The Queen's Gambit
Declined: 5 ~f4!
Colin Crouch

CADOGAN
('hess
LONDON. NEW YORK

Copyright © 1998 Colin Crouch

First published 1998 by Cadogan Books pIc, 27-29 Betwi~k St..
London WI V 3RF

Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, 6 Business Park Rd,
P.O. Box 833, Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475-0833, USA.
Telephone 1-800 2430495 (toll free)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British
Library

ISBN 1 85744 207 5

Edited by Graham Burgess and typeset by John Nunn for
Gambit Publications Ltd, London.

Printed in Great Britain by BPC Wheatons Ltd, Exeter

CADOGAN CHESS SERIES

Chief Advisor: Garry Kasparov
Russian Series Editor: Ken Neat
Editor: Murray Chandler

For a complete catalogue of CADOGAN CHESS books (which includes the
Pergamon Chess and Maxwell Macmillan Chess lists) please write to:
Cadogan Books pIc, 27-29 Berwick Street, London WI V 3RF
Freephone 0800 328 0242

Contents

Symbols 5
Preface 6

1 Historical Introduction 8

2 The Old Main Line 20
2.1 Introduction 20
2.2 Alternatives for Black on Move 10 20
2.3 1O...~e7: Alternatives to 11ll:)d2 e5 23
2.4 11 ll:)d2 e5: Introduction 29
2.5 12 ~g5 d4 13 ll:)b3 "d8 30
2.6 12ll:)b3 "b6 13 ~g5 d4 (or 12 ~g5 d4 13ll:)b3 "b6) 41
2.7 12ll:)b3: Alternatives to 12.....b6 13 ~g5 d4 44
2.8 12~g3 47
2.9 Conclusion 50

3 The New Main Line 51
3.1 Introduction 51
3.2 1O...~e7 11 h4 52
3.3 1O...~e7 11 g4 63
3.4 1O... ~e7: White's 11th move alternatives 73
3.5 10...dxc4 11 ~xc4 without 11...~e7 76
3.6 1O...~d7 77
3.7 1O... a6 85
3.8 1O.. Jld8?! 87
3.9 1O...ll:)e4 87
3.10 General conclusion on 10 0-0-0 91

4 Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 93
4.1 Introduction 93
4.2 White's alternatives on move 10 93
4.3 White's alternatives on move 9 102
4.4 White's alternatives on move 8 113
4.5 White's alternatives on move 7 144

8 Odds and ends 226 8 Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 229 8.4 Miscellaneous 6th moves for White 247 8..1 Black's alternatives on move 9 149 5. a6 229 8.4 The 5 .2 7 'ifc2: Black delays .1 Systems with ...7 7h3 225 7..4 The Exchange Variation.2 6 .ltlbd7: Lines not already examined 238 8..ltlbd7 or .0-0 212 7. 7 cxd5 217 7..1 7 'ii'c2ltlbd7 195 7.c6 195 7....c5 system 168 6 Systems with ••• b6 172 7 Systems with .2 Black's alternatives on move 8 159 5.3 4ltlf3ltlbd7: Transpositions and independent lines 214 7..3 Miscellaneous 6th moves for Black 244 8...3 Black's alternatives on move 7 165 5.0 Systems 149 5..5 Black Avoids the Main Line: .5 7 ~d3 220 7.6 7 :cl 224 7.5 Miscellaneous 5th moves for Black 250 Index of Variations 255 ..

t White is slightly better = equal position 00 unclear position =+= Black is slightly better + Black is much better -+ Black is winning Ch championship Cht team championship tt team tournament Wch world championship Ech European championship Wcht World Team Championship ECC European Clubs Cup Ct candidates event IZ interzonal event Z zonal event OL olympiad jr junior event wom women's event mem memorial event rpd rapidplay game COlT correspondence game 1-0 the game ends in a win for White 1/2.Symbols + check ++ double check # checkmate !! brilliant move good move !? interesting move ?! dubious move ? bad move ?? blunder +.1/2 the game ends in a draw 0-1 the game ends in a win for Black (n) nth match game (D) see next diagram . White is winning ± White is much better .

For example.f4 Queen's Gambit.. the New Main Line with 10 0-0-0. with Black in particular suffering some unnecessarily severe defeats.f4 system is 5 .f4 system is a young system. Where knowledge has not been properly systematized. . It has to be said that the quality of some of the earlier games by top players in this variation was by grandmaster standards atrocious. The apparently totally reck- less idea of castling queenside. but it is also exciting. several innova- tions have been introduced in the text. In particular. but I now feel that I can live with !. dxc4. the general effect of which is to strengthen these lines for White. before then. and thus to achieve superior piece mobility. Then in 1988 a radically new idea for White was discovered. which ap- pears to have lost some of its popularity in grandmaster play in 1997. c5 in the 1970s and 1980s appeared to indicate a wholly satisfactory defence for Black.i. A book published before 1995 would have missed the most important variations in the main line. which will take us outside existing pub- lished theory as early as move 7.Preface When Murray Chandler first suggested that I write a book on the . has been given a new shine in several critical positions.i. the objective being to get his pieces out on good squares before Black.f4 variation for White. The . At first I would have preferred !?. The counter-attacking approach proved more successful for Black.. or to attempt a counterattack against White's pawn centre. missed the . This itself can be taken as an indication that many ofthe basic ideas were wholly novel.. one of Black's most interesting defences to the .i.. Black's choice is either to de- velop quietly.e7 11 h4) was introduced only as recently as 1995. accepting this disadvantage. into the face of what appeared to be a ready-made attack. White is aiming for simple development. he was right. everyone was pushing the wrong pawn on the kingside! So maybe it is only now that it is possible to set down the full case for the . published in 1987. while ECO. Improvements for Black are more likely to be found in the lesser-known lines.i. and the intense exploration of the Old Main Line after 6 . pawn structures tend to be fluid. To cover more or less uncharted territory is difficult in any field. was not only possible. opening up lines of attack before White's development is complete. To my surprise. even though some of its key ideas go back to Hastings 1895. but it is salutary to remember that White's most dangerous plan (10 ..i. In the more established lines. Counterat- tack by Black versus normal play by White led to dynamic equilibrium. The theory of the variation has settled down a bit now. he noted that no book had been written on this system.. but positionally justified and strong. The exclamation mark at the end of the title was also Murray's idea. there is so much more room for radical discovery.

in that discussion of variations necessarily involves consideration of what each side is aiming for. My approach has been encyclopaedic rather than selective. if the new ideas and corrections of mistakes of others outweighs the introduction of mistakes from my own hand. but where I have found improvements for Black I have noted them. Again because of the lack of literature on the subject. then some sort of contribution has been made to chess literature. if there are mis- takes. the author has a much bigger responsibility to show why some variations are more important than others. Where there is no existing book on an opening. indeed almost the only. for the moment. there is no bibliography as such. Colin Crouch Harrow Weald December 1997 . I noticed that a strong and re- spected grandmaster recently published a book that repeated this analysis verba- tim and on trust. they are genuine mistakes. it is theoretically important to show clearly why they are second-rate. ECO volume D (1987) and a computer database of around a thousand games. Kasparov produced some poor analysis. This book is generally written from White's point of view. One can never achieve perfect accuracy in writing. No doubt many of the second-rate lines discussed in this book will be dis- carded when others write on this opening in several years' time. The main. I have tried to explain the themes that arise. I have tried to trust the analysis of others as little as possible. The reader as White who grasps the basic themes should be rewarded by some smooth posi- tional victories and some attractive attacking wins. It is hoped that the reader will find the book useful. and was instantly obsolete as far as critical assessment of 5 ~f4 is concerned. In one case. and have continued variations often deep into the middlegame to make it clearer why particular assessments have been made. Preface 7 main line altogether. It is a fallacy to assume that any openings book can be completely 'objective'. sources are a couple of shelves of In- formator. overlooking at one point a simple back-row check. In part this is out of necessity. and surely there must be. Neither have I at- tempted to keep secrets or to mislead the reader on any position.

1e7 before point of view. noting that "no good results from this early sortie of the bishop" after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tLlc3 tLlf6 4 .tb2. dxc4!? 5 e3 (or 5 e4 . 3 tLld tLlf6 4 . The second line would be my own What we are concerned with here is personal preference. but both sys- but ...!Lld5 !.1b2. and never regain it until re. tems leave the white bishop exposed larity..1g5 system es..tf4 (D).1f4 lose its popu. Black has two ways of be added that Gunsberg also advo. tablished itself as White's main choice The first point to note is one of ele- in the Queen's Gambit (with 2 .1f4 plan was the most successful.1g5 system.1 Historical Introduction Early days grandmaster level? These are the questions to which we try to provide Although in the early years of the outline answers in this introductory twentieth century the . At Hastings 1895 following position: three basic plans were tried.1f4.1f4. but in fairness it has to playing 5 . a mentary move-order. Gunsberg was famously dismissive of the . c5. How- ever..1b4) Black. a plan that becomes justi- fied if Black breaks with . to a good Nimzo-Indian. Why did . reaching the ing plan of action.g5 nor . many defensive and counter-attacking 2) 4 . equalizing in comfort: cated the queenside fianchetto for 1) 4 . particularly in the Semi-Slav. even at top order 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 tLlc3 tLlf6 4 .. Gunsberg was the main advocate of systems of development with . cently? And what new theoretical The variations analysed in this developments have led to it being seen book all start with the modern move- as a dangerous weapon. neither i. Some of the few years earlier the debate was much Hastings games started 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 more open as to White's most promis. and if anything the .1g5 in the celebrated Pills- bury-Tarrasch game. This move-order is inaccurate.... ers have seen this as rather a quaint White should insert 4 tLlf3 . the bishop bites on granite if Black is content to strongpoint d5. chapter.1b4!... . leading in effect the third way. Many later writ. e6). and ineffective on f4. systems. which is now seen as critical in 5.

. Black's grip on the Black's b.. Historical Introduction 9 ffi . by means of a kingside attack. c6.0-0. although natural and logi- cal. Leaving aside the point of move.te7?! 5 e3 0-0 6 ffi b6 7 . cism. dxc4!?.tf4?! . The classic hanging pawn position.. 1-0.29. 1-0. order on moves 4 and 5. equal. and if either of the 'hanging pawns' on c5 and d5.58. and oc- casionally 5 .Em. for the centre. but this pion Lasker was unable as Black to plan must be treated with some scepti- find a good way to back up his pawns.. 12 tOe2 1t'b6 13 ~ tOxeS?! Round 9: Teichmann-Marco. 5 . and ECO assesses the position as Round 1: Lasker-Marco.. remains almost completely unex- plored.te6(D) 5 .. as the result sum.and e-pawns missing. so the moves most com- monly played here are 5. Black centre disintegrates. Black's pieces remain active. Lasker sition in the next diagram: Hastings 1895 (notes based on C..tf4 games from Hast.te7 5 .. leaving White proved completely unable to handle with a clear positional advantage. a verdict I would regard as 'not Round 4: von Bardeleben-Lasker.td3 cS 8 dxe5 bxcS 9 0-0 tOc610 adS exdS 11 :c1 .. the Centenary Book)... .txe5 lDg4 15 . Curiously..tel 1t'd6 The two games Marco lost were Black aims to solve his difficulties massacres. 13. 14 . B 1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 tOe3 tOf64 . 1-0. but they are also ings 1895 was the battle against the open to attack. c5 or 5 . tOb4!? 32. von Bardeleben . proven'. reaching the po. while even World Cham.Haines.tb4? would now be a simple loss of tempo.Crouch and K. this pawn structure. Hastings 1895. how- mary shows: ever.tf4 (D). a defect we try to remedy in this book. with pawns advances. as the pieces diverted to the in a game which is still of theoretical kingside do not provide much cover interest today.. squares in the centre. a recurrent The two black pawns cover a lot of theme in the .

~f2..l:Id2!? There now follows a standard sim.C5 :'1+ 32 ~g2 J.xC6! J.xb2 21 :c4!) 21lOxC6+ "xr6 J. J:tb6 29 :lc2 :db8 30 :xcS :xb2 31 ':xb2 l:lxb2 32 :as +.dS!? and e4.g4!? 25 ':c3 :CdS 26 ':del :c6 27 J. J. f4. 3S••.Gunsberg.xfS 33 :xfS :f8 34 :a7 a4 sting out of Black's kingside initiative.. lOeS 17lOf4 . leaving White with a strongly favour.:d2 29 :lc2 :xc2 30 :xc2 :as 31 J.xh3 34 bxa4 :d2 35 as h5! 36 a6 (20 ....... J.d5+ 37 e4 :aa2! 38 cJilf3! 22 "h5 'ii'h6 23 'ii'xh6 gxh6 24 :Cdl Avoiding the trap set by the ever- (D) resourceful Lasker: 38 :xdS? :xf2+ 39 ~gl (39 ~h3?? :h2#) 39. 1ilburg 1987 given that the cS-pawn will almost in- evitably fall. ':a8 34 J..e4 +. 31 J.Gunsberg.or 28 .•':xa2 ± 29 :b5 J.. 28. 33. and that we now know how to keep the hanging pawns safe.f41 16 g3J.a2 plifying sequence which takes the 32.e6 30 :c7 as?! 30. 24•••:ac8 24 . For those who would argue that this is old hat.C4 0-0 6 e3 b6 7 :el c5 S dxeS . 19 J.:a3+ 39 ~C4 l:Ixf2+ 40 ~e5 B J..10 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5J. with a decisive advantage.xC6 20 lOxd5 J. etc..d7?! Endgame play in those days was unso- 16.xe4 :txa6 42 ~d4 :h6 43 ':c8+ ~g7 44 ~e3 :ff6 45 :g5+ and Black soon resigned. 33 b3a4 able endgame. leaving White with an I d4lOc6 2 c4 e6 3 ffi d5 4lOc3 J.e7 active 2-1 queenside pawn majority.to phisticated however.. J. this more recent game should act as a cor- rective.. and Lasker was 17lOc4 "h6IS h3lOc6 (D) almost let off the hook.e4 :a6 28 l:lxc5? White should play 28 a3!: 28 ..:g2+ drawing.. A successful early outing for the Yusupov .xe4 41 J... 5 J. 3S :f4 :a2 36 :b4 +..Ljubojevic system! White should win this easily.

..i. a task which was achieved more successfully than that of holding the hanging pawns. it helps White 25. "e6 28 .i.••1Ob6 "b7 "a4 37 l:[bll-O 12. Going back to the early years.c4 17 .f4?! . 21•••.f3 :e8 15 lOb5! Hastings 1895 Black was also called lIa6(D) upon to handle a couple of isolated queen's pawn positions.b4 keeps Black in the game.g3 ± Yusupov.i.. in that support is given for the knight to land on e5.eS? 22.. 261Oxb7 "fIe7 27 d6 wins ...d4. if . which ultimately but not wholly convincingly favour White.i.f3 in prospect.i. 11..xd6 26 :xaS .i. but no more than that. with Black successfully liqui- dating with an early .i.Janowsky Hastings J895 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lbc3 lOr64 . As in the von Bar.i.i. according to Yusupov. The text leads to in- teresting but unnecessary complica- tions. and Yusupov points out that the quiet 16 b3!. delehen-Lasker game.i.xd5lbcxdS 29 :dl :eS :XeS 31 "xc5 h5 32 as h3 g6 34 "c6 "b4 35 a6 "as 36 "e4 30 33 12..:xc5. The early part of Teichmann-Janowsky from round 8 has a modem appear- ance.i... would present grave difficulties. 16.. Teichmann .e2 . lOxe5 13 ..e7?! 5 e3 0-0 6lbr3 eS 7 dxeS .c7 "d7 18 lOe5 "c8 19 b3lba8! 20 bxc4lbxc7 21 cxdS A radical way of dealing with the hanging pawns! White certainly has full compensation for the piece.i.. preventing c4..xeSlbd7 14 .lOxd5. 12lbes! 23 lbxaS! :xaS 24 :xc5 "d8 25 Yet again White sets up a powerful lbd6!! attack against the hanging pawns.xeS 8 cxdS!? ..xd5 27 "d4 :eS to have his bishop on f4 rather than on g5.b7 10 0-0 lObd7 11 16lbd3 cxdS exdS?! (D) Black now has a lifeless position. at 13 a4! a5 14 .i. Historical Introduction 11 bxeS 9 . with An attractive tactical resource.i... 25 .d6! 22 lbc4 .i.

i. but was one of Black's main defensive systems (via 7 .. as 14 i.g4. Few now trick which shamefully I missed in would agree with Nimzowitsch that writing my 1895 book. a l:lfdl with a clear edge.. Here 12. side pawns have been weakened more ment of the bishop.g5 for White..f4! Nowadays 8 'ii'c2 lOc6 9 a3 is re..e7 13 exd4 lOxd4 Hastings 189S continued 1O.. 8 ... this particular point.. d4-pawn or black dS-pawn] as does a 12.12 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ll.d6 =1=) 9 •••lOc6 10 0-0 i.. i. lOxh7 16 e6-bishop] belongs to the PQ4 [white 'ii'xd4 i. The text-move is an elegant way of tain the momentum of the position.i.xd4?! 15 h3! .g4 for Black) is necessary to main.'ii'f6.g4! (D) 17.. Steinitz-Burn.xh7+?? also fails: Is . Then after 10... the posi- tional threat of .b6 12 0-0.b4+ in most cases persuading White to spend a move on 11l:lc1 10 a3.. but there were ahead of his time. gxf6 GO or 15 . i. when Black is passive that the d-pawn 12 lObS becomes a problem.d716lOf6+lOxf617 way to keep the pressure on the iso.xg6 fxg6 9i.b613lObxd4lOxd4 14 exd4 nurse to a suckling child". is a weakness...i.lOxdS 9 lOxdS exdS is now preferred.••i...1Oc6 II i. Janowsky was garded as the main line..xf3.....xdS 16 lani. On dealing with the IQP problem. with attention therefore switching to the attempt to make something out of the immediate pawn exchange.xf3 16 "xd8 J:lfxd8 i.. in the spirit of the Teich. times during the 1980s and early 1990s when the main line was not looking too promising. vincing after 12.. The isolated pawn than Black's..J:lad818l:ladlJ:lfS+. often the "cIS! (D) 'KNS' development (i. 11•••d4! tively he can hold the balance..d3 14 g5lOhS 15 "xdS+ (1SlOxdS can 9 i..bl 'ii'a5?! 13 lOd2 Wxh7 15 "xd4 i. Black .lOc6 8 cxdS exd5) as recently as the early 1970s. It is only Nicely judged.i.e7 14 lOb3 'ii'd8 IS 'ii'd3 "d7 16 17 gxf3 l:ld4 wins a piece for Black..xh7+?? 11 l:lcl l:lc8 12 i. After 12 lOa4 i.hS 12 g4?! is uncon- mann-Janowsky game. or 12.. 14 i. 11 h3 i...Wh8) lS .. though. Black can try 12 . White's king- Then as now the correct develop. but if Black plays ac..e2 is now regarded as a better be met by 15 .g6 13 i. Illxd5 lOxf4 17 exf4 (17lOxf4 i.d3 Chasing the bishop is always a pos- i. d4 or sibility in this type of position.. .c7 "dS! "the BK3 [white e3-bishop or black IS i.e6?! White has problems.. 14.. 8 •••exclS This is now firmly out of favour.

. ~b4 is another possibility for Black.. the knight being able..xd4 20 :c3 :dB 21 h3 the ~f4 system remained very much a 21 "xb7?? ~4! is winning for secondary plan.c5.. and now 4 . "a new defence is an example. but there 10 ~xd7+ ... but the system never accuracies. Budapest 1896 an advantage in pawn structure and started 1 d4 e6 2 c4 d5 3 1Oc3 lDf6 4 squeezed relentlessly. the ~f4 sys. ~e7.. while 4 .Rubinetti lDxf4 7 exf4 Black already stood com. It is not proposed to deal with this particular topic in this sacrifices the weak isolani in order to book.•b4 and Black is slightly bet. 7. 4 ~f4 gives 5 ~f4 cS 6 dxcS lDa6 7 e3 White nothing. know that 4 lDf3 ~e7 5 ~f4 is a per.. to reach the dark squares.c6 or 4 . Naturally the problem of how to deal with 4 . good. Systems with 4 ~g5 or 4 cxd5 cut down Black's options. and the clear-cut 4 At around the same time. IlDf3lDf6 2 c4 e6 3M dS 4 d4 ~e7 The secret was out. He could also choose a Semi-Slav with w 4 . Historical Introduction 13 not meet 4 lDf3 with 4 . Around the early 1970s.. but it is something the reader give White an even weaker one. typical pattern was that White gained Tarrasch-Maroczy. seurs of the Queen's Gambit such as ter. We now had some smooth wins with 7 ~d6.. On 5 e3 lDd5 6 ~xc4 Gbeorghiu . The Recent Revival 15 ~e5 :ac8 16 . Portisch ~g5 came to be preferred. a minor alternative to Black. the tem was to remain comparatively rare.. will have to be aware of..••lDxcS 8 adS exd5 9 ~b5+ ~d7 fectly valid try for an edge. ~g5.xl3 :xcll9 :Xci For the types of reason listed above. according to Charousek. fur. which is perfectly good". Yet results with the ~f4 system were After Hastings 1895. . unlike the Rubinstein and Capablanca played it bishop.e2 ~xd4 17 ~xd4 ~xl3 18 .... even after the passive 7 .c6. and Bogoljubow tried it game was later drawn after several in.c6. Black makes full use of the blockading square in front of the pawn. Mar del Plata 1971 fortably.dxc4.c5 still has to be faced by the player who wants to try the 5 ~f4 system.. The next game ~f4. mak- ing preparation simpler. for several decades..xd7 11 0-0 0-0 12 ~e5 are complications in that Black need (D) . Black later won the game. thermore.. more often. Connois- 21. The occasionally. really moved out of the shadows. or a Semi-Tarrasch with 4 .

14 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4!

22.••~gS 23 ~4lbxr3+ 24 ~xf3
~e4 25 j.b2 lIdd8 26 ~d4 'ifd7 27
B 'ifc7 (D)

The start of a prolonged positional
campaign against the isolated pawn.
Such a pawn is not necessarily in itself
a decisive weakness, but if the player
with the isolani cannot achieve active White has kept a firm grip on the
piece-play, the prospects are grim. position, and now progresses towards
This is the case here. an endgame in which all Black's queen-
12•.•lIfd8 13 'ike2 86 14 lIfdl 'iff5 side pawns, and not just the isolani on
15 j.c7 lId7 16 ~d4 'ifg6 17 j.eS d5, are weak. White's knight outpost
~fe418:act lieS 19 ~3 'ifOO 20 b3 on d4 is more secure than Black's on
j.f8 21'ifc2 e4, a point which becomes even clearer
Meandering play, but also construc- after queens are exchanged.
tive and accurate play. White shifts his 27••. j.d6 28 'ifxd7 lIxd7 29 ~S
pieces around with no obvious grand j.e5 30 j.xe5 :XeS 31 lIc8+ ~b7 32
plan in sight. but places reliance on the ~4 ~f6 33 lIdct lieS 34 lISe7 lIed8
fact that it is difficult for the defender to 35 f3 g6 36 lIxd7 :Xd7 37 lIc8 ~g7
cover everything adequately. White's 38 ~f2 ~b7 39 cRe2 m 40 ~d3 bS
first priority is to keep just a little extra 4184 lIe7 42 a5 ~d7 43 'itd2 ~6 44
piece flexibility, so that Black can b4~e84S:d8
never fully equalize; then he can be The first attempt for over 20 moves
perpetually on the lookout for a way to to make a direct attack on the d-pawn.
take advantage of any momentary lapse Static weaknesses don't run away, so
in the defence in order to gain ground. it is perfectly in order to be patient.
It is this purposeful tacking around, 4S••• ~7 46 ~d3 cRf6 47 ~b3 ~e5
rather than the attempt to follow a pre- 48~cS (D) .
determined plan, that is the secret of Black's queenside is now under
successful play against a static pawn clamps, and White has a completely
weakness. free hand to use his kingside pawn ma-
21 •.. b622~2 jority. The immediate threat is f4+ fol-
Making real progress; the other lowed by lId6.
knight gets a chance to head for d4. 48•..g5 49 g3 f6 50 b3 ~b5 51 f4+

Historical Introduction 15

gxf4 52 gxf4+ ~5 53 :xd5+ ~g6 54 clear long-term positional advantage
l:[d7 l:lxd7+ 55 .fu:d7 Ci)a7 56 e4 tDc6 that we have seen in previous games.
57 'iii'c4 ~7 58 e51-0 Indeed, if White tries anything too
elaborate there is the danger that he
In/ormator references to the i.f4 will find himself suddenly stuck with
system in the early 1970s were domi- an exposed king in the centre and an
nated by smooth wins for White, al- exposed kingside. To give one exam-
though it has to be acknowledged that ple, the line 9 :dl WaS 10 a3 i.e7 II
the worst game of the 1972 Fischer- .J:d2 briefly aroused interest in the
Spassky match (game 14, Fischer as early 1980s, but it was soon found
White) finished as a draw after several that 1l...C/)e4! 12 Ci)xe4 dxe413 Wxe4
serious mistakes by both sides. Play- IId8 followed by a timely ...e5 gives
ers at the time were quick to draw the Black excellent attacking chances.
lesson that Black's play needed to be 9 :dl .a5 10 a3
sharpened to avoid the risk of being This is what we describe as the 'Old
slowly ground down. Sometimes in- Main Line'. The usual move here is
deed Black's play became overly sharp, lO ...i.e7, which is satisfactory for
as in this game from a later world Black. Karpov now tried a prepared
championship match. 'improvement', which Korchnoi im-
pressively demolished over the board.
Korchnoi - Karpov 10...:e8?!
Baguio City Wch (21) 1978 Preparing to sprint through the
barricades with ...e5 and ...d4, but

5 i.f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 i.xc5 8
tDc6 (D)
.c2
1 c4 Ci)f6 2 Ci)c3 e6 3 Ci)f3 d5 4 d4 i.e7 White's position is not taken so easily.
lllDd2!
A standard response in the main-
This position remains theoretically line systems. The knight breaks the
critical for the i.f4 variation. Black pin on the as-el diagonal (so that b4 is
develops rapidly and aggressively, now a threat, without Black having
hoping to ensure that White is not ... Ci)xb4), blocks any ...C/)e4 move by
given the time to build up the sort of Black, prepares a knight recapture on

16 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4!

c4 should Black exchange, and aims e3 18 'ii'xf5 ~f3+ 19 'ii'xf3 exd2#, is
to play ~b3, dispersing Black's ad- refuted by 16 cxdS. This claim is made
vanced queenside forces. without considering any variations, and
1l... eS 12 J.gS ~d4 is made on the hardly earth-shattering
Still prepared analysis. Black's at- grounds that the c4-square is freed and
tack runs out of steam after the other the black knight remains trapped. But
piece sacrifice 12...d4 13 ~b3 'ii'b6 14 with all Black's pieces in play, and
~a4 J.b4+ 15 axb4 Wxb4+ 16 ~d2 White undeveloped and uncoordinated,
e4 17 J.xf6 gxf6 18 ""3. it would be amazing if Black could not
13 "bl! create dangerous attacking possibili-
White calmly ignores the sacrifice, ties. After 15 J.n ~g4 16 cxdS, Black
avoiding such horrors as 13 exd4? plays as before 16 ...~S, and is ready
exd4+ 14 ~2 ~g4 15 b4 d3 16 'ii'xd3 to meet such direct approaches as 17
J.xt2#. ~c4 ~ef3+ 18 gxf3 ~xf3+ 19 ~e2
After the text-move, Black faces a Wa6, or 17 exd4 ~f3+ 18 gxf3 exf3+
common problem in the old main line: 19 J.e3 (19 ~de4 llxe4+) 19... J.xbl
once he has achieved ... e5, the d5- with very sharp play, probably favour-
square becomes particularly weak, es- ing Black. Maybe Timman had in
pecially after J.xf6 by White. Black mind 17 J.f4, threatening J.xeS fol-
must continue to play very aggres- lowed by ~4. Then the attempt to be
sively to justify his earlier play. super-cool with 17... bS?! backfires af-
13•••J.rS ter 18 J.xeS llxeS 19 WeI! when exd4
13 ...J.g4 14 J.xf6 gxf6 15 ~xd5 becomes a real threat, but the critical
J.xdl 16 ~xdl ± Speelman. line would seem to be 17 ... ~d3+ 18
14 J.d3 e4 (D) J.xd3 exd3 19 0-0 ~2+ 20 ~xe2 dxe2
21 Wxf5, and now perhaps 21...ex-
dl'ii' 22 llxdl 'ii'b5, with the idea of
...We2, with unclear play. [Later note:
In the recently published second edi-
tion of his book, Timman analyses 17
exd4 J.xd4 18 J.e3 to a win for White,
but either ignores or overlooks the
possibility of 17...~f3+.]
It's certainly a long way from the
win claimed by Timman. Korchnoi's
judgement in avoiding this line is vin-
dicated, in that he achieves a clear
edge in the line he plays.
15 J.c2! IS•..lDxc2+ 16 .xc2
Timman, in The Art of Chess Analy- Despite the exchange of White's
sis, claimed 15 J.n as a win, suggest- bishop, Black still comes under severe
ing that Kholmov's line of 15 ... ~g4, pressure on the light squares.
with the idea 16 ~xdS ~e5 17 exd4 16•.••a6!?

Historical Introduction 17

16... dxc4 17 i.xf6 gxf6 180-0 ± view of his control of the d-file and
Thuman. queenside light squares.
17 i.xf6 .u6 IS lDb3 i.d6 19 Snatching the e-pawn is bad: 23
lhdS Wxe4? .xe4 24lDxe4 :xc4 2s1Dc3
So White has won a pawn, but i.xa3 +, or 23lDxe4? b5 24 0-0 :xc4
Black's bishop-pair gives him the op- :j: Filip.
portunity to create trouble. With some 23•••:xc4 24 :dl 'ii'eS 25 g3 a6 26
regret, we give only brief notes to the 'ii'b3 bS 27 a4! :b4 28 .dS .xdS 29
rest of the game, which is a real heavy- lhdS i.f8 30 nbS as! 31 :dS :xb2
weight struggle, as this is an openings 32ltaS fS 33:xaS (D)
book not a game collection.
19...:e5
19 ...i.e5 20 lDd4 i.xd4 21 :xd4
"gS 22 g3! ± Andersson (cited by
Timman).
20 lDd4 :cS 21lheS
Timman gives 21 f4 as a clear win.
Again one must dispute this. After
21...:xdS 22lDxdS Wh4+, Black is in
the game on either 23 g3 Wh3 24
lDxfS WxfS 2S "b3 hS, when White's
kingside still needs watching, or 23
Wf2 Wxf2+ 24 ~xf2 i.d7, which is if
anything good for Black. White proceeded to win the end-
21 ..."xeS 22lDxfS .US (D) game after a titanic struggle.
33•••i.b4 34 :as+ ~f7 35 lDa4
:bl+ 36 ~g2 i.d6 37 :a7+ ~f6 3S
b6 i.bS 39 :as i.e5 40 lDcS .td6 41
b7 ~e7 42 :g8 .teS 43 f4 eu3+ 44
~~f7(D)

230-0
Returning the extra pawn in order
to complete his development. White
can now look forward to a very pleas-
ant late middlegame and endgame in

18 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1./4!

45I:tc8?! unsuspecting Short, scoring a critical
Timman (based on joint analysis victory. The story was that a critical
with Andersson) gives as winning 45 game from the Soviet Championship
I:td8 ~e7 46 I:td7+ ~e8 47 e4 I:tb5 48 happened to be published in a Norwe-
I:td5 fxe4+ 49 ~xe4 ~b8 50 ~d3 ~a7 gian newspaper, and Tisdall, a mem-
51 ~c4 I:tb6 52 ~4! followed by I:tb5. ber of Speelman's team, happened to
45••• ~e7 46 h3 h5? be travelling in from Oslo, while Short
Andersson suggested that 46...I:tb5 was not privy to this particular chan-
probably still holds for Black. nel of information.
47 I:tg8 ~7 48 I:td8 g5 49 g4 bxg4+
50 bxg4 9:;e7 51 llg8 fxg4+ 52 ~xg4 Speelman - Short
~7 53 I:tc8 .i.d6 54 e4 I:tgl+ 55 ~5 London Ct (3) 1988
g4 56 e5 I:tn+ 57 ~e4 I:tel+ 58 ~d5
I:tdl+ I d4ll:)f6 2 c4 e6 3ll:)f3 d5 4 M ~e7
58 ...~xe5 59ll:)d3 +-. 5 .i.f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxeS ll:)c6 8 Wc2
59ll:)d3 :Xd3+ 60 ~c4 1-0 ~xeS 9 a3"aS 100-0-0! (D)

However, it has to be emphasized
that Black's results in both theory and
practice proved satisfactory after
1O... ~e7, despite various attempts to
improve White's play. The ~f4 sys-
tem proved modestly fashionable dur-
ing the early 1980s, but then interest
gradually waned. Many of the side
systems that were tried, such as 8 ~e2
or 8 cxd5, were modestly successful,
but no more than that. Then suddenly
Grigory Kaidanov's idea of castling
queenside, into what appears to be the Upping the ante considerably. In a
centre of the storm, rejuvenated the system which had previously been
~f4 system; White's king is safer than considered quiet, positional and only
it looks, and it turns out that it is not so dangerous if Black played insuffi-
easy for Black to hold both centre and ciently aggressively, White meets fire
kingside. Many first-class scalps have with fire. Clearly White has it in mind
been collected in double-quick time to launch a kingside pawn-storm, but
using Kaidanov's idea; several of this is not the only justification for
these games are given in full in the castling queens ide instead of playing
theoretical section of the book. In the I:td 1. The point is that the white king is
meantime, just consider what effect it better placed on cl than on el, in that
had on the chess public when in a Can- White no longer has to take such great
didates' Match Jon Speelman played care to deal with counterplay along
the latest and freshest idea on an the as-el diagonal. This means for

until fxe3 19 fxe3 j.e7 11 g4 Even this move has been super- seded. 21 . this has to be timed very carefully to avoid disas- ter on the light squares. Indeed there was a danger for a while that White would lose interest in this system. .a5 plan.. but rather as a result analysis of specific variations..xc4 e5 13 g5 exf4 is now regarded as a satisfac- tory reply for Black.. if Black aims for counterplay 16 ti)xd5 with the . . Such timing is absent here.... as a possibility in the 1987 edition of 16•••:xd5 17 cxd5 exf4 18 dxc6 ECO.:d8 12 h3 a6 13 ti)d2 e5?! As in the :dl variations. it is 'obviously' wrong .dxc4 12 j.••:a7 22 :hf1 j. by getting White's king out of the intuitive that it was not even mentioned central zone. with queenside cas- tling. White's best approach in the j. in that ll.c4 (D) 10••• j. 23 "e4 ~f8 24 "xh7 g6 25 e4 c5 26 e5 j.. more importantly. until Kas- parov introduced 11 h4! in 1995. but to play very aggressively.g7 27 e6 1-0 In very general terms. Historical Introduction 19 example that White's pressure on the of the acceleration of the attack d5-pawn is also accentuated. against Black's centre. as 14.c5..f6?! Speelman gives 22 ..xf6 16 ti)xd5 is unbearable. 11...:e7 as the only chance to resist.... So the decision comes not through We now move on to the theoretical a kingside attack.f4 system is to try to create a slight but persistent positional edge if Black plays quietly. a mas- 14••• ti)e815 ti)b3 "b6 (D) sive advantage in piece activity and coordination. made possible White's whole idea is so counter..exf4? left White with a slight material ad- 15 gxf6 j. 14g5! The liquidation of the centre has Forcing a knight move..xg5 20 ~bl bxc6 21 you take a close second look! j. vantage and.

d4. so Black usually replies B: 10•••dxc4 20 10 . there is a major Chapter 4. This point is discussed fur- For 10 0-0-0 see Chapter 3. lDd2. See the Korchnoi-Karpov game in ally becomes quite sharp.... B) 10 0-0-0 is currently preferred.. avoiding 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 M lDf6 4ffi i.. The old 10. 10 lLld2!?) see From the diagram. without even waiting for main line remains important however. i.f4 0·0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS i. the thematic A) plan is..2 Alternatives for Black on Move 10 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lDc3 lDf6 4ffi i.:dS 21 take him a long time to get his king E: 10.e7 11 lDd2 e5.i. other moves (10 l:c1.a5.e7 is clearly best.. This allows Black time to build up a counter-attack.1 Introduction not least because Black could consider 9 .g3 and 12 i...1. As a result.d7!? 21 velopment on the queenside. but it will D: 10. Before considering these main lines. We theoretical debate through the 1970s consider: and most of the 1980s..f4 0-0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS i... 11 . For ther in Chapter 5.. the Introduction for further comment. i...1.g5 all need to be considered. 2.xcS S Wc2 White to find something other than 10 lLlc6 9 a3 WaS 10 :dl (D) :d1 "as. branching point after 1O ..:eS?! 20 threatens b4. but the gen.:eS?! is probably too ambi- with .. Play usu. e5 followed by .. when 12lDb3. dxc4.. if White plays lLld2.e7 the 'new main line'.2 The Old Main Line 2. 12 i.i. to reply 10. White is clearly ahead in de. we exam- ine alternatives on moves 10 and 11. i. White now A: 10...e7. and challenging 5 i. Line H.xcS S Wc2 ~9a3WaS 10:dl Now 10.. eral impression is that Black holds his own in the complications.•..e7!? instead of9 . and This position was the main focus of the alternatives are mostly inferior.. gives White a free hand...e7 5 i. C: 10.lDe4?! 21 into safety. tious.

g3 and Black has not got enough for bxc3 exdS 14 0-0 i..d3 i. "d8 14 'ifxd8+ (14 'ii'c2li:ldS IS i.g3 li:lxc3 16 'ifxc3 'ife7 17 i..e7 16 axb4 i.e8 IS ltlc4 "fS 16 'ifxfS O. ltlxc3 13 i.:xdl+ 13 'ifxdl White wins...eS f6 IS li:lab6 axb6 17 li:lxb6 :a5 18 li:lxc8 i.xf6 gxf6 IS It:lds +...d3?! h6 12 cxdS (12 i. 3) 11 . USSR-Yugoslavia 1971. li:ldS!? 16 li:lxdS exdS Bagirov- Matanovic.xb4 13 :clltle4 14 i..gS i..d7!? could be considered.. D) and now instead of 17 i.d4? 12ltlb3 'ifb6 13 ltla4 11 cxdS i. Tukmakov.e2 i. E) 10•••li:le4?! (D) has a poor reputa- tion for the wrong reason. Las Palmas 1978. as seen after 11 It:ld2: 1) l1.gS d413li:lb3 'itb6 14 i..xc4 i. but 11 . ltlxd8 IS i.3. . lun-Adianto....• i..'ifxa3) IS a4 i.d4 eS.d7 18 C) 0-0 bS =Gallego-San Segundo.xe4? 16 b3li:lb4 17 'ifbl d3 18 f3li:lhS 19 dxe4 13 'ifxe4? i. ish Ch 1996) 14.b4+ 14 axb4 'ifxb4+ IS li:ld2 'ifaS 11 i.e7 (threatening the piece. Bratislava U-14 Wch 1993.d6 b6 =. If IS . Zurich 19S4) poses into Chapter 2.xf6 IS ltldS.Rodriguez. Line C.e2 (win- since 11 b4? is met by 11.d7 i.g4 14 12li:lxc4 (12 i..exdS 12 :xdS li:lxc3 13 bxc3 White ~an play for an endgame edge: 'ii'xa3 . Dubai OL 1986. 10•••:d8 (D) Matanovic suggests 17 li:ld6 with a slight advantage for White.e7 120-0 eS 13 i. better for White. 16 b4 'ifxa3 17 :alltlxb4 18 'ifd2 and Moscow 1978) 12.f6 16 li:ld4li:les =Xu Carlo 1969. when 11.i. w This removes an important retreat- square.i.R.eS? 12 i...Vergun...Ostojic. Balashov-Averbakh.. 14 i. ment.xa3) 12. IS .Bates- D. gives exfS 17 i.d8?. Euwe-Kupper..f3 :ac8 18ltld6 is slightly excellent central control. dxc4 is more sensible. White should probably first l:tcS gives Black a big lead in develop- play 11 li:ld2.. Gheorghiu-P.e7 13 0-0 i.e7 trans.xf6 i.li:lxb4 12 ning a pawn with IS li:la4?! i. Monte . 2) 11.. Span- 10•.xc4 i. The Old Main Line 21 i.

14 l%dl and g5#) 23 exd4 "xc3 24 "h6+ lDg6 i. Great fun to play through.xc3 or move..f5?! led to desperate compli. i..•• b6! (D) Black's a-pawn will be a tremen- dous asset for the endgame..xf7?? :h8) White should win. 21 'iWd2 lDe7 22 i.xa3 16 i../4! 13 .c4 i.xf7! (though not 23 "xh7+ ~f6 24 i.xa6 W'xa6 18 h4 USSR 1981: 16 :xf5 gxf5 17 O-O! :ad8 19 :fdl "c4 20 :d7 i.~g7? 16 0-0 i..22 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51.~d6? ':xd3 "xa3 . Gipslis-Shashin.. but White 14lDgS can do better by delaying "xh7+ and Who can resist threatening mate in playing instead 21 f4! (not mentioned one? (But see below for White's best by Chekhov).d6 19 "e2 i. later drawn.) 21.d3 i.e6 20 i..Schroll-Wohl..e5+ f6 19 ':g5 1-0 Portisch-T.f5 17 "b3 ± 24 fxe5+ ~xe5 25 "g7+ f6 26 "e7#.. 21...xf7 +-) 27 "xg6 i. Nepominshay) 160-0 27 "f6+ 1. or 15 ..f5 15 i.xd3 16 25lDh7+ ct.e7 .i..Ravi-D..g5+ ~g7 is only a 15 . or..xg5 19 i. .xa3?! (15 .e7 26 "g5+ f6 (26 .c7 28 i.a6 17 i.e7 17 e4i.lDe7 can be met by 14lLlg5 g6 f4 i.h6 is answered by 22lDxf7.d4!! (22 . 22 "xh7+ transposes into 14..xc3? 23 g4! followed by lDe4+ perhaps less convincingly.. 15. 22 ..i. Calcutta 1996 Oater "h5 ~g7 and then 21 "xh7+ ~f6 22 drawn).f6+ ~g8 changing light-squared bishops.!. 16 lDxh7 ~xh7 17 :h5+ ~g7 18 mann. if the game ever gets that far! Kingside dis- asters have tended to intervene.. St Petersburg 1996. But the main improvement is Black's ...i.e5 i.g7 18 i.f618 Black intends to defend by ex- e5 i.xe5 20 L. i. 16. cations in Chekhov-Azmaiparashvili..xc3? 23lDe4+ fxe4 15 :d2 i. for ex- ample 15 . Fi- nally.••g61S i... inshay-Marciano.i..d4 22 exd4 "xc3 23 i.. lDe7 18 i. Amsterdam 1964.c4 (D) the variations given by Chekhov.i.. Moscow 1970.xc3. drawing line.Berger. while after 21.xg5 i... Then if 21.lDd8? 16lDxh7 ~xh7 17 %lh5+ q.d3 :fc8 23 :a5 160-0 "xc3 24 "h6 1-0 G.. Austria 1989.h6+ ~f6 19 i. ..xd3 17 :xd3lDg6 18 :al ± Nepom.. with an unclear position.Donchev.

.e7 from it in grandmaster play! His 5 J.e5..f4 0-0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS J.xcS 8 Wc2 queenside pawns are too weak to al- lLlc69 a3"aS 10 l:[d1 J.b5lLld8 20 Our lines are: l%c7 00 Miles-Van der Sterren. ipdeed almost forcing. Instead of chasing the king. After 14. b6?! 16 a4) to unbalance the central pawn-structure 16 :xb7 :fc8 17 :cl. Wijk . 11 lLld2 is very much the main line. other lines also leave Black with problems.3 10.. Now there are two possibilities for aiming to harass the black queen. dubious..e2?! lLle4 12 cxdS lLlxc3 13 14 lLlg5?! takes the knight to the bxc3 exdS 140-0 J. but not for the reasons given by exist- ing theory. after all.. and instead of with 11.e716J. 2. J.. and White: tempting.e7 (D) low him to play for an edge. lLle4 is...Wxa3 (D). The Old Main Line 23 Does this mean that 1O.i....e7: Alternatives to 11 lLld2 e5 The biggest surprise about this po- sition is that White has achieved 75% 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3lDf6 4 ffi J. White can chase the queen with 14lLld2! threatening lLlc4. lLle4 is a simple equalizing line.Wal+ 15lLlbi J... 17 .. Black 1) 15 l:tbl 'it'xa3 (15 . return to the position after 13 . and that players with the black pieces need not read the rest of the chapter? Not so.e6 (D) wrong side of the board.e2?! 23 B: 11 :d2 24 c: l1lLld2 without 11•••eS 28 A) 11 J..d3 Black has massive difficulties with his queen.f5 18 'it'dl a5 19 J. So 10... w A: 11 J.

xd6 14 l:lxd6ll:)f6.xdS 21 l:lxdS "xb2 22 "xa7 -*... B3) but it breaks the pin on the as-el di.. and sian-Ubilava.. 'ifb6! 20 -*..e2 (13 'ifb3?! i. After 13 -*.xc3 19lLlgS) 18 "xc3 -*... however..-*. And if White can de. 1l.. i. Telavi 1982. perhaps 17 .. eS.d4 11..dxc4 24 "xc3(17.e6 14 "xb7 l:lac8 15 -*.Grunberg-Geller.xc3 BS: 11. he might well be able IS gxf3 l:lac8 16 -*. then simply 19.l:le8?! misplaces the rook.b5 d4! 16 exd4 ~S gave Black a B massive attack in H.. and had some ini- tial successes through surprise value. The rook move looks a bit strange. l1.-*.Petro- keeping the tension on the d-fiIe.. 12 cxd5 exdS 13 -*. White use of g5.xc4 and now: agonal. B2: 11.... A 2) 12 . a promising gambit line.xbS ~ 17ll:)xe4 dxe4 18 -*.s Gambit Declined: 5 j.g4 14 0-0 -*. Af- =(instead of 19. Hast- ings 198516..xdS ~419 "dl l:lcd820 file. Black has several ways of The waiting move 11 ..f6 16 l:lfd1 Black is worse off than in corresponding varia- B) tions with the rook on d8 (Line B4 be- 11 l:ld2 (D) was introduced by La. jos Portisch in 1982.f6 =.dxc4 12 -*.f4! aan Zee 1984. ~!? 18 Bl: 11••• l:le8?! 24 l:lc7 -*. and does so without decentral. has been tried with success by Geller.. Not.xc3? 18ll:)gS... -*.xc6 exf3.l:ld8 2S 18 'ifb1-*. Meduna-Geller.... low).f6 20 h3 h6 21 l:lc7 ter 12 cxdS ll:)xdS 13 ll:)xdS exdS 14 when White is slightly better)...b3) 19.. 23 l:lxd8+ "xd8 24 'ifb3 ± A. ll:)xdS 18 -*.d3 h6 150-0 -*.. 1) 12.i. Lugano 1983 ...dS (20 i..h6..h6 24 2) IS a4:tc816l:lbl-*.d6 -*..24 The Queen·.b3) 20. Conquest-Greenfeld. lLlh4? B4: 11.xf7+ lhf7 21 exd4 exd4 22lhd4 a6 Black's main choices are 11. the so our variations are: game Adorjan-Tisdall.l:ld8... Sochi 1983) 13 .lLle4! 27 19 l:lcl. for example 13 -*. denying equalizing. allowing ..xf3 velop in peace.eS?! is bad. 17.g3 -*. and without himself too much on the light squares.. few other moves have also been tried.xf3 -*.e6 140-0 l:lac8 IS l:lfd 1 bS! 16 -*.. Sochi 1983 continued 19 "a4 (19 'ife4? -*...lLle4. and if Black is content to B1) liquidate to safety. B2) However. 12ll:)b5? e5.-*.f6:j:.f617lhb7 B3: l1. lLlhS may be considered.a2 bS 17 ~S! to double rooks profitably on the d. Black weakens izing the king's knight. and Black is OK de- spite the pawn count.h4 23 g3 i.

xd418 :Xd4 a619lDeS bS 20 12 cS several years ago.. The gambit Black must be prepared to abandon with . Miles-Karpov.d2 CiJe7 16 e4 'ircs 17 The author toyed with the idea of . The most likely place to 12•.!.. if 1l•••:td8 (D) ...•xcS 13 b4 .. and look for an improvement for White is 12.!."'6.. and gives 13 lDbS as merely ·'unclear".. The Old Main Line 25 continued IS .e5! with a strong initiative.CiJe4 (BS below).. Portisch- 12cxd5 . ~e6 17 g4 l%d8 18 'iIIc2 lDb4! 14...cS 16 lDbS also worth considering. 13lDxdS :txd5 . rather than 18 h3 changing pawn~ ~xf3! (18 . a 20 'ifb5 'iIIxbS 21 ~xb5 = Browne- serious loss of tempo. as one would expect. Presumably it would not have been a wise career-move for a member of Karpov's analytical team to suggest that the great man could err.. Curi- ously the analysis in ECO.. Karpov.lDe4 is dangerous enough with.xb4 -+ Browne) days White usually responds by ex. lDeS! ao (16 . Browne) 16 This was Black's reaction in the in.. a6?! 17 b4). but rather 15 12••.lDe8 14 ~d3 h6 IS 0-0 ±. for instance 13 . 18 ~e2!? gives Lputian..b6 14 lDa4lDxb4 is move IS. Not IS O-O?! . 13 . Plovdiv Echt 1983 continued tamely 13 ~e2?! ~g4 14 0-0 ~xf3 IS ~xf3 d4 Ih. for example IS . does not cite the above game.. ~e6 19 'iIIbS. Tilburg 1982.....xd2 b6 with ECO) IS lDxd2 eS 16 ~h2 (16 ~g3 equality. under Kar- pov's name. Ree-Beliavsky. Plovdiv Echt ~e6 17 ~e2 :d8 18 .lDe4! is a fully adequate reply. but again ~b3 ~b7 =. Toluca IZ 1982) 19 gxf3 d4 12 h3?! is. In Agzamov. 16 .. out the gift of an extra tempo. USSR Ch 1982. In- stead.. 14 .. eS! 14 ~c4 :txd2 15 .exdS? 13lDb5! jams up Black's ~e2 ~b7 18lDe4!? queenside.. chances for a slight edge.xd5 'iIIxe4 transposes to lines given under 18 ~e4 'iIIe619 ~g3 ± Farago. h6?! is too slow: 15 0-0 ci>h8 12 ~e2 lDe4 13 lDxe4 dxe4 14 (IS .. these b4 'iIIxa3 19 'iIIxc6 ..d4 .._ l h...exdS 14 ~d3 h6 IS 0-0 ~f6 (IS .:td7 and now.. Black con... his h-pawn if he is to stay in the game. tinued vigorously with 12 . 'iIIb3 ~g4 17 :edl (17 'iIIxb1? ~xf3 18 augural Portisch-Balashov game. lDc3 threatening lDa4.c2 ~fS +) 1983..e5 16 ~h7+ ci>h8 17 :txdS .~g4?! 16 lDes . a6 160-0 bS 17 12. has plans of building on the light . with White ready to 84) continue his assault with b4 and... White 11... 17 . lDxd5 :td2. lDe4! 13 14 ~d3 (D) lDxe4 dxe4 14 'iIIxe4 :txd2 (14 .. Balashov.

IS•••.i.g5./41 .g4! 20•••f6 It is best to repeat the pawn offer. 17 . closer to the centre for the endgame..xc6?:xc619"h7? lDxg5. USSR 1983.xg6 fxg6 18 'ii'xg6 when Black was comfortably equal :xd2 19lDxd2 .d7.j.i. I. .e6 and Black's active minor pieces 22 :d2 "b5+ 23 ltd3 :c2+ gives perhaps slightly outweigh the slight Black a mating attack.j. the exchange of light-squared bishops will favour White.. Abramovic.lf8! The obvious 16..a2... then 15 .exf3 19 "xb7 "xd2 20 "xa8+ tt)d8 21 gxf3 . White offered the exchange of rooks After 11. . 20 lDxd2!? Polovodin and Fedorov.i.:c8 = ovodin. USSR 1983 continued 21 :bl (ECO) improves on the game con.26 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.d7 18 lDc4 ± I.i. but this move. :xd2) 16. e4! (15 .xd8 21 "e8# Polovo.c4?! :xd2 17lDxd2 but with Black's king two squares .i. ifhe plays ac- 18 lDxd2 . Belgrade 1982.i. material deficit.lel b624lDh4 tinuation 18. .Zilbershtein-Polov.e4 :d6 18 . Mes- a comfortable advantage in space.i. White White's weak queenside pawns and has too little to attack with.xe4.xc6 bxc6 19 "xc6 ticularly wants to offer..lxd2 f6 21 a4lDa5 22 does not work: 16 .:d8 Black is comforta- too early.:xg5? 17 offside minor pieces.1.j.h3 + (ECO).xf3 19 :xd6 din and Fedorov) 17 "bl :xg5 18 .f5 .:xd3!: 17 "iWxd3 e4 18 "iWb3 (18 "xe4 . Y.xh7+ c. 00 according to despite being a pawn down.. while 18..i.1..lxd2 odin. loses a piece to 18 . Hastings 198213 contin- IS .e4 :xd2 able.le2 "b5+ 21 :d3 "xb2+ .i.. 16 O-O! . but 18 O-O?? :b8 20 :d8+ .i.i. White has might just give Black the edge.g6 17 . 18..xf3) 18.g3 (16 .i. e5.i. when 18 ..h5. lDa5 22 a4 :d8+ 23 c.i.i.e6 17 . bringing the king 17 lDxd2 .i.i...xg5 19 .i. :c8=i=.lh8 20. closer to the centre.. or 17 :xd3 e4 18 :d4lDxd4 19 lDxd4 Wd5 :j: Agzamov-Ubilava.. 16..g3 ued 17 .) 16 .j.c5 24 .j.i.Kalinsky-Pol- ovodin. + according to Karpov.xe4 :C5 (but not 16.i.i. Once Black has played tively..i...•••xc3 19 bxc3 :xd2 20 c.xh7+?! c.e8 19. If 15 . 16•••c..) 16 ..c3 Not an exchange that White par- lDxg5 'ii'xg5 18 .i.e4 :Lcl+ 20 c.g5?? lDh4 :d8+ 23 ~c2 . On 15 .xh7+ 16 O-O? faces tactical problems af- ter 16..lh8 bxc3 :xd2 20 c.j. As in the Mestel-Vaganian game.i. in view of Farago.i. USSR 1983.. However.e4 :d6 18 "c3 "xc3 19 It turns out that 15 .i.i.i.i. c.. USSR Ch (First League) 1982.h6?! .i.i.lh8 is also play- squares with :dl.j.i.!..j. h6. tel-Vaganian.d7 180-0 occurred in Yuneev-Pol..i. etc.Farago.i.. 16 .c4 l:xd2 bly holding the balance.

..i. De Roode-Van der Sterren.xf4 . 18 ~d4 ~xd4 19 exd4 f4 20 Wxe4 3) 14 .i. and then wins a piece) 19.i.i. . AmsterdamlArnhem 1983) 15 .g5 0-1 Miles-Beliavsky.c3+ 20 ~dl 14 Wc2 e5 15 .f4 sys- Black hopes to build up a major lead in tem.i. 16 l:xd8+ ~xd8 (l6. Wijk Even better! This thematic pawn aan Zee 1984. Bareev-Goldin. Agza- 17 ffi (17 ~h3 .Baka1ar-Harasta.f5 -+ 17 Wf4 l:xd2 18 ~xd2 l:d8 . 2) 14g4g5!15b4Wxa316l:xd8+ 12lDxe4 dxe4 13 Wxe4 l:d8 (D) ~xd8 17 ~xg5 'W'xb4+ 18 ~dl 'W'b3+ The gambit was originally played 19 ~el (19 Wc2 'W'xc2+ 20 ~xc2 e5 in conjunction with B .g4 21 14.. More problems b4 ± Browne-0gaard. Czechoslovakia 1989) 17 0-0 "xb4 the point of which is to clear the c4.i.xd8 170-0 g6 portunities to go wrong! 18 ~xe5 ..e2 16 Wc2 e4 17 lLld4 ~xd4 18 exd4 f3..e4 mov-Alzate.d7 (ECO) wins. ECO suggests as an improve- 1) 14 Wc2? e5 15 .i.t Meduna-Velikov.g4! (threatening .. White will have 19 e4 .g3 . Bogota 1984.e5 'W'cl 26 . USSR 1983..xa3 The text gives White even more op.e620 22.e6 17 Wc2 l:d8 '.i.i.g5 .. and now (l7...i. rather than (20 Wc3?! Wg5 + Nei) 20 .i.e6 + Nei) 17..i.. Trnava square..c3 .. Alternatively: 1983...g5 and difficulty completing his develop- .e6 25 .i.i... development.i..l:d8? 18 c5! ~h8 19 WcI! .. fS.•~! (D) (22 Wxg4 lLlc2+) 22 . . The Old Main Line 27 85) 1l•.i...g3 e4 16 'W'xe4 ment 14....g5 '.i.i. A devastating example sacrifice aims to replace the awkward of the disasters that may occasionally pin on the c3-knight with an even befall White if he allows his king to more awkward pin on the d2-rook.i.Wal+ 23 ~f2 gxf4 24 .i. An untested suggestion by Miles.. liquidating into a drawn endgame....xgS 16 ~xg5 h6 Wa1+ 21 ~d2 "b2+ 22 ~dl.g3 f5 Wd5+ 'W'xd5 22 cxd5 l:fe8+ 23 . 18 lLlxe5 .f5 19 'W'f3 "xb4 20 ~xc6 14c5 bxc6 21 'W'xc6 +..i.i..i..i..l:xd2! 15 ~xd2 e5 16..i. get stuck in the centre in the .b4) 20 c5 ~b4 21 f3 g5 22 axb4 ment. Gj(6vik 1983) for the white king...e2 and now. e5?! 15 b4! (better than 15 .

II l:d2. complications follow.WxcS IS 1... 14. After 12 cxdS exdS 13 iDb3 iDb3 (16 1.te6 IS 1.t Miles.tMiles) 16Wc4(I60-0?eS=F ECO) and White forces the exchange of queens. 16..td3 Wxb4+ 18 ~e2 J. gave Black good play in Dreev-Kupo- It is difficult to see any prospects rosov.tfS1S "c4 .txbS knight retreat. e... 14. :rei 1. .a6 is possible.xf6 . but with no real sign of an advantage. it is unlikely that White ~g8 22 J.. 12 . Ultimately. logical to revert so suddenly to the 1l•••. iDxdS ...iDxdS IS lbdSiDb4 16 axb4 Black is comfortably equal..td3!? 16 ..xc2+ an advantage. but it radically destabi. but once Black below went 11 .•. and in the .txdS 17 l:xdS l:ac8 18 l:cS After I1../41 14•••:xd2! 14. but pieces amply compensate for White's if ..e2 to complete his development.. might also be worth a try.txf6 16 iDxdS iDxdS 18 1.gS . though So that the queen can go back to d8 interesting.28 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. ECO suggests 14 merely a transposition (thus.t..d7 is played next move. Tallinn 1986.l:ac8.. a6 12 . fS 16"c4. cit- stance.. is more natural....tg3?! bS IS cxbS?! axbS 16 . while if 14iDxdS.l:fcS both lines..xcS? IS b4 +-.. After 20 iDxdS play ..tgS .td7 rather has played ...xb3 19 other (l1.d3 11l-1/2 was Petrosian-Spassky. is a little too artificial.fS IS 1i'c4 . eS IS 1.xdS b4!?) 16.xh7+ ~h8 20 l:h5 .txc2 21 J.d7.h7+.td7 frrst). 15 tQxd2 eS16 . eS plan. iDb4 17 Wb3 1. .txeS iDxe5 17 Wxe5 .. lliDd2: alternatives to ll .. ll. will find the necessary improvement in 12.g617 .f3 as an improvement for White... it seems a little il- than 11... for a white revival in the 11 l:d2 line.iDe4.te6 18 Wc3 Wxc3 19 bxc3 1. with White having had time 121.xdS iDb4 19 We4 ..iDe4) Black is aiming for 1.eS After 12 .1.ta4 17 ... suggested by C) Geller. a6!? 13 0-0 l:ac8...g. the onus is on White iDe7 19 .td3 l:xcS 20 iDxcs Wa5+ to equalize..1..xcS 20 a4 1.eS is the natural reply to the ..th6 ....td7 and aim for counterplay iDxdS 21 Wxd3iDxb4 Black's active along the c-file. IS cxdS exdS 16 ning. for in.d3 g6 (1S . Black's only realistic alternative is to Buenos Aires 1979...1. I4.td7 (D) ..xbS 18 axb4 Wb6 19 lizes the centre. 1. without breaking the coordination of the rooks.e7 =F ECO. 14 11. Geller gives the entertaining drawing If in one of the main lines (l1.txd3 19 "xd3 :dS 20 "c2 l:dS .l:d8) line 14.te2 . 14 ... it is extra isolated pawn.Wb6 17 Wb6. bS!? The pawn is not really worth win. the game Petrosian-Spassky ing 14..

xc5 8 "c2 most cases in the J. when the queen has the recent theoretical improvements to take cover. sitionally inadvisable. This is Black's most direct method 15lDc4 of dealing with the Old Main Line.4 11 ltld2 e5: Spassky.eS. After 14.d7 line is under-researched..xd6 there was even a lull in the popUlarity 18 J. an inflexible defensive piece is being exchanged for a flexible w attacking piece. These themes will be further illustrated when the 'Exchange Variation' is discussed in Chapter 4.e6?! 21 provides interesting possibilities for 'iFd4!) with ample compensation for Black. White had the standard good play against the isolani in Karpov- 2. Montreal 1979. ..J. which makes it easier for Black to create active play. un- lDc4 21 J.ust examine the main the pawn. as gorse bush.xd6lDaS 19 l:[d4lDxc3 20 bxc3 of the J..e8 16 J. and Black duly won in Taborov. First. Sec- ondly.e7 pawn will tend to want to simplify... the c3-knight provides impor- tant cover for White on both the el-aS diagonal and the c-file. able on dS.. There are two main reasons for this.e7 UlDd2 will want to exchange the f6-knight e5(D) for the c3-knight before accepting the isolani. especially when The general impression is that the Black has already weakened the light . 15. Yalta 1982.. Black will want to .g3 b5 17lDd6 J. but ensures is more convincing than White's on the that the d-pawn is totally unsustain- dark. Indeed. The Old Main Line 29 lDxdS 20 'iFxdS IIfd8 (20 .. Main Line' (10 0-0-0) in 1988.xc4 l:[xc4 til interest was revived by the 'New In this opposite-colour bishops po. 16 'iFb3 J.f4 system Black lDc6 9 a3 "as 10 l:[dl J. But we lb. and squares with . and the re- moval of this knight adds to Black's ability to create threats.!. Introduction Despite the general principle that the player opposing the isolated queen's 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3lDc3lDf6 4lDf3 J. in 5 J. lines to see whether Black has any 13 0-0 "d8 14 cxd5lDxd5! need to avoid them.e6 17 'ii'xb7?? running in Black's favour..exdS?! IS lDf3 h6 16 lDeS .. Evidently deciding there is nothing and by the mid-1980s.f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 J.dxc4 is usually po- Lerner. Since .eS gains a tempo. J. we noted in the introductory chapter.. sition... Black's grip on the light squares 11. was re- lDaS would be like taking cover in a garded as fully satisfactory. with most of in 15 lDxdS exdS.f4 system for a few years...

Instead. he al.xe7 popUlarity of this variation for Black 16 ~5 .6 12 i. and maybe try to surround an isolated d-pawn.xf6 i. Thus lows his d-pawn to be pinned.g5 d4 13 ~b3 Wd8 (gener. White can then exchange in order to isolate the d-pawn. The obvious 15 ~5leaves 2../41 play . /~)h8 16 h4! (the increased when Geller. we sider a few alternatives..xf6 i. demonstrated that 14 knight move being able to transpose i.g5 i.e7 11 ~2 . Fta~nik-Rosandic.a5 10 lIdl i. g61! 15 exd4 exd4 16 ~e2 ~g4 Black avoids the simplifIcation (and 17 i.d3?! 30 ally regarded as the main line).g5 d4 13 lLlb3 should by the same analogy hold no .. C: 14exd4 31 2.xf6 30 2.xe7 .) 15 .g5 or 12 i.xg6 ..xf6 15 ~d5.. only move.30 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.. Vinkovci 1995.g5 d4 13 ~b3 Wb6 (or 12 D: 14 i.e2. edge to White) that follows 13 . Calcutta 1988.S 12 i.xf6 15 ~5).g4 A) (White avoids 2. and after eS 12 i.Wb6 Black does best to abandon his h-pawn 14 i.g3 d4).e2 33 ~b3 'ifb613 i. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 ~f6 4 ~f3 i. The 14.g3.gS d4 13 ~b3 ..g5 d4).g5 ~b3 Wb6 13 i. while Black will try to make some- thing of his lead in development.xe7 "ilxe7 180-0 "ile5 19 ~g3 hence danger of a slight but steady White stood well.~g4! 15 i.xf6 is strictly a minor al- 2.xf6 i.d4 at the fIrst opportunity.6 (12 i. To take Before discussing 14 i.512 i. From the diagram. 2.. g6 17 i. 16 i.6). d4 13 ~b3 Wb6 14 i.xc5 S ~c6 9 a3 .f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 i.e7 5 i.e2 as! was a good equalizer. into either of the other lines.g7. we con- into account these transpositions. while 15 i.7 12 ~b3 Wb6 13 i.g3 d4 13 ~b3 "ifb6 (or 12 White a tempo down on 2.5 12 1. White can play 12 ~b3.xe7 .c2 B) 14 i.. but this opens up the e-flle at a time when White's kingside devel- opment is severely lacking. As so often though.d3?! was tried in Kaidanov- Murugan.dB terrors for Black.h4.f4 system.xe7 17 ~d5 covered several new ideas for Black in "ilM +) 16.d3 g6 16 ~5 i.. Indeed the general theme of battle in these varia- tions is that White will try to establish control of the light squares..xe7 (17 i.dS (D) 14. who has un. B: 14 i. Our lines are: consider: A: 14 i. 2. and get on with his counterplay.5 and Black avoids 14 i. with the the i. ternative. 12 i.xh7+ (15 i.

lLlxd4 (Line C2 below). Wxh1? 19 190-0 ..te7... lLlg4 16 i. 2) IslLlbS is another untried sug- gestion in ECO. but probably does not equal.. However.Arnason. development is cause for concern for Black.... A simpler try would have been lLldS :bS +) 17. as it is one of the few unex- plored possibilities in the Old Main Line that offers White the chance to make headway.lLlxd4 IslLlxd4 exd4 16 lLlbS . Wh4 is bxc6 IS .. This is worth savouring..th4+ 20 usually preferred. but by analogy with the 14.txa3+ IS .txd4 (17 :xd4?! .lLlxe7! IS hS .tg4 line (C2 below).. lLlxd4 17 .. by hand White had a clearly good 17lLlds ..tg7! 16.•exd41S ..txg2? 23 .te6 20 lLldS! White's lead in hxg6+ . Now Black may capture either way. where Is .txe2 25 Wxe2 and White safe- guards his extra piece.txe7 Wxe7 16 Bewersdorff-A.tgS 21 Wcl and after castling recapture is also fully satisfactory.tg4!? although he may well be obliged at Is.txfS .lLlg4 16 i.. Black might want to try IS .te2lLlg4 IS .tf6 "" is cited.. lLlxdS 21 cxdS .. In this 1990 continued 16.lLlxd4 32 C1) 14.txe7 .te3!? is given without analy- sis as an untried suggestion in ECO. Reykjavik exd4 exd4!? (Line D below)... This position can also be reached ize.. lLlg4?! 17lLlxc6 particular move-order. One light-hearted tactical pos- C) sibility is 20.tgS 17 .te2lLlxe3 19 fxe3 . it must be remembered that Black can also vary with 14..tcS and Black will eventually eat up the +) 17 .tg3 .txg7 . . 16.txfl 24 ..... Then the obvious IS ..xe7 'fIxe7 (D) some stage to sacrifice the isolated pawn for active piece-play: Cl: 14•••exd4 31 C2: 14. The Old Main Line 31 fxg61S Wxg6 WeS 19 WxeS :xeS 20 game. IS ..te2 .. lLlg4 16 . however..tg7 20 l:lh7+ WgS 21 g7). but after bishop (not. WeS!? may improve for Black.txdS?! 14 exd4 (D) 22 .f4 .... but the simple pawn ~d2! . After 16lLlxd4 the post-ECO game after 14 . IS ..txd4 lLlxd4 17 :xd4 gives White a suffi- cient grip on dS to allow him to count on an edge.te2 I) IS ...

e6 that it is White who is struggling to (2l.. one gets the impression now.. Sofia 19. rather than 20.fS 19 'it'd2 d3 20 hxg4 dxe2 an unsound piece sacrifice: 21 :cl (21 Wxe2 'ii'xe2+ 22 ~xe2 1) 17 .. for example.J. :fe8 24 ~t2 ± Sher-Ahlander. In this endgame..•1. 1984) 19 . Black ~d2 :xe2+ 28 ~d3 fxg6 0-1 Dreev.itle3 19 fxeS itlxc2+ 20 ~t2 Informator 33...32 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! 17 itlxd4 could provoke Black into 18 h3 J..f3 :e2+ 26 Wxe2 1.Wf6+ 20 ~e3 1.f5 23 ~c IlLle4!. 19 O-O??. corr.itlf6! 21 Wf4 :e8 and the initia.n 1.. 17 . 18(4 . as 18•.. but Black 2) The correct reply is the thematic was looking good in Dreev-Gelfand. . etc.'ii'h6 20 lLlxd4itlxd4 21 :xd4 :e8 22 h4! and Black had nothing to show for the pawn in the game Dreev-Gelfand..Wc2 23 :del 2a) 19 We4? leaves White's king in Wxc3 24 bxc3 :fe8 25 : n :ad8 26 the crossfire after 19 .. Assessed as equal in ECa..xe2 attacking the queen..e4... Farum 1993..itlf6 22 Wf4!) 22 nitlf6 23 Wd3 equalize. lLle3 21 lLlxe3 dxe3+ 22 ~xe3 itlxeS threatening the standard smothered 23lLld4left White nicely placed for the mate with .c2 =F) 2l. lLlh3++.:tel! left White a clear piece up in dxe3 22 'ii'c3 Cu. 24 itlxg2 g3 i. Wgl+. both Black's lLlef3+ 25 Wxf3lLlxf3# leads to a less pieces are more actively placed than stereotypical smothered mate) 24 I[xd7 their counterparts.) endgame in Forintos-Radulov. 17••:iVeS! This time the direct attack is less convincing: 17.. We3. Fronze 1988. Black can play more resolutely: C2) 20.Hansen-Ahlander..c2 27 lLld4 itlxd4 28 cxd4 Wg2 21 :n :ae8 22 'ii'f4 lLlce5 23 :xd4 29 :fxe3 :xe3 30 :xe3 ~f8 31 lLlh4 itlxh2! (very pretty...:b8 21 :d21. Kruppa. duly won some 40 moves later... in view of 19. and now the killer zwischenzug 27 19 1Wd2 1We4 20 0-0 itle3 21itlxe3 ..(5 recommended by Azmaiparashvili in 18..itlxd4?! 18 :xd4itlxt2 19 1. ~xf2! (not. however. Uzhgorod 1987.xg4 =F.1. and White's queen- Wh3 25 :d4itlg6 26itlxg6 Wxfl + 27 side pawn structure is broken. 22 ~d2 i. Malmo 1994..Wh4?! 18 g3 Wh3 19 itlf4! (19 'ii'e4 1.Wh4 18 g3 Wh3: Riga 1987 after 22 ..d7 20 lLlf3 1. 14••• lLlxd4 15 itlxd4 exd4 (D) tive is with Black after.d3+ 25 1..e3. The text-move is more logical in 22itld5 :fe8+ 23 ~t2 :xd5 24 I[xdS that Black is developing a piece while 1..d7 20 ~d2 GO Petrai- tis-Tomson..f5 21 Wd2 :ad8 1981.. Unless White can make something 2b) 19 lLlxc6 bxc6 20 'ii'e4 and out of IS i.

i.. Gaining an important tempo with 16 ..d3l:[ae8 . when my initial view was that Black stood well.i.g8..•a5 17 l:[f3! (30 l:tcl?! .i. then 20 "b2 (20 ~xf6+ gxf6!) 20 .xd4 19 .d7! 20.txd4 .i.f3.i.i.txd4 1984.tcS 20 0-0 . This does not exhaust the possibilities. The Old Main Line 33 16~bS 24 . However. Burgess then suggested 22 'ifb2! f6 (22.i.. Certainly 16..e3?! .d7 17 1990.e2? Black won nicely in J.xb6 i.. llxe2+ 24 ~f1l:[ae8 25 ..xb3 28l:[d7. 19l:txg4?? 20 'it'fl WeS 21 .b4#. after 16.i..i.. ..xf6 18 b4 "e5 19 li:)d5 ..e3. 21 li:)b5 li:)xd2) 21.g4 17 f3 encounters the same reply.c5?! 17 b4 "e7+ (17 .e6) 30.i. gxf6 20 ll)c7) .i.. it is a little too late for 17•••l:[eS! Black to try retaining the d4-pawn. USA 1984.td3 .e5 f6. . 20. 17l:txd4 16••.i.Scbroer... ...xf6 gxf6 23 h3 i.h4.. with one possible line ..i. instead 18 'ife2?! is tempting..e2 d3 19 "xd3 . l:[fe8 3l...... li:)xd4 "a5+ 18 "d2 "b6 19 i.dS 22 .i. if 31 l:[h3.a5+? 23 l:[d2! ±.. being 28 .e2 serves serious consideration as an al- dxe3! 18l:[xd8 exf2+ 19 ~fll:[xd8 20 ternative to 16.xe3 26 fxe3 White must play for material gain.i. li:)e4! 21li:)f5 (21 "c2 Wa5+. Lyons Z was agreed drawn after 16. i.c5 ! (21 . .a6 18 the threat of .i.c5 17 . li:)xd4 .xb4+ 24 1fxb4 "xfS 25 "xa4li:)c3 00) 23 . Kiljavajr Wch 19 . the most theoretically relevant perhaps being 20.f5 unclear endgame. One gets the feeling that.i.Hansen-Thorsteins.d7 de- sacrifice after 16 . if 21 f4 "xd5! 22 cxd5 d3 23 "b3 anything. position perhaps slightly favouring Ivanchuk-Vaganian.a4 20 b3..i.c4 . a6? 21l:[d6.... ll)dl g6 21 fuf2 ..i.te2 (D) 21 l:[blli:)e4 22 :xb3li:)xd2 23l:txb6 li:)xfl 24 :xb7li:)xe3 25 fxe3 ±.l:[e819 21 .. and then 20. who agreed the draw ECO gives another promising queen prematurely..xf6...i. it was Vaganian with Black...i.i.i.b6 and now 18 .. and not Ivanchuk.i.Hansen) IS.xe4 l:[xe4 25 0-0 . and there are many entertaining varia- tions. but Ivanchuk analyses further with 0) 19 .i.t li:)xg4 20 .xb3 14 .i.i.f5 22 "cl bS! +. Piket-Van der Sterren.i.txh7+ ~g7 with an unclear 19.. but Black has the resource 18 ..xb3 22 ~xe7+ ~h8 23 'ifcl ±).xc4 29 l:[xg7+ ~h8 30 Dolgitser.i.thS 24 .xf2+ Another queen sacrifice.i.i. Likewise.... USSR Ch 1988 Black.i.e3.. "xb3 (26 .xf6 "xf6 22..e3 ± Cu.b4+ 21 ~dll:[el#.l:[e5 with an ....g4...... Cu.. 23 b4?! .xf6? (hoping for 19. l:[xc4? 27 l:[bl) 27 "xb3 it is too late to play quietly with 16 .i.i..

. i.. exd4 lOxd4 17 lOxd4 exd4 18 lOb5 and White is well advised to accept the . 22 i.. aims to dissolve White's pressure but White is fully developed and there- against the black centre with a timely fore ready...xf6 i.xg4 18 l:[d2 his dream of complete control of the exd4 19lOxd4.... Black's initiative wom 1997 continued IS 0-0 lIc8 16 fully compensates for the two pawns.. Bundesliga 24 hxg4 ...d7 and 19 lIfel :le8 20 i. i....... but others of. initiative} 20 ... a4 IS1Oc5 i.xf6 i. 'iIIgl 'iIIh3 2S 1Ih4 'iIId7 26 'iIId4 lIe8 17.xf6 i.. g6 15 exd4 exd4 160-0 and ample 21 'iIIc 1 lOxd4 22 lIxd4 i.e8 19 lOd5 i.f5 gives White two at- (18 .aS lIxe8 2S lin ..fS to react. or Ree-Pfleger.xg4 i.e6 17lOcs .xe6 19 lOdS .xd3 Cura~ao Ct 1962) 21 l:te4 i. i. 17 ..i.xd3! i. repetition here..t Korchnoi- 14.e2 'iIIh3.34 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.txe4). but exd4 (Line C 1 above).. etc. this trick of into lines considered under 14 exd4 Black's can work in 14 .exd4!? transposes 22 exd4 +. a6!?. 18 lOc5 i.t) 18 lOe2 .. Black (by analogy with 14.e2+ now: 23 ~gl i.. aS variations.. as it finished his development and is ready cuts out the possibility of 23 h3 i. lated pawn.•hS (proba. lOg4 IS i..Wg2? 19l1niOd420fud4exd4 tractive choices: either 17 i.xc4) 17 . h6 IS i. The one attempt by White White had safely picked up the iso- to try for more backfired in Chiburdan. 20 ~n {20 lOde2 lIe6 gives a strong Brussels 1986..xf6 160-0 as a number of tactical resources.d3 b6 28 l:tn 1-0 Petrosian-Filip. the old lOxe6 ... and is backed up by 2) 14 ... and now 16.. USSR 1984. Havana 1966.xf6 20 lOxd4 and repetition..e7 18 .'ille7 is strong.. ening c5.xeS 22 lOd5 ± Forintos-I.d3 i. here White is too far ahead in tempi) but is liable to fizzle out into a draw."g2? loses control: 21 'iIIe4! Klovans.lOg4 is satisfactory.t Yusupov- :est (20... a4.Zaitsev. Goehler-Koglin.)xd4 exd4 20 :lxd4 (17 .. 17 . i. with 22 ~d2? . USSR 1982: After 14. Of the alternatives. keeping .'illh3 18 dSiOd4! 3a) 16.e6?! makes the mistake 22 .xe7 'iIIxe7 16 lO3xa4 'iIIaS 20 b4 'iIIa7 21 i.d7 (17 ..e7 20 lOd3 There follows 17 g3 (White hasn't so dxe3 21 fxe3. the most popular.'iIIh4 is safe.Abramovic. 3) 14. aS lines.. with Black playing 4) 14.cl d3?! (17 ..xc6 bxc6 exd4.f4! 14••. for ex..tf3 i. 16.h6+ 23 f4 lOf2 24 lIxe8+ the most popular choices being IS . a6!?) 18 i. or. 16.xh2 with a clear ad- This move of Geller's is currently vantage for Black... and indeed 19 .. Spassky. for example Portisch. Baguio City Wch (9) 1975) fer White an edge. a5. Karpov.f5 in reserve. idze-Azmaiparashvili...'illh6 instead of 22 ....•b61SlOb5! threat- 27 i.xf6 21 lIxe8+ now various games have subsided to ..as 19 i. USSR 1978.e6 21 'iIIe4 ±) 19 li. play branches. of delaying active play until White has bly a slightly safer move-order. 16. Hiibner-Short.n 'iIIhS 3b) Black may do better with 23 i. and White has achieved far risked 17 i. l:ae8+ central light squares.xd3 ..e7 19 1) 14 .. more imagi- 'iIIxf2+ 22 <it>d2lOf6 23 'iIIe3 'iIIg2 24 natively though not necessarily better. Lone Pine 1981.

Farago-Geller. I.txf6!? 35 things up with 17 f4?.. Black has the better bishop.b6! 18 ..a5 ceptable: variation.txg5. 18•••lDxd4 19 Wd2 lDhS 20 .tc8! =t Geller) 20 b3 lDg4 21 . but has also provided the b3- 1991.. a consid- rect defence is clearly more economi.txf616 0-0 (D) .. cal and does not misplace the queen.te6 D2) With the point 17lDxa4?"a5 18 b3 IS .te6 18 b4 axb3 ment of White's play. 18 ..txe7 This has had rather a poor reputa.. the exchange 19lDxb3 "b6 20 exd4 exd4 21lD3xd4 has not only weakened Black's grip .. ECO assumes. the superior pawn structure..td5+.te4 tion. al- the a-pawn has allowed Black to con. but the indi.... Geller gives 17 .Wlodarczyk.a5 17lDb5 .lDg4! start ofD4.. 17•••g6 Not 17... knight with a 'retreat' on c5. White mistakenly tried to mix 02: IS .txe7lDxe7 19 .. 16•..txg4 .txe7 "xb2 20 "xb2 cxb2 21lDd3lDxe7 22lDxb2 1Dc6 .b6 18lDxa4 04: IS lDa4 37 "a7 19 f5 .txf6!? . and the d4- square. Wxe7 21 We3 f6 22 .td3! lines covered here are perfectly ac. Jakarta olov suggests that the position is not 1996. a recent game by Ivan Sok.. Bog~. has also been tried.Sokolov-Portisch.. since the uninterrupted thrust of White possibly has a slight edge.dxc3! 19 .!.txg4 .. 16•••84 . and Black stood 03: IS exd4 36 slightly better after 17 .td7 (19 . I.txg4 20 :ct3 "b6! would have been winning. that for example 23 l:lxd4 exd4 24 .txf6 (18lDd5?? lDxd5 -+) 18 ... Copenhagen on d5. Exchanging on f6 first is a refine- 16.dxc3? 18 .... though the two other 17. Black must avoid 22 . erable improvement on the c I-square. After- 15 lDb5 is briefly mentioned at the wards Geller showed that 17 .txc4?? the straightforward. knight on c 1 reduces his prospects However. In the inaugural game of the 14.. somewhat... IS 0-0 84 161Dc1 (D) Blocking the centre with 17 e4 gives Black an unchallenged edge. 18exd4 Correctly releasing the pressure in the centre..txa3 =t. Novi Sad 01: IS 0-0 35 1979.txf6.. though the awkward position of the solidate the position of his d-pawn. The Old Main Line 35 exd4 and 15lDa4. the D1) weakness on e3 costs White dearly.

f3 by White's active pieces.xc5 22 ther investigation. Hubner. but White can cut his losses with 17 ':xd8 (ECO).f3 is Hubner.. had doubled on the a-file.36 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.b7 keeps Black in the jor factor in the position.. lLld7 17 i.. White strong. re- w sulting in positions where Black seems no worse. axb3 17 "'xb3 lLld7.. but this assessment seems The passed c-pawn. as being much better for Black.•c7 with compensation 24•••lLlxb4 25 lLlxb7 for the pawn.d2! 'ifxb4 well do better to try 16. Geller's original analysis sug- gested 16.. and saw that with correct play he could force a As given by Geller in his analysis of favourable endgame. Korchnoi- game. a thematic 23 . .. as 20. preparing lLlb6. but the immediate 20 i..j4! This position provides an excellent object lesson against taking someone else's analysis on trust.xb7 ':c5 = Quin- Beliavsky is quoted in ECO as ad. vocating 19 . This pawn but Black slipped to safety just before capture would not be possible if Black the time control. Thus: his game with Farago. g6. 20 b5 b6! 21 i. In Informa- tor 28 Geller assesses this position.. "a7 17lLlcS "as of both bishops. The line with 15 i. lLlxc5 "xa3 (D) D3) 15 exd4 a4 (D) This leads to a tactical interlude. Hanover 1983. 18lLl3xa4 i. And a year later. is now a ma- bxc5 22 i.xb7 26 "'xb4 lLlxb4 27 i.xe7 axb3! + .xf6 merits fur- 20 i.e7 19 b4 24'ifxb4 24 "'d6 ':a5 25 lLlxb7 i. however. well backed up rather optimistic. reached after a long forcing variation.. lLlxb4 24lLlxb7 is also good for move which increases the flexibility White.. teros-Chen. Korch- noi.. had seen beyond the two weak pawns on b4 and e3.. played down Geller's analysis. in a critical Candi- dates' Match game against Korchnoi.Geller.f3 dxe3 21 fxe3 i.xc6 i. 21 bxc5!. but Black might 23.i. Merano Ct (6) 1980. 16lLlxa4 16 dxe5? is well answered by 16.xc5 can be met with soon established a winning position. ECO.

i. "as+ 20 "d2 fS with an equal posi- 19•••. Diving into the hedge with tbc3 :e3 29 tbdS :xe2 30 tbxf6+ 16 . However.. If The line with 19 . h6 being the main possibili- League) 1982: 24 :xd4 .i.b7 26 f3 :fe8 27 ..fS! 20 "b2. with a draw soon following.i.xb3 2S "xb3 White's knights are moving far enough "al+.:fe8 28 the hedge". immediately squelching Black's tinued 21 .. After 20. "e7. with IS . but he is be- hind in development and his knight is sidelined.. A more D4) ambitious and riskier plan would be 15 tba4 (D) 19 .. USSR Ch (First and IS . Agreeing to the exchange of queens and the return of the pawn.i.aS+ 19 'iVd2 14.i.xhl 27 f3 leads to a more erb..i.b4?! .b4+ 22 ~n gxf6 23 l:[xd4 :eS Equal..i.i. brief mention: 15 tbb5 a4 16 tiJd2 dxe3 ever.xa4 2S bxa4 ties: . but White cannot win it 17 tbxd4 exd4 18 b3 without shedding enough pawns to 18 0-0 "as 19 .i. .d2!? might well anything.xf6 . How. g6 Bagirov-Vaganian. White could try instead 21 to the left to cause concern among spin .i. Black's choice is as an assessment confirmed by the game wide as a move earlier..d2 .i.xa3 22 "xd4 .. aS.i. be theoretically critical for Geller's 18••:.eS.xf6 . 2O•••:xaS 21 .i.i. as after 17 dS ~f8 31 tbxe8 :xe8 32 ~f2 :b8 33 b6 tbaS 18 d6. this is generous to White. was After IS tba4.xf6 20 b3 concede the draw.i. Moscow 1981 con. which Beliavsky assesses as giv.b4+ 23 ~f1 doctors..i.i. Another knight move deserves a ing compensation for the pawn. ':xb4 . tbxd2 23 :xd2 .i. Korchnoi-Karpov.Olafsson.i.d2 1987.c2 24 :d2 .i. tion.i. 23 :xd4 .e3!? .xd6 19 tbcs (Beliavsky) :b7 Black cannot escape with his cor- White is about to trim the a-me.d7 =Korchnoi. Portisch-H.xb4+ 22 axb4 :fe8 ambitions with the a-pawn. Merano Wch (11) 1981 continued 24 g4 bS 2S cxb5 .d7 is given as equal by Beliavsky.. "Knights on the edge get stuck in elaborate draw. The most popular move in this posi- Portisch-Beliavsky.i..dl :xbS. The Old Main Line 37 :xa4 26 :d7 b6 and soon agreed drawn...xe3 tbg4 18 lLle4 lLlxe3 19 fxe3 of Black's position. 24 c5! quickly reduces the appeal 17 . White is a pawn up. nered bishop.xa3 20 WxaS tion. Reykjavik 200-0 tbe4 21 "xaS :xaS 22 . Korchnoi 16•••tbxd4 noted that the exchange sacrifice 26 Black aims to illustrate the old prov.i. and indeed one of the games on the database was agreed drawn here.i.:xa4? is unwise. After 27 .

..g6 39 move earlier.i.. 'ii'h4. After 17 exd4?! "h4. h6 16 ..d7 38 043: 15..h4 first. 18..i. li)xe3 18 fxe3 Wh4+ 19 an improvement.. rather than 18 .xc2 19 :xa8 :xa8 20 Korchnoi..!. 16.!.tOg4 38 044: 15.. ..i....xe2 (16 .i. If 19 18 li)xd7 "xd7 19 ~f3 li)e7 20 .g4?! is perhaps a little primi.i... Moscow 1987) 17 ~xf6 ~xf6 Korchnoi gives 18 . Korchnoi.i.. :b8 (16 .i.xe7 'fIxe7 19. 22 .. 17 ...i. Yusupov-Ubilava..g5! co. USSR then 21. 042) as given by Korchnoi.... but promises and now..xf6 20 tOb6 :ad8 21 e4 ± 17•••li)b6 Yusupov-Beliavsky. b6?! leaves too 18exd4 many weaknesses: 17li)xd7 fud7 18 18 ~f3 is probably more accurate . 041) 16 ~xe7 'jIxe7 17 b3! 15..g4?! 38 042: 15...i.e4 "e4 ~f5 20 Wf3 exd4 21 li)xd4? g6 21 c5 .f5 18 :xd8 .exd4 avsky. Montpellier Ct The piece sacrifice is not quite good 1985.•.. while 18 g3 . 18 ~xg4?! tive.c8!?...xf6 .. Yusupov suggests 18 ..i..i.. :dl"c2=t:.f4! 043) 15•••li)g4 (D) w 041: 15•••. He notes that the simpler 18 for the bishop. in that White's knight is out of range of the d-pawn. again with thoughts of . 16 0-0 .. 18 g3?! li)xe3 19 e4.f3 ± Ivanchuk-Beli. but it is more flexible to 0-0 li)h6 19 exd4 exd4 20 .tg4 .li)xd4 22 :xd4 'ii'cl+ 23 1983.xf6 and After 17 . d3 17 :xd3 ~xg4 19 :d2 exd4 =i= was Yusupov- . is messy and 15. Tilburg 1987...dl ± Yusupov) 17 "xe2 :e8 18 c5 (Korchnoi) is possible..i. .38 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 /J.).i. etc.d5 as enough. ..td3 is good insert 15 .c7?! 19 no edge. then maybe 19 "c2 Citd2 Wg5 20 ~c1 "xe3+ 21 ci>bl e4 (instead of the suggested 19 lOcI e4!?.i. "d3 li)g2+ 20 ~f1 e4 21 Wd2li)e3+ 22 ci>gl "g5 23 :h2 'ii'e5 24 fxe3 d3..••b6 39 Arguably with less point than a 045: 15. ~d7 is a sensible development unclear.i.. 16 li)bc5 for an edge. .

if 3) Tal also analysed 17 exd4lLlxd4 20.Bykhovsky-Kharitonov.txf6 . h3 the black knight lacks the retreat on for example. 16 . hannless.. Not very convincing as a try for an edge.tdl "b4 25 . (17 . the exchange of h6.. as actu- 2) ECO suggests that 20 f4 stabi.txe7 'ii'xe7.txf6 21 b5 ate pressure along the h7-bl diagonal. Montpellier Ct 1985 The most popular choice.tCS A challenge to White.tf3 :ac8 22 "g4 :fd8 Black was on the point of consolidating. Tallinn 1983..xb4! 23 'ii'd2 'ii'xb3 24 lLlxd4i..Llxd7 w lLlxd7 19 . unnecessarily in- terpolated 20 'fIe4 'ii'f6. 180-0.td 1 112-112.td7 . Poland 1986... and aims for immedi- unpin the knight.tf5 22 and now 22 ... 15•••16 (D) 2) Portisch-Tal. but neither is anything else: 045) 1) Certainly not 17lLlac5?? a4. Grabowski-Sapis. ally played.txh3 24 gxh3 .... 18 .th4 ily defended kingside. Kharkov 1982.Llxd4 23 'ii'xd4 . lizes the position in White's favour.txa4lLlc5..... Black is already taking over Kharitonov-Polovodin. 23 'fId3 ltfe8 24 . exd4!?) 18lLlxd4 exd4190-0(19 ltxd4?? . have been more precise than 22. The white queen needs to attack the queenside ('ii'c2-b3 perhaps) rather than the heav- 16..txf6 .Lld7 17i. The Old Main Line 39 190-0"g5 20 bxa5 i. Black went 17 O-O?! lLlb4 18 axb4 .i. lLld7 21 ..Tal) Now: 20 ... or 16. 18i. (Tal) would 'ii'c6+ = Av. i.. Gorelov-Polovo- din. and now by analogy with the Ivanchuk-Beliavsky game (Line 042 above)..tf3 "b4 23 :d3 :ac8 =t...Llg4 17 .tg3 lLld7 19 lLlb3 dxe3 20 fxe3 16.txa4) 19. can he do better than to repeat moves? 17.tf3! with a light square bind. the initiative.td3 g6 22lLlb6 ±.txa4 19 takes advantage of the displacement of exd4 exd4 20 :d3 (White must aim to White's knight. 20 . various minor pieces after 18 .txe7 'fIxe7 18 gled to give any advantage. 15•••h6 (D) 17. b6?! is less reliable. while on.txa4 20 'ii'xa4 044) "b6=. 1) 20 'iWd2 'ii'g6 21 ~hl . axb4 USSR 1983.txe7 "xe7 22 :xd4.Llbc5 leaves the a4-knight stranded. 20 .Lld7! aiming for c5 .txf6 170-0 "c7 18 e4 IslLlb3 b6. is With a draw by repetition following.. but after 21 ...e7 then 21 ..txf6 ..th4leaves White's pawns too man- After 16. 'ii'e7 22 ..

and has the best Now in 0stenstad-Bonsch.. :lc8 with equality. Gaining some queenside space. d-file looks awkward.tf3 is an- swered by 19 . but General conclusion on 12 .. 24 gxf4 i. in that d4 13liJb3 'it'dB 17 c5 "c7?! 18liJb6 is inadvisable for Black.tfS 17"c1 exd4 (17 .. 1983) 180-0 l:te8 19 :lfel?! (19 .f4 23 g3 'ii'hs i.....t Fta~nik-Kotronias. and Black was already knights are so off-centre.tg5 17 cS is slightly more flexible. but White's 19 . ..xd8 23 c..th6 20. the game..d3. Belgrade 1988 concluded 20 i... corr. liJxd4 18 liJxd4 exd4 19 0-0 l:tc8 is equal.•i.h6 important squares..g5! (improving on 19 .c4 i. Tilburg 1988: 16. resigned prematurely. and Several possible improvements come hoping to bring the knight back into to mind. i. Gutop-Vitolin~.. though that Black is covering all the 2O•••l:tad8 21 i. OL 1990. for example 22 "d3!?.tc4 .xe7 "xe7 22 "f4 ± Bareev-Zotkin.dxe3 21 ':xd8 exf2+ 22 ~xf2 21liJd2 . White. exchanging the knight as soon as it reaches d2. On 16 exd4 White suffered a drastic setback in Hiibner-Short.tg718 0-0 'it'b419 e4.xf617 cS while White had lost his grip on dS. White unwisely exchanged White cannot really afford a sudden with 22 i.tgl liJeS.tg5 21 liJf3 .c4 l:tac8 21 l:tfe1 ~h8 22liJd2 i.Gurevich give 20..:lc8 20 i... The pin on the After 17 0-0 "c7 18 c5 i.e3. but not 19 . gaining pressure on the kingside.txe4 liJxe4 21 i. 20 liJb6 USSR 1982/3) 19 .. 17. with a ized.t.tg7 18 cS transposes.f3 25liJxf3 "g4+.th6 22 .xd2 1/Z-1f2. Then F~nik-Ubilava. demoral.te6 (D) w So as to loosen Black's grip on the e4-square.. and After the alternative 20 i.. Novi Sad minor pieces.. 16.e6 19 e4.xe6?! fxe6 23 "d3:lf7 24 opening of the position when his llJc4 :ldf8. Thessaloniki OL w 1988) is most accurate. Sch- after the thematic queen sacrifice with neider and V. 17 0-0 . It is clear draw..tg4 22 :ldel i.. Black has little to fear. liJe7 20 kings ide development takes a long .40 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! liJd2 .te4 ? 20 ..

'±' Doroshkevich-Plisetsky.'ilh419 g3"h3 20 dominate the light squares as he would ~f4 :LeS+ 21 ~d2 'iht6 22 ~cl .tr4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 clxc5 . Dort- mund 1988 finished abruptly: 18 d4 (or 12 .te6 20 . 2) 17 ~xf6+ "xf6 18 exd4 exd4 19 0-0 .t. when I.t. Ceske Budejovice 1995..txr6 23 ~xe6 1t'xe3+ 24 Wf2 1t'xf2+ 2S Almost invariably chosen.. extremely strong for Black. there is still 1979 is the reference given by ECO.te4. and older lines involving . :Lxf2 fxe6 26 :Lxf8+ :Lxf8 27 b4 :Lf4 by forcing another queen move..e7 22 ~xe6 1t'xe6 23 :Ldel 1t'f6 24 :Le4 :LfeS with equality. 14 cS?!.~g4 seem 14•••.g5 development.h6: ~c6 9 a3 "as 10 :Ldl .te6 .. a tempo....td3 more reliable.txdS 112_112 Miles-D. but is open to a hit with with 17 0-0 .. Gupta-Lengyel.txe2 24 ~xe2 ~f3+ 0-1...tbS ~g4 16 ..te2 as. and White's grip on dS. USSR That having been said.txc5 8 "c2 Or 16.th7+ ~h8 21 ..txe7 "xe7 17 exd4 can castle. looks equalize with Geller's 14 .txf'6 15 ~d5 "d8 16 . Tolstikh-laworski..te4 . the move fS is pointless) 21.f6! is main focus of debate during the 1980s. After 14. the very unclear. However.Farago-Bayer. The Old Main Line 41 time.. gives Black an easy and harmonious 2. 'gains' 28 :LeI ±.Gurevich.. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 M ~r6 4 ~r3 .dS IS builds up counterplay before White .•g6 5 .te2 . If Black plays sharply.te7 16•. White Black's queen is no longer pinned does better to focus on these squares in this line.tc4?!). San Fran- cisco 1987.. Luxem- White can establish an edge with the bourg 1986 continued 19 . 18 .. g6: 17 exd4 ~xd4 IS ~xd4 exd4 190-0 .te7 11 ~d2 1) White gets nowhere by follow- e5 12 ~b3 "b6 13 . h6 to some extent abandons the light squares.te6 20 f4 :Lad8 21 ~S (with- out a black pawn on g6..tg5 d4 13l2Jb3 ~xf6+ 1t'xf6 19 0-0 :Lac8 20 :Ld2 "b6) ~eS 21 ~xd4 .. 3) Since 16 ..td7 wish.tgS d4 (D) ing the same plan as against . 16 exd4?! exd4 17 .. White will not be able to exd4+ 18 ~2.:Lc8 20 exchange on f6.txdS 22 .txc4 22 1t'fS :LcdS 23 "c2 .. the suspicion that Black does not quite but 23 h3! (instead of23 .6 12 l2Jb3 'ii'b6 13 i. The critical question is whether . but the net effect is to weaken 17exd4~d4 . 18 .te6 18 ...th7+ ~hS 19 ~dS. ~xf6 Wxf6 21 ~S dxe3 22 fxe3 WgS 14.

18 ~xd4 exd4 19 ~xf6+ 22i.xf5 23 i. Allowing f5 with gain of tempo is but on the whole Black would probably dangerous.d7 42 and then 22 .Hansen-Bonsch. Baguio City Weh (23) lIxdS+ lIxdS 25 ~a5 l:[d4 26 c5 i..e6 23 :lxd4 a4 24 noi-Karpov.g7 20 i.. Lipetsk 1965.. tos-Doroshkevich.e6 42 ECO cites 21 i.. so in fact each player had taken an extra move. . There is scope for further testing here.d5 USSR 1979.d7 30 'ilxg2 lIxg2+ 31 ~hl lIg4+ 0-1 21. queenside pawn majority. Haninge with f4-f5.d7 (D) edge.xf5 Cu. 23 i.xd5 25 cxd5 lIac8 Black gets his rook into play just in time to offset the loss of the pawn.g4 leads to 22 f5 g5 is watertight.i... i..42 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. although 24 'ilf2 seems strong.. Tilburg 1994) 20 gxf5 24 b3! (24 :lxf5 lIxc4) 24 . nificant weakening of the e-file.e6 22 ~5 lIacS 23 25 lIxf5 'ile7 26 1If3 lIc6 27 'ilf2 ~xb7 d3 112_1/2 Savon-Geller. Reykjavik 19S5 continued 26 g3 ~f8 27 1112 lIe3 2S 1i'xd4 1i'xd4 29 lIxd4 ~e7 30 d6+ ~d7 31 lIfd2 lIc6 32 :lb4 1Ib6 33 ~f2 lIe6 and soon drawn..e6 21 f4 ~c5!? rather than 20f4?! ~e7 21 'ilf2 21 :lfel lIacS 22 b3 lIfdS =Korch- :ldS 22 .c6 23 i.. 22•••i.. in which White B) tries to play for a slight positional 2O•••i. The critical position..d5.i. lIadS 23 1i'e4 ±..i. while with the text-move prefer to exchange his passive knight Black hopes to have provoked a sig- for White's active knight..e4 i. Black's d-pawn will always re.g4 21 f3 i.. Cu.. This was reached via 20 .i.. We have: 19S5.e4 i. 27 f5 'ilg5 +2S f6 lId2 29 fxe7 'ilxg2+ 21 .c6 22 i.exd4 IS ~xf6+ 'ilxf6 19 0-0 A) l:[dS (after 19. B: 2O•••i...d5 1975.xc6 bxc6 24 f5 looks more 19. Forin- C: 20.lIfdS i. A: 20•••i.xf6 20 0-0 (D) promising. Ruderfer-Zhidkov. White should try 20 20•••i. an equal position.bl .e6 22 f4. 2111d2 quire protection. a5. and also the 21 b4 lIacS 22 1i'b2 lIfdS 23 1Id2 possibility of pushing on the kingside 112-112 Korehnoi-Schiissler. 23•••lIfe8 24 "d3 i.g4 21 f3 i. Wijk aan Zee 1970. while White has a Aiming to double rooks.e4 19 O-O?! i.g4 43 tos-Smederevac. Tiraspol "xa3 2S "g3+ lIg6 29 "c7 ± Forin- 1994.e4 i.Hansen-Yusupov./4! 17..:lacS?! 22 f5 i.

:c2 27 :bl :d6 and Black l:tfel b6 2S lIe2 l:td6 26 f4 ±.b3 lIed7 Beliavsky-San Se.... transposes into the 20.. and the rooks should tinued 21. The queen belongs on f2. the most reliable method for Black.tc6 22 b4 'ii'f4 (threaten. The manoeuvre :f2-d2 Again.txdS 26 cxdS (26 :xdS lIxdS 27 perimental in I. double on the e-fiJe rather than on the ing .td7. Catania 1994. Forli cxdS ~f8 will round up White's extra 1992: 22 .txc6 isolated and Black's rooks fully acti. aiming for counterplay 1) 21.Farago-Arlandi... 2l•••lIae8 C) The most direct.. winning the isolated pawn does success in a positional struggle.tfS 2S .. Having holds.g. Wd3 lIfd8 24 Wxd4 Wxd4 2S :xd4 2) 21.txg2) 23 h3 :fe8 (23 ... The Old Main Line 43 but 22 . not mean a win in the double rook 3) After 21. :xd4 Wf3 27 :g4 ±. White has also tried 22 b3 .txfS gxfS 21 f3!? is also possible: 26 'ii'xd4 Wxd4+ 27 :xd4 :e2 also .tfS proved a little too ex- . when 22. .te6 variation e.t. Forintos-Genovese.. As in the Hansen-Yusupov four isolated pawns is not a recipe for game. tacks the d-pawn. Kislo- 2l•••lIac8 vodsk 1982..txh3) 2llld2 23 .:ae8 24 f3 . :ii'gS 24 d-file.Almasi.te4 . counterplay on the c-file is looks out of place in this line though. Thus 22 'ii'f2! . 22 :f2?! :fe8 endgame when White's extra pawn is 23 :fd2 :ad8 24 . Hungary 1993 con.txdS 24 cxdS lIc4 or 23 (Line A.. above). . . where it at- Kallai-I.te4 :e7 23 Wd3 (23 h3? . . better..txfS gxfS 23 Wd3 :ad8 24 pawn) 26. looks much more natural. 23 'ile4 .....te6 (maybe best) 22 f4 on the c-file.tn 22 b4..te6 23 :tfdl :fd8 24 .. 22 . bxc6 26 cS :e3 27 W'c4 'ii'eS 28 ~f2 vated.. although 21 ..:ac8! is gundo. lIac8.. keeps an edge for White.l:fe8 20•••.tc6 2S .tfl l:tgS 26 queen and minor piece endgame. forcing Black either to concede f4 Wg3 2S bS .tc6 24 :e7 2S cS b6 26 ab6 axb6 27 b4 ..tg4 (D) 22 ..td7 26:f3 Wel+ 27 the open file or to go into an awkward <ili>h2 ±) 24 lIfdl :eS 2S. d3 ~ was Tukmakov-Balashov.f4 bS.te4 . Madrid 1995.:fe8 23 ... = 28 .

..~g4? 15 f3 ~d7 16 0-0 :ad8 17 tbd5 tbxd5 18 ~xd5 'iVc8 19 e4 with a light-squared bind. and then attempt to transpose into 2...i.... For 13 ~g3. How. then 15 cxdS Wxa4 16 ~xf6? tbb4! 17 12....d8.g5 d4 rather 14. 1) 13~g3dxc414~xc4..b6 "e4 :ac8 18 axb4 ~xb4+ 19 ~e2 12. nor 14. 5 ~f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 ~xc5 8 ~c6 9 a3 "as 10 l:ld1 ~e7 11 ~2 "c2 2) 13 ~g5. e5 12 tbb3 (D) transposing to 2. d4. Tbilisi 1980. ~b4? 15 We2llk2+ 16 Wxc2 let the pawn drop. 13 .andnow He must be prepared in some lines to not 14..•d6!? enters new Black is more or less obliged to play territory.d4... ~d8! 15 tbb5 Wc6 160-0 ~e617 :cI ~xc418 . the seventh. USSR 1973.. 13 tbb3 Wd8 is satis.. ~g4 is a genuine al. The trouble for White is that. So White can try 12 13~g5 ~b3.~g4 14 12 .6 above if Black plays If White plays 12 ~g5 first...Wd8? loses a pawn to 13 tbxd5.. One point is that if White spectacular but objectively not fully has already played ~b3. but de- Black should be holding the margin of serves consideration: the draw comfortably enough though.. 2..d4 (maybe best) 14 ~xf6 ~xf6 15 tbd5... This is another case where the singleton passed pawn is easily block- aded. Polanica Zdroj 1987.. ~e6?! immediately saw a ternative.... Black is not obliged to play pawn move..Spassov-Bonsch../4! proved sufficient to hold in Gorelov- Andrianov. then 15 . and get a rook on "xc4 17 ~xe5 ± K.. and probably gets it. but 15 . ECO also gives 13 .'ifb6 13 . Now ECO gives 13. 12 .8 below. 17 ~xe7 ~xb3 18 .... 22 ~e4 ~e6 23 c5 b6 24 c6 :fd8 25 :el ~cIS 26 ~xd5 :xd5 27 b4 b5 = L.. particularly if Amsterdam 1992: 14 ~a4 'iVa6 and Black has already played . . more likely possibility..c7 is rarely played.~e6.. f3 ~e6 15 cxdS ~xd5 16 ~xd5 ~xdS as we have seen. Aiming to provoke a weakening ever.xb3 .dxc4 is a deserved success in Seirawan-Short. see 2.xc4 Wxc4 19 1 d4 cIS 2 c4 e6 3llk31Of6 4 tbf3 ~e7 l:lxc4llk6 =Lputian... Wxb3 20 i. and 13 . USSR 1984...to factory for Black. but to 12.Grigorian-Spassky... Conclusion White can aim for a microscopic edge in the .44 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51..7 12 tDb3: Alternatives Tukmakov-Lputian..b6 13 ~g5 d4.xe5 :c4 21 l:td4 :xd4 22 . aiming to force the queen to b6..."b6line.6 13••• ~g4 above with 12. 1) 13 ..

The Old Main Line 45

'fIxd4 .i.xd5 0-1. A crushing exploita- 15...i.e6!?
tion of White's underdeveloped king- A recent attempt by Yusupov to
side, but Seirawan noted afterwards sharpen Black's play. He accepts the
that White could have turned the ta- weakness of the doubled isolated e-
bles with 15 lLlac5! i.xc5 16 cxd5 pawn, but in doing so enhances his
.i.b4+ 17lDd2 i.xd2+ 18 ':xd2 "a5 control of all the key central squares
19 dxe6 :ad8 20 .i.xf6 gxf6 21 exf7+ except for e4. White's e-pawn will it-
~g7 22 .i.c4 ±. Pieces are level again, self be weak, as if he ever plays e4 he
but White has two extra pawns and is loses control of d4 and foregoes the
close to completing his development. possibility of occupying the blockad-
Also, by analogy with Chekhov-Ken- ing square.
gis (discussed under 13 ....i.g4 14 f3 The old move is 15 ....i.h5, with the
i.e6), 15 cxd5! 'fIxa4 16 dxe6 should equalizing plan being to challenge the
be strong. d-file:
2) 13 ... dxc4?! 14 i.xc4 .i.g4 15 1) 16 'fIe2?! was met by 16...:ad8
l:1d2! ;!; :ad8 16 .txf6 .i.xf6 17 lLld5 170-0 :xdl 18 :xdl l:1d8 19 :xd8+
was a move-order lapse by Black in 112-112 in I.Farago-Kurajica, Amster-
Naumkin-Slezka, Prague 1989. dam 1976, but even in this line Black
14f3 can play more sharply: 16... e4! 17
14 :bl 112-112 Portisch-Beliavsky, i.xf6 exf3 18 gxf3 i.xf6 19lLld5 'fId8
Tunis IZ 1985, did not test Black's 20 lLlf4 i.h4+ 21 ~f1 1i'g5:j: Naum-
idea'to destruction. 14... d4 is the natu- kin-Klovans, USSR 1985. Then 22:d5
ral reply. lbe5 23 :gl i.xf3 24 :xg5 .i.xe2+ 25
After the text-move, Black can lLlxe2 i.xg5 26 :xe5 .i.f6 followed by
choose between: ...i.xb2, a variation given in In/orma-
A: 14.•. dxc4 45 tor.
B: 14....te6 46 2) 160-0 leaves the king less ex-
posed: 16...e4 17 ~hl exf3 18 .txf6
A) i.xf6 (18 ... fxg2+ 19 1i'xg2 i.xf6 20
14...dxc4 15 .i.xc4 (D) :xf6 i.xdl 21 lDxdl .d8 is also
slightly better for White) 19lLld5 Wd8
20 gxf3 ;!; I.Farago-K.Grigorian, Ere-
van 1982. Black must avoid 16... h6??
17 .i.xf6 1i'xe3+ 18 ~hl.i.xf6 19 g4
i.g6 20 .xg6, but 16...:ac8 may be
considered.
3) 16 Wf2 ':fd8 17 0-0 :xdl 18
:xdl :d8 19 :cl :c8 (19 ... lLlg4? 20
fxg4 i.xg5 21 :el! i.xg4 22 lLld5
wins the exchange) 20 i.xf6 i.xf6 21
lLld5 ;!; I.Farago-Eolian, Erevan 1982.
We conclude that Black is not fully
equal after 15 ....i.h5.

46 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.,f4!

16.i.xe6 Yurtaev-Lputian, Tbilisi 1980. Neither
After 16itJa4, 16.....c7? 17 .i.xe6 does 16 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 17 itJxd5 .i.xd5
fxe6 18 .i.xf6! l:txf6 19 0-0 l:th6 20 18 J.c4 work, in view of 18 ... ltJd4! 19
itJac5 saw White in control in Gulko- itJxd4 .i.xc4 -+ Lputian. 16 e4, as
Yusupov, Novi Sad 1990, but 16...itJb4! suggested in ECO, still looks pleasant
equalizes after 17 axb4 "xb4+ 18 for Black after 16... d4.
ltJd2 .i.xc4 19 "xc4 ji'xc4 20 itJxc4 15.....c7
b5, 17 "c3 itJa2 18 "c2 itJb4 or 17 Cited as the main line in ECO.
"e2 .i.xc4 18 "xc4 "a6 - Gulko. 1) The only recent Informator ref-
16•••fxe617lbd2 erence is 15 .....d8 16 J.xf6 .i.xf6 and
As this time 17 .i.xf6? is not possi- then 17 itJac5 d4 18 .i.d3 g6 19 itJxe6
ble in view of 17 ...Wxe3+. fxe6 20 .i.e4itJe7! =Tukmakov-Klo-
17•••lOds 18 iOOI vans, USSR 1981. ECO, however,
Not 18itJxd5? in view of 18 ...exd5 gives 17 cxd5 .i.xd5 18 ltJc3 .i.xb3 19
19 .i.xe7 "xe3+. "xb3 ;t, a fair enough verdict given
18•••"c7 19 itJb5 "d7 20 .i.xe7 that Black is likely to face problems on
"xe7 the light squares. .
Black is comfortable, with well- 2) 15 .....a6?! is interesting but in-
entrenched knights, Kamsky-Short, advisable, analogous to the Seirawan-
Tilburg 1991. Short game (13 ... .i.e6 14 itJa4 Wa6),
but with White's extra f3 move as
B) likely to be a handicap as an advan-
14....i.e6 (D) tage. Chekhov-Kengis, USSR 1981
continued 16 cxd5 "xa4 17 dxe6 l:tac8
(17 ...fxe6 18 "c4 ±) 18 exf7+ ~h8 19
.i.xf6itJb4 (19 ... gxf6 20 "c4itJb4 21
w "e6! ±) 20 "xc8 l:txc8 21 .i.xe7
ltJc2+ 22 ~d2 and White will emerge
with a good spread for the queen.
16 .i.xr6 dxc4
A vital gain of tempo.
17 .i.xc4 .i.xc4 18 'ii'xc4 .i.xf6 19
0-0
19 itJbc5 l:tfd8 20 l:txd8+ l:txd8 21
itJe4 .i.h4+ 22 g3 .i.e7 23 ~f2 Wd7 24
ltJac3 'ii'h3 and White's kingside pawns
This simple retreat is also possible, are ragged, Piket-Ivanchuk, Monaco
the tactical point being that 15 .i.xf6 1997. This was a quickplay game, and
can be met by 15 ...dxc4. one should be cautious about drawing
15 itJa4 conclusions from such games, but the
15 c5?! takes too much pressure off text-move definitely looks more solid.
the black centre. Following 15 .....d8, 19....i.g5 20 e4 l:tacH =
16 J.d3 d4 left Black already on top in Analysis by Kengis.

The Old Main Line 47

2.8 12 ~g3 .txa3180-0J.b419lb3xd4lbxd420
lbxd4 We7 21 "f3 We4 22 "b3 ~
1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 M ~f6 4 ~f3 J.e' Glek-Donchenko, USSR 1983.
S J.f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 , dxc5 J.xc5 8 Wc2 2) 14 J.e2!? g6?! (14...J.e6!?) IS
~c6 9 83 WaS 10 l:ldl J.e' Ulbd2 exd4 lbxd4 16 ~xd4 exd4 17 lbbS
eS 12 J.g3 (D) J.fS 18 Wd2 ~e4 19 Wxd4 "a5+ 20
b4 .txb4+ 21 axb4 "xb4+ 22 ~f1
l:lad8 23 J.d6 ± Plaskett-Cools, Skien
jrWch 1979.
After the text-move, we have reached
a branching-out point, with White's
choices being:
A: 14 c5?! 47
B: 14lbbS 48
C: 14 exd4 48

14 lba4?! has also been tried, but
presumably only as a move-order slip.
C.Wagner-Goldgewicht, Cannes 1997
Lines with J.gS do not promise all continued 14....tfS IS fub6 J.xc2 16
that much, mainly because the bishop lbxa8 .txb3 (16 ...l:lxa8! +) 17 lbc7
is exposed to tactical tricks and sim- J.xdl 18 ~xdl dxe3 and Black was
plifying manoeuvres. The quieter 12 slightly better.
J.g3 makes it more difficult for Black
to exchange the bishop, but also re- A)
moves the pressure from the f6-knight, 14 c5?! (D)
and hence lessens the pressure on d5.
12...d4
Still the most effective reply.
12 ...dxc4? is unthematic. After 13
lbxc4 Wc7 14 lbbS Wb8 IS lbd4!
lbd7 16 .i.d3, Ivkov-Pfleger, Bamberg
1968, White's pieces were in picture
positions.
12... J.g4 involves a queen sacri-
fice: 13 f3 J.e6 14 ~b3 "d8 IS cxdS
J.xdS 16 .i.c4 J.xc4 17 l:lxd8 l:lfxd8
18 ~f2 J.d3 19 "cl ~ Toth-Barbero,
Switzerland 1986.
13 lbb3Wb6 Attempting to drive the queen to an
13 ...Wd8 gives White a choice: inferior square, but Black unleashes a
1) 14 exd4 exd4 IS lbbS J.g4 16 typical tactical resource.
J.e2 (16 f3 ~) 16... J.xe2 17 "xe2 14•••J.xc5!

48 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4!

Also 14 ....tfS!? IS .td3 .txd3 16
:xd3 Wa6 17 exd4 exd4 IS lDe2 lDe4
=1= Klovans.
15 ~a4 .tb4+ 16 axb4 Wxb4+ 17
~.tg4
With two pawns, an attack, and a
massive lead in development for the
piece.
IS:al
Or:
1) 18 f3 dxe3 19 fxg41Oe4! keeps
White in a bind - Ciolac.
2) 18 .te2 .ixe2 19 'lixe2 d3+ 20 are fun to play, but should not be ven-
~xd3 "bS+ 21 "c4 .J:lfdS+ 22 'lic3 tured on if there is a simpler and better
"as+ 23 ~c2 bS -+ Ciolac. alternative. Analytically, it is enough
3) 18 'ikb3 (relatively the best move) to show that Black is not better in this
IS .....xb3 19 lOxb3 .ixdl 20 ~xdl line, and 19 :c1, preparing ~2, is
.J:lfdS 21 ~c1 :acS gives White an ex- the way to start.
tremely nasty endgame to defend, 15 c5 WdS 16 exd4 nbS 17 dxeS
Footner-Dijkstra, corr 1984. 'ife8! IS .ixbS
IS...:ScS 19 Wb3 Perhaps it is better to allow Black to
Queen sacrifices for Black in the do his worst on the e-file: IS exf6
Old Main Line are highly thematic, .ixf6+ 19 .te2 .te6 20 .id6 .txb3 21
and 19 e410aS 20 "d3 'ii'xa4 (Ciolac) 1i'xb3 lOd4 =Klovans.
is another. l8•••lObS 19 .te2
19•••:fdS 20 f3 .te6 21 'ira3 dxe3 19 f4!? Klovans.
22 -'xe3 lOd4 23 .td3 e4! 24 fxe4 19•••lOxg3 20 hxg3 h6 ; Kaida-
lOg4 25 Wf41Ob3 -+ Bondoc-Ciolac, nov-Klovans, Pinsk 1986.
Romania 19S4.
C)
B) l4exd4
14~b5(D) The main line. Black's choice lies
With obvious designs on the queen. between the natural 14... lOxd4 and the
Black must respond vigorously. less obvious 14....tfS:
14•••a6! Cl: l4...~d4 48
A simple, direct and effective move. C2: l4••..tfS 49
14... dxe3 leads to complications after
IS cS "a6 161Dc7 (161Oc3 exf2+ 17 C1)
.txf2 bS IS .txbS "b7 is unclear, l4•••lOxd4 15 lOxd4 exd4 16 lObS
possibly favouring Black) 16 ... exf2+ (D)
17 .txf2 "a4 IS ~aS .ig4 with com- As so often, the d4-pawn appears
pensation for the sacrificed material, doomed, but Black can seek compen-
according to Kaidanov. Such positions sation through active piece-play.

The Old Main line 49

White is a safe pawn up, Kaidanov-
Lysenko, USSR 1983) 21 b4! (21l1d2?!
B .i.a4 22 1Wxa4 .i.xd4 112-112 Arlandi-
Inkiov, Banco 1985) and Black is in
trouble.

"d22b) 18 ...lIad8 19 .i.f2 "a5+ 20
'ifh5 21 "c3 (21.i.e2 might im-
prove) 2l....i.cS 22 .i.e2 lIfe8 23 lId2
"g6 24 ~f1 and Black has compensa-
tion for the pawn, H.Griinberg-Lobron,
West Germany 1983.
17li)c7
16.•.a6! The obvious capture on d4 is weak.
Putting White's undeveloped king- 17 lDxd4? :dS 18 lDb3 (IS lDf3?
side under great pressure. "a5+ favours Black), and now instead
1) 16....i.d7 is also good. 17lDxd4 of IS ...lIxdl+? 19 ~xdl.i.e6 20 ~cl
:fe8 18 .i.e2 'ii'a5+ 19 'ii'd2 (19 :d2 co YrjOlii-Westerinen, Gausdal 19S5,
lIad8 20 0-0 .i.a4 21 b3 {21 .i.c7 Black could have kept up the pressure
'ii'xc7 22 'ilxa4 'ii'f4 23 lIfdllDe4 -+; with IS ....i.fS! 19"xfS"xb320.i.d3
21 "d3lDe4 22 b4 "b6 23 "xe4 .i.g5 "xb2 21 .i.e5 "xa3 22 .i.xf6 g6! 23
+} 21. ...i.c5 22 :fd 1 lDe4 23 lId3 "f3 .i.xf6 + YrjOlii.
lDxg3 24 hxg3 lIxd4 25 lIxd4 .i.xd4 17•••lIb8!
26 lIxd4 .i.xb3 27 "xb3 lIxe2 = is 17...lIa7?! IS .i.e2 .i.d7 19 b4 ±.
analysis by Abramovic) 19 .....xd2+ The text-move is assessed as un-
20 lIxd2lDe4 21 lId3 (21 lid 1? .i.f6 clear by Yrjolii, without giving sup-
22 .i.f4 .i.a4! 23 lId3 lDc5 24 lId2 porting analysis.
.i.xd4 2S lIxd4li::le6, and Black, hav- 18 lDds lDxdS 19 .i.xb8 lDb4! 20
ing ftrst won a tempo with ....i.a4, now 1We4
wins the exchange, Hai'k-Abramovic, 20 axb4 .i.xb4+ 21 lId2 (21 ~e2?
Montpellier 1986) 21.. ..i.f6 22 .i.f4 "e6+ -+) 21...:e8+ 22 .i.e2 .i.f5! 23
lDcS 23 lId2 .i.xd4 24 lIxd4 lDe6 2S "xfS .i.xd2+ -+.
lIxd7lDxf4 26 lId2lDxg2+ =Abram- The position after 20 "e4 is unex-
ovic. plored. One feels that Black ought to
2) 16....i.g4 17 f3 .i.d7 is less con- have plenty of compensation for the
vincing than in variations where White exchange. Maybe 20 ... lDc6!? is the
has played .i.g5; Black lacks the tacti- way to proceed.
cal tricks resulting from the exposure
of the bishop, and voluntarily relin- C2)
quishes the possibility of playing 14•••.i.fS
... lDe4. 18lDxd4 and now: Aiming to get stuck into White's
2a) 18 ... .i.c5?! 19 .i.f2 lIfe8+ 20 queenside before White can complete
.i.e2 lIad8 (20 ... a5 21 0-0 lIad8 22 his kingside development.
lId2 .i.a4 23 'ii'xa4 .i.xd4 24 "dl and IS.i.d3

••:t'd8 19 0-0 lLle4 20 :fdl (20 It is time to tum to the New Main i.e2lLlg4. based at least in part on the in the centre. while Averkin regards it factory and valid alternative. i.xb2 17 19.d8 14 i.e7 :de8 24 i. but the surrender his c-pawn.g3 d4 13 lLlb3 Wb6 14 16.tg5 . a line will challenge the basic sound- microscopic advantage perhaps? ness of Black's position. This as slightly advantageous for White.i.t. vour Black as White.f4! lLlb5 a6 18 :bl .d3 g6 20. Bulgaria :dl..g4 14 f3 . unless he is prepared to author's own style of play. 16. and to see what Black has got "a6 23 i. For such a player. USSR 1983.e6+ keeps the white king tive. Time after time it becomes clear 1986.a2 15 . and while there are several sharp 27 .. survey of the Old Main Line with 10 Arkhangelsky-St. these are just as likely to fa- placed. IS•••.xf5 . exd4lLlxd4 15lLlxd4 exd4 16lLlb5 a6.. 2b) 12lLlb3 'il'b6 13 . provement for White in a particular from the last few moves of the game.exd4?! 17lLlb5.9 Conclusion :xa8 26 :xb7 and after some fast- moving but relatively straightforward We have now reached the end of our play. l/z_l/. 2) I1lLld2 e5 and here: 2a) 12 i.xaS lLlxeS 2S there. . but 26 .Nikolov. Black is perhaps a little better.xa3 23 bxeS 'i'xaS 26 lLlxd4 "xeS Glek-Averkin. the most reliable choices would seem to be: 10 :dl i.f3 lLle5 would leave him well variations.xe4:d8.c5 ing.e7 and then: 1) 11 :d2 lLle4 12 lLlxe4 dxe4 13 .50 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. good news for Black is that in each of ECO assesses the position after 18 these lines of play.e5 i..g5 d4 13 lLlb3 . 17 lLlxd4 exd4 18lLle2 Such a selection is slightly subjec- 18 lLlb5 . Black has a satis- lLle2 as even.i.te6.••lLlxd4 2c) 12 i.txe5 lLlxe5 24 0-0 lLlxd3 25 lLlxa8 2..:e8 and later lost.. 18.i.f6 21 b4 as 22 eS Line.. means that it is unlikely that any im- We leave it to the reader to decide. Black played passively with that White has nothing or next to noth- 26 .xd3 16 :xd3 (D) This chapter is perhaps of most practical use to the player with the black pieces attempting to find a reli- able method against 10 :dl.f6) 20•••i.xb3 16 dxe5 .f3 lLld7 21lLlc7lLldxe5 22 ..e2 . .

• Again associated with this. we .. given that in so many other- wise promising lines in the .xcS 8 "c2 10 O-O-O!? (D) These are far from minor considera- tions. and lines will be opened up still attack. opening play. more upon an exchange of pawns..l:tdl variation. White's development is quicker and nite leap in imagination to appreciate more flexible in the new main line that there are several positive points to than in the old . but this will be a started to open up lines on the queen. which outweigh the mani. Even so. surprising as it may seem. • Associated with this. Black has already the black queen. This diversion of wards it has been very much the main the knight in the Old Main Line al- line. while as yet White's kingside attack is These points together suggest that not even in its infancy. the move is so visually lows Black time to play .e7 his king getting stuck in the centre. White need no longer have worries over the devel- opment of his king's bishop. Queenside castling was not even atingly slow lLld2-b3 purely in or- mentioned as a possibility in ECO. White We now move to the cutting edge of no longer needs to play the excruci- theory. ment is one of the chief objectives of fest defects. lLlc6 9 a3 "as 5 i. The fl-bishop moves out when it is ready to play its part in the game.1 Introduction • The pin on the knight is broken. rather than an obligation. Sometimes White will still convince oneself that White's play is want to play lLld2-b3 to embarrass sound. yet from 1988 on. or to block the e-file.e5 and implausible that it can be difficult to . an element in an side.and efficient develop- the move.C4 0·0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS i. After all. It takes a defi. is safer on c1 than on el.3 The New Main Line 3. and White need no longer worry about 1 d4 cIS 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3lLlc6 4lLlc3 i.d4.. and not as an emergency measure to speed up castling. matter of choice. If we now consider the For example: positions of the respective kings. The king. a5-el diagonal.. der to relieve the pressure on the published in 1987. the initiative disintegrates because the white king comes under attack.

e7 with neither 11 h4 nor 11 g4. general experience has fa.dxc4 11 . . useful in a kingside attack. 3.. but 11 h4 does not threaten 3.2 10. . possibility.4 1O.. such as 111L1d2.i.i.. with and many of the verdicts in this chap. a6. because it will support any piece land- 3. However. far coming from the 1980s.6 1O. anything just yet.i. 3. lOe4. One would of kingside pawn-storm.i.xf6 IS lLlds being a briefly flits into fashion before being critical line (3. it is re- voured White in this position.3 10. in 3.5 1O. queenside..i.e7 11 g4.9 1O. such as 10 l:ldl and 11 l:ld2. The main lines in this chapter are as follows: 3..xc4 eS! 13 gS lines. Black can re- that this line has proved its worth for a spond with an immediate counter- decade now.. Secondly we 5 ....7 1O..3 below). it is not one of those attack.xc4 without 11 h4 has the merit of avoiding this 1l. The h-pawn will always be 3. thilt exf4 14 gxf6 . though. The older 11 g4 is considered in which makes it more difficult for Black 3. theory.i. 3.4. l:ld8. .i. .f4! may first of all note that Black's king 3. the g-pawn or the h-pawn? were found for Black in several lines.xcS 8 'it'd may note that White's pressure in the lLlc6 9 a3 ..d7..i. 11. It knight with gS and then taking control must be reassuring for White though in the centre..8 1O. the straightforward plan of booting the ter are best regarded as provisional..2 1O. packed off to the lumber room..i.dxc4 12 . and freshing to jump straight into the latest grandmasters of the calibre of Short..e7 11 h4.e7 11 h4 has not too many friendly pieces around it....3.. not least 3.r4 0-0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS . to open up lines effectively on the 11 ~bl and 11 lLlbS. With so many of the examples so So far. ing on gS..i.52 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j. and other moves.. 11 g4 is the most obvious move...i.as 10 0-0-0 .i. Timman and Vaganian have suffered White naturally intends some sort crushing defeats as Black.e7.e7 11 h4 centre makes it particularly difficult (D) for Black to develop the c8-bishop.. giving White legitimate hopes of 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 M lLlr6 4lLlr3 .e7 building up an attack. provided of course Black allows the position to occur.. One may feel reasonably confident that White will be winning grandmaster games from this position in ten years' time.i. but which not be surprised if reliable equalizers comes first. Neither.

.:al +) 22 "b3 Black's attack has A1) only limited resources... didn't last long! Could it be that Kasparov was writ- 13~gS?! ing on the principle that "the winner's Although Kasparov won the stem moves are always correct.. 26 f3! looks even stronger..e5 is a tougher de- fence..b6?! 53 nary if White..xd6 18 B: 11. l:xa5 17 . and ~xb5 White's passed pawn will rov-Vaganian.dxc4 53 ~xa5 (l6 ..i.i.xd6 IS :xd6 b4 19 axb4 ~4 20 l:ddl :al+ A) (20 ..Burgess) 21 1l•••dxc4 12 . Black easily outpace Black's.i.J:a1+ 21 ~bl b5 (Burgess) with the idea of .xc4 ~bl :cS "with compensation for the Now we have: material". Novgorod 1995. with queen and pawn A2: 12•••86 54 for two minor pieces... danger.e5?! 13 surely bust Black: .i. The New Main Line 53 does it provide any target for Black to believe in the exclamation mark that attack.i.. 20 :d4! in- stead of the limp 20 :ddl? must An inferior option is 12.:xb4 or 29 .b5! places the queen in mortal with the aid of threats and tactics.i..i.....xd3. ~ed6 30 ~b3 +-) 30 :d7 ~xe3+ 31 ~b3 This was Black's first try.d6 ..i...xh6 gxh6 1) For example.i... 14 . did not have an A3: 12. and if 26 .i.. Then 22 :hdl e5 23 :dS .e4! is stronger . 12•••b6?! (D) 2) 20.. back-row mates after.d7?! 63 clear advantage) 17 .•:d8 60 :xd6 b4 19tile4 ~xe4 20 'ii'xe4 bxa3 c: 11••.b7 We consider: 14 ~d2 a6 15 ~c4 axb5 16 ~xa5 A: 1l.:d2 would be decisively met by 30 ~d5.f5 19 .:xb2 27 fxe4 :xc2+ 2S ~xc2 ~xe4 29 ~c3 ~f2 (29 ... Kasparov then gives 13 ..d6 .i..i...i. I find it hard to the wi~ner is Kasparov"? . 27 'ii'xd3 :xb2 28 'ii'dS+ tiles 29 ~3! and now either 29 .:fcS 21 15"g6+~hS16"xh6+~h717 :d5 :hdl ~5 (Black must watch out for "ikc7 IS ~g5 .e4 24 :xf8+ ~xfS 25 :d3 :a2.. 21. especially given it difficult to him to develop quickly that 13 . in Kaspa. White's lack of queenside pawns will make it difficult to force the win.a6 61 21 bxa3 :xa3 22 :hdl gives White a D: 11 ••.g5 ±. and if 13 . after 20.. doubly so if game very nicely.i. Yet it would be extraordi- AI: 1l.. l:d8 58 outright win in all this.. and now Nunn gives 26 "dl :xb2 27 ~3 ±.. which is important as it makes he awards this move.. After 26 .d3..i.. for example. etc.h6?..

White's reply is 24 ~xf6+ 1-0 Kasparov-Vaganian. ing point of this is that presumably both players took Kasparov's analysis A21) at move 13 on trust! 13.. possibilities: Tondivar. pre- ferring instead IS .. ceptible to tactics. But should fruitless. or the forcing 14iOd5?! would have been should he do something about White's strong.. 23iOxf6! i.xf6+ i.d7 16 IOxh7) 16 Both sides limber up for their at.h6 56 IOd5 24 /Od6 ':'c6 25 IOxf7 ~xf7 26 None of these moves seem to be e4 iOe7 27 lIxh7+ (27 'ti'dS h5 28 adequate.l:txf6.54 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1£. lIxc2 241Og4+ l:tf6 25 axb4! Black's last move is to be regarded We4 26 i.i.xf6 27lOxf6 lIxb2+ with suspicion. given White's improvement on move 13. It is worth noting.~a6 14 IOce4 g6 15 IOxf6+ ~xf616lOe4! ~e7 17 ~xa6 "xa618 ~b1"b7? Kasparov annotated the phase from moves 16-1S in considerable depth in Informator 63.. the kingside attack. 15 12•••a6 13 lOgS (D) ~g3 IOh5 (15 ... giv. even more questionable. lOe5 20 Wb3 as. vincing. no attempt is made to repeat or summarize his analysis here.. Since if 24 ... as it places the knight 28 <it'xb2 We5+ 29 <it'b3 Wxf6 30 lId7 on an exposed square in a position sus- +. The interest. i.~e8 2S l:thS+ ~f7 29 that 12.t.. leading to the conclusion gxh6 Wc8!) 27 . A2) threatening /Ods. A21: 13•••lOe5?! 54 stead 19 ... problems.a2!./41 13. a6 does not solve Black's lIh7+ with a perpetual. exposes his weaknesses on the c-file. as it Novgorod 1995.Kasparov.. lIfdS 20 ~g5 1Ob4 21 A22: 13••• b5 55 l:xdS+ ~xdS 22 Wd2 i. The recommended move is the more discreet 14 i. and if 14. that Kasparov re- garded this as the critical mistake.lIacS 19 ~h6. however. My first impression was that Black just get on with his attack. kingside pressure? We consider three ing 19.h2. when Black's counterplay is tacks on the opposing king..lOe5?! 19 hS lIac8 20 hxg6 IOb4 21 Given the honour of the exclama- gxh7+ <it'h8 22 i... Netherlands 199516 saw in. exd5 15 lIxd5 . 25 axb4 lIxc2 26 without adding anything substantial to lId8+.. De Boer.e5+ f6 tion mark in Informator 67.. but uncon- And now a little combination.lOg6... however....xg5 23 hxg5 A23: 13. but after 14.. Since this phase is of no great significance theoretically...xf6 14lOce4? 23 .

suggests 16 .xe6+ ..g7 23 . with even leading fxe6 19 "xc6 b4! is.i. g6! IS . perhaps not so much theoretically). lLlxe4 17 .d7 Motwani) IS hSlLlxe4 16 "xe4 .xe6 26 "xf6+ might follow: ~e8 27 "xe6+ 1-0.b3 .. however. It turns out.xgS 17 hxg6 h6 (17 .d6 l:d8 14lLlce4! g615 .. we see knight is trapped) 17 lLlxf6+ ~g7 18 short and snappy wins by White.e6 21 lLlxf6 lLlb3+ with Black giv- ing perpetual check.. but lLlfxh7 l:h8 19 hS with a massive at- only after openings in which both tack. 20 at both grandmaster and club levels.eS l:e8! (Burgess and Nunn) the invasion on h7 is relatively harmless. that comes well below meeting the needs 16.i. This is alas 2) lS .a4+. with pieces flying allover the complicated opening systems where place: the theoretical material is lacking. ~h8.xe6!?.xf6 .i.. lLlg6? (14 .f6 2S . 24 ..i. players made mistakes. and perhaps wisely ated... axb2+. The New Main Line 55 lLlxc4 16 l:xaS lLlxaS 17 . But White is not so enough for a draw at least if he plays obliged.. b5 (D) Black is winning after 23 ~bl "al + This would be fine if White had to 24 ~c2. For what it is worth (3 Elo points to the Scottish GM.f6 21 l:xh6! Hjartarson suggests IS . 20 "e4.. lLlxd6 17 lLlxd6 . with- gxh6 22 "h7+ .i. Mot- wani-Bartels...i.eS l:g8 24 out offering further analysis.i. Nunn gives w 18 .i.i. or 2a) In an editorial comment. takes. Nunn has not had time to be properly evalu. appar- is the modest hope of the author that ently satisfactory for Black: the fmt proper codification of the new 2al) The main point is that if the system will make it easier for players.i.i. 1) IS . contrary to all grandmasters making big mistakes.i. bxa3 21 "xe6+ avoid making the elementary mis.. It notions of natural chess justice. when perhaps it is wisest for the author to leave the reader the analyti- A22) cal exercise of working out whether 13••. after 14 lLlce4?. to 'ii'd7) Black has 20 .i..d6 the the Kasparov-Vaganian games. :. .i.xf6 19 "xh7+ ~f8 20 lLle4 .lLle8 is complicated and typical of what happens in new and critical. and if 22 "xe7 then 22.i..i. queen aims for e6 (20 "c4..i. The rest of the chapter provides leaves the author to sort out the result- several further instances of play which ing chaos. There "fS+ .i.b3 19 gxf7+ ~xf7 20 f4 .xe6 18 lLlxe6 of the position.i.i.hxg6) 18 ..i.bxc4 16 ...xf8lLlxgS 18 .xe7lLlxe7 (after In both the Motwani-Bartels and 16.d6. Tilburg 1996 finished = 14 . Black's attack should be good move his bishop.

... though there is scope for further analysis.xb4 24 'ilxb4lOxb4 2S i..xc2 23 :thS+ ~g7 24 ±) 24 ..f4+ 22 IS :txb7lOes +and suggested. for example piece sacrifice is well timed.b4?? (23 .. in return for the queen. IS•••i.b3 is not..xf7+ out further analysis. = 24 . b5.. lOb4 19 i.. On my flfSt draft of the book.. :tlh7#) IS hxg6 hxg5. lOxe4 16 .b6? (23 .:xc6 ':xc6 2S :txe7 1-0. bxc4 IS White having an excellent mixed bag hxg6 is extremely unlikely to be ten. and that 13 .te7? IS ':d7 eS 2a3) It is not clear either that 20 a4 (1S .c4 should only good for a draw after 19.. when 20. 25 lbe5 :txf2 or 25 lOb6 :tbS 26lOdS 17•••.. I felt that White was much A23) better. and now I mis. with- ~b1 :tacS 23 'ii'xe6+ .th6 lOb4 21 ...xb7 lOxb7 Hjartarson) 24 hS 3) 15 ..h6+ ~f6 27 .. 16•••i..e5 21 f4i.h7+ the game Hjartarson-King.~xg7 be played. can White find an improvement on move 20? At the very least. 19 g7! improves.•c7! (Burgess) is good According to Hjartarson.td6!? is the move that has Variation '2' is critical for the to be looked at.f7 24.•f5 21 e4 ..56 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 JLf4! 2a2) If instead White tries 20 1&4. Winterthur ~xg5 23 f4+ CiPf6 24 .xf4 19 exf4 'fIe7 20 ~bl takenly suggested 19 gxf7+? :txf7 20 :tad8 21lOxb7 'fIxb7 22 'fIe4 b4 ..xe4.h4+ CiPg7 25 1996 continued 23 a4 . Hjartarson's IS i. It is hard to believe that the rapid counterattack on b2. b5 was inferior. hxg6 Olesen... lOf6++? ~g7) 21. For example.. what? But IS ... and now with a clear plus for White.•dS 22 fxe5 i. as I first assumed..txe6.xf6 17 lOe4 .. lOaS :thllOg6 26 .. with White having frac- 20 :th7+ ~xh7! 21 lOxg5++ (not 21 tionally the better endgame..~h6 22 . Hjartarson analysed 17 :td7? :tacS Black has 20. The game 19:th7 i. soundness of 13 ..lOeS. for example IS . a case of bottling out of the critical lines.Hjartarson.c7! ± Hjartarson) 19 b3 makes progress for White.. 17lOxh7!? ~xh7 :txf7 and Black saves the day by a IS hS. Copenhagen 1995.teS! bxa3.b720':dhl..xe4 finished abruptly: 23 .. Instead. It 13..xcS 2b) My original note suggested 16 ':xcS+ 22 CiPb1 lOc6 23 :tc1.g5+.b7 16lOxf6+ 16 hS? lOxe4 17lOxe4 :tacS with a strong counterattack . but is still ..e2. Schandorff- able for Black. after Nunn's 16 . 18lOeS i. Improving on 17. with i.•• h6 (D) is with some amazement that I con- clude that Black may well be OK after IS .xe7 lOxe7 17 h5 h6 (17 .. :txb7 ':acS 20 .. 23 axb4 for Black.

Ruban.. 2bl) Ruban blew another fuse in 11. 18 . Indeed.tc3 hxg5) 21. essary to analyse further to overturn 2a) Ruban-Kotronias. Compared 15.. but it is useful to (17lOxf7!?. 20 . play: sense of Black's whole plan of action.d5! exd5 18 and Black has the extra move . but not so ambitious..:C5 14 .... and his development lags a file problems) 17 IOxe4 f5 18 lOd6 bit.. . Sochi 1989 these 'unclear' verdicts. instead of the quiet 18 ~bl 2b3) Ruban also analyses the line .. ~xf7? 18 h5 yields a winning at- also be reached via the move-order tack. and now White blew it with notes that follow. while 17.txe5 Other moves have been tried here.txg6! hxg5 19 couple of pre-1990 references in the hxg5 .:xf7 18 Wxg6+ . b5?! 14•.a6 aims to push it to a differ.td3 also gives Black some scary h4 h6.Maric. the variation in Black's favour.txf7+?? :xf7 21 Wg6+ ~f8 -+. gives White a Bartels game (13 . 1989: 15 :d5? exd5 16 . Ruban-A. Ruban..te4! bxa3 21 .dxc4 develops White's bishop. This position may 17 . dxc4! 17 . b4 18 .ta2 .tg7 IO. h6..xf6 17. The New Main Line 57 Black might not be threatening the 15lOce4 g6 161Oxf6+ .i.Wf517Wxf5 with the variation to the Motwani- exf5 18 .•:d8 .hxg5? 16hxg5. with compensation for the pawn..tf6. two tempi to help White with the would have been even stronger) 17 lengthy but dangerous manoeuvre .txc6 Wxb2+ 23 Wxb2 axb2+ 24 White takes the bishop out of harm's ~bl (Ruban) would have left White way... 2b2) After 15lOd5 exd5.txe5 . given by Sok.. 16.. so that Black has used up (16 .... it is not nec- structed by the knight.te6 =. g6.:td8 ent square.i.e5. ..tal! Instead 20 . 16..hxg5?! 17 hxg5 gives Black h- suspect. A. but arguably Since White need not go into any of less logical. 1) 14 IOce4!? is good for a slight while 16 :xd5? IOxc4 17 :xa5lOxa5 edge...Sokolov. Black's pawn structure is (l6 .xg4 20 Wxa5 Beliavsky.e5 g6 19 Wc3 . saw some brutal hacking after 14 .i..txe5 Wxe5 Untried.txf6 . 2b) 14 ... 18 . but probably very strong.i.tfl-c4-a2-bl... lOxe4 15 Wxe4 Wf5 (following would be distinctly unwise. White has the the refutation of 16. is also worth a try: keep it attacked.xc4 a6 12lOg5 ..i.. Erevan OL 1996 continued l:ac8+ 21 ~b1 (21..i.tf5 -+. olov is even prettier: 17 l:r.te5 IOxe5 19 Wh4) 16 Wxf5 exf5 17 which attacks the knight. mating attack down the h-file.:th2!. lOe5?! 14IOd5?!.. 14.e7 13 19 .txg4 +.. 22 .. which attacks nothing.td6 would have kept a 15 IOce4!? lOexg4 16 :hgl IOxe4 slight edge. :d8 is given by Ruban as unclear.. 2) 14 g4 is violent. liavsky. and prepares to bring it to bl to with a good endgame. and now according to Be.dxc4 11 . intensify the attack on h7. these double-edged lines. Palma de Mallorca then 12 . Ruban.. Line A21 above). extra move g4. lOe51eads to complicated White is attempting to make a non.td3 knight straight away. while etc. which explains why we have a moments) 17. in that the pawn is ob. this swings IOf3 .

te8 defends much more IS .l:.. Kharitonov then gives IS playing for a lasting edge.l:..h4 14 lObS lOeS is comfortable for lOxf2 20 .l:.. We 1) 14 . cations. lOxc4 resource after 15 .ddl?.cS 23 "f2? .d8 12 g4 .xd7..tbl would walk straight into White's A31: 13 ~bl S8 attack. simplest lOce4lOxe4 16 'ifxe4 'iffS 17 "'xfS perhaps being 161Oge4. 13 ~bl dxc4 14 .. against both g4 and h4.. Moscow 1996.xd8 20 olb3 ole7 =+= 21 f3 loaS 22 ... and Black was able to counterattack to great effect with IS . 14.olc5?? 17 . but 20 Kharitonov has favoured on several .txa3 has no real right to low). One possible drawback is the lack of Other moves lead to disaster: flight squares for the black queen..l:.tc4+ seems to favour White) 19 :xb6 .d2 eS 21.xf2 exf4 22 exf4 Black.... This move leads to massive compli- S) 14. as Black no longer has 14 g4 transposes to positions usu- the . and prepares favourable sim- White now has several ways of plifications.. 171Oxf7 (D) 17•••lbxd5 Better than 17 .td7?? IS l:r.l:.txbS ct..td7 16l:txd5.lOd4 (Kharitonov gives the line 18 ... a6 does not solve Black's making much progress.xdS 1i'b6 16. exfS as .. 12•••.l:.f5? 15 "'e2 followed by discuss: .txc4 (Line B...xf7 as unclear..Khari- tonov.dS (D) 15•••exdS 16 J:. 17 ~xb2 hxgS 18 hxgSlOg4 19 l:r..ta2 J:... lOxdS ally reached via 11 h4.l:....xdS+ .l:. After 14 .. and Black's kingside will soon buckle 14•••h6!? under.te8 A3) and IS lOge4lOeS as unclear.l:.hxg5? 15 hxg5 'iff5 16 'ife2 is similar..1. but it is difficult to see White Thus 12. A31) 3) 14.......58 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.tfS+ 0-1) Is . A32: 13 lObS!? S9 2) 14.. but it would have occasions. ~f8 18 .b5! (in Korotylev-Kharitonov. been better a couple of moves earlier. White chickened out with 18 . 16.... be- 4) 14.f4! A sensible idea.xc5 +-.ac8 Black has good work: 15 bxa3 'ifxa3+ 16 'ifb2 'ifxb2+ chances of equalizing.txdS simply..:iVxdS? 17 .. problems..l:.xbS This is the basic formation which 19 . lDe5? 15 ll:xIs works for 13 ~bl old7 14 lOgS White this time. 151Od5!? Kharitonov gave both IS g4.txdS hxgS 18 hxg5 +.txa3 1910xdS ...

. when if anyone has the edge.. Unexplored..txd5+ lIxd5 24 ll)h6+ ~h7 (24 ... 24 . gxh6 23 ll)c7ll)xd4 20 exd4 (20 ll)xa8? ll)b3+) .te5+ ~g6 24 e4l1xd5! The alternatives 24 .tg4 25 "d2 ll)gS 26 "f4 and 24 . Black's queen is out of play after 19•••..tf6 22ll)h7+ ~e7 14.txdS 14 ll)g5 g6 15 h5 ll)xf4 is uncon- 23 "e4+ ~d7 24ll)xf6+ both win for vincing. etc. Kharitonov considers only the less incisive 20 lIxb7 .i.xf5 .xe6 22 ...ll)xd5 22 "h7 is extremely a6? 17 .d5. 22 . hxg5 20 hxg5 opens tional edge. Not 19 "h7 .tf6 21 "hS+ ~f7 22 "h5+ ~gS 23 . 22 hxg7+ ~xg7 23 .tc7 b6 The lines 19.g.tf5+ 21 "xf5+ .tg5! ~fS 25 "hS+ ~f7 26 lIh7+ ~e6 27 lIh6+ ~f5 2S "h7+! ~xg5 29 "g7+ ~f5 30 lIh5+ leads to mate. leaving White with excellent chances in the end- game.... 18.i..xe6 and Black's ex- tra knight is trapped..i. 21.lIxdl+ 14 lIxdl. e.tc7 ll)b4 18 .ll)xd5 25 exf5+ ~f7 26 "e2 lIgS (26.xdS? 21 lIxf6+) 21 ll)e6+ .e4 24 lhe7 . so White plays for a posi- White..txa3?? 20 ll)h7+ 16ll)g5..tf5+! (Burgess) 20 13•••ll)d5 .xdS lSll)xh6+ ~f8 19 "h7 ... with a likely draw.i..txa5 ll)xc2 19 dangerous for Black..e7 21 "e4+ and 19. thanks to his strong bishop-pair and passed e-pawn..tf6 and White is in trouble. gxh6 00) 25ll)f5+ is a perpetual check. 25 exf5+ ~5 26 . axb6 (20 ..f5 21 A32) ll)xdS ll)xe3+ 22 ~a2 ll)xc4 23 ll)c6 13ll)b5!? (D) ..i.xc6 25 lIe7 .tC5 14..f5+! 20 ll)xf5 .ll)a5?? 20 Wh7 . while 19.te6 25 "dl.. lIxd5 15 lIxd5 exd5 16ll)fd4.i. formator. it is Black) 20 ..!.tel "b5 ll)xc2 20 ll)xdS! (in his analysis in In. 14•••exd5 20 hxg5 ll)e7 21 gxh6 . q..td7 15 ..i.. the h-file for White's attack..txgS 13 .txh6+ ~eS 24 .. The New Main Line 59 . ll)f6 27 lIh6) 27 lIh7+ ~f8 2S "h5 all win for White. yet I suspect this is 18•••~ 19l1)g5! White's most promising idea..i..i.

hS.c6 20 11 . After IS Wxd8+ fol- but there is a better knight move.. If 16..c7 .i. However. and indeed Black is doing the variation just considered. the g4 variation with h4 thrown in.i. (correctly preferring good piece coor- cation process is well in hand. which leaves unresolved the question 14.e2 B) . if 2S . 17 .60 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. 2) 12.. dination to early simplification. White has a pleasant 12 .. 1) 12.i.. in effect White is playing .d7 13 ~bl dxc4 much.i... Elista 1995: 16.dxc4 13 ...c6 24 dS lLlf4? 2S corresponding degree.i. After 12 g4: play against the isolated d-pawn. of how to make gS a killer blow when 15 .i.. 'it'd2 1-0.i. and the simplifi..d6 g6! l:[xdl .b3lLlfS 21 'it'd3 g622lLld4 enhancing Black's counterplay to a ± lLlxd4 23 exd4 .e2 . but Black is creating a flight square for the queen without losing his grip on dS..f4! 20...dxc4 was recommended in Informator.e4 i. to concur with Cvetkovic's view that ceeded only in misplacing his knight. lowed by . l:[d7.d6 ':ac8 would transpose after 16 ~bl..!Lld2! advantage in space and development Still chasing the lady.•... Black collapsed remarkably quickly in Lu- The general conclusion is that the govoi-Komeev. both by Agdestein and by This is much better timing than in Cvetkovic.e2.g4...dxc4 is premature.i. and White has suc.xdl 18 14 .i. 16 .. probably still not sufficient to equal.i.. as it 17 .i.d7 14 gS w lLlhS IS .cS 19 . The attempt to take through to the endgame. Black can quietly meet 12lLlbS? lLlxc4! l:[xdl + 14 Wxdl Wd8 it is hard with 12 .gS d4 was seen in Cifuentes-Van der . Instead.1/2 was Rustemov-Kharitonov. Black is equal.t the knight still has an escape square on White has the standard active piece.•xbS IS .xe7lLlxe7 18l:[xd8l:[xd8 19l:[d I assists White's development without i l:[c8 20 .. Novgorod Black's bishop-pair not counting for 1995 continued 12. 12•••':d7 This looks awkward.i.e8?! exchange 11 .xc4l:[ac8 IS gSlLlhS 16 .i.xd8. ning. to make her a widow with 12 g4 is less 2) The familiar plan of 12.i. Russia 1996.i.i..i.xc4 .i.i.e8 17 .lLlxdS.i.eS 13 convincing.i.xd6 18 l:[xd61:iJe7 19 Wb3 . Jlb8 21lLlxdS and White is win. after the more natural 13 ize.i.l:[d8 (D) l:[xd8+ ':xd8 21 ':dl WfS+ 22 ~al ':f8 23 e4 WcS 24 'it'b4.xc4?! a6. with 1) Kasparov-Ehlvest.!Drd4lLlxd4 16lLlxd4 . but it is reasonably well after 13 .i. then 26lLlxdS Wxd2 27lLlf6+ wins a piece) 17 ..xe7 ':xdl+ 18 ':xdllLlxe7 1/2.i. forcing a level ending.

l%xdS 23 cxd5 "c7+ is secondary. but rather an Cvetkovic suggests instead 19 important prop for the bishop.. the h-pawn goes.txa3 23 l%xdS! . 16 .. but 18 liJc3! is more 15 ... of White's king. White let things slip to equal...dxc4 liJxd4 l%xd4 17 .:c8 26 "xc8 "xc8+ but it looks a bit slow.te7 11 liJf3 (1S i.. liJds! head of a kingside attack. etc. nificant positional advantage without velopment. natural.txf6 dxc3! ...txh7+ ~h8 20 liJds g6 21.f8 16 g4liJe4 So another of Black's tries proves (16 .txf6? dxc3 =t.. . 13.txh7+ C) ~h8 22 ..teS l%d7 18 . given the misplacement of ment. IS. exchanging queens and prepared if necessary to take things ensuring that Black has the better sup- quietly and positionally..1.txf6 ±.fS?! d4! 00) Black has obvi.. any risk whatsoever.txf6 19 h4-pawn turns out not to be the spear. g6 17 hS ±) 17 liJeS liJxe5 18 unsuccessful..txf6 18liJd5 ±.txf6 . 14. . 20 dxe5 "xdl+ 21 "xdl l%xdl+ 22 15 liJb3 <iitxd 1 liJxeS.exd4 17 .e4 15 . 27 . After 14 by Cvetkovic.. liJxc3 21 .txg4 11.txf6.xd619cxd6 "xd6 centre badly over-extended. leaving Black with the prob.. Amsterdam 1995.txf6 .txeS f6 19 . White is clearly better. but the set. but also piece de... The text and notes follow analysis ting seems wrong for Black.tc2 i.txc3 .d8 14 cxdS exdS 15 sponding lines with 10 l%dl . a6 (D) 24 fxg4 l%xc3 25 'il'xc3 (25 l%hS "b4! Black has done well with this so far.. liJxd4 19 liJxd4 exd4 20 16•••liJxd4 liJa4 or 18 . d4 14liJb3 "d8 15 exd4liJxd4 16 12..tfS a4 Threatening a double capture on 33 :e11-0.. liJd2 e5 12 ..txg6 fxg6 So often in the 11 h4 line. White's 17 liJxd4 exd4 18 . White must always be 24 ~bl "h7. clear positional advantage. liJb3 "b6 IS cS "c7 16liJbS "b8 17 14... dS.td3 . ..td4 l%c7 20 f3 (20. Agdestein) 25 ..l%d8 13 .. ported passed d-pawn..dxc4 transposes to the ll...txe4!? ± Cvetkovic) 20 .. White has a 16.. Stornaway 1995: 15 . 13.tgSd4 exd4 a6..e7 28 l%hdl ~g8 29 l%d7 12liJgS ~f8 30 ~bl as 31 hS "c6 32 ..tgS d4 13 liJb3 "b6 14 ous difficulties with his rook place.. line (A2 above). The New Main Line 61 Sterren.td3! The text-move gives White a sig- Pressure on h7. Agdestein also gives the line 12.. White is about 13•••eS two or three tempi ahead of corre- After 13 . we find 22 "xg6 '±'.te21eaves Black's pawn itywith 18liJd6?! i. which is unconvincing that the threat to attack on the kingside as Black has 22 . and later Black's rook and the better placement won spectacularly in Agdestein-Short.exd4 19liJa4. After 18 .:W'd8 16 exd4 lem of how to develop his queenside..

k'.c4 lLld4 16 i... has nothing to fear after IS . ~p /. '..g4 17 i. 2b) However. hxgS IS hxgS. an interesting try.\ (it' ~:~ "ifxe4 l:lxgSl or IS lLlcxe4 dxe4 16 queen is in trouble. ""':' •• >.Black is happy after IS l:I. ~f8 17 l:lxd4 l:lxd4 IS i. of communication. 14 g4! With ideas of a knight sacrifice fol- lowed by gS.. and if 14.p l:lxds+lLlxdSI7"ife4 "iffS!. 17•••~f818 i.g6+ ~d7 21 lLlxdS and Black's (. But taking 20 hxgS l:ldS= Nunn) IS . Linares Z 1995 (in which the ex.xgS measures on the kingside. 2) I spent a lot of effort trying to 15 i. bly best. White lost the plot: 14 followed by lLlxf7.'. .. Black also probably trick.xh6 e4! blocks White's lines and White should win. having gained a couple of bishop might just make the difference...i. 13 .fS 16 2o•••lLlxh7 21 "xh7+ ~e8 .. ~7 gestions... something for White after 14.. so 14.xh6 gxh619 "xh6+ cede defeat. 13 cxdS exdS is the alternative: White's plan is to play f3 to bring the 1) In a game Van Wely-Me. dxc4 I found plenty of perpetual checks..e2 l:lacS..i.dxc4 doesn't ~bl ? h6 16 lLlf3 i. Naturally... Attacking the and Black. ".ISi. I finally had to con.Nunn) 17 'ii'b3 lLlxhl (Burgess).fS 19 "ifxc4 i.dxe4?! IS i. after direct l:[dS? (IS "ifxe4 i.. not be on..Sharif...xh6 sacrifice will queenside. if immediately 14.h7+ move 12). was powering ahead on the if it retreats the i. ~eS 20 \ .. g6 14 hS leaves White with good attacking chances..h7+ Wf8 16lLlxf7 cJlxr7 make 14 e4 work: 16. but after IS .••h6 It is not so pleasant for Black to have to make a pawn move in front of the king. lLlxe4!. on the attempt to prove Running with the king does not .xf7+ fice in material. 13. queen to h2.i. exf4 17 lLlxdS keeps White's 2a) One attractive possibility is attacking chances for negligible sacri- 14.. for example 19 . really help.c4is 20lLlxdS ! '/ .f4! lLlxdSlLlg3 (or 16. 14•••eS!? change on dS actually took place on White is obviously planning i.xdS l:lxdS 16 j. 62 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i..a2! l:ld3 19 17"g6+ lLlcxe4 "iffS 20 "ifxd3 "ifxf4+ 21 ~bl 17 i.. tempi.xh7+ followed by lLlxf7..' 16 l:lxdS+ "ifxdS 17 l:ldl "as! IS but nothing conclusive..xgS . capturing the This direct attacking move is proba.xgS! control of the centre might do the Black is on top. "ifg6+ is now the big threat. knight on gS is extremely hazardous. really slow him down. after a few editorial sug.lLlxhS?! then IS l:lxhS gxhS 16 i.

. Practical experience is limited. Even so.txc4 . line (Chapter 3..txb2+ 24 <it>xb2 leaves Black 21 Wb2 1-0. on general grounds.. he should do so on move 10..te7 11 g4 (D) If Black wants to play the . White can try to steer towards Or 22. up pressure on the kingside without creating weaknesses. The big plus that it has in ducting the kingside attack for White comparison with 11 g4 systems (to be involves having to play very accu. Black's one-shot attack with no playable checks.e7 11 g4 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3lDc3lOr6 4lDf3 . system. .6. The at. lOd2 a6 16 cxdSlOb4? 17 axb4 "'al+ tempt at counterattack with 22 . and Black is helpless against the threat of 24 lOxe7+ <it>c7 25 lOxc6+ Conclusion: <it>xc6 26 Wf6+..a6.Olafsson-0gaard..th2. .te5 f6 23 g6 . 3.. 12lOg5 or 12 <it>bl.te815 run his g-pawn with 22 g5.tf4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 .te7 easy win.... that implies that he can shift seamlessly to positional lines if Black makes compromises in order to defend his kingside.txb4 20 . It is perhaps not surprising that At the moment.3 10... Line B) with. The inserted 1O. for ex- 23"'r7! ample. discussed shortly) is that White builds rately. Gaus- dal 1996 is unlikely to appeal to Black: ..te7 11 h4 favours White. And if White 0) has no structural pawn weaknesses in 11•••. 11 h4! looks a very Black has avoided.td7 defence.te7 the line with 11..te7 5 . but the game H.tfB 23 "g6+ Wd7 24 Wt7+ the types of position reached in the Wd6 25 lDb6+ Wc5 26 lOxa8 with an 10.i....txa3 18 lOdbl . 22"'g8+~d7 Also.<it>fB leaves time for White to 12g4:fc813g5lOh514..td7 11 <it>bl dxc4 12 . etc.ta4 19 b3 . The New Main Line 63 21. didn't work...txc5 8 "'c2 lOc6 9 83"'aS 100-0-0 . one important detail being that White's bishop has a retreat on h2..td7 (D) his position.. con. good prospect against the 1O .

.e7! 17 h4 g6 18 h5 popular..dxc4 Schwabisch Gmund 1996. with the 1l.xf6 20 e4.. and sec.g6 -+. was agreed drawn just in time to prevent massive complications breaking out) 18 :gl J. White's fashion...e4!! (24..c6.. lbe7 19 :dgS fxe3 + Cais-Ciolac. White makes an immediate score with IS :dS is an unimpressive and direct lunge at the king. Gogichaishvili- Tabatadze. missing Black to avoid the exchange on c4.xc4 eS 13 gS exf4 is Black's most 2) 16lbe4 .lbxdS 22 J..c4 .•g6? 2S J. 1988-90..xdS 21lbxh7 "'d8 22 :xg6+ fxg6 23 "'xg6+ J.xgS (19 ..xc4 bishop sacrifice drawing the queen Now: over the critical d3-square.. This line A) features a problem theme. (D) 3) 16 l:lhS g6 17lbdS .xc4! -+) 24 . Bie11993. 20. J.e6 co..g7 24lbgS +-) 20 :hxgS J.c7 16 :hS deserves further exploration. as 21 A2: 12. lbe7! AI: 12. J..g7? 19 :xg6 hxg6 20 ..xd5 ~g7 co Libeau-A.dxc4 12 J... We conclude that 15 :d5 .a6 71 :d4 J. now: ondly whether he is weakening him..:d8 72 'itxh7 24 eS+ J. J.. 1) 16 J.xdS A3: 12.. the startling defensive idea demon- OUT lines are: strated by Nasybullin: 20.d3 g6 17 :gl J. ifless spectacular. A4: 12.a2 J....J.g7 18 h4 self on the dl-hS diagonal.64 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.lbxg4?! 69 :ac8 23 J..•d6 18 :gl fxe3 19 fxe3 b5 20 J..xf6 White's attack had run out of steam.Hoffman.g4! =+= 21 A: 1l•••dxc4 64 hxg6? J. corr./4! This was what White usually played ISlbds when the castling line first came into Bringing up the reserves. and will be considered first.xdS 21 J.. and is difficult to see convincing ways for now Black played 20..xdS ......g4 + 22 eS .e5 13 gS exf4 14 gxf6 J..e6 (18 . Nasy- The pressure on dS is so strong that it bullin-Klovans. 12 J.g7 21 lbf4.':d8 70 Stockholm 1992 continued instead 21 AS: 12.xdS 20 J. Bmo 1991.xe4+ .bS? 69 exfS is met by 21.d3 +-) 2S . . The direct approach with 11.xg6! fxg6 21lbe7#) 19lbgS J.•c7 and when the pawn reaches gS. but he 115 on my database. lS .d8 (after 17....c6 23 hxg6 hxg6 24 e6 (24 :d6 . but the move is must ask himself.. first what he does not as bad as all that.fS 19 lbxf6+ .•xf3 A1) 2S exf7+ ~g7 26 :e1 :ac8 and 12.. Agrest-Sanden.eS 64 is also strong.xf3 22 gxf7+ ~h8 23 :xh7+ B: 1l .J.

b5 keeps the position .ig4! 17 the black king.d8? 16 ~xf4 ..ixgS -+) 20. and if . .Niel. White ~gS. h6 19 :xh6 gxh6 20 ...if5! 20 ~xfS ~xfS (20.. The New Main Une 65 15•••~e7 alive.. explored.id3 .•xa3+! (20 ...xdS 22 :e4 ~d3+ 23 ~bl After several practical tests it seems .ig7 21~.eS 18 ~bl bS 19 ..~S! get his pieces out quickly to expose 19 fxg4 :c8 20 b3 (20 :d4? :xc4 21 White's weaknesses on the queenside. fxe3 17 Minsk 1990) 18 fxe3 "eS 19 ~bl fxe3 g6! (17 . A. Rimavska w Sobota 1996. Hubner-Van der Sterren.ixf7+ would have won.ie6? 16 ~xf6+ gxf6 17 vour.. Bundesliga 1994 continued 17 ~d4 asco for Black being 16. 4) It is a little surprising that IS . 4a) The sole Informator reference is a brief note by Kruppa (Informator The main subject for theoretical 46) who suggests 16 h4. Jaksland-L. tion is lO<i4.ie4 :g1+ ~h7 21 "g3 1-0 Summerscale. 3) IS .Jc7 .A.. 19 16•••gxf6 (D) . and now instead of + . a recent fi... 16 :hgl ~h8 17 ~xf6 gxf6 trans- 2) IS ..ie7? 16lO<i4 :e8 17 ~b3 poses. intending discussion in the early 1990s. 19 e4? :ec8 20 fua8 ~S GO. with an attack.ixh7+ ~h8 21 exf4.. hopes to make use of the exposure of lowed to counter-attack: 16.Rabinovich-Dervishi. then 18.ixg5 19 hxgS g6 Kruppa. and the g-file is not fully opened against the king.•xfS? 21 18 h4... 16~xf6+ Kruppa.. 4b) 16 :hgl is critical.... Ultimately. bS? 21 that Black is doing OK..xf4 ~xg7 20 20 .. and indeed might white pawns to feel secure against well be advised to do so if his inten- White's extra piece.ie6 18 ~gS ±). while Black hopes to ~gS g6 18 f3 (18 :dgl ~) 18 .g6+ . But Black is al.. or 18 .. 16. • b2 ±) 21 "b2 ~xc4 22 bxc4 :xc4+ 17:hgl+ 23 ~bl "xb2+ 24 ~xb2 fxe3 and The natural move. At the cost of a tempo... Mednis. the assessment to run in White's fa- 1) IS . although White Black has liquidated and won enough can also hold fire.. . I would expect ral moves lose very quickly. • a4 18 t.id8 has not been tried more of- ten. :hg1+ ~h8 18 .. . g6 19 ~xg6... :ac8 23 "d3 ± Shabalov-Kruppa. lbc4 . Cannes 1997.... 16 h4 ~xd5 17 :xdS "c7 18 ~gS sen. e..g.id7 17 :dS ~a5 18 :hS! with a winning attack.h6? 17 "e4 fxe3 (17 .ifS. although there is still much to be Many of the apparently more natu. 18 ...ixe6 fxe6 19 :d7 +.ib7 ~h8 18 :xg7 f5 19 . the bishop is preserved..id3 ±) 21 :dS fue3 22 :xeS ~xc2.h5 22 .. Randers 1990..

.td3 A11) l:c6 is equal.l:cS 24 .. but if the weak b-pawn than 21 l:d6? Wa4 22 .f4! and White finds there is no way to take 19••• Wb6 advantage of the wayward position of Forcing the exchange of queens... Frunze 1989...h3 18 ~bl Or alternatively 21.xa3+ 23 should fall..e6! 21 22...t. nected outside passed pawns.tg4 24 l:c3 l:cd8 would have gained a tempo. l:xe3.. . fS. White will have two con- ~dl l:fd8 + Ambartsumian-Mago. =Gulko-Rodriguez Talavera. Seville 17 e4 will usually end up with 1992. l:fS 24 rln rlcs 2S . medov. 23 'it>a2 leaves 1989.fS?! 23 rlxf6 i..... Lucerne Wcht 18 . 19 ridS? Wc7 20 Wd4 i...t. 2) 23 .tdS bS! 24 ~d2 l:a6 =. 'it>g7 25 lLld4 rle8 is more adven- turous for Black.tfS 20 b4 'ii'c6 1993....th3 g-file.i.xf4 ..lLle5! 23lLlxe5 fxe5 24 exf4 (24 19Wd4 ..e6 24 17.66 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. 22 . but after 26 e4 l:e5 B 27 l:n lLle7 28 l:dxf6 lLlxd5 29 l:xf7+ ~g8 30 exdS rlexdS.. lLlO ~d2 rlac8 23 l:cl.td3 l:fd8 2S lLld4 ± Agamaliev- Play now branches out into: Smagacz. 23 rlxb6 rlcS AU: 18lLld4 67 24 b3 ..axb6 21 l:d6 . Wijk aan Zee 1993..•c5? 19 . i. i. 18 We4 (D) Reggio Emilia 199112.e4 24 . i..txb7 fxe3) holds the balance. 22~b1 After 22 . given by Van der Sterren as 23 lIe7 20Wxb6 lLld4 24 lIxb7lLlf3! 2S . for example 17 .dS lLleS. Instead. Black may be a pawn up after and now 21 ~b2 ± Khalifman. White throwing in a check along the 20. Kasparov-Khalifman.fxe3 22 fxe3 llac8 19 l:hgl+.xb7 fxe3 26 fxe3 l:d3 27 lLld4 . 22 .. Koszalin 1997) 23 <i>d2 (23 All: 18 We4 66 .••~h8 .tf5 22 White had given a check on gl.tdS!?. Black's knight since 23 rle4 is met by White has not had much luck trying to 23 .. Frunze The safest square. l:aS! (22 .te6 2SlLld2lLleS =Khalifman) A13: 18e4 67 and now: 1) 23 . the king too exposed: 23 . rlac8+?! 23 'it>bl l:cd8 24 rlxd8 l:xd8 25 .rS+ 23 ~a1 l:cs We7 +Shabalov-Kruppa. The clearest way to the draw is win this position..... If 20 exf4 Wxd4 21 l:xd4 .d3 . White can try 31 l:f8+ ~g7 32 l:1f7+ ~g6 33 l:f4! instead of 31 ~e3?! l:d8 32 l:e7 rlh5 ~ Lputian-Van der Sterren... rather 27 ..t..tdS (! Khalifman) 24 .t was 18•••lLlg6 Vera-Van der Sterren.

. . 22~blfS White seems to have adequate com- pensation for the pawn.xf5 20.c2 .. however. 28 'iff2.. Tilburg 1994 continued 23 ..e4 was A13) found to be prospectless.xg6+ ~h8 nares 1993..i.•c8? 22 .xh7 f5 23 l:td4! - Akopian.>h8 18 l'Lld4 is in fact an inaccurate own initiative.-. and that 17 l'Lld4 fxe3 18 counterplay on the h7-bl diagonal. White's next try.i...xf7. . but perhaps nothing more.fS B Black could also try 19. but preventing any black move-order.i. .i...d3 l'Llf3 Black gains an important tempo.b6 22 ~bl . St Pe...xe3 (22 . Akopian-Kruppa. .•e5!? 20 c...i. the reason being that after 23 l:txe5 l'Llxc2 24 l:te7 l'Lld4 25 . . l'Llxe3? tersburg 1993. Pelletier) 24 l:td3 .i. much as in Hiibner-Van der Sterren.. This would imply that 17 l:thgl+ The latest try. 23 .l:tc6? 25 .i..e4 24l'Lld4l'LleS 2S . Zurich 1995.h6 27 .c2 (29 to be preferred.t Akopian. l:tac8 24 .i. ISe4!? (D) IS___fxe3 18 ..f5! 21 l'Llxf5 l'Llxf5 22 l:td5 l'Llxe3. followed by l:th3 winning - .xf5 l'Llxf5 21 .l:lxe4?? l'Llb4+ mates on the back rank) 20 l'Llxes .i. l:[d5 .xes 29 .xf7 ...d3 "eS 21. Akop- ian-Pigusov. ~xh7 26 .bS fxe3 l'Llg7 (23 ..d5+ 30 l:txd5 l'Llb4+ winning 20 .i.i. although Akopian notes that Black could also have tried 23 . ISl'Lld4 (D) Pelletier-Van der Sterren.f5 19 l'Llxf5 .lbd5. 24 . b5!? 25 l:td7 as ao Akopian) 25 l:td7 ±.f6 (24 .i.b3 fxe3 26 fxe3 l:tg8 fxe3 .lLle7 24 l:th5l'Llg6 25 l:txh7+ + 26 fxe3 l:tgS Gelfand-Yusupov.i.xh7+ ~xh7 24 l:th5#) 23 l:tg4! 23. after 18 .i. ·slowing down his c. White had taken care to avoid l:thgl+.f5 19 l'Llxf5 .>bl .i.el + 25 ~a2 and A12) Black is in trouble on the kingside.b3. The New Main Line 67 lbd4 l'Lle5 25 .i. l'Llxf5? would be mistimed: 21 the exchange.i. After 23 . There. given in the notes to White's 17th.. Li.xf5 20 l:thgl + is 27 l:tn b5 28 l:tf4? l'Lld3 29 ..i. 21. 19 fxe3 ..d3 ..

.... l:tfe8 loses to 27 22 .!DxdS 26 o!tJc6 "'e4 and now the simplest line Black has many attempts to sharpen for White is to force a very favourable the play still further..i.h5 22 "'xf4 ..i..e7! de- less clear...!Dxf7+.. The only move to have been tried so tempts to 'win' queen for two rooks far.i.... 25 . though 20 . On 19 . in which the humble pawn.i.g4! is too slow. bxa3!? the situation is "'e6. but not 25 .. 1) 21 "'c6?! ..e6! (21... 23 ~b2! l:tb8 24 "'b3 is On quieter moves. l:tfc8+ 19 . intriguing alternative. 18 . White consoli.. After ~bl) 28 l:txd4.1. if only he had a safe place for the king! 2) 21 l:td4!? bxa3! 22 b4 a2! 23 bxa5? al"'+ 24 ~d2 "'xa5+ =1= gives a B highly practical setting for the Excel- sior theme..a4 White continues 25 o!iJd4! (25 Ch 1996. marches boldly from home square to queening square. . heroics often require co- operation from the opponent in order 20••• b4 to succeed.... Annenian 24 . If 25 . runs 21 "'e4 ...i. while the various at. serious problems for Black.:... 'ii'a2!? 23 "c3 "'xd5+ 24 ~cl l:tc3!. 19 . Short.. 1) 24 ..... Akopian-Egiazarian..1.!Dg5...) 22 ~bl (22 20 ..g4 is an least until practical tests emerge.68 The Queen' s Gambit Declined: 5 1. . .dS . the open d.. 21 axb4 ficult to meet.!De5 l:tac8+ 25 . using The most direct.!Dc6 b4 26 22 ~d2 'ii'a6 (D) l:td3 and now 26 .f5+ squashes another attempt to counter.i.. But in chess. and the vulner.i... fends. metaphorical sword in hand... but 26 . l:tb8?..and g-files.h3 19 ~bl pin and counterpin to clear a route to l:tac8 20 "'b3 wins the f7-pawn and bl for the king. bS 2) 24 l:td3! is a clever idea.e6. would be doing very well in the 18 e4 20exdS (D) variation..b6 22 ability of Black's king.al+ "'xf6+ ~g8 and now: 2l. at dates with ~bl.e5?? 26 ..i. White attack. "'xb6 axb6 23 axb4 . Short. . ..xa8 l:txa8 21 ~bl b4 22 "'d2 "'d6? bxa3 23 dxe6? axb2+) 22 ..i./41 18. The critical line 3) 21 a4?! .xb4 22 l:td4..i. 23 ~a2 "'b6 24 "'xb6 axb6 =i=.f5 28 and obvious move seems best..g6 23 21 •.!De5 "'e4 is less clear-cut) 25 . 20 "'c5 is surprisingly dif. nonchalantly brushing aside all the diverse obstacles in its path. After tage. or as close to it as you are likely to get in an over-the-board mid- dlegame. probably best described as unclear.. and this seems to cause gives White a clear positional advan. but this simple ending by 27 "'d4 "'xd4 (27 . though there are certainly alterna- favour White in view of his control of tives to be considered..

Black 18 ~e2 'fia2 19 :al 1-0 M.b7 14 ~d2 ~b4?! win..xb4 16 ~4 1i'al+ 17 ~d2 . USSR Ch 1988.. We now consider other pos- sibilities for Black. The queen cannot return. endgame in which White later went 13•••eS 14 ~eS ~eS 15 ..b7 2S "'xa6 .b7 Wijk aan Zee 1995. White's best defensive try is to set up some back-row tricks with 2S :del.i. turns the tables) 28 1i'xdS 'fixdS+ 29 13~xbS ~c 1 1i'cS+ 30 ~d2 ..xc3+ 26 :d4 :ac8+ 27 ~d2 .e6 Black should 13 .i.xb4+ 26 ~c1 'ficS+ 27 ~d2 :xd5+ (27 .i.. starting with those where Black has already exchanged pawns.fS+? 30 ~b3! can safely capture either way. Akopian-Short..xc4 eS is holding up well for Black.. If 16.Sokolov.i.i.b7.•.. distinct advantage .i. If Both sides determinedly centralize. only points came so easily all the time! and both sides just about consolidate.i.. as Black has 23 ..i...xf7+.Gure- won the d-pawn...i. White ~cl "'al+ 29 ~c2! . after the further moves This also sails too close to the wind.xdl.c4! leaves White's defences totally uncoordinated. Groningen 1996."'as+ 28 A reckless pawn sacrifice. .Gurevich) IS axb4 but after 24 ~c3 . J:ld8! and if 24 'fixa8?.i. 27 ~cl fS 28 "'gS :cS+ 29 ~d2 "'g6 13:hgl'ii'hS 30"'e7"'b6.xeS astray.i.~xg4?! (D) tion looming.xa6 ..:xd5+ 26 ~el "'e4+ and Black wins.xf4+ 18 ~bl gives White a Van Wely-Short.xg4 16 .i. since 25 'fixa7 fails to 25 . with repetition of posi.i. was A3) agreed drawn...i.. Wijk aan Zee 1997.c7 1-0 Bertholee-Peelen. Or: . 17 26"xf4l:[xdS :xdl1i'a6 18 ~d6 'fic6 19 .gS 17 White avoided this humiliation in exdS . (l4.i.xbS . reaching a drawn vich-A..i. but after 2S ..i. The New Main Line 69 It would seem that the main line 11 g4 dxc4 12 .~S 15 ~4 "'d8 16 e4 . 23•••:d8 24 bS 1i'b6 2S 1i'e4 .i. 12. then 24. A2) 12•••bS? (D) 23~d4 w 23 "'c6 is not as strong as it looks.

. Simfero..~xg4 13 . the stunning swindle through which 3) 13 .g5! .i.. Not..xf6! .i. lDd4 23 A4) ~xd4lDdl !! 24 1I'g3 ~xc3+ 25 bxc3 12•••l:tdS (D) .i. Tbilisi 1996. but somehow failed ¢>d7 24 ~5+! ~xe5 25 ..i. as the offer to ex- change rooks slows White down mther less than the various counter-attacking possibilities.e4 18 l:td5.. ~f6 14 .i.e8 1/2. But if White can gain a tempo.xf6 16 ~e4 14l:tdgl .i. f6.xd4 26 cxd4 f6 0-1.i.xa3 17 .xd5 lIxd5! 19 exd5 "xd5 00. 18 ..i. 13 .i..70 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. lov-Kharitonov.d2 . ~d5./41 Not often seen.i.i.l:txdl+ 14 l:txdl ~xg4 15 l:tgl 1) 13 . A sane and rational move.i..i.i.Shabalov) 22 .. g6 18 ~xf7 l:txf7 19 l:txg6+ led to crazy complications in Shaba- or 17.i.. Kharitonov) 22 ... 14l:thgl e. 20 l:txg7+! ¢>xg7 21 "g2+ ¢>h8 pol 1988 (18.1/2 Bagaturov-Dzhan- dzhgava. 17 ....h6 ±. the assess- ment of the position will change con- siderably. 13 e4!? A little more testing than 13 h3.. IS•••l:txdS ..i.. Leningmd 1989...e2 l:tdS 16 ~e5 14.c3! w keeps White in control.i.i..d7 14 e4 ...i..i.e7 17 ~gS. Black knocked back a winning attack: 14 h3 ~f6 15 . 13. and White should win...h6 g6 20 ~ (21.. e5 14 ..clOds 19 .c5 18 ¢>bl b5?! White soon snared the black queen (18 .gS ~f6 (otherwise gives White good attacking chances.¢>f8 22 .h6+ ¢>e8 23 1I'g8+ "xgl 21 l:txgl). l:txdl+ 15 1I'xdl ~xf2 16 1I'n 'ifh4 17 .e7 23 ~5!! +.. then the reply 18 . however. The 2) 13 .i. 14••• ~geS 15 ~xe5 ~xe5 16 ~dS exdS 17 . ISexd5! Kharitonov's analysis continues 18 .~ge5 14 ~xe5 ~xe5 15 whole game is worth reprinting for lDd5 ±.d7 14 e5 ~e8 15 ~g5 ± Kharitonov.c??? "xc7 19 .g5 'ifxf2 IS 00 .i.xdS+ l:txd5 20 "fIxc7 l:tc5+.g.) 15 .i. etc.xe5 .i.i.d8 00 Kharitonov) 19lDd5 "d8 in G.f8 If 17 .i.c3+? (22 .Georgadze-Kharitonov.xb5+ +- to win the game..

e6! is more The thematic square. eS?? 16lDxeS wins a pawn..i..fS rod 1995.. Po- land 1988..xgS 19 ..i.Kempinski-R. lDh5 IS h4 eS 16 .d3 . and therefore fxg6 21 .i.i... there 24 ':xf8+ ~xf8 2S ':dl +-) 23 ':d8+ is plenty of unexplored territory here.g2 lDg6 23 fS +-.lDxf2 22 .. if 18 . on the bishop.i... The New Main Line 71 It's difficult to see how Black can 13 g4. led eventually to a draw in 2) A recent try for Black.Vladimirov- not as popular..c7 17 h4 "xf4+ 18 ~bl hS (18 .*.d6 Or 14 ..i.. R. ':f8 24 ':xf8+ ~xf8 2S ':dl .dxc4 11 .*..d3 ±. Kaidanov-KonsaIa. .i.e4 then 19 . Matalascaiias 1989.h6 ltf7 21 f4! lDe7 22 .xd6 15 . gxf6 16 gxf6 . lDd7? is a mistake. kingside attack. Erevan via 1O.a4 . 21 .. blocking any tricky. Obviously able..e4 (IS cttbl!? Vladimirov) Is .e3! ..i.*.d3 g6 (14. Novgo.i.i. b5.. since 22 WgS :c8! 23 .*....xc4 a6 12 ..xg6 Quieter than 12 ....d2?! . 14..i.xdS 'iVxdS 21ltdl ± pelle la Grande 1997.h6 (22 . reached the game Akopian-Beliavsky.. and preserving options loses to 23 .xhl !. but maybe just as reli.xa3 19 .i.*.xhS 1i'xhS 20 ':gl After 13 . and so must release 14.xf3 "xgS 18 ~ .i..c7 . Even so. A few years later gS 112-112 in Ivanchuk-Ehlvesl.i.xeS ~4 22 .*. lDxf4 (1S .e6 17 .EkstrOm.cS 20 .h2 . bS-b4 means that White has a draw whenever he wants White has little time to build up a it..xgS f6 20 . Podolsk 1993) 16 exf4 . this position was played out: 20. Kaidanov gives the main line as IS .xf6 17 ':hgl+ ~h8 18lDgS . lDd6 .•h6!? Beliavsky) 21lDf6+':xf6 .a6 (D) ning attack. lDxf3 17 .xh7 (IS ':hgl lDgeS 00) Is .f6?? pawn-roller.. eS.. ~h8 was answered by 14 sky. With a sound material advantage 13.. lDg4 IS (20 . for example 14 gS avoid the exchange sacrifice. Presumably 14 .lDhS for White.d726 for example 14 .i.e2 some of the tension.i. but it is unlikely he can do better.rs 19 13gS .f5? 19 gxf6 . The threat of . g6? 23 ':d8+ ':f8 holds no joy for White.. is 13 .. Styrenkov-Gasthofer...d4 The gain of tempo.i....J:xd6 tOes 16 . Cap- 19••:.e7 OL 1996.i.i.g3lDxg4 IS .i. USSR Ch 1989.i...~h8!? Beliav- sky) IS .d3!?: Agreed drawn in Gelfand-Beliav- 1) 13 .xf6 20 hS ± Vladimirov) 19 ~2 "c7 20... Bass. ':ac8 18 ~bl .b4 20 19. Mter 14 AS) ~4 ~S ISlDf6+! White has a win- 12.xg6+ ~h8 E.*.i.i..xh7. g6.*.. ':xd7 bS.. 13 .i.xaS lDxaS 21 .

:xd5 16 ~bl Wb6 17 .. the vulner.72 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.:ct8 (D) variation of Line A4 above. After 15 Wxd8+ exd5 (15 ... dxc4 13 li)xc4 :xdl+ 14 "b6 16li)xd5 :xd5 17 cxd5 ± Speel- Wxdl Wd8.c6 19 :hdl li)g6. USSR Ch centre.i.li)xd8 16 .li)h5 12h3 15 .d 1 Wxf2 25 :xe6.. b5 14 cxd5li)xd5 15li)xd5 keeping an edge.txd5 13 :xd8+ Wxd8 14 . but he still has chances of 3) 13 .f4! B) = .. Black tried to hold firm in the M. 21 "xc5 :d7 22 had fractionally the better of the draw 'ifd4!) and now Nunn in his original in Malaniuk-Kharitonov..td6? 20 ll)c5! .xd6 22 :xd6 :xd6 23 :xd6 WeI + play than by trying to keep the central 24 . while 13 "xdl+) 21.t (now that h5 is no longer available for the knight) 15. The sponding lines after 11 h4. that in this particular variation White's with the idea 20.i.xd6 20 .tf5 18 ~a2! 12 li)d2!? leads to simplifications .xd8 Black had ex- In some of the earlier games with cellent compensation for the pawn in 11 g4... Gurevich noted as better 20 .xe4 21 Wxe4 attack is better met by active piece..d7 leads to a quiet side- 1l.tf5 Agrest-Ambartsumian.td7 13 ll)d2 a6 transposes...te2 :ac8 15 g5 .td7 14 .. w 13lOd2 Black has tried a number of moves here.i..li)e4 15lbb3 Wxc3 16 Consolidating his gains.xd6 .c7 Wxb3 (19 . and after 20 :xd8+?! :xd8 21 :xd8+ J. ..tg2 ..i.i..i. Black must be careful not to let his queen get snagged by li)b3.i. In comparison with corre.i...t {Nunn} is safer but in- :dl!? li)xf4 18 exf4 f6 19 . This is not correct.tc7 16 h3lai5 17li)xd5 exd5 18lai6 ..txc5. li)e4 16 li)dxe4 dxe4 17 li)xe4 li)e5 18 :d4 ..i..i.dxc4 here. 14. However.txc4 . 2) 13 .g2 ..e6 White then 20. London Ct (3) 1988. bxc3 . nor 21 Wc5? :d7 22 .. Podolsk 1989) 17 li)b3! Wa4 18 gxf5 :ac8 19 . Speelman gives Wc4+.tb4 19 . Simferopol analysis cited in Informator gives 20 1989. experience has shown 1988.t sufficient to equalize) 16 Wxc6 . man-Short..i.tg2 '! ±'. without challenging the verdict that White is better. 1) 13 ... rest of the game is given in the intro- ability of the g-pawn costs White a ductory chapter....a6?! 20..:d6! is fully satisfactory for Black It is surprising that Black has not after 21 Wc2 (certainly not 21 "b7? tried 12.td6.Gurevich-Kharitonov.i. 12.Nunn... since 12..e2 li)d5 17 :c5 18 "d3.i. if 19 .txe5 ± Speelman) 15 lbb3 after 12.txa3+ 17 ~bl .. tempo. J.f3 ~f8 .e5? 14 g5! li)e8 (14 .Wxc2+ 22 ~xc2 :xc7+ .xc4 =...th2 ±. pawn tension..xd8 (15 .....

xd7 -*. Vladimirov-Campora..xa3 21 :c1 Moscow 1989.fS! IS master play.g5 :d8 12 -*..c4..i. for ex- ample 14 -*. and indeed were to be. for some obscure reason.xc4 19 'ii'xc4 :re8 =t.xa3 18 .g2"a2 24 -*. 19 bxa3 :xc7 20 ~b1 ..f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 ~xcS 8 1Oc69 a3 . lOxd3 19 l:txd3 ...•el 23 -*. ..a510 0-0-0 ~e7 (D) .e7: White's b6 13 lOd6 (13 b4?! -*. wins.xd8!) 23 -*.i.xb4 14 axb4 11th move alternatives lOxb4 followed by . Thessaloniki OL 1998 continued 13 .fS) 17 .. while 21.c2 (17 'ittbl 'ii'xd2 IS l:txd2 have occasionally been tried in grand.i.i. Catania 1995.d3 dxc4 13 .xbS :fc8 24 ~c3 ± E.f6 c: 11~g5 73 22 -*. relatively fashionable in 1997.. White is at best aiming for a slight edge. C) The first three of our lines are 11..e7 16 cS b4 + Vescovi-Arlandi.xd8 :xc6 23 -*..~d7 12 ~c7 3.i.Seitaj. . :ac8 22lOd2 .lOd4? 16 -*. Then 21. The New Main Line 73 with equality. 'ii'xaS l:txc2+ 19 ~b1 l:tcS+ and Black come. 20 :d3! .fS+ axbS 17 ..i. and just 4) 13 . Nunn.d6 23 lOb3 :xc4 0-1 Deak-Bauer. However.f6 (22 . with fewer complications.d3 19 .dxc412-*.d2 lOeS+ 11 lOd2 and the prophylactic 11 ~bl 17 -*.e4a616.d3 l:tacS (ls .xd3 :xd3 20 gSlOe8 b614:xd71Oxd71S.xc4 strictly minor alternatives: ..c7!) 16 . -*.. h6 14 lOeS ~e6 IslOxc6 bxc6 16 ~eS cS 17 g4 d4 IS . B) 11 cxd5 lOxdS 12 lOxdS exdS 13 -*.a2 21 :c3 seems to preserve a substantial A: 11lOb5? B: 11 adS 73 73 advantage for White.d7 14 ~b1 kS =Kveinys-Klovans.i... 11.) 13 ..e3..-*.xd6 14 ~xd6 l:tfcS IslOd2 bS 5 -*.xd8! :xc6 2S ~xf6. Hungary 1993.. A) 11 lOb5? is pointless.•b6 14 -*.xd4 18 c-file: ll.~e6! fol- lowed by quickly playing a rook to cS. But Black can do better still with 13 .c2 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 31Oc31Of6 4 00 -*.4 10. Or.xc6 21 ~c2 :d8 221Ob3 eS 2310aS -*... D: 11lOd2 74 tive simplification.d3 would be a good idea if it weren't for the placement of the white king! N..xc4~d713~c7 -*.•al+ E: 11 ~bl 7S 22 ~c2 -*. when White is in difficulties..~xbS.xf6! is an attrac..g2 d4 IS lOa4 makes it easier for Black to open the 'fIa7 16 ~xc6 bxc617 exd4 . etc.. wins in similar fashion. White is wasting too much time..Saleh-I.xh7+ ~hS IS -*.i.

clDxd3 20 :xd3 lbg4 21 .i.txf4+ 20 ~bl .i. Dieren pair in an open position.te7..7 be- low. a611 ~2 . :hel ± Osterman-Krudde.txg7 cia.Kempinski-Lutz.c2 1/2.xa3 17 bxa3 Wc3+ 18 Wc2 Wa1+ 19 1IIbl (not 19 ~d2?? 'iWd4+) 19 .xaS 14 e4 (14 cxdS exdS =) 14. Wb6 !? is the latest try.tg4 19 J.te2! loses the exchange to 19 . 2b) R.tg3 bishop to f8 rather than to e7 in the 12 . All he had succeeded in 18.. WxaS 18 :d3 . Groningen 2) 18 Wd2!? . ~xg7 22 :g3 eS 23 h3 1IIg6 24 hxg4 2) 11 . corr.tgS!? d4 13 ~b3 Wb6 14 exd4 1O.. there .. 1990.. a6 is discussed..Ginsburg. Pula Echt 1997: 13 gS lbhS 14 lbb3 . ~h8 =..c6 20 .c3+ 20 ..txf6 ...td3 should be met not by dxc6 bxc6.e2 (19 f3?? 1996 continued 12 g4 :fc8 13 .txgS 21 'iWe2 'iWa6 =1=) 13 . Black often prefers to retreat his 12. 19... Bad Homburg 1997. Internet 1997.td7 is a little inflexible.74 The Queen' s Gambit Declined: 5 ~4! Groningen 1991.th3 .eS 14 0) gSlbe8 IS .xg6+ hxg6 26 :tel 1/2.e2 1IIg61S good compensation for the pawn. 17lbdS Wd8 is a formation more com- G.. .i... dxe4 IS lbxe4lbxe4 16 1IIxe4 . .tf6 21 doing was in giving Black the bishop..1/2 Gabriel-Lutz.td3 d4 16lbb3 Wd8 17 1l~2(D) exd4±.....txcS 17 dxcS ~b3+ 18 ~bl I) 11..1/2 we shall see later (section 3.te6 2S . eS lbb3 Wb6 IS exd4 ~aS (IS . cxdS lbxf4 16 exf4 lbaS 17 lbxaS tions. Linares 1997. Hebert-Fahrbach... As . 16 ~S .. White is doing well. ~xd4 IS ~xd4 exd4 16 . 19 . this time by analogy with II ~bl a6 12 ~2 111b6.td7 line.tgS+? 19 ~bl ~h8 20 f4 ..Gar.i.txf6 2a) White tried too hard in Agrest.g3 'iWh6 19 J. under 1O.. By analogy with the 10 l:1dl line.te3!? . Line E below: 4a) 12 lbb3 lbaS 13 lbxaS . 3) 11.b6 IS Back now to the more serious varia. but by 18 .tbS into adrenaline-sapping exertion: 12 Wc7 21 lbdS ~xd5 22 1IIxcS with lbxc4111cs 13 b4 1IIh514.teS (19 .Georgadze-Vaganian.d8 IS exdS exf4 16 I) 18 .td619 .e4 ± Avrukh-Gild...dxc4? forces Black's queen lbxcs 19 . 4) 11 .... 4b) 12 .td3 d4 13 cS WxcS 14 1l.. Pinsk 1993: 12lbb3 1IIb6 monly seen after 10 :tdl: 13 e4?! eS 14 cS ..d3111hS 16 h3lbdS 17 g4111h4 18 are probably other reasonable tries) . in section 3.6 below). is too slow to cause (White's timing was less successful in Black problems. G..td7!?) Preserving the analogy.tgS.

19 b4?! "a6 exd4 .el+ 21 l:r. In- stead 16 cxb6?! lLlxg3 17 ..xd3 lLlxhl 19 l:r.1c4 b6 22 b4 ± Fta~­ 14 exd4lLlxd4 15lLlxd4 exd4 16lLlb5 nik-Klovans.1xb5 a5 ..1d7 17lLlxd4 l:r... and vigorous play with lLl5xd4 lLlxd4 18 l:r..dl "e6 22 . .c8 21 ~bl g6 22 l:r.xd7lLlxd7 21 l:r.1xb5 19 12•••d4 ..txd6 l:r. Other lines The text-move looks more natural.1xd6 20 After 13 . but Black is well .xd4 l:r.xd4 lia 1997.c8 and 14lLle2 g6 15 After the text-move...xc2 24 ~xc2 ahead in development) 19 .1g7 =Lima-Pelikian...l:r.xe8 25 ~xb3. seems thor- oughly unclear.. E) pensation for the piece.1xe2 20 l:r..c8?! 19lLld6 . After 15 .1xd3 followed by ...1xd6 24lLlxd6 "xe5. Erfurt 1993 . desig- nated as unclear by Fta~nik..1d6 14 cS 1Fd8 .. 1) 11.txb5 20 .1d7.xd4 transposes. White then has excellent chances of B keeping Black's extra central pawns blockaded.1xb5 l:r. 18 lLlxd4 . "xe2 l:r.. enabling him to use his ex- tra piece effectively. Even so.aS! 'it'b8 15 lLld4 ± Ftaenik.1xc5.1xd3 18 .1xc2 18 ~xc2 ±..xhl dxc3.ac8 or 19lLlci6 b6! 20 lLlb7 gant-looking 14.hel ~h8 16 lLlxd4 exd4 17 lLlbS . . Fta~nik gives both . . lLlxe4?! is best met by 16lLlxe4! .1d3 .dllLlxc5! 22 . The New Main Line 75 lLlxf6+ "xf6 20 f3 is probably critical "e8 20l:r. l:r. 1) 15. 18 11 ~bl (D) 'irxd3 'irc7 19 lLlaxc5 l:r.White wins a pawn. lead to equality.e8 21 .....c8 19 .1d7 18 23 "d3 .d8.dl "xe7 Fta~nik points out that the extrava."c7 with com. Though fairly safe. as- sessed as ± by Fta~nik. looks good for White after the simple 20 ~bl. 2) The even more extravagant 15 . dxc4?! 13lLlxc4 "c7 14 ~b5 18. 22 . this is a bit too 15 exd4 lOxd4 slow to promise much... ward when White's king has already tical liquidation into a level ending: 17 left the c-file. 18 b4 .fc8.td7?! seems a little awk- while Fta~nik also gives a massive tac. . .1xc516lLla4. 17 11•••a6 lLl3xd4 lLlxd4 18 l:r.tc4 . weakness of the a-pawn. Brasi. Improving on the somewhat me- 13lLlb3 'irb6 chanicaI18 ..c6 23 15 e4 and now: ..td6 .Fta~nik 12 .exd4 16 lLlb5 .1f5 is also possible.1xe7 "el+ 21 l:r.1d3 .1b5 12 g4 or 12 h4 would be promising. for example 19 .1f5 16 "c3 lLle4 17 "e3 as gets White nowhere in view of the leading to a slight edge for White.1xe417..1xe8 lLlxb3+ 23 ~bl l:r.1xe4 17 cxb6 .

with long forcing lines. cellent compensation for the sacri- Jinrong Liang.ic3 lIfd8 23 lIhd I bS ience. IS lDd2 a6 Black already held the ini. .ig8 tiative..ixdS IS lIxdS lIac8 gives Black good nitely H h4!. A com.WfS 14lDde4ll)xe4 IS lIxdS+ 26 Wb2 We7 27 ll)a2 as 28 ~a11Dc4 .ie6 16 .. lDd7.. and f6 22 ll)f3 ll)cs = Gelfand-Short. The older move II 'defending' an isolated pawn is to sac.76 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! White played too slowly with 12 h3?! 19l1)e4 Wxd2 20 ll)xd2ll)d7 21 .ixf6 17ll)xdS the recommendation for White is defi- .if4 0-0 6 e3 eS 7 dxeS . and with without 11 . 19f3 11•••a6 Black's pieces are much better Again with transpositional possi- placed to work with the isolani after bilities...ifS lIe7 23 'iVctlDeS 24 b4 2) H ..lIfcS 13 g4 bS 14 cxbSlDds Novgorod 1996.t Van Wely-Van lines we have just looked at. g4 leads to equally complicated posi- rifice it.ixc4 (13ll)xc4l1xdl+ 14 Wxdl WdS Now after 24 ...if4 in Eslon-A. Beijing 1997.lxdS 16 ll)xe4 eS 17 .ie7 Van Wely... mendably straightforward way of tak. which. h4! or 12 g4. lIdS!? 12 lDd2 dxc4 13 Otherwise Black is clearly better.ic2 . 22 .txc4 ll)bS allows White to pressurize the (D) isolated d-pawn: 20 ll)e2 Wxd2 21 Taken next as a matter of conven- lIxd2 ll)c6 22 .. move is aiming at.id3 lIae8 sition.ie6 17 . lLld7 19 .txc4 with . S .id3 'i!i'h6 19 lIdl . IS . Of the quieter moves.. II ~bl is 18"'d2~h8! only equal.ie7 queenside.ig3 Wg6 IS 29 WbSll)d6 30 Wbl bS Black had ex- = . promises a clear ad- dam 1995. but 13 ll)b3 ll)aS 14 ll)xaS "'xaS IS Black emerges with a satisfactory po- exdS exdS 16 . .te7 transposes to 24 ll)f4 . Black envisages a defensive formation 3. but the Van Wely- Pigusov game will clarify matters. gested in the text..igS 2S .Hoffman... since 11..e7 the kingside thus secured it will be possible to try for something on the 1 d4 dS 2 e4 e6 3ll)c3ll)f6 4ll)f3 . Antwerp 1997. . Van Wely-Khuzman. tions..ieS .*..5 10. 12 ll)d2 'ikb6 12 .ixb4 2S axb4 Wxb4+ =) 13 ... while 11 ll)d2 might per- At first it is difficult to see what this haps offer the chance for a small edge..ixcS 8 "'e2 The less subtle 18 . ..igS. ficed piece in Van Wely-Pigusov. bS 13ll)b3 Wb6 14 cxdS exdS Concluding our survey of 10. after 12 der Sterren.. Amster.id4 f6 21 "e2 . Beijing 1997... Javea 1992.ie7. dxc4 11 ... The recent theoretical ing advantage of the lack of pace of 11 battle with 11 ~bl has not gone in ~b1. 19•••ll)d7 20 . after 12.f6 and . White's favour.igS .id4 lLle6 9 a3 "'as 100·0·0 dxe4 11 . ... .ixf6 . Sometimes the best way of vantage for White. in conjunction attacking chances in return for the with some of the innovations sug- pawn.

3... 13h4 13 J.e7 acing lead in development..3.lLld7 the 10.f4 0-06 e3 cS 7 dxcS ... since 13 .e7 13 lLlb3 J. etc.2.xc4 a6 (sec...... ~xg4 is met by 14 14 J. Beijing 1997: 13 .Ruban. offers longer resistance) 23 l:lhS+ 1-0. White stands well. lLlg6 17 ~6 1-0. Instead. eS?! 13 J. Instead: should be OK for Black. The New Main Une 77 Line AS.e7 line (3... as pointed out by Burgess...e7 cxb2+ 16 <i>bl Wxa3 17 i. queenside attack: 13 .e7 IS i.i.J. Wxg6+ i.J..g7 22 WeS+ i..••i. 16 an elegant way to conclude the attack) lLlxaS Wxa5 17 e4 gives White a men.xfS 19 hxg6 to be good for White.xb3 WcS GO.e7 13 gSlLlh5.xc4 a6 14lLle4 i.. bS 14 ~ce4 g6 Ib) 12 .d3).xh7+ <i>hS and it was White's attack that pre- vailed. lc) Black offered a pawn race and lost in Yepez-Pau.610.id7 12. is lLlxb3+ 17 i. bS?? 13lLlce4 +...xe7 ~xe7 16lLlfgS 13lLlgS h6 variation (3. 21 l:lgS J..b3 ± Ruban. eS.. the same move.l:ldS 12 ~2 i. Line A23)..a2! h3 ±.d3 b4 14 gS bxc3 IS gxf6 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3ll)f6 4 W i.e7 11 g4 dxc4 12 i. to be satisfactory.lLlxdS 21 thread. We have now transposed back to idovic.Dav. "as S J. Dutch Ch 1990.e7 13 g4 is another A straightforward developing move..d3 worked well for White in the game Alterman-Jinrong Liang... 13 . in Blees. bS 13 J. g6. White might want to spend a move preserving the bishop with IS 11.. Line AS). Sydney 1990 finished 13 .i. transposition to the lO.. Instead. and later the game.e7 12. which allows Black to place his king's .xcS 8 lLlc6 9 a3 10 0-0-0 J. g6?! 14 h4lLleS IS hS (tempting.h6 14 h4 lLleS tion to the lO.e7 11 h4 dxc4 12 J...e7line. illustrating perfectly so let us be consistent and recommend the dangers of a mistimed .d3 J. 12.i....d7 (D) "c2 2) 12 J. as White's I) 12 g4 and then: queen and bishop are the wrong way la) 12. after 16 g4?! 23 l:lh5!. back to lines already considered under 13•••h6 lO. Black has no need to set up Aiming for yet another transposi...... Azmaiparashvili-A.gS! is strong for IS i. 12lLlgS! However.. White. but he lost the fxg6 20 l:ldS Wc7 (20. the target on g6. Again Black cannot get on with his tion 3..g7 22 Wxg6 Wf7? (22.fS and now Pliester. on the limited evidence so far. but having provoked . leads round on the bl-h7 diagonal.e2!?) Is . Black's position seems.J...... lLlxd3+ 16 l:lxd3 eS 17 l:lxdl+ 14l:lxdl Wh51Sf3lLla5 ought lLlxh7! exf4 IS lLlxfS J. 13 J. Catalonia 1996: 3.

l:.e8 13 iLld2 R. before Ivanchuk. since 17 . ..f8. but rather 12 . cxbS iLlb6.g.it . eS is A) met by 18 iLle4.:Cc8 for the bishop. The one real R. other plans are now pre...xd7 A: 11 g4 78 bxa3 17 bxa3 l:.. 11 g4 (D) 12~bl This was played many times in the 1) 12 h3?! is too slow.. then not 12 .. R.. Hilversum (1) 1993 showed White seriously questioned whether to good effect Black's regrouping plan the g4 push was really achieving any.e2 thing.ad8 leads to complica- B: 11 ~b1! 81 tions that tum out well for Black C: 11 adS 83 (Gulko). .xa3 F: 11 h4!? 8S 14 iLlxf6+ gxf6 IS bxa3 "xa3+ 16 'ii'b2 'ii'xb2+ 17 ~xb2... White has several options here. R. R. with Black having good at- ferred. Gulko-Portisch. maybe White the pawn by 13 gSiLldS would be fool- can make this work in his favour.gS 84 e.d3 .e7 14iLlxf6+ R.f4! B rook on c8.fc8! (Gulko)..l:.!. of which 11 ~bl is probably tacking chances as he uncoils. Timman- late 1980s and early 1990s.e7 16 l:. D: 11 R.. Black contem.:for White to win pressure on the d-file... 13 iLlde4 b4 consider: 14iLlxf6+ gxf6 ISiLle4 R.. which in tum vacates f8 11.xc4.e8. R.78 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.xf61SiLle4..fd8?! minor pieces (.f8 14 R. Reggio Emilia drawback to this plan is that Black is 1990/1. R. 13 . but 13lLlce4!? is worth a shot... where it is better placed 11.. he also White's best choice. after 12 ... Since the threat of gS and taking iLle7 IS h4?! (after IS gS iLld7 16 h4 on dS is easily met by placing a rook bS Ivanchuk cited 17 iLlb3 "d8 18 on the c-file. we 2) After 12 iLld2 bS. E: lliLld2! 8S White is much better after 13 ... voluntarily placing himself under Black is doing well. hardy.xc3!? 18 bxc3iLlg6 . iLle7) 13iLld2iLle7 14iLlb3""6 IS gSiLlfdS and attacking on the queenside with 16 iLlxdS iLlxdS 17 iLlxcs 'ii'xcs 18 pawns and major pieces. ered: plates defending on the kingside with 1) If 12 R. gave 17 cxbS l:..dxc4!? may also be consid- defensively than on e7.

with unclear complications after 20 l:c 1 WcS 21 li)ce4lLlxe4 22 ~e4 'irxe3. 12 .eS d4 20 . or maybe ±. Black's kingside would have been highly vulnerable after 20 l:xd8! fol- lowed by . 13li)gS is also promising.Stem..txO 23 ~ lLlb3 'irb6 14 gS lLlhS IS .xc3! 18 J.. and instead of the miscal- J..xa3 IS gxf6? lhc3) 14. A checkmating position to A3: 12•••dxc4!? 81 dream of.xc3 18 bxc3 li)xg3 19 hxg3 . Khalifman-Ki. but 2a) Black should try 17 ...tg7IShSJ...lt)c6 17 hxg6 hxg618 2) 12 h4?! looks ferocious. bS? (too late) 18 cxbSl:iJe7 After the text-move.. J. in view of 24 .xe7li)xc3+ 20 ~c2li)e4+ 21 ~b2 have played 21 cxdS . The New Main Line 79 used to be Petrosian who had the repu. Oslo Cup 1991.tf8 13 21. 2c) 17. 16 gS li)e4! and the white king soon I) 13 .....f8 79 24 J...xf6 'irxf6 12 .xe7 (18 bxc3 li)e4 19 giev.txd4lt)edS 21li)xdS! into: l:xc2 22lLlxf6+ ~f8 23 li)gh7+ ~e7 AI: 12••.xc6 17 J. li)xhl and .teSlt)c6 19 J..cS+ 1-0. (Khalifman)..g716 came under serious attack.txeSli)xf3 22li)xf3 ... Manila IZ 1990..l:ab8 l:xc3 23 'ird4!. although tack against the king by retreating again it raises the question of why everything to the back rank!) IS .••.. finished spectacularly dapest 1991.g3 d4 19 exd4 li)xd4 20 'iWh2 .tfS (D) ersen-Parker.....1:iJe714h4g6IShSJ.eS 18 it is not clear that the knight should J.. g614h4.tc6 abandon the kingside...txdS 24 cxdS ..Garcia.. S.d3 ± Khalifman) 17 White's attack failed to connect after hxg6 hxg6 18 .tg3lt)e7 14. see line F below) continued 18 'irh2 eS 19 J. hxg6 hxg6 17 0.Geor- J. 13gS tation of preparing for a decisive at..ta4 22 'irxa4 li)xf2 followed by .b4 16 'ifxaS J. .Ped- 12. and now: 3) 12lt)d2 has also been tried.. bS!? 80 li)g8#.. 13•••li)h5 14 .e2 . London 1997 (reached via II h4. bS 13 cxbSl:iJe7 14 ~bl (14 gS? 20 f4 li)aS. l:xd4 'irxgS+!1= S.l:xcS 2S A2: 12.. bS White ever played g4.. Matanzas 1992. but cxdS exdS 19 J.... play branches 19 J. Bu. White could J.td6 'ird8 (16.. J. g6 prepares an imaginative piece sacrifice: 1) IS cxdS ...e2li)aS 17li)xaS 'irxaS 18 e4 d4 19 2b) The game Vera-Gild. However..e816 Shabalov-Tisdall..tg3 g6 16 ..xa3 IS culated 21li)ce4?? 'ire7 22 l:h7 dxe4 'ii'a4 J....g3 l:d8...tg7 16 dxc6 ...i.i.d6 23 'irh2 f6 -+. after 17 ...Farago-R. li)xg4 19 bxc3 li)xf2 + in 2) 13 .. +) 18 . A1) but probably no improvement. J.dxc4?! is a more recent try.1.txc4.xaS 17 J.

.a4 20 'iWb2 and now in Dinstuhl.xe7 "xe7 19 cxdS lDe5 .xc4 :xc4 26 'ilxb7 =.h3! ± places the black centre under enormous pres.lt)g7 18lDg4 ±. The kingside 16 It)eS f6 17 gxf6 gxf6 IS lDf3 barricades can wait until White has .xc6 16 17 .i. Better would have been 20.. or 13 .. Enthusiastically awarded a double sure.d6 modest assessment here. Here Black's defensive structure .lDe716 cxdslDxdS exclamation mark by Mikhalchishin there follows 17 :xdS!.Beliavsky) 19 e4 Gel. 1) 14 lDd2 'iWd8 (14 .d6! 17 .i. IS .i. 19 .xc6 -+ Mikhalchishin..xc3 17 16 lDd4 lDxg3 17 hxg3 g6 18 :h4 00 bxc3 .i..xhS gxbS 13 .i.bS!? (D) 20.xa3) 15 . meanwhile 21 lDfS lDxfS 22 exfS .i.i.i. fand-Beliavsky.xa3?? 15 Sturua..xa3 IS bxa3 'iWxa3 16 "b2 :ab8 17 lDxeS 22 . fS! looks good for Black.dxc4 17lDeS g6 18 . TbiIisi 1981 (notes from move lDb3) IslDb3 (15 gSlDhS followed by 16 by Georgadze and Azmaiparash.. dxc6 ... White does not have to accept the bait. ~ Mikhalchishin) 16..xc6 IS axb4 .xb4 16 . since on IS . 16 .i.. Linares 1990...xe3 +. 3) 13 g5 It)bs 14 cxb5 lDxf4 15 17lDeS "d8 exf4 (IS 'iWa4 d4!.i. in Informator 51...exdS 20 f4 ± G..dxc4 19lDd4 .e5 ..i..e5 19. A2) Lengyel.i.e2 .i.xdl 'iWdS+!. ..i.i. .i......Georgadze..e2 .i. White 1) 13 cxdS b4! 14 lDa4 (14 dxc6 inverted moves IS and 16 in this game. 2) However..xh5? 'iWxg5..g6 20 e4 eS started attacking there. . but we make a more 15 ..i.lDe7 16 18 .g6 (IS .e5 .xdl 23 :xdl (23 .. 15 bxc6 . side.lDg6) 15 .e8 + Mikhalchishin. but not 26 'iff6?! :c8 27 :d7 :c2+ 2S Wbl'iWbS++..i...i.xeS+ 'iWxeS 23lDf6 'iWfS 24 .i. 16•••g6 2) 13 lDxb5 is well met by either 16. and now 13 cxbS! 19.xb8 :xb8 18 lDb5 'iWaS + Mikhal- 'fi'xfS exfS 2S l:d7 gives White a clear chishin. ex- plaining why Black wanted to force the king to a2) 23 ... exf4 d4 17 lDe4 ..i.i.xdl :xc3 22 lDd2 l:acs 23 lDe4! l:cl + 24 Wa2 ±.e4 -+ Ftacnik) 14..xd6lDxd6 proved too passive..:acS 24 lDc4 :3xc4 2S .:xcS 17 .i. Budapest 1994 Black played 12.xdl? 21 ...i.i.c2+ 22 'iWxc2 :xc2 23 Wxc2 :cS+ +) 21.i.i.:xc3 21 lDd2 (21 :d3 .i.f8 15 (Georgadze and AzmaiparashviIi).e8 16 ..lDe4! 16lDxc5 (16lDxe4 viIi).i. 13•••lDe7 14 .c2+! 22 Wa2 .f7 23 :d7 there is work to be done on the queen- with an attack .i.i. lDe7 + Ftaenik.i.i.80 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! . a6 141Dc3 19 lDe4 lDg6 20 lDf6+ WhS 21lDxeS! .i.i. . advantage.i.i.

21 ~gS both kings are exposed. However. 3) 14 :cl.i.xc4.. 17.xg7 ~e3?! 13 .xa3 15 ~xdS "a4 16 White's attack is faster.b4 18 b3"aS White is better here. and Black's 15 e4 ~g6 16 j..c620:g1 bS21lM6. passive impression. ~xf6+ gxf617 ~d4 j. may well be able to seek improve.. and leaves B Black the chance to make something of his bishop-pair and three connected passed pawns. might be worth considering.g2+ WfS (19.i. Thus attack according to Kishnev.:fc8 20 ~xg4!? gives White a promising slightly surprisingly help White.e8 21 ~g4 :xc3! 22 ':xc3 j.~xg4 15 j. nev-Barsov. Beliavsky. Black has re.d4 . After. bS may be compared with the Following IS ... and Black bxc3 17 j. but 2) 14 Wd2 j. the inserted ~bl and . 14 ~e4 b4 IS ~xf6+ gxf6 16 :xd7 this is far from exhaustive.. IS ..e7 17 h4 hS 18 king is exposed.d8 ments. kingside attack.hS 17 h3 a6!? Black's play might give a slightly 18 hxg4 h4.••dxc4!? 13 lOcl2 liJe7 14. this breaks up Black's pawn centre.t cxb2? 18 :xf7.g3 . Mikhalchishin. The exchange sacrifice kills off White's attack.. exdS gained his pawn.. . However.. . 12. Sochi 1989 continued Pawns are now level. Gelfand. The New Main Line 81 ~xc3+ 18 j.~xg7 16 :gl.. White can improve upon this though.. .e8 lbd2 bS. get moving on the queenside. bishop-pair and much the better pawn and now 21. Kish.~xg7 seems fine for Black..xa3 18 exdS ~xdS? (18 . 17e4! Not mentioned by Kishnev. j.Garcia.. dxc4 12 17 h3 hS 18 hxg4 hxg4 19 ~S j.. when Black's counter.. j. 16. Now.xe3 18 :d3 (18 "g2+~fSI9 B) ~gS CD Kishnev) 18 .~h8?? 20 :gl more on the queenside than White has ~xc3+ 21 bxc3 +-) 20 ~xdS exdS on the kingside. Zwolle 1993 continued 17 h4j..fS position reached after 11... and he will soon be able to dismissed lightly.xd6 22 exd6 "b7!? structure give him hope..xc3 j. awaits A3) exploration. 14~xc4. Linares 1991.. but his position is attacking possibilities should not be resilient. Khalif- 16fxe3~xg7 man-Kotronias.b6 19 "g2+ 11 ~bl! (D) 'ifi!fS 20 ~S?! (20 ~gS is better - Kishnev) 20 . mak- ing it easier for White to use the cen- tral squares as staging posts for the .. Black's gS~81geS.... Gild. for example.. and has achieved ±) 19 ..xbS .. but earlier on 19 "a2 "xa2+ 20 ~xa2 eS + Vera. for example 16 . Matanzas 1994..

Burgess. nov game... but difference between the players than even here Black can defend: 18. dS..ixf6 . .xe4 an inferior version of the to..~f8 17 l:tbslDd4 18 l:txb6lDxc2 York 1994) 14lDxd7lDxd7 IslDxdS 19 lDxd8! axb6 20 lDe6+ . this would suggest for White 16 lDexdS (13 . By anal- 1) 11.... one point being So probably 14lDds has to be aban- that tactics based on l:txd7 make it doned.ig4 14 ian . Another possibility is 14•••lDeS! 12 g4 dxc4 (12.. l:tdS} 18 lDxc6 bxc6 19 h4 "fS.. attack with 12 lDgS.f4! It is questionable whether White 14lDds exdS IS l:txdS "b6 16 l:tbS actually achieves anything after an lDd4 17 l:txb6lDxc2 18 l:txb7 .Garcia.id6 . 18 lDd6!?. Antwerp h4 to back up the knight. Now 18 ~gS.ixdS ~f8. for example 13 gS .ixc4 .... lDxeS? 18 Korotylev-Kharitonov game.ixf6. However..l:tac8? ISlDce4lDxe4 16.ieS ':'c6 20 .ia4) 16..ie2lDb6 18 l:td3 . Line A31). Black has covered all the tactics on siderable technical difficulties.eS?! leaves Black with 14.ie4 ~ gxf6.. New (16. 18 1995.ixe2 17 "xe2 l:tfd8 {17 .b3 a6 17 . ..ifS? 19 "xfS+ .ie7 19 .ie2 lDe4 IS lDxe4 dxe4 16 lDxeS 14.ixe6 ±) 17 . while ~bl. Similarly. Budapest 1995) 13 .2. Akopian notes ISlDdS? exdS 16 Borocz.ie7 11 g6 17 l:txd7 l:txd7 18 . although there may still be very difficult for Black to capture with room to look for new ideas . It is more positions reached are the same as in flexible to play it immediately. Bled 1996...maybe 18 his d-pawn. with IS. is usually alert reader will have noted that the necessary sooner or later.... more to do with the 300-point rating There is a third way.if6! with the position.ixeS! White a clear pawn up. Moscow 1996 then play according to Black's reply. the king from the perilous c-file.l:tfc812cxdS ~713~S! ogy..ixe6! +. 12 .ixe7 lDxe7 17 .. maintain the initiative.ie7 screams out for a hack l:tdl .. favours Black.Akop- g4 line. IS ~ce4? lDxc4 16lDxf6+ Beliavsky-Stohl. ..... and Korotylev-Kharitonov.. which clearly favours (18 .•xeS 16 f4! 12.ixf6 ':'xf6 22 l:thdl g6 23 1!fc3.l:tfc8 13 ~4! lDxe4 14 l:txd7 This pawn sacrifice is necessary to ±Akopian. h6 have been omitted. . After 12 . Again the im- 13lDgS l:tfd8 14 h4 mediate tactics don't work: 16lDd5? .io . (section 3.dxc4 and . is harmless with no pawn on Delemarre-Van der Sterren.ie' 15.. except that h4 1l. White l:tdl!? is clearly better.ixeS (16 l:txdS? . but facing con..ifS+!. and the draw agreement had "xh7 .ifS 19 early g4.if6 is less accu- White. rate due to 20 b3! +-) 19lDc4 'iVbs 20 2) 11. Also.if6 21 as analysed in the Korotylev-Kharito- .h6 13 h4.id3 g6 18 . lDxdS 'iVa4 ± Akopian-Gild.ig4 and the attack collapses. h6 directly transposes to the . to remove the ~a2 ~f8 00 Akopian..ixc4 ..ifS 18 e4 l:txdl+ 19 l:txdl ... exdS 14lDxd7lDxd7 IS ~xf7 (instead of 16 l:tbS) 16..82 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.ie8 16 .•.ixe6 21 exdS 16 . Kallai...dxc4 17 l:tfd8 14 gS lDh5 IS .

i.xe6lDfS position of the white king makes it 23 .. With 19 ':'dn!. exf6+ 'fIf5 {23 .xd5 2S exd5 ~fS =..b3(D) 'iVb6 26 'fIhS+.':'xdl+20':'xdl ':'dS 21 ':'xdS . White argues that his pressure is greatest if he can keep pieces on. e.i. ..i. This is a standard plan against fective.. lDh7 21 ':'xd7 l:r. as we shall see. lDeS C. h6 is met simply by 20 fxe5. 17 . after 16 .i.. for example 19..fS 27 'fIf6 'fIc4 2S ':'hS 'fin + 29 do not quite work out. 18 e4 eS 19 ':'dO! Akopian suggests 19 g3 with a slight edge.i..d7 in positions where White has 2) 19... Akopian's 14 ~c2. since ':'xd7 22 .i.e8! can build up pressure elsewhere.. 16.xdS 22 'fId3 'fId4 23 'fIxd4 exd4 24 &Dd5 h6 25 lDxf6+ . 24 lDe4 +-) 24 'fIh3 ~eS 25 lDe4 17. the threat 11•••lDxdS 12lDgS?! ..fS 27&Dd6+ 'fIxd6 As recommended by Akopian..xd7 22.h6 IS e4 hxg5 19 hxg5 and White's plan is to roll up the centre now: with fxe5... 2S .i.i..xc2+ ~f7 26 g6+ ~f6 27 17 f5 ':'acS IS ':'hel 'fIg3 19 fxe6 g5#) 22 e5 g6 23 "d3! ~fS (23 . The New Main Line 83 exd5 17 ':'xd5 'fIc7 IS lDxf7 b5! 19 of'flh3 gives Black no time to save his lDxdS 'fIxc4 -+ (Akopian).c6 27 .Garcia. knight.i.i.xf6 26 lDf3 . ':'f5 and e5..••... but nothing ef. 11 adS (D) there are alternatives..xd7lDxd7 24 'fId3!!.i. Akopian gives 19 .. as the "only move".~f7 24 g6+J 24 g4! Philadelphia 1994.i..i. and White's king soon escapes h4 seems critical.xf6 00) not castled queenside. so long as White 17. the tail of the combination.i.lDh7 20 ':'xh7 ~xh7 21 The sacrifice is best declined.i.. Black's bishop-pair provides good insurance for an endgame. and that it does not matter if the d-file is ceded...lDeS 20 e5 g6 21 ':'xd7 cult to see how Black defends. but a resolute exchanging policy should keep Black in the game. who 2S exd6 and White wins.........fS ':'xc4 20 exf7+ ~fS 21 'fIe2 +-. Black ':'hl+ ~gS (21. and it is diffi- I) 19.i.'ii'xe3?! 'fIxc2+ 25 .d5 ..g. the checks.~g6 22 e5+ f5 23 got poleaxed in Akopian-Gild. The sting in more hazardous here.i. but the exposed 20.. g6 20 e5! (20 gxf6 .CS! 3) 19 . Black is holding comfortably.. leaving Black in a desper- ate position.xg5 19 hxg5 g6 20 ':'c I 'fIf5! with a decisive advantage. 24 'fIh7+ ~f7 25 g6+ ~eS 26 'fIxg7 Given that the tactics with 14lDd5 .i.c6 notes that after 17 lDce4 lDxe4 IS 29 'figS ':'xd6 30 ':'hS ~e7 31 ':'h7 'ifxe4 .xe6 fxe6 23 'fIxg6+ lDg7 19.

..c6 19 fxe5 17 ~c3 .i. but IS •••~ White can make Black suffer a long This position is assessed as unclear time before agreeing to the draw. 12•••g6 13 ~ge4 Lputian gives 13 h4?! :ac8.xc3+ 15 ~xc3 e5 as unclear. but if I were White.c?? ~5 16 . Given as equal by Bonsch.i.gS (D) B 12 ~xd5 exd5 13 ~bl might still leave White better.. 12 .i.f5 16 12 .i. 14.i.xb6 axb6 IS f4 .I.i..i. +.c4 1l•. Petach Kivka 1997. when Black's attack is favourite to come in fIrst. .d6 ~xd5 16 ~xdS ..i. 13•••.xe6 16 .i.) (17 . tion..c4 :acS 15 dxe6 ..f4! gathering of Black's pieces in front of the king.i.i. 14.xd6 IS ~xd6 ~a4! =1= 12. Piket. e5 17 .84 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. but it uses up a . but the tempo which might otherwise have chances must be with White after 16 been spent securing the king's posi- :Xd7 exf4 17 ~4.i.i. .1.i.i.i.h4 :acS 14 ~bl IS.xf6 13 cxd5 ~e7! 14 ... 14~bl :fdSaoLputian.b5 Linz 1990..xc3 'ii'xc3+ 16~c3 weaknesses.a4:acS~.exd5 .~c315.. Lputian) 17.h7+ ~hS 19 :xd7 ..xh4?? (16...•.e7 12 adS 14 ~xd5?! exd5 15 ~c3 .b3 a6?! (mistimed.xe4 20 . 14 .i. White's bishop excursion used up too 14•••l:ac8 15 .xf6? .i.h6 :fdS IS ~ . by Lputian.i.~xdS 13 ~xdS exdS 14 ~bl Azmaiparashvili-Lputian.xa3 wins for Black.b3 :fcS 17 . I White has defInite chances of pressure would be deeply worried about the against the isolated queen's pawn.xe4 .i..Kobrin-Kunin.i.xe7 ~e7 16 Wd2 much time. B 0) ll. 14. fIce justifIed by White's front-of-king 14..i.i. USSR 1991..i.i. Amsterdam 1995..e7 The most direct attempt to win the Piketdescribes 13 .i.xc3 battle of the d-file.d3 h6 13 .f6 IS .xe6 14•••~b6! fxe6 17 :d3 ~5 =1= Klinger-Bonsch.i. ~xc3 14.d3 :fcS!.i.:tdS! =) 15 cxd5 15 .~xf4? 15 :xd7 ~xg2 16. A memorable pawn sacri- ± Piket-Timman.

White has a promising attack. pressed that 11.e7 leads to positions dis- cussed under 1O.xf6 gxf6 14 lLlde4! dxe4 15 l:tfc8 12 «i>bl . but with est scale. In conclusion.i.xf6 gxf6 14 cxd5 We have reached positions dis- exd5 (14 .d7 was not the 13lLlg5 g6 most accurate. There the view was ex. the other bishop be.d7 11 g4 13 . 13 ...d7 12 «i>bl .e7 11. has cussed.g7 15 h5 . wins for White.f8 15 bxg6 bxg6 16 g4 Damaging Black's pawn structure.. F) while 11 h4!? is promising. Beijing 1995.e7 11 lLld2 .i.. a leaves both Black's bishops hanging..i.. 12. 11 «i>bl! and IllLld2! both seem good for White..c7 13 .i.i. hxg5 16 hxg5 lLlxdS 17 l:txdS lLle7 IS ommended line was 12 g4 l:tfcS 13 1Ifh7+ «i>f8 19 1IfhS+ lLlg8 20 l:th7 ... who has a wide choice there.xeS 8 .i.f8 13 lLlg5 g6 14 h4 l:txd7 f5 ± Alterman-Jinrong Liang. Line AI) lLlde4 ±) 15lLlb3 .i..i. There are several transpositional 3.f4 0-0 6 e3 eS 7 dxeS . and has an extra queenside pawn.lLle7 13 b4 ±.. 12 .. The rec.. . of advantageous replies.g5! 14 hS . lLlc6 9 a3"aS 100-0-0 a6 (D) . only a solitary appearance on the data- base..e8 16 hxg6 hxg6 17 f3.i..... but probably strong.g5 keeps the initiative on a mod- Yet another promising try..6.Pedersen-Parker.4.i. 11•••:t'ca 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3lLlf6 4lLlf3 J.g5 might profitably be delayed a move.i. a6 possibilities.i.i. .lLle7 11.g717 f3 S.e8 (3.710. Line D).i.i...i. where the next few moves are dis- White is better on the kingside..dxc4?! 12 lLld2 b5 13 lLlde4 5 J. Black is immediately forced to work out how to disentangle his bish- ops.e2 ~.l:tacS 15 dxe6! fxe6 16 cussed earlier (section 3. . taken control of the open central file. hav.i. London 12•••:t'ca 1997.i. The New Main Line 85 This line deserves further testing.. B E) 11lLld2! Not often played. but our next line suggests that ..i. 1O. 12. . under the move-order 10. .. and even 11 h4!? (D) 11 . 11. h6 14 cxd5 exd5 15 lLlxd5 longing on fS rather than e7.. .d7 is no prob- ing already neutralized Black's play lem for White.b6 16lLld4 ~..i..

d3?! (13lilgS First we should note that 11 £gS?! transposes to '2'..fS+ 18 ~al :c2! 19 ter 11.dxc4 12 £xf6 gxf6 13 £xc4 "'xaS i. as in the 1O. 2) 12 lilgS i.86 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.e2!?. w Black has ideas of getting on with his queenside counterplay without.e6 13 ~bl :ac8 14 :xdS!? (14 i.£g4?! IS lilgS 0gaard. i.a7 IS i.. maybe by IS i.c4lilxf4 18 exf4 ~h8 19lilce4 "'c7 11 •••exdS (D) 20 i. leaving a hanging bishop... Again an im- mediate response on the queenside is 12i..lile7 (but not 11 adS 14...f4! better for White in M.a3 17 'ifd2 i. 13 'iFa4 "'xa4 14 move) 14 . so if White can neutralize the plan of ... £b7! IS 'iFe4 £xa3 16 lilxa4 i.b2+ 20 ~bl :d2+ and mate bS 14 £dS (a flashy but ineffective follows.. Brisbane 1995. White g6 16 f3 £fS 17 £d3 was clearly has a slight material advantage. Af.'ifal + 20 Ubilava.e6 13 i.xe6 i..xa3 21 "'xc7 :xc7 22 After 11 . but one feels that White ought to be slightly better. Norwegian Ch 1995. Bern 1989.Gurevich-Silva. but .... Tbilisi 1988. 14... planning to meet IS .. 13 b4? lilxb4 14 gave Black no problems in the game axb4 i.g4? with 16lilgs... The problem is that this move does not actually help get his pieces out.d3 d4 16:c 1 dxe3 17 'iFg4+ ~h8 17 tbe4 exdS 18 'iffS £e7 fxe3...d3?! transposes into A) Conquest-Ubilava) 14 ..gS indicated: There is no real consensus on this A: 11 adS 86 position..xdS? IS lilxdS "'el+ 16 ~a2 So that . bS will attack precisely +-) IS :eS lilg6 16 :xe6 fxe6 17 nothing! i...i. but it makes sense to try to B: 11 /t)d2 87 damage Black's pawns. Alternatively: 1) 12 ~bl i. bS he stands well.lilxdS 12 lilxdS exdS 13 bxa3 lilxe4 23 lilxe4 :xf4 ~ Tisdall- ~bl £e7 14 b4...b8 14lilgS h6 IS White's desperate attack had burnt it. £d7line. lilxe6 fxe6 16 'iFb3 bS + Conquest- self out.xb4 IS lila2 :ac8 16 "'b2 Pardoen-Solomon. ~c2lilb4+ -+. if 19lilxf6 then 19 . i. Ubilava.h6 w as unclear. Ubilava) 13 . Gurevich assesses 14.

. given Black's active rooks.. since Kasparov won a miniature White has the upper hand on the against Vaganian in 1992. The good news on the kingside.ixf6 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3lDr6 4lLlf3 . I) 12 g4!? also looks strong: 12. is unconvincing. for Black is that Kasparov's published So 10.xc5 8 'iWc2 gxf6 17lDe4 ±.ie7 IS lDxdS . Reykjavik 1997.xc3 "xf2 IS lIhfl ± Astrom-Nordstrom..a7 17 lLlc3 :d8 18 lLld4 lLlxd4 19 I1lDd2 dxc4 12lDxc4 lIxdl+ 13 = exd4 ~f8 Malaniuk-Ziatdinov.xf6 16lDxdS fxe3 :j: Eriksson- Sanden. but IS dxc6! will force him to spend a lot of time regaining the pawn. Novi Sad OL 1990.r4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 j. . Moscow 1991.. Black could consider instead 12. sadasi 1990.. Stockholm 1995.eS 13 gS exf4 14 gxf6 (14lLlb3?! "d8 IS 3... The New Main Line 87 not enough to create anything work.bS IS ~bl ± Hjartarson-Thorsteins- son.xc5 8 'iWc2 the black rook not yet on cS.. 2) 12 .ieS (IS .910.. B) 11••• b6 11~2 l1. 3. Gelfand-Ki. b5! is more thematic) 13 j..1. Ku. Jld871 able. Helsingborg 1991) 14. bS!? 13 gSlDhS 14 cxdS lLlxf4.. with 5 j. fxe3 16 lDxf6+ 5 j... going to do with her queen? ing... 12•••"b613 c5 'ii'd8 14 e4 d4 15 e5 lDh5 16 ... 12. playing the queenside... . 12lDes j. and again quite promis.1. j. 14llXl4!? lDc6 9 a3 "a510 0-0-0 lId8?! . What is Black Thematic...Georgiev.ig3 "c7 17 lLla4lLlxe5 18 The sharpest move on the board.g5 d4 14lDb3 "b6 IS exd4 exd4 16 .e7 12lLlb3 ± Miles-Amura.•• j..8 10.f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 j..e2 ± but more or less abandoned by Black Tabatadze-Kuzmina...ie2 e5?! (12 ..ixc4 ±..dS?? 16lDb3 lLlc69 a3 "a510 0-0-0 lDe4 (D) 'ifa4 17lDc3 +-) 16lLlb3 "dS 17 exf4 j..e7 An unnecessary precaution.. 14•• JUc8 15 'iWa4 'iWxa4 16 lLlxa4 11lLlb5! j.....e613 j. and is about to roll pawns equally sharp 11lLlb5..e2..lDe4 gxf6 j. Andorra 1994.. l:[xd4 lDxg3 19 bxg3 h6 20 j.b7 13lDxc6 i. advantage for White. IS .. suggesting a big for White. This soon gets Black in a tangle.xf6 gxf614 ~bl 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 M till'6 4lDf3 i.. a6 11lDd2 is looking good analysis on 11lLlbS... "xdl "dS 14 "xdS+ lDxdS IS i.xc6 14 b4 11••• j..dxc4 12 .ixf6 dxc3 17 j..

...'iVh4+ 15 ~e2.txeS ... Sometimes though the Steinitzian ac- cumulation of small advantages is more to the point.g.tel the e4-pawn.:<18+ 15 .txcS.xe3 19 "xe3 J:[xe3 20 J:[d8+ ~f721. We examine the simpler Black could get a genuine initiative and stronger move first: if White tried to hold on to the pawn A: 11~e4! 88 with 18 J:[el. B: 11 ~bS 89 18..88 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ij4! at one point he even misses a simple Play may continue: back-rank check.txa3 "! with an attack". and thus the good news for 15.. White has an extra piece and the better develop- ment. White.:ifb2+ 15 ~el! or 14. but his queenside Now: will still be very troublesome to disen- AI: 12 'ifxe4! 88 tangle..e5 15 . 12•••fS A suggestion in Informator 54 (al- legedly by Yusupov) gives 12 .J:[e8.. 14. ... Yes.tf3± A) Black can offer the exchange of 11 ~xe4! dxe4 rooks with 21. 14.. The A1) fact that grandmaster theory has 12 'ifxe4! (D) tended to concentrate on the compli- cated and obscure II ~b5. is per- haps indicative that the spirit of old- B fashioned romanticism is not yet dead.. A2: 12 . rather than the simple and strong II ~xe4... A2) 12~(D) Less direct and less menacing. but after 13 B bxa3 'ii'xa3+ 14 ~d2.. I just don't see it. The bad news for 14 ~eS ~eS IS .!Dd2 88 I find it difficult to see how Black is supposed to improve in all this. e.. is that White can safely snatch 16 fxe3 "xeS 17 "d2:es 18.. 13 'ifc2 eS With compensation for the pawn. and a whole pawn is quite large in the scale of small advan- tages. 14. and it is questionable whether Black's attack has any legs after.td3. according to Valdes. .txa3 16 J:[d5 'ifel+ 17 W'dl..txe3+ Black.

2) 13 .lxe5.lxeS lOxeS 14 lOxaSlOg4 =+= B) Ftacnik. without having to worry about 13. 12lOc7 12 ..lg3 .le716 .. An Informator reference gives 13 Now we have an important branch- lOb3 Wb6 00 S.:ta7? 13 cxdS ± Valdes-Otano. there is a bewildering array .lfS is unclear ac- cording to Yusupov.fS?! 14 ~b3 Wb61S :td5! . 15 dxc6 fxe3 =+= Yusupov.exdS 14 :txdS is possible for Black is obliged to weaken dS.lc??! b6 13 ~bd4 (Yusupov) 13 . 11 ~xe4 should be pre- ferred. 12 ..lg4! B3: 13tOxdS 91 An important zwischenzug.lfS 13 ~h4) 13 Wxe4 tOe7 14 b4! 'ifa4 15 Wc2 +. followed by . 11•••a6 11..eS 12 cxdS exf4 (12 ..fS? 13 lOb3 Wb6 14 lOxcs Cuba 1991. 13 . B2: 13lbxas 91 13•••.. It seems choice of: sensible to delay the knight move... The New Main Line 89 12. then fine..lxe3+..lxd4.lhS 1) 13 cxdS? Wxc7 14 Wxe4 exf4 If anyone is better here..ld6 wins the exchange... but with no follow-up..Valdes. 11 lObS (D) 3) 13lOxeS Wxc7 14lOxc6 Wxc6 15 cxdS We8 16 f3 . but they fIrst opportunity. is fine for Black.. to Bl: 13lbdS 89 keep the pressure on e4. with White having the 1991. can't all be taken at once! As might be 12. if not. but Black is surely much better after 17 fxe4 :tc8.. 8 Let us now take a look at Kaspa- rov's attempted refutation. ing point. COIT..t Three minor alternatives: 14 :tel rs 15 f3 exf3 16 gxf3 . the point being that for "xcS 15 .:ta7 at the Four pieces are en prise. White. so once 13 ..Spasov-Sergiev...•eS! expected..••eS 12. B1) 13lbdS (D) If this is genuinely strong. it is Black..

Kaspa. i. Black play.f5 IS 'ii'xf5 in the design of strong players is shown lnformator 56.':b8 is better . i.d6..f4! of alternatives.i.d6 Wc6 20 i. Even world cham..xc4 Black's position is unex- i.'ii'xc7 14 'ii'xe4 and now af... lyse.90 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 /£.. may consider instead 14.. ':xg7+? 'itxg7 19 i.d3 though.el+..xc2 20..e7 16 'ii'h4! Black's (Burgess.. Some of the key posi- 14. i... but after 5) 13 . t?Jxe5 15 i.. 18... 4b2) 17 "'g3!? is another try. Maybe there is a 17 ':d5) and now: moral in all this? 4bl) White has the opportunity to 13••• t?Jf6! over-combine with 17 ':gS "'c6 18 This move retreats one of the at.e6 (16..b2 and the queen 18 .i.Kasparov) 20 ':xg7+ 'ith8 20 exf4.i.... f5?! 14 ':xe5! ± t?Jxe5 15 i.xe416i.. some of which leave 4b) 14 1i'xt2 "'xc7 15 t?Jxe5 t?Jxe5 various pieces hanging for a few moves. pectedly resilient: 21 "'c3 "'xf4+ 22 Debrecen Echt 1992...f5...g4!...d3 !? with the spectacular possibility i.xf4 19 (19 ..exf4 15 ':xc5 fxe3 16 fxe3!? ±...d7 18 b4 "'xa3+ 19 i. winning 14. black queen and forces liquidation 3) 13 .t?Jxf2 and now: children. white pieces on the kingside gives one doubts Yusupov's claim that Black Black the chance to create counter- has compensation for the pawn.xh7+'ith8 20b4!!.. reached by enthusiastic primary school 4) 13 . totally missing the by the way that the queen is snared.. but 15 e4!! 17 fxe3 'ii'e7) 15. Another approach is that men- i..i. i.. 14':xe5 pions can sometimes miss simple 14 t?Jxa8? exf4leaves Black with a back-rankers! clear advantage... and also the most difficult to ana. i.d6?! a simple retreat. the pieces being apparently 4a) Kasparov recommends the con.xc4 'ii'xc4 the tangle of terl4.e6 23 /Df4 1-0 Kasparov-Vaganian. Af- ternatives: ter 17.i.e6?! 14 ':xe5 (an original into a queenless position where White method of destroying a pawn centre!) is material up..h6+ 'itg6!! 20 tacked pieces to a safe square.xe5 Wc6 17 "'g3 f6 18 The complicated lines are the most lIxc5 'ii'xc5 19 i. Al.. Kasparov's 15 'iVd2 is less hopes of effective gambit play will be clear-cut) 15 .d2! traps the disappointed.b2 "'a4 tioned by Burgess: 18 ':g5 i. and 'ii'g3+ 'itxh6 21 "'h4+ 'itg6 22 'ii'g3+ opens up an attack on another piece.e6 22 "'f3.a2 20 t?Jc3! +. ':fd8! keeps Black in the game soon gets trapped) 16.xe5 (15 'iVc2?! exf416 ':xc5 fxe3 vastly complicated at first. 'itxfS 21 i. but Black's best shot may well be may also be good) 16... 'itbl f6 is unclear.xeS ':a7 (lS .f5 14 t?Jxa8 t?Jg3 appears 15 i..i. so randomly placed.xc419 i.... b6 17 i... the rov) 16 /DdS! (so that if 16.d3 +. b4! "'xa3+ 18 i. 16 ':xe5 (16 i... it is certainly a logical try. However.f5 16 i.. 17 main point being 20 .. Burgess. But evidence of tinuation 14 t?Jg5(??) i..xfS fun. ..d3+ 21 lIc5.. tions look as though they have been Kasparov.d3 i. As such. ':ad8 22 i. after bxcS bxc5 21 t?Je5 Wxc2+ 22 i.. while after 21 ~bl 2) I3 .xe5 i..d6 Nunn points out 18 1) I3 .

Black is doing enough.ifS! 15 "xf2 IS "xfS g6 (the knight blocks off "c6! h3!) 16lLlf6+ ~h8 17 W'd7. with a strong attack. tions of the 1980s.ig4 17 ...ifS 16 "xf4 .ixf6 16lLlgS? ...ixfS 14.. 14•••lLlxeS IS.ixe3+ :. but does not IS. 82) 13lLlxa8 "as 17•••. but the conclusion is clear As given by Ftacnik.xc7 16. on 100-0-0 pov. White is better..exf4 14 adS lLlxf2 write. lLlxhl.exf4 16 "xf4liJe717lLlxe7+ seem to refute Black's play.... 16. opening up a whole .ixeS IS lLlxa8 lLlxf3 16 gxf3 "el + 17 "dl "xf2 is at the very least comfort- able for Black.. Yusu..ixe7 18 ':dS! "el+ 19 ':dl 20 ':dS 9e1 + 21 ':dl lh· 1h Gel- fand-Yusupov.lLle7 (Valdes) IS "xe4 .Yusu- Kasparov's 13 ':xdS gives rise to pov.. must be regarded as one 13lLlxdS (D) of the most important opening innova- The safest option. Also to be considered is 14.ixe2 18lLlfxe2 tempt to keep the initiative going..ixa3 3...: Yusupov.ifS! 19 ..... gxf6 17lLlds .. 10 O-O-O!. "e4.. on lLleS (Yusupov) White's extra pawn other moves Black is fine. On the 'grab the material and run' principle.ixe3+.':a7 16... The New Main Line 91 Kasparov's Informator analysis stops here.ixe2 lLlhS. The idea is probably counts for less than Black's that now 18 . 18. Black can do better though. suggested 83) by Kaidanov.ixb2...ie7 ... 1O. with the strong implication that White is better. and now Winning a piece. This can be dis- puted.lLlxf2 14lLlgS 17 lLlgS g6 18 lLlxh7?! After 14 "xf2 exf4 IS lLlxf4 ':e8 This combinative try is the only at..10 General conclusion 17 :d2 ':c8+ 18 ~dl .ixe3+ 16 ~bl met with 11lLlxe4 dxe4 12 "xe4.ie2 ..ixa3 or 17 . for example 18 "e2 "xe2 19 .. 16lLld4.id3 ~xb7 20 . So we tum 17 . Linares 1992.. This was an exhausting section to 13. 'ii'xdS . massive complications.id3 lLlxdS 18 "xfS g6 19 now to other tries.to 13.. either 17 .~xh7? is met by 19 extra piece-activity. IS. lLle4 is objectively best well after IS dxc6 .

dxc4 11 ~xc4 a6 12lLlg5 . in a system which had previously but remember that the basic positional been assumed to be veering towards advantages lie with White.t's tend much more to. is unwise to deal with the position Most of the . the centre... White Meanwhile.t (11lLld2 . . Yes. lLle4 I1lLlxe4 dxe4 12 Wxe4. 11 ber is to keep his positional trumps.. White system is at least as good for White as should lead with pieces (lLlg5. shielded by pawns than White's. the have just seen. White should think first about can challenge at least one of these ver. queen may still be chased with iOd2- tially an aggressive and violent system b3. and the pressure against ter 10 0-0-0: the opposing centre.f4! new field of research for opening the.t. His one real 1O. a6 II lLld2 . must not forget either that it is not just cal tips concerning the variations we the black king that is vulnerable. then either it is necessary for the kingside. and only secondly about dicts. or the ~f4 correct theatre of operations. ~e7 11 h4!. This sometimes involves a kingside 10.) rather than with pawns.92 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J. lies in the placement of his king. here are·some practi. g4 00). disposition.t..t. etc. 10 0-0-0 is poten. involving a lot of sharp tactical play. and it 1O. the ~g5 system.. ~d7 11 ~bl . but Black's king is better 12 ~g5. wards ± than towards Unless Black kings. purely in terms of attacks against =.. He has the equality.. lLlce4. And if the kingside is the Black to vary much earlier. important thing for White to remem- 10. ory.t (11 g4 00. 11lLld2 cause for concern in his own position 00).... better development and the freer piece To summarize the key variations af.t. The 1O.t or 11 cxd5 exd5 attack.

the lines presented in this chapter aim for a modest edge for If this were a repertoire book ('White White. and provides want to know about alternative plans.. This indi. the most dangerous try against .e7 5 ~f4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 the year that Kasparov introduced 11 ~xc5 8 'ii'c2 ~c6 9 a3 "as. after having completed our survey of 10 0-0-0 we would shoot 4. from both theoretical and historical points of B: 9 a3 C: 9 l:ldl D: 9 l:ldl "as "as 10 ~e2 100 10 ~d2 101 94 view. Why then include this chapter? The A: 9 a3 "as sections are: "as 10 l:ld 10 ~d2 93 first reason is completeness.d4 . practitioners that 10 0-0-0 is indeed more importantly. Our than in 1996. but does whether through reasons of personal nothing to develop the kingside or cre- style. The second reason is that play- ers with the black pieces in particular A) will want to know about deviations by 9 a3 ••510 l:ld (D) White from the main line. 10 ~d2. or because of the possibility that ate tension in the centre. 10. against the New Main Line. extra cover for his knight. which is a good enough reason in itself.. The third Strictly a minor alternative. White has also tried 10 l:lcl and. already considered 10 l:ld 1 and 10 0- cates the consensus of grandmaster 0-0. The extent to which this is to play and win with the 5 ~f4 Queen's achieved is variable. White reason is that White too might well renews the threat of b4.4 Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 4. although it is noticeable that move 10 in the sequence 9 l:ldl "as. it will be noted that few of the After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 ~f6 4 games in this chapter post-date 1995. Black equal- Black might yet find something strong izes comfortably enough. we have h4 into grandmaster play.1 Introduction In general.2 White's alternatives straight on to what to do against Black's on move 10 attempts to avoid the main line.. ~f3 i.. Black has been a little more willing to by which White avoids a transposition defend this type of position in 1997 to the Old Main Line by 10 a3. In- deed.c5 We also mention alternative ideas at systems. Gambit') this chapter would be unnec- essary.

i. with White be- Simple and steady.tb4 97 11 exd4 11 b4? "xa3 12 bxc5 dxc3 13 1O.xc3 16 10.g4 140-0. draws obvi- gadze..td2 "d8 14 ..txc3 15 . as in the ..d3 b6 looks promising...aS 10 tDd2 (D) Or 1O. he may try 11..te2 e5 13 .f41 B) 9 a3.xc3 . more critical: gadze. which was explored a lot in 1993 . the second is .t Taimanov-Lar.. line F). e.txf2+... b4!? ..g3 lines.tg5 h6 15 12 . D)..!Dxc3 13 of the debate. Zaradic- "xc3 "xc3+ 14 :xc3 . Line and he has an extra central pawn..!De4 + T.e5 14 .xd5 exd5 14 "b3 .tf6 16 :b3 h6! =Taimanov-T. ~5 13 .Geor..i.xd6 14 cxd5 12 tDxd4 .. ous comparisons with the 9 .i. Bitman. USSR 1983 seems to be a safe B1: 10..txd4 13 ....b7 1713 :ac8 Tomaszew. .xc4 still gives White a slight pull. Also 11 0-0-0 White's bishop-pair promises little.dxc4 12 .tg5 :d8 13 .e5 13 . leads to one of the lesser offshoots of as Black's pieces are healthily placed the New Main Line (Chapter 3..e7 II .!Db3 dxc4. game cited.th4 g5 16 .1.. Naleczow 1995. B2: 10.td6 13 .td2 "d8 = T.. If Black is out ing a tempo up if he can find some- for blood.te7 94 enough option. .d8?! 11 :d1 "e7..i.e2 and now: 1) 11. Aus. with 11 .e7 (D) = :xc3 .....e7line 11•••tDxd4 (Chapter 5.Geor- gadze.lOe4! 12 cxd5 .4. Bucharest 1967. Vinkovci 1970... just before Kasparov's 10 tria 1989.i. or 12. is unconvincing..94 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1..txd6 ... A serious alternative to the main sen... and 1994.i.i. B1) 14 0-0 .tg3 :e8 GO GIek-Lputian.g.. Inviting transposition to the Old ski-Staniszewski.i.tg5? then 15 . If 15 .i.te7 11 h4line altered the terms 2) 11. .Geor.t Denk-Foessmeier. e5 12 .. "xc3 "xc3+ 14 :xc3 exd5 150-0 Of Black's choices.xd4!? 12 thing more constructive than 12lbf3. 13 . 12 . 0-0-0.i.. Main Line with 11 :d 1.tg3 d4 13lbb3 . but 12 Tashkent 1984.

.4.td7 11.tg4 16 .txc5 23 ~xcS :lxc5 11.td7 to play g4 in advance of .. Line D. Ubeda 1996.. Prophylaxis. 12. Pula Echt 1997.. White ing an isolated pawn did not help does not have to touch the rook though.te2. re- turning to the New Main Line.tg3 95 13 :lfdl Wb6 14 b4 as 15 cS Wd8 B13: 11 ~b3 96 16 Wb2 e5 17 . White usually preferring against . ~xd5 15 cxd5 ~a5? 16 ~d2! dxe3 17 fxe3 leaves the black knight stranded) 14 . Al- though this position is not directly discussed in Chapter 3.. forc- 'iFb6 tending towards equality. 'fId8 15 ~xe7+ 'ilxe7 16 exd4 exd4 17 0-0 .exd4 15 ~b5 . 11 J... stuck in the centre inconveniently long.td7 .te2 24 ~xd4 'irf6 25 'ira3 Ib. Insufficiently forceful. was the game Orn- stein-C..ta4! :f. leaves White with an improved ver- sion of the Old Main Line. l4 . 1/z Yrjola- Why not? White's main problem in T... 11•••. while 14. Gausdal 1993: 14 cxd5 ~xd5 15 structive: ~xd5 exd5 16 Wb3?! ~a5! 17 Wxd5 Bll: 11 . as the previous note hinted. 12 . Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 95 12 O-O-O!? is much more testing. was assessed as very good for White in Chapter 3.te2 95 ..Kempinski-Lutz.e5. and now 13 g4 e5?! 14 g5.:lfc8.. White much in Bern-Heine Nielsen. the following moves are all more con.tg3 d4 13 ~b3 Wb6 14 exd4 (after 14 ~d5.e5....:lfc8 13 :lfdl Wd8. Groningen 1996. so he prepares to castle before 812) taking action in the centre.tg3 d4 18 exd4 exd4 19 ~a4 axb4 20 axb4 ~d5 21 b5 811) ~cb4 22 ~f3 ..Hartman.txg4 ~xg4 17 0-0 :lacS 18 :adl :lfeS 19 :lfel ± Suba-Margolin. B12: 11 .Upton. the position after 12 .•:lac8 After 12. the 10 l:tdl line is that his king gets But 120-0-0 is critical. Swedish Ch 1987. R... directed against the 120·0 advance ..g3(D) 11•••.!.

Black is looking solid in this family effectively..d4 14 lOa4 "dS :.:tdS?! 130-0 a6 14 b4 "b6 15 c5 "a7 16lOa4 ± L. to take any advantage of the isolation erally quite reasonable belief that it is of Black's d-pawn.i.i.i. 14 .e6 lOf6 co Liberzon) 18 b4 with a slight The position is balanced. :..e2.g3! d4 15 . Wijk aan Zee 1994.i..lOxd5!?) 15 lOn .96 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 1l . 'lrd3 f5 IS n ~hS and Black was However..d7 13 cxd5lOxd5 14lOxd5 exd5 = 13 ..:. Line 04).. 11. Van Wely-San Se- better to develop than to undevelop.i.Jakob.Hansen-P.g5 d4 4) 12 . Denmark 1993 shows the old problem of the blocked retreat......:fc8 13 0-0 "dS 14 :adl 15 lObS dxe3 16 fxe3 "b6 d4?! (14 .dS 12 :dl a5 13 lOa4 (13 Cifuentes.5. 11lOb3(D) 1) 12. exd4 exd4 17 0-0 .d4) 14 cxdS exd5 11•••""6 (14 .Ionescu.i. both tried in the same of variations.And- ersen.e2 d4 15 lOa4 "d8 16 e4lOd7 17 13....i..i. L. :..i..d3 was rov-Beliavsky. Bern 1991. . exd5 14 0-0 :ac8 15 :Idl :dl e5?! (17 . 3) 12. Buenos Aires 1995 continued but it leaves Black less solid in the 16lOb3 a6 17 l:tacllOe4!? 18lOxd5 centre. cxd5!?) 13 . 12 :dl :ac8 13 .e2 g6 16 starting to take the initiative in Koma. game! Petrosian-Liberzon... . as played in Possibly 11 .g3 is a little too the Costescu-Ionescu game below..:ac8 13 0-0 (13 :dl "b6 should be met by 14 cxd5 !? rather than 14 O-O? d4 15 lOa4 "as:..Upton.i.e2 would transpose into the Old lOxd5 exd5 15 0-0 d4!? 16 e4:C8 17 Main Line (Chapter 2.1Wb6!? were.f5 18 ... Ni~ 1996.d8 12 M (12 :dl 13 O-O? is carelessly mistimed: ..•""6 One of several moves to have been 813) tried. .a5 13 lOd2 'lrb6 14 Deep Blue. . B 2) 12 . f5 18 exf5 exf5 19 f4 . Costescu- O. e5.Hansen- Liberzon) 12.. gundo.d8!? 13 cxd5 lOxd5 14 15 ..d8!? and 11...Hansen.e8 18 b4 :d8 19 1i'b3 ± Tukma- 17 "d3 kov-S.t L.i.i. Biel IZ 1976 13cxdS continued 11.dS (intending to play . White's advantage for White.. lOa5! looks fine for Black) .xd5 19 :xd5 lOd4 20 lOxd4 :xc2 12 ... better for White in Tisdall-T. Copenhagen 1993 . Bucharest 1993) 13 .. elaborate to cause Black's defences transposes.. serious problems. and now 14 .e2 21 :xc2=.i...i. pieces are not placed actively enough The text-move is based on the gen. 12...

.i..i. 10 liJd2 . with.lLIcb4? is no longer possi- move . a619.i. Sumperk 1990.. USSR 1981) 1) 15 .l:1d 1.e2 and then: Theory is far from settled yet...i..d7 17 b4 "b6 18 "b3 l:lfc8?! (18 .i. lLIaS!? 13 lLIxaS "xaS 14 0-0 dxc4 15 .lLIxdS 13lL1a4 13lL1xd5 exd5 14 l:dl. One feels that White ought lated d-pawn. lLIcb4?! 16 14 .i.d3lL1xf416exf4lL1b417 axb4 12cxdS "xa4:j: Kelei!evic-Przewoznik.Berger.i..d7. This.:ii'd8140-0-0! White's initiative.bS! . but 2a) After 12. 3) 12 ...i.xe7 cxb2 16 tWxb2lL1xe7 = I.t Tomaszewski-Slezka. gives White freer and more favourable to White...d3 h613 .d7 (15 . to provide prospects for White.i.b4! (D) positions where l:ldl has been played.i.g3..i.e2. ter 15 . much as in line '3' below.. Benko-T.i. gio Emilia 1992/3.xdS exdS 21 .. d4 15 l:lcllL1d7! (taking the ini- 'ii'e2 lLIc2+? 17 ~f1 . 14••••e81S .i.xc4 .xd7 tiative.i..Garcia-A..i..i. B2} a tactical possibility not available in 10.i.i. 2) 12 . 2b) Black might well prefer to try 12. Amsterdam 1964. Ibercaja 1993..g3 d4 15 l:lcl 14.i. lLIg4 16 h3 dxe3 17 fxe3.xc4 . 15 .i..d7 18 . Other tries: 16•••l:lcS 17 lLIxd7 . Fink- This exchange is rather more likely enstein 1990..c4 bS 20 .i..d3 poses to the Old Main Line (Chapter With strong play against the iso- 2. rather than the obvious 14 11 cxdS .i....e6 = Prze- woznik.xf6 lines.g3 trans.g5 (14 .i..xd7 18 ~bl 1) 12 l:ldl e5 13 .i.. A much more direct challenge to 13.f5 =Gavrikov-Peshina.i. 'ii'xd7 19lL1c3 +-) 16lL1ac5? lLIcb4!. beeause of the unlikely tactical 1) The defensive 11 l:lc 1 is ineffec- point that White does not want Black tive after 11.••. . Thus if l:lxc3 e5 14 ..i.b5 .i.. which is .lLIxc2 with check.g5 again trans.g3lL1a5 (13 ..Hemando.e7 idea for White is 13 .d716lL\acS out him having wasted a tempo on the Now 16.i.lLIh5!? 00) 19 :Udl .d4? 14 lLIa4 "a6 15 lLIxd4) 14 lLIxa5 It'xa5 150-0 dxc4 16 . .i..i. as in Line B 12 above. 13 . dxc3! 15 .i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 97 Gausdal 1993. ble: 17 .e7. The g3-bishop exerts 2) Black has no problems either af- pressure on the queenside.g5 d4 14 . e5...xd7 +-.i. and either lllLlb3 or 11 poses into Line B 11 above.. Reg- to be aiming for more. Vaganian-Arfandi.. 12••.6 above).e8: ..xc3 12 'ifxc3 'ifxc3 13 to play .. A less successful flexible play than in the 10 l:dl .

Indian style. ex- l:e8 22 ~dllOc5 23 b4lOa4 24 lObi tends White's bind) 18 _xeS 'ii'xb2 19 ..i.i. corr.xd2+ 14 'ii'xd2 'ii'xd2+ 15 ~xd2 lOd4!? Agdestein).. 13.Griin..xc6 J.i.d4 (D) 3) 11 .h617 ...g4! 16 1Of3 d4 = O.l:e8 16ll'ld4 'ii'xc2 17 J. New York tpd 1994) 15 f3 (15 ..h4 J.. loss of the bishop-pair.i.i......lOe7?! is reasonably prom.. Black ising if White exchanges on e6 (12 played less convincingly..e7 14 .98 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! = and now 17. Bareev- bishop. h6 14 l:cl 13 .i.i.g3 f4 20 exf4 exf4 21 .e6 16 lOb3 'ii'b6 17 lOc5 tive pieces..a4 J.i.i. lOxdS releases the tension a 130-0! little too early. Hanover 1991) 16..Foisor. l:ac8?! 18ll'lxe6 fxe6 19 tive but to fall in with White's idea.i. Nimzo- Black's pawn structure in the endgame.d3! 'ii'a4 14 bxc3 dxe3 15 fxe3 lOa5 00 Another line you won't find in 112_112 H. Stohl- has the bishop-pair and the higher Franzen.i.e7 (14... 15 0-0 . White 14 lOxaS .i. but Lputian notes that 12 d6! 18 J.d7 19 J. ECO! This has supplanted the older 12 liga 199112.e2? lowed by a well-timed l:bl wins.Miiller.d3 h6 in 1990.f5 25 ~d2 1Oc3 0-1 Konikowski.e2 d4 120-0 .Griinberg-M.Gar- 1) 11..!. Possibly both sides were lOb3 ..not exactly the 22 l:al! and White regains the pawn best advertisement for White's f4. h6 ECO.i... so Black has little alterna- .d3 b6 FIDE rating.xc5 (17 .l:e8!? 150-0 ll'le5 16ll'ld4 {16 islands is not much fun.i.i.h4f518 while 20 .xc2 . Tmava 1985) 14 .g5 lbed5 13ll'lxd5ll'lxd5 14 l:d 1 strongly h6 21 J.xc3 14 'ii'xc3 15 . to compensate for the Suba-Cvetkovic.i.. Belgrade 1984.i.g3 .lOe7 21 b4 ±.xc6 20 J. l:bl 'ii'd2 20 l:fdl 'ii'a5 21 l:b5 'ii'a4 Foeldi.h2 nik-Htibner.. Sochi 1995) 13 . Black will have to con.xc3+ 13 bxc3 'ii'a4 (13 . better-placed minor pieces. (16 exd4 exd4 ':F) 16....xc3 131Ob3 12.. giving White chances This Korchnoi idea put the 10 ll'ld2 of play against the isolani.f6 20 'ii'h5! and White has Korchnoi suggested 13 .xe6 13 l:cl . on b7 with a slight edge. the kingside: 20..xd2+ 15 'ii'xd2 .... Bareev) leaves White with much the more ac- 15 0-0 .i. when Agdestein lOe4+ 16 ~ellOxg3 17 hxg3 bxc6 18 suggested 15 .xc21OhS 'ii'a4 00).a6 16ll'ld4 _xc2 17 l:h5 l:e8 19 ~d2 as 20 ~c3 leaves J.i.i.'ii'xb2? 21 'ii'g6 fol- berg-Bonsch.i.xc3 13 dxc6 cia.d3 (13 l:dl. 1978 .d7 =Agdestein-Gild.xc2 15 lOxb7.i.e6 =} 16. dxe3 16 successfully transferred his attack to fxe3 l:d8 17 .. 121Oxd5 variation back on the theoretical map exd5 13 . Dzhandzhgava. Debrecen Echt 1992..i.i. 2) ll.i.i.dxc3?! 14 axb4 'ii'xb4 15 bxc3 . Gjl1Jvik (5) 1985.e7 in his .i.i..xc2 lOaS as equalizing.i.'ii'xc2 1l•••exdS 17 . and after dxe6?! . as in Kram- h3 g5 19 .d7 22 ~d2 White had the favours White. 'ii'e2 . Bundesliga 1993/4....f5?? unhappy with their position.xf6 gxf6 = H. tort himself to regain the pawn.. In Agdestein- 2) 11..xe5 l:xe5 17 c4 J. 12.••J.i. Hjartarson.xc3 Pigusov. Bundes... 15 .i.e5 12 . Black has several question marks hanging over pressure on the queenside.i. but having all those pawn (14 . .

e4 23 j.e2 lOeg4 (18 ..e2 WaS 20 Wb2 lOg6 21 j. White is an isolated 14ltX4! Wd8 ISlDe2 dxe3 16 fxe3!? passed pawn up. . Vaganian.. :xb7 ltXi4 20 cxd4 Wxd4 21 Wb2 tested. 17 .. probably with good reason.: Dreev-Vaganian.. 822) IS.:.. 2) In Nogueiras-Gild..e6 and now: 16 j. etc.txg4 20 :bS lOdS 21 :xdS WxdS 22 j.dxc3 (D) 16.i. Korchnoi...Garcia.dxe3 16 ~e3 (D) Black hopes to equalize gradually with . GO Dreev. lOfg4 19 j..j.Dreev) 19 lOxg4 . WcS!? looks more secure.i. Not..tc6 B22: IS•••dxc3 99 22 cS lOe4 .. Mos- B23: Is...tg3 16. pieces active. which leaves the queen short of squares: 18 j. Mat- anzas 1994..Ravi.d7!? 16 Wxc3? lOdS .. with the idea 1) Following 17 :abl. but Black is gaining time avsky.i..lbclS 100 cow 1991. 17 .xg4 +.. having the rook on the c-file makes a big difference) 18... Calcutta 1992... b6.e6.Dreev-L.d6 . ltXiS? 17. .1. 14lbc4 WhS 15 bxc3 17 :abl Now Black has three choices: 17 :fdl?! lOe7! 18 c4 :fe8 19 B21: IS•••dxe3 99 j. White kept the a-pawn covered with 17 :fbl :ac8 18 j...xbS j.xdS 22 j. as Wxf4 22 :xa7 . Amsterdam 1990 after 18 :bS after 17 . however. when the two minor pieces easily outweighed the rook.xe5 lOxe3 20 j.. IS. was suggested by led to a catastrophe in Korchnoi-Beli.lOas 821) .WcS 19 Informator notes. 16. but it will be very dif- leaves White with a lot of clout in the ficult to advance it if Black keeps his centre. with counterplay against the a-pawn. 17... j.xhS lOxc2 21 :xb7 +. Vaganian's alterna- tive proposal 17 . Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 99 :fd8 19 c4! lOd4 20 Wb2lOxbS 21 cxdS .d6:d8 17 Wxc3..e2 (18 :xb7ltXiS! gives Black counter- play.I... bS 18 lOb6..lDeS?. but it remains un...c6.c7 :dc8 24 :cl..

...xf3 24 gxf3 'it'g6 19lLlc4?! Black equalized in Stohl-Korneev.i.bS lLlde7 = L.•.i. 18lLlxe3 18 fxe3 is messy. 18 .:ad8 20 lLld6 823) 20 lLleSlLlce7! 21 .exf2+? 18 :xf2 . 18.Hansen- B. It would seem that White's pros- pects in the 10 lLld2line are better than in the 10 :dlline.xfS 24 exfS lLlc6 =F Tukmakov-Lputian. New York 1988..fS (20 lLlxb7lLlxd3 21 "'xd3 :d7 22 "'bS "g4 GO Lputian) 20 ..:ad8 19 lLld6lLleS 20 .xf6 .e2 lLlc6 9 "'c2 (9 0-0I?.bS 18 .xf6 19lLlxc6 :h6 +. but maybe 20 c4!? f3 .100 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 17. little concern.d4 b6 GO Lputian) 23 ...g. Too time-consuming. Tilburg 1994.. Moscow OL 1994.i.xc6 . but . . but 2S e4! would have weakening of the d4-square being of maintained White's initiative. White still Hamburg 1993 after 2S :xa7?! lLlh5 has the initiative after 19 c4!.i..i.d4?! (23 :e3 lLlg6 24 ..i.d7 19 .e2 (D) Instead 10 a3 is the Old Main Line.Foi- Simple piece-play preserves Black's sor-Morovie.h6 16••.i. Is•••lLlds (D) 20•••b6 21 ..i.i.xc4 =.. 15 ~dS "d8. White has chances for a modest edge in the critical lines..i.gS d4 14 .e2 "'fS =Lalie.i.i.i.i. the 26 ~g2 :c6. but probably not favourable to White.e6 saved a tempo by missing out a3.i. but not as good as after 10 0-0-0.i..i.i. Instead 20:e4? would be po- 18•. 19.i.:xd6 21 .e7 11 lLld2 eS 12 . Lputian now gives 16 continued 1O.Lalie.e6 =.i.i..i..i. Play opportunities... 9 cxdS!?) in the game O..:ad8!? 19lLlxdS :xdS and now 18 axb4lLlxb4 19 "xc3 lLlxd3 20 Lalie gives 20 . This position was reached via the move-order 8 .i. and White had indeed 16 .xc6 20 axb4 sitionally weak due to 20 ...fS 21 :ad8 21 :as 'ii'g4 22 'ii'xc3 l:[xd623 :h4 "'g6. e. C) 9 :dl "'as 10 .g3 dxe3 17 :ael .i.xeS :dd8 22 e4lLle7 23 .d6? :d8 17 cxd4 bS 18 lLleS :xd6 ~b3 Wb6 13 .e6 19:e4 ± Lalie. bS 17lLld6 b4 18 .c4 :d2 21 'ilxd2 'ilxd3 .i.

but Black's ability here to place a piece on b4 without coming to harm from the a-pawn has some tacti- cal implications.td3 next anyway.. are far from fully coordinated and his Black can play more vigorously: a-pawn is weak. 13.d5 White has the pleasant but ultimately unconvincing.xd2 .2. 17 ..xc3 eS (Filip) 16. then 20.txd2+ development.xh7+ eRfS IS 0-01 turns the tables. This is almost totally unexplored..b6 12 ..td3 c-file pin. Line E).. but the weak a-pawn will need attention. and if 17 a3 then 17 .. After 16.xd2+ 18 eRxd2 :td8+ IS . 19 :xd2 and Black cannot exploit the 10. open files. 19 .. 11 cxd5 exd5 12 :xd5 ~xc3 13 bxc3 13 "'xc3.td3.. 16 e4?! .td3 l%ac8!? 19 ..:c5!? has already played a3 (Chapter 2.~b4 14 cxb4 .. leaves Black with a significant lead in 16.tb4 14 :xaS . The text is complicated.txd2+ IS "'xd2 :cl+ 19 . Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 101 16. . Black naturally must re- 'ii'xd2 :xc7 22 ... b6. .tb4 11 ~b3 .:d7?! 20 :cl :adS 21 :c3 consolidates White's position. it is likely that Black 10•••~e4!? is holding his own.. If for example 20 This is not so convincing if White f3. So maybe Black must try 1) 12 a3 .txe2 19 eRxe2 :acS 20 :dl leaves White perhaps a little better in the endgame. White choice between 17 e4 "'d7 IS 0-0 again hopes to save a tempo by not .txf3 :acS IS "'dl :fdS leaves a killer pin on the as-el diagonal. followed by spond by making use of the unpro- ttJe3-d5. or 170-0 .... but given that Black's rooks are well placed on since he played 16 ...tc3. while White's minor pieces this was hardly an improvement..txc3+ 13 .tdl :xdl#..tc7! is Burgess's suggestion...txd2 19·~e5 "'e7 20 ~xg4 :acS 21 playing a3..:fcS? 17 ..tg416~g5 16 it)d4? :acS 17 "'dl . 16 ..txaS wins the exchange.txb4+ 15 :d2 .txf3 17 .txd2 IS :dl :acS tected b4-square..

..xb3) 23 .dxc3 16 axb4 cxb2 (White is slightly better after 16. j.xb6 axb6 19 fxg4 %lxa2) 5 j. if 20.xc3+ 22 bxc3 %lh8. and transposes directly into ...txc3+ 15 bxc3 ~g5 21 'ife4 j. 15.a5! is again strong.3 White's alternatives now not IS j...xc3+ IS bxc3 dxe3) either 21 %le4 j.. 16 dxc6 'ifxc617 0-0j.e6 23 0-0 (23 cS? j.taS! 16 c!Llxa5 'ifxa5 17 tried.e2 exf3 16 gxf3 dxc4 17 lLld2 .dxc4 14 j..1i'c7 16 83 ~g7?! A) 16.4.tg5 d4 Hastings 198112.e4 j. play 8 j.. 17 exd4 9 cxd5 has no independent signifi- exd4 18 c!Llxd4 c!Llxd4 19 j.g3? d4 14 a3 j. There are other C: 9%lel 104 attacking tries for White. j.xc3+ 16 bxc3 dxe3 17 a3..gxf6 17 fxg4 /t)eS =F is not so sharp) 17 'ifxc4 (17 .g7 cance. 9 b4 and 9 %lcl have also been 3) IS .. but rather c!Llc6 (D) IS j....to 2) 13 .xf6 gxf6 15 cS?! An unnecessary weakening.td4 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 c!Llc3lLlf6 4lLln j.... j.d7 17 0-0 dxc3 18 axb4 lLlxb4 19 is slightly better for Black../4! 2) 12 j.xh7+~g719'ifd2~xh7 20 'ifxb4 ±..Littlewood-Speelman.e6 =F.h3 18 f3 j.%lac8 24 cS j. but Black al.••e5 13 .1. 1) 13 .. 'ifxc3lLlxd3 =P..te6 18 j.txh7+ A: 9 adS 102 ~g7 20 %ld5 'ifc7 21 'ifxc3 'iff4 22 g3 B: 9 b4 103 'ifh6 23 j.xb3 2S 'ifxb3 %lxcS (if the other The main alternative to entering the rook had moved to c8 to give the king main lines with 9 'ifc2 is 9 j.e2..e2.e2?! eS 13 j.xc4 j..xc3+ 22 bxc3 'ifh5. Line A.102 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51.tfS then 21 e4 as (21 .g4 (Filip).e7 cxd3 18 j.xe4? 22 cS +-) 22 'ifa4 j. suggesting that White does better to lowed by 28 %ld3. D: 9 j. or 13 . 12. This is covered in Chapter 4.e2 lOS ways seems to come out ahead...gS (not 13 20 %lxd4 'ifeS+.xf6?! exd3 16 'ifxd3 on move 9 dxc4 (Burgess..r4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxcS j... 26 'ifxf7+ would now though there is a strong argument for win) 26 'ii'h3+ ~g7 27 'ifg4+ fol.~ 14 cxdS . lLlxb4 17 'ifxc3lOa2 18 'ifc2 c!Llb4 19 'ife2) 17 bSlLlb418j... 14 j. and 4. winning a piece after j...xcS 8 a3 17 . We discuss: exd4 exd4 18 0-0 dxc3 19 .xh7+ q. al- a flight square. 0-0.xf6 gxf6 19 'ife4 with at- tacking chances. and now IS %ld2 . j. and to try to do without 2) IS . 15 a3 is best: 1) IS . 16.e6! winning a piece.g4 14 f3 e4 (Filip). j.

0-0 b6 13 cxdSlLlxdS 14lLlxdS .i. aiming to hit the queenside pawns with .•f6 IS g3 bxc6 16 "c2 1) 9 .. la) 10 cxdS exd5 11 ~gS ~e6 12 lOcxdS c!DbS ~e7 13 lLlbd4 c!De4 =Barkha.. Volgodonsk 1981. 1O. gen-Wedberg.lDxdS 10 lLlxdS exdS trans. Since this was a quickplay. Dortmund 1991) 11 ~e2 (11 cxdS can ...l:ld8 12 10 a3.!Des ~. . = 17 l:lacl g6 Mikhalchishin-Renet. for example to play against the isolani.xdS poses into 8 cxdS exdS 9 ~e2lLlc6 10 IS. Czech Ch (Tren~ianske Teplice) 1995.~d7 (or 10..~b6 and then: 2a) 10 l:la2.e7. and not just part of a ±) 11 cxdS lLlxf4 12 exf4 (12 dxc6 prophylactic plan.dS would appear to be more accu- 9.... White bided his time and exchanged only when he had completed his own development and had forced Black to commit his bishop.!De4 11 c!Dxe4 dxe4 12 .. Instructive timing by White: instead of exchang- B) ing on dS immediately.. Lvov 1996.. Vaxjo 1992) 11. it would be one should not expect highly refined more naturally placed on b2 rather decisions. it .. cxdS exdS 12 ~e2 ~g4 = SjOOin- poses into 8 cxdS lDxdS 9 lLlxdS exdS Barkhagen...as) 13 . White's queenside pawn ad. = . Having said that. White's development? Play down the vances actually make it more difficult c-file is the natural plan. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 103 systems discussed in Chapter S.dxc4 11 Aiming to show that a3 can be di.c2. Stockholm Rilton Cup but does the insertion of b4 really help 1992.~d6 and now: ~b7 17 . outside the pawn-chain.d7 Ib) 10~gSdxc411 ~xc4...d4?! 11 exd4lLlxd412 cS! rectly aggressive.•f6 13 0-0.!DeSI2 12 0-0 l:lc8 13 "e2 c!Dhs 14 . shin-Koziak.xdSl:lxdSI6l:lfdl ~d717 l:lxdS a3 (instead of the critical continuation exdS 18 l:lcl ~ Mikhalchishin-Ubi- 10 0-0)..••~e7 rate than 14.. 9 .!Des i.xc3 14 dxc6 seems a little unusual to use this plan Mikhalchishin-Magomedov.eS ~e2 lLlxf3+ 13 ~xf3 as 14 bS a4 IS lLlxeS 15 lLlxeS ~f6 16lLlxd7 "xd7 0-0 hS with equality.. and 14.t. and isolating 9 b4 (D) Black's pawn but releasing his bishop. as played. 2) 9.eS 14 ~g3 fS IS bS f4 16 bxc6 fxg3 17 bxg3 bxc6 = Stohl- Prandstetter.xd8 ~xd8 13 lLld2 (13 . lava..f6!) 12. 2b) 10 ~e2 lLlh5!? (1O . Mikhalchi. 1O....dxc4 11 ~xc4 i. under lc) 10 ~xd6 'ilfxd6 11 ~e2! (11 8 cxdS.exdS 10 ~e2 trans...•xc6!? IS l:lci than f4.... 1) 10 "c2 is the main alternative. Tallinn when the Queen's bishop is already rpd 1988. while 9 .

11 ~dS exd5 12. Dortmund 1994.txe6 Ilxe6 19 e4 'if'e7 ~f21Dd4 17 ~xd4 Ilxd4 18 ~e3 ±. Lugano 1989) Short.te2 b6 13 cxd5 ~xdS 14 ~xdS exd5 Is0-0.tb6.txf3 16 e.exdS 11 .tg4 15 h3 .txd8 transpos- ing to the Stohl-Prandstetter game given under 9. Olafsson 9 Ild (D) suggested instead 1O. Dreev- 2) 10 1la2 and now 10.. Amsterdam 1991. but b4 is as much a weakening move as a constructive one.d4!? and now: a6 la) 10 exd4 ~xd4 =..te6 ~xc6 'it'xd1+ 12 Ilxdl exf4 13 ~d4 14... Black can hagen 1991..104 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! be met by 1l. ~b8 12 .~xd4 11 b4! ~c6 12 'if'xd8 'if'xf3 ~eS 17 .: 20 ~d2 .te2. 1O. .t Heine Nielsen-Barkhagen.txc4 lines discussed later. Groningen FIDE Wch 1997. g6 is unnecessarily passive: IS fxe3 14 fxe3 lle8 with ample com- h3 'if'e7 (lS .tb1 g6 16 .. Moscow 1985.Polgar-Geller...te6 Belgrade 1993 continued IS . 13 . This is probably a wise precaution. 11.... 14.t Ilxd8 13 bxcS ± Knezevic-Szabo..txeS IlxeS 18 Ilfdl .. ..te2 dxc4 10 . a6 130-0 b5 14 ..txa3 17 pensation for the pawn . However.. 10.dxc4 'if'b6 16 ~bS . Copen..e8!) and now Kramnik-Beliavsky.:r..Kramnik) 'if'al. Mikhalchishin-Heine Nielsen.EkstrOm.txc4 'if'xdl+ 12 Ilxdl gains a tempo on the 9 . Belgrade 1977.exdS 12 b5 ~S 23 11'b3 Ild8 24 IlcS d3 was ~aS 13 . improve with 10.te5 21 ..t was Arkhipov.. with 11 ~xe4 dxe4 12 'if'xd8 .. 16..te6 121Dd4 Ilc8 13 0-0 ~xb4 14 axb4 Ilxc3 15 Ilxa7 9. Black has taken the initiative.. 12 .. eS! 11 ~b3 (11 140-0.llc8 120-0 dxc4 13 Iladl 'if'e8 14 15 ... but perhaps not very enna 1993. B 3) 10 h3 dxc4 ll. b6? 16 17 'if'd3 d4 18 .lle8 14 0-0 .. ~e4 b3 :..tbl .. 1b) White can also try 10 ~xd4. C) L.e7 16 e4?! Ild2 as 15 bS ~b4! 16 axb4 axb4 17 16 'if'd3 00...te6 15 f3 (15 lbcS?! maiajr Wch 1991.td3 Ilc8 140-0 lbc4 =was played successfully in Beliavsky- Grynszpan-R.tg3 .~xdS 1O. instead 11...td3 .tDe4 00..txg3 22 bxg3 Olafsson.Spassov.. Ilxd8 14 exf4 . Ma.g...d7! Reykjavik 1986...tb7 = Granda-Ivanchuk. aS 11 bS Lutz.te617 1l.txa3! 12 bxa3 exf4 13 'if'xd8 Ilc2 .th6±) 16'if'd2.t Zsu..txb418.. Vi..: Christiansen-H.. The simplest.lle8 IS .tb2? 16 Ilc2 . plausible as a winning attempt.ta2 .tg3 .td3 Ild8 15 ~41Dd5 16 ..~xd5 12 ~xd5 exd5 :.Olafsson.tf613 Ild 1) 9.

xc4 .te7!? 00.xc7 ':xd3 18 :xd3 ':c8 19 j. 16 ~xf2 'ticS+ 17 ~g3 'tixc4 I8iLleS 16 lDgS lLlf6 17 j..e2 (10 cxdS!?) 10 . d4 now ap- pears to be satisfactory for Black... Adorjan-Karlsson.g3 j. The text The most direct of Black's many al- aims to squeeze a little more from the ternatives.. 2) 9 ..xd4 13 0-0 . White is better. j.e7 17 j. 199516) 11. a6 and 9 . Kramnik-Vaganian...gS f6 17 j. Then Black can con- l:td8 20 :d1 f6 21lLlel eS 22 ~f3 as tinue: also equalizing. 11 0-0 (11 18 ~xdl! lDd8 19 j.e7 both trans- pose to the 'Exchange Variation' of Chapter 4.. Lucerne lDbdS 14 j..f3 112-112. nik gives lS .e6 17 j...b713 :hdl :Cd8 queens. . is too slow for Black. D3: 9•••:e8 110 Gjjljvik 1983... 14lDb5 lDe8 15 j. Kram.lLle4!? 111 exd4 lDxd4 12 lLlxd4 j.. Bundesliga lDb4 19 j. out of the position by exchanging 11•••b6 12 ~e2 j. Black could be regarded as slightly better. Black aims to take the sting position.e2 dxc4 10 j.a6 16 lDc7 lDxc7 17 10 . j.h4 112-112.xd1+ 11 hd1.g3 D2: 9•••a6 110 j.e7 13 j. 17.b6 (since 9 .e7 112 Orlowski-Gerigk.. DS: 9••• j. this is revealed as an unnecessary loss of tempo) 10 j.gS! Now: h6 14 j.....xb7 lDxb7 20 lDxbS?! . 1) 1O. but D) probably:j:..xf2+ Wcht 1993.h4 gS? IS lLlxgS) 13lDg5 h6 Dl: 9.j. and by restraining White's b4 idea. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 105 Kramnik notes that Black should not be scared of l'lX:S: lS .c4 h6 = Dreev-Vaganian. D6: 9. Gjjljvik 9 j..d3 as 10 j.e4 :xd1 tinue in gambit fashion... 3) 9 .c2!? at least makes sure the j.a6 12 :adl (12 lDgS?! Tilburg rpd 1993.b7 13 :adl "'e7 14 lDge4lDxe4 IS lDxe4 eS 16 j..4...xc4 . j. If anything.Wb6 (12 . Germany 1994.xc4lLlxf4 IS exf4 j....••others 112 10 j. j.:ac8! 16lDcs lDaS 17 lDxe6 fxe6 =.g3 queens stay on.. 9•••dxc4 discussed in Line D 11 below.. Line B2 after 10 cxdS exdS.xdl+ 11 ~xdl 11 :xd1 transposes into the line 9 D1} j.as+ 12l'lX:3 lDb4 13 'tiel lDfd4 ±. not worth analysing. Adorjan-Helmers.xc4 Black aims to stabilize the position 10 'tixd8?! is unhealthily eager.••bS! forces White to con- lS ..e2 (D) 1983) 12. d4 11 D4: 9 .dxc4 lOS 14 lDge4 lLlxe4 15 lLlxe4 e5 16 j.h6?! 16 b4 j.a6 18 a4 "'b3 =+= Gavrikov-Lutz.

b5 17 0-0 and White has a clear advantage.e2!? (12 i.:dS (12. 12..c6 22 :dl :eS 23 ~e8 i.b7?! 011: 10. to equalize. with Dreev-Vaganian.xc4 play again branches 2) After 11 .. White 12e4~d7!? will play for e4-e5. though exchanges queens immediately: admittedly in a quickplay.I. Safer for 10••••xdl+ 11 :xdl (D) Black is 12 ..xf6 gxf6 :xdS i. Zsu.Ekstrom.e2 a6. Pamplona 1990/1) ending in Vaganian-BeJiavsky. a top grand- out.e7 16 i. Neuchlitel Bonsch. Til- :fdS 14 :xdS+ :xdS 151...b7 17 ~e2 boring game in this book..d3 i.g5 h6 14 i. Minsk 19S3.. :dl h6 17 i... is probably the most 15 ~e4 i.d3 :dS i. :xdS+ ~xdS 14 0-0 i.e7 13 i.. .a6 12 i. demonstrating that Black has to 5) For 10.g5 1-0 Kramnik-Yusu- 011) pov.xe3 IS ~xe3 =. Szym- czak-Novak.dl :xdl burg 1993 continuing 15 ~e2 i. Moscow PCA rpd 1995..I. although he eventually . 3) 1O.~a5?! is an inferior way to hold on to the pawn: 11 :d 1 "eS 12 ~g5 i.b7 16 16 ~xdl lh-lh Hertneck-Yusupov. M. according to whether or not Black master even lost a miniature.b7 13 :hdl e5 ~eS..b5 13:c1 Gurevich) 13 burg rpd 1993. Adorjan-Van der Sterren..g5 h6 14 i. a6 10 .d7 11 :dl i. Til- 12.d7 (14.•e7?! 11 i. a6.•a5 130-0.d6 13 i. 12. b6 12 e4...d3 1) 11.. but Munich 1992..h4 ~e5 15 ~4 17 ~e4 ~xe4 18 ~xe4 i. German Ch 1991.1. ment he must try to neutralize.8ap. Poland 19S2.i...c3 ......c6 = Gavrikov-Ubilava. 1996. After 10 i. maybe 16 :d2!?.e6 is unclear.e5 g614 ~ge4 ~xe4 15 ~xe4 f6 16 i..eS 16 ~d2 ~6 i.xc4 :cS (12 .i.e4 :xd2+ 19 :xd2 :dS 20 13 i. see 9. would force Black to work hard to Black has a slight lag in develop.:d8 13 :xdS+ ~xdS 14 11 ~xdl b6 12 ~e2 i. ~hS! 107 16 ~xc5 ± i..e7 19 ~d6 ~g6 16 i..e7 15 :d2 :acS 16 :hdl ~bS 17 i.xf6 gxf6 17 :fd 1 ± Muse. and now instead of 16 ~e4 ~xe5 17 ~xe5 i.c61S i.:dS 13 ~e2 i.h4 e5 15 i.d7 14 e5 ~eS 11•••i.xeS 24 :dS ~f6 25 i..e7 12 i.e3 i....c2 handle his pieces very carefully ifhe is dxc4.xdS gave White a slight ad- 16 ~h4 i. vantage in mobility in the minor-piece Gomez Esteban. close the .xf3? 17 :xd8+l:xd8 IS 013: 10•••86 107 lLlxe6 :e8 19lLlc7 :c8 20 e6 ~xc4 21 014: 10•••b6 109 e7 i.xdl+ 106 13 e5 ~g4 14 ~4 :fdS 15 0-0 ~5 012: 10••. b5!? 4) 1O..Gurevich-R.106 The Queen' s Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 2) 1O. Plovdiv Echt 19S3) 130-0 ~h5 14 i..xc4 :dS 120-0 Gurevich) 15 :dl i.Polgar.e5 "eS 15 .

c4 e41Dc6 19lDxc6 . St Affrique 1997.i.e2 1.i.f3l:[b8 190-0-0 i was Dau- tov-Beliavsky...c3 1.~f8 18 b4 17 axb4lbc6ISl:[d6lDxb4 19 1.. 12•••l:[d7 13 1.g5 1. 14...1Dh5.. Lvov 1987.xe7lDxe7 161.e2 l:[dd8 17 0-0 lDa5 18 lDed2 lDc6 19 lDe4 lDa5 20 lDed2 in Lobron-Lutz. preserving the bishop.l:[d8.xd7 112-112 Bareev.a2 I.xc6 20 .. bitious.. than after 10..xb5+ 21 lDxb5 l:[xdl ever.i. but allow- with equality. is safer.b5. but he lDxe8 22 e5 ~e7 23 g3 f6 24 exf6+ i.b3 Liogky-Marciano.. and in l:ta7 20 l:ta1l:[c7 21 ll)d2 lDes 221.i. as he could thereby 14 .i. tion of being a reliable equalizer. must take great care.. This variation is a very safe choice.e7. ll'iVxdS 11 1.b7 16 1..b614ll)e4 and now 14. Instead..c6 16 13~e2a6 lDe5 lDf6 17 . l::td7 23 l:[xd7 . 20 .•xe7 13 0-0 l:[d8 14 . any advance on 14 1. Erevan Z 1982) 17.c7 1l"c2 .Zaitsev. 22l:[xdl ~e7 ought to be a safe draw.d7 15 l:[fdl 1.~d8.d7 Keeping close symmetry..lDxe5?! 15 lDxe5 l:[c7 16 1. Rimavska Sobota 1990) queenside pawns. how.i. 12 1. and led to a draw after 15 1.. Reggio Emilia 199516. as we shall see.c7 10•••lDhS! (D) l:[d7 112-112 Zlochevsky-Kharitonov. lDxc6 1. endgame after 20.Nikolic-Ki. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 107 contrived to lose it by leaving his e..Georgiev.1.d7 15 1De5 1.xe7 lDxe7 14 pawn weak. Moscow 1996? 13. Black forces simplification without provided Black is not careless or am- loss of time... ing a bit more tension in the position Dubai OL 1986.e2 ~f8 = Lechtynsky- Black did well to delay touching his Dobrolowski.xc6 20 f4 ~e7 = Agzamov- 14 . if23l:tcl a624l:tc7+??then24.e7 12 1.xe7 (12 .e8?! 21 . 14lDxeS l:[dSIS 0-0 lDf616l:[fdl 1. There is.eS lDxeS 012) If 13 .d7 17 lDxd7 l:[xd7 IS l:[xd7 lDxd7 19 l:[dl ll)f6 20 ~n 112_112 Topalov- This continuation has the reputa. Black needlessly landed in an inferior Novikov. P. Vienna 1996.xd8 D13) l:[xd8 transposes into the next note) 10•••a6 (D) 12 . a safer way to exchange queens.i..xe8 So Black should equalize.1.i. 1l•••l::txdS 12 1.g5 1. Nussloch 1996. 17 f3 (17 e4 ~f8 18 ~e3 ll)c6 19 ciding his own pawn structure.e2 lDf6 17 lDxc5 bxc5 18 1.. ~e2 (14 0-0 1.. . Gelfand.d6 bS IS 1...e7 13 1.e8 16l:[hdl lDf6 wait to see what White did before de.

Pula winning a clear pawn..t Hellsten-San Segundo.td3 . The queen wasted 2) After 11 .td7!? should be safe enough.. prisingly considering his more active Oviedo rpd 1992) 14lLlxf6+ .. gundo) 13 .d3 h6 13 0-0 ... Poland 1996. .txc6 23 .. 11•••.lLlhS?! 13 lLlgS g6 14 lLlge4 lLlxf4?.txf6 IS minor pieces in an otherwise symmet- . Zhachev. Maiwald-Bonsch.e7 ISlLlxf6+ . h6 12 "'c2 .te7 13 b4 WhS (l3 .te7 13 WxdS . agreed drawn in the game Yuferov.Nik- the bishop out of trouble..te7 (13 .. keeping 13 .. .ta2 . French Ch 1996: 14 ..txh7+ ~hS 16 :dl WaS+ 17 ~e2 rical position. which.te7 2) 12 i.te4 . Instead lLlce4 ± Lechtynsky-Tozer.... 3) 11..t and the knight is :xdl+ 17 :xdl WcS 18lLlgS g6 19 awkwardly placed on hS.te2 WfS IS .tgS h6 13 .te7 13 0-0 lLlhS) 14 h3 1) ll.bSI2.te7 14 We2 :cS was soon 17 :ac 1 :acS = Yakovich-Lputian.Sokolov-Cifuentes.td6 IS .txh7+ tensteig 1994) 14 . 2) 11.tbl lLle4 f6 IS lLlfd2 ..WaS+?! is mis. :ifb6 14 :fdl .txf6...td3.tgS .td7 and now 120-0 lLlhS 13 .. Fonnia 1995.WaS?! is premature.te2lLleS 16 . squeeze something out of 11. leads to no A natural square for the queen.. AI- 19 gxf3 Wd6 20 lLlb6 Wc6 21.tb7 IS :acl :d8 16 . . lLlhS 14 :fdl ± Adorjan-P.te3 "'c7 17 eSlLlxeS ISlLldS! lLlxf3+ Wa7 IS e4 ± Maiwald-Masserey.te4 ± I.td3 essarily the most solid. la Grande 19S9..&5 13 0-0 (D) 16. and clear results) 140-0 (14 :dl .t.td3 ~hS 22 Wxc6 . . and if 12 . timed: 14 ~e2 i.. 12 ':dl is much more challenging. ski. but not nec. .. Moscow 1990) 13 .. exdS 18 1i'd2 . with a move that Black cannot reciprocate.txf6 12. CappeUe 11.. not sur- b4 19 ..txh7+~hSI7 :acl :acSlSWbl Results favour White.te7 14 :adl h6 IS .. 120-0 :adl Wb6 (14.te2 White managed to too much time..a2-bl.1/2 was Stohl-Ubi- lava.lLlhS 12:d1 12 .ta2 1/2.:.f4! :acS IS Wbl b4 with unclear play. Berlin 1994. USSR Ch (Kiev) 19S6.txe7 Wxe7 16 .a5!?) IS e4lLlh5 16 ..tg3 .108 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j:.tgS ..td7 (13 :cl .txe4 24 WhS 16 lLle2 eS 17lLlg3 Wg41SlLlxeS fxe4 .td7 (or The most popular choice.th4 Wc7!? (challenging White to play 14 .. olic. however.te7 14 4) 11.We7 12 . ideas of i. Trencianske Teplice 19S5.. reached via 11 .txdS in Hau.. 1) 12 O-O!? bS 13 :fdl WeS 14 chard-Marciano. is more forceful) 1) 11 0-0 bS 12 .tb7 13 "'c2 14 .tb713lLle4(13 :'c8 IS e4 bS 16 eS lLldS 17 lLlxdS 0-0 transposes to HeIlsten-San Se.t Zlochevsky-Arlandi. Vdac 1983. Skalik-Jawor- Echt 1997. then IslLlxcS.

xfS bxc3 21 i. but White would 'ili'xb2 30 exdS .e8 IS :fel bS 16 i...gS i.g6+ Iii>h8 26 .. spears a piece. though in the game.. D14) 3c) 14 h3 l:ld8 IS i. However.e8 Stohl-Gavrilaikis.l:td7 eS 19 i. 17 l:lxd7 l:lxd7 18 i. l:la7 can be tried. 2) 13 . without having to wony about again the potential dangers on the light counter-tactics. a6.xc3 19 bxc3 l:lac8 20 i.bl ttlhs 18 eS g6 19 i. Ri.h7+ Iii>h8 18 IS•••exdS 16 l:lxdS . 14 ttlgS 14 e4 i. Polanica Zdroj 1985. Asti 1995.dS much safer on gl than on cl. White a little more time to mature his mavsIca Sobota 1990. mov-Dutreeuw.a2 i.a2 l:lc8 17 i.a4 liz-liz Pekarek-Geller. In comparison with the New Main Stohl-Cvitan.g4 IS i.h6 and then: i.i.xf7+ 1ii>f8 19 3) 13 . ..cS13 0-0 then 19 ..d7 A familiar tactical idea from the 1) 13 . Line.gS +.a2 g6 20 ttlxh7+ Iii>r:T 21..xg6+ Iii>h8 23 .l:ld8? 20 i..b7 12 l:ldl i. illustrating yet attack....:a7 ±) 19 ttlxdl and short of squares.xh6 ttld8 20 i.b7 IS ttle4 h6 New Main Line. Black has the extra move .d3 i.a2+ ttldS 25 .xf6 which prevents White from ever play- i.h6 b4 20 i.eS IS i... i. Now 27 e4 cording to ECO. White now unnecessarily the black queen runs dangerously contented himself with 17 i. Haifa The problem with this move is that Echt 1989.ttlhS!?) IS 22 .xa6 'ifxa6 IS b4! trapped Black's rook in broad daylight. Khalkidhiki 1992.xa2 32 dxc6 wins.c7 would have 13 .xf6 17 i. whereas 17 ttlc4! 'ifhs 18 ttlb6 l:lxdl (18 . 14•••lUd8 IS ttlds!? 13.f6 16 h3 ttlgeS 17 moves before playing this line.a2 i.c6.e7 .eS 14 i. giving 'ifxa3 21 c4 ± Stohl-Dobrolowsky. Efi- ttlxd4 exd4 19 'ili'd3 'ili'b6 is unclear ac. Dortmund 1992.•.xe7 ttlxe7 22 i.. squares after Black has played .. ttlxeS ttlxeS 18 i.xf3 16 gxf3 i. Vrbas 1980.d7 16 10•••b6 ttld2 i. White repeated ment) IS i.eS. but after 20 'ifb3 Black's posi- tion is miserable...d7 (l4 . 16 ttlxf6+ i. White's king is 'it'xe4 i. hop- ing for something like 20 ttlc8 l:la8 21 ttlxe7+ ttlxe7 22 'ifc7 ttlfdS! 23 'ili'xb7 i.a6? 14 i. 11 . seem to have a useful lead in develop. i.e3 bS 19 i..bS 14 i.d2 Iii>g8 'ifc7 16 ttldS ttlxdS 17 exdS ttld4 18 White has a decisive attack.cs liz-liz Stohl-Kotronias.xf6 17 l:ld7 e4 18 ing l:lbS..lbl1ii>xh7 3a) 14 i.a2 i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 109 Naturally 19.a2 i.hS+ 3b) 14 e4 ttlg4 (14 ...bl 'ili'hS 18 ttlce4 t.c2 i..b6 .h6+ Iii>g8 24 ttld2 ± Miles-Ivkov.

xf6 is assessed as unclear by 1994) 11 i.xf6 'ii'xf6 =.e8 Black has in mind the .dl. 1O. Sokolov. 10 i.xf6 14 i.f8 12 i.xg4 +) 13 .a6 (D) 1995. Yugoslav Cht (Tivat) 1995. Wa5?! 11 0-0 dxc4 12 11 i.. Portoro~ 9 ..:it'xf6 13 lbe4 We7 14 ~xeS ing for a win..d4 push. and was soon forced on It is of course possible to transpose the defensive: 11 b4 i. h6?! in Miles-Lobron. e4 14 i..f3 Shuraev..xc4 is that Black can Beliavsky.:r.xe4 Black has played . Ifinstead 12 ~d5?!.ac8 19 g4 i.xf3 Wf5 18 g4 Wg6 in Chapter 4.xf6 :j:.. with 10 Wc2 dxc4 (or.:r. when 12 ~e4 i.e7! (12 .c1.f4 exf3 17 i.b1 i... 11 i.d8 16 'it'c2 Wxc2 17 9. ~h5 leave White ~xb4 14 axb4 Wxb4+ 15 ~ed2) 13 with good prospects of an advantage.xcl h625 . ':'xe4 15 ~xf6+ gxf6 16 'ii'xd8+ lowing White time to develop his king.e51.xe5..e7 13 i.. 03) 9•••.xc4.110 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.. l:te8 18 l:tdl ±. desire. Sokolov 10.d2 23 ~4 ... Perhaps 10 Wc2 is to be preferred.:r. ~h5.a2 . ~xf6+ i. Altensteig i..gS Mter 100-0: 1) Black wasted a tempo with 10.xc4 Maiwald-Masserey. 2) Black can simply play 10. Wa5+?! 13 b4 Alternatives to 10 . These lines feature side.d8 15 i. .. a6 prematurely. Goldin gives 12 ~e5 ~xe5 13 some tactics reminiscent of the Old i.g3 a6 to the previous line...xf6 but the position is dull and drawish..:r... e5! isfactorily. should both sides 13 Wc2 i...4 Line B 1. less sat.. ~5 21 e4 ~xg4! 22 0-0 . he should vary at move 'it'xeS 15 ~xd4 .fS 18 . :j:) 15 Wxd4 .d4 12 i.. discussed i.g5 d4!.:r.:r.d4 i.:r... Y..e4 16 'ii'd2 d4 17 i. 11.xd3 (13 'ii'xd3 1O.Kozlov. 12.xf6 i. except that 19 Wxc5 i. equalize very easily with 10 .g6 20 f3 02) Thus far Psakhis-Sitnik. If Black wants to keep options of play...e8 14 i.:r. Tula 1995.d7 14 . ~xd8 17 i.gS The general conclusion concerning If 11 0-0. Now 20.:r... simply 11. Reggio lOadS Emilia 1985.d4 = Goldin- 9 . leads to a drawn endgame...:r.. ~xc2 i. al. as given in Informator..:r. d3! 13 i.. ~xd5 11 ~xd5 exd5 is like the e4 14 Wc3 ~xd5! 15 cxd5 Wxd5 16 Knight Exchange Variation. i...fdl ±. dxc4 10 i.:r.. 12 ~e4 i. exdS analyses 12 .xcl 24 .f4! 14 i.d6 MainLine.xd4?! (14 .

or 13 .e5 14 ~g3 ~f5 15 0-0 (15 b4! Dreev) 15 . :"e7 (l5 ...... Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 111 Therefore White contents himself perhaps? The position needs further with a quieter move.!Dd5 14.i. d4 can be achieved so easily. 15 'ifxd8 ~xd8 16 . This variation might just hold the 16 'ii'xallDa6 17 'ii'bl ±. Debrecen Echt then 12 "xd8 lIxd8 13 b4 ~b6 14 c5 1992.a5 14lbc4 axb4 15 axb4 lIxal play.xd5 exd5 15 ~xe7 lIxe7 16 The text-move is a more sophisti- 0-0-0 ~e6. is unclear.i.. Muse- Van der Sterren.i.. in I.:"f6 12 lDxc6 bxc6 13 "c2 has been previously seen. Not.i.. cated way of trying to exploit the lack olov. 10 "c2lDxc3 11 "xc3 d4 12 exd4 15... "a3 ter 11. 10. of escape squares for White's minor 14. Other lines answer to how Black can play for a are also good for White. Unclear ~e7 20 ~c4 ~xc4 21lDxc4 b5. if l1..lbe4!? (D) :e8 16 b3 ~f5 17 "b2 "e7. 12 'ii'xd8 :xd8 13 b4 ~e7 14 c5 a5!. a5 16 'ifc3 ± Dreev) 16 b4 ~b6 17 c5 . Although this is largely ignored by 12. but probably satisfactory for Black.e7 13 c5 f6! theory.. challeng- ing the queenside pawn majority. 12b4 Preparing a retreat on c4. testing..i. Undeveloping to b8 puts the 'ii'c7 knight on the only square where it Now 17 lDd4 ~d7 led to equality does not get in the way...i.xb2 15 ~e5 f5 16 "f4 "c2 17 ~f3 ~a6 18 0-0 ± Dreev.. Only 11.. Black runs out of tactical tricks af- pawn when .dxe4 l1lDe5 lDbS! It is not worth isolating Black's d. a5 14 "xe4! (14 O-O?! e5 15 ~g3 9.lDcxe7 15 0-0 lDxc3 16 'ii'xc3 pieces..•.. given as unclear by Sok. win against the ultra-solid 9 ..g3 b6 trans- 10~xe4! poses. 17 lIac 1 (Sokolov) preserves ~c7 15lDxf7..xe7 lbd7. 12•••dxc413 . .. Altensteig 1991) 14. Black can improve on previous 13...lbe7?. who does Leading to unclear play after 19 0-0 not provide an assessment.i.c7 18 lIfdl ± Dreev- Khalifman.Sokolov-Lobron. White's slight edge in piece mobility.. .. b6 16 cxb6 axb6 17 'ii'xdS lDxd413 lIdllDxe2 14 ~xe2"b6 15 ~xdS Islbd6 ~e6 b4 ~e7 is given by Dreev. could be critical.e2 14lDc4 e5 15 ~g3 variation... ~e7 11 'ii'c2 h6 12 ~h4 10. Linares 1995. Then D4) 13 ..a5+? 12 b4 lDxb4 13 axb4 "xb4+ 14 ~f1 f6 15 lIbl 16 14 ..xc4...

.xd6 'ii'xd6 12 ~xd4 ~xd4 13 c!Dxd4 'ii'xd4 IS g3 i.112 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! however.. 9. but Black has no real weaknesses 9 'ii'c2 i. .. and there are some potential holes in White's position that need 062) watching. General conclusion to 9 i. 19 ~xe4?? fS followed by 11 ~c6 bxc6 12 i.d6Ied to 'orthodoxy' in Sze- KneZevic-Karpov... ECO gives it as ± after 13 . Moscow 1982: 10 i. Line H. on the dark squares..I.Santo.eS ~xeS (14 .g. 10 ~a4 i... Poland 1982..xc4 c!DhS! is just D62: 9•••d4?! 112 as solid as in the 9 . czak-lasnikowski. White can pressurize pawns on the light squares. and seek out- posts. a couple of 'played-onces' from several years back: 10 lbes D61: 9•••i. and there 'ii'aS is safer. Polanica Zdroj 1983. leaving White with clearly the better pawn w structure..d6 2) 12 'ii'e2 ~xf4 13 exf4 ~d4 14 11 i.cS and ..a2 :d8 19 ~4 i.xc4 h6 13 i.xd6!? with possibilities of play deceptive.d6 112 10 0-0 dxc4 11 i. trapping White's bishop. ~h8 19 ~S :e8 20 'ii'c3 ± Szym- Roman... Leningrad 1977) kely-I..f6 1/2. And if the pawns remain im- mobile. Irkutsk a6 14 :cl 1/2. to attack.d6 10.h4 = c!Dd4 c!Df6 Lputian-Aseev.e7 11 0-0 dxc4 12 i. Analo- building up a significant space advan. 0-0 Szymczak-Abramovic.I.1h. e. The position is perhaps slightly 10 i. 06) Finally.. 05) Black's position looks OK until one 9•• ~e7 (D) asks how he is going to advance any of his central pawns safely.eS both being answered by cxdS.: 1) 12 'ffxd8 :xd8 13 i.gS IS fOxeS IIc7 16 fObS :cS 17 f4 a618 i.c7 :d7 14 061) i. it looks as though White is against the isolated d-pawn. Line E.f4. are few ways for Black to seek any sort . White could also try 1986. gS!? IS h3 c!DxeS = 9.dxc4 line.f6 16 lIfdl 'ii'b6 'ii'xd4 'it'c6 14 ~3 'ii'xg2 IS 0-0-0 eS 17 :ac1 a6 18 i.d4?! is premature..d6 in Chapter S. i. 10 'ii'c2 transposes to Chapter S.1/2 Lin Ta .~xeS!? lli..xc4 The move is extremely solid.xeS dxc412i. Lucerne Wcht 1985.e7 16 'ii'xeS 'ifxt2 17 :dfl 'ii'h4 18 :hgl 20 ~3 i.xd6 'iIIxd6 13 .Zaitsev. gous lines of play are discussed under tage.e2 10•••i.:d8 14 ':'cl.. notably cS.

Developing the bishop to e2 is generally more flexible if the central pawn formation has not been clarified. unpromising plored 9 .xc4 a6 11 0-0 b5 12. Cht 1997.d31Oc6 9 0-0 We7 10 jor exception. . system.i.i.i. White's extra tempo.i.i. with . 4. or .e2 is that pose into the 8 . iObd7.g5 . a6. is 8 .g3 lOe4 16 9 .dxc4 Black then has the possibility of de- 9 .e2 (D) We now consider lines where White plays neither 8 'ifc2 nor 8 a3 here. from the diagram ity in the text to start with 8 . After all.i.. with .. Dutch White can do to try for an advantage.i. An Even so.i.e2 113 B: 8 adS 122 A) 8 .e7 dxc4 10 . b5.i.b7 and .e2.g5 :d8 12 :cl h6 13 content with a drawish position.i.e7 9 . have just looked at 8 a3 iOc6 9 . Alternatives to the Main lines for White 113 of complications.i.e2... . We 8.i.b7 13 'ife2iObd7 112_112. although veloping his queenside more flexibly clearly 8 Acl discourages alterna.d3 and 8 :cl could well trans. Any line not already considered where White plays 8 Wc2 or 8 a3 will be cov- ered in Chapter 5.i.i. which ended tamely after 8 .e2 line after 8. tives to the queen swap on move 9.e2 instead of 9 .i..i.b3 S .i.. back to 8 .. independent possibility.i.dxc4 10 . The only draw- 8 .f4 0-0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS ... Black is cxdS exd5 11 .i..h4 a6 14 :el g5 15 . Our lines are: A: 8. . it makes for better continu.e2 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 1Dc3 iOf6 4iOf3 . If.i.xc4iOh5.i.. there is little iOd2 . St Ingbert 1990. more bite than the 8 a3 1Oc6 9 .xcS (D) .xc4 'ifxdl+ 10 :xdl. for White.4 White's alternatives We note also in passing the game on move 8 Gabler-Zlatilov.b4 :j: Tjiam-Vaganian. the relatively unex.. The most important alternative here This ought in principle to have is 8 cxd5. ~4 being perhaps the ma. the 'Exchange Variation'..i.i.iOc6 is a common enough move.e2 However. under 'Alternatives for Black'..i.i. and few would consider 9 a3 as the but is a3 really necessary in this line? most dangerous reply...i. however.

tg5 in 10 ..ixd8 12 Ibragimov-Lputian. a5 :fd8 =Zsu..txd6 13 :xd6 :fd8 = of Augustin- A1) Faibisovich.. A13: 9"'lLlc6 119 ulLleS! Given the 'N' symbol in lnformator A11) 56. but actually played by Nimzowitsch 9. Novi 2) 1O...e7 9 cxd5 :d8 10 0-0 lLlxd5 I1lLlxd5 :xdS 12 .ib2 is more All: 9 .... lLlc6 11 0-0 is clearly more Sad wom OL 1990.Polgar-A.b6 12 e4 . is arguably more signifi- cant..ie2 ±.ib4 16 sideration..:xdl 21 :xdl ~g6 22 .g.. Again envisaging a development Alternatives pose Black few prob- with the knight on d7.id7. lLlxeS 14 .dxc4 9 .. more testing than the limp 12 ....id6 .ig5!? ..ixc4 2b) 11. . with the ..a6 116 threatening. lLle4 .td3 quishes the bishop-pair much too eas.txd6 18lLlxd6 .lLlc6 comes into con..114 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.. lems: 1) 1O. 8. lLlh5?! lLlbS lLla3 17 fxg7 ~xg7 18 lLlc7 is not this time an antidote.xd1+ 10 :xd1 (D) in the 1930s. not. Targeting Black's minor pieces All: 9 .b6...ib7 14 lLlxc5 lLlxc5 15 . Nimzo contrived to 10. The main lines are: AI: 8..Mari~. 9 ..td7?! 11 lLleS . favourable for White than in the 8 a3 2) 11 .lLlc6 121 First.ixeS .a6 lose the game .ic6 relin. True.ieS+ ~g6 21 ....... 12 e4 is a lot Stahlberg-Chekhover. If advantage of White's omission of a3.td3 lLlbd7 12 :cl b6 13 lines..tc6 19 lLlxc6 15 .. 2a) If then 1l.ib7 17 .. The immediate 9 . White should be better.. We lLlc2 23 ~f1 :c8 Black had counter- consider: play.. 1) 11 0-0lLlbd712lLleS bS 13 .b3lLlc6 13 :adl :xdl 14 :xdl is a rather time-consuming way for Black to clear the central pawns.dxc4 114 A2: 8. one minor alternative for Black may be noted: 8.te7 IS a4 b4 16lLle4 ily: 12 0-0 a6 13 :d2 b5 14 lLlxc6 . 15 lLlg5!? looks strong (instead of 15 a3..th4 better mobilized for any endgame. Vienna 1996.. After 14... After 14 exf6 lLlxc4 15 b3 . a6 or 9 .ie7 11 Wxd8 .id6?! ./41 half-tempo.txf3 19 gxf3 :ad8 White played for other knight not yet in the game. e.te2 .xd1+ 114 with 20 .ixd8 lhd8 13 ~e2 and White is much after 20. but ... Moscow 1935).tb7 13 eSlLlaS! Again one must ask whether Black is a more interesting attempt to take can equalize by exchanging queens. control of the d-file with 20 . Brno 1991..

*ob7 18 ~e2 .d6 .*oxf3+ 24 ~xf3 IIc2 25 a4 bxa4 26 bxa4 lIa2 27 ~e4 IIcc2 28 IIld2 f5 0-1. If enough pressure is exerted 3) 11 a4?! ttlc6 12 ~e5 and now. IllIns applying to lesser players.f3 lIa7 to inflict what is in context a trivial (f)) pawn weakness.e7 17 g4.*od4 nlll.i. if things go smoothly. The game went 15 . Gothenburg 1934.*od6 Yet in the game Nimzowitsch- ixd6 14 IIxd6 ~6 15 IIhdl :Cd8 = Stablberg. The pawn that is most .Markovic-Carlhammar.Ivantage in piece mobility. this game was played in his last tournament. Nimzo- Bobotsov-Sobhani.d7 lS~e2! 15 . IS•••..*oxb7 IIxb7 17 .*oxe5 with sible.i.Ivantage by struggling to prevent the skirmishes.!. identifiable weakness without allow- Stockholm 1987. pllsition suggests otherwise.. forces. it should be pos- rather than 12. Teheran 1991. that follows is forced.. ~lIl1lding of the inner spirit of chess has 17•••. ~xe5 13 . 4) 11 ~e2 b5 12. Now let us see the modem treat- ment with 15 We2.*oxf6? gxf6 16 ~4 . our under.*obS+ 18 ~d2 ~7 19.t Malaniuk-Arlandi. ~6 IId7 23 b3.*oxe5 bS 14.i. but . J(lIod old days in chess tend to argue 16 lIel! b417 tDdS! Ihut while our knowledge of openings Leaving Black only one way to pre- might well have increased immensely serve the bishop-pair. Those who fondly look back to the Malaniuk. He was soon overrun by Black's piece-play on the queen- side.*od5 19 b3 IIc8 20 IId2 ~f8 21 IIhdl :ac7 22 IId4 a5 23 ~d2 . White has even Ilpen position. and the there is little doubt that he has more nnlural way for White to play it would than enough compensatory piece ac- Ill' In aim to preserve and enhance this tivity as a result of the minor tactical . tivity among the enemy pieces.bS.... to force an equality. 12.e2! change his excellent bishop on eS for a Forestalling .. It is an In formal terms. on the black position. complete mobilization of the black Wijk aan Zee 1972.*ob3 .i...i. In fairness to Nimzowitsch.*oxd4 20 ~e7+ Wh8 21 exd4 ~b6 22 Knsparov..*ob7 13 .b7 16 . with corresponding rela. The sequence liver the last sixty years. with White having the slightly the worse pawn structure. witsch was perfectly happy to ex- 11••• ~bd7 12 .. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 115 = IICc8 160-0 ttld5 Donner-Benko.i. M. This Forli 1992... not particularly active knight in order 12••• ~xe5 13 . and by then his playing strength had declined. a Capablanca is at least equal to a .~h5 would have ing any corresponding increase in ac- heen more enterprising.

!Dxh7 15 .e 7 14 lDce4 lDxe4 15 .g5 pins.e7 =Zsu. lDh5.i....i.lDbd7...i.. possibly favouring White..b6 lIa8 23 lIc7 . the concessions that White has made to preserve his bishop-pair are not worth it. see 9 . ll. Mos- cow 1996. centralizing the rooks would hold the balance.b6!? 12. with 12.Eriksson-I...xc7 lIc8 19 lDxb5 ..e7 14 'ilfc2 lDbd7 15 .i. but rather Black's b. in Kacheish- vili-Myc.xe3 20 fxe3 pawn. axb5 21 b3 f6 22 .i. 2) 12 lDg5 lDbd7 13 l&e4 (13 lDge4 b4 14 lDxf6+ lDxf6 15 lDa4 .. the note to move 13..l&6...b7 13 lDxc5 B lDxc5 14 .i. h6 14 lDxf6+ lDxf6 15.i.lDbd7 (13 . . 12"e2(D) Alternatives generally involve tar- geting h7: I) 1211cllDbd713 lDg5!? (13 'ilfe2 reverts to the main line) 13 . White found no alternative but to allow an opposite-coloured bishop ending. Budapest 1994.i.g3 lDe4 16 . Danielian-Rustemov. White's standard plan involves Smyslov-Kasparov game discussed in 0-0.d3. lDa4. Line A13 below. b4 13 opment.. a6.i. Vejstrup 1989) 13 .e4?! 17 . Instead 12..!De5 ~ was unnecessary... Black's active bishop-pair 9 •••a610 0-0 (D) enabled him to hold the position com- fortably despite losing a pawn.i.i.l&6 10 0-0 A. After 12lLle4 .d5 1/2..!Do = 'ilfb6 16 'ilfe2 and now.1/2 Lechtynsky-Efimov.c7 'ilfc8 ate play on either side of the board..xe4 1) 12 . .e2 .d3.h4 'ilfb6. Zaganjr Wch 1997.. 3) 12 e4 is probably best answered 10 'ilfe2 almost invariably trans.i.xh7+ does prevent any awkward .i..i.!Dd5 15 . although it Lenk 1991) 14 lDxh7.i. 16 lIacl . completing his devel...bS messy./4! likely to drop for nothing is not the ~xh7 16 'ilfxd7 lIad8 17 'ilfc7 'ilfxc7 white d-pawn. by analogy with the poses. 'ilfe2.b7 Black can also tease White with l1.i.i. there is any justice in chess.xe4 lDxe4 18..xe4 16 lDxe4 ~ Efimov-Ziatdinov.Polgar-Schiissler.i.i. .116 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.Almasi.i. 18 .!De8 17 . Pra- A12) gue 1985. and readying himself to initi. For 1O.i. h6?! should be too slow.a5 'ilfb8 18 b3 is 10.i. Black's 16.. . if .

Kaspa- tive. 16 eS is extremely danger.. Then: rather than 'gain' a tempo by attacking 4a) Razuvaev-Geller. USSR Ch the queen.ie3 longer supported by its colleague) (sec Smyslov-Kasparov below).. but there are in.:.Gure. Instead.tg3 lDbd7 (14 .. Vilnius Ct (4) 1984. the main problem for Black is to 20 lDel1Dc6..ie7 14 lIacl and now 16 'ilc2! (lUght to be good for White..c7. :ile7 anyway. Wellington 2b) White could... 12 lIadl 'ilb6 13 ..: with 14 a4 b4 151Dbi (Gurevich notes Kasparov) 14.ixe3 16 "xe3 lIfd8 :.tb3 .ie7 16 h3 liz-liz. it is best to put the 10 .. Antwerp 1993..lIad8 16 16 lDbd2 lDcs 17 as "a7 18 . hut White has scope for improvement 4) 12. the tempo 21 .......ic2 lDc4 23 ... hrcakthrough after 19.ieS with a strong attack ..id6 20 f3 f6 li)dS IS . in the game M. but there is no obvious 17 ~hl "h3+ 181Dh21DeS 19 f3 ±.id2 (14 .lDc6 move order) 14 a3 lIfd8 15 2a) 14 . 2c) Instead.igS (if White wants to of the bishop from cS by playing 14 try for more.lDc6 9 0-0 dxc4 play .~bd7 Play continued instead IS . rook on its best square immediately.. and if 14. Kasparov ~uined by threatening h7 giving time also gives a couple of move IS alterna- for e4 ± next move. 1311fdl (D) vich-Dutreeuw.ixe3 17 'ilxe3 "cS :.id3 .ixf3 16 .igSlDxg3! 17 hxg3 "xg3+ li)fd7 with chances for both sides.if4 1Db4 18 . 16 b3? tives... lDc6 leads to a position nor- . 18 ~hl "h3+ 191Dh2 . .ixc8 191DeS is tempt.lDxg3? 16 hxg3 "xg3+ ing at first.Polgar-Sarapu.ie3 lDeS 22 .te7 13 ':fdl "b6 is poten.1Dc6 the king's knight is no with 12 . lId8 20 lDes lIxdl+ 211Wxdl "'d822 tic defences. White 1) 13 e4?! lDhS! 14 .. After 15 then 18 lDcS ':xcS! 19 ':xaS ':xcl+ g3. lDbd7 13 e4?! lDhS 14..t..ie3 played analogously to the main line 'ilb6! IS :fel . 1983 was drawn quickly after 13 :adl 2) 12 .. showing that Black remains un- li)d7 17 lIc4 lIfc8 was played in troubled after either IS eS? . If 14. Stockholm 16 "'e4 fS 17 exf61D7xf6 co Kishnev. 4b) Zsu. try to 1988 did not last much longer: 13 tuke advantage of the early withdrawal lIac 1 'ilb6 14 . lDhS...1Dc6!?) .Kasparov) 16...te3 with a White takes advantage of the fact that critical gain of tempo when compared after . rov notes IS .. IS ....igl ..maybe 13 lIacl . and Black has the initia. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 117 13 lIfd 1 'ile7 14 e41Dbd7 IS eS lDdS Wedberg-Van der Wiel..ib7.ibl lIxdl+ 19 lIxdl ous. 14 lDgS! is the way - e4!'!.c7 was already com- II possible queen sacrifice after IS as fortable for Black in Smyslov-Kas- ~c5 l61Da4 "xaS 17 ':dcl ':c8 and parov.ig3 "as 3) 12 .ie7 IS lIfdl lIad8 16 h3 h6 17 15 . If Black plans to mally reached via 8. 1987 and the unnecessary hole on c3 Negulescu. "b6 (this position actually arose via tially transpositional. Black's kingside lacks any realis.ib7) IS .. Cappelle la Grande 1993.. "xd8+ 11z-112. 18 lIxc8+ .. however..igS ... cost White dearly.ie3 (16 .ixc4 a6 11 "e2 bS 12 .ib7 in the dependent possibilities: 8 .ic2 . b4 13 lDa4 .. Icads back to the main line. avoid sacrificing prematurely.

aS17iDd6Axd218lDxb7 Esteban-A.. Reykja.bl :c8 18 a3lDc5 is a complicated liquidation to equal..a7 191Obd2 e4 20 ~h7 25 '6'h5 . Gurevich lObd2 :fc8 17 lOc4 ..Meyer.Hoffman.Shvidler- gives 20 lOxe4 g5 21 lOfxg5 lOxe4 22 Ciolac.Ivanov..xf4 18 axb5 Ih.i. and aims to take ad- sov..•e7 cal than 14 Ag3.b6 15 a3lDc5 16 for White. An Informator reference 15 .-Ih...t M..Axe4.Gurevich-Beliavsky. :c6 . but 2) 13 :acl Ae7 (l3 .xf6 gxf6 tersely gives 23 lDc2 'iVb8 24 :d4 .e5 f6 20 i..Gurevich.. iDel AfS (20.t F...:fe8 (15 . or 13 .g3 1) 13 .:fc8 16 Ae4! lOb6 17 i.Olafsson-H.. the queen looks strange at first.f5 lal) 14. defensive plan.•e7 and now: 1) 14 a4!1 b4 15 lObi (15 as .e??! 16 Moscow 1990.fS transposes) 211Ob3 iDe5 22 la2) 14..xd7 fxe3 ~ M. aS 171Obd2 h6 18 Ah4 i.•e7 14 Ag5 White's bishop has been lured to a less :fd8 15 Ae4 Axe4 161Oxe4 Ab6 17 active diagonal..xf3 g6 + or 15 b4 Ab6 (15 ..t E.xb7 . and in view of 19 AxfS1! Ae5 20 f4 :xfS 21 fxe51Oxe5.e8!? (or i.xb7.. 19 lOe5 /Dd5 20 ..118 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! ..b6 a4-a5 without allowing this type of 19 Ae4 .. 14i.d6 .xd7 23 lOxe4 Ad8 24 Af6 17 Ac4 h618 as .t Gomez 161Oxb5.xe5 :xe5.. lOb3 i.xc5 18 i. Gausdal1993 continued 14 .. h6 15 Ah4 ..•e8 Ac2 :fd8 171Oe5 1/2. For Black's most popular choice in re.c6 26 f3 with a danger. which cuts across the .xc3 18 i.. The loss of tempo with pawn's worth of piece-play.h4. Munich 1992..e7 16 lOxd7 lOxd7 17 a3 i. It is of course 13. Ib) 141Od2!? is a more recent try vik 1984) 14 :tdl . Axb4 181Od4 f5 19 i..xd2 20 lOxd2 lOxd3 16 :acl Ae7 17 i.Gurevich- Yusupov.. Blees-I.h6 are generally slightly older. Games featuring 13 .. iDe5 21 Axe5 :xe5 22 ous attack.:ac8 15 a4 b4 16 lObi exf4 19 i.c3 .1/2 Gulko-Pigu. Silvaplana 1993) 16 i.xd2 . when Black has excellent compensation for the exchange. If 19.b6 open for White to try to improve. vantage of the lack of retreat squares for the black bishop. Salamanca 1991) lOf4! 19 .g3 is to prepare vich) 16.. White played 19 bxc3 and agreed a draw in M.. 2) 13 . of the points of 14 i. one (161Oe4 Axe4 17 Axe4 h6 = Gure..g3 e5 :xd7 . example 14iDe5looks more economi- cent years. possibility) 15 ..c2 g6 21 Axe7 ity) 16 a41Of4 17 Axf4 .to This might well be promising. Bu- axb5 19 Axb5 lOe5 with an ample dapest 1989.... Biel IZ 1993.:ac8 15 lOde4 /Dd5 16 lOxd5 exd5 17 lOxc5 lDxc5 18 Af5 iDe6 19 i.c6! la) 14 Ag5 and then: 16 iDa4 e5 17 lOxc5 . h6 14 Ag3 Ab4 15 iDe5 .. Kaidanov-Van der Sterren.

Black has good chances of achieving a 18 .t Zsu. while Chekhov...i.a rare case of the knight- mov..tbl.txa6 ..Zsu. 9.. 9.~(D) 16.. "c6 24 . Several minor pair dominating the bishop-pair in an transpositions of move-order are pos. 'ii'c6? 17iCla4 l:tfcS IS e4! left Black in a bind in Zsu.g3 b4 16 ~e4 ~c4 l:td8 24:ac1 Wc5! and Black's h6 = Ibragimov-Sturua. What is clear is that both sides must IS a4 b4 manoeuvre their pieces carefully in 15 . Katowice 1993.f6 24 ~4 essarily blocks off the rook...:fcS!? .txf3 23 likely that he would want to do so.c5!? 17 ~bl "h5 IS iClbd2 White could transpose to the 9 a3 lCJcS 19.•. Helsinki 1992. Russian Ch 1997. as winning . ~S unnec...i.tf4 h4 aD and Black is well set 25 "d2 "bS 26 l:ta4 l:thS 27 g3 . Rustemov) 20.xe2 21 .Polgar.xg2 31 Citxg2 "fS 32 h4 "f3+ 33 17 ~bliClhS 18 iClbd2 Citgl l:txh4. 23 .txe7+ Q.lCJfe4 20 iClxe4 line with 10 a3.f3 29 . Maybe White achieves a 14.fl "eS 30 . 20 e4?! e5 22 lCJel WeS 23 iClxd3 :dS 24 lCJe5 21 iCld5+ ..g2 M..i. So where does the truth 18 .i... etc.i. Dutch Ch gxf3 .Polgar-Geller..tfl 112_1/2 Kiriakov-Ruste. positions where direct tactical threats 16aS"d8!? are not far below the surface.. but it is extremely un- iClxe4 21 l:td7iClxg3 22 hxg3 . A13) Aruba 1992. when Tregubov gives 21 "b2 l:tcd7 22 . but the impression the more patient 20.. bishops gradually took control in 3) 14 l:tac1 l:tac8 ISiClgS l:tfd8 16 Blees-Van der Sterren. iClxg3 25 hxg3 .!.te7 ubov-Van der Sterren.iClbd7...."eS! is equal. Brussels 1993. l:lc7 27 Wxa6 l:tdS.c4 l:tfc8 (19 . 14.iCJxd3? 21iClb6! ±. . Moscow 1995 was agreed 22 ~4. l:lxdS+ l:txdS 23 iClbd2 .i.. ~xg3 19 bxg3llkS 20 ~ aniuk-Heine Nielsen.cS h5! 23 ... iClge4 (16 . but Tregubov. Gurevich) 21 f3iClfd7 22 e4 drawn after 23 l:td4 l:taeS 24 ~2 .a6 line.tdS 29 a6 :bS 30 WaS. 18. Wijk aan Zee 17 .. 2S iClxb4 . ~d4 "g6 (20 .. Now Black got into trouble in Treg- 16 ~e4?! h6..te4 iClxf6iClxf6 20 b4 (20 a3 =.l:laeS.txe2iClfe4 Gorelov.Gurevich-Geller. The b. 16. Gurevich) 20 (Eindhoven) 1992.i.txh7+? Citxh7 19 'ii'd3+ Citg8 lie? Probably Black should meet 23 20 'ifxd7 Wxd7 21 l:txd7 l:tfdS 22 ~2 with 23 ... given in both '2' and '3'isthatanearly We are still a long way from being iClg5 is not all that threatening if Black able to give a lasting verdict on the has played .txf3 26 gxf3 l:tcS =+= pawn will almost inevitably fall.te2 l:txd 1+ 23 :xdl 28 "b6 .. Peristeri 1993.. bxa4 16iClxa4 .. Rustemov) 16. open position.txd5 22 exd5 l:txc1 23 ..i.!. or maybe Black equalizes..tf6 24 .xe7 19 1995 after20.td6 25lCJed7! l:txd7 26iClxd7 Wxd7 "xe5+ "e6! . Tregubov suggests that sible in this line.g4 for counterplay on the dark squares...te5 g6 19iClbd2iClxe5 20 lClxe5 compensatory kingside attack.te7 slight edge.Polgar.te7 17iClge4 b4 =Mal.td6 CitfS IS .... "c7 21 ~ec4 iClf6 22 iClb6 l:ta7 23 2) 14iClgS eS IS .i. Alternatives to the Main lines for White 119 Cifuentes-Van der Sterren. ..

lLlb4 14 lLle4 i.lLlc6 in the 9. Ibragimov-Ruste- 15 e5 tLld5 16 i. i.xd6 14 lLlxd6lLla5 IS Zysk-Hochgrlife. 12 i.e7 11 i.td6 18 i.....!. indeed it is hard to see 11••• b5 how Black holds everything together.b3 i.gS (or II "e2.e2 h617 h3 'iPfB 18 a3 i. Copen- i. . Bundesliga 199112 White played qui- etly and soon drew.....c7 :ld7 13 i.g3 i. tLlhS 11 "xd8 l:lxd8 12 12 i.d6 i. 3) 1O. Splitting the king- side pawns with 14 i.gS h6 13 i. Karlsson-Lechtynsky.d3. 2) 1O.b7 was 0-0 h6 12 i..bl 'irxdl 14 i. St Petersburg 1996.xdlll l:lfxdl b6?! 12lLlb5 16 tLle2 might improve on IS i.d7 21 19 e4. is a more attractive option...g5 ±. transposing into the Gurevich-Short game above) 11..lLlhs.f4! Emilia 199112..i. as in Parker-McLaren 10 "e2!? and now: below.Meyer-R.!.d3 lLlb4 13 i.Koglin... l1:lct 2) 1O.!.d3 i. Parker-McLaren.b7 I) 1O. i.. Instead. the immediate queen ex.Ragozin-Makogonov.g3 bS and now IS i.txeS 10•••a6 lLld7 14 i.d7 mov. I) Black rashly went pawn-snatch.120 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j.. a6 13 :lfdl 'ire8!? could be tried) 13 l:lfdl e5 1400 lLlxd5 15 White. Portisch-Vaganian. when 13 :lacl practical experience is lacking..Gurevich..d2 "d8 17 :lfdl i..b4 II 0-0 i.g3 a6 15 :lfxdl i. but 17 'ire4!? (Moscow) 1944.h4 :ld8 1983.i.d3 is less threatening: 13 . 12 l:lfd1 "b6 "b6 14lLlgS was recommended for 13 i..h4 :ld8 13 "e2 'iWfB and in H.bS ± Karlsson-Balashov.h6 12 i. 4) 10. USSR Ch Short. Paris rpd 1991.a6 .. i...xf6 gxf6 16lLle4 .e7 II h3 a6 12 We2 bS 13 ing in the game Khurtsidze-A.. but maybe 12. British Ch (East- change is a little too slow.xf6 gxf6 ISlLle4 100-0 i. Dortmund 1991.xeS i.d6 :acl i.xc6 :lac8 was M.h5.g4 16 "c4 i.e7 15 lLle4 lLlbd5 16 i. Even if Black can improve on 14 'ire2 "fB IS i. :ladl "b6 14 i..Wiemer.te2line) makes it much less likely for Black to secure equality with an early .e7 is more cautious: 11 After II "e2 bS. 18 i.. line (Line AI2 above).xc3 12 tLla4"a5 17 b3 :lfd8 18 "e3lLld7 19 bxc3 'iVa5 13 e4 "xc3? 14 :lac 1 "a5 :lcl :lac8 20 eS ... move II. Substituting 0-0 for a3 (comparing this and the 8 a3 lLlc6 9 w .b4 seems a bit of a time-waster..eSlLlf6 14 i. 11. Now 17 a3 tLlxd3 IS tLlxf6+ gxf6 16 :lxd3 :ld8 .f3 . bourne) 1991.b4 (the whole idea of discussed under 12.. Reggio hagen 1983. Helsinki 1l.e7 16 i.xd5 i. = V.d3 i...b7 IS e4 b4 16 Leon 1996: 1O.!..h6 12 tLleS tLlxeS 13 ...xd6 17 lLlxd6 :ld8 18 lLlxf7 'iPxf7 :ld8 19lLleS lLlxeS 20 i.. might be better..b7 13 i.e7 12 i.e7 16 :lac1.

t D.Gurevich-Frias..lDc6 (D) ler.e6 14 l:tac 1 (better without having inserted a3.tDe7!? 13 'ii'b3 d4?! 14 i.lD the game's 14 i.e6 15 'it'xb7 tDfd5 16 tDxd5 York 1983..b7 keeps Black alive.i.e5 W'e6 19 First. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 121 A2) i. l:tfdl "f6 17 tDo h6 18 i.. New York rpd 1990...l:te8 13 tDxc6 bxc6 14 tDa4 i. 11 tDxdS exdS It is not particularly clear how Black has gained by interpolating . see Line B3 below. dxc4 (the pawn is weak even when it is ined... Stull-Arencibia. thus: This tends to suggest that 9 .. after 12 Wc2 . Smo- and ends after 9 0-0.. Kiriakov-O.a6 in this line either.d4?! IO . LineC.i..b6 With mainly transpositional effects..exd5..e6 15 Wa4 9 cxd5 exd5 leads to the Pawn Ex. tDa5 13 Wa3 i.. Moscow OL 1994) 12.•i. Uzes 1990.. USSRjr In comparison with the Knight Ex- Ch (Alma-Ata) 1991.dxc4 A21: 9 0-0 121 is best.e7?! 10 cxd5 tDxd5?! 11 tDxd5 10 tDxdS exdS (D) cxd5 12 'ii'b3 is uncomfortable for 110-0 Black.. Line B3 below.b613 exd4 tDxd414 tDxd4 l. tDe7 14 W'b3 Wb6 15 Wa3 :le8 16 sibility is 9 cxd5 tDxd5 10 tDxd5 exd5. 11•.i. tDa5 change Variation (8 cxd5 tDxd5 9 White gets good play with either 13 ICJxd5 exd5).. or 12. is far less challenging) .3. 11 ':cl i. Our sections are lensk 1992. we must deal with some odds Wb3 ± Kharitonov-Gavrilov. New J:lld 1 i. l:tc8 16 'it'a3 l:tc4 17 i. exd5 does not fit in well with to a big plus for White. Vienna 1990..e5 tDc615 i..xe7 'ii'xe7 19 Wxe7 :lxe7 20 l:txc4 0-0 dxc4leads to variations just exam..e6 14 l:tfdl :lc8 15 tDd4 tDc4 16 'ii'b3 tDa5 17 Wc2 We7 18 Wbl l:tfd8 19 i..xd415 b3. Ih. 12..d6 :le8 18 change Variation. 016.c2 or 13 'it'd3 i. After 12.a7 12 'it'b3 (after 12 (12 l:tel i.was Kaidanov-Gel- 8. A22: 9 cxdS tDxd5 121 A22) A21) 9cxdS tDxdS 90-086 For 9.c3).Danielian. 9.a713 tDe5 The main non-transpositional pos.. 9 'ii'c2 'ii'a5 10 l:tdl is Chapter no longer isolated) 21 tDf4 ± Lobron- 4... 12:lct White gains significant pressure against the isolani after either 12.i)c5!'!... Renet.g5 ± Kolev-Polak.b6 10 cxdS tDxdS 1) Abramovic analysed 11. White is able to castle .. but 12. 13 tDe5 tDe7 14 tDd3 i. 9 i.xd5 17 Wb4 +.

Geller tried to knight going to d7..122 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J. see above.. 12i. i. ago-l.. could be tried.Bykbovsky-Geller.d3 i.xd6 "xd6 19 l:fdl B) :ac8 20 "a4 l:fd8 21 l:acl the iso. Dortmund 1992. 12 "b3 h6 (12 . b5 "d3 ±) 14lLle4 and then 14. fS 14 l:ac1 view. and hope that no CID Abramovic) 13 lLle5 i... Brussels 1987.lLlc6 gives White resurrect Black's play with 14 . but maybe 12 "b3.g5 12 "c2 h6 = Abramovic.... complete the exchange.e6 14 lLle5 "f6 leads to a position assessed by Abramovic as equal..c2 i.. angling for a transposition into Kaidanov-Abramovic.. ing .a5.. the most promising plan is i..fS IS and a queenside fianchetto.e2line..b6 13 lLleS "f6! 14 .ie6 14 "'a4 h6 15 .xd4 15 :adl "f6 16 "g3 Exchange Variation.e2 is a genuine try for an edge.e6 14 l:adl one confuses it with the 'other' ex- d41S"a3 (IS"a4 "f6=Abramovic) change variation (1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Kaidanov-Abramovic..f6! Black is not absolutely obliged to 16 lLlxc6 bxc6 17 i..xd5 i.h6!? and then 12 l:cl i.. and now Abramovic suggests 15...c4+ ~h8 16 exd4lLlxd4 17 8 ...... but after IS a3 i. 8.. etc. i.. 2) 11.ixe5 White has the typical modicum of pressure against the isolated pawn..f4! 12•••"'d6 13 l:c1 .. but play is more lively than in the 8 a3 lLlc69 i.. British Ch (Swansea) 1987.Polgar-Lobron. Sochi 1981 continued 9 ..d6 l:fe8 threaten. with the "xcS "xe4 16 i.b6 IS i. I...xe4 i. Vienna 1989.Far- eter...Zaitsev. than in the New Main Line.... has not been refuted. White aims for less. although tried only once in grandmas- The text aims to keep the game qui..f3 ±. even if only a modest one. 8 i. 1Oc3lLlf6 4 cxd5 exd5... In conclusion.d6 18 i.). while 12 ..e6 15 "bS lLld4 16 exd4 "xf4 = was Conquest- Motwani.b6 13 l:adl i. good prospects after 9 0-0.d4 13 exd4lLlxd4 For convenience we call this the 14lLlxd4 i.dxc49 . bu.ixc4 a6 followed by .if4 "'e716lLleslLlxe5 17..fS 16 i.. and risks less.xe4 17 i.e7 13lLlgS g6 (13 .. From Black's point of 12.. ter chess. 8 cxd5 (D) lani was under mortal pressure in Av. since 8..xa2.. i.....b4...

agreed drawn immedi- has to stick his pieces behind the iso. is Knight Exchange Variation.. and the opportunity to liquidate As well as the Knight Exchange his isolani with ... when 13.tf4 system. lively piece. Many of the :cl... Supposing that White is not content and fail to fathom now.. has free development.e6 16 lLleS lLlxeS 17 ... but 9. 7 .txcS 8 cxdS exdS 9 .••lLlxdS 123 instead of 13 .. lLld7 14 :bS 1id8 IS B2: 8•••exdS 13S :d 1 i.xdS 10 leads to stodgy positions where Black "xdS exdS. 20 ~f1 in Ruban-Smirin.. O-O-O?! lLlc6! 12 :xdS .txcS.lLlxdS 9lLlxdS exdS he will have to spend a tempo on 10 a3....id4 13 :c I . Line.d4. this. Farago in his notes suggests 9 dxe6 B1) ..d7140-0:ac8IS games in the Pawn Exchange Varia..txeS tion were played with the move-order :xc1 18 :xcl :c8 19 :xc8+ j.lLlxc3 13 bxc3 "xc3 14 :fdllLld7 . with White facing the problem that if he wants to castle kingside after 8...something for the adven- turous to explore perhaps. is worthy of consideration..tb613j..e7 We divide our coverage as follows: 12 "c2 h613 :abl.. Saint lated pawn... lLlc6 8 cxdS exdS 9 j. with 9 .xc8 7.. there is also a Queen Ex- Exchange Variation.exdS.. lLlc6 was with a quick draw. 9 .. where he a simpler route to equality.1d3lLlxdS 10 0-0 lLlxc3 II bxc3 j.. and after 11 a3 lLlc6 12 build up any initiative. The knight capture leads to lively play. The Knight Exchange Variation has been popular in recent years.•lLlxdS (D) 0-0 ±.bSj.. than in the Pawn Variation. the choice is with the knight or the pawn. For some reason I've forgotten..e2 j. :fdl j. Bl: 8.lLlxc3!?.1xe6 10 . Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 123 ...1b6 wins a rate than 7 . which change Variation.lLlxf4 10 exf4lLld7 has been seen a bit less often since II 0-0 lLlf6 12lLleS . ately in Nogueiras-Damljanovic.td3 :d8 11 "e2 lLldS 12 8.ixc3 the successes of h4 in the New Main 14 :xc3 b6 00 Dementiev-Tavadian.. 9 •••exdS (D) play.tf6!?. 8 . but as with most other 9lLlxdS white options in the . but at the cost of development. Novosibirsk stead of 7 . in.. If Black is to recapture.te2 1995. lLlc6. Black's rooks and bishops will soon . few now believe pawn. and hope that White can't John 1988.td3. but it is not so clear why White should be so much better if Black con- tinues 12 . Erevan 1983 is possible.xcS. Black generally feels happier in the splitting White's queenside pawns. it Mter 9 . then what? II once regarded as slightly more accu.

.. 13. or whether to spend a tempo 14 liJd4 "b6 IS "b3 .f6 14 "c2 h6 15 ~b3 :e8 16 a pawn down is unconvincing: 12. with Lasker not yet castled) 13 :cl (after 13 g4. 14 h4 .d3 side activity seem premature) 13 .i.. London 1899 as continuing 12. 10 . Vaiser-Speel- 1O. rooks. ..i.i.i.. ~c6Ieaves the kingside bare.i. Sochi 1982 continued 11.e7?! 11 0-0 ~c6 12 :cl ..i. For example 13 a3 position: ...i. Bernstein mistakenly remem- bered Janowsky-Em.. Palma Soriano 1986.xh7+ ~xh7 IS Wc2+ ~g8 16 .c2 . = 17 :c2 ~S Lputian-Timoshchenko.lDf6 and Now White must decide whether to a speedy .. and White's general plan will be "d2 . Granda-J ..i. .i.t.i... man.Bernstein-Rubinstein.i.i....f6 14 exd4.Lasker.g3 ~c6 13 . Swedish Ch 1974..i. suggest that 11.b5!. d4 = :labl "e7 17 "cS liJes Blagojevic- 13 .i.i.f5 15 . and 12 .i.. White has preventing it with 10 a3.lDf6 . but I find it hard to agree. The attempt by Black to reach Ib) 11.xc6 bxc6 14 ~xd4 ... .i.b4+.xd2 14 Wxd2 .i. Irkutsk 1986.f6 IS "d2 d4 16 :dl .c7 trapping the queen.. 2) 11 ~f1 has a venerable pedi- gree. .d3 . but w 12..i.lDc6 120-0 .g4 17 11~e2 hS :e8 Ill_Ill.. but 13 . waiting a little ..e6 IS :ac1 :c8 16 ~cS We7 to exchange a pair of rooks on the e.124 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! swann around the white king after 1) II liJd2 takes the knight out of .xc6 dxe3 17 Wd6 ...i. Nik~ic 1997) 13 ..i. in Akiba Rubin- B12: 10 a3 126 stein: Uncrowned King. in his notes.. against his kingside. ...d6.... Our sections: good play against the isolani.i.d6 Ek-Nordstrom.. Bernstein..:ac8.xd4 15 Abramovic.. and to target Black's weak queen. . file.Ar- before deciding the best squares for the mas.i.i.i.t.:e8?? walks into 14 .i. ~e4 makes White's king- allow the bishop check with 10 ..i.e7 12 h4lDd7 (this was questioned by Bernstein.i. or 13liJe5 .e6 14 la) 11 .bl!? is slightly better for White's bishop no longer covers gS) White.f6120-01Dc6?! (it makes lDxc6 bxc6.. more sense to snatch the pawn) 13 a3 Maybe the most promising shot is .e7 (now that now 13 .i.e6 14 :d2lDa5. O.e6.e7 is better than the 'modern' B11) 11.b4+ Black wants to lessen the pressure An opportunity too good to miss. Ostend 1906 continuing 11. etc. Don- B11: 10.bS d4 16 11 a3 lDc6 12 . side pawns.d3 124 aldson and Minev.i.1Dc6 here.b6.i.e7 13lDb3 an opposite-coloured bishops position (13 a3 ..i.. but in fact this was in a different position via a very inaccurate move-order..

txf3 15 gxf3 1If6 16 cow 1981.txh3 18 .tg4 and then: 19 ~fl . Lvov 1981) slight advantage for White. ~g2 (16 a3 .Gure- D. as it allows the rooks to Then: be connected without wasting time.ta5 15 l:lhdl 'iff6 =F 16 ~f1? g5 17 de Firmian-Handoko.tg4 15 .l:le8 14 a3 15 'ifa3 'ifb6 16 l:lhd 1 . 11... b4 a6 18 1:Ia2 ltad8 and now 19 b5!? Wuppertal 1986... before on the kingside. 13 .td6 is not so im.tf6 15 l:lac1 'ifc2 g6 14 l:laci .tg3 .l:.tf6 17 ltadl 'iVb6 18 'ifb5..t Smyslov-Beliavsky.ftfl . This compromises the kingside the even though it leaves his king a little least.hdl ~e5 15 ~xe5 10v-Van der Sterren.te5 with a "" A.ta5 17 ~g2 .td6 19 .te7?! 12 'iVc2 h6 16 .. Kissingen 1982.. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 125 White generally prefers 11 ~e2. Reykjavik vich-Rechlis.ftfl .txc6 bxc6 17 h3 .tc5 18 :lac 1 ~6 = Reykjavik 1982 allows White the O. instead of barrassing accident in Lechtynsky- 12.tg4+ 16 ~fl l:lac8 = Djuric- 1) This time 11.te6 14 l:lhdl might well improve on 19 l:lad2 'ife6 "" l:tc815 'iVa4 'iff616l:labl d417 l:lbcl Seirawan-Campora. 3a) 14 ~fl .. ~c6 14 l:. Black . White can consolidate in the centre. 13l:lhdl 12'iVc2 1) After 13 h3?! White had an em- 1) 12 h3 and now.td6 14 .txd6 2) 12 "bl!? h6 13 l:. Beersheba 1987.td6 14 . Berlin 1982: 13 . Yugoslav Ch 1995. I. An approach worth considering. but 12 .txd6 'ifxd6 13 'ifa4! (13 2) 13 a3 . Black played less vigorously aims for ... d4 before White can sort in Lematschko-Gaprindashvili.. Rotterdam 1997.txc6 bxc6 20 .tg4 15 'ifc5 'ife5 16 a5 16 :lhdl . Mos.Soko- 13 . 16..Foisor-Oll. 2) 13 a3 . . 'ifxe5 16 'ifh4 h6 17 l:ld2 d4 18 e4 l:le8 3) 13 l:lhdl .Meyer.t Bischoff-Kuligowski. g6 has also been played.te2 .td3 12 .txd6 'ifxd6 Lputian.tg3 .t .txf3+ 18 gxf3 13 l:lhdl ~c6 14 a3 ..dl l:. and in Kndevic-P. and indeed Gavrikov-Geller..te7 14 h3 .Petrosian-Lputian..i..te2 'ifd7 16 a3.••h6 Erevan 1982 was agreed drawn here. . pressive: 12 . much. Bad out his king's position. Abramovic.tb6 =F 2) Il.txe5 1Ig5 15 1l•••lZk6 ..tfS 17 17 'ifc5 . Erevan 1983) ~c6 14 c.txd6 'ifxd6 20 l:ld2 l:ld7 21 16 'ifa4 . 13 ...~d4 17 'ifa4... The 1982. smooth development that he wants.e8?! 12 'ifc2 h6 13 l:lhdl A.. weakness of Black's hanging pawns It is essential for Black to get his outweighed White's pawn weaknesses queenside pieces out quickly.tb5 'iFc3 'iFh5 17 'iff6 ~d7 18 'iff4 l:lac8 'ifb6 19 .te6 15 l:ld2 l:lc8 .e8 14 'ifxd6 15 :lhdl .l:le8 is more harmonious.tb5 :lfd8 3) Similarly. .t.. 1993.td7 17 ~d4 .td6 13 "a4 ~b4 14 . Dubai OL 1986. 12. Buenos Aires 112_ 1h..xd6 'iVxd6 is a even though White lost the game in bit too simplistic to promise White question.t l:lcl c5 22 1Ib5 d4 23 b4 ± D.te6 16 l:lacl l:lac8 c. 1) 13 ~5 ~xe5 14 .Gurevich-Gudmundsson..Petrosian-Beliavsky. 3b) 14 'ifa4!? 'ife7 15 ...tf5 19 . Tbilisi 1983.tg4 -+.te6 17 ~f1 a4 18 .. more exposed.

ta3 (20 Maybe this is the critical place to 'iVcS? b6 21 'iVa3 :xd6 22 'iVxd6 look for an improvement...Seirawan-Li combination of ECO. 18 a3! improves on the game's 18 16~d4 j.h3?! ...taS 16 b4 .... but not necessarily better. After 17. but 16 .tf6 18 ':c2 d4!.tfS j.xb4 Wbs+ 22 leads to sudden tactical problems after :d3 'ilxb4 23 :b3 'it'h4 24 :xb7 d4 16. while if 10a3(D) IS ... 14a3 USA 1983 as leading to a slight edge 14 ~f1 ..tc7. the flashy 16 "xc6?! bxc6 17 .. equalize after 16 "xf6!? j.th7+ ~h8 IS lar.xf3+ 16 gxf3 ~e7 17 . 16 ':acl?! 'it'bS+) 20 . Informator. e. j.xd4 18 17 j. 2) ECO quotes Zaltsman-Benko.taS 19 j.b3 looks good. 2S exd4 ~6 26 'ilxc6 0-1 (26 .d2 for White after 13. Biel IZ 1985.126 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5. Tbilisi :ad8 20 j.1.. 10 a3..td6?? 14 . 1978.'ii'xc3 16 bxc3..:fe8+ but Black still has some work to do to would follow)..e6 Is .tb4 21 j.tb6 17 bS..1/2 Mikhalchishin. ..tg4.g. 812) IS . A :xdS ~b4 16 :xd6 +.. This line was a popular try for ..xc3 17 ':xc3 .taS IS . examples below.d6 16. is a massive computer database gives only the two miscalculation rather than a real trap.tb6 16 ..xd4 ..th7+~h8 ':d8 17 ~4 ~xd4 18 exd4 = Quin- IS ... ./4! IS :hd 1 . B w White eliminates the possibility of the bishop check at the cost of a tempo.tg414. under-explored. rather than IS ~f1 :fd8 16 .•e8.tg4 should give Black no This critical position remains vastly problems.t.teS leads nowhere after 17 .xd6 :xd6 18 'ilc3 d4 19 exd4 exd4 Ill_lIz Tukmakov-Geller..te2 .te7 15 j. USSR Ch (Riga) 1985. and Zunian......d6 :d8 20.xf6 17 3) 13 . certainly when com- 13••••f6(D) pared with positions in the more popu- 1) 13 .xc6 1/2.e614 :acl 'it'f6 and now. Balashov. 14•••. Mar del Plata 1982..te7..tbS j. maybe IS a3 could be considered.lDxd4+ 17 . ':abl.c3 teros-Najdorf.. even though Black won a miniature in the game in question.

(13 . lLld2?! lLlb417 "xc8lLld3+! 18.t) 15.. Black has to good for Black is unconvincing. .ig4 14 h3 .c5 dxe3 20 .i.i.i.i. . This strategic retreat. al. is Black's most popular .i.h7+ ~h8 15 ..xe3 "a5+ 14 b4 'irxb5 15 l:tc5 "a6 16 b5 "a5+! 17 'ird2 +) 12.. "d3!? is worth trying.i.i.g3 (15 consolidating the extra pawn. is under-explored: ler...i..i...i... Tolo- play very actively to stay in the game. the white queen Threatening .b6 12 b4 a6 130-0 l:te8 sort of slight but stable positional ad.bl d4! 16lLle4 (16 'it'd3 f5 17 lLlf3 dxe3 18 fxe3 :f6 +Gaprin- dashvili. .b6 12 . SurakartalDenpasar 1982.. Ubilava) 16. Vaiser-Ubilava.. preparing to neu. when Arkhangelsky and Kimel- 10.e7 13 lLlg5?! (13 0-0 .i..ixf3 15 "xf3 d4 00 Ga- prindashvili.i.d4 13 .i..i. taking the sting out of :ac 1 ~7 17 lLld4 Speelman-Chand.b5?! 11.i.ig5!? can be met by 12...i.i.Cramling-Schiissler.h6 14 . g6!?) 14 .lDa6 16 2) 11 .i.xd3 12 "xd3 "a5+ 13 "xf5 "b5 is well met by 18 .i. White should have tried 16 with an early .g4..i.. 11••. .xf5 17 tcr 11 .lDc6 15 .d3 . but 14 with. but af.e7 is also possible..b6 I b) 11.h6!?. I) 11 :cl has only limited point..ib6 13 . USSR 198213 contin- and sometimes has to sacrifice the ued 12 ..i.f5 has also been tried.ig4 13 "c2 l:tc8?! h7-pawn with check. Prague vantage that the Queen's Gambit 1983 was soon drawn after 14 "c2?! player should feel very comfortable "f6 15 :adl d4 16 ..i. White has cause to regret not having castled earlier...ig5 'ii'g6.i.xe3! 13 .d4.d3 (12 . Swedish Ch way: 1983.i.i. keeping an though the example cited by ECO as eye on d4. and now Meduna-Abramovic.f5 "a5+.. h4. 13 .. ..ie5! ~c2 "b6 14 b4 .i..d6 15 ..d3 (D) 15 lLlg5 g6 16 e4 ...i.xd3 tralize the weakness of the d-pawn . Hastings 198112..i.i.d3 . tiansen.ixc8 .d6 "c6 18 . having a good square in reserve on g3...i.d4. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 127 White in the early 1990s..xh7+ ~h8 10.i. Kislovodsk 1982.e6 16 14lLlxd4 c5 15lLlb3 "xdl+ 16 ~xd1 . .ixe4 "xe4 21 "f3 exf2+ 22 ~fl 'irg6 ..a5+ 14 ~fl "d6 15 l:tdl . ll. feld's suggestion of 16..i.xfS . 2b) Black played more actively in as the bishop is going to leave c5 any.. Ubilava) 13 . nen-Kimelfeld. White has the 2a) 11.xe4 19 .f6 12 "c2 .xh7+.i.. but White still stood better after la) 11.e2!?.f5! 17 ..t. or 12 . and now instead of 16 The natural move. and if 14...xc6 bxc6 . ~dl.. D...xd6!? "xd6 16 l:thdl .f4 "e7 17lLlg5 g618lDxe6 fxe6 19 :d8+ 17 ~el 112-112 Browne-Chris..i.

the g6 16lLlxe6 fxe6 17 .td8 17 . the white king's exposure.*.*. J%e8? (20 'ital lIfc8 21 ..Pxh7 ening) 16. ferov-Doroshkevich...g4 15 3b) 13 h3?! is slow...*.c2!? Farago) 12.e6 and now 15lLlg5 natives. for example 18.*. 120-0.xd6 'ilfxd6 140-0 'ilff6 . e.d6 13 "a4 .. passive) 120-0 (12 h3?! .d7 15 lIadl lLle5 16 "f4 ... for example: "xf4 I...d4 does not feel entirely sky.bl ~ 14 "d3 g6 15 ..lIxc2+ or up on the bl-h7 diagonal.*..*. should prefer 13 . but (I'm not saying which!)..f6! 14 b4 . 16lLlxd4lLlxd4 17 'ilfxd4 'ilfaS 18 'itbl side...xd3+ 22 .. 20 "h4+ 'itg6 21 lIgl . but rather 12 Black should have enough..tb5 gave White a ..xh7+ <. Black can im- .b614 'ii'xb6 "xg4+ ± Gavrikov) 19 f3 .*. is also good for an edge.t Skem. IS .*..*.128 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! here.*.d6line.*..*. 12 "a4 (12 .....h6? is a horrible little move.*.. and White is effectively a tempo 16 l:txt2 or even .g3 'ilff6 18 lIhfl problem being not 12 ~5 . when Gavrikov has and now 17 'ilfg4 is bad due to failed to prove an advantage for White 17 .*.Maric. 11 . .xh7+ winning a pawn.*. = 'ilfa5+ 14 'ite2 Alexandria-A.g4+ 22 3c) 13 'ilfb3 g6 (13 .*.d6 aims for gradual equal. White's most direct plan is to pile (18 "e4?? loses to 18. Krasnodar 1991. as given was Gavrikov-Timoshchenko......*.t.xb4+ 15 axb4 21.*.lIc419'ilfd3 g620... although there are several alter.e6 2d) 14 lIdl!? 'ilfa5+ 15 b4 'ilfxa3 13 .xf5 Wxg2+ 21 <.tf5 20 axb6 IS lIabl . Black is uninformative.*.*.d6 . for ways to sacrifice a pawn or two for the example 12 . 15 lIfdl g6 16 lId2 lLlc6 17 lIadl .*. Ih-lh Yu- .xd6 "xd6 13 0-0 Biel 1991) 12.*.*... ..Nikitin-Svidler.*.. "xal 16 'ifh7+ 1-0 Ehlvest-Martinov.*. in terms of . Moscow 1956) 'ilfc2+ ..xb2 14 ..*.*..*.*. 13 .bl (12 .e2 lIad8 = Gavrikov) 12.*.xf4 prove over 13 . Malta OL 2c) 14 O-O!? dxe3 15 lIadl!? ext2+ 1980..c2 ..te6 16 . Not.f5) 18.Pel "gl+ with a .e6 IS (12 .Letelier-L....xe7 lLlxe7 19 lLlg5 ..*. Linares 1994...b3!? 12..th6 l%e8 17 . though less convincing. .c2 is tempting. 2b) 140-0-0 .*..e6??.*..xh6 l:[fd8 160-0.xd3. 'ilfb6 =. Instead. sate for the pawn after 15 .te6 Ch 1986. .*. 'ilfxg2? 19 . h6 14 IIbl .t perpetual.b3? lIc3) 20.t with 13 .Iosif..e7 (perhaps slightly too 1989. bris-D. h6?! 14 "a4 3a) 13 'ilfc2 h6 14 lIadl.xf4 14 initiative.e7 18 .g. ahead of the 11 .Jano§evic..xc4 ..lIc8...*. wasting time and weakening the king. ~7 13 .f6 and now: and now rather than 13 .Farago-Griinfeld.f6 13 "c2 2) 11 . 16 ..g4+ (18 .*. and White can think of ambitious.Sanchez.*. Belgrade 1988.. to compen- 1) 11 ...tf5 16 'ilfxb2 (16 'ilfxf5+?! g6 13 'ilfxf4 d4!?. or 12.*. ity.c7 .*.. Gavrikov-Beliavsky. Still.f5 13 "c2 "as+ 14 b4 .t Titov-M. but even in two attempts: after the better 17 "g5! W'xg5 18 2a) 14lLlxd4 'ilfaS+ 15 'ite2lLlxd4+ lLlxg5+ <.*. 16 b4 ± A..*. Sumperk 1990.txal 18 lLlg5+ 'itg7!.Pg8 Black's queenside pawn 16 "xd4 lId8 17 'ilfb4 'ilfg5! 1811hdl majority might start to become threat- . Irkutsk in a hasty note in an old Informator 1986.. USSR Lputian) 14 l%adl lLla5 15 'ilfa4 . however.xh7+ 'itxh7 15 M.*. Lugansk 3) 11 ...

1) 13 .. a6?! 14 ~gS .e6 .g6 12 h3 (12 O-O!?) 12 .. meeting 24 . . Mos- 23 'iVd3 ~g4.bl also maintains a slight 11123: 12••• ~g4 131 edge for White. for example 12...! . and so is not loss of a tempo in its prevention...~f5 :'c8 16 .. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 129 slight advantage in the game Van der 8121) Sterren-Bonsch.. and is still critical. SurakartalDenpasar 1982.f6+. Anikaev. and now 24 .e4 ~xd4 21 exd4 :xd4 22 :xd4 ~xd4 would have been strong.•f6 that follow. tried a couple of times. slightly improves White's position. ~g4 is the only line given by When playing through the variations . Cannes 1993 J. particularly promising for White..c2 h6 transposes to Skem- is not fearsome enough to justify the bris-Abramovic above... but 12. . ~g4. for example IS .1/2 Anikaev-Geller.hS dxe3 (lS .g4 = Skembris-Abramovic. ~g4 14 h3 ~fS has been placed on c2.. although one After White castles. with 25 h3 and 'iVh7+. neutralized: 12..d4 13 e4 ~d6 14 ~h6 :e8 IS 0-0 a6 16 :cl ~f817.~b6 as the main line.d6 IS l:ta2 /luez. bear in mind that Black IIIIlI 12 ..1/2 Keene-O.. 12.~g4 130-0. as in the Gofshtein-Kharitonov game discussed later.. 2) 13 .f6 (D) 4) 11. Black must de.d2~Panno-Amura. 12 ... with an unclear position."f6 129 Lputian suggests that 14 ~xfS 11122: 12•••d4 131 "xfS 15 . h5 row 1982.. The queen is mis. 13b4 2) 12 h3 is unenterprising.. None of these alternatives is likely to supplant 11. Black is weak on too many dark squares.c2 h6 13 0-0 .... I.~ka Banja 1989... can reach them with h3 inserted.xf7 'iVf6 18 l:td2 l:td8 19 ~bl d4 20 ~xd4 Wc8 19 ~xh6 gxh6 20... 1..h6 16 ~h4 g5 17 ~g3 n·()·o ~fS 17 ~xf7+ l:txf7 18 . but is soon where Black has played 12..d3!? 16 continued IS .Ar­ gcntine Ch 1992. d4 have been played with suc..~g4 13 .·ro. d4 13 e4 h6 14 0-0 ~e6 IS:tel 13.e2 1/2... leaves White ahead of similar lines 3) 12 ~gS is ferocious.. is " perpetual) 16 fxe3 1i'e8 17 ~ fS I H "xe8 1/2. Munich 1991...Rodri..... 120-0 1) 12 b4!? is a move-order tease.. h6 13 ~h7+ ~h8 14 Arlandi-Van Dongen.. Instead White 4) 12 . with White generally castling next move and transposing into the main lines. Vrn.. would imagine that the extra move h3 mle how to complete his development.f6 14 b4 played 24 "h7+?! ~f8 2S 1i'e4 hS i.. I·SS: 14 b5 11121: 12••.c2 d4! IS .

.e4 is on the whole drawish. Black 19 i.fS d4 23 lbes dxe3! (Lputian. 17..Gurevich in In- Jormator 53 gives 17. 2) IS lbeS i.. accurate play White can still keep a 20.130 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.xd416:tcl (l6exd4 whether White is achieving anything i.:d7 22 slight edge.. Thnik-Sulipa.lbe6 18 as i.xb2 23 :abl a6 24 :xd8 :xd8 2S h4 (. 1991 continued 19 ...c2 h6 21 'ii'xe4 dxe4 22 :fdl :fc8 disputes this assessment.c3. Minsk stead of 13 . giving 20.xfS "xfS 18 in another of the lines that Goldin though Seirawan suggested that 19 "f3 i..c7 19lbg4 Goldin.b6 23 i..xf3 'ibfS 1784 After 17 :fdl.:fd8 eliminated any back-rank wornes White 17. but with sky..t Goldin) Black looks stead.xd4 move-order 13 .xd3 :fd8! 18 as 17 a4 (l7lbg4 Wg6 18 Wxg6lbe2+. USSR Cht (Azov) 1991) or.t..•lbxf3+ 16.c7 .... 22 .We7 24 a6.b6 17 i.g.. but and the tactical justification behind Goldin in InJormator 56 claims a 12...•e7 20 14••• lbd4! (D) i..:ac8 18 :fdl :fd8 19 as i.i.. then ±.....t) 22 :ac 1 :fd8 23 h3 h6 24 15 i.Wg6 20 "xg6 hxg6 21 i.. 23 .t Gurevich..xd4 22 'iVxb2 i..f4! 16 a4 as 17 bxaSlbxaS 18 :dl :fd8 should not be too dangerous.g3.c2 "xc2 20 With the white pawn on h3 (via the :xc2 d4 21 exd4 :ac8 22 :fcl i. In- gives... more simply.c7 . Linares 1990 continued 18 :fdl the white pawn on h3 rather than h2 :ad8 19 :ac1 d4 20 i. d4 18 exd4 A spectacular idea of Beliavsky's. Tilburg 1992 (reached via 17 .. with 19. One can remain sceptical as to 1) Islbxd4i.. d4 23 exd4:d5 24 b6 axb6 2S axb6 :xal 26 lbal lbe6 =Brenninkmeijer-Van der Sterren. can equalize either with 19.xf3 21 (see note to Black's 13th).fS). "xbS 19 Wxb7 :ad8 as equal. Seirawan-Beliavsky. WfS 21 i.to slight difference in pawn structure 17... "f3 ..xc7 "xc7!? (20..g4 14 h3 i. al- might keep a slight edge for White..fS in- 23 'ii?fl f6 =.•f6.Wb2 21 i. after 20.e3 :dS (21.xfS :c4. 18 :fdl transposes to Yusupov- Lputian) 17 .xd3 16 .eS. i. but again Goldin .d7 =.... e.. i.d4 =) 22. i.t Lputian-Beliavsky. Dutch Ch 1992. Play continued 20 20 :acl .xc7 lbxc7 22 :fbl (22 :abl f6 =Lputian) 22 . and this gxf3 .xd3 =) 16.... while M.e3 i. the extra tempo proved useful... Yusupov-Beliav- 1993..:fd8 18 a4 transposes.cs might have had. However. lbxc7 21 f3 = Lputian) 21 :fcl "d6 22 . Belgrade safe enough on 2S . it seems that with slight edge for White after 20 a4.xb6 :xc I 24 :xc I axb6 2S :C7 21 axb6 axb6 22 h3 (if 22 . Is. saw the same position..

. If now 21. looks good for Black.. 8123) 12•••i.h2 . 15 i. Aac8 19 h3 (19 a5 transposes tried... 16 .f6!?..Gurevich-Beliavsky. him to play carefully to hold in a very handing White a passed e-pawn.. equality against world-class oppo- ncnts.i. but Beliavsky vich gave 17.h5 defend..f6 will l"IImc with gain of tempo. so that ..d6?. preparing . 22 a6!.:ae8!..i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 131 Afdl) and White achieved nothing af. lLlxd4 ISlLlxd4 18••.. .xf3 20 gxf3 tlt'xd4 16 ... h6 20 a5 clusions on this line.i. rather pawn.e7 12. but Be- liavsky has twice guided the position h. M. lLle5.c4+ moves of tactical fun.e6 is nothing. Aac8 as a more accu.g4.. l3e4 .... continuing 16..i. though.g4 (D) To knock out the pawn protection III'the bishop on f4. notes 15 hxg4 "xf4 16 gS as a possi- rute defence.i. Ihan a winning attempt... A reasona.i. Karpov-Beli- avsky.i. Tilburg 1993. When even 13 "c2 remains un- Icr 18 .. It should be noted though that Gure- "ill After 14. to which we now turn. Linares 1992.xb6 "xb6 18 Ad7 21 b6! Aac 1 i.g4!) 14.... There is not much experience of this.e3 "f6 17 i.c7 =.g6 16 Ad Ae8 17 Ael 8122) ~h8 18 ~g2 f6 19lLlh4 . f6 The general impression is that 17 g3 'it'g4 18 gxf6l1xf6 19lLlh2 'iVh3 12 ..g4 14 h3 i.. ble improvement. However.. Bel- grade 1991. it is difficult to come to firm con- 10 the previous note) 19... (14 Aadl . 13 . perhaps. h6 14 exd4 J.... 16..i..d4 would appear to be a sound enough way for Black to avoid the masses of theory after 12. 15 g4 . Black has a difficult endgame to 13•••i.. .xf3 16 = "xf3 17 gxf3lLla5 was Salov- Beliavsky. but then forces ...i. 12. and Icchnical sort of position. removing his headaches over the g5- hly solid drawing line.e7 ."f6 gives Black a couple of 20 "g4 "xg4 21lLlxg4 Ag6 22 .i.e5 19 .1. d4 (D) Black is comfortable..f6?! is a strange move.

t.:c8 15 ..xc7 Wxc7 18 g4?! (18 :c2!? :ad8!? Georgiev).c7 =..g6 19 :e2 :fe8 .t Beliavsky) 19.d4 and ...t.c7 17 .~h8 followed by .. notwith.. a6 omit. sufficient compensation in Gavrikov- 14•••:e8 (D) Vaganian. but again B1234: 15 :&2 134 we may doubt whether this is the best place for the rook..xf4 21 Wxf4. White must watch out for the f4-square.Georgiev.xf3 d4 16 exd4 .xd4 time.xf3 15 .ltle5 both in the air. White will have to prod the White learnt a lot from this game of bishop sooner or later. Hiibner-Karpov. but this was Reckoning that b5 is no threat..t.f4! 13b3 Georgiev) 20 .t. Epi..f6!? Beliavsky) 19 ...f6.t.xg6 1983.t.g3 (19 Wb3! Georgadze's suggestion.e2?! d4! (18 .t..:e8 15 pieces on the e-file is not important in b4. use for his encounter as Black with 13•••. is extremely drawish..f6?! 15 g4 .. a6 has been tried a few times: w la) If then 15 :a2 d4 16 e4 (or 16 g4 .. 17 "d2 Wb6...t. 18 .t...t..xg6 fxg6! Georgiev) 16..t. f6 20 b5 (20 f4! tives: .. "xb5 ..t. as in Spassov-Georgadze. while bishop back into play without loss of 14.t. Ter Apel 1992 eral times in recent years.. Ib) White's main choice is 15:Cl d4 16 g4 . 18 . This position has been reached sev- shin-Van der Sterren...t.t... Piling 14 .. Dubai OL 1986..bS 14 b4 Karpov the following year.e2?! 132 be a more reliable choice for Black..t. Biel B1233: 15 g4 134 1992 saw instead 17. Tallinn 1988.t.:e8. Evidently Beliavsky as poses. Wd2 . Line this line..t.:c8 18 :el.. but by analogy with . and get the deviation from the main line...t.c7 20 trying a variety of moves. leads to a minor white pawn roller with . Play continued 18 81231) ltld2 (18 :el!? Beliavsky) 18 . Seirawan-Ki.Georgiev. but Black. axb5 21 Wb3+ Wh8 22 13 b4 :e8 (or 13 ..t. with the Karpov-Beliavsky game in has enough play to remain comfort- section B122 (with b4 and ... Alterna- . B1232: 15 :ct 133 Ib2) Beliavsky-Ki.132 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. it is better to restrain the B1231 below.. with White continued 18 ..:e8 19 Wg2 .e2 is uninspiring.. 14. 14..g6 17 . 1) Even so...g6 16 ...g6 17 e4: Ibl) After 17 . able: ted).f6 might B1231: 15. a6) 14 h3 trans. that bringing another piece into play is useful. hxg6 17 Wxd5 grabbed a pawn for in- standing White's bishop-pair. Tilburg 2) 14. and only a quickplay encounter.

lLlds 20 lDe2 (20 i..eS?! (exchanging bishops 24 . gS 21 i.. lOxd41Ocs 22 Wc2 l:e7 23 WcS WdS 2) IS .xf3) 16 g4 i.i.g3!? ao) 20 . lOeS!? l:bS 24 lOc4 l:xb7 25 lOd6. 16exd4 Instead White exchanged queens.... Dreev showed a simpler.. 1990) 19 i..g617 i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 133 I) IS .l:xb7 27 as +-) 27 l:bS +-. a6. 19 ~)xeS IS i.xg6 hxg6 IS bSlDe7!? (1S ... Aktiubinsk (Elista) 1995. Lima.xhS i. and 16 lOxd4 i.xal =+= his far-advanced queenside pawns Gcorgadze. Dreev gives this as equal...a7-bS. Tunik-Kharitonov. and forces White to win This thematic thrust leads to a sharp back the exchange while he still has tactical sequence which liquidates to the chance.g6! 19 We3 1Oc2 20 'iVb3 lOxal :j: 3) IS . prepares the defence IS•••d4 .g3 lOxe3! 22 Wxd8 :axdS 23 l:fellOdS 24 ~f1 :d7 2S l:edl l:edS 26 o!ik3 f6 27 l:d3 '12-'12.. 2) 15 .Spassov. i.. Fta<:nik has suggested 23 what should be a drawn endgame.xbS l:xbS 26 a4 ~f7 Wd3 ~ Lputian-Geller.. Wd7 20 i.xd4 21 T. 18•••dxe3 19 bxc6 e2 20 WxdS ex- nW+ 21 ~ l:axdS 22 cxb7 f6?? A move too far down the track.g3 l:d7 i. tested idea.g6 17 23 l:bl! gS 24 i.... l:d3 2S ~g2 l:xa3 26 l:el! l:f8 . proved weaIc:er than Black's isolated 16•••l:xe2 17 . London :xc7 27 lOxeS l:c3.d4 i..l:bbS.Georgadze. and a Brazilian GM fol- lowed the road a year later. l:c6 with endgame pressure.xd4 l:e7... aS (with the point 16 b5 Instead. lOe7!? 191Oxd4 (19 e4 might improve) 19 .d6 f6 19S2.l:bS 2S i.....xg6 hxg6 IS Wd3 d4 fine though after 25 . a6!? is simple and reliable.. and now repetition with 1985.. is an un- Georgadze. i.e2!? i.xeS i.. Black is 16 g4 i. Wd2 ~) 19 .g6 16 l:a2 d4 17 exd4 24 l:fd 1 lOb6 2S 1Of3 l:eS 26 Wc7 li)xd41SlOxd4 Wxd419 Wxd4 i.c7! 26 l:xc7 19 e4 '12-'12 Speelman-Geller.xd4 17 i.. i. Lputian.xg6 bxg618 bS 81232) Now Dreev-Geller.. New York (26 .xhS o!ik4 = L. 22 ...lOe5.xe2lLlxd4 18 'iVe4 d-pawn in the endgame. Others: and if 2S .g6 =. a6 16 l:a2 Wd7 17 lDes leaves holes in the white position. tactical path to safety.g6 17 i.. lOeS 17 i. 27 WcS would have been advisable. 26 lOxeS l:xeS 27 1) 15 . and if 2S i... 16 i. Helsinki 1992 ISl:c1 (D) headed for a quick but bright draw af- ter IS ... lLla7 19 24 .. but it loses. Bulgaria 19S1.. White's minor pieces are in a tangle. Russian Ch ::: Gofshtein-Kharitonov. 16 g4 i.

c7 (28 .M. Reyk- javik 1994..xf3 17 "xf3 l:lxe5 18 l:ldl "g5 19 l:lc2 l:lae8 =Ehlvest-Kotronias..xa220cxb7 tle too early. keep check- ing the position on the board.. 16b5 16 g4 -*. would transpose to the main line.xg6 hxg6 18 :ld2 (after 18 b5.l:ld8 27 l:lel +-) 27 -*.Gurevich. and again White's Aruba 1992.g616-*. A game with a moral: when fol- lowing published analysis.J4! (26.d519bxc6 . White . 1) 16. Sao Paulo Z 1993. followed side is over-extended.d5 19 exd4 l:le4.g6 17 -*. 25 bS'it' l:lxbS 26 -*.. 15•••d4 The most enterprising reply.lba5. but it B would seem that Black may also kill the tension with 15 ... 15•••-*... etc. lbe5 17 -*.d6 30 l:le8 +.xbS And the extra piece won the end- game in Lima-Milos. by "e2 and f4 . l:led7 and White's king.xg6hxg617 b5 ~ Kharitonov. ter in the centre after 19 e4..lbb2 24 l:ld2lbc4..b4! +-) 29 15 l:la2 (D) l:le7 -*.a5 29 -*. lbe5!? 16 -*. whileI8 .-*.. "xf3 l:lxe5 and now White stands bet- lowed by . is unclear) 18 . particu- larly if the move in question is a quiet one at the end of a long forcing se- quence.. draw with 23 .. The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.xf3 18 for example 23 . and don't just rely on the analyst.g5 In the game Chiburdanidze-Geller. 18 ..g6 18 -*.xe5 -*.. and Black's central block- IS 'it'd3 ~4 19 'it'b3 'it'r6 20 l:ladl ade nullifies White's extra pawn. l:ladS 21 ~g2 'it'e7 22 l:ld3 'it'e4 23 Kharitonov also gives 16 l:ld2 "f6 ~g3 17 g4 -*...... f6 24 h4 l:le7 fol...xf8 -*.xg6 hxg6 19 -*.d6 l:lb3 28 81234) -*. White is 15 g4 (D) prepared to double rooks on any of the central files if required. Black headed for the extra pawn means very little. Possibly releasing the tension a lit. as in the Seira- wan-Speelman game given below. "e6 20 exd4 "d5!...xe5 -*.. 16•••~ Black may well be able to try for more. 1.is analysis by Lima. 81233) The most popular choice.

..g6 18 i. one intui- 25 .!:txel :c4 28 :al and Black was ulti- the opposite-coloured bishops and mately unable to hold the endgame.xg6 8 ..:xd2) 32 'iWdS+ .... USSR Ch play-off Vilnius (4) 1985 continued 24 Wg2 WfS 2S "c2 WgS 26 .... 11k5 .d3 system.d2 "f7 cult for White to attack.fS-f4.gl+ 22 Wg3 he plays actively. able...aS! 27 1i'e2WfS 28 Wh2 :e8 29 "c2 wgS and the deadlock remained unre- solved..!:td3 i. easily) 28 .. after which the plan of develop- i. or 21 exd4 :e4 22 i. Various attempts have been made to tonov) 20 . Play normally continues with 9 . is diffi- is in danger) 29 Wh6:e8 30 i.. rather than 10 tonov notes that 28 "b3+! Wh8 29 a3.!:txd8 for improvement for White..dS+ 24 'iWxdS . plored 10 i. London exd4 1i'xd4 20 1i'xb7 instead... Black is comfort- promotion and a king wandering com........ 'iWxf3 21 gxf3 bolster the Knight Exchange System :ab8 22 i.xb8 :xb8 23 :b2! +..d4.. Smolensk 1991.e3 'iWe5 30 'iWf7 would have won ment with . but highly satisfactory. 'iVxd3 19 cxb7 exf2+ 20 Wh2!! (20 :fxf2 'iWxf3 21 gxf3 . ..t) is unsound. This is the Pawn Exchange Varia- 18••• hxg6 19 tDxd4 1i'dS 20 :c2 tion. Khari.!:teS 33 'iWd3 with a draw. with promotion. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 135 could try picking up a pawn with 19 Here Seirawan-Speelman. Gavrikov-Kharitonov.Gurevich.. under.e3? (a move-order slip. but after 1984 continued 20.!:tab8 = Khari. J:ld8 21 :d2 1i'c3 22 :e2 g6 22 tDf3 "xdl 23 :xdl tDeS 24 tDel Tunik-Komeev. If there is any scope fl tD+ 23 Wh4 i.tg4. in view of .xd4. again aiming 2) 16 .c4! (now the white king often in association with .. 31 "d3 :e2! (threatening .xf3?! 17 "xf3 dxe3? to fix a white pawn on d4.b6..xd3 20 "xd3 :xe2 21 'iWxe2 h6 22 :dl tDc4 23 a4 :d8 is another line where Black suc- cessfully blockades the light squares after having sacrificed the isolani to give White an isolani of his own. Gav- rikov-M.e3 b6 (to ing up. tDc4 21 a4 :acS 20 .. in recent years. Black's active pieces. Nei- ther side can do anything constructive if the opponent holds his ground.!:tf2 f6 26 :xfl g5+ 27 Wh5 "c5 tively feels that it is in the less well ex- 28 i. but Black seems OK if Kharitonov) 21 bxaS. i. "xbS 22 :cS 'iWa6!..... The simple 20. his tDf3+ 2S Wfl tDxel 26 :xc8 :xcS 27 winning chances are slight...i. 82) 17 g4 i."f6 and .exdS (D) 18 exd4 'iWdS 19 l:e2 i. seems more (l7 .xfl (20. when after 21 'iWxd4 entertaining. i. USSR prevent :cS) and Black can think Ch(Moscow) 1988 continued 18bxc6 about attacking with .

e2 ~c6 12 0-0. but the material is sparse.cxd4 8 ~xd4..i. as we exd5 9 . 823) The diagram position is generally a 9l:lcl~(D) pleasant one for White to play.i. ECO 11 ..i.d6 (1O.~ seems simpler than 12..xc5 8l:lcl 11 l:lcl d4! 12 ~b5 . as in the 9 cxd5 ~xdS 10 .i. c5 6 dxc5 ~c6 7 e3 J. 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 ~c6 8 cxd5 Janowsky. Juarez-Campi- (Kasparov) gives 7 . ~xd4 14 exd4 Wd5! = Teichmann- 5 . leaves White's initiative unchal- further possibility 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lenged.d3 136 ample: 822: 9 J. With the c3. and now as equal. 824: 9 ....~d4 there must surely be scope for explo.i.. 5 .136 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! ..e2 and 9l:lc 1. he has chances of manoeuvring against the isolated queen's pawn structure.d3lllc6I00-0andnow 1O. 0-06 e3 c5 7 dxc5 ..b4 telli. to play for pressure that can be arrived at by several differ. ~3 c5 4 cxdS exd5 5 ~f3 ~6 6 .dxc4!?) 9 cxd5 exd5.e2 . 8 dxc5 .xc5 8 bly avant-garde idea for its time.xc5 8.i.. there is also the 1895..e2 ~c6 here..e6 10 .e2 0-0.i. rather than.i. 9J..0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 . leading to a position ~xd5 exd5 line. a remarka- 5 .xc5 822) 9 ..i..and f6.xc5.J.bl ~ If one is looking for something as in the game Steinitz-Burn.eS .f4 ~f6 7 e3..i... and 12.i. 13 ~xd4.i. was. Black certainly does not have the fluidity of piece movement associated with the Knight Exchange Variation..e2 137 ing considered here).e2 821) ~c6 9 cxdS exd5. it makes sense to keep the isolated pawn under restraint. Hastings 1895. I leave this to the reader. while Black will find it difficult to establish w counterplay. 0-06 e3 c5 7 dxc5 .b6 13 ~bxd4 ~6 (8 . stead 1O..e2 ~6 (the move-order be.. For ex..i. and if 7 .i.g4 5 .i.knights still on the board. In- cxdS exd5 9 J.i. The ..i.f4.i.eS 136 5 ..i. We consider ent move-orders after 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 two minor lines first: ~c3 ~f6 4 ~f3 .i. 821: 9 J.f4 system against the 9 .. with no too dangerous: 1O.e2 0-0. White's main.e7 5 .. ration and improvement..i. Hastings against the Tarrasch. noted in the Introduction. choices are 9 .i... along the bl-h7 diagonal..i.d4 shouldn't be Tarrasch is well out of fashion.e6 lll:lci lIc8 12 .i.e7.e7!?) recent InJormator references.. Villa Ballester 1996.i.i.xc5 8 cxdS 823: 9l:lcl 136 exdS 9 ..i.

i.. li)b5. as White is behind in devel- If you can play . li)d3+! 19 'it'd2li)xb2. . but 'if'xd8 (12 exf4?? 'ile7+) 12. An editorial note in In/or- reasonably solid.i.d4! preferred.. tells.i.e2.i. Antwerp 1997) suggest. li)xb4 13 axb4 nor offshoots. Black wins a exdS) in Dreev-Short.e2 . ltXl3+.i. Russia example 11 exd4li)xd4 12ll)xd4 'ilxd4 1992.xa6 .. If anything.xd4 14li)b5 .txa3! 16 ':al 'i'xa6 17 ':xa3 though 1O. pawn by 18. and achieved much less. 1O.xd4 13 11 exd4 .xg2 ':xd8 = Reinfeld.i.li)a6 15 i.te2 li)dS 17 sition (8 a3 li)c6 9 ':cl a6 10 cxdS l:txb2 li)xf4 18 li)c7. 11 .lvanovic.i.xd4 0-0 .. B24. was ~~~~Karpov.e616 a3li)dS =Ye Rongguang-Van and Black wins... Equal.li)xd4 12li)xd4 'ii'xd4 13 'ii'xd4 2) 10 .. thing.xd4 14 li)b5 ...d3?! d4 11 exd4li)xd4 12 .e2 (D) .e7?! 12 .li)xg2+ White's lack of development always 13 ..i..i. .... 11 exd4 li)xd4 12 li)xd4 .i.:xcS exd2+ best delayed.i.i.xb4+ 14 li)d2li)e4 15 exd4 ':e8 16 10a3 li)c7 li)xd2+ 17li)xe8 li)b3+ 18 'it'e2 1) 10 li)xdS?! (this tactic rarely li)xcl+ 19 'if'xcl . There are also a few mi.i.e6 11 0-0 leads 12li)b5? (12 exd4) 12.xc7 16 .. If then 16 . Lugano OL 1968) After lO':c 1..i. with 11 9 . . dxe3 13 'ilxd8 back to the main line.. Black is to be 10.b5+ -+) 13 .xb2 IS ':c2.g4 11 .xc7 ':e8 +) IS .. works....gS?! d4 (11..i.i. d4.i.e2).i..:e8+ as good 2) 10.e6 13 9•••li)c610 0-0 0-0 ± Hamann-Filip. Linares 1995.tb6 15 0-0 (IS White probably does best to settle li)c7? ..Lasker. If any.bS ':e7 1) llli)a4?! 'if'aS+ 12 b4li)xb4 13 19 ':fel Ill-If'].i.d4! exf2+ 14 ~e2 ':xd8-+.i..e7 13 'ii'b3li)aS 14 'ila2li)c6 is also problems... the play is fast-moving.i. ... as we shall see in other settings In this analysis by Kibalnichenko as well) 1O. Instead White tried for 824) more.xd4 . 13 axb4 . Larsen-B. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 137 This will usually transpose.g4+ +..e2 l:te8 12 0-0 e-file.e6 for dull eqUality... according to Kibalnichenko tersburg 189516. d4! should equalize (for bS + Slutskin-Kibalnichenko.. mator 57 gives...i. 1l. The f2-square could also cause .i. while 10. do so! opment and exposed to checks on the 1) 10. back into the main line.. 16 a3 ':fd8 17 li)d6 l:ld7 18 ..b6 15 0-0 2) 11 li)e2? dxe3 12 'i'xd8 exf2+ i.xb4+ 14 'it'e2 d3+ move-order was 8 ':c 1 li)c6 9 cxdS 15 'it'xd3 . der Sterren. 15 . 13 'ilxd4 . St Pe.. Black may be a little better.. after 10 (14 li)xc5!? exd2+ ~) 14..i.i..xd2li)e4 ~) 12. and Zinov..i. for Black. 15 . li)xdS 11 ':xcS li)xf4 12 and Zinov.dxe3 14 fxe3 exdS 10 .i.g4 ~ Steinitz-Em. a6 was reached by transpo. after the suggested 14 Bugojno 1982.i. 3) 11 li)bS 'ilaS+ 12 b4 (12 'ild2 ing perhaps that White's rook move is 'i'xd2+ 13li)xd2 dxe3 14 . li)d2 (captures on cS are met by Seville Wch (22) 1987 (where the .e2 would lead towards standard positions.

txd6!? 'ii'xd6 14 "d3 c5 15 ':fdl Mikhalchi- shin) 13 .. USSR Cht (Azov) 1991. .~7 16 .t Zsu. Moscow tt commit itself before playing ~5.t sense to force the black bishop to Mikhalchishin-Beliavsky.txc3 12 ~d3 .Meduna... U':c1 5) 11 J. but there are ':c8 14 ':cl WaS 15 ~xe6 fxe6 16 several reasonable alternatives.td7 16 ':acl also gives keeps a slight edge.txe5:C8 15 :Xc8 "xc8 16 ~c3 "c5 17 .txf414 Wxf4c5 (14 . Yugoslavia ~e5 .Bauer./41 2) 11 ~a4 .....te5 ~d7 14 .th4 the most popular choice.tf6 17 ~xe6 Wxe6 18 We2 ~c5 19 double-edged positions of the main .tO . E.tb3 "e7 23 "d2 dxe3 24 'ifxe3 .Wb8 lO.t 4) 11 a3 a6 (1l.te6 15 Wc2 :lab8 16 'ii'a4 Wxa4?! (17 . Alushta Federau..tb6 12 ~5 ~e7 13 ~a4 .. Salamanca 1989. This is a pattern White a slight advantage.te5 .. a6 11 ~5!? (11 ':cl .tf6 19 'ifd2 .bxc6? 13 .te7 second half of this book.138 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.g5 seems slightly unthe- The natural developing move. 11.. Baku 1993: 11 190 . ':cl!? .td3 ~xd4 16 ~xd4 ine ways in which Black avoids the . Berlin 1984. .te5 ~4 leads back to the main text) 11..txc3.td4 . White.. most "b3 Wb4 = Shamkovich-Yudovichjr.te7 13 2) 10. Tallinn rpd 1988) 12 ~xc6 bxc6 13 "a4 (13 ..':c8 12 ':cl typical isolated and hanging pawn p0- transposes to the main line) 12 ~bd4 sitions. we shall witness several times in the Abramovi~.t Gavri- kov-Magomedov. 3) I1lL1e5 .t Mikhalchishin.te6 15 'ii'xb8 ':axb8 16 b3 c5 17 :edl 1) 10.':c8 12 ':cl trans- Nikitin-Shur.h6 was not tested very hard ':fc8 18 ':acl g6 {18.tc2 g6 20 ':adl d4 21 b4 iDd7 22 lines..Wb6! 18 ':fdl b3 ':fc8 17 ':fdl 112-112.td4lL1xc3 17 ':xc3 ':xc3 18.te7 12 ~5 ~e4 13 ':cl ~xe5 14 .... .te7 12iDd4 h6 13 . Hungary 1993..t overrun.. 11 1981. It makes more ':fd8 GO Mikhalchishin) 18 ~xa4 .t Cebalo-Rukavina. ..t D. 1993.':c8 12 ~xc6 ':xc6 {12. and matic: 11. as we exam- 14 ~fd4 ~ 15 .~7 12. Moscow 1982) 13 .txd6 1982) 15 b3 WaS 16 ':acl :lac8 17 'iVxd6 14 ':cl .. Black avoids being quickly .te7 15 ~g5 ..td3 ~xc3 18 .Johansen.Polgar-Franco.... poses to the main line) 12 ':cl..ta7 13 .':b4!? Cebalo} in Bagirov-Guseinov. .t Golod-Suetin.. but makes it easier for White Portisch-T.... of which seem to keep a plus for USSR 1964. to achieve a modest positional plus..ta6 traps the rook} 13 . These lines exhibit a wide range of 1) 11 ~b5!? a6 (11.te6 ~5 ':c8 14 ~xc6 ':xc6 15 .td6 (11.td6 12 ~xc6 bxc6 13 . The general impression would 'iVb613 ~b3 (13 ~xc6 bxc614 Wc2 be that White plays natural moves and .

b5!? IS 12.txcS 14 :xcS it tLlcs b4 IIC. These isolated queen's pawn posi- tions can be difficult to judge."e7 may Schussler..•..bS 16 :fdl :c4 17 B243: 11.xaS .. as Black takes a guard off here.txe7 tLlxe7 for White.tn'iWd7 14 h3 tLlxd4 IS "xd4 B242: 11•. as it loses a clear tempo simplified a little too early and a little after 12 tLla4 . 12. he is comfortable 1) 12 . Black should try 14.:c8 and 11..tf6 =Ornstein- being the most popular.txd6 "xd6 14 too directly. is clearly better. Black has several 2) 12 "a4 "b6 13 'iWbS "xbS 14 choices. tLle4 15 b4 "d8 16 .ta7 res 1964. Buenos Ai.b5 .d3 15 :d8 16. When is White better? When is Black equal? This should be regarded with some The general answer is that when.tb417 ..as . bxc6?? 14 . Paris 1935. .. pieces in the centre. was played in Uhlmann-StAhlberg...td6 13 .. 13•••:Xc6 13 . 14 . a recurring theme in this type of position where White has a bishop onf4.. a6 12 tLla4 13 .ta6 wins the ex- change..••. Others allow establish the more active cluster of Black good prospects of equalizing. Albena 1977. vie.••...•a6 139 (IS exd4!? it) IS ..Byrne.. We discuss in detail: :ca 12••• 13 tLlxc6 B241: 11 . .. tLlxd4 14 "xd4 "a5 15 a3 :c6 16 e4 dxe4 17 tLlxe4 J:d8 18 "e3 112-112 8242) Reshevsky-R.tb6 140 "e5 :fc8 18 :bl :4cS 19 e4 ± Tarta- B244: 11••• :ca 140 kower-Klein. 11. is able to The natural reply... When Black..Popov-Marjano. allowing Black to posi- tLlc5 b6 15 tLld3 it L. rather than 12 tLleS!? is a more promising try 14 .. Piling everything on the 11.. with 11.and e- files.te7 13 tLlcs .. USA Ch 1981) 11.a5 14 tLla4 and now. 17 tLlcI4 it Petrosian-Filip.tb619 tLld4 ± Browne-Cifuentes.te7 (D) c-file leads to neglect of the d... Here White be disregarded.tg5 :c8 13 a3 (13 tLld4 at least.. as in the 12tLld4 Ornstein-Schussler game. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 139 After 11 lIcl. tion his minor pieces actively. although one can certainly question the accuracy of 8241) Black's play. .. Eksjo 1982.tb6 tLlxb5 tLle4 IS :fdl . White establishes the more ac- the blockading square in front of the tive piece positioning in the centre he isolated pawn.txaS 18 tLlb5 . Santiago 1981.te7 139 13.to . as suspicion.

Reykja../4! Marianske Lazne 1965... B2444: 12 ~ 141 12 .. d4 if given the chance.xd415~f3 .:c8 (D) 1) 12 ~a4 d4 (another possibility The main line.d7 12.xd4 Taimanov. d4.~xe2+ 15 ~xe2 .. 12 'i'a4! 17. Moscow 1991. USSR Ch (Tallinn) B2442: 12 J.i..i.a3 ~xe2+ 16 ~e2 . 13 :fdl ~4 14 ..g5 d4 14 exd4 'ifxd4 15 . most accurate 12 a3.. J. Seirawan-R.b6 (D) 12. ~! Bukie) 14..d4 13 ~xc6 bxc6 14 exd4 ..J.tg417 Taking the bishop out of range of lOed4 the rook.txd4 22 exd4 :xc 1 23 :xc1 :c8 24 :xc8+ . 1l..txd8 = .b3 22 ~xb6 .i.i.. White now gener- is 12. 15. d4 equalizes. possibly in view ..Bykhovsky.d414exd4(14:fdl ferior square e7.i.xe8 :xe8 21 :fdl Horin...Byme.~d5 =is sim- 13 J. Beliavsky..Heim.. in order to be able to play 17 .. Athens 1981..i.b4 as 14.c4 20 .e7.xf6 gxf6 19 a3 ~c6 20 ~fd4 ~xd4 21 ~xd4 ..txd4 =Kne!evie-Rukavina..xa4 13a3 16 ~xa4 .xa2!? (16.i...tg5 h6 15 . Baden-Baden 1980. sible pin on the d-file... more directly. Karpov-BeJiavsky.. as in Schiissler-S...d6 :fe8 18 :al ~5 19 13.:c818 b3.i.d6?! :a6! 18 'ifxd8 ...~e4 13 ~5 ~xe5 14 J..txf6 a7 for the bishop. B2443: 12. USACh 1981. Mos- cow 1981..g5 d4!? pler) 17 . Gheorghiu-Soylu.g5 141 1965.. .:c8 14 ~cS liz_liz Notkin.txc8 and White should almost certainly win the bishop ending.140 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51. A flurry of tactics leads to a peaceful conclu- 8243) sion. because of the pos. Leningrad 1977.g4 16 ~d4 ~ 17 h3.. Deterring . gxf6 oo ECO) 13 .xe5 ally chooses 12 ~b5 or the perhaps "g5..xd4 B2445: 12 ~b5 141 15 'ifxd4 .i. B2446: 12 a3 142 . In other lines. but it makes Yugoslav Ch (Borovo) 1981) 13 'ifa4 questionable sense for Black to vacate (13 . :ii'e7 13 :fdl :fd8 14 .. while there are a vik 1981) 13 exd4 ~xd4 14 ~xd4 few others too: = 'ifxd4 15 'ifxd4 J.xdl 1/Z-1f2 Vaganian- of 14 .b5 J. Vaganian-Beliavsky. for 8244) example: 1l.th4 :ac8 16 ~b5 'ifb4 17 'ifxb4 ~xb4 18 . then play it to the in. B2441: 12 ~dS? 141 An.a4 141 2) 12 ~e5 ~7 (or.

although ECO 12. 17 "dl ± Chekhov) 16 ~3 .i....xbS .xdS 131fxdS lbxdS 14 :XCS is mistaken in citing this as Quin- lL\xf41S exf4lbd4! 16 :eS lbxe2+ 17 teros-Bolbochan.g4 exd41.b6 14 "d3 .gS 1.i.e7 16 ward pin..hS (lS .f3 is The direct approach. 82445) 12 . lbe7 13 "a4 . 13 lbxc6 bxc6 14 .e7. l l.a4 1. slightly better for White..e7 12 .i.i.txf3lOeS Unclear. note to . a6 13 %lfdl 'ii'b6 is too cautious: 12lbbS (D) 14 "c2 1. llxe21.c4 since a3 and .i...i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 141 82444) 12lDeS(D) 82441) 12lbxdS? This fails tactically. The same trap is also sprung after 12 a3 h6 13 Il.. Baden-Baden 19S1.pieces are so active that White can launch no really effective 82443) attack on the hanging pawns.. The second move with the Keres. Black wins the exchange.xa2 IS h3 .h6 had been inserted.t Chekhov.i.gS pared with lllOes lines (B24.....tg6 17 Black should be OK. 13 1. lbe4 zicker.eS :e8 = J~:­ tively.i. see B24 and B241 respec. Buenos Aires 1976. Black in return aims for immediate 13'irbSd4! piece activity.xbS ...e7?! runs into an awk- 14 lba4 'ifxbS 15 . or with 11 :cl .. 12"a4""6 As Black has no need to fear'ifbS. USSR Ch (Tbilisi) 19S9.te4 ISlL\d2 :cdS 19l:lcdl :reS .i.i..gS . "bS .d6 lbxdS? 12.e7 despite the loss of tempo when com- This inter-transposes with 11 .xf4 15 .gS (12 move 11).txf3 16.xf4 cs 16 :Cdl :b8! 82442) This seems satisfactory for Black... 12 1.t. -lJlacK's.e7 IslOes :fdS 16 . 13 . lbd4!?).... according to Chekhov.i.. 1) 12.. Ribli-Un. 17 b3 :b4 18 . bishop is not very convincing..

a draw was soon agreed in 1981) 13 . although 12 lObS is an interesting try. 13lDd2 13lDfd4?! . the possession of the bishop-pair does not promise much for White..ole7!? 14lDxe4 dxe4 IS lDd6 i.xcS 16 J. Halle the text.fS 19 W'b3 W'g6!.. Black appears comfortable.d2 is a con· vincing reply. as Black's pieces are The most subtle of White's tries.xgS =) 14.... IS "a4 (Kasparov) at ing through an advantage...g. lDe4 IS :cl .142 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. J.b4 18 "dl 12a3(D) lDh5 =+= A.. 20 lDdxe4 dxe4 21lDds ± Chekhov. 21 :c7. White makes a ..fS! "") 16.. but its one feels the play on both sides can be defect is that it abandons the e4-square tightened up.. B 14. given as un- clear by Kasparov.b6!? IS :xcS . a6?! 161Oc3 tially a waiting move.lDxd2 After 13 . provides adequate counterplay..b6im.t. Tal- linn rpd 1988.d6 "b6 17 J. e.. Kasparov.c4 ... merely shows that strong players can make substandard strategic decisions in a quickplay. Hamburg 1996.xd6 16 olxd6 :e8..Eng.eS 112-112... 13.Meyer. After olcs = Tischbierek-Lechtynsky.a5 (why not 13 .e7 17 b4 as 181Oc7 i.b6 14lDb3 ole7 IS f3 82446) lDf616. IS.xb7 20 bS 2) 12.. too quickly. 15••••b6 16 a3 ole7 17 b4 as 18 Wilhelmi.b4 14. but IS .ole713 tDes (13lilld4 'ifb6 :c8! 14lDxe6 fxe6 IslDd4lDxd4 16 "xd4 If the knight moves. Brussels 1986: mediately?) 14 a3 'ifb6 IS b4 tDe4 16 21 bxc6 :xc6 22 :bl :b6 23 :xb6 lDxc6 bxc6 17 lDd4 old7 =P. 13 lDgS lOxgS 14 :xcS (14 i.. H..dl IS "d3!? W'f6 16 a3 (16lDd6 i. 'i'xb6 24 i. Korchnoi-Kasparov...f4! fS 17 i. centralized and active.b6 is given by Kasparov as unclear. lOd6 :cd8 19 lDxb7! .xf8 ~xf8 18 :cI a6 19 lOd4 lOxd4 20 :xc8+ olxc8 21 exd4 = a5 Kasparov.xd6 17 J... Bundesliga 199112.. IS .xdlJ..xd6 J.Petrosian-Magomedov. and his pawns and perhaps the best chance of carry- straightened out.d2 a6 17lDsd4 i. It is essen- first looks good..

. "fIc7 18li)d4li)xd4 19 Wxd4li)e4 20 For 13li)xd5? see B2441. rather than his good ... who has the classic slight edge against 13.eS? (allowing Black to exchange his stand pressure along the b-file. ... and to with.b6? 14 14 . Portisch- 12••• h6 Ioseliani. This is the sort of clear-cut posi- into trouble on as.i.. if the bad bishop.xc8 17 li)f3 Hastings 199011..g3 ':fd8 li)fd4? li)xd4 ISli)xd4 ':xc116 "xcI 17 ':fdl li)hS = Quinteros-Spassky. . = 1) 13ll)eSll)e7 (13 ...d4 =ECO.li)e4!? try instead 13li)bS!? li)e4 14li)bd4.). .i. the point 3) 12.li)e4 and waits for Black to make a piece 14 li)bd4 .. it is more difficult quickly fell apart after 17 ...I.1. etc. Black should we have seen in this system..i.i... It is all the any hanging pawn position (after 14 more surprising then that his position li)xc6 bxc6.i. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 143 little pawn move which will probably white pawn is on a3 rather than on a2. 13 . Others: the player of the white pieces for dis- I) 12 .i. or as protection is removed from b3.d6 move before deciding his own piece "b6 16 . li)xdSWxd318li)xe7+~fSI9li)xc6! 14.. though one would not blame . 18 li)xe6+! Black too waits. placement...c4.xd6 Wxd6 14 trusting this plan.i. .g3 the isolani.f3.gS h6 IS .. rather than 18 a4?!.lbhs. chance of dynamic play for Black that as 14lOci6 wins material. unexpectedly shows White keeps a slight advantage. it should standard plan with 16..i.i.i.i.i. fxe6 19 'ifd3 gives various attacking and leaves open the potential threat of chances.. 13 'iWd3!? is a more 'ifa4 a6 IS ':fdl ':fd8 16 h3 t. made ground using the Another quiet move which...d6 ECO) in Korchnoi-Seirawan. White.i.. This cuts out .h6 17 l:ld2 not be forgotten.. thematic method of development.b6 14li)e5 ':fd8 ISli)xc6 ':xc6 16 b4 Wxa3 17 14li)a4li)e4.aS 14 "d3 13.i.d6 13 .i. London 1973 was very odd.li)e7 15 li)a4 li)e4 16 :Xe8 "ii'xe2 20 li)xd8 ± Suba-Resende. Las Palmas 14 'ifa4 a6 IS ':fdl . a6 13li)bS "b6 (13 .d6!? might tion with well-defined strategic objec- be worth trying.xd4 17 exd4 "b6 112-112 O'Kelly- Amsterdam 1973 is about the first Timman. etc. Reykjavik Wch (14) New Main Lines .i.b6 and now 13 'iWa4 "e7 2) 13 li)bS and now 13 . 13 h3!?) and now 13 . Quinteros-Bol- 1981.xfS ~xfS 17li)bd4 "xb2.h4 gS 16 . the point being that in superbly in his peak years.e7 13ll)eS (13 .. be useful later on (in preparing b4..) 14 ':xcS "xcS IS .. . presumably being 16.the queen getting 1972. now threatens li)xdS..... and now..i.i.i.gS..i. 2) 12. Monaco 1994. a theme we saw a lot in the Old and Fischer-Spassky. boehan.gS trans...1. Buenos Aires 1976. section B241. ..xd4 18 "xd41Dc4..li)b6 17 'ifdl poses to Petrosian-Filip. despite the apparent tives that Fischer normally played loss of tempo.. .i..i.d7 18 for White to restrain .. taking b4 away from a black piece).xeSli)d7 16 .. 3) 13 "a4 a6 14 li)eS li)xeS IS (Minev) or 13 li)a4!? .i.e7!? or 13 . lldc2li)xc3 21 ':xc3 Wd7 22 .i. White can play 13 . . 4) 12..i..

te5 ~ Gligoric) 18. for the knight.xd3lOb4 is slightly better These mostly come under the cate. White Bundesliga 1996f7.5 White's alternatives 7 .te2 lOc6 10 on move 7 0-0 dxc4 11 . cxd4 8 exd4 b6 9 .txcS 10 a31Oc6 11 . central pawn structure. White should try 9 cS!? 883 8 cxd5 lOxdS 9 lOxdS .aS 4.. pawn structure. following moves: lated d-pawn are not to everyone's A: 7.. Ribli-Gligoric.tf4 0-0 6 e3 c5 (D) ll'lxdS lllOxdS . w C) 7 h3lOc6 7 . D: 7. etc. Kazan 1997.te2!? 146 this line as a legitimate winning try. although after further is to find a favourable way to fix the mistakes the game was drawn.f6! and Black had a se. though even here.. Copenhagen 1996. demanding from both players B: 7:et 144 good manoeuvring skills and clear C: 7h3 144 positional judgement. A) ter this line only if Black plays 7 .c21Oc6 8 0-0-0 WaS 9 a3 cxd4 instead of7 . 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3lOc3lOf6 4lOn .xdS 12 .144 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J. a3. Schwierskott-G. as in on the New Main Line. 18lOxb6 ..td7 11 lOe5 :fd8 ao San- White could.Allan. this is usually easily enough done.xa4 good-looking square. .c2.te7 8 . and can use E: 7..te3 . Nevertheless. 10 exd4 . Torbin- Tokmachev.c2!?. B) 7:let.d2 :d8 9 cxdS cxd4 10 exd4 5 . BledlPortoroz 1979....tc6 Savitsky- Rauzer.td3 14S White keeps a slight pull. with .tc4 'if'e4+ = 13 .txc5.xb6 moves a piece out to a reasonably 19 ..tf4 . 0-0-0..txc4 . for Black.td7 14 0-0 .xdS 10 dxcS . gory 'naIve developing moves'.. F: 7 adS 147 The player who seeks the main lines.xdS .c2!? lOb4 9 This is certainly no improvement .tb7 = Kapstan- D. USSR Ch (Leningrad) 1934. will encoun. offer chez-0stergaard.xcS 11 .lOc6 7 .Schmidt. We consider the The heavy positions with an iso. and ignores the 1Oc6! 20 .bl.txa4 19 . cxd4 8 exd4 a6 and rather than 9 cxdslOxdS 10 lOxdS .. if he so chooses..c2 144 taste. Black's main priority rious initiative.f4! bishop.td3 :d8 12 Wbl :xd3 13 . the main line with 8 . Canada 1996.

dxc4 9 i..dxc4 8 i. Schlechter-Rubinstein. 1) 8 cxd5 exd5 9 dxc5 i.b7 13 :el :ac8 14 i.d3 (D) e2.g4! 11 :cl d4!.id7 dxc3 12 bxc3 bxc6 13 Wc2. White does best to on f4 strengthens White's grip on e5) meet 8 .lDxg3 12 :el i.. 2) 8 :cl (or 7 :Cl lLlc6 8 i. into the 7 dxc5 i.Exner-Charousek. Ostend 1905) 8.ixc4 a6 12 a3 b5 13 i.xc4 b5 = Tarrasch.g3?! (too tame.e2 dxc41ine.b7 12 a3 ':c8 13 i... Teichmann-lanowsky.Agdestein. Karlovy Vary 1907. 1907. As noted in the Introduction. Bres- lau 1912. dxc5 i.e7 lLle5?! cxd4 10 lLlxc6 bxc6 11 exd4 (assessed as equal in ECO..) 9.exd5?! Schlechter.xc5? 12 lLlxd5 ±} 11 dxc6 lDxd5 W'xd5 10 0-0 cxd4 11 exd4. Las Vegas 1994.xc5 8 cxd5 exd5.. USSR 1972. and dager. G. G.... Older moves: Less to the point is 9 O-O?! b5 10 i... 9 1O.a2 :a7 . and the move I suggested when 1) 7 ... instead.1.. 9 exd4 dxc4 11 i. Budapest 1897. cxd5! lDxf4 10 exf4 cxd4 {1O.b3 1) S.1. 8 •••cxd4 Played a lot in the early days. Karlovy Vary .c6 13 :e5 Wd8 14 :e3 .b7 = Anikaev-Lis.xc4 and now: annotating lanowsky-Pillsbury (be- la) S. 1ohner-Teichmann} 9 h3?! cxd4 10 2) 8 .al i..a2 Wd7 14 i.d3) B 8.. but White Wb6 12 Wd2 :d8 =was S..e3 lLlg4 with equality.xh7+ <RhS 18 Wf5.. Gausdal 1982) 10 i. volving a grandmaster from this posi- 7•••lLle6 tion.lDxd5 9 11 dxc5 i.xc4 b512 i.1. dxc4 9 i.) where White has taken the unusual decision D) to develop the bishop to d3 rather than 7 i.. lLlc6 with 9 dxc5. Hast- {8 . Black equalizes with 1O.Booth-San...Krahenbiihl-E. (an idea later developed by Rubinstein mann. leads to a Pawn Exchange Variation (7 This line is too quiet. still seems better) 13 :cl "a5..xc4 b6 11 0-0 i.i.b7 11 We2 Wb6 P. Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 145 8•••a6 ~H[c1 cxd4 10 exd4 dxe4 11 80-0 i.xc5 8 i.lohner-Teich.. improves on 14 Wc2. etc.xc4lLlh5 10 dxc5! = i. a6 9 dxc5 will transpose low) for my book on Hastings 1895..I. 10 fxg3?! (10 hxg3 =) 1O.e4 Wd7 15 d5 exd5 16 Wd3 "g4 17 i. dxc4 11 Schlechter-Tartakower... Hastings 1895.xc5 10 0-0 tengarten. and others: the minor-piece exchange 1b) Similarly. now 14 We2.cxd4 9 exd4 dxc4 (9 .xc4 transposes into ings 1895. a6 8 cxd5 (8 0-0 lDc6?! played in lanowsky-Pillsbury. lLlh5 9 i.lDxf4 11 exf4 i. .. as 2) 7 .xc5 12lLle4 i. b6 10 cxd5 lLlxd5 11lLlxd5 Wxd5 120-0 i... but Played in the one modern game in- still a 'naIve developing move'..

i...lDc6 9 cxdS exdS 10 O-o.lrensen.xe2 17 ti'xe2lDe7 Brad- bury-T./41 3) 8 .xc4 lDbd7 10 0-0 leads to positions discussed under lDb6 11 ..b3?! {II 7 . is yet 9 cxdS! is strong.Ragozin-Makogo.i.i. V.eS . = 16 l:ld2 .b7 10 cxdS exdS 1) 8 . dignity after 12.xc4lDbd7 is a more accurate move- order. one of the main databases sug- modest bishop move allows White to gests however that the game actually keep some influence on the d-file.i...eS?! is another way to transpose to the 6 .i.. 8 .xc4 2) 8 .xcs 10 ..e6?? 12 ..i.i. when White's pieces are This poses the sternest test. while .xf6 ti'xf6 13 lDg3 8 . White.i... 9 exd4lDb4 10.Santos.i.146 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.a6 11. cS met by 10 lDfS! exf4 (1O. ..f6 IS l:ld3 ..d3 is misplaced on f4.gS! lDb6 12 ..xd6 12 ti'xd6 fxe3 8lDxd4 13 lDxe3.xcs 8 . l:lxc7.. White should be better. . dxc4 9 dxcS material.Costa-C. b6 systems. 14 lDa4 ti'aS IS b4 wins After 7 . but in such positions the bishop 9 •••dxc4 10 .. 8 ...xc4..i.b7 12 ti'd3 l:c8 =Gloria-Campora... a6 11 . Moscow 1968.i. The ever.c7 1-0.i.i. but This is the one move in this section Black is at the very least losing a lot of that might have been under-estimated. Ceriano Laghetto 1997. its ideal square be.lDc6 9 0-0 dxc4 (9 .i.i..g3?! nov.t ti'b6? lllDdbS ..lDa512.i.i. Copenhagen 1997) E) 10 .xc4 lDb6 11 . finished 12 a3 l:lac8? 13 .c7 1-0 Giretti- Perssinotto.b4 11 7 dxcS .g3lDxc3 14 l:lxc3 ...i.i...xc4 b6 (1O . Bern 1993.cxd4 9 exd4 transposes to the next leaves Black wondering how to regain note.e2 dxc4 11 .i. 8 exd4 much better mobilized in an open po- leads to an attacking IQP position for sition. Moscow ing gS.... as if 7•••cxd4 13 .e2!? (D) a3!?} 11.i.i. lDc6 8 0-0.i. = lDbdS Brestian-Murugan. . 8 ...i. tsov-Bitman.t Skvor- .. since 9 .i.. USSR Ch (Moscow) 1944. How- quick and certain route to equality.i. Portu- guese Ch 1997) 11 a3 . the pawn) 11 d6. Thessalo. aiming for the same equalizing position. threaten- Black does not appear to have any ing to trap the queen with lDa4. b6 10 a3 = lDbdS Averbakh-Castillo. 9. .b6!? could also be tried..c2bSI3lDeS. dxc4 9 .i.i.i..b7 11 l:lcl l:lc8 12 cxdS lDxdS 13 niki 1988.i.d3lDbdS 12 .. dxc4 9 .i. There might follow: OL 1994.e2 variation. Possibly a premature resignation.ti'cs 13 a3.b7 14 a3 l:lc8 IS ti'd3 g6 16 l:lfel l:le8 17 l:ladllDds ~ P. .Sl/.i. 8•••lDbd7?! Missing a tactical trick. b6 9 l:lcl .

Alternatives to the Main Lines for White 147

F) =
i.b4+ (13 ... d4!?) 14 <Rdl i.fS Dos
7 adS (D) Santos-GarweII, Dubai wom OL 1986.
3) 9 .i.d3!? cxd410 exd4 .i.b4+ 11
<Rfl might be worth a try.
9dxc5
9 i.d3 cxd4 10 exd4 i.b4+ 11 ~2
'iVaS:;:Minev.
9 i.e2 cxd4 10 Wxd4 WaS+ 11 <Rfl
~c6 12 "e4 i.d7 13 ltdl l:tfd8 :;:
K.Ryan-Mateus, Dubai OL 1986.
9 Wb3 Wxb3 10 axb3 cxd4 11
~xd4 i.b4+ 12 <Re2 i.d7 13 f3 ~6
again with a slight plus for Black,
L.Gomes-C.Toth, Brazilian Ch 1996.
9.....xc5 (D)
There are obvious comparisons to
be made with the Exchange Variation
(7 dxcS .i.xcs 8 cxdS), but this par-
ticular move-order is less accurate in
that Black has more flexibility in how
to recapture.
7.../oxdS
7...exdS?! gives White the opportu-
nity, should he so desire, of entering
the Pawn Exchange Variation with 8
dxcS. White could also consider 8
i.e2, for example 8...~c6 9 0-0 c4 10
~S i.e6 11 ~xc6 bxc6 12 b3 WaS 13
~a4 ltac8 14 bxc4 dxc4 IS ~b2 11'b4 10 i.d3
16 Wc2;t J.Gonzales-H.Leyva, Cien- lO a31Dc6 (10...ltd8 11 Wcl as 12
fuegos Capablanca mem 1991, or i.e2 b6 13 o-o;t Wislez-G.WinkIer,
8...cxd49~xd4~4?! lOWb3~xc3 Brussels 1993) 11 l:tel WaS+ 12 Wd2
11 bxc3 WaS 120-0 l:td8 13 l:tfdl ± Wxd2+ 13 ~xd2 eS 14 i.g3 was as-
Chachalev-Rabara, Bratislava 1992. sessed by Minev in Informator 33 as
SlOxdS unclear. Korotkova-Strygina, Kaluga
8 i.g3 cxd4 9 exd4 WaS lO "b3 1996 soon headed for the draw after
~6 =B.Sadiku-Wiegner, Berlin 1996. 14...ltd8 IS i.c4 <Rf8 16 <Re2 f6 17
S.....xd5 l:tc3 i.fS 18 l:tdl l:td7 19 f3 ltad8 20
After 8... exdS: i.el, etc. Not very inspiring, but at
1) 9 dxcS transposes to the Knight least White is relatively safe.
Exchange Variation. 10.....85+
2) 9 i.e2 1I'aS+ 10 Wd2 "xd2+ 11 lO...Wb4+!? 11 Wd21Dc6-Minev.
<Rxd2 lDc6 12 dxcS i.xcs 13 ~S 11 <Re2 (D)

148 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.f4!

IIl£ld2?? :dS with a killing pin- After 12...eS? 13 b4 We7 14.tg3
Minev. a6 IS We2 fS 16l£lxeS White wins a
pawn, G.Goldberg-Chekhover, Kiev
1940.
13 b4 WhS 14 l:lel eS 15 .tg3
After the incorrect IS ...:dS? White
won a brilliancy in Ribli-Chandler,
Surakarta/Denpasar 1982: 16 Wc2
.te6 17 .te4 ± l:lac8 18 Wbl g6 19
l:[hdl l:lxdl 20 ~xdl .tg7 21 ~el fS
22 .txe6 bxe6 23 l£lxeS .tdS 24 Wd3
f4 2S l:lxc6! l:ld8 26 l:le8! 1-0. But
roles would have been reversed after
the even prettier IS ...l:le8! 16 Wc2 e4
17 .i.xe4 .i.f5! 18 .i.xfS l£ld4+ - Mi-
1l•••l£lc6 12 a3 .tf6! nev.

5 Black Avoids the Main
Line: ... c5 Systems

The rest of the book examines ways in We are looking for alternatives to
which Black avoids the main line. In 9 ... 'Wa5, of which the most important
this chapter we consider lines where are 9 ...J..d7 and 9 ...J..e7. First we dis-
Black plays an early ...c5, but deviates pose of the unquestionably weak
later. lines. Our sections are:
A: 9•••e5? 149
5.1 Black's alternatives B: 9...a5? 149
C: 9...d4?! 150
on move 9 D: 9...dxc4?! 150
E: 9...J..d6 151
F: 9.....e7
5 J..f4 0-0 6 e3 cS 7 dxcS J..xcS 8
lDc69 a3 (D)
"c2
1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lDc3 lDf6 4lDf3 J..e7
G:9••• :e8
H: 9 ...J..e7
152
153
154
I: 9••• J..d7 155

A)
B 9•••e5?
Is this pure bluff? Or even a mis-
print for 9 ... d4 10 0-0-0 e5? I can see
no reason why White shouldn't just
swipe the pawn with 10 lDxe5, e.g.
1O... lDxe5 11 J..xe5 lDg4 12 J..f4 d4
13 O-O-O! (Burgess). White played
more respectfully in Sobolev-Purgin,
Yaroslavl 1995, with 10 J..g5 d4 11
0-0-0 J..e6 12 exd4 lDxd4 13 lDxd4
In so many of the main lines, Black exd4°o.
plays something like ... J..e7xc5-e7
and ...Wd8-a5-d8. If this gives the im- B)
pression of being an inelegant waste 9...aS?
of time, we may sympathize to some
extent, although Black is of course try-
ing to provoke weaknesses in the
This just eats a tempo.
10 :dl J..e7 11 J..e2 a4 12 e4
13 cxd5 exd5 14 exd5 +- Miles-
"as
white position. Franco del Valle, Seville 1993.

150 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.f4!

C) 14.txe3
9 •••d4?! (D) 14 tOe4 is met not by 14... exf2? 15
tOxf6+ gxf6 16 .th6 ±, but 14.....e7!
is unclear.
White could try 14 fxe3!?
14....c6 IS h3?!
This seems to be one preparatory
move too many. It is the queenside
rather than the kingside that White
needs to be consolidating. 15 .te2
makes it more difficult for Black to
justify the pawn sacrifice. White can
then think in terms of .td4 and, if the
knightmoves,.tf3.
IS••..:te816 tOb3 .td7 17 iOd4 Wc7
This is premature. The tactics fa- 18 ~bl .:tacK 19 .:tel Wb8
vourWhite. It is not so easy for White to con-
100-0-0 eS solidate. Mohandessi-Dutreeuw, Bel-
1) 1O... dxc3 11 .:txd8 cxb2+ 12 gian Ch 1996 continued 20 .te2 /Od5
~xb2 .:txd8 13 .td3 .td7 14 g4 leaves "", while 20 1Ifb3!? iOe4 is not clear ei-
Black with insufficient compensation ther.
for the queen, Gheorghiu-Voilescu,
Romanian Ch 1977. D)
2) 1O.....e7 11 exd4 ~d4 12 ~d4 9•••dxc4?! 10.txc4 (D)
e5 13 tOf5! (13 .tg5 .txd4 14 /Od5
"d6 15 .txf6 gxf6 16 .td3 ~g7 17
o!tle3 b5! and Black is developing dan-
gerous counterplay, Filip-Guimard, B
Buenos Aires 1964) 13....txf5 14 "u5
exf4 15 .td3 g6 16 "xf4 ± ECO.
The text-move is a recent attempt to
enliven Black's play, and is tricky,
though one would suspect not wholly
reliable.
11 tOxeS
11 exd4 exd4 "".
II •••'ite8 12 o!tla4 tOxeS 13 tOxcS
dxe3 Exchanging on c4 before White
Black is aiming for the sort of posi- has played .te2 is a pointless loss of
tion where, although a pawn down, he tempo. Examples:
has enough counterplay on the h7-bl 1) 10... a6 11 0-0 tOIt5 (11. ...td7
diagonal and along the c-file to make 12 .:tad 1 "e8 13 o!tlg5?! {13 .ta2!?;t}
it difficult for White to consolidate. 13 ....te7 14 "d3?! .:td8 15 .tc7 .:tc8

Black Avoids the Main Line: ... c5 Systems 151

16.id6.ixd617.xd6.e718~ge4
'/2-'12 Nickoloff-I.Findlay, Toronto
1997) 12 :adl .e7 13lbe4 ~xf4 14
exf4.ia7 IS :fel :d8 16lOegS g6 17
.c3 bS 18 .idS .ib7 19 .ixc6 :ac8
20 :xd8+ .xd8 21 lDxf7 ~xf7 22
lDgS+ ~g8 23 Wh3 We7 24 .txb7
:c2 2S :dl :xf2 1-0 (26 :d8+ wins)
Nogueiras-J.Diaz, Santa Clara 1991.
White was too far ahead in develop-
ment throughout.
2) 1O... .id7 11 0-0 lDhS and now
12lDgS?! g6 13lDge4lDxf4 14lDxcs lO.txd6
.gS IS .idS lDxg2 16 .txg2 .xcS The obvious choice, but the unex-
can't be bad for Black, even though he plored 10 .ig5!? might be more test-
later lost in Kallai-Eberlin, Bundes- ing.
liga 1990/1. 12 :adl is better, as in the lO••.•xd6 11 :dl
Nogueiras game - the centre needs to If immediately II cxdS exd5, the
be watched. black bishop can get to g4.
3) 10....td7 11 0-0 :c8 12 :adl 11••.•CS!
.te7 13 e4 WaS 14 eS lDhS IS .tcl A new improvement in an old line.
:fd8 (1S ... lDxe5? 16lDxe5 .xeS 17 1l ...:d8 12 .ie2.e7 13 cxd5 exdS
:xd7 :xc4 18 :xe7 +-) 16.e2! g6 14 0-0 .te6 15 .a4 :ac8 16 ~4
17 b4 ± Vera-Borges, Cuban Ch (Mat- lDxd4 (16... a6 17lDxc6 :Xc618 :d4
anzas) 1997. 'fIc7 19 :fdl :cd6 20 h3 h6 21 .tn ~
4) 1O...•e7 11 .ig5 h6 12 .th4 a6 Gipslis-Naglis, Moscow 1970) 17 :xd4
13 .ta2 :d8 14 lDe4 g5 and now 15 a6 18 :fdl :d7 19.tn .c5 20 h3 h6
lDxc5 gxh416 :cl b617lDa4 .ib718 21 .b3 :cd8 22lDa4 'fIc7 23 'fIb6
~xb6 h3! 19 gxh3lDb4 20 axb4 .txn .xb6 24lDxb6 :d6 25 ~a4 :6d7,
led to a short but sharp draw in Suba- and in Capablanca-Yates, Hastings
S.Mirlcovic, Belgrade 1984. White must 1929, the players settled for a draw af-
surely have improvements, starting ter 26 ~b6 :d6. Capa was evidently
perhaps with the simple 15 .ixg5. in an easy-going mood that day. He
could certainly have squeezed a lot
E) harder with, for example, 26 b4, with
9•••.td6(D) standard play against the isolani.
This move has a slightly old- 12b4
fashioned feel to it, and the average 12 cxd5 lDxd5 13 :c 1 lDxc3 14
age of the games below confinns the .xc3 .e7 leaves White little to work
impression. Black is not too con- with.
cerned with minor pawn weaknesses; 12.•••d6
he just wants to blunt the white initia- Black has sacrificed two tempi, and
tive with exchanges. in return has succeeded in luring

transpos. White was starting drawback is that a pin with ~gS could to gain control after IS ~eS dxc4 16 be awkward. White kept a slight edge in Suba.. 10. If fore they are fully backed up by pieces. Chicago 1994 continued IS tl)xf6+?! gxf616~xh7+~g717tl)b4 ~xdl 18 l:txdl "d7 19 ~fS "c7 and White had over-extended himself .tl)xd412exd4~xd4 'ifxd6 16 tl)c3.Ziatdinov... to be the most promising line against 11~g5 . Line E above.. and it would be a brave annotator who de- A straightforward plan of develop.....l:td8 11 Korotylev-Duchov....exdS 1) 10 ~gS is perfectly playable. where Black's extra ... ~xf3 17 gxf3 dxe3 18 tl)fS ±) 17 e4 fol- lowed by h4 may already be position- ally lost for Black.aS..d4? 11 tl)xd4! (11 exd4 tl)xd4 (13 .152 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! White's queenside pawns forward be. In the game Van Wely-Ziatdinov.eS 13 F) ~d3 ~g4 14 h3 ~h5. Black's queenside pawns are After 1O... is probably more useful than White's Or 11 ~gS dxc4 12 ~xc4 as 13 bS a3. rooks are cOMected.... tl)eS. ~d6!? should be this section. 4b) Black does not have to sacri- ing to lines considered elsewhere in fice. comfortable lead in development.... 4) If 10 b4: 4a) Black can try the piece sacri- fice 1O. tween 11 :dl and 11 0-0-0. but the text too is worth trying) 12.... IS ~xf6! gxf6 16 tl)g3 ~g6 (16 .. scribed it as anything other than un- ment. After 1O.. 18 ~d4.....ac8 13 :tfdl l:tfd8?! 1O. a6! Suba) 14 tl)a4 i.•:fle7 (D) ovsky. White's The immediate plan is to play for . The Amsterdam 1994.as. which avoids a lot of the to-ing clear. not as mobile as they might look.tl)xb4 11 axb4 ~xb4 12 tl)d2 ~d7 13 ~e2 :fc8 14 0-0 bS.. however. Hemdl-Martin- 9. and if 11 ~xd6?! 2) 10 cxdS exdS gives an Exchange 'ii'xd6 Black is a tempo ahead of the Variation.d6 IS ~xd6 12tl)xd4eS) 11. Moscow 1996 was ~gS d4 12 tl)e4 (the simpler 12 exd4 agreed drawn after 13 cxdS exdS 14 tl)xd4 13 tl)xd4 ~xd4 14 ~d3 gives a tl)bS "e7 IS "cS. 9 .one w should beware the pawn snatch.e7. White can choose be.as lines.. 'ille7 Korotylev-Duchov game. 13 l:txd4 eS 14 lle4 gives White a clear 3) 10 O-O-O!? might well tum out advantage . Lobron. ~f3 tl)dS 17 fudS (17 ~xdS?! exdS lO:dl I8fudS"xeSI9fub4aS!) 17..:d8.. and fro-ing of the . Dortmund 1983 after 11 ~e2 1O•••l:td8 ~e6 12 0-0 l:. the d-file is cleared suddenly. perfectly playable. as well as against 9 ..

d7 14 ence probably favours White.. tical trick in the game Pinter-Hurme.i.. not always stand we)] on 0... Ziatdinov tried the 12l:lxdS+ piece sacrifice again. Lucas-Hochgriife. Chemin-Plachetka. though White might be able to try for a little more with 17 ~xe6. ± Miles-Kogan. USSR ~xe5 J. dl White's rook no longer covers the 12.. c5 Systems 153 1) After II b4. "dS-a5-dS and White (Chapter 4.f5 17 "xf5? (17 e4! 00 Zi- atdinov) 17. ifa little dull. Doroshkevich-Liberzon.e7 16 h3 l:lcS 17 100-0·0 "e2 "as IS e4.. l1.e2 and now: 2a) 11.xc4 i.i.xc4 as 14 b5 1&5 15 i.e7 13 ~xe7+?! (13 i.xdS 13 i.. and now Gligoric assesses 16. 1) 10 ....d4?! favours unlikely that Black will want to try White after 12 ~e4 dxe3 (12 . except that Black when compared with the 9 i.d6 15 J. Helsinki 19S3: 10 :dl e5 11 i.i. Prague 19S9..xd3 e4 open position... The differ- "xdS (12 .J. 1. dxc4 (14 . but Black's This could lead to positions rather pieces are a little awkwardly placed like the main line.xc4 l:lxdl+ 13 "xdl h6 14 in more favourable positions for him.... . the inserted rook moves favour White) 12 axb4 J. Moscow 1967.i.e7 14 0-0 queenside.i.~b4!? (11..d6 12 .Yudovich.e2 transposes after 1O.xb4+ 16 ~fd2.dxc4. i. this time But 10 0-0-0 is critical. 2) 11 J.i.g5 d4 (11.g5 dxc4 13 i..Toth.g5 d4 fice) 13 ':xdS+ ~xd8 14 ~xc5 "xc5 12 ~5 i. e5 tive in Stean-B. After 12l:lxdS+ has omitted ~f3-d2-b3.d7 15l:ldl "cS with an equal posi- tion. but with the rooks 12 i. 13 c5 i. BledIPortoroz 1979. Line D).e2 G) .aS+ 14 b4 ~xb4 15 axb4 2) White missed an important tac- i..xe5 16lhdS+ "xdS 17 ~e4 Ch (Tbilisi) 1967.xe3 with the bishop-pair in an 13 . is an implausible sacri.xf6 =) 15 i.xd6 l:lxd6 16 li'lc5.e4 12 ~2 d4 13 11•••dx:c4 ~xe4 i.h6 12 cxd5 exd5 13 0-0 J.. Biel19Sl. Ribli-Gligoric.l:lac8!? Miles) 15 . it is Safe. ...xb4 13 ~2 J.. Montpellier 1994.d3 "dS 16 0-0 .0 e5 9•••l:leS (D) 16 J. ..xc31S"c2~ 1ge4 b5 20 0-0 "b2 + Miles-Ziatdinov.. 2b) Black can of course avoid the isolani with 11.. USA 19S0.d3 ±) 120-0-0.d7 14..:tcS as equal. while on Petrosian-M..h4 a6 15 i.i..f5 14 i.e2 lines has omitted . So the knight does teheide 19S9.. winning a piece.e6 14 ~a4 J. Black Avoids the Mai~ Line: . White held the initia. li'lxdS!?) 13 0-0 i..xc4 a6 15 l:ldl i. 11.b6?! 1O...g5 J. Barg....i.dxc4.e2?? d3! 15 i.e7 = his rook is centralized on dS. 11 i...xe7 14 i..

ac8?? 16 l:r. .eS 11 .e2 Wiel.c8 then the dark side of Not 11 cxdS? exf4 12 dxc6 "c7! queenside castling clearly reveals it- Forintos. tinued 11.d3lllaS ISllleS i.i.Almasi.aS.i..d7 i.bS = Mikhalchishin-Bonsch.e2 dxc4 10 "'c2 .. The more turbulent 12111dS 11.Forintos.b1 . l:r.i. then again Black need not ment.e6 12 0-0 h6 13 l:r. Elementary tactical themes in the i.i. Forintos-Vaiser. surprisingly.a8 17 ... 11 c.. self. 10..e7! . or 11.i. for example..i..i.d3 dxc4 11 . mediate pressure along the c-file with haps 13 . Szabo..i.i... .. Dutch Ch 1983.i.. but 11. bS 13 0-0 i.d3 .d4?! 120-0-0.. as there does not seem to be any way for Black to take Black has no need to fear 10 l:r.e7 (D) the 9 .i...xe7111xe7 19 .d3 .gS g6 18 l:r.3.i. 11.i..dl transposing into the Old Main Line..i. at least according to the data- 12.. "as.aS.d7 130-0 "c8 14 .i.a2! (12 l:r.tJf8 17 . try 1O.i.&5 13 exd4111xd4 14111xd4 base. Naturally White does not have to 11•••d4 12 .. White avoids seeking the main H) lines.. Calmly completing his develop..fd1 Black can. but could try for more im- .xh7+ c. tested.i.xc4 transposes..b7 14 l:r.xdS 14 cxdS "xdS IS ..1. consider moves other than 1O. ... Main Line with 100-0-0.dxc4 11 . Black could Ivkov.xdS?! l:r.xc4.154 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.e7 .a6 12 . Hungarian Cht 199213: 1l. After l1111gS.d7 11 l:r.. 10 . for instance.i.dl transposes to 8 a3 lllc6 9 line. which on the whole is uninspiring.i. Budapest 1989) 12 .. but if..g.d1.i.xf6 .g4 while if White angles for the New 120-0.i.) 13 11. then per..f4 Queen's Gambit...c8 12 c.aS.i.... for a slight edge..xd4 IS lllbS ± Langeweg-Van der 10.e2 variation (Chapter 4. replacing 9.i.xf6 14 . good for White.i.d7!? "e7 14111a4.e6 (12 .l:lc8.. e.i.. and waiting for Black to show transpose to the Main Line with his hand.i.tJbl.e2 is enough that on the current state of theory.!.d7 The most reliable.dl .i.. Line DS). .Farago-I.i.e2 be so compliant.i.l:r..i.i.adl "as IS i.gS 13 l:r. and if 11 cxdS?! lllxdS 12111xdS exdS 10.tJb1 gxf6 16 .f4! 3) 10 cxdS exdS 11 . un- linn 1986. Hungary-Yugoslavia 1966 con. advantage of the e-file. All this remains..1..h6?! 12 ..i.xf6 h4 is dangerous.. This unpretentious move might in 120-0 future be destined to become the main 12 l:r. 11.. .. The point is .e4 is also g6 is unclear.xf6 +-. Tal.. Black came hor- ribly unstuck trying to fianchetto in I.. but reaches one of the lines of 9...

Forin- White might perhaps be able to claim tos. could be very uncomfortable to play lar of Black's 9th move alternatives to after 12 -*. particu...e5..xf6 minimum time. Forintos's suggestion of 11 .d3 g6 180-0 some stage.-*. 11) slavia 1985. the bishop is not sation for the pawn in terms of creat- necessarily well placed on d7.. since if 12. leaves Black with too much play a small advantage..... Mirkovic-Cvetkovic..... larly if the position is opened up.. 12•••:c8 10.e2 156 14.xc3 16 bxc3 Wc7 17 -*. ing direct threats in Forintos-Averkin.gS (D) I) 9.dxc4 Finally we come to the most popu. ltlh5. Line 01)...xc4 (Chapter 4. How- IO:dl ever. Wxc3 19 -*.. m!? White can now choose between: 13 :rdl "'6 14 -*. l1-*. 11 :c 1 lIc8 piece-play. 12 cxd5ltlxd5 =..1.a2!? 12: 11 -*. c5 Systems 155 12 -*. Bangiev.xf6 13 cxdS exdS 14 :xdS queenside. Black Avoids the Main Line: .ltle7?! 15 :d2 White generally exchanges on d5 at -*. 'it'a5. for the pawn. 12 Wxc5ltlxf4 13 exf4 :e8+. hardy rather than brave in castling 12. With the rook coming to c8 in 12 -*. Black's main assets are active After 10 cxd5 exd5. Instead 11 .:c8 12 .e2 :fd8 with equality.. h6 15 b4 .e2 d4. 9 .-*..d7 (D) B w 11. and 11 -*.d3 11: 11 -*. Yugo.xc4. and this in itself must count 'We7! as a minor positional victory for Black.xf6 gxf6 13 -*..gS 155 14 -*..!Dxd5?! ltlxd5 pair and a lead in development. White would be fool. Hungary 1969: 14.. 13 -*. and it . backed up by the bishop- transposes.xg6! 'fIg7 20 Wbl .. Black sought immediate compen- On the negative side. is satisfactory for Black.-*.e7! Black's simplest is to let the pawn go.g4 18 -*.!DdS 16 ltlxdS exdS 13: 11 o:dS 157 17 'Ii'd2 -*.3.

g3 l:[b8 17 "a6 "xa6 IS . but after 14. as in Ruban-Geller below.h7+ .b5 14 .i. Nice OL 1974 continued 14.a5?! 14 "b3 leaves the b- pawn weak...i.g5 .tb6 140-0 12) (141Oe4 . Dortmund 1997.. ings.i. 120-0 dxc4 trans..t.. (15 .i.i..te2 lOg7 19 l:Ld3 "e7 20 "d2 .f8 (23 .i.. 13 ...e617 l:Lb5 ± Gelfand-Yusupov.e7. 2a) 16.. lOh5?! 14 .cl! (15 .i.i.a5 13 0-0 l:Lfd8 14 e4 (14 tively for White if Black takes the sec- tDe4.xa6 e4 19 tDe5 (19 ..i.i..xc4 lOh5 (13 ..i. Linares 1991 Not the ideal square for the rook.. l:lxb2 20 l:Lxd7 :xd7 21 tDxc6 ±. may be more accurate.i.e4 a6 19 l:Lb6 ti)a5 Kapengut).l:Lrd8 18 .i.i..xh7+.xf6 gxf6 16 tDe410bS 17 "e2 f5..i.a2!? l:LfdS IS tDd2 .....i.td3. in Kohlweyer-Kon- 1990.. Portisch-Westerinen..xd6 17 l:Lxd6 tDbS IS . rather .c6 21 l:Ldl ± Kramnik-Yusu- pov.td3!? threatening . 12. for example. .i..i.h7+?!~f8171Oxf7~xf7 12 ..i.. h6 ll..e7 15 ti)d6.. If 2) 14 .1Oh5 15 lOeS 23 lOgS . to c4.. a6 13 . USA Ch bly best.xd6 b5 ond piece. Black took the initiative after 13 .tg5 . while Ruban.xh6 wins attrac- I) 12.txf2+ IS"xt2..xe6+) 24 .i.i.te7 12. with the knight possibly coming A refinement in move-order to dis.a5 13 ti)e4 is a try.t is proba- ....e7 16 .e8 24...c7?! ~h8 2S ..i.tfS+ ~gS 26 .c6 =) 14.d6 .d3?! g616 0-0 . 1) 14 .i..i.t) 16 tDbS "bS 17 vating the remaining pieces..i. gxh6? 20 17 ..i... Ru- 120-0 ban.xe619l:LxdS+ than by trying to cash in immediately.i.ta5+ 15 ~e21ObS!) 14. (notes based on those by Gelfand and 17•.e7 ISlDeS!.156 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! makes sense to build on this by acti. courage Black from early activity..xc4 has also been played: 18 "g6+ 'it?f8 19 .l:Lfd8 IS tDgS h6 tDxe4 14 "xe4 (14 l:Lxd7?! tDf6 15 White must be careful not to get car- l:Lxb7 tDd8!). 13 ..c4 +Browne-Christiansen. After 11.. ti)xdS (19 ...xbS? tDxb8) 1l.i.xc4 Wb6 13 ..a2 tDd4 18 Wd2 tDxf3+ 19 gxf3 "xh6+ ~f7 21 ..t EGO) 14 lOgS g6 B 151Oge4..l:LfdS 15 "xb7 e5 16 . 12 cxdS ti)xdS 13 ti)xd5 exd5 14 Wb3 14tDgS _ 1i'a5+ is considered unclear by Ruban.e7.g6+ ~g8 221Oe4! Wxd2 20 l:Lxd2 .i.h6 ± poses. now.i...i. 20 "a4 "cS 21 l:[b4 "c7 22 ti)d4 2) On 12. Black's kingside is ex.i.i..e7 16 "e2.i.td3 g6 15 .i. ried away with the attack: posed. 19...i.e2 (D) IS . for example.txe6.l:Lxd8 20"h4 ±) 20 tDxa7 15 . Instead. 12 . Netherlands 1995.i.e7 =) 15 . 13 lOgS .. dxc4 19.xd6 16 .i.

bishop-pair does not accomplish much. Black's centre and kingside look frag. is also to be considered. 16.i. but the picture will soon pawn exchange is White's one realis- change if Black can play .lbl g6 19 ':d6 12J. collapse. this ile at first..e2 . lDxb5 Wxb5 21 Wdl Wxb2 (2l.Ruban..lbS 17 .. As already take control of the long light-squared noted. Sochi 1989...txg6 q.. Why kingside pawns. 19. c5 Systems 157 . 18 ..•h6 questionable.b4.. With the c.g7 2b) 16 t:j)ge4 might keep chances 22 b4!) 22 . but this is highly 14.lxh6 as slightly advanta- for a slight edge.f6 19 J. as 20 ':xd7 ':xd7 21 Stirring up the mud. Ruban gives some detailed analysis 20••• Wc4! 21lDxbS Wxc2 22 hel of IS .f7+ t:j)xf7 25 'ifg6+ J. the exchange counts for more son to quote the analysis in detail here.. geous for White..g7 lh-lh Ruban- dict being that White is slightly better Geller. for example. 13) 11 adS exdS (D) 16lDxf6+ J. after. After 22 ..and d-files fully ':xd8+ Wxd8 21 J. t:j)xe4 16 Wxe4.bl fS 19 bxc3 . 19•••WcS 20 l:.. White can exchange a move diagonal.. t:j)e8! is a good and surprising de. with Black's a. There is no rea.d6 ':d8 20 draw... Black Avoids the Main Line: .Itfd8? ISlike4 ± Ruban.. Ruban gives 20 lIhe6 t:j)f6! covers everything.. earlier (10 cxdS exdS 11 ':dl ':c8). By a process of elimination. fxe6 23 ..xf6 17 .lal .xe6!? fence. the basic ver. In addition..g7 26 'ifxf7+ 19 J....lbS..lik4 and tic try for an advantage.xh6? J.xfl 20 J. than White's bishop-pair and extra as the text is simpler and better..lxc3!? 18 J. White's hring the white queen into play? queenside pawns remain weak... but wins the exchange .c4! ~h8 27 ':d4 'ifxd4 28 exd4 +-... however.and b-pawns IS••• t:j)aS (D) ready to fill the vacuum. Ruban. ':fd8 White's 14 ..xfB J. IS t:j)ge4 while his queenside is on the point of Not 15 ':xd7?? hxg5 -+ Ruban.J. open....lDaS 17 ':xd7 Black was generous in agreeing the ':xc4 18 Wf3 J.

dxe4 all seem viable.. Biel change Variation offers.f41 White aspires to the long-term po.. we have noted no not be necessary. lIfd8 IS1i'a4 (1S lId2 12.. ~g2 . However..... In Sturua-B. The 1i'c2.~e6.... but 18 e4!? (in.. 22 .. but Dutch Ch 1995. gS!? induces White to playa queen move Bangiev) 17 lId2 gS 18 ~g3 ~fS 19 before Black has to play .i. tOc6 20 ~xf6 ~xf6 9 .... except that White the best pieces of news for Black in the now has the rook on dl rather than on book. h6 ~) 17 ~d4 1i'd8 and now A.. tOxe4 tOdS (19 ..... Debrecen Echt 1992 desliga 1992/3..~e7 and 9. h6 16 ~xf6 1i'xf6 17 lIfdl tOe7 ao 12.~d6. although Black still has to be c 1. Bun- YrjOlii-Dutreeuw.Martin-Dutreeuw.~e6 nesses after 14 .b6 14 1i'bl ~e6 Bangiev) IS .. play to compensate for his pawn weak- 12.. then this is one of Exchange Variation. If 9.i. but the ex- 21 i.. immediately crushing. is White went for the sacrificial option a slightly less flexible mode of devel- with 18 tOgS1Dc6 19 ~xg6 hxg6 20 opment for White....h4 a6 (16.•e7. Black was very passive after development is less economical than 14. following 14•••~d6 15 tOxe6 bxe6 16 ~xd6 up with 22 e4 tOxd4 23 lIxd4 (23 'fixd6 17 lId2 'fieS 18 'fia4 lIe7 19 lId3? tOh7 24 l:[h3 ~h4) 23 . for example 18.. ~d7 in White's favour.Toth.e7 13 0-0.h6 16 i.hS! White can make Black suffer for a (Burgess) defends. ~e6.tOe6 19 ~xf6 ~xf6 20 cxdS) 19 sarily sufficient for speedy equality.. but stead of 18 tOgS) opens up the position 9 . At first I as.1i'e7 13 0. as prepared to enter the Old Main Line Black has no time to put the queen after 10 lIdl1i'aS.Martens. The most important .. losing a tempo.i.1i'e8 231i'h6+ ~g8 24 e4 ..~e7 is really as effective as im- tion that can occur through the Pawn plied in the notes.. 13 ..... l:[dl 1996..0 ~e6 transposes.g3 tOes 19.. The difference favours White. although not neces- (l8 . should have been uncomfortable for 14 lId2 :fd8 IS lIfdl h6 16 tOeS Black: IS ~d3 tOaS 16 ~eS g6?! ~d6 17 tOxc6 bxc6 18 ~xd6 lIxd6 ao (16 . of IS tOxdS. 17 i..1i'e7 15 tOes lIfd8 16 tOxc6 lIxc6 %lcl and keeping the queen at home. 9 ....t Van der Sterren-M. especially since c2 is not a particularly 14 tOeS safe square for the queen. sumed that 22 lId3 improved. Most of these are clearly inferior.. Black's very long time in this type of position. 9.b6?! 14 1i'a4 reaches a posi..•e8! lid lIb8 20 ~f3 hS 21 g3 ~g4 22 with an unclear position. :tfdl ~e4 in Bangiev-Yusupov..eS tOd7 18 i. I do not see anything fewer than nine alternatives to 9. but on the Angling for the endgame.d7 in view sitional pressure that the Pawn Ex. whole structure seems so unconvinc- ing that sacrificial measures should In conclusion.158 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 l. under pressure with 14.b4 ±. change of pawns on dS leaves White 130-0 'fie7 with a nagging positional advantage.'fiaS. The more other hand Black will soon have to complex 14 ~gS gave Black sufficient play ...~d7 has been popular. London 1988. tOxe6 fxe6 21 1i'xg6+ ~h8...a6!) 20 b4 tOc6 21 ~b2 ±.

..xcS 8 'ifc2 ple.tf4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 j.••aS?! 159 A2: 8 ••:"aS?? 159 A3: 8 . etc..Clement. Black Avoids the Main Line: . then the marginally playable: AI: 8 .. j. c5 Systems 159 position for further investigation in A6: 8 •••a6 162 Ihis section is the one after 9 . although sire for completeness keeps these even this seems over-friendly on sub-optimal variations in the book. 9 'iVc2 ~6 10 :d1. Cli- chy 1992.. however. and only a de.. There are. 9 b4 j. with. R.. but rather to stop Black using b4 for a piece..Letel- ur8a3 ier-l. for exam- 5 . A3) 8.te2 and White wins.xb4 10 axb4 'iVxb4 11 After 8 a3 (D): 1t'd2 ~6 12 cxd5 exd5 13 ..2 Black's alternatives This misses the point.dxc4 160 change pawns and force Black to .~ 160 The natural reaction is now to ex- AS: 8 .e7 10 A7: 8 ••• j.'''aS?? A: Alternatives after 8 a3 159 Possibly played very early in the B: Alternatives after 8 'ii'c2 163 morning..aS?! 5. Marostica 1990 was Mostly these alternatives involve a agreed drawn after 9 cxd5 exd5 10 tempo-wasting .e7 should simply develop.e7 162 O-D-O j. White's part. White I d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3lOt'6 4lOt'3 j. ifit wins a piece. Chabanon-C.dxc4.. Our coverage divides as follows: 8. then A) play it..... Though b4 is not top of White's agenda. b6 (D) First two very minor alternatives. a few lines of in- dependent significance to be consid.d7!? A1) 8.Bouton.. White plays on move 8 a3 not to prepare b4. . A2) ered.te2 ~6 11 0-0 h6 12 :cl...b6 159 A4:8.

Sao Lorenco jr consider instead 9 lbxe4!? dxe4 10 1995.xc4.Altan-Och.i. than Black's kingside majority.b7 16 . b5.i.i. 10 .. Black's pieces Leaving the choice of 9 . .. when White is a tempo ahead of the 8 White did not help his cause by play.i. WxdS lIxd8 11 ibd2 f5 12 . con- trol of the long diagonal. Miles . 8. Budapest 19S9....d3 .lbxd5?! 10 lbxd5 Wxd5 11 Wxd5 exd5 12 lIcl a5 13 .160 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J. when White's queenside Taking the sting out of the advance pawn majority will be more effective .i. see 9 Wc2 a6.d3 even 12 g4). Compared with the Pawn Exchange White's extra tempo is only a2-a3 Variation.i. 9 .f4! block d5 before the bishop takes con.b7 10 lIdllbbd7 11 cxd5 A5) exd5 12 ... 9cxdS 9 Wc2 .d6 13 . A4) 9.i... strained by the doubled e-pawns..e2 line.xd6 "xd6 14 lbbS "d8 15 :lel lbc6 16 lbbd4 "d6 17 lbfS "d8 18 "84 ± Van Wely- Stefansson.i.b7 11 0-0 h6 12 b4 12 ':cl!? 12.i. such a great barrier to his attempts to consolidate.a2 allowed White . .xdl+ 8•••lbe4 For 9 . tum out to be very flexibly placed.i.i.i. having the bishop on b7 though. Moscow OL 1994.... White might want to tack in Roiz-Bodnar.xc4 160 14lbd411c8 15 Wb3 b5 16lbf5 lieS AS2: 9 'it'c2 161 17 lbxe7+ Wxe7 IS 0-0 lbb6 Black was already starting to take advantage A51) of White's weakened queenside. .i. a6 10 Wc2. 9 .e5 (or 10 lIxdl 86 11 . and Black can attempt to rather than on e6 is no advantage for prove that this little pawn-push is not Black.i. Adorjan-Sibarevic..i..b5 .xa6 lbxa6 15 ~e2leaves Black with seri- ously weakened pawns for the end- game.xc4 (D) 9•••exdS 9 . Here there is just a single reference section A52.e7 ASl: 9. New York 1994. and after 13 .i.i.g5 .a614 .d3 h6 130-0 lbc6 14 lIabl WdS 15 to build up the standard kingside at- l:fdl 'ilfe7 =.i..i... or the more spirited 9 Wc2: ing 13 b4? (13 0-0).We7100-01ldSll Wc2lbc612 Banja Luka 1983 continued 9 'ilfc2 lIadl b6 13 lIxdS+ lbxdS 14 lIdl a5 'ilfa5 10 cxd5 lbxc3 II bxc3 exd5 12 15 .dxc4 son..e2 a6 = Forintos-Stefans.i. in ECO to go on.

!. ... Black can aim to consolidate with ..e2 White's bishop-pair ensured him a .i.e2 . Pekarek.i.i.i.h3 A sharper approach.:d7.i.i.xc4 gave 120-0 White a winning attack in Adorjan- After 12.b7 15 lOe5.i. 10 lid llObd7 11 ..d6 i..xd6 14 :xd6 lOc6 slight but enduring pull in the end- liz-liz.i.g5! Suba) 12 lIdl . game. 1) 9 .!Ods IS lOxdS i. Czechoslovak Ch 1986... Lucerne 1O. and is hopelessly dull.xe3+ 14 fxe3 "xdS IS .i.. c5 Systems 161 1) 11 0-0 and now 11.i. Chapter 4..b5 12lOe4 ± Miles...b7 14 opening..i.xc4 Prandstetter... Buenos Aires 1964.i. one "a5 18 b4 "d8 19lOe4 lIe8 20 lOf6+ suspects that White won because he <i>f8 21 lIdll-O. .!.te2 .b7 13 . ..xg2? 16 :gl .b7 14 lOxc5 lOxc5 15 lO.e7. Black Avoids the Main line: . A52) Prandstetter. lOd3 lOxd3 18 i.!Od2 b5 13lOde4 i.d7 16 .i..i... Budapest 15 . Erevan 1965..d5 16lOe5 b5 (anyway!) 17 1986.b3 i. lIc8 keeps an 9..Behling.e7 13 lOge4 lOxe4 14 lOxe4lOb6 15 i. was World Champion.!OdS?! 10 O-O-O! "as 11 H . .. leads back to .lObd7 12 .. Alternatively.xc4lOxf4 13 exf4.i. lOgS g6 IS 0-0 leaves Black with very 12••• b5 questionable compensation for the l2 .lObd7 12 lOgS tion .i.e7 12 i. 13 lOe4 .Oliviera.d6 .. .xd6 13 :xd6 bS 14 .... finished 15 .4. the recommended move in the 8 .d3lObd7 (11.. Czechoslovak Ch 1986. b4. but satisfactory for Black proved unable to hold the posi- Black.f3 l:a7. and Black eagerly gobbled the poisoned pawn in Knezevic-Halldorsson.. Portisch-St8hlberg.e2 line (thus with White's pawn still on a2. The rooks soon came off. 20 i. Lechtynsky. rather than as 2) 9 .b7 14lOxc5.i.. 3) 11 b4 . attempting to 17 e4 a5 18 lId3 axb4 19 axb4 lIal+ refute Black's play.e2lOxes 13 i. bS?! 10 lOxb5 "a5+ l11Oc3 the result of any gains made from the lOdS 12 . 9 'ilc2 (D) 2) lllOes. b5 11 .••a6 acceptable position..i.b7 12 Wcht 1985.i. 11 .b5 12 . 10i.!OxcS pawn. b6 l3lOe4 i. After II. i.xdS... Lugano 1983. Simply 15 ... The game f3 .!. Line A 11) is less appropriate here. Muse-Lechtynsky.dl +-.i..lObd7 lOxd5 exdS 12 lOgS g6 13 lIxd5! l1.i. Black would be ready to force a favourable pawn exchange with .xc4 transposes.i..xd3 . Miles-Li Zunian.!tJbd7 .d6.xeS b5 14 i. Reyk- javik 1984: 15 .b7 14 R. Petrosian.b3 .i.!.f5 16 "c3lOc6 17 g4 A.i. and if 15 b4 .

e7 keeps a Stohl-Bus.i.a2 . Once again.i. White can just play 19 .lilhS!?) 120-0 lilxd7 1/2. ':'g8 24 "xf6+ ~e8 2S g3 .. In I.i.e7 to be 14.i. 2) Suba gives some analysis lead.eS! ISlilxeSlilxeS 16..xf6 gxf6 17 "e2 ..:ac8. or unclear position..i. winning attack. After 13 b4 ..I. ~h8 18 .i. Hradec Kralove 1988.xeS lilg4 (IS . Black can im- . 162 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. in view of the natural play. lilc6 leads to Chapter S.lilc6.i. Thessaloniki ':xa8=.h7+ ~h818 ':'d6 Wa719 b4 ~h8 18 ':'xdS exdS 19 "fS with a with a clear advantage for White. White gained nothing Black is under great pressure. solid position.xh7+ line we have just been looking at.c7 of 14.i.xe4 ..i.i.b6 IS eS gen 1992.lilgxeS?? 16lilxeSlilxeS 17 Suba recommends 14 "e2.xe4 IS .i. and now 19 axb4 which White can feel happy about.i. Also.!.e7 14 e4: 15 lilxd7 lilxd7 16lilxc5 lilxc5 1) Spassky notes that Black can't 16.eS ':'fe8 20 . with 14.e7 is a It is difficult to see reasonable alter- complicated sequence leading to an natives.i. IS eSlildS 16 fudS ...b7 followed by . 14.i.i..d4 winning the n •••bS 12. almost entirely transpositional.i.b7 "h7+ ~f8 22 "h6+ ~e7 23 lilge4 Mistakenly given as equal by Suba. ':'a7 17 b4! .i. and this is the most playing an early b4. OL 1984) 16 liJe4 lilxeS 17 "xeS nlldl "xeS 18 lilxcS :a7 19 b4 lild7 20 1) 11 e4lilg4 (ll. Suba-Spassky..i.i.i..e4 axb4. 14 lilxd7.xcS?? 17 .e7 18 .g3 bS 14 . on another Suba 2) 11 0-0 bS 12 . lilxeS IS . "g6 (ls .Schuett. 9 "c2 gle.xa8 in all this! A7) 3) Black's correct plan would seem 8•..xd7 IS . Maiwald . despite his extra pawn..xdS 17 .i.f4! the main line.xe4 Schiiffer.e4 .d3 Wb6 13 lDes exchange.. :a3 20 "b2 ':'a6. 13•••h6 14lDe4! Velden 1995.i.!.. when White ternative to 8.xe5 This is the one fully satisfactory al- .i. "xb7 19 .b7 13 :dllilxe4 14 ...i..a5 8•••a6 9 Wc2 dxc4 transposes to the 15 eS lilhS 16 .xf6 gxf6 "xe4 lilf6 16 lIxd8 lilxe4 17 l::txa8 17 ...i.b7 16 . However.e7.b7!? 14 .. but 14 . in view "e4 +-) 16 "xg6 hxg6 17 lIfdl. 9.i.i.i.h7+ ~h8 18 develop the bishop due to 14.i.i....c6 16 16 ':'adllilf6 17lilg5!? "c6 18 ':'xb7 . IS lilc6.b7? ':'xd7+-.. etc...Farago-W.. German Ch 1993.i.i.eS .i.i..b7 IS lilxd7lilxd7 16 "hS 18 lIel .d3 "b6 13 ':'fdl suggestion. Line H White must be very careful about above (9 ..xeS lilxe4 16 . from the liquidations after 12 liJe4 Less effective is 14 0-0 lilxeS IS ..i.. Gronin- "f6 13 .i.i..i..i..xh7+ 17 .!.Schmidt. lilxd7.. but its effects are will find it very difficult to disentan. as if 14.xh7+ lilxh7 15 ':'xd7 :ac8 prove over 14 ..i.e3 "b8 17.i. weakening of the c-file. lilf6 17 "h4. A6) ing to an unclear position after 14.•...b7 19 lIadililb6 20 lilgS..i.1/2 Piket-Beliavsky..e7).i.xf6 gxf6 21 14•••.te2lilc6 .i.i..

gS!? ECO) ll. to Black's 9th. while 11 B2) . is unthreatening. 10 Alicante 1977..xe6+ Wg7 Black 81: 8 .. for the continuation.... Alicante 8.xc4 (D) =.•86 9 .xc4 Mancebo-Cabrara.••~bd7 163 had slig1ltJy the better of the draw in 82: 8••.i....i.i.85 164 2) The best answer is probably 10 :dl. AmsterdamlAm- hem 1983.. leaving White ef- 9 cxdS must also be good for a se. IS ~xd7 ~xd7 16 ~xcS ~xc5 17 9:dl .. 10 0-0 dxc4 11 .d3 h6 8•.dxc4?! 9 . . 83: 8.lbbd7 1997 continued 10.. B) After 8 "fIc2 (D): This is even less appealing for Black than after 8 a3. 9 . 10...txc4 ~xf4 12 exf4 "fIc7 13 .llhl412exf4 "fIc713 ~gS ~f6 14 ~e4 ~xe4 IS 1Wxe4 g6 The normal move is 8 .. To meet 1O. b5 with 11 ~ ±. B Black has used a simple equalizing plan from Chapter 4.e7! there are several alternatives: 17 ~xe6 fxe6 18 . about lines where Black forces .i.td3 9.~hS. From this B1) position. but 16 fS?! (too adventurous) 16.i. De Roode-Hrsec...~bd7 and now: 1) After 100-0?! lQb511:tad1 (11 .i.dxc4?! 163 Larsen-tiric.. White will not have to worry promising line given under A52 above.tb7 is less well timed..d3 . Leningrad 1977. note '2' is also possible. c5 Systems 163 The simplest. a6 11 0-0 bS 12 Unthematic.tb7 13lbeS ± h6 14 ~ "'b6 wants to come to c6.i...d4..i..d3.. Beverwijk 1964.xc4 ~h5 = Kne!evic-Karpov. 0-0 b5 11 . Black Avoids the Main Line: . as after 10 "'c2 tOdS.3.h7+ ~h8 18 :d6.i. Line D... fectively a tempo ahead of the already cure edge. See B2. Mancebo-Cabrara. as White's extra tempo is a developing move rather than a prophylactic pawn-push. 9•. ~6.•dxc410 ..dxc4 immediately White stands well.. discouraging ... 11 O-O-O"'aS 12 ~xdS exdS 13 e4 c3! recoils badly on White. the knight generally .i..

ixc4 . dxc4 10 .ie2?! .. iLle4.ixg6 fxg6 ao Tabatadze-Michenka. This is a respectable try.{4! 10•••h6 .. al- though after 10 .. 9 . dxc4 11 . iLlc6 9 a3 Wa5 10 . and now 13 considering. Khol- 83) mov admits that 12 a3! . when White's queenside is a lit- iLlbd7 120-0 ±.ixe3 11 bxe3 iLlc6 12 9lLld2 0-0 e5 13 ....ie7 and now 12 Entertaining. 11•••iLlc6 2) 9 .164 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j. and if 10 iLld2?!. in that he has substituted . In- deed..ie2 and now: Ensuring that White has to spend a 2a) The simplest reply is 9 . 20 h3 iLlh6 21 h4 might be an horrible.ig5lLle4! =F O...if3 Wb5 giving White nothing. thus sorting out the problem of his kingside devel- opment before the centre opens up.. Tbilisi 1986. but without White having to 10. iLlc6 10 0-0 Ostrava 1992. then 1O.Byme.ib4 9 .Sachs-Emeste..ixc4iLlbd7 15 e5 WbS 16... 10. tle loose.ig3 d4. iLlbd7 110-0 b5 12lDe4 Wb6 17 :hel g61SiLld4 Wc719... Ali- cante 19S9.ie7 and 10•••lLlc6 11 0-0 d4 9 ... Biel 1991.aS (D) Wh5 14 .ie7!? seems more secure... . 9•••. while 9 .Foisor-Ubi- 1) 9 a3 may obviously be met by lava. in the final position White may be regarded as ahead of the Old Main Line.ig3iLlg4 10. is Black....id7 13 b4 8.. improvement on 20 We2iLlh6 21 ... The main 11 cxd5?! iLlxd5 12 iLlxd5 Wxd5 13 line is similar to S. Altensteig Again. a6 10 iLld2 .. 10 ..lLlc6 11 0-0 e5 Ih-Ih Bellon-Martin Gonzalez. was . However..id7 13 a3 :fcS! 14 b4 WdS kept better control. 10. iLld2..ie2 would have been good for White.e5 12 .ixe4 a6 are fully worth 1) 1l . was fine for Black in Greenfeld-Khol- mov.ixc3 14iLlb3 Wa415 bxc3 dxe3 iLlb3 Wb6 120-0-0 Wa7 13 e4 dxc4 14 =F G.id3 spend a move on a3.iLlxe3?! lliLlb3) 11 Wxd2 dxc4 'it'h8 15 bxc5 iLlxg2! 16 'it'xg2 g6 17 12 .ie2.. 9 .ixc4 =.. Moscow 1975. 2b) Another try is 9 . Pardubice 1995.. 11 :dl!? 1994. but White could have :fdl?! ... iLlxd2 12 a3 iLlh5 13 b4 iLlxf4 14 ~h7+ (1O.id7 is more flexible for Black. lLlc6 10 0-0-0. fractionally early.. tempo on a3. is not a rigorous test.if4 11 O-O?! iLlgS ao Pelletier-Dubiel.ie7 11 a3?! .ie2 and 0-0 for a3 and :dl.ia2~hS 13 :acl ~e7 14 ~c7 Wa7 15 ~d6 ± is too elaborate to be convincing for Petrosian-R.

12 ~b3 .te7 12 0-0 b5 13 ... or at least willing to accept the slight disadvantage it entailed..xd5 20 . We have al- ready considered this variation under the move-order 7. Novi 1993.i. Gavrikov-Begovac.i.i..!. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 M ~f6 4 ~f3 . For example.i. White has a wide choice: A: 8.xc5 9 (1O .e5 ~xc5 11 . ..i..4..ta2 .bl ':c8 15 5.i.te6 14 . c5 Systems 165 over-elaborate.i. Black Avoids the Main Line: . ~6 was regarded as the main line.te2 dxc4 White has an imposing lead in de- vclopment.d6?! 165 B B: 8 ':c1!? 166 C: 8.i...xc5.b7 14.xc3 12 bxc3 e5 13 . ..xh7+ could have improved earlier.dxc4?! is dubious. Black not being frightened of the isolated pawn.!:tadl reason than that it leaves White a "'as 17 a3 .i.te2 14 exd4 is strong.aS!? 5 . Swiss Cht .i. This is premature.d3 b5 12 ~e5 Wb6 13 . still relatively under-explored. Buda- Jlcst 1990. Black 'ifc2 a6 10 ':dl . Sanna-Hawes. if for no other ~xd4 . after 8 cxd5 exd5 9 ... White will not be lated pawn is 7 .txf6 Wxf613 Wd4 Wxd4 14 2) 11. though.3 Black's alternatives ~g5 g6 16 Wb3 'ifb617 e4 ~bd7 18 on move 7 e5 ~d5 19 ~xd5 .i.i. ~bd7 11 . ~xh7 14 ':xd7 ± Miles-Barua. as noted.. attempt for Black.!:tabl . Simply 13 ~b3 "d8 ~xd5 exd5 10 . Another way of accepting the iso..g3 ~f8 21 h4 ±V.i.!.c2 166 D:8~ 167 A) 8 .i. .te2 .i.g3 fud4 ....e2 ~6 (Chapter 4.e718lDc3 tempo ahead of 7 .txc4 ..d8 13 exd4 ~xd4 14 7.xc5 8 cxd5 exd5 9 .Bukaljr-Jukic. British Ch (Edinburgh) 1985) 11 a3. This is certainly not a winning Sad OL 1990.i.i.e7 7.xc5 8 .xd4 15 lLle2 "d8 16 .i.f6 12 .a5 9 . Zagreb 1995. ~6 8 cxd5 ~xd5 9 able to keep the extra pawn. 8 .txc4.... Shneider-Kakhiani.d6?! (D) Back in the early 1970s. 7 .tf4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 (D) This is a more interesting try. Line B2).

dxc4 ..xe4 Wxc5 10 We2 ~c6 11 0-0 :dS advantageous to White. However..i. Dortmund 1992.i..166 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 JJ. 13 ~xd5 exdS 14 ~b3 ± Larsen-Lom.i.. There is extra pressure on the c- ample. the main line. . Black feels obliged to provide a re- treat for the queen. 12 ~d2..e2 ~c6 11 0-0 .b7 13 .i.xc4 Wxc5 and now Sl:lcl!? 10 . Csaba-Kapu. for ex..d711 g4 l:lfcSl2 'i>bl.. and one should Showing willingness to avoid the always be a little suspicious of lines main lines.i. If.i. and slightly . the knight is very un. 2) S.f8?! on b3.Kuijpers. then 12.l:ld8 9 l:lel dxc4 10 .xc4 corr.dxc4 9 .1Dc6 9 ~d4 .. with the queen on comfortably placed on a4.b3 ~c6 is e<Lual according to This looks impressive from the two ECO.ll)c6!? 9 a3lOe4 10 Wa4 than it would damage Black's posi- Black has no reason to be scared of tion.e2 . Beverwijk 1967. the New Main Line. 12 e4 ± Govbinder-M.. 'i>xd2 ~a5! with . bardy. Sticking closely to the themes of 11.i..xc5 9 ~2 .]ohanessen. this formation Black has excellent compensation seems more promising for Black than for the pawn...i.i. S.i.f4! S••.e7 10 .i.Wc5 =. he may try 8.. 10 b4.i. If Black is more am- bitious..i.i. 10•••.i.. leaves Black exposed on the c-file..dxc4 9 . Hungary 1993.i.xd6 10 cxd6 Wb4 11 ~b5 dxc4 12 'ii'a4 a6 13 Wxb4 ~xb4 141Dc7 l:lbS 150-0-0b516a3 ~c617 .xc4 l/2-1fz Mikhalchishin-Azmaiparashvili.xd6 Heading to what western players often derogatorily refer to as the 8 'Russian draw' . 1972.. 9 cxd6l:ld8 10 Wd2 dxc4 11 .i.. There is a promis- SWc2(D) ing exchange sacrifice with 13 ..~ B) 1) S.e6.d8 12 cxd5 ~xd5 ± Larsen-F.d7 to follow af.d3 ~6 11 a3 e5 12 examples given in ECO: 8.i. a5.i.eS ter White has averted the knight fork 13 ~2 ....g3looks more thematic. Attacking the queen with which have not been tested recently. etc. but 10 .i.. 9a3'ii'xcS!? these are old examples. 10 cxd5 exdS 11 b4 Wxa3 12 ~xd5 100-0-0 .xe5 11 .. would weaken White more S•. Monte Carlo 1967. Provided Black avoids any sudden 10•••Wxa4! 11 ~xa4. and loses the C) thread of the game.e2l:lb618 f4 l:ldS 19 e4 e5 with sharp and unclear play.b3 b5 120-0 .i. or S. ~xd2 13 file.f6 accident to the queen..

i.xc4!? :d8 10 "e2 "xeS 11 1) 9 a3 dxc4 10 . We consider: 1) 9 lbxc4 "xeS 10 l:te1 l:td8 11 Dl: 8 .Moloney. Black has no time for 10.xc4 l:td8 11 :cl lbb3 "fS 12 .td3 .. Tel.lbc6 10 a3?! White's pawn-storm on the queen- 9 •••... while a tempo-gain with . lbd417 jM3lbfS 18 . 13 c.tg3! . lactic 10 ... 02) 8.tg31O:6 lbc6 12 b4 "fS = Benko-Ivkov. b5?? in side is rarely dangerous in the .e6 KlingelhOfer-A..i. capture with the bishop..h3 ± Goldin- Geller..f3.. is given as ±...e7 :d7 13 . 14.••dxc4 (D) 0) 8lbd2 (D) H 9. lbo d4 14 exd4 lbxd4 15 lbxd4 lIed on opposite flanks.i..xd6 10 cxd6. Mill Hill 1997 ..i.. lbxdS exdS 12 . Black Avoids the Main Line: .i.:xd1+ 15 "xd1 .10:6 14 0-0 Croueh-N. lack is a few tempi ahead of White's.td7.d6 In another dodgy ECO verdict.I.) Aviv 1964. Even so. The prophy- IS .t>n I?) 13 ...xe2 14 :xe2 .xCS9:c1 2) 9 . when. is best.d7 = Plachetka-Prandstetter.i..i.cS ment.tb4+ 13iOd2 (13 there was not enough to squeeze in c. 14 h3! . b4 16lbxc8 l:txc8 and Black's at.f4 view of 11 ..eS l1lbxc4?! .. Sochi 1989. system.i. = . Czechoslovak 01) Ch 1978.i. this Strongly discouraging the simple re... 10•••eS 11 b4 "d6 12 .tg3 l:td8 13 always useful when the kings are cas. 8 . Dort.. c5 Systems 167 14 lbxc4 bS! 15 o!M6 (15 b4lbxb4) always needs watching.1. with the move 14 improve- mund 1993. un- 2) 9 lbb3 "b6 10 cxdS lbxdS 11 fortunately for the author's Elo rating...xCS 167 "e2 lbc6 12 a3 "fS 13 .Nikitin..te2 (13 D2: 8 ••• dxc4 167 "xfS!?) l3 . this might be White's best try. 14 :dl (14 0-0 lbbS =. Yugoslavia- 14 gS 'DhS 15 adS lbxf4 16 exf4 USSR 1967. = "xd4 Gligoric-Geller. 9 •.t>e2!?.

6 .i. 6dxcS 14•••. corr. ous lead in development... and ued 9 .xc4 is w safe.e2 ~bd7 18 tried. but way behind in development in regain.. Czech Republic 1996) 8 along the c-file.. once having the isolani.. ~4? 16 f4!.. when Black has fallen a long bringing pressure to bear on e4.txc4 0-0 9 0-0 gives rise to a the- IS~bcS.Meduna-Brameyer.. but generally chooses not to.i..tb3 possibly a little better.f4 cS (D) B: 6.f4! It is tempting to try to keep hold of the extra pawn.. ... a piece to 14 .te7 A: 6•••.:d8 6 .gS queen exchange with 16 Wd4 is White's b6?! 13 ~dS exdS (13 . 12••• b4! when play could transpose to the main Improving on the horrible 12 .4 The 5 ..i. cS before cas- ~xe4 WeS still gives Black a danger. 11 . but the effect is to re- tard White's development. c5 system fen 1995... for example. Play contin- Black should be at least equal.txCS 169 5 . suggest that what usually happens is Vriac 1977.cxd4 7 exd4 dxc4 (simplest.i.d7 6 e3?!justifies Black's move-order.~bd7 10 :el ~b6 II .tc6 matic IQP position.t in E.. 1l••• bS! 11 .i.te2 WxbS 19 axbS ~b3+ 20 ~c2 ~S 21 b4 ~b7 22 e4 is clearly better for White. The obvious continuation 14. Cher- nenko-Rovner. Knezevic-M.Kapelan. with White for But not IS .td3 fS 10 h4 .0-0 ISWd4! Wxd616'ifxd6lhd617:cl 8 cS ~e4 9 ... with the idea of . but de- 13 ~b3 Wb6 14 Wd4 Wxd4 15 ~xd4 viations are possible.i. White's position...~fdS leaves Black less of the white knights. Offering the tucked up on the kingside) 12 . that White exchanges on dS and gains 13 ~b3 "eS 14liJa4 14 Wf3? bxc3 15 Wxa8 cxb2 wrecks comfortable play against the black isolani. a6? lines if both sides are willing.. if deadly dull.d7 GO leaves Black with a few weaknesses Horak-Efler. 12~aS?! But 12 ~d2 b4 13 ~e4 ~xe4 14 Black may play .~6 could be :d8 160-0-0 :xd6 17 . given the tangle ~bdS?! (l1..~c6 12 Wb3 :b8 13 a4 b6 14 WbS . Bad Worisho- 5.i... various games from the early 1970s ing his pawn.f3.~dS?? loses most prudent choice. 7..i.. tling. Now we have: 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 31Oc3lM6 4 ~f3 .a6 15 Wxa6 ~b4 16 'it'bS ~2+ 17 ~d2 ~xa118 .i..168 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j.xdS) 14 ~eS . White's natural response is 6 dxcS. 1970.liJa6 169 .

but Black is worse off 'iVc2 g6 160-0 d4 17 e4 with perhaps a here through his bishop being pas- slight edge to White. sively placed on e7. 6. He may continue: nich 1994 takes the game out of estab....e7. Black is threatening . (5) 1969.xc5 though from force of habit Black usu- This would quickly lose independ. ally castles first. maybe hoping to estab.xc4 ~S 13 B1) = . Moscow Wch There is nothing particularly star.. Moscow 1992.i.. iar from the Nimzo-Indian (1 d4 ~f6 2 Play continued 11 ~5!? 0-0 12 ...~c6 Here there are three examples: 1) 8cxdS~dS9~dSexdSlOa3. 7. Black Avoids the Main line: .h4 ~5!? 15 8 .d3 c4 e6 31Oc3 .. leaving White free to develop bxc3 0-0.i.i.e5 . then 9.. c5 Systems 169 A) and no worse than 5..i. Mu.i.i.. 0-0 10 Itdl ... This form of development is famil- lish the bishop on f6 before castling.•..eS .. Unclear play resulted B2: 7 ..1Oc6 and then castle.cS is probably no better now fell for 14 .i.xd5 'ifxdS 14 c4 Hertneck) 12. Bern 1995.b4 4 'ii'c2 c5 5 dxcS 0-0 ~xe5 13 .e2 0-0 (8 .0-0 transposes to the Knight Exchange Variation..i.i.i.. Hertneck-Beliavsky.e7 (1l... 6•••..i.i... without interruption. 2) 8 ..'iWb6..i.. Bl: 7 e3 169 lished theory...i.xf6 'ii'xf6 15 6 ~f3 ~6). Petrosian-Spassky.i. 0-0 goes straight Begovac.i.t) 10 Itdl 'ii'a5 11 1) 9 .i. while 8 .dxc4!?) 9 cxdS ~dS Itfd 1 ~g6 16 . The normally alert Petrosian tling here. .xc4 ..f6 14 .t) 9 .d6!? 170 after 11 ~d2 (11 'ii'c2! Hertneck) 11.e7 12 0-0 0-0 13 ~e4 .e2 ...t D.. 8 ..i.b4+ =..i.i..i.t Itc8 12 Itcl a6 13 h3 bS with unclear Whiteley-McDonald.i..e2 0-0 10 0-0 . a6?! 8. 0-0 6 e3 c5.i.xc3 10 idea.xe5 .~a6(D) sider the deviations.0-0) 9 0-0 (9 This takes all the bite out of the . back to the main lines.. 9 'ii'c2 'iVb6 10 O-O-O?! ~c6 would be taking great risks with the king.. 10 ~dS exd5 11 .g3 b6. rather than on b4.b4!? (8 ..exdS and then: (9 .e6 11 . Black varied with 1O.~dS gains nothing for Black: 9 'ii'c2!? dxc4 8 .i. London 1994. Here we con.xd4 . Now 10. ent significance if after 7 e3 Black were to castle immediately or to play B) 7. play. 7e3 7 cxdS ~xd5! 8 ~xdS exdS is un- promising.. S.Gurevich- 3) After 8 a3.. ~a6 1i'c2!? ~ 10 0-0 .d3?? d4! IS . w lind if 9 e3.gS 7 e3 ~c5 8 adS Itd8 13 'ifc2 h6 14 .i.. In Chekhov- Anikaev.dxc4! 12 ..i..

d4lile4 IS "d3 b6 16 2) 7 .f6 14 .. 82) change. The text is startling. for example..f3 .i.d6!? (D) 14.d6lilxcs 9 . Black could.i.dxc4 8 "d4 0-0 9 e4lLld7 10 more extensive database gives three . equal.e2 "b6 12 "b3 "xb3 13 axb3 Depriving the bishop of an impor.eS l:fd8 13 "e2 a6 14 l:fdl .. 9 lbxdS exdS 10 . Amsterdam 1971..g4 140-0 :ac8 15 11'b3 :c7 knight.i.i.i. Orlowski-Begovac.i. lilb4 14 0-0 .i. Gheorghiu-Rubin- etti.i.f3 .xe7 "xe7.d7. See the Intro- duction for the complete game.i. but this is far from conclusive.. but now there is more sympa.lilaxc5 extra draws. Lvov 1978.. quoting pieces to exchange.t.. Tukmakov-Savon.xe2 17lilxe2 "eS 18 l:adl thy for an approach involving ex... but bishop' is the target.0-0 8 cxdS exdS 9 e3 (9 l:fdl l:fd8 with equality.i.. Black's 'good Darga-C.. ECO gives 14lild4 and then 7 ..i.i.i.i. there seems to be no reason that the ..i.i. but dom. This plan cited in the text actually went 7 cxdS gives Black's other pieces more free.xd7+ "xd7 12 0-0 White too can pick a pair of minor ECO tersely gives this as ..i.i.!.g3lUd8 16lUdl 'ii'bs 8 .i. but it avoids Switzerland 1994. a 1) 7 .c4 winning the ex. . 16lLld4.i.xe7. Danielian.bS+! .xd6 "xd6 16.e2 .i.d7 11 . a6 14 "xb6lbxb6 IS .i. but White's minus score II l:dl ..e2lLlce4 12 "d4lilxc3 13 protecting the isolated pawn with the "xc3 . exdS 8 .i. Black has 7•••lbxcs 212 from this position! Apparently.i. Havana 1965.xd7+ "xd7 11 0-0 0-0 12 .bS+ .xe7 ~e7! 17 :ac1 lile4 . Balatonbereny ECC 1993.i./4! lilxd3 16 "xd3 ..xe7 "xe7 10 e3lilxcS transposes to Nikolac.t.xd6 12 "xd6 "b6 13 . Prague 1970. the tedious positions reached after Chess technique is still evolving! A 8..bS still stands. 14 l:cl is about lilel Wf8 17 .. Mar del Plata 1971.xc4 (10 eSt? Portisch) 1O. b4 in mind..d7 10 . . on the database I am using.i....!.d7 IS :fdl :fc8 16 tant retreat square. there is a simpler and better plan for White: 9 . Portisch- 12•••0-0 13 . 13 .e5 :'c8 Ivkov. 170 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.d6 IS . consider 14. for example 9 cxdS exdS 10 generation ago..t and White has effortlessly achieved pressure against the isolani. players felt happier e3 0-0 11 .i. B 2) However. 14•••f6 IS . with .i. the next note) 9. changing Black's passive f6-knight for It should be noted that the game White's active c3-knight.xd6 10 cxd6 "xd6 14 "d4?! II .t Portisch-Bobotsov..i.i.Bielicki.

....tbS . . Black Avoids the Main Line: . mund 1973. c5 Systems 171 king capture can't be tried against the 9•. etc.te2 'ii'b6 7 i. Black's king looks = 12 Wd4 :hc8 13 0·0 ltlce4 14lt:la4 temporarily exposed.d6 move-order.:e8. 17 ltlxbS ltlcs 18 ltlxcS :xcS 19 9cxdS ltld4 I/z·112 L. ..•exdS 10 e3 . ~f8.te6 11 . but it can soon Wxd4 15 ltlxd4 .td7 16 .txbS he secured by .. Dort- 9 e3 dxc4 =.Popov-Spassky.

but may still be OK if White little extra room to manoeuvre to give takes care. White's main hope of making progress is either to play for a Pillsbury Bind with cxdS. and the .. a move D:' i. can claim E:' l:[c1 190 easy equality without making a serious F: 5••• b6 (instead of 5•••0-0) 194 .. c6 and related sys- the chapter..b6 system. with 7 i. or to play against the hanging pawns if Black plays a In effect. with ambitious.d3 187 behind and with less space. now we examine what hap. the main system is simple and unpretentious choice is between 7 cxd5. etc. Our sections are: Few would contend that White's A:' Wc2 173 advantage is anywhere near decisive if B:' i.r40-0 development. simply and unpretentiously. position. and the avoidance of un.e' assault on the logic of White's plan of 5 i.. we reach Part 2 of the later .d3. at the end of system. ment. We have so Also..e2 174 Black plays quietly.. White's basic plan in the i. see Line F. chances of a lasting edge. but challenges White's initiative with an since this was in an under-l0 tourna- early . 7 Wc2 has had a big cloud his pawn structure providing just that over it.b4+ 8 far considered what happens if Black lLlc3 :j: has crept on to the database.. or whether Black is gradually edging his way towards a playable middlegame with chances for both sides.. i. In the ...6 Systems with .d3 and 7 development.b6 For S. l:[cl. b6 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3lLlc3lLlf6 4lLlr3 i.. but it would also C: 'adS 175 be difficult to argue that Black.. tems discussed later.c5. a game with 7 lLlbS? i. The important theoretical and practical question is whether this is the sort of slight advan- tage that is likely to be the prelude to a bigger advantage.. lLle5..f4 from the diagram. it would be unfair to cite the ex- pens if Black too is content to play act reference. we look at this shortly.e2 being solid and un- necessary exchanges of pieces. 7 i. Wf3.b6. cS.. Thus with both the . we are in the ter- 6e3b6(D) ritory of a slight but unquestioned advantage to White. In terms of particular moves book.

if accepted.i..gS ..i.~S is going to be a big problem.d3 10 "xc?? is extremely risky due to This routine developing move is not 1O. Sochi 1989.d6 14 .xf6 see why this should not be played... 9 ..i.i. as noncommittal as it looks. etc.e6 17 .i.. This pawn sacrifice.b7 (9 ...xd3+ 13 pying the long diagonal.i. better pawn structure to work with.. 9 .e2!? 9 ~xdS "xdS 10 . White could also win a pawn by 9 ~bS?!.e2 of. .h4+ 10 ~dl ~6 11 .i.i..cS?! 8 dxcS bxcS 9 .2. 11 ~e2 .xh7+ ~h8 12 .~xdS 14 . c6 7 "c2 b6 11 dxc5 (Chapter 7. 13 ~2ll:la6 +...... 31..~6!? 10 a3 cS 11 dxcS ~cS is worth considering.xb2 and White had the for example 12 J:[dl "xcS 13 0-0!1.i.i.. . Black can 10 a3 "a5+ 11 ~2 =.exdS on the database is ancient..i.xc4 10 ~xc4 ~dS 11 ~xdS "xdS axb6 16 'lfb5 120-0cS 13dxcS"xcS 14l:acl ~6 If White doesn't exchange queens.a6 12 l:hcl .. Line E).i.. 10•••c5 tacking White's centre with .xeS d4 (16 .i. I) For 7 .. exd4 ~6 14.xb7 dxc3 18 l:xd8+ l:xd8 19 he ignores the pawn and just develops.i.i.Gure. 11 ..i.b7 Bewersdorff-Rybak.b4+?! the bonus of having the bishop occu.. 18 l:ad 1 . tinued 9 ....i.fS.t 7 •••.. .. Marseilles 1988 con..i.f3 cxb2 20 .i.d3 and rather than 9 . lows Black to take the initiative. now revert to the aggressive plan of at. al- vich-Dolmatov.xf6 .h4+ followed by ... see 6 .f3 ~xeS wins a pawn and exchanges queens to 16 . but Black has compensatory piece activity after 9 . New York 1889.t Gurevich) 10 0-0 But White shouldn't accept..i... b6 173 A) 8cxdS~xd5! 7"c2(D) The one example of 8. fers White the pleasant prospect of play 11•••h6! against the hanging pawns.i. when Black's hanging pawns soon fell apart in Blackbume-Taubenhaus.i.cS..d4 10 exd4 cxd4 11 12cxb6?! l:dl ~c6 120-0.i.. 7 .i.l:c8. Maybe 9 . al- ll:lbd7 11 l:fdl l:c8 12 l:d2 "b6 13 though one would have to see over ten cxdS exdS?! (l3 . 12..t moves ahead in a line where White Gurevich) 14 ~eS :Cd8 IS . = Khalifman-Pigusov..a5+ 13 ~e2 along with his bishop-pair.~bd7 10 0-0 cS 11 dxcS bxcS 12 l:adl h6 13 . .i.i. c6.i....d3 cxd4 13 2) 7.i.xd6 "xd6 IS ~gs.e4 ~d4 .xc4 13•••l:c8 14 "b3 ~6 15 l:hc1 ..i.xc7 "e7..a6 8 ~S dxc4 9 . Systems with . Prague 1989.i. .. with The check isn't worth it 1O. M.xc3 19 bxc3 ± Gurevich) White still has chances for an edge if 17 . "xd3...

:et w 26 ~c2 J. Sochi 1996. 26•••J. and naturally B wants to keep a tight pawn structure to make use of his extra pawn in the end- game. with a draw being the likely result... 24 ..c5 0-IIzkuznykh-Pushkov.e2 (D) on all three games on the database! We are in the middle of one of the deepest and most subtle opening traps there is.xg2 27 f4 gxf4 28 exf4 J. but in the time that Black takes to win the pawn back.d3 J. Pushkov got a second chance to find the correct move! 25 J.. and kov.xd6 cxd6 14 J. .xe5 26 .xb5 J.d4 32 ':c7 J. White has won a pawn..f3' bxc4 26 ~b4 ':xe5 27 J. White can get all his pieces into reasonably active play.f6! 18 ~e5 ':dl cxb3 + was Naumkin-Pushkov.d3 dxc4).g3 ':a5 22 J. g5 21 J. i. As with so many games from the 22••• ~4!! Soviet and ex-Soviet school of chess.d4 30 J. 20a3?! B) White made this identical mistake 7 J. It is only with the benefit of hindsight that one can say that 20 a4! is the correct way to play.xg2 30 f4 gxf4 31 exf4 J.xc4.xe5 J..d6 13 J.c4? 80-0 It is still not too late for 22 a4.d5 33 ':a7 J. The trap is sprung.e4+ 29 J. Naturally the pawn cannot be held in the long run. :c5! 19 :Xc5 ~c5 (D) Azov 1993. see Line 02 (7 into.c5-+ Oragomaretsky-Koniushkov. The cleanest kill.xe4 ~xe4 31 ':dl (31 ~d3 ~c5+) 31.174 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 16••••xb5 17 J.xd5 10 0-0 ~7 II ~5 ~xe:). The most interesting traps are those 7•••i. if slightly unthematic.xe5 i. b5?! 25 ~xc3 12 J. Erevan 1983 took longer than five White's position is about to collapse.J. 20.e4+ 27 ~d2 ~bl+ 28 ~e2 ~xa3 29 J.xe5 28 Ih-1h.. ~xd5 ~ 23 b3 ~+ 24 ~d3 ':xe5 ~d5 J. Suddenly the one wonders whether A.Nikitin-Bai- black pieces are totally dominant.xe5 J.~1 1995. Astonishingly. Ultra-solid.b7 which only a strong player would fall For 7 . minutes: 8 cxd5?! (drab) 8 ..dxc4 8 J..d3 J..

xd5 is impossible O-O.. c5 (T... pawn exchanges could be SlOxdS considered. for ex.. it is difficult to see although there is no immediate refuta- what Black can do with the pawn. for exam- ple 1O..exd5 ment in view of 14.. li:)xd5 (D) 9h3 White keeps the tension.Georgadze) is a touch order to clarify the position in the cen- premature. C1} antee equality. b6 17S For 8 :c 1. taking the gambit pawn with White.t gives Black the problem Cl: 7 •••li:)xdS 175 of the hanging pawns) 10 cxd5li:)xd5 C2: 7 •••exdS 178 II li:)xd5 "xd5 12 "c2 with a slight advantage. in 8 .b7 9 i...Schulz.... Bradee Kralove in view of the weakness on a6) 14 b3 1992.t Fiedler-Pallova.... 15 Wc2.... White can Black is still able here to recapture ei- now try 9 dxc5 i. i..d3 c5 11 li:)xd5 exd5 (13 . tion of9 i. That having been said.b7 10 i..li:)xc3?! 9 bxc3 i.li:)bd7 change pawns here sooner or later... fore opening the centre. bxc5 10 ther with pawn or knight: cxd5 exd5 .xc4 cxd4 12li:)xd4 (12 exd4!?) 12.. Instead it is diffI- Now Karpov-T.Georgadze. which not only wins . After 8 i..xc7!?. Karpov in ECO suggests 13 8 .xc5 (9 ... ory.. 9 . White will generally want to ex- 8... Moscow cult to see why Black should voluntar- 1979 continued 13 "bllD7f614:dl ily strengthen White's pawn centre by cxd4.d3 c5. With White's development tre. and is more likely to be able to close to completion. 7... dxc4 11 i. see Line E2.. lla4:c8 Again. the critical reply is 12 adS lOxd5 8. the 7cxdS normal move with the 7 :c 1 move.c4 creating a 8 . but if White avoids the 1) No one seems to have risked immediate exchange and plays. . Symmetry does not guar. Instead 9 li:)e5 li:)e4 1O:C 1 li:)xc3 11 :xc3 ll:)f6 12 :el dxc4 13 :xc4 c5 was equal in Tomczak-H-l. note to C) White's 8th (7 :el i.. S.to I was at first sceptical of this judge..i.. We now move on to the heavy the- order would be 8 cxd5..•. not yet on b7.. it is wiser for force a pawn recapture if the bishop is Black to get some more pieces out be.g3..e2).xdS has also been tried: passed pawn.. ample.b7 8 i..h2 a6?1 The pawn becomes a potential tar- get here. 2nd Bundesliga 1983/4.0 10 i. Systems with .:c8. Black probably has several routes to a reasonable game..

a4 c6 IS 0-0 (IS b4!?. Austrian League 16 "b3 lbd7 17 i.lba6!) l1.. but it releases the tension .ta6! 16 1.cS?! 10 .'iVg6 threatens tory for Black.tbllbf6 13 lbes .c2!?.tfS 12:c 1 i.c4 12 .txeS 15 drov-Landa.g3 .>n . awkward bishop check. Two attempts 2) Instead. the insipid 9 .. instead of21 :c4 9•••i..tb7 14 We leave the lack of votes for 9 . . :fd 1 .bl ± 'ii'c6 18 'iVxc6 lbxc6 19 :d7 2) 10 0-0..e2lbxdS 17.a6 20 :fdl :acS 21 i..txfS 1-0 Dreev-Dor.. 0 bS 15 b3 .td3 14 . 2c) 9 . b4-bS.SchrolI-Bradner.e4 1./41 a pawn.tf6 17 ius. Now 18 h3..d6 11 e4 ~ 'ii'aS 12 ...xg3 13 hxg3 ..td2 . (ll. aS! G.txc119 game White blundered a piece .t Donner-Darga.i. although later in the .. with games 1) 9 .ta611.lbd7 11 :cl (II dxcS!?. cxd4 13 0-0 is a more accurate move. defend..e6 (Oreev's notes in Informator 57 sug.t 14 . Tisdall-Kveinys. and now. also possible: 2d) 9.xd3 c6 16 lbo lbxa6 12 "e2 'iVb7 13 :fdl :fdS 14 lbd7 17 .xb6 :fb8 proved perfectly satisfac- g4? is pointless.b6 14 e4 lbc6 15 exdS lbb4 sue with 11. but The onus must be on Black to justify there is the drawback that Black has an the sacrifice..txd2 14 .o lbf6 =Aleksan- 1989/90) 13 1Ic1 eS 14 dxe5 ..t R.te2 .ta6 2a) 9.i.g6.c7 ... Moscow 1979..>hS 13 1.c2 h6 13 order. as 17.tb4+?! 10 r.teS lbb4 18 i.te2 23 .cS is possibly slightly favours White. but also cuts out the .txa6 14 :acl .tb4+ 10 lbd2 i.Scher- e4 cxd4 IS lbxd4 lbcs 160 a6 17 bakov-Landa..td3 has to bypass this problem: generally been chosen.tb4 13 1...a6 lUcS 18 :c2 ..txd6. the immediate 21 eS!? The usual irritant..i.h5 (12 .. Thematic in that White places the thus helping keep the centre secure.b6 16 .tfS h6 18 .zilbershtein-Pigusov.lbc6 12lbeS lbxe5 13 . and :xcl cS 20r..b4+ (D) :feS 22 eS 00..xb2 22 ences: .c4 .d6 11 2) 9 .ta6 10 0-0 cS 11 . Black's position is tedious to Minsk 19S6...td3 h6 130-0 ..txh7+! r..c2 g6 15 b3 .tb4+ 10 lbd2 i.. West Germany 1969) 12 .d3 dxe3 14 fxe3 :ad8 was equal in Ruderfer-Butnor- lba6 15 :adl lbb4 16 .txeS ..txd3 15 .txa6 White's d-pawn. The clas- = :ac1 lIac8 D.td3 is tempting...d6 a3 . in Irkutsk 19S3...td6 . bishop on its strongest diagonal.176 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. although 9.aS+ 10lbd2. sic 'minority attack' pawn structure.tgS :fe8 17 i. lurmala 1991.a4 15 :hcl .tb7 11 0-0 1) 10 dxcS bxcS 11 0-0 i.xc7 as an unsolved mystery.t) oshkevich.xd2 .xd6 12 ..t) IS .txf6?! (winning material 9. as now Black can confuse the is. which Black's c-pawn is held back by 2b) 9.cS break..>e2 1.d6 11 mostly tending towards early eqUality. Rostov on Don 1993.. won! Oslo 1992.i. 2a) 1O.c2 . lurmala 1989.•xe4+) 17. l1. . 1. and White can pre- "xa6 12 'ii'e2 c5 13 .>hS 12 .te6 gest that 11 .txbS 'iVxe2+ 14 pare to lay siege to the queenside with r.xa6lbxa6 17 'iVa4 (17 .>xe2 :axb8 = Yakovich-Gelfand.i. with divergent experi- i..txb21S 'iVxa6.cxd4 12 16 ..txh7+ r.

i.d6 11 ... lbe4 14 .cS 11 dxcS.xe4 dxe4 lind.i.e6 and now 11 dxcS hxcS 12 e41Dc6 13 exdS tWxdS 14.xeS... 11..i. b6 177 on the kingside... be a try.bl 10~e2 lbxa2!. after all. Hungar. This is nur first introduction to the Pillsbury Bind in this chapter.bxcS :'008 IS .. while hxcS IS :'cl (1S tWc2 followed by Black can play to recover the pawn :'fdllooks more accurate) IS . if then 13. IS a3 ±) 14 a3 .c4 IS tried.i. would leave the black bishop mis- Kirchheim rpd 1990.i.i.i.c2?! lba6! 14 imov-Radulov.xd6 ....a4.i.c2 ± Psakhis) bxcS 13 .i..xh7+ ~h8 IS . this might have to be better.i.d4.i. Gausdal 1994 continued the database on 10 lbd2. Iraklion 1993.. Psakhis.bl .g..a4 bS IS ..a6?! 13 . fS 16 with . but 1 l.e2 1) After 1O.i.•xf6 19 .i..xf3 20 gxf3 a6! 21 . Tren~ianske Teplice 1985. the king gets the Scherbakov-Landa game above (9 in the way less on f1 than on e2. g4.c2 . 11 tWc2!? h6 12lbeS.. 2b) 10..xa6 instead 10.. the cxd4 . 141Dc4! ian Cht 1993/4.xf3+ 17 gxf3 is . 13 dxcS (after 13 .. and now Psakhis- remain untested..a6?! IS :'hdl improve on the Lalic-McDonald game . Black's queenside pawns outweighed the exchange in the cited game. bxcS 14 .. this placed. Then: .xe8 :'xe8 22 bxc4 dxc4 GO Lechtynsky- Ubilava.f3. for example 12 c6 lDcs 13 ments for White are probably easy to .i.i. . ~g2.xd3+ 16 :'xd3 and White was a little given below.i. However.i.i.xd2 :'c8 2c) 1O. presents Black with a few problems in 3) 10 lbeS!? and now 1O..i..c2 .i. 11 0-Olbd712dxcS lbxa6 14 . there is nothing on Westerinen.a4lbxeS 14 . Rezsek-Letay.lM7!? (Burgess) might was only a quickplay.fS lbb4 16 .e2. Maybe White should set- h3 .d6 13 .to possible idea is to gain space on the 10•••.b4+ 12 ~f1 was suggested by bishop is still weak! Psakhis in Informator 61 and given as 2) If 10.f4! gives dan- gerous attacking chances against the under-protected kingside) 18 .lbe6.xd6 "xd6 unclear. Systems with .e6 17 .i... and improve.d7 .. One . If 12 :'cl cS (12 .d2 :'fd8 tle for play against the IQP with 120-0 with equality.i...g4 16 :'hdl! . etc.. e.i... 18 .. h4.. If White can't with the routine 14.i.e2 :'ac8 18 . Black is in control) Sometimes the most obvious moves 13 .xd2+ IS ...e4lM4 =Blagojevic-Hresc. White should be able to play White can if he chooses transpose into this for an edge.xeS .xd6 14 dxcS comfortably stuck in the centre.i.i. lbxcs 13 .i..d6 11 hd6 "xd6 12 "c2 kingside with .i.i.a6! (13 ..b7.lbc6 11 lbeS lbxeS 12 16 c7 tWf6 and White's king is un- .cxd4 11 completing his development.t Ibrag.c2) with 12 .i... there will be sev- eral more.. Psakhis notes that 14.

.xe4? 22 J. ..d3 After 15 J.f5 ~b4 16 .xe4 :ae8 23 d7! analogous lines after 6. I 18.J.a6 13 :hdl J..d3 J. winning the h7- pawn has used up a lot of time.•xg2 Black's attack should prevail.. Lone Pine nothing after 7. ~xc2? 17 cxd6 ~xal 18 ~5! (the prisoner can wait) 18. 7.. c5 7 dxc5 :xe5 24 :c8 :xe4+ 25 ~f2 +-) 22 d7 J.. has to demonstrate clear equality after 13:hc1 10 ~d2. pawn formation.bxcS 19 ~el liz_liz B.c3 c4! . e2) Lalic.. "0.. the failure to exchange ± is analysis by Lalic..~xd5.xc5 8 cxd5./41 good for White.cS! ..xd3 20. as Black still 1981...xd3 c4 followed by .... The alternatives mainly much.a6 20 .. as 18 b3 gave White a small advantage This isn't quite proof that White has in Seirawan-Christiansen. Even so..b5 ±) 21 e4 :ad8 the more popular response. the defensive f6-knight for the attack- rarily a rook ahead.Lalic.:. counterplay after 13 J..a6+ 20 ~el ....:fe8? 22 d7 :xe5 23 :c8+ +-. best policy is to let the h7-pawn go..~a5 White has queenside prob- lems . dination is miserable. 16.... etc. Hastings 199415. but 14 .d5 22 J.xd5? J..bl J..d5 (20. 15•••~b4 16 dxcS 16 .. 1) 8 J.. 16. After the text-move. ing c3-knight favours White.a6+ 17 ~d2 (17 ~el!?) 17..e6 19 f4 d4 20 f5 J. Lalic gives 19..xh7+ ~h8 14 J.xd3+ 14 :xd3 ':c2 "g6 22 :acl "xg2 23 'irxa6 ~a6 15 a3 c5 16 dxc5 ~xc5 17 :c3 "xO 24 "e2 =.xb2 would Yet another instance where Black's have been unwise.d3 soon start clawing back material.xa2 21 The more traditional. as with 21.J.f6 It is not advisable to snatch the ex- change. 19 12.. Black is tempo. This is White's natural response..Lalic.. McDonald.J. bilities: .Lalic. and White will 8J. back to safety and offers the draw... White's edge is far Black gets plenty of chances for from overwhelming. and indeed :xal J. (21.xh7+ ~h8 15 J. 17 'ire3 ~xd3 18 'irxd3 aiming for the Pillsbury Bind with 18 ~xd3? chances his arm too ~5.e2 with the following possi1. However. after 18. but his piece coor.178 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. .f5 J. JWb6 should White prudently brings the king be playable for Black.a6+ 15 ~d2 ~6 16l:[hcl c4. g618 a3liX:6 19 J. one cannot help feeling that.exd5 (D) 13•••~6 14 J.a3 :ab8 21 12.J. Again.g6+ followed by anticipate playing against a hanging.J.

The position after 8 . /i)fd7 10 0-0 lbxe5 11 .'\c2 cS =.tb7 9 0-0 c6 10.tg3 as 14 . branching point.tg3 b5 14 a4 ± Toma.tbS 9lbeS . 11 . Nurem- Ic I lbbd7 11 lbe5 is discussed under berg 1896.te6.tb5!. is 4) The only examples I have with 8 nlKo pleasant for White) 11..cwski-Haubro. 8 .td6 16 'it'd3 'iVe7 17 lbe2 Aac8 18 Ac3 . a6?! scoring wins against leading grand- (slow) 9 .. 8 . b6 against .. We consider: However. .txe5 c6 12 lei ltid7 13 ... O-OCS) 179 IlIkower system ( . Black's queenside fian.. e22: 8 •••cS without 9 0-0 .. N~ic 1983. 8 . IIhiu-A.i)xg3 14 hxg3 fS IS AfcI ..t Seirawan-Spassky..tg3 t..td3.c5 9 llxc5 bxcS 10 0-0 h6 11 'ffe2 a6 12 ~a4 .. c5 10 14lbd3 ± Steinitz-Schallop.ta4lbbd7 II 'tIe2lbh5 12 . White's one success in this variation came when Black played slightly pas- sively: 8..td3 is a major II/..td3.teS Ad8.. e21: 8 •••cS 9 0-0 .teS! f6 (12 .. variably transpose.tb7 10 0-0 lbh5?! II masters such as Spassky (twice!)... b6 179 I a) 8 .te6! 9lbe5 exdS.tb7 (or 8 •••.cS 9 . IImple.teS lbd7 12lbellbhf6 13 . by analogy with after 10 h3 has an interesting history.td3 Ae8 15 C21) 1.tb7 8 cxdS . but the position development..id6 12lb<i3 . e23: 8 •••.. 12 Afdl c6 13 . using the b6. Line EI . Dortmund 1987. runs into 9 In 1978 Tony Miles tried out a new lDeS lbfd7 10 lbxd7lbxd7 II ...td3 The most natural. Black was also holding 9•••. Gheor. .. system against the Queen's Indian.111m 1981 continued 8 .lbxeS?? loses a pawn to 13 lbxe5) 13 . and C23 started via 7 .te2 ..tb7 (D) Ihe balance in Doroshkevich-Sitni- kova. 8 .tb7 9 0-0 (9 ~5lbbd7 10 . Amster.td3 . 3) 8 Acl is promising.lc8 (not lbeS or 8 h3 follow up with 9 ..te2 development than with a . Systems with . lbbd7 (9 . when Black is in trouble. Las Palmas 1982..te6 13 AfdI 'ffb6 14 ...Medina.tb7 10 'iVf3 will almost in- IIchieves anything special after. 8•••cS 9 0-0 2) It is not clear that 8 . below.txf4 13lbxf4 ±..tb7 9 rhetto is questionable... As in the Tar.te6. a6. c5?? 12 lbxd7 winning a pawn) and are considered under 8 . c5: Many of the games listed in C21 I b) Thus Langeweg-Hort... but it must he recognized that it fits in better with 10lbes a ..tb7 184 JIIuck can play .. after 8 ....te2 is examined 7 Icl) 10 lbe5 a6 11 'iVb3 (11 Icl under 7 Acl c5 8 cxd5 exd5.tg3 Ac8 II·() transposes) 9 .. Ihe Langeweg-Hort game.tg5). for ex.tb7 without 9 0-0 cS 186 puwn as a possible support for . St Petersburg 1995.

i.i. after 4 .. a6 11 ~S c4 12 . Spas sky preferred 6 .i. after 10 h3 2 c4 e6 3 lDf3 b6 4 .!. Lublin However. 2) 1O. Montreal lish an edge by playing a quiet move 1979) 9 . lOxdS! bury Bind attacking formation against should equalize. After 10. From the Queen's Gambit move- whether after 7 dxcS bxcS.cS. Now we have: Gambit if Black plays an early .. Dzhindzhikhashvili and Tim.c2? (prema- turely releasing the pressure.i.xe4 11 Wxe4 like 10 h3.. Velden Ct (S) 1980..fS bS 13 "f3 g6 14 . Florian) IS . Florian-Berney.i.f4 Queen's our main line)....h6 lieS IS ..t Miles-Larsen.i.i..c4?! 11 ...e7! White 1978.. 10 0-0.a612"f3 lIe8 13 lIadl must play 6 h3 (D) in order to avoid cxd4 14 lOxc6 .. see how to play for an edge for White. lOg3 as 1610fS ± Sydor-Zinn.. some- cxd4 S lOxd4 0-0 9 lbdbS ~8.. 1) 1O.i.!. IS lIadl . and we have transposed to the man.c4 12 . or 7 lOc3 order. 11. 1OhS. 0-0 7 1977.b7 S e3 .lOxcS 12 . a knight on f8 Mter 6 .e4 .d6 13 (ll..180 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i... I do not even begin to neutralizes the Pillsbury Bind. Korchnoi- Petrosian. Instead 61Oc3ll)bS 7 . lObd7 11 We2?! (the queen proves to be poorly placed here.lObd7! with chances for both sides..d3 lOd7 9 "c2 (9 O-O?! g6 10 h3 bit point of view.. I can't really IIcl. Montilla ticular. g6 10 .i..eS IIcS\ lOg4 ..lObd7 ful relevance) 9 .i.i.i. 1O. which could in the Queen's Gambit move-order of clearly transpose into a .i. In times reached by transposition from 7 view of this possibility. lOc6 11 ~S. . and if 11 dxcS then 11. Stean suggests 11 IIcl!?) 11. IS Wg4 .c2 a613 g4 bS 14 gSlOe8 but then antidotes were found.i.i.i...xc6 IS exd4 . Hun- gary 1979.i.t4! Larsen.bxcS / 0-0 a6 11 lOeS lIe8 12 Wf3 ..c4 12 . dS..f4. White had achieved the Pills- lOc3 dS 8 cxdS exdS?! (8 . Amsterdam 1978. Miles-Spassky..i. The system he tried was 1 d4lDf6 line being considered (Le.. or l1.. and now The innovation was briefly successful. the minimum of resistance..bllOfe4 13 ... In par.d3 cS (9... lObd7 10 is wiser.g3 d6 Looking at this from a Queen's Gam- 8 . 10 IIcl is also possible.c2 a6 13 lIadl bS 14 a3 lIe8 IS lOeS 1Of8 and Black stands well...i. Tilburg 1975) 14 Wc2 Wd7 IS b4 lOa6 16 a3 is a' . Black's kingside is secure and he is ready to roll on the queenside.bl a6 12 add a chapter recommending 4 .t Miles- the exchange of his bishop after Spassky.f4 as lOeS bS 13 "f3 b4 14 ~2 lIa7 IS a system against the Queen's Indian. if White can estab- lOxg3 + Spassky-Karpov. Buenos Aires OL 1978. 3) 10.. White's h3 is of doubt.i... his prospects must be very 0-0 12 Wc6 a6 13 a411a7 14 aSlOb8 promising if he can play something IS "e4 cS proved very solid for Black more aggressive! in Miles-Andersson.

.Kramnik) 14 White's advantage on the kingside re.lbbd7 or 11.c7 14 lbg4! lbxg4 IS hy keeping the knight at home.. Moscow 1979. and now instead of 16.. a .gS!? . shows that there is a specific point to shin..lbc6 would trans. lbxc6 ..i.xh6? only draws after 17.d6 13 ':fd1 hit more flexibility on the queenside cxd4 (13 .xh6 gxh619 "xh6 f41...i.Mikhalchi. Erevan 1996) 12.Hoffman. C212) Kashashvili.f3 bS 14 a3 ':a7 15 ':cdl!1 (at first glance. Tbehang- ing pawns are less problematic to de- fcnd if White's dark-squared bishop has been exchanged for a knight.a6?! 11 "(3:a7 strong: ll.i...a4 16 b3 .xc61Slbe2! .i.i. 19 .eS h6 GO was It is best not to be provoked too N.i.lbhSI3.. ':c 1..i.t 14.. USSR 12':adl 1991.i.lba6!? 183 kingside preponderance.. 14 g4!? ..Mikhalchishin. Belgrade 1968.c2 bS 14 a3 developing move.i. Systems with .bS mains unchallenged..i.. lbe4 13 "c2 fS and 17f3 now 14 exf6lbxf6 IS . The discovered attack with lbe2 12 g4!?. 1) 11.bl a6 13 .i..e2 (12 10.. then 17 .xh7+~h818 .i.i. With lbe2! ± Kramnik... a6: C211: 10•••a6?! 181 C212: 10.cxd4 12 lbxc6 .i.. 12 . 3) 11.i..i. the text-move..c7 18 ~a4 c4 19 .c2 .b4=.. tLlxc3 15 bxc3 g51! 16..':fe8?! 17lbb3 ...g3lbxg314hxg3 "'a5 15 :tfdl tLlf6 16 tLld2..lbh718 . and also 1O..a6 12 'iFf3 .i.. Kecskemet 1991.a8 16 g4 h6 Kramnik) 12 . l1"f3 C211) 11 ':cl!? might well be just as 10. b6 181 little better for White..g6fxg3 tLldf6 20 gS lbe4 21 fxe4 .. quickly.lbxeS 12 dxeS (12 . lbbd7 15 "h3 .c4 13 .i. and if 14 .xeS ..Minasian.c417 . After 10 lbeS. Black can play 16. Mikhalchishin notes that 17 One suspects that White has room for .. 4) l1.gxh6 18 improvement.ttx6 181 A natural and popular move..Popov-Klovans. yet it is C213: 10.i.. and that it is not just a random 12.c4 12 .xc6 13 pose to lines considered shortly.. 17lbxd4 ± Kramnik-Yanvariev.. Ara..f8 20 lbd4 ± Gip- slis-Andri~... for example 14 :Cdl I?.lbbd7 182 still not enough to challenge White's C214: 10..xgS 22 1I'h3 ± Mikhalchishin-A.g8! wins nicely.lbc6 (D) h3!?) 12.i... but lbxdS lbxh2 16 'iWh3 +.i. Black hopes to create a 2) 11.g3 17. "'xh6':e8. Black has tried all three ways of developing the queen's knight.c2....

h6 lIe8 17 Dinstuhl-Hedke.xd6 1Lle2 g6 19iLlg3 ± Keene-O.f6 18 pawn structure....d6 17 h3 "h4 18 iLlb5 1) 11.. nia 1993.182 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51... able pair of hanging pawns.xd6. Again this allows White too free a White is clearly better.d6 14 1.bliLlxe5141. Kha- structure is passive. indeed the symmetry often enhances the effects of any superiority in piece mobility that one player might have.f5 "b7 17 lIe3 b4 18 1.d7 11 "'3 a6 1211adl 13 ..xbS 20 1... Sturua. Malaniuk-Arbakov.1..f5!? iLlxe5 13 dxe5 1Lle8 14 16 1... Esbjerg 1981. winning the exchange. Lirindzakis-Mikhalevski... C213) 2) 11.xd6 "xd6 17 "g3 is only .. 1Lle4. 13.f41 strange loss of tempo. were unsuccessful af.e4 "xd6 20 1.g5 1. 12 lIacl 1.. e5-bishop keeps him in the game.. lIfe8 15 lIfel to discourage the defensive idea of 1..xfJ 17 gxf3 1If8 18 lIael attempts to wriggle out of trouble in 1. notwith- ter 13 ...Ph8 19 1...xb2 19 1.. Bundesliga 1996/7. Black's equal. Petach Tikva 1997. 2nd Bun.e7 15 lIfel h6 12 1.. b5 16 1..h4 "d7 17 lIe5 lIfe8 18 lIael ± lIadl1Llc7 15 Wh3 g6 16 1. while 12 dxc5 bxc5 13 lIadl dolsk 1990... dominating bishop-pair and. Warsaw 1992.. but White wants 14 a3?! (why?) 14. Black's pressure on the leaves Black with a particularly vulner.. White has a desliga 1995/6.. Ruban-Begun.. ...Farago- the game Dautov-M. "d6 1.. 16iLlb5! 11•••cxd4 16 "e3 1.xb5 19 1.....Kobrin-Kal- cheim. :ii'b6 14iLlxd5iLlxd5 15 "xd5 standing the doubled f-pawns. and he can do lit. the safer iLlxe5 16 "xe5 "c6 17 f3 1. hand.....Jakobsen.ROder. tle to stop White's attack) 15 .xe5(14dxe5d4 00) 14 . Black's 16.. Po- above.1...:re8 15 1.xc6 13 exd4 An illustration of the point that po- sitions with symmetrical pawn struc- tures are not necessarily drawish.xh7+ <.f5+ +-) 18 1...xbS I.d6 16 1..d7 19 a3 1.xb5 lIe6 does not give transposes into Kramnik-Yanvariev White very much..d6 16 14.. Erevan 1982..g4 Black succeeded in ex- changing queens in M.c8 and now after 12 lIadl 10•••iLlbd7 (D) c4131..a6?! is too slow....xd718 15 ...... iLlxe5 followed by .eS "g4 "h3iLle717iLld7! iLlg6 (17 .. winning material... Possibly this would be the time to follow the Miles-Spassky games in the note to White's IOthinC21 and play 12h3!? 12iLlxc6 1. e6 ± is analysis by Nogueiras and Gar- 1411rel cia Gonzalez..

Beersheba 1996.e2 b5 16 .b5.td6 Bagirov- 12... 1l.tb5 ±.b3 ± Mikhalchishin-Azmaipar. . e6 before capturing on c5. 14 .tc2 b5 17 .tc2lllb6?! 15 g4lOe8 3) 12 dxc5! . Systems with .tbl .i.i. Erevan 1982.1Ob4 problems. switching attention to 14.xc5 14 .. misplaced on e2. USSR Ch (Vil.xg4lOe6. Tbilisi 1980.th61Og718 f4 well be the way to play the position for A kingside wipe-out is in progress.g5 If 12 ...tc4 and 13 .t Nogueiras.i.g6 15"f3 "e616 .i.lIIxf6 older line: 17 lOxd5). It is surprising 15 . Taxco IZ 19S5.xd6 20 l:lxd6 l:lacS was equal in possible battery along the diagonal Vaganian-Beliavsky.tc4 dxc4 16 'Wxb7 13.dl! (an knight round to e6.... until the knight had already landed on IIshvili.txc5 15 ..te5 . 4) 121Og4 has also been tried.lOe6?! 13 C214) lIIh3 g6 141Oh6+ ~g7 15 . Budapest 1990....Mikhalevski.tc4 turn Speelman.xf6 that both here and in '1' White waited IK ..td7.lOxg4 13 .CS 11.. then Cvetkovic gives 12 ...tg3 as 16 .txf6 17lllxc4. an edge.Luce.td6 10.h5 17111b3lOd3 ISlIIxb6 ....c6 llle6! =. leading to h7...txf6 . The correct response is not 12..i.cS 15 12... The only move to cause White any 12.c4?! 13 . Gronin- 1) 12 l:lfdllOe6 13 dxc51Oxf4 14 gen 1995. In V.i.lDa6!? (D) 16 f4 ± Kolesar-Hirsch.a6 19 .1Ob4?! (amove too late?) 13 a3 cxd4 14 exd4 .1Ob4!? 12 . cxf4 ..tbl l:le8 14 . 13 a3 c4 14 .h3 b4 17 llla4 lllxe5 (Bagirov suggests that both 13 .. out well for White) 14 . challenging the attractive switching of flanks. but rather 12.i..••b5 = "e2 l:le8 16 l:lfel .tel 'ii'c8 17 'iff3 'We6 Islllb5 'iff5 19lOd6 13 ..f5 15 ... Mikhalchishin-S. even if a 11"a4 couple of tempi have gone missing) The latest try.d7 14 lOxe7+ 'Wxe7 15 ..f3 .. 16.g5 l:lcS 16 . Bmo 1991.i.Mikhal- evski-A. Black's attempts to complicate mis- fired: 12.i.txc5 13 l:ladl may 16"h3 g617 . b6 183 12 l:lfdl l:leS 13 l:lacl l:la7 14 g4 g6 2) 12 l:ladl lOe6 13 dxc5 lOxc5! I ~ .txf6! winning the queenside. lllc7!? 13 lllc6 . 11 'Wf3 ~7 is the a pawn (16 . the hishop rather than the knight. Pillsbury Bind is powerful..i.cxd4 13 exd4 l:leS 14l:[fellOfS Lputian.i. Black intends to swing his 12. bxc5 IK dxe5 lOd7 19 .tbl! looks stronger. with a . The bishop is a little nius) 1980. Avrukh-Florath....

. but there was no joy to be ltles wins the exchange .. ltlhs.tb7 as follows: C221: 90-0 without 9•••. USSR Ch (Tallinn) 1965.. .ltlc6 10 .te2 provements in the above notes run in ~ Forintos-Liptay. If gained there either.. Black wants to play . for example.. However.. C223) see Line C23 below. There are obvious transpositional ant choice between 10 dxcs bxcs 11 possibilities..Simagin.Mohd.txa6ltlxa6 13 ltlxds 10 0-0 ltlc6 I1ttles..tb7 rather than . after..cs.. 15 Wdl!? IS •••c!0c6 16""3 "'e6! Since 17 Wxb6?! is answered by Haifa OL 1976.. 9 .. ltlaS 12 dxcs bxcs 13 l:tfdl a6 14 . Here we consider ltlxds 14 'ii'xdS l:tad8 15 'ii'c4 with a the independent lines.txa6ltlxa6 11 'ii'a4 cxd4 12 exd4 ltlc7 13 ttles ± Taleb-S.tbs!? (10 It!es . and 10 . the white bishop is better placed on e2... Singapore 1995. 9 l:tel (D) 2) 9. C222) C22) 9 dxeS bxeS (D) S•••eS Here we discuss lines without 9 0-0 . Beersheba leads back to C212) 1O. To play it as a pure hanging-pawn position.ltlh5?? 10 ..tb7 l:cl WaS?! 12 .184 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j.ltlxd4. the suggested im.... 17.tb7 11 Wa4 1996.ta6?! leaves White the pleas. Keene-Kraidman..Keene. 10 0-0 . so diverted his attacks to the 1) 9.tb7 Avrukh-A..f41 13•••l:tdS 14 l:tael a6 IS a3 clear extra pawn. In this example White made no progress against the hanging pawns.Mikhalevski. Hungary 1969. he must prepare it with .txb8 l:txb8 11 kingside.tb7 184 C222: 9 dxeS 184 C223: 9 l:tel 184 C224: 9ltleS 185 C221) 9 0-0 (D) This exchange is probably prema- ture. White's favour.tb7 11 l:tel ltla6 12 ltle2 "'b6 13 ltlg3 g6 14 h4 l:trd8 IS hS ltle4 = Keres-V... Black was OK in the game 3) 9.

b7 this. or 12 We2 J.h3 lLle4 19 J. Pamporovo 1982.Nemeth-Vujo§evit.lLle8 130-0 lbc7 .ixf4 19 exf4 ':a7 20 ':c3 'iff6 21 ':h3+ ~g8 22 'ifhS 'ifh6 23 'ifxh6 gxb6 24 Normally just an inversion of ':xh6 =Doroshkevich-Vrulin.ie6?! worked out badly for Black 1) 10 dxc5 bxc5 11 0-0 and now in.ixe4 18 "xe4 bS 19 a4 ..ixgS 16 'ifxhS+ .. .ib7 100-0 9 . It also C224) gives White a more opportune mo.t Teichmann-Marco. a6?! allows White to follow the main lines with 10 lLle5.g4 ':ad8 = Velikov-Abramovit. Bala- tonbereny 1996.... St .ixh6 lLlf6) 17 ..ixd5 18 Wxd5 .b7 13 ':fdl (13 h3!?) 13 ..xeS lLld7 IS J.g3 Wa5 16 J. knight?) 11 :CI1Wb7 12"f3 :d8 13 2) 10 lLleS lLlbd7 11 Wf3 lLlxeS 12 ':fdl ± lLla6? 14 .. nnd now 12 lLleS J.ig4 16 lLlxe7+ ~f8 17 "g3 . Black should play ll.ixeS!?) 12. 10 dxcS bxcS 11 0-0 lLlbd7. 9 ...ih6 17 lLlxdS (17 ..ig3 c4 14. and 11 0-0) coming next.i. etc. but Black's set-up is sound.id6 lLle8 19 lLlf5+ ':xd6 20 lLlxd6 Petersburg 1996.igS lLlbd7 13 Bern 1995 after 10 0-0 'iFc8 (ugly. lLlh5 14 J.ixdl 18 = 14 :fdl 'ifc8 Lugovoi-Sirotkina. the difference is in Black's fa- vour.. M. White should be able to improve on 9. Kstovo move-order.fS lLlf6 17 'ifc2 g6 18 J..c6 20 lbc3 lLlgS 21 J. stead of 11. 10•••lDa6!? 10 "nlDa6 11 g4?! . even so.lLlbd7 =.ifS .. So maybe 10 lDes is clearest.xh7+ ~xh7 IS lLlgS+ . in the game Mikhalchishin-Zumtobe.ifS a6 IS e4 dxe4 16 lLlxe4 lLlxe4 17 . Systems with ...b6 185 In comparison with Line C214 above.id6 with a slight advantage for Black.. success is not guaranteed.ixa6 "xa6 Islbc6 dxeS (12 . Hastings how else does Black develop the 189S.J. 9ttJeS (D) ment to initiate play against the hang- ing pawns.. 9 •••..eS . and White wins.id6?! 12 .b7 13 lLla4 lLlxeS B 14 J. as White is not so aggressively placed in the centre. White has played ':cl instead H of lLleS. with 100-0 (or 10"f3 1994. 11 "e2lDc7 12 :rdl ttJe6 13 ..ixe4 . but .

. C21... 9 16 Wxe4 ._lh.txg517 l%dl.... In- stead after 9 . 11. cS. line is 9 . lCle4! 14 lClxe4 dxe4 15 .teS is critical: 1) After 1O.txr418 Wxf4 h3 is an unnecessary concession. lCJd7. chances by means of l%f3-h3... or semi- storm with the king still in the centre. his queenside pawns: 9 lCJes lClbd7 10 these would seem to run in White's 0-0 (10 'iff3 l%e8 11 0-0 and now not favour after 12 lClxh7! fxeS 13 dxeS 11..tf6 13 l%hl g614 ~gllCJc6 00..186 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j... However..•. Czech Republic 1996.. but slightly ahead on material. a6 on h5 has no way back into the game.. Hungary 1993..!.td6 14 . his retarded queenside de- Queen's Indian. Wd5 =1= Dinstuhl-Florath.Neu- Here we discuss lines without 9 0-0 man-J. one of the quickest uncastlings on record.td6?! 12lClxd7 Wxd7 13 l%fcl .tg3 ought to be harmless after ei- e23) ther 10. or 8. Rimavska Sobota 1992 saw in- stead 1O.. Warsaw 1983.. Black would need to find a substan- 9 h3.cS..a6!? followed by . 11 Wf3 l%e8 12 Wh3lClfS 13 .txfS IS f4! . . motivated by fears of .tb7 (D) 1O.txe4 In the Queen's Gambit move-order.. a6 100-0 lClbd7 110-0 is discussed under C214. the knight 11.....lCJxg3 11 hxg3 cS 12 ~h2!? .. discussed in Line velopment works against him. White should wait he is not content to transpose into the for Black to play . %5.txg6 ±) leads to sting when Black has not committed unexplored complications.86 199516. assuming At the very least.. lClhS. or 11 l%ct lClxeS 12 lClxeS g6 13 Wa4 . lCJd7 14lClxf8 ..•.fxgS? 90-0 12 Wi'xhS +-...c4 before carrying main line with 9.. independent. Moscow 1992. Osipiak-Der- vishi.. 2) 1O.. kov.te2lClg7 ISlCJc6 'ifgS 16 f4 ± P.Baranyaijr.. the move 10 . Whether it is good is another question..txe4 .White is Damaso-Alexandre. out this pawn-storm. White is doing well on either 11 'ifa4 c6 (l1. Black's most direct try... lClxg3 11 hxg3 lCJd7.lClhS. is 9 .g6? 12lClxh7 fxeS An early lCleS loses much of its 13lClxfS followed by . The one independent.Groh.f4! An unconvincing attempt at a pawn..f6 lIlClgS! 'ife8! (lI ..Foi- sor-Bonsch. . Lisbon 1997.Nagy-S. lClf8) 1O.lCJxeS 12 dxeS ±) 12 l%acllClxeS 13 dxeS g6 14lCld4 bS IS Wdl a6 16 f4 ± O. tial improvement to put 9 ..lCJd7 immediately. Kharitonov-Shvedchi. 11 l%cl cS 12 l%el l%e8 13 a3 l%c8 = 1l•••cxd4 12 exd4 li:k7 13 g5?! A. 10 .tgS cS and White has kingside attacking 14 1i'f3 lh. %5 back leads into the Miles Variation of the in business. Bundesliga 9.

under 7 . a6. White has 10 B ti)bS! ti)e8? (1O. Uhlmann gave 11 The most popular moves for Black J..dxc4 189 11 ti)es cS 12 "13 l:lc8 13 "h3 g6 14.ti)bd7 12 here are: c4! dxe4 13 ti)xe4 .b7 8 cxdS exd5..b7.i.i. he can de. We have al- D) ready cited an Ibragimov-Lputian 7.. l:lxdl . 7 . White missed this trick in Teichmann-Schallop.cS 7 dxcS .xe5 . preventing Black's freeing plan.xc4 'irxdl+ 10 with the knight. D2: 7... To summarize.i. Therefore ..i.a6 must come first to cover hS. or Dl: 7••.. Singapore patiently with IS f4?! ti)xeS 16 fxeS 1995 has been noted under 7 cxd5 ti)e4 GO.i. and Black 2b) 8 dxcS and now: is probably better advised to recapture 2bl) 8 . b6 187 Why though 9 .. ECO.i. 10 l:lct ti)bd7 1O.e7 14 ti)g3 :t.. l:lcdl.i.. tinctly favourable to White. All).. Hungary 1993.. 10 .. Line C221.xc5 11 0-0 ti)c6 and now 12 However.b7 9 'ire2.. 1) 7 .i.i.. was Szymczak-Rybak... after 7 cxdS.e2 dxc4. Maybe both players were happy with a draw before the game..exd5 looks dis. ti)xd5 is strong .xa6 ± Taleb-S.tc4 :t in Uhlmann-Bonsch. alternatives: dable kingside attack..a6?! 8 cxdS exdS 90-0 c5 H1azsik. .a6?!.gS as even better. playing instead 10 l:lc I?! :t.i. Prague 1989.xd6 Wxd6 16 dxcS bxcS 17 not to capture in a position in which .i.dxc4 9 .i..d3 . . the transposing to a position we consider pawn recapture 7 ..g.i..i. Line pose to variations already given. in which White kept a slight for example. whereas the 'mysterious' 15 exd5 8 . Leipzig . In Soponyai.Mohd.. 1983.d6 was met by 11 ti)eS l:le8 12Wf3ti)bd713 ti)xd7Wxd714l:lfdl c5 IS . Systems with . lay a move with 7 ..c5 is given as the main line in would have kept full control.i.d3 (D) game (reached via 6..i.. ti)bd7? immediately..d3. Chapter 4. 2) 7 .l:le8 12 l:le1 ti)bd7 13 . In his notes. but is seldom played: 2a) ECO gives 8 0-0 . he played im.b7 14 h3 1/2..i.. etc. e. .b7 188 1l.xc5 Naturally this could easily trans..cS 11 ti)d6 ±) 11 Wc2 winning a pawn. edge by playing instead 12 e4 .i. a seemingly passive move? The point is that if 9 ... White is not obliged to ti)es ti)xe5 13 . 11..4.b7 13 though White must always be careful e5 ti)a5 14 exf6 ti)xc4 IS b3..i. 8 .i.fS :t. after.i...h6l:le8 First we shall consider a couple of White has the makings of a formi.. Nurem- herg 1896..1/2 capture on d5 immediately.i.

bxcS. your author made no progress with 12 8 .i. swered by 9 cxdS. had he seen the simple tactic '2b' to Black's 9th) 11 :fdl and now: 8 . 9 :cl cxd4 10 iDxd4iDbd7 = ECO...i.I:Ixb8 111Dc6 winning the exchange..dxc4 leads to the 7 . but one feels there ought to be scope for White to improve ...b6 Exchange Varia. . Line D2. 2) ECO recommends 11. Loosdorf 1993.xd6 17 01) iDbS "'b6 ~ Yuferov-Klovans. which is the motivation for 91i'e2 the 7 :cl variation described later. iDc6.. 80-0 1) It is probably a little too early....i...txc4 00 is White's most common option.. rather than delaying. dxc4) 1O.b6. instead of 16 d6 . von Bardeleben-Em.. 9 :lc1lDhs Van Voorthuijsen.g.dxc4 varia- proximate equality. 8 .cS 189S continued 12 tOe2 W'b6 with ap.xb8! 1) l1.i. 9•••iDbd7 The most solid response.. USSR 7•••.i.. Instead. In = ECO) 1O. Your author ECO) 10 "'e2 iDbd7 (for 1O.. 9 'iFe2iDbd7 10 dxcS? iDxcS .xeS .e6 main text. is so that Black cannot recapture with the knight.gS!? One possible point of capturing the pawn on move 9.Lasker.i.d6 =in Crouch.esiDxeS 11iDxeSiDf6 12 cxdS a subtle shift in the position (placing exdS 13 f4 cS 14"'f3 a61S g4 cxd416 the bishop on e2 rather than on d3) exd4 :c8 17 <. e..i. w continuing 12 :acl ....d6 =. A century later tion.i.xcs 12 iDeS ± Variation just considered.188 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 2b2) If instead 8 . the tension.e4 "xf417 g3 "'g418tOeSW'hS191Dc6 with a clear advantage for White.. oped.i. would have played it in the Guernsey see 9 "'e2 iDc6 10 dxcS bxc5.t>hl tOe8 =was Porten- would change this to a substantial plus schlager-Klovans. iDbd7 is again most simply an- ~S l'bxeS 13 . Yet 10 .b7 (D) 1977... Lepeshkin suggests 16 .iDbd7 11 cxdS iDxdS 12 .lDhS?! 12 "'c2! iDxf4 13 ..maybe 12 .i.. b6 Exchange "'xdl 11 . 9 dxcS!? bxcS (9 .. for White. .i..cxd4? 9 iDxd4 iDxdS 10 .. 2c) 8 cxdS is probably the best.exd5 11 :c1 .i.I:Ifxdl ..dxc4 10 . note game. It may well be that White should given that Black is not fully devel- transpose to the ..xc4 transposing to the . Guernsey 1997..cxd4 tion with 8 cxdS here.. Hastings 8•.. Black will not want to 8 "'e2 cS 9 0-0 leads back to the play .. to open the centre with 9 .xh7+ ###BOT_TEXT###amp;Ih8 14 exf4 "fIc7 IS cxdSiDf6 and here. and indeed this 10 iDxd4 (10 exd4 dxc4 11 .i. then after this section we consider some inde- 9 0-0 1Oc6 10 cxdS (10 "'e2!? keeps pendent lines.

hut it is presumably possible for White 10.i..i...xM 22li)b4 'ilcs 23li)xa6 b4 ll)e6 with unclear play. li)xdS li)bl 'ilc7 20 e4 M 21 'ilc2 J:[ac8 22 21 li)xdS . Systems with . lisi) 1975. This entertaining combinative display from Ihe great Estonian did not even make his autobiographical collection .e5 . Hence 9 .li)bd7. but his play is clearly slower ~S 'ilcs 13 a3ll)c6 14 . Prague 1937. tion by Black.Mdxc41S li)eS.i.tf6 23 'ilh7+ ~f8 24 'ilhS+ g.d3 li)f6 IS lIad 1 li)h5 16 j. it does not then exchanges on c4.. 10J:[fdl 90-0 10 h3 is unnecessary.. Wijk aan Zee 1971.li)b4 12 . In Tukmakov- 20 li)xdS .a6 11 a4 9 We2lLld5 (9 .bl ..d6 14 j. for example J:[actli)h5 14 . Now ECO gives 13 e4 17 ...i.. Tuk- .i.li)c6 and now: White has some chances of a king- 2a) 10 lIadlli)b4 11 ..c6 16 Wc2 . Vilnius 1978.bl WeS 13 a3 dxc4 14 axb4 cxb4 ISli)a4 .i.xf6. he waits until White The general impression is that makes a move with his king's bishop. 'ilfl.i.i.. b6 189 ~xdS .i.b7 (D) :~ lli)e3 b4 32 . exdS (20 .xf618dxcSd419 lLlxdSli)xdS ±) 20.i..gS ± cxd4 15 than in the lines with 7 or 8 cxdS. in the centre. a6!?) 10 j.cS 15 li)fl 'ile7 = makov-T.i.e7 25 ficed a pawn to gain active piece-play: J:[xdS 'ii'xdS 26ll)c6+ +-) 20 :txdS (20 16.i.. the game 'ii'xa6 24 We4 +-) 21 'ilxe7 lieS 22 was later drawn..i. etc.eS g6 15 g4li)bf6 16 13 ..is Ihere a flaw somewhere? 2b) 10 dxcS bxcS 11 :fdl 'ilaS (ll..ll)c6 is a little inflexible. exd4l:[dSI6l:fel h617 . and gets in the at the cost of conceding a little ground way of the bishop.. A standard Queen's Gambit reac- gary 1969.g3 c5 11 lLle4 12 lIfdl cxd4 13 exd4lLldf6 14 0-0 cxd4 12 exd4li)xc3 13 bxc3lLld7 cxd5 exdS 15 Wc2 lIcS 16 Wb3 .hS 23 WxeS+ li)xeS 24 lLlb4 'ii'bS 2Sli)xa6li)f6 26li)b4 as 27ll)c2 D2) 'ii'xb2 28 . Hun.c2 and White's material advantage eventually proved decisive.i..t Forintos-Bobotsov..i.xM 2Ili)b4 'ilcs 22 'ile4 Petrosian. 9. so the early exchange lLlxc6 'ilxc6 19 dS! lhdS (19 .Georgadze.c6!? h3 2) 9 .i.xdS.e5 lIe8 leads to equality... USSR Ch (Tbi- Forintos-Donner... lLlxdS should be preferred.xf6 gxf6 29 a4 fS 30 g3 bS 7.xc4 . even though it took another thirty moves to convert in Keres-Pelikan.i. bS!? 17 .••dxc4 8 .xfS c3 33 J:[bl Wa234 i.i.tb7 14 lIfdl .i.i.bS 17 b3±Zaitsev) 12a311fdSI3h3:d7 14 Wc2 .a6 12 side attack. Black sacri- .••a611 adS exdS12 b3 :teS13 In play more incisively.i.i. 1O. liJxdS G. gaining a tempo protect the cS-pawn.bS!? eS?! 14 .

190 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 jJ4!

l:lcS 17 c4 .td6 IS 'ire3 ~ Gavrikov- succeeded in doing is entering the line
Ciri~, San Bernardino 1991. It makes 6 ...c5 7 dxc5 .txc5 S .te2 dxc4 9
a change for White to have the hang- .txc4 a6 10 0-0 b5 11 .td3 .tb7
ing pawns in this system! (Chapter 4.4, Line A12) a tempo down.
9•••a6 12 l:lfdl cS 13 dxcS .txcS 14 ~
Not so much to prevent ~bS, but b6
rather to prepare ... bS and ... cS, after While Black may be happy on the
which Black will have no reason to queenside, White still has the centre
feel inferior on the queenside. While it and kingside. Now 15 ~xd7!? ~xd7
is true that ... b7-b6-bSloses a tempo, 16 .tc2 ~ is promising (implying also
White has also lost a tempo with that White could consider 12 l:ladl and
.tfl-d3xc4, thus leaving the tempo- 16 .tbl). while Dokhoian-Kveinys•
count the same as in the Queen's Gam- Bad Godesburg 1993 continued more
bit Accepted. violently with 15 ~xb5!? axb5 16
White's initiative is unchallenged .txbS .tdS 17 ~xd7 ~xd7 IS e4 .td4
by other methods: 19 .txd7 "f6 ~. White has an extra
1) 9 ...cS?! 10 dxcS .txcS?! (Black pawn. but it is difficult to convert.
should prefer 1O.....xdl ~) 11 "e2 Thus the idea of 7 ... dxc4, S....tb7
'ire7 12 .tgS ~bd7 13 e4 ± Ivkov- and 9...a6 does not solve Black's prob-
Cudina, Sombor 1968. lems.
2) 9...~bd7?! lO'ire2~ ll:acl
(11 ~xe4 .txe4 12 l:lac1 as 13 .tbS E)
l:la7 14l:lfdl 'ircs IS ~ .taS 16 e4 7l:ld(D)
± Ivkov-Pietzsch. Sarajevo 1966; hor-
rible contortions by Black to defend
his weak queenside) 11...~xc3 12
l:lxc3cSI3l:ldl cxd414~xd4±.tb4 B
IS ~e6 fxe6 16 .txe6+ ~hS 17 l:lc7
+- Liogky-Pushkov, Ore11994.
lO'ire2
lO:Cl bSll.tb3 cS12dxcS ~bd7
13 c6 .txc6 14 ~2 ~S IS ~ed4
.td7 16 .tc2 l:lc8 17 .tbl "b6 18
'ire2 l:lfdS Ih-lh Tunik-Doroshkevich,
Anapa 1991.
lO••• bS 11 .td3! ~bd7
11...cS?! 12 dxcS, and now after A natural plan in the Orthodox
12...~bd7, 13 l:lfdl 'ireS 14 .tc2 Queen's Gambit (l d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3
~xc5 soon led to a draw in Turian- ~c3 ~f6 4 .tg5 .te7 5 ~f3 ~bd7 6
Pushkov. Orel 1995, but can anyone e3 0-07 l:lcl). but with even more
explain why White didn't play 13 b4 point here in that there is direct pres-
or 14 b4. keeping the extra pawn? If sure on c7. This is one of the few lines
Black plays 12....txc5. all he has in the .tf4 system where White directs

Systems with ... b6 191

his main attention to the queenside 13 g4lDg6 14 gSlDxeS IS .ixeSlDd7
rather than the kingside. 16 'ii'h3lDfS 17 f4 ±.
The main lines to be considered, the 4) 7 ... a6 8 cxdS exdS 9 .id3 cS,
second of which is perhaps the more Doroshkevich-Vrulin, Kstovo 1994,
accurate, are: has already been considered under 7
10;1: 7•••cS 191 cxdS, Line C223.
":2: 7•••.ib7 193
E1)
There are, as usual, a few minor al- 7•••cS (D)
ternatives to be considered, the most
implausible being the game cited in
BCO as continuing 7 ... lDbd7(?) 8
1i'c2(?) l:le8(??) 9 a3(?) with both w
players being apparently oblivious to
the effect of a white knight reaching
hS. Checking sources, in the game
cited Black had actually played 6 ...c6
rather than 6 ...b6. Others:
1) 7 ... dxc4?! leaves Black a tempo
down on the already unsatisfactory 7
.td3 dxc4 line: 8 .ixc4 cS 9 0-0 .ib7
10 'ii'e2lDbd7 11 dxcS .ixcs 12 l:tfdl
and White has a clear advantage, Sal- Now White really oUght to resolve
tcrs-Maris, Hengelo 1995. the pawn structure in the centre, be-
2) 7...lDhS?! is mistimed, with fore Black develops his queenside. Af-
White being so far ahead in develop- ter 8 .id3 .ib7 9 0-0 lDbd7 10 lDe5,
ment. 8 .ig3 (8 .ieS!?) 8 ....ib7 9 cxdS 1O... lDxe5 11 dxe51De8 12 "c2 g6 13
exdS 10 .id3 lDd7?! 11 lDeS lDxg3?? :rdl ± was Schlechter-Janowsky, Kar-
12 .ixh7+ +- Paasikangas-Moshin, lovy Vary 1902, but 1O...cxd4 11 exd4
Kishinev 1995. dxc4 12 .ixc4 l:tc8 is fully satisfactory
3) 7 ... c6?! adopts a plan some- for Black. Instead, after 8 .ie2 .ib7 9
times seen in ...c6 systems, but gener- dxc5, 9 ... bxcS transposes to note' I' to
ally used only when White has played, White's 8th move, below. However,
as he often does, a waiting move such since White is not threatening to iso-
as h3. In the present position, White late the d-pawn, 9 ... .ixcS!? should be
has consistently played developing safe enough.
moves, and his pieces are well enough 8cxdS
activated exploit the weak square on 8 dxcS, as played in the Yusupov-
c6. Or, as in A.Martin-A.Johanessen, Ljubojevic game cited below, may ul-
Gausdal 1990, to take advantage of timately transpose, e.g. 8 ... bxcS and
Black not having challenged the cen- now:
tre with ...cS: 8 .id3 .ib7 9 cxdS exdS 1) 9 .ie2 .ib7 10 0-0 lDbd7
IOO-Ol:le8111DeslDbd712'ii'f3M (l0...lDc6?! 11 cxdS lDxdS 12 lDxdS

192 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.f4!

exd5 13 1IIa4 111b6 14 l:tfdl lOb4 15 the game Kallai-T.Bauer, Hungarian
~5 l:tfd8 16 a3 ~c6 17 .tf3 ± Uf- Cht 1992/3.
imtsev-Konstantinov, Sverdlovsk 1951) 9.te2
11 cxd5 (11l'tle5lOxe5 {1l...lOb6!? 12 9 .td3 .tb7 10 0-0 lObd7 00 is cov-
cxd5lObxd5} 12 .txeS dxc4 13 .txc4 ered under Line C21, 7 cxd5 exdS 8
111b6 14 1IIe2 l:tfd8 15 e4 a6 16 .tf4 .td3 c5 9 0-0 .tb7 10 l:tcl. It is more
~d7 17 f3 ;t Obukhov-Zhukovitsky, flexible for White, having already
Krasnodar 1991) and after 11...exd5 played l:tc 1, to keep the bishop off the
12lOe5 we have transposed back into d-file.
the main line. Since on Dvoretsky's 9••..tb7 10 0-0 ~bd7 11 dxc5!
reckoning 1l ...lOxd5! would cut down In strategic terms, Yusupov's real
White's advantage significantly in this innovation in his game against Ljubo-
particular move-order, there would jevic, quoted in full in the Introduc-
seem to be a strong case for taking on tion, was not so much the individual
d5 as early as possible, to make it less move 8 dxc5. Rather it was the appre-
enticing for Black to recapture with a ciation that this set-up could be treated
knight. by means of an assault on the hanging
2) The one possible objection to an pawns, rather than by trying to create a
early cxdS for White in this variation permanent outpost on eS.
is that it gives Black the chance to de- 1) 11 l'tles is the older try:
fend his centre with ....te6. For exam- la) 11...lOxe5 12 .txe5 lOe4 13
ple, Guedes-de Asis, Havana 1997 went ~xe4 (13 dxc5 .txc5 14 ~xe4 dxe4
9 cxd5 exd5 10 .te2 .te6 (1O....tb7 IS .tc4 "'g5 16111d7111xe5 17111xb7
11 0-0 lObd7 transposes to the main :ae8 18 :cd 1 with at best a micro-
line) 11 0-0 h6 12 ~e5111c8 13111a4 scopic edge, Antoshin-Donner, Ha-
~fd7 14 ~xd7 ~xd7 15 .tf3 ~f6 16 vana 1968) 13 ... dxe4 14 "'a4 .tf6 15
l:tfdl l:td8 17 h3'ifb7 18 .te5l:td7 19 .txf6 1IIxf6 16 dxc5 bxc5 17 1IIbS ;t
1IIf4; nevertheless Black has not suc- Ree-Donner, Leeuwarden 1981.
ceeded in relieving the pressure on his 1b) 11.. .:c8 12 dxcS ~xc5 (after
pawn centre. 12 ... bxcS?! 13 "'a4 ~xe5 14 .txe5
8...exdS 111b6 15 :fdl :fd8 16 .tf3 Black's
8... lOxdS 9 lOxd5 1IIxd5 (9 ... exd5 hanging pawns cracked in Ibragi-
10 .td3 lOd7 11 0-0.tb7 12 1IIc2 g6 mov-Galdunts, Kherson 1991), and in
13 dxc5 bxc5 14 :fdllOf6 15 .th6 ± Gheorghiu-Ree, Wijk aan Zee 1981,
Agdestein-Spassky, Gjl/lvik 1983) 10 White could find nothing better than
.tc4 1IId8 11 0-0 .tb7 (11...a6?! 12 the retrograde 13 lOf3 lOfe4 14lOd4
dxc5.txcS 13 ~e5111e7 14111g4 f6 15 .tf6 15 .tg4lOxc3 16 l:txc3l'tle4, with
~3 ~h8 16 ~xcS bxc5 17111f3 .tb7 equality.
18 .td6111d7 19 .txe6 winning a pawn, 2) The quiet 11 h3 has also been
Kallai-Zo.Varga, Hungarian Ch 1993) tried to no great effect: 11...lOe4 12
12 dxc5 .txc5 13111c2?! (13 ~eS!?;t) dxc5 ~xc3 13 l:txc3 bxc5 = R.Kem-
13 ... .txf3 14 gxf3 ~d7 IS .tbS 'fIe7 pinski-Gyzinski, Poland 1993, or
16 1IIa4 lOf6 with an equal position in l1...a6 12 dxc5 bxc5 13 l'tle5lOxe5 14

Systems with ... b6 193

=
i.xeS i.d6 Agzamov-Azmaiparash- 8 i.e2 and then:
viii, Erevan 1981. 1) 8 ...dxc4 9 i.xc4lClbd7 10 h3 cS
11... bxc5 11 0-0 a6 12 a4lLldS (l2 ... cxd4!?) 13
If 11...lClxcS, White is two tempi i.h2lCl7f6 14 'it'e2 'it'e8 ISlCle5 with a
ahead of Gheorghiu-Ree above. 12 small advantage for White, Semionov-
lLld4 should preserve an advantage. Muraviov, Alushta 1994.
12 lCleS! lClb6 2) 8 ...cS 9 0-0 (clearly White could
12... lLlxeS 13 i.xe5lCld7 14 i.g3 ± consider 9 cxd5 or 9 dxcS) 9 ... lClbd7
Dvoretsky. 10 cxdS lClxdS 11 i.g3 lCl7f6 Ih_lh
13a4! Lechtynsky-Chiburdanidze, Banja
Forcing Black to make concessions Luka 1985.
in his queenside pawn structure, in 8 ...lClxdS! 9lClxdS
view of the threat of as and a6. The 9 i.g3 is less aggressive, but not to-
immediate 13 i.f3 'iVc8 14 lCla4 (14 tally harmless:
a4!?) 14"'lClxa4 15 'fIxa4 'fIe6, Tol- 1) 9... cS 10 lClxdS (10 i.d3lCld7 11
stikh-Anikaev, Cheliabinsk 1991, is 0-0 lCl7f6 12 :el lClxc3 13 bxc3
not so incisive. i.e4?! {13 ... lCle4 would have been
13... a5 14 i.r3 :e8 IS lLlbS! ± equal} 14 i.a6;1; D.Rajkovic-M.Kape-
Yusupov-Ljubojevic, Tilburg 1987 (see lan, Vdac 1983) 10...i.xdS 11 dxcS
Historical Introduction). bxc5! (11...i.xc5 12 'fIa4 as 13 a3;1;
Kapelan) 12 i.c4 'it'b6! 13 i.xdS exd5
E2) 14 'it'xdS?! (Petrosian was not nor-
7...i.b7! (D) mally a man in a hurry; 14 O-O!, hop-
ing to win the pawn thirty moves later,
makes it more difficult for Black)
14...:d8! IS 'it'b3 (IS "xaS 'iWb4+ 16
~f1 'it'xb2 17 :el 'it'bS+ 18 ~gllClc6
+ Kapelan) IS .....aS+ 16~e2lClc617
:hdl i.f6 and Black's active pieces
make it very difficult for White to util-
ize his extra pawn, Petrosian-M.Kape-
lan, Vdac 1981.
2) 9 ... lLlxc3 10 bxc3 cS could be
considered.
9..:ibdS 10 i.c4
10 :xc7?! i.b4+ II lCld2 lCla6 12
This is a much safer line for Black. :el 'iVxa2 ±; 10 i.xc7 i.b4+ 11lCld2
By holding back the c-pawn, and by 'iVxa2 ;I; Kapelan.
being prepared to recapture on dS with 10..:.a5+ 11 ~e2 i.d6?!
a piece, he minimizes White's chances Slightly limp. Surely Black can't be
of achieving a favourable pawn struc- worried about that c7-pawn? ll...lCld7
ture. should equalize, since if 12 .i.xc7?!,
8cxdS then 12 ...:ac8 13 i.g3 (13 i.b3??

194 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1./4!

.ta6+ -+; 13 .td3 .xa2 +) 13 ...:xc4 7lbbS and 6 ...•d7?! 7 .xd7+ ~xd7
14 l:r.xc4 .ta6 with a slight advantage (otherwise White exchanges as neces-
for Black. sary on dS, then wins the c-pawn) 8
12 ~S .txeS 13 .txeS lbd7 14 lOeS+ ~e8 9 cxdS with a secure posi-
.txc7 :rc8 15 .td3 .txg2 16 :gl tional edge for White.
'ii'dS 17 ~e1;t Svirin-Yanvariev, Nab- After 6....td7 7 'iib3 lLlc6 (7 ... dxc4
erezhnye Chelny 1988. 8 'ili'xc4 cS 9 dxcS .txcS 10 :dllLlc6
II e3 leaves Black under a lot of pres-
In conclusion, 7 :cl may not be as sure) 8 cxdS lOaS 9 'ili'c2 exdS 10 e3
strong as its reputation, but 7 .td3 and and White stands better, both Black's
7 cxdS both offer excellent prospects queenside minor pieces being mis-
of a comfortable edge for White. placed.
7cxdS
There is just one loose end to be After 7 .txb8 :xb8, 8 .xc6+??
tied up; Black can perhaps delay cas- .td7 traps the queen, while 8 .xa7
tling and try 5...b6. .td7 9.a4 cS 10 .b3 dxc4 II .xc4
bS gives Black compensation for the
F) pawn. 8 lLles .td7 is critical, for ex-
1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 1Oc3 lOr6 4 lOr3 ample 91Oxc6 (otherwise Black is se-
.te7S .tr4 b6 ~ .. :·.·:cllf.tlL9 ... 'iIi'c7 10 'it'xa7! .xa7 11
It seems a little strange that while . 'lOxa7 dxc4. Black is a pawn down, but
S... c6 instead of 6 ... c6 is frequently has the two bishops and prospects of
played, S... b6 has been ignored. How- active play. It is perhaps safest to de-
ever, if Black can substitute ....tb7 for scribe the position as unclear.
...0-0, then he is more likely to be able The text-move aims for a more po-
to make a safe recapture on dS with a sitional solution.
piece, and in some lines (for example 7•••exdS 8 g3!
6 e3 .tb7 7 .td31OhS!?) he can play Fianchettoing the bishop makes it
...lLlhs without having to worry about much more difficult for Black to free
a later .txh7+ or attacks against the his position with ... cS. White should
king along the open h-file (after .tg3 be better, in a very technical sort of po-
lLJxg3). sition. This line reminds me of a sys-
I do not propose to analyse this in tern in the a3 Queen's Indian (1 d4
detail; what follows is just an outline. lOf6 2 c4 e6 310n b6 4 a3 .tb7 SlLlc3
6 .a4+!? dS 6 cxdS exdS 7 g3 .i.e7 8 .a4+ c6)
6 cxdSlOxdS 7 .tg3 (71Oxd5 .xdS except that White has been able to
00) 7... c5 00. substitute .tf4, which is the thematic
6•.•c6 developing square for the bishop, for
Black should avoid both 6...lObd7?? the by now redundant a3.

this system is largely of the lines leading to a slight edge for ignored by ECO.t. To an even greater extent than The first key position. getting just one line White. c6 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 itX3 lbi'6 4ll)f3 JLe7 system.7 Systems with . Black will want to play ..r4 0-0 want a lot more than 7 'iFc2 .r4 0-0 6 e3 c6 7 'iFcZll)bd7 (D) Black is not aiming for excitement.. Why though should White play plus footnotes of coverage. with most for that reason. b6Iines. I would estimate to be the true theo- 6 e3 c6 (D) retical significance of this defensive system. compared a nondescript pawn move rather than with nine lines on the Old Main Line. Such a reader will presumably 5 i. and so I have resisted the temptation S. To free level by the player who tries the JLf4 his position. completing his development? The an- This variation will probably be en. Perhaps partly from a3 to h3 has been tried. White can achieve cian's frustration at dealing with this a slight advantage just by playing system can be seen from the fact that natural moves....e7 5 i.1 7 'ifc2 ~bd7 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 M lbi'6 4lbi'3 i. The theoreti- with the .. without any detailed just about every reasonable move knowledge of theory. swer lies in what is commonly known countered a lot at club and congress as 'the battle of the tempo'. 7.c6 will be covered at the end of the to truncate coverage in line with what chapter. and indeed one gets the impression from the database that this is the line that is all too frequently wheeled out if Black is anxious about the opponent's possible superiority of opening prepa- ration.t or 7 ':c 1 Non-transpositional lines involving .

but Black often has to think of some way to free his rather constricted pieces without opening the position. b5 A6: 8••• g6?! 204 and . If. .i. If White plays an early A7: 8....d3. e5.h6 204 ..b4 16 ltle4 ~S 17 "b3..dxc4 10 ....b6 203 veloping move. with more space to manoeuvre. ~f8-g6 and .e2 tance is given for a possible later . it does nothing to pre- AS: 8.b7. a6 and .d3 is too much of a routine de- A4: 8..aS 204 vent Black's freeing plan. the bishop play can doubtless be improved: 9.. and 0-0-0..d3 196 A: 8 h3 196 A13: 9. White's plan 8h3 worked smoothly in Conquest-Hogg. 9 . h6.h2!? deserves to have been A) played more than once.00 now has a retreat on h2... AI: 8•••l:e8 196 A2: 8•••dxc4 200 A12) A3: 8•••86 202 9 i. All: 9 i. There are even a few instances in this chapter where White plays a3 and h3.i. l:e8 White's main choices here are 9 followed by .J4! something like . 10 0-0-0 dxc4 11 .tb7 13ltle5"a5 14 Wbl l:ac8 15 f4 pawn-storm with g4.i.. The usual if convoluted plan is . suddenly Black is ready for . White can play a useful waiting move like h3. Black will generally be very happy to make this exchange. 196 The Queen' s Gambit Declined: 5 J. and Black then captures on c4.i..h2!? 196 Now: AU: 9 .d3 208 A16: 9l:d1 198 E: 8 .i.i.. The benefits of this waiting move Kuala Lumpur 1992. Maybe choose from: 9 . ~f8 10 .i...i.xc4 b5 12 . 9 l:dl and 9 a3. though Black's are readily appreciated. 8 •••l:e8 (D) however. while assis.i.e2 197 B: 8l:dl 205 A14: 9 cxdS 197 C: 8cxdS 208 AIS: 90-0-0 197 D: 8 .txc4 bS..i.d6. each player waiting for something to happen.. has nothing to lose from these tempo battles.... White A1) having lost a tempo with his bishop. Now Black can .dxc4 followed by . White......e2 209 A17: 9 a3 199 F: 80-0-0 210 G:8a3 211 A11) 9 i.. and Black plays ..... it is White who has won the battle of the tempo.

Kempinski-Asrian..i...tb5 21 ...~f8 10 .~g6 11 . Black has successfully exchanged two pairs of minor pieces. White over-pressed with 15 e5 ~h7 16 Wd2 21 l:...exdS? very slight edge to White which could 11 ~b5! wins the exchange) 11 . . Khal.i.c5.~f8? 15 1) 9 .e2 ~f8 10 0-0 ~g6 11 .i. 90-0-0 (D) dcnko-Mainapalert. Moscow Not 1O.xd613 .'fIcS 13 ~6 2) 12 .txfl) 11. 14. if for example 15 b3 b6.i. In the game.d6 11 ~5 dxc4 12 .i. Manila OL 1992.e6 13 ~bl :CS 14 g4 (14 ently an innovation....txc4 bS Gelfand-Azmaiparashvili. 16 ..i.i. Loncar-Ranieri..txg6 hxg6 13 h4 ~f8 14 h5 ± Cattomio-Aller- A14) heiligen.a6 IS c5? (18 cxd5 =) 18 . even the bad hishop has a life. Moscow GMA 1990.txfl ifman-Speelman. Rebecchetto 1996..txdS exdS 12 GMA 1990. .xd6 14 . White must surely h4!?. f6!? 00) 1O.i.'fIaS (0stenstad-Lein.xd6 Wxd6 13 c5 'fIc7 14 part of White's arsenal against .txb5 lIxb5 22 lId3 .tc7 +-. yet is appar- 1) 12... Bie11993.xg6hxg614e4 . (11 ~b5 .~g6 11 ..i.. Erevan OL 1996. 9 cxd5 ~xd5 10 ~xd5 exd5 11 2) 9 ... Sere.i.i. Systems with .d8 R.td3.txg2!} 12. it is difficult to see what dam- age he can do to the black position. c6 197 0-0 (10 g4 . ~xdS cxdS? 13 .d6 12 ~xd6 .tc7 {12 ~7 .i.i.as h6 17 lIfel .i. 9•••dxc4 Black obligingly played 14.. . bxc5 19 dxc5 20 We3 lIabS This is promoted to joint main-line status for subjective reasons: I like it! It is surprising that this ultra-direct A13) move is not tried more often.. and although White has an obvious advantage in space.. 13 ~xa8 .tg3 lIecS 20 White a slight advantage. but in the game rather more slowly here.xd6 ... i..t Speelman) 14.d7 13 ~bl lIcS 14 g4 .i. after all. Gaus- 0-0-0 ~f8 12 .abl ~f8:j:.d3line.xd6 17 lIcl lIc7 with a 3) 9 .i.td3 (10 .h2 castling queenside is now an accepted i..d3?! merely leaves White a tempo and the queenside is being opened up down on the 9 .. with two games dal 1990) 10 ~d2! borrows an idea from the same tournament diverging: from the New Main Line.h2 .:le5 ±..h2!?) li.txc6 gives 'ii'xb3 18 axb3 ~e6 19 .d6 15 Wa4 a6 be doing very well....d6 12 .xc4 A15) li)d5 13 0-0-0 ~xf4 14 exf4.t 10..b6?! 10 cxdS cxdS (lO.txc6 14 .ta6! 12..tb7 12 'fIb6 15 lIc 1 c5 16 dxc5 lIxc5 17 'fIb3 ~5 a6 13 ~c6 . lIcdl .te5 ~7 12 .. . 9 .tb5! easily be (and was) overturned.. 1O..txd6 .~d5?? 11 .

txeS?! 1. but a win is elusive... A good square for the rook. 1.hxgS? 21 .1.. 198 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i. and the ble drawing.c4!? This position contains a wealth of fascinating tactics.. ~xe4 14 1. 21 gxf8'ii'+ ~xf8 22 1. 21.~xa2+ 22 ~bl 1.xf6+ ~xf6 23 l:lxh6+ ~xgS (otherwise White is ahead in material) 24 l:ldhl +-..d7 3S 1i'g8+ 1i'e8 36 1i'xc4 14 ~eg5 g6 15 h4 ~b4 16 'ii'b1 ~c7 37 1i'xa2 1i'xeS and Black is bet- e5!? ter.e2+ 1i'd2 1.l:.xgS bxgS 23 1. But why this 23••• bxc4 24 'ii'g6 ~a2+ 25 ~d2 strange reluctance to have the king on :e6 26 'ii'xgS ~e8 and now: cl as well? I) 27 ~el 1i'b4+ 28 ~fl 1i'e729 9..~xd3+ diagonal for a juicy check and clears 18 1i'xd3 ±) 18 hxg6 fxg6 19 1.xg6! c4 for the king to flee to the queenside..xgS 21 g7 l:lxeS! 22 gxfS1i'+ ~xfS 23 dxeS 1i'cS+ gives Black a strong counter-attack.txeS +-) 21 1.xgS 21 ~xgS 1. most popular move here. after 32 l:lxfS ~f7 23 ~xgS+ ~e7 24 l:lh7+ ~d8 2S ~xfS 33 l:lcl !? (or maybe with checks dxcS+ and White regains the queen. Fritz's idea is critical.. and 20 B l:lxh6 is slow.eS 1.e4+ 23 ~al 3) 27 l:lh7! 1i'xb2+ 28 ~el 'ifb4+ 1. cS 17 h5 1i'g7 ~dS! 301i'fS c3! opens the a6-fl 1. on h8 and h7 first) the position is very keeping a decisive attack) 20 ... l:le7 33 l:lxe7 1i'xe7 34 13 . I enjoyed playing this game.fS 10 cS!? b6 II b4 a5 12 a3 ~e2 ri... A16) 17 ~xeS f6 18 h5! fxeS 19 bxg6 h6 9l:ldl (D) 20g7! 20 .~d8 32 1i'gS+ (32 ~e2 axb4 13 axb4 bxcS 14 bxcS 'ifa5 15 .xe4 1. and 32 ~e I e4 33 1i'a5+ ~e8 34 1i'xa2 Antwerp 1995....b7?! (17 ..~xg7 (20.b8 33 dxeS l:lxb2+ 34 ~el . White has no trou.....xeS+ 1. dxeS+ 1. Crouch-Bielby. 2) 27 ~e2 ~d7 28 l:lh7+ ~d6 29 Durham 1997 continued 16.~f8 l:lh8+ ~d7 301i'fS 1i'd6! 31 l:lh7+ (31 9 .teS unclear.b7 ±.. 2O•••1.f6 22 1.txhl 2S l:lxhl ~fS 29 ~fl ~3 (forced) 30 l:lh8+ 'iffS 31 26 .l:.f4! 11 1. cxd418 hxg6..c7) 3l.xgS 24 ~xgS .a6 16 g4 ± Van Wely-Ravia. hxg6 (I was hoping for the chance to After 31 dxeS+ ~c4 32 l:ld4+ 1i'xd4! make a queen sacrifice with 19.d3 'ii'b6 12 g4 ~f8 13 ~e4 'ii'b4+ 3S ~fl 1i'b3 are bad or lost for lbds White) 32.tf6 with mate on h8} 22 l:lh8+! 'ifhS+ ~e7 and now.xgS {or wins easily.xgS 20.xhl 22 l:lxhl 1-0. ~xg6 33 exd4 l:lxeS+ 34 ~fl cxb2 Black 20 1i'xg6+! hxg6 21 1.. 17 .. .

lDg6 II .i.i. Systems with .. Russia Cup (Moscow) drade.h7+ ~hS 2O.. i..xc4 Now this is perfectly possible..aS 19 h4 .xc3) (l1. Moscow 1996. White can.b7 17 lDgS g6 (17 . Then..d3 IS•••b6 16 . . Brasilia 1997. Black. i.Zakharov- (Novgorod) 1997.b7 17 i..d3lDdf6 12 .i.xd6130-0.i.fS .i.i. piece) 120-0 lDxc3 13 bxc3 dxc4 14 13 . 1O. Russia Cup (Novgo.b6 IS b4 as 161i'b2 axb4 17 axb4lDdS 18 A17) lDxdS exdS = Elsness-Kosasih.xd6 .xc4lDds IS .c7 IS .d6 12 ..h2.h7+ lDxh7 19 .c8 00 A.g421 f3?! 19 .xa3 18 cS. and cS 16lDgS l:tf8 17 dS cxdS 18lDxdS gives Black a very solid position. Dja.i..xa3? 12 l:tal! lDxc3 13 l:txa3 13 . bxc4 23 .i.).t.f2.i.c714e4dxc4IS.Hoffman.xh7+ ~f8 20 lDe4 10•••dxc4 +-) 18 f4 cS 19.i. The exchange of two pairs 11 i.. 10i.i.d3 f6 12lDf3 fS A little refinement to cover f7.b3 23l:tf2 :rc8 followed by .d6 14 . liya-Astian.b7 13 0-0 l:tc8 able to manoeuvre freely behind the looks like loose queenside play by lines without feeling cramped.d820h4i.e4 l:tb8 21 m .d3 'iVc7 lO. gain space in the centre with 14 e4 fol- lowed perhaps by 'iVe2.gS17lDe2lDit418lDf4 blanca mem 1994 continued instead =Landa-Astian. Ultra-solid defence from the land of Astian...i. Matanzas Capa- lDg616i...•aS 10 a3!? ~4 ll.i.. lDxdSIgexdS.d6 .e7 19.xc3 b6 16 l:tc1 . Petrosian.xd6 IS 0-0 will lDa4+ 14lDd2 followed by b3 wins a transpose. capturing on f4 does not guarantee Black easy equality.m) 22. 16.xd6 'iVxd6 140-0 lDxc3 IS i. for example.bS 22 fxg4 (22 .d3 g6 16 c4!? lDxf4 bxc3 17 exf4 .. 12..b7 =Razuvaev-Astian. As we shall see at various points in this chapter (Section A2.i..i.h6?? 18 rod) 1997....i..bS 12 .g3 i.xeS IS .. 1996. Russia Cup .. etc.i.xeS Lima-A.••i.i..e2 20 g3 and White's positional bind is lDd7 18 :rdl .i.xc4lDds of minor pieces ensures that Black is II.i. despite the advantage of the bishop-pair and the doubled f-pawns. Lima-de An.b6+ (21 l:td2 ±) 21. when Black will find it hard to generate counter- play..!De1 eS =Koba- well worth the pawn. rather than 14 a3 . 12.xd6 17 c4 cS IslDgS h6 . 9a3(D) karta 1997.f6 140-0 .!DeS ~4! ll.g3 12 O-O!? should also be possible.d3 i. lDxc3 13 bxc3 (or 13 . c6 199 9. 13 lDeS i.

txc4 bS 11 .tb7 17 l:fdl l:ed8 18 l:d2 ~ Be- this move is that White may have in liavsky..200 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.. Vladi- vostok 1994..... Linares 1991: 1IM2.tb7 120-0 a6 13 b4 as 14 .td3 spread the bind across the whole board (11 .lDg6 11 . instead of the infe. Beliavsky suggests instead trying to 2) 9 . Copenhagen 1994.a6 12 b4 as 13 l:bl axb4 White's best chances of securing an 14 axb4 'iVb6 IS 0-0 . 14.tfS 10 .th2.txc4 lDd5 15 l:adl lDxc3 16 'ifxc3 b6 17lDe5lDxe5 18 dxeS "ii'e7 ~ Mikhalchishin-Brestian. It takes a lot of ingenuity for White 9.Ivanov-Korkina.. in that Black can offer 13 Wxc3 .tgS 'ifd8 19 eSlDdS under-explored 9 0-0-0 or in the out- 20 lDe4 f6 ~ Hjartarson-G..txd6!? 'W'xd6 IS b4 b6 160-0 game.dxc4 14 ..te3 ~ L. however.td7 16 g4 We7 vre. Salsomaggiore 1997) 13 .tb7 16 e4lDfS edge seem to be in the ultra-violent but 17 l:fdl l:ec8 18 ...tcl l:a6 18 .. Tmava 1988.txd5 .txeS 8 •••dxc4 9 . handle 9 l:dl. One possible justification for ..dxc4 10 ..txc4 b6?! 16 ttle5 ± P. . Black can son.td3 g6 16 a4 cS 17 e4 "ii'c8 18 in Beliavsky-Speelman. 18 h4?! c5 19 d5 exd5 20 .txd6 'W'xd6 14 lDe4 "ii'd8 150-0 lDg6 16 l:adl b6 17lDe5 Black apparently disregards the ....td3 10 l:d 1 and now.Iotti-Dole- schal.Thorhalls. logic.t lDf6? 19lDg5 ± Savon.lDfS to create anything unusual in such a 1) 9 . lDe4±. Reykjavik 1994. 10.txg3 15 fxg3 .td6?! lllDeS a612 cS . Vladivostok 1995.. White now made a lDdS 12 .th2 ..txe5 ± A.td6 would be more thematic.tb7 18 'ife2.td6 12 .th2lDxc3 13 bxc3 b6 140-0 pawn move too many on the kingside .td3 dxc4 11 . The plan has its Gerbich. 11 .tb7 IS . 10•••dxc4 B 1O.td6 14 O-O!? a double exchange of minor pieces . Novi Sad OL 1990. after Black's freeing manoeu..Olafs.. 10../41 White continues to play the waiting 14 .tg3lDxc3 12.txc4 (D) 13 .c5 23 l:abl h6 IS e4 axb4 16 axb4 l:a3 17 dxcS bxc5 24 b5 ±) 23lDd2 l:ca7 24 ...ta2!?) and now: with 18 b4 as 19 l:abl axb4 20 axb4 2a) 11..ta6 19 as ~ Gelfand-H.. mind. battle of the tempo. wardly ultra-quiet 9 a3.te8 21 l:f2 b6 22 h4 l:c7 (22 ..Hansen-Lyrberg.txd6 'iVxd6 13 0-0 (13l:dl 'ife7 140-0 dxc4 15 . 2b) 11.txc4 stodgy variation. lDg6 11 .tc6 son. A2) rior 10.txc4lDds 12 . b4 and l:acl restricting Black's 17 gS l:ec8 queenside..td6 13 . =.

and in (after 8 .tb4+ lllit>e2) a tempo 12..td3 are too badly split to be a real threat.. Now: 2) 9 . Black will generally want to ity after 1O.... more natural way to do so. against White here.td3 dxc4 9 .td6 =B. which seems to put scribed as the 'Rubinstein Bind'.tb31OfdS later on with . White's pawns la3) 1O. Rubinstein- Black wishes to prepare for the 'semi.td6 12 ..td6 12 e41Oxc3 13 bxc3 (13 'it'xbS .td6) 11.c6 variation. Canal.. Systems with .txcS 14 lOe4 ±) is up. Meran' formation.txa6 .tb7 11 e4 b4 12 1) 13 ...td3 . pawns. I) 9 .. l:le8 11 0-0. 14 :tacl a6 IS We2 'ifaS 16 e4..M.... However.. 14 . c6 201 rather more economically than after (12 . :ii'e8-hS. and prepares for possible counterplay 10.. If White plays Black drifted into complete passiv. 8.th2?! and here: that Black must work hard to avoid in lal) 1O. the point being la2) 1O.. be satisfactory for Black. etc. can play 10 lOxdS exdS 11 . lOdS?! and now: This is exactly the type of nightmare la) 10 .tg3. the 12. but after 14 .tf8 in 9 •••lOb6 Doering-Genduso...lOxf4 12 exf4 hcst. planning to recapture with the h- tactical means. Establishing what might be de- Ib) 10 .107b6!.tc8 lOxc5 l:lxcS 16 'ife2 lOdS 17 'ife4 g6 18 a3 .. RogaSka-Slatina 1929..td3 . just as central and kingside dark squares with in line' la3'. Moscow Ironically. and any plan to in Section C (8 cxdS lOxdS 9 lOxdS open the centre quickly (for example exdS 10 ..tf6 17 Wxb4 as 18 11 . cS IS pawn after .. . bS?! II...Reilly-Conrady. is still intends to keep a complete grip on the well answered by 1O.lLlds 13 g3 extra h3 tempo is useful... lObd7 13 l:lfdl 'ikc7 . likely to come unstuck.td6 is Black's 11. dxcSlOb4 16 'ifc3 ..b7 13lLlxdSlOxdS 14lLld2. If tightened considerably. White Psakhis-Onoprienko.....td3 . h6 12 a3 .tb3 (11 ..l:le8.. . l:lfdl (too quiet.ta6 19 'ifxa6 l:lxa6 20 . Since a possible kingside pawn.td7 16lLleS l:lad8 17 :fdl. etc.a6 (Line A3) is a 2) 13 .. bS 10 ..... 12 e4!?) 12 . White the bishop on a better square. Here though. Cannes 1997. lOxc3 14 Wxc3 Wd6 IS lLla4 cS 13 dxcS l:lc8 14 eS lOxcs IS l:lac1.107f6?! 11 0-0 b6 12 the .teS!?) 12.tc2 ± hS :fd8 22 :c3 and the bind has been Mainville-Brumen.txg3 14 fxg3 cS! should the passed c-pawn soon told.. lOxdS.1. Nuremberg 1989...tb4+ Black's position is more difficult to 12 ~e2.te2107f6120-0 that if the pawn had still been on h3 i.tg3 ...td6xg3.. . the extra move h3 works 19S6.tb7 13 11 0-0 a3 . cS 13 dxcS .txd6!?) 13.tgS capture with the d-pawn.. Groningen 1995 could happily drop the bishop back to Black tried to solve his difficulties by g3. reaching Vaganian-Forintos defend than it looks.txc4.. with space being created on lc) The real problem is that White the kingside by g3 and h4..th6 lOc3 19 'ife3 l:ldS 20 . storm is part of White's agenda.)..tf6 19 We3 'ike7 20 h4 l:ld6 21 18 ..107b6! 11 . f6 covers both eS and gS.

.f7 and White's h6 15 :fel :fdS (1S ..•b5 Deciding that it is not worth playing the waiting game any longer.xd5 .. 1970.a2 .!l)f8 15 b4 as 16 "b3 axb4 17 7 ..e2 .d3 a6).i.i.i.i..•a6 (D) 9.b7 13 e4?! This move takes its inspiration from (13 ..i.i.xc4 and now: la) 11.d7 24..b7. critical game is nearly 70 years old.i..i. the endgame.!l)xd7 IS :dl .i.. .d3 1) 9 a3 dxc4 10 .g.i. etc.a2 ..i.. h6?! (not one of the most successful of recent grandmaster inno- vations) 10 a3 dxc4 11 .i.xel 22 e7+ cS 120-0 .d3 dxc4 10 .d6 17 e4 ± Gheorghiu-Westerinen.b4!?) 13 .i.xh6 gxh6 15 .Kristins- l:fdS 14 e4.i.. Ib) 11. then Novosibirsk 1993..i.xe6 (19 . 1) 9 . (11.!l)h7 18 l:fel Black's position is close to col- lapse-Kramnilc) 14~5~615..xc3 IS bxc3 %leS 3) 9 .xc4 bS 11 .l:eS IS . .d7 16 .i...!l)f815 f5 . "as b6 14 b4 bxcS 15 bxc5 .i.bl cxd5 15 h4 ± Gheorghiu-J..xc4 bS 11 . then 14 ..~S 12 O-O! . Black's plan is axb4 ..a2 "b6 12 e4 g6 13 eS ~ 14 . Russia Cup (Krasnodar) 1997..bl .b6 12 b4 ±) 12 .dxc4.!l)f8 15 e5 ~5 16 ..i.b4 17 exdS ~ Ivkov-Kurajica.c2 connected passed pawns should win "as 00 Shulman-Lyrberg.b7 13 l:adl :acS 14 "bl ~h7 23 l:xel ..l:e8 10 a3 lLlf8 11 cSlLl6d7 .b7 12 l:dl "b6 (12 .xe6 .bl .dxc4 is so l:xd7. or 17..i.i. :fdS 15 .i.i..!l)b4 20 "d2 .i. b5..i.b7 120-0 c5 13 l:fdl 'ilb6 14 .i. Debrecen Echt 1992.xc4 b5 S ..!l)g6 13 0-0 9:ctl At least Black knows White is not going to castle queenside..!l)xdS son.d3 20 "xg6 hxg6 21 . Palma de Mallorca 1965.!l)xf4 13 exf4 "c7 (after 13 ..!l)g4 .!l)xd5! cxd5 19 g4! "g6 2) 9 cS b6 10 cxb6 "xb6 11 ..i.i.e2 19 c4 .i.!l)e5 20 l:xe6 is similar) 20 l:txe6 and wins.!l)bd7 6 .f4! l:fel "eS 15 f5 'ifh5 16 ~g2.:eS 14~5 .i.i.i.i.!l)f6 4 .!l)xd7 :xd7 16 dxc5 "xeS 17 The whole line with S.i..i. There are too many options on both sides to draw any strong conclusions A3) from these lines.. Minsk 1996.cxd4 00) 16... follow up quickly with .i. to pick a moment to play .%leS.f6 16 .. 17 .i..:eS 14 .. .!l)e5! looks very strong. Reykjavik 1972. Alternatives: 3) 9 .!l)xdS . 8•.xe6 the Semi-Slav (1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~3 with a winning attack) 13 .!l)f6 =Kobaliya- little explored that the theoretically Asrian.. Wijk aan Zee fxe6 causes problems for Black....b5 12 .f6 16.d3 dxc4 .!l)6d7 18 e5 00 Psakhis-Pigusov.dxc4 10 .i. and if a main line of the Meran Variation of 13 ..202 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.i. 2) 9 . c5..!l)e4 "e7 17 .xc4 b5 11 .eS 17 d5 ± Kramnik- Lputian.!l)f3 c6 5 e3 . e.i.

d3 i. weakness on c6.d3 dxc4 10 i. White used a more tactical ap.h2 cxb6 ~xc3 15 bxc3 i. Systems with .a6 10 ~S "c8 11 i. 4b) 10 cS!? (a more positionally 11mbitious try for White) 10. OL 1996. For example: game.d3. b6 11 cxb6) 11 "a4 i.t 23 ~xb6 'fIxb6 24 l:[bl ±.i. b6. 10 i.e2 cxd4 15 ~xd4 "a5+ 16 ~fl ao Koro- tylev-Deviatkin.d3 b4 12ltla4 i.. b6 system.t Kacheishvili-Dzhan- White has a definite advantage in dzhgava. c6 203 4) 9 . = J:[xa8 Arduman-Vaganian..xf4 20 exf4 able to reach a hanging pawn position "c7 21 J:[bl J:[b8 22 'ii'c2 ±. Moscow 1996. ~xc3?! 13 'irb3! is good for White....t plan worth repeating in the first place? Muse-Fuhrmann.... But was Black's .. Black will be Riga 1981 with 19 "b2 i.. .~xb6 22 cxb6 J:[xb6 15 dxcS bxcS 16 J:[fdl "b7 17 'fIc2.b7 11 0-0 'fIc8 12 proach: 19 i.b7 11 0-0 a6 12 a4 h6 13 A4) i. Erevan chetto without ill effect.i.xb6 16 i.c6 as a loss of tempo in a Bundesliga 1994/5. treating .i.xd6 "xd6 Encouraged by White's loss of time 18 ~b5 i..d8 16 ~3 i.d8 12 "xa5! (after 12 b4?!...xe6 16 J:[rct .exdS?! is to be regarded with cS covered in Bagirov-A..e2 . In a later a tempo down after . (11 O-O!?.i. Black tries to fit in the fian.e717 a3 bxa318 bxa3 J:[e8 ~xeS 12 dxeS ~7 13 0-0 bS 14 cxbS cxbS 15 'ii'd3 . 24 J:[b7 'fIc8 25 J:[bl ± Kramnik-Zude.. Georgian Ch 1996.. space. but 12.. White still keeps the initiative with 14 9 i.Petrosian.. Boca 1997.xc4 00 11 i.. 11 ~xdS!?) 11. 13 'fIa4!? bS 14 'fIdl .~e4 (1O. 1O•••aS 11 i. Kaluga 1996..i.e2 .xb5 19 axb5 axb5 2O:xas with h3. 12.i..a6 13 'fIa4 i.xc7 'fIxc7 20 J:[bl eS 21 J:[acl i.. White took care to keep 9 ..b7 11 ~S J:[e8 12 tastrophe) 22 'ii'b2 exd4 23 exd4 J:[e4 0-0 ~f8 is another way of playing it.. Black to keep the exchange lead to ca..d6 17 i.. At last we see a position with some life in it for Black.. 2) 10 .xaS gexdS 13 J:[c 1 . 1) 10 i...xa4 13lLlxa4 bS! favours Black) 12 .xa6 :xa6 14 0-0 "cS 15 lOel i.i. trying to fix a White's spatial advantage by 13 ..b7 12 10cS 0-0 lLlxc3 13 bxc3 c5 =Nazin-Pirozh- 10 cxd5!?.xe2 14 ~e2 cS J:[b6! J:[aa8 (21. attempts by Minzer-Gamarian...to If Black tries to break The natural response.d3 i.a5 and now: 4a) 10 ~d2 cS 11 ~b3 "b6 12 cxdS ~xdS 13 lLlxdS exdS 14 i. some suspicion. cS.a6 13 9 J:[dl!? i. .b6 (D) . 10 cxbS!? kov. At best.h2 ~b8 14 ~eS lLle6 15 ~xe6 8. Bundesliga 1996n... but needs to find some way to 9•••cxdS make it tell.

Erevan 1982..dxc4 10 i. though Black could do without the 11•••cxdS 12 0-0 eS 13 ~b3 "'b6 kingside holes.g6! 19 .. If then 8 ••••aS(D) 17..b618ltJxb4 'ifxb419 J-xe5 J-xh3 (19 . White's calculations had stopped here..b6 .~xf3+ 21 ~hl ~4 22:n :xe8 Black was winning.. sively at various stages. White for play such as 15 :fd 1 !? should give his own part could play more aggres.. bearing in mind 8. Steady forms of the Exchange Slav... England 1996.'iff5 or2l. After 11 0-0 e5 12 J-g3 e4 13 J-e2 a6 14 a3 J-fS. good for White.. However.204 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! This is fine for Black if you are such possibilities as 15 i.J-fS 18ltJxe8 Maybe in Tavadian-Anastasian. 17.b7 queenside is entirely anti-positional 12 0-0 a6 13 :fdl "'b6 14 a4 b4 IS for White..g5ltJxd3 16 happy playing the more deadly dull 'ifxd3 J-xc3 17 'ifxc3?? ltJe4... as "'a7 16ltJa4 cS 17 ltJeS . after 18.ltJxb716ltJxdS "'d617 ~c7? 13 'ife2!? Burgess makes the interesting sug- gestion of 17 :fdl I?. However......'ifc8 White has a clear extra pawn in the ending) 22 ltJd4 :ad8 23 gxh3 'ifxh3 24 'ife2 and the attack collapses. 14 dxeS ~eS IS i.xc4 bS 11 J-e2 i...c7 J-e4 20 f3 (20 J-g3 :xe8!) 20. cxdS cxd5 16 ~b3 'ifd8 17 ~a4 is There is no immediate refutation.t Povah- nesses. A6) hagen 1985 continued 15 b4?! 'ifd816 8. Karlsson-Hf1ji. for example IS. the kingside proved stronger than 9J-d3 anything White could muster on the 9 :dl!? opposite side.. with Black scoring 100% Finally a couple of very minor al- after White tried too hard to refute the ternatives..xb7+!? White's advantage is much more A7) slender than it looks. so no diagram. not conceal them. Copen. although one of these was queen sortie.. closing the 9. when Black's play on Not very pretty.:xe5? 20 :d8+). he needs to expose weak. keeping a few A5) threats hanging over Black. able to knock over Kramnik in a 9 lM2 :e8 10 J-d3 J-b4 11 adS quickplay...g61t c5? g6 17 a4 h5.. something though. We have just a couple of examples of this move. White contin- ues 20 J-d6 'ifg4 21 J-g3! ltJg5 (after 2l.. Thus 15 Merriman.

The as yet not very systematic..a6 11 b3 'irc8 12 0-0 bS 13 moves first..txc4 b5 13 ...lDxg3?!. b610 J. 13 cS B2: 8. After straightforward 9 ..!Lle4lDf6 lSlDe5 (1SlDeg5!?. the most popular.e7 6 e3 lDbd7 7 J.tb7 20 d5 . 8.... and if 9 . Yet again there is a frustrating lack retical recommendation after 1 d4 d5 2 of consensus as to what Black should c4 e6 3 lDc3 lDf6 4 cxd5 exd5 5 J.... instead of 18 Ilfe1 b619 lDxc6 . Sec- 9 cxd5!?.txb2 = Matthias- Schlindwein.1...... 14 g3 ±.as ble. lDxe4 16 "xe4 i.aS). 9 g4!? In a ondly.b4 21 "a4 ~5 0-1. Systems with . c6 205 When one considers that the theo....g5 play next.. no retreat is provided for 9l:r.aS do not seem quite sufficient to i. We cover the two aggressive 10••• J.. 13 ..h6 here is readily but the move has two potential de- doubted..d3 h6 is 8 J..~. lle8.f6 17 h4 "c7. B1) 8.. fects. White plays a natural devel- i..1.. the wisdom of 7..d3 dxc4 12 . lDf6 11 0-0 dxc4 12 .. Instead.txc4 lDb6 13 i..1.lDhS 205 Walking into a self-made pin.aS 206 might yet give something to play for. the recom- mendation is 9 0-0-0.....td3 14 cRe2.tb3! looks very strong... Lippstadt 1996... Oviedo rpd B4: 8. 11 h4 dxc4 12 . B.1le8 206 Now Kramnik-Ubilava. lDh5..dxc4 and 8.a6 207 1992 continued 13 ... White can keep up the pressure with 18 h5. First. Klatovy 1995. .txc4 lDd5 13 83 86 (13 . and if 13 . 9 .. oping move instead of a pawn-push. B3: 8. f6!?) 14 . there is a danger that White 9.. 9 O-O-O!?. 10 hxg3 g6 11 equalize.lDxf4 10 exf4 g6 8 Ildl (D) After 10.f4 .ta6 15 ~ ± Matras-Jirman... 9. .. f5!? gives good chances of equalizing. White would play on the a5-el diagonal (after have time to think.dl the bishop if Black plays 8 .. Our lines are: cxbS? Bl: 8. if Black can create immediate game at normal speed.) 15 .d3?! This is a slightly unfortunate square for the bishop.td3!? The theory on 7 'irc2lDbd7 8 h3 is Aiming for a Rubinstein Bind.cxb5 14 "d3 b4 BS:8•••b6 207 15 "xa6 bxc3 16 'ira5lDe417 Ilcl a6 B6: 8. 15 h4 ...tg3 is also possi- 8.. 8.lDhS 9 .dxc4 207 18 ':c2 "b7 19 Ilal Ilfc8 20 lDel J.e2 will have to play ':c 1 at some stage to 10 cxd5!? cover c3..

both possible. and three different moves. 9 .. a6 transposes to 8 .h7+ ~g7 20 IId3 IIhS 21 IId3 If anything.. 2) 9 a3 ~410 i... even against one of Black's most direct approaches.h2"f7 18 IIgl fxg4 19 IIxg4 i.:r.d6. despite the worrying lack lIe8. It is more important for Black to I) 9 .xf3 19 for White.xd4 = after 8 IIdl.. 10.a6 was ever. preparing 16 IIfel "d617 ~S ...i.b4 10 i...aS (a strange choice with free his queenside: IS . 8 h3 "as. ~41Oi. Alternatives tend to be 19 ..e3 i.d3 i.. i. i..xe4 dxe4 22 ~eS ± cxb6 ~) 11.. while 9 . 1O. 11 . 1) 9 ~d2 i.g7 20 h4 and White had a gUilty of mixing plans.206 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 iLj4! 13•••lbd5 14lbxd5 One can conclude very little from 14 g3?! ~b4 reveals the point be.f8 11 3) 9cSwasmetby9 .... Dortmund 1993.. 8 . on 17 hxg6 hxg6 18 . see Line B4 below. aS 10 c5 b6 11 ~S?! (11 20 tilegl h6 21 i. except that 8.e2 e4 15 ~b5 l:e6 16 IIcl ~ P.Gure.xa3?! The standard manoeuvre.. Antwerp 1994.eS (D) 82) S.. though White IIcl ~xf4 IS exf4..Neu- 14 ~e2 a6 IS "b2 g6 16 g4 gS 17 mann-Vorisek...i. this.. transpos- ~c3 12 bxc3 dxc4 13 i..aS is a valid try.. Khania 1993. BledIRog~ka Slatina 1992.etc. bS!? and 9 .i. and in M.xc3 (this can wait for a move. White's attack has burnt itself out.. of flight squares for the queen.d3 i..:r. ..d3 ~df61l 0-0 The main line here is 9 h3.a5 makes more sense i.. Van Wely-Radulov.g7 2) 9...xg6 . ~h5!? are Labahn..i. cxb6 tilxb614 .. Cesky Brod 1995. b6!? might be 3) 9 . hind Black's last move. 3/3 for White..a5 Here we have three games.d3 g61S h4 i... bind. . How.cS 12 ~b3 ~) 12 ~xc4 ~S 13 h3 ~b6 14 ~S +. can try a different waiting move: vich-Weemaes..f6 i..cS! GO) 11 bxc3 dxc4? (a disastrous surrender of the centre.cS GO.b4 unavailable) 10 1tX12 i.. Black 9a3!?M snatched the pawn with IS .i.f618 :Cdl g6 . Moscow 1995.f6 16 wn i. i...i. No real significance should be at- 14•••exd5 15 b5 i.xc4ltX1S 14 ing to Line AI6 above..g3 eS 12 ~b31t'd8 13 cxd5 cxdS 14 fS 11 IIbl "d8 12 h3 "e8 13 b4 i..... Black doesn't have to playa unclear in the game Klingelhoefer- Stonewall.d3 ~g6 . a6 9 a3 best of all. 8 IIdl "as.Buki~­ Mali.g4 tached to the statistic.~xe5 12 dxe5 ~d7 13 in Najer-Notkin. 83) S•••. It is rare to get an opening system where there is such lack of consensus.

i.Petrosian and Kramnik-Zude Yin.. Salta 1995.. London Lloyds Bank 1994. 1O. White over-pressed in Kotov-Grechkin.xc4 b5 11 .i.xc4 bS 12 8.i. .t Meulders-G... 3b) Gelfand suggests 10 lLle5. and after 130-0 'iWb6 14 e4 cS IS dS?! exdS 16 eS d4 17 ~gS c4! 18 exf6 lLlxf6 White.xe5 .f6 Gelfand-King.i..i. "e7 14 l:td2 a6 IS e4 dxe4 16 . Schwabisch Gmiind "c2 ~bd7 S l:tdl c6).i.i. Schneider.d3 l:te811 0-0 lLlf8?! 2) 9 . though a piece up.i.. velop in Meran fashion with .i... c6 207 1O..i.i.e2 The disease of mixing plans. 12 e4 .i..g3 = Avrukh-Hao irov-A.xe4 10 . 3a) 10 cS?! (thi..xc4 ~b6 10 ...i. move-order in this game was 6 .aS! Gel.lIeS 10 h3 dxc4 11 .. Cala Galdana U-18 1996.i..a6 10 b3 :CS 11 0-0 ~ 12 I) 9 h3!? transposes to the Bag. St Petersburg 1996... giv- 11 . Systems with .i.t Psakhis-King.dxc4 11 . bS. or to de. discussed in Line A3 above.h4 (1O. Len- ingrad 1938.i.~aves the posi. 13.Hoffman-Aramayo.dxc4. .i. was soon suffocated by Black's advancing pawns.i..a6(D) .exdS 10 ..i.d3 dxc4 10 .i. B6) 3) 9 .g3 h6 tion too blocked) 1O.. b5.i. Instead.g3 :c814 ..i....i.b713.i. games.i.d3 . Munster fand) 11 1&4 as 12 lLleS ~xeS 13 1991.a2 . bxc4 11 ~xc6 "eS 12 b3 or eS 17 lLlgS :rs 18 dS ± Nepomni.i. a6 7 viii-H. 9 . etc.xe4 bS 11 ..~. Haifa Echt 19S9 (the 16 h5 lLle7 17 lLle5 ± Kacheish. The thematic reply. .i.b7 11 c5.i. successful.b7 12 b4 as 13 l:tbl l:te8 14 e4 . What c5?! (l1...i.i.e2?! . 9cxdS . 9.xc4 l2Xis 12 0-0 ~b6! l:ta7 14 ~xcS "xcS IS .xc5 13 0-0 'iWb6 14lLlg5 h6 A.b6 =.e2 b5 and now: 8 •••dxe4 is not very thematic either.t Pogorelov-Ruberg.eS ~hf6 13 .d3.Winkler. 15 lLlge4 . ..xg3 13 bxg3 ing a slight edge after 1O.d6 12 0-0 .i..fS ± 12 dxcS .t lLlxf4 13 exf4lLlg6 14 g3 b6 15 h4 . rather than 9 9&3 .e2 ~bd5 l1. White lacks the does Black do about his c6-pawn? tempo to block the queenside with b4) 12lLleS .. ~xe5 11 dxeSl2Xi7 12 cxd5 cxd5 shay-Asrian..g3 . 9•••dxe4 84) 9 . 1994. Brussels 1993. and now 13 ~e5 looks slightly better for White. 10 . B5) 8•••b6 This has two possible objectives: Not a move one would expect to be either to play an early .b7.

xg4+ 18 lOxg4 .t was H. Forintos gives two better de- fences: 1) 13 .d6 ac..xf4 00. 14 gSlOe415 J. providing chances of continuing 18 dxe5 d4. We look at the alternative capture 13 J.f4 . then 11 Wd2.g3 .xg4+ 14 lOxg4lOxg4 15 w J. since as played the g-pawn S cxdslOxdS (D) itself becomes a target. 11 ~e2lOr6 12lOeS :e8 13 g4!1 With ideas of a full-blooded attack.. al- though White looks a little better.cxd4? 17 hxg6 The knight recapture is known in J.d3 (D) lOf6 14 J..:e8?! 12 J. 8 ..b4+!? 1O.Miiller-Kaju- mova.xe4 J.d6! 17 . 14 :agl J. 9 •••exdS 10 J.c3 J.xg6 J.c2. 11. 10•••J.h4! 16 fxe4 :xe5 00..xe5..Berg- Hf2Ii.d3 White can try 10 a3!1.xd3 :e8 25 Wc2 (instead of a bishop move) in that :hgll-O.e6 00) 14. as with the New Main Line.c5 14 a3 (14 dxc5 lOe4 15 f3 .xe5 play along the a5-el diagonal.a5 10 e4 lOxc3 II D) bxc3.d6 15 h4 cS 16 h5 White's attack now broke through spectacularly in Vaganian-Forintos.xe4 dxe4 16 . but is all the more tempting after :xc2+ 23 J. from castling. but 18 J.... such as ll. Danish Ch (Ringsted) 1995..exd5 under the move-order 7 cxd5 13•••g6?! exd5..•a5+. Dresden 1993.xe5 18 g5! J.c5.g4 1h_ 111 K.xc2 d3+ 24 J. Forintos suggests as an im- White's king is still two moves away provement 16..... looks strong.d3 h6 13 0-0 SJ. Moscow 1975: 16. c4 15 J... but Black has livelier defensive attempts available.208 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! C) 13 h4 first. would seem to be more prudent to play aiming to complete development in . Even so..lOf6 II 0-0 J. and if Black replies 1O.xh7+ ~f8 ac.xh7+ lOxh7 16 axb4 . it The most natural move on the board.. c4 17 J. J. 2) 13 .g4+ 19 :xg4 :c8 20 positions where White has not played gxh7+ ~h8 21 J. Unnecessarily weakening his pawn structure.xe5 :xe5 22 gxf6 . 9lOxdS After 9 J.g5 h6 14 h4 J..

b4 12 ~e4 ~xe4 13 i. for this opening than the moderns..d3!?~bdS liamova-Kakhiani...g3 19 b4 .c6 = Nedela-P. ~dS?! leaves White ahead of 16 h3 i.:eS. except that E) in that variation White usually plays 8 i. ~xe4 15 i.d3 h6 16 0-0 ~xe5 for a win. S i. 10 i.. 11 .. 11 0-0 . transposes to the 6 .h6 (too passive?) 12 lIfdl most effective.d7 IS i. i.eSg61Sh3~g716e4 . when sions of an old trap. lIxd6 ~xd6 27 ~xe5 We7.a6 16 lIfc1?! that the old masters had a better feel 1611fdl =.Bazant. Hungary 1993 i..b7 11 0-0 :c8 The 'Semi-Slav' treatment is the 1) 11. i.xe5 i.t Korchnoi-Doroshkevich... of course.... ~xc3 12 bxc3 WaS 13 0-0 ~h5?! 2) 11. 9 lid 1 is another White's extra pawn proved insufficient possibility.e5. dxc4 10 i.g5 Wc713 l:.. 12i.. the loss of tempo if posed c2-square. as after 9.xc4 to force the win against active play.d616 ~bS ful than Black's. lIe6 21 i.e2(1Oi... Kholmov-Dmitriev- Black exchanges on c4. cxd4 but there are several ways of playing 14 exd4 ~d7 15 i.h4 WfS laying with S.e4 lowed by .t) 13 .4..f5 i.. Bern ~7f6 11 a3 (unnecessary.. line A). ~bdS l1i. WaS 10 0-0 ~b6 11 i.d3?! 21 lIdl i. for example 20..ac1 h6?! (13 . LDb6 11 i.e2(D) ... f6!? fol- 17 i.d3(13a3!?) 13 . is just one of several ver. 1925..e2 (11 0-0 .g3 i.g3 ~xc3 12 draw after 20 .. The one his queen to e2 rather than to the ex- snag is.xf5 20 Wxf5 i. .t Mikhalchishin-Lyrberg.xdS exdS 12 ~xdS. Borzhomi wom Ct II ~xdS exd5 120-0 leaves White 1990.xe4... cS=) 14i.t) 14 i.~b6IOi.xe4 i. Then 9 0-0 dxc4 10 IS lId2 ~cS! 19 :adli..h614a3e5 There is no particular sense in de.fS IS as ~bd7 the S cxdS ~xdS variation. Baden-Baden 1970... 9 i.e2 varia- tion (Chapter 4..Stefan-J.. ~b7 24 ~e4 lIe6 25 ~xd6 lIxd6 26 Paris 1994. ± O. 15 i.. sky.b3 ~bd5 12 i.d6 17 i. ahead of the S cxdS ~xdS 9 ~xdS Black now contented herself with a cxdS line) 1O.xc5 19 .xc4 b5 10 i. Czech Ch If Black plays accurately.Groch. Systems with .d3 i. in Play the Queen's Gambit.g3 lieS 16 i.d3).. Slovakia 1994. loss of tempo makes it difficult to keep 3) 9 . c6 209 the simplest fashion possible. USSR Ch ! Tartakower-Yates. White's 1996. a6 10 0-0 cS tt-dxc5 i.. i.eS WaS 13 4) 9 .h7+ ~hS 19 i.b4 17 ~a2 i.xc5 any ftrm grip on the position.xf6 lIxf6 22 Wbl b5 23 b4 winning a pawn.xc4 ~dS?? 11 i.. Goldin-Lamoureux.d3!? ~bd5 12 ~xd5 . Alternatives: a6 13 a4 lIcS 14 We2 ~b6 15 e4 lieS 1) 9.. c5..t) 1995.h4 ~g4? 15 i.xeS lIxeS 20 lIxc5 +Gal- 2) 9. Moscow 1966 continued 12 lIfdl 8•••dxc4 We713i.~bd5 (reached via S l:.t Csaba-Vajani.. bxc3 cS 13 ~eS (13 0-0 .. This suggests that Marovic's 12 ~g5 h6 13 ~ge4 b4 14 ~a4 claim.. ~xc3 White's interpolated move is more use.xe4 (I3 .dl lieS 9 i..t) 11. is 16•••eS! 17 ~c5 ~c5 18 dxc5 to be treated with some scepticism.

~b6 is perhaps a little inflexible after 10 ~d3. White's lacklustre play can 11 ~bl g6 12 ~2 ~xg3 13 hxg3 be improved considerably. trans. in either case White ~g419:d2c520f3 c421 ~xc4:c8 is after the black king's throat. Cuban Ch 1995 continued 10 8 O-O-O!? (D) ~b3?! (the bishop is now a target for Not the sort of move to play if you Black's advancing pawns) 1O. f5 12 ~d3 ~xg3 13 hxg3lDffi 14 ~2? posing to lines we have just looked at. (14 f3!?) 14.a5?! 9 ~bl?! (unnecessary. 22 b3 b5 23 fxg4 bxc4 24 bxc4 :xc4+ 25 ~dl .. Naturally. However. Wrexham 1995. 9 ...aS could also be considered.dxc4...210 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j.as withstand the three-pawn gambit.. h4.c7 13 ~2 ~d6 14 f5 ~b6 15 ~b3 exf5 16 gxf5 ~d5 17 :dgl ~d7 18 f6 ~f4+ 19 ~bl ~xf6 20 . aS II want a reputation for subtlety! I would h4 (11 a3!?) 11 .. ~b4 10 ~2 ~ 11 ~g3 The simplest way is 8 . in Touzane-Laclau. The point of this move is to discourage . ~f6 14 g4!? (14 c5!?) 14.~h5?! 9 ~g3 f5 100-0-0 a6 Naturally.. sacrificed pawn. 8 . a4! 12 ~xa4 ~xa4 suspect that 8 h3 :e8 9 0-0-0 is a 13 ~xa4 ~d5 14 ~g5 g6 15 ~b3 slightly more accurate rendering of ~b416 jlb1 e5! 17 ~xe5 ~f5 18 e4 the plan.1....g6 ~8 21 ~g5 1-0 Doeserich-Krebs. ~xg4 15 9~xc4bS ~xg4 fxg416 f4 with a positional grip The most thematic plan... ~xc4 ~4 and Black should win...h6? 9 h4 dxc4 10 ~xc4 ~d5 11 g4 ~xf4 12 exf4 ... 1993: 8 ... Valdes-Rivi- F) era..~xd2 15 :xd2 dxc4 16 Black tried to vary.f4! 8•••dxc4 Black must urgently start action on B the queenside.. 11 ~bl ~b7?! (routine play may lead to quick disaster in this type of .c8 and White was unable to B . White can often fol- low queenside castling by central play. 8 .. 10 ~d3 11 ~d2 Taking the knight from the kingside is already a minor concession.. Baden- weiler 1995 was a rottweilering in Badenweiler. cess.) 9 . though that more than compensated for the 9 . 9 ~2 . but as we have seen while examining the New Main Line. with no great suc... French Cht Pein-Martinovsky..

a5 9 ~2 ~h5 10 .h2. 8••• ~bS "... The queen ing some of the pressure off h7) 12 doesn't really belong on as in this type ~5 l:lfdS 13 ~?! (13 g4! is much of Stonewall position.l:leS will transpose into lines already considered after 9 h3 or 9 :dl. b4 White is taking control..g6) with coun- terplay . 11.g3 f5 11 .. Systems with .xh7+ <RfS 16 dxe5 c5 17 a3 (oth.d6 14 . but 3) S.i.a69cxd5(9c5!?c!llli5 1Oi.. and now instead of Gurevich.Gurevich..b7 a4 l:lacS 15 ~5 l:lfdS 16 . 10.. 1l. it makes more sense to Kain-G.. c5 in reserve.e6 16~a4~717~5~xc518bxc5.xc4 b5 11 Black was in control. more effective) 13 .h6 9 h3 dxc4 10... In D.i. tions. 9•••f6 9. gives again the usual bewildering array of White good play against the weakened choice.b4?! 12 ~b3 "'dB ~xf4 11 exf4 h6 120-0 i. Montecatini Terme Sa3 (D) 1995. however. Toronto 1997. c6 211 sharp position.tg3 f5 1O.McMahon-Tuddenham. Duisburg girls U-18 Wch 10 i..lLId5 14 ~g5lDxe5 2) S.t G) Efimov-Barletta..Kis. White ventured 10 i. al..teS 9 .te5 I) S.i.d3. as "'a7 IS ~xd7 ~xd7 19 ~e4 and though one feels that Black.d3 l:leS? 11 ~b5.. should play 12 i.. b4 followed by ....e5 ±. i...b6 14 11... In Veltmann.....te2 ~xg3 12 hxg3 ~f6 GO II i.xd6 .b4 and Black has a Golders Green 1995. with .b7 120-0 a6 13 l:lfdl . Gurevich.b3 b4 17 This position needs exploring.h6 <Re8..~xe5 10 dxe5 g6 II O-O-O. Ortega-Giretti.i. H 9.. the old trap on powerful counter-attack...exd5 Eriksson.i.e2 ~df6.as 12 g4 ~g7 13 h4 with a kingside at- tack . should not be berg. tak. White play 11 .i. kingside...e2 i.. 5) S. 4) S. the c-file was sprung after 9 cxd5 exd5 Zugic.. 18 ~xe6+ fxe6 19 i.a6.txh7+ <RhS 11 exf4 dxc4 (or even ll.. slower than White.td3 ~xf4 10 ..i. as?! misreads White's inten- 15 i.xd6 15 b4 i.i.d3 l:leS 11 h3 ~fS 12 0-0 ~g6 13 1992... .. erwise . leaving yet gxf5 exf5 14 .f6 13 b4 ± 13 ~a4 ~b6 14 ~bc5 ± Dubinka. Verona 1997) 9 .~b4) 17.Gurevich. playing 12 O-O? ~xg3 13 bxg3 i.d3 Not. Tisdall-Lyr- or .d7 ~.~xg311 bxg3 f512g4~f613 Another tempo move. Oslo 1994. Hungary 1995. 1l•••~hf6?! .

'it'dS?! in tives. S. has seventh-move alternatives..Gure. we must note that Black too not well placed on as. but one can be sceptical of this assessment.27 'ii'c2: Black delays 8 J. find nothing better than 9 ... Guarapuava U-lS h3 is at least as promising as anything Wch 1995.0·0) 7 8 ... h6.g3 1£lxg3 . Ljublj- 'it'xd6 22 c5 'it'c7 23 c4 .td3 lIe8 10 0-0 J.i... 13 h3 llldf6 14 J. h6?! (pointless) 8 lIdl111hS lowed by f3 is also good... etc.t M.d3 delayed 212 Kramnik notes that 100-0-0 'it'as B: 6 •••0·0 7 'it'c2 with •••lllbd7 11 ~bl is also promising. vich-An. it is possible to conclude that 8 Delemarre-Andrade..f8 11 J. but the queen is 7 'it'c2.Fernandes. 12 J. or simply 8 . 2) 7 .d7 15 0·0 J. 2b) 9 . Mikhalchishin-Siska. After 12 .J.0-0. h6 10 a3. This is undoubtedly an ex- else in the 'it'c2 system.. gS.g3 g6 12 lIfel a6 13 e4 ± Chenaux- Astengo. White's pieces are not working effec- tively in the centre.t Kramnik.e7 castled kingside... Geneva 1996. delayed/omitted 213 10•••0-0? .i. with the idea of .111hS 13 J..hS 17 llle5I£ld7 18 f3111xe5 121£leS with a distinct advantage for 19 J. Black looks comfortable enough. l£lg7. 9 J.d3l£lxf4 14 exf4 ± Gurevich. and possibly ...e816J.... 0-0 It is usually a positional error to make this capture before White has 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3lllc3 ~ 4 00 .xe5l£lxc3 20 bxc3 J.d6 21 J.. Our coverage falls naturally into 9hxg3g6 two sections: 9. 1) 7..111bd7 7 'it'c2 (D) for White.xd6 White. A: 6 •••111bd7 7 'it'c2 with •••0-0 10J... Kramnik suggests 5 J. as pos- 'it'c2 sibilities worth exploring.'it'aS?! 8111d2 0-0 and now: 2a) Following 9 0-0-0.f4 c6 6 e3 lllbd7 (or 6. Before leaving aggerated reaction. g6....212 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! Gurevich gives 11.h2 7•••111hS Gurevich notes that 16 llleS fol.d7- e8.f4! 1£le4 12 .d3 J. which allows Black to take certain liberties with his kingside pawn structure in order to keep his pieces active.e2. ~bd7 or .. Linares 1995. A) Black delays castling with the idea of .. as good 6. ana 1994. 7... 0-0. Black could After going through seven alterna.d3 lllxf4 10 exf4 lllf6 11 0-0 0-0 16•••J....l£lxeS 12 dxeS.

a5?! 8 lDd21Obd7 9 i. . Aalborg 1995.. where Black's . b5 91Oe5).Andersen- Hellegard..••b6 Begun. lc) Other 8th move replies by nik-Abrarnovic.d3 :leS 10 0-0 1Of8 11 a3 .tf5? g6 13 .txc4 b5 10 ..t Kramnik. 2) 7.t.. 10 0-0-0 is worth con. the plan of cxd5..1Dc7? 9 c5 .. 00) 11 0-0 lOh5 12 :fel .Lasker-Marco... such as 8 :dl or 8 h3. very relevant. will tend In this game it was not long before to transpose to lines already consid- White broke through on the h-file. dxc5) 9 ...txc4 bS 13 .. which is now Tarrasch gives 13 ..t) 8.d3 Simferopol 1989 continued 10 0-0 c5 111Ob5? 1Dc6 12 ..tb7. While not particularly thematic.txc4 b5 12 cxb6. 5) 7.lObd7 9. The perhaps about equal.. 'Russian draws' re- this has been tried a few times.b6 9 Wa4 (9 lOe5? 1Ob4! followed by line. Makarska- Tucepi 1995.tb7! . thinking is that once White has played 5b) 8 c5 is probably best.td31ObdS poses into the . Hastings 1895.d3 (8 h3 I?) S.dxc4 9 . b5 101Wdl . ered..td3. opening never was Lasker's strong Ib) 8 c5!? is also possible.td3 (8 h3!?. 4) 7 . c4 +. White..td3 .txc41Obd7 100-0 lOb6 11..dxc4 9 la) 8 cxd5 exd5 9 .. tOe5 and "f3.1Ob4 9 Wb3. while Doroshkevich-Lobach....a5 11 b5.. for ex... Nova Gorica 1997.b79cxd5exd5lOi.td3 .. a6 and now: :e8 6) 7. S.. Antwerp 1992. 8 .a6 is not looking Slavk. Bobotsov-Shafie.. 8 . 12 . but it B) Black avoids ..•~h8? (lO. which is so dangerous in the 6 .te2 b4 11 axb4 lOxb4 12 "d2 c5 112-112 Korneevets- 7 . 6 . 1O.dxc4? has been played. 1) Sa3?!i.td3 Bossuyt.. Systems with .c6 Exchange Varia...t Den Ber- 11 0-0-0 dxc4 12 . Belarussian Ch (Minsk) 1996.lOa6 and now: 5a) 8 a3 dxc4 (8 .t) 1O.. 8 i. Teheran 1991) 9 .. . even by the standafds of a hun- ample 8 .....0·07 Wc2 (D) 3) 7. Biel IZ 1993.td7 10 i.. . the knight is Others: misplaced.dxc4 11 . a6..t J . 1) 7 .Marjanovic.ta6 15 1Oe4 ± Krarn..td3! (D) sidering. c6 213 1O..h6?! S ...lObd7 is a simple loss of tempo.d3 b6 11 b4 and Black is getting squashed.. lObd7 11 :ablM 12 b4lOb5 13 ..txc4 b5 10 ...txe4"b6 = Belarnaric-Paraminski. point.Varga- tion. and f6 14 .tg3 lOxg) 15 hxg3..tb7 11 0-0 a6 12 h31Obd7 13tOe41Oxe4 14 .... is no longer available. and if 'iic2. Just occasionally.td3 b6 10 b4?! (10 dred years ago.b6 (8 ..te5 Em. "as 14 ~bl .td3 :e8 trans.. Black's veal something interesting.tg3 h6 13 a3 lOb5 00 M.

tb7 10 0-0 With unclear play.cxdS is probably safest. better of a messy position.. lOe4..tb7 9 0-0 lObd7 10 cxd5! Good timing. 9.xd4 .. the 4 . pressure... usually it is only the possibility of creating this knight outpost that justifies . Bundes. Hilversum 1993..f4! 2) 8 cxdS cxdS! 9 .. or 6 e3 17 b4 . White probably has the transposes..tcS 19 l:r..exd5 11 ~e5?! It would be stretching the bounds of This is a little impatient.i. Novi White's improvement on move 11 Sad OL 1990 is an Exchange Slav would have kept Black under more with White's queen misplaced.te2 .d2 ~b6!? (6 . but players with White make any freeing pawn move.dxc3? 17 e6. 10. lObd7 rather than .ta6 13 lOc4 though we make a detour.td3! "a5+ 12 ~e2 .3 4 ~f3 ~bd7: Transpositions and B independent lines After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 ~r6 4 ~f3 ~bd7 the following position is reached (D): w 8•••. Van der Sterren- lObd7 11 h3 %tc8 12 'iWb3 lOe4 13 Brestian.. and now 9 ..e7 9 dS? ~b6 10 ..i.txf3 14 %tfdl l:r.b7 9 eS .1Oc6 in the Exchange Slav.. %tacl a6 = Lobron-Beliavsky. 11 %tfdl ~ this book to attempt a full survey of makes it very difficult for Black to this system. ~dS 7 . which often liga 1993/4.txb4 18 l:r..e8 15 e4 d4 16 ... ~dS 9 .•cxdS White is better as Black cannot play .gS f6 ~ Van Avoiding 16.tb4 1l. to consider 'iWhS+ 14 f3. 7. White should beware that S ... Tilburg 1994.Sokolov.lOxdS is We now leave the 7 'ifc2 system to tempting..lObd7 before exchanging on dS..tc4 .tf4?! dxc4 is re- can then build up in relative leisure.tb7 9 cxdS.i. If now 1O. ~bd7 variation. However. puted to be fine for Black: 6 e4?! .tbS+ ~f8 ~ . First . but after 10 lOxdS 'iWxdS 11 look at the pawn exchange on dS.214 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.tb4 . 3) 8 lOes . He waits until Black has played ..tcS! Sokolov) 8 ...h6 12 h3 lOxe5 13 dxe5 1Oci7 7 'ifc2 bS 8 eS (8 a4?! .. Wely-I.txc4 ~xf4 8 exf4 . Muse-Pfleger..

but this leaves Black the option of de... makov-l.e2 0-0 The following key references come = Kasparov) 12 :lxf2 ..Ivanov.g5 ±...e6 standard positions which will be dis.i. and 8 e5 ~xe5! 9 ~xe5 .:le8. Our coverage divides "c4 f5 20 . which gives White a bit of time to veloping more actively with 6 . 5 "'c2 has also been tried. After 5 cxd5 exd5.i. but it is far from clear that this 7.b4 catch up later. Black intends to offer the exchange What this is all leading up to is that of dark-squared bishops without wast- White could consider entering a Clas.. entering 8 h3 . for example. dxc4 6 e4 c5 7 dxc5 (7 d5 exd5 and now Kasparov gives 8 exd5 as unclear. .i..i.i. White can of 8e3 course play 6 . Amsterdam 1996 continuing 5 ... . White has played 6 . ing a tempo on .. with Kasparov-Seirawan..e6 11 .i.d3 lDbd7 12 O-O-O!? Variation.i.. . but Byrne and Mednis note that White keeps his edge after 9 'iVc2) 7 .e7. .f4 several times.. ~d5 as equal..i.e7.i. intending . ..Byrne..i.i.i..i.. 1k- .d6 10 "'a4+ with unresolved complications) 7 .f4 Variation. though I'll have to as follows: rub my eyes a few more times before I A: 7 ••• lDb6 215 can believe that White has enough for B: 7•••lDh5 216 the exchange after 17.. 1l. but cussed shortly in Section 7.. the knight is not well placed on b6.. Earlier. 9 A) a3.4. but if he wants to stick with 0-0-0 13 ~bl ~b8 14 ~al ! :lhe8 15 the . rather than 6 .g8. then 6 'iVc2!? c6 7 :lbl :lc8 16 :lhcllDb6 17 b4.lDfS.i.. Even so.d3 leads to U3lDc4?! (Smagin suggests 1l ..xd6 "'xd6 10 e3 'iVe7 the main lines of the ...i.lDc8-d6 as equal. playing such elaborate manoeuvres as stead of .i. In recent maybe White can try 120-0-0 again) grandmaster play.. Systems with ..0-0. c6 215 Portisch-R.•lDb6 brings anything much.... and without sical Exchange Variation with .d6.~ge5 12 ~xe5 ~xe5 13 .. lDb6 or 7 ....i.e7 8 e3 0-"U9-.d6 9 .i... lDh5..i.xc5 8 . Black has attempted 12 ..xc4 B ~xc4 8 'iVa4+ c6 9 'iVxc4 and now Byrne and Mednis give 9 .xf2+ 13 "'xf2 from recent Informators (D35) rather "fIxc4 14 Wg3 f6 15 "'xg7 Wc5+ 16 than from computer databases. Ashkhabad 1978) 11 7 .i...xc4 a6 9 to inject a bit more life into the posi- a4 "fIc7 10 0-0 ~g4 11 h3 ~xf2 (or tion by playing 7 .g5 instead..i...i.i. Biel IZ 1976. ~hl "'fS 17 "'g4 and White won the partly for reasons of space. White could vary with.f4 (D) could be considered.f7 18 e5 :lg8 19 vey is not given..g5.i.g5 Exchange (1O. ....!.i... a full sur- game after 17.xc4 dxc4 130-00-0 14 e4 b5 15 ....i.. thus.f4 in.

Georgiev) I1.d2 lDb6 9 e4 (9 h3!? Bareev) There is still much to be explored 9 ..0 15 %:let This seems very solid here. 13 ~bl (13 %:lh4lDfS 14 %:ldhl b6 15 l1g4 'i1'd2..c4 h6 +.*.xg4 16 f3 .*...lDb6.e6 13 ~bl 7 •••lDh5 (D) 1We7 14 ~al 0-0.d3 . S.d3lDf6 12 0-0-0 .lDbd7 line. Black Seirawan recommends 15 %:lbl fol- gains considerably from not having lowed by %:lhcl..e7 II.d6 bxa4 g5 =as played in Ki.e7 =Bareev-Short.probably 8 . mem 1995. instead of 19 b3 lDd5 20 9 e3lDxg3 10 bxg3 . Russian Ch (Elista) 1995.*.. B) 11 .*.•.e7 Ki. I1.. gives 14lDe2!'? .*. 10.d3 h6 120-0-0 ...e2 ..e7 12 .*. b4. There is also 11 .e6 13 ~bl WaS 14 angling for a well-timed e4) 12 a3 a4 lDe5lDg4 15lDxg4 .*. D.*.*.g5!? and if 11 .d3!? %:lcl b6 as unclear.*.*.*. ings 1983/4 continued 14 e4 dxe4 15 slavia 1995.e2 0-0 13 0-0 lDfd7 14 lDxg6 hxg6 is given by Georgiev.e6 13 WdllDe4 14 . 8 g3 ..1/2 Bareev-Kram.*.d6 1O. make the play more lively than in the . and Black can Linares 1992.g6.*.*..lDfS and now Cvetkovic Bind after 11 . Wijk aan . Moscow OL 1994.Georgiev-Smagin. Piket-Timman.. Hast- = lDfd7 Ki.*.*.g4 17 ~bl c5 .*.dxe4 10 lDxe4 .d6 15 lDxg6 17 .d3 .g6 11 Wb3 (11 .*..d3 0-0 120-0-0 %:le8 Piket.a5?! (weakening and ineffective..g5 .Gurevich-Csom.. Probably not the most accurate.xg6 hxg6 13 0-0 lDfd7 14 . Yugoslavia White can think in terms of a Pillsbury 1995) 13 . USA Ch 1993..*.. 17 lDe5 looks criti- 11 ..*.*. etc.*. 19 b4! ±.*. 8••.13 IS••. lDxe4 . 8 .*.xe7 Wxe7 15 lDxd7 Wxd7 16 a4 as = Shabalov- Kamsky.*...216 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 Af4! ':fel ~ Epishin-Smagin.. as in Thkmakov-Ivanov after 7.*. Biel IZ 1993.xd3 12 = lDxd3 . ~b8 16 c!ba4 h5 with equality.*.••g6 venturing an assessment . Yugo.f3.. .*..*.*. .ixd6 Wxd6 and now Georgiev gives Zee rpd (3) 1995. Amsterdam Donner 110-0-0 g6 12 e3 1/2.*. 1O..Georgiev.*.e7 9 e3lDxg3 10 hxg3lDf6 11 White is a little better after 15 .e2 cal..g6 12 1Wb3 'fIe7 13 .g6 12.*.*. the same plan committed his bishop to e7.g7 11 .. Instead.e6 16 lDeg5?! (16 1Dc5 = Csom) 16.£g4 9 ~ . without 8.f6 16 %:l4h2 .*.*.f5 and White keeps a strong grip hxg6 16 lDxe4 dxe4 17 Wc2 f5 18 in the centre.*. nik.. .e6 15 lDf4 %:lc8 16 12lDxg6~..*.*.e7 9 h4lDxf4 10 gxf4lDf6 Piket-Seirawan.*..d5 17 . in the 4 .*.Martinovic-Cvetkovic.*..h5 10 h3 10 . 8.

7 cxd5 parison purposes we shall examine this position. and 7 •••lOxdS does not appear on the da- since this book is already much longer tabase. particularly if Black plays captures: 7..e7 5 i. After Naturally. allowing the king a quick .d3. he can try 7 g3!?.g4 11 h3 i.b4+ 10 lOd2tOf6. in a system in which 9 i.f4... but Black should of course cxd5. but this is perhaps more to do than originally envisaged. this exchange League 1988/9 continued 9 . A: 7•••lOxdS 217 If White wants to try something a B: 7•••cxdS 218 little different.. instead of 7 i. delay cxd5 until he has developed his It should not be forgotten that in this bishop. This capture has been seen where Black delays castling: S•••c6 6 e3 7.g5 or 7 i. Systems with .. with White at in this section.d3 tObd7 8 a6 14 a4 . not mentioned in A) ECO. Austrian transpositions are rife. and to'cover other re.e7 and . than as the result Back to the key position we left ear... Black has alternative re- slender. capture. i[}f6 10 may take place a move or so later.. of any specific defect in the knight re- lier.. Since this is a book on i..i..4 The Exchange tObd7 7 cxdS lOxdS (D) and for com- Variation. 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 M ~6 4tOf3 i.tOh5. 0-0 i.t.c6 line. then after 5 cxd5 exd5 C: 7•••exdS 218 6 'ifc2 c6. This sort of captures according to the move-order possibility might encourage White to in which White initiated the exchange.f4. c6 217 4 . best having a tiny edge. P6cksteiner-F. The general policy in this book have taken the opportunity to play is to cover recaptur~s with the e-pawn 9 . White's edge is position too.f4 0-0 6 e3 c6 7 cxdS (D) w 8 tOxdS exdS 9 a3 Avoiding the irritating check. i.h5 12 l:lbl 0-0 13 b4 most notably after 7 i.Schuh. I shall not with White delaying the pawn ex- try to examine this further! change until move 8..

Smuk-Zugaj....xgS =.*. C) 7. but Black had excellent Stopping the minority attack...adS (D) Black's chances of counterplay are considerably reduced if he plays .aS+!? "xe3+ 23 'ilf2 "g5+ 24 ~hl :xfB 10. Crisan-Cifuentes.*.i..d3 0-0 8 more modestly placed bishop might cxdS tLlxdS 9 tLlxdS exdS 10 0-0 !. It is not being claimed that the White played 13 "c2 ~xfJ 14 gxfJ.xe7 'ilxe7 19 .. Black "g2 'ilf6!? 21 tLld7 'ilh6 22 tLlxfB could try lO . is a orymuch.xf6 IS g4 ~g6 16 ~xg6 hxg6 17 tried rushing forward on the kingside 0-0~e7 18 tLles ~d619 f4 gS 20~g2 with IS g4 h6 16 gS hxgS 17.*. the database with this direct transposi- On other moves. Of course.1/2 Umanskaya-Emeste. In compensation for the exchange.. For example. major plus for White... be useful in assisting queenside ex- 9. Ljubljana 1992 went 5 ~f4 c6 6 cxdS dall-0stenstad.. At first sight. in the move-order with %S 18 ..O-O 6 e3 tLlbd7 7 gram position) 8 . Amsterdam 1989.i.g4 "c2 tLlaS 14 fJ tLlc4.tLlc6. while Black's isn't. but in fact Black's 8..hS 14 ..xc4 dxc4 20 an early .i. the fact Dresden 1993 (actually reached via 7 that White's bad bishop is outside the ..d3 .218 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J. Gausdal Eikrem mem cxdS 7 e3 a6 (7 . White ..xf6 standard queenside formation.0-0 leads to the dia- 1997 (reached via S.i.tLlbd7 9 h3 .tLlbd7 before exchanging on dS.i. B) but it is important to recognize that 7. tLlbd7 instead of ..i.tLlf6 10 .eS ~h8 13 h3 . transpos. above game is necessarily important.exdS (D) Again it must be emphasized that most of the examples below were reached with a different timing of the pawn exchange.. play continuing 11 . reaching Black's 12 .i.another reason w for waiting until Black plays .c6 rather than . 10 "c2 0-0 transposes into Tis. Black is comfortable. 8~d3 This is perfectly playable.d3 tLlc6 9 a3 0-0 10 cxdS tLlxdS 8 tLlxdS exdS 9 a3 tLlf6 10 0-0 bS 11 :cl ~b7 12 tLles :c8 13 "c2 c6).d3 pansion. 8 ~e2 tLlbd7 9 0-0 a6 10 illeS tLlxeS ing into one of the main lines of the 11 ~xeS 1/2. tion.*.*..0-0.. though there is no particular reason it just happens to be the only game on why this should give White anything.. Exchange Slav..~g4 11 h3 ~h5 12 0-0 as! 2S :cel tLlf4. AJull theoretical survey of this line is beyond the scope of this book.i...e2 and 8 0-0) does not advance the- pawn chain.....f4! getaway. This pro- vides White with yet . for example 7 .

lLlxfS 17 ...lLlg6 conjunction with~ngside castling. Torey 1991. rather than aggressively with queenside castling.e6 example: 1l. 2) IllDeS lLl6d7 12 :bllLlxeS 13 i.!..fS IS :fcl :c8 16 i.. Reg- 18 lLlxbS.Petrosian. 17.eS h6 14 M {14 :abl and now: lLlxe6!?} 14.. as h3 is not a constructive move in Lesecq-Caron. 1992) 13lLle2 . for 11•••i. The same basic idea.. Biel 1991..e614 b4lLlxg3 IS hxg3 i. 13 gS lLlhS 14 2) 11...d6! 12 i. 11..xd6 improves..xeS 19 lLlxdS ± Ib) However.cS!? 13 i. In- when Black 'wins' bishop for knight stead 11.c6 6 to follow.xeS lLlg6 14 i. Black is solid after 10 0-0 lLlfS..!..lLlhs 12 i. Wijk aan Zee 1983.f6 17 bS .. lLlxc6!) 18 bxc6 i.as+ 14 ~fl 'il'c7 IS with the idea that if 16...i. 10•••lOrs 11 0-0-0 This is probably the most accurate.e6 gives White good chances of an edge after either 12 9 .xd6 16lLlf4 i.e7 16 bS! ± tion..h2 i.xa3...i.d6 Ih-Ih Szekely- A. Sverdlovsk 1984.. Bareev-Andersson...xd6 .i. 0-0-0 i. 2) After 11 O-O?!. or 13 Taimanov-Klovans..lDe6?! 12 i.g3 as 13 a3lLlh5 16 gSlLl6d7 17 ..!.g3lbxg3 ~bl a6 with a finely balanced posi- 14 hxg3 i.aSI2a3lLlh513i. Reggio Emilia 1988/9.d6 12 . M.d6 equalizes easily. c6 219 lLlg6 13 i.i. 1) 11 g4 and now: la) 11. then i.. 11..d3 .Petrosian. Wijk aan Zee Browne-Hulak. Manila vich-Andersson..h2 g6 130-0 lLlg7 . lLl6d7 IS 0-0-0 :c8 16 1) ll. lLlfS 11 (12 . should be safe enough. possibly with e4 1) 11:c1 a6 (reached via S.c2 to untangle his kingside.tgS..c2 lLlc4 20 lLld2lLld6 =M.cxb5? 18 b4. was Kozlovskaya- 9•••:e810'il'c2 Skripova. 11.d6. A standard equalizing plan.b8 3) ll.d6 = Tunik- A..d7 17 a3 :e7 White replies 17 lLles i.d6 (17 .xd6 Browne. Erevan 1984.d2 :c7 18 h4lLlb6 14 b4 lLlxg3 IS hxg3 axb4 16 axb4 19 .eS f6 13 i. OL 1992.!..•d6 18 bxc6 bxc6 19 gio Emilia 1991.lLlg6 12 i. 0-0-0 (see main line) or 12lLlgS i. Timman-Hubner. .. Hemdl-Thomsen. 11.i..g3 i..lLlhS?! 12 i.. St Petersburg 1996..xfS of bishops with ..Gure- i.. White is now almost obliged to play 3) 11 lLles and now..e6 14 ~bl :ac8 IS :cl .lLlg6 fol- The minority attack has more bite lowed by ..!.d6 IS b4 . .g3 0-0-0 g6! IS lLles lLle6 16 h4lLleg7 = i.eS g6 13 a3 than when there is a straight exchange lLlg7 14 b4 i.n 16 bS. makes it difficult for Black e31Obd7 7 h3 0-0 8 :cl a6) 12. USSR 1966.g..d6 poses to the main line) 1O.Gurevich-Andersson.c2 :e8 10 0-0I? (10 h3 trans.i. Systems with . e.

d3 (D) 13liJg5! 1) 13 g4 bS 14liJg5 .. For example.c6 27 :dhlliJg6 we may briefly note the possibility . IS liJxd5liJxd5 7 . ment. Bie11984.f5 liJd7 18 i. 2) There is also the quiet positional approach: 13 l:c1!? c5 14 dxc5 1. White may be able to do even better by delaying the pawn-push and getting pieces into play more quickly. Osterskars has switched to lines involving an 1995. The main alternative. in IS dxc5 1.aS 14liJg5 c5 play in recent years. will generally lead straight 16 i.. to the Exchange Variation. 2) 12. is a cleaner 12 g4!? ~4 (12 ..e7 noi-Eslon.e5 h6 15 liJf3 cS .!. 5 1.. early . which as 14 i..xc8 . Tmunan.e7 21 i..... liJd717 h4! but there are also good alternatives.. attention kingside.l:c8!?) 13 1.. though it does raise the question continuing 14 i.. a6? 13 g4. liJbd7 move-order..d7.id3 White's pawn-storm is much better backed by pieces than Black's.xb4 19 f4 B: 7. if 14. White's kingside attack rolls on Our lines are: nicely.!.!.eS h6 (15 ..xc5 16 1. of whether Black can gain a tempo but 14 g4! keeps more of a grip on the with 7 . Bugojno 1978 A: 7•••dxc4 221 continued 17.. Tmunan-Karpov. and White mopped up 12•••:c8 comfortably enough in the endgame.xc8 22 liJg3 f6 23 l:xh6! llJef8 24 :th3 c4 25 Before considering these variations..e5 prises open the the 4 . Tallinn 1979.g6liJxe5 20 dxeS . Esbjerg 1984..f5 and 7.xe6 fxe6 19 B . Korch.•b6 15 1. g6 16 f4 ± Miles) 16 liJxe6 liJxe6 17 i.liJb6 or . b4 18 ~2 1.. c5??..... liJfS fxe5 26 fxeS .57.. Miles-O.. USSR Ch 1981.. position. Black gets carved up if he plays It is noteworthy that Black has been anything remotely slow: avoiding this variation in grandmaster 1) 12 .Jakob- sen..a6 i.xcs IS ..b5 Simple and unpretentious develop- Timman gives instead 13 .xh7+. liJbd7.i.e5 h6 IS liJxe6 liJxe6 16 g4 a4 17 i. "c6 31 "fS as 32 e6 'ilxe6 33 'ilxd5 Yusupov.xe4 kill) 28 . Tal-Vooremaa..220 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 12~bl 28llJd6 (28liJxg7. aS 13liJg5 b5 14 i. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 liJc3 liJf6 4liJf3 i..f4 0-0 6 e3 c6 7 i.. llJdf8 29liJxe8 "xe8 30 l:h5 dxe4 14 liJd2 b5 15 ~bl ± Psalchis.liJbd7 222 c5 20 1. dxc4.liJh5..e5 h6 15 liJxe6 liJxe6 16 g4 we have seen is promising for White. a4 34 l:cl.a4 a6 16 l:hdl . Ornstein-Vilar. 13.

.b7) 12 a4 b4 13 ~.g3 ~7 10 0-0 ~xc3 The developing moves in lines '2' 11 bxc3 b6 and now.b7 13 i.e5 3) 90-0 and now:"._.. choice of move-order: 9. perhaps more so than the main Moscow OL 1994.d3 h6 00 Milla-Sprotte.dxc4 9 central control in Ye Rongguang-Han- i. P. ~h5?! 10 i..e7 17 'ii'c2 ±. swings to d5.d3 i. 10 i.i.. the other knight OreI1996.g6 12 'ii'e2 b5 13 i.xf6 i..'ii'aSI3"c2h6 3a) 9. Systems with .'ii'xdl 12 :txdl g6 F. 9•••~dS 1) Black neglected the . Plotnikov-Zuev..d6 doko.xe5 3) 9. Aachen 1988... Bundes- liga 1996n. but Black's position is also bad after l1.e2 c5 16 ~g5 h6 15 i. 1993: 9. Meran formation with 9.Nau. 8.. able alternative...g3 ~xc3 11 bxc3 b6 120-0 i.. b5 followed by .Novak-Scblecht.Holzke.Siegmund- dxe5 and now 11.. A recent example: 3b) 9....xf6 16 ~7 :eS = :acl c417 ~4 gave White complete Skembris-Kofidis..~d5 10 dxc5 ~xc5 15 ~xc5 i. (l1.b3 as 14 a4 b4 A) 15 ~4..d3 2) Black adopted the Meran for- b4 11 ~a4 i.b7 with a comfortable mation in A. mann-M. Barmen 1905.d6 with equality.. Parana Semi-Slav type position for Black.:e8!? 8 h3 (8 cxd5!?) 8...h2 i.. Beijing 1992.b6?! 10 9h3 i..~b6!? is a perfectly accept- i. Play continued 13 .Esser. rather than 12 and '3' both seem quite promising for 'ii'c2?! i. White.~xe5 14 i. a6.d6 14 ~5 ±.. but was ple 12 'ii'c2 h6 13 :cl :c8 with an un.g3?! (100-0) 1O.d3 ~bd5 11 i. ~xc312bxc3c5(l2 .. Nettetall991) 130-0 b6 14 13 g4 ~g7 14 ~ b5 15 i.xd6 'ii'xd6 12 'ii'b3 ~d7-= F.c5. In such position it is not nec- essarily an unmixed blessing for White to have the bishop outside the pawn chain. a6 10 0-0 b5 11 i.... b5 10 i..Moran-Tseleng...xe4 :c8 14 ~5 ~xe5 15 i. ~5?! (13 e4 ~) 13 .xc4 ~bd7 (D) 1996..d7 = R. c6 221 7.....i. c5 break in Rubinstein-Sartori. aS?! 14 2) 9 :cl (via 7 :c1) 9..xc5 16 :cl i.e5 ~xe5 11 14 e4 c5 150-0 i. and was soon suffering: 9..xe5 "d7 followed by . f6 is equal..b7 13 i.d3 c5 who will shortly play . b5 10 i.b3 :d8 11 0-0 ~f8 12 'ii'e2 ~g6 13 1) 9 e4 is no refutation of Black's i.... for exam... A.xc400 1Oi.. . Greek Ch 1994. queens is extremely time-consuming.b7 11 :cl a6 12 ~e4 ~xe4 13 i. The exchange of 11 i.Hammond-Sage.. getting dangerously behind in devel- clear position. ~d5 9 i.. England 7•••dxc4 8 i.. 12 e4! leaves White text. opment. Black may do best to copy the with control of the centre.

b4+.. and Wc2 seems here a more flexible way of protecting c3 than :cl. .*.te2 .t... . 7 .e8 ±) IS . satisfactory for Black.tb4 17 ~d2 snatching the a-pawn after 12 ..a3 IS :dllOds Vaganian.b6 12 0-0 lOxc3 13 Wxc3 hope for much.. 2) 8 h3 is too quiet for White 2) 11. fS WaS?! 120-0 lOxc3 13 bxc3 . Czech Ibragimov..Meduna-Jirovsky.td3.g3 Ibragimov notes 12 .*. B) burg 1896.. 80-0 If then 12. lOxc3 14 bxc3 lOds IS J:I should be able to get away with lOxc3? 16 :xc3 .d3lO7f6?! 10..tb7 14 .. tives here. Mar del Plata 19S1. provided it is out of reach of Black's minor pieces.td3 Ibragimov. Line Al below. continuing 11.*. dered' the battle of the tempo witt: Ja..ta6 la) 11 :cl?! lO7b612 . generally be avoided. 16 :d3? (16 ..85 11 bS 1) By analogy with Van Parreren- White to enter the Exchange Variati with 8 cxdS. Ibragimov gives 12.*..*.. 12 .txh7+ ~h8 14 "'bl g6 (14 .*..xg6 fxg6 "'c2 ± Barkhagen-Rylander.:e8 12 0-0 lOfS 13 :bl . lOxc3 13 bxc3 Wxa2 ee) 12..d3.h6 13 move-order 7 lOes lObd7 8 .b7 11 a3 a6 3) 11.... but Black surely should grasp the chance to play 11..cS 12 . 2) Ibragimov gives 10 lOxdS exdS 11 .d3. Prague 1992.d3. The bishop is a little more actively w placed on g3 than on h2. he has already 'sum = Wxc3 14 bxc3 . St Peters.*. Ch 1997.107b6. of plans) and now: 13'irb3.g6 1) 8 lOeS!? is examined under t 13 Wb3 cS 14 WbS ...txdS 112_1/2 Van Parreren-Palatkova..b7 Ju.tb3lOxc3 13 bxc3 lOds 14 .Bolbochan..*. "'b3 lOxc3 14 bxc3 Wa3!? should be Section 7.8. Black could also consider 11 .tg6 :f6 16 ..222 The "Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 4) 9 .*.t. is an inappropriate mixture The simple 12 . but 12 .tb3 (Black 13 .xdS =) 16.. but . eS! 17 e4 lOxc3 + Steinitz-Chigorin. taking advantage of White's loss of tempo with the bishop..te2 .t Ibragim( Wc2lOxc3 14 bxc3 .*....bS?! 11 .tb4 13 14 0-0 b4 15 lOe2! . Ch 1997. Berlin 1991. bS!? 10 .*.h2 WaS (1O .. We consider the alten Palatkova (' Ib' in the previous note)..h6 equalizes...Bolbochan.lObd7 (D) Ib) 11 Wc2lO7b6 12.. lOb4?! I) 10 .txdS exdS 130-( = 12 b4 as E. so waiting pawn moves shot 13 bxc3 is more challenging. Swedish "'xg6 with a strong attack.*. This would be a good moment j "'c2 10..*....

... 9 cxbS IS b4 as 16 'ifb3 ±..1L1xeS!?) 121L1xd7 i.eS (otherwise Black suffo.e2 b6 is equal.d7 IS lLle4 .dxe4 10 lLlxe41L1xe4 II . cS) 13 .t Chelny 1993) 1O. probably prepare e4 more gradually) ll1i'c2 f6!? 9 .c2 fS IS :lfdl .1L1xf4 10 exf4 dxc4 II ..:eS can easily transpose into to Beliavsky.i.eS ± Strikovic-Maas. b6 91L1eS (9 cxd5!?) 9 .b7 = 1) 91L1eslLlxf4 10 exf4 fS 11 cS gS Bemei-J.xd6 Wxd6 9 .i. S.xc4 bS II .Saric. 12 e4 (12 i. Naberezhnye (ll. I) 9 ..Lau..b3 Wb6 16 e4 fxe4 10 dxeS (10 ... Bum-Sterling... i. Dortmund 1993. 11.cS 12 :adl cxd4 13 lLlxd4 . or 9 :lc I 12:ladl . Danielian-I.i...... exchange) and Black is in deep trou.h6?! (slow) 9 e4 (White should :lfxdl g6 131L1e4 ± Vaganian....t) 1O. lLlxc3 13 :lxc3 .. ke.i. White should.. Moscow 3) Dorfman notes that 9 cS is less 1979) 12.c2 lLlhS? (Black must play for stead of 13 :lac1?! bS! 14 cxbS cxbS .xeS 13 lLlxeS . Leningrad USSR- 2c) S.1L1xf4 10 exf4 b6 II cates) 13 dxeS lLlxeS 14 . f6? falls into the thematic 8•••1L1bS trap 10 lLlgS!.i.:leS 9 0-0 lLlfS 10 cSt? (10 Yugoslavia jr 1991..i.i.1L1xeS 14 :ladl bS IS i.xeS lIxeS b4 bxcS 12 bxcS WaS followed by IS :lcl (even stronger than taking the . Baden-Baden 1925. :lcl dxc4 11 ... Hungary 1992) 9.i.xgS 14 f4 . fOr example. 9 Wc2 or 9 h3 (this is '2c' in the The text-move looks weakening at previous note).t Dorfman-Ivkov.. although in one of the Naturally.i. after. i.. 9••..i.t Kotov-Kasparian.i. IS a3 as.. according 3) S.. is still possible.1L16d7 11 b4 i..d7 1) S. Lowenstein 1997. Haar.eS i. Reggio lem 1995.exdS (11 ..1L1d7 11 17 Wxe4 :lf4?? Is1L1xdS 1-0 Bogol- cxdS exdS 121i'hS g6 13 'iff31L1cS 14 jubow-Rosselli. convincing) 9 cxdS!? (9 0-0 dxc4 10 9..d6 14 . Malaniuk-U.dxc4 missed.i.lLlg6 fIrst cuts White' s options) g3 i. 1O. but other lines tend to 2) 9 . Beliavsky-Vaganian.c4 ± i..e5 ..i.a6.xc4 lLldS 12 .. fS?! 10 'ifc2lLlhf6?! II cxdS leave Black's pieces in contortions: lLlxeS 12 dxeS lLlxdS 13 .f6?! Dorfman) 12 i.. but there is no effective way to lLleS1Ll6d7 II :ladllLlxeS 12 dxeS ± get at the black king.xe4 lLlf6 1l.xc41L1b6 IS e4 ...t French Cht 1993.. Zatulovskaya-Kozlovskaya.g3 2) 9 'ifc2 is a more thematic move. . Systems with .. and now in- 12 i.d7 12 :lfdl :lcS. lOdxe5 g6 Parnu 1947....xc4 "xdl 12 2) S.i. a6 (this and '2c' are less Cht (Tucepi) 1996.i. Paris 1900.... it is to avoid this that junior games on the database this was White sometimes plays S h3.t Dottling-Schulz. Also 9 We2!? lLlfS 10 fIrst.i. dxc4line (Line A above). cxdS.xd7 13 fxgS 10 0-0 :leS II :lbl . c6 223 2a) S.xeS . dxc4 transposes into the lLlfSlOlL1eslLl6d7111L1e2?! (11 e4±) 7 ...Toth.. Emilia 1991. play 13 a3 bS 14 cxbS other headings.t Lempert-Shur...f6 00 Mikuli~ic-Puljek..dxc4?! II .. 1L1xe5 ble.d3 cS 12 lLleS . effective after 9 .d3 g6 13 a3 lLldS 14 ( 11..i.f6 IS i. Croatian 2b) S.i.

White's h-pawn is better placed on g3 (after hxg3). Yet again.td3 ~g6 11 Wc2 dxc4 12 . Also: and if 14..tg3 1993.224 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 ~f4! 12 e4!? is a try for an edge.td614 f4 .exd5 9 .e2 g5 7.*.i. USSR Ch (Mos- 8h3 cow) 1988.txc4 c5 11 0-0 b5 12 .tgS? ! (difficult to understand) 14 rook in the . or 1) 8 .xc4 ~dS 10 12.Abramson-A. fxe5 13 exdS exd5 14 cxdS. bS 13 .. Villegas.. In this type of varia- 5 .*.*.e5+ ~xe513 ~xe5 'iraS 14 Wc2 7 . 8 cxd5 is to be consid- ample 12...*. dxc4!? 13 .tg3 (10 O-O!?) 10.. ered.xc4 f5 00.txg3 14 hxg3 'ire7 15 ~2 . Palma de Mallorca ~g718:lf6 1966) 12 . White does not H.*. built. Ljubljana 1997. than on h3. ~g6 11 cxd5 exd5 12 ...~bd7 12 . .*.txdS 16 WxdS ~f6 17 'irb7 :le8 18 :lfdl "c8 = Malaniuk-Emeste.*.xf6 14 eS ..tg5 system makes less of ~xg5 Wxg5 15 ~e4 Wh4 16 .txe4 ~ Nemet-Rukavina.a2 .*..h2 ~f8 10 . in an 9lbxe4 opening in which waiting moves such Striking before the wall is fully as a3 and h3 are rife.~f4 13 exf6.xg6 bxg617 "xg6+..*.tg4 ~g7 19 :ldl ~f6 = ~e5 ~ Hribar-Banic. 12.b7 14 ~d2 :lfd8 15 a4 ~ 15 (xeS .*.*. Gavrikov-Vaganian. 8. oping move can hardly be bad. placed at cl. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~ ~f6 4 ~f3 ... 12 :lxc3 (12 bxc3 b6 {12 .*..td3 ~bd7 10 h3 :le8 11 0-0 ~f8 12 :lxc3 f4 18 .td6 15 0-0 ~xc3 16 'irxc3 Wxc3 17 . cxd5?!...... Villa Balles- yet know whether the rook is best ter 1996. dl or even bI. Katowice 1993.:le8 9 . 9 . The usual stodge has also been tried: 1) 8.te7 Portoroz 1971.*. from where it cov- ers f4. 15 /t)xd5.tf4 0-0 6 e3 c6 7 :tel (D) tion.tg3 ± an impression here.txeS We2 ..g7 15 . 2) 8.WaS 11 0-0 ~xc3 :lfeI.tb3 .•~!? Trying to take advantage of White's half-heartedness in covering e4. Karvina 1989.*.txc4 ~5 13 The standard development of the 0-0 .*.. a6 9 a3 dxc4 10 .tb714 'irbl b4 White has compensation for the 15 :lc4 ~f6 00 Znamenacek-Chmiel..d6 13 0-0.d7 7. bS!?} 13 12•••fxeS 13lbxeS . this quiet devel. for ex. Stefansson-Danielian..xd5 . piece but is not necessarily better. Still.b7 13 dS exdS 14 ~xd5 /t)xdS IS . Buenos Aires 2) 8 'iVc2 :le8 9 a3 ~f8 10 ...td3 .td3 f5 10 'irb3 ~h8 11 .d7 16 . a6 8 cxd5 (8 cS!?) 8. Ivkov-Pfleger.d3 dxc4 9 .67 flc1 16 e4 dxe4 17 ~xe4 :lad8 18 :lfel ~xe4 19 .

lLle5. variation.1h2 l:ldS IS 0-0 ..c7 17 l:lc1 ~7f6 12 ~5 and White's advan- cS Adianto-Irwanto. . the hanging pawns of the tempo too easily. but not against 7 h3. compare 6 . 8 . 1) 7 ..1d3. with maybe even . .1g5 to follow.. the difference perhaps thematic. with 8 'ifc2.. planning to meet 7 .. The plan is cxd5...1d3 dxc4.. 8 .. Here we consider only the odds 12 O-O!? leads back to the 6 ..~bd7 8 . Chapter 8.~bd7 tempo a3.1a6!?.exd5 has already been examined) 9 lLlxd5 exd5 10 a3 The reader should not be misled by h6?! (10.. Indonesia 1983. queenside counts for more than the 2) 7 . ~7 12 e4 ~c3 13 bxc3 is better. On the whole. modestly favours White..xeS 16 b4 . the A. 8 cxd5 ~xd5 (8 .1d3 ~f6 12 0-0 the relative brevity of this section. etc....1xc4 ~5 9 are defensible.1b7?! (8 .1d3 (8 ~e5 is more accurate. that most games starting with 7 h3 9 cxdS lLlxd5 10 ~dS exd5 11 quickly transpose into lines -giVen ear.1xd6 'ifxd6 11 0-0 position is not yet clear. c6 225 9 •••dxe4 10 ~ .1e7 . is less rewarding) 8 .1. a6 9 c5. Systems with . 9 ..1d6 16 ~2 c5 17 dxc5 bxc5 18 .xd5. Bratislava U-14 Wch 1993. S83 Another tempo move.t Sopanyi- is.. . f5 is natural.1f4 l:le8 14 0-0-0 lLlfS 15 h4 .. a6.~f6) 11 . while S . 8:C 1 and 8 . c6. b6 and ends. The alternatives seem slightly un. White's pressure on the wan-Miolo. The point is.... tempo down on 7 . most accurate of the moves at White's S•••b6 disposal.. b6?! is OK against 7 'ifc2. but 11 83 rs 12 .Good..1e2 cS 13 dxeS eS 14 not really satisfactory) 10 0-0 f5 11 . For example..f3lLlxe5 B 12 . with White having the extra 7.1h2 ~d7? (now Black is a whole Decentralizing.. but also having played h3.as?! .. . lLlbd7 For 8 . White plays it as a . in the opinion of the author. blockage of the bishop on h2.. 7 h3 . The etc...1d6 10 . 1O. with . Genting High.dxc4!?) 9 cxd5 exd5 10 ~5lLlbd7 11 ...1d3 eS 12 dxeS lier....1c4 ± Lechtynsky-Pfleger.1d613 ~5 'ifc714 'iff3.1e2 dxc4 9 .b6 system in which Black has played 7.1r4 0-0 6 e3 c6 7 h3 (D) 8 cxd5 ~xd5! 9 ~xd5 .1a6 to follow. Bundesliga 199112. however...1xe5 ~7 13 .c2 lead to lines already con- sidered. likewise 8 .... tage is already close to decisive... 8 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3lDf6 4 M . dxc4?! surrenders the battle After the text.1d3. Seira- lands Z 1995... 8 ..1xc4. 'iff3..77 h3 an irrelevant .

226 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.txh7+ ~h8 dxcS .. Moscow OL 1994. In general.. cellent play against the isolani.Juarez-G. 14•••cxb4 15 axb4 ...tb7 (S .tf4c66e3 .txd4 ±..t Tregubov-Pigusov. Now 21 .lDbd7 S ..txe4 dxe4 12 lDxe4lDxcS gave Black compensation for the pawn in A.txd6 IslDxd6 f3 16 gxf3 A1) lDeS 17 lDxb7 . White should wait for . These are: AI: 7lDeS!? 226 A2) A2: 7 a3 226 7 a3 b6 8 ..te7 10 .xd3 lDxd3 7lDeS!? (D) 19 b4 as 20 bxaS l:[tb8 21 a6 lba6 22 :tdl ± Forintos-Dely..tdllDxeS tbcs 17 .ta6!?) 9 A3: 7 c5 226 0-0 cS (Black has unnecessarily lost a A4: 7 .Mendez.td6 In this rounding-off section we con.ta6 18 lba6!? 'ii'xa6 S.tc2.td3 h6 9 g4 eS 10 dxeSlDe4 11 . B: Black delays castling 227 14lDe4 ..Petrosian. Hungarian Cht 199213..cxd4 AS: 7 l:[bl 227 11 lDxd4lDbd7 12 cxdS eS 13 lDfS exf4 14 d6 . 12. A) Odds and ends for White on Definitely the most promising of move 7 the miscellaneous tries. sider two types of idea: 12.e2 (10 dxcS!?) 10. Black has simpler ways of handling the position.tel ... Petrosian. B A3) 7 c5 and now 7 .. Buenos Aires 1993.. Dortmund exdS (13 .8 Odds and ends 9.c2+) 14 l:[cl .txb4 16 clOci2 7•••lDbd7 8 . .t Tregubov..td6 IS .. keeps . A: 6 •••0-0: Odds and ends for White 13hdllDdS on move 7 226 13.tbl with ex- the position unclear....lDxdS 14 . b6 8 b4 as 9 a3 lDhS!? ..te71S "g4 ~616 "g3.. 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 W ~6 4lDn .a6 or . Gheor- ghiu-Rainberg./4! 12••• bxc5 130-0 'ii'b6 14 b4!? A recent attempt to enliven the p0- 14 "c2 =A.....lOd5 13 e4.dxc4 9lDxc4lDb6 10 lDes cS 11 19 "bl ~ 20 .te2 227 tempo) 10 .txcS 12 0-0 lDbdS 13 lDxdS Lputian-A. St Petersburg 1993.cS?! 13 l:[fdl cxd4 14 . sition..txh7+ ~xh7 IS 1992. nota- bly 7 ..Petrosian.txeS dxc4 9 . 7. b6 ~ Tregubov.xd3 18 .. lDbd7 before playing cS.•e7?! 14 f4 ± Tregubov.txc4 b6 11 0-0 .tb7 12 'iWe2 S.td3 .

.... the Nimzo-Indian. ~bd5 10 ...~f8 8 c5 ~g6 9 .. AS) Hungarian Cht 199112. instead of 9 dxcS ~bd7 ~ Sulik- Planas Garcia.. Systems with .tf2 is also 12 "d2 ~h4 13 ~xh4 . After 6 . 3) 7 :lcl ~5 8 . 10 ~b3?! (10 O-O~) 10...~e4..tg3 f4 13 .. Sarosi-Pasztor.Lee. dxc4.aS 11 ..Kuba... 9 ~b3 ± leaves White well ahead of .td3 ~5 12 g3 ~xc3 13 bxc3 0-0 14 h4 ~ G.txf3 ± Tarrasch-Walbrodt.tb4 10 a3 .tg3 "as 11 "b3 is quite reasonable for Black. ~bd7 8 0-0 "c2 f5 13. c6 227 A4) la) 7 .Antoniowski-G. .....txh4 14 b4 ± strong) 11. b6 11 0-0 cxd4 12 exd4 dxc4 .. R. Hungarian Cht Black plays 6. (1O. White must 7 :lbl ~bd7 8 b4?! (not an inspired be prepared to recapture on c4 with a idea) 8..Gold- berg-Savitsky..tg3 ~) 8.te2.td3 ~xf4 9 exf4 dxc4 10 .Moyse.~g6 9 ~xg6 hxg6 = Gunkel-Lilienbeck.•c66e3 (D) "b6 15 e4 ± Schlechter-F..dxc4 8 .txc4 ~b6 11 .Crea. is a poor follow-up...~f8 8 ~e5?! (8 cxd5!? ~xd5 9 ...b6 12 f3 exf3 13 . then 8 0-0 ~d7 9 ~xe4 dxe4 10 ~d2 f5 11 Leipzig 1894... but these usually involve slow and 8 h3 ~xe5 9 dxe5 g6 10 Wc2 0-0 passive plans of development..td7 120-0 b5 =Ye ample: Rongguang-Li Zunian. E.td3 ~xc3 (11. Oth.. 2b) 7.td6 ± Tarrasch-Von Scheve.txc4 ~b6..txc4.f5 ±) h3 (11 f3 g5 12 . 11 0-0-0 "as 12 h4 b5 13 cxb5 cxb5 ers: 14 . ~?! 8 ~xe4 dxe4 9 ~2 7 .aS 8 ~2 0-0 9 . 9 . or 7.. Leningrad 1932.. knight. Vienna 1898.0-0.~b4? B) Black delays castling 12 .td3 ways White has of getting a poor posi- tion from this opening. but 11.te2 may of course be answered .dxc4 8 .txd2+ 11 "xd2 0-0 12 by 7......th2 "as 10 a3 ~4 11 ..~bd7 without castling.tb7 16 :ld3 ..tbl ~fd5 13 0-0 ~xc3 14 "xc3 5•. Beijing 1995) 1) 7 h3 is best met by 7. Bozen 1992.td3 c5 1993.txb5 . if7 .tb4 8 "c2 cS. Szombathely lc) 7 .. N.td3 variation..td3 ~f6 with an equal There have been a few games where position.. both transposing into the 7 .. Dortmund 1987. Borsi-Pasztor..~7 10 ..... Buenos Aires OL 1939. However. is one of the few 2) 7 ..te5~78"c2(D) The most important independent 8 ~d2 ~xe5 9 "xh5?! (9 dxe5) try..tb4 15 ~4 .td3 and then: 2a) 7 . Ib) 7. 199112..dxc4 9 . 6•••~h5 7 ....txc4 ~b6 9 ... Lon- don 1899.aS 7 ~d2 .. For ex.

. and Black having three or four reasonable replies to each of these. As a result. .. White does well to bear in mind the possibility of queen- side castling.. Stereotyped.Schneider. but note that White wasted 10 0·0·0 . Wiesbaden 1990.9 . however. Kallai-A. theory does not go deep. As in the .f5!? Sharp play..228 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! :'fc8 17 ~bl a6 was unclear in Van 8 •••lOxe5 9 dxe5 g6?! Wely-Posazhennikov.txt6 13 g4 with a clear advantage for White. . B This was a complicated chapter to write. c5 lines. with White often having around seven choices on a particular turn.td7 11 h4 (5 12 ext'6 a tempo with h2-h3-h4. Vlissingen 1997.

g3 (7 i..d3 c5 10 i.... A: 5•••a6 229 After 5.... sometimes .... exd5!?) 7 i.. Yet again...c5 GO) w 8 e3 0-09 i..lvanov) 7 . but with Black trying 6. The exceptions are as A) follows: 5•••a6 (D) 6e3 6 cxd5 ~xd5 (6. . Black's moves in this game was 5.Mortimer.e5 ~6 II 0-0 ~xe5 12 dxe5 ~b4 13 i..h2 g6 11 all his weaknesses and to rearrange his g4 ~g7 12 'it'c2 b4 13 ~a4 a5 14 pieces behind the lines until he is 'it'e2 f6 150-0-0 ± Van Wely-Sehner..d3 i.. b5 is 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 ~6 4 ~f3 i.e5!?) 7 ..f4 get in ... a6)..... An unconvincing alternative where iar with the idea of Black playing a Black delays castling is 6.~bd7 and 7 .8 Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 8. a6 to avoid spending a tempo on ... a6 line usually follow on either 6 c5 0-0 or 6 e3. trying to cover c6 8 c5 b5 9 i. c6. ~5 7 lIcl (7 i..e7 a reasonable plan... quick transpositions to B: 5 •••0-06 e3 a6 231 the 6 ..S. (Chapter 7). on . ready to make some break to free his Bundesliga 199617 (the sequence of position.b7 120-0 lOd7 13 'it'e2 lIc8 14 lIfdl ~f615 f5 ± Yangel-Stom.~f4 8 exf4 0-0 9 i. Mos- We start by looking at systems that cow 1997.1 Systems with .0-0 6 e3 a6.d3 ~5 10 i.... White's bishop is no guarantee of Already from the previous chapter eqUality..xc4 b5 11 '" i..•dxc4 6 .~bd7 7 h3 string of quiet moves. Paris 1900. a6. a6 follow simi.. 7.f5?! (an uncon- vincing way of preventing e4. we will be famil..dxc4 followed by .c6. with Black trying to 5 i. 6 .d2!? .d3 dxc4 10 i.e2 "xdl 14 lIfxdl and Black proved to have too many queenside weaknesses in Burn- J. simply taking do not transpose into 5..c5 with one move rather than Now: two. Plans with . lar types of idea.c6..

12 'i'd lLld6 13 lbes lLlxe5 According to Ivanov.xh7 should favour ... 0-0-0 with an attack.*. 6 .. the main lines being 14 l:r. or 10 "e2 So S.*.xcS 12 try for Black.bl c4 15 "e2 l:r. position of move-order..*.*.. Black seeks to 14 . would be better in this line).i.lLlxd4 16 . when he con....dl "c4 20 "f5+ ~g8 with good at./4! 7. lLld5? 14 ...xc4 a6. and if 9 .0-0!.c8 16 "e3 and White.S.ed 1.e8 15lLle5lLlxe5 rifice.. meeting 13 d6?! with White is more or less forced to sac- 13 ..d3 . 13 .*.xd6 l:r.l:r.c1 . Russia e3 O-O?! 7 .xc4 l:r...lLlxe4 tacking chances for Black.xc6 15 "xc6lLlxd4 16 "xc7 00.. a rare mis- l:r. ll.adl 9 .xe4lLlxe4 IS "el ...lLlbd7) 11 dxc5 .....*.*.*.xcS 11 .xdS 14 White .xd4 "xd4 17 l:r..*.xd6 cxd6 14 ..t) 13 "xf3 ..d6 play . 0-0 tends to favour White: 10 (In/ormator has 17 l:r.. However. White has good compensation for Slovakia 1995 (reached via S.xd5 14 unclear.fdl Wb6 13 a4 b4 14 a5 "a7 15lLla4 7 a4!? .b4?! 121&4 print?) 17 .i.xc7 lLlxc7 16 ..b7 9 0-0 (D) 1996.i.*. but 18 ...xbS+) then 10 e4 cS 10..d6 13 .230 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 51..i. 15.xh7+ ~xh7 18 "xe5 "d3 19 Ivanov.lvanov-Nikolaev. S.xe5lLlb5 15 l:r. but he must bear in mind . lLlxd5 13 lLlxd5 .... lLlbd7 (9 .ac 1 . Ubeda 7••• b5 8.d6 15 lLlc5 lLlxd4 16 "a4 ..*.Ivanov.dxc4 6 the pawn.c5? 10 10 "e2 c5 = Ivanov. Kolesar-P.*.lvanov...*..i. There are other messy 9 •••lLlbd7!? possibilities the reader might like to Trying to show that delaying cas. . 11 e5?! lLlhS 12 lLle2lLlxf4 13 (15 . Ivanov suggests that the simplest route to safety is 11... a6 is a possible independent c5?! (l0 .*.a7 is given by Ivanov as hits c7) 12 e5lLld5 13lLlxd5 . Ivanov suggests that 9 "e2 is more 10e4!? accurate. l:r...xe5 17 lLlxb7 "f6 18 ...*.xd6 cxd6 15 "g3=.*.*.xe4 12 l:r.Kramarik. for White.xe5 "xeS 19lLlc5 c6 00 and 14lLlc6 .xf3 (12 . Black lllLla4 can try 12 .rel! .e4 lLl7f6 15 . etc.c5 painlessly. lLlds 1992..i. c5 11 d5 with an attack for tinues 12.. lLlb5 im- proves.*. 10. ± Matamoros-Martinovsky.e6? 160-0-0) 16 . dxc5 .*.i.*.xe5 l:r.c6+ +-) 14 .xd6 14 .*.d6 8 (13 . White's kingside pressure gives him a 16lLlc5 slight advantage.*.*.*. explore. I haven't found a clear edge tling is not merely a question of trans..cllLlbd711 e4c5 (l1..xe5 lLlxf4 c5 and Black is slightly better- 17 .*..b4 11 d5!? exd5 12 exd5..

b6 might fol- choice has been the gain of space with low without fear of b4.. and sim- been tried here. Those change Slav a tempo down if he cap.d6 = must be careful not to enter an Ex.•.dl . with B14. bS is discussed in connection 6 .i. The b4-square is now on dS.d3 .tooo (D) 5•••0-06 e3 86 (D) w For the time being Black ignores Various developing moves have White's queenside advances.. the most popular covered.. however. White cxb6 cxb6 10:c 1 . Copenhagen 1988.i.d7 100-0 B2: 7:ct 234 fS 11 h3 lOxf4 12 exf4 gS 13 fxgS B3: 7. 2a) Black replied with 8 . However. cussed in Line B 1. b6 9 ture with the a-pawn.0-0 7 e3 reaches a position dis.f6 IS :ael ti'e7 16 84: 7 adS 237 ..~?! 233 2b) However. Now Black has: tions are always drawn will take com- B11: 7 •••~ 231 fort from Black's victory in the game B12: 7•••b6 232 cited. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 231 that White can reply 6 cS!?. Not model B1) play by Black.i. who worry that Exchange Slav posi- tures on b6.i. Kecskemet 1990.Sokolov.i.. Cs.. in that 2) 8 h3 and now: Black is not going to be able to recap.Horvath-I.i. .i.. 7 cS. B11) B) 7.i.c2 234 .a4 ± Sarosi-Kasper- sen. and also the exchange ply develops. b6..e2 . However..g7 17 . when 7 . in Muse-Ruf. is of limited effectiveness.d3!? Bl: 7 c5!? 231 1) 8 a3 lOhS?! 9 ...i.. Black can play more B14: 7•••00 233 aggressively.i. and the is that . usually the thematic reply. B13: 7. The lines are: 8. and .xgS 14 ti'd3 .b7 11 . the exchange of the 7 c5!? bishop on f4 achieves less than noth- The positional justification for this ing in a Stonewall formation. knight would be better placed on e4.

i..i.xd4 19 0-0 .i. Buenos Aires 1993) 1993/4.d3 a5 10 a3 with the c-pawn before exchanging.f6 11 ..i.i..b7 cxb6 (see above).i..eS 13 Black must be careful to avoid be- b4 'ire7 14 .i.!Db5 lba6 12 cxb6 cxb6 13 Admittedly the tempo disappears if bxaS bw 140-0 and White is slightly Black plays the thematic . but better.!Df4 e5 17 for Black to essay the Stonewall: %lxc6 'it'xc6 IS dxe5lDe4 19lDd4 'it'c3 S.!DeS 20 'irg4 with an imposing attack.. lbc4 'ire7 15 h5 %ldS 16 'ircl e5 17 Petrosian-Pietzsch. ~e7 23 .i.d7?! (10.d6 13 .i.xe5 220-0 Black's loss of time.f41 J Nildic 1991 showed the correct way 14 b4 b5 15lbe2 %lacS 16.d3 f5 10 lbe2 (10 .b5!?) 12 %lcl.i.a3 .TItov-AHashim. 1O.b5.!Dxd7 'it'xd7 12 f3 .bl %lcS 13 .i.g5 ..!Dd2lbc6 14 ..i. ~4 9 .. . Triberg 1921.b7?! 9 . %lc8!?. Varna OL 1962..b6(D) Waiting moves are sometimes an unaffordable luxury.i.e6 24 . with this position... Manila OL Black's formation is still satisfactory. . he has duly reached 8 b4lbe4 the Exchange Slav a tempo ahead.. 1992.:CS) lbxe4 dxe4 12 lbd2 f5 13 h4.i..i. for tion: example 9 %lbl bxc5 10 bxc5lbe4 11 1) 11 h3lbb4?! (11. with mann.i.c4+ but White's edge is solely due to ~f8 20 h6 g6 21 . lbd3 f4 17 exf4lbxd4 Islbxd4 .. 2) 10 %lcl .Kovacs-l.232 The Queen s Gambit Declined: 5 1.!Da4.!.i..xe5 19 .c2 ~hS 15 lbf4 g5 16 ing psyched out by symmetricality..Kadlicsko. lbe4 11 . %lb7 ~ and play continues to be sharp l1.i. 7 .!Dg5 Ih-lh E.xd6 'it'xd6 even as the endgame approaches.i.bl lbd7 13 .. Hungarian Cht Servat-Soppe.xe5 .d7 12 a3 ..••b6 9 cxb6 cxb6 10 0-0 1) 10 lbe5 is an aggressive gesture. 1) Black gains nothing by tempo- White having spent an extra move rizing with S..d7 II. dxe5lbxe5 ISlbxe5 .b7) 11 h3 lba5 12 0-0 lbc4 13 'ire2 b5 14 b3 lbd6 15 .i.i...b7 11 0-0 lbb4 12 . .i..i. Another principled move. White achieving nothing after S cxb6 10•••.xe6 ~xe6 25 2) 11 a3 h6?! (why? 11. lbc6!? seems a valid try. Practical experience from this posi. 11.b5!?. ..dS 16 'it'b3 lbaS 17 'it'b4 'irb5 = G...i.!DeS ± Bogoljubow-Spiel. but in the end it leads only to simplifi- cation: 10.i. 2nd Bundes- liga 19S3/4. it is simpler to develop.i. G.!Dxd7 'it'xd7 14 a3 lbc6 15 . Black's only poten- Black should have no problems tial worry is an immediate h4.i.Jacoby-Kordsachia. and to cover e4.f6 14 12 . 2) S.h2 . . 8 .b5 and Black's attack proved 812) decisive.

not generally Otherwise Black loses a pawn. White has several tries for 20 Wb4 ~e2 21 fxg5 +.g7 14 ':abl White's grip on e5.. 9.b5 tile5 16 19 .xe5 17 fxe5 WgS 18 g3 lLic6 19 14 Preparing to exchange the good lLixd4 bishop for a bad bishop. Danish Ch (Aalborg) 'Thus far and no farther.d3 .c2 g6 13 b4 .b7 17 lLixc6 . ov-Speelman.b7 lLigS ±. ful: 13 .c2 lLifd7 14 e4 lLixc5 15 exdS lLig6 16 . 12l&4!?.i.i.' Black 1965.i. Gosti~a.e2 f4 16 1O..Begun. The next few moves were pain- (Minsk) 1994.lLibd7 9 b4 9 0-0 lLih5 10 ':el lLixf4 11 exf4 The main effect of this is to increase .f6 lb.i. Rishon Ie Zion 1992. aS 11 ':cl b6 12 cxb6 cxb6 13 lLixe4 fxg3 17 bxg3 .i.dS 13 .f6 12 Goglidze. lLig6 14 g3lLih8 15 h4lLi17 16 9 ~e4 dxe4 10 tiJd2 ..c6 6 e3lLibd7 7 h3 a68 c5 0-0.xdS exd5 14 lLib3 814) lLic6 15 a3 b5 16 0-0 . Moscow rpd 1995.i.i. The move order in this game was S.xc6 picks Kiss.f6 12 lLie2 .fS 20 g4 . Linz 1993.Serebrjanik.i.i. etc. 12 a3!? (in.xc6 18 d5 Black's queenside was leaking seriously.i. 8. Kladovo Wb3 lLih5 13 a4 lLixl4 14 exf4 bxa4 ._lIz Ham.. .i.xd7 lLixd7 17 .i.i. a promising position. but after 7.Kaspar- an advantage: 12 .i. V.c6(D) ann-Hvenekilde. 11 h4 .Sokolov-Markos. A.i. .i. advisable..i.i.b5 16 Wb3 11 Wc2 f5 12 . fS 11 Wb3 l&6 12 .xb8 .g3 bS IS .lLihS?! (D) 10 'ii'b3lLie4 11 axbS cxbS 12. Croatian Cht (Tucepi) 813) 1996.d3 lLixf4 9 exf4 lLIc6 clear advantage for White.xbl 22 ':xbl .f6 12 ...dS 18 .xgS 23 .g3 ± I.i.d3 8 h3lLibd7 9 ..i..':e8 10 0-0 .Ragozin- 9.Vebif.xe4 dxe4 16 lLieS ..c2tile7 13 . Belarussian Ch 1990.i.f8 11 "'a4 bS 12 tion for Black. 8".c4 Wd7 10a3f5 13 ':dl gS 14 . Black's light squares up a third pawn for the piece and keeps on the queenside are weak.i. tending cxb6).xb8 13 .i.b3 ± Lechtynsky- .i..i. 7". tried a similar philosophy in V.i.d2 with a lifeless posi.i.i.f3 .bl ':17 lLia4. Moscow 1935 .b7 7".d7 140-0 g6 15 .i. 12•••.xc5 11 dxcS e5 12 lLixeS lLixeS 13 .i.i.d7 13 ':c1 Veinger. f5 10 0-0 lLic6 II ':el .i.Bukal jr-Keglevif..d8 15 .g6 21 lLixgS .c4?! .i. K~ge 1997.c7 15 g3 f6 16 h4 f5 17lLia4 with a 8 .i.i.i.d3 ':e8 10 0-0 .c6 14 0-0 . Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 233 A..e2!?. 1O..Rustem-S.bS 8 b4 c6 9 a4. 'fIe7 14 hSlLid8 15lL1e5 .

This illus- trates one of the potential perils of an early . White is certainly squeezing more out of this than out of the 7 cS varia- tions.. Netherlands tt 1996.... where White has llli)eS! li)bd7 12 ~e2..234 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i..bS 10 ~e2 6 .. ~xdS!? ~xdS 14 "g4 ~f6 IS l:fd1 Croatian Cht (Makarska) 1995. B 10l:xdl~xcS With yet another transposition to the Malaniuk-Arlandi game given in Chapter 4... b6 8 b4li)c6). c6 line... 11 ~e2 ll)c6 12ll)a4 ~a7 13 ~c7 l:e8 (13 .c6 transposes to the .li)bd7 7 "c2 c4?! 11 li)eS ~b7 12 ~f3 /Ods 13 dxc4 8 ~xc4 a6.4.bS 14 ~b3 ±) 14li)b6 ± Van der Vliet- Bartels.cxd41Oexd4bS 11 ~d3~b712 the only good reply to 7 cS (except l:e1 ~b413 ~gS li)bd7 14 We2 Wb6 perhaps for 7.. 9dxcS White makes sure the queens stay Yet another central pawn clearance on the board... New York 1899...li)bd7?! 8ll)eS c6 9 ~d3 l:e81O 0-0 ± Schlechter-Showalter.. that follow may also be reached via 90-0 is effective after 9.~xcS 82) 10 "xd8 l:xd8 is illusory.f4! 15 llxa4 ± Belamaric .t..Bazaj-Bockai.. but that = Ghinda-Ciocaltea.llk6 is of9 ... 7 . since the 7 l:ct (D) rook soon becomes a target. but the more modem plan The impression is that 7 . or 6 .bS. Most of the positions and queen exchange. is satisfactory for Black. 83) 7•••dxc4 7"c2(D) 7 . if a4 by White forces the pawn to advance.. B 8~xc4cS S. bS 9 ~d3 ~b7 10 a4!? b4 11 li)bl ~d6 12 ~g3 li)bd7 13 li)bd2 l:eS 14llk4li)f8 15 li)aS ± Van der Sterren-Hort... Line All. Bern 1993. Black can try: . London 1899..li)bd7 7 Wc2 a6.xdl+ The 'gain' of tempo with 9 . 9. a lot of weak squares are created.. White 1982. ~e7 16 e4 ± Blackburne-Burille.. must look for something different... Baile Herculane it is good enough to equalize..

xc4 h6 12 0-0 i... 8 a3 i. 8 dxc5 .. but White should simply have completed devel- opment with 13 :adl i. White can of course sub- 7 ••• b6 8 i. with .c5 Main Line. 831) 7•. 7••• ~bd7(D) convincing.e2 i. Black could find This can lead directly back to the nothing better than the truly miserable New Main Line..to Black was soon overrun. As played i\l the Yepez-Pau game given Black's inability to shift a piece cited in Chaptel3.~b8?. but un.. San Martin 1994 went 13 i. i.llk6 834) An independent possibility. with for ex. 832) 7•••cS This is a . In A. White's a-pawn is just as weak as B33: 7•••M 235 Black's d-pawn.to White now played 10 a3 ~bd7 11 2) 8 O-O-O!? is an untried sugges- b4?! c5 12 bxc5 bxc5 13 :bl Wc8 14 tion of Gelfand's. 1) It is surprising that 8 c5 is not tried more often. leaving White two clear a case too for trying to take advantage tempi ahead of the 7 c5 line.c6 15 dxc5 ~xc5 16 0-0 ~6 B32: 7•••cS 235 =.. possibly 9 In Y. After 9 of the omission of .e5?! lLld7 14 i.d7 9 h3 i. There must surely be 8 .d3 ~c6 10 a3 h6 11 h3 lLld7 12 b4 ample 10 lLlci2 . Fiorito- Soppe. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 235 B31: 7•••llk6 235 Wb2 i.lbc6.Rahman-Elsayed. f5 is much too slow. Tanta 1997.c6.. 9 h3 would transpose into the Shul- man-Lyrberg game given in Chapter 833) 7.xd6 GO.xcS 10 0-0-0 VIlla Ballester 1996. Line A3.e8 10 i.... to e4 quickly.as 9 i. 12 ~g5 is the rec. ~5 and . . 9••.xf4 14 exf4 ± with another Rubinstein Bind. Preparing to besiege B34: 7•••lLlbd7 235 the hanging pawns with 10 0-0 ~bd7 B35: 7•••dxc4 236 11 :acl c5 12 dxc5 is more appropri- ate.5.d6!? 9 a3 but there are several alternatives.Hoffman-Varela.i...d3 dxc4 11 i.. when ommended move. Stonewalling 10•••dxc411 i..d6 Black's manoeuvring behind the lines has not been smooth.b7 9 cxdS exdS stitute a developing move.e2 b6 10 cxb6 Wxb6 11 0-0 . early.xc4 ~c6 with 8 . This leaves 8.1.a6 8 adS having been played unnecessarily A simple and very natural move. i..

!.xf3 12 gxf3 lbhs is much more 1) 10 g4 c4 11 . 16 good compensation for the pawn after lLlxdS!).. B 4) 8 :dl would transpose into the .bS?! 10 lLles noi-Short. Alternatively..i.fS ±. 9. edge after 7. be avoided. or 12. Dortmund 1982. dxc4! 9 .b6 7 •••dxc4 8 .... 16 .i.xc4 (D) with unclear play.lLlbd7.xeS 15 dxeS 90-0 :XeS 16 f4 . 8 .i.e2!? sets the positional trap ± Kishnev-Steinbacher. but if 14 .i..i. but this does not change the general Nogueiras. .e4lbxf4 lLlxg4?! (16 e4 00 Hort) 16.i.i.cS is probably the best 8.bS 9 . Bern 1992.i.d6... ceptably met by either 12 . 8•••exdS 9 .bS? 10 a4 b4 I1lLle4lbds 12 :cl .i. verdict that White. c6 system after S.xc4 bS 11 .i.xa8 17 *xh3 'irxf3# would 2) 10 dxc5!? lLlxcs 11 0-0.gS c4 14 . fS 15 ....i. 14.i.xc4 bS 10 .b7 11 . b6?! 9 cxd5 exd5 10 lLles .c6.d3 (9 .lbbd7 considered.h6 d4!.i..i.d3 :c8 12 lLlxd7lLlxd7 13 ued 11.i.h6 9 a3 dxc4 10 .d3 Good enough for an edge..a2 c6 12 e4 :eS 13 .a2 has several ways to achieve a slight cS II :dl (11 dS exdS 12lLlxdS is ac.l:cS? 12lLleS 'ire8 13lLle4 ±.lbh3+ 16 McCambridge-Hort. Kstovo 1994...i..i. and now Korch- OL 1990 continued 9 .bllLli8 14lLleS ± S.i..f5 17 Wet :e818lLlxdS 1) 9 .i. Of course this mating line can is also good for White. Biel IZ 1993.. *g2 .eS.xhS IS f4lLlf6.e2 ± Gelfand..xh7+ *hS..g6 12 . lLlxdS Gelfand. White now over- pressed with 15 dS? exdS 16 eS lLlhS 17 .e6 16 e2.i.fS bS 14 a3 .e2!?) 9 . challenging. lLlce4. 14. After 13 .i..Ivanov-Talanin. running into a strong ex- change sacrifice.g6 .b615 b4! finish.. play con..b7 10 reply.i.fS? (11 .h4 150-0 .. Porper-Lelchuk.b7 Nogueiras) 11.e2 ..236 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i/4! 3) A few years after making this No doubt Black's defensive play in aggressive suggestion. Gelfand played this game could have been improved. the more restrained 8 a3 in Gelfand. and a good reason for Hort) 11..c4 835) 12 e4 . Monaco rpd 1993 contin- .•xdS =+= IS .d6 .i.i. Novi Sad 0-0 lLlbd7 11 :fdl.i.i.i.i.bl g6 14 0-0 ...e6 12 have been a particularly humiliating lLld4 :cS 13 . tinuing 8 ..xd7 . not surprisingly...i.b7 11 .i.i..xh7+ *hS 14 .xd7 13lLleS White to have retreated his bishop to lLlxg4! 14lLlxdS . but the uncompromising 9 0-0-0 may also be 8..i.e2 .i.i... 13 .i..i.i...g.. A touch of quickplayitis perhaps? 9•••cS 10 lLles 11 . Black has Groningen 1995 (and if IS ..i. but 0stenstad-Mirza..... or S.gS+ 17 *hl ...i.xhS 10•••:e8 11 0-0 lOf8 12l:adl . e. 9.i.i.i..xa8? (15 exf4 00) IS .b7 13 .

White's best chances for an edge in Solid enough.b6 7 cxd5 ~xd5 8 ~xd5 'IIxd5 9 i. Black's chances are clearly better than in the similar but unexplored line with 6 .d3 (10 i. tion 7"c2...e7 11 0-0 b5 12 i.a6 line are with the continua- insert 7 'IIc2 first.xf3 wins a pawn.d7 11 a3 7 adS (D) :c8 Black seems to have adequate com- pensation for the pawn.d3 i.xb8 i. . but with Black f t l :d7 19 e4 1 Gavrilov-Moroze.e2 ~6 130-0 :e8. but it makes sense to the 6 .b7 11 ~g5 h6 12 ~ge4 ~5 13 i.g3 f5 14 i.xh7+.d6 10 i.d6 14 ~4 and White has a slight a3 i..b7 14 0-0 ± Mai. Kstovo 2nd Bundesliga 199516. advantage.e2 i. 2a) 9 . but in Knefevic- i.c5 7 dxc5 i. shake after 11 :cl i.d3 i.xc7.. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 237 ~xf4 13 exf4 i. Prot.i.c5!? 10 dxc5 1) 8 i. i.f4 system.d6 12 i.e5 c6 13 10.d6 11 i. Bel- grade 1982.exd5 9 a3 c5 10 dxc5 i.xc7 i.e2 ~xg3 15 ~xg3 b4 16 112-117.. piece mobility in a position with a White was content with an early hand- symmetrical pawn structure.. for example 12 i. 1994.. St Peters- 'IIb3 ~h8 GO Sturua-Danielian.. :.~e6 12 i..b4+ 10 ~2 i.. Vejen jr Ech 1993.b6 12 ..b7 .. etc. i....i.b7 11 :fdl We8 8~dSWxdS 12c!M2c5 8 .xd3 10 'IIxd3 1O.xd6 'IIxd6 12 0-0 ~bd7 i.. or 12 i. draw'.David-Malich. 9••• b5 10 i.g3 i.c5 Exchange Varia- 13 dxc5 ~c5 14 b4 lOcd7 15 a3 tion (6. was presumably a 'Russian vino 1993.. should give This is quite characteristic of the White a slight edge. Naumkin-Dydyshko..Cvetkovic.d3. Russian Ch (Orel) 1992.f5 9 i. threatening i. Lugovoi-Margolin. burg 1992.:teS!? transposes to the . 7 .xd2+ 13 "xd2 :axb8 14 f3 e5! Agzamov-Sr.. R.... 11 vich.g3 2) 9:ctl and now: c5 13 i.e5?! (10 0-0 1) Prague 1985) 11.d3 ~bd7 90-0 :eS 1O:tel ~xc5 lU[dl WaS..112 Lechtynsky-Mozny. 2b) 9 . ~f8 11 'IIb3 (11 ~e5 i..a4 14 :cl ~d7. a6. 13 h3 i. 84) 9 i.xd2+ 13 'IIxd2 i.. having played the unusuall0 .e2!?) 2) 8 h3 i. in that no weakness has been created along the long diagonal.xc5 S cxd5 ~xdS :c8 16 Wd3 ~b6 17 :ad :d8 18 9 ~xd5 exdS 10 a3).xc5 12.. b5 10 i. Neskaupsstadur 1984. White keeps an edge in McCambridge.bI 112. 7•••~dS wald-Danielian.exd5 and now: Black should reply 9 ..

Line A52......xe6+ siders the independent alternatives ~g7 20 "c3 "f6 was Zaichik-Az- after the following moves: maiparashvili. San Sebastian 1994.d6 15 g3 g6 16 :fel sidered elsewhere.2 6. Other moves: 1) 7 .lDxf4 12 exf4 b6 13 :adl . l:cS 17 h4 c5 IslDxf7 ~xf7 19 -*.e2 dxc4..lLlbd7: Lines not knight. without making it clear D: 7 h3 242 who is supposed to be down in mate- E: 7 ~d3 243 rial after 21 ~xc8 or the possibly F: 7 a3 244 stronger 21 dxc5.. leading to lines con. 2) 7 ..xc5 is uncon- vincing.... Kramnik-Andersson. ECO ends A:71i'c2 238 the game sequence here with an enig- B: 7 cS 240 matic 'with compensation for the ma- C: 7 adS 241 terial' symbol.. for Black.. keeps White in control in the Generally Black will play an early centre) 11. ~b7 14 lDe5 -*./41 option of recapturing on c5 with the 8...... Monte This is an interesting defensive try Carlo blindfold 1997. c6 (Chapter 7...a2. This section con.c5 (D): . c5 7 dxc5 71i'c2 ~xc5 S -*..1) or 7 .1). after 100-0 "e7 (Chapter 8. if only because it leaves A) White a tempo ahead of 6 . In comparison with the Returning to the position after 6 .. a6 12 -*.. 11 a3 (threateningb4) 11. leaving the bishop on its best already examined defensive square.b6? leads to disaster on c7: 8 cxd5 exd5 9 lDb5 ~b4+ (9 .lDb69~b3lDbd510lDxd5 lDxd5 11 0-0 (offering the Rubinstein Bind is unnecessary here.. Instead. White's most dangerous positional of all the possibilities. Black has the added 7..g3. c5 variations.We7.cS!? the game. G: 7:c1 244 2b) S. a6 here.. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 M lM64lDfJ ~e7 White has committed his queen to c2 a 5 ~f4 0-0 6 e3lDbd7 (D) little too early.g5lDb6 Black is back in 7••. II e4 e5 12 -*. See Chapter 5... and plan would probably be 10 :dl.. with e4 in mind.. Tbilisi 1979. In comparison with 5 .. c5 9 dxc5 -*. This is the most common and trans. as the straightforward II -*.dxc4 8 ~xc4 and now: 2a) 8 . c5 6 dxc5lDa6 7 cxd5 exd5 8 e3.. and if is well suited to give an edge against 10.c5 10 ~c7 "e8 IIlDd6 wins the exchange) w 10 ~dl ~b7 (1O..a5 either 7 . etc.2...c5 II ~c7 again picks up the exchange) II a3 ~e7 12 ~xc7 Alvarez-Bello.. c6 or .238 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.

b7 IS I) 8. I note that 10 ~gS!? has appeared in practice: Scb:eS 2bl) 1O.tal {21 'iVxc3?? fxe6 16 . Now 13 .i. of advocating 'iVc6 with equality.i.tbl! and the White can probably do better than broken kingside pawns are more im- this. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 239 panacea. Moscow Ch 10 dxe7 ..b6 was Kaida...xe2 18 bxc3 ~e4 (18 .a6 with a distinct ad- 13 ..i..~xf2?? 13 ~4) 13 :gl!? with the sort of messy and double-edged position we saw in Chapter 3. Tilburg 1993...gS ~S gives Black a 2b2) 1O.e2# would have = 0-0 .e2 fxgS IS .i. With a mixture of relief and regret.tbl .e8 with equality.i..00 17 .. 14.xc3 and h8 is covered by the queen} ~f6 17 'Wf3 . .b4 = Parker-H.i.d8 19 .i. Mirall~s­ czyk.. perhaps even advanta.g4 12 ~4 ~ 13 .e2 dxc4 II .tfS ~xd5 10 ~xdS exdS II .. e. 2) At the risk of being accused.i.g3?! (1S ~xe6 20 :dhl ~xc3+ 21 c.xc4 pawn.e2 ~xf4 14 exf4 .d3+ ~e4 26 :lh6+ c.d7 10 .i.exdS 9.tfS 24 :xb7 +-} 24.f6 16 hS ..~a4 19 :h3 :fc8 14 "xe2 1017 IS .. Spassky. {23 .:t5 :c8 12 0-0 ~a4? (an over-elaborate 17 ..c. ~xd4 16 exd4 .d7 120-0"aS 13 :fdl :fd8 vantage for White.i.xc3lO1s 1997..tf6 British Ch 1993.lvanov-Grabar.eS 12 .i.f6 may be met by 14 fxe4 8•••lDxeS 9 .g4 13 'iVb3 .tg4 28 .. cxd4!? and now 9 exd4 c.i... then very solid..i. portant than Black's temporary extra I) 9 a3 .eS dxe4 16 c.b7 13 'iVe2 'iVe8 14 :fdl jocularly or otherwise.i.xg6+! 2) 8 ..fl ...i.i.e5 .i.d7 II g4! ~xg4 12 cxdS bS (12. Stohl-Gavrilov.i.. position..i.e2 ~f6 12 27 :r7+ c. been a far more memorable finish) 19 nov-Campora.txr7 23 :h7+ c... French Ch 1991. a6 keeps a perfectly .•aS: 2a) 10 1012 .g3 or 16.. 16.i.e2 a6 10 dxcS ~cS c.i.c. g6?! II h4 bS 12 cxbS Or 8 cxdS: ~hS 13 . .g3 .xc5 continuation....dxc3 fxeS 1-0 Notkin-Shur. S.) IS .xcs 20 g4 followed by 21 'iVxe4. queenside castling as the universal Pardubice 1995. perhaps II h4 hxgS 12 hxgS ~fe4 13 geous..xgS! gives unclear play though.i. 12..i.xe7 11 bxc3 (11 .i.i. At flI'St ~xe4 dxe4 20 'W'b2 eS 21 c4 :re8 22 glance 9 d6100ks strong.e8 IS :fdl . f3. but 9 . Lubniewice 1995.i.i..xa4 bxa4 18 . 21. 9•••cb:c4 10 .i.tfS 22 ~xr7 c.... 2b) Indeed.d4 eS 18 lOIs .i.as playable game) 13 ~xa4 bS 14 ~S 16 b4 'l'xa4 17 .xc3 17 hxg6 hxg6 II 0-0..i. I draw attention to the possi- bility of 9 O-O-O!? After 9 .i.i.1. =) 11.txg6 2S .xc4 86 11 84 b6 11.g.h6 seems critical.i.. I leave it to the reader to analyse.Hunt. as I make the final cor- rections to this book. at this stage of the book.i. 1Z 0-0 .

i.d3 lt1e4 13 g4 not even given as a possibility..bxcS 13 bxc5 c6. a6 7 cS.. as I had first assumed. but 9 j. Hungarian Ch 1965) 8.. This sequence passes without 2) 7. Black has 11. as 9 f6?! 10 .. or not it is historically 100% correct to apart from a few analytical correc..fS 10 O-O. 8. Steinitz was apparently unfa- lt1eSlt1e4 10 lt1xe4 dxe4 11 .i.a6? 121t1xd5! won a pawn in when compared with 6..c4. an lt1xg3 11 fxg3 and now: obvious continuation of the attack...ECO.i.lt1hS 8 ..xc5! 10 dxc5 e5 .ltX6. tions.i...!...i.!. needs to be added to ECO.O .. Steinitz-Napier. 2) 8.l:le8 and then not 9 h3? ..a5 13 c6 axb4 14 . .!.xgS (or ECO... Bue- nos Aires 1993.xd7 15 lt1dl :a3 co.lt1f6 12 .•c6 concept against Pillsbury at Hastings 1) 7 ..... is promising. talk of a 'Rubinstein Bind' (and Janow- tions. and the White's attack does not win outright. New York 1897.i. Black has not played the weakening 9 (). sky at least partially anticipated the 7. g6 9 0-0 c6 10 b4 b6 11 . Llanos-Cordero. The attack is extremely strong Forintos-Csom. that Antoshin-Uusi..240 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 j"f4! B) 2b) 8 lt1xe4 dxe4 9 lt1d2 is a better 7 c5 (D) option for White. out the idea of 15 .d3~ 1) 8 .i. but there is much 2a) 8 'ilc2 g5 9 j.!.i..ECO) 14.~e7 16 g5 :h8 16 .!.h6 IS g4! with the idea of g5+.. ECO.lt1f6 12 .i.xh7+? 2a2) ll. cxd7 . Moscow 1967..h6 l:le8 12 e4 'ilc7 13 :el ± Portisch-Donner.b6 9 b4 bxcS 10 bxcS 'ilaS 11 With the disadvantage for White. 8. and yet lt1g314:h2(14:gl!?.. 'ild2 .i.h5 piece sacrifice 12.i.j. simple and safe 12..d3 lt1xf4 (8 . 12 <i>f1 ..a6...b7 11 0-0c612 'ilc2 g6 13 g3.b4+ miliar with the idea Steinitz-Chigorin. fxe5 11 'ilxh5! (11 .i.eS .. Hungary 1969. c6 leads back to the main line) 9 exf4 b610b4j.!..i.e5?! Forintos. If 12 b4. 3) 7 . Nuremberg 1896 continued 9 j. not mentioned by ~h8 12 'ilh5 j. Halle 1963.i.i.g6+ ~f6 14 . ..d3 .~!? and then: comment in ECO....xh7+ ~h8 12 'ilh4) 12 the choice between the enterprising 'ilxh7+ ~f7 13 j.. is 2al) 11..c6 it poses Black some difficult ques- ISlt1e2'i1aS+ 16~f2~ 17~gl. as Nunn points with ideas of .g3?! f5?! 111t1g5 lt1df6 12 a3 bxc5 10 bxc5 ~ 11 .g3 f5 10 h3· that is open to question. Whether few variations where relatively little.b6 8 b4 (but not 8 c6?! lt1b8 9 1895).... after 1O..d6 13 dS 'ile7 =+= Portisch.b6!. This is one of the idea to readers of this book.xgS) 11.i.i..!..g3 j.e5 at some stage. but with the advantage that Black This by now should be a familiar no longer has .. 10 lt1g5!.

Kne!evic-D... one line suggested by Nunn. position is unbalanced. and open kingside lines for White.i.g6 Wd8 14 ~xe6. White has the straight. tLlxe5 16 c7 1We8 17 ..f5 .g6 Wd8 14 . or Gulko. For example.i... tLlbd7. 9.. 7 adS forward plan available of castling Keeping to strategically well- queenside and rolling his kingside trodden paths. 17 :gl!? 10b4! exd4 18 exd4 ~d8 19 gxh6 :xh6 20 10 h3 ~6 11 ~s tLlxes 12..... 12. White is about to regain his 9 .i.e5 ± 14 tLlxf8 .We8! (Burgess) is the one real..i.i.. while a move) later 1O.xh5 ±). on the tactical theme that if 13 .c2 advantage for White.i.d6 ..i. Is ... it is not so clear where Black 7..xes Wgs+ ~f6. fxgs 13 .i. An' interesting historical and analytical di- gression.~xg3 makes more sense.. tLles .. bxcs Wa5 13 Wc2 g6 14 :fel . nightmares about. 1977. tLldf6 18 Wa3 ~e8 19 ~5 Wxd6 20 the critical move is 13 ~xe6!. Of the other queried move~.. the black knight is trapped.. claimed as only a slight ~7 13 . Vdac tial positional advantage. with White having rook and two pawns for two C) minor pieces.fs (instead ot. actually looks ~4 = Chistiakov-Neishtadt.!. USSR extremely difficult for Black to hold 1956.. ECO notes that 9 . 9 . It is the type of position 10.e2. 13 axb5 :0114 1Wxal gS 15 bxc6 After 11 . and ought to be noted.i. Gulko.d7 18 .h2 es 14 dxes tLlxcs 15 .!. f6) would be equal. bxc6 16 .xh7+ ~h8 12 Wc2 fs ~xcS (12 .i.i.!.xd6 17 cxd6 12.i. backward development....b5 . gs? 13 bxc6 bxc6 14 ~es ± istic attempt to hold the balance. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 241 Wg6 WfB.8611 84 that French Defence players have 11 h3!?....lOxdS (D) gets his play..f6 15 cellent prospects of keeping a substan. but it is still promising. and ought to have ex. Gulko.. but really 9 O-O! is the logi- cal and thematic move. prove that White has over-pressed.i..i.~xh714tLlxfB+tLlxfBI5~2the ing try against 6 . tLlxf4 10 exf4 b6 11 b4 bxc5 12 material though. Dos Hermanas 1994.Jano§evic. 12..axb5 1O. pawns. bad bishop. weak 11••• h612 b5 dark squares.. So 10 ~gs is not quite as massive a missed opportunity as I first thought.xfB 15 dxe5 ~xh7 16 g4! Gulko-Lautier. fxes? 13 . After Maybe this is White's most promis- 13 .i. after 21 . based 'ii'cs! ± Gulko. 12 ~es .

Ilic-Lein. Line C.ttk6. which we have considered un. .c6 or .b3 .t Ftai:nik-Prand- ttk5 120-0 Jlf6 13lDb5 Jle614 Jld6 stetter..txd6 ..xd6 14 c4 :bS 15 9•••cS cxd5 lDxd5 16 :acl .1.c5 . White 1) 9..h6 17 :fel Others: . a3 comes exd5 10 .b6 IS ttk7 :tacS 19 b4 and D) White is slightly better...tc3 lDd5 = Torma- lD7f6?! (1O.1. 10•••c4 S•..c2 c6 is a similar knight might be slightly questionable.....b3 c6 11 ~d3 lDf6 120-0 across as a weakening move.. a6 at 12.. as the other knight has committed it.f4! For once..e7 13lDd2 Jle6 14 f3 matic plan of . b6.xe7 17 l:bl ± Ftacnik..c2+ ~g8 15 posing into lines already considered in ~xc5 .. Jld6!? 10 Jlxd6 cxd6leaves tlemanly thing and play 7 .•exdS 9 Jld3 1O. 10 dxc5 lDxc5 =Ftai:nik.a5 =) 11 0-0 lDh5?! 12 Reiter.) 13 . b6 The cautious 9 a3 has been tried: variation. ~xd2 14. Saint John 1) The most solid move is perhaps 1988..te6 13 b3 15 :fc1 :e6 16 .lDe4!? 8 cxd5lDxc3 9 bxc3 With this particular structure..c5 (via 7 a3 c5 S cxd5lDxd5 16 b4! ± Ftai:nik. but it is unlikely that there will be any- der .. Jessen. rather than 4) 9 ..c6 10 Jld3 :eS 11 .. 7h3 (D) gius.. Jld6 :eS 12 dxc5 ~xc5 {but not most invariably plays . Tisdall.. 3) 9..242 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 JJ.c4 12 ~c2 ..lDf6 10 .I. 12 b4 a6 13 0-0 Jld6 14 Jlxd6 ... ~d6 13 .Meduna-Prandstetter. 13 . Czechoslovak Ch 1980. depriving Black of the the. Black considerably better off than in 7•.xd3 :eS 16 Jlg3 :fB 17 :tac1 . Hoping that Black will do the gen- 3) 9 . recapture as our main line... 1995.I. 9lDxd5 exd5) 10 Jld3 cxd4 11lDxd4 16•••85 17 l:c1 .c2lDfB then has 11 dxc5!? . transposition. Copenhagen 1991. Chapter 6.. thing leading to more than a tiny edge... trans. Ehlvest-Kro. c6 systems.. Jld6 10 Jlxd6 cxd6 11 0-0 self to d7.txe4lDf6 S Jld3 c5 9 Jlg3 cxd4 10 exd4 17 . Hungarian Cht 199213. E....lDxc5? 13 ~xc5 ~xc5 14 Jlxh7+} the earliest opportune moment. the recapture with the 2) 9.. leads to the 6 .tel lDf6 12 lDe5 .exd5 since in that case Black al.. c5 followed by ..a5 13 Chapter 7 or S. 13 ~xh7+? ~xh7 14 .. Norwegian Ch (Namsos) 16lDxe7+ ... 14 axb3lOd7 15ftl fS 16lM3 2) 9 . Jlb4+ 10 lDd2 c5 11 0-0 (11 7 .I.tf3 :d8 18 .. lDxd3 15 .xd6 11 . Trnava 19S1. Stokstad. White may have improvements. lDf6 12..dS 17 Jlf5 cxb3 :h6 IS JlxcS :xcS 19 a4 . 9 ... Ftai:nik.c7) 11..xd2 SlBxd5 "xd2 15 Jlxd2 dxe4 16 . lDh515:acl f516:c3l:acSI7:fcl Despite this. we shall take the knight . St Petersburg 1994. 1) 7 .. b5 14 bxc4 bxc4 15 ttk6..c6. Jle5lDdf4 13 Jlc2lDg6 14 'ifd3 with 100-0 a clear advantage for White.te6 112_112 Z. c6..d7 0stenstad. e4?! (13 lDf3 ...cS the Meduna-Prandstetter game below.

td3lDbdS 12 .te2 dxc4 8 .b6 13 :fdl :acS 14lDeS with equality.td3 (lO .. Aix- 1997.txd6 cxd6 100-0.td6 9 ..txc4 is equivalent.te6 12 move ..tb7 lO 0-0 lDe4 11 :cl cS 12 dxcS lDxc3 13 l:txc3 bxcS 14 "ii'a4 lDb61S . 9 ..tb7 11 :cl .. 3) 7 .td7 13lDeS .cS 8 cxdS exdS 9 With 7 h3..Johner-Janowsky.txc4 and now: 3a) S.tb3?! .bS .teS .. 7•••dxc4 There is also 7 . Black is passive.txf6 gxf6 17 better for Black in P.txf6 . Psakhis-Saidy.dS..tb7 12.tgS Ill-liz Ivkov-Spassky. French Cht 1993.te2 9.Roiz-Grl- 10•••cxd4 11 exd4 'iV85+ 12 .tgS lDb6 (or 90-0 bS 10 . . Podolsk 1993.tb3 :d8 14 "ii'e2 h6 IS ..te2 1/Z-1f2 Henley..t K.. Indonesia 1983..cS!? 9 dxcS (9 O-O!? cxd4 lO exd4lDb6 11 .tbl :c8 13 .teS.cS 90-0 a6 10 a4 transposes.Len-Denisov.tdS :b8 Psakhis) 13 CC) Karlovy Vary 1907) 1O.te2 .. lO dxcS lDxcS 11 "ii'xdS :xdS 12 Andersson.. = ~e2 . b6 S cxdS exdS will tend to 8 . :acl .. in the event of ..teS M. 8 cxd5 lDxdS 9lDxd5 exd5 10 ..tc2?!"ii'b6 was slightly lDxf6 IS "ii'xdS :xdS 16 . the same goes for the vari- ous odds and ends described below. 8•••86 Psakhis) 9 .txc4 (D) leave Black defending hanging pawns.d716 .. Sao Laurenco jr 1995.. 2) 7 .txcS 10 0-0 (10 a3!? 8 .... 3b) S. h6!? 13 lDdS "ii'dS 14 lDxf6+ 11 'iVe2 cS 12 . White has discouraged the 0-0 a6 lO lDeS lDb6 11 :c 1 ... dS. Waikiki ):fdS = Verbaere-Lepelletier.••cS 100-0 (D) lO dxcSlDxcs 11 . 7 h3 does not seem particularly dangerous. would discourage Black's next move) 984 10..dxc4 S .t Ibragimov-Kozh- evin. With- out . the wrong bishop and a misplaced knight. Podolsk 1993. Black has. St Petersburg 1993..lDe4.•e7 11 e4 eS 12 . Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 243 = 'iVb6 13 'iVb3lDf6 Agrest-Gavrilov. vent .xd7lDxd7 17 l:tdllDb6 18 . les-Bains 1991.. E) 7.tb6 IS .. but done nothing to pre.td2 goriants.. . lDhS.xf6 cS 12 ..td3 7 ..e2 .

a2 00) 9.e7 recapture with the knight..244 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 J.e2 (9 cxd5 ~xd5! 10 ~xd5 exd5 00) 9.....xd6 ti'xd6 15 ~xd5.i.i..i. Black should play 10.i.e5 ~xc316I1ac1 B With a massive initiative in return for the pawn.Singer.e2 .. It is doubtful whether any of the Austria 1995 continued 9 ti'c2 (9 0-0 lines below will catch on. Palma de Mallorca 1967.c6!? is perhaps the 6 ••• h6 is probably most simply an- safest) 8 dxc5 (8 . 8 cxd5 exd5 and a win against Dreev.c5..Loebler-C. French Ch 1997.d6? loses a pawn to 13 ~c6 ti'd7 14 .~xc5 9 .b3 cxd4 12 ~xd4! .i.i.h6 244 Ehlvest-Krogius in Line C above) 9 B: 6 •••1Ie8 245 ..xc4 a6 11 ~5 ti'xdl+ 12 = IIxdl b5 13 .. . and waiting to see .. E: 6•••dxc4 246 G) A) 7 1Ic1 c5 (7 .dxc4 8 .i. a6 10 cxd5 exd5 11 0-0 b5?! 12 ~d4 . If 7 ..b7 Larsen-Por- tisch.t and now 12 . Paris 1992) 10 ..i. 11 .e6 12 c: 6•••~c6 245 .i.i. D.3 Miscellaneous 6th 10•••~b6?! moves for Black This is slightly casual.b4 13 "f3 . Then 11 5 . e4 IIc8 :.i.i.xc4 a6 swered by 7 "c2.e2 a6 10 dxc5 ~xc5 11 0-0 . see A: 6.i.. H..xc3 14 bxc3 ~bd5 15 . Relange-Bricard. The lines are: (8 .d3 .d3 dxc4 9 ..i.xc5 11 battle honours include a draw against b4?! ..i.. going into Line E a waiting move down.b7 14 an admittedly very youthful Kasparov.e7 12 0-0 b5 13 . White's extra tempo would of course disappear com- pletely after 9 a4.f4 0-0 6 e3 (D) exd4 is equal.j4! = 10 a4 cxd4 ECO) 8 .i.c5 10 dxc5 .i.Medina.:.. F) 7 a3 may quite legitimately be met by 7 .d3.t.i.i. as White cannot 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 ~r6 4 ~f3 .. ~xd5 9 ~xd5 exd5 10 ..e5 .i.dxc4 (9 .i. Palma de D: 6 ••• ~h5 245 Mallorca 1968. but Black's b5 10 . 8.xc4 a6.. cxd4 first.t Benko-A.Chevalier-Jojic.i.i.i.

h6 was actually use. when 7 .xe6 14 .i. 8 .d3 g6 ao Saraiva-H. B) 6 •••:le8 gained Black about half a tempo on the main lines after 7 h3?! cS 8 dxcS .i.i. Minsk 1978 continued 7 Black plays .xd6 7.d3 cS 10 his queenside light squares will be- liJes cxd4 11 exd4 . then cxdS lrurdS 8/t)xdS exdS 9 .lvanov-Bezgodov.i./t)b4 is known to be satisfac- tory for Black (see discussion of 6 If this move is effective.e6 Ih-1h. as Black is I) 7 h3 (quiet play allows Black to falling behind in development. when White about be justified if White had already should be able to play for an edge. However.i. Sagua la Grande 1989. castled..tg2 b6.i.i... The Stonewall formation might just 8 ti'c2 is more thematic.xe6 8 It)eS! ± rather than 8 cxdS exdS 9 fxe6 = Blagojevic-Z. it's not so simple.e2/t)xg3 11 hxg3 vin.g3 g6 (7 .dxc4 8 . Yugoslav Ch 1992.i.i.tn ti'f6 come weak after White exchanges on 13 g3 /t)c6 14 lrurc6 ti'xc6 IS . and if rov-Klovans..f4 immediately! Of Other moves: course.b4+ 12.. S..... and see what Black plays.i..Vuk.Vukovic. Instead... Yugo.i. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 245 what Black does next. it ceed.xcs 9 ti'c2 /t)c6 10 a3 in J . side-stepping any threats to the 6•••/t)hS (D) h7-pawn. White can ti'c2/t)c67 e3 in Section 8.i. a5. a6 was followed by 8 :lel 7 . D) ful. seems odd for White to prepare ti'c2.g3 lrurg3 9 bxg3 f5 and then not play it for several moves. Krasnodar 1991. as he is losing a pawn. The prospect of White playing .. OL 1996) 8 ti'c2 b6 9 :ldl . In the system that White chose.c6?! should be met by dxe6 ti'xdl+ 13 :lxdl .i. .i. Again.4 below). know how Black was intending to pr0- ovic./t)d7 8 cxdS Ih-Ih Yuferov-Vara- /t)hS 9 .i. Kaspa.. C) 6 •••/t)c6 is directed against 7 ti'c2. preparing (Elista) 1997.i. White should choose 7 "c2!?.e5! cxd6 10 dS /t)eS 11 /t)xeS dxeS 12 7 . then 8 cS!..i. cover for the queen to come to c2: 7•••f6 3a) 7 . Black's .Annas-de Annas.d6 9 .i.i.g7 14 :lfdl ssian draw' .i. Erevan worn slav Ch 1990.. equalize) 7 . ..g3 g6 10 . Russian Ch rpd 3) 7 a3 is probably best.f6 120-0 liJe7 13 ti'c2.Mira. give up on . b6 at some stage.b7 10 2) 7 /t)eS /t)xeS 8 dxeS liJe4! 9 cxdS exdS 11 .e2 /t)d7 12 0-0 :le8 = /t)xe4 dxe4 is satisfactory for Black. It would be interesting to c6 IS cS fS =in Ljubinkovic-Z. is another 'Ru- . 3b) If 7 ..xc4 .

Dubinka-Skripova..e3 .. although cxdS 14 tLlxdS winning a pawn..cS. but tersburg 1996.td7 11 e4 tLlc6 12 eS tLlxd4 13 'ii'xd4 lLIhS 14 .i..tLlc6 0-0-0.te2 "h4+ as + in Informator 55.i. Manila OL 1992. Black's position has already gone... g6 13 . bxa4 10 0-0 a3 11 bxa3 tLlbd7 12 e4 ± gadze. After this loss of tempo.tf6 18 :d3 lbb3+ 19 ~c2 20 "g4+ ~h8 21 axb3 with unclear "as IS . but this variation is cS 10 eS tLlhs 11 . for example 9 .txc4 (D) Black.. Dreev-Nenashev... or 9 . 8 0-0 cxd4 9 exd4 is also S.d6 is ..tLlxeS 14 f4 (14 ..c?? 11 tLlg6 .xc4 12 llldS 11 .td3 +. lLlbd7? 10 bear.td3! tLlbd7 (8 . dxcS .e8 13 e4 ± Llanos-A. ..txhS gxhS 16 'ii'xhS tLlxd4 17 play.td7 12 lbes If 7 . 2) 8 a4 cS 9 0-0 cxd4 10 tLlxd4 .n win- B ning a piece) 13 . whereas 13 f4100ks like a Si- E) cilian that has gone badly wrong for 6 •••dxc4 7 ..tc6 IS ...g6 12 gxfS exfS 13 cxdS The most vigorous move.txe6 15 . cS?! 9 . Leningrad Cht 1989. Voskre- low..te2 (16 g4? tLlf4 17 .. for SlLleS! example 11......J4! g4 (twice if necessary) and attacking advantage for White.dxc4. discussed in Section 8. Bue- with the idea of entering the 6 .te6 14 'ii'f3 leads to a slight winning for White) 11 exd4 leaves .bS) 9 a4 cS 7 . draw. .i.te2 dxc4 variation a S•••b5?! tempo ahead. tLlc6 10 a3 tLlbd7 (lO.246 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 i.txeS . Psakhis-Pelikian.cS 14 .a6 10 dxcS lbxcs 11 0-0 .tcS 14 .txcS 8 ....i... there are reasonable alternatives.. cS 7 nos Aires 1993. 3) 8 . Savchenko- along the h-file is a little bit harder to Cepon.te2?! (this looks like a miscal- culation.. New York 1997 - Perhaps more catastrophic than it too much time-wasting by Black) 9 e4 need have been. lead in development is obvious. g6 and the game is heading for a S.bS?! 9 a4 . White's simplest is 8 dxcS. Bled 1996.txdS exdS 12 lLleS lLlxeS 13 lbxe7+ ~hS 13 :xd4 .S be.xf4 :d4 +) lar for Black than the more interesting 16 .xd8 :axd8 16 Swprisingly.e3 cxd4 12 tLlxd4 undeniably difficult for Black...dxc4 is more popu... 6 .f3 cxd4 10 O-O-O! eossible. 12 gxf5lM6 13 adS adS 14 fxe6 1) 8 . without offering any suggestion as to how to meet IS g3lLlxg3 16.tc7 "e8 12 . St Pe- Creating a dreadful impression.Hoffman.i.txhS gxhS IS 'ii'xhslLld3+) 14.. Aleksandrov-Danielian.Nasybullin-Moma. lLlbS tLlb6 11 ..e2 lbbd7?! (S . then Nenashev gives 13 .txb6 axb6 10 tLle5 c6 11 g4lDd7 13 tLlc7 +. White's sensk 1993.

. 9".*... 6".cUs 9 .1IId7 16 ~e2?! (16ll:)e5 King) junior game.86 9. moves for White 7b4aS Black must break up White's pawns 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 ll:)c3 ll:)f6 4 00 . 10 1Wc2 ll:)xc3 11 "xc3 axb4 12 axb4lOc6 13 e3 .Gal. which maybe may try 6 .4 Miscellaneous 6th A.. 6cS?! 8.dxc4 to good effect . Du. A) opment.b4+ 7 lD<i2 1Da6 8 lOc3..e8 12 g4. We may also briefly note 16. f6. Natanya 1987. C: 6:c1 248 There is. that the time-wasting 6 h3?! has been played. World Champion. pare LineC..txf114 ~ bS IS :al Plaskett-King. Nuremberg 1896.td3 ..t is probably Black's This has been played by a reigning best.d7 (10 . The game continued .te7 as quickly as possible..tb7 11 1Wh3 scribed as an interesting move played ll:)bd7 12 :dl g6 130-0 1WaS 14...*..Lasker-Schallop. etc..t Plaskett- 8..ll:)bd7 or . which is suitable . British Ch (Ply- mouth) 1989.tgS a move too early.*. S ... but is best de- 9 1Wf3 :87 10 .f4 0-0 (D) 8 allOe4 9 :c1 9 ll:)xe4? dxe4 10 lOe5 f6 11 lOc4 axb4 12 axb4 :xal 13111xallOc6 + Em.f6 :j:.*.. Kharitonov-Danielian.. continuing 6 .c5 7 6 adS e3 b6 8 cxd5 ll:)xd5.lbxdS 7 lbxdS exdS (D) The 'main lines' are: 8"c2 A: 6cS?! 247 8 e3 leads back towards standard B: 6 adS 247 lines.a6.. with Dos Santos-Yilmaz.. when Black is starting to take We can quickly dispose of 6 IOb5? the initiative.axb4!? 10 axb41O:6 11 b51Da7! -King. ter. played in a = 15 . 6 . Black has played . lOe4?! 7 'iVc2 f5 8 e3 a69 .b6 1993. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 247 White several moves ahead in devel. w another dodgy position that the great Emanuel managed to win.. it should wait until :e8 IS 1Wh4 and White is clearly bet. deserves a second glance. however. the unexplored D: 61Wc2!? 249 possibility of 8 g3!?. B) bai wom OL 1986..d3 lOc6 10 a3 . Voskresensk 6"..com. while Black Another Plaskett try.*. King now suggests 15 ..*. g5 first is more accurate) 11 h3.tg3 ..

te7.. that Ilc 1 is not a wasted ge3 move if Black avoids the .. excellent play.te7 4 . while White ous move-orders after 3 ... With the bishop fian- chettoed. it is cannot get his king away in time.c5.c5 have also been ECO ungenerously gives this as tried.. cxd5 exd5) in Korchnoi-Kasparov.tf5 attack. Banja Luka 1985.... The position now reached is the however.td3 lines. same as after 5 . gives Black tions. but 13 .tf4!? ~f6 5 e3 0-06 Ilcl (e3 of pressurizing the queenside. c5 7 dxc5 . Chiburdanidze..and of steering the game towards a Pawn c-pawns. however. this particular move-order is noeuvring the bishop to e4.. This immediately gives Black a sat- isfactory game. space in this volume for detailed dis- Black aims for the simple but effective cussion of the implications of the vari- .trs 11 ~dl Ilc8 12 a3 ~c6 Plaskett-Chiburdanidze.248 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1. a move-order trick..••~a6! Brussels 1986. Black's d-pawn is going to come under a lot of pressure if he ever This has occasionally been used as plays . but it inaccurate. dxc4!? 6 e4 (Section . 6....... being substituted for ~f3) is perfectly This would seem to be the only try playable. keeps White well in the game.~b4 and . shows. clear. however. As Black's reply on the queenside.. and indeed succeeded in lur- for White in this section that offers ing Kasparov into a Pawn Exchange any realistic prospects for an opening Variation (after 6 . 6 .~b4 10 "'c3 . c5 varia- 9 a3 c5. it would 7e4 be difficult to claim any advantage.. while if Black avoids .txc5 8 advantage.dxc4! 9. equalizes instantly. Regrettably there is no This. 8..c5.c6 and 6 .. but 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ~c3 doesn't really affect White's intention . with the intention White can put pressure on the b./41 C) 61lct (D) w B if White wants to try an ultra-technical sort of game. transposing to more familiar clearly better for Black. and aim for a minority attack Exchange Variation..... Black can try ma...

.td3 h6 13 6. There is the possibility of returning to 2) 6 .:) 6'iVc2!? (D) 11.dxc4line. Royan 1988..tg3 fs. cess: 10 .. but with :lc1 inserted for White.S below).txc3+ 10 bxc3lOxe4.td2 Wc7 13 e4 e5 +Conquest-Kotro- . 0-0. either Bind is not so effective for White through the possibility of e4. is recognized as the Savchenko-Polovodin.txc4 cxd4 9 lOxd4 lObd7 10 lOdbs lOb6 11 . with only limited suc- 11 .. aiming to transpose to Line 'la'..td2 ...dxc4 9 e4 "xcS 10 D) ..te3 fs... ...txc4 gS!? . or ~ when Black has not played .tbl.: Pein-Anka. and if bellishments.lOc6! :laellOc6 14 a3 .td7 12 0-0 lOa6 :. Budapest 1989.. . lOexds 13 lOxd5 Black must keep the initiative..te2 (11 . which is to be S...txc4lOg4:. St Petersburg antidote. then 11.. White has tried a couple of em- have 9 .txd414 :lxd4 eS 15 as a whole to justify detailed analysis.c5 7 dxcs and now: 7e3 .tb4+ 9 M! lOxe4 regarded as a satisfactory outcome for Without:lc1 and .. An interesting move to dabble with. and 11 ...txcs 8 a3 lOc6 9 0-0-0 Otherwise White is just a pawn WaS allows White to return to the New down... Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 249 S.te3 "c7 11 .tf4 lOxd4 13lOxd4 .td7 16:lel since if he retreats..txc3 12 bxc3 nias. and .cs S .. The difference is for the most part in B Black's favour (see the note to Black's 9th for the one exception)... his weaknesses on :lfcS with unclear play. Wf6 all give Black chances of dynamic Ib) 7 .td2 Wcs =1= Kotronias) 11.td3 lOe8 12 es a6 = 13 lOd6 Miralles-Kharitonov. Black would him. Reykjavik 1992. play..dxc4 7 e3?! (7 e4!) 7.tg5 (12 e4!?) 12 .aS!? S lOd2?! (S 0-0-0. Instead 7 e3 lOdS is equal. Biel IZ 1993. 1) 6 . but White hopes to . Others: 1993. ' dxc5 Wc7 11 0-0 'iVxf4 12 ...td7 15 b4 :lfdS = This......... .. SlOxbS la) 7 . or IOWbl?! The position reached is perhaps not d4! 11 lOa4 (11 lOb5 a6! 12 lObxd4 critical enough for the theory of 5 . 11 .td2 Wc7 11 cxds lOe7 12 10 .lOxc3.txc4.. derSterren.lOds 8 the main lines. is more accurate) S. however.txc4lOxf4 9 exf4 c5 (the Rubinstein benefit from having delayed e3. lOxd5 14 e4lOb61S c.te7 12 but the possibilities of 11 . c6) 10 keeping a retreat for the bishop. 7 ••• bS!? As in the s . 7 .. Bareev-Van the queenside will tell against him..0-0 inserted for Black. Main Line with 10 e3.

. pawn up.aS g~ka Slatina 1991. 8.xc4 ltlbd5 12 J. ltle4 S ltlxc7+ 'fIxc7 9 J.xd2+ moves for Black 8 . to resignation...e7 is dreadful.g3?! 6 •••J.. al- though 9ltld6+ ~ 10 b4 J... is equivalent 14 a4ltle4 and Black has a slight ad. but that ultimately 6 12 e3 b5 13 a4 will soon leave White a "c2 is less threatening than 6 e3.c7 11 c5 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3ltlc3ltlr6 4ltlr3 J..) 9 J. where it offers an exchange of bishops.xc4 c5 =.e5 ltlxc3 13 S•••ltlbd7? 6ltlbS! = "xc3 J...a4! 8 b4 a6°o... B) S•••ltle4?! This is more likely to be fruitful in the J..... D: S.Dumitrache...xc4ltlbdS 11 J.dxc4!? 251 S•••b69 a3 9 lIcl c5 =.5 Miscellaneous 5th 8•••J. 9 lIdl J.David. and straightforward . Bareev-Vaganian. S J. We consider first the minor possi- Crouch-S.. Parnaiba 1995. 7.b7 10 a3 dxc4 A) 11 J. while and untested gambit.. BledIRo..g5 variations. vantage..d6 Bareev..c5 9 a3 lOc6 10 C: S•••ltlbS 251 dxc5 J..) 12.e5 =Bareev..xc7 One feels that there is scope for fur.Armas.g5? very much under-researched alterna- (12 cxd5 .. A: S•••ltlbd7? 250 S.xc5 12 J../4! 7 :d 1 dxc4 S e4 ltlaS is an unclear Black normally castles here.r4 (D) 9 <i>xd2 eS 10 dxeS ltle4+ 11 <i>el ltlecS 12 1Fb4 a6 13 e6 nbS 14 exd7+ ltlxd7 15 adS White has a sound extra pawn. 8.1.d4 13 ltle4 J..250 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1..1. e5 7 dxe5 c6 S exf6 Toloza- 11•••J.. ltlb49"cl ings.c6 is Black's last chance. a6 have already 7 •••ltlb4 been considered under other head- 7... 6.e7 :. 5 . Matanzas Capablanca mem 1994.. dxc4!? is a significant but c5 10 a3lOc6 11 dxc5 J.b3 B: S•••ltle4?! 250 S "cl dxc4 (S . 9•••dxc4 10 J....a6Sh3 (SlIdl!?) S.. 7ltld2J...xd2+ 10 'fIxd2ltlxd2 11 ~d2 dxc4 ther investigation.. 5.b4+ 11 J.. Van B Wely-J.: tive.b7 12 0-0 ltlxc3 13 bxc3 cS R.. Cappelle la bilities: Grande 1993. An outright refutation.xc5 11 cxd5 .. c5.... 5 .. Here it is a bit lazy with tempi. c6 and 5. J.

Austrian League 1988/9. Gheorghiu-Mohring. diate 7 . Practical experience. 6.txc4 lbxf4 8 exf4 0-0 9 0-0 b6 11 "'e2 .txc5 14 e4 b5 15 .td3 ~xd2 (9 . for White.td3lbf6 11 0-0 and White's plan of development has White is slightly better. in development.c6. yielded him very much.tg3 ~xg3 8 hxg3 f5 9 ~5 0-0 10 e3 ± D) Umanskaya-Dergachova.. Robatsch.td3 dxc4 9 ..tb7 10 1Wc2? 10 cxd5 exd5? 11 ~xd5) 10 1Wxd2 (10 "'e2!?) 10.. The usual ap.b5 9 ..tb7 12 lIadl a6 L3dx~5 ~7 10 ~e5 '12-'12 raises the interest- . Sarosi-Hartung.....te5 f6?! (6 .lMi (D) An important but unexplored try. when I was paired as Black against . My own preference would be for 7 1Wc2!?. 6 1It'c2lbxc3 7 bxc3 0-0 8 e3 tM7 .txc4 a6 8 la) 8 lIeI ~ 9 .txc4 c5 10 0-0 lbd5 7 . The more recent game.td2 e4. for example: Black getting a good game by uncon- 1) 7 .tf4.tb3 1Wc7 16 e5 ing question of how deeply Gulko had ~8 17 ~4 with a distinct advantage analysed the system.. keeping a watch on e4.txc4 with an imposing lead lbxd4 1Wxd4 13 . de Fir- Romania 1966.f5.txc7 lIac8 . ..~!? followed by . at least as far as This challenges White to find some the database is concerned. is limited to useful way of avoiding the repetition the following two examples. Manila IZ 1990.. Cohn-Showalter. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 251 development gives White a slight but 2) Black may consider the imme- very comfortable advantage.. 6 . ~c6 11 a3 ~xd4 12 dxc4 11 . of moves with 7 . 0-0. etc.. mian-Gulko. fS 0-0 (8 a4!?) 8 .0-0 and then: vincing means: 6 e4 O-O?! 7 . and it is not clear that 9 cxdS exdS 10 ....td3 .. Baumgartner... London 1899 saw proach has been 7 e3. 6 e3 1b) 8 .. Dortmund I was hoping to add a third example 1988... Svetlogorsk S•••dxc4!? (D) 1997. ~6!? 00) 7 . and C) with the possible intention of playing S•••lbhS 6 .

but still an t'hd5 12t'hxd5 exd5 13t'he5 j. as in the de Firmian-Gulko glance it would appear that White re- game. which went S.f4! Mikhail Gurevich in the 1997 Euro. 7•••lhxf48 exf4lhc6! The most accurate. j... At first 90-0 iOd7. and aims to create pressure against the d-pawn with pieces. as we have seen in Chapter 8. but he varied with Bind in traditional fashion.xc3+ 9 bxc3 t'hxe4 and l:tfeS 18 h5 l:te7 19 g4 j. IT now S1Oc3.d7= 01) 02) 6e3~! 6e4(D) An important resource. j.xc4 The pawn can be a little trouble- some to regain after 7 j. The 8lOd2 O-O! (D) . White therefore has l:txd3 l:tae8..0-0 5 . and this 02: 6 e4!? 252 increases Black's defensive problems. dxc4 has been ignored.O-O 9 6 •••bS! 7iOxbS j..252 The Queen' s Gambit Declined: 5 J. 022: 8 j. .d2 253 side pawns forward is tempting. and the rea- son why Black delays castling. without having to worry 01: 6e3 252 about the safety of his king.3. Unknown to me at the time of writ. 6. based on the exposure of also the game Youngworth-Rai(!evic.xd3+ 20 Black stands well.. with king- j. 03: 6 "a4+!? 254 9j.xc4 is. but later lost. 021: 8lOd2 252 tling queenside and rushing the king.. B 7 j. and keeps an 1OWe2. while if 8. Lone Pine 19S0..f5 16 g3 c6 17 ~bl then S. However..0-0 7 j. Black avoids compromising his queenside pawn structure. The idea of cas.g3 t'hb6.g5.b4+! j. is that White is free to Therefore what follows is mainly probe for weaknesses on the queen- original analysis. h4 "f6 15"f3 j. After 8 .d3 t'hd7 10 "e2 t'hf6 11 O-O-O!? A loss of tempo maybe. the game was later drawn. White is probably still only two real choices: better...d6 14 awkward check to meet. White's king. We investigate: side as well.c5 9 d5 exd5 10 IOxd5 White is comfortably Presumably this is the reason why ahead in development.. but it can be difficult to find targets for the 021) pawns if Black defends steadily. enormous space advantage.f6 may soon follow. it turns out that Black has tactical re- ing the main draft of this book. White is probably better after gains the pawn with ease....bS j. good for White. Line E. side castling. there is sources. advantage of playing the Rubinstein pean Club Cup.

.. at the very cxb5 10 a4 liJc6 11 i. If one wants a pretty finish.. but White is potentially trol.cS 'ii'a5+..xc4 is untested and tion.. tack on the bishop leaves the knight 9•••a6 temporarily stuck on d2.and c-files count for something. fortably split. and satisfactory for Black.xc3 13 bxc3 II i. i. round up the as-knight... My opinion of the position has var- with alternatives for both sides. e5! (the bishop is overworked as Black targets D22) both the white knights. 9 'ii'xd2liJxe4 followed by ..eS tDg4.. 9 .liJxe4? 10 liJxaS .... 13 f3 9tDxd2 'ifxd4 14 i.xd4liJxd4# is a new set..b7 10 0-0-0 i.xd2 +-) 10 i. he still has to decide how to secure his so not everything is clear-cut.. Black's 12 ~e2..e3 returns the ini- tiative to White.. though 1) The attempt at refutation with 9 practical tests are awaited.e3 I had hoped to make the more ambi- i. surprising 12 liJd2! (Burgess) is ex- ing material parity while retaining the tremely difficult to meet. The ied from "White has a slight but .xd2+ (Nunn) 13 .xd4 11 i. liJxe4 llliJxaS i. the worst. who is Black's queenside pawns are uncom- better developed and has central con. This is e-pawn and make his bishop effective.•xc7) 1O.liJd6 is ting of Legall's mate. probably favourable to White. If then initiative.. ways to win. fine for Black.. plest. the at- liJd7 =.xc4liJxe4 11 9•••a6 10 liJc3 "'xd4 11 tDxc4 liJdxe4 i... 10 dxe5?? drops a piece to 12. liJxc7? is itself refuted by 9 .xc4liJxd4 12 Wd3 cS With complicated play in which 9"'c:2 Black should be no worse..xd6 cxd6 IS i. however.xd2+ II "'xd2 11...xe5 (after tious S.xd2+ 12 . 8 i.liJc6 seems sim. 11 i.•xd4?! lli. but after 9 i.g. So back to my original idea.b7 10 i.xb4 10 liJxaS exf4 Black can.d2 i.xd2+ 9 . liJxe4 14 axbS. not.liJxe4 13 axbS!) 13lla3! 1O. 10•••liJc6 1O.xc4 0-0 is less testing.. restor.. The text maintains the flow of play.. Miscellaneous Systems on Moves 5 and 6 253 text is clearer..xbS and Black has several strong con- tinuations.xe4 12 0-0 i.. 12.xdl + 12 lbdlliJc6 liJxe4 12 'ii'e3 liJa6 13 liJc3 liJd6 14 We have reached the critical posi- i. however. and now there must be several position is falling apart. 2) 9liJc3!? i. c6 work. e.liJb4 (12 .. argue-that weak on the central dark squares.. and the b. Black can. 10 liJc3 10 liJxc7?! l:a7 11 tDbS axb5 12 i. just one line in a complicated position.l:d713 i. but 12.... which needs further testing.

. 7. known. cation that however much is already known about the J.xc4. we left theory two full moves ago. One line that the thought of what effects this would might be worth further study is 8 J. times first. so at least some main lines ing system. It is hoped The best.a5 examine and assess what is already Probably the best. . there is a way in which White can play for an edge.f4 system? If this were so. which is critical to the 6 e4. is usual arithmetic applies. the author system as a whole. and that Although we are only on move 7.. The The position. each player will complete his development with might have three or four or more rea- .a5.. rJ.. singly or in combination. while any advantage White has is far the rest of the book being consigned to from crushing.lOe4/d5. All the 9a6 9 9xa6 . and to indicate where future ficult to be certain in an uncharted discoveries are likely to be made. with the indi- that has not been tried.e7 and challenge the d. expect in a main-line opening. doesn't this just kill off the 5 J. a sense of to wait for this line to be played a few pride at having busted a whole open. . combined with horror at may become established. As This is a pleasing place at which to so often. 5 ..c5.t and =... It would be unreasonable to attempt any sort of So the delicate question arises: if definitive assessment of this particu- Black is doing OK after both 6 e3 and lar position. in the ab- not necessarily drawish...dxc4 system. I suggest that the position consist of. dxc4 is the recommended move.. and Black sence of forcing lines... the correct move is the one draw the book to a close. 6 . . and hence to the J. the most White has a very small edge. number of reasonable replies. although it is dif.1Oc6 7 e4 gives White that the author of this book has ful- control of the centre.. is at least as satisfactory as Black can .. ing we are in the zone of uncertainty stall.d2 have on the sales of this book./41 workable edge" to "Black is fine". It would be better would have mixed feelings. Mercifully though.. although queenless..b5-b4. filled his duties to the readers: to cite.254 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 1.f4 5..f4 system. between . As is usual in the open- the remainder bin of the chess book. sonable moves. each with the same file... and . the sake of provoking further debate Black's potential freeing manoeuvres and testing.!Oxa6 10 e4 O-O!? Black reader would have to know is that is certainly not better after 7.. there is D3) still much completely unexplored ter- 6. For position so early in the opening.b7.a4+!? c6 ritory to be mapped out.J.

..c2163 After 6 e3: 8 j. exd5 B: 6 •••cS 135 ..c2213 5•••00 6 e3lObd7 (6 .. 7 j.d3145 7 j. lObel7196 6l:[c1248 Now: 8 h3 196..e7 6••• lDhS 245 4•••lObel7 214 5 adS exdS 6.e2 174. 7 l:[cl 190 5••• b6194 5•••a6229 A) 5•••lObS 251 6 ••• c6226 5•••dxc4251 7 ... 7 'ifc2 212 7 cxdS 217: 7.tr4 215 and now: 7.c2 00 7 6•••dxc4 246 ..d3 219 234.0-0 6 e3 c6) and now: 7 h3 7h3225 227.d3220: 7..f4 250 0-0 247 6••• b6 172: 7 Wc2 173.. cxdS 6 e3 244 (DJ 218. 8 a3 211.00 8 cxdS 122: 8...lObd7 222 6 ad5 247 7.e7 8 e3 0-0 9 i.... 7. lOxd5 217.e2 209. 6 .xcS 113 7•••lDc6165 7•••lOa6165 7•••dxc4165 7••••&5 165 8 ..d3 227. 8 j..e2146 7 adS 147 7 ••• i.1Ob6 215. 7.d3 6. 7 j. lOxd5 123. 7Wc2 216... 7 cxd5 237 5 i. 8l:[d1205 B) 6 ••• cS144 7 dxcS 165 7 i.e2113 A: 6. 8 cxd5 208. j.d3 187.. 80-0-0210.. 7. 7 l:[c1234.. 8 i. 7. 7 i. 8 .0-0 7l:[c1224 .lDh5 6•••a6231: 7c5231...see 5.1Oh5 227.c2249 208. exdS 218 6 cS 247 7 j..dxc4221.Index of Variations 1 d4 dS Others: 2 c4 e6 6•••lObel7238 3 lDc3 lOr6 6•••lDc6 245 4 lOO i. 7 5•••cS 168 cxdS 175... 7....

tg5 84.dxc4 163 11 ••• es 29 12 iLlb344 8••••aS 164 9 a3 149 12 ....te7 .te7 10•••iLle4 21 162) and now: 9 cxdS 102.td721 12.see 12 . 13...b6 41...••.te223 8 ••• lLlc6 11 l:[d224 8..256 The Queen's Gambit Declined: 5 .£141 8 a3 159 iLlc6 (8 .. 11 ~bI81..te2 105 11.. 8. a6 162.••.tg3 d4 .••d4 . lolLld2101 9 ••• (D) 12 . 8. dxc4 160.td763 Bl) 12 .tg444 13... 9 11 lMe··2B :CI 104.':d858 ..td777: 11 g4 78..••b653 10•••dxc4 20 12..•.. II.as 9l:[dl..te2100.aS: IO. Il ....txc453 10 l:[dl 20 ..l:[d860 10l:[c193 11•••8661 11..8654 10•••.txc4 76 .tg3 d4 13iLlb3 9•..d830 12 ••• 1Wb6 9••••e7152 13 ....td7155 Now: 13.a5: 11 h452 Bl: 10l:[dl ulLldl 74 B2: 10 0-0-0 11 ~b175 11 g4 63: 11 . 11 cxdS 83. 8.dxc4 10•••8685 10.l:[d8 72..••iLle4 87: 1liLlxe4 88. II h4 85 After 9 .tgS d4 13 iLlb3: I3 ..b6 159.. lDe4 10•••l:[d821 160... 8.tgS 9•••l:[e8153 13 .te773 10•••dxc4 11 .:d887 10. IIiLld2 85.te7154 'ifb6 9.... 9 b4 103...te7 Now: 10.te7 followed by ll.see 12 .•.see 10. 9.tg3 47 d4 13iLlb3 "b647 9••.tg5 d4 13iLlb3 'it'b6 w B2) 10 0·0-051 ....•l:[e8 15 12. II iLlb5 89 10..•. . dxc4 64 Or: 11 ••• dxc4 10 iLld2 94 11....td6151 .