Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Open Spanish (gnv64) PDF
The Open Spanish (gnv64) PDF
SPANISH
CADOGAN CHESS SERIES
MIKHAIL KRASENKOV
CADOGAN CHESS
LONDON, NEW YORK
Cadogan Books
Distribution
UK/EUROPE/AUSTRALASWASWAFRICA
Distribution: Grantham Book Services Ltd, Isaac Newton Way,
Alma Park Industrial Estate, Grantham, Lincs NG3 1 9SD
Tel: (01476) 67421 Fax: (01476) 590223
USA/CANADA/LATIN AMERICA/JAPAN
Distribution: Paramount Distribution Center, Front and Brown
Streets, Riverside, New Jersey 08075 USA
Tel: (609) 461 6500 Fax (609) 764 9122
First edition published 1995 by Cadogan Books pic, London House, Parkgate Road, London
SW114NQ
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, me
chanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the
publishers.
Typesetting by ChessSetter.
Printed at Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wiltshire.
Contents
Bibl i ography
ChessBase Magazine, Hamburg, 1984-1995.
Ekspress-shakhmaty, Moscow, 1991.
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (vol 2), Belgrade, 198 1.
Keres P., Suetin A, Nei I. , Spanisch bis Franzosisch, 3 Aufl., Berlin,
1974.
Malchev A, Ispanskaya parliya (vol. 2), Sofia, Meditsina i
Fizkul'tura, 1981.
New In Chess Yearbook, Alkmaar, 1986-1995.
Sahovski Informator (vols. 1-6 1 ) , Belgrade, 1966-1994.
Shakhmaty v SSSR, Moscow, 1936-1991.
Shakhmatnyj biulleten, Moscow, 1955-1990.
Shakhmatnyj vestnik, Moscow, 1992-1993.
Suetin AS., Ispanskaya partiya, Moscow, Fizkul'tura i sport, 1982.
The Chess Herald, Moscow, 1994-1995.
Introduction: The Basi c
Strategy of the Open Span ish
Dear Reader, strategy. Nowadays grandmas
ters choose openings according to
I am delighted that you have cho their tastes. However, even such a
sen this book in preference to a loyal adherent of the Sicilian as
number of monographs attrac GM Sveshnikov has been forced
tively named 'Winning with . . . ' . to admit: 'Well, 1 . . .c5 is the second
Perhaps you have been disap best reply to 1 e4, certainly best is
pointed by the strange fact that 1 . . .e5. '
the openings described in them, So, let us consider the following
instead of leading to victory, often sequence, seen thousands of times
bring rather the opposite result. at all levels of play: 1 e4 e5 2 tZ)f3
So now you are searching for a tZ)c6 3 .ib5 a6 4 .ia4 tZ)f6 5 0-0
solid (especially for Black) , posi These logical moves (both sides
tionally well-founded and at the develop their pieces and actively
same time active system, a good apply pressure to the centre)
remedy for meeting both higher have crystallised as the main road
rated and lower-rated players . I in the jungle of variations . How
hope this book will meet your ex should Black respond if White
pectations. plays otherwise? You can find the
A hundred years ago players answer in different books, which
had no doubt as to Black's best re will introduce you to the fascinat
ply to 1 e4. Everybody knew the ing world of open games . . . where
basic principles of the opening you can choose to explore the ro
strategy: develop pieces and fight mantic or restrict yourself to the
for the centre! If somebody had most simple and effective lines!
asserted that the Sicilian, French But what should you do now? If
or Caro-Kann Defence gave Black you wish to cowardly potter about
better chances to win than 1 . . .e5 in your own camp for some 30
(and had published a book about moves then, sorry, you have made
it) he would have been considered a poor purchase - close this book
rather less than sane! and play 5 . . . .ie7. If you prefer ac
Things have changed in the tive counterplay then take the
course of the 20th Century. The central pawn and hold on to your
ideas of the hypermodern school hats!
gave proof of the ' diversionary' 5
••• tZ)xe41
8 Introduction
a�.�..t�.�
� - - g �
'ii'xe7 1 7 i.xd5 1:td8 18 'ii'e 3 .ixd5
19 'ii'x a7 i.xf3 20 gxf3 'ii'g5 + 2 1
.,-,.,-, 'iti>hl 'ii'xe5 .
,... . . As you can see, this maiden try
was quite successful for Black.
�a�
� �a�� • •
v� ",,"'� The position in the second dia
ii.B ••• • gram has become the basic start
• • _ttJa
A��(AH RAR
ing-point for a whole system,
which became known as the
O� �OU coc ' Open Spanish'. Immediately giv
�ttJ�.�.�
� - � .: �
� ing back the captured pawn,
Black obtains substantial posi
This was the choice of Wilhelm tional benefits, viz . a powerful
Steinitz when Bird and Gelbfuss knight on e4 and chances to com
played 5 0-0 for the first time fortably develop his pieces. The
against him in Vienna, 1873. Here price he pays for this is the
is how those stem games went: slight weakening of his queen
a) Bird-Steinitz : 6 d4 b5 7 i.b3 side, which, incidentally, was the
d5 8 lDxe5 lDxe5 9 dxe5 c6 10 c3 reason Capablanca didn't like the
i.c5 1 1 lDd2 lDxd2 12 .ixd2 'ii'h4 Open Spanish. However, the list
13 'iti>h l 0-0 14 f4 i.g4 15 'ii'e l of outstanding players who have
'ii'x e1 1 6 1:taxel .if5 17 .ie3 i.xe3 included it in their repertoires
18 1:txe3 1:tad8. proves that this time the great
b) Gelbfuss-Steinitz : 6 d4 b5 7 Cuban was not necessarily right:
i.b3 d5 8 dxe5 .ie6 Tarrasch, Rubinstein, Euwe, Fine,
Reshevsky, Botvinnik, Keres, Kor
chnoi, Yusupov etc. Even the lat
est pretender to Garry Kasparov's
throne, Vishwanathan Anand, has
used it in several important
games.
Now look at the last diagram
again.
Which of his opponent's active
possibilities should Black take
into consideration in the basic
position?
1) An attack on the queenside
(a2-a4) . Usually Black can com
fortably reply . . . b5-b4. Failing
that, you can often simply leave
Introduction 9
masters sometimes fail with it, as dxc6 10 �b3 0-0 11 i.f4 tDf5 12 c3
I saw with my own eyes when GM �d6 (van Mil-Piket, Eindhoven
Smagin lost to Finnish 1M Pyhala 1993) is harmless, and after 8 d5
(Odessa 19B9). tDc5 9 .ib3 (9 dxc6 tZnra4 10 cxd7 +
7 :el i.xd7 1 1 tDxe5 0-0) 9 . . . e4 10 dxc6
Neither 7 d5 nor 7 dxe5 are dan exf3 11 'ii'xf3 tDxb3 12 axb3 dxc6
gerous, e.g. 7 d5 tDbB B trure5 tDc5 13 'ii'xc6 + i.d7 14 'ii'f3 0-0 15 �f4
9 �b3 tDxb3 10 axb3 d6 1 1 tDd3 c5 16 tDc3 �e6 17 :Cdl 'ii'cS 18 tDd5
0-0 12 c4 i.f5 13 tDc3 tDd7 14 i.e3 (Zapata-Litinskaya, Biel 1988)
.if6 15 'ii'd 2 tDe5 (Radev-Sydor, White's advantage is minimal.
Varna 19 77) or 7 dxe5 0-0 B i.f4 7
••• f5
tDc5 9 tDc3 tDxa4 10 tDxa4 f6 1 1 •••7 d5 is barely playable as af
exf6 .ixf6 12 'ii'd 5 + 'at>hB 13 tDg5 ter B tDxe5 �d7 9 tDxd7 'ii'xd7 10
�xg5 14 �xg5 'ii'eB 15 l:tael 'ii'g6 c4! tDf6 11 tDc3 ! Black faces huge
(Brustman-Litinskaya, Tskhal problems of development.
tubo 19BB) with a fine position for Another interesting possibility
Black in both cases. is 7 b5!? 8 :xe4 (or 8 d5 tDc5 9
•••
than 7 :el . Black usually replies tDxe5 tDxe5 10 :xe5 (10 �xb5 +
7 f5 8 dxe5 0-0, when he in
••• axb5 1 1 :xe5 0-0, followed by
tends to create counterplay on . . . c7-c6 and . . . i.e7-d6, yields Black
the kingside by . . . 'ii'eB-g6, . . . f5-f4, sufficient compensation for the
14 Turning to One Side
9 .ib3 +
Here is how White should not
play: 9 li)bd2? li)c5 10 .ixc6? dxc6
11 li)b3 li)e6 12. li)bd4 c5 13 li)xe6
.ixe6 14 'lVxd8 lIaxd8 15 .ig5 �f7
16 b3 h6 17 .ixe7 �xe7, and Black
is more than okay (Knoppert
Piket, Dutch championship 1992).
In the event of 9 .ie3 'lVe8 10
c3, instead of 10 . . .'lVg6 11 li)bd2
d5 12 exd6 .ixd6 13 li)c4 �h8 14
li)xd6 cxd6 15 .if4, and White
won in Glek-Krasenkov, Moscow li)xg5 'lVh5 15 h4 li)d8 16 g3 b6
1989, the usual plan of 10 . . . �h8 1 7 lIad 1 li)e6 White ' s advantage
followed by . . . b7-b5 and . . . .ic8-b7 soon slipped away.
was preferable.
Finally, 9 li)c3 li)xc3 10 bxc3 Section 3
'ltt h 8 1 1 c4!? is not dangerous: af Deviations on move 7
ter 1 1 . . .li)a5! 12 'lVd3 b6 13 .ie3 f4
14 i.d4 i.b 7 Black obtains coun ( 1 e4 e5 2 li)f3 li)c6 3 .ib5 a6 4
terplay (Kristiansen-Smyslov, Co .ia4 li)f6 5 0-0 li)xe4 6 d4)
penhagen 1985). 6 b5
9••• �h8
10 li)c3!?
Instead 10 .id5 li)c5 1 1 li)c3 b6
12 li)e2 .ib7 13 li)f4 "e8 14 h4
li)d8 15 li)g5 .ixg5 16 hxg5 .ixd5
17 li)xd5 li)ce6 results in a solid
position for Black (Griinfeld-Sy
dor, Gausdal 1978).
10 li)xc3
1 1 bxc3 (D)
11••• 'ii'e 8
But not 1 1 h6?! 12 a4 a5 13
•••
lbxb3, followed by 13 . . . i.x£2 + , de 'it>h8 15 i.g5 i.g8 with equal chan
serving serious attention. ces, as in the game Bondarevsky
b2) 8 i.e6 also leads to a com
••• Gurgenidze, Moscow 1960). Now
fortable position for Black after 1 1. fS is risky due to 12 lbxe4
••
the continuation 9 cxd5 i.xd5 10 fxe4 13 f3! but also after l l ...lbcs
lbxe5 lbxe5 11 dxe5 c6 12 i.c2 12 i.c2 or 1l ...lbxd2 12 i.xd2
i.c5 13 �e1 �h4 14 i.e3 0-0 (Vito White's chances are preferable.
linsh-Sideif-Zade, USSR 1979) . That's why 9 . . . c6 is more accu
b3) Finally, 8 dxc4 9 i. c2... rate: Black retains the possibility
fS!? or 9 lbf6 10 dxe5 �xd 1 1 1
••• of developing his bishop to f5 in
1:1xd 1 lbd7 (Levenfish) i s interest one move.
ing. b) 9 i.b7. Now the bishop
...
c) 8 a4!? Now Black can play doesn't control the diagonal c8-
8 b4 9 dxe5 i.e6 transposing to
... h3. However, Black saves a tempo
a line from the next chapter. How for development hoping to quickly
ever, Schlechter's move 8 lbxd4! ... create active counterplay. Now 10
is stronger. Mter 9 lbxd4 exd4 i. e3 is met by 10 . . . i.c5 11 i.xc5
10 axbS ( 10 �xd4 i.e6) 10 . . . i.c5 ( 1 1 �g4? i.xe3 12 �xg7 �g5 ! 13
11 c3 0-0 12 cxd4 i.b6 13 lbc3 �xh8 + 'it>e7 14 �xh7 i.xf2 + 1 5
i.b7 14 bxa6 1:1xa6 15 1:1xa6 i.xa6 'it> h 1 1:1g8 and Black was o n top in
16 1:1e1 i.b7 (Lasker-Schlechter, Rokhlin-A. Zaitsev, USSR 1954)
World Championship match, Vi 11 . . .lbxc5 12 lbd2 0-0 13 �h5 d4
enna 1910 illustrative game 2)
- 14 f4 lbxb3 15 axb3 �d5 16 1:1£2 c5
or 10 lbc3!? lbxc3 11 bxc3 c5 12 with a good game for Black (Sa
axb5 i.e7 13 �f3 i.e6 14 cxd4 von-Shiyanovsky, USSR champi
axb5 15 1:1xa8 �xa8 16 dxc5 0-0 onship, Erevan 1962), so White
(Mewig-Wagner, Cologne 1911) should prefer 10 c3 i.c5 11 lbd2
Black enjoys an excellent game. (less effective is 11 �g4 �e7 ! 12
The main defect of the text, lbd2 �xe5 13 lbxe4 dxe4 14 i.f4
compared to 8 dxe5 , is that Black �f6 with equality, as in Cherep
now has no problems with his c kov-Bronstein, USSR champion
and d-pawns. ship, Moscow 196 1 ) 1 1 . . .�h4 (the
8 ...lbxeS line 11 . . . 0-0 12 lbxe4 dxe4 13 �g4
9 dxeS c6 �e7 14 i.f4 'it>h8 15 1:1ad 1 f5 16
The most popular move. How �g3 h6 17 h4 yields White a mini
ever, Black can develop his bishop mal plus, as in Vasiukov-Savon,
at once: USSR 1970) 12 lbxe4 dxe4 13 e6
a) 9 ie6 10 c3 (10 lbd2 lbc5!?)
.• fxe6 14 i.xe6 1:1d8 15 �e2 i.d5
10 i. e 7 l l lbd2 (in my opinion,
••• 16 g3 �e7 1 7 i.xd5 1:1xd5 18 c4
this is stronger than 1 1 i.e3 f5 1:1f5 19 cxb5 0-0 20 i.e3 i.xe3 21
12 exffi lbxffi 13 lbd2 0-0 14 �e2 �xe3 axb5 with an equal position,
18 Turning to One Side
attention. In Plachetka-Brinck
Claussen (Copenhagen 1987) an
equal position arose after 11 c3
�e7 12 liJd2 liJxd2 13 'ii'xd2 �f5
14 .i.c2 'ii'h 5 .
1 1 liJd2
Black's plan now consists of White can also choose a sharper
taking the light squares under plan which avoids simplification :
control. 1 1 e3 0-0 12 f3 (12 liJd2 liJxd2 13
10 �e 3 i.xd2 i.f5 14 �fe1 'ilt'd7 with
The most common line. Other equality, Trifunovic-Donner, Wag
possibilities are: eningen 1957) 12 . . . liJc5 13 i.c2 f5
a) 10 e3 �c5 1 1 liJd2 (or 1 1 ( 1 3 . . . liJe6 14 f4) 14 exffi �xf6 15
'ilt'e2 0-0 12 �e3 �f5 1 3 liJd2 'ilt'b6 �d4 �f7 16 liJd2 liJe6 1 7 �e5 i.d6
14 liJxe4 �xe4 15 �fe1 �ad8 with which led to an equal position in
no problems for Black in Keres the game Barle-Tukmakov (Yu
Korchnoi, USSR championship, goslavia-USSR match 1976). Tuk
Moscow 1973) 11 . . . liJxd2 12 i.xd2 makov indicates that White could
�f5 ! ( 1 2 . . . 0-0 13 'ilt'h5 ! is slightly have maintained an edge by 15 f4!
better for White, Spassky-Keres, Therefore 1 1. f5!? 12 exf6 liJxf6
..
lDxc6! 'ii'xc6 1 7 .ixd5 'ii'c8 18 'ii'f3 This was played in the game
(Ciocaltea-Sydor, Bucharest 1971). Fischer-Addison (New York 1967).
The interesting 1l lDc5!? has
••• Black controlled the light squares
not yet been tested. and White's attempt to seize dark
12 'ii'xd2 0-0 squares by 13 'ii'c3 (13 f4 .if5 is
not dangerous either) was unsuc
cessful due to the terrible posi
tion of his b3 bishop; 13 . . . .ib 7 14
f4 (14 .ic5 ! ? lUe8 was equal in
Gligoric-Matanovic, Monte Carlo
1967) 14 . .. a5 15 a3 b4 16 'ii'd 2 a4
17 .ia2 bxa3 and the great Ameri
can had to fight for a draw.
So, neither side can derive any
real advantage by avoiding the ba
sic position. However, the above
lines might be worth exploring
against unprepared opponents.
2 So Many Ways...
( 1 e4 e5 2 lL\f3 lL\c6 3 i.b5 a6 4 13 'ii'xb3 ( 1 3 axb3 c5 14 b4 cxb4
i.a4 lL\f6 5 0-0 lL\xe4 6 d4 b5 7 15 cxb4 0-0 is equal) 13 ...c5 14 a4
i.b 3 d5) O-O! 15 axb5 'ii'b6 Black obtained a
8 dxe5 i.e6 good position.
White's early queenside attack
13 •.. i.e7
Besides this move, Black used
to play: 15 ... bxc3
a) 13 �b8 14 c3 bxc3! 15 bxc3
••• Or 15 ... 0-0 16 i.c2 iLg4 1 7 h3,
i.g4 16 i.c2 g5 17 i.g3 i.e7 18 as in Kindermann-Tukmakov, Biel
ne1 0-0 19 lbb3 lbe4 with unclear 1988, when White obtained an
play (King-Kaidanov, Budapest edge after 17 ... i.h5?! 18 'ii'e 1! bxc3
1989). 19 bxc3 f6 20 lbd4 iLe8 2 1 lb2b3;
b) 13 g5 14 i.g3 iLg7 (another
••• however, 17 ...iLxf3 18 lbxf3 bxc3
possibility is 14 ... i.e7!? with the 19 bxc3 lbxe5 20 'ii'x d5 lbxf3 + 2 1
idea of ...h7-h5) 15 c3 0-0 16 i.c2 'ii'xf3 �fe8 leads t o equality (Kin
bxc3 17 bxc3 iLf5 18 i.xf5 'ii'xf5 dermann).
19 lbb3 (Kindermann-Marin, Novi 16 bxc3 liJxb3 !
22 So Many Ways ...
1 1 cxb3 ! 12 Ac l 'lVd7
13 lbe2
Clearing the c-file. White can
also maintain a slight edge by 13
h3 0-0 14 lbe2 Afc8 15 lbf4 a5 16
a3 lbd8 17 lbd3 (Groszpeter-Brun
ner, Biel 1990) or 13 'lVd2 0-0 14
Afdl Aad8 15 i.g5 d4 16 lbe4 i.d5
17 "f4, as in Winsnes-Krasenkov,
Stockholm 1989/90.
13 ••• i. g4
13 Ac8 was tried in Smagin
•••
b) 9 i.c5!? is an aggressive
•••
.•
,� �.�.�
19 bxc6 l:tc4 with an equal posi
tion, Wahls-Haba, Germany 199 1). ?� � �
?�
Mter the text move, instead of .
� .
",,,,,v .
_ .
_,
1 7 . . . l:txe5 18 l:txc7 l:txe4 19 l:txc6
:Xe3 20 l:t£1 with a slight edge for
,.�.,.,.
White, as in Avshalumov-Kra .,.
mf� • "
iiQ'f. �W�
��
senkov, Nimes 1991 , Black should . .,. .
play 17 . . . l:tc8 ! with equal chances
(Haba) . • • • •
So it seems 14 .ie3, with a �9�. D�D
small edge for White, is probably
more accurate (see above).
"
� A
- •
� .:�
�
Now we move on to 9 . . . .ie7 . This move looks quite natural
With this move Black invites his and is in fact the most common.
opponent to the main line from However, 14 'ifdS!? is an inter
•••
17 ••• lillte 5
After 17 'ii'c5 18 l:te2 l:td8 19 K_ 5i.. •
�.� - � •.•.
•••
that has passed, theory has still only gives back his extra piece but
not drawn a final conclusion about also sacrifices another one to liq
this idea. uidate into a sharp endgame with
Black's quiet replies yield a strong passed pawns: 13 .ixe6 +
minimal edge for White: (or 13 'lVxc6 'lVxe5 14 tDf3 'lVd5 !
a) 1 l tDxb3 12 tDxe6 fxe6 13
••• with equality) 13 . . . fxe6 14 'lVxc6
'ii'xb3 'lVd5 14 'lVxd5 exd5 15 tDf3 'lVxe5! 15 b4 'lVd5 16 'lVxd5 exd5 1 7
dxc3 16 bxc3 .ie7 17 :dl (Angan bxc5 dxc3 18 tDb3 d4
tysson-Pokojowczyk, Copenhagen
1980).
b) 1 l dxc3 12 tDxe6 fxe6 13
•.•
as well, e.g. 15 .. . i.xd4 16 ttJg5! 0-0 1 7 i.e3 'ikb6 18 �a4 �fb8 19 ttJa5
1 7 axb5 ttJxg5 18 i.xg5 i.xf2 + 19 �c8 equalising, Sax-Yusupov, Sofia
�xf2 'ikxg5 20 bxa6 with a slight 1984) yield White any advantage
edge for White in the game Tisch after 15 ... 0-0 16 i.e3 c5 1 7 �a4
bierek-Chekhov, Potsdam 1985) 'ikb8 18 'ika1 ttJbd4! (Hiibner-Yusu
15... tLlxg5 (15 . ..0-0 16 'ikh5 is obvi pov, Tilburg 1987).
ously better for White) 16 i.xg5 b3) 14 ttJxd4! (this interesting
'ikd7 17 �e1 ! (a move that was rec idea lies at the centre of White's
ommended by Am.Rodriguez be plan : he lures Black's knight to
cause 1 7 axb5 'ikxb5 18 ttJc3 'ikd7 the centre where its position will
19 'ika4 allowed Black to equalise be less solid and less harmoni
by 19 . . .'ikxa4 20 ttJxa4 h6! 21 tLlxb6 ous) 14 . . . ttJxd4 (after 14 ...'ikxd4?!
cxb6 in Am. Rodriguez-Korneev, 15 axb5 'ikxe5 16 bxa6 0-0 17 'ika4 !
Barbera del Valles 1994) 1 7 . . .0-0 Black cannot easily regain the a6-
18 �a3 ! , transferring the rook to pawn, e.g. 17 . .. �fb8 18 a7 �b7 19
the kingside and obtaining good ttJf3 'ikd5 20 i.e3 i.c5 2 1 �ad1
attacking chances (Am. Rodriguez). 'ikb3 22 'ikxb3 �xb3 23 i.xc5 tLlxc5
b) l3 i.e7 and now:
... 24 ttJd4, as in the game Ehlvest
Marin, Tallinn 1989 or even 18
ttJf3 'ikb5 19 a7 �b7 20 'ikxb5 �xb5
2 1 .te3 i.f6 22 �a2, Hjartarson
Smejkal, Germany 1990) 15 ttJe4
( 1 5 axb5 ttJxb5 16 'ikc2 0-0 1 7 ttJf3
ttJd4! 18 ttJxd4 'ikxd4 19 'ikxc7 .tb4!
led to equality in Kindermann
Mikhalchishin, Dortmund 1993)
15 ...0-0 (in the stem game Karpov
Korchnoi, World Championship
match, Merano 1981 illustrative
-
the period of the chess informa White in the game Hort-Grey (USA
tion explosion means that it has 1974) : 10 c3 lDxb3 1 1 axb3 lDc5 12
not been developed as deeply as lDd4 'lVc8 13 b4 lDd7 14 f4, while
other lines, so there are still many 10 lDd4!? c5 1 1 lDxe6 fxe6 12 c3
relatively unexplored avenues. (Euwe) is also better for White.
Who can predict whether one day c) 9 lDe5 leads to a line exam
•••
this system will not rise from the ined in Section 2 (after 10 l:td1
ashes like a Phoenix? .ie7), which is not considered to
38 In an Antique Shop
(N evostruev-Petelin, Vladivostok
1990).
c) 10 'fIe7 1 1 :dl :d8 12
•••
lDxe5 16 :ad l 'fIe7 1 7 lDxe4 (Tal must avoid the exchange of dark
Korchnoi, Brussels 1987). squared bishops ! ) 13 .ig5 'fId7 14
b) 11 .ixe3 12 'fIxe3 lDxd2
••• h3 :fe8 15 :fel iLb4 16 c3 dxc3
13 'fIxd2 lDe7 (D) and now: 1 7 bxc3 'ii'xd2 18 iLxd2 .ia3 19
bl) The attempt to seize dark iLcl iLfB with a good endgame for
squares on the queenside at once Black (Schmid-Korchnoi, Lucerne
does not succeed: 14 'fIc3 a5 15 a4 1982) . This explains why 1 1 :dl,
b4 16 'fIc5 'fId7 followed by . . . c7-c6 taking the d4 square under con
and . . . 'fId7-a7 with an equal posi trol, is more accurate.
tion, as in Lobron-Yusupov, Sara 11 ••• lDe7
jevo 1984. Or:
b2) Against 14 'fIe3!?, which a) 1l lDa5 12 lDbd2 .ixe3 13
•••
10 l:tdl
For 10 c3 see Chapter 7.
10 c4?! is dubious: 10 ... bxc4 1 1
.ia4 .id7 1 2 e6 fxe6 1 3 .i.xc6 .ixc6
14 lZ)e5 ..tb7 15 'lVh5 + g6 16 lZ)xg6
Preparing both lZ)f3-d4 and lZ)f6 1 7 'lVh4 l:tg8 18 lZ)e5 d4 and
.ib3-c2 , e.g. 12 c6 13 lZ)d4 .i.b6
••• Black held the advantage (Keres
14 .ic2 'lVc7 15 f3 lZ)c5 16 f4 lZ)e4 Bronstein, Moscow 1946) or 1 2
17 lZ)d2 lZ)xd2 18 l:txd2 c5 19 lZ)f3 lZ)c3 lZ)c5 13 e 6 fxe6 1 4 .i.xc6 .i.xc6
and White was slightly better 15 lZ)e5 'lVd6 16 'lVh5 + g6 17 lZ)xg6
(A Sokolov-Korneev, Bad Woris hxg6 18 'lVxh8 + ..t>d7 with an in
hofen 1992). itiative for Black (Abroshin-Rad
Generally, the lines examined chenko, corr 1954).
in this section yield White a mini Black's most common reply to
mal advantage. However, the posi 10 l:tdl is 10 ... 0-0, which we shall
tions appearing are little-studied, deal with in the following section.
In an Antique Shop 41
bxa5 lbxe5 19 'ikf5 lbg6 20 �ac1 14 lbc3 .txf3 15 gxf3 'ikc8 16 lbd5
.ta3 2 1 �b1, and White retained a with a clear advantage for White,
certain amount of pressure (Hiib Keres-Alatortsev, USSR champi
ner-Korchnoi, Solingen 1973). onship, Moscow 1947) 13 lbc3 c6
d2) 11 lbxb3! (this is appar
... 14 .te3 0-0 (14 . . . 'ikc8 15 .tg5 !
ently more accurate) 12 axb3 (12 .txg5 16 lbxg5 0-0 1 7 cxd5 lbxd5
cxb3 ! 0-0 13 lbc3 transposes to the 18 'ike4 is also better for White,
l 1 lbc3 line ; the text move is less according to Shamkovich) is fa
dangerous) 12 . . . 'ikc8 ( 1 2 . . . 'ikb8 13 vourable for White : 15 �ac1 ( 1 5
lbc3 lbb4 14 .tg5 c5 15 .txe7 lbe4 i s weaker due t o 15 . . . .tg4! 1 6
<3;xe7 16 lbg5, A. Sokolov-Condie, lbc5 'ikc8 1 7 �ac1 f6 18 e6 �fe8,
Copenhagen 1982, or 12 . . . 0-0 13 c4 Wedberg-Tukmakov, New York
lbb4 14 lbc3 c5?! - 14 . . . c6, leading 1988) 15 ... 'ikb8?! (15 . . . h6!?) 16 .tg5!
to the 11 c4 variation, is also bet with a distinct advantage (Keres
ter for White - 15 cxd5 lbxd5 16 Alexander, match USSR-England
'ike1 ! b4 1 7 lbxd5 .txd5 18 �d3 , 1947).
Kurajica-Cortlever, Wijk aan Zee The intention behind 11 . . . d4 is
1969, promise White the better to push this pawn as far as possi
prospects) 13 lbc3 lbb4 14 .tg5 ble to disturb the co-ordination of
i.xg5 ! (but not 14 . . . h6? ! 15 i.xe7 White's pieces. However, this con
<3;xe7 16 lbb1 c5 17 c3 lbc6 18 'ike3 cept does not succeed if White plays
with clearly better chances for accurately.
White in Matanovic-Rabar, Yugo 12 cxb5
slav championship 195 1 ; after 12 lbbd2? is poor, e.g. 12 . . . .tf5
14 . . . c5 15 i.xe7 <3;xe7, instead of 13 lbfl b4 14 lbg3 i.g6 and Black
44 In an Antique Shop
1 7 bxa6 i.xb3
The most dangerous reply se (17 'iVe3 ttJa5 18 .tb3 .txg5 19
curing White the advantage of a ttJxg5 .tg8 is also unclear, accord
pair of bishops. The other possi ing to Szmetan) 17 . . . l:txf6 18 ttJg5
bilities are harmless: ( 1 8 l:td2? is met by 18 . . . l:txf3 ! 19
a) 16 'iVxe6 + ?! 'iVxe6 17 .txd5 gxf3 'ilt'f7 20 l:te1 .th3 with a dan
'ilt'xd5 18 l:txd5 .txc3 19 l:tb1 ttJb4 gerous attack, Young-G. Garcia,
20 l:tc5 ttJxa2 2 1 'it>f1 l:tfb8 and New York 1989) 18 . . . .tg8 (18 . . . ttJa5
Black's position was slightly bet is also possible, e.g. 19 .txa6 .tg4
ter in Kr. Georgiev-Ekstrom, Ber 20 f3 l:tfxa6 2 1 fxg4 h6 22 ttJf3
lin 1988. ttJb3, Sigurjonsson-F.Olafsson, Ge
b) 16 .tg5 neva 1977, or 19 'iVd3 .tg8 20 ttJe4
.tg6 with equal chances according
17 .txg5
.txg5
h6
This move looks formidable, 17 l:tae8 18 'ilt'd2 ttJe5 19 .txd5
..•
but Black can obtain good counter .txd5 20 'iVxd5 + 'ilt'xd5 21 l:txd5
play by a typical regrouping ma l:tf5 22 l:td8 yielded White an edge
noeuvre : 16 . . . 'it>h8 ! (16 . . . ttJa5? 1 7 in the game Geller-Larsen (Co
'ilt'xe6 + 'iVxe6 18 .txd5 'iVxd5?! 1 9 penhagen 1966) .
l:txd5 .txc3 2 0 l:tc1, Fischer-Ree, 18 .te3 ttJe5
N etanya 1968 illustrative game
- Centralisation! 18 'ilt'd6 leads
...
Section 4
Main line with 1 2 .i.c5
...
Besides this move, Black has the White threatens 17 f3 and pre
following possibilities: pares �el-d3 . Another possibility
a) 15 'iVa7!? 16 'iVxa7 &iJxa7
••• is 16 �bd2. Now both 16 liJx:d2
•••
(16 . . . lha7 is risky due to 17 �xd5, 17 l:txd2 �xb3 18 axb3 lIc8 19 l:tcl
e.g. 17 ... �xd5 18 lhd5 �b4 19 l:td4 c5 20 lhc5 lhc5 21 'iVxc5 'iVxb3 22
�c2 20 lhe4 �xal 2 1 lDa3 l:tb7 22 �d4 (Keres-Euwe, World champi
l:tel l:txb2 23 l:txal l:td8 24 h3) 1 7 onship, HaguelMoscow 1948) and
�bd2 ( 1 7 �xd5? l:tad8) 17 . . . �c5 16 'iVb6 17 'iVxb6 cxb6 18 �d4
•••
�xe4 �xb3 20 axb3 dxe4 2 1 �d2 ltd4, and Black seizes the initia
e3! 22 fxe3 ltb7 23 �e4 ltxb3 24 tive (Ude-Kuuskmaa, corr 1978) .
�xc5 ltxe3 with balanced chances If 18 �d2 then 18 . . . c5.
(Matanovic-Korchnoi,Yugoslavia 18 lbf6
USSR 1966). 19 f3 �d6
d} 17 �d4 �xd2 18 'ii'x d2 (18 20 �d2 lth6
ltxd2 c5 19 �f3 �xb3 20 'ii'xb3
ltab8 2 1 'ii'a3 ltb5, with equality
Ivanovic-Beckemeyer, Berlin 1988)
18 . . . 'ii'b 6 19 i.c2 c5 (19 . . . �4!? 20
'ii'e 2 c5 was suggested by Geller)
20 �f5 i.xf5 2 1 .ixf5 ltad8, again
with equal chances, Kavalek-Kar
pov, Montreal 1979 illustrative
-
game 1 6.
16••• �b3
16 'ii'b6 1 7 'ii'xb6 cxb6 is pos
•••
Black should consider the break c) 10 i.g5 'lVd7 11 i.c2 (also not
through in the centre (. . . d5-d4 or dangerous for Black is l 1 lDa3 b4
. . . f7-f6) and the transfer . . . i.g4- 12 lDc2 bxc3 13 bxc3 lDa5 14 lDcd4
h5-g6 . The strategically complex lDaxb3 15 axb3 h6 16 i.h4 g5 1 7
positions which usually arise are i.g3 i.g7, a s i n Schmittdiel-Flear,
quite suited to a positional style of Luxembourg 1988, or l 1 lDbd2 h6
player. However, the Berlin vari 12 i.h4 lDd3 13 'ii'e2 lDxb2 14 a4,
ation has a certain defect: it is Mortensen-Pokojowczyk, Malta
somewhat passive and gives White 1980, and now 14 . . .:b8, gives Black
greater board room. an excellent game) 1 1 . . . i.g4 (or
If White plays 9 c3 , Black can 11 . . . h6 12 i..h4 g5 13 i.g3 i.. g4! 14
start with 9 . . . i.e7 and transpose h3 i.h5 15 lDbd2 i.g7 16 'lVbl 0-0
to the Berlin variation after 10 with an unclear position, Byrne
lDbd2 (10 . . . lDc5 11 i.c2 i.g4) to Wedberg, New York 1987) 12 :el
eliminate some side lines. How lDe6 13 i.h4 i..e 7 14 i.xe7 lDxe7
ever, he gains nothing this way as 14 lDbd2 :d8 with equal chances
White has many possibilities be (Aronin-Smyslov, USSR champi
sides 10 lDbd2 (see Chapter 7), so onship, Leningrad 1947).
9 . . . lDc5 is the best way of reaching d) 10 lDd4. A typical pawn sac
the desired position. rifice. In this position, however,
Black manages to maintain good
Section 1 counter-chances after 10 lDxe 5 •••
d2) 13 "e2 lDe6 14 1Iel (Szna (see Section 3). The lines 12 Jl.h5
•••
is: what will Black manage to get .ib4 19 :f1 'ii'e4 20 "c1 ! followed
58 With Germanic Consistency
'i'e8 19 �ad1 id8 20 'itg2 'ith8 2 1 19 dxc5 i.xc5 20 i.g5, again with
h4 !, and White obtained a danger a slight edge (Chandler-Wedberg,
ous attack (de Firmian-Agzamov, Haninge 1988) .
Stara Paz ova 1983). Black should b4) 13 ttJe4
...
due to 16 . . . tl)cxd4 17 tl)xd4 0-0 and tion, e.g. 16 'lVd3 (16 i.xh7 + 'at>xh7
then ... c7-c5) 16 lOOd8 17 .te3 (D)
••• 1 7 tl)g5 + .txg5 18. 'lVxh5 + .th6
1 7 . . . a5 ! . An important improve- 19 .txh6 gxh6 20 'lVf5 + 'at>h8 2 1
ment suggested by Haba. (17 . . . 0-0 'lVf6 + 'at>h7 2 2 'lVf5 + with an equal
yielded Black a good position in game, Ilincic-Lalic, Yugoslav cham
the game Tseshkovsky-Agzamov, pionship 1989) 16 . . . .txf3 1 7 'lVxf3
With Germanic Consistency 65
g6 18 ii.c2 ffi 19 exffi ii.xffi 20 'it'g4 ii.xf5 21 ii.xf5 cxd4 22 ii.d2 'iVb6!?
ttJe5 2 1 'it'g3 ttJc4 22 ii.f5 .l:i.fe8 ! (de Firmian-Agzamov, Vrsac 1983)
with equality (Przewoznik-Kotliar, and 16 . . . 0-0 17 ii.f5 ( 1 7 ttJgf5!? was
Netanya 1987). suggested by Korchnoi) 1 7 . . . ttJe6
Returning to 13 ttJf1 . 18 ii.g4 ttJcxd4 19 cxd4 c5 20 ttJf5
13
... .l:i.d8 'iVa7 (Hiibner-Korchnoi, Tilburg
13 ii.h5 leads to a transposi
... 1986), with a good position in both
tion of moves after 14 ttJ e3 .l:i.d8 . cases.
White can also proceed to vari 14 ••• ii.h5 (D)
ations examined in Section 2 : 14 Not 14 ii.xf3? 15 'iVxf3 ttJxe5
•..
bishop and thus weaken the dark 22 exf7 + .ixf7 23 tZ)xe4 tZ)d5 24 f3
squares in Black's camp. Black - 24 a3 tZ)xc3 25 tZ)xc3 llxc3 26 .ie3
usually replies 15 . . . 0-0. However, lIe8 27 lIed 1 .ie6 with chances for
15 tZ)e6 deserves attention, too,
••• both sides, Hiibner-Zak, Lugano
for example 16 a4 (16 b4!?; 16 h3!?) 1989 - 24 . . . .ig6 25 �f2 lIe8 recap
16 . . . b4 ! 17 a5 tZ)a7 18 'ifd3 tZ)b5 19 turing the pawn and equalising,
tZ)3d4 .ig6 with sharp play (Woda as in A. Sokolov-Korchnoi, Til
Hrai!ek, Poznan 1987). burg 1987 - illustrative game 21 )
Mter 15 0-0 the following vari
••• 17 tZ)a4 ( 1 7 . . . tZ)e6? ! yields White
•.•
B �..
.. � ,W� � The drawback of the text move
is that the c7 pawn loses the pos
. � .. � ...
... •
. - •. . sibility to advance to c5. Besides,
• • a.1. . • the e4 knight is now deprived of
its only retreat square (c5), and
. ... �
fif� . -· '�
... �� ,,� .
• therefore badly needs active sup
• .aR • port. Black usually renders this
.i."
� u Bl2).
,0;i% w�
by means of . . . f7-f5 or the break
. . . f7-f6. His additional possibility
A R • R A R
o g • U o �� is the sacrifice of two pieces for a
��lD '�'��'iV.
� ", . ': �
� rook and a pawn on f2. White tries
to oust Black's pieces by means of
When reading the last chapter, lDb1-d2, .ib3-c2 , possibly lDd2-b3 ,
you probably felt that something lDf3-d4 and f2-f3 . Both sides have
was wrong with Black's concept. been playing their trumps for
Does seizing territory (5 . . . lDxe4, many decades already, and their
6 . . . b5, 7 . . . d5), especially at the packs seem to be endless . . .
cost of weakening Black's queen
side, make any sense if he imme Section 1
diately gives up his gains ( . . . lDe4 Side lines
-c5-e6 etc.) and finds himself in a
constricted position? Black has Usually White automatically plays
taken positional risks to achieve 10 lDbd2. However, in this section
easy development; so why not go we examine some alternatives.
the whole hog and play actively? 10 'ii'd3
Active development with 9 . . . .ic5 Other moves are rarely seen in
looks more suitable for the Open practice:
Spanish. Indeed, it has always been a) 10 a4 b4 ( 1 0 . . . 0-0 is less ex
one of the most topical lines of act: n lDbd2 b4 12 .i.c2 ! bxc3 13
this opening. At least, it is hardly lDxe4 dxe4 1 4 .i.xe4 'ii'xd 1 1 5
less popular than 'the main vari l:txd1 l:tfd8 16 l:te1 cxb2 1 7 .ixb2
ation' which starts with 9 . . . .ie7 l:tab8 18 .i.a3 with a minimal edge,
70 The Discussion of Decades
'ii'x e3 ll)xd2 14 'ii'xd2 also offers 15 .td4 .ixd4 16 cxd4 'ii'd6 17 :acl
White good prospects, for example with slightly better chances (Tal
14 J�ad8 15 :fel ll)a5 16 .ic2
•• Langeweg, Wijk aan Zee 1968).
ll)c4 17 'ii'c l c5 18 b3 ll)b6 19 ll)g5 14 'ii'xe3 ll)xd2
g6 20 f4 with a clear edge (Sigur 15 'ii'xd2
jonsson-Honfi, Cienfuegos 1976) or Or 15 ll)xd2 :ad8 16 'ii'c 5 .if7
14 ll)a5 15 .ic2 ll)c4 ( 1 5 . . . c5? 16
••• 17 :adl 'ii'd6 18 ll)e4 'ii'xc5 19 l1)xc5
ll)g5 h6 1 7 ll)h7 :fd8 18 f4 is good a5 with an equal position (Zago
for White, S. Garcia-Antoshin, La rovsky-Estrin, corr 1968) .
Habana 1968) 16 'ii'c l (R.Byrne 15 ••• :ad8
Martinowski, USA 1968).
d) 1 l 'iVd7!? 12 ll)bd2 .ixe3
•••
The text move (a typical ma 12 'ii'e 2 0-0 13 exffi 'ii'xffi 14 ll)n
noeuvre, preparing . . . .ie6-gS) was .ixf2 + 15 'ii'xf2 ll)e5 16 .ie3 ttJxf3 +
played in the 4th match game be 17 'ii'xf3 'ii'xf3 18 gxf3 :Xf3 19 .ic5
tween Kamsky and Anand (Las (Ljubojevic-Korchnoi, Reykjavik
Palmas 1995). Mer 17 :e3 .ig8 1987) both give White the better
18 :dl d4! 19 :eel ( 1 9 cxd4? chances.
ll)xd4! 20 ll)xd4 :xd4) 19 . . . dxc3 20 Surprisingly, nobody yet has
'ii'xc3 'ii'xc3 2 1 bxc3 ll)a5 Black ob tried 10 'ii'd 7!? in this position.
•••
1:.a4! with a clear plus for White, bxc5 with a slight advantage (Kie
as in Boleslavsky-Szabo, Gronin ninger-Bogolyubow, Krakow 1941).
gen 1946) 14 lDbd4 lDxd4 15 lDxd4 15 'i'xd4!
c5 16 lDe2 d4 (Suetin-Nei, USSR Decades of investigation and
championship, Tbilisi 1966/6 7) discussions have finally proved
or 14 axb5 axb5 15 1:.xa8 1:.xa8 16 that this move is stronger than
i.e3 (Suetin-Faibisovich, USSR the more natural 15 cxd4. This
1975), and now Korchnoi recom pawn capture leads to an interest
mends 16 . . . b4 with equal chances. ing forced variation : 15 f4! (nec
•••
Suetin considers that Black can tZ)e6 22 'i'xd5 'i'b6 + 23 'it>hl :ad8
also reply with 16 'i'e7 , 16 a5
••• ••• is insufficient in view of 24 a5 !
or 16 c4. A wide choice but . . . no
••• 'i'c7 25 'i'c4! (Nokso Koivisto-Kau
practical tests! nonen, COIT 1986). 19 . . . c4 was rec
17 f3 tZ)g5 ommended by Bronstein back in
Now 17 tZ)g3 18 hxg3 fxg3 19
••• the fifties. However. . .
'i'd3 is clearly in White's favour. 20 b3!
18 a4! 20 'i'd4 .if5 ! (Bronstein) is fa
Undermining Black's queenside vourable for Black, but the strong
pawn structure. 18 b4 is harm text move clarifies the situation.
less: 18 . . . 'i'b6 19 bxc5 'i'xc5 + 20 After 20 d4 21 bxc4 .ixc4 22
•••
.a. - �
�-* ••• �% ,,, " " �
h3 :e8 16 i.f4 ll)e6 (Karpov-Kor
chnoi, Baguio City 1978) .
•
�;:; k
l
� '� •
�j:.
/" ,, & • E . z" " ,� However, just a few days after
. _4&\. _ _ the latter game Karpov refuted the
whole line: 13 h3! i.h5 (13 . . . i.xf3
.,_
_ � , � '/tt.
W"
� x ,,� 14 gxf3 �xf2 + 15 :xf2 ll)xf2 16
• .4&\. • �xf2 'ii' h 4 + 17 �g2 ll)xe5 18 ll)d4
• ��
�;;
;%{@ -ttJ. � w%;%
is favourable for White, according
to Filip) 14 g4 i.g6 15 i.xe4 dxe4
A fi ?>. � ' ''� fi A � �
O U£� : �� o �,, � 16 ll)xc5 exf3 17 i.f4! 'ii'x dl 18
"
� ��.
M _:�
�
:axdl ll)d8 19 :d7 ll)e6 20 ll)xe6
fxe6 2 1 i.e3 :ac8 22 :fdl (or 2 2
keep his centralised knight by tac i.c5 :fe8 23 :el h5, a s i n Timo
tical means such as the break schenko-Sideif-Zade, Frunze 1979,
. . . f7-f6 etc. Still, White manages and now 24 gxh5 ! i s slightly bet
to carry out Capablanca's idea, ter for White) 22 . . . i.e4 23 i.c5
i.e. to force the exchange of pieces :fe8 24:7d4 i.d5 25 b3, and
on d4 with Black's c-pawn delayed White's chances in this endgame
on its initial square. Despite the are clearly preferable (Karpov
fact that Black also obtains some Korchnoi, Baguio City 1978 il -
White should play first 16 axb5 i.bl a4 1 7 tZ)d2 a3 White has the
axb5 1 7 1:!xa8 l:txa8 and only now strong move 18 'ii'c l ! (Karpov-Sa
18 f4. However, the positions after von, Moscow 1971) when even the
18 . . . tZ)c6 19 tZ)xb5 or 18 . . . c5 19 best line 18 . . . c5 19 bxa3 cxd4 20
fxe5 cxd4 20 cxd4 are hardly in axb4 dxe3 21 tZ)xe4 followed by 22
White's favour. 'ii'xe3 yields White an extra pawn
c) 15 �c6 'ii'xc6 16 i.e3 MeS. (Karpov) .
Now both 1 7 f3? tZ)xc3 ! 18 'ii'd 2 Mter 15 . . . a4 White finds him
( 18 bxc3 'ii'xc3) 18 . . .i.xc2 19 'ii'xc2 self at the cross-roads.
l:txe5 20 l:tael tZ)e2 + 21 l:txe2 'ii'xc2
22 l:txc2 l:txe3 (Speelman-Timman,
London 1989) and 1 7 f4? tZ)xc3
18 bxc3 'ii'xc3 19 i.d4 'ii'xc2 (Pop
ovic-Ernst, Tilburg 1992) are in
Black's favour. White should play
17 i.d4 tZ)c5 with equal chances.
After the move 14 cxd4, in view
of White's unmistakable threat 15
f3 , Black should urgently create
counterplay on the queenside.
14
••• a5l
14 f5 15 f3 tZ)g5 is poor due to
•••
est twist, whereby White doesn't a couple of years ago. Still, after
allow Black's knight to b4) 18 . . . b4 17 lbxe4 axb2 18 l:tbl ii.xe4 19
( 18 . . . fxe5 19 lbxe5 lbxe5 20 ii.xe4 l:txb2 �d7 20 i.d3 (20 ii.xe4 dxe4
ii.xe4 21 dxe5 �d7 22 f3 ii.f5 23 2 1 l:txb5 lbxd4 2 2 l:tc5 l:tfd8 is
l:tc1 yielded White a secure edge in equal, A. lvanov-Yusupov, Frunze
the game Aseev-Korneev, Krum 1979) 20 ii.xd3 (20 . . .b4? 21 ii.b5 ! )
••.
ltxb8 + lbxb8 26 'ii'xa3 yields White pawn to free himself from the pres
a slightly better endgame as well, sure: 25 . . . ttJe7 26 ltxb5 ltab6 2 7
Hiibner-Korchnoi, Chicago 1982) ltxb6 "xb6. Still, White's chances
23 . . . ltb6 24 'ii'b 1 h6 25 h3 lta7 look somewhat preferable.
(25 . . . ltab8 26 ltc5 ttJd8 2 7 ltcc2
with a slight pull, Karpov-Yusu Section 5
pov, USSR championship, Mos 11 ttJxf2
cow 1983 illustrative game 28)
...
Losa, 1948) yield Black a strong ii.d3 19 'it>h 1 liJe5 20 'iVg3 c6 with
attack. A move deserving atten a clear plus (Medina-Wade, Palma
tion is 16 'it>g3!? (introduced by de Mallorca 1966) or 17 ii.xf5 'iVxf5
Hort) . At least, after 16 liJxf3 1 7
••. 18 b3 d4 19 ii.a3 ( 1 9 cxd4?! liJxd4 !
gxf3 g5 18 liJd4 ii.d7 19 b 4 'iVh6 20 20 liJxd4 'iVc5 is better for Black,
'iVg1 'iVh4 + 21 'it>g2 White success Ljubojevic-Yusupov, Tilburg 1987
fully defended and shortly won - illustrative game 30) 19 . . . dxc3 !
(Hort-Niermann, Neuenkirchen 20 i.xf8 l:f.xf8 2 1 ttJc4! 'iVc5 + 22 'iVf2
1987) . Black should rather prefer 'iVxf2 + 23 'it>xf2 bxc4, and Black
16 l:tae8!? or even 15 ... l:tae8!?
..• has the better endgame (analysis
with unclear consequences. by Yusupov) .
d) 15 'it>gl l:tae8 (15 . . . ii.g4 is fa d4) 16 liJf1 liJe5 . Now 1 7 ii.e3
vourable for White: 16 liJf1 ! ii.xf3 liJxf3 + 18 'iVxf3 'iVxf3 19 gxf3 l:f.xf3
17 'iVxf3 'iVxf3 18 gxf3 lhf3 19 ii.e3, leads to one of the main lines aris
Korchnoi ; but 15 . . . g5 !? deserves ing after 15 liJf1 - the move we
attention, e.g. 16 'iVe1 - 16 liJb3 g4 proceed to analyse.
1 7 'iVd3 l:f.f7 18. ii.g5 'iVg7 19 liJfd4 15 ..• liJe5 (D)
liJxd4 20 liJxd4 'iVxg5 2 1 liJxe6 'iVf6 Black can first activate his rook
yields Black better chances, Wal- and then the knight ( 1 5 . . . l:f.ae8 16
ther-Dilworth, corr 19 79 - 16 . . . g4 ! ii.e3 liJe5 ) . The break 15 d4 is a
.••
_i_i. _
22 'iVxf3 'iVxel 23 'iVh5 h6 24 'iVg6
(Richardson-Estrin, corr 1978). In
- - - - each example White is clearly bet
_ rJj _ttJ _
ter.
16 lbxf3 is not quite suffi
A ?:Q,,
W� £ !}, . � An •••
advantage (Dekker-Van der Zijpp, .ixg6 :e5 25 :d4 .ig4 26 h4. How
Beverwijk 1984). ever, the pawn sacrifice was in no
b3) 20 .id4 .ih3 21 ll)g3 g6 way necessary. 23 . . . :e5 24 :d4 g5
( 2 1 . . J�e6!?) 22 a4 <:Ji;f7 23 axb5 would have given Black quite suf
axb5 24 :dl h5 25 .id3 h4 26 ficient counter-chances .
.ixb5! with equality (Savon-Ser Mter the strongest move 1 7
per, Moscow 1990). .ic5 Black can move the rook or
b4) 20 i.f2 .ih3 (also 20 ... .if5 first exchange knights.
proves sufficient for equality : 2 1 17••• ll)xf3
.i d l :d3 2 2 .ic2 :f3 2 3 .ib3 c6 17 ...:f7 enables White to pro
24 :el :xel 25 .ixel .id3 26 i.f2 tect the f3 knight: 18 ll)ld2 (18
.ic4, as in Aseev-Ivanchuk, Frun 'ii'd4? ! is dubious, e.g. 18 ... .ig4 -
ze 1988) 2 1 ll)g3 (21 ll)d2 :f6 22 18 . . . .if5 ! ?, Liberzon - 19 ll)ld2
.id3 h5! 23 :el :xel + 24 i.xel 'lVh6 20 .idl 'lVxh2 with a clear
c5 led to a good ending for Black advantage, K.Andersson-Darmo
in the game M. Kaminski-Chek gray, corr 1977, and if 18 ll)g3
hov, Lubniewice 1993) 2 1. g6 22
•• then also 18 . . . .ig4 19 'lVxd5 ll)xf3
:dl (or 22 :el :xel + 23 .ixel h5 20 gxf3 .ixf3 is advantageous for
24 .i d l :f7 2 5 .if2 h4 26 ll)f1 c6 Black, as in Wittman-Espaola, COIT
with an equal position, Aseev-Ag 1975) 18 . . . .ig4 (18 . . . .if5 19 <:Ji;gl
zamov, SevastopoI 1986). ll)d3?! 20 .id4 'lVd6 2 1 'lVbl 'lVg6
22 ll)h4 led Black to defeat in
Liberzon-Rosino, Venice 1974; he
should have preferred 19 . . . ll)xf3 +
20 �f3 .ie4, although after 2 1
i.d3! - Liberzon - 2 1 . . . .ixf3 2 2
gxf3 'lVxf3 2 3 'lVxf3 :xf3 2 4 :d l a
typical endgame arises, in which
White' s bishop pair, in the ab
sence of Black's bishop, guaran
tees him a small but clear edge.
The same endgame appeared in
the game Boogaard-Thorn Lee
son, corr 1979, after 18 . . . 'lVh6 19
Viktor Korchnoi in the Encyclo <:Ji;gl .ig4 20 'lVf1 i.xf3 21 ll)xf3
paedia of Chess Openings as ll)xf3 + 22 gxf3 'lVg5 + 23 <:Ji;hl
sesses this position as slightly 'lVd2 24 'lVd3 "xd3 25 i.xd3 :xf3
better for White . Indeed, in the 26 �dl) 19 <:Ji;gl ll)xf3 + 20 ll)xf3
game Matanovic-Wade (Palma de .ixf3 2 1 gxf3 'lVg5 + 22 <:Ji;hl "h5
Mallorca 1966) his edge became 23 'lVf1 :xf3 24 'lVg2 :f7 . Black
clear after 22 . . . c6 23 :d2 h5?! 24 has avoided the exchange of queens
The Discussion of Decades 93
but still White's chances are pref 'ifc4 25 'iVxc4 bxc4 26 �xh5 with a
erable (Poulsen-Tronhjem, corr clear edge (IlinCic-Todorovic, Yu
1985). goslav championship 1990) and
1 7 ... tbxf3 eliminates the idea of 22 . . . d4 23 i.xd4 c5 doesn 't work
tbf1 -d2. However, White's king owing to is 24 i.f2.
obtains the g2 square. b) 19 :�'h4 is also insufficient:
••
16 hxg3 l:td8 17 ii.e3 i.c5 - Korch leads to the 10 ii.c2 line; 11 ttJd4
noi - with good counterplay in both 'ii'd 7 12 f3 is favourable for Black
96 From Alekhine to Dolmatov
. a a • II
o �
r,::
_ �
0
I'"
�W0
,,� "",
�
,,�
1',
v
n B B:a • _if _•
:xc7 fxe5 24 .ib6 :f7! Black man
aged to hold his ground (Mitchell
•a -*-. •
Malmgren, corr 1950). a • • a �
Now we examine 1 1 . . .'ii'd 7.
12 .ic2
a a • a
12 lDd4? is a poor sacrifice:
. " �
d fQ;; . .
_
A R � � % '� A n
12 . . . lDxd2 13 'iVxd2 lDxe5 14 f4 � ��� � . � � �
lDc4 15 .ixc4 dxc4 16 f5 .id5 17 f6
.ixf6 18 :xf6 gxf6 19 .ig5 'ii'g4! ,
"'tW.
� - -.:� �
and Black won in Tal-Korchnoi, Until recently White's chances
Curac;ao 1962. in this complicated position were
12 lDxe4 leads to an equal posi considered preferable, for exam
tion : 12 . . . dxe4 13 "xd7 .ixd7 14 ple 15 .ig8 16 .if5 "e8 1 7 lDdf3
•••
"d6 20 "e1 'at>d7 21 .!Dfl lIah8 Mter 22 .!De5 "d6 23 .!Dg4 'at>g7 24
with a good position (A Kuzmin "d2 lIh8 25 lIae1 lIh4 26 h3 lIah8
Egin, Kishinev 1987). a complicated position arose (Sti
15 lIg8 sis-Gyimesi, Saanen 1993). Still,
16 i.xg6 lIxg7 White, with his centralised pieces,
17 lIxe6 bIgS has slightly better chances.
But the best option is probably
ation 15 . . . .id6!? deserved more at 14 l:tad1 lDa5 15 .ic2 .if5 16 lDd4
tention. This variation requires .ig6 17 .ixg6 fxg6 18 e6 'ii'd6 19
further tests, too. .ig5 c5 20 lDf3 lDc6 Black held his
d) 12 h3!? 0-0 ( 1 2 . . . lDxd2 13 ground in Kotronias-Stefansson
'ii'x d2 lDa5 yields White a slight (Reykjavik 1992 ) . However, the
edge after 14 .ig5 ! , e.g. 14 . . . c5 15 typical 14 .ig5 promises White bet
�Ue1 - 15 .ixe7!? 'ii'xe7 16 lDg5, ter prospects.
Kova�evic - 15 . . . lDc6 16 l:tad 1 h6 13 .ic2
1 7 .ixe7 'ii'x e7 - 1 7 . . . lDxe7 18 13 a4 b4 14 lDxe4 dxe4 15 'ii'xd7
lDh4 ! ? - 18 .ic2 0-0 19 'ii'd 3 g6 20 .ixd7 16 lDd2 lDxe5 17 lDxe4 lDd3
'ii'e 3 rj;;g7 21 a3 , as in Short-Ljubo 18 l:te2 .if5 19 lDg3 .ig6 yielded
jevic, Linares 1989) 13 l:tel. Now Black a good position in Timo
13 lDxd2 14 'ii'x d2 lDa5 15 .ig5
••• schenko-Marin (Bucharest 1993).
c5 16 .ic2 .ixg5 17 lDxg5 .if5 18 13 ••• lDxd2
e6 (or 18 g4 lDc4 19 'ii'c 1 �e4 20 Black can also play:
lDxe4 dxe4 2 1 �xe4 l:tfe8 22 'ii'c2 a) 13 .if5 14 lDxe4 ( 14 lDb3
...
'ii'd 2 .ixc2 20 'ii'xc2 lbe4, Khalif 37) . White should not let Black's
man-Hubner, Manila 1990, or 15 queen to an active position.
lbg5 �f5 16 �f4 �c5 1 7 lbb3 ! - 1 7 15 ..• l:tfe8
.ixf5 'ii'xf5 18 lbe6 .ixf2 + ! 1 9 � 15 lba5 is somewhat prema
•••
for an edge for White was 20 .ih4! .ig5 .ixc2 18 'iVxc2 'lVg6! 19 'lVxg6
(the game saw 20 lbd4 lbxd4 2 1 hxg6 20 .if4 .i.c5 2 1 lbd4 lbxd4 22
cxd4 lIc8! 2 2 f4 c 5 2 3 f5 cxd4! with cxd4 .ib6 23 lIe2 lIe6 24 lIc2 to
a slight edge) 20 . . . lId7 (20 . . . .ie7 the endgame proved equal. Dvor
21 .ixe7 followed by 22 lbd4 with etsky recommends 17 .if4. Then
a clear edge) 2 1 lbd4 lbxd4 22 17 .ixc2 18 'lVxc2 'lVg6 is risky in
•••
Section 2
1 0 ... 0-0 - side lines
In this position White main knight, and clears a square for his
tains a small advantage since the own.
dark squares in Black's camp are 11 ••• f5
weakened. The game Jano§evic The other possibilities for Black
Lukic (Yugoslavia, 1955) saw 16 are:
f4 f5 1 7 exf6 'YWxf6 18 'YWe3 .if5 a) 11 .if5 12 lDd4! lDxd4 13
•••
with an initiative for White (Iva dxc5 .ixc5 16 li)b3 .ia7 1 7 li)d4
novic-Cvetkovic, Yugoslav cham .ig4!? 18 f3 'lVb6 19 .ie3 l:tae8 20
pionship 1974). White can also play .if2 li)e4 !? 21 .ixe4 dxe4 22 fxg4
more simply: 12 li)b3!? li)xb3 13 l:txf2 23 'iti>xf2 'lVxd4 + 24 'iVxd4
axb3 'lVd7 14 'lVd3 g6 15 .ih6 .if5 .ixd4 + 25 'ltte 2 .ixb2 26 l:tadl
16 'iVd2 l:Hd8 17 l:Hel with a small with a clear plus for White (Gar
advantage (Am. Rodriguez-Karl, mendez-Gunderman, Los Angeles
Chiasso 1993). 1991). Black should probably play
Black strengthens his central 14 'lVd7 or at once 13 'lVd7.
••• •••
liJc5 20 'iVe3 �ae8 with an initia White an edge in the game Nunn
tive for Black, Gipslis-Suetin, Tal Wedberg, Novi Sad 1990) 14 i.d3
linn 1959) 17 . . . 'iVh4 18 liJxb5 liJx£2 �ab8 15 'iVe2 a4 16 liJbd4 liJxd4 1 7
19 �g5 ! liJxd3 20 �xh4 axb5 2 1 liJxd4 c6 1 8 f3 liJc5 with a solid po
�xd3 � d 7 with equality (Rago sition for Black (Akopian-Krasen
zin-Ravinsky, Moscow 1947) . kov, Vilnius 1988).
b) 1 2 liJd4 prematurely simpli 13 ... liJxd4
fies the game: 12 . . . liJxd4 13 cxd4 13 liJxe5 is hardly possible
.••
C hapter 1
1 . 1 : 6 'iVe2, 6 lIel etc. - OK 11
1 . 2 : 6 d 4 i.e7 ;1; 12
1.3: 6 d4 b5 7 i.b3 i.e7 (or 7 . . . exd4 ± ) ± 15
1 .4: 6 d4 b5 7 i.b3 d5 8 tDxe5 (8 c4 and 8 a4 - OK) 8 . lDxe5
. .
The rest of the book deals with the position arising after 6 d4 b5 7
i.b3 d5 8 dxe5 i.e6
120 Theoretical Conclusions
C hapter 2
2 . 1 : 9 a4 - OK 20
2 . 2 : 9 i.e3 tbc5 (9 . . . i.c5 ;1;; 9 . . . i.e7 10 c3 - Chapter 7) 10 tbc3 !
( 10 'iVe2 i.e7 1 1 nd1 - OK) ;I; 22
C hapter 3
3 . 1 : 9 tbbd2 i.e7 (9 . . . tbxd2 ;1; ?* * ! or 9 . . . ii.c5 ;1; ) 10 tbxe4
( 10 c3 - Chapter 7) - OK ?**! 25
3 . 2 : 9 tbbd2 tbc5 10 c3 ii.g4 11 h3 ( 1 1 ne1 - OK; 1 1 ii.c2
- Chapter 5) - OK 28
3 . 3 : 9 tbbd2 tbc5 10 c3 d4 11 ii.xe6 ( 1 1 tbg5 !? OK?*)
1 L . tbxe6 12 cxd4 tbcxd4 13 a4 (13 tbe4 - OK) 13 ... nb8!?
(13 ... ii.e7 ;I; ) OK ?** 29
C hapter 4
4. 1 : 9 'iVe2 tbc5 (9 . . . ii.c5 etc. ;1;) 10 nd1 tbxb3
(10 . . . i.e7 - Section 4.2) ;I; 37
4.2: 9 'iVe2 iLe7 ( 10 c3 - Chapter 7) 10 nd1 tbc5 1 1 i.e3
( 1 1 ii.xd5 - OK ; 11 tbc3 tbxb3 12 cxb3 0-0 13 ii.e3 'iVd7 - OK;
11 c4! ;1;) 1 L .tbxb3! ( 1 1 . . . 0-0 ;1;) - OK 40
4.3: 9 'iVe2 ii.e7 10 nd 1 0-0 11 c4 bxc4 12 ii.xc4 'iVd7 - OK 44
4.4: 9 'iVe2 i.e7 10 nd 1 0-0 11 c4 bxc4 12 ii.xc4 i.c5 - OK 47
Chapter 5
5 . 1 : 9 c3 tbc5 10 i.c2 (10 tbbd2 - OK?) ii.g4 and now: 51
A) 11 tbbd2 ii.e7 ( 1 1 . . . tbe6 ;1;; 1 L .'iVd7 ;1;) 12 ne1 d4 ;I;
B) 1 1 ne1 iLe7 12 h3 (12 tbbd2 - line A and 5.2) - OK
C) Other White 1 1th moves ( 1 1 'iVe2, 1 1 h3, etc.) - OK
5 . 2 : 9 c3 tbc5 10 ii.c2 ii.g4 1 1 tbbd2 i.e7 12 ne1 0-0 13 tbb3!
( 13 tbf1 i.h5 14 tbg3 i.g6 - OK) ;I; 58
5.3: 9 c3 tbc5 10 iLc2 ii.g4 1 1 tbbd2 ii.e7 12 ne1 'iVd7 13 tbf1!
(13 tbb3 tbe6 - OK) ;I; 63
C hapter 6
9 c3 ii.c5 and now:
6 . 1 : 10 'iVd3 and other White 11th moves - OK 69
6 . 2 : 10 tbbd2 0-0 11 'iVe2 tbxd2 ;I; 75
6.3: 10 tbbd2 0-0 11 iLc2 f5 12 tbb3 iLb6 13 tbfd4 tbxd4
14 tbxd4 ii.xd4 15 'iVxd4 (15 cxd4 - OK?* ) ;I; ?* 77
6.4: 10 tbbd2 0-0 1 1 ii.c2 ii.f5 12 tbb3 i.g6 (12 ... i.xf2!? * *;1; ?)
13 tbfd4 ii.xd4 14 cxd4 a5 15 ii.e3 a4 16 tbc1 (16 tbd2 ;1;) ;I; ?* 80
Theoretical Conclusions 121
C hapter 7
9 c3 .te7 and now:
7 . 1 : 10 .tc2 (10 'ii'e 2 lbc5 ! - OK; 10 l:te1 0-0 - OK) 10 . . . 0-0
(l0 . . . .tg4 - OK ? * * I ) 1 1 'ii'e 2 ( l 1 lbbd2 - Chapter B) ;!; ?* 94
7 . 2 : 10 .te3 0-0 l 1 lbbd2 ;!; 100
7.3: 10 .te3 lbc5 1 1 .tc2 lbd7 ( 1 1 . . ..tg4 ;!;J±) OK?;!; ?*! 103
7.4: 10 .te3 'ii'd 7 l 1 lbbd2 l:tdB ( 1 1 . . . lbxd2 ±; 11 . . . lbc5 ±;
1 1 ... .tf5!? ;!; ?**) 12 l:te1 0-0 13 .tc2 f5 !?
(13 ... lbxd2 - OK) - OK ? * * ! 106
C hapter S
9 c3 .te7 10 lbbd2 and now:
B . 1 : 10 . . . lbc5 (10 . . . 'ii'd 7!? OK? * * I ) 11 .tc2 d4 ( 1 1 . . . .tg4
- Chapter 5 ; 11 . . . 'ii'd 7 ;!; ? * * I ) 12 lbb3 =/;!; 111
B . 2 : 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 'ii'e2 ( 1 1 l:te1 - OK) ;!; ? * 1 13
B.3: 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 .tc2 ;!; 1 16
Play Like a Grandmaster!
This chapter contains 40 grand Black has obtained a develop
master games which illustrate ment advantage and an initiative
nearly all of the most important on the kingside. Now 1 7 g3 i.xg3 !
lines of the Open Spanish. It was 18 l:txe4 i.xe4 19 fxg3 i.xc2 or 18
far from easy to choose the cream fxg3 lDxg3 + 19 �gl i.e4 would
of the many thousands of Open have left him a good position. How
Spanish games played at the top ever, after the text move Black
level during more than a century. simply obtains a decisive attack.
However, I hope you will find this 17 'Yi'h4 18 'Yi'xf5
•••
Game 1
Planinc - Parma
8anja Luka 1976
that follow the text move is quite 'Yi'xh6 22 �xf2 i.d6! 23 l:te8
satisfactory for Black. l:txe8 24 'Yi'xe8 + �h7
10 i.xd6 1 1 'Yi'd5 + �h8 12
••• The game has been simplified.
lDf7 + l:txf7 13 'Yi'xf7 i.xh2 + 14 However, the position of White's
<;WI b5! king is so bad that he is unable to
This is the point of Black's sac find an adequate defence.
rifice. 25 'Yi'e3 'Yi'h4 + 26 'it?e2 b4! 2 7
15 i.b3 lDxb3 16 axb3 i.b7 'Yi'd3 + �g8 28 lD d l 'Yi'g4 + 2 9
1 7 lDc3 � d2 'Yi'xg2 + 30 �cl?
Play Like a Grandmaster! 123
Game 2
Lasker - Sch lechter
World Championship,
8th match game, Vienna 19 10 Black's minimal advantage af
ter the opening is his better pawn
Karl Schlechter and Siegbert Tar structure. White should play care
rasch are the players who made fully to neutralise it.
the most significant contribution 17 lZ)a4
to the foundation of the strategi This decentralising manoeuvre
cal concept of the Open Spanish. looks somewhat dubious . 17 .if4
Even the great Emanuel Lasker, was more solid.
after this match and especially af 17 'ii'f6 18 .ie3 .ia7 19 f3
•••
ter his game against Tarrasch in lZ)g5 20 lZ)e5 .ixe5 2 1 dxe5 lZ)e6
St Petersburg ( 19 14), had to ad 22 'ii'd3 �d8 23 .ie2 g6 24 b4 d4
mit that he was unable to oppose 25 .iel h5
Black's defensive strategy. Black's plan of playing . . . h5-h4-
1 e4 e5 2 lZ)f3 lZ)e6 3 .ib5 a6 4 h3 proves unrealisable . 25 . . . .i.d5 !
.i a4 lZ)f6 5 0-0 lZ)xe4 6 d4 b5 7 was more exact, with the idea 26
.ib3 d5 8 a4 lZ)xd4! .ib3 .ixb3 27 'ii'xb3 d3 (recom
This move averts any danger mended by Schlechter) .
White's previous move might cause 26 .ib3! .id5 27 .ixd5 �xd5
(see Chapter 1, Section 4). 28 h3 �e5
9 lZ)xd4 exd4 10 axb5 .ie5 1 1 This exchange is the only active
e3 0-0 1 2 exd4 .ib6 1 3 lZ)e3 possibility for Black. However, the
According to Schlechter, 13 'ii'd3 position becomes too simplified.
.i.e6 14 �xa6 �xa6 1 5 bxa6 c5 is 29 �xe5 'ii'xe5 30 'iW2 'ii'd5
quite comfortable for Black. If, 30 . . . g5 !? was better.
say, 16 .i.e3 then 16 . . . c4! 1 7 .ixc4 3 1 h4! 'ii'a2 + 32 'ii'e2 'ii'b l 33
.if5 ! . 'ii'b2 'ii'd3 34 'ii'e 2 'ii'b 3 35 .id2
124 Play Like a Grandmaster!
Game 4
Lj ubojevic - Hjartarson
Amsterdam 199 1 Now Black's central pawns become
dangerous.
Ljubomir Ljubojevic i s not always 20 c5 2 1 ll)f4 l:tfd8 22 'ii'c 2
•••
Game 6
G h i nda - Yusupov
Dubai 1986
Game 7 •
_ •••@"
.�
,W$; .
Geller - Krasen kov • • • ••
Cappelle la Grande 1992 •• •••••
Efim Geller was Karpov's assistant • • • 1. _ . 1.
during his matches against Korch
noi, so he must have explored many p
• �\ii1BiYm
• W�
•
interesting ideas in the Open Span . � �� . .
ish during their pre-game prepa �B�.�D�.
ration, especially in the 9 ll)bd2
system.
.
�f;§ .
d .��
d �
1 e4 e5 2 ll)f3 ll)c6 3 .ib5 a6 4 loose by tactical means and . . .
.i a4 ll)f6 5 0-0 ll)xe4 6 d4 b5 7 blunders!
.ib3 d5 8 dxe5 .ie6 9 ll)bd2 .ie7 24 lId4? 25 'lVa8 + 'if;f7 26
•••
From this moment Black tries Mikhail Tal often played the Open
to avoid simplifications such as Spanish since positions with ac
17 . . . ll)xe5 18 'lVxe4 but fails to tive counterplay suited his taste.
achieve anything better. 1 e4 e5 2 ll)f3 ll)c6 3 .ib5 a6 4
18 lIe2!? lId8 ( 1 8 . . . ll)d4? ! 19 .ia4 ll)f6 5 0-0 ll)xe4 6 d4 b5 7
lId2 ) 19 h4! lId5 20 lIft 'lVc4 2 1 .ib3 d5 8 dxe5 .ie6 9 ll)bd2
b 3 'lVc3 2 2 h5! ll)xe5 2 3 'lVxe4 ll)c5 10 c3 d4 1 1 .ixe6 ll)xe6 12
l!xh5 24 .if4 (D) ll)b3?
White has sacrificed a pawn, A risky experiment. 12 cxd4 is
obtaining a strong centralised po normal (Chapter 3, Section 3).
sition. Besides, the pawn will soon 12 dxc3 13 'lVc2?! 'lVd5!
•••
Game 1 0
Short - Beliavsky
Barcelona 1989
35 "xe6 36 e6 :xd6 37 e7
•••
:e8
To 37 . . . iDxd4 (recommended by
Beliavsky) White could have re
plied 38 "xd4! :e8 39 "xd6 and
so on.
38 :xd6 iDxd6 39 "e6 "e5 +
40 <i&i>h l iDb7??
This time-control move lets the
victory slip ! 40 . . . c3 ! 41 "xd6 c2
(John Nunn) or 41 :d5 "c4 42
:Xd6 "£1 + 43 <i&i>h2 c2 would have
23 :ii'e6 24 e4 :ad7
•• been an attractive finish to the
White's ' active' pieces are now game.
hanging and pinned. Black is ready 4 1 :d7 "e5
to push his c-pawn. After 4 1 . . . 'i'c8 42 "d5 c3 43
25 h3 f6? "xb 7 "xb 7 44 :xb7 <i&i>g8 45 :c7
But this ' active' move on a side (but not 45 :a7 c;&;>f7 46 :xa6? :c8!)
Black should firmly defend is prob Black's chances to win are also
ably wrong. 25 . . . c4 would have minimal.
yielded Black a good game. 42 "ilf7 :g8 43 :xb 7 e3 44
26 "g3 e4 27 bxe4 bxe4 28 :e7 "el + Draw agreed. A disap
"g4 iDe7 29 iDd4 "a8 30 iD4f5? pointing finale!
A mistake. Beliavsky indicates
30 iDe6! h5 31 "f5 iDxd5 32 iDxd8
:xd6 33 exd6 iDe3 34 "e6 + <i&i>h7 Game 1 1
35 "e8 iDxd1 36 "xh5 + with a Tal - Korchnoi
draw. However, after 35 :e1 ! (in Reykjavik 1987
stead of 35 "e8) 35 . . . "xd8 36
:xe3 .i.xd6 37 <i&i>f1 ! 'ii'b 6 38 <i&i>e2 Victor Korchnoi has been faithful
White keeps the better chances. to the Open Spanish since his
32 . . ...xd8 33 "e6 + 'ii?h 7 34 :xd5 youth. However, his deep under
c3 35 exf6! is even worse for standing of the opening has not
Black. After the text move Black always protected him from the oc
successfully parries the attack casional crushing defeat.
and obtains a material advantage. 1 e4 e5 2 ltJf3 iDe6 3 .i.b5 a6 4
30 .....a7 + 3 1 .:5d4 .i.xd6 32 .ia4 iDf6 5 0-0 iDxe4 6 d4 b5 7
exd6 iDb5 33 iDe7 + <i&i>h8 34 iDe6 .ib3 d5 8 dxe5 .i.e6 9 iDbd2 iDe5
"b6 35 e5 10 c3 d4 1 1 .ixe6 ltJxe6 12 exd4
35 ltJxd8 :Xd8 was equally hope iDexd4 13 iDe4 .i.e7 14 i.e3 ltJf5
less. 15 "e2 0-0 16 :ad l iDxe3 1 7
132 Play Like a Grandmaster!
• • .iV •••
Black sacrifices a pawn to acti
vate his pieces.
• •
• .�
-.
",,,,,!,:, 30 'ii'xa5 'ii'xe5 3 1 'ii'xb5 l:!e6
•• • • 32 'ii'bs h5 33 'ii'dS g6??
� � '� ."if
A fatal mistake. After 33 . . . l:!e8 !
• • ,.
• • ", , !,:, 34 'ii'g5 g6 Black would have main
• • • • tained sufficient compensation for
· .
• " �
• U ��
the missing pawn. Now he finds
himself under a decisive attack.
�"
�y, .
• . �
•�� 34 lt)g4!
·
• .
• . : ��. ��!':'
•
This is stronger than 34 lt)h6 +
rl;g7 35 It)xf7.
22 a5!
••• 34 hxg4 35 It)h6 + rl;g7 36
•••
Game 1 2
Smyslov - Euwe
World Championship,
Hague/Moscow 1948 c) 14 . . 'fIb7 15 lDc3 .ib3 16 l::td 2
.
Game 1 7
Alekh i ne - Rubi nstein
Vi/no 19 12
:Xe7
.txd6 lDxd 1 2B lIxd 1 lId7 29 .tb4, choice for Black. His rook has
and it would have been difficult nothing to do on eB.
for Black to make use of his 16 h4! .txc2 17 'iVxc2 lDd7 18
material advantage. After the text .tf4! lDf8
move Black soon crushes his op It was risky to grab a pawn by
ponent. 1B . . . .txh4? ! 19 lDf5 .te7 20 e6 ! ,
25 f6! 26 lId4 (26 lDc2 ! would
••• giving White a strong attack.
still have been clearly better for
Black) 26 ... 'iVc5 27 bxc4 dxc4 28
lDc2 a5! (threatening 29 . . . lDd3)
29 .ia3 b4 30 cxb4 'iVa7 31 b5
lId7 32 lIee4
Or 32 lId 1 lDd3 33 .td6 lIedB.
32 ... .if5 33 'iVf2 .txe4 34 l!xd7
'iVxd7 35 fxe4 'iVd1 + 36 lDe1 lDd3
White resigned.
Game 1 9
Ivanch u k - Tu kmakov
New York 1988 Now it turns out that 15 . . . lIeB
has been useless. White can com
1 e4 e5 2 lDf3 lDc6 3 .tb5 a6 4 fortably create threats on the
.t a4 lDf6 5 0-0 lDxe4 6 d4 b5 7 kingside and at the same time put
.tb3 d5 8 dxe5 .te6 9 lDbd2 lDc5 pressure on the d-pawn.
10 c3 .te7 1 1 .tc2 .t g4 12 lIel 19 h5 lDe6 20 .te3 lDa5 2 1
0-0 1 3 lDfl lIadl lDc4 2 2 .tc1 c5 2 3 'iVf5
13 lDb3 is an important alter lIa7?!
native (Chapter 5, Section 2). According to Ivanchuk, 23 . . . 'iVd7
13 ....th5 14 .te3?! was a better defence, e.g. 24 lIe4
After this inexact move Black lIadB 25 lIg4 'iti>hB ! .
could have immediately forced a 2 4 lDe4! lDb6 25 lDeg5 .txg5
draw: 14 . . . lDxe5! 15 .txc5 lDxf3 + 26 .txg5! 'ii'c8 27 .te3
16 'iVxf3 ! .ixf3 1 7 .ixe7 'iVd7 1B White has managed to exchange
.txfB .txg2 ! 19 .tc5 ! .txf1 ! 20 'iti>xf1 Black's dark-squared bishop, pre
'iVh3 + 21 'iti>gl 'iVg4 + 22 'iti>h1 'iVf3 + serving one of his own knights.
(Ivanchuk) . However, Tukmakov Now he is ready to transfer it to
decides to proceed to usual lines. d6.
14 ... .ig6?! 15 lDg3 lIe8 27...h6? (D)
The plan of . . . 'iVdB-d7, . . . lDc5-e6 A careless slip. 2 7 . . . lId7 was es
and . . . f7-f6 was probably a better sential to meet 2B lDh4 by 2B . . . d4!
140 Play Like a Grandmaster!
'ii'e3 h5 25 ttJxg5?!
White assesses the endgame er
roneously. 25 ttJh2 ! was a better
option.
28 ttJh4! l:tc7? 25 'ii'xg5 26 'ii'xg5 ttJxg5 2 7
••.
• •
• •
Game 2 1
. . _••
••• ••• A . Sokolov - Korchnoi
• • • • �f�� •
Tilburg 1987
- - - -
24 f3
Mter this move Black has abso
lutely no problems . 24 a3 was bet ·
. .�""� . -.
. -
ter. In the endgame with bishops
of opposite colour White would
- . - -
have maintained a better pawn -
• : ��
�� . �'
B� -
•
structure.
24 .ig6 25 ..w2 :e8 26 a4
- - . -
•••
of the Open Spanish as Black. The White 's pressure on the queen
numerous novelties and improve side is insufficient for a win. He
ments invented by both of them should create new active possibili
form a considerable part of the ties (a so-called 'second weakness'
modern theory of the opening. in Black's camp) .
1 e4 e5 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.b5 a6 4 36 ttJa6 37 i.d6 ttJb8 38 g4
.•.
gxf6 55 h5 gxh5 + • _ B
B
Or 55 . . . �f7 56 hxg6 + �xg6 5 7 _ .1.B ••
i.e5 and wins (Rodriguez) .
56 �h5 �f7 57 l:tc6! l:ta8 5 8
�
- �tii�
� BiB
. .
�g4 �e8 5 9 �f5 �d7 60 l:tb6 BiBiB ii411
iDc7 6 1 �xf6! l:te8 62 i.c5 l:te3 .
• �
� "
U .
•
63 f4 iDe8 + 64 �g5 l:tg3 + 65 <M5
l:te3 66 l:tb7 + �d8 67 �g6 l:tg3 + B O B .
68 �5 l:te3 69 l:ta7! l:te1 70 �g6 �'�
7- , v, .
• •��
. U
l:te6 + (70 . . . l:tgl + 71 �f7!) 71 �g5
iDd6 72 i.xd6 l:txd6 73 f5 Black
� .
� . .
. .: �
�
resigned. A classic endgame! An unobtrusive mistake in such
an unclear position which proves
decisive. White could have forced
Game 23 a draw by 26 f5! l:txf5 27 l:txf5 i.xf5
A. Sokolov - Ti m man 28 g4 'ii'e5 29 gxf5 i.xd4 + 30 cxd4
Reykjavik 1988 'ii'xd4 + 3 1 �hl 'ii'e4 + (Timman).
26 iDg7!
•••
Game 25
Tsesh kovsky - Tal
USSR championship,
Leningrad 1974
19 a4!!
This is a very deep move, much 1 e4 e5 2 tZ)f3 tZ)e6 3 i. b5 a6 4
stronger than a standard 19 f4. i.a4 tZ)f6 5 0-0 tZ)xe4 6 d4 b5 7
White can start his attack on the i.b3 d5 8 dxe5 i.e6 9 e3 i.e5 10
queenside without protecting his tZ)bd2 0-0 11 i.e2 f5 12 tZ)b3 i.b6
e5 pawn as 19 . . . 'ii'x e5 opens the 13 tZ)bd4 tZ)xd4 14 tZ)xd4 i.xd4
game in favour of White's bish 15 cxd4
ops: 20 ltel ! i.c7 21 i.gl 'ii'd6 22 This old variation (see Chapter
axb5 axb5 23 ltxa8 ltxa8 24 i.xf5, 6, Section 3) again acquired some
recapturing the pawn with a clear popularity in the seventies.
advantage. 15 f4 16 f3 tZ)g3 17 hxg3 fxg3
•••
• ••
6th match game, Merano 198 1
• •
. �""� . �""�
• • B� %
"
� &. ?ai '''0' lI.
'� . _• 1 e 4 e S 2 tZ)f3 tZ)c6 3 .ib S a6 4
.ia4 tZ)f6 S 0-0 tZ)xe4 6 d4 bS 7
_ . �,, + � .L � �
7" , , , 1& " , •" , , , 1& i;:7}:i({:i .ib3 dS 8 dxeS .ie6 9 c3 .icS 10
• a ;", j �
,
• •�
W;_
�
i!m. . 1. ••• Game 28
� ",0 %1 . .tl
'�
z. " " ,, � % '�%1 i
",�,.
n
�
!;;::
'" " . ,"
"Nn� Karpov - Yusupov
• • • • USSR championship,
.i.i. • Moscow 1983
� rQ;;
_ "411 �
� • . 1 e4 e5 2 ll)f3 ll)c6 3 .ib5 a6 4
.ia4 ll)f6 5 0-0 ll)xe4 6 d4 b5 7
��.
- - �
- .
- .ib3 d5 8 dxe5 .ie6 9 c3 .ic5 10
�._ .
_ "
u�u " ll)bd2 0-0 11 .ic2 �f5 12 ll)b3
�.
� iJ�
R . :
• � � .i g6 13 ll)fd4 .ixd4 14 cxd4 a5
15 .ie3 a4 16 ll)d2 a3 17 ll)xe4
Nunn recommends 26 'ii'd 2! with axb2 18 :b1 .ixe4 19 :Xb2 'ii'd7
mutual chances. 20 .id3 .ixd3 2 1 'ii'xd3 :fb8 22
26 d4 27 ll)g3 :ee8 28 'ii'd2
••• :fbI b4
ll)c6 29 .ig5 'ii'e 5 30 :ac 1 d3 3 1 A quiet position with a minimal
:fd 1 .ig6 3 2 �e3 :e6 3 3 .if4 advantage for White has arisen (see
'ii'f6 34 :e1 :ae8 35 :xe6 :xe6 Chapter 6, Section 3 ) . For Karpov
36 :b1 h5 37 h3 h4 38 .ig5 'ii'd4 it is quite enough to play for a
39 �e3 'ii'd5?? win!
Korchnoi had already been in 23 h3 h6 24 :c 1 :b6 25 'ii'b 1
serious time-trouble for a couple :ab8 26 :c5 ll)d8 2 7 :cc2 ll)c6
of moves. Therefore this blunder 28 'ii'c 1 :8b7 29 :c5 ll)e7 30
was not surprising. Mter the con 'at>h2
tinuation 39 . . . 'ii'e 5 40 ll)f1 'ii'd 5 What typical Karpov-like ma
Black would have maintained a noeuvres! It is not so easy to bear
clear edge, with White's extra such a play. Most of his opponents
pawn being of no importance at usually try to break away and . . .
all. get killed at once! This game is no
40 ll)f1?? exception.
Unbelievable! White, who was 30...ll)f5?
not even in time-trouble, misses An incorrect pawn sacrifice.
his chance! Mter 40 ll)e2 ! :e8 4 1 30 ... :b5 was the best option.
ll)f4 the advantage would have 31 :bc2 :g6 32 :Xc7 :Xc7 33
passed to him! Now the game ends :xc7 'ii'b 5 34 g4! ll)h4 35 :c8 +
in Black's favour. 'at>h7 36 'ii'd 1 'ii'a 6 37 :c2 f5? (D)
40 ... .ie4! 4 1 .if4 (41 f3 �xf3 According to Karpov, 3 7 . . . 'ii'a3
42 gxf3 ll)e5 ! ) 4 1 ... .ixg2 38 'ii'e 2 b3 was the only chance to
The sealed move. The variation play on. Now White wins a piece.
42 ll)e3 'ii'f3 43 ll)xg2 :e2 is quite 38 'at>g3! fxg4 39 'at>xh4 gxh3
convincing so White resigned. 40 f4 'ii'e6
Play Like a Grandmaster! 149
Game 29
Smyslov - Botvi nnik
Moscow 1943
1 e4 e5 2 li)f3 li)c6 3 .i b5 a6 4
.ia4 li)f6 5 0-0 li)xe4 6 d4 b5 7
.ib3 d5 8 dxe5 .ie6 9 c3 .ic5 10
li)bd2 0-0 1 1 .ic2 li)xf2 12 :xf2
f6 13 exfG 'lVxfG?!
13 . . . .ixf2 + ! is more exact (see
Chapter 6, Section 5). 27 li)g5! hxg5 28 .ixh5 :e5
14 'fj'fl .ig4 15 'ifi>h l ( 1 5 h3 or 29 .if3 'lVe7 30 a4! 'ifi>h7 31 axb5
15 "lid3 was better) 15 .ixf2 16
••• axb5 32 :a7 "lid6 33 .ig4 (threat
'lVxf2 :ae8 1 7 'lVg3?! ening 34 .ixg5) 33 :d8 34 'ifi>h l
•••
�e8 22 .id2 c5
Black's edge is now clear as his
opponent has no counterplay.
White decides to liquidate into an
ending but it is in Black's favour
as his rook and two pawns prove
stronger than his opponent's two
minor pieces.
23 .ifl i.xf1 24 �xf1 �xf1 +
25 �1
Black should now improve the
19 tZ)xd4! 20 tZ)xd4
••• position of his pieces and create
This leads to a favourable end passed pawns.
game for Black. After 20 .ib2 or 25 �f7 26 �f2 �e6 2 7 .ie3
•••
20 i.a3 Black would have main �f8 + 28 �e2 �d6 29 tZ)h5 �f7
tained a strong initiative, too. 30 tZ)f4 d4 31 cxd4 cxd4 32 .id2
20 'ii'c5 2 1 .ib2 �xf1 + 22
••• g5 33 tZ)d3 g4
�xf1 �e2 23 �f2 �xf2 24 �xf2 Yusupov considers that the move
"d5 25 �e3?? 33 . . . h6 was more precise. Instead
Play Like a Grandmaster! 151
gar). After the text move his bishop White recaptures the bishop and
finds itself in danger. obtains better chances due to a
22 i.f1 lIdd8 (otherwise .ifl more active position of his pieces
g2, lIdl-d2, lIbl-dl etc.) 23 .ig2 and strong pressure along the f
liJe7 24 lDd4 flf7 25 'ife2! file.
The 26 lDf3 threat is irresist 17 h5
•••
with chances for both sides (Dol text move White obtains strong
matov). pressure on the kingside.
28 ii.xd5 'ikxd5 29 'ikxd5 cxd5 18 i.c2 0-0 19 'ikd3 g6 20 'ike3
<Ji?g7 2 1 a3 a5 22 'ikf4 l:td7 (note
that 22 . . . b4? ! is a poor choice due
to 23 ii.a4 ! ) 23 l:td2 a4 24 h4 f5
25 exf6 + l:txf6 26 'ikg3 'ikd6 2 7
lbe5 lbxe5 28 l:txe5
30 l:txe5!
Mter 30 . . . fxe5 31 f6 the pawn
promotion is inevitable, therefore
Black resigned.
cxd4 c5!
Let me remind you that this
move is usually necessary after
the exchange on d4.
18 dxc5?!
18 'ii'a5 was preferable, and if
18 . . . 'ii'e 6 then 19 dxc5 d4 20 .td2 .
However, a pawn sacrifice 18 . . . c4!?
19 'ii'x a6 b4 would have allowed
Black to maintain his initiative.
18 ...d4! 19 .tf4 .txc5 20 l:tac1 In this position Black's main
l:tc8 problem is to restrict his oppo
Now it is not so easy for White nent's active possibilities.
to fight against Black's strong d 3 1 g5 !
•••
pawn. Black's plan includes . . . d4- But not 3 1 . . .'ii'x a5?! 32 'ii'e 7!
d3 and . . . l:tc8-c2 . White tries to l:tf8 33 e6 ffi 34 �d7 with a strong
create some counterplay. counterplay for White.
2 1 h3 ( 2 1 g3 was stronger) 32 f4?!
2 1.. .tb6 22 .tg3
• This loses at once but 32 f3 was
The endgame which would occur not enough to save the situation
after the continuation 22 l:txc8 either, e.g. 32 . . . 'ii'e2 33 'ii'c6 'ii'e3 !
l:txc8 23 l:tc1 l:txc1 + 24 'ii'xc1 h5 is 34 'ii'xh6 l:td1 35 h4 'ii'c 1! 36 'ii'xg5 +
favourable for Black. 'ii'xg5 3 7 hxg5 l:ta1 with an easily
22 h6 23 'ii'b4 d3 24 l:txc8
..• winning endgame for Black.
l:txc8 25 'ii'd6 32 ...'ii'e4!
Play Like a Grandmaster! 157
Game 38
J . Polgar - Anand
Munich 199 1
best defence would have been Judit Polgar points out that
19 . . . .if6 (Fta�nik) . White should have kept queens
158 Play Like a Grandmaster!
Game 39
Flamberg - Alekhine
Mannheim 1914
1 e4 e5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 � b5 a6 4
� a4 liJf6 5 0-0 liJxe4 6 d4 b5 7
�b3 d5 8 dxe5 �e6 9 c3 �e7 10
liJbd2 0-0 1 1 �c2 f5 12 liJb3 'ikd7
13 liJfd4 liJxd4 14 liJxd4 c5 15
liJxe6 'ikxe6 1 6 f3 liJg5 1 7 a4
l:tad8 18 axb5 axb5 19 'ike2 c4
This line (see Chapter 8, Section
3) grants White a certain positional
edge . His pair of bishops and pro
tected passed pawn in the centre 26 g4!
should not be underestimated. This blow is now extremely ef
Beliavsky criticises Black's last fective. Black can never capture
move. An early stabilisation of the on g4 in view of f4-f5 so White can
centre deprives him of active coun simply maintain pressure on the
terplay. 19 . . . 'ikc6 was better. f5 point.
20 �e3 b4 2 1 'ikd2 b3 22 i.. d l 26 gxh4 27 'ithl l:tg8 28 'ike3
•••
160 Play Like a Grandmaster!