First published 2000 by Everyman Publishers ple, formerly Cadogan Books ple, Gloucester Mansions, 140A Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H 8HD Copyright © 2000 Glenn Flear ‘The right of Glenn Flear to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Al rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing.in-Publication Data ‘A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 85744 261 X Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, 6 Business Park Road, P.O. Box 833, Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475-0833. Telephone 1-800-243 0495 (colll free) Alll other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Gloucester Mansions, 140A Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H 8HD tel: 0171 539 7600 fax: 0171 379 4060 email: dan@everyman.uk.com website: www.everyman.uk.com To my family ‘The Everyman Chess Opening Guides were designed and developed by First Rank Publishing. EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess) Chief Advisor: Garry Kasparov Advisory Panel: Andrew Kinsman and Byron Jacobs Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Production by Book Production Services. Printed and bound in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press Ltd., Trowbridge, Wiltshire.1 e4 eS 2 Af3 Ac6 3 Ab! 4 2a4 D6 5 0-0 Axed Bibliography Preface Introduction 6 d4 bS 7 &b3 d5 8 dxe5 LG Part One: 9 ¢3 2c5 1 10 Qbd2 0-0 11 Me? Dxf2 12 Hxf2 {6 (Dilworth Variation) 2 10 Dbd20-0 11 2 £5 3 10 Abd? 0-0 11 Bc? 215 4 Tenth Move Alternatives Part Two: 9 c3 Se7 5 Main Line with 10 @bd2 Dc5 11 &c2 6 10 Abd2: Black avoids the Main Line 7 White avoids the Main Line 8 10 Be3 Part Three: Other Systems 9 9 We? 10 9 @bd2 11 White’s Other Ninth Moves 12 Odds and Ends Index of Complete Games 4 5 7 10 32 56 85 109 120 138 147 157BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings Volume C (Sahovski Informator 1997) C80-81, C82, C83, Victor Korchnoi (Sahovski Informator 1994-5) ‘The Open Spanish, Mikhail Krasenkov (Cadogan/Everyman 1995) My 60 Memorable Games, Robert Fischer (Faber 1972) Euwe, Drazen Marovic (Sahovska Naklada 1978) Capablanca’s Best Games, Harry Golombek (Batsford 1996) Periodicals Informator ‘New in Chess Yearbook British Chess Magazine CHESS Monthly Various Chess Computer Databases: Fathase, Fidechess, The Week in Chess etc.PREFACE ‘The Open variation of the Ruy Lopez (or Spanish) starts with the moves 104 05 2 213 De6 3 2b5 a6 4 das Dt 50-0 Dxeq ‘What is the big attraction of the variation for Black? In the Open variation (or simply ‘Open’) of the Ruy Lopez Black aims for active piece play and an asymmetric pawn structure including a queenside majority. The Open is a logically named variation involving fluid piece play and offers a more dynamic struggle than the long-winded manoeuvres of the Closed Ruy Lopez. “The variation has remained in popular use since the 19th century and has a remarkable pedigree. Virtually every World Champion has played it - and most with both colours! ‘A number of great historical matches have included important games from this variation, inchiding of course the World ‘Championship clashes _AlekchineEuwe, Karpov-Korchnoi and Kasparov-Anand. Over the last quarter of a century one associates this opening primarily with Korchnoi, Timman and Yusupov, but in recent years Anand has also included this opening in his repectoigy. "The Open sara players of all styles: Korchnoi is a prolific analvst and practitioner of the Open and by nature a provocative, counter-attacking player. ‘Timman is more of a aggressive tacncal player who is attracted to the more critical lines (and like the other great Dutchman before him, Max Euwe, he is happy and willing to play the Open with cither colour), whereas Yusupov is a more cautious positional player. ‘Some lines of the Open involve long, forcing tactical variations; others careful manoeuvring. In the Dilworth variation Black even takes the gamble of giving up two active minor pieces for a modest rook and pawn in order to wrest the initiative from ‘White's grasp. Overall in the following pages wwe shall see a rich family of variations with something for everyone. In some opening books, the author tries to hype their choice of opening by pointing out ‘surprise value’, ‘attacking chances’, ‘easy for the opponent to go wrong’ or whatever. None of these claims hold much water if the opening is not fundamentally sound and robust against best play. ‘A statisucal analysis of a large database shows that the Open scores an average percentage (44%) with an average length of 38 moves per game. Fair enough, but this is hardly a persuasive argument! It is more significant that whereas manv active lines inOpen Ruy Lopez the Ruy Lopez. come and go with fashion or the latest novelty, the Open remains, year in, year out, a popular option among the top players, providing interesting games, active play and winning chances, while at the same time being positionally rock-solid. Although this book is written primarily from Black's point of view, I have purposely tried to be objective with my analysis, judgements and recommendations. The illustrative games have been chosen for their intrinsic worth, not because Black wins every one of them! There is nothing more than ‘opening books with ridiculous bias, in which some strange ideas are extolled and clear improvements for the opponent are conveniently ignored. Here I have tried to point out the rough with the smooth, the good with the bad and, yes, sometimes even the ugly. I trust that this book can be used with confidence by White players in their efforts to obtain something against the opening. However, a the same time it offers a mainstream, sound bur dynamic opening that can stand at the heart of your repertoire against 1 e4. Glenn Flear Baillargues, France, fanuary 2000INTRODUCTION ‘The core of the Open variation is the tabiya that arises after the eight standard moves 14 e5 2 Df3 De6 3 &b5 a6 4 B04 D6 5 0-0 Dxe4 6 d4 b5 7 &b3 d5 8 dxe5 206 which forms the staring position of all but one chapter in this book. Here White has a kingside majority with an advanced pawn on 5, whereas Black in compensation has a d-pawn and a queenside majority. Blagk-has a well-placed knight on ef but this i$ prone to attack by (2-13 or exchange by @bi-d2, Although White is attacking the d5-pawn twice, itis sufficiently well defended. Finally, White has already ‘managed to remove his king from the centre, ‘whereas Black is not yet ready to do so. ‘Typical Themes for White Here are a summary of the typical plans (with game references as thematic examples) that White commonly adopts. These are often combined for added effect. 1. Push the fpawn along with its counterpart on €5 to create a dangerous attacking force (Game 32). 2. The pawn on e5 stops the black knight from retxeating to {6, so pressure on the bi- h7 diagonal can cause problems aganst the h7-square (Games 24, 31, 42, 52 and 59). 3. The knight on e is annoying so White will try to exchange, undermine or at least push back the beast, either with 2-{3 or Db1-d2 (most games). 4, Create pressure on the d5-square and along the d-file where Black's queen 1s generally resident (Games 36, 48-49 and Chapter 9). 5. An early a2-a4 putting pressure on the bS-pawn and opening up the rook’s line of action (Games 16, 25-26 and 47). 6. The advance b2-b4 aiming to fix Black's queenside on rather passive squares (Games 4, 37, 41, 47-48, 77 and 88). 7. Aiming to occupy the c5- and dt squares with pieces in order to fix Black's majority and limit his scope for counterplay. This often involves the exchange of Black's 7Open Ruy Lopez dark-squared bishop (Games 4, 31 and 36). 8. With the black light-squared bishop on the kingside, advancing the kingside pawns to harass and weaken the black king’s defences (Games 14, 37 and 52). 9, Manoeuvring a knight to the useful f5- square (Games 35 and 37-38). 10, Disruptive ideas based on €5-e6 either to break-up Black’s pawn structure or as part of tactical play on the kingside (Game 17, 36, 38 and 57). 11, Allowing Black to capture the pawn on ¢5 in order to gain time (Games 18, 23 and 51). 12, Recapturing away from the centre with c2xb3 in order to press on the cfile (Games 61, 78 and 81), Typical Themes for Black For his part, Black also has several common ideas that occur time and again. Likewise, Black may use several of these in one game. 1. Development of the bishop to c5 with consequent pressure on the a7-g1 diagonal, purticularly the (2-square (Part One and Game 65). 2. Capturing on £2 with bishop and knight and following-up with ...7-£6 (Chapter 1 and Game 13). 3. Supporting the knight with ..{7-£5, so that if White caprures en passant the Ffile is opened for Black and the knight can retreat wo the safe f6-square (Games 7, 24-27, 43, 49 and 59). If White ignores the f-pawn (Games 8-12 and 44) then it can even threaten to advance to f4, 4. Pressure on the e5-point, sometimes just with pieces such as ..d7 (Games 53- 54) or by simply secking its exchange with f7-£6 (Games 15, 20-21, 23 and 63). 5. Black plays the liberating ..d5-d4, opening lines for his pieces (Games 29-30, 37 and 70-76). 6. Black plays for queenside sion with «.c7-<5 with options of -b5-b4 or od 4 creating a passed d-pawn (Games 15, 52 and 59). 7. Supporting the d-pawn with ..Wd7 and --Hd8 (Games 37-38 and 56-58). 8, The standard pin ...@g4, slowing down ‘White's kingside expansion and then using this bishop as a defender of the black king with ...£h5 and ...2g6 (Games 31-39, 52, 55 and 69). 9. Pushing the apawn to harass a white knight on b3 and generally gaining space (Games 29-30 and 68). 10. Developing quickly, allowing White to capture on e4 or d5. This sometimes involves gambisting the pawn or perhaps just a weakening of the black structure (Games 31 and 48). 11, Simplifying by exchanging knights on d2 (Games 40, 42, 58 and 88) or by eliminating the bishop with ..@xb3 (Games 41, 61-62, 68, 77 and 80-81). 12. Isolating his own d-pawn with the line-opening ...c7-c5 (Games 44, 46, 50 and 88). In summary, Black’s pieces can all be developed harmoniously, his king can usually castle and he has no permanent weak points. ‘White has a number of interesting options but no automatic route to an advantage. For each of White's thrusts Black has a counter, and thus a fascinating struggle begins to take shape. ‘The Structure of this Book “The first two parts of this book deal with the standard move 9 €3, to which Black usually replies 9..c5 (Chapters 1-4) or 9.Le7 (Chapters 5-8). However, in recent years 9 <3 has been replaced by 9 @bd2 as the most popular move, since the latter reduces Black’s options and completely avoids the 9 <3 Stes variation. After 9 Qbd2 the most common move is 9...@c5, when after 10 c3 Black can choose between the 10..d4 of Chapter 10 or 10...e7 of Chapters 5 and 6. I personally feel that 9 bd2 is overrated and we shall see that Black has several ways of obtaining ad game. Although 9 We2, intending Hdl Eh an ently 2-4 pressing down the dine, is out of fashion, personally I have found this the most difficult to meet (see Chapter 9). The final two chapters deal with other Introduction possibilities for both sides, avoiding the main line. Chapter 11 covers White's other ninth moves and Chapter 12 wraps things up with a look at early deviations from the standard move order.CHAPTER ONE 9 c3 2c5 10 Abd2 0-0 11 2c2 Axf2 12 Exf2 6 1 of 05 2 DF3 Dc6 3 Ab5 26 4 La4 Die 5 0-0 Dxe4 6 d4 bS 7 2b3 d5 8 dxed Bob 9 c3 Bc5 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 Ber OQxf2 12 Bxt2 16 In this chapter we shall consider the famous Dilworth Variation, named after the English correspondence player who promoted it for so long. The Dilworth leads to sharp forcing variations where Black, for a modest. material investment, obtains a dangerous initiaive. In some ways it is similar to the Marshall Auack, though it is much less popular and less well regarded. Tt goes against one’s gut feeling to give up two active minor pieces for an inactive rook and pawn. However, it is more important to concentrate on what remains on the board: an exposed white king and Black’s lead in development with open lines for his rooks after .17-£6. ‘Typically, if the players (especially White) avoid a labyrinth of traps we often see simplification to an ending with three minor pieces against rook, bishop and two pawns. Here theory has a slight preference for White, but in reality Blade's activity is sufficient to earn good play and itis often the second player who has the better practical chances. Key factors in judging resuking positions are: How many extra pawns docs Black have? Is Black likely to invade on the seventh or eighth ranks with his major pieces? How well is White's king defended? And how effectively has White developed and can his pieces find firm foothold in the ccentee? ‘Yusupov, Mikhalevski and others have shown that the Dilworth is a fully viable way to wrest the initiative and obtain realistic winning chances with Black. Over the next six games we will see an instructive battle between minor pieces looking for central outposts and rooks seeking open lines and invasion. Tilburg 1987 1 04 05 2 013 De6 3 Lb5 a6 4 Ln4 Die 5 0-0 Sxed 6 dé bS 7 2b3 dS 8 dxeS B06 9 63 B05 10 Dbd2 0.0 11 Lez Dxt2 12 Eod2 16 13 ext ‘There is litle point in avoiding this move, as allowing Black to capture on e5 and maintain a passed central pawn is dubious: 13, Dada? Dud 14 cxd4 Bxd4 15 WS g6 16 Sxg6 We7, as in LLarsen-Eriksen, Denmark 1965, is already winning for Black and 13 QAI SAxfd+ 14 Soxf2 fxeS 15 degl ef 169 c3 &c5 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 Bc2 Dxf2 12 Bxt2 6 gs Wio 17 Be} De5, as in lonescu- Dilworth, correspondence 1985, also clearly favours the second player. Note how the pawn on 4 limits White's minor pieces. For the record, 13 We2 represents White's best alternative to 13 exf6 and offers for equality. For example, 13..fxeS 14 Ronis ae ef 16 Wel Qg4 17 Dfda DeS 18 De WIE 19 Me Kac8 20 Wes? (after Van der Tak’s improvement 20 di! ‘White is probably okay) 20..h5 21 2b3 whe 22 h3 Wd6 23 Wh4 Deo 24 Wel Sc8 25 De2 xh}, as in KlugerSzabo, Hungarian ‘Championship 1946, when Black was on top. 13...xf2+ Experience has shown that delaying this capture enables White to limit the exposure of his king: 13..Wxf6% 14 Wit Bae 15 Db3 Rxf2+ 16 Wrf2 De5 17 Dbds c5 18 gS and in fact it’s Black's king that is the problem, eg. 18..Waxg5 (or 18..WI7?? 19 Rxh7+) 19 Rxb7+ PhS 20 Axgs Bx? 21 sbxf2 (21 Ddxe6!? also looks good) 21..cxd4 exdal 14 oxt2 Wxte 15 91 Games 2-6 feature 15 2\f1. There are two. other tries, tha?” st is bad, the second rather good: a) 15 WEL? 95 16 shgt g4 17 Dds Duds 18 Wale e2+ 19 Sef2 Hxfo+ 20 sbxe? Hale with a clear advantage to Black who is ‘coming into £2 whilst White is far from completing his development, as in Krutnik- Klompus, correspondence 1986. b) 15 @b30 (@ good try for White with surprise value) 15...2¢5 (15..g5 16 We3 B17 and now 17 Sxg6! is a trick that crops up frequently in the Dilworth) 16 @c5! (16 $5321 Hae8 and 16 Dbd4? Bet 17 b4 Hack 18 2d3 Wh4+, as in Weir-Dilworth, correspondence 1941, give Black strong attacking chances) 16...$2g4?! (16..2xf32? has been suggested by Velickovic) 17 Wad5+ hs 18 Wet g6 (not 18..Wh4+ 19 cgi @xi3+ 20 gxf3 BacB 21 Mp5l, as in Rey Ardid-Kleczynski, Paris Olympiad 1924, ‘when Black is in trouble) 19 25! (My own clear improvement on the theoretical continuation 19 $h6 @xf3 20 gpd Sixf3 21 Wes di + 22 shed Wadd 23 cxd4 Bxc? 24 Sxf8 Bxf8 with equality according to Velickovic) and if 19..Wxg5 then 20 Wha. 15...Haes A sign thar this variation is not particularly troublesome is that even 15..5 (15..g4, as in Babula-Simacek, Czech Republic 1998/89, is best met by 16 2\F1! and White hits the d5- square) gives Black a good game: 16 Wel g¢ 17 Who 265 18 Wate Bxlo 19 Qxf5 Bas 20 @h4 He5 21 Db3 was given as unclear by Korchnoi, but a recent practical test shows that Black is bewer after 21..Hel+ 22 sbf2 BacB 23 f5 (23 44 looks preferable but doesn't equalise) 23...8e2+ 24 dg} gi 25Open Ruy Lopez G64 Wexg2+ 26 h4 Bxal 27 Dxat Bxb2, as in Ginzburg-Pereyra Arcija, Argentine ‘Championship 1996. The tricky 17 Qg5 is the best try and should lead to equal play according to the following analysis by Velickovic: 17.5 18 Rb} Hads 19 des Wes 20 Dg3 ho 21 Qud5 Bxfs 22 Web+ Web 23 Dxes Bes 24 Dis Wel + 25 Hf2 Excl 26 Excl Bxft+ 27 bg BES. 161 16 h3, 16 2b3 and 16 ft are all well met by 16..De5. 16...815 16...2g4 is generally recommended here. am happy with Black’s position after 17 h3 Axf3 18 Daf3 (18 Wxf3 Wado 19 Wi Wes and wins, for instance 20 fi Bet 21 Wad5+ Gh8 22 Rd3 De5 23 R4 Dxd3 - Korchnoi) 18...De5 19 Bd g5 20 Wi2 Dd3 21 Wd4 Wxd4+ 22 cxd4 Ext 23 Sxf3 Bel+ 24 Gh? c6! with a clear edge for Black in Ostojic-Karaklaic, Beverwijk 1967. However, I feel uncomfortable with 17 Wd3 De5 18 Wexh7+ &f7. ‘The books prefer Black because of 19 Wh4 Dxf3+ 20 Sets Weh4 21 Dxh4 Het+ 22 bef We2+ 23 cogs Kxc2 24 dong MeB 25 ‘Rf4, as in Pupko-Monin, correspondence 1974, but is this convincing? The black king on £7 is ugly and it wouldn't surprise me if ‘White has some clever resource. An untried alternative is 16...@¢h8!? 17 Wa3 g6 (or even 17...%g8) 18 Db3 #5 19 Sg5! (unclear according to Korchno)) 17 Bxf5 Korchnoi again concludes that things are unclear after 17 &b3 Wd6 18 Wi2 &d3 19 We3 Wes+ 20 skh (20 Wi2 Hel+! was the end of that in SibarevicRogers, Mendrisio 1987) 20,,¢h8 21 Dgi b4, when White is tangled up but does Black have anything convincing? 17.5 18 b3 Not 18 Bb3? De5 19 Dbd4 Arxf3+ 20 Qxf3 We2 with chronic paralysis of the ‘white camp in Millle-Cruz. Lopez, French “Team Championship 1998. 18...d4! Tn Game 2 the early advance ..d5-d4 proves to be a mistake, but here it creates problems for White. There are some, differences, as here line-opening for Black can be achieved without giving away any central outposts. In the next game White was able to occupy the centre, had access to et and dida’t have such a weak c3-square. BDe5 19 La3 Bi 20 , as in Kagan-Monin, correspondence 1973, leaves White with the better prospects as he has completed his development and Black only has one pawn (note that 21..We3+ 22 Wrxe3 Hxe3 23 5! He2 24 D13 Bg6 25 g3 M6 26 Het leaves ‘White in command). 19 cxd4 Given as a decisive error by most commentators who prefer 19 223 dxc3 20 Gxf8 HxfB 21 Act (not 21 Wel dé) 21..WeS+ 22 WE2 Wi2+ 23 sbxf2 bret 24 Bet cxb3 25 axb3 (Yusupov), when Black has an extra pawn in the ending although ‘White has drawing chances. 19,..@xd4 20 @xd4? This isthe real mistake as White is now in trouble whereas after 20 £223! (my move) his position looks playable. Then 20..@e2+ 21 hI 5 would offer some initiative for Black but nothing concrete.963 Bc& 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 Bc2 Axf2 12 Bxt2 t 20...We5 21 &b2 ‘Ljubo’ banks on a blockade as 21 Wd3? fails to 21..Hei+ 22 Of1 Wad4+! 23 Waxd4 ‘Bifxfi mate! 21..Mxft+ 22 Ext Bez 23 Bf2 On 23 Bt Whs! is awkward. 23...ixf2 24 &xi2 Wd5 Three pieces are often the equal of a queen, but not here. Black's exra c-pawn can be used to dislodge the knight on d4 and the queen can invade on d3, c2 or b1. White has no_central pawns and thus has serious difficulties in finding any solid ourposts for the pieces. White now blundered but the defence was already problematic. 25 03? After 25 @2f3 then 25...We4 is a nuisance. 25...We5+ 0-1 lack will follow up by ..c7-cS winning material. Game 2 Short-Popovic Belgrade 1987 1 04 05 2 O13 Dc6 3 2bS 26 4 od O16 5 0-0 Qxe4 6 d4 bS 7 2b3 d5 8 dxeS Be6 9 c3 Bc5 10 Dbd2 0.0 11 cr Qxi2 12 Ext2 {6 13 exfS Axf2+ 14 sbxt2 Wats 15 Dt 447 ‘This move, opening up lines, is aggressive but remember that White's pieces can also benefit, The black rooks are happy enough on e8 and {8 and there is no need to bla open the centre, most grandmasters general play 15..De5 16 Be} Bae8 or 15..Hac8 ~ sbgi De5 17 Be} as in Games 3-6, Bad 15.95? in view of 16 Wad3 HI7 17 @xg5!, in Andersson-Poletaev, correspondent 1960, when 17...Wixg5 18 Wrxh7+ Bsh7 Gxh7+ Sexh7 20 4xg5+ wins for White. 16 tot! ‘An excellent move, simply improving h worstplaced piece. Other moves are found to be lacking: a) 16 cxd4t Dxd4 17 Bet Bad8, as Selke-Roth, correspondence 1986. b) 16 WI g6 17 Dg3 eS 18 Wads « 19 Wai Bad8, as in Terenkov-Lazare correspondence 1985. 0) 16 Re4 duc 17 bxc3 (17 &xc6 cxb2 ‘g00d for Black) 17...Wxc3 and now: cl) 18 Be3 Hads 19 Wel Wxcl 20 Bx cS favoured Black in Monsalvo-Rot correspondence 1977. 2) 18 25 was is given by Korchnoi . an improvement, but surely after 18..Hae (or even 18..We5 19 Bxc6 We5+) 19 He Wats 20 Wid Dud 21 Hxc7 xa? Blac has all the chances. 16...205 On 16..dxc3 17 gS WI7 then 18 bxc neatly tidies up. White is better as his minc pieces are developed and working wel whereas Black has only one pawn and n pressure against the white monarch. 17 cxd4 Dxi3+ 18 gxf3 Inferior is 18 Wad3 due to 18..1Wxd4+ 1 We3 S.c4! 20 .d2 Wb? (Shor?) 18...Bad8, On 18..0d5 19 £41 Black has no pawn and nothing against White’s kingside despit first appearances. 19 £63 65 After 19..Wxf 20 Wxf Bxi3 21 6 ‘White has great minor pieces in the ending. 20 Wd3 g6 21 Daz Black will win back the pawn on d4 buOpen Ruy Lopez ‘White's pieces are ready for action. BAD cadd 23 Des Wid 24 Wit Hxcf3 25 gb leaves the black position in ruins. Otherwise the exchanges after 21.05 22 Det Qxet 23 Wes Bes (23..Wat 24 decd Weed 25 Rxe4 Be8 26 295 is hopeless but 23..cxd42? is the best uy to complicate ‘White's tasks) 24 Wa Wixf4 25 @ xf4 Brxd4 26 Let leave the wo bishops dominating. 22 We2 oxd4 23 26 d3 Or 23...Bfe8 24 Det etc. 24 &b3+ GhB 25 WI2 Ede8 26 £03 Quicker but complicated is 26 Sxfa! Be2 27 Sc7 Wah? 28 Hb1 Wes 29 £4 (Shor). 26...0d8 27 Dea WeS 28 &d2 BcB 29 Het Whs 30 Waat 1-0 Black's rooks failed to _pressurise effectively and White's minor pieces were able to gradually occupy key central squares. Black’s best results in the Dilworth come from concentrating pressure on the vulnerable f-file, as we shall see in the following games. Game 3 Kaminski-Chekhov Lubniewice 1993 1 e4 05 2 D3 Ac6 3 £b5 a6 4 Had DIC 5 0-0 Axed 6 d4 b5 7 Ob3 d5 8 dxeS Re6 9 c3 205 10 Dbd2 0.0 11 Hc2 Qxt2 12 Bet2 16 13 exi6 Lxf2+ 14 soxt2 Wie 15 Of ‘The move order 15 gi Hac8 16 Of1 e517 Be3 transposes to the game. 15...005 16 203 ‘White can also simply unpin a move earlier with 16 gi. The idea is thar, by giving up a pawn to exchange queens, the white minor pieces can be activated in the my impression is that in practical play it proves to be difficuk to tie down the black rook(s). Play may then continue 16.. 23+ 17 gcf3 Wats 18 Wicf3 Baxi 19 Myst (after 19 Mdi HE7 20 Des Mh3 21R¢2 HeB 22 2d? c5, as in Morovic- Yusupov, Tunis Interzonal 1985, Black is ewer due to his active pieces and fluid majorities on both wings; the further 23 #f1 xf 24 Raft Weft 25 dxf 7 26 Sf ‘Seb 27Re3 Bi8+ 28 he2 ded6 29 Dhs BE” gave good winning chances for Black) 19..Haf8 20 @d2 Hf2 21 Hel Bxfi+ 22 Dxfi 5 23 ed dé 24 cad cxd4 25 txt &xa2. with drawish simplification in Nijboer- Rogers, Netherlands 1987/88. 16...2a08 The tempting 16..1ih4+?! 17 sbgt @xf3+ 18 gxf3 Efe 19 ds We5+ 20 hi h3 21 Be3 Bly 22 Wel, as in Kupreichik Stoica, Kirovakan 1978, just enables White to consolidate. Also imprecise is 16...xf3% 17 pef3 BET (or 17.06 18 Bc5 BE7 19 We2 gd 20 Dd? a5 21 Het Ld7 22 Wes Wre5 23 Exe5 a4 24 g3, when with only one pawn and inactive pieces Black is worse) 18 heZ Bek 19 £4 5 20 SxfsWafs 21 Dg3 Web 22 Sd2 c5 23 WIS which yields a slight edge to White according to Velickovic. Black's rooks have no invasion squares and White has opportunities to further improve his position. 1791 ‘The main alternative 17 £c5 can be seen in Games 46. Also common is 17 £d4, when after 17..Wh4+ 18 dg Dxi+ 19 gpd Wg5+ 20 De3 Bh3 21 a4 Hes (21.5?9c3 25 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 &c2 Dxk2 12 Bxi2 6 22 4 Bixf4 23 WathS leaves White on top) 22 axb5 axb5, as in Enders- Chekhov, Dresden 1985, White has probably nothing better than 23 £4 Hxft 24 Wh5, ditching the sickly f- pawn to obtain a reasonable ending (Black remains active but all White's pieces are well, placed, so it's about equal). Fritz instead. suggests the aggressive 23 a7 but then “White's first rank may become open. Another try is 17...2g4 18 @id2, 18 &xe5? ExeS 19 Dfd2 Whé+ 20 Sfi Hhs as in Jens-Ernst, Netherlands 1998, with a Dyxf3+ 20 Dxf3 (also possible is 20 gxt3 Mh3 21 Df We5+ 22 D3 g6 23 Phi hs 24 WS Be6 25 gi @h7 with chances for both sides in Apicella-Hardarson, France- Tceland 1993, as all the pieces are in play and both kings must watch their step, though Krasenkov’s 23..Wfal looks like an imy in this line) 20..Wh5 21 Wdz 21 WIM allows the enterprising exchange sacrifice 21.2312, which, however, only ears half a point: 22 gxf3 Sxf3 23 2f2 Be2 24 di Wy5+ 25 S93 We3+ 26 212 with a draw in Griinfeld-Mikhalevski, Israel 1992) 21,63 (21.8632 is well met here by 22 xf xf 23 WE) 22 gxfd Wak 23 Was Weds 24 hi g6 with unclear play in Er Widenmann, correspondence 1988. White hhas two good bishops, but Black has adequate activity and material compensation. 17.,.Dx3+ 18 gxf3 Wxi3 19 Wxt3 BxtB Black has two pawns but White is ready tc kkeep the black rooks at bay and control som« key dark squares. 20 £f2 White has also investigated other bishoy moves: 2) 20 Qd4 Bh3 21 Dg3 g6 22 a4 E72 axbS axbS 24 Hdi h5 25 &d3 h4 with shay play. The game Savon-Serper, Moscow 1990 continued 26 Sxb5 hxg3 27S.xe8+ sbxe8 21 hug} Hxg3+ 29 bh2 Hf 30 Hel+ followe: by 31 Be3 with a drawn b) 20 Rdi BE7 21 Kb3 c6 22 Ads (2. 5 allows Black’s rook to use the e5-squan after 22...h3 23 Ae} He5; for instance, 2 af bxat 25 Bxad dé 26 @xd4 Bg5+ 27 dh 5, and Black held the initiative in Suetin Mikhalevski, Cappelle la Grande 1999 22...¢h3 23 Bg3 h5! 24 @xh5 Be2 25 Ag. Exb2 (Chekhov), when Black’s active piece guarantee him the better chances. 20...&h3 21 Qd2 ‘The continuation 21 Dg} g6 22 Hd 2. a4 leads to equality after 22.9247 23 axb! axbS 24 &di Hd3 25 Df according t Korchnoi) 22...06 23 Bd2 used to be plays: frequently but has disappeared because 0 23...Hef8! 24 2d3 h5! 25 LF (not 25 Qxg6 in view of 25..h4 26 Df1 shig7 27 @h5 HSS 25..Sxf1 26 Dxfl g5 and Black has some initiative, 21.,.Ef6 22 2d3 Exchanging a pair of rooks leads to equa play after 22 Hel Bxelt+ 23 Sxel Het (23..h51? is a suggestion of Chekhov's) 2¢ E2 G+ 25 segs eo, 22...n5 23 He Exe1+ 24 fxe1 c5 ‘see following diagram 25 Bhar This allows Black the time to invade on g2 via a4! Instead Chekhov's suggestion 25 23 is judged as unclear by most commentators ‘Typically, the minor pieces can stop anything nasty happening but are too preoccupied te indulge in anything particularly constructiveOpen Ruy Lopez themselves. 25...Hf4 26 £93 Had 27 a3 h4 28 has Hig4+ 29 wf2 Bg2+ 30 tet ‘Not 30 $3?? d4+. 30...g1+ 31 Ott ‘After 31 {2 Edt 32 £4 $217 Black can gradually build up with ..2f6, ..g7-g5 etc. (31...c4 32 2e2 Sf7 33 &c5 Bh1 The line 33..Bg2? 34 Of2 95 35 26 ‘would be an embarrassing way to losel 34 £d6 Egi 35 &c5 Whi 36 £d6 g5 37 St2 Se6 38 VE g4 39 Ac77! ‘The resource 39 Dei! Hb1 40 Dd gi+ 41 boxg3 hxg3+ 42 Qxg3 F543 263 22 44 Qe3 holds (Chekhov). It’s noteworthy that even after progressing so far, Black isn’t yet winning. 39...0f5 40 2467! Axf1 41 Axf1 h3 ‘Now White is getting squeezed, 42 2e2 Hb1 43 bg3 Ng1+ 44 dha Bg2 45 2a1 d4t Decisively creating a passed pawn. 46 cxd4 Exb2 47 &xg4+ Se4 48 &xh3 ©3 49 Sg5 Bf2 50 a4 c2 51 @a3 Exh2 52 27 ba 53 b2 Bg2+ 54 wie Brat 55 @e6 Bf 56 d5 Bb1 0-1 Game 4 Wanchuk-Yusupov Linares 1990 104 05 2 Df3 Dc6 3 Rb5 a6 4 ba4 DIS 5 0-0 @xea 6 d4 b5 7 Sb3 d5 8 dxe5 B06 9 c3 Lc5 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 Lc2 @xf2 12 Bxf2 16 13 exf6 Axf2+ 14 sbxi2 Wxt6 15 Df1 Des 16 203 Hack 17 B05 Oxf ‘The ahernative 17...267 has been largely abandoned, as this allows White to reinforce 8 with the knight and therefore recapruré with a piece. The whole story has not yet been told, however, as the new move 19... We6 offers hope in an otherwise inferior line. Play might continue 18 Did2 Sg¢ 19 sbgi @a3+ Gamarian’s suggestion of 19,.We6 was recently tied with some success: 20 Wb1 @xf3+ 21 @xf3 Sxf3 22 Qxh7+ h8 23 gxt3 Bxfd 24 Qd3 Bls 25 2f1 dé? with complex play where Black held its own in Hydra-Eugen 7.2, World Computer Championship 1997) 20 Dxf3 Qxf3 21 gf We5+ (or 21..Wixf3 22 Wied Hxf3 23 dg? followed by 24 23 defending against invasion on e2 and preparing active play with a4, which Korchnoi judges to be slightly better for White; however, this type of ending is no disaster for Black whose rooks are always menacing) 22 thi Wh5 23 Wit Bxf3 24 We? Bf7 25 2d3 06 26 at Wh4 27 b3 as in Poulsen-Tronhjem, comespondence 1984-85, when again White has everything under control and can start to create pressure against the black position. However, it's hard to see a convincing plan GE White goes for 06 with his rook then his first rank is weakened etc). 16963 B66 10 Dbd2 0-0 11 Be2 Dxt2 12 Bxt2 16 48 oxf3 BF7 19 Dg ‘The fashionable 19 wg? is covered in Games 5 and 6, whereas after 19 2d3 Black has 19...2h3! with good play (ineffective is 19...S2g4 due to 20 se?) as 20 Se2? Wg5 21 Dg} will be killed by 21..d4 - a nice thematic trid all three captures are hopeless. Instead, after 20 Dg3 h5! 21 S41 (again after 21 Qxh5? Wg5 22 Zg3 then 22...d4! is too strong) 21...g¢ 22 2@2 h4 23 Aft h32 better not to give the g3-square so ‘Yusupov suggests either 23...1ig6 or 23...Hed 24 Sad4 We6 with attacking chances) 24 ht Bes, Short-Yusupov, Belgrade 1989, when ‘White is fine but Black went on to win. 19.,.294 20 &g1 Waxi3 21 Wxt3 21,.2xf37! This is considered a mistake by Yusupov who improved in a later game with 21..2xf3! 22 ep? h5 23 Qg6 Heb 24 BxhS Bxp3+ 25 xg} Bxh5, Leko-Yusupov, Horgen 1994, though with only slight winning chances for Black. White can instead try the exchange of a pair of rooks with 22 R11? Hxfi+ 23 sbxfl HAT 24 B43 Hee 25 Bs Bho 26 ber Bh3+ 27 #12 (Velickovic suggests 27 sbgl intending to play b2-b4, but Black can often react with ..26-a5 followed by ..Ha6 when he shouldn't really be worse) 27...2d7 28 Df 25 29 Me? YAY Grosepeter-Gyimesi, Kecskemet 1994; the ending is balanced. 22 Bf Bre Black is now a litle tangled up and this allows White some tactical chances, eg. 22...24g4? 23 Bxh7+ or 22...H4 23 Sdi Bet unpinning, but in unfavourable circum- stances. 23 b4 ‘This move, fixing the queenside, enables ‘White to reinforce his dark-square control in the centre. 23...08 24 25? Inaccurate, Instead 24 Sd4! exploits Backs prolems on ths fle and wins the ¢- Bs (or 24..0f18 25 2f5 Le4 26 Bay: 25 QE5 (intending 26 2d?) 25.. Bc5 Be5 27 £d7 and so on. 24...2e2 25 Bet 2hS Taking the opportunity to release the white pressure, and now everything holds together. 26 Exe8+ ®xe8 27 #e7 Zh6 28 O95 ‘Bd6 29 &e7 Bh6 30 &c87! Naturally White has a draw with 30 95 but he tries for more by going for the a pawn, This is a risky strategy as it leaves the bishop out of play whils. Black's king walks boldly onto the centre stage. 30...8'7 31 G8 £66 32 2xa6 247 33 2b7 tt7 Beuter than 33..2e6? 34 a4 bxat 35 b5 which gives dangerous play for White who ‘would then be threatening 36 bé, 34 Qe2 Heb 35 Dda+ she5 36 Db3 ted 17Open Ruy Lopez 37 92 2n3 38 Daa With 06 about to fall Black decides that bailing out with a draw is the safest course. Perhaps 38...2d7, intending .. Wixg3+ 20 Shi h6 21 Wad5 h3 and Black wins - Pliester) 17_.Wrxh4 18 gxh4 c5 19 f5 Bxf5 20 exis @DB+ 21 f2 Det 22 Sxei of 23 KT Sxh2 with an unclear position (Pliester). 12 cxd4 he Or 12.64 13 He2 Wh4 14 23 a5 15 Lc2 MG 16 13 Dg5 17 Red fo 18 Wa2 Baek 19 exf{6 gxf6 20 3, when White had the better pawn structure in Engels- Bogoljubov, Stuttgart 1939. 13 £3 Dg5 14 Des 14 Re3 BES 15 Dc3 6 16 Het Kh7, inending ~-Beb, is given by Hiibner as 14... aalee eee eal Better than 16 Wxd4 Hc8 17 Wd1 d4! and Black fights back. 16...d3 e line 16...De4 17 Aixdd Sc5 18 Led just gives White what he wants: a strong square on d4, action in the centre and nothing much for Black to attack. 17 Wxd3 2c5+ 18 Dd4 2151 19 Wxts, De6 20 £03 Oxd4 21 Was. ‘Hiibner later criticised this natural move, preferring 21 Stxd4 Stxd4+ 22 thi Sxb? 23 Hadi d4 24 Bd3 when the opposite bishops give White promising attacking chances as Black’s bishop is not helping with 929 c3 &e7: White avoids the Main Line the defence. All this despite being a pawn down (the d-pawn is going nowhere as White has total light-square domination). 21...2xb3 22 axb3 d4 23 212 Was 24 ‘h3 Hfe8 25 Sh2 ‘A.waste of time according to Hubner. 25...a5 26 Hecl 2b6 27 Bc2 Hec8 28 Bact Exc2 29 Rxc2 a4 30 bxa4 bxa4 31 Ret Wb3 ‘The ending is equal. 32 Wxb3 axb3 33 Hc6 205 34 2x05 Exa5 35 Bb6 d3 36 Bd6 If 36 Hxb3 then 36.005. 36...Ra2 37 Rxd3 Bxb2 38 dg3 g5 39 15 He2 40 xb %-% This is another example of ..<7-c5 leaving, Black with a double-edged pawn structure. Game 51 Alekhine-Euwe Netherlands (13th matchgane) 1935 14 e5 2 Of3 Dc6 3 2b5 a6 4 204 D6 5 0-0 Dxe4 6 d4 bS 7 2b3 d5 8 dxeS Re6 9 c3 207 10 a4 ‘A favourite of Alekhine, this sensible move often crops up as a sideline. 10...b4! Both 10...a5? 11 axbS axb5 12 2c2 00 13 @d4, as in Ahues-Montacell, San Remo 1930, and 10..Hb8 11 axb5 axbS 12 Ddt @Dxe5 13 £3 Dc5 14 Kc2 Kd7 15 b4, as in Alekhine Rohachek, Munich 1941, were both much better for White. Black must keep the a-file dosed at this early stage in the game (in Chapter 11, 9 a¢ is also best met by 9..b4). 11 Bde After 11 %c3 0.0 12 cxb4 Murey- Demarre, Paris 1990, Black does best to play 12...2nib4 freeing the c-pawn for its advance. 11...2xe5! ‘Courageous but 11..@ixd4 12 exdé cSt is worthy of further investigation, eg. 13 B 4 (aot 13..Dg5 14 Rugs Rss 15 £4 ct 16 fag5 exb3 17 Wxb3 with better chances for White according to Korchnoi) 14 Sxct (14 Rc2 De5t 15 Dd2 Db7 16 4 Woe 17 DES 86, as in Klavins-Ostrauskas, USSR 1957, looks like a good French for Black) 14 23 15 Qxd5 Wixd5 16 hxg3 Hd8 17 2c3 Bc5, which Korchnoi regards as equal. 12 #4 Dea?! More active is 12...%g4, when after 13 ‘We2 cS 14 fxeS cxd4 15 cxd4 0-0 16 Dd2 Red 17 Het He8 18 Wbi 2h5 Black meets 19 Qxe4 with 19.296, In this position relatively best is 20 Wd3 dxe4 21 Wdi 2h4 22 Hl 2¢5 with equal play in Evans-Hanauer, New York 1949, Other ties seem lacking: 20 c2 dxes 21 Be3 Bh4 22 g3 Me5 23 Sexes Wres 24 Sxe4 We2 and Black was more active in Poletaev-Zbanduto, correspondence 1956, and 20 @f6+% Sxf6 21 Wa2 Qh4 22 g3 Set when Black is bewer (Kom) as the 93Open Ruy Lopez ‘queen on a2 is decidedly out of play! 1315 Natural but later analysts discovered 13 Wea) a5 14 cd 00 15 “ada wih advantage to White, e.g. 15..S2c5 (15..2xd2 16 Dxeb fee 17 Wxe6+ Gh8 18 Sxd2 and 15.26 16 Dxe6 fxe6 17 Wxe6+ Gh8 18 D3 are not much better) 16 Dxet dxet 17 Wes Rxd4+ 18 cxd4 g6 19 £5 ds 20 Wet with a decisive atack in Gibl-Sleihard, correspondence 1954-56. 13...908 14 Wet ‘With the threat of taking on o4 (followed by ef) or recovering the pawn on b4, 14,..b7 15 oxb4 cB! ‘The standard counter. Now the pin on the a7-g1 diagonal will be too strong, hence ‘White's reaction. 16 f6!? 2x16 17 D5 0-0 18 bxc5 HeS 19 Ws Ws ‘The black pieces are well placed, whereas White has not completed his development and is in danger of simply being a pawn down. 20 2x04 a5 21 Wa3 dxcd 22 Dc3 Oxo’ Marovic recommends 22...@xc3 23 bxc3 He2 24 Ha? Mxg2, but then 25 Exe? Qxfl 26 @dé Wee looks rather messy. Instead a simple way to an advantage is 24..Eixa2 25 Wera2 Wixc5+. 23 203 Wes 24 E13 Dds 24...e5! 25 @d4 We8 seems to win. 25 Eafi Bxest ‘A temporary exchange sacrifice which reduces White’s defensive capabilities. Now the a8-h1 diagonal is a major problem. 26 Qxe3 2d4 27 We7 If 27 @edt then 27...2e8 wins quickly. 27...Qe5 28 thi Qxt3 29 Exts HIS 30 hs see following After 30 @f5 then 30... Wixf3! 30...2xe3? 30...Wb6! leaves White with no defence: 31 Ded (or 31 Beds Web2 32 Bi Lxed 33 @xe3 c3 etc) 31...Wb+ and the win is lear. 31 Wxe3 Wee 32 Zg3 HeB 33 WoS Wes 34 Wxe5 Exes 35 Zg4 He37 ‘Consolidation starting with 35..2ic5 was called for. With an extra pawn Black should ‘uy to win slowly bur surely. The text is miét by masterful defensive work, up to a point! 36 gt E Also possible was 36 xc Hxh3+- 37 gi Bigs 38 Ded! Bob 39 We7 £5 (39...b6? 40 De5) 40 Hxb7 fret 41 Be7 with a likely draw. 36...2d3 37 Hxo4 Hd2 38 b4 Hxg2+ 39 2f1 Eb2 40 Hada! 96 41 bxaS Bez 42 Db8 bo7 43 tet Bc544 Bd6 2c6 45 a6 2xb5 46 a7 2c6 47 Bxc6 Bas 48 Ho7 Hxa4 49 dd2 g5 50 dc3 HS 51 wb3 Hat 52 de4 94 63 hxg4 hxgd 54 bd4 wg6 55 we5? Giving an unnecessary chance; 55 de3! ‘was correct. 55..16+ Instead 55,.Hatl, cutting the king and threatening ..17-f5, looks winning to me, for instance 56 Hct 641 57 de6 Hab+ 58 dds Bixa7 59 Bxgt+ of 60 Mgt Bd7+. 56 fd Katt 57 g3 15 58 thd df6 59 b7 %-% ‘An important historic game which Euwe should have won. The opening chosen by Alekhine shouldn’t be dangerous for the well Prepared player. 949 ¢3 fe7: White avoids the Main Line ‘summary In this chapter we have seen a selection of older ideas and tricky move orders. ‘Ans 10 cd 10 We? sd 10 Het he spl replys the univer 10S wth pay as ‘As bith anost ines involving an ently a-at by White, Black does best to reat to 104 with 10...b4. in 1 ef 05 2 DIS Dc6 3 2b5 a6 4 Lad DIG 5 0-0 Dxed 6 dé bS 7 2b3 d5 8 dxed 2e6 903 207 10 We2 10 Het - Game 50 10 a4 b4 (D) - Game 51 10 Be2 cd 11h3 - Game 46 11 Bet Sg4 12h3 Rh5 13b4 (D) ~ Game 47 10...0-0 11. Bd1 Deb 96CHAPTER EIGHT 9c3 2e7 10 Re3 104 05 2213 De6 3 2b5 26 4 ad Dts 5 0-0 Dxe4 6 d4 bB 7 2b3 d5 8 dxe5 B06 9 03 207 10 263 ‘With this move White develops his queen's bishop to control the key d4- and c5- squares. The move S¢3 is also popular one move earlier, when Black may then react with 9.85 or 9.5, whereas after 9.207 White may delay or dispense with thé move <2-c3. All these ideas are developed in Chapter 11. Black’s two main plans exploit the fact that with the bishop on e3 White has less control of e¢ and e5. The first three games in this chapter deal with 10,..2c5, when besides the standard 11...8g4 (Game 52), the plan ~-D5-d7xe5 is feasible, as in Games 53 and 54, In Games 56 and 57 Black builds up in the cenure with 10,..Wd7 11 Dbd2 Eds (11 g4 is less effective, as we see in Game 55), allowing White to capture on o4 when the resulting endings are acceptable for Black, although White may retain a very slight pull Finally, in Games 58 and 59 White chooses to continue development with 12 Bel 0-0 13 £2, forcing Black to finally make a decision about the knight on ¢4. These games are critical as Black’s best at move 13 is not yet clear. Game 52 Dolmatov-Yusupov ~ Wijk aan Zee (11th matchgame) 1991 10405 2 O13 De6 3 Abs 06 4 04 Dis 5 0-0 Dxe4 6 d4 b5 7 2b3 d5 8 dxed M06 9 c3 Be7 10 2e3 Dc5 10...Wd7 is the subject of Games 55-59, while after 10..0-0 transposition to Games 57-59 is likely with 11 @\bd2 We7 and then Bas. 11 &c2 The natural 11 Qbd2 is an error due to 11..2431, hitting both b2 and e5. 11 Bd is no good either: 11..@xe5 12 Dixe6 fxeb 13 Qd4 Di 14 Qxp7 Hes 15 Bid4 @xb3 16 axb3 €5 17 Se3 o5 with a big centre and a clear advantage for Black in Toykan Flew, Hastings Challengers 1988/89. in Chapter 5, the difference being that there ‘White delays the development of his queen’s bishop. Here, once 3 has been played, the plan is much less popular for Black, See Games 53 and 54 for the alternative, 11.27. 9612 @bd2 De6 13 Wot! This neat move, unpinning and eyeing h7, wasn't available in Chapter 5 (with the bishop still on ef). Black now has to spend time bringing his bishop back to g6 in order tocastle 13...2h5 14 2157! ‘With Black losing time to get his king to safety, White can obtain the better game by immediately playing on the queenside: a) More to the point is 14 afl bé 15 a5 2g6 16 c4 00 17 Bal dot 18 Mxg6 hxg6 19 Wet Da7 20 Dxc4 We8 21 Sxa7 Bxa7 22 Dds, as in Jansa-Kelecevic, Sarajevo 1981, when White is somewhat better organised. 6) Another good plan is 14 b4 26 15 Db} 0-0 16 a4 Wa7 17 axb5 axb5 18 Bags xg 19 Wd3 (Stoica), which also gives Wiste sihely annoying pressure against d5 14.,.096 15 Hd1 Wd7 16 We2 16 gf is aggressive but risky, eg. 16..0-0 17 Bed (17 h4 hS! 18 Lxg6 figs 19 Wrgs fa 20 Rxf4 Boxt4 provokes complications in which White's king is the more exposed to attack) 17,025 18 Dg3 c5 19 h4, as in Kindermann-Kwatschevsky, Beersheva 1985. Here White’s attack looks dangerous but Kindermann no longer believes in it, giving 19..@cfl 20 Sci {6 21 hS MxfS 22 gets fxe5 23 fxe6 Wexe6 when Black has good 93 Re7 10 e3 compensation for the sacrificed piece with his good centre and chances of launching an attack against White’s fragile kingside. 16...0-0 17 Of1 Das 18 De3 cB 19 ha Dc4 20 cl Bfe8 21 b3 Dbé 22 HS Finally forcing Black to yield the f5-square but he has had time to complete his development. 22...2xf5 23 DxfS 218 Black has played as solidly as possible. He will uy to make something of his queenside majority whilst staving off attacking ideas by White. 24 £e3 We6 25 Dh2 a5 26 Dg4 Dd7 27 Ed2 b4 28 Hadi @c7 29 £14 bxc3 30 Wxcs Wes 31 Wg3 ths Clearly not 31...Wxi5?? which loses on the spot to 32 Dh6+. 32 fe3 dé 33 Ded Dds ‘White has run out of steam, Black covers all his sensitive points and is ready for ~.a5-a4 and ..c3. 34 he? Desperate stuff. Black now uses the g-file and the doubled h-pawns to positive effect, so White should have avoided this self: destructive approach. 34...gxh6 35 Hel Za6 ‘A useful defensive move but 35..h5 would have won further material. 36 WIS hs! ‘Winning the exchange and the game. 37 Dn2 Oxia 38 Wxid 2h6 39 Wha 97