Technical Editor: IM Sergey Soloviov

Cover design by: Kalojan Nachev

Translation by: GM Evgeny Ermenkov

Copyright© Igor Lysyj, Roman Ovetchkin 2012

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia ISBN13 : 978 954 8782 89-0

Igor Lys)j Roman Ovetchkin

The Berlin Defence

Chess Stars

Bibliography Opening for White Ace. to Anand (vol. I) by Khalifman, Chess Stars 2003 The Berlin Wall by John Cox, Quality Chess 2008

Other CHESS STARS Books

Repertoire books:

Opening for White Ace. to Kramnik 1.c!l\£J by A. Khalifman Volume 1a: Old Indian, rare lines in the Classical Variation, 2006 Volume 1b: The Classical Variation, 2006 Volume 2: Anti-Nim-Ind, Anti-Queen's Indian, English, 2008 Volume 3: English (l...c5), English (four knights), 2011 Volume 4: Maroczy, Modern, Trifunovic, 2011

Opening for White According to Anand l.e4 by A. Khalifman Volume 8: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Kan and rare lines, 2006 Volume 9: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Taimanov and other lines, 2007 Volume 10: The Sicilian, Sveshnikov, 2007 Volume 11; The Sicilian, Dragon, 2009 Volume 12: The Sicilian, Rauzer Attack, 2009 Volume 13: The Sicilian, English Attack, 2010

Opening for Black According to Karpov by A. Khalifman

Current theory and practice series: The Sharpest Sicilian by Kiril Georgiev and At. Kolev, 2007 The Safest Sicilian by Delchev and Semkov, 2nd rev.ed. 2008 The Queen's Gambit Accepted by Sakaev and Semkov, 3rd. rev. ed., 2008 The Easiest Sicilian by Kolev and Nedev, 2008 The Petrosian System Against the QID by Beliavsky and Mikhalchishin, 2008 Kill K.I.D. by Semko Semkov, 2009 The King's Indian. A Complete Black Repertoire by Victor Bologan, 2009 The Scotch Game for White by Vladimir Barsky, 2009 The Modern Philidor Defence by Vladimir Barsky, 2010 The Moscow & Anti-Moscow Variations by Alexey Dreev, 2010 Squeezing the Gambits by Kiril Georgiev, 2010 A Universal Weapon l.d4 d6 by Vladimir Barsky, 2010 The Meran & Anti-Meran Variations by Alexey Dreev, 2011 The Safest Grunfeld by Alexander Delchev and Evgenij Agrest, 2011 Fighting the French: a New Concept by Denis Yevseev, 2011 The Modern Reti. An Anti-Slav Repertoire by Alexander Delchev, 2012 The French Defence. Reloaded by Nikita Vitiugov, 2012 The Open Games for Black by Igor Lysyj and Roman Ovetchkin, 2012

More details at www.chess-stars.com

4

Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Part 1. Anti-Berlin l.e4 e5 2.ll:J f3 .!Llc6 3 . .ib5 .!Llf6

1 Rarely-Played Moves; 4 . .ixc6 ; 4.�e2 ; 4.d4 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2 4 . .!Llc3 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

3 4.d3 .ic5. Rarely-Played Moves ; 5 . .!Llc3 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

4 4.d3 .ic5 5 • .ixc6 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

5 4.d3 .ic5 5. 0 - 0 ; 5.c3 0 - 0 .Rarely-PlayedMoves ; 6.�e2 ; 6 . .ixc6

Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6. Rarely-Played Moves ; 7 . .ig5

Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 1

5

7 4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.ll:J bd2 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 4 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

8 4. 0 - 0 ll:Jxe4. Rarely-Played Moves ; 5JWe2 ; 5J:1el Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

9 4. 0 - 0 ll:Jxe4 5.d4 ll:Jd6. Rarely-Played Moves ; 6.i.g5 ; 6.dxe5

Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

10 4. 0 - 0 ll:Jxe4 5.d4 ll:Jd6 6.i.xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ll:Jf5. Rarely-Played Moves ; 8.'1We2

Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

Part 2. The Berlin Endgame l.e4 e5 2.ll:Jf3 ll:Jc6 3.i.b5 ll:Jf6 4. 0 - 0 ll:Jxe4 5.d4 ll:Jd6

6.i.xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ll:Jf5 8.'\WxdS+ 'i!?xd8

11 Rarely-Played Moves ; 9.i.g5 ; 9.h3 ; 9J:'1 dl ; 9.ll:Jbd2 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

12 9.ll:Jc3 'i!?e8 w/o l O JM l and 1 0 .h3 Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

13 9.ll:Jc3 'i!?e8 l O J�dl Quick Repertoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Step by Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 Complete games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221

6

14 9.tt:\ c3 i>e8 1 0 .h3 h5. Rarely-Played Moves ; ll.b3 ; ll.c!t:le2 Quick Repertoire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 Step by Step 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0227 Complete games 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235

15 9.c!t:lc3 i>e8 1 0 .h3 h5 1U�dl .ie7 12.g3 ; 12.c!t:le4 ; 12.c!t:le2 Quick Repertoire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 Step by Step 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0241 Complete games 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 246

16 9.c!t:lc3 i>e8 1 0 .h3 h5 11 • .ig5 Quick Repertoire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 Step by Step 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o251 Complete games 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 261

17 9.c!t:\c3 i>e8 1 0 .h3 h5 11 • .if4 Quick Repertoire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 Step by Step 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0265 Complete games 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 272

7

PREFACE

Every grandmaster who intends to begin defending the black side of the open games must first find the right answer to the question - which line to choose against the Ruy Lopez? I was no exception to this rule. I was taking a walk once with my friends Alexander Riazantsev and Igor Kurnosov and they came up with a wonderful idea: "You've always been an excellent endgame player; study the Berlin Wall !" I liked that advice very much and it gave me a clear direction for studying a new repertoire.

I worked hard at mastering l . . .e7-e5 for Black and the results were very fruitful in the 2011 World Cup, where I had no problems at all af­ter l.e2-e4. I was especially happy with the outcome of the opening battle against the outstanding theoretician M. Kobalia. In fact, in one of the main tabias of the anti-Berlin system I found an order of moves which I believe to be among my best analytical achievements.

In this book Roman Ovetchkin and I have decided to illustrate the theoretical section with model games and thorough analysis of these will undoubtedly help the reader to gain a better grasp of the finer points of this system and orientate himself among the enormous amount of information available.

My co-author and I very much appreciate the help, in the creation of this book, of our friends, GMs I.Kurnosov, P.Ponkratov and A. Riazantsev, and my life-long coach N.Ogloblin. We should also like to thank its editor, Sergey Soloviov, without whose invaluable advice this book would probably not have come to fruition.

Igor Lysyj Ekaterinburg, February 2012

9

Partl

l.e4 e5 2.l2jf3 llJc6 3.�b5 llJf6

Anti-Berlin

Our analysis of the Ruy Lopez has been divided in two parts. In Part 2 we study the Berlin end­game (l.e4 e5 2,l[jf3 tt:lc6 3.ib5 tt:lf6 4.0-0 tt:lxe4 5.d4 tt:ld6 6.ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tt:lf5 8 .1Mfxd8+ <i>xd8), while here we deal with all the possible ways for White to avoid this.

In Chapter 1 we have analyzed some relatively rare attempts by White to avoid entering the Berlin endgame.

After 4.1Mfe2 ic5, White will have to play d2-d3 sooner or later, transposing to variations ana­lyzed in Chapters 3 and 5.

The move 4.d4 leads to origi­nal positions and the game be­comes rather open. It would be useful for the readers to memo-

10

rize some concrete lines, but the reputation of this move as com­pletely harmless for Black is com­pletely justified.

If White transposes to the Four Knights Game with 4.tt:lc3, as in our book "The Open Games for Black", we recommend that you study the symmetrical varia­tion 4 . . . ib4, and the key game you should follow is Nisipeanu -R.Ponomariov, Bazna 2010.

It is a well-known fact that White's attempts to avoid the Berlin endgame, after the moves 4. 0 - 0 tt:lxe4, are completely harmless for Black and we pro­vide you with convincing proof of this in Chapters 8-10. There often arise positions with a pawn-struc­ture similar to the exchange vari­ation of the French Defence, where there is not much opportu­nity for a fighting game.

Much more interesting mid­dle-game positions arise after 4.d3. When we had to make our choice between the moves 4 . . . ic5 and 4 . . . d6, we relied on the expe­rience of the world's leading ex­perts, such as Kramnik, Karjakin

and Yakovenko, who have unani­mously preferred 4 . . . i.c5. The main lines in that case are amaz­ingly similar to the Giuoco Piano, but White has many additional possibilities (the exchange on c6

for example). The thorough anal­ysis of all the possible plans for White proved to be very useful for Igor Lysyj in his match against Mikhail Kobalia at the World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk, 2011 .

11

Chapter l l.e4 e5 2.lt�f3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6

Quick Repertoire

Black invites his opponent to enter the Berlin endgame. This move seems quite logical, since he develops a knight and attacks a central pawn.

4.d4 White plays much more often

the moves 4.0-0 and 4.d3, which we will analyze in the next chap­ters, together with the possible transfer into the Four Knights Opening.

4 . . . exd4 5. 0 - 0 It is bad for White to opt

for 5.\We2? �d6 !N, because after this beautiful move Black com­pletes quickly his development and begins active actions on the e-file, while the variation S.eS

12

ttJe4 6. 0-0 a6 7.h:c6 dxc6 8 . ttJd4 �cS 9 .c3 0-0= is considered quite deservedly as harmless for him.

5 . . . a6

6 . .ia4 Following 6.h:c6 dxc6 7.d4

exd4 8.\Wxd4 \Wxd4 9.t2Jxd4, in comparison to the exchange vari­ation of the Ruy Lopez (l.e4 eS 2 . ttJf3 ttJc6 3.�b5 a 6 4.h:c6 dxc6 5 .0-0 \Wd6 6.d4 exd4 7.\Wxd4 Wxd4 8.ttJxd4 ttJf6), Black has an extra tempo, since instead of the move f7-f6, which is necessary there, he has developed his knight.

White presents his opponent with important tempi for devel-

l.e4 e5 2.ltlj3 ltlc6 3 . .ib5 ltlf6 4.d4 ed

opment with 7 . .ig5? h6 8 . .ih4 gS ! i

There arises a harmless varia­tion for Black of the Two Knights Defence after 6 . .ic4 lt:lxe4 7.Ei:el dS, because the fact that his pawn is on a6 and not on a7 is not detri­mental to his position.

6 . . . .ie7

7.e5 Chess amateurs fall often into

the trap 7.lt:lxd4? lt:lxd4 8.'�xd4 cS+

In the variation 7.Vtfe2 bS 8 . .ib3 d6, White must lose time in order to regain his pawn and Black can exploit this to activate his pieces.

After 7.Ei:el bS and 8 .e5 lt:lxeS ! = , or 8 . .ib3 d6= Black has no noticeable problems, moreo­ver that if White plays too ambi­tiously, Black may even seize the initiative.

7 • . .lile4 8.lil xd4 0 - 0

9.lilf5 This aggressive move only en­

ables White to keep the position within equality. His alternatives would force him to play later very precisely.

9 • . .lilc5 1 0 .Vtlg4 g6

In the diagrammed position he must follow with ll . .ih6, or ll.lt:lh6+ and he would maintain equality. After ll . .ixc6?! dxc6+ all Black's pieces are perfectly co­ordinated, so White must fight for a draw.

13

Chapter 1 l.e4 e5 2)[)£3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6

Step by Step

A) 4. h:c6 B) 4.'�e2 C) 4.d4

A) 4. h:c6 This early exchange does not

create any serious problems for Black.

4 . . . dxc6 5.d3 About 5.0-0 lt:Jxe4 6.�e2 lt:Jd6,

or 6J:l:el lt:Jd6 - see Chapter 8. The endgame arising after 5.

tt:Jxe5 �d4 6.lt:Jf3 �xe4+ 7.�e2 �xe2+ 8.\tlxe2+ is favourable for Black due to his two-bishop ad­vantage.

White has also tried in practice 5.lt:Jc3 .ic5 6.0-0 (6.lt:Jxe5? ! .ixf2 + 7.\tlxf2 �d4+ 8.\tlfl �xeS 9.d4 �e7 10.�d3 .ie6+ - his central pawns will be a target for attack of Black's major pieces.) 6 . . . 0-0.

14

Here, it is not good for White to opt for 7.lt:Jxe5 Ele8+ and Black has the edge thanks to his two power­ful bishops. It is preferable for White to continue with 7.d3 - see Chapter 4.

5 . . . i.d6 Black has an extra tempo in

comparison to the variation, which we analyze in Chapter 5, because his bishop has come to the d6-square at once.

6. 0 - 0

6 . . . h6 The idea of this move is not so

much to avoid the pin of the knight (it is not dangerous at all), but to ensure the safety of the bishop, after its deployment on the e6-square, against lt:Jg5.

6 . . . c5 ! ? - This is a more ambi-

l.e4 e5 2. tt:lj3 tt:lc6 3. i.b5 tt:lf6 4.d4 ed

tious move for Black. He does not wish to lose a tempo. 7.We2 tt:ld7 8.tt:lbd2 tt:lf8 9.tt:lc4 tt:lg6 10 .�g5 f6 11 .�e3 0-0? - he has obtained a very good position, Gharamian -Kharlov, Cappelle la Grande 2004.

7.i.e3 In response to 7.b3, Toller -

Havelka, Bad Ragaz 2005, it seems very attractive for Black to opt for 7 . . . �e6 8.�b2 tt:Jd7 9 .tt:Jbd2 0-0=; it is not preferable for White to continue with 7.tt:lbd2, Pina Sierra - Espin Buendia, Oro­pesa del Mar 2001, 7 . . . �e6 8 .b3 tt:Jd7= and in both cases, Black has no problems at all .

7 • . . .ie6 8)l:\bd2 0-0= Woj­na - Makosa, Chatawa 2009.

B) 4.We2 White has protected his e4-

pawn, but his last move has no other pluses.

4 . . . .ic5

5.c3 5.d3 0-0 - see Chapter 3 ;

5 .0-0 0-0 6.c3 d5 - see 5.c3.

After 5.tt:lc3 tt:ld4! 6.tt:lxd4 hd4t Black seizes the initiative.

5.hc6 bxc6 6.tt:Jxe5 (following 6.d3 d6 7.tt:lbd2 0-0, White must fight for equality in the variation 8.tt:lb3, Gurgenidze - Podgaets, Kharkov 1985, 8 . . . i.b6 9 .0-0 �e6+, as well as after 8 .h3 E!e8 9 . tt:lb3 i.b6+ Glek - Dautov, Riga 1988 and his knights have no good prospects in either case) 6 . . . We?

7.f4 (White fails to equalize af­ter 7.tt:ld3 �a6 8 .tt:lc3 0-0. In the variation 9.b3 E!fe8 10.f3 tt:ld5 11. tt:lxd5 cxd5 12 .�b2 dxe4 13.fxe4 Wxe4 14.Wxe4 E!xe4+ 15.�d1 �f8+ Black has maintained the materi­al balance, he has two powerful bishops, while White's rook on a1 will hardly enter the actions any time soon, J.Polgar - Smejkal, Moscow 1994. He would not change much with 9 .0-0 E!ae8+ Black regains unavoidably his pawn and has a superior develop­ment.) 7 . . . d6 8 .tt:Jxc6 Wxe4 9. Wxe4+ tt:Jxe4 10.d3 (It looks very risky for White to choose 10.d4 �b6 ll.c3 aS+ Black's pieces are tremendously active, while White will have to waste important tern-

15

Chapter 1

pi for the salvation of his knight on c6, Formanek - Coppini, Reg­gio Emilia 1977. It may be possi­ble that his best chance is 10.lt:lc3 lt:lxc3 1l.dxc3 and after ll . . . �f5 12 .�d2 �d7, not 13.lt:lb4 ElheS:+ with an attack for Black, which more than compensates his miss­ing pawn, but 13.lt:ld4! hd4 14. cxd4 Elae8� - although even then, White cannot keep his extra pawn and neutralize his opponent's ac­tivity at the same time.) 10 . . . lt:lf6 ll .b4 �b6 12.lt:la5 lt:ld5 13 .�d2 0-0 14.lt:lc4 Ele8+ 15.�f1 �d4 16. c3 �f6+ - He has no satisfactory defence against the threats lt:lxb4 and �f5, Bryzgalin - Skatchkov, Sochi 1998 (game 1).

5 .. . 0 - 0

6.hc6 6.d3 Ele8 - see Chapter 5. After 6.0-0 Ele8 7.Eld1 (7.h3 a6

8.�a4 d5 9.d3 h6, or 7.d3 a6 8 . �a4 h6 - see Chapter 5, variation Bl) 7 . . . a6 8.�a4 d5 9.d3 h6 10.h3 b5 1l .�b3 �e6? Black reaches a very good position, since White has failed to place a pawn on the d4-square, so his rook on d1 is not

16

so well deployed, Lorenzini - Sa­rin, Rosario 2000.

6 . . . bxc6 7 _lljxe5 d6

8.d4 In the variation 8.lt:lxc6 �d7 9.

lt:la5 lt:lxe4 10.d4 �b6 11.lt:lb3 Ele8 12 .�e3 aS+ Black's activity more than compensates the sacrificed pawn and his powerful light­squared bishop can hardly be neutralized, Cuijpers - Mitkov, Sitges 1998.

8 . • . �b6 9)tJXC6 White loses a piece after 9 .

�g5? dxe5 10.dxe5 h6 1l.�h4 g5 12 .exf6 gxh4-+ Czebe - Resika, Budapest 1998, while following 9.lt:ld3 lt:lxe4 10.0-0 Ele8+ Black has a noticeable lead in develop­ment in a position with material equality. He dominates on the only open file and on the light squares, Giaccio - Slipak, Buenos Aires 1995.

9 . . . �d7 1 0 .lt:lb4 a5 11.lbd3 After 11.lt:ld5? lt:lxd5 12.exd5

�a6 13.c4 Elae8 14.�e3 f5-+ all Black's pieces will take part in a decisive attack, Gurgenidze - Ols­son, Leningrad 1960.

l.e4 eS 2. CiJj3 CiJ c6 3 . .ib5 CiJf6 4.d4 ed

ll. . . �xe4 12. 0 - 0 But not 12.1Mfxe4? l"le8 13.�e5

dxe5-+ 12 . • . ges 13 . .ie3 .ia6 gg Yuda­

sin - Khalifman, St. Petersburg 1995 (game 2).

Black's piece-activity more than compensates the sacrificed pawn.

C) 4.d4 White is trying to seize imme­

diately the initiative, but he lacks sufficient resources to do that.

4 . . • exd4

He fights for the advantage most often with the moves Cl) 5.e5 and C2) 5. 0 - 0 .

His other possibilities lead ei­ther to transposition of moves, or enable Black to equalize easily, or even to seize the initiative.

5 .CiJxd4 a6 6.hc6 (6 . .ia4?! CiJxd4 7.1Mfxd4 b5 8.ib3 c5 9.1Mfe5+ ie7+ White will save his bishop, but his exposed queen only helps Black to complete his develop­ment with tempo. Following 6.CiJxc6 bxc6 7.id3 d5= , there arises a position this is a harmless variation for Black of the Scotch Game, but with the extra move a7-a6 for Black. The presence of this move cannot change the eval­uation of the position as equal .) 6 . . . dxc6 7.0-0 - see variation C2.

The move 5.1Mfe2? enables Black to seize the initiative, A.Vi­tolinsh - Fernandez Garcia, Jur­mala 1983, 5 . . . .id6 !N - after this beautiful move he completes his development very quickly and at­tacks on the e-file, for example: 6.0-0 (6.ixc6 dxc6 7.e5 0-0 8.0-0 l"le8 9.c3 c5 10 .if4 CiJh5 11 .1Mfd2 if8 12.cxd4 cxd4 13.CiJxd4 c5 14.CiJf3 1Mfxd2 15.hd2 .ig4 16. CiJc3 hf3 17.gxf3 l"lxe5+ White fails to maintain the material bal­ance ; 6.e5 0-0 7.if4 CiJd5 8.ig3 l"le8 9.0-0 he5 10.CiJxe5 CiJxe5 11 . he5 c6 12 .ic4 d6 13 .hd5 cxd5 14.if6 gxf6+ Black has two extra pawns and a lead in development, so all this more than compensates the obvious defects of his pawn­structure.) 6 . . . 0-0 7.l"le1 l"le8 8 . CiJbd2 .if8 9.1Mff1 d5 10 .hc6 bxc6 11.e5 CiJd7 12 .CiJxd4 (12.CiJb3 c5+) 12 . . . l"lxe5 13.CiJ2f3 l"lxe1 14.1Mfxe1

17

Chapter 1

1Wf6+ - He has a stable edge thanks to his extra central pawn and the two-bishop advantage.

Cl) 5.e5

After this active move, White can still maintain the balance, but he must play very precisely.

5 .• .ll:)e4 6. 0 - 0 6.\We2 lt'lc5 7.0-0 a6 - see

6 .0-0. In reply to 6.lt'lxd4, Bird -

Steinitz, London 1866, Black ob­tains an excellent position after 6 . . . �c5 7.c3 0-0 8 .\We2 d5 9.�xc6 bxc6 10.lt'ld2 lt'lxd2 11 .hd2 aS+ White's king cannot remain in­definitely in the centre, but he loses the exchange if he castles kingside, while if he evacuates it on the queenside, it cannot be safe there either, in connection with Black's threats on the b-file.

6 . . . a6 (diagram)

7 . .ixc6 7.\We2 lt'lc5 8 .�g5 (8 .�c4?! �e7

9J�d1 d6 10.exd6 \Wxd6 ll.lt'lc3 �g4+ He has preserved his extra pawn and completes effortlessly

18

his development, MacKey - Hue­seyin, Email 2007) 8 . . . �e7 9.�xe7, Malysheva - Neubauer, Zadar 2005 (after 9.hc6 �xg5 10 .�d5 0-0 11 .l'i:d1 d6 12 .exd6 \Wxd6 13. lt'lc3 �f6 14.lt'lxd4 1Wb6t Black has the two-bishop advantage, but White still has chances for a draw). Now, it seems excellent for Black to continue with 9 . . . lt'lxe7! ? 10 .�c4 b5 11 .�b3 0 - 0 12 .lt'lxd4 lt'lxb3 13.axb3 �b7 14.lt'lc3 c5 15. lt'lf3 lt'lg6t - his light-squared bishop will exert even more pow­erful pressure against White's po­sition if Black manages to advance f7-f6. White can hardly prevent that, because in the variation 16. lt'le4 \We7 17.\We3 d5 ! 18.lt'lxc5 d4 ! 19.\Wxd4 hf3 20.gxf3 lt'lxe5 21 . \We3 lt'lxf3+ 22 .Wh1 We?+ Black maintains the edge, despite the numerous exchanges. White's king is seriously endangered.

7.�a4 lt'lc5 8 .hc6 dxc6 9 . lt'lxd4 (It is not preferable for him to opt for 9.\Wxd4 �f5+, because contrary to the set-ups of the Ber­lin type, Black's light-squared bishop is perfectly placed and he has preserved his castling rights.

l.e4 e5 2. liJj3 liJc6 3.�b5liJf6 4.d4 ed

In answer to 9.�g5, Marco -Mieses, Leipzig 1894, it seems very good for him to centralize his forces with 9 . . . �d5 10.liJxd4 liJe6 U.liJxe6 he6+ and Black is slight­ly better, due to his excellent de­velopment and the two powerful bishops.) 9 . . . liJe6 10.liJf3 (follow­ing 10 .liJxe6 he6 11.�e2, Morphy - Loewenthal, London 1858, Black has superior prospects after the aggressive move ll . . . �h4+; following 10.liJf5 �xd1 11 .l"l:xd1 �d7 12 .�e3 0-0-0 13 .liJc3 h5� he has a good position thanks to his bishop-pair, Mnatsakanian -I. Ibragimov, Katowice 1992) 10 . . . �xd1 ll .l"l:xd1 �e7= Mogilevsky -Lilienthal, Kuibyshev 1942.

7.�c4 - This move transposes to one of the variations of the Two Knights Defence (l .e4 e5 2 . liJf3 liJc6 3.�c4 liJf6 4.d4 exd4 5.e5 liJe4 6.0-0), which is considered to be harmless for Black, moreo­ver that he has played the extra move a7-a6, which is not harmful at all. 7 . . . d5 8.exd6 liJxd6 9 .l"l:e1+ (9.�d5 liJf5 10 .l"l:e1+ �e7 11 .hc6+ bxc6 12 .g4 liJd6 13.liJxd4 �d7 14. �g5 f6 15.�f4 liJb5 16.liJf5 �xd1 17.l"l:xd1 hf5 18.gxf5 liJd6= He has no difficulties in this situa­tion.) 9 . . . �e7 10 .�d5 0-0 11 .hc6 bxc6 12 .liJxd4, Gavrilov - S.Kalin­itschew, Pardubice 2001. The ac­curate move 12 . . . �d7!� provides Black with excellent compensa­tion for his compromised queen­side pawn-structure, due to his two powerful bishops in this quite open position.

7 ... dxc6

8 .c!l:lxd4 8.�xd4?! �f5 9 .�f4 �c5 10.

�xd8+ l"l:xd8+ He has completed his development quickly and comfortably, Medley - Morphy, London 1858.

In answer to 8 .�e2 , Kuyindzhi - Mi.Tseitlin, USSR 1977, it is very good for Black to follow with 8 . . . liJc5 ! 9.�g5 �d7 10 .l"l:d1 liJe6 11 .�e3 c5 12 .c3 �b5 13.�xb5+ axb5 14.cxd4 cxd4 15.liJxd4 liJxd4 16.hd4 b4+ White has regained his pawn indeed, but lags in de­velopment, while Black has a clear-cut plan for actions on the queenside and the two-bishop ad­vantage.

8.l"l:e1 �f5 ! ? (8 . . . liJc5 ! ?) 9.liJxd4 �g6

19

Chapter 1

10.f3 (White has no edge following 10.�e3 �cS 1l .c3, Oechslein - Rau, Email 2009, be­cause after 11 . . .0-0 12 .f3 'LlgS 13. 'Lld2 'Lle6, he has a choice between 14.'Llxe6 he3+ 15.:1'1xe3 fxe6� with mutual chances, since Black's bishop is very powerful and he can easily centralize his pieces, or 14.'Ll 2b3 hd4 15.'Llxd4 'WeB= - he has protected the c6-pawn and is ready to restrict his opponent's bishop with b7-b6, followed by c6-c5.) lO . . . 'LlgS 11. �e3 (Or 1l.c3 'Lle6 12 .'Llxe6 fxe6+ and White misses badly his light­squared bishop.) 1l . . .c5 12 .'Lle2, Van Leeuwen - Sorenfors, Email 2008, Black can continue here with 12 . . . \Wxd1 13.:1'1xd1 hc2 14. :i'i:d2 hb1 15.�xg5 h6 16.�e3 �h7= and he ends up with an extra pawn. He does not need to keep it however, because in the variation 17.:1'1c1 :i'i:d8 18.:1'1xd8+ �xd8 19. hcS hcS+ 20.:1'1xc5 �c8 2U\d5 )"1e8 22 .f4 gS 23.g3 gxf4 24.gxf4 f6= White regains it, but Black's bishop is at least as good as White's knight in a fight on both sides of the board.

8 . . . .ic5 Black completes successfully

his development and solves con­vincingly his problems in the opening.

9.c3 0 - 0 l O J";el f5 (diagram)

ll.f3 After ll.exf6? ! \Wxf6 12 .f3

'Lld6+, the game is opened in fa­vour of Black, who has a superior

20

development and the two-bishop advantage.

ll.f4 �e6 12 .�e3 hd4 13.cxd4 �dS� - He has created good counterplay on the light squares.

ll . . .<!l::lg5 12 . .ie3 Following 12 .hg5 \WxgS 13.

1Wb3+ �h8 14.'Lla3 \We?+ White will have problems proving that his central pawn compensates Black's two powerful bishops, Gu­seinov - Karjakin, Baku 2009.

12 • . . f4 13 . .if2, Guseinov -Shirov, Baku 2009.

He has numerous good moves here, but Black's most convincing line seems to be the centralizing 13 ••• �d514.c!l::ld2 .ixd4 15.cxd4 (15. hd4?! �f5 16.�f2 b6+) 15 • . . .if5=

l.e4 e5 2.<'Llj3 <'Llc6 3. i.b5 <'Llf6 4.d4 ed

C2) 5. 0 - 0 White is trying to come ahead

in development, but this is a dif­ficult task to accomplish.

5 . . . a6

6 . .ia4 The move 6.i.c4 transposes to

a variation of the Two Knights Defence, which has been long considered as harmless for Black. 6 . . . <'Llxe4 7J''le1 dS 8.i.xd5 WfxdS 9.<'Llc3, Gashimov - Hartman, Dos Hermanas 2004 and now, we be­lieve that his simplest road to equality is 9 . . . Wfh5 10.<'Llxe4 i.e6 1l .i.g5 i.d6=

6.hc6 dxc6

We have already mentioned in our "Quick Repertoire" that there arises a transfer to a favourable

for Black modification of the ex­change variation of the Ruy Lopez and he has no problems in all the variations :

The move 7.i.g5? presents the opponent with important tempi for development. 7 . . . h6 8 .i.h4 gS ! 9.i.g3 i.g7 10.<'Llbd2 cS ll.<'LleS Wfe7 12.<'Lld3 i.g4 13.Wfe1 0-0-0 14.f4 :B:he8 15.e5 <'LldS+ Black's extra central pawn provides him with excellent winning chances, Trepp - Spassky, Lugano 1984;

7.e5 <'LldS ! ? (this is stronger than 7 ... <'Lle4 with transposition to variation Cl) 8 .i.g5 (8.<'Llxd4 cS 9.<'Llb3 <'Llb4 10.Wfh5 i.e6 ! ll .:!'ld1 Wfc8 12 .Wfe2 i.fS 13 .<'Lla3 Wfe6 14.i.g5 h6 15.i.h4 gS 16.i.g3 b6+ Black's pieces are much more ac­tive than their white counterparts and his doubled cS and c7-pawns control the important d4 and d6-squares) 8 . . . i.e7 9 .he7 <'Llxe7 10 . <'Llxd4 cS ll.<'Llf3 (ll .<'Lle2 i.fS 12 . Wfc1 <'Llc6+ Black has deployed per­fectly his pieces, his bishop is con­siderably stronger than White's knight and Black's doubled cS­pawn participates actively in the fight for the centre, contrary to White's eS-pawn.) ll . . . Wfxd1 12 . :B:xd1 i.fS 13.c3 <'Llg6 14.h3 h6 15 . <'Llbd2 0-0-0+ Black dominates on the d-file, while the d3-square is vulnerable in White's camp and his eS-pawn needs protection too, G.Gurevich - Dautov, Minsk 1986.

In the endgame after 7.Wfxd4 Wfxd4 8.<'Llxd4, in comparison to the exchange variation of the Ruy

2 1

Chapter 1

Lopez (l.e4 e5 2 .ttlf3 ttlc6 3.�b5 a6 4 . .b:c6 dxc6 5.0-0 '&d6 6.d4 exd4 7.'&xd4 '&xd4 8 .ttlxd4), Black has an extra tempo, since his knight has already been devel­oped on f6 ! 8 . . . c5 9.ttlf3 (It is worse for White to opt for 9.ttlb3 �e6 10.ttlc3 0-o-m: and Black's queenside initiative becomes even stronger later after b5, c4 etc. In reply to 9.ttle2, Semenova -Zaiatz, Alushta 1992, it is good for him to capture his opponent's central pawn 9 . . . ttlxe4 10.Ele1 ttld6 11 .ttlf4+ �d8+ and White will hardly prove that he has compen­sation for it with queens absent off the board.) 9 . . . ttlxe4 10 .Ele1 f5 11 .ttlc3 �d6 12.ttlg5 (or 12 .ttlxe4 fxe4 13.Elxe4+ �f7 14.�f4 �f5 15. ttle5+ �f6 16.ttlg4+ .b:g4 17.�xd6 cxd6 18.Elxg4 Elhe8= with an equal endgame with four rooks) 12 . . . �d7! 13.ttlgxe4 fxe4 14.ttlxe4 �c6= White was busy regaining his pawn, while Black ensured the safety of his monarch and had no problems with the development of his pieces to active positions.

Or 7.ttlxd4 c5 8 .ttlb3 (8.ttlf3 '&xd1 9.Elxd1 ttlxe4 10.Ele1 f5 - see 7.'&xd4) 8 . . . '&xd1 9.Elxd1, Khol­mov - Reshevsky, Moscow 1991. Now, Black can deploy comforta­bly his forces by playing 9 . . . �e6 10.�f4 (10.ttlc3? ! �d6 11 .�g5 ttld7+ White's knight on b3 is iso­lated from the actions, while Black's bishops are perfectly placed and his knight can go at an opportune moment to the c4-square. His queenside pawns will

22

be easily advanced. Black has no problems either in the variation 10.f3 �d6 11 .ttlc3 0-0-0 12 .�e3 b6 13.ttlc1 ttld7 14.ttl 1e2 h6=) 10 . . . ttlxe4 11 .�xc7 Elc8 12 .�f4 Eld8 ! 13. Elxd8+ �xd8= He has exchanged a couple of rooks and ensured the safety of his king, so Black can think about seizing the initia­tive.

6 ... .i.e7

White's attempts to create problems for his opponent in the diagrammed position are usually connected with the moves C2a) 7J�el and C2b) 7.e5.

It is bad for him to play instead 7.ttlxd4? ttlxd4 8.'&xd4 (White can save his piece with 8.e5 ttle6 9.exf6 .b:f6+, but Black's extra central pawn provides him with superior prospects .) 8 . . . c5 9.'&d3 (it would be a disaster for White to opt for 9 .'&d1 b5 10.e5 ttlg8 ll.'&f3 Elb8 12 .'&g3 g6 13.e6 d6-+) 9 . . . b5 10.e5 ttlg8 ll.'&d5 Elb8 12 . �b3 c4+ Black wins the enemy bishop for a couple of pawns and has excellent winning chances.

7.'&e2 b5 8 .�b3 (But not 8.

l.e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tL:lc6 3 . .ib5 tLlf6 4.d4 ed

e5? ! tL:lxe5 9 . \Wxe5 bxa4 10Jl:e1 d6, because in the variation 11.\Wg3 0-0 12 .tL:lxd4 l"le8 White loses af­ter 13.tL:lc6? .if8 !-+ , but even fol­lowing 13.tLlc3 \Wd7 14.h3 c5+ he fails to equalize, since Black has two powerful bishops and an ex­tra pawn, despite its being dou­bled, Flamberg - Alekhine, St. Petersburg 1914, while after 11 . Wxd4 .ig4 12 .Wxa4+ Wd7 13. \Wxd7+ ci>xd7+ he is ahead in de­velopment, dominates in the cen­tre and has a mighty light-squared bishop without an opponent, Kirov - Timoscenko, Polanica Zdroj 1976.) 8 . . . d6 9.a4, Vijayal­akshmi - Kavitha, Mumbai 2003 and here, Black obtains an excel­lent position with the line : 9 . . . .ig4 10.axb5 axb5 11.l"lxa8 Wxa8 12 . Wxb5 (it is inferior for White to opt for 12 .tL:la3 b4 13.tLlb5 Wb7 14.l"ld1 \Wb6+ and he fails to regain his central pawn) 12 . . . .ixf3 13. gxf3 0-0 14.\We2 (Black has no problems in the variation 14 . .if4 tL:la5 15.tL:ld2 l"lb8 16.Wd3 tL:lxb3 17.tL:lxb3 c5 18.l"la1 Wb7=) 14 . . . tL:la5 15 . .ia2 c5 16.tLla3 tL:lc6+! White's kingside is vulnerable and that provides his opponent with excel­lent counterplay.

C2a) 7J:!el After this move, White has no

chances of obtaining an advan­tage, since Black completes his development without any prob­lems.

7 .•. b5

8 • .ib3 8 .e5? ! - White has no pros­

pects of maintaining an edge after this aggressive move either. 8 . . . tL:lxe5

9.l"lxe5 d6 ! 10 .l"le1 (10.l"lxe7+ \Wxe7 11 ..ib3 c5+ Black's pawn­mass in the centre prevents the manoeuvres of White's minor pieces; 10.l"lg5 bxa4 and here, fol­lowing 11 .tLlxd4 0-0 12.tLlc3 .id7+ he has no compensation for the sacrificed pawn, Perez Perez -Spassky, Amsterdam 1964, while after 11 .l"lxg7 tL:lh5 12 .l"lg5 hg5 13. .ixg5 Wd7 14.\Wxd4 0-0+ White has some compensation for the exchange, but it is insufficient, since Black's king is bare indeed, but is perfectly covered by his pieces, Rogers - J.Howell, Lon-

23

Chapter 1

don 1988.) 10 . . . bxa4 11.ltlxd4 (11 . i!.g5? ! 0-0 12 .�e2 h6 13.i!.h4 g5 14.ltlxd4, Petrushin - Dorfman, Tallinn 1983, 14 . . . �d7!+ He ex­ploits the fact that his bishop on e7 is untouchable and covers the weakened f5 and c6-squares, completes the development of his pieces and remains with an extra pawn.) ll . . . i!.d7 12.�f3 (After 12 . c4 0-0, Black has an extra pawn and White must lose time in order to regain it. Black has better de­velopment too and a powerful bishop-pair in a position with an open centre. White fails to keep his opponent's king in the centre with 12 .�e2 c5 13.ltlf3 l"i:a7 14.ltlc3 i!.c6+ De Blasia - Miotto, corr. 1994.) 12 . . . 0-0 13.ltlc3 (13.ltlc6 ii.xc6 14.�xc6 d5+ He regains his pawn, but lags in development, while Black dominates in the cen­tre.) 13 . . . l"i:e8 14.ltlc6 ii.xc6 15. �xc6 �d7 16.�xd7 ltlxd7= and the position looks completely drawish, Kengis - Aseev, Vilnius 1984.

9.ltlxe5 bxa4 10 .�xd4 (10.i!.g5 0-0 11.�xd4 h6 - see 10.�xd4) 10 . . . 0-0 ll.a3 (ll .ctJc3 l"i:b8 12 .a3 Ei:b6! - see 11.a3 ; in the variation 11 .�xa4 Ei:b8, Black maintains ex­cellent attacking prospects after 12 .ltlc3 Ei:b4 13.�a5 i!.b7 14.f3 Ei:h4! i Galkin - Yemelin, St. Pe­tersburg 1994, but even in White's more accurate line: 12 .ltld3 ltld5 13.i!.d2 i!.f6? Black obtains an ex­cellent position, G.Kuzmin - Pod­gaets, Kharkov 1985; following 11 .i!.g5 h6 12 .i!.h4 l"i:b8+ White has

24

problems regaining his a4-pawn, Shliperman - Sasikiran, 1995) ll . . . Ei:b8 12.ltlc3

12 . . . Ei:b6 ! (this is an excellent transfer of the rook in the centre) 13 .i!.g5 (13.ltlxa4 l"i:e6+; 13.ltld3 d6 14.�xa4 l"i:e8= ; 13.�xa4 l"i:e6 - af­ter the retreat of White's queen from the centre, his position be­comes worse, for example it is bad for him to continue with 14.f4 ltlg4+, in answer to 14.i!.g5, Chiburdanidze - Romanishin, Frunze 1985, Black's position is very active after 14 . . . h6 15.i!.h4 i!.b7 16.Ei:ad1 g5 17.i!.g3 i!.c5+, while following 14.i!.f4 i!.b7 15.ltld3 c5 16.i!.e3 l"i:e8+ he will advance his central pawns, preserving his two-bishop advantage, Chiburda­nidze - Grivas, Athens 1984.) 13 . . . h6 14.i!.h4 l"i:e6 15.f4 i!.b7 16.f5 Ei:d6 17.�a7 i!.a8+ Black's rook is ready to penetrate to his opponent's second rank, so White has no time to regain his pawn, Makarichev -Timoscenko, Tashkent 1987.

s . . . d6 (diagram)

9.i.d5 9.ltlxd4? - Strangely enough,

but this blunder of a piece is en-

l.e4 e5 2. ttJ.f3 tLlc6 3 . .ib5 tLlf6 4.d4 ed

countered often in practice. 9 . . . t2Jxd4 10.'\Wxd4 c5 11.'\Wd1 c4-+

9.a4 - White is trying to im­pede his opponent's queenside actions. 9 . . . .ig4 10.axb5 (after 10 .c3 dxc3 11.t2lxc3 O-m= Black's threat t2le5 seems very unpleas­ant, Egin - Savon, Orel 1998; fol­lowing 10 .h3 h£3 11.'\Wxf3 0-0 12 .'\We2, Zapata - Smejkal, La Val­etta 1980, he can simplify maxi­mally the position with 12 . . . t2le5 13.axb5 axb5 14.l"1xa8 '\Wxa8 15. '\Wxb5 t2Jxe4 16 . .id5 c6 17.hc6 '\Wxc6 18.'\Wxc6 t2Jxc6 19.l"1xe4 l"1b8= and Black's piece-activity pro­vides him with excellent compen­sation for his seemingly vulnera­ble pawns) 10 . . . axb5 ll.l"1xa8 '\Wxa8 12 .t2la3 \WaS!+ - He has pre­served his extra pawn, without compromising his position and White must fight for equality, Vo­lokitin - Dorfman, Bad Wiessee 2001.

9.c3 ! ? - This move provides White with good compensation for the pawn, but it is still insuffi­cient for equality. 9 . . . dxc3 10. t2Jxc3 0-0 ll.t2ld5, B .Savchenko -P.Smirnov, Olginka 2011 (11 .h3

.ib7+; 11 ..ig5 .ib7+). Black can continue here with 1l . . . .ig4 12 . .if4 .ixf3 13.'\Wxf3 t2Jd4 14.'\Wd3 t2lxb3 15.t2lxe7+ '\Wxe7 16.axb3 l"1fe8+ and he simplifies the position keeping his extra pawn.

9 . . . t2Jxd5 1 0 .exd5 c!Lle5 ll.c!Llxd4

After 11.t2lxe5? ! dxe5 12 .l"1xe5 0-0+ Black has a great lead in de­velopment, two powerful bishops and extra space.

11 • • • 0 - 0

12.a4 12 .f4? ! - This move weakens

the position of White's king. 12 . . . .ig4 13.'\Wd2 t2lc4 14.'\Wf2 (in the variation 14.'\Wd3 .if6 15.t2lc3 l"1e8 16.l"1f1 c5 17.t2lc6 '\Wd7-+ he fails to develop his queenside, AI Qudaimi - Amin, Khanty-Mansi­ysk 2010) 14 . . . .ih4 15.g3 .if6+ White's king is endangered and his d5-pawn is weak, Blatny - Ro­driguez Cespedes, Amsterdam 1989.

12 . .if4 .ib7 13.t2le2? ! (It is preferable for him to play 13.he5 dxe5 14.t2lc6 '\Wd6 15.t2lxe7+ '\Wxe7+, although even then,

25

Chapter 1

Black's bishop is stronger than White's knight and the d5-pawn is likely to be exchanged for the pawn on e5.) 13 . . . tLlc4 14.tLlbc3 .if6+ White will hardly neutralize the activity of Black's pieces with­out material losses, Fressinet -Kramnik, Paris 2002.

12 .tLlc3 EJ:e8

13 . .if4 (13.tLle4?! .ib7 14.tLlf5 Wd7 15.tLlxe7+ EJ:xe7+ He will oc­cupy unavoidably the e-file, since White's rook on a1 will fail to en­ter the actions any time soon and his pawn on d5 will need perma­nent protection, Konstantinov -Kaiumov, Alushta 2002 ; it will be almost the same after 13.a4 b4 14.tLle4 .ib7 15.tLlf5 Wd7 16.tLlxe7+ EJ:xe7+ Timman - Spassky, Hilver­sum 1983; in the variation 13.f4 .ig4 14.Wd2 tLlc4 15.Wd3 .if6 16. tLle4 hd4+ 17.Wxd4 �f5 18.b3 Wh4 19 .g3 We7 20 .bxc4 he4 2l .�b2 f5= it looks like there will arise numerous exchanges and the game will end in a draw.) 13 . . . �g4 14.f3 �d7 15.he5 (following 15.b3 tLlg6, Black obtains better prospects in the variation 16.Wd2 tLlxf4 17.Wxf4 �f6+, as well as fol­lowing 16.�g3 Wb8+ with a trans-

26

fer of his queen to the b7-square, from where it will attack the ene­my d5-pawn and will not stand in the way of the other pieces) 15 . . . dxe5 16.EJ:xe5 (16.tLlb3 �f8+ Black's bishops are stronger than the enemy knights)

16 . . . b4 ! (The inaccurate line : 16 . . . �f6? 17.EJ:xe8+ Wxe8 18.tLle4± leaves Black without sufficient compensation for the pawn.) 17. tLle4 (17.tLlce2?! �d6 18.EJ:xe8+ Wxe8 19 .g3 We5 20.Wd2 Wxd5 2 1.tLlf4 Wc4 22 .c3 EJ:d8 23 .We2 Wxe2 24.tLlfxe2 bxc3 25.bxc3 c5+ His bishops are tremendously ac­tive in this open position with ma­terial equality. White will have great problems maintaining it, however . . . ) 17 . . .f6 18 .EJ:h5 (Black should not be afraid of the ex­change-sacrifice 18 .EJ:e6?! he6 19.tLlxe6 Wd7 20 .c3 bxc3 2 l.bxc3 c6 ! 22 .c4 f5 23.tLlf2 �f6 24.EJ:b1 cxd5 25.cxd5 EJ:ab8+ There are open files for his rooks and White's knight on e6 is almost harmless ; 18.tLle6 Wc8 19.EJ:f5 c6 20.EJ:h5 he6 2l .dxe6 Wxe6 22 .g4+ Black's bishop is more powerful than the enemy knight, because the centre is opened and the fight

l.e4 e5 2.ti:lf3 ti:lc6 3.�b5 ti:lj6 4.d4 ed

is on both sides of the board, moreover that White's rook on h5 might get lost.) 18 . . . g6 19J'!h6 f5 20 .ti:lf2 �g5 2Ulh3, Juarez de Vena - Turko, Email 2010. His rook on h3 is isolated from the ac­tions and this enables Black with 21 . . .Wf6 22 .c3 �e3 23.f4 bxc3 24. bxc3 �xf4+ to restore the material balance, preserving his two-bish­op advantage.

12 . . . .ig4

13.f3 13 .Wd2 �d7 14.ti:lc3 b4 (In an­

swer to 15.ti:ld1, Votava - Lukacs, Germany 1995, it seem very good for Black to activate his queen in a standard fashion with 15 . . . Wb8+; after 15.ti:lce2 Wb8, White equal­izes neither with 16 .ti:lg3 Wb7 17. ti:ldf5 �f6+ Zimmermann - Siklo­si, St. Ingbert 1990, nor following 16.b3 Wb7 17.c4 bxc3 18.ti:lxc3 :Bfe8+ Perez Rodriguez - De la Paz Perdomo, Santa Clara 2005 and in both cases his forces are squeezed with the protection of his d5-pawn and are incapable of countering the activity of Black's pieces.) 15.ti:le4 Wb8 16.f4 (16.b3

Wb7 17.ti:le2 f5 18 .ti:l4g3 c5+ White is faced with an unpleasant choice. Capturing en passant in­creases dramatically Black's pres­sure on the light squares, while if White does not capture, then he will remain with an weak pawn on d5.) 16 . . . ti:lg4 17.b3 (17.Wd3 Wb7 18.h3 ti:lf6 19.c4 bxc3 20.ti:lxc3 :Bfe8+ White has failed to solve the problem with his d5-pawn, Niko­nov - Turko, Email 2009) 17 . . . Wb7 18.ti:lf3 (18.�b2 Wxd5 19 .c4 Wb7! 20 .ti:lc5 dxc5 2l .:Bxe7 :Bad8+ Black has an extra pawn and he will restrict the enemy bishop with the move f7-f6, while his own bishop will remain very active.) 18 . . . �f6 19.ti:lxf6+ t2Jxf6+ He has lost his two-bishop advantage in­deed, but White's d5-pawn is still weak and his king lacks sufficient protection, Kiewra - Bojkov, Berkeley 2011 .

13 . . . .id7

14.�c3 14.axb5? ! - The opening of the

a-file enables Black to attack the vulnerable d5-pawn very quickly. 14 . . . axb5 15.:Bxa8 Wxa8 16.f4 t2Jg6

27

Chapter 1

17.\Wf3 .if6 18.lt:lc6 lt:lh4 19.\Wf2 .b:c6 20.dxc6 \Wxc6+ Efler -Pokorny, Czech Republic 1999.

In the variation 14.f4 c5 15. dxc6 lt:lxc6? he has excellent compensation for the slight weak­ening of his queenside pawns. Black has two bishops and a supe­rior development, moreover that White's king is insufficiently pro­tected, Donaldson - Gligoric, Lu­gano 1983.

14 . . . b4 15.lt:le4 15.lt:lce2 .if6 16.b3 Eie8 17 . .if4

\Wb8+ Cramling - Balashov, Hast­ings 1985.

15 .•. �e8

16.b3 16.f4? ! lt:lg4 17.b3 lt:lf6 18.

lt:lxf6+ .b:f6 19 . .ib2 Elxe1+ 20. \Wxe1 \Wb8 2 1.\Wf2 \Wb7+ His d5-pawn is weak, his knight is pinned and he has no active prospects, Makarichev - Kholmov, Tallinn 1983.

16.a5? ! - White loses an im­portant tempo with this move. 16 . . . \Wb8 ! (The transfer of Black's queen - \Wb8-b7 is a standard ma­noeuvre for similar positions.) 17.

28

c3 bxc3 18.bxc3 (18.lt:lxc3 \Wb7 19 . \Wc2 .if6+) 18 . . . \Wb7 19.lt:lc2 f5 20 . lt:lg5 .if6+ White has great prob­lems with the protection of his queenside pawns, Reis - Renner, Ingolstadt 1991.

After 16 . .if4 iWb8 ! 17 . .b:e5 dxe5 18 .lt:lb3 f5 19.lt:lf2 .id6 20. iWd3 iWb6+ Black has a mobile pawn-centre, supported by his powerful bishops.

16 .•. .ih4 17.g3

17 .•. f5! White is incapable of exploit­

ing the vulnerability of the e6-square and he cannot oust Black's bishop to the f8-square, or ex­change it, without weakening the position of his own king.

18)ijf2 After 18.gxh4 fxe4+ White's

king is terribly endangered, while following 18.f4 lt:lg4 19.lt:lg5 hg5 20 .fxg5 \Wb8+ his king is opened and Black is not forced to win the enemy d5-pawn. He can simply exchange it and then, his attack on the light squares should settle the issue.

18 • • • .if6 19 • .ib2 Yl!fb8! 2 0 .f4

l.e4 e5 2. ct:lj3 ct:lc6 3.j,b5 ct:lf6 4.d4 ed

ttlg4 2l,gxe8+ (21.ct:lxg4 fxg4 22.\!-lfd3 \Wa7 23 .c4 bxc3 24.i.xc3 \1-lfcS+) 21 ... WI'xe8 22.ttlxg4 fxg4 23.WI'd3 W�m- The vulnerability of the dS-pawn and his bare king make White the defending side for a long time to come, Zapata -Bruzon, Merida 2006 (game 3) .

C2b) 7.e5 He occupies space. 7 ... ttle4

8.ttlxd4 White restores the material

balance. After 8.i.xc6 dxc6+, there airs­

es a position from variation Cl with an extra tempo for Black, since he has already developed his bishop on e7.

8 .\We2 ct:lcS 9.i.xc6 dxc6 10.:1'1dl j,g4+ White has lost tempi for the manoeuvre j,bS-a4xc6 and he will hardly manage to regain his pawn.

8 .c3 - This is a pawn-sacrifice, but he will have problems proving that his compensation for it is adequate. 8 . . . dxc3 9.j,c2 (9.ct:lxc3 ct:lxc3 10.bxc3 0-0 11.\Wd3 dS+ Lelie - Ad. Anderssen, Amster-

dam 1861; 9 .bxc3? ! 0-0 10 .\1-lfdS ct:lcS ll.j,c2 , Bird - Steinitz, Lon­don 1866, ll . . . d6+ Black has an extra pawn and a superior devel­opment; 9 .:1'1e1? ! cxb2 10.j,xb2 ct:lcS 11.j,c2 , Bird - Minchin, Lon­don 1866, ll . . . ct:lb4+ He has a cou­ple of extra pawns and the two­bishop advantage.) 9 . . . d5 10.ct:lxc3 ct:lxc3 11 .bxc3 j,g4 12 .h3, Rudolf­Korneev, Zalakaros 2003 (12 .:1'1e1 \Wd7 13 .:1'1bl bS+) 12 . . . j,hS+ Black has preserved his extra pawn.

8 .:1'1e1 ct:lcS 9.i.xc6 dxc6 10. ct:lxd4 (or 10.\Wxd4?! j,fS+ and his pieces are more active) 10 . . . 0-0 11.ct:lc3 (ll .j,e3 f6 12.exf6 i.xf6= The activity of Black's pieces com­pensates fully his imperfect pawn­structure, Moehle - Zukertort, USA 1884) ll .. .fS ! ?

This i s his simplest way of ob­taining a comfortable game.

12.exf6 .hf6 13.j,e3 ct:le6 14. ct:lxe6 (14.ct:lb3 b6 15.\We2 i.xc3 16. bxc3 cS+ White's bishop is re­stricted by his opponent's pawns, while Black's bishop is very ac­tive. In addition White's doubled pawns, contrary to Black's dou­bled pawns, need protection, Platzgummer - Schlosser, Austria

29

Chapter 1

2010; in response to 14.'Llf3, Black can enter a very pleasant end­game with 14 . . . �xd1 15.Ei:axd1 c5=) 14 . . . he6= and his two­bishop advantage compensates fully the defects of his pawn­structure, Ajanski - Tringov, So­fia 1955.

12 .'Llce2 'Lle6 13 .�e3 (After 13 .�d3 �c5 14.c3 f4+± Black has an excellent game on the king­side; the exchange 13.'Llxe6 �xd1 14.Ei:xd1 he6= leads to an equal endgame, Pogats - Kluger, Buda­pest 1952.) 13 . . . 'Llxd4 14.hd4 (14. �xd4 �xd4 15.�xd4 �e6+) 14 . . . f4+ Black activates easily his forc­es, while White's task to do this is much more complicated, Krupa -Jaracz, Bogatynia 2009.

12.f4 'Lle6 13.'Llf3 (13.�e3 'Llxd4 14.�xd4 �xd4 15.�xd4 �e6+; the endgame following 13. 'Llxe6 �xd1 14.'Llxd1 he6+ is in favour of Black, because he has an easy plan, connected with gradual advancing of his queenside pawns, Torrens - Prins, Madrid 1951) 13 . . . �b4 14.�e3 hc3 15. bxc3 c5+ - His knight is perfectly placed on a blocking position, his c5-pawn restricts the mobility of White's pieces and his light­squared bishop will be very active on the long diagonal, Darga -Ivkov, Hastings 1955 (game 4).

8 ... 0 - 0 (diagram)

9)iJf5 9.c4? 'Llxe5 (Black reacted

much worse in the game Bron­stein - Gligoric, Amsterdam

30

1994: after 9 . . . 'Llc5 10.�xc6 dxc6 11.'Llc3 f6= the game was equal .) 10 .Ei:e1 'Llxf2 ! 1l.lt>xf2 �c5->

He has a very powerful attack, which can be confirmed by the following variations :

12 .lt>g1 - After this move White loses the exchange by force. 12 . . . �h4 13.Ei:xe5 hd4+ 14.Ei:e3 Ei:e8 15.�e2 b5 ! 16.cxb5 �g5 17. 'Llc3 he3+ 18 .he3 Ei:xe3 19.�f2 �b7 20.h4 �e5 2l .l"i:f1 f6-+

In response to 12 .lt>g3, Black's energetic reply 12 . . . �f6 13 .�c2 d5 !-> enables him to bring quickly all his pieces into the actions.

It is not preferable for White to continue with 12 .Ei:e4 b5 ! 13. �c2 �b7 14.Ei:xe5 �h4+ 15.1t>f1 hd4 16.hh7+ lt>h8 17.Ei:e2 �f6+ 18.1t>e1 lt>xh7-+ Black has re-

l.e4 e5 2.lLlj3 cuc6 3 . .ib5 lLlf6 4.d4 ed

gained his pieces and his attack is still running.

12 .@f1 - This seems to be White's most resilient move. 12 . . . 1/¥f6+ 13.ll:lf3 cug4 14.1!¥dS cuxh2+ 1S.@e2 E&e8+ 16.@d1 E&xe1+ 17. @xe1 d6 18.11¥gS (after 18.cuxh2 11¥h4+ 19.@d1 1/¥xh2 20 .@c2 , the long and practically forced varia­tion 20 . . . c6 21 .1i¥f3 g6 22 . .id21i¥g1 23 .b4 .id4 24 . .ic3 .ifS+ 2S.@b2 E&e8 26.cud2 .ixc3+ 27.1/¥xc3 1/¥xg2 28 . .ic2 E&e2 29 .E&d1 .ixc2 30.@xc2 1/¥e4+ 31.1/¥d3 11¥eS+ provides Black with four pawns for the knight and his attack continues) 18 . . . 11¥e6+ 19.@d1 f6 20 .11¥dS cug4 21 .cuc3ll:lf2+ 22 .@c2 c6 23.1/¥xe6+ .ixe6+ He has three pawns for the piece and the activity of his forces has not decreased, despite the trade of the queens.

9.1/¥g4? ! - After this move Black gains tempi for a transfer into a favourable endgame. 9 . . . dS 10.cuxc6 .ixg4 ll.cuxd8 l'l:axd8 12.c3 .icS+ - He has completed his development, while White's entire flank is idle, Rellstab -Spielmann, Stockholm 1930.

9 .11¥e2 - He loses too many tempi and this is detrimental for his development. 9 . . . cuxd4 10. 1/¥xe4 cue6 11 ..ib3 (White should prefer here 11 ..ie3 dS 12 .exd6 .ixd6 13 . .ib3 cueS 14 . .ixcS .ixcS 1S.cuc3 1/¥d4 16.l'l:ad1 1/¥xe4 17. cuxe4 .ib6= his pieces are well de­ployed and Black cannot do much with his two bishops.) 11 . . .ll:lcS 12 .11¥dS c6 13.11¥f3 dS 14.exd6, Bronstein - Ivkov, Beverwijk

1963 and now, he obtains a slight edge with 14 . . . 1/¥xd6 !+, because Black's pieces enter the actions easily and he is threatening to ob­tain the two-bishop advantage.

9 .c3 - White fortifies his posi­tion in the centre, but Black can capture the eS-pawn. 9 . . . cuxeS 10.E&e1 dS 1l.f3 cS 12 .fxe4 cxd4 13.cxd4 (13.exdS? dxc3 ! 14.E&xeS, H.Wolf - Leonhardt, Barmen 190S, 14 . . . .if6 ! 1S .E&e2 11¥b6+ 16. .ie3 cxb2-+ He has won the ex­change, preserving the activity of his pieces.) 13 . . . .ig4 14.1/¥d2 (14. 11¥c2? ! .ih4 1S.E&f1 11¥b6 16 . .ie3ll:lc4 17 . .if2 .ixf2+ 18.l'l:xf2 1!¥xd4 19. exdS ll:ld6+ Black has completed his development, while White's dS-pawn is weak.) 14 . . . cuc4 1S.11¥f4 .ie6 (lS . . .fS ! ? 16.eS 1!¥aS 17.cuc3 .ib4� Morgado - Montero Gon­zalez, carr. 1968) 16.exdS 1/¥xdS 17.cuc3 11¥d6= The d4-pawn is vul­nerable, but Black can hardly ex­ploit this effectively.

9.cuxc6 dxc6 10 .c3 (10.11¥e2? 1/¥d4 11 ..ib3 1/¥xeS+ White is a pawn down and he cannot make use of the pin, because of his king, Kaem - Fridstein, Tula 19SO; af­ter 10 . .ie3 cueS ll.cuc3 cuxa4 12 . cuxa4 .ifS+ Black's light-squared bishop is very active and it has no opponent, so this guarantees for him a slight but stable edge, Ma­karichev - Vladimirov, Pavlodar 1987; 10.1/¥xd8 E&xd8 ll . .ie3 .ifS+ In this endgame, White's difficul­ties, connected with the develop­ment of his pieces, are even more obvious, Shumov - Kolisch, St.

31

Chapter 1

Petersburg 1862 ; after 10.tt'ld2 tt'lc5 1l.i.b3 tt'lxb3 12 .tt'lxb3 1Wxd1 13J'lxd1, Calvo Minguez - Ree, Las Palmas 1973, it would be very good for Black to play 13 . . . l"le8+ with an excellent game in the cen­tre and on the light squares.) 10 . . . \Wxd1 1l .i.xd1 l"ld8 12 .i.c2 tt'lc5 13. tt'ld2 (13.i.e3 tt'ld3 14.hd3 l"lxd3+) 13 . . . tt'ld3 14.tt'lf3 i.g4 15.hd3 l"lxd3+ He dominates on the d-file and on the light squares and has a stable advantage, Y.Meister -Gustafsson, Bad Koenigshofen 2007.

9 .l"le1 tt'lxd4 10 .\Wxd4 (It would be preferable for White to opt here for 10.l"lxe4 tt'le6 1l .tt'lc3 tt'lc5 12 .l"ld4 f6 13.i.xd7 hd7 14.e6 tt'lxe6 15.l"lxd7 \We8 16.l"ld3 i.d6= Black has solved all his problems, but White has nothing to com­plain about either, Botvinnik -Ragozin, Moscow 1946.) 10 . . . d5 ll .exd6 tt'lxd6 12 .c3 (The position remains equal after 12 .i.f4 i.f6 13 .i.e5 he5 14.l"lxe5 i.e6= Barry - Ziatdinov, Dublin 1991, as well as following 12.tt'lc3 i.f6 13 .\Wd3 i.e6= Kiss - Gal, Hungary 2009.) 12 . . . i.f6 13.1Wd1 i.f5 14.i.b3 \Wd7 15.i.f4 l"lad8= Black's develop­ment is a bit better, but he can hardly make use of that, Ve­likhanli - Safin, Abu Dhabi 2004.

9 •• .liJc5 1 0 .1Wg4 10.i.xc6 dxc6 11.\Wg4 (It is

worse for White to play ll .tt'lxe7+ 1Wxe7 12 .f4, Susie - Gligoric, Tito­grad 1965, 12 . . . i.f5+, or 11.\Wxd8 hd8 12 .tt'ld4 tt'le6 13.i.e3 tt'lxd4 14. hd4 i.f5+ Kostov - Sargissian,

32

Internet 2009 and in both cases, Black's powerful light-squared bishop provides him with superi­or prospects.) ll . . . g6 - CM. 10.1Wg4.

10.tt'lc3 tt'lxe5 1l .tt'ld5 i.f6+ -He remains with a solid extra pawn.

1 0 ••• g6

ll.hc6? ! ll .tt'lxe7? ! 1Wxe7 12 .hc6 dxc6

- see 11.hc6. After 1l.tt'lh6+ \t>g7 (Black can

try, if he so wishes, the move 11 . . . \t>h8?, which does not lose and leads to a complicated situation with mutual chances.) 12.tt'lf5+ (12 .hc6? dxc6 - see ll .hc6) 12 . . . \t>g8= and the game may end in a draw by a perpetual check.

1l .i.h6 l"le8 12 .lLlxe7+ (12 .i.e3? tt'lxe5 13.tt'lh6+ \t>g7 14.tt'lf5+ \t>h8 15.\Wd4 tt'lxa4 16.tt'lh6 i.f6-+ Black has parried his opponent's hasty attack and has remained with an extra pawn and a superior devel­opment, Morgado - Muhana, corr. 1977.) 12 . . . 1Wxe7 13.lLlc3 \&xeS 14.l"lad1 d6 15.\Wh4 i.e6= White is incapable of exploiting the vulnerability of the dark

l.e4 e5 2.ltJ.f3 lt:lc6 3.ib5 lLlf6 4.d4 ed

squares on his opponent's king­side, but Black will hardly realise his extra pawn.

ll . . . dxc6 12 . .lLJxe7+ 12 .lt:lh6+? ! rJdg7 13.Wg3 lt:le4

14.We3, Piotrowski - Von Barde­leben, Berlin 1902, 14 . . . Wd5+ He is better due to his perfectly cen­tralized pieces and a superior de­velopment.

12 . . . �xe7 13.�e2 13 .�g3 Ele8 14.Ele1 (14.if4?!

if5 15.lt:la3 lt:le6 16.Elae1 Elad8 17. ic1 b5+ White's minor pieces are isolated from the actions, Ris -Baramidze, Liverpool 2008; it is not advisable for him to opt for 14.f4 if5, because after 15 .ie3 lt:le4 16.�e1, Gdovin - Skala, Czech Republic 1995, it is very strong for Black to play 16 .. .f6+ with a lead in development and chances of exploiting the vulner­able light squares, while in re­sponse to 15.lt:la3, Jimenez - Gli­goric, Palma de Mallorca 1967, he can continue with 15 . . . Elad8 16. �c3 b5+ managing to isolate com­pletely White's knight from the actions.) 14 . . . if5 15.lt:lc3 (15.ig5 f6 16.if4 hc2+ Black has won a pawn, preserving his better devel­opment. Following 15.lt:la3 lt:le6 16.c3 b5 17.ie3 Elad8+ White's knight is idle and his d3-square is vulnerable, Pettersson - Rhodes, Email 2007.) 15 . . . tLle6 16.lt:le4 he4 17.Elxe4, Mosquera - Pusti-

na, Istanbul 2000 and by playing here 17 . . . Wc5 18.c3 Wd5 19.Ele1 Elad8+ Black maintains superior prospects thanks to his well cen­tralized pieces.

13 .Wg5 Ele8 14.Ele1, Yudovich - Lilienthal, Moscow 1942 (after 14.Wxe7 Elxe7 15.f4 if5 16.lt:la3, O'Kelly de Galway - Smyslov, Za­greb 1955, 16 . . . Eld7+ Black occu­pies the only open file and his pieces are more active than their white counterparts) 14 . . . if5 15. Wxe7 (15 .lt:la3 lt:ld7 16.Wxe7 Elxe7 17.lt:lc4 Elae8 18.f4 f6+ White loses a pawn) 15 . . . Elxe7 16.ig5 Eld7 17.lt:la3 b5+ - His knight is out of action and this provides Black with a better game.

13 . . . :ges 14.l'�el i.f5+

White lags considerably in de­velopment and is incapable of ex­ploiting the vulnerability of the dark squares on Black's kingside, Godena - lvanchuk, Reggio Emil­ia 2011 (game 5).

33

Chapter 1 l.e4 e5 2 )l:lf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6

Complete Games

1 Bryzgalin - Skatchkov Sochi 1998

l.e4 e5 2.tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3 • .ib5 tt:lf6 4.'\!!lfe2 .ic5 5 . .ixc6 bxc6 6.tt:lxe5 �e7 7.f4 d6 8.tt:lxc6 �xe4 9.�xe4+ tt:lxe4 1 0 .d3 tt:lf6 ll.b4 .ib6

12.ttla5? It is less ambitious for White,

but much stronger for him, to continue here with 12 .a4 .ib7 13. a5 hc6 14.axb6 axb6 15.1'l:xa8+ ha8 16.0-0 lt>d7 17.lLlc3 and he is close to complete equality.

12 . . . tt:ld5 13 • .id2? It is better for him to opt for

13.lLlc4 lLlxb4 14.\t>d2+ 13 . • . 0 - 0 14.tt:lc4 ges+ 15.

lt>fl .id4! 16.c3 .if6+ (diagram)

White has an extra pawn, but is completely helpless.

17.a3

34

or 17.d4 .ia6 18 .b5 hb5 19. tt:lba3 .ia6 20.\t>f2 c5-+

17 • • . .1£5 18.ttlb2 a5 ! 19.b5 gabS 2 0 .a4 tt:lb4?

Black could have won even faster with 20 . . . c6 2l .lt>f2 cxb5 2 2 .axb5 1'l:xb5 23.1'l:a2 1'l:eb8-+

21.@f2 tt:lxd3+? It would be more precise for

him to choose 21 . . .hd3 22 .lLlxd3 tt:lxd3+ 23.@f3 1'l:e6+

22.tt:lxd3 .ixd3 23 . .ie3+ White is almost out of the

woods. 23 . •• c6 24.gd1 .i£5

l.e4 e5 2. tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3.�b5 tt:lf6 4.d4 ed

25.b6? He had to continue here with

25.�a7 l"lb7 26.�d4 cxb5 27.hf6 gxf6 28.l"ld5 �d7 29.axb5 hb5 30.l"ld2 a4 3l .ttla3?

25 • • • d5+ 26.l'�a3 �d8 27. c!Lld2 h:b6 28 • .ixb6 :Sxb6 29. c!Ll£3 :Sb2+ 3 0 .:Sd2 :Sxd2+?

I t i s preferable for Black to play now 30 . . . l"leb8 3l.l"la2 l"l2b6+

31.c!Llxd2 �f8 32.c!Llb3 :Sa8 33.�e3 �e7 34.�d4 �d6 35. :Sa2?

White would have some chances of equalizing after 35. tt:lc5 l"le8 36.l"lb3+

35 . . • :Se8 36.c!Llc5 :Sb8 (36 . . . l"lel 37.l"ld2 �c8-+) 37.g3 :Sbl 38.:Sd2 h5 39.c!Lla6 i.c8 4 0 . c!Llc5 :Sal (zugzwang) 41.c!Llb3 0 -1

2 Yudasin Khalifman St. Petersburg 1995

l.e4 e5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3.i.b5 a6 4.i.a4 c!Llf6 5. We2 i.c5 6 • .ixc6 bxc6 7.c!Llxe5 0 - 0 8.c3 d6 9. d4 i.b6 1 0 .c!Llxc6 Wd7 ll.c!Llb4 a5 12.c!Lld3 c!Llxe4 13. 0 - 0 :Se8 14.i.e3 i.a6 15.c!Lla3

15 • • • Wf5!

This move is more aggressive than 15 . . . l"le7? ! 16.l"lfel l"lae8gg and Black has some compensation for the pawn, but not more than that.

16.:Sadl c5! 17.Wc2? White fails to equalize too fol­

lowing 17.dxc5 hc5 18.Wc2 ha3 19.bxa3 l"lec8+

He would have some counter chances after 17.d5 ! Wxd5 18 .Wc2 Wc6 19.c4 a4 20 .tt:lf4+!

17 . . . cxd4 18.cxd4 :SacS 19. Wbl c!Llf6 2 0 .:Sfel

2 0 • .• c!Lld5? This is a very annoying mis­

take. Black would have good chances of winning after 20 . . . �b7 21.h3 �e4 22.f3 hf3! 23.gxf3 l"lxe3 24J�xe3 �xd4 25.tt:lc2 Wg5+ 26. �f2 l"lxc2+ 27.Wxc2 he3+ 28 .�fl Wgl+ 29.me2 '?tfg2+ 30.tt:lf2 Wxf2 + 3l .md3 Wxc2+ 32 .mxc2 d5+

21.c!Llf4! Draw.

35

Chapter 1

Black could have continued to play for a win, despite his mistake on the previous move, with the line: 2l . . .tt:Jxe3 2 2 .fxe3 �e4 with more than sufficient compensa­tion for the pawn.

3 Zapata - Bruzon Batista Merida 2006

1.e4 e5 2)Lrf3 tlJc6 3.i.b5 tlJf6 4.d4 exd4 5. 0 - 0 a6 6 . .ia4 i.e7 7 .l'�e1 b5 8.i.b3 d6 9.i.d5 tlJxd5 1 0 .exd5 tlJe5 11. tlJxd4 0 - 0 12.a4 .ig4 13.£3 .id7 14.tlJc3 b4 15.tlJe4 l:!e8 16.b3 i.h4 17.g3 f5 18.tlJf2 i.f6 19.i.b2 �b8 2 0 .f4 tlJg4 21. l:!xe8+ �xeS 22.tlJxg4 fxg4 23.�d3

23 . . . �£7+ Black emphasizes the vulnera­

bility of the enemy dS-pawn. 24.�c4 l:!e8 25.13d1 White loses after 25.�xa6??

�xdS 26.�c4 �xc4 27.bxc4 c5-+ , a s well a s following 25.�xc7? �e7-+

25 . . . 13e7?! After the more precise re­

sponse 25 . . . .ic8 ! 26 . .ial .ib7! 27.

36

tt:Jc6 .ixc6 28 . .ixf6 .ixdS 29.�xd5 gxf6+ Black would have ended up with an extra pawn in the end­game.

26.i.a1 hd4+

27.hd4 White fails to equalize with

27.�xd4 .ifS 28.�d2 �e8 29.@f2 hS+, or 28.�xb4 .ixc2 29.�el �xel+ 30 .�xel hS 31 .�c3 .ie4+ and in both cases, his dS-pawn is weak and his king is bare, so Black has excellent attacking prospects .

27 . . . i.f5?! He maintains a stable edge

thanks to his active pieces after 27 . . . c5 28.dxc6 �xc4 29.bxc4 .ixc6 30.a5 �e2+

28.a5 ! =

White has suddenly obtained his own trumps - Black's a6-pawn is vulnerable.

l.e4 e5 2. {iJj3 {iJc6 3.ib5 {iJj6 4.d4 ed

28 . . • h5 29 . .if2 �e8 3 0 . �xb4?!

White had to play here 30. �xa6 .bc2 31 .1'l:al�

3 0 . . • .b:c2 3Ukl Instead, it would be worse for

him to opt for 31.1'l:d4 ie4 32 .�a4 �xa4 33.bxa4 if3+

31. . . i.d3 32.�c3 Following 32.1'l:dl �g6t White

is still too far from equality. The light squares around his king are tremendously weak.

32 . . • .ib5 33.1'l:el 33.1'!dl �g6-> 33 . . J:�e2-+

34J'�xe2 He is beyond salvation in the

diagrammed position: 34.1'l:cl �e4 35.�xc7 !'!xf2 ! 36.

'tt>xf2 �f3+ 37.'tt>gl �e3+ 38.'tt>g2 id3-+ ;

34.�b4 't!?h7 35.'tt>hl !'!xel+ 36. �xel �g6 37.�dl �e4+ 38.'tt>gl c5 39.h4 id3 40.�d2 �f3 4l.�e3 �xd5-+

34 . • . �xe2 35.�el �d3 36. f5 't!?h7! 37.f6 gxf6 38.h4 gxh3 39.'tt>h2 �xd5 4 0 .'t!?xh3 .id7+ 41.@h2 i.c6 42.�fl �f3 43.b4 't!?g7 44. ti'g1 wt7 45 • .id4 .ie4 46.'tt>h3 'tt>e6 47 . .ie3 'tt>d7

(Black's king is headed for the b5-square.) 0 -1

4 Darga Ivkov Hastings 1955

l.e4 e5 2.t!Jf3 t!Jc6 3 . .ib5 a6 4 . .ia4 t!Jf6 5. 0 - 0 .ie7 6.d4 exd4 7.e5 t!Je4 8.l:!e1 t!Jc5 9. hc6 dxc6 1 0 .t!Jxd4 0 - 0 11 . t!Jc3 f5 12.f4 t!Je6 13.t!Jf3 .ib4 14 . .ie3 hc3 15.bxc3 c5+

Black's light-squared bishop is potentially much more active than White's dark-squared bishop.

16.'�d3 �e7 17.l:!ad1 h6 18. h3 b6! t9.'tt>f2 .ib7 2 0 .ti'd7 ti'xd7 21.l:!xd7 .ie4

White's defence would not be any easier after the trade of queens.

22.l:!e2 l:!ad8 23.l:!ed2 l:!xd7 24.l:!xd7 l:!d8

37

Chapter 1

25.1!e7? (He could have still had some illusions after 25.E\xd8+ tt'lxd8 26.tt'lel tt'lc6 27.g4 Wf7+) 25 • . . Wf8 26.i.xc5 (Black's e6-pawn is untouchable, because fol­lowing 26.1!xe6 Wf7-+ White los­es a rook.) 26 .. )l:\xc5 27.1!xc7 lile6 28.1!a7 .ixf3 29.Wxf3 l!c8 3 0 .g4 l!xc3+ 3l.We2 fxg4 32. f5 gxh3 33.1!a8+ We7 0 -1

5 Godena lvanchuk Reggio Emilia 2011

1.e4 e5 2)l:\:f3 lilc6 3 . .ib5 a6 4 . .ia4 lilf6 5.d4 exd4 6. 0 - 0 .ie7 7.e5 lile4 8.lilxd4 0 - 0 9. lilf5 lilc5 1 0 .'1Wg4 g6 ll.i.xc6 dxc6 12.lilxe7+ '1Wxe7 13.'1We2 l!e8 14.1!e1 .if5+

White is incapable of organiz­ing an attack against the enemy king, so this position with bishops

38

of opposite colours is in favour of Black.

15.lilc3 l!ad8 It is more accurate for him to

play here 15 . . . h5+, impeding White's active actions on the kingside.

16.h3 It would be premature for him

to opt for 16.g4 .ie6 17 . .ie3 b5t 16 • . . h5 17 . .ih6? Here, White had to play more

aggressively - 17.g4 hxg4 18.hxg4 .ie6 19 . .ie3 b5 20.Wff3?

17 . . . lile6 18 . .ie3 '1Wb4 19. l!ab1 lild4 2 0 .i.xd4 l!xd4+

His c2-pawn is vulnerable and White is incapable of activating his knight.

21.a3 '1Wc5 22. '1We3 l!c4 It was preferable for Black to

choose 22 .. .f6 23.f4 '1Wb6 24.b4 l!c4 25.Wfxb6 cxb6+

23.1!bc1 Wg7 24.'1Wg3?! (White could have prolonged his resist­ance with the move 24.tt'ldl !?+) 24 . . . h4 25.'1Wh2 l!e6 26.1!e3 a5 27.g4 hxg3 28.'1Wxg3 '1We7 29. lile2 g5 3 0 .c3 c5! 31.f4? (In the variation 3l.Wff3 .ig6 32 .tt'lg3 1!b6+ Black needed to play very careful­ly.) 31 . . . gg6 32.wh2 gxf4 o -1

Chapter 2 l.e4 e5 2)2Jf3 ltJc6 3 . .ib5 ltJf6 4.ltJc3

Quick Repertoire

The diagrammed position of­ten arises in the Four Knights Game, so the readers who have studied our book "The Open Games for Black", may only glance over this chapter, although we believe that reading it again and mastering the nuances of that insidious variation would not be harmful.

4 . . . .ib4 We believe this ancient sym­

metrical response provides Black with excellent chances of equaliz­ing. He has a good alternative though.

This is the sharper move 4 . . . 'Lld4 ! ? - see Konstantin Sakaev's book "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black".

5. 0 - 0 It is not advisable for White to

play 5.d4 exd4 6.'Llxd4 .ixc3+ 7. bxc3 'Llxe4+ Black has won a pawn and White fails to regain it.

The position after 5.'Lld5 'Llxd5 6.exd5 e4 7.dxc6 dxc6= is equal, but White must play precisely in order to maintain the balance.

Following 5.d3 d6 6 . .ig5 h6 7 . .ih4 g5 8 . .ig3, it is good for Black to continue with 8 . . . 0-0 ! ? 9 .a3 .ixc3+ 10.bxc3 'Lla5 ll . .ia4 c6 12 . 'Lld2 b5 13 . .ib3 'Llxb3 14.cxb3 .ig4 ! = - he has deprived his op­ponent of the control over the important h5-square and it will be soon occupied by Black's knight.

White can harm his opponent neither with 5.Wt'e2 0-0 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.0-0 l'!:e8= , followed by the transfer of Black's knight to the e6-square, nor after 5 . .ixc6 bxc6 ! 6.'Llxe5 Wt'e7= and Black regains unavoidably his pawn and White must react accurately not to end up in an inferior position.

5 . . . 0 - 0 (diagram)

6.d3

39

Chapter 2

It would be too risky for him to opt for 6.d4? ! .b:c3 7.bxc3 tt:lxe4 8.Wd3 dS 9.tt:lxeS tt:lxeS lO.dxeS c6+ White has regained his pawn indeed, but his light-squared bishop has been isolated from the actions.

He cannot create problems for his opponent with 6.We2 d6 7.h3 h6 8.tt:ldl �as 9 .c3 �b6= and White's queen is often placed even worse on e2 than on dl.

There arises a very dull posi­tion after 6.a3 �xc3 7.dxc3 tt:lxe4 8J:lel tt:ld6 9 . .b:c6 dxc6=

The game is much sharper following 6J''lel d6 7.tt:ldS �cS 8 . c3 a6 9.�c4 �a7 10.d4 exd4 12 . cxd4 l"le8 13.Wd3 tt:lxdS 14 . .b:dS tt:lb4 1S.�xf7+ 'it>xf7 16.Wb3+ dS 17.Wxb4 dxe4 18.tt:leS+ 'it>g8�, but even then, Black has excellent compensation for his exposed king due to his superior develop­ment and the two-bishop advan­tage.

The exchange 6 . .b:c6 dxc6= is rather insidious, but Black can be optimistic about the future with his bishop-pair. His plan includes the deployment of the bishop on

40

g4, creating an unpleasant pin for White's knight and to follow that with a transfer of his own knight to the e6-square.

6 . . . d6 7.i.g5 It is more accurate for White

to play 7.h3 tt:le7 8.a3 .b:c3 9.bxc3 tt:lg6=, but that enables Black to fortify his position in the centre.

The risky line: 7.tt:ldS? ! tt:lxdS 8.exdS tt:le7 9 .c3 �cS 10 .�c4 �g4t provides Black with good attack­ing prospects against White's kingside.

In the variation 7 . .b:c6 bxc6 8.tt:le2 �g4 9.tt:lg3 tt:lhS lO.tt:lfS �cS !?= Black prevents the com­pletion of the manoeuvre of White's knight to the e3-square and equalizes completely.

White can try a very tricky variation - 7.tt:le2 tt:le7 8.c3 �aS 9.tt:lg3 c6 10 .�a4 tt:lg6 ll .d4 l"le8 12 .�c2, but after the precise reply 12 . . . �b6 ! = Black will advance d6-dS, opening the centre and reach­ing a completely symmetrical pawn-structure.

7 . . . tt:le7!?

This enterprising move was

l.e4 e5 2. {ijj3 {ijc6 3. 1J..b5 lijf6 4. [ijc3 1J..b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

tried back i n the 19th century by Steinitz and Pillsbury. Surpris­ingly enough, but its popularity diminished and it began to attract followers only recently again. This is mostly due to Ponomariov's victory over Nisipeanu.

8.{ijh4 This is a multi-purpose move.

White is preparing f2-f4. After an eventual exchange on the f6-square, his knight may go to f5 and his queen to the h5-square.

Black should not be afraid of 8.hf6 gxf6 9.d4 hc3 10 .bxc3 c6 ll . .ie2 {ijg6 12J'l:el f5= and the slight vulnerability of his king is compensated by his dominance in the centre and the endgame will be excellent for him.

White cannot obtain much from the pin after 8.{ije2 c6 9 . .ia4 {ijg6=

In the variation 8 . .ic4 c6 9 . hf6 gxf6 1Q .{ije2 d5? White's light-squared bishop is isolated from the actions and Black ob­tains excellent counterplay on the kings ide.

It is not good for White to choose 8.h3 c6 9 . .ic4 {ijg6 10 . {ije2? ! h6 11.hf6 �xf6+, since he can hardly protect the dark squares with his dark-squared bishop absent from the board.

8 . . . c6 Black is fighting for the centre. 9 . .ic4 Following 9 .{ija4 {ijd7, Black

not only avoids worsening of his

pawn-structure, but will complete a successful chase after the enemy light-squared bishop.

9 . . . d5 1 0 . .ib3 After 10.exd5 {ijexd5, the

placement of the knight on the h4-square becomes useless.

White has an interesting al­ternative here - 10.hf6 gxf6 11 . .ib3, but Black can counter that with ll . . . a5 ! He obtains wonderful counter chances as you can see in the following exemplary variation 12 .a3 .ixc3 13.bxc3 a4 14 . .ia2 {ijg6 15.�h5 li>h8 16.\i>hl l'i:g8 - His ex­cellent prospects on the g-file and the control over the centre com­pensate fully the defects of his pawn-structure.

1 0 . . . a5 ll.a3 .ixc3 12.bxc3 a4!

Black fixes the enemy weak­ness on a3 and has the possibility to transfer his rook to c5, via the aS-square, in order to attack the pawn on c3.

13 . .ia2 �d6 14.�£3 h6 15. .ixf6 �xf6 16. �xf6 gxf6?

41

Chapter 2 l.e4e5 2.tljf3 �c63 . .ib5 �f64.�c3.ib4

Step by Step

5. 0 - 0 Black has no problems after

5.a3 .bc3 6.dxc3 "Llxe4 7.1We2 "Lld6 8 . .bc6 dxc6 9.1Wxe5+ 1We7 10. 1Wxe7+ �xe7= with an absolutely equal endgame, Bachin - Gutov, Sochi 2007.

In the variation 5.d4 exd4 6. "Llxd4 .bc3+ 7.bxc3 "Llxe4 8 .1Wf3 0-0 9.0-0 "Llxd4 10.cxd4 d5+ White fails to obtain sufficient compensation for the pawn, since it would be bad for him to contin­ue with 1l .ia3? "Lld2 12 .1Wf4 "Llxf1 13 . .bf8 1Wxf8 14J'lxfl c6 15.id3 ie6+ with advantageous simplifi­cations for Black.

After 5 .1We2 0-0 6 . .bc6 (6. 0-0 d6 - see 5 .0-0; but not 6.d3? "Lld4 7."Llxd4 exd4 8.a3 ia5 9 .b4 and after playing 9 . . . ib6 10."Lld1

42

a5+ Black obtains a considerable lead in development and his piec­es are perfectly placed; in answer to 6.a3, he is not obliged to pre­sent his opponent with the two­bishop advantage. It would be sufficient for Black to play 6 . . . ic5 7 . .bc6 bxc6 8.0-0 Ei:e8=) he equalizes with 6 . . . dxc6 7.0-0 Ei:e8= Black has no weaknesses in his camp and he has two powerful bishops. Later he plans to deploy his knight on the e6-square.

The move 5."Lld5 leads to sim­plifications and White must play very carefully after that. 5 . . . "Llxd5 6.exd5 e4 7.dxc6 dxc6 8 .ic4 (It is simpler for him to opt for 8 .ie2 exf3 9 . .bf3 0-0 10.0-0 1Wf6= Black's development is a bit bet­ter, but he can hardly exploit this.) 8 . . . exf3 9.1Wxf3 0-0 10.0-0 1Wh4 11 .ie2? ! (White must make one more precise move, because after 11.d3 id6= Black's slight ini­tiative is not dangerous, unless White weakens the light squares around his king with 12 .g3? ! 1Wh3+ Falout - Vaindl, Czech Republic 1999.) ll . . . Ei:e8 12 .d3 id6 13.g3 1Wa4t Black's pieces are noticea­bly more active and he has dan-

l.e4 eS 2. {/jj3 {/jc6 3.�b5 {/jf6 4. {/jc3 �b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

gerous initiative. The game Y. Meister - Kurnosov, Satka 2008, ended up in a win for him after 14.c3 �h3 15.l"1e1? �g4 0-1.

5.d3 d6 6.�g5 (6.0-0 0-0 -see 5 .0-0; 6.�xc6+ bxc6 7.0-0 0-0 - see 5.0-0; it would be too passive for White to choose 6 .�d2 0-0 7.0-0 {/je7 8.a3 �a5 9.�c4 c6 10.�a2 {/jg6= Black has covered the d5-square and can try to seize the initiative later with the move d6-d5, ot prepare the transfer of his knight to the f4-square, Baramidze - Kir.Georgiev, Kusa­dasi 2006; it is hardly preferable for White to opt for 6.a3 hc3+ 7.bxc3 0-0 8 .0-0 h6 9 .l"1e1, be­cause by playing 9 . . . a6 10 .�a4 {/ja5= Black deprives his oppo­nent of his only trump - his two­bishop advantage. ) 6 . . . h6 7.�h4 g5 8.�g3, Legaspi - Iuldachev, Kuala Lumpur 2008. Here, it de­serves attention for him to try 8 . . . 0-0!? 9 .a3 hc3+ 10.bxc3 {/ja5 1l.�a4 c6 12 .{/jd2 b5 13.�b3 {/jxb3 14.cxb3 �g4 ! 15.f3 �e6= After the bishop-manoeuvre, Black has de­prived his opponent of the control over the important h5-square and later his knight will occupy it una­voidably.

5.hc6 bxc6 - Neither side has castled yet, so it would be better for him to capture with the pawn towards the centre, obtaining chances of seizing the initiative. 6.{/jxe5 (6.d3 d6 7.0-0 0-0 - see 5 .0-0; after 6 .0-0 d6 7.d4 0-0 8.dxe5 hc3 9.bxc3 {/jxe4 10.�d4 d5, it would be premature for

White to play ll .c4? �a6 12 .l"1e1 hc4+ with an extra pawn for Black and an advantage in the centre. Following ll.�a3 Ei:e8 12 . l"1fe1, Salameh - Myers, Lugano 1968, he can play 12 . . . �a6= not allowing the opponent to advance c3-c4.) 6 . . . �e7.

Now, White must play very carefully in order to maintain the balance in this position.

It is bad for him to continue with 7.d4? ! d6 8 .{/jxc6 hc3+ 9 . bxc3 �xe4+ 10 .�e2, E.Mamedov - Joerg, Germany 2003, Black can counter that with 10 . . . c±>d7! 11 .�xe4 {/jxe4 12 .{/ja5 {/jxc3+ re­gaining his pawn and maintaining a lead in development.

After 7.f4 �xc3 8.bxc3 (In re­ply to 8.dxc3, it is strong for Black to opt for 8 . . . 0-0! 9 .0-0 c5 10 . l"1e1 �b7t and he regains his pawn, while his light-squared bishop, having no opponent, becomes very active.) Black must enter a forced variation by playing 8 . . . d6 9 .{/jxc6 �xe4+ 10 .�e2 �xe2+ 11 . c±>xe2 �b7 12 .{/jd4 hg2 13.l"1g1 �h3+ He has powerful initiative thanks to his superior pawn­structure and more active pieces.

43

Chapter 2

If White plays greedily - 14Jl:xg7? then, his king comes under the combined attack of all Black's pieces: 14 . . . �g4+ 15.�f1 �f8 16. l"i:g5 l"i:e8--t, followed by subse­quent removing of White's rook from the g-file with the move h7-h6.

After 7.'Llf3 hc3 8.bxc3 (It is worse for White to play 8.dxc3, because after 8 . . . Wxe4+ 9 .�e3 �a6t Black regains his pawn and prevents the evacuation ofWhite's king to the safe kingside.) 8 . . . Wxe4+ 9.We2 Wxe2+ 10.�xe2 �a6+ 11 .�d1 0-0= There has arisen complete symmetry on the board and Black has several extra tempi, but he can hardly exploit this in any meaningful way, Cof­man - Pfefferle, Germany 2005.

In the variation 7.ct:lg4 �xc3 8.dxc3 Wxe4+ 9.'Lle3 d6 (9 . . . �a6! ? 10.Wd4 ! = ) 10.0-0 0-0= Black has a slight advantage in the cen­tre, but the position is practically equal, Kroselj - Novak, Nova Gorica 2009.

Following 7.'Lld3 ! hc3 8.dxc3 Wxe4+ 9.We2 Wxe2+ 10.�xe2 0-0= White cannot exploit the vulnerability of his opponent's a7-pawn and has no other pluses ei­ther, Aripov - Khoroshev, Tash­kent 2010.

5 . . . 0 - 0 (diagram)

White has tested different pos­sibilities in the diagrammed posi­tion. He has best chances of trying to obtain an advantage with A) 6.hc6 and of course with the

44

most natural move B) 6.d3. It is bad for him to opt for 6.

d4? ! hc3 7.bxc3 ct:lxe4 8.Wd3 d5 9 .ct:lxe5 ct:lxe5 10.dxe5 c6 11 .�a4, Riemann - A.Anderssen, Breslau 1876, since his bishop on a4 re­mains out of action and Black can attack the e5-pawn with ll . . . l"i:e8+

The simplifications after 6. ct:ld5 ct:lxd5 7.exd5 e4 8 .dxc6 exf3 9 .Wxf3 dxc6 10 .�d3 �d6t enable Black to obtain a lead in develop­ment, Thesing - Werle, Eforie Nord 2009.

The position is completely symmetrical after 6.a3 hc3 7. dxc3 ct:lxe4 8.l"i:e1 'Lld6 9 .hc6 dxc6 10.'Llxe5 l"i:e8=

6.We2 - This is an attempt by White to reach original positions. 6 . . . d6 7.h3 (It is not preferable for him to opt for 7.hc6 bxc6 8.'Lld1, because by playing 8 . . . l"i:e8= Black prevents d2-d4 and prepares the pawn-advance d6-d5, ending up with a space advantage.) 7 . . . h6 8. 'Lld1 �aS 9.c3 �b6 10.d3 �e6= He has deployed perfectly his pieces and has no problems whatsoever, Santamaria - Monteros, Barran­quilla 1995.

l.e4 e5 2. liJ.f3 liJc6 3. ilb5 liJf6 4. liJc3 ilb4 5. 0 -0 0 - 0

6.Ele1 d6

7.d4? ! - Black is much better prepared for the opening of the position 7 . . . exd4 8.liJxd4 liJxd4 9.�xd4 ilc5 10 .�d2 , Koziel - Wil­iczkiewicz, Slask 1996 and after 10 . . . c6 ll .ild3 liJg4 12.Elf1 f5+ he is ahead in development and has ex­cellent attacking prospects.

Following 7.h3 ild7 8.a3, Sha­rapov - Burdalev, Yuzhny 2010, Black obtains a very good game with 8 . . . ilxc3 9.bxc3 liJe7 10.a4 liJg6= White can hardly utilize his two-bishop advantage having doubled pawns in his position.

It is not preferable for him to continue with 7.a3 hc3 8.bxc3 (after 8.dxc3, it is good for Black to opt for 8 . . . h6= restricting the mobility of his opponent's dark­squared bishop), 8 . . . Ele8= he has prevented White's possibility to occupy the centre with d2-d4 and has no problems at all.

After 7.d3, Black's simplest re­action would be 7 . . . h6=, prevent­ing the pin of his knight on f6.

In reply to 7.liJd5, it is good for Black to choose a line, which has not been tested in practice yet : 7 . . . �c5 8.c3 (The risky move 8 .d4? !

leads after 8 . . . liJxd4 9.liJxd4 liJxd5 10.liJb3 liJf4+ to a position with a pawn down for White.) 8 . . . a6 9 . �c4 �a7 10.d4 (After 10 .d3 liJxd5 ll.hd5 liJe7 12 .�b3 liJg6= Black can parry easily the activity of White's bishop by playing �e6.) 10 . . . h6 11 .h3. White has not al­lowed his opponent to increase the pressure against the d4-pawn with the move �g4, but here, Black can play ll . . . exd4 12 .cxd4 Ele8 13 .�d3 liJxd5 14.hd5 liJb4 15.ilxf7+ lt>xf7 16.�b3+ d5 17. �xb4 dxe4 18.liJe5+ lt>g8? His king is not so safe indeed, but he has two powerlul bishops, while White can hardly develop his at­tack, because after 19.�b3+ �e6 20 .�g3 �xd4 2 1.ilxh6, there aris­es an endgame in which Black's bishop is slightly superior to White's knight after 21 . . .�xf2 + ! 22 .�xf2 Jlxf2+ 22 .1t>xf2 gxh6 23. Elxe4 �d5=

A) 6 . .ixc6 This exchange deserves atten­

tion. 6 . . . dxc6

45

Chapter 2

Black's two-bishop advantage compensates fully his slightly compromised pawn-structure.

7.d3 After 7.Ele1 Ele8 8 .a3 (in re­

sponse to 8.d3, it seems good for Black to opt for 8 . . . h6 9 .h3 b6 10. i.e3 .b:c3 ll.bxc3 cS= fortifying his position in the centre) 8 . . . i.d6 9 .h3 t2Jd7+! - this standard trans­fer of Black's knight to the e6-square provides him with an ex­cellent position.

7.t2Jxe5 Ele8 8.t2Jd3 (following 8 .t2Jf3 t2Jxe4 9.t2Jxe4 Elxe4+ Black has a bishop-pair and a superior development, Forgacs - Vidmar, Budapest 1913; in the variation 8.d4 i.xc3 9.bxc3 t2Jxe4= Black has better pawn-structure, but he can hardly realise anything real out of this, Taubenhaus - Chig­orin, New York 1889) 8 . . . .b:c3 9.dxc3 t2Jxe4 10.Ele1 (after 10.'�f3 �f6 11.�xf6 t2Jxf6= the opponents can agree to a draw, Spassky -Ljubojevic, Linares 1985; White has no chances of obtaining an advantage after 10 .i.f4 i.fS 11.Ele1 t2Jd6= Michiels - Sasikiran, Ant­werp 2009, or 11 .�f3 i.g6=) 10 . . . t2Jd6 ll.i.f4 Elxe1+ 12 .�xe1 i.fS= The position is symmetrical and its evaluation as absolutely equal can hardly be changed, Al.Ivanov - Kamsky, Saint Louis 2011 .

7 . . . .ig4 (diagram)

8.h3 In answer to 8 .i.g5, it is good

for Black to play 8 . . . �d6 9.a3 .b:c3 10.bxc3 t2Jd7= followed by a

46

transfer later of his knight to the e6-square.

It is hardly preferable for White to opt for 8.i.e3 t2Jd7+! Black is ready to exchange on c3 and to follow this with c6-c5, as well as to accomplish the stand­ard manoeuvre of the knight to e6.

After 8 .�e2 t2Jd7 9 .t2Jd1, it is good for Black to continue with 9 . . . �f6t, which would lead to a fa­vourable change for him of his op­ponent's pawn-structure.

s . . . i.hs

9.�e2 It is not so easy for White to

get rid of the pin, for example it would be bad for him to opt for

l.e4 eS 2. liJj3 liJc6 3. ilb5 liJf6 4. liJc3 ilb4 5. 0 - 0 0 -0

9.g4? l/Jxg4 10.hxg4 (Black can organize a powerful attack with­out sacrificing anything after 10. l/Jxe5 l/Jxe5 11.'Wxh5 f5---+) 10 . . . JJ.xg4 11 .�h1?, Capablanca - Cha­jes, New York 1912 (it is prefera­ble for White to opt for 11 . �g2 JJ.xc3 12.bxc3 f5 13.'<We1 fxe4 14. l/Jg5 l:l:f5 15.'<Wxe4 l:l:xg5 16.bg5 '&xg5+ although even then his king is bare, while Black has two pawns for the exchange) and here, he wins by force with 11 . . .f5 ! 12.l:l:g1 bc3 13.bxc3 JJ.h5 14.l:l:g5 '<We8 15.exf5 e4 ! 16.dxe4 '<Wxe4 17. l:l:xh5 l:l:ad8-+ and Black regains the sacrificed material with inter­est.

Following 9 .ilg5 '<Wd6 10.JJ.xf6 '<Wxf6 11.g4 (White plans to organ­ize an attack on the kingside, making use of the circumstance that the centre has been closed.) 11 . . .JJ.g6 12 .�g2 l:l:ad8 (Black wins an important tempo by attacking the enemy e4-pawn.) 13.'We2, Nimzowitsch - Leonhardt, San Sebastian 1911. Now, he obtains an excellent position with the line : 13 . . . JJ.c5 14.l/Jd1 'We6 15.l/Je3 f6� Black has fortified his king­side and plans to advance his queenside pawns.

In the variation 9.�h1 l/Jd7 10 .g4 ilg6 ll .l/Je2, Nimzowitsch ­Levitsky, St. Petersburg 1914, he ends up with a wonderful game by transferring the knight to the e6-square, where it is both defending and attacking after 11 . . .JJ.d6 12 . lt:Jg3 l/Jc5 13.l/Jf5 l/Je6�

9 •• .c!Lid7

lO .c!Lidl 10 .g4 JJ.g6 11 .l/Jd1 iJ.d6 12 .l/Je3

l/Jc5 13.l/Jc4 f6 14.l/Jh4 JJ.f7 15.l/Je3 l/Je6+ Black has deployed perfect­ly his forces and is well prepared for active actions on the queen­side, Soffer - Alterman, Israel 1998.

10 ... �e8 ll.ttle3, Tarrasch -Rubinstein, Vienna 1922 , 11 . . .

i.f8� He intends to accomplish the manoeuvre l/Jd7-c5-e6 and fortifies the position of his king.

B) 6.d3 This is White's main line in

this position. He wishes to pin the enemy knight on f6.

6 . . . d6

47

Chapter 2

In the diagrammed position, he can try to fight for the advan­tage with Bl) 7.hc6, B2) 7.tLle2 and B3) 7 . .ig5.

7.'2ld5?! (The change of the pawn-structure is in favour of Black.) 7 . . . '2lxd5 8 .exd5 'Lle7 9.c3 i.cS 10.i.c4 i.g4 11.h3 i.hS 12 .i.e3 i.b6 13.a4 fS+ White's light­squared bishop is out of action now and Black gains easily addi­tional space on the kingside, ena­bling him to organize an attack there, Jaffe - Capablanca, New York 1910.

7.h3 'Lle7 8.a3 (8.'2le2 c6 - see 7.'2le2 ; 8 .i.g5 c6 - see 7.i.g5; 8 .'2lh4 c6 9 .i.a4 dS�) 8 . . . .ixc3 9.bxc3 'Llg6= He has deployed perfectly his pieces, preventing White to obtain an advantage in the centre. In reply to the careless move 10.c4? ! , Bazant - Zeberski, Czech Republic 2008, Black could have played 10 . . . '2ld7! ?t with the idea 'Lld7-c5 and c7-c6.

Bl) 7.hc6 bxc6

8.tLle2

48

White has compromised his opponent's queenside pawn­structure with his previous move, but has lost his chances of deploy­ing his knight on the dS-outpost. Accordingly, its transfer to the g3-square seems to be his most rea­sonable continuation.

8 .i.g5 h6 9.i.h4 (It is worse for White to play 9 . .ixf6 1Mfxf6+ and Black has a solid centre, powerful bishops and a clear-cut plan for actions connected with the pawn­advance f7-f5, Weiss - Strathoff, Dortmund 2003.) 9 . . . 1Mfe7 10.h3 1Mfe6 1l.l':\e1 'LlhS+ His knight is eyeing the f4-square and he is preparing f7-f5.

After 8 .i.e3 .ixc3 9.bxc3, it is good for Black to fortify his centre by playing 9 . . . c5=

8 • . . .ig4 9.tLlg3 tLlh5 1 0 .tLlf5 In answer to 10.c3, K.Berg -

D.Bronstein, Tastrup 1990, be­fore removing his bishop from an attack, it would be useful for Black to weaken his opponent's king­side with 10 . . . '2lxg3 ll.hxg3 i.cSt

1 0 ••• .ic5!?N This is a logical move, prevent-

l.e4 e5 2. ttJ.f3 ttJc6 3. 1J.b5 ttJf6 4. ttJc3 1J.b4 5. 0 - 0 0 -0

ing the manoeuvre ttJf5-e3, but it on g3 than on c3. has not been tested in practice yet.

ll.i.e3 After 11 .ttJe3 he3 12 .fxe3 f5

13.exf5 Elxf5 14.h3 hf3 15.Elxf3 �f6= Black completes his devel­opment and has no problems at all .

It is not preferable for White to opt for 11 .i.d2 ttJf6 12.ttJe3 he3 13.fxe3 ttJd7= preparing f7-f5.

ll . . . .ixf5 It is also possible for Black to

try the original idea ll . . . �f6 ! ? 12 .hc5 dxc5 13.g3 Elfe8 14.Ele1 hf5 15.exf5 �xf5 16.ttJh4 �g5 17.ttJf3 �f5= and White is incapa­ble of exploiting the vulnerability of Black's tripled pawns.

12.exf5 he3 13.fxe3 llJf6 14.e4 'ti'b8 15.b3 'ti'h6+ 16.@hl lUeS=

Black is preparing to advance d6-d5, opening the d-file, pre­venting his opponent from organ­izing an effective kingside attack.

B2) 7.llJe2 White's knight is better placed

7 . . . llJe7 This position is rather similar

to these, which will be analyzed later, in the anti-Berlin variations with 4.d3.

8.c3 About 8.i.g5 c6 - see 7.1J.g5;

8.1J.a4 ttJg6 9 .c3 i.a5 10 .ttJg3 c6 -see 8.c3.

8.ttJg3 c6 9.1J.a4 ttJg6 10 .d4 (10. c3 i.a5 - see 8 .c3 ; Black has no problems after 10.i.b3 h6 ll.h3 Ele8 12 .c3 i.a5 13.Ele1 d5= , as well as following 10 .h3 d5 11 .c3 i.d6 12 .Ele1, Nimzowitsch - Maroczy, Karlsbad 1907, 12 . . . h6= and in both cases he even enjoys having a bit more space.) 10 . . . exd4 11. ttJxd4 d5 12 .exd5 ttJxd5= The posi­tion is completely equal after the central pawns have disappeared off the board, Janowski - Burn, Ostend 1907.

Following 8 .h3 c6 9 .i.a4 ttJg6 10.c3 i.a5 11.i.c2 (it is better for White to choose here ll.ttJg3 d5 -see 8.c3.) ll . . . d5 12 .i.g5 (12.l2Jg3 Ele8 13.@h1, Korenev - Diulger, Eforie Nord 1998, 13 . . . 1J.b6i) 12 . . .

49

Chapter 2

h6 13 . .ie3, Novak - Priborsky, Klatovy 2002 and after 13 . . . Ele8 14.tt:lg3 .ib6t Black can deploy perlectly his pieces and obtains a slight space advantage.

8 . . . .ia5

9.tbg3 White has no chances of main­

taining an edge after the alterna­tives :

9 .h3 tbg6 10.tbg3 c6 ll . .ia4 d5 - see 9.tt:lg3; 9.tt:lh4 c6 10 . .ia4 d5 11 .tt:lg3 .ib6 12 .h3, Gubanov - Pe­telin, St. Petersburg 1993, after playing 12 . . . tt:lg6 13.tt:lxg6 hxg6= Black fortifies his kingside;

9 . .ig5 tt:lg6 10.tt:lh4, Godena -Toth, Switzerland 1997, now, fol­lowing 10 . . . c6 1l . .ia4 .ib6 12.<;t>h1 d5 13.exd5 �xd5= Black equalizes completely, since after 14.hf6?! gxf6 15.tt:lf3 Eld8+ White cannot exploit the slight weakening of his opponent's kingside and his d3-pawn needs additional protec­tion.

9 . . . c6 1 0 . .ia4 About 10 . .ic4 tt:lg6 ll . .ib3 h6

- see 10 . .ia4. 1 0 . . • tbg6

50

ll.d4 ll.Ele1 Ele8 12 . .ic2 d5 13.a4

(White can create more problems for his opponent with 13 . .ig5 ! ? h6 14 . .ixf6 �xf6 15.d4, because after 15 . . . .ig4 16.exd5 hf3 17.�xf3 �xf3 18.gxf3 tt:lh4 19 . .ie4 cxd5 20 . .ixd5 exd4 21 .Elxe8+ Elxe8 22 . b4 .ic7 23.cxd4 Eld8 24.hb7 Elxd4 25.a3 g6gg there arises practically by force an endgame in which Black has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn.) 13 . . . .ic7= and his position i n the cen­tre is slightly preferable, Llaneza Vega - Sebastian, Germany 2009.

In answer to 11 ..ib3, it is good for Black to opt for ll . . . h6 12 .h3 d5=

The position becomes dead equal after 11.h3 d5 12 . .ib3, Varga

G.Timoshenko, Herculane 1996, 12 . . . dxe4 13.dxe4 h6=

ll . . J!e8 (diagram)

12 . .ic2 White fortifies his e4-pawn. It would not be so reasonable

for him to choose 12 . .ib3 h6 (But not 12 . . . exd4? ! 13.cxd4, Alekhine - Euwe, Amsterdam 1936, since

l.e4 e5 2JiJj'3 tt'lc6 3. 1lb5 tt'lf6 4. tt'lc3 flb4 5. 0 -0 0 - 0

the e4-pawn i s untouchable, be­cause of 13 . . . tt'lxe4? 14.tt'lxe4 Elxe4 15.1lxf7+ lt>xf7 16.tt'lg5± with an extra exchange for White. It has turned out that Black has simply given up the centre to his oppo­nent for nothing.) 13.h3 (It would be more accurate for White to continue with 13.dxe5 dxe5 14. �c2 flb6= ; in the variation 13. Elel?! flg4, he is incapable of hold­ing on his centre and after 14. dxe5, Janowski - Tarrasch, Os­tend 1907, 14 . . . tt'lxe5+ Black de­stroys his opponent's king shel­ter.) 13 . . . exd4 14.tt'lxd4 d5 15.exd5 tt'lxd5=

The position is symmetrical and both sides have comparable development; nevertheless, they have to play very accurately, be-

cause following 16.tt'ldf5 �f6 17. �f3 tt'le5 18.�h5, G.Kuzmin - A. Kharitonov, Moscow 1991, Black could have seized the initiative with the move 18 . . . 1lc7t

12 . . . .ib6! After this move White is inca­

pable of preventing the freeing pawn-break d6-d5.

13.h3 But not 13.Eiel?! 1lg4 14.1le3

d5t 13 . . . d5 14.lbxe5, P.Popovic ­

Pruijssers, Germany 2010.

Now, the position is totally simplified after the following practically forced line: 14 .. .tbxe5 15.dxe5 ll:lxe4 16.ll:lxe4 dxe4 17.Ybd8 hd8 ts.gel gxe5 19 . .if4 ges 2 0 .he4 .ie7 21. .ic2 .ie6 22 . .ib3 hb3 23.ax:b3 .ic5= the endgame looks very drawish.

B3) 7 . .ig5 White bases his hopes of ob­

taining an advantage on this par­ticular move.

51

Chapter 2

7 •• )2Je7!? Black accomplishes the stand­

ard manoeuvre of his knight to the g6-square without being afraid of the destruction of the shelter of his king. He is prepar­ing to play in the centre by ad­vancing c7-c6 and d7-d5.

This ancient move became fashionable again during the years 2010-2011 and mostly due to the games of the ex-world champion Ruslan Pomomariov against the strongest Rumanian grandmaster Nisipeanu. Black is trying to seize the initiative.

8)2Jh4 After 8.tt:le2 c6 9 .i.a4 tt:lg6 10.

c3 i.a5 11 .b4, Schiffers - Steinitz,

52

Nuremberg 1896, it seems very good for Black to poise his bishop at the f2-square by playing 11 . . . i.b6i

It is not advisable for White to choose 8 .i.c4 c6 9.hf6 (About 9 .tt:lh4 d5 - see 8 .tt:lh4; it is worse for him to opt for 9 .1l{ife2 tt:lg6 10. tt:lh4, Janowski - Showalter, New York 1898, since Black can coun­ter that with 10 . . . tt:lf4 11.hf4 exf4+ obtaining the two-bishop advantage and preparing the opening of the central files with the move d6-d5; White fails to maintain an edge with the line: 9.tt:le2 tt:lg6 10.c3 i.a5 11 .tt:lh4, Ma­tisons - Kostic, Bardejov 1926, Black can reply with 11 . . .d5 12. exd5 cxd5 13.i.b3 i.c7= having a slight advantage in the centre.) 9 . . . gxf6 10.tt:le2 d5 11 .a3 i.a5 12 . i.a2 i.b6 13.tt:lg3 tt:lg6+! He has isolated White's light-squared bishop from the actions and has excellent counter chances, con­nected with eventual active ac­tions on the kingside.

8 .h3 c6 9.i.c4 (9.i.a4 tt:lg6 10. i.b3 h6 11 .i.d2 i.e6=) 9 . . . tt:lg6 10. tt:lh4, Zavoronkov - Zjukin, Tal­linn 2005 (10.tt:le2? ! h6 11 .hf6 1l{ifxf6+ The lack of White's dark­squared bishop is a telling factor in this position.) 10 . . . tt:lf4 11 .i.b3 tt:le6 12 .he6 fxe6 ! = Black has covered reliably the f5-square.

8.hf6 - This is a very princi­pled move. 8 . . . gxf6

(diagram) 9 .d4 (Black can obtain a very

good position after 9.tt:ld5 tt:lxd5

l.e4 e5 2. li'Jf3 li'Jc6 3.ib5 li'Jf6 4. li'Jc3 ib4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

10.exd5 ig4�, as well as i n the variation 9.li'Je2 c6 10 .ia4 f5 ll.exf5, Schiffers - Halprin, Vi­enna 1898, 11 . . . li'Jxf5� or 9.li'Jh4 c6 10.ia4 f5�) 9 . . . ixc3 10.bxc3 c6 11 .ie2 (ll .id3 li'Jg6=) 11 . . . li'Jg6 12 .Elel f5 13.exf5 ixf5 14.id3 Wlf6 15.ixf5 Wfxf5= White can hardly manage to exploit the somewhat unsafe situation of his opponent's king, while Black dominates in the centre and has excellent pros­pects after an exchange of the queens, Bogut - S.Atalik, Neum 2004.

8 . . . c6

9.i.c4 In response to 9.ixf6?! Black

has the powerful line: 9 . . . ixc3 ! 10.bxc3 cxb5 11 .ig5 f6 12 .ie3 Wfa5+ and he obtains superior

prospects thanks to the vulner­ability of White's queenside pawns.

9.ia4 li'Jd7

Now: 10.a3 ixc3 ll.bxc3 li'Jc5 12 .ib3

li'Jxb3 13.cxb3 ie6= and Black has no problems at all, Y.Gruenfeld -Baron, Petach Tikva 2011 ;

10 .ib3 li'Jc5 (10 . . . h6? ll.ixe7 Wlxe7 12.li'Jg6± White ends up with an extra exchange) ll.li'Jf5 ixf5 12.exf5 h6 13 .ih4 Wld7 14.ixe7 (in the variation 14.f6 li'Jg6 15.fxg7 Wxg7 16.ig3 f5i Black has excel­lent attacking chances) 14 . . . Wlxe7 15.li'Je2 d5+ with a very position for him in the centre, Nitin - A. Gupta, Dubai 2011 ;

10 .li'Je2 li'Jc5 11 .c3 (The game is equal after ll .ib3 li'Jxb3 12 .axb3 f6 13.id2 ixd2 14.Wlxd2 d5= White's rook on al has become ac­tive, while Black has obtained a slight space advantage.) 11 . . . li'Jxa4 12.cxb4 (12.Wlxa4 ic5 13.d4 ib6 14.Eladl ig4! 15.f3 ie6+ He has better prospects thanks to his bishop-pair, Negi - Sargissian, Sestao 2010) 12 . . . li'Jb6 13.a4 ie6 14.li'Jg3 f6 15.ie3 d5= Black has a bit of extra space and his king is

53

Chapter 2

quite safe. After White's risky at­tempt 16.a5 d4 17.�d2 tt:Jd7 18 .f4 exf4 19.tt:Je2 tt:Je5 20.tt:Jxf4 �f7 21 .tLlf3, Adams - Clery, Mulhouse 2011 , Black could have seized the initiative by attacking the en­emy b4-pawn with the move 21 . . . �d6t

9 . . . d5

Here, it is worth analyzing thoroughly B3a) 1 0 .i.xf6 and B3b) 1 0 . .ib3.

In answer to 10.exd5, R.Pono­mariov - A.Mastrovasilis, Rima­vska Sobota 1996, it is good for Black to opt for 10 . . . tt:Jexd5 11.tt:Je4 �e7= with unavoidable simplifi­cations.

B3a) 1 0 . .ixf6 White is trying to prove that

the weakening of his opponent's king is more important than the two-bishop advantage, which he presents to Black with his last move.

1 0 . . . gxf6 ll . .ib3 ll .exd5 cxd5 12 .�b3 hc3

13.bxc3 tt:Jg6

54

14.�h5 - This quite natural and aggressive move was tested only in the game Schiffers -Teichmann, Berlin 1897. Black must react very precisely. At first, he must fortify his central pawns 14 . . . �e6 15.Elae1 (after 15.d4 Wh8 16.dxe5, Black has the pleasant choice between the equalizing line: 16 . . . tt:Jxh4 17.�xh4 fxe5 18. �g3 f6= and the double-edged variation 16 . . . tt:Jf4 17.�h6 fxe5 18. Elae1 f6 19.g3 Elg8 20 .Wh1 tt:Jg6�) 15 . . . Wh8 16.tt:Jxg6+ (It is worse for White to continue with 16.d4 e4+ Black's centre is very solid and White's bishop on b3 may remain isolated from the actions for long. 16.g3 �d7 17.tt:Jg2 Wg7 18.tt:Je3 d4! - Black must oust the enemy knight from its excellent outpost, since White was already threaten­ing to advance his f2-pawn. 19. cxd4 exd4 20.t2lg2 �g4 2 l.�d5 Elfd8 22 .�xd7 hd7! = He fails to make use of the vulnerability of Black's pawns mostly because his knight is terribly misplaced.) 16 . . . fxg6 17.�h6 a 5 18.a4 El f7 19.f4 �b6+ 20.Wh1 �c7 2 l.fxe5 fxe5 22 .Elxf7 hf7= White's pawn on c3 and Black's e5-pawn are equally weak;

l.e4 e5 2. 11Jj3 11Jc6 3.ib5 11Jf6 4. 11Jc3 ib4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

14.11Jxg6?! - It i s not logical for White to fortify his opponent's king shelter, although that move has been played very often in practice. 14 . . . hxg6 15.i'¥d2 (It is inferior for him to continue with 15.f4 e4 16.c4? ! Arngrimsson -Semcesen, Reykjavik 2009. Black can counter that with 16 . . . dxc4 17.hc4 b5 ! 18 .ib3 i'¥d4+ 19.<;t>h1 exd3 20 .i'¥xd3 i'¥xd3 2l .cxd3 if5 22 .d4 a5+ and he ends up with a better endgame thanks to the pos­sibility to create an outside passed pawn. It is also essential that White's central pawn cannot ad­vance further than the d5-square. He fails to equalize with 15.Ei:b1 ie6 16.f4 i'¥c7 17.fxe5 fxe5+ White's bishop is passive and his c3-pawn is weak, Koehler - Schmidt, New York 1898. It is much more relia­ble for him to choose 15.c4 ! ie6 16.cxd5 hd5 17.f4 <;t>g7 18 .fxe5 fxe5= White has got rid of his vul­nerable c3-pawn, but Black has no weaknesses in his camp either, Schulz - Hromadka, Trencianske Teplice 1926.) 15 . . . <;t>g7 16.l"i:ae1, Schiffers - Janowski, Moscow 1901 (In response to 16.f4, Schiffers -Suechting, Berlin 1897, it is very good for him to opt for 16 . . . '\Wb6+ 17.d4 exd4 18.cxd4 i'¥d6+ White's bishop is in a cage and his attempt to free it from there would lead to the appearance of another weak pawn.), he can play 16 . . . ie6 17.f4 i'¥c7 18. fxe5 fxe5+ and Black ob­tains a solid centre and can exert pressure against the weak enemy c3-pawn.

ll . . . a5 ! This is an important improve­

ment to Black's treatment of this position in a game, which was played nearly a hundred years ago : 11 . . .i'¥d6 12 .i'¥f3 <;t>h8 13.exd5 hc3 14.bxc3 cxd5 15.c4 d4 16.c5 i'¥c6oo Tarrasch - Yates, Karlsbad 1923.

12.a4 After 12 .a3 hc3 13.bxc3 a4

14 .ia2 11Jg6 (Black can change the character of the fight if he so wishes with the line: 14 . . . dxe4 ! ? 15.dxe4 i'¥xd1 16.Ei:fxd1 11Jg6 17. 11Jf5 ixf5 18.exf5 11Je7 19.Ei:d7 11Jxf5 20 .g4 11Jh4 2l .l"lxb7 Ei:ad8=) 15. i'¥h5 <;t>h8 16.<;t>h1 l"lg8? he has solved the problem with the safe­ty of his central d5-pawn (Black can also protect it with his rook from the aS-square, if necessary.) and prepares active actions on the kingside, Nisipeanu - Ponomari­ov, Medias 2010 (game 6).

12 .. .!ilg6 13.tt:lxg6 It is not preferable for White

to opt here for 13.11Jf5 <;t>h8 14.11Je2 l"lg8?, since Black will organize counterplay on the kingside.

It deserves attention however

55

Chapter 2

for White to try 13.'Wh5 'it>h8.

In the variations 14.liJe2 liJxh4 15.'Wxh4 !'1g8 16.exd5 cxd5 17.'it>h1 f5 18 .'Wh5 ie6�, or 14.exd5 ixc3 15.bxc3 cxd5 16.g3 ie6� he can hardly prove that Black's centre is weak, while following 14.g3 liJf4 ! 15.'Wf3 (15.gxf4 l:':1g8+ 16.'it>h1 ig4 17.'Wxf7 f5 18.liJg2 l:':1g7+ White's queen gets suddenly trapped.) 15 .. . !'1g8 16.liJf5 ixf5 17.exf5 ic5 18.'it>h1 liJh3 19.'Wg2 liJf4 20.'Wf3 liJh3= There arises a triple repeti­tion of the position practically by force.

13 . . . hxg6 14.exd5 ixc3 15. bxc3 cxd51'

Black's set-up in the centre is quite reliable and his king is rela­tively safe. In the endgame he will

56

have the possibility to create an outside passed pawn by advanc­ing b7-b5, Saptarshi - Gupta, New Delhi 2011 .

B3b) 10 .i.b3

This is the most popular reply for White. He is convinced that the possibility to capture on f6 will hardly run away.

1 0 . . . a5 Black begins immediately ac­

tive queenside actions, although it would be also very good for him to continue with 10 . . . 'Wd6 !? , Caru­ana - Aronian, Moscow 2010.

ll.a3 After 11.a4 'Wd6 12.'Wf3 h6

13.ixf6 'Wxf6 14.'Wxf6 gxf6 15.f4 (White fails to obtain any advan­tage with the line : 15.exd5 ixc3 16.bxc3 liJxd5 17.ixd5 cxd5 18.f4 l:':1a6 ! =) 15 . . . ie6= He can hardly exploit the vulnerability of his op­ponent's kingside pawns, while Black has already occupied the centre, Yu Ruiyuan - Harikrish­na, Mashhad 2011 (game 7) .

ll . . . i.xc3 12.bxc3

l.e4 eS 2. Cjjf3 Cjjc6 3.�b5 Cjjf6 4. Cjjc3 �b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

The diagrammed position was reached in the game Ni Hua - Yu Lie, Guangzhou 2010. Here, Black can already acquire some more space on the queenside with

12 • . . a4! 13 • .ia2 Wd6 14.Wf3 It is worse for White to opt for

14.f4 dxe4 15.fxe5 (in the varia­tion 15.dxe4 Wc5+ 16.@h1 Cjjxe4 17.he7 Wxe7+ White loses anoth­er pawn) 15 . . . Wxe5 16.hf6 gxf6 17.dxe4 �xc3 18.�d6 Cjjg6 19. Cjjxg6 hxg6+ He can regain his

pawn only at the price of exchang­ing queens, but then the endgame will be very difficult for White due to his numerous weak pawns.

14 • . . h6 15 . .hf6 Wxf6 16. Wxf6 gxf6 17.f4

17.l"i:fe1 dxe4 18.l"i:xe4 Cjjd5t 17 .. J��a5?

Both sides have vulnerable pawns on different sides of the board, so the position is double­edged.

57

Chapter 2 l.e4 e5 2 .ttJf3 ttJc63 . .ib5 tlJf64.ttJc3.ib4

Complete Games

6 Nisipeanu - Ponomariov Bazna 2010

l.e4 e5 2.lbf3 c!Llc6 3.c!Llc3 c!Llf6 4.i.b5 i.b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0 6.d3 d6 7.i.g5 c!Lle7 8.c!Llh4 c6 9.i.c4 d5 1 0 .i.xf6 gxf6 11.i.b3 a5 12.a3 i.xc3 13.bxc3 a4 14.i.a2 c!Llg6 15.'1Wh5 �h8 16. �h1 �g8

17.d4? White is trying to obtain an

edge, but fails . It was more accu­rate for him to choose 17. tt:Jxg6+ fxg6 18.\Wh4 g5 19.\Wg3 i.e6= and he would not create any problems for his opponent, but would not end up in a worse position either.

17 . • . f5! 18.c!Llxf5? He had some chances of equal­

izing following 18.tt:Jxg6+ fxg6 19.\Wh6 fxe4 20.c4 !+

18 . . . c!Llf4

58

19.'1Wh6? White makes a third mistake

in a row and his position becomes completely hopeless. He could have prolonged his resistance with 19.tLlh6 tt:Jxh5 20 .tt:Jxf7+ �g7 21 .tLlxd8 Ei:xd8 22 .dxe5+

19 . . . �g6 2 0 .'1Wh4 i.xf5 21. '!Wxd8+ �xd8 22.exf5 �xg2 23.dxe5 Ei:dg8 0 -1

Black is threatening to check­mate in three with 24 . . . tt:Jh3, fol­lowed by the unavoidable 25 . . . Ei:gl + and 26 . . . tt:Jf2 # , while White's only defence against that would lead to the loss of his bishop 24J!gl Ei:xgl+ 25.Ei:xgl Ei:xgl+ 26. �xgl tt:Je2+ 27.�fl tt:Jxc3-+

7 Yu Ruiyuan - Harikrishna Mashhad 2011

l.e4 e5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3.c!Llc3 c!Llf6 4.i.b5 i.b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

l.e4 e5 2.tiJj3 ttJc6 3.�b5 tLlf6 4. ttJc3 �b4 5. 0 - 0 0 - 0

6.d3 d6 7.�g5 ttJe7 8.ll:lh4 c6 9 . .ic4 d5 1 0 . .ib3 a5 11.a4 \!;lfd6 12 .\!;lff3 h6 13 . .bf6 \!;lfxf6 14. \!;lfxf6 gxf6 15.f4 .ie6 16.exd5 cxd5 17.ttJb5 �adS�

Black has fortified reliably his central pawns and can be quite optimistic about the future with his two powerful bishops.

18.ci>h1 After 18.c3 �cS+ 19.d4 �b6�

it is inconceivable how White can increase his pressure against the enemy centre.

18 . . . e4!? 19.c3 i.c5 2 0 .d4 i.b6 21.g3 lt>g7 22.ll:la3 f5 23. �c2 tLlg6 24.tLlg2 .ic7

25.�ce3?! After the more accurate line :

25.ttJa3 hS 26.h4 t2Je7 27.tLle3= he could have maintained the bal­ance. White has no targets to at-

tack and Black cannot break any­where.

25 . • . h5! 26.ci>g1 White could have prevented

the further advance of the enemy h-pawn by playing 26.h4 t2Je7 27. tLlc2 l"ld6 28.ttJa3 l"lb6 29.tLlb5 �d7+. Still, he would have lost a pawn in that variation.

26 . . . h4 27.ci>f2 �h8 28.�g1 ci>f6 29.�gfl ci>e7 3 0 .�a3?

The main drawback of this move is that White's rook remains isolated from the actions volun­tarily.

He should have simply waited, for example with 30 .�a2+

3 0 . . . h3 3l.tl:le1 �xf4! 32. gxf4 .ixf4-+

Black's advantage has become decisive thanks to his powerful central pawns supported by his mighty bishops.

33.�h1 .ig5 34.�f3 It was a bit more resilient, but

still hopeless for White to have tried here 34.tLldl l"lhg8 35.'it>fl f4-+

34 • . • exf3 35. i>xf3 gh4 36. i.c2 ggs 37 .gfl he3 38. Wxe3 f4+ 0 -1. He loses his h2-pawn after the exchange of the rooks.

59

Chapter 3 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.d3

Quick Repertoire

This is a quiet move, but very insidious too. White does not allow his opponent to enter an endgame and hopes to transpose to habitu­al variations of the Ruy Lopez.

4 ••• i.c5 This is not worse than Black's

most popular reply 4 . . . d6 - he de­velops a piece and prepares cas­tling kingside. The move 4 . . . .ic5 was preferred by some of the most outstanding classics of the Berlin system as Kramnik, Karjakin and Jakovenko.

White's main moves in the di­agrammed position are 5.c3, 5. 0-0 and 5.hc6 and we will ana­lyze them in the following chap­ters . Now, we will deal with all his other possibilities.

60

5.<liJc3 Black should not be afraid of

5.tt:Jxe5?! tt:Jxe5 6.d4 tt:Jxe4 !+, be­cause he ends up with an extra pawn.

White cannot obtain any ad­vantage with the more solid ap­proach 5.tt:Jbd2 d6 6.tt:Jfl 0-0 7. tt:Jg3 tt:Jd4=

It is too slow for him to con­tinue with 5.h3 0-0 6.hc6 bxc6 7.tt:Jxe5 dsgg Black is considerably ahead in development.

The pin of the knight 5 . .ig5 h6 6 . .ih4 creates problems only for White, because after 6 . . . d6 7.tt:Jc3 a6 8 . .ia4 g5 9 . .ig3 .id7t his dark­squared bishop is isolated from the actions and Black gains im­portant tempi for the develop-

l.e4 e5 2.ltJ.f3 ltJc6 3.ii.b5 ltJf6 4.d3 ii.c5 5.ltJc3 0 - 0

ment of his initiative o n the king­side.

He has an excellent position following S.'&e2 6.hc6 bxc6 7. ii.e3 ii.xe3 8.'&xe3 d6 9.0-0 ltJhSt:!

White cannot exploit the open f-file in the variation S.ii.e3 he3 6.fxe3 ltJe7= , since Black will ei­ther advance c7-c6, followed by d7-d5, or will neutralize the ene­my light-squared bishop by devel­oping his own bishop on e6.

5 . . . 0 - 0

6. 0 - 0 White fails to obtain the two­

bishop advantage, because after 6.ltJa4? ! , Black has the resource 6 . . . ii.e7! =

He should not fear 6.ltJxe5 ltJxeS 7.d4 ii.d6+ White has ad­vanced d2-d4 with a loss of a tem­po and must fight for equality.

It would be too optimistic for him to choose 6.ii.g5 h6 7.hf6 1Mfxf6 8.ltJd5 1Wd6 ! ? 9.'\We2 ltJd4 lO.ltJxd4 hd4 ll.c3 c6 !+ White's knight must leave its central base and his position is worse due to his lag in development.

6 . . . ltJd4 The exchange of the knights is

in favour of Black. He can also play 6 . . . d6, but in that case fol­lowing 7.ltJa4 White obtains the two-bishop advantage.

7)iJxe5 White is practically forced to

capture this pawn if he wishes to fight for the advantage, because the position after 7.ltJxd4 hd4= would not promise him anything more than equality.

Now, Black's initiative be­comes very powerful after the simple moves :

7 ••• d6 8)iJf3 .ig4 9 • .1te3 .ix£3 1 0 .gx£3 c6 ll . .ia4 b5 12 . .ib3 ltJh5�

White's pawn-structure around his king has been destroyed and Black has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn. It is essential for him, after the prac­tically obligatory move - 13.'i!?h1 to play 13 .• . t¥h4!+ and he re­stores unavoidably the material balance and his pieces remain very active.

61

Chapter 3 l.e4 e5 2 .4Jf3 4Jc6 3.i.b5 4Jf6 4.d3 i.c5

Step by Step

5)tJC3 5.lLlxe5? ! - This standard tac­

tical trick is connected with a loss of a tempo for White - d2-d3-d4, so it is not effective at all . 5 . . . ttJxe5 6.d4, Riemann - Ad.Anderssen, Breslau 1877, 6 . . . ttJxe4! 7.0-0 0-0 8.dxc5 (8.dxe5?! �e7+) 8 . . . lLlxc5+ - he has the two-bishop advantage, but his compensation for the missing pawn is insuffi­cient even for equality.

5 .lLlbd2 d6 6.lLlfl, Inarkiev -Ponomariov, Astrakhan 2010 (6.c3 0-0 - see Chapter 5) 6 . . . 0-0 7.lLlg3 lLld4 8 .lLlxd4 hd4 9.c3 �b6=

5 .h3 0-0 6.hc6 (the varia­tions after 6.�g5 h6 7.�h4 d6 8.c3 g5, 6 .0-0 d6 and 6.c3.d6 are ana­lyzed in Chapter 5) 6 .. bxc6 7.lLlxe5

62

d5gg Black is considerably ahead in development and has two pow­erful bishops, so all this more than compensates the sacrifice of the central pawn. White's attempt to simplify the position led to his quick demise after 8 .�e3? �xe3 9.fxe3 �d6 10.lLlf3 dxe4-+ Chlub­na - Majstrova, Email 2009.

5 .�g5 h6 6.�h4 (6.hf6?! �xf6 7.lLlbd2 lLld4+ Black's dark­squared bishop has no opponent and this provides him with a slight but stable edge ; in answer to 6.�e3, he equalizes with 6 . . . �xe3 7.fxe3 lLle7= - his e5-pawn is untouchable due to 8 .lLlxe5? c6 and if White retreats his bishop, Black will follow with �a5+ win­ning the knight, so he succeeds in transferring his knight to the g6-square, solving all his problems.) 6 . . . d6 7.lLlc3, Bildt - Puehn, Forchheim 2010 (after 7.c3 �d7 8.lLlbd2 a6 9.�a4 g5 ! 10 .�g3 �e7t White's dark-squared bishop is isolated from the actions, so he fails to advance d3-d4 under favourable circumstances) 7 . . . a6 8 .�a4 (8.hc6+ bxc6 9.d4 exd4 10.lLlxd4 �d7 11 .0-0 0-0? Black's powerful bishop-pair

l.e4 e5 2.CiJj3 lLlc6 3.i.b5 lLlf6 4.d3 i.cS 5. lLlc3 0 - 0

compensates fully his compro­mised queenside pawn-structure) 8 . . . g5 9.i.g3 i.d7 10.0-0 '&e7t He is already perfectly prepared for a kingside attack.

S.'&e2 - White's queen is very seldom placed well on this square, since he must consider the possi­bility 'Lld4, a move, which will be played with tempo in this situa­tion. 5 . . . 0-0

About 6.c3 l"le8, or 6.0-0 d6 -see Chapter 5.

In answer to 6.i.e3? ! , it is even stronger for Black to continue with 6 . . . 'Lld4 7.i.xd4 (7.'Llxd4?! exd4 8.i.g5 c6 9.i.c4 dS+ White lags in development and fails to hold his centre) 7 . . . exd4 8.0-0 c6 9.i.a4 dS+ and White has man­aged to evacuate his king, but Black has extra space and two powerful bishops.

6.i.g5? ! - This move is too op­timistic. 6 . . . h6 7.i.h4 gS ! 8.i.xc6 (Black should not be afraid of the risky line : 8 .'Llxg5? hxgS 9.i.xg5 'Lld4-+ and he wins easily, or of the calmer possibility 8.i.g3 d6 9.c3 'Llh5 10.i.xc6 bxc6 ll .d4 exd4 12 .'Llxd4 'Llxg3 13.hxg3 '&f6+ - He

leads in development and his bishops are stronger than the en­emy knights, so White is incapa­ble of exploiting the slightly com­promised position of Black's king.) 8 . . . bxc6 9.i.g3 (It would not work for White to try 9.'Llxg5? hxg5 10.i.xg5 i.e7+, because Black parries his opponent's hasty at­tack, remaining with an extra bishop and a superior develop­ment.) 9 . . . d6 10.'Llbd2 l"lb8 11.'Llb3 i.b6+ White's dark-squared bish­op is isolated from the actions, while Black will prepare in the nearest future the pawn-advance f7-f5, opening the centre in order to activate his bishops, Naiditsch - Pinter, Budapest 2000.

6.i.xc6 bxc6 7.i.e3 (Following 7.i.g5 l"le8 8.'Llbd2 aS 9 .0-0 h6 10 .i.h4 d6+! Black's powerful bishops compensate perfectly his compromised queenside pawn­structure. He will get rid of the pin by playing g7-g5 at an oppor­tune moment. It would be too risky for White to accept the pawn-sacrifice 7.'Llxe5 dS ! 8.'Lld2 l"le8 9.f4 i.a6gg, since Black's piece-activity provides him with more than sufficient compensa­tion. In the game Pina Vega -Marrero Lopez, Holguin 2010, there followed 10 .'Llb3 and Black could have countered that with 10 . . . 'Llxe4! ll .'LlxcS lLlxcS+ giving back the pawn and threatening to trap the enemy knight. It would be a bit better for White to opt for 10 .c4 '&d6 ll .'Lldf3, but even then,

63

Chapter 3

after the tactical strike 11 . . .tt'lxe4 ! 12 .dxe4 f6+ Black would have su­perior prospects . Still, if White accepts the pawn-sacrifice, he can obtain an acceptable position if he finds the only line : 8.d4 ! .ib6 9 . .ie3 ! tt'lxe4 10.tt'ld2 \WeB 11.tt'lxe4 dxe4 12.0-0 cSf:!) 7 . . . .ixe3 8.\Wxe3 (8 .fxe3? ! dS+ Black opens the cen­tral files in order to exploit his lead in development.) 8 . . . d6 (The position is completely equal after 8 . . . l"le8 9 .0-0 dS 10.tt'lbd2 \Wd6 ll .l"lfe1 h6=) 9 .0-0 tt'lhS 10.d4 exd4 11.tt'lxd4 c5 12.tt'le2 fSf:! Black is trying to activate maximally his forces, without being afraid that White may exploit the defects of his pawn-structure.

S . .ie3 - By exchanging the dark-squared bishops, White can­not reap any dividends out of the opening of the f-file - 5 . . . .ixe3 6. fxe3 tt'le7

7 . .ic4 d6 8 .0-0 0-0 9 .tt'lc3 .ie6 10 . .ib3, Duras - Leonhardt, Nuremberg 1906, by playing 10 . . . c6= Black will force sooner o r lat­er the exchange of the bishops on e6, preparing the isolation of the enemy bishop from the actions with the pawn-advance d6-d5.

64

In reply to 7 . .ia4, Kravtsiv -Zherebukh, Enschede 2010, he should not be in a hurry to com­plete the manoeuvre with his knight, but can play instead 7 . . . c6 8 .0-0 d6= fortifying reliably his central pawn.

The position is completely equal following 7.tt'lc3 c6, if White tries 8 . .ia4 tt'lg6 9 .\Wd2 0-0 10. .ib3 bS ! ? 11.a4 b4 12.tt'le2 aS 13.h4 hS 14.tt'lg3 dS 15.tt'lg5 .ig4+ Black has isolated the enemy bishop from the actions, having occupied the centre in the process, Firman - McShane, Warsaw 2006 (game 8) and also after 8 . .ic4 d6 9 . .ib3 0-0 10.0-0 tt'lg6= with an equal position. Black can always choose .ie6, if he so wishes, creating an absolutely symmetrical struc­ture, Saltaev - Knaak, Germany 2 006.

7.0-0 c6 8 . .ic4 d6 9 .tt'lbd2 (af­ter 9 . .ib3 tt'lg6 10.tt'lc3 \We7 11.tt'le2, Tarrasch - Pillsbury, Vienna 1898, he solves all his problems, completing his development and beginning the fight for the centre with 11 . . . 0-0 12 .tt'lg3 dS=) 9 . . . 0-0 10.\We1 tt'lg6 11.tt'lh4 (1L.ib3 dS 12. exdS, Mustafaev - Nabaty, Kerner 2007, after playing 12 . . . cxd5= , Black maintains a slight space ad­vantage, although the position is still within equality) ll . . . dS 12 . tt'lxg6 (12 . .ib3? ! tt'lxe4+) 12 . . . hxg6 13 . .ib3 \Wb6 14.\Wg3 l"le8= He has slightly more space, but can hard­ly achieve anything meaningful out of that.

5 . . . 0 - 0

l.e4 e5 2. 4'Jj3 4'Jc6 3. §J.b5 4'Jj6 4.d3 §J.c5 5. 4'Jc3 0 - 0

6. 0 - 0 6 . .b:c6 dxc6 - see Chapter 4. 6.4'Ja4? ! - White fails to obtain

the two-bishop advantage. 6 . . . §J.e7 7 . .b:c6. The e-file has been cov­ered by Black's bishop, so he must play here 7 . . . dxc6= with equality, since his pawn is untouchable. Af­ter 8 .4'Jxe5? �d4 9.4'Jc4 b5-+ White loses his knight.

6.h3 - This move looks like a waste of an important tempo and following 6 . . . 4'Jd4= Black has no problems at all .

6.4'Jxe5 - This exchange-com­bination is dubious, because White regains his piece losing a tempo - d2-d3-d4. 6 . . . 4'Jxe5 7.d4, Nowak - Tkaczyk, Warsaw 2 010, after 7 . . . §J.d6 8.dxe5 .b:e5 9 .0-0 .b:c3 10 .bxc3 4'Jxe4+ Black wins his opponent's central pawn, for which White has some compensa­tion, thanks to his two bishops.

6.§J.e3 4'Jd4 7.§J.c4 d6 8.0-0 c6+ Black's position in the centre is superior and he deploys his pieces more comfortably.

6.§J.g5 h6 (diagram)

7.§J.h4 - This seems to be the

most consequent move for White. 7 . . . 4'Jd4 8 .4'Jxe5 (8.4'Jxd4 .b:d4 9.0-0 c6 10 .§J.a4 b5 - see 6 .0-0; 8 .§J.c4 c6 9 .4'Jxd4 §J.xd4 10.0-0 b5 - see 6.0-0) 8 . . . d6 9.4'Jf3 §J.g4 10.§J.c4 c6 11 .0-0 b5 12 .§J.b3 g5 13. §J.g3 4'Jh5+ Black regains unavoid­ably his pawn and preserves great piece-activity.

7.§J.xf6 �xf6 8.4'Jd5 (It is worse for White to play 8 .§J.xc6 dxc6+, as well as 8 .0-0 4'Je7! with the stand­ard transfer of the knight to the f4-square. 9 .4'Ja4 §J.b6 10.4'Jxb6 axb6 ll.d4 d6+) 8 . . . �d6! ? (This is an ambitious move. Black wishes to seize the initiative. He has also tried in practice 8 . . . �d8 9 .0-0 4'Jd4 10.4'Jxd4 ixd4= with equali­ty, because White's minor pieces are active, Bielinski - Bosek, Po­lanica Zdroj 2005.) 9.�e2, Obels - Verstraten, Hengelo 2002 (The e5-pawn is protected, so even af­ter the more accurate move 9 . 0-0, Black has the possibility to exchange his opponent's more ac­tive knight with 9 . . . 4'Je7! 10. 4'Jxe7+ �xe7 ll.c3 d6+ White's dark-squared bishop is absent from the board and he is faced with a difficult defence.) . Black can play now 9 . . . 4'Jd4 10.4'Jxd4

65

Chapter 3

.hd4 11.c3 c6 ! 12 .cxd4 cxd5 13. Wd2 (13.0-0? Wb4-+) 13 . . . Wb6 14.�a4 Wxd4+ and he wins sever­al pawns.

Following 7.�d2, he maintains superior prospects with the line : 7 . . . '2Jd4 8.�c4 (8.'2Jxe5?! c6 9.�a4 d6 10.'2Jf3 �g4 11 .�e3 '2Jd7+ White will hardly get rid of the unpleas­ant pin without material losses .) 8 . . . c6 9.'2Jxd4 �xd4+ His light­squared bishop is a juicy target for the development of Black's in­itiative.

6 . . .ti)d4

7.tl:lxe5 This is White's most princi­

pled move. He has captured his opponent's central pawn, so Black must react very precisely.

7.�g5?! - This move is too risky. 7 . . . c6 8.�c4 h6 9 .�h4? (White's more reasonable alter­natives here - 9 .'2Jxd4 hxg5 10. '2Jde2 g4+ and 9 . .hf6 Wxf6+ both lead to inferior position for him, but do not lose immediately.) 9 . . . '2Jxf3+ 10.Wxf3? (After 10.gxf3 g5 11.�g3 d6-+ it would be practi­cally impossible for White to save

66

the game, since his dark-squared bishop has remained packed in a cage and will never get out of it.) 10 . . . g5 11 .�g3 d5 12.exd5 �g4-+ V.Losev - Berke, Email 2009.

7.h3? ! - This is a loss of an im­portant tempo, enabling Black to compromise his opponent's queenside pawn-structure. 7 . . . c6 8 .�c4 b5 9 .�b3 a5 1 0 .a3 '2Jxb3 11.cxb3 d6+

After 7.�e3 c6 8 .�a4 b5 9.�b3 a5 10.a3 '2Jxb3 11.cxb3 .he3 12. fxe3 d6+, there arise numerous weaknesses in White's camp, Feh­res - Ziltener, Gladenbach 1999.

7.�c4 - Following this accu­rate move, he can maintain the balance. 7 . . . d6 8 .h3 (8.'2Jxd4 �xd4=) 8 . . . �e6 9.'2Jxd4 (9.�xe6 fxe6 10 .�g5 Wd7t Black exerts powerful pressure on the f-file) 9 . . . .hd4 10 . .he6 fxe6= All his pieces are perfectly placed and he has excellent compensation for the defects of his pawn-structure, Papista - Vereb, Hungary 2007.

White plays quite often in practice 7.'2Jxd4 �xd4

8.�c4 c6 9 .Wf3 d6 - see 8.Wf3. 8.�a4 c6 9 .�b3 a5 10.a4 d6

11.Wf3 �e6=

l.e4 e5 2. CiJ.f3 CiJc6 3.�b5 CiJf6 4.d3 �c5 5. CiJc3 0 - 0

8.�e3 he3 9.fxe3 c6 10 .�c4 d6= Black will play �e6 in the next few moves, neutralizing his opponent's active bishop, Ngo Da - Williams, Canberra 2001.

In reply to 8.CiJdS, V.Perez -Meneses, Lima 2000, the change of the pawn-structure after 8 . . . CiJxdS 9.exdS d6t presents the ini­tiative in Black's hands.

8 .CiJe2 - The transfer of this knight to the g3-square is easily countered. 8 . . . �b6 9.CiJg3 c6 10. �a4 dS 11 .h3 dxe4 12 .dxe4 "Wxd1 13.l"lxd1 g6= Black's pieces are deployed effortlessly to active squares, Milos - Morovic Fernan­dez, Santiago de Chile 1989.

8 .�gS c6 9 .�c4 (9.�a4 h6 10. �h4 bS 11.�b3 aS - see 9 .�c4) 9 . . . h6 10 .�h4 (in answer to 10 .�e3, it is very good for Black to acquire additional space on the queenside with 10 . . . he3 ll.fxe3 bS 12 .�b3 aS+) 10 . . . bS 11 .�b3 aS 12 .a4 b4 13.CiJe2 �a7! (the activity of this bishop is more important than capturing the weak b2-pawn) 14. �h1 gS ! (if White succeeds in ad­vancing f2-f4, he would have dan­gerous initiative) 15.�g3 d6 16.f3 CiJhS? Black has occupied space on both sides of the board, but has somehow weakened his camp, so the position is with mutual chances, Petrisor - P.H.Nielsen, Aix-les-Bains 2011 (game 9).

8."Wf3 c6 9.�c4 d6 10 .h3 hc3 ll.bxc3 �e6= (after ll . . . h6 12 ."Wg3 CiJhS 13."Wf3 CiJf6=, the game In­arkiev - Eljanov, Jermuk 2009, ended quickly in a draw) . Follow-

ing the move we recommend, the position is still within equality, but it would be much easier to play it with Black. White has been deprived of his only asset - his two-bishop advantage.

7 ••• d6 8.lLlf3 8.tt:lc4? a6 9.�a4 bS-+ 8 . . . .ig4

9 • .ie3 After 9.a3?, Plos - Firm, Kranj

1995, his neglect towards Black's threats leads to White's quick de­mise 9 . . . c6 10 .�a4 tt:ld7 11.�e3 tt:leS 12 .hd4 �xd4-+ and he must give up his queen for two minor pieces ; otherwise, he will get checkmated.

9.i.g5 "Wc8 10 .hf6 gxf6 11 . �h1 c6 12 .ic4 �h8-t Black's at­tack is decisive.

9 . . . .txf3 1 0 .gx£3 c6 ll . .ia4 ll.ic4 bS 12 .ib3 tt:lhS - see

l l .ia4. ll . . . b5 12 . .ib3 l2Jh5

(diagram) 13.�hl Following 13 .hd4, Tarrasch

- Perlis, San Sebastian 1912 and the powerful intermediate move

67

Chapter 3

13 . . . ttlf4 ! White is on the verge of an immediate loss, for example: 14.�hl hd4 15.ttle2 ttlxe2 16. '\Wxe2 hb2 17J��abl i.e5+ - the material is equal, but the dark squares in his camp have been catastrophically weakened.

13.ttle2 ttlxf3+ 14.�g2 lLlh4+ 15.�hl he3 16.fxe3 '\Wg5 17.l"lf2 '\Wxe3+ Black has a solid extra pawn, Panarin - Kruchev, Be­lorechensk 2009.

13 • . . '\Wh4! His energetic actions help him

to restore the material balance, preserving a superior pawn-struc­ture.

14.�g1 '\Wh3 (diagram)

15.'�fl! Black's attack would be deci­

sive if White plays something else. 15 . • • '1Wxf3+ 16.'\Wg2 a5!

68

Black forces his opponent to compromise his queenside.

17.a4 b4 18.ttlb1 Y;Yxg2+ 19. �xg2 .!LJxb3 2 0 .cxb3 f5+ Svidler - P.H.Nielsen, Copenhagen 2010 (game 1 0 ) .

White has so many weak pawns that Black maintains a sta­ble advantage. He has neutralized the system 5.ttlc3 with an ener­getic play.

Chapter 3 l.e4 e5 2 )iJf3 tLlc6 3 • .ib5 tLlf6 4.d3 .ic5

Complete Games

8 Firman McShane Warsaw 2006

l.e4 e5 2.l2:lf3 c!lJc6 3 . .ib5 c!lJf6 4.d3 i.c5 5 . .ie3 he3 6. fxe3 c!lJe7 7.c!lJc3 c6 8 . .ia4 c!lJg6 9.%Yd2 0 - 0 1 0 .i.b3 b5 ll.a4 b4 12.c!lJe2 a5 13.h4 h5 14.c!lJg3 d5 15.c!lJg5 .ig4 16.%Yf2 �a7

17.'t!.>d2? White could have preserved

his important light-squared bish­op with the more resilient line: 17.exd5 cxdS 18.0-0+.

17 . . . c!lJd7! 18.exd5 c!lJc5! 19. dxc6 c!lJxb3+ 2 0 .cxb3 f6

Black was winning immedi­ately with 20 . . . %Yd5-+ and his at­tack would have been decisive.

(diagram) 21.c!lJ5e4 Now, White's position is com­

pletely lost. He could prolong his

resistance with 21 .li'lf3 �dS 2 2 . E1acl E1d8 23. 't!.>el+

21 . . . %Yd5 22.�hc1 �c7 23. �c5 %Yxb3 24.'t!.>e1 f5 25.c!lJd6 f4 26.c!lJge4 fxe3 27.%Yxe3 c!lJf4 28. 't!.>d2 �xb2+ 29.�c2 �xa1 3 0 . �c1 �a2+ 31.�c2 �d5 32.�c5 %Ye6 33.c!lJc4 c!lJd5 34.�e1 c!lJc3 35.c!lJg5 �f6 36.c!lJxe5 �f4+ 37. <t!.>c2 i.d1+ 0 -1

9 Petrisor - PH.Nielsen Aix-les-Bains 2011

l.e4 e5 2 .c!lJf3 c!lJc6 3.c!lJc3 c!lJf6 4 • .ib5 i.c5 5.d3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 c!lJd4 7.c!lJxd4 hd4 8 . .ig5 c6 9 • .ic4 h6 1 0 . .ih4 b5 11 • .ib3 a5 12.a4 b4 13.c!lJe2 .ia7 14.'t!.>h1 g5 15 • .ig3 d6 16.f3 c!lJh5

(diagram) 17 . .ie1 White should have exchanged

69

Chapter 3

his opponent's powerful dark­squared bishop, but after 17.�f2 .hf2 18.l"lxf2 '\Wb6 19.l"lfl '\We3= Black's queen would be so active that White would not manage to exploit Black's somewhat weak­ened kingside.

17 • . • @h8? After 17 . . . d5 18.c3 '\Wd6t he

can isolate White's light-squared bishop and obtain some advan­tage in the centre.

18.c3 bxc3 19.hc3;!;

Black's inaccurate move 17 has led to a position in which his king's shelter is seriously endan­gered.

19 . . . gbs 2 0 . .ic4 .lLlf4?! It is preferable for him to

opt for 20 . . . @g8 21 .'\Wd2 �b6;!; with a difficult but defensible po­sition.

21 • .lLJxf4?

70

White could have won a pawn with 21 .'1Wd2 t2Jxe2 2 2 . .ha5±

21 . . . gxf4 22.d4;!;

His pieces are more active and Black's king is bare.

22 . . . . '\Wf6 23.dxe5 dxe5 24. haS?

White's desire to create an outside passed pawn is under­standable, but now, Black can make a combination, which leads to a draw. It was more precise for White to have played 24.l"lbU

24 .. ,gxb2 25 • .ic3

25 . . . gxg2 ! ! 26.@xg2 ggs+ 27.@hl .ih3 28,ggl?

White wishes to save his rook, but his last move loses outright. He could have still made a draw, but finding it with only moves was a tremendously difficult task in the time-trouble: 2 8.'\We2 '\WgS 29.

l.e4 e5 2. 4Jf3 4Jc6 3. 1lb5 4Jj6 4.d3 ilc5 5. 4Jc3 0 - 0

8:f2 .bf2 30.�xf2 ilg2+ 3l.mgl .bf3+ 32 .mfl �hs 33.hf7 �h3+ 34.mel l'%g2 35.1le6 ! �xe6 36. �xf3 Ei:gl + 37. mf2 l'%xal 38.1lxal �a2+ 39.�e2 �xal 40.�d2 �xa4 4l.�d8+ mh7 42.�e7=

28 . . . gxgl+ 29.�xg1 .ixg1 3 0 .gxg1 �e7 31.a5 �c5 32.a6 @h7 33.a7 �f2! 0 -1

10 Svidler - P.H.Nielsen, Copenhagen 2010

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 tilc6 3.1lb5 tilf6 4.tilc3 .ic5 5.d3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 tild4 7.�xe5 d6 8.tilf3 .ig4 9 . .ie3 hf3 1 0 .gxf3 c6 11. .ia4 b5 12 . .ib3 tilh5 13.@h1 �h4 14.gg1 �h3 15.�fl �xf3+ 16.�g2 a5 17.a4 b4 18.�b1 �xg2+ 19.gxg2 tilxb3 2 0 .cxb3 f5 21.tild2 .ixe3 22.fxe3

22 . . . fxe4 It is also very good for Black to

continue with 22 .. .f4 23.4Jc4 fxe3 24.�xe3 l'%f3 25.4Jf5 l'!xd3 26. 4Je7+ mh8 27.�xc6 h6+ and his knight on h5 protects perfectly his kings ide and can even join later in the attack.

23.tilxe4 d5 24.tl:lc5 gae8 2s.ge1 gf3 26.gge2 d4!

27.@g2 In the variation 27.�e4 dxe3

28J'!xe3 8:xe3 29.8:xe3 l'!e5+ White's kingside pawn-structure is compromised and he can hard­ly equalize.

27 . . . gf5! 28.�e4 dxe3 29 . gxe3 gds

It seemed more aggressive for Black to choose 29 . . . �f4+ ! ? 30. mgl l'%e6+

3 0 .gc1 tilf4+ 31.@g3? White had a more tenacious

defence here - 3l.mgl l'!xd3 32 . Ei:xd3 4Je2+ 33.mg2 4Jxc1 34.8:d8+ mm and he would activate his rook and knight.

31. . . tl:lxd3? Following 31 . . .8:df8 32 .8:cel

4Jd5 33.8:3e2 l'%f3+ 34.mg2 l'!xd3+ Black could begin collecting ma­terial maintaining his piece-activ­ity.

71

Chapter 3

32.gxc6 ges The greedy line: 32 . . . 'Llxb2

33.'Llc5!� would present White with the possibility to activate considerably his forces.

33.gc2 gd4 34.gd2 gexe4 35.gxe4 gxe4 36.gxd3=

(diagram) The endgame on the dia­

grammed position is objectively a draw, although White must still play precisely in order to hold it.

36 . . . ge2 37.gd5 gxb2 38. gxa5 gxb3+ 39.'it>g2 ga3 4 0 . gas+ 'it>t7 41.a5 h6 42.gbs b3

72

43.a6 gxa6 44.gxb3 gas 45. gb6 ges 46.h3 ge6 47.gbs 'it>f6 48.'it>f3 ges 49.gb7 'it>g6 5 0 . ga7 ggs 51.ga6+ 'it>h5 52.ga4 ggl 53.'it>f2 gbl 54.'it>g3 g5 55. ga6 gb3+ 56.'it>g2 gb2+ 57. 'it>g3 gb3+, Draw.

Chapter 4 l.e4 e5 2.ll:)f3 �c6 3.i.b5 �f6 4.d3 i.c5 5.hc6

Quick Repertoire

White's last move seems to be completely harmless, since he presents voluntarily his opponent with the two-bishop advantage. Still , the fact that numerous out­standing grandmasters like Anand, Cheparinov, Inarkiev, lvanchuk, Malakhov, McShane, Morozevich, Nepomniachtchi , Radjabov, Shirov, Smirin, Svidler, Sutovsky, Topalov, Vachier-La­grave, Zvjaginsev and may others have tried it indicates that Black faces problems, which are hardly so simple. There arises a middle game with long positional ma­noeuvring and a very complicated fight.

5 . . . dxc6

6 . .ie3 White loses after 6.t2J xe5?

I!Nd4-+ Following 6.b3 I!Ne7 7 . .ib2

.ib4!?� he is forced either to ex­change his powerful dark-squared bishop, or to play c2-c3, reducing its activity.

In the variation 6.1!Ne2 .id6 7. l2Jbd2 .ie6 ! � Black has no prob­lems at all thanks to his bishops perfectly placed in the centre.

6 . .ig5 I!Nd6 7.l2Jbd2 .ie6 ! 8 . .ixf6 gxf6 9.l2Jc4 I!Nd7 10.l2Je3 :1'\gS� He has excellent compensa­tion for his compromised pawn­structure due to the powerful bishops and the dominance over the g-file.

73

Chapter 4

White cannot harm his oppo­nent with 6.tt:Jc3 0-0 7.tt:Jxe5 'Wd4 8.�e3 Wxe5 9.d4 We7 10.dxc5 tt:Jxe4= Black has a superior posi­tion in the centre and White must play very accurately in order to hold the balance.

6.h3 - This move looks like a loss of time, but now White's bishop can occupy the e3-square without being afraid of the possi­bility tt:Jg4. 6 . . . tt:Jd7 7.0-0 0-0 8 . �e3 �e8 9.tt:Jbd2 (It is more pre­cise for him to opt for 9.hc5 tt:Jxc5 10.tt:Jbd2 f6 ll .tt:Jc4 tt:Je6= -He has deprived his opponent of the two-bishop advantage, but Black has fortified his set-up in the centre.) 9 . . . �f8 10.tt:Jc4 f6+ -His knight will go to e6 and from there it takes part in the protec­tion of the kingside and can be ac­tivated at an opportune moment by going to d4, or f4.

The endgame is equal fol­lowing 6.0-0 tt:Jd7!? (Black not only protects his e5-pawn, but brings his knight closer to its ideal place in that pawn-structure - the e6-square.) 7.�e3 �d6 8.tt:Jbd2 0-0 9.tt:Jc4 �e8 10.d4

74

exd4 ll .tt:Jxd6 cxd6 12 .'Wxd4 tt:Je5=

6 . . . �d6 7.h3 �e6 Black does not wish to let the

enemy knight to c4. He could have also started

with the move 7 . . . h6, defending against tt:Jg5 in advance.

8)iJbd2 h6 9.d4 exd4 1 0 . ll:lxd4 We7�

White can exploit his superior pawn-structure only in a late end­game, while at the moment, Black exerts powerful pressure on the central files. He is reluctant to waste time for the retreat of his light-squared bishop and begins an immediate attack against the enemy e4-pawn.

Chapter 4 l.e4 e5 2 )2Jf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.d3 .ic5 5 . .ixc6 dxc6

Step by Step

White has many alternatives here and our analyses will be cen­tred on A) 6.�c3, B) 6.h3, C) 6. 0 - 0 and D) 6 • .ie3.

About 6.tt:lbd2 tt:ld7 7.0-0 0-0 - see variation C.

We will mention in short some other possibilities for him:

6.tt:lxe5? �d4 7 . .ie3 (other­wise, White loses his knight) 7 . . . �xeS 8 .d4 �xe4 9.dxc5 �xg2-+ and Black has an overwhelming lead in development in a position with material equality.

In response to 6.c3, it seems very good for Black to continue in a standard way 6 . . ..id6 7.tt:lbd2 .ie6=

6.b3 �e7 7 . .ib2, McShane -Parker, Hinkley Island 2011 , 7 . . . ib4 + ! ? 8 .ic3 (8.tt:lbd2 ig4 9.c3 id6 10.h3 ih5 ll.tt:lc4 tt:ld7+! The activity of White's bishop has

been neutralized and Black has obtained a comfortable position) 8 . . . hc3+ 9.Lt'lxc3 ig4 10.0-0 (10. �d2? ! hf3 ll.gxf3 Lt'lh5+ White has no active prospects on the g­file and the vulnerability of his kingside has become quite obvi­ous) 10 . . . tt:ld7=

6.�e2 - He has protected his f2-pawn and Black's e5-pawn is already hanging. 6 . . . .id6 7.Lt'lbd2 ie6! - This set-up solves all Black's problems in the main line of the variation. 8.d4 (after 8.Lt'lg5 ig4 9.f3 ih5 10.tt:lc4 Lt'ld7+! there arises a double-edged position in which Black has no problems at all, while following 8.0-0 Lt'ld7 9. tt:lc4 hc4 10.dxc4 0-0= the situ­ation is very close to a draw. Nei­ther side can change advanta­geously the pawn-structure and the major pieces are likely to be exchanged on the only open file.) 8 . . . tt:ld7 9.tt:lc4 hc4 10.�xc4, Bar­tel - Sargissian, Plovdiv 2010. Here, it deserves attention for Black to play 10 . . . exd4 ! ? with the following exemplary variation 11 . �xd4 0-0 12 .ig5 f6 13.ie3 �e7 14.0-0-0 E1fe8 15.Lt'ld2 b5+! - The opposite sides castling has led to a position with mutual chances.

75

Chapter 4

6.�g5 �d6 7.ct:lbd2 �e6 ! 8.�e2 (Following 8.�xf6 gxf6 9.ct:lc4 �d7 10 .ct:le3 l'!g8 1l .�d2 0-0-0 12 . 0-0-0 b6 13.Wb1 <i>b7? Black has an excellent compensation for his compromised pawn-structure thanks to his powerful bishops and active major pieces, Sutovsky - Z.Almasi, Dresden 2007; 8.ct:lc4 hc4 and now, it is bad for White to play 9.dxc4? ct:lxe4+ with an ex­tra pawn for his opponent, so he must continue with 9 .�xf6 �xf6 10.dxc4 �e6 11 .0-0, Hossain -Eljanov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 and after the natural reply 11 . . . 0-0=, the position becomes com­pletely equal.) 8 . . . ct:ld7 9.c3 f6 10. �e3 he3 1l.�xe3 c5 12.0-0 (it is again equal after 12 .d4 cxd4 13. cxd4 exd4 14.ct:lxd4 ct:le5 15.ct:lxe6 �xe6= ). In the game Inarkiev -Kir.Georgiev, Sochi 2007, there followed 12 . . . 0-0= with equality, but Black can try the sharper ap­proach - 12 . . . 0-0- 0 ! ??

A) 6)L!c3 White's knight is not so well

placed on this square. 6 . . . 0 - 0

76

7.tL!xe5 7.�g5 h6 8 .�h4 l'!e8 9.0-0 g5

- see variation C. In response to 7.�e2, Black

should better react in a standard fashion 7 . . . l'!e8 8 .0-0 ct:ld7 9.�e3 �f8=

White would not achieve much with 7.ct:le2 l'!e8 8.ct:lg3 ct:ld7 9.0-0 ct:lf8=

After 7.0-0 l'!e8 8 .�g5 (8.h3 ct:ld7 - see 7.h3 ; 8 .ct:le2?! �g4 9. ct:lg3 ct:lh5 10.ct:lxh5 �xh5 1l .�e3, Robidas - Campbell, Montreal 2007, 11 . . . �f8+ Black has better chances in view of his two-bishop advantage and the absence of a clear-cut plan for his opponent's actions. In the variation 8.l'!e1 ct:ld7 9.�e3 �f8 10.ct:le2 ct:lc5 11. ct:lg3 f6? he accomplishes the standard deployment of his forc­es, with good prospects to seize the initiative.) 8 . . . h6 9 .�d2 , Phan Nguyen Phuong - Le Thi Hai, Hue 2004 (It would be more con­sequent for White to choose here 9 .hf6 �xf6+, but Black main­tains a slight edge, because his bishops are more active than White's knights, while in the vari­ation 9 .�h4 g5 10 .�g3 ct:lh5? his e5-pawn is untouchable and he obtains a good game.) 9 . . . ct:ld7 10.ct:le2 ct:lf8 1l.h3 ct:lg6 12 .ct:lg3 �e6= Black's position is not worse at all.

7.h3 ct:ld7 8.0-0 l'!e8 (diagram)

In answer to 9 .�e2 , Pauch -Zahorbensky, Czech Republic 2005, it is good for Black to play

9 . . . i.f8 ! ? 10 .i.e3 aS and here, after 1l.d4 bSt he seizes the initiative, while following 1U'1fd1 b6 12 .d4 i.a6 13 .Wd2 exd4 14.l2Jxd4 ttJeS 1S. b3 i.a3? or 1l.�ad1 b6 12 .Wd2 i.b7? his two-bishop advantage provides him with a comfortable position.

In the variation 9 .i.e3 i.f8 ! ? 10.ttJe2 f6 1l .ttJg3 ttJcS? Black's king is safe and he will complete his development in the next few moves. After that, he will have better prospects due to his two powerful bishops.

9.ttJe2 l2Jf8 10.i>h1 f6 ll.ttJh2 l2Je6 12 .f4 exf4 13.l2Jxf4, Philip­owski - Plachetka, Germany 2000, 13 . . . i.d6! 14.l2Jxe6 he6 1S. i.f4 cS ! 16.b3 bS !?. Black has cre­ated excellent counterplay on the queenside, connected with the pawn-advance cS-c4. It is essen­tial that White cannot prevent radically that plan with 17.c4? ! , because of 1 7 . . . bxc4! 18.bxc4 (18. dxc4 hf4 19.�xf4 aS+) 18 . . . hf4 19.�xf4 Wd4+ and Black has an excellent game against his oppo­nent's vulnerable d3-pawn.

Following 7.i.e3 i.d6 8 .h3 cS 9.ttJd2 l2Jd7 10.We2 l2Jb8 ll.ttJb3? ! b6 12 .0-0 l2Jc6 13.f4, Nepom-

4.d3 i.c5 5. hc6 de

niachtchi - Naiditsch, Mainz 2009, it is very effective for him to choose the attractive line : 13 . . . exf4 ! 14.hf4 h£4 1S.�xf4 WigS ! 16.Wd2 hh3 17J''1xf7 WeS ! ? 18. �xf8+ �xf8. The forced variation has ended and White loses after the greedy approach - 19.gxh3 Wg3+ 20.Wg2 We3+ 2Li>h1 �f3-+, while following the more accurate reaction 19J'1fl �xfl+ 20 .i>xf1 i.e6+ Black's pieces are much more active. It would not be in fa­vour of White to trade queens, be­cause then, Black will create quickly an outside passed pawn on the kingside.

7 . . . �d4 8 . .ie3 White's blunders 8 .ttJf3??

Wxf2# and 8.0-0 WxeS-+ have also been encountered in several games.

8 ••• �xe5 9.d4 �e7 1 0 .dxc5 c!Llxe4

ll.�d4 After ll.ttJxe4 Wxe4 12 .0-0

i.fS= Black's pieces are a bit more active, but he can hardly exploit this effectively, Berkelmans -Groenhuis, Schagen 2003.

77

Chapter 4

ll . . . .i£5 12. 0 - 0 - 0 gadS 13. '!Wb4 '!We6 14.�b1 b5t - In this position with bishops of opposite colours and castling on different sides of the board, Black has be­gun active actions on the queen­side prior to his opponent, Carlsen - E.Alekseev, Biel 2008 (game 11).

B) 6.h3

This move is considered useful for White and its idea is purely prophylactic. He wishes to ensure the possible development of his bishop on e3, preventing the eventual move lLlf6-g4!

6 •• )t)d7 7. 0 - 0 7.i.e3 i.d6 8 .lLlbd2 (8.0-0 0-0

9.lLlbd2 �e8 - see 8.lLlbd2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.0-0 (9.lLlc4 �e8 10.0-0 lLlf8 -see 9.0-0) 9 . . . �e8 10.c3, lnarkiev - Aronian, Mainz 2010 (10.lLlc4 lLlf8 ll .c3, Nepomniachtchi -Eljanov, Moscow 2010 and here, we recommend ll . . . b6 ! ? = with the idea to prepare the immediate attack of White's weakness on d3 with the light-squared bishop). The vulnerability of the d3-square can again be emphasized now

78

with the line 10 . . . b6 ! ? ll .d4 i.b7 12 .'1Wc2 exd4 13.cxd4 c5+± Black's bishops have become very active and this provides him with an ex­cellent game.

7.lLlbd2 - This is a standard move and from this square White's knight may go to g3, or to c4, while from the e3-square only to g3. 7 . . . 0-0 (it is preferable for him to choose 8 .0-0 �e8 - see 7.0-0) 8.lLlf1 �e8 9.i.e3 i.d6 10. lLlg3 lLlf8 1l .Wd2 c5 12.0-0 lLle6+± Black's knight is ready to pene­trate to the d4-outpost, Solak -Sargissian, Novi Sad 2009.

7 . . . 0 - 0 8.i.e3 8.lLld2 �e8 9.lLlc4 i.f8 10.lLlh2,

Predojevic - Eljanov, Sarajevo 2009, 10 . . . lLlc5 ll.f4 exf4 12.hf4 lLle6 13 .i.e3 c5+± - He has ob­tained an excellent pawn-struc­ture, similar to the Rossolimo variation of the Sicilian Defence (l.e4 c5 2.lLlf3 lLlc6 3 .i.b5 g6 4. hc6 dxc6 5.d3 i.g7 6.h3 e5 and later White advances f2-f4) with the important difference that Black's kingside has not been weak­ened by pushing the g7-pawn.

s . . . ges

4.d3 �c5 5. hc6 de

9.tl:\bd2 C) 6. 0 - 0 9.hc5 li:Jxc5 10.ti:Jbd2 f6 11. This is a natural developing

ti:Jc4 li:Je6= He fortifies his posi- move. tion in the centre and equaliz- 6 .. .tl:\d7 es .

9 . . . i.f8 1 0 .tl:\c4 Opening of the centre with

10.d4 exd4 11 .i.xd4 c5 12 .i.c3 b5 13.b3 i.b7� may provide White with better chances only in the advanced stage of the endgame, while now, Black obtains an ex­cellent position, P.Czarnota -Naiditsch, Germany 2010 (game 12).

10 ... f6 11.lLlfd2 11 .�e2 li:Jc5 12 J'lad1 �e7 13.

ti:Jh4 li:Je6+ White fails to begin ac­tive actions, because Black has prevented the moves d3-d4 and f2-f4 and later he will follow with b7-b6 and c7-c5 seizing the initia­tive.

ll . . . lbc5 12.f4 exf4 13 • .txf4 b5 14.lba5 �d4+ 15.�h1 lbe6+ Opening of the game has turned out to be in favour of Black due to his perfectly placed pieces, Hou -Naiditsch, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009 (game 13).

That is White's most precise reply, since Black cannot retreat his bishop to the f8-square yet.

White has also tried in prac­tice :

7.c3 - This move would be sensible only with the idea to pre­pare d2-d4, otherwise, White may have problems with his d3-pawn. 7 . . . 0-0 8 .d4 (8.ti:Jbd2 l"le8 9 .b4 i.d6 10.li:Jc4 c5 ! ?�) 8 . . . i.d6 9 . ti:Jbd2, Ginsburg - Naumann, Germany 2005, 9 . . . b6 10.l"le1 i.a6� Black's bishop-pair pro­vides him with excellent chances of seizing the initiative. He will complete his development and start opening of the game in the centre ;

In the variation 7.�e2 0-0 8. i.e3, Kretschel - Hecht, Bayern 1996, Black obtains an excellent position, deploying his pieces ac­cording to the already familiar scheme: 8 . . . l"le8 9 .ti:Jbd2 i.f8 10.

79

Chapter 4

lt:lc4 f6 ll .a4 lt:lcS 12J':1fd1 Wfe7 13. c3 Wff7�. In this variation, you can see why Black should not be in a hurry to play c6-c5 - the cS­square may be used for the trans­fer of his knight to e6;

7.b3 - he wishes to exert pres­sure on the long diagonal by de­veloping his bishop on b2, but Black has more than sufficient re­sources to reach an acceptable po­sition. 7 . . . 0-0 8 .�b2, Popovic -Nestorovic, Zuerich 2010 and by playing 8 . . . Wfe7! ? 9 .lt:lbd2 aS 10. lt:lc4 f6 ll .Wfd2 a4� he not only fortifies his centre, but obtains very good prospects for effective queenside actions;

7.lt:lbd2 - The transfer of the knight to the c4-square is one of White's basic resources to fight for the advantage in this pawn­structure. 7 . . . 0-0 8.lt:lc4 E1e8

9 .�d2 (In answer to 9.�e3, Zvjaginsev - T.L.Petrosian, Plov­div 2010, it is very good for Black to play the reliable move 9 . . . �f8 ! = - his bishop protects the king from here and does not stand in the way of his other pieces. After the somewhat artificial move 9 . <ilh1, Predojevic - NeSmith, Ro-

80

gaska Slatina 2011 , Black obtains an excellent position following the standard reaction 9 .. .f6 10. �e3 �f8� and a subsequent trans­fer of the knight to the e6-square.) 9 . . .f6 10 .lt:lh4, Harikrishna - Ro­manov, St. Petersburg 2009. Af­ter accomplishing the standard regrouping of his forces with 10 . . . �f8 11.lt:lf5 lt:lcS 12 .Wff3 lt:le6� Black has protected reliably his king and after he completes the development of his queenside with b7-b6 and c7-c5, he can even think about seizing the initiative.

7 . . . �d6 8 . .!Llbd2 In answer to 8 .d4, Keller -

Hecht, Dresden 2003, it is good for him to try 8 . . . 0-0 9 .lt:lbd2 b6 10 .l"1e1 �a6� activating his light­squared bishop.

8 . . . 0 - 0 9 . .!Llc4 �e8

1 0 .d4 Following 10.lt:lfd2 lt:lf8 11.lt:lxd6

cxd6 12.f4 exf4 13.hf4 lt:lg6 14. �g3 �e6 1S.<ilh1 f6 16.lt:lb3 dS= White has failed to reap any divi­dends out of the change of the pawn-structure, Sick - Klingel­hoefer, Germany 2009.

1 0 . • . exd4 11.�xd4 In the endgame, arising after

11.ttlxd6 cxd6 12 .�xd4 ttle5 13. ttJxeS dxe5 14.�xd8 �xd8= Black will make a draw easily, Zvja­ginsev - Khismatullin, Magnito­gorsk 2011 .

ll . . . .ic5 12.�d2, Naiditsch -Ivanchuk, Moscow 2009, 12 . • .

.if8 13.gadl �f6?

Black has preserved his two­bishop advantage and that would help him in the organization of counterplay.

D) 6 • .ie3 White's bishop is developed to

an excellent square. 6 . . . .id6

4.d3 i!.cS 5. hc6 de

7.h3 In response to 7.0-0, Solak -

Kir.Georgiev, Rijeka 2010, it would be best for Black to play like Kramnik (analogously to the main line) 7 . . . il.e6 ! 8.ttlbd2 ttlg4 9.�e2 ttlxe3 10.�xe3 0-0?, since without opening of the position, White can hardly make any pro­gress. After its opening however, Black's bishops will be much more mobile than White's knights.

7.ttlbd2 ttlg4 ! (Black fortifies his position in the centre with tempo.) 8 .il.g5 f6 9.il.h4 il.e6 10 .h3 (10.�e2 c5 ll .ttlc4 �d7 12 .ttlfd2 bS 13.ttlxd6+ cxd6 14.f3 ttlh6= He has a slight space advantage and his bishop is more active than its counterpart. He cannot achieve much out of all this, though . . . , Vachier Lagrave - Bacrot, Pau 2008; 10 .d4 exd4 11.ttlxd4 �e7 12.ttlxe6 �xe6 13.�e2 0-0-0 14. il.g3 �he8 15.il.xd6 �xd6? Black's piece-activity compensates fully the defects of his pawn-structure, Rausis - Fressinet, France 2007) 10 . . . ttlh6 ll .d4 (The calm line : 11 . �e2 ttlf7 12 .d4 �d7 13.c3 0-0-0 14.0-0, Cheparinov - Dorfman, Mallorca 2004, enables Black to begin active actions against the enemy king with 14 . . . g5 15.il.g3 hS+) ll . . . exd4 12 .e5 i!.e7 13.exf6 gxf6 14.�e2 �ds 15.0-0-0 ttlf5 16.�he1 i>f7+ His king is quite re­liably placed on f7, so we believe White's compensation for the pawn is insufficient, Shirov -Bacrot, Odessa 2010.

81

Chapter 4

7 . . . .ie6

This is the optimal set-up of Black's bishops and it will provide him with a good game if the op­ponent opens the centre, as well as in the case White continues to do nothing special .

8.tbbd2 h6 9.d4 exd4 1 0 . tt:lxd4 'fle7

He has obtained a better

82

pawn-structure, but White can exploit this plus only in the latter stages of an endgame.

ll.'flf3 0 - 0 12. 0 - 0 lUeS? Nepomniachtchi Kramnik, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010 (game 14).

Black's pressure on the central files provides him with excellent counterplay,

Chapter 4 l.e4 e5 2 .tt:Jf3 tt:Jc6 3 . .ib5 tt:Jf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.hc6 dxc6

Complete Games

11 M.Carlsen - E.Alekseev Biel 2008

l.e4 e5 2.lL!f3 ttlc6 3.i.b5 ttlf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.ttlc3 0 - 0 6. hc6 dxc6 7.ttlxe5 �d4 8 . .ie3 �xe5 9.d4 �e7 1 0 .dxc5 ttlxe4 ll.�d4 i.f5 12. 0 - 0 - 0 �adS 13.�b4 �e6 14.�bl b5 15.b3

15 . . . �e5 It was more precise for Black

to play 15 . . . �g6 16.ttlxe4 .ixe4+ and his pieces would be more ac­tive, which would be very impor­tant with bishops of opposite col­ours present on the board.

16.ttlxe4 he4 17.�d4 �f5 18.�c3=

(diagram) White has succeeded in neu­

tralizing his opponent's piece-ac­tivity and it seems that the draw has become the most likely result.

It is difficult to anticipate that ei­ther side could achieve anything meaningful.

18 • . . f6 19.f3 i.d5 2 0 .�hel �d7 21..if2 �fd8 22.�d4 h5 23. h3 .if7 24.g4 hxg4 25.hxg4 �g5 26.�b2 �d4 27.hd4 �d5 28.�dl b4 29.�xb4 �xf3 3 0 . �d2

3 0 . . • �xg4?! Black would have held the bal­

ance with the accurate move 30 . . . .ig6=

83

Chapter 4

31 . .ic3! Wfc8 32J�g2 After 32.8:h2 ! ?t White would

have excellent attacking pros­pects, which would be much more important, in this position with bishops of opposite colours, than a mere pawn

32 . . . .id5 33.�gl Wff5 34. Wfb7 'i!?f7

35.Wfxc7+ It is rather difficult to refrain

from capturing a pawn with check, moreover that White's last move helps him to bring his queen closer to the enemy king. Still, it would have been much stronger for him to play 35.Wxa7!t and pushing forward the a-pawn would be much safer for him than for Black to advance his own passed pawns.

35 . . • 8:d7 36.Wfc8 .ie4 37. Wfh8 Wfh7 38.Wfc8 Wff5 39.8:fl

84

39 . . • Wfe6 After 39 . . . Wxfl 40.Wxd7+ Wf8

41.Wxa7 We2= , he could have forced White to end the game by a perpetual check.

4 0 .Wfh8 �e7 41.8:dl �e8 42.Wfh2 .if5

The position is equal too after 42 . . . Wf5=

43.8:d2 Ei:e7 44.Wfb8 Ei:d7 45. Ei:f2 .ig6 46.8:h2 �e8 47.Wfg3 Wfe4 48.8:g2 Ei:e7 49JM2 Ei:b7 5 0 .Wfh2 Ei:e7 51.Wfb8 .if5 52.a4 .ig6 53.a5 .if5 54.a6 .ig6 55. �g3 .if5 56.�g2 .ig6 57.8:h2 .if5 58.Wfb8 .ig6 59.'i!?a3 .ih7 6 0 .8:d2 .if5 61.Wfh8 Wfe3 62. 'i!?b2 Wfe4 63.l'U'2 Wfg4 64.Wfh2 .ig6 65. Wfd6 Wfe6 66. Wfxe6+ 'i!?xe6

The queens have been traded, but the position has not become any simpler. Both sides still have their trumps.

67 . .ia5 It was a forced draw after

67.8:e2+ Wf7 68.8:d2 .ie4 69.8:d6= holding the opponent's pawns.

67 . . . .ie4 68.c4 g5 69 • .id2?! The position would be com­

pletely unclear following 69 . .id8 Ei:f7 70.8:e2 WfS 71.b4�

69 . . . :!;g7 70 .:!;e2 f5 71.b4 g4 72.b5 cxb5 73.cxb5 g3 74.:!;e1 c;!;>d5

75 . .ie3? White's last chance to make a

draw was 75.b6 �xeS 76 . .ie3+ �b5 77.b7 .ixb7 78.axb7 �xb7 79 .�c3=

Now, Black's pawns are un­stoppable.

75 ... .id3 76.�d1 �e4 77. :!;xd3 �xd3 78 . .ig1 f4 79.b6 f3 8 0 .b7 :!;g8 81.c6 f2 82.c7 fxg1\W 83.c8\W \Wd4+ 84.�a2 0 -1

12 Czarnota - Naiditsch Germany 2010

1.e4 e5 2.lbf3 ll:\c6 3 . .ib5 ll:\f6 4.d3 .ic5 5 . .ixc6 dxc6 6.h3 ll:\d7 7. 0 - 0 0 - 0 8 . .ie3 :!;e8 9.ll:\bd2 .if8 1 0 .d4 exd4 ll • .ixd4 c5 12 . .ic3 b5 13.b3 .ib7 14.:!;e1 ll:\f6

(diagram) Black's pieces are very active

and his doubled pawns are not weak at all . In fact, White's e4-pawn is much rather a liability.

15 • .ie5?! He could have maintained the

4.d3 iJ.c5 5. hc6 de

balance with the move 15.\We2 ! (with the idea to bring quickly the rook on a1 into the actions) 15 . . . '2lxe4 16.\WxbS �b8 17.tt:lxe4 he4 18.1We2 YJ.b7 19.tt:le5 1Wf6=

15 . . . i.c6 It is also very good for Black to

try here 15 . . . .id6 ! ? 16.hf6 1Wxf6i 16.c4 bxc4 17.bxc4? ! The surprising move 17.

1Wc2 !?= would enable White to obtain compensation for the pawn, which would be sufficient for equality. His pieces would have access to the c4-square.

17 . . . .id6 18 . .ixd6 cxd6 19.1Wc2

19 .e5 tt:lh5 ! i 19 . . . ll:\h5i

Black's knight is ready to sup­port his active light-squared bish­op and does not impede the acti­vation of his rook and queen.

85

Chapter 4

2 0 . '1Mfc3 l':le6 21. '1Mfe3 h6 22.e5? White should have played here

22 .8:adl+, trying to organize coun­terplay against the enemy d6-pawn.

22 . • . dxe5 23.lijxe5? Following 23.lt:le4 h:e4 24.

'&xe4+ it would be a difficult task for White to fight without a pawn and any compensation for it, but that could have prolonged his re­sistance.

23 . . . 1Mfd6? Black could have created deci­

sive threats much quicker with 23 . . . '11¥f6 ! 24.lLldf3 lLlf4-+ and against the threat 25 . . . lt:lxg2 ! his opponent would be completely helpless.

24.'11¥d3? After 24.'11¥c3 ! 8:ae8 25.lLldf3

lLlf4 26.lt:lxc6 '&xc6 27.8:xe6 '&xe6 28 .'11¥c2+ White would have de­cent chances of survival.

24 . . • 1Mfxd3 25)tjxd3 l':ld6 26. l':le3 l':lad8 27)!je5 .ixg2 28. t!Jb3 t!Jf4+

Black's pieces are tremen­dously active, while White's pawns are so weak that his posi­tion is practically beyond salva­tion.

86

29.t!Jxc5 l':ld1+ 3 0 .l':le1 �xa1 31.l':lxa1 .ixh3 32.t!Jb3 f6 33. t!Jc6 �d3 34.t!Jxa7 t!Je2+ 35. 'tt>h2 i.g4 36.'tt>g2 i.h3+ 37.'tt>h2 .ie6 38.�e1 �h3+ 39.'tt>g2 t!Jf4+ 4 0 .'tt>g1 hc4 41.l':le3 t!Je2+ 42. 'tt>g2 l':lxe3 43.fxe3 t!Jc3 0 -1

13 Hou Naiditsch Khanty-Mansiysk 2009

1.e4 e5 2.t!Jf3 t!Jc6 3.i.b5 t!Jf6 4.d3 i.c5 5.hc6 dxc6 6.h3 0 - 0 7. 0 - 0 �e8 8.t!Jbd2 t!Jd7 9.t!Jc4 f6 1 0 .i.e3 i.f8 n.t!Jfd2 t!Jc5 12.f4 exf4 13. i.xf4 b5 14.t!Ja5 '&d4+ 15.'tt>h1 t!Je6

16.t!Jdb3 Following 16.i.g3 '&xb2 17.e5,

Black does not need to try to win material, since the variation 17 . . . fxe5 18.'11¥h5 g6 19.1Mff3gg provides White with excellent compensa­tion. Black's king is bare. The more precise move 17 . . . f5 !+ would not allow White to create any threats against the enemy king.

16 . • . 1Mfxb2 17 . .ic1 1Mfe5 18. t!Jxc6 1Mfc3

It was also good for Black to choose 18 . . . '11¥d6 19.t!Jca5 '&g3t and the endgame is clearly better

for him due to his powerful bish­ops. In the middle game he still has chances of checkmating his opponent.

19.tl:)ca5 �e5 2 0 JU5 �g3 21JU'3 �h4 22.i.e3 c5 23.tl:)d2

It was preferable for White to play 23.c4+, depriving Black of the possibility to open files in the cen­tre with the pawn- break c5-c4.

23 . . . i.d6 24.�e1 �xe1+ 25. �xe1 i.d7+ 26.�b1 �ac8 27.�ffl a6 28.tl:)f3

28 . . . �c7? ! He fails to exploit the chance

of activating radically his pieces with 28 . . . c4 ! 29.dxc4 i.c7!+

29.'it>g1 tl:)f4 3 0 .'it>f2 c4? Now, this only leads to a quick

draw. Black would be still better after 30 . . . tl:)h5 31.'it>gl f5 32 .e5 he5 33.tl:)xe5 l"lxe5+

31.dxc4 i.c5 32.hc5 �c5 33. gfd1 i.e6 34.cxb5 gxc2+ 35. gd2 gxd2+ 36.tl:)xd2 axb5 37. �b5 ha2= 38.tl:)c6 h6 39.gbs gxb8 4 0 .tl:)xb8 tl:)d3+, Draw.

14 Nepomniachtchi-Kramnik Khanty-Mansiysk 2010

l.e4 e5 2.tl:)f3 tl:)c6 3.i.b5 tl:)f6 4.d3 i.c5 5.hc6 dxc6 6.

4.d3 i.c5 5. hc6 de

i.e3 i.d6 7.h3 i.e6 S.tl:)bd2 h6 9.d4 exd4 1 0 .tl:)xd4 �e7 11. �f3 0 - 0 12. 0 - 0 gfe8 13.gfe1 �adS 14.c3 i.c8

15.i.f4?! White had to deprive immedi­

ately his opponent of the two­bishop advantage by playing 15.tl:)f5 i.xf5 16.exf5=

15 . . . i.xf4 16.�xf4 c5 17. tl:)4f3 b6 18.ge3 tl:)h7 19.tl:)fl tl:)f8+

Black has long-lasting initia­tive thanks to his dominance over the d-file and the vulnerability of the d3-square. The game was played in the team-tournament of the World Chess Olympiad and having in mind the situation on the other three boards in that match, Black decided to offer a draw.

87

Chapter S l.e4 e5 2.ttJf3 ttJc6 3 . .ib5 ttJf6 4.d3 .ic5

Quick Repertoire

5.c3 In this chapter we begin the

analysis of this basic move for White, as well as the natural reply 5 .0-0 and among Black's two possible good moves - 5 . . . 'Lld4 and 5 . . . d6, we recommend the second. 6.'Llc3 (He should not be afraid of 6 . .ie3 he3 7.fxe3 0-0=, because White can hardly exploit effectively the open f-file.) 6 . . . .id7! ? (Black i s trying to exchange his opponent's light-squared bishop.) 7.'Lla4 .ib6 8.'Llxb6 axb6 9.c3 'Lle7 10.hd7+ (after 10 . .ic4 .ia4 ! ll.b3 .ic6 12 .b4 .ia4 ! = Black has weakened his opponent's queenside and White cannot avoid the trade of the light­squared bishops anyway.) 10 . . . \Wxd7 ll . .ig5 'Llg6 12 .hf6 gxf6

88

13.'Lld2 f5� Black has occupied space on the kingside and has a very comfortable game.

5 . . . 0 - 0

6.h:c6 White wins a pawn and forces

his opponent to begin active ac­tions.

He should refrain from 6 . .ie3?! he3 7.fxe3 'Lle7!+ Black advances unavoidably c7-c6, followed by d7-d5, occupying the centre.

After 6.'Llbd2 d6 7.b4 .ib6 8 . 'Llc4 d5 9 .'Llxb6 axb6 10.1We2 'Lle7! ll.exd5 'Llexd5 12 . .id2 c6 13 . .ic4 b5 14 . .ib3 �e8+ he ends up with a superior pawn-structure.

6 . .ig5 h6 7 . .ih4 .ie7! (Black neutralizes the pin and intends to exchange favourably White's

dark-squared bishop.) 8 .'Llbd2 d6 9.�g3 'LlhS (The standard move 9 . . . 'Llh5 solves all the problems for Black in response to White's other alternatives.) 10.0-0 'Llxg3 ll.hxg3 �f6 12 .Ei:el 'Lle7 13 .d4 c6= He has obtained the two-bishop advantage and has no difficulties at all .

6.'\We2 Ei:e8 (As you have seen in the variation with 6.�g5, Black does not need to be in a hurry to play d7-d6.) 7.�a4 (It is more ac­curate for White to choose 7.�g5 h6 8 .�h4 �e7! = , but he has no chances of obtaining an edge ei­ther.) 7 . . . d5 8 .h3 h6 9.g4 !? (He is trying to organize a checkmating attack using his opponent's pawn on h6 as a target.) 9 . . . Ei:b8 ! ? (Black creates counterplay on the queen­side.) lO .gS hxgS ll .hgS bS 12 . �b3 dxe4 13.dxe4 'LlaSf± White's king has no safe haven and Black has excellent counter chances.

6 . . . bxc6 7.tLlxe5 d5!

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0 - 0

H e must play maximally ener­getically in order to prove suffi­cient compensation for the pawn.

8.d4 .ib6 9. 0 - 0 tLlxe4 1 0 . tLlxc6 '\Wd6 ll.tLlb4 c5!

Black opens even more files for his pieces.

12.dxc5 .ixc5 13 • .ie3 .ixe3 ! 14.fxe3 l:!d8�

White's pieces are squeezed with the protection of his e3-pawn, while Black's forces are tre­mendously active.

89

Chapter S l.e4 e5 2.�£3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.d3 .ic5

Step by Step

A) 5. 0 - 0 B) 5.c3

A) 5. 0 - 0 d6 Black has a good alternative

here - s . . . 'Lld4 ! ? and it is because of this move that White prefers to begin with S.c3, but the move we recommend is not worse at all.

6.ll)c3 6.c3 0-0 or 6.a4 0-0 7.c3 a6

- see Chapter 6; 6.'Llbd2 0-0 7.c3 - see Chapter 7.

6.a3? ! - This is a loss of time. 6 . . . 0-0 7.'Llc3, Tomesch - Mey­berg, Pinneberg 1992, after play­ing 7 . . . 'Lld4 8.'Llxd4 .bd4= Black solves all his problems.

6.h3 0-0 7.'Llc3 (7.c3 a6 - see Chapter 6; 7.l"\e1 'Lle7 8 .c3 a6 9. �a4 'Llg6 10.'Llbd2 �a7 - see

90

Chapter 7) 7 . . . 'Lld4 8 .�a4 (8.�c4 �e6 9 .'Llxd4 hd4 10 .he6 fxe6 11.'Lle2 �b6t and Black has rather unpleasant threats on the open f­file, Papista - Vereb, Hungary 2007; there arises a completely drawish position after White's best 8 .'Llxd4! hd4 9.'Lle2 �b6= J.Polgar - Grischuk, Moscow 2002) 8 . . . c6 9.'Llxd4 (9 .�gS?! h6 10.�h4? 'Llxf3+ 1l.Wxf3 gS 12 .�g3 g4 13.We2 'LlhS+ - His kingside is vulnerable and his minor pieces are isolated from the actions, Ra­mos - Retamozo, Lima 1998 ; 9 .�e3 aS 10 .�b3 bS 1l .a3 'Llxb3 12 .cxb3 he3 13.fxe3 l"le8+ White's pawn-structure has been compro­mised, Kakabadze - Van der Mije, Tbilisi 1970) 9 . . . hd4 10.'Lle2 (His alternatives are not any better: af­ter 10 .�b3 aS 1l.a3 �e6 12 .'Lle2 �a7 13.c3 dSt Black occupies space and isolates in the process his opponent's light-squared bishop, A. Fernandes - Fernandez Garcia, Bucaramanga 1992 ; in re­ply to 10 .�e3, Bellizzi - Bouzou­kis, Philadelphia 1992, it is very good for him to follow with 10 . . . aS ! 1l .a3 he3 12 .fxe3 Wb6 13 .We1 �e6+ White's bishop on a4 is away

from the actions; 10.ig5, Ma­kogonova - Sudakova, St Peters­burg 1996, 10 . . . a5 11 .a3 h6 12 .ih4 ie6+ Black will double his oppo­nent's pawns on the b-file) 10 . . . ib6 11.ltlg3 (White will fail t o ad­vance f2-f4 under favourable cir­cumstances, because in answer to 1l.@h1, Black can seize the initia­tive with a counter strike in the centre: 11 . . .d5 12 .exd5 lt:lxd5t; fol­lowing 11 .ig5, Ferreira - Chaves, Rio de Janeiro 2004, he should not be afraid of weakening the shelter of his own king, because White cannot make use of this and after 11 . . .h6 12 .ih4 g5 13.ig3 lt:lh5t Black can exploit the fact that his opponent's light-squared bishop is completely isolated and create dangerous threats on the kingside. In the variation 11 .c3 d5, the reduction of the tension in the centre with 12 .exd5 provides him with an excellent game after 12 . . . lt:lxd5t with the idea t o g o with the queen to the h4-square, so it would be best for White to con­tinue with 12 .lt:lg3 ie6 13.\We2 Ele8= Black will have slightly ex­tra space, but still not an edge, Frilli - Bentivegna, Bratto 2 006.) 11 . . .ie6 12 .\Wf3 (12 .ib3 a5 13.c3 d5 14.\Wf3 a4 15.ic2 lt:le8t He oc­cupies space on the queenside and deploys perfectly his pieces in the centre.) 12 . . . lt:ld7 13 .ib3 (Fol­lowing 13.c3, Black chose 13 . . . \Wf6 14.\Wxf6 lt:lxf6= and equalized eas­ily in the game Lakos - Kende, Hungary 2 005, but he could have played more ambitiously - 13 . . .

4.d3 i c5 5.c3 0-0

g6! ? 14.ih6 Ele8 and i n connec­tion with the unavoidable move 15 . . . \Wh4 ! , White's bishop would be ousted from h6, after which Black could have begun the prep­aration of f7-f5.) 13 . . . a5 14.ie3 a4 15.ixe6 fxe6 16.\Wg4 \We7t White is deprived of active possibilities, while Black can operate on both sides of the board, Stopa - Becer­ra Rivero, Richardson 2008.

6 .ie3 - There arises a change of the pawn-structure after this move and White can hardly ex­ploit this in his favour. 6 . . . ixe3 7.fxe3 0-0

In the variation 8.lt:lbd2 lt:le7 9.lt:lh4 c6 10.ia4, Areshchenko -Kryvoruchko, Kiev 2011, Black's best line seems to be: 10 . . . a5 11 .c3 \Wb6 12 .d4 d5 13.exd5 lt:lexd5t White has got rid of his doubled pawns, but his problems with the protection of his pawns are not less worrisome.

8.lt:lc3 l'iJe7 9.ic4 (9.d4?! lt:lg6 10.@h1 c6 11 .ie2 \We?+ His cen­tral pawns must be defended and he has failed to organize any ac­tive counterplay to compensate that, N.Shyam - Nabaty, New Delhi 2011) 9 . . . l'iJg6 10.ib3 ie6=

91

Chapter S

- the position is completely equal, Landa - Dorfman, Port Barcares 2005.

8.c4 - White increases his control over the centre, but his bishop may become passive. 8 . . . ttJ e 7 9.ttJc3 ttJg6 10 .'Wd2 c 6 1l.i.a4 i.e6 12 .ttJg5 i.d7 13 .i.b3 'We7= Black can hardly prove that his opponent's doubled pawns are weak, but White cannot reap any dividends out of the open f-file, Kersic - Rodman, Ljubljana 2010.

8 .'We1 - He plans to occupy the f5-square. 8 . . . ttJe7 9.ttJc3 (9. i.a4 c6 10.ttJc3 ttJg6 - see 9.ttJc3 ; 9 .ttJbd2 ttJg6 10 .i.c4 i.e6 and here after 1l.i.xe6 fxe6= , as well as fol­lowing 11.ttJh4 ttJxh4 12.'Wxh4 c6 13J'U3 ttJd7 14.'Wxd8 Ei:axd8= the position would be completely equal.) 9 . . . c6 10 .i.a4 ttJg6 ll .i.b3 a5 12 .ttJh4 (12 .a4 'Wb6 13.h3 i.e6=) 12 . . . b5 13.ttJxg6 hxg6 14.a4 b4 15.ttJe2 'We7+ Cuartas - Mitk­ov, Turin 2006. The main draw­back of White's position is that his knight has no good squares.

8 .i.xc6 - He will not succeed in exploiting the weakening of his opponent's queenside after this move. 8 . . . bxc6 9 .ttJc3 (9.ttJbd2 c5=) 9 . . . ttJg4 ! ? (This is more ag­gressive for Black than 9 . . . Ei:e8 10 .b3 d5=) 10 .'We2 ttJh6 ll .d4 a5 12 .Ei:fe1 i.a6 13.'Wf2 'We7 14.'Wh4 f6= - He has fortified reliably his central pawn and has a very solid position, G.Kuzmin - Mitkov, Chalkidiki 2002.

6.'We2 0-0

92

7.c3 h6 - see Chapter 6. After 7.h3 ttJe7= , Black accom­

plishes the standard transfer of his knight to g6.

The change of the pawn-struc­ture following 7.i.xc6 bxc6 8.c4, Mrdja - Govciyan, Cannes 2001, leads after 8 . . . i.g4 9.h3 hf3 10. 'Wxf3 Ei:b8= to an equal position, because Black's defects of his pawn-structure - the doubled c­pawns, are excellently compensat­ed by his active pieces and the vul­nerability of White's d4-square.

7.i.g5?! - This is a loss of an important tempo. After 7 . . . h6, White ends up in a very difficult position following 8 .i.h4 g5 9.i.g3 g4 10.ttJe1 ttJd4+, therefore in the game Kondou - Garcia Vicente, Thessaloniki 1988, he tried 8.i.d2 ttJd4 9.ttJxd4 i.xd4 10 .c3, but Black seized the initiative by play­ing 10 . . . i.g4! 1l .'We1 i.b6t and af­ter that his knight occupied the f4-outpost via h5.

7.i.e3 i.xe3 8.fxe3 ttJe7 9 .ttJh4, Strikovic - Korneev, Vila Nova de Gaia 2002, here, after the aggres­sive line: 9 . . . c6 10.i.a4 d5 ll.exd5 ttJexd5+, in connection with the threat 12 . . . 'Wb6, Black obtained a slightly better game.

6.�g5 h6 7.�h4. This is the most principled move (after 7. ix:f6 �xf6t Haenel - Poghosyan, Lauenburg 2009, or 7.�e3 he3 8.fxe3 0-0= Melnikov - Reshe­tov, St. Petersburg 2004, Black had no problems at all) 7 . . . g5 8. �g3 (8.hc6+ bxc6 9 .�g3, M.Ni­kolic - Scepanovic, Belgrade 2007, 9 . . . lt:Jh5� he obtains a very good position thanks to his pow­erful bishops and the possibility to organize an offensive on the kingside) 8 . . . �d7 9.c3 a6 10 .�c4 �a7 11.lt:Jbd2 lt:Ja5= - The position is equal. White's only idea to play for a win is connected with saving his bishop from an exchange with 12 .�d5 lt:Jc6 13.�b3, but it is re­stricted by the b-pawn (13 .�c4 lt:Ja5=) and after 13 . . . �e7� Black creates excellent counter chances, for example: 14.d4 0-0-0 15. d5 lt:Jb8 16.�a4 :i'i:dg8 17.hd7+ lt:Jbxd7-+ he can begin an offensive against the enemy king, Carames - Flear, San Sebastian 1995.

6.hc6+ bxc6 7.h3 (7.�e3 he3 8 .fxe3 0-0 - see 6.�e3 ; fol­lowing 7.:1'i:e1 0-0 8.c3, Mateo -Arias, Linares 2007, it is good for Black to play simply 8 . . . :1'i:e8= , al­though he can continue with the obviously senseless move in this position 8 . . . a6, transposing to Chapter 6) 7 . . . 0-0

(diagram) 8.lt:Jc3 (In reply to the rather

indifferent move 8.�e2, Black can seize the initiative with 8 . . . lt:Jh5 ! 9.<j;Jh1 �e8 10 .lt:Jc3 f5t ; after 8 .c3 �e7 9 .:1'i:e1 a5= , he holds on to his

4.d3 �cS 5.c3 0 - 0

central e5-pawn and equalizes, Negulescu - Navrotescu, Roma­nia 2002 ; following 8 .�g5 h6 9. �h4 g5, White cannot achieve an­ything much with 10.lt:Jxg5 hxg5 11.hg5 <j;lg7 12 .<j;Jh1 �e8+, while after the calmer line : 10 .�g3 lt:Jh5� Black organizes excellent counterplay on the kingside.) 8 . . . �b6 9.:1'i:e1 h 6 10.lt:Ja4, Kamsky -Ponomariov, Moscow 2008 and in this position, we consider as the best for him to continue with 10 . . . :1'i:e8 = , preventing the move d2-d4 by exerting pressure against the e4-pawn.

6.d4 - The change of the pawn-structure is connected with a loss of tempo for White, since he advances d2-d3-d4 in two moves and Black obtains a good position without any problems. 6 . . . exd4 7.lt:Jxd4 (7.hc6+ bxc6 8.lt:Jxd4 0-0 9.lt:Jc3 �d7 10.�g5 h6 11.�h4 :i'i:e8 - see 7.lt:Jxd4) 7 . . . �d7 8 .hc6 (8.lt:Jxc6 bxc6 9.�d3 0-0 10.�g5 h6 11.�h4 :i'i:e8 12 .:1'i:e1 :i'i:b8 13.lt:Jd2 �g4 14.�c1 g5 15.�g3 lt:Jh5+ - He has deployed perfectly his forces, Sumets - Fedorchuk, Kharkov 2000) 8 . . . bxc6 9 .�g5 (9.lt:Jc3 0-0 10.�g5 h6 11.�h4 :i'i:e8 - see 9 .�g5) 9 . . . h6 10.�h4 0-0 11 .lt:Jc3 :i'i:e8 12 .

93

Chapter S

�e1 (12.l2:Jb3 .ib6 13.�e1, Keres -Beskov, Germany 1932, after playing 13 .. .'�e7 14.\1Md3 11Me5+ Black activates his queen and maintains a stable edge) 12 .. J'1b8 13.'Llb3 .ib6 14.�h1 (It would be more accurate for White to play 14.h3, recommended by GM Pre­dojevic, but even then after 14 . . . aS ! ?�, Black should have no problems at all .) 14 . . . 'Llg4 15.\1Mxg4 hg4 16.hd8 �bxd8+ - His bish­ops are much more active than White's knights, T.Kosintseva -Winants, Kusadasi 2006.

6 . . . i.d7!? Black's most popular reply

here is 6 . . . 0-0. We do not like however White's possibility 7.'Lla4 .ib6 8 .'Llxb6 axb6 9.c3t Svidler -Kramnik, Dortmund 2004. His bishop manages to avoid the ex­change on c2 and the position is nearly equal, but we do not wish to fight against White's two-bish­op advantage in this situation.

7.tDa4 7.a3 a6 8.hc6 (8 . .ic4 'Lld4=)

8 . . . hc6 9 .b4 .ib6 10.�e1 0-0= -Now, Black has the two bishops,

94

but the position is still within equality, Ganghoff - Boernemei­er, Wolfsberg 2004.

7.hc6 .ixc6 (he equalizes with 7 . . . bxc6= too) 8.d4, Ries - Kin­dler, Seifhennersdorf 2001 (in the variation 8 . .ig5 0-0 9 .a3 h6 10. .ixf6 11Mxf6= Black has no prob­lems, since his bishops are not in­ferior to the enemy knights, Ewert - Schulz, Hockenheim 1994) and after 8 . . . exd4 9.'Llxd4 0-0= he completes his development with chances of creating counterplay against White's e4-pawn.

7 . .ie3 - He cannot pose seri­ous problems for his opponent with this exchange. 7 . . . he3 8. fxe3 0-0 9.11Me1 (9.d4 �e8=) 9 . . . 'Lle7 10.hd7 11Mxd7=

7.11Me2 0-0 8 . .ig5 h6 9 . .ih4 g5 10 . .ig3 'Lle7 11.hd7 11Mxd7= White cannot exploit the weakening of his opponent's castling position mostly because his bishop is iso­lated from the actions.

7 . .ig5 h6

8 . .ih4 g5 9 . .ig3 (after 9.'Llxg5? hxg5 10 .hg5 �g8-+ Black par­ries easily all the threats and be­gins an attack, Jazgeldyev - Drag­omarezkij, Moscow 1972) 9 . . . 'Lld4

10 .. bd7+ Wxd7 11 .lt:Jxd4 .bd4+! His possibility to play aggressive­ly on the kingside provides him with good prospects, Ha Trong Cuong - Dang Vu Khoa, Ho Chi Minh City 2005.

In response to 8.�e3, it is good for Black to opt for 8 . . . .be3 9 .fxe3 0-0= followed by a transfer of the knight to g6.

8.�xf6 - White's idea is to oc­cupy quickly the centre. 8 . . . Wxf6 9.lt:Jd5 Wd8 10.c3 a6 ll.�a4 �a7 12 .d4 exd4 13.cxd4 0-0 14J�c1 l"lc8 15.h3 b5 ! ? (Black preserves his two bishops, although he can play too 15 . . . lt:Je7, with good chances of equalizing, Azarov -Wang Yue, Dresden 2008.) 16. �b3 (16.�c2? ! lt:Je7 17.lt:Jf4 c5 18. d5 c4+! White has occupied the centre, but Black's powerful dark­squared bishop provides him with excellent counterplay) 16 . . . lt:Je7 17.lt:Jf4 c5 18.dxc5 dxc5 19.lt:Je5 �e8 20 .Wxd8 l"lxd8 21 .lt:Jd5 lt:Jxd5 22 . .bd5 'it>h8= White's minor pieces are threateningly poised, but Black has already prepared f7-f6, so after that, there will probably arise a drawish endgame with bishops of opposite colours present on the board.

7 . . . �b6 8)L!xb6 8.c3 lt:Je7 9 . .bd7+ , P.Popovic

- Vojinovic, Vrnjacka Banja 2005 (9.lt:Jxb6 axb6 - see 8 .lt:Jxb6) and following 9 . . . Wxd7 10.�g5 We6= Black avoids the doubling of his kingside pawns and holds the bal­ance.

8 . . . axb6

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0 - 0

9.c3 In the variation 9.a3 lt:Je7 10.

�xd7+ Wxd7 11 .�g5, Thewes -Weber, Saarlouis 1999, the accu­rate reply 11 . . .We6= enables him to keep the existing pawn-struc­ture.

9.h3 - This seemingly modest move is very insidious. 9 . . . 0-0 (After the careless reaction 9 . . . h6? ! , White can choose 10 .lt:Jh2 ! lt:Je7 11 . .bd7+ lt:Jxd7 12 .f4i and he has powerful initiative on the kingside, Maze - Roussel Rooz­mon, Montreal 2008.) 10.lt:Jh2 (He cannot obtain an advantage if he tries something else : 10 .�g5 h6 11 .�h4 lt:Je7! 12 .a4 g5 13 .�g3 lt:Jg6+! with good counterplay for Black, or 10.c3 lt:Je7! 11 .�c4 �a4 ! 12 .b3 �c6 13 .b4 �a4! 14.�b3 .bb3 15.Wxb3 lt:Jg6= White is incapable of avoiding the exchange of the light-squared bishops.) 10 . . . d5 ! ll.�g5 �e6 12 .exd5 Wxd5 ! 13.�c4 Wd6 14 . .bf6 gxf6= He has suc­ceeded in destroying the pawn­shelter of the enemy king, but White cannot make any use of that, because Black's forces are perfectly placed in the centre and

95

Chapter S

he has exchanged his opponent's most active pieces.

9 .• .tDe7 1 0 . .b:d7+ In response to 10 .�c4, L.

Paulsen - Goering, Krefeld 1871, it is very strong for Black to con­tinue with 10 . . . �a4 ! 1l .b3 �c6 12 . b4 (12 .d4 'Llxe4 13 .�c2 exd4 14. 'Llxd4 d5 15.�d3 0-0= White can regain his pawn indeed, but after that the position will be simplified almost to a dead draw.) 12 . . . �a4 13.�b3 hb3 14.�xb3 'Llg6= There are no light-squared bishops on the board and this is very impor­tant, because now, Black's knight is not inferior to White's bishop.

1 0 • . . �xd7 11.�g5 ttlg6 It is also good for Black to

choose here 11 . . .�e6, preventing the disruption of his pawn-struc­ture.

12 . .ixf6 After 12.'Llh4 'Llxh4 13.hh4

�e6 14.f4 exf4 15.l"i:xf4 'Lld7 16.l"i:f1 0-0 17.a4 f5 18.exf5 l"i:xf5= he has nothing to complain about, since White's queenside pawns look more vulnerable.

12 . • • gxf6 13.ttld2 f5 14.ttlc4

96

f4? Black has occupied space on the kingside and has obtained ex­cellent counterplay thanks to that, Carlsen - Wang Yue, Baku 2008 (game 15) .

B) 5.c3 This is White's main move. He

prevents the simplifying resource 'Lld4 and is ready to occupy the centre with d3-d4 at an oppor­tune moment.

5 . . . 0 - 0

Now, his most natural move in the diagrammed position is 6 .0-0 and we will begin its analysis in the next chapter. Here, we will deal with all his alternatives and among them we will emphasize on Bl) 6.�e2 and B2) 6.i.xc6.

In answer to 6.�e3? ! it is good for Black to reply in a standard fashion with 6 . . . he3 7.fxe3 'Lle7 8.'Llxe5?! (after 8 .0-0 c6 9 .�a4 �b6 10.�c1 'Llg6+, he occupies the centre and advances on the next move d7-d5) 8 . . . c6 9 .�a4 �aS 10. 'Llf3 d5 11 .0-0 (White lags consid­erably in development, for exam-

pie in the variation 11.eS lLlg4+ Black regains his pawn and his pieces are tremendously active, while following 11.exdS CLlexdS 12 . e4 �e8 13.�b3 lLle3 14.�e2 lLlxe4 1S.dxe4 �xe4+ he will develop very quickly the rest of his pieces and will organize a dangerous at­tack.) 11 . . .dxe4 12.dxe4 lLlxe4+ with a slight edge for him due to his superior development and the vulnerability of White's e3-pawn.

6.b4? ! - This move weakens his queenside. 6 . . . �b6 7.�gS, Bo­hatirchuk - Thibaut, Amsterdam 19S4 (after 7.0-0 d6, Black will counter practically every move of his opponent with the aggressive reply 8 . . . aS !+) . He can exploit this with the line : 7 . . . aS ! 8.bxaS �xaS 9.a4 dS lO.exdS �xdS ! t with pow­erful initiative for Black, for ex­ample in the variation 11.hf6 e4! 12.dxe4 �xe4+ 13.�e2 �xe2+ 14. @xe2 �e8+ 1S.�eS �g4+ he re­gains his piece and has much more active pieces.

6 .lLlbd2 d6 7.b4 (7.0-0 a6 -see Chapter 6; 7.hc6 bxc6 8 .0-0 aS+! Black has a good position thanks to the vulnerability of the d3-square in White's camp; 7.lLlf1 - this transfer of the knight is too slow. 7 . . . a6 8 .�a4, De Filomeno ­D'Amore, Spoleto 2011, Black can play here 8 . . . dS+! and begins ac­tive actions in the centre with ex­cellent counter chances due to his superior development.) 7 . . . �b6 8 . tLlc4 dS 9 .lLlxb6 axb6 10.�e2 , Zin­chenko - Vas, Rethymno 2011 . White has obtained the two-bish-

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0 - 0

op advantage, but has weakened his queenside and Black can ex­ploit this by playing 10 . . . lLle7! 11 . exdS (he was threatening 11 . . .c6 winning the enemy bishop) 11 . . . lLlexdS 12 .�d2 c 6 13 .�c4 b S 14. �b3 �e8 1S.lLlgS �fS+ Black leads in development and can rely on his superior pawn-structure in case of a transfer into an endgame.

6.h3 d6 7.lLlbd2 (7.0-0 a6 -see Chapter 6; after 7.�e2 a6 8 . hc6 bxc6 9 .0-0 aS= the absence of White's light-squared bishop is hurting him, while in reply to 8.�a4, it is good for Black to opt for 8 . . . �a7= , planning the stand­ard transfer of the knight lLlc6-e7-g6; following 7.�gS, he creates excellent counterplay with the sharp line: 7 . . . h6 8 .�h4 gS 9 .�g3 lLlhS 10 .�h2 �f6+! White's dark­squared bishop survived, but Black obtained an easy target -the f4-outpost.) 7 . . . lLle7!? (He has a good alternative here, the move 7 . . . a6, after which it is likely to arise transposition to Chapter 7, for example : 8 .hc6 bxc6 9.d4 exd4 10.cxd4 �b6 11.0-0 �e8, or 8 .�a4 �a7 9.0-0 lLle7, or 9.lLlfl lLle7 10 .lLlg3 lLlg6 11 .0-0 c6 - see Chapter 7, while following 10 .�e2 lLlg6 11 .g3, Lindberg - Semcesen, Sweden 2010, Black occupies space with the move 11 . . .dS+ and maintains a slight edge in view of his superior development) 8 .d4 (in response to 8 .b4, he should better retreat with his bishop to a7, making use of the fact that af­ter 8 . . . a6, it would be too risky for

97

Chapter S

White to try 9.bxcS? ! axbS 10.cxd6 Wixd6 1l.d4 Wic6+ and he will have great problems with the protec­tion of his weak pawns.) 8 . . . exd4 9.cxd4 �b6 10.0-0 dS 1l.eS 4Je4 12 .�d3 (after 12 .Wie2 fS= , Black's centralized knight is very power­ful) 12 . . . �fS 13.Wie2 4Jc6 14Jl:d1 ltJxd4 1S.ltJxd4 hd4 16.he4 dxe4 17.4Jb3 c5 18.�e3 Wie7 19.4Jxd4 cxd4 20 .hd4= - The long and practi­cally forced variation has led to an equal position and the opponents agreed to a draw in the game Svidler - Carlsen, Gjovik 2009.

6 .�gS h6 7.�h4 �e7!

This particular move makes White's bishop-sortie to gS sense­less, prior to the move d7-d6. 8 . 4Jbd2 (After 8.hc6? ! bxc6 9 . tUxeS? 4Jxe4 !+ Black regains his pawn and maintains an edge thanks to his lead in develop­ment; in answer to 8 .h3, Rogic -Buhmann, St. Veit, Glan 2011, he equalizes completely with 8 . . . 4JhS 9 .he7 Wixe7P. Black's knight will occupy the important f4-outpost. ) 8 . . . d6 9.�g3 (following 9.0-0, Miton - Korneev, Montreal 2006, 9 . . . 4JhS 10.he7 Wixe7 11.d4 4Jf4P., as well as after 9.h3 ltJhS 10.he7

98

Wixe7P. the trade of the dark­squared bishops provides Black with excellent counterplay on the kingside. The game becomes very lively after 9.4Jf1 tUbS ! ? 10.4Je3 ltJg4oo Shirov - Carlsen, Biel 2011, but we believe it would be prefer­able for him to continue in a standard way 9 . . . 4JhS 10.he7 Wixe7 11 .4Je3 4Jf4P. and Black ob­tains a very good position domi­nating over the f4-outpost.) 9 . . . ltJhS 10.0-0 (White's attempts to exploit the seemingly defenseless knight on hS will lead to an infe­rior position for him after 10. tUxeS? 4Jxg3-+ and he loses a piece, while following 10 .hc6? ! bxc6 11.4Jxe5 dxeS 12.WixhS Wixd3 13.�xe5 Wib5+ White will have great problems keeping his bish­op and completing his develop­ment. The too calm line: 10. Wie2 �f6 11.4Jfl 4Je7+ would also ena­ble Black to occupy the f4-square with his knight.) 10 . . . 4Jxg3 11. hxg3 �f6 12 .l"i:e1 4Je7 13.d4 c6 14. �d3 �g4 1S.Wic2 Wic7= He has ob­tained the two-bishop advantage, but opening of the position would not be easy, so the game is equal, Fedorchuk - Bindrich, Cappelle la Grande 2010.

Bl) 6.Wie2 This move cannot create great

problems for Black, because White's queen is often placed worse on e2 than on the d1-square, since it does not help in the preparation of the pawn-ad­vance d3-d4 and can be attacked

after 'Llf4 with tempo.

6 .• J:�e8 This is a useful waiting move

for Black. He is not in a hurry to play d7-d6 and preserves the pos­sibility to neutralize the unpleas­ant pin of his knight in the already familiar fashion.

7 . .ig5 It would be too risky for White

to choose 7 .. b4 dS 8.h3 h6 9.g4 !? , Gashimov - Kramnik, Monaco 2011, because Black can counter this with the original resource 9 . . . l'!b8 ! ? 10 .g5 hxgS 11..bg5 bS 12 .ib3 (12 .ic2? ! b4+) 12 . . . dxe4 13. dxe4 'LlaS 14.l'!g1 'Wd6 15.'Llbd2 b4f! White's king has no safe shelter and Black's counterplay looks very dangerous.

7.h3 a6 8 .ia4 (White should better play here 8 . .bc6 bxc6=) 8 . . . b5 9 .ib3 dS lO.igS dxe4 11 . dxe4 h6 . This i s a standard idea of the transfer of Black's knight to f4 (The position is interesting, but completely unclear after 11 . . . tt:Ja5 12 .ic2 'Llc4oo R.Mamedov - Bolo­gan, Budva 2009). 12 .ih4 'Wd6 13.0-0 'LlhS+.

4.d3 ic5 5.c3 0 - 0

7.0-0 a 6 8.ia4 h 6 9.h3 (9.ie3 he3 10 .fxe3, Meijers - Crouan, Sautron 2009, 10 . . . d6= White will hardly manage to exploit effec­tively the opened f-file, while his pawn-structure has been partially compromised.) 9 . . . d5 10.'Llbd2 bS 11.ib3 ie6= Black has completed his development and has no weaknesses in his camp, Kotsur -Dautov, Yerevan 1996.

After 7.'Llbd2 a6 8.ia4 dS 9. 0-0 ia7= he removes his bishop from a potential attack and solves all his problems. He has a better position in the centre and his pieces are more active.

7 . . • h6 8 • .ih4 .ie7! 9.c!L!bd2 9.0-0 d6 10.'Llbd2 'LlhS - see

9.'Llbd2. Following 9.ig3 d6 10.h3, A.

Ivanov - Rohl Montes, San Felipe 1998, it deserves attention for Black to opt for lO . . . 'LlhS 11 .ih2 igS ! ?f! with the idea to deploy his knight on f4.

9 . . . d6

l O .tilfl 10.0-0-0 - Castling on differ­

ent sides of the board leads to in-

99

ChapterS

teresting double-edged positions with mutual chances. 10 . . . i.d7 11 . Ei:hg1 (ll.tt:lc4 a6 12 . .bc6 bxc6�) ll . . . a6 12 . .bc6 bxc6� Black is al­ready dominant on the open file, while the g-file has not been opened yet and it will be connect­ed with weakening of the f4-square, Safarli - Pashikian, Rije­ka 2010 (game 1 6) .

In response to 10.0-0, Bo­guslavsky - R.Buhmann, Nurem­berg 2010, the simplest road to equality for him would be 10 . . . tt:lh5 ll . .be7 Vfffxe7 12.g3 tt:lf6= and White must weaken the light squares on his kingside in order not to let the enemy knight to the f4-square.

1 0 . • . tt:lh5!? We believe this thematic move

is the easiest way for Black to solve his problems and provides him with chances of seizing the initiative, although he can also try 10 . . . i.d7 11.tt:le3 tt:lg4 12.i.g3, Safa­rli - Maze, Aix-les-Bains 2011 (12. tt:lxg4 .bg4 13 . .be7 Vfixe7= and his position is quite safe, Mame­dov - Mchedlishvili , Konya 2010)

100

and after 12 . . . a6 13.i.a4 tt:lxe3 14. fxe3 i.f6 15.0-0 tt:le7 16.i.b3 tt:lg6= Black fortifies maximally his kingside.

11 • .h:e7 In the variation 1l .i.g3 tt:lf4 12.

.bf4 exf4� he obtains the two­bishop advantage and a superior development and also hopes to open the central files.

ll . . . Vfffxe7 1 2.g3 lbf6 1 3.tt:le3 a6 1 4.i.a4 i.e6=

Black has no weak spots in his position, although it would not be easy for him to organize active ac­tions.

B2) 6 • .ixc6 This is one of the most princi­

pled lines for White in the anti­Berlin - he wins a pawn.

6 . . . bxc6 7.lbxe5 Now, Black must play very ag­

gressively; otherwise, White's ex­tra central pawn will be a telling factor.

7 . . . d5!

8.d4 8.Vfffa4? - He is trying to pre-

serve his pawn at the expense of his development. 8 . . . i.d6 ! 9 .d4 tt:lxe4 10 .�xc6 �b8 11 .0-0, Fedo­seev - Najer, Taganrog 2011 (game 1 7) and here, the energet­ic reaction 11 . . .�b6! 12.�a4 �h4-+ provides Black with a de­cisive advantage, since all his pieces join in the attack against the enemy king.

8 .tt:lxc6? - This move is unnec­essarily greedy. 8 . . . �e8 9.tt:ld4 (9.e5? �xc6 10.exf6 �e8+ 1l.c;t>f1 �xf6-+ White fails to develop his pieces) 9 . . . dxe4 10.i.e3 i.a6 11. dxe4 tt:lxe4 12.tt:ld2, Mayet -Ad.Anderssen, Berlin 1865, Black can choose here 12 . . . hd4! 13. cxd4 c5 ! 14.d5 �b8 15.�c2 tt:lf6+ and he regains his pawn main­taining the tremendous activity of his pieces.

8.f4 dxe4 9.d4 i.d6 10.tt:lxc6 �e8 11 .tt:le5 i.a6� Black is domi­nant on the light squares and has an excellent compensation for the pawn, moreover that White's king is stranded in the centre.

8 .0-0 - His king is safer on the kingside than in the centre, or on the queenside. 8 . . . dxe4 9.d4 i.d6 10.i.g5 (10.tt:lxc6? �e8 11. tt:la5 �b5 12.tt:lb3 i.g4 13.�d2 hh2-+ Black's attack is decisive. 14.c;t>xh2 �xf1 15.�f4 i.f3 ! 16.gxf3 �xf2+ 17.c;t>h1 exf3 18.�h2 �e1+ 0-1 Neumann - Ad.Anderssen, Berlin 1864; 10.f4? White fortifies his centralized knight, but weak­ens the shelter of his king. 10 . . . c5 11.i.e3 cxd4 12.cxd4 tt:ld5 13.

4.d3 i.cS 5.c3 0-0

�e2 he5 14.dxe5 i.a6 15.�xa6 tt:lxe3-+ Black wins at least the exchange, Riemann - Ad.Anders­sen, Breslau 1876; in the variation 10.i.f4 �e8 1l.�e1 c5 12.tt:ld2 cxd4 13.cxd4 tt:ld5 14.i.g3 f5+ he ob­tains a powerful knight in the cen­tre, the two-bishop advantage and good attacking chances, Bensch -Neubauer, Aschach 2008; Black has no problems at all after 10. tt:ld2 c5�) 10 . . . i.a6 1l .�e1 he5 12. dxe5 �xd1 13.�xd1 tt:ld5=

8.i.g5? ! - White's bishop is misplaced on this square. 8 . . . �e8 9.f4 (or 9.tt:lxc6? �d6 10.tt:la5 tt:lg4!-+ and he loses unavoidably material)

9 . . . �d6 !N (We believe this move is more energetic than 9 . . . dxe4 !? , as i t was played in the game Ivanchuk - Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2001.) 10.tt:ld2 (White should fortify his e4-pawn, be­cause in the variation 10.�e2 tt:lxe4! 1l.dxe4 f6 12.tt:ld2 fxg5 13. �h5 �f8 14.�xg5 i.e3 15.g3 hd2+ 16. c;t>xd2 dxe4-+ Black has a very dangerous attack in a position with material equality.) 10 . . . h6 11.i.h4 i.e3 12 . .ig3 :B:b8 13. tt:ldc4. White is trying to solve his prob-

101

ChapterS

lems in a tactical fashion (after 13 .t2lfl i.c5 14.�c2 aS 15.t2ld2 i.a6+ Black has more than suffi­cient compensation for the pawn, because all his pieces participate in the actions) . 13 . . . dxc4 14.t2lxc4 �c5 15.b4

It looks like White regains his piece and remains with several extra pawns in a safe position, but after 15 . . . �xc4! 16.dxc4 i.g4 17.�d3 tt:Jxe4-+ he is beyond salvation.

8 . • . i.b6

9. 0 - 0 9.t2lxc6 - This greedy move

has not been tested in practice yet. 9 . . . �e8 10.e5 (following 10. t2le5 i.a6--+ White may fail to de­velop altogether) 10 . . . a5 11 .0-0 t2lg4 12.h3 t2lh6 13.i.xh6 gxh6 14.

102

t2lxa5 B:xa5+ - He obtains three pawns for the lost knight, but this compensation is insufficient, since there are too many pieces left on the board.

After 9.exd5 �xd5 10.0-0 c5 ! ll .i.e3 cxd4 12.cxd4 i.b7�, Black has an excellent compensation for the pawn; therefore, White pre­ferred to give it back and trans­ferred to an equal endgame: 13. �f3 �xf3 14.t2lxf3 i.xf3 15.gxf3 B:fd8 16.t2la3 i.xd4 17.i.xd4 B:xd4= Lane - Lipka, Slovakia 2007.

Following 9.i.g5 c5 10.dxc5 i.xc5 11 .t2ld3 i.e7 12.e5, Volokitin - Cheparinov, Cuernavaca 2006, the simplest way for Black to solve all his problems is 12 . . . t2ld7! 13.i.xe7 �xe7 14.0-0 i.a6 15.f4 f6 16.B:e1 �e6 17.exf6 �b6+ 18.@h1 i.xd3 19.�xd3 t2lxf6 20. t2ld2 �xb2= - He has regained his pawn and has a very easy game.

9 . • .li:)xe4

1 0 .l!J xc6 10 .b4 - This is an attempt by

White to squeeze the enemy dark­squared bishop and it has not

been tried in practice yet. 10 . . . �d6 (it i s also good for Black to opt for 10 . . . �f6 ll .ie3 aS 12.�a4 Ci:ld6+) ll.a4 (ll.if4 �e6 12.Ci:ld3 aS+ he disrupts the pawns on White's kingside) ll . . . aS 12.bxaS E!:xaS 13 .ia3 cS+ - He has not suc­ceeded in trapping the enemy bishop and Black's pieces are much more active, which provides him with better prospects.

10.a4 - This move has not been tested yet. lO . . . aS ll .Ci:ld2 (after ll.t2Jxc6 �d6 12.Ci:leS ia6 13.E!:el, Black can continue the fight with the help of the move 13 . . . csgg with excellent compensa­tion for the pawn, or he can force a draw by sacrificing his queen -13 . . . �xeS 14.dxeS Ci:lxf2 lS.�xdS Ci:lh3=) ll . . . t2Jxd2 12.hd2 cS= Black has corrected his pawn­structure solving all his problems.

The position is equal following 10.l2Jd2 t2Jxd2 ll .ixd2 cS 12.dxcS hcS= - he has the two-bishop advantage, but his pawn-struc­ture is slightly inferior.

After 10.f3 Ci:lf6 ll.ie3 E!:e8 12.if2, Firman - McShane, Bre­men 2011, Black is not forced to be in a hurry to advance c6-cS, but can prepare it by playing 12 . . . �d6 13 .l2Ja3 t2Jd7 14.Ci:lxd7 hd7 1S.Ci:lc2 cS=

1 0 . . . �d6 ll.c!bb4 c5! 1 2 . dxc5

12.Ci:lc2? ! E!:e8 13.E!:el (following 13.dxcS Ci:lxcS+ the activity of his pieces more than compensates the sacrificed pawn) 13 . . . �g6 14. if4 ih3 1S.ig3 ig4 16.f3 Ci:lxg3

4.d3 ic5 5.c3 0 - 0

17.hxg3 ifS-+ Suddenly, it has become evident that White has failed to develop his queenside.

1 2 . . . i.x c5

13.ie3 After 13 .Ci:ld2 hb4 14.cxb4

�xb4= the position becomes completely equal.

In the variation 13.l2Jd3 ia6 14.Ci:lxcS tLJxcS 1S.b4 (lS .E!:el? ! Ci:ld3 16.E!:e3 E!:ae8 17.h3 fS--t White's queenside fails to enter the actions.) 1S . . . t2Jd3 16.a4 �g6 17.bS ib7 18.�f3 a6= he should give back the extra pawn and de­velop his pieces.

13.�xdS - This move is not a win a pawn, but a sacrifice of the exchange. 13 . . . �xdS 14.Ci:lxdS ia6 1S.ie3 he3 16.t2Jxe3 hf1 17.c;!(xfl E!:ad8= White's pawns are going nowhere, but he has two for the exchange, so the most likely result of the game would be a draw.

After 13 .l2Ja3 �b6! 14.t2JxdS ixf2+ lS.c;!(hl �d8 16.if4 �h4 17.�d3 E!:e8gg Black's compensa­tion is more than sufficient, be­cause White's king is insufficient­ly protected.

103

ChapterS

13 • • • he3!N We believe this move is better

than 13 . . . i.xb4 14.cxb4 �a6 15.b5 ! i.xb5 16.E!:el E!:fd8 17.�d4 E!:ac8 18.l2Ja3t and White exerts power­ful pressure, Kurnosov - V.Ma­lakhov, Moscow 2010.

14.fxe3 �d8�

His e3-pawn is weak, while Black has a perfectly placed knight and a very active bishop and this provides him with full compensation for the pawn.

15.lL! d2 c!Llf6 16.�f4 After 16.�f3 a5 17.l2Jc2 �a6 18.

E!:fdl �b6 19.b3 E!:ac8t White has too many weaknesses in his camp.

16 • • • a5 17.c!Lld3 17.l2Jc2 - The transfer of the

104

knight to d4 is not sufficient to parry Black's initiative. 17 . . . �c7 18.E!:bl E!:b8 19.l2Jd4 E!:e8 20.�f3 E!:b6t

17 • • • �e8 18.�£J Or 18.l2Jfl �a6 19.E!:d4 �b6� 18 • • • V;Vb6 19.�d4 .ia6 2 0 .

�bl �a7 21.c!Llf4 �ae7 22.c!Llxd5 c!Llxd5 23.V;Vxd5 �xe3 24.c!Llc4 .ixc4 25.V;Vxc4 �e2 26.�fl V;Va7�

White has preserved the extra pawn and exchanged his oppo­nent's active minor pieces, but his king is nit well protected and his queenside pawns cannot be termed as passed yet. Black has an excellent compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

ChapterS l.e4 e5 2.ttlf3 ttlc6 3 . .ib5 ttlf6 4.d3 .ic5

Complete Games

15 Carlsen Wang Baku 2008

l.e4 e5 2.c!LJf3 c!LJc6 3 . .ib5 c!LJf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c!LJc3 d6 6.c!LJa4 .ib6 7. 0 - 0 .id7 8.c3 c!LJe7 9. c!LJxb6 axb6 1 0 .hd7+ exd7 ll . .ig5 c!LJg6 12 . .hf6 gxf6 13. c!LJd2 f5 14.c!LJc4 f4+! 15.eh5 0 - 0 16.d4

16 . . -l:!aeS It would be a good alternative

for Black to play here 16 . . . exd4 ! ? 17.cxd4 f5+!, ensuring operational space for his rooks.

17.l:!fe1 f5 18.dxe5 b5 19. c!LJd2 c!LJxe5 2 0 . eh3

The endgame is completely equal after 20.exf5 exf5 21.�xf5 l'l:xf5= . Now, Black must play ac­curately.

2 0 . . . fxe4 21.exd7 c!LJxd7 22.c!LJxe4 d5 23.l:!ad1 l:!e5 24. c!iJd2 l:!fe8 25.c!LJf3 l:!xe1 + 26.

c!LJxe1 c!LJc5 27.'t!lfl c6 28.c!LJd3 c!LJxd3 29.l:!xd3 l:!e5 3 0 .l:!d4

3 0 • • . 1%h5! After this precise move, the

draw is inevitable. 31.l:!xf4 l:!xh2 32.'t!lg1 l:!h6

33.£3 l:!e6 34.'t!if2 't!lg7 35.1%h4 h6 36.a3 l:!d6 37.g3 l:!d8 38. l:!h1 d4 39.cxd4 l:!xd4 4 0 .'t!le3 l:!d7 41.l:!h4 c5 42.l:!h2 l:!e7+ 43.'t!lf4 l:!d7 44.g4 b4 45.axb4 l:!d4+ 46.'t!le5 l:!xb4 47.l:!d2 c4 48.f4 l:!b3 49.f5 l:!d3 5 0 .l:!e2 b5 51.'t!le6 c3 52.bxc3 l:!xc3 53.l:!b2 l:!c6+ 54.'t!id5 l:!c4 55. l:!xb5 l:!xg4 56.'t!le5 l:!a4 57. l:!b7+ 't!if8 58.1%b8+ 't!lt7 59. l:!b7+ , Draw.

16 Safarli Pashikian Rijeka 2010

1.e4 e5 2.c!LJf3 c!LJc6 3 • .ib5 c!LJf6 4.ee2 .ic5 5.c3 o-o 6.d3

105

ChapterS

ges 7.i.g5 h6 8.i.h4 i.e7 9. tLlbd2 d6 1 0 . 0 - 0 - 0 .id7 11. ghg1 a6 12 . .bc6 bxc6+!

13.g4? This consistent and logical

move leads to a difficult position for White, but even after 13.tt'lc4 �b8 14.h3 tt'lh7 15.he7 '&xe7+ Black transfers his knight to e6, or g6 and after that White fails to open files on the kingside due to the vulnerability of the important f4-square.

13 . . . tLlxg4 14 . .ig3 gbs+ He has succeeded in opening

the g-file indeed, but White can hardly exploit it effectively and he is a pawn down.

15.d4 exd4 16.cxd4

16 . . . �c8! Black is planning to bring his

queen closer to the enemy king.

106

17.h3 '&b7 18.b3 tLlf6 19 . .if4 'i!?h8 2 0 .�e3 .if8 21.i.xh6 gxh6 22.1Wf4 ge6 23.e5 dxe5 24.c!Llxe5 .ie8 25.tLldc4 gds 26. �f5 c5 27.d5 gxd5 28.c!Llg6+ fxg6 29.�xe6 gxd1+ 3 0 .gxd1 .ig7 3t.gds 'i!?h7 32.lt:le5 1Wh1 + 33.'i!?b2 �e4 34.f3 �e3 35.�e7 .ib5 36.f4 �xf4 37.gh8+ 'i!?xh8 38.c!Llxg6+ 'i!?h7 39.tLlxf4 c!Llg8+ 0 -1

17 Vl.Fedoseev Najer Taganrog 2011

l.e4 e5 2.tLlf3 c!Llc6 3.i.b5 tLlf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6 . .ixc6 bxc6 7.c!Llxe5 d5 8.�a4 i.d6 9. d4 c!Llxe4 1 0 .'&xc6 gbs ll. 0 - 0

11 •.. .be5 We have already pointed out

in "Step by Step" that it would be more precise for Black to play im­mediately ll . . . gb6 ! White has great problems in this situation as well.

12.dxe5 gb6 13.'&a4 gg6--+ There are so many of Black's

pieces ready to attack White's king that its defenders are by far insufficient.

14.g3

14 . . . f6? It would be more accurate for

Black to choose 14 . . . ih3 lS.l"lel \Wh4+, threatening to end up the game with the move 16 . . . l2lxg3 !-+

15.e6! f5 16.f3 Naturally, White must try ur­

gently to decrease his lag in devel­opment and the best way to do that would be 16.l2ld2+

16 . . .tl:lc5?! After the precise reaction -

16 . . . £4 ! 17.fxe4 fxg3 18.l"lxf8+ \Wx£8� Black will have excellent winning chances. All White's piec­es on the queenside are too far away from his quite bare monarch.

17.\Wxa7 �xe6 18.®hl c5 19 . .if4?

It was better for him to opt for 19.l2la3 f4+

19 . . . �xf4 2 0 .gxf4

2 0 . . . \Wd6?!

4.d3 icS 5.c3 0-0

Black was winning rather quickly with 20 . . . l"le8 21.l2ld2 l"le2-+ and White would be help­less against the unpleasant threat 22 . . . l"lxh2+ .

21.�d2 \Wxf4 22.�adl .ia6 23.\Wxc5 ixf1 24.\Wxd5+ ®h8 25.�xfl h5 26.�g3 ®h7?

This move enables the oppo­nent to offer much tougher resist­ance. It was preferable for Black to continue with 26 . . . h4 27.l2le2 \We3-+

27.\Wd3 �e5 After 27 . . . \WgS !+, White has no

defence against the threat 28 . . . h4. 28.\Wd4 \Wb5 29.�f2 h4 3 0 .

�fl h3 31.�e3 �e8 32.�d5 �c4 33.b3 �c6 34.�h4+?

White would preserve some miraculous chances of salvation following 34.l2lf4 l"ld6 35.l"lgl+

34 . . . ®g8 35.c4 \We6 36. �xh3 �e2 37.�fl �xa2 38.�f4 �h6 39.�g2 �xb3 4 0 .�gl �h7?

This rook is misplaced on this square. After the simple move 40 . . . \Wc3-+ Black will win in the next few moves thanks to the threat Sl . . .l"lel.

41.c5 �f'7 42.�b2? White was obviously tired of

the long and laborious defence. He was on the verge of losing dur­ing the last 30 moves and over­looked the surpnsmg lucky chance - 42.l2lg6gg

42 . . . �h6 43.�d4 ®h7 44. �c3 �c7 45.�g2 �e5 46.�c2 �h4 47.�d3 �e3 48.c6 �xf3 49.�e5 �d8 5 0 .�el �e4 51.c7 �dl 0 -1

107

Chapter 6 l.e4 e5 2.li�f3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6

Quick Repertoire

It is high time Black supported his eS-pawn.

White's basic move in the dia­grammed position is 7.ltJbd2. We will analyze it in our next chapter and now, we will deal with all his alternatives.

7 . .ig5 Just like in the previous chap­

ters, White cannot create prob­lems for his opponent by ex chang­ing 7.�e3 he3 8 .fxe3 ltJe7 9 . ltJbd2 ltJg6 10.d4 �d7 ll .�d3 aS+! and Black will fortify reliably his eS-pawn and continue with active actions on the queenside.

White would only weaken his queenside with the line : 7.b4 �b6 8.a4 aS 9 .hc6 bxc6 10 .h3 axb4

108

ll .cxb4 cS 12.bS c4 !?+! and Black's active bishops provide him with excellent counterplay.

He should not be afraid of 7. �xc6 bxc6= . He has saved an im­portant tempo for the move a7-a6.

It would not be so active for White to choose 7.'�e2 h6 8.h3 a6 9 .�a4 �a7 1QJ'gel ltJe7 11.lLlh2 ltJg6 12.�b3 i>h8 ! ? 13 .ltJa3 ltJh7t Black will advance unavoidably f7-fS, seizing the initiative.

It is essential to remember that after 7.�a4 a6 8.d4, Black must play 8 . . . �b6 !+!, despite that fact that he has the possibility to retreat to a7. The b6-square is the right place for the bishop in this situation.

Following 7.h3 a6 8 .hc6 bxc6 9 .d4 �b6 10.'�c2 dS ! +! the centre is opened and Black's powerful bishop-pair compensates perfect­ly the defects of his pawn-struc­ture.

White can hold his centre after 7.d4 �b6+!, transposing to the variation with 7.h3, or he can al­low his kingside pawn-structure to be compromised after �g4 and the exchange on f3 .

7.l''i:el a6 8 .ixc6 (White cannot create problems for his opponent with the standard reaction 8.ia4 ia7 9.h3 t'iJe7= , since Black can try to occupy the f4-square.) 8 . . . bxc6 9.d4 .tb6 10.h3 l"i:e8 ll .dxeS dxeS 12.'�'xd8 l"i:xd8 13 . .tg5 l"i:e8 14.hf6 gxf6 1S.t'iJbd2 ie6� - His bishops are very active and he is dominant over the open file, so Black has full compensation for his disrupted pawn-structure.

7 . . . h6 8 . .ih4 g5

9 . .ig3

4.d3 ic5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6

White's desire to preserve the pin would lead him to a lost posi­tion following 9 .t'iJxg5?! hxgS 10. hgS Wg7 11 .hc6 bxc6 12.d4 ib6 13.a4 aS-+

9 . . . t'iJh5! 1 0 .d4 .tb6=

Black can obtain the two-bish­op advantage at any moment, moreover that White must be on the alert about Black's possible pawn-advance f7-f5, activating the rook on f8. White can hardly make use of the slight weakening of his opponent's kingside.

109

Chapter 6 l.e4 e5 2.tiJf3 ttlc6 3 . .ib5 ttlf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6

Step by Step

A) 7.:1:1el B) 7.i.g5 7.a4 a6 8.hc6 (after 8 .ic4 h6

9 .b4 .ia7 10 . .ie3 liJe7, Black has no problems after ll .liJbd2 liJg6= , a s well a s i n the variation ll.ixa7 �xa7 12.�e1 liJg6 13.d4 Wfe7 14. liJbd2, Stefan - Kotan, Eger 2004, 14 . . . a5 15.b5 b6= - he blocks the queenside and his position in the centre and on the kingside is not worse) 8 . . . bxc6 9 . .ie3, Naiditsch - Aronian, Internet 2004, 9 . . . he3 10 .fxe3 ie6= Black's posi­tion is completely safe.

7.ie3 - He has no problems after this exchange. 7 . . . he3 8. fxe3 liJe7 9.liJbd2 liJg6 10.d4 (10 . ic4?! c6 11.Wfe2? Wfb6 12 . .ib3 liJf4-+ White loses his d3-pawn, Grundy - Mackenzie, New York

110

1880; after 10.Wfe1 c6 11 ..ic4 d5 12 . .ib3 a5= , Black's piece-deploy­ment looks more harmonious) 10 . . . .id7 ll . .id3 aS 12.h3 �e8+± -He has obtained a very solid posi­tion with chances of organizing good counterplay, Jaracz - Hed­man, Pardubice 2010.

7.d4 - He occupies the centre indeed, but White is incapable of holding it without considerable positional concessions. 7 . . . .ib6

8.Wfd3 (8..ig5 h6 9 . .ih4 g5 10. liJxg5 hxg5 ll .hg5 l!?g7 12.hc6 bxc6 - see 7 . .ig5; after 8 .�e1 exd4 9.cxd4 .ig4+± Black's pressure against the d4-pawn is tremen­dously unpleasant for White ; 8 .d5 - Black's dark-squared bishop be­comes much more powerful after this move. 8 . . . liJe7 9 .Wfe2 c6 10. dxc6 bxc6 11..id3 liJg6 12.liJa3

d5+) 8 . . . exd4 9.cxd4 ig4 10 .hc6 bxc6 11 .tt:lc3 (in the variation 11. ig5 h6 12.ih4 hf3 13.gxf3 g5 14.ig3 tt:ld7? Black has excellent counterplay thanks to the exposed position of White's monarch) 11 . . . hf3 12.gxf3, Ju.Polgar - Anand, Reykjavik 2006 (game 18) and after 12 . . . tt:ld7?, he wishes to pre­pare f7-f5, or to follow with c6-c5 and after d4-d5, Black's forces are activated dramatically with tt:le5 and c5-c4. In addition, his queen is ready to go to h4, in the vicinity of the enemy king.

7.b4 - This move weakens White's queenside. 7 . . . ib6

8.tt:la3 a6 9 .hc6 bxc6 10.tt:lc4 h6 - see 8.tt:lbd2.

8 .tt:lbd2 a6 9.ixc6 bxc6 10. tt:lc4 h6= Vezzosi - D'Amore, Spoleto 2011.

In response to 8.ig5, Chomet - Broca, Paris 1999 Black can ob­tain a superior pawn-structure by playing 8 . . . h6 9.ih4 a5 10.bxa5 tt:lxa5+

After 8.a4 a5 9.hc6 (9.ie3? ! he3 10 .fxe3, Danilovtsev - Ovod, Perm 1998, he can continue with 10 . . . tt:le7+ and he emphasizes the vulnerability of White's pawns.)

4.d3 ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6.0 - 0 d6

9 . . . bxc6 10 .h3 axb4 1l.cxb4, Ko­sek - Horak, Karlovy Vary 2009 and here, after the aggressive line: 1l. . . c5 12.b5 c4 !?? Black obtains excellent counterplay.

8 .h3 - This move is too slow. 8 . . . a5 9.ixc6 bxc6 10 .bxa5 Ei:xa5 11.tt:lbd2 ie6+ - He has compro­mised his opponent's queenside and ended up with the two-bishop advantage, Ahmed Garcia - Ortiz Fernandez, Oviedo 2003.

8.ic4 tt:le7 9.Ei:e1 tt:lg6= Black has completed the standard trans­fer of his knight and is ready to begin active actions in the centre with c7-c6 and d7-d5, Incutto -Visconti , Buenos Aires 1959.

7.hc6 - This move enables Black to save a tempo for a7-a6. 7 . . . bxc6 8 .h3, Negulescu - Navro­tescu, Romania 2002 and after 8 . . . Ei:e8= , he has an excellent posi­tion.

7.Wie2 - White's queen is mis­placed on this square. 7 . . . h6 8.h3 (8.tt:lbd2 a6 9 .ia4 ia7= ; after 8 . ie3 ixe3 9 .fxe3 tt:le7 10 .tt:lbd2 c6 11 .ia4 tt:lg6 12.d4 Wffe7 13.Ei:ae1 ie6 14.ic2 Ei:ae8= Black's posi­tion is quite reliable, Bokros - Fo­dor, Hungary 2007; following 8 . Ei:d1 Wie7 9 .h3 a6 10.ia4 ia7 11 . tt:lbd2 tt:lh5 12.tt:lfl Wfff6? he will occupy the f4-outpost and that will provide him with excellent counterplay, Strikovic - Pau­novic, Yugoslavia 1989) 8 . . . a6 9 . ia4 ia7 10.Ele1 (It i s more accu­rate for White to choose 10 .ie3 he3 11.fxe3 tt:le7=) 10 . . . tt:le7 11 . tt:lh2 tt:lg6 12.ib3 <;t>h8 ! ? 13.tt:la3

111

Chapter 6

tt:lh7 14.tt:lf3 fS 15.exf5 .bfSt, but his rather slow play enables Black to seize the initiative on the king­side, Reinhart - Fontaine, France 2010 (game 19).

7.�a4 a6 - He ensures the a7-square for his bishop.

About 8.tt:lbd2 �a7, or 8.�c2 �a7 9 .tt:lbd2 h6 - see Chapter 7; 8J'le1 �a7 - see variation A; 8.h3 �a7 - see 7.h3 ; 8.'�e2 h6 9.h3 �a7 - see 7.'�e2.

Following 8.d4, Black should play 8 . . . �b6! and this is an excep­tion to the rules. White has occu­pied the centre a bit prematurely and in order to hold it, he must continue with 9 . .bc6 bxc6, enter­ing a position from variation A, but with an extra tempo for Black.

After 8.�g5 h6 9 .�h4 gS 10. �g3, Odeev - Okner, Moscow 1983, he should choose 10 . . . g4 ll .tt:lh4 tt:lhS 12.tt:ld2 �gS� organ­izing excellent counterplay on the kingside.

8.�e3 .be3 9.fxe3 tt:le7 10. tt:lbd2 tt:lg6= White can hardly re­alize anything meaningful on the open f-file, but Black is incapable of exploiting the defects of the pawn-structure of his opponent

112

without his assistance, Balashov - Grischuk, Tomsk 2001.

7.h3 a6 8 . .bc6 (8.�a4 �a7 9 .tt:lbd2 - see Chapter 7; 9J'le1 tt:le7 - see variation A; in answer to 9 .�e3, Black solves his prob­lems with the standard reaction 9 . . . �xe3 10.fxe3 tt:le7 11.tt:lbd2 tt:lg6= ; he should not be afraid of White's risky line: 9.�g5 h6 10. �h4 gS 11.tt:lxg5? hxgS 12 . .bg5 �g7 13.�h1 tt:le7 14.f4 exf4 15. M4, Talla - Semcesen, Olomouc 2010, since after 15 . . J'lh8 16.d4 �3 17.gxh3 l"lxh3+ 18.�g2 �h8-+ Black's attack would be decisive.) 8 . . . bxc6 9 .d4, Radulski - Petkov, Blagoevgrad 2010 and here, he obtains a wonderful game by playing 9 . . . �b6 10 .�c2 (10J'le1 l"le8 - see variation A) 10 . . . d5 !N

See some exemplary varia­tions :

1l.�g5 h6! 12.hf6 �xf6 13. tt:lxeS (13.dxe5?! �g6+ Black re­gains his pawn and has dangerous initiative) 13 . . . c5 14.exd5 (It would be too risky for White to play 14.dxc5?! hcS 15.tt:ld3 �d6 16.exd5 �fS! 17.tt:la3 �g6 18.l"lad1 l"lae8 19.tt:lc4 i.xh3 20.tt:le3 �hS and here, he loses immediately af-

ter 2l.gxh3 �xh3-+, but even fol­lowing 2U'1fe1 �f5+ Black's piece­activity more than compensates the sacrificed pawn.) 14 . . . cxd4 15. tt'lc6 (15.cxd4?! hd4 16.tt'ld3 �f5+ White will not only fail to pre­serve his extra pawn, but he is likely to lose even more material. ) 15 . . . hh3 ! 16.gxh3 �g5+ 17.1flh2 (17.1flh1 �xd5-+) 17 . . . �f4+ 18. lflg2 (18.1flh1 �f3+ 19.1flg1? d3-+) 18 . . . �g5= Black will end the game by a perpetual check.

ll.tt'lxe5 tt'lxe4 12 .tt'lxc6 (After 12 .�e3 c5= , he has no problems following 12 .tt'ld2 tt'lxd2 13.hd2 c5 14J''1fe1 �e6 15.�d3 i"le8=) 12 . . . �d6 13 .tt'le5 �f5 14.g4 (in the vari­ation 14.�d1 c5 15.�f4 i"lfe8� Black's piece-activity compen­sates fully the sacrificed pawn.) 14 . . .f6 15.tt'ld3 �g6 16.�f4 �d8 17. �e2 i"le8 18.�f3 c5 19.dxc5 hc5 20.tt'lxc5 tt'lxc5� White's king is not sufficiently protected, while Black's forces are tremendously active and particularly his knight, which will penetrate unavoidably to the d3-square.

A) 7.l:�el

4.d3 �cS 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6

White wishes to occupy imme­diately the centre with the move d4.

7 ... a6 8.�a4 - He decides the pre­

serve his bishop. 8 . . . �a7 9.h3 (9. tt'lbd2 tt'lg4 - see Chapter 7; 9.d4? ! b5 10 .�c2 �g4 ll .d5 tt'le7 12 .a4 �d7 13.tt'lbd2 c6 14.dxc6 hc6 15. tt'lf1 tt'lg6? White is incapable of exploiting the vulnerability of his opponent's backward d6-pawn, while Black will either prepare d6-d5, or will organize active ac­tions on the dark squares.) 9 . . . tt'le7 10.�b3 (10.tt'lbd2 tt'lg6 - see Chapter 7; after 10.d4 tt'lg6 1l.�c2 tt'lh5 12 .tt'lbd2 tt'lhf4? he will de­ploy his knight on f4 and this will provide him with excellent coun­terplay) 10 . . . tt'lg6 1l.d4, G.Kuzmin - Choudhary, New Delhi 1984. There arose a position from the Giuoco Piano (l.e4 e5 2 .tt'lf3 tt'lc6 3.�c4 �c5 4.d3 tt'lf6 5.0-0 6.c3 0-0 7.�b3 8.h3 �a7 9 .i"le1 tt'le7 10. d4 tt'lg6), but with an extra pawn for Black, which would enable him to equalize easily after ll . . . b5 12 .�e3 (12 .tt'lbd2 �b7 - see Chap­ter 7) 12 . . . �b7 13.dxe5 dxe5=

8 . .ixc6N

113

Chapter 6

This move has not been tested in practice yet, but the possibility to occupy the centre and to dis­rupt the opponent's pawn-struc­ture seems to be quite reasonable, so Black must be well-prepared for it.

8 . . . bxc6 9.d4 .ib6 1 0 .h3 About 10.'1!9c2 �e8 ll.h3 (11.

'Llbd2 exd4 12.cxd4 cS - see Chap­ter 7) lO . . . dS - see 10 .h3.

lO.dxeS?! 'Llg4 1l.�f1 'LlxeS 12 . 'LlxeS dxeS 13 .'Lld2 aSt - The ac­tivity of Black's bishops more than compensates the vulnerabil­ity of his queenside pawns.

10 ... 1!e8

ll.dxe5 1l .'Llbd2 exd4 12 .cxd4 cS - see

Chapter ?. 11 .'1!9c2 dS 12 .�gS (following

12 .'LlxeS 'Llxe4, White should bet­ter comply with equality 13 .�e3 cS= , since after the greedy move 13.'Llxc6? Black has the powerful resource 13 . . . '1!9d6 and in the vari­ation 14.'Llb4 �fS 1S.�e3 aS 16. 'Lld3 'LlgS 17.We2 'Llxh3+ 18.gxh3 Wg6+ he regains his pawn, de­stroying in the process the pawn-

114

shelter of the enemy king, but even after 14.'LleS hh3 ! 1S.�xe4 dxe4 16.gxh3 �xeS 17.dxeS WxeS 18.�e3 he3 19.fxe3 Wg3+ 20.�f1 �dB� White's king remains bare and Black will collect unavoidably the pawns on the kingside, after which his h-pawn will join in the attack.) 12 . . . h6 ! ? 13.hf6 Wxf6

We will analyze now the fol­lowing variations :

14.'LlxeS cS 1S.'Lld2 (1S.Wa4? ! hh3 ! 16.gxh3 cxd4 17.'Llg4 WgS 18.cxd4 fS+ Black regains his pawn and preserves enormous piece-activity) 1S . . . cxd4 16.cxd4 hd4 17.'Llef3 hb2 18.�ab1 �c3 19.eS ! ? (19.exdS �fS 20 .Wa4 �ed8+ - In this open position with material equality, Black's bishops are more powerful than White's knights.) 19 . . . �xeS 20 . �xeS (after 20 .'LlxeS �fS 21 .'Lld3 cS+ Black regains his piece and ends up with an extra pawn and a much better bishop than the ene­my knight.) 20 . . . �xeS 2l .'LlxeS �fS 22 .Wxc7 hb1 23.'Llxb1 WfS+ White has great problems defend­ing against the coordinated ac­tions of his opponent's major pieces and his passed dS-pawn;

14.dxe5 �g6 15.'it>fl dxe4 (Black is trying to play for a win. It will be only a draw after 15 . . . aS ! ? 16.'t'lbd2 .ta6 17.Wg1 .tc8 18. 'it>fl .ta6=) 16.�xe4 .tf5 17.�f4 .te6 18.lt:Jbd2 �c2 19.lt:Je4 �xb2 20 .lt:Jd4 hd4 2l.cxd4 8:ed8f:! and there arises a complicated posi­tion with mutual weaknesses on the queenside;

following 14.lt:Jbd2 �g6 15. lt:Jh4 �d6 16.lt:Jhf3 �g6 17.8:e3 .td7 18.8:ae1 f6f:! the situation is very interesting and rather com­plicated and both sides will have problems finding the right path. Black has the two-bishop advan­tage however and he will main­tain the tension in the centre, de­spite the activity of White's rooks.

ll ... dxe5

12.Ybd8 With 12 .�c2 - he is preparing

c3-c4-c5. 12 . . . lt:Jh5 13.c4 �d6 14. 8:d1 .td4 15.c5 �f6 16.lt:Jxd4 exd4 17.g4. This is White's most princi­pled move, since he captures with it the enemy d4-pawn; otherwise, Black will have a very comfortable game, because his pieces are ac-

4.d3 .tcS 5.c3 0 - 0 6.0-0 d6

tive and the d4-pawn may become a dangerous passed pawn. 17 . . . �h4. He forces his opponent to make a draw with precise play. (It is also acceptable for Black to choose 17 . . . lt:Jf4 18.hf4 �xf4 19. 8:xd4 hsgg with excellent compen­sation for the pawn. There arises an interesting position following 17 . . . .txg4! ? 18.hxg4 �f3 !gg), 18. 8:xd4 ! (It is bad for White to opt for 18.gxh5? hh3-+, as well as 18.f3? f5 ! and he fails to hold the position after 19.gxh5 fxe4 20 .�f2 �xh3 2l .�g2 �xh5-+, as well as in the variation 19.gxf5 hf5 ! 20 . exf5 8:e1+ 21 .8:xe1 �xe1+ 22 .Wh2 �g3+ 23.�h1 8:e8-+ and Black's attack is decisive in both cases.) 18 . . . lt:Jf6 19.f3 h5 ! 20.�g2 hxg4 2l.hxg4 �e1+ 22 .�f1 �g3+ 23. �g2 �e1= with a perpetual check.

There may follow very inter­esting lines after 12 .�a4 lt:Jh5 ! 13. �xc6 (if 13.lt:Ja3 �f6t Black's kingside initiative is running "for free") 13 . . . 8:b8gg

It becomes evident that White is helpless against the strike on h3 :

after 14.lt:Jbd2? Black does not need to sacrifice. 14 . . . lt:Jf4-+ and

115

Chapter 6

White fails to neutralize his oppo­nent's dark-squared bishop, be­cause after 15.lLlc4 i.d7, he loses his queen ;

14.c4? - He needs just another tempo to block Black's active bishop. 14 . . . i.xh3 15.gxh3 WeB ! 16.1i>h2 l"!e6 17.Wd5 i.xf2 1B.l"!f1 i.g3+ 19.1i>g2 i.f4-+ White's queenside has failed to join in the defence;

14.Wa4 i.xh3 ! 15.gxh3 Wf6 16. lt>g2 (16.lLlbd2? l"!edB 17.Wd1 lLlf4-+) 16 . . . Wg6+ 17.1i>fl (17. lt>h1? i.xf2-+) 17 . . . lLlg3+ 1B.fxg3 Wxg3 19.1i>e2 Wf2+ 20 .It>d1 l"!edB+ 21 .i.d2 (21.lLlfd2 Wf3+ 22 .l"!e2 Wf1+ 23.l"!e1 Wf3+ 24.1i>c2 Wd3+ 25.1i>d1 Wf3= with a perpetual check) 21 . . .Wxf3+ 22 .1i>c1 l"!d3 23. Wd1 Wxh3 24.lLla3 i.e3 25.l"!xe3 l"!xe3 26.i.xe3 Wxe3+ 27.Wd2 Wg1 + (Black can try to play for a win here with the move 27 . . . Wxe4?) 2B.Wd1 We3+ 29.®b1 Wc5 30.1i>c1 We3 = ;

14.lLla3 - White brings his knight into the actions keeping an eye on the important f4-square. 14 . . . i.xh3 15.lLlc4 (It is bad for him to capture the bishop, be­cause after 15.gxh3 l"!e6 ! 16.Wc4 l"!g6+ 17.1i>f1 Wf6-+ Black check­mates, while following 17.1i>h2 i.xf2 1B.l"!f1 i.g3+ 19.1i>h1 WeB 2 0 .lLlg1 i.f4+ White cannot avoid material losses, since his king is bare and his queenside pieces fail to assist in its protection.) 15 . . . i.g4 16.lLlcxe5 (With the move 16.i.g5, he prevents the transfer of the enemy rook to the g6-

116

square. 16 . . .f6 17.l"!ad1 WeB 1B.i.c1 i.xf3 19.gxf3 Wh3 20 .lLlxb6 lLlg3 ! - this is the simplest for Black, 2 1 .Wc4+ li>hB 22 .fxg3 Wxg3= with a perpetual check along the third rank.) 16 . . . l"!xe5 17.lLlxe5 M2 + 1B.Ii>xf2 Wh4+ 19.1t>fl Wh1+ 20. li>f2 Wh4=

12 .. .l'�xd8

13.i.g5 Or 13.lLlbd2 lLld7 14.lLlc4 f6 -

see 13.lLla3. 13.lLlxe5?! lLlxe4!+ After 13.lLla3 lLld7 14.lLlc4 (14.

i.e3 i.xe3 15.l"!xe3 a5 16.l"!d3 l"!fB ! White is incapable of exploiting the vulnerability of his opponent's queenside pawns following 17. l"!dd1 f6 1B.lLld2 lLlc5 19.f3 i.e6= , as well as after 17.l"!ad1 lLlc5 1B. l"!dB f6+ and Black's position is even preferable, because he can attack easier his opponent's pawns.) 14 .. .f6 15.l"!d1 i.b7 16.i.e3 i.xe3 17.lLlxe3 lLlc5 1B.lLld2 a5 19. f3 a4= - The activity of his pieces compensates the weakness of his pawns.

13 . . J''!e8 Black has a very good alterna-

tive here: 13 . . . a5 ! ? 14.tt:la3 Ele8 ! 15 .�e3 �xe3 16.Elxe3 tt:lh5 17.h4 f6 18.g3 Eld8 19.'it>g2 g6 20 .Ele2 a4 21 .Eld2 �e6 22 .c4 tt:lg7 23.Eladl Elxd2 24.Elxd2 tt:le8? - there aris­es a fighting position in which White cannot attack his oppo­nent's pawns, but Black must play very energetically.

14 . .hf6 14.tt:lbd2 tt:ld7 15.tt:lc4 f6 16.�e3

he3 17.tt:lxe3 tt:lc5 18.tt:ld2 a5= White's knight has failed to go to the aS-square, so Black's pawns are not under threat and the posi­tion is equal.

14 ..• gxf6 15.ll:lbd2 i.e6 16. ttlfl Eled8 17.ttlg3 'it>f8? - He has a clear-cut plan for queenside actions, dominates on the only open file and his bishops are very active. All these factors compen­sate Black's compromised pawn­structure and the position is with mutual chances.

B) 7.i.g5 This pin seems very attractive.

White wishes to impede the de-

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6

velopment of Black's pieces. The result is however just contrary to the desired.

7 . . . h6 8.i.h4 White cannot maintain an

edge after 8.�e3 he3 9.fxe3 tt:le7= . Black wishes to deploy his knight on g6 and to advance c7-c6, followed by d6-d5, or b7-b5 and a7-a5.

8 . . . g5

9.i.g3 9 .tt:lxg5?! - This is an interest­

ing piece-sacrifice with the idea to preserve the pin. 9 . . . hxg5 10.hg5 lt>g7 ll.hc6 (in response to 11. �f3, Brkic - Jovanic, Sibenik 2006, it deserves attention for

117

Chapter 6

Black to play 11 . . .l"lh8 ! ? and he takes the h4-square under control and prepares 'it>g6, while follow­ing 12 .li'ld2 'it>g6 ! 13.h4 �g4 ! 14. .bf6 'Wd7 15.'Wg3 'it>xf6+ Black an­nihilates his opponent's dark­squared bishop and preserves the extra piece, while after 12 .h4 'We7 13.li'ld2 li'ld8 14.d4 exd4 15.li'lb3 li'le6 16.e5 li'lxg5 17.exf6+ 'Wxf6 18. 'Wxf6+ 'it>xf6 19.hxg5+ 'it>xg5 20 . li'lxd4 .bd4 21.cxd4 �e6+ he ends up in a very favourable endgame thanks to the activity of his king and the vulnerability of White's d4-pawn.) ll . . . bxc6 12 .d4 �b6 13.a4 (He loses after 13.f4, Kim pinsky - Bulthaupt, Germany 1993, because of 13 . . . exd4 14.cxd4 'We8 ! - + Black gets rid of the pin and begins an offensive. It is not preferable for White to opt for 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.'Wf3 'Wd6 15.l"ld1 'We6-+, since he has no resources to continue the attack.) 13 . . . a5

It is easy to see now that White is lost:

14.f4 exd4 15.cxd4, Neumann - Ad. Anderssen, Berlin 1866 (15.e5 dxe5 16.fxe5 dxc3+ 17.'tt>h1 'Wxd1 18 . .bf6+ 'it>g6 19.l"lxd1 c2-+ Black should realize easily his ex-

118

tra bishop in this endgame.) 15 . . . 'We8 ! 16 . .bf6+ 'it>xf6-+ His king is in the centre ; nevertheless, it is completely safe;

14.'Wf3 'We7 15.li'ld2 (after 15. dS cxd5 16.exd5 e4 17.'Wg3 'Wd7 18.�xf6+ 'it>xf6 19.li'ld2 'Wg4-+ the queens are exchanged and his king tuns from a weak piece into powerful force, or 1S.'Wg3 'We6 16 . .bf6+ 'it>xf6 17.f4 'it>e7 18.fxe5 dxe5-+ Black has an excellent de­velopment and the central files are closed, so White fails to attack his opponent's centralized king.) 15 . . . 'We6-+ Black gets rid of the pin, coordinates easily his defence and should not have problems to realize his extra piece, Akopian -Kir.Georgiev, Moscow 2 006.

9 . . )t)h5! This is a logical move. He will

obtain at any moment the two­bishop advantage and has the re­source f7-f5, bringing his rook into the actions.

1 0 .d4 10 .b4 �b6 11 .li'lbd2 aS 12 .li'lc4

axb4 13 .li'lxb6 cxb6 14 . .bc6 bxc6 15.cxb4 f5t Black seizes the initia-

tive, making use of the fact that White's bishop is isolated from the actions, Shnyrev - Genga, Email 2007.

After 10 .cubd2 'Wf6 11 .b4 (In response to 11 .a4, T.L.Petrosian -A.Gupta, 2011 , it is good for Black to opt for 1l . . .a6 12 .�xc6 bxc6 and if White follows consistently his plan, occupying the centre with 13.d4? ! , then after 13 . . . exd4 14.e5 'Wg7 15.cxd4 �a7 16.ct:Jc4 f5 ! t he will need to start defending.) 11 . . . ct:Jxg3 12 .hxg3 �b6 13 .ct:Jc4 ct:Je7 14. a4 c6 15.ct:Jxb6 axb6 16.�c4 �g4?, Black obtained a good position in the game Pietruske - Privoznik, Email 2 007.

10 ... �b6 We were already preparing

this book, while there appeared a very interesting new idea - 10 . . . exd4! ? 11 .cxd4 �b6 12 .cuc3 �g4 13.cud5, Felgaer - Zherebukh, Khanty-Mansiysk 2011 (it is obvi­ously worse for White to opt for 13 .�c6?! bxc6 14.d5 f5 15.exf5, Kurnosov - Hammer, Helsingor 2011, because Black can counter that with 15 . . . E1xf5 16.dxc6 'Wf8+ and thanks to the activity of his pieces, he maintains a considera­ble advantage) 13 . . . M3 14.gxf3 ct:Je7 15.cue3 �h8?, followed by ct:Je7-g6-f4 with very good coun­terplay for Black.

(diagram) ll.i.xc6N This move has not been tested

in practice yet, but it is the only one which creates problems for Black and is much better than all

4.d3 �cS 5.c3 0 - 0 6.0 - 0 d6

the other moves played until now. 11.dxe5 ct:Jxg3 12.hxg3 ct:Jxe5 13.

ct:Jxe5 dxe5 14.cud2 'Wf6t Black's bishops are very powerful and he will occupy the only open file pri­or to his opponent, Ju.Polgar -P.Eljanov, Wijk aan Zee 2 008 (game 2 0 ) .

In the variation 11 .cua3 ct:Jxg3 12 .hxg3 g4 13 .cuh2 (after 13.�c6 bxc6 14.ct:Jh4 exd4 15.cxd4 E1e8 16.'Wd3 d5 17.e5 c5 18.dxc5 �c5+ White's e5-pawn is weak and his knight on a3 is temporarily out of action, being restricted by his op­ponent's d5-pawn. In principle, Black's bishops are more power­ful than the enemy knights, be­cause they have excellent opera­tive diagonals. White can hardly exploit the open position of the enemy king.) 13 . . . exd4 14.�c6 bxc6 15.cxd4. In the game Fedor­chuk - Eljanov, Germany 2011, Black fixed the pawn on d4, but reduced the pressure against the e4-pawn with the line : 15 . . . d5 16. e5 'Wg5? and there arose an inter­esting position with mutual chances. We believe it was prefer­able for Black to have chosen 15 . . .

119

Chapter 6

l:'le8 ! 16.l:'le1 h5+ and naturally, White can trade his passive knight for his opponent's powerful dark­squared bishop, but he can hardly activate his knight on h2 , since both his central pawns need pro­tection.

ll . . . bxc6

12.a4 Following 12 .dxe5 tt:lxg3 13.

hxg3 dxe5 14.1Mfxd8 (after 14.tt:lbd2 Wf6 15.tt:lc4 l:'le8= , Black's piece­activity compensates fully the de­fects of his pawn-structure) 14 . . . l:'lxd8 15.tt:lxe5 l:'le8 16.tt:lxc6 l:'lxe4� he has more than sufficient com­pensation for the pawn with his two powerful bishops and very ac­tive rooks.

12 . . . a5 13.dxe5 .!L!xg3 14. hxg3 dxe5

120

15 . .!L!xe5 (15 .1Mfxd8? ! l:'lxd8 16. tt:J xe5 l:'le8 17.tt:lxc6 �b7 18.tt:ld4 hd4 19.cxd4l:'lxe4 20.tt:lc3 l:'lxd4t Black's bishop is superior to his opponent's knight, but this does not promise him big advantage. Still, it would be White who must fight for equality.) 15 . . . i.a6 16. gel Wxdl 17.gxdl f5 18 . .!Lld7 (after 18.tt:lxc6 fxe4 19.tt:ld4l:'lab8 ! 20 .tt:ld2 �d3� Black obtains more than sufficient compensation for the pawn) 18 . . . fxe4! 19 . .!Llxb6 cxb6 2 0 . .!Lld2 e3! 21.fxe3 gae8 22.ge1 c5= White's e3-pawn is weak and he cannot activate his pieces because of that. Black's bishop is superior to his oppo­nent's knight in a fight on both sides of the board, so his compen­sation for the pawn is quite suffi­cient for equality.

Chapter 6 l.e4 e5 2)2jf3 ttJc6 3.�b5 ttJf6 4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0- 0 6. 0 - 0 d6

Complete Games

18 Ju.Polgar Anand Reykjavik (blitz) 2006

1.e4 e5 2.c!l:lf3 c!Llc6 3 . .ib5 c!Llf6 4.d3 .ic5 5. 0 - 0 d6 6.c3 0 - 0 7.d4 .ib6 8.�d3 exd4 9.cxd4 .ig4 1 0 . .ixc6 bxc6 11. c!Llc3 .ix£3 12.gxf3

12 • . . �d7!? We recommend here the move

12 . . . c!Lld7! ?�, because from this square Black's knight may go to e5.

13.�h1? ! The position would become

very complicated following 13.tt:Je2 ! ? d5 14.e5 tLlh5 15.tLlg3 �h3 16 . .id2oo White has fortified his kingside and occupied the centre, but he must watch very carefully for Black's undermining moves c6-c5 and f7-f6, or even for the resource f7-f5, followed by a

transfer of the knight to the e6-square.

13 . • • c!Llh5 14J�g1 �h3! 15. .ig5?

White needed to bring his rook to the protection of his kingside with 15.a4 a5 16.tLle2 f5 17J�a3+

15 . . . f6 16 . .id2 f5! 17.e5 dxe5 18.dxe5 .ixf2+

Black wins at least a pawn. The rest of the game was played in a situation in which both players were desperately in need of time, so our comments would be as short as possible.

19.c!Lle2? (White would re­main only a pawn down after 19.\Wfl \Wxf1 20J'\gxf1 .id4 2 1.f4+) 19 . . • .ixg1 2 0 .gxg1 f4-+ 21. �c3 gadS 22 • .id4 �h8 23.�e4 �f5? (Black was winning imme­diately after 23 . . . c5 ! 24 . .ixc5

121

Chapter 6

Ei:d2-+) 24.'!Wxf5 Ei:xf5 25.Ei:cl+ (White's position is clearly worse, but he still has defensive resourc­es.) 25 . . . ®g8 26.Ei:xc6 g5 27. e6? (27.Ei:xc7+) 27 . . .ll::lg7! 28. .ic3 Ei:d6 (28 . . . Lt:le8 ! ?+) 29.Ei:xc7 tt:lxe6 3 0 .Ei:xa7 Ei:fd5? ! (30 . . . g4 !+) 31.a4 g4 32.®g2 Ei:d3 33. tt:lg1 h5 34.a5? (34.Ei:a5 !+) 34 . . . Ei:d7? (34 . . . Lt:ld4-+) 35.Ei:a6 Ei:3d6 36.Ei:a8+ Ei:d8 37.Ei:xd8+ Ei:xd8 38.tt:le2 (38.fxg4 hxg4 39 .h3 g3 40.Lt:lf3+) 38 . . . Ei:d3 39.tt:lg1 tt:lg5 4 0 .a6 Ei:d6 41.a7 Ei:a6 42 . .id4 tt:le6 43 . .if2 tt:lc7 44.tt:le2 tt:lb5 45.tt:lxf4 tt:lxa7 46.tt:lxh5 gxf3+ 47.®xf3 tt:lc6 48 . .ic5= The po­sition here is a draw, but White lost on time 0 -1

19 Reinhart Fontaine France 2 010

l.e4 e5 2.tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3 . .ib5 tt:lf6 4.�e2 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.d3 a6 8 . .ia4 h6 9. h3?! .ia7 1 0 .Ei:e1? ! tt:le7

ll.tt:lh2? It would be more accurate for

White to continue with ll . .ie3 Lt:lg6 12 . .ib3 he3 13 .fxe3 c6t, but Black has the initiative and he will

122

be unavoidably dominant in the centre.

ll ..• tt:lg6+ 12 . .ib3 ®h8!? He is planning to prepare f7-

f5. 13.tt:la3 tt:lh7 14.tt:lf3? White's knight is unstable on

this square. He had to fortify his d4-pawn by playing 14.Lt:lc2! f5 15.exf5 .ixf5 16.d4 Lt:lg5 17 . .ie3+

14 •.. f5! 15.exf5 .ixf5 16.d4 White must try somehow to

neutralize urgently the activity of his opponent's bishop on a7; oth­erwise, after 16.Lt:lc2 .ixh3 ! 17. gxh3 �f6 18 . .id5 c6 19 . .ie4 Lt:lh4+ Black regains the sacrificed mate­rial and his pieces remain tre­mendously active.

16 • • . e4 He has a very good alternative

here - 16 . . . Lt:lh4! ? 17.Lt:lxh4 �xh4 18.Lt:lc2 Lt:lg5+ Black will capture on h3 and his attack will become decisive.

17.tt:lh2 �h4! 18.tt:lc2 c6 It was also good for him to

play18 . . . Lt:lg5+ 19.£3 d5 2 0 .�£2 �xf2 + 21.

®xf2 ex£3 22.tt:lxf3 .ie4 23.Ei:e3 tt:lh4! 24.tt:lce1 tt:lg5 25.®e2 tt:lf5-+

White loses the exchange and his entire queenside has not even entered the actions.

26.ll)xg5 hx:g5 27.gf3 gae8 28.�d1 h£3+ 29.c!Llxf3 c!Llh4 3 0 .c!Lle5 i.b8 31.g3 .ixe5 32. gxh4 0 -1

2 0 Ju.Polgar Eljanov Wijk aan Zee 2008

1.e4 e5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3 . .ib5 c!Llf6 4.d3 .ic5 5. 0 - 0 d6 6.c3 0 - 0 7.i.g5 h6 8 . .ih4 g5 9 • .ig3 c!Llh5 1 0 .d4 .ib6 ll.dxe5 c!Llxg3 12.hxg3 c!Llxe5 13.c!Llxe5 dxe5 14.c!Lld2 'flf6t

15.'fle2 It seems more tenacious for

White to defend with 15.lLlc4 l"i:d8 16.'fle2 i.c5t, but he fails to neu­tralize completely Black's activity anyway.

15 • . . c6 He had a very good alternative

here 15 . . . h5 ! ? 16.lLlc4 (after 16. 'flxh5? lt>g7-+ White would be checkmated along the h-file) 16 . . . ig4 17.'flc2 h4 18.lLlxb6 axb6t

16 . .ic4 �g7 It was again very good for

Black to have played immediately 16 . . . h5 ! ?

4.d3 JJ.c5 5.c3 0-0 6.0-0 d6

17.i.b3 h5! He begins a crushing attack. 18.c!Llc4 .ig4 19.'fle1 i.c5 2 0 .

c!Lle3 ghS!

It is very instructive to see how Black prepares opening of the h­file, moreover that White's coun­terplay seems rather abstract.

21 . .id1 .ie6 22 . .ib3 .ig4 23 . .id1 gh7! 24.b4 .ib6 25.a4 a6 26.a5 .ia7 27.ga2 gabS 28. gd2 ic8-+

Black only needs here to fix the enemy g3-pawn with the move g5-g4 and then to open the h-file.

29.c!Llf5+ .ixf5 3 0 .exf5 g4! 31.'f!e4 h4 32 • .ixg4 hxg3 33. .ih3 gh4 34.'f!d3 'f!g5 35.f6+ �xf6 36.gfd1 .ixf2+ 37.gxf2+ gxf2 38.�xf2 �g7 39.'fle3 gf4 4 0 .�e2 ghh4 41.'f!d3 ge4+ 42.�f2 'flf4+ 43.�g1 ge3 0 -1

123

Chapter7 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 ltlc6 3 . .ib5 ltlf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0- 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.ltlbd2

Quick Repertoire

You can see on the diagram the main position of the anti-Ber­lin, beginning with the move 4.d3. Black plays often here 7 . . . i.b6, which is a reliable, but somewhat passive move presenting the op­ponent with the two-bishop ad­vantage. Struggling against this long-term plus for White is not included in our plans.

7 . . . a6!? 8 . .ia4 White has an interesting alter­

native here - 8.hc6 ! ? bxc6 9.d4 - he has occupied the centre and disrupted his opponent's pawn­structure on the queenside. Black must play very precisely in order not to end up in a worse position. 9 . . . exd4 10.cxd4 i.b6 ! (This is an important nuance. This bishop

124

must be ready to go to the aS­square.) 11 .'1Wc2 �e8 12 .�el c5 (This is a standard resource. Black uses his doubled pawns to under­mine White's centre.) 13.d5 ! ? (13. e5 ti:ld5 14.ti:lc4 h6 ! 15 .i.d2 i.e6=) 13 . . . i.g4 ! 14.b3 i.a5 15.�e3 hf3 ! = This surprising move enables Black to obtain a comfortable position in all the variations.

8 . . . .ia7

9.h3 His game is much easier after

9 .i.c2 h6 10.h3 i.e6 ll.�el �e8 12 .ti:lfl d5= . Black is slightly supe­rior in the centre and deploys per­fectly his pieces.

9 • • .ll)e7 1 0 .E:el c!Llg6 11.c!Llfl He solves easily his problems

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.tt:Jbd2 a6

following 1l.d4 c5 ! ? 12 .�c2 b5 13. tt::lfl cxd4 14.cxd4 �b7! +± Black ex­erts powerful pressure against the e4-pawn and if White plays 15.d5, then Black's bishop will go to d7, from where it will be useful on both sides of the board.

ll . . . c6 12.tbg3 d5 13.exd5 lbxd5 14.i.b3 i.e6=

(diagram) Black's e5-pawn is untoucha­

ble (15.tt::lxe5? tt::lxe5 16.Ei:xe5 bf2+ 17.i>xf2 '&f6+ and White loses the exchange), so his best chance of fighting for the initia-

tive is the move 15.d4, but after 15 • . • exd4 16.lbxd4, Black solves his problems with the precise re­sponse 16 • • • Wfc7 ! =

125

Chapter7 l.e4 e5 2)i�f3 lL'lc6 3.i.b5 lL'lf6 4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.lL'lbd2 a6!?

Step by Step

A) 8.hc6!? B) 8.i.a4

A) 8.hc6!? White compromises his oppo­

nent's pawn-structure, but Black's light-squared bishop remains without an opponent and he will have excellent prospects of organ­izing active counterplay on the light squares.

8 . . . bxc6 (diagram)

9.d4 White has also tried in prac­

tice : 9 .ltlb3? ! i.b6 lO.i.gS h6 ll.i.h4

gS 12 .ltlxg5? (It is preferable for him to opt for the less risky line: 12 .i.g3 lLlhS 13 .ltlfd2 ltlxg3 14. hxg3 fSt , although even then

126

Black has excellent attacking prospects.) 12 . . . hxg5 13.i.xg5 Wg7 14.Whl l"!h8 15.f4 ltlg4-+ - He be­gins an attack and the extra piece will be very handy, T.Hoffmann -M.Andersen, Esbjerg 2008;

9 .1Mfa4 i.a7 10.b4 i.e6 ll.d4 (White loses with the greedy line : 11 .\Mfxc6? i.d7 12 .1Mfc4 i.bS 13.1Mfb3 i.xd3 14.l"!el ltlg4-+ Black has re­gained his pawn and wins the ex­change.) exd4 12 .cxd4 1Mfd7? and thanks to his two powerful bish­ops, he has a very good position, Rockdoc - Jazzled, Internet 2006.

In response to 9 .ltlc4, Hracek - Kramnik, Prague 2002, it is ad­visable for Black to continue in a natural fashion 9 . . . i.e6 10.1Mfe2 (It is worse for White to choose 10.

4.d3 ic5 5. c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7.tt'lbd2 a6

ig5, because after 10 . . . h6 11 .ih4 g5 12 .ig3 tt'lxe4+ he loses his cen­tral pawn, while in the variation ll.hf6 �xf6+ Black's bishops are stronger than the enemy knights and this provides him with a sta­ble edge.) 10 . . . h6= - His perfectly placed light-squared bishop com­pensates fully the defect6s of his queenside pawn-structure. The only way for White to try to ex­ploit this would be to open the po­sition, but then Black's bishops will turn into powerful force.

In the variation 9 .l"!e1 l"!e8 10. tt'lc4 ie6= he has no problems at all .

9 . . . exd4 1 0 .cxd4

1 0 . . . .ib6! Now, after 11.�c2 l"!e8 12 .l"!e1

c5 13.d5, Black's bishop can be ac­tivated via the aS-square.

After the routine reply 10 . . . i.a7 11.�c2d:, White managed to obtain an edge in the game Mov­sesian - Pashikian, Plovdiv 2010 (game 21).

ll.�c2 1Ule1 - There are no games in

the chess-base with this move,

but it is logical, so we analyze it here. ll . . . l"!e8 12 .h3 c5 13 .e5 (13. d5 l"!e7 14.�c2 �e8+ White will fail to hold his centre) 13 . . . dxe5 14.dxe5 tt'ld5 15.tt'lc4 tt'lb4 16.id2 ib7 (Black must also play accu­rately, because the seemingly at­tractive move 16 . . . tt'ld3 after 17. l"!e3 �d5 18 .�c2d: enables White to coordinate his forces and to oust the enemy knight from its ac­tive position.) 17.ixb4 cxb4 18. �e2 �e7= Black's strong light­squared bishop exerts powerful pressure on the long diagonal and compensates fully the defects of his pawn-structure.

ll .h3 - This move has not been tested yet too, but it would be quite sensible for White to re­strict the mobility of the enemy light-squared bishop. After for ex­ample: 11 . . .l"!e8 12 .e5 tt'ld5 13.tt'lc4 if5 14.id2 dxe5 15.dxe5 id3 16. tt'lxb6 cxb6 17.l"!e1 ig6= Black's powerful centralized knight en­sures his safety. He lacks space at the moment, but if he manages to exchange the queens, his pros­pects will become preferable .

n . . . ges 12.ge1 12 .h3? ! - White blunders a

standard tactical trick.

127

Chapter 7

12 . . . LLlxe4 13.LLlxe4 .ifS 14 . .igS (Even after the best 14.Ele1 Vfie7 1S.Vfixc6 .ixe4 16.dS Elab8+ Black's powerlul bishops provide him with a stable advantage in a posi­tion with material equality.) 14 . . . he4 1S.Vfffxe4 Elxe4 16.hd8 Elxd8+ - He has an extra pawn and more active pieces, Movse­sian - Karjakin, Moscow (blitz) 2010 .

In reply to 12 .Vfixc6, Palac -Sulava, Otocac 2010, Black equal­izes with 12 . . . .id7 13.'Wc2 LLlxe4 14.LLlxe4 .ifS 1S.Ele1 Vfie7 16.Vfffb3 he4 17.LLld2 dS= - it is essential that White cannot win the enemy bishop, because of the pin, since following 18.f3? hd4+ 19.Wh1 .ic2 !-+ he can already resign.

There arise very interesting variations after the aggressive line : 12 .eS LLldS 13.Vfixc6 .ie6 14. Vfffa4 .id7!

1S. Wb3 - This move has not been tried by White yet, but Black should be well-prepared against it. 1S . . . LLlf4 16.Ele1 (16.LLle4? ! dxeS 17.dxeS .ie6 18.Vfia3 LLle2 + 19.Wh1 WdS+ - His pieces are tremen­dously active and this more than compensates the sacrificed

128

pawn.) 16 . . . dxeS 17.LLlc4 (17.LLlxeS .ie6 18.Wg3 f6 19.Vfixf4 fxeS 20 . ElxeS Vfffxd4 21 .LLlf1 Vfid1 22 .Vfid2 Eiad8 23.Vfie1 Wxe1 24.Elxe1 .id4= Black's active bishops are suffi­cient for equality.) 17 . . . .ic6 18. LLlxb6 (After 18.LLlcxeS .idS, it would be very risky for White to choose 19.Wc3 LLlxg2 ! 20 .Wxg2 f6 21 .LLlg4 Wd7 22 .h3 hd4 23.Elxe8+ Elxe8 24.Vfffc2 cS 2S . .ie3 Vfffb7 26. LLlgh2 .ieS+ Black regains the piece and maintains better pros­pects thanks to the open position of the enemy king. In the varia­tion 19.Wa4 LLlh3+ ! ? 20 .gxh3 f6 21 .LLld7 Wh8 22 .LLlxb6 .ixf3 23. Elxe8+ Wxe8 24.Wxe8+ Elxe8 2S. .ie3 cxb6 26.Elc1 Wg8 27.Elc7 Eie6= there arises a completely equal endgame. White has an extra pawn, but has numerous weak­nesses on the kingside.) 18 . . . cxb6 19.hf4 (He loses after 19.dxeS? LLlxg2 ! 20 .Wxg2 Wh4 2 1.h3 Ele6 22 .Ele2 VfihS 23 . .if4 gS 24 . .ig3 Eih6 2S.Elh1 g4-+ Black's powerlul bishop is absolutely dominant in this variation.) 19 . . . exf4 20.Elxe8+ he8 21 .Elc1 Wd6 22 .h3 Eld8= White's passed pawn in the centre is harmless and might become a liability later.

1S.Vfic2 LLlb4 16.Vfffb3 (There arises repetition of moves follow­ing 16.Vfic3 LLldS 17.Wd3 LLlb4= ; Black has full compensation for the pawn in the variation 16.Vfffc4 aS 17.a3 .ie6 18.Wc3 LLldS 19.Vfic2 dxeS 20.dxeS LLlf4gg, for example : 21 .LLlc4 Vfffd3 22 .Vfffxd3 LLlxd3 23. LLlxb6 cxb6 24.Eld1 Elad8 and the

4.d3 icS 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0-0 d6 7Jijbd2 a6

position is a dead draw, which can be confirmed by the following variations : 2S.igS l"i:dS 26.l"i:d2 tLJxeS= , or 2S.ie3 ib3 and after 26.l"i:d2 tLJxeS 27.l"i:xd8 t2Jxf3+ 28. gxf3 l"i:xd8 29 .hb6 l"ldS 30.l"i:c1 f6= , or 26.l"i:fl tLJxeS 27.t2JxeS!"lxeS 28.hb6 l"i:ddS 29.l"i:fc1 f6 30.a4 l"i:e4= it is time to agree to a draw.) 16 . . . t2Jc6 17.�c3 dxeS 18.dxeS iaS 19.�e3 ie6 20.b3 (After 20.t2Jb3 hb3 2l.�xb3 t2Jxe5 22.CLJxe5 l"lxe5= Black's compromised pawn­structure on the queenside is fully compensated by the activity of his pieces.) 20 . . . ib6 21.�f4 t2Jd4 22 . lt>h1 h6 23.ib2 gS 24.�f6 �xf6 2S.exf6 t2Jc6 26.h3 idS� - He has deployed perfectly his pieces and after the transfer of his king to g6 and the penetration of his rook to the e2-square Black can think about winning this position, Grabner - Marquardt, Email 2009.

12 . . . c5 Black can hardly continue the

game without this move, but it would be an interesting and fresh idea to wait with it a little bit: 12 . . . id7!? 13.b3 cS 14.ib2 cxd4 1S. hd4 hd4 16.t2Jxd4 aS 17.l"i:ad1 �b8 18.t2J4f3, draw, Areshchenko - Ponomariov, Kiev 2011 .

(diagram) White's most principled move

now is Al) 13.d5!? , although it has not been tested in practice yet. It is also interesting for him to choose A2) 13.e5.

Al) 13.d5!?

This looks like the most dan­gerous move for Black. White wishes to isolate the enemy dark­squared bishop from the actions, obtaining a long-term strategical plus.

13 . . . .ig4! Black's task is to activate max­

imally his pieces.

14.b3 14.l"le3? ! ihS 1S.h3 ig6 16.

�c4 h6 17.b3 c6 ! 18.dxc6 t2Jxe4+ White's beautiful centre has been destroyed and Black maintains a great advantage.

Following 14.h3 ihS 1S.b3 iaS 16.l"le3, he obtains an excellent game with the key-resource in this variation : 16 . . . c6 ! 17.dxc6 dS

129

Chapter 7

18.exd5 (The aggressive attempt 18.e5 d4 19.l'!d3 ttJd5 20.1Wxc5 t2Jf4 21 .ltJe1 ttJxd3 22 .t2Jxd3 �c3+ leads to a position in which White has no compensation for the ex­change, since his c6-pawn cannot be supported by his pieces and is bound to be lost soon.) 18 . . . l'!xe3 19 .fxe3 1Wxd5 20 .�b2 �g6 21 .1Wc1 1Wxc6 22 .t2Jc4 �c7 23.ttJfe5 1We6 24.t2Jxg6 hxg6= Black's queenside pawns are weak, but White's king is insufficiently protected.

14 . . . .ia5 15.l'�e3 Ponomariov - Sargissian, Me­

lilla 2011 . He must be on the alert about

possible tactical motives, for ex­ample: 15.ib2?! ixf3 16.gxf3 ttJxd5+ and White loses a pawn

15 . . . .ixf3

16.tDxf3 There arise very interesting

positions after the non-standard reaction 16.gxf3 ! ? c6! 17.dxc6 d5.

(diagram) White's greedy attempt 18 .ia3

d4 19.l'!d3 ttJh5 20 .ixc5 l'!e6-+ would enable Black to organize a decisive attack.

130

After 18.exd5 1Wxd5 19.t2Je4 t2Jxe4 20 .l'!xe4 1Wxc6= the pawn­structures of both opponents have been compromised, but the posi­tion remains still within equality.

In the variation 18.t2Jf1 1Wb6 19.exd5 ttJxd5 20.l'!xe8+ l'!xe8 21 . �e3 ttJxe3 22 .t2Jxe3 1Wxc6= White's king is not safe and due to that he cannot exploit the vulnerability of Black's queenside pawns.

18.E1d3 - This is White's best possibility. 18 . . . Wc8 19.1Wxc5 (19. exd5? ! l'!e1+ 20.I!tg2 Wf5 21 .t2Jf1 1Wg6+ 22 .t2Jg3 t2Jxd5-+ - he has no satisfactory defence against l'!xc1, followed by Wxd3 and ttJf4) 19 . . . �c7 20.1Wc2 (White must play very precisely, because after 20 . ttJfl dxe4 21.fxe4 ttJxe4 22 .1Wc4 1Wg4+ 23.t2Jg3 1Wg6 24.�e3 h5 25. l!th1 Wg4 26.l'!d7 1Wf3+ 27.'i!tg1 ixg3 28.hxg3 t2Jxg3-+ Black's threats would be decisive.) 20 . . . dxe4 21 .t2Jxe4 ttJxe4 2 2 .fxe4 1Wg4+ 23.l'!g3 ixg3 24.hxg3 1Wxe4 25. Wxe4 l'!xe4 26.�f4 l'!c8= White's passed c-pawn enables him to rely on equality, but not more than this, for example : 27.c7 (27.l'!c1? ! l!tf8 28 .c7 l!te7+) 27 . . . 1!tf8 28.l'!d1 l!te7 29.'i!tg2 E1xf4 30.gxf4 l'!xc7= and the endgame is completely

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. lLl bd2 a6

acceptable for Black. 16 . . • �e7 Strangely enough, but his

counterplay against the enemy e4-pawn equalizes completely.

17 • .id2 We must have a look at White's

other attempts to fight for the ad­vantage :

in the variation 17.�b2 lLlxe4 18.lLle5 dxe5 19.l"lxe4 f6 20 .l"ld1 �f7! 21 .�xc5 �b6 22.'�' c6 l"lad8 23 .d6 �d7 24.l"lc4 �f5= Black succeeds in activating his queen and freeing his bishop from exile;

after the inclusion of the moves 17.h4 h6, the above men­tioned idea would not guarantee any advantage for White: 18.�b2 lLlxe4 19.lLle5 dxe5 20 .l"lxe4 f6 21.f4 l"lad8 (It is also possible for Black to play the super-risky line: 2l . . .f5 22 .l"lxe5 �xh4 23.�xf5 �b6 24.�e4 c4+ 25.�d4 l"lxe5 26.�xeS hd4+ 27.�xd4 cxb3 28 .axb3 l"le8=) 22 .l"ld1 �f7 23.fxeS l"lxdS 24.l"la4 c4 2S.l"lxdS �xdS 26.<i>h2 c3 27.hc3 hc3 28.�xc3 l"lxeS 29 .�xc7 l"le2= and the arising endgame is a dead draw.

17 . . . .h:d2 18.lbxd2 tl:\g4 19. geel

It is not preferable for White to opt for 19.l"lg3 fS 20 .exfS �e2 21 .l"lf1 lLlf6 22 .�c1 lLlhS 23.l"lf3 lLlf6= and he has nothing better than to comply with the repetition of moves after 24.l"lg3 lLlhS.

19 . . . �e5

2 0 .tl:\f3 20.g3 - After this careless

move, White becomes the defend­ing side. 2 0 . . . �f6 ! 21 .lLlf1 (or 21 . lLlc4 l"lxe4!+ with an extra pawn for Black, but he will hardly real­ize it) 2l . . .aS 22 .<i>g2 a4 23.bxa4 �d4+. There has arisen a pawn­structure, which is typical for the Benoni Defence, with a very im­portant plus for Black - his per­manently weak d6-pawn is relia­bly protected by his c7-pawn.

20 .lLlfl - This move leads to complete equality following 20 . . . aS 21 .h3 lLlf6 2 2 .lLld2 a4 23.bxa4 �d4 24.aS ! l"lxaS 2S.a4 c4 26.l"lad1 �a7 27.lLlxc4 l"lxa4=

2 0 •.• �f6 2U3acl The position remains balanced

after 21 .l"lad1 aS 22 .h3 lLleS 23.

131

Chapter 7

ttJd2 Eleb8=, while in the variation 21 .h3 ttJe5 22 .tLld2 (22 .ttJxe5?! Elxe5+ Black's centralized pieces provide him with better prospects in this endgame with major piec­es) 22 . . . E\ab8+! White can hardly exploit the vulnerability of the en­emy pawns on a6 and c7, while Black has good counterplay thanks to his active pieces.

21. .. Eiab8 22.�d2 �b4+!

He has excellent counterplay in this position, connected with his pressure against the d4-pawn and the possible march forward of his a6-pawn in order to weaken White's queenside.

A2) 13.e5 He copes with the difficulties

defending his pawn on e4. 13 • • .ll:ld5

(diagram) 14.tl:lc4 In reply to 14.dxc5, the most

precise road to equality for Black is the somewhat surprising move 14 . . . dxc5 ! (his c5-pawn controls important squares, although it

132

would be good for him to follow with the more natural response 14 . . . hc5) 15.a3 (By playing 15. ttJc4 h6 16.�d2 , White restricts considerably his opponent's dark­squared bishop, but Black can still organize sufficient counter­play with 16 . . . �g4 17.Eiad1 �d7 18 .�a5 �e6= and after, for exam­ple : 19.Eixd5 �xd5 20 .hb6 cxb6 21 .tLlxb6 �xa2 22 .ttJxa8 Elxa8= it is time to agree to a draw.) 15 . . . h6 16.h3 ttJf4 ! . The main drawback of White's position is the absence of his light-squared bishop. Black can create sufficient counterplay exploiting the vulnerability of the d3-square. 17.ttJe4 (17.�e4 ttJd5 18.Eid1 �d7 19.ttJc4 ttJc3 20.Eixd7 ttJxe4=) 17 . . . ttJd3 18.Eid1 �f5 19. Elxd3 he4 20.Eixd8 hc2 21 .Eixa8 Elxa8 22 .�e3 c4 23.Eic1 �d3 24. ttJd2 he3 25.fxe3 E\b8= and White is forced to enter a dead drawn rook and pawn endgame.

14 . • . h6! Black has defended against

any sorties of White's pieces to the g5-square and can think about organizing counterplay.

15.i.d2 i.e6 16.exd6

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.t'iJ bd2 a6

In the variation 16.tLlxb6 cxb6 17.exd6 �xd6 18.dxc5 bxc5 19. )'!ad1 �b6= Black has no prob­lems at all. His queenside pawns are weak, but White cannot attack them, while Black's pieces are much more active than their counterparts .

16 . . . cxd6

17.ltJXb6 He obtains a quite acceptable

position following 17.)'!ac1 cxd4 18.tt:Jxb6 �xb6 19.�d3 tt:Jb4 20. �xb4 �xb4 2l .b3 �a5 22 .tLlxd4 �d7=

17 . • . �xb6 18.dxc5 dxc5 19. c!Lle5 c!Llb4 2 0 J1b4 c!Lld5 21.�c2 c!Llb4= Svidler - Karjakin, Mos­cow 2010.

B) 8.i.a4 White is reluctant to present

his opponent with the two-bishop advantage.

8 ..• i.a7 (diagram)

Bl) 9.i.c2 B2) 9.h3 9.b4 - He loses time with this

move and weakens his queenside.

9 . . . tLle7 10.)'!e1 (Black has no prob­lems after 10 .�b3 tLlg6 11 .tLlc4 c6 12 .�e3 �e6=) 10 . . . tLlg6 11 .tLlf1, Ro­zentalis - Bachmann Schiavo, Asuncion 2010, he has completed the standard transfer of his knight to the g6-square and is ready to begin active actions in the centre: ll . . . d5 12 .h3 dxe4 13.dxe4 eSt

It would be premature for White to opt for 9.)'!e1 tLlg4 ! 10 .)'!e2 f5 11 .tLlf1, Fakhiridou - Dagkakis, Kavalas 2008, since Black can counter that with 11 . . . fxe4 12 .dxe4 �e8 13 .tLlg3 �g6t and he opens the f-file with powerful initiative on the kingside.

9 . .ixc6? ! bxc6 - He has an ex­tra tempo in comparison to varia­tion A and this enables him to seize the initiative. 10.tLlc4 �e6 1l.�a4 �e8 12 .�g5 tLlh5t Soto Vega - Cotrina Moscoso, Lima 2002 .

Bl) 9.i.c2 The game transposes to one of

the variations of the Italian Game, which is considered to be quite harmless for Black and justifiably so.

133

Chapter 7

9 . . . h6

1 0 .h3 This is the best move for

White. In answer to 10 .'1We2? ! it is very

good for Black to follow with 10 . . . tt:lh5 11 .tt:lc4 '&f6t with powerful kingside initiative.

10 .tt:lc4 �e6 ll .tt:le3 (ll .'We2 Ei:e8 12 .<;t>h1 '&d7 13 .�e3 .b:e3 14. tt:lxe3 d5 15.d4 exd4 16.e5 dxe3 17.exf6 �f5 18 .fxe3 .b:c2 19.'1Wxc2 g6+ - the pawns on e3 and f6 are both weak, Paehtz - Ashton, Port Erin 2007) ll . . . d5 12.exd5 (fol­lowing 12 .'We2 Ei:e8 13.Ei:d1 d4 14. tt:lf1, Bok - Leenhouts, Internet 2011 , Black can play 14 . . . tt:lh5? and he obtains an excellent posi­tion, because White fails to ex­ploit the defencelessness of Black's knight 15.tt:lxe5? tt:lxe5 16. '&xh5 �g4-+ , or 15.cxd4? �g4 ! +, or 15.tt:lxd4 tt:lxd4 16.cxd4 'Wxd4 17.�e3 tt:lf4+) 12 . . . tt:lxd5 13.tt:lxd5 (13.tt:lc4 f6 14.Ei:e1, Li - Aleksan­drov, Moscow 2007 and after a simple set-up of his pieces in the centre with 14 . . . '1Wd7 15.tt:le3 Ei:ad8? Black has excellent coun-

134

ter chances. In response to 13J'l:e1, it seems very attractive for him to try 13 . . . Ei:e8 14.tt:lc4 f6?) 13 . . . .b:d5+ and he obtained a slight advantage in the centre in the game Zufic - V.Malakhov, Si­benik 2009.

1 0 • • • .ie6 ll.�el 1l.b3? ! d5 12 .�b2 dxe4 13.

dxe4 '&e7+ with a slight edge for Black thanks to the greater activi­ty of his pieces.

ll . . . �e8 12.c!t:\fl He equalized easily after 12 .

tt:lh2 d5 13.'1Wf3 dxe4 14.dxe4 tt:le7 15.tt:ldfl tt:lg6= Radjabov - Carls­en, Linares 2009.

12 . . . d5

13.'1We2 13.�d2 '&e7 14.'We2 �ad8 15.

tt:lg3, Gara - L.Vajda, Harkany 2009, 15 . . . '1Wf8= He has deployed his pieces in the centre and equal­izes completely.

13.tt:lg3 dxe4 14.dxe4 '&xd1 15. Ei:xd1 Ei:ad8 16J''lxd8 Ei:xd8= Black has no problems at all , since his development is even preferable, although this does not provide him with anything real, Devangi

4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. lt'l bd2 a6

- Karavade, Nagpur 2008. Following 13 .i.e3, Manakova

- Zaiatz, St. Petersburg 2010, the simplest way for him to equalize is to transfer into an endgame with 13 . . . i.xe3 14.lt'lxe3 dxe4 15. dxe4 Wxd1 16.l"1axd1 l"1ad8= and later Black will centralize his king, while White's knight on g3 can be restricted by the move g7-g6.

There arise very interesting positions after 13.exd5 lt'lxd5 14. lt'lg3 '1Wd6

and here, after 15.lt'lh4, Predo­jevic - Hess, Moscow 2011 , it looks very attractive for Black to continue with 15 . . . '\We7 16.lt'lf3 l"1ad8 17.i.d2 '\Wc5 18.lt'le4 Wf8+ -the manoeuvres of White's knight and his opponent's queen have enabled Black to deploy all his pieces in the centre and to pre­serve the e5-pawn without weak­ening of the light squares. It is more or less the same after 15. lt'le4 Wf8 16.i.d2 l"1ad8+; in reply to 15. '1We2, Svetushkin - A.Onis­chuk, Moscow 2009, Black can follow the same set-up: 15 . . . l"1ad8 16.i.d2 Wf8+; after 15.lt'ld2 Wd7 16.lt'lc4 f6 17.'1Wf3 l"1ad8t he seizes the initiative, making use of the

circumstance that White cannot punish the move f7-f6, Aresh­chenko - Svetushkin, Moscow 2008.

13 . . . b5 14.lL!3h2 There arises a completely

harmless endgame for Black after 14.lt'lg3 dxe4 15.lt'lxe4 lt'lxe4 16. dxe4 i.c4 17.'1Wd1 Wxd1 18.i.xd1 l"1ad8= , as well as following 15. dxe4 i.c4=

14 . . . d4!? White's knight is away from

the centre and Black exploits this and begins a plan to occupy the important d4-square.

15.lL!g3 �d6 16.a3 a5! 17. i.d2 ged8 18.gec1 dxc3 ! 19. bxc3 b4 2 0 .cxb4 axb4 21. hb4 c!L\xb4 22.axb4 �xb4 t

Black has weakened the dark­squared complex in his oppo­nent's camp and has long-lasting pressure, T.L.Petrosian - E.Alek­seev, Tashkent 2011 (game 22) .

B2) 9.h3 White cannot continue the

game without this prophylactic move.

135

Chapter 7

9 • • .c!2Je7 1 0 .l':1el 10.d4 ltJg6 ll ..tc2 - This is an

interesting mov�rder. White keeps his knight on d2 and does not al­low Black to advance quickly d6-d5 (it is not preferable for White to choose lU 'lel cS ! ? - see lOJ'lel, or ll . .tb3 bS 12J'lel .tb7t with an excellent position for Black, since White cannot accomplish the standard transfer of his knight to the g3-square.) , so he needs to oc­cupy additional space on the queenside as quickly as possible and the best way to do this is to play ll . . . b5 12.Elel cS - see lO .Elel.

10 • • .c!2Jg6

B2a) ll.d4 B2b) ll.llJfl

136

ll ..tc2 bS 12 .ltJfl, Vuckovic -D'Amore, Sarajevo 2010 (12.a4 .tb7 13.ltJfl dS=) 12 . . . d5 (This is the simplest reaction, although Black can try some other moves too, among which we believe the most precise is 12 . . . c5 ! ?, fighting for more space.) 13.exd5 �xdS 14 . .tg5 �d6 15.ltJg3 .tb7 16.ltJf5 �b6 17.d4 exd4 18.�xd4 �c6 19.�d3 Elfe8= All his pieces have entered the actions, but White has nothing to complain about ei­ther.

B2a) ll.d4 c5!?

12 . .tc2 After 12 .d5 c4t, Black, in com­

parison to the classical Ruy Lopez - the Breyer or the Chigorin vari­ations, has his dark-squared bish­op comfortably placed and has no problems with a passive knight, which is perfectly deployed on the g6-square at the moment. Follow­ing 12 .dxe5 dxeS, White is forced to play 13.c4 ; otherwise, Black will prepare gradually b5-c4 and after 13 . . . Elb8 14.ltJfl bS 15 . .tc2 .tb6? he will place his bishop on

4.d3 .icS 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. lt\ bd2 a6

a5 and will have no passive pieces any more. The pawn-structure is symmetrical however and White should manage to hold the bal­ance.

12 • . . b5 13.tl:\fl In the variations 13.d5 c4 14.

lt:\fl .id7+!, or 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.c4 V!Jc7+± Black's counterplay is quite sufficient.

13 . . . cxd4 14.cxd4

14 . . . .ib7! He is provoking d5. 15 . .ie3 White can also continue with

15.d5 .ic8 ! - in this pawn-struc­ture the right square for Black's bishop is d7. 16 . .ie3 he3 17.lt:\xe3 lt:\f4 18.V!ffd2 .id7+!. There are no more dark-squared bishops left on the board and Black's knights are perfectly placed. His queen on b6 will be ready to join in the ac­tions on both sides of the board. It is essential that White's pawn is on h3, so that he cannot oust Black's knight from the f4-square with the move g2-g3 .

15 . . .ltJxe4 16.dxe5 .ixe3 17. �xe3

It is more accurate for White to play 17.lt:\xe3 17 . . . dxe5 18 .lt:\g4 lt:\g5 19.lt:\gxe5 lt:\xf3+ 20.lt:\xf3 V!fff6= , but he cannot create prob­lems for his opponent with this either.

17 .. .tl:\g5 ! 18.tl:\ 3h2? White could have still pre­

served the balance with the line: 18 .lt:\1h2 lt:\xe5 19.lt:\xe5 dxe5 20 . l"lxe5 V!fff6t with a superior devel­opment for Black.

18 . . • tL!f4 19.1Mfg4 dxe5 2 0 . �xe5, Kobalia - Lysyj, Khanty­Mansiysk 2011 .

Black wins with the surprising retreat of his knight: 2 0 . • . tl:\ge6! 21.tl:\f3 �c8 22 . .ib3 h5 23.1Mfg3

137

Chapter 7

�c5! 24.�e3 '!Wf6-+ and White is completely helpless against the coordinated actions of Black's forces.

B2b) ll..!Llfl c6

12 . .!Llg3 The position after 12 . .ib3, Tan

- Ledger, Birmingham 1999, aris­es often in the Italian Game after the moves l.e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 tt.Jc6 3 . .ic4 tt.Jf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 d6 6.h3 0-0 7 . .ib3 a6 8.0-0 .ia7 9 .4Jbd2 tt.Je7 10.Ele1 tt.Jg6 11 .4Jfl c6 and it is not difficult to see that here, Black has an extra tempo, which can be used for the beginning of active actions in the centre and after 12 . . . d5 ! ? 13.exd5 tt.Jxd5 14.4Jg3 .ie6, there arises transposition to the main variation - see 12 .4Jg3.

In response to 12 . .ic2 , Black solves all his opening problems with 12 . . . d5 13.exd5 tt.Jxd5 14.d4 exd4 15.4Jxd4 Ele8 16.Elxe8+ '!Wxe8=

Following 12 .d4 exd4 13.4Jxd4 (White would not achieve much with 13.cxd4 d5 14.e5 tt.Je4 15.

138

4J1d2 f5?) 13 . . . d5 14.exd5, Smirin - Jakovenko, Aix-les-Bains 2011 , the position becomes completely equal after 14 . . . 4Jxd5 15 . .ib3 tt.Jdf4=

12 . . . d5

13.exd5 Black has no difficulties after

13 . .ib3 dxe4 (His careless reac­tion 13 . . . Ele8? ! 14 . .ig5t led to un­pleasant pressure against his cen­tre in the game Kosyrev - Landa, Internet 2005.) 14.4Jxe4 (14.dxe4 h6 15.'\Wc2 �c7=) 14 . . . 4Jxe4 15. dxe4 h6= Black has covered the g5-square and has no problems at all , Dominguez Perez - Lysyj, Khanty-Mansiysk (rapid) 2011 .

13 • . • .!Llxd5 14.i.b3 Radjabov - Kramnik, Kazan

(blitz) 2011 (game 23). Opening of the centre after

14.d4 exd4 15.4Jxd4 Ele8 16.Elxe8+ �xe8= led to an absolutely equal position in the game Karjakin -Jakovenko, Odessa 2010.

(diagram) In the diagrammed position, it

looks like White has some initia­tive, but Black can solve all his

4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. tll bd2 a6

problems with the natural devel­oping move

14 . . . .ie6N It becomes clear now that his

pawn is untouchable, because fol­lowing 15.t2Jxe5? t2Jxe5 16.E1xe5 hf2+ 17.c;hf2 �f6+ White loses the exchange.

It is hardly any better for him to opt for 15.tllg5 .id7 16.tll3e4 h6

17.tllf3 �e7 18.d4 exd4 19.tllxd4 E1ae8+ Black has completed his development, while White was busy roaming with his knights.

In the variation 15.tlle4 h6 16. d4 exd4 17.tllxd4 E1e8 18.tllxe6 E1xe6f2 White has obtained the two-bishop advantage and opened the centre, but Black is consider­ably ahead in development and his knight on d5 neutralizes White's light-squared bishop. Black's dark-squared bishop re­mains very active.

After 15.d4 15 . . . exd4 16. .!Dxd4 �c7= the vulnerability of the f2-square would not enable White to obtain the two-bishop advantage, so we can consider that Black has equalized com­pletely.

139

Chapter7 l.e4 e5 2)iJf3 liJc6 3 . .ib5 llJf6 4.d3 .ic5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.llJbd2 a6!?

Complete Games

21 Movsesian - Pashikian Plovdiv 2010

l.e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3.i.b5 �f6 4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.�bd2 a6 8.hc6 bxc6 9.d4 exd4 1 0 .cxd4

1 0 . . . i.a7?! Black has the two-bishop ad­

vantage indeed, but he must react very accurately in order to com­pensate his pawn weaknesses. This game illustrates the fact that just a single imprecise move may cause great trouble for Black.

The correct reply is 10 . . . .ib6 ! - see "Step by Step".

11.\Wc2 �e8 12.�el c5 The position is rather unpleas­

ant for Black following 12 . . . .id7 13.b3±

(diagram) 13.d5!;1;

140

Now, the bishop on a7 will be passive.

13 . . . .ib7 14.b3 c6 15.dxc6 hc6 16.i.b2 d5 17.exd5 �xd5 18.�c4?!

White loses a part of his ad­vantage, since after 18.hf6 ! ? gxf6 19.'LlfU Black will have prob­lems protecting his weakened kingside.

18 . . . �ad8

19.�ce5?! White's reluctance to part with

4.d3 �c5 5.c3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7.li'J bd2 a6

his active dark-squared bishop is understandable, but his only way to fight for the advantage was 19. hf6 gxf6 20.�c3J;

19 . . . .ia8 2 0 .l;adl �b7 21. �c4 lL!e4!

Black's knight has survived and is perfectly placed in the cen­tre.

22.l;xd8 l;xd8 23.h4

23 . . . .ib8! He activates his temporary

passive bishop. 24.h5 h:e5 25.h:e5 h6

26 . .if4 �b4 27 . .ie3 .id5 28. �xa6 lL!g5!?

Black i s trying to seize the ini­tiative. He could have equalized completely with 28 . . . 1"la8 29.�d3 tt:Jf6=

tinue the fight as well. The endgame, arising in the

variation 29.hg5 �3 30.hd8 �xe1+ 31.�f1 �xfl+ 32 .1!?xf1 hh5= is a dead draw.

29 . • . �g4 3 0 .�fl �xh5 31.£3 lL!e6 32.�f2 .ib7 33.lL!fl �d5 34.lL!g3 c4 35.bxc4 �xc4 36. l;cl �d3+

Black has nothing to worry about any more. His pieces are ac­tive, while White's king is not well protected.

37.l;el l;a8 38.l;e2 .id5 39. l!?h2 h:a2 40 .l;d2 �a3 41.<!Llf5 l;a5 42.ll)g3 .ibl 43.f4 �e7+

Black has an extra pawn and there are still many pieces present on the board, so he has excellent winning chances.

44.l;dl .if5 45.l!?gl �f6 46 . .id4 �g6 47 . .ie3 l!?h7 48.l;el �g4 49)l)fl l;a4 5 0 .lL!h2 �g6 51.l;cl l;b4 52.ll)fl �f6 53.lL!g3 l;b2?

This is a mistake. Black could have maintained his advantage with the move 53 . . . �d3+.

54.lL!h5! �g6 55.�xb2 �xh5=

29.lL!d2? ! He is an exchange down, but White is quite willing to con- the position is equal. Black has a

141

Chapter 7

pawn for it and controls the light squares.

56.�£2 �g4 57.�h2 �h5+ 58.�gl �g4 59.�h2 �h5+, Draw.

22 T.L.Petrosian-E.Alekseev Tashkent 2011

l.e4 e5 2.ttlf3 ttlc6 3.i.c4 i.c5 4.c3 ttlf6 5.d3 d6 6. 0 - 0 0 - 0 7.i.b3 h6 8.ttlbd2 a6 9.h3 i.a7 1 0 .gel ges n.ttlfl i.e6 12.i.c2 d5 13.�e2 b5 14.ttl3h2 d4!? 15.ttlg3 �d6 16.a3 a5! 17.i.d2 ged8 18.gecl

18 . . • dxc3!? This i s a typical resource in the

fight for the d4-square. 19.bxc3 b4!? 2 0 .cxb4 axb4

21.i.xb4 ttlxb4 22.axb4 �xb4t 23.ttlf3

142

23 •.. ttld7? ! After 23 . . . �b6 !+, Black could

have squeezed the enemy rook to the al-square, since otherwise, his own rook would have pene­trated to the penultimate rank.

24.gabl �a3 25.tl)f5 i.b6 26.gdl �c3 27.�d2 �xd2 28. gxd2 �f8 29.�b3 ttlc5?!

Black's pieces are active, while White's d3-pawn is vulnerable, so he would remain the defending side after 29 . . . hb3 30J�xb3 l2Jc5 3l.l"lc3 f6t

3 0 .he6 fxe6, Draw.

The opponents agreed to a draw here, although after

31.ttl5h4 gxd3 32.ttlg6+ �g8 33.ge2 gda3 34.ttlfxe5 ttla4t Black's bishop is much stronger than any of Black's knights with rooks present on the board.

4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7.liJ bd2 a6

23 Radjabov - Kramnik Kazan 2011

l.e4 e5 2)2�£3 .!Dc6 3.i.b5 .!Df6 4.d3 i.c5 5.c3 0 - 0 6. 0 - 0 d6 7 . .!Dbd2 a6 8.i.a4 i.a7 9.h3 .!De7 1 0 .�e1 .!Dg6 U • .!Dfl c6 12 • .!Dg3 d5 13.exd5 .!Dxd5 14. i.b3

14 . . . �e8?! About 14 . . . i.e6 ! = see "Step by

Step". 15.i.g5! f6 16.i.e3t Black's single imprecise move

proved to be sufficient for White to seize the initiative for long. His light-squared bishop is tremen­dously powerful.

16 . . • he3 17.f:xe3 .ie6

18.�d2 It seems more energetic for

him to play the standard move 18.d4 ! ?

18 . . . �c7 Black can try here an interest­

ing attempt to create counterplay on the queenside with 18 . . . a5 ! ?

19.�ad1 �adS After 19 . . . c5+!, he would domi­

nate in the centre and that would compensate the vulnerable light squares on the kingside.

2 0 .�(2 �f7 21.�fl

21 . . . �f8?! Black's queen i s misplaced on

this square. The position would be very complicated after the more accurate move 21 . . .�c7oo, but he was planning to organize counterplay by advancing his f6-pawn.

22 . .!Dd2 It was also good for White to

play immediately 22 .d4± 22 . • • <;!;>h8 23 • .!Dde4 .!Dge7?! 23 . . . a5 ! ? 24.�e2 Black would be in trouble too

following 24.'Llc5 i.c8 25.c4 'Llc7 26.'Llce4t White's d3-pawn is threatening to advance, cramping the opponent's pieces.

24 . • . i.g8 25.�f2 (diagram)

25 . . . f5?

143

Chapter 7

After the more accurate line : 25 . . . a5 26.c4 CiJc7 27.�el b6 28. �c3t Black is doomed to remain very passive.

26.lMfl ? I t i s much better for White to

transfer his queen to the queen­side after 26.c4! CiJc7 27.�d2±

26 • • • f4 27.exf4 .!Llxf4 28. �g4 hb3 29.axb3 .!Lleg6?

Following 29 . . . Ei:xd3 30.CiJh5 CiJedSoo, all White's pieces are ac­tive, but it would not be easy for him to find the right way to main­tain his advantage.

3 0 .d4! �g8

3U'U'3? It is more precise for him to

opt for 3l.CiJg5± with excellent at-

144

tacking prospects . 31 • • • .!Lle6? 3l. . .Ei:f8t 32 • .!Llf5 exd4 33.�g3 ! �us

34 • .!Lled6 dxc3 35.bxc3 �d7 36.h4 �f6 37.h5?

White's pieces are much more active than their counterparts and he could have emphasized that with the line: 37.CiJe4 Ei:f8 38.b4±

37 • • • .!Lle7? Black overlooks the equalizing

variation - 37 . . . CiJgf4 38.Ei:xf4 CiJxf4 39.Ei:xf4 Ei:dxd6 40.CiJxd6 Ei:xd6 4l.�f3 Ei:d8= .

38 • .!Llh6! gxh6 39.�e5!+­After this move, he i s beyond

salvation. White regains his piece, while Black's king is helpless.

39 • • • .!Lld5 4 0 .�xf6 .!Llxf6 41. �xf6+ �g7 42 • .!Llf5 �f8 43 •

.!Llxg7 �c5+ 44.'it>hl .!Llxg7 45. �f8+ 1- 0

This was a "blitz" game, but it illustrated perfectly the difficul­ties Black would have to face in this variation, which was consid­ered as harmless for him.

Chapter S l.e4 e5 2 )2:JfJ �c6 3.i.b5 �f6 4. 0 - 0 �xe4

Quick Repertoire

5.�e1 This is White's main alterna­

tive to the most popular and doubtlessly best move 5.d4.

The aggressive attempt 5. tLJxe5? ! llJxe5 6.Ei:el f5 7.d3 a6 8. ia4 �h4t enables Black to seize the initiative rather quickly.

The position is equal following 5.'&e2 llJd6 6.ixc6 dxc6 7.'&xe5+ '&e7 8 .'&a5 '&d8 9.'&c3 (White can try another line here, if he so wishes : 9 .'&e5+ '&e7 10.'&a5) 9 . . . lLJf5 10.Ei:el+ ie6 11 .'&e5 ie7=

5 .. .liJd6 6.tiJxe5 .ie7 (diagram)

hope to seize the initiative later. 7 .. .liJxe5 8J�xe5 0 - 0 9.d4

.if6 1 0 .�e1 �e8 ll.c3 �xe1 12. �xe1 �e8=

7 . .ifl His task in this symmetrical It is more ambitious for White position is to exchange his passive

to choose 7.id3 ! ? llJxe5 8 .Ei:xe5 bishops and mostly his dark-0-0 9.lLJc3 c6 10 .b3 llJe8 ll .ib2 squared bishop, since it is re­dS 12 .'&f3 id6 ! = , but Black can stricted by the opponent's pawns.

145

Chapter S l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 - 0 �xe4

Step by Step

A) 5.�e2 B) 5.gel 5.ltlxe5?! - This temporary

piece-sacrifice is too risky. 5 . . . ltlxe5 6.E:e1 f5 7.d3 a6 8.dxe4 (af­ter 8 .. b4 �h4 9.dxe4 f4+ Black obtains excellent attacking pros­pects) 8 . . . axb5 9.exf5 d6 10.f4 �xf5 11 .fxe5 d5+ He has parried his opponent's hasty attack and has a superior position thanks to his dominance in the centre and the two-bishop advantage.

Black has no problems follow­ing 5.hc6 dxc6 6.E:e1 ltlf6 7.ltlxe5 �e7 8.�e2 �e6 9.d3 ltld7 10.ltlc3 ltlxe5 11.�xe5 0-0= Anand -Kramnik, Mainz 2001 .

A) 5.�e2 cllJd6 6 . .ixc6

146

In response to 6.ltlxe5, Noa -Chigorin, Berlin 1881, it is very good for him to choose 6 . . . ltld4 ! 7.�d3 ltl6xb5 8.c3 c5 9.cxd4 ltlxd4+ Black ends up with an ex­tra pawn.

6 . . . dxc6 7.�xe5+ 7.ltlxe5 �e7 8.E:e1 ltlf5 - see

5.E:e1; 8.d4 0-0 9.f4 f6 10.ltlf3 �f5+ The complex of light squares in White's centre is vulnerable, so Black's position is preferable, be­cause he can easily exploit this due to his powerful light-squared bishop, C.F.Schmid - Zukertort, Berlin 1881.

7 . . . �e7

8.�a5 8.d4? ! �xeS 9 .dxe5 ltlf5+

There arises a typical Berlin end-

game, but contrary to the posi­tions, which we analyze in Part 2 , Black's king is on e8 and this i s in his favour, moreover that he can castle, which facilitates his game considerably, Stepovaia_Dian­chenko - S.Vajda, Bled 2005.

In the variation 8.Wc5 'Llb5 9. We3 Wxe3 10.fxe3 �e7= he has no problems either. White has more pawns in the centre, but Black has a couple of powerful bishops.

After 8.Wf4 �e6, White fails to create a weakness for his oppo­nent on e6 with the line: 9 .'Llg5 0-0-0 10 .l"le1, in view of 10 . . . 'Llf5 ! 11 .'Llxe6 'Lld4 ! 12 .Wg4 'Llxe6 13.d3 h5 14.Wf3 lt>b8 15.�e3 g6= with equal chances, while following 9. d3 0-0-0 10.Wa4, Thelen - Ska­licka, Prague 1927, Black obtains a very good game with the simple reply 10 . . . \t>b8 1l.l"le1 c5 12 .'Llc3 h6 13.�e3 'Llf5? and he has the two-bishop advantage, his king is quite safe and the only thing he must still do is complete his de­velopment.

8 • • • Wd8

9.Wc3

4. 0 - 0 'Llxe4 5. l"lel 'Lld6

9.We5+ We7 10.Wa5 Wd8= 9.l"lel+ �e7 10.We5 (Or 10 .d3

0-0 ll.i.g5 �xg5 12 .Wxg5 Wxg5 13.'Llxg5 'Llf5 14.'Llf3 �e6= The endgame is completely safe for Black, Varga - Pinter, Lillafured 1999 .) 10 . . . 'Llf5 ll.'Llc3 (The haz­ardous attempt 1l.g4?! f6 12 .We2 'Lld6 13.h3 lt>f7+ leads only to compromising of White's king shelter, Slizhevsky - Tchernyi, St. Petersburg 2005.) 11 . . . 0-0 12 . 'Lle4 �e6 13.h3 Wd7 14.b3 f6 15. Wf4 l"lfe8 16.�b2 a5= Black has the two-bishop advantage and no problems at all .

9 . . .tl:lf5 l O .l:�el+ Following 10.d4 �e7 ll.�f4

0-0= White's pawn is not better placed on d4 than on d3, Stevie -Brkic, Stari Mikanovci 2010.

10 . • • .ie6

ll.�b3 1l.We5 �e7 12 .g4? (This move

is too risky and weakens White's castling position. He had to com­ply with the absence of any ad­vantage and to play a reasonable move like 12 .'Llc3, or 12 .d3, keep­ing the position within balance.)

147

Chapter S

12 . . . tt:lh4 13.tt:lxh4 �xh4 14.�xg7 �xf2 + ! 15.'it>xf2 �h4+ 16.me2 (White loses too after 16. mfl 0-0-0 17.�c3 �xg4-+) 16 . . . o-o-o 17.d4 �xg4+ 18.md3 �f5+ 19.md2 l"lxd4+ 20 .mc3 l"lc4+ o-1 Panarin - Aleksandrov, Saratov 2006.

After ll .d3 �e7 12 .tt:lbd2 0-0 13.tt:le4, Gashimov - Almasi, Reg­gio Emilia 2008, by playing 13 . . . l"le8 14.�f4 �d7 15.tt:le5 �d4= Black can exchange queens ad­vantageously.

ll . . . �c8 12.tt:lg5 c!Dd4 13. �a4 �d7

14.c3 The position is equal after 14.

tt:lxe6 tt:lxe6 15.d3 �c5 16.�e3 0-0 17.tt:ld2 �e7=

14 . • . .ie7 15.c!Dxe6 Following 15.d3 hg5 16.hg5

tt:lf5= neither side can organize an attack, so there will follow ex­changes of rooks on the open e­file and a most likely draw.

15 • . . c!Dxe6 16.d4 c5 17. �xd7+ mxd7 18.d5 c!Df8= The far-advanced d5-pawn may be­come a cause of worries for White,

148

Jovanovic - Neubauer, Chur 2010.

B) s.ge1 This is the second most popu­

lar move for him, besides 5.d4. 5 . . . c!Dd6

6.c!Dxe5 About 6.�f1 �e7 7.tt:le5 tt:lxe5 -

see 6.tt:lxe5; 6.�d3 �e7 7.tt:lxe5 -see 6.tt:lxe5.

After 6.hc6 dxc6 7.l"lxe5+ (7. d4? ! e4 8.tt:lc3 f5 9.tt:le5, Bird -Steinitz, London 1866, Black can play 9 . . . g6 10.f3 �g7 11.fxe4 0-0+ he completes his development and after opening of the position, he may rely on his bishop-pair be­coming powerful force) 7 . . . �e7 8. �e1 (White fails to keep his oppo­nent's king in the centre with 8. �e2 f6 9.l"le3, since Black's sim­plest reaction against this would be 9 . . . tt:lf5 10.l"le4 tt:ld6= and White must either repeat the po­sition, or Black will castle leading in development.) 8 .. .f6 9.l"le3 mf7 10.tt:lc3 l"le8= His king is com­pletely safe.

6.�a4 �e7 7.tt:lc3 (7.d4 exd4 -

Chapter 9 ; 7.lt:Jxe5 tt:Jxe5 - see 6.tt:Jxe5) 7 . . . 0-0 8.d4 lt:Jxd4 9 . tt:Jxe5 (9.tt:Jxd4 exd4 10.lt:Jd5 lt:Jf5 11 .lt:Jxe7+ tt:Jxe7 1Vl>ll'xd4 lt:Jf5 13. �f4 d5+ Black completes his de­velopment preserving the extra pawn. White must still work hard to prove that his bishop-pair is sufficient compensation for it.) 9 . . . tt:Je6 10.lt:Jd5 Ele8= His knights seem very powerful in the centre, but Black has no weaknesses and White's attack is not likely to achieve anything more than a per­petual check.

6 . . • .ie7

His basic moves in the dia­grammed position are Bl) 7 • .id3 and B2) 7 • .ifl.

White has also tried in prac­tice :

7.lt:Jc3? ! lt:Jxb5 8.lt:Jxb5 tt:Jxe5 9 . Elxe5 d6 10.Ele1 0-0+ Black has a slight but stable edge thanks to his bishop-pair, Belkhodja - Ste­fansson, Mallorca 2004;

7.�h5? ! - This is a loss of time for White. 7 . . . g6 8.�h6 lt:Jf5 9 . �f4 tt:Jxe5 10 .�xe5 0-0 ll .lt:Jc3 c6 12 . .id3 d5 13 . .ixf5 .if6 14.�f4

4. 0 - 0 ltJxe4 5. Elel ltJ d6

.ixf5+ Black has already complet­ed his development and has ob­tained the two-bishop advantage in the process, Jabot - Yarovik, corr. 1999 ;

7.lt:Jxc6 dxc6 8 . .if1 (White has an edge neither after 8 . .ia4 0-0 9 .d4 .if6 10.c3 Ele8 ll.Elxe8 �xe8=, nor following 8 . .id3 0-0 9.lt:Jc3 Ele8 10 .b3 .if6 ll.Elxe8+ �xe8= Marholev - Rizouk, San Sebastian 2008 and in both cases Black's position remains slightly preferable, but White can quickly neutralize that.) 8 . . . lt:Jf5 9.d3 0-0 10.a4 .ie6 1l.c3 a5 12.lt:Jd2 Ele8= Both opponents have a solid posi­tion, but there are no active pros­pects in sight for anyone of them, Rogers - Aronian, Caleta 2005;

7 . .ixc6 dxc6 8.d4 (after 8.�e2 lt:Jf5 9 .c3 0-0 10 .d4, John -Schlechter, Hamburg 1910, Black can create an X-ray juxtaposition against the enemy queen with the move 10 . . . Ele8+) 8 . . . 0-0=

White has tried numerous moves in this situation, but only Black can think about something more than equality. He completes faster his development and ousts easily the enemy knight from the

149

Chapter S

e5-square. Later, after the trade of the rooks, White will have no active prospects, while Black's bishop-pair may turn the evalua­tion of the endgame in favour of Black.

7 .. b4 - White's bishop is not so active on this square. 7 . . . tt'lxe5 8J'!xe5 0-0 9 .d4 (It is not prefer­able for him to opt for 9.tt'lc3 c6, because following 10.d4 tt'lc4 11. 1"le1 d5+ White lags in develop­ment and his light-squared bish­op will not enter the actions any time soon, Moen - Rausis, Gaus­dal 1996, but even in the variation 10.�b3 �f6 11 .d4 tt'le8 12 .�f4 d5= he has the same problems with his bishop.) 9 . . . tt'lc4 (This is a fighting decision. It all ended in a quick sharing of the point after 9 . . . �f6 10.1"le1 tt'lf5 ll.c3 d5 12 .tt'ld2 �d7, draw, Bronstein - Smyslov, Moscow 1971.) 10.1"le1 d5 ll.tt'ld2 tt'lb6 12 .�b3 �d6 13.�h5 1"le8 14. tt'lf3 1"lxe1 + 15.tt'lxe1 c6= There is still plenty of fight left, but the po­sition is objectively equal, Ye Jiang­chuan - lvanchuk, Shenyang 2000.

Bl) 7.i.d3

150

This is an ambitious move. White is eyeing directly the ene­my h7-pawn, hoping after the de­velopment of his bishop on b2 to organize an attack. Black controls the centre however, so White will fail to realize his main idea.

7 .. .lbxe5 s.:gxe5 0 - 0 9.tt'lc3 9 .c3 b6 10 .�c2 �b7 ll.d4 �f6

12 .1"le1 1"le8 13.�f4 1"lxe1+ 14.�xe1 �f8+ Black leads in development and this enables him to occupy the only open file.

9.�h5 g6 10.�f3 �f6 11 .1"le2 �g7 12.tt'lc3 1"le8= The position is completely symmetrical and Black's pieces are placed quite well.

9 .�f3 �f6 10.1"le3 (10.1"le2 1"le8 11 .tt'lc3 1"lxe2 12 .he2 g6= He com­pletes his development without any problems, Thoma - Henock, Email 2009.) 10 . . . �d4 11.1"le2 �f6 12 .�xf6 hf6 13.tt'lc3 c6 14.b3 1"le8 15.1"lxe8+ tt'lxe8 16.�a3 d5= The position is again totally symmet­rical , Black's forces are well de­ployed and his knight will be eas­ily activated via the e6-square, Evans - Heineman, Email 2006.

9 .. . c6

1 0 .b3 10.\Wh5 - White loses time.

10 . . . g6 11 .\Wf3 (ll .i"lfe2? ! �f6 12 .b3 he5 13.\WxeS, Miton - Sadvaka­sov, Moscow 2004, by playing 13 . . . l2Jf5 !+ Black succeeds in neu­tralizing his opponent's activity) ll . . .f5 ! i - His plan includes l2Jf7, d5, �f6, occupying additional space, Steinitz - Zukertort, USA 1886 (game 24) . We have to mention that he has an extra tem­po in comparison to the variation with 10.\Wf3 f5 !? , which we will analyze later.

10.1Wf3 l2Je8 (It deserves atten­tion for Black to try the sharper line : 10 .. .f5 ! ? 1U'l:e1 g6 12 .�f1 l2Jf7 13.d4 d5oo with a very complicat­ed position. He has weakened the important e5-square, but has oc­cupied space on the kingside, Berg Krasenkow, Warsaw 2008.) 1l .b3 (White fails to check­mate his opponent with 11 . hh7+?, because after ll . . . ®xh7 12J:l:h5+ ®g8 13.\Wh3 f5 14J'l:h8+ ®f7+ Black manages to parry his opponent's threats and preserves the extra piece.) 1l. .. d5 - see 10 .b3.

10 .1We2 �f6 1l.l'l:e3

4. 0 - 0 lLlxe4 5. 2"1el lLld6

ll . . . �g5 ! ?N (This move has not been tested in practice yet, but it enables Black to fight for the advantage. After 11 . . .�d4 12 . �xh7+ ®xh7 13.\Wd3+ lt>g8 14. l'l:h3 l'l:e8 15.\Wh7+ lt>f8 16.'\Wh8+ ®e7 17.\Wh4+ lt>f8 18.\Wh8+ White ended the game by a perpetual check, T.Hansen - Hammer, Kal­lithea 2008.) 12 .hh7+ (Follow­ing 12 .l'l:e5 f5i he has some prob­lems with his development and Black can quickly exploit this oc­cupying space according to the already familiar scheme - g6, l2Jf7, d5 etc.) 12 . . . ®xh7 13.'\Wd3+ lt>g8 14.\Wxd6 �xe3 15.dxe3 l'l:e8 16.e4 l'l:e6 17.\Wd3 \We7 18 .�e3 d6+ White has some compensation for the exchange - a pawn and the possibility to exert pressure against the d6-square, but he must still work hard to maintain equality.

After 10.\We1 �f6 1l.l'l:e2 l'l:e8= Black completes quickly his de­velopment, Bruzon Batista - Mat­amoros Franco, Ayamonte 2 006.

10 .l'l:e1, Campora - Korneev, Coria del Rio 2001, 10 . . . l2Je8 ! 11 . i"lfe2 (ll .b3 d5 12.\Wf3 �d6=) 11 . . . �f6 12 .b3 ( in the variation 12 .l2Je4 �d4 13.c3 �b6= Black's bishop is transferred to another active po­sition) 12 . . . l2Jc7 13.�a3 l'l:e8 14.\Wf3 d5= His slight space advantage does not promise him a substan­tial edge, because the pawn-struc­ture is symmetrical and he lags in development a bit.

l O . • .tbeS

151

Chapter S

ll . .ib2 11 .1Wf3 d5 12 .�b2 �d6! - see

1l .�b2 . 11 .1Wh5 g6 12 .1Wh6 ! (12.1Wf3 d5

13.�b2, Tarrasch - Pillsbury, Vi­enna 1898, 13 . . . 'Llg7 14J�\ae1 �f6 15J'l:5e2 'Lle6+ Black has neutral­ized completely his opponent's active rooks and obtains better prospects thanks to his domi­nance in the centre.) 12 . . . d6 13. Ei:h5 'Llf6 14.Ei:h4 d5. White has created a powerful battery on the kingside, but this does not pro­vide him with anything real, for example: 15 .�b2 Ei:e8 16.1Wf4 h5 ! (Black emphasizes the awkward placement of his opponent's rook.) 17.'Lle2 c5 18.'Llg3 'Llg4 19. Ei:xg4! (preparing to end the game with a perpetual check) 19 . . . hg4 20 .'\Wh6 d4 21 .hg6 fxg6 22 . '\Wxg6+ �h8 23.'\Wh6=

ll . . . d5 (diagram)

12.'\Wf3 12 .1Wh5 'Llf6 13.'\Wh4 �e6 14.

Ei:g5 (White cannot achieve much by increasing the tension with 14.Ei:ae1 g6, since after 15.Ei:xe6 fxe6 16.Ei:xe6 Ei:f7 17.'Lle2 'Llh5

152

18.'\Wh3 �f6 19.hf6 'Llxf6+ Black parries the activity of his oppo­nent's dark-squared bishop and ends up with a great advantage due to his extra exchange, Behling - Baroin, Email 2006. It is prefer­able for White to play neither 15. '\Wf4 �d6+, nor 15.'\Wd4 c5 16.'\Wf4 �d6 17.'Llb5 �b8 18.'\Wg5 'Llg4+ and in both cases Black neutraliz­es his opponent's threats and pre­serves the extra material.) 14 . . . g6 15.'Lle2 (after 15.'\Wh6 d4 16.'Lle2 'Llg4 17.Ei:xg4 hg4 18.hd4 �f6+ he wins the exchange for a pawn and parries White's most danger­ous piece, Holmsten - Sepp, Fin­land 2 005) 15 . . . 'Llg4 ! (in the game Kryakvin Kobalia, Novo­kuznetsk 2008, there followed 15 . . . 'Lle4? and after 16 .'\Wh6 �f6 17. Ei:h5 Ei:e8 18.1Wxh7+ �f8 19.'\Wh6+ �e7 20 .hf6+ 'Llxf6 21 .Ei:h4 �d7 22 .'\Wg5± White ended up with more active pieces and an extra pawn) 16.f4 (The aggressive at­tempt 16.'\Wxg4 hg4 17.Ei:xg4 Ei:e8-+ would not bring him any success, since having only two mi­nor pieces for the queen is evi­dently insufficient) 16 . . . '\Wb6+ 17.

'Lld4 (17 . .id4 c5 18J"lxg6+ fxg6 19.Wxe7 cxd4-+ White's attack has reached its dead end and he is a rook down.) 17 . . . .if6 18.c3 h6 19.f5 hg5 20.Wxg4 .id7 2l ..ic2 .ixd2 22 .'&g3 c5 23.'Llf3 .ie3+ 24.Wh1 Wf6-+ Black neutralizes his opponent's threats and re­mains with an extra exchange.

12 .l"1e1 f5 ! ? - It would not be easy for White to exploit the weakening of the e5-square, while Black's knight will be perfectly placed on the e4-outpost. 13.'&f3 'Lld6 14 . .ia3. The trade of the dark-squared bishops will be in favour of White (14.'Lle2? ! 'Lle4 15.We3 .ic5 16 . .id4 .id6+ Loc - Ti­its, Email 2006). 14 . . . 'Lle4 15 . .ixe7 Wxe7 16.'&e3 Wf6 17.'Lle2. Here, Black has a very pleasant choice between 17 . . . l"1e8 18 .'&d4 Wxd4 19.'Llxd4 .id7 20.f3 'Lld6 2l.f4 g6 22 .'Llf3 c5= occupying additional space on the queenside and 17 . . . .id7 18.f3 'Lld6 19.Wd4 f4= with seizing extra space on the king­side. In both variations, his space advantage will compensate the weak square in the centre.

12 . . . .id6!

4. 0-0 'Llxe4 5. E1el 'Lld6

This is an aggressive move aimed at seizing the initiative.

13,ge2 White's position becomes very

difficult after the overly aggres­sive try 13J'1h5 g6 14.'Llxd5? (it is preferable for him to choose 14. 'Lle2 'Llg7+ with a lead for Black in development) 14 . . . cxd5 15J"lxh7 (It seems to be more tenacious for White to continue with 15.l"1e1 'Llg7 16.l"1xd5 l"1e8 17.l"1xe8+ 'Llxe8 18 . .ic4 .ie6 19.l"1b5 hc4 and now, he loses after 20 .bxc4 b6-+, but even following 20 .'&c3 ! Black must find a series of precise moves in order to obtain a great advantage: 20 . . . Wf6! 21.'&xf6 'Llxf6 22 .bxc4 'Lle4 23.d3 'Llc5 24.d4 l"1e8 ! 25.g3 b6! 26.dxc5 l"1e1+ 27. Wg2 hc5 - He has given back his extra piece and is temporarily a pawn down, but the terrible place­ment of White's rook and his compromised queenside pawn­structure provide Black with a considerable advantage : 28.l"1b3 l"1e2 29 .l"1d3 l"1xf2+ 30.Wh1 Wf8+) 15 . . . d4 16.hd4 hh2+ 17.l"1xh2 Wxd4 18J"le1 'Llf6 19.c3 Wd6 20 . .ic4 .id7-+ He has coped almost effortlessly with his opponents badly prepared attack and should manage to realize his extra piece without too much of an effort, And.Kovalev - Dautov, Minsk 1987.

13J"lee1 - This move seems less natural, because White's rook on a1 remains isolated from the actions. 13 . . . Wg5 14.h3 (after 14. 'Lle2 Wxd2 ! ?+ his compensation

153

Chapter S

for the pawn is obviously insuffi- not organize a quick offensive any cient, because Black's pawn- more. structure is very solid and his king is completely safe, Lazarov - Pet­kov, Borovetz 2008) 14 . . . tt:lc7 15. Ei:ad1, Gabrielsen - Hammer, Norway 2008, he can play here 15 . . . tt:le6 16.tt:le2 tt:lcS+ and Black obtains the two-bishop advantage and slightly more space.

13 . . . �h4 14.h3 .!bf6 It is also good for him to follow

with the standard transfer of his knight to the e6-square with the move 14 . . . tt:lc7+

15 • .if5, Rozentalis - Khalif­man, Aarhus 1997 (15.Ei:ae1?? .ig4-+ ; 15.tt:ld1? d4 16.Ei:e1 .ie6 17 . .if1, Somkin - Sorokin, Miass 2006, 17 . . . Ei:ae8 !-+ Black creates decisive threats with considerably superior forces.) 15 . . . .ixf5 16. �xf5 g6 17.�f3 .!bh5+ His pieces are better coordinated and he controls the centre.

B2) 7 . .ifl White does not close the way

forward of his d2-pawn, but can-

154

7 . . . .!bxe5 Black has a good alternative

here - 7 . . . tt:lf5 ! ? 8.Ei:xe5 0 - 0

9.d4 The position is completely

equal following 9 .Ei:e1 tt:lf5 10 .d4 d5 11..if4 .id6 12 . .b:d6 tt:lxd6= Maslak - Babujian, Moscow 2006.

9.tt:lc3 ! ? tt:le8 10.tt:ld5 (After 10. d4 .if6 ll.Ei:e1 dS, White has tried in practice 12 . .if4 c6 13 . .ie5, Aver­bakh - Yudovich, Moscow 1944, but Black can counter this with 13 . . . .b:e5 14.dxe5 f6= and his

pieces enter the actions effortless­ly and he has excellent chances of seizing the initiative thanks to his dominance in the centre; 12 . l2le2 �f5 13.l2lg3 �g6 14.c3 c6 15. l2lh5 �e7 16.�f4 l2lf6 17.l2lxf6+ �f6 18.'&d2 '&d7= The position is completely symmetrical and the major pieces will be exchanged on the only open file, draw, Guliev -Alexandrov, 2006; after 12 .�d3 g6 13.l2le2 l2lg7 14.c3 Ei:e8 15.�h6 �g5 16.�g5 '&xg5 17.'&b3 c6 18. l2lg3 h5 19.Ei:xe8+ l2lxe8 20 .Ei:e1 l2ld6= White failed to create any problems for his opponent in the game Naiditsch - Bertholee, Wijk aan Zee 1999.) 10 . . . �d6 ll .Ei:e1 c6 12 .l2le3 �c7

13.c4 (13.l2lf5 d5 14. l2le7+ �h8 15.l2lxc8 Ei:xc8 16.d4 l2lf6 17.'&f3 '&d6 18.g3 l2le4= It will not be easy for White to prove that his bishop-pair provides him with an advantage, since Black's knight in the centre is very powerful and White's bishops cannot be acti­vated so easily due to the sym­metrical pawn-structure, Weiss­kohl - Brandhorst, Email 2005; after 16.d3 l2lf6= Black's knight will not go to the e4-square in-

4. 0 - 0 l2lxe4 5. E\el l2ld6

deed, but White will hardly acti­vate his light-squared bishop, which belongs, no doubt, to the d3-square, Vallejo Pons - Hans­en, Novi Sad 2009.) 13 . . . l2lf6 14. b3, Gashimov - Anand, Nanjing 2010 and now, it deserves atten­tion for Black to continue with 14 . . . l2le4 ! ? with the idea after the natural reply 15.�b2, to force a draw with 15 . . . �h2 + 16.�xh2 '&h4+ 17.�g1 '&xf2 + 18.�h2 '&h4=

9 . . . i.f6 l O .l'�el After 10 .�d3 �e5 ll.dxe5

l2le8+ White has some compensa­tion for the exchange, because of his better development, but he can hardly achieve anything real out of this.

10 . • J3e8 After 10 . . . l2lf5 ll.d5oo, there

arises a very unclear position, since White has a long-term plus - his space advantage, but Black has a slightly superior develop­ment, Anand - McShane, London 2010.

ll.c3 ll.d5? ! b6 !? 12 .l2lc3 �est

155

Chapter 8

He should not be afraid of 1U '1xe8+ lt:lxe8 12 .c3 (following 12 .d5 d6, Black should react in the same fashion after 13 .ii.d3, Pil­gaard - Vajda, Bucharest 2006, 13 . . . c6 14.c4 cxd5 15.cxd5 Wfb6 16.Wfc2 g6=, as well as following 13 .lt:ld2 , Bakre - Roktim, Vi­sakhapatnam 2004, 13 . . . c6 14. lt:lf3 lt:lc7 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.c3 lt:le6= and in both cases, his pieces enter the actions quite comfortably.) 12 . . . d5 13 .ii.d3 (13.lt:ld2 ii.g5 ! = ; 13. ii.f4 c6 14.ii.d3 g6 15.lt:ld2 lt:lg7 16. lt:lf3 ii.f5= Black exchanges here the light-squared bishops and then transfers his dark-squared bishop to the d6-square, Amona­tov - Bruzon Batista, Havana 2008) 13 . . . ii.g5 ! 14.lt:ld2 lt:ld6 15. Wfc2 g6= Kovacevic - Efimenko, Sarajevo 2010.

In the variation ll.ii.f4 Ei:xe1 12 .Wfxe1 lt:le8 13.c3 d5 14.ii.d3 g6 (He has a very good alternative now - 14 . . . ii.e6 15.lt:ld2 and he solves all his problems with 15 . . . ii.g5 ! 16.hg5 Wfxg5 17.lt:lf3 Wff6= followed by the transfer of his knight to d6.) 15.lt:ld2 lt:lg7 16.Wfe2 c6 17.lt:lb3 b6 18.Ei:e1 ii.f5= and it is high time the opponents agreed to a draw, Nepomniachtchi - Ria­zantsev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2011 .

ll . . J�xe1 12.tbel (diagram)

12 . . .'�e8 This is the most direct road to

equality for Black. After 12 . . . b6 13.ii.f4 Wfe7 14.

lt:la3 ii.b7 15.Wfxe7 he7 16.hd6 hd6 17.4Jb5 <.!lf8 18.4Jxd6 cxd6

156

19.f3;t White managed to create problems for his opponent by comprom1smg his pawn-struc­ture, J.Geller - Safin, Nizhnij Tagil 2005.

It deserves attention for Black to opt here for 12 . . . Wfe7 !? Kurn­osov - Granda Zuniga, Pamplona 2010 (game 25).

13.Wfxe8+ 13.Wfd1 lt:lf5 14.ii.f4 (It would be

worse for White to play riskily 14.g4 lt:lh4 15.g5 ii.d8 16.Wfg4 lt:lg6 17.ii.d2 d5+, because his light squares on the kingside are so weak that Black maintains a stable advantage, Drtina - Bre­stak, Nova Bana 1983.) 14 . . . d6 15.lt:ld2, Sargissian - Khamraku­lov, Zafra 2007 (15.ii.d3 Wfc6= fol­lowed by ii.e6) and after 15 . . . Wfc6 16.i.d3 ii.e6= he completes his

development equalizing com­pletely.

13 . . .lilxe8 (diagram)

14 . .id3 14.ii.f4 d5 (It is also good for

him to try 14 . . . g5 ! ? - he frees the g7-square for his knight and re­stricts the mobility of his enemy

dark-squared bishop in the pro­cess. 15 . .ig3 d6 and here after 16. tt:la3 a6=, as well as in the varia­tion 16.tt:ld2 tt:lg7 17J''1el .ie6 18.f3 1"\e8 19 . .ib5 c6 20 . .id3 d5= Black completes his development and the draw seems to be the immi­nent result due to the completely symmetrical pawn-structure.) 15. tt:ld2 .ie6 16.1"lel (16.tt:lb3 ! ? 1"\d8 17. tt:lc5 .ic8= followed by tt:le8-d6, or even g7-g5) 16 . . . 1"\d8 17 . .id3 tt:ld6= The pawn-structure is symmetri-

4. 0 - 0 tt:lxe4 5. 1"\el tt:l d6

cal and Black's pieces are well de­ployed, Schnider - Neubauer, Austria 2010.

14 . . . d5 15 . .if4 .ie7!

White's dark-squared bishop is very active and Black should ex­change it.

16.tbd2 .id6 17.gel .ie6 18.hd6 �xd6 and in the game Vysochin - Efimenko, Olginka 2011 , the opponents agreed to a draw and quite justifiably so.

157

Chapter S l.e4 e5 2 )i:Jf3 c!Llc6 3 • .ib5 c!Llf6 4. 0- 0 c!Llxe4

Complete Games

24 Steinitz Zukertort USA 1886

l.e4 e5 2.c!ilf3 c!l:lc6 3 • .ib5 c!ilf6 4. 0 - 0 c!l:lxe4 5J3el c!ild6 6.c!l:lxe5 .ie7 7 • .id3 0 - 0 8.V*Ih5 f5 9.c!ilc3 c!l:lxe5 1 0 .13xe5 g6 11.'\1;!ff3 c6 12.b3 c!l:lf7

13.13e2?! It is more accurate for White

to opt for 13J:'i:el d5t, but even then Black has more space and a superior development.

13 • • • d5?! The transfer of the knight to

the e6-square would enable Black to obtain excellent attacking pros­pects : 13 . . . c!l:lg5 14.'\1;!1'e3 lt:Je6 15.Elel f4 16.'\1;!ff3 d5+

14 • .ib2 It seemed obligatory for White

to continue here with 14.'\1;!1'e3 id6 15.f4+, with chances for a success­ful defence.

158

14 • • • .if6? Black's attack would have been

decisive after 14 . . . lt:Jg5 15.'\1;!ff4 lt:Je6 16.'\1;!1'g3 f4 17.'\1;!1'h3 lt:Jd4-+ White loses the exchange and must weaken the shelter of his king; otherwise, he would lose his queen.

15.13ael He could have equalized com­

pletely with the move 15.'\Wf4= 15 • • • '\1;!1'd6 16.13e8 .id7 17.

l3xa8 l3xa8 18.c!l:ldl c!l:lg5 19.'\1;!fe2 l3e8 2 0 .'\1;!ffl

2 0 . . . i.xb2 Black had here a very unpleas­

ant variation for his opponent -20 . . . E1xel 21 .\Wxel d4+ - he would occupy space and isolate the ene­my knight from the actions.

21.l':1xe8+ he8 22A)xb2, Draw.

This decision seems to be a bit premature for Black, because af­ter 22 • • • 1We7t he would dominate over the only open file and White's attempt to fight for it with the move 23.\We2 would lose the a2-pawn for him following 23 . . . \Wxe2 24 . .be2 lt:Je4 25.d4 lt:Jc3+

25 Kurnosov-GrandaZuniga Pamplona 2010

l.e4 e5 2)iJf3 c!lJc6 3 . .ib5 c!lJf6 4. 0 - 0 c!LJxe4 5.l3e1 c!lJd6 6.c!lJxe5 c!lJxe5 7.l3xe5+ .ie7 8. i.fl 0 - 0 9.d4 i.f6 1 0 .l3e1 l3e8 ll.c3 l3xe1 12.\Wxe1 �e7!? 13. �xe7 i.xe7 14 . .if4

(diagram) 14 . . . g5 ! Black frees the g7 -square for

his knight! 15 . .ig3 c!lJe8! 16.c!lJd2 d6

17.l3e1 'i!if8 18 . .id3 h6 19.f4

4. 0 - 0 ltJxe4 5. E1el ltJ d6

c!lJg7 2 0 .fxg5 hxg5= Black has covered reliably the

weak fS-square with his knight and has no problems at all .

21 • .if2 .ie6 22.c4 d5 23.c5 a5

It is also interesting for Black to play 23 . . . g4�, occupying space on the kingside and restricting the enemy knight. He can rely on seizing the initiative later.

24 • .ig3 c6 25.a4

25 . • • .id8?! It is more precise for him to

opt here for 25 . . . .if5 ! and he is not worse, to say the least, because White's d4-pawn may turn out to be a liability.

26 • .id6+ We8?! It is more accurate for Black to

continue with 26 . . . .ie7 27 . .ie5 f6 28.E1fl Wf7= and he would have no problems whatsoever.

159

Chapter S

27.ttJf3 f6 28.h4 g4 Black's position seems rather

unpleasant too after 28 . . . gxh4 29.ltlxh4 '\t>dn

29.h5! gxf3

3 0 .i.g6+?! White could have exploited his

space advantage much better with the line: 30.h6 '\t>t7 31.hxg7 i.d7 32 .g4 !± - making use of the fact that his g4-pawn is untouchable due to the variation 32 . . . hg4 33.l"\e8 ! '\t>xg7 34.i.e7 winning the

160

exchange and forcing the trade of the light-squared bishops on the f5-square.

30 • • • '1t>d7 31.h6 i.c7 32. i.xc7 ttJf5! 33.i.xf5 i.xf5 34.i.d6 ges! 35.gfl ge3 36.gxf3 ge2�

Black's pieces are so active that he manages to draw easily.

37.�hl gxb2 38.gel gbl 39.i.g3 gxel+ 4 0 .i.xel �e6 41.i.xa5 �f7= 42.i.d8 i.c2 43. �g2 i.xa4 44. �g3 �g6 45. �f4 i.dl, Draw.

Chapter 9 l.e4 e5 2 )!)£3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 - 0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6

Quick Repertoire

In this chapter we will deal with White's last attempt to avoid entering the system "Berlin Wall" (6 .. bc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lt:lf5).

6.dxe5 Black should not be afraid of

the sharp variation 6.ia4 ! ? exd4 7.c3 ie7! 8.cxd4 b5 !+ - he must not be greedy, capturing a second pawn and should complete quick­ly his development obtaining a better position.

It seems rather unpleasant for Black if White chooses the aggres­sive line: 6.ig5 f6 ! 7.dxe5 lt:lxb5 8.exf6 gxf6 9.Ei:el+ lt>t7 10 .�d5+ 'it>g7, but Black parries all the threats with a cold-blooded de­fence and White must find a fan­tastic resource here if he wishes to

hold the balance - ll.Ei:e8 ! ! = 6 . . .lt:lxb5 7.a4

7 . • )L!bd4 This is his most accurate reply. In the line : 7 . . . d6 ! ? 8.e6 ! �

about a hundred games have been played and the first of them was even during the 19th century -D.Janowski - Showalter, New York 1898, but even nowadays, Black enters this position as well, Barrientos - Bruzon Batista, To­luca 2011 .

8.lt:lxd4 .!Llxd4 9.�xd4 d5 (diagram)

1 0 .�d3 White's queen cannot be at­

tacked with tempi on this square and prevents the activation of his

161

Chapter 9

opponent's light-squared bishop. In addition, it can be redeployed to the g3-square, impeding Black's development, while White's dark­squared bishop will have the free route i.cl-e3-c5.

There were numerous games ending up in a quick draw follow-

162

ing 10.exd6 ! ? \Wxd6 11 .1Mfe4+ \We6 12 .1Mfd4 \We6 13.\We4+ \We6=

10 . . . c6 ll.a5 i.e6 ! =

Black plans to transfer his king to the queenside and to begin ac­tive actions in the centre and on the kingside.

Chapter 9 l.e4 e5 2 .tilf3 lLlc6 3 • .ib5 ltJf6 4. 0 - 0 ltJxe4 5.d4 ltJd6

Step by Step

A) 6 • .ig5 B) 6.dxe5 He has also tried in practice: after 6.hc6 dxc6 7.tt:lxe5 (7.

dxeS - see Chapters 10-12 ; 7 . .ig5 f6 - see 6 . .ig5) 7 . . . .ie7, White has tested numerous moves here, but he has failed to create any problems for Black, since he has a harmonious development and his king will be evacuated away from the centre on the next move, while his two bishops will enable him to seize the initiative in the nearest future.

6 . .ia4 exd4 7.c3 (following 7 . .ig5 .ie7 8.:1'ie1 0-0+ Black's king runs away from the centre, while after 7.:1'ie1 .ie7 8.c3, Fier - Matsuura, Sao Paulo 2011 , he

can play 8 . . . 0-0 9.cxd4 bS 10 . .ic2 .ib7+ completing his development and ending up with a solid extra pawn) 7 . . . .ie7! (Black should not be greedy; otherwise, he may fail to complete his development alto­gether.) 8.cxd4 bS ! (The some­what indifferent move 8 . . . 0-0, provides White after 9 .tt:lc3 tt:lfS lO.dS tt:lb8 ll.d6! tt:lxd6 12 . .ic2� with a huge lead in development, which compensates fully his cou­ple of sacrificed pawns, Ganguly - Ismagambetov, New Delhi 2006.) 9.i.b3 (9 .d5 bxa4 10.dxc6 0-0 11 .�xa4 dxc6+ The position has been opened and Black's bish­op-pair provides him with a sta­ble advantage.) 9 . . . .ib7 10 .:1'ie1 0-0 11 .tt:lc3 tt:laS 12 . .ic2 fS 13.�e2, Sulskis - Alexandrov, Dubai 2005. We believe that here, his most precise way of obtaining an edge is the line: 13 . . . :1'ie8 !N 14. tt:lxbS .if6 15.�f1 hf3 16.:1'ixe8+ tt:lxe8 17.gxf3 c6 18.tt:la3 hd4 19 . .ixf5 g6 20 . .ih3 dS+ Black has given back his extra pawn, but has destroyed his opponent's cas­tling position and occupied the centre.

163

Chapter 9

A) 6 • .ig5 This seems to be a quite sensi­

ble move, since White wishes to keep the enemy king in the centre.

6 . . . f6!

That is Black's most precise re­sponse, forcing White to follow the narrow path of "only moves" for a while . . .

7.dxe5 It is worse for him to play su­

per-aggressively - 7.lLlxe5?! fxg5 (White relied on the greedy line for Black: 7 . . . lLlxe5? 8.dxe5 lLlxb5? 9 .exf6 gxf6 10 .'&h5+ me7 11 . .b:f6 + ! and White ends up with an extra queen) 8 .. bc6 (8.'&h5+ ? ! g6 9 .lLlxg6 hxg6 10.'&xh8 lLlxb5-+ and Black has three minor pieces for a rook and parries easily White's activity) 8 . . . dxc6 9.'&h5+ g6 10.lLlxg6 hxg6 ll.'&xh8 mt7 12 . lLld2 '&f6 13.'&xf6+ cJdxf6+ Black's minor pieces are superior to his opponent's rook and pawns most­ly because White can hardly cre­ate a passed pawn, moreover that his rooks are likely to remain pas­sive, Mladenov - Cheparinov, Plovdiv 2004.

164

7 . .ixc6 dxc6 (after 7 . . . fxg5? 8 . .id5± Black's defence is very difficult. His king is bare and he will hardly complete his develop­ment.) 8 .dxe5 (8.lLlxe5 fxg5 - see 7.lLlxe5) 8 . . . fxg5 9.exd6 .b:d6 10. :1'\e1+ cZJt7 11.'&e2 . White has some compensation for the pawn. He has kept his opponent's king in the centre, but he must play very precisely; otherwise, Black will complete his development (after 11.l2'lc3 g4 12 .lLle5+ .b:e5 13.:1'\xeS '&xd1+ 14.:1'lxd1 mf6+ the queens disappear from the board and Black will follow on his next move with .if5 and then his rooks will enter the actions ; in reply to 11 . '&d3 ! ? Black equalizes easily with ll . . . g4 ! ? 12 .'&c4+ cJdg6 13.lLld4 :1'le8 14.lLlc3 h6 15.lLle6 .b:e6 16.:1'\xe6+ :1'lxe6 17.'&xe6+ '&f6 18.'&xg4+ cZJh7= His bishop is more power­ful than the enemy knight, but White's pawn-structure is prefer­able. ) . 11 . . .:1'lf8 12.'&c4+ cZJg6 13. lLlc3 h6 14.:1'lad1 mh7 15.lLle4 .if5 16.lLld4! '&d7 17.lLlc5 .b:c5 18 . Wxc5, Bokros - Postny, Germany 2005, after 18 . . . :1'\ad8+ Black com­pletes his development and is ready to give back to his opponent his extra pawn in order to com­plete his development. His bishop should turn out to be much better than the enemy knight in a fight on both sides of the board.

7 . . . lLlxb5 8.exf6 8.i.h4? .ie7! 9 .a4 (9.c4 fxe5+)

9 . . . fxe5 10.axb5 .b:h4 11 .bxc6 dxc6 12 .'&e2 .if6+ In this open po­sition, Black's bishops are strong-

er than White's knights, moreover that he can hardly regain all his sacrificed material.

8 . . • gxf6

9.l'�el+ We must have a look at the

other possibilities for White : 9.�e2+? �f7 10.�xb5 fxg5 11.

tt:Jxg5+ �g7- + ; 9.�d5? fxg5 10. �e1 + !J.e7 ll.tt'lxg5 tt:Jd6 12 .tt'lxh7 tt:Jf7-+ he will fail to create any threats against Black's king;

9.!J.f4, Naiditsch - Georgiev, Kusadasi 2006, he preserves his extra piece with 9 . . . tt:Jd6 ! 10.�e1+ �f7 11.tt'lh4 �g8 12 .iWh5+ �g7 13. hd6 hd6 14.tt'lf5+ �h8+ and the moment Black develops his queenside, White's position will become hopeless;

9 .!J.h4 - This is his best alter­native. 9 . . . tt'ld6 (It is bad for Black to choose the seemingly attractive line : 9 . . . !J.e7 10.�e1 0-0? 1l .�d5+ �h8 12.�xb5 d5 13.tt'lc3± White regains his piece and is clearly ahead in development.) 10.�e1+ !J.e7 11 .hf6 (ll.tt'lc3? ! 0-0 12 .tt'ld5 �f7 13.tt:Jxe7+ tt:Jxe7+ followed by the unavoidable move tt:Jf5 and

4. 0 - 0 tt:Jxe4 5.d4 tt:J d6

subsequent simplifications ; 11 . �d5 tt:Jf7 12 .hf6 0-0 13 .�xe7 tt:Jxe7 14.�e4 d5 15.�h4 tt'lg6 16. hd8 tt'lxh4 17.hh4 !J.d7 18.tt'lc3 c6+ White is only an exchange down, but Black has succeeded in consolidating completely his po­sition.) 11 . . .0-0 12 .�d5+ tt:Jf7 13 . �xe7 tt:Jxe7 14.�e4 d5 15.iWh4 tt'lg6 16.hd8 tt:Jxh4 17.hh4 c6+

9 . . . �t7

l O .iWd5+ Or 10 .!J.h4? d5 ll .c4 dxc4 12 .

tt'le5+ �g7 13.iWh5 tt'lxe5 14.�xe5, I .Malakhov - Lysyj, Warsaw (rap­id) 2010 and here, after the devel­oping move 14 . . . !J.d7!-+ White will be deprived of all illusions.

10 .!J.f4 d5 ! ll.tt'lh4 (ll.a4 tt:Jd6 12 .�xd5+ �g7 13.tt'lc3 �d7! 14. tt'ld4 �g4 15.g3 tt'lxd4 16.�xd4 tt:Jf5+ Black has ensured the safety of his king, which is most likely to go to the h8-square and then, he can begin the realization of his ex­tra bishop.) ll . . . �d7 12.c4 tt:Jbd4 13.iWh5+ �g8 14.cxd5 �f7+ White can regain his piece and enter an endgame, but he will be helpless against the threat tt'lc2.

165

Chapter 9

1 0 • • • 'it>g7

ll.l��e8 ! ! This fantastic resource helps

him to hold the position . 1l .il.h4? ! tt:ld6 12.tt:lc3 h5 ! (in

the variation 12 .. J�gS 13.'�h5 �hS 14.tt:ld5 il.g7 15.!"1ad1gg White's pieces are very active) 13.!"1ad1 l"\h6+ He has some compensation for the pawn, but his attack is running out of steam after Black's rook has joined into the defence.

White would not achieve much with the modest move 11.1d2 tt:ld6 12.1Mfh5 tt:le7 13 .tt:lc3 �eS (13 . . . !"1gS!? 14.�h6+ �f7 15.�xh7+ l"1g7 16.�hS tt:ldf5 17.tt:ld5 tt:lxd5 1S.�h5+ �gS 19.!"1eS �xeS 20 . �xeS tt:Jde7+ Black has ensured the complete safety of his king and has enough time to complete his development. After this, his pieces will prove to be stronger than White's queen.) 14.il.h6+ �gS 15.�c5 tt:ldf5 16.hfS d6 17. �xc7 �xfS+ Only his queen is around Black's king and he will eas­ily send it back trying to exchange it. Gradually, he should manage to consolidate his position.

166

11.1f4 tt:ld6 12 .tt:lh4 !"1gS !

13.hd6? ! hd6 14.tt:lf5+ �hS 15.tt:lh6 l"\g7 16.tt:lf7+ l"\xf7 17.�xf7 tt:le5 18.�h5 �gS 19.tt:lc3 b6+ Black has parried his opponent's threats and begins a counter of­fensive.

13.tt:lc3 f5 ! (13 . . . �hS ! ? Socko ­Lautier, Leon 2001, see game 26). Now, Black neutralizes his opponent's onslaught and pre­serves the material advantage, which can be confirmed by the following variations :

14.!"1e3 �hS 15.!"1g3 l"1xg3 16. hxg3 �e7!+ ;

14.hd6 �xh4 ! 15.hc7 �f6 16.tt:lb5 (after 16.!"1ad1 �hS 17.1f4 d6+, or 16.1f4 d6 17.tt:lb5 il.d7 1S. il.d2 tt:le5+ Black completes his de­velopment and ends up with an extra piece) 16 . . . a6 17.tt:ld6 hd6 1S.hd6 �hS 19.il.f4 b5+ His bishop will go to b7 and he will seize the initiative.

14.g3 ! ? - White parries the threats on the g-file. 14 . . . �hS 15. hd6 hd6 16.tt:lxf5 il.fS 17.�f7 d6! 1S.l"1eS �g5 19.tt:ld5 l"\bS 20 . tt:lf6 hf5 21 .!"1xbS tt:JxbS 22 .tt:lxgS tt:ld7! 23 .l"\e1 �d2 !+ White's rook fails to join into the actions.

ll . . . fbe8 12.hf6+ �xf6 13.�g5+ �t7 14.�h5+ �e7

14 . . . Wg7? ! 15 .�xe8 .ia3 16. �h5 hb2 17.�g5+ Wf7 18.lLJa3 .ixa1 19 .lLJxb5t His queen col­laborates perfectly with his knights.

15.�g5+

15 . . . i>d6!? Black i s playing for a win. It

was simpler for him to have come back 15 . . . Wf7= and then, White would have to give a perpetual check.

16.tiJa3 tLJxa3 17.gdl+ �d4 18.�xd4, Somkin - Lysyj, Satka (rapid) 2011 , now after the cen­tralizing move 18 . . . �e4!oo the position remains completely un­clear. There is no perpetual check in sight, but Black will have great problems to ensure the safety of his king.

B) 6.dxe5 This variation seems to be

completely harmless for Black; nevertheless, it has some venom.

4. 0-0 lLJxe4 5.d4 lLJ d6

6 . . . �xb5 7.a4 About 7 . .ig5 f6 - see variation

A. White cannot create problems

for his opponent with 7.c4 d6 8 .e6 (after 8.cxb5 lLJxe5 9.l'!e1 .ie7 10. lLJxe5 dxe5 1l.�xd8+ hd8 12 . l'!xe5+ .ie6+ Black's two-bishop advantage provides him with su­perior prospects, since he will complete effortlessly his develop­ment, R.Bogdanovic - Trifunovic, Sarajevo 1958.) 8 . . . he6 ! ? 9.cxb5 lLJe5 10.lLJd4 .id7!? 11 .f4 (It is not preferable for White to opt for 11 .lLJc3 c5 12 .bxc6 bxc6+, since his knight is perfectly placed on d4, but this is insufficient, because Black has covered the d5-square.) ll . . . lLJg6 ! ? 12 .�f3 .ie7 13 .\Wxb7 0-0 14.lLJc3 .if6+ He has given back his extra pawn, but has acti­vated his pieces instead, which if we have in mind the weakened position of White's king, makes the evaluation of the position in favour of Black, Shabalov - Bolo­gan, Edmonton 2005.

7 . . .c!tJbd4 8.�xd4 �xd4 9.fbd4 d5

167

Chapter 9

White's most principled moves here are Bl) 1 0 .exd6 and B2) 1 0 .'\1�fd3!?

Following 10 .l'l:d1 .if5 ll.c3 c6 12 .lt:Jd2 .ie7 13.lt:Jf1 0-0 14.lt:Jg3 .ig6+! he has a space advantage, but Black's light-squared bishop is very active and he can activate his dark-squared bishop by play­ing t7-f6, Rogulj - Van den Doel, Germany 1998.

10.Wf4 Wd7! White's queen is very active and Black should try to trade it, or send it back. ll.c4? ! d4 12 .h3 c5+ Sagit - Berend, Plovdiv 2 010.

10 .lt:Jc3 c6

11 .Wd3 g6 - see 10.Wd3 ! ? ll .lt:Je2 .ie7 12 .lt:Jg3 (Opening

of the centre is in favour of Black after 12.c4 dxc4 13.Wxc4, Sjugirov

168

- A.Loginov, Tula 2007, 13 . . . 0-0+; following 12 .c3 0-0 13 . .ie3 We?+! he obtains a very good posi­tion, Eliskases - Redolfi, Mar del Plata 1960.) 12 . . . 0-0 13.l'l:e1 .ie6 14.b3 c5 15.Wd3 Wd7+ Black has succeeded in advancing his cen­tre, therefore his prospects are preferable, Filipovic - Brglez, Pula 1990.

l l . .ie3 .if5 12 .f4 Wb6 13.Wxb6 axb6 14 . .ixb6 hc2 15.f5 (after 15.l'l:fc1 .ib3 16.a5 .ie7= White's pieces are beautifully placed, but he can hardly improve his posi­tion, Gebuhr - Ollek, DD!l: 1985) g6 16.e6 fxe6 17.fxe6 .if5+ His pawn on e6 is much rather a lia­bility than an asset, Apicella -Dautov, Noyon 2005.

11 .a5 .if5 12.f4 Wd7 13.l'l:f2 (13. Wf2? ! c5 14.l'l:d1 d4 15.l'l:d2 .ie7 16. b4 cxb4 17.lt:Je2 0-0 18.lt:Jxd4 .ic5+ Black has activated both his bishops by opening the centre, Loc - Krivonosovs, Email 2000) 13 . . . h5 14 . .ie3, Nunn - Salov, Haifa 1989, after 14 . . . .ie7 15.lt:Ja4 0-0= he maintains easily the bal­ance and White's slight space ad­vantage is compensated by Black's bishop-pair.

Bl) 1 0 .exd6 Opening of the central files is

usually in favour of the better de­veloped side - in this particular case this is White. Black has how­ever the two-bishop advantage and if he mobilizes his pieces, he will seize the initiative.

1 0 . . . Wxd6

ll.�e3+ 1l.�e4+ �e6 12.�f3 (There

were many games that ended here with triple repetition of the posi­tion after 12.�d4 �e6 13.�e4+ etc . ; following 12 .�xe6 �e6+ Norqvist - Aleksandrov, Stock­holm 1995, or 12 J�e1 �xe4 13. �xe4+ i.e6+ Black will have a very pleasant endgame with an excel­lent development and two power­ful bishops) 12 . . . i.d6 13.i.f4 (13. li:Jc3 0-0 14.li:Jb5 �g6 15.li:Jxd6 cxd6= White can hardly exploit the vulnerability of his opponent's isolated d6-pawn, Malisauskas -Naiditsch, Liepaja 2007.) 13 . . . 0-0 14.�d6 (after 14.li:Jd2 �f4 15.�xf4 �c6 16.c3 i.e6i Black's bishop is superior to his oppo­nent's knight, but White should manage to hold the draw without too much of a problem, Kojovic -Gonda, Senta 2009) 14 . . . �xd6 15. li:Jc3 c6 16.�fe1 �g6i Black has completed his development and has a more active position, Ham­douchi - Tkachiev, Belfort 2010.

1l.�c3 - White prevents the development of his opponent's kingside. 1l . . .i.e6 12.'2la3 a6 13.b3

4. 0 - 0 li:Jxe4 5.d4 li:Jd6

0-0-0+ Black has ensured per­fectly the safety of his king on the queenside, occupied the f-file and preserved the two-bishop advan­tage, Del Rio Angelis - Korneev, Dos Hermanas 2002.

1l.�c4 - White keeps the ene­my bishop on c8 for another move. ll . . . c6 12 .'2lc3 i.e6 13.�e1 i.e7 14.li:Je4 �e5 15.�e2 �d8 16. i.d2 0-0 17.i.c3 �f5 18.li:Jg3 �g5 19.li:Jh5 g6 20 .'2lg3 �f4= His bish­op is ideally placed on c3, but Black has nothing to complain about (in the game Decoster -Levin, Belgium 2008 he played the seemingly "active" move 2 0 . . . �h4?? 2l .�e5 and had to resign) .

1U '1e1+ i.e6 12.�e4 (12 .�h4 i.e7 13.i.g5 �b4= with favourable simplifications for Black) 12 . . . �b4 13.�e2 i.d6 14.c3 �h4 15.g3 �e7= White has failed to reap any dividends out of his lead in devel­opment, while Black's king can be evacuated to either side of the board, Nevostrujev - Markov, Vladivostok 1995.

ll . . . i.e7 Or 11. . .�e6?! 12 .�g3;t and Black

will have certain difficulties with the development of his pieces.

12.li:Jc3 12 .�e1 i.e6 13.li:Jc3 c6 - see

13.'2lc3. 12 . . . c6

(diagram) 13.l3el 13.li:Je4 �e6 14.f4 f5 15.'2lf2

�xe3 16.�e3 i.e6= White takes the dark squares under control, while Black is dominant on the

169

Chapter 9

light squares, Romanov - Alek­sandrov, Dresden 2007.

13 . • . .ie6 14.�e4 14.b3 0-0 1S . .ia3 Wfc7 16 . .ixe7

Wfxe7 17.t'Lle4 .ifS 18.Wff4 .ixe4 19. l'!xe4 WcS=

14 . . .'�e5 15 . .id2 After 1S.l'LlgS Wxe3 16 . .ixe3

.ixgS 17 . .ixgS 0-0= it is time to agree to a draw, Ib.Saric - Alek­sandrov, Saint Vincent 200S.

1S.f4 Wfs 16.Wff2 0-0 17.l'Llg3 .ih4 18.l'LlxfS .ixf2 + 19.c;t>xf2 .ixfS= The dark squares in White's camp have been compromised, but Black can hardly obtain any­thing substantial out of that, since there are just a few pieces left on the board.

15 • • • 0 - 0 16 . .ic3 �f5

170

17.�g3 17 . .id4 aS 18.Wfc3 .ib4 19.Wfg3

Wfg6 20.Wfxg6 hxg6 2l .c3 .ie7 22 . .icS l'!fe8 23 . .ixe7 l'!xe7= There has arisen an endgame, which looks very drawish.

17.l'!ad1 Wfg6 18.l'!d3 .idS! 19. Wfd4 (The position seems like a dead draw in the variation 19.�d2 .ih4 20.Wff4 l'!ae8 2l .Wixh4 l'!xe4 22 .l'!xe4 Wxe4 23.Wxe4 .ixe4 24. l'!d7 cS 2S.aS a6=) 19 . . .f6 20J�g3 Wff7 2l ..ib4 .ixb4 22 .Wxb4 l'!ae8 23.l'!ge3 Wg6 24.g3 b6 2S.b3 hS= and White must already play ac­curately in order to hold the bal­ance.

17 . . • �g6 18.�c7 .id5

19.�xe7 19.f3 l'!ae8 20.Wfxb7 .icS+ 21 .

c;t>h1 (2l .t'LlxcS?? .ixf3-+) 21 . . . .ixe4 22 .fxe4 l'!xe4 23.Ei:xe4 Wfxe4f± Black's pieces have been centralized and he has a very good position, since White's king is not sufficiently protected.

19 . . • 13ae8! 2 0 .�g5 The opponents agreed to a

draw here, in view of the unavoid­able transition into an absolutely

drawish endgame, Shirov - Kir. Georgiev, Sarajevo 2002.

B2) 1 0 .�d3!?

10 . . . c6 It would be worse for Black to

play prematurely 10 . . . cS? ! 11 .'Llc3 ie6 12 .�g3t, since White will have powerful initiative on the dark squares and Black will have problems with the development of his pieces.

ll.a5 Following ll.'Lld2 �gS ! ? 12 .

�e2 (12 .'Llf3 �g6 13.�c3 aS=) 12 . . . �g6 13.'Llb3 .ig4 14.f3 .ifS 1SJ'U2, Recuero Guerra - Illescas Cordoba, Melilla 2008, he can choose 1S . . . .ie7 16 . .ie3 0-0= and he completes his development ob­taining a good game.

ll .'Llc3 g6 12 . .ie3 (12.�g3 .ig7 13 . .igS �c7 14 . .if6 .b:f6 1S.exf6 �xg3 16.fxg3 .ie6+ with a slight but stable advantage for him thanks to his superior pawn­structure; 12 .b3 .ifS 13.�e2 �aS 14 . .ib2 .ih6+ Black has activated both his bishops and can castle on either side of the board; in the

4. 0 - 0 'Llxe4 5.d4 'Ll d6

variation 12 .'Lle2 .ig7 13.'Lld4 0-0 14 . .if4, Berbatov - Petkov, Plov­div 2010, he equalizes with 14 . . . l"le8 1S.l"lfe1 .id7=) 12 . . . .ifS 13 .�d2 (13.�d4 .ig7 14.�b4 b6+ and he seizes the initiative) 13 . . . �aS 14 . .igS .ig7 1S.l"lfe1 0-0+ Black has completed his development and must prepare the advance of his central pawns, Guseinov Balogh, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010.

In response to ll.b3, Guseinov - Fernando, Turin 2006, it would be interesting for him to continue with 11. .. �d7 !? 12 . .ia3 (after 12.f4 �fS, White obtains an advantage neither in the variation 13.�c3 ie6 14 . .ia3 .b:a3 1S.'Llxa3 0-0 16.aS l"lfc8= , or even 16 . . . f6= , nor following 13 . .ia3 �xd3 14.cxd3 .ifS 1S.d4 aS 16 . .b:f8 l"lxf8= and in both cases Black's bishop is very powerful) 12 . . . .b:a3 13.'Llxa3 0-0 14.l"lfe1 �g4 1S.h3 �gS (1S . . . �b4 16.l"le3 .ie6=) 16.�e3 �g6 17.l"lad1 l"le8 18.c4 .ie6 19.<i>h2 f6=

ll . . . i.e6!N This natural move has not

been tested in practice yet. We be­lieve it is stronger than ll . . . g6, as

171

Chapter 9

it was played in the game Sjugirov - Naiditsch, Moscow 2010 (game 27) : 12 .�e3 �e6 13.l2Jd2 �g7 14. �c5t White has succeeded in ex­erting powerful pressure on the dark squares and keeps the ene­my king stranded in the centre.

12.lt:Jd2 We must have a look at the al­

ternatives for him: 12 .f4 g6 13.�e3 c5 14.1"ld1 �e7+

Black completes his development without any problems, controls important squares in the centre and has the two-bishop advan­tage;

after 12 .�e3 �d7+ he has taken the f5-square under control and succeeds in livening up his central pawns, because the pawn-ad­vance c6-c5 is unavoidable;

The inclusion of the moves 12 .a6 b6= would not bring any­thing to White moreover that Black's rook on a8 will not be forced to protect his a7-pawn any more;

after 12.lt:Jc3 �d7 13.lL1e2 (it is not preferable for White to opt for 13 .l2Ja4 c5�; or 13 .�e3 �f5 14.�d4 �xc2 15.Elfc1 �f5 16.l2Ja4 �e7+ He has built an impressive set-up on the dark squares, but his compen­sation for the pawn is insufficient, since White cannot increase his pressure in any way.) 13 . . . �f5 14. �c3 c5 15.a6 b6 16.l2Jg3 �e6 17. �f3 h6 18 .Ele1 0-0-0� Black's king is a bit bare, but White can hardly exploit that. Instead, Black will begin soon active actions on the kingside;

172

in response to 12 .�g3, it would be very strong for him to follow with 12 . . . �f5 ! 13.c3 �d7 14.�e3 (after 14.1"le1 �e6 15.l2Jd2 �g6 16. �e3 �e7= , or 16.�xg6 hxg6= and Black should not mind any more his lag in development and that means that his position is quite acceptable) 14 . . . �e7 !? 15 .�xg7 0-o-ogg His threats on the g-file seems to be sufficient compensa­tion for the pawn, since with con­nection with the pressure against the g2-square, there will appear unavoidably numerous weak­nesses on the light squares in White's camp.

12 . . . �d7 (12 . . . �e7? ! 13 .l2Jb3;!; and he will manage to transfer his bishop to the c5-square) 13.�g3 (after 13.l2Jb3 c5�, or 13.l2Jf3 c5� Black obtains a quite acceptable position) 13 . . . .if5 14.c3 .ie7!? 15.�xg7 0 - 0 - o !gg The g-file and his powerful bishops provide him with excellent compensation for the pawn. The idea to sacrifice the rook on g2 will enable Black to draw by a perpetual check in prac­tically all the lines.

Chapter 9 l.e4 e5 2.liJf3 lLlc6 3.i.b5 lLlf6 4. 0 - 0 lLlxe4 5.d4 lLld6

Complete Games

26 B.Socko Leon 2001

Lautier

l.e4 e5 2)L\f3 c!Llc6 3.J.b5 .!Zlf6 4. 0 - 0 c!Llxe4 5.d4 c!Lld6 6 . .ig5 f6 7.dxe5 c!Llxb5 8.exf6 gxf6 9J'�el+ 'i!?t7 1 0 .�d5+ 'i!?g7 u . .if4 .!Zld6 t2 . .!Zlh4 ggs t3 . .!Zlc3

13 . . . 'i!?h8!? I t i s simpler for Black to play

here 13 .. .f5 - see "Step by Step". 14.�h5! White loses after 14.:1'\ad1

lt:Je5-+ 14 . . . lt:Jd4? Black could have maintained

his advantage with a queen-sacri-fice - 14 . . . b6 15.lt:Jd5 ia6 16.b3 lt:Jd4! (16 . . . tt:Je8 17.:1'\e3�) 17.lt:Jxf6 �xf6 18.ie5 ig7 19.hf6 hf6+

15.lt:Jd5! b6 Here, it would be already in­

sufficient for him to opt for 15 . . .

lt:Jxc2 16.lt:Jxf6 �xf6 17.ie5 ig7 18.hf6 hf6 19.lt:Jf5 tt:Jxa1 20. lt:Jxd6 cxd6 21 .�f7 ie5 22 .:1'\xeS dxe5 23 .'1Wf6+ Elg7 24.�f8+ Elg8= and Black would have many piec­es for the queen indeed, but he would not manage to avoid the perpetual check.

16)L\xf6? The position remains very

complicated after 16.:1'\ad1 lt:Je6 17.lt:Jxf6 �xf6 18 .ie5 �xeS (but not 18 . . . ig7?? 19.hf6 hf6 20 . Elxd6! cxd6 21 .�f3 hh4 22 . �xa8+-) 19.�xe5+ ig7 20 .�e3oo Black has a material advantage, but his king is vulnerable and he must take care about neutralizing the immediate threat 21 .lt:Jg6+ hxg6 22 .�h3+.

16 . . . �xf6 17 • .ie5 J.g7 18. .ixf6

173

Chapter 9

White loses after 18.hd4 \Wf7-+ , as well as following 18. l"le3 tt:le2 + ! 19.\Wxe2 \Wg5-+

18 • • • .ixf6 19J';e3 .ib7 19 . . . tt:Jxc2? 20 .l"lh3 l"lg7 21 .\Wf3

hh4 22 .\Wxa8+-2 0 .l"lg3 In the variations 20 .l"lh3 hh4

21 .\Wxh4 l"lxg2+ 22 .@f1 l"lg7 23. \Wxd4 �g2+ 24.@e2 �xh3 25.l"lg1 lt:Je8+, or 20.l"lae1 hh4 21 .\WeS+ l"lg7 22 .\Wxd4 l"lag8 23.E\g3 ! lt:Jf5 24.\Wa4 �c6 25.\Wxa7 tt:Jxg3 26. hxg3 �d8+ White's queen will re­main isolated in the nearest fu­ture, so he would hardly manage to equalize completely.

2 0 • • • l3ae8! 21.'k!ihl It would be bad for him to opt

for 21 .tt:lg6+? l"lxg6 22 .l"lxg6 tt:le2+ 23.\Wxe2 (or 23.@fl tt:lf4-+ and Black obtains a fourth minor piece for the queen) 23 . . . l"lxe2 24. l"lxf6 l"lxc2-+ - His minor pieces are supported by his active rook and Black will realize easily his advantage.

21 • • .l!)e4 He has an interesting alterna­

tive here - 21 . . .tt:le6+, or even the more concrete approach 21 . . . l"le4 ! ? 2 2 .f4 (but not 22 .tt:lg6+

174

l"lxg6 23.l"lxg6 l"lh4-+) 22 . . . l"lxf4 23.\Wh6 tt:le6 24.tt:lg6+ l"lxg6 25. l"lxg6 lt:Jf5 26.\Wxf4 tt:Jxf4 27.l"lxf6 tt:Jxg2+ - White's rooks are almost helpless against the coordinated actions of Black's minor pieces.

22)!)g6+?! Following 22 .l"lxg8 + ! ? l"lxg8

23.f3 tt:lf2+ 24.@g1 tt:lh3+ 25.@h1 tt:le6 ! and in the variation 26.gxh3 hh4+, as well as after 26.lt:Jg6+ l"lxg6 27.\Wxh3 �xb2+ White will be doomed to a long and labori­ous defence.

22 • • • l3xg6! 23.l3xg6 lilxf2+ 24.@gl lile2+ 25.@fl

He loses even faster after 25.@xf2 �d4+ 26.@f1 lt:Jf4-+ with the rather surprising threat 27 . . . �a6+.

25 • • • lilf4 26.l3xf6 White would not save the

game with 26.\WfS �a6+ ! (but not 26 . . . �d4?? 27.\Wf7! �a6+ 28.c4±) 27.@xf2 (27.@g1 �d4 28.\Wxd7 tt:le2+ 29.@f1 tt:lg3+ 30.@g1 lt:Jh3#) 27 . . . �d4+ 28.@g3 tt:Jxg6-+ and all Black's pieces participate in the crushing attack.

26 • • • ltlxh5?! It was more accurate for him

to play 26 . . . hg2+ ! 27.@xf2 tt:Jxh5

28.ElfS l2Jg7 29.Elf7 .ic6 30.Elg1 l2Je6-+ with an overwhelming material advantage for Black.

27.�xf2 @g7 28.c4 l2Jf6 29. �dl .ic6 3 0 .�e2 c!De4 31.@gl a5 32.�fl �e6 33.�f4 h5 34. �e3 @g6 35.h4 c!Df6! 36.�xe6 dxe6 37.�d4 .id7! 38.c5 b5 39.�d3 e5 4 0 .c6

4 0 . . . .ie6!-+ White would have more chanc­

es of a successful defence after the imprecise line for Black: 40 . . . hc6 4U'k3 .idS 42.Elxc7 .ixa2 43J''kS .ic4 44.ElxeS a4+

41.�g3+ c!Dg4 42.�c3 .b:a2 43.�a3 .ic4 44.b3 .ie2 (but not 44 . . . .id3? 4S.b4?) 45.�xa5 c!Df6! 46.�a8 (White still loses after 46.@f2 .id3 47.@e3 .ie4! 48.ElxbS hc6 49.ElcS .ixg2-+) 46 . . . @£7 4 7 .�c8 ( 4 7. @f2 .id1 48.Elb8 .ixb3 49.ElxbS .idS SO.Elb7 l2Je8-+) 47 •.. c!Dd5 48.@f2 .ig4 49.�h8 @e7 5 0 .�h6 b4 (Black could have finished the game here even faster with SO . . . e4 Sl.@e1 e3 S2 .g3 l2Jb4-+) 51.@el e4 52.g3 c!De3 53.�h8 @d6 54.@d2 c!Dd5 55. �h6+ @c5 56.�g6 @d4 57.@el @c3 58.�g5 c!De3 59.@f2 c!Df5 6 0 .�g8 e3+ 61.@el c!Dd4 0-1

4. 0 - 0 lLlxe4 5.d4 lLld6

(We have used in our analysis the comments of GM Lautier.) .

27 Sjugirov - Naiditsch Moscow 2010

l.e4 e5 2 .c!Df3 c!Dc6 3 . .ib5 c!Df6 4. 0 - 0 c!Dxe4 5.d4 c!Dd6 6. dxe5 c!Dxb5 7.a4 c!Dbd4 8.c!Dxd4 c!Dxd4 9.WI'xd4 d5 1 0 .WI'd3 c6 ll.a5 g6? !

It is more precise for Black to choose here 1l . . . .ie6 !N - see "Step by Step".

12 . .ie3 ! .ie6 13.c!Dd2 .ig7 14 • .ic5!t

14 • • • .ixe5 15.Elfel? ! It is stronger for White to

play 1S.WI'a3 ! .if6 16.Elfe1 .ie7 17. l2Jb3t with more than sufficient compensation for the pawn. Black lags in development, his king is stranded in the centre and his dark squares are vulnerable.

15 . • . b6 The position is quite interest­

ing following 1S . . . hb2 ! ? 16.Ela4 .if6 17.WI'g3 .ie7 18 .WI'eS .if6 19. Wl'f4 .ie7 20 . .id4 Elg8oo White has excellent compensation, but al­ready for two pawns and not for just one.

17S

Chapter 9

16.axb6 axb6 17.�xa8 �xa8 18.hb6 hb2 19.i.c5 �a5! 2 0 .�b3 �xc5 21.�b8+ @e7 22.�b7+ @d6?

The board is full of pieces and as usual Black's king should not remain in the centre.

He should have tried to trans­fer it to the h7-square with 22 . . . @f8 23.Wfxb2 @g8 24.tt'lf3 h6oo

23.�xb2 �aS 24.�e5+ @d7 25.ll:le4 Wfb4

26.tt'lg5 It would not be so easy for

White to break his opponent's fortress after 26.c3 ! ? Wfxe4 27. E\xe4 dxe4 28 .h4±. His task would be difficult indeed, but White would maintain an edge anyway.

26 . . . l'!a2 27.ll:lxe6 fxe6 28. �xe6+ @c7 29.�e5+ @b7 3 0 . h3 l'!xc2 31.�e8 @b6 32.�b8+ @c5 33.�a7+ @c4 34.l'!al @b3 35.l'!a6 �el+ 36.@h2 �e5+ 37. g3 @b2 38.l'!b6+ @cl

(diagram) 39.�a3+? Black's monarch is paying a

visit to its counterpart, but there is no checkmate in sight, moreo­ver that White must play precisely

176

in order not to end up losing the game.

After 39.E\b3gg, he had nothing to be afraid of.

39 . • . @d2 40 .l'!b3 �d4? The simple move 40 . . . d4-+

deprives White's rook of the im­portant e3-square and brings Black's queen and pawn into the defence.

41.l'!e3 c5? He could have parried all the

enemy threats with the accurate reply 41 . . .Wfc4+

42.�a5+ @cl 43.�a3+ �b2 44.�e2 �b4 45.�al+ �bl 46. �a2

46 . • . �c3? Black overlooks the draw,

which he could have made with the line: 46 . . . E\b2 47.Wfal+ E\bl=

47.�xd5 �b2 48.�hl+ 1- 0

Chapter t O l.e4 e5 2.tt�f3 l2Jc6 3.i.b5 l2Jf6 4 . 0 - 0 l2Jxe4 5.d4 l2Jd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 l2Jf5

Quick Repertoire

The diagrammed position characterizes the system named the "Berlin Wall". We deal here with White's attempts to avoid the Berlin endgame, which arises after 8.�xd8+ . They are com­pletely harmless for Black and have nothing to do with it, so we have decided to include this chap­ter in Part 1. All this means that the high level players do not need to read this chapter at all. We in­clude it here, just because we would like the readers to have a thorough understanding of the entire variation.

8.�e2 c!Lld4! The exchange of the knights is

no doubt in his favour too, because he will complete his development

much easier and his light-squared bishop has an immediate access to its most active - f5-square.

9.c!Llxd4 �xd4 1 0 .h3 It is worse for White to choose

here lO .�dl �g4 ll.�xd4 .be2 12.lt:lc3 �h5 13 .�e3 �c5 ! i and Black will evacuate unavoidably his king to the queenside after which he will be threatening to penetrate with his rook to the pe­nultimate rank.

1 0 • • • .if5 ll.c!Llc3 .ib4 12.l'Ml �h4+

Black completes effortlessly his development and the basic de­fect of White's position is that he can hardly activate his dark­squared bishop.

177

Chapter 1 0 l.e4 e5 2.l2:Jf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0- 0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5

Step by Step

8.�e2 It would be stupid for White to

trade queens in any other way, besides 8.1Wxd8+ , because after the moves 8.�g5 1Wxd1 9.Elxd1 �e6+, or 8.b3 '\Wxdl+, or 8.c4 '\Wxdl+, or 8.tt:lc3 '\Wxdl+ there aris­es the same Berlin endgame, but with two important differences in comparison to what we analyze in the following chapters:

1) Black's king is better placed on e8 than on d8. In fact, he loses a tempo in the main line in order to go back with his king to the e8-square;

2) Black has not lost his cas­tling rights and because of that he can coordinate his rooks much easier.

Both these details are in his fa­vour, therefore the evaluation of

178

this endgame is changed immedi­ately in favour of Black.

It is not preferable for White to opt for 8.tt:lbd2 �e7 9 .1We2 tt:ld4 10.tt:lxd4 1Wxd4 ll.tt:lf3 1Wg4 12 .�e3 0-0+ Black has completed his de­velopment and his light-squared bishop is very powerful, Cetkovic - Dautov, Buehl 1992.

s . . )i:ld4 9.ti:lxd4 It is not preferable for White

to choose 9.1Wd1 tt:lxf3+ 10.1Wxf3, Llaneza Vega - Oms Pallisse, Ay­amonte 2007, since Black can play 10 . . . '\WdS 11.1Wg3 �f5+ and he completes his development.

9 • • • 1Wxd4 1 0 .h3 Following 10.�h1 �f5 11.tt:lc3

�b4+ White has much more seri­ous tasks to accomplish than ad­vancing his kingside pawns, Sho­walter - Pillsbury, Brooklyn 1896.

He will enter a very unpleas­ant endgame for him after 10.tt:ld2 �f5 11.tt:lb3 1We4 12 .1Wxe4 he4 13.c3 0-0-0+ Vedder - Aleksan­drov, Vejen 1993 (game 28), as well as 10.tt:lc3 �g4 11 .1We3 1Wxe3 12 .he3 0-0-0+ Das - Sengupta, Paleohora 2009. Black has com­pleted his development, occupied the c-file and his subsequent plans include c6-c5, b7-b6 and

4. 0 - 0 li'Jxe4 5.d4 li'J d6 6. hc6 de 7.de li'Jj5

the transfer of his king to the g6-square. The possible trade of the rooks is also in his favour.

10 J'l:d1 �g4 1U l:xd4 �xe2 12. li'Jc3 �h5 13.�g5 (In answer to 13. �e3, Nisipeanu - Dumitrache, Bucharest 1994, it would be very strong for Black to follow with 13 . . . �c5 ! 14.8:d3 he3 15.8:xe3 0-0-0t - his rook is threatening to penetrate to d2, after which White will have difficulties with the protection of his pawns on the queenside.) 13 . . . h6 14.�h4 �c5 15.8:d2 (15.8:c4 �b6 16.8:e1, Lochte - Mitkov, Lisbon 2000, 16 . . . g5 17.�g3 0-0-0"i" Black isolates the enemy bishop from the actions and occupies the only open file.) 15 . . . g5 16.li'Je4 �e7 17.�g3 8:d8 18. 8:e1 8:xd2 19.li'Jxd2 'it>d7+ His piec­es and in particular Black's king are much more active than their counterparts, Janosevic - Sme­jkal, Vrsac 1977.

1 0 • . • .if5 11.ltlc3 11.8:d1?! 'We4 12.'Wxe4 he4+ Eo­

lian - APetrosian, K.irovakan 1978. ll . . • .ib4

He obtains a quite acceptable game in the variation 12 .g4 �e6 13.8:d1 'Wc4 14.'Wxc4 hc4 15.8:d4 b5? and if Black manages to trade a couple of rooks and to bring his other rook into the actions, then the arising endgame with bishops of opposite colours will be defi­nitely in his favour, Wurschner -Tauber, Email 2009.

In the variation 12 .li'Jb5 'Wb6 13.c3 �c5 14.b4 cxb5 15.bxc5 'Wc6+ the difference in the power of the bishops becomes quite obvious. White's bishop is restricted by his pawns, while Black's bishop has comfortable diagonals, Reinaldo Castineira - Narciso Dublan, Tor­revieja 1997.

12 . • . 'ti'h4 13.�e3 In reply to 13.'We3, Garakov ­

M.Sorokin, Sukhum 2006 (game 29), he should complete his de­velopment by playing 13 . . . 0-0 14.8:d4 'We7+

13 . . . i.xc3 14.bxc3 0 - 0 15. gd4

It would be more precise for White to continue with 15.'Wf3 'We4 16.'Wxe4 he4t Black's bish­op is more active, while White's queenside pawns are vulnerable. Still, the presence of bishops of opposite colours on the board is an important drawing factor, Do Amaral - Herzog, Email 2 009.

15 • . . Y*fe7 16 • .if4 Y*/a3 17.'ti'f3 'ti'b2 18.ge1 'ti'xa2+ White has ac­tivated his pieces, but he can hardly organize an attack, while Black's a7-pawn may quickly become dan­genms, Grekh - Babujian, Lviv 2008.

179

Chapter 1 0 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 tt:Jc6 3 . .ib5 tt:Jf6 4 . 0 - 0 tt:Jxe4 5.d4 tt:Jd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 tt:Jf5

Complete Games

28 Vedder - Al.Aleksandrov Vejen 1993

l.e4 e5 2)iJf3 lLlc6 3 . .ib5 llJf6 4. 0 - 0 llJxe4 5.d4 llJd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 llJf5 8.'lffe2 llJd4 9.lLlxd4 'lffxd4 1 0 .lLld2 i.f5 11.lLlb3 'lffe4 12.'lffxe4 .ixe4 13. c3 0 - 0 - 0 +

All Black's pieces enter easily the actions and he only needs to prepare his queenside offensive.

14 . .ie3 b6! 15.�fdl .ie7 16. f3 .ig6 17.@f2 a5 18.lLld4 @b7 19.lLle2 a4 2 0 .llJf4 .ic2 21.�dcl .if5 22.g4?

This is not an active move at all. It only creates additional targets.

22 . . . .ic8 23.a3? White needed to protect his

weaknesses : 23.@g3+ 23 . . . g6 24.�dl �deS 25. @g3

h5!+ Black has fixed the enemy

180

weak spot on b2 and begins active operations on the kingside.

26.lLlg2 hxg4 27.fxg4 .ie6 28.�d4 i.b3 29.�el �h7 3 0 .�e2

3 0 . . . .if8? He could have settled the issue

immediately with the move 30 . . . �eh8-+

31..if2? After the active attempt 31.

.ig5 .ig7 32.�de4f!, White could have created some counterplay.

31 . . . f6 32.�de4 fxe5 33. llJh4 .id5?

It was more precise for Black to play 33 . . . i.f7! 34.tt:'if3 i.d5-+

34.�4e3? White could have exploited his

opponent's imprecision with 34. tt:'ixg6! ixe4 35.�xe4gg and his kingside pawns would have turned into dangerous passed pawns.

4. 0 - 0 tLJxe4 5.d4 tLJ d6 6 .hc6 de 7.de tlJ.f5

Now, it all ends quickly. 34 . • . g5 35.t2Jf5 .ic5 36.l'�xe5

.ixf2+ 37.c;!;>xf2 gxe5 38.gxe5 gxb2+ 39.c;!;>e3 gxb2 4 0 .c!L!d4 ga2 41.gxg5 �xa3 42.c;!;>d3 ga2 0 -1

29 Garakov - M.Sorokin Sukhumi 2006

l.e4 e5 2.tl::lf3 .!Llc6 3 • .ib5 .!Llf6 4. 0 - 0 .!Llxe4 5.d4 .!Lld6 6. .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 .!Llf5 8.�e2 .!Lld4 9 . .!Llxd4 �xd4 1 0 .h3 .if5 ll . .!Llc3 .ib4 12.�d1 �h4 13. �e3

13 • . . .ixc2? ! It was preferable for Black to

complete at first his development with 13 . . . 0-0+ - see "Step by Step".

14.gd4 �e7 15.�g3!� White is clearly ahead in de­

velopment and this provides him with excellent compensation for the pawn.

15 • • . .ixc3 16 . .ig5! �xg5 17. �xg5 .ixd4 18.�d2

(diagram) 18 • • . .ixf2+? Black leaves the wrong bishop

on the board.

The position would have re­mained completely unclear after 18 . . . .bb2 19.Ei:e1 0-0 20.'&xc2 .id4co Black's dark-squared bish­op would have participated both in the attack and in the protection of his own king.

19.�xf2 .ie4 2 0 .e6!± He must watch for White's

possible pawn-break e5-e6 in all the variations of the Berlin De­fence.

2 0 . . • fxe6 21.gfl .ig6 22. �d4 b6 23.�a4 0 - 0 - 0 24. �xa7 c5 25.b4!+-

White begins a decisive on­slaught, exploiting the fact that Black's dark-squared bishop does not take part in the protection of the king. 25 . • • c4 26.gf4 ghe8 27.gxc4 gd1+ 28.c;!;>h2 ge7 29.�a8+ 1- 0

181

Part 2

l.e4 e5 2 )tjf3 tlJc6 3.�b5 tlJf6 4. 0 - 0 tlJxe4 5.d4 tlJd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tlJf5 8.�xd8 + �xd8

Berlin Endgame

The Berlin endgame begins with the diagram position. Back in the 19th century, many famous players such as Emanuel Lasker and Siegbert Tarrasch were happy to play this as Black. However, it never became really popular until the match between Kasparov and Kramnik, London 2000. Before that there was the many-times champion of Belarus, Alexey Al­exandrov and one of the strongest Hungarian GM Almasi, who played it regularly and with great success and have continued to do so since the 90s of the last centu­ry.

The drawbacks of Black's posi­tion are rather obvious. He has lost his castling rights and his pawn-structure has been dam-

182

aged. His knight on f5 is not well placed either. It restricts the de­velopment possibilities of his own bishops and can be attacked at any moment with the pawn-ad­vance g2-g4. Black's position however also has several impor­tant pluses:

Firstly, the absence of queens from the board is already a seri­ous advantage for those players who do not like to calculate sharp variations.

Secondly, Black's bishop pair can be very helpful and in particu­lar his light-squared bishop, which has no opponent. In fact, it has much better prospects than in the classical endgame arising from the Exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez (l.e4 e5 2 .lt:Jf3 lt:Jc6 3.ib5 a6 4. hc6 dxc6 5 .d4 exd4 6.Wxd4 Wxd4 7.lt:Jxd4) .

The point is that White's e4-pawn has been advanced one square forward and as a result the f5 and d5-squares can be excel­lent posts for Black's bishop.

The third factor is that in the endgame, the uncastled king is not necessarily a handicap. If the rooks are exchanged, it is going to come into action very quickly. Sometimes Black is able to play c6-c5 and deploy his king on the c6-square, where it is completely safe. As a rule, strong players with White do not allow this and Black's king goes much more of­ten to the e7-square and joins in an attack against the enemy e5-pawn, after an exchange on e6.

What should Black strive for in this endgame?

Naturally, it is advantageous for him to exchange all the rooks.

Exchanging the knights is also obviously in Black's favour. He obtains the excellent f5-square for his bishop and his rooks come into action much faster.

It very often happens that a

transition into an endgame of bishops of opposite colour not only enables Black to draw with­out any problems, but can also al­low him to seize the initiative. Sometimes, however, Black can have difficulties with bishops of opposite colour, because without his dark-squared bishop he will encounter problems fighting for the d-file.

What should Black try to avoid as much as possible?

Firstly, it is obvious that he should never enter a king and pawn ending.

Secondly, he should try not to allow an exchange on e6 if he has to recapture with f7xe6. Some­times he can compensate for this change of the pawn-structure if he is able to fight actively for the d-file, or if his knight can go to the d4-square.

The third important nuance is that if Black advances c6-c5 with­out good preparation, this can en­able White to deploy his knight powerfully in the d5-outpost.

183

Chapter 11 l.e4 e5 2 )Zlf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0-0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8. VNxd8+ ci>xd8

Quick Repertoire

In this chapter we will analyze White's attempts to avoid playing the basic move in this position -9 .tt:Jc3.

9.tilbd2 It would be too optimistic for

him to opt for 9 .g4? tt:Je7 10 .h3 h5 ll.lLlg5 \t>e8 12 .f3 lLlg6 13.2:el hxg4 14.hxg4 iJ.e7 15.tt:Jc3 f6+ Black leads in development and is ready for active operations on the kingside. His bishops enter the actions easily.

9.c3? ! - White weakens the important d3-square with this move. 9 . . . h6 lO .Eldl+ lt>e8 11 . tt:Jbd2 iJ.e6 12 .tt:Jb3 c5+ - A pair of rooks will be exchanged unavoid­ably and Black's knight will be transferred to c6 - a perfect square for it.

184

It would be interesting for White, but insufficient even for equality if he tries the original move 9.a4 !? h6 10.a5 iJ.e6 ll.Ela4 b5 12.axb6 cxb6+

He loses a tempo with 9. iJ.g5+ ? ! lt>e8 10.tt:Jc3 h6 ll .iJ.d2 (He may even lose another tempo with the line : ll.iJ.f4 iJ.e6 12 .2:adl iJ.b4 13.iJ.d2 and if Black enters a position with bishops of opposite colours with 13 . . . hc3 14.hc3 eSt he remains with much more active pieces.) ll . . . iJ.e6 12 .2:adl 2:d8 13.g4 tt:Je7 14.h3 h5 15.tt:Jg5 iJ.c8+

9.h3 - In general, this move is useful for White. 9 . . . \t>eS 10 .b3 (It is preferable for him to play 10. tt:Jc3 h5 and we analyze this varia­tion in the next chapter.) 10 . . . b6 ! ? ll.lLlc3 iJ.b7 12 .2:dl iJ.e7� Black's imminent plans include the ex­change of a pair of rooks and after White's knight is removed from the c3-square, the activation of his light-squared bishop with c6-c5.

Black obtains an excellent po­sition in the variation 9 .Eldl + WeB 10.h3 tt:Je7!? ll.iJ.f4 tt:Jd5 12 .iJ.g3

4. 0 - 0 Ci:Jxe4 5.d4 Ci:J d6 6. hc6 de 7.de Ci:Jj5 8. WffxdB r.trxdB

i.f5�, because his pieces join in the actions very easily.

9 . . . h6 1 0 )Zle4 After 10 .b3 i.e6 ll.i.b2 a5

12 .c4 c5 13 .'2le4 r.trd7 14.�fdl+ r.trc6� Black's king is perlectly placed and does not stand in the way of the coordination of his rooks.

1 0 . . . .ie6 11.h3 .ie7+ (diagram)

He wishes to trade the knights excellent b7-square, while his on h4 and his king will occupy the rooks will be joined in action.

185

Chapter 11 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 lL!c6 3 . .ib5 lL!f6 4. 0 - 0 lL!xe4 5.d4 lL!d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lL!f5 8.�xd8 + <i>xd8

Step by Step

A) 9.i.g5+? ! , B) 9.h3, C) 9.Ei:dl+, D) 9.tt'lbd2.

The alternatives for White are not popular at all and quite de­servedly at that.

9 .lLlg5? - This is a loss of two tempi. 9 . . . �e8 10 .Ei:d1 (10.ttJc3?, Lima - Britto, Brazil 1999, 10 . . . ltJd4+ Black wins a pawn; 10 .c3 -White covers the d4-square, but weakens the d3-square. 10 . . . h6 ll.ttJe4 �e6 12 .�f4 Ei:d8 13.ltJbd2 , Pellicer Castillo - Brunet Marti­nez, Barcelona 2002, and here, Black can regroup favourably his forces with 13 . . . g5 14.�g3 �d7 15.ttJf6+ �c8+ - he has connected his rooks and is ready to start ac­tive operations on the queenside.) 10 . . . h6 1l .ttJe4 (It would not work for White to play ll.Ei:d8+? �xd8

186

12.lLlxf7 + �e8 13.lLlxh8 lLld4-+ and his knight will not escape from the corner of the board.) 11 . . . �e6 12.ltJbc3 (In response to 12 . b3, Petrushin - lonov, Rostov on Don 1993, it is advantageous for Black to continue with the stand­ard exchange 12 . . . Ei:d8 13.Ei:xd8+ �xd8 14.c4 �c8+) 12 . . . Ei:d8 13. Ei:xd8+ �xd8 14.�f4 �c8+ His rook will go unavoidably to d8, af­ter which he will begin his queen­side offensive, J.Geller - Yemelin, St. Petersburg 2001.

9 .�f4 �e8 10.ttJbd2 (about 10. ltJc3 �e6 - see Chapter 12) 10 . . . �e7 1l .c3 cS+! and exploiting the fact that White's knight cannot go quickly to dS, Black deprives the enemy pieces of the d4-square, Kaforos - Papadimitriou, Athens 2008.

9 .g4? - This is a very risky move after which Black obtains excellent attacking prospects. 9 . . . ltJe7 10.h3 hS ll.ttJgS �e8 12 .f3 ltJg6 13.Ei:e1, Em.Lasker - Hesse, USA (sim) 1901 and following 13 . . . hxg4 14.hxg4 �e7 15.ttJc3 f6 16.exf6 gxf6 17.ltJge4 �f7+ he completes quickly his develop­ment and has chances of exploit-

4. 0 - 0 CiJxe4 5.d4 CiJ d6 6 .hc6 de 7.de CiJ.f5 8. '@xdB rtJxdB

ing the weaknesses on White's kingside.

9 .c3? ! h6 10 .Eld1+ rtJe8 11 . CiJbd2 �e6 12 .CiJb3 (12.CiJe4 Eld8 13.Elxd8+ rtJxd8+ Black's rook on a8 has no problems entering the actions, so the trade of a pair of rooks was in his favour.) 12 . . . cS 13.h3 b6+ White's minor pieces are passive, while Black's knight has the possibility to go to the perfect square for it (c6) and the exchange of a couple of rooks is unavoidable, Mueller - Markus, Borkum 1996.

9 .�d2? ! �e6 10.�c3 (lO.CiJgS? ! CiJd4+ White cannot protect com­fortably his c2-pawn.) 10 . . . h6 11 .CiJbd2 cS 12 .CiJe4 b6 13.a4 aS 14.h3 rtJc8+ Black's plan later is to transfer his knight to c6, where it is perfectly placed, and to trade the rooks on the only open file, Escher - Rausis, Germany 1997.

9.c4? ! - With this move White loses a tempo and weakens the d4 and d3-squares. Black cannot ex­ploit this so easily, though . . . 9 . . . �e6 10 .b3 h6 ll.CiJc3 (ll.�b2 b6 12 .CiJc3 rtJc8 - see ll.CiJc3 ; ll .g4 CiJe7 12 .h3, ! .Gurevich - Puri, Boston 1988 and here, after 12 . . . hS 13.CiJgS hxg4 14.hxg4 CiJg6+ Black can attack the weak enemy pawns on the kingside) ll . . . b6 12 .�b2 rtJc8 13 .h3 rtJb7 14.CiJe4 cS 1S.Elad1 aS 16.a4 CiJe7 !t - His knight will go again to the excel­lent c6-square and his rooks will be connected, Parkanyi - Sander­mann, Budapest 2008.

9 .a4 ! ? - This is an original

idea to bring the rook to the fourth rank. 9 . . . h6 lO .aS �e6 ll .Ela4, Runau - Kestler, Germany 1989, but it seems very good for Black to continue with 1l . . .bS 12 . Ele4 (following 12 .axb6 cxb6+ Black's chances of creating a passed pawn on the queenside are increased considerably) 12 . . . rtJc8 13 .CiJc3 b4 14.CiJe2 gS+ White's aS­pawn is weak, his bishop on c1 is passive and he has failed to attack the enemy bishop on e6.

9 .b3 b6 ! ? - This is a very sen­sible reaction to White's some­what slow move. 10 .�b2 , Jansa ­Kurajica, Vrsac 1979 (10.CiJc3 rtJe8 - see 9.CiJc3 ; 10 .Eld1+ rtJe8 11 .�b2 �e7 12 .c4 �b7 13 .CiJc3 Eld8 14. Elxd8+ rtJxd8 1S.Eld1 + rtJc8= Black has solved all his problems after the exchange of a pair of rooks). Now, it deserves attention for him to follow with 10 . . . rtJe8 ! ? ll.a4 (The idea behind Black's last move is to enter the position after ll.CiJbd2 �e7 12 .Elad1 cS 13.CiJe4 �b7 14.CiJc3 hf3 1S.gxf3 CiJd4 -see Chapter 12 .) 1l . . .aS 12 .CiJc3 �e7 13.Elad1 �a6 14.Elfe1 Eld8 1S. Elxd8+ rtJxd8?

A) 9.i.g5+?! This is hardly the smartest

possible decision for White, be­cause his bishop can be attacked with tempo on this square after h7-h6 and following that Black will not be afraid any more of knight-sorties to the gS-square.

9 • . • rtJe8

187

Chapter 11

1 0 )i)c3 About 10.l"1d1 i.e6 - see varia­

tion C. 10.g4? ! - This move is too

risky and now, White must worry about his kingside. 10 . . . ti:le7 11 .h3 hS 12.ti:lh2, Mirabile - Bisguier, Philadelphia 1997 and after 12 . . . ti:ldS 13.l"1e1 i.e6+ Black leads in development.

White should better avoid 10.ti:lbd2 h6 1l.i.f4 i.e6 12 .l"1fe1 E1d8 13.l"1ad1, Bonnet - Kramnik, Lyon (blitz) 2001 (game 3 0 ) and after 13 . . . g5 14.i.g3 g4 1S.ti:lh4 i.e7 16.ti:lxf5 hfS+ Black wins the en­emy c2-pawn.

10 .c4 i.e6 ll.b3, Vincze - Fo­dor, Balatonlelle 2009, following ll . . . h6 12 .i.c1 i.cS 13.i.b2 l"1d8+ he completes his development and occupies the d-file.

10.i.d2 - White's bishop is not better placed here than on b2 or f4. 10 . . . i.e6 ll .i.c3 cS 12 .ti:lg5 i.dS 13.l"1e1 h6 14.ti:le4, Petri - Puri, Baguio City 1987 and after 14 . . . l"1d8 1S.ti:lbd2 @d7 16.ti:lf3 @c6+ Black's king is perfectly placed. On the c6-square it is safe, close to the centre and is ready to sup-

188

port the active queenside opera­tions if necessary.

In the variation 10 .h3 h6 11. i.f4 i.e6 12 .ti:lc3, Duschek - Gru­ber, Schramberg 1993, it is im­portant for him to exchange a pair of rooks, therefore Black will ob­tain a very good position after 12 . . . l"1d8+!

1 0 . . . h6

ll.i.d2 1l.i.f4 - This retreat is worse

for White, because Black will win a tempo at an opportune moment. 11 . . .i.e6

12 .l"1fd1 l"1d8 - see variation C. In answer to 12 .a3, Chasovni­

kova - Houska, Aviles 2000, Black can exploit the tempi, pre­sented by his opponent, by start-

4. 0 - 0 CiJxe4 5.d4 CiJ d6 6. hc6 de 7.de CiJfS 8. WffxdB �xdB

ing active actions on the kingside with 12 . . . g5 13.�g3 l"i:d8 14.CiJe4 �g7+

After 12 .l"i:ad1 �b4 13 .�d2 (It is bad for White to centralize here -13.CiJe4? �c4+ and he loses the ex­change.) 13 . . . �c3, Matsuura -Mann de Toledo, Curitiba 1992, he does not need to compromise his pawn-structure, but even after 14.�xc3 eSt Black deprives his opponent of the d4-square and seizes the initiative.

12 .CiJe4 - Now, White's knight is too far way from the dS-square, so Black can try to acquire more space with 12 . . . c5 13.l"i:ad1 l"i:d8 14. l"i:xd8+ �xd8 15.l"i:d1 + (1S.h3 b6 16.g4 CiJe7 17.a3, Hoecker - Schaf­ranietz, Ditzingen 2006, 17 . . . �c8 18.�g3 CiJc6 19.CiJfd2 gS+ - His pieces are perfectly deployed and can begin the siege of the enemy eS-pawn.) 15 . . . �c8 16.h3 b6+ White is incapable of thwarting the ap­pearance of Black's knight on the c6-square, Harmonist - Tarrasch, Breslau 1889 (game 31).

ll . . . i.e6

12.l'�adl

White's decision to deploy his rooks on d1 and e1 seems to be most reasonable.

After 12 .CiJe4 cS 13.�c3 �d7 14.l"i:fd1+ �c6+ Black has central­ized his king and is ready to ex­change the rooks, Sabuk -Grudzien, Leba 2008.

12 .CiJe2 g5 13.CiJfd4 (He has de­prived White's pieces of the f4-square and following 13 .�c3 cS+ he would not let them to the d4-square either.) 13 . . . CiJxd4 14.CiJxd4 l"i:d8 15.�c3 (White fails to capture the enemy bishop, because in the variation 1S.CiJxe6 l"i:xd2 16.CiJxf8 l"i:xc2+ he loses at least a pawn.) 15 . . . �c4 16.l"i:fe1 cS 17.CiJfS �e6 18. CiJg3 �d7+ Black has succeeded in trading the knights and saved his light-squared bishop from an ex­change, so he is already better.

12 .b3 - White has no chances of obtaining an edge after this move. 12 . . . l"i:d8 13.l"i:ad1 CiJd4 14. CiJxd4 l"i:xd4� Black has traded his misplaced knight and activated one of his rooks.

12 .l"i:fd1 - Now, White's rook on a1 is out of the actions for a while. 12 . . . l"i:d8 13 .CiJe2, Mach -Bode, Bargteheide 1989 and after the standard response 13 . . . g5 14. �c3 cS+ Black has ensured that his powerful light-squared bishop will be safe from the attacks of White's cavalry.

12 . . .lM8 (diagram)

13.g4 This is his most aggressive

move.

189

Chapter 11

After 13.a3 !J.e7 14.!J.c1 E1d7 15. E1xd7 lt>xd7 16.l:'1d1+ lt>c8+ Black has no passive pieces, Martin Oje­da - Pinto Henriquez, St Feliu 1994.

In reply to 13.h3, Black's sim­plest reaction would be 13 .. .'t:Jd4 14.lt:Jxd4 l:'1xd4? and after the ex­change of a couple of knights, his task to create counterplay has be­come much easier. White must consider all the time the possibil­ity of Black's bishop appearing on the f5-square.

13 .!J.c1 - White's bishop is not well placed here. 13 . . . !J.b4 14. E1xd8+ (following 14.!J.d2 , Zhug­der - Gray, Reykjavik 1957, Black can simplify the position advanta­geously with 14 . . . !J.c4 15.E1fe1 hc3 16.hc3 E1xd1 17.l:'1xd1 !J.e2 18.l:'1d2 hf3 19.gxf3 lt>e7+ White's king­side pawn-structure has been compromised beyond repair.) 14 . . . \t>xdS 15.l:'1d1+ (15.!J.d2 lt>c8 16.lt:Je4 !J.e7+ Black has preserved his two-bishop advantage and is ready to begin active operations.) 15 . . . \t>c8 16.a3 hc3 17.bxc3 c5+ He has lost his two-bishop advan­tage indeed, but has destroyed

190

White's queenside pawn-struc­ture. Now, Black's bishop is ac­tive, while its white counterpart has no good prospects at all, Ate­ka - Van Hoolandt, Mallorca 2004.

13 . . .tt:Je7 14.h3, Melnikov -Yemelin, St Petersburg 1999. White's kingside has been weak­ened and Black can exploit this with the line : 14 . . . h5 15.lt:Jg5 .icS 16.f3 lt:Jg6+

B) 9.h3 We have to mention that GMs

Volokitin and Sutovsky prefer to play this particular move. The fine point behind this order of moves is important if Black tries to hide his king on the queenside. In the set-up we recommend, with a king on e8, their games transpose to the variations in Chapters 14-17.

9 . . . \t>eS

1 0 .b3 The above mentioned grand­

masters prefer to follow here with 10.lt:Jc3 h5 - see Chapters 14-17; 10 .E1fd1 lt:Je7 - see variation C.

4. 0 - 0 t2Jxe4 5.d4 t2J d6 6 . hc6 de 7.de t2Jf5 8. WfxdB WxdB

10.g4? - This move only weak­ens White's kingside, because he is not well-prepared for a massive offensive there yet. 10 . . . t2Je7 11. t2Jg5 h6 12 .t2Je4 h5 13.f3 t2Jg6 14. l"!:e1 hxg4 15.hxg4 ie6+

10 .a4? ! - Black's queenside actions are facilitated after this. 10 .. . ie6 11 .a5 l"!:d8i

10.t2Jbd2 - White's knight is now far away from the d5-square and Black can play 10 . . . c5 11 .t2Je4 b6 12 .c3 (He has no problems af­ter 12 .if4 ie7+!) 12 . . . ie6 13.l"!:e1 h6 14.g4 t2Je7 15.t2Jg3 Wd7 16.t2Jh5 g5 17.b3 a5 18.c4 a4 19J''i:b1 t2Jc6i - his knight has occupied its per­fect square and the rook on a8 is ready to enter the actions. Black only needs to place his other rook on the dB-square, Kamsky -A.Onischuk, USA 2009 (game 32).

10.if4 ie6 (10 . . . ie7 11.t2Jc3 h5 - see Chapter 14-17) 11 .t2Jc3 (11. t2Jbd2 l"!:d8 12 .l"!:fd1 c5+!) 11 . . . ib4 12 .a3 (following 12 .id2 l"!:d8 13. l"!:ad1, Johansen - Leonard, Email 2008, Black can continue with 13 . . . ic4 14.l"!:fe1 hc3 15.hc3 �xd1 16.l"!:xd1 ie2 17.l"!:d2 ixf3 18. gxf3 c5+ and he enters an end­game in which his knight is much stronger than the enemy bishop.) 12 . . . hc3 13.bxc3, Radnai - S.Va­jda, Hungary 2005. Black can play here 13 . . . c5+ and he does not let the enemy knight to the d4-square, so White has no chances of correcting his pawn-structure.

After 10.l"!:e1, Solak - Sturua, Panormo 1998, it is very strong

for Black to play simply 10 . . . ie6 11 .t2Jc3 (White loses following 11 . t2Jg5? t2Jd4-+ , Black has no prob­lems after 11.t2Jbd2 c5+!) 11 . . .ib4 12 .id2 hc3 13.hc3 c5+! White's bishop is so passive that Black can be quite optimistic about the fu­ture.

1 0 • • • b6!? This is a much more precise

move than the standard line: 10 . . . ie6 11 .t2Jc3 l"!:d8 12 .ig5 (12 .ib2 t2Jd4 13.t2Jxd4 l"!:xd4=) 12 . . . ie7 13. l"!:ad1 hg5 14.t2Jxg5, Negi - Naid­itsch, Peristeri 2010 and after bringing his king closer to the centre with 14 . . . We7= Black equalizes completely.

ll.t2Jc3 .ib7 12.gdl 12 .ib2 l"!:d8 13.l"!:fe1 ie7 14.

l"!:ad1 l"!:xd1 15.l"!:xd1 h5 - see varia­tion A (13.l"!:fe1) in Chapter 12 .

In answer to 12.t2Je4, Iglesias - Narciso Dublan, La Pobla de Lillet 1999, he can exploit the fact that White's knight is away from the d5-square and choose 12 . . . c5 13.l"!:e1 l"!:d8+! with an excellent po­sition.

12 • • • .ie7 13 • .ib2 gd8+! Black

191

Chapter 11

has brought his rook on a8 into the actions and is prepared to play c6-c5 if White removes his knight from c3 .

C) 9-l:�dl+ This move is usually chosen by

players who are afraid that Black's king may go to the queenside.

9 • • • c.t>e8

1 0 .h3 10.lt:Jc3 lt:Je7 - see Chapter 13. 10 . .ig5?! - White's bishop will

be attacked with tempo on this square. 10 . . . .ie6 ll .lt:Jc3 (His al­ternatives are not any better, be­cause after 11.lt:Jd4 lt:Jxd4 12 .2"1xd4 h6 13 . .ie3 .ic5 14.2"1d3 .ib6 15. hb6 axb6+ Black's rook on a8 has already entered the actions and he has no difficulties with ac­tivating his second rook, Scholvin - ! .Schneider, Germany 2001; in the variation 11 .b3 h6 12 . .ic1 !"1d8 13 .2"1xd8+ c.t>xd8 14 . .ia3 c5+ he has solved the problem with bringing his rooks into the operations and preserved his two-bishop advan­tage, Mariano - Cori Tello, Sao

192

Paulo 2009; White's aggressive attempt 11 .g4 lt:Je7 12 .h3, Jaracz ­H.Jonkman, Bad Wiessee 1998, provides Black with the possibili­ty to begin active actions on the kingside 12 . . . h5 13.lt:Jd4 .id7+) 1l . . .h6 12 . .if4 2"1d8 13.2"1xd8+ (after 13.h3 .ib4 14.lt:Je2 g5 15 . .id2 , Wu - A.Bisguier, Cherry Hill 2007, he should not avoid exchanges and can continue with 15 . . . .ixd2 16. lt:Jxd2 c.t>e7+ - All Black's pieces are in action and he emphasizes the vulnerability of the enemy e5-pawn.) 13 . . . c.t>xd8 14.2"1d1+ c.t>c8+ Sogues Tena - Ortega Morales, Benidorm 2004;

In reply to 10.2"1e1, Anand -Karpov, Zuerich 2009, it seems reasonable for him to opt for 10 . . . .ie6 ll.lt:Jc3 .ib4 12 . .id2 hc3 13. hc3 h6= and as a rule, Black should not have problems in this endgame with bishops of opposite colours.

After 10.c4 .ie6 ll.b3, Hosek ­Genba, Pardubice 2008, it is good for him to follow with 11 . . .2"1d8 12 .!"1xd8+ c.t>xd8 13.lt:Jg5 c.t>d7 14. lt:Jc3 h6 15.lt:Jxe6 c.t>xe6 16 . .ib2 .ib4 t - The numerous exchanges have led to a position in which Black has activated his king and has no bad pieces.

In response to 10.lt:Jbd2, Black can continue with 10 . . . .ie7 11 .b3 lt:Jh4 12 .lt:Jxh4 hh4 13.lt:Jf3 .ie7 14.lt:Jd4 .id7= and after the trade of the knights he can coordinate the actions of his pieces much easier.

1 0 . . . lt:Je7!?

4. 0 - 0 tiJxe4 5.d4 tiJ d6 6. hc6 de 7.de tiJj5 8. WixdB �xdB

It is also possible for Black to play 10 . . . h5, transposing after ll.tiJc3 !J.e7 to one of the main lines.

ll.i.f4, Vogt - Gyimesi, Ger­many 2006.

It is preferable for White to choose here 1l.tiJc3 tiJg6 - see Chapter 13, variation B.

Following ll.b3 !J.f5 12 .tiJd4 !J.g6 13.!J.a3 l"i:d8 14.l"i:d2 tiJd5 15. !J.xf8 l"i:xf8+ Black is considerably ahead in development, Sulskis -Granda Zuniga, Los Angeles 2003.

ll . . . tiJd5

This is the most aggressive move for him. Black exploits the placement of the enemy bishop on f4 in order to develop his piec­es in the fastest possible way.

12.i.g3 i.f5 13.c4 He has an excellent position

after 13 .tiJd4 !J.g6 14.c3 !'i:d8 15. tiJd2 c5 16.tiJ4f3 !J.e7i Black is bet­ter mostly due to the presence of his powerful light-squared bishop on the board.

13 . . . tiJb4 14.tiJc3 i.e7 15.a3 The position is equal after

15.tiJd4 !J.g6 16.l"i:d2 l"i:d8 17.:9:ad1 !J.h5 18.tiJf3 !'i:xd2 19.:9:xd2 !J.xf3 20.gxf3 tiJa6 2l .tiJe4 f5 22 .exf6 gxf6=

15 . . . tiJc2 16J�acl �d8 17. �xd8+ i.xd8 18.�dl h6?

White cannot make use of the somewhat awkward placement of the enemy knight on c2, while Black would like to occupy addi­tional space by advancing his g­pawn. He is also ready to play c6-c5 in numerous variations, be­cause he would not be afraid of the appearance of the enemy knight on d5, since Black's bishop on d8 would protect reliably the weak c7-pawn.

D) 9.tiJbd2 The basic drawback of this

move is that White loses control over the d5-square and that ena­bles Black to play c6-c5 and to transfer his knight to its ideal pos­sible c6-square.

9 . . . h6 Black ensures the e6-square

for his bishop.

193

Chapter 11

l O .tL\e4 After 10 .g4? lt:le7 ll .h3 hS ! , he

can attack immediately White's kingside weaknesses. 12 .lt:lgS @e8 13.f3 lt:lg6 14.E\e1 i.e7 1S.lt:lf1 hxg4 16.hxg4, Simacek - Navara, Os­trava 2010, 16 .. .f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.lt:le4 @f7 19.lt:lfg3 i.e6+

10.lt:lc4? ! - He loses tempi in order to make an exchange, which is in fact advantageous for Black. 10 . . . i.e6 ll.E\dl+ @c8 12 .lt:le3 lt:lxe3 13.he3 cS 14.l"ld2 b6 1S.b3 aS 16.a4 @b7+ Jentsch - Borsos, Zalakaros 2011 .

lO .l"ldl i.e6 - You can see now another drawback of the place­ment of White's knight on d2. Black is not obliged to evacuate immediately his king to e8 and can develop comfortably his piec­es. 1l .a4 (ll .b3 b6 12 .a4 aS 13.h3 @c8 14.g4 lt:le7 1S.lt:ld4 i.d7 16. lt:lc4 lt:ldS 17.@g2 @b7+ Vl.Popov - Ve­renev, Email 2009) 1l . . .@e8 (The plan with a king on the c8-square was not worse for Black either.) 12 .b3 Ei:d8 13 .i.b2 cS 14.lt:lc4 b6+! Valutanu - Troia, Email 2008.

10 .h3 i.e6 1l .g4 lt:le7 - White's last move was too aggressive and

194

he only created weaknesses with it on the kingside. 12 .lt:ld4 id7 13. lt:le4 b6 14.f4 cS 1S.lt:lf3 @c8 16.fS @b7+!. As it often happens in the Berlin endgame, when Black's king is on the queenside, the march of White's pawn to fS does not bring him any dividends. Black's minor pieces have enough good squares and White's far-ad­vanced pawns may become later a target for an attack, Efremov -Bunk, Email 2009.

10 .b3 i.e6 1l .ib2 aS

After White has played b2-b3 and created a target, the advance of Black's a-pawn becomes much more effective.

12 .lt:le4 a4 13.c4 (13.h3? ! b6 14.c4 cS 1S.E\ad1+ @c8 16.E\d2 lt:le7 17.Ei:fdl lt:lc6+ - His knight is again on its perfect square, Rho­din - Schwekendiek, Germany 1994) 13 . . . @c8 14.h3 b6 1S.Ei:fd1 ie7 16.g4 lt:lh4 17.lt:lxh4 hh4 18.f4 g6+! - All Black's pieces are in action and even if White push­es f4-fS, he would have no advan­tage at all, Baer - Krause, Email 2007.

After 12 .h3 c5 13.a4, Sax -Torre, Biel 1985, it seems very

4. 0 - 0 t'iJxe4 5.d4 t'iJd6 6 . hc6 de 7.de t'iJj5 8. 'WxdB rj;;xdB

good for Black to play 13 . . . b6 14. !'1ad1 rj;;c8+ with the idea to follow with t'iJf5-e7-c6.

After 12 .c4 c5, his king will go to the c6-square and that would solve one of the most serious problems for him in the Berlin endgame - connecting the rooks. 13.t'iJe4 rj;;d7 14.!'1fd1+ rj;;c6 15.h3 iie7 16.g4 t'iJh4 17.t'iJxh4 !ixh4 18. f4 g6? Kusmierek - Bley, Email 2006.

12 .a4 - White prevents a5-a4, but weakens his c2 and b3-pawns. 12 . . . rj;;c8 13.t'iJc4 (13 .h3 c5i) 13 . . . iib4 14.t'iJe3 iic5 15.!'1ae1, A.So­kolov - Arkhipov, Moscow 1980 and after 15 . . . b6+, Black is ready to follow with rj;;b7, bringing his rook on a8 into the actions.

1 0 • • • .ie6

ll.h3 After all the other moves for

White, Black continues with the logical plan to place his king on b7 and obtains an edge:

ll . .id2 c5 12 .!'1fd1 rj;;c8 13.!ic3 b6 14.!'1d2 rj;;b?+ Serra Pages - Gra­nados Gomez, Martinenc 2001 ;

11.!'1d1+ rj;;c8 12 .b3 b6 13.!ib2 iie7 14.!'1d3, Firth - Staal, Email 1996, 14 . . . rj;;b7 15.!'1ad1 !'1ad8+;

1l .c3 rj;;c8 12 .h3, Hrivnak - Bi­olek, Czech Republic 1999, 12 . . . b6+;

ll.!if4 b6 12.!'1fd1+ rj;;c8 13. t'iJd4 t'iJxd4 14.!'1xd4 rj;;b7+ Rodri­guez - A.Bisguier, Las Vegas 1974;

ll .b3 rj;;c8 12 .c4, Abbasi - A. Bisguier, Chicago 1994 12 . . . c5 13.h3 b6 14.!ib2 a5+;

11 .!'1e1 b6 12 .h3 (12 .b3 rj;;c8 13.c4 rj;;b7 14.!ib2 fie?+) 12 . . . c5 13.rj;;h2 rj;;c8 14.c3 rj;;b?+ Zaton­skih - L.Semenova, Alushta 1999.

ll . . . .ie7 Black is preparing the stand­

ard exchange for this endgame of the knights on the h4-square.

12J�dl + rj;;cS 13.g4 tLlh4 14.tLlxh4 .ixh4+

He has no bad pieces left, be­cause following b7-b6, Black's king goes to b7 and his rooks are connected. His two-bishop ad­vantage provides him with supe­rior prospects.

195

Chapter 11 l.e4 e5 2.ttlf3 ttlc6 3.i.b5 ttlf6 4. 0 - 0 ttlxe4 5.d4 ttld6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ttlf5 8.1!;¥xd8+ @xd8

Complete Games

3 0 Bonnet Kramnik Lyon 2001

We analyze this game mostly because, despite the fact that it was played with a short time-con­trol , Black demonstrated numer­ous ideas typical for the Berlin defence. The opponents were of quite different class, so this ena­bled him to show the ideas in their "pure form" and the game became even more instructive.

l.e4 e5 2.c!l:\f3 c!l:\c6 3 . .ib5 c!l:\f6 4. 0 - 0 c!l:\xe4 5.d4 c!l:\d6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!l:\f5 8. �xd8+ 'itlxd8 9 . .ig5+ 'itle8 1 0 . c!l:\bd2 h6 11.i.f4 .ie6 12.lUel lM8 13J;adl

13 . . . c!l:\d4 It is a bit more precise for him

to play 13 . . . g5 !+ see "Step by Step".

196

14.c!l:\xd4 �xd4 The exchange of the knights is

in favour of Black. 15 . .ie3 �d7 16.f4 b6 17.c3?

a5 !

18.a3? He usually needs a lot of ef­

forts to weaken the light squares on White's queenside.

18 . • . c5!+ His opponent's knight is too

far away from the dS-square, so Black begins his queenside offen­sive.

19.c!l:\e4 .ie7 2 0 .�xd7 'itlxd7 21.�dl+ 'itlc6 22.'itlf2 �d8 23. �xd8 hd8

The trade of the rooks is also advantageous for him, since now, White has great problems fighting against Black's active king.

24.'itlf3 'itlb5! 25.g4

4. 0 - 0 l!Jxe4 5.d4 l!Jd6 6 .hc6 de 7.de l!Jj5 B.''lfixdB cJJxdB

It would be more resilient for White to defend with 25.l/Jd2 !+

25 • • . .id5 26.f5 'tt>c4! 27.'tt>f4 'tt>b3-+

Black's strategy triumphs! 28.�d2+ 'tt>xb2 29.c4 .ig5+

3 0 .'tt>g3 .b:e3 31.cxd5 hd2 32.f6 .ic3 33.e6 i.xf6 0 -1

31 Harmonist - Tarrasch Breslau 1889

l.e4 e5 2.�f3 tlJc6 3.i.b5 �f6 4. 0 - 0 tlJxe4 5.d4 �d6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8. \Wxd8+ 'tt>xd8 9 . .ig5+ 'tt>e8 1 0 . tlJc3 h 6 ll.i.f4 i.e6 12.gad1 gds 13.�e4 c5 14.gxd8+ 'tt>xd8 15.gd1 + 'tt>c8 16.h3 b6+ 17. 'tt>fl

17 • • . .ie7 It also seemed very good for

Black to try 17 . . . l/Je7+, transfer­ring the knight to the c6-square.

18.a3 gds 19.gxd8+ 'tt>xd8 2 0 .c3?

This move weakens the light­squared complex on the queen­side.

2 0 . . . .id5 21.tlJfd2 'tt>d7 22. 'tt>e2 g5!? 23 • .ih2 �h4 24.g3 tlJg6 25.f4 'tt>e6 26.'tt>e3 c4?!

It is more accurate for Black to play here 26 . . . gxf4+ 27.gxf4 l!Jh4+, redeploying the knight to a more active position.

27.�f3 gxf4+ 28.gxf4 c5 29.�g3 �h4!? 3 0 .tlJxh4 hh4 31.�e4 i.e7 32 . .ig1

White would have preserved good chances for a draw with the move 32 .l!Jf6 !? , trying to reach a position with bishops of opposite colours.

32 . • . .ic6 33 . .if2 .id7 34. .ig3 'tt>d5 35.�£2?

It was essential for him to re­move his pawns from attack and to try to enter a drawish position with bishops of opposite colours with 35.h4 i.f5 36.l/Jd6 ! =

35 • . . h5 36. 'tt>f3 .if5+

White has overlooked his chance of activating his knight and is now doomed to a long-last­ing defence.

197

Chapter 11

37.@e3? He could have offered much

tougher resistance with the help of a surprising pawn-sacrifice for the sake of activating his king and knight with the move 37.lt:ldl!+

37 . . . b5 38.@f3 a5 39.@e3 b4 4 0 .@f3

He needed to continue here with 40.h4! ci>c6 41.lt:le4 <i>b5 42. lt:ld2 bxc3 43.bxc3 .tf8+ and Black must still overcome certain tech­nical difficulties.

4 0 • . • @c6! 41.axb4? White practically resigns after

this move, because Black creates a passed pawn. White could have still preserved some illusions of a fight after 41.lt:le4+

41. .. cxb4 42.cxb4 axb4 43. tlJe4 @d5 44.tlJd6 .ixd6 45. exd6 c3 46.bxc3 b3 0 -1

32 Kamsky Onischuk Saint Louis 2009

1.e4 e5 2.tlJf3 tlJc6 3 • .ib5 tlJf6 4. 0 - 0 tlJxe4 5.d4 tlJd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tlJf5 8. �xd8+ @xd8 9.h3 @e8 1 0 . tlJc3 b6 ll.tlJe4 c5 12.c3 .ie6 13J�e1 h6 14.g4 tlJe7 15.tlJg3 @d7 16.tlJh5 g5 17.b3 a5 18.c4 a4 19.�b1 tlJc6t

(diagram) Black's knight is perfectly

placed here. It exerts pressure against the e5-square and is ready to go to d4, or to b4.

2 0 .@g2 tlJb4 21.�e2 @c6 22.@g3 axb3

He could have maintained the

198

pressure on the queenside with the line : 22 . . . ci>b7!? 23 .h4 gxh4+ 24.lt:lxh4 Eld8 25.lt:lf4 .tc8+

23.axb3 b5 Black has a good alternative

here 23 . . . .te7 !? 24.lt:lg7 Elhd8 25. lt:lxe6 fxe6t - he has allowed his light-squared bishop to be ex­changed indeed, but his rooks and knight are tremendously active.

24.cxb5+ @xb5 25.h4! gxh4+ 26.tlJxh4 tlJd3 27.Ele3

27 . . . tlJxc1 Black's knight was very strong

and he did not need to exchange it. He could have opted for 27 . . . Eld8 ! 28.lt:lg2 .te7 29.f3 lt:lb4t and all his pieces would be in action, providing him with long-lasting initiative.

28.Elxc1 Ela3 29.Elb1 @b4 3 0 .�e4+ @b5 31.Ele3 @b4 32. Ele4+ @b5, Draw.

Chapter 12 l.e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 - 0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8.'�xd8+ <!>xd8 9.�c3

Quick Repertoire

This is White's most natural and quite deservedly most popu­lar move.

9 . . .'�e8 Black is ready to develop his

queen's rook to the dB-square. His other rook may enter the ac­tions on the h-file.

There are some more aggres­sive schemes for him connected with the placement of his king on the c8-square. Black has no prob­lems then to activate later his king, but he has difficulties with the protection of his f7-pawn and with his defence against the of­fensive of White's kingside pawns. The move, we recom­mend, is considered to be the most reliable.

The diagrammed position has been at the focus of attention of numerous strong players as Anand, Aronian, Carlsen, lvanchuk, Jakovenko, Karjakin, Kramnik and many other grandmasters.

1 0 . .if4 White places his bishop here

with the idea to advance e5-e6 at some moment.

White has tried to break Black's position in different ways. The most popular move is the seemingly modest at first sight pawn-ad­vance 10.h3 and we have devoted to it Chapters 14-17. The other popular choice for White is 10 .l"ld1 and we analyze it in the next chap­ter. Now, we will deal in details with the rest of his alternatives.

199

Chapter 12

It is premature for White to opt for 10 .g4? - this is a thematic move aimed at occupation of ad­ditional space on the kingside and it is his most dangerous plan. He needs to prepare it well however; otherwise, Black will undermine his opponent's kingside with h7 -h5, forcing White's knight to go to h2 and then, Black will open files on the kingside by advancing f7-f6 : 10 . . . 'Ll e7 ll .h3 hS 12.'Ll h2 �e6 13.�g5 hxg4 14.hxg4 tLl dS 15.'Ll e2 f6+ - he completes eff ortlessly his development and has multiple targets to attack on the kingside.

F ollowing 10 .b3 b6 ! ? 11 .�b2 �b7 12Jl ad1 �e7 13.'Ll e2 c5 ! = , Black i s ready to compromise his opponent's kingside pawn-struc­ture even at the price of the ex­change of his active light-squared bishop. L ater, he will transfer his knight to e6 via the d4-square.

10.'Lle2 b6! Wh ite's knight must fight against the enemy bishop on e6 and it will find a good sq uare for that. 1U'l d1 �b7 12.'Ll f4 :B:d8 13.:!'lxd8+ i>xd8 14.g4 tt:le7 = He has deployed very actively his pieces but has no obj ects to at­tack, so White's main task for the moment is to hold the balance.

In the variation 10.tt:le4 �e6 ll .h3 :B:d8 ! 12.'Ll eg5 �c8= (this is the safest sq uare for Black's bish­op) he will have to play 13.e6 (oth­erwise, the transfer of his knight to the gS-square will turn out to be a loss of time) 13 . . . fx e6 14.:!'le1 �e7 15.tt:lxe6 he6 16.:!'lxe6 :B:d1+ 17 .:!'l e1 :!'lxe1+ 18.'Ll xe1 i>f7= After

200

the numerous exchanges Black's pieces are considerably more ac­tive, but this is only sufficient for eq uality, because his pawn-struc­ture is inferior.

1 0 . . . �e6 llJUdl

White cannot create problems for his opponent with the li ne: 11.a3 h6 12 .h3 :!'ld8 13.:!'l ad1 �e7 = Black wi shes to exchange the knights on the h4-square.

ll . . . h6 Black ensures the e6-square

for his bishop. White would not have achieved

much with ll.tLlgS on his previous move, since Black would have re­treated his bishop with tempo: ll . . . �c4 and after 12 .:!'l fe1 - h6.

12.h3 .ib4 H e is trying to reach a favour­

able position with bishops of op­posite colours.

13.g4 ll:le7 14.ll:le4 �d5! Black realises his idea. 15.ll:lfd2 i.xd2 16.ll:lxd2 g5

17 . .ig3 c5=

His bishop will occupy una­voidably the long diagonal and Black will have equal chances.

Chapter 12 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 ll:Jc6 3 • .ib5 ll:Jf6 4.0 -0 ll:Jxe4 5.d4 ll:Jd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ll:Jf5 8.�xd8+ <;!;>xd8 9.4Jc3 <;!;>eS

Step by Step

A) 1 0 .b3 B) 1 0 .ll:l e2 C) 1 0 A:le4 D) 1 0 • .if4

About 10.a3 �e6 11.�f4 h6 -see var iation D.

The alternatives for White are played only very seldom and they do not create any problems for Black.

10 .g4? {jje7 ll .h3 hS - He em­phasizes White's premature ac­tive actions on the kingside with this standard undermining move. 12.[fjh2 � e6 13.�g5 hxg4 14.hxg4 [fjdS 1S.[fj e2 f6 16.�f4 fS 17 .�g3 fxg4+ Dimitrov - Almasi, Niksic 1997 (game 33).

1Q .{jjd1? ! Salmensuu - M ar­kowski, Saint V incent 2000. This

is a useless manoeuvre, because the trade of the knights is in fa­vour of Black. lO . . . �e6U .[fj e3 2"ld8+

10 .�d2 - Black is very happy i n the Berlin endgame whenever White uses a slow plan of devel­opment. This is because all his ad­vantages (with the excepti on of his pawn-structure) are in fact temporary and he provides Black with sufficient time to activate his pieces. 10 . . . �e6 11.2"l ad1 (He should not be afraid of U .[fj gS, since following 1l . . .�c4 ! 12 .2"l fe1 h6 13.[fj f3 2"l d8+! Black ensures a good sq uare for his light-squared bishop and brings into the actions his usually passive rook on aS.) 11. . .2"ld8 12.�c1 (Black has only temporary problems after 12.�g5 !"l d7 ! 13.2"lxd7 hd7 14.2"l d1 h6 15. �c1 {jje7 +± and the moment he in­troduces his rook on h8 into the actions, his prospects will become preferable.) 12 . . . �b4 13.�g5, Z iat­dinov - Z hurikhin, V oronezh 2011, 13 . . . 2"l d7 ! 14.[fj e2 h6 15.2"l xd7 lt>xd7 16.�d2 �xd2 17 .2"l d1 i' c8 18. 2"lxd2 gS+ White's eS-pawn was cramping Black's position, but it would need permanent protec­tion to the end of the game.

201

Chapter 12

10.El e1 .ib4 - This is the sim­plest move for him, since the posi­tions with bishops of opposite col­ours are in favour of Black. ll . .id2 .ixc3 12 . .ixc3 .ie6 13.h3 Ei: d8 14. Ei: ad1 c5 15.a3, Brodsky - M arce­lin, C ap d'Agde 2002 and here, he can try to obtain an advantage with 15 . . . .id5 16.lt:ld2 lt> e7 i - his bishop has occupied an active po­sition and his king will be placed on the e6-square.

A) 1 0 .b3 b6!?

This i s a seldom played move, but it is q uite sufficient for equal­ity. White's plan of development is too slow and Black is trying to deploy his light-sq uared bishop to the potentially best sq uare.

ll . .ib2 11..if4 .i a6 ! - sending the en­

emy rook back to the b1-sq uare. 12 .Ei:fb 1 (after 12.El fe1 .ib4=, there arises a position with bishops of opposite colours and Black has no problems with it, while following 12 .Elfd1? .ib4 13 . .i d2 .ixc3 14 . .ixc3 .ie2+ the endgame will be very difficult for White, because

202

his "bad" bishop will be inferior to Black's powerful knight) 12 . . . .ib7 13.El d1 .i a3 14 . .ic1 .ie7fl - After Black's rook on h8 enters the ac­tions, the evaluation of the posi­tion will become even more fa­vourable for him.

ll . . . .ib7 12.l�ad1 12 .lt:le2 - White is trying to

transfer his kn ight to f4 in order to prepare the pawn-break e5-e6. 12 .. . c5 ! - A fter White has weak­ened his control over the d5-sq uare, Black's bishop on b7 be­comes a very powerful piece. 13. Ei:fd1 .ie7f}.

12 ..• .ie7 13)l:le2 This is a standard transfer of

the kn ight to f4. 13.El fe1 - White does not cre­

ate any threats with that move and this enables Black to begin exchanging pieces. 13 . . . Ei: d8 14.h3 Ei:xd1 15.Ei: xd1 h5 16 . .ic1, Ootes -Pliester, Bossum 2010 and here, it deserves attention for him to choose 16 . . . Elg8 !?i planning g7 -g5 or f7-f6 and Black introduces the rest of his forces into the actions.

13 . . . c5!

4.0-0 I:Dxe4 5. d4 I:Dd6 6. hc6 de 7. de I:DfS 8. V!ixdB cJJxdB 9 .'D c3 cJJeB

This is the most precise move for him.

14.tl:lc3 .ix£3 15.gxf3 tt:ld4 Black's knight is deployed to a

wonderful blocking square. 16.tl:ld5 ttle6 17.cJJg2 1M8=

White has failed to advance f3-f4-f5, so Black has no problems whatsoever.

B) 1 0 .tt:le2 White does not allow the ene­

my bishop to go to e6. 1 0 .•. b6 Still, Black's bishop can go to

another very promising sq uare.

lU�dl A bout 1l .'Df4 ib7 12.:1'1d 1 - see

1l .l"1dl. ll .l"1e1 c5 12.if4. Now, in the

game M otylev - Pashikian, Mos­cow 2010, the opponents agreed to a draw and in fact, following 12 . . . ib7 13.'Dg3 'Dxg3 14.hxg3 id5= Black has no difficulties at all .

Aft er l l .c4 i.b7 12 .l"1d1 c5 13. 'D c3 i.xf3 14.gxf3 i.e? 15.'D d5 l"1c8+ his prospects are superior

thanks to his better pawn-struc­ture.

1l .a4 ib7 12.a5 c5 13.c4 f6 14. exf6 gxf6 15.'Dg3 'Dd6i White has played rather originally and the centre has been opened, but Black has no weaknesses and his active bishop on b7 exerts powerful pressure against White's king­side. Black has an easy plan to im­prove his position - cJJf7, l"1g8, ie7 etc., M esq uita - A ndersen, E mail 2009.

ll . . . .ib7

12.tt:led4 The exchange of the knights is

in favour of Black. White's knight will go to the f5-square, but this is completely harmless for Black.

With a Black bishop on b7 , it would be rather foolish for White to play 12 .g4? ! c5 13.'D e1 'Dh4+

12 .'Df4 - He has taken control over the d5-sq uare, preventing c6-c5. 12 . . . l"1d8 (it would be also interesting for Black to opt for 12 . . . i e7 ! ?) 13.l"1xd8+ cJJxd8 14.g4 (but not 14.e6? f6+ and White's e6-pawn will fall unavoidably) 14 . . . 'D e7

203

Chapter 12

White's pieces are seemingly active, but he must play very ac­curately in order to maintain the balance.

15.'Ll g5 me8 16.�d2 (it is bad for him to opt for 16.e6? f6 17 .ti:lt7 E\g8 18 .b3 �c8+, or 18.�e3 �c8 19.E\d1 'Ll d5+ and in both cases White loses his e6-pawn) 16 . . . h6 17 .ti:l e4, Smirin - J ovanic, R ij eka 2010, 17 . . . ti:lg6 ! Black attacks the enemy e5-pawn and forces the ex­change of the knights, which is in his favour. 18.ti:lxg6 (18.E\e1 ti:lxf4 19.hf4 md7 20.E\d1+ ffi e6t - He has no bad pieces on the board, since after 2l .E\d8, Black has the powerful argument 21 . . .g5, fol­lowed by �g7 , his king has occu­pied an ideal position and his light-sq uared bishop is very pow­erful.) 18 . . . fxg6 19.E\e1 (in the var­iation 19.f4 �c8 20 .h3 h5+ Black dominates on the light sq uares on the kingside) 19 . . . �c8 20 .f3 �e6+ - His pawn will occupy the g5-square, emphasizing the vulnera­bility of the enemy e5-pawn.

15.�e3 me8 16.E\d1 'Ll d5 17 . 'Ll h5, V allejo Pons - A ronian, L in­ares 2010 and here, Black could have forced a draw with the line : 17 . . . c5 18.�g5 h6 19.c4 ti:l e7 20 .

204

he7 hf3 21 .hf8 E\xf8 22 .'Llxg7 + me7 23.'Ll f5+ me6 24.ti:lg7 me7 = and a perpetual check.

12 .. .ti:Jxd4 13.c!L'lxd4 .ic5 Black's task now is to enter a

position with bishops of opposite colours.

t4.�f5 ggs

He has protected his g7 -pawn and will unavoidably oust the en­emy knight from its best possible sq uare.

15.h3?! It is preferable for White to

choose here 15.�e3 �c8 16.'Lld4 hd4 17 .gxd4 �e6=

15 . . . .ic8 16.�g3 16.g4 h5 17 .mg2 g6+ White's

kn ight is sent away and his king­side pawns are weak.

16 . . . .ie6 17.b3 a5 18.a4 gds 19 • .ig5 gds 2 0 .c4 gd7!+ Ior­dachescu - F ressinet, R ij eka 2010. Now, after the exchange of the rooks, Black's king will go to the q ueenside and his rook on g8 will enter the actions. White's pawns on a4, b3 and c4 are an ex­cellent target for Black's light­squared bishop.

4.0-0 liJxe4 5.d4 liJd6 6.hc6 de 7.de liJj5 8. VfixdB W xdB 9 . liJc3 W eB

C) 1 0 .c!Lle4 White's kn ight is perfectly

placed on this sq uare. It has avoided the pin in advance and his rooks can now occupy the el and d1-sq uares.

1 0 ... .ie6

ll.h3 ll . .id2 l"1d8 12.l"1fe1 c5 13.liJeg5

liJd4 14.liJxd4 cxd4 15.liJxe6 fx e6= Black has succeeded in correcting his pawn-structure and eq ualized completely, A nd.Sokolov - A . Onischuk, C ap d'Agde 1994.

11.b3 - White is trying to re­strict the enemy light-sq uared bishop and is ready to start a chase for it with the move liJfg5. ll . . . .id5 12 .l"1e1 .ib4 13.l"1e2 (He cannot create problems for his opponent with 13 . .id2 .ixd2 14. liJexd2, Nadvesnik - S.V ajda, K ozje 2008, since Black can coun­ter that with 14 . . . l"1d8 15.l"1ad1 h5 ! 16.liJg5 We7 = ensuring the f5-out­post f or his knight and continuing the fight for the d-file.) 13 . . . a5 -This is his standard reaction to the appearance of White's pawn on b3.

14 . .ib2 a4 15.l"1d1 axb3 16.axb3 h5= Black has ensured a comfort­able placement of all his minor pieces and has not forgotten to bring one of his rooks into the ac­tions.

He should not be afraid of 14. c4 .ixe4 15.l"1xe4 .ic3 16.l"1b1l"1 d8= Black has lost his two-bishop ad­vantage indeed, but has won the fight for the only open file and plans to trade the knights on the d4-sq uare.

14.l"1b1 a4 15.c3 (15.c4 .ie6 16. h3 h5=) 15 . . . .ie7 16.c4 .ie6 17 . .ib2 l"1d8= He has avoided the ex­change of his powerfu l light­sq uared bishop and thanks to that his counterplay on the q ueenside will be very eff ective.

14.a4 - White has defended against a5-a4, but now, his pawns on c2 and b3 have become chroni­cally weak. 14 . . . l"1d8 15 . .ib2 h5 16. l"1d1 l"1d7 17 .liJfg5 l"1h6fi

14.g4 - White is better pre­pared for this pawn-advance at the moment, in comparison to the situation we have already ana­lyzed. 14 . . . liJe7 15.c4 .ixe4 16.l"1xe4 l"1d8 17 . .if4 liJg6 18.e6 (After 18. .ig3 liJf8 ! = Black's knight will be t ransferred to a better sq uare.)

205

Chapter 12

18 . . .'t:lxf4 19.exf7+ @xf7 20.Ei:xf4+ @g8= Black's powerful dark­sq uared bishop compensates fully the defects of his q ueenside pawn­structure and after the unavoida­ble pawn-advance h7 -hS, his rook on h8 will enter the actions eff ort­lessly.

ll .Ei: e1 h6! - He defends against White's possible knight­sorties to the gS-square and en­sures the e6-square for his bishop.

12 . .id2? ! Ei: d8 13 . .i c3 b6 14.h3 cS 1S.Ei: ad1 tt:J e7 ! 16.a3. Here, in the game Ulibin - Dumitrache, C appelle la G rande 1994, the op­ponents agreed to a draw. Black must have respected his opponent very much; otherwise, after 16 . . . Ei:xd1 17 .Ei:xd1 .ifS 18.Ei: e1 @d?+ - it would be very difficult to imagine a more favourable position for him in the Berlin endgame.

12 .h3? ! - This move is too slow. 12 . . . Ei:d8 ! 13 . .i d2 tt:J d4 14. tt:Jxd4 Ei:xd4t Degerman - E ngq­vist, Haparanda 1994, or 13 . .if4 tt:J d4 14.tt:Jxd4 Ei:xd4t Neville -F erguson, Kilkenny 1999 and in both cases the exchange of the knights solves all the problems for Black.

206

He has nothing to worry about 12 .b3 .ib4 13.c3 (following 13 . .i d2 hd2 14.tt:Jexd2 Ei: d8t he is already fighting for the advantage) 13 . . . i.e? 14 . .ib2 aS 1S.c4 a4� Black's light-squared bishop is taking an active part in the organization of his q ueenside counterplay.

12 .g4 - This aggressive plan only causes problems for White. 12 . . . tt:J e7 13.h3 Ei: d8 14.tt:J g3 (in re­sponse to 14.@g2 , Lj uboj evic -Panno, L as Palmas 1973 , Black must prepare the transfer of his kn ight to the c6-sq uare with the line: 14 . . . b6 1S.a4 cS ! and this will enable him following 16.aS tt:J c6 17 .axb6 axb6+ to obtain a stable edge - his next moves will include i.e? and the transfer of his ki ng to the b7 -square. White fails to equalize too after 14.tt:J h2 .idS 1S. tt:Jf6+ gxf6 16.exf6 @d7 17 .fxe7 he?+ and it is very likely that he will come under a dangerous at­tack, Paulet - A .M astrovasilis, L eros 2011) 14 . . . cS

Aft er 1S.tt:Jh4? tt:J c6 16.c3 g6+ Black's pieces ar e very active, contrary to their white counter­parts, Naiditsch - E fimenko, Ri­j eka 2010 (game 34).

4.0-0 4Jxe4 5.d4 4Jd6 6. hc6 de 7.de CiJ.fS 8 . WxdB @xd8 9 . 4Jc3 @e B

15.tt:J h5 ! Stein - Spassky, Mos­cow 1967 - This is the only move for White to maintain approxi­mate equality. 15 . .. tt:J c6 16.c3 g5 ! ? Black deprives his opponent's knight of the f4-square and en­sures the comfortable placement of his bishop on e6. 17 .i.e3 ! (It is bad for White to play 17 .tt:J f6+ @e7 18.h4 gxh4 19.g5 �d3 20.i.e3 @d8+ , as well as 17 .h4 �d3 18 .i.e3 @d8+ and in both cases he will have problems with the protec­tion of his kingside.) 17 . . . b6 (There arise double-edged posi­tions after 17 . . . @d7 ! ? 18.� adl + @c8 19.�xd8+ @xd8 20 .tt:Jd2?) 18.�edl (18.�adl? ha2+ ) 18 . . . i.c4 19.4Jd2 i.d3 20.f4 gxf4 21 . tt:Jf6+ @e7 22 .hf4 i.g7 =

ll . . J�d8 ! Black is preparing not only to

trade the kn ights on d4, but to re­treat his bishop to the c8-square.

12.ttleg5 Aft er 12 .i.g5 i.e7 13.c3, Strau­

tins - Lj ubicic, E mail 2009, he obtains an excellent position fol­lowing 13 . . . i.d5 14.�fe1 hg5 15. tt:J exg5 h6 16.Ct:J e4 h5? and he does not have any bad pieces.

12 . . • .ic8N In the game B.Savchenko -

R.Ponomariov, Olginka 2011, Black did not have anything to worry about after 12 . .. i.c4, but the varia­tion we would like to recommend would eq ualize even simpler.

13.e6 This is the only way for White

to justify the transfer of his knight to the g5-square.

13 . . . fxe6 14.�el i.e7 15. ttlxe6

It is not preferable for him to choose 15.i.f4 tt:Jd4 16.tt:J xd4 �xd4 17 .i.e5 �d2 18.hg7 �g8 19.tt:Je4 �xc2 20.i.e5 i.d7 t - Black will send his king to d8 and will have excellent chances of realizing his extra pawn.

15 •.. he6 16.�xe6 �dl + 17.�el �xel+ 18.ttlxel @t7

The activity of his pieces com­pensates the defects of his pawn­structur e. For example: 19.ttlf3 �e8 (Black can also enter a dead drawish endgame with the line: 19 . . . c5 20 .i.f4 4Jd4! 21 .LLlxd4 cxd4 22 .hc7 �c8 23.i.e5 �xc2 24.hd4 i.f6 25.hf6 @xf6 26.b4 �b2 27 .a3

207

Chapter 12

:gb3=) 2 0 .c3 h6 21..id2 .if6 22.l:l:el l:l:e6 23.@fl c!t:ld6 24. l:l:xe6 @xe6 25. @e2 @d5 26. @d3 c5=

D) 1 0 • .if4 .ie6

ll.l:l:fdl ll .tt:lg5?! - This knight-sortie

would not achieve much for White, because Black can attack the enemy rook with tempo. 11 . . . .ic4 12.:gfe1 h6 13.tt:lge4 .ie6 14 . :gad1 :gdst - He wishes to play c6-c5 and to establish his knight on the d4-outpost, while after the trade of the rooks, his king will go to the queenside after which the second Black rook will enter the actions.

As usual, White cannot create problems for his opponent with the prematurely aggressive at­tempt 11.g4 c!t:l e7 12 .h3 tt:ld5 13 . .id2, Naiditsch - K ir.G eorgiev, V alj evo 2011 (He should better avoid 13.tt:lxd5 .ixd5 14.tt:ld4 h5t - all Black's pieces enter the ac­tions eff ortlessly and the weaken­ing of White's kingside will be­come a permanent factor.) and by

208

playing 13 . . . tt:lxc3 ! 14 . .ixc3 h5 15. tt:ld4 .ic4 16.:gfe1 hxg4 17 .hxg4 c5 18.tt:lf3 .ie6 19.tt:lh2 @d7+ Black succeeds in preserving his bish­op-pair and in coordinating his rooks , beginning active actions on both sides of the board.

After 11.tt:le4 h6 12.:gadl :gds 13.b3 .ia3t, the position is obj ec­tively eq ual, but Black's future play is much simpler.

11 .a3 - White deprives the en­emy bishop of the b4-square. 11 . . . h6 12 .h3 (after 12 .:gad1, besides the transposition of moves fol­lowing 12 . . . :gds 13.h3 .ie7 - see 12 .h3, Black has the interesting resource 12 . . . g5 ! ? 13 . .ic1 g4 14. tt:ld4 tt:lxd4 15.:gxd4 .ig7 16 . .if4 :gd8= and White will have to go quickly with his knight to the f6-sq uare; otherwi se, he may even end up in a worse position.) 12 . . . :gds 13.:gad1 .ie7 (it seems also good for Black to try here 13 . . . .i c5 14.:gxd8+ @xd8 15.g4 tt:le7 16.tt:la4 .ib6 17 .tt:lxb6 axb6 18.tt:ld4 .id7 = Naiditsch - J akovenko, Poikovs­ky 2010)

In the diagrammed position White has practically no resourc­es to fight for a win :

4.0-0 liJxe4 5.d4 liJd6 6. hc6 de 7. de liJ.f5 8. "!!ixdB cJ;;xdB 9 . liJc3 cJ;;eB

14J''i:fe 1 gd7 15.liJe4 gxd1 16. gxd1 .i dS 17 .liJed2 c5i Black' s light-sq uared bishop i s very ac­tive and the trade of the rooks has been in his favour, E spinosa -Delgado Ramirez, Santa C lara 2003;

14.g4 liJh4 15.gxd8+ hd8 16. liJd4? ! (White had to comply with eq uality after 16.liJxh4 hh4=) 16 . . . .i d7 17 .liJe4 b6 18 .c4, A lmasi - A ronian, Germany 2002 and af­ter 18 . . . c5 19.liJb5 .ic6+ Black acti­vates his light-squared bishop.

ll . . . h6

12.h3 As usual, it would be prema­

ture for White to play 12 .g4? ! liJe7 13.h3 liJd5 14 . .id2 liJxc3 15.hc3 c5+! Black has taken control over the d4-sq uare and his light­sq uared bishop is completely safe from the possibility of being ex­changed. He will trade unavoida­bly his rook on aS and his only problem will be to activate his rook on h8, Naiditsch - Efimen­ko, M ukachevo 2010 (game 35).

12 . . . i.b4 13.g4 White would not achieve much

with 13.liJe2 g5 14 . .id2 hd2 15. gxd2 l'! d8 16.l'! ad1 gxd2 17 .l'!xd2 liJe7 = and the transfer of Black' s knight to the g6-square will em­phasize the vulnerability of White' s e5-pawn.

13 . . .l!Je7 14.l!Je4 Aft er 14.liJd4? ! hc3 15.liJxe6

fx e6 16.bxc3 g5 17 . .ig3 liJg6+ White's pawn-structure is in ru­ins, Hartoch - Kool, A msterdam 1963.

14 ... .td5 15.�fd2 .ixd2 16. �xd2 g5 17.i.g3 c5!

Black ensures the occupation of the long diagonal with his light­sq uared bishop.

18.f3 18.e6 fxe6 19 . .ixc7 liJg6= and

White is incapable of attacking the isolated enemy pawn on e6.

ts ... �g6 t9.cJ;;f2 gds 2 0 . �fl i.c6 21.�e3 h5= Efimenko - J akovenko, Poikovsky 2011 .

Black will trade one of his rooks and the other one will enter the actions on the h-file. White' s pawn-str ucture i s slightly prefer­able, but Black' s bishop is much more active.

209

Chapter 12 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 �f5 8J�xd8+ <i>xd8 9.�c3 <i>e8

Complete Games

33 Dimitrov - Z.Almasi Niksic 1997

l.e4 e5 2.ll'lf3 ll'lc6 3 . .ib5 lilf6 4. 0 - 0 lilxe4 5.d4 ll'ld6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lil£5 8. Wfxd8+ 'it>xd8 9.ll'lc3 'it>e8 1 0 .g4 ll'le7 ll.h3 h5 12 .ll'lh2 .ie6 13 •

.ig5 hxg4 14.hxg4 ll'ld5 15.ll'le2 f6 16 . .if4 f5 17 . .ig3 fxg4 18. lild4

18 . . . \t>£7 Black had to preserve his pow­

erful bishop: 18 . . . i.g8 ! 19.lt:Jxg4 �d8 20 .e6 lt:Jf6 21 .lt:Jxf6+ gxf6+

19J�ae1 .ic5 It is also good for him to play

19 . . . g5 20 .�e4 i.c5 21 .lt:Jxe6 'it>xe6 22 .lt:Jxg4 � ad8t - White's bishop on g3 does not participate in the actions and he cannot oust the en­emy ki ng from its wonderful placement on the e6-square.

210

2 0 .ll'lxe6 'it>xe6 2U;e4

21. •. ll'le7? Black had again the possibility

to maintain long-lasting pressure, thanks to the isolated white bish­op on g3, with the move 21 . . .g5 ! t

22.�xg4 lilf5 23.ll'lf3 i.e7= White has eq ualized but not

more than that. 24.�e1 �adS It would be interesting for Black

to opt for 24 . . . g5! ? 25.lt:Jxg5+ i.xg5 26.�xg5 �hg8 27 .�xg8 �xg8 28. 'it>g2 � d8 29.�e2 c5� - he has cre­ated a blockade on the light squares and it would be very difficult for White to activate his bishop be­cause of that. Still, Black's com­pensation would be hardly suffi­cient for more than eq uality.

25.'it>g2 c5 26.�ee4 �h6 27. .if4 �h5 28.�g6+

4.0-0 CiJxe4 5.d4 CiJd6 6. hc6 de 7.de CiJj5 8. �xd8 <tixd8 9. CiJc3 <tieS

White could have sharpened the game considerably with 28. :!"1 a4 a6 29.�g5 :!"1 dl�

28 ••• <tit7 29.:!"1g4 @e6 3 0 . :!"1g6+ @f7, Draw.

34 N aiditsch - Efimenko Rij eka 2010

l.e4 e5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3 • .ib5 c!Llf6 4. 0 - 0 c!Llxe4 5.d4 c!Lld6 6 • .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 .!Ll£5 8. '\!;lfxd8+ <tixd8 9.c!Llc3 <tieS 1 0 . c!Lle4 .ie6 11.:!"1el h6 12.g4 c!Lle7 13.h3 :!"1d8 14.c!Llg3 c5 15.c!Llh4 c!Llc6 16.c3 g6+

17.f4? ! This is a natural attempt to ad­

vance f4-f5, which would cramp considerably the opponent, but it weakens seriously White's king­side.

17 • • • h5! 18.gxh5 .ie7 It is also good for Black to play

18 . . . hh3 ! ?+ 19.c!Llf3 gxh5 2 0 .<tih2 :!"1d3

21 • .ie3 .idS (diagram)

22.!ilg5? Whit e should have complied

with t he fact that his position was clearly worse and try to fight for

equality with the move 2 2 . <tig2+ 22 ••• .ixg5 23.f:xg5 h4 24.

.!Ll£5 Aft er the amazing move 24.

CiJhl!+ White would have off ered a much tougher resistance.

24 ••• b6 Black only needed to bring his

king into the actions with the move 24 . . . <tid7+ in order to con­solidate his achievements.

25.2"1e2 @d7 26 • .if4 .ie6 27.c!Lle3 c!Lle7!+

F rom the g6-square Black's knight will protect the h4-pawn, attack the enemy e5-pawn and will not stand in the way of the ac­tivation of his own king.

28.a3 c!Llg6 29.:!"1fl <tic6 3 0 . c!Llg4 :!"1hd8 3 1 • .icl :!"1dl 32.:!"1eel E1xel 33.:!"1xel :!"1d3 34.c!Llf2 :1'1£3 35.c!Llg4 @b5!-+

211

Chapter 12

White' s position is beyond sal­vation, despite the material equal­ity. The difference in the activity of pieces is too great.

36.<j{g2 �g3+ 37.<j{h2 .id5 38.�e2 i.£3 39.c4+ <j{xc4 4 0 . �c2+ <j{b5 41.lLlf6 i.b7 42.e6 lLle5 0 -1

35 Naiditsch - Efimenko Mukachevo 2010

l.e4 e5 2.lLlf3 lLlc6 3 . .ib5 lLlf6 4. 0 - 0 lLlxe4 5.d4 lLld6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lLlf5 8. Wfxd8+ <j{xd8 9.lLlc3 <j{e8 10 . .if4 .ie6 ll.�fd1 h6 12.g4 lLle7 13.h3 lLld5 14.i.d2 lLlxc3 15 •

.ixc3 c5+± 16.<j{g2 i.e7 17.lLlg1 h5 18.£3 �d8 19.lLle2

19 .•. �xd1?! Black did not need to be in a

hurry to trade the rooks so much, because White cannot exchange them. Black's rook on h8 will en­ter the actions immediately.

He could have preserved ex­cellent prospects with t he move 19 . . . i.g5+±

2 0 .�xd1 hxg4 21.hxg4 .ig5

212

22.a3 <j{e7 23 . .id2 hd2 24. �xd2 b5?

It was more accurate for Black to play 24 . . . .id7 25.'2l g3 b6+± and he would have chances of proving that his bishop is more powerful than the enemy knight and that would have compensated his infe­rior pawn-structure.

25.lLlc3! �b8 26.lLle4! c4 27.<j{g3;t

The main defect of Black's po­sition is that his pawn has been advanced to the c4-square, hav­ing restricted his own bishop.

27 • . . a5 28.f4 g6 29.<j{h4 b4 3 0 .axb4 axb4

He would have maintained a defensible position with the line : 30 . . . c3 ! ? 31.'Llxc3 �xb4 32 .<j{g5 �xb2 33.f5;t

31.<j{g5 �b5 32.lLlf6± Black's king is locked in a cage

and it will hardly get out of it, be­cause all White's pieces are active.

32 •.• c3 33.bxc3 bxc3 34. �h2 .id5 35.�h3 .ic6 36. �xc3+- �b6 37.�c5 �a6 38. <j{h6 <j{f8 39.c4 �b6 4 0 .lLld5 .ixd5 41.cxd5 gb7 42.d6 cxd6 43.exd6 1- 0

Chapter 13 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 tlJc6 3 . .ib5 tlJf6 4. 0 -0 ttJxe4 5.d4 tlJd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ttJ£5 8. �xd8+ @xd8 9.tLlc3 @e8 1 0 .�dl

Quick Repertoire

The drawback of this develop­ing move for White is that his rook may belong later to the e1-square.

lO ... tL!e7 With a white rook on d1, Black

can transfer quickly his knight to a more favourable position - g6 - without being afraid of plans for White connected with the pawn­advance e5-e6.

ll.h3 This is prophylactic against

ig4. It may look rather unpleasant

for Black to face the line: ll .if4 ig4! 12 .:1:1 d3 tt:lg6 13.ig3 :1:1d8 14. :1:1xd8+ l!?x d8 15.tt:lg5 l!?e8! 16.e6 f6 ! = , but he can consolidate his position w ith precise moves.

Aft er 11.tt:le4 tt:lg6 12.:1:1 e1 ig4

13.tt:ld4 :1:1d8 14.c3 a6? Black will prepare c6-c5, ousting the active enemy knight and deploying his bishop to the e6-square.

In the variation ll .tt:ld4 tt:lg6 12.f4 ig4 13.:1:1d3 (13.tt:lce2 ic5 14. l!?f2 :1:1 d8 15.i e3 tt:lh4 16.g3 ixd4 17.:1:1xd4 tt:lf5? - Black manages to hold his opponent's kingside pawns and will soon begin an of­fensive on the queenside) 13 . . . i c5 14.ie3 :1:1d8 15.:1:1f1 h5 16.:1:1f2 tt:le7 17.:1:1fd2 ixd4 18.:1:1xd4 :1:1 xd4 19. ixd4 b6= White fails to organize a pawn- assault on the kingside and in a position with bishops of opposite colours, as a rule, Black has no problems at all .

ll ••• tL!g6

12 . .ig5

213

Chapter 13

Following 12 .b3 ie7 13.ib2 i d7 14.tt'le4 tt'lf4 15.El:el tt'le6 16.c4 a5 ! ? 17.a4 El:d8 18.El:adl b6+ Black prepares successfully the place­ment of his bishop on e6.

Aft er 12 .tt'le4 if5 13.El:el EJ:d8 14.i g5 ie7 15.c3 .b:g5 16.tt'lexg5 h6+! his knight will go to the f4-square.

Black should not be afraid of 12 .El:el ib4 13.i d2 ie6 14.a3 ix: c3 15.ix: c3 EJ:d8 16.<;t>h2 <;t>d7 17. El:adl + <;t>cS+!

The too precise line: 12 .a3 i e7 13.El:el tt'lh4 14.tt'lxh4 ix:h4 15.tt::le2 i e7 16.tt::ld4 ic5=, leads after the unavoidable move ix: d4 to a drawish position with bishops of opposite colours.

It would be completely harm­less for Black if White chooses 12.El:el ib4 13.id2 ie6 14.a3 ix:c3 15.ix: c3 EJ:d8= and the endgame with bishops of opposite colours is usually advantageous for Black.

12 ..• i.e7 White's dark-squared bishop

exerts pressure against the d8-

214

square and prevents the coordi­nation of Black's rooks, so he should better try to exchange it.

13 . .ixe7 <;t>xe7 14.tt'le4

14 . . . �e8 He exerts immediate pressure

against White's e5-pawn. Black has an alternative plan

here, connected with 14 . . . b7-b6 and the subsequent development of the bishop on the long diago­nal. A ll this emphasizes that his position is very promising.

15.�el <j{f8+ A ll Black's pieces are in action

and White's e5-pawn is an excel­lent target for attack.

Chapter 13 1.e4 e5 2)iJf3 ttlc6 3 . .ib5 ttlf6 4. 0 -0 ttlxe4 5.d4 ttld6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ttlf5 8.1.�/xdS+ @xd8 9.ttlc3 @e8 10 .�d1 ttle7

Step by Step

A) U.ti)d4 B) ll.h3

About 11 .�e3 lt:lg6 12 .h3 �e7 -see variation B.

White has also tried in prac­tice :

in reply to 11.�e1, Wirig - Paci, V andoeuvr e 2004, Black brings quickly into the actions his queen­side pieces 11 . . .�g4 12.lt:ld4 �d8 13.�e3 lt:lf5+;

11.�f4 - With a white bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal, Black must watch carefully about the possible pawn-break e5- e6. 11 . . . �g4! 12 .� d3 (It would be more principled for White to try here 12 .h3 h:f3 13.gxf3 - he has com­promised his kingside pawn­structure indeed, but has de-

prived his opponent of the two­bishop advantage and impeded the introduction into the actions of his rook on h8. 13 . . . lt:lf5 14JM 3 �d8 15J'J: ad1 �xd3 16.�xd3 �e7 17.lt:le4 c5 18 .c3 b6 19.Wfl h6 20 .We2 �h4 != , followed by the unavoidable We7 and Black's rook will leave its exile.) 12 . . . lt:lg6 13. �g3 � d8 14.�xd8+ Wxd8 15.lt:lg5, V otava - Berezjuk, Presov 1999 (15.� d1+?! White forces the ene­my king to go to the queenside. 15 . . . Wc8 16.lt:le4 �e7 17.h3 �f5 18. � e1, Panarin - V .R odchenkov, E ssentuki 2003, 18 . . . c5+ ) . 15 . . . We8 ! - Black' s light-squared bishop is very powerful and he must preserve it. 16.e6 - This is the only way for White to fight for the advantage; otherwise, Black will play h7-h6 and seize the ini­tiative. 16 .. .f6 ! 17.lt:lf7 �g8 18 .�xc7 h: e6 19.lt:ld8 �c8 20 .� d1 �e7 2 1 . lt:le4. In this rather unclear posi­tion, the simplest way for Black to reduce the tension is the not so obvious move 21 . ..l2lh8 ! ? 22 . lt:ld6+ h: d6 23.�xd6 lt:lf7 24.lt:lxf7 Wxf7 =

ll.lt:le4 lt:lg6 (it is also interest­ing for him to opt for ll . . . �g4 ! ?)

215

Chapter 13

12 .El e1 (12 .t2Jd4 f1. e7 - see varia­tion A; 12 .h3 f1.f5 - see variation B) 12 . . . 11.g4. Black solves with tempo the problem with the de­velopment of his rook on a8. (In the game Sarbok - M arkowski, Reykj avik 2000, there followed 12 . . . h6 ! ? 13.tt:Jd4 c5 14.tt:Jb5 'it>d7 15.f4 lt>c6t and only White may have problems, but he could have played better with 13.h3 !? , after which Black would have problems developing his light-squared bishop.) 13.tt:J d4 (White would not achieve much with 13.tt:J eg5 c5 and here, after 14.e6 f6 15.h3 f1. f5 16.tt:J e4 El d8 17.11. d2 fi e?+ his e6-pawn would be much rather a liability than a passed pawn, while in the variation 14.h3 f1. f5 15.tt:J e4 h6? the position would be approximately equal, although Black's play would be a bit easier.) 13 .. . El d8 14.c3 a6 (preparing c6-c5) 15.f1. g5 El d5 16.h3 f1. c8?

A) ll.t2Jd4 This move is connected with a

trap.

ll . . .lbg6

216

Black's naive reply 1l . . .t2Jf5? will be countered by the problem­like variation 12 .tt:J db5 ! cxb5 13. tt:Jxb5 Elb8 14.t2Jxc7+ lt>e7 15.g4 tt:Jh6 16.h3± and he has an extra piece, but he can hardly complete the development of his forces.

12.f4 Now, it would not work for

White to continue with 12 .tt:Jdb5? cxb5 13.tt:Jxb5 lt>e7 14.tt:Jxc7 Elb8 15.b3 f6+ Black's knight is even better placed on g6 than on f5.

12 .11.g5?! f1. d7 13.El e1 h6 14. f1.d2, Almasi - Dumitrache, Odor­heiu Secuiesc 1995 (14.11. e3 f1.b4 15.f4 hc3 16.bxc3 c5 17.t2Je2 b6+ He has obtained a favourable po­sition with bishops of opposite colours, Penillas - C abezas, Na­valmoral 2008). Black can play here 14 . . . Eld8 15.tt:J e4 c5 16.t2Je2 f1. e7t and he activates his rook on a8 and deploys his bishop to the long diagonal.

12 .h3 f1. e7 13.f4 (13.Ele1 c5 ! 14. tt:J db5 'it> d7 15.tt:J d5 f1. d8? with ex­cellent chances for Black of seiz­ing the initiative) 13 . . . h5 14.11.e3 tt:J h4 15.f1.f2 (White cannot create problems for his opponent with 15.tt:J e4 tt:Jf5 16.'it> f2 h4 17.Eld2 tt:Jxd4 18.hd4, K osteniuk - Kar­j akin, Brissago 2003, 18 . . . b6?) 15 . . . tt:J f5 16.t2Jf3 h4 17.tt:J e2 f1. e6 18. b3 El d8 19.c4 a6 20 .Elxd8+, R at­tinger - Haeusler, E mail 2006. Now, Black can make an easy draw with 20 . . . \t>xd8 2l .El d1 + lt> c8= and White does not have a single active idea, but Black must protect his h4-pawn with his rook.

5.d4 4Jd6 6. hc6 de 7.de lDf5 8. WffxdB @xdB 9.tDc3 @eBJO.'fMl tDe7

12 .0J e4 :il.e7 13.f4 (following 13.l'!e1? ! c5 ! White cannot equal­ize with 14.0Jb5 @d7! - this is a typ ical manoeuvre, Black's king will go to the c6-square and after 15.:il. g5, S pasov - Zhang Zhong, Elista 1998, he will obtain a great lead in development with 15 . . . hg5 16.0Jxg5 @c6 17.a4 l'! e8 18. 0Jxf7 a6 19.0Jg5 h6 20 .0J e4 :il.f5 21. 0Jbc3 0Jxe5t, while following 14. 0Jb3 b6, White achieves nothing with 15.0Jf6+ in view of 15 . . . @f8 16.0J d5 :il. d8 17.0Jd2 c6 18.0J e3 0Jxe5+ with a solid extra pawn for Black, Leko - Almasi, Budapest 1997) 13 . . . 0Jh4! - White's move f2-f4 will fortify his e5-pawn in­deed, but will compromise the light squares.

14.:i!. e3 - After this move Black can accomplish the desired ex­change of the knights. 14 . . . 0Jf5 15.@f2 f6 16.0Jf3 0Jxe3 17.@xe3 @f7� , or 15.:il.f2 0Jxd4 16.l'!xd4 :il. e6� K undin - Postny, L itohoto 1999 and i n both cases Black's powerful bishop-pair compen­sat es the defects of his pawn­struct ure.

14.l'! e1 c5 ! He will place his ki ng on c6. 15 .0Jb5 @d7 16.b4 @c6

17.a4 b6 (Black cannot make more than a draw with the straightfor­ward line : 17 . . . cxb4 18.0J d4+ @d5 19.0Jb5 @c6=) 18.bxc5 bxc5 19. :il. a3 0Jf5t - his c5-pawn is not weak at all and Black's knight will soon occupy comfortably the d4-square and his rooks will enter the actions easily, Svidler - Tim­man, Elista 1998.

12 •.. i.g4 13.l'!d3 Aft er 13.0J ce2 �c5 14.@f2 ,

Wharrier - Dufour, E mail 2007, he can provoke advantageous ex­changes with 14 . . . l'!d8 15.:i!.e3 0Jh4 16.g3 hd4 17.l'!xd4 0Jf5 18.l'!xd8+ @xd8 19.0Jg1 0Jxe3 20.@xe3 h5� - the move h7-h5 is a defensive resource, since Black plans active actions on the queenside.

13 . . . i.c5 14.i.e3 gd8 15.gfl Following 15.g3, Stanoj oski -

Mitkov, Ohrid 2001, he will enter a favourable position with bish­ops of opposite colours after 15 . . . b6 16.@g2 hd4 17.l'!xd4 l'!xd4 18. hd4 �f5 19.l'!c1 h5+ - His bishop is very active, while its white counterpart is restricted by his own pawns.

15 . . . h5

217

Chapter 13

16.:af2 Black has nothing to worry

about in the variation 16.h3 hd4 17.E1xd4 E1xd4 18 .. bd4 .ifSt Zju­kin - O.Sepp, Tallinn 2007.

16 .• .lt)e7 17.:afd2 hd4 18. :axd4 :axd4 19.hd4 b6 2 0 .<;!{f2

20 .a3 h4 21 .tt:le4 .ifS 22 .tt:lg5, Turko - G omez G alan, E mail 2004, 22 . . . c5 23 . .i e3 f6 24.tt:lf3 @£7+ - His pieces will soon attack the weak light squares in White's camp.

2 0 • • • tt:lg6= Black has con­tained the avalanche of White's pawns on the kingside and can look optimistically in the future, G oloshchapov - Haba, Pardubice 1998 (game 36) .

B) ll.h3 White does not let the enemy

bishop to g4. ll . . . tt:lg6

12.:ae1 His rook is better placed here

than on d1, but he has lost a tem­po.

In response to 12 .@h2, Black continues with the thematic 12 . . .

218

f6 13.exf6 gxf6� , eliminating the cramping enemy pawn.

F ollowing 12 . .i e3, Dervishi -M iles, Saint V incent 2000, Black should also plan the undermining resource t7-f6 : 12 . . . .i e7 and then on the next move t7-f6 with ap­proximate eq uality.

12 .b3 .ie7 13 . .ib2 (13.tt:le2 f6 -see 12.tt:le2) 13 . . . .id7 14.tt:le4 (after 14.tt:le2 E1 d8 15.E1d2 .ic8 16.E1 xd8+ @xd8 17.E1 d1+ @e8 18.tt:lg3 hS !� White's knight will fail to go to the h5-sq uare) 14 . . . tt:lf4 15.E1 e1 tt:le6 16.c4 aS ! ? 17.a4 E1 d8 18.E1 ad1 b6 19.lL'l g3 cS+ - The activation of Black's light-squared bishop pro­vides him with superior pros­pects, Hj artarson - Gyimesi, Tu­rin 2006.

12 .tt:le2 .ie7 13 . .id2 (13 .b3 f6 14.exf6 gxf6 1S . .ib2 @t7 16.tt:lg3 hS=) 13 . . . .id7 14 . .i c3 E1 d8 1S.tt:le1, Aseev - R azuvaev, St Petersburg 1998. Now, he has the pleasant choice between 15 .. .f6+ and 15 . . . cS+

White would not achieve much with 12.tt:le4 .ifS 13.E1e1 E1 d8.

Black completes eff ortlessly his development and has no prob­lems at all :

5.d4 tiJd6 6.hc6 de 7.de tiJf5 8.1Jffxd8 mxdB 9 . tiJc3 me810.'i1dl tiJe7

14.g4 he4 15.'f1xe4 'i1 d1+ 16. mg2 h5 17 .b3 hxg4 18.'f1xg4, Yan­demirov - Plachetka, C appelle I a G rande 1998. Here, it would be very good for him to continue with 18 . . . �e7 19.�b2 'f1xa1 20.ha1 c5� , c ompromising White's king­side pawn-structure in order to compensate the defects of his own on the q ueenside;

14.�d2?! �e7 15.�a5 b6 16. �c 3, Bernal V arela - Nielsen, E mail 2006, after 16 . . . c 5+ , Black plans to deploy his knight on e6 and his king on c 6;

14.�g5 �e7 15.c 3 (15.he7 ? ! mxe7 16.c 3 'f1d5 17 .c 4 'i1 dd8 18.tiJg3 �e6t - All his piec es enter easily the actions, De H aas - Bloem­hard, Soest 1998) 15 . . . hg5 16. tzJexg5 h6 17 .tiJe4 tzJf4� H errera - C heparinov, C ollado V illalba 2004.

12 .a3 �e7 13.'f1e1 (in answer to 13.mh2, Loskutov - Belikov, A lushta 2005, as well as following 13 .�e3, F ontaine - C rouan, Meri­bel 1998, it would be very strong for Black to play the standard 13 . . . f6 14.exf6 gxf6=) 13 . . . tiJh4 14. tzJxh4 hh4 15.tiJe2 �e7 16.'Lld4 �c 5 17 .�e3 hd4 18.hd4 �e6= -There has arisen a c ompletely drawish ending, Dominguez Perez - Lysyj , Khanty-M ansiysk (rapid) 2011 .

12.�g5 �e7 13.he7 (13.'f1 d2? ! Suchomel - Staufc ik, C zec h Re­public 2007 , this is a blunder of a pawn. 13 . . . tzJxe5 14.'Llxe5 hg5 15.'i1 d3 �f6 16.'f1 e1 �e6+; 13.'f1e1 �b4 ! ? 14.tzJ d4? - it is preferable

for White to play 14.�d2 �e6 -see 12 .'f1 e1 - 14 . . . hc 3 15.bxc 3 c5 16.'Llb5 m d7 17 .h4 mc 6 18.c4 h6 19.h5 'Llf8 20 .�h4 �g4+ K onguvel - M iles, An dorra 1998) 13 . . . mxe7 14.'Ll e4 (White c annot equalize with 14. tiJe2 �e6 15.'Ll g3 'i1hd8+ -all Black's piec es are in action, his light- sq uared bishop is very pow­erful and White's attempts to ex­change it would lose the e5-pawn for him, Nikolaic zuk - Schwer­teck, Dortmund 2004) 14 . . . 'f1 e8 15.'f1 e1 mf8 16.tiJg3 �e6+ H e has diffic ulties with the protection of his e5-pawn, Nepomniac htc hi -K urnosov, M osc ow 2010 (game 37).

12 •.. .ib4 13 . .id2 .ie6 14.a3 14.'Ll e4?! hd2 15.'Llexd2 'i1d8�

- The position may be obj ectively equal, but Black's play is much simpler.

14 • • . hc3 15.hc3 �d8 16. mh2, Dominguez Perez - Lysyj , K hanty-M ansiysk 2011 (game 38).

Here, it would be very good for him to acc omplish the standard transfer of the ki ng to the queen-

219

Chapter 13

side by playing 16 . . . �d7 17. �ad1+ (following 17 .lt:JgS b6 18. E1 adl+ �e7 ? Blac k's king will be perfectly plac ed in the c entre, sinc e it would not work for White to play ib4+ in view of c 6-c S) 17 . . . �c8 18.l::!xd8+ (18.tt:JgS E1 xdl 19.!:1xdl idS?) 18 . . . �xd8 19 )i)g5 lilf4 2 0 .�e4 (Black

220

should not be afraid of 20 .tt:Jxh7 i dS and now, it is bad for White to opt for 21.f3 tt:J e6+ and his knight will remain under arrest, while following 21 .g3 tt:Jxh3 22 . �xh3 E1h8= the opponents may already agree to a draw) 2 0 ••.

lild5 21.lilxe6 fxe6 22 . .ie1 b6? - Both sides have their trumps.

Chapter 13 l.e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 �c6 3.i.b5 �f6 4. 0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 �f5 8.'�xd8+ �xd8 9.�c3 �e8 lO.�dl �e7

Complete Games

36 Goloshchapov - Haba Pardubic e 1998

l.e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tLlc6 3.i.b5 tbf6 4. 0 - 0 tLlxe4 5.d4 tLld6 6. i.xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tLlf5 8. '11;l/xd8+ �xd8 9.tLlc3 �e8 1 0 . E1dl tLle7 11.tLld4 tLlg6 12.f4 i.g4 13.E1d3 gds 14.i.e3 i.c5 15.E1fl h5 16.gf2 tLle7 17.gfd2 i.xd4 18.E1xd4 gxd4 19.i.xd4 b6 2 0 . �f2 tLlg6 21.i.e3 h4 22.h3 .id7 23.�f3 gh5 24.b3 i.c8 25.tLle2 tbe7 26.c4 tLlf5

27.tLld4?! White needs to take urgent

measure s in order to neutralize his opp onent's light- square d bishop o n the long diagonal. H e should try t o transfer his kn ight to the dS-square with the line: 27 . i.f2 c S 28.tLlc 3 i.b7 + 29.tLl d5=

27 . • . tLlxd4+ 28.i.xd4 c5 29.i.e3 �e7t

There has arisen a standard endgame with bishops of opposite colours. White's bishop is c om­pletely idle in it.

3 0 .i.f2 i.f5 31.i.el E1h8 32. i.f2 a5 33.a4 f6

34.exf6+?! It would be more acc urate for

him to c hoose 34. E1 e2 . 34 •.. gxf6+ White has a weak pawn on b3

and problems with the protection of his g2-pawn.

35.ge2+ �f7 36.ge3 .id7 37.�e2 .ic6 38.g3 hxg3 39. �g3

H e c ould have made an easy draw with 39.i.xg3 ! E1xh3 40.f5=

39 .•• .id7 4 0 .h4 .if5 41.�d2

221

Chapter 13

�d8+ 42.c.!?c1 .ig6 43 . .ie1 �e8 44 . .id2 .if5 45 . .ie3 .ig6 46 . .id2 �e2 4 7 .�h3 .ih5 48.�d3

Aft er 48.El e3 ! = , White could build a fort ress which would be impossible to break.

48 ... .ig4 49.�d8 �f2 5 0 . �h8 .if5 51.h5?!

It was more tenac ious for him to defend with Sl.Elb8+ , trying to organize c ounterplay against Blac k's pawns.

51. .. �h2 52.h6 c.!?e7 53.h7 @f7

54.�g8?! After 54.i.el+ White's chanc es

of a succ essful defenc e would have been quite real. It would be diffic ult for Black to c apture the h7 -pawn without exc hanging the rooks, or losing the c7 -pawn.

54 ... �xh7 55.�g3 �h1 + 56. c.!?b2 �fl 57.c.!?c3 �f2 58.�g1 .ie4 59.�g3 .ib1 6 0 .�g1 .ie4 61.�g3 .ig6 62.�g1 .ih5 63. c.!?c2 .if3 64.�g3 �fl 65. c.!?c3 c.!?e6 66.�g7 .id1 67.�g3 @f5 68.�d3 �f2 69.c.!?b2 c.!?g4 70. c.!?c1 �f171.c.!?b2 .if3 72.�d7 .id1 73.�d3 c.!?f5 74.c.!?c3 �h1 75.�e3 �h2 76.�d3 c.!?g4 77.c.!?b2 .ie2 78.�d7 �h3

222

79.c.!?c2 White could have made a draw

easily here with 79 .Elxc7 ! i.dl 80. i.c 3 Elh2+ 81. <i> a3=

79 ... .if3 8 0 .�g7+ @f5 81. �xc7 �h1 82.�e7 .id1+ 83.c.!?c3 �h2 84.�b7

84.El e8 hb3 85.Elb8 ha4 86. Elxb6=

84 ... �h3+ 85.c.!?b2 �xb3+ 86.c.!?c1 .if3 87.ha5?

H e was obviously tired of the long and laborious defence and made a blunder. 87 .<i>c 2 ! hb7 88.<i>xb3=

87 ... .ixb7 0 -1

37 Nepomniachtchi-Kurnosov M osc ow 2010

l.e4 e5 2.ll:\f3 ll:lc6 3 . .ib5 ll:lf6 4. 0 - 0 ll:lxe4 5.d4 ll:ld6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ll:lf5 8. �xd8+ c.!?xd8 9.ll:lc3 c.!?e8 1 0 . �d1 ll:le7 ll.h3 ll:lg6 12 . .ig5 .ie7 13.he7 c.!?xe7 14.ll:le4 �e8 15. �e1 @f8 16.ll:lg3 .ie6+ 17.h4 .idS 18.h5 ll:lf4 19.ll:lh4 �adS 2 0.c4 .ie6 21.b3

(diagram) 21. .. b5 It seems very interesting for

Blac k to try now 21 . . .ll:ld3 ! ? 22 .El e4

5.d4 li'Jd6 6.hc6 de 7 .de li'Jj5 8 . Wffxd8 c,!;xd8 9.ctJc3 c,!;e810 .:Sdlli'Je7

�c 8 23.f4 �g4+ - he has allowed his opponent to protec t his e5-pawn, but his bishop has gained acc ess to a wonderful square.

22.h6 gxh6 23.:Se4 tbg6 24.tbh5

24 ..• bxc4? ! Blac k reduc es the tension pre­

maturely. It is not favourable for White to exchange on b5, bec ause that will not only present the d5-square to Black' s bishop, but will also c orrect his pawn-structure.

It was simpler for him to c on­tinue with 2 4 .. J'l:d3+ , activating gradually his p iec es.

25.bxc4 f5?! It is prefe rable for Blac k to opt

here for 25 ... :Sb8 26.li'J f6 :S ed8+ , occupying both open files.

26.exf6 J.c8 27.:Sxe8+ :Sxe8 28.tbf3 J.g4 29.tbg7?!

White c ould have equalized

with 29.li'Jg3 hf3 30.gxf3 :S e6 3l .:Sbl :Sxf6 32 .:Sb7= and the ac ­tivity of his rook compensates fully the vulnerability of his king­side pawns.

29 . . .l'�d8?! Black' s position would be bet­

ter, but not bec ause of his extra doubled pawn, but thanks to his more active piec es following 29 . . . :S e4 30.li'J d2 :S e2 3l.:Sdl c,f;; f7 32.f3 cJ;;xf6 33.fx g4 c,!;xg7+

3 0 .tbh2 J.c8 31.:Sel <.t>t7 32.tbh5 :Se8

It was preferable for him to opt for 32 ... :Sd4 !?

33.:Sxe8 c.t>xe8 34.tbfl? The position would be c om­

pletely unc lear after 34.f4 c,f;;f7 35. c,f;; f2 c 5 36.'it> e3oo

34 •.. tbe5 35.tbe3 c.t>£7+ White loses his f6-pawn and

Black's prospects become again preferable.

36.c5 <.t>g6 37.f4 White fails to equalize after

37.li'Jf4+ c,f;; xf6 38.c,!;h2+ 37 . . . tbd7 38.g4 tbxf6? It was essential for Blac k to

c reate at first a passed pawn with 38 . . . li'Jxc 5 39.c,!; g2 c,f;;f7 40.li'Jc 4 li'Jd7 4l.cJ;;f3 c5+ and only then to

223

Chapter 13

c ontinue with active ac tions on the kingside.

39)2Jxf6 <!>xf6 4 0 .<!>f2 .ie6 41.a3 h5 42.g5+ <!>g6 43.<!>g3 h6 44.gxh6 <!>xh6 45)2Jc2 <!>g6, Draw.

38 Dominguez Perez - LysY,j World C up

Khanty-M ansiysk 2011 1.e4 e5 2)2Jf3 tDc6 3 . .ib5

tDf6 4. 0 - 0 tlJxe4 5.d4 tlJd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tlJf5 8. �xd8+ <!>xd8 9.1%d1+ <!>e8 1 0 . tDc3 tDe7 ll.h3 tlJg6 12.1%e1 .ib4 13 . .id2 .ie6 14.a3 .ixc3 15. .ixc3 1%d8 16.<!>h2

16 ..• 1%d5!? It was more acc urate for Black

to play here 16 . . . �d7 - see "Step by Step" .

17.g4 h5 18.�g3 h4+ 19. <!>h2 c5 2 0 .tlJg5 1%d7?

The thematic reaction 20 . . . �e7 21 .b4 1%hd8 22 .bxc 5 �d?gg would have provided Blac k with exc ellent c ompensation for the pawn. A ll his piec es would be in action and White's queenside pawns would be very weak.

21.1%ad1?

224

The surprising resourc e 21 .b4 ! cxb4 22 .axb4 a6 23.l2J e4;t; would have enabled White to activate considerably his forc es.

21. . • 1%xd1 22.1%xd1 .ic8? This is a blunder. Black could maintain easily

the balanc e with the line: 22 . . . �e7 23.l2Jxe6 �xe6 24J::! fl l2Jf4 25.�d2 g5=

23.tDe4! �e7 He would lose the game with

the variation he had planned on his previous move - 23 . . . b6? 24.e6 ! f6 25.l2Jxf6+ gxf6 26. hf6+-

24.t2Jxc5 b6 25.ft�e4

25 ••• .ib7? White would not win the game

so easily after the more tenac ious defenc e 25 . . . 1% d8 26.1%xd8 �xd8 27 .l2Jg5 �en

26.tlJg5 .ic8 27 • .ib4+ ! c5 28 . .ic3±

H e has provoked the weaken­ing of the d6-square and his knight is headed there.

28 . . . tlJf4 29.tlJe4 .ia6 3 0 . tlJd6 g6 31.tDxt7 1%f8 32.tlJg5 tDe6 33.tDxe6 <!>xe6 34.1%d6+ <!>e7 35.�g1 1- 0

Chapter 14 l.e4 e5 2)ij£3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4.0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8.'!�fxd8+ cj;lxd8 9.�c3 cj;le8 10 .h3

Quick Repertoire

White does not determine yet the placement of his minor and major pieces and makes a useful move forcing the opponent to consider the possibility of the pawn- advance g2-g4.

1 0 . . . h5 Black has prevented for long

g2-g4, but has weakened the im­portant gS-square. The subse­quent actions mostly depend on whether White will manage to ex­ploit this defect of Black's posi­tion. T he rook on h8 may enter the actions on the h-file in numer­ous variations.

ll..!Lle2 We will analyze the move

11.:E\ d1 in our next chapter, the move ll.i.gS - in Chapter 16 and

what is c onsidered to be most un­pleasant for Black - 11.�f4 - in our final chapter. The alternatives for White do not pose any serious problems for Black.

H e should not be afraid of 11. h4 �e7 12. g3 �e6 13.ct:l e4 :B d8 14. c3 cS� - White has gained some tempi for development, but his pawn-structure has lost its elas­ticity. H is other possibility is too slow and also harmless for Black 11 .�d2 �e7 12.:B ad1 ct:lh4 13.ct:ld4 ct:lfS=

In the variation ll.ct:le4 �e7 12 .:E\ e1 �e6 13.�g5 :B d8� Black has developed his rook on a8 and is ready to begin q uietly the im­provement of his position on the q ueenside with b7 -b6, c7 -c5, a7 -a5, c5- c4 etc.

White cannot achieve much with ll.b3 �e7 12 .�b2 �e6 13. :B ad1 aS= Black's plan is standard. H e must try to exchange the rooks.

(diagram) ll . . . b6!? This idea forces White to stop

his attempts to prove his advan­tage, while he could have tried to

225

Chapter 14

do that after for example: ll . . .i.e7 12 .i.g5 i.e6 13.ttl f4 .idS 14.tt:lxd5 cxd5, K arj akin - P ashiki an, K hanty-M ansiysk 2010.

12 . .if4 It is more principled for White

to choose 12.:B dl i.a6 13 .ttl f4 ! , but following 13 . . . :B d8 ! 14.:B xd8 lt>xd8 15.e6 f6!? Black has sufficient

2 26

counterplay against White's far­advanced e6-pawn.

12 . . . c5 13.gadl .ib7 14.tbg5 gh6!=

Black has activated his rook on h8 and defended against the pos­sibility e5-e6. He has no problems at all.

Chapter 14 l.e4 e5 2.tt:Jf3 tt:Jc6 3 . .ib5 tt:Jf6 4.0 -0 tt:Jxe4 5.d4 tt:Jd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tt:Jf5 8.'�xd8+ @xd8 9.tt:Jc3 @eS 10 .h3 h5

Step by Step

A) ll.b3 B) ll.tiJe2

1l .h4 - White prevents h5-h4, followed by the activation of his opponent's rook on the h5- square, but Blac k gains sufficient time to complete his development. 11 . . . .i e7 12 .g3 .i e6 13.'Lle4 (13J'!d1 l:'ld8 14 . .ig5 f6 15 . .if4 l:'ld7= White fails to exert pressure on the d-file) 13 .. J�d8 14.c3 c5 15.l:'l e1 b6� Black's plan is quite c lear. H e must try t o transfer his king to the queenside, C orrales J imenez -Quesada P erez, Havana 2010.

ll . .i d2 - This developing move is too slow and as usual, it does not c reate any problems for Black. ll . . . .i e7 12.l:'lad1 (in answer to 12 .'Ll e2? ! , K .Schmidt - H olst,

Denmark 2007, it would be good for Blac k to c omplete his devel­opment with 12 . . . .ie6, sinc e he should not be afraid of 13.'Lled4 'Llxd4 14.'Llxd4 .id7t, bec ause the exchange of the knights is in his favour and he c ompletes eff ort­lessly his development, or 13.'Llf4 .ic 4 14.l:'lfe1 g5 ! and he occ upies additional space on the kingside, depriving White's knights of c om­fortable squares. 15.b3 .i a6 16. 'Ll e2 fi.xe2 17.l:'lxe2 g4 18.'Ll e1 l:'ld8t)

12 . . . 'Llh4 (Blac k is tryi ng to acc omplish the thematic ex­change of the knights, although it is also good for him to opt for 12 . . . .i e6 ! ? 13.'Llg5 .ic 4 14.l:'lfe1 'Ll d4� ) 13.'Llxh4 (13.'Lld4 'Llf5=) 13 . . . hh4 14.'Lle2 .i e7 15.'Lld4 (White's other attempt to prepare e5- e6 with the

227

Chapter 14

move 15.l"!fe1 can be parried by Blac k with 15 . . . i.d7 16.tt:ld4 c5 17 . e6 cxd4 18.exd7 + 'it>xd7 t White will regain his d4-pawn, but in re­ply to cxd4, Black will continue with c 5-c 4 and thanks to his cen­tralized king he will have c hances of obtaining an advantage.) 15 . . . a6 (He has deprived White' s knight of the b5-sq uare and will prepare the pawn-advance c 6-c 5.) 16.l"!fe1 c5 . H ere, in the game A .Sokolov - C ornette, Nimes 2009, the opponents agreed to a draw and in fact after 17 .tt:le2 i.f5 18.c3 l"!d8 19.i.e3 g5� Black would have no problems whatsoever.

1l .l"!e1 - White will try to pre­pare e5-e6, but Black c an easily prevent that. ll . . . i.e6 12 .a3 (12. tt:le4 i.e7 - see 11 .tt:le4; the the­matic ll .tt:lg5? would not work, bec ause of l l . . . tt:ld4 and White c annot save his c 2-pawn. In reply to 12 .i.d2, A .V ajda - Meszaros, Z alakaros 2001, it would be logi­c al for Blac k to complete the de­velopment of his q ueenside with 12 . . . l"! d8 13.i.g5 i.e7 14.l"! ad1 hg5 15.tt:lxg5 tt:ld4� ) 12 . . . l"!d8 13.i.g5 i.e7 14.l"! ad1 l"!xd1 (it is also good for him to choose 14 . . . hg5 15. tt:lxg5 tt:ld4=) 15.l"!xd1 f6 16.i.f4 i.d8= The exchange of the e-pawn for the g-pawn is not dangerous for Black, bec ause later, he will transfer his knight to e6 vi a the g7 -sq uare and his bishop on d8 will enter the actions too. White c annot fight for the advantage in any other way, Ismagambetov -Alekseev, Tashkent 2011 .

228

ll.tt:le4 - The drawbac k of this centralizing move is not only that White loses his c ontrol over the d5-square, but also the fac t that Black succ eeds in occ upying first the d-file. 11 . . .i.e7

12.l"!e1 (It is best for White to play here 12 .l"!d1 i.e6 - see Chap­ter 15.12 .b3, M ista - M iton, Fry­dek M istek 2010, with this move, he not only prepares the develop­ment of his bishop to b2, where it will be doing nothing, by the way . . . but he prevents the devel­opment of the enemy bishop on e6, sinc e White will attack it with tt:lg5 and it c annot go to the c4-square. The drawbac k of the move however is that Blac k c an activate his light-squared bishop on the b7 -sq uare. H e c an play 12 . . . b6 with the following exemplary var­iations: 13. i.b2 i.b7 14.l"! ad1 l"!d8 15.l"!xd8+ hd8 16.l"! d1 c5t and only White may have problems. The position remains very com­plic ated, but advantageous for Black after 13.l"! d1 c 5�; he has no problems at all 13.i.f4 c 5 14.l"! ad1 i.b7 15.l"!fe1 l"! d8= , or 14.l"!fe1 i.e6 15.l"! ad1 l"!d8 16.c3 l'! d7 =) 12 . . . i.e6 (Black prevents e5-e6 in a radic al

5.d4 l/Jd6 6.hc6 de 7.de l/Jf5 8. W1xd8 �xdB 9. l/Jc3 �eB 10 .h3 h5

fashion and is ready to develop his rook.)

Now: 13.b3 a5 - This is a typic al re­

sourc e for him. He plans to ex­ploit the target on the queenside in order to activate his rook on a8 from its initial place . 14.ib2 a4 15.l/Jfg5 ixg5 16.LLlxg5 c5 17 .LLlxe6 fx e6+ White's bishop is very pas­sive, C orrales J imenez - Korneev, Z aragoz a 2010 (game 39);

13.i f4 )"ld8 - This is a stand­ard reaction and after 14.c 3 b6, Black is ready to enter a position with bishops of opposite c olours. 15.LLl eg5 ix g5 16.ixg5, Shc hebe­nyuk - Sc haff rinna, E mail 2010, here, he c an prepare the transfer of his king to the queenside with 16 . . . )"l d5 ! 17 .b3 c 5 18.�f1 a5 19. )"l ad1 �d7?;

following 13.LLleg5 idS 14.b3 c5 15.i. f4, F elgaer - M alakhov, Khanty-M ansyi sk 2011, he c an obtain an exc ellent position with the surp rising move 15 . . . )"l g8 ! ? 16. )"lad1 i. c6?. The idea of Black's previ ous move is that White fails to organiz e the thematic break­through in the c entre - 17.e6? ! f6 ! 18.LLl e4 )"l d8t Black exc hanges a

c ouple of rooks and protects easi­ly his c7 -pawn, while White's e6-pawn is much rather a liability than power;

13.i.g5 )"ld8 14.c 3, Borisek -Neubauer, R ogaska Slatina 2009, Black c an play here 14 . . . b6 15.b3 c5? and he deprives his opponent of the d4-square, gains acc ess to the wonderful c 6-square for his kn ight and is ready for ac tive ac ­tions on the queenside with a7 -a5, c 5-c 4 etc .

A) ll.b3

White develops his bishop on b2 and plans to exc hange his e5-pawn for Black's g7-pawn at some moment after e5-e6, activating all his other piec es in the proc ess. In general however, Black c an easily parry all the ideas of his oppo­nent.

We would have q ualified that move as medioc re, but it was played onc e by one of the greatest spec ialists in squeez ing Black in the Berlin endgame - GM A lexey Shirov.

229

Chapter 14

ll ... i.e7 12.i.b2 The position is totally simpli­

fied after 12 .l"\e1 tt:lh4 (This is a standard resourc e for Black, al­though he could have entered a position with bishops of opposite c olours with 12 . . . i.e6 ! ? 13.i.b2 l"\d8 14.l"\ad1 i.b4 15.l"\xd8+ <±>xd8 16.l"\d1+ <±>c 8 17 .tt:le4 i.e7 18.tt:lfg5 hgS 19.tt:lxg5 c S=) 13.tt:lxh4 (13. tt:ld4 tt:lfS 14.tt:lc e2 tt:lxd4 15.tt:lxd4 a6= he will advanc e c 6-c 5) 13 . . . i.xh4 14.tt:le4 i.fS 15.g3 i.e7 16. tt:ld6+ cxd6 17 .exd6 i.e6= Dvirnyy - G rigoryan, Rijeka 2010.

12 ... i.e6 It is also very good for Black to

react more aggressively here 12 . . . b6 ! ? 13.l"\ad1 i.b7 14.l"\fe1 (or 14.tt'le2 cS 15.tt:lc 3 i.xf3 16.gxf3 tt:ld4=) 14 . . . l"\d8= - his plans are analogous to what we have ana­lyzed in variation A, Chapter 12 and the inc lusion of the moves h2-h3 and h7 -h5 does not c hange anything.

13J;adl White c an hardly find a better

sq uare for this rook. 13.tt:le4 l"\d8 14.l"\ad1 l"\xd1 15.

230

l"\xd1, R asmussen - A ntonsen, Denmark 2009. Now, Black c an transfer his bishop to a fighting diagonal with 15 . . . i.d5 16.tt:lfd2 c S 17 .c 4 i.c 6 18.tt:lc 3 l"\h6 ! - The acti­vation of the rook along the sixth rank is one of the most important strategic al resourc es for Black, partic ularly with a pawn on cS . H e obtains a n exc ellent position after 19.tt:lde4 he4 20.tt:lxe4 l"\a6 2l.a4 l"\b6 22 .l"\d3 tt:ld4=, as well as fol­lowing 19.tt'ld5 hdS 20.cxd5 l"\a6 2l .a4 l"\b6 22 .i.c 3 tt:ld4=

13.l"\fd1 l"\d8 14.tt:le4, Broniek ­Spanton, Email 2008, 14 . . . i.d5 ! 15.tt:lfg5 l"\h6 (Black c an take c are of his light-sq uared bishop even in a less forc ed way with 15 . . . b5 ! ? 16.l"\ac 1 b4 17 .c 4 bxc 3 18.hc 3 l"\h6? - his powerful bishop o n dS guarantees him against any pos­sible problems.) 16.c 4 l"\g6 17 .f4 (17 .cxd5 cxdS 18.tt:lc 3 i.xgS 19. tt:JxdS l"\c 6=) 17 . .. he4 18.l"\xd8+ hd8 19.tt:lxe4 i.h4= White will never advance his kingside pawns to the end of the game and with­out that, he has no chanc es of winning.

13 . . . a5 The c hoic e of the World Cham­

pion is quite logic al , sinc e White has already played b2-b3, but it was also good for him to choose the more straightforward line : 13 . . . l"\d8 ! ? 14.g3 (14.tt:le4 l"\xd1 -see 13.tt:le4) 14 . . . l"\d7 15.<±>g2 c5=

14.a4 14.tt:le4? ! a4 15.tt:ld4 tt:lxd4 16.

hd4, Topi - Sepp, Finland 2010, 16 . . . b6+ Black's queen rook has

5.d4 'LJ d6 6.hc6 de 7.de 'LJj5 8. VfixdB mxdB 9. 'LJc3 m eB 10 .h3 hS

entered the actions from its initial square and his other rook on h8 will soon do the same easily after the unavoidable move h5-h4.

14 •.. b6

15.tbe4 It is interesting for White to

try 15.CLJe2 !? with the idea to oust the enemy bishop from the e6-square. 15 . . . El d8 16.'LJfd4 (Blac k should not fear 16.'LJf4 �c 8 17 . Elxd8+ hd8 18.El d1 El h6=) 16 . . . 'LJxd4 17 .'LJxd4 �d7 . He will have to play c 6-c 5 sooner or later, but now he c annot deprive the enemy knight of the b5-square. M ean­while, there is a serious drawback in the plac ement of White's pawn on a4, bec ause his pawn-chain c 2 , b3, a4 is a very juicy target for Black's light- squared bishop. He will be ready to even sac rific e a pawn in order to activate it: 18. Elfe1 (18.f4 c5 19.'LJb5 �f5 20. 'LJxc7 + mf8 21 .Elc 1 �h4+±) 18 . . . c 5 19.'LJb5 (White c annot d o any­thing muc h with 19.e6 cxd4 20 . exd7 + Elxd7 21 .hd4 f6=) 19 . . . �f5 20.'LJxc7 + (it is a forc ed draw after 20.'LJd6+ cxd6 21.exd6 El h6 ! 22 .

Elxe7 + mf8 23.Elb7 El dxd6 24.Elxd6 Elxd6=) 20 . . . mf8 21 .c 4 �c 2 22 . 'LJd5 hb3 ! (White's powerful knight on d5 saves him from any trouble in the variation 22 . . . hd1? ! 23.Elxd1 Elh6 24.g3gg) 23 . Elb1 hc 4 24.'LJxb6 �d3 25.Elbc 1 Elh6 ! = and Black's last piec e has entered the actions.

15 ••. c5 16.c4 Aft er 16.'LJeg5?! �xg5 17 .'LJxg5

m e7 i his game is very simple. H e will have to trade rooks from the d8- sq uare.

16 ••. gds 17.Elxd8+ mxd8 18.gdl+ mcs

t9.mf1 White's c hase after the enemy

bishop on e6 will not bring him any divi dends in the line: 19.'LJeg5 'LJh4 20 .'LJxe6 'LJxf3+ 21 .gxf3 fxe6=, or after 19.'LJfg5 hg5 20. 'LJxg5 El d8 21 .Elxd8+ m xd8 22 . 'LJxe6+ fx e6 23.mfl 'LJd4 24.hd4 cxd4= and in both c ases the oppo­nents c an agree to a draw.

19 •.. gds 2 0 .gxd8+ mxd8 21.me2 me8 22.'it>d3 .idS= White's pawn- maj ority on the ki ngside is fully c ompensated by

231

Chapter 14

Blac k's powerful light- sq uared bishop and White's q ueenside pawns may turn easily into tar­gets for attack, Shirov - Anand, Bilbao 2010.

B) ll.li)e2

This knight will prevent from the f4- square the appearanc e of Blac k's bishop on e6 and will sup­port the pawn-break e5- e6 . The drawbac k of this idea however is that he loses c ontrol over the d5-square and Blac k c an exploit this immediately.

ll . .. b6!? 12 . .if4 It would be too slow for White

to play 12.i.g5 c5 13.l"lad1 i.b7 14.'Llc 3 .txf3 15.gxf3 c 6= and Blac k will have a very easy game thanks to his perfectly plac ed knight on f5.

12.li)f4 i.e7 13.e6 (The posi­tional threat g7-g5 forc es White to react immediately.) 13 . . . he6 14. 'Llxe6 fx e6 15.l"le1 i.f6 16.l"lxe6+ @d7 17.l"le1 l"iae8� Blac k's plan inc ludes c 6-c5, followed by ag­gressive operations on the queen-

232

side and the activity of his piec es c ompensates c ompletely the de­fects of his pawn- structure.

12 .l"ld1 i.a6

After 13.'Ll ed4? ! 'Llxd4 14. 'Llxd4 c5 15.'Llf5 i.e2 16.l"ld2 i.c4 17.'Ll e3 i.e6+ , White is almost helpless against Black's powerful bishops, Kurnosov - K arj aki n, M osc ow 2010 (game 4 0 ).

It would be more princ ipled for White to c ontinue with 13.'Llf4 l"ld8 14.l"lxd8+ (14.i.d2 i.c 8= and he fails to advance advantageous­ly e5- e6) 14 . . . @xd8

White is inc apable of exploit­ing his only trump at the moment - the lead in development.

It would be too slow for him to opt for 15.b3 i.e7 16.i.b2 g5 17.e6 f6 18.Eid1+ 'Ll d6 19.'Ll d3 l"lg8� White's pawn on e6 is not danger-

5. d4 tiJd6 6. hc6 de 7. de 4Jj5 8. 'WxdB Wxd B 9 . 4Jc3 We810.h3 h5

ous at all for Blac k and may be­come a liability.

15.a4 ! ? - Blac k has not played a7 -a5 yet, so White wishes to bring his rook on a1 into the ac ­tions from its initial sq uare. 15 . . . i.e7 16.a5 i.b7 17 .e6 fx e6 18.4Je5 (18.4Jxe6+? ! Wd7 19.4Jeg5 Ei:e8+ ­He has regained his pawn, but in view of the unavoidable pawn­advanc e for Black c 6-c 5, White's position is worse, sinc e Blac k's bishops are very powerful.) 18 . . . Wc 8 19.4Jfg6 Ei:e8 20.a6 i.a8 21 . 4Jxe7 + 4Jxe7 22 .b4 c5 ! 23 .bxc5 Ei:d8= - He has activated his light­squared bishop and has no prob­lems at all .

15.e6 - This is the best move for White and Black must defend very c arefully. 15 . . .f6 ! (he is not afraid of the penetration of the enemy knight on g6) 16.4Jg6 Ei:g8 17 .i.f4 i.e2 Black is threatening to disrupt the enemy pawn- struc ­ture.

Aft er 18 .Ei:e1? ! hf3 19.gxf3 i.d6+, White's e6- pawn turns out to be a weakn ess.

18.4Jg5 ! ? 4Je7 ! (Black c ontin­ues to invite the enemy piec es into his own c amp.) 19.4Jf7+ Wc 8

20 .4Jxe7 + (after 20 .4Jfh8? ! h4 ! t Blac k has the unpleasant threat i.h5 ! ) 20 . . . he7 21 .Ei:e1 i.b5� -He wishes to place his dark­sq uared bishop on b4 and then to advance c 6-c 5, not letting the enemy rook to d7 . L ater, he will begin an attac k against the e6-pawn.

18.4Jh2 - White is preparing g2-g4. 18 . . . h4 (with the idea i.h5) 19.4Jg4 4Je7 20 .4Jxf8 Ei:xf8� and Black has a target - the enemy e6-pawn.

12 •.. c5 13.�adl .ib7 14.tt:�g5 Following 14.4Jc 3 hf3 15.gxf3

c 6, White must already think about equalizing.

14 ••. �h6! This is a typic al resource !

Black's rook prevents e5- e6 and is ready to be activated via the g6-square.

15)bg3 .!Llh4 He is playing for a win . Blac k c ould have equalized

easily after 15 . . . 4Jxg3 ! ? 16.fxg3 (16.hg3?! h4 17 .i.f4 i.e7 18.Ei:fe1 Ei:g6 19.4Je4 Ei:d8+) 16 . . . i.e7 17 . 4Jxt7 Ei:g6 18.e6 (18.4Jh8?! Ei:e6 19.

233

Chapter 14

:1'1del �dS 20 .�c l 'it> d7gg) 18 . . . :1'1xe6 19.tt::lg5 :1'1e2 20.:1'1f2 :1'1xf2 21 .'it>xf2 :1'1d8 22 .:1'1el :1'1d7=

16.£3 .ie7

17.:1'1fe1 He has no reasons to be afraid

of 17.tt::l5e4 :1'1g6 18.:1'1f2 'it>f8 ! (threatening tt::lxf3+ ! ) 19.'it>hl :1'1e6 20 .tt::lxh5 tt::lg6 21 .�h2 he4 22 . fx e4 tt::lxeSf± and the vulnerability of White's e6-pawn promises Blac k a very easy game.

17 • • • :1'1g6 18.ltl5e4 .ic6 19. 'it>h2 ltlxg2 2 0 .<;!;>xg2 h4

(diagram) 21.c4!? The position would be equal

after 21 .tt::ld6+ ! ? 'it>f8 22 .tt::ldf5 hxg3 23.h4 :1'1g4 24.hg3 :1'1c 4 25. c3 :1'1a4 26.e6 (26.a3 g6 27.tt::lxe7 'it> xe7=) 26 . . . :1'1xa2 27.hc 7 :1'1xb2+ 28 .'it>g3 :1'1e8 29.tt::lxe7 'it>xe7 30.

234

�d6+ 'it>f6 31.�e5+ 'it> e7= 21. • • hxg3 22.ltlc3 l3d8 23.

ltld5 l3d7 24.b3 .idS 25.l3e4 .ib7 26 • .ixg3 b5t

White's knight has occ upied the d5-square, but is not danger­ous at all and he will soon need to take c are of the protection of his weaknesses on the queenside, Mc Shane - Kramnik, London 2010 (game 41).

Chapter 14 l.e4 e5 2)i:Jf3 lt:Jc6 3.i.b5 lt:Jf6 4. 0 - 0 lt:Jxe4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 6.i.xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lt:Jf5 8.'�xd8+ @xd8 9.lt:Jc3 @e8 1 0 .h3 h5

Complete Games

39 Corrales Jimenez-Korneev Z aragoza 2010

1.e4 e5 2.c!bf3 c!bc6 3 . .ib5 c!bf6 4. 0 - 0 c!bxe4 5.d4 c!bd6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!bf5 8. '\!;!fxd8+ mxd8 9.c!bc3 me8 1 0 .h3 h5 ll.c!be4 .ie6 12.l:�e1 .ie7 13.b3 a5 14 . .ib2 a4 15.c!bfg5 hg5 16.c!bxg5 c5 17.c!bxe6 fxe6 18.ge4 axb3

19.cxb3 Following 19. axb3 Ei:xal+ 20.

hal bSt, Black's knight is more powerful than the enemy bishop and he c an fight for the advantage.

19 •.. gd8 2 0 .Ei:c4 b6 He would have exc ellent at­

tacking prospects after the imme­diate 20 . . . Ei:d2 ! 2l .Ei:bl Ei:f8 22 . Ei:xc 5 l2J h4t

21.b4 gd2 22.l�b1 gf8!? 23. bxc5

23 .•. c!be3!? In the variation 23 . . . b5 24.Ei:e4

c!be7� Black's compensation for the pawn is evident, but there is an element of risk, while now, he forc es a draw.

24.fxe3 gff2 25.cxb6 gxg2+ 26.mh1 gh2+ 27.mg1, Draw.

4 0 Kurnosov - Karjakin M oscow 2010

l.e4 e5 2.c!bf3 c!bc6 3 • .ib5 c!bf6 4. 0 - 0 c!bxe4 5.d4 c!bd6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!bf5 8. '\!;!fxd8+ mxd8 9.c!bc3 me8 1 0 . h3 h5 ll.c!be2 b6 12.gd1 .ia6 13.c!bed4 c!bxd4 14.c!bxd4 c5 15. c!bf5 .ie2 16.gd2 .ic4 17.c!be3 .ie6+

(diagram) Blac k has no "bad" piec es and

despite the fact that W hite's

235

Chapter 14

knight will occ upy the d5-outpost, Black is better, bec ause he will oust easily the enemy knight and the advantages of his position will be long-lasting.

18.ll:l d5 gcs 19.b3 c6 2 0 . ll:le3

White's attempt to exchange the active enemy light- squared bishop would lead after 20 .lilf4 .if5 21.lLle2 .ie7 22.lLlg3 .ig6t to the result that Blac k's bishop will go from one active square to another.

2 o . . . gds!

The exc hange of the rooks is in favour of Black, but White is inc a­pable of avoiding it, because fol­lowing 21 .ge2, Black c an march advantageously with his ki ng to the queenside by playing 21 . . .\t>d7 22 . .ib2 lt>c7 i, or occ upy extra spac e on the ki ngside with the move 21 . . .g5t

236

21.gxd8+ lt>xd8 22 . .ib2 g6 23.gdl + lt>c7 24.£3 .ih6 25.1t>f2 a5! 26.a4 b5!

Black is advanc ing his queen­side pawns, while White has noth­ing to brag about.

27.axb5 He would have good chanc es

for a draw following 27 . .i a3 b4 28 . .ic l .if4 29.l2Jd5+ cxd5 30. hf4+

27 . . . cxb5 28.lild5+ lt>c6 29. lilc3 .if8 3 0 .gd8?!

It would be more acc urate for White to choose 30J''lal lt>b6 31. l2J e4+ and he would off er longer and much tougher resistanc e than in the game.

3 0 . . . c4! 3l.lt>e2 b4? After 31 . . .cxb3 32 .cxb3 hb3

33.l2Jxb5 .ic 4+ 34.\t>dl lt>xb5 35. e6 El h7 36.Elxf8 fx e6+ , Black en­ters an endgame with an extra pawn, while now, the bishops of opposite c olours do not guarantee a draw until there are two rooks present on the board.

32.ll:le4 cxb3 33.cxb3 .ig7 34.gd6+ lt>b5

35.gd3? The problem-like variation -

35.lilc 5 ! ! .if8 36.l2Jxe6 hd6 37.

5.d4 CiJd6 6.hc6 de 7.de CiJf5 8. WffxdB mxdB 9. CiJc3 meB 10 .h3 hS

CiJd4+ mc 5 38.exd6 �d8 39.f4 �xd6 40.CiJf3= would have ena­bled White to save that difficult position.

35 . . . .ih6 36.md1 �as 37. mc2 �cS+ 3S.mb1 �c7 39.g4 .if4 4 0 .ti'ld6+ ma6 41.tLleS �d7 42.gxd7 hd7 43.tLlf6 .ie6 44. gxh5?

The line : 44.mc 2 h4 ! 45 . .id4+ would have hardly saved the draw, but White would have re­sisted long and hard.

44 . . . hb3!-+ Now, i t i s all so simple. 45 . .ic1 hc1 46. mxc1 gxh5

47.f4 a4 4S.f5 a3 49.tLld7 .id5 5 0 .e6 fxe6 51.f6 e5 52.tLlxe5 h3 53.t7 h2+ 54.mc2 .ie4+ 55. md2 b1'1W 56.f8'1W '!Wc2+ 57.me3 a2 5S.'!Wd6+ �b5 59.'\WhS+ �c5 6 0 .tLld7+ �c6 61.tLle5+ �d5 62.tLlt7 '1Wc3+ 63.�f4 '!Wf6+ 0 -1

41 McShane - Kramnik L ondon 2010

l.e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tLlc6 3 . .ib5 tLlf6 4. 0 - 0 tLlxe4 5.d4 tLld6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tLlf5 S. '!WxdS+ �xdS 9.tLlc3 �eS 1 0 . h3 h5 ll.lZle2 b6 1 2 . .if4 c5 13.gad1 .ib7 14.tLlg5 gh6 15. tLlg3 tLlh4 16.f3 .ie7 17.gfe1 gg6 1S.lLJ5e4 .ic6 19.�h2 tLlxg2 2 0 .�xg2 h4 21.c4 hxg3 22. tLlc3 gds 23.tLld5 gd7 24.h3 .idS 25.ge4 .ib7 26 . .ixg3 b5!t

(diagram) Black's pieces are so active

that White's only powerful battle unit - his knight on d5 is incapa-

ble of opposing them eff ectively. 27.�f2 gh6 2S.h4 �f8 29.

�e2 ga6 3 0 .gd2 bxc4 31.bxc4 c6 32.tLlc3 gxd2+ 33.�xd2 .icS 34 . .if2 .ie7 35.ge1 .if5

36.�c1? It was better for White to play

36.�cl+ 36 . . . .ie6?! Black could have c aptured the

pawn on c4 with the move 36 . . . .id3+ and his winning chanc es would be c onsiderable.

37.ge4 gb6? He had other possibilities to

improve his position : 37 . . . g6 38. md2 m g7+

3S.lLla4 gb4 39.tLlb2 g6 (diagram)

4 0 .a3? White compromises unneces­

sarily his queenside. In fact, he could have organ-

237

Chapter 14

ized c ounterplay with the surpris­ing variation 40J'�e3 g5 41.h5 'it>g7 42J'�a3 E!:b7 43.E!:a6 E!:c7 44.E!:a5?

4 0 . . . �b3 4U��e3 �b7+ 42. �c3 .if5 43.tl:la4 'it>g7 44. 'it>d2 .idS 45. 'it>e2 �bl 46.i.xc5 i.xh4+

Black's bishops are very active and he c an either attac k the vul­nerable enemy pawns, or organize an attac k with minimal resourc es.

47.i.xa7 �el+ 48.'it>d2 �hl 49.'it>e2 �el+ 5 0 .'it>d2 �hl 51. 'it>e2 �h2+ 52.'it>dl

238

52 .•. .ig5? He c ould have preserved all

the pluses of his position with the preliminary move 52 . . . l"la2 !+

53.c!lk5 .if4 54.ll:lb3 g5 In the variation 54 . . . .be5 ! ?

55.�d4 �f6+ , Blac k's bishop is more powerlul than the enemy knight with active actions going on both sides of the board.

55.tl:ld4 .ih3 56.l"lc2 l"lhl + 57.'it>e2 .id7 58 • .ib8?

White should have activated his only trump and advanc e as far as possible his outside passed pawn 58.a4 .be5 59.a5 l"lal 60. �b6+

58 .•. c5 59.e6 .ia4! 6 0 .i.xf4

6 0 .•. gxf4 F ollowing 60 . . . .bc 2 ! 61.e7

E!:h8+ Blac k c ould have won the exchange.

61.ll:lf5+ 'it>f6 62.exf7 �h8 63.�d2 @xf5 64.�d5+ 'it>f6 65. �xc5 .ic2 66.�d5 'it>xf7?

He had a way of preserving his pawn on f4 with the line : 66 .. J'U8

67 J�d4 'it>e5 68.E!:d7 'it>e6-+ 67.�d4=. The game contin­

ued for 64 more moves, but the evaluation of the position c ould not be c hanged - Draw.

Chapter 15 l.e4 e5 2.ltlf3 ltlc6 3.i.b5 ltlf6 4. 0 -0 ltlxe4 5.d4 ltld6 6.hc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 ltlf5 8.Wfxd8+ @xd8 9.ltlc3 @e8 10 .h3 h5 11.B:dl

Quick Repertoire

This is a natural developing move. White has occ upied the open file and keeps his options about the future plac ement of his bishop on c 1 and knight on c3.

ll . . . .ie7 12.liJe2 White's main attempts to fight

for the advantage are c onnected with the moves 12 . .ig5 - see Chapter 16 (variation C) and 12 . .if4 - see Chapter 17 .

After 12 .g3 .ie6 13.tt:J g5 E:h6 ! , Black i s ready to part with his two-bishop advantage, but acti­vates his usually idle rook. We will enc ounter again this impor­tant resourc e in Chapter 17. 14. 1f4 (or 14.b3 hg5 15.hg5 E:g6=) 14 . . . hg5 15.hg5 E:g6 16 . .i f4 E:d8 17 .E:xd8 + �xd8+! He has brought

his rook on h8 into the ac tions, exchanged his other rook on a8 and has no difficulties at all .

It looks like White c an c reate more problems for his opponent with the line: 12 .lLle4 1e6 13.tt:J fg5 i dS 14.b3 and here, we rec om­mend to Black to save his valuable light-sq uared bishop from its be­ing traded without any c hange of the existing pawn-structure with 14 . . . b5 ! 15.lLlc 3 E:d8= and he should not avoid the exc hange getting rid of his doubled pawns in the proc ess.

12 •.. .ie6

13.liJf4 White must try to fight against

the enemy bishop on e6; other-

239

Chapter 15

wise it is unc lear what the knight is doing on the e2-sq uare in the first place .

Black should be afraid neither of 13.j,f4 Ei:d8 14.Ei:xd8+ hd8 15. b3 j,dS 16.tt:led4 tt:lxd4 17 .tt:lxd4 c5+ , nor following 13.tt:led4 Ei:d8 14.j,f4 tt:lxd4 15.tt:lxd4 j,c 8 16.e6 he6 17 .hc7 Ei:d5=

(diagram) 13 . . . .ic8!= Black has obtained a very com- threatening g7 -g5. In order to

fortable position, despite the loss avoid the worst, White must c om­of two tempi, sinc e White;s knight ply with the repetition of the posi­on f4 is misplac ed and Black is tion after 14.tt:le2 !

240

Chapter 15 l.e4 e5 2.tbf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8.�xd8+ @xd8 9.�c3 @e8 10 .h3 h5 llJ�dl .ie7

Step by Step

A) 12.g3 B) 12.�e4 C) 12.�e2

It see ms too slow for White to play 12.b3, Voitsekhovsky - Gor­batov, Moscow 2000, 12 ... 'Llh4. The ex change of the knights is Black's simplest way to e quality and as a rule, it is in his favour. H is light-squared bishop e nters the actions easily, enables Black to trade his rook on a8 vi a the dB­square and all this is a part of his plans. (He c an react eve n more ambitiously by playi ng 12 ... b6 ! ? 1 3 . .i b 2 i.b7 14.'Lle 2 c5 15.'Llc 3 h£3 16.gxf3 'Lld4 17.'Ll d5 'Lle 6� and Black destroys his oppone nt's kingside p awn-structu re , but los­es his two-bishop advantage.

White's bishop on b2 is restricted by his pawn on e5, but he has chanc es c onnected with the ad­vanc e of his f3-pawn. ) 13.'Llxh4 (13.'Ll d4 .i d7 14 . .ib2 l"ld8 15.'Lle4 c5 16.'Ll e2 .ic 6i Black has pushed advantageously c 6-c 5 and has no problems with the development of his piec es. ) 13 ... hh4 14.'Ll e2 .ie7 = H is plan inc ludes the moves c 6-c 5, .if5, l"ld8.

A) 12.g3

This insidious move not only preve nts Black's resourc e 'Llf5-h4, followed by the exchange of the knights, but also doe s not allow the pawn- advance h5-h4, so that his rook on h8 e nds up isolate d from the actions.

241

Chapter 15

12 . . . .ie6 13.�g5 A bout 13.�g5 �g8 ! ? - see

Chapter 16. White's attempt to exploit his

pawn-maj ority on the kingside with the help of exchanges after 13.b3 �d8 14.�b2 cS 15.�xd8+ 'it> xd8 16.�dl+ 'it>c 8 17 .�d5 �d8 18.lt:Jxe7 + lt:Jxe7 19.�xd8+ 'it>xd8 20 .lt:Jg5 'it>d7+ leads to positions advantageous for Black. H is light­squared bishop is ready to attack White's queenside pawns. Black's king is active and his knight has exc ellent prospects on the c 6-square.

Following 13.'it>g2 �d8 14.�f4 c S lS.lt:JbS �d7 ! ? Black is ready to transfer his ki ng to the queenside.

13 . . J�h6! This is a typic al resourc e neu­

tralizing the knight- sortie to the gS-square.

14 . .if4 White's attempt to restrict the

mobility of the enemy light­squared bishop will fail:

after 14.b3, Black equalizes c ompletely entering a position

242

with bishops of opposite c olours. 14 . . . hg5 15.hg5 �g6 16.�f4 (16. h4 f6 17 .exf6 gxf6 18.�f4 lt:Jxh4 19.hc7 �fS=) 16 . . . � d8 17 .�xd8+ 'it>xd8 18.�dl+ 'it>c 8 19.lt:Je4 (19. 'it>h2 cS 20.lt:Je4 b6=) 19 . . . lt:Jh4 !? (Blac k i s playi ng for a win. It would be more reliable for him to c ontinue with 19 . . . �d5 20 .lt:Jg5 bS= and this should end in a quick draw.) 20.�d3 �fS 2l .�g5 (after 2l .� e3 lt:Jf3+ 22 .�xf3 he4 23.�c 3 � e6= the opponents c an agree to a draw) 21 . . .lt:Jf3+ 22 .�xf3 he4 23.�f4 hc 2 24.h4 f6 25.exf6 gxf6 26.hf6 c S? Black fixes his oppo­nent's weaknesses on the queen­side and provides sufficient c oun­ter c hanc es for himself;

following 14.lt:Jc e4 �dS 15.b3 �g6 16.c4 ,

Black has an important re­sourc e at his disposal 16 . . . �d8 ! 17 .�d2 (17 .cxd5 cxdS 18.lt:Jc 3 hgS 19.lt:Jxd5 �d7 =) 17 . . . he4 18.lt:Jxe4 cS= and he occ upies the d4-square and activates his rook along the sixth rank.

14 . . . i.xg5 15.i.xg5 gg6 16. .if4, K arj akin - A kopian, Ohrid 2009 (game 42).

6.hc6 de 7.de CiJf5 8. Wixd8 mxd8 9 . CiJc3 me810.h3 h511. 'il, dl �e7

Now, Black provokes favoura­ble simplifications with the line: 16 .•. gds 17J;xd8+ mxd8 18. lMl+ @c8 19.@h2 c5+t planning CiJd4.

B) 12.ltle4

White wishes to prevent the appearance of Black's bishop on e6 and does not allow the move CiJh4 in the process.

12 ••• i.e6 This standard manoeuvre,

aimed at trading the knights, is not good for Black at the moment: 12 . . . tt:lh4?! 13.tt:lxh4 hh4 14.CiJg5! �f5 15.c4 'fl,f8 16.'il,d4! hg5 17. hg5;!; - he has failed to coordi­nate his rooks, Balogh - Delorme,

Arinsal 2009. There has arisen an exceptional case in which the po­sition with bishops of opposite colours is in White's favour.

13.ltlfg5 i.d5 14.b3 He begins an immediate chase

after the enemy light-sq uared bishop.

14 .•. b5!N This is an important move for

Black in order to avoid the ex­change of his active light-sq uared bishop.

It would be worse for him to opt for 14 . . . 'il,d8?! 15.c4 he4 16. 'il,xd8+ hd8 17.CiJxe4;!;

This is exactly what White is after in the Berlin endgame. Black has no counterplay and is doomed to a passive and laborious de-

243

Chapter 15

fenc e, V achier Lagrave - G ozzoli, M arseilles 2010 (game 43).

15.liJc3 The pressure against the ene­

my bishop on d5 is White's only way to fight for the advantage.

H e fails to get rid of the b5-pawn, bec ause after 15.a4? f6+ White loses at least a pawn.

H e c annot c reate problems for his opponent with the indiff erent line: 15.ib2 Elh6 16.Ele1 Elg6 17 .tt:lf3 c 5� Blac k's bishop has remained on a fighting diagonal and his piec ­es enter the actions eff ortlessly.

15 . . . �d8

This is the key-position of the variation and Blac k c an hardly avoid it. Acc ordingly, we will ana­lyze it in great details.

16 • .if4 16.El d3 Elh6! - This standard

inc lusion of the rook into the ac ­tions along the sixth rank is suffi­c ient to avoid any diffic ulties for Black. 17 .if4 (17 .tt:lxd5 cxd5 18.a4 b4=) 17 . . . El g6 18.tt:lxd5 cxd5 19. tt:lf3 Ela6=

16.tt:lge4 b4! - He c orrects his pawn-structure. 17 .tt:lxd5 cxd5 18.

244

tt:lg3 tt:lxg3 19.fxg3 ic 5+ 20.\t>h2 (or 20.\t>fl d4 2l .a3 bxa3 22 .ixa3 ib6=) 20 . . . d4=

16 . . . b4! White's threat e5-e6 forc es

Black to react energetic ally. 17.tt:lxd5 �xd5 Or 17 . . . cxd5? ! 18.e6 ixg5 19.

exf7+ \t>xf7 20.ixg5± and after the unavoidable move a2-a3, Black will have great problems protecting his queenside.

18.ll:l f3 18.Elxd5 cxd5 19.Eld1 (White

fails to obtain an edge playing analogously to the variation, we have analyzed a move earlier, af­ter 19.e6 ixg5 20. exf7+ \t>xf7 21 . ixg5 tt:ld4� the trade of a couple of rooks is in favour of Black.) 19 . . . c6 20 .e6 fx e6 21 .tt:lxe6 \t>f7=

18 •.. �g8

White is threatening g7 -g5-g4. 19.g4 Or 19.ig5 ixg5 20 .Elxd5 cxd5

21 .tt:lxg5 tt:ld4 22 .a3 f6 23.tt:lf3 tt:lxf3+ 24.gxf3 bxa3 25.exf6 gxf6+ 26.\t>f1 c6 27 .f1xa3 Elg7 = with an equal rook and pawn ending.

19 •.• hxg4 2 0 .hxg4 lbh4

6. hc6 de 7. de t'iJfS 8. Wixd8 mxdB 9. t'iJc3 me B 10 .h3 h5 lUMl �e7

This is the most forc ed line for Black. It would be sufficient for him to equalize with the move 20 . . . t'iJh6 ! ?

21Ajxh4 g5! 22 . .ih2 22.t'iJf5 gxf4 23.mg2 gxg4+ 24.

mf3 gg6 25.mxf4 gg2 26.gxd5 cxd5 27.mf3 gg5=

22 . • . gxh4 23.£3 gcs 24.gd2 lk3 2s.mg2 h3+ ! 26.'i!?g3 f5! 27.exf6 .id6+ 28.'i!?h4 :Bh8+

The game ends with a perpetu­al c heck after 29.mg5 :Bg8+ 3 0 .'i!?h4 :Bh8=

C) 12.ttJe2

White is trying to prevent the development of Black's bishop on the e6- square. Still . . .

12 .•• .ie6 13.tLlf4 If White does not play this

move, Blac k will complete easily the development of his queen­side:

13 .�f4 gds 14.gxd8+ hd8 15. b3 �d5 16.t'iJed4 t'iJxd4 17.ttJxd4 c5 18.t'iJf5 � e4 19.t'iJe3 md7+ His game is even a bit more pleasant, K amsky - Ni Hua, M oscow 2011;

13.t'iJed4 gds 14.�f4 t'iJxd4 15.

t'iJxd4 �c 8 16.e6 �xe6 17.hc 7 gd5 18.c4 gd7 19.t'iJxe6 fxe6 20 .�b8 �c 5= Black should not worry about his weakness on e6 with knights absent from the board, C aruana - K ramnik, Khanty­M ansiysk 2010.

13 .•. �c8! H e has lost two tempi, but

White is inc apable of exploiting this.

14.b3?! The repetition of moves is the

best White c an do under the c ir­c umstanc es. After 14.t'iJe2 �e6 15. t'iJf4 �c 8, the game J .P olgar -K arj akin, Khanty-M ansiysk 2010 ended in a draw.

14 ..• g5 This is a typic al resource for

Black to occ upy additional spac e when White's knight is unlikely to go to the f6- square.

15.ttJe2 :Bg8 16.a4 .ie6 17. ttJfd4 :Bd8 18 • .ib2 .ic8+

White will have great prob­lems, sooner or later, with his pawn- chain c 2-b3-a4, Ar.Timo­feev - P ashikian, Khanty-M ansi­ysk 2010 (game 44).

245

Chapter 15 l.e4 e5 2)Ljf3 llJc6 3.i.b5 llJf6 4. 0 -0 llJxe4 5.d4 llJd6 6.i.xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 llJf5 8.�xd8+ <i>xd8 9.llJc3 <i>e8 10 .h3 h5 11J3dl i.e7

Complete Games

42 Karjakin Akopian c!tJe2 c5 22.£3 c!tJc6 23.g4, Draw. Ohrid 2009

1.e4 e5 2 .c!lJf3 c!tJc6 3 . .ib5 c!lJf6 4. 0 - 0 c!tJxe4 5.d4 c!tJd6 6 . .ixc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 c!tJf5 8. �xd8+ 'it>xd8 9.c!lJc3 'it>e8 1 0 .h3 h5 1UM1 .ie7 12.g3 .ie6 13. c!lJg5 �h6 14 . .if4 hg5!? 15. hg5 �g6

16 • .if4 Black obtains an exc ellent po­

sition following 16.h4 f6 17 .exf6 gxf6 18 . .if4 c!lJxh4 19 . .ixc7 .ifS? ­all his piec es are in action, while the light sq uares on White's king­side are vulnerable.

16 ..• c!tJe7 Black c ould have played more

aggressively here - 16 .. J'1d8 ! ? 17 .l"lxd8+ 'it>xd8 18.'it>h2 eSt!

17.'it>h2 .if5 18.�d2 �d8 19. �ad1 �xd2 2 0 .�xd2 �e6 21.

246

Black agreed to a draw in this position, although following 23 . . . .ig6 24.c!lJc 3 hxg4 25.hxg4 tt:ld4t his game would have been much more pleasant.

43 Vachier Lagrave - Gozzoli M arseilles 2010

1.e4 e5 2.c!lJf3 c!tJc6 3 . .ib5 c!lJf6 4. 0 - 0 c!tJxe4 5.d4 c!tJd6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!tJf5 8. �xd8+ 'it>xd8 9.c!lJc3 'it>e8 1 0 . h3 h5 ll.�d1 .ie7 12.c!lJe4 .ie6 13.c!lJfg5 .id5 14.b3 �d8 15.c4 .ixe4 16.�xd8+ .ixd8 17. c!tJxe4;!;

(diagram) Black fails to maintain c ontrol

over the d-file and the d4-square and that means he has no com-

6.hc6 de 7.de llJf5 8. WxdB Wxd8 9 . liJc3 W e810.h3 h511. 'l'l dl i.e7

pensation for his immaterial pawn- maj ority of the q ueenside.

17 . . . h4 18.i.b2 .ie7 19.�dl �h6 2 0 .�d3 c5 21.®fl?!

It would be more energetic for White to opt for 2l .f4 'l'le6 22 .Wf2 f6 23.i>f3:t

21. . . �e6 22.lil c3

22 . . .tild4 It deserved attention for Black

to try here 22 . . . c6 ! ? 23.liJe2 i.g5 24.f4 i.h6 25.i>f2 'l'le7 26.i>f3 g6, building something like a fortress.

23.tild5 .idS 24.f4 lilf5?! The original manoeuvre of the

rook 24 . . . 'l'la6 ! 25.a4 'l'lg6 !? would have created a weakness on b3 for White.

25.®f2 It would be more accurate for

him to choose 25.liJe3 ! ?t 25 . . . gg6?! Here, once again after 25 . . .

'l'la6 ! 26.a4 'l'lg6= Black would have no problems whatsoever.

26.lile3! lilg3? H e needed to play 26 . . . llJxe3

27 .'l'lxe3t and that endgame may seem difficult, but Black would have much more chances of sur­vival in it.

27.®f3 f5

28.exf6? White's manoeuvre 28.i.c3 ! c6

29.i.el± would have emphasized Black's problems with his king­side pawns.

28 . . . .ixf6 29 . .ie5 .ixe5 3 0 . fxe5 ge6 3 1 . .!Llg4

White's e5- pawn is not dan­gerous at all . Instead, he had to try to activate his pieces with 3l.liJd5 ! 'l'lxe5 32 .liJxc7 + i>e7 33. liJd5+ @f7 34.llJf4t

31. .. ®e7 32.®f4 �a6 33.a4 �g6 34.a5 �a6 35.lile3

247

Chapter 15

35 •.. �g6? The position after 35 . . . lt:Je2+

36.\tlg4 lt:Jd4 37 .lt:Jd5+ \tlf8co, will be tremendously diffic ult to eval­uate. Black will have his own trumps.

36)i)d5+ \tld7 37.�d2 c6 38.ll:l e3+?

White was winning easily after 38.lt:Jb6+ \tle7 39.lt:Jc 8+ \tle8 40. lt:Jd6+ \tle7 41.lt:Jxb7 +-

38 •.. �e7 39.lLJg4?! It was preferable for him to

opt for 39J'1b2t, with the idea to attac k Black's b7 -pawn.

39 . . . lLJfl? H e c ould have regrouped his

forc es with 39 .. J'1e6 40J'1b2 \tlt7co and he would have no problems with the protection of his b7-pawn.

4 0 .�b2 lLJg3 41.b4± 1- 0

44 Art. Timofeev - Pashikian Khanty-M ansiysk 2010

1.e4 e5 2.lLJ:t3 lLJc6 3 . .ib5 lLJf6 4. 0 - 0 lLJxe4 5.d4 lLJd6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lt)f5 8. �xd8+ �xd8 9.lLJc3 \tle8 1 0 .h3 h5 ll.�d1 .ie7 12.lLJe2 .ie6 13.lLJf4 .ic8 14.b3? g5 15.lLJe2 �g8 16.a4 .ie6 17.lLJfd4 �d8 18 . .ib2 .ic8+

248

All Black's piec es are in action and the favourable for him exchange of the knights is unavoidable.

19.�d3 c5! 2 0 .lLJxf5 .ixf5 21.�xd8+ �xd8 22.�c1 \tlc8 23.lLJg3 .ig6 24.lLJfl

24 ..• g4! 25.hxg4 hxg4+ White's pawns on e5 and c 2

are weak and he has no c hances of eq ualizing.

26.i.c3 �d8 27.lLJe3 .ig5 28. �fl g3 29.�e2 gxf2 3 0 .�xf2 �d7 31.�d1 + \tle6 32.�xd8 hd8 33 • .ib2 .ig5 34.c4 .ie4 35.g3 a5

36.lLJd5 (It would be futile for White to try to remain passive: 36 . .ic l .ibl 37 . .id2 .i a2 38.ha5 b6 39 . .ic 3 hb3-+) 36 . . . hd5 37.cxd5+ �xd5 38.�:£3 c6 39. �g4 .ie3 40 • .ic3 b6 41.� .id4 42 . .ie1 .ixe5 43.g4 .id4 0 -1

Chapter 16 l.e4 e5 2)/jf3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8.�xd8+ c;!?xd8 9.�c3 c;!?e8 10 .h3 h5 11 . .ig5

Quick Repertoire

This is a serious argument for White. He exploits immediately the vulnerability of the gS-square. H e takes c ontrol over the dB­sq uare and prevents the develop­ment of Blac k's rook on a8 and plans to attack the enemy bishop on e6 with his knight from the f4-sq uare.

ll ••• .ie6 12.lUdl Black should not be afraid of

12Jl:ad1 i.b4 13. a3 (following 13. tt:le2? i.c4+ , the vulnerability of the placement of White's rook be­comes an important factor) 13 ... i.xc3 14.bxc 3 .idS 1S. tt:ld4 tt:lxd4 16. :1'lx d4 bS ! t Black has consoli­dated his superior pawn-struc ­ture and ensured the wonderful

dS-sq uare for his bishop. White's alternatives c reate

even less problems for Black. 12. a3 i.e7 13. :1'lad1 h4 ! ? 14. :1'lfe1

:1'ld8 1S. l"lxd8+ @xd8 16. tt:le4 .i dS= H is piec es are so active that White must play very accurately in order to hold the balanc e.

H e c an hardly harm his oppo­nent with the line: 12. tt:le4 i.e7 13. :1'lad1 b6 ! ? 14. :1'ld2 :1'ld8 1S. :1'lxd8+ i.xd8 16.i.xd8 @xd8 17. tt:J egS .idS 18.e6 i.xe6 19. tt:leS @c 8= and Blac k's piec es are very active.

After 12. tt:le2 .idS 13. tt:lfd4 tt:Jxd4 14. tt:lxd4 i.e7 =, he forc es an advantageous exchange of the knights and has no problems with the activation of his rook.

Black manages to solve the problem with the development of his rook on h8 as well in the line : 12.b3 i.e7 13.:1'lad1 h4 14. tt:le4 .idS 1S. l"lfe1 :1'ld8 16.i.f4 :1'ld7 17. tt:lfgS :1'lh6 18.c 4 i.xe4 19. tt:lxe4 :1'lxd1 20. :1'lxd1 :1'le6?

12 . . . .ie7 He develops his piec es and is

ready to exchange the rooks on d8.

249

Chapter 16

13.g3 White has an interesting alter­

native here - 13J3d2 8:c 8 ! ? This is an important prophylactic move. Black plans f7-f6, so he protects his c 7- pawn in advanc e. 14.8:adl f6 15.i.f4 @f7 16.l2J e4 i.dS !f!, he has played very prec isely and has eliminated the risks, c onnected with the opening of the e-file. Black wishes to fortify his power-

250

ful light- sq uared bishop by play­ing b7-b5 and to plac e his other bishop on b6.

13 .. J�g8!?f!

He will advanc e unavoidably f7-f6 (This undermining move will follow after practic ally every reasonable reply by White) and after that his rook will be perfectly plac ed.

Chapter 16 l.e4 e5 2)i�f3 tt:Jc6 3 . .ib5 tt:Jf6 4. 0 -0 tt:Jxe4 5.d4 tt:Jd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 tt:Jf5 8.VNxd8+ cj(xd8 9.tt:Jc3 cj(e8 10 .h3 h5 ll . .ig5 .ie6

Step by Step

Now, it seems very attractive for White to improve his position by plac ing one of his rooks on the open file:

A) 12.b3 B) 12.gadl C) 12.gfdl

12 .a3 - This move is too slow and its idea is to deprive the ene­my dark-squared bishop of the b4-square. 12 . . . i.e7 13.Ei:ad1 h4 ! ? (Black plays this with the idea to develop his rook on hS and to ex­ert pressure against the enemy eS-pawn.) 14.Ei:fe1 Ei:d8 15.Ei:xd8+ �xd8 16.l2Je4 i.dS 17 .�h2 hgS 18.l2Jexg5 �e7 = H e has activated all his piec es and has no problems at all . In the game Amonatov -K arj akin, M osc ow 2010 (game

45) White demonstrated a pre­c ise play in order to make a draw at the end . . .

12 .l2Je4 i.e7 13.Ei:ad1 b6 ! ? (Black c overs the cS- square, al­though he c ould have c ontinued with 13 . . . i.d5 14.Ei:fe1 Ei:d8 15.b3 h4 ! = transposing to variation A, chapter 15) 14.Ei:d2 (after 14.g3 c S 15.�g2 i.d7 !f:! h e transfers his bishop to the c 6-square) 14 . . . Ei:d8 15.Ei:xd8+ hd8 16.hd8 (16.Ei:d1 i.e7 =) 16 . . . �xd8 17 .l2Jeg5 i.dS 18. e6 he6 19.l2Je5 �c 8 20.l2Jexf7 hf7 21 .l2Jxf7 Ei:e8f:!. Black's piec es are so active that he has exc ellent c ompensation for the defects of his pawn- structure. White's ag­gressive attempt 22 .g4? ! , Naid­itsc h - G ajewski, M osc ow 2009, turns him into the defensive side after 22 . . . Ei:e7 23.l2Jg5 hxg4 24. hxg4 l2Jd4 25.c 3 Ei:eS 26.cxd4 (26. l2Jf7 l2Je2+ 27 .�g2 Ei:bS 28.Ei:d1 Ei:xb2 29.Ei:d8+ �b7 30.Ei:g8 Ei:xa2 31 .Ei:xg7 Ei:d2 32 .Ei:g8 aS 33.g5 a4 34.g6 l2Jf4+ 35.�f3 l2Jxg6 36.Ei:xg6 Ei:d1 !+ Black's passed a4- pawn c an hardly be stopped.) 26 . . . Ei:xg5 27 . f3 Ei:dS+ White will fail to maintain the material balanc e, but his po­tential passed pawn on the king-

251

Chapter 16

side will enable him to save the draw.

12.l2le2, V olokitin - E .Alek­seev, Dagomys 2009, 12 . . . �d5N - This is a quite logic al novelty. Black does not need to defend the position after 12 . . . �e7 13.'Ll f4 �dS 14.'Llxd5 cxdS lS.l"ladl and we have already mentioned that in varia­tion B, Chapter 14) 13.'Llfd4 (13. 'Lld2 �e7 =) 13 . . . 'Llxd4 14.'Llxd4 �e7 15.he7 i>xe7 16.l"ladl (following 16.'Ll f5+? i>e6+ White loses a pawn) 16 . . . g6= and Black plans to double his rooks on the d-file.

A) 12.b3

White is tryi ng to restrict the enemy light-sq uared bishop.

12 • • • .ie7 13J!adl h4 Black's rook on a8 will fight

for the d-file, while his other rook on h8 will enter the actions via the h6, or hS- sq uares.

14.�e4 .i.d5 It also seems good for him to

play the standard move 14 . . . a5 !? , with the idea to enable his rook on a8 to j oin in the fight from its ini­tial square.

252

15.l"lfel l"ld8 16 • .i.f4 16.'Llf6+? gxf6 17 .exf6 hf3

18.l"lxd8+ i>xd8 19.fx e7 + i>e8 20 .gxf3 l"lg8-+

16 ••• l"ld7 Black has a good alternative

here 16 . . . he4! ? 17 .l"lxd8+ i>xd8 18.l"lxe4 i>d7 19.i>fl l"ld8 20 .i>e2 (20 .�g5 hgS 21 .'Ll xg5 i>e7 22 . 'Ll f3 i>e6 23.i>e2 cS=) 20 . . . i>e6 21 .�g5 hgS 22 .'Llxg5+ i>e7 23. 'Ll f3 i>e6= He has not allowed the enemy king to go to the q ueen­side, so White c annot improve his position.

17Jl:lfg5 l"lh6 18.c4 he4 19.�xe4 l"lxdl 2 0 .l"lxdl l"le6 21.�g5 l"lg6 22.�f3 c5 23.l"ld3 );'!a6 24.a4 c6!+t

6. hc6 de 7.de {jjj5 8. WixdB mxdB 9 . {jjc3 ffie810.h3 h5Jl. !J.g5 !J.e6

This is an important resourc e for Black. H e has packed the rook on the queenside and is preparing b7 -b5 with counterplay.

In the game Karjakin - J ako­venko, Dagomys 2010, there fol­lowed 25.g4 and the opponents agreed to a draw in view of the variation 25 . . . hxg3 26.fxg3 b5 27.cxb5 cxb5 28.g4 {jjd4 29. {jjxd4 cxd4 3 0 .axb5 �b6 31. mg2 �bs=

B) 12.�adl

This looks like the most logic al move for White. H e is preparing to double his rooks on the d-file and keeps the option to develop his other rook on the e1-square.

12 . . . .ib4 It is also possible for Black to

c ontinue here with 12 . . . !J.e7 13. �d2 (White must c onsider the possibility - 13.�fe1 ! ?) 13 . . . �c 8 ! ?, H az nedaroglu - M oradiabadi, A nkara 2011, trying to transpose to variation C.

13.a3 13. �fe1? - White loses a pawn

with this move 13 . . . . bc 3 14.bxc 3 !J.xa2+

Blac k should not be afraid of 13.{jjd4 {jjxd4 14.�xd4 !J.e7 15.{jje4 !J.f5 16.!J.xe7 mxe7 17 J'Ud1, Kon­nyu - K ovacs , Budapest 2011 , his king is active, so the simplest way for him to eq ualize c ompletely is 17 . . . !J.xe4 18.E1xe4 E1 ad8= ex­changing a pair of rooks.

13.a4 ! ? !J.e7 - with the ma­noeuvre !J.f8-b4-e7 , Black has provoked the enemy pawn to go to a4, where it is more vulnerable. (The move 13.a4 was aimed against the line : 13 . . . !J.xc 3 14.bxc 3 !J.d5 15.{jjd4 {jjxd4 16.E1xd4t and Black c annot play b7 -b5, which means that his bishop would be unstable.)

About 14.E1fe1 E1 d8 15.E1xd8+ mxd8 16.E1d1+ me8 - see 14.E1d2 .

14.{jje2 !J.d5 15.El d3 !J.e4 16.E1b3 !J.d5 17 .!'1d3 !J.e4= White is forced to c omply with the repetition of the position; otherwise, his king­side pawn- structure would be c ompromised.

Blac k equalizes easily after 14. g3 El d8 15.!'1xd8+ mxd8 16.E1d1 + m e8 17.mg2 f6 18.!J.f4 !J.d8= and in view of the threat g7-g5, White

253

Chapter 16

must play 19.exf6 gxf6= reaching a standard position in whic h Blac k uses the g7- sq uare to trans­fer his knight to e6.

White c annot harm his oppo­nent with 14.tt'le4 b6 15.a5, sinc e Blac k c an play 15 . . . c5 16.\t>h2 l:l:d8 17 .l:l:xd8+ hd8 18.l:l:d1 hg5 19. tt'lexg5 lt> e7+! and he fights for the d4-sq uare and plans to activate his light- squared bishop.

F ollowing 14.b3, due to the plac ement of White's pawn on a4, it would be very strong for Blac k t o trade the dark-squared bish­ops : 14 . . . hg5 15.tt'lxg5 lt> e7 16. tt'le2 l:l:hd8 17 .tt'lf4 h4 18.tt'lfxe6 fxe6= and the insufficient protec ­tion of the b3-pawn provides Blac k with excellent c ounterplay due to the idea c 6-c 5 and tt'lf5-d4, while following 19.c 3 l:l:d5= he oc ­c upies the d-file.

14.l:l:d2 - This is the most princ ipled move for White. 14 . . . l:l:d8 15.l:l:xd8+ lt>xd8 16.l:l:d1 + lt>e8 (16 . . . \t>c 8? ! 17 .he7 tt'lxe7 18.tt'lg5 tt'lg6 19.tt'lxe6 fx e6 20 .tt'le4t Blac k's e6-pawn is very weak and this provides White with a stable plus.) 17 .tt'le2 (17 .g3 f6 - this is a standard reaction for Blac k. 18. i.f4 i.d8 19.exf6 gxf6=) 17 . . . i.d5 18.he7 \t>xe7 19.tt'lg5 l:l:d8 20.tt'lf4 h4 21 .b3 l:l:d7 = It is essential that White does not have the plan with c 2-c 3 and l:l:d1-e1, bec ause his pawn on b3 is defenc eless.

13 ••. .ixc3 14.bxc3 i.d5 15. �d4

15.l:l:fe1 1t>f8 ! = Blac k's king will go to the h7 -square in order to en-

254

sure the c onnection of the rooks. 15 . . . �xd4 16.�xd4

16 . . . b5! 17.�fd1 17 .a4? ! a6 18.� a1 lt>d7 t H is

king will be perfectly plac ed on e6 and White's defenc e would be very diffic ult, despite the pres­enc e of bishops of opposite col­ours on the board.

17 . . . \t>fS 18.a4 a6 19.�a1 �e8 2 0 .axb5 axb5 21.f4 lt>g8 22.�a7 \t>h7 23.�xc7

In the game Karj akin - Bac rot, Poikovsky 2011, the opponents agreed to a draw, bec ause after 23 . . . \t>g6 24.i.e7 �aS� Blac k has exc ellent c ompensation for the pawn. All his piec es are active

6. hc6 de 7.de (jjf5 8. VffxdB 'ikixdB 9 . (jjc3 'iki e810.h3 h511. i.g5 i.e6

and partic ularly the diff erenc e of the power of the bishops is quite evident.

C) 12J�fdl White has developed his rook

on the open file, neutralizing the idea i.b4, bec ause following 12 . . . i.b4? ! 13.(jje2 ! t Black is inc apable of preventing the transfer of the enemy knight to the f4-sq uare.

12 . . . i.e7

This is one of the key-positions of this variation. White has nu­merous possibilities. Among them, the most dangerous for Black are Cl) 13.lM2 and C2) 13.g3.

13.a3? ! - This move is not only usele ss, but sometimes it is even harmful for White. 13 . . . �d8 (It is also good for Black to play 13 . . . b6 ! ?) 14.�xd8+ 'iklxd8 15.�d1+ 'iklc 8 ! and this move is even stronge r thanks to the unfavour­able plac ement of White's pawn on a3. 16.he7 (jjxe7 17 .{jjg5 (jjg6 18.� e1 (The drawback of the move 13.a3 can be also seen in the vari­ation 18 .(jjxe6 fxe 6 19.(jje4 (jjxe5 20.(jjg5 (jjc4+ and White c annot

play b2-b3, sinc e his a3-pawn is hanging.) 18 . . . �e8 19.(jjf3, (jjguy­en V an H ai - Tran, H anoi 2009, after 19 . . . i.f5+ Black deploys har­moniously his forc es and exerts pressure against the pawns on c 2 and e5.

13.(jje2 i.d5 14.�d3 (14.he7? ! hf3 15.gxf3 'iklxe7+ H e has a sta­ble edge thanks to his superior pawn- struc ture and more active king, K lovans G orbatov, Sc hwarzac h 1999) 14 . . . i.e4 15.�c 3 �dB 16.�e1 hf3 17 .�xf3 hg5 18. �xf5 i.d2 19.�d1 'ikle7 = Black's king is active and this c ompen­sates his inferior pawn- structure, Beltins - Silva, E mail 2009.

13.(jje4, G ao Rui - Y ang K aiq i, Subic 2009, White's last move is not threatening anything. 13 . . . b6 (This is a prophylactic move with which Blac k is c overing the c5-square.) 14.� d2 �d8 15.Elxd8+ hd8 16.Eld1 i.e7 =

In reply to 13.El d3, K otronias - Mastrovasilis, V rahati 2010, we recommend the standard reaction for Black 13 . . . h4 (following 13 . . . Elc 8 14.b3 !? f6 15.i.f4, White's rook is better plac ed on d3, than on d2, bec ause his knight on c3 is protected)

255

Chapter 16

14.b3 - This move is too slow. 14 .. J�h5 (It is also good for Blac k to choose 1 4 . . . E\d8 15.E\ad1 E\xd3 16.E\xd3, Sengupta - Shyam, In­dia 2011 and here, he obtains a very good position with 16 . . . hg5 17 .t2lxg5 �c 8 18.t2le2 f6 19.exf6 gxf6 20.t2lf3 �f7� - he wishes to deploy his bishop on the long di­agonal after the preliminary moves c 6-c 5 and b7- b6 and his rook on h8 is ready to go to e8.) 15.he7 t2lxe7 16.t2le4 E\d8 17 . t2leg5 �d5 18 .E1ad1 E\d7 = Black has defended against c 2-c 4 and is preparing to c apture on f3 .

White c annot c reate problems for his opponent with 14.t2le4 E\d8 (Blac k c ontinues with his devel­opment.) 15.E\xd8+ hd8 16.hd8 (16.E\d1 �e7 17 .t2lc5 �c 8� and he has parried all the threats and is ready to begin active actions) 16 . . . �xd8 17 .t2lfg5 �d5 18.t2lc 3 �e7 19.E\d1 E1 d8= White has no active plan in sight.

14.E\ad1 - This is the most princ ipled move for White. 14 . . . E\h5 15.he7 (Now, c ontrary to the position with a rook on d2, as it happened in the game R obson -Bac rot, Khanty-M ansiysk 2011 , White c annot play 15.t2le4?, be­c ause after 15 . . . �d5 16.he7 he4! , his rook on d3 would be hanging and after the forced line: 17 .E\d8+ E\xd8 18.hd8 hc 2 19. E\d2 �e4 20 .hc7 �d5+ Blac k's piec es would be tremendously ac ­tive. White's temporary pawn­sac rifice would be harmless for Blac k following 15.�c 1 E\d8

256

16.E\xd8+ hd8� - he has solved the problem with the activation of his rook.) 15 . . . t2lxe7 16.E\d4 (White fails to obtain an edge with the temporary pawn-sac ri­fic e : 16.t2ld4 E\xe5 17 .f4 E\h5 18. t2lxe6 fxe6 19.E\e1 E\d8 20.E\xd8+ �xd8 21 .E\xe6 �d7 22 .E\e4 E\c5� Blac k will soon begin an attack against the enemy q ueenside.) 16 . . . t2lg6 17 .a3 �f8� - He has a c lear-c ut plan for c ounterplay against White's e5-pawn .

13 .b3 h4 - After the exchange of a pair of rooks on d8, Black's rook on h8 will attack the enemy e5-pawn from the h5- sq uare.

14.E\d2 - This is an attempt to double the rooks. 14 . . . E\d8 15. E\xd8+ (15.E\ad1 E\xd2 16.E\xd2 E\h5 17 .he7 t2lxe7� - Black's knight is going to g6 in order to attac k the enemy e5- pawn.) 15 . . . �xd8 16.E\d1+ �c 8 17 .he7 t2lxe7 18.t2lg5 t2lg6 19.E\d4 c5 ! 20 .E\e4 �f5 21 .E\e3 E\h5 22 .t2lxf7 �e6 23. E1 f3 t2lxe5 24.t2lxe5 E\xe5= and in a fight on both sides of the board, Blac k's bishop is c onsiderably su­perior to White's knight, which c ompensates the defects of Black's pawn- structure.

6. hc6 de 7.de !Uj5 8. WixdB WxdB 9 . !U c3 W e810 .h3 h511. i.g5 i.e6

14.Wf1 ! ? b6 {Aft er the trade on d8, Black will have the resource c 6-c 5. The advantage in the plac e­ment of White's king on f1 c an be best seen in the variation: 14 . .. Eld8 15.Elxd8+ Wxd8 16.El d1 + Wc 8 17 .he7 !Uxe7 18.!Ug5;t K arg -SplHc hal, Email 2010 and Black c annot play the seemingly attrac ­tive line: 18 . . . !Ug6 19.!Uxe6 fxe6 20J'!d4 lUxeS 21 .El e4 El h5 22 .!Ue2 Wd7 , bec ause of 23.g4 ! hxg3 24. !Uxg3+-) 15.Eld2 El d8 16.Elxd8+ Wxd8 17.Eld1+ Wc 8 18.he7 !Uxe7 19.!Ug5 c5� Blac k is fighting for the d4-square, does not let there the enemy rook and is ready to begin the attack against the e5-pawn.

Cl) 13.�d2

13 . . . �c8 !?N Black has not tried this move

in practice yet. It is a nic e prophylactic , sinc e

h e protects i n advanc e his c 7-pawn and thus neutralizes the ef­fect of White's doubling of his rooks along the d-file.

Black has played much more often 13 . . . El d8 14J'!xd8+ (White c annot harm his opponent with 14.El ad1 �xd2 15.�xd2 h4 16.he7 Wxe7 = Anand - K arjakin, M os­cow (blitz) 2009) 14 . . . Wxd8 15. El d1+ We8

H ere, the only way for White to c reate some problems for Black seems to be 16.!Ue2 ! In the game So - Wang Yue, Guangzhou 2010, he played 16 . . . i.d5 17 .he7 Wxe7 18.!Ug5 f6 19.!Uf4 !Uh4 20.exf6+ Wxf6 2l .!Uxd5+ cxd5 22 .�xd5;t and ended up a pawn down.

14.�adl White's alternatives would not

c reate any problems for Blac k. The endgame is eq ual after

14.he7 Wxe7 15.� ad1 l"!c d8 16. l"!xd8 l"!xd8 17 .l"!xd8 Wxd8 18.Wf1 (if 18.!Ug5?, then 18 . . . We7 t with the idea to c apture on e6 with the ki ng) 18 . . . i.d5=

Following 14.b3, Blac k should react analogously to the main line of the variation: 14 .. .f6 15.exf6 (15.i.f4 i.b4 16.l"!d3 wf7� ) 15 . . . gxf6 16.l"!e2 Wf7 17.i.f4 i.b4 18. !Ue4 l"!he8� - all his piec es are perfec tly plac ed, his rook on c 8 will enter the actions after i.a5, or

257

Chapter 16

after the transfer of the knight to the e6, or d6-squares.

14.:B e1 - White prevents the move f7-f6. Black gains tempi however, to activate his rook via hS. 14 . . . h4 1S.b3 (1S.tt:le4 :B d8 16. :B xd8+ .bd8 17.:B d1 :ile7=) 1S . . . :ilb4 16.:B d3 .bc 3 17.:Bxc 3 :idS 18. :ilc 1 (following 18.:B d3 :BhSf± he organizes c ounterplay against the enemy eS-pawn and it is essential that he c an counter 19.:B ed1 with the c old-blooded response 19 . . . tt:le7) 18 . . . :B d8 19.tt:lgS tt:ld4! Black c ements the e6-sq uare. 20 .:ile3 tt:le6=

14.tt:le4 b6 ! ? (it is useful for him to c over the c S-sq uare too) 1S.:B ad1 (following 1S.b3, Black c an begin the standard exc hange operations with 1S . . . :B d8 16. :B xd8+ .bd8 17 . .bd8 i>xd8 18. tt:lfgS i>e7 19.tt:lxe6 i>xe6f± and his king is very active) 1S . . . :ildS ! (M­ter this move, White is forc ed to c omply with exchanges.) 16 . .be7 (16.:B e1 :B d8 17.b3 :ile6 18.:B xd8+ i>xd8 19.:B d1+ i>e8= planning c 6-c S) 16 . . . i>xe7 17.tt:lfgS :B edS 18. tt:lc 3 :ilc 4 19.b3 (White c an win a pawn here by playi ng 19.:Bxd8 :B xd8 20 .:Bxd8 i>xd8 21 .b3 :idS 22 .tt:lxdS cxdS 23.tt:lxf7+ i>e7 24. tt:lgS, but after 24 . . . tt:ld4 2S.c 4 dxc 4 26 . .bc 4 tt:le2+ 27.\t>fl tt:lc 1= he will hardly manage to keep it. ) 19 . . . :B xd2 20.:Bxd2 :ila6f± and Black's bishop will go to b7.

14 . . . f6 (diagram)

15 . .if4 Aft er 1S.exf6 gxf6 16.:ilf4 i>f7f±

2S8

he had no diffic ulties in the game H aznedaroglu - M oradiabadu, Ankara 2011 .

15 . . . i>t7 16.lile4 i.d5! 16 . . . :Bhd8? 17.g4± 17.:Bel b5!

With his last two moves, Black has solved his only problem - the potentially unstable position of his bishops on the e-file. H is light­squared bishop has gained acc ess to the wonderful dS-sq uare, while his dark-sq uared bishop is ready to be transferred to b6, after which he c an bring his rook on c 8 into the actions.

H e has nothing to worry about at all and that c an be best illus­trated by the following variations:

6.hc6 de 7.de l1Jf5 8. �xd8 @xd8 9 . l1J c3 @e8 1 0 .h3 h5 11. ii.g5 ii.e6

18.gde2 (18.l"1d3 .ib4 19.ii.d2 a5+! ; 18.b3 ii.b4 19.c3 ii.a5+!) 18 . . . ii.b4 (but not 18 . . . ii.c4? 19.exf6 gxf6 20 .11Jg3+-) 19.c3 i.a5+!

C2) 13.g3 This rather insidious move,

preventing h5-h4, followed by the inclusion of Black's rook on h8 into the ac tions, was tried in the game Anand - Kramnik, London 2010 (game 46).

13 . . . gg8!?

This useful move increases the eff ect of the move t7-f6, and White cannot avoid this advantageously for him.

14.gd2 Aft er 14.11Je4, Black c an follow

with the standard plan of activat­ing his piec es : 14 . . . i.d5! 15.2"1e1 hg5 16.11Jfxg5 (White thus loses his control over the d4- square, but following 16.11Jex g5 @e7 17 .g4 hxg4 18.hxg4 l1Jh6 19.11Jh2 j"1h8+! he only weakens his king even more) 16 . . . 11Jd4! 17.2"1ac1 @e7 18. l1Jc5 b6 19.c4 l1Je6 20.11Jcxe6 he6=

It is not preferable for him to choose 14.he7 @xe7 - after the exchange of the bishops, Black has ac tivated his king and c oordi­nated his rooks. 15.l1Jg5 j"1ad8 16. l1Je2 (The transfer of the knights to f4 and g5 is White's only rea­sonable plan.) 16 . . . ii.c 4 ! 17 .Li:lf4 l1Jd4 18 .b3 l1Je2+ 19.Li:lxe2 he2 20.j"1e1 j"1d2+!

14.@h2 (following 14.@g2, the same plan for Black is even more eff ective) 14 .. .f6 15.ii.f4 (after 15. exf6 gxf6 16.ii.f4 l1Jd6= White does not exert pressure against the enemy c7 -pawn, Tarlev -Lysyj , Mosc ow 2012) 15 . . . g5 16. exf6 gxf4 17 .fx e7 fxg3+ 18.fxg3 @xe7 19.j"1e1 j"1af8 20 .Li:le4 @d8 2 1.Li:lfg5 ii.d5 22 .Li:lh7 Li:ld4 23.j"1ed1 Li:lf3+ with a perpetual check after 24 .@g2 Li:lh4+ 25.@h2 Li:lf3=

14.h4 (This move does not pre­vent Black's counterplay on the kingside) 14 .. .f6 15.ii.f4 (15.exf6 gxf6 16.ii.f4 l1Jd6=) 15 . . . g5 ! 16.exf6 gxf4 17.Li:lg5 id6 (the game is much sharper after 17 . . . j"1xg5! ? 18.hxg5 id6oo) 18.Li:lxe6 @t7 19. Li:lg5+ @xf6 20.11Jc e4+ @g6=

14.j"1d3 f6 15.i.f4 (following 15.exf6 gxf6 16.ii.f4 j"1c8 17.@g2 @f7= Black's kn ight will go to the d6-sq uare, covering the c7-pawn ) 1 5 . . . g5 16.exf6 gxf4 17.fx e7 (17 . l"1e1 hf6 18.j"1xe6+ @t7 19.j"1e1 fx g3 20.2"1d7+ @g6 21 .fx g3 @h6+! White's kingside needs additional p rotection) 17 . . . fxg3 18.j"1e1 gxf2+ 19.@x f2 @xe7

(diagram) Black has captured a pawn,

259

Chapter 16

but has fallen behind in develop­ment and c ome under a very un­pleasant pin. Still, he c an main­tain the balanc e without too much of an eff ort:

20 .'t:l e2 �f6 21 .lt:lf4 �f7 22 .E\d7 E1 ae8 23.E1xc7 lt:ld6= H e has every­thing protected and his king is ac ­tive and not vulnerable at all;

20 .lt:le4 E\ae8 21 .lt:lc 5 �f6 22 . lt:lxb7 �c 4 23.Ei:c 3 Ei:xel 24.lt:lxel idS 25.lt:lc 5 lt:ld4= Blac k's q ueen­side pawns are weak indeed, but his piec es are very active.

14 •.. f6

15.exf6 15.�f4 g5 - H e follows a con­

crete line and proves that his po­sition is unbreakable. 16.exf6 gxf4

260

17 .fxe7 . In the variation 17 .Ei:el ixf6 18.E\xe6+ �f7 19.Ei:e4 ixc 3 20.bxc 3 fxg3 2l .Ei:d7 + �f6 22 .Ei:f4 �e6 23.Ei:xc7 lt:ld6t Black has a c lear edge.) 17 . .. fxg3 18.Ei:el gxf2+ 19.�xf2 �xe7 - White is again in­c apable of exploiting the pin along the e-file : 20.lt:le4 Ei:ae8 21 .lt:lc5 �f6 22 .lt:lxb7 (22 .Ei:de2 lt:lg7 =) 22 . . . lt:lg7 23.h4 �d5= - The vul­nerability of the h4- pawn is much more important than Black's queenside weaknesses.

15 ..• gxf6 16 . .if4 White c annot ac hieve muc h by

exerting pressure on the e-file with 16.Ei:el �f7 17 .Ei:de2 �d7 18. if4 �d6 19.ixd6 cxd6= Blac k has c orrected his pawn- structure and has no problems at all .

16 •. .1�k8 17.Ei:e2 't!lf7 18.1%ael �d7 19J�d2 ttld6=

We will have to mention onc e again that i n this typical pawn­structure for the Berlin endgame, Black's powerful bishop- pair compensates his weaknesses, which White can hardly attack.

Chapter 16 l.e4 e5 2 . tlJf3 tlJc6 3 . .ib5 tlJf6 4.0 -0 tlJxe4 5.d4 tlJd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 ttJf5 8.�xd8+ @xd8 9.tlJc3 @e8 10 .h3 h5 ll . .ig5 .ie6

Complete Games

45 Amonatov - Kaijakin M osc ow 2010

1.e4 e5 2.lt:rf3 c!Llc6 3 . .ib5 c!Llf6 4. 0 - 0 c!Llxe4 5.d4 c!Lld6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!Llf5 8. �xd8+ l!>xd8 9.c!Llc3 l!>e8 1 0. h3 h5 ll • .ig5 �e6 12.a3 .ie7 13.�ad1 h4 14.�fe1 �d8 15. �xd8+ l!>xd8 16.c!Lle4 .id5 17. l!>h2 hg5 18.lilexg5 l!>e7= 19. �d1

19 . . . a5! Black ensures with this move

his spac e advantage on the queen­side.

2 0 .c!Lld4 c!Llxd4 21.gxd4 �h5 22.f4 f6 23.exf6+ gxf6

(diagram) 24.c4 ! , Draw. It would be worse for White to

opt here for 24.lt:J e4 i.e6t -Black's rook and bishop are muc h

more eff ec tive than White's rook and knight. The opponents agreed to a draw, which was quite timely, sinc e after the obligatory moves :

24 ..• hg2 25.1!>xg2 fxg5 26.ge4+ l!>f6 27.1!>f3 gxf4 28. �xf4+ l!>e6 29.l!>g4 �h8 3 0 . l!>g5= there would arise a com­pletely drawish rook and pawn ending.

46 Anand Kramnik L ondon 2010

1.e4 e5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3 . .ib5 c!Llf6 4. 0 - 0 c!Llxe4 5.d4 c!Lld6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 c!Llf5 8. �xd8+ l!>xd8 9.c!Llc3 1!>e8 1 0 .h3 h5 ll . .ig5 .ie6 12.�fd1 .ie7 13. g3 f6!?

(diagram) 14.exf6 The fight would be muc h more

261

Chapter 16

interesting after 14.�f4 ! ? fx e5 15 . .ixe5 tt'ld6oo

14 . . . gxf6 15.i.f4 l''k8 16. <i>h2 <i>f7 17.gd2

It is preferable for White to play here 17 .a3 tt'ld6 18.tt'ld4 �d7 19.b3=

17 ..• gcd8 By playing 17 . . . �b4!t , Black

would have seized the initiative. ts.gxd8 i.xdS 19.gdl ges

2 0 .tiJd4 White is forced to trade the

knights, since after 20 .ci>g2 c5� the prospects of his kn ight on f3 would be rather grim.

2 0 ... tiJxd4 21.gxd4 i.f5 22.gd2 i.e7!

262

23.tiJdl T he light squares around

White's king are so weak that Black would have excellent com­pensation for the pawn following 23 . .ixc7 �b4 24.a3 .ixc3 25.bxc3 8:el�

23 . . . gds 24.gxd8 i.xd8=

His two-bishop advantage compensates fully his awkward queenside pawn-structure.

25.tiJe3 i.e4 26.g4 hxg4 27.hxg4 i.e7 28.i.xc7 i.c5 29. c3 i.xe3 3 0 .fxe3 <i>e6 3l.lt>g3 a6 32.<i>f4 i.c2 33.e4 i.dl 34. a3 i.e2 35.i.b6 i.dl 36.i.d4 i.e2 37.i.e3 i.dl 38.i.d4 i.e2 39.i.e3 i.dl, Draw.

Chapter 17 l.e4 e5 2.4Jf3 4Jc6 3 • .ib5 4Jf6 4.0 -0 4Jxe4 5.d4 4Jd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7 .dxe5 4Jf5 8.�xd8+ @xd8 9.4Jc3 @e8 10 .h3 h5 11 . .if4

Quick Repertoire

on e6 is not dangerous for Black, bec ause the eventual exc hange of the knights would be in his fa­vour. 12 . . . �e6 13.l2Jed4 l2Jxd4 14. l2Jxd4 �d7 15.e6 he6 16.l2Jxe6 fxe6 17 .hc7 l'k8=

12 .l2J e4 - This move is also harmless for Black, sinc e follow­ing 12 . . . l2J h4 13.l2Jxh4 �xh4 14. l2Jg5 �f5 15.c3 hg5 16.hg5 Wd7 ! = he activates his king and

This is the main move for c onnec ts his rooks in the pro­White. H is bishop is eyeing the c ess. c7 -pawn and the g5-sq uare is left 12 .•. .ie6!? for the knight. H is rooks are now c onnected.

ll ..• .ie7 One of the real c lassic s of the

Berlin endgame - GM L evon A ro­nian demonstrated a quite new idea rec ently. Naturally, we feel obliged to at least mention it -ll . . . �d7 ! ? 12 .l"lad1 Eid8 13.b3 �e7 14.Elfe1 �b4 15.�d2 �c 8+! Black obtained an exc ellent position. We would like to present to the readers the possibility to find how White c ould have played, lvan­chuk - A ronian, Mosc ow 2011 .

12.gadl 12 .l2Je2 - This attempt by

White to attac k the enemy bishop

13.l2Jg5 This is a standard resourc e for

White, exploiting the vulnerabili­ty of the g5-sq uare. H e wishes to exchange Black's light-sq uared bishop and to provoke a c hange of

263

Chapter 17

the pawn-structure favourable for White.

In the variation 13.l2J e4 8:d8 14.l2Jfg5 �c 4 15.8:xd8+ hd8 16. 8:d1 f6 17.exf6 gxf6= the exchang­es are advantageous for Black and after he transfers his rook from h8 to the d7 -square, he will not have any "bad" pieces left on the board.

13 . . . 8:h6! This is also a standard reply.

Blac k is ready to part with his two-bishop advantage, but acti­vates instead his usually idle rook. In this particular c ase, if he enters a position with bishops of oppo­site colours, then he will be in trouble, bec ause after 13 . . . hg5 14.hg5±, Black would be inc apa­ble of c onnecting his rooks.

14.g3 There is nothing forc ed in this

situation, so White is tryi ng pa­tiently to improve his position. H e i s ready to support his knight on gS with the move h3-h4.

F ollowing 14.l2Jc e4 �dS 15.b3 f6! 16.exf6 gxf6=, White must force a draw in order to avoid the worst.

264

Black has a very good position after 14.8:fe1 �b4 ! ? 15.g4 hxg4 16. hxg4 l2Je7 17 .l2Jxe6 8:xe6 18.8:e3 ! l2Jg6 19.�g3 hc 3 20.bxc 3 8:d8 ! = and h e has n o problems after the trade of his passive rook.

14.l2Jxe6 - This exchange of White's knight for Black's light­squared bishop is usually in fa­vour of White. Here, however, he is forc ed to make a draw at the first possible moment, sinc e Black's usually passive rook o n h8 enters the actions easily. 14 . . . 8:xe6 15.8:d3 8:d8=

14 . . . hg5! Black succ eeds in c reating suf­

fic ient counterplay just for a tempo. 15.hg5 gg6 16.h4 f6 17.

exf6 gxf6 18.i.f4 tt:lxh4 19.f3! If White had not plac ed his pawn on g3 before, he would not have that possibility either.

19 . . . gd8 ! =

Black has made his last "diffi­c ult" move and the position has been equalized. H e exc hanges his passive rook and the drawing ten­denc ies in this situation become quite obvious.

Chapter 17 l.e4 e5 2)ijf3 ltJc6 3.i.b5 ltJf6 4. 0 -0 ltJxe4 5.d4 ltJd6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ltJf5 8.�xd8+ @xd8 9.ltJc3 @e8 10 .h3 h5 ll.i.f4 i.e7

Step by Step

12J�adl In re ply to 12.l"lfe1 , R oj ic ek -

H aba, K arvina 2010, Blac k solves easily his problems with 12 . . . ie6 13.l"lad1 ib4� and he is trying to enter a favourable position with bishops of opposite c olours.

12 .tt:le 2 ie6 13.tt:led4 (13.l"lad1 l"ld8 - se e 12 .l"lad1) 13 . . . tt:lxd4 14. tt:lxd4 i.d7 15.e6 (White has no time for the preparatory move 15.l"lfe 1, in view of 15 . . . c5 ! 16.e6 cxd4 17.exd7 + lt>xd7 18.l"lad1 c S 19.c 3 i d6 20.hd6 lt>xd6 2l .cxd4 c4 !+ White's d4-pawn is weak, while Black's king is very active.) 15 . . . he 6 16.ttJxe6 fx e6 17 .hc7 l"lc 8 18.i e5 'tt>f7= This position is analogou s to what happened in the game C aruana - Kramnik, Khanty -Mansiysk 2010 and we

have analyzed it in c hapter 15, variation C.

12.ttJe4 ttJh4 13.ttJxh4 (The trade of the knights is in favour of Black and White c annot avoid it advantageously, bec ause after 13. ttJd4 ttJfS 14.ttJe2 i e6 15.l"lfd1, H rac ek - R is, Germany 2008, Black c ompletes the mobilization of his forces by playing 15 . . . l"ld8 16.b3 idS 17 .ttJ2c3 b6 18.a4 ie6�) 13 . . . hh4

14.ttJg5 (after 14.l"lfe1 i e7 , the position looks like a dead draw following 15.tt:ld6+ cxd6 16. exd6 ie6 17 .dxe7 lt>xe7 18.l"le3 l"lhe8= , while after 15.l"lad1 i e6 16.ttJg5 ifS ! = M ista - Krysztofiak, War­saw 2011 , White should better forc e a draw with: 17 .e6 ! ) 14 . . . i f5 15.c 3 (15.l"lad1 - H e sac rific es temporarily a pawn and prevents

265

Chapter 17

the c onnection of Black's rooks. 15 . .. hc 2 16J'\d4 .tf5 17 .Ei:fd1 Ei:f8 ! , but h e manages to advanc e f7-f6 : 18 . .te3 hg5 19.hg5 f6 20.exf6 gxf6 2l ..tf4 Ei:f7=) 15 . . . hg5 16. hg5 i>d7 ! White has failed to oc ­c upy the d-file and Black's king succ eeds in evac uating to the q ueenside.) 17 .Ei:ad1+ i>c 8 18.Ei:d2 b6 19.Ei:fd1 i>b7 20 .Ei:d8 Ei:axd8 2l .Ei:xd8 Ei:xd8 22 .hd8 .tg6, Draw, Bac rot - J akovenko, Dort­mund 2009.

Following 12.Ei:fd1 .te6 13.ltlg5 (13.g3 Ei:d8 14.Ei:xd8+ i>xd8 15. tt:lg5? hg5 16.hg5+ i>c 8+; 14. i>g2 Ei:d7 =) 13 . . . Ei:h6, White has not obtained any advantages in c omparison to the deployment of his rooks on d1 and f1 - see the main line, after Black's move 13.

The only exception in this po­sition is the variation 14.tt:lxe6 Ei:xe6 15.i>fl. Black must react res­olutely then by playi ng 15 . . . g5 ! ?N (The essence of the idea behind this move is to isolate the enemy bishop and also Blac k occ upies space on the ki ngside in the pro­cess. The c almer line: 15 . . . Ei:d8 16.Ei:xd8+ hd8 17.tt:le4 .te7 18. Ei:e1 t left him as the defending

266

side in the game K amsky - Na­vara, Wijk aan Zee 2012 .) 16 . .th2 Ei:d8 17.tt:le4 (Blac k's piec es are notic eably activated in the varia­tion 17.Ei:ab1 Ei:d4 18.ltle2 Ei:d5 19. c4 Ei:xd1 + 20. Ei:xd1 c5 21 .ltlc 3 tt:ld4=, a s well a s following 17 . Ei:xd8+ i>xd8 18.Ei:e1 i>d7 19.Ei:d1+ i>c 8 20.ltle4 c5 2l .c 3 tt:lh4 22.ltlg3 Ei:xe5 23.ltlxh5 Ei:e6 24 . .tg3 Ei:a6 ! 25.a3 Ei:b6 26.Ei:d2 c4=) 17 . . . c 5 18. c3 (It is hardly preferable for White to c ontinue with 18.Ei:xd8+ i>xd8 19.Ei:d1+ i>c 8 20 .c 3 tt:lh4 21 . Ei:e1 tt:lg6 22 .g4 hxg4 23.hxg4 b5= Black's queenside counterplay is suffic ient for equality, moreover that White must remain on con­stant alert about his e5-pawn, which c ramps Black's position.) 18 . . . Ei:d7 19.Ei:e1 i>d8 20 .Ei:ad1 Ei:xd1 2l .Ei:xd1+ i>c 8 22 .Ei:d3 g4! 23.hxg4 hxg4+! Black's piec es are much more active than their c ounter­parts and his position is quite ac ­c eptable.

12 . . . i.e6!? Tournament prac tic e has

shown that the alternatives 12 . . . .td7 and 12 . . . tt:lh4 are also quite acc eptable for him.

6. hc6 de 7.de 4:Jj5 8. VfixdB ct;xdB 9 . 4:Jc3 ct; e810.h3 h511. §Jj4 i.e7

13.ll:\g5 13.4:Je2 - Black should try to

exc hange the knights and not White . . . 13 . . Jl:d8 14.4:Jed4 4:Jxd4 15.4:Jxd4 i.c 8= Black has ac hieved everything that he c an dream about in the Berlin endgame. He has developed his rook on a8 and exc hanged his knight, Negi - M o­radiabadi, M ashhad 2011 (game 47).

13.4:Je4 - White wishes to threaten the enemy bishop on e6 by plac ing his knight on g5. 13 . . . EJ:d8 (13 . . . 4:Jh4? ! - The trade of the knights turns out to be disadvan­tageous for Black, bec ause after 14.4:Jxh4 hh4 15.4:Jc 5±, White ex­changes on e6 and Blac k is forc ed to rec apture with his pawn) 14. 4:Jfg5, Negi - K ayumov, Dubai 2011 . H e must avoid the trade of his light-squared bishop: 14 . . . i.c 4 15.EJ:xd8+ (following 15.El:fe1 EJ:xd1 16.EJ:xd1 f6 17 .exf6 gxf6 18.4:Jf3 i.d5 19.El:e1 ct;dS+! Blac k has solved the problem with the pro­tection of his c7 -pawn by bringing his ki ng c loser) 15 . . . hd8 16.El:d1 f6 17 .exf6 gxf6 18.4:Jf3 i.d5= and he plans to transfer his rook to d7 , via the h7 -square.

13 . . . gh6! This is an important strategic

resourc e. Black is planning to c apture on e6 with his rook and to begin an immediate c ounter at­tack against his opponent's e5-pawn. If White does not c apture on e6, then Black intends to enter a position with bishops of oppo­site c olours in which his rook on

g6 will take an active part in an of­fensive on the kingside.

This is the key position of the variation and we will analyze it thoroughly.

14.g3 This is an interesting pawn­

sac rific e. White wishes to provoke havoc in his opponent's position and to activate maximally his own forc es.

14.4:Jce4, E.Alekseev - Pon­omariov, Saratov 2011 (game 48), White refrains from c aptur­ing on e6 and wishes to preserve his knight on the g5-square. Now, Black c an keep both his bishops by playing 14 . . . i.d5 15.b3 (threat­ening c 2 -c4)

15 .. .f6 ! 16.exf6 gxf6 17 .El:xd5

267

Chapter 17

(White is forc ed to make a draw now.) 17 . . . cxd5 18.lt:Je6 c 6 19.hh6 (19.lt:Jc7 +? ! @f7 20.lt:Jxa8 E1h8 21 . lt:Jc7 dxe4 22 .1"1e1 E1 d8+ The e4-pawn is untouchable, bec ause af­ter 23.1"1xe4? E1 d1+ 24.@h2 E1 d4-+ White loses his knight, although even without c apturing on e4, he will hardly save the game.) 19 . . . @fl 20.lt:J4c5 (20.lt:Jc7 ? ! E1c 8?) 20 . . . lt:Jxh6 21.1"1e1 hc 5 22 .lt:Jxc 5 b6 23.lt:Jd3 lt:Jf5=

14.1"1fe1 i.b4! ?N - Suddenly, Blac k has obtained surprising c ounterplay (It is also possible for him to play 14 . . . Ei:d8 15.Ei:xd8+ i.xd8, Ter Sahakyan - T.L . Pe­trosian, Martuni 2011 .) . He is not only threatening to compromise his opponent's queenside, but has freed the e7 -square for his knight.

15.lt:Jge4. This is a purely de­fensive move. (White c an hardly obtain any advantage following 15.i.d2 Ei:d8 16.lt:Jc e4 hd2 17 . Ei:xd2 Ei:xd2 18.lt:Jxd2 c5+±) 15 . . . 1"1g6 16.g3 (The position is equal after 16.a3 hc 3 17 .lt:Jxc 3 Ei:d8= and it is a wonderful version for Black of a situation with bishops of opposite c olours.) 16 . . . Ei:d8 17 .Ei:xd8+ @xd8 18.Ei:d1 + @c 8= - He has activated

268

all his pieces and has no problems whatsoever.

15.g4 - This is White's only ac ­tive possibility. 15 . . . hxg4 16.hxg4 lt:Je7 17 .lt:Jxe6 Ei:xe6 18.Ei:e3 ! Black is now forc ed to play very prec ise­ly. (He would have eq ualized eas­ily following 18.i.d2 Ei:d8 19.a3 i.xc 3 20.i.xc 3 Ei:d5 2l .f4 E1xd1 22 . Ei:xd1 lt:Jd5 23.i.d2 g5 ! 24.fxg5 Ei:xe5=) 18 . . . lt:Jg6 19 .i.g3 hc 3 20. bxc 3 Ei:d8 ! It is essential for him to trade his passive rook. (Aft er 20 . . . c 5? 2l .f4t Blac k's defence against the enemy pawns would be much more difficult.) 2l .Ei:xd8+ @xd8 22 .f4 lt:Je7 23.f5 (23.Ei:d3+ @e8 24.f5 Ei:h6 25.@g2 c5 !+± with the already familiar c ounterplay along the sixth rank) 23 . . . Ei:h6 24.@f2 @e8 (but not 24 . . . c5? 25. e6 fx e6 26.i.f4 Ei:f6 27 .i.g5 E1f1 28.Ei:xe6+- and the arising king and pawn ending is winning for White.) 25.i.f4 (after 25.c 4 c5 26.1"1b3 b6 27 .i.f4 E1h1= he has succ eeded in preventing the ap­pearanc e of Black's rook on a6, but it will be activated on the first rank.) 25 . . . Ei:h1 26.c 4 g6 27 .f6 g5 ! (He sac rifices a pawn and acti­vates both his knight and his king.) 28.hg5 lt:Jg6 29 .e6 E1h2+ 30 .@e1 fx e6 3l.Ei:xe6+ @f7 32 .Ei:e2 Ei:xe2+ 33.@xe2 lt:Je5= - Blac k c aptures the pawns o n g 4 and f6, but loses his c7-pawn, so at the end, there arises a dead drawish endgame.

Following 14.@h2 Ei:g6 15. lt:Jxe6 Ei:xe6= the plac ement of the king on h2, does not provi de

6.hc6 de 7. de {iJj5 8. WixdB �xdB 9 . {iJc3 �e8 10.h3 h5 11. iJ.f4 iJ.e7

White with any advantages in c omparison to the variation with 14.{iJxe6.

14.{iJxe6 :1'1xe6. Blac k's rook is very active now, so that thematic exchange has not been so succ ess­ful for White. The c onc rete varia­tions prove convinc ingly that the activity of Black's piec es c ompen­sates fu lly White's pawn-maj ority on the kingside.

When you see the variation 15.iJ..h2 E!:d8 16.:1'1xd8+ �xd8 17 . {iJe 4 c5 18.E!:d1 + �c 8= , you c an understand what Blac k wishes to achieve. He has exc hanged his passive rook on a8, evac uated his king to the queenside and en­large d the sc ope of activity of his othe r rook, having ensured the d4- sq uare for his knight in the proce ss.

There was an only game played in the line : 15.:1'1d3 :1'1d8 16.E!:fd1? ! (It was p referable for White to choose 16.:1'1xd8+ �xd8 17 .:1'1d1+ �c 8=) 16 .. . :1'1xd3 17 .cxd3, Gve­tadze - Imnadze, Tbilisi 2011 (White would have good c hanc es of building a fortre ss afte r 17 . :1'1xd3 g5 18.iJ..h2 f6 19.g4 hxg4 20.hxg4 {iJh4 21.{iJe 4 fxe5+) and

after playing 17 . . . c5 , Blac k could have fixed the enemy weakn ess on d3, preparing the acc ess of his king to the c 6-sq uare and the de­ployment of his knight on d4.

15.:1'1fe1 - The basic drawback of this move is that White comes under an unpleasant pin. 15 . . . g5 16.iJ..h2 iJ..b4 17 .g4 hxg4 18.hxg4 {iJh6 (Black wins a tempo and is ready to disrupt his opponent's pawn-structure.) 19.f3 hc 3 20. bxc 3 {iJg8= and his kn ight will go to the g6-square.

15.{iJe4 - White is trying to build a fortress with this pawn­sac rific e. 15 .. .f6 16.g4 hxg4 17 .hxg4 {iJh4 18.f3 fx e5 19.iJ..g3 {iJg6 20.�f2 :1'1d8 21 . �e3 :1'1xd1 22 .E!:xd1 c5=

15.g4 - This aggressive plan c an be c ountered by Blac k with a conc rete variation. 15 . . . hxg4 16. hxg4 {iJh4

17 .{iJe 2 ! (White begins a chase after the ene my rook.) 17 .. .f5 ! 18. exf6 iJ.xf6 19.{iJg3 hb2 20.:1'1b1 iJ..d4 21 .E!:xb7 iJ..b6 22 .hc7 :1'1e7 23. :1'1b8+ :1'1xb8 24.hb8 {iJf3+ 25.�h1 (We c an see the same mec hanism for a perpetu al check for Black in the variation 25.�g2 {iJe1+ 26. �h3 g6 27 .g5 {jjf3 28.iJ..f4 :1'1h7 +

269

Chapter 17

29.@g2 tt:J h4=) 25 . . . @f7 26.c 4 l"le8 27 .i.f4 l"lh8+ 28 .@g2 tt:J h4=

14 . . . h:g5 Black c an hardly improve his

position in any other way, bec ause after 14 . . . l"lg6 15.tt:J xe6 l"lxe6 16. tt:J e4, he c annot win a pawn with 16 . . .f6 , since in the variation 17 . exf6 l"lxe4 18.fx e7 :;t White's bishop on f4 is protected.

15.h:g5 �g6

16.h4 White may continue without

sac rific ing a pawn, but then he c annot avoid the triple repetition : 16.i.f4 tt:J h4 17 .@h1 tt:Jf3 18.@g2 , Draw, G rischuk - Anand 2011 .

16 . . . f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.i.f4 lilxh4 19.£3!

27 0

19 •.. �d8! Black's position is worse after

19 . . . l"lg7 20.tt:Je4 @£7 21.@£2 tt:Jx£3 22. @xf3 i.g4+ 23. @f2 i.xd1 24.l"lxdU Efimenko - Bacrot, Poikovsky 2011.

2 0 .@f2 It would be harmless for Blac k

if White chooses 20.l"lde1 @d7 ! 21 . @f2 tt:J fS 22 .l"ld1+ @c 8 23.l"lxd8+ @xd8 - see. 20.l"lxd8+ .

20 .l"lxd8+ @xd8 2L@f2 tt:Jfs 22 .l"lh1 (Blac k has nothing to c omplain about after 22 .b3 tt:Jg7 23.l"lh1 i.fS 24.tt:J d1 i.e6 25.tt:J e3 i.f7= White has some c ompensa­tion for the pawn indeed, but it is suffic ient only for a draw.) 22 . . . tt:J g7 23.i.d2 i.fS 24.tt:Jd1 i.xc 2 25. tt:J e3 i.d3 26.tt:'ig2 tt:J e6 27 .l"lxh5 l"lg7 28.i.c3 @e7 29.l"lh6 l"lf7= Black will hardly manage to realize his extra pawn, but he c an make eas­ily at least a draw, A nand - Naka­mura, Bilbao 2011 (game 49).

2 0 •.• �xdl

21.lilxdl Following 2l .l"lxd1 tt:Jxf3 ! 22 .

@xf3 i.g4+ 23.@e4 i.xd1 24.tt:Jxd1 l"lg7 25.c 4 l"ld7 = there arises a po­sition, whic h is very similar to the

6.hc6 de 7.de !iJ.f5 8. 'i/fjxdB @xdB 9 . !iJc3 @e810.h3 h511.�f4 �e7

one, we have analyzed in the game Efimenko - Bac rot, but with the important diff erenc e that Black has succ eeded in trading a c ouple of rooks. Now, his h5- pawn is c ompletely safe and neither side has any active plan.

21 ••• !iJf5 22.:gh1 .ixa2

White fails to trap the enemy bishop after 23.b3? ! �bl 24.:gel+ @f7 25.:ge2 !iJd4 26.:gd2 c5 27 . !iJe3 :gg7 28.hc7 @e6 29.�b8 b6? Black has won a pawn and exerts pressure against the weak enemy c 2-pawn.

23,:gxh5 Here, in the game M otylev -

M alakhov, Olginka 2011, the op­ponents agreed to a draw. In the variation 23 . . . �e6 24.hc7 :gh6 25.:gxh6 !iJxh6 26.g4 !iJf7= Black c an enter a dead drawish position with bishops of opposite colours, sinc e White c an hardly exploit the weakn ess of his enemy f6-pawn without rooks present on the board.

2 71

Chapter 17 l.e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3 . .ib5 �f6 4. 0 -0 �xe4 5.d4 �d6 6.hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 �f5 8.VNxd8+ c;!?xd8 9.�c3 c;!?e8 10 .h3 h5 ll . .if4 .ie7

Complete Games

47 Negi Moradiabadi Mashhad 2011

l.e4 e5 2.llj f3 llJc6 3 . .ib5 llJf6 4. 0 - 0 llJxe4 5.d4 llJd6 6 • .ixc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 llJf5 8. �xd8+ c.t>xd8 9.llJc3 c.t>e8 1 0 . h3 h5 1 1 • .if4 .ie7 12 .l'!adl .ie6 13.llJe2 13d8 14.llJed4 llJxd4 15.llJxd4 .ic8t

16.c3?! Aft er the acc urate line : 16. e6 !

.i d6 17. exf7+ <;t>xt7 18 . .i e3= White c an rely on a quick draw.

16 •.. g5 17 . .icl?! Aft er 17 . .ig3 ! White would be

still eyeing the c7 -pawn. 17 .•. 13g8 18.llJe2 13d5! 19.f4? It was preferable for him to

have c hosen 19.!l:xd5 cxdS 20 . .i e3 b6 2l. !l:dl .ie6 22.b4 ! and Black would have problems penetrating on the light squares.

272

19 .•. gxf4? It would be more energetic

for him to play 19 ... !l:a5 ! 20.fxg5 (or 20. a3 gxf4+) 20 ... .ixg5+ and White will fail to hold his eS­pawn, moreover that he will have obvious problems with the pro­tection of his flanks.

2 0 .13xd5 cxd5 21.llJxf4 c6 22 . .ie3?!

H e c ould have equalized with the line : 22. !l:f3 h4 23. llJh5= with unavoidable transition into a drawish position with bishops of opposite c olours.

22 . . . b6 23.13£3 (diagram)

23 .•. 13h8?! Blac k could have played here

23 ... !l:g5 !+ not only protecting on hS, but emphasizing that White also has weaknesses that he must worry about.

6.hc6 de 7.de lbj5 8. Vf1xd8 @xdB 9. lb c3 @e810.h3 h511. 1Jj4 i.e7

24.a4 !!h7 25.ttle2 .ie6 26. b4 @d7 27.!!fl !!g7 28.@h2 !!g8 29.ttlf4 !!h8 3 0 .b5?!

30.g3 ! = 3 0 . . . !!c8 31.ljjxh5 cxb5 32.

axb5 !!xc3 33 . .igl !!a3 34. ljjf6+ .ixf6 35.exf6 !!a5+

White will lose unavoidably his b5-pawn and the question will remain whether he will create suf­ficient counterplay on the king­side.

36.!!bl .if5 37.!!b3 .ic2 38. !!b2 .id3 39.!!d2

White would have more chanc­es following 39.h4! @e6 40.h5 @xf6 41.g4+

39 ..• .ie4 4 0 .!!b2 <!>e6 (diagram)

41 . .id4? His position is already diffi­

cult, but he would have better prospects of obtaining counter-

play following 41.�e3 @xf6 42 .h4 i.d3 43.�d4+ @f5 44J'1f2+ @e6 45.h5+ and despite the fact that White would be two pawns down, his passed h5-pawn should not be underestimated.

41 . . . !!a4 42.!!d2 !!b4 43. <!>g3 !!xb5+

White has failed to advance his passed pawns.

44.<!>f4 !!bl? This is a loss of a tempo.

Black could have advanced his pawns much faster after 44 . . . a5 45.h4 E!b4 46. @e3 b5+

45.g4 a5

46.!!b2? White should have prevented

the advance of the enemy pawns with 46.!!a2 !!b4 47.@e3 E!b3+ 48.@f4+

46 .•• !!xb2 47 • .ixb2 b5 48. h4 b4 49 . .id4 a4 5 0 .h5 .ih7

273

Chapter 17

51. �e3 (White loses too follow­ing Sl .�cS b3 52 .�a3 �xf6-+) 51. • . a3 52 . .ic5 0 -1

48 Alekseev - Ponomariov Saratov 2011

l.e4 e5 2.ll:rf3 llJc6 3 . .ib5 llJf6 4. 0 - 0 llJxe4 5.d4 llJd6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 llJf5 8. �xd8+ �xd8 9.llJc3 �e8 1 0 . h3 h5 ll . .if4 .ie7 12.gadl .ie6 13.llJg5 gb6 14.llJce4

14 • . . c5? ! I t i s preferable for Black to

choose here 14 . . . �d5 - see "Step by Step".

15.llJxe6 gxe6 16.gfel gd8 17.gxd8+ �xd8 18.c3 b5

He could have played here 18 . . . llJh4 !?f!, showing his oppo­nent that his eS-pawn may turn out to be weak.

19.!3e2

274

19 • . . h4 Black could obtain good coun­

ter chances with the line : 19 . . . �d7!? 20.g3 mc6 2l .mfl c4co

2 0 .g4 hxg3 21.fxg3 b4? ! It was more energetic for him

to continue with 21 . . .:!"la6 22 .a3 md7 23. mf2 b4= and he would have got rid of his doubled pawns.

22.�f2 White had an attractive possi­

bility to activate his pieces with 22 .g4 llJh4 23.llJg5 :!"la6 24. llJxf7+ me8 25.e6 :!"lxa2 26.mf2t

22 • . . ga6 23.b3 bxc3 In the variation 23 . . . md7 24.

:!"ld2+ me6 25.g4 lt:Jh4 26.c4 llJg6 27.mf3t White would maintain long lasting pressure thanks to Black's "bad" dark-squared bish­op.

24.llJxc3 g5 25.gd2+ �c8 26.g4

6.hc6 de 7.de tiJj5 8. VfffxdB mxdB 9. tiJ c3 me810.h3 h511. :ij4 :ie7

26 • • • lL!h4?! He could have created coun­

terplay against White's e5-pawn with the line : 26 . . . tiJd4 27.tiJd5 (27.:ie3 l"le6) 27 . . . :id8 28.:ie3 l"lh6 29.mg2 l"le6?

27.lL!d5 i.d8 28.i.g3 It was preferable for White to

continue with 28 .:ie3t keeping under pressure both the enemy weaknesses.

28 • • • c4! 29.bxc4

29 • • • c6? Black could have activated his

rook here with 29 . . . l"la3 ! 30 .hh4 gxh4 3Lmg2 l"lg3+ 32 .mh2 l"lf3� and he would have excellent com­pensation for the pawn, since White would hardly manage to improver his position.

3 0 .lL!b4 �a3 31.�d3! �a4 32.lL!xc6 i.b6+ 33.mfl±

He has a couple of extra pawns, but Black has succeeded in acti­vating his forces.

(diagram) 33 • • • �xc4? Black had to cover the weak­

ness on e7 with the move 33 . . . tiJg6±, since the enemy pawn was not running anywhere.

Now, White can realize his ad-

vantage easily. 34.lL!e7+ <;!;>b7 35.�d7+ �c7

36J�xc7+ hc7 37.<;!;>e2+- i.d8 38.lL!f5 <;!;>c6 39.tLld6 <;!;>d5 4 0 . lL!xf7 i.e7 41.hh4 gxh4 42.g5 <;!;>e6 43.g6 i.f8 44.<;!;>f3 <;!;>f5 45.lL!d6+ <;!;>xg6 46.<;!;>g4 :ig7 47.e6 i.f8 48.lL!f5 <;!;>f6 49.e7 he7 5 0 .lL!xe7 <;!;>xe7 51. <;!;>xh4 <;!;>f6 52.<;!;>g4 <;!;>g6 53.a4 a5 54. <;!;>f4 <;!;>h5 55.<;!;>e5 <;!;>h4 56.<;!;>d5 <;!;>xh3 57.<;!;>c5 <;!;>g4 58. <;!;>b5 <;!;>f5 59.<;!;>xa5 <;!;>e6 6 0 .<;!;>b6 <;!;>d7 6V�b7 1- 0

49 Anand Nakamura Sao Paulo/Bilbao 2011

l.e4 e5 2.lL!f3 lL!c6 3.i.b5 lL!f6 4. 0 - 0 lL!xe4 5.d4 lL!d6 6. hc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 lL!f5 8. Vfffxd8+ <;!;>xd8 9.tLlc3 <;!;>eS 1 0 . h3 h5 ll.:if4 :ie7 12.�adl .ie6 13.lL!g5 �h6 14.g3

275

Chapter 17

14 . . . i.xg5 15.i.xg5 gg6 16. h4 f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18 . .if4 tt:lxh4 19.f3 gds 2 o .gxd8+ @xd8 21.@f2 tt:lf5 22.gh1 tt:lg7 23 • .id2 .if5 24.tt:ldl hc2 25. ttle3 i.d3 26.ttlg2 ttle6 27. gxhs gg7 28 . .ic3 @e7 29.gh6 gf7

3 0 .g4 The evaluation of the position

remains the same after 30.a3= 3 0 . • . .ibl 31.a3 f5 The situation would be much

276

more interesting following 31 . . . c5 ! ? 32 J!hl i.d3 33.gelgg

32.g5! tt:lxg5 33.tt:lf4�

White's pieces are tremen­dously active. He is safe from los­ing the game, but has no chances of wining either.

33 • • • @e8 It is a draw after triple repeti­

tion following 33 . . . tt:lh7 34.tt:lg6+ �!feB 35.tt:le5 ge7 36.tt:lg6=

34.gg6 tt:lh7 35.gg8+ :1U'8 36.gg7 gf7, Draw.