5

CONTENTS

From First Steps to Success. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8

Competing at Top Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
.

2
3

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

011 - Dreev, Kiljava 1984

27
Dreev - Kaidanov, Moscow 1985..........................28
Dreev - Bareev, Tallinn 1986..........................30
Dreev - Gelfand, Tallinn 1986.......................... 34
Dreev - Kamsky, Pavlodar 1987..........................36
Dreev - Gelfand, Uzhgorod 1987 ..........................39
Dreey - Chekhov, Protvino 1988..........................40
Dreev - Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988..........................42
Baburin - Dreev, Gorky 1989............................45
Dreev - Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989 ...................48
Pliester - Dreev, New York 1989............................52
Ruban - Dreev, Tbilisi 1989 ............................54
Dreev - E.Geller, Moscow 1989.......................... 57
Aseev - Dreev, Lviv 1990...............................60
I.Novikov - Dreev, Lviv 1990.............................63
Dreev - D.Bronstein, Reykjavik 1990 .......................66
Dreev - Wedberg, New York 1991 ..........................69
Dreev - Malaniuk, Moscow 1991 ..........................73
Anand - Dreev, Madras 1991 .............................76
Nadera - Dreev, Manila 1992 .......... ',' ................78
Dreev - Gleizerov, Moscow 1992 ..........................81
Dreev - Sakaev, Moscow 1992 ..........................82
Tiviakov - Dreev, Podolsk 1992 .............., ..............84
Rogers - Dreev, BieI 1993 ...............................86
Lerner - Dreev, Rostov-on-Don 1993 ......................91
Dreev - Muhutdinov, St Petersburg 1993 ..................94
Galdunts - Dreev, St Petersburg 1993 ......................97
Gelfand - Dreev, Tilburg 1993 .........................99
Dreev - Golubev, Alushta 1994 ......................... 102
Adams - Dreev, Dortmund 1994 ..........., .............105
Dreev - Leko, Dortmund 1994 ...........................108
Dreev - Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1995 ........ ... 110
Dreev - Seirawan, Wijk aan Zee 1995 ................... 112
Dreev - KhaIifman, Linares 1995 ..................... 115
.

Dreev - Shirov, BieI 1995 ........... . . . . . ....... . . 116

6
36
37
38
39

Dreev - de Firmian, Biei1995 ........................117

Dreev - Milov, Biel 1995 .......................... 119
Dautov - Dreev, Yerevan 1996 .........................122
Dreev - Galkin, Elista 1996 ......................... 125
40 Dreev - Vaganian, Budapest 1996 ...................... 129
41
Dreev - Graf, Groningen 1997 ...................... 131
42
Sadler - Dreev, Groningen 1997 ...................... 134
43
Dreev - Kasparov, Linares 1997 ...................... 139
44 Dreev - Krasenkow, Kazan 1997 ...................... 142
45
Dreev - Svidler, Elista 1997 . . .................... 144
46
Dreev - Khalifrnan, Elista 1998 ...................... 147
47
Dreev - Rublevsky, Elista 1998 ......................149
48 Dreev - Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 1998 .................151
49 Balashov - Dreev, Samara 1998 ...................... 152
50 Timman - Dreev, Elista 1998 ...................... 154
51
Sasikiran - Dreev, Linares 1999 ...................... 157
Dreev - Svetushkin, Linares 1999 ...................... 159
52
53
Dreev - Grischuk, Ubeda 1999 ....................... 162
54
Tiviakov - Dreev, Ubeda 1999 ........
.. ................
55
Semeniuk - Dreev, St Petersburg 1999 ..................167
Dreev - Khalifrnan, St Petersburg 1999 ................. 169
56
Wang Zili - Dreev, Shenyang 1999 ......................172
57
58
Dreev - Rublevsky, Las Vegas 1999 .......................176
59
Dreev - Chandler, Hastings 2000 ........................178
6 0 Dreev - B.Lalic, Hastings 2000 ........................ 180
Dreev - Huebner, Essen 2000 ...........................182
61
Dreev - Sax, Neum 2000
186
62
63
Dreev - Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 2000 ................. 187
64 Dreev - Zhang Zhong, Beijing 2000 ................... 191
van Wely - Dreev, New Delhi 2000 ......................193
65
66
I.Sokolov - Dreev, Dos Hermanas 2001 .................196
67
Dreev - Smirin, Dos Hermanas 2001 ................. 198
68 Atalik - Dreev, Sarajevo 2001 ...... ............... 200
69
Dreev - Tkachiev, Shanghai 2001 ......................202
70
Dreev - Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2001 ................ 206
71
Dreev - Banikas, Panormo 2001 ...................... 209
72
T.Nadev - Dreev, Yerevan 2001 ..................... 214
Dreev - Pigusov, Moscow 2001 ...................... 216
73
':.'4
Dreev - Jobava, Moscow 2002 ...................... 219
5
Dreev - Pelletier, Biel 2002 .......................... 223
-6 Dree\' - Vallejo Pons, Biel 2002 ...................... 226
Dree\' - Kishnev, Chalkidiki 2002 ..................... 229
.

7
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100

Dreev - Svidler, Chalkidiki 2002 ..................... 230

Dreev - Zagrebelny, Moscow 2003 ...... .... ........ 232
Dreev - Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 2003 ....... ........ 234
Dreev - Jakovenko, Togliatti 2003 .................. 237
Dreev - eu. Hansen, Esbjerg 2003 .................. 238
Dreev - Sasikiran, Esbjerg 2003 .................... 241
Dreev - Gallagher, Gibraltar 2004 ....................243
E.A1ekseev - Dreev, Moscow 2004 .................... 245
Dreev - J. Geller, Sochi 2004 ...................... 249
A.Kuzmin - Dreev, St Petersburg 2004 ................. 252
Volkov - Dreev, St Petersburg 2004 ................... 254
Dreev - Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 2004 .............. 258
Morozevich - Dreev, Moscow 2004 .................... 261
Dreev - Kulaots, Moscow 2005 ...................... 265
Dreev - Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 2005 .................267
Dreev - Minasian, Warsaw 2005 ..................... 271
Dreev - M. Gurevich, Warsaw 2005 .................. 275
Dreev - Sakaev, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005 ................ 277
Dreev - van Wely, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005 ............... 280
Dreev - Bareev, Moscow 2005 ...................... 282
Dreev - Bareev, Poikovsky 2006 ......................284
Bologan - Dreev, PoJkovsky 2006 ..................... 288
Yevseev - Dreev, Mo scow 2006 ..................... 290

Tournament and Match Results

Index of Opponents

Index of Openings

.
.

.. .

.294

298
299

From First Steps to Success

I have chosen and commented on 100 games for this book and I have played them
in a period of more than 20 years. These games are so different from each other
that there will be some to everybody's liking - there are sacrifices, there are quiet
moves, there are sharp tactical games as well as tough positional fights. You can
also find instructive examples of how to play in the various stages of the game. In
general, I have devoted a great attention to the openings and my comments about
them are from the point of view of the contemporary theory.
A chess professional's life is not only the games played over the board. You go
to different countries, you visit various continents; you see picturesque places and
ancient towns and you come into contact with chess-fans all over the world. In my
notes to some of the games, I have shared with my readers (as much as the size of
the book allows) my impressions of these journeys and encounters.
While working on the story of my first steps in chess, it was as if I re-lived again
everything I came through during all these times. Naturally, my memory is not
perfect. I have had to omit many things also because this book is not an autobi
ography, it is not memoirs, and it is supposed to be a collection of games. Still I

tried to tell in earnest about my development as a player, about my problems and

hardships (some of them due to the surroundings and some of them just personal).
I have shared with my readers my joy about my victories in my first tournaments
and I have told about people who have helped me and to whom lowe my deepest
gratitude.
I would like to begin my story with my early childhood. I was born 30.01.1969
in the city of Stavropol, but my family (my mother - Nina Michailovna, my father
Sergey Sergeevich and my elder sister Tatyana) lived in
Zheleznovodsk - a resort town, which seemed to me to
be huge then (at present there are about 60,000 inha
bitants there). My father (who is an engineering gradu
ate) used to work in the town of Mineral Waters as the
director of PTU (professional technical school in which
people acquired high school special education). Later,
he was given lodgment in the town of Zheleznovodsk
and he had to quit his job as the director of the school,
because it was too far from Mineral Waters town.
My father (who was a strong first-grade player and
he would have been at least a candidate-master if he
had played competitive chess) loved chess very much

lamS

9
(Meanwhile,

he
loves it now as well
and he works as a
coach in the Sports

School for children

and juniors)

and

he read and stud

ied
He
to

chess books.
had decided
introduce

his

children to chess.
My sister Tatyana
is older than me
by two and a half

My mother and 1,1974

years and when

she became eight

my father started
teaching her chess. I was only five and a half then and my father had no intentions
to start teaching me yet. My sister proved to be a very good chess student, though.

I
(I had just become six years old). At some moment I sug

My father recalls how one day when he was studying chess with my sister,
was standing around

gested a move, which proved to be not so bad after all. My father was pleasantly
surprised, because in fact I d not been taught the rules by anybody. My sister
had some doubtless successes by then, but she was not really interested in chess.
Therefore my father reconsidered the situation and he decided to try with me. We
began working together and he was convinced immediately that

I was improving

rapidly, so we started playing chess games regularly. There were just a few chess
coaches in Zheleznovodsk then. Meanwhile, there were plenty of excellent books
about chess (published in a huge print runs) in those Soviet times. Therefore my
father was teaching me not only moves, but also the chess notation so that I could
read and study books on my own. I remember vividly how he was teaching me the
chess notation. We had a chess board, but without files and ranks marked by letters
and numbers - just light and dark squares. My father had prepared 64 pieces of
paper with the indexes of the squares (aI, bI, (:1 etc.) and he placed them on each

square. Strangely enough I grasped the notation immediately. In fact later, when I
started going to school in my first grade and I had to learn a poem or a story, I was
not studying them word by word or line by line, but I was remembering the words
and the lines in their entirety, repeating the poem and the story altogether. My par

ents used to be amazed and all that seems to be hardly believable even to me now,
since my chess memory is too far from being perfect. Still, I am telling you this not
to boast about my memory, but just to explain to you how that system with the 64

I remembered visually where every square was situ

I understood the notation and if we present that sche
matically then I was reasoning like this: the bishop goes from f1 to c4 and that was
pieces of paper did the job

ated. Somehow gradually,

10
not because these squares were on the same diagonal. I learned the notation and I
was already able to play games over from the books. I was very impressed then with
the games of Alexander Alekhine and I recommend even now to the aspiring young
players to study the chess inheritance of that outstanding Russian player.
Later, my father decided to introduce me to some chess specialists who lived in
Zheleznovodsk. We went at first to the home ofVasily TikhonovichVlasov who was
an eminent chess functionary and who was the director then of the Chess Club of
Sochi. That was not just a chess club - it was the Club which organized the famous
Sochi International Tournaments (There were just a few International Tourna
ments in the USSR at those times).Vasily Tikhonovich played a great role in the or
ganization of these events and he was well-known in the chess world. He happened
to be in Zheleznovodsk then and according to the whim of fate he became the direc
tor of the Chess Club there, naturally it was much more humble than that in Sochi.
So, we visited him at his home. He lived up the slopes of a mountain while we lived
in the valley. I remembered how we were climbing roaming around. There was a
huge Sanatorium in front of us (with more than 1000 beds) and my father pointed
his hand in the direction of the Sanatorium and he said "Vasily Tikhonovich lives
there... ". I was thinking then
- the director of the club is
supposed to inhabit a large
house and that was certainly
a big house. I was walking
up there with delight and
awe. It turned out however
that

Vasily

Tikhonovich

lived much more modestly.

So we met him and he tested
me and gave me problems
for homework. The he came
to the conclusion that I was
worth teaching. Accordingly,
my father got me acquainted
with all chess specialists re
siding at those times in Zhe
leznovodsk. After that .he

My father and I, 1976

worked with me intensely.

Later, my father took me to the Chess Club. I remember how we went there, be
cause I was reluctant to go and I resisted, but he took me there anyway.
They were playing chess in that Club - practice, tournaments (at first without
clocks, later with clocks). I was recording my games even when I was still six years
old and I could not write regular sentences yet. I became a first grade player almost
immediately and I was improving rapidly. I was noticed then and I made my debut
in the Championship of the Stavropol region for adults, then I became the junior

11
champion of the region three times in a row and later I shared 1-3 places in the
adult Championship of the region.
Whenever I had nobody to play against, I went out to the park of Zhelezno
vodsk. I used to sit on a bench in the park, I arranged the pieces on the board and
I was waiting for some passer-by from among the tourists. In case somebody came
around - my father asked him to play with me. Some people agreed, and I was
accumulating practical experience. Later, they built a pavilion in the park and we
could play with a clock there. My father cosidered that experience useful and he
kept finding sparring-partners for me - strong. players among the people conva.
lescing in the Sanatorium.
There soon happened something important for my chess-development. My fa
ther got acquainted with a high-class chess player - master Vladimir Sergeevich
Saigin - Byelorussian champion numerous times, since he lived there for years.
He was also famous because of the fact that as a master he tested the then young
Mikhail Tal and played a match with him. Those were the times when you could not
become a master without beating another master in a match. Tal won that match
after a tough fight, so Saigin could have asserted that he gave the green light to
world-class chess to M. Tal himself. He did something like that for me too and I am
tremendously grateful to him about that as well. I know that Vladimir Sergeevich
and Mikhail Tal preserved an excellent attitude towards each other throughout the
years. According to the whims of fate, Vladimir Sergeevich ended up at the Cauca
sian Mineral Waters, in the town of Essentuki. My father asked him to work with
me. They agreed on some financial conditions too. His work was paid indeed, but
it soon became clear that he was teaching me not just for the money. In fact he told
my father that money was money, but he would have never taken the job unless he
had seen that it was worth it. It is a bit embarrassing for me to praise myself, but
he had obviously detected something like talent in me and that had impressed him
a lot. That seemed to motivate his enthusiasm while working with me; otherwise
there was no other rational explanation..
I remember how I asked Vladimir Sergeevich a question when he came to us for
the first time. I was really interested in the problem why in the position after 1.e4
eS 2.I2lf31t:lc6 3.d4 exd 4.lt:lxd4, Black was not playing 4... lt:lxd4 S:xd4, followed by
S...cS - ? It seemed to me that Black was winning a tempo like that. Now of course,
I am a bit ashamed of a question like that, but back then I was really interested in
that, since I was taught that it was essential to win tempi in the opening. Vladimir
Sergeevich explained to me that not every win of a tempo was good and meanwhile
in that position Black was not even winning a tempo, because he did not develop a
piece, but he was just advancing a pawn. He gave me a lesson about weak squares
and he told me that you should avoid compromising squares unnecessarily. I was
really impressed and I understood that you were not supposed to push pawns just
like that.
I still remember well my sessions with Vladimir Sergeevich

they were tiring

not only for me - an eight year old boy, but also for him being an elderly man. They

were lasting sometimes for eight hours a day - at first in the morning, then we

re having lunch and then we were working again in the afternoon. There was a
riod (of about half a year) in which we were working quite often, like 5-6 times
veek. He usually came to our place. Still, I remember once we went to his place
rly in the morning and it was some holiday, or somebody's birthday. So, instead
celebrating, Vladimir Sergeevich spent the whole day working with me, while ev
{body around was having fun, drinking and eating. We were studying chess then
ring the entire day and we went back home only late at night.
I solved a colossal number of most interesting positions. V. Saigin helped me a
. I felt that as a result of our work the quality of my chess improved considerably
d I became a candidate master. We had competitions with a norm for a candi
te master and I took part in a tournament like that when I was only 8 years old. I
lyed there with quite serious adult opponents (first grade players and candidate
lsters) and I fulfilled my first norm for a candidate master. I acquired the title
er in the Championship of the region for men. I was playing often, numerous
mes and I was also playing for the team of the Stavropol region in some zonal
lrnaments - there was an entire system of tournaments then and if one wanted
improve - there was never a shortage of tournaments.
Our sessions with V. Saigin stopped at some moment. I do not remember why,
t evidently something had changed in his life or mine-back then.
The city of Zheleznovodsk was too far away from the actual chess centres and it
came difficult to know how I was going to develop further. My father was won
dering how to introduce me to the real "chess
world". Fortunately for us, theAll-Union Chess
School of Smyslov had some sessions in Kis
lovodsk. That city was close to Zheleznovodsk
and I went there with my father to join. The
session was almost coming to an end, but still I
was accepted and I was given some problems.
I was asked to solve them and to send the solu
tions by post. I solved the problems, of course
some of them with mistakes, but in general it
seemed that I had made a good impression on
people and I became a member of the Smyslov
School and I began to participate in every ses
sion.
I would like to say a few words about that
school. It was organized with the all-union stu
dents sporting club "Burevestnik". The Direc
tor of the club was the eminent chess-function

Russia Youth Championship

Saberemye Chelny 1979

ary Boris Naumovich Postovsky, who was the

leader of the Russian National Team for a while

13
and later also of Team USA. His experience has been appreciated everywhere. Vas
ily Vasilievich Smyslov was of course present at the sessions, but the main coaching
chess work was performed by other coaches and there were simply brilliant special
ists selected to work there. At first there was Yuri Sergeevich Razuvaev (I remem
ber how he came and he had some lectures with us at one of the sessions, a bit later
in the city of Podolsk, immediately after the end of one of Karpov's matches and
he was an aide to Karpov then). Yuri Balashov was also often present at some of
our sessions. Berezin had some lectures with us. I also remember the names of S.
Kishnev, B. Zlotnik, G. Nessis, V. Faibisovich - all of them strong masters. We had
many a teacher to learn something from. It was far from easy to join that school
and later many of the "graduates" of that school became famous grandmasters: A.
Khalifman, E. Bareev, V. Salov, V. Akopian, K. Aseev, I. Glek, M. Krasenkow,

E.

Pigusov, Y. Piskov, G. Serper...We were solving problems and we were also playing
against each other. All that no doubt proved to be quite purposeful.
Then, something very important happened in my life. When I was 10 years old,
Mark Izrailevich Dvoretzky (he was also a very good player then, surprisingly for
all but obviously not for him, decided to start working as a coach, and he became a
brilliant coach, famous all over the world) came to Kislovodsk as a second to Nana
Alexandria in her candidates match against Levitina. I was introduced to him, we
had a look at some positions together, he asked me some chess questions and he
gave me some problems to solve. Later he gave me some homework, too, and he
went back to Moscow. I solved my problems and I did my homework and I sent the
solutions to him by post.

"-

With Mark Dvoretzky, Zheleznovodsk 1983

14
That is how Mark Izrailevich Dvoretzky came into my life. My sessions with
Vladimir Sergeevich Saigin continued to be tremendously important for me as be
fore, but my work together with M. Dvoretzky became essential for me as well. I
have to acknowledge that these two people taught me to play top-class chess.
My father and I went to Moscow to work with M. Dvoretzky and we lived there
with relatives or in hotels. We worked for a fortnight - this was something like
a session. Mark Dvoretzky was working then simultaneously with me and Sasha
Budnikov from Vladivostok. He had noticed his talent somewhere too. Sasha was
a bit older than me and he was a member of the Smyslov School as well. 1 even had
the feeling that Dvoretzky was somehow choosing between me and him, because it
was obviously too strenuous for him to work simultaneously with both of us then.
We lived 1600 kilometers away from Dvoretzky and we met only from time to
time, besides our sessions were too expensive for us. After he decided that our work
together was quite fruitful, we began to meet more often and we had some training
camps together too. We used different possibilities for me to join in the sessions.
I remember how I went to the First League Championship of the USSR and while
Dvoretzky was helping Sergey Dolmatov there he worked with me during his free
time. 1 was getting tuned to the world of top-level chess. In fact, Dvoretzky had his

own methods and he worked according to them. He told me immediately: "1 began

working with you in order to make a World Champion out of you!" 1 thought that
to be absolutely unbelievable then, but his confidence proved to be contagious. It
was already evident that he was not fantasizing - by that time Dvoretzky's pupils

Valery Chekhov, Arthur Jussupov and Sergey Dolmatov had already become World
Champions. Gradually, we began to meet and work with Mark Izrailevich more and
more often.
I fulfilled the master norm at a tournament in the city of Grozny. The problem
was not so much to make the norm but that there were so few tournaments with
a master norm then that the real problem was
to participate in a tournament like that! My fa
ther went together with V. T. Vlasov to Moscow
and he asked for an audience with Vera Niko
laevna Tikhomirova, who was then the official
head-coach of the Russian Federation. Vera
Tikhomirova was quite famous for her rather
peculiar character, she was always principled
in her work and she was reluctant to favour
anybody about anything, including herself. (In
fact, 1 do not know anybody in the chess-world
who would talk about her except with great re
spect and even reverence!). My father and Vla
soy explained to her the situation - that there
was a talented young player who had nowhere
to show his skills. There were some arguments

15
against, but Vera Tikhomirova decided to take a risk and she presented me with
"a wild card" and I was included in the tournament of the Russian Young Mas
ters. I played quite successfully in that strong tournament and I fulfilled the master
norm when I was only 13 years old. I got the title not immediately, but a bit later
when I was 14. The process of awarding the title took some time but still the fact
of somebody making the norm at the age of 13 was somewhat shocking. Nowadays
no one will be even surprised, because there are 13 years old grandmasters, but
those times were quite different. There were not so many possibilities to show your
strength, there were not so many tournaments (particularly international), it was
too problematic to even go abroad and of course there were no computers available
for preparation. If we have to make a comparison, for example with Garry Kasp
arov - he made the master norm when he was almost 15 years old.
I had my chances to go to the World Championship a bit later - the qualification
tournament for the World Championship for cadets (juniors under 16) was held in
Sochi and I was the youngest participant (I was not even 14 yet). The tournament

was quite strong and included V. Ivanchuk, B. Gelfand, E. Bareev, Art. Minasian, A.
Shabalov, S. Savchenko. I tied for 1-2 places with Zhenya Bareev and I won several

very good games, with good quality at a high level.

I do not remember what exactly the additional criteria were but it was decided
that we had to play a match. I can understand the desire of the governing body of
the Chess Federation to send to the Championship a more experienced player, the
elder...and that was the last chance for Zhenya to become Under-16 World Cham
pion. In the end, no matter' what, our match with Bareev was played at "his ter
ritory" - in Moscow. I do not want to say that there were some intrigues and evil
intentions, but the organization of the match was just terrible. I was not even given
a hotel room and I lived with Mark Izrailevich at his home in Strogino. I slept in one
of the rooms and Mark Izrailevich and his family slept in the other room. He had by
then a little baby, who was pretty calm (I can understand that now, being the father
of two daughters myself), but it could have woken up and cried in the middle of the
night. I was supposed to eat at the Hotel Sport, which was situated on the other side
of the enormous city of Moscow and naturally there was no reason to waste half a
day in order to have lunch or dinner there. In the end, we managed to get some
money for the coupons that we received for food. We played in the Central Chess
Club. Zhenya studied and he lived in the Sports School and his road to the Central
Chess Club was much shorter than mine from Strogino. It took me more than an
hour to get to the Club, while Zhenya was there in about half an hour. I was not
paying attention then to such trifles (I learned about that only later), but naturally,
all that did not help me obtain a good result. After all this, I lost that match with
a result of "-2" and Zhenya Bareev went to the World Championship. He played
quite well there and he won it.
I was already too strong by the following year and I was chosen to represent my
country at the World Championship even without preliminary qualifying. That was

{ first

travel abroad and it was to the faraway country Colombia - to a town with

exotic name of Bucaramanga.

It was a competition at that Championship between me and the quite talented
nerican player Patrick Wolff. (Patrick became a grandmaster soon after and we

t again at the Interzonal Tournament in Biel, where I beat him. Still, later we
t in New York and he beat me, but I see his name only rarely now. He has prob
ly quit chess altogether...) During those times it was a great rivalry between the
o countries, the USSR and the USA in everything, and particularly in sports.
. erefore our chess competition had a special meaning.

III CAMPEONATO
Para

.......r

MUNOIAL DE AJEDRE Z

de 16 alios.

Game Dreev

Wolff

I beat Patrick in our game in the first half of the tournament and later I built a
mfortable cushion of a lead so he could not catch up with me. Still, when it looked
e there were no more rivals anymore and nobody could catch me, when there
nothing to be afraid of - there suddenly appeared a player from Indonesia

lS

[.Wahl), who started the tournament from the fourth round and then he began
ating everybody (He was playing like a machine!). There were not so many play
; anyway, so he came closer to the top and he started playing the participants that
.ad just played against. So I was thinking "If he goes on like that, how will all that
d?" He won, I thought, six games in a row, when he came to play against me. If I
d lost that game, the difference would have become very small and it could have
ded either way. Instead, our game ended in a draw after a balanced fight, and he
) failed to catch up with me. It would be interesting what might have happened if
had started the tournament right from the very beginning. I do not know what is

17
happening with that player these days either, but back then he was just absolutely
fantastic. The journey was also quite interesting and beautiful. It was my first travel
abroad and it was in such a picturesque country. I was filled with impressions and
it was all in such a wonderful atmosphere. It was very important for me to take first
place, because any other place back in the USSR was considered to be a disaster. At
the end, I made 10 out of 11 and I was 2 1/2 points ahead of the runner-up. That was
how I became World Champion. Mark Izrailevich made good his promise.
I had serious problems with my studies in high school, because I was going to
tournaments every month. The governing body of the school was furious, since
at those times it was absolutely unbelievable that somebody might just not go to

With Mikhail Tal

Newspaper "Evening Moscow" Blitz, Sokolniki (Moscow 1982)
school. Higher education was something sacred during Soviet times. Parents could
be deprived of custody if their kids did not attend school. There were no other forms
of teaching except regular school attendance and I had to convince some of the
teachers that I would study on my own and later I would pass individual examina
tions. For example, when I went to the tournament in the city of Grozny, and even
after I came back having fulfilled the master norm, my father was reproached that
he was impeding my education. There were similar accusations from the school,
from the city council and the city Party committee, and even, what was really amaz
ing, from the sports committee. The moment I went to the World Championship
my father was totally cornered. They were quite adept at maltreating people during
those times - he was called and reproached in the city Party committee as well as
in other governing bodies. He had numerous difficult conversations and I did not

18
know about all that then, because my father had kept me protected from all this.
Still, when I came back as World Champion, the situation changed overnight and
the same people who almost wanted to take me away from my parents now had an
entirely different attitude. I was accepted in the regional committee of the Party
and I was officially congratulated. My name was noted in the Official Book of the
Pioneers. (every Soviet schoolboy was a pioneer then...)
During the next year 1984, when I became 15, I had the personal right to par
ticipate in the next World Championship as the acting World Champion, and I did
not need to pass through qualifying. The tournament was organized in France, in
the town of Champigny, near Paris. The competition was considerably stronger
than the previous year, and there were more participants, too - 40 players. The
distance was a bit shorter - it was an 11 round Swiss system tournament. At the
start, the American player S. Rachels (once again the representative of the USA!)
showed a 100% result, but then he lost to me and later he lost to Vasily Ivanchuk as
well. (Grandmaster Alexey Stepanovich Suetin was our coach at that tournament.)
The fight for the first place between me, Vasily as well as V. Anand and J. Piket was
quite tough and only the last two rounds clarified the situation. I was the only one
among the leaders to win my game in the last round. Thus I made 8 1/2 points and
took the first place. (V. Anand, V. Ivanchuk and J. Piket all remained half a point
behind me.) That was how I became Under-16 World Champion for a second time
in a row.
After my second World title among cadets, in August of the same year I took part
in the Under-20 World Championship in Finland. It was the first time in the his
tory of these championships that a 15 year-old chess player was challenging much
more experienced and famous players who were almost all 3-4 years his elder. Still,
I managed to show a good result (10 points out of 13) and I was a whole point in
front of the World Champion for the previous year Kiril Georgiev (meanwhile my
rating was 200 points (!) inferior to his) and K. Torsteins. Unfortunately, I only
won the silver medal, because the 19 year old Curt Hansen had half a point more
than me. V. Anand was also a participant in that tournament. We played in the
penultimate round in which I failed to materialize my positional advantage and the
game ended in a draw.
In the year 1985, at the age of 16, I made my debut in the Championship of the
USSR for Young Masters (there were not such young participants in similar tour
naments up to then), which was by that time a real test for the young and promising
players in the USSR. Many of the participants there became grandmasters later.
Among the players in the year 1985 there were A. Khalifman, J. Ehlvest, G. Kaid
anov, I. Glek, I. Novikov, K. Aseev, V. Neverov, Z. Sturua...I began the competition
with two victories and during the first half of the tournament I was among the lead
ers and I shared 5- f"h places with a final result of "+ I" with Alexey Vyzhmanavin
and Andrey Kharitonov, just a point behind the winner - Eduardas Rozentalis.

19
Here, I would like to deal with another subject for a while. Naturally, I cannot
talk about earlier times, but during my years the state was helping chess consider
ably. "The Soviet Chess School" was an entire system for the support and devel
opment of chess. That did not apply necessarily to everybody, but in my case the
support was quite significant. I was a member of the sports club "Burevestnik" and
it was assisting eminent sportsmen and helping them in their travels, in competi
tions, in their work with coaches. (I was often traveling with my father, he was paid
for that and I received coupons for food.) Our city was famous for its Sanatorium
and the people, who were resting there, needed entertainment. There was a whole
system for that and one of the things was a simultaneous display by a strong chess

player. I began to give simuls when I was 8 years old. If I had the free time, I could

have given up to 10 simuls per day. We were paid very well indeed. This was hon
est money for real work and the
state had no qualms about that.
In fact, I could make as much
money in a month as the first
secretary of the city committee
of the Party. We received our
money at one and a same place
and he was really amazed - how
was that possible? He received
250 rubles, while a 9-10 year
old boy received 300 rubls? I
did not know all the details, but
there were rumours, and even
legends going around. I did go
sometimes with my father to the
accounting office, and I signed
the invoices. (I did not even
have a passport then) That had
always been interesting for me,
because the accountants and
the tellers were looking at me
so strangely. Later, they started
recognizing me, of course so, in
the USSR - in a country, which
was considered to be a socialist

Simultaneous display, Budenovsk 1979

one, and where there was no

capitalism, it was official that a 10 year old could receive money for individual work
(a bit creative, though). So, on one hand, there was a total absence of freedom in
the country, but on the other hand, the state was providing colossal support for
chess and chess players and the possibility for them to work without any obstacles.
There were simultaneous displays in Sanatoriums and in villages as well. The title
was also very important: a grandmaster could receive up to 100 rubles per simul.

20
(the average salary of an engineer was about 150 rubles per month) Naturally, no
one could have simuls every day and there was a special office in Moscow where
the available simuls were to be distributed about equally among the grandmasters.
We had candidate masters who also had simuls. There were numerous sanatori
ums and the simuls were distributed by the Chess Club. There was no animosity
between the players about that. I did not have so many simuls then, because I had
many tournaments, and I also had to attend my lessons at school. After I became
Master of Sports of the USSR, World Champion and FIDE master (for my win at
the World Championship) I was invited to work for the Sports School for children
and juniors. I was working there with children; I was even given some elder, so that
my work could have been more interesting and more effective, too. I think I worked
there for a period of about half a year, and I received some salary from there as
well.
In general, I lived quite well during those times. My sessions with Dvoretzky
continued. Mark Izrailevich had an excellent system of preparation, but it had (and
it still has) a certain drawback, which he admitted, too. He did not work with open
ings. Naturally, he could show you some not so fashionable schemes, and of course,
he dealt with opening principles; nevertheless he either could not make a concrete
opening repertoire for you, even in the sense of understanding in the so-called pre
computer era, moreover in the contemporary sense of the word, or he simply did
not want to.
Dvoretzky was not an expert in
the opening stage indeed, but he
was always trying to attract spe
cialists in that field to our training
camps. There was a coach among
them - Alexander Vasilievich Fili
penko - whom I met at the all-union
junior games in Tashkent. I was
playing for the team of the Russian
Federation there, and he was one
of the coaches of the team. Alexan
der Panchenko was the chief-coach.
That tournament was an important
competition. I remember, they gave
us special costumes (whenever they
did that, that meant that the event
was something special), and even
sneakers. We did not have so many
contacts with Filipenko, but there
arose a chess problem at some mo
ment - I needed to play for a win
\\ith Black in the exchange variation

With daughter Diana and A. Filipenko

21
of the Slav Defence and I was advised to ask him for help. He recommended to me
something, I did not agree with him and we started analyzing and he proved to me

quite convincingly that I had been wrong. (It is an amazing thing, but I have won
so many points in that variation and mostly thanks to the concepts and ideas of A.
V. Filipenko.). I very much liked the way he was showing and explaining things and

I was really impressed. Later, when Dvoretzky asked me with whom I would like

to study openings and maybe even go along to tournaments with (he had so many
pupils and other work too that he could not always travel with me to tournaments),
I named A. V. Filipenko. That was how our collaboration started and it has contin

ued up to now. He came with me for the first time to a tournament at the Young

Masters Championship in Tallinn back in the year 1986.

After I turned 17 my good life was suddenly troubled and it was soon over. That

was the end of my junior chess years and there began a new period of my life. I was
still not an adult, but I was not a kid or a junior either. My main coach at that mo
ment - Dvoretzky told me that we had achieved a lot together, but it would be diffi

cult for us to develop any further, because we saw each other so rarely that it would
be better to live closer together. He was a member of the military club (AAD Anti
-

Aircraft-Defence for the region of Moscow) and he worked there and he tried to
make me a member there too. That was how I ended up in Moscow. Later, it turned
out that some people had made some promises to M. I. Dvoretzky, but they failed
to do what was necessary. So it happened that I was in Moscow, but I was like an
illegal person there. There was a system acting in the USSR then and it was called

"propiska" and according to it every person had to be registered and to live at a

certain address. (That system has remained almost similar even today, but it is now
called "registration".) I took my leave from Zheleznovodsk with the idea to be regis
tered in Moscow. I failed however to register in Moscow (that was something quite
difficult in those times and not everybody could manage a registration in Moscow
by himself). I could see Dvoretzky only on Saturdays and Sundays. I was already

having problems not so much chess wise, but I had purely everyday problems in
life. Dvoretzky had tried to arrange a place for me to live in Moscow, but that failed

as well. I had no relatives there except an aunt, but she lived in a shared lodgment
and I joined to stay with her for a while. My parents were far away; meanwhile they
got divorced by that time and my father was absolutely incapable of devoting to me

so much time and care as before. I was faced with having to solve problems that I
had never encountered before. Dvoretzky was also unable to solve all my problems

as well and we had to interrupt our collaboration. We kept our good relations and
we have preserved them until now too.
It was about during those times that I was being stopped from going abroad.

Every time I received an explanation like: "We have failed to prepare your docu
ments", but in fact that usually meant that I was becoming something like a player
for "domestic consumption". As a rule, somebody else was going to a tournament

instead of me. The really warning bell for me rang when I was not even allowed to

22
participate in a tournament in one of the socialist countries (naturally, somebody
else went there too...). It looked like some loss to me then, but later I went with
Alexander Filipenko (and V. Ivanchuk too) to a training camp in Estonia to prepare
for the World Championship, which was going to be held in Australia. Then it was
once again the same story with"We have failed to prepare your documents... This

time however, the situation was completely different, since my place was from the
reserve of FIDE and no one could have replaced me. In fact I learned later that our
Federation did not even understand that at the moment and they were trying to
prepare the documents of another player. So, after I was not allowed to go to Aus
tralia, it became clear that the almighty authority KGB had something against me
as they were responsible for all travels abroad. I had numerous theories and specu
lation why it was like that. It was possible that it was somebody's libel to blame
(every anonymous slander was paid attention to in those times and that was totally
destructive for society), or some anonymous letter by some malevolent person. In
fact, I did not have any serious political dissension with the government when I was

15-16 years old and I was simply playing chess. It might have been connected with
something else - for example I could have praised Fischer or Korchnoi in a conver
sation and that could have become like a "death sentence" for me. There was a pe
riod when some strange people, working for the state, were talking to us during our

training camps and they kept asking questions. I used to an&..wer them with what
I thought at the moment, as I was young then. After so many years have passed, I
received some information by chance and I remember a situation in which I was re
ally tested for reliability - they asked me a direct question about: what my attitude
towards Victor Korchnoi was (in fact his family name was not mentioned in the
USSR, not even in the news about his match against A. Karpov). I answered defi
nitely that my attitude towards his chess legacy is quite positive (naturally, I could
not even imagine that I would play in tournaments with him many years later!) It
was possible that answer might have contributed to the fact that I was not allowed
to go abroad at that time. That should not have been the main reason, though. I still
have no idea what the real reason was, even up to this day.
So, I was not permitted to play tournaments abroad and those were difficult
times for me, financially too. There were many reasons that I could not go back to
Zheleznovodsk either. I was in a semi-legal situation and I was not registered any
where. I had a friend - Alik Ehevich, he was a student then (he lives in Israel now)
and he did not understand many things, but he helped me a lot anyway. We spent
plenty of time together and I visited him at his home in Odessa. I had to make some
money for bread and butter by playing blitz for pretty serious stakes sometimes. I
remember Alexey Vyzhmanavin too, we were often playing blitz at the same time,
we were giving huge odds, at first he did, then I etc. - with great handicaps. We lost
sometimes but still we were winning most of the time. We had to do that; you have
to make your living somehow.
aturally, I continued to play in tournaments and I was often in the process of
quing for something, though I could not go abroad anyway. It is quite sufficient

23
to remember the qualification tournament in Borzhomi where I took first place, so
I had qualified once again for the Under-20 World Championship . Just like before,
I did not go anywhere (Volodya Akopian was sent there instead of me and he took
second place).
At my age, in that country, nobody could have given me a hint about what was
going on or helped me at that moment. I was left entirely on my own.
When I became 18 years old I understood that I had better join the Army. I was
advised to try to enter a special sports regiment, where sports people were not only
soldiers, but they took part in competitions too. It was essential for the Army sport
bosses to collect capable sportsmen - in the USSR every establishment had its own
sporting club and teams and there were special competitions between the different
establishments and there were special points awarded for all that. Still, the entire
system of sports in the Army (just like the Army system itself) was so huge and
clumsy that I failed to enter a sports regiment outright. At first I went to the Taman
Artillery Regiment and I passed through the "young soldiers' preparation course"
in a period of one and a half months and then I gave my solemn Army oath. Later,
I was transferred to a sports regiment indeed and right on the next day, in an Army
uniform, I went to the city of Pavlodar to participate in the semi-final of the USSR
Championship. Later I lived in the sports regiment and that life was semi-martial ,
semi-civilian. I was in Lefortovo then.
It was as if I was periodically discharged from the Army - you go out at 9 o'clock
in the morning (and you become a civilian) and then you have to be back by 9
o'clock in the evening and you are again a soldier. Naturally, it was not like that
every day. There were periods that I had to stay for a week or two with the Army
and I had some fatigue duties too - the usual Army life. I was in fact lucky to be
together with Maxim Sorokin, since he was responsible for a while for the library
in the sports regiment and he was holding all the necessary keys. That was quite
comfortable, because at 6 o'clock in the morning the usual Army activity started
(sometimes it started at 5 o'clock as well) and there were all kinds of marching for
mations, some running around and sessions of studying something (I believe even
today that all ofthem were utterly senseless; of course nobody cared about any real
combat preparation). Instead we managed somehow to sneak into the library and
we slept for an extra hour on the sofa. Denis Bilunov was also in our sports regi
ment (he is one of the founders ofthe Internet site - kasparovchess, he is quite close
to G. Kasparov and he has been collaborating with him for a long time).
I played in numerous tournaments while I was in the Army and I had to be
inside the barracks in between them. It was not easy at all to go out though. The
system was so gigantic and difficult to fight against: the organization which was
holding the tournament had to send a letter to the Army chiefs (the so-called invita
tion) and then the soldier had to be issued permission to go out. You could not even
talk about any real preparation for a tournament during that time, because you did
not know at all what would happen to you on the next day. There were times when

24
you could only sleep for 4-5 hours and you had to be up at 4 o'clock in the morning
for some marching formation (for example, because the chiefs were not in a good
mood, or because somebody did something wrong and we all had to pay for that).

Sometimes we had to take care of the snow and clean it during a massive snowfall

(that was not a very sensible thing to do either!), so there was no time or strength

to prepare for chess. I worked on chess a bit together with Maks Sorokin though,

whenever the circumstances allowed us to do that.

There were not so many tournaments around and we wanted to go away all the
time, so we used to invent some non-existing tournaments to take part in, for ex
ample - "Championship of the Central Chess Club". It is well-known that the Central

Chess Club is situated in Moscow, but these "Championships" were held either in

Kuibishev (now - Samara), or in Gorky (nowadays Nizhny Novgorod) - all of them

big cities close to Moscow. In fact Alik Ehevich had managed somehow to acquire
some blank forms with stamps on them from the Central Chess Club in Moscow.
He used to send me to different cities and places with them. Naturally, that was all
very dangerous, because I could have been caught and that would have meant seri

ous punishment and even imprisonment for me. It all ended well though, and often

when there were no real tournaments I had managed to stay away from the Army
barracks thanks to those non-existing tournaments.
After about half a year I was sent away from the sports regiment - there were
some mishaps and all the sportsmen were sent to regular regiments. I was again

among common soldiers and I was not accepted so cordially. That was not "the

young soldiers' preparation course", where we were all of the same age; that was

the real Army where there were some very special relations between the different
annual intakes of conscripts. There were numerous conflicts with the "old guys"

and some other rather unpleasant moments. Still, I managed to avoid somehow

the horrors that had been described in the media and they even seem to continue

now in the Russian Army. It all passed almost normally for me then, or maybe I was
just lucky and I had been sent to a regular normal Army regiment. I did not harm

my health there and I acquired some useful life experience. Still, I wished at that

moment much more to play chess than to be in marching formations and to collect
snow during a snowfall. The Soviet Army was not professional then and plenty of
time was lost on all kinds of activities, which in principle had nothing to do with
Army service.
Later, things improved considerably and I was transferred to the sporting regi

ment of the "Dzerzhinsky - Academy" and there the attitude towards me (and some
other sportsmen too) was more personal. I had some difficulties there too, but the

second year of my service in the Army passed for me relatively comfortably. I had
no problems going to tournaments; I had the possibility to participate in training
camps too and to work on chess as well. My duties in the Army in the year 1989

were much easier and thus my service was soon over and done with.

Competing at Top Level

In the year 1989 I had my debut in the final of the USSR Championship. It was a

round-robin event with 16 participants. I had a 50 % result and I managed to beat

Sergey Dolmatov in particular who happened to share 2-5'h places.

I had lost some momentum in chess even not so much because of my Army ser
vice, but because I was not allowed to play abroad, since these travels were quite
essential. It was practically impossible then, if you played only in the USSR, where
there were so few international tournaments, to fulfill any norms for international
titles.
Meanwhile, every journey abroad in those times (and not only for chess players)
was important also for your well-being. You could not make a lot of money outright
(suppose 300 or 500 dollars per travel, often thanks to savings from your food and
pocket money), but you could live on that money comfortably in the USSR for half
a year.

I somehow came out of the list of the players "for domestic consumption" only
after the intervention of the member of the Academy - Leonid Ivanovich Abalkin,
who was the Director of the I nstitute of Economy and a world renowned scientist.
He was also a famous politiCian and social functionary, and besides all that, he was
the president of the Russian Chess Federation for a long period of time. During that
time, Karen Sergeevich Agadjanyan was the chief coach and he was a good, kind
and considerate man, who had done so much for chess. I decided to address him
about the subject. He understood the situation and intervened. He asked member
of the Academy Abalkin to clarify what the situation was. Leonid 1vanovich had the
opportunity to contact some really powerful people then and once at a reception in
the Kremlin he approached the Chairman of the KGB Krjuchkov and he asked him
"What was all that about and was all that so serious ... ?" Krjuchkov made a promise
to have a look into it and it turned out that it was not so serious as "to stop the oxy
gen" for me. So finally, after the intervention of Leonid 1vanovich Abalkin, I went to
play in the European Championship. I had earned that right once again in a qualifi
cation tournament. I was just 19 years old then (I was still in the Army) and I began
traveling abroad again - possibly that was already an indication of the forthcoming
liberty. Times were already changing and the Soviet Union was in a period of dis
solution. I went to Arnhem, in Holland, and I became immediately the Champion

of Europe. So, at the age of 20, because of all of my results, I was awarded the title
of International Grandmaster.

26

Later, I played my candidates match against V. Anand, but I lost it despite the
fact that I was the favourite. My results went down for a while after that. Gradually,
I had my ups again and I managed to win several tournaments and I improved my
position in the ranking table. My subsequent biography can be followed according
to my participation in tournaments and in the notes to the games, which I have
chosen to include in this book.
I believe that it would not be so original if I say that I would like to hope that I
have not played my best game yet. Still, the 100 games which have been present
ed in this book, will probably give the readers an idea about what kind of a chess
player I am.

Alexey Dreev

Moscow

April 2 0 0 7

27

Oll-Dreev, KiIjava 1984

A07

Oll - Dreev
World Ch U20, Kiljava 1984

This game was played in the

World Championship u nder 20 in
Finland and I had written about it
in the preface of the book. USSR was
represented there by two partici
pants - the highly talented Estonian
player Lembit Oll (who unfortunately
passed away too young...) and 1. We
had to face each other in the middle
of the championship according to the
whim of tournament pairing and that
loss precluded Lembit from fig hting
for the top-places in the event.
l.fJ f6 2.g3 dS 3.ig2 c6
4. 0 - 0 ig4 S.d3 bd7 6.h3
White plays much more often here
6.bd2.

logical too. It has some drawbacks

though, since Black will manage to
push eS sooner or later and he will ob
tain certain space for piece maneuver
ing. Meanwhile, White's light squared
bishop does not have too bright pros
pects, since it is restricted by Black's
pawns ...

e6

It is a bit early for Black to play 7 ...

eS, because of: 8.f4 id6 9.fxeS liJxeS
1O.d4, followed by lUgel.

S.f4 i.d6 9.d2 0 - 0 1 O .fJ

White has problems to prevent e6eS. Black can counter 1O.d4 with 10 ...
c5.

1 0 ...eS H.fxeS xeS I2.d4 geS

That is a useful move and it pre
pares the retreat of the bishop to the
fB-square, in case of liJd4-fs.

13.a4 as 14.i.e3 g6
Black is threatening lS . . .g3.

IS.'d2 h6

6 . . .h1!?
White cannot capture now with a
knight and that move seems to be quite
sensible. After 7.1xf3 eS, followed by
cS, Black completes his development
rather quickly and his position is ac
tive. The price that Black must pay for
all that is the two-bishop advantage. . .

16.gael
That was a very careless move.
White had to consider the possibility
c6-cS, followed by dS-d4. Therefore,
the logical reaction for him seemed to
be - 16.c3.

7.exf3

16 ... cS 17.f5 i.f8

This move is possible and quite

The move 17 . . . d4 looked to me

Game 2

28
rather dangerous i n view of: 18.ixh6
gxh6 19.tLlxh6+ wf8 20.tLlf5 Wg8 and
here White had at least a draw, but he
could also try to play for a win, capturing Black's b7-pawn.

18.g4
White had better continue here
with: 18.Wfd1 Wfd7 19.Wff3 l3a6, with a
complicated position.

18 . .Wfd7
.

Suddenly, my opponent was faced

with serious problems.

19.b3?
Lembit is oblivious to the danger
and he simply defends his pawn. The
situation would have remained quite
unclear after: 19.f4 ! ? Wfxa4 20.g5 Wfd7
21.tLlxh6+ (or 21.tLlxg7 ixg7 22.gxf6
ixf6 23.ixc5 tLlh4) 21...gxh6 22.gxf6
Wff5.

19 ... d4 2 0 .i.f4 l3xeI 2 1.l3xel

A43

2
Dreev - Kaidanov
Moscow 1985

My encounter against Grigory

Kaidanov was in a round-robin tournament of category 8, which was or
ganized by the Moscow Region Chess
Club. (There was also a main tourna
ment of category 13 and it was won
by O. Romanishin.). . We lived and
played in the Hotel "Kosmos" (The
Moscow Chess Olympiad was played
later there.). J. Dorfman won this
tournament. I was not so successful
in the event and I shared 7-11 places
(among 14 participants), but still I
played several interesting games.
l.d4 tLlf6
4.tLlc3

2.tLlf3 c5 3.d5 e6

Black should manage to equalize in

that line after a correct play. White's
usual move here is - 4.c4.

4 ... exd5 5.tLlxd5 tLlxd5 6.Wfxd5

tLlc6

21 ... c4!
That is the point! Now, White is already beyond salvation ..
.

22.Wfcl cxd3 23.i.d2

Or 23.cxd3 l3c8.

23 ... l3c8 24.M1. dxc2 25.i.c4 d3

26.ha5 l:'lc5 27.i.d2 tLle5
ow, Black's knight joins the ac
tiOD \\ith a decisive effect and White is
helpless , so he resigned. 0-1

7.i.g5
It deserves attention for White to
try now the line: 7.e4 ! ? d6 8.c4 e6
9.Wfd3 e7 1O.c3 , with a slightly more
pleasant position for him.

7... i.e7 8. 0 - 0 - 0 tLlb4

29

Dreev-Kaidanov, Moscow 1985

The game Shereshevsky - Gusev,
USSR 1977, followed with: B ... O-O 9.a3
bS? 1O.e3 bB 11.d3 c4 12.ixh7+-,
but instead it was possible for Black to

It was quite interesting for Black to

try the active move 17. . . bS. Here after:
IB.f4 Wie7 (IB ...Wif6 19.eS!) 19 ..bbS bB
20.d3 dS 21.WigS (21.exdS? Wif6 22.c3

continue with 9 ... h6 and after 1O.e3

Wib6 23.d2 xdS) 2 1 ...f6 2 2 . Wig3 dxe4

23.c4+ e6 24.fudB+ fudB 2S.Wib3
.bc4 26.Wixc4+ 'it>g7, Black would have

White has an only minimal edge.

9 .be7 Wixe7 1 0 .Wib3 d6 1l.e4
.

0-0
I had intended to counter 1 1. . .e6
with the check - 12.bS+.

12.a3 c6 13.'itld5 gd8 14.'itlh5

an excellent game thanks to his passed

pawn. After 17 ... bS, the only way for
me to maintain the tension would
have been the move - IB.Wih4.

18.f4 'itlg7 19. 'itlxg7+

g6
It seemed good for Black to try
14 . . .e6, without being afraid of the
exchange of the bishop after: IS.gS
b6 16.xe6 (or 16.M eS) 16 ... Wixe6
(or 16 . . .fxe6 17.f4) 17.WidS Wif6. The
endgame is only slightly better for
White after: 14 ... Wixe4 IS.Wixf7+ 'it>xf7
16.gS+ 'it>e7 17.liJxe4 e6 18.e2.

15.'itlh6 e5 16.xe5
Following
16.liJgS?
achieves nothing much.

16

f6,

White

Wixe5

, It would have been a mistake for

Black to play 16 ... dxeS?, because of:
17.xdB+ WixdB 18.c4 and he would
not be able to answer with IB . . . Wid4?,
due to 19.dl+-

17.,id3

In case of 19 .Wih4, I did not like

Black's possibility: 19 . . . c4 20.i.e2 c3.
19 'it>xg7 2 0 .f5 gxf5

There would have arisen a compli

cated, but still approximately equal
endgame with four rooks present
on the board after: 20 . . .d7 21.c4
(or 21.hf1 gxfS 22.exfS 'it>f6 23.e4
c6 24.ixc6 bxc6 2S.f3) 2l...gxfS
22.xd6 e6.

21.exf5 ,id5 22.,ib5 ,ie4

In case of: 22 . . .c6 23 . .bc6 bxc6
24.hel 'it>f6 2S.g4 h6 26.e3 dS 27.
c3 c4 2B.b3 'it>gS, the position re
mains balanced. It deserved attention
for Black to follow with 2 2 ... a6!?

23.ghel J.xf5

Black should have possibly avoided

letting White's rook to the seventh
rank. It was simpler for him to have
defended with: 23 . . . dS 24.d3 ixd3
2S.fud3 'it>f6. After 26.h3 the posi
tion is unclear, but White should also
consider the possibility - 26.c3 ! ?

24.ge7 'it>f8?!
This is already a serious mistake.
The correct defence for Black was:
24 . . .dS 2S.xb7 e6.

17

,ie6

25.gxb7 ,ie4 26.l3C7 .bg2 27.

gd2 ,ie4

Game 3

30
Or 27 ... f3 28.c4 dS 29.gf2 S
30.gfS.

it is the best(!), and I usually prefer

the more modest first move l.d4. Still,
in this game I was almost 100 % sure
that my opponent was going to choose
the French Defence. Evgenij Bareev
was playing almost entirely that par
ticular opening at that time and I had
a very good idea about it, because I
was playing it myself regularly. Natu
rally, it was not a problem for me to
play the position which arose in that

28.d3!
The exchange of the bishops is es
sential for White. Now, Black has
nothing to protect his pawn-weak
nesses with. White has a great advan
tage now, despite his opponent's extra
pawn. Black's defence is extremely
difficult and he loses the game rather
quickly...

28

..

game, since I knew it rather well. At

the end, the following game turned out
to be quite interesting from the point
of view of strategy as well as theory.

1... e6 2.d4 d5 3.otle3 otlf6 4.e5

otlfd7 5.f4 c5 6.otlf3 otle6 7.e3 exd4
8 .otlxd4 e5 9.'d2 ixd4 IO .ixd4
otlxd4 11.'xd4 'b6

f3

Or 28 ...xd3 29.gxd3

29.e4 d5 3 0.lU2 gae8?!

Or 30 ... hS 3U'lf5

31.gxa7 h5 32Jf5 g6 33.

gxd5 ge8 34.b3 gel+ 35.mb2 ge3
In case of 3S . . . gh1, White plays
36.gd2, threatening gd2-f2.

36.a4 gf3 37.gd2 gf4 38.a5 gb8

39.d5 e4 4 0 .ga8 gxa8 41.ixa8
exb3 42.exb3 1- 0
3

ell

The variation that we are playing

is well-familiar. Contemporary theory
considers White's prospects slightly
preferable; however as practice indi
cates in the main lines: 12.119xb6 otlxb6;

Dreev - Bareev

1VijbS 'xd4 13.liJxd4, or 12.0-0-0

USSR Ch Under 20, Tallinn 1986

Wl'xd4 13.Elxd4, White is practically

forced to enter an endgame in which it
is quite problematic for him to prove
that he has any real advantage if at

1.e4!?
WelL I play that move very seldom,
despite the opinion of the famous the
oretician of the past - V.Rauzer - that

all. In case White decides to avoid the

endgame with 12.WI'd2 (G. Kasparov's

31

Dreev-Bareev, Tallinn 1986

idea... ) he should consider the possi
bility 12 .. :xb 2 ! ?, after which the po
sition becomes rather unclear and in
the game Shirov - Bareev, Wijk aan
Zee 2003, after 13J:!:bl 'lWa3 14.ttJbS
'lWxa2 IS.ttJd6+ f8?! 16Jdl 'lWb2 17.
e2 \Wb6 18.c4 ! d4 19.f3 as 20.0-0
d3+ 21.hl, White had a powerful
initiative. Still, in a later game against
the same opponent - Shirov (Monaco
2003) Bareev chose IS ... e7!? and
Alexey failed to find anything better
than : 16.'lWb4 as 17.ttJxc8+ d8 18.'lWe7
xc8 19Jxb7 xb7 20.'lWxd7+ b8,
so that he forced a draw at the end.

12. 0-0- 0 !?
This move seems to be quite logi
cal, because castling long is an integral
part of White's plan anyway.

12 'lWxd4 13.fucd4 e7!?

.

Presently, this move is regarded by

theory as the most reliable for Black;
nevertheless it was introduced into
the tournament practice by Evgenij
Bareev in this very game. According
ly, I was faced with a novelty over the
board, so I decided after some thought
to follow with:

14.h4

White's possibilities at the same time

and it is evidently the best.
In case of 14 ... ttJb8, I was plan
ning to continue with IS.hS!? myself,
occupying additional space and seiz
ing the initiative on the kingside. For
example after: lS . . ttJc6 16.13d3 f6 17.
13g3 fxeS 18.13xg7+ f6 19.h6 exf4 20.
13h4!? Black has a lot of problems to
worry about. Now, after: 20 . . . ttJe7 21.
M4+ <tlfS 22.d3 eS, it deserves at
tention for White to sacrifice the ex
change: 23 ..bf5 ! ? xf4 24.7 and
his compensation for it is more than
sufficient.
It is hardly worth for Black to try:
14 .. .f6, because after IS.exf6+ ttJxf6 (or
.

IS . . .gxf6 16.fS) 16.e2, his position re

mains quite passive without any good
prospects.

15.e2 b8 16.!M2 d7
It was also worth considering
the move 16 . . . ttJc6!? with the idea to
counter 17.bS with: 17 ... d7 1 8.ixc6
ixc6 19.e2 (Black's position is quite
acceptable in case of: 19.13el h6!?)
and thanks to the move 19 .. .f6, Black's
counterplay is good enough to equal
ize. Well, I think that instead of 17.bS,
I would have played 17.hdl !?, main
taining somewhat better chances.

17.ghdl g6?!

14 h5!?
.

This

blocking

move

restricts

----

Game 3

32
This is a serious imprecision. Ev
genij did not have to be in a hurry with
that move, since he practically de
prives himself of any counterplay con
n ected with the undermining pawn
break fl-f6: now, in case that happens
- Black will not be able to capture on
f6 with the pawn. It would have been
much better for him to have tried 17 ...
a6, or 17...ic6, obtaining much more
dynamic positions than the one he
had in the game.
Here, as a result of my opponent's
mistake, I had a clear-cut plan for a
solid positional bind on the queen
side:

me to play 20.aS immediately, trans

posing after 20 ... lLid7 21. i'b2 to the
position, which was played later in the
game.

2 0 ... lLid7
Evgenij fails to exploit the pos
sibility to try to free himself from
the positional bind with the move
20 ... aS!? Although after 21.lLibS lLid7
22.lLid4 lLic5, I would have preserved
a slight but stable positional edge, it
would have been much easier for him
to defend a position like that.

18.b3! a6
Black is now forced to resort to
only passive defence. It is too bad for
him to follow with IS . . . lLic6?! 19.1Lie4
and White has an overwhelming ad
vantage.

19.a4 ic6
It is too dubious for Black to play
19 ... lLic6? ! , because of 20.lLi e4.
On the other hand, Black could
have tried another defensive plan::
19 . . . 1!dS! ? 20. i'b2 lLic6, which seemed
to offer him much brighter prospects,
because it would be very difficult for
White to accomplish the blocking idea
a4-aS with a black knight on the c6square, while his attempt to follow
2o .if3 lLic6, with the tactical varia
tion: 21.ixdS exdS 22.lLixdS+ i'fS 23.
lLib6 ig4 24.lLixaS 1!xaS 2S.1!el, would
have made the game so sharp that
Black would have obtained easily an
active counterplay.

2 0 .b2
It

was

much more precise for

21.a5!
This blocking move fortifies White's
positional advantage and Black is
bound to remain very passive now.

21 ... ghb8 22.gd4 lLic5

It is not any better for Black to de
fend with: 22 ... b6 23.1!al bS 24.lLia2,
because White's positional advantage
is obvious.

23.gb4 b5 24.gbd4
This move frees the b4-square for
the knight. It is understandable that
after: 24.axb6?!, following: 24 ... aS
2S.1!bd4 1!xb6, Black is not worse at
all.

24... ga7 25.lLia2 gc7 26.lLib4

ib7 27 .tf3 lLid7 28.g1d3

33

Dreev-Bareev, Tallinn 1986

1a8 35.E:dd3
This move creates the straightfor
ward threat - E:d3-c3.

35... E:d7! 36.E:d4

I was in a time-trouble, so I decid
ed to repeat the moves. Of course, it
would have been a blunder to follow
with: 36.E:c3?, due to 36 ... d4.

36 E:dc7 37.E:f3! 1b7 38.E:dd3

d4?
.

I have managed to improve my

position considerably and my advan
tage is indisputable. Black's position
is passive indeed, but it is still solid
enough and as long as there are rooks
present on the board he has the poten
tial to defend successfully. Therefore
my plan is clear - I need to trade a
couple of rooks and after that the cata
strophic weakness of the dark squares
in my opponent's camp will make his
situation critical. Accordingly, Evgenij
should do his best to try to prevent the
realization of that plan.

Evgenij was also in a time-pres

sure and he made a decisive mistake.
He had to continue with: 38 ... gd7 and
although after 39.E:c3, I would have
maintained my positional bind - he
could have resisted. Now, Black's de
fence crumbles.

39.l'U2 E:d8 4 0.E:fd2 E:cd7

28 . . Jbc8
Black parries the threat Eld3-c3.

29.Ele3 tiJb8 3 0 .g3 tiJc6?!

This move facilitates considerably
my task to press the positional advan
tage home. It was better for him to
play 30 ... ltJd7, because in that case it
is not immediately evident how I can
proceed with the idea to exchange
rooks.

31.tiJxc6+ !lxc6 32.1dl!

It is essential to keep the c3-square
free for my rook. After 32.c3? El6c7=,
all my advantage would have evapo
rated into thin air.

32 ... E:c5 33.a3! E:5c7 34.b4

41.c3! dxc3

and here Black de

cided not to wait for the evident

line: 42.gxd7+ gxd7 43J'ixd7+ xd7
44.@xc3 and the king and bishop end
ing is hopeless for him (for example:
44 ...id5 45.@d4 @c6 46.b4 and Black
is in a zugzwang - after the retreats of
the bishop 46 ...ic4; 46 ... 1g2, or 46 ...
ia2, White wins promptly with 47.g4,
while in case of any king-move - White
wins with 47.f5!), so Black resigned.

Game 4

34

E12
Dreev - Gelfand
USSR Ch Under 20, Tallinn 1986

l.d4 tiJf6 2.tiJf3 e6 3.c4 b6

4.tiJc3 ib7 5.a3 d5 6.cxd5 tiJxd5
7.V;Vc2 c5
The move 7... tiJxc3 has always been
considered as more reliable for Black,
both now and even back then, when
our game was played...

8.dxc5 ixc5 9.ig5 c8 1 0 .gel

h6 1l.tiJxd5!?
In the game Kasparov - van der
Wiel, Amsterdam 1988, White pre
ferred 1l.ih4, which seemed to be
more solid and trustworthy than the
move in the game.

15.xe5 ixb4+ 16.mdl tiJc6

After: 16... V;Vd7 17.axb4 (but not
17.e4? id6) 17... tiJc6, I would have to
choose between the calm line: 18.V;VhS
'lWxdS+ 19.V;VxdS exdS 20.bS tiJeS 21.e3
(21.h3 g3) with a slightly better posi
tion and the much riskier variation:
18.V;Vg7 'lWxdS+ 19. mel l"ld8 20.V;Vc3.

17Jxc6
It seemed interesting for me to play
17.'lWxg7!?, but after: 17... ixa3 (or 17...
V;Vd7 18.axb4 'lWxdS+ 19.me1) 18.l"lc3
exdS 19.1"lxa3 V;VfS 20.e3 V;Vb1+ 21.md2
tiJaS, I did not see anything better for
White than a draw by repetition of
moves.

1l hxg5 12.b4 g4 13.tiJe5 gh5!?

14.2N

That is a new move. In the game

M.Petursson - K.Hansen, Borgarnes
1985, there followed: 14.V;Va4+?! tiJc6
lS.bxcS l"lxeS 16.tiJe3 l"lxcS and Black
had the advantage.

17...xc6?

14 ...!'!xe5!
My opponent changes the situation
in the game radically with this sacri
fice. In case of: 14 ...hdS lS.bxcS bxcS
16.lLlxg4, White's advantage is so to
speak - for free ...

Now, Boris makes a wrong decision

in this rather complicated position. It
would have been too dubious for him to
try: 17...ixc6?! 18.tiJxb4 ia4+ 19. md2
as 20.tiJd3 'lWc2+ 21. me3 0-0-0 22.f3,
but following the surprising line: 17...
'lWd7! 18.l"lc7 (or 18.e4? ixc6 19.axb4
eM8 20.bS ib7 21.h3 g3! 22.V;Vc7 l"ld8
23.V;Vxd7 l:'lxd7 24.fxg3 exdS+) 18. . .
'lWa4+ 19J:k2 l"ld8 (19 ...ixdS 20.e4
l"lc8? 21.ibS!; 20 ... gd8 21.exdS l"lxdS+
22.V;VxdS exdS 23.axb4=) 20.e4 i.e7
21.ic4 bS, Black would have obtained
an excellent game.

35

Dreev-Gelfand, Tallinn 1986

18. tt'lxb4 0 - 0 - 0 +
Or 18. . .a4+
tt'ld3

19.@d2 xa3 20.

19.tt'ld3 f6 2 0 .'M>2?!
It was stronger for me to play:
20.f4 and if 20 . . . e5 21.xg4+ @b8,
then 22.f3.
20 ..e5 21.@el
The move 21.f3 100ked weaker.
.

Finally, I am solving the problem

with the development of my kingside.
24 ..e5
The variation: 24 . . . :i3c8 25.d2 e5
26.ia6, leads to the same position as
.

in the game, but it deserves a serious

attention for White to consider too:
26.ie2 ! ? al+ 27.idl xa3 28.'Llc2 !?
If 24 ... a5, then 25.'Lla6+ @a7 26.
'Llc7+-, and White is threatening 'Llc7b5-d4.

25.ia6
That move is not bad at all, but pos
sibly it would have been stronger for
me to have continued with: 25.ie2!
:i3c8 26.d2 al+ 27.idl xa3 28.
'Llc2, or 28.hg4!?

25 :i3c8
.

That is an only move for Black.

26.ed2 ixa6
21. e4
.

That pawn-advance facilitated the

realization of my material advantage
considerably. My opponent could have
pffered much tougher resistance after
the move 21 ... @b8!, thus preventing
White's threat to trade queens. Fol
lowing that White would have had se
rious problems to prove his advantage,
mostly because of his lag in develop
ment. For example: 22.f3 (or 22.h3
g3 23.e3 d5; 23.f3 e4 24.fxe4 xe4
25.b4 :i3d4 26.f8+ ic8) 22 . . . e4
(22 . . . gxf3 23.gx:f3 :i3xd3? 24.exd3 xf3
25.ig2 ! +-; or 23 . . . e4 24.fxe4 xe4
2S.'Llf2 e3 26Jgl :i3c8 27.:i3g3!+-)
23.fxe4 xe4 24.b4 :i3d4 25.f8+
.lc8 and although my chances would
have been preferable, there would b e
still a real fight t o follow. . .

22.tt'lb4 ed6 23.ecl+! @b8 24.

e3

After 26 ... al+?, I had the beau

tiful winning line: 27.@e2 xhl 28.
d6+ :i3c7 29.'Llc6! @a8 30.xc7
ha6+ 31.@d2+-

27.tt'lxa6+ @a8
Or 27 . . . @b7 28 .d7+

28. tt'lb4? !
This move is too hasty. Naturally, it
would have been a mistake for me to
play 28.a4?, because of 28 ... a5 - and
White's knight gets trapped. The cor-

36

Game S

rect move for him would have been

28.Elfl

28

a5?

That is a decisive mistake for Black.

Boris failed to find in his time-trouble
the correct defence 28 . . . g;,b7!, which
would have created great problems for
me to materialize my advantage. Now,
in case of: 29.El1 a5 30.WfdS+ (30.
lLla2) 30 ... Wfxd5 31.lLlxdS ElcS! 32.lLlf4
Elc1+ 33.g;,e2 Elc2+ 34.g;,d1 :i3a2 3S.lLle2
:i3xa3, Black has an excellent compen
sation for the piece. I had another pos
sibility: 29.g;,d1! as 30.lLlc2 Wfb2 31.Ele1
Wfb1+ 32.Wfc1 Wfb3 33.Ele2 :i3h8! 34.f3
gxf3 35.gxf3 exf3 36.Elf2 :i3c8.

29.lLld5+- Wfal+
Or 29 ...g;,b7 30.g;,e2+-

3 0 .g;,e2 xhl 31.c!DXb6+ g;,b7

32.tl'lxc8 g;,xc8 33.9c2+
The arising king and queen end
game is extremely difficult for Black.

33 g;,d8 34.xe4 xh2 35.

xg4 c7 36.ge6

36.Wfd4 + ! ?

36 9c3? !
.

It was a bit better for Black to have

defended with: 36 ...Wfc2+ 37.g;,f3
g;,c7.

37.9g8+ g;,c7 38.xg7+ g;,b6

After the obvious mistake 39.Wff8??, Black makes a draw with the
line: 39 ... Wfc2+ 40.g;,f3 Wff5+ 41.g;,g3
WfgS+ 42.g;,h2 Wfh5 + !

39

a4 4 0 .ge7 g;,b5 41.d7+

Here, the time-trouble was over

and Black resigned.

C44

5
Dreev

Kamsky

SSth USSR Ch (112-final),Pavlodar 1987

This was the tournament (the

USSR Championship semi-final), in
which as I explained in the Foreword,
I came to participate in the uniform
of a Soviet Army private. I played
well in the tournament though, and I
qualifiedfor the Final.
1.e4 e5 2.tl'lf3 tl'lc6 3.c3
The Ponziani Opening is a quite
rare guest in the contemporary tour
naments ...

3... d6
This move is possible, but it is not
principled. There arise some very
complex positions after: 3 ... dS 4.ibS.
I think that Black's best reaction is
- 3 ... lLlf6 4.d4 lLlxe4 5.d5 lLle7 6.lLlxe5
lLlg6, with an approximate equality.

4.d4 e7

39.g4

Dreev-Kamsky, Paviodar 1987

5 ..td3
It deserved serious attention for
White to enter positions typical for
the King's Indian Defence with d4-dS

37

18 WI'e8
..

Black should worry about the pos

sibility - ltJe3-dS.

(S.dS !? tLlb8 6.c4), or by first exchang

ing the light squared bishops (5 . .tbS!?
.td7 6.dS); but I preferred to preserve
the tension in the centre.

5 g6 6. 0 - 0 .tg7 7.lll bd2 tLlf6

8..)c4 0 - 0 9.dxe5
.

In case of the immediate 9 . .tgS, it

is good for Black to follow with: 9 ... h6
1O.ih4 exd4 1l.cxd4 gS.

dxe5

9 . . . tLlxeS ! ?

1 0 ..tg5 h6 11 ..th4 lld8 12.WI'c2 g5

Black is forced to play that move,
which compromises his position con
siderably; otherwise the pin along the
h4-d8 diagonal is too unpleasant for
him. In case of 12 ... ig4, White can
simply answer 13.ie2, followed by
e3 with tempo.

13 .tg3 tLlh5 14. tLle3 tLlf4 15.llfdl

,
It was also possible for White to
continue with 1S . .tbS.

15 .te6
.

Black could have tried here the ex

change: 1S .. J''lxd3 16.llxd3 tLlxd3 17.
exd3, but White's position would be
dearly preferable, for example: 17...
J.e6 18.WI'bS b8 19.tLldS Wl'd6 20Jldl
wb8 21.tLle3 a6 22.WI'e2 V9cS 23.tLldS
(23.h4 g4 24.tLlh2 hS 2S.tLldS) 23 ... llc8
24.h4 g4 2S.tLlh2 h5 (2S ... f5 26.b4)
26.tLlfl.

16 .tc4 a6 17.a4 llab8

Or 17... ixc4 18.tLlxc4 Wl'e6 19.tLle3

e7 20.a5

18.b4
White is occupying space on the
queenside.

19.h4
I could have continued the game
without that move somehow, instead
I could have played something calm
er, but it seemed to me that I could
not maintain my advantage only by
exploiting the weakness of the light
squares in Black's camp.

19 g4 2 0 .tLlh2 h5 2t.tlld5?!

I decided to change radically the

course of the game, but that was prob
ably in vain ... It would have been much
more logical for me to have continued
with the simple move 21.tLlhfl.

2 1 .b:d5 22.exd5 ttle7 23.WI'e4

ttlc8

After: 23 ... c6! 24.dxc6 Wl'xc6 25.

Wl'xc6 tLlxc6 26.f3 llbc8! 27.fxg4 tLld4,
Black's position is excellent.

24 .ta2 ttld6 25. Wl'c2 b5

Gata prevents the move c3-c4, but

he loses too much time while doing
that. It seemed again quite acceptable
for him to have played - 2S . . . c6

26.ttlfl ttlg6
Black had better follow with 26 ...
bxa4 and if 27. .tbl - 27 ... V9bS !

27.ttle3 Wl'd7 2 8 .tbl lla8

Game 6

38
The move 2 8. .. e4!, would have led
to a very unclear position.

29.a2 eS?!
Black defends against the threat
abS, but he relinquishes the initiative
completely with his last move. Once
again, his best move would have been
29 ...e4!

30 . .b:g6 fxg6 31.c4 f7

Or 31...bxc4 32.lOxc4 lOe4? 33.d6!
'<!ih7 34.dxc7 13xdl+ 3S.13xdl lOc3 36.
d2 lOxd1 37.lOb6+-

32.axb5 lOe4
Black's counterplay is evidently too
slow.

would be unstoppable.

39 ...xh4 4 0 .dxc7 13f8 41.g3

f6 42.d2 '<!ihS
Or 42 . . .h6 43.lOxg4y;'g6 44.lLlxh6+
y;'xh6 4S.y;'d6.

43.y;'d6
Naturally, the exchange of queens
is in favour of White.

43 ...f3 44.d5 f6 45.f3

It was also possible to try 4S.cS.

45 ... e4 46.h2+ .ih6 47.f4

al+ 4S.dl c3 49.d2 xd2
5 0 .xd2 ig7 51.b6
The rest is quite clear without any
comments.

51 ic3 52.d7 ib4 53.b7 aeS

54.a7
.

33.bxa6
That is the simplest decision for
White. His passed pawns are much
more important than Black's extra ex
change.

33 lLlc3 34.Va3 lOxdl 35Jhdl

f6 36.b5 g5 37.hxg5
..

i
j

37.d6! ?

37 xg5 3S.d6 h4

(diagram)

39 ..b:h4
It was much simpler for me to have
followed with: 39.dxc7 13xdl+ 40.lOxdl
hxg3 41.y;'xg3 and White's pawns

54 ic5 55.bS .b:e3+ 56.'<!ifl

1- 0
..

39

Dreev-Gelfand, Uzhgorod 1987

D37

6
Dreev - Gelfand
Uzhgorod 1987

l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 d5 4.lLlc3

.ie7 5.ti4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 ixc5

B.c2
White has here a calmer line at his
disposal - 8.cxdS 'LlxdS 9.'LlxdS exdS
1O.a3 'Llc6 1l.id3 ib6 12.0-0.

B lLlc6 9.gdl

The other principled variation for

White is: 9.a3 WfaS 10.0-0-0.
9 .. :a5 1 0 .a3 .ie7 1l.lLld2 e5
12.ig5 d4 13.tl:lb3 WfdB (13 ...Wfb6)

14.exd4
I decided to try that seldom played
move. White plays much more often
here: 14.ie2 as 1S.'Lla4 h6 16.ixf6
ixf6 17.cS ie6, with a complicated
position.

14 exd4
..

It is also interesting for Black to

defend with: 14... 'Llxd4 1S.'Llxd4 exd4
16.'LlbS. Now after: 16 ...id7 17.'Llxd4
WfaS+ 18.Wfd2 Wfb6 19.ie3, the oppo
nents agreed to a draw in the game
Ivanchuk - Vaganian, USSR 1988.
Meanwhile, Ivanchuk pointed out
later that after: 19 ... ia4 20.b3 ixb3
2U!b1 'Lle4 2 2.E:xb3 'Llxd2 23.gxb6
'Llxf1 24.E:xb7 'Llxe3 2S.fxe3, White
could have maintained the advan
tage. Therefore, it deserved atten
tion for Black to follow with: 16 ...
ig4!? 17.fud4 ge8! 18.ie3 (this is
the only move) 18. . . Wfb6 19.id3 ics
20.0-0 ixd4 21.ixd4 Wfd8 22.ix6
gxf6 (or 22 ... Wfxf6 23.'Llc7) 23.h3 .ihs
24.ixh7+ \t>g7 2S.ie4 a6 26.'Llc3 ig6
and the position was approximately
equal in the game Piket - van der
Srerren, Lyon 1990.

15.ie2 lLlg4 16.ixe7 Wfxe7 17.

lLldS
In a game, which was played a
year later - (Dreev - Kruppa, Frunze
1988) I deciejed to capture the pawn
- 17.'Llxd4, but following: 17 ... Wfh4
18.g3 Wfh3 19.Wfe4 id7, Black had an
excellent compensation for it.

17 IDl4

Game 7

40
We played subsequently i n the
same year another game in this line
with Boris and there he continued
with 17 . . :eS! and after 18.f4 fS ! , he
had the advantage and he won that
game. The only correct solution for
White would have been: 18.d2 :1'1e8
19.ttJf4, with mutual chances.

Possibly, Black had simply over

looked that move . . .

18.g3 h3 19.1Llf4 h6 2 0 .
lLlxd4

Protvino 1988

26 ... xa3 27.@xf2 e3+ 28.@el

xg3+ 29.@tl g6 3 0 .h3 1- 0
7

D27
Dreev - Chekhov

I fulfilled a grandmaster norm in

that category B - tournament in the
town ofProtuino, near Moscow, with
2 0 ... lLlxd4 2U'lxd4 e8 22.h4
B points out ofll rounds andl tiedfor
Here, I failed to find the best move first place with grandmaster Valerij
- 22.ttJdS ! , after which my advantage Chekhov ...
would have been considerable.
1.d4 d5 2.lLlf3 lLlf6 3.c4 dxc4
22 ... b6
4.e3 e6 5.ixc4 a6 6. 0 - 0 c5 7.id3
That is totally wrong! Black had cxd4 8.exd4 lLlc6
Now, Black can hardly rely on ob
taining any compensation for the
pawn.

better continue with: 22 . . .f6 23.:1'1d2

ifS 24. b3 e4 2S.0-0 fS.

23.c5! a5+ 24.d2

Black plays much more often here

8 ...ie7, not determining the place
ment of the knight for the time being.
Now, after 9.ttJc3, Black can play 9 ...
b5, but in that case he must consider
White's active possibility 10. ttJeS.

9.lLlc3 ie7 1 0 .ig5 0 - 0 ll.cl

24 if5?
..

This is an incorrect combination in

an already difficult position. Follow
ing: 24 . . .b6 2S.0-0 bxcs (or 25 . . .xc5
26.xcS bxcs 27.:1'1c1) 26.:1'1d5, I would
have the task to press the advantage of
an extra pawn home. No w, White wins
easily.

25. xf5 lLlxf2 26.b4

1l ...b6
My opponent took a long time to
make up his mind here and that nov
elty was 0 bviously not the result of any
home-preparation.

41

Dreev-Chekhav, Fratvina 1988

In a game, which was played much
later (Dreev - Karjakin, Dos Herma
nas 2003) Black equalized without too
much of an effort with: 1l ... lOd5 12.h4
(It is much more principled for White
to follow here with: 12.lOxd5 hg5
13.lOxg5 'lWxg5 14.lOb6 ElbB 15.'lWc2.)
12 ... h6 13.he7 lOcxe7;::

12 ..bf6
It also deserved attention for me to
try to avoid exchanges - 1 2.'lWd2 and
gfdl. I went for a forced tactical op
eration:

12

.bf6 13.lOe4

At first it seemed to me that the

move 13.ie4 would guarantee my ad
vantage: 13 ...ib7 14.d5 exd5 15.xd5
ixb2 16J''lb l. However, Black is not
obliged to capture on b2, but he can
play instead 15 ... ElcB and he can still
hold that position: 16.xf6+ 'lWxf6 17.
IWd7 ia8; White's position is evidently
more active, just like before, but what
he can do to turn that into something
real remains unclear.

13 J.b7
..

Naturally, Black cannot capture

on d4 - 13 ... lOxd4 14.lOxf6+ 'lWxf6
15.xd4 'lWxd4 16.ixh7+; and if 13 ...
id7, then 14.lOxf6+ 'lWxf6 15.ie4 Elac8
16.'lWd3 lOb4 17.'lWb3 and after the un
avoidable move a2-a3, Black's b-pawn
becomes an easy prey. Therefore 13 ...
ib7 - is a practically forced move.

14.xf6+ gxf6
It was worth for Black to capture
with the queen - 14...'lWxf6 15.ie4Elac8
16.e5 tll xe5 17.ixb7 Elxc1 18.'lWxc1,
because after the best defence for him
18 ... lOg6, White remains with only a
slight advantage.

lS.J.e4 Elc8 16.i:lc3 f5

17.gS! IWxgS
It is too bad for Black to play 17...
h6, due to 1B.hc6 gxc6 (In case Black
captures with his bishop - there fol
lows the same reaction anyway.)
19.'lWh5 and here either: 19 ...hxg5 20.
Elh3, or 19...Elxc3 20.'lWxh6 and White
checkmates.

18.hc6 IWe7 19.dS hc6

If 19 ... Elfd8, then 20.'lWh5.

2 0 .dxc6
White's powerful passed pawn pro
vides him with an overwhelming ad
vantage.

20

..

Elfd8 21.IWe2

This move is hardly the best. The

correct decision would have been - the
recommendation of Mark Dvoretzkij
- 21.'lWc1! with the idea to trade a cou
ple of rooks after Eldl. Now, Black pre
vents that quite reasonably. He would
like to exchange queens, though ...

21 IWd6 22.IWe3
..

In view of what I have already men

tioned - it would have been better to
follow with 22.'lWf3.

22

IWd4 23 .IW3 EldS

Valerij has made a good use of my

indifferent play and he has improved
his position considerably.

24.gfcl Elc7
Black must still try to exchange

Game B

42
queens - 24 ... VNg4, in order to fight
for the draw. His king is so vulner
able that he has no chances to attack
White's c-pawn effectively.

2S.h3 mfS

... but still fortunately, writing the

move did not mean that I played it... !

4l.VNc2!
This move just shuns all possible
temptations!

41. . .md8
26.'?NhS! me7 27.trgS+!

or 4l.. .Ela3 42.Elc3

Black can counter 27.VNxh7, with

42.a4 a4 43.c7+ mc8 44.ElgS

This is the ultimate necessary pre-

27 .. Jk5 equalizing.

27 VNf6

cision. Black resigned.

After 27 ... mf8 28.a3, there arises a

peculiar zugzwang situation - Black
has no useful moves left. Now, he loses a pawn by force and that practically
spells disaster for him.

28.%Yf4 md8 29 .'i!rb4 VNe7 3 0 .

VNxb6 as 3 1.Elc5 VNd6 32.trxaS Eld1+
33.Elxdl %Yxdl+ 34.mh2 trd6+ 3S.
mgl

D2 0

8
Dreev - R.Sherbakov

Qualifer for World Junior (Under 20)

Borzhomi 1988

I have already mentioned this

tournament too in the Foreword to
White wins some additional sec this book. It was a qualification event
onds in the time-pressure.
for the World Under-2 0 Champion
3S ...VNdl+ 36.mh2 %Yd6+ 37.g3 ship), and I tookfirst place, but I did
f4 38.VNc3 fxg3+ 39.fxg3 me7 4 0 . not go anywhere...
b4 Ela7
l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4.f3
(diagram)
ib4+
The time-trouble is

How

It is much more fashionable here

should I continue? After 41.a3?, Black

plays 41...Elxa3! with a draw. I was

over.

tempted to follow with the spectacular

line: 41.c7? l':lxa2+ 42.VNc2, but after
4 2 ...VNxc5! Black again saves the day. I

for Black to follow with the captur

ing 4 . . . exd4. Now, the transfer to an
endgame after: 5.VNxd4 %Yxd4 6.tLlxd4,
leads to an equal position. In case 0(:
5.tLlxd4 ic5!? 6.ie3 tLlf6, Black has a

wrote the move 41.c7 on my scoresheet

good game, because he can counter

43

Dreev-Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988

7.tDc3 with 7 . . . tDg4!?, while against
7.f3 he has the powerful argument 7. . .
tDc6!. Following 7.a4+ tDbd7 8.tDc3
0-0, Black's prospects, having in
mind the threats tDd7-b6 and tDf6g4 are evidently superior. Therefore,
White's only way to fight for the open
ing advantage is the variation: 5.hc4
ib4 + ! ? 6.tDbd2 tDc6, which is connect
ed with a pawn-sacrifice. Well, as con
temporary practice shows, even then
White's compensation for the pawn is
sufficient, but the arising positions are
rather complex and double-edged.

After 6.xd4 xd4 7.tDxd4 tDf6,

Black has nothing to worry about in
the arising endgame.

6 e7!?
..

This is the principled reaction by

Black. Ruslan practically forces me to
sacrifice a pawn for the initiative. The
more modest move 6 ... tDe7 is not good
enough to save Black from his prob
lems as the tournament practice shows
in the last several years. For example,
the abovementioned game Topalov Kharlov, continued with: 7.hc4 tDbc6
8 .e3 tDxd4 9.xd4 xd4 10.hd4
0-0 1l.a3 hc3+ 12.hc3 e6 13.e2
b3 14.h4! ? and White maintained a
stable positional advantage, because
in that purely technical endgame the material ratio of a couple of white
bishops against a b ishop and a knight
for Black is a very powerful argument
in favour of White.

7.hc4 xe4+ 8.e3!?

No doubt, that novelty must have

5.lOc3!?
With this move I avoid the standard
modem tabia: 5.tDbd2 exd4 6.hc4
tDc6; as well as the not less fashion
able scheme - 5.d2 hd2+ 6.tDbxd2
exd4. Of course, this became possible
mostly because my opponent had cho
sen the line 4 ... b4, and not 4 ... exd4.
The move 5.lOc3!? is quite promising
for White in this position and that can
be proven by the interesting fact that
16 years later than our game with Elus
Ian - the same move was preferred by
Vesselin Topalov in his game against
GM A.Kharlov in the World Champi
onship in Tripoli (2004).

5 exd4 6.lOxd4
..

been a surprise for my opponent,

since he failed to find the best defen
sive plan over the board. Naturally, I
cannot tell what improvement Ruslan
Sherbakov must have found against
the main theoretical line: 8. <,!;>f1 hc3
9 .bxc3, which used to be fashionable
at that moment.

44

Game B

8 ixc3+?!
.

This exchange i s hardly necessary

and it seems to me to be anti-posi
tional. He should have played instead
the principled reaction 8 .. :xg2!? and
I had planned to counter that with
9.i>d2! . There arises a rather unclear
position, in which White has a power
ful initiative for two sacrificed pawns.
It is quite understandable - why Rus
Ian avoided that possibility. It is ex
tremely difficult psychologically, par
ticularly without any home-prepara
tion to enter complications like that,
while White's game would have been
quite easy. His threats like a4, b3,
Elg1 and h5 are more than obvious;
meanwhile the best defensive plan for
Black is mildly speaking - rather un
clear. Still, I believe that from the point
ofview of theory, after 9 . . . tLlc6!?, or 9 ...
i>f8!?, Black's prospects should not be
inferior . . . . Similar intuitive pawn-sac
rifices for initiative were often met in
the games of the great Russian player
- the World Champion number four
- Alexander Alekhine and his chesslegacy is something I had studied quite
thoroughly in my junior years ...

9.bxc3

In this very moment, the move

9 ... xg2 is hardly any better that the
line in the game, because in this case,
besides 9.i>d'; (dnd White's initia
tive compen' . . tes the two sacrificed
pawns ... ) I would have had the even
stronger argument - 1O.h5!?, after
which Black is practically forced to en
ter the line: 1O ... g6 (or 1O . . .xh1+?
1l.i>d2+-) 11.e5+ tLle7, but after 12.
0-0-0, White's initiative is very pow
erful. For example, in case of 12 ... c6?,
it is good for White to follow with:
13 ..tg5! f6 14.d6! and Black has no
satisfactory defence: if 14 . . . xg5+,
then 15.f4 a5 16.Elhe1+-, while in
case of 14 ...fxg5, there follows a spec
tacular checkmate in five - 15.d8+ ! !
i>xd8 16.tLle6+ i>e8 17.tilc7+ i>f8 18.
Eld8+ e8 19.Elxe8#. It is also too bad
for Black to play: 12 ... .tg4? 13.Eldg1
tLld7 14.f4+-. Therefore, he has
probably nothing better than: 12... f6
and after 13.xc7, White regains his
pawn and maintains his initiative. It
is also possible for White to try here:
13.xf6 !? gxf6 14 . .tf4 and his initia
tive is quite dangerous notwithstand
ing the absence of the queens on the
board.
1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0 1Utel tLlg6?!
My opponent is immediately in a
very difficult position after that mis
take. Even following: 1l...h4 12.d2,
he would have had plenty of problems
to worry about, but he could have
offered some tenacious defence. Now,
the developments are just forced:
12 .tcl! g4 13 .ta3 gd8?!
This move enables me to start a
quite spectacular attack. Black could

have tried to hold the position only

Dreev-Sherbakov, Borzhomi 1988

by entering a very difficult endgame
after: 13 ... xd1 14J3axdl l3d8 15.ttJb5.

45
sign outright, because of the unavoid
able threat of the "quiet' move - \t>gl
h2! ! , with the idea to follow with g2-g3.
Black is totally helpless against that
threat. For example, in case of: 20 ...
d6 21.l3f5 ! , or 20 ... e5 21.l3f5 ixf5
22.g3+ White wins .on the spot. I think
I played quite well until that moment,
but here I made a serious imprecision
and although I did not let the win slip
away altogether, my opponent had a
chance to resist quite resiliently for
much longer. . .

14 .hf7+ ! c;!}xf7

In case of: 14 . . . c;!}h8 15.xg4 .bg4

16. l::l a bl, or 16.f3, I would have main
tained an overwhelming positional ad
vantage with material equality present
on the board.
15:b3+ C;!}f6 16.h3 d7 17 l3e3 !
Black is beyond salvation after that
strong move.
.

17 'I19d5

He can save the day neither with:

17 ... ttJf4 18 .l3ae1 d5 19 ..ie7+ c;!}g6 20.
gg3+ \t>h6 21 ..ig5+-; nor with: 17...
e5 18.l3ael ttJbc6 19.f4+-

1S.lU'3+ \t>g5 19.Jtcl+ c;!}h4

2 O .g3?! 'I19xb3 21.ttJf3+ c;!}h5 22.

gg5+ c;!}h6 23.gf5+ ttJf4 24.hf4+
g5 25 .ixg5+ c;!}g7 26 .axb3 hf5
27 .ixdS c5 2S.Jte7 b6

Or 28 ... ttJc6 29 ..ig5 l3e8. This end

game without a pawn is still hopeless
for Black despite the opposite coloured
bishops present on the board. White
can easily advance his connected
passed pawns on the kingside, just like
it happened in the game, though . . .
There still followed:

29.dl ttJc6 3 0 .Jtg5 geS 31.gd6

ttJa5 32.Jtf6 + c;!}gS 33.g4 Jte6 34.
g5 JtcS 35.f4 ttJxb3 36.Jte5 ttJa5
37.ttJe4 gfS 3S.ttJf6 + c;!}f7 39.ttJxh7
ggS 4 0 .ttJg5+ e7 41.gh6 Jtd7 42.
f5 ttJc4 43. f6+ c;!}fS 44 .1f4 ttJe5
45.ttJh7+ c;!}f7 46 ..ixe5 .ixg4 47.
hxg4 xg4 + 4S.c;!}f2 a5 and Black

resigned without waiting for the quite

evident follow-up - 49.l3h5.

D13
Baburin - Dreev

Now, the most logical final touch of

my attack would have been the move
- 20.'I19dl! and Black should better re-

56th USSR Ch (lh-final), Gorky 1989

There were Championships in ev-

Game 9

46

ery republic constituting a part of

the USSR. In the Russian Federation
(which later turned into Russia after
the dissolution of the Soviet Union)
there were Championships as well,
but they hardly ever attracted the
strongest players. There were not
enough international tournaments
however and grandmasters partici
pated often in the Championships of
the different republics, which among
everything else were qualification
tournaments for the Championship
of the USSR. In November 1989, in
the city of Gorky (now that city is
named Nizhny Novgorod) there was
organized the Championship of the
Russian Federation as a round-robin
with 14 participan ts. I took the bronze
medal with a result 8 112 points "+4",
half a point behind Semen Dvoiris.
Alexey Vizhmanavin playedjust bril
liantly and he became the Champion
with 10 points.
1.d4 dS 2 .c4 c6 3.cxds cxds
4.tOc3 tOf6 S.tOf3
In case of S . .if4, White must con
sider S . . . b6.

..

tOc6 6 ..if4 e6 7.e3

We have played one of the lines of

the exchange variation of the Slav De
fence. It looks like White does not risk
anything in that position and after the
attractive moves 7. .id3, or 7.h3, his
prospects seem to be superior. Things
are far from simple, though ...

Botvinnik at those times ... He was a

player with an active positional style
and he was just brilliant in his capa
bilities to complicate some quite sim
ple positions with Black, right after
the opening, in order to play them for
a win. I am going to quote a magnifi
cent classic example of his treatment
of that variation in a training game T.Petrosian - Botvinnik, USSR 1952,
which followed with: 8 . .igS b6 9.a3
h6 1O .ih4 gS 11..ig3 tOg3 12.hg3 .ig7
13.id3 d8! 14.tOh2?! hS 1S,Ek1 .id7
16.tObS 'tt> f8 ! 17.tOfl g4 18.tOd2 eS and
Black seized the initiative.
.

8 ..igS
-

White's other possibility here is

8 ..ieS.

8 b6 9 .ibS

This move is no doubt the best for

White and he is trying to create maxi
mal problems for his opponent with it.
V.Kron is his game with White against
me in the same tournament tried

(diagram)
This interesting move leads to
a complicated situation and it was
played and quite successfully at that

here 9.b1, but after 9 ... h6 1O ..ih4

gS 1l.tOd2 tOg7 12 . .ig3 tOfS, he did
not achieve anything much and later,
following the dubious line: 13 . .ieS?!
tOxeS 14.dxeS .ig7 1S.e4 tOe7 16.exdS
exdS 17 ..ibS+ 'tt>f8 18.0-0 .if5, I even
managed to obtain the advantage with

by the sixth World Champion Mikhail

Black.

7... tOhS

47

Baburin-Dreev, Gorky 1989

In case of 9.d2, Black can coun
ter with the standard reaction: 9 ...h6
IO.Ah4 g5 1l.Ag3 ttJxg3 1 2.hxg3 Ag7
and his position is quite promising.
9...h6 1 0 .Ah4 Ad7
It would have been a serious im
precision for Black to follow with 10 ...
g5, due to 1l.ttJeS! and White main
tains a dangerous initiative - 1l ... ttJf6
12.Ag3.

15.dxe5 ttJf4 16.Ag3 ttJe6 17.

'l'Hxd5 lUd8

11. 0 - 0 Ad6!?
After ll ... gS 12.hc6 hc6 13.ttJe5,
White is clearly better.
I had some compensation for the
pawn and even if it had not been quite
sufficient objectively from the prac
tical point of view, White's game is
much more difficult here.

18.'l'He4
18.a4!?

18 ... liJed4 19.a4 Af5 2 0 .h4?!

It would have been more reliable
for White to try: 20.e3 a6 2 1.hc6
bxc6, with some compensation.

12.e4
That is White's most energetic pos
sibility. His alternative is: 12.ttJe5 he5
13.dxe5 g6, but it leads to an approxi
mately equal position, because in case
of 14.g4, Black has the powerful argu
ment - 14. . .g5!
12 ... 0 - 0
I had i n mind a positional pawn
sacrifice, while I played that move. Of
course, it was possible to follow with
the less risky line 12 ... ttJf4, but not
12 ... de4, because of 13.dS!

13.exd5 exd5 14.ttJe5 Axe5

It is too bad for Black to continue

with: 14 ... ttJxeS IS.dxeS hb5, due to:
16.ttJxdS! a6 (or 16 ... cS 17.exd6
ixfI 18.xhS) 17J!el+-

2 0 ... a6 21.Ac4
After: 21.hc6 bxc6, my position
would have been even slightly better.

21 ...'l'Hxb2 22.liJd5
My opponent gave back his extra
pawn and he evidently intended to
seize the initiative with that active ma
neuver.

22 ...Ae6
This is a very solid move. It was
also interesting for Black to follow
with: 22 ... b5 23Ja2 ttJe2 + ! 24.whl
ttJxg3+ 2S.xg3 xeS (2S ...d4 26.
ttJf6+ wh8 27.ttJhS g6 or 26.ttJe3 bxc4
27.ttJxfS xeS 28.ttJxh6+ Wf8 29.f3
d5) 26.axbS axbS 27.xeS ttJxeS 28.
!3xa8 !3xa8 29.hbS.

23.gabl 'l'Ha3 24.liJe3 gab8 25.M4

Game 10

48

My opponent was in a terrible

time-pressure here and he made a
grave blunder. The correct defence for
him would have been: 25.l"lal c5, but
Black would still preserve the edge.

and that was a real holiday for chess

then. Chess fans could watch the play
of the grandmasters there (there was
no Internet transmission yet!) and
they could also participate in simul
25 hc4 26 .!Llxc4 Yfxa4
taneous displays and they could at
tend chess lectures. I remember that
the exhibition of the chess-computer
"Mephisto" attracted enormous inter
est. Naturally, nobody suspected then
what tremendous level of playing
quality the computers would achieve
later! As far as I remember from the
publications in the media, the tour
nament was visited by at least 3 0
thousand spectators. All that seems
almost unbelievable now. After 9
Now, White is helpless against the rounds Sergey Dolmatov took first
threat tiJe2 and he resigned.
place alone with 7 points. I had 1 1/2
This game proved once again the points out of the first 2 rounds and
tremendous importance of the psy in the third round I played against
chological factor in the fight over the Zurab Azmaiparashvili. After my
board. White had an extra pawn in win in that encounter, the rest of my
deed, but he had great difficulties de games ended in draws and Ifinished
fending, instead of being able to attack with "+2", sharing 11th to 4 0 th places.
or develop some initiative.
l.d4 g6 2.e4 d6 3 .!Llc3 i.g7
4.i.g5!?

10

B07
Dreev - Azmaiparashvili

The idea of this move was popular

ized in the past by the outstanding Es
tonian grandmaster Paul Keres.

GMA Qualifer for World Cup

Moscow 1989

The qualification tournament of

the GMAfor the World Cup 1991-1992
was acknowledged at that time to be
the strongest open tournament in
history. There were 128 participants
and 85 grandmasters among them.
It was played in the cinema-concert
hall "Izmailovo". The conditions for
the spectators were just wonderful

4 .!Llf6
...

49

Dreev-Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989

Black transposes to the Pirc
Ufimzev Defence with this move. He
has tried in the tournament practice
some other a bit awkward moves like:
4 . . . c6, 4... a6 and 4...h6. It is not good
for Black to play here 4 ...c5, since
White can counter that with the excel
lent recommendation of Paul Petro
vich - S.dxcS aS 6.id2 xcS 7.lOdS! ,
and Black loses after 7...e6? 8.ib4
c6 9.ibS+Actually, the position that we are
discussing arises usually after the fol
lowing order of moves: l.e4 d6 2.d4
lOf6 3.lOc3 g6 4.igS. GM Azmaipara
shvili used to be the world-renowned
expert of that opening at the time
when this game was played. Only a
few might not remember his famous
victory with Black against Anatolij
Karpov in the SOeth jubilee Champi
onship of the USSR in the year 1983.
Meanwhile, in our home-preparation
with my coach 1M Alexander Filipen
ko, we noted that despite the fact that
Zurab played that opening often and
quite successfully at that, this particu
lar system, including the active move
of White's bishop, had been tested ex
tremely rarely, both after: l.d4 g6 2.e4
d6 3.1Oc3 ig7, as well as after the other
move-order: l.e4 d6 2.d4 lOf6 3.lOc3
g6. On the other hand my coach was
and continues to be a real connoisseur
of that super-aggressive system... Ac
cordingly; our preparation lasted for
not more than 40 minutes, despite the
fact that I was going to play it for the
first time in my life . . .

5.f4 !
This i s White's most active move.
In general, he plays more often here

S.d2, but the positions arising after:

S ... h6 6.ih4 (or 6.if4 gS 7.ig3 lOhS)
6 ... gS 7.ig3 lOhS, or 6.ie3 lOg4 7.if4
eS are favourable for Black.

5 c6
...

It is too dubious for Black to try the

seemingly active move S ... cS, because
after 6.eS! White's initiative is very
dangerous.
Forexample in the gameA.Filipenko
- M.Gurevich, Moscow 19B3, there
followed 6... lOhS (It is worse for Black
to play: 6 ... cxd4?, because of 7.exf6
exf6 8.xd4 e7+ 9.lOce2 1Oc6 1O.c3
and his compensation for the piece is
insufficient; after 6 . . . de 7.de, White
maintains a clear positional advan
tage; in case of 6 ... 1tl bd7, Black has no
suitable way to avoid the forced line:
7.ed f6 8.ih4 ed 9.e2 \!lfB 10.ltlf3
Itlc6 11.0-0-0 and White's position
is evidently superior.) 7.dxc5 dxeS
B.xdB+ \!lxdB 9.0-0-0+ id7 1O.fxeS
h6 11.ie3 (11.ih4!?) l1 ...heS 12.ltldS
Itlc6 13.ltlf3 ig7 14.ibS lOf6?! (This is
a mistake by Black, but his position is
difficult anyway.) IS.lOxf6 M6 16.fld2
\!leB 17.flhdl S 18.id4! flc8 19.hf6
exf6 20 .lOd4 and White's positional
edge was overwhelming.
Black cannot solve his problems in
the opening with the inclusion of the
moves: S ... h6 6.ih4 - and only then
6 . . .cS: 7.eS ltlhS B.dxcS Itlxf4! (It is too
dubious for Black to continue with:
B . . . dxeS 9.xd8+ \!lxdB 10.0-0-0+
id7 11.fxeS heS 12.lOdS, because
White is once again clearly better, due
to the vulnerability of Black's king.)
9.exd6 gS 10.if2 . Contemporary the
ory evaluates the arising position as
approximately equal, but I think that

50

Game 10

is not quite correct, since Black's com

pensation is not sufficient.
Finally, in case of 5 . . . 0-0, Black
should consider the possibility 6.e5!?, but still I believe that the most
precise move for White is - 6.d 2 ! .
But not 6.ttlf3 c5! - and Black obtains
an excellent counterplay, because he
can counter 7.dxc5 with 7 ... a5, and
7.e5 - with 7 ... cxd4 8.exf6 (8.xd4
ttlc6)
8 . . . exf6.
Following 6.d2,

considered the move 9.0-0. However,

after 9 ... b6, tournament practice
has shown that Black has no problems
whatsoever.

Black's relatively best line is - 6 ... c6

(6 ... c5 7.dxc5) 7.ttlf3 b5 8.id3 and
there arises a well-familiar theoretical
position. The same situation arose by
a transposition of moves in our game
too, though ...

9.e5!
This move is not a novelty yet, but
still it was quite seldom played at the
times .. .

9...b4 1 0 .ttle2 .bf3

It is worse for Black to follow with
1O ... ttld5 11.0-0 and White dominates
in the centre.

11.gxfJ ttld5 12 ..tc4

6.d2
In case of 6.ttlf3, White should
worry about 6 ... m6 and here he must
practically sacrifice a pawn in order
to fight for the opening advantage
- 7.d2 xb2 8.gbl a3, obtaining
after 9 . .td3 a quite sufficient compen
sation for it, indeed.

6 b5 7. .td3 0 - 0 8 .ttlf3 J.g4

Following some mutual tricks

- there arose a well known theoreti

This is already a novelty. White had

played before only 12.ed, or 12 . .th4,
after which he never achieved any
thing substantial. Black should not
fear the move 12.0-0-0 either, at least
because of 12 ...a5!? The bishop
move in fact opens a new page in the
theory and that position is presently
one of the most critical in this system
of the Pirc-Ufimzev Defence.

12 ... a5 13. 0 - 0 - 0
(diagram)

13 ...d7
GM

cal position on the board (it was a true

Azmaiparashvili was faced

with a new idea i n the opening and he
failed to find the best continuation. A

tabia in that opening then... ) and the

whole seven years (!) after our game,

main line for White here used to be

the talented 1M Igor Zakharevich,

51

Dreev-Azmaiparashvili, Moscow 1989

at the Russian Team Championship

(Azov 1996), found against me the
best plan for Black i.e. 13 .. .f6 ! 14.exf6
exf6 15.h4 ih6 ! 16.M2 (White's at
tempt at an improvement of the varia
tion after the move 16.ig3, was in fact
fruitless, because following: 16 ... ltJd7
17.h4 ltJ7b6 1B.id3 a4, in the game
Kobalia - Zakharevich, Ekaterinburg
1999, Black had a very good game.)
16 ... ltJd7 17.h4 ltJ7b6 1B.id3 ltJa4. (M
ter 1B .. JleB 19.wb1! White still has
the initiative; later in the game Ulibin
- Zakharevich Elista 1995, there fol
lowed: 19 ... whB 20Jldg1 a4 21.h5 g5
22.fxg5 hg5 23.f4 ih6 24.Wa1 d7? !
25.c4! bxc3 26.bxc3 a3 27.c4 ltJe7
2B.d5 ltJa4 29.ltJc3 cxd5 30.id4! and
White's threats were very dangerous.
In case of 1 B ... a4 - when White's bish
op is on the f2-square, that move is
not so effective, while now it is possi
ble - there follows: 19.h5 g5 20.ltJg3!.)
In answer to 18 ... ltJa4, I played the at
tractive move 19.h5?!, which suddenly
proved to be a serious imprecision.
After: 19 ... ltJac3! 20.hxg6 ltJxe2+, I al
ready had to think about equalizing:
21.xe2 ltJxf4 22.gxh7+ wh8; 22.c4+
d5; 21.Wb1 ltJec3+ 22.bxc3 hf4 - and
I was clearly worse. I managed some
how to save that game, though, but

I am not so excited to think about it,

mildly speaking...
Still, I do not think that Zakharev
ich's improvement has buried the
whole system ... I believe that instead
of 19.h5? ! , White can try 19.wb1!?
with the threat h4-hS, while in case of
19 .. JlbB, White can proceed with his
positional plan with the prophylactic
move 20.wa1, removing his king to a
safer place. White thus has once again
the threat h4-h5 on his agenda and so
he maintains somewhat better chanc
es. By the way, I still think that the re
ally important theoretical disputes in
this system belong to the future.
Now, let us go back to my game
with Azmaiparashvili...

14.f5!
This is an original plan - White ig
nores the material losses and he begins
attacking Black's king-shelter with his
doubled f-pawns, which finally leads
to success!
1 4 '?Nxf5
Black does not have much to hope
for after 14 ... dxe5 - following 15.fxg6
hxg6 16.h4 e6 17.h5 ltJb6 1B.id3 d5
19.wb1, White's attack is extremely
powerful, as in the game Yakovich
- Beim, Leeuwarden 1994.
..

15.ltJg3!?
White maintains his initiative with
this strong move. Naturally, I saw the
variation: 15 . .txd5 cxd5 16 . .txe7 cB
17.hd6, but I did not like to surren
der the initiative to my opponent...

15 '?Ne6 16.f4!
..

I had sacrificed a pawn already...

Now comes another one ...

16 dxe5
.

In case of16 ... h6 17.f5!? gxf5 18.if4,

Game 11

52
White's compensation for the two sac
rificed pawns is more than sufficient.

17.f5! d6
After 17... gxf5?! IB.ltJh5, White's
attack is probably irresistible.

'ltlgB+-. His relatively best defence

would have been the move - 19 .. .f5,
but even then after 20.h4, White's at
tack would have still been extremely
dangerous ...

18.fxg6 bxg6

2 0 .ltJf5!

19.IMgl!

2 0 ...e5 21.ltJxg7 ltJe3?!

That is a precise positional move,

which helps White preserve all the ad
vantages of his position.
The straightforward attempt 19.h4, would have been much weaker,
because of: 19 ... exd4 (or 19 ... ltJb6!?
2o.id3 'ltlxd4 21..te3 ltJc4) 20.gdg1
ltJe3 etc. . .

19

exd4?!

This is evidently a miscalculation.

My attack now is running unopposed,
but it was hard from easy for Black
to find the right move. He would not
have saved the day, for example with:
19 ... ltJb6 20 . .td3 f5 21.ltJxf5! gxf5 2 2 .
.th6 gf7 23.ixg7! (23 ..txf"5 'ltlxd4)
23 .. J!xg7 24.ixf5 ltJBd7 (Or 24...
'ltlf6 25.dxe5 'ltlxf5 26. 'ltldB+-; 24 . . .
'ltlxd4 25.gxg7+ Wxg7 26.'ltlg5+ WfB
27 . .te6 'ltlf4+ 2B.'ltlxf4+ exf4 29.!:g1
and White checkmates unavoidably.)
25.fug7+ wxg7 26.'ltlg5+ wfB 27.!:!gl
l!ieB 2B.dxe5 'ltld5 29.ixd7 + ltJxd7
(29 ... l!ixd7 30.gdl) 30.'ltlg6+ wd8 31.

It is quite possible that by playing

19 ... exd4, Azmaiparashvili had based
all his hopes on that particular move.
He could have prolonged his agony
though, with the line: 21...g7 22 . .th6.
Now, his position crumbles like a pa
per fortress ...

22 .,txe3 dxe3 23.'ltld3! xg7

24 ..txf7! 'ltlh5 25.!:txg6 +. Black re
signed.
The move 25 ... Wxf7 will be coun
tered by White with: 26.gf1+ weB
27.fuf8+ wxf8 2B.'ltldB+ wf7 29.
gB#

D47

11
Pliester - Dreev
New York (open) 1989

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ltJc3 ltJf6 4.ltJf3

e6 5.e3 ltJbd7 6 .td3 dxc4 7.,txc4
b5 8 ..te2 ib7 9.e4 b4 10 .e5 bxc3
11.exf6

53

Pliester-Dreev, New York 1989

We are playing a well known varia
tion ofthe Meran system.

and after it Black's position is at least

equal. It was stronger for him to play

1l cxb2

14.ttJd2 ! and that would have led to a

I was in a fighting spiritthat day and

situation, which is practically impos

making that move I decided to enter

sible to be eval uated properly. Black

a very complicated and double edged

has plenty of possibilities - 14 . . . c5,

12 .fxg7 bxal 13 .gxh8,

14 . . .ia6, 14 . . . 0-0-0, 14 . . . 5xa2 , but

although that was connected with a

I like most Garry Kasparov's recom

variation:

great degree of risk. It was more solid

mendation 14 . . . f5!?, although the

and reliable for Black to play: l1...iLlxf6

position remains quite unclear after

12 .bxc3 .td6, since he would have no

that as well . . .

problems concerning equality. Still, in

14 xdl+ 15 .b::d l f5 16. 0 - 0

0 - 0 - 0 17.d5?!

that case, (the position is rather sim

ple) Black would have no chances to
seize the initiative outright. . .

12.fxg7 bxal! ?
The calmer line : 12 . . . .txg7 13 ..txb2 ,
is not so good for Black at all, as con
temporary tournament practice shows,

..

My opponent sacrifices a pawn and

that is risky. In case of: 17.g8 .te7
18 .g7 g6, or 18 .g3 iLl f6, Black has
no problems at all. White has nothing
to complain about either . . .

17...,td6!?

because his inferior pawn-structure

guarantees White a slight positional
advantage.

13.gxh8

18.d4? !
That is another quite important
imprecision. Now, White cannot ob
tain any sufficient compensation for
That is an amazing position, since
it is quite rare to see an opening varia

the pawn.
It was better fo r him to follow with:

tion with four queens on the board

18 .b2 xd5 19 . .te2 c5 2 0 .:8bl, with

and that only on move thirteen ! . . The

situation is tremendously complicated

some compensation, nevertheless he

had a long way to go to prove it was

and unclear.

sufficient.

13 ... a5+ 14 .td2

18 ...c5 19.a4 xd5 2 0 .,te2

That is not the best move for White

After 20.xa7?! :8g8, Black would

Game 12

54
have a crushing attack and White
would probably be defenseless.

f5. Entering after: 7... 0-0 8.e3 ILlbd7

9.d3 !le8 10.0-0 ILlf8, the Carlsbad

2 0 Jg8 2Ud1 e4 22.xe4

variation would be less purposeful,

The exchange of queens is forced .

because despite the fact that Black's

22

he4

position is solid enough, the long

Now, the game enters the technical

term world-experience indicates that

stage of a realization of an extra pawn.

he would be still too far from equal

My opponent had only negligent prac

ity.

8.e4!?

tical chances to make a draw.

23.g5 d5 24.f3 f5 25.xh7?

That is White's most active re

White loses quickly after that move.

source in his fight for the opening ad

Re had better defend with 25 .1Llt7, but

vantage. Black has no problems what

even after that his chances to save the

soever after: 8.e3 f5 9.d3 (In case

game were quite minimal indeed.

of 9.'lWb3 'lWb6, I believe that Black's

25 e7 26.a6+ c7 27.f4+
M8 28.h4?! 1xh4 29.g3? hg3
3 0 .g5+ c7 31.g2 M4 and White

position is already a bit superior.)

not permit even the slightest hint of

resigned.

White's initiative in the line: 10 . . . 0-0

9 . . . hd3 10.'lWxd3 ILlbd7! (Black does

1l.hf6 ! ? hf6 12.b4.) and Black equal

izes easily after 11.0-0 0-0, as well as

12

D36
Ruban

Dreev

USSR Ch Under 26, Thilisi 1989

after: 11.h6 ILlg4 ! ? 12 .g7 !lg8 13.e5

ILlgxe5 14.lLlxeS (or 14.dxeS 'lWc7 and
Black is even better) 14 . . . lLlxeS 1S.dxeS
'lWc7.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.f3 lLlf6 4.c3

e6 5.cxd5 exd5 6.c2 e7 7.g5

8 dxe4

It is much worse here for Black to

follow with 8 ... lLlxe4?!, due to 9.he7
xe7 (but not 9 . . . 'lWxe7? 1O.lLlxdS+-)
10. lLlxe4 dxe4 1l.'lWxe4+ f8 12.c4
and White maintains a slight, but sta
ble advantage.

9.hf6 hf6 1 0 .xe4+ e7

This is the most reliable answer.
The move 1O . . . f8 is more fashion
able nowadays and it leads to compli
cated, double-edges positions. Black
has more chances to seize the initia

7 g6!
. .

tive after that, in comparison to 10 ...

This is n o doubt Black's best move,

'lWe7, but the risk for him to end up in a

which provides him with excellent

worse position is considerably greater

chances to equalize without too much

too.

of an effort, because of the threat c8-

11.c4 O - O ! ?

55

Ruban-Dreev, Tbilisi 1989

Black's other possibility here is 11 . . . Af5 12.xe7+ xe7 13.0-0-0 gd8
14.ghe1+ f8, with an approximately
equal position.

12. 0 - 0
It is more precise for White t o play
here: 12.xe7 Axe7 13.0-0-0 tLld7,
entering a complex and roughly equal
endgame.

to save the game in a variation with a

pawn down - 19.tLlf6+ (It is too bad
for him to play 19.Ac4, because of 19...
xe5 20.xe5 tLlxe5 21.tLlf6+ g7 22.
tLlhS+ gxh5 23.13xe5 f6.) 19 . . .tLlxf6 20.
exf6 xf6 21.Ac2, or 21.Axa4 xb2.
White could have tried here the
seemingly passive line: 16 Jac1 a4
17.Ac2 Ae6 18.gb1, which was leading
to an approximately equal position
and it would have been his most reli
able continuation, indeed.

16 ...,ie6

12 'M>4!
..

Now, my chances are not worse to

say the least.

13.,ib3 i.f5 14.ti'f4 d7 15.!Uel

.s!
This is a good positional move,
which improves my set-up. The threat
as-a4 is rather unpleasant for White.

16.g4
My adversary opted for this sharp
Ed somewhat risky advance, which
compromises his pawn-structure on
the kingside.
In case of 16.tLle4?! a4, Black ob
tains a very good counterplay. Now,
.tler: 17.tLlxf6+, then 17...tLlxf6 18.,tc2
eelS; if 17.d5, then 17... g7, while
Wowing: 17.tLle5, Black's simplest
4efence is 17. . . Axe5 (The position is
llightly better for Black too after: 17 . . .
b,7 18.i.xf7+ h8 19.tLlxd7 d7.) 18.
ms ti'e7 and White will have to try

17 .be6

White should not expect any

thing promising out of the variation;
17.e6 fxe6 18.Axe6+ h8 19.Axd7,
because of: 19 ... xb2 !? 20.c1 (or
20Jlc1?! Ag7 21.d2 xd2 22.tLlxd2
gad8 23.Ae6 gfe8) 20 ...xc1+ 21.c1
gad8 22.Ae6 Axd4 23.tLlxd4 gxd4 and
despite White's minute material ad
vantage (he has a knight and a bishop
against a rook and a pawnO, this end
game is preferable for Black, because
of his superior piece-coordination and
his pawn-majority on the queenside.
In fact, what was most important - the
initiative would have been definitely
on my side in that case. Black's com
pensation for the pawn would have

Game 12

56
been sufficient too in the line: 19 . . .

dark square and it might turn later

'fie7 2 0 . ltJe5 'it>g8 2 1.'fid2 Elad8 2 2 .Eldl

into a juicy target after a move like

Elxd7 23.ltJxd7 'fixd7.

g7-f8.

17 fxe6 18.e3 Elae8 19.e4

ig7 2 0 .Eladl b6 21.e5 d5
..

Black's position is already slightly

2 8.<tld3 'it>f7 29.<tlc5 b5 3 0 .1!1f1?

This is a serious mistake and my
opponent's

position

becomes

ex

better, because of the weakness of the

tremely difficult after that. He should

f4 -square in White's camp.

have played 30.f4 , preventing e6-e5

and although after 30 . . . f8, my pros
pects would have remained clearly
superior, he could have offered some
more tough resistance to the end of
the game.

22.a3
My
queens,

opponent

wishes

compromising

to

his

trade
pawn

structure on the queenside and that

is easily understandable. With queens
present on the board, after 2 2 . 'fie2

30

e5!

ItJf4, threatening Eld8, White's posi

This move literally destroys White's

tion has no good prospects and its de

position. It is not quite all over yet, but

fence becomes extremely difficult.

he is practically beyond salvation . . .

22 Elf4 23.h3 xa3 24.bxa3

Elxe4!?

After 31.dxe5 Elxe5 32 .Elxe5 be5,

It seemed attractive for Black to

the endgame with a bishop against

play: 24 . . . be5 25.dxe5 Elf3, but after:

a knight is easily winning for Black,

31.<tlb7

26.Elbl Ele7 27.Elb3, he does not achieve

because of the chronic weakness of

anything substantial, while variations

White's a3-pawn.

of the type: 26 . . . Elxh3 27.Elxb7 Elxa3

31

28. ltJf6+ ItJxf6 2 9 . exf6, or 26 . . . Elxa3

Or 32.Elel?! Ele7 33.ltJc5+ 'it>d5-+

'it>e6 32.dxe5

27.Elxb7 Elxa2 2 8 . ltJf6+ ItJxf6 2 9 .exf6

32 Ele7?!

ElfB 3 0.Elxe6 are quite unsafe for me,

I was in a serious time-pressure

mildly speaking . . .

here and I made a great imprecision,

25.Elxe4 c3 26.Eldel <tlxe4 27.

Elxe4 a4!

which provided my opponent with

Black fixes White's a3-pawn on a

had to follow with: 32 . . . Elb8 ! 33. ltJa5

good chances of survival. Instead, I

57

Ruban-Dreev, Tbilisi 1989

ga8 34.lLlb7 c;?;>d5 35.gf4 J.xe5 36.Elf7
cS and the victory would have been
quite close in sight.

33.lLldS+ !
This is an excellent defensive re
source!

33

c;?;>d5 34.ge1 ixe5 35.gd1+?

Here, my opponent overlooked in

his time-trouble the excellent oppor
tunity to continue with 35.f4! and that
would have provided him with a life
line in the variation: 35 ... i.f6 (or 35 ...
id6 36.Eldl+ c;?;>cS 37.Elc1+ c;?;>d5 38.
gdl+ ) 36.Eldl + c;?;>e4(36... c;?;>c4 37.lLlxc6= )
37.lLlxc6 Elc7 38.1Llh4 Elc3 39.Elel+.
Presently, White's position is al
ready lost, because he cannot bring
into action his "roaming" knight.

35 ... c;?;>c5 36.gc1+

36.Elel c;?;>d6 37.f4 if6 38.Elc1 c5-+,
or 38.l'!xe7 J.xe7 39.1Llf7+ c;?;>d5-+

36... c;?;>d6 37.gxc6 +

Naturally, this position is winning

for Black, since he has an extra piece
for two pawns. I had to overcome some
technical difficulties, indeed, mostly
because I had to avoid the exchange of
the rooks. In case I had allowed that
- the position would have become im
mediately drawish, despite my extra
bishop. This is what my opponent had
based his practical chances on. Still,
generally speaking, what followed to
the end of the game was in fact just a
matter of endgame technique ...

46. c;?;>g2 h5 47.h4 c;?;>c6 4S.ge4

ic5 49.a4 id6 5 0 .ge6 ga5 51.gh6
c;?;>d7 52.c;?;>h3 ie7 53. c;?;>g3 c;?;>eS 54.
ge6 gxa4 55.ge5 gg4+ 56. <M3 gxh4
57.c;?;>g3 C;?;>f8 5S.a4 if6 59.gf5 c;?;>g7
6 0 .a5 gg4+ 61.c;?;>h3 c;?;>g6 62.gc5
ga4 63.c;?;>g3 ga3+ 64.c;?;>g2 h4 65.
c;?;>h2 ig5 66.gd5 if4+ 67.c;?;>h1
ga2!

Now, White is practically forced to

give up a piece, since the line: 37.Eldl +
c;?;>c7 38.h4 c5 39.Eld5 i.d4 is complete
ly unacceptable for him.

37 c;?;>d7 3S.gc5 c;?;>xdS 39.gxb5

J.d6 40 .gd5 c;?;>c7 41.gd4 ic5 42.
!xa4 gf7 43.f4 ie3 44.f5

In case of 44. c;?;>e2, Black has the resource - 44 ... Elxf4 ! -+

44 ... gxf5 45.gxf5 gxf5+

But not 67 ... h3? 68.Eldl=.

6S.gb5 ic7 69.gc5 ixa5 7 0 .gb5

ic3 71.gc5 if6 72.gb5 ig5 73.gc5
c;?;>h5 74.gc4 J.f6 75.gb4 gd2 76.ga4
c;?;>g5 77.gb4 ie5 7S.gc4 J.f4 79.gb4
gd1+ S O .c;?;>g2 c;?;>g4 0-1
13

E97
Dreev - E.Geller
Moscow 1989

This was a game with the legend

ary grandmaster Efim Petrovich
Geller in the Moscow International
round-robin Tournament. I tookfirst
place with 7 1/2 points out of11. Alexey
Vizhmanavin remained half a point
behind me. Efim Petrovich shared 34 places with V. Kotronias with 6 1/2
points out of11.

Game 13

58

l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 ig7 4.e4

d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.ie2 e5 7. 0 - 0
c6 8.d5 e7 9.d2
The line 9.b4 is more fashionable,
but 9.d2 is also critical.

9 a5 1 0 .!!bl
.

White has played more often here

the move 1O.a3, but I prefer 1O.l3b1,
since he enjoys greater variety of plans
after that (naturally, it all depends on
Black's choice of move), while after
1O.a3, White is more or less bound to
proceed only with the plan with h4.

1 0 ...id7
That is a relatively seldom played
line. It is much more popular for Black
to continue here with 10 . . . d7, but ev
idently Efim Petrovic, who is a world
renowned expert on the King's Indian
Defence, had a different opinion on
the subject...

1l.b3!?
The variation: 1l.a3 a4 12.h4 axb3
13.xb3 b6 has been tested quite fre
quently in the tournament practice,
but I was reluctant to play it. It did not
suit my style, since it was too risky.
The move 1l.b3 !?, seemed to me to
be more flexible and solid.

1l ... c8

that moment. Its idea is to counter the

standard 12.a3 with 12 ... lt'lb6 and after
the thematic 13.b4 to continue with:
13 ... axb4 14.axb4 It'la4, as it was played
in the game Langeweg - E.Geller, Am
sterdam 1974, in which after 15.'.Wc2
It'lxc3 16.'.Wxc3 ih6!? Black equalized
easily. All that emphasizes the fact
that my opponent was well-familiar
with the scheme with 1l ... lt'lc8. In fact,
he was one of the main exponents of
the entire plan connected with that
line. I have managed, however to find
the drawbacks of the move 1l ... lt'lc8
- it discoordinates Black's pieces a bit
(the knight on c8 is awkwardly placed
indeed ... ) and most of all - Black does
not control sufficiently the e5-square
in the diagrammed position! He can
not support it with f6-d7, because
the d7-square has been occupied by
the bishop.
Therefore I continued with:

12.ib2!?
This powerful positional move is a
novelty! White refrains from the sche
matic idea a3 and b4 and he is threat
ening to develop a powerful initiative
on the kingside by playing f4.

12 ... ih6
Naturally, Black is trying to prevent
radically the pawn-advance f2-f4.

13.c2 h5?!
This activity is not justified,
since it weakens Black's kingside.
He had better opt for the more mod
est line 13 ... lt'le8, but even then I
would have retained after 14.l3be1 a
slight but stable positional advantage
thanks to my superior piece-coordina
That move was quite fashionable at

tion.
We have witnessed a similar idea

59

Dreev-E.Geller, Moscow 1989

with the move IiJh5 in the famous game
Spassky - Fischer, Reykjavik 1972, in
which after l.d4 IiJf6 2.c4 e6 3.1iJf3 c5
4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.liJc3 g6 7.liJd2
IiJbd7 B.e4 ig7 9.ie2 0-0 10.0-0 eB
11.c2, Fischer suddenly played 11. . .
IiJh5!?, but his attempt had been much
more justified in that position.

successfully, having neutralized the

direct threats along the al-hB di
agonal, but now he has new prob
lems connected with the weakness of
the e6-square. His position is clearly
worse in a strategical aspect, despite
the extra exchange.

24.i.c1 'g7 25.tOd4

14 . .bh5 gxh5 15.f4!?

That is the most active line for
White; nevertheless it is connected
with a positional exchange-sacrifice.

15 .bf'4 16.gxf4 exf4 17.tOe2

25 tOg6?!
..

My compensation for the exchange

is no doubt quite sufficient, due to the
vulnerability of the dark squares on
Black's kingside. My bishop on b2 is
extremely powerful, since it dominates
the al-hB diagonal. White has seized
the initiative completely and Black's
defence, particularly in a tournament
pme, is tremendously difficult.

17 g5 18.tOf3 h6 19.ic1 i.g4

ZO.tOxf4 'f6 21.'d2!?
..

White protects his knight on f4 and

be is threatening to deploy his bishop
from cl to b2, in order to organize a
dangerous attack along the al-hB di
agonal.
2 1 liJe7 22.i.h2 Mt6 23.'c3 f6
It looks like Black has defended
..

This is a serious mistake and it

makes Black's situation quite difficult.
It might look like blundering the ex
change, but I believed Efim Petrovic
had decided to give it back with the
idea to simplify the position in the
hope of equalizing after the transfer of
his knight to the e5-square. Obviously,
he had failed to notice that he would
have serious problems connected with
the vulnerability of his h5-pawn. He
was understandably reluctant to de
fend passively the position without
any bright prospects after: 25 . . .f7
26.ib 2 ! ? h6 (It is too bad for Black
to opt for 26 ... liJg6?, due to: 27.liJfe6
be6 2B.liJxe6 h6 29.ic1 and White's
position is easily winning.) 27.E1fl,
but that would have been the least of
evils, since his position would have re
mained still defensible.
26.tOfe6 ixe6 27. tOxe6 f7 28.

60

Game 14

xfB l:'lxfB 29.J.b2 b6 3 0 .l:'lfl e5

3t:'h3
Now, the weak hS-pawn has be
come the object of attack and White is
threatening ElfS.

31

..

g6

32.J.xe5 !?

That is the simplest way for White

to press his great advantage home.

plest road to victory is : 39.e6+ <;f{g3

(39 ... <;f{xh4 40.f6+ <;f{g4 41.f3+-)
40.h3+ M4 41.f3 +.

047

14
Aseev - Oreev

Zonal Tournament, Lviv 1990

32 fxe5?!
.

That move speeds up Black's de

mise. His relatively best choice would
have been 32 ... dxeS. Indeed after:
33.ElfS g4 34.f3, he would not have
saved his hS-pawn and most probably
the game either, but still it would have
been his most tenacious defence. Now,
the arising queen and pawn endgame
is totally hopeless for Black.

This game was played in the last

round of the Zonal tournament and
it was extremely important for both
of us, since the winner was going to
qualifyfor the next stage of the World
Championship - the Interzonal tour
nament.
After my win against I.Novikov \
(see the previous game) I had 2 112
33.gxf8+ <;f{xfS 34.cS+ <;f{g7 points out of three, but that was fol
35.xc7+ <;f{h6 36.xb6 xe4 37. lowed byfivedraws (againstA.Shirov,
AKhalifman, Y.Balashov, L. Yudasin,
xd6+ <;f{g5?
This move loses immediately. In A Vizhmanavin). Before the last
case of 37... <;f{g7, White's simplest round S.Lputian and L. Yudasin were
line would have been: 38.c7+ <;f{g6 leading and they had to play against
39.xaS and his victory with three each other. Six players were follow
extra pawns would be just a matter of ing them having half a point less...
time.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.f3 f6 4.c3
e6 5.e3 bd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4
b5 S.J.d3 J.b7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .a4 c5
n.e5 d5 12. 0 - 0 cxd4

3S.h4+! and Black resigned. Af

ter 38 ... <;f{xh4 (38 ... xh4 39.e7+-)
White wins with: 39.f6+ <;f{g4 40.
f3+, while after 38 ... <;f{g4, his sim-

We have on the board one of the

61

Aseev-Dreev, Lviv 1990

fashionable variations of the Meran
system.

13.<!i:lxd4
My opponent chooses a sharp gam
bit line, which was introduced into
practice by GM Jurij Razuvaev in
1987, three years before that game.
The other possibility for White is the
move - 13Je1, after which he protects
his e-pawn, and it is played much
more often, leading to complicated
positions with mutual chances.

lLldS 17.J.g3 lLl7b6 18.lLlxb6 11Nxb6 19.

lLlbS!? J.a6 2 0.11Ne4! g6 21.lLld6 J.xd3
2 2Jxd3 J.xd6 23 .exd6, White re
mained with a stable positional ad
vantage.
In case of: 13 . . .g6 14.11Ng4!?, White
maintains his initiative and the game
Razuvaev - Bagirov, Jurmala 1987
continued with 14 ... J.g7 and after
lS.J.gS! lLlxeS ? ! 16.lLlxe6 ! ! Black came
under a crushing attack. The move
13 ... J.e7 seems to be much more reli
able than 13 ... lLlc7 and 13 ... g6, but still
I believe that even then after 14.11NhS ! ?
White's prospects are superior, be
cause of his more active position.

14.J.b5+ <!i:ld7 15.gel gc8!

Contemporary theory considers
this move to be indisputably the best
for Black. Instead, it is bad for him to
follow with lS . . .a6?, because of 16.J.c6
11Nc7 17.lLlxe6! fxe6 18.11NhS+-. The

13 . . <!i:lxe5!
.

This is the most principled answer

fOr Black. He must accept the pawn

sacrifice in this variation in order to
obtain some active counterplay. Oth
erwise White will have a powerful
initiative in a position with material
equality.
It is just terrible for Black to play:
13. . . a6?, because of: 14.lLlxe6! fxe6
15.\WhS+ rne7 16.J.gS+ lLlSf6 17.exf6+

and White's attack was overwhelm

move lS ... J.e7? ! seems to be rather du

bious because of the recommendation
of GM A.Mihalchishin - 16.lLlc6 and
White's positional advantage is more
than obvious.

16.Y:Yh5 g6 17.Y:Ye5
The other popular line for White is
- 17.11Ne2, but the move in the game is
no less fashionable.

17... 11Nf6 18.<!i:lf3!?

This is the only continuation for
White to fight for the initiative. It is
questionable for him to try: 18.11Ne4?!

ing in the game Smagin - Sveshnikov,

c7!; as well as 18.11Nxf6 ? ! lLlSxf6 19.

Sochi 1987. In the game Chernin

- Kaidanov, Lviv 1987, there followed
13 .. lLlc7, which seems to be rather
passive and no doubt it contradicts the
spirit of the active Meran system and

J.gS J.g7, since his compensation for

the pawn is practically non-existent in
both cases.
Black should not worry too much
about the rarely played move - 18.

after: 14.11Ne2 J.e7 lSJd1 0-0 16.J.f4

J.f4. For example in the game Obuk-

Game J4

62
hov - A.Filipenko, Perm 1988, there
followed: 18 ... J.e7 19.Elac1 a-a!?
20.bd7 Elxc1 2 1..ixc1 '?NxeS 2 2 .!':lxeS
J.f6 and the position was approximately equal.

theless the vulnerability of the dark

squares on Black's kingside still provides White with some hopes for a
successful defence.

22.ti'd4?!
18 J.g7!
.

Presently, this move enjoys the rep

utation of Black's most solid and reli
able line. Back then, when we played
our game - that move was a novelty!
Until this game, Black usually played
here; 18 ...J.e7 19.J.h6 !?, or 18 ...h6 19.
J.f4 ! ? ; and White had a good compen
sation for the pawn in both cases.

19.ti'g3?!
This is a very serious mistake. My
opponent was faced with a new idea
in a complicated theoretical position
and he failed to find the best solu
tion. His best line would have been:
19.bd7+ @xd7 20. '?Ne2, after which
there would have arisen a complex
double-edged fight. The contempo
rary practice shows however - Black's
prospects are not worse at all.
19

..

ti'd8 2 0 .e5 he5 21.ti'xe5

0-0
As a result of White's mistake on
move 19, his compensation for the
pawn is already insufficient; never-

White should not rely too much on

a favourable outcome for him in the
endgame after: 2 2.bd7 '?Nxd7 23.J.h6
f6 24.'?Nxe6+ '?Nxe6 2S.Elxe6, because
of 25 . . J:'lfd8! and Black's advantage is
evident, because he can counter the
attractive move for White - 26.Elae1,
with the powerful argument 26 ...
Elc2 !?, threatening J.b7-c6. I believe
White's best move here was 22 .'?Ne2,
maintaining the tension.

22 '?Nf6! 23.ti'xa7?

White was greedy to gobble Black's

a-pawn, but that proved to be his deci
sive mistake. After: 23.'?Nd3 J.c6 Black
holds on to his solid extra pawn, but
still it would have been a long road to
its realization. Now, the placement of
White's queen on the a7-square is so
bad that his position quickly becomes
totally hopeless.

23

gc7 24.J.e3

This move is practically forced,

since Black was threatening f8-a8,
trapping White's queen.

63

Aseev-Dreev, Lviv 1990

well: 36.E'!xf2 c1+ 37.ltJf1 xc5-+;

36.ltJc4 c3.

24....tLc6
Generally speaking, I do not let the
win slip away from my hands with
this move yet, but my task becomes
much harder after that. It was evi
dently stronger for me to follow with:
24... eS! and White is almost forced
to enter the variation: 2S.E'!ac1 E'!a8
26.E!xc7 E'!xa7 27.E'!xd7 ltJxe3 28.E'!xe3
(or 28.fxe3 h4 29.E'!e2 a6! 30.E'!xa7
.hbS 31.E'!f2 e4-+) 28. .. gS 29.g3
(29.f1 g2 !-+) 29 . . . fS and the po
sition is easily winning for Black.

25.a-xc7 ltJxc7 26.hc6 ltJe5 27.

te4 ltJd5 2S.hd5 exdS 29.E'!adl
leS 3 0 .ltJb6
White has nothing better. It is too
bad for him to try 3 0.d4? ltJf3-+. In
case of30.E'!xdS, Black wins with: 30 ...
g4 31.E'!dd1 a-eS 32.g3 a-hS 33.h4
e3.

3 0 ... ltJg4 31. ltJxdS xb2 32 ..tLc5

le2 33.E'!f1
It would not work for White to de
fend with: 33.ltJe7+ <tJg7 34.d4+, be
cause of 34 ... xd4!-+

33 ...E'!d2 34.E'!xd2 a-xd2 3S.ltJe3

Black cannot save the game after:
35.ltJxb4 f4 36.g3 c4 37.e7, due to
37 . ltJxh2 !
..

3S ... ltJxf2! 36.ltJf5

Black's other possibilities lose as

36 ... ltJg4 37.ltJe7+ <tJg7 3S.ltJc6

ltJe3. White resigned.
By winning this game I shared
1st - 4th places with 6 points out
of 9 with A.Shirov, S.Lputian and
L.Yudasin and I qualified for the In
terzonal Tournament (A.Khalifman,
A. Vizhmanavin and Y.Balashov had
5 Ih points each and they played a
match-tournament for the gh place.
Alexander Khalifman won it.).

D43

15

Dreev
Zonal Tournament, Lviv 1990

I.Novikov

There was a tremendous rivalry

among the chess players in the for
mer Soviet Union (starting in the
1940s - 1950 s). There were so many
strong and talented players, that it
had become unbelievably difficult to
break through into the international
arena. Now, instead ofjust one coun
try, there appeared many differ
ent independent countries and chess
players can travel freely and they
can choose where to live and they can
even obtain the citizenship of other
cou ntries. The players of the former
USSR dominate in individual and
in team championships as well. The
situation was entirely different then.
The Soviet Union was a separate zone
for the World Championship. The
qualification Zonal Tournament in
1990 in Lviv was played in 9 rounds
according to the Swiss system and it

Game 15

64

had assembled a very powerful and

balanced selection of participants.
There were 28 players at the start
and they werefightingfor 5placesfor
the Interzonal Tournament. I started
well; I had 1 Ih points out of 2 and I
was playing with Black against Igor
Novikov in the third round...
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.f3 f6 4.c3
e6 5.ig5 h6 6 ..bf6 xf6 7 b3
.

This variation was played back then

by World Champions - Vasilij Smys
lov and Tigran Pertrosian. The alter
native is in fact the main line - 7.e3.

for White to have simplified the posi

tion with 10.xb4 (In case of 10.tLlc3
c5, or 1O.tLled2 c5, Black has no prob
lems at all.) 10 ...axb4 11.tLlxf6+ gxf6
and the endgame is about equal.
Evidently, my opponent had much
more aggressive intentions and it was
quite understandable. He did not play
8.e4!?, in order to enter a drawish
endgame out of the opening, did he?

10 ... f4 11.id3
White adheres to the idea of sharp
ening the position. It seemed more re
liable for him to have continued with:
11.e3 ! ? xe3 1 2.fxe3 and the game
would have been complicated, but still
roughly equal.

7 a5!?
.

This idea belongs to GM Semyon

Furman. Black plays more often here
7... tLld7 and 7... dxc4. The relatively
low popularity of the move 7... a5!? is
probably due to the fact that the aris
ing positions are usually quite com
plex and rather unclear.

8.e4!?
My opponent chooses a double
edged line. After 8.e3 tLld7, there arise
much calmer positions in which the
chances of both sides are approxi
mately equal.

11 .. f5!
.

Until this game, Black had played

in the tournament practice only the
line: 11...ie7 12.tLle5 h5 13.g3 h6,
which led to a slight advantage for
White.

12.g3 c5!
Now, White's Idng is not complete

The game becomes much sharper

ly safe on the dl-square and after this

move, which undermines White's cen
tre, I have an excellent counterplay.
It was too passive for me to follow
with: 12 ... ie7 13.c5, because White

after that move. It was still not too late

would have maintained a slight, but

8 dxe4 9. xe4 ib4+ l O .'itdl

..

65

Novikov-Dreev, Lviv 1990

stable edge, due to the weakness ofthe
e6-pawn.

13.a3
It is too risky for White to play
13.d5?!, because after: 13 ... a4 14.Wc2
a3 !? Black's prospects are consider
ably brighter.

13 a4 14.Wc2 .la5

pair and the relatively unsafe place

ment of White's king in the centre of
the board.

15 .ld7 16.Wc2 cxd4 17.l2Je2?!

.

This is already a more serious mis

take after which Black seizes the ini
tiative. It was better for White to have
continued with: 17.Wc1, although even
then, following: 17... Wxc1 + 18.xc1
llJc6, Black would have been better,
thanks to his excellent couple ofbish
ops and his mobile pawn-centre.

15.Wxa4+
This is not good for White. The
strongest move for him here is 15.llJe2 !?, but still after 15 ... Wd6! ? (It
is worse for Black to play 15 ... Wg4?!,

17 Wg4

because of 16.llJe5! and White's ini

I was considering the retreat 17...

tiative is quite dangerous, as it was

proved later in the game Novikov
- Shirov, Alicante 199 2 . It continued
with: 16 ... Wxg2 17.g1 Wxf2 18.Wxa4+
llJd7 19. b4 cxd4 20.xg7! Wf1+ 21.c2
Wlxa1 2 2.llJxd7 b5 23.Wxb5 and Black

Wc7 as well, but it was not so pre

cise, because after 18.llJexd4, White's
chances are not worse anymore.

resigned ...This was a quite instruc

tive crush, indeed! ) the position re
mains rather unclear. Black's chances
are definitely not worse and that was
confirmed later in the game V.Popov
- Lastin. Elista 2000: 16.Wxa4+ .ld7
17.Wc2 llJc6 18.dxc5 Wxc5 19.1lJc1 .ic7

18.l2Jexd4?!
That is not the best move for White,
but its idea is quite understandable.
Should he suffer - he must have at
least a pawn to hold on to... It was
better for him to defend strictly pas
sively with - 18.g1, but it was not
easy for him to play like that from the
point of view of psychology, because
after 18 ... llJc6, Black would have been
clearly better in a position with mate

20.llJb3 We7, because Black's compen

sation for the pawn was sufficient.
Now, my position seems to be

rial equality. Still, in that case White

would have more chances to hold the

slightly better, because of my bishop

position. Mer the move in the game,

Game 16

66
his position becomes extremely diffi
cult and I only had to be on the alert
not to make a blunder in order to press
my advantage home.
18 q)c6

It is not any better for White to play

here 19.h3?!, because of 19 .. :xg2 and
it is bad for him to follow with 20.1!g1,
due to the forced line: 20 .. :xg1+ ! 21.
t'Dxg1 t'Dxd4 22:b1 .ia4+ 23.b3 t'Dxb3
- and Black's victory is just a matter
of time. It is also bad for White to try:
20.1!h2 WTxh2! 21.t'Dxh2 t'Dxd4 22.Wfh1
.ia4+ 23.b3 bb3+ 24.c1 .ic3-+;
while in case of: 20.e2 t'Dxd4+ 21.
t'Dxd4 WTgS, Black's great advantage is
doubtless.
19 Ybg2 2 0 .e2 tyg4
Black creates the deadly threat
- t'Dc6-eS.
2Uhgl tyh5 22.gg3
White loses by force after: 22.1!xg7,
because of: 22 ... t'DeS 23.t'Dbd4 t'Dxf3
24.t'Dxf3 .ic6 2S.1!g3 .ic7 and he has
no satisfactory defence at all.
22 ... q)e5 23.q)bd4 q)xf3 24.
q)xf3
In case of 24.fui3, Black's simplest
winning line is - 24 ...WTg4 2S.e3
.id8!
.

24....ic6 25.b4
This is a desperate attempt by
White to complicate the game, but
he is beyond salvation anyway. After
2S.1!ag1, White wins with the simple
2S ....ic7-+
25 ...,ixb4 26.axb4 gxal 27.
tyb2
My opponent obviously had some
hopes connected with that move, since
he intended to capture my g7-pawn,
but...

27... gg1! 28.tye5

It is understandable that 28.1!xg1
loses because of 28 ... WTxf3+; while
28.WTxg7 would not work, due to the
spectacular strike - 28 . . .WTxf3+!
28... g3 29.tyxe6+ d8 3 0 .
tyd6+ c8 and White resigned.

16

E61
Dreev - D.Bronstein
Reykjavik (open) 1990

There are not so many players of

my generation who can brag about
having played with the outstanding,
legendary grandmaster David Ionov
ich Bronstein. This game was played

67

Dreev-D.Btonstein, Reykjavik 1990

in the quite strong open tournament,
which was organized immediately
after the team match-tournament, in
which the team of USSR (I took part
in it, though...) took thefirst place, in
front of the tea m of USA after some
fiercefight.
l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 .ig7
4.f3 0 - 0 5.e3

This move seems to be too risky,

but it is logical to assume that Black is
provoking White quite deliberately. It
looked more natural for my opponent
to have continued with 9 ... c6 1O.a4
and White's position would have been
only slightly better.

1 0 .b5!? e4
I was playing that scheme quite of
ten at that time. In case Black enters
the Gruenfeld Defence with the move
S... dS, then White plays 6 ..id2 and
Black has great problems to accom
plish the thematic move c7-cS.

5 ... d6 6.,ie2 bd7

Black could have considered here
also the plan with 6 . . . cS.

7.b4 e5 8 . .ib2 e7
It is also interesting for Black to
play 8 . . . exd4. In the game Dreev
- Shirov, Lviv 1990, there followed:
9.xd4 cS 10.bxc5 dxcS 11.dbS b6
12.b3 lUg4 13.h3 lUeS 14.0-0 ,ie6
15J''1adl h4 16.lUc7 lU exc4 17.lUxe6
tixb2 18.lUxf8 and here after I had cal
culated that I had no chances to win
the game in case of: 18 ... ltJxd1 19.xg6
hxg6 20.Elxdl c4 21.c2 Eld8, I offered
a draw

and it was accepted.

9. 0-0 Ele8!?

That move leads to positions with

a non-standard material ratio, but it
is too late for Black to retreat. In case
of: 10 ... d8 11.dxeS ltJg4 (or 1l ... ltJe4
12 ..id3 ltJxeS 13 . .ixe4 ltJxf3+ 14.xf3
.ixb2 1S.Elab1 ieS 16 ..ixb7; ll ... dxeS
12.ltJxe5 ltJe4 13.ltJd3), there follows:
12.exd6! .ixb2 13.Elbl .ig7 14.ltJxc7 and
White's advantage is decisive.

1l.ltJxc7 exi3 12Jl.xf3 b6 13.ltJxe8

It is a mistake for White to play

13.ltJxa8, because of 13 ... ltJxc4.

13 xe8 14.b3 e4 15"\:fdl

..

Game 16

6S

15... d5!
Black manages to block White's
pawns at the price of a pawn. I would
have countered 15 ...if5 with the move
16J!acl.

lbf6!, White's chances to obtain an ad

vantage are not so great at all.

21.b5

16.cxd5 f5
Black wishes to solidify the place
ment of his knight on the e4-outpost
with this logical move. In case of the
attractive move 16 ...id7, White can
play 17.b5, occupying additional space
on the queenside, since Black cannot
play 17....bb5? lS ..be4 ia4, because
of 19.'I&d3. On the other hand, Black's
last move has certain drawbacks,
since now White has enough time to
improve his position.

17.l"lacl 'l&f7 IS.l"lc5!

This important resource enables
White to fight for the advantage, since
it is bad for Black to capture the rook
on c5; meanwhile White is threaten
ing the plan with a2-a4-a5.

IS ....id7 19.l"lc7
It looks like White goes astray from
the right path, being tempted to oc
cupy the seventh rank, instead of
the seemingly correct line: 19.b5 ifS
20 .a4, but then after 20. . . a5!, the po
sition remains quite unclear, for ex
ample: 21.l"lc7 l"lbS 22 ..be4 fxe4 23.f3
exf3 24.l"lfl id6 25J!xf3 'l&eS! (or 25 ...
'l&e7 26.ia3).

19 ...l"lbS 2 0 ..ie2? !
Here, I overlooked a possibility,
which was a bit risky and not so easy
to notice: 20 ..be4 fxe4 2l.f3! (open
ing the position!) 21...exf3 22.l"lfl
and White's advantage is quite obvi
ous.

2 0 ... d6?
After Black's correct response 20 ...

Now, thanks to Black's mistake,

I had the possibility to begin imple
menting the plan with the advance
of the a-pawn. Black has great prob
lems.
21 ... lbeS 22.l"lc5 ifS 23.a4 cS
Black regroups his forces without
waiting for the move a4-a5.

24.f3
This is a quite purposeful move in
deed, but White could have tried too
the calmer line: 24.ia3 lbcd6 25.l"ldc1,
followed by advancing the queenside
pawns.

24...b6
Black should have avoided weak
ening the c6-square. It was better for
him to play: 24 . . . lbf6.

25.l"lc2 cd6 2 6.h.3 l"ld8 27.

l"lfl
White is threatening e3-e4.

27...'I&e7 28.l"lel
Black's position is very difficult
now and he can hardly prevent the
pawn-advance e3-e4.

2S ...'I&h4 29.g3 'l&h6 3 0 .ifl g5

31 .ib2?

I have to admit that it is really dif-

69

Dreev-D.Btonstein, Reykjavik 1990

ficult for me to believe that I have
played a move like that... Why not
simply 31.e4! with an overwhelming
advantage?!

31 ti'g6?!
.

David Ionovich makes another

mistake and that was probably be
cause we were both in a time-trouble.
After 31...lLlf6, the real fight would be
just starting.

A70

17
Dreev - Wedberg
New York (open) 1991

l.d4 c!Of6 2.c4 e6 3.c!Of3 c5 4.dS

exdS S.cxdS d6 6.c!Oc3 g6 7.e4 ig7
S.h3 0 - 0 9.id3
That variation was just becoming
fashionable at the beginning of the
90ies of the last century, while now it
is one of the most critical in the Modern Benoni Defence.

32.e4!
Finally White has pushed his cen
tral pawn forward and Black cannot

avoid capturing it, while taking it loses

as well.

32 fxe4 33.fxe4 xe4 34.d6+

J.e6?
.

My task would have been much

more difficult after: 34... i>h8 3S.id3
8xd6 36.dS+ i>g8 (or 36 ... ig7
37.ti'b4) 37.ia3 (or 37.ieS ti'f7 38.
.Axe4 lLlxe4 39J:!xe4 if5 40J!c7 ti'xdS)
37... ti'f6 38.ixe4 lLlxe4 39J:!xe4 ti'al+
4O.ic1 if5 41.ti'c4

3s.ic4 hc4 36.ti'xc4+ i>g7?

Or 36 ... i>h8 37.dS+ lLl4f6 38.l!f2
Jg7 39.l!e6+-

37.l!xe4 ltlxd6
37. . .ti'xe4 38.dS+

3S.ti'c7+ i>g8 39.ti'xdS ti'xe4

40 .ti'xgS+ 1-0

9 . . .leS
This line leads to a tough positional
fight in which White's prospects are
slightly better, because of his space
advantage. In case of: 9 ... a6 10.a4!
l'!e8 11.0-0, or 1 O ...lLlbd7 11.0-0,
Black has greater problems to equal
ize in comparison to the move in the
game, due to White's doubtless space
edge. Black has great problems to find
an acceptable game plan in similar
positions. He has also difficulties to
develop comfortably his light-squared
bishop. His most active line (quite
fashionable nowadays, though ...) is
- 9 ...bS!?, but the game is quite forced
i n that case. Tournament practice
has shown in the last 15 years that
Black m\lst play very precisely in the

Came 17

70
long forced variations in order to have
chances to equalize. The theory of that
line has developed tremendously in
the last several years and Black often
finds forced or semi-forced lines in
which he manages to draw. Here is a
typical example in which he has dem
onstrated an excellent home-prepara
tion - the game Beliavsky - Jobava,
Khanty-Mansijsk 2 005, which contin
ued with: 1O.hb5 ttlxe4 11.ttlxe4 a5+
12.ttlfd2 xb5 13.ttlxd6 a6 14.ttl2c4
!!d8 15.f4 ttld7 16. 0-0 ttlb6 17.ttlxb6
xb6 18.ttlxc8 !!axc8 19.!!b1 b7 20.
d6 f8 21.d3 hd6 2 2 .hd6 !!c6 23.
!!fd1 d7! 24.a3 !!xd6 25.!!xd6 xd6
26.xa7 !!e8 27.a3 d4 28.b3 !!e2 and
despite White's extra pawn the posi
tion is quite drawish. There still fol
lowed: 29.a8+ r;!}g7 30.f3 !!a2 31.
a4 c4 32.bxc4 !!xa4 33.e3 and the
opponents agreed to a draw.

1 0 . 0 - 0 c4 11.c2!?
The other possible line here for
White is - 1l.hc4 - but it is rarely
played in the tournament practice, al
though after: 1l ... ttlxe4 12.ttlxe4 !!xe4
13.d3 !!e8 14.g5, or 13.g5, White
has good chances to obtain a minimal
opening advantage without risking
anything.
Still, I believe White must connect
his ambitions to obtain something real
only with the variation 11.c2 ! ?
(diagram)

1l b5!?
..

That is the most logical and evident

ly best move for Black in this position.
It is too passive for him to play 1l . . . a6,
since after the obvious 1 2 .a4 White
has a stable positional advantage, be
cause the thematic pawn-advance for

Black - b7-b5 would be too difficult to

accomplish. He would have problems
to equalize after 1l . . . ttla6 too, because
of 12.e3 (It is also good for White to
try: 12.f4 ttlc5 13.!!e1 with a slight,
but stable positional advantage for
him.) 12 . . . d7 (It is not any better for
Black to defend with 12 ... ttlb4?!, due to
13.ttld2 !? with a powerful initiative for
White; in the game V.Bagirov - Vasiu
kov, Moscow 1991, there followed:
13 ... ttlxc2 14.xc2 d7 15.ttlxc4 e7
16.f4 ttlxe4 17.!!fe1 hc3 18.bxc3 f5
19.ttlxd6 and White was clearly bet
ter.) 13.a4 ! ? with a considerable posi
tional edge for White.

12.ltJxb5!?
This is the most principled line
for White in his fight for the opening
initiative. The lines 12.a3 a6 13.f4
and 12.!!e1 a6 13.f4 lead to compli
cated positions with mutual chances.

12 ... ltJxe4 13.!!el

It was also possible for me to con
tinue with 13.he4 !!xe4 14.g5! ? with
a slightly better game, but I wanted to
preserve my light-squared bishop.

13 . b6
. ..

Contemporary theory considers

that to be Black's most reliable move.
It is dubious for him to play 13 ...
ttlf6?!, because after: 14J:lxe8+ ttlxe8

71

Dreev-Wedberg, New York 1991

lS."*'e2, White has a clear advantage.
Black should not rely too much
on 13 . . .f5?!, since following: 14.he4
fxe4 lS.lDgS J.fS 16.,,*,a4!? he has great
problems to worry about, in view of
White's threat lDbSxd6.
At first sight it seems quite attrac
tive for Black to try 13 ... lDxf2, but
then after the practically forced line:
14JlxeB+ ,,*,xeB lS.lDc7! ,,*,e7 16.,,*,e1!
fixc7 17. "*'eB+ J.fB 1B.J.h6, his position
remains tremendously difficult. For
example, in the game A.Rychagov Batsanin, Sochi 199B after: 1B ... lDd7?!
19.1DgS lDxh3+ 20.gxh3 "*'cS+ 21.l!Ifl
fixdS 22.J.e4 Black was almost hope
less. He had better defend with lB ...
lDxh3+, but even then after: 19.9xh3
ficS+ (or 19 . . . lDd7?! 20.lDgS ,,*,cS+
21.1!Ifl ,,*,xdS 22.J.e4 J.a6 23.,,*,xfB+!?
JWB 24.hdS) 20.l!Ig2 lDd7 2U'le1!
J.b7 Black is practically forced to give
up a piece, due to the threat ge1-e7!
with a decisive attack: 22.,,*,xd7 hdS.
White's chances, with an extra piece
for three pawns, seem to be clearly
p-eferable and he risks practically
DOthing in a position like that.

opponent's knight on bS, but in case of

14 ... hbS 1S.axbS, White remains with
a couple of powerful bishops and pres
sure along the a-file.

14 .b:b5
.

What else?!. .. In case of: 14 ... lDf6

lS.gxeB+ lDxeB 16.,,*,e2 White has a
considerable positional advantage.

15.axb5 lDc5 16.lDd2!?

White maintains the initiative with
that move. I would not have achieved
much with: 16.l:ixeB+ ,,*,xeB. In the
game Stohl - Wedberg, Gausdal 1991
Black played: 17.b6 a6 1B.J.f4 S and
he equalized easily.

16 l!bel+ 17.fixel c3 18.bxc3

.b:c3 19.9a3
..

19 ...lLb4 !
That is the only move, which en
ables Black to hold the position, al
though his situation remains clearly
worse. Following: 19 ... J.g7?! 20.lDc4, I
would have preserved a clear advan
tage.

2 0 .ge3 <tJbd7 21.fie2 <tJb6 22.

lDe4 <tJxe4?!
14.a4!
This is a strong positional move. It
is difficult for Black to put up with his

That is a grave mistake and my

initiative becomes quite dangerous
after that. Black had better continue
with: 22 . . . lDxdS!? 23 .J.b2 gcB! (It is
too bad for him to try: 23 ... lDxe3?

Game 17

72

White loses a considerable part

24.'*'xe3, since he has no satisfac
tory defence in sight, for example: of his advantage with that impreci
24 . . . tDxe4 2S. .b:e4 1:kB 26.'*,d4 f6 sion. It was much better to follow with
27.J.dS+ g7 2B.'lWxb4+-, or 2S . . .J.cS 26.gg4!?
26 ...1f6 27.1e3 gc8?!
26.'*,c3 f6 27.J.dS+ g7 2 8..b:aB 'lWxaB
That attractive move is a clear mis
29.'lWxf6+-). Indeed, even after that,
White can play 24.J.b3! (He achieves take and my opponent's position be
nothing much with: 24.tDxd6 'lWxd6! comes evidently worse after it. It de
2S.EleB+ gxeB 26.'lWxeB+ 'lWfB 27.'lWeS served attention for him to try here
J.c3 2B ..b:c3 tDxc3 29.'lWxc3 'lWd6=) 27. . . a6!? and I had not seen anything
24 ...tDxe3 (Or 24. . . tDxe4? 2S.gxe4+-; better than the line: 2B.bxa6 gxa6
24...tDxb3? 2S.gxb3 and Black is 29.g3, with only a slight advantage.
helpless against the threat 'lWe2-d1.)
2S.tDf6+ and his compensation for
the exchange is more than sufficient
in variations like: 2S . . .f8 26.'lWxe3
tDxb3 27.tD xh7+ gB 2B.tDf6+ f8
29.'lWh6+ e7 3 0 .tDdS+ d7 31.'lWf4
fS 32.'lWxb4 tDc5, or 2S ... g7 26.'lWxe3
tDxb3 27.tDg4+ fB 2B.'lWh6+ eB 29.
tDf6+ e7 30.'lWe3+ fB 31.tDxh7+
gB 32.tDf6+ fB 33.'lWh6+ e7 34.
tDdS+ d7 3S.'lWf4 f5 36.'lWxb4 tDc5.
Still, White's advantage is far from be
28.'lWg4! gc7
ing decisive in all these lines and there
Black was losing after 2B ... tDd7?
would have been a lot of fight left.
due to: 29.gxcB 'lWxcB 30.1fS and he
23.gxe4 1c3
would be left with a piece down.

29.g3 'M>8?
My opponent's position is hopeless
after that move. He could have tried
29 ...J.g7, although his position would
have remained clearly worse.

3 0 .h6

24.h4!
Now, my kingside initiative is tre
mendously dangerous.

24... d7 25.h5 c5 26.gc4

That is not the best move for me,

but I still maintain a solid position
al advantage. The optimal line for
White here is: 30.hxg6 hxg6 (30 ...fxg6
31..b:g6! gg7 32 ..b:c5 dxcS 33.'lWe6+-)
31..b:g6! fxg6 32.'lWxg6+ 197 33.lWxd6
winning. I failed to see that variation
in the time-trouble, though...

30 ...'lWxb5?

73

Dreev-Wedberg, New York 1991

T.Wedberg was also under time
pressure here and he made a mistake
too. After 30 .. .'d8, he could have of
fered some more resistance.

l.d4 f5 2.g3 f6 3.,ig2 d6 4.f3

g6 5.b3 ,tg7 6.,tb2 0 - 0 7. 0 - 0 h6
8.c4 e8 9.c2 a6 1 0 .bd2 c6
11.gael
We are playing one of the most
popular lines of the Leningrad system
of the Dutch Defence.

31.ixc5
Now, Black loses by force.

31. ,te7
.

He would have saved the game

neither with: 31...xc5 32.'c8! +-;
nor with: 3 l.. .dxc5 3 2.d6 d7 33.xc5
"fixc5 34J't!xd7+-. Black gets check
mated unavoidably in both cases.

32.ixg6! fxg6
Black loses too following 32 . . . hxg6,
in view of: 33.h7+ Iflxh7 34.h3+ Iflg8
3S. .td4+-

33.e6+ 1flf8 34.gb4 Elxc5 35.

ftxb5 gxb5 36.c8+ 1flf7 37.h8
and Black resigned.

18

A87
Dreev

Malaniuk

58th USSR Ch, Moscow 1991

This game was played in the last

championship of the USSR (which
was organized according to the Swiss
system) and I remember the game,
because it received the prize as the
best in the tournament.

11...f7
This move seems to be too slow.
It looks more reliable for Black to
play: 1l ...g5 12.e4 (In case of 12 ..tc3,
or 12.a3, Black can answer with 12 ...
g6 and the position would be ap
proximately equal.) 1 2 ... ttJb4 13.'c3
and the situation is quite complex
and still not well investigated. We
played that position with A.Minasian
in a tournament in the Spanish town
of Ubeda (1999) and after 13 ...fxe4
(The position is much more complex
after 13 ... a5 ! ?) 14.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 15:xb4
a5 16.'a3 .tf5 17.d5 f7 18.e3 cxd5
19.cxd5 b5 2 0.hg7 xg7 21 .c1 Elac8
22.el, my opponent failed to equal
ize with Black and I obtained a slight
but stabl e positional advantage.

12.,tc3!
That is a powerful prophylactic
positional move, preventing ttJa6-b4.
Black fails to prevent the thematic
pawn-break for White - e2-e4. The

Game 18

74
immediate move 12.e4, does not bring
White anything, because of: 12 . . . fxe4
13.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 14. xe4 ifS lS.xe7
(lS.e3? ! ttJb4) ls ...id3 16.xd6 .ixfl

immediately after 16 ... cxdS?, because

of 17.ttJxgS !. It is equally bad for him
to continue with 16 ... Elae8?!. After
17.ttJd4, Black's position is so difficult

17.'ktixf1 Elad8 18.e6 ttJb4 and Black's

chances are not worse at all.
12 g5
In case of 12 ... ltJc7, it is possible for
White to play 13.ttJh4!? with a danger
ous initiative, since the threat e2-e4 is

that it is hardly defensible at all.

..

17.l"le6!
After: 17.Ele3 fS 18.l"lfel Elae8 White
is only slightly better.

very unpleasant for Black.

13.e4 fxe4 14.ltJxe4 Ad7

This is an imprecision. Black had
better play 14 ...ifS. Indeed, after:
lS.ttJxf6+ xf6 16.d2 Elae8 17.Ele3,
White's position is clearly better, be
cause of Black's backward e7-pawn.

15.ttJxf6+ exf6?!
Now, that is already a serious mis
take for Black. It is quite understand
able from the psychological point of
view that Vladimir was reluctant to
play passive positions with a backward
e7-pawn after: lS ...xf6, or ls ...ixf6,
but still that would have been the least
of evils for him.

17...ltJc7
Accepting the exchange-sacrifice
would not be good for Black at all,
for example: 17... he6?! 18.dxe6 e7
(or 18 ...xe6? 19.1tJxgS!+-) 19.Y:ifS
and White's initiative is very danger
ous. In case of: 19 ... Elae8 20.ttJd2 ih8
21.ie4 ttJc7 (or 21...ttJb8 22.h4 ttJc6
23.'ktig2 Y:ig7 24.hxgs hxgS 2S.l"lhl
ttJe7 26.Y:if3+-) 22.h4 Y:ig7 23.hxgS
hxgS 24.'ktig2, Black's position is too
difficult - now if: 24 ... Ele7 2S.Elhl
Elfe8, then 26.ids! - and Black's po
sition becomes completely hopeless.
He is almost stalemated and he has no
defence against White's deadly threat
ttJd2-e4.

18.l"lxd6 '9'e7!
16.d5!
16 ... c5!

My opponent creates maximal dif

ficulties for my task to realize my ad
vantage. It would have been much
worse for Black to have defended with:

That is Black's only move. He loses

18 ... ttJe8, because of 19J'le6! (The po-

White's initiative is very powerful

now.

75

Dreev-Malaniuk, Moscow 1991

sition after: 19J'!xd7 xd7 20J'!el d6
21.l"le6 l"laeS 22 ..lth3 is quite unclear.)
- and here Black is already forced to
accept the sacrifice; otherwise he re
mains a pawn down in a very bad posi
tion. Still after: 19...,he6 2 0.dxe6 e7
(or 2 0 . . .xe6? 21.xg5! +-) 21.f5,
White has a pawn for the exchange
and a very dangerous initiative. For ex
ample: 21...l"lcS 22J'!dl d6 23Jlxd6!
xd6 24.d2.

24.g6! !
This excellent move consolidates
my advantage. My opponent had
great defensive problems and Vladi
mir made the decisive mistake on his
next move:

24 <lih8?
.

Black has two exchanges extra;

nevertheless his defence is extremely
difficult. For example the move 24...
l"lfeS? loses immediately after 25.e7!,
while following 24 . . .e7, White has
the resource 25 ..ltd5, after which Black
is again practically stalemated, since
he has no defence against the posi
tional bind g3-g4, followed by d2e4, threatening e4-g3.

19.1"!xd7 xd7 2 0 Jdl! l"!ad8

It is too dubious for Black to play
20 ... d6? !' After 21.f5 (threatening
J.g2-fl and f3-d2) Black's position is
probably already defenseless.

21.b4! b6
White would have a clear advan
tage after: 21...cxb4?! 22.,hb4 l"!feS
23.d4.

22.bxc5 bxc5 23.d6! e8

It is also bad for Black to play here:

24 ...a4? ! 25.l"!d2 ! l"lxd626.xg5!hxg5
27.l"!xd6 xd6 2S . .ltd5+ l"!f7 29 . .hf7+
xf7 30 ..b:f6 dl+ 31.<lig2+-; or
24 ... xd6? ! 25.xg5 f5 (25 ...hxg5
26 . .ltd5+ l"lf7 27 ..b:f6+-) 2 6..ltd5+ <lihS
27.f7+ l"!xf7 2S ..hf7 f3 29.l"!d3+-;
or 24 ... l"!f7?! 25.d2 xd6 26.e4!
e6 27.l"!xd6 l"!xd6 2s.xd6 xd6 29.
.ltd5 e7 30 ..ltb2! <lIfS 31..lta3 el+
32.<lig2 l"lc733.,hcS!+His only chance to hold the posi
tion would have been the move 24 ...
f7! and although after: 25.e5! %Vxg6
26.xg6 l"!f7 27 ..ltd5, White maintains
a clear positional advantage; Black
preserves some chances for a draw.

25.tOxg5!
My opponent's position crumbles
after that move and he has no satisfac
tory defence at all.

25 fxg5
..

Black loses too after: 25 ...hxg5, be

cause of: 26.h5+ <ligS 27. .ltd5+ l"!f7
2S..lta5!

76

Game 19

26.Bxh6+ 'it>g8 27. .idS+ gf7 28.

BxgS 'it>f8 29 .bf'7 'it>xf7 3 0 .ixg7

White wins in case of: 30.ge1 Wxd6

31.Wh5+ Ms 32.gxeS+ gxeS 33.hg7+
cJle7 34.h4, as well.

30 liJxg7 31.Bxc5+- liJe8 32.

Bhs+ 'it>f8 33.Bh8+ 'it>f7 34. BhS+
'it>f8 3S.c5 Be6 36.lM4 gd7 37.
Bh8+ 'it>f7 38.Bh7+ 'it>f8 39.l'U4+
..

Black resigned.
game is rather interesting as well. Mo
rozevich used to play it often and quite
successfully some years ago.

19

Candidates (m/2), Madras 1991

7.liJf.J b6 8 ..id3 .ib7 9.Be2 c6

1 0 . 0 -0 liJd7 11.l'Uel Bc7 12.a4 as
13.c3 liJf8 14.Bd2 liJg6

This is an encounterfrom our can

didates match. I was so very close to
victory in that game, but unfortunate
ly Ifailed to materialize my chances.
There were numerous reasonsfor my
demise in that match. One of them is
closely connected with the specifics
of the contemporary chess. Anand
played very quickly as usual and he
forced me into a time-pressure all
the time. Naturally, I made plenty
of annoying mistakes then... In fact,
I failed to solve the problem with the
time-trouble throughout the whole
match...
1.e4 e6

My opponent failed to obtain any

thing real out of the opening stage.
Now, he had to take some measures
against Black's possibility f6-f5, with
out doing anything active on the king
side.

e13
Anand - Dreev

The French Defence was my main

opening weapon against 1.e4, at those
times. . .

2.d4 dS 3.liJc3 liJf6 4 .igS dxe4

S.liJxe4 .ie7 6.ixf6

lS.b4 f5 ! 16.liJg3
Or 16.lDeg5 Wf4.

16 ...hst 17.bxaS

(diagram)

It was maybe worth for White to

have avoided that exchange and to
play instead 17.lDe2 immediately.

The move 6 ...if6 is considered to

be the more solid, but the line in the

This is a purposeful prophylactic

move, since I was reluctant to be in a

6 gxf6

17...ElxaS 18.c4 'it>f8

77

Anand-Dreev, Madras 1991

hurry to push c6 c5 (l8 ... h4 l9.l)e2 c5
20.dS if6 2 U ab l).
-

19 . .tfl .tf6 2 0 Ja3 <tig7 21.l'bl

h4 22.l)e2 h3
That was a very important move,
which included some risk too.

23.g3?
It was correct for White to capture
that pawn - 23.gxh3! and that was
leading to a rather unclear position.

23 ... c5 24.d5 exd5 25.cxd5 c4

Now, Black has the advantage
thanks to the vulnerability of the h l
a8 diagonal.

26.tiJc3 c5 27.la2

32.tiJd4!?
This move loses of course, but I
have to admit - that was White's best
practical chance in my time-trou
ble. After the seemingly natural try:
32.lWxb7 lOc3! 33.lWxb6 EldS-+ 34.lWe3
Eldl 3S.tiJh4 Elb8 36.tiJxf5+ <tig8, White
would be helpless against the threat
37. . .El fl
.

32 ... <tig6?

27... tiJe7!
Presently, Black's king is safe
enough and he can exploit his knight
in order to attack White's dS-pawn.

28.gab2?
White's relatively best decision
would have been - 28.l)h4.

28 ... tiJxd5! 29.gb5 tiJxc3

It was much simpler for Black here
to follow with: 29 . . JlxbS! 30JxbS lWa3
3U'lxdS ! (or 31.l)xdS lWxf3-+) 31...
1Ixc3 32.lWxc3 ixc3 33.Elxf5 Eld8!-+
34,Axh3 M6.

3 0 .!hc5 tiJxb1 31.lWd7 gxc5

Or 3l...ixf3!? 32.ElxaS bxaS 33.
.hc4 ihS.

This was a serious mistake. Black

was winning instead with the calm
and simple line: 32 . . .idS 33.l)xfS+
<tig6-+; or with the more complicat
ed variation: 32 ... ge8 33.lWxe8 ixd4
34.lWd7 idS 3S.lWxfS ie6 36.lWxbl ElfS
37.lWc2 c3 38.id3 Elxf2 39.lWxf2 hf2+
40.<tixf2 ib3.

33.xb7 ixd4?!
That was another mistake ... It was
correct for me to finish him off with:
33 . . . l)c3 34.lWxb6 lOxa4 3S.lWa7 ixd4
36.lWxa4 ElbB-+

34.xb6+ f6
But not 34... <tig7 3S.lWd6 ! !

35.xbl c3 3 6 .td3

(diagram)

36 ...c2?
This move was connected with a
miscalculation. Still, the win for me
was already problematic, anyway.
After: 36 . . .Elhc8 37.ic2, the position

Game 20

78

49.me2 mxh3 50.M3 ib8! 51.a7 .ixa7

52.M4 ie3 ! ! +
43 ... gxg1+ 44.mxg1 mg7 4S.a6
-

ibS 46.mh1 mgS 47.li?gl

Here, I had nothing left to do - a
draw was a draw. . . 47.g5 f5 48.g6 f4
49.g7 f3 50.a7=
47... mfB 4S.mh1 meS 49.gS f5

S O .g6 f4 Sl.g7 Ii?t7 S2.gSti'+ \f.>xgS

53.a7 ixa7 Draw.
would remain absolutely unclear (37.
c2?! 1:le8 (or 37 ... 1:lb8 38.ixf5+ mg5
39.hb3 f5-+) 38.mfl (38.1 c2)
38 . . 1:lce5 39 . .ixf5+ mg7-+ 40.dl!
.

37.ixc2 ghcS 38 ..b:f5+! gxf5

39.g4 gc1+ 4 0 ;t9"xcl gxf2 41.mh1
AeS 42.9g1 gg2

D47

20
Nadera - Dreev
30th Olympiad, Manila 1992

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3 .!Of3 '!of6 4.lOc3

e6 S.e3 .!Obd7 6.Ad3 dxc4 7.ixc4
bS S.id3 Ab7 9.e4 b4 10 . .!Oa4 c5
n.es .!OdS 12. 0 - 0 cxd4 13.lOxd4
.!OxeS 14.ibs+ lOd7 15.ge1 gcS 16.
h5 g6 17.ti'e2

43.a5!
This is a beautiful and smart de
cision. Anand plans to make a draw
based on the motive of a stalemate.
He had to overcome certain difficul
ties had he played in some other fash
ion. Objectively speaking, his position
was not worse even then, for example:
43.1+ mg7 44.a5 1:lxh2+ 45.mgl
1:lg2+ 46.mhl 1:lxg4 47.b7+ (but not
47.a6? h248.a71:lg1+ 49.9xgl+hxgm+
50.mxgl id4-+) 47 ... mg6 48.c8=;
43.xg2 bxg2+ 44.mxg2 mg5 45.h3
M4 46.a5 ib8 47.a6 ia7 48.i>fl mg3

We are playing one of the sharp

variations of the Meran system. This
position is well-familiar in the con
temporary theory. White has the ini
tiative for the sacrificed pawn, but
Black's position is solid enough and
his chances are not worse at all.

17...ti'e7
That is in fact the old line. Pres-

79

Nadera-Dreev, Manila 1992

ently, the move 17 ... a6!? is much more
popular and fashionable and it pro
vides Black with a good counterplay.
Still, the more modest approach - 17...
Be7 is quite reliable and White has not
found yet any convincing way to prove
his opening advantage.

18.Ag5!?

holm 19B9.
It is much worse for Black to con
tinue with 2 2 ... Ac6?!, because after
the forced line: 23.Elxe2 hb5 24.lDc7 +
dB 2S.lDxbS, White's great advan
tage is obvious.

23.ixd7+ f7 24.ixc8 ixc8

25.xe2

That is the most energetic line for

White. He would not achieve much
with IB.Bg4. Alexey Vyzmanavin
played like that with White against me
(Moscow 19B9) and there followed:
IB ... lD5f6 19.Bh3 Ad5 20.Aa6 ElaB
21.Ag5 Ag7 22.Eladl 0-0. I managed
to obtain a solid and reliable posi
tion and White had a long way to go
to prove that his compensation for the
pawn was sufficient.

18...Bxg5 19.<tJxe6

The position has been simpli

fied as a result of the forced devel
opments and we have reached a
rather complex endgame. Black has
a pawn for the exchange. His couple
of powerful bishops is quite danger
ous for White in that open position
and I believe Black's chances are not
worse at all despite White's extra ex
change.

25...Aa6+!? 26.f3?!
19 ... tbg2+ !
That spectacular move i s the only
one, which provides Black with a suffi
cient active counterplay and the game
t.ecomes forced after that.

20 .xg2 <tJf4+ 21.fJ. <tJxe2 22.

lladl fxe6
This is the best move for Black and
lie has a good counterplay after it.
That line was played for the first time
ill the game I.Sokolov - Shirov, Stock\

That is a grave imprecision and

Black seizes the initiative completely
after that. White played better in the
abovementioned game Sokolov - Shi
rov, which continued with 26. e3, but
still after: 26 ...AbS 27.b3 .th6+ Black
had an excellent compensation for the
exchange.

26 ...Ab7+ 27.g3 Ad5 28.b3

It is too bad for White to try 2 B.a3?
here, because after: 2B ... Ac6 29.b3
bxa3, he can hardly save the game.

Game 20

80

2S id6+ 29.o;t.h3
..

As a result of White's inferior move

26, I managed to activate maximally
my bishops gaining tempi. My oppo
nent's knight on a4 is presently out of
action and his king is not well placed
on h3 either.

ic5 33.tLle3! Elxe3+ 34.Elxd5 l"lxel

35.Elxc5, because the endgame is.
drawish.) 32.ltJe3 he3 33.fxe3 Elf3+
34.lt7g2 (or 34.1t7h4?! h5 35.Eld2 o;t.h6
36.Elg2 ie4+) 34 ... Elxe3+ 35.lt7g1,
or 32 ... ic6!? 33.Elgl (33.Elcl? Elf3+
34. o;t.g2 Elxe3-+) 33 ... l"lxf2 and Black
maintains better chances, but the
fight is not over at all. Now, the game
enters a stage in which I had to over
come only some technical problems to
materialize my extra pawn.

31 ... exd5 32 .o;t.g2 o;t.f6

29 . J'lf8 !
.

That is an excellent positional

move, which consolidates my consid
erable advantage. I am threatening to
play o;t.g7, bringing my rook into the
action along the f-file. The immedi
ate move 29 ... o;t.g7?! would have been
clearly premature due to: 30J'lxd5!
exd5 31.Eldl and White would have
good chances to equalize.

30 .lt:\b2
What else can White do? He is un
derstandably reluctant to leave his
knight on a4 throughout the entire
game? !

3 0 ... o;t.g7 3Ulxd5?!

This exchange-sacrifice is by far
not the best line for White, since now
he remains without a pawn and a suf
ficient compensation for it.
He could have offered serious re
sistance only in case of 31.lt:\c4!. In
deed, after 31...ic5!? (Black does not
achieve much with: 31...Elf3+ 32.lt7g2

33.lt:\d3?!
That move just si mplifies my task.
White could have defended more tena
ciously with 33.l"lcl, not letting Black's
rook to the c-file.

33... l"lcS 34.l"le2 l"lc3 35.l"ld2 g5

36.h3 h6 37.lt:\b2 o;t.e6 3S.lt:\d3 a5
39.l"le2+ o;t.f5 40 .l"ld2 o;t.e4
Black improves methodically his
position. White has no active counter
play in sight and his position is hope
less. Black's victory is already not a
matter of technique, but a matter of
time only ...

41.lt:\el d4 42.l"le2+ o;t.d5 43.l"ld2

M4 44.l"ld3 o;t.e4 45.f3+ o;t.d5 46.
o;t.f2
White loses too after: 46.Elxc3 bxc3

Nadera-Dreev, Manila 1992

81

47.f2, due to: 47 ...d3 48.tLlxd3 c2,

winning for Black.

46 l'kl 47.e2 .ig3 4S.tLlg2

e5 49.gd2 .if4 50 .gb2 gc3
.

I have improved my position maxi

mally and now the issue is settled
qUickly.

51.tLlel
The other moves are even worse
for White: 51.tLlxf4 xf4 + ; or 51. dl
-

gxf3

51 ge3+ 52.f2 .ig3+ 53.xg3

el

The rook and pawn endgame is eas

ily winning for Black. The game still
followed with:

54.gd2 ge3 55.f2 ge3 56.ge2+

wd5 57.geS gc2+ 5S.g3 a2
59. gdS+ c5 6 0 .geS+ b5 61.
ftbS+ e6 62.gcS+ b6 63.gdS
ftb2 64.d4 b3 65.gd6+ b5
66.!Wt6 a4 67. gh5 a3 6S.gxg5+
wa4 69.ggS gbl and White re
signed.

21

AS5
Dreev - Gleizerov

Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1992

The following game was played

in a Swiss system open tournament

in memory of Alexander Alekhine,
which was held in Moscow. It had
attracted plenty of strong players
and that was not surprising, because
the prize fund was quite considerable
even according to the contemporary
standards. The first prize was not
less than 20, 0 0 0 $, if I remember
correctly and that was almost unbe
lievablefor those times in Russia...
International master Evgenij Beb
chuk had a huge contribution to the
organization of the tournament. He
was a famous chess-functionary and
it was a pity that he passed away re
cently...
This game turned out to be quite
short at the end. My opponent loses
so quickly only very seldom and he is
considered to have a high level ofpo
sitional understanding and an excel
lently prepared opening repertoire.
Unfortunately, he still needs a lot of
work to realize his chess talent to its
full extent...

l.d4 e6 2.e4 f5
The Dutch Defence is Zhenja's
trademark opening weapon.

3.tLlf3 tLlf6 4.<tlc3

Now, in case of 4 ... d5, White
reaches a very favourable position
from the Stonewall system, by play
ing 5.tLf4, therefore Black often trans
poses to various set-ups, which can
arise in some other openings like the
Queen's Indian Defence as well as the
Nimzowitsch Defence.

4 ....ib4 5.1:!fb3 1:!fe7

It is also possible for Black here to
continue with 5 ... a5.

6.g3 b6 7.tLg2 .ib7 S . O - O .b:c3

Game 22

82

19 .c5 ttlc6, preserving some practical

chances.

18...d6?
This is j ust a terrible blunder...

9.bxc3
This move is quite energetic, but it
is a bit arguable. It is more solid for
White, but somewhat dull, to follow
with 9.xc3 . . .

9 ttle4

19.1:!xd5! Bxd5 2 0 .l:!dl l- 0

This move was not forced for Black,

but he thus prevented White's eventual
pawn-break c4-c5. Meanwhile, White
has numerous other possibilities too.
It can be recommended to Black to try
instead: 9 ... 0-0 1 O.a3 d6 11.c5 e4
and the game would have remained
quite unclear...

10.ttlg5! 0 - 0 11.ttlxe4 he4

Or l1...fxe4? 12.fi.a3 d6 13.c2.

12.he4 fxe4 13.h3 c5

D49

22
Dreev - Sakaev

Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1992

l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 c6 4.ttlc3

ttlf6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.i.d3 dxc4 7.hc4
b5 8.i.d3 a6 9.e4 c5 10 .e5 cxd4
11.ttlxb5 ttlxe5 12.ttlxe5 axb5

Or 13 ... d6 14.c2.

14.Bc2 d5
Black should not have held to that
pawn. He had better continue with:
14 ... e3 15.fxe3 c6 16.f3, but White
would still have some edge. Mean
while, he is not forced to capture on
e3, but he could have continued in
stead with f2-f4, followed by e4.

15.ad5 exd5 16.dxc5 bxc5 17.

l:!adl l:!d8 18.3
Now, it becomes clear that Black
has failed to consolidate his position
without giving up the pawn, His best
chance would have been: 18 ... e6

13. 0 - 0 !?
This interesting line of the Meran
system is named the Relshtab attack
and it is even presently not as well

Dreeu-Sakaev, Moscow 1992

analyzed as the more popular varia
tion 13.b5+. At the moment that we
played our game it was almost terra
incognita ... Contrary to the long forced
lines arising after 13.ib5, it leads to a
complicated positional fight and the
variations are much less forced.

13 'd5 14.1Mle2 b8
..

That move is not so often played

as 14... a6, which is considered to be
critical by the contemporary theory,
but I am not convinced that it is worse
at all. It is much less analyzed though,
that is for sure ...

15.J.g5!
This is the only way for White to
fight for the opening initiative. In case
of: 15.a4 J.d6, or 15.f4 e7, Black has
DO problems whatsoever.
15 ...J.e7
That is of course quite possible, but
I think that the fashionable move 15. . .
.id6 !? seems t o be more reliable. After
16.f4 there arises a complicated posi
tion wjth mutual chances. In the game
Lautier - Bacrot, France 2000 there
followed later: 16 . . . d7! ? 17'!;ael 0-0
18.f3 f5, with a rather complex situ
mon in which Black's prospects were
at least equal. I think that instead
of 17.l"iael, it deserved attention for
White to play 17.e4!?, having in mind
the variation: 17 ...1MlcS 18 .d3 1Mlb6
19.f5, in which White would have a
sufficient compensation for the pawn
and some initiative.

16.gacl!

That is the best move for White

and it enables him to fight at least for
a slight opening advantage. In case of:
16.f4 0-0 17.gf3, the position would
llave remained rather unclear.

83

16 . 0 - 0 17.c6 gb7?
That is a very serious mistake after
which Black's position is hardly de
fendable anymore. He had to continue
instead with 17 ... 1Mlxg5!? obtaining a
quite acceptable position. Now, after
18.f4 1Mlh6! 19.xe7+ (or 19.xb8?!
d6 20.c6 .hf4=t) 19 ... h8, he can
counter 20.gf3 with the powerful ar
gument 20 ... e5!? and Black's chances
are not worse (But not 20 ... b7? ! due
to 21.gh3 1Mlxf4 22.gf1 1Mlg5 23.M6 h6
24.1Mlf2 !? gxf6 25.gg3 and White has
a crushing attack. It is not good for
Black either to try: 2 0 . . . 1MlhS?! in view
of 21.f1 ! ! and after 21...b7 22.gh3
1Mlg4 23.e2 his position is tremen
dously difficult.). Indeed following
20.c6 and 20... ga8 21.a3, White's
position is preferable but not more ...
.

18 f4!
.

After that very powerful move my

opponent comes into something like
a zugzwang, despite the fact that the
board is full of pieces, since he has no
useful moves at all.

18 ...c7?
That move loses quickly by force.
He could have still defended with 18 ...
h8!? and after 19.xe7 gxe7 20.eS!
ib7 21.gf2 g8 22.ixe7 xe7 23.gc7

Game 23

84
Black would have remained with an
exchange down without a sufficient
compensation in an endgame. Nev
ertheless he was not losing directly
yet and he could have relied on some
practical chances for a draw in the
hope that I might go wrong in the real
ization of my advantage. Now, every
thing is over with in only four moves.
There still followed:

19.xe7+ gxe7 2 0 .ixf6 gxf6

2 1.fflg4+ g;,h8 22.fflh4 and Black re
signed.

23

C07
Tiviakov - Dreev
Podolsk 1992

We played this game in the town

ofPodolsk, near Moscow, in a round
robin, category 11, tournament - "Po
dolsk Company Cup". It was orga
nized by the local chess-club with the
sponsorship of the Podolsk Company
- one ofthefamous producers ofsew
ing machines in Russia. The open
ing ceremony was attended by some
quite distinguished guests - the may
or of the town and the World Cham
pion Garry Kasparov. There were
players of different generations par
ticipating in the tournament - some
eminent chess-veterans, like the fa
mous grandmasters Vladimir Bagi
rov, Aivars Gipslis, Eduard Gufeld
and Igor Zaitzev. Sergey Tiviakov,
Alexey Vizhmanavin and the author
- we were the rating favourites. Af
ter the drawing of lots, it turned out
that I had to play against Tiviakov in
the last round and before it I had 61/2

points together with S. Tiviakov and

International master Georgij Geor
gadze. We were leading the tourna
ment with a whole point in front ci
the rest of our rivals. We were dis
cussing some opening variations with
Sergey Kiselev (He had to play in the
last round against Igor Arkadievich
Zaitzev.). I have to acknowledge that
some of the ideas of Sergey Kiseleo
(He was a very talented chess-player.
who unfortunately passed away too
young. . .) proved to be very helpfulfor
me in my last round game, thefollow
ing day against Sergey Tiviakov.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.d2 c5 4.exdS

fflxd5 5.gfJ cxd4 6.J.c4 ffld6 .,;
0-0 f6 8.b3 c6 9.bxd4
xd4 1 0 .xd4 a6

This position is in fact a very popu

lar tabia in this particular variation of
the French Defence.

1l.b3
Myopponent has chosen a relatively
calm positional line, which is not nec
essarily fighting for a serious opening
advantage. White's other possibilities
here are: - 11.c3; 1l.a4; 1l.J.b3 - and
they all lead to a complex positional
battle. There is a forced line that is
rather popular nowadays: lUlel V/ic7

Tiviakov-Dreev, Podolsk 1992

12.b3 d6 13.fS hl2+ 14.i>hl 0-0
IS.lLIxg7!? and it leads to a very sharp
double-edged position.

1l %Yc7!? 12.J.b2 d6 13.h3

0 - 0 14.a4

Thus seemingly standard move

prevents Black's maneuver b7-bS,
but it is imprecise and Black obtains
a very good game after it. In case of
14.\'9f3?!, Black has the powerful ar
gument - 14 . . . bS!, with an obvious
advantage following: IS. d3 b7, as
well as after: IS.\'9xaS b7 16.%YxfS+
.txfS ! 17.d3 eS.
White's best move would have
been 14.d3, with approximately
equal prospects. Now, in case of 14...
bS, White can enter a rather compli
cated position with IS. c4, or he can
force a draw if he so wishes with:
IS.lLIxbS axbS 16..txf6 gxf6 17.\'9g4+
i>hS lS.\'9h4 fS I9.\'9f6+ i>gS 20.\'9gS+
i>h8 21. \'9f6+.

SS
would have been rather unpleasant
for him. For example: IS.gadl e3!
and if 19.fxe3, then 19 . . .ih2+ 20.i>hl
lLIe4-+

18 ... %Ya5!
But naturally not IS ... %Yc5?, in view
of: 19.3! \'9xd4 20.gfdl.

19.9dl! %Ye5 2 0 .g3?!

This is already a very serious mis
take. Sergey had better continue with
20.f4!? and although after 20 ... %YaS,
(It was also interesting for Black to
try: 20 . . . exf3!? 21.\'9xeS ixeS 22 ..b3
fxg2 23.ixf8 i>xf8 24.i>xg2 ILIhS and
he would have a good compensa
tion for the exchange.) my prospects
would have been somewhat better,
White could have preserved a quite
defensible position. My advantage
became considerable after the move
in the game and I seized the initiative
altogether.

2 0 ... lLIh5
14... e5! 15.f3 e4 16.lLId4
I was planning to answer 16.lLIgs

with 16 ...eS and if 17.3, then 17...

bS!-+

16 ...d7 17.\'ge2 gae8 18.J.cl

My opponent was practically forced
to make that ugly unaesthetic move,
since the positional threat - e4-e3 ! ?

Black cannot capture the h3-pawn

due to: 20 . . . hl3? 21.if4 \'9c5 22.ixd6
\'9xd6 23.e6!

21.\'9f1 J.c5! 22.c3

The move 22.e3?, can be coun
tered by Black with 22 ... xg3-+

2 2... i>h8!?
Now, capturing - 22 ... lLIxg3?! is

Game 24

86
far from clear: 23.fxg3 1Mfxg3+ 24.1Mfg2
1Mfxc3 25 . .ib2 1Mfxh3. I was considering
the move 22 . . .b5!?, but then I decided
to play with my king with the quite
straightforward idea to try to break
through White's position by advanc
ing my f-pawn.

23.g2 f5 24.e2?!
That is another grave mistake and
White's position might be already
beyond salvation after it. In case of
24.h4! ? , or 24.a5!?, White's position is
evidently worse, but he can still hold
on, because there is no decisive win
ning line in sight for Black yet.

24 .ie6 25 ..if4

32.gd5 xb3 33.lLld4 c3 34.

gel d3 35.xd3 exd3 36.M1
d2 37.f3 J.xf4 38.gns gf6 39.
gd5 h6! 4 0 .xd2 ge2 4l.g;,gl .igS
42.f3 .ie3+ 43.g;,hl (if 43. <;!{fl, then
43 .. .l:'lf2 + 44.<;!{el g6-+) 43 ... gg6
44.gd3 (after 44.lLle4, Black wins
with 44 ... gg2) 44 ... .if4 45.tl
geg2. White resigned in view of the
unavoidable checkmate.

..

The other defensive possibilities for

White are hardly any better: 25.lLld4
e3 26.lLlxc6 exf2+ 27.<;!{h2 bxc6; or
25.e3 ixe3 26.fxe3 bs - and Black
has a great advantage in both cases.

25 xf4 2 6.gxf4 e7 27 .id5

gf6 28.g;,hl gg6
.

Now, White's position is practically

hopeless, because of his vulnerable
king and his weak kings ide pawns.
The rest is so to speak a matter of
technique.
The game still followed with:

28 . . . b6 ! ?

29.tl .id6 3 0 .J.xe6

This victory enabled me to win the

first place in the tournament without
a tie (G. Georgadze drew his game
and he was quite happy about that,
because that was a grandmaster
normfor him...).
Later, I was awarded the prize for
"Best Game in the Tournament" for
my win against 1'iviakov.

Bl3

24
Rogers - Dreev
Interzonal, Biel 1993

30

..

xe6

In case of 30 ... bxc6, White can de

fend with: 31.lLld4 .ix4 32.1Mfxa6 c5
33.1Mfb5.

31.e4 b6

I played quite well at the Interzon

al Tournament in Biel. I only had to
make two draws in the last two rounds
in order to qualify. However, I lost in
the penultimate round to Valery Sa
lov and I thusfailed to become a Can
didatefor the World Title...

l.e4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 exd5

4.d4 lLlf6 5.lLlc3 e6 6 .ig5 .ie6

87

Rogers-Dreev, Biel 1 993

with approximately equal chances af

ter: 7.hf6 gxf6 8.cS, or 7 exf6 8.cS.
White would not achieve anything
much with 7.llJf3, since after 7... llJe4!?,
...

I tried here a very seldom played

move. Black usually continues with
6... e6 or 6 ... dxc4 and these moves
are popular and solid. Naturally 6 . . .
J.e6 seems to be rather strange, since
the bishop is placed in front of the
e7-pawn, therefore many players
are quite skeptical towards that ap
proach.
For example, Mikhail Botvinnik
considered that after 7.ii.x6 gxf6 8.cS,
or 7 ...exf6 8.cS, White was better, but
tournament practice did not confirm
that evaluation.

Black's counterplay is quite sufficient

as contemporary tournament prac
tice shows. It deserves attention for
White to try 7.a3! ? and that it a move
preferred by V.Topalov and M.Adams.
In his game against me at the tourna
ment "Kremlin Stars" Moscow (rapid)
1996, Garry Kasparov played like that
against me. There, I did not check
the well familiar theoretical line 7...
d7, (which is presently considered
to be quite reliable) against the world
champion, but I tried instead a novelty
- 7... ig4 and after: 8.f3 ie6! ? 9.cS g6
1O.ibS ig7 1l.llJge2 0-0, I obtained
a quite reliable and satisfactory posi
tion.

In fact, strangely

enough,) nobody has proved yet how

White can obtain any serious advan
tage in that line. I chose 6 ...ie6 as a
purely chess-weapon (that position is
very complicated and it is not well an
alyzed yet) and also because of some
psychological reasons. I had never
played before the variation with 6 ...
J.e6 and I hoped that my opponent
would not be well prepared for it.
In general, that is what happened.
I bad no problems in the opening and
my adversary lost so much time on his
opening moves that he was later in a
time-trouble.
7.J.e2
That is a relatively calm line. There
arise

more

complicated

positions

7 ... a5!
That is the best move for Black. Its
idea is in case of the standard reaction
for White in similar positions - 8.cS,
to answer 8... llJe4!?, with a counter
play, which would be quite sufficient
to equalize completely.

8.llJf3
It is not dangerous for Black if
White plays 8.ii.x6 and I believe

Game 24

88
Black's simplest method to counter
that is 8 ... exf6 ! ?, with an excellent
counterplay. Here, in case of: 9.cxds
.b:ds 1 O.f3 b4 11 . .b:dS (or 11.e2+
It>f8! and Black's position is even
slightly better) 11...xdS, or 1O.lLlf3
O-O-O ! ? and Black's prospects are
not worse at all.

8 dxc4
.

I did not like the move 8 ... lLle4, be

cause of: 9 . 0- 0 ! ? lLlxc3 1O.bxc3 dxc4
(In case of: 1O ...xc3 11.gbl, Black
lags in development considerably and
White has a very dangerous initiative
for the pawn.) 11.1f4 and although
objectively Black should not be worse,
I did not wish to play a position like
that. White would have the initiative,
despite being a pawn down.

seems very good for White to continue

with 1l.b3!? and White's initiative is
again threatening.
1 0 cl
It deserved attention for White to
try 1O.gel!? with a complicated dou
ble edged position. Now, it is bad for
Black to play 10 ... lLlxd4?, because of:
1l.lLlxd4 xgS 12.lLlxe6 fxe6 13.a4+
and his position would be hardly de
fensible. Still, after 1O . . .h6!, the situa
tion would have remained rather un
clear.
.

1 0 ... h6 1l.1d2
In case of: 1l.1e3 gS! Black has a
good game.

9. 0 - 0

1l . .lLlxd4!
.

9 .. gd8!
.

It was too risky for Black to try

9... 0-0-0, due to 10.cl! and White's
compensation for the pawn would be
more than sufficient. Here, in case of:
1O ... lLlxd4 11.lLlxd4 d4, it is quite
strong for White to follow with 12.b4!
with a powerful initiative. That varia
tion illustrates the danger of Black's
lag in development. After 1O . . . lt>b8, it

That is the most precise move. Fol

lowing 11...gS, White can enter the
variation (It is practically forced for
Black.): 12.dS ! lLlxdS 13.lLlxdS xdS
14.c3 f6 IS. e3! and his initiative
is quite sufficient to compensate his
two-pawn deficit.

12.xd4 gxd4 13.b4! d8 14.

1e3 gd7 15.1dl
That is a mistake after which White
must still prove that his compensation
is worth a couple of pawns. He had
better play IS . .b:a7! and that would

Rogers-Dreev, Biel 1993

have led to a very complicated posi
tion in which I thought that after IS ...
gS, or IS ... g6, Black's prospects would
not have been worse.

15 a6
..

16.b5?!
This is another imprecision and
this time it is quite serious, because
White already does not have enough
compensation for the sacrificed mate
rial for sure. It was stronger for him to
continue with 16.lLla4! and he would
have preserved good chances to main
tain the balance.
16...axb5 17.gbl g5 1S. gxb5 1J.g7

19.a4!
My opponent creates maximal
problems for me to materialize my ad
vantage by playing that move.

19... e4 2 0 .1J.b6!? WfbS 21.gel

d6?
Here, it was my tum to make a mis
take and my position becomes sud
denly dangerous ... I had to continue
instead with: 21...f4! 2 2.ie3 f6,
preserving a considerable advantage.
22. gb4! gc 7? !
It i s not better for Black to play here
22 ... iik8?!, because of: 23.gxe6! fxe6
24.ihS+ \!;>f8 2S.xc4 and his posi-

89
tion remains nearly hopeless... The
best chance was 2 2 ...1J.fS!?, obtain
ing after: 23.lLlc5 gc7 24.1J.a4+ f8 a
slightly worse, but still quite defen
sible position.

23.c5?!
White returns the favour ... After:
23.gxe6 ! ! fxe6 24.1J.hS+ f8 2S.c5
gxcS 26.1J.xc5, my position would have
been tremendously difficult ...

23 ...gxc5 24.ixc5
Now, the move 24.gxe6 is not
so dangerous, because Black is not
Obliged to enter the variation: 24 ...
fxe6?! 2S.1J.hS+, in which his posi
tion is clearly worse, but he can play
instead: 24 ... geS ! ? with an approxi
mately equal game. The variation:
2S.1J.a4+ \!;>f8 26.gxd6 xd6 27.gxc4
1J.f6 28.1J.c7 is not dangerous, because
of 28 ... a3! and White has nothing
better than: 29.1J.xeS xcl+ 30.gxc1
1J.xeS 310gbl g7 32.gxb7, transfer
ring into an equal endgame.

24 ... 0 - 0 25.m
Now, Black has two pawns for the
exchange and they are a quite suf
ficient compensation. The prospects
are about equal.

25 .. ,!'kS

Game 24

90

positional advantage is doubtless.

32 ... Ela5 33.a4 d4

26.ixd6?!
Here, my opponent overestimated
his position and he decided to play for
a win relying on his extra exchange.
He had obviously ignored the power
of Black's c-pawn ... Instead, he had
better give back the exchange with
the move 26.l''l x e6, entering after: 26 ...
fxe6 27.ixd6! 'lWxd6 (or 27... exd6?
2SJ!xb7+-) 2SJ!xc4 gxc4 29.'lWxc4 a
drawish endgame.

26 ...'lWxd6 27.fucb7 c3
Now, my reliably protected and far
advanced c3-pawn provides me with a
stable positional advantage. White's
extra exchange is practically immate
rial in that position. In fact, his defence
is already very difficult and addition
ally he did not have enough time ...
28.'lWc2 1d4 29.g3 gc5 3 0 .1e4

rllg7 31.1d3 1f6

I am improving my position me
thodically. My adversary had to ad
here to a waiting strategy, since he
had no active counterplay.

32 .1e4
It is not any better for White to try:
32.a4? ! , due to: 32 ... gdS 33.!"!e3 1d4
and he has no good lines in sight. Now,
after: 34.!"!e2 ixf2 + ! 3S.!"!xf2 gxd3,
as well as following: 34.gel 1xf2+
3S.'lWxf2 gxd3, Black's considerable

34.1c6?
GM Rogers was in a desperate
time-trouble here and he made a de
cisive mistake. He had to defend with
34.l''l a l, but after 34 ... 1d7, I would
have preserved a great advantage;
nevertheless he could have still resist
ed. Now, the game is quickly over.

34 .ti5 35.c1
..

Or 3S.1e4 EleS-+
35.. Elc5 36.Elb5
It is not better for White to con
tinue with: 36J:ldl 'lWc4 37.1bS (or
37.1d7 c2-+; 37.1g2 'lWxa4-+) 37...
'lWe4 3S.!"!bS !"!xbS! 39.!"!xbS 1h3 and
Black checkmates unavoidably.
.

36 ... fucc6 37.E!xffi xa4 38.gd5

c2 39.Eld2 b3 4 0 . Ele3 b2 41.Elel
!"!c5

Rogers-Dreev, Biei 1993

91

and White resigned, since he had no

useful moves at all. In case of 42.ltIg2,
Black wins with 42 .. .''b7+, followed
by 43 ...ib2, while after 42Jde2 or
42 Jlf1, Black's simplest win is 42 ...
'M>3. That was a quite interesting
game, although with numerous mis
takes ...

The idea of the move 6 ...a6 is

simple enough: in case of the retreat
7.ie2, Black follows with 7 ... tbb6 (or
7... b5 with the idea ic8-b7) and later
he regains easily the d5-pawn, obtain
ing even a slightly better position,
because White is left with an isolat
ed pawn. He cannot change much in
that case by continuing with 7.ic4 b5
8.ib3 tbb6 (or B .. ib7).
The straightforward move 7.hd7+
.

BIO

25
Lerner - Dreev
Rostov-on-Don (open) 1993

l.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5

4.exd5 tbf6 5.1b5+

seems to me to be anti-positional.
White exchanges his important light
squared bishop for Black's knight
and after 7 .. .'xd7!?, in order to try
to protect his d5-pawn, he is practi
cally forced to play 8.'M>3 (It is too
dubious for White to try B.''f3?!
here, since after B ...b5 9.tbge2 ib7
10.tbf4 f5, Black is clearly better.),
but then after B .. g4! ? 9.ltIf1 (It is
worse for White to continue with
9.g3, because that move compromises
the light squares and it presents
Black after 9 ... b5 with a very danger
ous initiative.) 9 ... g6, or 9 ...b5!?,
Black's compensation for the pawn is
more than sufficient and what is even
more important - he has the initia
tive, while White is deprived of cas
tling rights and his pieces cannot be
coordinated easily. It is less energetic
.

5 ... tbbd7!
This is the best counter argument
against the opening line, chosen by
White (5.ib5), based on the idea to
hold on to the d5-pawn. The other
possibility - 5. . . id7 presents him after
6.ic4 with more chances to preserve
his extra d5-pawn and as a result of
that, with better prospects to maintain
an

opening advantage.

6.tbc3 a6!
This simple and logical answer pro
vides Black with a good counterplay,
contrary to the line 6 . . . g6, which leads
to more complicated positions.

for Black to try the line: B ...b5 9.tbf3

ib7 1O.tbe5 d6 1l.tbc4 c5 12.tbe3,
although it is obviously good enough
for equality. For example, in the game
Formanek - Khenkin, Antwerp 1995,
there followed: 12 .. JldB 13.d4 xd4
14.0-0 c5 15.gdl g6 16.id2 ig7 17.
gac1 0-0 18.tbe4 b6 19.tt:lxf6+ i.xf6
20.ic3 gd7 and Black had balanced
the chances.

Game 25

92
Therefore, there is no sensible al
ternative to the variation, chosen by
my opponent in the game.

7.a4 gb8 8.hd7+

That exchange is practically forced,
since it is quite obvious that 8.ie2 b5
cannot be good for White at an.
8 . . .xd7!

played most often the move 1O.d4 (Af

ter 1O.ge2 gd8 1l.d4 if5, Black is
better.), but following: 1O . . . gd8 1l.ig5
it5 12.ix6 exf6, he never achieved
any opening advantage.

10

f5 1l.g5

1l ... gd8!
9.xd7+
Strangely enough, entering the end
game here for White is his relatively
best decision. His prospects are very
poor in a middle game with queens
present on the board. For example, in
case of: 9.b3 g4!? Black's initiative
is more than sufficient to compen
sate the pawn. Following 9.f4 ga8 !
White fails to hold on to the d5-pawn,
because now, after the relatively best
move 10.f3 (It is worse for White
to play 1O.f3?!, because of: 10 ...
b5 11.lLlge2 ib7 12.f4 f5, with an
overwhelming advantage for Black.)
in the game Kengis - A.Filipenko,
USSR 1985 there followed: 10 ... xd5
11.xd5 xd5 12.0-0 e6 and Black
had a slight but stable advantage.

9 ...,bd7 1 0 .d3!?
Having in mind that I play this line
for Black, my opponent had prepared
a novelty here. Until that game, White

This is Black's most precise de

fence. In case of 1l ...ixd3 12.0-0-0,
White's chances would have been su
perior, thanks to his lead in develop
ment.

12.1xf6
This is forced; otherwise White
cannot hold on to his extra d5-pawn.
Now however, Black remains with two
bishops against a couple of knights
and that is a good compensation for
the pawn by itself.

12...exf6 13. 0 - 0 - 0
That is an imprecision, although
only slight. It is better for White to
play 13.'d2 !?, planning the maneuver
gl-e2-g3, with a complicated and
approximately equal position.

13 ...c5 14.d4?!
This is another mistake and that
time it is much more essential. White
weakens the important diagonal - bl
h7. It was definitely better for him to
have followed with 14.gd2, or 14.\!{d2

Lerner-Dreev, Rostov-on-Don 1993

and his position would have remained
quite defendable.

14 .id6 15 . .!tJge2 gc8 16.c.t>d2

c.t>d7 17.gcl g c4!
..

I have the edge after that move. It

is worth mentioning that it becomes
very difficult to defend a position like
that with White. Meanwhile, it is rath
er easy for me to improve my position,
for example with moves like - b7-b5,
ghc8, or h7-hS, White's best moves
are far from obvious or easy to find
and his every imprecision might have
grave consequences for him. Konstan
tin Lerner again chooses not the best
defensive line:

18.h3?!
He could have still held the posi
tion with: 18.b3 c7 19.12Ja4 ib4+
20.l2Jec3, but it was quite understand
able that it was far from easy for him
to make up his mind to play like that.
White's position seems rather precari
ous, due to the pin of the knight on
c3, despite the fact that I could hardly
profit anything substantial out of it.
Now, Black seizes the initiative alto
gether:

93
It is dubious for White to follow
with 20.f4?!, because of 20 . . . h4 and it
would not work for him to play 21.g4
ixf4! 22.l2Jxf4 xd4+ 23.l2Jd3 l"lxd3+
24.c.t>c2 ig6 25.';tlb3 ee3-+

2 0 ....1g4 21.a3 b5 22.c.t>d3 g5!

Black's pieces are totally dominat
ing the whole board. White has no ac
ceptable defensive plan in sight. My
opponent became a helpless spectator
of my decisive actions to the end of the
game.

23.gcel
White loses after 23.ghel?, because
of: 23 ...gxh4 24.gxh4 if5+ 25.c.t>d2
M4+ ! 26.l2Jxf4 xd4+ 27.l2Jd3 gxd3+
28.l!ic2 xd5+ 29.c.t>b3 l"lxel 30.gxel
d2 31.e2 d4 and the loss of a sec
ond pawn is unavoidable.

23 ....15+ 24.c.t>d2 b4 25.axb4

fucb4 26.lticl geb8 27 .!tJdl J.g6!

Black emphasizes his overwhelm

ing positional advantage.

28.hxg5 fxg5
White is beyond salvation now and
he has no satisfactory defence at his
disposal.

18 ...ge8!
The threat is - if4+

19.93 h5 2 0 .h4

29 .!tJec3

My opponent was trying to coor

dinate his forces somehow, but that
could not save the game.

Game 26

94

29

fucd4 3 0 .lLle3 as 3l.lLlc2

White was losing too after: 3Ud1

gdb4 32.gd2 a4 and there was no ac
ceptable defence against the threat
a4-a3.

3l .. J3C4 32J3e3 a4 33.gdl J.c5

34.grn g4 3S.ge3 gb3! and White
resigned, because of the numerous
threats against which he was totally
helpless.

This was a good positional game

in which I managed to exploit the al
most unnoticeable minute impreci
sion of my adversary.

26

ESl
Dreev - Muhutdinov
St Petersburg (open) 1993

The games against Galdunz and

Muhutdinov were played at the open
tournament in Saint Petersburg.
I started with 7 out of 7 and I had
guaranteed the 1st placefor me with a
round to spare.

l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 ,Ag7 4.e4

d6 s.rn 0 - 0 6.,AgS lLlc6
That is one of the possibilities
for Black and it leads to a compli
cated positional fight. Still, I think
that after 6.,Ag5, the sharpest and
no doubt the most fashionable lines
for him are: 6 ... c5 7.d5 e6, or 6 ...
a6! ? 7.Wd2 c5 B.d5 b5, in which it is
much more difficult for White to fight
for the opening advantage, than af
ter the move 6 . . . lLlc6, played in this
game.

7.lLlge2 a6 S.YlYd2 gbS

9.gcl!
That is an interestind and new
idea. White makes a useful waiting
move and he prevents the thematic
pawn-break b7-b5 in the process. He
plays more often here either 9.d5 ttie5,
or 9 ... ttia5, and that leads to compli
cated positions with mutual chances,
or 9.h4 with a very sharp and rather
unclear game.

9 ...,Ad7
In case of: 9 ... e5 1O.d5, Black is
slightly worse after: 1O ... ttie7 1l.ttig3,
as well as following: 1O ... ttia5 1l.ttig3
- these positions are too passive for
Black, since he has no active counter
play in sight.

l O .dS
This move is too straightforward.
Some time later (see the game against
Mikhail Golubev, played at the tour
nament in Alushta in 1994) I played
the more flexible move - 1O.b3 ! ?

lO ...lLleS
Black's knight is rather unstable
here. It would have been more reliable
for Black to follow with 1O . . . ttia5 and in
the game Mamedyarov - Cheparinov,
Antalya 2004, there followed: 1l. ttig3
c5 12.,Ad3 b5 13.b3 bxc4 14.bxc4 !lb4
with a complicated, but quite accept
able position for Black.

Dreev-Muhutdinov, St Petersburg 1993

1l.b3 ltJh5
That seemingly active move is an
imprecision enabling me to seize the
initiative. Black should have defended
passively, having in mind the line: 11...
ic8 12.f4 1C!ed7. The other active look
ing move - 1l ... b5 is not any better,
because after: 12.cxb5 axb5 13.ltJd4,
White's initiative is quite danger
ous. For example, in case of: 13 . . .b4?!
14.lC!cb5, he has an obvious advan
tage.

95

13.ltJxh5 gxh5 14.e2 ltJg6 15.

exfS 16. 0 - 0 d7 17.ltJe4 h4
18.d3 e5

19.94!
This move consolidates White's
great positional advantage.

19 .be4
..

12.ltJg3!
White achieves nothing much with
12.f4, due to; 12 ... h6 13.4 lC!xf4
14.lC!xf4 g5 and Black's chances are
Dot worse.

12 f5
.

The desire of my opponent to play

somewhat actively is easily under
standable, but his last move seems to
be anti-positional. He compromises
his set-up considerably. Strangely
enough, it would have been better for
him to defend with 12 . . . lC!xg3, without
being afraid of the attack along the h
file after 13.hxg3. Well, after 13... !1e8 ! ?
14.h6 h8, or 14.e2, White main
tains the initiative indeed, but still
Black's position would have remained
quite defensible.

In case of: 19 ...hxg3 20 .hxg3, my

opponent would be faced with seri
ous problems. White would plan to
regroup his forces according to the
scheme - h2, Wg2, !1hl with an at
tack along the h-file.

2 0 ..be4 ltJf4
It is evident that Black's position is
difficult from the strategical point of
view, so my opponent is trying to com
plicate things somehow. He hopes to
have more practical chances to save
the game by sharpening it.

21 .bh4 h5 22.f5 gxfS

Now, the exchange-sacrifice is in

fact forced for Black; otherwis e after:
22 . . . 1We8 23.g5 lC!h3+ 24.Wg2 lC!xg5
25.1Wxg5, he would remain a pawn
down without any chances for active
counterplay.

23.gxf5xfS 24.g;.hl gf8 25.c2

ltJd3 26.gcdl e4!?
That is his best resource from the
practical point of view. In case of 2 6...

Game 27

96
tOf4, he would have to enter an end
game being an exchange down for
nothing...

27.1g3!
White is threatening now the sim
ple move - fxe4, reducing the tension
in the position considerably. Accord
ingly, Black's next move is practically
forced:

27 h4 28 .bh4 mt3 29.1g3

exf3 3 0 .Elgl f2
.

That is Black's only possibility to

regain the exchange. The position
however, is simplified after that and
that suits me just fine.

33.'ffe4
That is an unprecision for White.
but it changes nothing in the evalua
tion of the situation. It was better for
me to play 33.a4!, preventing Black's
counterplay on the queenside, con
nected with b7-bS. Naturally, Black
exploits the available opportunity to
show some activity:

33 b5! 34.a4 bxa4 35.bxa4

mt5 36.EleU .c3 37.Elcl mt3 38.'ffg2
mt5?

Here, Black blundered in his time

trouble, leaving his bishop en pris,
since he overlooked White's spectac
ular move 40. He could have played
instead 38 ...\Wf5!?, with chances to
offer some resistance. The move
39.xc3?? would not work then for
White, due to: 39 ... 'ffb l+ 40.\Wgl \We4+
41.\Wg2 fl#

31.'ffxd3
White is not falling into the trap:
if 31.gfl??, then 31...tOel! and Black
wins, since White gets checkmated in
the variations: 32 :xf2 \Wxfl + ! 33. \wxfl
l3xfl#, or 32J:ldxel fxel\W 33.Elxel Elfl+
34.xfl 'ffxfl#
Now, Black loses by force:
31 fxgl'ff+ 32.E!xgl h8
39.E!xc3! 'ffd l+ 4 0.\Wgl Elf! 41.
The position has been simplified 1e5+t
considerably and Black is a l>awn down
Black resigned. He fails to cal>
and his king's shelter is much less re ture White's queen, because in case of
liable that that of its counterpart. It 41...dxe5, or 41... h7, he gets check
becomes quite difficult for Black to mated after 42. h3. That was an in
defend such a position, moreover in a teresting fighting game with an exqui
time-trouble!
site finish.
.

Galdunts-Dreev, St Petersburg 1993

B3t

27
GaIdunts

Dreev

St Petersburg (open) 1993

l.e4 cS 2.f3 c6 3.ibS g6

4. 0 - 0 ig7 S.c3 f6 6.!"lel 0 - 0
7.h3
Here, it is much more popular for
White to play: 7.d4 cxd4 8.cxd4 dS
9.eS tLle4? and that is presently quite
fashionable; nevertheless the move
in the game was also a frequent guest
in the tournament practice and it was
modern too.

7... eS!?
That is the most logical and the
most principled answer for Black. The
other most often played lines (7. . . d6
8.d4 cxd4 9.cxd4; 7... %%6; 7... dS; and
7... a6) are, I believe, not so reasonable
for Black and they all present White
with more chances to fight for the
opening advantage, than after 7... eS!?

97
has not achieved anything promising
out of the opening. In case of: 8.d3 d6
9.tLlbd2 c7!? lO.tLlfl a6 Il.ia4 bS,
Black will have no problems in the
near future and his plans are already
preferable. In fact, the position resem
bles a lot, in its pawn-structure, one of
the Chigorin variations of the Ruy Lo
pez, except that it is now under much
more favourable circumstances for
Black. White's most active line here
is - 8.d4. After the practically semi
forced variation: 8 . . . cxd4 9.cxd4 exd4
lO.eS (or lO.tLlxd4?! b6 ! 1l.tLlxc6
dxc6+) lO ... tLldS 1l.igS! ? c7!, there
arises a familiar theoretical position,
in which Black has no problems what
soever, as contemporary tournament
practice shows convincingly.

8 ... dxc6 9.xeS

Otherwise the move 8 ..ixc6 be
comes senseless. After 9.d3, I could
counter with 9 ... c7, defending my
eS-pawn and my position would have
been clearly preferable due to my
bishop pair.

9 ... ge8 1 0 .f4

It is worse for White to play lO.d4
in view of: lO ... cxd4 1l.cxd4 (or
11.xd4?! tLld7 12.f4 c7+) 1l ... tLlxe4
and Black is better. Now, in case of:
12.!"lxe4 fueS, Black maintains a huge
positional advantage as well.

l O ... hS!
8 ..b:c6?!
I have always been quite skeptical
about such possible exchanges of the
bishop for the knight in similar posi
tions, since they all seem to me to be
somewhat anti-positional for White.
I even think that after 7 ... eS, White

I also considered the possibil

ity lO ... tLlxe4; after: 1l.!"lxe4 f6, there
would have arisen a rather complex
position, in which my chances seemed
to be at least not worse. Still, the move
10 ... tLlhS was stronger.

1l.d4 h4 12.!"lfl

Game 27

98

12 .bh3! 13.gxh3g3+ 14.mhl

tfxh3 + 15.mgl .!Llg3

and Black would have a much better

endgame.

I have more than sufficient com

pensation for the sacrificed piece in
this position. The most important
point here is - I have the initiative. It
is far from easy for White to defend
that position, because of the unsafe
situation of his king.
16 .!Lld2
Following: 16Je1?!, I could have
played: 16.. .' h 1 + 17.mf2 .!Llxe4+ 18.
l!i>e3 1Wh4 and Black's initiative would
have been tremendously dangerous.
For example: 19.1!i>xe4 (Or 19J1h1?!
\wf2+ 20.l!i>xe4 c4! and White has
no satisfactory defence against the
threat f7-fS with a checkmate; 20.l!i>d3
20 ... cxd4 and Black's attack is so pow
erful that White is practically defense
less.) 19 ...he5 20. l!i>d3 (or 20.dxe5?
gxe5+! 21.mxe5 1We7#) 20...hf4 and
Black has already three pawns for the
piece and his attack is still quite men
acing.

18.mf3 tfh3 19.mf2 .!Llxfl 2 0 .

.!Llxfl cxd4 21.cxd4 f6 22 .!Llf3 lhe4
23 .!Llg3 He7 24.f5!

..

16 ...'hl+ 17.mf2
(diagram)

17... tfh2+
That was not the best. I had better
play: 17 ... .!Llxf1! 18.1Wxf1 (or 18 ..!Llxfl?!
tfxe4 19 ..!Llg3 1Wd5+) 18 ... 1Wxfl+ 19.1tIxfl
cxd4 20.cxd4 f6 21..!Llf3 fue4 22.fS gd8

This is a very strong move after

which the game becomes quite un
clear and most probably White is not
worse anymore to say the least.

24...g5 25.'Ml3+ mh8 26 .id2

gae8

27.tfd3?
My opponent had a quite difficult
defensive task during most of that
game and as a result he was in a des
perate time-trouble. That can easily
explain his blunder, after which his
position becomes immediately hope
less. It was correct for him to follow
with 27J3hl!, after which in case of:
27...ge2+ 28 . .!Llxe2 1Wxhl 29 . .!Llg3, as

99

Galdunts-Dreev, St Petersburg 1993

well as after: 27... 1Wg4!? we would
have reached complex positions with
mutual chances.
Now, the game is practically over
rather quickly.

27 g4 28.h1 e2 + ! 29.xe2
'ttxh1 3 0 .el h5 31.f4 h4 32.e6
g3+ 33.lt>e2 g2 34. b3
..

the Dutch city of Tilburg was orga

nized like that in the year 1993.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.J f6 4.c3
e6 5.e3 bd7 6.1d3 dxc4 7..bc4
b5 8.1d3 1b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5
n.dS c4 12.1c2 'ttc7
We have reached one of the basic
positions of the main variations of the
Meran sysrem.

34 .ih6!
.

That is the fastest road for Black to

victory.
35.lt>dl .be3 36.'ttxe3 gl'tt and
White resigned.
It might be interesting to mention

13.d4!?

My opponent chose a very seldom

played line at those times (it is not so
popular nowadays either ... ), avoiding
the famous opening tabia, arising af
that after Our game the variation: 1.e4 ter: 13.dxe6 fxe6.
c5 2. j3 c6 3. 1b5 g6 4. 0 - 0 197
Back at the times in which we
5.c3 f6 6.'i'l.e1 0 - 0 7.h3 eSf? 8.hc6 played our game, Black's main argu
dxc6 9. xeS 'i'l.e8 1 0/4, became prac ment against the line 13.tiJd4, was
tically extinct in the top-level tourna considered to be 13 ...tiJc5, but the
ment practice.
move 14.b4 !? was already beginning
to become fashionable. It was lead
ing to an extremely complicated and
28
D48 double-edged position after the prac
Gelfand - Dreev
tically forced line: 14 ... cxb3 15.axb3
Interpolis Ck. 0.), Tilburg 1993
b4 16.tiJa4. After my opponent made
up his mind to follow with 13.tiJd4, I
Nobody is surprised nowadays' understoo d that in case I answer with
with knock-out tournaments. The idea the usual move 13 ... c5, I risked fac
of organizing chess events according ing some home-preparation novelty
to that system had been tested long in this line and even if my position
ago. For example, the tournament in turned out to be acceptable, I would

Game 28

100
have to solve difficult problems over
the board in a very complex situa
tion. Meanwhile, my opponent would
have been armed with home-prepared
analysis, so at the end, after a relative
ly short hesitation, I decided to choose
a very rare line:

13 eS!?

avoiding complications and steer

ing the game into a semi-closed posi
tional maneuvering scheme.
It is interesting to mention that 12
years after our game, the same sel
dom played variation with the move
13.t2)d4, happened in the game Anand
- van Wely, Monaco (rapid) and small
wonder, Loek decided not to take his
chances with the move 13 ... t2)cS, evi
dently afraid of the line 14.b4!?, but he
chose instead, just like I did, the move
13 . . . eS. Later, after: 14.t2)fS g6 lS.t2)e3
c5. he reached a reliable and approx
imately equal position.

what was more important he had the

initiative...

16.'lWf'3 f4 17.xf7!?
This is White's most principled ar
gument in his fight for the opening ad
vantage.
Following: 17.hf4 exf4 18.V;\Ih3 (18.
t2)g4? hS-+) 18 . . .g7, Black is better;
after 17.t2)g4 g7 there arises a compli
cated position, but I believe that Black
is not worse at all, to say the least ...

17... c;t>xf7 18.g3 gS 19.9xf4 gxf4

2 0 .'iWhS+ c;t>e7! 21.V;\Ih4+
It is inferior for White to play here
21. V;\IgS+?! t2)f6, because he will re
main to be the only one with problems
to worry about. ..

14.t2)f5 g6 ls.h6

21... 1t>f7

lS ... hS!?
This is a new idea. Black had tested
before that only the move lS ... t2)g8
and in the game Szmetan - Morovic
Fernandez, Buenos Aires 1992, af
ter: 16.xg8 xg8 17.V;\If3 d6 18.b3,
White had just a slight advantage, but

It is too bad for Black to play 21...

t2)f6?, dueto 22.ixf4! g8+ (22... exf4?
23.e5+-) 23.g3 and White has a
great advantage, but still it is quite
possible for Black to follow with: 21...
It>e8 22.V;\IhS+ It>d8 and the position is
complicated enough with mutual
chances.

22.dl?!
This move involves a great risk for
White. I believe that my opponent had
better comply with the fact that he had
failed to obtain any advantage out of

101

Gelfand-Dreev, Tilburg 1993

the opening and after: 2 2.1WhS+ It;>e7
23.1Wh4+, he could have presented
me with a choice - to either agree to
a draw by a repetition of moves after:
23 ... 1t;>t7 24.1WhS+ It;>e7, or to continue
the fight in the quite unclear position
after: 23 ... lt;>eB 24.1WhS+ It;>dB . . .
Evidently, GM B.Gelfand had over
estimated his position a little bit ...

22

ggS+ 23.cj;lhl f6 24.J.h5+

Here, at first I of course calculated

the line: 24 . . . tDxhS 2S.1WxhS+ It;>g7
26Jlg1+ It;>hB 27.fugB+ It;>xgB 2B.id2
It;>hB, evaluating the position as rough
ly equal. Later, after some serious
thought, I decided to sacrifice the ex
change in order to reach a very sharp
position in which I hoped to confuse
my opponent and to manage to seize
the initiative:

nevertheless my light squared bishop

was going to become a real monster!

3 0 .exd5
Once again, White had to accept
that sacrifice as well, because after:
30.id2 tDf6, my position woul d have
been clearly better. I would have a
pawn for the exchange and the perma
nent threat - itJxe4.

3 0 ... hd5 31.gfl if6

Black is threatening ghB.

32.h7+ gg7 33.h3 ie6! 34.

g2?!
This is an imprecision, after which
my initiative becomes extremely dan
gerous.
White had better play 34.1WhB!,
and later either: 34 .. .l':lgB 3S.1Wh7+
gg7 36.1WhB ggB with a draw, or: 3S ...
ig7 36.1Wh4 ghB 37.1Wf2 itB!?, with a
rather unclear position.

24 gg6!? 25.hg6+

White is now forced to accept the

sacrifice, because in case of: 2S.l':lg1
itJxhS 26.1WxhS It;>g7, Black's chances
are at least equal.

25 ...hxg6 26.gg1 ie7 27.h6

ggS 28.f3 b4 29. itJe2
(diagram)

29 ... xd5!
After that capture, I was going to
have only two pawns for a whole rook;

34... g5

Game 29

102

35.a3!?
This is White's only chance to ac
tivate somehow his position. In case
of 35.tiJg1, Black's strong initiative
is running unopposed; after 35 ... g4
36.fxg4 xg4, White has no good de
fence in sight, while in case of: 37.%Ve4
Y;Yd7 38.tiJf3, it is possible for Black to
follow with: 38 ... %Vd3! ? 39.%Vxd3 cxd3
with an overwhelming advantage for
him, because Black's three connected
passed pawns are a much more pow
erful argument in that position than
White's extra rook.

40 .tiJd5 hd5 41.Y;Yd2 ic6 42.

Y;Yxd7+
The exchange of queens does not
save White at all.

42

hd7 43.gxa6 i.b3 44.gf2

Or 44.a7+ e6 45.fu:g7 ixfl-+

35 g4 36 .axb4 id5 37.tiJc3

gxf3!

44 i.b4! and White resigned. Af

.

ter 45.a7+, Black wins easily with:

45 ... M6 46.xg7 ixf2 47.g8 id4
.

E81

29
Dreev - Golubev
Alushta 1994

38.%Yf2?
Here, my opponent made the deci
sive mistake in the time-trouble after
which he lost quickly. It was relatively
the best for him to try that practically
forced line: 38.%Vxg7+ ! ? ixg7 39.tiJxd5
%Vc6 40.a5! (40.d1?%Vg641.glf2-+)
40 ... %Vg6 !? 41.xf3 %Ve4 42.g2 %Vc2+
43.f2 %Vxc1 44.a6 %Vd1 and despite
the fact that White would have been
clearly worse in that case too, there
was no quick victory for Black in sight.

38

ib7 39.ga5 Y;Yd7!-+

This i s the best line for Black with

the deadly threat - ih4.

This game was played in a round

robin tournament, which was held in
the town of Alushta in the Crimean
peninsula.
l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3.tiJc3 ig7 4.e4
d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.ig5 tiJc6 7.tiJge2 a6
8.Y;Yd2 m,8 9.gcl! id7

103

Dreev-Golubev, Alushta 1994

That variation was played ayear ear
lierin mygame against M .Muhutdinov,
which was also a part of this book (see
game 26). I played there the straifgt
forward move - 10.dS.

1 0 .b3!?
At the moment - that move as a
novelty. 1O.b3! ? is a much more flex
ible move than 1O.dS. Its idea is to
respond n.d5, in answer to the seem
ingly attractive 1O ... bS, after which
Black is practically forced to enter
the rather complicated and even
risky for him position after 11...liJe5,
since his knight is unstable there.
The other retreats of that knight
promise no good prospects for Black;
for example: n ... liJa7 12.liJg3 c6 13.
dxc6 .bc6 14.liJdS and White has a
slight but stable positional advan
tage. The pawn-structure resembles
the Maroczy system in the Sicilian
Defence, except that the situation
is much worse for Black, since his
knight is misplaced on a7. It is even
worse for him to play 1l ... liJaS?!,
because in that case after: 12.cxbS
axbS 13.liJd4 e8 (There is noth
ing better for Black in sight; if 13 ...
b4, then 14. liJcbS) White can enter
the following semi-forced variation:
14.liJcxbS! ? .bbS lS.liJxbS bS 16.b4
gb7 (16 ... liJb7?! 17.a4 gb6 18.a5 b5
19.9xc7+-) 17.bxaS with a great ad
vantage for him.

1 0 ...bS ll.dS eS
After: n... b4 12.dxc6 bxc3 13.liJxc3
.b:c6 14.ie2, Black ends up in a pas
sive position, without any good pros
pects and he has no available plan to
obtain an active counterplay.

12.f4
This move seems to be the most
logical in White's fight to obtain an
advantage in the opening. I would
not have achieved much with: 12.cxbS
axbS 13.liJd4, because of: 13 ... e8
with a rather unclear position. Now,
after 14.f4, Black can continue with
14 ... liJeg4 and he should not be afraid
of15.h3, because of lS ... b4 with a good
counterplay for him.

12 ... eg4 13.g3 h6 14..1b4

h7 1S.h3
That obvious move is imprecise.
Black's knight on g4 is not so well
placed, so it is hardly worth for White
to repel it. He should have simply con
tinued his development with lS.ie2,
preserving a slight positional advan
tage thanks to his superior piece-coor
dination. Now, the position becomes
much sharper and quite unclear at
that.

IS ... gf6 16 ..id3 eS!

My opponent obtains here an ex
cellent counterplay after that strong
move .

17.fxeS
The position is complicated and
double-edged after: 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.eS
(White achieves nothing with 18.0-0,

Game 29

104
because of: 18 ... xe4 19.he4 xh4
with a better game for Black.} 18 ... dxeS
19.fxeS gS 20. exf6 xf6 21.hgS hxgS
22.xgS .tc6 and Black's compensa
tion for the pawn is quite sufficient.

17 dxe5 18.ge2 c6
. .

It is too dubious for Black to play

18 ... xe4?!, due to: 19.hd8 xd2 20.
hc7 flbc8 21..td6 bxc4 22 . .txf8 cxd3
(or 22 ... wxf8 23 . .tc2 cxb3 24.axb3+-)
23.hg7 wxg7 24.wxd2 dxe2 2S.wxe2
and he does not have a good compen
sation for the exchange.

He is threatening now to sacrifice a

piece on h3, under favourable circum
stances.

22.ie3 gfS 23.dxc6 hc6 24.

d5 bxc4 25.bxc4 e6
We were both in time-pressure at
that moment.

19.if2
It is worse for White to play 19.
O-O?! , in view of: 19 .. b4 20.a4 (or
20 .d1?! xe4+) 20 ... xe4 21.he4
xh4 22.cS flfd8 and Black is evi
dently better.
.

19 ... h5

2 0 .ic5!
This move forces Black to remove
his rook away from the f-file. His plan
is more than obvious: that is to push
f7-fS and eventually also - f4, with
the idea to follow with f3, so he needs
his rook on the f-file. White's move
- 2 0 . .tcS! impedes that plan. In case
of: 20.0-0 f5 ! ? 21.ic5 flf7, Black has
an excellent counterplay.

2 0 .. .l:e8 21. 0 -0 g5!?

26.g3
That is a good positional move. In
principle, it might have been stron
ger for me to have captured the pawn:
26.hh6, but I did not have enough
time to evaluate correctly the position
after: 26 . . .hdS! ? 27.exdS (In case of
27.hg7, Black can follow with: 27...
he4 28.hf8 xd3 and the position
is approximately equal, while after:
27.cxdS ixh6 28.xh6 ef4, the su
tuation is unclear.) 27 ... cS, in which
case Black has some compensation for
the pawn. Having in mind the time
trouble, it would be then much easier
for Black to play that position, even if
his compensation is insufficient, be
cause his knight on cS has occupied
the perfect blocking outpost. Addi
tionally, he is threatening to advance
his pawn-mass on the kingside with
f7-fS.

26 ... d4 27.h2 h7 28J:lf2

a5?!

105

Dreev-Golubev, Alushta 1994

This is an imprecision, since Black
had better play 28 ...!"lb7with a compli
cated position with mutual chances.

29Jcf1 !"lb7 3 0 .'?9c3

37.,ixg6+ !
That is the fastest way to victory.

37 hS
..

Or 37. . . xg6 38.'?9d3+ e4 39.'?9xe4+

It/g5 40.h4#

3S.'?9f3 xg3 39.xg3 !"lxa3 40

.id3, and Black resigned. He has no

defence against White's numerous

threats - 41.'?ge4, 41.'?9f5, or 41.!"lg7.

C07

30
Adams - Dreev
Dortmund 1994

30

..

V9bS

Now, Black makes a serious mistake

in the time-pressure and his sutuation
becomes desperate after that. He had
to continue with 30 . . . lOe6, after which
I would have preserved better chanc
es anyway, because of the powerful
placement of my knight on the d5outpost. Still, the position would have
remained quite complicated with a lot
of fight left.

l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.d2 c5 4.exd5

'?9xd5 5.gf3 cxd4 6 ..ic4 '?9dS 7.
0-0

31.'?9xa5 !"lb2 ?! 32 . .ic1! !"lb7 33 .

.ia3 !"la7 34.'?9c3 !"lcS 35.!"lxf'7
Black is already two pawns down
without any active counterplay. His
position is hopeless. There followed:

35 ...,ixd5 36.exd5 lOb5

This i s a well-known position i n a

popular variation of the French De
fence.

7... e7N
Now, that is already a novelty. I do
not believe this move to be superior
to the standard lines for Black (7...
a6; 7... lOc6; 7 ... lOf6), but possibly it is
not worse either. I chose that varia
tion, (which was not yet analyzed at
the moment the game was played),
mostly because of some psychological

Game 30

106
reasons. I wished to introduce the ele
ment of surprise and to force my op
ponent to play an unknown position,
avoiding his opening preparation in
the well-familiar theoretical tabias.
The development of the game proved
that my experiment with the new idea
- 7. ..tiJe7 was quite successful. Mi
chael Adams lost his confidence in
that unknown situation and his posi
tion became quickly somewhat worse
already in the opening stage.

8.b3 Vlic7 9.Vlie2

tl:)fxd4

tl:)g6 1 0 .

It was more precise for White to

play 10.tl:)bxd4, in order to counter
1O ... a6 with: 1l.iob3 ioe7 12.l::l el 0-0
13.iog5!? and to try to convert his lead
in development into a slight opening
advantage. My position would have
remained solid enough in that case
too, but I would still have some open
ing problems to worry about.

1 0 ...a6 11.f4 1e7 12.f5 exfS 13.

tl:)xfS 1xf'5 14.gxfS 0 - 0

on c4, the queen on c 2 and the rook on

f5 are all placed rather unstably.

15.d4
That is an imprecision. White had
better continue with: 15.iod2 d7!?
16.gafl tl:)f6 with an approximately
equal position.

15... tl:)d7!
This is a very good move, since this
knight will be redeployed to f6 and it
will be multi-functional there. It will
cover the vulnerable spot - f7 and it
will control the important e4 and g4squares.

16.1e3
That is another questionable move.
n would have been more reliable for
White to transfer the bishop to a more
stable placement with 16.iob3.

16 ... tl:)f6 17.lfih1

This natural move is not the best
either. It was stronger for White, just
like on the previous move, to play
17.iob3. Now, I succeed in seizing the
initiative.

17 gae8 18.Vlif1
..

My opponent has not obtained

anything out of the opening. White's
bishop pair is immaterial in this posi
tion. The harmonious development of
forces is much more important and
some of White's pieces like the bishop

18... tl:)g4
Here, I played imprecisely too.
It was much better to continue with
18 . . .ioa3 ! ? and White was practical
ly forced after that to enter the line

107

Adams-Dreev, Dortmund 1994

19JbIT6 (White has great problems af
ter 19.icl? ! , in view of: 19 .. Jle4 20.c3
13fe8 and Black has a clear advantage.)
19 ... gxf6 20.f5 hb2 2U'lbl ie5
22.ih6 hh2, in which Black's posi
tion would have been evidently supe
rior.

19.J.gl J.f6 2 0 .c3 e3 21.J.xe3

e3 22.J.b3 fe8 23.!U"3 3e4
28 ge4!
.

This move emphasizes the vulner

ability of White's first rank.

29.gl
It would not work for White to de
fend with 29.f1, because of 29 . . . Elf4!
and he would be completely defense
less.

29 e1 3 0 .ti'f2 fu:gl+ 3V;i;>xgl

ti'e7
.

24.f5?
This seemingly active move is the
decisive mistake for White. Michael
bad to play 24.id5 !, with the idea to
counter 24 .. J14e5, with 25.13f5!? and
he would have good chances to equal
ize. Now, my opponent ends up in a
very difficult position by force.

24 . ..e5! 25.g3
It is not any better for White to play:
25.h6+ gxh6 26JbIT6 g4 27.ixf7+
<Jlg7, because Black's position is eas
ilywinning: or: 25.Elf4 g4 26.g3 Elxf4
27.%Vxf4 (27.gxf4 %Vc6+ 28.%Vg2 Ele2+)
27. . . %vxf4 28.gxf4 Ele2 and Black has
an overwhelming advantage.

25 ... g4
Now, Black is threatening f4,
therefore White must give up the ex
change.

26.xg4 fu:g4 27.h6+ gxh6

28.ti'xf6

Naturally, that endgame is hope

less for White with an exchange down
without any compensation. Still, there
are queens present on the board and
he preserves practical chances to cre
ate some havoc on the board. There
fore, my urgent task was to trade
queens.

32.J.d5?!
White could have offered a more te
nacious resistance by playing 32.<Jlf1,
avoiding the exchange of queens.

32 ... ti'el+ 33.ti'xel xel+ 34.

c;t>f2 e7
Now, after the position has been
simplified, Black's win should not be
so complicated anymore. The game
followed with:

35.c4 c;t>g7 36.b4 c;t>f6 37.J.f3 b6

38.a4 a5 39.bxa5 bxa5 40 .c5 e5
41.c6 c;t>e7 42.h4 c;t>d6 43.h5 c5
44.c;t>e3 c4 and White resigned.

108

Game 31

31

D82
Dreev - Leko
Dortmund 1994

This game was played at the su

per-tournament in Dortmund and
then Peter Leko was still young and
quite promising ...
l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 d5 4 .if4
.ig7 5.e3 c5 6.dxc5 %Ya5 7 %Ya4+

Contemporary theory does not

consider that line to be so dangerous
for Black. Still, he must play precisely,
because he has to defend an endgame
with an extra pawn for White. The crit
ical line for White is 7.!3c1!?, but I was
reluctant to compete with Peter Leko
(He was at that time already a great
specialist of the Gruenfeld Defence...)
in long and complicated variations of
the type: 7... e4 8.cxdS xc3 9 .%Yd2
%Yxa2 1O.bxc3, or 7...dxc4 8.bc4 0-0
9. ge2 %YxcS lO. %Yb3 c6 11. bS %YhS,
therefore I chose a simple line trans
ferring immediately into an endgame
right after the opening. I wanted to
avoid playing complicated unclear po
sitions and I intended to fight in a tech
nical, positional manner. This strategy
proved to be successful in that game.

7 %Yxa4 8.xa4 .ie6!?

..

That is an interesting, but rarely

played move. In general, Black plays
here: 8 ... 0-0, 8. . . lLle4 and 8 ...id7.
(diagram)

9.ixb81?
That was a novelty at the moment
we played our game. Until then, White
had usually tried: 9.!3cl 0-0 1O.lLlf3
!3c8, as well as: 9.cxdS lLlxdS 1O .ibS+
lLld7, but he had not achieved anything
special after all that.

9 B:xb8 1 0 .cxd5 xd5?!

.

Strangely enough, that natural

and even attractive move is a serious
imprecision. It was obvious that af
ter Peter was faced with a novelty on
move nine, he failed to grasp on the
board all the fine points of that posi
tion, so he played the most obvious;
nevertheless not the best move. I be
lieved - Black had to prefer here: 10...
id7! 1l.lLlc3 !3c8; and White would not
manage to keep his pawn after: 12.c6
bxc6 13.dxc6 bc6, as well as follow
ing: 12.lLlf3 :axcS 13.!3d1 0-0 - and
Black's couple of bishops and his lead
in development would be quite suffi
cent to compensate the pawn.

1l..ib5+ 'it>f8?!
That is again not the best for Black.
He had better follow with: 1l...id7
12.bd7+ 'it>xd7 13.0-0-0 'it>c6 14.lLlf3
!3hd8, creating maximal difficulties for
White to materialize his extra pawn.

109

Dreev-Leko, Dortmund 1994

12.l;cl!
This move consolidates White's
considerable positional advantage.
Now, Black's compensation for the
pawn is clearly insufficent.

12 ... a6?!
Black again makes a mistake. Peter
weakens the b6-square without anyne
cessity and he simply sends my bishop
to a more comfortable square. After:
12 ... b4!? 13.a3 dS !? (Black should
not expect anything promising out of
the variation: 13 . . . a2?! 14J'ib1 b3
lS.f3; White is threatening 16.d2
and the move lS ... a6 can be countered
by White with 16.b6! with a decisive
advantage.) 14.f3 c6 IS.axb4 i.xbS
16.c3 c6, my opponent could have
still offered tenacious resistance, de
spite being a pawn down. Now, his po
sition deteriorates quickly.

13.ic4 b4

have a winning position, because af

ter 17 ...bS, he would win with: 18.cxb6
l;xc4 19J'lxc1 !ixc1 20.b7, while Black
would be defenseless against the
threat - b8.

15.e2 xa2 16.l;c4

b4

as

17.f3

Or 17. . .h6 18.l;al b4 19.b6+-

Peter succeeded in restoring the

material balance, but his e6-square
was so weak and his pieces were badly
coordinated that Black's position was
strategically hopeless. Now, the game
enters a purely technical stage.

18.g5 e5 19.b6 e8 2 0 .gal

c6 21.l;ca4 if6 22.e4 rJ1f7 23.c4
Black is bound to lose his as-pawn.

23 ...lThc8 24.xa5 b6
In case of: 2 4. . .xaS 2S.fuaS b6 26.

!ia7! Black's position is again doomed.

25.xc6 l;xc6
14.iLxe6!
Black had obviously overlooked
that move.

14 fxe6
..

Black would not have saved the day

with: 14 ... d3+ IS.wd2 xcl (or 15 ...
xf2 16.c4 xhI 17.h3+-; IS ...l;d8
16.ib3 li'lxf2+ 17. We2 li'lxhl 18.li'lf3+-)
16.c4 c8 17.f3 and White would

Game 32

110

26Ja6!
Now, White is threatening b2-b4
and the win is already close.

26 .. Jc7 27Jbb6 !bb6 28.cxb6

gc6 29.ga6 gc2+ 3 0 .d3 fucb2
31.b7!
That is the fastest road to victory,
since Black has no useful moves.

31. h6
.

After 3l...gxb7, White wins with: 32.

gxf6+ exf6 33.tt:ld6+ we6 34.tt:lxb7.
32.tt:lc5 e4+ 33.xe4 and Black
resigned.

32

D45
Dreev - Cifuentes Parada

V.Ivanchuk, V.Anand, V.Akopian and

plenty of other super grandmasters
play like that with Black. I have also
tried that line numerous times ...

9.gdl b6?!

Instead of the move in the game

- 8 ... ge8, contemporary theory rec
Hoogovens Ck. 0.), Wijk aan Zee 1995
ommends the solid and completely re
1.d4 ttlf6 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 d5 4.ttlc3 liable system with 8. . .b6, in which af
ter 9.gd1 Black follows with the quite
c6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.c2 1d6
This is the most popular position of natural move 9 ...b7 with an approxi
the so-called Anti-Meran system and mately equal position. Nobody has
it has been played a zillion times in the tried here the seemingly unnecessary
move 9 ... ge8, since the combination
tournament practice...
of the two systems (8 ... ge8 and 8 ...
7.e2
That move is probably neither bet b6) looks a bit strange and completely
ter, nor worse than 7.b3, 7.d3 or awkward. In our game that position
7.d2, which all lead Gust like the arose after a slightly different move
move in the game) to a complicated order. Instead of 9 . . . b6?! it is better
positional fight. The choice of moves for Black to play 9 .. :e7 with a quite
here is much rather a matter of style. satisfactory position as tournament
After 7.g4, there arise sharp positions practice shows.
with mutual chances.

7... 0 - 0 8. 0 - 0
(diagram)

8 ... ge8
This move is possible, indeed. Re
cently, the more fashionable line is:
8 ... dxc4 9.hc4 a6 !? and it seems that
Black has greater chances (in compar
ison to 8 ... ge8) to equalize and even
to seize the initiative. G.Kasparov,

Dreev-Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1995

1 0 .e4!
That is the most energetic move for
White. He emphasizes the fact that
after the practically forced line: 10 .. .
dxe4 11.xe4 xe4 12.Y;Vxe4, or 10 .. .
xe4 11.xe4 dxe4 12.Y;Vxe4, the move
gf8-e8 is evidently unnecessary and
it is simply a waste of time. It is less
energetic for White to continue with
1O.b3, because in that case after: 10 . . .
ib7 1l.ib2 Y;Ve7 the chances of both
sides would have been approximately
equal.

111

17.ctg5 g6
Black saves the game neither with:
17. . .f5 18.ic4, nor with: 17 ...hh2+
18.<;f;lh1 g6 19.Y;Va4 tZlb8 20.Y;Vh4 f6 21.
xe6 and White is completely win
ning in both cases.

IS.Y;Va4 ctb4
I was planning to counter 18 . . .
c5 with: 19 .Y;Vh4 h 5 2o.hh5! gxh5
(or 20...f6 21.hg6 fxg5 2 2.Y;Vxg5+-)
21.Y;Vxh5 with a crushing attack.

1 0 dxe4 11.xe4 ctxe4 12.

Y;Vxe4 Y;Vc7
..

After 12 . . .ib7 13 ..tf4!? White

maintains a slight but stable position
al advantage. The move in the game
is aimed at preventing the maneuver
ic1-f4.

13.ie3! ib7 14.c5

That is the idea behind 13.ie3! .
White thus prevents Black's thematic
pawn advance c6-c5 and he obtains a
considerable positional advantage.

14 bxc5 15.dxc5 ctxc5?

.

That is a decisive mistake; since the

c5-pawn is "poisoned" ... Black could
have still defended with 15. . .if8!? and
although my position would have still
been clearly better due to his "bad"
bishop on b7, but there would be a lot
to fight for.

16.Y;Vc2!
This is the best move for White and
it leads to a practically forced varia
tion after which his position is easily
winning.

16 ... cta6
Black loses immediately after 16 ...
tZld7?, because of 17.Y;Vd2 and he relin
quishes a piece.

19.d6! Y;Vxd6 2 0 .cte4 Y;Ve5

21.Y;Vxb4
The forced play is over and al
though my material advantage is only
minimal (a couple of pieces for a rook
and a pawn), but my positional edge is
overwhelming.

21 ... gedS 22.f4 a5

The exchange of queens would not
save Black.

23.fxe5 axb4 24.ctc5 gabS 25.

ic4 icS 26.g4 gaS 27.gfl
(diagram)
My pieces are completely dominant
all over the board and my adversary
has no counterplay whatsoever, so his
position is completely hopeless.
The game still followed with:

27... Wg7 2S.Wg2 ga5 29.Wg3

gaS 3 0 .h4 ga5 31.h5 gaS 32.hxg6

112

Game 33
Slav Defence - l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.lLlc3
lLlf6 4.lLlf3 e6, but with the inclusion of
the moves a3 and b6. He then plans to
build his game on the nuances arising
in connection of the inclusion of these
moves. Most probably, Y.Seirawan
wanted to surprise me with the move
4... c6, avoiding in the process the well
trodden theoretical paths.

5.lLlc3 d5 6.cxd5!?
bxg6 33 .ig5 1- 0
That was a wellplayed game with
out any imprecision or mistakes on
my part.

33

E12
Dreev - Seirawan

Hoogovens (k. 0.), Wijk aan Zee 1995

1.d4 lLlf6 2.lLlf3 e6 3.c4 b6 4.a3

I wished to clarify the situation

in the centre with my last move. It
also deserved attention for White to
try 6.igS!? with a more complicated
game. Here, after: 6... dxc4 7.e4! the
transfer to a position resembling the
Botvinnikvariation with: 7...bs 8.eS h6
9.ih4 gS l0.lLlxgS hxgS ll.i.xgS lLlbd7,
should be favourable for White, since
he has an extra tempo - his pawn is on
a3 and not on a2. That provides him
with a good chance to maintain his
opening advantage, since the place
ment of the pawn on a3 is no doubt
in favour of White in the critical lines
of the Botvinnik variation. In case of:
6 ... ie7 7.e3, there arise positions from
the Queen's Gambit in which White is
better.

6 ... cxd5 !?
4 ...c6
Y.Seirawan tries a very seldom
played line on move four. I believe that
the usual variations 4 ... ib7 and 4 ...
ia6 are clearly better. Still, strangely
enough, the move 4 ... c6 should not be
defined as dubious, or bad. It is only
slightly worse than 4 ...ib7 or 4...ia6.
The idea behind 4 ...c6 is to counter the
natural move s.lLlc3 with S... ds and to
obtain a well known position from the

That is the most logical move; oth

erwise 4 ... c6 is senseless, because af
ter: 6 ... exdS 7.igS, or 6 ... lLlxdS 7.e4,
White has the initiative and a slight
advantage.

7.M4 a6
(diagram)

8.gcl!
That is the best for White and
now Black has problems develop
ing his dark-squared bishop. If here
8. . . ie7?! (but not 8. . . 1d6? 9.i.xd6

113

Dreev-Seirawan, Wijk aan Zee 1995

In case of 1O.i.d3, my position

would have been still better, but the
move in the game is stronger. Now,
the game becomes sharp and semi
forced. Black should play very pre
cisely to hold the position.
l O ... gc8
It is too bad for Black to play: 10 ...
axbS? 1l.ixbS gc8 12 ..!iJeS, since his
situation is hopeless.
'fVxd6 1O . .!iJbS+-), then after: 9 . .!iJa4
id7 (or 9 ... bS 1O.ic7+-) 10 ..1c7 ixa4
11.V;lixa4+ V;lid7 12.V;lic2, White has an
overwhelming advantage.

11.'fVa4 'Od7!

Presently, my adversary still finds

the best defence. It is worse for him to
try ll ... .!iJhS, since White has 12 ..!iJa7!?
8 ... ib7 9.e3 'Oc6?!
and Black has plenty of problems to
This imprecision enables me to worry about. For example: 1 2 ....!iJxf4
seize the initiative. Black cannot solve (or 12 ... bS 13.ixbS! ? axbS 14.V;lixbS)
his problems with 9 ... ie7 in view of 13.exf4 b5 14 .ixbS! ? axb5 1S.V;lixbS id6
1O ..!iJa4! (White has no more then (or lS ... gc7? 16 . .!iJxc6 'fVd7 17 . .!iJfe5+-)
equality after: 1O . .!iJbS axbS 1U.c7 V;lic8 16. .!iJxc8 V;lixc8 17 . .!iJeS ixeS 18.fxeS
12.i.xbS+ .!iJbd7 13.if4 and following 0-0 19.V;lib6 and White has a consid
13 ... 'fVd8, he has to repeat the moves - erable edge, because the material ra
14.ic7 V;lic8 lS ..1f4 V;lid8 etc.) 1O ... .!iJc6 tio of a rook and two connected pawns
(It is not better for Black to defend against two light pieces is clearly in his
with: 1O ....1d6 11.'fVb3! ? ixf4 12.exf4 favour.
.tlbd7 13.id3 0-0 14.0-0, because
12.'Oc7+
White's great positional advantage is
It was also possible for White to
quite evident.) 1l . .!iJeS .!iJxeS 12 .ixeS continue with: 12 . .!iJd6+ ixd6 13.ixd6
id6 13.ixd6 V;lixd6 14.V;lic2 and White .!iJxd4! 14.gxc8 .!iJxf3+ 15.gxf3 V;lixc8
has a clear positional edge.
16.md2 ! and his initiative compen
sates fully Black's extra pawn.

12 gxc7

l O . .!iJb5!

114

Game 33

13.ha6!
That is the only way for White to
fight for the opening advantage. It is
worse for him to follow with: 13.hc7
1f1xc7 14.ha6, due to: 14 ... ttJdb8
ls.hb7 (or ls.ibs id6) ls. . .1f1xb7
16.0-0 id6.

13...ha6!
In case of: 13 . . . ttJdb8 14.hc7 1f1xc7
15. ibs id6 16.0-0 0-0 17Jk3 c8
18.fc1, Black's position is quite pas
sive and he has great problems con
nected with the pin along the c-file.
There is nothing decisive for White
in sight indeed, but Black's defence is
tremendously difficult, while White
does not risk anything at all.

ttJf6, since the coordination of his

pieces improves considerably.

2 0 ...exd4!?
In case of 20 ... 'it>f7, White follows
with 21.fc1 and the threat c6-c7 is
quite unpleasant for Black and he can
not parry it with 21...id8, because of
22.c7! and White wins; or 20... 0-0
21.xe6.

21.fcl

14.hc7 1f1xc7 15.ful:c6 %lli7 16.

ttJe5 ie7 17.b4!
That is the only way for White to
maintain his initiative.

17...f6!

21...'it>d8?!

Y.Seirawan is again beyond re

proach - that is his only move to de
fend successfully. It was too bad for
him to try 17. . .ic4?, because after
18J!xb6! White would have a win
ning position. Here, in case of: 18 ...
1f1xb6 19.1f1xd7+ 'it>f8 20.ttJc6, Black
has no satisfactory defence in sight,
for example: 20 ...hb4+ 21.axb4 g6,
TO 22.1f1e7+ 'it>g7 23.ttJes+-

18.b5!

Following: 18.xb6 1f1xb6 19.1f1xd7+

'it>f8 20.ttJc6 1f1b7 21.1f1xe6, there arises
a very unclear position, but I believe
that Black's prospects (with an extra
piece for three pawns) are not worse
at all.
18 .. ..bb5 19.1f1xb5 fxeS 2 0 . 0 0 !
Black's defence is much easier af
ter: 20.xe6 exd4 21.0-0 'it>f7 22Jk6
-

My opponent had defended excel

lently until his last move, but here he
made a serious mistake and his posi
tion became quite difficult. It might
be already beyond salvation. His only
possibility to continue the fight
would have been the move 21...1d8.
Indeed, in that case after: 22.xe6+
'it>f723 .cc6 ttJf6 (or 23 ... ttJcS?! 24.es)
24.e4! 1f1d7 (Black's situation is quite
dangerous too in case of: 24 ...dxe4?!
2s.1f1c4 'it>f8 (or 2s ... 'it>g6? 26.1f1xd4
'it>f7 27.1f1c4 'it>g6 28.1f1xe4+ 'it>f7 29.
xf6!+-) 2s.exds, because White pre
serves his initiative with a better
game, but Black can still fight tena
ciously.
Now, he has nothing to counter
White's dangerous onslaught with and
his situation deteriorates rapidly.

115

Dreev-Seira wan, Wijk aan Zee 1995

Linares 1995

llJxc3 16.Wlxc3 Wlc7 17.llJd4 id7=

I.Sokolov - Lobron, Debrecen 1992;
9... dxc4 1O.1xc4 llJh5 (Or 10 ... Wlxd1+
1U'!xd1 b6 12.e4 :1dB 13J;xdB+ llJxdB
14.e5 llJeB 15.e2 ib7 16J;J:d1 h6 17.
ie3 1xe3 1B. xe3 f8= Dreev - Va
ganian, Tilburg 1993.) 11.1g5 ie7
12.1xe7 (12.WlxdB gxdB 13.ixe7 llJxe7
14.e2 id7 15.llJe5 ie8 16.ghd1 llJf6=
G.Agzamov - I.Zaitsev,Yerevan 1982.)
12 ... 'l!Nxe7 13.0-0 l'l:d8 14.Wle2 id7=
P.Nikolic - Ki.Georgiev, Dubai 1986.

I have selected several interest

ing games for this book which I have
played againstAlexander Khalifman.
We have played together in numerous
tournaments. This game was played
at the super-tournament in Linares.

Naturally, the exchange of knights

is quite favourable for me. Sasha ad
mitted after the game that he had un
derestimated that move. Now, Black
must prove that he has not compro
mised his pawn-structure in vain.

1.d4 li)f6 2.c4 e6 3.li)f3 d5 4.li)c3

ie7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5
hc5 S.a3 llJc6 9.ie2

1l...VU6 12.li)xc6 bxc6 13.c2

22.exd4! gfS 23.a4! ig5 24.

glc2 gf4 25.a5 gxd4 26.g3 l'l:dl+
27.g2 ga1 2S.axb6 llJbS
Black loses too after: 2B ...Wla6
29.Wlxa6 l'l:xa6 30.b7 l'l:xc6 31.l'l:xc6 if6
32.l'l:d6 and he is completely helpless.
29.gd6+ and Black resigned.

D37

34
Dreev - Khalifman

1 0 .li)xe4 dxe4 11.li)e5!

13... e5
9 ... li)e4?!
I played this variation often at that
time. With his last move Sasha decid
ed to avoid the fashionable lines. He
had obviously prepared that line be
forehand.
See some other possibilities: 9 ...
l'l:e8 10.ig5 ie7 11 .Wlc2 h6 12.ih4 dxc4
13.1xc4 llJd5 14.1xe7 llJcxe7 15.0-0

This is a novelty. It is weaker for

Black to play 13 ... a5. He stops the the
matic pawn-advance b2-b4 with that
move, but White can follow with:
14.Wlxe4 Wlxb2 15.ie5, but not 14.
O-O? e5 15.ig3, due to 15... l'l:eB! 16.
Wlxe4 (16.b3 16 ...if5 17.Wfh2 Wle7 lB.
l'l:tb1 f6, Muse - van der Sterren, Alten
steig 1991.) 15 17.Wlf3? (17.Wlh4 Wle6)
17 ... e4 1B.Wlf4 g5 19.Wlc7 l'l:e7-+

116

Game 35

14..ig3 M5 15. 0 - 0 'i!re7

Or lS . . . aS 16.Wc3 !"lfeB 17.h4

28.!"ldl h6 29.!"ld6 'i!rg5 3 0 .!"le6

f3 31 .ifl fxg2 32 .,ixg2 'i!rf5 33.'i!ra2
'i!rg4 34.!"ld6 !"lf5 35.'i!re6 g;.h7 36.h3
'i!rg5 37.g;.f1! !"lf8 38.,ixe4+ g;.h8
39.'i!re8 .ie7
.

16.b4 .ib6 17.c5 .ic7 18.!"lfdl

.ig6
My opponent is reluctant to wait
passively here and he tries to advance
his f-pawn. That plan gets refuted,
though . . . In case of IB ... !"lfdB, White
can continue with: 19.a4 .ig6 20.bS
fS (or 20 ...cxbS 21.axbS fS 22.b6 axb6
23.!"lxaB !"lxaB 24.cxb6 .id6 2S.Wc6
!"ldB 26 ..ih4+-) 21.b6 axb6 22.cxb6
.id6 23.aS! f4 24.a6 fxg3 2S.hxg3

Or 39 ... 'i!re7 40.'i!rg6.

4 0 .'i!rxf8+! 1- 0

35

E81
Dreev - Shirov
Biel 199S

19.'i!ra4! 'i!re8
Or 19 ... !"ladB 20 .Wxc6 fS 21..ih4+-

2 0 .b5 f5
Or 20 ...cxbS 21.i.xbS We7 22 ..ic6.

21.bxc6 f4 22 ..ih4 .if5

This game was played in the tra

ditionally strong round-robin in Biel
- Switzerland, which I managed to
win. In general, the year 1995 was
quite successful for me, since I also
managed to win in January the tour
nament in Wijk aan Zee, which was
played according to the knock-out
system.
l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 .ig7 4.e4
d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6 .ig5 c5 7.d5 'i!ra5
8 . .id2 e6 9.ge2 exd5 1 0 .xd5
'i!rd8 1l .ig5

23.!"ld71
That is White's strongest move.
Black's kingside initiative has been
practically parried.

23 ...,ixd7 24.cxd7 'i!rg6 25 .ie7

g;.h8

Or 2S...!"ltbB 26.ic4+ @hB 27 ..idS.

26 ..ixf8 !"lxf8 27.Wb3+-

It is also good for White to continue

here with 27.Wxa7.

27 ... .id8
Or 27 .. .f3 2B.ifl fxg2 29.i.xg2 WfS
30.';!ihl+-; 27. . .Wc6 28.WbS.

1l...'i!ra5+?
Black was just having a black-out...
The usual line for him here was: 11 ...
ie6 12,c2Jec3 ItJc6 13.Wd2 ItJd4; it was

117

Dreev-Shirov, Biel 1995

also interesting for Black to try: 11...
h 6 ! ? 12.iiJxf6+ ixf6 13.ixh6 ixb2
14.h4 itJc6, with a rather unclear posi
tion.

12.b4! dS 13.bxc5 aS+

the beginning of a correct regrouping

offorces.

IS ...f6 19.c3
That move protects indirectly the
d6-pawn.

19 ... a6

There is nothing better for Black

here. If 13 ... dxc5, then 14.e5+-

Or 19... 'lWxd6 2 0.itJb5+-

14.,id2 dS
Or 14. . .'lWxc5? 15.ib4 xc4 16.
itJd4+It was understandable that Black
was in dire straights, but I had to play
precisely to make a good use of that. I
thought that I had to sacrifice the ex
change in order to achieve something
real after Black's serious mistake on
move eleven.

2 0 .ti'b4 bS 21.,ie3!
21.ie2 b6!

21. . . ttJd7 22.,ie2 eS 23. 0-0

,id7 24.f4 ttJf7 2S.,ic5 !
Once again, White regroups his
forces in the correct fashion.

2S ... gcS
Or 25 ... a5 26.'lWd4 b4 27.itJb5.

26.d4+Now, Black's pieces are a sorry

sight. Alexey understood that only
White could improve his position and
he tried his last chance.

26 ... gxc5 27.xcS ,icS 2S.a4!

That is White's simplest and most
precise road to victory.

2S ...xd6 29.xd6 xd6 3 0 .

axbS xe4
Or 3 O axb5 31.ixb5 itJxbS 3 2. itJxb5
fu:e4 (32 ....ia6 33.itJc7) 33.itJd6.
.

31.xe4 e4 32.gcl ,ifS

IS.cxd6! xdS 16.cxdS hal
Or 16.. f5 17.,ic3 ! and Black's ini
tiative is easily parried.

Or 32 ...ib7 33.bxa6 ixd5 34 ..if3.

33.,id3 ga4 34 ..ixf5 gxf5 3S.b6

17.xal geS
Or 17...'lWxd6 18 . .th6 1Wh4+ 19.f2
(19.dl 'lWa4+) 19 ...'lWc5+ 20.g3
'lWd6+ 21.e5 (21. itJf4 f6) 21 ...'lWxd5
22.itJf4+-

IS.'lWd4!
I could have tried to keep the
extra pawn with the move 18 ..if4, but
it was much more important to
develop my pieces and not to relin
quish the initiative. My last move was

White's pawns are absolutely unstop

pable. Black resigned.

A70

36
Dreev - de Firmian
Biel 1995

l.d4 f6 2.c4 e6 3.f3 c5 4.dS

exdS S.cxdS d6 6.c3 g6 7.e4 ,ig7
S.h3 0 - 0 9.,id3

Game 36

118

9 b5
..

This is the most principled line for

Black.
His other possibilities are - 9. . J:e8
10.0-0 c4, or 9 ... a6, and White can
counter that with a2-a4; meanwhile
he can even allow his opponent to
push b7-bs: 10.0-0 bS 11.if4 and the
position remains complicated.

1 0 .ti)xb5
Recently, contemporary theory
prefers capturing with the bishop: 10.
ixbS lLlxe4 11.lLlxe4 aS+ 12.lLlfd2
xbS 13.lLlxd6 a6 14.lLl2c4 and White
maintains somewhat better chances.

1 0 ... e8 11. 0-0 lLlxe4 12.el a6

That is an important intermediate
move.

13.lLla3 lLlf6 14.xe8+ lLlxe8 15.

ig5 if6
This is an imprecision for Black. Af
ter the correct reaction lS ... c7, tour
nament practice has shown that White
can hardly obtain any advantage.
(diagram)

16.ti'd2
The idea of the subsequent maneu
vers blongs to GM Vladimir Epishin.
His game against Vesselin Topalov
(Las Palmas 1994) followed with: 16 ...
ib7 17J'e1 tLld7 18.ie4! (This is a very
important move for White! ) 18 ... lLlb6

18.b3 igS 19.1LlgS lLlf6 20.lLlc4 and

White has managed to solve his main
problem - the defence of his dS-pawn
and thanks to his extra space and the
vulnerability of Black's dark squares
he has the advantage.

16 ... lLld7 17.lLlc4 ib7 18.ie4

.ixg5 19.lLlxg5 lLldf6 2 0 .el
I did not intend to waste tempi for
the retreat of my bishop and I brought
my rook into the action. I had to
consider my opponent's next move,
though.. .

2 0 ...h6?
This is the principled reaction for
Black, but .. .it is a mistake. He has
problems to find an acceptable alter
native, for example in case of: 20 ...
lLlc7, White has the powerful resource:
21.f4! lLlcxds 2 2.g3 and he has a
dangerous initiative, for example: 22 ...
lLlhS 23.'&b3 ic6 24.lLlxf7 1t>xf7 2S.lLlaS.

119

Dreev-de Firmian, Biel 1995

21.loxf7!
This sacrifice is strong and quite
correct too.

21 ... xf7 22 .f!rxh6 ltlg7

Black loses the thread of the
game ...
In case of 22 ... iLlxe4, it is very good
for White to continue with 23.h7+!
(but not 23.!"lxe4? .ixd5 24.h7+-;
23 ... iLlf6 24.!"lf4 .ixd5 25.iLle3! e6?
26.xg6+-; 25. . ..te6? 26.h7+ <j;lf8
27.xg6+-; 25 . . ..te4! 26.g4!? h8
27.g5 !"ld8-+; 27.xh8 !"lxh8 28.g5
!"lxh3 29.!"lxf6+ e7 30.<j;lfl !"lh5-+)
23 ... iLlg7 (23 ... f8 24.!"lxe4 iLlf6 25.
!"lf4 g5 26.!"lf5 .ixd5 27.g6+-; 23...
M6 24.!"lxe4 iLlg7 25.!"lg4 g5 26.h6+
<j;lf7 27.!"lxg5+-) 24.!"lxe4 .tc8 (24...
g5 25.!"le6; 24....ixd5 25.!"lf4+-) 25.
!"lf4+ .tfS 26.g4 g5 27.iLlxd6+ e7
28.iLlxf5+Black's only possibility to continue
the fight would have been 22 ... <j;lg8!?
Here, after 23 ..ixg6, Black has 23 ...
.ixd5! 24. .ixe8 (or 24.!"lxe8+ iLlxe8)
24... .ixc4=. I could have tried instead:
23.xg6+ 23 ... iLlg7 24 ..tfS ! .ixd5 25 .
.te6+ .ixe6 2 6Jlxe6 iLlfe8 (26 ... d5
27.iLlb6+-; 26 ... iLlfh5!? 27.g3 d5 28.
iLle3) 27.iLlxd6 iLlxd6 28.!"lxd6
23.hg6+ gS
23 ... M8 24J"le6! .ixd5 25.!"lxd6+-

24.ge6! +- hd5
After: 24 . . . iLlxe6 25.dxe6, White has
the deadly threat .tg6-f7, while in case
of 24 ...f8, White wins with he line:
25.!"lxf6 xf6 26 . .ih7+ <j;lf7 27.iLlxd6+
<j;le7 28.xf6+ <j;lxf6 29.iLlxb7+25.!"lxd6 hc4
Following 25 ...e7, White has the
powerful argument 26.!"lxd5! + - and if
26 ... el+ 27.h2 iLlxd5, then he con
tinues with: 28.h7+ M8 29.h8+
<j;le7 30.xg7+ with an unavoidable
checkmate.

26.gxdS+ !"lxdS 27.f!rh4 1- 0

A70

37
Dreev - Milov
Biel 1995

l.d4 ltlf6 2.c4 e6 3.ltlc3 c5 4.d5

exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ltlfJ g6 7.e4

We have entered one of the lines of

the Modern Benoni.

7...a6!?
Presently, this move is very fash
ionable, but back in the year 1995,
when we played our game, it was just
becoming modern.
It is quite dubious for Black to play
7... .tg4, because of: 8.a4+! .td7 (or
8 ...iLlbd7?! 9.iLld2) 9.b3 and White

120

Game 37

obtains a clear advantage.

The more popular move here
- 7... ig7 is in a crisis nowadays, be
cause after 8.h3 !? (White prevents
the resource ig4, which is almost al
ways favourable for Black in similar
positions.) 8 ... a6 9.a4 0-0 1O.id3,
White's position is evidently supe
rior. Black has great problems to ac
Black's queenside is not developed
complish the thematic pawn-advance
in similar pawn-structures - b7-bS. yet and that activity is bound to back
In case of: 8 ... 0-0 9.id3 bS, White fire. It would have been more reason
can enter the forced line: 1O ..txbS able for him to adhere to a waiting
tiJxe4 11.tiJxe4 \MfaS+ 12.tiJfd2 \MfxbS strategy with - 12 ...\Mfb6, 12 ...ib7,
13.tiJxd6 \Mfa6 14.tiJ2c4 and it is quite or 12 .. J"!a7. Well, even in that case, I
popular indeed, but as tournament believe White maintains a slight but
practice shows lately, White does not stable advantage thanks to his harmo
risk much in this position, while Black niously deployed pieces.
must play quite precisely in order to
13.lOa4 J.d7 14.a3
It is rather dubious for White to
fight for equality.
The idea behind the move 7...a6 is continue with 14 ..txd6? !, because of:
rather obvious: Black wishes to push 14 ....txa4 lS.\Mfxa4 \Mfxd6 16.eS \Mfd7!
b7-bs. It looks like White can and and Black is suddenly clearly better.
should prevent that maneuver with
14 ... a5
the natural move 8.a4. But in that case
Black is in trouble after 14 ....txa4
after 8 ... ig4 !, contemporary tourna (In case of: 14 ...bxa3 lSJlxa3, Black's
ment practice shows that Black ob pawns on a6 and d6 are so vulnerable
that White's positional advantage is
tains a good counterplay.
8.h3 b5
overwhelming.) lS.\Mfxa4 bxa3 16Jlxa3
Black has managed to push the tiJfd7 17.b4 and Black was evidently
Sax,
thematic move b7-bS, but he still has worse in the game Z.Polgar
plenty of opening problems to solve. Aruba 1992.
White enjoys a space advantage and
Black cannot develop his pieces har
moniously.
-

9.J.d3 ig7 1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0 1l.M4

ge8 12.gel
(diagram)
This position arises practically by
force after 7... a6!? and it is critical in
that variation of the Modern Benoni.

12 ...b4?!

121

Dreev-Milov, Biel 1995

Black has an excellent counterplay.

15 .b:d6!

That is White's best move, after

which Black's position becomes quite
difficult to defend.

15 c4

This is not his best defence. He

could have offered a more tenacious
resistance with: 1S . . .ha4!? 16.%Vxa4
%Vxd6 17.eS %VxdS 1S ..ie4 %Vd7 19.%Vxd7
bxd7 20.ha8 ElxaS 21.exf6 il.xf6,
trying to save an endgame, in which
Black would have a pawn for the ex
change. It would have been far from
easy then for White to press his ad
vantage home. Now, he seizes the ini
tiative completely.

16 .b:c4 xe4 17 .if4 a6

Black's position is tremendously

difficult to defend after: 17 ...ha4
1S.%Vxa4 hb2 19.Elad1 ha3 20 . .ibS.

19 ... xd6
This is relatively Black's best defen
sive line; nevertheless he is already be
yond salvation. In case of: 19...%Vxd6, I
was winning quite easily after: 20.b6
hb2 21.hf7+ ! cJJxf7 22.%Vb3+ .ie6
23.%Vxb2 ElabS 24.axb4 xb4 (24...
%Vxb4 2S.%VeS+-) 2S.i.h6! +-

20 .b:a6 .b:a4

It is totally hopeless for Black to

play: 20 ... Elxa6 2 1.cS Ela7 22.axb4.

2U'xa4 l3xa6 2 2 .ig5!

That is again the best move for

White and now Black loses practically
by force.

22 Jb(el+ 23.!hel tlIf5

.

Or 23...%Vxb2 24.EleS+ xeS 25.

%VxeS+ .if8 26.i.h6+-

lS.d6!? %Vf6
It would not work for Black to try:
1S . . .ha4 19.%Vxa4 hb2, because of:
2o.hf7+ ! @xf7 21.%Vb3+ @f8 22.%Vxb2
and White's position would be easily
winning.

24.geS+! xeS 25.tlIxeS+ .if8

26 .ie7 h6 27.tlIxfB+ cJJh7 2S .ic5!

This is the most precise line for

White. The bishop is transferred to
the a1-hS diagonal and Black comes
immediately under a crushing attack.

2 S...g5
1 9 .ie3 !
That is White's most precise move.
It is considerably weaker for him to
continue with: 19.Elxe4?! Elxe4 20 ..ig5,
since after: 20 ...%VfS 21.b6 hb2,

In case of 2S ...bxa3, White wins by

force with the line: 29 ..id4 f6 30.%Ve7+
@gS 31.%VdS+ cJJf7 32.%Vc7+ @gS 33.
%VbS+ @f7 34.tlIb7+ cJJgS 3S.%Vxa6.
2 9 .id4 f6 3 0 .tlIf7+ 'tthS

Game 38

122

are: 1l.e4 ! ? 0-0 12.eS V!ie7 13.gge1, as

well as: l1.ggc1 V!ie7!? 12.e4 0-0 13J:le1
and he tries to fight for a slight open
ing advantage in both of them.

1l ... e7 12.c2 0 - 0

3ViJe5! This is a spectacular final

strike. Black resigned.

38

D43
Dautov - Dreev
32nd Olympiad, Yerevan 1996

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.f3 f6 4.c3

e6 5 ..ig5 h6 6.J.xf6 xf6 7.e3 d7
8.J.d3 dxc4 9 .Axc4 g6 1 0 . 0 - 0
J.g7

It is insufficient for equality for

Black to try 12 ... b6, because of: 13.J.bS!
J.b7 (It is just bad for Black to play
13 ... cxb5?, since after 14.V!ic6, he has
no satisfactory defence, in case of 14 ...
ggb8, White wins with: lS.d6+ 'ttf8
16.xc8; lS ...'ttd 8 16.GGfc1+-) 14.ixc6
Elc8 15.ixd7+ V!ixd7 16.c3! (Follow
ing: 16.V!id3 eS!, Black's compensation
for the pawn is more than sufficient.)
16....bf3 17.gxf3 and Black does not
have enough for the sacrificed pawn.

13.J.b3
In case of 13.ggad1, it is good for
Black to continue with 13 ... b6!, fol
lowed by J.b7 and an excellent game
for him.

13 e5!?
.

This position is in fact the most

popular tabia of the Moscow variation
of the Slav Defence.

1l.e4
White chooses here a rarely played
line, which does not have the reputa
tion of being too dangerous.
The critical lines for White here

That move was a novelty at the mo

ment the game was played. Black has
no opening problems after it at all. He
used to play before: 13 ... GGd8 14.!!ad1,
or 13 ... Eld8 14.Elfd1; both these lines
were no doubt completely acceptable
for Black, but they were a bit passive.

14.ggfel

Dautov-Dreev, Yerevan 1996

The other lines for White are not so
dangerous for Black. In case of14.lLlc3,
or 14.lLlg3, Black can follow with 14...
'i!lh8! ? and he has no problems at all.
After 14.B:adl, it is good for Black to
continue with: 14. . .exd4 1S.exd4 lLlf6! ?,
and his prospects are not worse to say
the least. If 14.dS, Black can follow
with: 14 ... cxdS Is.ixdS lLlb6 16.b3
if5 17.'<!ffcS B:fe8!? and his chances are
again at least equal.

14 'i!lh8!

It is less precise for Black to play

here 14... 'i!lh7, because White can
counter that with IS.lLlc3!?, in order to
answer the attractive move for Black
- IS .. .fS, with 16.e4!? and White's
prospects are superior. In case of: 16...
exd4 17.exfS, he is again slightly bet
ter.

15.lLled2
Following: IS.dS cxdS 16.ixdS fS
17.lLlc3 e4 18.lLld4 lLleS, Black has a
good game.

15 a:e8 !
.

That is the best move for Black. He

is threatening eS-e4 and his prospects
are already slightly better. White must
defend very precisely.

16.lLlc4 e4 17.lLlfe5 lLlxe5

123
That move is a serious imprecision
and my opponent has quite difficult
defensive problems to solve after it.
White could have preserved some
thing close to equality with the follow
ing semi-forced line: 18.lLlxe5 ixeS
19.d:S f5 20.e6 ! ? ixe6 (After 20 . . .
fxe6 .:::J,V ?, the game becomes much
sharper and Black might have some
serious problems too, for example in
case of 21 ...exf3 , White has the line:
22.e4 g4 23.h3!? and Black is practi
cally forced to enter the variation: 23 ...
S 24.g4 B:f8 2S.B:1 '<!ffgS 26.'<!ffc3+ eS
27.B:xf3 ixg4 28.hxg4 '<!ffxg4+ 29.B:g3,
in which his three extra pawns are
still not a sufficient compensation for
White's extra bishop.) 21.'<!ffxe4 ixb3
22.'<!ffxe7 B:xe7 23.axb3 B:d7 24.B:edl
B:ad8 2s.B:xd7 B:xd7 26.'i!lfl B:d3 27.
a:xa7 B:xb3 28.B:a2 - this endgame
looks quite drawish.

18 ... if5 19.gadl a:f8 2 0 .lLld6?!

Now, this is a grave mistake and
Rustam's position becomes really
difficult after it. It would have been
much better for him after: 20.h3 ixeS
21.lLlxeS '<!ffxe5, to give up a pawn with
the idea following 22.B:d4, to obtain
some compensation for it. At least, by
playing like that, White could have stilI
offered some tenacious resistance.

2 0 ....txe5 21.lLlxf5 gxf5 22.gd2

gad8 23.gedl 'i!lg7 24.V!i'c4 a:xd2
25.13xd2

18.dxe5?!

(diagram)
That is a quite difficult position to
defend for White, despite the fact that
there remain opposite-coloured bish
ops present on the board. Black's plan
is very easy - it is connected with ad
vancing the queenside pawns.

Game 38

124
c2 + 51. \t>c1 i.b4.

46 ...i.b4 47.dl aS 4S.bl

a3 49.\t>e2 a6 5 0 . \t>el ga3 51.
\t>e2 a7 52. \t>el \t>c5! 53. \t>e2 a2
54. \t>dl \t>c4
I and my opponent, we were both
in a time-trouble at that moment.

55.\t>cl?
25 cS!
..

Now, Black has the straightforward

threat - b7-b5.
.

26.a4 c7 27.g3 a6 2S.i.dl

It is not any better for White to de
fend with: 28.a5 gd7 29.gxd7 xd7
and his position is just hopeless, be
cause of the vulnerability of his pawns
on b 2 and a5.

2S ...b5 29.!:Vb3 !:Ve6 3 0 .!:Vc2 c5

31.axb5 axb5 32.b3 c4 33.bxc4
bxc4 34.a2 \t>f6 35.!:VaS cS 36.
!:Va5 c3 37.a2 h5!? 3S.h4 !:Vd6 39.
!:Va6 gbS 4 0 . xd6+ .b:d6

That was another serious mistake

for White. He had better play 55.gel!
and my task to materialize my advan
tage would have been far from easy
then. Indeed, I could have continued
with: 55 . . .f4 ! ? 56.gxf4 f5 and White's
defence would have been extremely
difficult in that case too.

55... i.a3+?
Here, it was my turn to make a mis
take. After 55 . . . ga5 ! ?, White had only
some purely practical chances left to
save the game.

56. \t>dl i.b4 57. \t>cl?

Now, White had to play again
57.gel!, creating maximal difficulties
for me to press my advantage home.

57... ga5!?
White is probably beyond salvation
after that move.

5S.i.b3+ \t>d3 59.i.c2+ \t>c4

I was reluctant to venture playing the
move 59 . . . \t>e2! in my time-trouble.

6 0 .i.b3+ \t>d3 61.i.c2+

It is too complicated for White to

save that endgame.

41.i.c2 \t>e5 42.\t>f1 \t>d5 43.\t>el

\t>c4 44.ga7 f6 45.a6 gdS! 46.gal
White was losing rather quickly in
case of: 46.gc6+?! i.c5 47.gxf6?! gd2
48.i.d1 gxd 1 + ! 49.\t>xd1 \t>d3 50J3a6

125

Dautov-Dreev, Yerevan 1996

Meran" variation, because in case of

6.b3, Black has the powerful argu
61 .';tie2! 62.fucb4 @xf2 63 .tdl ment 6 ... .tb4!, with a good game for
him. White is then practically forced to
@xe3! 64.@c2
In case of 64.ixh5, Black wins with: play 7 ..td2 (As a result of 7.Wfc2 lLle4,
64 ... @d3! 65.gb1 f4.
Black's position is at least equal, while
64 @f2 65 ..hh5 @xg3 66 .tdl after: 7. .tb2?! Wfa5 8.Wfc2 lLle4 9.gcl
e3 67. @xc3 f4 68.gb6 gd51 69. Wfxa2, White loses a pawn by force.)
and after 7...Wfe7!? (It is also possible
.te2
Or 69.@c2 f5 70.h5 f3-+
for Black to continue with 7... 0-0 and
69 3 7 0 .ixf3 @xf3 71.fucf6+ he obtains an approximately equal
@g2 72.ge6
position.) Black has no problems at
Or 72.h5 e2 73.ge6 It>f2 74.gf6+ all . I can quote here a classical exam
It>e1 75.h6 @d1-+
ple of how to play that position with
72 @f2 73.gf6+ @el 74.@c2 Black. It was demonstrated by my
coach - the international master Al
and White resigned.
He was understandably reluctant exander Filipenko. The game B.Kogan
to play to the end of the variation: - Filipenko, Tashkent 1977, followed
74.lt>c2 e2 75JU8 gc5+ 76.lt>b2 It>d2 later with: B . .te2 0-0 9.0-0 dxc4
77.gd8+ It>e3 78.ge8+ It>d3 79Jd8+ 1O.bxc4 b6!? 1l.Wfa4 c5 12.lLle5 .tb7+
@e4 80.ge8+ ge5, in which the ap 13.lLlc6 ixc6 14.Wfxc6 gac8 15.Wfb7?!
pearance of the new black queen was (or 15.Wfa4 cxd4 16.exd4 lLlb8! ?) 15 ...
unavoidable.
cxd4 16.exd4 e5 17.d5? ixc3 18.ixc3
Wfa3 19.d6 (19.gfcl lLlc5 20.Wfe7 gfeB
21.Wfd6 lLlfe4!-+) 19 . . .Wfxc3 and White
D31 resigned.
39
Here the time pressure was over
and there followed:
.

..

Dreev

Galkin

Russia Ch, Elista 1996

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 f6 4.c3

e6 5.b3
Grandmaster Artur Jussupow is
the greatest specialist in that variation
and it is still not analyzed so extensive
ly. Its idea is to develop White's pieces
according to the scheme .tb2, lLlf3,
.td3 and to avoid the usual move Wfc2,
which is hardly necessary for White in
the plan with b2-b3 and .tcl-b2. After
the habitual line - 5.lLlf3 lLlbd7 - White
can only seldom manage to continue
without the move 6.Wfc2, in the "Anti-

5 lLlbd7
.

This move is a bit passive and

White manages to realize his idea in
the opening after it and to avoid play
ing the move - Wfc2.

Game 39

126
It is more active for Black to try:
5 ... ib4!? 6.b2 e4 7.Wc2 (In case
of: 7.ge2 c5 B.f3 xc3 9.ixc3; or 7...
Wh4 B.g3 Wf6, the position remains
approximately equal.) 7... e5! ? and the
situation is quite complex with mutual
chances, Jussupow - Ivanchuk, Istan
bu1 2000.

6.ib2 b6 7..id3 ib7 8.:f.J ie7

9. 0 - 0 0 - 0

the game would have been approxi

mately balanced. The move in the
game is quite reliable too.

13.cxd5 exd5
In case of: 13 ... xd5 14.xd5,
White has a long-lasting positional
advantage after: 14... exd5 15.dxc5
bxc5 16.l'l:fdl, as well as following: 14 ...
ixd5 15.dxc5 xc5 16.b4 ixf3 17.gxf3
l'l:xd3 (or 17 . . . Wd6 IB.ib5 b7 19.a3)
IB.Wxd3 xh2+ 19.<j{xh2 xd3 20.l'l:c2
xb4 21.l'l:d2.

14.gfdl 8 15.c2 gfe8 16.1

a6 17.e2 e4!?
This is Black's most active possibil

ity. It is worse for him to continue with

1 0 .e2!?
It is understandable that White's
queen is much better placed on the
e2-square in that scheme than on c2.
His position seems to be slightly bet
ter thanks to his more harmoniously
deployed pieces.

17...i{B, because after: IB.g3 e4

19.dxc5 bxc5 20.ixe4!? dxe4 21.g5,
White maintains a clear advantage,
since Black can hardly protect his e4pawn; the move 21.. :lWaB, would not
work in view of 22.13 and he cannot
play 22 ...exf3, because of the check
mate on h7.

18.g3 df6

10 ... c5 lUadl
That is an imprecision. It is stron
ger for White to play lU'l:fdl!?, with
the idea to counter 11..:fc7 with
12.l'l:ac1 and he maintains a positional
pressure.

11 ...c7 12.l'kl
Here, I had to admit my mistake on
move eleven, placing the 'wrong" rook
on the dl-square.

12 Jad8
.

Black would have probably equal

ized easier with the line: 12 ... dxc4
13.ixc4 (or 13.bxc4 l'l:adB) 13 ... a6 and

There arose a very complicated po

sition with somewhat better chances
for White.

19.a4!?
That is an interesting plan and it
leads to a very complex situation. I am

127

Dreev-Galkin, Elista 1996

threatening to push a4-aS and to dis
rupt the homogeneous pawn-struc
ture on Black's queenside. I would not
have achieved anything with the stan
dard line in this type of positions:
19.dxcS bxc5 20.tiJfs fB 21. %lfa1 , due
to: 2 1. . .d4! and Black would have an
excellent counterplay. He can counter
the attractive move for White 22.exd4,
with the powerful resource 22 ...%lff4!
and Black's initiative is very danger
ous; now after: 23.tiJg3 tiJxf2 ! 24.c;t.xf2
tiJg4+, or 23.tiJSh4 tiJxf2 ! 24.c;t.xf2 tiJg4
Black's attack is quite powerful. Even
after the relatively best line for White:
23.he4 he4 24.tiJg3 (24.tiJSh4?! gS
2S.dxc5 d1+ 26.gxdl gxh4 27.M6
.txf3 2B.gxf3 h3! 29.%lfc3 g7!-+) 24...
hf3 25.gxf3 %lfxf3, Black maintains a
clear positional advantage.

M2+ 23.c;t.fl he3-+) 20. . .d6! ? 21.

as hg3 ! ? 22.hxg3 c4 ! ? 23.bxc4 dxc4
24.hc4 (or 24.c4 bS 2S.gc2 d6)
24 ...bS 2S.d3 %lfd6 and in both cases
Black's compensation for the pawn
would have been quite sufficient in
view ofthe threat %lfh6.

2 0 .a5! ctJg4?!

It is too late now for that move.

In case of 20 ...bxaS 2 1.dxcS, I would
have preserved a clear positional ad
vantage, but still that would have been
his relatively best decision.

21.lUl d6

Black's defence would not be any

easier after: 21...bxaS 22.dxc5 hcs,
because of: 23.cS! tiJxc5 24.h:h7+
c;t.hB 2S.%lffS and White's attack would
be so powerful that Black would hard
ly be able to cope with it.

22.axb6

19 ...M8?!

This is a serious imprecision, af

ter which White seizes the initiative
completely. It deserved attention for
Black to follow with 19...tiJg4!? and
the position would have remained
rather unclear with mutual chances
for both sides. For example: 20.gfl (or
20.he4?! dxe4 21.tiJxe4 4! 22.tiJg3
hg3 23.hxg3 i.e4 24.%lfa1 tiJxe3!+;
20.tiJxe4? dxe4 21.he4 4! 22.hb7

22 . . .h6
The other possible defence for Black
- 22 ...%lfxb6 is not any better, because
of: 23.h3!? ltJxe3 (It is too dubious for
him to try: 23 ... tiJxg3 24.h:h7+ c;t.hB
2S.fxg3 tiJxe3 26. tiJgS, since Black's
position is almost hopeless.) 24.fxe3
tiJxg3 2S.hh7+ c;t.hB 26.tiJgS and
White maintains a very dangerous at
tack after: 26 ... gd7 27. gxf7, as well as

Game 39

128
following: 26 . . .f5 27J:lxfS!
23.fS ti'h5 24.h3 ti'xf5
Black's position is very difficult too
in case of: 24 ... gxf2 25J:l:xf2 ti'xfS
2 6.dxc5 ti'h5 27,glfc2.

25.dxc5 ! !
That is the fastest and the most
spectacular road for White to vic
tory. The simple line: 25.hxg4 '<l:Vxg4
26.dxc5 c5 27.e5 !'l:xe5 28.e5
b6 29.ic7, was also good enough
for me to maintain a decisive advan
tage.

25 ... gf6 26.c6 ti'e6

After 26 . . .c6 27.!'l:xc6, Black's
position is hopeless. He is a pawn
down and he has no active counter
play whatsoever.

ning, but in that case there might re

main a chance for me to fall into some
trap in the time-trouble, like for ex
ample: 3l...!'l:g5+ 3 2.l!i>hl h5! 33.c8ti'
d7 ! ? 34.liJf3? fuh3+ 35.l!i>g2 ti'g6+
36.lt>xh3 ti'f5+ 37.l!i>g2 ti'g4+ 38.l!i>h2
ti'h5+ 39.lt>g2 ti'g4+ and Black would
have saved the day with a perpetual
check.

31 . gfS 32.c7 e8
.

In case of: 32 ... xf3, White wins

with 33.ie5! (But not 33.cxd8'<l:V?, because of: 33 . . . g3 + ! 34.fxg3 (34.lt>h2?
g4-+) 34 ... ti'xg3+ 35.l!i>h1 '<l:Vxh3+
36.lt>gl '<l:Vg3+ and Black makes a draw
by a perpetual.

33.c8ti' gxf3 34.b8ti'

27.d4 '<l:Vd6 28.ti'al! ic8 29.b7

.ixh3!?
My opponent is trying to exploit
his last chance in a totally lost posi
tion and that is to complicate matters
with a piece-sacrifice in order to force
a mistake on my part. That did not
happen, though . . .

3 0 .gxh3 e5
(diagram)

31.f3
This is the simplest line for me. I
believed, the move 31.c7 was also win-

Black resigned.

His counter attack is over now and

White's colossal material advantage
is indisputable! He has several extra

129

Dreev-Galkin, Elista 1996

Black had tested before only: 7...

queens after all! The final position
deserves a separate diagram, be .b:cS 8.if4 e5 (Or 8 .. 0-0 9.0-0-0
cause it is a quite rare occasion in the %Va5 lO.a3 /tJc6 11.b4 .b:b4 12.axb4
tournament practice in which White /tJxb4 13.id2+- Eingom - Vaganian,
has three queens in a middle game! USSl% 1988; 8 ... %Va5+ 9.id2 'lWb6 lO.b4
This was an interesting tactical en ie7 11.a3 e5 12. /tJxe5 g6 13.cS;t; Ein
counter.
gom - Beliavsky, USSR 1987; 8 ... /tJa6
.

40

D37
Dreev - Vaganian
European Club Cup (final)
Budapest 1996

l.d4 f6 2.c4 e6 3.f3 d5 4.c3

ie7 5.%Vc2
The idea of this order of moves is
that after: 5 ... 0-0 6.cxd5 exd5 7.ig5,
White can transpose to the Carlsbad
variation.

5 c5
..

This is the most energetic and the

most principled move for Black. There
was no definite evaluation of that vari
ation at the time that we played our
game.

9.a3 /tJg4 1O.%Vd2 0-0 11.b4) 9 ..b:e5

ib4+ lO./tJd2 /tJc6 11..b:d4 /tJxd4 12.
/tJxd4 0-0 13.e3 .b:d2+ 14.%Vxd2 /tJe4
15.%Vb4 %Vf6 16./tJf3 ig4 17.ie2 l%ad8
18.cS l%fe8 19.1%dl Galliamova-Ivan
chuk - E.Geller, Vienna 1993.

8.xe5 a6 9.a3 hc5

Black did not have to capture that
pawn. Later, in the game Khalifman
- Topalov, Dubai (rapid) 2002, Black
found the correct reaction: 9 . . .0-0
lO.g3 %Va5+ 11.id2 %VxcS 12./tJd3 %Vc6
13.l%gl ifS 14.ig2 %Vc8 and he had a
good compensation for the pawn.

10.d3 ha3
Or lO ... ifS 1l.%Va4+.

1l.bxa3 0 - 0 12.g3! ge8 13.ig2

.ig4

6.dxc5 d4 7.b5

14. 0 - 0 !
7 e5!?N
.

This is an excellent novelty and it

provokes a new look at the entire vari
ation with 5 ... cS. Or 7 ... /tJc6 8.if4 0-0
9. 0-0-0

This move was quite unexpected

for my opponent. White gives back his
extra pawn, but he maintains a stable
positional advantage thanks to the
couple of active bishops and the pres-

Game 40

130
sure along the b-file. After: 14.f3?! if5
15.0-0 c6, Black would have a quite
sufficient compensation for the pawn.

14 .txe2

Or 14.. .l:l:xe2 15.Yl!fb3

15.l:'lel .txd3 16.fuLeS+ Yl!fxeS 17.

Yl!fxd3 Yl!fel+?!
It would have been better for Black
to have played 17... c6 and after
1BJ:l:b1, o r 1B.if4, my position would
have been only slightly better.

lS.Yl!ffl c3 19.l:l:bl c6

22 J'!cS 23.J.b2 tOe6 24.J.h3

1!dS 25.el

It deserved attention for White to

try: 25.l:l:d1 ! ? Yl!fb6 26.ial

25 b6 26.c5 c6
.

Or 26 . . .Yl!fxc5 27.e6 fxe6 2B.

xe6+ rnhB 29.l:l:c1 Yl!fd6 30.xd6
l:l:xd6 3l.f3

27 .txe6 fxe6

It is a mistake for Black to continue

with: 27...xe6, because of 28.xe6
fxe6 29.c6 e5? 30.c7 l:l:cB 31.d4+-

2S.gdl

2 0 Jb3?
Here, I overlooked an excellent
possibility to increase my advantage,
which however required exact calcula
tions: 20.l:l:xb7! a5 (That is Black's
only defence. He was losing after:
20 ... e5?, due to 21.l:l:b3+-) 21.ib2
Yl!fd2 22 .l:l:b4 E1e8 23.c5! l:l:e1 (or 23 ...d3
24.ix6 gxf6 25.l:l:e4 l:l:dB 26.Yl!fa1 Yl!fg5
27.if3 f5 2B.1!a4+-) 24.l:l:xd4 Yl!fe2
(24 ... l'M1 + 25. rnxf1 +-) 25. 1!dB+ eB
26.ic3 l:l:xf1+ 27.M1 Yl!fe6 28. a5 h6
29.ig2 rnh7 30.c6+-

20 ...a5 21.fuLb7 dS 22J!bl

In case of the not so good line
for White: 2 2.l:l:xf7 22 ... xf7 (22...
l:l:bB 23.l:l:e7 l:l:b1 24.e1+-) 23.aB,
Black's passed pawn becomes very
powerful: 23 ... Yl!fc3 24.id5 d3.

2S tOe4!

Black's knight is headed for the

g5-square and White must play ex
tremely accurately. If: 2B...d3, then:
29.e3 d5 30.c6 xc6 31.l:l:xd3 1!xd3
32.Yl!fxd3

29.!!xd4 !!xd4 3 0 .txd4 tOg5 31.

e3 f3+ 32.rnfl d5 33.ic3

131

Dreev-Vaganian, Budapest 1996

33 e5?

Black had good chances for a

draw in case of: 33 . . . xh2+, but even
then after the correct line for White:
34.<>e2 ! (Or 34.<>el eS=; 34.<>gl f3+
3S.<>g2 d4+ 36.f3 xa2+ 37.<>h3
c6 38.e4 d5=) 34. . .xa2+ 3S.
d2 c4+ 36.d3, Black would
have some serious problems, for ex
ample: 36 . . . xc5 (or 36 . . .g4+ 37.f3
xg3 38.dB+ <>f7 39.d7+ <;!;>[B 40.
d6+ xd6 41.cxd6+ - and ic3-e5;
36 ... a2+ 37.<>el) 37.dB+ fB
38.xfB+ <>xfB 39.f3 gS (that is the
only move for Black) 40.g4 hS 41.ie5
(Or 41.gxh5 g4 42.f4 g3 43.ie1 g4
44.ixg3 f6 4S.h6 g4 46.h7 <>g7=)
41...xg4 42.fxg4 hxg4 43.<>d3.

34.<>g2 !
This paradoxical decision creates
maximum problems for my oppo
nent.

37..b:d2 <>f7 38.ic3 .!lJc6 39.

<>h3 g5
Or 39 ... <>e6 40.<>g4 <>dS 4l.f4 exf4
42. <>xf4 g6 43.\i1gS+-

40 .<>g4 <>g6 41.f4

There still followed: 41 h5+ (Or

4l...exf4 42.gxf4 gxf4 43.<>xf4 <>f7
44. \i1f5 <>e7 4s.if6+ <>f7 46.igs+-)

42 .<>f3 exf4 43.gxf4 g4+ 44.<>e4

h4 45.f5+ <>g5 46.f6 <>g6 47.<>f4
and Black resigned.

34 .!lJd4+?

Black lacks two pawns at the mo

ment, but he should better wait with:
34. . . .!lJe1 + 35. <>h3 .!lJf3 and it is not
clear how White can win, for example:
36.g4 .!lJg5+ ! 37.<>h4 (37.xg5 f3+)
37. . .h6!

35.f3 xa2+
If 35 ... xc5, then: 36.ixd4 exd4
37.eB+ fB 38.1WxfB+ <>xfB 39.M2
<>e7 40.<>e2 <>d6 41.\i1d3 \i1d5 (or 41...
<>c5 42.h4 <>d5 43.hS+-) 42.f4 h5
43.h3 as 44.a4 g6 45.g4 hxg4 46.hxg4
\i1c5 47.g5 \i1d5 4B.a3+-

36.d2 xd2 +?!

Black had more practical chances
to save the game after a transfer to a
king and queen endgame: 36. . .dS
37.ixd4 exd4 3B.c6 xc6 39.xd4
c2+ 40. \i1h3 f5+ 41 .g4

D34

41
Dreev - Graf

FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.)

Groningen 1997

This is the second game of my

match against Alexander Graf He
used to have a family name - Ne
nashev then...) and it was played in
the first knock-out World Champion
ship. That was myfirst match, since I
started fighting in the second round.
The first game of the match ended in
a draw and I tried there a novelty in
the Meran variation (see my com
ments to the game against M.Sadler,
which was played in the next round of
the Championship).

132

Game 41

This win in the second game en

abled me to win the match and to
qualify for the next stage.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.c3 c5 4.cxd5
exd5 5.f3 c6 6.g3 f6 7 .ig2
.ie7 8. 0 - 0 0 - 0 9.dxc5 .ixc5 1 0 .
.ig5 d4 1l.hf6 'lWxf6 12.d5 'lWd8
13.d2

16 ... 'lWe7?!N
This novelty is not so good al
though the idea of that move looks
logical. Black does not wish to let
White's knight to the cS-square. Evi
dently, Alexander was reluctant to
try the usual line 16 ... gb8, since after
17.cS !? (I really intended to play like
that...) White has a minimal, but very
stable positional advantage thanks to
his superior piece-coordination and
Black's vulnerable d4-pawn. In case
of 16. . . 'lWaS 17. 'lWb3 gab8 18.lLld6 Y:Ve5
19.'lWa3, White has again a slight long
term positional edge.

17.d5 'lWe5?

This variation of the Tarrasch De

fence is well known in contemporary
theory. Black's position is acceptable,
but still I think White's prospects are
preferable.

13 ... a6

That is already a serious mistake

after which Black is clearly worse.
He had to admit his mistake on the
previous move and to go back with
his queen - 17 ... 'lWd8, although after
I8.lLlcS, White would have the initia
tive and he would be clearly better.
That would have been the least of evils
for Black, though...

My opponent tries here a seldom

played line, which is not so well ana
lyzed. Black usually continues with
I3 .. Jle8 and that seems to me to be
more solid.

14.cl .ia7 15. f4! .id7 16.e4

18.f4!
This is an excellent move! That is
the right way for White to maintain
his advantage. The discovered check is
not dangerous for him, as we are go
ing to see later.

133

Dreev-Graf, Groningen 1997

lS

..

d3+ 19.<bhl Ylxb2!

That pawn-gobbling is not dubi

ous at all. It is in fact a forced only
move, enabling Black to continue
the fight, despite being in a clearly
worse position. He was losing af
ter: 19 ... dxe2 20.lWxe2 IWb8 (20 ...
IWd4 2 U!fd1+- ; 20 ... liJd4 21.lWd2+-;
20 ... lWe6 21.liJc7+-) 21.liJef6+ gxf6
22.liJxf6+ 'Ot>g7 23.liJxd7+-. It is also
bad for him to defend with 19 ... lWd4?,
in view of: 20.e3 IWxb2 21.lWxd3 and
Black's position is hopeless, because of
White's threats liJe4-gS and !3c1-bl.

20 .Ylxd3 j,g4!
We have to admit that Alexander
finds the best moves to create maxi
mal difficulties for me to materialize
my great advantage.

22 .Ylxd4
Naturally, that move does not
lose the advantage altogether, but it
enables Black to consolidate his de
fence. It was much stronger for me
to continue with 22.lWc2!, threaten
ing to follow with 23.!3fd1 and 23.e3,
trapping Black's queen in the middle
of the board. H e has nothing better
than 22 ... !3ad8!?, relying on the varia
tion: 23.!3fd1 !3xdS 24.!3xd4 liJxd4 and
although Black is definitely worse he
can still fight. Still, instead of 23.!3fd1,
White has a much stronger move
- 23 .liJgS and Black practically cannot avoid entering the variation: 23 .. .
g6 (23 .. fS 24.liJe6+-) 24.e3 1Wg7 (24 .. .
IWh8 2S.!3xb7+-) 2S.!3xb7 and White's
advantage is overwhelming.
.

22 .ixd4 23.e3 j,a7 24.liJef6+

gxf6 25.liJxf6+ g7 26.liJxg4 h5!?
27..ixc6 bxc6
.

It is not better for Black to play:

27 ... hxg4?! 28.!3xb7 ixe3, because of:
29.!3b3! !3ac8 30.id7, since follow
ing 30 . . .!3c7 (or 30 . . . !3cd8 31.ixg4)
31.ixg4, Black remains two pawn
down.

2S.liJe5 .ixe3
2U!bl! IWd4
This is once again the only move
for Black. He was lost after: 21...lWxe2?
22.liJef6+ gxf6 23.liJxf6+ 'Ot>g7 24.
IWxh7+ 'Ot>xf6 2S.lWh6+ 'Ot>e7 26.!3xb7+
id7 27.lWxc6 and White's attack was
crushing. In case of 27 ... lWe6 (or 27 ...
!3fd8) White wins with 28.fud7+ !. It
is also hopeless for Black to play 21...
ixe2?, due to: 2 2 .liJef6+ gxf6 23.lWfS!
and he has no satisfactory defence
against the threat ig2-e4.

It is a quite difficult task to make a

draw in a position like that in a practi-

Game 42

134
cal game. Of course, Black has some
practical chances and White needs to
play precisely to reduce these chances
to a minimum.

gd4 39.tLld5 idS 40 .tLle3 gd3 41.

gd5! d5 42.<Jxd5

29Jfel!
Black's c6-pawn is not running
away, so it is essential for White to im
prove the placement of his rooks and
to send Black's bishop to an inferior
square i n the process.

29 id2 3 0 .ge2 ic3 31.gc1!

id4
.

The transfer after: 31...heS 32.

!:!xeS h4 (32 ... gfeS 33.ggS+! <>fs
34.gxhS+-) into a rook and pawn
endgame is a disaster for Black in view
of: 33.ggS+ ! wh7 (33 ... <>f634Jlxc6+-)
34JlhS+ Wg7 3S.gxh4 gfeS 36.gc2
and White's victory is just a matter of
technique.

This endgame is an easy win for

White after the trade of the rooks
and he can try different methods too.
Therefore, the rest of the game does
not require any further comments.

42 Wg6 43.h3 ia5 44.We2 mg7

45.a3 idS 46. mf3 mg6 47.me4 f6
32. tLlxc6 if6 33.wg2 gfeS 34. 4S. f5 49.tLle3 fxg4+ 5 0 .mxg4
a5 51.a4 <M7 52. ib6 53.tLlc4
gxeS gxeS 35.Wf3
White has some other advantages in ic7 54.tLle5+ me7 55.tLlg6+ md6
that endgame, besides the extra pawn. 56. tLlxh4 mc5 57.tLlg6 mb4 5S.h4
His king is more active and the knight mxa4 59.h5 mb3 6 0 .h6 a4 61.h7
is a more maneuverable piece than a3 62.hS a2 63.me4 id6 64.md3
Black's bishop. Meanwhile, Black's ia3 65.c3+ and Black resigned.
hS-pawn is very weak. All these fac
tors make me evaluate Black's posi
tion as nearly hopeless.

35 ge6
.

D4S

42
Sadler - Dreev

Black would not achieve anything

FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.)
by pinning along the c-file after 35 ...
Groningen 1997
gcS, since White can counter that with
36.gc2 and it is rather unclear what
The result of this game was tre
Black can do next. White is threaten mendously importantfor me, because
ing to improve his position maximally thefirst encounter of that match had
with the maneuver wf3-e4-fS and then ended in a draw, so the second game
he will get rid of the pin easily with the had become decisive. The win here
moves tLlc6-b4 or lDc6-d4 and Black's enabled me to qualify for the quarter
situation would become even worse.
final, but then in the tie-break I lost to

36.gc5 gd6 37.tLlb4 h4 3S.g4 Boris Gelfand.

Sadler-Dreev, Groningen 1997

13S

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.J f6 4.c3

e6 5.e3 bd7 6.1d3 dxc4 7.hc4
b5 8.1d3 1b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5
11.d5 c7
Black's usual line here is - 1l ... c4.

The queen move seems to be quite

attractive. This line became fashion
able at the very beginning of the 90ies
of the 20th century. White's standard
reaction 12.'iWe2, after: 12 ...c4 13.1c2
1d6, leads to a different line (also
well-familiar ... ) in which Black has
no problems. In case of the immedi
ate 12.1c2 ? ! , Black has a good coun
ter argument and that is the move
12 ... 0-0-0!, after which White faces
difficulties. For example, it is dubi
ous for him to play 13.lDgS, due to 13 ...
lDb6. After 13.dxe6, Black follows with:
13 ... lDeS! 14.'iWe2 lDxf3+ IS.'iWxf3 fxe6
16.1Wh3 't!;1bB and his position becomes
even slightly better; if 17.'iWxe6?, then
17 ... ic8 .
Accordingly, in case White intends
to fight for the opening advantage, he
should reduce the tension in the cen
tre with:

12.dxe6 fxe6,
and that already seems to be a cer
tain compromise on his part.

13.1c2!?

There arose one of the most criti

cal positions of the so-called Reynolds
Variation.
Black used to play before this game
the move 13 ... c4, after which White
could transfer into an endgame with:
14.lDgS lDc5 IS.eS xeS 16J!el d6
17.'iWxd6 ixd6 IB.1e3 0-0 19.E!ad1
!i.e7 20.ixcs ixcs 21.lDxe6 ElfcB 22.h3;
but still the main line for White was
- 14.lDd4!?
Following 13 ... 1e7 14.lDgS 'iWc6
(It deserves attention for White to
try IS.f4!?) IS.'iWf3 h6 16.'iWh3 hxgS
17.'iWxhB+ 't!;1f7 1B.'iWh3, White's chanc
es are preferable.
In my game against GM Evgenij
Bareev (Elista 1996) I used a novelty
- 13 ... 0-0- 0 ! ? and after 14.lDgS lDeS
IS.'iWe1 1Wh6 16.f4 lDd3 17.'iWg3 c4+
IB.1e3 1c5 19.ixc5 lDxcS ! 20 .'t!;1h1 b4
21.lDa4 lDxa4 22 .!J.xa4 h6 23.lDf7 lDxe4,
I had an excellent position. I was in a
ti.me-trouble at that moment, so I

offered a draw. I remember I was

afraid then of the move 24.'iWg6, but
in that case Black can force a transfer
into a clearly better endgame after:
24 ...lDf2+ 2SJxf2 'iWxf2 2 6.lDxhB ElxhB
27.'iWxe6+ 't!;1bB 28.1c6 1Wb6 29.'iWeS+
Vffc7 30.'iWxc7+ 't!;1xc7 31.ixb7 't!;1xb7.
Earlier, I had tested that same posi-

Game 42

136

14.lDg5
tion in my game against GM M.Sadler
The move 14 ... lt>e7? is unplayable,
at the World Team Championship
in Lucern (which was played sev because of 15.f4+14...lDfS
eral months prior to the World FIDE
This is Black's only move.
Championship in Groningen). My op
15.f4 0 - 0 - 0
ponent played a much better move
A.Nenashev played here 16.,*,e2,
than E.Bareev - IS.,*,e2! and after 15 ...
geB 16.f4 lDc6 17.lDf3! I had plenty of but after: 16...h6 17.lDf3 4 18.eS
problems to solve. Here, the line: 17... !! 19.,*,xf3 eS 20.,*,a8+ It>d7
lDd4 1B.lDxd4 cxd4 19.lDdl is not good 21.,*,xa6 h2+ 22.lt>hl It>e7, I had a
enough for Black to equalize. I played wonderful position.
17...gS!?, but subsequently I lost after:
16.t:iel!?
That is Mathew's novelty! I had
IB.eS! g4 19.exf6 gxf3 20.,*,xf3 lDd4
21.,*,hS. The position was complicated expected something of the sort,
indeed, but still White's chances were though...
clearly better.
I had understood already that
M.Sadler must have been perfectly
up in anns against the variation with
13 ... 0-0-0, therefore I chose 13

.ltd6,

trying a new idea, which was pre

pared by me especially for that tour
nament.
Here, I should mention - this move
could have hardly been a surprise for
my opponent, because I had already
16 ...e5!?
This was probably a nasty surprise
tested that novelty three days earlier,
in the previous round of the tourna for my opponent, at least because he
ment, against GM Alexander Graf.
went into deep thinking after that.
Most probably he expected that I
Naturally, M.Sadler should have
expected that I was going to play 13 ... was going to play analogously to the
.ltd6 once again. I thought that he was game Nenashev - Dreev: 16. . . h6?!.
not going to have enough time for Here, it is dubious for White to con
preparation and he would hardly be tinue with: 17.eS?! hxgS 18.exd6 ,*,xd6
able to manage to analyze thoroughly and Black's position is at least equal,
such extremely complicated position. but after: 17.lDf3 4 IB.eS! cl
Still, I must admit that M.Sadler had (IB ...3? 19.f4+-) 19.9xcl 19 ...
prepared a good line, but later he failed lDdS 20.lDe4, White's initiative for the
to find the best continuation and that pawn is very dangerous.
led to his demise.
M.Sadler decided to advance his a
So, the game continued with:
pawn:

Sadler-Dreev, Groningen 1997

17.a4!?
This standard move turns out to
be a serious imprecision in this situ
ation.
White could have entered the rath
er unclear position after: 17.fxeS AxeS
18.lDf3 lDe6 19.1DxeS xeS 20.1:%f5, or
the more reliable line: 17.f5, which
would have led to an approximate
ly equal position in case of: 17. . . h6
18.lDf3 lD8d7=

17 b4 18.lDe2

White has no compensation for the

pawn after: 18.lDdS lDxdS I9.exdS exf4,
as well as after: 18.fxeS AxeS 19.1DdS
lDxdS 2 0.exdS AxdS! ?

137

20

..

lDe6!

Black has seized the initiative, his

pieces are very active and White has
a serious problem with the defence of
his e-pawn.

21.lDxe5 xe5 22.EU'5 d61

The centralization of Black's forces
looks just threatening.

23.M4
It would have been preferable
for White to defend with: 23.eS c6
24.f1, but even then Black's pros
pects are superior after 24 ... lDe4.

23

lDxf4 24.lDxf4

18 h6 19.fxe5 !xe5 2 o .lDf3

.

Sadler felt that things were going

wrong and he offered a draw here. I
had played rather quickly by that mo
ment and I had spent very little time
on my clock, while my opponent had
been thinking a lot. Still, when I had
a look at the chess-clock I noticed that
I had about twice less time left than
my adversary. It was amazing, but the
electronic clock had gone out of or
der ... Nobody knew at that moment
what was going to happen in the game,
but Mathew proved to be a real gentle
man and he pointed out to the arbiter
the correct time for each player...

This is the critical position of the

game.
GM Rainer Knaak pointed out in
his comments that here the best for
Black was: 24 ... b3 2S.l;dl b6 26.
ibl c4+ 27.g;,hl Axe4. Indeed, 24 ...b3
looks interesting. I think White must
play 2s.Axb3 and after: 2S ...d4+
26.f2 f2 27.M2 lDe4 28.g;,gl, the
position
remains
approximately
equal.
There is another attractive possibil
ity for Black - 24 ... Axe4, after which
White has numerous moves to choose
from:
It is dubious for him to try 25.
1':lxf6? ! , because of 2S ... d4+ (but

Game 42

138
not 25 ... xf6? 26.xe4 d4+ - 26 ...
It>b8 27.lDd5! - 27.xd4 gxd4 28.lDe6
gd2 29.gcl) 26.lt>hl g2+ ! (or 26 ...
iLc2 27.e6 ! ; 26 ...xf6 27.xe4 It>b8
28.lDd5! xb2? 29.gbl; 26 ... !'!he8?
27.l3e6; 26 . . .gxf6? 27.e4 l3he8 28.
lDe6 ! +-) 27.lDxg2 xf6 and Black is
better;
White can also play - 25.gdl! ? c6
26.gxf6 gxf6 27.l3xd8+ gxd8 28.e4
xa4 (28 ... l3e8 29.iLf5+) 29.lDd3 and
the position remains unclear;
It is also not easy to evaluate the
position in case of 25.e4!?, and 25 ...
d4+ 26.i>hl l3he8 (or 26 ... lDxe4?!
27.liJe6 xb2 28.l3fl) 27.l3xc5+ xc5
28.l3c1 lDxe4 29.l3xc5+ IiJxc5 30.c1
i>b7 31.h3; as well as after 25 ... l3he8 !?
26.gxf6;
As you can see - the position is
extremely complicated. Presently,
it seems to me that my most attrac
tive possibility is the line: 24 . . .d4+
25.i>hl l3he8 26.gdl (26.lDe2 e3
27.liJg3 el 28.l3el lDd7 and the end
game is better for Black.) 26 ...xb2
(26" 'l3xe4 27.f1) 27J:1xcS+ i>b8
28.gbl (28J:!xd8+ gxd8 29.lDd3 d4
30.xb4) 28 ... d4 29.xb4 xb4
30.l3xb4.
However, I continued with:

mined the result of the entire match)

against GM M.Sadler - a remarkable
player and a true gentleman. No one
can ever explain, without the involve
ment of the mystical. .., how neither
of us had noticed that after the move
26.lDe2 !/+-, Black did not have the
lifeline - l3d4 and as a result White
wins the exchange, although I might
still have had some chances to save
the draw. . .

26 ... fucel + 27.1W2 fucd6 28.

fucc5+ It>d8 29.lt>xel g5!
That is the point! The forced line
continues ...

3o .lDd3 b3 31.liJe5!?
White plays quite enterprisingly.
In case of: 31 ... bxc2?! 32.lDf7+ i>e7
33.lDxd6 i>xd6 34.l3xc2, Black's win
ning chances are just minimal.

24 ghe8,
.

having calculated a long varia

tion, which happened in the game,
though ...

25.Ml fuce4??
After 25 ... b6 !?, there would have
arisen another complex position.
(diagram)

26Jxd6??
Something quite mystical hap
pened in that game (which deter-

31... liJd71-+

139

Sadler-Dreeu, Groningen 1997

This precise move guarantees
Black's decisive advantage.

43

E81
Dreev - Kasparov
Iinares 1997

32.liJf7+ e7 33.liJxd6

It is too bad for White to follow here with: 33.l3c7? xf7 34.ifS
(34.h:b3+ dS-+) 34 ... 6-+ and
Black wins.

33 ... liJxc5 34.liJf5+ f6 35.bl

1.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3.liJc3 1g7 4.e4

d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.1g5
There arose the Zaemish variation
ofthe King's Indian Defence.

6 ...a6

Black's main line here is - 6... cS

7.dS e6. G.Kasparov chooses a tricki
er move order, which is well-familiar
too.

7.d2 liJbd7

The endgame is a technical win

for Black now. White's g2 and a4pawns are under attack and Black's
pieces are extremely active. He must
be careful, though, because White
maintains some drawing chances,
due to the considerably reduced mate
rial.

35...h5! 36.g3 liJxa4 37.d2

d5!
This is the most precise move for
Black. Now, White loses his b2-pawn
and that leads to a winning endgame
for Black. There still followed:

38.liJe3 e6 39.d3

It is evident that the passive move

39.c1 is unsatisfactory for White,
because after 39 ... eS (with the idea
to follow with d4) Black wins easily.

39 ... liJxb2 4 0 ..ba6 e5 41.b5

d4 42.h4 g4 43.liJg2 liJc4+ 44.
.bc4 .bc4 45.liJf4 f7 and White
resigned.

8.d5!?

The other possibility for White is

- 8.liJge2 cS. After 9.dS bS 1O.cxbS,
Black has the resource 1O ...a5 - that
is the idea behind that move order.

8 ... liJe5!

In case of 8. . . cS?! you can see the

idea of the move 8.dS: after 9.a4,
Black has difficulties playing e7-e6, as
well as b7-bS. Following 8 ... c6, White
can respond simply with 9.liJge2.

9')ld1

This move is a bit strange. The

point is that after the natural line: 9.f4
liJed7 1O.liJf3 c6 (1O ... liJc5!?) I fail to
stabilize the situation in the centre.

9 ... c6 1 0 .dxc6 bxc6 11.b3

Game 43

140
That pawn-structure is quite un

20

d4 21.ttle2 c5

typical for the King's Indian Defence.

Neither side has any opening advan
tage here and the position is quite
complex.

1l 'a5 12.ttla4

But naturally not 12.ttlge2? lDd3+

13. xd3 xg5.

12

..

c7

Black could have entered the com

plicated endgame after 1 2 ... xd2+!?

13.ttle2 ttlh5 14.ttlec3

It was maybe better for White to
play 14.ttlg3.

14 fS

The situation has been clarified. As

a result of a series of imprecise moves
in the opening, my position has be

come slightly worse. Black has a bish

op pair and a powerful passed pawn in
the centre. Additionally, G.Kasparov
enjoyed a tremendous advantage on
the chess-clock, while I was already
entering a time-pressure. . . I still had
some defensive resources, though. . .

22.ttlb2 a5 23.lMel .tfS 24.ttld3

a4 25.ttle5! axb3 26.axb3 M6
I case of 26 ... ElfbB. I had the excel
lent possibility: 27.h4! Elxh4 2B.ttlxd4

15.exf5? !

EldB 29.xb4 cxb4 30. ttlxf5 with some

I was afraid of the move f5-f4, but

compensation. The same line was ap

in case of 15.e2 f4, White could con

plicable to the move 26 .. J1abB.

After 26 ... Ela3 27.b4 f6 2 8.f2, it is

tinue with 16.c5 ! .

15 . . gx:f5 16.f4

not good for Black to play: 2B . . . ttlxf4?

16.e2 f4.

29.ttlxf4 .txe5, in view of 30.lDd5.

16

ttlg4 17 .te2 h6 18 ..th4 d5!

G.Kasparov seized the initiative

here.

Therefore Kasparov preferred :

27 .b:f6 exf6 28.ttld3 ga3

This move forces White to play ttle2-

19 .ixg4

cl. On the other hand the knight on c1

It is also bad for White to follow

is not so badly placed, since I could

with: 19.0-0 d4, or 19 .cxd5 lDxf4 20.

have regrouped my knights, moreover

hg4 e5+!

that Black's rook is misplaced on a3 as

19 fxg4 2 0
.

If 20.cxd5,

then

White cannot castle.

well. Accordingly, it was maybe worth

20 . . J3xf4

and

for Black to try immediately 2B ... ttlg7!?

followed by h5-h4.

Dreev-Kasparov, Linares 1997

29.ec1 g7 3 0 .:i:1e2 h5 31.:i:1fel

:i:1f7 32.2
32.l2Jf2.

32 a7

I thought during the game that the

move 32 . . . :i:1a8 was stronger for Black,
but after 33.b4, I would have an ac
ceptable game, for example: 33... cxb4
34.cS :i:1d7 35.xb4 h4 36.c4+ h7
37.b3.

33.f2 h4 34.e4 :i:1a6

It deserved attention for Black to
try here: 34 . . ..b:e4 35.:i:1xe4 g3 with a
rather unclear position.

35.d3 1xe4 36.lhe4 :i:1a2 37.

m,l h3
Or 37. . .:i:1d2 38.f5.

38.gxh3 gxh3 39.f2 a5

Or 39 . . .f5 40.:i:14e2 :i:1xe2 41.:i:1xe2
a8 42.xh3 :i:1a7 43.f1 h5 44.:i:1e6
:i:1a1 45Je1=

40 .d3?!
I should have played here 40.:i:14e2.
I have to mention that I played the
second half of the game a terrible
time-trouble (I had about a minute
left for fifteen moves.). It is still diffi
cult for me to imagine how I succeed
ed to make so many moves against
such a strong player under the cir
cumstances (There was no time added

141
per move then... ), moreover that I had
even managed to improve my position
around move 40.

40 ... :i:1al?!
After 40 ... f5 41.:i:1e5 :i:1a1, the posi
tion is equal. The best for Black was:
40 ...c3! 41.xc3 dxc3 42.:i:14e3 f5
43.:i:1xh3 (or 43.:i:1xc3 :i:1g7+ 44.f1 :i:1g2
45.3 !:!xh2-+) 43 ... c2 44.d3 :i:1h7,
with some advantage for him.

41.f1 f5 42.:i:1xal xal+ 43.:i:1el

a8
43... b2=
G.Kasparov played his last several
moves in a time-pressure too. We
were not recording the moves at that
moment, so we had no idea whether
the 40 moves of the time control had
been completed. As a result, we played
blitz a bit longer than necessary.

44.xh3

44... :i:1a7!
My flag fell at that moment and lat
er it turned out that the time-control
was over, so I had plenty of time to re
consider the situation ... I understood
that I would have great problems to
realize my extra pawn, due to my vul
nerable king. Therefore, I decided to
force a transition into an endgame in
which G.Kasparov managed to draw

Game 44

142
easily despite his one pawn deficit.

45.g2
If 45.lLld3, then 45 . . .l::1 a3 46.g3
Elxb3 47.Ele7 a1 + 4B. g2 aB=
In case of 45. g1, Black plays 45...
ga1 46.f1 ga6.

45 xg2+ 46.xg2 ga3 47.ge5

fu:b3 48.gxc5 ge3 49.gd5. We
..

agreed to a draw here.

D92

44
Dreev - Krasenkow
European Club Cup (final)
Kazan 1997

This game was played in the final

of the European Club Cup and I be
longed to the host team of the compe
tition, since I was playingfor Kazan.

indeed in that case after 7.dxc5 ie6!?

(Contemporary theory considers that
move to be the most reliable.) B.lLld4
lLlc6 9.lLlxe6 fxe6 1O.e3, there arises
a well familiar theoretical position in
which I think White has more chanc
es to fight for the opening advantage
than in the lines after 6 . . . dxc4!?
It is also possible for Black to de
fend with 6 ... c6, but that move is not
so often played, because after 7.e3,
Black's position is solid indeed, but it
is rather passive.

7.e4 ig4 8.he4 .hf3 9.gxf3

White cannot obtain anything
much after 9.xf3, due to 9 ... lLlh5.

9 ... c!Llh5 1 0 .ie3

1.d4 lLlf6 2.e4 g6 3.c!Llc3 d5 4.c!Llf3

ig7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.l:'lel
This variation of the Gruenfeld De
fence is very well known and it is also
quite popular too until now.

l O ...e6

6 ... dxe4!?
Michal chooses the most fashion
able move, which leads to complicated
double-edged positions.
Among the other serious alterna
tives for Black I have to mention 6 ... c5;

Here, my opponent decided to opt

for a very old line, which had been
tried often in the 70ies and the BOies
of the last century. It is of course quite
acceptable for Black, but I believe that
it is stronger for him to continue with
the move 1O ... e5!?, which has become
quite modern in the last 5-7 years and
it provides Black with an active coun
terplay. The position is complicated
and double-edged and his prospects
are not worse at all after: 1l.dxe5
fixeS.

Dreev-Krasenkow, Kazan 1997

See the most interesting examples:
12.'lWxd8 l::!xd8 13.b4?! (or 13.lOe2
lOc6 and the game is quite unclear)
13 ... lOf4! 14.lOd5 (or 14.0-0 lOc6!)
14 ... lOg2+ 15.'itlfl lOxe3+ 16.fxe3 c6
17.f4 cxd5 18.ixd5 lOc6 19 .fxe5 lOxb4
and Black was even slightly better in
the game Lputian - Ivanchuk, Elista
1998;
12.'lWb3 lOc6 13.'lWxb7 'lWf6 14.ie2
lOd4 15.lOd5 'lWh4 16.'lWb4 lOxe2 17.
'itlxe2 l::! ab8 and Black's initiative was
at least good enough to compensate
White's extra pawn, Dreev - Alter
man, Elista 1998;
12.ih6 lOc6!? 13.,txf8 'lWxf8 14.lOe2
lOf4 15.lOxf4 .txf4 16J''lc3 lOe5 and
Black had a sufficient compensation
for the exchange in the game Rogers
- Timofeev, Amsterdam 2005.

1l.f4 'lWh4 12.'lWf3 c6 13.e2

gad8 14.gdl

143
an even more meaningful novelty:
15.0-0!? (instead of the moves 15.a3,
or 15.l::!gl), with the idea after: 15 ... l::!d7
16.l::!d 2 l::!fd8 17.l::!fdl to obtain a slight
but stable positional advantage. It is
also interesting to mention that a year
later, at the Olympiad in Elista, that
novelty (15.0-0!?) was tested in the
game Lputian - Sutovsky, in which af
ter: 17 ... lOa5?! 18.id3 c5 19.dxc5 ,txb2
20.,txa6! White obtained a great ad
vantage. It might be quite possible that
Michal Krasenkow had a very good
idea about the strong move 15.0-0!?,
therefore he had decided to avoid the
theoretical move 14 ... a6.

15..\id3 c5 16.dxc5 hb2 17.

O - O !?
I would not have achieved much
with 17.e5, due to 17... f6! and Black is
not worse at all.

17 e5 18.f5
.

The arising position is also well

known i n the contemporary tourna
ment practice.

14... a5N
My opponent tries a novelty here,
but it stilI does not solve all his open
ing problems.
Black usually played before 14...a6,
but I was planning to counter that with

That is the critical moment in the

game. The position is quite complex,
but I believe White's prospects are su
perior here.

18 ... c6
This is an imprecise move, since
Blackhad better play 18 ... g5!? 19.d2 !?
with only somewhat better position
for White.

Game 45

144

19. .ic4 f6?!

That was also not the best. It was
too dubious for Black to continue with:
19 ... d4?! 20 .xd4 .ixd4 21.1dSj
but it deserved attention for him to try
19 ... .id4 and his position would have
remained quite defensible, although
after: 2 0.fxg6 hxg6 2 1.g2 ! ? White
would be still better.

24 ... .hf2+
It is not any better for Black to
defend with: 24 ... xf2 + 2S.xf2
1xf2+ 26.xf2 xe4+ 27.e3 d2
28. 1e6 h8 29.Eld7 fl+ (29 ... c4+
30.e4 d2+ 31.dS+-) 30.e4
xh2 31.Elxd8+ xdB 32.1d7 g7 33.
c6 xc6 34 ..ixc6+-

25.Wg2 hc5
2 0 .Elxd8 !
It is not advisable for White to con
tinue with: 20.Elb1?! 1d4 2 1.Elxb7, be
cause of: 21...aS 2 2.!:'1b4 g4 with a
good game for Black.

2 0 ... gxd8 21.fxg6 hxg6 22.gbl

.id4?
That is already a very serious mis
take and Black can hardly hold the
position after it. He had to play in
stead 22 ... aS! and although after
23.hf7+ xf7 24.Elxb2 xe4 2S.xe4
iLlxe4 26.ElbS iLlc4 27.Elxb7+ he would
remain a pawn down, but he would
have still preserved some chances for
a draw.

23.Elxb7 he3
(diagram)

Or 2S. . .gS+ 26.xf2 g4+ 27.

xg4 xg4 28.Elf4+-j 2S ... g4+ 26.
xf2 xe4+ 27.e3+-

26.gxf6+ h8
Or 26 ... g7 27.!:'1xc6 ElfB 2B.!:'1c7+
1e7 29. e3+27.gxc6 gfB 28 .if7 g5+ 29.
g3 and Black resigned.

D2 0

45
Dreev - Svidler

Russia Ch (k. 0.), Elista 1997

1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 f6 4.e5

d5 5.hc4 b6 6 ..id3 c6 7 .ie3
b4 8..ie4 f5 9.exf6

Or 9.1f3? ! f4 1O ..ixf4 1fS.

9 . . exf6
.

That is the best move for White and

Black's situation becomes hopeless af
ter it.

We are playing one of the fashion

able variations of the Queen's Gambit
Accepted.

Dreev-Svidler, Elista 1997

10 .a3
In my later games, I preferred the
move 1O.ttJc3 and I believed that White
had greater chances to fight for the
opening advantage after that move.

10

f5 1l.axb4 .hb4+

This check used to be considered

as the main line at the time that we
played our game. In fact, it is stron
ger for Black to play: 1l ... fxe4 and that
move became more fashionable later.
For example, in the game Ehlvest
- Volzhin (Kochalin 1998) after:
12.ttJc3 ie6!? 13.ttJh3 id6 14.ttJgS ic4,
Black equalized without any prob
lems. Instead of 12.ttJc3, I tried with
White against D.Adla (Internet 2002)
the move 12.hS+, but after: 12 ...g6
13.eS+ mf7 14.ttJc3 hb4 1S.igS e8
16.xc7+ d7 17.g3 g4, I did not
obtain anything promising out of the
opening.
12.ttJc3 fxe4 13.1ml5+ mfS 14.

145

White can enter the complicated vari

ation after: 17.f3 ixc3 !? 18.fxe4+ mg8
19.ttJxc3 ixfl 20.xf1, sacrificing the
exchange. Indeed, that approach in
cludes a certain degree of risk. Mean
while, White can answer with a sim
pler move and I like it much more
- 17.fcl!? I believe that White's
compensation for the pawn is more
than sufficient, because of his harmo
niously placed pieces.

16.xe4

16 e8?!

ge2

..

(diagram)

14 ie6 !?
.

This is an interesting novelty. Black

usually played before 14 ...We8, but af
ter lS.h4, he still had some opening
problems to solve.

15. 0 - 0 mg8
In case of: 1S ... e8 16.h4 ic4,

That is a serious mistake. It was

more reliable for Black to play: 16 ...
dS 17.h4 (or 17.ttJgS if7=) 17. . .fS,
with a complicated position, in which
he has good chances to equalize. Now,
I seize the initiative and Black's situa
tion worsens very rapidly.

17.xe8+ fure8 18.fcl

Game 45

146
That move no doubt helps me pre
serve a considerable positional ad
vantage. It also deserved attention
for White to try: 18J:'lxa7!?, not be
ing afraid of the variation: 18 ...ic4
19.ttJ4g3 ia6, because after 20.1'kl ! ?,
it was far from clear how Black could
profit from the placement of his oppo
nent's rook on a7.

18 ic4 19.ttJ2g3 idS

It is not advisable for Black to de

fend with 19 ... a5? ! , because after:
20.ttJc5 id5 21.ttJd3! White maintains
a great advantage in case of: 2 1.. .ttJc4
22.ttJxb4 axb4 23.b3 ttJxe3 24.fxe3
c6 25.e4, as well as following: 2 1...c6
22 .ttJxb4 axb4 23.!:'la7.

2 0 .id2! J.xd2?!
It was better for Black to play 20 ...
as, but even then after: 21.hb4 axb4
22.ttJcS, White would maintain a con
siderable edge. Still, in that case my
opponent would have offered a much
more tenacious resistance than in the
game. Now, Peter remains without a
pawn by force in a very difficult posi
tion and he only has some practical
chances for a draw, relying mostly on
my eventual mistakes.

24.dS!
That is the best move for White,
since he does not need to enter the fol
lowing forced variation: 24.!:'lxc6 bxc6
25.!:'lxc7 r1le6 26,l;1xc6+ i'd5 27J::1 c7
i'd6 and despite the fact that he has
three pawns for the exchange, win
ning that position might turn out to be
problematic.

24...J.xdS 2S.J!jxc7 r1le6?

This mistake in the time-trouble
speeds up Black's demise. He could
have resisted more stubbornly with
the move 2S .. J::1 d 8, but after: 26.ttJd4
l"lhe8 2 7.r1lfl, threatening ttJg3-fS and
!:'la7-aS, Black would have hardly sur
vived for long.

26.ttJd4+ r1ld6 27.ttJbS+ r1le6 28.

ttJd4+
I decided to repeat the position a
couple of times in the time-trouble in
order to gain some time on the clock.

28

r1ld6 29.bS+

21.ttJxd2 ic6 22Jha7 r1lf7 23.

ttJJ! ttJd7

29 r1le7
..

Peter avoids the repetition - 29 ...

't!Ie6 and quite deservedly so. I had
planned to counter that move with
30.h5!, even before the repetition
and Black had no defence against the
numerous threats in that case. The

Dreev-Svidler, Elista 1997

147

move in the game does not provide my

opponent with any chances to save the
game either. There still followed:

3 0 .fS+ 'it>f6 31.e3 b6 32.h4

1c6 33.d4 d5 34.g4+ 'it>g6
35.h5+! and Black resigned. Peter
decided not to prolong the purpose
less resistance in an endgame with
two pawns down after the practically
forced line: 3S . . . 'it>xhS 36J:lxg7 gegS
37.gxgS gxgS 3S.xc6 'it>xg4 (or 3S ...
bxc6 39.eS+-; 3S ... gxg4 39J::1 xb7+-)
39.fub7+-

46

D92
Dreev - Khalifman
President's Cup, Elista 1995

This game was played in the semi

fin al of the Presiden t's Cup. The first
game ended in a draw. The winner
of the second game would qualify for
the Final.

l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.tLlc3 d5 4.tLlf.l

ig7 5.if4 0 - 0 6.gcl dxc4 7.e4 c5
8.dxc5 a5 9.e5 l3d8

tLlgeS IS. 0-0 ifS 16.gcdl ic2 17.gc1

if5 IS.gcdl ic2, the opponents
shared the point. The idea behind
White's move 14 is that now it does
not WOI;k for Black to play: 14 ... lUxf2
IS.ghfl g4, because of: 16.tLlc7 gbS
17.e6 with an edge for White and
the routine line: 14 ...ih6+ IS.ltie2
hc1 16.gxc1 tLlgxeS 17.lUxeS xeS 18.
idS is obviously in favour of White.
The move that Black played in the
game (14 . . . tLlgeS) has a quite essential
drawback. It enables White to trade
the knights and that is clearly in
his favour, because of his extra ex
change.

This is the official theory. In fact,

14 ... tLlgxe5 15.xe5 1xe5!

Back in the past, when I found

it is stronger for Black to play as

the move 14.ltixd2 - that was about

V.Z\jaginsev did against me some

time later (Dreev - Z\jaginsev, Es
sen 200 0): 9 ... tLlhS. After: 1O .ie3 gdS
11.d2 .txeS 12 ..txc4 c6 13.b3 e6
14.tLlf3 if4 IS.0-0 .txe3 16.fxe3 xc5
17.tLle4 e7 IS.g4, we agreed to a

coach A.Filipenko analyzed mostly

IS ... lUxeS. Before this game however,
we decided to refresh our analysis
and we paid due attention to the move
IS... .txeS as well.

a year before this game - I and my

(diagram)

draw.

1 0 .id2 g4 11 . .txc4 tLlc6 12.b5

l3xd2 13.xd2 xd2 +
(diagram)

14. ltixd2!N
In the game van Wely - Khalifman,
Ter Apel 1993, following: 14.tLlxd2

16.'it>e3!
That is the only move for White;
otherwise he would not achieve
much!

16 ...ifS
Black complies with his fate. In

Game 46

148

is which White is better indeed, but

the material is still equal. That game
however, confirmed the old rule that
"All rook and pawn endgames are a
draw... " (Z.Tarrasch) ! ... Meanwhile,
after the cold-blooded move 31.e4!
Black (as A.Khalifman said after the
game too ...) would have hardly man
aged to survive ...
case he had followed with: 16 ...hb2
17.bl, I would not h ave put my mon
ey on him entering the final...

31... xh6 32.xh3 gxh3 33.

gxh3 1f?g6 34.gxh4 1f?fS 35.);c4 gcS
36.d4 );dS+ 37.lf?e3 );cS 3S. lf?d4
gd8+ 39.1f?c3 gcS

17.c3 .td4 lS.e2 heS 19.

ghdl .td4 2 0 .h3 h5 21 ..td3

Or 39 . . . dl 40.f4+ e6 41.e4+
d6 42.d4+; 41.. . f6 42.e2 !

That is the beginning of an inte

resting plan for me, which is not the
only one available at all. Instead,
it was more solid to continue with:
21.idS eS and for example - 22.b3,
with an overwhelming advantage for
White.

40 .b4 If?e5 41.geS+ If?d6 42.gfS

f6 43.);a5

21. .te6 22 ..te4 .te5 23.e3 g5

24.g3 .ixh3 25.hl g4 26.e2 .tgJ
27.f4 6 2S.hc6 bxc6 29.);eS
h4 3 0 .);h5 If?g7

43 gaS
..

That is the best move for Black.

44.d4 e5+ 45.e4 e6 46.

ga6 fS+ 47.lf?e3 If?d6 48.a3 ghS!
49.xa7
Or 49.bS ! ? c8!

49 );hl 5 0 .);aS );bl 51.);dS+

If?e6 52.gd3 );el+ 53.lf?d2 );al 54.
If?e2 ga2 + 55.lf?e3 );a1 56.gc3 d6
31.);xh6?
57.f4 ga2 58.fxe5+ xe5 59.1f?f3
That move was played as a result of gal 6 0 .);e3+ If?f6 61.c3 e5 62.
the oncoming time-trouble and also gc5+ If?d6 63.);c3
of my desire to simplify the position.
I had already dissipated the lion's
It leads to a rook and pawn endgame share of my advantage, but still I in..

Dreev-Khalifman, Elista 1998

tended to play some more. .. Still, my
opponent A.Khalifman was on the
alert and he pointed out that after the
move 63. . . r;!}eS, the position had been
repeated for the third time... Draw.
In the additional games, with a rap
id time-control, Alexander made a
draw with Black (and that again in
a slightly worse rook and pawn end
game, by a triple repetition) and then
he beat me with White to reach the
final. There he encountered Vassily
Ivanchuk who won that match and
won the tournament as well.. .

47

D2 0
Dreev - Rublevsky
President's Cup, Elista 1998

This game was played in the

President's Cup too. Meanwhile, in
Elista preparations for the World
Chess Olympiad were running atfull
swing. City-Chess (consisting of cot
tages for the teams and the players
and playing - halls) was being built.
The Casino had already been opened
and everything was done so that the
chess-players could enjoy losing their
money, because on the casino tokens,
besides the sum in US dollars, you
could also see a chess-piece.

1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4.fJ

exd4 S.hc4 c6
Sergey prefers recently the varia
tion with 5 ...ih4+ for Black.
6 . 0 - 0 .te6 7.he6 fxe6 8.'Ml3
ed7 9.11*'xb7 gb8 1 0 .11*'a6 .td6 11.
tlbd2 f6 12.11*'d3 0 - 0 13.a3
My coach AFilipenko and I were

149
preparing for a long time an improve
ment for White in this line and we
thought that we had found the right
path ...

13 ... aS
In the first game of our match Ser
gey replied here with: 13 ... g4 and af
ter 14.b3 ce5 15.xe5, he continued
with 15 ...he5; following 16.g3 11*'f7
17.f4 e3 18.c4! xc4 19.11*'xc4 (or
19.bxc4! ? id6 2 0.11*'xd4 !:lbd8 21.e5
ha3 22.11*'xa7) 19...id6 20.e5 ie7
21. h4 I obtained some advantage
(Dreev - Rublevsky, Elista 1998). It
is therefore understandable why he
avoids the move 13 ... tt:l g4 in this game
and he goes for 13 ... a5.
After some time, Sergey found an
excellent counter measure against
White's prophylactic plan, whose main
idea is to restrict maximally Black's ac
tive possibilities connected with some
knight-maneuvers and then to exploit
the advantages of White's position
- 15... tt:lxe5! (This is a very important
novelty!) 16.11*'xd4 tt:lg4 17.e5 (or 17.g3
tt:lxh2 18.e5 tt:lxfl 19.tt:lxf1 !:lxb3 20.
exd6 cxd6 21.if4; 18 ...11*'b5! 19.r;!}xh2
he5-+; 19.exd6 11*'xf1+ 20.tt:lxfl tt:lf3+
21. r;!}g2 tt:lxd4 22.dxc7 !:lxb3 23.if4;
22 ...!:lb7 23.if4; 17...11*'e7! 18.11*'d3 tt:lxf2

Game 48

ISO
and Black has the advantage) 17. . .
ttJxeS lB.,ib2 !:'lbS! 19.ttJc4 (19.,ic3 !:'ldS
2 0.'?tIxa7 '?t1c6 21.ttJe4 !:'ld3 22 ..ixeS l"laB
23.ttJxd6 l"lxa7 24.ttJcB '?ticS; 19.!:'ladl
!:'ldS 20.'?tIxa7 ttJg4-+) 19 ...!:'ldS 20 .'?tIe4
(20.'?tIh4 ttJd3 21.,ic3 !:'lf4 22.'?tIh3 ,ic5;
20.'?tIc3 ttJd3 21.ttJxd6 cxd6) 20 ... ttJd3
21.ttJxd6 (21.'?tIe2? ,icS 22.ttJe3 ttJxf2 ! ;
23.ttJxds '?tIxdS; 23.!:'lxf2 .ixe3 24.'?tIxe3
!:'ldl-+) 21.. .'?tIxd6 (2l...cxd6! ? 22.,ic3

bilities for an effective counterplay. I

managed to exploit the advantages of
my position rather quickly.

18 ...e5
Or IB . . . !:'lbS I9.eS l"lfbB 20.'?tIe4 '?tIdS
21.'?tIg4 g6 22.!:'lfdl.

l"lcB) 22.,ic3 '?tIb6 23.'?tIh4 ttJf4! 24.'?tIg4

(24.!:'lael '?tIxb3 2S.'?tIg3 !:'lf7) 24 ... !:'lf7
2S.l"ladl? (2S.!:'lael '?tIbS ! (or 2S ...'?tIxb3
26J:'lbl '?tIxc3 27J:lbB+ !:'lfB 2B.!:'lxf8+
\!txfB 29. '?tIxf4+) 26.a4 '?ticS) 2S . . .
hS!-+ 26.'?tIf3 ttJh3 + ! Galliamova Rublevsky, St Petersburg 199B.

14.b3 <j}h8
Here already, the move 14. . . ttJg4 is
evidently weaker than on the previ
ous move. The inclusion of the moves
b2-b3 and a7-aS is clearly in favour of
White.

19.<j}g2
It was also possible for me to fol
low with: 19.ttJcxeS ttJxeS 20.ttJxeS
'?tIxh3 2U'lxc7 '?tIe6 22.'?tIxd4, but I did
not wish to enter forced lines, because
White's position was extremely good,
no matter what!

19 ... '?tIe6 2 0 .ttJcd2!

This is an important part of my
plan: the knight retreats temporarily
consolidating the position in the pro
cess and the rooks are exerting pres
sure on the c-file.

2 0 ... !:'lb6 21.!:'lc5 !:'lib8 22J&fcl

'?tIg6 23.<j}h2 !:'lfS 24.!:'llc2

15.h3
Or IS.ttJc4?! ttJg4 16.h3 !:'lxf3 17.gxf3
ttJgeS IB.ttJxeS ttJxeS 19.'?tIdl ttJg6.

15 ... lLlh5 16.lLlc4 ,if4

Or 16 . . . ttJf4 17. .ixf4 .ixf4 18.eS.

17.g3 hcl 18.!:'laxcl

Black's offensive has reached its
dead end and he has no active possi-

This is a simple prophylactic - I am

protecting the f2-square and Black is
helpless against the triumphant march
of White's knight to the c4-square.

24 ... h6
Or 24 ... '?tId6 2S. '?tIc4.

25.lLlc4 gbb8 26.lLlfxe5 lLlxe5

27.lLlxe5 '?tId6 28.gd5 '?tIe6 29.lLld7
ttJf6 3 0 .lLlxfS gxfS 31.l"lxd4 %Ve5
32.<j}g2 1-0

Dreev-Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 1998

lSI

Strangely enough, E.Sveshnikov

has preferred this strange looking
move numerous times. Black's main
defensive line here is - 8 ... lt) a6.
9.J.c5 lt)d7 1 0 .J.d6!
In the game M .Sorokin - Svesh
This is a game from the fourth
round of the Championship of Rus nikov, Elista 1996, there followed:
sia and in that year it was also a 1O.'lWd4 It)c5 l1.'lWcS b6 12.'lWa3 J.b7
Zonal qualification tournament for 13.lt)f3 It)e7 14Jdl It)c6 IS.lt)d2 'lWeS
the World Championship. I made 7 16.lt)f3 'lWe4 17.lt)d2 'lWf4 18.lt)f3 Draw.
1 0 ...'lWg2 n.W 'lWg5 12.h4
points out of 11 and I tied fo r 5th_11 th
places, half a point behind the win
ners - P. Svidler, K.Sakaev, S.Shipov
and A.Morozevich. Thefinal standing
was decided only after the finish of
all the ga mes and the calculation of
the Bucholz coefficient when the gold
medal and the title Champion ofRus
sia was awarded to Alexa nder Mo
rozevich.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3. lt)c3 c6
Naturally, this is not the first time
that I play against Evgenij Sveshnikov
I had "borrowed' that idea during
and he used to try every time with his my home preparation from the Dutch
black pieces to profit from the fact grandmaster J.Piket. In the game Pik
that I had been reluctant to enter et - van Der Werf, Netherlands 1998,
the Slav Gambit. Here, in this game, I there followed: 12 . . .'lWaS 13.b4 'lWfS
14.'lWb3 liJgf6 IS.0-0-0 It)eS 16.'lWc3
had prepared the most principled line.
4.e4 dxe4 5.lt)xe4 J.b4 6.J.d2 It)f3 17.lt)f3 J.d7 18.lt)d4 'lWf2 19.13h2
It)e4 2 0.'lWd3 'lWh2 2 1..h2 It)f2 2 2.'lWg3
tJd4 7.J.b4 'lWe4 8.J.e2
It)dI 23.'lWg7 1-0.
E.Sveshnikov chose another way:
12 ...'lWf6 13.'lWb3 lt)e7 14.lt)e2
Or 14.J.b7? J.b7 1S.'lWb7 l3d8.
14 ... 0 - 0 15.lt)g3 liJe5 16.J.e4
It)5c6?
This move loses by force. It would
have been correct for Black to have de
fended with: 16 .. Jle8 andlhadplanned
to counter that with 17.0-0-0 and
here it would have been bad for Black
to play 17... lt)fS, because of: 18.J.f5! ef
8 ...c5!?

D31

48

Dreev - Sveshnikov
Slst Russia Ch (swiss)
St Petersburg 1998

Game 49

152

Or 26 ...,tc4 27. Wf4!

19.!:hel f4 20 .lLle4 WfS 21.ie5? and
27.b3
White wins.
The rest requires no comments at
17.hc6! bxc6
Black's relatively best chance is all.
27 !;g7 28.!;d6 gag8 29.gc6
17. . .lLlxc6.
ic8 3 0 .!;f6 gh 31.h5 gg5 32.f7
18.lLlh5 Wf5 19.ie7 !;e8
!;5g7 33. h5 gg5 34.h6 g5g7 35.
Or 19 ...We4 20.lt>d2.
c5 !;e8 36.h5 id7 37.b2 1- 0
..

49

BI 0

Balashov - Dreev
Russian Cup (final), Samara 1998
This game was played in the
round-robin tournament of the final
for the Russian Cup. It coincided with
the fa mous scandal of the year 1998
2 0 .lLlf6! gxf6 21.!;g1 It>h8 22. zoaa. The tourna ment made history
0 - 0- 0 ia6
with thefact that its prizejund dimin
ished somehow in a magic way more
tha nfourfold...

1.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 lLlf6

4.lLlc3 cxd5 5.cxd5 lLld5 6.lLlf3 lLlc3
7.bxc3 g6

E.Sveshnikov admitted after the

game that he had been considering
that position as quite acceptable for
Black. He had overlooked the fol
lowing powerful resource for White,
though. . . :
8.d4
White has also tried here the move
23.e3! !;e7
Black cannot save the day after: 8.h4, with which he attempts to punish
23 .. .!''l g8 24.Wh6 !3g6 25.!3xg6 fxg6 Black immediately for his last move.
This does not bring White anything
26.!;d7.
24.Ml6 g6 25.!;xg6 fxg6 26.h5 e5 promising, as the game A.Sokolov

Balashov-Dreev, Samara 1998

- Karpov showed and it was played as

early as in the year 1987 in Linares. It
followed with 8 ...i.g7 (That is Black's
most principled answer, although he
can try also 8 ... h6.) 9.hS lbc6 1O.!ibl
Wlc7 1l.i.a3 iJS 12.!ibS a6 13.!ic5 Wld7
14.Wlb3 0-0 15.hg hg 16.i.c4 i.f6 17.d4
b5 18.i.d5 lbaS 19.Wld1 lbb7 and Black
was better at the end.
8 9.i.d3 lbc6 1 0 . 0- 0 0-0
1l.i.e4
This is a new idea, with the inten
tion to prevent Black's plan with b7
- b6. White plays more often here
1l.!ie1 and Black can counter that with
1l...b6, or with 1l ...i.g4.
1l J.d7
Now, Black changes his plan. I con
sidered also the move 1l ...Wlc7, but I
did not like the fact that I would not be
able to play 12 ...b6 on my next move,
because of 13.d5 lbaS 14.d6.
12J'!el Hc8 13.i.g5 !ie8

153
That is an imprecision. It deserved
attention for White to play 15.Wle2.
15 lbc4 16.Yflb3?!
Or 16.Wle2 i.e6.
Possibly, White had to consider the
line: 16.i.c4 !ic4 17.lbeS i.xe5 18.de
(but not 18 .!ie5? f6 19.Wlb3 b5) and the
game could have ended in a draw after
all. Well, I had in mind the move 17...
!ic7 too, with somewhat better chanc
es for Black ...
16 b5 17.i.c4 Hc4 18.lbd2
It is quite dubious for White to fol
low with: 18.Wla3?! !ia4 19.Wlc5 i.f6.
It is extremely risky for him to play:
18.lbe5 i.e5 19.de (or 19.!ie5 f6) 19 ...
!ig4!

18 !ia4!
That move is much stronger than
18 ... !ic7.
19.1be4 i.c6 2 0 .Hcd1?
This is a mistake for White in a dif
ficult position for him. After 20.lbc5,
Black plays 20 ...!ic4, with the idea to
follow with Wld8 - d5.
2 0 i.d5! 21.Wlb1
Now, it becomes clear that White
cannot continue with 21.Wlb5, due to
2l...!ia5, followed by i.dSxe4 - and he
loses his bishop on gS.
21 !ia2 22.lbc5 a6
.

14.Hc1
White's most logical reaction here
seemed to be: 14.dS lbaS lS.d6 and I
had intended to counter that with: 15 ...
i.f6 16.i.xf6 (or 16.de i.e7 and Black is
better) 16 ...ef. I believed that position
to be better for Black as well.
14 lba5 15.i.d3

..

Game 50

154

D48

50
Timman - Dreev
Olympiad, Elista 1998

33th

I tried an entirely new idea in one

of the fashionable variations of the
Meran system in this game against
the world-famous grandmaster Jan
Timman at the Olympiad in Elista
1998. This novelty was highly appre
ciated by the experts of the Chess
Informant and it was awarded a
second place among the most impor
tant theoretical novelties of the year.

Black's position is winning, but it

still requires some precision. I was in
a time-pressure, so I was trying to play
the most reliable moves possible.
23.lLld3 lia4 24.lLlb4 b7 25.f3
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlf3 lLlf6 4.lLlc3
tic7 26.tib3 e6 27.lial lic8 28.i.d2 e6 5.e3 lLlbd7 6 .i.d3 dxc4 7..b:c4
b5 8.i.d3 i.b7 9 . 0 - 0 a6 1 0 .e4 c5
gal 29.lial tid6
It was even stronger for Black to n.d5 %Vc7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.i.c2
have played 29 ...%Vb6.
30 .e3 e5 31.lidl ed32.d4i.d4
33.lid4 tic5 34.lLla2 lie8 35.%Vdla5
36 .tid2 \tlg7 37.lLlc1 i.d5! 38.lLld3
tib6 39.h4 h5 40 ..t>h2 c4

13 ...%Vc6 !?N
I used to play before the moves
13 .. 0-0-0 and 13 ...i.d6 in this posi
tion.
The idea behind 13... %Vc6 is that
I had managed somehow not to Black is preparing i.e7; meanwhile
spoil anything in the time-trouble and he prevents the move e4-eS, because
here, my position was already totally in case of 14.eS, he captures the pawn
winning, thanks to the a-pawn. There 14 ... lLlxeS and lS.lLlxeS is impossible
due to IS ...%Vxg2 - checkmate!
still followed:
41.lLlf4 a4 42.%vf2. White sets
J.Timman responded with:
14.i.f4!?
up his last trap, as he is threatening
lLlf4xhS 42 ...tif6 0-1
I have to mention that even after
.

155

Timman-Dreev, Elista 1998

this game, my novelty - 13 ...c6 was later after that game. Playing against
played only very seldom in tourna L.Fressinet (Enghien les Bains 2003),
ment practice. For example M.Sadler Lautier continued with 16.eS!. After:
a bit later in the same year at the tour 16 ...ttJd5?! 17.ttJxd5 xdS lS.gfd1 c6
nament in Hastings played otherwise 19.i.g5! ttJb6 (or 19 ... .txgS 20.gd6!
- 14.e2 and after: 14... i.d6 15.ttJg5 cS 21.ttJxg5 with an advantage for
i.eS 16.f4 i.d4+ 17.Whl e5 lS.a4 .txc3 White) 20.l3xdS+ .txdS 21..txdS WxdS
19.axb5 axb5 20.gxaS+ i.xaS 21.bxc3 22.l3d1+ ttJdS 23.ttJgS Wc7 24.g4 wb6
0-0 22.c4 b4 23.i.b2 he obtained a 2S ..txh7 and White was clearly bet
slightly better position. Black had to ter. But as grandmaster Lutz recom
continue however with 14...i.e7 with mended later, Black had better play:
an unclear game, because he should 16 ... ttJh5 !? and if 17.i.d2 !? (or 17.i.e3
not be afraid of 15.e5 in view of 15 ... 0-0 18.i.e4 b6), then 17... 0-0 IS.
ttJdS 16.i.e4 ttJxc3 ...
i.e4 b6 (or 18 ... c7 19.ttJg5 .txe4
K.8ashikiran in his game against 20.ttJcxe4 i.xg5 21..txg5 ttJf4 22.e3
C.8andipan (Chalapathi 2 000) tried with an advantage for White) 19 .ttJg5
the move 14.l3el. Black answered with: i.xe4 20.xe4 g6 and White is prob
14 ... l3dS 15.e2 i.d6 16.ttJg5 i.b8. He ably only slightly better.
could have also played 14... i.d6 with
16 0 - 0 17.gfel
the idea to counter 15.ttJgS with 15...
Or 17.e5 ttJh5.
ic7!? 16.4 0-0.
17 ttJh5 18.i.ct
14 gd8!
It is rather dubious for Black to
follow with 14 ... i.e7? ! 15.eS! ttJd5
16.i.e4.
15.e2 ie7
..

16.l3adl
The specialists of that vanatlOn
of the Meran system for White tried
hard to find an improvement. Joel
Lautier managed to do that five years

18 ... 1Wb6!
It is bad for Black to play lS ... ttJf4?
19.ixf4 l3xf4 20.ttJdS! ; as well as IS...
c7?
19.d7
1f 19.g3, then 19 ... ttJhf6 and Black is
already slightly better.
19... gxd7 2 0 .ttJe5 ttJf6 21.ttJxd7
ttJxd7 22.e5 c4 23.ie3 'i:fc6 24.ie4
c8

156

Game 50

After 32.lMlg4, I was planning to

In case of 24 ... lMlc7?, White coun
capture on f2 - 32 ... liJxf2 ! -+
ters with 25.lMlg4!
2S.J.c2 lMlc6 26.J.e4 lMlc8 27.
White would not have solved his
J.c2
problems with: 32.1Mlh4 3 2 ....bd4
Here, after lMlc7, the position would 33 . .bd4 M3 ! 34.gxf3 (or 34 . .bd3
have been repeated for the third time cxd3 35.gx3 lMlc2) 34 ... 1'3(4.
with a draw.
32... J.xd3?
27.. ,likS
Naturally, I was also considering
This move leads to a slight edge for capturing with the pawn - 32 ...cxd3.
After 33 .1'3c1, I managed to see only:
Black.
33 ....bd4 34JlxcB xcB 35.'i;Yg4!, but
I failed to notice the move 33 ...d2,
which would have consolidated my
advantage after: 34 . .bd2 1Mld7 35.l!xc5
lMlxd4 36.J.e3 lMlxb2.
Accordingly, being in a time-trou
ble and having overlooked 32 ... cxd3 !,
I dissipated my advantage. Timman
defended tenaciously:
33.lMlg4 l'3e8 34.h4
But not 34.liJe6?? M8.
Now, my opponent should have
34 ... 1Mlb7
continued with 28.a3 !?, but even then
Planning to follow with 35... lMle4.
after 28 ... lMlc7! Black's position would
3S.b3! M8 36.hS Wlf7 37.l'3d2
still be slightly preferable.
as
Instead of that J.Timman played:
28.l'3d1?
and that allowed me to push
28 ...b4! 29.1Mlh5
White saves the game neither af
ter: 29.liJa4 1Mlc6, nor with: 29.liJbl b3
30.axb3 cxb3 31.J.d3 liJxd3-+
29 ...liJd3 3 0 .liJe2
If 30 J!xd3, then 30 ... l!f5!-+
3 0 ...J.e4!
Now Black has an overwhelming
positional advantage.
Here, I had only several seconds
3l,otd4 J.cS
left on the clock and I decided to offer
Here, Black was winning immedi a draw, which was accepted by Tim
ately after - 31...J.g6! 32.lMlh3 liJxb2 man. You should not forget that game
33.hg6 hg.
was played in an Olympiad and after
32.J.xd3
an eventual mistake in the last few

157

Timman-Dreev, Elista 1998

moves of the time-control, not to even a trap after: IS... lI.'lc3 16.1/Nc2 1/NdS
speak about the possible loss on time; 17.lI.'lf3 !;d8 18.ltle1 id4 (that was the
that would have ended in a disaster for only move) and fortunately Black had
the Russian team. After for example: saved his piece, but after 19.id2, I had
38.bxc4 .bc4 39.lI.'lc6 idS 40.lI.'lxaS serious problems to worry about. lat
YNc7 41.lI.'lb3 1/NxeS, Black is naturally er, in the same year 1989 in Odessa,
slightly better, but there is of course a in my game against V.Tukmakov, I
lot of fight left.
played: 15... 0-0 16.ltle4 id4 17.ltld6
ic6 18.ih7+ Iiixh7 19.1/Nxd4 f6 and
my position was quite acceptable. In
SI
D47 the year 1994, while I was prepar
Sasikiran - Dreev
ing for my game against V.Epishin, I
Linares (open) 1999
found out that Black had an excellent
move here:
Thefollowing game was not played
IS ... YNc7!
in the famous super-tournament, but
This resource seems to be good
in an ordinary Swiss open (although enough to equalize.
quite strong, though ...J. I was feel
16J;'lel );ldS 17.ltle4 ,te7 1S.ltlg3
ing rather comfortably and I took the
first place with +7...
l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.c3 f6 4.e3
e6 S.f3 bd7 6.,td3 dxc4 7.hc4
bS S.,td3 ,tb7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .a4 cS
H.eS ltldS 12.dxcS
The other possibility for White is
- 12. 0-0 cxd4.
12 . . .ltlxcS 13.ltlxcS hc5 14. 0-0
h6 lS.ltld2

I had played that position before.

The first time it was against R.Dautov
(Tbilisi 1989) and I had fallen into

lS ...g6!
That is a standard plan for Black in
this variation. He cannot castle, so he
solves the problem with his king, by
transferring it to the g7-square.
19.id2
In case White had played at first
19.1/Ne2 Iiif8 and only then 20.id2, he
would not have allowed the line ltldS
c3, which would have led to a very UD
clear position.
19 .. 1iif8
I was also considering the move
.

Game Sl

158
19 ... lLlc3!? Here, it is bad for White
to play 20.c2?, because of 20 ...d7
2U!e3. Now, Black has the pleasant
choice between: 21...cS!? 22.bxc3
bxc3 ! ? 23.xc3 e3 24.xe3 xd3,
with the idea: 2S.b4 dS 26.f3 xeS
and the move 21. .:c6 !?, since White
loses immediately after: 22 . .ltil lLle2+,
or 22J!f3 lLle2!-+, while after the only
possible answer - 22.f3, Black has
plenty of attractive possibilities. Still,
it is quite sufficient to look at the move
2 2 ... lLldS to understand that Black is
clearly better. In fact, the right con
tinuation for White is - 20.c3! bxc3
2 1.c2 and the position remains un
clear and double-edged. Therefore, I
chose the move 19. . . @f8.

2 0.e2 wg7 2Ulacl b6 22.

gedl
Sashikiran is playing a new move
here. The abovementioned game
against V. Epishin, followed with: 22.
c4 d4 23.b3 hS 24J'ledl b6
Draw.

The position in the game is quite

amazing with the fact that on the
board we are having something like a
mutual zugzwang. Each side has prob
lems finding moves, which would not
compromise his position ... Black can-

not play, for example: 22 ... d4?, be

cause of 23.Elc4, while in case of 22 ...
Eld7, he must consider 23.bS. Fortu
nately for me, my a-pawn had no idea
about all that, so I had a useful move,
that did not spoil anything ... :

22 ... a5! 23.h3

White's h-pawn tried to imitate its
counterpart...
Pay attention to the fact that nei
ther here, nor on the previous move,
White could have played: 23.lLIe4?,
due to 23. . .d4; or 23.Elc4?, because
of 23 ...a6.

23 ... a4 24.b5?
White was so happy with the pos
sibility to play something active, but
this aggression led to his demise. It
is of course quite difficult to recom
mend moves like 24.@hl, but Black
will have problems to create anything
sensible, for example after: 24 ... hS,
White plays +2S.lLIe4, while in case
of 24 . . M7 2S.bS. White's best bet
was to continue waiting with the move
- 24.c4...
-

24...g5!
White can hardly save the game af
ter that move by Black.

25.ixa4
White loses following:

2S.gS

159

Sasikiran-Dreev, Linares 1999

hxg5 26.ixa4 lLlf4 27.litfe3 litfa6 28.
lhd8 l'lxd8 29.!b3 ixg2 30.M !a8-+

2S .ll:lf4 ! 26 .i\xf4
.

exd4 S.ixc4 lLlc6 6. 0 - 0 .ie6 7.

ibS ics S.tLlbd2 tLlge7 9.lLlgs YMd7
1 0 .tLlxe6 YMxe6 1l.lLlb3 YMd6

If 26.litfg4, then 26 ...lLld3.

26 ... .i\xf4

27.gc4
I had relied here only on the move
27.litfg4, after which Black could have
played simply 27. . .!e5 with a tre
mendous advantage; although it was
also possible to continue with: 27...
.bc1!?, without being afraid of the
line: 28.lLlh5+ M8 29.litfxb4+ litfxb4
30.l'lxd8+ rile7 3 Hld7+ rile8! and
Black was winning.

27 ... ixg3 2S.l'lg4 litfaS 29.l'lxdS

gxdS 3 0 .i.bS
Here, I could have won quite simply
with the move 30 .. Jld5-+, but what I
played in the game proved to be quite
sufficient too:

3 0 ...YMxbS-+ 31.litfxbS gdl+ 32.

YMfl ih2+ 33.rilxh2 gxfl 34.gxb4
.ids 0-1

We are playing one of the new and

rather fashionable variations of the
Queens Gambit Accepted. In my game
with S .Rublevsky (Elista 1998) I tried
here to improve White's play with the
move 12.litfg4. The game continued
with: 12 ... 0-0 13.if4 tLle5 14.ixe5
litfxe5 15.4 and after: 15... d3 ! 16.rilh1
litfxb2, there arose a complex position
in which Black's chances were not
worse at all.

12.M4 YMxf4 13.tLlxcS 0 - 0

Now, it is not so precise for White to
play 14.g3, as it happened in the game
Stocek - Ashley, Budapest 1997, as
well as in the rapid-chess game: Dreev
- Svidler, Elista, 1997. Black retreated
in both games - 14...litfh6, overlook
ing the wonderful possibility to equal
ize outright with 14... litfd6!, following
with the idea - 15.lLlxb7 litfb4.

14.l'lcl
S2

D20
Dreev - Svetushkin
Linares (open) 1999

1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 eS 4 .!ilf3

That position was played for the

first time in the game Granda Zuniga
- Ibragimov, New York 1997, in which
Black tried: 14... lLle5 15.g3 litfh6 16.4
a6 17.!e2 b6 18.liJb3 d3 19.!h5 tLl5c6
2 0.i.f3 and White had a great advan-

Game 52

160
tage. In the later game on the same
subject however, G.Giorgadze - Sve
tushkin, Ubeda 1999, White preferred
17.d3 and after: 17 ... lt:lxd3 18.llJxd3
l"iac8 19.1Wf3 b6 20.b4 lWe6 21.l"if2, he
had some compensation and he later
even won the game, however I would
not venture to recommend that line to
you.
It deserves attention for Black to
play: 14 ... l"ifb8, as he did in the game
W.Browne - Kaidanov, Denver 1998,
which continued with: 1S.g3 1Wh6 16.f4
a6 17.d3 as and the position was
quite unclear.
Black tried a novelty here in our
game and I considered it as quite du
bious:
14 b6?!

That is what my opponent had re

lied on, but after:

18J'xc6! It:lxc6 19.hc6

it turned out that Black had to com
ply (and for a long time at that!) with
an inferior position. Now, he cannot
play: 19 ... lWxd3 20.ha8 IWd2 2U'ld1,
because White remains with an extra
piece. Black played instead:
19 ... l"iad8
but once again he was faced with
great problems. Well, I needed to play
very precisely in order to materialize
my advantage too.
Here, for example, it would have
been rather inaccurate for me to con
tinue with 20.lWc4 (planning to ad
vance my b-pawn). in view of 20 ...
l"id6, followed by l"id6xc6.
I answered with:
2 0 .1Wb5! IWf6
15.llJd3!
After the exchange of queens: 20 ...
Now, things look quite grim for IWxbS 2 1.hbS l"id6 22.l"ie7 c6 2 3.c4, I
Black in case of: lS ... lWd6 16.c2 It:leS think I should win this position.
17.lWxc7 IWxc7 18.l"ixc7 It:lxd3 19.hd3
21.b4 l"ld6 22J3cl lWe6 23.Wc4
llJg6 20.f4 l"ifc8 2U'ld7 l"id8 2 2.l"ixd8 a5!
l"ixd8 23.g3 l"ic8 24.l"idl and the end
Otherwise, after the trade of
game is lost for him. After lS... lWf6, queens, (Black's position might be
White can follow with 16.f4.
even more difficult with queens pres
15 lWxe4 16.l"iel
ent on the board ...) Black can remain
If 16 ...lWg6, then 17.lWf3.
with a weak pawn on a7 and that spells
16 Wd5 17.lWa4 1Wf5!
rather quick demise for him.

161

Dreev-Svetushkin, Linares 1999

24.b5 gfd8 25.xe6

I was in some time-pressure here,
so I decided to exchange queens, af
ter all. Meanwhile, I had foreseen the
possibility to go with my king to the
d2-square.

25 !he6 26.c,t.f1 g6 27.f3 ge7

28.e2! c,t.g7 29.c,t.el gdS 3 0 .a4
gd6 31.c,t.d2
. .

order to win the game and it consists

of two parts. The first one - White
needs to deploy his pieces on their
ideal squares (The bishop must be
placed on d3 and the knight on the
eS-square.). The second part of the
plan requires from White to create an
additional weakness in Black's camp
(there is one - the pawn on c7... ). Af
ter that explanation I hope you wiIl
understand much easier what is going
on in the next few moves.

36.dl ge7 37.gc4 gg7 38.f4

ge7 39.f3 gg7 40 .gcl ge7 41.dl
gb7 42.e2 gg7

31...h6
Suppose I am not going to criticize
Black's move g7-g6, but Black's last
move is obviously unnecessary, be
cause his pawn-structure on the king
side becomes much more vulnerable
after it. He had better not push any
more pawns (They only go forward,
you know that, don't you... ?) and ma
neuver with his rook along the d-file.
My task to press my advantage home
would have been much harder in that
case.

32.f3 g5
Black is persistent with his faulty
strategy.

33.kh5 f5 34.g3 f6
If 34 ...g4, then White plays 3S.h3
gxh3 36.f3 ! and his advantage is de
cisive.

35.i.f3 gg7
I only need to complete my plan in

43.c,t.el!
This is one of the most difficult
moves in our game. White's king had
just been centralized a short while
ago. Now however, the situation has
changed. The knight, as I told you al
ready, must go to the e5-square. If my
opponent after that decides to capture
gSxf4, then I will have to take with
the pawn. Accordingly, my king must
control some squares along the g-file.
That is exactly the reason I am send
ing it back to the kingside.

43 ... ge7 44.c,t.f2 c,t.g7 45.gc4 c,t.f7

46.e5 c,t.f6 47.d3 gg7 48.gcl ge7
49.h4!

Game 53

162

I was maneuvering with my rook in

Now, White's pieces are perfectly
placed. The first part of the plan has order to wait for the opportune mo
been fulfilled. In fact Black "helped" ment to play ltJe5-g6.
in the accomplishment of the sec
57... gd6 58.g6
ond part, because he created another
Mer: 58 ...l"le3 59.l"lxc7 l"lxg3 60.
weakness on f5 himself. White's last i.c4, White wins, because of the check
move is an attempt to clarify finally mating threat.
the situation on the kingside.
58 ged7 59.h4! gd5 6 0 .
xf5
49 . g4
This is the simplest...
60 . gxf5 6Ute6 gd6 62 .gxd6
exd6 63 ..hf5 cj;>xf5 64.cj;>d3
Black resigned. The king and pawn
endgame is just lost for him.
..

..

D3 0

53
Dreev - Grisehuk
Ubeda (open) 1999
Black will have to play that move
sooner, or later. Here, I was consid
ering the immediate move 50.h5, but
I was afraid of the possibility - 50 ...
l"lde6, followed by an exchange sacri
fice on the e5-square. White's bishop
on d3 would not be protected then
and Black would be able to win an ad
ditional tempo with the move l"le3.
I preferred instead
50 .cj;>e2
- since my king could go to the
centre once again.
50 gd5 51.lk6 l"ld6 52.ge4
gdd7
It was more resilient for Black to
defend with 52 . . .h5, but even then af
ter 53.gel, followed by c4, cj;>d3 and
i.b3 etc. White had to win the game
easily.
53.cj;>d2 gd6 54.h5! gd5 55.lk6
gd6 56.gel gd5 57.l"le4
..

Thefollowing game was played in

a very strong open tournament in the
Spanish town of Ubeda. That tourna
ment was played immedia tely after
the Open in Linares and the great ma
jority of the players had participated
before that in Linares too. Some of
them continued to live in the same ho
tel in Linares and they used to arrive
to the round in Ubeda by bus. Among
the strongest players who partici
pated in Linares, V.Bologan and
A.Sokolov did not take part in Ubeda.
Meanwhile, VAkopian had appeared
and he became number one in rating
at the tournament and he finished
with 7 1/2 points out of1 0 . I made 8 1/2
points and I shared 1st-2nd place with
grandmaster Konstantin Landa, who
was the leader throughout the tour
nament. I managed to catch up with
him only at the end and before the

Dreev-Grischuk, Ubeda 1999

last round my tie-break coefficient
(Bucholz) was better than his. There
was a mishap though, almost all of
my opponents lost in the last round.
Meanwhile, K. Landa was almost
losing his last round game against
G.Giorgadze - he had less time on the
clock, a difficult position and he was
against a strong opponent a t that.
Konstantin survived however and he
won that Swiss Open event, thanks to
his superior Bucholz.
This was my first encounter with
Alexander Grischuk, who was only 15
years old then and his talent was just
striking (I had already written about
that in the media). His play at that
time was very impressive indeed.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ltlf3 c6 4:c2

id6
This is a seldom played move and
as we are going to see soon it has quite
serious drawbacks. My next move will
emphasize them:

163

6.,ih4
Naturally, not 6.,id2, because of
6 ... f5.
6 ... ltle7 7.,ig3!
After: 7.e3 liJf5 8.il.g3 liJxg3 9.hxg3
fS, it is possible that White is still
slightly better, but I wanted to obtain
much more out ofthat position. Black's
king shelter has been weakened, while
the bishops will be soon exchanged.
7 c5 !?
In case of some calmer develop
ments, Black's compromised pawn
structure enables White to rely on ob
taining a considerable opening advan
tage, for example: 7 . 0-0 8.e3.
8.dxc5
This is the best for White. I would
not have achieved anything with
8.cxd5, because of 8 ... cxd4. White has
no advantage either after: 8.e3 cxd4
9.exd4 liJbc6.
8 il.xc5 9.cxd5 a5
Or 9 .. ib4 1O.liJbd2 (lO.liJc3!?) 10 ...
ed 1l.e3 and White is better.
..

..

5.ig5!
In case of 5.g3, Black can enter a
1 0 . liJbd2
position from the Stonewall Dutch
It is amazing, but that same po
system with 5 .. .f5.
sition happened in my game with
5 ...f6
Artashes Minasian, several days ear
It is less precise for Black to play: lier in another open tournament in
5... ltle7 6.e3 f6, due to 7.if4+.
the neighbouring Spanish town of

Game 53

164
Linares. My opponent offered me a
draw then. We had spent about an
hour and fifteen minutes on the clock
on seemingly simple moves. I took an
other 15 minutes, but I failed to find
any clear way of obtaining any advan
tage, so I agreed to a draw, moreover
that draw enabled me to preserve my
leading spot in the tournament. After
the game we spent a long time analyz
ing the foUowing position: 1O.lLlbd2

ment - 16.lLlh4.

14.Ae2
If White manages to castle, Black
position will become critical.

14.. J:kS
Here, Black seemingly considered
that he had prevented White from cas
tling.

ed lUkl lLla6 12.e4! and Black has

problems. Still, after the natural reac
tion 1l ... Ab6 12.e4 (It is not advisable
for White to try: 12.WEc8 lLlc8 13J%c8
Ad8.) 12 . . . lLlbc6, Black is perfectly OK.
Of course, it never entered my mind
that I was going to have that same po
sition on the board again so soon and

I had not made up any decision about

how White was supposed exactly to
fight for the opening advantage. Still,
the ideas, which we had found in our
analysis with Minasian, helped me
solve that problem over the board. I
understood that the move 1l.l"lc1 was
unnecessary, moreover it was even
harmful. Instead, it is much better for
White to follow with 1l.e4, as it hap
pened in the game, emphasizing the
drawbacks of Black's position.
I suspected that my young op
ponent, who had also played i n that
tournament, must have studied thor
oughly the final position of our game
with Minasian.

10

exd5 11.e4 lLlbc6

Nevertheless I played:

15. 0 - 0 ! ixf2?!
Now, Alexander had to comply un
willingly with entering the endgame
after: Is... lLlbds 16.lLlb3 WEb6 17.lLlxc5
l"lxcs, but even then following 18.WEb3!
with the idea 18 . . .WExb3 19.axb3 a6
20.Ac4, he would have to solve plenty
of problems.

16.lIxf2 l"lxc4 17.lLlxc4 WEdS

In case of 17 ... WExds, White plays
18.l"1dl and Black's queen has no good
squares to retreat to.

lS.lLld6 'itlfS 19.1Lle5 l"lgS

After 19 ... Ae8, it is possible for
White to continue with: 20.lLlxe8 WExe8
21.d6 lLlec6 22 .d7 WEe7 23.l"1dl.

2 o .lLlxb7Y9cS 21.lLlc5 Af5 22.gc1

lLlbd5

In case of: 11...dxe4 12.WExe4 lLlbc6

13.Ac4, Black has nowhere to castle.
12.exd5 lLlb4 13.WEc4 Ad7!
After: 13 ...ifs 14.lLlb3 lLld3 Is.'itle2

time to make up my mind. At first, of

WEb 6, White has the powerful argu-

course I was considering to give back

(diagram)
Here, I had a choice and I took a long

Dreev-Grischuk, Ubeda 1999

the extra material with: 23.lLlcd7 ixd7

24Jxc8 hc8 - and I would have had
a clear advantage.
I studied too the line: 23.ia6 e8
24.ic4 hS, but I failed to find any
thing decisive.
Finally, it just struck me:
23.i.b5!
This is the best move.
23 a8
It is evident - that is Black's only
move. This is an excellent illustration
of the theme of "domination".
24Jxf5!
That is the right decision!
This is a rare sight to witness - four
white pieces and even one black in the
middle are arranged picturesquely
along the fifth rank!
24 lt)xf5 25.i.c6

165
This move loses immediately, but
even after: 25 ...c8 26.lt)ed7! (but not
26.ixdS fxeS 27.lLle6 1t>e7 28Jk8 xc8
29.heS? lLle3) 26 ... lt>e7 27.hdS lLlxg3
28 .!!e1 It>d6 (or 28 ... lt>d8 29.ixg8)
29.ib7 e8 (29 ...d8 30Je6 1t>c7 31.
!!c6# - this is a very beautiful check
mate, indeed!) 30.xe8 !i:xe8 31.hxg3
!i:e2 32.b3 !i:xa2 33.g4! White should
gradually win.
26.ha8 It)e2 27.1t>f2 It)xcl 28.
hd5 fxe5 29.lt)d7 It>e7 3 0 .hg8
It>d7 31.lt>e3 1- 0

B18

54
Tiviakov Dreev
Ubeda (open) 1999
-

l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.lt)d2 dxe4

4.lt)xe4 if5 5.lt)g3 i.g6 6.i.c4 e6
7.lt)le2 It)f6 8.lt)f4 i.d6

25 lt)xg3
.

I had played that position before

and I had encountered: 9.c3 lLlbd7 10.
f3 lLlb6 1U.b3 It)bd5 12.lt)xg6 hxg6
13.igs ie7 14. 0-0-0 b5 with a rather
unclear game, (Rublevsky - Dreev,
Elista 1998), as well as: 14.0-0 It)d7
1S.he7 xe7 16. !!fe1 It)Sf6 17.a4?!
d6, with a better position for Black,
Pedzich - Dreev, Linares 1999.

Game 54

166

Naturally, Sergey Tiviakov knew 13.0-0-0, because of: 13 ... cxd4 14.
about these games, so he tried to con lhd4 i.e5.
13.dxc5 xc5 14 ..1xf6
tinue in another fashion:
That is an admission that his pre
9.h4 c7 1 0 .xg6 hxg6 11.f3
vious actions were wrong and it is in
bd7 12.g5?
fact another mistake. White's position
becomes even worse after that. He is
possibly beyond salvation already. He
cannot play: 14.xb7 b8 15.a6 b6
16. a4 E:b4. It is also too bad for White
to follow with: 14.e2 hg3 15.fxg3
xg5 16.hxg5 E:xhl. He could have
tried: 14.i.e2 xc2 15.0-0 xb2, or
14.i.b3 e5 15.e2 xg5 16.hxg5 E:xh1
17.<>d2 xa1 (18.c3 0-0-0) 18.xb7
18 ... E:d8, but White's compensation is
This position has also been tested insufficient after that too.
into practice numerous times and
His only correct defence could be:
Black has always allowed White to 14.b3!?, preserving some defen
castle long. For example, back in the sible position. For example: 14 ...c8
year 1953, at the tournament in Bu 15.i.d3 ! e5 16.i.e2.
charest, in his game against Isaak
14 xf6 15.i.b3 0 - 0 - 0
Boleslavsky, the player with Black I was also considering here: 15 ...
B.Sliwa chose: 12 . . .a5+ 13.c3 0-0-0 e5 16.e2 xb2 (if 17Jl:d1, then
14.0-0-0. Black has also tried here: 17.0-0-0 and Black is better) 17.xb7
12 ... 0-0-0 13.0-0-0.
a1 18.<>d2 i.b4! and Black wins. The
I found over the board a simple move in the game however is at least
counterstrike after which White's po that strong too.
sition became immediately critical:
16.c3?!
12 c5!
Here, Sergey should have thought
This concrete approach was quite about playing: 16.0-0-0 E:xh4! 17.
surprising for my opponent and he E:xh4 g5 Cif 18.e3, then 18:xh4
took a whole 40 minutes on the clock. 19.xa7? i.f4) 18.<>bl xh4 and I
Possibly, he considered opening of the would have to work hard to material
game as contrary to the spirit of the ize my advantage.
position - he had the bishop pair after
(diagram)
all. Still, the tactical complications are
16 hg3! 17.xg3
in favour of Black and he should al
In case White had captured with
ready think about how to save the the pawn 17.fxg3, I would have fol
game; moreover it looks like it might lowed with: 17.. :e5 18.<>f1 e4.
17... E:h5
be even too late for that. For example,
it would not work for him to play
Black's position is totally winning.
..

..

Tiviakov-Dreev, Ubeda 1999

167

The material is equal, but White has

no useful moves whatsoever. The rest
of the game does not require any com
ments at all:
18. 0 - 0 Mh8 19.Wif3 gxh4 2 0 .
g3 gh2 21.i.c2 g5 22.i.e4 g4 23.Wif4
eh5. White resigned.

55

B13

Semeniuk - Dreev
Russian Club Cup, 8t Petersburg 1999
We played this game in the Rus
sian Club Cup, where the team of
"Khimik" (from the city of Bjelorech
ensk), for which I was playing,
became the Champion ofR ussia and I
managed to achieve the best result on
board one. The battle between the
leaders of the teams was very tough
indeed. The level of opposition corre
sponded to category 13 and there
were players like A. Khalifman (you
will see my victory against him later),
V. Zvjaginsev and S.Rublevsky.

l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.

i.d3 .!Qc6 5.c3
(diagram)
5 ... Wic7!?
This move prevents the develop
ment of White's bishop to f4 and I

believe that is Black's most active

and logical alternative against the
exchange variation of the Caro-Kann
Defence chosen by White.
In fact, Black plays much more of
ten in the tournament practice the
variation: 5 ... lLlf6 6.M4 ig4 7.eb3
Wid7 8.lLld2 e6 9.lLlgf3 .bf3!? 1O.lLlxf3
i.d6, in which he does not have any se
rious problems, but I think that in
stead of the standard move 7.Wib3,
White should start his fight for the
opening advantage with the rarely
played move 7.lLlf3 !? Now, in case of
7... e6 8.eb3! Wic8 (or 8 . . .ixf3?!
9.Wixb7 ixg2 1O.Wixc6+ lLld7 lU'igl;
8 ...Wid7? ! 9.lLle5) 9.lLlbd2 i.e7 1O.0-0,
or7... a6 8.lLlbd2 e6 9.0-0 i.d6 1O.,bd6
Wixd6 11.Wic2, his position is somewhat
better.
6.lLle2
The idea of that move is easily un
derstandable - he wishes to develop
his bishop with tempo to the f4-square.
It has a certain drawback though; the
knight is much more passive on e2
than on the f3-square.
It seems at first sight that the move
6.ig5 is more active and logical, but
in that case after: 6 ....!Qf6!? 7. .!Qd2 i.g4
8.lLlgf3 e6 9 .i.h4 i.d6 1O.i.g3 i.hS,
Black has no problems at all, IIlescas

168

Game 55

Cordoba - Anand, Linares 1994. Black

should not be afraid either of the line:
8.bl (instead of 8.l2Jgf3), because he
can counter that with 8 ... eS, reaching a
complicated and approximately equal
position, as well as with 8 ... e6; here,
after 9.l2Je2 i.d6 !? Black's chances are
at least equal, while following 10.l2Jg3,
it is good for him to continue with 10 ...
l2JhS !? and after: 1O.ixf6 gxf6 11.l2Jg3,
he can play: 11 . . . 0-0-0!? with a slight
ly better game.
6 i.g4 7.3 i.d7!?
It is also possible for Black to try
7...i.hS with a complicated position,
but the move in the game is stronger.
Its idea is to counter White's thematic
move 8.i.f4 with the active 8 ... eS!?,
just like it happened in the game.
S.i.f4 eS!?
This was a powerful move, since I
was not reluctant to opt for a position
with an isolated d5-pawn.
9.dxeS l2JxeS l 0 . 0- 0 i.d6
.

My opponent has not achieved

anything much out of the opening.
The position resembles a lot one of
the variations of the French Defence
- the Tarrasch system (l.e4 e6 2 .d4 dS
3.l2Jd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5), but White's
situation is clearly worse, since his

f3-pawn does not beautify his posi

tion at all, mildly speaking ... Black is
already slightly better, but not more
than that.
1l.lt>hl ltle7 12.ltla3 a6 13.ltlc2
0 - 0 14.ltled4 acS lS.ltle3?
That is a serious mistake after
which White loses a pawn by force and
his position becomes very difficult.
After lS.d2 Black's situation would
have remained slightly better thanks
to his superior piece-coordination.
lS ... ltlxd3 16.hd6 ltlxb2 17.3
In case of: 17.ixc7? ! ltlxdl 18.axdl
xc7 19.d3 fc8, Black's victory is
just a matter of time.
17... xd6 1S.y,yxb2
White is already a pawn down,
meanwhile his c3-pawn is very weak
and he can hardly save the game. The
encounter enters the technical stage
of the realization of Black's advan
tage.
lS ...bS 19.fel feS 2 0 .adl
h6 21.e2 c5 2 2.d3 ltlg6 23.ltlb3
y,ye7 24.g3?
After that mistake, White's posi
tion becomes completely hopeless. He
had better defend with 24.!!d4, but
that would have hardly changed the
outcome of the game...

Semeniuk-Dreev, St Petersburg 1999

169

24 ... tt)e5
It was even stronger for Black to
play: 24 ... ig4! 25.2:f2 (or 25.tt)d4
hf3+ 26. tt)xf3 e4-+; 2S.g2 .bf3+
26. xf3 e4-+) 25 ... tt)e5 26.tt)xd5
(or 26.2:d4 i.xf3+ 27. g1 g5-+) 26 ...
e6 and White would have no satis
factory defence in sight.

25.tt)xd5 d6 26.2:d4 ic6

Black was also winning with the
following forced variation: 26 ... tt)xf3
27.tt)e7+ xe7 28 .Elxe7 Elxe7 29.2:d1
2:ce8 and White would be defenseless
against the threats ic6 and 2:e2.
27.tt)f4 .txm+ 28.gl b6 29.
l3f2 ib7 3 0 .tt)d2 c6
I had here two extra pawns and a
crushing attack, There still followed:

31.tt)d5 tt)g4 32.l3f3 l3el+ 33.tt)f1

gce8 34.d2 c5 35.l3f5 gle5 36.
l3xe5 tt)xe5 37.g2 tt)c6 and White
resigned.

D92

56
Dreev

Khalifman
Russian Club Cup, 8t Petersburg 1999
-

l.d4 tt)f6 2.c4 g6 3.tt)c3 d5 4.tt)f3

ig7 5.,U4 0 - 0 6.2:cl dxc4 7.e3
Until this game, whenever I had
played against Alexander, I had tried
only the move 7. e4 in this position.

7...ie6 8.tt)g5 id5 9.e4 h6 1 0 .

exd5 h:xg5 1 1..ixg5 tt)xd5 12.ixc4
tt)b6 13.ib3 tt)c6
White has two possibilities here in
this variation: 14.d5 and what hap
pened in the game:

14.tt)e2

14 ...d6
The Encyclopedia of Chess Open
ings recommends the move 14... tt)aS.
For example, that was played against
me by Michal Krasenkow in our game
in (8henyang 1999). One other game,
played on that theme, witnessed the
move 14 ... aS (G.Giorgadze - Avrukh,
Bugojno 1999). Alexander tried here a
novelty.

15. 0 - 0 e6
It deserved attention for him to
play 1S .. .1''l ad8! ? 16.c2, which hap
pened in the game Bareev - Huzman,
Bugojno 1999.
After the move in the text, I took a
long time on the clock, because I had a
choice between 16.c2 and 16.h4.
I would have been definitely bet
ter after: 16.c2 l3ac8 17.l3fdl, with
the idea to counter 17 ... tt)xd4 with
18.tt)xd4 ,bd4 19.he6 ! . Now, the
line: 19 ...fxe6 2 0.xg6+ h8 21.hS+
g8 2 2.g4 loses for Black. But even
in case of: 19 . . . 'iffxe6 20.gxd4, should
Black defend in the best possible way
20 ... 2:fe8! I still have superior chanc
es after 21.h4, while capturing on a2
is extremely dangerous for Black, for
example: 2l...'iffxa2 22.hS and if 22 . . .
e6, then 23.hxg6. Following 23 ...
fxg6, then I can continue with 24.1"1h4

170
and my attack would be very power
ful, while in case of 23 ...Yffxg6, then
- 24.%Yd2, with the idea - l3g4.
Still, I had decided to play the move
16.M...

16.h4 ltlxd4 17.ltlxd4

That is the critical position of the

game.
The aggressive move 17. . .hd4,
probably looked to Alexander as un
necessarily risky. During the game I
also considered that White's initia
tive would be running smoothly and
unopposed. That is not quite correct,
though . . . After 17. . . hd4, White has
several possibilities:
IB.hS hb2 19.%Yg4 (It would be
rather dubious for White to follow
with: 19.hxg6?! %Yxdl! 20.l3cxdl cS.).
Here, it is a mistake for Black to play:
19 ... %Yd4 20.%Yh3 ixcl? 21.hxg6 %Yg7
22.f6 %Yh6 23.gxf7+ l3xf7 24.Yffxe6
l3afB 2S.%Yg4+ @h7 26.c2+. In
stead, he should follow with: 19...
.b:el 20. .b:c1. Now, it deserves atten
tion for him to continue with: 20 ...
%YeS! ? 21.hxg6 ltldS. If 20 ... %Yd3, then
21..b:e6 and after: 21...fxe6 22.%Yxe6+
@h7 23.%Ye7+ White forces a draw.
Still, Black can try instead 21...l3aeB
and White's attack ebbs away...

Game 56
The second possibility for White
is - IB.l3xc7!? As Khalifman told me
after the game, he was afraid of that
move most of all. Here, after: IB ...
%Yxc7 19.%Yxd4, it seems reasonable
for Black to play: 19 .. ,l'!ad8 20 ..b:d8
l3xdB 21.%Ye3! with the idea to follow
with: 21.. .%Ye7 22.g3 %Yf6 23.l3el Yffxb2
24.hS. On the other hand, Black has
at his disposal the line: IB ...hf2+
19.fuf2 %Yxc7 20.hS %YeS! 2 1.%Yg4 ltld7!
and if 22.hxg6, then 22 ... ltleS 23.%YhS?
Yffxf2+! and Black wins.
Naturally, all these lines do not ex
haust the numerous possibilities for
both sides after the move 17....b:d4.
For example, White can try lB.
%Yg4!? - and he most probably re
mains with a good compensation for
the pawn. Is White better is something
that remains unclear?
Nevertheless, the move 17....b:d4
is clearly better for Black than what
Alexander Khalifman played in the
game .. .

17...%Yxd4?
He had evidently evaluated wrongly
the consequences of the transfer into
an endgame, thinking that it might
have been approximately equaL

18.l3xc7 %Yxdl 19.lhdl l3ab8 2 0 .

if4! if6
If 20. . .l3fcB, then 21.l3e7; while in
case of 20 ...hb2, White plays 21.l3c2
eS 22.h6 .
(diagram)
21.l3d3!
Just before I played my move in
the game, I decided at the last mo
ment to have a look at the line: 21. a4.
It turned out, however that after: 21...
l3fcB 22.aS ltldS 23..b:dS i!xc7 24 ..txc7

171

Dreev-Khalifman, St Petersburg 1999

k8 2S.Ag3 exdS 26J!xdS l"ic1+ 27.li>h2
gb1 Black equalizes easily.

After the move 29.f4 (fixing Black's

g-pawn) Black's position would have
remained quite difficult, but I would
This is by far not an obvious move not be quite convinced to assert that it
and it came as a surprise to many would have been completely lost. Nat
people, including my opponent. I had urally, I had a look at that line too, but
planned it already when I had played it seemed to me slightly unprepared.
20.Af4.
29 l"ic6!
Khalifman was in a severe time
21 l"ifc8
Blackloses after: 2l. ...bh4? 22.AeS! pressure here, but he found the best
gfc8 23.gh3 gS 24.g3, as well as after: practical chance. I would not like to
21...l"ifd8 22.l"ixd8+ .bd8 23.l"ixt7 li>xf7 say that I had foreseen all the conse
24. .bb8 1i.xh4 2S . .ba7.
quences of that brilliant maneuver by
22.hS l"ixc7
Black, but I had felt intuitively that I
In case of: 22 ... gS 23Jlxc8+ gxc8 did not let the advantage slip out of
24. .bgS .bgS 2S.E:g3, White has a my hands altogether.
clear advantage.
3 0 .AdS gf6 31.f3 Ac1 32.g3 gS
23.hc7 gc8 24.hb6 axb6 2S.
bxg6 gcl+ 26.li>h2 hb2 27.gd7
It was possible to leave the e6-pawn
to Black for a while after: 27.gxt7+
1i>xt7 28.E:d7+, but I did not like the
idea to let Black's king away from the
eighth rank.
27 fxg6 28.he6+ Ii>h8
(diagram)

I decided here not to force the issue.

Generally speaking, it was not easy at
all to choose the right move. For ex
ample, I did not like 29. li>g3, because
of 29 ... l"ic7 and Black repels my rook.

That move had become possible

only because of the placement of
Black's rook along the sixth rank; oth
erwise White's king goes to the g6-

172

Game 57

square and the checkmate becomes

unavoidable.
Now, it might seem to you that
White cannot improve his position in
a decisive fashion, but that is an illu
sion!
33.@g4 e3 34J;xb7 gd6?!
In case Black continues to keep his
bishop along the e3-c1 diagonal with
the move 34 . . .c1, then for example
after: 3S.gd7 e3 36.a4 c1, I have the
possibility to play: 37.f4! gxf4 38.@gS.
If 38 . . ,lU8, then 39.@g6, therefore
Black's only move is - 38 ... b2. Ac
cordingly, White plays - 39.gxf4, fol
lowed by fS, e6, gd6 and he must win
the game.
After the move in the game, I had
no problems to press my advantage
home.
35.ge7 d4
If 3S . . .ic1, then 36.ie6! .
36.b3 f6 37,gf7 e5
Or 37 .. ,lk6 and 38.ltifS.
38.gb7 gd4+?
Following38 ... gf6, White continues
with: 39.ge7 d6 40.gd7 eS 41.gdS.
Therefore, Black's more resilient de
fence would have been - 38 . . .gc6.
39.@xg5 hg3 4 0 .gxb6
Alexander Khalifman lost on time
in this winning position for White.
1- 0

57

ell

Wang Zili - Dreev

Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shenyang 1999

The Chess Federation of China,

thanks to the sponsor Mr. Tan Ch in

Nam, who was residing in Malaysia,

but who was of a Chinese origin, was
organizing early regular round-rob
in tournaments with high-level par
ticipants in different cities of China.
The main purpose of organizing
these tournaments was formulated
by Dato Tan Ch in Nam so as to en
able the strongest Chinese players to
encounter the best chess players of
the West and to let them accumulate
experience and to improve their rat
ings. From what we see now - how
impressive the results of the Chinese
players are, both men and women,
it looks like that purpose has been
achieved!
This was my first participation in
the tournaments for the "Tan Chin
Nam - Cup " and I shared 1st_2nd place
with Ye Jiangchuan, but his tie-break
coefficient proved to be better than
mine.
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.lOc3 lOf6 4,g5
dxe4 5.lOxe4 e7 6 .hf'6 gxf6
I had tried that capturing with the
pawn before, as early as in my candi
dates match in 1991 against V.Anand.
The "regular" move 6 ... f6 had been
tested in my tournament practice nu
merous times.
7.lOf3

Wang Zili-Dreeu, Shenyang 1999

173

13.d2!
7. . . a6
This variation became popular
This is the correct maneuyer for
thanks to the efforts of Alexander Mo White after which Black's position.
rozevich. It is amazing, but when I first which is presently quite suspicious
saw that move, it seemed to me quite anyway, becomes even more critical.
interesting, but still dubious. The rea White is preparing f2-f3, followed by
son that I decided to play it, despite i.d3. Black's main problem is that he
the fact that I had considered it quite cannot complete his development, due
questionable, was that I was relying to his weakness on f5. His only plus is
on the effect of surprise. Meanwhile, that his dark squared bishop has been
I had evidently become the victim of deployed to the important diagonal
the effect of advertising, which often al-hB. It is not so easy to exploit that
makes us buy things that we do not advantage though, but as we are go
really need, indeed ... Black's usual de ing to see later, that was what helped
fence here is - 7 . . . b6.
me come out of my difficult situation
later.
8.c4
That move (preventing the advance
13 . . .i.g7
The move 13 . . .b5 would have been
b7-bS) made me happy, because I con
sidered the move B.g3 as the most dan rather premature in that situation.
14.3 f6 IS.i.d3
gerous, as it was played in (Frankfurt
White is now threatening g2-g4.
(active) 1999) against A.Morozevich
IS ...bS!
at first by Peter Leko and then by
Black cannot wait anymore, so he
Christofer Lutz and White had been
has no other chance.
victorious in both games.
16.h3
S . . .f5 9.c3 cS?!
This move is a bit slow; neverthe
It was much better for Black to play
here 9 . . .f6, with the idea to follow less it is correct from the point of view
with c7-cS. I could have obtained a of strategy. White is not trying to force
quite acceptable game in that case, for the issue with the move 16.g4, or with
example: 1O .d2 cS ll.dS e5.
16.cxb5 and I was planning to counter
1 0 .dS i.f6 11.c2 eS I2 . 0 - 0 - 0 these with 16 . . . c4! (Pawns are not so
0-0
important in similar positions, it is es
sential to open the c-file.) 17.il.xc4 (or
17.lZlxc4 axb5 IB.lZlxb5 Ei:xa2) and here
either 17 . . . lZld7, or 17 . . . axb5 IB.il.xb5
i.a6 and Black has an excellent coun
terplay for the sacrificed pawns.
It is evident now (after 16.h3) that
Black cannot wait anymore. If it had
been White to move in that situation,
he would have played g 2-g4 and his
position would have become practi-

Game 57

174
cally winning. I managed to find the
only plan to distract White from the
pawn-advance g2-g4.
16 b4

the resource - 2 0. . . e4 21.fxe4 fxe4

22.he4 xe4! 23.xe4 d7 24.hf1
(or 24.d6 eB 25.xeB heB 26.d7
hd7 27.xd7 c6) 24 ... d6.
2 0 .hfl i.f8
This is again Black's practically
only move. He has protected his c5pawn and he is threatening i.d7.

17.ti:Ja4
That is the most attractive variation
for White. The position would have
been quite unclear in case of: 17. .!De2 ! ?
a5 IB . .!Dg3 (Or IB.g4 e4! 19.fxe4 a4,
21.d6!
The careless move 21.g4, would
with the idea to follow with b4-b3.
Black has sacrificed some material have lost material for White after: 21...
indeed, but his counterattack seems i.d7 22.ttJxa5 b3!
21.. .i.d6 22 .g4
quite dangerous.) IB ... a4.
Or 2 2.ttJb6 a4 23.ttJxaB axb3
17 . . . a5 1 1S.mhl
After 18.g4, I had considered: lB ... 24.xb3 (24.axb3 ! ?) 24 . . . i.fB with an
e4 19.fxe4 i.d7 20 . .!Dc5 cB (20 ... a4!?) unclear position.
21..!Dd7 ttJd7 with an unclear position.
22 . . . e4
The move IB . .!Dc5 can be countered
This is the only move.
with IB . . . a4.
23.fxe4 f4 24.e5 he5 25.i.xh7
IS ... .!Da6 1 9 .!Db3
mhS
I did not like here 25 ...l!ig7, because
In case of 19.94, Black can organize
a powerful counterattack with: 19 . . . of the possibility - 26.g5.
i.d7 (but not 1 9 ... e 4 20.fxe4 d7 2 1.e5!
26.i.f5
xe5 2 2 . .!Db6) 2o . bfS ha4 2 1.xa4
White has decided to enter an end
e4 22 .c2 b3 23.axb3 a4!? (or 23 ... game, because he was obviously not
ttJb4 24.ttJxe4 b6 2S.f2) 24 . .!Dxe4 happy with the lines: 26.ttJbxcS ttJxc5
b6 25.bxa4 fbB 26.d2 hb2 .
27.ttJxc5 a4 and Black has a good com
19 . . . eS
pensation; or 26.ie4 a7 27.ttJbxc5
That is the only move for Black. (27.ttJxa5? ttJbB) 2 7 . . . ttJcS 2B.ttJc5 and
White cannot play here comfortably the game is quite unclear.
20 .g4 once again, because Black has
26 ...hf5 27.xf5 xf5 2S.gxf5

Wang Zili-Dreev, Shenyang 1999

175

White has an extra pawn indeed,

but he cannot play for a win anymore.
He should not have problems to make
a draw either ... Still, my opponent,
who was playing quite well in the pre
vious part of the game, started to play
rather unconvincingly. I began to ac
cumulate gradually small advantages
and I managed to win that game at the
end.
43.IM3
It is quite evident that Black cannot
It was better for White to play 43.a3
protect all his pawns simultaneously.
Therefore he exchanges the rooks. As immediately.
a result of all that the importance of
43 ... gd6 44.'it>e2
his passed pawn increases consider
This is forced, because in case of
ably.
44.\i1c4, Black will follow with: 44 ...
2S gadS! 29. axc5 xc5 3 0 . gd2 45.'it>b3 a4.
44 ... 'it>e5 45.a3 gc6 46.'it>d2
xc5 gxdl 31.gxdl f3
That is a serious imprecision. White
Or 31...\i1g7 32.d7.
32.gfl iJ.d4 33.d3 ge3 34.\i1c2 would have maintained the balance
\i1g7 35.c5 \i1f6 36.c6 iJ.b6 37.\i1d2 with the move 46.\i1d3.
ge2 3S.\i1dl ge3 39.el ge2
46 ... 'it>e4 47.gb3 bxa3 4S.xa3
I was in a time-trouble here, so I 'it>xfS 49.gf3 'it>e6 5 0 .b3 iJ.dS 51.
did not mind the repetition of moves. ge3
It would have been weaker for me to
Or 51.c4? a4 52.\i1c3 a3.
play: 39 . . .2 40J'lxf2 Elxh3 41.Elc2 iJ.c7
51...'it>fS 52 .gf3 'it>g6 53.c4 iJ.c7
42.Eld2! and here the move 4 2 . . . Elhl? 54.'it>d3 gc5 55.'it>d4 gb5 56.ge3 fS
would not work (the correct move is 57.h4
- 42 ... Elh8) 43.Eld7 iJ.g3 44.c7 Elxel
White does not wish to defend pas45.\i1d2 Ele8 46.Eld8+sively . . .
4 0 .c2 ge7 41.gxf3 gc7 42.\i1d2
57... 'it>h5 5S.ge7 iJ.dS 59.gf7
c6
'it>xh4 6 0 .d6 iJ.b6 61.'it>c3 gc5

176

Game 58

62.b2?

That is the decisive mistake. White

could have still made a draw possibly
with the move 6Vi Jc4, with the idea
to follow with b3-b4.
62 ... g4 63.liJc4 gb5 64.c2
f2!

Now, Black's position is technically

winning.
65.gg7 f3 66.gf7 gd5 67.ge7
f4 68.ge8 e3 69.ga8 e2 7 0 . ge8
gd3 71.gg8 gd4 72.liJxa5

here the move 6.tiJbd2 ! ?, which leads

to complex situations. It is no doubt
Or 72.Ele8 Elc4 73.bc f3 74.lt>b3 f2 the critical one in White's fight for the
75.Elf8 f1 76.Elf1 1t>f1 77.lt>a4 b6 opening advantage.
78.c5 d8-+
Still, the move 6.d2 has its pluses
not so much in theoretical aspect, but
72 ... f3 73.tiJc6 ge4 0 -1
for mainly practical reasons. The po
sitions, arising after 6.d2 are much
58
D2 0 simpler than those after 6.tiJbd2 and
White can fight for a slight opening
Dreev - Rublevsky
edge, avoiding complicated develop
FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.)
ments. Black does not have in that
Las Vegas 1999
case any practical chance of seizing
This game was played in the FIDE the initiative and he is forced to play
knock-out World Championship. I basically for a draw.
6 ... hd2+ 7.tiJbxd2 \wf6
was in the "waiting list" at that mo
That is a seldom played line, but
ment and Ijlew to Las Vegas without
even knowing whether I would play stiII it is quite possible. Black plays
or not. Literally at the last possible much more often in the tournament
moment, it turned out that plenty of practice the move - 7. . . tiJc6.
8 . 0 - 0 liJe7 9.e5 \Wg6 1 0 .tiJxd4
the participants in the main scheme
dropped from the competition and I tiJbc6 1l.liJ2f3 0 - 0 12.e6!
joined in the action . . .! reached the 1/8
final though, but then I lost my match
against Michael Adams.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5 4.tiJf3
exd4 5.hc4 b4+

(diagram)
This is well-known theoretical po
sition.
6.d2

It is more popular for White to play

177

Dreev-Rublevsky. Las Vegas 1999

That is a very fashionable position
in this variation of the Queen's Gam
bit Accepted.

12 he6
.

That is a novelty. Black's usual

defence here is 12 ... fxe6. It is inter
esting to mention that in his subse
quent games, Sergey stopped play
ing 12 ... e6 and he preferred 12 ...
fxe6. For example in the game Volkov
- Rublevsky, Ekaterinburg 2002, af
ter: 13J''le1 tiJxd4 14.tiJeS tiJf3+ lS.tiJxf3
tiJdS 16.ixdS exdS 17.xdS+ f7 18.
d4 ifS 19J1ac1 c6 20.a3 f6, Black
equalized.

13.tLlxe6 fxe6 14.l'el @h8

I case of 14 ... E:ad8, I would have
maintained better chances - in the mid
dle game after lS.e2, as well as in the
endgame after: lS.E:xe6 E:xd1+ 16.
E:xd1 c2 17.ib3 xd1+ 18.ixd1, since
White's light-squared bishop has much
better prospects in these positions
than its opponent - the black knight.

lS.E:xe6 g4 16.'!We2 tLlg6

Black cannot solve all his open
ing problems with the move - 16 . . .
E:xf3. After the practically forced line:
17.E:e4 tiJd4 18J:ixg4 tiJxe2+ 19.ixe2,
there arises an endgame with better
chances for White, because his bish
op is stronger in that position than
Black's knight.
17.h3 f5 18.id3 tLlf4 19.hf5

tLlxe2+ 2 0 .E:xe2 E:xf5 21.E:dl

(diagram)
White has a leeway for his king
now and his pieces are more active.
All that guarantees him a slight, but
stable positional advantage.

21. .. @g8 22.E:d7 E:f7 23.E:xf7

@xf7 24.tLlgS + @g8

That move seems to be somewhat

passive, but even the more active lines
for Black - 24 ... @g6 and 24 ... <>f6, do
not solve all his problems. For exam
ple: 24 ... @g6 2S.tiJe6 E:c8 (In case of:
2S . . . E:e8 26.tiJf4+ @f7 27.E:xe8 @xe8
28.lLle6, Black is faced with a long and
difficult fight for a draw.) 26.E:e3! and
White has a powerful initiative; or
24 . . .@f6 2S.lLle4+ @f7 26.lLlcS and he
is again the active side.

2S.E:e3!
That is an excellent move, which
improves considerably my tactical
chances. White is threatening lLle6
and later, depending on circumstanc
es: E:g3 or !"lb3. Black must defend ex
tremely precisely.

2S !"ld8 26.tLle6 E:dl+

..

This is a mistake. Black had better

play here 26 . . . E:d7!?

27.@h2

17B

Game 59

27 gd7
He is still defending stubbornly. It
was much worse for him to play the
seemingly active line: 27 .. jd2, be
cause of: 2B.E:b3 lUaS 29.E:f3 h6
30.E:fB + It>h7 31.b4 lUc6 32.bS lUaS
33.a4; or 28. .. E:e2 29.c!Llxc7b6 30.E:c3!?
lUd4 31.E:d3 lUfS 32.E:dB+ It>fl 33.E:d7+
It>f6 34.g4 lUe7 3S.lt>g3 and White
would remain with a clear advantage
in both cases.
2SJ'lf3 gf7 29.lt>g3!
That powerful move creates great
problems for Black now. I would not
have achieved much with the line:
29.E:xfl \!;>xfl 30.c!Llxc7 lUb4 31.tDbS
tDxa2 32.c!Llxa7 It>e6 and despite the
fact that Black would be a pawn down,
he would preserve good chances for a
draw, because of the active position of
his king.

3 0 J'lxf7 It>xf7 31.c!Llxc7 c!Lld3 32.

c!Llb5! c!Llxb2 33. c!Llxa7 e6 34.c!Llb5
d5?
That move only speeds up Black's
demise. It was more tenacious for him
to defend with 34 ... lUd3. Now, the
game ends up rather quickly.
35.c!Llc7+ c4
It is hardly any better for Black to
play: 3S ... lt>eS 36,4+ It>e4 37.lUeB, be
cause White's position is easily win
ning.
36.c!LleS b5 37. c!Llxg7 c!Lla4 3S.f4
c!Llc3 39.f5 d5 4 0 .f4 ! c!Llxa2 41.f6
It>d6 42.f5 c!Llc3
In case of 42 . . . lt>d7, White wins
without any problems after: 43. lUe6
It>eB 44.lUc7+, since he remains with a
couple of extra pawns.
43.c!Lle6 c!Lld5 44.f7 c!Lle7+ 45.e4
and Black resigned.
I managed to outplay a very strong
opponent in this game in an only
slightly better endgame for me. I ex
ploited rather well his almost insig
nificant imprecision at some key-mo
ments of the fight.

D37

59
Dreev - Chandler
Hastings 2000
29 c!Lle5? !
This is a very serious mistake and
Black's position becomes quite diffi
cult after it. His only chance to fight
for a draw was: 29 .. J'lxf3 + 30.lt>xf3
lUb4; but indeed after: 31.lUxc7 lUxa2
32.c!LlbS (or 32.lt>e4!?) 32 . . . a6 33.c!Lld6
b5 34.lt>e4, I would have stm main
tained a considerable positional ad
vantage.
..

I took partin the traditional round

robin tournament in Hastings (which
has a long and glorious history and
impressive traditions) at the begin
ning of January in the year 2 0 0 0 .
It was a part of the 75th International
Chess Congress in Hastings. The Pre
mier tournament in which I partici
pated was ofcategory 13. There were

Dreev-Chandler, Hastings 20 0 0
1 0 players in the tournament and the
two youngest participants - 16-year
old American Irina Krush and the
English player McShane (who be
came 16 just during the tournament)
did not have high ratings at all and
they diminished the category of the
tourn ament considerably, but they
proved to be very tough nuts to crack.
Emil Sutovsky came first and he
played quite convincingly throughout
the tournament. I shared 2nd_3rd place
with Jonathan Speelman. I did not
start so well in that tournament and
after round 5 I had only 50 %. I man
aged tofinish successfully though and
I collected 3 1/2 points out of the last
four rounds. I consider that tourna
ment to be quite satisfactory for me
from the creative point of view and
I played several good games. I have
selected two games played in Hast
ingsfor this book - the game against
M.Chandler (which turned out to be
almost exquisite - technically) as
well as my game from the last round
against B. Lalic.

179

- Ki.Georgiev, Biel 1992 and: 15J"1a2

d4 16.e4 .ic7, Seirawan - Ki.Georgiev,
Dubai 1986.

15... d4
Now, it is already weaker for Black
to play: 15 ... !"1e8 16.!"1a2! and he cannot
follow with: 16 . . . d4 17.tOxd4.

16.exd4
Or 16.tOxd4? .ixd4.

16 hf3
.

It also deserved attention for Black

to try the move 16 ... lM'd5.

17..bf3 lM'xd4 18 ..ie3!

But, of course not: 18.lM'xd4? tOxd4
19.b7 tOe2 + .

18 . . .lM'xdl 19.9fxdl he3 2 0 .

fxe3

l.d4 tOf6 2.c4 e6 3.tOf3 d5 4.tOc3

.ie7 5 ..if4 0 - 0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 .ixc5
8.a3 tOc6 9.cxd5 tOxd5 1 0 .tOxd5
exd5 11 ..id3 .ih6 12. 0 - 0 .ig4 13.h3
.ih5 14.h4 a6
Black plays much more often here
14 .. .Ele8. Of course, the move 14 ... lM'f6,
does not work, due to 15.g4 and after
the trade of the bishops Black loses his
d5-pawn.
(diagram)

15 ..ie2 !
This is an important improvement.
Until now, there have been games with:
15J"1c1 d4 16.g4 g6 17.e4, Beliavsky

2 0 ... !"1fe8?
That is White's first serious im
precision and it is going to have grave
consequences for him. He had bet-

Game 6 0

180

ter continue with: 20 ... !3fd8 21.hc6

(Or 2l.'it>f2 !3xdl 22 .!3xdl !3d8 with a
possible draw.) 2l...bxc6 22.!3xd8+
!3xd8 23.!3cl !3c8 (Or 23 ...!3d6 24.!3c5,
threatening !ta5.) - and White has a
slight edge.
21.'it>f2 !te7
Just like before, Black had to de
ploy his rook on the d-file - 2l...!3ad8,
irrelevant of the loss of a tempo.
22.ixc6 bxc6 23.!td6
Or 23.!3acl? !3e6.

Black again overlooks his best

chance to save the game - 29 ... !3d7!
3 0 .lte4 g6

31.lMc3!
Now, the game has been practically
decided, because Black's king has been
cut off from his vulnerable pawns.
31 lte6 32.!3xe5+ 'it>f6 33.!313+
Itg7 34.'it>d4 !td7+ 35.ltc4 !3b8 36.
!tc5 !tb6 37.b3 !3d6 38.'it>a4 h5
39.h4 !td7 4 0 .a5 !tb8 41.!3xc6,
and White soon won the game.

23 !tc8?!
Murray admitted after the game
that he had intended to continue with
the move 2 3 ... a5 here, but he noticed
that he would lose a pawn in case of:
24.!3xc6 axb5 25.axbS!.
Black's best chance here was 23 ... !3ae8: since as M.Dvoretzkij had
taught me - passivity in king and rook
endgames never ends up well. There
might have followed: 24.!3xc6 !3xe3
2S.!3xa6 !3e2 + 26.Kpfl !3b2 ! 27.!3el !3c8
28.!3e2 !3bl+ 29.Kpf2 hS, or 24.!3el
!3e6 2S.!3xe6 !3xe6 26.!3c1 - and White
would have serious problems to mate
rialize his advantage in both cases.
24.!tc1 !tec7 25.!tc5 'it>f8 26.e4
'it>e7 27.e5 f6 28.!3d3 fe 29.'it>e3
Itf6?
.

E81

60
Dreev - B.Lalic
Hastings 2000

t.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 i.g7

I was a bit surprised with that move,
because the King's Indian Defence
is not a part of GM Lalic's opening
repertoire. I had expected 3 ... dS. He
must have been quite well prepared,
because my exclusive interest towards
a certain line of the Zaemisch system
- (6.llJge2) was very well known ...
4.e4 d6 5.13 0 - 0 6.ge2 a6!?
That is a smart move. Now, in case
of: 7..tgS cS 8.dS, Black sacrifices a
pawn favourably with - 8 . . .bS 9.cxbS

Dreev-B.Lalic, Hastings 20 0 0
aS. Therefore . .
.

181

14.ie3 h5

7.ie3 c6
The move 7. . . c6 leads to the "Yu
goslavian" variation.

S.c5!? bd7
Black plays much more often here
8 ... bS.

9.!'!cl
This is possibly a novelty. White
usually played before 9.cl.

9 . b6
.

My opponent probably decided

against the natural move 9 ... bS, be
cause of 10.b4! ?

1 0 .cxd6 exd6 11.f4 c5?!

Here, Black had to play ll ... bs.

15.e6!
But not: lS.xd6 cS! (or IS...
h4+? 16.g3 xg3 17.hxg3 xhl 18.
M2) 16.xd8 xd8 17.g3 xf4 18 . .ixf4
M4 19.9xf4 d7 and Black's position
is quite acceptable.

15 ... fxe6 16.ixh6 h4+ 17.g3

xg3 18.hxg3 xhI 19.ixf8 xf8

12.a4!
White prevents the possibility b6bS in a radical fashion and he main
tains an opening advantage.

12

..

cxd4

Black had better continue here

with 12 ... ib7, complying with a slight
ly inferior position after, for example
13.dS! ?

13.hd4 ih6?
I believe - that one and the next
move is what Black had in mind, while
he played the anti-positional move
12 ... cxd4. Just like before, he had to
follow with 13 ... ib7.

At this moment my opponent sur

prisingly offered me a draw. Evident
ly Lalic had relied only on the line:
2o.M2 Ela7! 21.xd6 ElV (It is worse
for Black to play: 2 l . . .Eld7 2 2.xb6
h2+ 23.ig2 Eld2+ 24.e2 Elxe2+
25.<i>xe2 xg2 + 26.f2.) with some
chances for Black to equalize. My next
move deprived him of his illusions.

2 0 .d5! exd5
Black was already beyond salva-

Game 61

182

the tournament Julian Borowski and

strangely enough - Zvjaginzev was
the best again. He practically never
fell out of the car and he showed the
2V1:YxdS+ il.e6 22:xaS lMrxf3 best result on the track. I drove over
23Jk3 V:Yhl 24.1tff2! V:Yh2+ 2S.il.g2 the series of ten laps, as I thought
quite fast, but. .. I ended up only sec
il.h3 26.eS dxeS 27.l3c7!
ond at the end...
But not: 27.lMrdS+? liJe6.
I had encoun tered Dr. Huebner
27 hS
Black could have prolonged a bit several times over the chess-board
his capitulation with: 27... .bg2 28. until then, but I had never beaten this
V:Yxg2 lMrhS 29.lMrdS+ 'it>h8 30 .lMrf3 V:Yh2+ outstanding experienced grandmas
ter.
31.'it>e3 V:Yh6+ 32.'it>d3.
tion: 20 . . . lMrg1 2Uxc8 (21.liJe7+!?)
21...l"lxc8 22.liJe7+ 'it>t7 23.liJxc8 lMre3+
24.i.e2 lMrg1+ 2S.'it>d2, or 20 . . .i.b7 2l.
liJe7+ 'it>t7 2 2 . l"lc7.

. .

2S.V:YO il.f5 29.V:YdS+ liJe6 3 0 .

lMraS+ liJfS 31.lMreS. Black resigned.
61

D12
Dreev - Huebner
Julian Borowski, Essen 2000

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.liJO liJf6 4.e3

il.f5 S.liJc3 e6 6.liJh4 il.g4
The other possible moves for Black
here are - 6 ... il.g6 (see my game with
S.Volkov, in which I was playing with
White) and 6. . . il.e4.

7.lMrb3 lMrb6
This game with GM Robert Hueb
ner was played in the second round
of the all-play-all tournament, which
was called "Julian Borowski Grand
master Tournament" (after the name
of the chess-sponsor and the owner of
the company "Borowski GmbH - An
tennen und Elektro-Technik'') and it
was held there for the second time.
Thefield was extremely strong, with
out any obvious outsiders and my re
sult of +2 proved to be good enough
for sharing Ist-3rd place with Va dim
Zvjaginzev and Klaus Bischoff Ac
cording to the tie-break rules Va dim
Zvjaginzev was declared the winner
of the tournament and I took the sec
ond place. It was quite amazing, but
there was a carting - competition,
which happened during the free day
(after roundfive) in the carting - are
na, which belonged to the orga nizer of

Black can also play now - 7 ... lMrc7.

S.h3 il.hS 9.g4 il.g6

1 0 .cS!?
I was reluctant to play in the "stan

dard" fashion - 1O .liJxg6 hxg6 1l.i.g2,

because I had understood, having in
mind my previous experience against
Dr. Huebner, that in order to win
against him I had to play definitely
in a non-standard way, not anti-posi
tionally, though . . .

183

Dreev-Huebner, Essen 20 0 0

1 0 'lMc7 H.g5 lOg8

In the game Calderin - Rausis,

Elista 1998, there fonowed : ll . . .lOfd7
12.lOxg6 hxg6 13.f4 b6 14.cxb6 axb6
IS.1I.d2 cS 16.1I.g2 ttJc6 17.ttJbS \!;\rb7
18.e4 and White had the initiative. It
seems to me however, that the move
lS ... cS is too risky and it is also incon
ceivable why White must play 13.f4 in
the first place. In case my opponent
had played ll ... ttJfd7, then I had in
mind the line: 12.ttJxg6 hxg6 13.e4 ! ?
b6 14.cxb6 axb6 lS.!g2 and White
would have slightly better prospects.
Still, the best move for Black here is
1l ... ttJhS, without being afraid for the
future of his knight, because White
cannot capture it in any way. For ex
ample after: 12.ttJxg6 (ar 12.1I.e2 ie7
13.\!;\rdl .hgS) 12 . . . hxg6 13.e4, there
arises a complicated position with
mutual chances.

12.ttJxg6 hxg6 13.e4 1"!h4?!

Evidently, that was the line that Dr.
Huebner had relied on, having played
1l ... ttJg8 before, but it turned out to
be a mistake. It is equally bad for him
to try: 13 . . . ttJe7 14.1I.f4 ! \!;\rxf4 lS.\!;\rxb7
dxe4 16.ttJe2 ! - and White wins. In
stead, he had better continue with:
13 ...b6 (or 13 ... ttJd7) and White would
have remained in a somewhat better
position.

14.exd5 exd5
(diagram)

15.ttJe2!
Following that natural and strong
move, the position should be doubt
lessly evaluated as very unpleasant
for Black. For example after: lS ... ttJe7
16.\!;\rg3 \!;\rxg3 17.fxg3 1"!e4! 18.1I.g2 l"le6
19.94!?, White is clearly better.

15

ttJa6 16. 'lMg3 l"lh8

In case of 16 ... l"le4, Black's rook will

be attacked with tempo and it also
stands in the way of his own pieces.

17.if4 \!;\ra5+
Or 17 ... \!;\rd7 18.h4 ttJe7 19.1I.h3 ttJfS
20. \!;\rd3 l"lxh4 21.0-0-0.

18.i.d2 'lMc7 19.h4 ttJe7 2 0 .ih3

It is much stronger here for White
to follow with 20.\!;\rg4 !. For example:
20 ... ttJfS 21.ttJg3 - and White has the
two bishop advantage.

20

ttJf5 21 .hf5

Or 21.\!;\rd3 !? l"lxh4 22.0- 0-0.

21. gxf5 22.if4 \!;\ra5+?

The right defence for Black here is

22 ...\!;\rd7. Naturally, my position would
have been much better after that any
way, but still that move was obviously
preferable to the one he played in the
game.

23.>!Ifl

184

Game 61

23 i.e7
In case of 23 . . . 0-0-0, White can
follow with 24.g6 !, for example: 24 . . .
!"ld7 2S.gxf7 !"lxf7 (or 2 S. . . d8 26.i.gS
i.e7 27.lLlf4 iLxgS 28.lLle6; 26 . . .c7
27.e3 i.e7 28.lLlg3 ,hgS 29 .hxgS
!"lxh1+ 30.lLlxh1+-) 26.g6 and it is
too bad for Black to continue with
26 ... !"lf6, because of: 27.e8+ d8 28.
xd8+ li>xd8 29.i.gS.

24.g6

not: 34 ... li>g4? 3S.li>e2 xf4 36.iLxf4

li>xhS 37.!"lh1+ li>g6 38.!"lh8+-) 3S.li>e2
lLlxcS! 36.!"lg1 lLle6, I would have to
fight for the draw in an endgame,
which could have arisen in case of:
37.1i>f1 !"lg8 38.lLlxe6 xhS 39.!"lxgS+
xgS 40. lLlxgS li>xgS 4 1.li>e2.
Therefore, after long calculations
and deliberations I played:
31.xf7+ li>xf7 32.hg7 if6 33.

hf6 \toxf6 34.!"lel !"lah8

This move is even better than 24.hS.

24 d8 25.h5 \!!Id 7 26.gxf7+
..

li>xf7 27.g6+ li>g8 28.h6 !"lh7 29.

i.e5 e8
White would have countered 29 ...
i.f8?, with 30.xh7+.
3 0 . xf5 f7
I saw here that Black was losing
immediately after: 3 0... !"lxh6 31.!"lxh6
gxh6 H3-3a 32 .g4+ i.gS 33.f4.

35. !"lh3? !

Frankly speaking, I had considered the move played by my opponent

as impossible, because of the queensacrifice - 31.xh7+ li>xh7 32.hxg7+
li>g6 33.lLlf4+ li>gS? 34.li>e2. Later,
after I had lost plenty of time calculating variations, I understood that it
would not work, because instead of
33 . . . li>gS?, Black could play 33 . . . li>fS
and after: 34.!"lhS+ i.gS (But naturally

Now, I made a serious mistake,

having lost a lot of time on calculating
the possible queen-sacrifice on move
31. Instead of the move in the game, I
had better play 3S.lLlf4 . For example:
3S ... !"lxh6 (Or 3S ... lLlc7 36.lLlhS+! li>f7
37.!"lh3 !"lxh6 38.!"lf3+ li>g6 39.!"lg3 + ! ;
3 6. . .li>g6 37.!"le3 and White's attack
is victorious.) 36.!"le6+ \togS 37.!"lhxh6
!!xh6 38.l';xh6 \toxh6 39.lLle6 b6 (Or
39 ... li>g6 40.lLld8 li>fS 4l.f3 ! lLlb4 42.
li>e2 ! - 42.lLlxb7? lLlc2 ! - 42 . . . lLlxa2
43.lLlxb7 and White must be winning.)
40.lLld8 lLlb8 (or 40 . . .bxcS 41.lLlxc6
cxd4 42.li>e2) 41.b4 bxcS (or 41 . . .li>gS
42.bS cxbS 43.c6 lLla6 44.lLle6+ - ;
4l...bS 4 2.lLlf7+ li>g6 43.lLleS+ li>fS
44.f3 +-) 42.dxcS li>gS 43.bS cxbS 44.
c6 lLla6 4S.lLle6+-

Dreev-Huebner, Essen 20 0 0

35 .. Jxh6 36.m'3+ g5 37.tilg3

l"lf6 38.l"le5+ g6 39.l"lb3 l"lh2 4 0 .
l"le2 l"lf7
It seems interesting, but it is hardly
advisable for Black to try: 4 0 . . . tilc7
4U:'lxb7 lLle6 4 2.l"ld2! ? 1"lh4 43.l"lxa7
tilxd4 44.1"la4.
Here, the time-trouble was over
and I understood that I would have
serious problems to materialize my
extra pawn . . .

41.gl l"lh4 42.l"le6+ h7 43.

tile2 l"lg7+ 44. l"lg3 l"lf7 45.l"lee3

185

52 ... l"lg6+?!
It is better for Black to play: 52 ...
lLlxa2 53.dxc5 (or 53.l"lxb6?! 1"lxb6
54.lLlxb6 cxd4 55.lLlxd5 g5 56.f4+
g4 ! ) 53 ...bxc5 54.lLlxc5, but White
preserves good winning chances in
that case too.
53. f3 tilxa2 54.dxc5 bxc5 55.

lLlxc5 l"lc6 56.tild3?!

The move 56.l"lb5 was much sim
pler.

56 ... tilc1 57.tilxc1 l"lxc1 58.e3

58 ... !k4?
I was planning to exchange the
rooks, so my opponent had to try to
organize some active counterplay.

45 ... b6! 46.cxb6 axb6 47.l"le6

I:!h6 48.l"lxh6+ xh6 49.g2 c5
5 0 .l"lb3
Or 50.f4 ! ? and if 50 . . .cxd4 51.l"ld3.

50 ... l"lf6 51.lLlc3?!

It is better for White to play 5l.f4.

51... lLlb4?
51...c4 !

52.tila4
Now, I had seen that after: 52.a3
cxd4 53.lLla4 lLlc2 54.lLlxb6 d3 55.lLlxd5
d2 56.lLlc3 l"ld6 57.lLldl l"le6 58. Elc3,
it looked like I was winning, but I
thought that was too risky, so I did not
play like that ...

The right defence for Black here

is 58 . . . l"lc2 ! , preventing the move
e3-d4. Now, White has the choice
between 59.l"lb8, with the idea to ad
vance the b-pawn - 59.l"lb5 'it>g6 60.b3
and the move 59.'it>d4; nevertheless
Black had some practical chances to
save the game in all these lines.

59.l"lb5 l"le4+ 6 0 .'it>d3 1"lf4 61.

l"lxd5 l"lxf2 62.b4 g6 63.l"le5 'it>f6
64.l"lel l- 0
I have remembered that tourna
ment not only because I managed to
share 1-3 place in it, having played
rather well indeed and to take second
place in the carting-competition, but
also with something that happened
on my way home ...

Game 62

186

The point was that the closing cer

emony of the Essen tournament was
quite unusual. There was a concert,
as a part of the program, of a bass
vocalist and that was grandmaster
Emil Sutovsky. I had listened to his
performances before (for example at
the Hastings tournament that same
year, but the audience there were
quite minimal.. .). Here, having a
wonderful piano-player to accompa
ny his singing, Emil demonstrated his
brilliant musical talent and the pub
lic were just delirious with pleasure.
I was so thrilled with his wonderful
interpretation of a Don Quihote aria
that on the morning of the next day,
when we were supposed tofty to Mos
cow with Vadim Zvjaginsev, I still
had in my mind the motif"
"That is why, senorita, that is why
The heart of Don Quihote is closed
for others,
Laa-a-aa-a-a-
la ...
So, I made a "long multi-move com
bination, sacrificing plenty of mate
rial... " and that was - having only
two hours left until theftight, Iforgot
in the taxi, which of course went im
mediately from the Dusseldorf air
port back to Essen ... , my bag with my
computer as well as my passport and
airplane ticket too...lt all ended well,
though ...
"

62

.ib7 5.tDc3 d5 6. .ig5 .ie7 7. a4+ c6

8.hf6 hf6 9.cxd5 exd5 1 0 .g3
I played like this for the first time
in my practice.

1 0 ... 0 - 0 11.i.g2 c5?!

I believe that move to be imprecise.
Black clarifies his intentions too early.
It was better for him to try 1l ... 4:ld7, or
1l ... .ie7, followed by f7-fS (V.Korchnoi
played like that. . . ) .

1 2Jdl!
This is the correct reaction! In case
of: 12.0-0 .ic6 13.dl, Black's posi
tion is acceptable.

12

..

tDc6?!

12 ... e7.

13.dxc5 hc3+ 14.bxc3 bxc5 15.

0 - 0 a5?
Sax should have been relying on that
particular move. On the other hand, I
think Black cannot save the game af
ter the move in the text. Instead, he
should have tried 15 ... Ele8 and I would
have faced a choice between: 16.c4 d4
17.e3, or the immediate move 16.e3. I
would have maintained a clear advan
tage in both cases. Possibly, I would
have preferred 16.e3, though . . .

E12
Dreev - Sax

European Club Cup, Neum 2000

l.d4 tDf6 2.c4 e6 3.tDf3 b6 4.a3

16.c2!
That is a very powerful move. Now,
Black has no satisfactory defence

Dreev-Sax, Neu m 20 0 0

against the threat 17.g5; moreover

that his d5-pawn is under attack.

16...h6
In case Black defends his d5-pawn
with 16 . . . e7, then after 17.g5 g6,
White has 18.c4! !"lad8 (following 18. ..
h6 19.h3, White's knight goes to
the f4-square) 19.cxd5 (It is also very
strong for White to play 19.a2!.)
xd5 (or 20 ... xd5?
ixd5 20 . bd5
.
21.e4) 2 1. e4! , threatening !"lxd5
and attacking the c5-pawn.
Sax could have attempted to give
up a pawn and to try to survive in an
endgame, but he obviously did not
like that possibility and he preferred
to fight in the middle game.

17.l'xd5 xa3 18.l'h5!

I admit, I did not see that move im
mediately and instead I calculated the
variations after: 18.c1 xc1 19.!"lxc1
a5 and 18 .d2 a5 19.bl b3, but
I came to the conclusion that Black
can hold the position in both cases.

187
rj;je7 22. xg7 !"lg8, with an unclear po
sition, but then I noticed the impor
tant intermediary move:

19.!"lbl!
Now, the point is that after:

19 ...!"lab8
(that is Black's only move)

2 0 .g5 hxg5 21.h7+ rj;jf8 22.

h8+ rj;je7 23.xg7
and i n case of 23 . . . !"lg8, White fol
lows with: 24.!"lxb7+ ! !"lxb7 25.xg8
!"lbl+ 26.ifl, winning the game af
ter: 26 ... c1 27.xg5+ xg5 28.!"lxgS
rj;jd6 29 .e4, as well as after: 26 ... a1
27.xg5+ rj;jd7 28.d5+ rj;jc7 29.xt7+
rj;jb6 30.rj;jg2 !"lxf1 31.b3+.
My opponent chose to defend in
another fashion:

23 . . .ia8
and after

24.xg5+ rj;jd7 25.d5+ rj;jc7 (if

25 ... rj;je7, then 26.e4+) he resigned in
view of the line 26.xt7+ !"le7 27.f4 +
e5 28.!"lxb8.

18 ... !"lfe8
Following: 18 ... d8 19.g5 f5 20.
hb7 xb7 2 1./tJe6 !U6 2 2 .c7, White
has the advantage.

63

A65
Dreev - Peng Xiaomin

Tan Chin Nam Cup, Beijing 2000

The Cup of Tan Chin Na m, a fa
mous chess-sponsor, was played in
the year 20 0 0 for the sixth time (and
for the second time with my partici
pation). The tournament was already
a category

16

event and it was even

very close to be category 17 (only 7

points short). There was tremendous

I had in mind here to counter

the move in the game with the line:
19.g5 hxg5 20 .h7+ rj;jf8 2 1.h8+

attention in the Chinese media. Hon

orary President of FIDE F. Campomanes visited the tournament after

Game 63

188

an official invitation by the organiz

ers.
The previous year the tournament
was played in Shenjan (I have includ
ed my game against Wang Zilijrom
that tournament in the book) and
there were seven Chinese players
then. This time it was balanced - there
were five hosts andfive guests. Nigel
Short was quite confident at the open
ing ceremony that the Chinese play
ers would dominate in the chess world
after not more than 20 years, but he
also expressed his hope that it would
not happen in the next 10 years. One
of the organizers said in his turn that
he hoped that after the tournament
the rating of the best Chinese players
would improve and the tournament
might be of an even higher category
in the next year's Cup.
The development ofthefight in the
tournament showed that N. Short's
hopes were a bit more justified, since
the European players (V.Bologan,
A.Dreev, N.Short and Al.Onishchuk
shared pt_4th place. It was amazing,
but just like in the previous year in
Shenja n, I came second according to
the tie-break coefficient. Frankly
speaking, the climate there is quite
difficult for Europeans: it is hot and
humid and in addition you have to
endure one of the greatest problems
in Beijing - the smog. It was in fact
much easier in Shenjan the previous
year. The wonderful attitude, howev
er, of the organizers towards the par
ticipants and their kind consideration
compensatedfor all that amply.

1.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3. c3 i.g7

4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.ge2 c5 7.d5

e6 8 .g3 exd5 9.cxd5

9 ... h5
This is a new and quite rare varia
tion of the King's Indian Defence and
I had played it twice in my practice be
fore that game. Black compromises his
kingside pawn-structure considerably
in order to obtain some counterplay
connected with the pawn-advance fl
f5 .

1 0 . xh5 gxh5 11.i.d3 f5 12.

0-0
Black has tried in that position the
move 12 ... ttJa6 too.

12 ... d7
This is a relatively new attempt, but
it is not a novelty. GM Viorel Bologan
had played that quite natural move
against me in the second round of the
same tournament and I had answered
with 13.ttJe2. Following 13 . . . c4! 14.i c2
we agreed to a draw, because I did not
have any opening advantage at all. Af
ter that game I understood that the
maneuver ttJe2 was correct, but it still
needed some preparation. According
ly, I was quite happy when that same
position had arisen once again on the
board, because I had the possibility
to check the correctness of that idea
again in practice.
,

Dreev-Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 20 0 0

13.c2 e5
Now, (just like on the previous
move) it is not good for Black to follow
with 13 .. .f4, due to: 14.tUe2 eS 1S.g3
and White maintains a great advan
tage.
14.e2!

Here, my opponent took a long

time contemplating his decision.
Black's pawn-weaknesses are slowly
becoming a factor, particularly if he
tries the typical idea for similar posi
tions - 14 ...fxe4 lS.xe4 fS 16 ..bfS
l':ixfS 17.tUg3.
The move played by Black is quite
interesting and it deserves an excla
mation mark.
14 ... ygh4!
This is not only an attacking ma
neuver by Black's queen, but he also
protects his weak pawn in the process.
Now, Black is planning fSxe4, followed
by cS-fS. Meanwhile, I am going to
mention that had he played: 14 ... fxe4
lS. .be4 and now lS... YGh4, then White
would have had the powerful argu
ment - 16.ygc2.
15.f4!
Here, White has another possibility
to fight for the advantage.
15... c4

189
In case of lS ... tUg6, White can play
16.exfS and after: 16 ... hf5 (or 16 ... tUe7
17.tUg3) 17 ..bfS l':ixfS 18.g3 d4+
19.i>h1, Black cannot follow with 19 ...
l':ixdS, due to: 20.YGb3 tUe7 21.tUfS.
16. g3 xb2
It is obviously in favour of White
if Black continues with: 16 ...fxe4
17..be4.
17.yge2 YGg4
This is a quite attractive move for
Black.
His other interesting possibility was
17... d3 and here lS.eS! dxeS 19.tUxhS
would have preserved the initiative for
White.
ISJ'lf3

lS h4
Now, in case Black follows with
lS ... tUd3, then after 19.ygxd3 .ba1,
the line: 20.xfS .bfS 21.l':ig3 l:'laeS
22.exfS l':ie1+ 23.i>f2 l:'lxc1 24.l':ixg4+
hxg4 2S.f6 l':ifl 26.YGd2!?, leads to a
clear advantage for White. Black how
ever, has a smart intermediate check
- 19 ...d4+ and after: 20.i>h1 .ba1
21. tUxfS .bfS 22.l':ig3 l':iaeS 23.l':ixg4+
hxg4, he even seizes the initiative, be
cause now White cannot capture efS,
because of the vulnerability of his first
rank. It is equally bad for White to
..

190

Game 63

try: 20 ..te3 kxa1 21.lLlxfS ixfS 22.E1g3

xg3 23.hxg3 E1ae8 and Black can
counter 24. exfS with 24 ... E1xe3. On the
other hand, White has the cold-blood
ed resource 2 0 . @f1, which n eutralizes
Black's tricky check and he maintains
his advantage after: 20 ... a1 21.lLlxfS
S 22.E1g3.
If Black checks immediately - 18 ...
id4+, then 19.ie3 (but not: 19.@h1
lLld3 20.xd3 and Black's abovemen
tioned idea triumphs once again 20 ... a1 etc.) 19 . . .fxe4 (or 19 . . . .be3+
20.xe3 lLlc4 21.c3 and if 2l.. .g7
- 22.eS) 20 . .bd4 exf3 21.gxf3 xf4
22 . .bb2 and White has the edge.

19.e5 dxe5 2 0 .h3!

But n aturally not 20.ixb2?, be
cause of 20 . . . e4; or 20.fxeS?, due to
20 ... d4+.

20

..

g6 2 1.fxe5

21..bb2 e4.
I had expected here White's posi
tion to have been completely winning.
I had seen Black's next move before
hand, but I could not even believe that
it was possible . . .

ing: 23. xh4 xal 24.lLlhS, but it did

not appease me at all. Finally, after I
saw that Black had at his disposal the
intermediate move 23 ... if6, I gave up
that possibility altogether.

23Jbl hg3!?
In case of 23 ... hxg3, I would have
answered quite comfortably with
24.f4.

24 ..tf4
It seemed attractive for White
to play 24.ib2, but after: 24 ... d7
2S.c3 E1ae8, he had no advantage
whatsoever, while following: 26.fug3
hxg3 27.idl (with the idea ihS) Black
had the wonderful resource - 27 . . .f4.

24 ...b6?
Until now my opponent had played
extremely well, but here he made a se
rious blunder. After: 24 ... 4 2S.E1xf4
d6 !?, I would have had some com
pensation, but the outcome of the
game could have gone either way . . .

2 1. . . lLlc4! 22.xc4 he5

25.E1xg3!
Naturally, I did not hesitate too
much ..
.

25 ... hxg3 26J'lb3 f6 27'!'lxg3+

@f7 28.'e2! h4?
Here, I understood that the posi
tion had remained quite unclear just
like before. I was seriously consider-

Now, Black loses immediately. But

even after the only possible defence
- 28 ... d4+ 29.ie3 h4 30.f3 !?,

191

Dreev-Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 20 0 0

he would have great problems and
his attempt to trade the rooks - 30 ...
l"lg8, after: 31..hfS l"lxg3 32.e6+ @e8
33.f7+ @d8 34.M4 e6 3S.dxe6 e7
36.c7!, leads to a victory for White.
29.e5. Black resigned.

vance, but it proved to be quite effec

tive. Here, my adversary was faced
with a dilemma - where to go with
his knight on d7? In case of 9 ... tLlb6, I
would have played: 1O.h3 tLlh6 1 1.c1
eS 12.cS and Black's position would
have been rather uncomfortable.

9 ... c!iJdf6 1 0 .h3

64

A81
Dreev - Zhang Zhong

Tan Chin Nam Cup, Beijing 2000

1.d4 f5 2.g3 c!iJf6 3.g2 g6 4.c!iJf3

.tg7 5. 0- 0 0 - 0 6.b3 d6 7.b2
c!iJg4!?
The idea behind that move is rather
simple - Black wishes to prepare the
pawn-advance e7-eS, preventing in
the process White's possibility d4-dS.
Zhang Zhong had played like that be
fore and I did not mind entering a po
sition of that type at all.

8.c4 c!iJd7
My opponent played rather quickly
until that moment. I had to spend a
lot of time in order to find the correct
continuation.

9.c!iJg5!

Naturally, it is not good for White to

follow with: 1O .dS? eS! 1 1 . dxe6 tLlxh2.
10 c!iJh6 H.d5 c!iJt7 12.c!iJxf7
l"lxf7
Now, we can conclude: Black has
failed to push e7-eS; accordingly the
opening stage has ended in favour of
White.
..

13.c!iJd2 d7 14.c!iJf3
Black would have liked to advance
c7-c6, but he could not do that imme
diately, because of: IS.dxc6 bxc6 (It is
not good for Black to play 15 ... bc6,
due to 16.tLlgS! .) 16.cS! dS 17.b4 and
White's advantage is obvious. There
fore, Zhang Zhong preferred the pas
sive defence:
14 ... l"lfS
although he should have consid
ered the possibility 14 ... aS, in order to
impede White's pawn-advance b2-b4.

15.b4 c6?!
That was an imprecision. We agreed
after the game with my partner that
Black's best chance had been: IS ... aS
16.a3 c6, but even then White would
have been slightly better.

16.dxc6 bxc6
This is possibly not the best choice
either. After: 16 ...xc6 17.b3 e8
18.a4, Black is of course worse, but
that was definitely the least of evils.
This was the only way for me to
prevent Black's thematic pawn-ad-

17.c5 1Wb8
Black has no more good moves; in

192

Game 65

case of 17 ... dS 18.ie5, followed by a2a4 and b4-bS, his position remains a
sorry sight. It is only slightly better for
him to defend with: 17. . . dxc5 18.bxc5
and after :gb8, White can always coun
ter with .te5.

18.cxd6 exd6
Or 18 ... xb4 19.dxe7 xe7 20.tLle5
and Black has great problems.

gS and White's queen has no good

square to retreat to. The following
line would not work for White either:
22.ixf6 ixf6 23.xd6 :gxe2 2Ulfl
ig7 25.xd7? :gd8 and his queen gets
trapped.

22.e3
This solid stabilizing move annihi
lates Black's hopes of organizing some
counterplay.

22... d5?
That is Black's decisive mistake.
His last practical chance was to try
22 . . . tLle4, but the evaluation of the
position after: 23.ixg7 li>xg7 24.a4 is
crystal clear in favour of White.

23.tLle5
White is threatening 24.tLlxd7 and
25.:gxc6.

23 .. Je6
19Jbl!
This is a strong move. It seemed
attractive for me to try 19.b3+, but
the queen had to keep under con
trol Black's d6-pawn. Additionally,
the move in the game is not a loss of
time, because Black now must defend
against the threat b4-bS.

19

Black loses too after: 23 ... :ge7 24.

tLlxc6 ixc6 25.ixf6 ixf6 26.:gxc6. He
could have only prolonged his resis
tance with the move 23 . . . ad8.

24.tLlxd7 tLlxd7

a6 2 0 .d3 e8?!

Black had better try 20 . . . tLle4.

21.fc).!
White is threatening now 22.tLld4.

21. .. b6
Once again, Black had to consider:
21.. .tLle4 2 2 .ixg7 li>xg7 23.d4+ li>g8,
with some chances for a successful de
fence.
Black's move in the game conceals
a trap : if now 2 2.xd6, then not: 22 ...
xf2+ ? 23.li>xf2 tLle4+ 24.li>gl tLlxd6
25.ixg7 li>xg7 26.:gdl and White wins,
but: 22 . . . tLle4! 23.id4 d8 24.f4

25Jxc6! xc6 26.hd5 d6 27.

hg7 tLlb6
Or 27 ... li>xg7 28.c3+ .

28.he6+ xe6 29 .tal xa2

30 .dl c4 31.d6. Black re

signed.

193

van Wely-Dreev, New Delhi 2 0 0 0

D46

65
van Wely - Dreev
FIDE World Chess Ch (k. 0.)
New Delhi 2000

Vlic7. This move was considered to be

quite reliable, but after: 12.ltJe4 ItJxe4
13.Vlixe4 ItJf6 14.Vlih4 cxd4 lS.id3! ,
White sacrificed a pawn and he ob
tained a powerful. initiative. I had all
this in mind, while I was preparing for
that game, but then I thought "Why
not simply capture cxd4?"

This is the first game of the third

round of the knock-out stage of the
World Championship.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.e3
1l ... cxd4 12.exd4
e6 5.lLlf3 lLlbd7 6.c2 d6 7.d3
The move 12 .!1xd4 seems to be
rather unnatural for White.
0 - 0 8 . 0 - 0 dxc4 9 ..b:c4 a6
12 ... c7 13.d3 b 6 14.e3! b7
This is the key-move for the entire
variation and its purpose is to prepare 15.e2
b7-bS and to follow that with c6-cS.
The immediate move 9 . . . bS is also
possible. There is some difference be
tween these two lines, though; some
times after 9 ... a6, Black plays c6-cS
without the preliminary move b7-bS.
That is exactly what happened in our
game.

1 0 .a4
White prevents the move b7-bS.
His other possibility is: 1O .!1dl bS 11.
ie2 etc.

10

..

c5 1 U'ldl

That is an interesting moment. My

opponent had already tested that po
sition before against Garry Kasparov
in a game played on the Internet. Gar
ry continued in that game with 11 ...

White has found an interesting

possibility not to lose tempi for the
defence of his h2-pawn. Now, if Black
is too greedy: ls ... ixf3 16.Vlixf3 ixh2+
17.q;,hl id6, then after 18.g3 (with the
idea to follow with I!Ig2, !1hl etc.), it
becomes evident that the dominance
over the h-file, the two bishop ad
vantage and the passive placement of
Black's pieces more than compensate
White's sacrificed pawn. Black's posi
tion is cramped, so he cannot remove
his rook away from the a8-square,
because his a6-pawn would be hang
ing. Therefore, I think my next move
is quite logical.

15 ... lLld5!? 16.lLle4?!

White surrenders the initiative to

194

Game 65

Black with his last move. The correct

24.itJd4 is in favour of White.) 22. itJd4

decision for him would have been

11*'g6 23.h5 ! , followed by 24.itJd6. It

16J'lacl! and Black can choose be

would be bad for White to try: 20 .itJe5

tween: 16... itJxc3, 16 ... itJxe3, or 16... %Vb8.

lLlxe5 21.dxe5, due to 2 1 . . .!'ladS, with

16 tOf4! 17 .hf4 .hf4 18.g3 ih6

White possibly thought that he can

the idea to follow with !'ld3.

20 ... 11*'d5!

somehow exploit the unusual place

After that move, it becomes clear

ment of the bishop on the h 6-square.

that White should be on the defence

One of his bishops is already absent

from now on.

however, moreover his rook cannot

21 .ibl gac8 22.gel gfd8 23.

tOeg5 hg5 24.hxg5 tOfS 25.ge3?!

go to cl and his d4-pawn is isolated.

All these factors might lead to serious

It is understandable that White

fu

wishes to get rid of Black's pressure

problems for White in the nearest

ture.

along the long as-hI diagonal and to

19.h4?!

preserve the queens on the board at

White does not even feel the dan

the same time. He has no time for that,

ger. He should not have wasted time

however . Instead, he had to contin

on scaring crows. He had instead to

ue with: 25 . .ie4 11*'xe4 26.11*'xe4 .be4

anticipate the move that Black played

in the game, so it deserved attention

worse endgame.

27.!'lxe4, complying with a slightly

for him to try 19.!'la3.

25 ... 11*'c4!
19 c6!
..

This move emphasizes the vulner

This move seems to be more reli

able than:

25 . . . 11*'a5 ! ? 26 . .ie4 xe4

ability of the as-hI diagonal, which

27.!'lxe4 11*'xa4 2S.d5; moreover that I

arose as a result of the move g2-g3.

had in mind that there were plenty of

Black is now threatening fl-f5 .

moves left to the first time-control.

2 0 .ga3
White prevents the immediate ad
vance 20 .. .f5, because he can coun
ter that with: 21. d5 ! exd5 (The line:
2l.. .xd5 22 ..ic2 fxe4 23.!'lxd5 exd5

26.11*'xc4
Otherwise White loses one of his
pawns.

26 gxc4 27.b3 gb4 28.id3!

I have to admit that Loek was play.

195

van Wely-Dreev, New Delhi 20 0 0

ing quite enterprisingly! He found an
interesting possibility to continue the
fight.

2S ... a5
But not 28 .. J':'lxb3?? 29 .. bh7+.

29.ie4 ixf3 3 0 .gxf3 gxd4

Now, Black has an extra pawn, but
his rook is stalemated. Frankly speak
ing, I entered that position quite de
liberately, since I considered that I
would easily manage to free my rook
from its exile.

31.gf4!
That is the only way to enable White
to occupy the d-file.

31

gd6 32.gee4 gdl+!

This i s an important fine point! Af

ter: 32 . . . ltJg6 33.Eld4 Elxd4 34.1:'lxd4,
White's king is better placed on g 1
than on the h2-square. That i s why the
intermediate check is so essential, just
like every minute detail in chess!

3S.gb7+?!
The idea to capture the pawn with a
check was basically incorrect. He had
better continue with 38.ib5 and after:
38 ... ltJf3+ 39.Wg2 1tJxgS 40.Elxb6 Elxb3
4Ula6, it would be still far from clear,
because White's a-pawn would have
remained to be very powerful.

3S l!ld6 39.ib5 l'!xb3 4 0 .f4

..

Now, the line: 40.1:'lxb6+ wc5

4U'la6, loses for White, due to: 41...
fub5 42.axb5 wxb5 43.Ela7 a4 44.f4
ItJc6.

40

..

lLlf3+

After: 40 ... Elxb5 41.axb5 ItJc4 42 .

fuf7 a4 43.Elxg7 a3 44.Elg8! (or 44.
Elxh 7 a2) the position would have been
unclear.

41.l!lg2 lLld4 42.gd7+ l!le5 43.

ge7+ I!ld5 44.ie4+ I!ld6 45.gxt7
ge3 46.ia6

33.l!lh2
It is too bad for White to play
33.g2? ItJg6 and he cannot continue
with 34.Eld4.

33 ltJg6 34.gd4 gxd4 35.gxd4

I!lfS 36.gdS+ l!le7 37.gbS
..

It is weaker for White to try here

37.l"lg8, because of: 37... h6! 38.gh gh 39.
f4 wf6, followed by e6-e5, or ItJg6-e7.

37 lLle5

46

lLlf5? !

The immediate move 46 . . . Elc7 was

stronger for Black. Then White would
have been forced to play 47.ElfS with
some chances for a draw.

47.1!lf2
I had overlooked that move, when I
played 46 . . . tLJf5; accordingly I had just
lost two tempi ...

47 fu:7 4S.gxe7
..

Game

196
The only advantage of the move
46 . . .llJf5 is that now White cannot
avoid the trade of rooks, because after
48. f8 c2+ he loses outright.

48 ... lt>xc7
Now, the position is almost equal . . .

49.d3 g6 5 0 .g4 IlJd6 51.lt>e3

b5 52 .axb5 a4 53.lt>d2
This is the precise defence. White
avoids the line: 53.lt>d4 a3 54.lt>c3
It>b6 55.lt>b3 IlJxb5, since he cannot
continue with: 56.5 gxf5 57.gxf5 exfS
58.hf5, because of 58 . . . llJ d4 +

66

qualifiedfor the liB-final. Veselin To

palov was my opponent there. I won
the first game with White, but then
I lost the second and my adversary
was luckier in the tie-break. I would
like to remind you that V. Anand won
that World Championship.

D43

66
I .Sokolov - Dreev
Dos Hermanas 2001

53 ... lt>b6 54.1t>c1 lt>c5

Or 54 . . .llJxb5 55.f5=

55.lt>b2 e5
That was my only chance to play
for a win. After: 55 . . . lt>d4 56.f1 lt>e3
57.b6 It>xf4 58.lt>a3 It>xg4 59.lt>xa4
It>xg5 60.wb4 1t>f5 61.It>c5 1t>e5 62.d3,
White holds the position.

This game was played in a round

robin tournament in the Spanish city
of Dos Hermanas. That was my first
participation in this traditional tour
nament. That was its eleventh edition
and the event had plenty of strong
players taking pa rt, with approxi
ma tely equal strength. Meanwhile,
the tournament was objectively
much stronger than its "official" cat
egory 16, because the ratings of the
young grandmasters were consider
ably lower than their actual strength
(The World junior champion under
1B
Francisco Va llejo was playing,
as well as, this tournament was the
grandmaster debut of the 14 year-old
Teimur Radjabov.) Miguel Illeskas
had a very low rating at that moment
too, but everybody knew how strong
he really was. At the end, I sharedfirst
place with 5 1/2 out of 9 with grand
master I.Smirin, but I was awarded
the trophy for the winner, because of
my better "Berger" coefficient.
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.1lJf3 llJf6 4.1lJc3
e6 5.g5 h6 6.h4 dxc4 7.e4 g5
8.g3 b5
-

56.lt>a3??
That is a blunder ... White could
have made a draw in a problem-like
fashion with: 56.fxe5 IlJxb5 57.e6 IlJc7
58.e7 <j;ld6 59.e8\:'t[! (or 59 .b5 a3-+)
59 ... llJxe8 60.c4 !

56 ... e4 57.fl IlJxb5 + 58.lYxa4

IlJd4 0-1
After this victory, I was White in
the second game, made a draw and I

197

I.Sokolov-Dreev, Dos Hermanas 20 0 1

We have played the so-called "Anti
- Moscow variation".

9.i.e2 i.b7 l 0 .h4 b4

Black's usual reply here is - 10 ...
g4. At the time our game was played,
the move - 10 ... b4, which leads to an
entirely different type of position, was
relatively new and not well analyzed.
It had the reputation of a variation
in which even the tiniest imprecision
might end up in a disaster for White as
well as for Black.

Capturing that pawn leads to an

advantage for Black here, for example:
17.axb3 a5+ IB.ttJd2 ttJexc5 19.ttJxc5
xb5 2 0.ttJxd7 xd7 21.ttJe4! fie7.

17 ... gxf3 18.c6 i.b4+ 19.i.c3

In case White interposes with his
knight - 19.ttJc3, then after: 19 ... ixc6
20.i.xc6 fxg2 2 Ulg1 ttJxf2 ! ! 22.i.xd7
xd7 23.xd7 xd7 24. xf2 fic5, his
position is lost too.

19 ... hc3+ 2 0 .bxc3 fxg2 21.!lgl

b2! 22.gdl
Or 22 .ttJxb2 ttJec5 ! ?

11. llJ a4
This is of course possible, but the
move - 11.hxg5 is evidently stronger
and it was played against me about a
month later by grandmaster Suat Ata
lik.

1l ... llJxe4 12 .i.e5 gg8 13.\Wc2

This is a novelty. That move is
active indeed, but it is riskier than
the one played in the game Xu Jun
- P.Nielsen, Istanbul 2000, 13.hxg5
hxg5 14.i.xc4.

13 ... c5 14.i.xc4
It seems here much more natu
ral for White to exchange pawns first
with: 14.hxg5 hxg5.

14 g4 15.i.b5+ llJd7 16.dxc5

.

(diagram)

16...b3! 17.d3

2 2 ... xh4! 23.xd7+ f8 24.

d4 bl ! !
The play is forced now and every
tempo counts!

25.gxbl gd8 26.cxb7 gxd4 27.

b8'IW+ gd8 2 8.'lWxa7 'lWh2 29.e2
!ld2+ 3 0 .e3 gg3+! 31.xe4 gg4+
White resigned.

198

Game 67

E81

67
Dreev - Smirin
Dos Hermanas 20 01

l.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 ig7

4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.ge2 a6 7.ie3
bd7 8.Wld2 c5 9.dxc5
That is a rarely played move; nev
ertheless it is quite interesting.

additional space with the standard

move 17. . . c4? ! , because White will
counter that with: 18jk1 b5 19.b3 and
his position is already clearly prefer
able.

17... d7 18.gel Wld6

Or 18 ... a5 !? 19.a4

19.b4! cxb4 2 0 .Wlxb4 %Yb8 21.

0 - 0 ifS 22.%Yb2 ib7 23.a4 a5

9 ... dxc5 l 0 .!Ml Wla5

It seems more restrained for Black
to try 1O ... c7, for example: 11. f4
e6 12.d3 e8 13.f2 f5 14.exf5
gxf5 15.f4 df6 16.ie2 b6 17.if3 Ela7
18.0-0 ib7 19.Wle2 .ixf3 20.Wlxf3 d6
2 1.ic1 liJf7 22.Elfe1 Ele8 23.Ele2 liJd8 liz
Khenkin - Banikas, Bolzano 2000.

11.cl Wlc7 12.d3 b6 13.if4

24.f2!

13 ... e5?!N
This is a very important decision
for Black. Instead, it was possible for
him to try 13 ... Wlb7, as it was played in
the game Luce - Morovic Fernandez,
Copenhagen 1982.

14.ig5 ge8
Black wishes to deploy his knight to
the d4-square via f8-e6.

15.ie2 f8 16.d5 liJxd5 17.cxd5

Now, it becomes evident that Black's
knight will never come to d4 in this
game. Meanwhile, he cannot occupy

With this powerful move White

wishes to redeploy his pieces, placing
them on the ideal squares - the bish
op to b5 and the knight (depending on
circumstances) - to g4 or to the d3square and his positional advantage
will become decisive.
Black's only possible counterplay
here is: 24 ... ic5
but White has the resource:

25.ib5 Wld6 26.h:d7 Wlxd7

199

Dreev-Smirin, Dos Hermanas 2 0 01

27Jxc5! bxcS 28 . .!LJg4 ga6

That is Black's only possibility.

29 . .!LJh6 +
This move is the best for White,
but it is not so pragmatic; therefore I
spent about ten minutes on it, which
left me another ten minutes to the end
of the time-control. The most natu
ral line for White would have been:
29.lLlxeS xa4 30 .xb7 d4+ 31.i>h1
xeS 32.xa6 xgS 33.xaS e3 and
his position would have been objec
tively winning, despite some possible
difficulties in the realization of the ad
vantage.
29 @f8
That is again an only move for
Black. After 29 . . . i>g7, White wins with
30.f4 f6 3l.fxeS+...

3 0 .f4 hd5 31.exd5

I was here in a time-pressure, so I
was reluctant to play the move 31.fxeS,
although I was calculating thorough
ly the variation: 31...ie6 and here
not: 32.lLlxt7 i>g8! (32 ...ixt7 33.e6
d4+ 34.xd4 cxd4 3S.ext7+-; 32 ...
i>g7 33.lLld6, with the idea to counter
33 ... gaa8 with 34.gt7+), but 32.f2 !
ib3 - defending against f6 (32 . . .
d4 33.ie3), 33.e6! 33 ... ixe6 (33 .. .
xe6 34.b2; 33 ... l"1axe6 34.xt7+;
33 ... l"1exe6 34.xcS+ l"led6 3S.eS) 34.
xcS+ d6 (or 34 ... ge7 3S.c3 a7+
36.@h1 i>e8 37.gd1) 3S.c3+31 . f5
(diagram)
..

32.gdl?!
This i s a typical time-pressure mis
take. White was winning easily after
32.b3! and if 32 . . .l"1d6 - then 33.lLlg4.

32 ...xa4

Now,

the

fight

becomes fierce

again.

33.cl gd6 34.h4! b3 3S.al

gxdS 36.gbl
White has lost almost all his pawns,
but his pieces are deployed in the clos
est vicinity to Black's king, so he has a
great advantage.

36 e3+
.

Or 36 ... d3 37.i>h2 ! ?

37.@hl!
If 37.i>h2 l"1d2 38Jlb6 Elxg 2 + ! 39.
i>xg2 e2=

37...d4
37...d3! ?

38.xaS exf4?
This is Black's decisive mistake. GM
Smirin admitted after the game that
he had overlooked in the time-trouble
the fact that White's queen controlled
the e1-square. Meanwhile, he had an
only move - 38 . . . Eld7, enabling him to
prolong his resistance.

Game 68

200

39.lb7! d7 4 0 .xd7 xd7 41.

XCS+ e7

ing that in Bosnia and Herzegovina

chess is regarded as one of the solid
Or 4l...'it>g7 42.c3+ .
connecting threads with the world
society and by organizing this tradi
42.g8 1-0
This endgame i s a n easy win for tional tournament the country wishes
White, because the h8-square is dark, to show its desire to maintain stabil
for example: 42 . . . 'it>xg8 43.xe7 xe7 ity and to be integrated into the Euro
44.e7 h6 4S.'it>gl 'it>f7 46 . .id8 'it>e8 pean system.
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.f3 f6 4.c3
47.ic7 gS 48.hS 'it>f7 49 . .ieS.
e6 S . .igS h6 6 ..ih4 dxc4 7.e4 gS
8.ig3 bs 9.ie2 .ib7 1 0 .h4 b4

D43

68
Atalik

Dreev

Sarajevo 2001

This game was played in the sev

enth round of the traditional round
robin tournament (It has been orga
nized ever since the year 1957! ...J in
Sarajevo. I had been already in Bos
nia and Herzegovina in the autumn
of the year 2 0 0 0 and I took part in
a tournament in the town of Neum,
situa ted at the Adriatic coast. Still,
that was my first visit to the capital
ofBosnia - Sa rajevo. It isjust amaz
ing how popular chess is there. I was
walking in the city and I often saw
people playing with huge chess piec
es directly in the streets. There were
electronic billboards in the pedestri
an zones of the city, informing people
about the participants in the tourna
ment. There were advertisements all
over the city. There were numerous
specta tors in the playing area in the
Concert Hall of the Army Building.
There was a n official reception for
the pa rticipa nts in the tournament by
the state government during the day
off It was emphasized at that meet-

I mentioned already in my com

ments to the game LSokolov - Dreev,
Dos Hermanas 2001, that the usual
reply for Black in that line of the "Anti
Moscow" system is the move - 10 . . .
g4.

1l.hxgS
This is stronger for White than the
move 11.ttJa4, against which Black has
serious arguments at his disposal as
my game against LSokolov showed.
.iy playing the move 11.hxg5, White
is aiming at a direct refutation of the
variation with 1O . . . b4.

1l ... bxc3 12.gx:f6

The subsequent development of
that variation showed that here it is
much stronger for White to follow
with: 12.bxc3 ttJxe4 13 . .ie5 h7 (Black
cannot solve his problems with the

201

Ata lik-Dreev, Sarajevo 2 0 0 1

move 13 . . . ltlxc3, which was played

in the game Beliavsky - Sveshnikov,
Metalska Trgovina 2002, 14.'lNc2 Itlxe2
lS.xe2 Itld7 16.ixh8 hxgS 17Jh7 g4
18.ltleS ItlxeS 19.ixeS 'lNdS. Alexander
Henrkovich played a wrong move with
White here - 20J'lb 1 and after 20 ...
cS, Black equalized. Beliavsky recom
mended later, as the best for White,
the line: 20.l'lah1! c5 21.l'lxf7 %Ye4+
22.'lNxe4 ixe4 23.l'lf4; or 20 ... %Yxg2
2U'lxf7! 'lNxh1 22.'1'g6+-) 14.'lNb1 'lNaS
lS.ltld2 ! and after this move, which was
played by grandmaster D.Rogozenko
against A.Filipenko (Internet, 2001),
it can be said that the entire variation
with 10 ... b4 was doomed to oblivion.
The game continued with: lS .. .fS (Or
lS ... 'lNxc3 16.0-0; lS . . . ltlxd2 16.'lNxb7
%Yxc3 17.'lNc8+ e7 18.f6+ d6 19.
'lNd8+ Itld7 20.ieS+ dS 21.'lNxd7+
e4 22.'lNxc6+ fS 23JMl.) 16.gxf6 cS
17.ltlxe4 ixe4 18.ihS+ d8 19.'lNxe4
'lNxc3+ 20.e2+-

12

cxb2 13.l'lbl %Ya5+ 14.ltld2

Or 14.f1 c3 lS.ltleS a6!

14 c3 15. 0 - 0 .ia6 16.ltlb3

In the game Yuferov - Sveshnikov,

St Petersburg 2000, there followed:
16.ltlc4 'lNxa2 17.ltle3 - and the game
was rather unclear.

16 ...%Yxa2 17.li)c5 ib5 18.%Yc2

%Ya3
That is the best reply for Black. It
would not work for him to play the
natural line: 18. .. ixcS 19.dxcS 'lNa4,
because of: 20.'lNxc3 ixe2 2l.%Yd2!
and White would capture Black's su
per-important c3-pawn and later he
would also regain his bishop thanks to
the threat 'lNd6.

19.1'lfdl l'lg8!

This is an important resource for

Black. Now, White must consider the
possible exchange sacrifice - l'lxg3.
It was not so easy for me to decide to
play that move from the point of view
of psychology, since I was losing my
castling rights. Still, the rook was my
only piece that I could have brought
into action at that moment. I was far
from sure that my king would be com
fortable in the centre, but I knew that
it would not be so easy for my oppo
nent to exploit that effectively. For
example, White would not be able to
push d4-dS anytime soon, because of
the placement of the knight on the cS
square.
In case of 20.ieS, Black can follow
with 20 ... l'lgS. It seemed to me during
the game that White's best possibility
was - 20 .if4, but I was planning to
counter that with 20 . . . l'lg6, provoking
my opponent to play 21.eS, after which
he would have problems to advance
d4-d5 ever.
Still, White captures:

2 0 .hb5
and he forces the issue. This move
looks anti-positional, because Black
now has in addition a passed pawn
and his knight obtains access to the
c6-square. Suat intended to rely en -

Game 69

202
tirely on dynamic factors, but he ig
nored some specific nuances of the
position.

2 0 ... cxb5 21.e2 b4

That move is much stronger than
21...a6, since now I have the addition
al threat - c4 .

22.c!oxe6
There is nothing else to recom
mend to White.

22 ...c4!
This is the most precise reaction
for Black. It was quite possible that
the line: 22 ... fxe6 23.hS+ d8 24.dS
eS, was also very good, but similar
complications were more to the taste
of the computer and much less to my
liking...

23.tOc7+ d8 24.h5
Naturally, 24.c2 was much bet
ter here for White, but I had plenty
of attractive possibilities in that case
too. For example: 24 ... liJc6 2S.liJxbS
(or 2S. liJxa8 liJb4) 2S . . . E:xg3!? 26.fxg3
xbS 27.xc3 E:b8; o r 24 . . . E:xg3 (This
move looks even more powerful.)
2S.liJxa8 E:g6 and Black's knight goes
to the b4-square.

24... E:g5 25.3 E:xg3 26.xg3

xc7 27.g8 tOd7 28.xf7 c4
Once again, this move with the

queen to the c4-square is the most ac

curate for Black.
29.d5 xe4. White resigned. In
case of 30.E:el, Black plays 30 ... c2,
while after 3 0. e6, he wins with: 30 ...
xb1 31.E:xbl c2 3 2.el E:c8.

We shared a place in the final

standings in the tournament once
again with I.Smirin, just like we did
a month ago in Dos Hermanas. This
time we had 5 1/2 points too, which
proved to be sufficient to tie jor first
place in Spain...Here, in Sa rajevo
however, we only tied for 3rd - 4th
place...Kiril Georgiev was the winner
with 6 1/2 points, while Veselin To
pa/ov was second, half a point behind
him.

A65

69
Dreev - Tkachiev

Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shanghai 2001

l.d4 tOf6 2.c4 g6 3.tOc3 ,tg7 4.

e4 d6 5.3 0 - 0 6.tOge2 c5 7.d5 e6
8.tOg3 exd5 9.cxd5 h5 1 0 .,te2 h4
1l.tOfl tOh7 12.,te3 f5 13.exf5
We had almost the same position,
except with the inclusion of the moves
a2-a4 and a7-a6, in our second addi
tional game with Topalov (New Delhi,
2 0 00). There followed: (Accordingly,
the numbers of the moves are in
creased by one... ) 14 . . . gxfS lS.,tf4 liJd7
16.ixd6 E:e8 17.d2 and after some
unbelievable developments I even
managed to win that game ... GM Tka
chiev however, has an exquisite feel
ing for the nuances of the \!ling's In
dian Defence and he finds a new idea,

Dreev-Tkachiev, Shanghai 20 01
based on the fact that both a-pawns
have not been touched yet.

13 .bf5 14.if2 b5!

..

Now, you can see the difference.

This move would have been impossible
with pawns on a4 and a6 and White
would have then an indisputable ad
vantage after the transfer of the knight
to the e3-square. Black is threaten
ing now bS-b4. In case of: IS.liJe3? !
b4 16.liJa4? ! (It is better for White to
play here 16. liJxfS.) 16 ... id7 17.liJc4,
it is good for Black to follow with 17 . . .
\1;\re7!? (It i s quite dubious for him to
try: 17 ... \1;\reB?! IB.liJxd6 ixa4 19.liJxeB
ixdl 2 0 . liJxg7 ixe2 21.liJe6, but he
can consider instead 17 .. JeB!? ) and
after 18.Wfl, White would be in a criti
cal situation after: IB . . .h3 19.93 liJgS.
The position following: IS.ixb5
\1;\ra5 16.ie2 ixc3+ (or 16 .. J''1eB 17.
\1;\rd2) 17.bxc3 \1;\rxc3+ 1B.d2 ic2 19.
c1 ixd1 20.xc3 ixe2 21.Wxe2 liJa6,
should be evaluated as rather unclear,
because of the vulnerability of the d5pawn, therefore I chose:

15.a3
although that might look like a
compromise on White's part.

15 a6
.

It is not advisable for Black to

continue with: IS ... b4 16.a'Xb4 ab4

17.a4.

16.liJe3 liJd7

Now, White can already push:

17.g4!
and Black is forced to capture en
passant:

17 ...hxg3 18.hxg3 c4 19.liJxf5

Of course not 19.94, due to 19 ...
id3.
19 gxf5
In case of: 19 ... xfS 20.f4, the
vulnerability of the light squares in
Black's camp becomes worrisome.
..

2 0 .wfl \1;\rf6? !
This natural move leads to consid
erable difficulties for Black, since now
he has no access to the f6-square with
his knights. He had better play 20 . . .
\1;\re7!?, or 20 . . . \1;\ra5 !?

21.f4!
That useful move fixes Black's fS
pawn and it creates a threat, which
is far from obvious and small wonder
Vlad overlooked it. . .

21. . . ac8? !
Black has already great problems.
He prepares liJcS with his last move,
because after the immediate 21...c5,
Tkachiev naturally would have never
liked the line: 22 .ixc5 dxc5 23.d6. In

Game 69

204
case of 21..J''lfe8 (defending against
ixc4) it is good for White to contin
ue with 22.'?Nc2, threatening l"lhS. It
seems more logical for Black to follow
with: 2l...l"lab8, with the idea to play
next a6-aS and bS-b4 and to create
some action on the queenside.White
however, can counter that plan suc
cessfully too, for example: 22.'it>g2 as
23.'?Nc2 b4 24.axb4 axb4 2S.ltJa4 c3
26.bxc3 bxc3 27.l"lac1 l"lfc8 (or 27...
l"lbc8 28.bS; 27...'?Nfl 28.ltJxc3! l"lfc8
29.hS '?Nf6 30.'?Ne2) 28.l"lhS and he
maintains his advantage.

play.My opponent thought quite jus

tifiably that after 24.cll e 2!? his posi
tion would have been rather difficult,
but the move that I played in the game
was at least that strong too...

24... l"lxb2 25.'?Nxh7+ 'it>f7

Unfortunately, there was no checkmate in sight - 26.l"le6 '?Nxc3.

26.'?Nh5+
Or 26.l:l:e6 '?Nxc3.

26... 'it>gS
Of course not: 26...'?Ng6? 27.l:l:e7+-

27.cll d l!
This is a very important move for
White, because now the knight joins
This move enables Black to orga the action via the e3-square.
nize some counterplay along the b
It is too bad for Black to play 27...
file; otherwise he would not have that l"lbl, because of 28.l"le6 (White can
possibility after his other lines.
also try here the simple move 28.'it>g2;
23.'?Nh5 l:l:bS.
while in case of: 28..id4 '?Nxd4 29.'?Nh7+
Vlad admitted after the game that 'i!ifl 30.'?NxfS+ cll f6 31.'?Nxbl '?NxdS, he
he had still hoped that his mistake would have lost all his advantage.)
would not have such catastrophic con 28 ...'?Na1 29.'?Nh7+ 'it>fl 30.'?NxfS + 'it>g8
sequences.I managed to find a clear 31.'?Nh7+ 'it>fl 32.'it>g2+- and Black
cut plan to obtain an overwhelming cannot capture White's knight: 32...
advantage.
l"lxdl 33.'?NhS+, while in case of 32 ...
24.l"lel
cllf6, White wins with: 33.l"lxf6+ 'it>xf6
I could have won a second pawn 34.
'?Ne4, as well as with: 33.l"le7+ 'it>xe7
with: 24.'?Nxh7+ 'i!ifl 2S.l:l:hS l"lh8 26. 34.'?Nxg7+ l"lfl 3S.l"lel+.
'?NxfS '?NxfS 27J'MS+ 'it>g6 28.l"lgS+ 'it>fl,
27. . . l"ld2 2S.ltJe3
but Black would have some counterIt is also possible for White to play

22 .hc4! bxc4

205

Dreev-Tkachiev, Shanghai 20 01
2BJe6 and after: 2B ... al 29.h7+
'it>f7 30.xf5+ 'it>gB 31.h7+ 'it>f7 32.
'it>g2 the position is winning for him.
Black must also consider the possibil
ity 2B ... c3 !, but after: 29.iel c2 (He
can also try the queen-sacrifice: 29 . . .
xd5! ? 30.xf6 /{Jxf6 31.e2 i!eS.) 30.
d2 cxdl+ 31.xdl d4 3 2.xd6
/{Jf6. his position would have been
hardly better than the one he had in
the game.

30 ... !!b5 31.!!dl

It was even stronger for White to
play immediately 31.a4, followed by
d5.

31 d5
..

Or 3l...ifB?! 32 .id4.

32.a4
Naturally, it would not work for
White to continue with 32 .xd5?, be
cause of 32 . . . c6.

32 ... dxc4
Black is now forced to give up the
exchange; otherwise the game would
be over after he loses his d-pawn.

33.axb5 axb5 34.b7! e6

2S

l:U7?!

Black played that natural move,

overlooking the possibility - 2 B ... c3 !,
after which strangely enough White
does not achieve anything with the
straightforward approach: 29.h7+
'it>f7 30./{Jxf5 hB 31.i!e7+ (31./{Jh6+
MB 32 .e4 /{Je5 33.h5 xh6 34.f5
hl+) 31 ... MB 32.eB+ 'it>xeB 33.
/{Jxg7+ xg7 34.xhB+ xhB 35.
xhB+ 'it>e7. He has however, the move
29.g4 and after: 29 . . .fxg4 30.h7+ 'it>f7
31./{Jxg4 xf2+ 32./{Jxf2 hB 33.e4
/{Jc5 34.e3, White is still better, but
of course it would be too early to talk
about victory.

29. /{Jxc4 !!xd5 30 .f3!

Now, Black's rook is so misplaced
that White wins tempi for an impor
tant regrouping of his forces.

35.!!el!
That is more precise than the im
mediate move 35.xb5.
35 d6 36.xb5 c3 37.c4
..

/{Jf6
Black is trying to obtain some coun
terplay at the price of a pawn.

38.cS+ !!f8 39.xf5 a6+ 4 0 .

'it>gl !!cS 41.c2 c6.
This move allows White to inflict a
deadly blow. Black would have more
practical chances if he had defended
with 4l...c4. but White would have
countered that with 42.h4! , followed
by f4-f5.

42.id4 d5 43.1xf6 1xf6 44.

Game 70

206

ffg6+ .ig7 45.13eS+ 13xeS 46.ffxeS+

.if8 47.ffg6+ .ig7 4S.tieS+ .if8 49.
13h5!
Now, Black is already helpless.
49 ... ffd4+ 5 0 .'it?g2. Black re
signed.

A46

70
Dreev - Zhang Zhong

Tan Chin Nam Cup, Shanghai 2 0 01

This game isfrom the 7'h Cup - Tan

Chin Nam.
l.d4 f6 2.fj e6 3 .ig5

I wanted that day to go away from

the most fashionable opening lines . . .
The Torre Attack is an infrequent
guest of the contemporary tourna
ments. Naturally, it possesses its own
theory and fine points. It is interest
ing to quote here the notes that Rich
ard Reti made more than 70 years
ago about the move 3 . .igS, which had
been played by Carlos Torre - " ... this
is not an attempt by White to take the
advantage in the centre, but it is just
a solid piece development...That set
up by White does not guarantee him
any real advantages . . . his excellent
development provides him with the
possibility to inflict a mortal strike, in
case the opponent makes even a slight
mistake . . . " (R. Reti "Ein Lehrbuch des
Schachspiels")

3 c5 4.e3 c6 5.bd2 b6

My opponent is playing in the

opening a bit carelessly. As a result,
I had the possibility to change radi
cally the contours of the game, which
was quite rare for that type of posi
tions.

6.e4!?
As usual, the game develops in the

following fashion here: 6.td3 te7

7.0-0 .ib7 8.c3, or 6.c3 .ib7 7. .id3
cxd4 8.exd4.

6 ....ie7
Black had tried, in one of the quite
rarely played games in this variation,
the move - 6 . . . cxd4 (Xu Yang - Enh
bat, Sofia 1994), but White could have
answered with the logical capture
- 7.exd4!?

7 .ixf6 gxf6
.

Taking with the bishop on f6 is in

favour of White after: 7. . . .ixf6 8 .dS!
b4 (In case of 8 . . . exdS, White has
the pleasant choice between: 9.ffxdS
0-0 10. 0 -0-0 and another line,
which might be even better: 9.d6+
'it?e7 1O.ffxdS.) 9 . dxe6 fxe6 1O.c3 iLlc6
1l.iLld6 + . The other possible capture
- 9 . . . dxe6 10.c3 iLldS (or lO . . . ffxdl+
lUlxdl iLlc6 12 . .ibS .id7 13.iLld6+ rtle7
14. iLlxf7) 1l.tbS+ td7 12.ffa4, leads to
a superior position for White as well.

S.d5 b4
I spent a lot of time on the clock
here. The move 9.d6 seemed to me to
be too optimistic! I considered also
9.iLlc3, but I understood that White
would fail to establish a complete con
trol over the dS-square, for example:

Dreev-Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2 0 01

2 07

9 ...b7 1O.c4 (or 10.e4 fS) 1O ... bS.

Therefore:
9.c4 f5

13 fxe4 14 .b:e4 f5 15.d3

0-0 16.'fYc2 'fYd7
.

Or 16 ... exdS!? 17.liJxfS (17.cxdS

d7) 17 ...dxc4 18.xc4+ mh8.

17.dxe6 'fYxe6+ 18.f1 'fYf7 19.

gel d8
This move is practically forced.

Here, I had two probably equal in

value possibilities to retreat with my
knight - to c3, or to g3. In fact, it was
far from obvious, which one was bet
ter . . . After the retreat to the c3-square;
the knight would have solidified my
position, while coming to g3 would
enable me to bring my knight into the
attack later. The move 1O.liJg3 is a bit
risky from the positional point of view,
because the knight there has practical
ly no free squares to go to; meanwhile
Black has the bishop pair! On the oth
er hand, I had already succeeded in
compromising Black's pawn-structure
on the kingside; while his knight on b4
is quite misplaced too . . . After some de
liberations I played:

1 0 .liJg3 d6 11.a3 liJa6 12.d3

liJc7 13.e4!?
I had a difficult choice once again.
It would have been a wrong deci
sion to play primitively, by simply
castling: 13.0-0 hS!? 14.dxe6 fxe6
lS.e4 f4 16.liJe2 eS; but I could have
tried instead to capture on e6 at first:
13.dxe6!? fxe6 14.e4 f4 1S.liJhS eS
16.liJg7+.

2 0 .h4
That is an important resource
for White! Now Black has to defend
against the threat liJgS.

20

..

h6 21.h5

I already have the possibility to

consider the maneuver liJf3-h4.

21 d7

It seemed to me that the line:

22.liJh4 hh4 23.l3xh4 l3ae8 24.l3xe8
liJxe8, was too primitive, so I contin
ued with:

22.'fYd2!
This move is rather unpleasant for
my opponent now, because in case he
tries to protect his h6-pawn, then my
queen comes to the f4-square with
tempo, attacking Black's d6-pawn.
He is presently forced to continue
with:

22

..

f4 23.liJe4 e7

After 23 . . . liJe8, I had a simple move

- 24.liJh4, but also I had the interest
ing tactical possibility: 24.liJxcS ! ? bxc5

Game 70

208
2S.ie4 0,c7 (or 2S ... xc4+ 26.c;tigl)
26.xd6.

24.0,h4 .ixh4 2S.lW14

White's rook joins in the action
now.

2S .. Jad8
That is a logical try. Zhang Zhong
is preparing the move d6-dS, which
would not have worked immediately,
because of: 2S . . . dS 26.cxdS xdS (or
26 . . . 0,xdS 27.0,d6 f6 28.i.c4 xh4
29.i.xdS+ I!ih8 30.i.xa8 E:xa8 31.0,f7+
I!ig7 32.xd7 hl+ 33.c;tie2 xhS+
34.l!id2 xf7 3Sj'le7+-) 27.0,d6 gS
28.i.c4+.

26.g3!
But not 26.0,xd6? f6.

26 ... dS
Now, White's rook has the possibil
ity to act in its full force in the fight for
the f4-square. After the capture 26 ...
fxg3, I would have to choose between
27.xh6 and 27J;!e3 xf2+ 28.0,xf2
E:xf2+ 29.xf2 gxf2 3 0 . 1"1g3+.

27.E:xf4
(diagram)

27... xf4
My opponent decided here to give
up his queen with the idea obviously
to have some practical chances con
nected with exploiting the X-ray d8-

d2 and the possibility to build up a

fortress in the future. In fact, his move
turned out to be a capitulation.
After 27.:.xhS, it would not have
worked for him to play: 28.0,f6+? E:xf6
29.1"1xf6 hl + 30. c;tie2 1"1e8+ 31.l!idl
i.a4+! (but not: 3l.. .ig4+ 32.l!ic2 xel
33.1"1g6 + ! ) . Capturing 28.cxdS, would
have provided Black with at least a
draw after: 28. . . hl+ 29.l!ie2 hS+
30.l!ifl (White's attempt at avoiding
sharing the point might have ended up
in a disaster after: 30.f3 h2+ 31.l!idl
i.a4+! 32.c;ticl xd2+ 33.l!ixd2 l"lxf4
34.gxf4 0,xdS).
I would have however, the resource
28.!!h4! and following: 28 ... ih3+
29.l!igl f3 30.!!xh3 dxe4 31.!!xh6,
thanks to the threat gS, my position
would have been winning. Instead,
my opponent could have played 27. . .
xhS, having more tactical possibili
ties at his disposal and my task to find
the best moves would have been much
more difficult.
28.gxf4 dxe4 29J3xe4 if5 3 0 .
E:e3 e6 31.!!g3+ 1!if7 32.c3

hd3+ 33Jxd3 0,xf4 34Jxd8

13xd8 3S.f3 13d4 36.l!igl I!if6 37.
1&b7 xhS
Black's attempt to obtain some
counterplay with 37.. j!dl+ fails after:

Dreev-Zhang Zhong, Shanghai 2 0 0 1

209

sometimes even contradict each oth

er. Still, it seems to me that most of
the contents of my article remain up
38.xa7 Eld6 39.c7 Ele6 4 0 .b4 to-date even now. Frankly speaking, I
cxb4 41.axb4 g7 42.bS e8 43. had no idea whether my opponent had
d8+ @eS 44.dS+ @f6 4S.cS studied my theoretical work before
our game or not . . .
bxc5 46.b6 d6 47.xcS 1- 0
One o f th e basic plans for Black
against the 5.b6 system is - d7-d6,
AS7 g7-g6, f8-g7 and depending on cir
71
cumstances - capturing on b6 with
Dreev - Banikas
the queen, or with the knight. It is in
European Club Cup, Panormo 2001
teresting, but still somewhat slow for
I was playing for the club ofBosna Black to play: 5 . . .a5 6.4Jc3 a6 - with
(from Bosnia and Herzegovina) in the idea to develop quickly the light
squared bishop and to trade it for its
that European Team Cup.
1.d4 f6 2.c4 c5 3.dS bS 4.cxbS white counterpart, preventing White's
a6 S.b6
castling in the process. Still, tourna
ment practice has confirmed that after
White's energetic reply 7.f4!, followed
by 4Jf3 and e2-e4 - the position is in
his favour.
My opponent chose the sharpest
line, in which Black opens up the cen
tre immediately:
38.@h2 d2 39.@g3 4JxhS+ (or 39 ...
4Je2+ 40.lt>g4) 40.@g4 4Jg7 41.f3+
and he loses his rook.

S ... e6 6.c3 xdS 7.xdS exdS

8.xdS c6
I play that line regularly against the
Volga gambit - White does not accept
the pawn sacrifice and that leads to
quite different positions in compari
son to the line 5.bxa6. Some two years
before this game, I had written a spe
cial article on that subject, which was
published in the German magazine
Schach. I had shared with my readers
my understanding of that variation in
details i n this article. Naturally, chess
theory develops permanently; fashion
changes and evaluations of positions

GM H.Banikas had not played the

Volga Gambit in any game before our
tournament; nevertheless I had ex
pected that variation as an eventual

210

Game 71

possibility. The point was that in the

previous round, in the game Portisch
- Banikas, that position had already
appeared on the board. The eminent
Hungarian veteran chose an unfa
vourable line for White - 9 .i.gS xb6
1O.e4+ i.e7 11.e7 ttJxe7 12 .c2
(In case of 12.xa8, Black can at least
force a draw with: 12 ... xb2 13Jldl
c3+ 14Jd2 cl+.) 12 . . . b8 (It also
seemed good for Black to continue
with the simple move 12 ... dS! ?, with
an advantage for him.) 13.b3 - and af
ter: 13 . . . c4 14.ttJf3 cxb3 IS.axb3 xb3
16.xb3 xb3, Black remained with
an extra pawn.
I decided to follow my own rec
ommendation from the article, so I
played:

9.ttJf3
This is the best for White and now
Black is practically forced to reply
with:

9 ilb8
.

have tested the move 1O . .td2 in several

games and quite successfully at that.
Therefore, I recommended it in my
article and I made a conclusion there
that although the move 1O.e4 (Natu
rally, I analyzed thoroughly that move
too in my article . . . ) was also possible,
Black, as a rule after it, could manage
to solve his opening problems. During
the game, it came to my mind that my
opponent should have been familiar
with this p ublication and he might
have been specially prepared for our
game, so I decided to play 1O.e4,
moreover that during the period af
ter the appearance of the article I had
succeeded in finding some additional
possibilities for White in this varia
tion. I still consider the move 1O.id2
up to the point in this line, though . . .
10 i.e7 1l.i.c4 0 - 0 12 0 - 0
.

ttJa5
Black avoids the main variation
(12 . . . xb6 13.hS d6 etc., White has
also tried here 13.b3) and he contin
ues with a seldom played line. The
idea behind 12 . . . ttJaS is quite obvious
- he wishes to repel White's bishop
away from the a2-g8 diagonal. The
drawback of that move is evident too
- Black's knight is decentralized.

13.i.d3 ilxb6 14.h5 ib7

In the game Lautier - Koch, France
1999, Black played an interesting

1 0 .e4
White's other possibility to fight
for the opening advantage is the move
1O.i.d2 and one of its ideas is to place
the bishop quickly on the c3-square,
from where it protects the b2-pawn
and it is aimed at Black's kingside. I

move - 14 . . . dS and after: IS.exdS g6

16.h6 xdS I7.el e6 18.xe6 e6
19.ttJgS gS 2 0.gS d4 2 1 .i.d2
xd3 2 2.aS a2 2 3.el d6 24.h4
f6 2S.c3 i.f7 26.e4, the opponents
agreed to a draw.

15 .td2 ild6
.

Black has tested in practice 15 . . .

211

Dreev-Banikas, Pan ormo 2 0 0 1

e6. Following 16.fel, White's posi
tion is preferable.

16J3adlN
This is a novelty. In the game Arake
lian - Sumaneev, Briansk 1995, White
went back with his bishop 16.i.c2. I
did not like to lose a tempo for the re
treat of the bishop and I played a use
ful move protecting it indirectly.

16... llJc6 17.i.f4

The most natural try here is 17.i.c3,
but I did not like Black's possible reply
17 ... llJd4.

17 J3g6!

would have been too optimistic. Black

has two good possibilities after that:
18 ... llJd4 19.1lJel h6 20.i.e3 !3b6, or
18 ... xg2+ 19.<;!ixg2 g6, followed by
llJc6-d4.
Meanwhile, I should have played
the move 18.fel, protecting my pawn
and preserving the threat e4-eS. Dur
ing the game I thought that the con
sequences of 18 . . . llJd4 might be quite
unclear, but later in my home analy
ses, I understood that after: 19. 1lJxd4
cxd4 20.a3, White's position should
be better.

18 ... d6
Now, it seems that White's pieces
are perfectly placed and his advan
tage should be overwhelming. In
fact, things are far from simple. For
example, White cannot play 19.eS?,
due to 19 . . . llJd4. I was considering the
move 19.fel, but Black could counter
that with 19 . . . i.c8!. After White's only
move 20.h3, Black redeploys his bish
op - 20 . . .i.e6 and his position is quite
acceptable.
Here, I thought for a long time be
fore playing:

19.h3

18.i.c4
That is an imprecision and it be
came the reason that my opponent
could have equalized the position, as
we are going to see later.
Naturally, the pawn-advance 18.eS

This move is motivated not so much

by the need to ensure a leeway for the

212

Game 71

king, but to prevent Black's maneuver

.ib7-c8-e6. Now, 19 ...ic8 is of course
bad, for example, because of 20.eS.
It looks like the position will soon be
clearly in favour of White, particularly
if Black does not play actively enough.
My positional advantage seemed to
be guaranteed and it was supposed to
increase, since Black's bishop could
hardly be redeployed. My opponent
found here a wonderful possibility to
avoid the positional bind:
.

19 .. .'l;,YaS!
White now obviously needs his rook
on et, but unfortunately I had to lose a
tempo for the move h2-h3. Here, after
20JUel, Black organizes some coun
terplay after the knight-maneuver
- 20 ... ttJb4.
I did not have too much time left on
the clock at that moment. My opening
advantage seemed to be dissipating
and I understood that I would fail to
consolidate my position. Therefore I
decided to act in a completely differ
ent fashion:

2 0 ..ig5 lWdS
The game is rather unclear after:
20 ...ixgS 21.ttJxgS h6 22.ixf7+ h8
23.lWe2 ttJd4.

21 ..ie3 lWaS 22 ..ig5 lWdS 23 ..id2

.if6

Here the move 23 . . . a8 would have

been senseless, because of 24 ..idS. In
order for Black's battery to begin func
tioning, he should remove his knight
somewhere, but White has taken the
b4-square under control.

24..id5lWaS 25 .ic3 ttJe7 26.ixf6

l3xf6

Black could have played here more

calmly - 26 ... ttJxdS 27.exdS h6! (This

is better for Black than: 27.. .1"lxf6

28.fel.) 28.gS g6 and that might
lead to a possible repetition of moves.
Now, the fight becomes fierce again
and its development is favourable for
me ...

27.ttJg5 h6 2S .hf7'+ l3Sxf7 29.

ttJxf7 l3xf7 3 0 .l3xd6 he4 31.l3fdl
l3fS
.

I had too little time left to be able

to apprehend all the fine points of that
tricky position, but I had the feeling
that White's prospects should be pref
erable.

32.l3d7!?
I considered the other possibil
ity too - 32.e2!?, but I made up my
mind to follow with the penetration of
the rook.

32

..

ttJf5 33.lWg6

Black has certain problems now.

For example in case of 33 . . . h8,
White can continue with 34.b6!?
Possibly, Black had to try 33 ... e8 ! ?
The exchange o f queens becomes quite
probable in many variations and that
would lead to an endgame. Instead,
H.Banikas tried to exchange queens
outright and thus he in fact was mak
ing me a present. I was in a severe
time-trouble at that moment, sO . . . un-

Dreev-Banikas, Panormo 20 01

213

fortunately I did not accept it... :

also short of time. It would have been

much better for him to follow \\ith T .
i.d5 and after: 38.b3 lLld4 39.\!;'h2. the
position would have been equal. Kow,
White can collect three pawns for his
knight after: 39,Ellxc5 lLle6 40.gxg7+
I!7xg7 41.,Elxd5 lLlf4 42.,Eld7+ M8 , but
that would not change the correct
evaluation of the position. . .

33 :""lc6?

38.gxc5 i.b5 39.ge7 gg6

Black had better play here 39 . . .
,Eld6.

40 .1!7f2 ,Eld6
34.'lbc6?
Naturally, I saw the move 34J'l1d6, but I never connected it with
the pawn-advance g2-g4 (attacking
Black's knight. . . ) in the line: 34 ...a4
35.g4!+- b4 (or 35 ... c2 36.gxf5
el+ 37.l:'ldl) 36.gd2!. In case of 34 ...
5, White can follow with the simple:
35.e6+ I!7h8 36.gd8+So, as you have already seen - the
move 34.,Elld6 was winning quite eas
ily.

White's rooks now are a bit mis

placed, they are badly coordinated
and they come under attack by Black's
pieces. Therefore, my plan was to con
solidate my position by exchanging a
couple of rooks.

34 ...,txc6 35.gc7 lU6 36.3

I was reluctant to continue with 36.
gel, because of: 36 ... lLld4 37.,Elxc5 gg6,
although it might have been quite rea
sonable to play like that and to follow
later with 38.g4.

36... l!7h7
That is an unnecessary loss of time.
Black could have equalized with 36 ...
lLld4! and if 37.b4 (It is better for White
to play 37.l!7f2.) then Black would have
the resource 37... ,Eld6! and it would be
White who would have to worry about
how to make a draw...

37.gcl lLld4?!
That is already a serious impreci
sion and the reason was that Black was

41.ge4!
Now, Black cannot play : 41...lLle6
42.l'k2 i.d3, because of 43J%d2.

41... i.d7 42.h4 lLle6 43.gc2 1!7g6

44.me3 mf6 45.gd2
So, I managed finally to accomplish
what I wanted - the rooks would soon
be exchanged. Black's position without
rooks would be extremely unpleasant
and maybe even lost.

45 ... gxd2 46.mxd2 a5

My next plan included the follow-

214

Game 72

ing: I wanted to improve maximally

the placement of my kings ide pawns
and then to create a passed pawn on
the queens ide. It is tremendously dif
ficult for Black to resist that plan suc
cessfully on both sides of the board.

l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.d2 dxe4

4.xe4 fS 5.g3 g6 6.h4 h6
7.f3 d7 S.h5 7 9.d3 hd3
1 0 .'bd3 e6

47.b3 c6 4S .gc4 d7 49.>t>e3

>t>e5 5 0 .h5 >t>d5 51.g4 a4
Now, my task becomes much eas
ier. Black's pawn-advance a6-a5 was
more or less reasonable, but his last
move just speeds up his demise. The
rest is quite simple.

52 .gc3 axb3 53.gd3+ >t>c6 54.

gxb3 >t>d6 55.gb4 c6 56.a3 g5
57.gf4 e6 5S.gfS eS 59. gaS c6
60 .ga7 c7 61. >t>f4 d5+ 62.>t>g3
c7 63 .f4 d7 64.gb7 d5 65.a4
f6
Or 65 . . . lLlc3 66.a5 lLle2+ 67.lflf2
ILlxf4 6S.a6 cS 69.gbS+-

11.d2
The other possibility for White is
- 11.f4.

1 1 gf6 12. 0 - 0 - 0 e7 13.e4

..

White obtains no advantage with

that move. He had better try 13.lflbl.

66.a5 >t>c6

13 . . . lLlxe4 14.Wxe4 ILlf6 15.We2

Or 66 . . .hg4 67.gb6+, followed by Wd5! 16.c4
6S.gxf6+-

67.a6 e4+ 6S.>t>h4 c5 69.gbS

xa6 70 .!':-lgS c5 71.gxg7 e6 72.
gf7 >t>d6 73 .>t>g3 eS 74.!':-lh7 b5
75.!':-lxh6 >t>e7 76.fS g5 77.gg6
e4+ 7s.lflf4 f6 79.h6 1-0
72

B19
T.Nedev - Dreev
World Ream Ch, Yerevan 2001

Now, in case of 16.lflbl, Black can

continue with 16 ... Wie4, as well as with
16 . . . lLlxh5, with the idea - 17.g4 ILlf6
IS.g5 Wie4 19.e3 ILlg4.

16 .. :e4 17.e3
Here, after some deliberations
T.Nedev decided to preserve the
queens. Meanwhile, he should have
considered more seriously the ex
change: 17.Wixe4 ILlxe4 IS.e3.
(diagram)

17. . .b5!
This game wasplayed in the World
Team Championship and I remem
bered it, mostly because that was the
first time I studied thoroughly one of
the most important variations of the
Caro-Kann Defence, which I had nev
er played before.

This move has already been test

ed in a game between not so famous
players and White reacted there with
IS.lLle5!? Capturing - 18. cxb5?! is
rather dubious, because of IS ... gcS.

lS.gh4 Wh7
Black's queen has occupied the va-

2 15

Nadev-Dreev, Yerevan 20 01

23 ... fd8 24.lLlc5 b8

Now, White's task to save the game
becomes too difficult.

25.lLlb3
In case of 25.d2, Black can answer
with 25 . . . lLlb6 26.Wc3 hc5, followed
by lLla4.

cant place of the "Caro-Kann bishop";

nevertheless it feels there quite com
fortably. . .

19.1Lle5 c8 2 0 .g4?
White overlooks now his last chance
to block the centre with the move
20.c5; still after 20 ... lLld5, Black's po
sition is quite acceptable. This was
relatively White's best decision under
the circumstances.

25... We4!
Now, Black's queen is already not
so happy to be acting only as a bishop
and it comes back to the centre.

26.gg1 lLlb4 27.lLld2 lLld3+ 28.

I!Ic2 xb2+ 29.1!Ic3
Or 29.l!Id1 l"lbl! - +

29 ... b4+ 3 0 .Wxb4

20

lLld5!

Black prevents White's possible

counterplay after 2 0 ...bxc4 21.g5.

2U "lh3 bxc4 22 .Wxc4 0 - 0 23.

lLld7?!
White is trying to impede the move
c6-c5, but he loses too much time while
doing that. His best chance would have
been the line: 23.Wc2 Wxc2+ 24.l!Ixc2
c5, but Black's prospects would have
been superior anyway.

3 0 ...c2 + 31.l!Ixc2
After 31.I!Ib3, Black has the pleas
ant choice between 31...Wd5+ and 3 1 . . .
lLlc1+ 32 .xc1 Wd3+ 33.ma4 !"lxa2+.

31... lLlxb4+ 32.mdl

Game 73

216
Or 32.lflb3 \!;Vc2+ 33.lflxb4 l3b8+
and Black checkmates.

32

\!;vd3 33 .g5 ll'lxa2 0 -1

D37

73
Dreev - Pigusov
FIDE World Chess Ch (k.o.)
Moscow 2001

This game was played in the third

round of the knockout FIDE World
Championship in Moscow. Before
the event, I had "studied" the tourna
ment scheme and I had expected my
opponent at that moment (naturally,
in case I had reached that stage ...) to
be the ex-world champion Anatolij
Evgenievich Karpov. Surprisingly, he
was sensationally upset by the young
Chinese chess-prodigy Zhang Pengx
iang, who later succumbed to Ev
genij Pugusov. Evgenij can be noted
for his solid, even bulletproof style of
playing . In fact he loses only very sel
dom . . .
In this game I managed to intro
duce a novelty, which was specially
preparedfor the occasion ...
l.d4 ll'lf6 2.c4 e6 3.ll'lf3 d5 4.ll'lc3
e7 5.ti.f4 c5 6.dxc5 ixc5 7.e3
0 - 0 8.cxd5 ll'lxd5 9.ll'lxd5 exd5
1 0 .a3 ll'lc6 1 1.d3 b6 12. 0 - 0 d4

We have played one of the popular

lines of the Queen's gambit. The posi
tion on the diagram is one ofthe most
fashionable in this variation.

13.\!;Vc2!?
This move was a novelty at the
moment in which that game was
played. White had usually tried be
fore - 13. e4 g4 14.h3 - and he was
not achieving much, according to
the state of theory in the year 2 001.
White is hardly obtaining much in
that position even nowadays, because
after: 14 ... h5 15.g4 g6 16.l3c1 l3c8
17.l3e1 f6!? 18.c4+ ti.f1 19.ixf1+ l3xf1,
Black equalized comfortably in the
game Navara - Kasimdzhanov, Calvi a
2 0 04.

13 h6
. .

It seems dubious for Black to try

here 13 . . . dxe3?!, because White can
answer that simply with: 14.fxe3 h6
15.l3ad1, obtaining an overwhelming
positional advantage, or even enter the
sharper line: 14.ixh7+ !? Iflh8 15.fxe3
g6 16.ll'lg5 f5 17.\!;vf2 Iflg7 18.\!;Vh4
\!;Ve7 (18 . . . l3h8? 19.94 d7 20.lLle6! +-)
19J'l:f3 ! ? and his attack becomes ex
tremely dangerous.

14.e4 ti.g4 15.d2

Presently, after the theory of the
variation 13.\!;Vc2 !? h6 14.e4 g4, has
developed considerably, the move
15.lLle5 is at the focus of attention.

15

..

l3c8 16.\!;Va4
(diagram)

16 e6
.

It is stronger for Black to play here

16 . . . \!;vf6 !? and that was tried for the
first time in a later game - Dreev Short, Hyderabad 2002, in which af
ter: 17.g3 lLle5 18.ixe5 \!;Vxe5, I failed

217

Dreev-Pigusov, Moscow 2 0 01

Black would not have changed much

with the line: 28 ... a6 29.1I;\Id2 ixf3 30.
l"lxf3 l"lc1+ 31.l"lfl l"lxf1+ 32 .xf1, be
cause my two powerful bishops and
my superior pawn-structure would
have provided me with a long-lasting
positional advantage.

29.11;\1xf3 c1 3 0 .dl 11;\1c6 31.1I;\Ifl

xd1 32.1I;\Ixdl
to achieve anything real out of the
opening.

17 .ig3 .!OaS

This was an imprecIsIOn. It had

been more reliable for Black to defend
with 17 . . . 1I;\Ie7, after which my position
would have been only slightly more
attractive.

18.:aacl .id7 19.1I;\Ib4 e8 2 0 .f4

.!Oc6 21.1I;\Ib3 .!OaS 22.1I;\Ib4 .!Oc6 23.
1I;\Id6

The game enters here a purely tech

nical stage after the trade of the rooks.
It is extremely difficult for Black to
defend a position like that. I have two
great positional pluses - a bishop pair
and a mobile pawn-tandem e4 and f4.
Black has nothing to brag about at all,
but still his position is solid enough
and my task is to try to shatter it.

32 ....ic7 33.1I;\Id2 gS?

Now, I have a minimal, but stable
advantage and my position is much
more dynamic. My opponent has
problems to organize any active coun
terplay and he is doomed to a passive
defence.

23 ...e6 24.1I;\IdS .!Oe7 2S.xc8

1I;\Ixc8 26.1I;\Ib3 c6 27.1I;\Idl .ig4 28.
.!Of3 .ixf3

This activity was absolutely un

necessary. Black had better adhere
to a strategy of waiting with 33 . . .1I;\Ie6.
Still, a move like 33 ...g5 is easy to un
derstand from a psychological point of
view. My opponent wanted to clarify
somehow the situation, because he
was evidently reluctant to just sit down
and wait how I was going to gradually
improve my position in the long run . . .

34.fxgS .ixg3 3S.hxg3

218

Game 73
Evgenij defends quite tenaciously,
creating plenty of technical difficulties
for me.

47.e2 'lWc5 48.'lWg5 + 1t>f8 49.

'lWd8+ It>g7 5 0 .'lWd5 'lWe7 51.b4 M6
52.1t>f2 'lWe7 53.'lWd2 It>g6 54.'lWd4
f6

35 'lWg6?!
.

Here it was much stronger for Black

to follow with: 35... hxg5!? 36.'lWxg5+
f8 and I would h ave great problems
to realize my extra pawn. My task h ad
become much easier after my oppo
nents last move and the game entered
a technical stage of the realization on
my extra pawn.

36.gxh6 'lWxg3 37.e4 q)e6

55.'lWb2?!
At that moment, both of us were in
a desperate time-trouble. It was much
better for me to continue with 55. \Wd2,
or 55.\We3.

55 'lWd6 56. lt>e3 It>e7! 57.'lWd4?

This was a terrible blunder in the

time-pressure.

57... 'lWe7

38.<M1!?
In case of: 38.'lWf2 \wxf2+ 39.xf2
tiJe5 4o.idS bS! I would have main
tained superior prospects anyway, but
I would have just reduced my huge ad
vantage and my opponent would have
obtained some chances for a draw.

38 q)e5 39.'lWxd4 'lWf4+ 4 0 .gl

h7 41.e2 b6 42.'lWf2 'lWei + 43.f1
'lWg5 44.g3 It>xh6 45. lt>g2 It>g7 46.
'lWf4 'lWe7
.

My opponent returned the favour. . .

After: 57 ... \Wh6 + ! S8.f2 \wh2 + 59.f1
\Wxg3, Black's position would have
been at least equal. Now, my chances
have become once again preferable,
but the realization of my advantage is
connected with considerable technical
difficulties.

58.lt>d2 q)e659.'lWd5q)e56 O. 'lWd4

q)e6 61.'lWe3 'lWd6+ 62.lt>el?!
That is another mistake in the time
trouble and my opponent thus ob
tained quite good chances for a draw
as a result.

62

q)d4 63.e4 'lWe5

Dreev-Pigusov, Moscow 2 0 0 1
One more imprecision i n the time
pressure, because in case of: 63 ...
%'fh6+ 64. %'fd2 %'fhl+ 6S.<b2 %'fxe4,
Black would have equalized easily.

64.%'fd3 c6 65.'it>bl

e5 70.'it>d4 'it>d6 71. 'it>e3 .tg6 ""!...

.ill5 e5 73.'it>f4 c4 74.'tt>f5 i;e75.e2 d6+
Or 7S. . . xa3 76.d3 as 77.bS+-

76.'it>f4 f7 77.g4 a5 78.b5 e5

79 .'it>f5 f7 8 0 .e5! xe5 81.g5 d7
82.g6 'it>f8 83.'it>e6 c5+ 84.'it>xf6
e4+ 85.'it>e5 c3 86.d3 'it>e7 87.
c4 'it>f8 88.'it>d6 bl 89.a4 and
Black resigned.

65 :d4?

That was already the decisive blun

der. Black could have offered a seri
ous resistance only by preserving the
queens on the board, for example in
the variation: 6S ... %'fc7 66.idS eS.
Now, I exchange queens and the game
is transferred into a technically win
ning endgame " a bishop against a
knight, with an extra pawn". I did not
have too many problems to press my
advantage home. The game still fol
lowed with:

66. xd4 xd4

I believe that game was quite inter

esting concerning the opening stage,
as well as the great competitive ten
sion involved...
Later in the tournament I had to
face VAnand...ln a match to enter
the last 8, I succumbed 0 .5-1.5. That
match was marked by a sad occa
sion too...Just before it had started,
my coach and invaluable assistant
Alexander Filipenko received the sad
news that has mother had passed
away and he had to leave...

E81

74
Dreev - Jobava
Aeroflot-open, Moscow 2002

Alexander Grigorievich Bakh (the

director of the tournament) had an
nounced several months before that
in February 20 02 there would be a
Chess Festival in Moscow with the
huge prize-jund of us $150, 0 0 0
(very high top-prizes too) and many
people were quite interested. Still,
some journalists were doubtful that
so many players might come to Mos
cow in the winter (since it is really
cold in Moscow then) and that the
67.'it>b2 f3 68. 'it>c3 f6 69.e2 tournament would be attractive for

Game 74

220

strong grandmasters. There were no

special conditionsfor anybody - both
grandmasters and amateurs were
supposed to pay "a package-deal",
which included an a irplane ticket with
"Aeroflot", the hotel lodgment and the
tournament entry-fee. Still, many
strong gran dmasters were attracted
by the big prizes, since Open tourna
ments with similar high prizes were
quite rare for Eastern Europe (and
even for the entire "old world" too).
I was absolutely convinced that the
tournament would be organized on a
top-level when after an absence from
Russia of almost a month (Iplayed in
a round-robin in Wijk aan Zee and
then in the Team Championship of
France) I came back to Moscow by
plane from Paris. I saw then at the
"Sheremetievo" airport an enormous
bill-board with the sign - "Welcome
to the Participants in the Interna
tional Chess Tournament "Aeroflot
- Open"!"...
The tournament rules were tre
mendously difficult - a time-control
of } lh hoursfor the whole game with
3 0 seconds added per move. There
were three days with 2 roundsper day
and three days with Just one round
per day. There were alsofour days in
which the games were to begin quite
early - that was at 1 0 o'clock in the
morning. I h esitated a lot whether to
participate or not because of these
severe rules, but in the end I under
stood that the role of a spectator at
a tournament like that, organized in
Moscow, would not be attractive for
me. The temptation of the fight was
too great to withstand. In the end I

made 6 points out of 9 and I shared

to 2 0 th place, just half a point be
hind the five winners - G.Kaidanov,
A.Grischuk, A.Shabalov, V.Milov and
AAlexandrov (according to the tie
break coefficient the first place and
the highest prize was awarded to
Grigory Kaidanov).
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 g7 4.e4
d6 S.f3 a6 6.Be3 c6 7.c5
6th

I like this variation particularly

because White manages to reach a
principally different pawn-structure,
which is quite untypical for the King's
Indian Defence.

7 ... 0 - 0 8.lLlge2 bS 9.cxd6 exd6

1 O .lLlf4 lLlbd7 11.e2 e7
There is no essential difference be
tween this move and 1l . . .c5, as Loek
van Wely played against me at New
Delhi in the year 2001. I had the ad
vantage there after: 12.0-0 b7 13.
d2 e7 lUladl fe8 15.dxc5 dxc5
16.iLlfd5 iLlxd5 17.iLlxd5 %\Id6 18.iLlc3
xd2 19J1xd2 Bc6 20.fdl 13a7 2Uld6
13c8 22 .iLlxd5 d5 23.136xd5, but a
draw in that game was quite sufficient
for me to win the match . . .
(diagram)

12.d2N
The game Sakaev - Zemehman,

221

Dreev-Jobava, Moscow 20 02

15 lLlfd7

It deserved a serious attention

for Black to try 15 ... b4 - and after:
16.lLla4!? lLlxa4 17.Wxb4 lLlxe4 (or 17 . . .
d5 18.Wxa4 dxe4 19.h4 and the game
is rather unclear) 18.fxe4 Wxe4, there
arises an unclear situation. White
has a positional alternative, though:
16.lLlbl c5 17.dxc5 dxc5 18.Wc2, with
the idea to follow with lLlbl-d2.
Duisburg, 1992 followed with: 12 .0-0
b4?! 13. lLl a4 lLldS 14.cl lLlxf4 IS.ixf4
d5 16.e5 b7 17.d2 c5 18.lLlxc5 lLlxe5
19.ixb4 lLlc6 20.c3 c8 21.Wd2
xd4+ 22.xd4 lLlxd4 23 .Wxd4 Wxe2
24.Wd5 and White had an edge.

12 J.b7 13. 0 - 0 gfe8 14.gadl

..

While playing that move, I had to

consider also the line: 14...b4 (14...
lLld5 15.f2 ! and White's advantage
was only minimal.) 15.lLla4 lLle4? 16.
fxe4 Wxe4, but after 17.gf3, Black does
not have a full compensation for the
piece.

14

16.gfel
16. Wc2! ?

16 gad8
.

H ere, once again it deserved a se

rious attention for Black to play: 16...
b4!? 17.lLlbl c5 18.a3! ? a5 19.b5, with
some initiative for White.

17.1Wc2 c5?!
That natural move looks like a mis
take to me. Black had better wait: 17...
c8! ?

18.dxc5

lLl b6 15.J.f2

This is a logical multi-purpose

move for White. Its only drawback
is that Black might play h6 at some
moment quite favourably. Meanwhile,
that move is presently impossible due
to lLlxg6.

18

lLlxc5

In case Black captures with the

pawn - 18 . . . dxc5, White follows with:
19.1Llcxd5 lLlxd5 20.lLlxd5ixd5 2l.xd5
c4 and here his task is to destroy
Black's pawn-chain on the queenside.
The simplest way to do that is 22.a4,
but it also deserves attention for White

Game 74

222
to try the immediate move: 22.b3 ! ?
c3 23J'ledl f5 24.a4 fxe4 (or 24. . .bxa4
25.ic4 Ifih8 26.exf5) 25.axb5 and he
maintains better prospects.

19.1iJfxd5 hd5 20 .liJxd5 liJxd5

2U:lxd5 liJa4 22.!':lb1!
The attractive move 22 .c6? ! , af
ter: 22 ... ib2 23.a6 liJc3, does not
bring anything good to White.

22 .. .!':lc8 23.d2 gc6 24 . .td1

White avoids the temptation
again! Mer the spectacular variation:
24 ..Elxb5 axb5 25.ixb5 liJc3 26.bxc3
.Elb8 27.id4 id4+ 28.cxd4 d5 !, there
arises a completely unclear position.

(after White attacks it with .Eldl) with

if8, enables White to improve pa
tiently his position, for example by ad
vancing his h-pawn. It is equally bad
for Black to try: 28 ... d8 29 . .Eldl f6
30 . .Eld6 .Elxd6 31.xd6 b2+ 32 .lfih3.

29.d3 ! gb8 3 0 .a4 bxa4 31.

.txa4 gc3! 32 .d1 %Yb4 33.gxd6
gc4 34.b3 gd4 35.gxd4 hd4 36.
c2
That is the correct reaction for
White! He must control the c and d
files in order to prevent the activiza
tion of Black's rook.

36 ...h7 37.gd1 %Yb6

24 ... gec8

38 .gd7!
25.g3 !
That is an important prophylactic
move, since now White can capture
on b6.

25 ...c7 26.lfig2 liJb6 27.hb6

In case of 27. .Eld3?, White preserves
his two bishop advantage, but after:
27 . . . liJc4 28.e2 e7, his pieces are
forced to defend the b2-pawn losing
their mobility.

27... xb6 28 ..tb3

Now, W1lite is clearly better.

28 ... a5
Black loses a pawn after that move.
The passive defence of the d6-pawn

Naturally, that move was quite at

tractive, but I had already made up my
mind to enter the variation with the
march of the king. I had an extra pawn
indeed, but it might not be enough to
win the game at the end, so I had no
more time to lose!

38 ... %Yg1+
Or 38 ... .Elf8 39.f4 gl+ 40.lfih3
f1+ 41.g2 a6 42.f3
39.lfih3 f1+ 4 0 g2 a6
Or 40 . . . c1 41.d2 f1+ 42.lfig4.
4UWd2 f1+
Had Black known how all that might
have ended, he would have preferred
.

223

Dreev-Jobava, Moscow 2 0 02
the move 41...h5, but . . .then White has
the resource: 42.f4 fl+ 43.g2 a6
44.f3.

42.g4! h5+

Following 44 . . .d8, Black loses

after the exquisite line: 45.h6 (45.
xg6?? !'!b6) 45 ... f7 46.d5+ f8
47.d6.

45.d7+ f8 46.xg6!
White's pieces are in perfect har
mony: 46 ...xf3 47.g7 # . It is amaz
ing, but even the bishop on a4 partici
pates in the final attack. It was only
a passive witness awhile ago; now it
played a key decisive role in the attack,
because it controlled the e8-square.
Black resigned, since he had no de
fence against the checkmate.

43.g5!
White must go forward! Black
could have countered the tentative
and humble move 43.f4, with the
immediate 43 ... gl, with the decisive
threat a7-e3+.

43 . . .1b6
In case of 43 .1c5, White wins
with: 44J'!t7! f7 45.f4. It would not
work for Black to play: 43 ...f3 44.!'!a7
g4+ 45.h6 b4, because White's
queen comes to the rescue: 46.g5!
..

Ell

75
Dreev - Pelletier
Biel 2002

l.d4 lOf6 2.c4 e6 3.lOf3 1b4+

4.1d2 a5

5.c2!?

44Jhf7!
That is the most precise line for
White!

44 ... xf7

This is an interesting line and con

trary to the more popular moves 5.g3
and 5.lOc3, it is not so often played in
tournament practice. I believe that it is
not worse at all and it seems to be quite
logical. In fact, White takes the e4square under control and he is threat-

Game 75

224
ening to occupy the centre with e2-e4
just in case, meanwhile the choice of
his plans is quite flexible, concerning
the possibility of fianchettoing of his
light-squared bishop.For example, in
case of S...dS, it looks good for White
to follow with 6.g3!? with an excel
lent position in a strategical aspect.
It resembles one of the variations of
the Catalan Opening, except that the
situation is much more favourable for
him, because Black's move a7-aS is not
particularly useful in similar pawn
structures ... Following S...O-O, White
can play 6.e4!?, occupying the centre
with clearly better chances.

S hd2+ 6,Fobxd2 dS
..

That is a novelty, but it is hardly

better than the usual move 6...d6,
which is a frequent guest in the tour
naments.

not very purposeful for Black either.

1 O . eS a6 11.l;fd1
I would not have achieved much

with Il.cS, because of: 11...bxcS I2.dxc5

d7! and Black's chances are worse
neither after: 13.c6 xeS 14.cxb7 gb8,
not in case of: 13.df3 xeS 14.xeS
b4.

1l cS 12.cxd5
..

Following: I2.dxcS xcS 13.cxd5

hdS, the prospects of both sides are
about equal.

1 2. . .exd51?
Capturing the pawn leads to a com
plicated fight with a slightly better po
sition for White.He would have main
tained superior chances too in case
of: 12...hdS 13.e4 1b7 14.dxc5 xcS
IS.gacl.

7.g3 1?
I like this plan including the fian
chettoing of the light-squared bishop
and castling short subsequently.

7 . 0 - 0 8.ig2 b6 9 . 0 - 0 ib7
..

13.b3 !?
I was preparing the b2-square for
my queen, in order to control the key
d4-square.

13. . .'oMfe7 14. 'oMfb2 l3fd8 15J;ac1

c7 16.ec4
White has a slight positional advantage in that pawn-structure. It
is a bit similar to some lines of the
Queen's Indian Defence, but as I have
mentioned before, the move a7-aS is

The calm move 16.e3, would have

preserved a slight advantage for me.I
decided to play that spectacular move,
since I wanted to sharpen the game,
although it was leading to a bit unclear
position.

225

Dreev-Pelletier, Biel 20 02

16

1%a6?!

That awkward move enables me to

improve my situation considerably. It
deserved attention for Black to follow
with: 16 ...dxc4 ! ? 17.ixb7 ab8, with a
complicated game with mutual chanc
es.

17.e3 g6
This is an impreclSlon, because
my opponent compromises his dark
squares on the kingside without any
necessity. It was more reliable for him
to defend with: 17 ... e6 18.f5 %Yd7,
obtaining a slightly worse, but still
quite acceptable position.

18.f3 e6
It is not better for Black to play:
18 ... a4, in view of: 19.bxa4 c4 20. e5
with a considerable positional advan
tage for White.

This move emphasizes the vul

nerability of the dark squares on the
kingside and it increases my pressure
along the al-h8 diagonal.

22 ... xg4
In case of 22 ... axb3, I was planning
to continue with 2 3.dxc5!, after which
my opponent would have very serious
problems. For example, in case of: 23 ...
xg4 24.xg4 h5 (White was threat
ening a checkmate in two - 25.h6
1Yf8 26.%Yh8 # ) 25.f6+! 1Yf7 (25 ... lYf8
26.c6+-) 26.cxb6! my initiative would
have been quite dangerous. Here, it is
rather dubious for Black to play: 26 ...
bxa2? ! , due to: 27.c7 al%Y 28.xe7+
IYxe7 29.al 1::l x al+ 30.lYg2 d4+ 31.
'itlh3 and his position would be very
difficult. White's knight is untouch
able, after 3l...'itlxf6, White wins with
32.%Yxd4+ and Black loses unavoid
ably his bishop. It is not any better for
Black to defend with: 31.. .e5, since af
ter 32.h7! his position is hopeless.

23.xg4 %Yg7?!

19.h3!? a4 2 0 .ixe6 fxe6 21.

e5 1%da8
Simplifying the game with - 21...
axb3 2 2 .axb3 da8 23.al xal
24.xal xal+ 25.%Yxal - would have
preserved for me a slight, but stable
positional advantage thanks to the
powerful knight on the e5-outpost. My
opponent would be doomed to a pas
sive defence then.

22.5g4!?

This is a grave mistake. It was bet

ter for Black to try: 23 ...h5 24.e5
axb3 25. axb3 a2 26.%Yc3. Indeed, in
that case I would have preserved a
slight positional advantage too, but
Black would have at least activated his
rooks.

226

Game 76

24.b4!
That excellent positional move cuts
off practically Black's queenside pieces
away from the actions and White has a
free hand to organize later a crushing
kingside attack.

24 ... a3 2S.'fNd2 c4 26.c3

My adversary's position is already
close to hopeless from the point of
view of strategy. His dark eS and f6squares are very weak and in addition
his bishop on b7 is a sorry sight.

26 bS
..

We were both in time-trouble here.

Still, it is quite understandable that
it is much easier to play that position
with White under time-pressure, be
cause I do not risk anything in that
pawn-structure, while every mistake
by my opponent would lead him to an
immediate disaster.

27.b1
That is a typical move for the time
trouble and it is not the best, but it
does not ch ange much in that posi
tion.

My kingside attack is developing

smoothly, while my adversary has no
counterplay at all.

29 ...'fNe7?!
That is another bad move for Black,
played under a severe time-pressure.
His position is strategically hopeless
anyway, so White's victory is just a
matter of time . . .
The game still followed with:

3 0 .J c8 31.c!l:ig4 'fNg7 32.c1

hS 33.c!l:if6+ d>h8 34.cc3 ca8?!
3S.'fNf4 c6 36.'fNeS e8 37.f4 c8
38.d>h2 ca8 39.g4 bxg4 4 0 .xg4
6a7 41.hS and Black resigned.
76

E12
Dreev - Vallejo Pons
Biel 2002

1.d4 c!l:if6 2.c4 e6 3.c!l:iJ b6 4.a3

a6

27. . . c6?!
This only speeds up Black's demise.
It was better for him to try 27 .. .l'!fB.

28.c!l:ieS e8

Pako plays the Meran variation

quite often with Black, but obvious
ly he had decided otherwise for this

29.h4

game . . . Meanwhile, he probably knew

that I was playing one and the same
line permanently against the Queen's
Indian Defence. He must have thought
that I had failed to repair that line af-

227

Dreev-Vallejo Pons, Biel 20 0 2

ter my game with V.Emelin (Aero
flot-open 2002), in which I had not
achieved any advantage with White
whatsoever. Contemporary chess is
becoming sometimes an exact science:
to find a weak spot in the opening ar
mour ofthe opponent, to analyze some
opening line with "Fritz" and you can
reach the desired result ... Still, it is far
from easy to understand the essence
of the opening strategy with such an
approach, so that tactics might often
turn out to be counterproductive...
This is exactly what happened in our
game...

5.'Mfc2 c5 6.d5 exd5 7.cxd5 g6

Here, Black can win a pawn with:
7 ... ib7 8.e4 'Mfe7 9.id3 tiJxdS 10.0-0
tiJc7, but that line is not popular for
him at all.

S.if4

the line: lO ...bS 11.tiJxbS 0-0 12. tiJc3,

but his compensation for the pawn
was insufficient.

1 0 'Mfd7 1 1 .bd6 'Mfxa4 12.<xa4

tLlxd5 13. 0 - 0 - 0 CiJe7 14.e4 hf1
15.ghxfl tLlbc6 16.tLlc3 .bc3
.

It is too bad for Black to castle, be

cause of tiJdS. Until now, we were fol
lowing the game Kasparov - Gligoric,
Bugoino 1982 and there it was played:
16 ... Eld8? 17.CiJb5 d7 18.if4 xdl+
19.xdl 0-0 20.d7 and White had a
great advantage. So, the exchange of
Black's bishop is practically forced.

17.hc gdS
This position was played for the
first time in the game Browne - Tim
man, Las-Palmas 1982. Black's move
in the game is considered to be his
main defence. His alternatives are
- 17. . . 0-0-0 and 17 .. .f6.

This is a rarely played move. The

main line for White is - 8.4:lc3 7 9.g3.

S ... d6
Or 8 . . .ig7 9.id6.
9. tiJ c3 ig7

IS.ie5N

1 0 .'ta4+
The previous as well as the subsequent moves are practically forced.
GM Lobron played against me in a
rapid chess game during the last year

In my game against V. Emelin

(Moscow, 2002), I played I8.ic7 and
he countered that in the best pos
sible way: I8 . . . xdl+ I9.xdl f6 20.e5
fe 21.tiJxe5 f8 2 2 .tiJf3 Elf6, so the
game was completely equal. Timman
played: 18 .. .EKd7 19 .if4 f6. The move
that I have chosen in this game chang
es not only the character of the fight,

228

Game 77

but possibly the evaluation of the en

tire variation.

18 13xdl+ 19.13xdl xe5 2 0 .

xe5 f6
..

24.e5! f5
After: 24 .. .fe 25.ltJxe5+ me7, White
has 2 6.f4!, preparing - 13c7.

25.lLlf6 lLle7
Black facilitates my task consider
ably. He had to defend with 25 ... h6,
with chances to offer some resistance,
although even then after the move
26.f4, White is clearly better.

26.13c7 We6 27.f4 h6 28.13xa7

g5
That is Black's last attempt...

21.d7!
This is the road to White's advan
tage. He cannot achieve anything
much with: 2 1.lLlc4 lLlc8, as well as
with: 2 1.lLlg4 13fB 22 .13d6 lLlg8.

21. . . mf7
In case of 21...f5, White has the
strong argument - 2 2 . e5, or 2 2.lLlf6+,
followed by e4-e5.

22 .13d6 lLlc8
Black had obviously relied on that
very much. (But not 2 2 . . . 13d8, because
White follows with 23.lLle5+, winning
a pawn.).

23.13c6 13d8

29.lLlh5!
This is the best for White, while the
move 29.g3 is less precise. Now, it is
impossible for Black to play 29 ... gxf4,
due to 30.ltJg7+. I had calculated that
line to the very end, though... : 3 0 . . .
me5 31.13xe7+ @f6 32.13b7 13g8 33.
ItJh5+ @g5 34J::lg7+.

29 ... lLlg6 3 0 . lLlg7+ Wd5 31.e6

Wd6 32.g4!
This move is not only the most
beautiful, but it is the most accurate
too! White obtains two connected
passed pawns and they are unstop
pable.

32 ...gxf4 33.gxf5 fJ 34.fxg6 f2

35.13f7 13g8 36.e7. Black resigned.

229

Dreev-Kishnev, Chalkidiki 2 0 0 2
77

D39
Dreev - Kishnev

under a difficult test.

lS,.."flfxbS+

European Club Cup, Chalkidiki 2002

This game was played in the Euro

pean Club Cup where I made my de
but for the Russian club "The Nickel
from Norilsk". We took second place,
though.
l.d4 f6 2.c4 e6 3.O dS 4.c3
dxc4 S.e4 J.b4 6.J.gS cS 7.hc4
cxd4 8.xd4 hc3+ 9.bxc3 "flfaS
1 0 .J.bS+ bd7 1l.h6 "flfxc3 + 12.
'il?fl gxf6 13.h4 "flfaS 14.l3h3

16.l3d3 ! !
After that brilliant move, Black's
position, despite his extra piece, be
comes absolutely critical. In case of
the seemingly attractive line - 16.i>gl,
Black could have defended with 16 ...
"flfc5 and White would then have noth
ing better than: 17.d6+ i>e7 18.f5+
i>e8 19.d6+ forcing a draw by a per
petual check.

16,.."flfb6
That is a well-familiar and quite
popular position in the Vienna varia
tion of the Queen's gambit. The criti
cal line for Black here is 14 ... a6, but he
can also play 14 ... 'iI?e7.

14,..eS?
My opponent chooses a quite rare
and as our game shows rather dubious
move. At the moment our game was
played, White used to counter 14 ...
e5, only with the line: 15.ixd7+ i.xd7
16.fS i.xfS 17.exf5 gd8 and Black had
no problems after that. Still, our game
continued with:

IS.f5!
This excellent novelty puts the
whole seldom played line with 14... e5

The other lines for Black are hardly

any better. He has no satisfactory de
fence, for example: 16 ... iWa5 (or 16 ...
i>dB 17.d6 a6 IB.i>gl+-; 16 ... i>fB
17.lLid6 iWa6 IB.iWb3+-) 17.iWb3 lLic5
I B.lLid6+ i>dB 19."flfd5 and White's at
tack should be victorious; or: 16 ..."flfa6
17.i>gl and the threat 1:l:cl is impos
sible to parry.

17.l3bl "flfa6 18.i>gl!

Black is in a zugzwang and he has
no useful moves. Now, the game is
quickly over.

18,. .xa2
Or IB ... 1:l:gB 19.9c1! "flfxa2 20.gc7
"flfe6 2 1.iWc1+-

19.13cl! bS
Or 19. . .i>f8 2 0.gdc3+-

230

Game 78

2 0 .13c7 'iWa4 21.'iWc1 'iWa6 22.13d6

'iWxd6 23A:lxd6+ 'i!?e7 24.13xc8 and

- against Loek van Wely and Peter

Leko.

7... dxc4

Black resigned.

That was a good game with a cer

tain theoretical importance. Under
standably enough, after that game
the move 14 . . e5 in that line of the Vi
enna variation, disappearedjrom the
tournament practice.
.

The other possibility here for Black

is - 7 ... tLle4.

8.hc4 0 - 0 9.tLlge2
The development of White's knight
to f3 (9. tLlf3) leads to the classical po
sitions.

9 'iWxc5 1 0 .'iWb3 tLlc6 1l.tLlb5

'iWh5 12A:lg3
..

78

D82
Dreev - Svidler

European Club Cup, Chalkidiki 2002

J.Piket played 12.ill c 7 against Loek

van Wely. After 12 ... ill a 5, Black had a
very bad position. He had better try
12 . . Jb8.

12
My games with Petr Svidler have
always been quite principled and in
teresting. Asfor the result, things are
fluctuating. I managed to win my
game against Petr at the European
Club Cup as he was playing there for
the French super-club NAO.
l.d4 tLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.tLlc3 d5 4.f4
g7 5.e3 c5 6.dxc5 'iWa5 7.13c1

..

'iWh4 13.tLlc7 g5

This is one of the three possibili

ties that Black had at his disposal. The
others - 13 .. Jlb8 and 13 . . . e5 - lead to
complex positions as well.

14.hg5
I had prepared that novelty for my

This order of moves enables White

to develop his knight to the e2-square.
I noticed it while I was playing through
the games of the Dutch GM Jeroen
Piket. He played like that twice in the
year 2001 at the Amber-tournament

game against Peter. The game Gret

arsson - Schandorff, Gentofte 1999,
followed with: 14.ill f5 !xfS 1S.!g3
ill d 4!

14 'iWxg5 15.tLlxa8 !d7 16.'iWxb7

13b8 17.'iWc7 13xa8
..

This looked like the most natural

move for Black, but it deserved at
tention for him to try 17 . . J lc 8 ! ? and if

231

Dreev-Svidler, Chalkidiki 2 0 02
1B.liJe4 - not 1B ... liJxe4 19.%Vxd7 l:'ldB
2 0.%Vxc6 %Va5+ 2 1.f1 %Vd2 22.e2,
but 1B . . . %VfS !?, or 1B . . . %VaS + ! ?

l S .ia6!

This is a very strong move. Still, it

would be fair to admit - that position
was mentioned by GM KIasenkow
in his comments and he had evalu
ated it as unclear. It seems to me that
Black's situation as almost critical, for
example it is too bad for him to play:
1B ... IiJb4? 19.%Vb7+-. After: 1B ... liJdB
19.0-0 liJe6 20.%Vb7, Black is clearly
worse.

lS ... liJeS
Peter continues with the forced
play. He could have tried instead lB . . .
%VdS! ?

19.%Vxd7 %VaS+

IiJxg7 (or 23 ... xg7 24.%Vd4+) 24.gc7

l:'lfB 2S.l:'lxa7.

23.!"!c6 %VaS
I saw that following 23 . . .%VbS, the
next spectacular line would not work
for White: 24.liJh6+ fB 2S.l:'lf6?, be
cause of 25 ... %Vxf1+. but it is quite
sufficient for him to play the simple:
24.liJxg7 IiJb4 2S.liJfS (or 2S.liJxeB
%Vxc6 26.%Vxe7) 2S ... liJxc6 26.liJxe7+
g7 27.liJxc6.

24.liJxe7+
After 24.liJxg7 xg7, I failed to find
anything decisive, while I was calcu
lating variations; for example after:
2S.%Vb7 l:'ldB 26.l:'la6, Black had the re
source 2 6 ...%Vd2.
24 .. lPfS 2S.liJc8
.

Here, my opponent made the deci

sive blunder:

2S...%Vb4?
This move defends simultaneously
against the threat %Vd7-b7, as well as
against %Vd7-e7.

2 0 .b4!
My opponent had underestimated
this important nuance.

20 ... liJxb4 21. 0 - 0 Yfixa6

After 2l. ..liJxa6 22.%Vxe7, White
maintains a clear advantage.

22.1iJf5 IiJxa2
As Peter told me after the game, he
had evaluated that position as quite
acceptable for Black. In fact, White has
a great advantage. In case of 2 2 ... e6,
White practically wins with : 23.liJxg7

Still, after my reply:

26.!"!c4! Peter resigned in view
of: 26 . . .%Vxc4 (or 26 ... %Va3 27.l:'le4)
27.%Ve7+ gB 2 B.%VxeB+ ifB 29.liJe7+
g7 30.liJfS+ g6 31.%VxaB+Black had an only chance that could
enable him to try to hold the game

232

Game 79

somehow - 25 . . .'?;l/e5 and if: 26.b7

ElbB 27.xa7 - 27. . . Elb2 (but not
27 ... itJb4, because of 2 B.Elc5). Well,
even then after: 2 B .itJb6 e7 (this i s
once again a n only move for Black)
29 .itJd7+ It<gB 30.ElcB (threatening
a7-aB) 30 ... f5, White's advantage is
considerable, but he has no forced win
in sight ...

1 0. . 0 - 0
Vesselin Topalov at the FIDE
World Championship in New Delhi
played here in another fashion against
me: 1O ...h5, but after: Il.h3 O-O?!
12.c5 e7 13.itJe5 It<hB 14.f4 itJxe5
15.fxe5 itJd7 16.bh7 g6 17.g4, Black
was faced with great problems and he
lost the game (Dreev - TopaIov, New
Delhi 2000).
.

1l.e5 ie7 12.itJe5

79

Dll
Dreev - Zagrebelny
Aerofiot-open, Moscow 20 03

l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Filf3 f6 4.e3

a6 5.b3 ig4 6.bd2 e6 7.id3
bd7 8. 0 - 0 id6 9.ib2
I had played that position the pre
vious time in the game (Dreev - Tim
man, Wijk aan Zee 2002). My oppo
nent chose the move 9 .. bB and it
looked a bit awkward, but it prevented
the move itJf3-e5, meanwhile Black
had at his disposal the c7-square in
case White pushed c4-c5.
.

9 ...e7?!

Naturally, White's attempt to win

a pawn seems rather dubious: 12.itJg5
h6 13.itJh7 itJxh7 14.bh7+ It<hB 15.f3
ih5 16. g4 f5 17.bf5 exf5 IB.gxh5
itJf6.

12 ... ih5 13.f4

That is the most natural move for
White.

13 ...ig6 14.xg6 hxg6

Now, White should consider the
possibility itJf6-g4 (followed by f7-f5).
In case of: 15.h3 itJh7 16.g4 f5, White
cannot control the important f6square with the move 17.g5, because
of his weakness on the g3-square.
Therefore I played:

15.ie2

Now you know - that move is not

precise, because of the abovemen
tioned reasons.
1 0 .e2

15 ... h7
Possibly, Black had to consider the
possibility of including the moves:

233

Dreev-Zagrebelny, Moscow 2 0 03
15...b6 16.b4 as 17.a3 - and only then
- 17... li:lh7 (with the idea to follow
with f7-f5). In that case, White would
not be forced to play the move g2g4 (analogously to the moves in the
game . . . ).

16.g4 g5
Here, the moves: 16 ...b6 17.b4 as
18.a3 g5, could have been included as
well.

17 .ltd3 g6

The line: 17 ... li:lhf6 18.\';\Id1, leads to

an advantage for White.
Black intends to continue now with
f7-f5 and White's next move is the
most principled. . .

18.f5 gxf5 19.9xf5 e5

This check was obviously a great

surprise for my opponent and he
thought for over ten minutes on his
only move. . .

22 lt>h8

It is quite understandable that

22 ... lt>g7 is very bad for Black due to:
23.l:!xf7+ ! l:!xf7 24.vtfg6+ @h8 2S.\';\Ixf7
Ii:ldf6 (or 2S ... li:ldxeS 26.fS) 26.l:!f1
l:!f8 27.l:!xf6.

23 . .ltf5?
That natural move turns out to be
a mistake as well . The correct move
for White would have been - 23.\';\Id1!
and Black can hardly save the game.
For example: 23 ... li:lh6 24.if5 Ii:lxeS
2S.\';\IhS @g7 26.li:lf3+-, or 23 ... @xh7
24.\';\Ixg4 Ii:lxeS 2S.\';\IhS+ @g7 26.1i:lf3
f6 27.li:ld4+-

23

li:lxe3 24.\';\Id3 .ixc5

After: 24 . . . li:lxfS 25.l:!xfS, Black is

practically helpless.

25 . .hd7

2 0 .f6!
This sacrifice leads to the opening
of important "arteries", so that I do
not allow Black to close the position.

2 0 . . . li:lhxf6 21.dxe5 Ii:lg4? !

It was better for Black to play 21...
Ii:lxe5, but then after: 2 2.l:!fS Ii:lfg4
23.li:lf1 ! , I would have a serious initia
tive for the pawn, while in the varia
tion: 23 ... li:lxd3 24.\';\Ixd3 Ii:lh6 2S.\';\Id4
f6 26.l:!xgS+ 1ttf7 27J'l:g2 l:!g8 28.li:lg3
l:!g4 29.e4, White would maintain his
advantage.

22 .lth7+ !

25

..

li:lc4+?

Black cannot save the game any

more after that mistake. He had how
ever a wonderful defensive resource,
which I found only after the game
- 2S .. .f6 ! !
Now, it is of course a mistake for
White to play 26.l:!fc1?, due to: 26 ...

234

Game BO

xd7 27.E1xcS g4+. It is also terrible

for him to continue with: 26.e6??, be
cause of 26 ... lLlg4+. White has no ad
vantage in the variation: 26.E1xf6 E1xf6
(or 26 ... lLlg4+? 27.lt>hl lLlxf6 28.h3 +
lLlh7 29.lLle4) 27.exf6 lLlg4+ 28 .id4
xh2+ 29.Ml lLleS 30.f7 E1f8 31.g6
ixd4 32.f6+ It>h7 33.ifS+ lLlg6 34.
ixg6+ It>h6 3S.xd4 It>xg6.
Following: 26J::lfel 26... xd7 (or
26 . . . lLlc4+?! 2 7.lt>hl lLlxb2 28.h3+
It>g7 29.ifS 13h8 30. c3) 27.13xe3
ixe3+ 28.xe3 E1ae8 (It is worse for
Black to play here: 28 . . . g4+ 29.lt>hl
E1ae8 30.13gl) 29.lt>hl! (or 29.g3
fxeS 30.ixeS+ It>h7 31.13el fS),
White might be still slightly better,
but the position would have remained
complicated enough. For example:
29 . . . lt>g8 ! ? (or 29 . . .d4 30.hd4 dS+
31.It>g1 fxeS 32 .h3+ It>g7 33.ie3)
30J:'lgl fS 31.E1g2 with the idea to fol
low with e3-gl.

Karjakin was anticipated with great

interest. I shared l't_2nd place with 6
points out 019 with Alexander Ruste
mov, but according to the Berger co
efficient he was declared the winner
of the tournament.
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3
.tb7 S.lLlc3 dS 6.cxdS lLlxdS 7 .td2

This flexible move was introduced

into the 'top-level tournament practice
by GM 5mbat Lputian.

7... lLld7 S.lLlxdS ixdS 9.c2 cS

10 .e4 ib7

26.lt>h1+- lLlxb2 27.h3 + It>g7

2S.E1f6 xe5 29.h6+ gS 3 0 .tf5
I had reached that position three
1- 0
times in the several months preceding

this game. In the first one, against Pe

ter Leko, in the match "Russia against
E12 The Rest of the World" after: 1l.13dl
so
cxd4 12.lLlxd4 a6 13.ie3 ie7 14.ie2
Dreev Tiviakov
c8 IS.bl lLlcS 16.f3 0-0 17.0-0
Dos Hermanas 2 003
b8 18.b4 lLla4 19.c2 bS 2 0.E1cl id6
This was my second participation 21.g3, we agreed to a draw (Dreev in the traditional round-robin tour Leko, Moscow 2 002).
nament. Just like in the year 20 aI, it
In the second game, at the World
was a category 16 event. I was only FIDE Cup, Vishy Anand played a dif
number three with my rating of2690 ferent move - 13 ... bS, but the game
at the start of the tournament. Alex also ended in a draw after: 14.f3 ie7
ey Shirov and Alexander Khalifman . IS.ie2 13c8 16.d2 lLleS 17.0-0 0-0
were infront of me, because they both 18.b4 lLlc4 19.ixc4 bxc4 2 0.lLle2
had a rating of over 270 O . The par xd2 21.13xd2 ic6 22 .lLlc3 1/2 (Dreev
ticipation of the 12 year old Sergey - Anand, Hyderabad 2002).
-

235

Dreev-Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 2 0 03

In the previous game, against Ana
tolij Karpov, (Dreev - Karpov, Cap
d'Agde 2 0 02), I had decided to try a
much sharper move - n.d5. After:
n . . . exdS 12.exd5 id6 13.0-0-0 0-0
14.liJg5 liJf6 15.<i>bl ie5 16.liJf3 id4,
I had no opening advantage and the
position had remained quite unclear.
Later, I had studied that position
quite thoroughly and I found an inter
esting possibility, so when my oppo
nent played 1O . . . ib7, I advanced my
d4-pawn once again ...

n.d5 exd5 12.exd5 id6 13.

0 - 0- 0 0 - 0

Therefore, I started with the mo\-e

- 15.c3

15 ... liJf6 16.c6 gb8

In case of: 16 . . . ixc6 17.dxc6 ElcB
IB.lMfa4, Black has certain problems to
worry about.

17.h4
My opponent had evidently under
estimated that move.

17. . liJg4
.

That was Black's only move, since

White was threatening liJf3-g5.

18.<i>bl
This useful move helps White pre
pare liJf3-gS.

14.b5!?
This is the possibility that I had
mentioned ...

14. . .h6
This move seems to be too slow, but
it is quite logical, since Black takes the
g5-square under control. White can
counter the immediate move 14 . . . liJf6
with the powerful - 15.ig5.
After 14 ... h6, in case ofthe straight
forward reaction 15.h4 (in order to
play after 15 . . . liJf6 - 16. liJg5) Black
must follow with 16 ... ie5 and White
does not achieve anything. If White
tries 16.ic3, then Black can simply
capture on d5 - 16 ... 'Llxd5.

18 ... ic8?
Sergey told me in our discussion
after the game that he did not wish to
allow the move liJf3-gS and he relied a
lot on his subsequent move g7-g6. In
fact, the move IB . . . icB turned out to
be his decisive mistake.
Meanwhile, after IB . . . lMfc7, it would
have been quite premature to talk
about any real advantage for White.
For example, here the move 19. 1iJgS,
leads possibly only to a draw by a
perpetual after: 19 . . . hxg5 2 0 .hxgS fS
21.gxf6 liJxf6 22.hf6 Elxf6 23.lMfh7+
<i>fB 24.lMfhB+ etc. Therefore, I would
have to look for some other possibili-

236
ties in case he had tried - 18..:c7 . . .

Game BO
After 19 ... c7, White wins again
with the help of: 20.li:lgS - 20 ... hxgS
21.hxgS fS 22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 23 . .ixf6 gxf6
24.gh6.
Following 19 .. .f6, White should at
first bring his queen into the attack 20.g6 bS 21.Ii:lgS hxgS 22.hxgS li:leS
23.h7+ I!;>o 24.gh6 and his advan
tage becomes decisive.

19.!'Mel!
This is an important preparatory
move. I though that after: 19.1i:lgS
hxgs 20.hxgS fS, White's attack was
insufficient.

19. . .g6
Black can hardly save the game af
ter his other possibilities either, for
example if: 19 ... bS, then 2 0.li:lgS hxgS
21.hxgS fS 22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 23.g6 (23.
gh6!?) and if 23 ... b4, then 24.axb4
cxb4 2S.d4 and Black is complete
ly helpless against the doubling of
White's rooks along the h-file after
ge4, or gh4.
In case of 19 . . .d7, White can again
answer with - 20.li:lgS hxgS 21.hxgS fS
22.gxf6 Ii:lxf6 (22 . . . gxf6 23.h7+ I!;>O
24.hd7 xd7 2S.ge6) and 23.g6.
After: 23 ...xc6 24.dxc6 ge8 (24 ... g0
2S.gh3; 24 ... c7 2S.ge6 1i:le8 26.h7+
I!;>o 27.ghel + .... ) 2S.gdl ge6 26.gh7
c7 27.gdhl, White's position is win
ning. Black's other possible defence is
- 23 ... c8 (threatening d7-fS) - but
after: 24.xd7 xd7 2S.ge6 (2S.hf6
gxf6 26.h7+ I!;>o 27.hS+) 2S ...e7
26.1"le3 e8 27.fS c8 28.xc8 l!bxc8
29.1"lxe7 gO 30.gh8+, the endgame
should be an easy win for White.

2 0 Je6! he6
This is the only move for Black.
2 1.dxe6 f5
Once again an only move ...

22.h5
That is the necessary introduction
to White's main idea. Now, it becomes
clear that Black's hopes to consolidate
his position with the help of the move
e7 are going to be in vain.
The point is that in case of 22 ... gS,
I had in mind the powerful argument
- 23.e7! ! , opening the important a2g8 diagonal. After: 23 . . . .ixe7 24.gdl
c7 2s.b3+ gO 26.e6 f6 27.gd7,
Black loses. If Black captures the pawn
with his queen - 23 . . . xe7, I had the
answer 24.dS+ and followinge 24 ...
I!;>h7 - 2S.gel, so that after every re
treat of Black's queen, White plays
26.e6 and Black cannot defend his
fS-square and his position crumbles.

Dreev-Tiviakov, Dos Hermanas 20 03

Therefore, Sergey played

22

gxhS

14 . . . 'i!Vc7
But after:

23.gxhS

my attack was impos

sible to be parried:
-

23 :e7 24.li:lh4 'i!Vxe6 2S.li:lxfS

ieS

Or 25 ... gxf5 26.fuf5 ie5 27.'e4.

26.idS l- 0

This is an interesting novelty. Black

is preparing li:ld7-f6. In a game, which
was played several days earlier in an
other tournament (Dreev - Tiviakov,
Dos Hermanas 2003), Black followed
with 14 ...h6 (I have chosen that game
too as a part of this book. . . ).
Information spreads in a flash in
contemporary society and naturally
my opponent must have known about
that game. He made his next several
moves rather quickly...

IS.ic3 gfd8 16.bl li:lf8

81

E12
Dreev - Jakovenko

Russian Club Cup, TogliaUi 2 003

This game against young grand

master Yakovenko was played at the
Russian Club Cup. I competed there
on board onefor the team "The Nickel
of Norilsk". Our club had the highest .
rating ofthe players, but we took only
secon d place after the team "Ladja"
(fro m the city of Kazan), which was
headed by Sergey Ru blevsky.
l.d4 li:lf6 2.c4 dS exdS 3.li:lf3 b6
4.a3 ib7 S.li:lc3 dS 6.cxdS li:lxdS
7.d2 li:ld7 8. li:lxdS hdS 9.'i!Vc2 c5
1 0 .e4 ib7 11.dS exdS 12.exdS id6
13. 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 14.ibS!?

After 16 . . . llJe5 17.llJg5 llJg6 18.h4,

White has the initiative.

17.'i!Ve4
Or 17.'i!Vf5!? a6 18.id3 b5 19.1lJg5
(19.'i!Vg5 llJg6) 19 ...b4 20.axb4.

17. . .a6 18.id3

18.ic6 ! ?

1 8 . . .bS I9.'i!Vg4 li:lg6 2 0 .llJgS

238
Here, my opponent made a blun
der:

2 0 ... b4?
The right move for him would have
been 2 0... .if4, after which he should
be afraid neither of 2 1.ixg6, nor of
21.ltJxh7:
a) 2 1..ixg6 hxg6 22 . .ia5 xa5
23.xf4 f6 24.e3 (or 24.ltJe6 xd5
25.xd5 .bd5 26.ltJxc5 (26.d6 d2)
26 . . .e8 and Black is even slightly
better) 24 ... fxg5 25.e6+ M8 (25 ...
l!ih8? 26.h4 g4 27.h5 g5 2B.h6+-)
2 6.h4 (26.d3 g4) 26 . . .g4 27.h5 .icB
2 8.xg6 (28.e5 eB) 2B ... c7 29.h6
f7 30. hxg7+ xg7 31.c2 l!igB! (or
31.. .c4 32 .h5 .ie6 33.h7 gB 34.d4
xd5 35.xd5 .ixd5 36.f5+ .if7 37.
c5+ l!ieB 38.e5+ l!id7 39.d5=)
and if 32.h5, then Black plays 32 . . .
.ie6;
b) 21.ltJxh7 b4 (Or 2l...l!ixh7 22.h4
.icB 23.f3 and White has some com
pensation for the material deficit and
a powerful initiative.) 2 2 . axb4 (or
22.ltJf6+ gxf6 23 ..bf6 d6; 22 . .if6
xd5) 22 ... cxb4 23 . .id4 (or 23 ..ixb4
.ixd5 24 ..ixg6 fxg6 25.xg6 c6
26.xc6 .bc6 27.xd8+ dB 2 B.ltJfB
.ixg2) 2 3 . . .b3! (In case of 23 ... l!ixh7,
White can continue with 24.h4 and he
again has compensation and the ini
tiative.). After the capturing 24.ixg6
- Black can counter that with 24 . . .
fxg6 25 .xg6 (or 25.cl f7 26.ltJf6+
gxf6 27. xf4 xd5) 25 ... c2 and he
remains in a slightly better position.
Following 24 ..ic3, it is good for Black
to play: 24 . . .d7! 25.xd7 xd7 26.h4
.bd5 and his position is again supe
rior.
Therefore, White obviously should

Game 82
better continue with 2 1 ..ie4, pro
tecting his d5-pawn. After 2l...b4
(or 2l.. ..ixg5 22 .xg5 f4 23.xf4
ltJxf4 24..ia5 d7 (24 ... .bd5 25 ..if3
.bf3 (25... d7? 26.xd5) 26.xdB+
xdB 27..ixdB ixg2 2B.el) 25.hel)
22.axb4 cxb4 23.id2, the situation re
mains completely unclear.

21.h:g6 hxg6 2 2.h4 bxc3 23.

hel ie5 24.h7+ l!if8 25.h8+
l!ie7 2 6.xg7

My opponent had obviously over

looked that move. Now, his bishop on
e5 is pinned.

26 ... l!id727.xf7 + l!ic8 2 8.e6+

!id7 29.e8+ !id8 3 0 .xe5
The rest is quite clear without any
comments -

3 0 ... \?;\lxe5 3U'!xe5 cxb2 32.

l!ixb2 l!id7 33.ltJe4 f8 34. l!ic3
ac8 35.!ibl ia8 36.!ib6 1- 0

82

E12
Dreev - eu.Hansen

IBth North Sea Cup, Esbjerg 2003

This game was played in the cat

egory 15 round-robin tournament,

239

Dreev-Cu.Hansen, Esbjerg 2 0 03
"North Sea Cup" in Esberg Denmark.
That year the Cup had its lS'h edition,
but it was still an anniversary, since
the local chess union had its 1 0 0 year
jubilee. I was in Denmarkfor thefirst
time in my life, but I will remember
for a long time these ten days, which I
spent on the North Sea coast. We were
accommodated away from the noise
of the city, next to a big park, maybe
with the idea to be better acquainted
with the local flora and fauna. That
was a wonderful and picturesque
place! There were deer grazing over
thefence without being afraid ofpeo
ple and there were ducks swimming
in the creek. There were some other
animals too among beautiful shady
alleys with attractive bridges and
nice benches. It was difficult to imag
ine a better place to have a rest any
where. Meanwhile, the a tmosphere
at the tournament and around it was
quite warm andfriendly and the con
ditions were just magnificent for the
players as well as for the spectators.
I would like to say again some kind
words for the Director of the tourna
ment, Brian Isaksen.
There were three winners with
the very good result of "+4" for such
a short distance - the young players
Luke McShane, Krish nan Saskirian
and 1. My rivals were collecting their
points mostly against the players at
the bottom of the tournament table,
while I had to win against the favou
rites, since there was a point at which
I had nowhere to retreat. So, my wins
came at the end of the tournament. I
will remember that event also with
the fact that just after it my rating

had passed over the 270 0 mark for

thefirst time in my chess career.
I encounter Kurt very seldom on
the chess board. I would like to re
mind you that the strong Danish
player was once the World Champion
under 20, while I was only second ...
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3
.b6 5.1&c2 b7 6.lLlc3 c5 7.e4 cxd4
8.lLlxd4 c5 9.lLlb3 lLlc6 1 0 .g5 h6
11.4 lLld4 12.lLlxd4 xd4 13.d3
e5 14.g3 1&b8 15. 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
16.<;i?b1 d6 17.f3 d8 18.,ixe5 dxe5
19.e2

In my game against grandmaster

Milos, at the World Championship in
Moscow (2001), I had to face a similar
pawn-structure. The doubled pawn is
a serious defect of Black's position. It
is not so easy to exploit that though ...
but still:

19 . . .c6 2 0 .xd8+ 1&xd8 21.dl

1&e7 22.1&d2 c8 23.b4 wf8 24.wb2
e8
Black is preparing to maneuver his
knight along the route - f6-d7-b8-c6d4.
It is far from easy for White to im
prove his position without exchanging
queens, so:

25.1&d6 1&xd6 26 .l!xd6 We7

240

Game 82
like Black's response - 29 ... aS!

29.c5!?
That is White's only possibility to
play for a win.

29 ...bxc5 3 0 .b5 gb8

27.1M2
That is the most natural move, but
it was possibly more precise for me to
play - 27.!'ldl.

27...g5
In case of 2 7... llJd7, White has the
powerful resource 2 8.llJbS; therefore
Black starts advancing his pawns, be
lieving that would improve his posi
tion ... You should always be very care
ful about pushing pawns, though ...

28.'it>b3
I did not like the idea to push my
own pawn - g2-g4 ...

28 ...h5

In case I manage to push my pawn

to the as-square, my advantage would
become overwhelming. Therefore
Black must prevent that in different
ways. Now, he would counter a2-a4
with a7-aS.

3l.'it>c4 llJd7 32.gdl

It seemed that 32.a4!? might be a
good move, but I was afraid that my
advantage would disappear after it.
Therefore I decided not to force the
issue.

32 ...h4?!
The move 32 .. J:lb6, does not solve
Black's problems either: 33.a4 as (or
33 .. J3d6 34.l3xd6 xd6 3S.aS) 34.bxa6
gxa6 3S.b3 ga8 36.ibs llJb6 37 .lhe8
.
xe8 (37 ... gxe8 38.aS) 38.gd6 gb8
39.llJbS, and White maintains the ad
vantage.

33.f1
The move a2-a4!? deserves atten
tion too.

33 ... f6?! 34.e2 1'lb7 35.g3 hxg3

36.hxg3 1'lb8 37.g4 1'lb7 38.ghl
I!?d6 39.1'lh8 1'lb8 40 .1'lh7 'it>c7
The time-trouble was over here and
I finally decided to advance themati
cally my pawn:

41.a4,
This is the critical moment in this
game. I did not see how I could im
prove my position playing in a normal
fashion. The most logical plan for me
would have been to advance my a
pawn, but in case of 29.a4, I did not

against which Black was complete

ly helpless. His position was very
difficult anyway and Kurt understood
that his fate was doomed after
passive defence, so he decided to fol
low with

4l ... l!?b6

241

Dreev-Cu.Hansen, Esbjerg 2 0 03

following: 48 . . X!)J -;').axb5 Iilb6 50.

a7 c4+! 51.wa3 lilaB, Black makes a
draw.
.

48 b6
.

Or 4B ... wb6 49.ib5 icB 50.wc4

Iilc7 51.a5+ and Black's kingside is de
fenseless.

49.ib5 .b:b5 5 0 .xb5 a6 51.

a5! Black resigned.
42.ge7!
This move emphasizes the drawbacks of the move 33 . . .f6.

42 ... a5 43.b3 a6 44.ic4!

That is the most precise move for
White!

44... b6
Here, I was reluctant to follow with
the beautiful line: 45.bxa6 (or 45 ...
Iild5+ 46J'1b7) and I played the much
more reliable move -

45.ga7 ga8
That is Black's only defence.

46.gxa8 xa8 47.bxa6 id7

In case of 47. . . wb6, or 47. . . lilc7,
White wins with 4B.ib5.

48.a7
Fortunately for me, I avoided the
trap. It looked like I was winning eas
ily with 48.1b5 and if 48 . . .ic8, then
49..tc6, attacking Black's knight. But

83

E12
Dreev - Sasikiran

18th North Sea Cup, Esbjerg 2 003

This game was played in the pen

ultimate round ofa round-robin tour
nament. My opponent and L.McShane
were leaders at that moment, while I
was half a point behind...
I.d4 f6 2.c4 e6 3.1ilf3 b6 4.a3
ia6 5.'l'!fc2 ib7 6. c3 c5 7.e4 cxd4
8.xd4 d6 9.ie2 bd7 1 0 .ie3 a6
11. 0 - 0 ie7 12.gfdl 0 - 0 13.f3 gc8
14.hl

This is a useful move, since White

must watch about the possibility d6d5 all the time. Now, after 14 . . . d5, he
has the line: 15.exd5 exd5 16.lilf5! and
if 16 ... dxc4 - 17.ixb6!

14...'l'!fc7 15.gac1 'l'!fb8 16.ifJ.

Game 83

242
I had to prefer possibly the move
16.b4, but it seemed to me that the
maneuver 11fic2 - f2 might turn out to
be more important.

It was also possible for me to play

23.cxb6. The move in the game was
the beginning of basically prophylac
tic measures.

23 ih6 24.tLled4 g6

16 id8 17.b4 ic7 18.igl whS

..

This is with the idea to follow with

gg8 and g5.

19.tLlb3
White should better prepare some
active actions on the queenside.

2S.11fia2

19

dS? !

..

This move is a grave positional mis

take. It would be logical for Black to
continue with the active move 19 . . . g5;
if he considered that move to be too
risky, he had better wait for a while. . .

2 0 .exdS exdS 21.cS! if4 22.

gbl
Now, White controls firmly the
d4-square and he has the possibility
to create a passed pawn in the future,
while Black cannot organize any seri
ous threats on the kingside. Later in
the game, I was trying to follow lines
in which Black's possible counterplay
was reduced to a minimum. My op
ponent had obviously u nderstood that
his position was terrible, so he started
to play very qui ckly with the idea to
exploit my time-pressure.

22

.!:lfeS 23.tLle2

White wishes to capture on b6 with

the idea to occupy later the c5-square.
Of course, it would not work for him to
play 25.c6 - after 25 ... tLle5 26.b5 axb5
27..b:b5 a8, he would have problems
with the c6-pawn.

2S . . . wgS 26.cxb6 ie3

That is practically a forced mea
sure. . .

27.be3 .!:lxe3 2S.11fif2 gec3 29.

bS
Naturally, I could have postponed
that move a bit, but I decided to force
the issue, because I did not have so
much time left on the clock ...

29. . .axbS 30 .tLlxbs .!:lc2 31.11fig3

That is the most reliable line. I
could have also played 31.11fih4.

31 ... tLlxb6 32.tLl3d4

Here, I overlooked the possibility
to win the exchange immediately with:
32.d3! 11fixg3 33.hxg3 ga2 34.tLlcl,
due to the time-trouble.

32
iaS

.!:l2cS 33.tLld6 tLlhS 34.11fieS

Dreev-Sasikiran, Esbjerg 2 0 0 3
In case of 34 ... lOc4? !, White wins
with: 3S ..bc4 dxc4 36.e7 Sc7 (or
36 .. J'!8c7 37.xb7!) 37.lOc6!! and his
material advantage is overwhelming.

.. , ..

a4 10eS 47.ib5 c-

It is too bad for Black to .p_

lLld6, because of 48.liJe6!

4S.g2
It was high time I did that!

4S...lOxb5 49.axb5 cS 5 0 .gd6

);e7 51.);dl );c4 52.g3 J.b7 53.h4
eS 54. f4 55.h5 gxh5 56.
gxh5 eS 57.g5 );cc7 5S.b6 );cd7
59.);xd7 gxd7 6 0 .gel+ f7 61.);e6
gdS 62.gf6+ gS 63.h6 J.aS 64.
f5

35.g4
I could have won a pawn here with
3S.IOxf7, but after: 3S . . .xeS 36. lOxe5
IOc4, Black would have good chances
to save the game. Therefore, I decided
to repel at first Black's knight on hS.
Still, it would have been the best for
me to have played the simple move
3S.el and after: 3S . . . f8 36.lOxf7
xeS 37.lOxeS, Black would not have
the possibility 37 ... lOc4.

The further resistance of my op

ponent could only be explained by the
specific time-control.

35 ... lOg7 36.f6 );fS 37.lOxf7

64 ...ib7 65. e5 J.cS 66.f4 J.b7
39.bS );cS 4 0 . 67.gd6 geS+ 6S.ge6 gbS 69.d6
gfS 7 0 .f5 ia6 71.ge7 gbS 72.gg7+
b4 dS 41.J.a6.
This move forces the exchange of hS 73.c5 gcS+ 74.);c7 );bS 75.
queens. The time-trouble was over ga7 J.b7 76.lOc6 gfS 77.gxb7 d4
and my position was easily winning. 7S.bS! 1- 0
);xf7 3S.xb6 fS

I had an extra pawn and a powerful

knight on the d4-outpost. My opponent continued to play very quickly,
while the time-control was "1 hour to
the end of the game", after move 40.
So, I did not have enough time; never
theless I played quite well in the tech
nical stage ...

41.. J'lcc7 42.bS !''!f8 43.xdS

);xdS 44J!b6 f7 45J!el );a7 46.

S4

ESt
Dreev - Gallagher
Gibraltar (open) 2004

My game against Joe Gallagher

was played in an Open tournament
with 90 participants. Nigel Short won
solefirst place with 8 points out oflO

244

games. He had shared lSI_2nd place the

previous year with V.Kotronias, but
he had been second on the tie-break.
Second place this time was taken
by the Indian grandmaster Surya
Ganguly (who had lost to Short in
round 6). I finished the tournament
without a loss with 7 out of 1 0 (that
corresponded to my expected level
of performance) and I shared 3,d_5th
place. I remember that journey with
my lasting impressions at the sight
of the Rock of Gibraltar and my ac
quaintance with its famous inhabit
ants - the tailless monkeys Barbary
Macaques I Macaca Sylvanus, which
were even depicted on the emblem of
the tournament playing chess.
l.d4 tZlf6 2.c4 g6 3.tZlc3 J.g7
4.e4 d6 5.f3 0 - 0 6.tZlge2 c5 7.d5
e6 S.tZlg3 exd5 9.cxd5 h5 1 0 .J.e2
tZlh7 1 1.J.e3 a6 12.a4 h4 13.tZlfl

I had already played that position

before - against Vesselin Topalov
(the moves a7-a6 and a2-a4 had been
included there) and against Teimur
Radj abov (without the inclusion of the
moves with the a-pawns) - I had won
both games. My opponents played f7fS and after exfS, both of them cap
tured with the pawn: gxfS.

Game 84
Grandmaster Joe Gallagher played
a much more flexible move:

13... tZld7 14.J.f2

This move frees the e3-square for
the knight and it prepares the move
f7-fS at the same time. After the less
flexible line 14.tLld2, White must wor
ry about Black's possibility 14 ... id4
all the time.

14 f5 15.exfS gxf5 16.f4 l3eS

17. tZle3 J.d4
..

Black was obviously afraid not to

be squeezed into a positional bind.
Therefore, he was trying to change
radically the type of the fight.

IS.tZlxfS
This is the most principled move
for White. He would not have achieved
anything with 18.tLlc4, because of: 18 ...
ixf2+ 19.Wxf2 tZlb6.

IS . .hf2+ 19.Wxf2 l3fB

..

Here, in case of 2o.ig4, it would

be very strong for Black to follow with
20 ... tLleS; while the move 20.tLlxd6
would have led to a quite unclear po
sition after: 2 0. . Jlxf4+ 21.if3 c4!?, or
21...tZleS!?

20 .g4!? hxg3+ 2 1.hxg3

It is understandable that I did not
play g4, in order to capture on g3 with
the knight...

Dreev-Gallagher, Gibraltar 20 04

21...E:xf5 22.E:xh7
I was also considering the following order of moves: 2 2 .id3 li.l df6 23.
E:xh7 li.lxh7 (The line: 23 ... xh7 24.g4
was just transposing to the game. . . )
24.g4+ gS 2S.xgS+ li.lxgS 26 ..bfS
ixfS 27.fxgS, but I was afraid that it
might all end in a draw. Objective
ly speaking, that might have been
White's best move order - you will
understand why a bit later. . .

245
e7, captures 32.E:xg8, then Black
can make a draw with the move 32 ...
c3+.

22 ... xh7 23.id3

28 ... E:g8?
This is a mistake. Black could have
saved the day only with the move - 28 ...
h 2!. After 29.e7+ g8 30.xf6,
Black forces a draw by a perpetual
30 ... h3 + ; in case of: 29.hl xhl+
30Jlxhl + g7 3U';lbl bS 32.axbS axbS
33.li.lxbS E:a6, the draw is again the
most likely outcome.

23 . . . li.lf6
Now, Black had a fantastic possibility at his disposal: 23 . . . gS!? White
can regain his material indeed, but
only with the line: 24. f3 g7 2S.fxgS
gxf3+ 26.xf3 and there arises an
endgame, which is already familiar to
us, but in a slightly better situation for
Black.

24.g4 c4!
The move 24... b6, would have
been refuted by White with the line:
2S.gxfS c4+ (or 25 ... xb2+ 26.li.le2 )
26. f3 cxd3 27.hl+ g7 28.g2+
f8 29.ggl.

25..bt'5+ .bt'5 2 6.gxf5 b6+

27.wf3 xb2 28.el
In case White after: 28. li.le4 gg8
29.hl+ g7 30.gg1+ f7 31.li.lxd6+

29.e7+ gg7 3 0 .ghl+ g8 31.

d8+ wf7 32.c7+ Wf8 33:c8+
1- 0
B12

85
E.Alekseev - Dreev
Aeroflot-open, Moscow 2004

It was again winter and I was

again in Moscow at the "Aeroflot
- Open ". That was the third tour
nament in a row and it was becom
ing increasingly popular and it was
breaking more and more records.
There were 370 players in the first
tournament (in all the groups), while
in the second tournament there were
already 476 participants (including

Game 85

246

grandmasters). In 2 0 04, there

were 650 players from 53 countries
and some representatives of "The
Guinness Book of Records" were in
vited in order to note the official re
cord - the participation of more than
160 grandmasters in a tournament.
There were some grandmasters tak
ing part at the drawing of lots con
cerning the colour of the pieces in the
first round in both the first and the
secon d years. This time that task was
assigned to the youngest grandmas
ter, the 13 year old Magnus Carlsen.
There were three ex-World Champi
ons present at the opening ceremony
- Vasily Vasilievich Smyslov, Bo
ris Vasilievich Spassky and Anatoly
Evgenievich Karpov as well as the
multiple challengerfor the World title
- Victor Kortchnoi and the widow of
Mikhail Tal - Sally Landay with their
son.
With 7points out of9, 1st to 3rdplace
was shared by Sergey Rublevsky
(who won the tournament according
to the tie-break coefficient), Rafael
Vaganian and Valery Filipov. I had 6
1/2 points and I tied for 4th_16th place
and I took 5th place on the tie-break.
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 ifS 4.c3 e6
5.ie3 'Il\Ib6 6. 'Il\Ib3
154

This seldom played variation of the

Caro-Kann Defence has been intro
duced into the tournament practice
relatively recently - at the very end
of the 20th century. There are not so
many games played in that line and
the theory is still investigating the
poss ibiii ti es . . .

6 lLld7 7.lLld2 f6
..

This is the main line and the most

principled too.

8.f4 g5!?
White's pawn-structure under
goes some changes after that move
and Black thus succeeds in getting
rid of White's e5-pawn, which cramps
Black's pieces.

9.lLlgf3
It is bad for White to play 9.g3 here,
because of: 9 ... gxf4 1O.gxf4 tLlh6!? (or
1O . . . ih6 ! ?) - and Black obtains a very
good game. Following: 9.exf6, 'Black
has the powerful argument: 9 . . . g4!
- he takes the f3-square under con
trol and he solves al his opening prob
lems.

9 . gxf4 1 0 . .bf4 ih6 1l.1xh6

lLlxh6 12.exf6 lLlxf6 13.ie2
..

The move 13.tLle5 is harmless for

Black, thanks to 13 . . . l'lg8! ? In the
game Smirin - Dreev, Moscow 2 002,
there followed later: 14. tLl df3 tLlhg4
lS.tLlxg4 tLlxg4 16.h3 tLlf6 17.'Il\Ixb6
axb6 18.lLleS hS 19.a3 We7 and Black's
position was superior.
(diagram)

13. . . lLle4
Peter Leko in his game against Al
exander Grischuk (Linares, 2 0 01) con
tinued with: 13 . . . l'lg8 14.'Il\Ixb6 14.axb6
15. 0-0 tLle4 and he obtained a good
position. White did not need how-

Alekseev-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 0 4

247
been about equal.

20

..

e7 21.!3fel

In case of 2 Ulae1, Black has the

powerful resource 2 1 . ..e5 - 22 .a3 (or
22 .d:xeS Elxa2) 22 . . . e4.

ever to exchange on b6. For example,

in the game Yudasin - Furdzik, New
York 2003, h e followed with: 14.0-0
tLle4 1S.tLlxe4 e4 - and there arose
by transposition a situation from our
game. After 16.g3, Black made a mis
take - 16 . . . tLlfS and following 17.tLleS,
White had the advantage.

14.lZJxe4 he4 15. 0

0
In case of lS.tLlgS, I intended to
-

continue with: lS . . .iMlxb3 16.axb3 ifS,

with the idea to follow with gg8 and
the position would have remained ap
proximately equal.

15

21. e5! ?
.

M y opponent had obviously under

estimated this positional pawn-sacri
fice.

22.dxe5 h5 23.ih3 h4 24.l;e3

hxg3 2 5.hxg3
All these moves were quite correct
for both sides.

!3g8 16.g3 ltlf7!?

That was a n ew idea, although the

move seemed to be quite attractive.
Black must take the eS-square under
control, in order not to become clearly
worse.

17.ltld2 if5 18.'f:lfxb6

It looked quite enticing for White
to play 18.ihS, but then after 18 ... iMlc7!
(threatening gxg3) White would fail
to occupy the eS-square, for example:
19.xf7+ xf7 and here it was bad for
him to continue with 20.ltlf3, because
of: 20 ... gxg3+ ! 21.hxg3 iMlxg3+ 22 .hl
gg8-+

18

axb6 19.ih5 ig6 2 0 .ig4

White is playing too optimistically.

After 20.g6 the position would have

25

..

llJh6!

Now, all Black's pieces will be de

ployed very comfortably. Naturally,
the rather nalve move - 2S . . . llJgS
would have been a mistake.

26.a3
White can hardly continue the

Game 85

248
game without that prophylactic move.

26

..

if5 2 7.ig2 .tg4!

Black has repelled White's bishop

away from the h3-c8 diagonal and now
he deploys his knight on the f5-square
creating some pressure and squeezing
White's pieces maximally.

2S.:Bael
Here it is essential that White can
not play 2 8J1fl, due to 2B . . . IUf5 29.13d3
ie2 .

After the correct reaction for White

37.lUg2, Black can follow with: 37. . .
13fg8 3B.IUh4 1e4 (or 3B . . . 13xg3? 39.
13e3), but he must consider the possi
ble exchange-sacrifice 39.13xe4. Prob
ably, I would have preferred: 37. . .
IUg4+ 3 B.ixg4 hg4 39.lUf4 if3, with
somewhat better chances for Black.
My opponent made a crucial mistake
however:

37.:Bf2? :BhS!

2S A:lf5 29.M3 .thS 3 0 .ttlfl

White had more possibilities for a

successful defence after 30.lt>h 2 .
Now, I was thinking of playing 3 0 . . .
b5, but White could have countered
that with - 31.lt>f2 13 afB 32.if3.
Therefore I made up my mind on
following with:

30 :Baf'S 31.lt>h2 :BhS 32. lt>gl

:BhgS 33.lt>h2
.

Suddenly, White's position becomes

hopeless. The attempt 3B.E:efl, would
not work, because of the spectacular
refutation : 3B . . . lUg4+! 39.lUxg4 13xh3 !
40.lt>xh3 13hB+ 41.lUh6 l"lxh6#. In case
of: 3B.g4 IUxg4+ 39. lUxg4 hg4, White
is again lost.
Therefore White decided to give up
the exchange:
38.!1xf3 13xf3 39. lt>g2 13f'S 4 0
.

33 ... bS!
That is one more important and
useful try. White has more and more
problems to find any useful moves at
all.

IUc2 1Uf7 41.e6 lUeS 42.lUd4 ttld3

43.:Be3 1Uf2 44.g4 13xh3 4S.:Bxh3
IUxh3 46. lt>xh3
(diagram)

Here, thanks to an essential tactical

nuance, Black's bishop can occupy the

Here, I had the choice between 46 . . .

c5 and 4 6 . . .l"lf2. In case o f 4 6 . . . 132,
I was winning after: 46 ... 13f2 47.b4
13a2 4B.g5 13xa3 49.lt>g4 13xc3 50.M5
(or 50.g6 M6) 50 . . . 13g3 ! (or 50 . . . 13d3

e4-outpost.

51.g6!) 51.g6 13g2 5 2 .lt>eS (White is in

34.ih3 ttlh6 3S.M2 13gS 36.lUe3

if3!

Alekseev-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 04

249

7 ttlxg4
.

My opponent accepts the pawn sac

rifice. The other possibilities for Black
are - 7 . . . h6, 7 ...!b4 and finally the
line, which is attracting more adher
ents in the latest tournaments - 7. ..
dxc4! ? 8.ixc4 eS 9.gS /DdS.

8.l:gl ttlxh2
a zugzwang here ... ) S 2 ... Elxg6 S3.ttJfS+
'it>d8 S4.'it>d6 Elg4.
I had calculated all that, but I pre
ferred the move in the game, because I
was winning much simpler after that.

46 ... c5 47.ttlxb5 <i?xe6 48.b4 b6

49.<i?g3 'it>e5 5 0 .bxc5 bxc5 51.g5
d4 52.cxd4+ cxd4 and White re
signed. Following S3.'it>g4, Black wins
for example with: S3 . . .d3 S4.g6 d2
SS./Dc3 f1 S6.g7 dlYlY+ S7./Dxdl xdl
S8.'it>gS Elgl + S9.'it>h6 M6.

GM P.H.Nielsen in his mini-match

against Garry Kasparov (Reykja
vik 2 004) preferred: 8 .. .fS 9.h3 /Df6
1O.g7 /De4. H e equalized in the rapid
chess game, but in the blitz-game he
blundered in the opening and he lost.

9.ttlxh2 .hh2 1 0 .xg7 YlYf6 11.

gg2
It is more natural for White to play
here 11.h7, but the character of the
game changes radically then - White
regains his pawn, but he loses his ad
vantage in development. For example,
it is possible for Black to follow with:
l1. . .a6, as it was played in the game

86

D45
Dreev - J.Geller
Russian Club Cup, Sochi 2 004

Shirov - J.Piket, Monaco 1995, where

after 12 .h8 YlYh8, White played 13.e4,
but he underestimated Black's re
source 13 ... eS! and he lost quickly.

11 J.d6
..

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ttlf3 ttlf6 4. ttlc3

c6 5.e3 ttlbd7 6.YlYc2 J.d6 7.g4
This active move is becoming more
and more popular lately.

12 .!d2
I had considered the move 12 .e4 to
be rather premature, because Black

25 0

Game 86

had the excellent resource 12 ... f4!

neutralizing White's initiative com
pletely.

12

b6

This move (which had not been

played before) should be qualified as
rather dubious; Black had better play
12 . . . lOfB.

13.e4!
Now, it is the right time for White!

13 .if4

That is Black's best h ere. It will

not work for him to try: 13 ... eS, due to
14.exdS exd4 IS.lOe4.

14.cxd5 exd5

with: 18.lOe4 f3! (or 18 . . . e7 19.f4)

19.13g3 !? xe4 20 .g2 fS 21.dxc6
ixc6 2 2 .ixc6 <t>b8 23.Elf3.

18.l3el+ <t>d8 19.Elg5!

White is coordinating h is pieces.

19 .l'l:c8
.

It deserved attention for Black to

try here: 19 . . . h6 20.l3hS g6, but even
then after the correct response for
White: 2 1. l3h 3 ! (or 2 1.Elh4 hS 22.id3
h6 23.Elf4 lOf6) 2 l. .. hS 22.Elhe3 (oc
cupying the e-file, with the idea to fol
low with ifl-h3) his position remains
very powerful.

2 0 .ih3

Having played 14 . . . cxdS, my oppo

nent had to seriously consider White's
maneuver lObS, after the preliminary
15 eS. The piece-sacrifice is clearly in
sufficient for Black, for example: 14 . . .
cxdS lS.eS lOxeS l6.dxeS xe5+ 17.lOe2.

15.exd5 hd2+ 16.xd2 .ib7

2 0 . . .l'l:c7

17. 0 - 0 - 0 !
I understood that after 17.dxc6
ixc6, my position was slightly better,
but not more . . . Therefore, I decided to
sacrifice a pawn for the initiative.

17. . . cxd5
Black is practically forced to ac
cept the gift, since after: 17 ... 0-0-0,
it is very strong for White to follow

This might be the best defence for

Black, but it is still too passive. He
could have tried for example the much
riskier line: 20 ... Elc4 21.e3 (The ex
change of queens after 2 1. Elf5, should
be favourable for White, but I was far
from sure during the game that it would
be sufficient: 21...xd4 22.xd4 Elxd4
23. Elxf7 lOcs 24.Elee7.) 21.. .Elxd4. Now,
it looks like that move is impossible
for Black due to 2 2.ElfS, but he has
the surprising resource 2 2 . . . e6! and
after: 23.d4 el 24.i>c2 Elf8, White
has the powerful move 2S.a4 indeed,
but Black has great chances for a suc-

2.51

Dreev-J.Geiler, Sochi 20 04
cessful defence. It i s quite possible
that the calm move - 2 2 .<.t>b1, might
turn out to be the most unpleasant an
swer for Black, since he has a problem
to find a good move ...

21.Wfe3
I could have played at first 2 U3fs
and if 21.. .h4, then 2 2.e3.

21. ..ic6 2 2.gfS Wfh4 23.gxf7

<.t>cS 24.ggl!
This is the decisive penetration for
White. Maybe, Black could have coped
with one white rook having penetrated
on the seventh rank somehow, but he
has no defence against White's dou
bled rooks ...

24 ... h6 2S.gg6 Wfhs

27 ... b5
That is the co rrect decisiv!:; :[.:
Black, because it is his only ch2.!!Ct' : :
avoid the positional bind.
Here, to tell you frankly, I had a:
most lost my mind. I understood that
I was winning, but I was seeing noth
ing and my last minutes were ticking
on the clock. When I had only sec
onds left (well, the time-control was
with thirty second added after every
move ... , so I could afford that . . . ), I
found a move, which was hardly the
best, but it seemed to be quite practi
cal . . . :

2S.gfS WfeS 29.<.t>d2 <.t>b7

After: 29 . . . b4 30./UxdS hdS, I had
seen the important intermediate move
31.)3e5!, which was leading to a clear
win for White. I must also add that af
ter the game, in my home analysis, I
found out that the line: 31.)3xdS Wfe4
32.b3! would have brought me an
easy victory as well.

30 .Wfd6! gdc8 31.gff7 b4 32 .

Wfxb4+
It also seemed quite effective for
White to play: 32.hd7.

26.ggg7
I was short of time here and I never
suspected that Black had made a ter
rible mistake on his last move, losing
control over the g3-square. Naturally,
the correct decision for White would
have been 26.g3! and because of the
threats )3c6 and )3f5, Black could have
already resigned. In case of 26 ...ia4,
White has the "cold-blooded" answer"
27.f3.

26 gdS 27.Wfg3
..

Here, I had already noticed that

move. . . !

32 ... <.t>aS 33. Wfe7

This was the simplest and probably
the best move in the time-pressure.

33...WfhS 34.Wfd6 /Ub6

252

Game 87

Now, White can finish the game off

in a spectacular fashion -

35.Wlxc6+! 1- 0
87

D47
A.Kuzmin

Dreev

57th Russia Ch (lh-final)

St Petersburg 2004

This game against Alexey Kusmin

was played in the semi:final of the
Russian Championship. There were
two semi-finals held that year (the
second was in the city of Tomsk) ac
cording to the Swiss system and the
first three players in both of them
were to qualify for the Super-Final.
There were also some players with
ratings over 270 0 invited person
ally to the Super-Final (including V.
Kramnik and G. Kasparov) as well
as Anatoly Karpov. There were the
so-called "white nights" during the
tournament in Saint Petersburg. I did
not know then if they had helped me
somehow, but I started the tourna
ment with 4 out of 4 and then I made
5 draws in a row. There was a really
tough one against A.Khalifman. So,
in the end I took a solefirst place, half
a point infront ofV. Tzeshkovsky and
V. Epishin. I have chosen two out of
myfour wins therefor this book.
l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.ltlc3 ltlf6 4.e3
e6 5.ltlf3 ltlbd7 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4
bs 8.id3 ib7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .ltla4 c5
n.e5 ltld5 12.ltlxc5 ltlxc5 13.dxc5
ixc5 14. 0 - 0
(diagram)
I have played that position numer
ous times before in my practice.

14. . .h6 15.ltld2 Wlc7

That move was not so favourably
regarded by theory for a long time.
Instead, Black had played: 15 .. 0-0
16.ltle4 .td4 17.ltld6, with slightly bet
ter chances for White.
.

16Jel ltle7
This move is a novelty. I used to
play before - 16 .. Jlad8.

17.g4
Here, my opponent took a long time
on the clock and he avoided the main
line - 17.ltle4 xe5 18.a4+ .tc6 (The
move I S . . wfS seems to be too risky.)
.

19 . .tb5. Now, Black has two possibili

ties and it looks like they both lead to
equality:
1) 19 .. JcS ! ? (It does not work for
Black to continue with: 19 . . ..txf2+?
20. wxf2 .txb5 2 1.xb5+ xb5 22.
ltld6+)

20 .td2
.

0-0 21 . .txc6 It)xc6

A.Kuzmin-Dreev, St Petersburg 20 04

253

22 .Elacl d6! 23.Elxc6 xh2 + 24.'i!lfl

hl+ 2S.'i!le2 xg2 26.ll'lf6+ gxf6
27.Elxd6 e4+ 2B.Ml hl+ 29.'i!le2
hS+ 30. Wf1;
2) 19 ... 0-0! ? 2 0.iJec6 ll'lxc6 21.
'8'xc6 ElacB 2 2.a6 fS 23.f4 '8'xf4 24.

that case with the line: 21.ll'lxcS '8'xcS

2 2.e3 lilxe3 2 3.'8'xe3 '8'xe3 24.Elxe3
Eld2 2S.a3; therefore I preferred the
move in the game.

xe6+ wh7 2S.ll'lxcS ElxcS=

Therefore, it looks like after: 17.ll'le4
'8'xeS, the game should practically end
in a draw in case both sides play cor
rectly throughout. Still, Black has an

I had some pressure here, but

additional possibility, which deserves

attention - the positional solution - to
counter 17.ll'le4, with: 17...e4 18.e4
Eld8 19.'8'a4 Ms.

17... gd8 !
This move just parries White's ac
tive actions.

18.,ie4
That is a velY reasonable decision,
but it would have been hardly bet
ter for White to have followed with:
IB.bS+ MB 19.1l'lb3 iJef2+ 20.Wxf2

2 0 .bd5 gxd5 21.lilc4 '8'a6 22.

b3 0 - 0
White's defence remained too solid.

23.e3 be3 24. '8'xe3 lilf5 25.

'8'e2 Elfd8 26.h3
Here, I had no real possibilities
to improve my position. I could have
tried only the transfer of my queen to
gS, or of the knight to the c3-square.
26 b7 27.Eled1
My opponent had decided here
that the following set-up of his rooks
would enable him to play a2-a3 at
some moment, but he had overlooked
some other factors .. Jt would have
been more prudent for him to have
defended with: 27.Eladl ll'ld4 2 B.'8'g4.
..

27 ll'ld4 28.g4

b6+ 2 1.,ie3 '8'xb5 and here in case

of 2 2 .ics, Black would have had the
powerful argument 22 . . . Eld2 + !

18 '8'b6 19.'8'3
.

28 f5! 29.exf6!

White accepts the challenge! This

probably looked to him to be neces

Now, the most natural line for Black

sary, mostly because after: 2 9.hS

Wh7, he could have had serious problems. Indeed, Black would have been

would have been: 19 . . .iJee4 20.ll'lxe4

lilfS, but White could make a draw in

better, for example: 30.Eld2 c7, with

the idea to follow with lilc6 and White's

19 ,id5
.

Game 88

254
e5-pawn would be very weak.

29 ggS 3 0 .gxd4
.

39.<;!;>g 2 xd2+ 40.<;!;>f3 , the outcome

would be the same all over again.

34 ge2 3S.gfl gxg7

This is White's only move.

30

gxd4 3Vxe6+ <;!;>h7 32.g3

Or 3 2 . liJe3? ge4.

32 ... f3!
Or 32 . . . gg6 33.f5 gxf6 34.gel.

33.fxg7
Meanwhile the time-pressure was
looming for both of us and I had al
most complied with an eventual draw,
by playing 33 . . . Elg3. Then, suddenly I
saw the move -

33 ge4!
..

36.liJaS
That was something unbelievable ...
It was evidently due to the time-trou
ble. . . ! After the correct defence for
White 36.h4, my position would have
been slightly better indeed, but as our
analysis with GM A.Kuzmin showed
after the game - there was still a lot of
fight left in that position. . .

36 gxa2 37.liJc6 ga6 38.Elc1

ga2
.

34.d6?
Alexey makes a serious mistake
in the time-trouble! After the cor
rect reply for h i m 34.liJe5!, I would
have to be very careful and to force
the draw immediately, otherwise I
might have fallen into a big trouble.
For example: 34 . . . h5? 35.c8 Elxg7
36.liJg4 g6 37.Eldl+-. The only cor
rect line for Black here is: 34 . . . Elxg3 ! !
35.fxg3 xg3+ 36.<;!;>hl gel+ (or 36 . . .
gxe5 37.g8+) 37.Elxel xel + 38. <;!;>g2
e2 + 39.<;!;>g3 e3+ 40. <;!;>g4 e4+ 4l.
<;!;>h5 e2 + .
Still, the move 34. liJe5, was not my
only possibility to make a draw. After:
34.c8 Elxg7 35.liJd2 Elxg3+ 36.fxg3
xg3+ 37.<;!;>hl Elel+ 38Jlxel xel+

I was repeating moves here with

the idea to reach safely the end of the
time-control.

39.Elfl ga6 4 0 .gc1 Elf7 41.cS

gc7 42.c2+ <;!;>g7 43.b2+ f6
White resigned. After 44.1iJb4,
Black's simplest winning line is: 44 . .
!kl 45.cl Elal.
.

D12

88
Volkov

Dreev

57th Ch Russia (l12-final)

St Petersburg 2004

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.1iJf3 tt'lf6 4.e3

f5 S.tt'lc3 e6 6.liJh4

255

Volkov-Dreev, St Petersburg 2 0 0 4
This is the eternal question for
Black - where to place his bishop, to
g4, e4, or g6 . . . ? The move in game is
the most popular for Black lately.

6 ig6
hxg6
..

7.1Wb3

1Wc7

8.ltlxg6

12.a4!
That is the only way for White to
create some problems for Black. My
opponent would not have achieved
anything with a calm development,
since I could have always countered
id2 with the move ltJc4.

9 g3
.

Sergey Volkov had played only the

move 9.h3 in his previous games.

. ..

ltlbd7 1 0 .g2

That was a surprise for me in a way.

I had expected either 1O.d2, or the

immediate move 10.cxd5.

1 0 ...ltlb6
The idea of that try is to clarify the
pawn-structure and the plans of both
sides.

1l.cxd5
But naturally not l1.c5 - because
Black will counter that with Il..ltJbd7,
followed by b7-b6.

1l... cxd5
I had a choice between that move
and 11...exd5. I liked the move 11...

cxd5 much more, because first of all

it simplified the position (sort of. .. )
and I thought at that moment that was
in my favour, because of several rea
sons. Meanwhile, after cxd5, White's
bishop on g2 is not as effective as after
exd5.

12 ...1Wc4!?
I was also considering the simpler
measure 12 . . . a6!?, which would have
led to an equal position after: 13.e4
dxe4 14.ltJxe4 ltJxe4 15.e4 ltJd5!.
Still, after some deliberations I chose
12 ... 1Wc4.

13.1Wc2
White does not achieve anything
good after: 13.1Wxc4 ltJxc4 14.'i!le2, due
to 14. . . ltJa5.

13 ... a6
Or 13 . . . b4 ? ! 14.a5 ltJbd7 15J:h4.

14.a5 ltlbd7
Frankly speaking, I liked the move
14 . . . ltJc8 much more during the game,
since the knight had better prospects
from that square. Finally, I chose
ltJbd7 as the more reliable move, wjth
out losing any tempi. The knight has
some good prospects on the d7-square
as weI! (although not so bright as on
the c8-square ... ) and it can be rede
ployed to the c6-square.
15.d2 e7

256

Game 88

Black's bishop has nothing to do on

d6; moreover in some cases (in similar
positions) the bishop is placed worse
on d6 than on the e7-square, particu
larly if White manages to advance e3e4 in the centre.

16.b3
Finally, my opponent has decided
to castle.

16 %!Ic7 17. 0 - 0 0 - 0 18.YGb2

gfcS l9.b4
.

This plan has some drawbacks too.

It seemed more natural for White
to try: 19J!fc1 %!IdS 20.tLla4 , with the
idea to follow with b3-b4 and tLla4-c5;
still after: 20 ...Elxcl + 2 1.Elxcl ElcS,
Black manages to hold the position
thanks to the numerous exchanges,
for example: 2 2 .b4 1!xc1+ 23.%!Ixc1
tLleS 24.tLlc5 tLld6. This plan would
have been much better for White,
though . . .

21.tLlxe4 dxe4 22 .b:e4 ga7

Naturally not:
6 24J'lac1.

22 ... 1!abS 23.f4

23.l:'lacl %!IdS 24. %l'b3

That is a witty possibility for White.
The move 24.d5?, would have been
very bad due to tLlf6.

24 tLlf6

I could have also tried: 24. . .Elac7

25.1!xc7 1!xc7 26.hg6 tLlf6 (or 26 ...
fxg6 27.ygxe6+ wh7 2S.Wh3+ wgS 29.
We6+ wfS?! 3 0.%!Ixa6; 29 . . . wh7 30.
Wh3=), transposing to the position
that we played in the game.

25 . .bg6

In answer to 25.1!xcS WxcS 26J''lcl,

I had planned: 26 ... 1!c7 27. 1!xc7 Wxc7
2S.xg6 fxg6 29.Wxe6+ wh7 30.Wxa6
(or 30 .%!Ih3+ tLlh5 31.g4 %!Id7) 30 . . .
Wc2.

25 J'lac7
.

19 b5!
..

Naturally, that was a quite attrac

tive move, but I had to consider quite
seriously the next reply of my oppo
nent:

2 0 .e4 tLlxe4
Of course, I had seen that I could
not play 2 0 ... %!Ic4?, because of: 21.exd5
exd5 22.tLlxd5! tLlxd5 23J;acl.

That is the correct decision. I had to

admit that I wanted to play that move
immediately. Then I decided to try to
refute White's idea in a more radical
fashion and I calculated for about 15
minutes the variations arising after:
25. . Jlxcl 26Jlxcl fxg6 27.Wxe6+ wh7
2S.%Vh3+ tLlh5 29 .g4 %Vd7 and here af
ter 30.1!c3, Black had the possibility
30 .. ib4. Later, I understood that I
-

257

Volkov-Dreev, St Petersburg 20 04
did not need to win material so much
as to compromise my position and I
gave up the whole idea, having come
to the conclusion in the process that
White's best reply would have been
probably - 30J'lel with somewhat un
clear position.

26.gxc7 gxc7
Now, White's game is much more
difficult than if he had remained a
pawn down and Sergey makes an im
mediate mistake:

27..ibl

29 ... %!,g4!?

3 0 .%!'3 hb4 31..id3

If 31..bb4 %!'xb4 32.%!'h5 %!'b2 33.
h7+ (or 33.e4 l"lcl 34.xd5 g6! 35.
f3 l"lxdl+ 36.%!'xdl exdS 37.xd5
al+ 3S.@g2 %!'xa5) 33. . .Ms 34.e4
g6 35.h6+ %!'g7 36.d2 l"lcS.

31. %!'c5 32 .hb4 %!'xb4 33.%!'h5

f6 34.%!'3 d5 35.%!'h5 f6 36.
%!'3 %!'f8 37.h4
.

Or 37.g4 d5.

37... %!'c8 38.@h2 l'ld7 39.l'lcl

%!'d8 4 0 .ibl

White's problem is the vulnerabili

ty of his b4-pawn and Black's potential
to exploit that weakness. Therefore, it
deserved attention for White to have
tried to regroup his forces by rede
ploying his bishop to g2, since it would
have controlled the d5-square from
there: 27.d3 ! ? %!'xd4 2SJ'ldl t2)dS
29.el (29.%!'bl!?) 29 . . .%!'g4 30.ifl
and Black's chances would have been
slightly better.

27 %!'xd4 28.gdl d5
.

4 0 . . . d5
40 ... g6 ! ?
That was my last move before the
time-control and it was played in a
mutual time-trouble. It would have
been a real disgrace for me to have fall
en into the trap: 40 . . .%!'xa5?? 41.a8+
l"ld8 42.l"lc8.

41.h5

29 . .iel?!
That was a serious imprecision.
White did not have to retreat with
his bishop and he had to try instead
29. %!'f3 .

29 ...%!'c4

This move was played after long

deliberations. My opponent wanted to
make my task of materializing my ex
tra pawn really hard.

41 ... l'lc7 42.l'ldl %!'f6

I practically forced the exchange
of queens with that move. Well, my
pawns became doubled, but I had to
trade queens, otherwise White's activ-

258

Game 89

ity would have compensated his one

pawn deficit.

43.xf6 gxf6 44.h6

It seemed at first sight that Black
should not have any problems to turn
his extra pawn into a full point. That
might be possible indeed, but I had to
play quite precisely, since White had
some serious counterplay with his
passed pawn.

to the end of the game with 30 seconds

added after every move . . . ) in that case,
than after S1. . . fxe6.

52.h7 + <j;Jg7 53.13d7 + <j;Jf6 54.id3

bl 55.hbl lLlxbl

44 13c5 45.g4 b4 46.13d4

White protects his pawn indirect

ly, since after 46 . . . l'laS, he can play
47.l'lc4.

46 ... b3 47. .ie4 b2 48.13d2

Now, my position is an easy win
thanks to the dS-outpost. My knight
is headed to that square and it will be
placed there just like a volleyball um
pire . . .

I understood here that after the

seemingly "natural" move 48 ... l'lbS
49.ibl, I would have great problems
to improve my position, so I played :

56. It>0 lLlc3 57.lt>e3 l'lh4 58.l'la7

lLld5+ 59.<j;Je2 It>e5 6 0 .13xa6 13xh7
61.13a8 lLlf4+ 62.1t>0 (Or 62.lt>d2
1'lh2) 62 ... l'lf7 63.a6 lLld3+ 64.lt>e3
lLlxf2 65.a7 lLldl+ 66.lt>d3 13c7 67.
<j;Jd2 13d7+ 68.<j;Jc2 lLle3+ 69 .lt>b3
lLld5 70 .<j;Jb2 lLlb6 (Or 70 . . . /;Je7, fol
lowed by/;Jc6.) 71.13b8 lLla4+ 72.lt>b3
l'lxa7 73.13b5+ <j;Jd4 0 -1

48 ...fS ! 49.gxfS
Or 49.ibl fxg4 SO.l'lxb2 fS!

49... lLlc3 50 .fxe6 13h5+!

But of course
Sl.h7+.

not:

SO . . .fxe6??

thought that after:

Dreev - Huzman
36th Olympiad
Calvia de M allorca 2 0 04

51.<j;Jg2 fxe6
I

D91

89

51.../;Jxe4

S2.exf7+ It>xf7 S3.l'lxb2 1'lxh6, my posi

tion would have been winning, but my
opponent would have had more prac
tical chances (particularly if you have
in mind the time-control - 1 0 minutes

l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3. lLlc3 d5 4.g5

lLle4 5.4 /;Jxc3 6.bxc3 dxc4
Now, the more fashionable and the
more popular move is - 6. . . ig7.

7.e3 e6

259

Dreev-Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 20 04

Black to try: 1l ... cS?! 12.if3 lLld7 (It is

even worse for him to play 12 . . .idS,
in view of 13.ixe7! and White obtains
an overwhelming advantage.) 13.dS!?
(After: 13.ixa8 Wlxa8 14.0-0 dS,
Black has some compensation for the
exchange.) 13 . . .ifS 14.e4 gS lS.ixgS
and White is clearly better.

12 . 0 - 0 c5 13 .ixc4 .ixc4 14.

lLlxc4 cxd4 15.cxd4 ElcS 16.Wf3
lLlc6 17.Elfcl

This position is very well known

in chess theory. I believe that White's
prospects in it are slightly better. I
had found only one game of Huzman
in the database in it, while I had been
preparing for the game. That was a bit
strange, because the Gruenfeld De
fence was supposed to be my oppo
nent's main weapon against l.d4.

The opening stage was over and I

had a slight positional advantage.

17...e6

S.lLlf3
This is a solid positional move.
There arise some much sharper posi
tions (naturally, less clear too. . . ) after
8.Wbl. For example, the game S.Atalik
- Predojevic, Sarajevo 20 04, followed
with: 8. . . WldS ! ? 9.lLlf3 WaS 1O.Wlb2
lLld7 1l.ie2 lLlb6 12.0-0 lLla4 13.Wlxb7
and the position was quite unclear.
S ig7 9Jbl b6 1O .lLld2 0 - 0
. .

1l.e2
The move 11.lLlxc4 here would have
been slightly premature. Following
1l ... cS, Black's chances are not worse
at all. For example, in case of 12 .Wlf3,
he can play 12 ... lLld7 and it is too dubi
ous for White to continue with 13.dS?!,
because of: 13 ...ixc3+ 14.e2 bS!
15JxbS lLlb6 and he is clearly worse.

1l ... Wd7
I intended to counter 11...lLld7, with
12.if3, threatening d4-d5, seizing
the initiative. It is not advisable for

18.g3
I chose that move, although it de
served attention for me to try 18.a4!?,
with the idea after 18 ... lLle7, to fol
low with: 19.1LleS ixeS 20.dxeS and
White's position would have been su
perior, thanks to the vulnerability of
the dark squares in Black's camp. In
case of 18 . . .f5 19.ig3, White would
have maintained some edge too.

IS fS 19.1Lld2 f5 2 0 .h4 lLlb4

21.Elc4 lLlxa2
...

That capturing of a pawn seems to

be a really risky business . . . It is much
more reliable for Black to continue
with: 21..Jlxc4 22 .lLlxc4 WldS, with an
approximately equal position.

260

Game 89

22 Jb2 cl 23Jbc2 d3 24Jc7

8eS 25.g2c3! b4 26.e4
Now, White's compensation for the
pawn is more than sufficient.

26 gxc7 27.gxc7 gcS

my opponent's situation becomes ex

tremely difficult. H e had to defend
with 31...%I'e6 and despite the fact that
my position would have remained
clearly preferable, Black could h ave
still resisted further.

2S.gb7!

32.e4!

It is too bad for White to try

28.l"lxa7?!, due to 28 ... liJc6 and Black
is clearly better.

2S 8c6

White's knight joins in the attack

with a decisive effect and Black can al
ready hardly save the day.

32 8eS

..

I thought that my opponent had

to consider here the possibility 28 ...
h6 ! ? and it would have led to a com
plicated position with quite unclear
consequences.

It was not any better for him to try

3 2 ... e7. After: 33.%I'b3 fxe4 34J;xe7,
Black's position is very bad.

33.f6+ xf6 34.ixf6 l3d7 35.

l3xd7 %l'xd7 36.b3+ %l'f7 37.xb6

29.exf5 exf5 3 0 .l3xa7 d5?!

This is Black's first serious impre
cision. White has excellent attacking
prospects while the queens are still
present on the board if you have in
mind the not so reliable placement
of Black's king. Instead, Black had
better exchange queens with: 30 ...
%l'xf3 31.liJxf3. I would have preserved
somewhat better prospects i n that
endgame too, but Black's position
would seem to be quite defensible.

31.ie5
(diagram)

31 l3dS?!
..

Now, after that second mistake,

I have managed to win a pawn and

the endgame is just totally hopeless for
Black. The game has entered a purely
technical stage, in which I was not
confronted with too many problems.

261

Dreev-Huzman, Calvia de Mallorca 20 04

The rest of the game does not require
any additional comments. There still
followed:

37...Bd5 3S ..ie5 .ie7 39.BbS+

M8 4 0 .BeS Bt7 41.Bc6 Be7 42.
Bc4+ Bt7 43.d5 .ie7 44.g3 q"f8
45.BcS+ BeS 46.Bb7 BdS 47.q"g2
q"eS 4S.Bc6+ Bd7 49.q"f3 Bxc6
50 .dxc6 .ic5 51.q"e2 q"e7 52.f3
q"e6 53.q"d3 .ie7 54.q"c4 h5 55.f4
and Black resigned.

6 ....id7

I am also choosing a VarIatIOn,

which is played in tournaments much
more rarely than the standard line for
B60 Black - 6 ...e6. The variation 6... d7
90
is still not extensively studied (Valerij
Morozevich - Dreev
Salov liked to play it, for example,
57th Russia Ch, Moscow 2004
among the strong contemporary play
This game was played in the ers.) and that is why it seemed quite
second round oj the Super-Final oj attractive (at least to me ... ) . I believe
the Russian Championship with the that the move 7. . .d7 is neither bet
participation oj Garry Kasparov ter, nor worse than the standard an
and all the best chess players in swer - 6... e6. I would also like to men
Russia (with the exception oj Vladi tion that the 6 ...d7 system had been
mir Kramnik and Anatoly Karpov). used successfully during the 60ies of
Garry Kasparov won that Super the last century by Leonid Stein, who
Final quite convincingly, while the was one of the strongest players in the
silver medal was awarded to Alexan USSR at those times ...
der Grischuk. I took the bronze med
7. e2
Contemporary theory prefers the
al.
1.e4 c5
move 7.lM'd2 as the best for White in
I had played the Sicilian Defence his fight for the opening advantage.
ly very rarely until that tourna After: 7 ... l"lc8 8.0-0-0 !i:lxd4 9.lM'xd4
ent.
lM'a5, there arises a rather fashionable
2.!i:lf3 d6 3.d4 !i:lf6 4.!i:lc3 cxd4 position which is sharp and double
edged.
xd4 !i:lc6 6 ..ig5
Suddenly, Alexander decided to
7... Ba5 !?
I force the exchange of White's dark
the Rauze,r system, which had
er been a part of his opening squared bishop for my knight on f6
ertoire before. He had usually pre with that move. All that leads to com
ed 6.f3, or 6.c4, or quite rarely plicated double edged positions. I
could have played the calmer and
6.e2.

2 62

Game 90

more reliable move 7... e6 as well. For

example, after the attractive line
for White - S.ttJdb5, Black obtains a
quite satisfactory position followlng:
S . . .illfb S 9.a4 a6 1O.ttJa3 illfc 7. After
S.ttJb3 a6, or 8.0-0 a6, there arise
positions, which are rather similar
to the Scheveningen variation, but
with an important difference White's bishop is on gS and not on
the e3-square (like in the Sche
veningen ... ).
This
circumstance
should rather be in favour of Black,
because the placement of White's
bishop on gS is less stable than on the
e3-square.

This is the usual move is similar po

sitions. There arises a quite complex
situation after: 12.ttJd5 0-0-0 (It is
also possible for Black to follow with:
12 ... ElcS.) 13.exfS ixfS, or 12.exfS hfS,
but all that has never been tested into
practice.

8 . .hf6 gxf6 9.ttJb3

My opponent chooses a relatively
rare line. White plays much more of
ten here 9.0-0.

9 ...g5
This obvious move is Black's only
chance for some active counterplay.

1 0 .g3
I was not so much afraid of the
move 1O.ttJdS, since after the simplest
possible reply - 10 ... 0-0-0, Black's
prospects are not worse at all. In the
game: Short - Salov, Amsterdam
1991, there followed: 11.0-0 Elg8 12.g3
fS 13 .f4 illfg7 14.exfS hfS IS.if3 ig4
16.c4 hS 17.ixg4+ illfxg4 IS.lLle3 illfx dl
19.Elaxdl ig7 and Black was slightly
better.

1 0 ...f5 11.f4
Now, in case of 1l . . . illfg6, White has
the powerful resource: 12.ihS! illfe6
13.ttJd4 ttJxd4 14.illfx d4 ElgS IS.lLldS !
and Black's situation is clearly worse
(Kupreichik - Mallahi, Ireland 2003).
Therefore:

1l .'ffil6 !? 12.d2
..

12 ig7!?
. . .

That is a novelty. The move that I

am playing is quite useful by itself and
it maintains the tension in the centre.
In the game Romanishin - L.Stein,
Odessa 1972, Black reduced the ten
sion with 12 . . .fxe4, but after 13. ttJxe4
ig7 14.c3 ! , White's position remained
slightly better.

13. 0 - 0 - 0
Naturally, it had been very attrac
tive for White to castle. After that
move, during the game, I was rather
unhappy with my position...but that
lasted as long as I understood how
powerful my move fourteen would
turn out to be... So, I have to tell you
now that White's move 13.0-0-0?! is a serious imprecision. He had bet
ter play: 13. exfS hfS 14.0-0-0 and
the position would have remained ex
tremely sharp and complex.

13 .. fxe4
.

It was also possible for Black to

263

Morozevich-Dreev, Moscow 2 0 0 4
play 13 . . . 0-0-0, but the move i n the

has a great advantage, thanks to the

game was stronger.

threats ItJ c6-b4 and 1'!fS-cB. It seems

14.xe4

that the move 15.g4, would have been

Alexander's best chance, because then
he would have maintained greater
chances to organize some active coun
terplay, than after the relatively calm
move that he played in the game:

15.%Ye3
Here, I had the temptation to play
the seemingly attractive move 15 . . .
1;\\I e 6 (in order to deprive White o f the
possibility to sacrifice his knight),
but it would h ave lost immediately to

14

..

a5!

It becomes clear now that not

White, but Black is trying to obtain the
advantage!
I lost plenty of time, while I was
calculating that move, since I was ex

16.c4!

15

...

0-0

Now, my bishop on g7 becomes so

powerful that my positional advantage
is doubtless.

16.a3

amining variations connected with

White should not let Black's pawn

15.g4 - that move and the lines after it

to be pushed all the way up to the a3-

were typically - trademark Morozev

square.

ich . . . I was convinced that after: 15 . . .

After 16.g4? ! a4 17.ltJbd2 a3 IB.b3

a4 16.ltJbc5 a3! 17.b3 cB lS.ltJd3 ! ?

d5 19. 1tJc4 1tJb4 ! , or 17.ltJbc5 dxc5

(It i s too bad for White to play: IB.g5?

ISJlxd7 1;\\1e 6 19J "lxb7 1'!fbB, Black's at

1;\\Ig 6 19.d3, because of: 19 . . . dxc5!

tack is probably unstoppabl e.

20. ltJf6+ hf6 2 1.hg6 b 2+ 2 2 . wbl

hxg6 and his position is just hope
less.) lS . . . ltJd4, my prospects would
have been superior.
In fact, White has already prob
lems to equalize. It is rather dubious
for him to play: 15.ltJg5? !, due to : 15 . . .
a4 16.ltJc5 cS 17.ltJce4 a 3 IS .b3 f5
19. 1tJf2 1;\\If6 and Black's advantage is
overwhelming. In case of 15.ltJbc5?!,
it is good fo r Black to follow with:
15 . . . h3! 16. ltJxb7 0-0 and his initia

16 . . .1;\\I e 6!

tive for the pawn is quite dangerous.

That is a very powerful resource for

The move 15.a4 for White is anti-po

Black - his queen enters the actions

sitional, because after 15 . . . 0-0, Black

with tempo, threatening d6-d5.

Game 90

264

17.lWd3 h6
I d i d not play here 1 7. . . a4, because

It looks like 19.1Llbd2 might be bet

ter for White, but I was planning to

I understood that White was not

counter that with: 19 . . . ds 20.lUcS 'lWf6

obliged to play the immediate: 18.lUgS

21.\WbS ifS. Black is threatening to

'lWg6 19. 'lWxg6 hxg6 2 0 . lUd2 IUd4, with

capture on c2, as well as to occupy the

a much better endgame for Black, but

d4-square with his knight and the ma

he can follow instead with: 18.lUbcS!

neuver 1'la8-aSxcS - White's queen is

18 . . . dxcS and only then - 19.1UgS, so

considerably overburdened.

19 ... lLld4 2 0 .lLlc3 1'lfc8

that the position becomes completely

unclear and White has serious counter

The move 2 0 . . . bS, would have been

chances. Therefore, I chose the move

senseless here, because White's knight

17 . . . h6

I had everything protected

and my opponent had all his problems

to worry about.

18.@b1

will go to the b4-square via cl and a2,

blocking Black's b-pawn.

21.lLlla2
White cannot solve his problems

It i s too dubious fo r White to play

with the move 2 U 'lhel. After 21...

18.if3 ? ! , because after 18 . . . a4, Black's

'lWfS ! ? (It is not so clear if Black plays:

initiative is quite dangerous, for ex

21..J'lxc3 22.'lWxc3 1'lc8 (or 22 . . . lUxe2

ample: 19.1Ubd2 'lWa2 2 0 .lUc3 'lWal+

23.'lWb4 !), because of 23 .ifl ! ) 2 2 . 'lWxfS

2 1 . lUdbi bS, with a strong attack. Or:

ixfS 23.id3 ig4 24.lUle2 e6 - Black's

19.1UbcS dxcS 2 0 . 'lWxd7 'lWa2 21.c3 1Ub4!

chances in the endgame are clearly su

22.axb4 a3 23J'ld2 (It is bad for White

perior.

to follow with 23 .bxa3, in view of: 23 . . .

'lWxa3+ 24.@c2 'lWa2 + 2S.@c1 'lWb3-+)
23 . . . cxb4 and Black's attack is just
crushing. Even in case of the relatively
best for White - 24.'lWd3, Black's ad
vantage becomes decisive after: 24 . . .
axb 2 + 2S.1'lxb2 'lWa3 26.@c2 1'lfc8.

18

a4

21... lLlxe2 !
This is an inconspicuous move, but
it is very strong, j ust like 17 . . . h6. It is
important to understand that Black
will manage to break White's defence
with his bishops sooner or later. White
will never succeed in building a block
ade in any of the variations.

19.1Llcl

22 .lWxe2 'lWf6!

265

Morozevich-Dreev, Moscow 20 04
I t i s quite evident that after: 22 . . .

Now, Black's

pieces are

totally

xe2 23.ltJxe2, the endgame is clear

dominant.

ly in favour of Black. Still, White's

27.M3

defence is even more difficult with

White has defended against the

threat l"lxc3, but now Black's b-pawn

queens present on the board.

23.Ylre3?

enters the action with a decisive ef

Alexander was in a time-trouble

fect:

here and he made a serious mistake.

27 b5 28.Ylrcl e6

Ins tead, he could have resisted much

The pawn-break b5-b4 had been

more

tenaciously

with

the

move

23.l"ld2. I would have the possibil

..

prepared, but I decided to play a cou

ple of prophylactic moves.

ity 23 . . . e6 then and White's posi

29.!lel d5

tion would have been rather difficult.

White's position is hopeless, be

I would have doubled then my rooks

cause he is completely defenseless

along the c-file, maintaining a very

against b5-b4.

powerful positional pressure.

3 0 .!le2 b4 31.ltJxa4 bxa3 32.

a3 !la8 33 . .!tJb6

23 e6 24.ltJb4 gc4
.

White cannot save the day with

33.b3, because of 33 . . . Elcxa4.

33 gxa3 34 .!tJxc4 dxc4 35.ge4

!la4 36.c3 YlrfS and White resigned.
This game was acknowledged to
be the best in the tournament and at
the closing ceremony I received a spe
cial beauty-prize delivered to me by
the ex-World Champion Boris Vas
silievich Spassky.

..

25.ltJbd5

27. . . axb2 28. Elhdl (or 28. @xb2

E32

91

It is not any better for White to

play 25.Eld3, because after: 25 . . . Elxb4!
26.axb4 a3, Black's attack is over
whelming. For example: 27.f3 (or
27.'lWb6 axb2 28.'lWxb7 l"lal+ 29.@xb2
'lWxc3+ 30.l"lxc3 l"la2 + 31.@c1 hc3-+)

Dreev - Kulaots
Aeroflot-open, M oscow 2005

l.d4 .!tJf6 2 .c4 e6 3 . .!tJc3 b4 4.

'lWc2 0 - 0 5.a3 hc3+ 6.'lWxc3 b6
7.g5 b7 8.e3 d6

f5

(diagram)

29.l"le3 'lWd4-+) 28 . . . f5 29. Ele3 e4 ! !

9 .!tJe2!?

- and Black wins. After 3 0.'lWxe4,

he plays 30 . . . 'lWxc3 and if 30 .'lWg4

This variation has become fash ion

able quite recently, at the beginning of

- 30 . . . d5 and Black's advantage is de

the 21" century. The once more popu

cisive.

lar line 9.f3 leads to complicated posi

25 .bd5 26.l"lxd5 gac8

.

tions, in which as practice has shown,

Game 91

266

21.@b1 fs 22 .l"1d4 IUb3 23 .l"1d3 IUcs 24.

l"1d4 IUb3 25. l"1h4 @g7 26.@a2 IUcS
27.Eldl, Vasily had somewhat better
chances, but he failed to materialize
his small advantage into anything real
and the game ended in a draw after 42
moves.

2 0 .'it>e 2 ! ?
This i s a new idea. White's position
seems preferable, because of his supe
Black obtains more than sufficient
counterplay.

rior pawn-structure on the kingside

and his more active king. Still, I think

9 ... tilbd7 1 0 .tM3 .b6 11.tile3

that after some precise defence, Black

I had chosen that calm and solid

has good chances to equalize.

2 0 .. J:!fd8 2Uadl @f8?!

move, understanding that the best

that I could hope for was just a slight
opening advantage. On the other hand,
thus I was almost eliminating the ele
ment of risk, because the position was
simplified considerably. It would have
been more active for me to have played
the move 1 l .b4, but then the game
would have become much sharper. In
the game Kasparov - Grischuk, Greece
20 03, there followed: l l . . . cs 12.bs b7
13.lUc3 a6 14.f3 and the position was
rather complicated.

It . . d5 12 .Y:!fe2 he4 13.he4

dxe4 14.Y:!fe2 e5 15.Y:!fxe4 h6 16.
h4 exd4 17.Y:!fxd4 til e5
.

This move was quite possible, but I

That is Black's first imprecision. It

was better for him to have defended
with 21.. .fS and I would have great
problems to achieve even a slight ad
vantage.

thought that it would have been more

22.g4!

flexible for Black to have tried 17 . . .

White fixes with that move Black's

Wc7!? For example, h e equalized the

somewhat compromised pawn-struc

chances after: 1S.0-0 l"1fcS 19.1"1fdl

ture on the kingside.

Wc4 20 .e4 Wxd4 2U!xd4 lUeS 22 .f3

22 ... 'it>e7 23.h4 !:'lxdl 24.!lxdl

!le8 25.f4 a6 26.h5

IUhs 2 3 .e1 IUf4, Beliavsky - Grischuk,

Tripoli 20 04.

I have improved my position con

18.hf6 Wxf6 19.Y:!fxf6 gxf6

siderably and my opponent had to

This position was tested in the

play very precisely. Instead, he made

game Ivanchuk - Kasparov, Greece

in fact a decisive mistake on his next

2 0 03 and there after: 20 .0-0-0 l"1fcS

move:

267

Dreev-Kulaots, Moscow 20 05

This is a simple and reliable move

on the road to victory.

33 ... ttJxa3 34.ttJc5+

ttJxa6

li>e7 35.

Black has no counterplay whatso

ever.

35 ... e5 36.b4 f5 37.d5+

Black resigned. In case of 37 ... rJie6,
White wins easily with 38.g5, while af
ter 37 . . . rJif8, his most direct road to the

26 b5?
..

win is the line: 38.gxf5 exf4 39. exf4 .

This activity was absolutely unnec

essary. It was better for him to have
played 26 . . . lDd7 and he would have
preserved some chances for a draw,

D27

92

despite the fact that my position would

Dreev - Karjakin

have been clearly superior.

Dos Hermanas 2005

27Jic1!
This was my third participation
in the tournament in Dos Hermanas
and knight endgame turns out to be (the previous times I was there were
just hopeless for him.
in 2 0 0 1 and 20 03). The organiza
27 li>d7 2S.ttJdl ttJe4 29J1:xcS tion wasjust perfect as always. There
li>xcS 3 0 .ttJf2 ttJd6 31.li>d3 li>d7 were some other tournaments be
32.ttJe4 ttJc4
sides the main event. Infact, this was
Black cannot save the game in the not just a tournament - it was a real
king and p awn endgame either, for Chess Festival with an excellent orga
example: 32 . . . lDxe4 33.li>xe4 rJie7 34. nization. Mr. Joaquin Espejo was the
rJid4 rJid6 35.g5 and I was winning Director of the tournament, just like
easily.
every time I have been in Dos Herma
nas.
This year it was again a category
16 event although the players were
new, almost halfof them, in compari
son to 20 03. There were four play
ersfrom the previous year - Alexan
der Rustemov and I, the "host" of the
field - the super-experienced player
Miguel Illescas as well as one of the
youngest grandmasters in the world
- Sergey Karjakin. Teimur Radjabov
was among the other participants. In
33.b3!
Now, Black cannot avoid the ex

change of rooks and the arising king

Game 92

268

fact he had already played there too

in 20 01. He beat S. Karjakin in the 5th
round and then managed to preserve
his lead until the very end, so T. Rad
jabov won the tournament outright
with the score of "+2".
This game against Sergey Karja
kin was played in the last round and
my victory enabled me to share 2nd
- 5th place in that quite strong tour
nament.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.lZlf3 lZlf6
The Queen's Gambit Accepted is
Sergey Karjakin's main opening weap
on against the move l.d4.

4.e3 e6 5.hc4 a6 6. 0-0 c5

7.i.b3
This is one of the main lines for
White. At the previous tournament in
Dos Hermanas (2003), in the game
against the same opponent, I had cho
sen the not so popular move 7.i.d3,
but I did not achieve anything out of
the opening and the game ended in a
draw.

bit different. Black takes greater risks

here in that line, but his chances to
seize the initiative are considerable
too. Meanwhile, that variation has not
been analyzed extensively yet.

8.a4 b4 9.lZlbd2
White can also play the immediate
move 9.e4.

9 ... i.b7
The other possible line for Black
here is the move: 9 ... i.e7, which is of
ten played by GM Sergey Rublevsky
- who is a renowned specialist of the
Queen's Gambit Accepted. He played
that variation twice at the tournament
in Poikovsky (which was played a bit
earlier during the same year 2 0 05),
but he lost both games - after: 1O.e4
cxd4 11.e5 liJfd7 12.liJc4 liJc6 13.liJxd4
liJcxe5 14.i.f4 liJxc4 15.liJc6 iWb6 16.
liJxe7 'it>xe7 17.i.xc4 i.b7, Alexander
Grischuk played the move 18.iWb3
(White used to play before 18.iWd2.)
and Black had suddenly serious prob
lems to worry about.

1 0 .e4 i.e7 H.e5 lZlfd7 12.liJc4

0 - 0 13. .ic2

7 b5
..

One of the basic positions of the

7.i.b3 variation arises after: 7. . .liJc6
8.liJc3 cxd4 9.exd4 i.e7 1O.e1 0-0
and here - 1l.i.f4, 11.i.g5, or 11.a3.
In case of 7 ... b5, the game becomes a

I had reached that position in my

game against Ruslan Ponomariov,
who tried here 13 . . . liJc6. I continued
with: 14.dxc5 liJxc5 15.liJd6, but after

Dreev-Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 20 05

269

lS ... b3 ! , Black had an excellent game

Sergey tries a novelty here. This

(Dreev - Ponomariov, Erevan 2001).

move is more logical than what Black

It is well-known that Sergey Karjakin

played earlier in the game: Banikas

worked together with Ruslan Pono

- Moutousis, Athens 2004: 18 . . ..icS

mariov, including also in his match

19.We4 lLld4 20 . .id1 !'lab8 21..id2 Wa7

against V. Ivanchuk.

22 ..ic3 fS 23.Wd3 !'lfd8 24.b4 !'lxb4

At the previous tournament at Dos

2S . .ixb4 .ixb4 26.!'lb1 as 27. lLld6 .ixd6

Hermanas, Sergey played the move

28 .exd6 lLlf6 29 ..if3 !'lxd6 3 0.!'lb7 WcS

13 . . . lLlc6 in his game against M.Ileskas

and after: 14.Wd3 g6 lS ..ih6 !'le8 16.

31.We3lLldS 32.!'lb8+ @f7 33 .!'lb7+ @g8

34.!'lb8+ @f7 3S. !'lb7+ @ g8 36 . .ihS g6

dxcS (It also deserved attention for

37.WeS 1-0.

White

to

try

16.lLld6 ! ? )

16 . . . lLlxcS

19

.i dl

17.Wxd8 !'laxd8 18. b3, the position

19 ..ic2 ! ?

was about equal (TIles cas - Karjakin,

19 ... gad8

Dos Hermanas 2 003).

We have to admit that move was

Therefore, my opponent's response

the cause of Black's further probl ems

proved to be a surprise for me in a

in this game. He had to play instead:

way:

13

19 . . . !'lfd8, so that he could counter

..

cxd4 14.Ybd4

20.!'la3 with 20 . . . lLlb4 21..id2 !'lab8

14.lLlxd4.

and he would have had a quite suffi

14 ...b3

cient compensation for the pawn.

This move is quite typical for this

variation. It is bad for Black to capture
immediately:

14 . . ..b:f3 lS.gxf3, be

2 0 .ga3! lLld4?
Possibly, Black should have played
h ere 20 . . .f6, which was not exactly

cause he fails to complete his develop

in the spirit of the position, but thus.

ment in a normal fashion, due to the

he would have somehow justified the

threat We4. It is too dubious for him to

move 19 . . . !'lad8. It would be weaker for

play 14 . . . lLlc6? ! , because of 1S.Wg4.

him to play 20 . . . lLlb4 (in comparison

15 .ixb3 .ixf3 16.gxf3 lLlc6 17.

We3 Wc7 18.f4

to the line 19 . . . l'lfd8), because after:

21..id2 as 22 . .ie2! White maintains

the advantage.

18 . . . lLlc5N

Game 92

270
2t.ttj d6!
Sergey had obviously overlooked
that move.
21 ttlf5
That was again not the best deci
sion for Black. My young opponent
continued to play too quickly even
after he had made a serious mistake.
So, he made another one as a result.
It would have been more resilient
for him to have defended with: 21...
hd6 22.1Nxd4 fie7 23.1Nc4 as.
22.ttlxf5 exf5 23.c3 a5
After 23 . . . 1NaS, White wins with
24.b4 1Nxb4 2S.fia3. It would have
been the best for Black to have tried:
23 . . . 1Nb6 24.b4 1Ng6+ 2S.1Ng3.
.

24.b3!
The pin of Black's knight becomes
deadly. My opponent had failed to
anticipate the fact that he cannot
unpin anymore. Therefore, now he is
forced to only sit down and wait...
24 1Nb6 25 . .b3 lk8 26.fif3 E:c7
27.gfcl gfc8 28 ..id5 g6+ 29.i>hl
a6
That is also possible, indeed .
3 0 .h3
Now, the threat hcs is again on
the agenda. I did not wish to play more
solidly (for example 30.flg2, in order

to improve my position later. . . ), so

that Black had the possibility to play
30 ... /tJe6, but then after: 31.he7 Elxc3
32.E:xc3 E:xc3 33.1Nxc3 1Nf1+ 34.i>h2
1Nxf2+ 3S.flg2 1Nxf4+ 36.i>hl hs 37.fla3,
I would have won even quicklier, than
if Black had just remained passive.
3 0 1Nb6 31.i>h2
The attractive move 31.e6 would
have been a mistake. Naturally in case
of: 31.. .f6 32.flxcS, followed by a dis
covered check, White is winning eas
ily, but after: 3l...fxe6 32.hcs fixeS
33 .1Nxe6+ i>h8 34.1NxfS (threatening
fle4) Black has the defensive resource
34 ...!lf8.
3 1 . . i>f8 32.c4 a7 33.b4 axb4
34.,hb4 1Nb6
Black should not allow the move
a4-aS, since he would not have the
move 1NbS.
35JHc2 g6 36.1Nd4 i>e8 37.a5
1Nb5
Now, White has a winning combi
nation:
.

..

38.a6! ttlxa6 39 .id6

I did not have enough time, so I
played just like a "human player'. It
would be much better and quicklier
for me to have won the game with:
39.e6! f6 40 .fic6+ .

Dreev-Karjakin, Dos Hermanas 2 0 05

39 ... c5
In case of 39 .. J'1c5, besides the sim
ple line: 40.cS xcS 4Ulb2, White
also wins with: 40.f7+ wxf7 41.e6+
WgB (or 4l...Wxe6 42.E:e2+) 42.l"lxcS.

4 0 .hc7 c7 41.b4 a6 42.

b8+. Black resigned, because af
ter 42 . . JkB, White has the resource
- 43.b7.

B07

93
Dreev

Minasian

6th European Chess Ch, Warsaw 20 0S

l.d4 d6 2.e4 f6 3.c3 g6 4.ig5

ig7 5.f4 c6 6.f3
This poison has been reached in
my practice several times and I have
always treated Black's possibility dB-b6 quite seriously. I used to play
before 6.d2, in order to be able to
parry that maneuver by castling long.
In that case h owever, Black switched
to the plan with the move b7-bS and
that led to very complicated positions
in which I had managed to win sev
eral games. The move 6.f3, no doubt
presents White with many more pos
sibilities in case Black follows with
b7-bS, since White should not be in a
hurry to play d2 at all.

6 . . .Wb6?!
Black has numerous troubles to
worry about in the line: 6 . . . 0-0 7.Wd2
bS 8.d3, as you can see in my en
counter against Zurab Azmaiparash
viii (Moscow 19B9) see game 10 .
(diagram)

7.d2!
Some half a century ago, in the

game Ravinsky - Shamkovich, Len

ingrad 19S7, White was afraid to sac
rifice his b2-pawn and he chose the
rather humble move - 7.b3. I feel like
including this interesting game in its
entirety here: 7 ... g4 B.Wd2 dS 9.f6
exf6 1O.exdS 0-0 11.e2 l'ldB 12.h3
ixf3 13.xf3 fS 14.l'ld1 cxdS ls.xds
'We6+ 16.M2 c6 17.c7 d4+ 18.
Wg3 'We7 19.xaB eS 20.dS bB
2 1 . Wh2 g5 2 2.g3 gxf4 23.gxf4 xf4+
24.'Wxf4 'We2+ 2S.Wg3 whB 2 6.c6
!3gB+ 27.Wh4 'We7+ 2B. whS 'Wf6 29.
!3hg1 E:g6 30.E1d6 1-0.
Besides 7.b3, White has tried 7.l'lb1
in this position as well. The move 6. . .
Wb6 i s thus justified i n both cases,
since 7.E:b1 deprives White of the pos
sibility to castle long, while 7.b3 com
promises White's queenside.
We had discussed the idea behind
the move 7.'Wd2, some 15 years ago
with my life-long coach Alexander
Filipenko, who had advised me not to
be afraid to sacrifice that pawn (and
not only it. . . !) . . .Still, I had never
managed to play that variation in
practice, so this was my first game in
that line. The reason possibly being
that not many players answer my l.d4
with 1 . . .d6, transposing to the Pirc
Ufimzev Defence. Meanwhile, the line

Game 93

272
6 . . . Wb6 is quite seldom played as
well.
During the game I thought that
the move 7.Wd2 was a novelty, but it
turned out that it had been played be
fore in some games of not so famous
chess-players.

7 1.Wxb2

In case Black refrains from accept

ing the pawn-sacrifice, then White can
castle long on his next move and the
maneuver 6 ... Wb6 will turn out to be
quite senseless. For example, in one
of the abovementioned games (Valko
- Thuroczy, Nyiregyhaza 2003), there
followed: 7 ...g4 8.c4 ixf3 9.gxf3
ttJh5 10.0-0-0 ttJd7 11.f5 h6 12 .h4
g5 13.f2 Wa5 14.h4 and White had an
overwhelming advantage.
8.l::lbl 1.Wa3
It became familiar to me, while I
was commenting this game for the
book that the same position had al
ready been tested in the game Duck
stein - Grabler, Austria 1972, where
White followed with the immediate
9.e5. I did not consider that move to
be the best for White during the game
and I preferred to continue patiently
with my development, without going
for immediate active actions:
9.d3

White's powerful pawn-centre and

his huge lead in development is evi
dently a more than sufficient compen
sation for the sacrificed pawn. It is ex
tremely difficult for Black to defend a
position like that in a practical game.
His main problem is that he can hard
ly castle - White then follows with e4e5 and the e7-square is immediately
in ruins. Black's queen does not seem
to help in the solution of that prob
lems at all, because of the line: 9 ... 0-0
lO.e5 dxe5 1Uxe5 ttJd5 12.Elb3 Wa5
13.ttJd5 and White regains his pawn
quite comfortably.
9 1.WaS
Black wishes to bring his queen
back to c7, in order to protect his e7pawn. This idea seems to be quite
reasonable, but still it consumes too
much time . . .
1 0 . 0 - 0 Wc7
Black has won his opponent's b2pawn at the cost of several tempi in
order to return with the queen to its
own camp. I had managed meanwhile
to mobilize all my forces in the pro
cess ...
H.eS!
This is the beginning of the all-out
offensive. White should absolutely not
slow down even for a bit, because he
has practically nothing more to develop . . .
H ... ttJdS 12. ttJe4
Here, I had a serious alternative at
my disposal - capturing 12. ttJxd5 and
after 12 ... cxd5 - 13.f5 . I understood that seemed quite attractive, but still I
decided not to continue like that. The
main reason was I thought that Black's
defence would be easier in that case,

Dreev-Minasian, Warsaw 2 0 05

273

since his choice would have been con

siderably reduced and additionally he
would have obtained the c6-square for
his knight.

12

f5

...

This is the critical moment in the

game: Black allows White to sacrifice
a piece and it leads to an extremely
powerful initiative for him. It is not
so easy to give a good advice to Black,
though ...His other possibilities are
hardly any better.
For example, in case of 12 . . . 0-0, it
is good for White to follow with 13.c4.
Now, it is terrible for Black to play
13 ... itJb6? !, because of 14.exd6 exd6
and after the strong move 15.itJf6+,
Black's position becomes hopeless:
15 ... Axf6 (or 15 ... Wh8 16.f5!) 16.ixf6
1iJ8d7 17.Ae7 l'le8 18.l'lbe1 and White
is threatening Ae7xd6 as well as f4-f5.
After: 13.. .f6 14.cxd5 fxg5 15.itJexg5,
White's initiative is tremendously
dangerous - if 15 ... cxd5 (Black has
nothing better in sight. ..) then White
can follow with: 16.itJxh7 ! ? Wxh7 17.
itJg5+ wg8 18 .hg6, with a crushing
attack.
I believe that the position after the
move 12 . . .f6, deserves a separate dia
gram:

13.f6 ! ! (This tactical strike is

much more effective than the position
al line: 13.Ah4 0-0 - the move 13 .. .f5,
leads after White's response to a posi
tion from our game - 14.c4 itJb6 15.c5
dxc5 16.itJxc5 itJd5 17.f5 gxf5 18.Ag3.)
13 ... exf6 (Or 13 ...hf6 14.exf6 itJxf6
15.itJxf6 + exf6 16.l'lbe1 +-; 13 ... itJxf6
14.exf6 exf6 15.1i*'b4! 0-0 16.itJxd6
- the placement of White's rook on
bl has turned out to be quite handy! 16... b5 17.f5 and Black has great diffi
culties.) 14.itJxd6+ M8 15.c4 (15.f5!?)
15 ... itJe7 16.itJg5 ! (This is more spec
tacular, but White can also continue
with 16.f5.) 16 .. .fxg5 17.fxg5+ wg8 18.
1i*'f4 itJf5 19.itJxc8 1i*'xc8 2 0.g4 ! + Black can hardly expect anything
good to happen to him after: 12 . . . dxe5
13.fxe5. Now, in case of 13 ... 0-0, it is
excellent for White to continue with :
14.c4 itJb6 15.f4 ! ? 1i*'d8 ! (It is too
bad for Black to try 15 . . .Ae6? ! , due
to 16.itJf6+ ! wh8 17.itJg5 and White's
attack is overwhelming.) 16.h6 f6
17.xg7 wxg7 18.exf6+ exf6 19.1i*'f4
and White remains with a clear po
sitional advantage. Following 13 .. .f5,
White can play: 14.exf6 exf6 15.h6
0-0 16.c4 and his initiative is quite
dangerous after: 16 ... itJb6 17.f4 1i*'d8
18.itJd6, as well as in case of: 16 . . .xh6

274

Game 93

17.xh6 Itlb6 (or 17 . . . f4? IB.ltlfgS+-;

17... ltlf4? IB.Itlh4+-) IB.gfel.
It is also a disaster for Black to try:
12 . . .ifS? 13.exd6 exd6 14.!'xb7.

Black's defence is extremely dif

ficult after his other possibilities
too. For example: 13 ... fxe4 14.ixd6
e3 IS.el dB 16.ltlgS, or 13 ... dxeS
14 . .td6 dB IS.fxeS fxe4 16.ixe4
- and White's initiative is decisive in
both cases.
14.ltlxd6+ 'i!?f8 15.ltJg5
This is to bring some more wind
into the fire. . .

15 . b6
..

White was threatening 16.!'xb7.

13 .be7!

Now, White's bishop is again the

sacrificial lamb! I can organize a pow
erful attack thanks to the precarious
placement of Black's king. I had some
other possibilities too; for example
after 13.ltlf2, my compensation for
the pawn would have been more than
sufficient, but Black's situation would
have remained much safer then and
I did not even wish to write about
that ...
Sometimes, if you do not play a
move like that in a game of yours,
you might regret that during all your
subsequent (1 hope - long . . . ) creative
chess-career. Meanwhile, I do not
share the conviction that only young
players can play chess wen, with good
and stable results, during the present
21't century. . . Therefore, I am always
glad when I hear about the outstand
ing successes of such tireless fighters
like Victor Korchnoi and Alexander
Beliavsky, who have never betrayed
their creative credo . . .

13 . . . ltlxe7

16.b4!
That is an important resource for
White, because now his queen joins
into the attack. He is threatening
17.b3.

16 . . .h6
The other moves for Black were
losing even quicklier.

17.3 Itld5 18.1tlgf7 ie6

White's attack is quite powerful
after: IB . . . E1h7 19.1tlxcB xcB 20.ltld6
d7 (or 20 . . . e6 2l.g4!+-) 2 1 .ic4
e6 2 2 .ixdS ! xdS (or 2 2 . . . cxdS
23.c4!) 23.g3 e6 24.c4, with the
threat d4-dS to fonow.
Black's best defence was IB . . . !'!gB,
but then after: 19.1tlxcB xcB (or 19 . . .
xt7 20.a3+ ltle7 2 l.ic4) 20.ltld6
(This is the return of the "ghost" - be-

275

Dreev-Minasian, Warsaw 2 0 05
cause now White's other knight comes
to the d6-square ! ; in case of 2 0.c4
@xf7 - 20 . . . e6 2 1.Itld8 - 2 1 .obd5+
cxd5 22 .xd5+ @e7 23.xa8 Itlc6
24.xc8 xc8 25.fdl ltla5, the posi
tion would have remained unclear.)
20 . . .e6 (After: 20 ... d7 2 1.c4 e6

Or 22 ... g8 23.!Lxi5 ! :::' xi5 24.gxf5

gxf5 25.e7.

2 2 .a3, White's attack is again very

powerful.) 21.g4! and White has a
dangerous initiative (It is weaker for
him to play the naturally looking line:
2 1.c4 ltle7 (or 2 1...ltlc7 2 2 .g4! ltle8
23.gxf5 gxfS 24. .bf5 obe5+ (24 . . . e7
25.ltlc8) 2 5 . @h l xd6 2 6.fxe5 xd4
27.e6+-) 2 2 .d5 (or 2 2 .a3 ! ? Itld7
23.a6) 22 . . . d7 and White has some
compensation for the piece indeed,
but the position is quite unclear, for

resigned.

example: 23.dxc6 (or 23.a3 c7)

23 ... e6 24.a3 Itlbxc6 25.c5.

19.1tlxhS xhS 2 0 . c4 1tle7

23.d5 Itlxd5
In case of 23 . . . ltlxe5, White's most
direct road to victory is the intermedi
ate move - 24.ltlb5.

24.cxd5 hd5 25.lbdl

and Black

94

D47
Dreev - M.Gurevich

6th European Chess Ch, Warsaw 2 005

l.d4 li:lf6 2.c4 e6 3.1tlf3 d5 4.ltlc3

c6 5.e3 li:lbd7 6.id3 dxc4 7.b:c4
b5 S.id3 b4
This variation of the Meran system
is named after the Swedish player Erik
Lundin and it is becoming recently
more and more popular in competi
tions at the highest possible level. The
lines 8 . . . a6 and 8 ... b7 are no doubt
sharper and more fashionable, since
Black often enters rather unclear posi
tions and he tries to seize the initiative
early in the game. Still, the move 8 . . .
b 4 i s quite reliable too and Black usu
ally obtains solid and relatively simple
positions, in which it is sometimes
quite difficult for White to fight even
for a slight opening edge.

21.g4!
This is a powerful p awn-break, af
ter which Black's defence crumbles ir
revocably.

21. ltld7 22.W1a3!

.

This quiet but extremely effec

tive move renders Black helpless, so
he opts for trying his last practical
chance.

2 2 ... c5

276

Game 94

9.e4!?
Contemporary theory considers
that move to be White's best chance
to obtain some opening advantage. In
case of9.lLla4 cS! Black's task to equal
ize is much easier. Following: 1O.dxcS
lLlxcS 11.lLlxcSbcS 12.0-0 (or 12.ibS+
id7=) 12 .../Lb7 13.ibS+ e7, or 13.
We2 0-0, he has no opening problems
at all. In case White plays 1O.e4, in
stead of 1O.dxcS, then after 10 ... cxd4
11.eS lLldS 12.0-0, Black is not forced
to continue with 12 . . .ib7 (entering a
very complicated and double edged
variation, which arises much more of
ten after another move order: l.d4 dS
2 .c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.lLlf3 e6 S.e3 lLlbd7
6.id3 dxc4 7.bc4 bS 8.id3 ib7 9.e4
b4 1O.lLla4 cS 11.eS lLldS 12. 0-0), but
he can opt instead for 12 . . . lLlcS, or 12 ...
WaS!?, reaching relatively simple and
reliable positions.

9 xe4 1 0 .he4 ib7 11. 0 - 0

/Ld6 !?
..

That line is quite fashionable lately

and tournament practice has shown
in the last several years that White has
great problems to obtain even a slight
edge in the opening. Great players like
Grischuk, Bareev, Akopian and Lau
tier play like that with Black . . .

13.id3 !?
This is a novelty, which has never
been tested before. Against Grischuk
(rapid tournament, Mainz 2003) I
continued with 13.a3, but after 13 .. .fS!
14.id3 cS, I did not obtain anything
promising out of the opening and
Black's position turned out to be even
slightly better.

13 ... f6 14.gdl
It deserved attention for White
here to play 14.e4 ! ? Now, after 14...
ie7!?, there arises a complicated po
sition in which I think White's pros
pects should be slightly better.

14 ... c5 15.Wa4+
I would not have achieved much
with: lS. dxcS gxcS 16.We2 O - O ! ?,
or lS.We2 cxd4 16.exd4 (or 16.bS+
e7=) 16 ... h6. Black is not worse at all
in both cases.

15 .../Lc6 16.ib5 hb5 17.Wxb5+

Wd7 18.Wxd7+ xd7 19.a3 b3!
That is the best for Black. Open
ing of the position after: 19 . . .bxa3?!
2 0.gxa3, or 19 ... cxd4?! 2 0.axb4, IS
obviously in favour of White.

2 0 .dxc5 gxc5 21 .id2

12 .Wc2 gc8

21 . . . lLle4?!
This is a very serious mistake and
White seizes the initiative completely

277

Dreev-M.Gurevich, Warsaw 2 0 05
after it. It seemed logical for Black
to play here 21...a5 ! ?, not allowing
White's bishop to come to the b4square and Black's position would
have been quite acceptable after that.

22 .ib4 gdS

In case of 22 . . . gc2, White has

23.ltld4! with an overwhelming ad
vantage. It is too dubious for him to
win a piece with the line: 23 . .bd6
Itlxd6 24.ltle5 + ? ! We7 25J'lxd6 @xd6
26.ltlxf7+ we7 27.ltlxh8, since after:
27 .. J'lxb2, he must already think about
survivaL.

23.ltld4 .ieS 24.ltlxb3 hb2 2S.

ElxdS+ exdS 26.Eldl Itlf6 27.ltlcS+
wc6 2S.ltld3 as 29.ltlxb2 axb4 3 0 .
axb4
As a result of his mistake on move
2 1, my opponent has remained with
out a pawn almost by force, but his
king is much more active than its white
counterpart and therefore the realization of my advantage is far from being
effortless.

3 0 ... ElbS

We were both under time-pressure

here. It was understandable that Black
had some chances for a draw, despite
being a pawn down. Sti1l, his defence
(particularly in the time-trouble) was
tremendously difficult. Therefore it
was not surprising that he lost rather
quickly.

34 ...We4 3S.h3 lab7 36.g4 hS

37.1tlf5 'it>f3?!
This move only speeds up Black's
demise. He could have still resisted
with the move 37 ... !'lb4, but I thought
that the variation: 38.ltld6+ @f3 39.g5,
would not have left him too many
chances to save the game.

3S.gS Itlh7 39. 'it>f1 g6 40 .ltlh4+

We4 41.Eld4+ 'it>eS 42.f4+ 'it>e6 43.
wf'2 1tlf8 44.1tlf3 'it>e7 4S.ltleS Elc7
46.wf3 ltle6 47.Elb4 'it>d6 4S.Elb6+
'it>dS 49.1tlxf7 and Black resigned.
9S

D31
Dreev - Sakaev

Word Cup, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005

It was more tenacious for Black to

defend with 30 ... @b5 ! ?, hampering
maximally White to press his advan
tage home.

This game was played in the World

Cup in the Siberian town of Khanty
Mansyik and I managed to win there
31.ltld3 d4 32.ltleS+ 'it>dS 33.1tlf3 several matches in a row and to en
ter the scheme of the last 16. At that
Elxb4 34.ltlxd4
particular moment ofthe tournament
however, we were both very tired as
a result of our previou s marathon
fights and that explains the numerous
mutual mistakes in our encounter.
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.ltlc3 e6 4.e4
dxe4 S.ltlxe4 .ib4+ 6 ..id2 xd4
7.hb4 xe4+ S .ie2 ltla6 9 ..iaS!?

This move is presently quite fash

ionable. It has become even more

27S

Game 95

popular and modern than the well-fa

miliar lines like 9.id6 and 9.ic3.

ous.) lSJlxd6 fxes 19.e3 hs 20.idS+

t7 21.E1f1+ gS 22.ie7 tiJc7 23.E1d2!
E1cS 24.id3 g6 2s.l3df2 h7 26.id6
tiJa6 27.hes and Black came under a
crushing attack.

1 0 .lLlt3!

9 f6!?
..

I believe - that is Black's most re

liable defensive line in this variation
of the Slav Gambit. Not so long ago,
it was considered that Black's most
solid defence here was the following
practically semi-forced variation: 9 ...
d7 10.tiJf3 tiJf6 11.'lWd6 'lWfs 12.tiJes
'lWxf2+ 13.xf2 tiJe4+ 14.f3 tiJxd6
lsJ!hdl e7 16.cs liJxcs 17.ib4 b6
1SJ!ac1 tiJce4 19.id3 fs 20.he4 fxe4+
2 1.e3 cs 22.E1xcs bxcS 23.ixcs ieS
24.hd6+ dS and Black's position
should not be worse. For example, the
game Yakovich - Galkin, Dubai 2001,
continued with: 2s.b4 as and the op
ponents agreed to a draw. Recently,
the entire line was dealt a heavy the
oretical blow in the game Grischuk
- Shulman, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005,
where instead of 16.cs, White played:
16.E1d2 ! ieS 17J'lad1 f6?! (Black's rela
tively best defence here would have
been the move 17. . . tiJfs, but I still think
that after lS.E1dS - or even lS.g4!? lS ... E1xdS 19.hdS+ MS 2 0 .g4, White
has more than sufficient compensa
tion for Black's two extra p awns and
his initiative is tremendously danger-

This simple move is much stron

ger than the seemingly more active
line: 1O.'lWdS+ t7, since in that case
after: 11.0-0-0 b6 12.ic3 es, Black's
prospects are at least equal, while af
ter 11.tiJf3, it is good for Black to play:
11.. .b6 12.ic3 tiJcs! 13.liJd2 'lWg6 and
he ends up with a better game. For
example, if 14.b4?! , then the line:
14 ... tiJe7!? ls.'lWxhS tiJd3+ 16.fl (or
16.hd3 'lWxd3 17.b2 b7 lS.'lWxaS
ixaS+) 16 ... tiJf4 17.g3 liJxe2 lS.xe2
b7 19.'lWxaS haS is evidently in fa
vour of Black.

1 0 ...h6 11.c3 c!Lle7 12. 0 - 0 0-0

13.l'lel e5

14.h4!?
White's compensation for the sac
rificed pawn is quite sufficient in that
position, because Black's queen is
rather unstable on the e4-square and
his pieces are not well coordinated at
all. The most important point is that
it is much easier to play that position
with White mostly because he has the

Dreev-Sakaev, Khanty-Mansyisk 2 0 05
indisputable initiative.

14 ...if5 15.'a4 c7 16J3adl

e6 17J3d6!? l3fd8 18.d2 'h4 19.
l3xd8+ xd8 20 .if3 e6 21. 'a6

279
been acceptable in view of the vulner
able light squares on White's king
side.

26.'xb6 xe2 27.l3xe2 'h3 28.

f3?!
That was a serious imprecision on
my part and I lost a great deal of my
advantage with it. The correct move
was 28.a4!, after which my opponent
would have nothing really to coun
ter the march forward of my a-pawn
with.

28 ...h5 29.a4 h4 3 0 .'f2

My opponent had defended pretty
well until that moment. I have pre
served some initiative for the pawn in
deed, but I still think that the chances
for both sides are approximately equal
here.

21. . . g5
This is an imprecision and Black
begins to have some problems after
it. It was more reliable for him to play
21 . . . ltJd4, or 2l...ltJf4 with a very com
plicated game and mutual chances.

That was another mistake for

White. It would have been better to
continue with 30.Elg2, preserving the
edge. Now, Black has good chances for
a draw.

3 0 ...hxg3 31.hxg3 id3 32.l3el

'e6 33.b5 cxb5 34.cxb5 l3c8 35.
ib4 d5 36.ia5 l3c2
Black's pieces are so active in this
position that he has a full compensa
tion for White's extra pawn. The final
part of this game was played in a des
perate mutual time-trouble. . .

37.b6?! gb2 38.'d4!?

22.'b7 ge8 23.ie2 e6 24.g3

'h6 25.'xa7
I have managed to regain my pawn
and now White is already better.

25 ... d4?!
That is already a grave mistake and
Black loses a pawn after it without suf
ficient compensation. It would have
been better for him to protect simply
his pawn with the move 25 . . . ltJc8, pre
serving a quite defensible position.
Then, in case of: 26.1!h'd7 gd8 27.1!h'xc6
ItJd4 28.1!h'c7 (or 28 .hd4? 1!h'xd2-+)
28 . . . ltJxe2+ 29Jxe2 Eld3 30.ltJfl i.h3,
Black's compensation would have

After that surprising move, my op

ponent had only a few seconds left on
the clock and he simply lost his cold
bloodedness and following:

Game 96

280

38 ... 'tYh3?? 39.'tYxdS+

he

re

h armless . . .

S... lLlbd7

signed.
Still, in the diagrammed position

That is Loek's favo urite move in

Konstantin had the spectacular prob

answer to S.lWa4. It seems to be active

lem-like move - 38 . . . 'tYb 6 ! ! , which

and quite logical too, but r think that

would h ave equalized, since in that

the more modest line - S . . . c6 is more

case White would have been forced to

reliable.

enter the line: 39.lWxb6 lLlxb6 with an

6.e4 a6 7.,bc4 gb8 8.'tYc2 bS

9.id3 ib7

equal endgame.

It is also interesting for Black to

try the variation: 9 ... cS ! ? 1O.f4 gb6,

96

D24
Dreev - van Wely

Word Cup, Khanty-Mansyisk 2005

which is very rarely played in tourna

ment practice. r believe that White's
prospects should be somewhat better,
due to the not so natural placement of

A game from the World Cup, in a

match/or the 13 th - 14 th place in the
final.
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 dS 4.lt:lc3
dxc4

Black's rook on b6, but still the posi

tion seems to be rather complex and
quite acceptable for Black.

1 0 .if4 gc8 H.dS!? lLlc5 12.

0 - 0 - 0 exdS 13.lLlxdS lLlxdS 14.
exdS lLlxd3+
All that has been played in the game
Tregubov - van Wely, Warsaw 2 0 05,
in which after:

lS.gxd3 e7 16.M

0-0 17.liJgS g6 18 .lWd2 d6 19.@b 1

f4 20.lWxf4 dS, Black maintained
equ ality.

IS.lWxd3 ! ?
This novely had been especially
prepared by me for that game and it
created certain problems for Black.

S.'tYa4+!?
White's

most energetic and

IS ...e7 16.h4
no

doubt critical line here is: S.e4!? b4

6.gS, but after 6 . . . cS there arises a
quite complicated, double-edged po
sition, which has been tested by my
opponent numerous times in practice.

r understood in my preparation that

he had played it quite well with Black.
Therefore, r decided to choose a not so
sharp line, which was far from being

Dreev-van Wely, Khanty-Mansyisk 20 05

My opponent took here about forty
minutes on the clock, but he failed to
make the right choice.

16 d7? !
.

That is a serious mistake, after

which Black's position becomes very
difficult. Why did he not play the seem
ingly obvious move - 16 ... 0-0? I had
prepared against that the line: 17.CDgS
g6 (It is too bad for Black to try 17. . .
bgS? 18.hxgS g 6 (or 1 8. . .h 6 19.9xh6
g6 20.h7+ 'i!lh8 2 1.h6 e8 2 2 .d4+
f6 23.g4+-), because of 19.xh7!
and White would have a crushing at
tack.) 18.CDxh7! ? 'i!lxh7 19.hS, with a
dangerous initiative for the sacrificed
piece.
Evidently, van Wely had seen that
variation and he did not find anything
better than the move 16 ... d7? ! , which
did not seem to be so natural. Still, my
opponent had a good chance to de
fend successfully if he had found the
move 16 .. .f6! in the diagrammed posi
tion. My prospects would be still bet
ter then, but not more. Black plans to
castle and I cannot prevent that, since
after 17.b3, he can follow with: 17. . .
d6 1 8.hel+ 'i!l f7 19.e3 and White
is only slightly better.

17.lt."le5 d6 IS.f5!
It."ld7 g6

0-0

19.

That is probably the best for Black.

Loek is trying to complicate the posi
tion somehow. In case of: 19 . . . b4
20.lt."lxf8 l"1xf8 21.gS, Black remains
an exchange down in a relatively sim
ple position and his practical chances
to save the game would not be so great
at all.

2 0 ..b:d6 cxd6+ 21.c2 l"1xc2+

22.'i!lxc2 l"1cS+ 23.'it>bl

Now, it is clear that Black's com

pensation for the exchange is insuffi
cent, but his bishop pair should not be
underestimated. I had to play precise
ly in order to materialize my advan
tage.

23 .. J'lc7 24.lt."lbS! l"1c5

In case of 24 . . . c8, White's simplest
line is: 2S.lt."lc6 bc6 26.dxc6 xc6 27.
l"1c1 and winning that endgame is just
a matter of technique. Naturally, Black
wishes to avoid simplification.

25.l"1del!
That is the best move and my op
ponent cannot avoid the trade of the
rooks anymore, so my task to realize
my advantage is facilitated consider
ably.

25 ...f8
Or 25 . . . c7 26.CDc6+-

26.lt."ld7 l"1cS 27.l"1cl! l"1xcl+

Black has to exchange rooks now.
After 27 .. Jd8, White wins easily with
28 .lt."lb6 and there is no satisfactory
defence against the threat - c7.

2S.l"1xcl e7 29.l"1el .b:h4 3 0 .g3

g5 31.f4 th6
(diagram)

32.l"1e7
That is the final touch. White is
threatening It."lb6 and Black cannot
save his bishop on a7. My opponent

282

Game 97

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.iLlc3 iLlf6 4.e3

e6 5.iLlf3 iLlbd7 6.d3 dxc4 7.h:c4
b5 8.d3

could have resigned here, but he con

tinued with:

32 ...g5 33.f5 g7 34.iLlb6 g4 35.

c2 f6 36.:Elxb7 f4 37.gxf4 g3
38.iLld7+ xf5 39.iLlf8 and finally

8 . . . a6

Black resigned .

That was a real surprise! Jenya had

played i n our last game a somewhat
passive, but reliable move
8 . . b4
and he managed to draw with Black
without too much of an effort. In fact,
I never understood why he chose this
time a variation, which led to much
more complicated positions. There
were two possible reasons - he was ei
ther afraid of my opening preparation,
-

97

D49
Dreev - Bareev
58th Russia Ch, Moscow 2005

It can be said that our chess games

with Jenya Bareev have always had
something quite special about them...
We are great rivals ever since we
were kids. I had played a match with
Bareev back in 1983 for the right to
represent the USSR at the Under-16
World Championship. (I have writ
ten about that in the Foreword to this
book). Then, the elder and the more
experienced Bareev won ...Presently,
I do not feel anything extraordinary
before our games with Ba reev, but
still there are some shadows of the
past hanging over our encounters on
the board. . .
This game was played at the Su
per-Final of the Russian Champion
ship which was held for the second
time in 20 05.

or he wanted not only to equalize, but

to play for a win at any rate. I was in
clined much more to think that the
second possibility was the right one,
because his tournament situation was
such as in case of his win against me,
he would have had great chances to
fight for winning the Championship.

9.e4 c5 1 0 .e5 cxd4 1l.iLlxb5

axb5
The other more "classical" line of
the Sozin variation is the move

11...

iLle5.

12.exf6 gxf6 13. 0 - 0 b6 14.

e2
It was still not too late for me to
chicken out and to regain my pawn

Dreev-Bareev, Moscow 2 0 0 5
with the line: 14.e4 b7 1 5. .bb7
iWxb7 16.lLlxd4 gS I7.iWf3, with equal
ity. Naturally, all that was too far away
from my plans . . .
14 ... a6 15.a4
That is a seldom played move.
White's main line here is - 15.d1. It
is amazing, but that position has been
played by Bareev numerous times with
White and Black as well . . .

2S3
that Black cannot castle, because of
h6, so he maneuvers with his queen
discoordinating Black's pieces, more
over White's bishop comes to the f4square with tempo.
18 ... f8 19.,tf4 ttle5 2 o .1Wh5
Until now, my opponent had played
almost instantly and he had an advan
tage on the clock of about 50 minutes.
Here he thought for about an hour and
a quarter! Evidently, Jenya had real
ized that things were far from simple
and White's initiative was really seri
ous.

15 ... ,tg7
That is a new move. Black's main
line here is: 15 . . . lLlc5 16.axb5 b7
17.xaS+ .baS. In the older game of
the two - Bareev - Shirov, Novgorod
2 0 ... 13c8
That move was a great surprise for
1994, there followed: IS.if4 id6 and
Black had a wonderful position, but me; meanwhile White's initiative was
later in the game Bareev - Karjakin, developing quite freely after Black's
Beer-Sheva 2005, White reacted cor other possibilities as well, for exam
rectly and that was: lS.lLlxd4. That ple:
move was considered to be impos
20 ... lLlxf3+ 21 .1Wxf3 iWd5 (or 21...
sible before, due to lS . . . iWd6, but af e5 22.d2) 22.e4 (Or 22 .iWxd5 xd5
ter the brilliant computer discovery 23.fcl e7 24.c6 aS 25.e4 d7
- 19.b6 ! , Black managed to draw the 26.E!b6 aa7 2 7.ibS ib7 28 .ixb7
game somehow, but White's position axb7 29.d6+ dS 30 .xb7 E!xb7
was clearly preferable.
31.a6 E!a7 32.ic5 E!a8 33 .i.xd4.) 22 ...
16.a5
iWd7 23.ic6 iWe7 24.iWd3 ! ? ;
This seems to be the most princi
20 . . .b 4 2l..be5 fxeS 22 .ltJgS E!d7
pled move.
23J:lacl ! ;
16 ... 1Wd6 17.1We4 13d8 18.1Wg4
20 . . . iWd5 21.e5 fxe5 2 2 . ltJg5 Eld7
White takes advantage of the fact 2 3.ie4 iWd6 24.fcl.

Game 98

284
2IJ3ael
It also seemed good for White to
follow with the more positional ap
proach 2U'1ac1, but I had decided to
play for a direct attack.
21. .. gc5 2 2.b4
It seemed to me that the inclusion
of that move was in my favour in case
I had intended to continue as I did in
the game.
22 gc3 23.,be5 fxe5 24.tLlg5
1!!e7
Or 24 ... Elc7 25.f4.
..

25.f4! e4
White's attack remains very power
ful, and Black can hardly parry it
even after 25 .. .f5, for example: 26.
hf5 exf5 2 7.fxe5 '<!Ig8 28.Elxf5 h6 29.
'Lle4 c8 30. 'Llf6+ hf6 3U3xf6 Elh7
32J"1g6+ Elg7 (32 . . . '<!IhB 33.e6) 33.
Elxh6 1"1h7 34.1"1xh7 1!!x h7 35.1!!e 8+ '<!Ig7
36.1"1f1+-. Meanwhile, White can also
continue with the simple move 26.b1
too.
26.,be4
I was very much tempted here to
play beautifully with the line: 26.f5
exd3 27.fxe6 f6 2B.1"1e4, with the idea
to follow with 1"1d4-dB, but Black can
parry all that with the simple move 2B . . . 1"1c4. It is interesting for White to

try 2B.Ele5, but the move in the game

is stronger and simpler as well.
26 h6
Black must play that move sooner
or later anyway.
27.tilf3
Now, White's knight is headed for
the e5-square.
27 1!!xb4 28.tLle5 1!! e7
The line: 28 ... 1"1c7 2 9.g6 ! , loses for
Black for the same reasons . . .
.

29.g6! b4
Black's light squared bishop finally
enters the actions, but unfortunately
it is already too late . . .
3 0 .hf7 hfl
30 . . .xe5 3l.fxe5 hf1 3 2.1"1xf1+-.
31.g6+ '<!Ixf7 32.xe7+ '<!Ixe7
33.1!!g 4!
Black's position is indefensible, so
Jenya resigned.

E12

98
Dreev - Bareev
Poikovsky 2006

This game isjust one ofour numer

ous encounters on the chess board
with Jenya Bareev. He lost against
me in the super-final of the Russian

285

Dreev-Bareev, Poikovsky 2 0 0 6
Championship (I have commented
that game in the book too.). Therefore,
despite the fact tha t he was Black, he
was evidently in a very aggressive
mood and he wanted to take his re
venge. The opening variation that he
chose confirmed that expectation.
l.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.lLlf3 b6 4.a3
c5 5.d5 .h6

1 0 b5!?
This is an interesting pawn-sac
rifice. After the main line: 1O ... 'lWd7
11.,bd6 xa4 12 .lLlxa4 It:lxd5 13.
0-0-0, Black must play very precisely
in order to equalize.
1l.lLlxb5 0 - 0 12.lLlc3 'lWb6 13.
gbl
There are only a few games played
in that line, but I have to mention that
White has tried here mostly 13.id2. I
do not like that move, though
13 ... lLlbd7
.

...

6.MJ3
I preferred that move, because I
wished to enter a certain line. In case
of the usual move 6.c2, White must
consider the vari ation: 6 ... exd5 7.cxd5
ib7 8.e4 e7 9.id3 It:lxd5 and after
10 .0-0 lLlc7, his compensation for the
pawn is sufficient, but that would have
led to an entirely different type of po
sition ...
6 exd5 7.cxd5 g6 S.if4 d6 9.
It:lc3 ig7 1 0 .'lWa4+
..

14.e4
That is the correct decision for
White. I lose my castling rights in
deed, but I solve other problems in
the process. The position resembles a
bit the Volga Gambit, but with an es
sential difference - the a-file is closed.
If White manages to bring his king to
safety, Black will have no compensa
tion for the pawn; therefore he must
act energetically ...
14 ixf1 15.1!ixf1 c4
This is an arguable decision. Evgenij
frees in that fashion the c5-square for
his knight, trying to seize the initia
tive. It seemed to me quite interesting
for him to try: 15 ... lLlhS, after which
he could have obtained a very accept..

Game 98

286
able game, for example: 16.d2 ILleS
17.lLlxeS eS 18.lLle 2 ! ? (After 18.g3
fS 19.exfS gxfS 20.'tYg2 '@b7, the game
is quite unclear.) 18 .. .fS 19.exfS gxfS
20.lLlg3 ILlg7.
16.'@b4
Or 16.'@c6 '@d8 17.'@xc4 e8, with a
good compensation for Black.
16 '@d8
It was evidently stronger for Black
to continue with: 16 . . . '@xb4 17.axb4
lLle8 18 .lLld2 and here either immedi
ately 18 .. .fS, or 18 . . . lLlb6, followed by
f7-fS .

18 li.:ld3!?
Or 18 . . .c8 19.xc4 tL'lcxe4 20.d3,
with an edge for White.
19.xd6
After 19.'@xc4 ILlxf4+ 20.gxf4 ILlhS
21.ILle2 !'le8, Black's counterplay is
sufficient.
..

19 li.:lh5!
The queens are exchanged now and
Black regains one of the pawns. The
position is transferred into a compli
cated mUlti-piece endgame.
2 0 .xd8 ILldxf4+ 2 1.gxf4 li.:lxf4+
22.'tYg3 li.:lh5+ 23.@g4
White controls the f4-square. If 23.
@g2, then after 23 . . . li.:lf4+ the game
might end in a draw. That could have
been the most logical outcome of that
encounter, but I decided to play more
aggressi vely. . .
23 .l:axd8 24.e5 f5 +
I t seemed very strong for Black to
play 24 .. .f6, but after 2S.lLld4! White is
better. It deserved attention for Black
instead to try 24 . . . !'lfe8!?
25.@h4 !'lfeS
It is obviously better for Black to
play immediately 2S . . . lLlf4. Jenya
probably had overlooked that after:
26.1'hdl ILld3 27.!':lxd3 (The correct
line for White here is: 27.b3 ! ILlxeS

17.g3
The principled decision for White
here would have been the move 17.
d6. After 17. .. e8, I was calculat
ing only the line: 18.eS ILlg4 19.e6 fxe6
20 .dxe6 (20.'@xc4 ILlb6) 20 ... lLlde5 and
Black would have some compensation.
I had completely overlooked the move
18Je1!, since i n that case after: 18 . . .
ILlg4 (or 1 8 .. .1'k8 19.h3) 19.h3 ILlgeS
20.eS lLlxeS 21.ILlxeS eS 22.'@xc4,
White would be clearly better.
17 ... li.:lc5 18.@g2
Or 18.'@xc4 !'lc8 19.e2 !':le8 20.
ILld2 ILlhS, with some compensation
for Black (or 20 . . . lLlfxe4 21. li.:lcxe4 fS
22.f3).

Dreev-Bareev, Poikovsky 20 0 6
28.liJd4, with an unclear position.)
27 . . . cxd3 2 8J"ldl Elfe8, I would have
lost one of my central pawns.
26.ghd1 <tJf4
The variation: 2 6 . . .1xeS 27.liJxeS
xeS 28.d4 - is in favour of White.
27.b3 gxeS! 2 8.bxc4 gee8 29.
<tJd4
Or 29.Elb3 Elc8.
29 ... gc8 3 0 .gb4

287
Here, my adversary lost his sense
of danger, so he avoided the repetition
of moves and he played:
39 ... .td6 4 0 . cS

Now, there happened a very strange

thing . . . Evgenij no doubt knew that he
had to make one more move to the
end of the time-control and he had
approximately three minutes left to
do that. Still, he could not make up
his mind whether to play 40 ... gS+,
3 0 ....teS!
or 4o . . . 1xcS. After 40 ... gS+, White's
My king was in a cage here and
king manages, like in a fairy tale, to
Black could have forced a draw at any
squeeze through Black's pieces. He
moment. ..
can win a piece indeed, but the evalu
31.<tJcbS <tJg2+ 32.h3 <tJf4 + 33.
ation of the position remains quite
h4 a6
unclear, because of White's powerful
My opponent was in a serious time
passed d6-pawn and his active pieces,
trouble here. Still, we both had thirty
for example: 41.xgS Elg7+ 42.xf5
seconds added after every move and
also the fact that Black could have Elf8 + 43.e4 1xcS 44.d6 liJh3 4S.dS
.ha7 46.liJe7+ h8 47.c6 liJxf2 48.
repeated the position at any moment
EldS. In case of: 40 . . . .hcS 4Uhf4
with liJg2 did not make me think
.ba7, it is only White who can be bet
that his time-pressure was so impor
ter - 42 .g3 ! ? cS 43.1''l a4 a8, but
tant.
Black has nothing to complain about
34. <tJa7 <tJg2+ 3S.h3 <tJf4+ 36.
either . . .
h4 gc7
At the end, Jenya played neither
That was another intermediate rep40 . . . gS +, nor 40 . . . xcS and he chose
etition ...
instead another possibility - he sim
37.<tJdc6 <tJg2 +
ply failed to play the last move of the
Once again . . .
time-control and as a result ... 1- O .
38.h3 <tJf4+ 39.h4

Game 99

288
99

B12
Bologan - Dreev
Poikovsky 2 0 06

l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 if5 4.lLIfJ

e6 5.ie2 lLId7 6. 0 - 0 ig6 7.c3
lLIh6
7... a6.
8 ..hb.6 gxh6 9.bd2

22.fxe3 ge8 and Black had a very good

game. Still, while I was preparing for
the game, it seemed to me that things
were not so promising for Black after
the undermining move fl-f6. He had
to play extremely precisely in most of
the lines in order to avoid ending up in
an inferior position. The fact that Vio
rei was obviously quite ready to repeat
the way he played against Z.Isoria
confirmed that evaluation. The move
I chose, was leading to a much more
complex position.
1 0 .lLIel
This is a quite interesting maneu
ver. White had also to consider the
possibilities: 1O.c4, 1O.lLlb3 and 1O.h4.
lO c5!
Of course, that move is an integral
part of Black's plan anyway, but after
the maneuver of White's knight it is
doubtlessly even stronger.
.

9 ...ie7!?
This is an interesting novelty. I
decided to refrain from the standard
plan here, including the undermin
ing move fl-f6. Black usually opted
for the immediate 9 .. .f6, as Z.Isoria
played with Black against V.Bologan.
The game continued with: 1O.lLlb3
ig7 11.exf6 V9xf6 12.lLlel eS 13.ig4 ifS
14.dxeS lLlxeS Is.ixfS V9xfS 16.lLld4
V9fl 17.f4 0-0 18.lLld3 lLlc4 19.9f3
gae8 2 0 .V9c2 ge4 and he obtained a
quite acceptable position (Bologan Izoria, St Vincent 2005). Meanwhile,
Black had also tried the move fl-f6,
after the preparatory if8-g7 and cas
tling. In the game Smikovski - Galkin,
Internet 2 004, there followed: 9 . . .
ig7 1O.gel 0 - 0 Il.ti:lfl f6 12.exf6 V9xf6
I3.lLlg3 e5 14.dxe5 lLlxe5 15.V9d2 gae8
16.gfl a6 I7.ti:lxe5 V9xe5 I8.gael V9f4
19.V9xf4 gxf4 20.if3 gff8 21.ge3 gxe3

1l.lLIb3? !
Black can counter ll.f4 with the
powerful argument - l1...V9b6. In case
of ll.lLld3, Black can also play 11 ...
V9b6, but then White would have the
strike - 12.c4 ! with great complica
tions. Therefore, it deserved attention
for White to come back with his knight
to the centre.

Bologa n-Dreev, Poikovsky 2 0 0 6

1 l :flb6 12.dxc5
Now, it is bad for White to play:
12.'d2 c4 13.ltJc1, because of: 13 . . .
ItJxe5! 14.dxe5 g5 15.'fld1 xb2.
12 .bc5
Capturing with the knight on c5 is
evidently worse, since Black's pres
sure against his opponent's e5-pawn
is thus reduced.
13.1tJf3
White has no advantage after the
opening. In case of: 13.ltJc5 ItJc5, he
has problems with the protection of
his b2-pawn.

289

13 f8 !?
Now, Black's bishop is redeployed
to g7, via its initial square, in order to
exploit the vulnerability of White's e5pawn.
14.a4
I was not impressed by that "active"
move. You will see later that it only
weakens the b4-square. White had
better play the immediate - 14.c4.
14 a6 15.c4
Viorel is trying to provoke a lively
piece-play as quickly as possible. I
only needed to complete my develop
ment and my position would be clearly
better.

15... e4!
That is the right way for Black to
hold on to the d5-outpost. I n case of
15 . . . dxc4, it is very good for White to
continue with 16.ltJbd2!
16.a5 b4 17.ltJbd2 l"ld8
This is a strong move. The tension
in the centre has reached its peak. Af
ter the "normal" line for Black: 17 ...
1i.g7 18.ltJxe4 dxe4 18.ltJd2, the posi
tion remains approximately equal.
You should not forget though, Black's
pawns are doubled . . .

..

18.cxd5? !
Now, the position has been stabi
lized and Black can calmly complete
his development! It deserved atten
tion for White to follow with: 18.e1!?
xb2 (or 18 ... 1i.g7? 19.1tJxe4 xe1 20.
ItJd6+) 19.1tJxe4 (White would not

Game 1 0 0

290
achieve anything much with: 19.cxd5
obd5 2 0.c4 c6! .) 19 ... dxe4 20.gb1
a3 2UiJd4 liJ c5 ! ? (It is clearly worse
for Black to play: 21 ... g7 22.liJxe6!?
fxe6 23.h5+ It>e7 24.xe4 obe5 25.
gfel.) 22.d2 a4 and Black is better. It is also interesting for White to
try 18.ga3! and here after: 18 ... xb2
19 .Elb3 a2 20.gxb7 i.g7 (It is too dan
gerous for Black to play: 20 ... xa5?
2l.liJd4 liJxe5 22.h5!.) 21.liJxe4 dxe4
22.liJd4 liJxe5 23.b3 xb3 24. liJxb3,
White maintains good prospects on
the queenside in that s harp endgame.
Instead, Black could have followed
with the more restrained line: 1 8 . . . liJc5
(preventing the move ga3-b3) 19.cxd5
bd5 20.c2 g7 2Uk1 liJd7.
18 h:d5 19.c2 ig7 2 0 .liJc4
Black can counter 20.Ela4 with the
powerful argument 20 . . . c5 !
2 0 ... 0 - 0
I managed already to evacuate my
king, while White's initiative ebbed
away and his pawns were quite vul
nerable ...
2UUdl gc8 2 2.b3
It is more resilient for White to play
here: 2 2 .ga4!? c5 23.c3 Elfd8.
22 liJxe5 23.liJfxe5 h:e5 24.
Ela4 e7
That was a n imprecision. I decided
to play more "solidly", while I was
choosing between that move and 24 ...
c3. The latter looks to me now much
stronger.
25.d2 ig7
(diagram)
White's position seems to be quite
difficult, but he could have resisted
more tenaciously with: 26.liJb6 ib3
27.liJc8 gc8 28.gg4! id1 and here he
..

..

would have the surprising intermedi

ate move - 29. h6 f6 (That is the only
move for Black, since 29 ... f8 does
not work, because of 30.d3! ) 3 0.d1
gc5 - and Black would have an obvi
ous advantage. It would be h owever,
rather difficult for him to tum it into
a full point, because of the opposite
coloured bishops present on the board
and the vulnerability of the e6-pawn.
26.if3?
This terrible move was played in a
time-pressure and it became quite easy
for me to press my advantage home.
26 h:t'3 27.gxi3 gfd8 28.e2
g5+ 29.1t>f1 dl+ 3 0 .xdl gd8
31.c2 h5 32.lt>g2 g6+ !
This is the simplest for Black.
33. xg6 hxg6 34.gb4 gd7 35.
liJb6 gc7 36.liJa8 ic3 0 - 1
..

100

D23
Yevseev - Dreev
Moscow 2006

This game was played in the tra

ditional match Moscow - Saint Pe
tersburg. It was preceded by a blitz
tournament for the participants of
the main event and I won it. Unfor
tunately, I could not play in the first
round of the compehtion and accord-

291

Yevseev-Dreev, Moscow 20 0 6
ing to the rules, in the second day I
could not play on boards one or two.
I was faced with the choice - to play
with Black on board three, or to be
with White on some of the lower
boards. I decided to choose board
three, because I wanted to try to take
my revenge against Denis, who had
beaten me a short while before that
with White, in the first round of the
Russian team championship ...
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tLlf3 tLlf6 4.c2
dxc4 5.xc4 ifS
I had played S . . . ig4 in the game I
mentioned.
6.g3 e6 7.ig2 tLlhd7 8. 0 - 0 ie7
9.tLlc3 0 - 0

time ago ..
1 O . .h5!
This move is relatively new. That
was the reason I stopped playing
lO.e3 altogether. The idea behind the
advance of the b-pawn is to impede
the occupation of the centre by White
with e3-e4.
1 l.e2
It is too dangerous for White to ac
cept the pawn-sacrifice: 11.xc6 b4,
since Black has a very good compen
sation.
1l ...h4 12.tLlhl
This move is a bit surprising, but it
is quite sensible. (I used to play here
12.lU a4.). White lags in development
now, but in case Black postpones the
pawn-advance c6-cS, his position
might become inferior rather quickly.
12 . Jk8
It was also possible for Black to
try the immediate move I2 ... cS and if
I3.lUeS, then I3 ... lUxeS 14.dxeS id3.
13.a3 a5
It deserved attention for Blak to
play here I3 ... aS.
14.axh4 axh4
I felt that the move 14 ... ixh4 would
have been good enough to equalize,
but I wanted to enter a more compli
cated position.
.

That is a well-known tabia in that

variation. White can continue here
with lO .a4, or lO.igs. It is also popular
for him to play the move lO.el, for ex
ample: lO.el lUe4 11.b3 b6 12.lUh4
ixh4 I3.gxh4. White only should not
forget the famous trap: lO .dI ic2
and in case his rook retreats (11.d2),
Black wins his opponent's queen with
the move 1l ... lUb6.
1 0 .e3
This is the main line here. The e2square is freed for White's queen. I
used to play like that with White some

Game 1 0 0

292

15.bd2
That move was not so accurate,
since White had better start with
15.b3, although even then after lS. . . cS,
Black would have an excellent game.

15 c5

Now, it becomes clear that White

has problems to complete his devel
opment.

16.b3
It is quite understandable that
White wishes to mobilize his forces
as quickly as possible, but he weak
ens the c3-square with his last move.
Black's knight heads for that outpost
immediately. The tension in the centre
would have been quite advantageous
for Black after: 16.e4 ig6, while the
move 16Jdl would have been sense
less in view of 16 . . .ic2

play 20J"lfc1, with the following even

tual developments: 2o ... Elxb3 21.aS
Elb2 2 2.1el c2 23.ltJc6 'lWe8 24.e4 (or
2 4.'lWc3 Elbl) 24 . . .ig4 2S.'lWc3 1'lb6 26.
ItJxe7+ 'lWxe7 27.Elxc2=

20
exd4

xe5 21. xe5 cxd4! 22.

Or 22.ltJc6 d3.

22 EkS
.

Black's rook goes back to the c8square just in time. The routine line:
22 ... !ixb3, after: 23.ltJc6 'lWd6 24.'lWc4,
led to complete equality.

23.c6 'lWd6 24.:i;a6 if6 25.ie4

It is too bad for White to play:
2S.ltJa7 'lWxd4 26.ltJxc8 id3!

25 ixe4 26.'lWxe4
..

16 d5 17.ib2 c3 lS .ixc3
.

That
forced.

decision

was

practically

lS bxc3 19.c4
..

Now, it seems at first sight that

White has no p roblems at all. He only
. needs to play - Elc1...

26 'lWd7!
.

This move disrupts the harmony of

White's pieces. Black's queen is head
ed for the b7-square.

19

..

:i;bS!

This reply is very powerlul. Black

creates immediate threats - in this
case against White's b3-pawn.

2 0 .fe5?!
That natural move is a mistake too.
It was still not too late for White to

27.Elfal 'lWb7 2S.b4 :i;fdS!

It is quite sensible for Black to bring
some reserves, while White's pieces
are pinned.

29.b5
Or 29.f3 Eld6.

29 J;xd4 3 0 .'lWe3 Eld5

.

293

Yevseev-Dreev, Moscow 20 0 6
It was even stronger for Black to
play here the immediate move - 30 ...
c2. I was calculating during the game
the variation: 31.ttJxd4 ixd4 32.IWcl,
but I saw that in case of: 32 ... ixal
33Jxal IWxbS, White had the resource
- 34.IWxc2, therefore I played 30 . . .l''i: dS.
Still, after the simple move - 32 ... h6!,
the combination ofthe threats IWf3 and
xal, would have rendered White's
situation completely hopeless.
31.);b6
After that move, I played quite im
precisely. I was planning to continue
with the correct reply at first - 31 ...
IWd7, but then the move in the game
seemed to me to be preferable.
31 . . . IWc7 32.ttJb4
Or 32.l"i:a7 xb6.
32 ... d4
That move leads to an endgame by
force. Black had better opt for: 32 ...
l"i:dd8 33.l"i:c6 b7.
33.xd5 .be3

Now, it is quite evident that

Black has complicated his task consid
erably, although victory is still within
reach.
37... <;!teS 3S. <;!tfl
Both kings are eager to join in the
fight.
3S . . . <;!td7 39. <;!te2 <;!td6 4 0 . <;!td3
If 40.l"i:a7, then Black has the re
source 40 ... l"i:c7.
40 ... <;!tc5 41.);a7
White has problems now to protect
his bS-pawn and his counterplay is
obviously too slow.
41. <;!txb5 42.ttJd4+ <;!tb6 43.
l"i:d7
43.l"i:xf7 l"i:d8
43 .. J'!c7 44.);d6+ <;!tc5 45.);dS
.

45 ig5! 46J''lb S if6 47.);b5+

<;!td6 4S .!t:Ib3 <;!tc6 49.);bS l"i:a7
The rest is already easy.
5 0 .f4 l"i:a2 51.g4 h6 52.);fS );b2
53.g5 bxg5 54.f:xg5 ixg5 55 . .!t:Id4+
<;!td5 56.<;!txc3 l"i:xh2 57.);xf7 if6
5S.l"i:d7+ 'iPe5 59 .);c7+ 'iPd6. White
resigned.

34.);e6! xe6 35 .!t:Ie7+ <;!tfS 36.

.!t:Ixc6 id2 37.);a2

294

Some of Dreev's Result of Tournaments and Matches

295

296

297

298
Index of Opponents
Game numbers in bold indicate the games where Dreev was White
Adams 30
Alekseev E. 85
Anand 19
Aseev 14
Atalik 68
Azmaiparashvili 1 0
Baburin 9
Balashov 49
Banikas 71
Bareev 3, 97, 98
Bologan 99
Bronstein D. 16
Chandler 59
Chekhov 7
Cifuentes Parada 32
Dautov 38
Galdunts 2 7
Galkin 39
Gallagher 84
Gelfand 4, 6, 28
Geller E. 13
Geller J. 86
Gleizerov 21
Golubev 29
Graf 4 1
Grischuk 53
Gurevich M. 94
Hansen Cu. 82
Huebner 6 1
Huzman 89
Jakovenko 81
Jobava 74
Kaidanov 2
Kamsky 5
KaIjakin 92
Kasparov 43
Khalifman 34, 46, 56
Kishnev 77

Krasenkow 44
Kulaots 91
Kuzmin A. 87
Lalic 6 0
Leko 31
Lerner 25
Malaniuk 18
Milov 37
Minasian 93
Morozevich 90
Muhutdinov 26
Nadera 20
Nedev 72
Novikov I. 15
Oll 1
Pelletier 75
Peng Xiaomin 63
Pigusov 73
Pliester 11
Rogers 24
Ruban 12
Rublevsky 47, 58
Sadler 42
Sakaev 22, 95
Sasikiran 51, 83
Sax 62
Seirawan 33
Semeniuk 55
Sherbakov 8
Shirov 35
Smirin 67
Sokolov 1. 66
Sveshnikov 48
Svetushkin 52
Svidler 45, 78
Timman 50
Tiviakov 23, 54, 8 0
Tkachiev 69

299
Vaganian 4 0
Vallejo Pons 76
Volkov 88
Wang Zili 57
Wedberg 17

Yevseev 100
Zagrebelny 79
Zhang Zhong 64, 7 0
d e Firmian 36
van Welly 65, 96
Index of Openings

Game numbers in bold indicate the games where Dreev was White
A07
A43
A46
A57
A65
A70
A81
A85
A87

1
2
70
71
63, 69
17, 36, 37
64
21
18

B07
BlO
B12
B13
B18
B19
B31
B60

1 0 , 93
25, 49
85, 99
24, 55
54
72
27
90

C07 23, 30
Cll 3, 57
C13 19
C44 5
Dll 79

D12 61, 88
D13 9

D20 8, 45, 47, 52, 58

D23 100
D24 96
D27 7, 92
D30 53
D31 39, 48, 95
D34 41
D36 12
D37 6, 34, 4 0 , 59, 73
D39 77
D43 15, 38, 66, 68
D45 32, 86
D46 65
D47 11, 14, 20, 51, 87, 94
D48 28, 42, 50
D49 22, 97
D82 31, 78
D91 89
D92 44, 46, 56

Ell
E12
E32
E61
E81
E97

75
4, 33, 62, 76, 8 0 , 81, 82, 83, 98
91
16
26, 29, 35, 43 , 6 0 , 67, 74, 84
13