Baltic Defense To The Queen Gambit PDF

::liOLIOT
CA
C I V I C A
SARz
zo
Invent. N.
6 00
Anno
Chess Digest, Inc

Copyright 1 993 Andrew Soltis
All rights reserved under Pan American and International Copy

right conventions.
ISBN: 0-87568-228-6
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 tapes, mechanical photocopying, recording,
or otherwise, without prior and current permission from the pub
lisher.
AUTHOR: Andrew Soltis

EDITOR: Ken Smith
COMPUTER TYPESETTING: Kenneth Artz
COVER: Elaine Smith
PROOFREADER: Sid Pickard
FINAL PREPARATION & DIAGRAMS: Kenneth Artz
PUBLISHER: Chess Digest, Inc. , Inc., 1601 Tantor,
Dallas, Texas 75229
Send the publisher $2.00 for the New Chess Guide that catalogs
every chess book for general sale in the United States. You are given
publishers, page counts, notation, and critical reviews. Also included
is a free Chess Improvement Course for Beginners up through
Master level players.
':,.:c.., )
.'r,
.....
"'
.
Y..
--
_,

.}:)
_,
't-..''"\
/_,_
&-""
THE BALTI C DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT 3
INTRODUCTION
Anyone who has faced the Queen's Gambit ( l .d4 d5 2.c4) has
regretted playing the move regarded as the best way of declining it.
The rea"ion is that after 2 ... e6, Black's bishop is hemmed in by his
own pawn and therefore completing development may take another
1 2 to 1 5 moves.
In the past, many of the great ma"iters have tried to solve the
problem posed by 2 ... e6: How to get that bishop on the board? Jose
Capablanca popularized a freeing maneuver involving a later ... dxc4
and ... Nd5 so that his queen, when it reaches e7, can promote the
... e6-e5 advance. Emanuel Lasker found another way of doing this,
involving an early ... Ne4. Siegbert Tarrasch discovered that by ... c7-c5
Black will tempt his opponent into playing cxd5 -- thereby isolating
Black's d-pawn but also allowing the c8-bishop to spring to life by
way of ... exd5 ! And another generation led by Alexander Alekhine
and Max Euwe tried to avoid 2 ... e6 altogether by playing the Slav
2 ... c6.
There is another school of thought entirely. This school, which has

had a number of adjunct professors over the years, believes that
Black should solve the bishop problem first, with 2 ... Bf5, before
solidifying his center with ... e7-e6. A surprising number of this
school's members have hailed from the Baltic nations of Latvia,
Lithuania and Estonia. Among them are Vladas Mikenas and Paul
Keres, who played in the 1930's and '40s, followed by Vladimir
Bagirov and the modern generation that has included Alexi Shirov
and Igors Rausis.
While there have been a number of others who have contributed

to the theory of 2 ...Bf5 (Roberto Grau of Argentina, Nikolai Nimev
of Bulgaria, Bent Larsen of Denmark, Vladimir Malaniuk of Russia)
4 INTRODUCTION
we feel justified in giving this overlooked variation a name -- the

Baltic Defense.
And we believe it has been unjustifiable overlooked. (Try and find

it in the $20 books that survey all the openings in one volume.)
Gall iamova-lvanchuk vs. Levitina, Manila 1 992
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
Played by Wilhelm Steinitz in the first official World Champion

ship match -- back in 1886 ( ! ) .
3.Nt3 e6
4.Qb3
Since Black has solved the c8-bishop problem at move two, White
does not have the usual confidence in a Queen's Gambit Declined
that he will emerge from the opening with an advantage just by
playing simple moves. He needs targets to attack and the only
obvious one here is on b 7.
4... Nc6!
THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 5
5.cxd5 exd5
6.Bg5
The Black b-pawn is often en prise for several moves of this

variation. But as soon as White plays Qxb7 Black replies ... Nb4,
threatening a minimum of a "perpetual check" to the queen
( ... Rb8/Qxa7/... Ra8).
6... Be7
7.Qxb7? ! Nb4!
8.Na3 Rb8!
9.Qxa7 Ra8
Now 1 0.Qb7 is met by 10 ... Rxa3! and 1 1 ...Nc2 + . Generally, when

White gets an advantage in the Baltic Defense it happens in a quiet
position. When the position becomes tactical -- White should watch
out. Here White, one of the world's strongest women's players, is
almost lost with the White pieces -- and not even ten moves have
been played.
10.Bxe7 Nd3 + !
l l.Kd2
Or 11.exd3 Qxe7 with check and 12 ...Rxa7.

6 INTRODUCTION
II... Nxe7
12.Qxa8 Qxa8
13.exd3 Qa5 +
And Black had a substantial advantage (although later errors led

to a draw).
MOVE ORDER
There are, in fact, many, many little traps for White to fall into in
the Baltic Defe nse. But before we get into the more specific analysis,
a point should be made about move order: there are three baic ways
of getting into the Baltic Defense:
(a) l .d4 d5 2.c4 BfS
(b) l .d4 d5 2.N f3 BfS
(c) I .N f3 d5 2.d4 BfS
The first order appears in the games of dedicated Baltic Defenders

and takes the greatest positional risks. However, if you don't feel you
can trust the analysis in Chapters Four and Five, you can still save the
Baltic Defense for those games which begin like (b).
THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT 7
Why would someone begin a game with White like that? There
are a variety of reaons, including fear of the Albin Counter Gambit
(which 2.Nf3 averts) and a desire to play the Colle (2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3),
which 2 ... Bf5 discou rages. In any event, you can save the analysis of
the first three chapters of this book for those occaions when your
opponent plays the conservative 2.Nf3.
A third possibility arises when an opponent starts the game with

LNG and then, when he sees that you are going to play classically
with l...d5 , decides against a true Reti Opening (2.c4) or King's
Indian Reversed (2.g3) and escapes into a queen- pawn opening with
2.d4.
Then 2 ... Bf5 surprises him further. You will find this move order
occurring in several fine games played over the years by Paul Keres,
Bent Larsen and others. Their opponents are often surprised into
passive opening play:
Voorema-Keres, Tallinn 1971
l .Nf3 d5
2.d4 Bf5
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.Bf4
White's fourth and fifth moves are the essence of conservatism -

and this troubles Black not at all. A we'll see, White has to put some
pressure on the light squares, such a b7 or d5, to have any hopes of
an advantage in the Baltic Defense.
8 INTRODUCTION
5... Nffi
6.e3 Nbd7
7.Ne5?! Be7
8.Be2 Nxe5
9.Bxe5 0-0
1 0.0-0 Bd6
l l.Bxd6 Qxd6
12.c5!? Qe7
13.f4
Suddenly White has made a major decision. He will advance his

b-pawn to open a file while preventing ... e6-e5 by Black. This
succeeds only if he can keep all the dangerous files closed.
13... Nd7
14.Bd3? b6!
15.cxb6
Now White realizes that the intended preservation of his pawn

chain -- with 15.b4 a5 16.a3 axb4 1 7.axb4, would lose a piece to
1 7 ... Rxa 1 and 1 8 ... Bxd3. The White pawn advance to c5 is a powerful
positional stroke, as we'll see i n Chapter One. But if Black can
counter with a well-timed ... b7-b6, all bets are off-- as Chapter Two
will show.
15 ... axb6
16.a3 b5!
17.Ne2 Nb6
18.Ng3 Nc4!
19.Bxc4
No better is 1 9.Bxf5 exf5 20.Nxf5 Qe4 and Black regains the pawn
favorably. With his b2-pawn under permanent attack White now
becomes desperate.
19... bxc4
20.e4!? dxe4
21 .Qc2 Qb7
22.Qxc4 Qxb2
23.a4 Rfd8
24.a5 h5
One pretty line runs 25.a6 Rxd4! 26.Qxc6 Rd2! and even winning
the rook with check will not save White.
25.Ne2 e3! 26.Ra2 Bd3! 27.Qa4 Qb5 28.Qxb5 cxb5 29.Rfa 1 Ra630.g3
Bc4 3l.Rb2 Rda8 32.Ra3 Rxa5 33.Rxe3 Ra1 + 34.Kf2 R8a2 35.Rxa2
Rxa2 36.Kf3 Kf8 37.Nc3 Rxh2 38.1'5 exf5 White Resigns
10 INTRODUCTION
We'll be examining the specific lines of the Baltic Defense in this

order:
Chapter One: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly
Chapter Two: 2.Nf3, Main Line
Chapter Three: White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3.
Chapter Four: The Grau Gambit, 2.c4 Bf5 3.Qb3 !?
Chapter Five: White dissolves the center with 3.cxd5
Editor's Note: Tum to the Table of Contents on the last two pages.
Go over it again and again and again until you have mastered all
the variations. Then you are ready to learn the following analysis.
CHAPTER ONE: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly
l.d4 d5
2.Nf3
As noted earlier, 2.c4 Bf5 3.Nf3 is another way ofreaching the main
lines below.
2... BfS
3.c4
If White avoids the Queen's Gambit --with developing moves such

as 3.Bg5 or 3.Bf4, Black will be under no immediate pressure until
after he has completed development with ... Nd7/ ... Ngf6/ ... e7-e6 and
... Bd6.
3 ... e6
This solidifies pan of Black's center and avoids the ope n center
problems that hat arise in Chapters Four and Five. In one of the 1 983
Women's Candidates matches, Nona Gaprindahvili suprised Irina
Levitina with 2 ... Bf5 --so much so that White meekly continued 4
e3?!. Then 4 ... e6 leads to a harmless Slav. But if Black imists -- as
12 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 - BUT QUI ETLY
Gaprindahvili did -- the position can remain independent with

4 ... Nc6!?. See Illustrative Game 1 .
4.Nc3
There are many non-threatening methods for White to complete

his development. A typical alternative is 4.Bf4 c6 5.e3 Nd7 and now
6.Bd3 Bxd3 7.Qxd3 Ngf6 8.Nf3 Be7 with a scant advantage to White
at best.
Inoffensive is 4.Bg5 and 4 ... Be7 5.Bxe7 Qxe7. Black does not mind
leaving himself with a ''bad" bishop in such positioffi as long as the
bishop is outside his center pawn wall. After 6.Qb3 c6 7.e3 Nf6
8.Nbd2 0-0 9.Be2 the move 9 ... a';! ? reduces any queenside hopes of
White. In Ftacnik-Bronstein, Tallinn 1 98 1 the game liquidated after
10.a3 a4 1 1 .Qc3 Ne4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Nd2 c5 ! 14.f3 exf315.Nxf3 Nc6
into a quick draw.
We now have two paths, one positionally natural, (a) 4 ... c6 -- the
other, double-edged (b) 4 ... Nc6!?. Right now, the latter seems pref
erable.
(a) 4... c6
5.Qb3!
Without this move the position declines into a semi-normal Slav

Defeffie, which promises very little for White. For example:
(a) After 5.Bf4 Black can simply reply 5 ... Bd6 6.Bxd6 Qxd6 with
quite a bit more freedom than the comparable Orthodox Defeffie
position with a bishop still on c8. After 7.c5 Qe7 8.e3 Nf6 9.Be2 Ne4
and ... Bg4, the position is even.
More combative is 5 ... Nf6 and now 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Be2 Be 7 8.0-0 Qb6
9.cxd5 ? ! Nxd5 ! is the way Keres used to equalize. Similarly, 6.Rc l
Nfd7 7.Qb3 Qb6 8.c5 Qxb3 9.axb3 White has his usual slight edge
but in a recent game lvo Nei with the Black pieces, got the edge with
9 ... h6 10.h3 Be7 l l .e3 0-0 1 2.Be2 Rac8 13.0-0 Bd8 14.b4 a6 15.Nd2
Re8 16.Nb3? e5 ! 17.Bh2 Bc7.
(b) 5.e3 Nf6 6.Be2 is similarly too conservative. Black can develop
aggressively with 6 ... Bd6 and eventually ... Ne4 as in Illustrative Game
2. Malaniuk once took time out for 6 ... h6 and then 7.Qb3 Qb6 8.c5
Qc7.
Black should be equal once he gets ... e6-e5 but somehow White
won after 9.Qa4 Nbd7 10.b4 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Qb3 e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5
14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15 .Nb5 Qe4 16.Nd4 Qxh1 17.Nxf5 (Zakharov
Malaniuk, Bryansk 1975).
(c) 5.e3 Nf6 6.Bd3 and now 6 ... Bg6!? 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.Qe2 Bb4 9.Bd2
a5 and in Seirawan-Larsen, Las Palmas 1981 Black was soon equal
with 10.Bxg6 hxg6 11.cxd5 exd5 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 0-0 14.Neg5 Re8.
(d) 5.Bg5 and now 5 ... Nf6 6.e3 Qb6!? was tried in Anikaev
Malaniuk, Riga 1982 which was promising for White after 7.Qc l
Nbd7 8.c5 Nbd7 9.Bf4 Qc8 10.h3 h6 1 1 .b4!. But simpler is 6 ... Be7
followed by castling and ... Ne4.
(e) 5.g3 is a Catalan with little bite. After 5 ... Nf6 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.0-0
the typical reply is 7 ... h6 to preserve the bishop but perhaps better is
just 7 ... dxc4! followed by 8 ... Bb4 to control e4.
5... Qb6
14 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUIETLY
Rarely seen is 5 ... Qc8, probably because of 6.Bf4 and 7.Rc 1 ,

intending 8.cxd5 and 9.Nb5.
The text is more natural since 6.Qxb6? only lets Black breath easier
(see Illustrative Game 3). Neither player wants to i nitate the queen
trade here because it will open a file for an enemy rook and allow
the enemy to use the forward b-pawn as a battering ram.
6.c5! Qc7
On 6 ... Qxb3 7.axb3 White's b-pawn is achi ng to run forward. How

quickly that pawn can wreak havoc is shown by 7 ... Nd7? 8.b4 a6 9.b5
cxb5 1 0.Nxb5 (Illustrative Game 4 ). Black must try to stop this with
somethi ng like 7 ... Na6 but then 8.Bf4 f6 9.e3 Nb4 1 0.Kd2 and the
Black knight is offsides at b4 because 10 ... a5 allows l l.Bc7!, and
10 ... e5 is refuted by l l .dxe5 Bxc5 1 2.Na4! (Boleslavsky), but not
1 1 .Bg3 g6 1 2.Na2? Nxa2 13.Rxa2 dxe4 1 4.exd4 Bh6 + 1 5.Kc3 Ne7,
Shipman-Soltis, New York 1 99 1 .
7.Bf4 !
White does not need 7.g3 to support 8.Bf4 because now 7.Bf4 Qxf4
8.Qxb7 wi ns the queenside.
N evenheless, you may very well fi nd yourself facing 7 .g3 N d7 8.Bf4

Qc8 some day. Then 9.Nh4 Ngf6! is an improved version of our main
line below ( 10.Nxf5 exf5 1 1 .Qc2 g6 and even ... h7-h5 to prevent
White from playing g3-g4 ).
7 .. Qc8
The queen has lost time but Black has reduced pressure on the
center. Bear in mind that this position -- with colors reversed -- occurs
in the London System ( l .d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.NtJ Qb6
6.Qb3 and now 6 ... c4 7.Qc2 Bf5 8.Qcl has often been played).
It is Black, who has ... b7-b6 and ... e6-e5 in reserve, who seems to
have the best chance of opening the position favorably.
For example, 8.e3 Be7 9.Be2 Nd7 and if l l .Qa4 to hold up l l ...b6
Black can try Tukmakov's suggestion of l l ... b5 and 12 ... a5.
An old Bronstein game once went 8.a4?! (why?), Nf6 9.h3 b6! and
then 1 O.cxb6 axb6 l l .Qxb6 N a6 gave Black fine play. After 1 2.e4 dxe4
13.Ne5 Nb4 14.Nxc6 Nd7 15 .Qxb4! ? the middlegame clarified in
Black's favor.
8.Nh4!
This catches the bishop. Normally such an exchange only helps

fonify Black's pawn structure -- and sometimes ends up weakening
White's. But here, for example, 8 ... Bg4 9.h3 Bh5 10.g4 the move
10 ... Be7 leads after 1 1 .Bg3 ! to a fine game for White.
8... Ne7
Tukamakov recommended 8 ... Bg6 but 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.e4! helps

White along nicely. Then 1 0... Nf6 l l .exd5 Nxd5 1 2.Nxd5 cxd5 13.0-
16 CHAPTER O N E : WHITE PLAYS 2.N13 - BUT QUIETLY
0-0! or 1 2 ... Nxd5 13.Bxb8 Qxb8 ( 13 ... Rxb8 1 4.Qa4 + ) 1 4.Bb5 + Kd8
15.Qf3 Qc7 1 6.b4 as Boleslavsky pointed out back in 1 95 1 .
For 8 ... Nf6 8.Nxf5 exf5 see Illustrative Game 6.
But what about 8 ... Be4! ?. This is the recommended move (with
colors reversed ) in the London System. After 9.Nxe4 dxe4 White's
knight is offsides and threatened by 1 0... Be7 ( l l.Bg3? g5 !). This
bears testing.
9.Nxf5
The trick behind Black's last move was that 9.e3 can be met by
9 ... Ng6!, denying White the two-bishop advantage ( 10.Nxg6 Bxg6 or
1 0.Nxf5 Nxf4 since on 1 1 .Nxg7 + Bxg7 1 2.exf4 Black has 1 2 ... Bxd4 ).
9... Nxf5
IO.e3 Nd7
l l.Bd3
Black's game appears more solid than it really is. It is too early to
start thinking about the queenside because l l ...b6 is met by 1 2.Qa4!
bxc5 13.Ba6 Qd8 1 4.Bb7! with advantage.
To fortify his pawn structure, Black tried 1 1 ... g6 1 2.0-0 Bg7 in

Tukmakov-Baburin, Helsinki 1992 but after 13.Bxf5 ! gxf5? ! 1 4.Ne2
he had problems on both wings and after a few more errors ( 14 ...Nf6
1 5.f3 Nh5? 1 6.Bd6 Bf8 1 7.e4!) he was doomed. More hopeful is
13 .. exf5 with play along the e-file, a in Illustrative Game 5.
.
Unless Black can improve his play significantly -- such a with

8 . Be4 or later 13 ... exf5 -- he should look more closely at the alter
..
native system, 4 ... Nc6!?
(b) 4 ... Nc6
l .d4 dS
2.Nf3 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 Nc6
So far, there has been relatively little experience with this odd
looking setup, but a convincing White strategy has not materialized.
18 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT Q U I ETLY
5.Bf4
White would like to pin Black's knight with 5.Bg5 Nf6 with a later
exchange on f6. But Black will reply 5 ... Be7! 6.Bxe7 Ngxe7 7.e3 0-0
followed eventually by ... Ng6/... dxc4 and e6-e5.
A little too cute is 5.Bg5 Be7 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bf4 and then 7 ... Nf6
8.Be5! ? i n order to play Bxf6. This was Shirazi-Soltis, Marshall C.C.
Championship 1992, which led to equality after 8 ...Bb4 9.Rcl 0-0
1 0.Bxf6! Qxf6 1 1 .e3 Rfe8 1 2.Bb5 Rad8 13.0-0 Bg4 and ... Ne7/... c7-c6.
5.. . Nffi
6.e3 Be7
Black can afford simple developing moves in the absence of d irect

White pressure against the queenside. As usual in such positions,
Black will eventually capture on c4 followed by ... Nd5 or ... e6-e5.
7.Rcl 0-0
8.8e2
We are following Andersson-Kovacevic. Bugojno 1984, in which

Black temporized before clarifying matters with ...dxc4 and
... Nh5xg3. See Illustrative Game 8.
ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES
( 1 ) Leviti na-Gaprindashvili, Lvov 1 983
l.Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.e3 Nc6!?
Against such an innocuous move as 4.e3, Black might have just

played 4 ... c6.
5.cxd5 exd5
6.Bb5! Bd6
7.Nc3 Nge7
8.0-0 0-0
9.a3 a6
This relieves a bit of the queenside pressure, but it wao;; time for
Black to reorganize his pieces with 9 .. Nb8! and 1 O... c6.
.
IO.Be2 Qd7
l l .Nh4 Be6
12.f4!
20 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 - BUT QUIETLY
One of the problems of the Baltic Defen.'''e -- a" with many

variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined -- is that the pawn
structure becomes set after cxd5/ ... exd5 and Black's centralized
pieces can't easily break into the enemy camp. White, however, does
have pawn action planned-- b2-b4 on the queenside to stop ... c7-c5
and something like f4-f5 on the kingside. (But White hurries matters
now.)
12... ffi
13.Bd3 Nd8
14.1'5? Bf7
15.Bd2 b6
16.Qe2 c5!
1 7.Bxa6 Ndc6
Now protecting the weak f5 and d4 pawns is difficult ( 1 8.Nf3 Nxf5)

so White returns to the offensive.
18.Bd3! cxd4
1 9.Nb5 Be5
20.Nf3 dxe3
2 1.Bxe3 Rfe8
22.Nxe5 Nxe5
23.Nd4
Alexey Yermolinsky, then second to Levitina, recommended

23 ... Nc4 24.02 Nc6 25.Bf4 N6e5 a" leading to dynamic equality.
23 ... Nxd3
24.Qxd3 Nc8?!
25.Racl Nd6
26.Bf4 Nc4?
27.Qg3 Kh8
28.b3 !
Black's whole conception of the last several moves was based on

this move not being possible. Since it is (28 ... Rxa3 29.Nc2; 28 ... Nxa3
29.Rc7) White begins to push the enemy back all over the board.
28... Ne5
29.a4 Re7
30.Rc3 RaeS
31.Qh4 Bg8
32.Rfcl Rf8
33.Qg3 RfeS
34.h3
White's position was so good that he could maneuver and repeat

moves before threatening 35.Bxe5 fxe5 (35 ... Rxe5 36.Rc7) 36.Nc6.
34... Qb7
35.Nb5 Nf7
36.Rc7 Qa8
37.Nd4 Ne5
38.Bxe5! fxe5
39.ffi!
Mate on g7 looms.
22 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT Q U I ETLY
39 ...
gxffi
40.Nf5 Be6
4l.Nxe7 Black Resigns
Black had better as shown in the notes.
(2) Salo-Grau, Stockholm (Olympiad ) 1 937
l.d4 d5
2.Nf3 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.e3?! Nffi
6.Be2 Bd6
7.0-0 Nbd7
8.b3 0-0
9.Bb2 Ne4
This kind of position, arising out of the Slav (2 ... c6 ) Defense, offers
White little chance for a serious edge. In fact, Black, with ... Qf6-h6,
has the more aggressive thoughts.
10.Nxe4 dxe4!?
l l .Ne5 Nffi
12.f4 exf3
13.Nxf3?
White's last two moves play into the enemy hands. Better was 12.
Qc2 or, ( after 12.f4) 13.gxf3.
13... Ng4
14.Qd2 Be4
15.h3 Bxf3
16.Rxf3 Nh2!
The rook, not the knight, is the endangered species on the kingside
now.
17.Rf2 Qh4
18.Bd l f5
19.Rf4 Ng4!
Now 20.hxg4 fxg4 2 l .Rxf8 + ? (else 21 ... Bxf4 and 22 ... g3 ) Rxf8 and
,
mates.
20.Rf3 Nffi
21 .Bc2 Ne4
22.Qel? Qxel +
23.Rxel Nd2!
(see next diagram)
And si nce 24.Rf2 Bg3 costs the Exchange, White struggled on

with:
24.Rf4!? g5!
25.Rf3 Nxf3 +
26.gxf3 Rad8
24 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2. N13 -- BUT QUI ETLY
After 23...Nd2!
27.Re2 h6
28. Rg2 Kf7
29.Re2 Ke7
30.Kg2 Kd7
3l .c5 Bc7
It's merely the absence of an open file that keeps the game going.
Once Black has prepared ...g5-g4, it's all over.
32.Bd3 hS 33.Bc4 g4 34.f4 gxh3 + 35.Kxh3 RgS 36.Rg2 Rg4 37.Be2

Rxg2 38.Kxg2 Rg8 + 39.Kh2 BaS! 40.Bc l Bel 4l .a3 h4 42.Bf3 Rg3
43.Bg2 Bf2 White forfeits
(3) Basescu-Soltis, New York 1 99 1
l .d4 dS
2.Nf3 Bf5
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.Qb3 Qb6
6.Qxb6? axb6
7.Bf4 Nffi
8.Nd2 Nbd7
9.Rcl Be7
Black actually has a slight edge in pawn structure, thanks to 6.Qxb6,

and will eventually be able to use it with ... dxc4 followed by ...b6-b5-
b4. White, on the other hand, believes in his pawn center.
10.13 0-0
l l .e4 dxe4
12.fxe4 Bg6
13.a3?
White realizes that the opening of the center will benefit Black and
that's why he avoids 1 3.e5 Nh5 1 4.Be3 c5 ! ( 15.g4 cxd4 1 6.gxh5 dxe3
or 1 5.dxc5 Bxc5) . But the center is going to open one way or another.
13... eS!
14.dxe5 Ng4
15.Be2 NgxeS
16.0-0 Rfe8
1 7.Rcd1 Bf6
1 8.Nb3 Rad8
19.Rd2 Nf8!
20.Rfd1 Rxd2
2 1.Rxd2? Ned7!
26 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUI ETLY
This wins a pawn (22 ... Bxc3) and with it the game. I n a bid for
compensation White drops the Exchange.
22.Na4 Rxe4
23.Bd6? Bg5!
24.Nc3 ReS
25.Bxf8 Bxd2
26.Nxd2 Kxf8
27.Kf2 Nc5
28.Kf3 Nd3
29.b4 Ne5 +
30.Kf2 Bd3
3l .Bxd3 Nxd3 +
Now the a-pawn is doomed.
32.Kf3 f5 33.Nb3 Nel + 34.Kf2 Nc2 35.Nbl Ra8 36.c5 Nxa3 37.N l d2
bxc5 38.Nxc5 Ke7! 39.Nxb7 Rb8 40.Na5 Kd6 41.Ndc4 + Nxc4
42.Nxc4 + Kd5 43.Ne3 + Ke4 44.Nc2 c5 White Resigns
( 4) Ornste in-Kauppala, Jarve npaa 1 985
l .d4 dS
2.Nf3 85
3.c4 e6
4 Nc3
. c6
S.Qb3 Qb6
6.c5 Qxb3
7.axb3 Nd7?
8.b4 a6
9.b5 cxbS
lO.NxbS ReS
l l .Nc3 Ngffi
12.Bf4
White has a simple win ni ng plan now of b2-b4-b5 and there is not
much Black can do about it.
12... Be7
13.e3 Ne4
14.N xe4 dxe4
IS.NeS
In view of 15 ... Nxe5 1 6.Bxe5 0-0 17.Bc4 and b2-b4-b5 touchdown.

Black's sacri fice now is desperation, but appropriate desperation.
28 CHAPTER O N E: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3 -- BUT QUI ETLY
15 ... Nxc5!?
16.dxc5 Bxc5
17.g4 Bb4 +
18.Ke2 Ke7!?
1 9.gxf5 Rhd8
20.Bh3 Rd2 +
2l.Kf1 Rcc2
22.Kg2!
The king is safe on g3 and White remains at least a piece ahead.
22...Rxf2 + 23.Kg3 ffi 24.Rhfl Rxh2 25.Radl ! fxeS 26.8g5 + KJ7

27.Rd7 + Ke8 28.fxe6 BaS 29.Re7 + Kd8 30.Rf8 + mate
(5 ) G. Garcia-Larsen, Linares 1 98 1
l .Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.Qb3 Qb6
6.c5 Qc7
7.g3 Nd7
8.Bf4 Qc8
9.Nh4 Ngffi
lO.NxfS ext'S
l l.Qc2 g6
12.Rd l hS!?
Bent Larsen likes to advance his h-pawns but here it seems a bit
too exotic. Perhaps he didn't l ike the looks of 12 ... Be7 1 3.Bh6. Or
perhaps he was anticipating 13.Bh3 with 13 ... h4.
White now begins an interesting but doomed plan to bring his

bishop to h3 and then open the diagonal with e2-e4.
13.13!? Be7
14.h4 0-0
1 5.Bh3 ReS
1 6.0-0 Bd8!
1 7.e4?
Unsound. White should have continued 1 7.Rael but 1 7 ... Bc7

would have been a good answer.
1 7... dxe4
1 8.fxe4 Nxe4
19.Nxe4 Rxe4
20.Bg2 ReS
2l.d5
30 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.N13 -- BUT Q U I ETLY
On anything else, Black consolidates with 2 1 ...Nf6.
21... cxd5
22.8xd5?! Qxc5 +
23.Qxc5 Nxc5
24.b4 Ne6
25.8xb7 Bb6 +
26.Khl Nxf4!
This saves the Exchange (27.Bxa8 Ne2 28.Bc6 Nxg3 + 29.Kg2

Nxfl 30. Bxe8 Ne3 + ) and ends resistance quickly.
27.Rxf4 Rab8 28.Bd5 Bc7 29.Rc4 Bxg3 30.Rgl Re3 White Resigns
(6) Flohr-Mikenas, Soviet Championship 1 95 1
l .Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
"A fully possible continuation," was Isaac Boleslavsky's less-than

revealing comment in the tournament book. He agreed with Flohr's
earlier comment in the he tournament bulletin that 3.c4 e6 4.Qb3
Nc6 5.c5 waiOi best.
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.Qb3 Qb6
"A poor move, since the exchange on b3 is disadvantageous to

Black," Boleslavsky added. "After 5 ... Qc8 a typical position oft he Slav
Defense is reached."
T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 31
6.c5 Qc7
7.Bf4 Qc8
8.Nh4!
"Much stronger than the mistaken developing move 8.e3," the
Soviet G M commented. Surprisingly, the effect of 8.Nh4 was more
or less forgotten after this game.
8... Nf6
9.Nxf5 ext'S
IO.e3 Be7
l l.Bd3 N h5?
Boleslavsky recommended 1 1 ...Na6. The more natural 1 1 ...0-0

invites 1 2.0 and 1 3.g4! with a line-opening attack. But after the text,
12.Be5 f6 can't be played because of 13.Bxb8! and 14.Be2.
12.Be5 0-0
13.h3! g6
14.g4 Ng7
15.Bxg7!? Kxg7
16.gxf5 Bh4
32 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.N1 3 - BUT Q U I ETLY
Clearly 1 6 ...gxf5 was to be avoided. Now Black is hoping he can

mount a counterattack on e3 and f2 (while stopping h3-h4-h5 ).
17.Qd l ! b6
18.cxb6 axb6
19.Qg4 Qd8
20.Ne2 Qe7
21.Kfl
This meets the threat of 2 1 . ..Qxe3 and gives White time for the
assault on g6.
21... Nd7
22.Nf4 Kh8
23.Rgl Rg8
24.fxg6 fxg6
25.Bxg6 !
And si nce 25 ... Nf8 26.Qh5 is quite lost, the game drew to a close
with ...
25... hxg6
26.Nxg6 + Rxg6
27.Qxg6 Nf6
28.Rcl ! Rf8
Or 28 ... Rc8 29.Qh6ch Qh7 30.Rg6! Ne4 3 l .Rcxc6 and wins.
29.Rxc6 Nh7 30.Rg2 Bffi 31.Qg4 Qb7 32.Qe6 Qa6 + 33.Kgl Ng5
34.Rxg5! Bxg5 35.Qe5 + Bffi 36.Rxffi Rg8 + 37.Rg6 + Black Resigns
(7 ) Shipman-Soltis, New York 1 99 1
l.d4 d5
2.Nf3 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 c6
5.Qb3 Qb6
6.c5 Qc7
7.Bf4 Qc8
8.e3 Nd7
9.Rcl? Ngffi
I O.h3 Be7
l l.Be2 0-0
12.0-0 b6!
34 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3- BUT QUI ETLY
This is what happens when White has delayed queenside action

( 1 2. Qa4) and allows Black to strike fi rst. Now the best policy was to
keep matters closed with 1 3 Na4.
13.cxb6?! axb6
14.Nh4?! Be4
1 5.13 Bg6
16.Nxg6 hxg6
1 7.e4 Qb7!
18.exd5?
Logic suggests that his bishops need an open position, but this isn't
the way to do it. Black is now able to seize the e-file.
1 8... exd5
1 9.a3 Rfe8
20.Bd3
20... c5
2l.dxc5 Bxc5 +
22.Kh1 Be3!
23.Bxe3 Rxe3
24.Qdl d4!?
25.Ne4? Nc5!
So that 26.Nxc5 bxc5 and 27 ... Qxb2 is threatened.
26.Nxffi + gxffi
27.Bb5 Rd8
28.Rel Qe7
29.b4 Ne6
30.Rxe3 dxe3
31.Qel Nf4
32.Rc2 Qe5
Here or on the next move Black could have played the paralyzing
32 ... e2.
33.a4 Kg7 34.g3 !? Nxh3 35.Kg2 Ng5 36.Re2 QfS 37.Rxe3 Qh3 +
38.Kgl Rh8 39.KJ2 Qh2 + 40.Kfl ReS! 4l.Bd3? Rei! White Resigns
(8) Andersson-Kovacevic, Bugojno 1 984
l .Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Nc3 Nc6
36 CHAPTER ONE: WHITE PLAYS 2.Nf3- BUT QU IETLY
It's worth noting that GM Kovacevic often plays the London

System ( l .d4 d5 2.Bf4) as White, but usually with c2-c3 rather than
Nc3, as he does here, with the colors reversed.
5.Bf4 Nffi
6.e3 Be7
7.Rcl 0-0
8.Be2 a6
9.0-0 h6
1 0.a3
What is going on here with beginner's moves like 8 . a6, 9 h6 and

.. ...
1 O.a3? Actually, they each have a purpose (to prevent Nh4xf5 or keep
an enemy piece off b4 or b5) . But they reflect a mutual reluctance to
change the pawn structure.
10... dxc4
l l.Bxc4 NhS
12.Bg3 Nxg3
13.hxg3 Qd7
14.Qe2 Rfd8
IS.Rfd l Qe8
16.d5!
White has a slight edge thanks to Black's vulnerable points along

the c-file.
16... exdS
17.Bxd5 Bd6
18.Bxc6 Qxc6
19.Nd5 QbS!
Black has calculated that the endgame is more than tenable.
20.Qxb5 axbS
21.Nd4 Bg4!
22.13 c6!
23.fxg4 cxdS
24.Nxb5 Bxg3
And since b2 and a3 are a weak as d5, a draw is soon agreed:
25.Nc3 Be5 26.Rxd5 RxdS 27.Nxd5 Bxb2 28.Rbl Bxa3 29.Rxb7 Ra4
30.Rb8 + Kh7 3 1 .Rb7 Draw
38 CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3 -- MAIN LINE
CHAPTER 1WO: 2.Nf3 -- Main Line
If Black can meet quiet play with a bit of eccentricity (4 ...Nc6),

perhaps White needs more direct approach. The ''book refutation"
of the Baltic Defense is the focus of this chapter.
l .d4 d5
2.Nt3 BfS
Black's last move is the traditional antidote to the Colle attack

(2 ... Nf6 3.e3 and 4.Bd3). After 2 ...Bf5 3 .e3 Nf6 White gets little from
4.Bd3 Bg6! (better than 4 ... Bxd3 5.cxd3 ! ) 5.Ne5 e6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 and
7 ... c5.
3.c4
After l.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 some grandmasters believe the best move
of al l is 3.NtJ! transposing exactly into this position, so this subvaria
tion has particular significance.
3 ... e6
VladirnirTukmakov has suggested 3 ... Bxb 1 ! ? without further com

ment. In fact, that move wa" played nearly a century ago by Carl
Walbrodt (e.g. 4.Rxb 1 dxc4 5.Qa4 + c6 6.Qxc4 e6 with the kind of
position that would later be called a slightly inferior Slav Defense).
Black can also handle the position the way Frank Marshall did in
the 1920s, keeping the center fluid with 3 ...Nf6 (and then 4.cxd5 Nxd5
5.Qb3 e6 or 4.Qb3 Nc6 5 .Qxb7?? Bd7! and 6 . Rb8/7 ... Nb4).
..
But solidifyi ng the center with 3 ...e6 is the move that puts White
to the test.
4.Qb3!
There is no reason to exchange on d5 here since White wants to

retain the possibility of c4-c5 ! . See the note to White's fifth move
below.
Also, 4.e3 agai n leads to little for White. The first edition of ECO
gave only 4 ... Nf6 but 4 ...c6! , creati ng a Slav, looks natural-- and quite
equal.
Note that 4.e3 N f6 allows White to play a delayed 5.Qb3 after

which 5 ... Nc6 is more or less forced. This allows 6.c5 Rb8 7.Bb5 ! with
advantage or 6 ...Qc8 7.Bb5 Nd7! 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 g6! as in an old
Colle-Nimzovich game. White does better in the last line with 8.0-0
Be7 9.Qa4! NebS 1 0.b4 preservi ng his two bishops.
4... Nc6
Here the road divides as White makes a crucial choice. Since

5.Qxb7 once agai n gets him into trouble by way of 5 .. Nb4 White's
.
40 CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3 - MAIN LINE
most interesting tries involve moves that prevent .. Nb4 . Specifically,

.
(a) 5 .c5 and (b) 5.Bd 2. We 'll examine them separately.
(a) Locking the center with 5.c5
5.c5!
This closes the diagonal of Black's f8-bishop and prepares

Bb5/Ne5 in addition to renewing the 6.Qxb7 threat.
In contrast, 5.cxd5 ?! exd5 leaves Black fairly well off. In the 1948
World Championship Tournament, Mikhail Botvinnik won a key
game from rival Paul Keres with 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Bxe7 N gxe7 8.e3 Qd6
9.Nbd2 (not 9.Nc3 Nb4 10.Rc 1 Bd3 ! ) 0-0 10.Rc1 a5 ! but it wasn't the
fault of Black's opening play.
Black can also try to compl icate the game with 6 ... Qd7 7.Nc3 f6
8. Bf4 Nb4 or 8 ... Na5 or even 8 ... g5 followed by queenside castling.
5... Rb8
After Minev's 1977 article on 2 ...Bf5 was reprinted in Shakmatny

Bulletin, a number of Soviet masters began to experiment with the
system. In the playoff match of the 1 978 Soviet Championship, Josif
Dorfman added a new wrinkle mentioned in the article: 5 ... Qc8!?.
There followed 6.e3 Nf6 7.Bb5 Nd7!. This safeguards against Ne5
at the cost of a pawn: 8.Qa4 Be7 9.Bxc6 bxc6 1 0.Qxc6 0-0 1 1 .0-0 Rb8
12.Qa4 Bd3 13.Re 1 e5 and the game, against Boris Gulko, was
eventually drawn.
6.Nc3
There is not much benefit to be had by locking in the c l-bishop

with 6.e3. Then 6 ... Nf6 looks natural, since Bg5xf6 is out of the
question. There was even an old Kostic game that went 6.e3 f6 7.Nc3
Nge7 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 and reached eventual equality -- although
9 ... Nxc6!? would have been much more interesting.
The chief alternative here is 6.Bf4 which stops 6 ... e5. Then 6 ... Nge7
7.Nc3 a6 will transpose back into our main line.
Meanwhi le, 7.e3 a6 8.Qa4 Ng6 9.Bg3 Be7 leads to a new set of
problems for both sides. After 10.Nbd2? 0-0 ll.Rcl Bf6! Black gets
... e6-e5 in and that is usually enough to equalize. It seems that White
should keep Nc3 and Rdl in hand to deter the Black e-pawn. See
Illustrative Game 1 1.
Nevertheless, Black's best answer to 6.Bf4 may be 6 ... a6 (waiting

and preventing Bb5 or Nb5) 7.e3 Nf6!? and then 8.Nc3 Be7 as in the
note to Black's seventh move.
6 ... a6
This anticipates the greatest dangers in the position (Bb5) while

preserving the option of ...Nf6-e4/...Be7-f6 as well as ...Bf6/...Nge7.
Compare this with 6...Be7, which has two useful ideas behind it:
...Bf6 and ... Nge7 or the kingside expansion of ... g7-g5 after White
plays Bf4. However, this neglects the queenside problem and after
7.Bf4 g5 8.Bg3 g4 9.Ne5 Bf6 10.Qa4! Nge7 1l.Nxc6 Black's queen
side is a mess but he has tactical chances. See Illustrative Game 9.
On the other hand, Keres' 6 ... e5? (based on 7.Qxd5 Qxd5 8.Nxd5
exd4 9.Nxc7 + Kd7) was dealt a serious blow by Lajos Ponisch at
Wijk aan Zee 1971: 7.e4! exd4 8.exf5 dxc3 9.Bb5 Bxc5 10.0-0 Nf6
1l.Qxc3 with a big edge.
7.Bf4
Since the bishop is bound to become vulnerable on this square -

to ...Nf6-h5 or ...Bf6 and ...Nge7-g6 --White sometimes inserts the
escape clause of 7.h3 (or 7.Bf4 and 8.h3).
But that turns out to be a wasted move or, worse, an invitation to

invite a charge of the Black g-pawn. See Illustrative Game 10.
7... Nge7
Here's a question that has never been resolved: what is a better

policy, 7...Nge7 or 7...Nf6?
After 7...Nf6 8.e3 Be7 Black has a minor threat of 9...Nh5 -- minor,
but it should be respected because 10.Bg3 Nxg3 and 1l...Bf6 will
allow him to eventually push the e-pawn.
White can anticipate the challenge to his bishop with 9.h3. But then
9...0-0 and Black has 10...b6 coming up. For example, 10.Be2 b6
ll.Qa4 Qd7 12.Bxa6 Ra8 or 10.Qa4 b5!?.
On the other hand, 9.Be2 Ne4 is also available although after

10.Nxe4 Bxe4 it is not clear where Black's play is coming from. See
Illustrative Game 12 for a smahing White victory.
8.e3 N g6
9.Bg3 Be7
Because Black has two pawn levers,White can not load up against
one of them. For example, IO.Rdl would discourage ...e6-e5. But it
makes 10...0-0 ll.Be2 b6 very appealing (12.cxb6 Rxb613.Qa4 Nb4).
10.Be2
In Flohr-Terpugov, Soviet Championship 1950White tried1O.Qd1

Qd7 11.Bd3 but his edge was microscopic after 11...Bxd3 12.Qxd3
0-0 13.0-0 f5!.
1 0... 0-0
1 1 .0-0 Qd7
This is untested analysis. Black's main idea is 12...b6!. On 12.Qa4

Black probably can't take time out for 12...Ra8 and 13...Rfb8 because
of 13.b4 Rfb8 14.a3 with firm control of the queenside. But 12...b6
13.Bxa6 Ra8!? may be possible (not 13...bxc5 14.Bb5).
Besides closing the center with 5.c5White has another method of

threatening the queenside and we turn to that now:
(b) Retaining Options with 5.Bd2
Botvinnik endorsed this move after playing it in his 1954 title

defense against Vasily Smyslov. A tricky alternative is 5.Bg5 so that
5...Be7? can be met by 6.Qxb7! Na5 (or 6... Nb4) 7.Bxe7!
Black's alternatives include 5...Qc8, 5...f6 and 5...B b4 + . Minev

points out a game that went 5...Bb4 + 6.Nc3 dxc4 7.Qxc4 Nf6 8.e3 h6
9.Bh4 Be7 10.Be2 0-0 ll.Rcl in White's favor, but suggests 7 ...Qd5!?
as an improvement.
But Shirov's 5...Nxd4! looks best, since 6.Nxd4 Qxg5 7.Qa4 + c6

leads at best to equality for White (8.Nc3 Ne7 9.Rdl g6 10.cxd5 exd5
ll.Nxf5 Nxf5, Sorokin-Shirov, U.S.S.R. 1988).
5... dxc4!?
Here 5...Rb8 may, in fact, be better, with play similar to that of

section (a). The text was played by Smyslov with play proceeding:
6.Qxb7 Nge7
7.Qb5! Rb8
8.Qa4 Rxb2
9.Na3
Here Botvinnik pointed out the intriguing Exchange sacrifice

9..Rxd2!? which offers substantial compensation after IO.Kxd2 e5 or
10.Nxd2 Qxd4 ll.Rdl c3 12.Ndc4 Qc5.
9... Qd7
10.Nxc4 Rb8
l l .e3 Nb4
46 CHAPTER TWO: 2.N13 - MAIN LINE
Unfortunately ll...Nd5 allows White to consolidate his structur

ally superior position with 12.a3!
12.Qxd7 + Kxd7
13.Bxb4 Rxb4
14.N ce5 + Ke8
In the Botvinnik-Smyslov game cited above, White continued

15.Bd3 f6 16.Bxf5 Nxf5 17.Nd3 Rb6 18.Ke2 Ba3 19.Nd2 and Rhbl,
eventually making his material count.
However, a Botvinnik pointed out, Black should solidify a posi

tion for his knight at d5 with 16...exf5!, after which he is only margin
ally worse.
ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES
(9) Fine-Grau, Stockholm (Olympiad) 1937
l.d4 dS
2.Nt3 Bf5
3.c4 e6
4.Qb3 Nc6
5.c5 Rb8
6.Nc3 Be7
7.Bf4 g5!?
8.Bg3 g4
Not as risky as it seems, since White has little access to the kingside
now. Black is willing to accept the doubling of his c-pawns.
9.Ne5 Bffi
IO.Qa4 Nge7
l l .Nxc6 bxc6
12.b3 0-0
13.e3 Qd7
14.Be2 N g6
15.0-0 Bg5
Here's Black's problem: He has some active pieces but the king
side and center are closed in a manner that keeps his queen and rooks
from complementing them. He would like to shoot his h-pawn up
the board butWhite is making steady progress on the other wing ( 16.
Qa5 Rfc8 17.Ba6; 16...Bd8 17.Qxa7).
16.Qa5 e5!?
1 7.dxe5 Rfe8
1 8.Rad l !
White has 19.e4 (or as it turns out Ne4) just in time. This is a
recurring danger to Black when he hurries ...e6-e5: His d5-pawn then
falls under immediate pressure.
18... Be6
19.Ne4! Qe7
20.Nxg5 Qxg5
2 1.Qxc7
Black's position, which looked reasonable a few moves ago has

suddenly collapsed.
2l. . Rec8 22.Qa5! Nxe5 23.Ba6! Rd8 24.Qc7 Black Resigns

.
( 10) Piket-Bareev, Dortmund 1992
l.Nt3 d5
2.d4 81'5
3.c4 e6
4.Qb3 Nc6
5.c5! Rb8
6.Nc3 Be7
7.h3
This is designed to preserve the bishop (Bf4-h2) and eliminate all

risks of ... g7-g5-g4. At least, almost all such risks.
7... Nffi
8.Bf4 a6
9.e3 Ne4!
10.Be2
On 10.Nxe4 Bxe4 ll.Be2 0-0 and 12...Bf6, Black has an easy game.
1 0... gS!?
l l.Bh2 hS
12.Nxe4? Bxe4
13.0-0-0 b6!?
White's last two moves have been quite compromising. Now

14.Qa4 Qd7 15.Qxa6 Bxf3 16.gxf3 bxc5 is promising for Black.
14.Nd2 Bg6
15.Bxa6 bxc5
1 6.Qa4 0-0!
Based on 17.Qxc6Rb6 18.Qa4 Qa8 19.Bb5Qb7! with a devastating

attack.
50 CHAPTER TWO: 2.Nf3- MAIN LINE
17.dxc5 Qd7
18.Nb3
Black was quite prepared to sacrifice the Exchange (18.Bb5 Rxb5

19.Qxb5 because of 19...Nd4! 20.Qxd7? Ne2 mate). Now he gets to
post his rooks at a8 and b4.
18 ... Rb4!
19.Qa3 Ra8
20.Rd2 Ra7
2l.Kdl Qe8
22.Nd4 Bxc5
23.Qa4??
A gross error in what has become a difficult position. White

resigned before Black could snap off the queen. But 23.f4 Rxd4
24.Qxc5 Rxd2 + was also lost.
(11) Anikaev-Vaganian, Moscow 1982
l .Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Qb3 Nc6
5.c5 Rb8
6.Bf4 Nge7
7.e3 a6
Here 8.a3 gives Black enough time to achieve ...e6-e5: 8...Ng6

9.Bg3 Be7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 e5 12.dxe5 Bxc5 13.Nc3 Be6 as in
Polugayevsky-Vaganian, Moscow 1981.
8.Qa4 N g6
9.Bg3 Be7
I O.Nbd2 0-0
l l .Rcl ?
White this time has geared up to stop ... b7-b6. He is taking many
precautions based on the assumption that Black can't open the center
-- or won't do anything with an open center when he does open it.
1 1... Bffi!
12.Be2 e5
13.Nb3 e4
Suddenly it's Black who has a space advantage and a clear plan of
. f7-f5-f4.
..
14.Nfd.2 Bd7!
15.Qa3 BgS
16.Na5 f5
17 .N xc6 Bxc6
18.0-0
White is playing without a queen.

18... f4!
19.exf4 Nxf4
20.Bxf4 Bxf4
21 .Rcd l Qg5
22.Qc3 Bd7
Target: g2.
23.Nb3 Rffi 24.Nal e3 25.fxe3 Bh3! 26.813 Bxe3 + 27.Khl Rxf3!
And Black won.
(12) H. Olafsson-Knezevic, Neskaupstad 1984
l.Nf3 d5
2.d4 BfS
3.c4 e6
4.Qb3 Nc6
5.c5 Rb8
6.Nc3 Nffi
7.Bf4 a6
8.e3 Be7
9.Be2 Ne4
THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QU EEN'S GAMBIT 53
This is often an equalizing move when White does not have an

immediate plan. The difference is that this time he does.
I O.Nxe4 Bxe4
1 1.0-0 0-0
12.Qc3 Bf6
13.Rfdl Qe7
14.Ne5!
14... Bxe5
15.d.xe5 h6
1 6.b4 f6
17.exf6 Rxf6
18.Bg3 Rbt8
1 9.a4 Qf7
20.t3 Bf5
2 l.b5 axb5
22.axb5
Black's worst nightmare has come true: The queenside pawns can
advance further.
22... Nb8 23.c6! bxc6 24.bxc6 Rg6 25.e4 dxe4 26.Ra8 Black Resigns
54 CHAPTER THREE: WHITE PLAYS 2.c4 AND 3.Nc3
CHAPTER THREE: White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3
Instead of pressuring the target at b7, White can also go after d5

with a combination of Qb3 and Nc3. This leads to trappy play that
should not be unwelcome to Black.
l .d4 d5
2.c4
In this, the most natural move order, Black is risking a bit more
than after 2.NtJ Bf5, since his center is not yet secure and can be
dissolved with 3.cxd5 (which we'll examine in Chapter Five).
2... BfS
There are no waiting moves at Black's disposal that will readily

allow him to play this move later. For example, 2...c6 (the Slav
Defense) 3.Nc3 Bf5? walks into 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Qb3! hitting both b7
and d5.
3.Nc3
T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 55
Now, it seems, Black does not have enough time to protect both
b7 and d5 before 4.Qb3 makes one of them indefensible.
3 ... e6!
Anything else leads to a major White advantage.
4.Qb3
Naturally, 4.Nf3 would have been Chapter One all over again -
and some analysts, such as Nikolai Minev, have called that White's
best option.
The text has been given a question mark -- by Latvian master

Valentin Kirillov in the Riga-baed "Shahs" magazine -- and a "?!" -
by Minev in the Bulgarian "Shakmatna Miscl." It is not quite that bad.
4... Nc6!
But this is why it's not very good. On 5.Qxb7 Nxd4 Black has . ..Rb8
and a big knight check corning up.
Black's d-pawn now proves surprisingly invulnerable:
5.cxd5 exd5
Watch out: This position is mined with Black traps:
Now 6.Nxd5? is met by 6...Be4! andWhite is in big trouble (7.Nc3

Nxd4 8.Qa4 + b5! and White resigned in aWest German miniature).
White can temporarily sacrifice a piece with 7.Qe3 Qxd5 8.f3 but
after 8...Nxd4 9.fxe4 Nc2 + 10.Kt2 Qc5! he doesn't get the piece back.
Of the other moves:
(a) Not much better is 6.Qxd5 Qxd5 7.Nxd5 because of 7...0-0-0

with advantage to Black's development.
(b) Again 6.Qxb7? Nxd4 runsWhite into trouble (7.e4 Rb8! and
wins).
(c) 6.e4 has been analyzed by the Russians with published analysis
that give: 6...dxe4 7.d5 Ne5 8.Qxb7 and 7.Qxb7 Nxd4 8.Bb5 + a-;
"unclear."
But in the first line 7.. Nb4 is better than 7...Ne5. And in the latter
line 8 ...Nxb5 9.Nxb5? Bb4 + or 9.Qxb5 + Qd7 is not at all unclear.
6.Nt3
Black was really threatening 6...Nxd4 now. The gambit 6.Bf4?!

Nxd4! 7.Qa4 + Nc6 8.0-0-0 Nf6 is insufficient. One of the many
miniatures that have arisen from such position was Bryansky
Komarov, Kiev 1983.
It ended with 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.e4 Bb4 1 1.exd5? Qe7 12.dxc6

Qc5 + ! White resigns. This was the shortest game played in the
tournament, a Soviet Youth Championship in which the adolescent
contestants included names like Gelfand, Bareev, Khalifman, Dreev

and Epishin -- and the winner was the little-known Rustem Dautov.
And 6.Be3 is a clumsy way of defending the d-pawn because it

invites a later ...Na5-c4. For exampl e, 6.Be3 Nf6 7.g3 Na5 ! 8.Qd l c6
9.Bg2 Nc4 with an excellent game for Black (Illustrative Game 13).
6... Bb4
Black must avoid 6 ... Nb4? which, because of the exchange of

pawns at move five, is bad here because of 7.e4 !. Then 7 ... dxe4 8.Ne5
Be6 9.Bc4 gives White a powerful attack.
For example, 9 ... Bxc4 1 0.Qxc4 Nd3 + l l .Nxd3 exd3 1 2.Qb5 +

Qd7 13.Qxb7! and White retains his advantage fol lowing 14.0-0 Be3
and Rad 1/Rfe l (Zaltsman-Shipman, World Open 1 983). Similarly,
10 ...Qe7 1 1 .0-0 f6 and now 12.a3 maintains an edge.
The main alternative here is 6 ... Nf6, which once again dares White
to play 7.Qxb7? (7... Nb4 ).
The problem with 6 ... Nf6 is the p inning effect of 7.Bg5 !. Vladimir
Malaniuk has had a good deal of experience as Black with 7 ..Na5
8.Qa4 + c6. One of his opponents played 9.Bxf6 gxf6 1 0.e3 but
S8 CHAPTER THREE: WHITE PLAYS 2.c4 AND 3.Nc3
achieved nothing more than dynamic equality after 10...a6 11.Nh4

Bg6 12.Be2 b5 13.Qd1 Nc4 (eventually drawn).
More accurate is 9.e3 and now 9 ...b5!? 10.Bxb5 is Illustrative

Game 14, in whichWhite gets three good pawns for a piece. Safer is
9...a6.
7.Bf4
White often decides to give up his bishop on f6 to avert ...Nf6- e4,

so this bishop move may be a waste of time.White got a small edge
in Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1979 with 7.a3 Bxc3 + 8.Qxc3 Nf6 9.Bg5
and then 9...0-0 10.e3 h6 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Be2. (Yet Black won. See
Illustrative Game 15).
7... aS
We are following Speelman-ShoTt, Hastings 1989 which went 8.a3

a4! 9.Qd1 Bxc3 + 10.bxc3 Nf6. Here 11...Ne4 is coming up (ll.Bb5
0-0 12.Bxa4?! Ne4).
Speelman continued 11.Bg5! h6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.e3 0-0 14.Bb5

Ra5! 15.Be2 Ne7 and after ... Ng6 held a very small edge forWhite.
ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES
(13) Shakins-Rause, Latvian Team Championship 1985
Although not involving a trap, this game shows how quickly Black
can develop an overwhelming initiative with relatively simple moves
(14-22).
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.Nc3 e6
4.Qb3 Nc6
5.cxd5 exd5
6.Be3?
As noted above, this walites the bishop on a square from which it

is soon driven.
6... Nffi
7.g3 Na5!
S.Qdl c6
9.Bg2 Nc4
I O.Bcl Bb4
l l.e3 0-0
12.Nge2 Qd7?
13.0-0 Qe7
After this indecisiveness (in place of 12 ...Re8 and 1 3 ...h5! ), the

benefit of moves 6-9 is lost. But Black still stands well and, what's
more,White hasn't a clue.
14.a3 Bd6
15.Qb3 a5
16.a4 Rfe8
1 7.Khl h5!
18.Ngl ?
Imagine that White's bishop is on g5, and not c l. Then, he might

be equal.
18... h4
1 9.gxh4? Ng4
20.Nf3 Bxh2!
Of course 2 1.Nxh2 Qxh4 and resignation is in order.
21.e4 dxe4
22.Bg5 Qc7
23.Qxc4
T his is the face of desperation.
23... exf3
White Resigns
( 14) Schneider-Malaniuk, Yalta 1982
l.d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.Nc3 e6
4.cxd5 exdS
5.Qb3 Nc6
6.Nf3 Nffi
7.8g5
Here 7...Bb4 8 a3! favors White more than usual.
7... NaS
8.Qa4 + c6
9.e3 bS!?
It's not clear what Malaniuk has against 9 ..Be7, since 10.b4 Nc4
.
l l .b5 cxb5 is harmless.
lO.BxbS! cxbS
l l.QxbS + Bd7
12.Bxffi ! gxffi
13.Qxd5 Rb8
Simpler is 13 ...Be7 and castling. White has material compensation

for his piece, but his pawns are not likely to count before an endgame.
14.0-0 Be7
15.Qh5 0-0
1 6.Nd5 ReS
1 7.Rfcl !
The threat is 18.Nc7 winning material.
1 7... Nc6
18.b3 ReS
19.Nh4 Nb4
20.Nxb4 Bxb4
21.Nf5 Bf8
22.Nh6 + Bxh6
23.Qxh6 Bf5
24.Rxc8 Qxc8
A curious decision, virtually agreeing to a draw.
25.Qxffi Qc3
26.Qg5 + Draw
( 15) Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1979
l .d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.Nc3 e6
4.cxd5 exd5
5.Qb3 Nc6
6.Nf3 Bb4
7.a3 Bxc3 +
8.Qxc3 Nffi
9.Bg5!
This follows a familiar policy, seen in the Queen's Gambit De

clined and some Nimzo-Indian variations. White, having lost control
of e4, acts to prevent it becoming a Black knight outpost.
9... 0-0
10.e3 h6
l l.Bxffi Qxffi
12.Be2 Rfc8
This looks like the WTong rook, since he needs one for the e-file
(and his 1 6th move admits as much ). Black will correct his pawn
structure with an eventual ... c7-c6, leaving White with one play: the
minority attack.
13.0-0 Ne7
14.Rfcl c6
15.b4 N g6
16.Nel !
Black's best chances naturally lie on the kingside and this preven
tive move anticipates ...Bg4 and ... Nh4 while aiming to bring the
knight to d3 and perhaps c5 or b4.
16... ReS
1 7.a4 Re6
18.b5 Rae8
19.Qa5 Qe7
20.Bd3 b6
21.Qc3
White ha" the typical advantage resulting from a minority attack.
21... Bxd3
22.Nxd3 cxb5
23.axb5 Qd7
24.Qb3 Rffi
25.Rc2 Nh4
26.Ne5 QfS
27.Rxa7?
27... Nxg2!
28.Rac7?
Not willing to see if there's more than a draw from 28.Kxg2 Rxe5 !,
White turns the tables 1 80 degrees.
28... Nh4
29.f4 Qe4!
30.Rc8 Rfe6
31.Rxe8 + Rxe8
32.Re2 Ra8
33.Qdl NfS
34.Qd3 Ra l +
35.102 Qhl !
This looks like the product of time pressure.
36.Rc2 Qgl +
37.Ke2 Qg2 + mate
66 CHAPTER FOUR: THE GRAU GAMBIT
CHAPTER FOUR: The Grau Gambit
None of the previous variations of the Baltic Defense, a tactical

a they may seem, will prepare you for the sharpest line of them all,
the neo-Aibin Counter Gambit introduced by Roberto Grau of
Argentina.
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.Qb3
Usually the reason an early bishop move by Black is dubious in the

closed openings is because of the retribution wreaked by Qb3 at
some point. This suggests that for the Baltic Defense to work it must
pas the test of the earliest possible 3.Qb3.
3... eS!
This was Grau's gambit idea. It is a vast improvement upon

3 ... dxc4? after which 4.Qxb7 Nd7 5.Nc3 gives White a clear positional
edge.
One example of this was Forintos-Sahovic, Reykjavik 1 982 which

went 5 ... Rb8 6.Qc6 Rb6 7.Qxc4 Ngf6 8.Nf3 e6 9.e3. White's edge wa
obvious after 9 ... QbB 10.Be2 Rb4 l l .Qc6 Rb6 1 2.Qc4 Rb4 13.Qa6!
Rb6 14.Qa4 Rb4 1 5.Qa5 c6 1 6.a3 Rb7 1 7.Ba6 and 1 8.()-0.
Keep this in mind: this is what happens when Black's initiative

evaporates and he is left to deal with numerous positional problems.
4.Qxb7
It's a funny how theory becomes established alii 'book." A typical

example:
Svetozar Gligoric won a 1 97 1 game with 4.cxd5 exd4 5.Nf3. The

game went 5 ... Be4 6.Nxd4 and now 6 ... Qxd5 7.Qe3 favors White. So
there followed instead: 5 ... Bxd5 7.Qe3 + Qe7 (7 ... Ne7 8.Nc3 Nc6
9.Nxc6! Bxc6 1 0.Bd2 seems to favor White) 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Qxe7 +
Bxe7 1 0.Bg5 Be6 1 1 .e4 c6 1 2.Nxe6.
This walii widely accepted as a key variation of the Baltic Defense

and demonstrated how White, while avoiding all risks, can aliisure
himself through forcing play of a superior endgame.
But the improvement of 5 ... Bc5 ! alters matters radically. Then

6.Qc4 Nd7 7.Nxd4 Qh4! leads to easy equality for Black.
The real test of5 ... Bc5 is 6.Nxd4 Bxd4 7.Qa4 + after which 7 ... Nc6!
8.dxc6 b5 9.Qxb5 Ne7 is a dangerous attacking line.
For example, 10.Nc3 Rb8 1 l .Qc4 Be6 1 2.Qd3 ( 12.Qa4!?) Nxc6

13.e3 Nb4 14.Qe4 0-0! 1 5.exd4 Re8. Perhaps IO .. Bc2 is even better.
.
An example of this line, Trobat-Rausis, Andorra 1 990, went 10.e3

Rb8 1 1 .Qe2 (else Black captures on b2 with something) ()-0! 12.exd4
Nxc6 13.Qd 1 Re8 + 14.Bd3 Qxd4 and Black soon had a won en
dgame.
4. Nd7!
Creating a kind of Albin Counter Gambit in which the moves

Qb3xb7 and ... Bf5/...Nd7 have been inserted. Clearly, Black's moves
have been more useful than White's.
If White continues in Albin style, with 5.dxe5? ! d4 he quickly gets

a bad position (6.Nf3 Rb8 7.Qd5 Bb4 + 8.Nbd2 c5 ! ? as in Illustrative
Game 1 6).
5.Nc3
On 5.cxd5 Black maintains his initiative with 5 ... Bxb 1 6.Rxb 1 and
then 6 ... Rb8 and ... Bb4 + .
More conservative, at first examination, is 5.Nf3. But then 5 ... Rb8

6.Qxd5 Bb4 + is OK (7.Bd2? Ne7! and wins as in a 197 1 English
game, Webb-Sinclair). Better is 7.Nfd2 but following 7 ... Ne7 8.Qf3
exd4 Black can hardly complain.
7.Bf4
Probably better is 7.e4!? after which 7... Bxe4 allows 8.Nxc7 + and
9.Qxe4.
The tactical 7 ... Nc5 leads to all sorts of complications, such as

8.Nxc7 + Bxc7 9.Qc6 + Nd7 10.exf5 Ba5 + 1 1 .Kd 1 Ne7 12.03 0-0
13.Bf4 Qb6 with Black better, or 8.Qc6! Bd7 9.Nxc7 + Qxc7!
1 0.Qxa8 Ke7 1 1.Qd5 Nf6 ( Miles-Gobet, Geneva 1 986).
Best of all may be the simple 7 ...Bg6 which renews Black's ideas
of 8 ... Rb8 and 8 ... Ne7.
7... Bxf4
8.Nxf4 Ngffi
Here 8 ... c5 anchoring the pawn at d4 and gaining queen access to

the queenside, is inexact because it allows the White knight back to
d5 with threats of Qxa8 and Nc7 + . See I llustrative Game 17.
9.0-0-0
And now Goldin-Klaric, Palma de Mallorca 1 989 went 9 ...c5 1 0.3

Rb8 1 1 .Qa6 Qc7 12.g3 Qe5 when Black must be OK (Illustrative
Game 18).
ILLUSTRATIVE GAMES
( 1 6) Litinskaya-Rause, Kiev 1 984
l .d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.Qb3 e5
4.Qxb7 Nd7
5.dxe5? d4
6.Nt3 Rb8
7.Qd5 Bb4 +
8.Nbd2 c5!
9.e6
Otherwise 9 ... Ne7 traps the queen. The game now begins to look
like a rout.
9... fxe6
10.Qd6 Ngffi
l l.h3 Ne4!
12.Qa6 0-0
13.a3 Ba5!
14.b4
This is a semi-desperate but apparently sound bid to break open

the center and free White's pieces. Both 14.bxa5 and 1 4.Nxe4 Bxe4
15.Qxe6 + are threatened.
14 ... cxb4
15.Nxe4 Bxe4
16.Qxe6 + Kh8
1 7.Qxe4 Nc5!
18.Qe5
White is obviously lost on 1 8.Qc2 b3 + so he might a well allow

the knight into b3.
18 ... Nb3
19.axb4!? Bxb4 +
20.Kd l Nxal
2I.e4?! dxe3 +
22.Ke2 Qc8
It's over in seconds now.
23.fxe3 Qxc4 + 24.Kf2 Qxcl 25.Bd3 Qxh l 26.Kg3 Bel + White

Resigns
( 1 7) M i kh alevsky-Basin, U.S.S.R. 1 990
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.Qb3 e5
4.Qxb7 Nd7
5.Nc3 exd4
6.Nxd5 Bd6
7.Bf4 Bxf4
8.Nxf4 c5
9.Nd5 Rb8!
Black is willing to allow a discomforting check in order to retain

the great pawn at d4.
IO.Nc7 + Kf8
l l.Qxa7
Clearly l l .Qd5 Qxc7 12.Qxf5 Qa5 + and 13 ... Rxb2 is unaccept

able.
1 1... Ne7
12.Nb5 Nc6
13.Qa6 Rb6
14.Qa4 Nb4
The threats of 15 ... Nc2 + and 15 ... Ra6 are immediately decisive.
I S.Rcl Ra6
16.Qdl Rxa2
17.Qd2 Qa5
1 8.e4 Rxb2!
White resigns in view of 19.Qxb2 Nd3 + .
( 18) Goldin-Klaric, Palma de Mall orca 1 989
l.d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.Qb3 e5
4.Qxb7 Nd7
5.Nc3 exd4
6.Nxd5 Bd6
7.Bf4 Bxf4
8.Nxf4 Ngffi
9.0-0-0 c5
Black can now castle and quickly develop an attack with . Qa5. His
. .
queen maneuver in the game only helps White find a tactical device.
1 0.13 Rb8
l l.Qa6 Qc7?!
12.g3 QeS
White now manages to break the hammerlock on the center.

13.e4! dxe3
14.Qa3 0-0
15.Bd3 Rb4
16.Qc3!
There is safety both i n numbers and in endgames. Now 16 Qxc3?!

...
17.bxc3 is probably an unsound exchange sacrifice.
16... Bxd3
17.Rxd3 Ne4!?
Concerned that the e-pawn is being surrounded, Black offers to

play an endgame with a very active rook against two knights. The
threat of 1 8 Nf2 forces matters.
...
18.Qxe5 Nxe5
19.fxe4 Nxd3 +
20.Nxd3 Rxc4 +
21.Kdl Rd8
22.Ke2 Rc2 +
23.Kxe3 c4!
If all the queenside pawns are exchanged off, White has winning
chances. But the text gives Black, if anyone, the better chances.
24.Nf2 Rxb2
25.Nf3 Rxa2
26.Rcl Ra3 +
27.Ke2 c3
28.Rc2 ffi
29.Ndl ReS
30.Kd3 a5
31.Nxc3 a4
After this Black's progress is stopped and a draw is reached

through exhaustion of ideas.
32.Rc I Rb3 33.N d4 Rb4 34.Ral Ra8 35.Nc2 Rb.3 36.N d4 Rb4 37.N c2
Rb.3 38.N d4 Draw
76 CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH 3.cxd5
CHAPTER FIVE: White Dissolves The Center With

3.cxd5
This has become something of a main line of the Baltic Defense,

particularly with 5.Kxb 1 below.White gets the two bishop advantage
and the superior center -- but somehow can't seem to prove any
advantage of significance.
l.d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.cxd5 Bxb 1 !
It is essential for Black to avoid 3. . Qxd5 4.Nc3 which would cost

.
him a prohibitive amount of time and center control.
The natural move here, or course, is (a) 4.Rxbl but this is rarely
played.We will also examine two other possibilities -- (b) 4.Qa4 +
and then 4 ... c6 5.dxc6 as well as (c) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.Rxbl.
(a) 4.Rxbl
T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT n
The initiative that Black o btains with his next move turns out to be
lasting. He can then continue with ...Nc6 and ...0-0-0, which in many
calies will doom the d4-pawn.
4... Qxd5
Another benefit of 3...Bx b 1 is that the a2-pawn is hanging. Defend

ing it via 5. b3?! is no way to o btain an edge and might give Black the
upper hand after 5...e5.
IfWhite is going to gambit the pawn he should simply continue

5.Nt3 Qxa2 6.Qc2 followed by 7.e4. But here again Black is in no rush
to grab such a pawn. He can use his knights effectively with 5...Nc6!
and 6...Nf6, followed by ...Nxd4 or ...Ne4.
... . .
r.:&'
.... . .. . ...

. ..... . .
. fB'i
. .
-

<!!> ? ;.- <!!> <!!>
f$ u n.
a
5.a3
On 5.Qa4 + Black might try Minev's suggestion of 5... b5 6.Qa5 e5!

intending 7...Nc6.
However, the ea11iest way of equalizing against the check is 5...Nc6.

Then 6.Nt3 allows the key tactical idea in this variation: 6. ..e5! with
prospects such as 7.dxe5? B b4 + 8.Bd2 Qe4! and the threats to the
78 CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES T H E CENTER WITH 3.cxd5
rook and queen (9 ... Bxd2 + ) force 9.Qd 1 0-0-0 followed by

10... Bxd2 + and wins.
Better, after 5.Qa4 + Nc6 is 6.e3 and then 6 ... e5 7.b4 0-0 8.Nf3
exd4 9.Bb5 a in Alexandrov-Svidler, Alma Ata 199 1 (9 ... Nge7 10.0-
0 Kb8 l l .Rd 1 a6 1 2.Be2 Qe6 13.b5 ! with a winning attack).
If Black is going to accept such a sacrifice he should be prepared

to continue 9 ... dxe3 ! and then 10.Bxc6 exf2 + l l .Kxf2 Qxc6 when he
is at least temporarily two pawn. ahead in the endgame.
5... Nc6
6.Nf3
Here 6.e3 looks better because of the idea of 6 ... 0-0-0 7.Ne2 ! and
8.Nc3. If Black may has to defend with 7 ...Qh5 ! ? 8.Qc2 Qg6 a in one
recent game (see Illustrative Game 1 9), then 6.e3 must be consid
ered an improvement.
One possibility for Black is 6 ... e5 ! ? but even in the line above he
can do better with 7 ... Nf6 (instead of 7 ... Qh5) 8.Nc3 Qg5 ! a in
Crouch-Shirov.
6... 0-0-0
7.Qc2!
Not 7.e3 e5 when Black is already a bit better. Now Yermolinsky

Malaniuk, Rostov 1 975 went 8.Be2 exd4 9.exd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4 Qxd4
l l .Qc2 Nf6 and 1 2 ... Qe4 denied White adequate compensation.
7... Nxd4
8.Nxd4 Qxd4
9.g3
White has much better compensation than in the note to his

seventh move. Now the Russian player Fadeev used this variation
twice at Uzhgorod 1985. Both games went 9 ... e6 10.Bg2 Qc5 1 1 .Qa4
a6 and now Khuzman obtained reasonable chances with 12.0-0 Nf6
1 3.b4 Qc4 14.Be3. But Smirin got the worst of it after 12.Be3 Qb5
13.Qc2 Nf6 14.0-0 Qf5 15.Qc3 Nd5 .
(b) 4.Qa4 +
l.d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 +
The check rudely interrupts Black in the process of equalizing. At

one time it was thought that it wa 4.Qa4 + that refuted 2 ... Bf5.
Now 4 ... Nd7 5.Rb 1 Ngf6 has been suggested, by Nikolai Minev,
without further analysis. After 6.e3 Nxd5 7.Nf3 Black's pieces are not
a lively as in section (c) below.
Black can also try this idea with queens off the board: 4 ... Qd7
5.Qxd7 + Nxd7 6.Rxb 1 Ngf6. Clearly, Black will regain the d5-pawn
and achieve material equality.
However, White's light-squared bishop is not restricted in any way

and he can obtain an edge with 7.Nf3 Nb6 8.e3 Nbxd5 9.Be2 e6 10.0-
0 Be7 1 1 .Ne5 and 1 2.Bf3 as in Euwe-Tylor, Pistyan 1926. These
positions should be compared with variation (c) below in which
Black's queen offsets the power of the bishop.
4... c6!
This appears to develop Black's game and liquidates White's fine

d4-pawn for no reason. However, the exchange on c6 serves to free
the board for the appearance of White's excellent bishop pair -- one
of whose members may take up residence on b5.
For 5.Rxb 1 , see subvariation (c) below.
5... Nxc6
6.Rxbl
This appears to equalize, according to analysis by Alexey Shirov in

Informant 52. Surprisingly, 6 ... e5, which sets the transparent
7.dxe5?? Bb4 + trap, can get Black into hot water after 7.Bd2!
Once Black regains his pawn the position may resemble a bad
version of the Albin Counter Gambit. For example, 7 ... exd4 8.Nf3
Qd5 9.g3 Bc5 1 0.Bg2 Nge7 1 1 .(}-0 and now 1 1 ...0-0? 1 2.Ng5! Qd7
13.Nxh7! worked perfectly in a Soviet game, Vaulin-Fadeev,
Yevpatoria 1 985.
Black does better with 7 ... Qxd4 8.Qxd4 and now 8 ... Nxd4 9.e3!
favors the bishops, according to Shirov (9 ... Nc6 1 0.Bb5 Rc8 l l .Nf3
Bd6 12.Bc3 f6 13.Nd2 or 10 ... Bd6 1 1 .Bxc6 + ! bxc6 12.Nf3 Ne7 13.e4 ).
But 8 .. exd4 !?, an idea of Malaniu k's seems OK. Black will play
.
... Bc5-b6, securing his center pawn and queenside.
6... Qxd4!
Black gets the same kind of endgame as in the last note but with
... e7-e6 instead of ... e7-e5, which concedes too much light-square
terrain.
But the text leads to an endgame in which White, at least at first,

has the better chances. More in the free-wheeling spirit of the
opening is 6 ... Qd5 ! ? and then 7.Nf3 e5.
More testing is 7.Bd2 after which 7 ...e5?! 8.dxe5 0-0 9.Bc3 ! is

unsound, and so is 7 ...b5? ! 8.Qb3 Qe4 9.Rcl Nxd4 1 0.Qc3, but
7 ... Qe4! ? and probably 7 ... 0-0-0 aren't.
That leaves only 7.Bd2 Nf6 and now not 8.e3 e5 9.Ne2 with
advantage to White but 8 ... Ne4!? 9.Nf3 Nxd2 1 0.Nxd2 e5 l l .Qb5
Qd7 12.d5 Bb4 1 3.Rd l 0-0-0! ?.
7.Qxd4
Shirov gives 7.b4 e5 8.a3 as being unclear.
7... Nxd4
8.Nt3
After 8.e3 Black plays 8 ... Nc6 9.Bb5 Rc8 followed by ... Bd6 and
... Nge7. A quick draw was seen in Kishinev-Svidler, Copenhagen
1991 with 10.Bd2 a6 l l .Ba4 b5 12.Bd l e6 1 3.Rc l Bd6 and 14 ... Kd7.
8... Nc2 + !
White's initiative is too great after 8 .. Nxf3 + 9.exf3 or 8 Nc6 9.b4

. ...
followed by 1 O.e3 and 1 1 .b5.
9.Kd l Nb4
And according to Shirov, chances are equal ( 10.Bd2 e6 1 l .e3 a6).
(c) S.Rxbl
l.d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
S.Rxbl QxdS
6.Nf3
This reasonable move may be a slight inaccuracy because it gives

up the opportunity for Ne2-c3 ! .
Both moves may involve the sacrifice of the a-pawn. For example,
6.e3 Nd7 7.Ne2 Nb6 and now 8.Qb3 Qxb3 is harmless while 8.Qc2
Qxa2 9.N c3 Qe6 1 O.b4 offered White good play in a 1 982 Soviet game
(Illustrative Game 20).
6... Nd7
Now the game begins. Black appears to be threatening 7 ... Nb6

after which 8.Qc2 Qxa2 is now a somewhat dubious gambit because
there is no Nc3 and because 8.Qb3 Qxb3 is an equal endgame.
White's choices here include: 7.a3, 7.e3 and 7.Bd2.
(cl ) 7.a3
l.d4 dS
2.c4 Bf5
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
S.Rxbl cxdS
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.a3
A modest move that solves the ... Qxa2 problem once and for all.
7... Ngffi
8.e3
After 8.Qc2 Black has enough time to play 8... e5! and then 9.e3 e4 !
(not 9 ... exd4 I O.Bc4 ). See Illustrative Game 22, won by Rausis.
8... e6
Another Rausis game went 8 ... Qe4 9.Ra 1 e5 and then 1 0.Bd2 N c5 !
with a strong attack ( l l .Qd 1 exd4 1 2.Nxd4 0-0-0 13.f3 Qe5).
9.8e2
More enterprising is 9.Qc2 and I O.Bc4 or IO.Bd3, and castling. But

White must be aware of another, quite dangerous Black strategy. If
White castles too quickly he invites a bayonet-like attack on the
g-pawn.
For example, 9.Qc2 Bd6 I O.Bd3 Qh5 !? and now 1 1.0-0? allows
l l ...g5 ! . The threat of 12 ... g4 is powerful and in Sakayev- Akopian,
Sochi 1 986, White decided to look for compensation with 1 2.e4 g4
13.Ne5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Bxe5 but never achieved any.
9... a5
This restrains White on the queenside (no b2-b4-b5) and takes

away a major enemy plan. A quite reasonable alternative is 9 ... Bd6
and I O ... e5 or 1 0... Qh5.
10.0-0 Bd6
And with ... e6-e5 corning up, Black should have a comfortable
rniddlegame. See Illustrative Game 2 1 .
(c2) 7.e3
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxbl Qxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.e3
We should take note of 7.b4 Ngf6 8.e3 which transposes into our
main line below.
7 Ngffi
Not 7 ... e5? 8.Bc4 which favors White. But 7 ... Nb6 forces either a
more questionable pawn sac (8.Qc2 Qxa2) or 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 e6
with unclear chances.
I n fact, 9.axb3 was the final move ofTimoshenko-Malaniuk, Lvov

1988 -- since the players immediately agreed to a draw.
8.b4 e6
9.Qc2
Now Hofstein-Fadeev, U.S.S.R. 1984 went 9 .. a5! 10.Bc4 Qe4

.
1 1 .Bd3 Qg4 and White must sacrifice a pawn. After 1 2.0-0 axb4
13.Bd2 there were chances for both sides for Black seems to be doing
quite well.
(c3) 7.Bd2
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxbl Qxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.Bd2
This is the best White can do with this bishop because 7.Bf4? is a
blunder, hanging a piece to 7 ... Qf5 ! . Almost unexplored is 7.g3 after
which 7 ... Nb6 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 e6 leads to an even game in
Christiansen-Senador, Manila 1992 ( 10.Bd2 Nf6 1 1 .Bg2 Be7 12.0-0
0- 0 13.Ra 1 Nfd5 14.Rfcl Bb4 ! ).
7... Ngffi
Here 7 ... Nb6 was unavailing because of 8.Qa5 ! offering to enter

an ending slightly favorable to the bishops (although one can be
eliminated by 8 ... Nc4 9.Qxd5 cxd..'i 10.e3 Nxd2). Worth investigating
is 7 ... Qe4! ? with the idea of 8 ... e5.
8.e3 e6
Not 8 ... e5? because of 9.Bc4 Qd6 1 0.Qb3 or 9 ... Qe4? 1 0.Bxf7 + .
In other words, Black has to be very careful about further loosening
of the light-colored squares.
9.Bc4
Not 9.Bd3? because of 9 ... Nc5 ! A 1 98 1 Malaniuk game went 9.Qc2

Ne4 1 0.Bc4 Qf5 1 1 .Bd3 Ndf6 12.0-0 Bd6 but it was clear that White
had very little from the opening. After 13.Be 1 Qd5 14.Rd1 a5 15.Khl
Bb4 16.Ne5 Nd6 1 7.Bc3 0-0 1 8.a3 Bxc3 19.bxc3 Nc8 Black won a nice
game.
9... QfS
I O.Qdl
Otherwise, 1 0 ... b5 or IO . . Qxb 1 + ends the game.

.
10... Bd5
1 1 .0-0 0-0
Time to take stock. White seems to have the superior center and
holds the two bishops. But his only clear plans are the advance of the
e-pawn -- a neat trick here -- or of the b-pawn. As long as Black
controls d5 and e4 he should be OK. And his future includes ... e6-
e5-e4.
With 12.Bc3 Ne4 13.Bd3 Qd5 White achieves nothing. A better

try is 12.Re 1 playing for 1 3.e4! Nxe4 14.Bd3 winning material
(14 . Nxf2 15.Bxf5 Nxd l 1 6.Bd3 traps the d l -knight). However,

. .
1 2 ... Ne4 13.Bd3 Qd5 keeps control. See Illustrative Game 24.
ILLU STRATIVE GAMES
( 1 9 ) Supatashvili-Lyegky, Leningrad 1 989
l.d4 d5
2.c4 815
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Rxbl Qxd5
5.a3 Nc6
6.e3 0-0-0
7.Ne2! Qh5
8. Qc2 Qg6
This forces an endgame in which Black's king position is safe but

he lacks th he normal cou nterplay in light-colored squares.
9.Qxg6 hxg6
1 0.b4 Nffi
l l .b5?! NbS
12.Nc3 Nbd7
13.Bc4 e6
14.a4 Nb6
15.Be2 Nbd5
Just in time . Since Black can retake now on d5 with a pawn -
improving his pawn structure sufficiently -- he is nearly equal.

16.Nxd5 exdS
1 7.g3 Bd6
18.0-0 Ne4
19.Rb3 fS!
Suddenly White has no obvious targets and it is Black -- with

g6-g5-g4 -- who has the threats.
20.13 Nffi
2l.Bd3 Rh3
22.Rf2 Rdh8
23.Rg2 Kd7!
Preparing to protect the f5 pawn with his king so he can push the
g-pawn.
24.a5 Ke6
25.a6 b6
26.Ba3! gS
27.Bxd6 cxd6!
After 27 ... Kxd6 28.Rc3 and 29.Rc6 + , White stands well.
28.Rc3 g4 29.f4 g6 30.Rc7 R8h7 Draw

(20) Ohotnik-Malaniuk, Yalta 1 982
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxb1
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxb1 Qxd5
6.e3 Nd7
7.Ne2 Nb6
8.Qc2! Qxa2
9.Nc3 Qe6
10.b4
Now, for example, 10 ... a6 (to stop 1 1 .b5 ) 1 1 .Ne4 and 1 2.Nc5 or just
l l .Be2 followed by 1 2.0-0, 13.Rd 1 and 14.Bf3 offer obvious compen-
sation.
10... Nffi
l l .b5 Qd7
12.bxc6 bxc6
13.Na4 Nxa4
14.Qxa4 Ne4!
Threatens the fork at c3 and in so doing, denies White the oppor

tunity of 1 5.Ba6 and 16.Rb7.
15.Rb6! ReS
16.Ra6 e6
17.Bc4 Rc7
18.0-0
The a-pawn is just weak enough to provide compensation but just

strong enough to be won only at the cost of a drawish liquidation.
THE BALTIC DEFENSE TO THE QUEEN 'S GAMBIT 91
18... Be7
19.Qc2 Nf6
20.Bb2 0-0
21.e4 Rb8
22.Bc3 Bb4!
23.Bal Rb6
24.Rdl Rxa6
25.Bxa6 Bf8
26.Bc3 Qe8
27.Ba5 Rd7
28.e5 Nd5
29.Qxc6
White regains the pawn but after Black's next move he finds it hard
to defend d his d-pawn and make progress at the same time.
29... Rd8
30.Qxe8 Rxe8
31 .Rbl Bb4!
32.Bb5
Or 32.Bxb4 Rb8 and 32.RxlJ4 Nxb4 33.Bxb4 Rb8 34.Bc3 Rb l +

35.Bfl Rb2 and the a-pawn is active enough for Black.
32... Rb8
33.Bc6 Bd6!
34.Rxb8 + Bxb8
35.Kfl Bc7!
Although this exchanges White's bad bishop, it is sufficient to

draw. White's king has no point of entry now.
36.Bxc7 Nxc7 37.Ke2 Kf8 38.Kd3 Ke7 39.Kc4 g5 40.g3 h6 41 .f4 gxf4
Draw
(2 1 ) Remlinger-Soltis, Chicago 1 992
l .d4 d5
2.c4 81'5
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxb1 Qxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.a3 Ngffi
8.e3 e6
9.Be2 a5
10.0-0 Bd6
1 l.N d2
This stops the freeing l l ...e5?? because of 1 2.Bc4.
1 1... Bc7
12.Bf3 Qd6
13.g3 0-0
14.Qc2 Rfe8
1 5.Nc4 Qe7
1 6.e4 b5!?
T H E BALTIC DEFENSE TO T H E QUEEN'S GAMBIT 93
17.Ne3 Bb6
18.e5 Nd5
19.Qxc6 Bxd4
20.Nxd5 exd5
2l.Qxb5 Nxe5
22.Bxd5 Rab8
23.Qxa5 Qd7
24.8g2 Nd3
Now the attack on f2 appears overwhelming (25.Qd2 Rb3!

26.Qxd3? Bxf2 + ) .
25.Be3! Bxe3
26.fxe3 Rxe3
27.Rbdl Re2
28.Bd5! Qh3!
A more or less forced piece sacrifice that ensures a perpetual check

-- but no more.
29.Rxf7! Qxh2 +
30.Kfl Kh8
31.Rxd3! Rbe8
32.Rd l Qh3 +
33.Kgl Qxg3 +
34.Kfl Qh3 +
35.Kgl Qg4 +
36.Kfl R2e3!
Black had to find a dark square to attack and it is g1 (via 37 ... Rg2
and 33 Rg 1 + )
. . . .
37.Qd2 Rg3 38.Kf2 Qh439.Rh l ! Rh3 + 40.Kgl Rei + 41.Rf1 Rxfl +

Draw
(22) Peshina-Rausis, Daugavpils 1 990
l .d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxbl Qxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.a3 Ngffi
8.Qc2 e5
White's loss of time has cost him the chance to play 9 Bc4. Now
9.dxe5 Nxe5 1 0.Nxe5 Qxe5 l l .Bd2 can be safely met by l l . . Qe4 or.
1 1 ... Ne4.
9.e3 e4
10.Nd2 Be7
l l .g3 0-0!
12.Bc4 Qf5
13.13 Qh5
14.fxe4 Ng4
15.Nb3 Nxe3!
16.Bxe3 Qf3
Now to preserve the extra piece White must try
1 7.Kd2 Nffi
18.Rbel b5!
19.Be2 Nxe4 +
20.Kd3 QfS
21.Rhfl Qg6
22.Rf4 Rae8
23.Rxe4 Bb4!
This wi ns back at least a rook.
24.Bf3 Bxel 25.Qe2 f5 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.Qxel f4 + 28.Kd2 Rxe3

29.Qxe3 White forfeited
The next two games should be compared with one another because
of their similar development and because of the outcome of the
Ne5 ! ? sacrifices.
96 CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH J.cxdS
(23) Knaak-Pfretzschner, East German Championship 1 984
l .d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxbl Qxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.e3 e6
8.Bd2 Ngffi
9.Qc2 Ne4
I O.Bc4 Qf5
l l.Bd3 Ndf6
Black will maintain the e4 outpost at all costs.
12.0-0 Bd6
13.Ne5! Bxe5
14.dxe5 Qxe5
15.f4 Qd6
16.Bel
White has reasonable compen. ation in the form of dark-squared

bishop and the prospects of breaking the e4 outpost.
16... Nc5
17.Rdl Nxd3
18.Rxd3 Qe7
If the queen goes to c7 then White would put the bishop on c3. But
now:
19.Bh4! Rd8
20.Rb3 Rd7
21.e4 Qd6
22.e5 Qd4 +
23.Khl ?
An error which should allow Black to seize the edge with 23 ... Ne4!.
Correct was 23.Bf2 Qe4 24.Qc l !, retaining compensation.
23... Nd5?
24.Rxb7! Nb4
Now Black is quite lost (24... Rxb7 25.Qc6 + Rd7 26.Qc8 + ).
25.Rb8 + Rd8
26.Qc3! Black Resigns
Because of 26 ... Qxc3 27.Rxd8 mate.
(24) Taylor-Soltis, Chicago 1 992
l .d4 d5
2.c4 BfS
3.cxd5 Bxbl
4.Qa4 + c6
5.Rxbl Qxd5
98 CHAPTER FIVE: WH ITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH 3.cxd5
6.Nf3 Nd7
7.Bd2 Ngffi
8.e3 e6
9.Bc4 QfS
10.Qd1 Bd6
1 1 .0-0 0-0
12.Re1 Ne4
13.Bd3 Qd5
14.Bcl ?!
White's faith in the two bishops is justified if Black opens the game
prematu rely ( 14 ...Ngf6 1 5 .Qc2 c5 ? 1 6.dxc5 Bxc5 1 7.Bc4 and 1 8.b4).
14... Ndffi
15.Qc2 Rfc8!
1 6.Ne5!?
Offering a plan as in the previous game. Alternatives such as 1 6.b4

a5 or 1 6.Nd2 Nxf2 ! were certainly unattractive.
16... Bxe5
1 7.dxe5 Rd8
1 8.exffi Qxd3
1 9.Qxd3 Rxd3
20.fxg7 Rad8
2l.Kfl fS!
Black must make the remaining bishop inferior to the knight. His
initiative is bound to run out of energy (2 1 ...Nd2ch 22.Bxd2 Rxd2
23.Re2) so Black must find a different way to win.
22.Ke2 Kxg7
23.13 Nffi
24.b3 Kf7
25.Rb2 e5
26.Rd2 Rxd2 +
27.Bxd2 Ke6
28.Rcl Rg8
29.g3?
An unlikely error, which allows Black to establish a hold on e4.
29... hS
30.Rc4 e4!
31 .Bel Rd8
32.fxe4 Nxe4
33.h3 c5
34.Ra4?! a6
35.g4 hxg4
36.hxg4 Rh8
37.gxf5 + Kxf5
38.Rc4 bS
39.Rc2 Rhl
Preparing to run White out of moves (40...Kg4 4 1 .Kd3 Kf3).
40.Ba5 Rh2 +
4 1 .Kd3 Nt2 +
1 00 CHAPTER FIVE: WHITE DISSOLVES THE CENTER WITH 3.cxd5
42.Ke2
Or 42.Kc3 Nd 1 + 43.Kd3 c4 + ! 44.bxc4 bxc4 + 45.Rxc4 Nb2 + .
42... Ng4 +
43.Kd3 Ne5 +
44.Kc3 b4 +
White Resigns
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction . . . . . ............................................................ ......... 3

Galliamova-lvanchuk vs. Levi tina, Manila 1 992 ............. 4
Move Orders ......................................................... .............. 6
(a) l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5
(b) l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5
(c) l .Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5
Chapter One ............... ....................... ................... . .......... 1 1
. . . .
White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly

l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3
(a) 4 ... c6 .................. . . ................... . . . . . . . . ...... ............ ........... 1 2
(b) 4 . . .Nc6 . . . . ............................ . . . . . . . . . ................................. 1 7
Illustrative Games ............................... . . . . ..... ...................... 1 9
( 1 ) Levitiana-Gaprindashvilli, Lvov 1 983 ...................... 1 9
(2) Salo-Grau, Stockholm Olympiade 1 937 .................... 22
(3) Basescu-Soltis, New York 199 1 .......................... ......... 24
(4) Ornstein-Kauppala, Jarvenpas 1985 .......................... 27
(5) G. Garcia-Larsen, Linares 1 98 1 ....... .......................... 28
(6) Flohr-Mikena", Soviet Ch. 1 95 1 . . . . . . ........... ............... 30
(7) Shipman-Soltis, New York 1991 ............................... 33
(8) Andersson-Kovacevic, Bugojno 1984 ........................ 35
Chapter Two ............................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ........................ 38
2.Nf3 : Main Line
l .d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Qb3 ! Nc6
(a) Locking the center with 5.c5 ..................................... 40
(b) Retaining Options with 5.Bd2 . . . . . . . . . ........................... 44
Illustrative Games ...................... ........................................ 46
(9) Fine-Grau, Stockholm Olympiade 1 937 ......... ......... 46
( 1 0) Piket-Bareev, Dortmund 1 992 . . . . . .......... ................... 48
( 1 1 ) Anikaev-Vaganian, Moscow 1982 .......... ............. . . . . . . 50
( 12) H . Olafsson-Knezevic, Neskaupstad 1984 ................. 52
Chapter Three .............. . . ..................................................... 54
White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3
l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.Nc3 e6!
Illustrative Games . . . . . . . . . ................ ...................... ............... 58
( 13) Shakins-Rause, Latvian Team Ch. 1985 ................... 58
( 14) Schneider-M alaniuk, Yalta 1982 .............. ................. 60
( 1 5 ) Ree-Sahovic, Amsterdam 1 979 . . ....................... ........ 62
Chapter Four . . . . . .............. .................. ...... ............................ 66
The Grau Gambit
l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.Qb3 e5!
Illustrative Games ...... ......... .................... .................. ........ 70
( 1 6) Litinskaya-Rause, Kiev 1984 . . .. ...... ........................... 70
( 17) Mikhalevsky-Bain, U.S.S.R. 1990 . . ........................ 7 1
( 18) Goldin-Klaric, Palma de M allorca 1989 .................. 73
Chapter Five ..................................... ......................... ........... 76
White dissolves the center with 3.cxd5 l .d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.cxc5
Bxb l !
(a) 4.Rxb 1 76
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.dxc6 ...................................................... 79

(c) 4.Qa4 + c6 5.Rxb 1 ...................................... ................ 82
Illustrative Games . . . . . . . . . ....................... .......... ....... ............. 88
( 19) Supatashvili-Lyegky, Leningrad 1984 ...................... 88
(20) Ohotnik-Malantiuk, Yalta 1982 ................................ 90
(2 1 ) Remli nger-Soltis, Chicago 1992 ........... .................... 92
(22) Peshina-Rausis, Daugavpils 1990 ............................. 94
(23 ) Knaak-Pfretzschner, East German Ch. 1 989 .......... 96
(24) Taylor-Soltis, Chicago 1992 ...................................... 97
NOTES

Baltic Defense To The Queen Gambit PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Baltic Defense To The Queen Gambit PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

::liOLIOT

Chess Digest, Inc

All rights reserved under Pan American and International Copy

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval

AUTHOR: Andrew Soltis

There is another school of thought entirely. This school, which has

While there have been a number of others who have contributed

we feel justified in giving this overlooked variation a name -- the

And we believe it has been unjustifiable overlooked. (Try and find

Gall iamova-lvanchuk vs. Levitina, Manila 1 992

Played by Wilhelm Steinitz in the first official World Champion

The Black b-pawn is often en prise for several moves of this

Now 1 0.Qb7 is met by 10 ... Rxa3! and 1 1 ...Nc2 + . Generally, when

Or 11.exd3 Qxe7 with check and 12 ...Rxa7.

And Black had a substantial advantage (although later errors led

(a) l .d4 d5 2.c4 BfS

(b) l .d4 d5 2.N f3 BfS

(c) I .N f3 d5 2.d4 BfS

The first order appears in the games of dedicated Baltic Defenders

A third possibility arises when an opponent starts the game with

Voorema-Keres, Tallinn 1971

White's fourth and fifth moves are the essence of conservatism -

Suddenly White has made a major decision. He will advance his

Now White realizes that the intended preservation of his pawn

We'll be examining the specific lines of the Baltic Defense in this

Chapter One: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly

Chapter Two: 2.Nf3, Main Line

Chapter Three: White plays 2.c4 and 3.Nc3.

Chapter Four: The Grau Gambit, 2.c4 Bf5 3.Qb3 !?

Chapter Five: White dissolves the center with 3.cxd5

CHAPTER ONE: White Plays 2.Nf3 -- But Quietly

If White avoids the Queen's Gambit --with developing moves such

Gaprindahvili did -- the position can remain independent with

There are many non-threatening methods for White to complete

Without this move the position declines into a semi-normal Slav

Rarely seen is 5 ... Qc8, probably because of 6.Bf4 and 7.Rc 1 ,

On 6 ... Qxb3 7.axb3 White's b-pawn is achi ng to run forward. How

N evenheless, you may very well fi nd yourself facing 7 .g3 N d7 8.Bf4

This catches the bishop. Normally such an exchange only helps

Tukamakov recommended 8 ... Bg6 but 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.e4! helps

For 8 ... Nf6 8.Nxf5 exf5 see Illustrative Game 6.

To fortify his pawn structure, Black tried 1 1 ... g6 1 2.0-0 Bg7 in

Unless Black can improve his play significantly -- such a with

native system, 4 ... Nc6!?

(b) 4 ... Nc6

Black can afford simple developing moves in the absence of d irect

We are following Andersson-Kovacevic. Bugojno 1984, in which

( 1 ) Leviti na-Gaprindashvili, Lvov 1 983

Against such an innocuous move as 4.e3, Black might have just

One of the problems of the Baltic Defen.'''e -- a" with many

Now protecting the weak f5 and d4 pawns is difficult ( 1 8.Nf3 Nxf5)

Alexey Yermolinsky, then second to Levitina, recommended

Black's whole conception of the last several moves was based on

White's position was so good that he could maneuver and repeat

Black had better as shown in the notes.

(2) Salo-Grau, Stockholm (Olympiad ) 1 937

And si nce 24.Rf2 Bg3 costs the Exchange, White struggled on

32.Bd3 hS 33.Bc4 g4 34.f4 gxh3 + 35.Kxh3 RgS 36.Rg2 Rg4 37.Be2

(3) Basescu-Soltis, New York 1 99 1

Black actually has a slight edge in pawn structure, thanks to 6.Qxb6,

Now the a-pawn is doomed.

( 4) Ornste in-Kauppala, Jarve npaa 1 985

In view of 15 ... Nxe5 1 6.Bxe5 0-0 17.Bc4 and b2-b4-b5 touchdown.