Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
stonewall
EVERYMAN CHESS
Reprinted 2002
The right of Jacob Aagaard to be identified as the author of this work has been as
serted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480,
246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480.
All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Gloucester Man
sions, 140A Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H 8HD
tel: 020 7539 7600 fax: 020 7379 4060
email: chess@everymanbooks.com
website: www.everymanbooks.com
The Everyman Chess Opening Guides were designed and developed by First Rank
Publishing.
Bibliography 4
Preface 5
Introduction 7
1 White Plays 7 b3 57
2 White Plays 7 i.£4 78
3 White's 7th Move Alternatives; 7 lDbd2, 7 lDeS, 7 'i'c2 97
Other Variations
4 5 lDh3 113
5 Other Stonewalls 132
6 White Plays an Early e2-e3 143
Books
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings Volume A (third edition), Alexander
Matanovic (Sahovski Informator 1997)
Positional Play, Mark Dvoretsky (Batsford 1994)
Periodicals
In/ormators 1-78
New in Chess yearbooks 1-56
Chessbase Magazine
Websites
The Week in Chess
PREFACE I
Tbis is my third chess book for Everyman structured, and how I believe the reader can
and my third book about opening theory. most improve his experiences with the
The two first books, Easy Guide to the Panov Stonewall. I am a simple player wbo remem
Botvinnik Attack and Easy Guide to theSicilian bers theory only if it makes sense - I know I
Sveshnikov, were produced in co-operation am not the only one. In fact I remember
with Gambit, and I would like to thank Gra Nigel Short writing something similar. I have
ham Burgess and Murray Chandler for giving around fifteen years of experience of helping
me the opportunity to enter the world of friends and pupils in their quest for im
chess books. provement and, thus far, my conclusion is
I would also like to thank Byron Jacobs that the actual opening phase is not very
for suggesting the title of this book to me. I important, at least not when knowledge of
admit that, initially, I did not know very the opening ends with tbe fifteenth move -
much about the Stonewall and was rather after which one is left witb little or no under
apprehensive about writing a book about it, standing of the position. For tbis reason I
but then I remembered hQw little I knew of have devoted a considerable part of this
tbe Panov and tbe Svesbnikov before begin book to non-theoretical material, with tbe
ning those books, despite the fact that they intention of illustrating the typical themes,
were in my repertoire ... plans and counter-plans available to both
Compared to my previous books this is sides in the Stonewall complex.
less loaded with theory and in all senses a I compare my comprehension of tbe
more enjoyable read, and this bas been my Stonewall to my understanding of the
main objective. I have endeavoured to work Nimzo-Indian, which I have played on and
within the format of the series in which it is off for the last five years. These are openings
part while simultaneously adding my own which do not require learning many moves
flavour. However, ultimately, I wanted to since there is no early direct contact. More
write a book that is fun to read as well as important than remembering fifteen moves is
enabling the reader to learn about the Stone to be aware of the nature of tbe position
wall. changing when, for example, White plays b2-
As for tbe practical use of this book I b3 a move before he usually would. Or what
would like to say something about how it is about a2-a4 in a position where ..i.b2 is al-
5
Du tch S to n e w all
most always played? Many players could very while others are also beneficial in that their
well play something like this, believing it to presence is required to make a particular
be theory, only to later find that it is new and point or observation.
a result of mixing up the positions. It has been an enjoyable learning experi
Consequently I would like to suggest that ence working on this book and I hope that,
the reader will gain the most from this book in the future, I will have the opportunity to
by carefully reading through it and playing write more like it. Currently I am working on
through all the games, as would be the idea a book on the Kalashnikov Sicilian with my
with a collection of Ulf Andersson's games, friend Jan Pinski. It will be more traditional
for instance (a collection that would include and strict in its structure, but perhaps there
many interesting draws...). If you plan to play will be some pages on which I can express
only the Stonewall with Black and hope to my need for explaining ideas and plans rather
have another fifty years with the King's than just giving games and references. I be
Gambit with White, then do not skip the lieve this is the type of book that people en
parts of the book where White's plans are joy the most. And for me chess is about fun,
explained! One of the main reasons why and nothing else.
these are featured is to make Stonewall en I would like to thank some friends for
thusiasts aware of what to look out for and supporting me while I worked on the book
what to try to prevent. during my holidays, providing me with a
For the material in this book I have used place to stay and not complaining when I
annotations by some of the players them chose to investigate the consequences of
selves, either from Inf ormator or Chessbase; exchanging a knight for a bishop rather than
I have taken a critical view of their analyses go to the pub! These are Ivo Timmermans,
and found some improvements. Some of the Helen Haythomwhite and Donald Holmes. I
games are heavily annotated while others are would also like to thank my good friends
not. Normally I would like to go into all of Oliver Yue and Robin Waltons for their sup
the games in detail, but it is simply not possi port and friendship. Finally I would like to
ble with so many games to cover and with thank Coach for helping me understand my
limited space. Nonetheless I have tried to self better as both a player and a person, and
annotate the best of the games in more de for reading through parts of the manuscript
tail, and in this way the games that are most with not too many suggestions of improve
fun and instructive can be studied deeper, ment. Thank you all!
Jacob Aagaard,
Nottingham, Glasgow, Hoogoven and Bollington, January 2001.
6
INTRODUCTION I
7
Du tch S t o n e wall
sequence from which Black will emerge in 32 @e3 prolongs the game.
control. 29 . . . l:th1+ 301$Jf2 lLlg4+ 0-1
suggested. For example 13 cxd5 cxd5 14 'i!'xfS i..xf5 24 J:lcl d4 is hopeless) 23...dxe4
t/Jxd5 exd5 15 t/Jxd7 �xd7 16 'i!'c7 'tlte8 17 24 t/Jxe4 l:lad8 must be better for Black the
�xd6 l:lc8 18 �xd5+ �h8 and Black wins a advantage is less clear than in the game.
piece for a few pawns and retains an active 21 . . . J:!.xf4!
position with good attacking prospects. Removing a major defender.
1 3 h4? 22 gxf4 'WWg 3 23 1Uxe4
This weakens the whole kingside pawn. 23 cxd5 serves only to hasten the end in
structure. Instead White should strike in the view of 23... ..ltc5 24 t/Jxe4 ..lth3+ 25 l:i.xh3
centre with 13 f3!, e.g. 13... t/Jh3+ 14 �xh3 'i!'gl mate.
'i!'xh3 15 e4 fxe4 16 fxe4 �b4 17 t/Jbl! t/Jf6 23 . . . dxe4 24 i::!xd7 .11.c 5!
18 t/Jd3 i.. e 7 19 t/Jf2 with a space advantage. Black should be careful here as 24...e3??
1 3 ... 1Ue4 1 4 .\tf3 'iWe8 1 5 1Uxd7 .11.xd7 25 l:!.xg7+! turns the tables.
16 \t>g2 .ltb4! 25 e3 'iWxf3+
A strong move that forces White to make Black now picks up the white rook and
an important concession. secures a decisive lead in the ending.
17 .11.xe4?! 26 'ilff2 'ilfxh 1 + 27 We2 'iWh3 28 f5 'il!'g4+
Now Black gets the f-file and his light 29 \t>d2 J:!.f8 30 e6!?
squared bishop tastes freedom, so 17 t/Jbl is A crafty swindle attempt.
more circumspect.
1 7 . . . fxe4 1 8 J:!.h 1 'iWh5!
Causing White another headache in view
of the threatened 19...i..xc3 20 ifxc3 't\txe2.
1 9 f3 'ii'g 6
19 ...e5 has been suggested as more accu
rate, but White has his resources too, as the
following line suggests: 20 dxe5 'ifg6 2 1
'tltcl! (21 �fl �xf4 leads t o the game)
2 1...�xf4 (21...�xc3 22 h5!) 22 h5 'tltgS 23
t/JxdS! cxd5 24 'ii' xf4 and White comes out
on top.
20 Wf1 e5 21 dxe5?
30 . . .'iWxf5
Not 30 ...�xfS?? 31 l:!.d8+ i..f8 32 'ii'xf5!
'tltxfS 33 e7 and Black must be satisfied with
perpetual check.
31 1Wxf5 l:!.xf5 32 l:ixb7 l:!.f2+ 33 We1
J:!.f6 34 b4 .11.xe3 3 5 \t>e2 .ltg1 36 e7 Wf7
37 e8'iW + �xe8 38 l::.x g7 J:!.96 39 J:!.xh7
.itd4 40 c5 J:!.g2 + 41 Wf1 .!:i:f2+ 42 We1
e3 0-1 .
10
Introduction
over the course of a year whereas now a 17 e4? dxe4! 18 lixe4 tllf6 helps Black to
game is available the same day it is played, so win the d5-square and develop his initiative.
developments in opening theory have differ 17 . . fxg3 1 8 1Ux g 3
.
ent implications today. The following game 18 hxg3 "ifg5 19 e4 transposes to the next
was played six years later but, basically, little note.
had changed. Again Black pins his hopes on 1 8 . . .'t'Hh4 1 9 lt:lf1
a solid structure in the centre and the rapid White achieves nothing with the pawn
development of an attack on the kingside. sacrifice 19 e4 .txg3 20 hxg3 "ii'xg3 21 exdS
since Black simply continues his develop
Flohr-Botvinnik ment with 2t...8f6 22 dxc6 bxc6 with ad
Moscow 1 933 vantage.
1 9 ...lt:lf6 20 J:!.e2
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g 3 il:lf6 4 .ltg2 .lte7 5 White is cramped but trying to free him
1Uc3 d5 6 1Uf3 c6 7 0-0 0-0 8 b3 't'He8 9 self too hastily is suicidal, e.g. 20 e4? dxe4 21
.ltb2 li:Jbd7 1 0 'iWd3 'iWh5 1 1 cxd5 exd5 fxe4 tllg4 22 h3 (22 eS l:lxfl +!) 22. lllf2 23
..
1 2 . . .lt:le4! 1 3 f3
13 f4 tllxd2! 14 'tltxd2 tllf6 leaves White's
knight too far from e5, although the text
allows Black to create a powerful initiative.
1 3 ... 1Uxc3
Now it is the d2-knight that has no route
to eS!.
1 4 .ltxc3 f4! 26. . . hxg3! 27 .11.xg4 gxf2+
The weakness of the dark squares around White is outnumbered.
White's will soon tell. 28 \t>g2 li:Jxg4 29 h3 lt:lf6 30 wxf2 lt:le4�
1 5 .!:i:fel .lld6 16 lt:lfl 6if7 1 7 e3 0-1
1;
D ut c h S t o n e wall
White resigned as there is no reason to in Black misses his chance. White's idea is to
vestigate 31 \t>g2 .ltxh3+. meet 16... .txd4! with 17 12Jb4 �f6 18 12Jxc6.
However this is fine for Black after
Capablanca-Botvinnik 18 ... .txf2+! 19 �xf2 �xc6 20 .ltxdS (20
Moscow 1 936 l:lxdS .lte6 does not trouble Black) 20...�cS+
21 e3 12Jxe3 22 �xcS ILlxdl+ 23 \t>el bxcS
1 1Zlt3 f5 2 g3 lt:lt6 3 .li.g2 e6 4 c4 ile7 5 24 .ltxa8 f4 25 gxf4 .ltg4 when, if anyone,
0-0 0-0 6 d4 d5 7 lt:lc3 c6 8 'iWb3 \t>h8 9 Black is better.
lt:le5 lt:lbd7 1 0 lt:lxd7 1 7 e3 lbd6
White is forced to make this trade as redi Retreating the knight (to a decent outpost)
recting his knight with 10 12'ld3? leaves the in his own time.
d4-pawn vulnerable after 10... dxc4 11 �xc4 1 8 a4 a5 1 9 b3 i::!e 8 20 ila3 1Zle4?
12Jb6. This seems to be a mistake as the knight
10 ...lt:lxd7 11 l:id 1 lt:lb6! achieves nothing on gS. 20...12Jf7 looks more
Highlighting the drawback of White's set appropriate.
up. Now he is forced to make yet another 21 t3 li:Jg5 22 li:Je5 l:!.c8
unfavourable exchange. 22 ... .txeS 23 dxeS l:txe5 24 f4 forks eS
1 2 cxd5 exd5 1 3 lt:la4 /Zlc4 14 lt:lc5 b6? and gS.
As is often the case this 'knee-jerk' reac 23 J:!.acl \t>g8 24 'iWd3 lt:lt7 25 f4
tion creates an unnecessary weakness on the White leads thanks to his firm grip on the
queenside. The light-squared bishop is not centre.
necessarily best placed on b7 in positions 25 ... ile7 26 Yl..xe7 '¥11.xe7 27 J:!.c3
where White has already exchanged on dS. 27 'it'a6 �b8!.
Black has a fine game after 14 ...12Jd6 15 .ltf4 27 . . . lt:lxe5 28 dxe5
l:'W. Black has an ostensibly fine position but if
1 5 lbd3 ilt6 16 't'Nc2?! he wants to free himself he has to do so with
Freeing the b2-pawn so as to evict the ... b6-b5. This must be the reasoning behind
knight. 16 e3 aS!? 17 �c2 a4 is roughly even, the following moves from Botvinnik, but in
but White had another way of vacating b3, retrospect Black should have stuck to passive
namely 16 �c3!, with the tactical justification defence.
16... cS 17 12Jf4! .ltxd4 18 �c2 12'ld6 19 e3 28 . .. 'il!'b4 29 ,;;idcl
.lteS 20 12Jxd5 and White is slightly better. Another possibility was to go directly into
the endgame with 29 �d4!? l':lb8 30 '1Wxb4
axb4 31 l:tc2 b5 32 axb5 l:i.xb5 331:!.al with a
substantial advantage to White due to his
superior rooks and Black's numerous weak
nesses.
29 . . .J:!.b8 30 'iWd4! b5 31 J:!.al !
Now the aS-pawn is weak and the rook
which was dreaming of greatness on the b
file will have to return to a8.
31 . ..J:!.a8
Taking on d4 permanently fixes the pawn
structure to White's advantage.
32 axb5 't'kxb5 33 J:!.c5!
1 6 . . . .li.d7? White now has a winning advantage,
12
Intro duction
thanks mainly to tactics involving i::!xd5. 40 ...fxg4 41 \t>f2 \t>t8 42 \t>g3 'lz-Y2
Petrosian-Ko rchnoi
Lening rad 1 946
1 ::
D u tc h S t o n e wall
Since Black cannot punish this attack on his then has a target.
centre and he has already parted company 1 1 . . . 121bd7 1 2 1Ud2?
with his best piece, he is close to losing. 12 b3 t/Je4 resembles the Rabinovich
16 . . . 1Uf7 Botvinnik game, earlier, with the only differ
16... fxe4 17 fxe4 l:lxfl+ 18 �xfl t/Jxe4 19 ence being that the white rook is on el in
t/Jxd7 i..xd7 20 i..xe4 dxe4 21 t/JcS �e8 22 stead of dl.
�f6+ leads to a decisive attack for White. 12 . . . 95!
1 7 cxd5 1Udxe5 1 8 dxe5! Black punishes White's recklessness.
The knight on d3 is clearly superior to its 13 .llc7 1Ue8 14 .lle 5 1Uxe5 1 5 dxe5 f4!
counterpart on fl so there is no need for Black already has the better game, and as
further exchanges. well as his prospects of a strong attack he
1 8 . . . cxd5 1 9 exd5 exd5 20 f4! also has a potential prisoner in the form of
Fixing Black's structural weaknesses. Now the pawn on eS (after 16.. .fxg3 17 hxg3 g4).
Black collapses but his prospects are anyway 16 gxf4 9xf4 17 1Uf3
very poor. White is really struggling. He could have
20 . . . J:!.d8 21 '¥/ic7 b6 22 fx95 .11.a6 23 defended the eS-pawn with 17 e4?! (with the
liJf4 1 -0 sneaky idea of 17... f3 18 �dl!), but Black
would play 17...d4! 18 t/Je2 �xeS 19 t/Jf3
In the next game we see an example of the 'i!'hS 20 lllexd4 eS with a strong attack.
power of Black's kingside attack. The game 1 7 ... '>t>h8 18 '>t>h1 12197
also demonstrates that it is important to not The knight finds and excellent outpost on
only think about your own plan but also con fS.
sider how the opponent might try to prevent 1 9 'iWcl .lld7 20 a3
it. This is hardly appropriate. White should
be more concerned about matters on the
Steine r-Botvinnik kingside.
G ronin9en 1 946 20 . . .J:!.f7 21 b4 J:!.98 22 J:!.91 /iJf5 23 liJd1
J:!.f97!
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 93 liJf6 4 .ll9 2 .ll b4 +! ?
B y employing this order o f moves Black
hopes to disrupt his opponent's develop
ment, the result here being to avoid the ex
change of dark-squared bishops via a3, as in
the previous game.
5 .lld 2 .lle 7 6 1Uc3 0-0 7 'iWc2
White can take time out here with the in
teresting 7 dS in order to prevent the Stone
wall.
7 . . . d5 8 1Ut3 c6 9 0-0 'iWe8 10 .\lf4 'iWh5
We have reached a standard position in
the Botvinnik Stonewall.
1 1 J:!.ae1 Precise calculation makes this pawn sacri
White intends to drop his knight back to fice a winning plan.
d2 to expand with f2-f3 and e3-e4, with the 24 'ilfxf4 J:!.94 25 'iWd2 IUh4 26 1Ue3
aim of compromising Black's centre. How 26 t/Jxh4 l:i.xh4 27 h3 l:lxh3+ leads to
ever, if White neglects his bishop on f4 Black mate.
14
In troduc tion
would have been a nice finish. cxd5 - even J6, with the idea of ... tlle4-d6 to
27 . . . J:!.h4 28 lt:lt1 .\lg5! 0-1 pressure the c4-pawn.
After the bishop comes to f4 there is no 1 2 cxd5 exd5
way to defend h2. 12 ...cxdS permits White to take over the c
file and thus quickly develop an initiative.
In the 1950s the Stonewall enjoyed its 1 3 f3 lt:lxc3
height of popularity. For example it was used 13 ... tlld6 14 e4 dxe4 15 fxe4 fxe4 16
by both Bronstein and Botvinnik in their ctJxe4 tllfxe4 17 .ltxe4 tllxe4 18 'tltxe4 leaves
World Championship match in 1951. In the Black with the bishop pair and White with an
following game, from that match, the set-up isolated pawn, but due to the open position
chosen by Bronsi:ein to counter the Stone of the black king White has the better pros
wall is not terribly threatening but it proved pects.
to trouble Black. 14 .ll xc3 g4
Bronstein-Botvinnik
World Ch. (game 22). Moscow 1951
15
Dutch Stone wall
at a price, for now White is given the oppor Ironically, Smyslov, the first player to take
tunity to operate on the a-file. the World Championship tide away from
21 .li.g2 IUg4 22 .ll d2 121t6 23 J:!.b2! .11. d7 Botvinnik, gave the Stonewall his ultimate
24 J:!.al 1Ue4 stamp of approval by using it in their 1958
Black finally gets his knight to e4, but in World Championship match. Well, if you can
the meantime White has been busy with his play the opening when it matters most, and
own plan. you can play it against the world's expert,
25 j/.el J:!.te8 26 'il!'b3 �h8 27 J:!.ba2 then you must believe that it is playable ...
'iWf8?
27 ... ..txf4 was necessary, as we are about Botvinnik-Smys lov
to see. World Ch. (game 22), Moscow 1958
28 liJd3!
With this move White retains his excellent 1 d4 f5 2 g3 1Ut6 3 .llg 2 e6 4 1Ut3 .Ile7
knight. The desired opening of the a-file can 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 c6 7 1Uc3 d5 8 .llg5
wait. 121bd7 9 e3 'ili'eB 1 0 'iWc2 WhB
28 . . . J:!.ab8 29 axb5 axb5 30 l'fa7 l:!.e7 3 1 Botvinnik's unambitious opening treat
1Ue5! ment has left him without a claim for an
advantage.
1 1 ll:le2 h6 12 il.xf6 .11.xf6 1 3 cxd5 exd5
14 liJf4 g5
Even though this is principally a weaken
ing of Black's king position there is no
convenient way for White to exploit this.
15 /iJd3 J:!.g8 1 6 'iWc3 .lte7 17 121te 5 1Ut6
Practically forcing White to nudge his f
pawn forward and in so doing compromise
the protection of his king - otherwise an
enemy knight on e4 will be a nuisance. Nei
ther choice is comfonable for White.
18 f3 il.e6
Now if Black removes this knight White Black has achieved equality; there is no
will exchange on e4 and plant his remaining reason why his light-squared bishop should
bishop on c3, the resultant pressure on the be any worse than the one on g2.
a 1-h8 diagonal combining with the presence 19 IUc5 .llxc5 20 �xc5
of the rook on the seventh rank will put White continues to dream of a minority
White firmly in charge. attack against c6, which is why he wants to
31 . . . .lle 8 32 g4! keep the c-file open. 20 dxc5 might interfere
Opening· up another route for the queen's more in the development of Black's offen
bishop. sive.
32 ... fxg4 33 .\lxe4 dxe4 34 .llh4 l:ixe5 20 ... 1Ud7 21 1Uxd7 'il!'xd7 22 J:!.ael J:!.g7
Black is out of options and tries some 23 J:!.f2 b6 24 'il!'c3 il'd6 25 l:!c2 il.d7 26
thing desperate. b4 h5 27 '>t>h1
35 dxe5 .llx e5 36 l:!.f1 'il'g8 37 .\lg3! Black has the better position, his attack
The final blow. Black cannot now defend being far more dangerous. The alternative 27
the position. e4 is punished by 27 .. .f4! 28 e5 �e6 and
37 . . . .ll g 7 38 'il!'xg8 + 1 -0 White remains under pressure.
16
I n t roduc tio n
27 ... h4 28 gxh4 gxh4 29 f4 J:!.ag8 30 launches an attack which ultimately fails and
.11.t 3 .11.e8 serves only to structurally weaken his posi
tion.
11... g5? 12 1Ute5 Wh8 13 b3 a5 14 f3
lt:ld6 15 il.d2 il.f6 16 l:iae1 b5 17 c5!
White is ready to blast open the position
to his advantage with 18 e4, hence Black's
next attempt to create confusion with some
subtle play- a plan that succeeds completely.
17
D ut c h S t o n e w a ll
18
Intro duc tion
which has its main justification in the line Chapter Six. Basically Black should not allow
2... h6?! 3 i..h4 gS 4 e4 i..g 7 5 i..g 3 f4 6 i..xf4 White to develop one bishop to f4 and the
gxf4 7 'tlthS+ @fs 8 'IWfS+ @e8 9 i..e 2 tl'if6 other to d3, as in this line.
10 eS d6 11 '1Wxf4 dxeS 12 dxeS t/'ids 13
11..hS+ @d7 14 °it'g4+ @c6 15 'tltxg7 and
White wins, as in Mah-Siebrecht, London
1997. The line with 2 lllc3 also bas many
followers. Therefore another common move
order is the following:
1 d4 e6 2 li:Jf3 f5 or 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5
Of course this order is not without incon
venience, either. White can change direction
and switch with 1 d4 e6 2 e4!?, and a player
whose usual answer to 1 e4 is, for instance,
1...cS or 1...d6 finds himself playing the
French Defence! However, for Nigel Short
and others who actually play the French, this White can try to force this after 1 d4 e6
specific move order is fine. 2 li:Jf3 f5 3 c4 lt:lf6 4 lt:lc3
Then there are those who do not really
want to play the standard Stonewall at all. A
popular route comes from a declined Note
boom or Botvinnik in the Queen's Gambit:
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 li:Jc3 c6 4 e3 f5!? This
has recently been tested with the sharp 5
g4!?, which will be discussed in Chapter Six.
Black can avoid this continuation with 1 d4
dS 2 c4 e6 3 lllc3 c6 4 e3 li:Jd7!? and post
pone the decision of whether or not t0 play
the Stonewall. White can then play 5 .li.d3,
still ready for 5... f5 6 g4!?, but then he has
lost the-possibility to play 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3
tl'ic3 c6 4 e3 tl'id7 5 tl'if3 tl'igf6 6 't\tc2 (in The idea is to meet 4...dS with 5 i..f4.
stead of 6 i..d3) if Black plays 5...li:Jgf6 Black has two ways of dealing with this. Tht
(players who dislike facing 6 'tltc2 in the first is 4... .ltb4! with an improved version 01
Meran often use this order). the Nimzo-Indian, while 4 ...i..e7 intends 5 g�
Some players are willing to play the Stone dS with a Stonewall with the bishop on el.
wall against just about anything. Many times White can try (4...i..e7) 5 'tltc2!? but Blad
in my junior days I played 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 should not fear 5 .. 0-0 6 e4 because 6...fxe4 i
.
3 li:Jc3 f5?! as White and never failed to get tl'ixe4 lllc6! already gives him a lead in devel
an advantage after 4 li:Jf3 c6 5 .\i.f4 ll:lt6 6 opment.
e3 Yl..e7 7 .\i.d3 0-0 8 'i°c2 li:Je4 9 g4! Some people also play the Stonewal
against the English opening. This give:
White an extra possibility that probabl}
see following diagram
makes the plan rather dubious for Black. The
I played 7 or 8 games from this position, following game illustrates this nicely.
winning them all. This line is considered in
1:
Dutch Stonewall
21
Dutch Sto n ewall
22
In troduc ti o n
23
Dutch Sto n e wa ll
Remember it is important to know what White, as Black can create a passed pawn on
kind of situation to aim for when exchanging the h-file to keep White occupied while Black
pieces; otherwise it is difficult to decide dur goes to the centre.
ing a game which pieces to remove and
which to keep.
Again the question of Black's queen's
bishop is significant. Should White exchange
it? Should he prevent Black from exchanging
it?
The whole subject of exchanges depends
on the situation, of course. Let us ex:lmine
the case of White's king's bishop against a
knight. The diagram position is from the
g:lille Beliavsky-Yusupov, lJSSR Ch 1987.
24
In troduc tion
25
D u tc h Sto n e w a ll
26
Intro duc tion
27
D u tc h S t o n e wall
that he could then play 21...ltal! 22 Vi'xa2 additional pressure on Black's pawns. White
"il'xb4 and continue to fight, although 23 e3 went on to win this game with little effort.
favours White due to Black's weaknesses. When White recaptures on e5 with the f
1 9 bxa5 bxa5 20 'Wxa5 li:lb4? pawn this does not necessarily produce an
Here Black could have entered a tenable, automatic outpost, but it does fit in well
albeit inferior endgame after 20.. lll cS! 2 1
. structurally. This situation occurs most often
Vi'c7 l;Xfc8 22 "il'd6 "il'xd6 2 3 exd6 �xa4 24 in the line with 7 il.. f4 il.. xf4! 8 gxf4, where
l:Ixa4 il.. xa4 25 l;Xcl, although it is an un the pawn later reaches e5. Again the (differ
pleasant position to defend. Note that now ent) e5-pawn keeps enemy pieces out of d6
White can continue with tt:ld4-f3-e5 at the and f6, while here White maintains control
right moment. over eS and cS. Of course White pays a price,
21 'Wc7 :ilfc8 22 'Wb6 lkb8 23 'Wd6 for .. .f5-f4 is a possibility, although this ad
'Wxd6 24 exd6 llic6 25 li:lxc6 i..xc6 26 vance is not as dangerous as it may seem.
a5 The following game is a good example,
White has an extra pawn. The d6-pawn is which also shows the downside of this ad-
doomed but it will take some time for Black vance.
to collect it and, meanwhile, White is free to
improve his position further. Beliavsky-Karlsson
26 . . . i..b5 27 :ilfb1 Wf7 28 a6 i.. c4 29 Novi Sad 01 1 990
lhb8 :ilxb8 30 :!la4 i.. xe2 31 a7 :!la8 32
.ii.f l i.. xf1 33 Wxf1 We8 34 We2 Wd7 35 1 d4 e6 2 li:lf3 f5 3 g3 li:lf6 4 i.. g2 d5 5
kta6 Wc8 36 Wd3 Wb7 37 J:!a4 Wc6 38 0-0 ii.d6 6 c4 c6 7 i.. r4 1ixf4 8 gxf4 0-0
Wd4 Wxd6 39 :ila6+ We7 40 Wc5 g5 41 9 e3 Wh8 1 0 'Wc2?!
fxg5 Wf7 42 h4 h6 43 gxh6 1 -0 This does not really improve White's posi
tion. Better is 10 llleS.
Although this looked bad for Black, the 1 0 . . .li:le4 1 1 li:le5 li:ld7 1 2 c5 a5 13 f3
following 'knightmare' - from Lputian 1Uef6 1 4 li:lc3 li:lh5 1 5 ktad1 1Uxe5
Semkov, Yerevan 1988 - is worse. Black exploits the fact that 13 f3 has
weakened the dark squares around the white
king.
16 fxe5 f4 17 e4!
White cannot allow an enemy piece to oc
cupy f4.
1 7 . . .'Wg5 1 8 Wh1 i..d 7
18 ..."il'h6!? seems better. Now White's
bishop becomes very strong.
1 9 i.. h 3! 'Wh6 20 'Wg2 g 5 ! ?
20 .. �ad8 21 �gl! leaves White well ahead
.
28
In troduc tio,
J:!:e1 J:!:e8 27 'Wh2 'Wg7 28 'Wg1 :ilh6 This recapture helps Black because no1
Black has some but insufficient compen either e5 becomes weak or White has t
sation. change the structure. 14 dxe5 Vi'e7 15 Vi'd
29 :!lh2 J::!.e e6 30 �f1 i.xf1 31 'Wxf1 h6 16 h4 Vi'f7 produces a roughly level gam
J::!. xh2+ 32 Wxh2 'Wg6 33 Wg2 'Wc2+ 34 1 4 . . . li:lxe5 1 5 dxe5 'We7 1 6 'Wc3 .lil.d7 1
'We2 'Wg6 35 ktc1 f3
White has consolidated and is winning due This has to be played sooner or later, an
to his extra pawn. rather sooner, before Black has time fc
35 . . . 'We8 36 'Wd3 Wg7 37 lk3 h5 38 ...i.d7-e8-g6(h5).
ktb3 'We7 39 'Wf5 hxg4 40 fxg4 l:!h6 41 17 . . . exf3 1 8 exf3 'Wc5+ 19 l:!d4 a5 2
'Wc8 b6 42 cxb6 f3+ 43 J:ixf3 J:ixb6 44 f4 'Wa7
b3 1 -0 . The situation is balanced.
21 f5?!
When White exchanges on e4 it is often The beginning of White's troubles sine
with the intention of following up with f2-f3 the e5-pawn is about to become weak, pui
to challenge the centre. Black's natural recap ting the onus on White to find accurat
ture is with the f-pawn because this opens moves to avoid being worse.
the f-file for the rook. However, this is not 21 . . . l:!ae8! 22 cxd5 cxd5 23 @h1 l:!c
the only possibility, and it is not unusual to 24 'Wd2 l:!c2!
recapture with the d-pawn. A neat tactic that exploits White's weal
First we consider the classical approach. nesses.
25 "ilfxc2 'Wxd4
2
D u r c h S to n e wall
The difficult task of defending against nent's unwise thrust with a smooth tactical
your opponents' numerous possibilities tends demonstration.
to result in a time shortage, which in turn 16 . . . cxd4! 1 7 il.xd4
results in mistakes. 33 @f2 a3 34 @e3 l:Ib2 17 exd4 e3! would be embarrassing.
35 ..111.. f3 with the idea of ..111.. f3-dl-b3 is per 17 . . .il.b4 1 8 'ii'c 2 e5 1 9 .ic3 .ixc3 20
haps the only chance to save the game. 'l!l'xc3 lt:ib4 2 1 J:!.a1 r!ad8!
33 . . . r!b3 Impressive play. Black temporarily sacri
Now Black is coasting to victory. fices a pawn to develop his initiative.
34 il.xd5 l'!xa3 35 c4 r!b3 36 Wf2 a3 37 22 a3 l2Jd3 23 fxe4 "ilig5 24 l:!f3 l:!fe8
We2 r!b2 38 r!xb2 axb2 39 il.e4 .ixc4+ White cannot keep his pawn and his
40 Wd2 il.a2 0-1 pieces are poorly placed.
25 h4 'ir'g4 26 Wh2 fxe4 27 r!ff1 'l!l'e2
In the following example Black recaptures Now Black invades from all sides. The fi
with the cl-pawn. This is not natural but can nal moves are a nice conclusion to a day at
afford Black certain advantages if played the office for the GM.
under the right circumstances, as was the 28 l:la2 'l!l'xe3 29 b4 tt:lf2! 30 'i'xe3
case with the exchange of the d6-bishop for a l2Jg4+ 31 W g 1 l2Jxe3 32 il.xe4 lLixf1 33
knight. Wxf1 r!xd2! 34 .::txd2 il.xe4 0-1
Yrjola-Yusupov
Mendoza 1 985
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 ctJf6 4 .ll g2 d5 5
tUf3 c6 6 0-0 il.d6 7 b3 'l!l'e7 8 il.f4 .ll xf4
This is the game Biebinger-Volkov, Gron 9 gxf4 0-0 1 0 l2Je5 CZ'ibd7 1 1 e3 Wh8 1 2
ingen 1998. White has played the opening CZ'id2 lLixe5 1 3 fxe5 l2Je4 1 4 f4 .i.d7 1 5
somewhat passively, having wasted a tempo l2Jxe4 dxe4! ?
to post his queen on bl �n fact dl might be An interesting decision. l5 .. .fxe4 16 'ii' g4
better). The following faulty exchange offers l:IfS 17 c5 is level.
Black a good ch ance to attack the centre. 1 6 'l!l'd2 Ji.es 1 7 b4
1 3 l2Jxe4?! dxe4 1 4 lLid2 .ib7 1 5 e3 Black's decision has helped White gain a
Unfortunately for White he is forced to space advantage on the queenside, a factor
play this at some point. Fortunately for Black that White tries to exploit quickly. On the
the new possibility of ... <'Lla6-b4-d3 is an ap other flank Black has a very simple plan. He
pealing prospect. intends to develop his bishop to hS and push
1 5 . . . c5 1 6 f3? with ... g7-g5, looking to open the g-file and
Black's territorial superiority and more ac pressure f4 (f4xg5 invites .. .f5-f4), perhaps
tive piece placement make this challenge a with chances to release the e4-pawn at some
definite mistake. Volkov punishes his oppo- point should the e3-pawn be flushed out.
30
I n tro duc tion
The problem for White is that Black's plan is On 38 �fl the strongest is 38 . ..1:.d3!.
far stronger than his own. Black has no reason to exchange queens at
this stage.
31
D u t c h S t o n e w all
32
In troduc tion
This is the key idea upon which White's White has gained the advantage through
play is based. The usual active plans for Black the removal of Black's good bishop, he has a
33
D u tc h S t o n e w a ll
lead in development, the facility to evict the this case Black exchanges on cS but then
knight from e4 with f2-f3 and the tradition plays wrong. White's win after this is very
ally desirable knight outpost on eS. All in all a 1mpress1ve.
rather promising position, but how does
White exploit it?
34
In tro duc tion
A very strong move that underlines the What a mistake! 17 ... 'it'xe5 18 lLJd3 'it'e7
weak spots in the Black pawn chain. followed by ... �a6 gives Black a perfectly
30 . . . i¥xb6 playable position.
Loses by force, but Black was already in 1 8 f3 lllg 5 1 9 �xc5 'flxc5+
serious trouble. 19 ...'it'xe5 is punished by simple, pawn
30 .. . fxe4 31 �h3 :!:ta8 (3 1...'it'c8 32 �xe6+ grabbing 20 'it'xa7 with a clear plus.
'it'xe6 33 'it'xe6+ Wxe6 34 b7) 32 �xe6+ 'itte 8 20 bxc5 l:!teB 21 h4 lllt7 22 e6 llld8 23
33 'iic7 l:Xb8 34 .i:!.al �c4 35 'it'xb7 �xb7 36 jLh3 g6 24 e4!
.i:!.a8+ 'itt e7 37 :!:ta7 and White wins. Sealing Black's fate.
30 ... dxe4 31 d5 exd5 32 e6+ 'itte S 33 Si.fl 24 . . . dxe4 25 fxe4 lllxe6 26 4'lxe6 .iilx e6
ii.xfl 34 'it'd?+! 'it'xd7 35 exd7+ 'ittxd7 36 b7 27 exf5 J:le3 28 fxg6 J:ld8 29 gxh7+ Wg7
Si.d3 37 l:tb2! and White wins. 30 l:!ad 1 1 -0.
3 1 exf5 ? !
31 exd5 nxd4 32 "ii'xe6+ >tfs 33 'it'xf5+ In the final example of the c4-c5 plan two
'itt e8 34 dxc6 was even stronger. of the world's leading players clash: Shirov
31 . . . 'i'a7?! Ivanchuk, Manila 01 1992. In general when
3 1 ...�b7 32 'it'xe6+ Wf8 33 f6 gxf6 34 White employs the c4-c5 strategy he must
exf6 is winning for White as well, but at least expect Black to react with . . . Si.a6 to exploit
Black can pretend to fight on a little bit. the newly opened a6-f1 diagonal; perhaps
32 'i'xe6+ Wf8 33 jLxd5 cxd5 34 .:l:xb5 Shirov did not consider this possibility.
l:lxd4 3 5 'i'c8+ 1 -0.
35
D u t c h S to n e w a ll
Black accepts the loss of the Bishop pair lllxe4 lllxe4 19 .i.xe4 cxd4 20 .i.xd4
in return for gaining time in the centre. lllc 5 21 .i.d5 °i'f7 22 .i.xc5 exd5 23
1 6 lll xc5 .i.xd6 l:!xd6 24 tt'lb4 .i.b7 25 lllxd5 .i.xd5
16 dxc5 i..c7 followed by ... Vilie7, . . . lL'id7 26 cxd5 J:i:xc1 27 i¥xc1 h6 28 'i'c8+
and ... i.. a6 and Black is doing well thanks to Wh7 29 �c2+ Wg8 30 'i'c8+ % - %
his influence on e5.
16 . . . .i.xc5 17 dxc5 e5 1 8 e4?? A simple equalising game for Black. How
A blunder. Bener is 1 8 e3, planning i..b2 ever he cannot always rely on this coumer
and f3-f4 to fight for control over the al-h8 play:
diagonal. Then Ivanchuk suggests the follow
ing line as being fine for Black: 18 ... i.. a6 19
�f2 d4 20 exd4 exd4 2 1 i.. f4 1Ue8 2 2 i.. d6
d3 23 i.. f 1 l:te3 24 �d2 �ae8 25 i.. xd3
i.. xd3 26 �xd3 �xd3 27 Vi/ixd3 lL'idS with
compensation for the pawn.
1 8 . . . .i.a6! 1 9 l:!e1
1 9 .i:!.f2 fxe4 20 fxe4 lL'ixe4! 2 1 i.. xe4 .i:!.xf2
22 �xf2 l:!f8+ 23 �g2 J:W gives Black a
winning attack.
1 9 . . . fxe4 20 fxe4 d4
White cannot prevent an invasion down
the f-file.
21 °i'd2 lllg4 22 .i.h3 h5 23 .i.a3 °i'f7 24 This is Kharitonov-Naumkin, Riga 1988.
.i.b4 J:lae8 25 .i.a5 l:!e6 26 .i.f1 lllf2 27 White prepares the e2-e4 break .
.i.xa6 °i'f3 0-1 14 �c2 Wh8
This practically rules out ideas of . . . c6-c5
White breaks out with e2-e4 in view of dxc5, although Black is vulnerable
Kramnik has written that when White plays anyway thanks to . . . g7-g5.
f2-f3 Black can respond with ... c6-c5 to ex 1 5 J:lae1 J:lg8
ploit the weakening of the dark squares in the A faulty plan. The more circumspect
centre. The follow ing is a good illustration: 15 ... �ae8 should be considered.
1 6 f3 l:!af8 1 7 lllxd7 tt'lxd7 1 8 e4 �g7
1 9 exd5 exd5 20 f4
White has a clear lead. Black tries to
muddy the waters with some tactics but he
fails to steal the advantage from White.
20 . . . lllf6 21 lZlc5 gxf4 22 llle 6 �g4 23
lll xf8 l:!xf8 24 J:le6 .i.b8 25 .i.a3 J:lf7 26
cxd5 fxg3 27 �xf5 �h4 28 hxg3 .i.xg3
29 i¥h3 �xh3 30 .i.xh3 tUxd5 31 .i.d6
.i.xd6 32 £!.xf7 .i.xf7 33 J:i:xd6 lll b4 34
l:id7 Wg8 35 J:i:xb7 lllxa2 36 .i.g2 lllc 1
3 7 Wf2 a 5 38 .i.xc6 tUxb3 3 9 l:!xf7 1 -0
36
In troduc tion
Black cannot afford to play . . .c6-c5 against to recapture with the e-pawn, as in the first
f2-f3 . Remember also that it is not unusual two examples below. However, sometimes it
for f2-f3 to gain time by hitting an unwel also makes sense to recapture with the c
come knight on e4. Often it is in White's pawn, and often this is forced because the f5-
interest to realise the e2-e4 break because it pawn cannot be abandoned. Moreover the f
challenges the pawns on dS and f5 and con pawn can occasionally be sacrificed with
sequently exerts indirect pressure against e6, advantage, but be careful !
but there are occasions where Black is happy The first example is from Beliavsky
to see the central thrust: Yusupov, Linares 1989
sequently Black should know how to ap 21 axb4 �e8 22 b5, illustrating Black's prob
proach this situation. Normally Black wants lem with the c6-pawn.
37
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
game. In reply to 33 ... ..ltd6 White can turn Surprise! The queen's bishop finds a way
the tables with 34 e4!! J:!.f2 35 ..ltxd6 J:!.xd2 36 to join the game, and fl is suddenly unavail
lL'ixd2 . able for the white rook.
34 °i'd3 27 l:!h3
The best defence is 34 l:Ie7! dxc4! 35 l:teS+ White tries to force matters with another
'itf7 36 J:lf8+ 'itt g6 37 '(/fc2+ 'itt h 6 38 ..It el+ g5 trade.
39 J:!.hS 'itt g7 40 ..ltxg5! 'i'hs 41 J:!.a8 'i'f7! 42 27 . . . 'i'h5 28 J:i:xh4 'i'xh4 29 °i'f 1 g5!
..ltf3 ..lth2+ and Black wins. Black's king will be quite safe on h8,
34 . . . jLc7 3 5 l:d8+ jLxd8 36 hxg4 dxc4 Wh ite's does not appear to be safe anywhere.
37 'i'xc4 l:!f6 38 g5 'i'xg5 39 jLc1 'i'g3 30 jLh3 gxf4 31 jLxe6+ Wh8 32 e4 f3
40 'i'c8 'i'c7 41 'i'xc7 jLxc7 0-1 33 e5 l:lf8 34 'i'f2 'i'h6 35 ji_g4 °i'g5 36
'i'g3 f2+ 37 Wg2 jLa6 0-1
Since the kingside attack is an important
aspect of Black's aggressive oriented strategy These two games offer us an understand
in the Stonewall we should have a look at ing of the ideas associated with the .. .f5-f4
another example. offensive. We have already seen other in
stances in which Black creates a kingside
attack and, since very few examples cover
only one concept, each deserves careful
study.
44
In troduc tion
45
D u tch S t o n e wall
collapse. It is possible that White is already 25 ... liJxg5 26 'ii c 1 1l.xe2 2 7 "i!Jxg5+
lost here, although his next reactionary try 27 lh.e2 nxe2 28�c4+ does not work on
hastens the end. account of 28 ...ne6!.
21 g4? 27 . 'itha 28 J::! a c1 d3
. .
Certainly not the best defensive policy. White has problems. What should he do
Now Black goes for the kill. about 29 .. .f4 followed by 30 ... d2 and wins?
21 • . . 'i'h4 2 2 cxd5 12Jxd5 23 J:l.c4 I:g7 24 29 .i.xc6?!
gxf5 12Jf4 0-1 29 �d2! is given as immediately losing for
After 25 exf4 comes 2 5 . ll:id!.
.. White by Kharitonov, but after his 29...�d4
White has the testing 30 i.. xc6! with the idea
Now we turn to a simple idea behind of 30 .. .f4 31 i.. xe8 fxg3 32 .l:xe2!. If Black
Black's blatant thrust of the g-pawn - forcing attempts 30 ... neS! ·white should play 3 1 �h6
the retreat of White's bishop from f4 and (3 1 i..b 5?! f4 !! [3 L.l:xb5? 32 Sxe2 is prom
gainin g space. Of course Black must not ising for White] 32 i..xd3 fxg3 33 nxe2 l::.xe2
advance just for the s ake of it, but by care 34 �xe2 nxf2 35 l:d:c8+ �.f8+ 36 'it>g2 nxc8
fully weighing up the positional and tactical 37 hxg3 l::.d8 38 i.. c4 'tid2 gives Black a
consequences it can put White under pres winning endgame). Then 3 L.�d8! keeps
sure. It is also interesting that ... g7-g5 is the control over the dark squares, when a sample
kind of move that invites White to try, often continuation is 32 'iif4 .l:e6 33 llfd2 f4 34
without justification, to search for a punish i..g2 'iid 4 35 gxf4 .l:xf4 36 .l:c8+ 37
ing retort. This is what happened in Douven nc7+ 'it>g8 3 8 �h t with a mess from which
Vaiser, Groningen 1993, with Black coming Black seems more likely to emerge ahead.
out on top. Here is the position after 23 Then again, who knows ...
�b2: 29 ...J:'i!.e6 30 .ia4?
White is struggling thanks to the enor·
mous d·pawn but a more stubborn defence
is 30 i.d5! 1:d6 3 1 Vlie7 il'd8 32 'il'e5+ Wif6
33 �xf6+ �fxf6 34 i.. b 3! (34 i..c4!? d2 35
i.. xe2 dxelWi + 36 lh.e1 gfe6 37 @fl nd2
has been suggested as clearly better for Black,
but after 38 i..g4! I don't see how Black can
force an easily winning endgame). The hasty
34 ...d2 nms into 35 l:!.c8+!, so Black has to do
some more work before he can count on
earning the full point. One idea is 34 .. .f4!? 3 5
ncs+ �g7 3 6 l:d:c7+ Wh6 37 nxa?? (tao risky)
37 ... d2 3 8 1:1at 1:c6 39 �g2 Ziel 40 l::.a 2
23 . . .liJf7 24 :11f e1 g5! 25 .i.xg5 ! ? ii.fl+! and Black wins. After the text White is
2 5 ii.cl!? h as been suggested b y Khari without hope.
tonov as an improvement. Now Black gains 30 .. .f4 31 :11c 5 d2 32 :11a 1 'i!'d8! 33 'i'd5
a passed pawn on the cl-file and the position 'i'f6 0-1
becomes difficult for White to defend, al
though many players have a problem retreat Our next example is Miralles·Agdestein,
ing a piece back to its starting position Lyon 1988. It does not rake long to figure
(sometimes this feels like putting it back in out that Black has a good position. He is fully
the box!) . developed, has no real problems with his
46
I n t roduc tion
weakness at e6, his occas ionally problematic 39 @xh4 W/xh2+ 40 \!ilgS h6+ 4 1 Wxg4
bishop has been exchanged and there is pres 'itg6 0-1
sure against the a3-pawn - tying the rook to There is no defence against ... h6-h5 mate!
al or inducing the creation of an attractive
outpost should Wh ite spend time on a3-a4. Black plays . . . c6-c5
With these factors in mind Black should do The Stonewall is not just a matter of Black
something active or risk seeing his advan launching a kingside attack, although many
tages disappear. For an experienced Stone of the club players I know would like to
wall enth usiast such as Agdestein the follow think so! To be able to use the full potential
ing sequence of moves comes with little ef of the Stonewall one should be acquainted
fort. with a full range of possibilities, including
actions in the centre and on the queenside as
well as the kingside. By now we are already
familiar with the idea of . . . c6-c5, but I would
like to discuss the idea further and not limit
ourselves to its use as a counter to Wh ite's
acuo ns.
In the first example White i s unprepared
for the opening of the centre and conse
quently pays the price.
47
D u t c h S t o n e w a ff
1 8 l!Je6 l2Jc3 1 9 l!JxfB l!Jxf8 20 :.c2 e4 The beginning of a poor plan. 13 lt:le5
21 :d2? lt:lxe5 1 4 dxe5 �d8 15 1fe2 c 5 is level.
21 lt:le 1 is forced, although it is easy to see 1 3 . . . c5 14 li:1b3 b6 1 5 dxc5 l!Jxc5 1 6
why White did not feel comfortable about it. l!Jxc5 bxc5 1 7 'ili'a4 .::i b8 1 8 b 3 l;'i:b6!
21 . . . exf3 22 .1i.xf3 l!Jd7 23 l:e1 d3 24 Preparing to swing the rook over t o the
exd3?! kingside, a decision justified by White's fail
24 1'ia3! i.b7 2 5 exd3 lt:le5 26 .txd5 ure to produce anything approach ing dan
27 d4 is less accommodating. gerous. In fact Glek's rook manoeuvre is
24 . . . l2Je5 25 :e3 f4! about to put White under tremendous pres
Ruining White's kingside completely. sure.
26 gxf4 l!Jxf3+ 27 l:txf3 .1i.b7 28 d4 li:1e4 1 9 'ili'a3 e5! 20 l:tcd1
29 .:'.c2 Vacating c l for the queen t o begin a de
Losing by force, as does 29 !;Ie2 'iWg6+ ]0 fensive manoeuvre, but Black is too quick.
@fl 'tii'h 5! 31 �ee3 1'ixh2 32 �xe4 i.a6+ 3 3 20 . . . exf4 21 exf4 l:g6 22 1¥ic1 'ili'h4 23
'it>e1 1'ih 1 +. 'ilfe3 'ili'g4 24 \Wg3 1¥ih5! 0-1
29 . . . :xc2 30 'ilfxc2 \Wg6+ 0-1 Black will now make a decisive gain of
material.
In the fol lowing game ... c6-c5 is a natural
means to establish a suitable structure for the There are other ways for Black to change
light-squared bishop. It also provides an op the structure. Originally I was going to cover
portunity for Black to gain access to the something ideas with ... e6-e5 but I came to
kingside for his queen's rook. understand that, rather than being the start of
an active plan, this advance tends to be part
of the wrapping up process, a> in the previ
ous game. Generally Black has no real inter
est in pushing ...e6-e5 unl<'->S it is relevant to a
particular strategy. Imagine a standard
Stonewall set-up where Black plays 1 ...e5 and
White replies 2 cxd5 cxd5 ] dxeS. This leaves
Black saddled witb an isolated d5-pawn and
White excellent outposts on d4 and f4. When
investigating 500 GM games for this book, I
came across this plan only once, and Black
lost in 19 moves. White was the GM! That is
not to say that . . . e6-e5 is always dubious (we
Kalinichev-Glek, Soviet Army Champion have several examples where the opposite is
ships 1987. Another more or less normal true), it is simply not the appropriate way to
situation, perhaps slightly favourable for begin an active plan.
White. This assessment is no longer relevant Consequently let us move on to a more
after the following exchange. reliable policy.
1 2 l!Jxe4?! dxe4!
Kramnik does not like this exchange, but Black plays ... d5xc4
offers no convincing evidence why it should There are two ways for Black to follow this
be worse than 12 ... fxe4, which leads to equal capture. One is ... e6-e5, the other ... c6-c5. In
ity. the first we consider the former
1 3 l!Jd2? option.
48
I n t r o d u c tion
Cifuentes Parada-Nikolic
Rotterdam 1 999
49
D u t c h S t o n e wa/f
50
In tr o d u c tion
51
D u rch S t o n e w a ll
52
In troduc tion
!ilt3 c6 6 0-0 .lii.d 6 7 !ile5 0-0 8 .lii.f4 such as ... tll c2, . ..l:txd4 and perh aps even
White's set-up is not typical. Nikolic finds ... i.g2+ available, as well as a nice passed
a way to equalize without too much effort, pawn.
although his position still requires accurate 25 .lii.e4 l:tf6 26 a3 tlld5 27 tllb 7!
play. Gelfand chooses to force a draw in view
8 !ilg4!? 9 l!Jxg4 .lii. xf4 1 0 gxf4 fxg4 1 1
.•• of 27 llgl tlle 3! when Black rounds up the
e3 V!!'h4 1 2 'i'e1 d-pawn. After this White has nothing to be
proud of and the f-pawn looks dangerous.
27 .. ,'tl,.d7 28 !ilc5 l'ldB 29 !ilb7 .!:l.d7 30
!ilc5 .!:l.d8 31 l!Jb 7 Y:. -'h
1 2 .. J':tf6!
Forcing White to play f2-f3 at once, oth
erwise White would h ave time for tll d 2 to
recapture with the knight. Black cannot allow
this transfer to take place because the result
ing structure and superior minor pieces fa
vour White - h ence the text.
1 3 f3 V!!'x e1 1 4 .!:l.xe1 gxf3 1 5 .lii. xf3 g5! This is from Van Wely-Kveinys, Yerevan
White is given no time to regr:oup. 01 1996.
1 6 !ild2 gxf4 1 7 e4 &6! 1 2 . . . C,'ig4?
This active development of the knight This is too optimistic. Black wants to chal
does not disturb the c8-bishop. lenge the eS-knight or have access to the f
1 8 exdS file. This is based on White's previous move,
18 a3 tllc7 poses Black no problems. 12 ac l. Unfortunately for Black the plan is
18 cxdS 1 9 cxd5 !ilb4 20 'iiih 1
.•• not very good.
No other move tests Black's position ac 1 3 tllxg4 fxg4 1 4 e4!
cording to Gelfand and Kapengut. If White succeeds in pushing e4-e5 Black
20 . . . <titS ! ? will be seriously short of breathing space, so
20. . .tllc 2!? 2 1 ltgl+ ltg6! 2 2 :t.xg6+ hxg6 the undesirable captures in the centre are
23 llgl tllxd4 24 1lxg6+ \t'h7 also leads to an forced.
equal game. 1 4 ... dxe4 1 5 .lii. xe4 .lii. xe4 1 6 V!!'xe4 llld 7
21 dxe6 .lii. xe6 22 .lii. x b7 .!:l.d8! 17 'l\Yxg4
The natural 22 ... l:.b8 misplaces the rook White nets a safe extra pawn.
after 23 i.e4!. 1 7 . . .'tl,.f5 1 8 l!Jc3 :!'lats 1 9 I:l.f1 h5 20
23 !ile4 l:tg6 24 tllc5 .lii.h 3! 'll¥e 2 .!:l.8f6 21 l:tae1 .!:l.g6 22 'i'd3 'll¥t7 23
White has won a pawn but Black has ideas tlle4 .lilts 24 f3
53
D u t ch S t on e w a ll
White has refuted Black's knight sortie comes Black's only but potentially lethal -
and is now firmly in the driving seat. problem. I am sure that 1 1...cxbS would have
24 . . . li'lf6 25 @ h 1 li:Jd5 26 i.c1 li'lb4 27 been answered by 12 l:Ic l !, hoping to domi
i\'e2 l:ia5 nate.
What good the rook is able to do out here 1 1 . . . i.a6 1 2 c5?!
is limited. Although Black does win back his A positional mistake, surrendering possi
pawn, other problems take over. ble active play on the c-file and therefore
28 a3 li'lc6 29 fic4 "ilfd7 30 l:!.d1 i.xa3 facilitating Black's equalising task on the
31 i.xa3 l:ixa3 32 d5 exd5 33 :i.xd5 fie6 kingside.
34 li'lg5 l:!.xg5 35 l:txg5 'tlifxc4 36 bxc4 1 2 . . . i.c7 1 3 a3 .l;l.a7 1 4 i. c 1 li'le4 1 5 h4!
li'ld4 37 :xh5 :c3 38 l:i a 1 a5 39 c5 White is already preparing the queenside
bxc5 40 lba5 c4 4 1 l:ihd5 l:Kc1 + 42 'iil g2 fight.
l:Kc2+ 43 @h3 li'lxt3 44 g4 c3 45 l:!.a8+ 1 5 . . .'tife8?!
1 -0 15 ... b4! provides the necessary counter
play.
Black plays . . . b7-b5 1 6 b4!
Sometimes Black tries to gain space on the Now the closed queenside and Black's de
queenside by advancing ... b7-b5 instead of velopment problems leave White i n charge.
nudging the b-pawn just one square. How 1 6 ... .tc8 1 7 .tt4 a4?
ever, Kramnik has written that h e has his Allowing the following exchange. The
doubts about the soundness of this more immediate 17 ...h6 and ... g7-g5 causes White
ambitious thrust. I am less sure. I understand more inconvenience.
what is behind Kramnik's opinion, n amely 1 8 li'ld3 h6 1 9 li'c1 i.d7 20 JJ.. xc7 :xc7
the fact that when the pawn continues to b4 21 li'lte5 ii'd8 22 tt'lt4 i.c8 23 h5 li'lg5
(leaving bS in order to give the light-squared 24 li'ltg6 rle8 25 f4 li'le4? 26 g4 tt'ld7 27
bishop more freedom) it is no better than on i.xe4 dxe4 28 e3 fxg4 29 ::!a2 li'lf6 30
b6, and more susceptible to attack. This is in :i.h2 fid5 31 'illd 1 l:!.d8 32 l:Kh4 @h7 33
theory. I believe the stamp of approval from ii'c2 'iit g8 34 :i.t2 :l.e8 35 '&tg2 .l;l.a7 36
Short and Agdestein is enough for us mortals @h2 i.d7 37 fit2 i.c8 38 ii'g3 @h7 39
to test this different way of queenside devel Wg1 �gB 40 l:ixg4!
opment from time to time. White has everything prepared and fin
The following game is a typical illti!>tration ishes off in style.
of the different positions Black should con 40 . . .lt:ixg4
sider: White also wins after 40 ... ll:ixhS 41 'l'h4
ll:if6 42 'l'xf6!! gxf6 43 ll:ie7+ @f8 44 ll:ixdS.
Christiansen-Rodriguez 41 li:Jxg4 'tlifd8
Saint John 1 98 8 4 1 ...'it>h7 42 l/Jf6+ gxf6 43 l/Jf8+ J:Ixf8 44
'l'g6+ 'it>h8 45 'l'xh6+ mates.
1 d4 e6 2 c 4 f 5 3 g3 li'lf6 4 i. g 2 c 6 5 42 q.1xh6+ @h7 43 'De5 ii'f6 44 'i'g6+!
li'lf3 d5 6 0-0 i.d6 7 b3 'tlife7 8 .ib2 0-0 'li'xg6 45 hxg6+ 'iith8 46 li:Jht7+ 1 -0
9 li'lbd2 b5!?
Both 9. ..b6 and 9 ... Ad7 are normal. In the next game Black's strategy is more
10 li'le5 a5 1 1 li'ldt3 successful.
1 1 cxbS! is given by Christiansen as being
slightly better for Wh ite. Often in openings This is from Kavalek-Ljubojevic, Bugoj no
like the Reti or the Meran the c6-square be- 1982.
In troduc ti o n
Ruban-Meister
Balassagyarmat 1 990
1 d4 e6 2 c4 ts 3 g3 4Jt6 4 .11/.. g 2 c6 s
/Dt3 dS 6 0-0 .11/.. d 6 7 b3 'f/e7 8 /Des This is Zak-Vaiser, Fuerteventura 1992.
55
D u tc h S to n e w a ll
From the diagram position White plays The queen is awkwardly placed here, so
less well than his GM opponent. Natural the prudent 13 l:.dl is preferable.
here is something like 9 Lt:ld2 (observing eS 1 3 . . . il..d7 14 il..e3 llla 6 15 lll d 3 lll g4 1 6
from a distance). However the game contin il..f4
ued as follows: Back again!
9 il..c 1 ? 1 6 . . . b4
This is just too odd. Now the knight !ooks Not surprisingly after White's rather aim
misplaced on h3. less treatment of the opening this initiation
9 . . . b5!? of tactics leads to a wonderful game for
Black exploits his sudden lead in devel Black. The rest of the game, albeit not too
opment - compared to normal lines - by interesting, soon goes downhill for White:
claiming space on the queenside. 1 7 lll a4 'i!Uxd4 1 8 h3 g5 1 9 il..d2 lllh 6 20
1 0 cxb5 l:tac1 f4 21 e3 il..xa4 22 exd4 ..11. xb3 23
In light of what happens 10 cS might be axb3 l:tac8 24 l:ta1 lll b8 25 gxf4 illf5 26
better. il..e3 lll c6 27 l:tfc1 gxf4 28 lll xf4 lll cxd4
1 0 . . . cxb5 1 1 lllf4 'i!Ub6 1 2 lllc 3 <;t>h8 1 3 29 l:txc8 l:txc8 30 l:txa7 il..d6 3 1 l:td7
'i!Ub3? il..xf4 0-1
56
I CHA PTER ONE I
White Plays 7 b3
57
D u tc h S t o n e wall
side have been weakened slightly. This is Releasing the tension in the centre for no
highlighted chiefly in the form of the unde particular reason. Black woulddo better with
fended knight on c3, but even in the case of 13 ...Lt:ld7!, with an approximately even game.
Lt:lbd2 Black might well be given the chance 1 4 'ifxd2 llld 7 1 S lll d 3!
to threaten to infiltrate with ... Lt:le4-c3. An White has a small plus. Black must be
other vulnerable point is b4, because by de careful as the traditional ... lllf6-e4 could leave
fending the square with a2-a3 White removes him worse after ..lli. xe4 and Lt:le5, although in
protection from the b3-pawn. These factors parting with his bishop White should keep an
are not of major impo rtance, but enough, in eye out for counterplay involving ... Sl.h5-f3.
my opinion, to make this system harmless. 1 S . . . l:!.f6?!
8 . . .il..xf4 9 gxf4 0-0 10 lll bd2 This move also seems a little strange be
Sensible development - White remains in cause the rook is poorly placed after the ex
contact with e5. 10 Lt:lc3 has also been change of queens.
played, when 10 ... Lt:lbd7 1 1 e3 Wh8 12 Lt:le2 1 6 '!Wb4!
b6 13 ii'c2 ..lli. b7 is fine for Black, e.g. 14 Clle 5 Forcing a trade that instantly crushes
Z!ac8 15 Z!fd 1 c5 etc. Black's dreams of a kingside attack.
10 . . .il..d7 16 ... 'i!Uxb4 17 ill xb4 dxc4?!
Developing the knight first is equally natu The start of a somewhat dubious plan.
ral. 10 . . .Lt:lbd7!? 1 1 e3 Lt:le4 12 Cll e5 Lt:lxe5 13 18 bxc4 cS 1 9 llld 3 l:tc8 20 dS lllb 6 21
fxe5 ..lli. d7 1 4 Lt:lxe4 fxe4 15 f3 exf3 16 Z!xf3 dxe6 il..c6 22 il..xc6 l:!.xc6 23 e7 l:!.g6+
l.hf3 17 ii'xf3 ..lli. e 8 18 J:[fl ..lli. g6 19 ..lli. h 3 24 <;t>h 1 l:!.ge6 2S Ille s l:!.c8 26 l:tfd 1
..lli. d3! 20 J:!cl l:[f8 was equal in Grunberg l:!.xe7 27 a4!
Goloshchapov, Cairo 2000. Black is under severe pressure here. White
1 1 e3! has control over the d-file, targets on the
Another logical choice, simply strengthen queenside and an all-seeing knight enthroned
ing the pawn structure. 1 1 ii'c2 Sl.e8 12 cxd5 on e5.
cxd5 13 Lt:le5 Cllc6 14 e3 J:[c8 15 ii'b2 ..lli. h 5 27 . . . g6 28 as ti:la8 29 h4 lll c7 30 hS
16 f3 Lt:ld7 17 Lt:lxc6 l:.xc6 18 Z!ac l Lt:lb8 1 9 lll e6 31 l:!.d6 l:!.d8 32 l:!.dS gS 33 l:!.g1 h6
Z!fel h6 20 Lt:lfl J:[fc8 21 l:.xc6 l:.xc6 22 l:.cl 34 fxgS l:!.xdS 3S cxdS lll x gS 36 f4 1-0
..lli. e8 was good enough for equality in Bukic
Botvinnik, Belgrade 1969. Game 2
1 1 . . .il..e8 1 2 'i!Uc2 lll e 4 13 Ill e s Palatnik-Dolmatov
Belgrade 1 988
1 d4 e6 2 c4 fS 3 g3 /llf6 4 il..g2 c6 S
illf3 dS 6 0-0 il..d6 7 b3 'i!Ue7 8 cS?!
There is some logic behind this move. The
reasoning is that Black has numerous pawns
on light squares, so in anticipation of the
exchange of dark-squared bishops White can
further improve his lot by fixing yet another
enemy pawn on a light square. Unfortunately
for White this argument fails to take into
account the simple plan of ...b7-b6, challeng
ing the centre and bringing the other bishop
1 3 . . . lll x d2?! to life.
58
7 b3
1 2 ll:le5?!
Instigating tactics that do not work out
well for White. Better is the less stubborn 12
cxb6 axb6 13 tt:lc3 with perhaps an edge to
Black. Not to be recommended is 12 b4?!,
when 1 2 ... a5! 1 3 axb4 14 cxb6 il'b7 15
.lxe4 fxe4 1 6 il'c5 l:l:a6 17 il'xb4 l':.xb6 leads
to a promising position for Black, as White
has no development to speak of and Black
has a potentially strong bishop (helped by the 25 d4 ll:ld5+ 2 6 Wf2 exd4 27 :l.c4 lll e3
e4-pawn). 28 :!.e1 @d8 29 Iita4 Wc7 30 l:c1 lll xf1
1 2 . . . bxc5 1 3 f3 ll:lt6 1 4 '11Hx c5! 31 Wxf1 d3 32 1il.d4 Illes 33 f4 lll g 4 34
Forced. 1 4 dxc5 tt:lfd7 15 l:.cl tt:lxe5 16 h3 ll:le3+ 35 Wf2 lll d 5 36 :!.cc4 h6 37
fxe5 f4! gives Black a large plus despite h av ll:if3 :lhe8 38 :l.xd3 l:e4 39 llle S g5 0-1
ing developed only his queen! The key is
Black's structural superiority. White has no Game 3
easily accessible outpost for his knight - only l .Sokolov-Salov
d4 looks good, but how to get there? Then New York 1 996
there is the e5-pawn - Black will play ... tt:ld7,
... 0-0 and perhaps . . .i':JS and/or ... il'g5 . [ 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lDf6 3 il.g2 e6 4 ll:lt3 d5 5
believe most GMs would consider that Black 0-0 i..d6 6 c4 c6 7 b3 'llle7 8 a4
has a sizeable positional lead. White practically insists on removing
1 4 ... 'i'xc5 1 5 dxc5 lll td7 1 6 llld 3 Black's good bishop. Remember also that the
It would be logical here to consider the advance of the white a-pawn in itself can
dark squares with 16 e3, intending 16 ...tt:lxeS reap positio nal rewards, as was illustrated in
59
D u tch S t o n e w a ll
the Introduction. However, in this particular improve Black's position. Undoubtedly Salov
line White has no chance to fight for an ad had some kind of idea with this move, but it
vantage owing to Black's no-nonsense reply. still seems to be inferior to natural develop
B . . . aS! ment with 1 1 ...b6 12 Lt:lcel ilb7 13 Lt:ld3
Lt:la6, when 14 e3 Lt:lb4 15 Lt:lfe5 c5 16 Z!cl
'.aac8 was okay for Black in Tukmakov
Tseshkovsky, Sverdlovsk 1987, while 14 Wifcl
c5 15 Wib2 Lt:le4 1 6 Lt:lfe5 l:.fd8 17 e3 '.aac8
18 l:.fd 1 Lt:lb4 left Black no worse in Gli
goric-Tukmakov, Palma de Mallorca 1989.
12 'lW c 1 b6 13 lll ce 1 /ll bd7 14 ti:Jd3 il..a6
1 S lllfeS lll xeS 1 6 lll xeS l:!.acB 17 'lWe3
/ll d7 1 B l:!.fc1 i/JxeS 1 9 'lWxeS 'lWt6 ! ?
Salov i s trying hard for the endgame - a
discipline in which he is an expert - no doubt
feeling con fident about his ability to defend
this slightly worse position.
A completely natural response. Black has 20 °'i!l'xf6 gxf6 21 cS
delayed this thrust in some games, continuing
8 . . 0-0 9 il.a3 il.xa3 10 Lt:lxa3 aS!, but this
.
60
7 b3
61
D u tch S t o n e w all
22 tt:le1 ?
Too passive. One should test all other op
tions before deciding on such a move. In
stead the fighting 22 Lt:ld2! fights for c4, and
22 . . . il.xe2 23 lll xe4 'il'c4 24 Clld6 'il'd3 is
only even.
22 . . .tt:lf6 23 b5 il..b7 24 tt:lc2 tt:ld5 25
tt:lb4?
25 'il'b3 'il'c3 26 e3 is terribly uncomfort
able but White might still be okay.
25 . . .'t!Yc3!
Winning a pawn and the game.
62
7 b3
26 Vi!l'xc3 lllxc3 27 e3 4'ixb5 28 ilf1 l/1c3 createcounterplay with . . .a5-a4 and supports
0-1 the knight's development to a6. 1 l ... c5!? has
also been tried and is considered in the next
Gamc G game, but not good is 1 L..Lt:lbd7? 12 cxd5
Sturua-Vaiser cxd5 13 Lt:ldc4! with a clear advantage to
Ercvan Open 1996 White, as in Tukmakov-Dolmatov in the
Introduction.
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 4:\f6 4 .it.g2 d5 5 1 2 e3
lllf3 c6 6 0-0 il..d6 7 b3 'il'e 7 8 il..b2 12 a4 transposes to Ibragimov-Shabalov
I find it hard to believe that this quiet de in the Introduction. White might have a
veloping move should be a problem for slight advantage in that line but it is nothing
Black. special.
8 . . . b61 1 2 . . . tt:la6 13 'il'e2 a4 ! ?
Since this is possible now, without all kind The sharpest opportunity available to
of tricks, Black should take advamage of it Black. The options are more solid but less
and quietly get on with his development. interesting:
9 tt:lbd2 13 ...Lt:lc7 14 l:!fdl Slxe5!? is Petursson
It is also possible to play 9 Lt:le5 and reach Tukmakov in the Introduction.
the same position after 1 1 moves, below. 13 . . . Jlxe5 14 dxe5 Lt:ld7 15 l:.fdl Lt:lac5 16
This was basically the way White played the Lt:lf3 l:!ac8 17 Jla3 l:.fe8 1 8 �b2 g5 19 Lt:le1
Stonewall in the 19 80s, as Black had not yet g4 20 �xc5 Lt:lxc5 21 Lt:ld3 Lt:lxd3 22 J:!xd3
discovered his full range of resources. b5 was equal in Petursson-Dolmatov, Aku
9. . . il..b7 1 O Ille s 0-0 1 1 l:!.c1 ! reyri 1988, but 13 . . . '.aac8 14 Z!fdl c5 15 cxd5
exd5 16 WibS! gave White pressure on the
queenside in Tukmakov-Haba, Haifa 1989.
14 bxa4
Forced as 14 cxd5 meets with the imme
diate 14 . . . a3! with the tactical point 15 dxc6?
axb2 16 cxb7 bxc1N!! 17 :!l:.xcl '.aa7 18 Lt:lc6
Wifxb7 19 Lt:lxa7 '*'ixa7 20 l:.c6 l:!d8 21 ti::lc4,
and White should not have en ough
compensation for the piece.
14 . . . il..xe5 1 5 dxe5 ti:ld7
Not good is 15 ...Lt:le4?! 16 Lt:lb3 Lt:lac5 17
f3 ti::l g5 18 jLa3 and c5 comes under heavy
fire.
This move is designed to disturb Black's 1 6 a5!
queenside development. The idea is that after White is trying to close the a-file again.
l 1...Lt:lbd7 12 cxd5 Black cannot recapture This pawn could never survive anyway, and
with the e-pawn as c6 is then hanging. Also - the a2-pawn would soon become weak after
of course - the rook is nicely placed on the c a capture on a4.
file. Fortunately for Black he has other ways 1 6 . . . ti:lacS!
to develop than the strictly dogmatic. Using the open file in a tactical way to
1 1 . . . a5! avoid closing it again.
The safest line, this is logical now that 1 7 tt:lb3 il..a6
White has left the a-file. Black is trying to Perhaps not the best option. 17 . . . Lt:lxb3!?
63
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
1 8 . . ..ixc4?!
1 8 ... dxc4! 19 tt:lxc5 ll'l:xc5 20 ..ta3 .tbs! 2 1
..tb4! b:xa5 22 ..ta3 'fla7 2 3 'fld2! gives
White compensation for his pawn, but
probably no more.
1 9 :lxc4 dxc4 20 i!'xc4 1Zlxb3 21 axb3
ll:xa5? A sharp idea that still needs to be fully
2 1...l:t.ad8! 22 J:[al! bxa5 23 ..txc6 is better tested before anything conclusive can be said
for White despite the exchange deficit. How about it. Since the outcome of this game was
ever the game continuation is even worse for positive I see no reason why it should not be
Black. tried again at this level. The diagram position
22 11'xc6 �b8 23 11'xb6 :1.a6 24 1l'b5 is similar to those that arise after 1 d4 ll'lf6 2
i!'c7? c4 e6 3 tt:lf3 b6 4 g3 il.. a6 5 tt:lbd2 the
24.. J:.td8 25 .!:tel 'fld7 looks awful but is Queen's Indian Defence. Of course the dif
nonetheless necessary. fe rence is the f-pawn which, in the QID,
25 l: c 1 ! l:b6 26 i!'a4 'i!fd7 27 i:.d4 'ii' xa4 stays on f7. But surprise, surprise when
28 bxa4 l:a6 29 :1.c4 :1.t7 30 @n g5 3 1 Black plays ... tt:le4 he tends t o s upport his
lit e 2 @g7 3 2 litd3 li:ld7 3 3 .1lb7 :1.a5 34 knight with .. .f7-f5!
.ic6 @g6 35 .1lb5 J:l.a8 36 lt:c3 l:b8 37 1 2 e3 llla 6 1 3 11'e2 .C.ac8 1 4 lll df3 li:lb4
:cs .C.e7 38 wb4 wf7 39 a5 Black is fully developed and therefore
There is no stopping this pawn. White's seeks to improve the knight.
bishops and rook dominate and Black can 1 5 dxc5
only wait for the end. White chooses to change the structure t o
39 . . .:as 40 J:l.d6 li:lb8 41 .ic4 g4 42 increase the scope of his bishop. Tht� in tum
wbs hs 43 il.. b 6 lZJd7 44 .li.d4 :ha+?! 45 gives Black tactical options with a later ...d5-
wa4 li:lf8 46 a6 J:l.c7 47 .1l b3 l:a8 48 d4.
lt:a5 l:b8 49 .1i.a4 li:lg6 50 l:d7+ l:xd7 15 . . . bxc5 1 6 a3 t:Zlc6?!
5 1 .i.xd7 �e7 52 a7 l:d8 53 i:.b5 l:as Klinger suggests the improvement
54 @a6 l:!d8 55 lt:b7 1Zld5 56 .li.a4 1Zlb4 16 ... CLla6! with unclear play. It looks as if
57 aa·111 l:xa8 58 wxa8 �d3 59 e4 f4 60 Black has lost two tempi b ut it is not that
.li.b5 1Zle 1 61 il.. e2 1 -0 simple: the b3-pawn is a weakness.
64
7 b3
1 7 lll xc6 l:!.xc6 1 8 Ill e s? for Black. I t is related t o 8 il.b2 lines, except
A grave error which invites dangerous tac in this system White postpones the matter of
tics. Klinger gives 1 8 il.xf6! 'ifxf6 19 cxdS the bishop's posting until later. In fact here
exdS 20 Z!fdl and White hits the hanging we see White opt for ilf4 to challenge its
pawns. counterpart on d6, and in some respects this
1 8 . . . l:!.b6 1 9 'i!Uc2 d4! 20 exd4 il..xg2 21 is a logical strategy. White puts his knights on
<;t>xg2 'il'b7+ 22 <;t>g1 l:!.xb3 23 il.. a 1 ?! · d3 and f3 and exchanges bishops. That
23 Cll d3 offers White better chances to de should be enough to afford him some kind
fend. Now his days are numbered. of an advantage, right? No! It is true that the
23 . . . il..x eS! knights are best placed at d3 and f3, and it is
By fixing the pawn on eS Black makes the true that the exchange generally -s uits White.
cornered bishop look quite ridiculous. Yet there are other principals that should be
24 dxeS lll e4 borne in mind. One such is, simply, devel
Suddenly the gS-square beckons. opment. While White's knights j ump around
2S h4 l:!.d8 the board Black completes his development,
Klinger's 25 .. .f4!? is also strong. not being too concerned with the eventual
26 l:!.cd 1 ? departure of his bishop.
Allowing a mating attack, although the
forced 26 l:!bl l:.xbl 27 l:.xbl 'ifd7 is
probably winning for Black.
26 . . . l::t xd1 27 �xd1
8 . . . b6!
This avoids tricks with Clldc4 by develop
ing the bishop quickly.
9 Ill e s il..b7 1 o llldf3 llle4 1 1 lll d 3 llld 7
27 . . . lll x g3 ! ! 28 <;t>h2 12 il..t4
28 fxg3 l:.xg3+ 29 Wh2 'iff3 followed by By now this exchange lacks punch be
... l:.h3+. cause Black's other pieces are doing nicely.
28 . . .'i!Ht3 29 't1Yd2 llln +!! 0-1 White has no advantage.
r-----.. 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 il..xd6 'i!Uxd6 1 4 l:!.c1 l:!.ac8 1 S
Game 8 lll teS ti:lxeS 1 6 lll xeS ?!
Kazhgaleyev-Del Rio Angelis Better is 16 dxeS with equality.
Ubeda 1999 1 6 . . . cS!
With this thematic challenge to the centre
1 d4 e6 2 c4 fS 3 g3 lllf6 4 il..g2 c6 S Black takes over the initiative, immediately
lllt3 dS 6 b3 il..d6 7 0-0 'i!Ue 7 8 lll bd2 inducing White to find a faulty plan and con
This move does not look very worrying sequently lose a pawn in a combination.
65
D u t c h S t o n e wall
1 7 f3?
8 . . . b6
17 . . . cxd4! 18 'tli'xd4 dxc4! 19 'tli'xd6 It might be better to challenge the knight
<Llxd6 20 .!;ifd 1 on eS directly. This can be done with
The correct continuation is 20 ll:lxc4 8 ... ll:lbd7!?, which has been played in only a
ll:lxc4 2 1 :l:txc4 :l:txc4 22 bxc4 when White few games and therefore is difficult to assess.
counters 22 ... �c8 with the uncompromising Anyway, White continues 9 .tb2 (the only
23 :l:tdl!, though the calm 23 ... J::lc 7! (intend- really testing move; 9 l2\d3 0-0 10 il.f4 il.xf4
ing ... �f7-e7 and maybe also ... .ta6) remains 1 1 ll:lxf4 b6 12 "iic l .tb7 1 3 "iia3 "iif7 14
excellent for Black. ll:ld2 gS 15 tLld3 g4 16 "iib2 l:1ae8 17 a4 cS
20 . . . cxb3! produced a complex game with chances for
Wins a pawn and the game. both sides in Lutz-Yusupov, Baden Baden
21 l:txc8 J:l'.xc8 22 axb3 i..d 5 23 g4 f4 24 1992, and 9 .tf4? loses a pawn to 9 ... .txeS!
g5 tllf7 25 tlld3 i.. xb3 26 l:l'.b1 i..c4 27 10 dxeS ll:lg4) 9 ... 0-0 (9 ... .txeS?! 10 dxeS
<Llxf4 tllx g5 28 h4 e5 29 <Llh5 tlle 6 30 tLlg4 1 1 .cxdS exdS 12 "iid4! gives White a
J.. h 3 J:l'.c6 31 @f2 12lf4 32 <Llxf4 exf4 33 clear plus) 10 ll:ld2 and now the point of
J:l'.d 1 J..e6 34 J..xe6+ l'he6 35 J:l'.d7 a5 36 Black's strategy is supposed to be 10 ... aS!
l:ta7 Wf8 37 h 5 J:te7 38 J:ta6 J:te6 39 lla7
h6 40 We1 l'ld6 41 @f2 J:td5 42 J:ta6 llb5
43 @g2 @f7 44 @h3 l'lb4 45 @g4 @f6
46 J:ta8 g6 47 J:tt8+ @g7 48 l'la8 a4 49
l'lc8 gxh5+ 50 lt>f5 J:l'.b5+ 0-1
Game 9
Goldin-Glek
USSR 1 988
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 <Llf6 4 il.g2 c6 5
<Llf3 d5 6 0-0 i..d 6 7 b3 W/ie7 8 tlle 5!
This is the most dangerous way of
challenging Black's set-up. The knight Black seeks counterplay on the queenside
advance is directed against natural while leaving the bishop on c8 for the mo
development with . ..b7-b6, unleashing the ment. Now 1 1 a3 has been tried (with the
bishop on g2. idea of meeting l l...a4 with 12 b4!). Then
66
7 b3
67
D u t c h S t o n e wall
A mistake that leaves White's king ex 'iie2 and White is on top.
posed and hands the initiative straight back 35 i.xe4
to B lack. After the stronger 30 i.xe4! i.xe4 35 lL'if4 :C:.h8+! 36 <.ilgl l:!.a8 37 'il'b6 l:a6
3 1 ifxaS White nets a pawn but Black has and Black wins.
obvious compensation on the light squares. 35 . . .J:l:.hS! 36 @g1
I'm not sure how he is able to exploit this, 36 i.g2!? i.xg2 37 'il'c3 :xh3+ 38
but there should be something. 'il'd5+ 39 f3 f4! 40 gxf4 'il'h5 41 li'c4+
30 . . .'iilf x d 1 + 31 wh2 h6! also wins for Black. Now White has no more
This is most likely what White had failed serious checks.
to appreciate. The prospect of the h-file 36 . . . :!:!.xh3 37 fia7
opening proves too much for White to han 37 i.xb7 'il'xb7 is just dead and gone.
dle. 37 . . .fxe4 38 'iilfxc5 e3 39 fic4+ 'itig7 0- 1
Game 10
Akopian-Guliev
Pula 1 997
32 'iilfx a5?
Glek offers a complicated alternative line
as another path leading to a very promising
position for Black. Unfonunately his analysis
seems to be wrong: 32 'iib 2! hxg5 33 tl:ih3
\\Vd4! 34 tl:ixg5 + �f6, and now instead of
Glek's 35 tl:if3 ifxb2 36 l:h8 + ! 37
<;tig1 .:ld8 with advantag!: to Black, White
has 35 Lbxe4 + ! fxe4 36 11Wc 1! (36 \i!Vxd4 + ? As we saw in the previous game 10 i.f4
cxd4 3 7 .i.xe4 d3!! would b e a real shock to poses Black no problems. The reason why
the systemQ 36 ...l:th8 + 37 <;tig1 and it is hard the bishop is better placed on b2 is simple.
to see why White should be any worse, al We know that Black is going to play ...i.b7
though there is a good deal of defending still to continue development and that this will
to do. leave the fS-pawn exposed, which in turn
32 . . . hxg5 33 l:ie1 'iilfd 7 ! 34 l2:ih3 g4! should induce ... g7-g6 after 'il'c2. It is also
The correct move order. 34 ... J::[ a 8? 35 clear that . . .c6-c5 is a major part of Black's
'Vl'b6 :C:.a6? does not win the queen due to 36 counterplay, to which White docs best to
·1:'lxg5+ <.ilg8 (36 ... <.ilg7 37 J:Id 1 ! 'ii'c8 38 'il'bS! reply dxc5, leaving Black with hanging
gives White a substantial advantage) 37 :dt! pawns. When this happens the al-h8 diago
'il'xdl 38 'il'xb7 'il'h5+ 39 <.ilg1 'il'd l+ 40 i.ft nal opens up and, naturally, this is where we
41 li'xa6 lL'if3+ 42 <.ilh 1 followed by prefer to have our bishop! Bence 10 ..tb2!
68
7 b3
20 'i'xt6+
This is the pragmatic approach. Later
Akopian analysed the following very beauti
ful winning line:
20 'lWh5+!? �g7 21 f4 il..xf4! (the only way White has the better of the deal - three
to put up any resistance) 22 gxf4 'lWxf4 23 connected passed pawns for a piece.
<1'lc3 'lWf2+ (23 ... fi'.hS 24 ii.cl!) 24 Whl lWxb2 34 . . . .il.e5 35 l;Je1 !
69
D u tc h S t o n e wall
Game 12
Portisch-Van der Wiel
Amsterdam 1 990
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 lLlfG 4 i..g 2 d5 5
lLlf3 c6 6 0-0 il.d6 7 b3 Wle7 8 lLle5 0-0
This move is unpleasant but necessary, as This is far more sensible than 8 ... b6. Black
we saw in the previous game. White now plans to develop his bishop over on the king"
develops normally. side via d7 and e8, relying on the greater so
1 2 lLld2 0-0 1 3 J:Iac1 c5 1 4 lLldf3 lLla6! lidity of his centre. White is also happy to
W ith the two white knights working in face this form of development, fo r now it is
tandem Black is not interested in challenging harder for Black to break with ...c6-c5, and at
es. Instead he prepares his own forces ready times the bishop cannot find a better square
fo r battle! than f7. As for Black, there is nothing to
70
7 b3
71
D u t c h St o n e wall
�c8 27 'ii'd6 g4! 28 ll:le5 ll:lxd4 29 l'.!e l! �e7 40 g4 Black's position falls apart.
guarantees White a commanding position. 38 J:ic5 1l.d7 39 :!:l.c7! b6?
Note that Black cannot play 29 ... ttJxe2+? due The final mistake. Black can still hope
to 30 �fl!, and White wins material. with 39 ... 'ii'g7 40 'i!'h4! We8! 41 l:t.xb7 ll:lc6,
22 . . . 'lih6! 23 'ilVc1 ! when he has finally untangled and achieved
23 tLlc7?? LLlc3! and the tables are turned. some sort of development, although White
23 . . . 'tli'xe6 24 lt'lxg5 'ilVd7! remains in the driving seat, still with his three
Keeping control over the most important pawns for the piece.
squares. 40 1l.f1 !
25 lt'lxe4 dxe4
25 . .fxe4!? 26 'ii'g S+ �f7 27 'ife3! 'ii'e7 28
.
72
7 b3
1 2 . . .12le4
Another route is 12 ... �h8!? 13 il..f4 (the
beginning of a series of exchanges which in
principle favours White but earns him only
an edge) 13 ... fl'.d8 14 'i!'cl h6 15 ll:lxd7 ll:lxd7
16 il.xd6 'ii'xd6 17 'i!'f4 (this is not neces
sary) 17 . . . 'ii'xf4 18 ll:lxf4 il.f7 1 9 cxd5 cxd5
and White's reduced forces leave him only a White's forces dominate.
touch better, Petursson-Hansen, Malmo 26 . . .'ilVe6 27 h4 12lh7 28 f4 ..lii..h5 29 l'lc1
1993. This position was discussed in the In Wh8 30 'ilVb2 12lt6 31 'tli'e5 'tli'xe5 32 fxe5
troduction. 12lxd5 33 ..lii..x d5 l'le8 34 e6
1 3 'ilVc2 h6 The endgame is close to winning for
13 . . .tLixe5 14 dxe5 i.. c7 15 a4! is promis White, and the GM over-runs the amateur
ing for White. 13 .. . .tf7 14 lLixd7 'ii'xd7 15 c5 with ease.
il.c7 16 il.f4 is also inadvisable for Black 34. . . J:ie7 35 wt2 g 6 36 We3 Wg7 37
thanks to the bishop on f7 being genuinely Wd4 Wf6 38 :!:!.cs ..lii.. g4 39 l:ih8 Wg7 40
lacking in potential. l:ta8 Wf6 41 J:it8+ �g7 42 J:tt7+ l:ixf7 43
14 f3 itSg 5 1 5 ..lii.. d 2!? exf7 Wf8 44 We5 We7 45 tS'IW + ! Wxf8
This looks rather strange but has its ad 46 Wf6 g5 47 hxg5 hxg5 48 ..lii.e . 6 a5 49
vantages. Also possible is 1 5 i.. f4! with a Wxg5 Wg7 50 ..lii.. xt5 ..lii.. d 1 5 1 wt4 b5 52
small plus. We5 b4 53 Wd4 Wf6 54 g4 a4 55 Wc4
1 5 . . . c5! 1 -0
Definitely the correct move. 15 ... tLlxe5? 16
dxe5 il.c7 17 cxd5! exd5 18 il.b4 was the Game 14
idea behind 15 il.d2. Wessman-Andrianov
16 e3 b6 New York 1 990
16 . . .l:!c8! is more convincing. Develop
your pieces! 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 12lt6 4 ..lii.. g 2 c6 5
1 7 ..lii.. c3 12lxe5? 12lt3 d5 6 0-0 ..lii.. d6 7 b3 "W/e7 8 12le5 0-0
73
D u t c h S t o n e wa ll
74
7 b3
'tli'd2
White has a lasting positional advantage.
1 6 . . . l'De4 1 7 12lxe4 dxe4 1 8 J:itd1 12la5
1 9 l:tab1 'ilVd5 20 f3 1l.b7 21 fxe4 fxe4
22 1l.b4 12lc6 23 1l.c3 12le7 24 l'lf1 'tli'h5 1 3 '1Wc 1 !
25 1l.b4 1Uf5 26 J:tf4 'ilVg6 27 l'lbf1 h5 28 Planning 14 ll:lfe5.
d5 l'ld8 29 1l.xe4 1l.xd5 30 1l.xt5 exf5 31 13 ...dxc4 14 bxc4 e5 15 c5 1l.c7 1 6
l'ld4 1 -0 dxe5 12lgxe5 1 7 12itxe5 12ixe5 1 8 'tWe3
12lg6 19 'tli'xe7 12lxe7 20 l:tab1
Game 16 White has the advantage as his pieces are
Bareev-P .Nikolic better and Black has a real weakness at b7.
Groningen 1993 20 . . . b5?!
This creates an even weaker pawn on c6,
1 d4 f5 2 c4 12lt6 3 g3 e6 4 1l.g2 c6 5 strengthening the potentially passed c5-pawn.
i2lf3 d5 6 0-0 1l.d6 7 b3 'ilVe7 8 1Ue5 0-0 Again 20 ...il.h5 ! is necessary, finishing the
9 1l.b2 1l.d7 ! ? job.
A s Black cannot post his bishop on b7 di 21 l'lfd 1 ! a5 22 1l.e5?!
rectly he chooses to take the longer route to Better to keep this bishop and still remove
h5, from where the bishop will join the game. its opposite number with 22 ll:lf4! il.xf4 23
This gives White some time to create a gxf4, when the two strong bishops threaten
queenside initiative, but at least Black has yet to take over. In the game the cl-file turns out
to weaken· his structure there, as happens to hold little promise for White.
with ... b7-b6. For the interesting 9 ... ll:le4!? 22 . . . 1l.xe5 23 1Uxe5 l'lc8 24 l'ld6 l:ic7 25
see the next game. l:tbd1 g6 26 J:i 1 d2! �g7
10 12ld2! After 26 ... il.f7 White wins a pawn with 27
The most challenging approach. 10 'i!'cl?! il.xc6! ll:lxc6 28 l'.!xc6 l'.!xc6 29 ll:lxc6.
is slow: 10 . . .il.e8 11 .ta3 tLlbd7 12 ll:ld3 27 t4! b4!
.th5 13 ll:lf4 .tf7 14 .txd6 'ii'xd6 15 'ii'a3 Intending ... a5-a4 to distract White with
'ii'c7 16 cxd5 exd5 17 e3 l:1ae8 1 8 l2\d2 ll:le4 the threat of creating a passed pawn. Again
19 'ii'b2 'ii' d6 and Black had no problems in 27 ...il.f7 loses a pawn: 28 l'.!d7 l'.!fc8 29 il.xc6
Espig-Knaak, Stralsund 1988. ll:lxc6 30 ll:lxf7 ll:lb8 3 1 l'.!xc7 fl'.xc7 32 ll:lg5.
10 . . . 1l.e8 1 1 12ldf3 12lbd7 1 2 12ld3 12lg4?! 28 l'ld8 1l.t7 29 l'12d7?!
More chances to claim an advantage come
see follo wing diagram
with 29 fl'.8d7, although 29 . . . l'.!fc8 30 il.xc6
More consistent and better is 12 ... il.h5, af ll:lxc6 3 1 ll:lxf7 �g8! might defend. After 32
ter which the position is balanced, although tLlg5 l:1xd7 33 l'.!xd7 a4 34 ll:lxh7 b3 35 axb3
White might have an edge after 13 ll:lfe5 !. axb3 36 C?lf6+ 'ltf8 White has nothing better
75
D u tch S to n e wall
76
7 b3
Summary
Against 7 b3 Black should play 7... 'VJ/ie7 to avoid the immediate exchange of dark-squared bish
ops. Of course White does have several ways of insisting on this exchange, namely 8 i.f4, 8
c5?!, 8 a4 and 8 i.b2 b6 9 'VJ/icl, but each of these has its drawbacks and allows Black to
equalize. If White chooses to develop normally Black's game should never be uncomfortable,
the most White can hope for being a position that he might find easier to play.
The only real test after 7 b3 'VJ/ie7 is 8 llle5!, immediately aiming to disturb Black's develop
ment on the queenside. Indeed Black finds himself with a slight disadvantage after 8...b6 due
to 9 cxd5 exd5 10 i..b2!, so he must look for other replies. One way is 8 ...lllbd7!? (Game 9,
note to Black's 8th move) to challenge the knight, but 8 .. 0-0 is the most versatile. The tradi
.
tional bishop journey with 9 ... i.d7-e8-h5 merits attention (Game 16), and .there is also
Schlosser's exciting 9... llle4!? (Game 17), which tries to address the situation in a different way.
Black should be able to cope with 7 b3 without too much effort.
8 lllbd2 Game 8
-
8 . . . 0-0
8...b6 9 cxd5 exd5 (D)
10 ..ll. f4 - Game 9
10 i.b2 i.b7 1 1 'VJ/ic2
1 1 ...0-0?1 - Game 10; 1 1 . ..g6 - Game 11
9 .ll b2 (D)
9 llld2 i..d7 10 lll df3 i..e8 1 1 llld3 lllbd7
1 2 ..ll. f4 - Game 12; 12 lllfeS! Game 13
-
9 ...i.d7 - Game 16
8. . . b6 9 . . exd5
. 9 i.b2
77
CHAPTER TWO I
White Plays 7 jLf4
d3 and has more point than the simple 9 10 ... i.b7 1 1 cxdS cxdS 12 lllb S 'il'd7 13
lll bd2 (Games 21-22), and 9 lllc3 (Game 26) 'il'c7! l:tcB 14 'il'xd7! lllbxd7 1 5 llld6 is also
lacks a point. The main move is 9 e3, when difficult for Black.
9...'il'e7 (Game 27) and 9 ... i.d7 (Game 28) 1 1 J:tac1 ..ll b7 1 2 cxd5 cxd5 1 3 lllb5
are less popular than 9... llle4 (Games 29-31). �e7?
Choosing the natural square in view of an
Game 18 inevitable llle S, but forcing White to defend
Beliavsky-Bareev the bS-knight is necessary, when 1 3...'i!'d7 14
USSR 1 987 'il'b3 l:!.fc8 15 llleS retains White's lead.
14 �a4 llle8
1 d 4 f 5 2 c 4 lllt6 3 g3 e 6 4 ..ll g 2 d5 5 Black's defensive task is made more diffi
lllt3 c6 6 0-0 ..ll d6 7 ..llf4 0-0? cult by being unable to contest the c-file as
78
7 .1J.. f4
Game 19
Van der Sterren-Winants
Wijk aan Zee 1990
1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 .1J..g 2 illt6 4 c4 c6 5
illf3 d5 6 0-0 .1J.. d6 7 .1J..t4 .1J.. xt4
At least this way sees White suffer incon
venience for the removal of the dark-squared
bishops in the shape of his altered kingside
complex.
8 gxf4 ill bd7
This move is slightly inaccurate but need
1 5 llc3 ill ec7 1 6 ill xc7 not harm Black's prospects if followed by
White has to play accurately to keep his 9 ... 0-0.
advantage. For example Beliavsky gives the 9 e3
following line as equal: 16 �fc1 l:tfc8 17 llle5
lllxb5! 18 'il'xb5 �xc3 19 Itxc3 lllc 7 20 'i!'a4
a6 2 1 'il'b3 'i!'d6 and Black holds.
1 6 ... ill xc7 1 7 h3!!
With this surprisingly strong move White
introduces a new challenge to Black's pawn
structure and prepares to open a second
front of attack, a thematic progression after
softening Black up on the queenside.
1 7 . . J:tfcS 1 8 g4 g6
.
79
D u t c h S t o n e wall
1 1 �a4! ..ll b 7
Black already has development problems
with his king stuck in the centre. Note that
11...0-0 loses to 12 'il'c6!.
1 2 �a3!
Again Black's king comes under inspec
tion, practically forcing the exchange of
queens and producing a position in which
Black has no prospects of genuine counter
play. One of the main reasons is that without
queens on the board there is no threat of an
attack from Black, and White can even re
move an unwelcome knight with i.xe4 be 49 �g6 �xd7 50 Wxg7 ..ll c6 51 h4 1 -0
cause his remaining pieces are strong. White
has certainly won the opening battle. Game 20
1 2 . . . °ilfe7 1 3 l':!.c1 ! 'lli'xa3 1 4 ill xa3 WdS Krasenkov-Ulibin
1 5 illb 5 Illes 16 ill g 5 @e7 1 7 ill c 7 ill xc7 Polish TVKnockout 1997
1 S J::i xc7 l':!.abS 1 9 l':!.ac1
I have a feeling that there is something
wrong with this game - probably the result. I
guess that it was a quickplay game, which
would help explain the strange mistakes at
the end. However I find it very interesting
and instructive, so here we go ...
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 illf6 4 .ltg2 c6 5
illf3 d5 6 0-0 ..\ld6 7 ..llf4 ..ll xf4 S gxf4
0-0 9 'lli'b 3!?
80
7 1i.. f4
sible since b7 is under fire. A nother clever when I believe Black is doing well. It is the
idea is that 9 ...'il'b6 is answered with 10 this game that does not fit
tactical as pect of
'i!'c2!, when the black queen is awkwardly in with Black's strategy.
placed on b6, while its opposite number is 14 l/)xe4 fxe4 1 5 li:le5 li:Jd7 1 6 f3
fine on c2. Not crucial, of course, but still a White's development lead is beginning to
superior version for White than the immedi tell, although Black should not be unduly
ate 9 'i!'c2. As only two games have been worried just yet.
played with the text at the this level it is not 1 6 . . . l2lxe5 1 7 dxe5 exf3 1 8 J::i xf3 g5?
yet clear what we can expect from this line.
Personally I believe that Black should find
some comfortable way to equalize, and that
this already exists in some of the major
Stonewall experts' personal files.
9 . . . 'life7
I do not think that this is less logical than
9 ... b6, which was the move Krasenkov met
when he first tried 9 'il'b3!?. Krasenkov
Gleizerov, Poland 1993, continued 10 lt:'ic3
i..b7 (not necessarily best as Black can also
try to take advantage of the awkward posi
tion of White's queen with 10 ... .1La6!? 1 1
cxd5 lt:'ixd5 ! 1 2 lt:'ixd5 exd5 13 'ifc2 'Ii'd6 14 But this is simply a beginner's mistake
lt:'ie5 'il'e6 15 ldfcl Itc8 16 i..h3 g6 17 e3 from a strong GM, and difficult to believe.
lt:'id7 with a decent position - this line de Of course Black has his reasons but he is
serves further investigation) 11 l:!.acl lt:'ie4 12 nevertheless violating one of the most im
lt:'ixe4?! (I agree with Gleizerov that 12 l:!.fd1 portant principles of chess: do not open the
gives White an edge) 12 .. . fxe4 13 lt:'ig5 l'!.f6 position when your opponent is ahead in
14 cxd5 cxd5 (14 ... exd5! seems much better, development.
with the tactical justification evident in the 1 9 J::i g3?
variation 15 .1Lxe4 h6 16 lt:'ih3 l:!.e6 17 iLf3 Hastily beginning the attack. After the ac
'i!'h4 1 8 'iitig2 �h8 and Black has good com curate 19 llgl! White enjoys his new open
pensation for the pawn, while 15 lt:'ixe4 l:!.xf4 file and an advantage. The impatient text
16 lt:'ic5 i..c8 is unclear) 14 ...cxd5 15 .lth3 affords Black an opportunity to get claim
'i!'d7 (also possible is 15 ... '!Wd6 16 'i!'a3 'il'd7 justification in his ambitious thrust of the g
1 7 lt:'ixe6! [1 7'il'g3?! Does not work out well pawn.
after 17 . . .lt:'ic6 18 ..11.xe 6+ llxe6 19 'il'h3 l:!.d6 1 9 . . . gxf4 20 exf4 J::ixf4!
20 �xh7+ 'iitif8 21 '!Wh8+ 'iitie7 22 'i!'xg7+ This also seems risky but Black's reason
'iitid8] 17 ...l:!.xe6 18 i..xe6+ 'il'xe6 19 .i:rc7 and ing is easy to follow: White will gain some
White has compensation according to Gleiz time to facilitate his attack and Black lags
erov) 16 f5 exfS 17 lt:'ixe4 Mh6, and now 18 behind in development, but this is a free
lt:'igS! lt:'ic6 19 'i!'d3 l:!.f6 20 f4 left White pawn, and Black is not without resources.
slightly better. From a practical standpoint it is the familiar
1 0 ll'lbd2 li:le4 1 1 e3 WhS 1 2 '.t>h 1 li:ld7 situation of the attacker and the defender -
1 3 'lli'c2 '2ldf6 White need-; only appreciate the idea of i.fl
Black is too busy with his knights. d3 in order to decide on 19 l:rg3, but Black
13 ...b6!? is a perfectly reliable alternative, has to search for and analyse numerous such
81
Du tch S t o n e wall
ideas. Defending might go well for some can thus be considered as a more flexible
moves but it is easier for Black to make a version of 9... i.d7. Browne-Christiansen,
mistake than for White. Los Angeles 1996, continued 9 ...i.d7 10
21 l::t. g 1 llle S .1Le8 11 'i!'b3 'il'b6 (11...'i!'e7 followed
With the key idea i.xdS to clear the g-file. by 12 ...llla6 or 12 ...llle4 seems more
21 . . . .J1l.d7 22 .J1l.f1 ! appropriate; the queen has no business on
The grand plan, intending to triple with 23 b6) 12 'i!'c3!? lllbd7 13 e3 l:!.d8 14 cxdS cxdS
'il'g2. 15 f3 h6 16 lllb 3 lllxeS 17 fxeS llld7 18 £4
22 . . . �f7 i.hS 19 Itfcl with a better game for White.
From here on things get rather weird. In Black can also play 9...lllbd7. A good
stead 22...cS!? 23 'il'g2 'i!'f8 24 i.d3 Itf7 25 game to illustrate White's possibilities on the
l:!.h3 'i!'e7! 26 l:tg3 'il'f8 is a drawing line. queenside is Olafsson-Chandler, Hastings
23 .J1l.d3 l:tf2 24 �d1 c5?? 1990. White played 10 b4!, a strong pawn
Losing valuable time. Forced is 24...dxc4! sacrifice that Black should consider declining.
25 l:tg7! cxd3! 26 l:txf7 l:txf7 27 'il'xd3 cS After 10 ... aS 1 1 a3 axb4 12 axb4 l:!.xal 13
with a dynamically balanced position. 'i!'xal dxc4 14 lllxc4 llldS 15 e3 lllxb4 16
25 l':!.h3 ?! 1 -0 l:!.b l lllds 17 'i!'a3 lll7f6 18 lllfeS White had
Black must block with 25 ... l:!.fS, parting definite compensation and later won.
with an exchange. It seems unfair to look for 1 o Ille s .ad7 1 1 e3
an improvement on a move that results in 11 'i!'b3 i.e8 is mentioned in the previous
resignation, but White has a forced win in 25 note; for 1 1 a3 see Game 23.
cxdS! exdS 26 l:!.g7 d4 27 l:!.xf7 i.c6+ 28 l:!.g2 1 1 ... .J1l.e8 12 '.t>h 1 '>i>h8 13 l::t. g 1 ill bd7 1 4
i.xg2+ (28 ... l:!.xg2 29 l:txh7+ 'iitig8 30 'il'b3+) illdf3
29 \t>gl l:!.xf7 30 'iitixg2 l:!.g8+ 3 1 'iitih t.
Game 21
Meduna -Klinger
Bracco 1 990
1 d4 e6 2 g3 f5 3 .J1l.g2 illf6 4 c4 c6 5
illf3 d5 6 0-0 .ad6 7 .J1l.t4 .J1l.xf4 8 gxf4
0-0 9 illb d2
The logic behind the text is that it will be
played anyway sooner or later, and perhaps it
is more important than e2-e3. Who knows?
It is not an easy question to answer. If Black
plays the logical 9... llle4 White cannot take 1 4 . . . ill g4!
because f4 is unprotected, so there is 10 llle S This solves Black's opening problems but
lll bd7 11 llld3 !?, or 10 e3 with a transposi is at the same time a little boring. However, it
tion to Games 30 and 3 1 (and possibly does serve to demonstrate that White has no
Games 24 and 27). advantage to slow in this line.
9 . . . �e7 ! ? 1 5 �e2 ill dxe5 1 6 lll xe5 'lli'h4 1 7 lllxg4
Not the most natural. 9 ...llle4 attracts at fxg4 1 8 f3 .J1l.h5 1 9 fxg4 .J1l.xg4 20 .J1l.f3
tention, but not from the games played. Also .J1l.xt3+ 21 i!'xf3 �f6 22 �h5 dxc4 23
logical is 9... i.d7, as in the next game and l:!.ac1 l':!.ad8 24 l:!.xc4 l':!.d5 25 �g4 h6 26
this note. 9...'i!'e7 can easily transpose and l:!.c2 g5 27 llf2 e5 28 dxe5 l::t. xe5 29 h4
82
7 .1l f4
1 9 . . . illd 7?
Black's defensive task is difficult and it is
1 0 . . . b5?! doubtful whether he can hold in the long
A rather drastic reaction to the threat to term. Levitt gives the following nice lines:
the b-pawri, allowing White to close the 19 ... lllf6? 20 'il'h3 lllbd7 21 lllxe6! l:!.xe6 22
queenside and subsequently be the first to l:txg7+ 'iitih8 23 'il'xh7+!! lllxh7 24 l:!.g8+ l:!.xg8
create threats on the kingside. Better is the 25 lllf7 with a fantastic mate, and 19 ... l:!.f6?
more flexible 10...'i!'c8 11 llle S i.e8 12 'iitih l 20 'i!'h3 l:!.h6 2 1 'il'xh6 gxh6 22 lllxe4+ 'iitih8
i.hS 13 f3 lllbd7 14 l:!.acl @h8 15 e4 dxe4 23 lll f6 and White has an easy win. Finally,
16 fxe4 lllxeS 17 dxeS, and a draw was 19 ... lllxgS! looks best, when 20 l:!.xg5 l:!.f6 2 1
agreed in Levitt-LB.Hansen, Denmark 1990. 'il'g3 'il'f8 2 2 h4 i s quite unpleasant for Black
1 1 c5! but the best hope.
Fixing the weakness on c6, which Black 20 illx h7!!
will be busy protecting c6. Consequently Not 20 lllxe6? lllxf2+!, and Black survives.
Black will have problems finding harmony 20 . . .'.t>xh7 21 ill g6 �dS 22 �h3+ WgS
for his forces. 23 �hS+ '>i>f7 24 ill xfS!
1 1 . . . a5 1 2 Ill e s .aes 1 3 '.t>h1 l:Ia7 1 4 Levitt entertains us with an amusing win
l:tg 1 .'1l.h5 1 5 .1J..t3! ning line after 24 llleS+?! lllxeS? (24 ... We8 is
White is ready to launch his attack on the necessary) 25 l:!.xg7+ @e8 26 'il'xf8+! @xf8 27
g-file. ki'.gB+ ¢iff7 28 Ylg7+ �f6 29 dxeS mate!
83
D u t ch S t o n e walf
24 . . . illxfS 2S l:txg7+ WeS 26 �xfS+! 1 -0 This is the idea behind 9 ... 'il/e7. On
10 ... tt'lbd7 White can play 11 lt:ld3!? with an
Game 23 edge.
Brestian -Klinger 1 1 a3 aS?!
Austria 1 989 I do not like this move, which seems to
facilitate White's queenside play, although by
1 d4 e6 2 illt3 ts 3 c4 illf6 4 g3 dS S this stage White can already claim a slight
..ll g 2 c6 6 0-0 ..\ld6 7 ..llt4 ..llxf4 8 gxf4 advantage.
0-0 9 Ill e s 1 2 cS
Clamping down on the b7-pawn.
1 2 . . . ..Iles 13 b4 axb4 1 4 axb4 illa 6 1 S
e3 lt'hS 1 6 '.t>h1
It is not unusual to see both kings leave
the g-file after the recapture gxf4.
1 6 . . . ..llh 5 17 t3
84
7 .1l f4
85
D u tc h S t o n e wall
86
7 .\t f4
activating his bishop and leaving its opposite 9\f3 c6 6 0 O .lid6 7 Xlf4 .\1. xf4 8 gxf4
number punching air. After 15 .. m6 16 t·xd'i
. 0-0 9 0 \c3
exdS (16...cxdS 17 'ii'xb6 axb6 18 Hid 0\a(, /\s has already been discussed elsewhere a
19 a3 might improve, although White's knight on c3 tends to carry out no other
knight reigns and Black is struggling) 17 .llc8 runction than removing a troublesome horse
'ii'xb3 18 axb3 a6 19 ..ltxb7 ria7 20 .l'.i..c8 it from e4, for from c3 it is not in contact with
has been a worthwhile expedition for White, the important e5-square. Consequently the
netting a pawn. text is not considered to pose Black any diffi
1 5 . . . exf3 1 6 .ltxf3 .ltxf3 1 7 l;ixf3 'l!l'xb3 culties. Moreover with stereotyped play
1 8 axb3 l:i:d8 White can easily find himself in an awkward
Thanks to the series of exchanges Black is situation.
close to achieving equality. Consequently, 9 . . . b6
with his opponent ready to bring his knight This is not the only way to achieve a good
into play, White wastes no time stepping up position. 9... i.d7 10 'ii'b3 'ii' b6 1 1 ClleS! ..lte8
the pace. 12 'ii'a3! was Birnboim-Keitlinghaus, Ramat
1 9 f5! exf5 20 l:i:xf5 �d7 21 il:lxd7 l:i:xd7 Hasharon 1987, when Black could have kept
22 cxd5 cxd5 23 l:i:a5! the balance with 12 ...'ii'd 8!.
1 0 �e5 Jtb7 1 1 il'a4
Hoping to inconvenience Black by exert
ing pressure on the c6-pawn. Unfortunately
Black can address this matter comfortably,
leaving White with insufficient pressure to
justify the queen sally.
87
Du tch S to n e wall
history, having all but disappeared from the 1 3 . . .exf3 14 li:lxf3 1l.e8 1 5 �b3 dxc4 1 6
professional scene since Beliavsky-Yusupov, 'iii xc4
Linares 1989: 10 'ii'e2 (10 ctJe5 ct'ixeS 1 1 White might have a slight edge but is
dxe5 ct'id7 12 ct'id2 'ii'e7 13 z:!.cl l:!.d8 14 'ii'c2 eventually outplayed by his higher rated op
was better for White in Beliavsky-Van der ponent.
Wiel, Amsterdam 1990, but Black could have 16 . . . i'.Lld7 17 liJe5
improved with 10... li:Je4) 10... �h8 1 1 ctJc3 Since White now achieves nothing from
'ii' e7 12 �h 1 l:'tg8 13 cxd5! with advantage to opening the d-file the text seems a little pre
White. Check out this game in the Introduc mature.
tion. 1 7 . . . il:lxe5 1 8 dxe5 21. f7 1 9 .!fad1 l:!ad8
1 0 liJbd2! 20 j}_f3 h6 2 1 b4 l:!xd1 22 .!bd1 l:i:d8 23
The key to White's plan is to keep in l:!d4 'tlol'h4
touch with the e5-square. The alternative The problem for White is his vulnerable
deployment of the knight is less dangerous kingside. Note that White's bishop is busy
for Black, for after 10 ctJc3 White's lack of defending the king, an inconvenience that
communication between his knights affords Black does not experience with his superior
Black the luxury of being able to send his kingside formation.
bishop to h5 with 10 ... ..td7!. Bauer-Vaiser, 24 l:i:xd8+ 'tiol'xd8 25 'i/Hc3 il'h4 26 il'd2
Cappelle 1994 continued 1 1 ctJe5 ..te8 12 21.96 27 a3 �h7 28 e4
..tf3 li:Je4 13 z:!.cl ct'id7 14 �hl 'ii'h 4 15 The circumspect 28 'ii' f2 holds together
ct'ixd7 ..txd7 16 i.xe4 fxe4 17 f3 exf3 18 without further compromising White's
'ii'xf3 i.e8 19 'ii' g3 'ii'e7 20 ct'idl c5 21 cxd5 pawns. Now both e4 and f4 are potentially
cxd4 22 exd4 exd5 23 li:Jc3 i.g6 24 .l:!.ce 1 weak, and the eS-pawn might also be under
..te4+ with an equal game. mined after ...g7-g5.
1 0 . . . liJe4 28 . . . 21.h5 29 j}_g2 'i/Hg4 30 il'e3 'iiid 1 + 3 1
Black can also try 10 ... i.d7!? but I have a 'i&t2 il'c2+ 3 2 Wg3 j;_g6 33 j;_f3 b 6 34
feeling that White should achieve some kind h4 h5 35 il'e2 'tlol'b 1 36 j}_xh5
of advantage. Nonetheless Cisneros-Vaiser, Allowing the change of pace Black has
Spain 1996 saw Black earn himself a playable been looking for. 36 'ii'e3 looks sensible,
position after 1 1 ctJe5 i.e8 12 a3 ct'ibd7 13 while 36 f5!? is also possible.
ct'ixd7 'ii'xdT 14 c5 h6 15 ct'if3 '>ith8 16 ctJe5 36 . . . 'iiig 1 + 37 Wh3 'tiol'h 1 + 38 Wg3 j}_xe4
'ii' e7 17 �h 1 l:!.g8 18 l:!.gl g5. 39 j;_g4 'iiig 1 + 40 Wh3 'tlol'h 1 + 41 Wg3
1 1 liJxe4 fxe4 1 2 liJd2! j}_d7 1 3 f3 'tlol'g1 + 42 Wh3 11.d5
89
D u t c h S t o n e wal!
43 f5 1 0 . . . 'iii b6
Another committal move, but Black has The queen tends not to be well placed on
this pawn covered. 43 i.f3 is safer. b6, but Black wishes to reduce the pressure.
43 . . . 'iiic 1 44 fxe6 il'xa3+ 45 Wh2 il'xb4 10...'ii'c8!? 11 Cllc3 ..lte8 12 l:!.acl i.hS is the
46 i.f5+ Wg8 47 .lth7+ Wh8 only decent alternative (for some reason Lo
47 ... �xh7 48 'ii'h5+ �g8 49 'ii'f7+ draws. bron mentions only 10...'ii'c7).
48 Wg3 .ltxe6 49 .ltd3 Wg8 50 h5 'i/Hd4 1 1 li:lc3 1l.e8
51 il.g6 b5 52 .ltc2 a5 53 11.96 a4 54 Trading queens does not damage White's
'iiie 1 b4 55 'ii'e 2 ..ll c4 56 "tlol'e1 il'c3+ 57 pawn structure, rather presents White with a
'iiixc3 bxc3 0-1 ready-made open a-file.
1 2 'iiic 2!
Game 28 Another example of this crafty retreat to a
Lebron -Hort useful square to leave the black queen doing
Munich 1991 next to nothing on b6. In fact the queen is
perhaps better placed on d8!
1 d 4 f 5 2 g3 �f6 3 .ltg2 e 6 4 i'.Llf3 d5 5 1 2 . . . il:la6?!
c4 c6 6 0-0 .\td6 7 .ltf4 .ltxf4 8 gxf4 0-0 And the knight must be poor here. Lo
9 e3 .ltd7 !? bron suggests the more flexible 12 ...'>ii h8!?
Another natural looking try, intending to but I still prefer White.
transfer the bishop to freedom on h5 as soon 1 3 a3 il'd8 1 4 Wh1 .lth5 1 5 �g5!?
as possible. However with the b7-pawn now Tempting Black to nudge his h-pawn for
without protection White should waste no ward and thus weaken the g6-square. 15 Clle5
time highlighting the fact. also guarantees White an advantage.
1 0 'iiib 3! 1 5 . . . 'iiie7 1 6 l:i:g 1 h6! 1 7 �f3 �b8 1 8
cxd5?
Presenting Black with an imponant equal
ising resource. Lobron's 18 ClleS maintains
the tension and still favours White. Note that
in these positions it would be unwise for
Black to take on c4 as there is no sensible
way to hold on to the pawn and Black's in
fluence on the key square is drastically re
duced.
1 8 . . . cxd5?
Missing his chance. Instead Black should
throw in 1 8 ... ..ltxB! 19 ..ltxf3 and only then
19 ... cxdS, when ... Cllc6 should be enough for
If there is a genuine test of 9 ... ..ltd7 then equality.
this is it, and it becomes more clear now why 1 9 il:le5
the previous game's 9...'ii'e7 deserves respect. Now White continues to control. Some
Thanks to the vulnerable b7-pawn Black is times when the bishop reaches hS it is any
unable to continue with normal develop way dominated by White's knight, leading to
ment. Rather than follow a comfonable a trade on eS. The problem for Black here is
route to the early middlegame the next item that this exchange will create further prob
on the agenda for Black is how to address lems because the new e5-pawn restricts him
the attack. considerably. Better to have removed the
90
7 j;_ f4
horse when it was still on f3. 0-0 j;_d6 6 c4 c6 7 j;_f4 j}_xf4 8 gxf4 0-0
9 e3 liJe4!
This is the main choice these days. Black
occupies the usual outpost anyway before
disturbing the queenside, being fully prepared
to meet f2-f3. However, White's decision to
evict the knight cannot be taken lightly be
cause this removes protection from the e3-
pawn and therefore leaves the dark squares
on the kingside more susceptible to attack.
1 0 liJe5
1 9 . . . liJbd7 20 f3 i'.Lle8?!
Again 20...�h8 improves, although White
retains the advantage by switching plans with
21 'ii'b3! l:!.ab8 22 'ii'b4 'ii'xb4 23 axb4 a6 24
li:'la4.
Returning to the main game, from here
the quality is not too high but what happens
is another good illustration of the problems
Black can experience if his opponent is able
to exploit the g-file for his own ends. I have
left in the annotations given by Lobron. Not the most dangerous line. This game is
21 il't2 .!kB 22 .!fac 1 ? liJd6 23 1l.f1 a6 a good illustration why.
24 1l.d3 liJf7 25 l:!g3 liJdxe5 26 dxe5! 1 0 . . . li:ld7
P..c7 27 P.. cg 1 liJdB 28 P.. h3 'iii eB! 29 il'h4 Black is prepared to eliminate the enemy
j}_g6 30 l:ihg3 j}_h5! 3 1 e4 dxe4 32 fxe4 knight when possible.
<;i.ihB 33 h3 i:.. d7 34 exf5 exf5 35 j}_c4 1 1 il'c2 "tlol'e7 1 2 f3
P..c 7! ? 36 .i.d5 i:..d7 37 Wh2 g6? 38 j}_b3? White is trying to gain space and at the
liJe6?? 39 j}_xe6 'iiixe6 40 P..x g6 P.. d 2+ 4 1 same time prevent Black from using the cen
i:.. 6 g2 P.. x g2+ 42 P.. x g2 j}_f3 43 i:.. g3 j}_c6 tral squares. Black, for his part, is by no
44 liJe2 Wh7 45 liJd4 'iiid 7 46 'iiih 5 'i/Ht7 means unhappy with the course of the open
47 'i/Hxf7'+ P.. xf7 48 liJxc6 bxc6 49 P.. c 3 ing thus far, and the text leaves White sur
l:!c7 50 b4 Wg6 51 Wg3 <;i.ih5 52 Wf3 prisingly vulnerable in the event of a timely
<;i.ih4 53 P.. c 1 J:{d7 54 P..xc6 l:id3+ 55 @e2 ...g7-g5 offensive.
i:..d4 56 We3 P.. e4+ 57 Wf3 h5 58 P..t6 1 2 . . . liJd6 1 3 c5
P.. c4 59 l:ixf5 P..c3+ 60 We4 l:ixa3 61 e6 Part of White's strategy to win territory.
1 -0 The wall of pawns looks impressive but a
closer inspection reveals that it will require
Game 29 constant attention.
A verkin-U libin 13 . . .li:Jt7 14 liJc3 il:ldxe5
Elista 1997 Black keeps the busy king's knight in play
- in fact the f7-square is a useful outpost
1 d4 e6 2 li:lf3 f5 3 g3 liJt6 4 j}_g2 d5 5 indeed. Meanwhile the exit of the d7-knight
97
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
frees the bishop and thus makes it easier to favouring White slightly.
connect Black's rooks. 28 :xg6 l'.i:lxh4 29 J:!.xg7 l:xg7 30 �xg7
1 5 fxe5 f4! >ilxg7 31 4.Jxf4
A thematic challenge that gives Black a The endgame is more or less equal .
good compensation for White's extra space. Black's passed h-pawn obviously has poten
As usual the c3-square is hardly an ideal tial, but White's knight is good and e6 needs
home for the knight, White is certainly no defending.
better on the kingside and the text also un 31 ... '>iif7 32 it.g4
dermines White's defence of the key d4- Not 32 lt'lxd5??
pawn. At the moment d4 is safe enough, but 32 . . . ll.lg6 33 1Llh5 4.Je 7 34 1Llf6
if it ever falls the c5- and e5-pawns will not Winning the h-pawn but not the game
be too healthy. since Black can regain the pawn shortly.
1 6 e4 White's big problem in trying to prove an
After 16 exf4 Black's knight begins an advantage is the position of his king. In such
other journey: 16 ... lt'lh8!? 17 lt'le2 lllg6 1 8 endgames you should bring the king to the
'i'd2 'i' h 4 and the plan o f . . .b7-b6 and .. Jta6 centre as soon as possible.
offers Black at least an even game. However 34. . . �c8 35 4.Jxh7 li:lc6 36 1Llg5+ >te7
White deals with 15 .. .f4 his d4-pawn is po· 37 Q.Jf3 l'.i:lb4 38 a3?
tentially weak. The b-pawn will be easier to defend than
1 6. . .it.d7 1 7 wh1 li:lg5 1 8 h4!? its neighbour on the a-file. Unfortunately
Creating a virtually fatal weakness in front White has failed to see Black's main th reat.
of his king, although it is understandable that 38 . . . t0d3 39 b4?? 4.Jt2+ 40 wg1 �xg4
White does not wish to give his opponent a 0-1
free hand on the kingside. For example by
clearing the e8-h5 diagonal Black introduces Game JO
options of bringing the queen or bishop to levitt-Porper
g6 or h5. Nor does White have time to create Badenweiler 1990
his own play on the queenside.
1 8 . . . i2lf7 1 9 'lif2 wh8 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 llif6 4 ilg2 c6 5
N ote that Black has no interest in playing t0f3 d5 6 0-0 it.d6 7 ii. f4 il.xf4 8 gxf4
. . dxe4 because it is important to have a pawn
. 0-0 9 e3 ll.le4!? 1 0 t0bd2
on d5 i f possible, denying White use of both Having seen that 10 lll e5 can easily prove
c4 and e4. ineffective we turn to a different approach.
20 it.h3 g5 21 exd5 cxd5 22 l'.l:g1 l'.i.g8 This time White plans to exchange on e4 and
23 hxg5 l'.i:lxg5 24 "iih4 .!:l'.g6 25 l'.i.g4 follow up by further contesting the centre
25 tt'le2!? U.f8 is also possible, with an un with f2-f3 to hit the new e4-pawn. Kramnik
clear position. White prefers to make his own ha� written that this is a strategic error. If he
presence felt on the g-file. is right then White is already without chances
25 ... 'lig7 26 l:ag 1 J:!.g8 27 4.Je2 to obtain an advantage.
It is fair to say the tension is mounting! 1 o . . . llid7
With so many pieces concentrated on a cou The most relevant choice here, making
ple of files something should give ... sure that Black has at least one knight in the
27 . . . 4.Jxf3! game. In Namgilov-Ulibin, Elista 1995 , Black
Forcing the exit of all the major pieces. first played 10 ... 'i'e7, and after 1 1 'i'c2 'ild7
27 ... U.h6 28 'i'xg5 %lxh3+ 29 'ii' xg5 30 12 U.acl �h8 13 �h 1 U.f6 14 lll g5 lllxd2 15
l:!.xg5+ 3 1 �xh3 has a similar result, 'i'xd2 White had an edge. There is no need
92
7 i.. t4
to commit the queen just yet. ness in anticipation of the coming offer to
1 1 �xe4 exchange queens.
21 . . ..ll c8 22 'lil'f2
Prompting Black to lose ground or trade
queens.
22 . . . l:ic7 23 'ilfxh4 li:lxh4 24 �h3 £:.f6 25
li:le5
93
Du tch S t o n e w a ll
33 ... k!.xf5 34 k!.g6 :!:!.5f6! is the most active 56 c7 >ties 57 f5! lt>d7 58 f6 h3+ 59
defence, although White enjoys a slight pull. @h2 \t>c8
34 h4 @f8 35 h5 g6?! 59 ...k!.f3 60 f7! l:xf7 61 c8R+ also wins
Helping White by opening the g-file for for White.
him. The route to a draw requires patience, 60 f7 'it:xb7 61 fB'iW @xc7 62 �·e7+ @b6
putting the onus on White to make progress. 63 'i1Kd6+ Wa5 64 'llfxd5 \t>a4 65 'llfa B+
36 Z:.f2! gxh5 37 J::.tg2 We7 38 lt>f3 h4 lt>b3 66 d5 b4 67 d6 l::.d3 68 �c6 lt>b2
39 l:lh1 \t>fB 40 l::.h g1 @e7 41 l:lg8! i:f8 69 d7 b3 70 'iWf6+ \t>c2 71 'llff 5 b2 72
42 l::. 1 g7 + l::. 6f7 43 i:xf8 @xf8 44 l:.\g6 dB'llk 1 -0
l::. g 7 45 l:U6+ l::.f7 46 J:!.xh6 @gB!
Game 3 1
Astrom-Ulibin
Goteborg 1999
47 l::.h 5!
Now Black is in zugzwang. The natural
but unwise 47 lhh4? k!.h7 48 �g3 lilitg7!
leads to a draw.
47 • . . i:h7
After 47... h3 48 l::txh3 :!:!.h7 White has 49
k!.g3+ k!.g7 50 k!.g5! etc. Notice that the quiet
a4-a5 is being kept in reserve for the pawn
ending. By dropping back to d2 White is able to
48 J::. g 5+! li'h8 49 \t>g2! recapture on f3 with his knight (not possible
Prevents Black's counterplay. in the previous game after 13 . . . h6) . This must
49 •.. J:!.e7 ! be a superior version of the line but even
Black seeks alternative counterplay, trying here Black has a straightforward means of
to find the rook some action. equalising.
50 J:l'.xf5 lbe3 51 l::.f 7 @gB! 1 2 . . . <1-lf6
This is the best try. Levitt gives the line Black should keep an open eye on the key
5 1 . ..k!.e4 52 .l:xb7 k!.xd4 53 b5 axb5 54 axb5 squares. Similar to the game is Hertneck
cxb5 55 c6 ki.c4 56 c7 and White wins. Narciso Dublan, Berlin 1998, which went
52 J:Ixb7 \t>f8 53 b51! 12 ... 'il'e7 13 lt'h l tll f6 14 f3 exf3 15 tll xf3
So White is still winning- Levitt is playing ..ltd7 16 tlle5 ..lte8 17 'il'b3. Now Black
this endgame very well. should play the careful 17... 'ith8 but instead
53 . . . axb5 54 axb5 cxb5 55 c6 J::. c3 17 ... ..lth5?l 18 cxd5 exd5 19 e4 was better for
55 ... �e8? 56 k!.b8+ is standard fare. White. Jonathan Levitt h as suggested the
94
7 il.. t4
31 . . . 'lWxd4! 32 .ltxf5
32 i.. xb7 l:!.xb7 33 'ii'e3 'ii'd5+ 34 �gl
l:!.b2 35 'ii'f3 i.e4 does not help White's
cause.
32 . . . exf5 33 ¥1ke6+ l:if7! 34 l:ic7 il'e4+
35 ¥1kxe4 fxe4 36 l:i:xf7 Wxf7
The amazing thing about the development The rook endgame is not difficult to win
of the bishop around the back of the pawn for Black. He has extra material and his rook
complex is not just that there is time to actu is more active.
ally carry it out. What many players fail to 37 l:i:c6?!
appreciate is that once it reaches its destina Not very active as the e-pawn is too
tion it the bishop is almost superior to the strong, but 37 l:!.c5 loses, too, e.g. 37. . .l:!.f2!
one on g2. 38 f5 e3 39 \tigl \tif6 40 l:!.c3 l:!.f3 41 '>ii g2 e2!
1 7 .ltf3 �d7 1 8 �xd7 ¥ikxd7 1 9 b4 i..g 6 etc.
20 a4 .ltf5 2 1 b5 a6 22 bxc6?! 37 . . . e3 38 l:!c1 �f6 39 l:i:e1 e2 40 Wg2
Voluntarily opening the b-file is an odd Wf5 41 �f3 l:ia2 42 l:!c1 l:ixa5 43 Wxe2
plan when Black's bishop has the bl-square Wxf4 44 l:ic4+ Wf5 45 l:i:c7 g5 46 h4
in its sights. Now Black is on top. Wg4! 47 hxg5 hxg5 48 Wf2 l:!a2+ 49
22 . . . bxc6 23 a5 .!Hb8 24 Wh1 l:i:b3 25 W g 1 a5 50 l:!c8 a4 51 l:ic4+ Wg3 52
l:i:fc1 h6 26 "tlol'e1 l:i:ab8 27 l:ic3 l:i:b2 28 l:i:c3+ Wh4 53 l:i:c4+ g4 54 l:i:c3 a3 55
l:i:ac1 l:i:8b7 29 cxd5 cxd5 30 e4 dxe4 3 1 �h1 g3 0-1
95
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
Summary
Black has no problems in the 7 i.f4 variation. It makes sense to damage White's pawn struc
ture with 7... i.xf4!. As for the light-squared bishop, in this line it is often best developed viad7
and e8 to h5 or g6, where it can become quite active, or even f7. Having said that, Games 24
and 26 see this so-called problem piece play important roles on the queenside. In general Black
comes under no pressure after simple moves and, although White has had moderate success
by trying to hinder Black's queenside development with �b3 at some point, this should not
bring White any advantage with accurate play. For example Game 20 looks fine for Black in
the opening, while 9...'Wie7 in Game 21 takes the sting out of a future °il'b3. In any case the
simple 9 e3 seems best, protecting the f4-pawn and generally solidifying the structure before
deciding what to do with the queen and bl-knight. Again 9..."il'e7 (Game 27) is okay for Black,
but 9 ... CDe4 (Games 29-3 1) gets the vote over this and 9 ... i.d7. There is no reason to rush to
activate the queenside as the position is closed, and this popular, provocative move threatens
to interfere with White's development.
96
CHA PTER THREE I
White's 7th Move Alternatives :
7 tl'ibd2, 7 tl'ie 5, 7 ifc2
l'LleS 0-0 8 il..f4. Unable to bring a piece to As 7 l'Llbd2 removes the immediate possi
d7 immediately due to the unprotected bility of il.. f4 and is not linked with the ad
bishop on d6, Black can choose to challenge vance b2-b4-b5 it is natural for Black to post
the new arrival on f4 with 8... l'LlhS (Game 35) his bishop on the q ueenside. It is also possi
or the knight with 8...l'Llg4 (Game 36). 7 'Viiic2 ble to deal with White's plan of a quick trans
is the most popular move, no doubt because fer of a knight to d3 in the following way:
of its flexibility. After 7 . 0-0 White has several
. 7 .0-0 8 l'LleS l'Llbd7 9 l'Lld3 b6! 10 b4!? Clle4
..
97
D u tc h S t o n ew a ll
noting that the standard set-up with knights The logical culmination of Black's play
on d3 and f3 is not always appropriate, de thus far. Now White's centre is under fire,
pending as it does on Black's development. and the merit of his knight manoeuvres
Incidentally White gains nothing from 9 cxds comes into question.
cxd5! 10 4Jdc4 ie7. For 9 4:ldf3 see the 1 5 a5 b5
next game. Ignoring the a-pawn and increasing the
9 •.• .lla 6! tension in the centre .
The point. Instead of the automatic de 1 6 .i.xd6 'ii!'xd6 1 7 b4
velopment with ... ..ib7 Black monitors the Introducing an interesting stand-off with
c4-pawn and prepares to exen funher pres the c4- and c5-squares coming under close
sure on c4 with ... 4:ld7 and ... l::t c8. If White scrutiny .
exchanges on d5 Black simply recaptures 1 7 . . . bxc4 1 8 li:Jxc5 .l:.b8
with the c-pawn, being more than happy to Having established a protected passed
see the opening of the c-file. pawn on c4 Black switches to the b-file to
1 0 'iil' c 2 llle4 1 1 b3 concentrate on a fresh target.
This has been provoked by Black's aggres 1 9 l:tab1 l:tb5 20 l:b2 l:'ifb8 21 l:ifb1 ..Iles
sive play and is therefore not a sub-variat ion Of course White did not want to give up
of 7 b3. Notice that White is already busy his c5-knight fo r this bishop, but as often
dealing with his opponent's action rather happens the problem piece will have its day.
concentrating fully on his own. 22 e3 tlldf6 23 li:Je5 .'.Llxc5 24 bxc5
1 1 . . . li:Jd7 1 2 li:Jf3 l:tc8 1 3 .ilf4 'iil'e7 1 4
a4?!
Another feasible idea that is sometimes
less relevant than others. In this panicular
case White judges that the time is right to
advance the a-pawn now that Black's rook
has left the a-file. Unfortunately for White
.his op ponent's fo rces have their own agenda.
Black's development is complete and his
rook stands on the same file as the white
queen, so Vaiser's next is hardly difficult to
guess.
1 4 . . . c5!
White's a-pawn is weak and the c4-pawn
is potentially stronger than the c5-pawn
(Black's bishop is already defending whereas
White's is out of play on g2) .
24 . . . �a6 25 �c3 tlld 7 26 g4
White misjudges the coming structural al
terations in the centre. Wholesale exchanges
with 26 l::txb5 .l:l'..xb5 27 1.lxb5 'il'xb5 28
4:lxd7 'il'b1+29 ..ifl .ixd7 leave Black more
active.
26 . . . ii:lxe5 27 dxe5 fxg4 28 e4 l:txb2 29
l:txb2 l:txb2 30 "tl!Vxb2 'i!'xa5 3 1 c6 �b6
32 'iil' xb6 axb6 33 exd5 c3! 34 i.e4 exd5
Wh i t e 's 7 t h M o v e A l terna r i v e s : 7 {jj b d 2, 7 {jj e 5, 7 'lW c 2
35 il.xd5+ \t>fs 36 il.b3 \t>e7 37 \t>t1 ii.ts With the knight on d3 White at least
The win for Black is merely a matter of maintains some influence on the cS-square,
time. and the text adds more. As in the previous
38 We2 il.e4 39 il.a4 We6 40 c7 il.b7 41 game Vaiser's key central break is actually
\t>d3 c2 42 il.xc2 Wxe5 43 Wc4 il.a6+ quite a simple decision to make.
44 Wb4 Wd6 45 il.xh7 @xc7 46 l.tc3 1 4 . . . cS!
ii.cs 47 Wd4 Wd6 48 il.d3 \t>e6 49 @e4 Freeing the bishop, denying White his
ii.d7 50 @f4 Wf6 51 t3 gxf3 52 @xf3 planned offensive and challenging the centre
@es 53 h4 b5 0-1 on Black's terms. In fact this thematic break
guarantees equality, as the rest of the game
Game 33
·
demonstrates.
A . Petrosian -Vaiser 1 5 bxc5 bxc5 1 6 dxc5 {jjdxc5 1 7 cxd5
Belgrade 1988 il.xd5 1 8 {jjx c5 {jjxc5 1 9 {jjg 5 il.xg2 20
lt>xg2 'lWe7 21 fl:fc1 fl:ac8 22 {jjf3 fl:c7 23
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 {jjf3 {jjf6 4 g3 d5 5 'lWc3 fl:fc8 24 'lWe5 'lWf6 25 fl:ab1 % - %
il.g2 c6 6 0-0 il.d6 7 {jj bd2 0-0 8 {jje S
b6 9 {jjdf3 Game 34
Better than 9 l'Lld3 but still nothing to K ozul-L . B . Hansen ,
worry Black. This time Vaiser again finds a Bled/Rogaska Slatina 1 991
logical path to a level game, using simple,
traditional Stonewall strategy. In fact it is no 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 {jjf6 4 il.g2 c6 5
coincidence that the knights, though sitting {jjf3 d5 6 0-0 il.d6 7 {jj bd2 {jjbd7 ! ?
pretty on d3 and f3, fail to make an impres Not entirely logical - castling i s the flexi
sion. Other factors are important in the ble, popular choice - but at least keeping
opening, one being development. It seems White's knight out of eS. By occupying d7
that in general White should address this with his knight it seems that Black intends to
before he starts sh uffling his knights around. play ...b7-b6, and White can try to exploit this
9 . . . il.b7 1 0 il.f4 {jje4 1 1 'lWc2 'lWe7 1 2 with the aim of disturbing Black's develop
{jjd3 {jjd7 ment.
Remember that Black does not give White 8 'lWc2
the satisfaction of lodging his knight on f4 This prevents the immediate 8 b6 in view ...
99
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
1 00
Wh ite 's 7 th M o v e A l ternatives: 7 liJbd2, 7 liJ e 5, 7 'l1U c 2
'lWb2 'lWc7 46 l:tg3 Wh7 47 h4 'lWc3?! White might keep a slight edge by exchang
47 ... e5! 4S fxe5 .te6 followed by . ."il'c5
. ing knights. There have been several tests of
leads to an easy win. this claim, e.g. 1 1 Cl'lxd7!? "il'xd7 12 Cl'ld2 b6
48 'lWxc3 fl:xc3 49 Wf2 �c4 50 �xc4 13 "i!'b3 h6 14 l:lfel il..b 7 15 Cl'lf3 and Black
fl:xc4 51 h5 fl:c2+ 52 Wg1 Wg8 53 Wh1 was only a little worse in Fominyh
@f7 54 @91 fl:a2 55 @h 1 ?! fl:f2 56 Wg1 Sherbakov, Elista 1996. Perhaps it is more
fl:f3 57 l:lxf3 exf3 58 Wf2 g5 59 hxg6+ logical to recapture with the bishop instead.
@xg6 60 @xf3 \t>f6 61 @g3 We7 0-1 1 1....ltxd7 12 Cl'ld2 gives White an edge, but
White should not be tempted to push with
Game-35 12 c5?, which gives Black something to at
A . Petrosian-Knaak tack and thus unnecessary counterplay. In
Erevan 1988 Milov-Vaiser, Paris 1 994, Black was already
slightly better after l 2 . il..e7 13 cud2 b6 14
. .
101
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
with 15 bxaS! l:XxaS 16 l:Xfb1 to pile up pres and White is a pawn up in a winning end
sure on b7. Note that 14 ... b6? drops a pawn game after 47... Vllif7 48 lDxf6 Vllixf6 49 ..ltd3.
to 15 lL'ixc6! (15 ... ..ltxc6 16 Vxe6+). 4 1 1;1xe6 'lil'bS 42 'ilt'xd5 1 -0
1 5 llJd3! .id7?!
The uncomfortable 15 ... ..ltf7 has to be Game 36
played, when Black has no choice but to face Relange-Rodriguez
the music and wait for b4-b5 and li:Jb4 after Ubeda 1997
16 a4.
1 6 lllf3 h6 1 7 llJfe5 .ieS 1 S 'li!'e3 Wh7 1 d4 f5 2 lllf3 llJf6 3 g3 e6 4 i.g2 d5 5
1 9 1:l:ab1 1:l:gS 20 a 4 a6 21 f3 ctJd7 22 0-0 Ji..d6 6 c4 c6 7 llJe5 0-0 8 Ji..f4 lllg4!
l:!.fe 1 This time Black challenges the knight in
White's absolute control of the e5-squ are stead of the bishop, although this in turn can
is the key factor. Black now plays for ...g7-g5, also leave the bishop exposed. So far no one
but White is fine on the kingside and ready to has been able to prove any disadvantage to
take over the queenside. this move.
22 . . . llJfS 23 i.f1 'if f6 24 llJt2 g5 25 9 ltJxg4
llJh31 .ids 26 b5 axb5 27 axb5 lii g 7 28 9 li:Jd2 ixe5 10 ixe5 11 dxe5 b6
lii a1 ! 1:l:cS 29 l';1a7 12 1:1.ct ib7 13 cxd5 exdS 14 f4 l1"\a6 1 5
29 b6! is even stronger, intending an inva Vi'b3 liih8 16 Vi a3 lt::ic7 was fine for Black in
sion down the a-file. Romanishin-Grischuk, Bled 1999.
29 . . . cxb5 30 i;1b1 b6 31 cxb6 i.xb6 32 9 ... i.xf4 1 0 gXf4 fxg4 1 1 e3
fxg5 hxg5 33 llJxg5+ WgS 34 J:!xg7+
'lil'xg7 35 f4 'lil'a7 36 llJef3 'lil'a2 37 i;1e1
.id7 3 S 'lil'e5 .ids 39 'li!'d6 'lil'a7
1 1 . . .'lil'h4!
The kingside attack proves to give Black
enough counterplay to later deal with the
queenside. The simple threat is ... l:tf6-h6.
And finally a little firework . . . , 2 ctJd2
40 llJxe6! i.xe6? 12 Vllie l l:tf6! has also been tried, with
The least stubborn defence. White also equality. In fact this is Gelfand-Nikolic,
wins after 40 . . lt::i xe6: 4 1 l:t.xe6 l:tc6 42 l:tg6+
. which featured in the Introduction (page 52) .
1t'h7 43 l:l.h6+ Wg7 44 Ve5+!! if6 1 2 . :as 13 l:i.e1 llJd7 14 llJf1
. .
(44... �h6 45 Vh8+ Wg6 46 li:JeS is a pretty 14 c5!? is the last attempt to try for an ad
neat mate!) 45 1:1.xf6 l:txf6 46 l1"\g5! ic6 vantage.
(46... Wg6 47 Vllie7 Vxd4+ 48 'it'g2) 47 lt::i h7! 1 4 . . . dxc4!
1 02
Wh ite 's 7 t h Mo ve A l t e rn a t i v e s : 7 CU b d 2 , 7 Ci'i e 5, 7 'li c 2
This capture is justified here because One of three knight moves available. 8
White's pieces are too busy elsewhere to act, C'LleS is Game 39 and 8 C'Llc3 features in
and creating a big centre with e3-e4 is not Games 42-44.
possible as this loses the f4-pawn. White gets 8 . . . b6
some compensation, but not much. As usual this is good development when it
1 5 'l!te2 Ci'ib6 1 6 f3 gxf3 17 'l!txf3 Si.. d7 can be carried out without any annoying
1 8 tll d2 fl:af8 1 9 fl:ac1 White tricks. The next game sees 8 . i.d7.
..
1 03
D u tc h S t o n e wall
1 S lll xd4 i.. xeS 1 6 tllxe6 i.. xb2 1 7 l::! cd1 h5.
Material is level but White has a strong 9 !Lies 12Je4 1 O ILid3
pawn on d5 and an elephant on e6 - signifi There is no reason to hurry in bringing the
cant factors for which Black has little to knight back to d3. More consistent, and ac
show. Consequently White also has the more curate, is 10 CLldf3, but White intends to kick
comfortable game. the black knight away.
17 . . . h6 1 8 �b3 hxgS 1 9 d6 �f7 20 1 O . . . i.. e8 1 1 f3 lllg S!
i.. xb7 c4 21 �xb2 �xb7 Seeing that the knight will never be chal
2 1...c3 22 "il'b3 c2 23 l:lcl "il'xb7 24 CLlc7+. lenged here Black decides to keep it active. If
22 d7 the weakening h2-h4 should ever come the
knight is well placed on f7.
1 2 lll b3
Obstructing the queenside pawns, which
White should be looking to advance in an
effort to generate a queenside initiative. The
knight lacks punch on b3.
12 ... !Lid7 1 3 .ITl.. f4 �e7 14 l:lae1
White prepares for e2-e4, a plan he made
quite clear with 12 ctJb3. Not surprisingly
Black is ready.
1 04
Wh ite 's 7 th M o ve A l t erna tives: 7 ti'Jbd2, 7 0i e 5 , 7 'llli c 2
1 05
D u tc h S t o n e wa ll
White seems to have good control over 45 J:!:xb2 l:tb3! 46 l:Ixb3 axb3 47 'it>f2 i.b4
the centre but this is illusionary. White has 48 'it>e2 'it>g7 49 'lt>dt >t>f6 50 'it>c l i.e 1! and
no active plans and Black has no weaknesses Black creates a winning passed pawn on the
(at least none that can be attacked) . h-file. 45 lDxa3 does not work in view of
1 9 ... Wib7 20 li:Je1 b5 21 Wie2 g6 22 f3 45 .. . i.xa3 46 l:!:dl i.b4 followed by the glo
li:Jd6 23 li:Jc2 i.g7 24 'l:'!.e1 Wic7 25 'l:'!.ad1 rious march of the a-pawn.
i.b7
Black's lot has improved since the diagram Game 40
position. The text is directed against e3-e4, Cosma-Dumitrache
e.g. 26 e4 fxe4 27 fxe4 i.xeS 28 dxeS lDf7. Romania 1 996
White shifts his rooks one file to the left, but
Black's c-pawn will take some stopping. 1 d4 e6 2 g3 d5 3 i.g2 c6 4 li:Jf3 .lld 6 5
26 :lic1 l;!ac8 27 lba3? 0-0 f5 6 c4 lbt6 7 Wic2
The knight is doing nothing out here. A similar idea to this game is 7 lDc3 0-0 8
27 . . . li!.fd8 28 l;!ed1 Wlb6 29 h4 a5 30 .i.g5 lDbd7 (8 ... h6!? is probably best) 9 e3 h6
\tih2 lbf7! 10 iLxf6 (10 i.f4, intending to recapture on
Removing White's only annoying piece. f4 with the e-pawn, might give White some
31 li:Jxf7 @xf7 32 f4 :.ll.d 5 thing) 10 ... lDxf6 1 1 lDd2 iLd7 12 c5 i.c7 13
f4, when 1 3 ...g5 14 lDf3 J:!:f7 15 J:!:g7 16
'iie 2 h5 17 lDf3 g4 18 lDeS h4 19 .l:i:fb1 l:!:h7
gave Black sufficient counterplay in Wess
man-Moskalenko, Moscow 199 1 . Instead of
putting the question to the bishop with
9 ... h6, the interesting alternative 9... b6 has
been played. Hoi-Knaak, Thessaloniki 01
1988, continued 10 cxd5 exd5 11 lDh4 ii.a6!
(1 1...g6?! 12 lDxd5! cxd5 13 i.xd5+ lDxdS 1 4
il.xd8 .l:i:xd8 does not give Black enough for
the queen) 1 2 :!;le1 g6 (now the rook on a8 is
protected) 13 .::te l iLb7?1 (13 ...'ii e7 is more
logical as White is not threatening to imme
33 lbb1 diately exploit the weakness on c6) 14 f3
A most embarrassing retreat. White can 'ii b 8 and a draw was agreed. However White
only sit and wait. could have achieved an advantage with 1 5
33 . . . b4 34 lbd2 c3 35 bxc3 'l:'!.xc3 36 e4!, e.g. 1 5 ... dxe4 (15. ..fxe4 16 fxe4 dxe4 1 7
.llxd5 exd5 37 'l:'!.xc3 bxc3 38 li:Jb1 Wib2! 'iib3+ 'it>g7 1 8 lDxe4 lDxe4 19 iLxe4 i s a little
A very precise assessment of the endgame. uncomfortable for Black) 1 6 fxe4 lDg4?1
39 Wixb2 cxb2 40 \tig2 a4 41 a3 .llf8 42 (interesting tactics, although it might be wiser
'l:'!.d2 J;!b8 43 'l:'!.d3 'l:'!.b3 44 l:i.d2 to transpose to 15 ... fxe4 with 16 ...fxe4) 17 e5
44 J:!:xb3 axb3 45 >t>f2 i.e7 46 i.d8 lDdxe5 18 .:l:xe5! lDxe5 19 dxe5 iLxe5 20
47 'it>d3 i.a5 and it is impossible for the king lDf3 and White has the better of an unclear
to approach the pawns. Black then sends his position.
king to a4, wins the a-pawn and infiltrates via 7 .•• 0-0 8 i.g5! ?
c4 and d3, using the bishop to put White in An interesting approach that has one main
zugzwang. drawback - White is practically forced to give
1 06
Wh ite 's 7 th Mo v e A l t e rn a t i v e s : 7 ib b d 2 , 7 lb e 5 , 7 'lll' c 2
up his bishop for the knight. Overall I doubt efforts to progress on the kingside he is sim
the efficacy of this trade and I believe that it ply tied down on the other wing, where
does not offer White a realistic chance to White enj oys a nagging initiative. Nonethe
fight for an advantage. less, making something of White's lead is
8 . . . h6 another question.
Simple chess. Ignoring the bishop with 1 9 . . . t:'i'Jb8 20 I:l.ab1 J:l.h8 21 t:'i'Je5 hxg3 22
8. ..b6 is dealt with in the next game. Good hxg3 <;ltf6
for White is 8 . . CZ'ibd7 9 cxdS cxdS 10 CZ'ic3
. Black c annot be faulted fo r his effort and
h6 1 1 �f4! �xf4 12 gxf4. his queenside is still intact. With so few black
9 .ixf6 '!lfxf6 1 0 t:'i'Jbd2. t:'i'Jd7 1 1 e3 pieces actually on the kingside White decides
Black should be more or less equal here. to open up there before Black manages a
In return for parting with a knight in an ef genuine strike.
fectively closed position Black has the sole 23 f4 gxf3 24 t:'i'Jdxf3 '!l!'g7 25 g4 fxg4 26
dark-squared bishop, the usual solid centre t:'i'Jh2 .ixe5 27 dxe5+ <;l,?e7 28 lbxg4 J:l.h4
and enough space. A closed centre tends to 29 l:ib4 a5 30 J:l.f4 .ia6 31 t:'i'Jf6 I:l.xf4 32
be a condition of a flank attack, which is 'llfxf4 t:'i'Jd7 33 e4 d4 34 I:l.c2 J:l.h8 35 li1f2
what prompts Black to embark on the fol .Ji.. b5 36 J:l.f3 lbxc5?
lowing kingside offensive. After 36 ... d3! Black is very much in the
1 1 . . . g5! ? game; now White enters via the queenside.
Very double-edged and indicative of the 37 'llfc 1 lbb7 38 a4 .ixa4 39 'llfa 3+ <;ltd8
ease with which Black can throw his pawns 40 '!lfxa4 <;l,?c7 41 '!lfxd4 J:l.d8 42 '!lfc4
forward in the Stonewall. Equality results '!lfe7 43 l:ic3 J:l.d 1 + 44 .if1 t:'i'Jd8 45 '!lfa4
from the sober 1 1 . ..'il' e7 12 .l::i. fc l b6 13 cxdS J:l.b1 46 'Yi'xa5+ <;l,?b8 47 '!lfa3 1 -0
cxdS etc.
1 2 t:'i'Je1 g4?! Game 41
I do not like this move at all. It hands over Gulko-Padevsky
the f4-square and loses time, and the idea of Buenos Aires 1978
immediately launching a mating attack down
the h-file is naive. Better to maintain the ten 1 d4 f5 2 g3 t:'i'Jf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 t:'i'Jt3 d5 5
sion with 12 .. . 'il'e7 followed by ... b7-b6. 0-0 .Ji..d 6 6 c4 c6 7 'Yi'c2 0-0 8 .Jl.g5 b6
1 3 t:'i'Jd3 h5 1 4 b4 h4 1 5 I:!.fc1 '!lfe7 1 6 b5 There is no reason why this should be less
<;l,?g7 1 7 bxc6 bxc6 1 8 c5 .Jl.c7 1 9 'Yi'a4 appropriate than 8 .. h6. By developing his
.
107
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
1 08
Wh ite 's 7 th Mo ve A l terna tives: 7 0i b d 2 , 7 0i e5 , 7 'ilf c 2
go t o f3. Here is what can happen to White Not a good square for the knight. Better is
against traditional development: 9 ... 'il'f6 10 16 CZ'id3 b4 17 :!;ldl CZ'if6 18 .tfl .
e3 CZ'id7 1 1 CZ'ie2 'ii'e7! 12 CZ'id3 b6 13 b3 .tb7 1 6 . . .b4 1 7 J:l.e1 0if6 1 8 b3
1 4 .tb2 l';!ac8 15 f3 CZ'ief6 16 CZ'if2 c5 17 e4? Handing over c3 on a plate. The calm 18
cxd4 1 8 CZ'ixd4 dxc4 19 bxc4? (19 exf5! is a 3Ld2 and .l::i.e cl is necessary.
better shot) 19 .. .fxe4 20 f4 (20 fxe4 .ta6) 1 8 . . . 0ie4 1 9 Jib2 0ic3 20 Jif1 il.xf1 21
20 ... .ta6 21 CZ'ixe4 .l::i.xc4 22 'il'f2 CZ'ixe4 23 <;l,?xf1 ?!
.txe4 i..c5 24 'ii'e3 CZ'if6 25 .l::i. fc 1 CZ'ig4 26 Another error, inviting the queen into the
'il'd2 .l::i. x cl+ 27'.!hcl .l::i.d 8 28 .l::i.d l eS 29 fxe5 position with gain of tempo.
'il'xe5 30 .tf3 'il'e3+ 3 1 'it>g2 'il'xd2+32 .l::i. xd2 21 . . .'ilfa6+ 22 <;l,?92 'i!!fd 3 23 I:!.ec1 'ilfe4
CZ'ie3+ 0-1, Lukacs-Tseshkovsky, Wijk aan 24 Jlxc3?
Zee 1988. This makes the progress of the Black g
9 . . . 0id7 10 0ie 1 0ixc3 1 1 'ilfxc3 b5! ? pawn impossible to stop. Hecht gives the
following long drawing line: 24 h4 g6 25
3lxc3 bxc3 26 .l::i.xc3 h6 27 .l::i. h 1 ! <;.i;>g7 28 l:tc6
.\1.f8 29 l:tc7+ 'it>g8 30 .l::i.xa7 g5 31 hxgS hxg5
32 '.!1h5 g4 33 l:tg5+ 'it>h8 34 .l::i.h 5+and White
makes a perpetual.
24 . . . bxc3 25 h4 c2 26 a3 96!
Of course not 26 ... h6? 27 h5 and the g
pawn is stopped in its tracks.
27 I:l.a2 h6 28 l:iaxc2 95 29 lk8+ We7
30 hx95 hx95 31 �h1 94 32 Ilh7+ '""'f6
33 <;1,?91 9xf3 34 I:l.ch8
White has perpetual check in his sights . . .
3 4. . .'ilfb 1 + 3 5 <;l,?h2
Black exploits his opponent's lagging de
velopment to nip any queenside play in the
bud. With the knight still on e 1 White has no
firm grip on the centre, and he now has the
choice of either closing or opening the posi
tion. The former seems to be the most logi
cal since he is underdeveloped.
1 2 cxd5
12 c5!? .tc7 13 CZ'id3 a5 is okay for Black,
while 12 b3? bxc4 13 bxc4 3la6 loses a pawn.
1 2 . . . cxd5 1 3 'ilfc6 'ilfb6
Also possible is Hecht's 1 3 ... CZ'ib6!? 14
'il'xb5 a5 15 'il'e2 .ta6 with compensation
for the pawn. 35 . . . Jlx93+! 0-1
1 4 'ilfxa8 Jla6 1 5 'ilfxf8+ <;l,?xf8
Hecht writes that White is certainly not Game 43
worse, perhaps slightly better. I tend to agree, Novikov-G leizerov
although the position is much easier to play Portoroz 1993
for Black since he has the initiative.
1 6 0if3?! d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 93 illf6 4 Jl92 c6 5
1 09
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
1 0 . . . .id7 !
This move appears to be the best way to
address White's ambition. Taking the pawn
introduces complications that favour White,
e.g. 10 ... il.. xb4? 1 1 CZ'ixe4 dxe4 12 j/_g5 'Yltkd7
1 3 .l::i. xb4 exf3 14 exf3 'Yltkxd4 15 j/_e7 .l::i.e8 16
.l::i. d l 'Yltke5 17 f4 'Yltkc7 1 8 il.. d6 with great pres
sure for a mere pawn. 10 ... a6 1 1 a4 CZ'id7!? 12
b5 axb5 13 axb5 'it>h8?! 14 j/_f4! .l::i. a 3!? is
Gleizerov-Moroz, Lubniewice 1994. Now 15
CZ'ia4! secures White an edge.
1 1 b5 ti'ixc3 1 2 "ilfxc3 cxb5 1 3 cxb5 S.c8 White has made progress, albeit insuffi-
1 4 'tlib3 a6! cient to win.
This liquidation of the queenside leads to 33 . . . I:l.c6 34 l:id8 g6 35 li1d6 .ll a4 36
1 10
Wh ite 's 7 th M o v e A l tern a tives : 7 ib b d2, 7 lb e 5, 7 V/Ji c 2
1 5 cxd5! exd5
. 15 .. cxdS 16 'Yltkc7 i..c8 17 CZ'ieS a6 1 8 bxa6
.l::i. xa6 19 l'.:!.b2 is a little better for White.
42 . . . <;l,?xe5! 1 S bxcS I:!.ac8 1 7 lbe5 lbxe5 1 8 fxe5
Black decides to sacrifice a piece to re .ll xcS 1 9 V/Jib3
move every last pawn. Black is worse due to the weakness on dS.
43 <;l,?xcS <;ltd4! 1 9 ... V/Jid7 20 I:!.fc1 Ilfd8 21 I:l.c3 hS 22
Cutting off the king. I:l.bc1 <;l,?h7 23 V/Jic2 .ll a4 24 V/Jib1 I:l.xc3
44 <;ltdS <;l,?e3 45 <;l,?xeS d4 4S <;ltd5 d3 47 2 5 I:l.xc3 V/JieS 26 .ll h 3!
exd3 <;l,?xd3 Y, - Y,
Game 44
Schando rff-Nielsen
Gistrup 1996
1 d4 eS 2 c4 f5 3 g3 t:'i'JfS 4 .ll g 2 d5 5
t:'i'Jf3 cS S 0-0 .lids 7 lbc3 0-0 8 V/Jic2
lbe4 9 I:l.b1 -VJJJe7 1 O .lif4!?
Much in common with the 7 .tf4 varia
tion, here White wants b2-b4 and the ex
change of Black's dark-squared bishop, too.
This should not pose Black any problems,
although in this game he reacts against the White's latest highlights Black's vulnerabil
principles of the position. ity on the light squares. The c-file, passed e
1 o . . .ixf4 1 1 gxf4 t:'i'Jd7?!
. pawn and the dS- and fS-pawns give White
When White has weakened his structure an easy lead.
on the kingside Black should normally trans 2S . . . .lld7 27 I:l.c7 V/JigS+ 28 <;lth1 .ieS 29
fer his bishop via d7 and e8 to hS or g6. J:l.xa7 V/Jih5 30 VJJi d3 I:l.d7 31 I:!.xd7 .ll xd7
1 2 b4 bS 1 3 b5 lbxc3 1 4 V/Jixc3 .ll b7 32 .ll g 2 .lies 33 @g1 V/Jie8 34 V/Jic2 V/Jid7
Having voluntarily weakened his queen 35 e3 .Ii f7 3S .ll h3 .lies 37 .ll g 2 .Ii f7 38
side Black now has problems on the light .llt 1 .lies 39 .lid3 V/Jic8 40 VJJib 1 h5 41
squares V/JixbS 1 -0
111
D u t ch S t o n e w a ll
Summary
These sidelines are not to be underestimated. 7 CZ'ibcl2 is rather harmless and is only for the
player who has no passion for opening advantages. Also lacking punch is fLgS, against which
Black should have no problems unless he gets too ambitious. 7 CZ'ieS 0-0 8 3lf4 is more or less
reduced to a draw after 8 ... CZ'ig4! (Game 36). Against 8 CZ'ic3 Black concentrates on the centre
with 8 ... CZ'ie4, when the manoeuvre CZ'iel-d3 appears too slow. However, there is plenty of play
after 9 .l::i.b l (Games 43-44). Note that in this system it is important that Black develops his
bishop on d7 (not b7). In conclusion Black should not fear any of these lines, although they
should not be considered inferior to 7 1Lf4 and 7 b3 just because they are less popular.
8 3lg5
8 . . . h6 - Game 40; 8 ...b6 - Game 41
8 . . . c'.Lie4 (D) 9 I:l.b1
9 e3 Game 42
9 ... "i!!fe7 1 0 .it4 - Game 44
10 b4 - Game 43
7 12
I CHAPTER FOUR I
5 ctJh3
1 13
D u t ch S t o n e w a ll
13 i.b2 �e8 14 .l:l:ad1 0.d7 1 5 Whl 0.f8 16 is better, with the idea of 1 1 f3 exf3 12 exf3
0.e5 0.g6 with a complex game. dxc4! 13 bxc4 'ilkb6 14 .l:l:b1 �d8!. After 15 c5
7 0.d2!? looks strange and unconvincing, 'ilkb4 16 0.f2! i.xd4 17 i1.xd4 'ilkxd4 1 8
but after 7 ... 0.c6!? 8 e3 e5? White played 9 'ilkxd4 .U.Xd4 1 9 Zlfdl l:xdl+ 2 0 .l:l:xdl 0.d7
dxe5 0.xe5 10 cxd5! in Nogueiras-Nikolic, 21 0.e4 White has compensation but proba
Zagreb 1987, and Black was already in trou bly no advantage. Khenkin writes in his an
ble: 10 ... �h8 1 1 0.b3 0.g6 1 2 0.g5 0.g4 13 notations to the game in Chess Informator
0.e6. that he had intended 1 1 'ilkc2!, intending to
7 . . . c6 delay the break in the centre.
7 ... 0.c6 8 i1.b2 0.e4 9 f3 10 0.f2 1 1 '1Wc2 '/We 7?!
i.f6 1 1 e3 b6 12 0.c3 i.a6 13 .l:l:e 1 tl\e7 was This puts Black in trouble. Instead Black
weird but probably okay fo r Black in can settle fo r a slightly inferior position with
Dorfman-Karlsson, Helsinki 1986. 1 1 . ..'irc7 12 f3 exf3 13 exf3 e5! 14 dxe5
7 ... tl\e4!? is quite interesting. Now White i1.xe5 15 i.xe5 'ilkxe5 16 li!Jel, when he has
cannot play as planned, as 8 i.a3 dxc4! 9 e3!? some problems with his development but no
{9 bxc4? i.xa3 10 0.xa3 0.c3 1 1 'irc2 �xd4 real weaknesses.
is not What White is hoping for, while 9 1 2 f3 c5
i.xe7 'irxe7 1 0 bxc4 e5 is equal) 9 . . . i.xa3 10 Black has to do something before the cen
0.xa3 cxb3 1 1 axb3 i.d7 12 'irc2 i.c6 1 3 tre is opened to his disadvantage.
0.f4 ·fie7 1 4 .:::i. fd1 .l:l:d8 1 5 0.c4 0.f6 1 6 0.a5 1 3 fxe4!
gave White pressure for his pawn in Ftacnik Accurate play. On 13 d5 Black can keep
Agdestein, Lyon 1998, but apparently no the position closed and later finish his devel
advantage. opment with 1 3 ... e3!.
8 .1i.b2 1 3 . . ..1i.xd4+ 14 .1i.xd4 cxd4 15 exf5 exf5
1 6 it:lf4 lt:lc6 1 7 J:ad1 .1i.d7 1 8 c5! Wh8!
Preventing 19 b4 by denying White an as
sisting check.
1 9 .!Lld5 '1We5
1 14
5 0i h 3
Game 46
Dokhoian-Vaiser 18 I:l.e5!?
Sochi 1988 A tempting but unnecessary sacrifice.
However, for players of this strength it is
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 0it6 4 Jlg2 d5 5 more important how the pieces play than
0ih3 c6 6 0-0 Jle 7 7 b3 what they are. The point is to gain full con
7 'il'c2 0-0 8 Clid2 .td7 9 Clif3 lLJe4 10 trol over the dark squares and reduce Black
Cll eS 3lf6 11 b3 was Nikolic-Short, Belgrade to passivity.
1987, and now Black could have achieved a 18 . . . 11.. x e5 19 dxe5 0ie8 20 Jld4 l:ib7
fine position with l 1...c5! 12 e3 Cll c 6. The only way to defend against .tb6.
7 . . . b5! ? 21 ill c5 Ilb8?
This move is interesting and attempts to Black is under pressure and does not find
justify an early 6 ... c6. However, a possible the best defence. Better is 21.. ..l::i. bf7! 22 cxd5
improvement is 7 ... lLJa6!. Then 8 3lb2 0-0 9 cxd5 23 'il'd2 Cll g7 24 'il'xaS 'i!'xaS 25 .l::i.xa5
Cll d2 .td7 10 t2Jf3 3le8 1 1 t2Jf4 Cll c7 12 'il'c l Clif5 26 .tc3 tDe7 27 .l::i.a2 with an advantage
1 15
D u t c h S t o n e wall
1 16
5 fiJh 3
117
D u tc h S t o n e wall
Game 48
Flear-Knaak
Wijk aan Zee 1 988
d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 (/jf6 4 .ilg2 d5 5
12lh3!? c6
The immediate 5 ... i.. d6 6 0-0 0-0 7 c5
i.. e 7 8 b4 b6 9 i.. b 2 a5 10 a3 tt:lc6 1 1 iia4
1 18
5 fiJ h 3
1 19
D u tch S t o n e wall
li:lxd7 ll:lxd7 1 7 iVa3! also better for White after 9 ... illd7 10 tt:lf4
Leaving Black with a simple choice: allow 'iie 7 1 1 illd3 b6 12 b4 i..a6?! 13 c5 i..c 7 14
�c7 or lose the e-pawn. a4, but Black could have improved with
1 7 . . .iVxa3 1 8 bxa3 li.Jf6 1 9 ll:lxe6 l:!.fc8 12 ... ..tb7.
20 li:lc7 10 .fl.t4
20 ill f4 is safe and easily winning. 10 illf4 should be harmless if Black plays
20 . . . I:l.ab8 21 ll:lb5 .fl.a6 22 li:ld6?! 10 ...'i'e7 instead of 10 ...illa6?!, when 1 1 !Ll
· eS
An illogical pawn exchange. White should 'i¥c7 12 cxd5 cxd5 1 3 'i¥xc7 tLlxc7 14 i..e3
play 22 a4. i..xe5 1 5 dxe5 tLla6 1 6 l;J;.fcl i.. d7 1 7 f3
22 . . .I:l.xc 1 23 l:xc1 .fl.xe2 24 ll:lxf5 .fl.c4 tLlecS 18 i..d2 gave some advantage to White
25 a4 g6 26 ll:le7+? in Speelman-Relange, London 199 1 .
26 tt:le3 ..lxa2 27 l:i.c6 tlle 4 28 f3 lll d2 29 1 0 . . ..fl.b7
�c7 is still winning. 10 ... i.. a6 1 1 cxd5! cxd5? (Black must re
26 . . .�f8 27 tLlc6 :le8 28 ll:lxa7 J:!.a8 29 capture with the e-pawn to keep the c-file
li.Jb5 I:l.xa4 30 ll:lc3 I:l.a3 31 .fl.f1 .fl.xa2 32 closed) lll:Ucl 'i¥e7 13 i..xd6 ill xd6 14 tt:lf4
li.Jxa2? !;k8 15 'i¥a4 l:!.xcl+ 16 l:txcl gave White a
And even here White can stay well ahead large plus in Chernin-Ulibin, Stockholm
with 32 lllb 5!. 1997.
32 ...:lxa2 33 I:l.c6 l:t'g7 34 1bb6 J:ta4 35 1 1 l:fd1
:b1+ wha 36 t3 Y. -v. It seems as if White has no other way to
..-------..,.--. guarantee an advantage. 1 1 l:!.ac l ! ? ti:ld7!? 12
Game 50 i.. xd6 lLlxd6 13 cxd5 exd5 14 tLlf4 'i'e7 was
Golod-Ulibin fine fo r Black in Madebrink-Wiedenkeller,
Vienna 1 998 Norrk0ping 1988, 1 1 lhdl i.. e 7!? 12 'tic!
'i¥e8 13 tLlhg5 i.. f6 14 tLle5 c5 was unclear in
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 li.Jf6 4 .fl.g2 c6 5 G-eorges-Klinger, Zurich 1992 and Kandba
li:ld2 d5 6 Wic2 ! ? .fl.d6 7 li.Jh3 0-0 8 IZJf3 ! ? Iljushin, Briansk 1995 was equal after 1 1
ll:ie4!? i..xd6 'i¥xd6 12 tt:lf4 tLld7 13 :.fd1 l:!.ac8 14
b3 l:!.fd8 15 'i¥b2.
11 .•. li:ld7 1 2 .fl.xd6 li:lxd6 1 3 li:lf4 'Wle7
14 cxd5 exd5 1 5 litac1
15 e3!? is more logical.
1 5 . . .ll:le4 1 6 li:ld3 c5
Now that Black has the centre covered
this desired, aggressive advance is possible.
1 7 dxc5 bxc5 1 8 li:ld2!? c4 19 ll:lxe4!
fxe4 20 li:lf4 li:lf6 21 b3 g5 22 ll:lh3 cxb3
23 iVxb3 h6 24 f3! .fl.a6 25 iVe3 l:!.ab8
26 fxe4 J:!.b2 27 J:!d2 :lxd2 28 iVxd2
dxe4 29 iVe3 J:!.b8?!
Better is 29 ...tLlg4!? 30 'i¥xe4 'i¥xe4 3 1
9 0-0 b6!? i..xe4 i.. xe2 with a draw.
White obtains a small advantage after 30 li:lf2 .!:!.b2 31 ll:lxe4 ll:lxe4 32 iVxe4
9 . .. ..td7 1 0 !bes i.. e8 1 1 tLld3 tlld7 12 f3 32 ..lxe4!? ,l;!xe2 33 'i¥b3+ 'ith8 offers
tLlef6 13 i.. f4, Efimov-Kovacevic, Formia White some chances in the endgame due to
1995. Lautier-Schmittdiel, Berlin 1997 was Black's exposed king.
5 ltJ h 3
Game 51
Anand-P .Nikolic
Wijk aan Zee 2000
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lbf6 3 .>lg2 e6 4 c4 d5 5
!Uh3 c6 6 0-0 .>ld6 7 i'.Wc2 0-0 8 !Ud2
.>ld7 1 1 . . . b6
I do not recommend this form of devel 1 1 ...g5 12 i.. xd6 iixd6 13 iixb7! g4 14
opment in the Lllh3 variation, and this game iixa8 gxh3 15 iixa7 hxg2 16 l:t.fcl gives
is a good illustration why. Perhaps Black White a significant advantage.
might throw in an early ... llle4, as in the note 1 2 J:l.fc1 ! .>le7 1 3 cxd5 !Uxd5
to Black's 9th move in Game 50, but this Sadly forced as 13 ... exd5 14 Cll e5 is very
also favours White. good for White.
8 ... Lll h 5!? 9 Lllf3 llld 7 is interesting. Then 14 .>ld2 g5 1 5 lbe5 a5! 1 6 e4 fxe4 1 7
Brenninkmeijer-Winants, Lyon 1990, ended .>1.xe4 J:l.a7 1 8 f4!
in a draw after 10 Lll f4 Lll xf4 1 1 i.. xf4 i.. xf4 Highlighting the risk involved in ... g7-g5.
12 gxf4 Lll f6 13 e3 i.. d 7 14 'lthl i.. e 8 1 5 The advanced g-pawn can become an easy
Cll e5 lll g4 16 i.. f3 lll xe5 1 7 dxe5 iih4 1 8 target, allowing White a well timed and ad
iie2. Dreev-Borges Mateos, Linares 1999, vantageous opening of the kingside.
went 1 0 llle 1 h6 11 llld 3 g5 12 i.. d2 Lllhf6 1 8 . . . gxf4 19 Wh1 .>lf6 20 !Uxt4 i'.Wd6 21
13 f3 iie7 14 l:t.ael c5 15 e3 b6, with good !Ufg6 .>lxg6 22 lbxg6 J:l.ff7 23 .>lt4! !Uxf4
counter-chances for Black. 24 gxf4 .>lg7
8 ... b6 9 Lllf3 i.. a 6!? is playable here as 24 ... i.. xd4 25 iih3 i.. xb2 26 l:t.dl i.. d4 27
White ha5 spent a move on iic2 compared iixh6 is also excellent for White.
with Game 49. Lautier-Nikolic, Monte Carlo 25 i'.Wh3 l:!.f6 26 .!:!.c3! 't1ixd4 27 '1Wg2 .!:!.d7
1997 continued 10 cxd5 cxd5 1 1 i.. f4 h6 1 2 28 J:l.g1 b5 29 .!:!.g3
i.. xd6 iixd6 13 Lll f4 l:t.c8 1 4 iia4 g 5 1 5 llld 3
i.. xd3 16 exd3 lll c6 17 l:t.fe l b5 18 iixb5 g4
with a complicated game that is no worse for
Black. Normal is 9 ... i.. b 7.
9 /tJf3 .>le8 1 0 .>lf4! h6 1 1 i'.Wb3!
This appears to be a virtual refutation of
the ... i.. d7-e8 idea. 1 1 i.. xd6 iixd6 12 Lllf4
Lll bd7 13 Lll d3 dxc4 14 iixc4 i.. h5 1 5 b4
Clle4 16 l:t.fdl Lll b 6 17 iib3 was only slightly
better for White in Kasparov-Nikolic, New
York 1994. Nikolic probably had an im
provement for the present game, but the text
is strong and therefore makes this irrelevant.
121
D u tc h S t o n e wall
Three major pieces on the same (open) Black's problem is not just the c-file - of
file as Black's king, a powerful knight and ten this is no more than a route to a draw
strong bishop clearly put White firmly in the through mass exchanges - but White's over
driving seat! all superiority. A look at the relative strengths
29 . . . i'.Wa7 30 lbe5 .!:!.e7 31 i'.Wd2 i'.Wc7 32 of the knights, for example, highlights
.!:!.d3 .!:!.e8 33 .!:id6 c5 34 lbg4 .!:!.ff8 35 Black's plight.
lbxh6+ wh8 36 lbg4 J:l.d8 37 i'.Wg2 .!:!.xd6 1 7 . . . lba6 1 8 a3 .!bc2 1 9 i'.Wxc2 i'.Wd6 20
38 i'.Wh3+ wg8 39 i'.Wh7+ wt7 40 .>lg6+ e3 lbe8 21 ->lf1
1 -0 Preparing to bring his final piece into the
.-------. game.
Game 52 2 1 ... !Uac7 22 g4!
Goldin-L B . Ha nsen The beginning of the final attack. Once
Warsaw 1990 again an advantage in one sector presents
aggressive possibilities in another.
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 lbt6 4 .>lg2 d5 5 22 . . .fxg4 23 .>ld3
!Uh3 c6 6 0-0 .>ld6 7 .>lf4 Black has no defence.
23 . . . g6 24 .>lxg6! i'.We7
24 ... hxg6 25 iixg6+ tt:lg7 26 iif7+ @h8 27
l:t.xc7 and White wins.
25 .>lf7+ wg7
25 ... @hs drops the queen to 26 tt:lfg6+.
26 lbh5+ wh8
1 22
5 Ci:J h 3
lar positions. J .Horvath-Moskalenko, Buda Black returns the favour. 15 ... fxe4! 16 fxe4
pest 199 1 , went 8. . . tt:la6 9 i.. f4 dxc4 10 e3 'ltg7 is unclear.
tt:lb4 1 1 'iVe2 tt:ld3 12 i.. xd6 'iVxd6 13 tt:lf4 1 6 f4! g4 1 7 b3! cxb3 1 8 i'.Wxb3 fxe4 1 9
e5 14 tt:lxd3 cxd3 1 5 'iVxd3 i.. e6 with a bal Ci:icxe4 Ci:ixe4 20 il.xe4 h 5 2 1 Ci:id3?
anced game. 9 l:t.b l dxc4 10 e4 e5 1 1 'iVe2 Razuvaev's 21 h3! gxh3 22 g4! creates a
exd4 12 'iVxc4+ @h8 13 'iVxd4 'iVe7 14 i.. g5 terrible attack.
i.. e5 1 5 'iVe3 tt:lc5 16 exf5 i.. xf5 17 l:!.bdl 21 . . . Ci:id5 22 Ci:ie5?!
l:t.ae8 favoured Black in Pinter-Rechlis, Beer 22 tt:lc5! with some advantage was better.
sheba 1988. 22 . . . il.f6 23 f5 .il..x e5 24 dxe5 i'.Wb6+ 25
6 . . .il.d6 7 il.f4 il.e7 ! ? .!:!.f2 exf5 26 .!:!.xd5 .il.. e6 27 .il..e3
Black hopes to profit from the potentially
awkward situation of White's minor pieces
on the kingside, either by leaving White to
untangle or attacking with the g-pawn. In this
and the next game White foregoes the the
matic tt:ld2-f3.
8 0-0 0-0 9 Ci:ic3!? h6?!
Automatically setting about an under
standable kingside expansion, but in this
particular case it is not a good idea. Gulko
suggests the improvement 9 ... dxc4!? 10 e4
'iVxd4 1 1 exf5 e5! 12 l:t.adl 'iVc5, which he
assesses as unclear.
1 0 .!:iad l g 5 1 1 ii.cl il.d7 1 2 f3! 27 . . .i'.Wa6?
Black should keep control of the seventh
rank. 27 . . . 'iVb7!? 28 l:t.xb5 'iVf7! is unclear.
28 .il..h6
White is running short of time. 28 l:t.xf5!
l:t.xf5 29 l:t.d8+ l:t.xd8 30 'iVxe6+ l:t.f7 31 i.. h7+!
@h8 32 'iVxf7 l:t.dl+ 33 'ltg2 'iVxa3 34 i.. c 2
wins easily.
28 . . . cxd5 29 .il..xd5 .il.. xd5
Or 29 ... l:t.fe8 30 'iVe3! @h7 3 1 'iVg5 J:tg8
32 'iVxh5.
30 i'.Wxd5+ Wh7 31 .il.. xf8 J:l.xf8 32 e6
i'.Wc8 33 e7 J:l.f6 34 i'.We5 1 -0
1 23
D u t c h S t o n e w a ff
1 24
5 Ci:J h 3
125
D u tc h S t o n e wall
3 1 /Llg5+!
Black must have underestimated this.
31 . . . 'ilkxg5+! 32 fxg5 li:Jxe8 33 gxh6
tbc7?!
33 ....tf6!? 34 e3 a5 is the best defence, al
though White has some chances to win.
34 li:Je5 Sl.. g5 35 '4/t2 il..h4+ 36 wtt Sl.. g 5
37 Wf2 Sl..h4+ 3 8 '.t>e3 Sl.. g5+ 39 Wd3
il..f4 40 1Llxc6 Sl..xh 2 41 1Llxa7 Wxh6 42
a4 Wg5 43 1Llc6 Wf6 44 Wc3 Sl.. g3 45
Wb4 ..lle 1 + 46 Wb3 il..f2 47 a5 f4?!
47 ... �f7!? is better.
Black has equalized. 48 Wa4 Wf5 49 li:la7 ! Wf6 50 tbb5 1Lla6
1 3 b4 il..d 7 1 4 b5?! 51 c6 We7 52 Sl.. g4 Wd8 53 i.. xe6 0ic7
This is too optimistic. An even game re 54 tbxc7 Wxc7 55 Sl..x d5 .ITl.. xd4 56 Wb4
sults from 14 �b3 .te8 15 £4 .lth5. Sl.. e3 57 Wc3 Wd6 58 '>ild3 ..ll c 1 59 We4
1 4 . . . tbc5! il.. d 2 60 a6 Sl..e3 61 Wf5 Wc7 62 We5!
The knight jumps into action. Black is now without moves.
1 26
5 l:l:i h 3
127
D u tc h S to n e w a ll
Game 59
Kozul-Bareev
Biel 1991
1 d4 e6 2 c4 fS 3 g3 /jjf6 4 Sl.. g 2 c6 5
/jjh3 dS 6 0-0 .ITl.. d 6 7 .\1.f4 .ITl.. e7 8 /jjd 2 It is nice to be able to make such aggres
0-0 9 'ilkc2 h 6 1 0 Sl.. xb8 l::i x b8 1 1 /jjf4 sive moves in the opening in relative safety.
il.. d 6 The g5-pawn introduces passibilities of both
Allowing the removal of this bishop is not ... g5-g4 and .. .f5-f4, creates space behind
a problem for Black, but keeping it, for the which Black can better organise an attack and
1 29
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
23 c6! ?
The beginning o f a great combination - I
am just not so sure that it is correct. See the
note to Black's 24th move.
23 . . . bxc6
23 .. . fxg3 24 hxg3 ctJg4 25 .!'hb5! axb5 26
cxb7 il.. b8 27 �c8! is a line given by Kozul.
Too passive. Consistent is 16 ... 4:Jd7 17 24 l::i xbS! axbS
4:Jxd7 �xd7 1 8 e3 f4! (Black has no coun 24 ... cxb5 25 J:l:.xa6 i;re8 26 il.a7 i;re7 27
terplay after 18 ... il.. g6 19 c5 il.. c7 20 f4) 19 �c6 clearly favours White according to Ko
exf4 gxf4, when White has no advantage. zul. I feel less sure about this assessment. It
1 7 cS j)_c7 1 8 bS! seems to me that White's initiative is too
A little tactic that gives White the edge. slight to be significant.
1 8 . . . cxbS 1 9 axbS Sl.. x b5? 25 l::ia 7 li:Je8
A dubious exchange sacrifice. After 25 . . . J:l:.c8 26 �xc6 �d7 27 �b7 and 4::lc5-
19 ... axb5 20 J:l:.a7 �d8 21 i;r£a1 ctJd7 22 a6 wins.
4::i xd7 il.. xd7 23 e3 White will win back the 26 'ii'xc6 'ilkxd4
pawn with interest. Or 26. . .�f7 27 il..h 3.
20 lt:lg6 'ilkg7 21 li:Jxf8 l::i xf8 22 llfb1 27 'ilkxe6+ Wg7 28 j)_xdS! 1 -0
Black has insufficient compensation for White wins a piece after 28 . . .�f6 29 �d7+
the exchange. @h8 30 il.. e4 �g7 3 1 �xg7+ l.t>xg7 32 il.. c6
22 . . . f4 fxg3 33 hxg3 @f6 34 il..x e8.
1 30
5 Ci'J h 3
Summary
The line with 5 ctJh3 ! is definitely the one that asks the most questions of the Stonewall. Nev
ertheless it must be said that Black has good chances to equalize and to generate interesting
play. However, to succeed in this variation requires more accuracy from Black than in any of
the other main lines, so I suggest that you play through all the games in this chapter in detail.
Although avoiding ... il..d6 is not necessary Black should not be too uncomfortable when set
tling for . ..ii.el. In fact Black is not without ideas, Tukmakov's l...4:la6!? (mentioned in Game
46) being a good example. If Black does play . . .il..d6 White does best to waste no time in play
ing il..f4, and after the tactical retreat to el at least Black has a target in the shape of the bishop
on f4. Notice that in Game 55 White is not forced to answer 9 ... 4:lh5 with 10 il..e3, but
9... ctJa6!? (Game 56) is an interesting alternative to the more common 9 ... h6 cif Games 51-59,
when expanding with 1 1 ...g5 (Game 58) is fine and 1 l...Sld6 (Game 59) is sensible.
s_ . . c6
5 ... Slel - Game 45
6 0-0
6 �c2 ii.el - Game 47
6 . . . .ITl.. d 6
6. . . Slel - Game 46
7 ..ll f4 (DJ
l b3 - Game 48; l �c2 - Game 5 1
7 . . . SJ..e 7 !
l. .0-0 (D)
.
8 4:ld2 b6 - Game 52
8 �b3 Game 54 -
131
CHA PTER ff VE I
Other Stonewalls
1 32
O th e r S t o n e w a fh
1 33
D u tc h S t o n e w a ll
.i.g2 .i.d6 6 0-0 0-0 7 b3 cult to resist playing. Black has a comfortable
Schussler's is another way to try and profit game and prospects of generating pressure
from the o mission of ... c7-c6. White threat on the kingside without having to take risks,
ens to trade dark-squared bishops with .i.aJ and it seems that White can find a path to an
and Black can do nothing to prevent it as the advantage after 18 ... g5, but I would be care
usual ... 'ilie7 simply loses a pi ece to c4-c5, ful with any final judgements here, as the line
trapping the bishop. However, White's plan is very sharp.
takes time, a luxury that Black has already
gained by leaving his c-pawn untouched - at
l east for the moment. Furthermore, Black's
experiment has left him less vulnerable on
the dark squares than after ... c7-c6. These
factors take the sting out of 7 b3.
7 b6 8 .i.a3 .i.b7 9 .bd6 'l'xd6
. . •
1 35
D u t c h S t o n e w all
It is a testament to the Stonewall that the 9 . . .a5 1 0 Ji.. xe7 'lWxe7 1 1 ll:ic3 Si.es 1 2
pawn mass in the centre affords Black such 'lWe3!
confidence if an opportunity such as Shon 's
should present itself.
28 'Wfc7 :n 29 Wlb6 :es 30 €\c2 'Wff4
3 1 'lWd6 r;!.fe7! 32 €\d4 h5! 33 €\b5 h4
34 h3 '\lff3 35 @h2 'lWf4+ Y, - 'h
Game 63
Timm an-Short
Ti/burg 1 990
Now White sends in his knights. il.f6 was fine for Black, who successfully
1 9 ill g 5! jl__xc4 20 illd 5 illd8 21 e6 jl__ x d5 handled White's queenside expansion after
22 J::!. x d5 %l'a3 23 J::!. d 7 illc6 24 jl__xc6 14 a3 b6 15 :!:!.cl il.e8 16 'il'c2 bxc5 17 ctJxc5
bxc6 25 e7 lile8 26 %l'c4+ li<h8 27 illf 7+ ctJxc5 18 'ii'xc5 'il!l'b8 19 l2Jd2 l:ta6 20 e3
li<g8 28 illh 6+ li<h8 29 '!Wg8+ li!xg8 30 l:ib6.
illf7 mate 9 e3 a5!? 1 0 a3 jl__ d 7 1 1 'il'c2 jl__ e8 1 2
.----. ille 1 a4!?
Game 64 Seeking to make progress on the light
Yrjola-Karlsson squares on the queenside. 12 ... il.f6, preparing
Gausdal 1987 ... ctJe7, is a more patient treatment of the
position.
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 ill f6 4 jl__ g 2 ji__ e 7 5 1 3 b4
illf3 d5 6 0-0 0-0 7 b3 Ille s 8 jl__b 2 ! ?
1 3 . . . b5!?
Avoiding the exchange of bishops, White Notice how Black's light-squared bishop
decides that his own will have some influence makes a valid contribution on e8, from
on the long diagonal. where it can also transfer to the kingside.
8 . . . ill e4 14 cxd5!
Later Karlsson deviated from this with The main idea behind Black's plan is to
8 ... aS but had no success after 9 ctJc3 ctJe4 10 meet 14 cxb5? with 14 ...ctJa7, whenBlackhas
ctJa4 b6 11 :!:!.cl il.b7 12 ctJel ctJb4?! 13 a3 good control of the light squares. Closing the
ctJc6 14 e3 l:if6 15 ctJd3 'il'f8, Polugaevsky queenside with 14 c5 is roughly level and
Karlsson, Haninge 1990. Then 16 f3 ctJg5 17 shifts the play over to the other flank. The
cxdS exd5 18 ctJc3 ctJa7 19 ctJe5 was excel text, on the other hand, denies Black use of
lent for White. Perhaps the immediate the b5-square while keeping the play open.
8... il.d7 is worth a try. Polugaevsky-Spassky, 14 . . . exd5 1 5 ill d3 illb 8!?
Tilburg 1983, continued 9 ctJc3 il.e8 10 lLigS A decent alternative is 15...ctJa7 to quickly
il.f7 1 1 e3 'ii' d7 12 ctJxf7 l:txf7, when 13 send the knight to c4.
ctJa4 b6 14 :!:!.cl ctJd8 15 ctJc3 l:!.f8 16 f3 ctJf7 16 Ill e s J::!. a 6 1 7 f3 ill d6 1 8 illd 2 ill c4 1 9
17 e4 left White only slightly better after his ill dxc4 dxc4 20 f4!
opponent's manoeuvres to f7. White went Clamping down on the centre.
for manoeuvres of his own in Schmidt 20 . . . J::!.d6 21 lilad 1 jl__ h 5 22 J::!. d 2 illd 7 23
Spassky, Buenos Aires 1978, but 9 ctJe5 il.e8 h3 jl__ g6 24 d5?
10 ctJd3 il.f7 11 ctJd2 a5 12 lLif3 ctJe4 1 3 c5 24 il.f3! ctJf6 25 l:!.g2 lLidS 26 'il'd2! gives
137
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
Game 65
I . Sokolov-Yusupov
Nussloch 1996 In reply to the automatic 1 8 �eS Black
.________________. has a promising pawn sacrifice in 18 ... i.xeS
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 li'lf6 4 i.. g2 il.e7 5 19 dxeS f4!, when 20 il.xe4 dxe4 21 'iYxe4
1 38
O t h e r S t o n e wa lls
il..g6 brings our old friend the light-squared Slightly stronger is 35 ll:ixfS exfS 36 'ite6.
bishop to life with sufficient compensation. 35 ... .ig6 36 �xe6 :xt1 + 37 �xf1
With his knight attacked Black should i.d3+ 38 ""f2 �f8+ 39 illf5
now refuse to retreat and instead try to ex An easier win is 39 'tli'f7! 1Wxf7+40 ll:ixf7+
ploit the voluntary weakening of White's @g7 41 ll:id6 etc.
kingside pawn complex with 18 ... ll:ixg3! 19 39 ... i.c7 40 b6 .ixh2 41 �e7!
hxg3 il..xg3. Then 20 f4 i..h S! sees the other White is still on the way to the full point.
bishop t ake a piece of the action, and after 21 41 ... �xe7 42 illxe7 .ic4 43 ii.. a 3! �h7
ll:ie5 'ith4 22 ll:if3 'il'xf4 the situation is 44 c6! bxc6 45 ll'lf5! .id3 46 We3! ile4
complicated indeed. 47 ll'ld6 ilg1 + 48 �d2 .ixd4 49 b7 SJ.. a7
1 8 . . . illf6 1 9 ifd2 50 CLJc8 ilb8 5 1 Si.d6 d4 52 ii..xb8 c5 53
White has an edge. ll'ld6 1 -0
1 9 .. .I;!gS?!
The thematic 19 ... ll:id? is preferable, aim Game 66
ing to address the traditional positional mat Speelman-Short
ter of the e5-square by pushing the e-pawn at London 1991
the appropriate time.
20 l:!:ae1 a5 21 a3 axb4 22 axb4 l:!:a2 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 ll'lf6 4 .ig2 Jle7 5
Handing over the a-file to White. 22 .. i..g6
. l/Jf3 d5 6 0-0 0-0 7 ifc2 Jld7!? 8 b3 a5
connects the rooks.
23 l:ta1 J:!:xa 1 24 : xa 1 g5 25 e4!
1 39
D u t c h S to n e waii
normal Stonewall position that should be 29 :!.a8 llld 7 30 l:.a7! li:lf6 3 1 il'b6 'it.?g6
slightly favourable for White. 32 il'xb7 il'c5 33 il'f7+ wh6 34 e3 'ii'b4
14 lllx h5 lll xh5 1 5 li:ld2 llld 7 16 a3 lll hf6
1 7 '!Wc3 lllb6 1 8 :lab 1 ! z:.l:t7
Not 18 ...'ii' x a3?! 19 'ii'e 3.
19 b4 axb4 20 axb4
35 g4! 1 -0
Game 67 ·
Kasparov-Short
White seems to be making progress on the Brussels 1 987
queenside, suggesting that Black should per
haps prepare for b4-b5 with 20 ... l:!.c8. Also 1 d4 e6 2 g3 f5 3 .11.. g 2 li:lf6 4 li:lf3 $i..e 1
possible is 20 . .. dxc4 21 tDxc4 e.g. 22 5 c4 d5 6 0-0 0-0 1 'Llbd2
'ii'b 3 tDxc4 23 ii'xc4 b!a4. What is clear is For the moment Kasparov refrains from
that Black should refrain from the following b2-b3 and avoids the ... l'Lic6 lines, developing
move. normally like Sokolov.
20 . . . li:le4? 21 .11.. xe4! fxe4 22 b5 7 . . . c6
Thanks to 20...tDe4 White's attack has just Black decides to play a normal Stonewall
gained another tempo and will soon be im with the bishop on e7.
possible to stop. 8 llle 5 lll bd7 9 lll d 3 llle4 1 0 11'c2!
22 . . .J:!a3?!
Speelman proposes 22... l'Lid7.
23 ,l';!b3 l:.xb3 24 il'xb3 c5 25 '!We3!
Concentrating on key dark squares in the
centre.
25 . . . lll d 7
25 ... cxd4 26 'ii' xd4 tDxc4 2 7 lDxc4 dxc4
2 8 'ii' xc4 e3 29 f3 gives White a clear lead in
the ending.
26 dxc5 lllx c5 27 il'd4! l:.f5 28 !;!:a1
w1111
The losing move. Black can still hang on
after 28 ...'ii' f8 29 g4!? l:!.f4 30 cxdS l:txg4+ 31
@h 1 exdS 3 2 'ii' xdS+ @h8 33 l:gl!?, al Kasparov believes that White is already
though White is much better. Now the game better. It is possible, of course, that this i s
is almost over. true. In Game 65 Black accepted t h e loss o f a
140
O th er S t o n e walls
41 a6!
Winning a piece.
41 . . . dxe3 42 a7 exf2+ 43 'it>h1 %l'xa7 44
%l'xe5+ 'it>f7 45 Sl.. f 1 h5?
Black should make the draw with
45 ... 'ili'aS+ 46 �h2 'ili'd5. If the queens come
off Black has no problems in making a draw,
as White needs his g-pawn to win the game
Latching on to the thematic plan of b3-b4. since the h-pawn + light-squared bishop is a
Black opts to trade knights. theoretical draw.
1 8 . . .ill gS 1 9 l:i'.fe1 %ff7 20 illx g5 11.. x g5 46 1/..c4!
21 1/.. d 6 Forcing Black to give up his f-pawn to
The freedom of White's bishop does high keep his centre together.
light the drawback of posting Black's on f6. 46 . . . f1 %1' + 47 11..x f1 %l'a8+ 48 'it>h2 %fd8
21 . . . 1/.. f6 22 e3 g5 23 b4! axb4 24 li!xb4 49 11..e 2 %fd2 50 'it>g1 %l'e 1 + 51 'it>g2 %l'd2
ill f8 25 l:i'.eb 1 52 'it>f2 g4 53 h4 %fd8 54 'it>e3 %ff6 55
25 li:JeS! Gives White a clear advantage. %l'a5 e5?
25 . . . ill g 6 26 Ill e s I:Ia7 27 %l'b3? It is difficult to see how White can make
White is playing too slowly. Now is the any progress without this help. Now White's
time to strike: 27 a5! l:!.dS 28 il..b S l:!.a8 29 bishop teams up with the queen.
li:Jxb7 and White has a commanding posi- 56 11.. c4+ 'it>g6 57 %l'c7 'llig
i 7 58 %l'd6+
tion. %l'f6 59 %fd7 %l'b6+
27 . . . l:i'.g7 28 %l'c2 %1'98! 29 h3 ? Another winning line for White is
29 li:Jd3 leaves White on top. 59 ... 'ili'g7 60 'ili'e8+ �h7! 61 �e2! �h6 62
29 . . . %fd8! 30 1/.. b8 li!a8 3 1 cxd5 cxd5 32 'ili'e6+ 'ili'g6 63 'ili'xeS etc.
11..e 5 ill x e5 33 dxe5 11..x e5 34 ill xb7 60 @d3 %l'b1 + 61 'it>c3 1 -0
11.. xb7 35 lilxb7 lhb7 36 lilxb7 lilb8! 37 Kasparov gives the following: 61...�cl+
%l'c6 l:i'.xb7 38 %l'xb7 %l'c7 39 %l'b5 'it>g7 62 �b4 'ili'el+ 63 �b5 'ili'bl+ 64 �cs 'ili'gl+
Black should in no way lose this endgame, 65 �c6 'ili'g2+ 66 �c7'ili'c2 67 'ili'e6+ �h7 68
but Kasparov finds a way to set Black new �d8 'ili'd2+ 69 �e8 and White wins.
141
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
Summary
Of the plans put forward in this chapter I prefer delaying ...c7-c6 (Games 60-61), an idea that
seems perfectly reasonable. Moreover, stereotype play from White saves Black a tempo! The
only problem for Black might be li:Jh3. The Short/Spassky/Karlsson treatment of ... li:Jc6 (or
delaying any move involving the c6-square) avoids li:Jh3 but introduces other inconveniences
for Black. Games 63, 65 and 67 are good examples of how these lines should be handled by
White, who can count on a slight advantage.
1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 lt:if6 4 11.. g2 d5
4 . . il.e7 5 li:Jf3 0-0 6 0-0 c6 - Game 65
.
5 lt:if3 11..e 7
5 . . il.d6 6 0-0 0-0!? (D)
.
7 cS!? Game 60 -
7 b3 Game 61 -
6. . 0-0
. 6 . 0-0
. . 7 . . . lbc6
1 42
I CHAPTER SIX I
White Plays an early e2-e3
In this final chapter we shall investigate the recommended. White's fluid development
different positions arising in the Stonewall soon leads to a dangerous initiative.
when White plays e2-e3 and develops his 4 ill f3 c6 5 11..f4
bishop to e2 or d3. These variations occur White should not be allowed the luxury of
most often from the Meran (Queen's Gam bringing out both bishops.
bit), but it is also possible to reach them in 5 . . . illf6 6 e3 11..e 7 7 1i.. d3 0-0 8 %l'c2 ill e4
the Dutch proper after 1 d4 fS 2 c4 e6 3 li:Jc3 9 g4!
li:Jf6 4 e3!?. In Game 68 Black pays too big a
price to play the Stonewall, allowing White to
actively post his dark-squared bishop and
then launch an attack with g2-g4. Games 69-
70 feature less threatening versions of g2-g4.
In Game 71 White monitors the e4-square
with .itd3, lt:Jge2 and f2-f3 ; the unavailability
of e4 is not a problem for Black here. Black
delays ...li:Jf6 in Game 72 in order to leave
the square free for the queen - a rather ambi
tious approach. White tries for an initiative of
his own in Game 73, throwing his queenside
pawns forward, whereas Games 74-76 see
White play b2-b3 and il.b2. Finally, Karpov's This is the key position. Black's play thus
answer to .. .f7-f5 is f2-f4 in Game 77, locking
far has concentrated on the traditional grip
the centre pawns! on the centre, but the text highlights how
------ fragile this can be when White has been al-
Game 68 lowed to deploy his forces as in the diagram
Serper-Sequera position. Black needs to protect e4 as well as
San Felipe 1 998 keep the b 1-h7 diagonal closed, leaving
------ White free to push his g-pawn with the sim
1 c4 e6 2 ill c3 d5 3 d4 f5 ple plan of opening the g-file.
This version of the Stonewall cannot be 9 . . . %l'a5
1 43
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
Game 69
The game continued 16 ll:lg6+!! hxg6 1 7 Agrest-Lautier
hxg6+ �gS 1S 'ifcl 'ifd8 19 il.c7!!, when the Harplinge 1998
best defence 19 ... il.h4! lead� to a win for
White after 20 il.xdS l:txf2+ 2 1 �d I il.xdS 1 c4 e6 2 1Llc3 d5 3 d4 c6 4 e3
22 �e l l:!.f3 23 �e2 l:tg3 24 'il'a3! with the
idea of 25 l:!.hS+! etc. Instead Black tried
19 .. Jhf2+ 20 �xf2 il.h4+ 2 1 �e2 'iVgS, but
after 22 'il'g1 eS 23 'il'h2 il.xg4+ 24 �d2
exd4 25 cxd4 dxc4 he resigned.
1 1 . . . ClJd7 1 2 J::!.g 2! ClJdf6 1 3 J;!ag1 1Lle8
13 ... ll:lxg4 14 h3 1Dgxf2 15 l:txf2 tllxf2 16
ltixf2 does nothing to diminish White's ini
tiative.
1 4 !i:le5 1Ll4d6?!
14. . . il.b4 15 gxfS exf5 16 il.h6! is worth
remembering.
1 5 c5
144
Wh i t e Pla ys an Early e 2 - e 3
145
D u tc h S to n e wall
agonal, thus prompting White to play the it more difficult for Black to infiltrate.
rather awkward 18 'ifa2 b5 19 .ITl..b3. Then 25 ... l':!.f7 !
the displacement of White's pieces favours It is preferable to bring the rook into play
Black (the a-file offers White nothing). The on this rank in order to provide the a-pawn
direct text, however, also looks promising for with extra protection.
Black. 26 h5 l':!.fd7 27 hxg6 hxg6
1 7 ILig5 Not 27...l:lxd3?? 28 gxh7 J:lh3 29 l:i:g8+.
2S il.a6 ii'b6 29 l':!.xg6 il.f7 30 l':!.h6
1 7 . . . l':!.fS
Defending f7 is not really necessary, so 30 ... l':!.d2!
Black should try 17: .. .ITl..fS. There is no reason Winning a piece and the game.
to fear 1 8 ll'lf7 J:lf8 19 ll'lxd6 ll'lxd6 as now 3 1 il.xd2 l':!.xd2 32 ii'xc6+ ii'xc6 33 l':!.xc6
the c4-bishop is under fire, and White needs l':!.c2+ 34 �d1 l':!.xc6 3 5 il.b5 il.b3+?
to keep this piece on the board. Alternatively, 35 ... .ITl..hS+ 36 .ITl..e2 l:ld6+!
after (1 7. . ..ITl..fS) 1 8 ll'lxe4 Black can recapture 36 lt>e2 "il.c4+ 37 il.xc4 l':!.xc4 3S l':!.xa7
with the bishop. l':!.xe4+ 39 lt>f3 l':!.d4 40 l':!.a4 �e 7 41 lt>g4
1 S 1Lixe4 ii'xe4 1 9 il.d3 �e6 42 f3 lt>e5 43 kl.as il.d2 44 kl.es+
Preventing ... .ITl..f5 but relinquishing the e6- �d5 45 kl.cs il.e3 46 l':!.bS �c5 47 kl.cs+
square. �b4 4S l':!.bS+ �a4 49 b3+ �a3 0- 1
1 9 . . . 'i'e7 20 e4?!
Consistent, and it is natural to try to close Game 70
the centre with the enemy queen and rook Gelfand-Short
posted so menacingly. Unfortunately for Ti/burg 1990
White the d4-pawn is left without protection
and the e3-square is not available to the 1 d4 e6 2 c4 f5 3 1Lic3 1Lif6 4 e3 d5
bishop. Consequently the d-file now be 4....ITl..b4 is also a good move here, giving
comes the focus of Black's attention. Black a comfortable version of the Nimzo
20 . . .il.e6! Indian.
Suddenly Black's forces jump to action. 5 il.d3 c6 6 h3! ?
21 ii'c2 il.b4+ 22 ild2 l':!.dS! Insisting on the g2-g4 thrust, this idea is
The d-pawn is doomed and White is in too slow to trouble Black. In the next game
serious trouble. White concentrates on e4 with f2-f3.
23 a6 l':!.xd4 24 axb7 ii'xb7 25 il.c3! 6 . . . il.d6 7 g4?! 0-0
A good defensive move, hoping to make Black has responded calmly to White's
146
Wh ite Pla ys an Early e 2 - e 3
show of kingside aggression with sensible the struggle). However White should in fact
development. In the previous game the odd exchange bishops and decentralise Black's
7 h3?! 0-0 would have led to the diagram queen with 17 i..xa6 'ifxa6+ 18 'it>g2, al
position, above, which suggests that Gel though Black is still ahead.
fand's treatment lacks punch. 1 7 . . . ii'd5!
A wonderful posting for the queen, de
fending the advanced knight, relieving the f5-
pawn of its duty and in tum preparing to
launch an attack on the f-file.
1 8 l':!.g1 fxg4 19 l':!.xg4
8 ii'c2?!
Presenting Black with a chance to develop
anearly initiative. 8 ll'lf3 is better, with a
complex game ahead.
8 . . . 1Lia6! 9 a3 dxc4 1 0 il.xc4 b5 1 1 il.e2
1 1 i..a2 b4 12 ll'la4 '>t>h8 illustrates how White has finally given his rook the g-file,
misplaced White's pieces can become. but the result is to see Black with an open file
1 1 . . . b4 1 2 1Lia4 bxa3 1 3 bxa3 1Lie4 of his own. Ironically White's problems are
Black has the advantage thanks to his su his own making, having inaccurately followed
perior development. His knight has found up his rather slow kingside build-up. In the
the usual influential outpost on e4, giving diagram position Black has the opportunity
him a commanding presence in the centre, to win the game with a nice combination.
and White is in no position to use the g-file. 1 9 . . . ILig3+?!
The f2-pawn, meanwhile, is particularly Not the strongest move. Instead
susceptible to attack. 19 ... ll'lxf2! 20 'it>xf2 i..xc4 21 e4 'llixd4+ 22
14 1Lif3 i..e3 'ifxal 23 'ifxc4 'ifxa3 gives Black a
14 'ifxc6 'ifa5+ 15 @fl l::tb 8 cannot be completely winning position.
recommended to White. 20 l':!.xg3!
1 4 . . .°il\l'a5+ 1 5 lt>f1 1Lic7! Black wins easily after 20 fxg3? �xf3+ 21
15 ...c5 16 gxf5 exf5 17 dxc5 ll'laxc5 18 i..xf3 'ifxf3+ 22 'it>gl k!:f8
ll'lxc5 i..xc5 19 i.. b2 is less clear according to 20 . . . il.xg3 21 lt>g2! il.h4 22 e4 'ih5 23
Short. 15 ... ll'lc7 keeps the tension and pre 1Lixh4
pares to bring the light-squared bishop into 23 ll'lce5! .ITl..xe2 24 'ifxe2 offers more
play. chances to survive, although White is still
1 6 '2lb2 il.a6 1 7 1Lic4? struggling.
Another natural choice as White does not 23 . . . ii'xh4 24 il.e3 l':!.f6 25 l:l.h1 l:l.af8 26
wish to part with a potentially useful de l':!.h2?
fender (and the text also returns the knight to A mistake in a hopeless position.
147
D u tc h S t o n e w a ff
26 ... l:lxf2+ 27 .i.xf2 i!'xf2+ 28 'it'h1 't!fc3 ti'ibds 20 'tlfa5 Ji.d6, Yasinsky
'iife 1 + 0-1 Sveshnikov, Novgorod 1995, also favoured
------ Black. Golod-Dgebuadze, Antwerp 1999,
Game 71 featured a third, slower mode of develop·
Korchnoi-P . Nikolic ment, with 8... ti'ia6 9 a3 tbc7 10 0-0 b6 1 1 h3
Sarajevo 1998 Ji.a6 12 b3 l:k8 1 3 e4 fxe4 14 fxe4 e5 leading
'------' to complications.
1 d4 f5 2 c4 lilt6 3 lilc3 e6 4 e'3 d5 5 9 cxd5 l.i)xd5
.i.d3 c6 6 �c2 .id6 7 f3 0-0 8 lilge2 9 ... cxd5 seems like a justification of put
ting the queen on the c-file, but obliging with
10 ti'ib5 leaves White slightly better after
10 ...1ixc2 11 i.xc2 i.b4+ 12 i.d2 ..itxd2+ 13
Wxd2.
10 il'b3
Also possible i s 10 a3!? ti'id7 1 1 lt:Jxd5
cxd5 12 'ifxc7 i.xc7 13 i.d2 i.d6 14 Wf2
ctJf6 15 i.b4! with an edge for White.
Korchnoi is happy to trade pieces eventually
but first he turns to development, putting the
onus on Black to un ravel and to find decent
squares for his pieces.
1 0 . . ."1Jh8
White's set-up is, of course, designed to Stepping off the a2-g8 diagonal.
deprive Black of the e4-square. The draw 1 1 .i.d2 li:ld7 1 2 l:rc1
back is that the knight is less actively placed Threatening to eliminate Black's dark
on e2, with the reduced control of the e5- squared bishop with lt:Jb5.
square being a key d ifference. Furthermore, 1 2 ... il'b6 1 3 .i.c4 lil7f6 1 4 0-0 Si.d7
f2-f3 voluntari ly weakens White's dark In return for losing the knight outpost on
squares. These factors Black a comfort e4 Black has been given the d5-square, al
able game. though it is in the nature of White's pawn
8 . . . il'c7 structure that e3-e4 might well come (\Xfhite
This is probably not the be>t from the op must be careful that this advance does not
tions available. 8 ... dxc4?! was seen i n Lobron leave his pawns vulnerable on e4 and d4).
Sveshnikov, Budapest 1996. After 9 i.xc4 bS 1 5 lila4
10 i.b3 Wh8 11 e4 b4 1 2 e5 bxc3 1 3 bxc3 Practically forcing Black to exchange
i.c7 l4 exf6 't!fxf6 l 5 0-0 e5 16 dxeS i.xeS queens as otherwise White's will be superior.
17 f4 i_c7 18 i.b2 lt:Jd7 19 c4 White stood 1 5 . . . �xb3 1 6 .bb3 b6
better. The following are improvements on Keeping the knight out of c5.
this and the game continuation: 8 ... lt:Jbd7 9 17 lilac3 l:rfe8 1 8 lilg3
i.d2 'ife7 1 0 cxd5 lt:Jxd5 l 1 a3 ctJ7f6 1 2 h3?! 18 e4?! lt:Jxc3 19 ctJxc3 e5! is fine for
e5 13 lt:Jxd5 ctJxd5 1 4 e4 fxe4 1 5 fxe4 lt:Jb6 Black.
was already better for Black in Bykhovsky 1 8 . . .lilxc3
Vekshenkov, Pavlodar 199 1 , while 8 ...Wh8 9 Instigating a series of exchanges that Black
il.d2 't!Ve7 1 0 O·O dxc4 l 1 .bc4 bs 1 2 i.d3 j udges (correctly) to bring about a level end
ti'ia6 1 3 a3 b4 14 ctJa4 b xa3 15 bxa3 i.xa3 16 mg.
�fb 1 J::!. b 8 17 't!fxc6 l::!.xb l+ 18 :!lxb 1 ti'ib4 19 1 9 Sl.xc3 c5
Wh ite Plays an Early e 2 - e 3
Game 72
Golod-Delemarre
Dieren 1999
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 lll t3 e6 4 e3 f5 5 il.d3
�d6 6 0-0 ii'f6 !?
1 49
D u tc h S to n e w a ll
d5 - hence Black's next, which defends the 25 . . . dxe4 26 ilxe4 °fid4! 27 b5! cxb5
bishop and eyes the b4-square. 27 ... i..e2 28 bxc6 i..xf1 29 cxb7 'ifxf2+ 30
1 0 . . . 1Lia6 1 1 cxd5 exd5! @h 1 and there is no way to stop the pawn.
Black offers the f-pawn, which is a consis 28 "fic2 °fic4
tent and wise decision considering the com With limited protection for his king Black
plexities that follow. elects to go into the endgame a pawn down,
1 2 ilxe 7 "fixe7 1 3 ilxf5 ILib4 1 4 °fib1 counting on his passed pawn to offer suffi
0-0! cient counterplay to make the draw.
Again Black is not afraid to invest forthe 29 "fixc4 bxc4 30 ilxb7 ile2?!
cause of development. This gives White more chances to win the
1 5 ilxh7+ \t>h8 endgame than he deserves. Helping the im
mediate advance of the c-pawn with 30 ...i..f5
3 1 .li!.cl .li!.b6! 32 i..f3 c3 is imperative, al
though Black is still obliged to play accurately
to split the point after 33 @fl .
31 �e1 �d6 32 f4 �d2 33 \t>f2 c3! 34
We3 ild1 35 ilf3 ilc2 36 �a1 �d3+ 37
We2 �d2+ 38 We3 �d3+ 39 We2 �d2+
40 We1 ilf5 41 g4?!
Too eager. White retains some pressure
with 41 .li!.a5 g6 42 .li!.c5 etc.
41 . . . ile6 42 �as+ lt'h7 43 ile4+ g6 44
f5
White has already committed himself to
For the price of two pawns Black has ac this.
tive pieces and pressure against White's king. 44 . . gxf5 45 gxf5
.
1 50
Wh i t e Pla ys a n Ea rl y e 2 - e 3
guarantees the draw, just as Black had hoped. ployed by White is a little dubious, and that
46 il.c2 ilt7 47 l':!.a7 lt>gS 4S f6 l':!.dS 49 White must in some way counter Black's
l':!.c7 il.d5 50 il.h7+ WhS 5 1 il.c2 kl.es+ offensive.
52 lt>t2 kl.ts 53 l':!.h7+ lt>gS 54 l':!.g7+ lt'hS 7 . . . 1Ligf6 S b4 a6 9 0-0 0-0 10 a4 1Lie4
55 l':!.g6 l':!.dS 56 We3 il.f7 57 l':!.g7 l':!.d2
5S il.f5 ll:.d5 59 il.d3 l':!.d7 60 il.g6 il.e6
61 l':!.xd7 .lixd7 62 wd3 WgS 63 Wd4
ii.es 64 il.c2 il.h5 65 lt>e5 Wf7 66 il.b3+
lt>fS??
A terrible mistake that costs the game. In
stead a dead draw results from 66 ... 'lt>g6 67
h4 'lt>h6 68 'ii>e 6 '1t>h7 69 .ltc2+ 'lt>h6!
(69 ... .ltg6?? 70 f7) 70 'lt>e7 .ltg6 71 .11..xg6
'lt>xg6 72 f7 c2 73 f8't!V cl'if as the defending
king blockades the passed pawn.
67 Wf5 il.e2 6S il.c2 lt'f7 69 h4 il.c4 70
h5 lt>gS 71 h6 il.t7 72 We5 lt'hS 73 Wd4
WgS 74 lt>xc3 WhS 75 lt'd4 WgS 76 We5 1 1 ii'b3
lt'hS 77 lt'd6 il. c4 7S lt>e7 il.d5 79 il.g6 A sensible alternative is 11 'ifc2. White
Of course not 79 f7?? .11.x. f7 and the posi chose this square in Kozul-Shirov, Biel 199 1,
tion is a theoretical draw. the only difference being that White's bishop
79 . . . il.c4 SO il.f5 il.f7 S1 il.e6 il.h5 S 2 stood on e2 instead of d3. Then 11...11£6 is
il. d 7 ! 1 -0 okay, with similar play to the main game, but
Shirov turned to the centre with ll ...'t!Ve7.
Game 73 After 12 b5 axb5 13 axbS cS 14 cxdS ll'lxc3
Cvitan-Sveshnikov 15 'ifxc3 exd5 16 dxc5 ll'lxc5 17 l:Ial ll'le4 18
Tilburg 1993 'ifb2 White had only a modest edge thanks
to his better centre, although 18 ... .11.e. 6 19
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e 6 3 1Lic3 c6 4 e3 ILid7 l:lxa8 l:Ixa8 20 g3 .11..£7 21 't!Vc2 'ifc7! 22
One of the two ways Black can delay .. .f7- 't!Vxc7 .11..xc7 23 ll'ld4 g6 24 .11..b2 '\t>f8 25 .li!.cl
f5 but, unlike 4 ... .11..d6, the light-squared .11.b. 6 saw Black comfortably hold the ending.
bishop no longer supports f5 in case of an 1 1 . . . l':!.f6!
early g2-g4. Black begins his attack at once. With con
5 1Lit3 trol of the e5-square White can address this
5 .11..d3 ll'lgf6 6 ll'lf3 leads to traditional offensive more comfortably. This will be
Meran lines but here White cannot play the 6 covered later in the chapter.
'ifc2 line, which some players might consider 1 2 b5 axb5 1 3 axb5 l':!.h6
significant. Black's plan on the kingside is certainly di
5 . . . f5! rect and easy to conduct.
Now there is no g2-g4. 1 4 g3
6. il.d3 il.d6 7 l':!.b1 14 h3 gives Black something to aim at af
White quickly turns to the queenside to try ter l4 ... g5.
for an initiative, with Black clearly looking 14 . . .1Lidf6 1 5 bxc6 bxc6 1 6 cxd5 exd5
for activity on the other flank. The question White has executed his plan but stands
is who will be first? In this game it is Black, worse. In fact the clearance of pawns on the
but I do believe that the general strategy em- queenside has left the single target on c6,
151
Du t c h S t o n e w a ll
whereas Black's forces point (increasingly) at lZJe5+ 'it.>f6 34 ZlxcS 'i1Yxa3 is good for Black;
White's king. Best now is the simple l 7 'i1Yc2 White cannot play 35 .Q:Jxc4 in view of
but, unfortunately for White, the thematic 35 ... 'ifaZ!) 30...Zixf6 3 1 l:xd7 li:lxd7 32
continuation chosen presents Black with a ii.d4!, when White fights on, although the
winning opportunity. task is not easy after 32 ... l:l:.c7.
30 li:le5!
Suddenly White is winning.
30 . . . J:i.c5!
1 7 li:le5? li!.b8?!
Returning the favour by allowing White to
complicate matters with a queen sacrifice.
Simpler is 17 . . . .ixeS! 18 dxe5 .Q:Jcs 19 'i1Yc2 The only chance for survival. Black loses
.Q:lg4 20 .ie2 (on 20 h4 Black does not go for by force after 30 ... 'i1Yxb8 3 1 Zie7+! lit>f8 32
any complicated sacrifices but cashes in with l:l:.d8+ 'it.>xe7 33 Zixc6+.
the decisive 20 ... .Q:Jxd3 21 Wxd3 .Q:lxeS) 3 1 li:lb6?
20....Q:lxh2 2 1 l:dl .Q:Je4. 3 l li'lf4! We7 32 Zle6!! wins.
1 8 ihb8! .ltxb8 1 9 Sxb8 o//ic7 20 Sb3 31 . . . h6 3'2 �xc8+
li:ld7? ! Leading to a forced draw. Also possible is
This i s passive and makes it harder for 32 Zied7 with a complicated and unclear
Black to realise his advantage. 20 ... li:JcS! 21 position after 32 ...c3! 33 .ic l ! (33 Zixc8?
dxcS 'ifxeS is the correct way to deal with the 'ifxb8 34 Zixb8 cxb2 and the b-pawn is a
eS-knight. winner) 33 ...c2 34 J:l:.d3. A remarkable draw is
21 li:lf3 li:lb6 22 i.b2 li:lc4 23 i.xc4 dxc4 34 ...'ifaS 35 @fl 'it.>h7 36 li:Jf8+ 'it.>g8 3 7
24 li!.b4 li:Jfd7 'it.>h7 38 li:Jf8+.
The last few moves have seen White gen 32 . . . J:i.xc8 33 li:lxc8 o//ia 2 34 li:le7+ 'it>h7
erate promising compensation and the posi 3 5 li:l5g6 o//i xb2 36 lt.\f8+ Y2 -Y,
tion is no longer so easy to play for Black.
24 . . . c5 25 dxc5 o//ix c5 26 li!.b5 o//i c 7 2 7 Game 74
li:ld5 o//id 7 28 li!.b8 J:i.c6 29 J:i.d 1 o//ia 7? Van der Sterren -Piket
Mistakes are not difficult to come by un Holland 1992
der such pressure! From a practical point of
view Black's situation has changed dramati 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 li:lf3 e6 4 e3 f5 5 .li:.d3
cally, which might explain why Black missed li:lf6 6 0-0 i.e7
29... J:l:.cSI, challenging the troublesome The bishop tends to be better placed on
knight. Play might then continue 30 li:Jf6+ (30 d6, the b8-h2 diagonal offering more pros
.ia3?! Wa7! 3 1 l1xc8+11xc8 32 .Q:le7+ 'it.>f7 33 pects and providing Black with some influ-
152
Wh i t e Pla ys an Early e 2 - e 3
ence over e5. In this game, however, White is range o f White's king ensuring him a pleasant
more interested in keeping Black out of e4 game. In fact White does not find a way to
than using e5. handle the numerous threats.
7 b3 0-0 8 il.b2 20 cxd5?!
8 i.. a3 is a normal means with which to The opening of the e-file benefits only
exploit ... .Ii.el, and should grant White a Black, while White gets nothing from the c
minimal advantage. file. 20 b4!? dxc4 21 i..xc4 e5 22 dxe5 i..xe5
8 . . . lt.Je4 9 12lc3 lt.Jd7 10 lt.Je2 ii'e8 1 1 is an improvement, with the better game for
lt.Jd2?! Black.
As we shall see this is not Van der Ster 20 . . . exd5 21 h4 lt.Jh5! 22 ii'h2?
ren's day. The text gives Black a chance to
take over the initiative, something a player
such as Piket does not miss.
1 1 . . .il.b4!
1 53
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
1 54
Wh i t e Pla ys a n Ea rl y e 2 - e 3
23 f5!
Making sure that the h5-pawn drops with
out Black being able to take advantage of the
£5-square.
White has an edge as Black has no easy 23 . . . exf5 24 gxh5 e3?!
way to develop his queenside. To be consid Speelman demonstrates that White is win
ered is 10 ... a5!? followed by ...'it>h8 and grad ning even after the best defence with the
ual improvements on the position. Alterna following wonderful line: 24....ITl..h7 25 k!:g3
tively there is 10 ... ll'le4 with the idea of 1 1 f3 'it>h8 26 e6 k!:f6 27 k!:g6!! il.xg6 28 'ifh6+
ll'lg5 and 12...ll'lf7, either gaining control 'it>g8 29 hxg6 ll'lxe6 30 k!:xf5 d4 31 .ITl..c4 dxc3
over e5 or, after 1 3 f4, playing ...ll'lf6-e4 and 32 l:Ixf6 'ifxf6 33 il.xe6+ 'ifxe6 34 'ifh7+
... il.d7-e8. In conclusion White might claim a @f8 35 g7+.
small advantage, but certainly no more. 25 'Wixe3 f4 26 l':!.xf4 il.e4 27 e6 1Lif5 28
1 0 . . . g5?! l':!.xf5 l':!.xf5 29 'Wih6
Understandable but too ambitious, for Black is now defenceless on the dark
White is free to react vigorously with his squares.
knight already firmly planted on e5. 29 . . . l':!.g5+ 30 l':!.g3! l':!.xg3+ 3 1 hxg3 'il\l'h7
1 1 f4! gxf4 1 2 exf4 1Lie4 1 3 1Lixe4 fxe4 Or 3 1.. .il.h7 32 .ITl..£6 'ifc7 33 'i¥g5+ @f8
1 4 'Wid2 34 h6.
White has play on both flanks. 32 'il\ff6 l::. e8 33 il.e5 l':!.e7 34 'Wig5+ lt'f8
1 4 . . . 1Lif6 1 5 c5! il.c7 1 6 b4 il.d7 1 7 a4 35 ild6 1 -0
1 55
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
156
Wh ite Pla ys an Early e 2 - e 3
157
D u t c h S t o n e w a ll
Summary
Systems involving e2-e3 are not a threat to the Stonewall player, unless White has already
brought his queen's bishop into play, as in Game 68. If White tries something aggressive like
g2-g4 (Games 69-70) Black's position is okay, and the game can easily prove more difficult for
White to handle than Black. The only strategy for White that fights for an advantage is demon
strated in Speelman's win against Seirawan (Game 76), although I am convinced that this line
is not dangerous for Black. Karpov's 5 f4 (Game 77) is a solid idea that aims for no more than
a modest edge, thereby affording Black some flexibility.
Because this chapter - unlike the others - consists of games with diverse initial
moves/sequences, below is an index in order of available plans. All games include the move
e2-e3.
White monitors the e4-square with lt:lge2 and f2-f3 (D) - Game 71
Black plays . "i!Vf6 Game 72
. . -
White plays g2-g4 White plays f2-f3 White plays b3 and ilb2
1 58
I tNVEX Of COMPLETE GAMES I
1 60