Chapter 16 SOLUTIONS Chapter One 1/1. C. Salvioli, 1887 The solution of this exercise is based on the ideas we discussed at diagram 1-7. 1...b4! 2.¢4 b3! 2...8a5? loses to 3 @b3 Bab 4 Sxb4 Ba7 5 Bb5 Bb7 6 a3! Bc7 7 Hab Sc6 8 ad! Be7 9 a7 Bc6 10 Sbs!. 3.a3 3 abt bd and 4...b5=) 3...a5 4 Qxb3 Gab 5 Hb4 Ya7! 6 Obs Yb7 Here White has only one spare tempo while in the line 2...8a5? he had two. 7 a4 Yc7 (7...8a77?8.a5+-) 8 Bab Heb 9 a7 He7! 10 a8 Hc8=. 1/2. H. Weenink, 1924 1 Ge4 a4 How should White continue? Ifhe managed to pass the move to his opponent he could force a favorable pawn exchange on the kingside (2.5 3 BeS Hed 4 SFE! etc.). But how can this be done? 2 Be5 is useless: 2...22g5! (2..9.g3? 3 @f5) 3 @d4 Wh4!. The only chance is to threaten the bS-pawn! 2 @d5! PhS! (2...Hf5 3 Gd4 and Black loses the opposition) 3 @c6! After 3 #5 #5! Black still maintains the opposition, while capture of the pawn leads to a draw: 4 @xb5? Hg4 5 G5 Gg3 6 b5 xg2 7 b6 £3=. But what can Black do now? To maintain the opposition, 3...2g6 is required, but the king is too far from the g2-pawn then and 4 xb5. wins. Otherwise White seizes his coveted oppo- sition and then transforms the distant opposition into the close one by standard means (an out- flanking). 3. O85 4 Oc5! Oe4 5 Sd! PhS 6 Od5! Gh47 Heb Hg58 Hes He49 G6 Og3 10 Bf5+-. 1/3, E. Somov-Nasimovich, 1936 1 @g3! 1 Ygl? is erroneous in view of 1...&b6 2 Eh5+ Og6 3 Bh2 Hxf2 4 Bxf2 a5 5 Sil Axf26 Sxf2 a4—+. Now 1...4b6 can be met with 2 43! 1... xf2! 2 Bh5+! @g6 3 Hd5 Ab6 4 Bd6+ OFS 5 Axb6 Hxf3+! 6 Wg2i! ab 7 Oxf3= Because of the pretty tempo-loss on move six, White has seized the opposition. 1/4. N. Grigoriev, 1933 1 a6 (of course, not 1 b6? &b7=) 1...b8 (1...f4 2 b6+-) 2 g3! The hasty 2 b6? misses the win: 2...@c8! (A 3...cb) 3 b7+ &b8 4 g3 c5. 5 SbS Bxb7 6 Sxc5 Gc7 7 Sd5 £4! 8 gf Sd7=; Black saves the game by seizing the opposition. 2...9a8 Another defensive method also does not help: 2...8c8 3 a7 Gd8 4 Hb8! (an opposi- tion!) 4...8d7 5 &b7 Sd8 (5...8d6 6 BcB+-) 6 &c6 (an outflanking!) 6..8c8 7 Sd5 Sb7 8& Hes Bb6 9 Sxf5 Fxb5 10 g4 c5 11 g5 c4 12 Sed! (we shall see this method - decoying the hostile king into a check - more than once in this book) 12...&b4 13 g6 c3 14 &d3! Bb3 15 g7 c2 16 gait. 3 b6 Gb8 4 WbS! (4 b7? c5 5 Sb5 Sxb7=) 4..Qb7 5 be Oxc7 6 Gc5 Gd7 7 Bd5+- This time White has seized the opposition, therefore the pawn sacrifice 7...f4 is senseless. 1/5. An Ancient Problem The white king must come closer to the black one, maintaining the opposition. And, when this is impossible, to outflank along the c- file. In fact, all this is an algorithm that we know already —a transformation of a distant opposition into a close one. 1 Ba2! HPb8! 2 Hb2! Was (2...Ha7 3 a3! Bb7 4 Bb3) 3 Ge3t Hb7 (3...8a7 4 Scd!) 4 Mb3! a7 5 c4 Pb8 6 Hb4 Has 7 Bc5 Yb7 8 Hbs wa7 9 Heb Ys (9...8a6 10 Hal; 9...8a8 10 Sc7) 10 Bb6 Was 11 Hc8+. 1/6. M. Dvoretsky, 1976 (based on the themes of an Estrin - Gusev ending, Moscow 1963). If Black postpones the transition to the pawn 326ending, playing 1...£42 (with the idea 2 28 xd7 3 Bxd7? Gxd7 4 Yd3 Ber, and Black seizes the opposition when the white king enters the 4th rank) he will have serious troubles in the rook- and-pawn endgame after 2 Bc2+! @xd7 3 Hc5 Hig8 4 @e2, He should focus on the task at hand and calculate the following forced drawing line: 1...8xd7! 2 Bxd7 2 Bc2t Sd6 3 AcS Geb 4 He6+ Hd6 is not dangerous for Black. 2x7 3 £41 941 After 3...9f? 4 $3 eb 5 dxf4 Bf6 6 93 White creates a distant passed pawn that will be decisive, We shall discuss this sort of position later. 4g3! 4..ghi! 4,..hg+? loses to 5 &xg3 gh 6 &xh3 eb 7 &h4 Sd5 (the pair of mined squares are g5 - e4) 8 PhS! Sd4 9 Heo! Hes 10 Hg5+-. 5 gh Geb 6 Sg3 G6 7 h5 (7 Sxh3 &g6-) 7...2g7 8 &xh3 Wh7! 9 og3 we7 The h4- and h6-squares are mined. White cannot win because 10 £3 @h6 11 &e3? &xh5 12 &d4 Phd! 13 Gd5 Yg3 14 Yes Yes is bad. 1/7, Taimanov - Botvinnik, USSR ch tt, Moscow 1967 1... g4! 2 Bxg4 (2 Bxa6 Bxh4-+) 2...hg 3 @g2 g5! 3...8f6 4 Yg3 SS? (it is not too late for Black to play 4...g5!) is erroneous: 5 e4+! @xe4 6 Sxgd e5 7 hg5s SF3 8 dxg6 4 9 h5=. 4hs 4&g3 &g6 5 &xg4 does not help: 5...gh6 S&xh4 FS 7 g3 Bed 8 G2 a5!? (rather than 8...8d3 9 GF3 e5? 10 a3=) 9 He2 a4 10 a3 e6! 11 Gd2 GF3 12 &d3 e5O-+. 4... 887 5 883 5... Qh7! The situation is very much like that in the game Alekhine — Yates (diagram 1-22). 5...5? wouldhave been a grave error in view of 6 &xg4 h6 7 e4 anditis Black who is put in zugzwang. 6 xa4 Hho 7 4 White resigned in view of 7...a5 8a4e59 5 SxhS 10 BxeS g4 11 BF4 Hh4 12 €5 g3 13 e6 g214e7 g1¥ 15 e8Y WF2t 16 Bes We2t, winning the queen. 1/8. N. Grigoriev, 1920 The c3- and e3-squares are obviously corresponding. The white king will break through to e3 in order to set the d-pawn in motion; the black king will confront him from the f3-square. The reciprocal zugzwang arises when the kings are on d2 and £3, so another pair of corresponding squares is defined. The third pair — 2 and f4— is adjacent with those already known. Finally, we come to the squares b3 and b2, which can be used for ceding the move because the single square (f3) corresponds to them. 1&2! Rather than 1 d4? e4 2 &c3 G5! 3 Gd3, Of4q. 1... £41 2 Hb3(b2)! GE 3 Pb2(b3 NO GBf4 4 Yc2! Bes 4.,.$e3? is quite bad in view of 5 #c30, 4... 83 5 &d20 is also inferior. Now we must discover a new subtlety: there is a reciprocal zugzwang when the kings are on d2 and d4, so the mined square d2 should be avoided. 5 Gd! (5 Sd27! Sd4 6 er? Gc3=) 5...@d5 6 Be2 Gd4 7 Hd2 Hes! 8 He3 Bd5 9 d4 Bcd Black’s only hope is to attack the b4-pawn. His pawn would promote simultaneously, but unfortunately the new queen is immediately lost. 32710 e4 Yxb4 11 d5 BHe5 12 Hed b4 13 d6 b3 (13...8c6 14 &e6 makes no differ- ence) 14d7 b2 15 d8¥y b1W 16 Wc7+ @b4 17 Wb7+ It is worth mentioning that 11...8a3 (in- stead of 11...8c5) 12 d6 b4 does notsave Black —a queen versus knight pawn endgame is win- ning. But if we shift the initial position one file to the right, then Black, with the bishop pawn against the queen, holds. We shall discuss this sort of position later. 1/9, B. Neuenschwander, 1985 1 @h4? with the idea 2 g5, for example 1...@h6? 2 g5+ Bh7 3 Sg4+— or 1...62 2 gs!+-, does not win in view of 1...g6! 2 &g5 @g7! (rather than 2...gh? 3 gh and White creates a dis- tant passed pawn) 3 &f4 f6!=. The natural plan is an attack against the d5- pawn, but it should be conducted very carefully. White must take Black’s counterplay (g7-g6) into account. 1 BFS? is erroneous in view of 1...2h6 and White is in zugzwang. 2 ®e5 is met with 2...27g5 3 Sxd5 Suge, and 2 4 —with 2...g6!3hg B eS gh 4 gh Hxh5 5 dxd5 5=) 3...8xg6 4 Bes Hg55 Bxd5 Sxgaq. However Black could have had serious dif- ficulties if he was on move when the kings were on f5 and h6. We come to the conclusion that these squares are mined. 1 Of4! Gh6 2 S510 F610 3 Hes gs 4 F71 Phe 4,.xg4?5 Sxg7 Gxh5 (5...£566) 6 Bxf6 was bad, but what should White do now? The answer is rather simple: he uses triangulation in order to pass the move to Black. 5 Ge7! (rather than 5 Se8? g6) 5... 9g5. 6 Gf8! Gh6 (6...26 7 Vg7!+-) 7 SI7O @h7 8 Heb Ph6 9 Oxd5+-. 1/10. R. Réti, 1929 First let us try 1 @c6 g5! 2 @b7 (2 hg h4-+); Black wins by means of 2...g4! because his pawn promotes with check. Now we notice that if the black king is on f6 White may play cb because he exchanges on g5 with check, avoiding Black’s promotion on gl. White cannot prevent ...g6-g5, but does this move invariably win? Assume thatthe black king has just taken the white pawn on g5 and White has replied with &g3. Now we calculate: 1...8£5 2 Gh4 SeS 3 Sxh5 Gd5 4 Sed Bc 5 SZ Sxb5 6 Ge2 Sed 7 Sd2 Sb3 8 Sl with a draw. White has made it just in time! This means that he would have lost if his king were slightly fur- ther away from the h5-pawn (say, on 3). We know enough to define the correspond- ing squares. The most simple reciprocal zugzwang is with the kings on 4 and f6: Black, if on move, cannot achieve anything, while oth- erwise White is lost: 1 ted g5-+ or 1 %g3 Bes-+. The correspondence between the e5- and f7- squares is less evident. Actually, if Black is on move, 1...&e7 is met with 2 &d5 &f6 and now 3 &c6l!=, profiting from the fact that the black king is unfortunately placed on f6. But what if White is on move? If 1 @f4 then 1...8f6-+, while after 1 &d5 Black wins by means of 1...g5! 2 hg @g6 3 ®e4 (3 wc6 h4) 3...Sxgs 4 BF3 G5. Using the neighborhood principle, the third pair of corresponding squares is g7 - e4. When the black king is on e7, White plays @d5. 1 Gd5! (1 He6? g5-+; 1 Hes? B70 -+) 1...£7 Or 1...8g7 2 Bed! Sf6 3 SF4 Be? 4 @e3!=, rather than 4 eS? G7 © -+ or 4 Hgs? G7 5 Bf4 S160 -+. 2 Bed! Be7 3 Hd5! HFG (3...8d7 4 Bes Hc7 5 Hd5!=) 4 He6! g5 5 hg+ Bx“5 6 &b7 1/11. M. Zinar, 1987 While both kings travel to the queenside they must be aware of the pair of mined squares 4 - d6. If the white king should arrive safely at <3, a drawing situation with untouchable pawns arises. However, we should take into account the utmost importance of the potential reciprocal zugzwang position with the kings on e4 and f6 that may occur. Analyzing all this, we discover the correspondence of the squares f4 - g6 and g4 - h6 and come to the conclusion that an anti-op- position takes place here. 1 gs? Bg7 2 G5 S7 3 Bed |B Ses He7O -+) 3.610 4 Hd3 (4 Hf4 c4 5 Hed 3 6 Sd3 Se5-+) 4...HeS 5 Bcd SAGO -+; 1 Sg4? PhO! 2 SES (2 SF4 Hg 3 Wes SET) 2.887 3 SH Sg! 4 GeS S75 Ged S60 -+; 328