuπentlΥ hotly disputed. Just recently, ίπ the game Gyimesi-Ni Hua, 35th Olympiad, Bled 2002, the following move order was employed:@ .. %:e8 13 %:ad Ι 'iWb6 14 b3 %:ad8 15 lba4 and now the Chinese player demonstrated a noνelty: 15 ...1Wc7, though this wasn't entirely satisfactory for Black: 16 d6! 'iWc8 (16 ... %:xd6 17 iLf4 and White is υρ an exchange) 17 tlJg5 %:d7 Ι θ 'iWc Ι! %:ede 19 i-f4 lbb4 (19 ... h6 20 lbf3 g5 was probably better, although White has the upper hand ίπ any case: a) 21 iLe5 lbe4 22 iLb5 iLxe5 23 iLxd7 iLxh2+ 24 Φχh2 Itxd7; ΟΓ b) 21 iLxa6 bxa6 22 lbxc5 gχf4 23 lbxd7 'iWxd7 24 Itfe Ι). 40 Heroes and Zeros Α year earlier ίη the game Gyίmesi-Smirin, Pula 200 Ι, Black had played 15 .. :iνa5, and after 16 d6!? ':d7 17 'ίi'b5 'ifde achieved an equal position. However, the latest analysis shows that White can obtain a positional adνantage by playing 17 ttJxc5 ttJxc5 Ι θ b4!. Anyway, Timman tries something else. He sends the knight to the side of the board so as to force his opponent's bishop away from the b 1-f5 diagonal, allowing the rook to move to bl. Ι3 ttJh4?! j.d7 14 ':ab Ι ':fe8 Ι 5 b4 15 .••.Le3! This exchange sacrifιce highlights the un(ortunate position ο( the knight οη h4 and White's broken pawn structure. Instead a standard developing move such asd~.. ':ace would lead to a disastrous position (or Black after 16 bxc5 'ifa5 17 c6 (obviously, not 17 ':xb7, because ο( 17 ... ttJxc5) 17... j.xc6 Ι θ dxc6 ':xc6 19 'iνb5 'iνxc3 20 'i'xb7. 16 fxe3 Heroes and Zeros 41 The alternatiνe continuatior\ -1:~bxc5 %:ιχc3 17 cxb6 %:ιχc4 Ι θ j.xc4 axb6, can't satisfy White. 16... cxb4 17 'iνf4 This is better than (7)liJd Ι 'iνd6 Ι θ e4 11ce when Black has an edge. 17...'iνc5 18lbe4 White could haνe complicated the situation by playing Ι θ j.xa6 bxc3 ([~ .. bxa6 19 'iνxb4 'iνxθ3+ 20 ~h Ι a5 21 .b7 11ce with mutual chances) 19 j.xb7 11eθ 20 'iνd4 .a3, and it's hard to predict the outcome of the game. 18...lbxe4 19 'iνxe4 Timman aνoids @)'iνxf7 +? ίη νiew of 19 ... Φhθ 20 'iνxd7 'iνxe3+ 21 Φhl 'iνxθ2 22 11bel 'iνd3. 19 ...:e82.9 .f4 'iνxe3+ 21 'iνxe3 11xe3 22 j.xa6 bxa6 23 %:ιχΜ :d3 24 11bf4?! 42 Heroes and Zeros :fb 24 :bS+ .tf8 25 ~f3 :xd5 26 Ι looks a better chance for White. Ιη the game, White is forced to return the exchange. 24 ...:Xd5 25 1hf7 .tb5 26 :χι7+ Returning the exchange is the only way to continue resisting, otherwise the power ο! the bishops will destroy White's fragile position. For example, 26: Ι f3 .td4+ 27 Wh Ι .tf6! 28 :7xf6 :d 1+ 29 :fl .txfl 30 h3 rJJtg7 31 11(2.tc4+ 32 Wh2 :al wins. 26 ...Φχι7 27 :cl g5 28 ~o g4 29 ~h4 If 29 ~e Ι 11f5! 30 h3 g3 31 ~f3 :d5 wins. 29 ... Φf6 30 :c7 h5 31 11xa7 11dl + 32 ~ 11d2+ 33 rl;e3 :Xa2 34:b7 If 34 11c7 a5 35 :c5 .te8 wins. 34...:e2 + 35 ~4 Heroes and Zeros 43 35 ... %:te4+! The knight οπ h4 is sentenced to 'Iife ίπ prison'. Those who wouJd like to try 36 Φχθ4 ννίΙΙ soon realise that White's situation is hopeJess. The rest is just technique. 36 Φg3 %:te3+ 37 ~f4 %:te4+ 38 Φg3 %:te7 39 %:tb6+ %:te6 40 ':b7 41 %:td7 ~b5 42 ':h7 ~d3 42 %:tb7 ~θθ wins. 42 ... ~e8 43 %:ta7 %:te3+ 44 ~4 %:ta3 45 ':b7 %:ta4+ 46 Φe3 %:te4+ 47 Φd3 %:te7 48 %:tb2 ~b5+ 49 Φd4 %:te2 50 %:tb3 50 %:txe2 ~χθ2 5 J Φθ3 ~b5 52 ~d4 a5 53 'ίt'c5 a4 54 ~b4 ~θθ 55 g3 'it>e5 wins. 50...Φg5 51 g3 %:td2+ 5 J... :χh2 52 ':c3 ':d2 + 53 Φe4 :e2 + 54 ~d4 Φf6 55 %:tc5 ~eBwins. 44 Heroes and Zeros 52 c,;tJe4 lIc2 53 c,;tJe5 53 llJf5 lIe2 + 54 lIe3 lIxh2 wins. 53 •••lIxh2 54 lIc3 1Ie2+ 55 ~d4 1Id2+ 56 ~e4 1Ie2+ 57 ~d4 1Id2 + 58 ~e4 ~6 59 1Ic5 1Ie2 + 60 ~4 60 c,;tJd4 .te8 wins. 60 ••• .td3 ο-ι Here White resigned ίη νiew of 61 1Ic6+ (61 1Ixh5? 1Ie4 mate) 61 ...1Ie6 62 :χe6+ ~xe6 63 Φι5 il.e4 (maintaining the domination of the knight). 64 c,;tJxh5 a5 65 'iίt>χg4 a4. The following spectacular game enriched the theory of the currently popular 'Hungarian Variation" Until this game. it had been considered that it gaνe Black suffιcient counterplay. ΚaspMoν demonstrates that he has his doubts about that νerdict. Adνocates for the νariation are still trying to repair its damaged reputation. Heroes and Zeros 45 G. Κasparoν Ρ. Sνidler White Black Hoogovens, Wijk aan Zee, 1999 Ι d4 ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 ltJf3 ~ι7 5 'iib3 dxc4 6 'iixc4 ο-ο 7 e4 a6 The starting point ο! the so-called 'Hungarian Variation'. White's reply is the most direct, attempting to control the centre. 8 e5 b5 8 ... ltJfd7 is also possible, although it's not as reliable for Black as the teχt. As an eχample Ι would lίke to give the following game, Bareev-Leko, Wijk aan Zee, 1995, 9 ~e3(~~1!> <1"" ι; \ (anyway) Ι Ο 'iί'b3 ltJb6 Ι Ι a4 ~e6 12 'iid Ι c6 (aiming to eχploit the d5 and c4 squares) 13 ~d3 (6 14 ο-ο ltJ8d7 15 ~e4 ltJd5 16 aχb5 aχb5 17 ltJχd5 cχd5 18 :tχa8 'ii'χa8 19 eχf6 eχf6 20 ~d3 "iib7 21 ~d2! (a wise clearance ο! the e-fιle, along with the idea to relocate the bishop οπ the a3-fθ diagonal) 21 ... ltJb6 22 :te Ι ~d7 23 ~b4 :te8 24 h4 (another thematic middlegame method, pressurising the opponent's kingside) 24 ...:tχel 25 'iiχel 'iic8 26 'fke7 i-e8 27 h5 gχh5 46 Heroes and Zeros 28 .i.c5 'ifd7 29 'ii'e2 4Ja8 30 .i.f5 'ίWc6 31 .i.e6+ and White is winning. 9 'ifb3 4Jfd7 At fιrst glancε(9)...i.e6 looks attractive, but it ννίll be met with a queen 'sacrifιce' for three pieces: Ι Ο exf6! .i.xb3 11 Ιχg7 Φχg7 12 aχb3, which favours White. 10 e6 fxe6 11 .i.e3 σ- :1.6 2.. Κasparov is not ίη a hurrγ to recapture the pawn οη e6-it has been tried before ίη numerous games. Here's a good example: Κarpov-Κamsky, Elista FIDE World Championship match, 1996: 11 'ii'xe6+ ~h8 12 'ίWe4! 4Jb6 13 'ii'h4 4Jc6 14 .i.d3! (ίΙ 14 .i.h6?! then Θ :Χf3! 15 .i.χg7 Φχg7 16 gχf3 4Jd4 17 0-0-0 c5 and Black's compensation is good enough) 14... ltχf3!? 4Jxd4? is a mistake, because ο! 15 .i.χg6) 15 gχί) 4Jxd4 16.i.e4 .i.f5 17 .i.e3~~)(17 ... e5! 18 'iWxd8+ %:ιχd8 19 0-0-0 c5 20 Ι4!? b4 21 .i.xf5 gχΙ5 Stohl-Ruck, Hungarγ 1997) 18 .i.xd4 cxd4 19 %:ιd Ι %:ιc8 20 %:ιg Ι .i.f6 21 'ii'h6 .i.g7 22 'ii'h4 and a draw is unavoidable. .. (1!3... Heroes and Zeros 47 Ι 1.•. tiJb6 12 h4 tiJc6 13 h5 :xf3 13 ... ,r '"' ",1- The best counter-shot! Other possibilities don't look good / "- .. tiJxd4 14 tiJxd4 ~xd4 15 hxg6 hxg6 for Black, e.g.\j3) (ι 5... ~xe3 16 gxh 7 + ~h8 Ι 7 fxe3 "ifd6 18 tiJe4 with adνantage) 16:d Ι c5 Ι 7 ~xd4 cxd4 18 "ifc2! :f5 19 "ifd2 e5 20 "ifh6 "ifd6 21 ~d3 with adνantage. 14 gxf3 tiJxd4 Θ~Χd4 15 hxg6 hxg6 16:d Ι is better for White. 15 :dl! Κasparov's analytical work ίη practice! 15 •..c5 @.tiJxf3+? 16 ιιte2 tiJd4+ 17 i.xd4 i.xd4 18 hxg6 hxg6 19 "ifc2 ~g7 20 :g Ι wins. 16 ~xd4 cxd4 48 Heroes and Zeros ''', (ι~).. .i.χd4 17 hxg6 hxg6 18':g Ι "ίWθ8 19 .i.d3 wins. 17 hxg6 h6 17 ... hxg6 Ι β ':g Ι! lbd5 'ii'eB 19 lbe2 'ii'fl 20 lbxd4 wins) 19 lbxd5 exd5 20.:χg6 e5 21 .td3 with advantage. @ .. 18 ':h5! After the tournament, when we met ίη New York, Garry told me that he found this rook manoeuνre at the board. Άpparently', said Garry, 'the rook οη the fιfth rank prevents any Black counterplay. It's sort of a 'no-fly' zone', he joked. G'j)'ii'c7 19lbe2 "ίWd6 20 lbxd4! .txd4 21 ':h4 "ίWθ5+ 22 ':e4 .txf2 + 23 Φχα wins; likewise Ι β ... Φh8 19 lbe2 e5 20 "ίWπ "ίWgB 21 'ii'xe7. 19 lbe2 "ίWxg6 20 ':h Ι Mission accomplished, the rook returns to the ready to take control of the g-fιle. fιrst rank Heroes and Zeros 49 20 ... Φh8 20 ....i.b7 21 :g Ι 'iif6 22 lLJxd4 .i.d5 23 'iie3 .i.xa2 24 .i.h3 wins. 21 :gl 'iif7 Ι! 21 ... 'iif6 22 :xd4 .i.b7 23 :dg4 .i.d5 24 'iid3 :g8 25 lLJf4 wins. 22 lLJxd4 lLJd5 23 'iid3 .i.d7 Instead, 23 ... e5 24 lLJxb5 .i.b7 25 lLJa3 lLJf4 26 'iie3 wins. 24 "ii'e4 :c8 Το a certain extent Black has been able to consolidate his position, but his king's vulnerability, along with the material and positional disadνantages, leaνe ηο hope for surνival. 25 .i.d3 lLJf6 Instead, 25 .. :l'g8 26 :g6lLJf6 27 "ίi'h4 'ίi'f7 28 We2 e5 29 :xh6+ .i.xh6 30 "ίi'xh6+ lLJh7 31 :h Ι exd4 32 .i.xh7 'iie6+ 33 'iixe6 .i.xe6 34 .i.f5+ Wg7 35 .i.xe6 wins for White. 50 Heroes and Zeros 26 ii'h4 %tcS 27 lDe2! lDcιs If 27 ... e5 28 lDc3! i.c6 29 Wb4 wins. 28 %tg6 28•• :iVf8 Alternatively 28 ... i.e8 29 %txh6 +! i.xh6 (29 ... Φg8 30 i.g6 ii'xg6 31 %txg6 i.xg6 32lDd4 wins) 30 'ίi'xh6+ Φg8 31 Φd2 'ίi'g7 32 %tg Ι is the end. 29 'iVe4 'ii" Or 29 ... lDf6? 30 IΣxf6; and 29 ... i.xb2 30 .:χe6! 'ίi'g7 31 ':g6. 30 Φd2! Α beautiful fιnaJ touch. The king is secure ίη the centre of the board as it makes way for the second rook to ίοίπ the attack. 30.••lDf6 31 'iWe3 ι-ο Black resigned ίπ view of: 31 ... %th5 (31 ... IΣg5 32 %Σxg5 hxg5 33 IΣh 1+ Φg8 34 'iVxg5 wins) 32 %tdg Ι i.f8 33 lDf4 IΣh2 34 IΣ6g3. Strategy Ιπ this chapter Ι give an overνiew of (ννΟ of the most popular systems ίπ the Grίίnfeld, the Exchange Variation, and the Classical ΟΓ i.f4 Variation. Ilay particular emphasis οπ the kind of strategy that both sides employ. Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 cxd5 lbxd5 5 e4 lbxc3 6 bxc3 i.g7 7 i.c4 c5 8 lbe2 lbc6 9 i.e3 ο-ο This is the starting point for the study of the Exchange Variation, and really for the Grίίnfeld as a whole. Knowledge and understanding of the main principles of this position are essential if you wish (ο make progress. The fundamental soundness of the opening is put (ο the test: White occupies the centre. White tries (ο maintain control over the centre, while Black tries (ο attack it, and at the same time generate counterplay οπ the queenside. Here, White's main option is: 52 Strategy 10 ο-ο .iιg4 this has taken over as the maίn lίne of the though the older move Ι O...'ί!ic7 remains popular. and there is also Ι O... .iιd7!?-see 'Tricks & Traps·. as well as the 'Details' chaρter. Α note about move order. Black could also play Ι O... cxd4 11 cxd4 and only then Ι 1... .iιg4. and that will transpose into the lines we are considering. however. by delaying the capture οπ d4. Black has more options ίπ the 'Seville Variation'-see later on. At top leνels Grίinfeld. ιι f3 tZΊa5 Aiming to force the bishop to give υρ its powerful position οπ the a2-g8 diagonal. At this point there are two main moves. either (Α) 12 .iιd3 ΟΓ (Β) 12 .iιxf7 +. We wiII analyse both continuations: (Α) 12 .iιd3 12..• cxd4 Ι 3 cxd4 .iιe6 Here is the fιrst critical point of the opening. Ιπ classic Grίinfeld style. Black's pair of bishops take charge of the two Strategy 53 main diagonals: a2-g8 and al-h8 respectively. Now White has a choice: (ΑΙ) 14 1Icl (Α2) 14 d5 (Α3) 14 'ii'a4. Kramnik. playίng White. ίη his 1998 match against Shirov. preferred the fιrst of these options. (Α Ι) 14 1Ic Ι .txa2 Ι 5 'ii'a4 White sacrifιces the a-pawn. taking the initiative while Black's pieces are temporarily discoordinated. lη this position. 15 d5 has aJso been tried. but after Ι S... .tb3 16 'ii'e Ι e6 17 'ii'b4 eχd5 18 1Ic5 .tc4! '9 i.χc4 lbχc4 20. ::Ιχd5 'ii'χdS! 2' eχdS lbχe3 22 1Ic Ι lbχdS 23 'ii'χb7 lbe3. Black has decent compensation. 15 ••• .tb3 Until 1994 everybody went for the recommended 15 ....te6. ΗοννθνθΓ. since Anand demonstrated the teχt move ίη his game against Yusupov ίη Wijk aan Zee. 1994. it has taken over as the most popular line. lη that game. Black had the better position after Ι S... .tb3 16 'ii'b4 b6 17 d5 'ii'd6!. 16 'iνM b6 17 i.g5 54 Strategy Κramnik deviates from the variation employed by Yusupov. The bishop pins the e-pawn, and provokes the advance of Black's f-pawn, which blocks the bishop οη g7, 17•••f6 18 ..tf4 Kramnik has also played 18 ..th4 ίη this position (KramnikShirov, Candidates match 1998), but couldn't prove White's adνantage there either. Ι 8 ... e5 19 ..te3 19 .i.g3!? exd4 20 tΔxd4 (5 21 ..td6 ..txd4+ 22 'iixd4 tΔb7 23 e5 has been suggested as an alternative. It's murky: White has a strong central position, and Black's king is exposed, but Black is stiII a pawn up, and if he can exchange pieces ννίΙΙ stand weII. Practical tests are needed! 19...exd4 20 tΔxd4 ..tf7 21 ..ta6 The naturaJ continuation 21 %:tfd Ι would be met by 21 ...%:tc8 and Black is better. Therefore White wisely brings his bishop to the a6 square, preventing his opponent's development. 21 •••%:te8 22 %:tfdl Strategy 55 The opening battle is over and Black has, thus far, come through the complications unscathed. Ιπ this critical position, Black has a choice between two distinct paths. He could keep the queens οπ the board and continue the complications: 22 ... 'ίIfb8 23 ltJb5 (23 ltJc6 ltJxc6 241Ixc6 1Id8 25 :dc Ι 'ίIfe5 26 .i.c4 is better for Black) 23 ... .tfθ 24 ltJd6ltJb7 25 ltJxe8 .i.xb4 26ltJxf6+ Φg7 27ltJd7 'ίIfe8 28 .i.d4+ ~h6 29 .i.e3+ g5 30 .i.xb7 1Id8 31 .i.c6unclear, has been suggested. Whether anyone is brave enough to test this is another matter. Alternatively, if you want to avoid this, then you may follow Shirov's pragmatic decision to trade queens, and keep a slightly better position after 22 ... 'ii'e7 23 'ίIfxe7 :Xe7 24 ltJc6 ltJxc6 25 1Ixc6 Here, ίπ the fιrst game of their candidates match from 1998, Kramnik and Shirov agreed a draw. Let's return to the position after Black's 13 ... i..e6, and look at another alternative: (Α2) 14 d5 56 Strategy This is a sharp and Controversial continuation. White sacrifιces the exchange for a long-term initiative, relying οη Black's weakened kingside and misplaced knight οπ a5, This variation opens the doors οη an enormous number of possibilities for both sides. LΠ this book Ι don't want to get lost ίπ the deep forest of lines, but Ι ννίΙΙ indicate the most popular COntinuations. Ι leaνe it υρ to you to test other ideas. Let's proceed with the main νariation. 14... .i.xa Ι Ι 5 'iixa Ι f6 16 .i.h6 White has an interesting alternative to this main move, that is to centralise the queen immediately: 16 'iid4 .i.f7 (16 ....i.d7 17ltJf4!? 'iic7 18 'iib4 b6! 19 'iixe7 :ae8 20 "b4 ltJb7 with an unclear game) 17 .th6 :e8 18 .i.b5 e5 19"f2 :e7 20 .i.e3 :c8 21 .txa7ltJc4 22 .tc5 :ec7 with balanced chances, Gligoric-Portisch, Nice 1974 16...1:te8 lπstead, 16 ...:f7?? would be disastrous: 17 dxe6 'iixd3 18 eχf7+. However, 16 .....b6+ 17 'ith Ι .td7 (Shamkovich) returning the eχchange, deserνes attention. (Incidentally, 17...:fd8 Strategy 57 didn't work out well for Black ίπ Bronstein-Boleslaνsky, candidates play-off match, 1950: Ι θ .ttb Ι 'ilYc5 19 j.d2 b6 20.1b4 'fic7 21 1:tc Ι 'fib7 22 'fib Ι with a winning position forWhite.) 17 .ttbl a6! Aiming to reactiνate the knight with ... b5 and ... tίJc4. 18 'fid4 The queen centralises, coνering the important g l-a7 diagonaJ, as well as forcing Black to retreat the bishop. 18•.•.1" 19 Ι4 1:tc8 20 f5 b5 21 fxg6 hxg6 22 a4 tίJc4! Black has been able to consolidate his pieces, and now, by deliberately sacrifιcing a pawn οη the queenside, he obtains a solid position-and he is stiII the exchange υρ. 23 axb5 axb5 24 :Xb5 tίJe5 (analysis by Shamkoνich). The knight has reached an excellent outpost, and Black can breathe more easily. Ι would 58 Strategy recommend you test your technical skills by practising this position. It is also worth looking at the νariations beginning with 16:b ι, 16"iί'b Ι , and 16 Wh Ι , We return again to the critical position after 13 ... i.e6 to anaJyse ΟΠθ more possible continuation for White: (Α3) 14 "iί'a4 White intends to play d5 and to sacrifice the exchange anyway, but ίπ this case he is trying to find a more actiνe position for his queen. 14••. a6 It seems illogical to chase the white queen with L1 ... i.d7. After 15 'ifa3 e6 16 J:.ac Ι b6 17 :fd Ι, White has the better prospects. 15 d5 b5! This is the best reply. White has a chance for a nice miniature after 15 ... i.d7 16 'ifb4 i.xal 17 .tb6! winning material, and the game. Strategy 59 16 Wb4!? It is worth testing the position after 16 Wa3!? For instance, L6 ... .Jtxa Ι 17 %:ιxa Ι iιd7 18 e5 e6, with a sharp game ίη prospect. 16... iιxa Ι 17 ':xa Ι iιd7 It would be interesting to trγ 17 ... %:ιc8, but Black should be ready to meet a possible attack after 18 tDd4 i-d7 19 h4. Is the attack really dangerous? As far as Ι know, ηο one has tested it yet ίη tournament praxis. 18 'iνd4 ί6 19 e5 fxe5 Νονν 19 ... ':c8 is bad because of 20 e6 iιe8 21 i-h6 tDc4 22 iιxf8 Φχf8 23 a4. 20 "ifxe5 Wb8! This last moνe deserνes attention. It is imperatiνe that Black fιnds counterplay ΟΓ his position could become hopeless. With that ίη mind, Black cannot afford the lυχυrγ of 60 Strategy waiting-he needs to coordinate his pieces at any cost. Therefore this pawn sacrifιce was the οηlΥ good solution at this point. 21 'fIixe7 'ue8 22 'fIic5 Obviously not 22 'fIixd7?, because of 22 ...,Uxe3. 22 ••• tLΊb7 23 'fIic Ι Or 23 'iWd4 'fIie5. forcing a trade of queens, with the better endgame for Black. 23 ...tLΊd6 24 tDg3 ..tf5 25 'iid2! Up until this moment we have been following a theoretical based οη the game Browne-Kudrin, US Ch. 1989, There, the continuation 25 tDxf5 tDxf5 26 ..tf2 'iie5 favoured Black. However, after the text move, the position is still complex. Both sides have chances. lίηθ, Strategy 61 Exchange Variation, Seνille Variation Ι d4 lί)f6 2 c4 g6 3 lί)c3 d5 4 cxd5 lί)xd5 5 e4 lί)xc3 6 bxc3 j",g7 7 j",c4 c5 8 lί)e2 lί)c6 9 j",e3 ο-ο Ι Ο ο-ο ~ι4 Ι Ι f3 lί)a5 (8) 12 j",xf7 + The so-called Seville Variation became popular after the uncompromising and dramatic 1987 World Championship battle between Anatoly ΚaΓpoν and Garry ΚaspMoν. ΚaΓpoν employed this hitherto overlooked νariation to try to undermine Κasparov's confιdence ίπ the Grϋnfeld Defence. Since their match, the Seville Variation has been tested at aII leνels by many prominent players and remains οnθ of the most popular and exciting νariations for both sides. Ιη ουΓ analysis we wiII refer to the games played by ΚaΓpoν against ΚaspMoν, as weII as more recent games by other prominent advocates of the Grϋnfeld Defence. 12•.. :ΧΠ 13 fxg4 1Σxf1 + 14 ΦΧΙI 62 Strotegγ Α critical position has arisen where Black has a choice of continuations. Before we consider them, let me sketch out the strategy for both sides. White is trying to prove that his centre is strong enough to withstand severe pressure. If the centre remains intact then he can restrict the black pieces' mobility and quell counterplay. Οπ the other hand, Black is hoping to eχploit the weakness of White's pawn structure. Relying οπ his g7 bishop and White's weak c4 square (thanks to the knight οπ a5 and the absence of the light-squared bishops), he is going to start the battle ίπ the centre as quickly as possible. Bearing ίη mind the strategic goals mentioned above, Black has the following continuations aνailable to him: (Β Ι) 14... cχd4 15 cχd4 e5; 14 ... cχd4 15 cχd4 'iWb6; (Β3) 14...'iWd6; (Β4) 14 ...'iid7 (Β2) Let's start with line (Β Ι), based Candidates Match 1998. οπ the game Kramnik-Shirov, Strategy 63 (8 Ι) 14••• cxd4 15 cxd4 e5 This immediate counterthrust allows Black either to equalize the game after 16 dxe5 ~xθ5 17 'ii'xd8+ ':xd8 when White's doubled extra pawn is irreleνant; ΟΓ to employ a blockade using the knight's manoeuνre lba5-c4-d6. 16 d5lbc4 White has to decide what to do with his bishop. Many players prefer to aνoid an exchange of bishop for knight. For example, Seirawan, ίπ his game against Popoνich, Manila Olympiad 1990, did well after 17 ~α 1If6 18 Φg Ι :fθ 19 'ii'e Ι ~h6 20 lbg3 'ii'a6 2 Ι ..t.th Ι ifa4 22 ~g Ι b6 23 'ii'c3 ':f7 24 ':b Ι ~d2 25 'ii'd3 'ii'xa2 26 d6!. Οη the other hand, Kramnik considered that Black's knight was annoying, and didn't hesitate to trade his bishop. 17 'ii'd3 lbxe3 + 18 'ii'xe3 'ii'h4 19 h3 .th6 The relocation of the bishop οπ g7 onto the h6-c Ι diagonal is quite common ίπ the Seνille νariation. We will see it repeated ίπ other lines. Now Black dominates the dark squares, which leads ΟΠθ to question White's decision to trade his bishop for the knight. 64 Strategy 20'i'd3':f8+ 21 ΦΙL 'it'f2+ 22~hl 'i'e3! Although the position ο( the queen, rook and bishop look impressiνe, ίπ reality there is nothing (or Black to attack. Therefore forcing the trade of queens is a good decision. Black's pawn disadνantage is well compensated by the pawn majority οη the queenside, as well as White's weak pawns οη a2 and e4. (Kramnik-Shiroν, 3rd game, Candidates match 1998). Seνille Variation (82) 14 .•• cxd4 15 cxd4 'i'b6 Strategy 65 Unlike the previous νariation (Β Ι), Black prefers to delay the counterthrust .... e5, but sti/l keeps it ίπ his arsenal, giving priority to activating the queen. 16 ~gl Grandmaster Shamkovich suggested playing 16 ... e5 ίπ this position. His recommendation certainly deserνes attention. It is based οπ the fo/lowing lίne: 17:b Ι 'i'e6 (it looks logical to place the queen behind the pawn, not ίη front) Ι θ d5 'i'xg4 19 'i'd3 b6 with chances for both sides. 16•••'i'e6 17 'iί'd3 Ιπ his book Beating the GrunfeId (Batsford, 1992) ΚaΓpoν wrote: Ί returned the pawn while keeping all ο! my positional trumps.' 17•••'i'xg4 18 :fl :c8 19 h3 'i'd7 20 d5lDc4 The same knight's manoeuvre as we wi/l see throughout this book. 21 ~d4 66 Strategy 50 far we have been foIIowing Κarpoν-ΚaspMoν, 9th game of their match ίη Seville, 1987, Ιη this position Κasparov continued 21 ... e5, and after 22 dxe6 'iWxe6 23 i.xg7 rt;xg7 24 lίJf4 'ifd6 25 'ίWc3 + rt;h6, White had aπ edge. However, it seems that Black can do better than this. 21 ••• lίJe5 22 'Wb3 b5 23 lίJf4 lίJf3+ Α nice tactical shot. 24 'ίWxf3 i.xd4+ 25 Φhl 1:[f8 with chances for both sides. Seνille Variation (Β3) 14••.'iWd6 Black maintains pressure οη the d4 square, combining it with an attack οη the h2 pawn. 15 e5 White continues his strategy of limiting the power of the fιanchettoed bishop. The downside of the e-pawn's advance is Black's domination of the triangle of light squares c4, d5, e4, along with control of the f-file by the rook. Strategy 67 Some players feel uncomfortable giving away lίght-square control ίη the centre and play instead 15 'it>g ι. White takes care of his king, and is wiIIing to return an eχtra pawn to maintain a solid position ίη the centre. However, ίη this line Black also has enough counterplay. The game may continue, for example, 15 .....e6 16 'i'd3 cxd4 (the immediate 16 .....xg4 favours White after 17 d5!) 17 cxd4 I:td8!? 18 g5 tbc4 19 ~α b5 with equal chances. However, Black could also foIIow 16 ... 'i'c4 17 'i'xc4+ tbxc4 18 ~α cxd4 19 cxd4 e5!? 20 d5 ~h6!? with a complex game (Κarpov-Κasparov, 11th W.Ch.1987); ΟΓ 20 ... tbd6 (Naumkin-Neverov, Moscow, 1989). 15 •••'i'd5 16 ~α 1:tf8 17 'it>g Ι ~h6 Once agaίn, Black's bishop takes charge of the c l-h6 diagonal. 18 h4 With the idea g4-g5, to lock out the bishop. 18•• :iVf7 19 ~g3 ~e3 + The bishop escapes! And the queen is coming too ... 20 'it>h2 'ίWc4! 21 I:tbl b6 22 :b2 "d5 23 'i'd3 tbc4 Black has relocated his queen and knight so as to maintain control over the light squares and keep the pressure οη White's centre. 24:bl 68 Strategy Up until this point we have been following another game (5th) from the Κarpov-Κasparov match ίη 1987. Then Κasparov played 24 ... b5. But later when analysing the position after White's 24th move, Garry discovered an impressive refutation: 24 ••. g5!! 25 ':dl gxh4 26 .i.xh4 .i.a 27 "ifh3 'ii'e4 28 .i.xe7 ':f7 and Black has a very strong attack. ΒΥ the way, if 28 ...'iί'xe2?, then 29 "ii'h6 ':f7 30 "ii'g5+ ':g7 31 'ii'f4 ':xe7 32 "ii'g5+ ~f8 33 "ii'f6+ ~e8 34 'ii'c6+ ':d7 35 e6 lt!e5 36 exd7 + lt!xd7 37 "ii'f3 "ii'xf3 38 gxf3, and the game is even. (Κasparov) The Iίne (84) 14••• 'ii'd7 is offered to readers as a test position ίη the Chapter 'Test Your Skill'. Strategy 69 Classical Line. 4 ~f4 System The CΙassical, ΟΓ -4 ~f-4 System, has been regarded for decades as a solid and respectable νaήation for White. It has enjoyed a resurgence ίπ popularity ίπ recent years, so theory continues to deνelop. Ι d4 lZΊf6 2 c4 g6 3 lZΊc3 d5 4 ~f4 White aims to control the h2-b8 diagonal, and specifically the central square e5. White delays the adνance of the e-pawn, maintaining the possibility of adνancing the pawn to e4 ίπ ΟΠθ moνe (giνen the chance). Now Black has the choice of (Α) 5 ... 0-0 ΟΓ (Β) 5 ... c5. We will analyse both lines. 70 Strotegy (Α) 5 .•. 0-0 61Σcl White develops the rook οη the c-fιle. combining with the bishop οη (4 to target the c7 pawn. The alternative continuation 6 cxd5lΩxd5 7lΩxd5 'ifxd5 8 j.xc7lΩc6!? gives Black the chance to sacrifιce the c7 pawn and seize a long-term initiative. For example. 9 lΩe2 j.g4 Ι Ο f3 1Σac8 Ι Ι lΩc3 'ife6 12 j.f4 j.xd4! (Black offers a piece to keep White's king trapped ίη the middle.) 13 fxg4 g5!? (Deflecting the bishop from the centraJ square e5.) 14 j.xg5 1Σfd8 15 'i'b3 'i'xg4 16 j.f4 e5 and the position is verγ complex. Chances are balanced. Of course. White could also play the orthodox 6 e3. 6 ..•dxc4 Instead, 6 ... c5 is possible, as occurred ίη Van Wely-Shirov, Wijk-aan-Zee, 1996, The game continued: 7 dxc5 j.e6 8 lΩd4 lΩc6 9 lΩxe6 fxe6 Ι Ο e3 'ίi'a5 Ι Ι 'i'a4 'i'xc5 12 i.e2 d4!? 13 exd4 lΩxd4 14 j.e3 1Σad8 15 ο-ο 'i'e5!? with an unclear position ίη which both sides can play for the win. Strategy 71 7 e4 Το justify his fιfth move, White pushes the e-pawn two squares so as to gain control of the centre. Some players prefer the more solid 7 e3. For example, just recently Anatoly ΚaΓρoν employed this lίηθ ίη the rapid match against Κasparov. Their game is defιnitely worth a look: 7 e3 .1e6 8 ttJg5 .1g4!? (Ιτ is more common for Black το play 8 ... .1d5-Babula-Κasparov, Prague 200 Ι , for example) 9 f3 .1c8 Ι Ο .1xc4 c6!? (This is certainly a novelty. lηstead, Ι 0 ...e6 Ι Ι h4 h6 12 ttJge4 ttJd5 Ι 3 g3 b6 14 .1b3 ltJa6 15 ~f2 .1b 7 16 'iie2 draw, Dreev-Sutovsky, Essen 2000.) 11 'iib3 e6 12 ttJge4 ttJd5 13 .1xd5 cxd5 14 ttJd6 ttJc6! 15 ttJxb7 'iih4+ 16 .1g3 'ifh6! 17 ttJe2 .1xb7 18 'ilxb7 ltJaS 19 'ili'b4 ttJc4 20 Iιxc4, with an unbalanced position, Κarpov-Κasparov, game Ι, rapid match, New York 2002. 72 Strategy 7 ... c5 Α thematic counterthrust, attacking the centre while White's king remains in the middle of the board. Black has two other alternatiνes at this point: a) 7 ... ~g4 and b) 7 ... b5!? (highly proνocatiνe). Let's briefly look at these: 7... ~g4 8 ~xc4 ~xO 9 gxf3 lDh5 Ι Ο ~e3 e6 Ι Ι lDe2 a6 12 lDg3 .h4, unclear (Shamkoνich-Grigorian, USSR 1973); b) 7 ... b5!? 8lDxb5 lDxe4 9 ~xc7!? (9 lDxc7? is a mistake, because of9 ... e5!) .d7 10 ~xc4 a6 IIlDa3lDc6 12 ο-ο! -'xc7 (12 ... lDxd4? 13lDe5!) 13 .i.d5lDf6 14 ~xc6 1%b8 15 lDe5! .a7 16 ~o ~b7 (16 ...1%xb2? 17 lDc6 'iWd7 18, lDc4 1%b5 19 a4 winning for White) 17, lDac41lbd8 18 .b3 .i.xf3 19 .xf3 and White has the upper hand, Portisch-Tukmakoν, Biel 1996. 8dxc5 If White had decided to play 8 d5, then Black refutes it with 8 ... b5! and after 9 e5 lDh5 Ι Ο ~e3 ~g4, he stands better. 8 ...'iWa5 Strategy 73 Black prefers not to exchange queens, but instead keeps the pressure οπ White's king. υρ 9 e5 lίJh5!? The knight not ΟΠΙΥ attacks White's bishop opens υρ his own dark-squared bishop. οπ f4, but also Ι Ο ~e3 lίJc6 Ι Ι lίJd2 Aiming to eliminate the pawn οπ c4, but also threatening to trap Black's knight οπ h5 with the outlandish g2-g4. It leaνes Black with πο choice but to play... Ι 1••• lίJxe5 12 lίJxc4 $0 far we have been following the game Yusupov-Korchnoi, Horgen 1994. lπ this position Black decided to return his queen to d8 and was a bit worse after 12 ...'i/ί'd8?! 13 ~e2 lίJxc4 14 ~xc4 lίJf6 15 ο-ο 'ti'c7 16 h3 .td7 '7 b4. lπstead Black could play 12.•• lίJxc4 13 ~xc4 lίJf6 74 Strategy The knight returns from the edge ο! the board aiming to jump into e4, but aIso g4 attacking the important bishop οη e3. 14 h3 lLJe4 and BIack has good prospects. Now Iet's take a Iook at the other line: (Β) S... cS Black does not wait, but strikes White's centre straightaway. 6 dxcS 'ίWaS The same thematic queen manoeuvre as we have seen previous νariations, pinning White's knight Το the king. ίπ 7 cxdS lLJxdS Severe pressure οη the c3 square forces White to pIay... 8 'ίWxdS .itxc3 + the Strategy 75 9 SΙd2 This is the οηlΥ move, tempting Black into continuing 9...SΙxd2?, which after Ι Ο 'iixd2 'iixc5 Ι Ι :c Ι 'ilf5 12 tbd4! 'ild7 13 'ilh6 tbc6 14 tbxc6 bxc6 15 'ilg7 gives Whίte aπ obvious advantage (Timman-Littlewood, Holland-England 1969). 9 ••• SΙe6!? Black hopes that White will capture the bishop οη c3. After Ι Ο iιxc3?! 'iWxc3 + Ι Ι 'iId2 (Ι Ι bxc3 SΙxd5 is better for Black) Ι 1... 'ilxc5 is equal. 10 'iixb7 SΙxd2+ 11 tbxd2 ο-ο!? 76 Strategy Another nice trick. If White is tempted by 12 lixa8?, then after 12 ....:td8 (threatening mate οη d2) 13.:td Ι .tdS! White's queen is captured! 12 b4 'ifa4 13 e3! Speedy development is needed. 13 .•• ~d7 13 ... ~c6 is obviously bad, because of 14 .tbS. 14 a3 Step by step, White secures his position, maintaining his material adνantage. 14••• .:tfd8 15 'ii'a6 'ii'c2 16 'ii'd3 Chasing Black's queen, attempting to trade it-White is, after a11, two pawns υρ. 16•• :i!t'a4 17 'ίi'c3 Ιπ the absence of Black's dark-squared bishop, White's queen takes full control over the long diagonal and supports the Strategy 77 strong and mobile pawn chain οη the queenside. The only question is--f8 17 'iWχd4 i.xd4 18 Φe2 and White is defιnitely better'. Κasparov had already used 9 ... i.g4 ίπ his game against Yermolίnsky ίπ Wijk aan Zee ίπ Ι 999-successfully. What's Hot 81 10 :bl! The text move not οπlΥ threatens to take the b7 pawn, but the c5 pawn as well after :b5. Instead, Κasparov convincingly met Ι Ο :c Ι with Ι O... ~xO! Ι Ι gxf3 e6 12 d5?! exd5 Ι 3 exd5 tLJd7 14 c4 'iWb6! 15 ~h3 (15 ~e2 'ii'd6 16 'ίtfl (5! 17 Φg2 ο-ο 18 ~f4 ~e5 19 ~xe5 tLJxe5 20 (4 tLJc6 21 :ce Ι tLJd4 with initiative MirovshchikovVotaνa, Pardubice 2000) 15 ... f5! 16 ο-ο 'ilfd6 17 ~f4 i.e5 18 :fe Ι 0-0-0 19 ~xe5 tLJxe5 20 'iVc3 :he8 21 :e3 'iVf6 22 (4 tLJd7 23 ~g2 'iVxc3 24 :cxc3 tLJf6 25 iιf3 :xe3 26 fxe3 :d6 27 :a3 ..t>b8 28 :b3 :a6 29 a3 tLJe8 30 e4 fxe4 31 ~xe4 tLJd6, with good winning chances for Black ίπ view οί his superior pawn structure and strong knight against bad bishop, Yermolinsky-Κasparov, Wijk aan Zee, 1999. ΒΥ the way, Ι Ο tLJe5?! is poor: Ι 0 ... ~xe5 Ι Ι dxe5 tLJc6, with the idea ...:d8, gaining the initiative. 10 ••• a6 Ι Ο :b Ι was fιrst employed by Timman against lνanchuk ίη Linares ίπ 1992. Ιη that game White was afraίd to take οπ b7, 82 What's Ηοι perhaps because it was unknown territory. Instead Timman played Ι Ι %:tb3 and the game continued Ι 1... b5 12 d5?! (12 dxc5!? is preferable) 12 ... tLJd7 13 c4 b4! 14 'iWc2 'fIc7 15 tLJd2 tLJb6 16 (4 a5 17 ~d3 a4 18 1:ιb Ι g5!? with an unclear game ίη which White probably risks more than Black. The curious Ι Ι %:tc Ι was also played recently: Ι Ι ... ~xO 12 gxf3 e6 13 d5 exd5 14 exd5 ttJd7 15 c4 'iWb6 16 ~e2 0-0-0 17 ο-ο 'iWc6, and Black is fιne, as ίη Cheparinoν­ Arkhangelsky, Mondariz, 2000. 11 %:txb7! It is strange that until this game ηο one had tried to play the obνious moνe and take the pawn. Either they trusted lνanchuk's analysis ΟΓ they weren't looking deeply enough. It is also possible that facing this νariation somebody wiII haνe the courage to test Ι 0 ... b6!? instead of Ι 0 ... a6, with the foIIowing ίη mind: Ι Ι %:tb5 'iWa4 12 dxc5 ο-ο. 11 ... i.xf3 This is the correct decision as Black is aίming to take control of the d4 square. Ι 1... tLJc6 12 i.c4 only transposes, as What's Hot 83 12... 0-0 13 .td5 ':ace 14 ο-ο .txf3 15 gxf3 cxd4 16 cxd4 'iWxd2 17 .txd2 lbxd4 18 .tb4! is a worse version of the endgame for Black. 12 gxf3 lLΊc6 13 .tc4! This is the most precise move. allowing White to continue his development and at the same time creating the threat of .tc4-d5. 13 (4 ο-ο 14 .tg2 would be inferior as Black has 14....:fbe. gaining the initiative. White's idea is becoming clear. Although d4 faJls. he still has an active pair of bishops and a rook οπ the 7th rank. 13 ... 0-0 Here Black could have tried a highly provocative move: 13 ... e6!? although White gets the better game after 14 ο-ο! (14 e5 cxd4 15 cxd4 'iWxd2+ 16 ΦΧd2 .txe5!-with the idea to fork οη a5-17 dxe5? 0-0-0+; ΟΓ 14 .txe6lLΊdS! 15 .td5 lbxb7 16 .txb7 ':be 17 j.c6 + Φe 7 Ι θ ο-ο cxd4 19 .txd4 .txd4 20 'ilfxd4 'i'g5 + 21 ~h Ι ':hde 22 .td5 is equal) 14 ... cxd4 15 cxd4 'iWxd2 16 .txd2 lLΊxd4 17 Φg2. 84 What's Hot Alternatively, 13 ... cxd4 14 cxd4 'iVxd2+ 15 ~xd2 ttJχd4 16 f4 tt)f5!? 17 1:Ib6 tt)xe3 18 Wxe3 a5 19 .i.b5 + Φf8 20 1:Id Ι is aJso better for White. 14 ο-ο Another precise move from Kramnik. White creates a serious positional threat-to play d5. The loss of the pawn οπ c3 is irreleνant. 14 .i.d5 1:Iac8 15 .i.xc6 1:Iχc6 16 ο-ο (16 Φe2 1:Ifc8!) 16...cxd4 17 cχd4 'iVxd2 18 .i.xd2 .i.xd4 191:1xe7 1:Ic2 and White can't save his extra pawn, so the game is equal. 14 ... cxd4 Ι 5 cxd4 15 ....i.xd4! Black re-establishes material balance. However, as White has two bishops and an active rook οη the seventh rank, there is πο doubt who stands better. We can conclude that White's opening has been a success, and that Black must fιght hard if he is to save the position. What's Hot 85 Instead of the game continuation. Black would get a poor endgame after 15 ... 'ii'xd2 16 .txd2 tL\xd4 17 'it>g2. It is unfortunate for Black that the attempt at perpetual check after 15 .. :ii'h5 does not work because of 16 .td5 'ii'xf3 17 :cl!. 16.td5! The best reply for White. If instead Ι 6 .th6 .tg7 Ι 7 .td5 .txh6 18 'ifxh6 tL\d4 19 'ii'e3, Black can hold using the trick 19 ...tL\f5! 20 'ifg5 (20 _b3 :ad8!) 20 ... e6 21 .tb3 h6 22 _f6 tL\g7. 16•.. .tc3 Aνoiding an unpleasant endgame after 16 ..."ifxd2 Ι 7 .txd2 :fc8 (Black would not get enough compensation for the exchange after 17... tL\e5 18 .th6 e6 19 .txfθ exd5 20 f4 tL\f3+ 21 Φg2 dxe4 22 .tb4) 18 f4! e6 19 .tb3 :a7 20 :xa7 tL\xa7 2 Ι f5!. 17 'ii'cl Here White had seνeral plans. for example: 17 'ife2 tL\d4 18 .txd4 .txd4 19 :xe7 'ii'd8! 20 :χΠ!? :χΠ 21 :d Ι :c8! 22 :Xd4 :c Ι + 23 :d Ι Φfθ! and the game looks equal. 86 What's Hot Or, 17 "iνc2 ':ac8! 18 ~xc6 (18 ~b6 "iνa3! 19 'iWc Ι ~b2!) 18...%lxc6 19 :Xe7 and White is winning a pawn, but has ηο time to consolidate his pieces: 19 .. :iνh5 20 "iνd Ι g5! (with the idea to relocate the rook οη h6) 21 (4 "iνh3! 22 fxg5 .:ιc7! 23 'iWd6 (23 :xc7? is dangerous because of 23 ... i.e5) 23 ....:.xe7 24 'iWxe7 'iWg4+ 25 'itih Ι "iνf3+ with perpetual check. 17••• lDd4 The idea behind Ι 7 'iWc ι is Ι 7...%lac8 Ι 8 ~b6 'iWb4 Ι 9 a3! "iνb2 20 'iί'xb2 ~xb2 2 Ι a4! and White will soon get a passed pawn οη the queenside. 18 i.xd4 ~xd4 19 %lxe7 Ιπ winning a pawn, White has had to go into a position where there are bishops of opposite colour--giνing Black drawing chances. Ιπ such positions one of the most important factors is the actiνity of your pieces. Therefore Black's next moνe is the best reply, aiming to trade the actiνe rook and so relieνing unpleasant pressure from the pawn οη f7. Whαt's Hot 87 19•••:a7! 20 :xa7 Jι..xa7 Now Black's intention is to build υρ a battery οη the b8-h2 diagonal with a direct threat to White's king. 21 f4! White cannot aIIow BIack to establish a dark-square blockade. 21 ••• 'ίWd8 22 'ίWc3 Jι..b8 23 'ii'f3 It was also possibIe to play: 23 'ίWg3 'ii'd6 24 f5 'ii'χg3 + (24 ... 'ίWf6 25 f4 pIanning 'ii'g5 with compIete domination) 25 hχg3 gxf5 26 eχf5 ':d8 27 Jι..b3 ..tg7! (27 ...:d2 28 ':c ι Jι..a7 29 f6! targeting the f7 pawn.) 28 ':c ι ..tf6. White has simίlar technical probIems to the game. 23 •••'ii'h4 24 eS gS! With this energetic counter-punch BIack destroys White's stronghoId ίη the centre, giving Iife to his bishop and renewing the pressure οη the b8-h2 diagonal. It Ieaves White 88 What's Hot πο other choice but to head for an endgame. After aJl, the position is still favourable for him. 25 1:te Ι 'iνxf4 26 'ii'xf4 gxf4 27 e6 fxe6 28 :Ιχe6 Φι7 29 :Xa6 At this point eχperts considered that the game was going to end as a draw. It is undeniable that White has an eχtra pawn, and that Black's position has its shortcomings (the weak pawn οπ h7 and the bishop without an outpost). However, the eχistence of bishops of opposite colour gives Black chances to hold the game-if he can manoeuνre his rook onto the second rank and the bishop onto the a7-f2 diagonal. 29 ...:Ιf5 If 29 ...%ιdθ 30 %ιa5 ~c7 31 1Ib5! (31 1Ia711χd5 32 1Iχc7+ Φg6) 31 ...1IbS 32 ~b7, with the idea of a4 and bringing the king to f3. If 29 ... f3, then both 30 1Ia3 and 30 1IaS leaνe White with the better position. 30~e4 What's Hot 89 30 ....:.e5?! Α mistaken manoeuvre as White would actually lίke to play f3. Therefore Black loses a tempo. 30 ....:.b5 would have given more chances for a draw: 31 a4 (31 Φg2 ':'b2 32 ~f3 .i.e5 33 ':'a7 + ~f6 34 .i.χh 7 .:r.χf2 +! 35 ~χα .i.d4 + 36 <;t>f3 .i.χa7 is a draw) 31 ....:r.b2 32 a5 .i.e5! 33 ':'a7 + Φf6 34.:r.χh7 .i.d4. 31 f3 ':'e7?! Again, it would have been better to have the rook οπ the second rank: 31 ....:.b5! 32 a4 (32 Φg2 ':'g5+ 33 c.t>fl .:r.h5 leads nowhere) 32....:.b2 33 a5 .:r.a2! White's king is confined to the back rank. 32 a4 ':'a7 33 .:r.b6! 33 .:r.χa7 +? .i.χa7 + is a clear draw: 34 ~g2 .i.b6 35 Φh3 h5 36 'ίttg2 Φf6 37 Φfl Φe5 38 .i.g6 h4 39 Φg2 .i.d8. 33 ••• .i.e5 34 ':'Μ .:r.d7 90 What's Hot 35 ~g2! Avoiding an elegant trick: 35 a5? i.c3 36.ua4 1:.d 1+ 37 ~g2 1%.a Ι , forcing a rook exchange and with it a drawn ending. 35 •..1%.d2+ 36 ~h3! The white king starts its journey. emphasising its superiority over its counterpart. 36 ... h5 Seeing that it was hard to stop the passed pawn, Black declines to go ίη for the usual method of defence, namely putting the rook behind the pawn. Nevertheless: 36 ... 1ιa2!? might have been better: 37 1%.b7 + (37 ~ι4 .uxh2 38 Φf5 1%.b2!?) 37 ... ~f6 38 1%.b6+ ~g7 39 1%.a6 h5. 37 I:[b5 ~6 38 a5 .ua2 39 1%.b6+ What's Hot 91 39 .•• rJte7? Α simple blunder, although Black's position is difficult. White would still need precise technique to ννίη after: 39 ... rJtg7 40 a6 .td4 41 1:.g6+ (41 1:.d6 .te3 42 rJth4 .:ta5! is similar) 41 ... Φf8 (41 ... rJtf7? 42 .:td6 .:ta4 43 .:txd4 wins) 42l:!.e6 .:ta5, White is pressing to ννίη, but it is still unclear whether he can break Black. 40.td5 ι-ο Ιη view of 40 ... .:txa5 (40 ....:te2 41 .:te6+ rJtd7 42 a6 wins) 41 .:te6+ rJtd7 42 .:txe5 rJtd6 43 .:txh5 .:txd5 44 .:txd5+ 'iftxd5 45 rJtg4, Black resigned. After this game, Garry did not risk playing the Grϋnfeld again ίη the match. We spent much time trγing to repair Black's opening, but to ηο avail, so Garrγ took a pragmatic decision and switched to the more solid Queen's Gambit Accepted ίη reply to Ι d4. Even a year after his title match with Kramnik, when Garry had had time to reflect and analyse at length, he mentioned 92 What's Ηοι to me that he still could not answer to θ ... .tg4 9 %:r.b Ι . fιnd a completely satisfactory What then should Black play against the Modern Eχchange νariation? Many Grandmasters, including Κasparov himself, suggest sticking with the more classical move B... lbc6, tried and tested ίπ practice for many years. Υου might well ask, 'Why didn't Garry try this ίπ the London match?' The answer is that he felt that considerable time would have been needed to check aJl the lines before playing θ .. .lbc6, and he was already using υρ too much analytical energy ίπ trying to break down Kramnik's Berlin Defence. This recent game, from the 35th Chess Olympiad ίπ Bled, 2002, confιrms Κasparov's later recommendation of B... lbc6. Ι personally believe that the line played by Black ίπ this game is reliable. J.Marcos White E.Sutovsky BIack Bled Olympiad, 2002 Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 lbf3 .tg7 5 cxd5 lbxd5 6 e4 lbxc3 7 bxc3 c5 8 .te3 'ilfa5 9'ΊlVd2 lbc6 What's Hot 93 The position displayed ίπ the diagram is a perfect illustration of Black's opening strategy: immediate pressure οη White's centre, with crossing laser beams from the queen and bishop cutting through the position. 10 ':cl Ιπ previous years White has also tried to play Ι Ο ':b Ι. Tukmakov-Romanishin, USSR Championship, 1981, continued Ι 0 ... cxd4 Ι Ι cxd4 'ii'xd2 + 12 Φχd2 ο-ο 13 d5 ':d8 14 iLd3 lba5 15 Φe2 f5!? (a thematic counterthrust) 16 ':hcl b6 17 ':c7 fxe4 18 iLxe4 iLa6+ 19 Φel iLb7, with mutual chances. Ι 0 •••cxd4 Ι Ι cxd4 'ii'xd2 + 12 xd2 ο-ο 13 d5 If 13 iLb5, then 13 ... f5!. 13 •••':d8 14 Φel Nowadays, contemporary players use this paradoxical king manoeuvre without a second thought. I'm sure many have 94 What's Hot forgotten how this move stunned the professional chess community when it was first played ίη the elite Soνiet Championship, Moscow, 1981. The 18 year-old future champion Garry Κasparov, playing against the eχperienced Grandmaster Oleg Romanishin, removed his king from the ρίη, placing it back οη its starting square. Ηονν is White going to release his rook οη h Ι? It was the first question ίη the press-centre. But while Romanishin was thinking how to reply, it became apparent that Black needs to play precisely to avoid a bad position. Thus, the natural 14 ... lί:Ίe5 15 lί:Ίχe5 .tχe5 16 f4 .tg7 17 Φα, ΟΓ 14 ... lί:Ίb4 15 .td2, are both bad for Black. Therefore Black has only one decent move at his disposal. 14 ... lί:Ίa5 Ι 5 .tg5 Again, this move has Κasparov's trademark from the game against Romanishin. Against aJternatives, Black gains the upper hand: 15 .tb5 f5! ΟΓ 15 ':c7 e6 16 .tg5 :d7. 15 ••• .td7 Now Black departs from the original game, where Romanishin preferred 15 ....tf6. Then followed: 16 .td2 b6 What's Hot 95 17 ':c7! .i.g4 18 i.a6 e6! 19 tLJg5! i.e5 20 ':'xf7! exd5 21 f4! .i.g7! 22 f5! and White had good winning prospects. The text move is aπ improvement, offering a poisoned pawn οη e7. 16 .i.d3 f5 As we have already seen, this method of attacking White's centre is quite staπdard ίn many lίnes of this νariation. 17 tLJd2 ':dc8 18 Φe2 Now the rooks are connected. 18... e6 19 h4 exd5 20 exd5 ':e8 + 21 Φf3 ':e5 Black doesn't waste time, but attacks the pawn straightaway. White has nothing better than to sacrifιce the exchange, relying οη the strength of his passed pawn to give him compensation. 22 ':c5 b6 23 ':xa5 bxa5 24 i.c4 ':c8 25 ':b Ι White hits the seventh. He must play as actively as possible to compensate for his material disadνantage. 96 What's Ηοι 25 ...%le4 26 %lb7 .ta4 Obviously, not 26 ... %Σeχc4? lΔχc4 27 :Xc4 %Σχd7. 27 d6+ This leads to a forced variation where Black returns the eχchange to stop the pawn promoting. However, the resulting ending is simply good for Black. Unfortunately for White, it is diffιcult to suggest an improvement. 27 ...l:texc4 28lΔxc4 .tc6+ 29 Φe3 .txb7 30 d7 %Σf8 31 g3 Prophylaχis for the coming endgame. ΒΥ positioning pawns dark squares, Black's light square bishop ννίΙΙ not be able to attack them. But White stiII faces a grim defence. οη 31 ...a4 32 .te7 lIa8 33 d8='fi+ :Xd8 34 .txd8 .td5 The theoretical battle is over. Thanks to the power of the ιννο bishops and the eχtra pawn, Black has achieved a winning position. The rest of the game is a good illustration of winning endgame technique. What's Hot 97 35 Φd3 rM7 36 .tg5 'ίPe6 37 .tc Ι .te4+ 38 'ίPe2 .td5 39 'ίPd3 .te4+ Don't be confused, BIack is not going to reρeat the position three times. This is just a practicaI method of getting to the first time control. 40 Φe2 .tb Ι 41 a3 .tf8 42 .tb2 Ι4 43 Φ13 .ta2 44 tαιI2 .td5 + 45Φe2 Of course, not 45 ΦχΙ4? because of 45 ... .th6 +. 45 ... Φf5 46lb13 fxg3 47 fxg3 Φι4 48lbg5 h6 49lbh7 .113+ Ο-Ι RecentIy, chess pIayers of aJI IeveIs have turned their attention to the fianchetto νariation. It is hard to say whether this is just fashion ΟΓ whether it's just a time-out from analyticaJ research ίη the other major Iines. NevertheIess, many new ideas have been generated ίπ this system. 98 What's Hot Υου might be surprised that Ι have preferred to feature a game played ίη a rapid time control rather than the slower classical. The reason? The rapid chess format becomes more and more popular ίη modern competitions, and the speed of play perhaps demands an even more fundamental knowledge of the opening than usual. This game is played by one ο( the most devoted advocates of the fιanchetto variation (or White, former world champion Anatoly Κarpov. A.ΚaΓpov White B/ack Russia vs The World, 2002 ι.Smίrίη Ι d4 lLIf6 2 lLIf3 g6 3 g3 .i.g7 4 .i.g2 ο-ο 5 c4 d5 6 ο-ο 6 •.. dxc4 At this point Black has two continuations. The one played ίη the maίn game by Smirin; and 6 ...c6. This alternative route is also well known to theory. The principal aίm ο( the move is obvious-to support the pawn οη d5, and thus to maintain a fιrm stance ίη the centre, using the symmetrical pawn structure. What's Hot 99 As an eχample, Ι would suggest an analysis of the game Belyaνsky-Smirin. Noνosibirsk, 1995: 6 ... c6 7 cχd5 cχd5 ιr! Γ J 8 lΔc3 lΔc6 9 lΔe5 e6 Ι~H lΔd7 Ι Ι ~e3 lΔb6. (βΥ the way ίη the 13th game Κarpoν-Κasparoν. London-Leningrad, W.Ch. match. 1986, βlack didn't lίke his opponent's knight οη the e5 outpost, attacking it immediately with Ι 1... f6, and after 12 lΔd3 lΔb6 13 ~Ω fS 14 lΔe5 ~d7 15 'ii'd2 lΔc8 16 'ii'e3 ~h8 17 :fd Ι lΔd6 18 b3 :c8 19 :ac Ι ~e8, obtained a position with equal chances) 12 ~Ω lΔe7 13 :c Ι (13 e4!?) ~d7 14 g4!? :c8 15 e3 (6 16 lΔd3 lΔc4 17 e4 dχe4 18 lΔχe4 lΔd5 19 'ii'e2 b6 20 (5! Φh8 21 (χg6!? (21 lΔg3!?) hχg6 22lΔc3?!. Instead. playing 22 b3!? lΔa3 23, lΔd6 :χc Ι 24 :χc Ι lΔb5 25 lΔχb5 ~χb5 26 'ii'χe6 ~χd3 27 ~χd5 :e8 28 'ii'c6. would haνe left White with the better position. 7 lΔa3 c3 8 bxc3 c5 9 e3 lΔc6 Ι Ο 'ii'e2 ~f5 White obtained a faνourable position after Ι O...'ii'a5 Ι Ι ~b2 lΔd5 12 :'fcl ~g4 13 h3 ~χO 14 ~χf3(iid~14 ... lΔb6! ('f'!~ was better) 15 lΔc4 'ii'a4 16 lΔd2, Akopian::-Κasparoν, Ljubljana, 1996. 11 •••'ii'a5 100 What 's Ηοι Κarρoν repeated the same Iίne against Judith Polgar ίη this tournament. lηstead οί the text move, she preferred to place her queen οη the b6 square. The game continued: Ι 1...'ii'b6 12 ~fd2 cxd4 Ι 3 cxd4 :acB 14 h3 :fdB 15 ~db3 ~fe4 16 .i.b2 g5 17 g4 .i.g6 Ι β ~ac4 'ii'b5 19 .i.fl ~cb4! 20 ~bd2~~d6?)<20 ...'ii'a4! was much better. Here White has a nice tactic) 21 ~c4xd6 'ii'xe2 22 ~xcS!! 'ii'xfl + ®.'ii'xdl 23 ~xe7+ Φf8 24 ~xg6+ wins) 23 ~xfl :xcB 24 :ac Ι, with a clear adνantage to White. 12 .i.b2 :fd8 13 ~d2 cxd4 14 cxd4 .i.g4 Ι 5 f3 .i.e6 16 ~b3 .i.xb3 17 axb3 'ii'b4 Smirin demonstrates his novelty. It is likely that ΚaΓρoν was relyίng οη a game played by his long-time second, Grandmaster Podgaets. There Black played 17 ... ~d5 Ι β (4 ~c3 19 .i.xc3 'ii'xc3 20 ~c4 'ii'b4 21 .i.xc6 bxc6 22 ~a5 :acB 23 'ii'c4 'ii'b6 24 b4, and White had a favourable ρosition, Podgaets-Lerner, Moscow, 2002. 18 :d3 :ac8 19 ~4 'ii'bS ;OΊe4 Although this move looks very attractive, aiming to gain control over the centre, it has a downside, because it makes Whαt'$ Hot /0/ the d4 pawn weak. It might be better to consider here the more solid 20 (4. 20 ..•ltJd7 21 :ad Ι White again played a logical. natural move ίn order to coordinate his pieces. Nevertheless it would be interesting to see what Black had ίn mind if White were to choose instead: 21 .th3. For example. the game could continue 21 ... e6 22ltJd6!? ltJxd4 23 .txd4 .txd4+ 24 Φh Ι iib4 25 :ad Ι iixd6 26 Axd4 iie7 27 iid2 Ac7 28 e5, and it seems to me that White has good prospects. 21 •.. ltJb6 22 .th3 Ac7 23 ltJxb6 iixb6 24 iif2 e61 Νονν, because of the weaknesses οη d4 and b3, White is going to have diffιculty saving his position. 25 f4 Acd7 26 e5 ltJb4 27 A3d2 ltJd5 28 :d3 Ac7 29 .tg2 .tf8 30 g4 ltJb4 31 :3d2 Adc81 Black has shifted his rooks onto the open to invade. c-fιle, and is ready /02 What's Hot 32.ite4 The immediate 32 f5 looks better. 32•..l2Ja2 33 f5! 'ίi'xb3 34 :d3 If 34 :al, then 34 ... l2Jc3. 34...l2Jc3 35 .itxc3 :Xc3 36 ~ι2 b5 37 d5 Hey, what else White απ do? 37....itc5 38 'ίi'13 :Xd3 39 :xd3? Of course, it's a blunder. The continuation with 39 'i'xd3 'ii'b2 + 40 :d2 'ii'xe5 41 dxe6 fxe6 42 fχg6 would have given more practical chances to save the game. 39 ...'i'b2+ 40 'it>h3 exf5 41 gxf5 'i'xe5 42 :d2 .itd6 43 :e2 :c3 44 .itd3 'ίi'f4 45 'ii'e3 h5 46 Φι2 'iνM2+ 47 Φf"1 'ίi'hl + 48 ~ .itc5 Ο-Ι Tricks and Traps The games featured ίη this chaρter are all fairly short. They demonstrate the kind of traps that it is possible to fall into ίη the Grϋnfeld-when playing with White ΟΓ Black. The opening abounds ίη treacherous middlegame positions and sharp tactics. This fιrst game demonstrates what can happen if White takes with his development. I'm grateful for the winner's comments. lίbertίes V.Doroshkeνich White B.Gulko BIack USSR Championship, 1975 Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 7'iWxc4 lbc3 d5 4 lbf3 J..g7 5 'iWa4+ J..d7 6 'iWb3 dxc4 104 Tricks and Traps It iS,tempting to take the pawn οη b7, but it is better not to, as\?)li'xb7 would be met by 7... lΔc6, and Black is better. -"",_.._--~ \7 ....i.c6!?) '---•.. __ . -'--- ... ,_.- 'Τhίs avoids transposition to the well-known theoreticalline 7...0-08 &4, although it is interesting here to test the energetic move 8 ... b5!?: (Gulko). 8lΔe5 'Instead, Ι would prefer to play the solid 8 .i.f4!?, but my opponent Was trying to get the maximum from the position that had arisen.' (Gulko) 8 ••• 0-0 9 .i.g5 .i.d5 Ι Ο "'d3?! It would have been better to play Ι Ο lΔxd5 lΔxd5 11 lΔf3! lΔc6 12 e3 "'d6 13 l1d Ι, with a slightly better position for White. lo...lΔc6 11 e3 Tricks and Traps Ι 05 The careless 11 e4? would permit a tactical shot-II ... ~xe4! However, White should consider Ι Ι a3!? preventing the knight jumping to b4. 11 .••tDb4 Now the complications begin. ΒΥ the way, Ι 1... iιxg2? 12 iιxg2 tDxe5 Ι 3 'ii'b5 didn't look at all good for Black. 12 'ii'd2 c5 13 dxc5 iιxa2? Ί must admit, this combination isn't correct ίπ all Iίnes. It would have been better to play 13 ... 'ii'c7, with the initiative.' (Gulko). 14 tDd3? 'ΜΥ opponent didn't fιnd the refutation at the board. Later analysis showed that 14 iιxf6 'ii'xd2 + 15 xd2 :'fd8 + 16 tDd3 iιc4 (16 ... tDxd3 17 iιxd3 iιc4 18 iιd4!) 17 iιχθ7 iιxd3 18 iιxd8 :'xdB 19 iιxd3 tDxd3 20 ..te2, and so οπ, would have given White a solid adνantage.' 14... tDxd3 + 15 'ii'xd3 iιe6 16 'ii'b5 a6! 106 Tricks and Traps The start of White's troubles. 17 'iί'M a5! 18 'ii'a3 Replying Ι θ 'ii'b5 would lead to the same kind of positions. 18...liJd5 Uncovering the deadly Grϋnfeld bishops. 19liJxd5 Ι nstead , 19 %:ιdl ~xc3+! 20 bxc3 'iί'c7, wouldn't be any better for White. 19 .. :iixd5 20 ~xe7 %:ιfd8! Despite the fact that White was able to take control over the dB square, Black's domination of the d-fιle means much more than the sacrifιced exchange. 21 ~xd8 If 21 ~d6, refusing to accept the exchange sacrifιce, then Black had prepared the aggressive 21 ... b5!. Tricks and Traps /07 21 •..:Xd8 22 'iixa5 'The νariation 22 ~e2 'iid2+ 23 ~fl ~χb2 24 'iiχa5 ~χal 25 'iiχal 'ifc2 is losing. White has ηο defence against the threat 1:r.d8-d2-e2.' (Gulko) 22 •.. ~xb2 23 ~c4 'ifxc4! 24 'ifxd8+ ~ι7 25 1:r.bl If 25 1:r.d Ι ~c3+ 26 1:r.d2 'iia6!. 25 •.. ~c3+ 26 Φdl 'ifa4+ 27~cl 'White has an unpleasant choice of checkmates. For instance. 27 'iί>e2 'ifc2+ 28 ~ "f5+ 29 ~e2 ~c4+ is nice too.' (Gulko) 27 ... ~B ο-ι 108 Tricks and Traps LΠ this next game Black falls into a positional trap. A.ΚaΓpoν White Black G.Κasparov World Championship match, Leningrad 1986 Ι d4 lDf6 2 c4 g6 3 1Dc3 d5 4 lDf3 J..g7 5 'iWb3 dxc4 6 'iWxc4 ο-ο 7 e4 J..g4 8 J..e3 lDfd7 This is the fιrst critical position of the Smyslov Variation of the Russian System. At this point White has a choice to play one of four popular continuations: 9 %:ιd Ι, 9 J..e2, 9 0-0-0, and 9 'ii'b3. lπ this game ΚaΓpov chose: 9 %:ιd Ι lDc6 Ι Ο J..e2 lDb6 Ι Ι 'iWc5 'iWd6 12 e5 Κarρov commented οπ his move: Ά paradoxical decision, at fιrst sight. White not οπlΥ leaves his pawn οπ e5 hopelessly weak, he allows a queen exchange too. But it is not as simple as all that.' 12...'ii'xc5 13 dxc5 lDc8 ~')Dd7? is bad, because of 14 h3! J..xf3 e I .j 15 gxf3!, aiming to Tricks and Trαps ννίη a piece with 16 f4, the pawn οη e5. ίη Ι 09 case one of Black's knights grabs 14 h3! This position also occurred ίη the 15th game of the same match, when Κarρoν preferred to plaY~-4)lΔb5. It allowed Black to equalise with 14 ...:b8! 15 lΔxc7- e6! 16 lΔb5 lΔ8e7 17 :d2 b6 18 cxb6 axb6 19 ~g5 lΔf5 20 b3 h6 21 ~f6 ~xf3 22 ~xf3 lΔχe5. 14...~xf3 15 ~xf3 ~xe5 16 ~xc6 bxc6 17 ~d4 ~f4 18 ο-ο This θΓΓΟΓ costs Black the game. It is true that the key to Black's defence is the redeployment of the obstructive knight οη c8. The correct method was later demonstrated ίη the game Κarpov-Timman, Tilburg 1986 ίη which the ~utch grandmaster found a better, more central, route for the knight: 18 ... e5 19 ~e3 ~χe3 20 fχe3 lΔe7 21 :d7 lΔf5 22 :Xc7 :fc8! and the game was soon drawn. 19 :fel a4 20:e4 ι ιΟ Tricks and Traps Now White has a clear positional advantage. 20 •••.i.h6 21 .i.e5 a3 22 b3 lΔa7 23 %:ιd7 .i.c Ι 24 :Xc7 .i.b2 25lΔa4! Black's pieces are completely discoordinated, which gives White the green lίght to launch his attack. 25 ... lΔb5 26 %:ιχc6 %:ιfd8 27 %:ιΜ! %:ιd5 28 .i.g3 Avoiding the trick 28 lΔxb2? %:ιχeS! 29 %:ιχeS axb2 30 %:ιe Ι lΔc3, and all of a sudden Black is winning. 28...lΔc3 29 lΔxc3 .i.xc3 30 c6 .i.d4 31 %:ιb7 ι-ο Ιη view of his inability to prevent the pawn's march to the eighth rank, Black resigned. Later, Κasparov learned to tackle the Russian System ίη a different way, with the so-called 'Prins νariation' (7 ... lΔa6). As we saw ίη the chapter 'Heroes and Zeros', it is, highly complex. Here, Anand is caught completely off-guard, and swept off the board. Tricks and Traps 111 y'Anand White G.Κasparov Black Siemens Giants, Frankfurt, 1999 Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 lbf3 i.g7 5 'ifb3 dxc4 6 'ii'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 lba6 8 i.e2 c5 9 d5 e6 Ι Ο ο-ο exd5 11 exd5 i.f5 12 J:.d Ι t~13 d6 J:.ad8 14lba4 'ii'c6!? ιr- 1(2. An unusuaJ geometry has appeared οη the queenside (White's queen and knight οη c4 and a4, versus Black's queen and knight οη c6 and a6 respectively). With his last move, Black accommodates the queen οπ a spot where it controls numerous key squares; and it targets the passed pawn οπ d6. 15 i.e3 White's alternatives don't look any better: 15 lbe5 We4; ΟΓ 15 'ii'b5 i.c2! 16 'iί'xc6 bxc6 17 J:.e Ι (17 J:.d2 i.xa4 18 i.xa6 lbd5) 17... i.xa4 18 i.xa6lbdS, Ιη both cases, Black's prospects are better. ι Ι2 Tricks and Traps 16.••J.d7! This seemingly modest move is based οπ deep positional understanding. Practically, White has πο choice but to exchange queens, and after that Black's pieces coordinate ίπ full harmony. It is amazing how Black has already achieved the maximum from the position. From πονν οπ he just needs to demonstrate good technique ίη order to ννίπ. Instead, 16 ...:xd6 17 :Xd6 "'xb5 18 J.xb5 lbxd6 19 J.xa6 bxa6 20 J.xc5 :d8 21 :d Ι J.c2 22 :xd6 :Xd6 23 J.xd6 J.xa4 24 b3 .tc6 25 .tc5 is a Iίttle better for White. 17 'i'xc6 .txc6 18 .txa6 Ι nstead , 18 lbc3 .txc3 19 bxc3 lbxc3 20 .txa6 lbxd Ι 21 :xd Ι bxa6 22 .txc5 .txf3 23 gxf3 1:td7; ΟΓ 18 .td3 .txa4 19 .txe4 .txb2 20 .txb7 .tχal 21 :χal :Xd6 are both winning for Black. 18..•.txa4 Tricks and Traps 113 19 i.xb7 Ι! 19 i.d3 ':xd6! 20 i.xe4 ':xd Ι + 21 ':xd Ι i.xd Ι , wins. 19 ..•i.xd Ι 20 i.xe4 Ι! 20 ':xd Ι ttJxd6 21 i.d5 ttJe4, wins. 20 ... i.xf3 21 i.xf3 i.xb2 22 ':d Ι i.d4 23 i.xd4 Ι! 23 i.f4 Φg7 24 h Ι 'iih5; and 21 'it>h Ι tl)f3! 22 gχO 'iWχf3+ 23 ~gl .th3 are losing. Tr;cks and Traps Ι Ι7 21 ••• ~f5! The outpost οη d3 is very appealing. 22 h3 'ii'h5 23 ~d Ι ? This is a fatal mistake. Although White's position is difficult, it is still possible to resist by playing 23 d6 ίη order to vacate the d5 square for the queen. (23 ... ~xh3 24 'ii'd5). 23 ••• ~xh3! 24 'ii'd4? This loses immediately. After 24 ttJd4 ~g4, White is a pawn down with the worse position, but the game could go οη. 24 .•• ttJd3! 25 gxh3 ~g7! ο-ι lη view of unavoidable materialloss, White resigned. / /8 Tricks and Traps This game is a good iflustration of the strategic importance of the a Ι -h8 diagonal. For once, ίτ is Black that suffers from poor development. I'm grateful το the winner for his comments. S.Palatnik White ι.Stοhl B/ack Tallinn, 1986 Ι d4 lLJf6 2 lLJf3 g6 3 c4 i..g7 4 lLJc3 d5 5 cxd5 lLJxd5 6 g3 c5 Α thematic move, defιning Black's opening strategy. He is going το exploit the power of his fιanchettoed bishop οπ the al- h8 diagonal with support from the pawn οπ c5, knight οπ c6, and queen οπ a5. 7 i..g2 lLJc6 8 ο-ο lLJxc3 9 bxc3 'White has thrown up a fragile barrier οπ the a 1- h8 diagonal, and with his next move Black could have destroyed ίτ. After 9 ... cxd4 Ι Ο lLJxd4! lLJxd4 Ι Ι cxd4 i..xd4 (Ι 1...'ίWxd4 12 11b Ι ο-ο 13 i..e3 'ίWxd Ι 14 11fxd Ι is similar) 12 11b Ι, Black's attack οπ the al- h8 diagonal has won a pawn. However, White would have good play οπ the h 1- a8(!) diagonal.' (Palatnik). Tricks and Traps 119 9 •••0-0 Black is not tempted by the variation above and instead makes a useful developing move. 10 dxcS! 'Instead, Ι Ο e3 would make White's central position stronger, but the price would be the incarceration of the bishop οπ c Ι . Now afterh3 11gl 40 ..tg2 'iWe3 41 fxg6 f5! 42 'i'h4 'ίfί>xg6 43 11a2 'i'e5 Maintaining the battery οπ the weak g3 pawn, and guarding some important squares 'back home'. 44 ~h2 11b Ι 45 ~h3 c2 46 ..tf3 If 46 ':xc2, then 46 ...11xb3, 46 .••cl ='i' 47 ..th5+ 'ίfί>ι7 48 11a7+ ..tc7, cutting out the checks, so White resigned. Solutions 137 Position 9 Botνinnik-Yudoνich, USSR Ch. 1933 The piece sacrifice with 21 lΩeg5 + hχg5 22 lΩχg5 + Φg8 23 "iWχg6 is not correct, because of 23 ...:f6. Howeνer, 21 lΩh4! Now it is impossible to defend the g6 square, for example, 21 ....:f5 22 g4; ΟΓ 21 ... a4 22 ':b Ι axb3 23 ':'xb3 "iWa2 24 ':b2 'iWa4 25, "iWb Ι, and Black is unable to exchange queens. 21 ..."iWe7 22lΩxg6! 22lΩg5+ hχg5 23lΩχg6 and 24lΩxfθ+ is also winning. 22 .•• Φχg6 23 ~h5+!! with ineνίtable mate after 23 .. .'.ttxh5 24 ttJg3+ and 25 'iWe4+, etc.; ΟΓ 23 .. .'~h7 24lΩf6++, and 25 "iWh7 mate. 138 Solutions Pos;tion 10 Seirawan-Popoνic, Manila,I990 26 d6! ltJxd6 Alternatives are also insufficient, e.g. 26 ... .:.d7 27 'li'd5+ Φg7 28 ':'fl! ~f4 29 :Xf4! eχf4 30 tbf5+!! gχΙ5 (30 ... ~fθ 31 tbh6 Φg7 32 g5!) 31 ~d4+ ΦΙ8 32 'li'χfS+ ~g8 33 'li'g5 +, forcing mate. 27 'li'xd6 'ii'xb Ι 28 'li'xd2 a5 After 28 ... 'Ii'bS 29 h3 'li'd7 30 'li'c3 'li'c7 31 'ii'b3 White also stands better. 29 'li'd8+ Φι7 30 'li'g5 h6 Parrγing the deadlythreatof31 tbfS+. 31 'li'xe5+ Φh7 32 h3! This neat prophylactic move makes room for the king to break the ρίπ so that the bishop can take part ίπ the final attack. 32...':'d7 33 tbh5! Another nice shot, forcing Black to resign. Solutions 139 Position 11 Yusupoν-Τukmakoν, USSR World Championship Zonal, 1982 26 d6! Another eχample of this thematic pawn thrust. 26 ••• exd6 27 .i.d5 .i.xe6 lπstead, 27 ...:tb8 28 'ίWχa7 and Black's pieces would be paralys~d. 28 .i.xe6 'ii'e7 29 ':'bc Ι ':'ae8 30 .i.d5 Three pawns for the bishop ίπ this position is insuffιcient compensation considering that the bishop οπ d5 is such a powerful blockader. 30 •••':'c8 31 ':'c6 :Xc6 32 .i.xc6 h5 Απ attempt to give the king some room and for the bishop to enter the game, but it creates a fatal weakness. 33 'ii'a4 .i.h6 34 'ii'e4 Φh7 35 .i.a4! .i.f4 36 .i.c2! ~e6 37 .i.h4 Φg7 38 g3 .i.h6 39 .i.e7! lπ view of unavoidable materiallosses, Black resigned. 140 Solutions Position 12 Goglidze-Botνinnik, Moscow, 1935 23 •••'ii'c2! White cannot surνive. If 24 i.d Ι 'ii'χb Ι 25 :χb Ι lLΊc4, and both 26lLΊb3 1:tab8, ΟΓ 26lLΊχc4 i.χc4 27 1:te Ι i.b4, lead to a hopeless position for White. 24 i.a3 i.xa3 25 :Xa3 'iWxe2 26 'iWxb6 ':'ab8 27 'iWd6 'WWxfl +!! It's aJways great fun to end with a 'grand fιnale'. 28 Φxfl 1:tb Ι + and White resigned ίπ view of mate neχt move. Position 13 Ηϋbner-ΚasΡarον, Brussels 1986 Another tactical masterpiece from Κasparov. It is amazing how he manipulates his pieces so harmoniously, especially Solutions 141 around his opponent's king. 25 ...f3+! 26 gxf3 tίJf4+ 27 Φe3 :f6 28 i...xe7 tίJg2 + 29 Φe2 :χο 30 i...d6 tίJf4 + 31 φ,1 tίJg4 32 :d2 :e8 33 tίJc4 tίJxh2 + 34 ~g Ι tίJg4 35 :fl i...d4 36 i...c5 :g3 + 37 Φh Ι :h3 + 38 <ίt'g Ι tίJh2 Ιη view of 39 ... tίJo mate, White resigned. Position 14 Naumkiπ-Korchπoi, Saint Vincent Open 2003 Black surprised his opponent with a storming exchange 19.••tίJxe5!? It is clearly bad for White to take the knight with 20 dxeS?, because of the simple 20 .. :iWxd2 21 i...xd2 :xd2 and Black wins. 20 i...xd8 :Xd8 Again, the knight οη eS is untouchable. 21 'iW14 tίJc4 The knight accommodates itself οη the 'traditional' Grϋnfeld square, c4. 22 h5 e5 The centre is burning! 23 dxe5 i...xe5 Black has suffιcient compensation for the exchange because of his control of the centre, domination of the bishop pair, and long-term initiative. 24 'iWh4 tίJd2 25 :al :e8 26 i...c2 i...b5 27 tίJg3 i...c6 28 hxg6 hxg6 29 :e Ι 'iWd5 and Black eventually capitalised οη his positional adνantage. sacrifιce. 142 Solutions Position 15 With the king's rook οπ c8, the f8 square has been vacated for Black's king-a useful precaution ίπ case White should break through οπ the h-fιle. 13 ...1:tfc8 is certainly preferable to 13 ... lIac8-as we shall see. 14 e5 Why does White play this move? Although it blocks out the dark-squared bishop, the pawn advance looks odd to me as Black can use the d5 square. However, many players deem this necessary. If White had played instead 14 h5 then Black counters ίη the centre with 14 ...e5! 15 d5 tίΊd4 as has occurred ίn many games. 14••• e6!? There is aJso 14 ... tίΊd8 15 h5 i.b5 16 i.xb5 'iί'xb5 17 hxg6 hxg6 18 'it>g Ι 1:txc Ι 19 tίΊxc Ι lbe6, as ίπ the game Polugaeνsky-Ftacnik, Haninge 1989, where White mistakenly played 20 'ifg4?, and after 20...'iί'bl! Black had the better position. However, after 20 'iί'e4! White has good prospects. 15 lbg3 lbe7 Threatening the tactical shot 16 ...:xc4!. 16 ~g Ι i.c6 17 h5 i.d5 and by taking control over the outρost οπ d5, Black is clearly better. Solutions 143 Position 16 With the rook οη 18, Black must take great care, though θνθη here there might be suffιcient defensive resources. 14 h5 e6!? Instead, here are a couple of eχamples where it can go badly wrong for Black. Ιη both cases the losses are directly attributable to the cramped position of Black's king. 14... b5 15 i.b3 e5 16 hχg6 hχg6 17 dχe5 t'Δχθ5 18 lIχc8 i.χc8 19 ltJf4 i.b7 20 ltJχg6 ltJχg6 21 'iνh5 ι-ο, DautovHuzman, Kecskemet 1989. And 14... e5 15 hχg6 hχg6 16 d5 ltJd4 17 ltJχd4 lIχc4 18 lIχc4 'iνa6 19 'iνd3 eχd4 20 i.χd4 i.b5 21 'iνh3 i.χc4+ 22 Φg Ι f6 23 'iνh 7 + xg7 Maintaining the threat 24 .. :ii'χe2+!. 24 'iνh7+ Φf8 and anything could happen. Α possible line: 25 'ii'h8+ Φe7 26 'iWf6+ Φd7 27 'iνxf7+ Φd8 28 'iνf6+ Φc7 29 i.xe6l1xe6 30 'ii'xe6 Φb8 31 Φg Ι 'iνd2 32 IIb Ι 'ii'xe2, It is still not clear who stands better. 144 Solutions Position 17 15 g5 ΚaΓΡov recommended pushing the g-pawn to blockade Black's kingside. There is aπ alternative plan available with the solid 15 h3. The pawn is protected, and White retains more lίght-square control. The game might continue as follows: 15 ... ttJc4 (one more example of the knight's relocation to the c4 square) 16 ~f2 cxd4 17 cxd4 e5 18 dxe5 ttJd2+ 19 'it>el as played ίη the game YusupovPopovich, Belgrade 1989. Then Black made a mistake: 19 ... ~xe5? aπd after 20 1Icl 1Id8 21 'ifc2! 'iff7 22 %:dl 11Ιθ 23 ~c5 1Ic8 24 1Ixd2 b6 25 1Id5, White won. Later, Artur Yusupov suggested 19 ... ~h6! 20 'ii'c2 %Σ.c8 21 'ii'b2 ttJxe4 22 'ifb3 +, when the outcome of the game would still be ίη doubt. 15••• %Σ.d8 It seems that this natural move, increasing the pressure οη the d-file, is Black's best reply. 16 Wg Ι e6 17 1Ib Ι tΩc4 Black has to stick with his strategy-the knight is οη c4! 18 ~α b5 19 'ii'd3 a6 20 a4 υρ to this point we have followed the game Gligoric-Popovich, Yugoslavia 1988. There Black responded 20 ... ttJe5, which gave White an advaπtage. However, instead he could have played: 20 •••'ifc6. Analysis shows that chances would then be equal. Details (Ι) Ι d4 lίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 f3 (diagram) 3 lίJc3 d5 4 f3 c5 5 dχc5 d4 6 lίJb5 e5 7 Jιg5 lίJbd7 8 e3 dχe3 9 lίJd6+ Jιχd6 Ι Ο 'ilVχd6 lίJe4 Ι Ι Jιxd8 lίJxd6 12 cxd6 'ίt>χd8 13 lίJe2 f5 14 lίJc3 b6 15 Jιe2 Jιb7 16 ο-ο lίJc5 17 b4 lίJe6°o Conquest-Stohl, Ostraνa 1994 3 ... d5 4 cxd5 lίJxd5 5 e4 lίJb6 6 lίJc3 Jιg7 7 Jιe3 ο-ο 8 'i'd2 8 f4 lίJc6 9 lίJf3 (9 d5 lίJα5 Ι Ο Jιd4 e5 Ι Ι be5 i.xe5 12fxe5'i'h4+ 13g3'ilVe7 14fkd4c5 15d6 cxd4 16 dxe7 1:te8t Kelecevic-Eidinger, Switzerland 1994) 9 ... Jιg4 10 d5 lίJa5 " Jιd4 e5 l2fχe5 'ίi'e7 13 Jιe2lίJac4 14 ο-ο Jιxf3 15 1:txf3 lίJxe5 16 1:tf2 c6°o Sorin-Minzer, Buenos Aires 1995 8 ...lίJc6 9 0-0-0 9 ...f5!? SturuaKrasenkow, Batumi 2002 e5 Ι Ο d5 lίJd4 Ι Ι lίJb5 Ι Ι f4 Jιg4 12 1:te Ι c5 13 fxe5 Jιxe5 14 h3 Jιd7 15 lίJf3 lίJxf3 16 gxf3 iie7 17 h4 c4°o SokolovKrasenkow, Wijk aan Zee 2002 11 ...lίJxb5 12 Jιxb5 Jιd7 13 Jιe2 c6 14 dxc6 Jιxc6 15 iixd81:tfxd8= Z.Varga-Macieja, Budapest 1996 (2) Ι d4 lίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 lίJc3 d5 4 lίJf3 Jιg7 5 e3 (diagram) 5 cχd5lίJχd5 6 Jιd2 c5 7 1:tc Ι lίJχc3 8 Jιxc3 cxd4 9 lίJxd4 ο-ο Ι Ο e3 lίJd7 Ι Ι Jιe2 lίJb6 12 lίJb3 Jιxc3 + Ι 3 1:txc3 lίJa4 14 :d3 'ilVb6= Ivkov-Simic, Yugoslavia 19845 ...0-06 Jιd2 6 b4lίJe4 (6 ... b6 7 Jιb2 c5 8 bxc5 bxc5 9 Ι cxd4 Ι Ο lίJxd4 e5 Ι Ι lίJb3 d4 12 exd4 exd4 13 'i'xd4 iixd4 14 lίJxd4 Jιb 7 15 f3 tΔa6 16 Jιe2 :ad8 Ι 7 :c 1:td Ι 00 Petuγsson-Kudrin, Hastings t 986/87) 7 Jιb2 c6 8 Jιd3 lίJxc3 9 Jιχc3 dχc4 Ι Ο Jιχc4lίJd7 Ι Ι e4 lίJb6 12 Jιb3 Jιg4 13 ο-ο 'ii'd6 14 h3 Drasko-Gavrikov, TaIIinn 1985 14 ... Jιxf3!?= 6 ...e6 6 ... c6 7 Jιd3 dxc4 8 Jιxc4 Jιg4 9 'iνb3 Jιxf3 Ι ο gxf3 'ίi'b6 Ι Ι ο-ο 'ilVxb3 12 Jιχb3 lίJbd7 13 f4 :fd8 14 :fd Ι 1:tac8 = S.Mohr-Pribyl, Germany 1989; 6 ... c5 7 146 Detαi/s cxd5lba68 dxc5lbxc5 9 .tc4 .tf5 Ι Ο ο-ο ':c8 Ι Ι lbd4.td3 12 .txd3 lbxd3 13 __e2 lbχb2 14 J:tab Ι lbc4;s Elson-Rychagov. Tallinn 1989 7 J:tc Ι fie7 7... b6 8 cχd5 exd5 9 b4 .tb7 Ι Ο i.d3 lbe4 Ι Ι ο-ο lbd7 12 b5 lbdf6 13 lbe5 a6 14 a4 aχb5 15 aχb5~ D.Gureνίch-Chudnoνsky. Chicago 1995 8 .td3 dxc4 9 .txc4 c5 Ι Ο ο-ο lbc6 11 dxc5 'ikxc5 12 lba4 'ife7 13 .tb5 e5 14 .txc6 bxc6 15 'ifc2 .tg4 16 'ifxc6 :ac8 17 __a6 :Xc Ι 18 .txc Ι .txf3 19 gxf3 e4 20 __e2 exf3 21 __xf3 lbe4 22 __e2 'iVg5++ Liang ChongRubleνsky. China-Russia Summit 200 Ι (3) Ι d4lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 lbf3 .tg7 5 e3 ο-ο 6 cxd5 lbxd5 7 .tc4 (diαgrαm) lbb6 7 ...lbxc3 8 bxc3 c5 9 ο-ο __c7 10 fie2 .tg4 11 .ta3 lbd7 12 1Iacl 'ila5 13 .tb2 1:ιac8 14 a3 cxd4 15 cxd4 lbb6= NajdorfKorchnoi. Hastings 1971/72 8 .tb3 lbc6 8 ... c5 9 dxc5 (9 ο-ο cxd4 Ι Ο exd4 lbc6 11 d5 lba5 12 Ι lbxb3 13 αxb3 .tg4 14 h3 .tx(3 15 "ikxf3 J:te8= Mikhaev-Notkin. Moscow 1995) 9 .....xd Ι + Ι Ο i.xd Ι lb6d7 11 lba4 lba6 12 c6 bxc6 Ι 3 ο-ο lbac5 14 .tc2 lbxa4 15 .txa4 .ta6= Burmakin-Khalifman. St.Petersburg 1996 9 ο-ο e5 Ι Ο d5 lba5 11 e4 .tg4 12 h3 .txf3 13 'δ'χΟ lbac4 14 __e2 lbd6 15 a4 a6°o G.Kuzmin-Epishin. USSR 1990 :e (4) Ι d4lbf6 2 c4 g6 3lbc3 d5 4lbf3 .tg7 5 e3 ο-ο 6 .te2 (diαgrαm) 6 ... c6 6... e6 7 ο-ο b6 8 cχd5 exd5 9 b4 i.b7 10 __ b3lbbd7 Ι Ι b5 :e8 12 a4 lbe4 13 .ta3 lbdc5 14 'ikb2 lbxc3 15 "xc3 lbe4 16 "b3~ KorholzPribyl. Poliska 1993; 6 ... dxc4 7 i.xc4 c5 8 ο-ο cχd4 9 exd4 .tg4 Ι Ο h3 .txf3 Ι Ι 'ikxf3 lbc6 12 d5 lbe5 13 'ife2 lbxc4 14 __xc4 'ikd7 15 .te3 J:tfc8 16 'ikb3 lbe8= Μοηίη­ Arbakov. Budaρest 1990; 6...c5 7 ο-ο cxd4 8 exd4 lbc6 9 h3 b6 Ι Ο lbe5 i.b7 11 .tf3 lba5 12 cxd5 lbxd5 13 i.d2 :c8 14 'ike2 lbxc3 15 .txc3 .txf3 = Polak-Gross. Czech Rep 1995 7 ο-ο e6 7... i.e6 8 cχd5 .txd5 9 'ikc2 i.χf3 Ι Ο i.xf3 lbbd7 Ι Ι :d Ι 'iVc7 12 e4 e5 13 d5 1:tac8 14 dxc6 __xc6 15 i.e3~ Cνίtan-Torre. Νονί Sad 1990 8 b4 b6 9 a4 .tb7 10 i.a3 lbbd7 11 __b3 :b8 1211acl :e8 13 1Ifdl a6 14 cxd5 exd5 15 __a2 b5= Danielsen-Petursson. Vally 1994 Details 147 (5) Ι d4 tLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 tLlc3 d5 4 tLlf3 iιg7 5 e3 ο-ο 6 iιd3 (diagram) 6 •••c5 6 ... c6 7 ο-ο ~g4-Slav. Smyslov System 7 ο-ο 7 cxd5 cxd4 8 exd4 (8 ltJxd4 ltJxd5 9 tLlce2? %4 10 ~bl e5 11 tLlb3 "iixdl + 12 xg2 c5 14 d5 e6 Yermolinsky-Wolski. USA 1995 15 d6 lbfd7!?oo (9) Ι d4 ttJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 ~ι7 4 .i.g2 d5 5 cxd5 lbxd5 6 lbf3 ο-ο 7 ο-ο lbc6 (diagram) 8 e4 lbb6 9 d5 lba5 Ι Ο 'ii'e Ι lbac4 Ι Ι ttJc3 e6 12 b3 'ii'f6 13 bxc4 'ii'xc3 14 'ii'xc3 .i.xc3 Ι 5 1:r.b Ι exd 5 15 ... lbxc4 16 .i.h6 .i.g7 17 .i.xg7 xd6 27 .i.xb7 11e8 28 ~ lbc4+ FominyhDvoirys. Russia Cup. 1996 Details 149 (10) Ι d4lίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 ~g2 iLg7 5 lίJo ο-ο 6 cxd5 lίJxd5 7 ο-ο c5 8 lίJc3 lίJxc39 bxc3 (diagram) 9 ••• lίJc6 9 ... cχd4 10 lίJχd4 'it'a5 Ι Ι iLe3 lίJc6 12 'it'b3 'it'a6 13 1:tab Ι lίJχd4 14 cχd4 'it'χe2 15 'it'a3 iLf6 16 1:tfc Ι 1:td8=rl\!bli-Hellers, Tilburg 1993 Ι Ο e3 Ι Ο dχc5 (~~}.ΓP iLe3 iLχc3 12 1:tc Ι iLf6r 13 'it'b3 'it'a6 14 a4 'it'χe2 15 %:tfd t 'it'b2 t 6 'it'b5 a6 17 'it'b6~ Bakic-Rosic, YugoslaVia 1994 10 ...'ίWa5 10 ... iLe6 11 ~a3 cχd4 12 lίJχd4 ~d5 13 iLχd5 'iί'χd5 14 'it'b3 'iί'χb3 15 aχb3 1:tfe8 16 :Hc Ι e6 Ι 7 Φf Ι lίJa5 18 iLb4 lίJc6 19 iLa3 lίJa5 20 iLb4 v'2-lh Akopian-Kuzmin, Dubai 2000 11 'ii'b3 'it'c7 11 ...1:td8 12 lίJd2 cχd4 13 cχd4 'it'h5 14 iLa3 e5 15 d5 lίJa5 16 'it'a4 b6 17 iLe7;t Slipak-Becerra, Mar del Plata 1995 12 iLa3 b6 13 dxc51:tb8 14 :fcl iLe6 15 cxb6 axb6 16 'ii'b5 ~d7 17 'iί'c4 :fc8~ Ljubojevic-Topalov, Melody Amber, Monaco 1997 (11) Ι d4lίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 iLg2 iLg7 5 lίJo ο-ο 6 cxd5 lίJxd5 7 ο-ο c5 8 dxc5 lίJa6 (diagram) 9 lίJg5 9 c6 bχc6 Ι Ο lίJa3 'iί'b6 Ι Ι lίJc4 'iί'c5 12 lίJfe5 ~θ6 13 'iί'a4 'it'b5 14 'it'χb5 cχb5 15 lίJc6 bχc4 16 iLχd5 iLf6 17 iLf3;t Zhelyandinov-Mikhalchishin, Ptuj 1993 9 ...lίJdb4 Ι Ο lίJc3 h6 Ι O...'iνχd Ι Ι Ι 1:tχd Ι lίJχc5 12 ~θ3 lίJca6 Ι 3 1:tac Ι lίJc6 14 a3 lίJc 7 15 b4 lίJθ6 16 b5 lίJcd4 Ι 7 lίJχe6 lίJχθ6 18 lίJd5;t Southam-Salem, Hundary 1996 Ι Ι lίJo 'ii'xd Ι 12 1:txd Ι iLe6 13 ~e3 lίJc2 14 1:tac Ι lίJxe3 Ι 5 fxe3 lίJxc5 16 b4 lίJa6 17 a3 lίJc7 18 lίJd4 iLxd4 19 exd4 1:tab8 20 lίJe4 lίJb5σo Izeta-Vakhidov, Moscow Olympiad, 1994 (12) Ι d4lίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 ~g2 iLg7 5 lίJo 5 cχd5 lίJχd5 6 lίJc3 lίJb6 7 lίJf3 lίJc6 8 ο-ο lίJχd4 9 lίJχd4 'ii'χd4 Ι Ο lίJb5 'iνc4 11 'it'b3 ο-ο t 2 'ii'χc4 lίJχc4 t 3 lίJχc7 1:tb8 t 4 lίJd5 iLg4 t 5 1:te t 1:tfe8 t 6 h3 ~d7 σο GotdinCvitan, Ευ Cup, Budapest 1996 5 ... 0-0 6 cxd5 lίJxd5 7 ο-ο lίJb6 8 lίJc3 lίJc6 (diagram) 9 d5 lίJa5 9 ... lίJb8 10 e4 c6 11 ~g5 h6 12 iLf4 g5 Ι 3 iLe3 lίJc4 14 iLd4 e5 15 iLc5 1:te8 16 'ifb3 b6 17 'ifχc4 iLa6;t Fominyh-J.Pribyl, Brno 1991; 9 ... lίJb4 Ι Ο e4 c6 11 a3 lίJa6 12 dχc6 bχc6 13 'ίWc2 iLe6 14 :d Ι 'ii'c8 15 lίJd4 iLg4 16 f3 iLd7 17 iLe3 %:tb8;t DraskoSygulski, Polanica Zdroj 1985 Ι Ο 'it'c2 Ι Ο iLf4 c6 Ι Ι dχc6 'ii'χd Ι 12 :fχd Ι '" 150 Details ltJxc6 13 1:tac Ι e5 14 ~d2 ltJc4 15 b3 ltJxd2 16 ltJxd2 ~e6= WinantsKouatly, Wijk aan Zee 1988; Ι Ο e4 c6 Ι Ι ~f4 cxd5 12 exd5 ltJac4 13 ~e2 J.g4 14 h3 J.xf3 15 ~xf3 1Ic8 16 1:ιac Ι ltJd6 17 1:ιfe Ι 1:ιe8= GreenfeldNeverov, Berlin 1995 Ι 0 ••• ltJxd5 Ι 0 ... c6 11 dxc6 ltJxc6 12 1td Ι J.f5 13 e4 J.d7 14 .if4 :c8 15 'ii'e2 1fe8 16 h3 ~e6 17 ltJd5 ~xd5cc SlutskyYermolinsky, London 1994 Ι Ι 1:ιd Ι c6 12 ltJe Ι Jιd7 13 ltJxd5 cxd5 14 :Xd5 e6 15 I:td3 1:ιc8 16 'ii'd Ι :c7 17 Jιf4 e5 18 ~g5 'ii'e8 19 I:tc Ι :Xcl 20 Jιxcl ~f5!? 21 e4 Jιe6= Tukmakov-Topalov, Elenite 1995 (13) Ι d4ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 J.g2 ~g7 5 ltJf3 ο-ο 6 cxd5 ltJxd5 7 ο-ο ltJb6 8 ltJc3 ltJc6 9 e3 e5 Ι Ο d5 (diagram) Ι 0 ••• ltJa5 Ι ο ... ltJe7 11 e4 ~g4 12 h3 Jιxf3 13 J.xf3 c6 14 a4 cxd5 15 exd5 ltJf5 Ι 6 a5 ltJc4 Ι 7 a6 :b8 18 'ii'd3 ltJcd6= Ljubojeνic-Leko, Leon 1994 11 e4 c6 12 .ig5 f6 13 ~e3 cxd5 14 J.xb6 14 exd5 ltJac4 15 J.c5:tf? 16ltJd2 ~f5 17ltJxc4 ltJxc4 18 'iWe2 ltJd6 19 g4 (19 1:ιαc Ι!?) 19... ~c8cc Κrogius-M.Pribyl, Czech Republic 1996 14 •.•'iWxb6 15 ltJxd5 1fd8 16 I:tc Ι ltJc6 17 'ii'b3 1:ιf7 18 :fd Ι Jιe6 19 h4 J.h6 20 1tc3 'ίt;>h8 21 'ίt;>h2cc C.Hansen-Korchnoi, Biel 1992 (14) Ι d4ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 J.g2 ~g7 5ltJf3 ο-ο 6 cxd5ltJxd5 7 ο-ο ltJb6 8ltJc3 ltJc6 9 e3 :e8 (diagram) Ι Ο d 5 Ι Ο ltJe Ι e5 Ι Ι d5ltJa5 12 e4 c6 13 a4 cxd5 14 exd5 ~f5 15 g4 ~d7 16 ltJe4 h6 17 h3 ltJc8 18 g5 hxg5cc Loginov-Gorbatov, St.Petersburg 1994; 10 :el e5 11 d5 ltJa5 12 e4 c6 13 .ig5 f6 14 .ie3 ltJac4 15 dxc6 ltJxe3 16 'ii'xd8l:txd8 17 cχb7 .iχb7 18 :χe3 J.h6 19 :ee Ι ltJc4 20 :ad Ι 'ίt;>f8~ Κarpov-Κasparov, Amsterdam 1988 Ι 0 •••ltJa5 Ι Ι ltJd4 ~d7 12 b3 12 e4 c6 Ι 3 b3 cχd5 14 exd5 1Ic8 15 ~b2 ltJbc4 16 bxc4 1fb6 17 ltJe6 ltJxc4 18 ltJxg 7 ltJxb2 = Kharitonov-Makarov, Russia Ch 1994 12•.•1Ic8 13 Jιb2 c6 14 dxc6 ltJxc6 Ι 5 ltJxc6 ~xc6 16 J:tc Ι ~xg2 17 Φxg2 'ii'xd Ι 18 1:ιfxdl 1:ιc6= Li-Liss, Peking 1996 (15) Ι d4ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 .ig2 ~g7 5ltJf3 ο-ο 6 ο-ο (diagram) 6 •••dxc4 6...ltJc6 7 ltJbd2 a5 8 b3 ltJe4 9 J.b2 ~e6 Ι Ο e3 f5 11 'ii'e2 .if7 12 J:tfd Ι e6 13 a3 g5 14 ltJe Ι ltJe7 15 ltJd3t Ki.Georgiev-D.Paunovic, Details 151 Cacak 1996; 6 ... c5 7 dxc5 dxc4 8 'ii'a4 'ikc7 9 'ikxc4 .te6 Ι Ο 'ii'h4 'ikxc5 11 tίJc3 tίJc6 12 tίJg5 Panzalovic-Savicic. Cetinje 1990 12 ... 'ii'c4 13 .tf4;t 7 tίJe5 tίJe8 8 tίJa3 c5 8 ... tίJd6 9 e3 .te6 Ι Ο 'ike2 'ii'c8 11 lίJaxc4 tίJxc4 12 ltJxc4 .th3 13 .txh3 'ii'xh3 14 .td2 tίJd7 15 :ac Ι 1:1fe8 16 .tc3 h5 17 1:1fd Ι h4 r8 'ii'f3 c6 19 'ikg2 'ii'e6 20 d5! cxd5 21 'ii'xd5 'ii'xd5 22 11xd5;!; RomanishinKozul. Solin/Spilt 2002 9 .te3 cxd4 Ι Ο .txd4 tίJd6 Ι Ι tίJexc4 .txd4 12 'ii'xd4 tίJxc4 13 'ifxc4 'ii'b6 14 'ii'c3 tίJc6 15 .txc6 bxc6 16 tίJc4 Ίi'b5 17 a4 'ii'd5;!; Romanishin-Hellers. Malmo 1993 (16) Ι d4 tίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 .tg2 .tg7 5 tίJo ο-ο 6 ο-ο dxc4 7 tίJa3 (diagram) 7 ••• tίJc6 7... tίJa6 8 tίJxc4 c5 9 b3 .tf5 10 .tb2.te4 11 'Wd2 'iic7 12 dxc5 ltJxc5 13 .te5 'ii'd7 14 11ac Ι 11ac8 15 ifxd7 tίJcxd700 Smejkal-Stohl. Germany 1996 8 tίJxc4 .te6 9 b3 a5 9 ....td5 10 .tb2 a5 11 :cl a4 12 bxa4 11a6 13 tίJfe5 .txg2 14 'it>χg2 'Wa8 15 tίJxc6 bxc6 16 g Ι 11xa4 Ι 7 a3 tίJd7 18 ltJe5= Κarpov-Piket. Tilburg 1996 10 .tb2 a4 Ι Ι tίJg5 .td5 12 e4 .txc4 13 bxc4 a3 14 .tc3 tίJd7 15 e5 tίJb6 16 11b Ι tίJa4 17 .ta Ι tίJb2 18 .txb2 axb2 19 .txc6 bxc6 20 11xb2;!; Brestian-Wach. Austria 1992 (17) Ι d4 tίJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 .tg2 .tg7 5 tίJo ο-ο 6 ο-ο dxc4 7 ltJa3 c3 8 bxc3 c5 (diagram) 9 e3 9 tίJc4 tίJc6 10 ltJce5ltJd5 11 'iib3 ltJxe5 12 dxe5 tίJb6 13 .te3 'iic7 14 'iia3 .te6 15 ifχc5 11fc8 16 "ilixc7 :xc7 17 .td4 tίJa4;!; Gutman-Lucke. Germany 1991; 9 tίJe5 tίJc6 Ι Ο tίJac4 tίJd5 Ι Ι .tb2 tίJxe5 12 tίJxe5 .tχe5 13 dχe5 .te6 14 "ilid3 tίJb6 15 .tχb7 :b8 16 .tg2 tίJc4 17 .tc Ι ltJxe5;!; Zaitsev; 9 'Wb3 tίJc6 Ι Ο :d Ι tίJa5 Ι Ι "ilib2 cxd4 12 cxd4 .tf5 13 tίJe5 tίJd7 14 tίJec4 .te6 15 tίJxa5 'ikχa5 16 .td2 'iib6 17 'ikxb6 axb600 Padeνsky-Ma.Schaefer. Munster 1990 9 •••tίJc6 Ι Ο 'ike2 Ι Ο .tb2 e5 Ι Ι tίJc4 exd4 12 cxd4 .te6 13 Ίi'e2 cχd4 14 tίJχd4 tίJχd4 15 .tχd4 11c8 16 11ac Ι "ilie7 17 tίJa5 'ifa3oo Frohlich-Luecke.Altensteig 1993 Ι 0 .•..tf5 10 ...'Wa5 11 .tb2ltJd5 1211fcl .tg4 13 h3 .txf3 14 .t~~15 ltJc4 σ" q σ tίJχc4 16 'ikχc4 1.tac8 17 'ifb3 11c7;!; Konyushkov-Yuferov. SoChi -Ί 996 11 11d Ι "ilia5 Ι 1...'iib6 12 tίJd2 cχd4 13 cxd4 11ac8 14 h3 :fd8 15 tίJb3 tίJe4 16 .tb2 g5 17 g4 .tg6 18 tίJc4 "ilib~_~.tf Ι ltJb4! 20 tίJbd2 '~d6\ (20 ...'Wa4!00) 21 ltJxd6 'iνχe2 22 tίJχc8!(~1 23 tίJχfl 1tχc8 24 %:tac-I ± Κarpov-J.Polgar. Russia-World. 2002 12 .tb2 fd8 13 tίJd2 cxd4 14 cxd4 .tg4 15 f3 .te6 16 tίJb3 .txb3 17 axb3 'ii'b4 17... tίJd5 18 f4 tίJc3 19 152 Detaίls iιxc3 'iVxc3 20 tiJc4 'iVb4 21 iιxc6 bxc6 22 tiJa5 1:.ac8 23 'iVc4 'iib6 24 b4 Podgaets-Lerner. Moscow 2002 18 1:.d3 1:.ac8 19 tiJc4 'iVb5°o ΚaΓpoν­ Smirin. Russia ν. World. 2002 () 1.. σ (, (18) Ι d4 tiJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 d5 4 i.g2 iJ..g7 5 tiJf3 ο-ο 6 ο-ο c6 (diagram) 7 'ii'b3 7 tiJc3 dxc4 8 tiJe5 tiJg4 9 tiJxg4 iιχg4 Ι Ο d5 cxd5 Ι Ι 'iVxd5 'iVxd5 12 iιxd5 tiJc6 13 iιxc4 1:.ac8 14 Φg2 a6 15 h3 iιd7~ DeutschKwatschewsky. Austria 1994; 7 b3 dxc4 8 bxc4 c5 9 i.b2 cxd4 Ι Ο tiJxd4 'ii'b6 Ι Ι tiJb3 ':d8 12 'iVc Ι tiJc6 13 tiJc3 iιe6 14 tiJa4 'iVc7 15 tiJac5 i.f5 P.Nikolic-Κhalifman. Yereνan 1996 16 i.c3! =; 7 tiJbd2 tiJe4 8 b3 iιf5 9 iJ..b2 tiJd7 Ι Ο tiJh4 tiJxd2 Ι Ι 'iVxd2 iιe6 12 cxd5 cxd5 13 'iVb4 1:tb8 14 1:.fc Ι 1:.e8 15 e3 iιf8= Κarpov-Topalov. Dortmund 1997 7 •••dxc4 7 ...'ii'b6 8 tiJc3 iιf5 9 tiJe5 i.e6 Ι Ο ':d Ι dxc4 Ι Ι tiJxc4 'iVa6 12 d5 cxd5 13 tiJxd5 tiJxd5 14 iιxd5 i.xd5 15 1:.xd5 tiJc6°o Goldin-Beshukov. Russia (ch) 19968 'iVxc4 iιe69 'Wa4 tiJa6 9 ... b5 10 'ii'dl tiJbd700 10 tiJc3 'iVb6 11 h31:tad8 12 e4 cS 13 dS iιd7 14 'ii'b3 e6 15 i.f4 exdSoo Loginov-Shabtai. Budapest 1993 (19) Ι d4 tiJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 dS 4 i.g2 iιι7 5 tiJf3 ο-ο 6 ο-ο c6 7 cxdS cxd5 8 tiJeS (diagram) 8 ...e6 8 .. ,tiJg4 9 tiJχg4 i.xg4 Ι Ο tiJc3 tiJc6 11 h3 i.d7 12 e3 e6 13 b3 'iVa5 14 iJ..d2 'iVc7 15 ':cl 1:.ac8 16 'iVe2= Polugaeνsky-Κasparov. Moscow 1991 9 tiJc3 tiJfd7 Ι Ο tiJf3 Ι Ο f4 tiJc6 (Ι ο... (6 11 tiJd3 tiJc6 12 i.e3 tiJb6 13 b3 iιd7 14 iJ..(2 'iVe 7 15 1:.c Ι 1:.ac8 16 1:.c2 i.e8 = ΚaΓpoν­ Timman. Amsterdam 1993) Ι Ι iJ..e3 tiJb6 12 iJ..f2 tiJe7 13 1:.c Ι iιd7 14 g4 l:c8 15 e3 f6 16 tiJd3 tiJc4;;!; Belyaνsky-Smirin. Novosibirsk 1995 Ι 0 ...tiJc6 Ι Ι iιf4 11 b3 b5 12 i.b2 i.a6 13 'ii'd2 b4 14 tiJa4 i.b5 15 1:.fc Ι i.xa4 16 bxa4 :c8 17 e3 'iVa5 18 'ii'd Ι tiJb6 19 a3 b3 20 tiJd2 tiJxa4 21 tiJxb3 'ii'b6= RomanishinNaiditsch. Lipstadt 1999 Ι 1...tiJf6 12 tiJeS iιd7 13 'iVd2 tiJxeS 14 iJ..xeS iJ..c6 Ι 5 1:tfd Ι tiJd7 16 iJ..xg7 Φχι7 ΚaΓI:lOV­ Κasparov. london 1986 = (20) Ι d4 tiJf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 dS 4 i.g2 iιι7 5 tiJf3 ο-ο 6 ο-ο c6 7 cxdS cxdS 8 tiJc3 (dίagram) 8 ... tiJc6 8 ... tiJe4 9 tiJxe4 (9 ttJe5 tiJxc3 Ι Ο bxc3 tiJd7 11 tiJxd7 'iVxd7 12 'iVb3 1:.d8 13 e4 dxe4 14 be4 e5 15 dxe5 be5 Details 153 16 .iιg5 1:le8oo Vukic-M.Schlosser, Austria 1989) 9 ... dxe4 Ι Ο tϊJe5 'iVd5 11 b3 tik6 12 i.b2 1:td8 13 tϊJxc6 bxc6 14 'iic2 i.f5 15 e3 1::tac8 16 1::tacl c5= Lagunoν-Pedzich, Berlin 1991 9 tϊJe5 i.f5 9 ... e6 (ι Ο) tϊJxc6 bxc6 11 tϊJa4 ~~; tϊJd7 12 i.f4 "ίWf6 13 "ίWc2 i.b7 14 .iιd6 1::tfe8 15 e3 e5 16 dxe5 tϊJxe5;!; Stohl Ι Ο ttJxc6 bxc6 11 tϊJa4 tϊJd7 12 i.f4 "a5 13 b3 tϊJb6 14 i.d2 "b5 15 tϊJc3 "ίWa6 16 i.e3 1:lad8 17 'iid2 c5 18 1::tfd Ι! c4 19 b4 "a3 20 b5 a6 21 bxa6 21 'iic Ι "xc Ι 22 l:dxc Ι aχb5 23 tϊJxb5 tϊJa4! = 21 ••.1::td7! 22 h3 h500 Vaganian-Hjartarson, Ευ Ch 199223 'iic Ι! "a5! 24 a4 1:tfd8 25 .iιd2 "xa6 26 a5 tϊJc8 27 i.e Ι;!; Hjartarson (21) Ι d4 tϊJf6 2 c4 g6 3 tϊJc3 d5 4 .iιι5 (diagram) 5 i.f4 5 cxd5 tϊJχg5 6 h4 li)e4 7 tϊJxe4 "xd5 8 tϊJc3 "a5 9 tϊJf3 .iιg7 Ι Ο "b3 ο-ο Ι Ι e3 c5 12 .iιc4 cxd4 13 tϊJxd4 tϊJd700 Peregudoν-Ibragimoν, Seνersk 1997; 5 i.h4 c5 6 e3 'iia5 7 'iib3 cxd4 8 exd4 .iιh6 9 :d Ι tϊJxc3 Ι Ο bxc3 i.e6 Ι Ι tϊJf3 ο-ο 12 i.e2 dxc4 13 i.xc4 i.xc4= 14 'iixc4 tϊJd7 15 ο-ο e6= Lerner-Mikhalchishin, Palma de Mallorca 1989 5.•• tϊJxc3 6 bxc3 i.g7 7 e3 ο-ο 8 cxd5 "ίWxd5 9 'iib3 'iiaS Ι Ο "ίWM "xb4 11 cxb4 eS 12 i.xeS i.xe5 13 dxe5 tϊJc6 14 J:l:c Ι tϊJxMoo Keleceνic-Vujacic, Yugoslaνia Ch 1991 tϊJe4 (22) Ι d4 tϊJf6 2 c4 g6 3 tϊJc3 d5 4 i.gS tϊJe4 5 .iιh4 tϊJxc3 6 bxc3 (diagram) 6 ••• c5 6... dxc4 7 e3 i.e6 8 J:l:b Ι b6 9 .iιe2 a6 Ι Ο .iιf3 i.d5 Ι Ι e4 .iιb7 12 e5 i.d5 13 tϊJh3 i.h6 14 ο-ο tϊJc600 Adler-Kudrin, Bern 1988; 6... i.g7 7 e3 c5 8 cxd5 'iixd5 9 'iνf3 'ifd8 Ι Ο i.c4 ο-ο 11 tϊJe2 cxd4 12 exd4 'iic7 13 i.b3 tϊJc6 14 ο-ο e5 15 1::tad Ι exd4 16 cxd4 i.f5 = Hultin-Budraitis, Vaxjo 1992 7 cxd5 "ίWxd5 8 e3 tϊJc6 8 ... cxd4 9 'ifxd4 'ifxd4 Ι Ο cxd4 e6 11 1::tbl i.e7 12 i.xe7 Φχe7 13 g3 tϊJd7 14 i.g21tb8 15 1tc Ι a5 16 Φd2 lId8 17lt'Je2 b6 18 lIc7 i.a6 19 tϊJc3;!; Khenkin-Yuferoν, Belgorod 1989 9 "ίWf3 "f5 Ι Ο i.b5 i.d7 Ι Ι 'iixf5 gxf5 12 tϊJf3 :g8 13 .iιι3 0-0-0 14 ο-ο e6 Ι 5 1:lfd Ι Ι 5 :ab Ι!? Ι 5••• i.e8 16 h4 i.e7= Sνidler (23) Ι d4 tϊJf6 2 c4 g6 3 tϊJc3 d5 4 tϊJf3 i.g7 5 .iιι5 dxc4 (diagram) 6 e3 6 e4 c5 (a) 7 d5 b5 8 e5 b4 9 exf6 exf6 10 'ii'e2+ 154 - Details Φf8 11 .te3 bxc3 12 bxc3 'iWa5 13 'iνxc4 tDd7 14 .td3 1:ίb8 (14 ... (5;1;) 15 ο-ο %Σb6 16 .J:[fel .ta6 17 'ite4± Chabanov-Bernard, Nantes 1993; (b) 7 .txc4 7... cxd4 8 'iWxd4 'iWxd4 9 tDxd4 tDxe4 10 tDxe4 .txd4 11 0-0-0 tDc6 12 .J:[he Ι .te6 13 .txe6 fxe6 14 .te3 0-0-0 15 .txd4 tDxd4 16 tDc3 .J:[hf8 17 ':e4 tDc6 18 .:txd8+ Φχd8 19 f3 Φd7= Zviagintsev-I'Sokolov, Moscow 1994 6 ....te6 7 tDe5 tDd5 8 ttJxc4 c5 9 tDb5 ο-ο Ι Ο dxc5 h6 11 .th4 tDc6 12 .tg3 a6 13 tDd4 ttJxd4 14 exd4 tDb4~ Grivas-Ristic, Athens Ι 993 (24) Ι d4 tDf6 2 c4 g6 3 tDc3 d5 4 tDf3 .tg7 5 .tg5 tDe4 6 .tf4 tDxc3 7 bxc3 (diagram) 7 ••• c5 7... dxc4 8 e3 .te6 9 :b Ι b6 Ι Ο tDg5 .td5 Ι Ι e4 h6 12 exd5 hxg5 13 .te5 Φf8 14 .txc4 tDd7 15 'iWe2 tDf6= Pankratov-Baikov, Moskow 1996 8 e3 ο-ο 9 cxd5 cxd4 Ι Ο cxd4 1i'xd5 11 .te2 tDc6 11 ...'iWa5+ 12 'iid2 tDc6 13 'iixa5tDxa514 .tc7 tDc6 15 %Σb Ι b6= ZviagintsevAzmaiparashvili, Portoroz 1997 12 ο-ο .tf5 13 'ita4 'ita5 14 'iνxa5 tDxa5 15 .:tfc Ι .:tac8 16 tDd2 tDc6= HertneckAnand, Munich 1994 (25) Ι d4 tDf6 2 c4 g6 3 tDc3 d5 4 tDf3 .tg7 5 .tg5 tDe4 6 .th4 tDxc3 7 bxc3 dxc4 (diagram) 8 e3 8 'iWa4+ 'iνd7 9 'iixc4 b6 Ι Ο .tg3 c5 Ι Ι tDe5 .txe5 ι 2 .txe5 .ta6 13 'iWb3 (6 14 .txb8 .J:[xb8 15 e3 .txf Ι 16 Φχfl cxd4= Timman-Κasparov, Brussels 1987 8... b5 8 ....te6 9 'iνb Ι b6 (9.. .c5?! Ι Ο 'iνxb7 ο-ο 11 he7 'iWa5 12 1:ίcl tDd7 13 .txf8 .J:[xf8 14 .te2 .J:[b8 15 'itc6 cxd4 16 !f 1 r tDxd4 .txd4 17 exd4;1; Zaichik-Dorfman, USSR Cup 1984) Ι Ο tDg5 .id5 11 e4 h6 (11 ... .ib7 12 hc4 ο-ο 13 'iWb3 'iie8 14 .id3;1; Zaichik-Tseshkoνsky, USSR Cup 1984) 12 exd5 hxg5 13 'itb5 + 1i'd7 14 'itxd7 + tDxd7 15 .txg5 b5 16 a4 tDb6 = Knezeνic-Ftacnik, Trencianske Teplice 1985 9 a4 c6 Ι Ο .ie2 a6 Ι Ι tDd2 ο-ο 12 .tf3 :a7 13 ο-ο .tf5 14 ':e Ι .td3 Ι 5 tDb3 .tf5 16 tDd2 .td3 = Sorin-Κasparoν, Buenos Aires 1997 (26) Ι d4 tDf6 2 c4 g6 3 tDc3 d5 4 tDf3 .tg7 5 .tg5 tDe4 6 .th4 c5 7 cxd5 tDxc3 8 bxc3 'itxd5 (diagram) 9 e3 tDc6 Ι Ο .ie2 cxd4 Ι Ι exd4 Ι Ι cxd4 ο-ο (11 ...e5 12 dxe5 'iνα5 + 13 'iνd2 'iWxd2 + 14 ιl;xd2 tDxe5 15 Details 155 l1ab Ι ο-ο 16 li:xJ4 lΔc6 17 ι!ίJxc6 bxc6 18 I1hc Ι iLf5 19 iLd3 iLe6 ± FoisorΧυ Jun. Timisoara 1987) 12 ο-ο e5 13 dxe5 'ifa5 14 iLf6 iLxf6 15 exf6 'iif5 16 lΔd4 'ifxf6 17 lΔxc6 'iixc6 18 1ι..Ο 'iia6 19 'iid4 iLe6= OstenstadL.Hansen. Gausdal 1992 11 •••0-0 12 ο-ο e5 13 c4 'iie4 14 d5 lΔd4 15 lΔxd4 'iixh4 16 lΔb5 e4 17 1Ib Ι iLe5 18 g3 'it'f6oo Bonsch-Gaνrikoν. Budaρest 1989 (27) Ι d4 lΔΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 lΔc3 d5 4 lΔo 5 1ι..ι5 lΔe4 6 cxd5 (diagram) 6 ••• lΔxι5 6 ... lΔxc3 7 bxc3 'ifxd5 8 e3 c5 9 iLe2 lΔc6 Ι Ο ο-ο cxd4 11 exd4 ο-ο 12 'it'd2 e5 13 c4 'it'd6 14 d5 lΔd4 15 lΔxd4 exd4 16 1:Iab Ι 11e8 17 iLd3 b6 = PolajzerKrumpacnik. Podlehnik 200 Ι 7 lΔxι5 e6 7... 0-0 8lΔo c6 9 dxc6lΔxc6 Ι Ο e3 e5 11 d5 e4 12lΔxe4lΔb4 13 'iid2 'it'a5 14 11cl b600 J.Armas-R.Alonso. Cuba 1993; 7... c6 8 e3 (8 dxc6 ι!ίJxc6 9 e3 e5 Ι Ο d5 'it'xg5 11 dxc6 ο-ο 12 h4 'ife 7 13 lΔd5 'ikd6 14 c 7 ~h8= Meleghegyi-Spirieν. Zalakaros 1991) 8 ...e6 9lΔO cxd5 10 iLe2 ο-ο 11 ο-ο lΔc6 12 1:Ic Ι 'ike7 13 a3 1:Id8 14 b4 e500 Y.Zilberman-Elsness. Gausdal 19958 'ifa4+ 8 'ifd2 h6 (8 ... exd5 9 'iie3+ ~f8 10 'iif4iLf6 11 h4 h6 12 liJ(31ι..e6 130-0-0 li:xJ7 14 e4 dxe4 15lΔe5 be5 16 dxe5 ~g7= Rajkoνίc­ Κhenkin. Iraklion 1993) 9 lΔh3 exd5 Ι Ο lΔf4 ο-ο 11 e3 c5 12 dxc5 d4 13 exd4 'iixd4 14 'ifxd4 iLxd4 15 0-0-0 lΔc6 16 lΔfd5 -txc5 = Daνies-King. Hamar 1982 8 •.• 1ι..d7 9 'iib3 'iixg5 Ι Ο 'ikxb7 ο-ο 11 'iixa8iLxd4 12 'ikb7 'ikf6 13 lΔd Ι -tb6 14 1:Ic Ι 'ifg5 15 e3 exd5 16 :Xc7 d4~ FyllingenL.Hansen. Stavanger 1992 1ι..ι7 (28) Ι d4 lΔΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 lΔc3 d5 4 lΔo 1ι..ι7 5 1ι..ι5 lΔe4 6 cxd5 lΔxι5 7 lΔxι5 e6 8lΔo exd5 9 e3 (diagram) 9 •••a5 9 ... 0-0 10 iLe2 (/ Ο b4 c6 11 iLe2 iLe6 12 ο-ο li:xJ7 13 I1c Ι σ6 14 lΔσ4 f5 15 g3 g5 16 h4 h6 Ι 7 hxg5 hxg5 00 Rayetsky-Tukmakoν. Biel 1995) Ι 0 ... c6 " ο-ο 'ikd6 12 lbe Ι iLf5 13 lΔd3 iLxd3 14 'iixd3 lΔd7 15 b4 b5 16 a4 a6 17 1:Ifb Ι lΔb6= Avrukh-Leko. Budapest 1993 Ι Ο -te2 ο-ο ιι ο-ο c6 12 a3 12 lΔe Ι ?! 1ι..f5 13 iLg4 iLxg4 14 'iνxg4 liJd7 15 liJd3 1:te8 16 :fc Ι iLf8 17 'iff3 iLd6 18 e4? iLxh2+! 19 ~xh2 dxe4 20 lΔxe4 'ifh4+ 21 ~gl ':xe4=F SimonenkoEpishin. Werther Schloss Oρeπ. 2000 12••. 'iνe7 13 lΔe Ι 1ι..Ι5 14lΔd3 lΔd7 Ι 5 b4 axb4 16 axb4 b5 17 'it'b3 lΔb6 18 lΔc5 lΔc4 = Thoγsson-Ernst. Gausdal 1993 156 Details (29) Ι d4 l2Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 l2Jc3 dS 4 ~Ι4 j"g7 (diagram) 5 ::Ιcl 5 'ii'a4+ l2Jc6 6 e4 e6 7 j"g5 j"d7 8 cxd5 exd5 9 l2Jxd5 l2Je7 Ι Ο 'it'b3 l2Jexd5 Ι Ι exd5 ο-ο 12 l2Jf3 c6 13 l2Je5 h6 14 dxc6 hxg5 15 cxd7 l2Jxd7 = SchusslerWiedenkeller, Gjovik 1985 S..•l2JhS 5 ... dxc4 6 e4 c5 7 dxc5 'ii'a5 8 j"xc4 ο-ο 9 e5 l2Jfd7 Ι Ο l2Jf3 l2Jc6 Ι Ι ο-ο l2Jdxe5 12 l2Jxe5 l2Jxe5 13 j"xe5 ~xe5;j; Pinter 6 ~gS 6 .td2 c5 7 e3 cxd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 d5 ο-ο Ι Ο ~xc4 l2Jd7 11 l2Jf3 a6 12 a4 b5 13 axb5 l2Jb6 14 b3 axb5 15 l2Jxb5 l2Jxd5 16 ο-ο ~b7 Ι 7 j"xd5 i.xd5 18 i.c3 = Stohl 6 ..• h6 7 ~h4 dxc4 8 e3 i.e6 9 i.e2 l2Jf6 Ι Ο l2Jf3 c6 11 l2JeS! bS 12 Ι4 l2JdS 13 'ii'd2 l2Jxc3 14 bxc3 ~dS 15 'ii'c2 i.f6 16 ~α ~xg2 17 ':gl 'iVdS! 181hg2! 'ifxg2 19.tf3 'ii'h3 20 ~g4 'ii'g2! 21 i.f3 'it'h3 = Dreev-Leko, Wijk aan Zee 1996 (30) Ι d4 l2Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 l2Jc3 dS 4 ~Ι4 i.g7 5 e3 cS 6 dxcS 'ii'aS (diagram) 7 'ii'b3 7 cxd5 lΔxd5 8 "'xd5 i.xc3 + 9 bxc3 'ii'xc3 + Ι Ο Φe2 "'xa Ι Ι Ι ~e5 'it'c Ι 12 ~xh8 i.e6 13 'it'xb7 'ii'c2 + 14 'ittf3 'ii'f5 + 15 Φe2 'it'c2 + = Vaughan-Purdy, corr 1945; 7 'ii'a4+ 'Wxa4 8 l2Jxa4 ο-ο (B ... l2Je4 9 f3 ~d7 Ι Ο fxe4 iιxα4 11 cxd5 iιxb2 12 ':b Ι ~c3 + 13 Φ(2 lΔd7 14 ':c Ι lΔxc5 15 h8 17 h3 Malaniuk-Atalik, Hastings 1995 8 'i*'xd8 1bd8 9 e4 ttJa6 Ι Ο e5 ttJe8 Ι Ι i..e3 i..e6 12 ttJg5 ttJec7 13 f4 ~h6 14 liJxe6 ttJxe6 Ι 5 g3 ttJaxc5 16 i..xc4 a6!00 FtacnikMalishauskas, Biel 1993 (37) Ι d4 ttJf6 2 c4 g6 3 ttJc3 d5 4 ttJf3 i..g7 5 i..f4 ο-ο 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 (diagram) 7 ...ttJe4 7...ii'a5 81:tc Ι dxc4 9 i..xc4 ttJc6 Ι Ο ο-ο 'i*'xc5 11 ttJb5 ii'h5 12 ttJc7 :b8 13 h3 ttJe4 14 b4 i..xh3 15 gxh3 'ii'xh3 16 ttJd5 ':bd8 17 b5 ttJb400 Mikhaleνsky-DνoiΓys, Leeuwarden 1994 8 :c Ι 8 ~e5 i..xe5 9 ttJχe5 ttJχc3 Ι Ο bχc3 'i*'a5 11 'i*'d4 ttJc6 12 ttJχc6 bχc6 Ι 3 Jι.e2 1:td8 14 ο-ο Jι.e6 15 cχd5 :χd5 16 ii'b4 ii'xc5 = GretarssonIllescas Cordoba, Groningen 1997 8 .••ttJxc3 9 bxc3 dxc4 Ι Ο 'i*'xd8 1:txd8 Ι Ι i..xc4 ttJd7 12 i.c7 ':'f8 13 c6 bxc6 14 ttJd4 14 ο-ο ttJb6 15 i..b3 i.a6 Detai/s /59 16 .l:tfd Ι .i.e2 17 J:[d2 .i.xf3 18 gxf3 .l:tac8 19 .i.f4 :fd8 Siegel-Schindler Germany 1992 14•••c5 15 lbc6 .i.f6h8 12 "e4 :(- 1.... j lί:\b6 13 "h4 lί:\c6 14 .i.d3 (14 .i.h6 ~~ 15 "xd8 r!xd8 16 .i.xg7 + Φχg7 17 lί:Ixe5 lί:Ixd4 18 0-0-0 .i.e6 19 tiJd3 .i.(5 = Jakobsen-Tisdall, Torshaνn 1997) J1).. 15 gxf3 lί:\xd4 16 iLe4 .i.f5 17 .i.e3 (~ 18 "xd8 + :xd8 19 0-0-0 c5 20 f4!? b4 21 .i.xf5 gxf5';; Stohl-Ruck, Hungary 1997 11 ••• lί:\b6 11 ... lί:\f6!? 12 a4 b4 13 'iί'xb4 lί:\c6 14 "~i "d6 15 .i.S1~a> Gyimesi,;; ι~~ Svidler, Germany 2002 12 h4lί:\c6 13 h5(~L4 gxf3\~~ςIj) 15 :dl(cS) rJ ~'.~ r 16 i..Xd4~~,17 hxg6 h6 17... hxg6 18:g I~,~} 19lί:\xd5 exd5 20 :xg6 e5 21 iLd3;!; l:.~:h5!;!; Κasparov-Svidler; Wijk aan Zee 1999 :f8 J • :xf3 (46) Ι d4 lί:\f6 2 c4 g6 3 lί:\c3 d5 4 lί:\f3 .i.g7 5 "b3 dxc4 6 "xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 lί:\a6 (diagram) 8 .i.f4 8 "a4 c5 9 d5 'iί'b6 Ι Ο .i.xa6 bxa6 11 ο-ο [email protected] .i.b7 13 :fd Ι h6 14 .i.xf6 i..xf6 15 :d2 'iί'b4 16 'ii'c2 1%fe8= Uhlmann-Pol~.{aevsky, Yugoslavia 1968; 8 'ii'b3 c5 9 d5~ Ι Ο .i.xa6 bxa6 Ι Ι ο-ο exd5 12 exd5 'ii'b6 13 .i.f4 .i.b7 14 :fd Ι 1%fd8 15 'ii'xb6 axb6 16 .i.c7 :d7 17 .i.xb6 lί:\xd5 18 i..xc5 :c8= Flear-Groszpeter, Belgrade 1988; 8 i..gS h6 9 .i.h4 c5 Ι Ο d5 bS Ι Ι lί:\xbS "aS + 12 lί:\d2 :b8 13 .i.g3 lί:\xe4 14 "xe4 :xb5 15 .i.xb5 'ii'xb5oo; 8 e5 lί:\d7 9 e6 lί:\b6 Ι Ο exf7+ Φh8 11 'ii'b5@V12 'ii'a5 llJc7 13 .i.e2 iLg4 14 ο-ο .i.xf3 15.i.xf3 :xf7 16 .i.e3lί:\cd5= Tukmakov-Groszpeter, Biel 1991 8 •••c5 9 dxc5 .i.e6 9 .....a5 10 e5lί:\d7 11 a3 "xc5 12lί:\d5lί:\b6 13 'ii'xc5lί:\xc5 14lί:\xe7+ Φh8 15 lί:\xc8 1hxc8 16 1%d Ι lί:\ba4';; Flear-Georges, Bern 1991 Ι Ο 'ii'b5 iLd7 11 'ii'xb7lί:\xc5 12 'ii'b4lί:\e6 13 .i.e5 a5 14 "a3 .i.c6 14 ...'iί'b6!? 15 .i.c4 lί:\g4! 16 .i.g3 'ii'b4 17 'ii'xb4 axb4 18 lί:\d5 .i.xb2 19 :b Ι i..c3 + 20 lί:\xc3 bxc3 21· ο-ο 1:tac8 22 .i.a6 c2! 23 :ta Ι :c3 24 :fc Ι lί:\c5+ BacrotSutoνsky, Albert 200 Ι Ι 5 .i.c4 lί:\xe4 16 .i.xe6 .i.xe5a> Kengis-Certek, Bratislaνa 1990 (47) Ι d4 lί:\f6 2 c4 g6 3 lί:\c3 d5 4 lί:\f3 .i.g7 5 'ii'b3 dxc4 6 'ii'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 lί:\a6 8 .i.e2 c5 9 d5 e6 (diagram) 10 ο-ο 10.i.g5 exd5 (ί\ lί:\xd5 .i.e6 12 0-0-0 .i.xd5 13 1:txd5 'ii'b6 f4' .i.xf6 "xf6 15Α 'iff5 16 .i.d3 'ii'c8 17 :d6! lί:\b4 18 .i.e4\~ Piket-TimlN~ Amsterdam 199~-..10 ••• exd5 11 exd5~!y 12 i..f4 12 1%d 1(:~8), 3 d6 h6 '4 .i.f4 llJd7 '5 :d2 lί:\b4 16'ν63 .i.e6 '7 i..c4 lί:\b6 '8 Detaίls ι5 ~'1 ". 163 (\"" ]J ..txe6 'I:Ixe6 19 tΔ~4..:~tJxa4 20 'ifxa4 tΔc6oo; 12 ..te3,,,b6(ι3\tΔh4?! ..td7 14 1:tab Ι 'I:Ife8 15 b4 \~~~ (§ fxe3 cxb4 '~ 'iff4 'ifc5 lθ~~ (18 ba6 Θ 19 bb7 1:te8 20 iid4 'ii'a3 oo) 18 ... tΔxe4 ~xe4 1:te8+ Timman-Κasparov, Sarajevo 1999 12...'ii'b6~ ..:Ιe8 13 :adl tΔe4 14 tΔb5 'iff6 15 ..td3 ..td7 cr}116 ..teS ..txb5 17 'ii'xbS i:txe5 18 tΔxeS tΔd6 19 tΔg4 'ii'f4 20 'ii'd7 c4°o lvanchuk-Dorfman, Ινον 1988 13 ..te5 1:tad8 13 ...:fe8 14 1:tfd Ι tΔe4 15 ..txg7 tΔd6 16 iif4 16 ... ~xι7 17 1:tac Ι 1:tad8 18 b3;!; Bareev-Van Wely, Enghien les Bains 2001 14 d6 141:tacl 14 ...'ii'xb2 15 tΔb5 iib4 16 tΔd6 Gureνίch-IIlescas Cordoba, Dos Hermanas 200 Ι 16 ... ..te4! 17 tΔxe4 tΔxe4 18 ..txg7 ~xι7 19 'ifc2 tΔf6 20 1:tb Ι 'ifa5 21 1:txb7 tΔc7 22 tΔd2 tΔcxd5 23 tΔb3 iic3 24 'ii'c Ι! = 14••. tΔd7 15 ..txg7 ~xg7 16 tΔb5 tΔΙ6 17 1:tad Ι ..td7 18 a4 tΔb4 19 b3 ..txb5 20 iixb5 'ii'xb5= E.Vladimirov-lIincic, Alma-Ata 1989 (48) Ι d4 tΔΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 tΔc3 d5 4 tΔf3 ..tg7 5 iib3 dxc4 6 'ii'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 ..tg4 8 ..te2 tΔc6 (dίagram) 9 d5 9 ..te3 ..txf3 Ι Ο gxf3 e5 Ι Ι dxe5 tΔxe5 12 'ifd4 'ifxd4 13 .txd4 tΔc6 14 ..te3 .:tfd8 15 :Ιc Ι tΔd4 16 tΔb5 tΔxb5 17 ..txb5 c6= M.GurevichRomanishin, Ινον 1987 9 •.• tΔa5 9 ... ..txf3 10 gxf3 tΔe5 Ι Ι 'ifb3 c6 12 f4 tΔed7 13 dxc6 bxc6 14 e5 tΔd5 15 tΔxd5 cxd5 16 'ii'xd5 e6 17 'ii'd6 lΔb6;!; Timman-Korchnoi, Reykjaνίk 1988 Ι Ο iib4 Ι Ο iia4 ..txf3 Ι Ι ..txf3 c6 12 ο-ο b5 13 'ii'd Ι b4 14 tΔa4 cxd5 15 exd5 'ifd7 16 ..td2 tΔc4 17 ..txb4 tΔe5 18 tΔc3 1:tab8 19 a3 .I:Ifd8 20 ..te2 tΔxd5 21 tΔxd5 iixd5 22 ..txe7 'ii'xd Ι 23 1:taxd Ι 1:te8 24 ..tc5 1:txb2= Κasimdzhanov-Sutovsky, Julian Borowski-A 200 Ι Ι O.....txf3 11 ..txf3 c6 12 .te3 cxd5 13 exd5 1:tc8 14 ..txa7 tΔc4 15 ο-ο tΔd2 16 1:tfdl 1:tc4 17 'ii'b6 tΔxf3+~ Farago-J.Horvath, Hungary 1991 (49) Ι d4 tΔΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 tΔc3 d5 4 tΔf3 ..tg7 5 'ii'b3 dxc4 6 'iνxc4 ο-ο 7 e4 ..tg4 8 ..te3 tΔfd7 (dίagram) 9 1:td Ι 9 ..te2 tΔb6 Ι Ο 'ii'c5..txf3 Ι Ι gxf3 tΔa6 12 ..txa6 bxa6 13 h4 tΔd7 14 iic6 %1b8 15 0-0-0 tΔb6 16 h5 'ii'd6 17 'iνxd6 cxd6= Timoshchenko-Lputian, Irkutsk 1986; 9 0-0-0 c6 Ι Ο h3 ..txf3 Ι Ι gxf3 b5 12 'ii'd3 'ii'a5 13 b Ι b4 14 tΔe2 c5 15 (4 tΔc6 16 d5 b3 Ι 7 a3 tΔb400 Piket-Shirov, Wijk aan Zee 1996 9 ...tΔc6 Ι Ο ..te2 tΔb6 Ι 0 ... ..tχf3 11 gxf3 tΔb6 12 iic5 (5 13 d5 tΔe5 14 f4 tΔed7 15 'iVb5 fxe4 16 tΔxe4 tΔf6 17 tΔg5 'ii'e8= Khalifman-lIlescas, Ubeda 1997 11 'iVc5 'ii'd6 12 h3 12 e5 'ifxc5 13 dχc~c~14)h3 ..txf3 15 ..txf3 ..txe5 16 ..txc6 bχc6 17 Λ 11 G{ ... 164 Details '-~ ;), ..td4 i.f4 Ι 8 O-cXe~ 19 i.e3 i.χe3 20 fχe3 'Δe7 21 1:d7 'Δf5 22 1:χc7 :fc8 23 1:d7 :d8 24'--:fd Ι 1:txd7 25 1:txd7 'Δχe3 26 :c7 .r:tb8 27 b3 1:td8= Κarρov-Timman Tilburg 1986 12 ••. i.xf3 13 gxf3 1:tfd8 14 d5 'Δe5 15 'Δb5 'ίi'f6 16 f4 'Δed7 17 e5 'ii'xf4= Botνinnik-Fischer. Varna Olympiad 1962 (50) Ι d4 'Δf6 2 c4 g6 3 'Δc3 d5 4 'Δf3 i.g7 5 'ίi'b3 dxc4 6 'iί'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 ..tg4 8 i.e3 'Δfd7 9 'ίi'b3 (diagram) 9 ... 'Δb6 9 ... c5 Ι Ο d5 'Δa6 11 i.e2 'iί'b6 12 'ίi'c2 i.χf3 13 gxf3 1:tac8 14 h4 f5 Ι 5 f4 fxe4 16 i.g4 1:tf5 17 0-0-0 'Δb4οο M.Gurevich-Gofstein, Brussels 1997 10 1:tdl ..txf3 10 ... e6 11 ..te2 'Δc6 12 'Δι Ι ..txe2 13 'Δgχe2 'ii'e7 14 ο-ο :fd8 15 a3 h6 16 'Δa4 'Δa5 17 'iί'c2 'Δac4= MedunaJansa, Trnaνa 1982 Ι Ι gxf3 e6 12 h4 'Δc6 13 e5 h5 14 ..tg2 'Δe7 15 ..tg5 'ii'd7 16 f4 c6 17 'Δe4 'ίi'c7°o M.GurevichKrasenkov, Jakarta 1996 (51) Ι d4 'Δf6 2 c4 g6 3 'Δc3 d5 4 'Δf3 ..tg7 5 1Wb3 dxc4 6 'ίi'xc4 ο-ο 7 e4 ..tg4 8 ..te3 'Δfd7 9 'ίi'b3 'Δb6 Ι Ο 1:td Ι 'Δc6 Ι Ι d5 'Δe5 12 ..te2 'Δxf3+ 13 gxf3 (diogram) 13.....th5 13 .....th3 14 J:[g Ι 'ίi'c8 15 f4 ..td7 16 f5 ..t>h8 17 fxg6 fxg6± Mikenas-Vaganian, USSR 1967 14 1:tgl 14 a4 'Δd7 15 f4 i.xe2 16 'Δχe2 'ii'c8 17:'c Ι c6 18 e5 'Δb6 19 dxc6 bxc6 20 'ii'c2 f6 21 exf6 ..txf6 22 'iί'xc6 1Wxc6= Kozul-Stohl, Νονί Sad 1990; 14 f4 ..txe2 15 'Δχe2 'ίi'd7 16 ..td4 c6 17 ..txg7 ~7 18 'ίi'c3 + ..t>g8 19 dxc6 'iί'xc6 20 'iί'xc6 bxc6 21 :rcι 1:I:ac8 22 h2 'ii'xg3 + 27 Φχg3 lί)c2 28 e5 ~4 29 ':xd4 cxd4 30 e6 1:rfd8 31 d7 Φf6 Βυ XiangzhiΚalantarian, New York Oρeπ 2000 22...lί)d4! 23 ':xh5 1:th8 24 1:td5 ~e6!= Halkias-Lputian, Yereνan Zonal, 2000 (62) Ι d4 ~f6 2 c4 g6 3 lί)c3 d5 4 cxd5 ~xd5 5 e4 ~xc3 6 bxc3 ~ι7 7 ~f3 c5 8 1:tb Ι ο-ο 9 .i.e2 lί)c6 Ι Ο d5 lί)e5 (diαgrαm) 11 ~xe5 ~xe5 12 "ikd2 12 1Ib3 12 ... e6 13 f4 J..g7 14 c4 1:tea 15 'i!ic2 ~d4 16 ~θ3 exd5 17 cxd5 ~f5 Ι θ ~xd4 J..xe4 19 'ii'xc5 1:tcθ 20 'ii'a3 "xd5 21 ~e5! (21 ~e3? 1Ic2+ Ogaard-Ftacnik, Gjovik 1983) 21 ...1:tc2 22 ':e3! ~xg2 23 1:tgl ~o 24 'i!ia4 1:txe2+ 25 1:txe2 b5 26 'i!ic2 ~χθ2 27 Φχe2 f6 28 1:txg6+! 'iti>h8!= Ftacnik 12 ...e6 12 ... b6 IΗ4 J..g7 14 ο-ο e6 15 d6 J..b7 16 e5 f6 17 'i!ie3 fxe5 18 fxe5 1:[xf Ι + 19 J..xf Ι 'i!ih4 20 J..d2 1:tf8;1; Van WelyLutz, Groningen 1993 13 (4 ~c7 13 ... ~ι7 14 c4 ':e8 15 e5 f6 16 d6 fxe5 170 Detαi/s 17 .tb2 exf4 18 .txg7 Φχι7 19 ο-ο b6 20 'it'χf4 e5;!; Yusupov-Malaniuk, USSR 1983 14 ο-ο exdS Ι 5 exdS .taS 16 fS 16 d6 b6 Ι 7 .tf3 1:tb8 18 .ta3 i..d7 19 1:tfe Ι ~f6 20 .tb4 i..xb4 21 cχb4 c4 22 1:tbc Ι b5 23 1:te5 1:tfd8 24 'ίi'd4 Φι7 25 g4 'it>g8 26 1:te8+ Φι7 27 1:te5 'it>g8 28 1:te8+ Yeνseev­ Mikheev, Togliatty 200 Ι 16•••i..xfS 17 1:txb7 'ίi'f6 18 i..b2 'ίi'eS 19 i..f3 c4 20 1:te Ι 'it'd6 21 'ίi'e2 1:tab8 22 'ίi'e7 'ίi'a6 23 1:txb8 1:txb8= HalkiasBagirov, Tallinn 1997 (63) Ι d4 liJf6 2 c4 g6 3 liJc3 dS 4 cxdS liJxdS 5 e4 liJxc3 6 bxc3 .tg7 7 .tc4 ο-ο 8 liJe2 (diαgrαm) 8 •.. b6 8 ...'ίi'd7!? 9 ο-ο b6 Ι Ο i..e3 .tb7 Ι Ι 'it'c2 liJc6 12 i..b5 liJb4 13 'it'a4 .tc6 14 .txc6 liJxc6 15 1:tad Ι;!; Kramnik-Yermolinsky, Wijk aan Zee 1999 9 h4 liJc6 Ι Ο hS Ι Ο i.d5!? 'it'd7 Ι Ι h5 e6 12 .tb3 liJa5 13 hxg6 fxg6 14 'it'd3 liJxb3 15 aχb3 c5 16 'ίi'h3 .th8 17 .th6t Klima-Oral, Czech Republic 200 Ι Ι O••• liJaS Ι Ι .td3 eS 12 hxg6 fxg6 13 i..e3 'ίi'e 7 14 :c Ι 14 'ίi'd2 exd4 15 .txd4 i..e6 16.txg7 'ίi'xι7 17 liJd4 i..f7 18 ο-ο 1:tad8 19 'it'c2 c5 20 liJf3 i..e8 21 1:tfe Ι .tc6 22 1:tad Ι 'ίi'e7 23 ~e2 :f4~ Stocek-Oral,Turnov 1996 14 .••c6 Ι 5 ο-ο i..e6 16 f4 16 'it'a4!?oo 16•••liJc4!? 17 .txc4 .txc4 18 fxeS 1:txfl + 19 'it'xfl :f8+ Seirawan-leko, Moscow 1994 ., <. ~ (64) Ι d4 liJf6 2 c4 g6 3 liJc3 dS 4 cxdS liJxdS 5 e4 liJxc3 6 bxc3 .tg7 7 i..c4 ο-ο 8 liJe2 liJc6 (diαgrαm) 9 ο-ο 9 i..d3 b6 Ι Ο i..g5 'it'd7 Ι Ι ο-ο .tb7 12 'it'd2 e5 13 d5 liJa5 14 c4 c6 15 1:tac Ι 1:tae8 Ι 6 .te3 f5 Ι 7 f3 'it>h8= S.Polgar-Hort, Munich 1991 9 ••• b6 Ι ο i..gS .tb7 11 'it'd2 'it'd6 11 ... 'ίi'd7 12 .tb5 a6 13 i..d3 liJa5 14 1:tab Ι .tc6 15 1:tfc Ι e6 Ι 6 e5 f6 Ι 7 exf6 i..χf6 18 i..xf6 1:txf6 19 cΓ QS f3 b5 20 'it'g5 1:taf8 21 a4t Yusupov-Berndt, Germany 200 Ι U 1:tad Ι eS 12 ... liJa5 13 i..d3 c5 (/3 ... e5 14 i..h6 1:tαe8 15 f3 J:.d8 16 'it'g5 f6 17 'it'h4 .txh6 18 'ίi'xh6 Shliperman-Kudrin, Salt lake City 1999) 14 d5 e6 15 c4 .ta6@'it'cl exd5 17 exd5 1:tae8;!; Belyaνsky-Gu)ko, Lίnares 1990 13.ta6liJaS 14.txb7liJxb7 IS.th61:tfe816.txg7Φχg7 17 liJg3 1:tad8 18 f4 exd4 19 cxd4 cS 20 d5 f6 21 eS fxe5 22 f5 1:tf8 23 liJe4 "d7 24 f6+ ± lνanchuk-Sνίdler, Wijk aan Zee 1999 Detoils 171 (65) Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 cxd5 lbxd5 5 e4 lbxc3 6 bxc3 i.g7 7 i.c4 c5 8 lbe2 ο-ο 9 Jiιe3 lbc6 Ι ο 1:tc Ι (diogrom) Ι 0 ••• cxd4 Ι 0 ... lba5!? 11 i.d3 e5 12 dxe5 b6 Ι Η4 'ii'h4 + 14 lbg3 1:td8 Ι 5 'ii'c2 i.e6 Ι 6 c4 i.h6 17 ο-ο lbc6 18 'ii'e2 i.g4~ ZarubinZilberstein, Russian Ch 1993 11 cxd4 iVa5+ 12 <ιtfl Jiιd7 12 ...'iia3 13 iVb3 iVxb3 14 Jiιxb3 i.d7 15 f4 1:tfc8 16 φα lba5 17 d5 lbxb3 18 axb3 i.b2°o Κamsky-Anand, Las Palmas 1995; 12 ...Jiιg4 13 f3 Jiιd7 14 h4 1:tfd8 15 h5 i.e8 16 hxg6 hxg6 17 Φα 1:tac8 18 Jiιb3 e6= Topalov-J.Sanchez, Palma de Mallorca 1992 13 h41:tfc8 Ι 3 ...1:tac8. 14 h5 e6 15 hxg6 hxg6 16 e5lbe7 17 ~d3 1:tfe8 18 i.d2 'ika4oo Grϋnberg-Gaugιitz, Germany 1989 14 h5 e5 14 ... lbd8 15 f3 iιb5 16 iιxb5 'ikxb5 17 Φα 'ikb2 18 ~b3 'ίIr'xb3! Shirov 15 hxg6 15 d5 lbd4 16 lbxd4 exd4 17 Jiιxd4? (17 i.d2) 17...:xc4 18 :xc4 'iVa6 19 'ίIr'd3 Jiιb5-+ Ι 5 ••• hxg6 16 iVb3 lbd8 17 i.h6 exd4 18 Jiιxg7 rJ!;xg7 = ι.Sοkοlον-Stοhl, Greece 1992 (66) Ι d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 d5 4 cxd5 lbxd5 5 e4 lbxc3 6 bxc3 iιg7 7 i.c4 ο-ο 8 lbe2 c5 9 ο-ο lbc6 Ι Ο iιe3 (diogrom) Ι ~ .•iVc7 Ι 0 ... i.d7!? Ι Ι :c Ι 1:tc8 12 'ίIr'd2 \:ii'a5')13 d5 lbe5 14 i.b3 ~§ 15 f4 lbg4 16 c4 iVxd2 17 i.xd2 eχd5 18 cxd5 i.b5 19 i.c4 i.xc4 20 1:txc4 b5 21 ':c2 lbf6= ShirovEpishin, Daugavpils 1989 11 1:tc Ι Ι Ι 1:tb Ι a6 12 iVcl b5 13 iιd3 1:td8 14 a4lbe5 15 dxe5 1:txd3 16 lbf4 1:td8 17 lbd5 'ίIr'χe5 18 i.χc5 'ίIr'xe4°o 11 •••1:td8 12 f4 12 'ίIr'd2 iVa5 13 1:tfd Ι cxd4 14 cxd4 'iVxd2 15 1:txd2 e6 16 i.b5 i.d7 17 i.g5 1:.dc8 18 h3 lbe5 19 :b2=; 12 i.f4 'iί'd7 13 d5 lba5 (l3 ... lbe5 14 be5 be5 15 (4 i.g7 16 'ίIr'b3 1:.b8 1704 'ίIr'c7 18 m Ι iιd7°o VyzhmanaVin-Adorjan, Alushta (994) 14 i.d3 e5 15 i.e3 b6 16 f4 exf4 17 iιxf4 1:teβ 18 lbg3 lbb7 19 'ίIr'O f6 20 h4 lbd6 21 h5! CramlingDzevlan, Stockholm 1994/95 12•.•i.g4 13 f5 gxf5 14 h3 i.xe2 14 ... i.h5 15 1:.xf5 Jiιg6 (15 ... cxd4 16 i.f4 'ίIr'b6 17 rJ!;h Ι dxc3 18 'iί'fl 'iVb4°o LobachKrupkoνa, Pardubice Open, (992) 16:tf2 e6 17 i.d3 'iί'e7 18 iVa4 a6 19 Jiιb Ι cχd4 20 cxd4 b5 21 'iWd Ι 1:tac8 22 rJ!;h Ι lba5 23 d5 lbc4°o Bellon Lopez-Conquest, Hastings 1985/86 15 'iWxe2 cxd4 16 cxd4 'iVd6 17 J:ιxfS lbxd4 18 i.xf7+ Φh8 19 i.xd4 'ii'xd4+ 20 Φhl 1:.ac8= Mukhin-Jansa, Primorsko 1973 172 Details (b-Cf, 1]1. 1)+-(67) Ι d4 l2Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 l2Jc3 d5 4 cxd5 l2Jxd5 5 e4 l2Jxc3 6 bxc3 i.g7 7 i.c4 c5 8 l2Je2 l2Jc6 9 i.e3 ο-ο Ι Ο 0-0 i.g4 Ι Ι f3 l2Ja5 (diagram) 12 i.xf7 + 1:[xf7 13 fxg4 1:Σ.xfl+ 14 Φxfl ~d6 15 Φιl 15 e5 ikd5 16 g5 'ife4 17 i.f2 ':f8 18l2Jg Ι l2Jc4 19 l2Jf3 l2Je3 + 20 .Jtxe3 'iVxe3 21 'ifb3 + h8 22 1:Σ.e Ι (Belyaνsky-Κasparov. Linares 1992) 22 ... .:xf3 + 23 gxf3 'ifxf3 + 24 '.t>g Ι 'ifg4 + 25 Φh Ι (25 ιl;f2cc) 25 ...'iff3 + = 15 .••'ife6 16 l2Jg3 16 'ifd3 'ifc4 17 'ifxc4 + lΔxc4 18 i.g5 cxd4 19 cxd4 e5 20 ':c Ι b5 21 dxe5 i.xe5 22 1:[d Ι (Seirawan-HoΓt. Lugano 1988) 22 ...:e8 =; 16 'ifc2?! ~xι4 17 dxc5 lΔc4~ 18 h3?? 'ifxg2 +! 19 'it>xg2l2Jxe3 + 20 Φg3 l2Jxc2 Ηυίπ­ Delphine. Meudon 1992; 16 e5 'ifxg4 17 l2Jf4 'ifxd Ι + 18 1:Σ.χd Ι l2Jc4 19.Jtf2 cxd4 20 cxd4 :c8 21 l2Jd5 Φf8= Fer-Vokarev. Perm 1993 16...'ifc4 17 ~d2 17 1:Σ.c Ι cxd4 18 cxd4 ikxa2 19 1:[c7 b5 20 d5 l2Jc4 21 i.c5 l2Jb2! 22 'iff Ι ':f8t Dadason-Jensson. Reykjavik 1996; 17 'ife2 'ifxc3 18 1:Σ.c Ι ~xe3 +! 19 'ifxe3 .Jtxd4 20 Φα iLxe3 + 21 Φχe3 b6+ Orso-Kocsis. Hungary 1998; 17 l2Je2 1:Σ.d8 18 'ifd2 'ife6 19 i.h6 ikxe4+ Madhy-Fairbairn, Copenhagen 1998 17...1:Σ.d8 18 1:Σ.cl 'ifa4 19 .Jth6?! 19 d5 19 ...i.xh6 20 'iVxh6 cxd4 21 l2Jh5 gxh5 22 'ifg5+ 1/2-1/2 Graf-Macejia. Ευ Ch 200 Ι. 22 'ifg5+ Φf8+ (68) Ι d4 l2Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 l2Jc3 d5 4 cxd5 l2Jxd5 5 e4 l2Jxc3 6 bxc3 i.g7 7 i.c4 ο-ο 8 l2Je2 c5 9 ο-ο l2Jc6 10 i.e3 (diagram) 10...cxd4 10 ... i.g4 11 f3 i.d7!? (I1 ... l2Ja5 12 i.d5 .Jtd7 13 :bl 'ifc7 14 i.f4 'ifc8 15 α3 e6 16 i.a2 b6 17 'ifd3 i.a4 18 d5 c4 19 ikd2 exd5cc Granda-Dorfman. Haνana 1988) 12 1:Σ.b Ι ':c8 13 dxc5 l2Ja5 14 i.d5 ~c7 15 a3 1:Σ.fd8 16 'ifc Ι e6 17 i.a2 i.fB 18 '.t>h Ι i.xc5 19 i.g5 1:Σ.e8cc Murei-Kouatly, Marseilles 1987 11 cxd4 l2Ja5 Ι 1... i.g4 12 f3 lΔa5 13 i.d5 i.d7 14 :b Ι a6 15 i.xb7 ':a7 16 i.d5 i.b5 17 a4 i.xe2 18 'ifxe2 e6 19 i.c4 .Jtxd4 20 :fd Ι i.xe3 + 21 'ifxe3 1:[d7 22 i.e2 ':xd 1+ 23 :Xd Ι 'ifc8= Polugaeνsky-Mecking. Lucerne 1977 12 .Jtd3 b6 13 1:[c Ι e6 14 ikd2 14 'ifa4 i.d7 15 'ifa3 :e8 16 ':fd Ι i.f8 17 'ifb2 'fie7 18l2Jc3 :ec8 19l2Jb5 lΔc6 20 d5 exd5 21 exd5 'ife5!= Nenashev-Dvoirys. Novgorod 1995 14...i.b7 15 h4 'ifd7 16 i.h6 ':fc8 17 i.xg7 Φχι7 18 h5t Christiansen-Wurzel. Porz 1991 Details 173 Γτ-- .'γ (69) Ι d4 lίJΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 lίJc3 d5 4 cxd5 lίJxd5 5 e4 lίJxc3 6 bxc3 j.g7 7 .ltc4 ο-ο 8 lίJe2 c5 9 ο-ο lίJc6 Ι Ο .lte3 .ltg4 Ι Ι f3 lίJa5 12 j.d3 cxd4 13 cxd4 .lte6 14 d5 (diagram) 14••• j.xa Ι 15 'ifxa Ι Ι6 16 .lth6 1:te8 16 ....ltd7!? 17 .ltxf8 'ifb6 + 18 lίJd4 1:txf8 19 1:tb Ι ~d6 20 'ii'c3 ~e5oo Christiansen-Lagunov. Porz 1991 17 ~h Ι !? 17 :bl a6 18 'ifd4.1tf7 19 f4 1:tc8 20 f5 b5 21 fxg6 hxg6 22 a4 lίJc4~ Shamkovich 17••• j.d7 18 e5 1:tc8 19 lίJΙ4 lίJc4 20 lίJxι6 j.a4 21 e6 hxg6 22 .ltxg6 lίJe5 23 j.e4 j.c2 23 ...'ifa5 24 'ifd4 %1c4 25 'iff2 1:txe4 26 fxe4 'ii'c3 (Christiansen-Korchnoi. Reggio Emilia 1987) 27 d6! 'ifd3 28 dxe7 j.b5 29 :e Ι 24 j.xc2 :xc2 25 'ifd Ι Φh7 25 ...'ifc7 26 f4 1:tc Ι 27 ~xc Ι 'ifxc Ι 28 1:txc Ι lίJg4 29 h3 lίJxh6 30 g4 %1d8 31 1:tc7 ± Kobalija-Zakharstov. St Petersburg 200 Ι 26 Ι4 ~xh6 27 fxe5 1:tc4 28 'ifd3 b5 29 exf6 exf6 30 d6t C.Hansen-McShane. Sigeman & Co 2003 1" S' -Co (70) Ι d4 lίJΙ6 2 c4 g6 3 lίJc3 d5 4 cxd5 lίJxd5 5 e4 lίJxc3 6 bxc3 j.g7 7 j.c4 ο-ο 8 lίJe2 c5 9 ο-ο lίJc6 Ι Ο j.e3 .ltg4 Ι Ι f3 lίJa5 12 j.d3 cxd4 13 cxd4 j.e6 (diagram) 14 'ifa4 14 1:tcl j.xa2 15 ~a4 j.e6 f"7-;-, (15 ... .ltb3!? 16 'ifb4 b6 17 j.g5 f6 18 j.f4 e5 -. ' 19 j.e3 exd4 20 lίJxd4 .ltfl 21 .lta6 1:te8 22 :'fdl 'ife7 23 'ifxe7 1:txe7 24 lίJc6 lίJxc6 25 1:txc6 draw. Kramnik-Shirov. Candidates 1998) 16 d5 j.d7 17 ~b4 e6 18 lίJc3 exd5 19 lίJxd5 j.e6 20 :fd Ι .ltxd5 21 exd5 1:te8 22 j.f2 j.f8oo Shipov-Neverov. St.Petersburg 1994 U ...a6 15 d5!t5 16 'ifb4 1.,2, 'ifa3!? 16..• j.xa Ι 16 ... lίJc6!? 17 'ifc5!? (17 'ifa3? iLxa Ι 18:Χα Ι b4! 19 ~b3 lίJe5 20 j.h6 'ifb6 + 21 ΦΓI lίJxd3 22 ~xd3 j.d7 Δ j.b5+. Browne) 17... j.xa Ι 18 :'xa Ι lίJe5 19 .lth6 j.d7 20 'δ'd4 f6 21 j.xf8 'if;>xf8 22 f4 lίJxd3 23 ~xd3 1:tc8 24 'ίWe3 1:tc4 25 h3 "a5 26 e5 'ifb4 27 1:td Ι 1:te4t Browne-Wolff. San Francisco 1991 17 La Ι j.d7 18 ~d4 18 a4 lίJc4 19 j.xc4 bxc4 20 j.b6 'ifb8 21 :b Ι 1:te8 22 'ίWxc4 .ltb5 23 axb5 "xb6+ 24 lίJd4 1:tec8 25 'ίWb4 axb5+ Budraitis-Akoral. Vaxjo 1992 18•••1:tc8 18 ... f6 19 e5 fxe5 20 ~xe5 'ifb8 21 'ifxe7 1:te8 22 'ifc5 lίJb7 23 'ίWc Ι lίJd6! 24 lίJg3 (24 lίJd4!?oo) 24 ... j.f5 25 ~d2! j.xd3 26 'it'χd3 'ifd8 27 j.c5! lίJb7!? 28 .ltf2 lίJd6 29 .ltc5 lίJb7 30 .lte3 lίJd6 = Browne-Ernst. Reykjavik 1990 19 j.h6 Ι6 20 .ltχf8 ~xf8~ Piket-Van Wely. Netherlands Ch. 2000 174 Details Gf-(C 1Jf,1.2..l- (71) Ι 'd4 tί'Jf6 2' c4 g6 3 tί'Jc3 d5 4 cxd5 tί'Jxd5 5 e4 tί'Jxc3 6 bxc3 iί.ι7 7 iιc4 ο-ο 8 tί'Je2 c5 9 ο-ο tί'Jc6 Ι Ο iί.e3 cxd4 Ι Ι cxd4 iί.ι4 12 f3 tί'Ja5 (diagram) 13 iί.xΠ + 1:ίχΠ 14 fxg4 1:ίxf1 + 15 Φxfl e5 15 ... 'iWd7 16 h3 'iί'e6 17 "iί'd3 'ii'c4 18 'iVxc4+ tί'Jxc4 19 iιι5 e5 20 d5 h6 21 iί.c Ι tί'Jd6 22 tί'Jι3 1:tc8 23 iιe3 :c3~ Dlugy-Nikoloff, Toronto 1989 16 d5 16 ~ι Ι 1:tc8 17 d5 tί'Jc4 18 iί.f2 tί'Jd6 (18 .. :iid7 19 :Ιc Ι b5 20 g5 a5co Van Wely-Leko, Monaco 2001) 19 tί'Jι3 iί.h6 20 h4 iιf4 21 g5 'iVd7 22"iί'o 1:ίf8?! (22 ... b5!?) 23 "iί'e2 "c8 24 tί'JfI ± YusuΡOν-Sutoνsky, Essen 200 Ι 16.••tί'Jc4 17 'iί'd3 tί'Jxe3 + 18 'it'xe3 "iί'h4 19 h3 iιh6 19... b6 20 ΦΙ Ι iί.f8 21 Φh Ι iί.c5 22 'iVd3 'ii'f6 23 tί'Jι Ι "iί'f2~ Nenashev-Conquest, Groningen 1997 20 'it'd3 1:tf8+ 21 ΦΙL 'it'f2+ 22 Φhl 'iVe3= Kramnik-Shirov, Candidates 1998 • • • • Definitions + ;t ; ± =+= !! !? ?! ? ?? 00 σο Δ Ch corr ο( Symbo/s check slight adνantage for White slight advantage for Black clear adνantage for White clear adνantage for Black equal game good move excellent move move deserνing attention dubious move weak move blunder with compensation with counterplay with initiative unclear with the idea of Championship correspondence game Before the Fight Ιη this book Ι hope I've made a convincing argument for playing the Grunfeld ίη your tournament games. Ι believe this is the Ρeήect opening (or those who are looking for a dynamic struggle. $0 many unclear positions and complexities arise that it is sometimes difficult to know how to continue. Βυι that is precisely what makes your choice of opening so exciting. The best advice at times like this is: 'Don't be afraid, and try to play'. Play and analyse again and again your οννη games, as well as games by notable players. Ι always advise my students ιο attempt ιο understand the main strategic concepts of an opening, not just strings of moves. When you understand the concepts, then you will be able ιο see ηοι only the obvious continuations, but hidden threats as well. This could apply ιο any opening you are going ιο use. 1'11 finish with some more specific advice. I'd like ιο quote from Garry Κasparov, who once told me: 'This is an opening ίη which you never know beforehand what kind ο( threat you may face during the game and where it comes from. Therefore you have to be ready ιο meet your opponent's plans at any time and οη any part of the board'. That applies when playing with White ΟΓ Black! The first ίπ a new series of innovative books οπ the major chess openings, incorporating fresh, clear presentation of the key ideas, explained ίπ an entertaining and accessible way. The aim of this series is to provide the essential knowledge to play the opening, while revealing the current thinking of the world 's elite players. Each of the books is divided into the following chapters: • First Moves leads readers through the basic opening moves • Heroes & Zeros gives examples of the best and worst performances with the opening • Tricks & Traps reveals how you might catch out your opponent ·What's Hot pinpoints the very latest ideas from the world 's best players • Detailed variations are given at the close of the book, summarising the main lίnes with assessments. Other chess books available from Batsford: 8atsford's Modern Chess Open;ngs Nick de Firmian r--_ _ _ _~O.:..; 71~ 34 8656 2 The counter-attacking Grϋnfeld Defence is a favourite opening ofthe legendary Garry Kasparov.ln this book, Kasparov's friend and confidante, International Master Michael Khodarkovsky, lets us into the secrets of Kasparov's opening preparation, expla ins the most important elements of Grϋnfeld strategy and n i\J"" "π IIn-tn-rlMe survey ofthe criticallines. ;ky is a respected coach ίπ America where he !ars after emigrating from the Soviet υπίοπ. f14.99 US$21.95 Can$33.95 U Il J,+I :Ιο;ι:,-" ISBN 0-7134-8827-1 For more information οπ Batsford Chess books. writeto: Β Τ Batsford The ChrysaIis BuiIding BramIey Road LondonWl 06SP www.batsford.com 9 8