Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Joe Gallagher
An ICE Book
International Chess Enterprises, Seattle
International Chess Enterprises, Inc.
2005 Fifth Avenue, Suite 402
Seattle, Washington 98121-2850
Symbols 4
Introduction 5
9 Trompowsky 111
10 Torre Attack 137
11 London System 148
12 Kingside Fianchetto 157
13 Veresov 170
14 Barry Attack 180
15 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 185
+ Check
++ Double Check
# Mate
Good move
" Excellent move
? Bad move
?? Serious blunder
!? Interesting move
?! Dubious move
;!; Small advantage to White
+ Small advantage to Black
+ Large advantage to White
+ Large advantage to Black
+- Decisive advantage to White
-+ Decisive advantage to Black
aO Unclear position
- Equal position
1-0 White wins
0-1 Black wins
112-l/2 Draw
Ch Championship
Echt European team championship
Wch Wor ld championship
Wcht World team championship
OL Olym piad
z Zonal
IZ Interzonal
Ct Candidates event
corr Correspondence g ame
(n) nth match g ame
(D) Diagram follows
Introduction
'What on earth are the Anti-King's been made up from the King's Indian
Indians?' you must be asking your lines in this book. And, what's more,
selves. Well, I have taken the liberty these figures do not take into account
of defining them as all variations of the 25% or so of my games in which
the King's Indian except for the White played 1 d4 and didn't follow
Classical, the Samisch and the Fian up with c4. The idea for this book
chetto; plus all the lines where White was beginning to take shape.
doesn't play an early c4 (Trompow Of course the material was much
sky, Torre Attack, etc.). too vast to consider an extensive ref
Much literature has been devoted erence book, so the by now familiar
to the King's Indian in recent years, concept of a repertoire book was the
but a large percentage of it has con answer. Against each of the vari
centrated on the 'main lines' . For ations in this book I have selected
example, Nunn and Burgess have one main defence for Black but you
produced a mammoth 640-page will also find plenty of alternatives in
work (in two volumes) uniquely on the notes in case the main line ever
the Classical Variation, while I my runs into trouble.
self chipped in with a 240-page ef As a quick overview, here are the
fort on the Sarnisch and I believe that principal recommendations against
Batsford have a project on the Fi each system:
anchetto variations in the pipeline. 1 Four Pawns Attack: 6 ... lDa6
Even books dealing with the whole 2 h3 systems: Main line with
King's Indian tend to treat our vari 6...e5, although Black can also play
ations as an afterthought. For ex . . . ltJa6 first.
ample, The Complete King's Indian 3 Averbakh: 6... ltJa6
by Keene and Jacobs (Batsford 4 Early i.g5: Benoni style ... c5
1992), devotes a mere 13 pages (out 5 Exchange variation (strictly
of 272) to the variations covered in speaking this is a Classical but it may
this book. also be considered as the ultimate
The neglect of these 'Anti-King's Anti King's Indian): Old line with
Indians' seemed a little unfair to me. 9 . .. Ite8 based on 13...ltJd7.
Taking my own games as an example 6 5 i.d3: 6...ltJc6 and 7...ltJh5
I found that about 50o/o of my King's 7 5 ltJge2: a quick ...a6 and ... c6
Indian's over the last five years have 8 Unusual Lines (King's Indian):
been Classicals, Samisches or Fi see chapter 8
anchettoes while the other 50% have 9 Trompowsky: 2.. . ltJe4
6 Introduction
10 Torre Attack: 4 ...0-0, delaying est chapter in this book (even though
the central strike until White has re I have only examined the one line
vealed his set-up. 2... lt:Je4) and the single variation you
11 London System: Playing for are the most likely to face. As the
...e5 world is still awaiting Hodgson's
12 Fianchetto Variations (with- version of events this line is covered
out c4): Pirc style set-up. in considerable detail.
13 Veresov: 3 ...lbbd7 The material is examined through
14 Barry Attack: Quick ...c5 the context of twenty nine complete
15 Blackmar-Diemer: Take the and annotated games. This is impor
money and run. tant as .I believe that it is impossible
to get to grips with an opening if you
I have tried to vary the type of de only ever study the first fifteen
fence that Black adopts as recom moves or so. Where variations are
mending ...e5 against everything new to you I think a good approach
would have been a little dull. Per would be to concentrate on the an
haps this may seem like extra work notated games and the text, only
for the reader, but in the long term, turning to the fine print when you
varying your approach will have have grasped the basic ideas and
beneficial effects on your game and have perhaps played a game or two
increase your understanding of chess in the line. I'm sure you will find that
in general. learning theory (if that is your de
Although this book has 'King's sire) will be a much simpler and less
Indian' in the title many of the lines unpleasant business once you have a
in the second section (Chapters 9- few practical outings behind you.
15) will be of interest to anyone who A quick word about 'Beating'
plays 1. ..lbf6 against 1 d4 (and even which appears in the title of this
to those who play 1...d5 in the case book is in order. Don't expect to get
of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit). It a winning position out of the open
has to be said, though, that the de ing every time as this is impossible,
fences I have selected are geared to especially with the black pieces.
wards the aggressive King's Indian What I have aimed for is double
player rather than the solid Queen's edged middlegame positions in
Indian exponent. which Black can confidently play for
A lot of the lines in Section 2 have the win. Even this has been ex
been neglected by the very top play tremely difficult in some cases
ers but amongst everyone else (and (Chapters 5 and 12 spring to mind)
that includes your average grand but if White is hell bent on a draw
master) they are extremely popular. I then there is very little you can do
rarely play a tournament without except for outplaying him in a drawn
having to face at least one of them. position, which will, of course, give
The Trompowsky is, in fact, the larg- you a great deal of satisfaction.
Introduction 7
Over the years I have had a great their soundness. I hope they bring
deal of experience with many of the you as many points and as much en
lines in this book and can vouch for joyment as they have brought me.
1 The Four Pawns Attack
The Four Pawns Attack, in which and the Four Pawns Attack did not
by the fifth move White has already escape this phenomenon.
constructed an enormous centre One of the main reasons for play
stretching from c4 to f4, is undoubt ing this system is that the theory is
edly White's most ambitious set-up still undeveloped. For example, one
against the King's Indian. In the of the most important sources of
early part of this century such an edi opening theory is the Encyclopaedia
fice would have been regarded as a of Chess Openings. Volume E, pub
decisive advantage and the player of lished in 1991, considered 6...l'ba6 to
the black pieces ridiculed for such be worth just one line {plus foot
weak opening play. Then along came notes) out of a 12 page coverage on
the hypermoderns who taught us that the Four Pawns Attack (and this
there are ways of battling against doesn't even include the main line,
such centres. They pointed out that 6...c5 7 d5 e6 8 �e2 exd5 9 cxd5,
while Black has been concentrating which is classified as a Benoni and
on development and getting his king dealt with in Volume A). Many other
into safety, White has invested valu books on the King's Indian hardly
able tempi on the construction of his mention, or don't mention at all,
centre. It follows, therefore, that 6.. . l'ba6 including some published
Black must strike quickly and try well into the 1990s. Only Burgess's
and open the position before White The King's Indian for the Attacking
can consolidate the space advantage Player (Bats ford 1993) deals with
that his centre has gained him. Until this variation in a thorough manner
recently it was assumed that the only and this is a book that your average
acceptable way for Black to do this Four Pawns practitioner is unlikely
was by playing a quick ... c5, but to possess as it is principally aimed
times have changed and now I am at the black player.
able to recommend a system which This does not mean, though, that
is based mainly on Black playing for 6... l'ba6 is just some tricky little side
... e5. As the immediate 6 ...e5 is pre line; in fact at international level it
mature (7 dxe5 dxe5 8 l'bxe5 is good is now the most common choice
for White) this advance has to be pre against the Four Pawns and has re
pared and the best way of doing this cently received no less than Kas
is with 6...l'ba6. The move ...l'ba6, in parov's seal of approval. The Four
general, has breathed new life into Pawns Attack, though, has never at
many variations of the King's Indian tained the popularity of the Classical
10 The Four Pawns Attack
now with .. . 4Ja6-c5 available things 'ifxg4 4Jxc3 15 bxc3 c5 16 4Jc2 ! (16
are completely different. 4Jb5 a6) 16...i.xc3 although I'm not
8 dxe5 advocating this line of play as if
The alternative capture, 8 fxe5, White ever manages to get organised
has been more popular recently and there may be a heavy price to pay for
that is the subject of the next game. the weak dark squares and the hole
White has one other possibility, 8 on d5.
0-0 which has never really caught on 2b) 12... i.xf3 13 gxf3 4Jh5 14
as after the sequence 8 . exd4 9
.. �h l, Schon-Fleck, Porz 1988, and
4Jxd4 4Jc5 10 i.f3 l%.e8 1 1 :%.el now 14... 'ifh4 with an edge for Black
Black has the strong possibility of according to Knaak.
1 1 i.g4! (D)
•.• 3) 12 e5 i.xf3 (the immediate
12.. .dxe5 is certainly worth consid
ering) 13 4Jxf3 dxe5 14 4Jxe5 c6 15
'ifxd8 l%.axd8 16 i.e3 4Jfe4 17 4Jxe4
4Jxe4 18 i.xa7 f5! 19 i.e3 i.xe5 20
fxe5 l%.xe5 and Black was at least
equal in McNally-Bennett, Scottish
Ch 1994.
4) 1 2 4Jb3 i.xf3 13 'ifxf3 4Jxb3
14 axb3 c6 is+ according to Knaak.
This may seem a surprising assess
ment but Black's position has been
eased by the exchange of a pair of
The only time Black failed to play minor pieces each and White also
this move was in Vincent-Gallagher, possesses the most serious weakness
Lyon 1993 where 1 l ... a5 was my in the position - the e4-pawn. A
choice� this was not because I didn't good plan would be to double rooks
see 1 l. . . i.g4 but because I mistak on the e-file although I must admit
enly t hought it would lead to exces that I don't consider Black to be bet
sive simplifications. Now, however, ter after 15 i.e3 ( )
= .
.txd 1 lbg4 11 .tf4 lbb4 + Belov) .te6 21 .tg5 when 21 lbxe5 22•••
for White) 17 'it>b2 lbc5 18 'it>a3 possible, but perhaps 18 ...f6 is the
The Four Pawns A ttack 13
most promising as both 19 '£k7 fxe5 10 fxe5 tlJg4 11 i.f4 lle8 12 l!d1
20 tlJd5 ltJc5+ and 19 tlJxg6 hxg6 20 has occurred a couple of times when
tlJc7 tDc5+ 21 �c3 l!d3+ 22 �b4 Black has responded rather weakly
i.f8 are very good for Black. with 12 tDxeS and 12 �f8. Best is
••• •••
2c) 13 i.e3 tDcxe4 14 tDxe4 i.f5 12 tlJcS intending 13... tlJe6 which
••. ,
15 l!hdl i.xe4+ (15... tDxe4? 16 g4) is also the reply to 13 h3. The point is
16 i.xe4 tDxe4 17 llxd8+ llxd8 18 that if the bishop drops back to g3
l!dl must be level, although Black then the g4-knight will hop into e3
can unbalance the game by continu and if it moves along the c l -h6 di
ing 18 ... llxdl 19 �xdl tlJd6 20 b3 agonal then Black will simply recap
i.xe5!? 21 fxe5 tDc8. ture on e5.
2cl ) If Black can then get his 10 •.• tlJc5
king to e6 he will be able to claim an 1 1 i.f3
edge. For example, after 22 �c2 �f8 1 1 tlJd5 was tried in Chibur
23 �d3 �e7 24 �e4 �e6 the knight danidze-Xie Jun, Manila worn Wch
will be able to get out via a7 (if (12) 1991. After l l ... c6 12 tDe7+
White prevents tDe7). �f8 13 tlJxc8 l!axc8 14 i.e3 tDfxe4
2c2) Unfortunately, White can 15 0-0 f6 16 tlJf 3 f5 the game was
prevent the king manoeuvre with 22 level.
i.cS! after which 22. . .b6 23 i.a3 c5 11 ••• i.e6 (D)
24 b4! cxb4 25 i.xb4 f5!? (25... �g7 The immediate 11 ttJfd7 has also
•••
9 dS
9 dxeS?! transposes to the line 8
dxe5 dxe5 9 fxe5 ! ? , discussed on
page 12.
9 lbxeS?! is also doubtful but
worth looking at in a little m ore de
tail. After 9 cS! 10 i.e3 (10 d5
..•
1) 10 ... cxd4 1 1 i.xd4 and now: though, he will have to part with the
la) Several commentators give important dark-squared bishop. Of
1 1 llJg4 an '! ', quoting the game
.•• the alternatives, 9 c6 (D) is the most
•••
d5 !) 12 lDh6+ �h8 ( l 2...i.xh6 13 cxd5 tiJe8 13 b4! ? \i'c7? ! (13 ... llJd6
i.xh6 \i'h4+ would be fine for Black looks more to the point) 14 lDb5
but White should play 13 i.xd4 ! \i'd8 15 d6 i.d7? (15...i.e6) 16 i.g5
with the advantage) 13 i.f2 ! i.e6 14 f6 17 lDxe5 ! i.xb5 18 .ixb5 \i'xd6
liJd5 \i'a5+ 15 �fl i.xh6 16 i.xd4+ 19 \i'b3+ �h8 20 lDxg6+ ! hxg6 21
i.g7 17 i.xg7+ �xg7 18 1Wd4+ f6 \i'h3+ �g8 22 i.c4+ llf7 23 l!adl
19 �f2 lDb4 ! with adequate com \i'c6 24 \i'b3 \i'c7 25 e5 ! �f8 26
pensation for the pawn. i.xf7 \i'xf7 27 e6 \i'c7 28 l!d7 \i'e5
9 .
.. lLJcS 29 e7+ and White soon won, Mich
This was thought suspect until re aelsen-Schafer, B undesliga 1993.
cently, as White will soon be able to 2b) 10 llJeS 11 dxc6 (11 i.e3
•••
kick the knight with b4. To do so, cxd5 12 cxd5 llJd6 will perhaps be
18 The Four Pawns A ttack
tested in the future) 11. .. Wb6+ 12 the spot to 23 lbel) 20 llfcl Wa4 21
cst>h1 bxc6 13 a3 (after 13 ltJa4 Wb4 ltJh4 llf6 22 Wxe4 as ;t. He points
14 a3 We7 15 i.g5 i.f6 16 i.e3 ltJg7 out that 22 %114 23 Wxg6 llxh4 is
•••
17 Wel ltJe6 Black had every reason refuted by 24 Wes+ i.f8 25 llb3 ! ,
to feel satisfied with the outcome of but doesn't consider 2 2 cxd5 23
•••
i.xb5 cxb5 19 lDc3 ltJd4 20 ltJd5 ltJxe4 i.f5 12 i.d3 i.xe4 13 i.xe4
and 17 lldS by 18 Wb3!.
••. f5, when Black regains his piece
3) 10 i.g5 h6 1 1 i.b4 (11 .lxf6 with the better game.
Wxf6 12 0-0 is equal according to 10 •.• h6
Lukin and l l . .. i.xf6 12 Wd2 i.g7 1 1 i.xf6
13 0-0 cxd5 14 cxd5 Wb6+ 15 �hl 1 1 i.h4 g5 12 i.g3 ltJfxe4 13
i.d7 was comfortable for Black in ltJxe4 ltJxe4 14 i.xe5 g4 ! 15 i.xg7
D.Bischoff-Schafer, Mengen 1990) gxf3 wins for Black since 16 .lxf3
1 1 ... Wb6 12 Wd2 ltJc5 13 i.xf6 (13 �xg7 17 i.xe4 drops a piece after
i.f2? ltJfxe4 ! and 13 Wc2? ltJfxe4 17... Wh4+ and 16 i.xf8 Wh4+ 17 g3
14 ltJxe4 ltJxe4 15 Wxe4 i.f5 are a f2+ 18 cst>n Wh3 is mate.
couple of lines for White to avoid) 11 ••• Wxf6
13...i.xf6 and now: 12 b4 ll)a6 !
3a) The game Bagaturov-Lukin, By attacking b4 Black gains the
USSR 1989 went on 14 llbl ?! cxd5! time he requires to blockade the po
15 cxd5 (15 ltJxd5 ltJxe4! is good for sition with ... c5. The alternatives are
Black) 15... i.g7 16 b4 ltJa6 17 ltJa4 less promising:
Wd6 18 i.xa6 Wxa6 19 ltJc5 Wd6 1) 12 ltJxe4?! 13 ltJxe4 Wf4 14
.••
.:txe1 + 26 .:txe1 .ic3 27 .:te3 .id4 The main idea behind Black's last
Black is not without hope. move was to protect b5 so that he can
2) 12 ttJd7 13 c5 ! a5 14 a3 axb4
••• play ...1Wd6 in one go. For example,
15 axb4 .:txal 16 1Wxal 1Wf4, Haus Gurevich gives 15 0-0 1Wd6 (the line
ner-Khalifman, Bundesliga 1990/1, 15... cxb4 16 axb41Wb6+ is also in
and now Khalifman gives 17 1Wa2! teresting since I 7 c5 is met by
f5 18 g3 ! 1We3 191Wd2 as clearly bet I 7... Ci:Jxc5 ! ) 16 Ci:Jb5 (161Wb3 is met
ter for White. by 16... fS and 16 b5 !De? leaves
13 a3 Black free to concentrate on a king
After 13 .:tbl c5, 14 a3 transposes side attack) 16...1Wb6! 17 �hl cxb4
to the game while 14 b5 Ci:Jc7 15 d6 18 axb4 .ixb5 19 cxb5 tf:Jc7 with ad
tf:Je6 I 6 Ci:Jd5 may have gained a vantage to Black. Lautier, not satis
tempo on Lautier-Kasparov, but is in fied by such variations, selects a
fact much worse for White because more aggressive continuation.
Black's bishop is actually better off 15 .•• tf:Jc7
on c8 in this position. 16 d6
13 •.• c5! (D) A double-edged choice, but other
wise Black will achieve his block
ade.
16 •.. l2Je6
Black avoids 16••. ttJes on account
of 171Wd5!.
17 ttJd5 1Wd8
18 1Wcl2 Ci:Jd4
18 f5 would be very risky as
.••
Game 3
Vaiser - Berkovich
Tel Aviv 1992
1 d4 lDf6
2 c4 g6
3 l2Jc3 i.g7
4 e4 d6
5 f4 0-0
6 l2Jf3 l2Ja6
7 i.d3
21 ...ii'xd6 drops a piece to 22 There is one other seventh move
l2Ja5 ! and 21 i.xc6 22 bxc6 bxc6
..• that has to be examined, namely 7 e5
23 l:b7 is horrible for Black. (D).
22 cxd5 cxb5
Obviously not 22 cxd5 23 ii'xd5
.••
28 l:xg6 e3 29 ii'e l ii'f 4 ! would not fit in weJJ with the strategy of
give Black a strong initiative. Gure undermining the white centre but
vich continues with 30 ii'g3 �h8 ! 7...l2Jh5 !? worked well after 8 i.e2
31 l:xg7? ii'f2+ ! 32 ii'xt2 exf2+ 33 i.h6 9 f5?! i.xcl 10 ii'xcl i.xf5 11
�xf2 �xg7 winning for Black. ii'h6 f6 12 g4 i.xg4 13 l:gl i.xf3 14
After 28 d6 the players agreed to a i.xf3 li:Jg7 15 i.xb7 ii'b8 ! , Vokac
draw. Several commentators justi Babula, Lazne Bohdanec 1996; 9 g3
fied this with the variation 28 l:d8
.•. must be the right move) White has
29 ii'd5+ �h7 30 ii'xe4 l:xd6 31 quite a few possibilities:
l:xd6 ii'xd6 32 i.d3 but, as Gure
=, 1) 8 h4 dxe5! (8...c5 9 d5 dxe5 10
vich pointed out, 28 e3! would have
••• h5 is playable but dangerous for
left White with some work to do. Black) 9 dxe5 (9 fxe5 c5 !) 9 ... li:Jdc5
The Four Pawns Attack 21
now:
3a) 9 tt:Jdb8, aiming for . ..c6,
•••
n't take long to finish Black off White. Perhaps Black should play
either: 15 ... d3 16 i.xd3 i.xb2 17 9 i.xf3!? before committing him
.. .
i.h6 l:e8 18 tlJe7+ @h8 19 f4 tlJf6 self in the centre. 1 0 gxf3 would be
20 e5 tlJxd3 21 Wxd3 i.xal 22 i.g5 quite strange now while 10 i.xf3 e5
tlJg4 23 tlJxg6+ fxg6 24 i.xd8 1-0. 11 dxe5 (11 fxe5 c5! is now quite
2a2) 10 Wet is the latest word, good for Black as he will obtain con
after which Black has: trol over ...e5) l l... dxe5 12 f5 is
2a21) 10 c5 11 i.g5 ! (to make
•.. probably the critical line. An inter
this move possible is one of the main esting idea for Black is 12 ... tlJb6, in
points behind Wel) l1. ..Wa5 12 Wh4 tending to meet 13 b3 or 13 We2
i.xf3 13 l:xf3 with very good at with 13...Wd4+! whilst after 13 Wxd8
tacking chances for White. Belov l:fxd8 14 b3 c6 the position looks
gives 13 ...cxd4 14 tlJd5 dxe5 15 very comfortable.
tlJe7+ �h8 1 6 l:h3 h5 17 Wg4, but 2b3) 9 i.e3 e5 1 0 fxe5 cS! 1 1 d5
fails to spot 1 6 W xh 7+ ! �xh7 17 (11 exd6 obviously loses to 1 l... cxd4
l:h3+ i.h6 18 i.xh6 tlJf6 19 i.d2+ and on 11 dxc5 both 11... dxe5 and
+-. 11. .. dxc5 look entirely playable)
2a22) 10 i.xf3 11 gxf3! dxe5
..• l l tt:Jxe5 1 2 i.e2 lllxf3 + (less good
...
2b) 8...llld7 when White can try: lines 15...i.e5 16 i. xe5 W xe5 17
The Four Pawns Attack 27
is 13 tt:Je5 with an equal game after 1b) 1 1 tlJa4! renders the above
13 ... tlJg4 1 4 tlJxg4 i.xc3+ 1 5 bxc3 line redundant. After 1 1 iYaS + 1 2
.•.
i.xg4 16 e5 f6 as 17 i.d4 can be met i.d2 ifd8 13 0-0 cxd5 14 cxd5 tt:Je8
by 17 ...c5) 13 ...tlJg4 14 i.gl i.f5 15 1 5 i.xa6 bxa6 16 i.b4 4Jd6 17 %:.cl
tlJc5 b6 16 tt:Ja6 i.xe5! ? 17 fxe5 White had the better chances in
I:.xe5+ 18 �d2 l:.d8+ 19 tt:Jd5 c6 is Garcia Palermo-Danailov, Alicante
an extremely sharp variation given 1992, although l l .ifb4+ 12 i.d2
..
(20 ... tt:Jf6 or 20...tlJh6 are met by 21 is now fine for Black as after 12 tlJa4
i.d4 ) 21 hxg4 dxc4+ 22 �c3 i.xg4 ifb4+ there is no 13 i.d2) 11. .. i.xf6
and here Black has three pawns, a 12 %:.bl tt:Jc7 (perhaps there are more
more co-ordinated position and a con dynamic moves available in the posi
tinuing attack for his piece (of course tion, 12 . ..ifb6 for example, but one
23 �xc4 loses to 23 ...i.e2+). shouldn' t grumble about the text as
8..• dxe5 Black will feel very comfortable
9 d5' c6 (D) once the knight has arrived on d6) 13
9... tt:Jc5 (quite effective with the 0-0 cxd5 14 cxd5 tt:Je8 15 �hl a6
bishop on e2) 10 i.c2 a5 is suspect (the knight doesn' t take up immedi
as Black won't be able to prevent a3 ate residence on d6 as this would al
and b4 in the long term . low White to exchange it off with
tt:Jb5, which would be a rather sad
end to such a lengthy manoeuvre) 16
w iYb3 lLxl6 17 tt:Ja4 i.g7 18 4Jb6 l:.b8
19 %:.be1 i.g4 with a roughly level
game, Garcia Palermo-Comas, lber
caja 1992.
10 cxd5
1 1 cxd5 tlJe8
12 ife2
On 12 i.x a 6 Black has the reply
,
12 ... ifb6+.
12 ••. tlJc5
10 0-0 13 i.g 5
Alternatively 1 0 i.g5 with two It is somewhat surpns1ng that
lines: Vaiser allowed the exchange of his
1) 10 ... ifb6 and now: bishop as Black seems to have com
la) 1 1 ifd2? ! tlJc5 12 %:.bl cxd5 fortable equality afterwards. Knaak
13 cxd5 tlJg4 ! (Sokolin) and White suggests 13 i.c2 b6 14 b4 i.a6 1 5 b5
can't prevent .. .f5 as 14 h3 is refuted i.b7 which he assesses as ;!;. Perhaps
by 14 .. .4Jf2 L this is true as White does have a
The Four Pawns Attack 29
passed pawn and a potentially deci cha nce to play the u ndermini ng
sive outpost on c6, but these assets move .. .f5.
will be very difficult to exploit; the 19 i.f2 f5
d-pawn is firmly blockaded and the 20 a4 a6
white knights are currently in no po 21 b4 :.ac8!
sition to occupy c6 . Black should Of course Black doesn't play
complete his development with a 21 ...li'xb4 which would allow White
combination of ... :.cs, . ..lLJd6, and to infil trate to the seventh rank after
. . .1!i'd7 (or . ..li'e7) and then, depend 22 :.abl , but instead prepares a
ing on the circumstances play . . .f5 or bishop-activati ng exchange sacri
perhaps double his rooks on the c fice. Perhaps White should not ac
file. I am sure that the majority of cept the offer although this woul d
King's Indian players would happily be inconsistent with the move b2-b4
settle for this position. which has, incidentally, already com
13 •.• f6 promised White's position o n the
14 i.h4 queenside.
White has developed his bishop in 22 i.c5 :.xc5
this fashion in order to hold up .. .f5. 23 bxc5 li'xc5+
14 lLJxd3 24 �hl 1!i'd4!
15 li'xd3 lLJd6 This is probably what White had
16 lLJd2 underestimated or overlooked.
Planning to exchange the strong 25 :.o
knight on d6 but this is all very time- 25 :.adl :.cs is very uncomfort
consuming. a ble for White as 26 :.f3 would lose
16 ••. i.d7 to 26 . ..:.xc3 ! .
17 lLJc4 li'c7 25 ••. :.cs
18 lLJxd6 1!i'xd6 (D) 26 :.e 1 i.h6!
With the awkward threat ... i.d2.
27 exf5 (D)
and a draw was agreed, some
what prematurely on Black's part.
tion for the exchange. He can also l:.xf5+ �e7 33 lDe5 �d6 with what
consider 27 �d2! ?, as I can' t see
••. should be a won endgame for Black.
2 h3 Systems
2) 7 g4 e5 8 d5 l2Jc5 (8 . . . c6 is an
alternative) 9 f3 a5 10 'ii'd 2 c6 1 1
dxc6 ! ? bxc6 1 2 0-0-0 l2Jb7 1 3 c5 d5
14 exd.5 ( 14 g5 d4 ) 14 ... liJxd.5 15 .lc4
( 1 5 l2Jxd5 cxd5 1 6 'ii' xd5 'ii' xd5 1 7
l:txd5 .le6) 1 5 . . . l2Jxe3 1 6 'ii' xe3 'ii'e7
with a roughly level game, Gomez
Topalov, Seville 1992.
3) 7 .l d3 (more common) 7 eS ...
has been played a few times ; . . . l2Jh5- a good game. White is far too under
f6-d7 may look like a waste of time developed to maintain his grip on e4.
but White has only gained .ld3-e2 14 .lg5 should be met by 14 . . . .lf5 .
and g2-g3, which don ' t really help 6
••• l2Ja6
him) 1 2 g4 f5 1 3 a3 l2Jac5 1 4 gxf5 ..•6 cS is quite popular, but after 7
gxf5 1 5 l2Jd2 l2Jf6 1 6 .lxc5 dxc5 1 7 d5 e6 8 .ld3 exd5 9 cxd5 ! we are in
'ii'c 2 l2Jxe4 1 8 l2Jdxe4 fxe4 19 l2Jxe4 the Modern Benoni, which is outside
.lf5 20 .ld3 'ii' h 5 2 1 'ii'e 2 'ii' h4 with the scope of this book.
an active game for Black, I.Sokolov 7 .ld3
Van Wely, Groningen 1994. It will be There are a couple of alternatives,
difficult for White to maintain both line 'l' being the most important:
his blockade on e4 and material 1 ) 7 l2Jf3 'ii'e8! (Black plans
equality. 8 . . .e5 but with this tricky move order
3b) 8 l2Jd7 and now ( D) :
... he can meet 9 d5 with an immediate
3bl ) 9 l2Jge2 l2Jdc5 1 0 .lc2 f5 1 1 . . . l2Jh5 ; it is also possible to play
exf5 ( 1 1 f3 .lh6) 1 1 . . . gxf5 1 2 0-0 f4 7 . . . e5 as 8 d5 transposes to game 6
1 3 .l xc5 l2Jxc5 1 4 f3 is unclear ac and 8 dxe5 dxe5 9 'ii xd8 l:txd8 10
cording to Kuzmin. l2Jd5 l:td6 is fine for Black) and now
3b2) 9 g4 l2Jdc5 10 .lbl ? ! ( 1 0 (D):
.lc2) 1 0 . . . f5 1 1 exf5 gxf5 1 2 l2Jge2 l a) 8 .l d3 e5 9 d5 (this falls in
'ii' h4 1 3 a3 e4 1 4 gxf5 .l xf5 1 5 l2Jd4 with Black's plans, but 9 0-0 didn' t
h3 Systems 33
boer, Wijk aan Zee 1 992. Bronstein tion but both my games have gone
can't have been concentrating that 7 eS 8 dS 'ii'e8 (8 ... c6 might be bet
.. .
1 4 'ii' xe4 :xe4 1 5 :xd6 :es with a it was a prepared improvement but
c omfortable game for Black, while because I'd completely forgotten the
B urge ss recommends 10 .lxe6 1 1
... Suba game (a large percentage of
'ii'xd6 .lx g4 1 2 hxg4 li)xe4 l 3 li)xe4 novelti es are born this way). Play
'ii'xe4 + 1 4 .le2 :res but does n ' t continued 1 0 li)g3 cxd5 1 1 cxd5
34 h3 Systems
King's Indian, but here the bishop on gxf5 1 3 gxf5 tlJe5 but, as Howell
g5 is misplaced) 14 tiJd4 'ti'xd 1 1 5 pointed out, this is a load of garbage;
llaxd l tiJb4 1 6 .l b l tlJc5 with a 14 f6! is very good for White so long
good game for Black, Cramling as after 1 4 . . . 1i'h5 he plays 1 5 tiJd4 !
Gallagher, Bern 1 992 (although 1-0 and not 1 5 fxg7??, which allows
after a mammoth 1 24 moves, 47 of mate in three. Instead of 1 0 . . . f5 I
which were spent mating with suggest 10 tDdcS 1 1 .lc2 f5.
•••
�� M A
y
�
�
'{Pbf.;;-;,
looks quite good.
0,, � ;ff ;@:,
19 llcl
:/.
� ,, ,, @, i?,., �, ?'.//:10
D
"',: .' :� ··�/:Wf,f:/,.;:-....;�?0;::. 'if·=
� '&;
0 ,/
� f; ' ,,
� � . �, ·� :,
«
,
�
With the intention of swin g ing his
q ueen's rook to the kingside.
1 0 tiJf3 19 ... .ld7
In th e same Basie quickplay men An attacking player like Kuprei
.
tt on ed above, Chernin played 10 a3 chik would be considering . . . llf4 at
36 h3 Systems
1 d4 lbf6
2 c4 g6
3 lbc3 .lg7
4 e4 d6
5 h3 0-0
6 lbf3
Of course 5 lbf3 0-0 6 h3 is the
same.
6 ••. e5 (D)
It is equally possible for Black to
play 6 lba6 7 .le3 e5, which has
•••
some depth so keep a look-out for his 4Jxc5 dxc5 1 4 b4 ! ? ( 14 iLe2 .J:lf6 ! 1 5
next game as it will no doubt prove 4Jb5 'ii'e 7 1 6 iLa5 f3 ! 1 7 iLxf3 4Jf4
more informative than this one. 1 8 ii.xc7 c4 + Markov-Sirota, corres
3b) 12 b4 axb3 1 3 axb3 l:.xal 1 4 1 987) 1 4 . . . cxb4 1 5 4Jb5 f3 1 6 g 4
'ii' xa l 4Ja6 1 5 ltJfl ? ! ( 1 5 'ii' b l c5 =) 4Jg3 1 7 lDxc7 'ii' t7 1 8 lDxa8 ltJxh 1
h3 Systems 39
lowed by 1 8 . . . 4Jd4 with a mess that if White can do better than 1 1 exf5
could easily work out in his favour. 4Jf4 1 2 i.xf4 (with the knight on h2
l a2) l l 4Jr4 ! ? 1 2 cxd6 ( 1 2 g3
.•. White can castle here with a roughly
4Jh5 with ... f4 to follow) 12 . . . cxd6 level game) 1 2 . . . exf4 1 3 fxg6 Wxg6
1 3 exf5 gxf5 14 i.xf4 exf4+ 15 i.e2 14 �fl 4Jc5 15 4Jf3, transposing to
(B urgess points out 1 5 We2 4Jb4 the note to move 1 5 in the main
1 6 0-0-0 4Jxa2+ ! 1 7 4Jxa2 Wa4) game.
15 . . . f3 ! 1 6 gxf3 i.d7 1 7 D.g l �h8 1 8 3) 9 a3 is a different approach
Wd2 D.c8 1 9 0-0-0 4Jb4 20 �bl f4 whereby White hopes to lock the
2 1 4Jd4 We5 ! + Koopman-Burgess, knight on a6 out of the game. How
Biel 1987 . ever, it seems risky to ignore Black's
1 b) 10 b6!? may be a tempo
••. kingside play. Flear-Cvitan, Bern
well spent. Klimenok-Lybin, corres 1 993 continued 9 . . .f5 (Piket once
1 993 continued 1 1 i.e2 4Jf4 1 2 i.f3 played 9 . . . We8 but it is unnecessary
f5 1 3 0-0 ( 1 3 h4 ! ?) 1 3 ... llJc5 14 4Jxc5 to support the knight on h5 since 10
bxc5 1 5 D.e l Wt7 1 6 D.b l a5 with a exf5 gxf5 1 1 4Jxe5 We8 ! wins mate
comfortable game for Black. rial for Black as . . . f4 is coming) 1 0
2) 9 4Jgl Wes 10 i.e2 and now: b4 �h8 ! ? (Cvitan had previously
2a) 10 4Jr4 l l i.r3 rs 1 2 g3 ( 1 2
.•. played 1 0 ... 4Jb8) 1 1 D.c 1 c5 1 2 dxc6
4Jge2 We7 1 3 exf5 was Vilela-Pe bxc6 1 3 i.e2 fxe4 14 4Jxe4 d5 1 5
corelli, Havana 1 99 1 , when Vilela cxd5 cxd5 1 6 i.g5 Wd7 1 7 4Jc5
gives 1 3 . . . gxf5 1 4 i.xf4 exf4 1 5 0-0 4Jxc5 1 8 D.xc5 i.b7 and Black's
i.e5 +) and now B urgess's sugges centre was very impressive.
tion 12 4Jb4 looks like fun. After
•.• 9•.• Wes
13 gxr4 rxe4 14 4Jxe4 exr4 White 10 i.e2 rs
has a cou pie of bishop moves : 10 4Jr4 1 1 i.r3 rs (D) is an im
•..
have also been played but these are lDc5 1 5 i.xc5 dxc5 1 6 i.f3 e4 ! gave
h3 Systems 41
i. xe4 26 l%.xe4 i.e5 ! (26 ... 'ifxh3 27 move, 22 liJd4 loses to 22 . . .i. xd4 !
,
1 d4 lbf6
2 c4 g6
3 lbc3 i.gT
4 e4 d6
s ll)f3 0-0
6 h3 eS
7 dS lba6
8 i.gS (D)
pawn. During the g ame I intended 32 ltb7 ltf7 33 ttJc4 ttJxd5 34 ttJxd6
the latter. ltxb7 35 ttJxb7 the ending looks like
20 ... ltb8! a draw.
21 ttJg3 .ixd3 29 .•• 11417
22 Wxd3 Wf6! Now everything is under control
Combining defence of the king again.
side with the attack on the queen 30 &4 lt:JxdS
side. 31 ltxf7 ltxf7
23 ttJe4 Wxb2 32 ll\xd6 Wat+
24 ltdl Wes 33 'itie2 Wxa2+
25 ltgl ltb4! 34 'itiel Wal+
26 ttJd2 ltxh4 35 'itie2 1ii'h2+
Black's miraculous major pieces 36 'itiel Wc3+
have netted a pawn through some 37 'itie2 lte7
heavy industry. White lost on time in a hopeless
27 Wg6 lt:Jc7! situation. Incidental ly, 37...ltxf.2+
28 ltbl ! would have been stronger as after 38
With his whole position collaps 'itixt2 Wxe3+ 39 'itifl 'ifc 1 + 40 'itif2
ing White finds the only chance. Wd2+ 4 1 'itig3 We3+ White can re-
28 ... lthf4? ( D) sign.
Under severe time�pressure I was 0 .. 1
quite pleased with this move but, in
fact, it throws the win away. Much Game 7
better was 28 ltb4! (not 28 ... ttJxd5 ?
••• Alexandrov - Zakharevich
29 ltb7) 29 'ifxh6 (29 ltxb4 axb4 30 St Petersburg 1 994
'ifxh6 Wal + fol lowed by . . . Wxg l )
29 . . .ltxbl + 30 lt:Jxbl lt:Jxd5 -+. 1 d4 ttJf6
29 ltb7? 2 c4 g6
And fortunately White fails to 3 ttJc3 .ig7
take his chance. After 29 Wxg7+! 4 e4 d6
Wxg7 30 ltxg7 + 'itixg7 3 1 .ixf4 ltxf4 S .ie2 0-0
h3 Systems 47
I ) 9 g3 f5 (9 . . . lba6 ! ?) I 0 exf5
gxf5 1 1 lbg5 ( 1 1 .ig5 'ife8 is un
clear) 1 1 . . . lbf6 1 2 g4 (White wishes
to control e4) 1 2 . . . 'ife7 1 3 gxf5 .ixf5
1 4 .ig4 lbxg4 1 5 hxg4 .ig6 1 6 l2Je6,
Pogorelov-Becerra, Cordoba 1 995 ,
and now as Pogorelov points out,
1 6 . . . lba6 1 7 lbxf8 ( 1 7 lbxg7 'ifxg7
This line used to be abou t as far 1 8 .ih6 'iff6 and 1 7 .i g5 'iff7 are
off the beaten track as you could get also playable for Black) 1 7 . . Jtxf8
(in fact the first time I came across wou ld give Black a lot of play for
the move was when Novik played it the exchange (which makes it hard
against me three years ago), but a to understand why he sprinkled
glance at Info rmator 64 will reveal White 's preceding moves so liber
no fewer than four games with 8 h3 . ally with exclamation marks).
Its main champion is the young Rus 2) 9 lLld.2 lbf4 1 0 .ifl lba6 1 1 g3
sian Zviagintsev, but other strong lbh5 (both sides have wasted time on
grandmasters, such as Beliavsky and the kingside and Black hopes to
Gulko, have also thought it worth a profit from the weakness on h3) 1 2
whirl . Although strictly speaking the lbb3 (on 1 2 .ie2, Beliavsky recom
vari�.tion belongs to the Petrosian mends 1 2 . . . lbf6 followed by . . . c6,
S ystem its spiritual home is to be while Knaak suggests l 2 . . . lbc5 , not
found amongst the h3 systems of this fearing 1 3 .ixh5 gxh5 1 4 'if xh5 f5 ;
chapter and, indeed, there are many but here Beliavsky proposes 1 3
direct transpositions to the other lbb3) 1 2 . . . c6 1 3 .ie3 .id7 (intend
games. However, it seems to me (and ing . . . a4) 1 4 a4 lbb4 15 lZ.c l 'ife7 1 6
others) that an earl y .ie2 reduces c5 ! ? c xd5 1 7 c xd6 'ifd8 ! ( 1 7 . . . 'ifxd6
White 's options and denies him 1 8 .ic5 'iff6 1 9 lbxa5 !) 1 8 lbxd5 ( 1 8
some important resources. For ex exd5 b6 !) 1 8 . . . lbxd5 1 9 'ifxd5 lbf6
ample, .ih3 is no longer available 20 'ifd3 .ia4 with a double-edged
and the queen's path to the kingside game, Zviagintsev-Beliavsky, Yu
has been blocked. True, Black has goslavia 1 995 .
committed himself to . . . a5 but this is 9 .ig5
a much more useful move which will 9 .ie3 has not been played much
very rarely harm him. My conclusion, so much here, as White prefers to
48 h3 Systems
2) 12 h4 and now:
2a) 12 c6 1 3 h5 cxd5?! (better is
.••
1iff7 2 1 1ilg5 + as equal. There's ob transposes to line ' l ' ) 1 3 . . . gxh5 ! 1 4
viously plenty to investigate here but gxh5 f5 with a double-edged game.
it's clear that Black should prefer 10 ••• llxl7
14 . . .f5 to 14 1'. d7 15 h5, which was
••. Black intends . . . it)d7-c5 followed
Novik's choice in the game. by .. .f5 . I believe this plan was intro
1 b) 1 3 0-0-0 1'. d 7 14 b4 and duced into practice by your not so
now: humble author who knew the idea in
1 bl ) 14 it)b4!? (threatening to
.. . similar positions. Another method is
play 15 . . . it)xa2+) 15 'fi;bl f5 1 6 gxf5 1 0 b6 1 1 1'.e3 lDh7 12 g4 f5 , but the
•• •
it)xe4? l 1 7 it)xe4 1'.xf5 1 8 1'.d3 1fa4 only comment I have seen on this is
19 b3 1fa3 20 1fe2 a4 2 1 1'.c 1 (Black ' unclear, Piskov-Arsovic, Belgrade
must have missed this when he em 1 995 ' ; not very illuminating.
barked on the combination) 2 1 ... axb3 1 1 g4
22 1'.xa3 l:.xa3 , Piskov-Damlj ano 1 1 a3!? (D) forces Black to switch
vic, Belgrade 1 995 , looks l ike pure plan as 1 1 . .. ttJdc5 would now be met
fantasy to me, although judging by by 1 2 b4. Alternatively, Black can
Piskov's notes in Informator he was try:
a worried man at the time. He man
aged to beat off the attack by return
ing a large chunk of material : 23
ft)fg5 ! l:.fa8 24 axb3 l:.xb3+ 25
1*'b2 ! l:.xb2+ 26 'fi;xb2 it)xd3+ 27
l:.xd3 h6 28 f3 hxg5 29 hxg5 with a
clear advantage for White.
l b2) 14 fS looks better to me.
•••
'ifxg2 1 9 'iff3 ! looks very difficult after which he was a little fortunate
for Black. not to get into difficulties. The game
2) 1 1 f6 1 2 .t h4 and now:
• .• continued 1 4 ltJg 3 cxd5 1 5 cxd5
2a) 12- .th6 l 3 b4 .tg5 1 4 .txg5
. .td7 1 6 h4 b5 1 7 'ifd2 b4 1 8 lDd l f6
fxg5 1 5 c5 dxc5 1 6 bxa5 lDf6 1 7 1 9 .te3 'ife7 (intending . . . f5) 20 h5
ttJc4 was good for White in Kra gxh5 2 1 f3 ! ? hxg4 22 fxg4 and now
senkov-Zakharevich, S t Petersburg 22 . . . f5 ! gained some desperately
1 994. needed space on the kingside. The
2b) Perhaps Black can try 12 g5 •.. position is unclear (0- 1 , 50 after
1 3 .tg3 f5 1 4 exf5 ( 1 4 f3 lDf6) many adventures).
14 . . .ltJf6 after which I can't see any 14 gxf5 gxf5
thing devastating for White, e.g. : 15 ltJg3 (D)
2bl ) 15 'ifc2 ltJh5 ! when 1 6 .tg4 Novik points out that 15 .th5
should be met by 1 6 ... ttJf4! rather 'ifd7 1 6 lDg 3 f4 1 7 lDf5 can be met
than 16 ttJx g3 1 7 fxg3 h5 1 8 f6 !
.•• by 17 ttJxe4; even if this tactic were
.•.
slow but here, with the white bishop playing variation ' l b' with a tempo
on the double-edged g5-square, other less. In Sorin-Ubilava, lbercaj a
factors come into play. Black intends 1 992, Bl ack decided to use this
to follow up with . . . liJc7 after which tempo to prevent White from playing
he will be ready to challenge the c5 without having to play ... c5 him
white centre with . . . d5 or embarrass sel f. The game continued 1 1 . . . Jl.xf6
the bishop on g5 by . . . liJe6. 1 2 d5 Jl.e7 ! ? 1 3 a3 liJb8 14 b4 b6
7 1We8 preparing . . . e5, is an im
•.• , (Black's position may look passive,
portant alternative, with the foil ow but as long as he avoids being steam
ing possibilities: rollered on the q ueenside his bishop
t ) 8 liJf3 and now: pair and potential kingside attack
l a) 8 eS 9 fxe5 (9 dxe5 dxe5 10
••• will give him a good game) 15 liJb5
liJxe5 liJc5 and the threats of . .. llJe 6 il.d8 t6 0-0 a6 17 liJc3 Jl.e7 1 8 �h t
and . . .llkxe4 provide adequate com il.d6 t 9 liJe t 1i'e7 20 liJd3 liJd7 2 t
pensation for the pawn) 9 . . . dxe5 10 :c t a5 22 1i'b3 Jl.a6 23 Jl.g4 :tbs
d5 ( t 0 liJxe5 c5 is good for Black 24 :r3 ? ! liJf6 25 il.h3 liJh7 ! 26 :f2
and t 0 dxe5 liJg4 t t liJd5 liJxe5 t 2 h5 27 g3 h4 28 :en hxg3 29 hxg3
Jl.e7 c6 is a perfectly playable ex liJg5 30 Jl. g4 �g7 with an excel
change sacrifice) I O . . h6 1 1 Jl.xf6
. lent game for Black. The remaining
( t t Jl.h4 liJg4 allows Black to be moves were 3 t :r.h2 :hs 32 :rf2
come very active) t t . . . Jl.xf6 t 2 a3 liJh7 33 bxa5 bxa5 34 a4 1i'g5 35
1i'e7 t 3 0-0 :ds t 4 :bt c5 t5 1i'd2 il.f3 liJf6 36 :xh8 :xh8+ 37 �g2
Jl.g7 t 6 :rd t Jl.d7 t 7 b4 1i'd6 with a Jl.c8 38 liJe2 1i'e3 39 c5 liJxe4 40
rou ghly level position, Mohr-Miles, cxd6 liJxf2 4 t liJdc t .i.h3+ 42 �g t
Bad Worishofen t 990. liJd3+ 0- t .
t b) 8 h6 {perhaps an improve
.•. 2) 8 1i'd2 (White believes that his
ment on the immediate . . . e5) 9 Jl. h 4 first priority is to establish some con
es and now: trol over the dark squares) 8 . . . e5 9
t bt ) 10 dxeS dxe5 t t liJxe5 liJc5 fxe5 dxe5 t 0 d5 liJc5 1 1 1i'e3 liJa4
( t l . .. g5 ! ?) t2 Jl.f3 ( t 2 1i'c2? liJfxe4 ! t 2 liJb5 1i'e7 t 3 0-0-0 a6 t4 d6 cxd6
t 3 liJxe4 Jl.f5 t 4 Jl.d3 liJxd3 + t 5 t 5 liJxd6 1i'c7 t 6 �bt liJc5 t 7 Jl.xf6
1Wxd3 Jl.xe5 t 6 fxe5 1Wxe5) t 2 . . . g5 Jl. xf6 t 8 liJxc8 :axc8 t9 Jl.g4 llJe6 !
(now t 2 . . . liJcxe4 J 3 liJxe4 liJxe4 t 4 20 Jl.xe6 fxe6 2 t :c t b5, Tuk
Jl.xe4 f6 i s not playable because of makov-Mortensen, Reykj avik t 990,
the weakness of g6) t 3 il.f2 ( 1 3 Jl.g3 and now 22 c5 ! would have been
g4) t3 ... liJcxe4 ! t4 liJxe4 (or t4 Jl.xe4 equal.
gxf4) t 4 . . . liJxe4 t 5 Jl.xe4 gxf4 t 6 8 ltJf3
Jl.d4 c5 ! t 7 Jl.c3 .i.xe5 with a clear 8 1i'd2 4Jc.7 is likely to trans pose
advantage for Black. back in to the main line after 9 liJf3,
t b2) 1 0 fxeS dxe5 t t Jl.xf6. The but in the game Moskalenko-Nadyr
problem for White is that 1 1 dS al khanov, Alushta t 994, Black tried
lows t t .. .liJg4, but after the text he is 8 bS! ?:
.. .
56 The Averbakh
e-file and his d4-pawn is less secure) 1 1 exf5 tiJf6 1 2 dxc6 bxc6 1 3 g4 !
l l . . . exf6 12 �h4 ifa5 1 3 tiJf3 �f5 llb8 14 ifd2 ltJa6 1 5 tiJd4 with good
1 4 0-0 llfe8 with an equal position prospects for White. Seirawan, how
according to Belov. ever, considers that 10 cxdS! 1 1
•••
1 4 �xf6 ttJxf6 1 5 0-0 tiJh5 Black 1 1 cxd5 cxd5 1 2 e5 �g7 1 3 h4, with
had decent positional compensation ad vantage to White, Moskalenko
for his p awn, Gulko-B arlov, Mont Nijboer, Wijk aan Zee 1 992.
real 1 992. 1 1 0-0 dxe4
12 ltJxe4 � g4! (D)
9 ifd2
9 dS prevents Blac k's two main Black's whole strategy is based on
ideas ( . . . d5 and . . . ttJe6) but allows a pressurizing the d-pawn. By elimi
third, 9 . . . tiJh5 ! . Seirawan-Gelfand, nating the knight on f3, playing . . . f5
The A verbakh 57
close to winning. The pieces that he about . . . tDc3. Now Black has to
does have co-ordinate beautifu lly back-pedal a little.
and his ki ng is completely safe. 39 libs+ 'it>h7
White, on the other hand, has an ex 40 •es 'it>g7!
tremel y exposed ki ng and a bishop Perhaps Black had originally in
that is virtually irrelevant. The d tended 40 i.12+ 4 1 'it>fl tlJxg3+ 42
•.•
pawn also remains firmly blockaded 'it> g2 but this would lose control of
and it is ironic that White would have the position.
more chances without it as then his 41 •es+ 'it>gS
bishop would become a piece again. 42 libs+ i.f8
28 b3 l::t b l 43 i.f3?
29 ..d3 l::t b 2 The only chance was to play 43
30 i.g2 d6!. After 43 . . . ttJxd6 44 i.f3 l::tc2 !
White lets his a-pawn go because 45 i.d5 l::tc 5 Black should stil l win
of the variation 30 a4 tDe4 3 1 _.b5 but his task would be more compli
i.d4 when he is liable to get mated. cated.
30 ..• l::txa2 (DJ 43 .•. tiJd6
But now Black can combine his 44 1n>6 l::ta3
threats against the king with pushing 4S i.dl lbe4
a passed pawn on the queenside. 46 i.f3 l::t a l+
White's position is hopeless. 47 'it>e2 tiJd6!
31 h4 as Now Black is threatening to pick
32 •e3 bS up the b-pawn.
33 lib6 i.f8 48 'it>d3
34 i.f3 l::taJ 4S 'it>d2 a4 ! decides the issue.
3S 'it>g2 b4 48 ..• l::tc l !
36 i.dl l::ta2+ Black just needs one passed pawn.
37 'it>fi tLJe4 49 •xaS l::tc3+
3S 'it>el i.cS? SO 'it>e2 l::txb3
38 l::ta l would have won on the
.•. S l •a4 l::t b2+
spot as there is nothing to be done S2 'it>d3 b3
The Ave rbakh 59
i.xg7 and now best was 1 7 . . . lll xg7 . 2 a) In Bareev- Kasparov, Lina
Zakharevich gives the following res 1 992 Black played 1 1 gS. This
•..
10 i.xf6! ?
I was quite pleased with the out
come of the opening and had been
expecting an easy game after some
thing like 10 dxeS. The text move
completely puzzled me, but I soon I ) Ryskin-lskusnykh, Azov 1995
discovered what it was all about as continued 17 llJdS ? fxe4 1 8 llkl2
after... i.g4 ! and White must have realised
10 ... i.xf6 only now that he can't move the rook
My opponent didn't even hesitate on accoun t of l 9 ... llad 8 winning
before playing . .. material . Therefore he gave up the
1 1 cS! ? exchange with 19 lt:Jxe4 i.xd 1 20
My first reaction was one of deep Axd 1 Afd8 2 1 c6 and punted a draw
scepticism that White's idea could be offer, which was accepted despite
any good but I was still pretty wary the fact that Black i s close to win
as I had obviou sly tumbled into a ning. The white knights may look at
prepared variation . White intends to tractive but he is caught in a nasty
ruin Black's queenside pawn struc pin on the d-file. Black should play
ture with i.xa6 and then try to prove 2 1 . . �f7, to avoid any checks, fol
.
that the resulting position i s better lowed by . . .l::tb 8 and ... llb5 . If White
suited to his knights than Black's ever supports his knight on d5 with
bishops. lt:Jec3 then Black will be able to lib
1 1 ... exd4?! erate his bishop with e4. . . .
and 18 J. b7 by 1 9 life 1 .
... able to generate counterplay along
More tempting was 13 dxcS and ••• the b-file or by pushing an a-pawn ;
although White's position is a little and no matter how sick they may be,
awkward after 14 J.d3 c6 1 5 l£lf4 for the moment he still possesses an
J.c7 1 6 1id2 J.g4 I can't believe that extra pawn.
Black has enough for a piece. 18 l::tfcl 1We7
14 1ixd4! 19 ltJeS!? J.e6
This is much stronger than 14 Pinning the knight by 19 1Wd6 •••
l£lf4 1Wxe4 ! 15 1id2 ( 15 l£lxg6 1Wxg6 was also possible although after 20
1 6 J.d3 1Wf6 is good for Black) l::td l 1i'b8 (not 20 . . . 1Wc7 2 1 lbxg6)
15 . . . J.g5 ! with advantage to Black. 2 1 b3 (2 1 1Wf6 1Wxb2 allows another
14 •.• dxcS pin) 2 1 . . . J.e6 22 l::t ac l White retains
I had originally assumed that his edge.
14 cxdS would give me a good
••• 20 1i'e3!
game, but after 1 5 1Wxd5 ! dxc5 1 6 Of course White is not interested
J.xb7 J.e6 (or 1 6 . . . J.xb7 1 7 1i'xb7 in 20 lbxc6 1i'b7 when Black takes
J.f6 1 8 l::t ae l with advantage to over the initiative.
White) 1 7 1Wxc5 l::tb 8 both 18 J.dS 20
••• 1i'd6
and 18 J.c6 J. b6 1 9 1Wc3 are in 2 1 1Wxc5 lixcS
White's favour. The only other real 22 l::txcS l::tab8
alternative is 14 bxa6 but this just
••• 23 b3 l::tbS
transposes to the game after 15 lDf6+ 24 l::ta cl?
J.xf6 16 1Wxf6 dxc5 . A serious mistake which changes
15 l£lf6+! J.xf6 the whole complexion of the game.
16 1Wxf6 bxa6 White should have played 24 l£ld3 as
17 1if4 <j;b7 (D) 24 . . . l::td 8 can be met by 25 l::tc3 ! .
The tactical phase of the game 24
..• l::td8! (D)
has ended and White has emerged Suddenly the black rooks have
with the advantage. Black's queen sprung to life. I felt quite relieved
side is a wreck but his game is not round about here as if I was going to
completely hopeless as he may be lose it would at least be without the
64 The A verbak.h
32 ..• .ic4
33 h5 a3
34 hxg6?
34 �h2 would have avoided the
next note.
34 •• . fxg6?
I didn' t have the time to work out
the consequences of 34 .:al+ 35
•..
lows Black a very comfortable game. though it's not my main recommen
After 9 dxeS there are a couple of
.•• dation (it was a very close call but
examples: finally I felt that 8 . . . 'ii'e 8 was more
1 ) 10 l:ldl lLJc5 1 1 i.xf6 i.xf6 12 energetic) here is a summary of the
lLld5 i.d8 13 'iVe3 lLJe6 ! ? ( l 3 . . . lLJd7 current state of affairs :
is also quite playable) 14 lLlxe5 c6 1 5 1 ) 9 i. d3 (on 9 i.d l , 9 . . . lLJc5 1 0
lLJc3 i.b6 1 6 'ii'h 6 i.c7 ! 1 7 lLJg4 f5 i.c2 transposes but 9 . . . cxd5 1 0 cxd5
1 8 exf5 lLJf4 1 9 fxg6 hxg6 20 lLJe3 b5 ! ? gives active play) 9 . . . lLJc5 1 0
l:lf7 2 1 'ii'g5 i.f5 ! ( White has two i.c2 a5 1 1 lLlge2 transposes to Game
extra pawns bu t his two most im 8, line '2' in the note to White's 7th
portant pieces are very unhappily move .
placed) 22 g3 (this loses, but perhaps 2) 9 i.f3 cxd5 1 0 ltlxd5 (a speci
it is already too late; 22 0-0 'ii'e 5 ! ality of Farago although his results
66 The Averbakh
a /
/
now:
3 a) 13 ltJbS ? ! f5 ! 1 4 ltJxc7 1i'g6
1 5 ltJh3 fxe4 1 6 .te3 1i'xg2 1 7 0-0-0
.ixh3 1 8 ltJxa8 ltJd3 + 1 9 <j;bl .ig4
2a) 9 ltJcS 10 f3 ltJh5 1 1 b4 ( 1 1
•.. 20 lldgl 1i'f3 21 ltJc7 ltJxf2 22 .ixf2
.ih6 a5 1 2 .ixg7 <j;xg7 1 3 .id3 f5 e3 23 .ixe3 .if5 24 .ih6 .i xc2+
1 4 .ic2 fxe4 1 5 lbxe4 lbxe4 1 6 25 <j;xc2 1i'e4+ 0- 1 was a real ham
.ixe4 ltJf6 1 7 .ic2 b5 ! was good for mering for White in K watschewsky
Black in Jasnikowski-Piket, Novi Gross, Balatonbereny 1995.
S ad OL 1 9 90) 1 1 . . . ltJa6 1 2 a3 ltJf4 3 b) 13 .ie3 ltJa6 ( 1 3 . . . b6 !?) 14
1 3 .ifl f6 1 4 .ih4 .ih6 1 5 <j;b2 f5 ltJge2 rs 15 f3 1i'g6 16 llh2 occurred
1 6 1i'c2 fxe4 1 7 ltJxe4 .if5 1 8 .if2 in Kakhiani-Kovalev, Helsinki 1 992
lbb8 112- 1'2 Raetsky-Golubev, Biel and although White eventually won
1 994. A bit more of this game would the game I can ' t believe that Black
have been helpful but it looks OK for stands badly here.
Black. 3bl ) Knaak gives the variation
2b) 9 ltJhS ! ? (this seems play
•.. 16 .ih6 1 7 .ixh6 ! 1i'xh6 1 8 1i'd2
.••
able even when White hasn't wasted 1i'g6 ( 1 8 . . . 1i'xd2+ 1 9 <j;xd2 fxe4 20
a tempo on 9 .id 1 or 9 .if3) 10 .ixh5 lbxe4 b5 ! ? is also suggested by
gxh5 1 1 .ih6 f6 !? ( l 1 . .. f5 looks more Knaak who continues 2 1 cxb5 ltJb4
natural) 1 2 .ixg7 <j;xg7 1 3 f4 <j;b8 22 ltJ2c3 .i b7 23 llxh5 lbxd5 24
1 4 ltJf3 ltJc5 1 5 f5 ( 1 5 llhfl !? has llah 1 ;t) 1 9 0-0-0 with attacking
been suggested) 1 5 . . . llg8 16 1i'h6 chances for White, but 1 9 . . . ltJc5 20
1i'f7 1 7 b4 ltJd7 1 8 lbe2 a5 1 9 b5 lldh l llt7 (20 . . . fxe4 2 1 llxh5 might
lbc5 20 ltJg3 llxg3 ! ? 2 1 hxg3 ltJxe4 be good for White) 2 1 llxh5 llg7
22 1i'xh5 1i'xh5 23 llxh5 lbxg3 24 looks fine for Black to me.
llh3 lbe2+ ! 25 <j;d2 li)f4 26 llh6 3 b2) 16 h4! ?, trying to use the
•••
grasped what it's all about and I am . . . f5 , is well met by the prophylactic
even recommending such a course. 1 3 .ie3 ! . Petursson-Djurhuus, Gaus
Of course after 10 .ixh5 gxh5 Black's dal 1 995 now continued 13 . . . lbh7 1 4
kingside pawns are shattered, but as 0-0-0 b6 ( 1 4 . . . f5 ? 15 .ixc5 dxc5 1 6
compensation for this he will have d6 c6 17 lba4) 1 5 h3 h4 1 6 g3 ! 'ii'e7
gained the bishop pair and an open 1 7 .:tdg 1 a4 1 8 f4 with a clear plus
g-file for his maj or pieces to oper for White.
ate on. Even so, the text may not be 2b) 12 <iii>hS is an alternative way
•.•
l:txf5 15 i.e3 'ti'xg2 1 6 0-0-0 is good was good enough for equality.
for White) and now White should 1 8 0-0?
have played 14 i.h6! lDc5 15 0-0 a5 The white king would have been
1 6 i.xg7 �xg7 1 7 f3 ! with some ad better off on the queenside according
vantage as Black's king is very ex to Grivas.
posed . 18 .. • h4?
12 i.h6 Black misses a golden opportu
One of the main points behind nity. After 1 8 :r4! Grivas gives 1 9
...
The first two games of this chapter is much less popular and much
are concerned with the Smyslov Sys sharper than the Smyslov System.
tem in which White plays i.g5 and
follows up with the solid e3. One of Game 1 1
his principal ideas is to limit the ac Dely - Haik
tivity of the King's Indian bishop but France 1970
if Black does manage to prise open
the long diagonal then the absence of 1 d4 lt:Jf6
White's dark-squared bishop from 2 c4 g6
the queenside may be keenly felt. 3 ltJc3 i.g7
Therefore my main suggestion is for 4 liJf3
Black to attack the centre with . . . c5, 4 i. gS is almost certain to trans
and this is the su bject of Game 1 2 . pose to lines considered later.
Playing for ... e5 is , as ever, an impor 4 •.. d6
tant option but I feel that here it plays If Black had played 4 . . 0-0 instead
.
into White's hands by increasing the then there is another interesting plan
relevance of the bishop on g5 . In against 5 i.g5, based on playing . . . c5
fact, there doesn' t seem to be any and then . . . d5 . This runs 4 0-0 5 •••
clear path to equality for Black after i.gS cS (D) and now White can sup
playing . . . e5 , which, along with a port or block the centre (6 i.xf6
couple of promising sidelines, is the i.xf6 7 lt:Je4 ti'b6 =):
subject of Game 1 1 . A word about
chasing the bishop from g5 : it almost
always makes sense for Black to play
. . . h6 but he should be wary about fol
lowing up with . . . g5 which involves
a much more serious weakening of
the kingside. A good rule is that . . . g5
should only be played when there is
a concrete follow-up in mind, such
as gaining the bishop pair with
. . . lt:Jh5 xg3, or removing the threat
against e7 so that . . . ti'b6 can be
played. I ) 6 e3 cxd4 7 exd4 (7 lt:Jxd4
The final game of the chapter ti'a5 !) 7 dS! ?. Normally one would
•..
1 8 . . . 1'.h6 wins the pawn back) 1 1 threat of llJxc5 and 1'.xh7 +) 1 9 llJf5
d5? (better is 1 1 llJc2, which Griin 1'.xf5 20 1fxf5 1fc8 2 1 1fxc8 :axc8
berg assesses as = after l l . . . 1'.g4) 22 1'. xe5 dxe5 23 1'.xg4 f5 24 1'.d 1
l 1 . . . 1fa5 + ! 1 2 ttJ<l2 (White probably llJg5 ! (on d6 the knight will feel like
intended 1 2 'ifd2, spotting too late an octopus) 25 f3 lLJf.7 26 1'.c2 lLJd6
1 2 . . .1'.xb2 ! ) 1 2 .. . 1'.xb2 ! 1 3 l:tbl ( 1 3 27 b3 e4 ! , keeping the knight out of
dxc6 1'.xa l 1 4 'ifxa l :d8 1 5 'ifb2 the game, gave Black slightly the
bxc6 1 6 1'.e2 :b8 ! 1 7 'ifc2 :b7 is a better of a draw i n Ehlvest-Kaspa
variation provided by Grunberg; rov, Horgen 1 995 .
White , s d a ys are clearly numbered) 5 1'.g5 0-0
1 3 . . . 1'.c3 1 4 dxc6 :d8 1 5 llJd5 It is surprising that 5 c6! ? is not
.•.
1'.xd2+ 1 6 1f xd2 1fxd2+ 1 7 �xd2 tried more often as after the virtually
bxc6 and Black eventually converted automatic 6 e3 Black has 6 . . . 1fa5 !
his extra pawn in Knaak-H.Grtin (intending 7 . . . llJe4 ), which seems to
berg , E.German Ch 1 989. equalize at once . Schmidt-Hug, De
2) 6 d5 (in general White seems brecen Echt 1 992 continued 7 'ifd2
reluctant to play d5 but Ehl vest is ob (nobody has played 7 1'.d3 , when
viously an exception) 6 ... d6 7 lLJd2 7 ... 1'.f5 looks sensible and 7 . . . 1'.g4 8
h6 8 1'.h4 and now: 1'.h4 { 8 1'.f4 ? e5 ! } 8 . . . 1fh5 interest
2a) 8 g5 9 1'.g3 llJh5 1 0 e3
. .. ing) 7 . . . 1'.g4 8 1'.e2 (8 b4 ! ? 1fxb4 9
llJxg3 1 1 hxg3 f5 ( 1 1 . . .e6 is an alter :bl 1fa5 1 0 :xb7 llJbd7 ! is unclear
native) 1 2 1'.d3 llJd7 1 3 llJf3 e6 1 4 according to S . Pedersen) 8 . . . 1'.xf3 9
dxe6 llJb6 1 5 g4 ! 1'.xe6 1 6 gxf5 1'.xf6 1'.xf6 1 0 1'.xf3 llJd7 1 1 0-0 0-0
1'.xf5 1 7 1'.xf5 l:txf5 1 8 'ifc2 'iff8 1 9 = 1 2 :fd l :fd8 1 3 :abl 1fc7 1 4 b4
23 lbxe4 11b6+
24 1l.f2! i.f5 (D)
White was not concerned about
24 i.d4 as even 25 i.c3 (25 �h 1 is
•••
Other moves are rare. They in 1 0 a3 b5 1 1 cxb5 axb5 1 2 i.xb5 i.d7
clude: 1 3 i.e2 h6 1 4 i. f4 1l.b8 1 5 1l.bl 'ti'c7
78 White plays Ji..g5
l a) 14 rs 1 5 g4 (the drawback
..• 2 1 . . . hxg5 22 fxe6 i.xe6 23 g4 (23
of playing . . . f5 too early is revealed 'ifh7 + 'iii> f7 24 lbe4 l:th8 ! 25 lbd6+
as White is able to launch an attack { 25 lbxg5 + 'ifxg5 ! } 25 . . .'iii> f8 and
on the light squares; nevertheless, Black wins) 23 . . . c3 24 'ifh7+ 'iii>f7 25
Black's position remains viable) lbe4 cxb2+ 26 'iii> b 1 l:.h8 27 lbd6+
15 . . . f4 1 6 'ife4 (Bagirov later gave 'iii> f8 28 'ife4 lbe5 29 f4 l:txh5 30
1 6 exf4 l:txf4 1 7 g3 as � but this is gxh5 lbf7 0- 1 S .Pedersen-Gadjily,
debatable � after 1 7 . . . l:.f7 both 1 8 Duisburg jr Ech 1 992.
1We4 lbd7 19 i.d3 lbf6 and 1 8 lbde4 9 0-0
lbc6 1 9 lbd6 llkt4 20 l:.xd4 cxd4 2 1 9 h3 has been pl ayed but after
lbxf7 'if xf7 22 lbe4 i.d7, intending 9 . . . lbe4 White is simply a tempo
. . . i.c6, look fine for Black) 16 .. .fxe3 down on the next note.
1 7 fxe3 lbd7 1 8 i.d3 :n 1 9 lbf3 I haven' t seen any games with 9
lbf6 20 'i6g6 lbxg4 2 1 lbe4 l:txf3 ! i.d3 but perhaps White should al
(avoiding 2 1 . . . lbxe3 ? 22 lbfxg5 ! ready be thinking of how to maintain
lbxg2+ 23 'iii>d2 hxg5 24 lbf6+ ! 'ifxf6 the balance with a move such as this .
25 l:th8+ ! and mate) 22 gxf3 llle5 23 9
..• lbbd7! ?
'ifh5 i.d7 with fully adequ ate com Preparing . . . 'li'b6, which is not
pensation for the exchange, Bagirov playable at once in view of 1 0 i.xf6
Kelecevic, Sarajevo 1980. followed by lbd5 . Black could of
l b) 14...lbc6 15 0-0 l:tb8 16 a3 a6 course play . . . g5 , but as the game
1 7 g4 ( 1 7 lbde4 f5 1 8 lbd6 l:td8 progresses you will discover his rea
poses no problems) l 7 . . .i.d7 18 llkie4 son for not doing so. 9 lbc6? is a
•••
lLJc3 i.xc3 ! 24 'ifxc3 l:tfd8 25 l:txd8+ tive, though. After 10 lbxe4 i.xe4
l:.xd8 26 l:td 1 :xd 1 + 27 i.xd 1 'li'e5 ( D) there are a couple of examples:
28 'ifxe5 lbxe5 29 i.e2 'iii>f7 with a 1 ) 1 1 'iid2 g5 12 i. g3 'ifb6 1 3
fractionally ad vantageou s ending l:tfd 1 lbc6 (White is already lost) 14
for Black, Alekseev -S chekachev, l:.ac 1 (after 14 d5 llkt8 White can kiss
Moscow 199 1 . goodbye to his b-pawn) 14 . . .l:tad 8 ? !
2) 13 g4 ltJc6 14 a3 l:tb8 15 lbd2 (perhaps a touch too sadistic; Black
'ife7 1 6 0-0-0 ? ! (playing with fire; could have cashed in at once with
16 0-0 would be similar to line ' l b' ) the same mini-combination that he
16 . . . a6 1 7 l:.h5 b5 ! (the race is on) 1 8 played on his next move) 15 b3 ( 1 5
cxb5 ( 1 8 l:.dh l b4 1 9 l:.xh6 f5 ! ) d 5 would have saved the pawn al
1 8 . . . axb5 1 9 lbce4 c4 20 lbxg5 f5 ! though Black would still be much
2 1 gxf5 (there 's no time to retreat) better) 15 ... i. xf3 1 6 i.xf3 cxd4 1 7
80 White plays i&.g5
ideas of .. i&.e4, also deserves consid ( l 2 . . . i&.f5 1 3 e4) deserves closer ex
eration . amination.
2) 10 ltJd2 (threatening 1 1 g4) 10 . .. '11b 6!
10 . . . g5 1 1 i&.g3 i&.g6 12 ltJb3 :cs 1 3 No time is wasted in attacking the
:c 1 ltJe4 1 4 ltJxe4 i&.xe4 1 5 i&.d3 most sensitive spot in the enemy
liJf6 1 6 f4 i&.xd3 17 'fixd3 ltJh5 1 8 camp, whilst the trap 10 ltJe4? 1 1
..•
i&.e l e6 1 9 'fie2 ltJf6 20 fxg5 hxg5 2 1 ltJxe4 i&.xe4 1 2 ttJd2 i&.f5 1 3 e4, is
dxc5 dxc5 ( 2 1 . . . ltJe4 ! ? ) 22 e4 ltJd7 avoided.
23 h4 gxh4 24 'fih5 ltJe5 (24 . . .'fic7 ! , 1 1 tt:Ja4
in tending to centralise the black Ugly, but 1 1 'fid2 g5 12 i&.g3 lbe4
queen, is preferable) 25 :d l 'fie8 26 1 3 ltJxe4 i&.xe4 and 1 1 'fi b3 g5 1 2
i&.c3 with some advantage to White, i&.g3 ltJe4 1 3 ltJxe4 i&.xe4 1 4 ltJ<l2
Shrentzel-Enoshi, Tel-Aviv 1 98 8 . i&.g6 both seem to lose a pawn.
White plays .tg5 81
11 fi'a5 17 fi'xb4
12 tiJd2 tlJb6 There is no choice for White as 1 7
13 tlJc3 (D) fi'xe7 fi'xb2 loses material.
13 tlJxb6 fi'xb6 again leaves the 17 ... cxb4
b-pawn in difficulties. Now White 18 tlJb5 ttJxd5 !
hopes that his problems can be 19 .tf3 .td3 !
solved by advancing e4, but Smys 20 .txd5 .txb5
Jov was ready for that one. 21 .txa8 .txn
22 .te4 .ta6
0- 1
Not surprisingly, Pachman denied
S myslov the opportunity to exercise
his legendary technique. A very ele
gant game full of neat tactical ideas.
The moral of the story : don' t play the
S myslov S ystem against Smyslov,
even a 73-year old Smyslov.
Game 1 3
Spassky Fischer
-
s .
. . h6 1 ) Bakic-Mozetic, Yugoslavia
It makes sense to put the question 1 992 continued l S ltJfS? ! i.xc3 + !
to the bishop before committing one 1 6 :xc3 i.xf5 17 exf5 fld4 I S fld2
self in the centre. a5 with advantage to B lack who has
6 i.h4 the far superior minor piece.
Alternative retreats for the bishop 2) lS ltJdS is better and Balde as
are: sesses the position after 1 5 . . . fldS 1 6
1 ) 6 i.f4 ltJc6 7 d5 e5 S i.e3 and 0-0 e6 1 7 ltJe3 a5 l S b5 ltJe7 l 9 ltJg4
here Black has the choice between i.d4 20 ltJh5 ltJg6 as unclear. After a
8 ltJe7 and 8.. ltJd4!? .
... . move like 2 1 i.bl Black can simply
2) 6 i. e3 ltJg4 7 i. c 1 e5 (perhaps support his bishop with 2 l . . . flb6,
7 . . . c5 ! ?) S d5 (S dxe5 should of not fearing 22 liJh(g)f6+ �e7 .
course be met by S . . . ltJxe5) S . . . f5 9 7 ..• gS ! ?
i.e2 ltJf6 10 exf5 gxf5 1 1 i.h5+ ( 1 1 7 e6 is another idea, whereas
•..
1 4 bxc3 dxe5 1 5 0-0, Petrosian to the main line and this was in fact
Torre, Tilburg 1 9S2, and now ac the move order employed in the
cording to Petrosian 1 5 . . . c5 ! would Stein-Geller game given below.
have given Black a clear advantage) 8 i.g3 flaS
1 1 . . . ltJxh5 1 2 flxh5+ �fS 1 3 ltJge2 9 i.d3 (D)
fies 14 ltJg3 ltJa6 1 5 0-0 i.d7 1 6 b4 9 fld2 ltJh5 would not disturb
�g s 1 7 ltbl �h7 I S ltJb5 l%f8 1 9 Black too much.
fixes ltaxeS 20 ltJxa7 i.a4 ! 2 1 i.d2
i.c2 22 libe l i.d3 23 ltfe l e4 112- 112
I.Sokolov-Ivanchuk, Linares 1 995.
I wonder what Senor Rentero had to
say.
6•.• cs
Delaying this advance would give
White the chance to play f4.
7 dS
7 dxcS flaS 8 i.d3 fixes (better
than S . . . dxc5? ! 9 f4) 9 ltJge2 ? ! (9 f3
would allow White to keep his im
portant bishop; even so, after 9 . . . ltJc6 9 ... ltJxe4!
1 0 ltJge2 ltJe5 1 1 i.f2 fla5 Black This combination is the justifica-
would have a comfortable Maroczy tion of Black's play.
Bind) 9 .. gS 10 i.g3 ltJhs 1 1 :ct
. 10 i.xe4 i.xc3+
ltJc6 12 a3 lLJxg3 (a strong case 1 1 bxc3 flxc3+
could be made out for continuing 12 �n fS!
1 2 . . . a5) 13 ltJxg3 i.eS! ? 14 b4 flb6 Black now wins back one of the
and now: white bishops and should remain a
White plays i.g 5 83
marily played to prevent . . . llJe6 fol which do allow White some chances
lowed by . . . i.c5 , but one of the of a nagging edge. Black now threat
reasons I prefer Black in thi s sort o f e ns to gain the bishop pair with
position (I'm not claiming an advan . . .liJf6 (perhaps preceded by . . . h6) so
tage, but I would take the black White's choice is quite limited.
pieces if offered the choice) is his t4 liJd2!
greater king security. Although the The only move. By defending his
queens have been exchanged all the e-pawn White renders the ...llJf6 idea
other pieces remain and with the harmless and at the same time moves
q ueenside quite likely to open at his knight nearer to the more active
some point the white king may yet squares on the queenside. S urpris
find itself uncomfortably pl aced. A ingly often, though, White has ig
good example is the game Lesiege nored Black's threat. For example:
Smirin, Biel IZ 1 993 which contin 1 ) t4 :ct h6 1 5 i.e3 ( 1 5 i.h4 g5
ued 1 7 . . . llJe6 1 8 a3 b6 1 9 �b2 i.b7 1 6 i.g3 4Jf6 is good for Black)
20 g3 �g7 2 1 i.h3 .:tab8 22 �b3 1 5 . . . liJf6 16 i.b3 (White can't allow
i.c8 23 i.c 1 a5 24 i.b2 i.a6 25 lbe2 l 6 . . . llJxd5 so he must seek compli-
�g8 26 llJe l (26 i.xe5 l2Jc5+ 27 cations) 1 6 . . . llJxe4 1 7 .:tc7 i.e6 1 8
bxc5 .:txe5 28 cxb6 .:txb6+ 29 �c3 i.xe6 .:txe6 1 9 .:txb7 .:ta6 20 a3
i.g7 ! gives Black a very strong at liJd6 ! 2 1 .:tc7? ! (it was better to re
tack) 26 ...a4+ 27 �c3 lLJd4 ! 28 liJxd4 tain control of the b-file, even though
88 The Exchange Variation
2 1 .f.tb4 .f.tc6 22 0-0 f5 was still very assures Black of an active game. A
pleasant for Black in the game couple of examples:
Teschner-Fischer, Stockholm IZ 2a) 18 l:tacl �xb2 1 9 .f.tc7 �e6
1 962) 2 1 . . . l:tb8 22 .f.tc2 e4 23 llJd4 20 �xe6 .f.txe6 2 1 .f.txb7 �c3 22
.f.ta4 ! 24 lbc6 l:txb2 25 .f.txb2 �xb2 llJbl llxe4+ 23 'iPf3 .f.tb4! with advan
26 llJxa7 llJf5 with a clear advantage tage to Black, Vanheste-Gallagher,
for Black, Capusciotti-Gallagher, Metz 199 1 .
Forti 1 992 . 2b) 18 llJc4 �e6 1 9 Wf3 �xd5
2) 14 0-0-0 h6 1 5 �e3 ( 1 5 �h4 (it looks risky to give White a passed
l2Jf6 1 6 �xf6 �xf6 is slightly better d-pawn but he doesn' t seem to be
for Black but perhaps the lesser evil) able to keep it) 20 exd5 .f.ted8 2 1
1 5 . . . l2Jf6 1 6 tlJe l ? ! l2Jxd5 1 7 exd5 .f.tad 1 .f.tac8 22 b3 .f.tc5 23 d6 b5 24
�f5 1 8 llJc2 .f.tac8 1 9 .f.td2 .f.tc4 ! and l2Ja5, H .Olafsson-Ehlvest, Erevan
Black was already close to winning 1 9 88, and now I think 24 . . . �f8 !
in Tillmann-Gallagher, Bern 1995. would be good for Black. 25 l2Jb7 is
14 ... tlJcS nothing to worry about on account
14 l2Jb6 and even 14 �f8 are
••• ••. of 25 . . . .f.tc3+ followed by 26 . . . .f.td7 ,
not so bad for Black but the text is whilst 25 d7 .f.tc7 26 l:td5 .f.tdxd7 27
the most active. .f.txb5 .f.tc3+ ! looks extremely good
15 l2Jc4 for Black.
Perhaps not the best as it allows 3 ) 15 0-0-0 l2Je6! (not 1 5 ... lDd3+
Black some tricks based on l2Jxe4 , 16 Wbl l2Jxf2 1 7 .f.tdfl ! and White
while the knight may also get booted wins) 16 i.e3 l2Jf4 17 �xf4 exf4 ( D)
by . . . b5 at some point. The alterna and now White has:
tives are:
1 ) 15 0-0 �e6 and now:
l a) 16 �e3? �xd5 17 �xc5 i.c6
l 8 l2Jc4 .f.ted8 ( 1 8 . . . �xe4 is an inter
esting exchange sacrifice but there is
no need for it) 19 f3 b6 20 �e3 f5
with a clear advantage for Black,
Mtilbach-Gallagher, Bern 1 993 .
l b) 16 �xe6 l2Jxe6 17 �e3 lDd4
l 8 llJb3 ! lbc2 19 .f.tac l llJxe3 20 fxe3
.f.tac8 and despite W hite's ugly cen
tral pawns he should have no trouble
holding the draw. 3a) 18 Wbl �e6! 19 �xe6 .f.txe6
2) 15 We2 l2Je6 16 �e3 l2Jf4+ 20 f3 (20 .f.the l .f.td8) 20 f5 ! with a
••.
fective here) B lack's position is not sive: 10 ifxd8 :xd8 ( 10 . . . ltJxd8 ;!;)
as good as it may seem at fust sight. 1 1 ltJd5 j_e6 ( 1 1 . . . :d7 12 j_a4 ! +)
A couple of examples (D): 1 2 :d t ;!;.
5 .id3 93
gxf5 1 5 .ixf4 exf4 1 6 'A'd2 'A'h4 1 7 then has to decide what to do abou t
llfe l .ie5, Kiselev-Zaitsev, Moscow the pressure on f4 :
1 992 . Here we have a conflict of 1 ) 13 rxe5 (I would certainly be
opinions as B elov considers White to extremely reluctant to play such a
be better whilst Knaak prefers Black. move) 1 3 . . . dxe5 14 .ig5 'A'd6 15
This suggests that the chances are !i:Jb5 'A'd7 16 !i:Jg3? (White inflicts
about equal. serious kingside weaknesses upon
3) 1 0 ltcl a6 1 1 b4 'A'e8 1 2 .ibl himself; better would have been 1 6
!i:Jxe2+ 13 !i:Jxe2 f5 14 exf5 gxf5 15 llael a6 1 7 !i:Jbc3 'A'd6 with an un
f3, Tunik-Fedorov, Minsk 1995 is clear game according to Belov)
assessed as ;t by Belov but Black's 1 6 . .. !i:Jxg3 17 hxg3 a6 18 !i:Jc3 'A'd6
1 0th move looks like the play of an with advantage to Black, Tunik
indecisive man. 10 rs or 10 cS look
••• .•• Shulman, Minsk 1 995.
more to the point. 2) 13 g3 is Tunik' s latest try. Af
4) 1 0 'A'd2! ? deserves an outing ter 1 3 . . . .id7 ( 1 3 . . . exf4 ! ?) 14 ltae l
as this introduces the possibility of a a6 1 5 b3 exf4 1 6 !i:Jxf4 !i:Jg xf4 1 7
later .ig5. gxf4 'A'h4 1 8 .ie2 llf6 1 9 .ixh5
10 'A'd2 rs 'A'xh5 20 !i:Je2 l:g6+ 2 1 !i:Jg 3 'A'h3
1 1 exr5 gxf5 (D) 22 'A'g2 'A'xg2+ 23 <iit x g2 lte8 a
94 5 i.d3
nal and was also slightly concerned queen to go to h4 ) and I didn ' t have
about 1 4 i.xf6 ltJxf6 1 5 g3 !? , but to waste a lot of time worrying about
thi s was probably just an excuse to it.
keep the bishop. I feel vindicated by 17 ••• �h8
the fact that it captured a rook just A useful move as there were some
seven moves later. variations where the h-pawn could
14 i.xe7 be taken with check and others
An understandable decision be where White could profit from my
cause 1 4 i.h4 ltJf5 1 5 i.f2 i.h6 king being on the a2-g8 diagonal.
would be a nerve-racking experience 18 c5 i.g5
for White. I didn't even consider 18... dxcS as
14 ... 'irxe7 this w ould weaken the crucial e
15 'irc2 i.h6 pawn, preferring instead to activate
After 15 i.f6, the bishop would
••• my bishop.
be impeding its own queen. 19 li)e4!?
16 JZ.ael :t7 (D) Just three moves ago I was slowly
After puzzling over my oppo building up my kingside attack, con
nent' s last move for a few moments fident that my opponent was devoid
5 �d3 95
29 ••• .:e s
Avoiding the trap 29 . 1ff6? 30
. .
I'm not sure who first thought of this In the notes below you will also
system but it was quite prominent find a d iscussion of the main line
amongst Hungarian players in the against ltJge2 (5 . . . 0-0 6 liJg3 e5) as
1 960s before disappearing and re this is also quite reasonable for
turning to enjoy a slight renaissance Black.
period in the 1 980s . To spend a cou
ple of tempi manoeuvring a knight to Game 1 6
g 3 (it obviously can't remain on e2 Flear - Gallagher
where it clogs up the whole kingside, San Bernardino 1 991
the one exception being when White
fianchettoes his king's bishop) may 1 d4 liJf6
seem like strange behaviour, but 2 c4 g6
from there the influence it exerts on 3 ltJc3 Jl.g7
the e4- and f5-squares makes it more 4 e4 d6
difficult for Black to achieve his tra S liJge2 (D)
ditional kingside counterplay. Con
sequently, my favoured approach for
B lack's is to initiate queenside pro
ceedings at once, even delaying cas
tling as the tempo saved may be put
to good use on the queenside and an
early h4 by White will be less men
acing. The basic position is arrived at
after the moves 1 d4 liJf6 2 c4 g6 3
4X3 Jl.g7 4 e4 d6 5 ltJge2 a6 6 liJg3
c6 when White has an important de
c ision to make; whether to stop . . . b5
with a4 (which has certain positional S a6
disadvantages after the reply . . . a5), B lack can equally play S c6, the
•••
or to ignore B lack' s queens ide dem choice being dependent on what you
onstration in favour of quick devel play against the Samisch (a variation
opment or attackin g in the centre. beyond the scope of this book, which
The h-pawn plays a very prominent we have transposed into after 6 f3). If
role in this variation and a lot of your variation contains neither an
g ames will see either a quick h4 by early . . . c6 nor an early . . . a6, then you
White or an early . .. h5 by Black. can study the material j ust below on
98 5 !iJge2
Nunn would call a lazy move; Black serious counterplay on the queen
doesn't want to have to calculate the side) 1 1 �g5 �bd7 1 2 iid2 �b6 1 3
consequences of d5 at each tum so 0-0 ( 1 3 l:tc l) 1 3 . . . �h7 ! 1 4 �e3 e6 (it
he prevents it but in doing so he con turns out that it's White who has
demns his bishop to passivity; better problems on the kingside) 1 5 d5 cxd5
was l l . . . �b6, keeping open the op 1 6 �xb5 ( 1 6 exd5 bxc3 17 Wxc3
tion of . . . �e6) 1 2 Wb3 �b6 1 3 l:tfd l �xd5 is good for Black) 1 6 . . . d xe4
h5 1 4 �fl e6 1 5 �c l �fd7 1 6 �e3 1 7 �gxe4? (1 7 a4 d5 is less clear)
�a4 17 lbd2 e5 1 8 �f3 We7 1 9 1 7 . dS 1 8 �g5 ? d4 1 9 l:tfdl e5 and
. .
l:txa8 l:txa8 1 9 � xb5 �d4 20 �d3 nal waste of time, but the point is that
l:tb8 ! 21 �e2 �f8 and Black re Black has now secured outposts for
gained the sacrificed pawn without himself on the queenside - b4 at
relinquishing his positional advan once and the more important c5 -
t age, Remlinger-Hebden, Gausdal square after an eventual . . . e5 .
1992. 8 �e2 0-0
Before moving on, 7 h4 deserves A case can be made out for play
a quick mention. Liardet-Gallagher, ing 8 eS although the most likely
.••
b5 -squares) 17 !l:Ja2 li'b6 1 8 !l:Jc3 is certainly the sort of move that has
li'd8 19 li'bl 'it>h7 ( 1 9 . . . !l:Ja6) 20 b4 a strong unsettling effect.
axb4 2 1 li'xb4 .ih6 22 .ixh6 'it>xh6 16 !i:Jb5! .if8
with an edge for Black, Ionov-Bol 17 .ig5
ogan, USSR Ch 199 1 . 17 lDd.6 .ieS looks excellent for
9 ••• e5! Black so White continues with his
10 dxeS unbalancing campaign.
10 fxe5 dxe5 1 1 d5 li'b6 ! looks a 17 ••. cxb5
little awkward for White 18 cxb5!
10 dxe5 Freeing c4 for his bishop was one
1 1 li'xd8 l:.xd8 of White's main ideas.
12 f5 18 !i:Jb4
White tries to make it difficult for 19 .ixd8 l:.xd8 (D)
B lack to develop his queenside and
doesn ' t allow him u se of the e5-
square but he is, nevertheless, still
balancing on the edge of a positional
prec1p1ce.
. .
12 ••• !l:Ja 6
13 0-0 !i:Jd7
14 .i e3 !i:Jdc5
15 l:.adl .id7 (D)
20 fxg6 fxg6?!
I was bluffed into this anti-posi
tional continuation. After 20 bxg6 •••
In this Chapter we examine a few There are many other moves that
very rare lines. The material is split Black can play but they are likely to
up as follows: transpose to the Classical, not cov
A : 1 d4 lt:Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 l'Dc3 .ig7 4 ered in this book. 6 lt:Jg4 leads to in
•.•
(7 . . . ltJh5 led to very wild play after S WcS ! 19 l0h4 1i'h 3 ! 20 lLlg2 lLJd7 21
i.e3 b5 9 i.xh5 gxh5 1 0 1i'xh5 llJc6 f4 l:.abS 22 1i'e2 l:.b2 23 l:.fbl i.xc3 !
1 l lLlge2 lLlb4 12 <ii'd 2 c5 in Bareev 24 l:.xb2 i.xb2 25 l:.bl i.d4+ 26
Dj uric, Bled 1 9 9 1 ) S i.e3 (S a4? ! i.e3 ? ! (26 <ii' h l h6 !) 26 . .. :es 27
llJc6 9 i.e3 e5 1 0 d5 lLJd4 is good for l:.b3 1i'f5 ! 2S 1i'c4 l:.xe3 ! 29 ltJxe3
Black) S . . . c5 9 d5 b5 ! 1 0 lLlf3 ! ( 1 0 (29 l:.xe3 lLlb6 ! ) 29 . . . 1i'xf4 30 1i'e2
cxb5 axb5 1 1 ltJxb5 ? i. xb2 1 2 l:.bl c4 ! 3 1 l:.a3 c3 ! 32 <ii'g 2 i.xe3 33
1i'a5 + ! and 1 1 i.xb5 i.a6 12 i.xa6 l:.xc3 1i'xg5+ 34 <ii'h 3 (34 <iti'f3 lLle5 +
lLlxa6 1 3 lLlf3 1i'b6 14 1i'e2 l:.fbS 35 <ii'e 4 f5#) 34 . . . i.c5 ! 35 Wes+
with a very good Benko are vari <ii' g7 36 1i'xd7 1i'h5+ 37 <ii'g 2 1i'e2 +
ations given by Lanka) 1 0 . . . ltJb6 ! 1 1 3S <ii'h 3 Wn + 39 <ii'h 4 1i'f6+ 0-1
cxb5 axb5 1 2 i.xb5 i.a6 1 3 1i'e2? Hort-Lanka, Manila OL 1 992.
( 1 3 1i'd3?? loses at once to 1 3 ... c4 ! , 2) 6 h4 ltJc6 (I don' t suppose
1 3 a4 i.xb5 1 4 axb5 l:.xal 1 5 Wxal there is much wrong with 6 . . . c5 or
e6 is very good for Black and 1 3 6 . . . e5 either) 7 i.e3 (7 d5 lLle5 , un
1i' b3 is well met by 1 3 . . . WcS ! , al clear, is better) 7 . . . e5 S d5 lLld4 ! 9
though this is probably the best that lLlh3 (9 i.xd4 exd4 10 1i'xd4 l:.eS 1 1
White can do) (D) 1i'd3 1i'e7 1 2 f3 ltJh5 is good for
Black) 9 . . . c5 1 0 dxc6 bxc6 1 1 ltJg5
d5 ! 1 2 cxd5 cxd5 1 3 exd5 lLlxd5 14
lLlxd5 1i'xd5 with advantage to Black,
Alvarez-Palacios, Seville 1 992.
6
••• es
6 c5 is not a bad move, but as the
••.
10 h4
10 1i°d2 h5 ! ? ( 1 O . lDe8 1 1 h4 f5
. .
1 1 :bl cxb4
12 :xb4 liJb8!? (D)
A grandmasterly move. Black
repositions his knight in order to cre
ate some play against the hanging
pawns. Spiridonov-Hort, Brno 1 975
continued 1 3 h3? ! ltJc6 1 4 :b5 ltJa5
1 5 i.e3 b6 1 6 :b4 i.a6 1 7 d5 ltJg4
1 8 i.g5 fllc7 1 9 liJb5 i.xb5 20 axb5
ltJf6 2 1 i.e3 :xe3 ! 22 fxe3 f//c5 23
:b 1 fllxe3+ 24 �h2 ltJh5 with a
clearly better game for Black.
9 The Trom pows ky
The last ten years or so have seen the all the time. In fact the popularity of
Trompowsky develop into a fairly the Trompowsky is largely due to the
respectable system. Much of the fact that it eliminates the need to
credit for this belongs to English learn masses of theory on the King's
Grandmaster Julian Hodgson who Indian, Nimzo-lndian, Queen's In
for years never played anything else. dian and many other lines. For some
Even in top tournaments where his time Hodgson couldn't even be both
opponents had days to prepare for ered to learn how to play the Queen's
him he still managed to prove that G ambit and started to play 2 i.g5
the Trompowsky can be a dangerous in response to 1 . . d5 . . . which hap
.
ites play i. xf6. White normally re posing back into the game, is an
plies 3 i.f4 and this, along with 3 equally valid move-order.
i. h4 and the eccentric 3 h4 are ex 4 f3
amined in the games below. 4 i.g3 would be an admission of
defeat whilst 4 ti'd3 led to an active
G ame 1 7 game for Black in JokSic-Gallagher,
Bellon W. Watson
- Chiasso 1 99 1 after the moves 4 . . . d5
Hastings 198516 5 f3 gxh4 6 fxe4 dxe4 7 ti'xe4 c5 !
(the initiative is what counts in such
1 d4 lLlf6 positions) 8 dxc5 ltJc6 9 c3 i.h6 1 0
2 i.gS ltJe4 ltJf3 (not 10 ti'xh4? i.c l ! winning
3 i. h4 (D) material; this is an extremely impor
This retreat was once quite popu tant trick which occurs time and time
lar but is now rarely seen. This is no again in this variation) 9 . . . h3 1 0 g4
The Trompowsky 1 13
.i.c I ! I I 'iic 2 .i.e3 I 2 b4 ( 1 2 .i.xh3 opted for 9 ltJa6 and after I 0 'tic4
.•.
'tie7 (as S . . . i.e7 9 'ii h5 looks good ing tried by S peelman, and this may
for W hite it is preferable to sacrifice be a more effective sacrifice since
the c-pawn) 9 'tixc7 and now: White's d-pawn is forced to advance
I a) de la Villa-Gallagher, Alicante if he wants to collect his booty.
I 9S5 continued 9 ltJc6 I 0 ltJc3
... 6 e3 .i.h6
i.g7 I I liJd5 'iixe4 I 2 0-0-0 ltJb4 I 3 The assault on the dark squares
ltJxb4 'tixb4 I 4 c3 'tia4 I 5 e3 'tixa2 commences.
I 6 .i. b5 .i.f6 ! I 7 .i.xd7+ .i.xd7 l S 7 �f2
'tixd7+ �fS I 9 'iid6+ i.e7 20 'tid2 The only way to protect the pawn
:cs 2 I ltJd4 :g6 with quite a good as 7 'iif3 'iib6 is out of the question.
game for Black, but I didn't feel con White has also tried 7 .i.c4, with the
fident enough to repeat this in a later obvious point 7 i.xe3?? S 'ii f3 ,
..•
:d3 would have posed more serious S 'iih5 'tig5 (S . . . .i.xe3 9 'tixc5) 9
problems. 'tixg5 .i. xg5 I O ltJc3 ( 1 0 �f2 cxd4
I b) I n a l ater game, Keitling I I exd4 .i.c I ! ) I O . . . .i. xe3 I I ltJb5
haus-Knaak, Bundesliga I 99 1 Black �dS 12 liJf3 a6 I 3 ltJd6 �e7 I4 e5
114 The Trompowsky
The ' h4 Tromp' , introduced as a calm, is 3 . ..c5 but I have also given a
stopgap between the fading 3 .i. h4 summary of the theory of 3 . . . d5 ,
and the rising 3 .i.f4, has been the w hich may be less dynamic than
subject of much ridicule and laugh 3 . . .c5 but is probably the simplest
ter over the y ears. From a purely way to equalise.
chess point of view it is hard to be 3 cS...
lieve in this line but in practice White 3 dS 4 ltJd2 with several possi
.•.
and White was able to sacrifice a llbl fi'xc3 1 4 llb3 fi'a5 1 5 llxb7 c4
piece for unclear complications after 1 6 @f2 0-0-0 ( 1 6 . . .fi'xa2 ! is best) 1 7
which ' Big Eddie' proved to be no llbl .i.b4 1 8 ltJxc4 ! dxc4 1 9 .i.xc4+
match for a Hodgson in his element, @c7 20 .i.xe6 llhe8 2 1 fi'b3 lld6 22
eventually overstepping the time d5 + llexe6 ! 23 dxe6 lld2+ 24 @g3
limit in a lost position. What made fi'b5 25 llhc l a5? 26 fi'c4 ! fi'xc4 27
this game so memorable though is llxc4 .i.e7 28 llh I @d6 29 llxh7
the reaction of Gufeld to his defeat. @d5 30 llc l .i.a3 3 1 llb l .i.b2 32
For the next hour he remained alone llh2 ! llxh2 33 @xh2 .i.a3 34 f5 gxf5
on the stage, a tragic figure with his 35 gxf5 .i.e7 1 -0.
head clasped in his hands and for the I b) 6 cS 7 g4 (7 dxc5 e6 8 ltJb3
•.•
White a couple of free moves� not 1 1 0-0-0 would give him good play
many players would choose i.d2 for the pawn) 1 1 'ii'b5+ 'ii'd7 1 2 'ii' b7
and h4. However, Hebden now opted 'ii'c8 13 'ii'b 5+ 'ii'd7 14 'ii'b 7 'ii'c 8 15
for S eS?! which is exactly the sort
. •• 'ii' b5+ c6 16 'ii'a4 dxe4 with advan
of reaction that the ' h4 Tromp' lures tage to Black, Hodgson-S alov, Wijk
people into. After 6 dxe5 ltJc6 7 ltJf3 aan Zee 1 993.
i.g4 8 i.g5 i.e7 9 'ii'd2 'ii'd7 10 0-0-0 3 b) 5 e3 h6 6 i.f4 e6 7 g4 i.h7 8
0-0-0, the simple 1 1 e3 (instead of 1 1 ltJxe4 i.xe4 9 f3 i.h7 10 i.d3 i.xd3
'ii'f4? f6 1 ) would have left White on 1 1 'ii'xd3 c5 ! 12 i.xb8 ! ? %txb8 1 3 f4
top. A more natural course for Black cxd4 1 4 exd4 i.d6 15 ltJe2 h5 with a
to follow would have been to play double-ed ged game, Hodgson-Be
. . . e6 and . . . c5 , perhaps even without liavsky, Groningen 1 994 .
. . . i.f5 w hich does rather invite 4 dxcS
White to expand on the kingside. In In his most recent outings with
my opinion this type of 'French' the 'h4 tromp' Hodgson has pre
bishop is often just as well placed in ferred 4 dS, after which there is:
sid e the pawn chain. 1 ) 4 'ii'b6 (risky) 5 lZJd2 ltJxg5 6
...
s on's solitary defeat in this line. with the intention of placing the
White has: bishop on its best diagonal, but also
3a) 5 ltJxe4 i. xe4 6 f3 h6 7 fxe4 with the id ea of preventing any awk
(7 i.f4 is less risky, but after 7 . . . i.h7 ward g6 pawn sacrifices from White)
118 The Trompowsky
be met by 1 3 . . .f6 1 4 gxf6 'ii'x f6) 9 ltJxc5 'ii'c 3+ 1 0 ltJd2 'ii'xc5 is good
l 1 . .. 'ii'e 3+ 1 2 <it'bl e6 13 'ii'c4 d5 1 4 for Black) 7 . . . ltJc6 (7 . . . 'ii' b6 8 ltJbd2
'ii' b 5+ .i.d7 1 5 'ii'x b7 llc8 1 6 llJd4 d5 9 ltJb3 .i.e7 1 0 'ii'd2 l2Jc6 1 1 0-0-0
.i.c5 1 7 :h3 'ii'e5 1 8 llc3 <it'e7 1 9 e4 .i.d7 1 2 'ii'c3 f6 is unclear according
:c7 with a clear advantage for Black, to Timoshenko) 8 'iid3 (8 g6 looks a
Kosic-Kiselev, Yugoslavia 1 993 . little premature as after 8 . . . fxg6 9
1 b) S ltJd2 (this seems the better .i.d3 0-0 White has nothing immedi
option) s ltJaxc5 with a further
.. . ate and moves such as 1 0 ltJc3 or 1 0
branch: <it'e2 are well met by 1 o . ltJb4; 8
. .
1 b l ) 6 ltJ xe4 ltJxe4 7 'ii'd4 'iia 5+ .i.d3 , threatening to play g6, looks
8 c3 ltJxg5 (8 . . . d5 ! ? has been sug quite natural though) 8 . . . 'iib6 9
gested here) 9 hxg5 'ii'xg5 10 e4 'ii'a5 ltJbd2 (9 'ii'b 5 or 9 'ii' b 3 were more
1 1 ltJf3 and somewhat surprisingly solid) 9 . . . 'iix b2 1 0 llbl 'ii'x a2 1 1
White seems to have good play for 'ii'c 3 ( 1 1 llxh7 is better), To�i<:-Vara
the pawn. For example: l l d 6 1 2 ... vin, Alushta 1 994, and now Black
e5 ! dxe5 1 3 ltJxe5 .i.e6 1 4 b4 ! 'ii'a4 failed to play the decisive 1 1 ...'ii'xbl + !
1 5 :d 1 with a very strong attack 1 2 ltJxbl .i.b4.
for White, Depasquale-Lanka, Mel 3) 4 lLJc6 5 llJd2 ltJxc5 !? 6 e4 d6
..•
I recall that Hodgson once derived l2Jf8 ! (Black now has the better pros
great pleasure from the rook ma pects) 1 9 c4 a5 20 a3 axb4 2 1 axb4
noeuvre 7 lth4!? l2Jc6 (7 . . . 'flxc5?? 8 'fld7 22 l2Jc3 l:a3 23 l2Jdb5 ?? (the
l:c4) 8 llc4 . N ogueiras and Estevez wrong one) 23 . . . l:xb3 0- 1 .
now give 8 . . . .ig7 9 c3 l2Je5 1 0 l2Jb3 8... .ig7
'fie? 1 1 llh4 a5 1 2 a4 as good for 9 e3 l2Jc6
White (Black won ' t get his pawn 10 l2Jb3 'ft6
back), but why not 8 . . . liJe5 when the 1 1 a4 d6
consistent 9 llc3 .ig7 Jooks good for 12 a5 'ilic7
Black? 13 lla4
7 ••.
'fixes (D) We've already seen the manoeu
vre llh4-c4, and now Hodgson at
tempts to treat us to the manoeuvre
l:a4-h4 . People usually talk about
open files for rooks, but sometimes
open ranks can be just as effective.
Take a look at the splendid game
Karpov-Hort, Moscow 197 1 for con
firmation (beyond the sc ope of this
book, I'm afraid).
13 ..• .id7
14 'flat! ?
White's imagination is working
8 l2Jgf3 overtime. With the a-pawn rein
8 l2Je4 'fies (perhaps there was no forced llah4 is now a serious threat,
need to encourage White's next move) hence Nunn's reaction, liquidating
9 l:h4 .ig7 10 l2Jf3 'flaS 11 b4 'flc7 the h-file pressure.
12 llcl 0-0!? 1 3 e3 d6 14 .ic4 lLJd7 14 .0 hS
lS .ib3 b6 16 �d2 .ib7 17 'flhl l S gxh6 l:xh6
(one of the few white moves that I 16 llxh6 .ixh6 (D)
managed to predict in this game)
17 llfc 8 and now:
.••
1 d4 lDf6
2 �gS lDe4
3 �f4 cS (D)
bishop has taken three moves to get 1 2 1i'e5+ �f8 ( 1 2 . . . �d8 1 3 .id2
nowhere, but Black's knight is sus l:e8 14 1i'g5 ! +) 1 3 a3 .ib7 14 axb4 !
pended in mid-air and his queen is li'xa l 1 5 lDge2 1i'a6 1 6 ltJ<l4 with
al so exposed on b6. Black must act excellent compensation for the ex
vigorously to prevent White from change. 9 i.. cS would have been
...
taking over the centre which, for another try when both 1 0 .i xc 4
some reason, he often fails to do in 1i'b4+ 1 1 lDd2 .ixe3 1 2 1i'e2? ! 0-0
practice. We are going to examine a and 10 lDc3 0-0 1 1 �f2 l:e8 look
couple of possibilities: fine for Black but I ' m not sure what
4a) S e6 6 f3 (D) and now:
... to do after 10 �f2 ! as 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1
.i xc4 l:e8 1 2 1i'b3 looks insuffi
cient.
4a2) 6 li'aS+ 7 c3 lDf6 8 e4 d6
.••
More logical is 8 e3 (D) after 'ii' xd5 17 l:.xd5 ll:\b4 1 8 Ci:Jc7+ �f8
which Black has the choice between 1 9 l:.d2 l:.d8 20 �e2 l:.xd2+ 2 1
countering in the centre with 8 . . . e6 �xd2 f5 ! 22 a3 Ci:Jc6 23 �c3 �f7 led
or evacuating his queen by 8 . . . 'ii'b4 . to approximate equality in Morta
zavi-Howell, British Ch 1 992) 1 4
ll:\c7 'ii'x a2 15 c4 'ii'b 3 1 6 f3 .ih4+
17 .ig3 .if6 1 8 �f2 Ci:Jc6 l 9 ll:\xa8
.ixa8 20 .ie2 ll:\a5 2 1 'ii' xd7 ll:\xc4
22 l:.d3 'ii'a2 23 'ii'c7 ll:\b2 24 l:.d7 c4
25 �fl , Klinger-Dimitrov, Velden
1 993, and now 25 . . .'ii' b l + 26 .ie l c3
27 .ic4 c2 28 l:.xf7 'ii'xe l+ 29 �xel
cl 'ii' + and 30 ... 'ii'x c4 would have
won for Black.
l e) 9 ll:\e2 ! ? 'ii' x d5 1 0 'ii' x d5
exd5 l l ll:\c3 appears to give White
1 ) 8 e6, with the following pos
..• enough play for the pawns. Klinger
sibilities: Akopian, Palma 1 989 continued
la) 9 c4 e5 (it's interesting that l 1 . . . d6 1 2 ll:\xd5 �d8 1 3 0-0-0 .ie6
Black waits for c4 before blocking l 4 ll:\c3 ll:\d7 (Black cannot save his
the centre; White no longer has ac pawn as 1 4 . . . �d7 is strongly met by
cess to the square c4 and the scope of 15 ll:\e4 d5 1 6 c4 ! when 1 6. . . �c6 1 7
his light-squared bishop is also re ll:\c3 dxc4 loses to 1 8 l:.d8) 15 .ie2
duced) 1 0 f3 'ii'f5 l l .id3 ?? 'ii'f6 1 2 f6 1 6 .if3 l:.b8 17 ll:\e4 ( 1 7 .ixd6
.ig3 e4 ! and White lost a whole .ixd6 1 8 l:.xd6 �e7 is fine for Black)
piece in Hodgson-Chandler, Hast l 7 . . . ll:\e5 1 8 ll:\xd6 .ixd6 1 9 .ixe5
ings 1 99 1 . fxe5 20 l:.xd6+ �e7 2 1 l:.hd 1 l:.hd8
1 b) 9 dxe6 'ii' xe6 (9 . . . dxe6 1 0 22 l:.xd8 :xd8 23 l:.xd8 �xd8 24
.ixb8 ! l:.xb8 l l .ib5+ �e7 1 2 0-0-0 .i xb7 .ixa2 25 �b2 .ie6 26 .ia6
'ii'd 5 1 3 'ii'c 3 gives White a very 1f2- 1h.
strong attack while 9 . . . fxe6 weakens 2) 8 'ii'b4 9 c3 'ii'a5 (D) and
...
and White had nothing to show for llJxe7 ( 1 4 . . . dxe4 15 llJg5 is danger
his pawn in Adams-Gelfand, Tilburg ous) 1 5 exd5 0-0 1 6 d6 llJc6 17 i.c4
rpd 1 993 (although White did man ( 17 d7 i.xd7 1 8 li'xd7 l::t fe8 + allows
age to draw). It should be noted that Black a strong attack) 1 7 . . . li'a4 1 8
the actual move order of this game .ld5 .le6 1 9 i.e3 .lxd5 20 li'xd5
was 8 llJf3 d6 9 e3 li'b4 1 0 c3 li'a5 . li'a6 ! 2 1 d7 llJe7 22 li'xc5 llJf5 and
2a 12) 12 i. bS + llJd7 (possibly in this highly unclear position the
I 2 . . . .ld7 is better since 1 3 .lxd7+ players chickened out and agreed to
llJxd7 14 l::txb7 llJb6 is not an option a draw.
for White; I actually avoided this line 2b2) The simple 13 llJxe7 looks
•••
2a2) l l .ld3 g6 1 2 l::tc l i. g7 1 3 proach here but I felt that Black's su
h4 ! ? .lg4 1 4 h5 .lxf3 ( 14 . . . i.xh5 1 5 perior pawn structure would give
lDh2 f5 1 6 llJ f l ! followed by llJg3 him the better chances in any ending,
didn' t appeal to me) 15 gxf3 llJd7 1 6 even if White won his pawn back.
126 The Trompowsky
Of course Black is completely that White has fair play for his pawn;
winning but, in comparison with but if Black had flicked in 4 . .. 1Wa5+,
I 8 . . . l:tc8, White is now able to get his then the move . . . 1Wc3 would have
kingside out and present the oppo captured a second pawn.
nent with some technical difficulties. Another variation which Black's
The remaining moves were 2 1 .i.f4 queen check avoids is 4 . .. lLJf6 5 dxc5,
lLJe5 22 lLJh3 l:tac8 23 e4 .i.c2 24 which usually leads to a very sharp
.i.e2 f5 ! ? (I was quite willing to re Sicilian type position - perhaps not
turn some of my material advantage to everyone 's taste. A drastic exam
to regain the initiative and simplify ple is Landenbergue-Roder, Bern
the position) 25 lLJg5 ! fxe4 26 lLJe6 1993: 5 . . .�6 (5 ...1Wa5+ 6 lLJc3 1Wxc5
exf3 27 gxf3 l:txf4 28 l'LJxf4 i.f5 29 7 e4 d6 8 1i'd2 a6 is an alternative
l:td l ? (the last chance was 29 lLJe6, way for Black to play) 6 lLJc3 lLJxc5
although 29 . . . <j;(f7 30 f4 lLJg6 should 7 e4 d6 8 1i'd2 i.d7 9 0-0-0 1i'a5 1 0
still be winning for Black) 29 . . . l:tc2 <j;; b 1 ltd8 ?? 1 1 lLJd5 ! 1-0.
30 h4 <j;(f7 3 1 l:te l a6 32 lLJe6 <j;; f6 33 5 c3 lDr6
f4 lLJg6 34 h5 lLJe7 35 .i.d l ? l:tc l + 6 dS
36 <j;; b2 l:tbl + 37 <j;;a 3 lLJxd5 38 tLJd4 6 lLJd2 is a major alternative, em
lLJb6 39 lLJb3 lLJc4+ 40 <j;; b4 lLJb2 0- 1 ployed recently by S alov, Adams
and Hodgson amongst others. After
Game 20 6 cxd4 7 lLJb3 1i' b6 (7 . . . 1Wf5 ! ? is a
•••
available to White) 6 . . . 1Wxb2 7 tLJd2 ably a l ittle better for White ; prac
1i'c3 has been reached on several oc tice suggests that he can transform
casions and the general consensus is his slight lead in development into a
128 The Trompowsky
material with . . . �c6 and I can't see lt:Jc3 e6 1 2 l:tc 1 l:tc8 ( 1 2. .. �e7 1 3
anything convincing for White, e.g. : lt:Jb5 i s good for White and 1 2 . . . a6 1 3
1 b43 1 ) 14 l:tcl �b4+ 15 �f2 lt:Ja4 ! ? ii'b4+ 1 4 lt:Jd2 foil owed by
l:txa2 1 6 l:tc7 + �d6 with good play a3 and b4 should also give White an
for Black. edge) 1 3 g4 �g6 1 4 h4 h6 15 �f2
l b432) 14 � cs �xc5 1 5 dxc5 1i'd8 1 6 �b5 �d6 1 7 lt:Je2 0-0 1 8
�c6 16 b4 and now both 16 lhJ and
..• lt:Jc5 �xc5 1 9 l:txc5 ii'b6 20 �xc6
16 d4 look very good for Black.
.•• l:txc6 2 1 l:txc6 1i'xc6 22 g5 hxg5 23
1 b433) 14 a4 �b4+ 15 cat>f2 �c6 hxg5 lt:Jh7 24 1i'b3 ;t Hodgson-Wojt
1 6 a5 lbd7 1 7 l:tc l + cat>d6 1 8 �c7+ kiewicz, Rakvere 1 993 .
'3ie7 and Black wins back his pawn 2a22) 9 lt:Jc6 1 0 lt:J e2 e5?! (the
..•
course blameless for the fact that I .i.c8 25 ltJce4 .i.e6 with a level posi
fai led to win my game against For tion.
ster. 2b2) I believe that Hodg son was
2b) 8 e6! 9 .i.d2 (one of the main
••• more concerned about 17 . liJc2+!?.
..
here this sacrifice, thanks to . . . 'ii'a5 +, 2b) 11 �bS d6 and now there are
involves throwing in the c-pawn as two possibilities:
well. After 7 . . . 'ii'x b2 8 ltJd2 'ii' xc3 9 2bl ) 12 � c4 e6 1 3 'ii'c 2 b5 (the
�c4 d6 10 ltJe2 'ii'a5 White has a se line 1 3 . . . �d? 1 4 �c l ltJe5 1 5 �b2
rious lead in development but Black 1Vxb2 l 6 'ii'x b2 ltJxc4 1 7 'iVxb? ltJb6
is solid and two pawns ahead. I, my followed by . . . �e7 and . . . 0- 0 also
self, have played this position with looks good for Black) 14 �xb5 �d7
White (a long time ago) in several 1 5 �c l l:tb8 1 6 ltJa3 l:txb5 ! ? (other
quickplays but without success. moves such as 1 6 . . . ltJe5 or l 6 . . . �e7
White should probably now play 1 1 might be even better, but the text is a
a4 to prevent . . . b5 and l l ... g6 would good example of the sort of tactics
be a sensible reply. that are available to Black in his at
2) 7 'ii'd2 is the move White tempt to extricate his queen) 17 ltJxb5
would like to play, but it does allow ltJb4 ! with advantage to Black.
7 ltJxdS 8 'ii'xdS 'ii'x b2 9 'ii'b3
.•• 2b2) 12 ltJe2 �e6 1 3 �xc6+ bxc6
'ii'xa l after which Black has won the 1 4 'ii' b7 l:tc8 1 5 ltJc l g6 (Black sim
exchange and two pawns but got his ply plans . . . �g7, . . 0-0 and . . . l:tb8)
.
even l l 1//d6!?.
...
10 ... 0-0
10 �xf4 1 1 l2Jxf4 1//d6 1 2 1//e2+
•..
other idea.
17 •.• 'iieS
18 ltJc3 ltJxdS!
19 'iixdS
On 1 9 l:tcl, 19 tt:Je3 looks goo d
••.
. . . a6 ensures that even more lines with 23 l:the 1 to follow and 20 l:ta4
••.
25 liJh5 llxe2 and Black has a much lla7 29 b6 and 26 �b7 27 lie? �g6
•••
better version of the game as he has a 28 llxb7 �xh5 29 a4 are very good
square on d7 for his knight and he for White.
has retained his h-pawn. 27 llc7 f4+
3c) 23 1i'd3 1i'xe2 (23 . . . 1i'e5+ 24 28 �b3 g4+!
�f2 liJd7 is also good) 24 llhe l 29 �b4!
1i'xe l + 25 llxe l llxe l and Black's 29 fxg4 �xg2+ gives Black a dan
material advantage should be suffi gerous f-pawn and 29 �xg4 llxg2+
cient to win the game. 30 �xf4 lla4+ allows him to activate
23 1i'f4! his pieces.
Forced because 23 libel loses to 29
•••
gxf3
23 .. Jle4 and 23 .ld3 to 23 . . . d5 24 30 llxb7
1i' b3 (24 1i'c3 lla4) 24 . . . 1i'e5+ 25 Better than 30 liJxf4, which w ould
�t2 1i'd4+ . leave White fighting for a draw after
23 ••• 1i'xf4+ 30 . . . lle4 3 1 llxb7 llxf4+ 32 �g3
Black too has no choice since llf8 33 gxf3 lla3.
23...1i'xe2 24 llhe l 1i'xe l + 25 llxe l 30 ... fxg2
llxe l 26 1i'c7 .ld5 27 liJf4 is out of 31 liJxf4 llf2
the question. 32 tl)xg2!
24 liJxf4 gS Otherwise ... llf 1 wins.
25 liJxhS llxe2 32
••. llxg2
26 libel (D) 33 llcl !
136 The Trompowsky
The Torre Attack is one of the most playing a very quick . . . c5 , but as this
solid systems in this book and a is not our intention it will merely
popular choice for those who wish to lead to a transposition of moves.
avoid anything resembling a theo 4 •.• 0-0
retical battle (for a variety of reasons, It's too early for Black to declare
but a lack of time for the amateur and his hand in the centre as, depending
a lack of the work ethic for the on the white set-up, he can strike
grandmaster are the most common) . with either his d-, c-, or e-pawn.
After the moves 1 d4 l2Jf6 2 l2Jf3 g6 3 5 e4
.i.g5 .i.g7 White usually plays 4 5 c3, actually White's most popu
l2Jbd2 intending to play e4. Then af lar choice, is the subject of the next
ter 4 . . . 0-0, 5 e4 is not very highly game.
thought of because of 5 . . . d5 ! (see 5 e3 is extremely passive but has
Game 2 1 ) so it is better for White to its supporters (usually pretty rock
wait with 5 c3. Then Black can solid characters). After 5 d6 (D) we
•.•
choose between the solid 5 . . . d5 and consider various moves by the king's
the more dynamic 5 . . . d6, which after bishop, but not 6 c3 which will just
6 e4 actually transposes to the Pirc transpose to one of the other lines. In
Defence. Black then has the choice of each case Black plays for . . . e5 , sup
playing for . . . e5 (6 . . .'iie 8, 6 . . . l2Jbd7 ) ported by ... l2Jbd7 and . . . 'iie 8, which
or playing 6 . . . c5 , which is the course seems to be the best reaction when
I am recommending and which re White has played e3 . This line can be
cently received the PCA World annoying to meet in a must-win situ
Champion's seal of approval. The ation, but then that's life.
details are to be found in Game 22.
Game 2 1
Bogdanovich - Cvitan
Liechtenstein 1 994
1 d4 l2Jf6
2 l2Jf3 g6
3 .i.gS .i. ,;T
4 l2Jbd2
Sometimes White plays 4 c3 (or
even 3 c3) to dissuade Black from
138 The Torre Attack
holds no hardship for Black but is grandmaster who would take the
better than the text which leads to big white pieces, given the choice.
problems on the d- file) 1 1 . . . :dS ! 1 2 12 .•• b6
0-0-0? (suicide; 1 2 0-0 is met by The bishop clearly belongs on the
1 2 . . . .txd4 1 3 b4 .txc3 !, so White long diagonal and it is worth talcing a
should probably try the ugly 1 2 b4 little bit of time to develop it effec
although 1 2 . . . 'it'b6 ! looks like a good tively.
reply) 1 2 . . ..txd4 1 3 cxd4 'it'xa2 1 4 13 :tel eS!
d 5 .tg4 (threatening . . . :tcS+) 1 5 More to the point than 13 :teS, ...
s lbbd2 d6
S dS is an important alternative
•..
ing move for Black to face) 7 . . . c5 S 3b) 9 b4 (with his rock-solid cen
i.d3 i.a6 9 i.xa6 lbxa6 IO 0-0 'fie? tre it's logical for White to expand on
I I 'fie2 'fib7 1 2 h3 :res I 3 lLJe5 ;!;; the wing) 9 c6 with several tries for
•.•
ing for White whilst other moves I 9 fih6 e4 20 ltJxe4 ! when he gets
are sli ghtly frowned upon because mated and play instead 18 r.itg7 as
•.•
White ' s d-pawn may become weak, I 9 f/f5 is simply met by I 9 .. . lth8.
144 The Torre Attack
prevented and Black has the option outcome is equality (and in addition,
of . . . ltJf4 or . . . g5 . Yusupov had to contend with the in
13 ltJc4 i.e6 timidating flourish that Kasparov
14 ltJe3 must have played 1 8 . . . b5 with).
According to Stohl White should 19 c4
have played 14 a4 to prevent Black's 20 .:edl ltJh5
queenside expansion. He then gives 21 i.g3 ll\xg3
1 4 . . . ltJf4 1 5 i.fl g5 1 6 i.g3 i.xc4 22 hxg3 'iib6
1 7 i.xc4 ltJe5 1 8 ltJxe5 i.xe5 =. Black has some advantage as his
14
••. llJf4 bishop has more mobility and more
15 i.n llJe5 targets than White's. These sort of
16 ltJxe5 i.xe5 opposite-coloured bishop positions
17 ltJc4 i.xc4 are extremely unpleasant to defend,
18 i.xc4 b5! (DJ although Yusupov did a very good
job until he cracked up just before
the end.
23 a4! a6
23 i.xg3 24 axb5 allows White
•..
counterchances.
24 axb5 axb5
25 .:xa8 .:xa8
26 g4 e6
27 i.e2 .:a2
2s �n i.b8
Intending . . . i.a7.
29 'ifd2
19 i.n Avoiding 'ifd8+.
1 9 i.xb5 c4 (threatening . . . ltJd3) 30 g5 h5
20 i.g3 .:ab8 (20 . . . ltJd3 2 1 i.xe5 31 g3 i.e5
'ifxe5 22 i.xc4 ) 2 1 a4 ltJd3 22
= 32 'ifd7 .:as
i.xe5 'ifxe5 23 .:e3 ltJxb2 ! 24 'ifxb2 33 'ife7
a6 is about equal according to Stohl, Fta�nik points out that it would be
bu t Yusupov must have felt that this difficult for Black to increase his
line was too risky. There are many slight edge after 33 'ifd2. One idea
other dangerous ideas lurking just would be to try . . . .:hs and ...h4.
beneath the surface, 21. .:d6 to
•• 33 .•• .: a7
mention just one. I think the vast ma 34 'ife8?! (DJ
jority of players would have reacted White p laces his queen in a pre
like Yusupov, accepting a slight dis carious position when, instead, 34
advantage rather than heading into .:d7 .:xd7 35 'ifxd7 would have
complications where it is easy to given him a tenable ending.
drop a piece and the best p ossible 34 ••• i. d6!
The Torre Attack 147
This chapter deals with all the lines early e4, though; Dominguez-Cv i
where White plays an early .if4 (ex tan, Novi Sad OL 1 990 continued
cept for the B arry Attack, Chapter 4 . . . 0-0 (after 4 llJbd2) 5 e4 d6 6 .id3
1 4). Game 23 examines an early c4 (6 .ie2 llJbd7 7 c3 llJh5 8 .ie3 e5 9
by White whereas Game 24 concen fic2 fie8 1 0 llJgl f5 1 1 g4 fx g4 1 2
trates on the more cautious c3 . The .ixg4 llJf4 1 3 .if3 exd4 1 4 cxd4 c5
latter is a favourite amongst those gave Black good play in Quinteros
who disregard opening theory or Uhlmann, Leningrad 1 973, although
those who wish to bore you out of it has to be admitted that White lost
your mind. Against both c3 and c4 I his head a little) 6 . . . c5 ! (Black finds a
am recommending that Black plays nice way of increasing the effect of
for . . . e5, which is more attractive . . . e5) 7 c3 cxd4 8 cxd4 e5 ! 9 .ie3
here than in the previous chapter as exd4 1 0 .ixd4 ( 10 llJxd4 llJg4)
when . . . e7 -e5 is achieved it will gain 1 0 . . . llJc6 1 1 .ie3 d5 ( I l . . . llJg4 1 2
time hitting the bishop on f4 (admit .i g5 f/b6 looks like an alternative
tedly Black sometimes has to play idea) 1 2 0-0 .ig4 1 3 .ig5 .ixf3 14
. . .'ife8 and ... fie7 in order to achieve llJxf3 dxe4 15 .ixf6 fixf6 1 6 .ixe4
. . . e5 ) . The white bisho p usually fixb2 17 .:t.bl fixa2 1 8 .:t.xb7 .:t.fd8
drops back to h2 from where it can 1 9 .:t.d7 llJd4 ! (otherwise the game
either play a pivotal role in a white would peter out to a draw) 20 .:t.xd4
queenside attack or find itself com .ixd4 2 1 llJxd4 .:t.ac8 22 fib3 fixb3
pletely out of play. Obviously we 23 llJxb3 %lc3 24 llJa5 .:t.dc8 and
shall be trying to bring about the lat B lack eventually won this favour
ter. able endgame.
4 ... d6 (D)
Game 23 It's too early to chase the bishop
Yusupov - Thkmakov as after 4 llJhS 5 .ie5 f6 6 g4 !
.•.
transposed to Sitanggang-Tkachev,
Djakarta 1 994, whose actual move
order (I d4 ibf6 2 c4 g6 3 lDc3 i.g7
active game for Black, Lopushnoi 4 ibf3 d6 5 h3 0-0 6 i.f4 c5 7 d5 :es
Bologan, Kazan 1 995 . 8 e3) is not examined elsewhere in
2) 1 1 d S (this looks more testing) this book. The game continued 8 . . . e6
l I . . . ibd7 1 2 0-0 ibf6 1 3 tbc4 h5 1 4 9 dxe6? ! (as White has no intention
tbe3 �f8 (Black didn ' t play . . . i.h6 of grabbing the hot pawn on d6 he
at once on account of 15 i. xh5+ might have settled for 9 i.e2, when
i.xf4 1 6 'ifa4+) 1 5 ibd2 i.h6 1 6 g3 9 . . . exd5 1 0 cxd5 a6 1 1 a4 tbe4 !?
i.h3 1 7 .:t.e l hxg 3 ( 1 7 . . . .:t.gS ! ?) 1 8 would be an interesting way for
fxg3 h4 with unclear p l ay in Rivas Black to continue) 9 . . . i. xe6 I 0 i.e2
Romero, Leon 1 995. d5 (of course) 1 1 0-0 h6 1 2 lbb5
5 ... 0-0 tba6 1 3 ibd2 .:t.e7 1 4 i.g3 .:t.d7 1 5
6 i. e2 'ifa4 lbb4 1 6 a3 tbc6 1 7 i.f3 d4 1 8
6 c3 and 6 i.c4 are considered in exd4 ibxd4 1 9 ibxd4 .:t.xd4 with ad-
the next game whilst the immediate vantage to Black.
6 c4 is very rarely played. It does, 6•.• ibbd7 (D)
however, pose us a slight problem as
Black will be unable to transpose
into the main line (White will play
tbc3 next move to prevent . . . tbe4).
One possibility is to play 6 tbe4! ? ..• ,
lDxe5 1 0 lDxe5 lDe4 1 1 "flxd8 l:xd8 turned sour for White: 8 "fld3 f5 9
1 2 lDd3 gives Black good play for l:d l e6 1 0 c4 b6 1 1 llk3 i.b7 1 2
the pawn; 1 2 . .. l:xd3 is one possibility b4 ? ! e5 1 3 i.h2 lDxf2 ! 1 4 �xf2 e4
while 1 2 .. . i.e6 is another) 9 ttlli5 !
••• and Black was much better.
(D) and now: 8 c4
8 c3 transposes to the next game.
8 •.. e5
9 i.h2 ltJe4
This seems to be the best move.
9 "i'le7 is quite often played but, in
••.
two trapped pieces and emerge with b8 diagonal, but it's the only sensible
the advantage. way to maintai n the tension in the
7
•.• "fies centre) 1 1 b4 ( 1 1 c5 ! ?) and now :
B lack aims to play . . . e5, more l a) 1 1 b6 1 2 c5 ! bxc5 1 3 bxc5
•.•
logical than . . . c5 once . . . 4Jbd7 has dxc5 14 lDxe5 i.b7 15 lDc4 l:fd8 1 6
been played. 7 l:e8 doesn't help but
•.• "i'lb3 with a pleasant game for White,
7 llJe4!? is certainly worthy of at
••• Bellon-Tai, European Club Ch 1984.
tention as Black may be able to save lb) 1 1 exd4 12 exd4 ( 1 2 lDxd4)
...
a tempo on the main line, e.g. after 8 1 2 ... d5 1 3 c5 llle4 ! 14 l:c l ( 14 lDxe4
lDbd2 lDxd2 9 "i'lxd2 e5 1 0 i.h2 dxe4 1 5 i.d6 "flf6 is fine for Black)
"fie? Black has achieved . . . "fie? in 1 4 . . . f5 1 5 l:el l:f6 ! ? 1 6 b5 l:e6 17
one go. Other tries don't look too bxc6 b xc6 18 i.fl h6 ( 1 8 . .. 4Jdxc5
convincing for White either. 8 i.d3 1 9 4Jxd5) 19 "i'lb3 ! liJdf6 (Black
should be met by 8 . . . f5 whilst the wasn't keen on allowing 20 llJe5 but
one game rve seen with 7 . . . ltJe4, the d5-square needed bolstering;
Ehrke-Volke, Munich 1 992, quickly both l 9 . . . 4Jg5 and l 9 . . . �h7 would
The London System 151
mentioning Torben S0rensen's idea, sible improvement and this does in
9 ttJhs. After 10 dxe5 ( 1 0 0-0 and
••. deed seem to be the case although
1 0 g4 are clearly options) 10 . . . dxe5 Black must still take care, e.g . 15
1 1 liJb5 \i'd8 1 2 g4 llJhf6 1 3 llJxe5 dxeS ( 1 5 dxc5 llJxc5) and now:
llJe4 1 4 llJd3 'ii'h 4 1 5 i.f3 llJdc5 1 6 2a) 15 dxeS?! 1 6 .J:r.d5 llJb6 (per
•••
i.xe4 llJxe4 1 7 'ii'f3 i.d7 ! 1 8 llJxc7 haps 1 6 . . . b6 but Black is very tied
( 1 8 'ii'xe4 i.c6) 1 8 . . . f5 ! 1 9 llJxa8 down after 1 7 l:ifd l ) 1 7 .J:r.xe5 ! (bu t
i.c6 Black had excellent attacking not 1 7 .J:r.xc5 ? llJa4 ! ) 1 7 . . . i.xe5 1 8
chances in Fedder-T. S0rensen, Co i.xe5+ 'iti>g8 1 9 .J:r.d 1 with tremen
penhagen Ch 1 992. dous compensation in return for the
10 liJbd2 exchange.
152 The London System
allows White some advantage after kov points out that White could have
17 l:.fd l b6 1 8 1fa4 ! ( 1 8 l:.xd6 tlJxc4 then played 1 7 i.e5 ! followed by f4.
1 9 i.xc4 i.xc4 20 l:.d7 l:.fd8 ! is OK 17 exf4 g4
for Black), e.g. 1 8 . . . i.d7 19 'ifb3 18 hxg4
i.c6 20 l:.xd6 tDxf3+ 2 1 i.xf3 i.xf3 White could have reopened the
22 gxf3 l:.ad8 23 l:.d5 and Black diagonal for his bishop at once with
doesn' t have a great deal in return 18 f5! ?, when Tukmakov considers
for his pawn. 1 8 . . . gxh3 1 9 g4 llJe8 ! , intending to
2b2) But the solid 16 llJf7 ! 17
•• . play 20. . . h5, as unclear.
l:.fd l l:.d8 will make it very difficult 18 ..• llJxg4
for White to improve his position. 19 i.xg4
Black, on the other hand, can de There was little choice, e.g. 19
velop his queen's bishop (probabl y i.g3 e3 ! and 19 lbc2 llJxh2 20 'iii> xh2
on b7) and attack c3 with . . . 'ii'f6. i.h6 ! 2 1 g3 l:.xf4 ! .
Somebody good (it might have been 19 •.• i.xg4 (DJ
Bronstein) once commented that f7
is the perfect square for a knight in
the King's Indian.
10 llJxd2
11 'ii'xd2 e4!?
12 ltJel 1fe7
13 ltJc2 f5
14 b4 g5
The position demands that White
attacks on the queenside and Black
on the kingside, as is so often the
case in the King's Indian.
15 c5 ltJf6 20 .J:.ael dxc5
16 ltJa3 (DJ 20 l:.ad8! would have been bet
• .•
9 ..•
Wle7 23 dxc5 l:tb8 24 lDa6 i.xa6 25 i.xa6
10 a4 (D) l:td8 with advantage to Black, De
noth-Gallagher, Chiasso 1 992.
1 1 lDrd2 l:te8
12 c4
12 a5 a6 1 3 b4 lDf8 1 4 lDa3 h5 1 5
b5 lD8h7 1 6 c4 lDg5 1 7 'iib 3 h 4 1 8
bxa6 bxa6 1 9 l:tac 1 i.e6 gave Black
quite a good attacking position in
J.Garcia-Vaganian, Dubai OL 1 986.
12 ..• lDf8
13 lDc3 hS
A standard move in such posi
tions. Black can now defend his e
10 .•. e4! ? pawn with ... i.f5 without having to
Black stakes his future on a king worry about g4 and he can also re
side attack but in doing so liberates deploy his knight on f8 to g5 via h7.
the bishop on h2 and allows White a 14 l:tcl
free hand on the queenside. Less 14 iLJdS? just loses a pawn after
boat-burning alternatives are: 1 4 . . . lDxd5 1 5 cxd5 'iig 5 with a dou
1 ) 10 &4 1 1 lDfd2 lDxd2 1 2
..• ble threat to h3 and d5.
lDxd2 f5 1 3 :C l �h8 1 4 a5 a6 with a 14 •.• c6
more or less level game, A.Hoffman 15 as tlJSh7
Epishin, St Barbara 1 992. 16 l:te l i.rs
2) 10 &8 is another method of
..• 17 Wla4 a6
preparing kingside play. A.Hoffman 18 i.fi (D)
C Foisor, Zaragoza 1 992 continued
1 1 a5 ( 1 1 c4 f5 l 2 lDc3 c6 1 3 'iic2 g5
is given by Bangiev) 1 1 ... �h8 1 2 a6
b6 1 3 i.b5 c5 1 4 lDa3 llJc7 1 5 i.xd7
i.xd7 1 6 dxe5 d5 ! 1 7 'iie 2 i.c8 1 8
lDc2 i.d7 1 9 lDa3 i.c8 and White
should have agreed to a repetition.
3) 10 �h8 1 1 lDa3 (perhaps 1 1
•.•
c4) l 1 . . . lDe8 1 2 b4 f5 1 3 b5 g5 1 4 c4
f4 (Black is not so much playing for
mate as to lock the bishop on h2 out
of the game; once this is achieved he
will be quite happy to counter on the White has now achieved his opti
queenside) 1 5 lDc2 h6 1 6 l:ta3 llkif6 mum defensive position and is ready
1 7 exf4 exf4 1 8 l:tel 'iff7 1 9 a5 c6 20 to turn his attention to the queenside
bxc6 bxc6 2 1 lDb4 'iic 7 22 c5 dxc5 where he will hope to breakthrough
The London System 155
before Black can arrange a success possible king moves, all of which
ful sacrifice on h3. The position is suffer the same fate:
difficult to assess.
t8 ... � h6
In his notes Bangiev preferred
t8 ..if8, which might have saved him
••
This chapter deals with all the lines afraid of this as the fact that the white
where White fianchettoes his king's knight is on f3 makes it a slightly in
bishop but doesn' t play c4. Instead ferior version for White. The most
he usually aims to steer the g ame popular alternative is 6 c4, transpos
into Pirc territory by playing e4, but ing into one of the main lines of the
Black has no reason to fear this; even King's Indian which is outside the
if the Pirc is not part of his normal scope of this book. All the other al
repertoire the variations are quite ternatives are examined in g ame 26 ,
limited and there is an easy plan for except for 6 b3 which we shall look
Black to follow. The main problem is at here.
th at White can, and often does, ex 6 b3 (D) is certainly one of the
change on e5, leading to deadly dull most tedious variations against the
positions. But one shouldn' t be too KID but Black should still take great
disheartened as, with the right atti care in the opening so as to avoid
tude, virtually any position can be slipping into a prospectless position
won against weaker opposition and where White has a nagging edge. I
against strong opponents . . . well, a am going to examine a couple of
draw is not too bad with the black possibilities but, it has to be said,
pieces. there are no miracle solutions for
Black to liven the game up :
Game 25
Espig - Gallagher
Bad Worishofen 1 994
1 d4 ltjf6
2 llJf3 g6
3 g3 i. g7
4 i.g2 0-0
s 0-0 d6
Those of you who are happy to
p lay a Griinfeld or the symmetrical
line of the Fianchetto variation can
play S ... dS . l ) 6 cS and now:
•.•
50 %:.bl "ifxc3!
5 1 :lxb5 "ife3
0-1
Game 26
Rivas Khalifman
-
1 d4 ltJf6
2 ltJf3 g6
3 g3 �g7
e2 because of . . . b4. The only factor 4 �g2 0-0
in White's favour is the reduced 5 0-0 d6
amount of ma terial which allows 6 %:.el
him to hope for a draw. The remaining 6th move alterna
38 %:.al :lc6 tives are:
39 h4 h5 1 ) 6 ltJbd2, intending e4, when
40 �f2? ! "ifc5+! Black has a couple of ways to pre
B lack takes the opportunity to pare . . . e5 .
transfer his rook to the d-file. l a) 6... ltJbd7 7 e4 eS (D) and
41 �g2 :ld6 now:
42 'ifcl �g7
43 ltJh3
Or 43 ltJe2 'ifc4 ! when the knight
is forced back to g l . Now that the
white pieces have been coaxed onto
inferior squares Black is ready to
start another assault on the enemy c
pawn.
43 ..• :lc6!
Threatening . . . b4 .
44 "ifel �c8
45 %:.bl �d7!
46 :lb3 "ifc4 l al ) 8 dxeS dxe5 (S . . . ltJxe5 will
47 "ifdl :la6! transpose to ' 1 b2 l ' ) 9 b3 :es 1 0
48 ltJll :la2 �b 2 b6 l l ltJc4 �b7 1 2 ltJfd2 ( 1 2
By some accurate manoeuvring ltJfxe5 is also equal) 1 2. . ."ife7 1 3 a4
Black has succeeded in infiltrating to a6 1 4 %:.e l :ladS 1 5 "ife2 h5 with a
the seventh rank. His attack is now comfortable game for Black, Todor
decisive, one nice point being that 49 cevic-Lautier, Palma l 9S9.
"ifd5 is refuted by 49 . . . � h3+ ! . l a2) 8 c3 b6 9 %:.e l :es 1 0 "ifc2
49 �gl �e6 �b7 (the position is the same as line
The Kingside Fianchetto 165
' l ' in the note to White's 8th move lb3) 7 c3 eS and now (D):
except for the fact that a4 and a5
were flicked in there) 1 1 dxe5 lt:Jxe5
1 2 lt:Jxe5 1:lxe5 ! ? 1 3 ttJc4 ?! .ixe4 1 4
.ixe4 1:lxe4 1 5 1:txe4 lt:Jxe4 16 'ifxe4
d5 1 7 'iff3 ( 17 'ife2 dxc4 1 8 'ifxc4
'ifd 1 + 1 9 'iffl 'ifc2 favours Black)
1 7 . . . dxc4 1 8 .ig5 'ife8 1 9 .:td l c6 +
Frendzas-Moutousis, Peresteri 1994.
1 b) 6 lt:Jc6 and now:
.•.
draw was very close but this was the 7.. c6 (7 ... e5 is worth examinin g as S
.
20 ... ltJef4!
Excellent judgement from Black
who gives up a piece for purely posi
tional reasons.
2 1 gxf4
2 1 i.xf4 exf4 22 g4 l!Jf6 is pretty
horrible for White and 2 1 'fld2 i.e6 !
22 gxf4 .:.ad8 is no better than the
13 f3 game.
The Kingside Fianchetto 169
21 ••• exf4
22 �cl
22 �f2 h3 23 �h l Wg5+.
22 •.• h3
23 i.. b l
If that thing on h l tried to describe
itself as a bishop it would find itself
in contravention of the Trade De
scriptions Act. Of course the per
manent incarceration of this piece
is what B l ack's combination is all
about. 2S ••• .:xdl!
23 • .• �e6! 29 �xdl �b3
There is no need to rush, for ex 30 .:aJ � xc2
ample 23 . . . 'it'g5 + 24 ltlg3 ltlxg3 25 31 c4 �rs
hxg3 Wxg3+ 26 �fl would allow 32 �cl?!
White an easier ride. 32 b4 could have bee n played im
24 ltld2 .:adS mediately against which Khali fman
2s �n .:d7 planned 32 ... .:es .
26 :et :eds 32 .•. :es
27 es 33 b4 cxb4
White tries to free his shackles, 34 .:b3 WcS
but passing may have been a health 3S �d2 .:xeS
ier option. 36 �xb4 Wc7
21 •.. .:ds 37 'it'dl Wxc4+
2S .:a4 (D) 3S �gl .:ds
White plans to meet 28 . . . .:xe5 0-1
with 29 .:e4, but now Black has a lit A fine performance from Black
tle combination to recuperate some who punished White for his passive
of his material. play.
1 3 The Veresov
rook) 1 4 . . . 'ifxf6 (Black has excel i.h4 l:.c8 1 3 ltJb5 ! ltJxb5 14 i.xb5
lent attacking chances in return for ltJxe5 15 fxe5 with rough equality.
172 The Veresov
tioned by theory but it deserves se 16 �b 1 'ii'e 3 when White can resign.
rious consideration, e . g. 6 e4 .i.xc5 7 2b2) 12 tlJxd5 tlJxd5 13 'ii'xd5 ?
exd5 'ii'b 6 8 tlJa4 'ii'a5 + 9 c3 .i.xg 1 .i.e3+ 14 �b l .:t.ad8 ! wins for Black,
1 0 .:t.xg l and now 1 0 . . . b5 is a very but 13 .:t.xd5 'ii'xa2 is the critical line.
risky way to win a piece, but the al A possible continuation: 14 .:t.xc5
ternative 1 0 . . . tlJxd5 is much safer; 'ii'a l + ( 14 . . . .:t.fe8 1 5 .:t.a5 !) 1 5 �d2
The Veresov 1 73
·-
�-·-
- -
�� ,
w • • •,.,
,,
B i B.i.B B
• .& .
. . �
�� � �
��
f%{
% 23 llJxb5?
• -�· •
,, •
24 :es
24 l::txe6 llJxd3+ 25 cxd 3 l::txe6 is
16 h3 no improvement.
White probably arrived at this 24 • • • llJxd3+
strange move after examining some 25 cxd3 cxb5
thing like 16 l::th dl l::th e8 17 �2 26 :xb5 l::tb8
�g4, which does indeed look good 2 7 llJe5+ �d6
for Black. 28 l::txaS �h4+
16 •.• 0-1
17 l::th dl f5!
18 e5 Game 28
Forced, as 18 exf5 �xf5+ 1 9 �f2 Miles - Speelman
�xd3 20 cxd3 llJxd3+ and 18 llJg5 London 1982
�xc3 1 9 bxc3 fxe4 are both excel
lent for Black. 1 d4 llJf6
18 .•. ttJd7! 2 llJc3 d5
19 l::te l �x e5 3 �g5 llJbd7
1 76 The Veresov
pair of bishops and strong centre .i.xd 1 (20 l:tfxd1 is even worse as the
Black can already claim a sizeable bishop is en prise after 20 . . . llJc6 !)
plus, Traudes-Gallagher, Liechten 20 . . . .i.d7 ! (20. . . llJc6 ! ?) 21 llJc7 axb4
stein 1996. 22 l:txa8 l:tx a8 2 3 llJxa8 bxc3 White
2) 8 ttJeS (a more serious alterna still has a lot of work to do before he
tive but Black still seems to be able can claim equality.
to get a good game) 8 cxd4 9 exd4
••• 8 ... b6
llJxeS 10 dxe5 llJg4 1 1 .i.e2 d4! 12 The text has been Black's most
llJbS ( 1 2 .i.xg4 dxc3 1 3 bxc3 .i.xe5 common choice but it can easily lead
1 4 .i.f3 flic7 ! is good for Black ac to mass simplification. If you are
cording to Browne) 12 llJxeS 13 ••. looking for a sharper struggle then
llJxd4 flib6! 14 c3 ( 14 .i.xe7 l:te8 15 8 h6 9 .i.h4 (9 .i.f4 - but nobody
..•
.i. a3 l:td8 1 6 c3 llJc6 is an edge for plays it) 9 e6 looks worth a try. For
.•.
game.
11 ..• exf6
12 i.114
12 i.e3 f5 also gives Black good
play.
12 ... i.xf3!
13 'ii'xf3 cxd4
1) 12 l:tc8?! 1 3 'ii'e2 l2Je5 (the
••• 14 lladl
alternative 1 3 . . . l2Jc5 is probably bet 14 i.b5 is well by 14 . . . l:tac8 15
ter) 1 4 i.c2 l2Jc4 1 5 l:tad l 'ii'c7 1 6 lle2 l:tc5 ! .
l2Jb5 'fib s 17 i.xf6! i.xf6 1 8 l2Jxf6+ 14 ..• l%c8 (D)
exf6 19 i.b3 ltJe5 20 f4 lbc6 2 1 l2Jd6 Obviously not 14 ltJes? 15 l:txe5.
...
l:tc7 22 'ii'e8 ! l:txe8 23 l:txe8+ 'ii'xe8 White now came to the conclusion
24 l2Jxe8 l:te7 25 lLJd6 i.a8 26 l2Jxt7 ! that drastic action was required to
</;g7 27 lLJd8 ltJxd8 28 l:txd8 i.c6 29 avoid ending up in an inferior posi
</;f2 +- Miles-Andersson, London tion.
1 982.
2) 12 tbxe4 13 i.xe4 i.xe4 14
••.
now:
3a) 13 i. xf6 exf6 14 l2Jxc5 bxc5
1 5 l2Jb3 'ii' b6 (Black's position is dy
namic enough to withstand the defi
ciencies in his pawn structure) 1 6
'ii'e 2 f5 1 7 l:tad l f4 1 8 'ii'e7 l:tac8 1 9 15 i.a6! :Xc2
The Veresov 1 79
plan was most effective when Black Black a comfortable game. After 6
developed quietly so I am recom li:Jxe4 dxe4 we have a couple of ex
mending a system of defence based amples:
on an early . . . c5 which rules out such I) 7 liJgS h6 ! ? (there is also noth
crude behaviour as the centre will be ing wrong with 7 . . . 'i'xd4 = ) 8 li:Jxe4
too tense for wing attacks. The Barry g5 9 i.e5 f6 I 0 i.g3 f5 1 1 li:Jxg5 !
Attack has never acquired a great hxg5 1 2 'i'xg5 •xd4 ( 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3
standing in the chess world and in 0-0-0 would be risky for Black) 1 3
fact earned its name as even its main 'i'g6+ 'ifi>f8 1 4 :.d I 'i'b4+ 1 5 c3
practitioners (including Grandmas i.xc3+ 16 bxc3 •xc3+ 17 :.d2 •c1 +
ters Hebden , Hodgson and Nor 1h- 1h Dolmatov-Gavrikov, Sverd
wood) considered it to be a load of lovsk 1 984.
old Barry. 2) 7 !£Jes i.e6 8 e3 tt:xl 7 9 ltJc4
0-0 10 i.e2 i.xc4 ! (a well-timed ex
Game 29 change which frees Black's game)
Josephs - Hebden 1 1 i. xc4 e5 1 2 dxe5 li:Jxe5 1 3 i.b3
Sheffield 1 991 a5 14 a4 li:Jd7 ! 1 5 0-0-0 li:Jc5 1 6
'i'xd8 :.fxd8 1 7 i.g5 :es 1 8 :.d5
1 d4 li:Jf6 i.f8 19 :.hd I li:Jxb3+ 20 cxb3 i.d6
2 li:Jf3 g6 w ith equality, Yusupov-Kasparov,
3 liJcJ dS Belfort 1 988.
4 i.f4 i.g7 (D) 5 ..• 0-0
5 e3 6 i.e2 cS! ?
The Barry Attack 181
has disappeared White will have lit llldxe2 { 1 3 lllcxe2 is rather similar }
tle hope of controlling the centre. 1 3 . . . :fd8 1 4 'flc4 :ac8 gives Black
9 llJcd7 is also quite interesting
••• good play, as does 12 'flc4 ! ? i.e6 1 3
and has in fact been played more llld 5 i.xd5 1 4 'flxd5 :fd8 1 5 'flc4
often than the text. After 10 i.d4 ltac8) 12 i.e6! ? 13 'fld2 Jhd8 (D)
.•.
14 ... 1Vf6
15 1Vd2
15 e4 is still met by 1 5 . . . d4, e.g.
1 6 li:Jb5 e5 17 ll:Jc7 :ac8 18 li:Jd5
ifd6 19 c3 lbe6 with a fine game for
Black as he w ill be soon able to ex
change off the strong knight on d5 .
White can easily drift into a very bad
position, for example 20 :d2 li:Jb6
10 •.• i.xf3 2 1 :rd 1 li:Jxd5 22 exd5 dxc3 23 bxc3
1 1 i.xf3 e6 lLJc5 would be positionally lost.
All schoolchildren (well, at least 15 . . . li:Jb6
Russian schoolchildren) are taught 16 1Vd4 1Vxd4
not to block their c-pawn in queen's 17 exd4 ll:Jca4
pawn openings and this position is a 18 ll:Jxa4 ll:Jxa4
classic example; White needs to play 19 :bl b5 ( D)
c2-c4 to activate his pieces and chal
lenge the black centre but with his .I�,,w
��� - �
& ·
�-• -
�
:?! 0 &
knight on c3 this will take too long to w
arrange. ,� � •. �-
� Ri �i8
,
12 1Ve2 li:Jfd7 !
Exchanging White's most active -i�i- •
piece is a goo d idea, especially as �
�/v::� -� '/* �
.�ft,;;: :u
� ?T �..
/•
� w%.·
-:j:,w@#. ,,
Black's queen will be able to replace
•�•. fl..tE LS
the bishop as guardian of the long di
agonal.
LS Pd LS ,.
� LS
�
%. ,
13 i.xg7 <:Ji/xg7 � • •:
14 :ad l (D)
White hopes to equalise by play Black has the advantage as he has
ing e4, which would of course have something to undertaket namely a
been met by 14 . .. d4 if played at once. minority attack on the queenside,
184 The Barry Attack
10 'i'h4!
Definitely White 's best chance.
Others:
1) 10 ltJxd4 liJh5 ! when 11 i.xe7
White usually chooses between: ltJxf4, 1 1 'ii'e4 f5 and 1 1 'ii'h4 i.xg5
A: 7 'ii'd.2 , which can be followed 1 2 'ii'xh5 g6 13 'ii'g 4 e5 are all hope
by 0-0-0; and less for White.
B : 7 i. d3 , usually followed b y 2) 10 0-0-0 dxc3 ! 1 1 i.xh7+
0-0. �xh7 12 llxd8 cxb2+ 13 �bl llxd8
188 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
secure posts in the centre for his ltJxc5 10 i.b5+ .i.d7 1 1 i.xf6 .i.xf6
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 189
7 . . . lba6: 5 . . . a6 6 lDg3 c6 99
Index of Variations 191
4 'ti'd3 17 1 8 c4 150
4 e3 17 1 8 c3 1 53