ov

LONDON-LENINGRAD
CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES
Rematch Championship Games with annotations by the World Champion
PERGAMON RUSSIAN CHESS SERIES
General Editor: Kenneth P. Neat

Executive Editor: Catherine Shephard

AVERBAKH, Y.
Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge 2nd edition
Comprehensive Chess Endings
Volume 1: Bishop Endings, Knight Endings
Volume 2: Bishop v Knight Endings, Rook v Minor Piece Endings
Volume 3: Queen and Pawn Endings, Queen against Rook Endings, Queen against Minor
Piece Endings
Volume 4: Pawn Endings
Volume 5: Rook Endings

BOTVINNIK, M.M.
Achieving the Aim
Anatoly Karpov: His Road to the World Championship
Half a Century of Chess
Selected Games 1967-70

BRONSTEIN, D. & SMOLYAN, G.

Chess in the Eighties

ESTRIN, Y. & PANOV, V.N.

Comprehensive Chess Openings

GE R, E.P.
- e pplication of Chess Theory

OV,
Cess a e op1979-1984

0 , . & BATURI SKY, V.

Fro Baguio o erano

KARPOV, A. & GIK, Y.

Chess Kaleidoscope

KARPOV, A. & ROSHAL, A.

Anatoly Karpov: Chess is my Life

KASPAROV, G.
The Test of Time
New World Chess Champion

LIVSHITZ, A.
Test Your Chess IQ, Books 1 & 2 2nd edition

NEISHTADT, Y.
Catastrophe in the Opening
Paul Keres Chess Master Class

POLUGAYEVSKY, L.
Grandmaster Preparation
Grandmaster Performance

SHERESHEVSKY, M.l.
Endgame Strategy

SMYSLOV, V.
125 Selected Ga es

SUETI , A.S.
Modern Chess Ope i g eory
Three Steps to Chess astery

VAINSTEIN, B.S.
David Bronstein: Chess Improviser
 LONDON-LENINGRAD
CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES
Rematch Champ;onship Games with annotations by the World Champion

by

GARRY KASPAROV

Translated by
KENNETH P. NEAT

PERGAMON PRESS
OXFORD · NEW YORK · BEIJING · FRANKFURT
SAO PAULO · SYDNEY · TOKYO · TORONTO
U.K. Pergamon Press, Headington Hill Hall,
Oxford OX3 OBW, England
U.S.A. Pergamon Press, Maxwell House, Fairview Park,
Elmsford, New York 10523, U.S.A.
PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC Pergamon Press, Room 4037, Qianmen Hotel, Beijing,
OF CHINA People's Republic of China
FEDERAL REPUBLIC Pergamon Press, Hammerweg 6,
OF GERMANY D-6242 Kronberg, Federal Republic of Germany
BRAZIL Pergamon Editora, Rua Eca de Queiros, 346,
CEP 04011, Paraiso, Sao Paulo, Brazil
AUSTRALIA Pergamon Press Australia, P.O. Box 544,
Potts Point, N.S.W. 2011, Australia
AP Pergamon Press, 8th Floor, Matsuoka Central Building,
1-7-1 Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160, Japan

Pergamon Press Canada, Suite No. 271,

253 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5T 1R5

Copyright First English edition© 1987 K.P. Neat

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 cape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without permission in writing from the
publishers.

First edition 1987

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Kasparov, G.K. (Garri Kimovich)
London-Leningrad championship games.
(Pergamon Russian chess series)
Includes games of 1986 match with A. Karpov.
Includes index.
1. Chess- Tournaments. 2. Chess- Collections of
games. I. Karpov, Anatoly, 1951- . II. Title.
Ill. Series.
GV1455.K262 1987 794.1'57 87-18875

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Kasparov, G.K.
London-Leningrad Championship games:
rematch championship games with annotations
by the World Champion. - (Pergamon Russian
Chess series).
1. World Chess Championship ( 1986:
London and Leningrad) 2. Chess -
Collections of games
I. Title
794.1'57 GV1455

ISBN 0-08-032053-8 Hardcover

ISBN 0-08-032054-6 Flexicover

Printed in Great Britain by

Richard Clay Ltd.. Bungay, Suffol
 CO N TE NTS

Foreword by A. Chikvaidze, President of the USSR Chess Federation vn

Preface XI

TheGames 1

Postscript 139

Index of Openings 143 .

v
 FOREWORD
When you write the foreword to a chess book
and are at the same time the President of a
Chess Federation, there is a great risk of your
words being read with one aim- whom does
the President favour? I wish to disappoint
those who try to determine the sense of big­
time chess through the prism of sympathy
and antipathy. In the first instance. it is
exclusively the interests of Soviet chess
which are dear to the President, and I do not
think that I will be accused of militarism
when I say that the army of Soviet chess
players is great (and we are still engaged i n
re-arming i t according t o the latest word i n
modern chess theory) , its marshalls are
grandmasters tested 'in battle', and the
success of each of them is naturally a matter
for rejoicing.
However, since this book has been written
by Kasparov, and I am writing the foreword
to his book, what I say here will mainly be
about the new World Champion.�
You have before you a unique collection of
games, played by the eminent Soviet chess
masters Garry Kasparov and Anatoly
Karpov. In centuries to come it is quite
possible that these maestros, standing on the
threshold of the computer millennium, will
be recognized as the most outstanding
human chess players of all time ... If this
should happen, it would not surprise us.
• This foreword was written for the Soviet edi tio n of
the book. which combines Kasparov's accounts of both
the19H5 and 1986 World Championship Matches. The
Englis h translation of the ·1985 Match has already been
published as New World Chess Champion (Pergamon,
19H6), and so the present foreword, as well as Kas­
parov's postscript, have accordingly been slightly
amended (Translator's note).
vii
The fact that Kasparov and Karpov are at a
very high stage of development is apparent
from the standard of their games. And the
fact that each of them still has reserves is
apparent from the way in which the intensity
of the struggle has not diminished from
match to match, but has grown. If we look at
everythin g that has occurred from our own,
of course, slightly selfish viewpoint, we have
to admit that we, the chess fans, have been
lucky- over a short period of time we have
been observing a battle between two chess
giants, the like of which there has never
been.
As he plays over these games on his board,
i.e. follows the thoughts of the World
Champion, each reader '>viii draw the con­
clusions that he can appreciate most clearly.
And, of course, only a player who is ready to
meet Kasparov at the chess board in a major
match will be completely on the same level of
understanding as the commentator. But for
all that, it is by no means impossible that the
meticulous reader will discover an inaccu­
racy in one of the notes. J do not intend
taking it upon myself to defend the author,
since he himself would never ask this, but I
would remind you that Garry Kasparov
wrote these books not only 'hot on the heels',
but also while preparing for a new match.
These are highly professional and excep­
tionally useful books on two matches for the
World Championship, which will not leave a
single reader indifferent. In general, chess
events today provoke unfeigned interest,
and in this sense matches for the World
Championship are altogether at an excep­
tional level. And what can it be like for the
participants in them to make superhuman
viii London-Leningrad Championship Games
efforts for months on end, watched by
millions of pairs of attentive eyes!
Matches for the World Championship are
the highest points of chess history, its 'eight­
thousand metre' peaks, as it were. Of course,
the conquering of such summits demands the
exertion of all possible strength, after which
a significant rest is necessary, and not a
repeat ascent. Young though our remarkable
masters may be, there is a limit to their
physical and nervous resources. The third
(and especially the fourth!) ascent of the
chess Everest has demanded of them fan­
tastic strength, courage and patience.
Fortunately, it would appear that order
has now been restored in the World Cham­
pionship cycle.
The chess world continues its lively com­
mentary and discussion of all the reversals of
fortune in the endless marathon between the
two outstanding representatives of the Soviet
Chess School - Garry Kasparov and
Anatoly Karpov. This is understandable,
since there was, and still remains, ample food
for debate and argument. And I am sure that
a highly important page of chess history
would never have been logically concluded,
had it not been for these books on the 1985
and 1986 matches, written by World Cham­
pion Garry Kasparov.
He is already well known to the chess
reading public as the author of the large and
exceptionally interesting hook The Test of
Time (Pergamon, 1986), where he not only
describes in detail his chess career, but also
gives a number of valuable chess analyses.
This is unique for his age, but, knowing
Kasparov's adherence to the ideas preached
by Ex-World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik,
there can be no doubt that the young man
will follow the path of his teacher in analyti­
cal work, and in the writing of fundamental
chess books.
The appearance of these books is a surpris­
ingly quick reaction by the World Champion
to the past two matches. Firstly, because a
match for the World Championship is a
deep, essentially i nexhaustible mine for illus­
trating the wealth of chess ideas, and work on
this match material must be long and pains­
taking. Secondly, in itself a match for the
World Championship takes a great deal of
strength, and it is always difficult to return to
these experiences. It is no accident that for a
long period, since the time of Botvinnik , new
champions have been unable to bring them­
selves to undertake such exhausting work.
They have known that the significance of
these matches , the attention paid to them,
and the high quality of the games would also
demand a high quality of analysis.*
Now, in these books on the second and
third Kasparov-Karpov matches, we see
forty-eight brilliantly annotated games. And
even a cursory glance will convince us that
the author has done a wonderful job, and has
disclosed to the reader the panorama of an
outstanding chess duel.
Here, to suit everyone, there are the most
diverse chess analyses. I have in mind both
general reasoning, and lengthy, variational
analyses. so that it can be said that each
commentary is i n its right place, and the
coverage by the author is in the required
accordance with the spirit of each game.
The books contain much generalizing
advice, and important practical recommen­
dations, which disclose deeply the essence of
the struggle not only in these matches. but in
such events in general. The psychological
basis of the clash itself is also analyzed i n
detail. After all, a match for the World
Championship is not only a duel of two
individuals, two personalities, or finally, two
teams, which for the match can prepare new
opening and even new middlegame
ideas ... It is also a purely psychological
struggle, a struggle of two match strategies, a
tactical struggle, a struggle for the match
initiative. All these processes are inter­
connected, and in the books this connection
can be clearly followed. In many, seemingly
*It should perhaps be me n t i o n ed thai all the games
from !he Karpov-Korchnoi World Championship
,
Match in Mera no 1981, are analyzed in fair detail by
Karpov in Chess ar. the Top 1979-1984 (Pergamon. 1984 )
- Translmor·s note.
 Foreword lX

explainable chess mistakes, the real causes see how the vie\vs of the author himself, and
are hidden from us and cannot be clarified by those of his opponent, have changed, and
normal chess analysis. But the genuine sense how chess theory has changed. And it is
and basis of these decisions are clearly shown precisely these changes which add fasci­
by the author in this inter-connection, which nation and interest to the books. This is
may be purely chess, psychological, or of essentially the development of chess truth at
course strategic. For each of the match the highest level, and a demonstration of the
games, each move, each idea, cannot be limitless possibilities of chess - great
taken out of the context of this titanic masters can change something in each
struggle. other's play and enrich it, and this means that
These two great masters have given the there is no limit to our perfection in this
world the best examples of present-day profound and ancient game!
chess, which, without the slightest doubt, Tt is certainly difficult to penetrate into the
will not lose their topicality for many years, spirit, the deep ideas of an opponent. Of
and, in addition, they have been accom­ course, the author himself can fully answer
panied by a thorough, objective and inspired only for his own ideas, but, nevertheless, we
assessment of all aspects of this struggle. see an impartial analysis of the actions of
Also of importance is the fact that these both sides and an objective attempt to
books answer many of the questions which explain to the reader the reason which
after the matches concerned genuine chess prompted the opponent to follow a chosen
enthusiasts. Thousands, indeed millions of path. Such objectivity is a rather rare
people, who followed the struggle with phenomenon in chess literature, and here it
interest and in the course of the matches is very pleasant to sec that the amount of
expressed their own suggestions and con­ critical material is divided fairly equally be­
jectures, are now as though initiated into tween the opponents. And this fact illumi­
those secret motifs and causes, which gave nates even more brightly the virtues of the
birth to the taking of this or that decision. books.
One is won over by the frankness of the When these books were being written,
author, since many ideas, which could be Garry often shared with me his new 'finds' in
regarded as 'confidential' and which could this or that game, and enthusiastically
theoretically have been used in the future. described the sleepless nights which he had
literally pour out from the pages of the spent analyzing these games, as he again and
books .I think that, for the sake of complete­
. again went through all the reversals of for­
ness, the author has very generously shared tune in the chess battle for the title of World
even his secrets, and all this is of inestimable Champion. The time had come to submit the
worth to the practical player. manuscript, but he still could not bear to part
In general, these books may and should with the 16th game of the return match,
become a highly important stage in the which had so captivated him, and to the
development of Soviet and also World chess analysis of which he devoted more than 30
literature. Here we have events at the typed pages!
supreme competitive level, with games of the At times 1 advised him to be more diplo­
highest present-day quality, accompanied by matic and more placid in his opinions, but
the most detailed and highly-qualified com­ can one halt a battering-ram which has swung
mentary ever seen in chess books in our to the limit of its amplitude?! I would say to
country. him: "Save your energy, use it more econ­
Also of exceptional value is the fact that omically''. He would nod his head in agree­
the books essentially trace the organic con­ ment, and within a minute would throw
nection between the three Kasparov­ himself heatedly into any nearby argument
Karpov matches. As if in sequence we can or into a planned discussion.
X London-Leningrad Championship Games
I do not think that he is always right about
everything. None of us is the bearer of
definitive truth. But" . . . worthy of life and
freedom is the one who each day goes into
battle for them''.
Since, in citing one of the classics, I have
involuntarily used the word 'battle', I will
share my impressions of the exciting chess
encounter which I witnessed in distant Dubai
at the World Olympiad. Only one game
remained, in which, to become Champions,
the Soviet team needed only a draw. Kas­
parov was playing the Polish grandmaster
Schmidt, and (on the whole with good
reason ) sober heads advised the World
Champion to agree a draw, to completely
eliminate any risk. He, however, was aiming
only for overall victory, and he achieved it.
When, through the cordon of enthusiastic
spectators we literally forced our way back to
the hotel, the victor sank into an armchair,
apparently completely shattered. But only
apparently. Within an instant he raised his
fervent eyes and passionately exclaimed:
"For the sake of such minutes it is worth
living!" This is how he both lives and plays.
And that, in my opinion, is how he wrote
these books.
I am convinced that readers will accept the
World Champion's books with the attention
they deserve, and each, irrespective of his
age, chess views and chess strength, will find
in the books much of value both for his own
improvement and simply for satisfying his
chess hunger.
From my heart I should like to wish the
author success not only in chess , but also in
his creative, analytical work, in the writing of
new books, since for the millions of chess
fans such books are the most valuable
present.
A. CHIKYAIDZE
President of the USSR Chess Federation
 PRE FACE
And so - a new encounter at the chess
board. Almost all that was said about the first
game of the previous match is applicable to
the first game of the Return Match, with the
difference that the time between the matches
had increased the significance of all the
factors. Behind the two players were now not
48 games, but 72, but the main point was that
the change in our status was bound to lead to
a change in the character of the struggle. The
psychological novelty of the situation - for
me the first World Championship Match as
Champion, for Karpov the first meeting with
the Champion- could not fail to tell on how
the general strategic course developed. The
influence of psychological nuances on the
course of match play will be discussed in the
postscript to this book, but at this point let us
recall my postscript to the 1985 match. In it 1
expounded in some detail my views on the
clash of two chess conceptions, and endeav­
oured to disclose the deep state of affairs of
our duel. I also criticized Karpov for his
conservatism, and for his unwillingness to
expand his chess arsenal and to increase the
power of his opening preparation.
I think that my frankness did Karpov a
good turn in his preparations for the Return
Match. However, I realized perfectly well
that in any event Karpov would not repeat
xi
those mistakes resulting from complacency
or over-confidence. For this match, which
. was of such crucial impmiance both in the
chess, and the non-chess sense, Karpov was
simply obliged to mobilize all his inner re­
serves. Here must be included not only
purely theoretical preparation, but also im­
portant components such as aggression,
resolution in the choice of complex, unclear
continuations, and so on.
On the other hand, remembering the dis­
mal experiences of Smyslov and Tal, and
with Botvinnik's reliable training behind me,
I had no intention of resting on my laurels
and wasting time. I n the preparation period
my trainers and I got through an enormous
amount of work, and prepared a number of
surprises. I felt that I had reached a quali­
tatively new level in my understanding of
chess problems.
In general, a fascinating encounter, differ­
ent to the two previous ones, was in prospect.
The concluding round of this extended duel
(within the bounds of one World Champion­
ship Cycle) was set to dot all the "i"s.
Jumping ahead, I should say that the match
justified its expectations both in the richness
of its content, and in the drama of its
struggle.
 GAM E 1
Karpov-Kasparov
Grunfeld Defence
1 d4
As the course of the match showed,
Karpov had decided to open only with this
move, and not 1 e4. But both here, and later,
it was difficult to guess this.
1 Nf6
2 c4 g6
A new word in our opening discussions,
although this cannot have been a surprise to
Karpov - after all, up till 1 983 the King's
Indian Defence held a maj or place in my
repertoire. This must undoubtedly have
been taken into account by my opponent
back in his preparations for the 1984-85
match.
3 Nc3 d5
In spite of the change of colour compared
with the previous match, in the very first
game I again employed an opening which
was new for me. This surprise must have
been much more stunning to Karpov than my
employing of the g2-g3 variation against the
Nimzo-lndian Defence throughout the en­
tire 1985 match.
True, I have to my credit a pretty game
with the Griinfeld Defence, played in an 8-
board clock simultaneous against the HSV
Club of the West German Bundesliga (Ham­
burg , 1985). Berhorst-Kasparov: 4 Nf3 Bg7
5 Bf4 0-0 6 e3 c5 7 dxc5 Ne4 8 Qb3 Na6 9
cxd5 Naxc5 1 0 Qc4 b5 11 NxbS Bxb2 12 Bc7
a6!! 13 Bxd8 axbS 1 4 Qc2 Bc3+ 15 Qxc3
Nxc3 1 6 Bxe7 Nb3 17 Rd 1 Rxa2 18 Bxf8 Kxf8
1
1 9 Nd4 Nxd1 20 Nxb3 Nxf2 2 1 Rgl Ng4, and
Black won . But experiments in simultaneous
displays can hardly be taken seriously.
In addition , I reckoned that the effect of
surprise would be intensified by Karpov's
limited practical experience in this opening,
and by the fact that the middlegame positions
arising were clearly not in accordance with
his chess tastes. Therefore , the reasons for
choosing the Griinfeld Defence, and a year
earlier the Nimzo-lndian Defence, were
very similar. But the results, alas, were
incomparable . . . Why was this? In the
cours� of the book I will e ndeavour to answer
this question.
4 Nf3 Bg7
5 Bf4
After thinking for the comparatively short
time of 10 minutes (remember his 50 minutes
of hesitation in the first game of the last
m atch), Karpov avoids the main theoretical
paths and settles for a fairly reliable con­
tinuation.
5 c5
. . .
5 . . . 0-0 6 e3 c5 is more often played. For
·a long time the immediate 5 . . . c5 had a bad
reputation because of 6 dxc5 Qa5 7 cxd5
Nxd5 8 Qxd5 Bxc3 + 9 Bd2 Bxd2+ 1 0 Qxd2
Qxc5 1 1 Rcl Qf5 12 Nd4 Qd7 13 Qh6±. But
Tseshkovsky's brilliant idea of 9 . . . Be6 ! ! 10
Qxb7 (now 10 Bxc3 Qxc3+ 11 Qd2 Qxc5 12
Rcl is pointless, since the bishop has moved
from c8) 10 . . . Bxd2+ 1 1 Nxd2 0-0 forced
this assessment to be reconsidered. At any
rate, in the source game Grigorian-Tsesh­
kovsky (Baku, 1977) White was unable to
cast doubts on Black's idea: 12 b4 Qa4 13 e4
(13 Qxa8? Nc6) 13 . . . Nd7 14 Qb5 Qa3 J 5 c6
Nf6 16 Be2, and now , in Belyavsky's
2 London-Leningrad Championship Games
opinion , 1 6 . . . Qc3 ! 17 Rd1 Rfd8 18 f3 a5 7 . . • dxc4
would have given B lack splendid chances. 8 e3
Several years later the debate was continued
8 Qa4+ Qxa4 9 Nxa4 is also unpromising.
in the game Dreyev-Yepishin (Tallinn,
Here the Press Bulletin recom mended 9 . . .
1986), where the attempt to improve White's
Nc6 1 0 e3 (10 Rxc4 Be6) 10 . Bd7 1 1 Bxc4
. .

play by 1 2 e4 ran into a brilliant reply -

Na5 1 2 .P3 (or 12 Bb3 Nxb313axb3Nd5 14
1 2 . . . Nc6! It transpires that the knight is
Be5 j6 15 Bg3Bb5) 12 . . . Bxa4 13 bxa4 0-0
immune: 13 Qxc6? Rfd8 14 0-0-0 (14 Rd1
with compensation for the pawn. B lack can
Rxd2!) 14 . . . Rac8 15 Nc4 (15 Qa6 Rxc5+
also choose a quieter path: 9 . . . B d7 10 Rxc4
16 Kbl Rxd2) 15 . . . B xc4 16 Rxd8+ Qxd8
Na6 11 e3 Bxa4 (11 ... 0-0 is weaker be­
17 Qa4 Bxf1 18 Rxfl Rxc5 + 19 Kbl Qd3 + .
cause of 12 c6!, giving Black a weakness at
Dreyev made the poor reply 1 3 Qa6?, and
c6, since 12 ... Bxc6 fails to 13 Rxc6) 12
after 13 . . . Qxc5 14 Qb5 Qd6 15 Nc4 Qd4!
Rxa4 Nxc5 1 3 Bb5 + Kf8 14 Rc4 Nfe4 with a
1 6 Be2 (16 Qxc6 Rac8) 1 6 . . . Rfc8! 17 0-0
good game.
Rab8 18 Qa4 Qxe4 he encountered major
problems. But even after the superior 13 Qb5 8 .
. . Qxc5
Qc7 Black has a wealth of possibilities for the 9 Qa4+ Nc6
sacrificed pawn.
9 .. . Bd7 1 0 Qxc4 Qb6 looks tempting,
All these variations are interesting and
attacking the b2 pawn and intending after
most probably require additional testing.
1 1 . . . 0-0 and 12 . . . Rc8 to exploit the
But . . . it is time to return to the first game
advanced position of the white queen to seize
of the Return M atch, in which nothing of
the initiative . In the event of 1 1 Bc7 Qxb2 1 2
particular interest occurred .
R b 1 Qa3 1 3 Rxb7 0-0 or 1 1 NbS Na6 12 Bc7
6 dxcS
Qe6! the idea would have succeeded, but
QaS
, Karpov had prepared a queen sacrifice ! - 11
7 Rcl
Be2 0-0 1 2 0-0 Rc8? 13 Qxc8 + ! Bxc8 14 Nd5
Qe6 (14 ... Qd8 15 Rxc8) 15 Rxc8+ Bf8 1 6
R fc1 with a very dangerous attack.
8
10 Bxc4
7
After 1 0 Ne5 Bd7 11 Nxd7 Nxd7 12 Qxc4
6 0-0 Black's lead in development at least
5
compensates for the opponent's two bishops.

4 10 ... 0-0
11 0-0 Bd7!
11 . . . Bg4, recommended as an equally
good alternative, would have allowed White
to create pressure on his opponent's position
both after 12 Qb5 Qxb5 13 Bxb5 Bxf3 14 gxf3
0 b c g
Rac8 15 Na4, and after 1 2 Bb5 Bxf3 13 gxf3
Qb6 (13 . . Nd5?! 14 Nxd5 Qxd5 15 Rxc6!
.

a616 Rxa6!) 1 4 Bxc6 bxc6 1 5 b3 Nd5 16 Nxd5

A solid move, which had not occurred
cxd5 1 7 Rc6.
previously in grandmaster games. I think it
unlikely that Karpov will find many followers
- by avoiding complications, White essen­ (see following diagram)
tially opts out of the struggle for an opening
advantage. 12 QbS
 Gamel 3
After 17 Ba4 Black could have activated
his game by 1 7 . . . b5 18 Bb3 Na5.
17 . .. Be6
Here too 1 7 . . . b5 was perfectly possible,
leading after 18 a4 to unexpected compli­
cations: 18 . . . b4 19 N b l N a5 ! 20 Bxa6 (20
Rxc8 Rxc8 21 Bxa6 Rc2) 20 . . . Rxc1 2 1 Rxcl
Bxa4 22 Bc7 Nb3 ! 23 Bxd8 Nxc l , and if 24
Bxe7 Nd5. Or 19 Bxa6!? Ra8! (weaker is
19 . . . bxd 20 Bxc8 cxb2? 21 Rxc6, or 20 . . .
Rxc8 21 Rxc3) 20 Bb7 bxc3 2 1 Rxc3 Nb4! 22
Bxa8 Rxa8 23 b3, with a position difficult to
assess.
18 Rxd8+
The unpleasant diagonal "X-ray" leaves
White practically no other choice . Things would not essentially have been
changed by 18 Ne5 Nxe5 19 Bxe5 Rxd 1 + 20
12 Qx;b5
Rxd1 Nd7 2 1 Bxg7 Kxg7 22 Bf3 Rc7 or
13 BxbS Rac8
20 . . . Ne8.
14 Rfdl Rfd8
18 Rxd8
White stands a little more actively, but
19 NeS NxeS
within a few moves even this trifle wil l
20 Bxe5 Rd2
disappear .
This activity was j ust for show. After 2 1
IS h3 h6
Nb1 I was intending simply t o return the rook
Preparing to bring the bishop out to an to d8 and then play . . . Ne8 .
active position . The immediate 1 5 . . . Be6
21 b3
would have allowed White advantageously
to break the symmetry: 16 Bxc6! Rxd 1 + 1 7 After making this move, Karpov offered a
Rxd1 bxc6 (17 . . . Rxc6? 1 8 Rd8+ Bf8 19 draw, which , of course, was accepted. If
Nd4!) 18 Be5. 21 . . . Nd5, then 22 B xg7 Kxg7 23 Rd l .
16 Kfl a6
17 Be2
 GAM E 2

Kasparov-Karpov
Nimzo-Indian Defence

d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 Bb4
4 Nf3

Once again the Nimzo-Indian Defence ,

which caused Karpov so much difficulty in
the previous match. It was obvious that , in
order to solve successfully the problem of the
o b c d e f g h
black pieces, Karpov was simply bound to
prepare something fundamental in this
opening.
Karpov was most probably intending to
4 cS improve Black's play somewhere, e.g. 8 . . .
5 g3 Nc6 Qe7 ! ? or 8 . . . Oa5, and therefore, on en­
6 Bg2 countering a surprise, I decided to satisfy
myself with a minimal initiative. After all ,
For the moment the development of the match was only j ust beginning, and in
events is identical to the 13th and 1 7th games home analysis it would be possible calmly to
of the previous match. Then Karpov con­ assess the value of Karpov's innovation.
tinued 6 . . . Ne4 7 Bd2 Bxc3 8 bxc3 0-0, but
here he is the first to deviate from the 7 cxd5 NxdS
familiar path. 8 Bd2 cxd4
9 Nxd4! Nxd4
6 dS!?
On 9 . . . Bxc3 10 bxc3 Nde7 White simply
castles (11 Bf4 is weaker because of ll . . .
(see following diagram)
Qa5! 12 0 -0 e5) , and the acceptance of the
pawn sacrifice leaves Black facing difficult
Strangely enough , this natural move had problems- 1 1 0-0 Nxd4 ?! 12 cxd4 Qxd4 13
not been played before. B y creating pawn Rb1 Nc6 (13 . . . 0-0 14 Bb4!) 14 Qc2 0-0 15
tension in the centre, Black aims to provoke Rfdl!
rapid simplification . Now the critical 7 0-0 Of course, B lack also cannot be satisfied
would have allowed White after 7 . . . dxc4 8 with 9 . . . Nxc3?! 10 bxc3 Nxd4 11 cxb4 e5 1 2
dxcS to transpose into the game Roman­ e3- White's advantage is obvious.
ishio-Tal (Sochi , 1 985) , where he gained a
strong initiative - 8 . . . Qxd1 9 Rxd l Bxc5 10 Nxd5 Bxd2+
10 Nd� Na..'i 11 Nde4. 11 Qxd2 Nc6

5
6 London-Leningrad Championship Games
The alternative retreat 1 1 . . . Nf5 would
have prevented white from avoiding the
exchange of queens, but in the resulting
ending the pressure along the long diagonal
(hl-a8) would have been highly unpleasant
- 1 2 N£4 Qxd2+ 13 Kxd2 Ke7 14 Rhc1
Rd8+ 15 Nd3 .
12 Ne3 ! ? Qxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2 also looks good,
when Black has the same problems.
12 Nf4?!
In contrast to the plan begun with 7 cxd5 ,
this aiming for simplification is not at all
justified - after the exchange of queens
White is merely left with illusory winning
chances. 12 Qe3 0-0 13 Nc3 would have led
to much more interesting play . Now the
persistent desire to exchange queens, 13 . . .
Qd4?! , places B lack in a difficult position-
14 Qxd4 Nxd4 1 5 0-0-0!, while after 13 . . .
Bd7 1 4 0-0 Qe7 he again has to play with
extreme care , e.g. 15 Rfd l Rfd8 1 6 a3!? Be8
1 7 Rxd8 Qxd8 (17. . . RxdB 18 Bxc6!) 18 Rd1
Qe7 1 9 b4 , and White is assured of a per-
sistent initiative.
- 12 Qxd2+
13 Kxd2 Bd7
Here we can sum up the results of the
opening. For the moment White stands a
little more actively, but the symmetry of the
pawn structure and the absence of weak­
nesses in B lack's position must soon neutral-
ize this symbolic advantage . It needs only a
couple of accurate moves , and peace can be
concluded. In my meetings with Karpov (I
have in mind the first, unlimited match)
there have been a number of games where
the desire to obtain an advantage without the
slightest risk encountered a precise reply,
after which the players departed in peace, to
the obvious dissatisfaction of the spectators.
The same result, but with much less moral
detriment for chess (this was after all only the
second game, and the London spectator is
not spoiled for events of this standard) could
have been predicted without particular risk
to the prophet's reputation, so solid is the
defender's positio n. That in fact is what Ex­
World Champion Mikhail Tal stated in his
radio commentary on this game. But such an
experienced chess fighter should on no
account be criticized , since at that point it
was impossible to suppose that the Return
Match would spring a number of surprises,
which would radically change the existing
opinion about the character of chess battles
between Karpov and Kasparov.
And it all began from this seemingly life­
less position, i n which Karpov did not display
his customary accuracy, and I proved un­
characteristically persistent in the "squeez­
ing out" of minimal chances. However, the
further course of the m atch will show that
this development of events was not acci­
dental.
14 Rhcl
The immediate 14 Nd3 is also possible, in
the hope of 14 . . . b6? 15 Rhcl ReS 1 6 Rc3
and 17 Racl, seizing the c-file. But after
14 . . . Ke7 it transpires that the threat of Nc5
is illusory ( 15 Nc5 RhdB!) .
14 ... Ke7
In the centre the black king is much more
securely placed than on the 0-side, where,
while defending the b7 pawn, it could itself
become a target for attack by the white
pieces_:_ 14 . . . 0-0-0?! 1 5 Nd3 Kb8 16 Kel
Be8 17 Rc3 , then 18 Racl and Nc5 .
 Game 2 7
15 Nd3 Rhc8 in the note to 18 . . . Bc6?! However, after 22
Ra3 a6 23 Nxd7 (23Rb3? Bb5!) 23 . . . Kxd7
The routine 15 . . . Rhd8 would have
24 Rb3 Rc7 25 f4 the placing of Black's Q­
allowed White to establish control of the c­
side pawns at a6 and b7 (instead of a7 and b6)
file - 16 Rc3 Be8 17 Ke1 Rac8 18 Racl ,
slightly changes the situation in White's
creating the unpleasant threat of b2-b4. B y
favour. Nevertheless, Black should probably
the move in t he game Karpov prepares t o use
have chosen this path, but as a matter of
the c-file for further simplification of the
principle Karpov is aiming for the exchange
position .
of bishops.
16 Nc5 Rab8

This does not yet spoil anything, but the

immediate 16 . . . b6 would have more
simply and quickly solved all B lack's prob­
lems - after 1 7 Nxd7 (17 Na6 Rd8! 18 Ke f
Rac8) 17 . . . Kxd7 1 8 Rc3 Rc7 19 Rac1 Rac8
there are no resources remaining for White
to strengthen his position.
It should also be mentioned that after
·

16 . . . Be8? B l ack would have run into diffi­

culties - 1 7 Rc3 Rab8 18 Racl Nd8? 19
Nxb7!
17 Rc3 Nd8
18 Racl Bc6'!! 0 c d e f g h
Once again, for some inexplicable reason,
Karpov avoids the obvious 18 . . . b6 . Of
course, after 19 Nxd7 Kxd7 the white bishop 22 b4!
is stronger than the black knight, but it is not
apparent how any gain can be extracted from An important nuance. To carry out his
this factor. One gains the impression that plan of exchanging bishops Black is now
Karpov regarded the continuation of play as forced to play . . . a6 (since the immediate
being solely due to my obstinacy, and, not 22 ... f6? is bad for him - 23Nd3 Bc6 24
wishing to experience the slightest (psycho­ Bxc6 Nxc6 25 b5), when in the future the
logical) discomfort, he was aiming to deprive pawns at a6 and b7 will inevitably come
White of even any purely symbolic advan­ under attack not only by the light-square
tage. At any event, soon B lack encounters bishop, but also by the knight, if it returns to
real, and not fictitious difficulties. c5 .
19 Nd3 Bd7 22 a6
23 Be4?!
19 . . . f6, countering White's plan, should
possibly have been preferred , although even At first sight very logical and consistent.
then B lack would have come under per­ White intends to provoke the advance of the
sistent pressure after 20 Be4! h6 2 1 b4 B d7 22 black pawns on the K-side, with the aim of
Nc5 Bc6 23 Bd3! creating a further weakness, thus widening
20 Ne5!
the active front . But the position of the
Rxc3
21 Rxc3
bishop at e4 gives Black additional tactical
Be8
possibilities.
Here by 21 . . . Rc8 Black could have
gone into a position similar to that examined 23 .. . h6
8 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Each of the other black pawn advances has In retaining the knight I was hoping to be
definite drawbacks, e .g . 23 . . . g6 24 g4! , and able to exploit it for attacking the black
B lack has to reckon with the constant threat pawns and , by restricting the opponent's
of Rh3. pieces, to play for domination .
A n d after 2 3 . . . f6 2 4 N d3 , in preventing
25 Bc6
the invasion of the white rook at c7 Black
26 Bxc6 Nxc6
must inevitably weaken his position - 24 . . .
27 NcS?
f5 25 Bf3 Bc6, and the defence of the pawns
at a6, b7 and e6 causes him considerable Although outwardly it appears to fit in well
difficulty - 26 Bxc6 Nxc6 27 a3 Rd8 28 Ke3 with White's overall plan, this hasty knight
with the unpleasant threat of Nc5 . move could have encountered a straight­
forward tactical reply, after which his advan­
24 a3 f6? !
tage would have disappeared . 27 f4! Rd8 28
Here Black could have changed to his Ke3 was much stronger, aiming for the
advantage the situation on the Q-side by further activation of his pieces.
24 . . . aS ! After 25 bxa5 (nothing is promised
by 25 f4 a.xb4 26 axb4 Nc6! 27 Bxc6 bxc6 28
Nd3 Ra8) 2S . . . Ra8 26 Nc4 (26 ReS Kd6 27
Nd3 Bc6) 26 . . . Bb5 27 a4! Bxc4 28 Rxc4 8
RxaS 29 Rb4 (29 Kc3 b5 !) 29 . . . Kd6 30 Kc3 ,
or 27 . . Bxa4 28 Ra3 (28 Nb6 Rxa5 29 Ra3
.

does not win a piece because of 29 . . . Ra6! 6

30 Nxa4 b5) 28 . . . BbS 29 Nb6 White merely 5

retains a slight initiative.
4
White could have avoided all this by play­
ing 23 a3 ! ( i nste ad of 23 Be4) , consolidating
his position and reducing the effect of Black's
undermining pawn advance on the 0-side,
e . g . 23 . . . a5 24 bxa5 Ra8 25 ReS Kd6 26
Nd3 Bc6 27 e4 f6 28 f4 Nf7 29 Kc3 eS 30 Kb4, o b c d e g h
with an obvious advantage.
25 Nd3

Inconsistent . The logical development of 27 . • • Ne5?

the Bg2-e4 idea was 25 Ng6+ . A fter 25 . . .
The correct 27 . . . aS ! would have enabled
Bxg6 26 Bxg6 Nc6 (26 . . . f5?! 27 Rc7+ Kf6
Black to solve successfully his defensive
28 Be8) 27 Be4 Kd6 28 f4 (28 Bxc6'! bxc6 29
problems, e.g. 28 b5 Nd4 29 a4 (29 Rd3 b6! 30
ReS Rb5.') a position is reached with the
Nd7 leads only to equality) 29 . . . b6 30 Nd3
balance of forces considered above (cf. the
Rd8. Now, however, White is able to carry
notes to 1 8 . . . Bc6 and 2 1 . . . Be8), but in an
out his plan.
even more favourable version for White ,
since new weaknesses have appeared in 28 f4 Nd7
B lack's position. Avoiding the exchange on 29 Nb3
g6 is also unpromising for B lack - 2S . . .
In the coming struggle the more active
Kd6 26 Rd3 + Kc7 27 Nf4 g5 28 Rc3 + Kd6 29
white pieces have good prospects. The per­
Nd3 Bc6 30 Nc5 , or 27 . . . Bb5 28 Rc3+ Kd6
manent weakness of Black's pawns con­
29 Bc2! (29 Nh5 f5 30 Bd3 g5!) 29 . . Bc6
demns him to passive defence.
.

(29 . . . g5 30 Nh5 f5 31 e4!) 30 B b3 with very

strong pressure. 29 • • . Kd6?!
 Game 2 9
Another serious inaccuracy. It was essen­ Black in view of 33 Kf3 ! followed by the
tial to play 29 . . . f5 , hindering White's poss­ transfer of the knight to f5 and the advance of
ible activation in the centre . Piece pressure the h-pawn .
by 30 Nd4 g6! 31 Re3 Nf8 does not promise And yet 32 N aS was more in the spirit of
White anything real, and he would h-ave had the position, especially since only Black can
to decide on more radical measures - 30 e4! hope to make use of the f-fi le which is now
fxe4 3 1 Ke3 N f6 32 Rc7+ K£8 33 Ke2! Nd5 34 opened.
Rd7 followed by NcS, or 30 . . . Nf6 31 Rc7+
32 ... fxgS
Kd6 32 Rxg7 Nxe4+ 33 Kd3. Here the
33 NaS! g4
initiative is still with White , but from the
practical viewpoint 29 . . . f5 was Black's best On 33 ; . . Nf6 White would have gained
chance of gaining counterplay. an obvious advantage by 34 ReS ! (34 Rc2
Ng4+ 35 Ke2 b6 or 34 h3 Nh5 is much
30 e4 gS
weaker) 34 . . . Ng4+ 35 Ke2.
Black intends to play . . . eS and with this
34 Rc2 hS
aim he avoids the possible blockade of his g­
35 Rcl !
pawn, e.g. 30 . . . eS (30 . . . b6 is bad in view
of 31 Nd4) 3 1 fS b6 32 Kd3 Ra8 33 Nd2, and White waits, since the opponent is in
good advice for Black is at a premium - zugzwang - any move leads to a weakening
33 . . . aS (the ending after 33 . . . b5 34 Nb3 of his position. B lack's last chance is to create
Nb6 35 Na5 Rc8 36 Rxc8 Nxc8 37 Nb7+ Ke7 counterplay down the f-file against the K­
38 Nc5 Nb6 39 Nxa6 Nc4 40 a4 Nb2+ 41 Kc2 side, abandoning his Q-side pawns to thejr
Nxa4 42 Nc7 is hopeless for B lack) 34 Nc4+ fate.
Ke7 35 Ne3 axb4 36 axb4 Kd6 ( as will be �
35 . b6
apparent from later notes, 36 . . . Ra2 37 Kc4
. .

merely eases White's task) 37 Nd5 Ra2 38 Sooner or later Black is obliged to advance
Kc4 Re2 39 Ne3 Rxh2 40 Kb5 Re2 41 Rd3 + ! this pawn. 35 . . . N f6 does not ease his
(after 4 1 Rc6+ Ke7 42 Nd5+ Kd8 White's defence in view of 36 ReS Nd7 37 Nc4+ Ke6
activity reaches an impasse) 41 . . . Kc7 (41 38 Rc7 Nf6 39 Na5 b6 40 Nc4 , when White
. . . Ke7 is decisively met by 42 Kc6!) 42 should win.
N d5 + Kc8 (Black loses immediately after
36 Rc6+ Ke7
42 . . . Kb7? 43 Nc3f 43 Rc3 + Kd8 44 RaJ
37 Nc4 Rf8
Ke8 (there is also a dismal finish for B l ack
38 Ke2! Rf3?
after 44 . . . Kc8 45 Ra8+ Kb7 46 Rg8 Rxe4
47 Rxg7+ Kc8 48 Rxdl) 45 Ra8+ Kt7 46 Kc6 Surprisingly, this serious mistake by Black
Nf8 47 Ra7+ Kg8 48 Ne7 + - the domi- · in time trouble was not severely criticized by
nation of the white pieces is close to the the commentators, who considered that even
absolute, and loss of material for Black is after the superior 38 . . . Rf6 his position was
inevitable. lost. But in fact B lack could have still held on
31 Ke3 eS - 39 Rc7 Kd8! (but not 39 . . Ke6 40 Ra7!)
.

40 Ra7 b5 41 Ne3 Rc6! 42 Nd5 Nf6, and

31 . . . b6 is bad in view of 32 Nd4.
32 fxgS?!
On 32 f5 Black can play 32 . . . b6, when
there appears to be no way of organizing a
breakthrough. The move i n the game was
played with the aim of weakening the e5
pawn, since 32 . . . hxg5 is unfavourable for
White does not have anything real. The
correct 39 Rc8! bS 40 Ne3 would have
maintained a positional advantage for
White, but it cannot be stated with certainty
that he should win.
(see following diagram)
10 London-Leningrad Championship Games
It was established that after 43 a4 Rxh2 44
b5 Rh3 ! (44 . . . h4?! is weaker in view of 45
Ra7+ Ke6 46 gxh4 g3 47 b6! with an obvious
advantage) 45 b6 Rxg3 46 Ra7+ Ke6 47 b7
Nxb7 48 Rxb7 Rgl the extra piece does not
give White a win - 49 Rb6+ Kd7 50 Rg6 (50
a5 Ral 51 a6 g3 52 Rg6 h4 53 a7 h3 leads to a
draw) 50 . . . Ra1 51 Nd5 (no better is 51 Nc4
e4+ ! 52 Ke3 Kc7 53 a5 Ra4 with an obvious
draw) 5 1 . . . e4+ ! (not 5J . Ra3+ ? 52 Nc3
. .

e4+ 53 Kc2! e3 54 Rb6! e2 55 Rbl g3 56 Kb2,

and White wins) 52 Kc2 e3.
0 c d e g h
43 . . . Ke6
44 Rh7 e4+ !?

Our main attention was devoted to 44 . . 0

39 Ne3?? Rxh2 45 Rh6+ Kd7 ! (the only move; 45 . . .
Ke7? loses to 46 a4! Rh3 47 a5 Rxg3 48 a6!
Obvious - and unbelievable ! 39 Rc7 Rc3 Nf5 49 Ke4 Rxe3+ 50 Kxf5 g3 51 b5 Ra3 52
(39 . . Ke6 40 Rtdl) 40 Kd2 would h ave
.
· b6! g2 53 Rh7+ Kd6 54 b7, or 46 . 0 . Ra247
concluded the game immediately, but the Nd5 + Kd7 48 RxhS Ra3 + 49 Nc3 e4+ 50
feverish haste of time trouble continues to Kd4) 46 Nxg4 e4+ , and White is unable to
affect matters . . . gain an advantage , as the following vari­
ations confirm:
39 Nf6-
(a) 47 Ke3 Ra2 48 Ne5+ (48 Nf6+ Kd8
40 Rxb6 Nxe4
leads only to equality) 48 Ke7 (48
41 Rxa6
0 • • 0 • •

Kc7? is a mistake - 49 Rh7+ Kb6 50 Rd7

Here the game was adjourned , and I was Rxa.'J. + 51 Kf4 with advantage to White) 49
reproached by many for failing to make the Rxh5 Rxa3+ 50 Kf4 e3! (50 0 RaJ ? is • •

"winning" move 41 N d5 + , which they associ­ weaker: 51 Nc6+ Kd7 52 Nd4) 51 Nc6+ Kd7
ated with my traditional impulsiveness and 52 Nd4 Rd3 ! (52 . . e2? allows White to win
0

nervousness. Of course, the play of partici­
pants in World Championship Matches can
and should be criticized, but this should be
based on an objective chess analysis, and not
on subjective assessments and opinions. A
simple analysis shows that after 41 Nd5 + Kf7
(in the rook ending after 41 . . . Kd7 42 Rxa6
- 53 Rh7+ Ke8 54 Nxe2 Rb3 55 Ke5 Nc4+
56 Ke6 Re3+ 57 Kd5 Nb6+ 58 Kc6 Re6+ 59
Kb5) 53 Ke5 (53 Rh7+ Ke8 54 Ke5 NbS!)
53 . . . e2 54 Rh7+ Nf7+ ! 55 Rxf7+ Ke8 with
a draw.
(b) 47 Kc3 Rh3 48 Nf6+ (48 Ne5+ Ke7!)
480 0 0 Ke7 49 Nxh5 Nf5 ! (49 . . NbS + ? is 0

Nc3 + 43 Nxc3 Rxc3 White is a lso unable to
win) 42 Rxa6 h4! B lack has sufficient
counterpla y.
Karpov's sealed move was obvious, and
the position was subjected to a painstaking
analysis. But a win, unfortunately, could not
be found.
bad - 50 Kd2 Nxa3 51 Rh7+ KJB 52 Ke3
Nc2+ 53 Kxe4 Nxb4 54 K/5 and wins) 50
Rh 7 + Kd6 with an equal gam e . Instead of 49
Nxh5 , White also achieves nothing by 49
Nd5 + Kd7 50 Rxh5 Rxg3 + 5 1 Kd4 Rxa3 52
Rh7+ Kc6 53 Rc7 + Kb5 54 ReS + Ka4.
45 Kc3

41 Rf2+ After 45 Kd4 Rd2+ 46 Kc5 Rd3 47 Rh6+

42 Kd3 Nd6! Kd7 48 Nc4 Nxc4 49 Kxc4 Rxa3 50 Rxh5
43 Ra7+ Ke6! (after 50 e3? 51 ReS Kd6 52 Re4
0 0 .
 Game 2 11
White wins) 5 1 Kd4 Rb3 Black is not i n 49 . • . h4l
danger o f losing. In this variation 4 8 Ng2 ! is 50 Rxh4
very strong, when there i s no clear-cut way,
Or 50 gxh4 g3.
for B lack to draw. But all this is by no means
obligatory - by continuing simply 45 . . . 50 Rxh4
Rxh2, Black has sufficient counterplay. 51 gxh4 g3
52 Nf4
45 NbS +
46 Kc4 Nxa3+ Nothing is changed by 52 Ne3 Nc2+ 53
47 Kd4 Kxe4 Nxb4, with an inevitable draw.
47 Kc5 Re2! also promises White nothing. 52 . . • Nc2+

47 ... Rxh2 Draw agreed.

48 Rh6+ Kd7! In an interview for the English press after
the game, Karpov stated that in the ad­
The simplest solution - 48 . . . Kf7? ! 49
j ourned position the chances of White win­
Ke5 would have made Black's defence more
ning and Black drawing were eq ual . The
difficult.
above analysis convincingly reveals the hid­
49 NdS den psychological meaning of this statement.
The last flicker of activity - a vain attempt
· to restore the lost domination.
 GAM E 3

Karpov-Kasparov
Grunfeld D efence
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nf3 Bg7
4 g3

It is understandable that, after the stormy

events of the second game, Karpov should
want to obtain a quiet position with a slight
initiative. And in the 4 g3 d5 variation
B lack's chances of counterplay are limited.

4 . • . c6

The main drawback to the 4 g3 variation is

that B lack can choose a symmetric set-up, Commencing the battle against the knight
where White's possibilities are also re­ at e5. After 8 . . Nc6 9 0-0 White's extra
.

stricted. Such a "solid" course for Black is tempo in the symmetric position is felt.
typical of match play.
9 0-0
5 Bg2 dS
6 cxdS In a game with Timman (Bugojno, 1 986)
Karpov continued 9 BgS , but did not gain any
It has been found in practice, strangely advantage: 9 . . . Qb6 1 0 Qd2 Nfd7 1 1 Nf3
enough , (after all, there are also 6 Qb3, 6 Nc6 12 Rd1 Nf6 1 3 0-0 Bd7 14 Bxf6 Bxf6 1 5
Nbd2 and others) that White achieves the e4 Q aS 1 6 Qf4 Bg7 1 7 Rfe1 Rad8 1 8 exdS
best results with this exchange. exd5 19 NeS Be6 .
6 cxdS 9 ..
. Nfd7
7 Nc3 0-0 10 Nf3
8 NeS
10 f4 is more logical (cf. game 13).

10 ... Nc6
(see following diagram)
11 Bf4 Nf6

A sluggish move, like White's 1 0th. 1 1 . . .

The occupation of the e5 and e4 squares is
an important motif in this variation . In the Qb6 is more energetic, as was confirmed by
event of 8 0-0 Ne4 9 Qb3 Nc6 B lack has no the 1 2th game of the 1986 Women's World
problems. Championship Match Akhmylovskaya­
Chiburdanidze: 1 2 Na4 Qa5 1 3 Rc1 b5 14
8 . . . e6 Nc5 Nxc5 1 5 RxcS Bd7.

13
14 London-Leningrad Championship Games
12 NeS 15 . . • Nd7

Here ECO cites the old game Podgaets­
Marszalek (1974) , which went in White's
favour after 12 Rei Qe7 13 Qd2 etc. But in
Romanishin-Andersson (Indonesia, 1983)
Black equalized with the obvious 1 2 . . . Ne4.
Karpov plays more accurately.
12 ... Bd7
13 Qd2 Nxe5
The attempts to put pressure on the centre
by 13 . . . Nh5 or 13 . . . Qb6 are ineffective ,
e . g . 1 3 . . . Nh5 14 Bg5 f6 15 Nxc6 Bxc6 1 6
Bh6 with a slight initiative, or 13 . . . Qb6 1 4
Be3 ! followed b y f2-f4, and B l ack cannot
solve the problem of the knight at e5 without
detriment to his position .
14 Bxe5
Black should not have been in a hurry to
provoke this exchange. 15 . . . Qe7 followed
by . . . Rfc8 and . . . Ne8 would probably
have been simpler.
16 Bxg7 Kxg7
17 Racl
The one genuinely active plan in this
position (which would have gained i n
strength after 1 5 Racl or 15 Radl) involves
f2-f3 and e2-e4. It cannot be carried out
immediately: 17 f3 Nf6 1 8 e4? ! dxe4 19 fxe4
e5 ! (20 dxe5 Qb6+ , with . . . Ng4 in mind),
but 18 Qf4 followed by 1 9 e4 came into
consideration (18 . . . QbB 1 9 Qe5 ) .
17 ... Nf6
18 Qf4

Trying for an advantage by tactical means 18 f3 is too late : 18 . . . Qd6! 1 9 e4 dxe4 20

- 14 dxe5 Ng4 (14 . . . Nh5 15 Bh6) 15 e4 fxe4 e5.
Nxe5 (15 . . . dxe4? 16 Radl Bc6 1 7 Qe2) 1 6
18 ... Qb8
exd5 exd5 17 Nxd5 - fails to the strong
19 Qxb8
rejoinder 15 . . . d4! 1 6 Qxd4 Bc6 17 Qd6
·

Qb8 or 17 . . . Qb6. 19 Qe5 !? Qxe5 20 dxe5 Ng4 21 f4, as

recommended by the commentators, is more
14 ... Bc6
interesting. Here 21 . . . g5? ! 22 Rd3 f6 23 h3
15 Rfd l
Nh6 24 exf6+ Kxf6 25 fxg5 + Kxg5 26 e4
1 5 Rac1 followed by doubling rooks was leaves B lack facing unpleasant problems, but
more natural. Then 15 . . . Ne4 16 Nxe4 Bxe5 after 21 . . . Ne3 22 Rd4 Nxg2 23 Kxg2 f6 24
17 dxe5 dxe4 18 Qf4 Qd4 19 h4 would h ardly exf6+ Kxf6 25 Kf2 g5 his task is not too
be good for Black , since the weakened difficult .
position of his king could tell .
19 Raxb8
20 f3 Rfd8
21 Kf2

21 e4 runs into the standard 21 . . . dxe4 22

fxe4 e5 ! 23 d5 (23 dxe5 Ng4) 23 . . . Bd7 and
. . . Ne8-d6.
21 Rbc8
22 e3 Ne8
23 Rd2 Nd6
24 Rdc2 Kf8?!

(see following diagram)

A routine move (king towards the

e f g h centre ! ) . The immediate 24 . . . f5 was more
 Game 3 15
It is hard to explain why White should give
8
up the struggle. 28 g4! suggests itself, with
7 the positional threats of g4-g5 or gxf5 and
Ne2-f4. Although after the strongest reply
6
28 . . . g5 ! (28 . . . Kf6?! 29 gxf5! gxf5 30 Ne2,
5 or 28 . . . fxg4?! 29 fxg4 g5 30 Rhl ) 29 Rhl
4 Rh8 30 Kg3 . Kf6 31 Rch2 Nf7 no serious
danger is apparent, Black would have had to
display increased vigilance.
2
28 • . . gS

Now B lack is out of danger.

a b c d e g h
29 Ne2 Bd7
30 ReS b6
accurate, followed by . . . g5 and . . . Kf6 (25
31 Rc7 Rxc7
h4 h6) .
32 Rxc7 Ra8
25 Bfl 33 Ngl

If 25 e4 dxe4 26 fxe4, then 26 . . . eS no If 33 Ba6, then 33 . . . Kd8 34 Rc2 b5 ! 35

longer works because of 27 dxe5 Nc4 28 Bh3, Ncl g4 36 Nd3 Rb8 37 Nc5 gxf3 38 Kxf3 Ne4,
but on the other hand 26 . . . fS is very good. and only White risks losing .
25 ... Ke7
33 Ne8
26 Bd3 fS Rc8
34 Rcl
Reverting to the correct plan . After 26 . . . 35 Rxc8
Rc6 27 g4 g5 28 h4 h6 29 e4 White's initiative
On Karpov' s propos al - draw agreed.
assumes real proportions.
The character of the play in games 1 and 3
27 h4 h6 suggested that the choice of the GrUnfeld
28 b3?! Defence had been correct .
 GAM E 4
Kasparov-Karpov
Nimzo-Indian Defence
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 Bb4
4 Nf3
Once again, for the eighth time in our
games, the Nimzo-Indian Defence is played.
And it is characteristic that in each o f the
seven preceding games the Ex-World Cham­
pion employed new continuations and vari­
ations. On this occasion too he does not
change his principles. Thus Karpov's inno­
vation in the second game did not undergo a
genuine practical testing.
4 c5
5 g3 cxd4
Karpov fin ally places his choice on the
main line of the variation , and, to j udge by is
determined appearance, there could be no
doubt that he had prepared here a serious
improvement .
6 Nxd4 0-0
7 Bg2 d5
8 Qb3
In recent times this has become the main
continuation . Earlier 8 cxd5 Nxd5 9 Bd2
Nxc3 10 bxc3 Be7 (10 . . . Bc5 is also poss­
ible) was played, and B lack was able to
equalize with comparative ease .
A new word was stated in the game
Romanishin-Ribli ( Reggio Emilia, 1985-86)
- 8 0-0! ? dxc4 9 Qa4, when after 9 . . . Qa5
10 Qxa5 Bxa5 1 1 Ndb5 Nc6 1 2 Rdl a6 1 3 Nd6
Bxc3 14 bxc3 N d5 15 Nxc4 Nxc3 1 6 Rd2 a5 17
17
Ba3 Re8 1 8 Rcl White gained a marked
advantage. Black played more strongly in
Condie-Suba (Dubai Olympiad, 1986) -
12 . . . e5 1 3 Nd6 Nd4 1 4 KfJ Rd8 J S Nxc4
Bxc3 16 bxc3 Be6 17 cxd4 Bxc4 1 8 Bxb7
Rab8, and within a few moves a draw was
agreed.
It is curious that, soon after the conclusion
of our match, Karpov himself employed this
variation with White in his game against
Portisch (Tilburg, 1986) . Instead of 9 . . .
Qa5 Black replied 9 . Na6, and after 10
. .
Ndb5 Nd5 1 1 Rdl Bd7 1 2 NxdS exd5 13 Rxd5
Qc8 14 a3 Be7 15 Bf4 White gained _an
advantage . -
.
_
8 Bxc3+
9 bxc3
9 Qxc3 does not work in view of 9 . . . e5
followed by . . . d4, when Black seizes the
initiative.
Here 1 consider it fully appropriate to
describe to the reader how Black's next move
came to be conceived.
18 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Initially B lack used to play 9 . . . e5 here ,
when there can follow 1 0 Nb5 dxc4 1 1 Qxc4
a6 1 2 Nc7 Ra7 (in Sosonko-Timman, Til­
burg, 1 98 1 , after 12 . . . b5 13 Qc5 Nd7 1 4
Qa3 Qxc7 1 5 BxaB Nb6 16 Bg2 Black did not
gain sufficient compensation for the ex­
change) 13 Nd5 N xd5 14 Qxd5 . In this
position the most accurate move is con­
sidered to be 14 . . . Qc7, which occurred in
Holzl-Portisch ( 1982) , although 1 4 . . .
Qxd5 15 Bxd5 b5 is also quite possible, with a
good game for Black . But instead of 1 1 Qxc4
White began playing 1 1 Qa3 ! , and the assess­
ment of the variation again changed in his
favour.
Black was forced to seek a new path - which Black's idea depends) 1 1 Qc2 Nxd5
9 . . dxc4, but here too 10 Qa3 ! is possible,
. appeared highly promising for Black, with
and it is around this gambit idea that the main
discussion has developed . For the pawn
White has sufficient compensation, and the
games played confirm this assessment, for
example :
(a) 10 . . . eS 1 1 NbS N c6 1 2 Be3 Be6 1 3
Rd l Qb8 1 4 0-0 Rd8 15 Qc5 Rxd1 1 6 Rxd1
a6 1 7 Nd6 Nd7 18 Qa3 with the better game,
Georgadze-Polugayevsky (Moscow, 1 983) .
(b) 1 0 . . . Qb6 1 1 0-0 Nbd7 12 Be3 Nd5 1 3
Rah l Qc5 1 4 Qxc5 N xc5 1 5 Bxd5 exd5 1 6
NbS Ne6 1 7 Rfd1 Bd7 1 8 N d6 Rfb8 1 9 Nxc4
- White has an obvious advantage , Ubi­
lava-Groszpeter (Sochi, 1 984).
(c) 10 . . . Nbd7 1 1 0-0 Nb6 1 2 NbS Bd7 13
Rd1 Nfd5 14 Nd6 Qf6 15 Rd4 Bc6 1 6 e4 Ne7
1 7 Rb1 e5 18 Rdl Rfd8 - in the forthcoming
complicated struggle the two sides' chances
are roughly equal, Karpov-Portisch
(Lucerne, 1985) .
(d) 10 . . . Nd5 1 1 0-0 Bd7 12 Rd l Qc8 1 3
c 4 Nb6 14 Bf4 R e 8 1 5 Bd6 e5 16 Nf5 Nc6 1 7
Ne3 Bh3 18 Bc5 Bxg2 1 9 Kxg2 f6 20 Bxb6
axb6 21 Qb2 N d8 22 Qxb6 - White has the
better chances, Lerner-Suba (Moscow,
1 986) .
There was no doubt that the character of
the play in the above games could not satisfy
Black, and a search was begun for additional
possibilities. Black's m ain problem in this
position is the development of his Q-side
pieces, and the attempt to solve it suggested
to us the possibility of 9 . . . Nc6.
9 ... Nc6!
Karpov made this move instantly, seem­
ingly with the aim of stunning me . It was
evident that the creative process of searching
for the strongest continuation for Black had
proceeded in parallel . . .
10 cxd5
After 10 Nxc6 bxc6 only White can have
problems - he is behind in development,
and Black's pawn centre becomes secure .
Of course, we realized that the position
after 10 cxd5 Na5 ! (a tactical nuance , on
his good development and the weakness of
the white c-pawn , but a possibility for retain�
ing the initiative was nevertheless found.
10 Na5!
• . .
Much stronger than 10 . . . exd5 1 1 0-0
Re8 12 Bg5 Nxd4 1 3 cxd4 Rxe2 14 Rfe1 with
strong pressure for White .
11 Qc2 Nxd5
12 Qd3!
Nothing is promised by 12 0-0 B d7 1 3 Ba3
Re8 14 c4 Rc8 15 c5 b6 with a perfectly good
game for Black.
12 ... Bd7?!
It is paradoxical , but a fact , that in our
preparations we too regarded this second­
rate move as best, and did not seriously
consider 12 . . . Qc7, which is so natural and
strong. 12 . . . Qc7 was recommended by the
commentators, and in subsequent analysis a
way of developing White's initiative could
not be found.
At the Dubai Olympiad, in my game
against the leader of the Romanian team
Mihai Suba, I again chose this variation,
hoping that my opponent possibly might not
be familiar with the l atest recommendation,
but, alas , he was in the know : 12 . . . Qc7 1 3
0-0 (this attempt t o avoid the forcing vari­
ations leading to simplification after 13 Nb5
 Game 4 19
Qc6 1 4 0-0 Bd7 15 a4! a6! 1 6 e4 axb5 1 7 exd5 correct reply to 1 4 . . . Bc6 is 15 Ba3, which
Qc4 proves risky, but how else can White after 15 . . . Bxg2 16 Kxg2 (and if 16 . . . ReS
play for a win?) 1 3 . . . Bd7 1 4 e4 Nb6 15 f4 e5 17 NbS) retains White the initiative ,
(15 . . . Rac8 is even stronger) 16 fxe5 Nbc4 although Black's position, without any ob­
17 g4! Nxe5 ( 1 7 . . . Bxg4? 18 Qg3 Nxe5? 19 vious weaknesses, is perfectly defendable .
Bf4 f6 20 Qxg4 i s bad for Black) 18 Qg3 Nac4
15 Nb3!
19 Bf4 Qc5 20 Rae l ! (20 Kh1 Ng6! 21 Bel
Qe5 with advantage to Black) 20 . . . Rad8 A very strong manoeuvre , forcing Black to
(20 . . Bxg4 21 Rb1 !) , and after an excep­
. agree to the exchange of his b7 pawn for the
tionally difficult struggle I managed to main­ weak pawn at c4.
tain the balance.
15 Nxc4
13 c4! 16 Bxb7 Rc7
17 Ba6!
1 3 B a3 is premature , as the position after
13 . . . Re8 14 c4 Nb6 1 5 c5 Nbc4 is unclear.
At the board I decided that for the moment it
would be better to manage without the move
of the bishop, which could become a target
for counterattack.
13 ... Ne7

This move was subjected to unfounded

cntlcJsm by the commentators, who
suggested 13 . . . Nb6 . But in that case a fter
1 4 c5 Nbc4 15 0-0! (15 Rb1 is pointless in
view of 15 . . . ReB 16 Bxb7 Nxb7 1 7 Rxb7
Rxc5 with a promising game for Black)
15 . . . Rc8 16 Nb3 Bc6 17 Bxc6 Rxc6 18 Qc3
White would have had the better chances. a c d e g h

14 0-0

In my preliminary analysis 14 Ba3 was
intended, in order to answer 14 . . . Rc8 with
15 Rcl , but 1 4 . . . Re8 1 5 0-0 Nec6! is much
stronger - Black provokes favourable sim­
pli fication and gains equality.
But now in the event of 14 . . . Nec6 15 Nf3
e5 White has a very strong rejoinder - 1 6
Ng5 !
14 ... Rc8?!
It was psychologically not easy to allow the
opponent the two bishops after 14 . . . Bc6!
15 Nxc6 Nexc6, and besides, the move
played is a consistent continuation of the
plan of attacking the c4 pawn. B ut that would
have been Black's best chance - the knights
coordinate well, and it is difficult for the
white bishops to develop their strength. The
The light-square bishop has fulfilled its
mission on the long diagonal , and now
changes the direction of its attack . The
knight at c4 is an outpost for Black, with
which his hopes of counterplay are associ­
ated . 17 Be4? h6 was much weaker, when
White has nothing real.
From this point it is interesting to follow
how with every move White confronts his
opponent with direct threats .
17 ... NeS
The little tactical trick 17 . . . Ng6 (18 Bxc4
Ne5) runs into a strong rejoinder - 18 f4!
18 Qe3!
There was no real choice , since both 1 8
Qd6?! Bc8! (it is also not dear what White
20 London-Leningrad Championship Games
can achieve after 18 . . . N7g6) and 18 Qe4
8
N7g6 were markedly weaker.

18 ... Nc4
6
After l 8 . . . f6 the wbite pieces, up till now
rather slow to develop, would have rapidly 5
become very active - 1 9 Ba3 Rf7 20 Rac l . 4

19 Qe4!

One would have to be abnormally materi­

alistic to be tempted by the a7 pawn (19 Bxc4
and 20 Qxa7) .
19 ... Nd6?!

Here B lack had to play 19 . . . Qa8. Of

After 24 . . . Ra6 2S NcS Rc6 26 Rbl Re8
course, in the ending arising after 20 Qxa8
27 Rb7 White has very good winning
Rxa8 21 B g5 ! N d5 (21 . . . f6 22 Rcl!) 22 Rfcl
chances.
Ncb6 23 Bd2 White has an undisputed advan­
tage, but B lack can still hold on . 25 Radl f6

20 Qd3! Black needs an escape square for his king.

There are two other possibilities, but they
The three-move dance has clearly ended i n cannot significantly influence the outcome of
favour o f White - hi s queen h a s returned the gam e : 2S . . . h6 26 Rd8 Rxd8 27 Rxd8+
with honour to its chosen square, whereas Kh7 28 Rd7, winning a pawn , or 25 . . . g6 !?
the _black knight is not destined to do the (this move enables material loss to be
same. avoided) 26 e4 (26 NcS f6 27 Nd7 Kg7 28 Bb2
20 ... Rc6 eS is not so clear) 26 . . . Rc2 27 Rd8 Rxd8 28
21 Ba3 Bc8 Rxd8+ Kg7 29 Re8 - the weakness of the
dark squares is bound to result in catas­
The attempt to exploit the "stray" bishop trophe.
at a6 is groundless - in reply to 21 . . . Qb6
White has the decisive 22 Nd4! 26 Nd4! Rb6

25 . . . Ra6 26 NbS is no better.

22 Bxc8 Ndxc8
White is at the crossroads: at first sight i t
appears that t h e choice o f move i s a matter of
taste. 23 Qf3 suggests itself, but in the given
specific case what comes to the forefron t i s
Black's basic defect - the insecure, poorly
coordinated placing of his pieces. It is very
important that with his next move White
succeeds in gaining complete control of the
d-file .
27 BcS Ra6?!
27 . . . Rb2 ! ? would have set White more
problems. After 28 Nxe6 Rxe2 29 Nc7 R£8 it
is simplest for him to continue 30 Ra3,
winning a pawn and taking the game into a
technical phase . 30 Rd7 Rf7 3 1 Kfl ReS 32 f4
Re4 (32 . . . RxcS 33 Ne6!) 33 Rd8 + Rf8 34 fS
Kf7 is by no means so clear.
28 NbS Rc6

(see following diagram) 28 . . . Rxa2 also fails to 29 Nc7 Rf8 30

Nxe6 Re8 31 Nc7 Rf8 32 Re3, winning.
23 Rf'd l ! Qxd3
24 Rxd3 ReS (see following diagram)
 Game 4 21
39 Nd5
8
The white pieces have gained maximum
7 activity, and at the same time tactical threats
6 are created.
5 39 Kh6
40 aS e4
41 a6!

7
e g
6

5
29 Bxe7!
4
Yet another non-routine decision, based
on concrete calculation. Now 29 . . . Rxe7 is
bad because of 30 Rd8+ Kf7 31 Rxc8.
29 • . . Nxe7
30 Rd7
0 c e g
In creating the threat of 31 Nd6 White
occupies the seventh rank , retaining � is
Accuracy to the end - the attempt by
positional advantage and gaining a matenal
Black to create threats against the white king
one. The game is decided - despite desper­
is clearly too late. Karpov resigned the game
ate resistance, B lack is unable to delay for
without resuming - a by no means pre­
long his inevitable defeat.
mature decision, e.g. 41 . . . Rd6 (or 41 . . .
30 N g6 Nc5 42 Rc7, winning) 42 Ne7 RdJ 43 Ra8
31 Rxa7 Nf8 Kh7 44 a7 Ra1 45 Nc6 Ng5 46 Re8, and White
32 a4 Rb8! wins.
Some commentators wrote that Kasparov
Temporarily preventing a4-a5 .
had won an excellent game against Karpov in
33 e3 ''Karpovian style". Of course, Karpov's style
and mine are very di fferent - I have always
White can permit himself to calmly
preferred a complicated, dynamic struggle. I
strengthen his position.
cannot help being flattered by comparisons
33 h5 with the Ex-World Champion in technique,
34 Kg2 eS but for such a comparison my play in game 2
35 Rd3! would have been more appropriate. Here, in
the fourth game , the World Champion made
The exchange of a pair of rooks deprives
clear and strong moves , in accordance with
Bl ack of his l ast saving hopes ; 35 Rd6 Rc2
the demands of the position, and in this. of
was less convincing.
course, Karpov does not have a monopoly.
35 Kh7 I regard this fourth game. conducted con­
36 Rc3 Rbc8 sistently and energetically by White from
37 Rxc6 Rxc6 beginning to end , as one of the best I have
38 Nc7 Ne6 played in my long-running duel with Karpov.
 GAM E 5

Karpov-Kasparov
8
Griin.feld Defence 7
After Karpov's defeat in the preceding 6
game it was to he expected that against the
5
Griin fel d Defence he would sel ect a more
effective weapon.
I d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nc3 dS
4 Bf4 Bg7
5 e3 cS a c d e g h

The gambit line 5 . . . 0-0 6 cxd5 Nxd5 7

Nxd5 Qxd5 8 Bxc7 has been widely played,
Bxe5 1 5 Nd4 Qxc5 1 6 N x f5 gxf5 17 0-0 W hi t e
but is nowadays considered favourable for
seized the initiative. Later research <> ho w e d
White.
that 1 2 . . . Nxc5 gives B l ack a comfortable
6 dxcS QaS ga me , e.g. 13 0-0 0-0 14 f3 e5 ! 15 Bg3 h5 1 6
7 Rei Ba2 Qb6 1 7 Kh1 a5 . Rashkovsky-M i khalch­
ishin ( 1 984) . Now White \ ho pes are m a i n l y
As is known, a draw can result from 7 cxd5
associate d with 12 Nf3 Nxc5 13 B e 5 , as. for
Nxd5 8 Qxd5 Bxc3+ 9 bxc3 Qxc3 + 10 Ke2
example , in two Agzamov-Gulko games
Qxa 1 1 1 Be5 Qcl (J I . . . Qb l .'?) 12 Bxh8
(Sochi , 1 985 an d Frunze, 1 985) . In genera l.
Bc6 13 Qxb7 Qc2+ 14 Kf3 Qf5 + .
White' s predominance i n the ce n tre gives
7 ... Ne4 him the better chances.
For the match we prepared the rare 10 . . .
In contrast to the 1 st game , here on
Qxd2 + , which occ urred i n the game
7 . . . dxc4 White has 8 Bxc4 (d. games 9 and
Schmidt-Gross ( 1 984). We did not find any
11) .
refutation of Black's ide a . and in addition we
8 cxdS Nxc3 were counting on surprise and o n the unusual
9 Qd2 Qxa2 nature of the result ing positions.
10 bxc3
10 Qxd2+
One of the standard positions of the Chun­ II Kxd2 Nd7
feld Defence. 12 BbS 0-0
13 Rxd7 Bxd7
(see following diagram) 14 e4

In the old game Petrosian-Fischer ( Can­ The seem i ngly strong 1 4 R bl is refuted by
didates Match , 1 97 1 ) after 10 . . . Qa5 1 1 Bc4 14 . . . Bf5 1 5 Rxb7 e5 ! 16 Bg3 (16 dxe6 Be4)
Nd7 1 2 Ne2 Ne5 ? ! 13 Ba2 Bf5 ? ! 14 Bxc5 ! 1 6 . . . B e4, with a splendid position.
23
24 London-Leningrad Championship Games
14 f5 This signals the end of the plan with
15 c5 e6 18 . . . c5 : White prevents . . . gS , and after
f2-f3 he transfers his knight to d3, securely
A new idea . Here G ross played 15 . . . defending his e5 pawn and attacking the cS
Rac8, and after 1 6 c6'? ! bxc6 17 d6 exd6 18 pawn . The bishop at g7 remains shut in, and
exd6 Rf6 he obtained a good position. But 16 thus for the remainder of the game White will
c4! Rxc5 17 Be3 Ra5 18 f4 is much stronger ­ be playing with an extra piece. It is true that
White's powerful centre assures him of an the transfer of the knight to d3 will take 3-4
advantage . moves , but what can Black manage to do
during this time?
16 c4 Rfc8
17 c6 bxc6 20 ... a5
18 d6
The pawn races as far as a2, but . . . It
stands to reason that 20 . . . Rcb8 was recom­
mended, and it also stands to reason that
during the game I analyzed this possibility:
21 f3 Rb2 + 22 Rc2 Rxc2+ 23 Kxc2 Ba4+ 24
Kd2 Rb8 25 Ral Rb2+ 26 Kel - Black
stands badly.
21 f3 a4
22 Rhe 1 !

After 22 Nf2 g5 23 hxg5 hxg5 24 Bh2 f4 25

Nd3 Be8 26 g3 Bg6 27 gxf4 a3 28 fxg5 a2 a
struggle would still have been possible .
Karpov's move kills all hopes of counterplay.
22 a3
23 Nfl a2
18 c5? 24 Nd3 Ra3
25 Ra1 g5
A serious mistake in our preparatory
analysis! It seemed very important to ac­ 25 . . . Rb8 26 Ke2 ! is hopeless.
tivate the light- square bishop, especially 26 hxg5 hxg5
since after the possible 19 Nf3 h6 20 h4 Bc6 27 Bxg5 Kt7
White has no successful regrouping, whereas
B l ack t ransfers his king to d7 and then pushes Here too 27 . . . Rb8 is most simply met by
forward his a-pawn . . . 28 Ke2.
Black should have called his dark-square 28 Bf4 Rb8
bishop out of "non-existence" : 18 . . . g5 ! 19 29 Reel Bc6
Bxg5 Bxe5. After 20 cS Bg7 (with the threat 30 Rc3 Ra5
of . . . e5) 21 f4 h6 22 Be7 Rcb8 23 Nf3 Rb2 + ! 31 Rc2 Rba8
24 Rc2 Rb4 (by his last few moves B lack has 32 Net Resigns
preve nt e d Rei-hl) 25 Ne5 (what else?)
25 . . . Bxe5 26 fxe5 a5 it is not clear what The opening catastrophe i n this game
W hit e can extract from the position, since he cancelled out the favourable development of
is unable to take the b -file. events. I took my first postponement, in
order to analyze the character of the play in
19 h4 h6 the initial games, and to plan a new strategic
20 Nh3! course.
 GAM E 6

Kasparov-Karpov Nc3 0-0 14 Bxc6 bxc6 1 5 Be3 Nd5 1 6 Rac l

White attained a promising position. But
Petroffs Defence 11 . . . Qe6! (instead of 11 . . Bel) is much
.

stronger, when there can follow 12 Qxeo +

It was decided to begin this game on the
fxe6 13 B b5 0-0-0 14 Bxc6 bxc6 15 Be3 Nd5
right hand side, so to speak , for a complete
16 Rcl c5 ! , and in spite of his broken pawns,
change of scene .
Black maintains equality.
1 e4 eS 9 Bxf3
As yet Karpov has not made any other first 10 Qxf3 Nxd4
move in matches for the World Champion­ 11 Qe3 +
ship. A new attempt to gain an opening advan­
2 Nf3 Nf6 tage. Th e path chosen by me a year earlier -
1 1 Re 1 + Be7 1 2 Qdl - led to a simplifi­
The choice of the quiet Petroff's Defence cation of the positio n .
shows that Karpov is not burning with a
II Ne6
desire to build immediately on his success. I t
12 cxd5 NxdS
will be remembered that in an analogous
13 NxdS QxdS
situation in the previous match (game 5) he
14 Be4 Qb5
preferred the Ruy Lopez, but i n this match
the time for Spanish battles had not yet When I annotated game 1 5 of the 1 985
come. match , I considered that White hardly had
serious compensation for the sacri ficed
3 NxeS d6
pawn, but in later analysis I was able to
4 Nf3 Nxe4
discover some interesting ways for him to
5 d4 dS
develop his initiative.
6 Bd3 Nc6
7 0-0 Bg4 IS a4 Qa6
8 c4 Nf6
A continuation which was first employed
by Karpov in game 1 5 of the previous match .
9 Nc3
For the moment White too docs not devi­
ate from the familiar path. The alternative 9
cxd5 Bxf3 10 Qxf3 Qxd5 occurred in several
tournament games during 1986, and brought
White good results, but this was the con­
sequence of Black playing the opening in­
exactly. For example, in game 2 of the
Timman- Yusupov Candidates Semi-Final
Match , after 1 1 Qe2+ Be7 12 Bb5 Qd6 1 3 a c d e g h

25
26 London-Leningrad Championship Games
The cowardly 15 . . . Qc5? gave White a
big advantage in the game lvanchuk-Serper
(USSR, 1986): H i Bxb7 Rb8 17 b4! Qb6 18
Qxb6 cxb6 19 Bc6+ Kd8 20 Rdl + Kc7 21 b5 .
I n retreating his queen to a6, B lack retains
his extra pawn and hopes calmly to compl e te
his development. Indeed, at first sight it is
not altogether clear for what White has
sacrificed a pawn. There are no obvious
weaknesses in Black's position , and his king
can castle unhindered on either side. How­
ever, White also has his trumps: the two
bishops (the light- square one being es­
pecially strong, having no opponent and
operating on both flanks) , the possibility of
provoking weaknesses in Black's position by
constant threats , and also of harassing the
black king after K-side castling. The position
of the black queen on the edge of the board
creates additional motifs for combinations ,
and if events develop rapidly it may prove to
be out of play. Nevertheless, Black's game is
based on a sound positional foundation , and
it is instructive to follow how, against all
kinds of tactical tricks by White, he finds
replies which maintain a dynamic balance .
16 Rd l !
A useful move , with several points t o it. In
the first instance White prevents B lack from
castling long and takes control of the d-filc.
The hasty 16 Qf3? would have been strongly
answered by 16 . . . Nd4! , when after 17 Qe3
there is no point in Black winning the ex­
change with an unclear position - 17 . . .
Ne2 + ? ! 18 Khl Ng3 + 1 9 hxg3 Qxfl + 20
Kh2. He should simply castle - 17 . . .
0-0-0 ! , remaining a pawn up with the better
game.
16 • • . Be7
I do not intend to go into an analysis of the
positions arising after 16 . . . Bd6 or 16 . . .
Bc5 . I will say only that they offer boundless
scope for creative thinking. It would seem,
however, that in these lines White's chances
would have been better. His rich attacking
potential is graphically illustrated by the
following variation: 16 . . . Bc5 17 Qf3 c6 18
Rd7 ! ! Kxd7 1 9 Qxt7 + Kd6 (19 . . . Be7 20
Bf5 Qc4 21 Bf4!) 20 Bf4+ Nxf4 21 Qxf4+
Ke7 22 Qe5 + Kf7 23 Qf5 + Ke8 24 Qxc5 with
a virtually irresistible attack. However, 18
. . . 0-0! is stronger: 19 Bd3 Qb6 20 aS Qb4 2 1
Bd2 Oh4 ! (not 21 . . . Qxb2? i n view of 22
Bc3! Qb3 23 Bxg7 Kxg7 24 Qg4+ Kh8 25
QJ5, winning) 22 Rxb7 Rad8 23 Bc3, and
although White has the advantage , a compli ­
cated struggle is in prospect .
17 b4
Now White's idea begins to become clear
- combined play on both flanks. The pawn
offensive on the 0-side pursues the aim of
regaining the pawn , and at the same time the
appearance of his dark-square bishop on the
long diagonal will cause th e black king to feel
uncomfortable even after K-side castling. 1 7
Qh3 i s of interest , with the aim o f keeping the
black king in the centre, but after 17 . . . Rd8
1 8 Rxd8+ Bxd8 19 Be3 Bf6 the weakness of
the 0-side pawns gives Black sufficient
counterplay.
An attempt to improve White's play was
made in Timman- Yusupov (Training
Match , 1 986) - 17 Qf3. The game did not
last long - 1 7 . . . Rd8 18 Bd3 QaS 19 Bd2
Bb4 20 Be3 0-0 21 Oxb7 Nc5 22 BxcS BxcS
23 Qb5 , and a draw was agreed.
Jumping ahead by several moves, I should
mention that 1 7 b3 , preventing the black
queen from going to c4 , would have proved
ineffective because of 17 . . . Bf6 ! (seizing
the long diagonal) 18 Ra2 0-0. But now
17 . . . Bf6 would have led to an unpromising
ending for Black - 1 8 b5 Ob6 19 Oxb6 axb6
20 Bxb7 Bxa1 21 Bxa8 (2/ Ba3 c5!) 2 1
0-0 2 2 Bc6 Rd8 23 Rxd8 Nxd8 2 4 Bd5 .
17 ... 0-0!
Black coolly completes his development.
Excessive greed could have had fatal con­
sequences - 17 . . . Bxb4 18 Qf3 c6 (after
18 . . . Rb8 19 Bb2 it is not apparent how
Black can compl e te his development, since
castling is impossible in view of 20 Qf5 g6 21
Qf6) 1 9 Rd7 ! ! (a familiar idea, but in a
slightly different version) 1 9 . . . Kxd7 (after
 Game 6
:9 . . . Be7 20 Rxb7 Nd4 21 Rxe7+ Kxe7 22
Ba3 + or 19 . . . 0-0 20 Qh3g621 Bxg6! hxg6
::� Bb2 Ng7 23 Qh6 White wins by direct
attack; things are also bad for Black after
1 9 . . . Nd8 20 Bf5 0-0 21 Bb2) 20 Qxf7+
Kd6 21 Bg5 ! ! (much worse is 21 Bf4 + ? Nxf4
�2 Rdl + Nd5 23 Bxd5 Qe2 24 Bf3+ , with
unclear play) 2 1 . . . NxgS (Black also loses
after 21 . . . Rhe8 22 Rdl + Kc5 23Be3+ Kc4
24 Bd3+ ) 22 Rd l + Kc5 23 Qe7 + Kc4 24
Bd3 + Kb3 25 Rb1 + Kc3 26 Qxb4+ Kxd3 27
Rd 1 + , and the black king ' s j ourney to the
centre of the board logically leads to mate .
18 Qh3
Events begin to develop rapidly and forc­
ingly - the crisis is imminent. Unfortu­
nately, the black queen cannot be cut off -
1 8 b5 Rad8 ! , and the weakness of the back
rank tells.
18 ... g6
This weakening of the long diagonal can­
not be avoided - 18 . . . h6? 1 9 Qf5 (weaker
is 19 b5 Qb6 20 Be3 Bc5 21 Bxh6 Bxj2+ 22
Kjl Rfd8 23 Bh7+ Kf8. when White's
activity peters out) 1 9 . . . go 20 Qe5 N gS 2 1
Bxb7 ! Qxb7 2 2 Bb2 f6 23 Qxc 7 , with advan­
tage to White.
19 Bb2?!
This looks very strong: White intends to
line up his queen and bishop, and it appears
not at all easy for Black to defend against the
threat of 20 Qc3 without detriment to his
position - 19 . . . Ng5? 20 Qh6 Bf6 21
Bxb7 ! , or 19 . . . Bxb4? 20 Rd3 Ng7 (21
Qxh7+ was threatened) 2 1 Qh6 f6 22 Rd7.
Black also has a difficult position after 19 . . .
Nf4? 20 Qf3 Qe2 2 1 Bxb7 RabS 22 Bd4.
However, Karpov was able to foresee
some latent defensive resources , and there­
fore the queen/bishop battery shoul d have
been set up in reverse order - 19 Qc3 ! Now
Black is obliged to play very accurately -
1 9 . . . Ng5 ! ( after 1 9 . . . f5? 20 Bd5 Bf6 21
Qb3 Bxal 22 BxefJ + White wins) . when
there can follow 20 Bxg5 (20 Bb2 Bf623Qxf6
Qxf6 24 Bxf6 Nxe4 23Be7 Rfe8 24 Rd7 Nc3!
27
leads to an equal game) 20 . . . Bxg5 21 Qxc7
Rad8! - this move e nables Black to main­
tain the balance , whereas after 21 . . . Rab8?
22 b5 Qb6 23 Qxb6 axb6 24 Rd6 or 21 . . .
Rac8? ! 22 Bxb7! Rxc7 23 Bxa6 White has
quite good winning chances.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a b c d e g h
19 ... Qc4!
The unexpected entry of the black queen
causes disharmony in the ranks of the white
pieces. White is a pawn down , and deter­
mined measures arc demanded of him, but
now he is obliged to lose time . . .
In our preparatory an alysis we under­
estimated the strength of this move . Here I
pondered for a long time, especially since the
position gave considerable food for thought.
I f 2 0 Bxb7, then 20 . . . Rad8! (20 . . .
Rab8 21 Bd5 Qc2 22 Be5 is weaker for
B lack) , seizing the initiative, e.g. 2 1 Qc3
Rxdl + 22 Rxd l Qxc3 23 Bxc3 Rb8 . or 21
Rdc1 Qxb4 22 Ba3 Qxb7 23 Bxc7 Nf4 24 Qg4
RfeH.
The cunning 20 Re I is also strongly met
by 20 . . . Rad8 ! (but not 20 . . . Bxb4 in view
of 21 Re3! with the threat of 22 Qxh7+ ) 2 1
Bxg6 (now 21 Re3 does not work - 21 . . .
Bg5!) 21 . . . fxg6 22 Rxe6 Qc2.
20 Bd5 Qc2 21 BeS appears strong, but
again 21 . . . Rad8! changes the situation in
favour of B lack - 22 Rdcl Qd2 (the queen
sacrifice 22 . . . Qxcl + and 23 . . . Rxd5 is
28 London- Leningrad Championship Games
also possible, with a good game) 23 Bxe6 21 Qxb4
fxe6 24 Oxe6+ Rf7. Now the pseudoactive 22 Bc3 Nf4!
25 Rxc7? leads to a dismal finish : 25 . . .
Qxf2+ 26 Khl Rd2 27 Rc8+ (27 Rgl ? The most clear-cut decision, safeguarding
Qxgl + !) 27 . . . BfH 22 Rxf8+ Kxf8 29 Qc8+ Black against any accidents - he takes play
Ke7 30 Oxb7+ Ke6, but the sensible 25 B g3 into an endgame where he even has a slight
retains drawing chances. positional advantage.
After thinking for 69 minutes I decided on 22 . . . Ob6 23 aS Qa6 24 Re I was dan­
gerous (White retains chances of an attack) ,
20 Rd7
as was 22 . . . Of4 23 Bxe6 fxe6 24 Oxe6+
Rf7 (or 24 . . . Qf125 Qe3! Qf4 26 Ref ! Qxe3
This looks pretty , e.g. 20 . . . Bxb4 2 1 27 Rxe3 Rf6 28 Bxf6 Rxe3 29 Rg7+ , when
Bxg6 ! , 20 . . . Bd6 2 1 Bxg6 ! , o r 2 0 . . . Oxe4 White emerges a piece up) 25 Re 1 (on 25 Bd4
21 Qc3 f6 (21 . . . Nd4 22 Rxd4 Qe5 23 Ref Black has the strong reply 25 . . . Rd8!) 25
Qf6 24 Rxe7 Qxe7 25 Re4 is no better for . . . Qxf2 + 26 Kh I Kf8 (no better is 26 . . .
Black) 22 Rxe7 . with a strong attack . And Qf5 27 Qxf5 Rxf5 28 g4, with the threats of
the ending arising after 20 . . . Qxb4 21 Bxg6 Rb4 and Rxc 7) 27 Rddl ! , and again Black's
Ng5 22 Bxh7+ Nxh7 23 Ba3 Qh4 24 Bxe7 defence is difficult.
Oxh3 25 gxh3 is highly unpleasant for Black .
But Black has in reserve a simpler 23 Bxb4 Nxh3+
measure. 24 gxh3 Bxb4
25 Rxc7
20 Rae8!
21 Bd5

Played with the now complete realization

that White's pretty idea has proved ine ffec­
tive , and that he has to concern himself over
maintaining eq uality .
Commentators can lightly sacrifice '·other
people's'' pawns, and they suggested 2 I Re I
Qxb4 22 Bc3. During the game I considered
the position arising after 22 . . . Ng5 (not
22 . . . Qxa4? 23 Rxg6!) 23 Qd3 Qxa4, and
was afraid that I would not obtain an attack .
For example , 24 Rd4 Qa3 (after 24 . . . Qa6
25 Qxa6 bxa6 26 Rc6 White wins the ex­
change) 25 Ral Qc5 26 Rd5 Nxe4! 27 Rxc5
Bxc5 with advantage to B lack. Nevertheless,
it would seem that White can avoid danger by The lively tactical skirmish has concluded,
the combinational blow 24 Bxg6! At first and on the board we have a prosaic endgame.
sight 24 . . . Bf6 appears to be a highly un­ Within a move White will restore the
pleasant rej oinder, but then White has a material balance , and it might seem that a
pretty mate ! - 25 Bxf7+ ! Nxf7 26 Qg3+ peace agreement is not far off.
Ng5 27 Qxg5 + ! etc. Therefore 24 . . . hxg6 is But the point is that - with the rooks on
essential, and after 25 Rexe7 Rxe7 26 Rxe7 it the board - White's broken K-side pawns
transpires that 26 . . . Re8? fails to 27 Qd4 ! , may become a target for attack. The f2 pawn
while after, say , 2 6 . . . Qf4 White has the demands particular attention, and on its
drawing combination 27 Qxg6 + . retention depends the fate of the game.
 Game 6 29
This is the type of positiOn in which 36 Kg2 Rc7
=-:. :u pov is especially strong - he has no 37 Bb3
� ,,ncrete threats, but he can indulge in
White has to play very carefully (37 Bb5
: ;; ngthy and unhurried manoeuvring, await­
Rc2 followed by . . . Bc5) to avoid ending up
:ng a mistake by the opponent. For a typical
in zugzwang. Passiveness and inertness m
;;xample it is sufficient to recall the 20th game
such positions can prove catastrophic.
,,f our previous match , in which Karpov tried
·squeezing' me right up to move 85. 37 1'5
38 Rd3 Bc5
25 ... b6 39 Rc3 Kf6
A somewhat unexpected decision - Black 40 Rc4
i ntends to retain his b-pawn . I fancy that the The dubious 40 f4? ! would have been
majority of players would have preferred unnecessarily weakening.
25 . . . ReS , aiming to activate the pieces as
quickly as possible (the transfer of the rook 40 gS
to f5 is threatened) . B ut Karpov's plan is also 41 Rc2 Ke5
quite well founded - it is to secure the c5 42 Bc4
square for his bishop, which will train its 42 Rd2 was possibly more exact.
sights on f2.
26 Rxa7 Kg7 8
27 Rd7 Rd8

The white rook is too active , and must be

exchanged . After 27 . . . ReS 28 Rbl BcS 29
Rb3! White would have successfully re­ 5
grouped his pieces (Rj3 is now possible),
4
covering his K-side pawns and creating a
potential threat to the f7 pawn . 3

28 Rxd8 Rxd8 2
29 Rdl Rd6
30 Rd3
a c d e t g h
While preventing the possible activation of
the black king (30 . . . Kf6 31 Rf:'+ ), White
intends to wait, basing his play in accordance Here the game was adjourned, and in
with the opponent's actions. analysis a search for the most accurate plan
of defence was begun. Things are by no
30 hS means as simple as they might appear at first
31 Kfl Rd7 glance. It was established that a passive
32 Kg2 Bc5 stance by Whit e - bishop at b5 , rook at e2 -
33 Kfl h4 does not succeed . Black plays his king to f4,
This essentially fixes the weakness of the regroups with . . . Rc3 and . . . Bc5 , and with
h2 pawn . This move could have been de­ his pieces activated to the maximum he
layed, to retain the possibility of playing threatens to break through with . . . g4. The
. . . g4, but Karpov had decided to make this attempt to " latch on" to the fS pawn by
breakthrough with the help of his f-pawn. transferring the rook to f3 and bishop to d3
also does not give a complete guarantee.
34 Bc4 Re7 B lack plays . . . f4 , penetrates with his rook
35 Rf3 Bd6 onto the second rank, and then, under the
30 London- Leningrad Championship Games
cover of his bishop ( . . . Bc3) , his king also
goes to the second ran k . After this the bishop
reverts to its former position . It is not diffi­
cult to carry out this regrouping, but can
Black also place White in zugzwang and gain
the e l square for his king?
In the assessment of such positions,
general reasoning prevails, and making a
concrete calculation of all the possibilities is
not easy . Here are some sample variations:
42 . . . Rd7 43 Bb5 (43 Be2 is also interest­
ing, e.g. 43 . . . Bb4 44 Rc4 Ba5 45 Rc2 Rd4
46 Bb5 Rd1 47 Re2+ K.f4 48 Re3, and White's
defences ho ld ) 43 . . . Rd5 (otherwise White
pl a ys a4-a5) 44 Re2 + Kf6 45 Rc2 (or 45
Bc4) , and White maintains the balance.
42 . . . Bb4 43 Kf3 Rd7 (the correct reply
to 43 . . . Kd4 is 44 B d3 .1) 44 Re2+ Kd4 45
Be6. Here 43 Bb3 ! is probably even stronger:
43 . . . Rd7 44 Re2+ Kf4 45 Be6 Re7 46 Rd3,
and it is not apparent how B lack can
strengthen his position .
In a word , 1 was not absolutely clear about
the adjourned position, although a draw
seemed the most probable result. I was
greatly surprised, therefore , when I learned
that Karpov had offered a draw without
resuming. Such a step seems to me an
inadmissible luxury in a match for the World
Championship. Perhaps Ka rpo v considered
his situation so favourable , that he was
unable to force himself to play tlat out?
 GAM E 7

Karpov-Kasparov 8 Qd2!

Queen's Gambit This is Petrosian's idea (instead of the

All the same, the match initiative had
passed to Karpov. "Match initiative" is a
psychological phenomenon, but for the one
who loses it , it often turns into a "material"
loss (an analogous situation arose after game
3 of the 1 9R5 match ) .
1 d4 d5
The Gri.infeld Defence is given temporary
frequently employed 8 Bd3, which simplifies
the game) . White is not concerned about the
loss of time : he has a solid position in the
centre and hopes to exploit the weakening
(by . . . g6) of the dark squares on the K-side ,
while the g6 pawn restricts the bishop at f5
and soon allows White to drive it from its
important diagonal.
8 Nd7
. . .

retirement, and on to the stage at last comes Black's main problem is the development
the Queen's Gambit, which someone aptly of his minor pieces, which can be driven hack
named "the opening of World Championship after f2-f3 and e3-e4-e5 (or g3-g4) . In
Matches". order to reduce the effectiveness of the pawn
offensive , I decided to delay the develop­
2 c4 e6
ment of my knight from g8 . Belyavsky pre­
3 Nc3 Be7
ferred the energetic 8 . . Nf6 9 f3 c5 , but
4 cxd5 exd5
.

after \0 Bb5 + Nc6 1 1 dxc5 Bxc5 12 N a4 Bc7

5 Bf4
13 Bh6 White retained the initiative . Matters
In the previous match this posttiOn were even worse for Black in the game
occurred in games 20, 21 and 22. Karpov Gulko-Anikayev ( 1 983) : 8 . . . N f6 9 f3 h5 1 0
played 5 c6, while I chose 5 . Nf6.
. . . . . Nge2 Nbd7 1 1 Ng3 Be6 1 2 Bd3 0-0 13 0-0
Re8 14 Rae I , and a few moves later White
5 c6
advanced e3-e4 with great effect.
. • •

Yet another reversal of roles ! Incidentally,

9 f3 Nb6
in game 8 the Ex-World Champion was to
10 e4 Be6
play 5 . . . Nf6!
II e5!
6 Qc2

The main continuation is 6 e3 B f5 7 g4 (the (see following diagram)

Botvinnik Variation) , as in game 21 of the
previous match. The queen move used to
have a harmless reputation, but in the game
Petrosian-Belyavsky ( 1 982) , which Karpov
in fact follows , White demonstrated a new
and interesting path .
6 g6
7 e3 81'5
Karpov took this committing decision
without hesitation (however, there would
appear to be no sensible alternative: II Bd3
dxe4; or 11 b3 a5.'?). White seizes space and
restricts the knight at g8, while 1 1 . . . Nc4 12
Bxc4 dxc4 13 Ne4 is to his advantage.
11 h5'!!

31
32 London-Leningrad Championship Games
16 Kf8
17 Kg2 aS
18 a3
Karpov is true to himself - he wants to
deprive Black of even a glimmer of counter­
play. He could have played the direct 18 h3
a4 19 g4 hxg4 20 hxg4 Rxh l 21 Kxh 1 (the
piece sacrifice 21 . . . axb3 22 gxf5 Qxf5 can­
not seriously he considered) .
18 0 0 0 Qd8

Black has in mind 19 h3 g5, and in addition

he vacates d7 for the future manoeuvre
. . . Nd7-f8-e6. 18 . . a4 19 h4 Nc4 was bad
.

because of 20 Bxc4 dxc4 21 Ne4 Qd5 22 Nf2

Preparing . . . Bf5 - a poor decision. 1 1
followed by Ne2-c3 .
. . . f5 was correct, and if 1 2 Nh3 h6, although
after 12 exf6 White would still appear to have 19 Nh3!
the better chances.
A further correction to the plan. Since
12 Bd3 Qd7 Black cannot tolerate the appearance of this
13 b3! knight at g5 , he is forced to exchange it, and
to White's many positional plusses is added
More subtle than 13 N ge2 . On 13 . . . Bf5
the two bishops. White's advantage is be­
White can play 1 4 Bxf5 Qxf5 1 5 Nh3 ! - this
coming overwhelming.
position did not appeal to me . And it was
here that a fanciful idea came to mind . . . 19 Bxh3+
20 Kxh3 Kg7
13 0 0 0 Bh4 + ?
21 Kg2 Nd7
A case o f the '"medicine'' being worse than
The transfer of the knight to c6 is the only
the ''illness" ! The loss of time involved with
sensibleaction .
this manoeuvre aggravates Black's diffi­
culties. 22 Bd3 Nf8
23 Be3 Ne6
14 g3
24 Ne2 Nh6
If 14 Bg3, then 14 . . . Be7 (or 14 . . . Bd8)
and . . . Nh6.
14 0 0 . Be7 8
Black has prevented Nh3 . hut this detail
does not affect the character of the play.
6
15 Kf2 Bf5
5
16 Bfl!
4
A change of plan in a changed situation.
Of course , 16 Re l also promises an advan­ 3
tage, hut Karpov's idea is more unpleasant: 2
White threatens to drive hack the bishop
from f5 (h2-h3 and g3-g4) and to "smother"
his opponent. a b c d e g h
 Game 7 33
Objectively White has a winning position 31 ... hxg3
- Black has no way of opposing the advance
A move which was unj ustly criticized -
of the K-side pawns (which could have been
against correct play , White w�uld not have
begun a move earlier - 24 h3 etc . ) . Knowing
been able to exploit the h-file. On 31 . . . Rc8
Karpov's i ron technique (added to mv lack of
I was afraid of 32 g4 (in the event of
time on the clock , and the u nfa;ourable
32 . . . h3 + the square h 1 has now been
nature of the play in the preceding games) , I
took a pessimistic view here of my chances. p repar� d for the king) 32 . . . Rc5 (32 . . . g5
I S possibly stronger) 33 Nxe7 Oxe7 34 f4.
When suddenly . . .
32 hxg3 Rc8
25 b4?!
33 Rhl
Without the slightest necessitv White
33 Nxe7 Qxe7 34 Rh 1 Rch8 35 Rxh6 Rxh6
opens a second front, at a time �hen the
36 Qxa5 is weak because of 36 . . . Q g5 with a
game could have been decided by direct
strong attack.
action on the K-side : 25 h3 fol lowed by
g3-g4, or 25 Rhfl followed by f4-f5 . Even
after 25 b4 White probably retains the advan­
tage, but now Black is at least able to display
some activity.
25 ... Qb6
26 b5? 5
Amazing! 26 Rab l axb4 27 axb4 Ra3 28 4
Rhcl was stronger, when in reply to b4-b5
3
Black is unable to seize the initiative by
. . . c5 . 2

26 ... c5!
Of course , not 26 . . . cxbS 27 Nc3 Nc7 28 c e g h
Nxb5 Nxb5 29 Rhbl.
33 Rxhl'?
27 Nc3
Black's lack of time tells . Correct, of
After 27 dxc5 Bxc5 28 Bxc5 QxcS Black is
course , was 33 . . . B g.S ! 34 f4 Rc5 ! 35 fxg5
again excellently placed.
Rxh l 36 Rxh l Rxd5 - this position arises
27 cxd4 (after an answering mistake by White) in the
28 Bxh6+ Rxh6 game . 36 Kxh 1 Rxd5 37 Bxd5 Qxd5 + 38 Q g2
29 Nxd5 Qd8 Qxb5 is also to Black's advantage , but
30 Be4 h4 weaker here is 36 . . . Nxg5 37 Qxd4 Nxe4 38
e6 + f6 . and now not 39 e7? Qh8+ 40 Kg2 (40
Black's achievements are obvious - even
Kgl Rc2) 40 . . . Rc2 + 4 1 Kf3 Qh5 + 42 Kxe4
his rook at h6 is in play!
Q f5 + 43 Ke3 Qf2 + 44 Ke4 Re2 + 45 Ne3 Qf5
31 Rhfl ?! mate ! , but 39 Qxe4 Qxd5 wi th a probable
draw. It is surprising that all the commen­
3 1 g4? ! h3+ was dubious for White, but 31
tators who criticized 31 . . . hxg3 overlooked
Rhcl was better, e . g . 3 1 . . . Nc5 32 Rabl
the possibility of holding the h-file hv - a
hxg3 33 hxg3 Nxe4 34 fxe4 Qd7 35 Rh I Rah8
simple transposition of moves!
36 Qxd4 Qg4 37 e6+ f6 38 Rxh6 Qe2+ 39
Of2 Qxe4+ 40 Qf3 Oc2+ with a draw. Now 34 Rxh l Bg5
the advantage passes to Black. 35 f4 Rc5
34 London-Leningrad Championship Games
0 c d e g h
36 fxgS?
Confusion. At this point. for the first time
in the game. Karpov caught up with me on
the clock and , seemingly unsettled, decided
to simplify matters , agreeing even to a clearly
inferior position .
36 Qa2? ! is also dangerous for White:
36 . . . d3 ! 37 Kf3 (37 Ne3? Qd4 38 Kf3
Rxe5!) 37 . . . Rc2 (if 37 . . . Nd4+ B lack
wins after both 38 Kg4? Qc8 + 39 KxgS Nf3 +
40 Bxf? Qf5 + 41 Kh4 g5 + 42 fxg5 Qxf3, and
38 Ke3 Nf5 + 39 Kxd3? Nxg3 or 39 Bxf5 ?
Rx(L5 40 Qh2 gxf5 , but it would appear that
after 39 Kf3 White can hold on) 38 QaL and
here Black h as several tempting continu-
ations : 38 . . . Bh6, 38 . . . Rc4 (with the
threat o f . . . Rxe4 ) , 38 . . . Qc8 (39 .fxg5?
Nxg5 + 40 Kf4 Rj2 + 41 Kxg5 Rf5+ 42 Kg4
Rjl + ) .
The h-file could have been exploited by 36
Kg I ! Rxd5'? 37 Bxd5 Qxd5 38 Qh2! Kf8 39
Qh8+ Ke7 40 fxg5 with a winning position.
The only defence is 36 . . . f5 ! Around this
position a lively discussion developed. and it
was established , firstly, that after 37 fxg5
fxe4 38 N f6 Black cannot play 38 . . . Nf8
because of 39 Qa2! Secondly. after 38 . . . e3
39 Rh7 + Kf8 40 Qd3 ( 40 Rh8+ Kg7 does not
ach ieve anything) B lack is hardly helped by
the cl ever trick 40 . . . Nxg5 ! ? ( 41 RhB + ?
Kg7 42 Rxd8 Nf3 + 43 Kfl Rei + , but 41
Qxg6! is dangerous for him). Thirdly, on 40
Qdl (or 40 Qd3) Black is saved by 40 . . . e2
4 1 Qxe2 Rei + only in the event of 42 Kh2 d3
43 Qf3 Rc2 + , but 42 Kf2! wins (42 . . . d3 43
Rh8+ Ke7 44 Rxd8 dxe2 45 Rd7+ ) .
So, Karpov could have won? Tell me ­
how? , if after 36 Kgl ! f5 ! 37 fxg5 B l ack
replies 37 . . . d3 ! ! Now it is clear that 38
Qh2?? Re i + or 38 Rh7+ ? ? Kxh7 39 Qh2+
Kg8 40 Nf6+ Qxf6 ! loses for White . Only a
draw is given by 38 Nf6 Qd4+ 39 Kfl fxe4 40
Rh7+ Kf8 4 1 Nd7 + , and the same result is
the most likely after 38 Bg2 (38 Bf3 Nd4)
38 . . . Rxd5 39 Bxd5 QxdS. Meanwhile,
both in London, and after the conclusion of
match as a whole, Karpov declared that by 36
Kgl he could have won game 7. Can the Ex-
Champion really not have noticed a possi­
bility such as 37 . . . d3 ! ! either on the first
glance at the position, or the second, or the
third ?
36 RxdS
37 BxdS Qxd5 +
QxeS
38 Kh2
QxbS
39 RO
40 Qf2
NxgS?!
40
. • •
This move does not give any winning
chances, and after making it l offered a draw .
Unfortunately, I completely overlooked the
simple 40 . . . Qd7! The weakness at g5 , the
dangerous p a sse d pawn at d4 - all this
would have made White's defence a difficult
matter.
 Game 7 35
41 Qxd4 + Kg8 easily parried , and the following day . on
Karpov's proposal , the players a g ree d a
This last move was sea l ed but the game
,

draw.
·' JS not resumed . A tt e m pts by either side are
 GAM E S

Kasparov-Karpov dream of (10 . . . d4? 11 Na4) . It is on such

imperceptible hut significant subtleties that
Queen 's Gambit modern opening theory is built.
1 d4 dS 8 Nf3!
2 c4 e6
This flexi bility is essential. After 8 dxc5
3 Nc3 Be7
B xc5 White is u n a b le to prevent the simplify­
4 cxdS exdS
ing break in the ce n t re , c .g. 9 Nf3 Nc6 10 0-0
5 Bf4 Nf6
d4 1 1 Na4 Bd6! 1 2 Bxd6 Qxd6 13 N xd4 (13
6 e3 0-0
exd4 Bg4) 13 . . . Nxd4 14 exd4 Bg4 ! , and
"We all learned little by little . " * The
. . B l ack has no reason to complain.
outcome of the ope ni ng battle i n game 22 of
8 Nc6
the 19H5 Match evidently did n ot appear
9 0-0
convincing to Karpov, and he is ready to try
and defend this same position as Black .
7 Bd3 cS! 8

Behind these two outwardly unremark­ 7

able moves are concealed counteracti o n s 6
against the two players' pl a n s . White has not
5
allowed the black bishop to come out to f5 ,
but has weakened his control over d4, which 4
the opponent promptly exploits by initiating
play i n the centre .
Here it is appropriate to recall games 20
and 22 of the previous match . In one of them ,
after 7 Nf3 Bf5 White went to extreme
measures in his battle against the opponent's
active light-square bishop - 8 h3 and 9 g4,
while in the other he played Qc2 (or rather, White is not afraid of the e xcha ng e on d 4
there was a transposition of moves - 6 Qc2 - the pawn structure arising a fte r this does
0-0 7 e3) , preventing the bishop from coming not in itself promise Black an easy life :
out . but again weakening his control over d4, 9 . . . cxd4 10 Nxd4 Nxd4 11 exd4 Qb6 ( 1 1 . . .

which B lack exploited to equalize quickly -
7 . . . c5 8 dxc5 B xc5 9 Nf3 Nc6 10 Be2 d4 etc.
It should also be mentioned that after 7
Nf3 c5 8 dxc5 Bxc5 9 Be2 Nc6 10 0-0 the
. . . d4 break is something B lack can only
Bg4 12 Qb3) 1 2 Rel Be6 13 Na4 Qa5 1 4 a3.
and after the inevitable b2-b4 the pressure of
the active white pieces becomes unpleasan t .
9 . . . Bg4

Black's consistent strategy forces White to

• A famous line from Pushkin's Evgeni Onegin
exchange on c5 , since it is not possible to
(Translator's note). maintain the d4 pawn any longer. It may
37
3X London-Leningrad Championship Games
seem that now Black will easi l y solv e his Rxd8 RaxdX 25 Qh4+ Kg7 26 Qg3 + , and
o pe n i n g
p ro blem s . but within two moves he Black can resign .
has a new task to solve . The Ex-World Champion's sense of
da n ger did not betray him, bu t suggested t o
10 dxc5 Bxc5
him the m o st rational and reliable defence.
11 h3

The black b ish op is now o b l i ge d to declare

i ts i n t e n tio n s . Re tai n i n g the p in by I I . . .
Bh5? i s not possible - 1 2 g4 ! B g6 1 3 B xg6
hxg6 1 4 g5. and White wins a pawn . The
retreat to e6 is equ ival ent to defeat in the
struggle for the c e n t ra l squares. Th a t only
le av e s the move in the game, wh ich gives
White the advantage of the two bishops .
11 nxt3
12 Qxf3 d4

After m a king this t h e m a t i c advance, nor­

m a l l y B lack can c a l m l y look to the futu re . It
wo u l d appear that this i s also the case here ,
especially si n ce it is n o t apparent hmv White
can gain any pe r ce p t i b l e a dv a n t age from his
t wo bishops: 13 exd4? ! N xd4 14 Qxb7? Ne6�
- the bi s hop s come under a t t a c k , and one of
them is lo s t . However. by e xploiting tactical
n u a nc e s resu lt i n g from the e xistence of his
l i gh t-square b i sh op . W h i te s u cc e ed s i n
av oi di n g s i m p l i fication and in retai n in g the
initiative.
13 Nc4! Be7
I Iere t h e commentators una n i m o us ly (and
unj ust ly ! ) c ri t ici ze d Black for his fai l u re to
simplify - 1 3 . . . l\'xc4 1 4 Bxe4 ( 1 4 Qxe4 g6)
14 . . . dxe3. a s s u m i ng that in this case
\Vh i t e ' s activity wo uld o nl y he t e m p o rary -
15 Oh5 (after 15 Bxe3 Hxe3 16 Qxe3 ReB
White has merely a sy mb o l ic ad van t a ge )
1 5 . . . exf2 + 16 K h 1 f5 17 Bxf5 g6 1 8 Be6+
Kg7 19 Qxc5 Rxf4 20 Rxf2 R x f2 21 Oxf2 Qe7
with an e q ua l gam e . or 1 8 Bxgo hxg6 1 9
Oxg6 + K h 8 . wh e n White s u p po se d ly has
nothing m o re than perpet ua l check . But let
us continue this last v a r i a t i o n - 20 Rad 1 !
Bd4 (things are also d i s m a l for B l ac k after
20 . . . Qfo 2 1 Qh5 + Kg8 22 Rd5 R.f7 23 Bg5)
2 1 Qh5+ Kg7 22 0g4+ Kh8 (22 . . . Kh 7 also
fai ls to save the gam e : 23 Be3 Bxe3 24 Qe4+
fo l lowed by Rxd8 and Qxe3) 23 Bc3 Bxe3 24
How should White now continue? 14 exd4
i s wrong on p ri n c iple (it is B l a ck who should
he ai m i n g in the fir st instance to relieve th e
tension ) : 1 4 . . . Qxd4 1 4 Rad 1 Ob6. and
White has n o t h i ng re a l .
White has a stable plus after 1 4 Nxf6+
Bxf6 15 e4 Ne5 16 Bxe5 Bxe5 1 7 Qe2 ,
i n t e n d i ng a l a t e r f2-f4 . hut in this case the
ga m e is s i m p l ifi e d .
I wa nt e d more: to complete my develop­
ment q u i ck ly , concentrate my fo rces i n the
centre . and then switch to a n attack o n the K­
si d e . With this aim a roo k move to d 1
suggests itself. but once <�gain there i s the
eternal dilemma - which roo k t o p l a ce on
this square, q ueen's or k i ng ' s? Reckoning
that after 14 R ad l White would create a
powerful group of attacking p i e ce s . I decided
to retain for my rook at fl the prospect of
com ing into p l ay on the K -sid e .
14 Rad l Qa5!
The attack on the Q-side pawns i s the basis
of Black's counterplay. He did h ave an
alternative - apart from the move in the
game , 14 . . . Qb6 ! ? came seriously into con­
sideration (it is obvious that both 14 . . . Nd5
 Game S
15 Bh2 dxe3? 16 Bc4 and 15 . . . Qh6 16 Nd6
are bad for Black ) . Now White has two ways
to develop his i nitiative:
(a) 1 5 BgS Nd5? 16 QhS (16 Qf5? is weaker
in view o f /6 . . . Rad8 17 Nc3 g6! 18 Nxd5
gxf5 19 Nxb6 Bxg5 20 Nc4 b5! with chances
for both sides) 16 . . . g6 (the only move,
otherwise White breaks up his opponent's K­
side - 16 . . . Bxg5 1 7 Nxg5 h6 1R Nxf7! /'1lj6
1 9 Nxh6+ gxh6 20 Qg6+ Kh8 21 Qxh6+ Kg8
22 Bc4+) 1 7 Qh6 f6 1 8 Bc4! fxgS 1 9 Bxd5 +
Kh8 20 Nxg5 ! (the careless 20 Bxc6?! is
refuted by the clever 20 . . . Rf5!. threatening
to trap the queen by 21 . . . Bf8) 20 . . . B xgS
21 Qxg5 RfS 22 Qh4 dxe3 (of course , not
22 . . . Rxd5 ? because of 23 Qf6+ followed
by 24 Qe6 + , winning the exchange) 23 fxe3
Qxe3 + 24 Kh l Qg5 (both 24 . . . Qe2? 25
Rxf5l Qxd1 + 26 Kh2 and 24 . . . Raf8? 25
Rxf'i Rxf5 26 Bxc6 bxc6 27 Rd8 + Kg7 28
Rd7+ Rf7 29 Rxf7+ Kxf7 30 Qxh7+ Kf6 3/
Qh8+ Kf7 32 Qc3 arc hopeless for Black) 25
Qc4 - White has an obvious positional
advantage .
Black should reply to 1 5 Bg5 with 1 5 . . .
Nc5 ! , provoking simplification , e.g. 1 6 Q f5
Nxd3 17 Bxf6 Bxf6 1 8 Nxf6 + Qxf6 1 9 Qxf6
gxf6 20 Rxd3 dxe3 2 1 fxe3 (21 Rxe3!? is also
interesting) 21 . . . Rfd8! 22 Rfd l (after 22
Rxd8+ Rxd8 23 Rxf6 Black equalizes by an
unusual rook manoeuvre - 23 . . . Rd1 + 24
Rfl Rd3! 25 Re1 Rd2!) 22 . . . Rxd3 23 Rxd3
ReS 24 Rd7 Rxe3 25 Rxb7 (25 Kf1 b5)
25 . . . Re2 - it is clear that with correct
defence B lack should not lose this ending.
(b) 1 5 Bd6 ! ? NdS ! (the alternatives are
hopeless for B lack - 15 . . . Bxd6? 16 Nxf6+
gxf6 1 7 Qg4+ Kh8 18 Qf'i , or 15 . . . Nxe4?
16 Bxe7 Rfe8 1 7 Bxe4 Rxe7 18 Bxc6 bxc6 19
A highly practical decision . It is not even a
Rxd4) 1 6 Qf5 (16 Ng5? would miss t h e mark :
question of the a2 pawn, but that Black
16 . . . Bxg5 1 7 Bxf8 Nxe3! 18fxe3 Bxe3 + 19
chooses the shortest path to e6. where the
Khl Rxf8 with an unclear game) 16 . . . Bxd6
17 Nxd6 Nf6 18 Nc4 Qc7 1 9 e4 - the threat of
e4-e5 is highly unpleasant , and White is
assured of a strategic initiative.
Karpov's decision (14 . . . Qa5!) seems to
me to be more crucial and correct.
15 Ng3!
39
An unusual and. at first sight , strange
decision - White removes a piece from the
centre to the wing. In analogy with the
vanatwns after 14 . . . Qb6 considered
above, 15 Bg5 suggests itself, especially since
in this case 15 . . . Ne5'! no longer works
because of 1 6 Nxf6+ Bxf6 17 Qf5 - w·hat
tells here is that from aS the queen does not
control f6. A further argument can be made
in favour of 1 5 Bg5 - 1 5 . . . Bd5? 16 Qh5
Bxg5 (or 16 . . . g6 17 Qh4 f6 18 Bh6 f5 19
Ng5 Rfd8 20 Bc4 Bf6 21 e4 fxe4 22 Qxe4. and
wins) 17 Nxg5 h6 18 B h7 + Kh8 19 Be4 ! ( 1 9
Bbl ? Qc7!) 1 9 . . . Nf6 ( 1 9 . . . Nxe3?! 20
Nxj7+ Rx.f7 21 Qg6 Kg8 22 fxe3) 20 Nxf7 +
Kg8 (20 . . . Rxf7 21 Qx.fl Nxe4 22 Qxb7) 2 1
Nxh6 + ! gxh6 22 Qg6 + Kh8 23 Qxh6 + Kg8
24 Bd3! Ne5 25 exd4 , and White has a certain
win .
However the accurate 1 5 . . . Nxe4! would
have solved Black's problems , e . g . 16 Qxe4
(16 Bxe7?! Nd2!) 16 . . . g6 1 7 Bxe7 RfeR 1 8
b4! ? (after 18 Qh4 Rxe7 1 9 exd4 Qb4! 20 Be4
Rae8 21 Bxc6 hxc6 the activity of the black
pieces deprives White of any hopes of
success) 18 . . . Qc7! (18 . . . Qb6? 19 Bc5!)
1 9 b5 Rxe7 20 Qh4 dxe3! 21 bxc6 e2. " Look
before you leap" - remember the diffi­
culties over the choice of 14 Rad 1 (instead of
the possible 14 Rfdl)?
15 .. dxe3
.
16 l'xe3
The excessively optimistic 1 6 N IS! ! would
most probably have favoured Black . For the
moment White should not take on too great
obligations.
16 ... Qxa2!
queen will cement together his defences and
keep control of the i mportant strategic point
e5. Note that all the same B lack could not
have prevented the i nvasion of the knight at
f5 - 16 . . . g6'? 1 7 Bh6 Rfe8 18 Nf5 ! with a
very strong attack .
17 NI'S Qe6
40 London-Leningrad Championship Games
a b c d e g
IR Bh6!
It wa s difficult to refrain from this spec­
tacular move , beginning a direct attack on
the black king. White's position is so good
that he could also have played 1 8 Nxc7+
Nxe7 (18 . . Qxe719 Bd6!) 19 Qxb7 , retain­
.
ing slightly the better chances . B ut it would
have been a pity to give up such a fine knigh t ,
which later might play o n e o f t h e leading
roles . . .
18
NeR
• . .
For the moment Rlack is not able to
<.:ountcrattack - 18 . . . Ne5? 19 Qxb7 Nxd3
(White also wins after 19 . . . gxh6 20 Qxe7
Nd5 21 Qc5) 20 Nxg7 (20 Nxe7+ Kh8 21
Bxg7+ Kxg7 22 Rxd3 is also perfectly poss­
ible) 20 . . . Qe4 2 1 Oc7 ! Ne5 22 Nf5 with a
Jecisive attack .
19 Qh5!
19 Be4 is weaker because of 1 9 . . . gxh6 20
3xc6 bxc6 21 Qxc6 Nd6!
19 . g6!
. .
The only sensible decision - B l ack gives
1p the exchange , but mai ntains a defensible
)OSition . It would certainly have been bad to
>lay 1 9 . . . Nf6? 20 Nxe7 + Nxc7 21 Rxf6 !
�xf6 (2/ . . . Qxf6 22 Bxh 7+ Kh8 23 Bg5,
vinning) 22 I3xf8 Kxf8 (Black also loses after
'2 . . . Qxe3 + 23 Khl Kxf8 24 Bc4! Ng6 25
}xh7 Qe7 26 Qh6+) 23 Oh6+ Ke8 24 Qg7 !
Qxe3 + 25 Kh 1 Qg5 26 Bb5 + Nc6 27 Re l + ,
when White wins by a direct attack.
20 Qg4 NeS!
This knight move is necessary, otherwise
the white bishop goes to c4 with decisive
effect - 20 . . . Bf6? 21 Bc4 Ne5 22 Bxe6
Nxg4 23 Ne7+ Bxc7 24 Bxf8 Nxe3 25 Rxf7
Bxf8 26 Rdd7 with inevitable mate .
8
h
7
5
4
3
2
21 Qg3?!
White 's desire to decide the game at all
costs by direct attack leads him astray. After
the logical 2 1 Nxe7 + Qxe7 22 B x f8 Kxf8 23
Qf4 he would have won the exchange and
taken the game into a technical phase ,
although the realization of his advantage
would have been not at all simple - Karpov
is a great master of defending such positions.
21 . . . Bf6!
Black coolly conducts a difficult defence .
22 Bb5!?
After 22 B xf8 Kxf8 23 Nd4 Qe7 Black
would have had sufficient compensation for
the exchange - control over a complex of
dark squares, centralized pieces , and weak
white pa\vns at e3 and b2 . On looking deeper
into the position , I realized that I had incor­
rectly assessed my possibilities on the pre­
vious move . when I assumed that the
opposite-colour bishops would help the
attack . In fact the black bishop is too strong.
 Game 8
The battle is now approaching its culmi­
:-. ation and demands unusual decisions by
::-oth players , and therefore I placed my
� hoice on the bishop move , which sharply
:ntlames an already tense situatio n . Also of
1 �1 small importance was the fact that by this
;:-oint both playe rs (especially Karpov) were
�.:riously short of time . I realized that such
:actics were risky , but I felt intuitively that
:he a cti v it y of White's pieces would
�uarantee him agai nst any troubles. The
initiative at all costs - this is the keynote of
White's subsequent play. B lack meritori­
ously accepts the challenge , skilfully dis­
charging the atmosphere on the K-side.
22 ... Ng7!
23 Bxg7
The retreat of the k night - 23 Nd4'! would
have s i gnifie d the complete collapse of
\Vhite's hopes - 23 . . . Qe7 24 Rxf6? ! Qxf6
25 Rfl Nh5 26 Rxf6 Nxg3 27 Bf4 Ne4 2R Bxe5
Rae8! 29 Bxe8 Rxe8 30 Nf3 Rxe5 31 Rxg6+
fxg6 32 N xeS Kg7 or 30 . . . N xf6 3 1 Bxf6
Rxe3, with a clear advantage for Black in the
endgame.
23 ... Bxg7
24 Rd6 Qb3!
24 . . . gxf5? 25 Rxe6 fxe6 26 e4 is bad for
Black.
25 Nxg7 Qxb5
41
The ranks of White's a t t a c king pieces have
been markedly thinned , and one gains the
impression that his activity will g ra duall y
peter out. 26 Nh5 is easily parried by 26 . . .
Nf3 + !
I think it was here that Karpov decided to
p lay for a win. His extra pawn and solid
position may have seemed sufficien t grounds
for optimism . But the point is that in his
attacking surge White h as not ove rs t epp e d
the boundary of acceptable risk , and as
before the position is in a state of dynamic
equilibrium.
It should be mentioned that , in my games
with Karpov, such situations (a complicated ,
double-edged struggle , mutual tim e trouble)
have arisen quite often . And each time I have
been left with the feel i ng tha t , after a success­
fu lly conducted defence , he has been very
resol utely i n cl i ne d and has aimed to s ei z e
,
the initiative and to tip the scales in his
favour.
Over the next two to three moves the Ex-
World Champion could have obliged me to
force a draw , but be deliberately avoided
doing so, reckoning that White's attacking
po tent i a l was insufficiently great , and that
sooner or later Black's material advantage
would decide the outcome . N evertheless the
complexity of the subsequent problems
proved too much for him. Yes , this was no
longer Autumn 1 984 . but the S umme r of
1986 . . .
26 Nf5 Rad8
Equality would have re sul ted from 26 . . .
Rae8 27 Q gS f6 28 Rxf6 Rxf6 29 Nh6+ Kg7
30 Qxf6+ Kxh6 31 Rf4 Nf3 + !
But by 26 . . . f6! Blac k could have forced
White to sign the peace agreement after 27
Nh6+ (27 Nd4? Qxh2 28 Rdxf6 Rxf6 29 Rxf6
Re8 leads to an advantage for Blac k ) 27 . . .
Kg7 28 Nf5 + KgR . Incidentally, in this vari­
ation Black cannot avoid the repetition of
moves - after 28 . . . KhR 29 Nd4 Qc5
(wcakcr is 29 . . . Qxh2 30 Rdxf6 Rfe8 3 l Ne6
Nd7 32 Rj7, when White wins) 30 Rdxf6
White has a strong initiative .
27 Rf6!'?
42 London-Leningrad Championship Games
I too did not insist on the draw which was
possible after 27 RxdR Rxd8 28 Qg5 ! Rd7 29
Nh6+ Kg7 30 Nf5 + (but not 30 Qf6+ Kxh6
31 Rf4 Nf3 + ! 32 Rxf3 Qg5 with advantage to
Black) 30 . . . Kg8 31 Nh6 + . At this point I
was convinced that the conflict was not yet
exhausted .
27 • • • Rd2
In itself this move does not spoil anything
- Black puts the second ran k under fire,
hoping to mount a counterattack on the
white king. But, in readj usting to playing for
a win, Black loses precious time, which
White later exploits.
The soundest move here was 27 . . . Kh8 ! .
after which the game would have gone by
force i nto an equal queen ending - 28 Nd4
(28 Nh6 Kg7!) 2R . . Qc5 29 Ne6 ! fxe6 30
. 33 Rxf2 Qal + 34 Rfl ; stronger is 31 . . . Rd7
Rxf8+ Rxf8 3 1 Rxf8+ Qxf8 32 Qxe5 + .
27 . . . Qxb2 28 QgS Qb5 (28 . . . Kh8?! 29
Nh6 Rd7 30 Kh I!) also suggests itself. In this
case White has no need to continue the
attack in cavalier style , since after 29 Nh6+
Kh8 30 Kh l Rd7 his activity peters out - 3 1
Nxt7 + Rdxf7 3 2 Rxf7 Rxf7 3 3 Rxf7 Q b 1 + ,
or 3 1 R6f5 f6 32 Rxf6 Qxfl + 33 Rxfl Rxf1 +
34 Kh2 Nf3+ !
29 h 4! is much stronger for White (it is
interesting that even the "cooperative" 29
Rxfl!? Qxfl + 30 Kxfl Nxf7 31 Ne7+ Kg7 32
Nf'5+ leads to perpetual check) , defending
the queen and retaining all the advantages of
his position. One cannot be deluded by
Black's two extra pawns on the Q-side - the
game will be decided on the K-side .
28 Qg5!
(see following diagram)
28 ... Qxb2?
Here it is - Black's decisive, and essen­
tially only mistake i n the game - at the most
i nappropriate moment he decides to "treat
himself" to a second pawn. The apparent
absence of real threats and the fever of time
trouble evidently dulled Karpov's vigilance.
A draw was still a reality, but for this it was
essential to play 28 . . . Kh8 ! , e . g . 29 Qh6
o b c d e g h
Rg8 30 Ne7 Qxb2 31 QgS Rg7! (this unusual
rook manoeuvre enables Black to maintain
the balance ; 31 . . . ReB? fails to 32 R6j2 Rxf2
32 Nxg8 Kxg8, although here too White
retains winning chances) 32 Re6! - a spec­
tacular reply. Now equality results from both
32 . . . Nd7 (32 . . . .f5? 33 Nxf5! is bad for
Black) 33 Nxg6+ fxg6 (33 . . . hxg6? 34 ReB+
or 33 . . . Rxg6 34 ReB+ Kg7 35 Rxj7+ ,
mating) 34 Re8+ Rg8 35 Rxg8+ Kxg8 36
Qd8 + Kg7 37 Qe7+ Kh6 38 Qh4 + , and
32 . . . Nc6 33 Nxc6 bxc6 (33 . . . fxe6 is very
strongly met by 34 Nd4! with the threat of
mate - 35 Rf8+ and 36 Q.f6) 34 Rxc6 (34
ReB+ Rg8 35 Re7 is also possible) 34 . . . f5
35 e4.
29 Kh l !
Essential prophylaxis - now Black cannot
avoid defeat.
29 • • • Kh8?!
It was this move that was unanimously
condemned by the com mentators, who
asserted that it was the decisive mistake ,
although in fact it merely simplifies White's
task , but by no means changes the overall
assessment of the positio n.
29 . . . Rd7 was recommended, but it too
fails to save Black - 30 Nh6+ Kg7 31 R6f4 !
(31 R6f2? Qb6!) 31 . . . f6 3 2 Rxf6 Nf7 (32 . . .
Rxf6? 33 Qxf6 + Kxh6 34 Qf4+ Kh5 35 g4+
Kh4 36 Rgl , or 34 . . . g5 35 Qf6+ Kh5 36
 Game S
g4+ Kh4 37 Rgl in both cases with in­
, to the game)
evitable mate) 33 Qf4 ! Qb3 34 Kh 2 ! (34 e4
Rdl i s less good for Wh ite ; after 35 Rxdl
Qxdl + 36 Kh2 Qd7 37 e5 Qe7 or 35 e5 Rxfl +
36 Qxf1 Nxh6! 37 Rxf8 Nf5 38 Rxf5 a d r a w is
inevitable). Now Black is in z ugzw an g - he
has no way of opposing the advance of the e­
pawn and t h e threCJt of Ng4 - 34 . . . aS 35 e4
Qc4 36 Ng4.
A l l that remains is for B l ack to put h i s trust
in his passed a-pawn, but here t oo there is no
consolation - 29 . . . aS 30 N e7 + (30 Nh6+
Kg7 3 1 R6f4f6 32 Rxf6 Rxf6 33 Rxf6 Qcl + 34
Kh2 Qc7 leads o n l y to e qua l i t y ) 30 . . . Kh8
(30 . . . Kg7 is decisively met by 31 R6f4 Nc6
32 Nf5 + Kh8 33 Qh6 or 33 Rh4) 3 1 Qh6
Rdd8! (31 . . . ReB? 32 Nxg6 + ! Nxg6 33
Rxf7) 32 R6f5 ! (t h reat eni ng both 33 Rh5!,
and 33 Rxe5 Qxe5 34 Nxg6+ ) 32 . . . Qc2 33
Kg l ! - it is s ymbo l ic that all White's pi eces
take part in the decisive att ack .
30 Nd4! Rxd4
A sad necessity.
31 Qxe5
Here the flag o n Black's clock fell , CJnd he
therefore overstepped the time l i m i t . A n
unprecedented occurrence for Karpov - a
loss on ti me 1 0 moves before the co n t ro l and ,
in a lost po si ti o n . Yes, in a lost p o si ti o n ! Do
you have doubts, dear reader, that the
as se ssme nt of the final posi ti on is so clear­
cut'? If so, you are n ot al o n e - a large
d etach m e n t of commentators and analysts,
with amazing scrupulousness and pe rsi s t­
ence, h ave tried to dot all the "i"s in the
concluding po s it i on . I wi l l l i m i t myself t o a
"di re ct" , forcing variation, which is capa b l e ,
in my opi nio n , of satisfying everyo n e : 3 1 . . .
Rd2 32 Qe7 Rdd8 33 Rxf7 Rxf7 34 Rxf7 Kg8
35 e4! (35 Rxh7? is wea k , and we will l eave
the "ultra-subtle" 35 Kh2 for others . . . )
35 . . . Qcl + (35 . . . g5 36 R.f5 Ra8 37 Kh2
Qd4 38 e5 , and wins) 36 Kh2 Qh6 37 e 5 Rf8
38 e6 g5 39 Rxf8 + QxfH 40 Qxg5 + Kh8
(40 . . . Qg7 4J Qd8+ Qf8 42 e7) 4 1 e7 Qe8 42
h4! (Philidor would have enjoyed this fi n i s h
43
42 . .. h5 43 g4 ! (make way for
the h-paw n ! ) 43 . . . h xg4 44 h5 Kh7 45
Qg6 + .
I hope to have co nvi nced you that the
position after the fa l l of t h e fl ag co ul d have
been worked out arithmetically . But as yet it
is a little e a rly to part with this game . . .
In my o pi n i o n , it has not been wo r t h i l y
a p pr a is e d by the sp ec ia l i st s . Just thi n k ,
Ka rp o v ov erst ep p e d t h e t i m e l i m i t I 0 m o v e s
before the control in a l o st position ! B a si­
call y . none o r the com me n tators wan ted to
delve de e pl y i n to the es se n ce or w h a t had
happe n e d .
A co m p l ic a t e d o p e n i ng . based on
n u a nc e s . A s u cce ss fu l transition to the
middlegame b y White (15 .:Vg3.') , en a b l i n g
him to obt ai n real c h an ces or a co m b i n e d
attack on th e black king (17 Nf5!. 18 81!6!. 1 9
Qh5!) . E xc e l l e nt defence by B la ck ( 1 4 . . .
Qa5!, 1 9 . . . g6!. 20 . . . l'v'e5.', 21 . . . H.fo.',
22 . . . lVg7!) . which enabled h i m to beat off
the attack , ga i n i n g sufficient counter­
chances , and t he n to try p l ayi n g for a win .
Yes , K a rp o v played for a w in , he de s p e ra t e l y
sou g h t victory , al th o ughto b e fa i r it should
be me n ti o n e d that this \vas n o t for long -
over the course of three mov e s (from 26 to
2H ) . U nfortunately for h i m . h e was no t in fact
able to assess precise l y t h e posi t i on s which
arose . and was chasing a mirage .
A n d for what s ho uld I be reproached? For
the fact t h a t by 21 Og3 ? ! a n d 22 B b5 ! '! I
sharpened to the utmost an a l r e ady compl i ­
c a t e d s tr ugg l e , o r fort h e fa c t t ha t b y the
u n e x pe c te d 27 R f6 ! ? I avo i d e d a draw .
hoping nevertheless to ch a n ge the c h a ra c te r
of the s truggl e to my a d va n t age ?
The i n te n s i t y of the eighth ga me . its at
times u n e xp e c te d clashes and upheavals. the
broad arsenal of means e mp loye d by both
players, t h e fierce character of the struggle
- is not all this the es s e nce of gen u i ne chess
c re a t iv i t y , that which we valw: in it a n d that
for which we love it?
You \vi i i soon be m e e t i n g game 1 1 . The
labels that \\· ere p in n e d on it, the enthusiastic
descriptions it received . . .
It is d iffi c u l t to overesti mate the psycho-
44 London-Leningrad Championship Games
logical significance of game 8 for the entire even a ft er he had taken a postponement
subsequent struggle in the match . The defeat before game 9, he was unable to motivate
in it was such a severe blow to Karpov that. himself for a full-blooded struggle .
 GAM E 9
Karpov-Kasparov
8
Grunfeld Defence
7

Before this game I was extra nervous : 6

recalled my defeat in the 5th game after
5
winning the 4th, especially since I was again
intending to employ the Griinfeld Defence. 4

1 d4 Nf6 3
2 c4 g6 2
3 Nc3 d5
4 Bf4 Bg7
5 e3 a b c d e g h

''Leave well alone" . K a rpov is o bviou sly

satisfied with the opening variation from
game 5 (after both 10 . . . Qxd2 + , a n d 10 . . .
Qa5). 10 Nc6
ll 0-0 QaS
5 c5
6 dxc5 QaS There was a time when this positiOn
7 Rei dxc4 occurred fairly often, but experience showed
that White's slight initiative could he extin­
Black chooses a variation which is con­ guished.
sidered unfavourable for him, but after
studying it we had come to a different 12 h3
opinion . White has to concern h imself over his f4
8 Bxc4 0-0 bishop: 12 Qe2? ! Nh5 1 3 B g5 Bg4 1 4 B h4 g5 .
9 Nf3 QxcS 12 ... 8r5

(see following diagram) While developing, Black prevents e3-e4

and prepares . . . Ne4.
10 Bb3
13 Nd4
Played without hesitation , although the
An unusual move, the basic idea of which
main reply is considered to be 1 0 NbS. Thus
is after 13 . . . Nxd4 14 exd4 to create press­
Salov, one of Karpov's he lpers, quickly
ure on the e-file hy d4-d5 and Re i (14 . . . e6
gained a winning position in one of his
leaves the bishop at f5 in a dangerous pos­
games: 10 . . . Qb4+ 1 1 Nd2 N a6 12 a3 Qa5
ition) . But Black succeeds in demonstrating
13 b4 Qb6 16 Nc7! Of cou rse , better is
that White's plan is harmless.
1 1 . . . Ne4 12 Nc7 Rd8 with great compli­
cations , or 10 . . . Be6 1 1 Nc7 (1 1 Bxe6 Qxb5) 13 Bd7!
1 1 . . . Bxc4, as in Ftacnik-Uhlmann ( 1 973) . 14 Qe2 Nxd4!

45
46 London-Leningrad Championship Games
U nd o u btedly the best move . By 1 4 . . .
e5?! 15 Nxc6 Bxc6 16 Bg5 B lack merely
w ea k e n s the central squares and i ncreases
the powe r of the b i shop at b3 , while on
1 4 . . . Rac8'? ! White h as the unpleasant 1 5
N f3 followed by e3-e4. An acceptable alter­
native is 14 . . . Nh5 ! '! 1 5 Bh2 Nxd4 (not
15 . . . Bxd4 16 exd4 Nxd4 1 7 Qxe7 Nxb3 18
axb3 Bc6 19 b4! or / 7 . . . Bc6 18 Bc4, with
a d vantage to White) 1 6 exd4 Bxd4 17 Rfd l
(! 7 Qxe7 Rc6) 1 7 . . . e5 H! B xe5 Rae8� 19
Rxd4 Rxe5 20 Qd2 B c6 , and Wh i te ' s ini tiat-
ivc peters out.
15 exd4 e6
8
7 Here an d on the following m ov e the com­
6
5 example , 18 . . . Qb4 was suggested, but then
4 the d4-d5 break is possible : 1 9 d5 exd5 20
3
2 bxc6 24 Rdcl Rfc8 25 Qa6, and it is only
0 e g h
Compared with 1 3 . . . Nxd4, Black has
ma naged both to take control of d5. and to
deploy his pi ece s well. S i nce the activitv of
h is b3 bishop and c3 knight is minimal, Wh ite
is not ahle to ex pl o i t the weakening of the
dark squares, and if Black s ho u l d succeed in
bri n gi ng his roo k s i nto play. White will stand
worse (no compensation for the isolated d­
pawn ) .
At this point Ka rpov takes the correct
d e cisi on (corre ct hoth from the p os i t ion . and
from the match s itu a t i o n ) - he a i m s to
''curtail" the game .
16 Bd2
1 6 Be5 , m a i n t a i n i n g the tension . is more
n a t u r a l , but Karpov doe s not like playing
with an '·isolani" without clear prospects.
16 ... Qb6
Of course . not 16 . . . Bc6? 1 7 d5 .
Bc6
17 Rfd l
1 7 . . . Qxd4? loses a piece to 1 8 Bg5 .
18 Be3
Weaker is 1 8 Bg5 RfeH· (18 . . . Rfd8? 1 9
Qe5). When h e rejected 1 6 Be5 White had
al re ady gi ve n up the struggle, since only the
exchange of dark-square bi s hops could have
given him any ch a nce s (due to the weak ness
of the dark squares in the op ponent ' s pos­
i ti on ) .
18 ... QaS
mentators discussed attempts by Black to
avoid the repet i t i o n of position. For
Nxd5 Nxd5 21 Bxd5 Qxb2 22 Rc2 Qf6
(22 . . . Qb5 23 Qxb5 Bxb5 24 Rc7) 23 Bxc6
Black who has problems.
19 Bd2 Qb6
1 9 . . . Qf5 looks better than 1 8 . . . Qb4,
but it is no stronger than the move i n the
game . A fter 20 Qe5 Qxe5 2 1 dxe5 Ne4
(21 . . . Nd7 22 f4 g5 23 f5! or 22 . . . Nc5 23
Bc2 and 24 Be3 ) 22 Nxe4 Bxe4 23 Bb4 Rfc8
24 Bd6 B lack naturally has no reason to h ope
for an ad v a n tage . More interesting is 20 . . .
Ne4 (20 . . . Rjd8?! 2/ Qxf5 gxf5 22 Bg5 with
t he idea of d4-d5) 21 Qxf5 gxf5 , with roughly
eq ual chances after 22 Bf4 Rad8 23 Be5 . A
curious variation here is 22 . . . RfdH 23 d5
Nxc3 24 Rxc3 ! Bxc3 (24 . . . Bxd5 25 Rcd3, or
24 . . . exd5 25 RgJ) 25 dxc6 Rxd l + 26 Bxdl
eS 27 bxc3 exf4 28 cxb7 Rb8 29 B£3, and
White is in no d an ge r of l osi ng .
20 Be3 Qa5
Draw agreed - a definite success for
Black !
 GAM E 1 0

Kasparov-Karpov
8
Queen's Gambit 7

1 d4 dS 6
2 c4 e6
5
3 Nc3 Be7
4 Nf3 4

Conti nuing to test the opponent over his

entire range of pre-match opening prepar ­

ation.
4 Nf6
a c e g
5 BgS h6
6 Bxf6 Bxf6
7 e3 0-0
8 Rei c6
14 Bb3!?
9 Bd3 Nd7
10 0-0 dxc4 A crafty move , cleari n g the c-file and
11 Bxc4 eS preparing Nd5 . If immediately 14 Nd5 , then
12 h3 14 . . . Bxd4 1 5 Nxd4 cxd4 1 6 Qxd4 Nb6= .
After the 23rd game of the previous match 14 . • .
cxd4
this i dea became popular. Then Karpov
Black probably wanted to re fra i n from this
failed to cope with the problems, and sub­
exchange and play 14 . . b6, but then White
sequent games too showed that 1 2 h3 did not
.

creates pressure by 15 Bd5 Rb8 16 Ne4.

j u st have novelty value. I ncidentall y , in re­
taliation the E x Champ ion had prepared
- 15 Nd5!
several replies (cf. games 12 and 22) . but . . .
If now 15 . . . Nb6. then 16 Nxf6 + Qxf6 1 7
the ball remained in Black's court !
Qxd4 Qxd4 1 8 Nxtl4 with a difficult e n di n g
12 exd4 for Black - there is m arked difference with
13 exd4 cS?! that achieved by White in the Tukmakov­
Abramovic game .
(see following diagram) 15 ... b6

After 15 . . . Ne5 16 Nxd4 Bd7 1 7 Rc7! or

A radical attempt to solve Black's prob­
- 15 . . d3 1 6 Qxd3 Bxb2 17 Rc7! Black's lack
lems, already known from the game Tuk­
.

of development is felt . and so Karpov pre­

makov-Abramovic (1983) , which ended in a
pares a post at c5 for his knight (blocking the
draw after 14 Ne4 cxd4 1 5 Nxf6+ Nxf6 1 6
c-file) .
Qb3 Qb6 17 Rfdl Bd7 1 8 Rxd4 Qxb3 1 9
Bxb3 Rac8 etc. 16 Nxd4

47
 London-Leningrad Championship Games
1 6 N xf6 + was also quite good : 16 . . Qxf6
. 20 Qg4!
17 Qxd4 Qxd4 1 8 N xd4 Nc5 1 9 Bd5 or
This primarily prevents the activation of
16 . . . Nxf6! 17 Qxd4 Qxd4 (1 7 . . Bb7 18
the black quee n . Threats associated with the
.

Qxd8 Raxd8 1 9 Ne5 Bd5 20 Nc6 Bxc6 21

opposition of queen and rook also arise
Rxc6) l R Nxd4 Bd7 1<) Rc7 R [c8 20 Rfc l , but
(20 . . . Kh8 21 b4 Ne6 22 Nf4 or 21 . . . Nd7
in the game Black has greater problems.
22 Nf4; 20 . . . h5 21 Nc3).
16 • • • Bxd4
20 ... Bxd5
Both 16 . . . Nc5 17 Nc6 Qd6 18 Qf3 and
Black avoids the obvious dangers,
16 . . . Bb7 1 7 Nc6 Bxc6 18 Rxc6 (18 . .
although now White's advantage - bishop
.

Bxh2? 19 Rd6) are dangerous for Bl ack . It i�

against knight - becomes stable .
curious that , although he has the two
bishops, Black finishes up in an endgame 21 Rxd5 Qe7
with a knight against White's bishop !
2 1 . . . Q f6 is strongly met by 22 Rc3 ! , but
17 Qxd4 Nc5 now 22 Rf5 ! would have prevented simpli fi­
18 Bc4 Bb7 cation and maintained strong pressure :
19 Rfdl ReS Black has to defend against Rxt7 , and the
other rook is also ready to come into play
Here too there was a difficult choice :
(Rc3) .
1 9 . . . Ne6? ! 20 Qe5 ! , or 1 9 . . . Og5 ? ! 20 h4!
(20 . . . Qh5 21 h4 Ne6 22 Ne7+ Kh8 23 Bxe6 22 Rcd l ? Qe4
.f-r:e6 24 Rc7 e5 25 g4! Qj7 26 Qe3 Bf3 27 Rd6 22 . . . Rcd8 is also possible . I n both cases
with decisive threats) .
the exchanges significantly simplify B lack's
task . but the position docs not become drawn
- the bishop is still stronger than the knight .
Remember the skill with which such pos­
itions were handled by Fischer!
23 Qxe4 Nxe4
24 Ba6 Nf6!

Of course ! After 24 . . . Rc7? 25 Rd7 Black

would have immediately ended up in a diffi­
cult position.
25 Bxc8

White requires this exchange - the rook

at c8 is active .
25 ... Nxd5
White is splendidly mobilized, and under 26 Ba6 Nf6
the cover of the knight a t d5 he can embark
on some concrete action . 20 b4 Ne6 21 Qe5
More solid than 26 . . . Nb4 27 Bc4 Rc8 28
suggests itself, but after 2 1 . . . Qh4! 22 Ne3 b3 ! Rc7.
Rce8 Black coordinates his pieces. 20 Rc3
was also suggested, but this too is unconvinc­ (see following diagram)
i ng: 20 . . . Bxd5 (20 . . . Kh8 is also possible)
21 Bxd5 N e6! 22 Bxe6 Qxd4 23 B xf7 + Kxt7 repeat: the position cannot be called
24 Rxd4 Rxc3 25 bxc3 Ke6 with a probable drawn (although this result seems the most
draw. probable). By activating his king and advanc-
 Game 10 49
threatening 42 g5 and 43 f6 - 41 . . . f6 42 a3
8 Kb8 43 a4 Ka8 44 a5 bxa5 45 Kxa5 Kb8 46
7 Kb5 Kb7 47 Kc5 Kc7 48 Kd5 Kd 7 49 1>3! a6 50
b4 etc. ) 39 h4 ! (a draw results from 39 g4?
6
hxg4 40 hxg4 Ka8 41 g5 Kh8 42 a4 Ka8 43 a5
5 bxa5 44 Kxa5 Kb7 45 Kb5 Kc7 46 Kc5 Kd7 47
4 Kd5 Kc7 48 g6 - 48 b4 Kd7 49 bS g6 ! , or 48
b3 Kd7 49 b4 a6! 50 g6 W - 48 . . . fxg6 49
Jxg6 Kd7 50 b4 a6! or 50 1>3 Ke7.') 39 . . . Ka8
2 40 a3 Kb8 4 1 a4 Ka8 42 aS bxa5 43 Kxa5 Kb7
44 Kb5 Kc7 45 Kc5 Kd7 46 Kd5 Kc7 47 f6! g6
(or 47 . . . gxf6 48 Ke4 Kd6 49 Kf5 Ke7 50 b4
o b c d e g a6 51 g3) 48 Kc5 Kd7 49 Kb5 Kc7 50 Ka6 Kb8
51 b4 K a8 52 b5 Kb8 53 b6 axb6 54 Kxb6 etc. I
once won a similar ending against Svesh­
ing his K-side pawns, White can strengthen nikov (USSR Championship Premier
his position. League , Minsk 1979) . ''

27 f4! ReS 33 Nc7

28 Kf2 Kf8 34 Ke5 f6+

Black sets up a "fortress·· on the dark

I think that 2R . . . gS 29 Kf3 Kg7 and squares. The only way of taking it will bt! by
. . . Re7 would h ave set up a secure defensive creating a zugzwang position.
line . Karpov aims for a different one - with
his king at e7 and rook at c7. 35 Kf5 Ne8
36 Ke4 Nc7
29 Kf3 Re7?! 37 h4 Kd6
It was not yet too late for 29 . . . g5 . But 38 Kf5 Ke7
now White also exchanges the second pair of 39 Kg6 Kf8
rooks, which enables him to centralize his 40 Kf5 Ke7
king. 41 Ke4

30 Rd8 + ReS Not 4 1 g4? Ne8 42 Ke4 f5 + !

31 Rxe8 + ! Nxe8
3 1 . . . Kxe8 32 Ke3 Ke 7 33 Kd4 would not
h ave changed anything.
32 Ke4 Ke7
33 Bc4!
An invitation to a pawn ending which I felt
(calculation at the board was difficult) should
be won. Karpov quickly - after three
minutes' thought - declined the invitation.
We were both right: 33 . . . Nd6+ 34 Kd5
Nxc4 35 Kxc4 Kd6 (or 35 . . . a6 36 Kd5 Kd7
37 g4 a5 38 a4 Kc7 39 h4 Kd7 40 h5 Kc7 41 g5
Kd7 42 gxh6 gxh6 43 Ke5 Ke7 44 Kf5 and
wins) 36 Kb5 Kc7 37 Ka6 Kb8 38 f5 h5 (or
38 . . . Ka8 39 g4 Kb8 40 h4 Ka8 41 h5! -
Here the game could have been ad­
journed , hut (to make the analysis easier) I
wanted to clarify matters: B lack had to
choose one of two methods of defence -
with his knight at c7 or f!:l (41 . . . Kd6 42 g4
Ne6!? 43 Kf5 NfB) . Karpov too could have
adjourned the game . hut he also wanted
clarity - he reckoned that the position could
be spoiled only by White . And he was proved
right !
41 Kd6
42 g4 Ke7
" Cf. f:mtgamr Strategy by M. Shc.-esh;:vsky p. 27
(Perga mon . 1985) - T.-anslator"s note.
 50 London-Leningrad Championship Games
0 e g h
43 b4?
White's plan is to play g4-g5 , and after
pawn exchanges to gain the e5 square for his
king, create a zugzwang position and break
through to the Q-side pawns. But after 43
b4? Black in some cases gains the oppor­
tunity of exchanging a further pair of pawns
by . . . a5 , which reduces White's chances to
the minimum.
White should have played 43 a3! Kd6 44
Kf5 Ke7 45 Kg6 Kf8 46 g5 fxg5 47 fxg5 hxg5
48 Kxg5 - this position would have been
very difficult for Black to defend. For
example: 48 . . . Ke7 49 Kg6 Kf8 50 Kf5 Ke7
5 1 Ke5 Kd7 52 Bfl Ke7 53 Bh3, and neither
the knight nor the king can move so as to
prevent the white king from invading the Q­
side.
43 • • . Kd6
44 Kf5
This last move was sealed , but I did not
bother to resume the game . Draw agreed .
This decision cannot b e considered cor­
rect. Although in analysis we were unable to
find a winning plan (in particular, the draw­
backs of 43 b4 came to light, e . g . 44 . . . Ke7
45 g5 fxg5 46 fxg5 hxg5 47 hxg5 NeB 48 Ke5
Nd6 49 Bd5 a5!= , or 45 Ke4 Kd6 46 a3 Ke747
a4 Kd6 48 Kf'5 Ke7 49 g5 fxg5 50fxg5 hxg5 51
hxg5 NeB 52 Ke5 Nd6 53 Bd5 Nf7+ ! 54 Bxj7
Kxj7 55 Kf5 a5! 56 b5 g6+ or 56 bxa5 bxa5 57
g6+ Ke7 58 Ke5 Kd7 59 Kd5 Ke7= ; even i n
the zugzwang position - White: Ke5 , Bh3,
pawns a4, b5, h4/Biack: Ke7, Nc7, pawns a7,
b6, g7 - Black is able to hold out: 1 . . a6 2
.
a5 Nxb5 3 axb6 Nd6 4 Kd5 a5 5 Kc5 a4 6 Kb4
a3) , the defence would have demanded
accuracy, care and nervous tension. After
such an adjournment session in a match, on
the following day the opponent is usually
tired and plays without vigour. But I, as
punishment for my premature offer of a
draw, was obliged in the next game to
withstand a dangerous attack .
 GAM E 1 1

Karpov-Kasparov
8
Grunfeld Defence 7

As expected, a tense battle occurred in this 6

game. Playing White, Karpov was obliged to
5
try and use his last real chance in the London
half of the match to level the scores. 4

I d4 Nf6 3

2 c4 g6 2
3 Nc3 d5
4 Bf4 Bg7
5 e3 c5 0 c d e g h
6 dxc5 Qa5
7 Rei dxc4
8 Bxc4 0-0
9 Nf3 Qxc5 oped (Farago-Schmidt, 1 981 , and Farago­
10 Bb3 Nc6 Smej kal, 1 985) .
11 0-0 Qa5 The main virtue of Karpov's innovation
12 h3 8f5 was that it was dramatic an d unexpected. ln
13 Qe2 t he psychological sense it proved profitable
I involuntarily took him "at his word".
Thus White places his choice on the main
-

Just imagine, Karpov himself sacrifices the

continuation .
exchange . . .
13 ... Nc4 What should Black do now? If he does not
play 15 . . . bxc6 , there only remains 15 . . .
Otherwise White plays e3-e4 and be­
exf4, as in the game . B ut this was the wrong
comes active i n the centre.
decision . He should have won the exchange :
14 Nd5 e5 in return White would have gained a certain
initiative, but not for long: 16 Ne7 + Kh8 1 7
Practically forced , since 15 Bc7 was
Nxc6 (not 1 7 Nxe5? Bxe5 1 8 Nxc6 Qd2.1 with
threatened.
advantage to Black) 17 . . . Qb6 1 8 Ncxe5
Be6 1 9 Nc4 Bxc4 20 Qxc4 Nc5 - a compli­
(see following diagram) cated struggle is in prospect , but Black at the
least stands no worse . It is interesting that all
the commentators. with the exception of
15 Rxc6?!
Maxim Dlugy (in the London Bulletin)
An innovation , which was prepared succumbed to the hypnosis of Karpov's i nno­
(according to Karpov) before game 9. Before vation. The best appraisal, in my opi nion ,
this 15 Bh2 was usually played here, and after was given by Karpov himself, who in later
15 . . . Be6! a double-edged struggle devel- games did not employ it again .

51
52 London- Leningrad Championship Games
15 • • • exf4?!
16 Rc7
White's idea becomes clear - he has a
powerful knight at d5 and his rook has
broken through onto the seventh r ank . Black
must act resolutely , so as not to allow the
opponent to stabilize the position .
16 . .. Be6!
After 16 . . . fxe3? ! 1 7 Qxe3 White has an
obvious positional advantage .
17 Qe1 ?
To j udge b y the speed with which Karpov
made this move , it can be confi dently said
that all this was prepared in his home labora­
tory , and this means that the unexpected
queen manoeuvre is the point of White's
plan . But , as later transpires, the game could
now have ended by force in a draw . I t is
surprising that Karpov and his helpers should
overlook 17 Nc7 + ! Kh8 1R Rfcl !, after which
White has complete domination, e . g . 18 . . .
Bxb3 1 9 axb3 fxe3 20 Qxc3 Nd6 21 Qf4 with a
strong attack. Black would evidently have
had to choose 19 . . . NgS, switching to a
gruelling struggle for a draw.
17 Qb5
The ending after 17 . . . Oxe 1 ? 18 Rxe 1
Bxb2 19 Ne7+ Kh8 20 Bxc6 fxe6 2 1 exf4
Rxf4 22 Rxb7 is obviously unfavourable for
Black.
Here, for the first time, Karpov sank into
thought (for almost half an hour). White has
a wide choice of tempting continuations, e . g .
18 Bc4 Oxb2 1 9 exf4 Ng3 ! 2 0 Ng5 Nxfl
(20 . . Rae8 is also possible) 21 Ne7+ Kh8
.
22 Bxe6 fxe6 23 Oxe6 (threatening 24
QgB "-r !) 23 . . . Qf6, and Black parries the
attack, or 18 Nd4 Bxd4 19 Ne7+ Kh8 20 exd4
Qb6 21 Rc1 f5 ! , and Black seizes the i n­
itiative .
What then did Karpov overlook in his
prepared analysis? Did he not consider 17
. . . Qb5 , which is essentially the only move?
It is probable that in this last variation (18
Nd4 etc . ) his "staff" missed 21 . . . f5 ! , but
only he himself can give a precise answer to
this question .
18 Ne7+ Kh8
19 Bxe6
19 exf4? is strongly met by 19 . . . Ng3 ! ,
and 1 9 Nd4 Qe5 20 Nxe6 fxe6 2 1 Rxb7 f3 also
looks dangerous for White.
19 . . • fxe6
After 19 . . . Qb6? 20 Nd5 Qxe6 21 Nxf4
(21 . . . Qxa2 22 Qb4) White's deeply en­
tangled knight escapes, and he retains a clear
advantage.
20 Qbl!
An interesting plan of attack - the queen
stands in ambush , a iming from afar at the g6
square. Of no less importance is the fact that
his advanced force (Rc7, Ne7) now receives
effective support and unexpectedly proves to
be in the right place. Black m ust immediately
do something energetic.
20 . . . Ng5!
In the event of 20 . . . Ob6 2 1 Rfcl White
woul d have completed the coordination o f
h i s pieces and would have been ready for a
decisive attack.
The position after 20 . . . Nd6 21 Nxg6+
(21 exf4!?) 2 1 . . . hxg6 22 Qxg6 Ne8 23 Ng5
Oxg5 24 Qxg5 Nxc7 is pretty complicated,
but White's chances are better.

21 Nh4!
Much stronger than 21 Nxg5 ? ! Qxg5 22
exf4 Rxf4 23 Rxb7 Raf8 (23 . . . ReB is also
possible), when Black has active play for the
pawn.
The move played guarantees White per­
petual check, but does he have anything
more? Had Black now played 21 . . . fxe3 ,
the game would have ended by force in a
draw - 22 Nhxg6+ hxg6 23 Nxg6+ Kg8 24
Ne7+ (24 Nxf8? e2 25 Rei RxfB) etc. It is
unfavourable for White to avoid the draw,
e . g . 22 fxe3? Nxh3 + ! 23 gxh3 Qg5 + 24 Ng2
BeS 25 Rd7 ! (the alternatives are much
worse - 25 Rc4 Qxe7; 25 Qc2 Rxfl + 26 Kxfl
Rf8+ 27 Kgl Qg3 ; 25 Qcl Qg3 26 Rf4 Rxf4
27 exf4 Bd4+ ; 25 Rc5 Bh2+ 26 Krh2 Qxc5 27
Nxg6+ hxg6 28 Nf4 Rf5!- in all cases with a
won position for Black) 25 . . . Qg3 26 Rf4
Bxf4 27 exf4 Rxf4 28 Qc2 Raf8 29 Qc3 +
Qxc3 30 bxc3 Rfl + 31 Kh2 Ral - White
faces a difficult struggle for a draw.
6 Rc5 or 27 . . . fxe3 28 Qxe6) 28 Qxh7+ Kxh7
5
4
3
2
o b c d e g
21 Nxh3 + ! ?
. • .
Game 11 53
Rxf2 (weaker is 23 Nexg6+ hxg6 24 Qxg6?
Qe5.' whe n , compared with the position
reached in the game, Black has an extra
tempo ; of course , if he wishes White can
force perpetual check) 23 . . . fxe3 ! 24 Rxf8+
Rxf8 25 Kh3 (naturally, White cannot be
satisfied with 25 Kgl Qb6 or 25 g3 Qe2+ 26
Kh3 g5) 25 . . . e2 (25 . . . Qh5 26 Rc4 e2 27
Qe4! g5! is also sufficient for a draw) 26 Qe4
QhS ! 27 Rc4 g5 ! 28 Oxe6 gxh4! , after which a
draw is inevitable.
23 Nexg6 +
The sacrificial order is not of particular
significance , but 23 Nhxg6+ was neverthe­
less more exact.
23 ... hxg6
24 Qxg6?
.
The chain reaction of mistakes continues.
This hasty move (Karpov made it almost
without thinking) is an obvious oversigh t ­
the Ex-World Champion overlooked Black's
reply. Correct was 24 Nxg6+ Kg8 25 Ne7 +
Kh8 26 Qg6 (this position would also have
been reached by force after 23 Nhxg6+ )
2 6 . . . 0h7 (26 . . . Qe5 2 7 Kxh3 Rf6 28 Kg4.',
and White wins) 27 gxh3! Rf6 (27 . . . Be5 28
29 Rgl - White h as an undisputed
advantage .
24 . . . Qe5!
The only reply, but an adequate one.
25 Rf7?
This move came as a complete surprise to
h
me. My calculations were associated with
White's numerous other possibilities, in
which Black's main problem was a search.for
equality, e. g . :

J could not resist the temptation o f making
this showy move , but even now Black still
retains equal chances.
22 Kh2 Qh5?
As often happens, a slight mistake leads to
a more serious one. 22 . . . Nxf2 ! was essen­
tial. White has to accept this sacrifice 2..1
(a) 25 Rxg7? fxe3+ 2 6 Qg3 (26 f4 Qxg7 2 7
Qh5+ Kg8) 26 . . . Qxg7 27 Ng6+ Kg8 28
Nxf8 Ng5 ! - Black has the advantage .
(b) 25 Rxb7 Nxf2 26 Nf3 Qf6 27 QhS + Qh6
28 Qxh6+ Bxh6 29 Rxf2 fxe3 with an equal
game.
(c) 25 Rfcl fxe3+ (25 . . . Nxj2?! 26 Rlc5
- fxe3+ 27 g3) 26 Kxh3 exf2 27 Qg4 (27 Qd3
54 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Kg8 - Black unexpectedly wins) 27 . . . Kg8 reckoning only on 29 . . . fxe3 30 Ng5 + Kgo
28 Ng6 Qe3 + 29 g3 Qh6+ 30 Kg2 fl =Q + ! 3 1 3 1 Nxeo with a n equal game .
Rxfl Qd2 + 32 Kh3 Qh6 + , with a draw by
30 Nd6 fxe3
perpetual check .
(d) 25 Oc2 fxe3+ 26 Kxh3 Kg8 27 f4 e2 28 The dark-square bishop for a long time
,

Rel R xf4 29 Rxe2 Qh5 30 g3 Qg4+ 3 1 Kg2 ''asleep" , finally wakes up - the advantage
(31 Kh2 is not signi ficantly different) 31 . . . is now with Black.
Raf8, and B lack's chances are no worse.
After White's mistake the i nitiative passes
to Black , and it is he who begins to think in
8
terms of winning.
25 . . • Rxf7!

Simple and strong. 25 . . . Ng5? 26 exf4 or

25 . . . Kg8? 26 Nf3 ! Qxb2 27 R b l is bad for
Black. while in the ending after 25 . . . fxe3 +
26 Kxh3 Rxf7 (26 . . . e2? 2 7 Rel Rxfl 28
Qxf7 Qxb2 29 Qh5 + ) 27 Qxf7 Qf6 28 Qxf6
Bxf6 29 fxe3 Bxb2 30 Rbl he faces a difficult
struggle for a draw .
26 Qxf7 Ng5!
0 c d e g h

31 Nc4

On 3 1 Nxb7 Black has a pleasant choice

between 3 1 . . . Rb8 32 Nc5 e2 33 Rel Rxb2
34 Nd3 (34 Nxe6 Be5 + 35 g3 Kf5) 34 . . .
Rxa2 35 Rxe2 Rxe2, and 3 1 . . Rf8! (32 Kg3
.

Be5 + ) .
31 ... exf2

Now the e6 pawn becomes passe d . Less

was promised by 3 1 . . . b5 32 Nxe3 Bxb2 33
Rbl Be5+ 34 g3 a6 35 Ret .

32 Rxf2 bS
Perh aps Karpov was hoping for 26 . . .
33 Ne3 aS?!
Qb5? 27 Rcl ! (in the variation 2 7 Ng6+ Kh7
28 Ne7 Rf8 29 Qg6+ Kh8 30 gxh3 Rf6 the The advance of the Q-side pawns looks
limit of White's dreams is a draw) 27 . . . Ng5 promising, and in principle it corresponds to
28 Oh5 + Kg8 29 exf4 Qxb2 30 Rc7 Qf6 3 1 the demands of the position. However , it
Ng6, with winning chances for White? would have been better to delay it slightly
and choose 33 . . . Rd8, aiming in the first
27 Ng6+ Kh7
i nstance to activate the pieces. Very import­
28 Nxe5 Nxf7
ant in t h i s case is the fact that White finds it
29 Nxl7 Kg6!
difficult to bring his king into play - 34 Kg3
It is most probable that this move too was Be5 + 35 Kg4 Rd4+ 36 Kf3 Rf4 + , winning a
overlooked by White, and that he was pawn.
 Game 1 1 55
34 Kg3 a4 threats of . . . a3 and . . . b3 are not dangerous
35 Rc2 Rf8 (42 Kf1? b3.'; 42 Kf4.1) .
36 Kg4 Bd4?!
39 Rxg2 +
36 . . . Bh6 was stronger (37 Rc6 R/4+ 40 Kf3 Rxa2
followed by . . . Re4, or 37 Re2 Rf4+ an d 41 bxa4
then . . . Rb4) .
If he greatly "desired'' . White could still
37 Re2 have lost - 41 Rxe6 + ? Kf7 42 Rb6 Ra3 .
But now, of course, it was pointless to
adj o urn such a position . and the players
8 agreed a draw .
7 The organizers of the London half of the
match put up a prize (£10,000) for the best of
6
the first 12 games. The j ury was made up of
5 members o f the English team , headed by the
well known grandmasters Tony Miles and
4
Nigel Short . I think that , in awarding this
3 prize to both participants for game 1 1 , the
2 English were displaying their customary tact .
Of course , game 1 1 was visually very inter­
esting (with a mass of outward effects) , but
the quality of both sides' play left something
to be desired . . . Incidentally, Karpov rated
it very highly, and compared it even with the
37 Bxe3?!
statue of Venus. A curious comparison -
Yet another blemish on this unfortunate but if one supposes that for each mistake an
game - the exchange of minor pieces is arm was cut off the wonderful statue. it
unfavourable to Black. 37 . . . e5 was more would be more approp riate to put in its place
logical (37 . ReB was also interesti ng) , re­
. . the multi-arm Hindu god Siva . . .
taining some chances. After the move in the I think that now the reader will be able to
game a draw is certain. j u dge game 11 at its true worth, after com­
paring it with game 8. And it can only be
38 Rxc3 Rf2
regre tted that the goddess Caissa "kept
39 b3
silent" and that she is unable to express her
The most clear-cut, although even a fter 39 preferences a l o ud . All that glitters is not
Rxe6+ Kf7 40 Kg3 Rxb2 41 Rb6 b4 the gold . . .
 GAM E 1 2

Kasparov-Karpov e5 ; for the moment the bishop at c8 is shut i n ,

but a t t h e same time t h e diagonal o f t h e c4
Queen's Gambit bishop is not extended. In the game Ivkov­
Geller (Sochi, 1 983) after 12 Ne4 cxd4 13
1 d4 d5
Nxf6+ Qxf6 the players agreed a draw, and
2 c4 e6
1 3 Nxd4 Nb6 also promises little. It stands to
3 Nc3 Be7
reason that , when analyzing this variation for
4 Nf3 Nf6
Black, I had also singled out the line which
5 Bg 5 h6
was unpleasant for him, and it now remained
6 Bxf6 Bxf6
to test my opinion .
7 e3 0-0
8 Rcl c6 12 Qe2
9 Bd3 Nd7
In anticipation of 12 . . . cxd4 13 exd4 Nb6
10 0-0 dxc4
14 Bd3 , when Black has difficulties with his
11 Bxc4 c5!?
development (14 . . . Bd7 15 Qe4) , and in
A most curious point! I had assumed, of general White's pressure is appreciable
course, that I would not get by in the m atch (Rfd1 , Be4, Ne5) . Karpov plays more
with the Griinfeld Defence alone , and as a subtly . . . , exactly as I was planning to do!
second opening for Black I had prepared the
12 ... a6
"eternal" Queen's Gambit. Moreover, in the
13 Rfd 1 cxd4
6 Bxf6 system I had analyzed in detail this
very idea of 1 1 . . . c5 ! And here Karpov is Forced: 13 . . . b5? 14 dxc5 ! (14 . . . Qc7 15
the first to employ "my" variation . . . Bd3, 14 . . . Qe7 15 c6 Nb8 16 Bb3).
14 Nxd4

Here this is stronger than 14 exd4, which

gives White an apparently threatening pos­
ition. But after 14 . . . b5 15 Bb3 Qb6! (15 . . .
Qe7 16 Ne4! Nb6 1 7 Ne5 is weaker) Black
comfortably deploys his pieces (the 3rd game
of the 1 985 match comes to mind) , and the 1 6
d 5 break is neutralized b y 16 . . . Nc5 17 Qe3
Rb8! 18 dxe6 Nxb3 ! 19 exf7+ Kxf7 20 Qxb6
Rxb6 21 axb3 Be6.
14 ... Qe7

Black must cautiously go about solving his

This logical m ove leads to positions which
are more "Queen's Gambit-like" than 11 . . .
57
development problems. In the event of 14
. . . b5 1 5 Bb3 Qb6 16 Ne4 Bb7 or 15 Qf3 Ra7
16 Nc6 Bb7 he has everything in order, but 15
Bxe6 fxe6 16 Nxe6 is dangerous for him . And
58 London-Leningrad Championship Games
if 14 . . . Bxd4 1 5 Rxd4 b5 1 6 Bb3 Qe7, then
1 7 Ne4 Nf6 18 Nxf6+ Qxf6 19 Qd2 with a
clear advantage.
15 Nc4 BeS
a b c d e g h
White has a serious lead in development,
but hmv is he to approach the defences of his
opponent , who has covered all the invasion
squares (thus the bishop at e5 controls d6 and
c7)? It should be remembered that I was
expecting to play this positi o n with Black ,
and we had mainly analyzed 16 f4 (to which
the simplest is 16 . . . Bh8 followed by
. . . Nf6) and 16 Nf3 (the game confirmed
that this too is not dangerous).
I n games 14 and 1 6 I opened with 1 e4, and
meanwhile a new idea was being analyzed in
our camp - 16 Qh5 ! ? True, I was o nly able
to employ it later, at the Dubai Olympiad in
my game with H. Olafsson .
16 N f3 Bb8
17 Qd2!
Combining pressure on the d-file with the
plan of transferring the bishop from c4 to the
long diagonal .
17 ... bS
18 Be2 Nf6!
The alternatives are clearly weaker: 1 8 . . .
Bh7 1 9 Oxd7 Qxd7 20 Rxd7 Bxe4 21 Nd2!
Bg6 (21 . . . Bd5 22 Bf3) 22 Bf3 Ra7 23 Rxa7
Bxa7 24 Rc6 Rd8 25 Nb3, and Black loses a
pawn , or 18 . . . Ne5 1 9 Nd6 Bxd6 20 Qxd6
Qxd6 21 Rxd6. and there is an enormous
difference in the activity of the two sides'
pieces .
In this position , which was well known to
me, I experienced rather unpleasant feel­
ings . . . According to our pre-match
analysis (I should remind the reader once
again: it was assumed that here I would have
the black pieces!) the most interesting play
resulted from 19 Nc5 e5 20 Qc2 Bd6 ! 21 b4
Bg4 22 h3 (or 22 Nh4 Bxc5 23 bxc5 Bxe2 24
Qxe2 g6 25 Nf3 Rac8) 22 . . . Bxf3 23 Bxf3
Rac8, when there was a possibility of "wild''
lines such as 24 B b7 Rb8 25 Bxa6 Rb6 26 a4
Bxc5 27 bxc5 Rxa6 28 axb5 .
I had no wish to check how far Karpov had
gone in his ''parallel" analysis, and since 1 9
Nd6 Bxd6 2 0 Qxd6 Qxd6 2 1 Rxd6 B b7 is
absolutely harmless (22 Rc7? NeB), I chose a
third alternative .
19 Nxf6 + Qxf6
20 Qd4 Bb7?!
This favours White, as does 20 . . . Qxd4?!
21 Nxd4 Bb7 22 Bf3 or 20 . . . Qe7? ! 21 Ne5.
Very complicated play would have followed
after 20 . . . e5 21 Qe4 (21 Qb4!?) 21 . . . Ra7
22 Rc6 Bf5 ! (22 . . . Bb7? 23 Bd3) 23 Qd5
Qe7, or 22 Bd3 g6 23 Rc6 Qg7! (23 . . . Qe7
24 Nh4!) - in both cases White's active
pieces are in danger of coming under attack
by the opponent.
 Game 12 59

21 Qxf6 gxf6 28 Rdd6 Rfa8

22 b3 29 Kg2 Be7
30 Rd2 b4
This is better than 22 Nd4 Be5 or 22 Nel
3 :: � 23 Nd3 RacR. Of course, now Black can The conflict is exhausted.
; -' into an ending with opposite-colour 31 g4 fxg4
< '-hops - 22 . . . Bxf3 23 Bxf3 Ra7, but I hxg4
32 aS
: :-: i n k that after 24 g4! White has chances
33 f4 Rd8
::-:anks to the defects of Black's pawn struc­
34 Rxd8
: J rc and the inability of the bR bishop to find
..: sdul employment. With his next move Draw agreed .
J.\.arpov repairs his pawn formation.
* * *
22 ... fS

This concluded the London half of the

match . I was happy both with the score of
6 1/2-SY2 , and, on the whole, with my play,
which had ''come off' in all stages - from
opening to endgame. True , it was of some
concern that our great amount of pre-match
opening preparation had not been utilized.
The general character of the struggle also
pleased me, and it was inconceivable how
and by what means the Ex-World Champion
could win in Leningrad by a margin of two
points . . .
h
And so the participants moved from the
a b c d e g
banks of the Thames to the banks of the
Neva, to the stage of the Hotel Leningrad's
23 g3?! splendid concert hall. The vexed question
about the maximum length of the hreak was
A pity: after 23 Nel! f4 24 Bf3 Bxf3 25
solved very simply by Karpov: he extended it
Nxf3 fxe3 26 fxe3 the ending is better for
at the cost of a postponement, when on 3rd
White. Now the Ex-Champion goes in for
September (the day that game 1 3 should
opposite-colour bishops in a favourable
have taken place) he presented a doctor's
situation .
certificate stating that he had a cold. How­
23 .
• . Bxf3! ever, it seemed to me that this "cold" was
24 Bxf3 Ra7 pre-programmed, since on 2nd September,
at the traditional pre-start inspection of the
Even here one can speak of an advantage
venue, 1 found it unprepared.
for White, but it is insignifican t - there are
A new city, new impressions . . . For the
too few resources.
first time in three matches the two "head­
25 Rc6 Kg7 quarters" of the competing sides were in
26 Be2 close proximity - directly visible from each
other! This strange neighbourliness occurred
Black's Q-side pawns are the last possible
at the desire of Karpov, who changed from a
target for attack (b3-b4 and a2-a4).
private out-of-town house which had pre­
26 Be5 viously been prepared for him. The rocky
27 h3 Bf6 island proved an excellent place for walks,
60 London- Leningrad Championship Games
and I thinkthat we both frequently made use
of this possibility. But a meeting occurred
only once - before game 24!
On 5th September, with the concert hall
practically ready , the match began. It would
be more accurate to say the second half of the
match , but the change in conditions was so
marked that the 1 3th game had strong
associations with the I st. Also different was
the atmosphere: in London , naturally, both
participants were guests, but in Leningrad
too , strangely enough . I had to play on an
"away" ground, which from the very first day
was emphasized with annoying persistence
by the official organizers. Bu t about that
later . . .
At 17.00 hours the demonstrators re-
produced White's first move on the magnetic
boards. How archaic this procedure seemed
after "computerized" London , and it was
hard to understand the stubborness of our
chess officials, who proudly declined the
offer by the English to provide (free!) all the
necessary equipment for the Leningrad half
of the match. The gesture by the English may
perhaps not have been liked by Campo-
manes, who has always been annoyed by the
independent position adopted by the
authoritative B ritish Chess Federation .
 GAM E 1 3

Karpov-Kasparov arily thought until recently, and the generally

played 10 . . . Nxe5 1 1 fxe5 Nc6 followed by
Griinfeld Defence . . . f6 does not at all promise Black an easy
life - sec , for example , the games Pigusov­
I d4 Nf6
Podgayets (Sevastopol, 1 986) and Kas­
2 c4 g6
parov-Nunn (Brussels, 1986).
3 Nf3 Bg7
4 g3 10 ... f6!?
Karpov shows that he is content with a This has hardly ever been played, although
small advantage. The time for the main the closed nature of the position allows
battles in the Grlinfeld Defence had not yet weakening moves to be made, without par­
arrived. ticular concern for their consequences. By
driving away the knight from e5, Black gains
4 c6
the chance to develop his Q-side without
5 Bg2 d5
incurring a weak pawn on the open c-file.
6 cxd5 cxd5
7 Nc3 0-0 11 Nf3 Nc6
8 Ne5 e6 12 Be3
9 0-0 Nfd7
Black's position is rather cramped , and
10 f4
therefore White does not hurry with 12 e4. In
this case after 12 . . . dxe4 13 Nxe4 Nb6 14
Be3 Nd5 15 Bf2 b6 Black successfully de­
8 ploys his forces, and the weakness at e6 is
compensated by his control of the important
d5 square.
6 On 1 2 b3 White may not have liked
12 . . . f5 13 Ne5 Qb6 .
5

4
12 . • • Nb6

If here 12 . . . f5 13 Ne5 , then 13 . . . Qb6

no longer works (14 Na4) , and no other
2 convenient way of solving the "Nxc6 prob­
lem" is apparent.
13 Bf2 f5

The difference i n the placing of the black

The situation - the white pieces and the
5 112-61/z score - obliges Karpov to try some­
thing different. I ncidentally, the plan with 10
f4 is by no means as harmless as was custom-
pieces after 13 . . . Bd7 14 e4! compared with
1 2 e4 is of course in favour of White , and
therefore Black decides on 14 . . . f5. It was
easy to do this, since a defence of the knight
at c6 is prepared ( . Bd7) .
. .

61
62 London- Leningrad Championship Games
1 3 . . . Nc4 (and then . Nd6} seems
. .

tempting, but by energetic play - 14 e4! 8

Nxb2 15 Oc2 Nc4 16 exd5 exdS 17 NxdS ! ­ 7
White gains an advantage.
6
14 NeS Bd7
5
The manoeuvring struggle now commenc­ 4
ing promises to be protracted . White has a
slight initiative (mainly due to the difference 3
in the strengths of the knights at e5 and b6} , 2
but the character of the position does not
promise him much, if the opponent is patient
and accurate. One would think that, with his 0 c d e g h
styl e , Karpov could not wish for anything
more , but this was to be the last time in the
match that he employed this opening vari­ not take them seriously} . After the transfer
ation. of his knight to e4 Black will "equalize" the
strength of the minor pieces, but in the
15 Qd2 Nc8!?
meantime White will seize the c-file. The
15 . . . Qe7 and 16 . . . RfcS was more . . . g5 advance has the aim of clearing the g­
natural , but I devised a plan which probably file for the black rooks.
has its drawbacks, but which may change the
17 Rfdl
content and direction of the struggle after the
transfer of the knight to e4 and the future Karpov is not in a hurry to occupy the c­
possibility of . . . g5 (when White becomes file, evidently reckon ing that one or two
absorbed in actions on the 0-side) . tempi in such a situation will not decide
anything.
16 Qe3
17 Nd6
In trying to hinder Black's regrouping
18 b3 ReS
(16 . . . Nd6? 17 Nxc6 bxc6 18 Na4±), the
Ex-World Champion wishes to continue the Not 18 . . . Qe7? 19 Nxc6, and Black has to
game at a slow rhythm. The alternative was take with the pawn .
the preparation of g3-g4, but in itself this
19 Racl Be8
plan is effective only when the opponent is
20 Bel
engaged i n operations on the opposite wing,
and othenvise it may lead only to simplifi­ The Ex-Champion plans Na4-b2-d3 ,
cation . Nxc6, NeS and Bb4, increasing the pressure
on the 0-side. It is time to act !
16 . . . Kh8
20 Bf6!
(see following diagram) 21 Na4 b6
22 Nb2 Ne4
23 Nbd3
This last move prepares 17 . . . Nd6 ( / 7
Nxc6 Bxc6 18 Qxe6?? Re8 1 9 Qj7 Nd6), and A crucial moment: White could have
is useful for carrying out the plan with . . . gS . prevented 23 . . . g5 by 23 h4. Then . . . h6
In mentioning this pla n , I am not adjusting and . . . g5 would have exposed the black
the commentary to fit the events of the game king too much. But by . . . Rg8-g7-c7 Black
- Black is simply obliged to seek counter­ could have held the c-file, and so Karpov
chances on the K-side (Karpov, I fancy, did now hurries.
 Game /3 63
23 . . . g5 (with the idea of Bh4; doubling on the c-file is
inappropriate here -29 Rc2? Rg8 30 Qc/
Qg7 31 e3 Bh5 , and White's position is
already difficult) 29 . . . Rg8 (perhaps the
exchange of bishops should be prevented -

29 . . . Qe7, and if 30 Rc8, then 30 . . Rg8 31

.

Kfl Qb7. evicting the rook) 30 I3 h4 Bxh4 3 1

Qxh4 Qg7 3 2 Qh3 Bh5 3 3 Rc2 Bg4 34 Qh4
Bh5. White must accept this peace offer (35
Qh3), since after 35 c3 I3dl 36 Rh2 Qc7
Black's activity becomes dangerous (37
Qh6? Bh5!. winning) .
27 Rg8
28 Kll ?!

a c d e g
And again a non-concrete , "in general
useful'' move. 28 Qh6! was more energetic.
slightly paralyzing Black. I t is true that then
24 Nxc6 Bxc6 28 . . . Bxc5 (28 . . Rc7 29 Rxc7 Qxc7 30
.

25 Ne5 Kfl ) 29 fxe5 Rg6 30 Qf8+ Rg8 31 Rh6 Rg6

leads to a draw, hut White has no reason to
25 Bb4 is associated with ideas of seizing hope for more (32 Rxc8 Qxc8 33 Rcl Qa6 34
the initiative on the K-side , but Black has
Qe3? f4) .
sufficient counterchances, e.g. 25 . . . gxf4 26 Karpov probably thought that the move
Nxf4 ReS 27 Bxe4 fxe4 28 Rfl Bg5 ! or Qh6 would not run away from him . . .
25 . . . Rg8 26 Ne5 Be8 27 Bxe4 gxf4 28 Qxf4
dxe4. 28 Rxcl
29 Rxcl
25 •.. gxf4
26 gxf4 Be8

There is no sense i n hurrying - 26 . . .

Bxe5 27 fxe5 Rg8 28 Bg3 , and White's
position is the more pleasant.
Over the last ten moves Black has
achieved more: the minor pieces are equiv­
alent , and although the c-file has been lost,
the g-file has been opened and is ready to be
exploited. And after all, this is a file against
the white king! Why did this happen? The
point is that Black has not wasted a single
tempo (both his e8 bishop and his king are i n
t h e right place), whereas White's play has
been slightly "untidy" (Qe3, Rfdl) .

27 Qh3
29 h5!
White's main trump now is his more active
. • •

q ueen . Paradoxical and very strong ! Black suc­

Another possibility was the preliminary 27 ceeds in restricting the white queen (it is
Rxc8 Qxc8 28 Rcl Qb7 . and now 29 Qh3 essentially out of play) and the roles of the
64 London-Leningrad Championship Games
two sides are reversed - it is now White of threats after 33 Qe3 d4! 34 Rdl Qh4 35 Rxd4
whom care is demanded (in approaching Bc6! (weaker is 35 . . . Rxf4+ 36 Bf3 Qxh2 37
time trouble ! ) . RdB, when Black has nothing better than
37 . . . Qh3 + 38 Kel Qh4+ 39 Kfl Rxf3+ 40
30 Bb4?!
exf3 Qxd8 41 fxe4 Bb5 + with minimal win­
An "old-schedule" move. It would appear ning chances) 36 Bf3 (36 Rc4 Nd2+ or 36
that Karpov did not notice the change of Bxe4 Bxe4 is also bad) 36 . . . Qxh2 37 Bxg4
scene. 30 Bf3 h4 was more cautious (31 Rc6 hxg4.
Qe7) .
33 Bxe4
30 a5
I n time trouble Karpov decides to get rid
. . .

Nothing is given by the immediate 30 . . .
Bxe5 3 1 dxe5 Rg4 32 e3 Ng5 (after 32 . . .
Rh4 33 Qf3 Rxh2? 34 Bel the rook is
trapped) 33 fxg5 Rxb4 34 B f3 .
31 Ba3?
of the annoying knight , and o ne can under­
stand him. But better practical chances were
offered by 33 Bf3 Rxf4 34 Ke 1 (Black would
probably have continued 34 . . . Kh7) .
33 • • . dxe4?

A serious mistake. Losing two tempi is
unpleasant, but after 3 1 Bel Black would not
have had anything real . The withdrawal of
the white bishop to the flank strongly in­
fluences the entire situation around the white
king.
31 Bxe5!
. . .
The wrong way! Now White is able to
parry the threat of the queen joining the
attack , by giving up a pawn. Black would
have retained a much more powerful attack­
ing potential by 33 . . . fxe4 ! , e.g. 34 e3 (34
Qe3 Qh4) 34 . . . a4 (preparing the invasion
of the queen) 35 Rc6 (or 35 Bd6 axb3 36 axb3
Qa8) 35 . . . axb3 36 axb3 Qa8 37 Rxe6 Qxa3

32 dxeS
38 Rxe8+ Kg7, and the white king is de­
32 fxe5 Qg5 is even worse. fenceless. The difference between 33 . . .
dxe4 and 33 . . . fxe4 is more clearly seen i n
32 Rg4
the variation 34 Bd6 d 4 ! (with the additional
. • •

threat of . . . e3) : 35 e3 a4! 36 b4 (or 36 exd4

axb3 37 axb3 QaB, while if 37 Qxb3 Qh4)
36 . . . Qa8 37 Kf2 Qd5 38 Rc2 d3 39 Rd2 Qc4
40 Qfl h4! - the inclusion of the bishop via
h5 (and i n some cases the h-pawn can also
advance) puts White in a helpless position.
34 Bd6!

The d-file is blocked, and the rook is ready

to invade at c7. In such a position the
possibility of threatening the opponent's
king sooner and more dangerously is more
important than an extra pawn. And it is
precisely such possibilities that Black is lack­
ing after 33 . . . dxe4.
34 • • • Rxf4+

The absence of his bishop from e 1 prevents How can one avoid taking a pawn with
White from playing 33 e3 - 33 . . . Rh4 34 check, especially in time trouble ! However,
Qf3 Nd2 + . Black also creates irresistible there appears to be nothing better: 34 . . .
 Game 13 65
e3!? (with a very dangerous attack in the 37 Qxg5 Rxg5
event of 35 Qxe3 Qh4 or 35 Rc4 b5 36 Rd4 38 Rc8 Rg8
Bc6 37 Qxh5+ Kg7) is parried by 35 Qf3 ! , 39 e3 h4?!
with a draw after 35 . . . Qh4 (35 . . . Bd7 36
A time trouble move. 39 . . a4 would
h3) 36 Rc8 R xf4 (36 . . . Rg8 37 h3) 37
.

have been normal.

Rxe8+ .
40 h3
35 Kel Rg4
In the event of 40 Bc7 Black would have
35 . . . Kh7 36 Rc7+ Kg6 37 Re7 Bf7 (or
escaped with a slight fright: 40 . . . a4 41
37 . . . Qc8 38 Qe3 Rg4 39 h3 Rg2 40 Kfl Rg5
Bxb6 (41 bxa4 Bxa4 42 Rxg8+ Kxg8 43 Bxb6
41 Rg7+!) is risky in view of 38 Qe3 (38 Rxj7
h3 44 Kj2 Bb5) 41 . . . axb3 42 axb3 h3 43
Kxj7 39 Qxh5+ Kg7 40 Bf8+! gives Black
Kd2 Bh5 44 Rxg8+ Kxg8 , with a draw.
the better chances in the queen ending:
40 . . . Qxf8 41 Qg5+ Kj7 42 Qxf4 Qc5!) 40 . . . a4
38 . . . Rg4 39 h3 Rg5, and now , probably,
Draw agreed. While the bloodless en­
not 40 Rb7 Rg2 41 Rxb6 Qg5 42 Qxg5 + Rxg5
counter in game 1 largely set the tone of the
43 Ra6 f4 , but first 40 Kfl .
London half of the match , this tense skir­
36 Qe3 Qg5 mish , as it turned out, signified the character
of the second half.
After the exchange of queens a draw is
inevitable . To be honest , as soon as Karpov
played 34 Bd6 I realized that Black no longer
had anything significant.
 GAM E 1 4

Kasparov-Karpov 8
Ruy Lopez
1 e4 6

Intending once again to test Black's de­ 5

fences in Petroff's Defence. But the next few 4
games showed that the Ex-Champion had
rejected his traditional standpoint - playing
for a draw with Black , and for a win with
White , and was aiming at all costs to seize the
initi ative in the match .
e g
1 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bb5 a6
4 Ba4 Nf6 One of the n umerous standard Spanish
5 0-0 Be7 positions. In game 9 of the 1985 match
6 Rei b5 Karpov chose 13 . . . NbB, transposing into
7 Bb3 d6 the Breyer Variation . and from the opening
8 c3 0-0 he gained a solid but very passive position.
9 h3
13 ... cxd4
The classical "Spanish'' - an inexhaust­
ible mine of original strategic plans. subtle The most critical - B lack gives up the
positional manoeuvring, swift attacks and centre in order to prepare counterplay o n the
counterattacks - is Karpov's favourite Q-side .
opening, in which he feels especially con­
14 cxd4 Nb4
fident, irrespective of which colour he is
playing. There had been a considerable 15 Bb1 c5
variety of openings played in our games, but Other possibilities:
up till then in the "Spanish" I had not (a) 15 . . . Qd7 1 6 Ra3 bxa4 17 Rxa4 aS 1 R
managed to beat him. I n three games I Ra3 Qb5 19 Nh2 g 6 20 Ng4 Nxg4 2 1 Qxg4
achieved highly promising positions, but Bg7 22 Nf3 with the initiative for White.
they all ended in draws, and one game I (b) 15 . . . bxa4 1 6 Rxa4 a5 - both Karpov
actually lost. Therefore this current debate and I have experience in playing this pos­
was of a crucial nature. ition. It is sufficient to mention the games
9 Bb7 Kasparov-Belyavsky (Moscow, 1 982) and
10 d4 ReS Balashov-Karpov (USSR Championship
11 Nbd2 Bf8 Premier League, 1 983) . The experience of
12 a4 h6 recent years has confirmed the favourable
13 Bc2 assessment for White, e . g . 1 7 Ra3 g6 1 8 e5
67
68 London-Leningrad Championship Games
dxe5 1 9 dxe5 Nh5 20 e6 ! with advantage,
Fernandez-Dobrev (Sharj ah , 1 985) .
(c) 15 . . . g6 i s stro ngly met b y 1 6 e5 ! dxe5
17 dxe5 Nh5 18 axb5 axb5 19 Rxa8 Qxa8 20
Ne4 - White's advantage is obvious, Matu­
lovic- Lukacs ( Vrnjacka Banj a , 1 985) .
16 d5
Experience has shown that, to fight for an
advantage , White has to close the centre.
One of the first games played with this
variation , Kasparov-Balashov ( Kislovodsk,
1982) , went 16 dxc5 dxc5 17 e5 Nd7 ( 1 7 . . .
Nh7 or 17 . . . Nh5!? is also pe rfectl y poss­
ible) 1 8 axb5 axb5 1 9 Rxa8 Bxa8 20 e6 (it is
not easy for White to com plete his deve lo p­
ment - 20 b3? Bxf3 21 Nxj3 Nxe5!) 20 . . .
Rxe6 2 1 Rxe6 fxc6 22 Ne4 Qc7 - White's
initiative in the centre compensates for the
pawn he has given up, and in the coming
com plicated struggle the chance s are roughly
equal.
Black's chances are also by no means
worse after 16 b3 cxd4 17 Nxd4 bxa4 18 Rxa4
a5 19 Bb2 g6 20 Bc3 ReS ! , Tseshkovsky­
Ba lashov ( Minsk , 1982).
16 ... Nd7
Black hopes to exploit the position of his
knight at b4 for undermining the centre by
. . . f5 .
The slow 1 6 . . . g6 (in Griinfeld-Frey,
Lucerne 1982 , after 16 . . . bxa4 1 7 Rxa4 Bc8
18 Ra3 Bd7 1 9 Nfl Bb5 20 Ng3 Ra7 21 Nf5
White obtained a strong attacking position)
17 Nfl Bg7 18 axb5 (18 Ra3 bxa4 1 9 Rxa4 a5
20 Ra3 Ba6 21 Ng3 Bb5 with a com plicated
struggle, Aseyev-Dorfman , Lvov 1984)
18 . . . axb5 19 Rxa8 Qxa8 20 Bf4 occurred in
Griinfcld-Greenfeld (Israel , 1984) and
Griin feld-Kraidman (Is rael , 1 984) . I n both
cases Black had difficult problems to face.
17 Ra3
The routin e 1 7 Nfl allows Black to change
to his advantage the balance of forces in the
centre and to sharply activate his game:
17 . . . f5 18 e xf5 (18 e5 Bxd5 /9 Bx.f5 Bxj3 20
Qxf3 Nxe5 is unattractive for White) 1 8 . . .
Nf6 1 9 Rxe8 (De Firmian-Bclyavsky, Tunis
1985 , went /9 Bd2?! Nbxd5 20 Ng3 Qd7 21
Ne4 b4! 22 Nh2 Nxe4 23 Bxe4 Nf6, and Black
gained an obvious advantage) 19 . . . Qxe8
20 Ne3 Nbxd5 etc.
17 • . • c4!
Black rejects 17 . . . f5 , and not without
reason - after 18 e5! Nxe5 1 9 Nxe5 Rxe5 20
Rxc5 dxe5 21 Bxf5 White gains excellent
chances of an attack on the opponent's K­
side.
1 7 . . . g6 (1 7 . . . bxa4 JR Rxa4 a5 19 Nc4!
Ba6 20 Nfd2 Bb5 21 Ra3 a4 22 Rg3 with
advantage to Whi te) is also no better: 18 Nfl
Bg7 19 aS Re7? (19 . . . Rc8) 20 Re2 ! Qf8 2 1
Bf4 Ne5 2 2 Nxe5 Bxe5 2 3 Bxe5 Rxe5 2 4 f4
Rc7 25 Rg3 , and in Gufeld-Timoshchenko
(Kislovodsk , 1982) B lack faced insolubl e
problem s .
Of course , the move . . . c4 has a drawback
- White obtains d4 for his knight, but Black
too gains the possibility of invading at d3.
Experience with this variation is limited; one
game which should be mentioned is
Sokolov-Psakhis (Volgograd. 1985). in
which after 18 Nd4 Ne5 1 9 axb5 Qb6 20 N2f3
Nbd3 21 Be3 Nxe l 22 Nxe1 Qc7 a compli­
cated struggle developed .
18 axb5
An innovation . The idea of it is clear- the
knight aims to go to d4 with gain of tempo, by
attacking the b5 pawn .
18 axbS
19 Nd4
(see following diagram)
On 19 . . . Qb6 I was intending 20 Nf5 ,
pre paring an attack o n the K-side , but
Ka rpo v had prep ared ( u n doubtedly in his
home labo ra tory ) an unexpected pawn
sacrifice.
19 Rxa3!
20 bxa3 Nd3
21 Bxd3 cxd3
 Game /4 69

8 8

5 5

4 4

3 3

2 2

a b c d e g h a b c d e g h

If n ow White takes the pawn - 22 Nxb5 ,
then after 22 . . . Oa5 23 Nd4 Nc5 or 22 . .
Ba6 Black obtains sufficient co m p e n sation
for i t .
Here I thought for a long time - it was
essential to find a way to retain the initiative.
difficult. It is hard to criticize Karpov for this
. knight move. closing the d an ge ro u s diag­
onal , but nevertheless the correct decision
was 23 . . . g6 ! . in accordance with the spirit
of fighting for th e initiative. It is possible that
the E x Cham pion was afraid of the piece
-

sacrifice after 24 Nb3 Qa4 25 Qxd3. Indeed,

22 Bb2!
White sets his sights on the opponent's K­
side.
22 ... QaS!
The correct reaction. 22 . . . NcS suggests
itself, but after 23 Re3 Black would have had
to defend against two threats: Nf5 and N4b3 .
23 NfS!
A "squabble" over the winning of t he far­
advanced black pawn is inappropriate here:
23 N2f3 (bad is 23 N2b3 Qa4 24 Qxd3 Bxd5
or 23 Re3 Ne5 24 f4 Nc4, in both cases with an
obvious advantage to Black) 23 . . . Nc5 24
Nb3 Nxb3 25 Qxb3 d2 26 Re2 Qa4! 27 Qxa4
bxa4 28 Nd2 Bxd5 - White h as to seek a way
to save the ending.
(see following diagram)
23 ... Ne5?!
On his last two moves White had spent
about an hour. and Black even more - in a
critical position the choice of move is always
the acceptance of th e sacrifice would have
given White a very strong attack - 25 . . .
gxf5 26 Qg3+ Kh7 27 Qf3 Ne5 (27 . . . Re5 28
Bxe5 Nxe5 29 Qxf5 + Kg8 30 Nc5! is no
better) 28 Qxf5+ K g8 29 Re3 Ng6 30 Rf3
Re7 3 1 Bd4 ! However. th e accurate 25 . . .
Ne5 ! would have led to a double-edged
struggle: 26 Bxe5 (not 26 Qg3 Bx(L5 27 Nhd4
Nc4) 26 . . . Rxe5 27 f4 Re8 28 Ng3 Bg7 -
Bl ack is a pawn down , but the advanced
p osi t ion of White's pawns. the weakened
position of his king. the possibility of under­
mining t h e centre by . . . f5 and the un­
pleasant dark-square "X-ray'' would have
provided full co mpensat ion .
24 Bxe5!
In such positions one's hand n aturally
reaches out towards the f- p aw n . Let us
consider the complications after 24 f4 :
(a) 24 . . . Ng6? ! 25 Rfl N e7 (25 . . . Rc8 26
Nb3 Qa4 27 Qxd3 b4 28 Nbd4 Ba6 29 Qdl !
leads to a cheerless position for Black) 26
Nb3 (the hasty 26 Nxh6+ is risky because of
26 . . . gxh6 2 7 Qg4+ Kh7 28 Qh5 KgB 29 RfJ
Bg7 30 Bxg7 Kxg7 31 Rxd3 or 28 . . . Ng6 29
70 l.ondon- Leningrad Championship Games
j5 Nh8 30 NJ3 Qd8, and it is not easy for 24 ... dxe5
Whit e to demonstrate the soundness of his 25 Nb3 Qb6
sacri fice) 26 . . . Qb6+ (26 . . . Qc7 27 Ne3
An aggressive plan - B l ack inte nds to
with advantage to White) 27 Bd4 Oa6 2R
eliminate the a3 pawn with another piece .
Nxh6 + ! (28 Qxd3 Nxf5 29 ex.f5 Bxd5 30 Bxg 7
Karpov still hopes to seize the initiative,
Bxg7.' 31 Qxd5 Qxa3 32 Qxb5 Re3 leads only assuming that White's activity i s only tem­
to e q uality) 2R . . . gxh6 29 f5 ! (the following
<.:ontin uation of the attack is also possible -
porary. 25 . . . Qxa3 , in my opinion u n j us ly�
condemned by the commentators , was qmte
29 Qg4+ Kh 7 30 Qh5 Ng6 3l .f5 Nh8 32 Rf4 )
(26 . . . Qb4 is
acceptable , e.g. 26 Qxd3 g6
- White's th reats are very dangerous.
strongly met by 27 Rbl) 27 Ne3 (27 Qxb5
(b) 24 . . . Nc4! 25 Nxc4 (25 Bxg 7'! loses to
Qb4 28 Nxh6+ Kg7 29 Qxe8 Qxel + 30 Kh2
25 . . . Qxd2 26 Qg4 Qxel + 2 7 Kh2 Ne3! 28 Qxj2 31 Qxe5 + Kxh6! 32 Qh8+ Kg5 33 Qxf8
Nxe3 Rc8! 29 N/5 Bxf5 30 ex.f5 Qe2; after 25 Q/4+ leads to a draw; here 3 1 . . . f6 is bad
Nb3 Nxb2 26 ;'\/�w5 tVxdl 2 7 Rxdl the ending
for B la ck because of 32 Ng4) 27 . . . Qa6,
is unp rom ising for White; the most practical
with fair chances of equalizing.
decision here is 25 Nxh6+ gxh6 26 Qg4+
Kh7 27 Qf5 + with a draw) 25 . . . bxc4 26 26 Qxd3 Ra8?!
B xg7 Bc8! ( h ad is 26 . . . Bxg7? 27 Qg4 26 . . . Bc8 ! was essential . This versatile
Qxel + 28 Kh2 Qc3 29 e5 with decisive
move (in case of n e cess i ty . . . Bx.f5 is poss­
threats) 27 J3xf8 ( there i s nothing hctter - 2 7
ible , or el se . . . Bd7, de fendi n g the b5 pawn
Qg4? Bxj5 28 exf5 Qxe1 + 2 9 Kh2 Qe2 30
and blocking th e path of White's passed
dr;3 R e3 . and White loses) 27 . . . Kxf8!
pav.'n) would have enabled Black success­
(stronger than 27 . . . BxfS 28 Bxh6 Rxe4 29
Rxe4 Bxe4 30 Qg4+ Bg6 31 [5 Qe1 + 32 Kh2
full y to regroup and to organize a defenc . �
After m i ss i ng this opportunity, he ends up m
Qe5 + 33 Bj4 QxfS 34 Qxf5 Bxf5 35 Bd2 Be4
a di fficult position .
36 g4 Bxd5 37 Kg3 , when White can probably
save the ending) 28 Nxh6 Qc3 ! (the direct
28 . . . d2 29 Re3 c3 is j u sti fi ed only in the
event of 30 Qh5 Qa7 31 Kh2 c2 32 Rg3
Qgl
.
+ .'. but a fte r 30 Kh2! Whi te ' s threats are
ve ry dangerous) . Now it i s obv i ous that
White's attack is parried . His material
advantage has no s igni ficance - B lack's
connected pass e d pawns arc too strong.
White's paradoxical decision (24 Bxe5!)
has a solid p osit i on a l basis - he obtains a
protected passed p<nvn in the centre (the
exchange sacrifice is d e a rly unfavourable -
24 . . . Rxe5 25 Nf3 Rxj5 26 exj5 Bxd5 27 Re3
Hc4 28 Nel Qxd3 29 I'v'xd3 d5 30 Ne5) , th e
d5ie4 paw n wedge restricts the light-square
bishop. the white knights occupy good pos­
itions - the b3 knight deprives B lack o f 27 Rcl !
active counterplay on the Q-side . \vhile t h e
One of the most d ifficult prophylactic
k n ight a t f 5 is potentially dangerous on t h e
moves in the game. Now the bishop dare not
K-sid e , a n d Black is forced t o weaken h i s
leave the c6 square undefended .
position h y . . . g 6 . For these obvious advan­
27 d6 is premature because of 27 . . . Rd8.
t a !.!es White does not begrudge giving his
p
o ponent t he two bishops. 27 ... g6!
 Game /4 71

The immediate capture o n a 3 would have

lost: 27 . . . Rxa3 (27 . . . BxaJ? 28 Qg3) 28
d6 g6 (28 . . . Ra2 29 Nc5 g6 30 Ne7+ Kh7 31
Qb3 or 30 . . . Kg7 31 Qg3 is equally bad for
Black ; 28 . . . Ra8 also fails to save the game
in view of 29 Nc5 ReB 30 Ne7+ Bxe7 31 dxe7)
29 Nc7+ Kg7 (29 . . . Kh7 30 Qf3 /5 31
Nxg6!) 30 Qg3 Kf6 (30 . . . Bxe7 31 dxe7 Qe6
32 Nc5) 3 1 Rdl .

28 Ne3 Bxa3

No better is 28 . . . Rxa3 29 Ng4 Ra2

(29 . . . Bg7 30 d6) 30 Qb l ! with an obvious o b c d e g h
advantage . 28 . . . h5 was recommended, but
here too after 29 Nc2 Bxa3 30 Nxa3 Rxa3 3 1
Qc2 b4 32 Qb2 White's advantage i s un­ opponent's ranks. In addition, the Ex­
disputed. Champion's defensive difficulties were
aggravated by severe time trou ble .
29 Ral ! Ra4?!
31 ... Qd6?
29 . . . Bf8 30 Rxa8 Bxa8 31 Qc3 Qb8 32
Ng4 Bg7 33 Nc5 or 29 . . . Bd6 30 Rxa8+ Worn out by the preceding complicated
Bxa8 31 Ng4 h5 32 Nf6+ Kh8 33 Qd2 is bad struggle , Karpov commits the decisive
for Black - with minimal forces White mistake. The best chance was 31 . . . £6 (bad
organizes a decisive attack . is 31 . . . Ra2 32 Qbl .1 Qa7 33 Re7 or 31 . . .
But Black should have restricted the Bg7 32 d6 Bxe4 33 ReB + ) 32 Qf3 Ra6,
knight - 29 . . . h5! 30 Qc3 f6 (30 . . . Qd6? retaining some hopes of saving the game.
31 Na5 ) . Now 31 d6 appears to win , but this is 32 Nc5!
not so - 3 1 . . . Qc6 ! (everything else loses :
31 . . . Qxd6 32 Na5 , 31 . . . Bxd6 32 Rxa8+ Of course , not 32 Qxh5? ! Rh4 with
Bxa8 33 Qe8+ , 31 . . . Bxe4 32 Nd2!) , and it counterplay.
is not clear how White can strengthen his 32 Rc4
positio n. Correct is 31 g4 ! (after provoking a
weakening , White energetically breaks up Or 32 . . . Ra7 33 Qxb5 - White bas a
Black's position on the K-side) 31 . . . hxg4 technically straightforward win.
32 Nxg4 Be7 33 Rxa8+ Bxa8 34 Qc8 + Qd8 33 Rxc4 bxc4
35 Qa6 - Black is condemned to a di iTicult 34 Nxb7 cxd3
defence .
White also has an easily won ending after
30 Ng4 Bf8 34 . . . Qb4 35 Qc2 Qb3 36 Ne3 .
Black was undoubtedly pinning his hopes 35 Nxd6 Bxd6
on this move (31 Nxe5? Bg7 32 Nd7 Rxal + 36 Kfl
33 Nxa1 Qe7) , but . . .
White is not tempted by the h-pawn - 36
(see following diagram) Nxh6 + ? ! Kg7 37 Ng4 f5 , and the win be­
comes problematic.
31 Re i !
36 ... Kg7
B y subtle manoeuvres White has achieved
complete domination - the elegant rook Here B lack could have set an interesting
"pendulum" has caused disharmony in the trap - 36 . . . h5 37 Ne3 Bc5 , in the hope of
72 London-Leningrad Championship Games
38 Kel ? Bxe3 39 fxe3 fS 40 exfS gxfS 41 e4!
(the only move, otherwise White stands
badly) 41 . . . h4! (an excellent resource -
Black fixes the white pawns, thus devaluing
his opponent's material advantage ; not 41
. . . fxe4? 42 g4, when White wins) 42 exfS e4.
unexpectedly saving the pawn ending. How­
ever, the accurate 38 N dl would have de­
prived him of his last hopes.
37 f3! fS
38 Nf2 d2
39 Ke2 Bb4
40 Nd3 Bc3
41 Nc5
o b c d e g h of the centre and to the creation of a pro­
The scaled move. Now 42 Nb3 and 43
Nxd2 is inevitable. Karpov resigned the
game without resuming, although a certain
accuracy is still demanded of White in realiz­
ing his material advantage .
It is clear that against passive defence
White wins easily by transferring his king to
bS and knight to e6 - B lack cannot simul­
taneously contend with the d6 pawn and
defend his K-side pawns. That only leaves an
active plan of defence: 41 . . . Kf6 42 Nb3
KgS 43 Nxd2 Kf4 44 Kd3 B aS 45 Nc4 Bd8 46
Nd6 Kg3 (Black loses quickly after 46 . . . h5
47 Nf7 Ba5 48 d6 h4 49 Kc4!fxe4 50fxe4 Kxe4
51 Kb5! or 46 . . . Bf6 47 Nf7 h5 48 d6 Kg3 49
d7) 47 exfS gxf5 48 NxfS + Kxg2 49 Ke4 h5 50
h4 Bf6 5 1 d6 Kh2 (51 . . . Kh3 52 d7 Kg2 53
Ng7 Bxh4 54 Nxh5 is also hopeless for B lack)
52 Nc7 Bxh4 (52 . . . Kh3 53 Ng6! Kg3 54 d7
Bd8 55 Nxe5 Bxh4 56 Nc6 Bf6 57 Kf5 Bh4 58
Ke6, and White wins) 53 Kxe5 Bel (on
53 . . . Bf2 White wins by 54 Ng6 Kg3 55 f4
Kg4 56 f5 Kg5 57 Ke6) 54 Nc6 Bf2 55 Nd4 Bel
5 6 f4 Kg2 (56 . . . Kg3 57f5 h4 58f6) 57 fS h4
58 d7 Ba5 59 Nc6 - as w e sec, Black is
unable to save the game.
However, all this "brillancc" is by no
means essential. White wins most simply by
44 d6! Bb4 (44 . . . Ra5 45 d7 Bd8 46 Kd3) 45
d7 Be7 46 Kd3 Kg3 (46 . . . Kg5 47 Nb3 Kf6
48 Nc5) 47 Nc4 Kxg2 48 NxeS .
Of course, in matches for the World
Championship such positions are not usually
resumed, but the adj ourned position has to
be analyzed (for peace of min d ! ) .
In this 14th game there was a real
"Spanish" battle : a clash of strategic plans ­
first there was a fierce skirmish on the 0 -
side, and by an interesting pawn sacrifice
Karpov managed for a time to seize the
initiative here : then a swift change of scene
- a demonstration of activity by White on
the K-side, leading unexpectedly (23 . . .
Ne5?! 24 Bxe5!) to a favourable stabilization
tected passed pawn . Black consistently (but
too directly) tried to break through on the 0-
side, and in his ambitious aims he lost
objectivity (26 . . . Ra8?!, 29 . . . Ra4?!) .
Severe punishment followed (27 Rcl !, 29
RaJ/, 31 Rcl.') , and catastrophe became
inevitable . I rate my victory .i n this game
among my best creative achievements, es­
pecially since it was gained on "Spanish"
territory. Yes , the Ex-Champion lost the
game after making several errors, but subtle
and original play was demanded of White i n
order to gain a decisive positional advantage .
"However, what is a correct game? There
are hardly any games played ideally by both
sides , since people are not machines. There
can only be various degrees of mistakes . . ."
A . Karpov
 GAM E 1 5
Karpov-Kasparov
Grunfeld Defence
Experience - in this case bitter experi­
· 5
ence - h as shown that glorious and import­
ant victories such as the one in the previous
game have to be "digested" - in order to
build up again one's supply of emotional
energy . But the postponement I took was
also for additional preparation. In the Griin­
feld Defence a storm was expected , since
Karpov so needed to win .
In this opening there are two genuinely
active variations : 4 cxd5 followed by e2-e4 ,
and 5 Qb3 . The 5 Qb3 variation is more to
Karpov's taste: it is not so well studied , and
White's powerful pawn centre is less vulner­
able. And indeed, the match showed that the
Ex-Champion had been working in this
direction and had prepared some new ideas.
Before the start of the game something
strange occurred . I was asked , and, evi­
dently, Karpov was too, to agree to a little
ceremony involving FIDE Vice-President
Tudela . Due to the Ex-Champion's habit of
arriving late, this ceremony began only some
2-3 min utes before the clocks were due to be
started. Campomanes came onto the stage
and introduced Tudela to the audience , then
said something with the most radiant smil e ,
t h e n Karpov and I were presented with
badges from the Venezuelan Chess Feder­
ation . . . This was an absurd and ridiculous
spectacle, and the game began some 5-6
minutes later than usual. Does this not
demonstrate the inner convictions of the
current FIDE officials, that chess players and
chess itself are secondary to them?
During the ceremony I noticed how
irritated Karpov was by all this - he was
dying to get on with the game !
73
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nc..l d5
4 Nf3 Bg7
Qb3
Thus the Gri.infeld Defence begins to
come under direct fire . As I was later told, at
this point the head of Karpov's delegation
informed the journalists in the press centre :
"Today we begin!"
5 dxc4
6 Qxc4 0-0
7 e4
White has seized the centre. but has
wasted two tempi on moves by his queen ,
and he still has to find a suitable square for it.
Black exploits this factor to organize
counterplay against the opponent's pawn
centre .
7 . . . Bg4
8 Be3 Nf'd7
The Smyslov Variation - an old weapon ;
all B lack's minor pieces join the battle
against the centre .
The alternatives here are 9 Be2, 9 Rd I and
(deemed the most ··subtle") 9 Qb3 N b6 10
Rd l - this is the basic position in the
Smyslov Variation , where Black has to
choose between 10 . . . Nc6 1 1 d5 Ne5 , 10 . . .
e6. and 10 . . . Bxf3 11 gxf3 c6.
9 Rdl
This gives Black an additional possibility
(apart from 9 . . . Nb6 10 Qb3 ; however,
perhaps Karpov had in mind 10 Qc5) , which
since the time of an encounter between
Botvinnik and Fischer (1962) has been con­
sidered fairly favourable for Black . Karpov's
decision is explained by the innovation which
74 London- Leningrad Champio11ship Games
h e has prepared and now employs on move Black could try to maintain the balance
12. with the help of tactical trickery: 14 . . . Bc6
15 Ng5 Ndxe5 1 6 f4 Nc4 17 Bel Na3 ! But if
9 Nc6
White sees through the opponent's idea in
10 Be2 Nb6
time, he will of course prefer 16 Nxe6 fxe6 17
II Qc5
f4 Nf7 18 Bc4 ! (18 Rd7 e5 gives B lack serious
In the event of 1 1 Qd3 Bxf3 and . . . e5 counterplay) 18 . . . e5 19 0-0, e . g. 1 9 . . .
Black has no problems. exf4 20 Bxf4 Bd4+ 21 Kh1 Bxc3 (Nb5 was
threatened) 22 bxc3 Kg7 23 Rd7! (23 Bxc7
11 ... Qd6
Nfe5 is less clear) , and Black is in difficulties.
The retreat of the knigh t to c8 is extremely
risky strategically ( and , to all appearances,
8 Karpov had hardly studied it in his prepar­
ations) . The knight is aiming for e7, but will it
manage to reach there, has it got time?
6 Nothing forcing for White is apparent. and in
5 addition the e5 pawn is attacked.
4 14 NbS
3 The most plausible move . Better chances
2 are given by 14 h3, which the Ex-Champion
discovered only in painstaking home analysis
and which he tried out in game 17.
o b c d e g h

Here Botvinnik played 12 h3, and after

12 . . . Bxf3 13 gxf3 Rfd8 14 d5 Ne5 1 5 Nb5
Qf6 16 f4 Ned7 17 e5 Qxf4! Fischer obtained
an excellent game. 12 0-0 and 12 d5 have also
been tried .
12 e5!?

An original strategic (mixed with tactical

subtleties!) idea . White forces the transition
into an endgame , in which B lack unexpec­
tedly has serious problems over his knight at
b6. a b c d e g h

12 . .. Qxc5
13 dxc5 Nc8! 14 ... Rb8!

At the first, superficial , glance it appears
that 12 e5 is simply bad because of 13 . . .
Nd7, emphasizing the weakness of White's
central pawn . But after 14 h3! Bxf3 15 gxf3
Ndxe5? 16 f4 Black loses his knight. There­
fore he would have had to play 15 . . . Rfd8
16 f4 Nf8 or 1 6 . . . g5 - in these positions it
is better to be playing White.
14 . . . Bxf3 1 5 Bxf3 Bxe5 16 Rd7 (or 16
Bh6 RdB 17 0-0) favours White, as does
14 . . . Nxe5 15 Nxe5 Bxe2 16 Kxe2 Bxe5 17
Rd7 or 15 Nxc7 Rb8 16 Nxe5 Bxe2 17 Kxe2
Bxe5 18 Rd7 Bxb2 1 9 Rb1 Be5 20 Bh6 Bg7 2 1
Bxg7 Kxg7 22 Na6. I n these variations m uch
material is exchanged, but the knight at c8
remains a burden to Black.
 Game 15
Since on 14 . . . e6 there can follow· 1 5 Rd7
jut not 15 Nxc7 Rb8, which leads to a
:--0sition in the game) , Black makes a move
.. h ich restricts hi s opponen t 's ch oice .
15 Nxc7 e6!
The eS pawn will not run awa y . Now, on
:he on e h a n d , the knight at c7 risks "not
jeing a b le to ru n away" (16 . . . a6 is
rhreatened) , and on the other hand the
kn i ght at e8 has acquired prospects.
16 NbS :'IJ8e7
Black's position has become q ui te attrac­
tive . and here Karpov th o u gh t for a long
tim�: do es White have a way of retaining the
initiative? If 17 Bg5 N d S 1 8 h 3 , then 18 . . .
Bxf3 1 9 B xf3 b6! (st ronge r than 1 9 . . . Bxe5)
20 Bxd5 exd5 2 1 Rxd5 (21 cxb6 Rxb6 22
Rxd5? Nb4, and White loses a piece ) 2 1 . . .
bxcS 22 Rxc5 Nxe5 23 0-0 Nd3 with a draw.
17 Rd2!
A deep prophylactic m ov e : the bishop at
e2 and the b-pawn are d efende d , and the
possi ble doubling of rook s on the d-file is
prep ared. On 1 7 . . . NdS White has in mind
18 h3 B xf3 19 Bxf3 Nxe3 20 fxe3 N xe5 2 1 Nd6
with a mi nima l initiative. 20 . . . Rfc8 is poss­
ibly more accurate: 2 1 Ke2 Nxe5 22 Rcl Bf8
(or 22 . . . Nxf3 23 gxf3 a6 24 Nd6 Rc6) 23 b4
a6 24 N d6 Rc7 , when Black digs himself in
(25 a4 b6 26 c6 Rd8) .
8
7 but perha ps very slight ly more p le asa nt for
6 White than in the game .
5 N xd4 N xd4 22 Rxd4 (after 22 Bxg4 Bxe5 the
4 centralized knight is as good as the bishop)
a c e g
75
17 ... b6!'!
This decision by B lack \Vas prob a bl y just as
u nexpecte d as White's prev iou s move . The
aim is understandable - Black gets rid of the
cramping pawn at c5 (and at the same time of
his own weak pav·m at b7) , t hus undermining
the opponent's outpost at d6. True , the pawn
at b6 becomes weak, the posi t io n of the
knight at h5 is strengthened , and the c-file
m av be seized by White. But all this is of no
gre; t importance , since in gem:ral Black's
position h as a good reserve of sol i d i ty .
18 cxb6 axb6
19 BgS!
1 9 Nfd4 Bxe2 20 Kxe2 Nx e5 21 Rcl \vas
reco m m en ded , but 1 9 . . . Nxe5! is stronger,
and i f 20 f3 Bf5 21 g4 , th e n 21 . . . Nd5 22 Bf2
Bb I 23 b3 g5 with well centralized pieces .
By 19 Bg5 ! W h i te wishes to clarify the
position of the kn i ght at e7, and on 19 . . .
NdS he plans 20 h3 Bxf3 2 1 Bxf3 Nxe5 22
Bxd5 exd5 23 b3! (23 Rxd5 Ra8!) , with hopes
of exploiting the pawn weaknesses in the
opponent's position .
A curious observation: clarifying and
awaiting the opponent's actions has been the
I ie t mot if of this game (14 . . . Rh8!, 1 7 Rd2!,
/9 Bg5!, and Black 's p rolon ged refusal to
take the e5 pawn) .
19 ..
• Nf5
20 b3
Once again prophylaxis (defending the c4
square in the event of 20 . . . Bxf3 21 Bxf3
Nxe5 22 Be4) , but this tim e unnecessary:
after 20 0-0 B xf3 21 Bxf3 NxcS 22 Be2 h6 2 3
Bf4 g5 24 Bxe5 Bxe5 the position is equal ,
But more log i ca l was 2 0 Nfd4 Nxd4 2 1
22 . . . Bxe2 23 Kxe2 BxeS 24 Rb4, and
White has slight pressure .
20 ... h6!
Now B lack clarifies the intentions of the
bishop at g5 . After 2 1 Bf4 g5 22 Bg3 Rfd8
76 London-Leningrad Championship Games
followed by exchanges on g3 and f3 the black Bxf5 gxf5 30 Kf3 hxg3 31 fxg3 Bgl 32 b4 ReS
knight goes to e5, and the combination of 33 Rdl Bh2 34 Rd2 the game ends by
Bg7 +Ne5 is very effective. White should repetition of moves) and 24 . . . Bf4 25 Rc2
trade his dark-square bishop for the c6 Rfc8.
knight, rather than the one at f5 .
24 Rfd8
21 Bf6 Bxf3 25 Rfdl Rxd2
22 Bxf3 NxeS 26 Rxd2 ReS
23 BxeS BxeS 27 g3 Rcl +
24 0-0 28 Kg2 Kf8
29 Be4 Ke7
In the endgame kings prefer to be close to
the centre , but on 24 Ke2 White may not On White's proposal - draw agreed. This
have liked both 24 . . . Rfd8 25 Rhd l Rxd2 + resultis indeed unavoidable , but how dis­
26 Rxd2 Bxh2 27 g3 h5 (after 28 Be4 h4 29 appointed Karpov must have been !
 GAM E 1 6
Kasparov-Karpov
Ruy Lopez
The day before this game, Leningrad
Television conducted an unusual interview.
Several chess specialists present at the match
were asked one and the same question:
"What opening do you expect tomorrow,
and how will the game go?" The most varied
suggestions were put forward , but on one
point they were all agreed - there would be
a fierce , cut-and-thrust battle (there was also
one "direct hit" - the Ruy Lopez, un­
fathomable complications, and a severe time
scramble ! ) .
It should be mentioned that i t was not very
difficult to predict a fierce battle - and it was
not j ust a matter of the uncompromising
nature of the preceding three Leningrad
encounters, but also of the number of the
coming game ! Yes, the reader should not be
surprised - the number 16 had something of
a magical effect on the two players. And this
was by no means mysticism, but quite con­
crete, even "live" memories. After all, it was
in game 16 of the previous match that the
conclusive turning point, deciding its out­
come, had occurred . Moreover, that game
became a genuin e highlight of the match -
remember with what merciless consistency
Black tightened the blockade, and how the
white pieces suffocated in their own camp as
they tried in vain to become active . But the
picture of this previous battle would be
incomplete if one did not recall the finely­
placed knight at d3 - the leader of Black's
offensive, which played the decisive role in
carrying out a grandiose strategic plan.
There can be not the slightest doubt that such
crushing wins are remembered for a long
77
time not only by the victor, but also by the
vanquished, the more so in that the direct
consequence of this defeat was the loss of the
title "World Champion", to which he had
become so accustomed over a period of 1 0
years.
I am convinced that Karpov arrived for
game 1 6 of the Return Match in an extremely
determined mood, aiming for comprehen­
sive revenge . In this context the word "com­
prehensive" has a great deal of emotional
and psychological meaning. Eleven months
earlier I had managed to win game 16 by
using Karpov's favourite weapon - domi­
nation, and so now he was intending not to
avoid a highly complex game , full of poten­
tial combinational explosions. Victory on
territory which was traditionally considered
''Kasparov's" would dispell the "myth" of
Kasparov's tempestuous attacking power,
and would be a very severe psychological
blow to the opponent. And in general, given
a favourable turn of events, why should this
game not provide the signal for a turning
point in the Return Match and eclipse the
glory of the previous 1 6th game? Of course , I
could have guaranteed myself in advance
against any great unpleasantness by choosing
with White some quiet system of develop­
m ent, but it is not in my nature to avoid an
open , gripping encounter, whatever the risks
involved. Besides, I believed in the lucky star
of game 16, and I dreamed of creating
another masterpiece, crowned by a crushing
final attack. So that Karpov could have been
in no doubt that he would obtain the desired
complications with interest. And the battle
commenced . . .
However, one is unable to look into
another person's mind, and I cannot guaran­
tee the accuracy of this description of my
7R London-Leningrad Championship Games
opponent's thoughts. Moreover, I m ay be 18 Nd4
reproached for attempting to interpret
Proposing a debate on the Sokolov­
Karpov's thoughts and mood in a light
Psakhis game, where I was intending to
favourable to myself. But, firstly, any author
demonstrate an improvement for White . But
has the right to a certain amount of artistic
Karpov is ready for a turn of events different
invention , if, without distorting the course of
from game 14, and he is the first to employ an
events, he creates a more intriguing situ­
innovation .
ation . Secondly, one can judge at a player's
feelings and mood from his chosen manner of
play and moves in a given game, and Kar­
pov's play in game 16 unequivocally testified
to his intentions. And finally, such a grandi­
ose battle (of which this game is an example),
the peak of a titanic struggle, requires a
slightly different, "other-worldly" i nter­
pretation . Otherwise , how does one explain
the unprecedently fierce character of the
battle , which was characteristic only of a
decisive encounter?
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
o b c d e g h
Of course , not 2 Nf6. The Ruy Lopez
. . .

is a much more appropriate place for the

settling of accounts.
18 ... Qf6!
3 Bb5 a6
This apparently pointless attack , merely
4 Ba4 Nf6
assisting White's development, has a pro­
5 0-0 Be7
found positional basis. White does not wish
6 Rei b5
to withdraw his knight from the centre and
7 Bb3 d6
lift the attack on the b5 pawn , and therefore
8 c3 0-0
he is forced to block the 3rd rank, m aking it
9 h3 Bb7
impossible in the near future to switch his
10 d4 ReS
rook across and mount a direct attack. And
II Nbd2 Bf8
Black , relieved of the necessity over the next
12 a4 h6
few moves of worrying about the safety of his
All as expected . Karpov demonstrates his king, can exploit his positional trumps,
readiness to continue the theoretical debate associated in particular with his outpost at
begun in game 14. d3.
13 Bc2 exd4 19 N2f3 Nc5
14 cxd4 Nb4
For the second successive time in a similar
15 Bb 1 c5
position, Karpov goes in for a pawn sacrifice .
16 d5 Nd7
hoping in return for indefinite positional
17 Ra3 c4
compensation ! An instance which , frankly
And here is a familiar motif, revtvmg speaking, is most unusual for the Ex­
memories of the previous 1 6th game - the Champion. The typical procedure "the sacri­
black knight aims to establish itself at d3, fice of a pawn for the initiative" has never
causing confusion in the white ranks. been a favourite part of his chess arsenal.
 Game 16 79
Over the long history of our games (this 16th analysis and in the assessment of a position.
game of the Return Match could be called Especially when hurried work has to be
:--l o . 88) Karpov has shown himself to be a done . . .
staunch supporter of material advantage,
20 axbS
and at any convenient opportunity has aimed
to demonstrate his rightness, by accepting There is no choice - if White is to suffer.
without much hesitation the pawns sacrificed let him at least have a pawn for it.
by me. And now the eternal creative debate
20 axbS
- "material or the initiative" receives a new
. . .

21 Nxb5
spur, but unexpectedly with reversed
colours ! Evidently , very great was Karpov's Now the knight has to take up a poor post
desire at all costs to achieve a turning point in at a3, but on no account could the black rook
the match . . . be allowed to invade down the a-file 21 -

Black's choice of 1 9 . . . Nc5 is especially Rxa8? Rxa8 22 Nxb5 RaJ 23 Nc3 Nbd3 24
intriguing, for the reason that at this point Rfl Nb3 , and White's position begins to
Karpov disregarded another, no less inter­ collapse .
esting possibility , and one more in accord­
21 Rxa3
ance with his style - 19 . . . Nd3 !? 20 B xd3
22 Nxa3
b4. Here the pawn sacrifice after 21 Ra l cxd3
is clearly temporary - 22 Qxd3 Nc5 23 Qc4
(23 Qhl Bxd5!) 23 . . . a5 ! , and White's pos­
ition begins to collapse (24 Nh5 Rac8!). The
prophylactic 22 Nb3 also does not help.
Black again wins back his pawn, remaining
with a positional advantage - 22 . . . Qg6! 23
Qxd3 Nf6 24 Nh4 (24 Nbd2 Bxd5) 24 . . .
Qh7 etc. Therefore White h imself would
have had to decide on a sacrifice of the
exchange - 21 Bxc4 bxa3 22 b3 (22 b4?! is
weaker because of 22 . . . Ne5! 23 Bb3 Nxf3 +
24 Nxf3 Qal !, and the a-pawn , which is still
alive, may unexpectedly cause serious prob­
lems) 22 . . . a2 (22 . . . Nc5 23 Qc2) 23 Bb2
a c d e g h
or even 20 Rxd3 cxd3 21 axb5 . True, in both
cases the question is only one of sufficient
compensation. Only Karpov himself can give
22 Ba6!
a definite answer to the question as to why he
. . .

played 19 . . . Nc5 rather than 19 . . . Nd3 ,
and any conclusion based merely on specu­
lative observations may prove to be far from
the truth .
To j udge by his speed of play, the plan
beginning with 18 . . . Qf6 was worked out by
Karpov in his home analysis, and it is hard to
imagine that neither he nor h is helpers saw a
possibility such as 1 9 . . . Nd3 . Although,
from my own experience I know that, in the
confusion of a match (when dangers seem
exaggerated) , oversights occur both in
Black has no reason to hurry , and before
invading at d3 he tries to strengthen his
position to the maximum .
The hasty 22 . . . Nbd3 would have
allowed White to consolidate successfully -
23 Bxd3 Nxd3 24 Re3 ! B a6! (24 . . . Nxb2? 25
Bxb2 Qxh2 26 Nxc4 is very depressing -
White is simply a healthy pawn to the good)
25 Qa4! (the passive 25 Qc2?! justifies
Black's idea - 25 . . . ReB 26 Nbl g6 27 Nc3
RbB! 28 Re2 Bg7, and it is not easy for White
to disentangle himself) 25 . . . Ra8.
80 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Here 26 Bd2 looks good, in the hope of
26 . . . Nxb2 27 Qc2 Nd3 28 Nxc4 Qa1 + 29
Be l ! (29 Nel is weaker because of 29 . . .
Nxel 30 Rxel Qd4) , retaining the extra pawn
and a solid position . But after 26 . . . Qxb2 27
Nxc4 Qb I + 28 Bel Nc5 29 Qc6 Rc8 30 Qb6
Rb8 31 Qxbl Rxb l the activity of Bl ack's
pieces probably enables him to gain a draw
without particular difficulty.
Therefore 26 Qc6! Qd8 27 Bd2 Nxb2 28
Nc2 is correct, returning the pawn , but
wresting the initiative, after which it proves
not so simple for Black to coordinate his
pieces, for example:
(a) 2S . . . Qc8 29 Ra3 ! Bb7 (29 . . . Qxc6?
30 dxc6 d5 31 Bb4 dxe4 32 N.fd4 Nd3 33 Bxf8
Kx.fB 34 c7, winning a piece) 30 Qxc8 Rxc8 3 1
Ne3 ! (3/ Ra7 i s not so clear i n view of
31 . . c3! 32 Bel BaB 33 Nfd4 Nd3, when on
. Rxd3 ! (27 Qxd3? Qal 28 Rei Nxj2!) 27 . . .
34 Bxc3 B lack has 34 . . . Bxd5) 31 . . . Ra8
(31 . . . ReB 32 Bc3 Nd3 33 Nd2, and the c4
pawn is doomed) 32 Rxa8 Bxa8 33 Nd4! (33
Bc3?! Na4 34 Bb4 c3 35 Nd4 g6 36 Nb5 f5! 37
f3 Bg7 38 Bxd6 Bb7 leaves B lack with some
counterplay) 33 . . . g6 34 NbS Bg7 35 Bc3 ,
wit h excellent winning chances in the end­
game.
(b) 28 . . . Nd3 29 Nb4 ! Nxb4 (after 29 . . .
Nc5?! 30 Nxa6 Rxa6 31 Qh5 Ral + 32 Kh2
Rfl 33 Re2 the activity of the black pieces
peters out, and the c4 pawn cannot be saved,
e.g. 33 . . . Nd3? 34 Qxc4 Nxj2 35 Rei! Rxel
36 Bxel Ndl 37 Qd4, trapping the stray
knight) 30 Bxb4, and White's positional
superiority is undisputed.
23 Re3!
Essential prophylaxis. White prepares in
advance for the appearance of a black piece
at d3. Now Black has several tempting possi­
bilities available, but he must choose a move
after carefully weighing up everything "for"
and "against" , since the slightest haste or, on
the contrary, the slightest delay may h and
over the initiative to the opponent.
Thus after 23 . . . Ncd3? 24 Bxd3 cxd3
(24 . . . Nxd3 25 Qa4 leads to a position
considered earlier) 25 Qa4 Rb8 26 Bd2!
Qxb2 27 Rei ! (27 Bxb4 Rxb4 28 Qxa6 d2 is
unclear) the black pieces are hopelessly en­
tangled on the Q-side.
The attempt to bring the dark-square
bishop into play could have ended in com­
plete fiasco - 23 . . . g6? 24 Bd2! Qxb2 25
Bc3 Qxa3 26 Qd4 ReS 27 Nxe5 Nb3 (27 . . .
Bg7 28 Qd2!) 28 Qa7 ! dxe5 29 Rf3 , and a sad
fate awaits the deserted black king, e .g.
29 . . . f5 30 exf5 Qcl + 31 Kh2 Qxbl 32 Bxb4
Bxb4 33 Qb8+ (33 Qxa6? Nd2!) 33 . . . Kh7
(33 . . . Bf8 34 fxg6) 34 Qxb4 etc.
23 . . . Nbd3, on the other hand, was
wrongly criticized by the commentators
(however, I must admit that I made the same
mistake when annotating this ·game for the
Yugoslav ln.formator) . It is true that the final
assessment of the variation 24 Bxd3 cxd3 25
b4 Nxe4 26 b5 (26 Qa4 ReB) 26 . . . Bb7 27
Nc3? 28 Bb2 Nxd1 29 Bxf6 Nxf2 30 Kxf2 gxf6
31 Nc4 is unquestione d - B lack is in great
difficulties. But he can easily avoid unfavour­
able simplification by 27 . . . Rc8 ! , when
White's extra pawn is not at all perceptible.
Of course, all these variations could be
continued, but for us they are now of purely
theoretical interest, since without much
thought Karpov played
23 ... Rb8!?
By switching his rook to the b-file B lack
has completed all his preparations for the
invasion of a knight at d3. In addition, his last
move has an elegant tactical basis - 24 Rc3?
Nbd3 ! , and White finds himself in a very
difficult position, since 25 Nxc4? loses
immediately to 25 . . Qxc3 ! 26 bxc3 Rxbl .
.
On discovering this straightforward trap, for
an instant I became distressed - the black
knight at d3 recalled very strongly the events
in game 16 of the previous match. In ad­
dition, the time on my opponent's clock
clearly demonstrated that this was not the
first time he had seen this position . Things
would also have been depressing for White
after 24 Nel ?! Nbd3 ! 25 Nxd3 cxd3. But even
so, Black's pressure is not so strong that
White is forced passively to await the devel­
opment of events . Therefore there is no
 Game 16 81
� :: ason to panic, but he must boldly advance improbable. Although , if it is assumed that
- and in the resulting complications every­ the entire analysis of the plan with 18 . . . Qf6
::Oing will be decided by enterprise and was made in great haste, everything starts to
::1genuity. become clear. At any rate, the fruit of an
hour's thought (which , incidentally, equal­
24 e5! dxe5
ized the readings on our clocks) was the
25 Nxe5
move
25 . • . Nbd3?
8 which immediately placed Black in a critical
7 position . Certainly , the invasion at d3 must
not be delayed any longer, but with which
6
knight? Moreover, in contrast to traditional
5 uncertainties after the opening - which
rook? - here the price of an incorrect choice
4
may prove very high , since practically all the
3 pieces are participating in the play and the
2
position abounds in tactical possibilities. Of
course, " by eye" 25 . . . Nbd3 looks more
logical - all other things being equal, simul­
a b c d e g h taneously Black also brings his rook into
play. But in such positions, moves made on
general grounds (unsupported by concrete
Exploiting the removal of the black rook analysis) often lead to catastrophe. And that
from the e-file, White has radically changed is the case here - by the brilliant reply 26
the character of the struggle . True , he has Qc2 ! ! White could have gained a big advan­
had to part with his strong pawn centre tage . Standing in ambush. the queen success­
(which, however, has lost its original value, fully combines both defensive and attacking
since B lack has managed to go round it on duties. In this case B lack's activity would
the flank) , and for the moment his d5 pawn is have reached an impasse , and most import­
more of a weakness than a strength. I n return antly, the scattered white pieces would have
White has sharply activated his pieces. and begun to coordinate harmoniously. Added
given the opportunity they are ready to to this should be White's material advantage
create threats against the black king. In and the possibility of winning the c4 pawn.
return , Black's play in the centre and on the However, we should not be in a hurry to
Q-side should balance the two sides' chances declare that 26 Qc2 ! ! would have automati­
- the position on the board is evidently one cally won the game , as many of the commen­
of dynamic equilibrium. tators hastened to do. Black's resources arc
Here , to my surprise, Karpov thought for a far from exhausted , and on the way to his
long time - another point in the game which goal White would have had to display con­
is difficult to explain . We can hardly expect a siderable resourcefulness .
candid explanation from the Ex-Champion , Very interesting complications arise after
and therefore we can only guess at the the direct 26 . . . Rb4 (defending the c4 pawn
reasons which prompted him to plunge into -27 Naxc4? Bxc4 28 Nxc4 Rxc4): 27 Nc6 (27
such a deep study of the position . White's Re2? c3.1) 27 . . . Rb7 (the tempting 27 . . .
break in the centre can hardly have been Rb3 28 ReB c3 is refuted by the fantastic 29
unexpected - it is a very obvious idea. Be3!l, when the weakness of the b l -h7
Perhaps it was a matter of an incorrect diagonal causes Black's downfall - 29 . . .
appraisal of the position , although this too is Rxb2 30 Bxc5 Rxc2 31 Rxf8 + Kh 7 32 Bxc2 or
82 London- Leningrad Championship Games
29 . . . g6 30 Bd4) 28 ReS. Again Be3 ! is
threatened, and therefore B lack must vacate
additional space for his king.
The timid 28 . . . g6? loses by force - 29
Bxh6! Rxb2 30 Bxf8 Kh7 3 1 Be7 ! (the
excessively showy 31 Bxc5??, in the hope of
31 . . . Rxc2"! 32 Bd4 Rei + 33 Kh2 Qf4+ 34
g3, is refuted by the simple 31 . . . Nxc5)
3 1 . . . Qf4 32 g3 Qf5 (32 . . . Qj3 33 Nd4!
Qxd5 34 Bf6) 33 Bxc5 ! Rxc2 34 Bxc2 Qxd5 35
Bd4 etc.
28 . . . g5 ! is much stronger, when an
amusing position arises - the most active
white and black pieces are simultaneously
also carrying out defensive duties, i . e . by
attacking, they do not allow the opponent's
pieces to become completely free. It is not
immediately apparent how White can
strengthen his position. 29 Be3 is no longer
so strong, because of 29 . . . Rxb2 30 Bd4 (30
Bxc5"! Rxc2 31 Rxf8+ Kg7) 30 . . . Rxc2 31
Bxf6 Rei + 32 Kh2 Nd7 ! 33 Bd4 Kh7 . 29 Ne5
looks thematic, attacking Black's strong­
point tandem of knight at d3 and pawn at c4,
and also inte nding by Ng4 to drive the black
queen from its excellent post a t f6. B ut then
Black has the strong reply 29 . . . Re7! This
exchange of rooks (which are clearly unequal
in strength) sharply ch<mges the situation on
the board - 30 Ng4 Qd6 31 Rxe7 Qxe7 32
Ne3 (32 Be3 f5 33 d6 Qe6) 32 . . . Nb3 etc.
The correct path consists precisely i n exploit­
ing the strong positions of the Re8 and Nc6,
which restrict Black's possibilities. By the
inconspicuous 29 f3 ! White rids him set f of his
weakness at f2 and creates an irresistible
threat to the c4 pawn, at the same time
bringing into play the inactive knight from
a3. Black , alas, cannot permit himself similar
prophylaxis - on 29 . . . Kg7 comes 30 Be3 !
with decisive effect. He is forced to play
29 . . . Qd6, although even here after 30
Nxc4 Qxd5 31 N4e5 ! his position is very
difficult, in view of the threats of b2-b4 and
Rd8.
In reply to 26 Qc2 Black's best chance is
probably 26 . . . Nb3 ! ? , e . g . 27 Nd7 Qd6 28
Nxb8 Qxb8 29 Nxc4 (29 Bd2? Bxa3 30 bxa3
Nxd2) 29 . . . Nbxcl 30 Rxd3 Nxd3 3 1 Qxd3
g6 32 b3 Bc5 - it is not clear whether White's
material advantage is sufficient for a win.
Also after 27 Naxc4 Nbxcl (27 . . . Qxj2 + ?
28 Qxf2 Nxj2 is bad because of 2 9 Rxb3.'
Rxb3 30 Kxj2 Bc5 + 31 Ke1 f6 32 Ba2 Rb4 33
d6! fxe5 34 d7 Be7 35 Nxe5+ Kh7 36 Bbl + !
g6 3 7 Nc6 Bh4+ 38 g3.' Bxg3+ 3 9 Kd1 ) 28
Nxd3 Nxd3 29 Qxd3 g6 30 b3 (30 Rj3 Qg5)
30 . . . Bc5 31 Re2 (31 Rj3? Qa1.' , and in view
of the threat of . . . Bxc4 - e.g. 32 Kh2 Bxc4
33 Qxc4 Bd6 + , White has to seek perpetual
check , which may well not be there -
33 . . . Kf8 34 Qxh6+ Ke8! 35 Qc6+ Kd8
e tc . ) 3 1 . . . Qal 32 Re1 (32 Ra2 Bxc4 33
Rxa1 Bxd3 34 Bxd3 Rxb3) 32 . . . Qf6 33 Rfl
h 5 ! Black's counterplay seriously hinders
White's task .
But in any event 26 Qc2 ! ! would have left
the assessment of the position in no doubt ­
Black would have faced a difficult struggle
for a draw. Thus after using up more than an
hour , Black made a serious mistake, which
White failed to exploit. Of course , the situ­
ation should not be over-dramatized - such
oversights often occur even in matches for
the World Championship (for example , look
through any 20 pages of this book), but
nevertheless it is worth dwelling on this point
in more detaiL primarily because we can use
the evidence of the other direct participant in
these events. According t o Karpov, he sud­
denly discovered that the prepared invasion
at d3 was merely bluff because of 26 Qc2 ! ! ,
but , o n failing t o find anything better, after
much hesitation he nevertheless followed
this path. But fortunately Kasparov took him
at his word, and missed a winning possi-
bility0 0 0
Well now , the question of Kasparov taking
him at his word will be considered a little
later, but for the moment, my dear Anatoly ,
allow me to question the sincerity of your
words. In a bad position , it cannot be denied ,
bluff is a normal thing, but is Black's position
really so hopeless? I cannot believe that
during the game you did not consider invad­
ing at d3 with the knight from c5 , and yet in
th e complex positions arising after 25 . . .
Ncd3 i t is difficult to demonstrate an advan-
 Game /6 83
tage for White not only at the board, but Qg4 + Kh7 (31 . . . Kf8 32 Qg8+ Ke7 33
even in analysis. White essentially has no Nf5 + Kd7 34 Qxf7 + Kc8 35 Qe6 + ) 32 N f5
choice: 26 Ng4 (the possibility of immedi­ Bf8 33 d6! Qd7 34 Qh5 + Kg8 35 Bd4 1'6 36
ately forcing a draw by 26 Bxd3 Nxd3 27 Qg6+ Bg7 37 Bxf6 etc.
Rxd3 cxd3 28 Nd7 Qd6 29 Nxb8 Qxb8 30 Therefore 26 . . . Qd4! is correct - in the
Nbl.' etc. obviously does not count). Where centre the queen occupies a much more
now should the queen move to? aggressive position , and - the main thing ­
26 . . . Qb6, in analogy with the game, controls the important a 1-h8 diagonal .
does not have the same strength , since the b­ However, at first sight is not altogether clear
file is blocked , and the queen is too far away how much the queen at d4 helps, if in the
from the K-side, where the main events same way White pursues direct strategy: 27
develop : 27 Rg3 Bc5 (Black has to resort to Rg3 Kh8? ! (27 . . . Nxcl ? allows an immedi­
various tricks - the simple parrying of the ate rout - 28 Nxh6+ Kh8 29 Nxf7 + Kg8 30
threats leaves White with a strong initiative Qh5) 28 Be3 ! Qxb2 29 Nxh6! gxh6 30 Qh5
and a material advantage - 27 . . Nxcl 28
. Qf6 (30 . . . Bg7 31 Bxh6 Qxj2 + 32 Kh2) 3 1
Qxcl Kh8 29 Ne5 or 27 . . . Kh8 28 Be3 Bc5 Nxc4! Bxc4 3 2 Qg4, and White maintains a
29 Qf3) 28 Nxh6+ (there is no time to think very strong initiative with m aterial eq ual .
about the f2 square - on the agenda is a However, the game develops quite differ­
decisive attack) 28 . . . Kf8 29 Qh5 ! gxh6 (or ently if Black does not sit it out in defence ,
29 . . . Bxj2 + 30 Khl gxh6 31 Bxh6+ Ke7 32 but boldly accepts the challenge and
Rg7! Rf8 33 Rh7 Qb834 Bxf8+ Qxf8 35 d6+ ! launches a counterattack - 27 . . . Bd6� 28
Kxd6 3 6 Rxf7) 3 0 Bxh6+ Ke7 31 Rg7 ! Rf8 32 Be3 Qxb2 (the difference with the 26 . . .
Rh7 Qb8 33 d6+ ! Bxd6 34 Bxf8+ Qxf8 35 Qb6 ? variation begins to tell - instead of
Nxc4! Bxc4 36 Qh4 + , and the outcome is occupying a passive post at c7 , the black
obvious. Another try is 27 . . . Bd6, attacking queen at b2 fulfils both defensive and attack­
the dangerous rook - 28 Be3 ! Qc7 (defend­ ing duties) 29 Nxh6+ (it appears that here
ing f7 in the event of 29 Nxh6 + Kf8 30 Qh5) too the black king, abandoned to the mercy
29 Nxh6+ (nevertheless! ) 29 . . . K f8. of fate . will come to a sad end , but White is
unable to land a decisive bl o w) 29 . . . Kf8 30
Qh5 (30 Qf3? gxh6 31 Bxh6+ Ke7 32 Rg7
Qxf2 + ! 33 Qxf2 Nxf2 34 Kxf2 Nxd5 35 Bel
8 Bc5+! 36 Kel Bxa3 37 Bxa3+ Kf6) 30 . . .
7 gxh6 31 Rf3 ! (after 31 Bxh6+ ? Ke7 32 Bg5+
f6 33 Re3+ Be5 34 Bxf6+ Kxf6 35 Rj3+ Ke7
6
36 Qj7+ Kd6 37 Qe6+ Kc5 or 33 Qh7+ Kd8
5 34 Bxf6+ Qxf6 35 Rg8+ Bf8 White's a ttack
4
peters out) 31 . . . N e5 ! (31 . . . f6? 32 Qxh6+
Kf7 33 Qh7+ Ke8 34 Qg6 + Kd7 35 Rxf6 or
31 . . . Rb7? 32 Qxh6 + Ke7 33 Bg5 + ) 32 R l'6
(32 Qxh6+ may lead merely to a trans­
position of moves in the event of 32 . . . Ke7
33 Rf6, since 33 Bg5 + Kd7 34 Rf6 is parried
o b c d e g h by the simple 34 . . . Rb6, while 33 Rxf7+
Nxj7 34 Qe6+ Kd8 35 Qxf7 is pointless
because of 35 . . . Qe5 ; in addition , after 32
30 Rx.g7 ! ! ( the tempo of the offensive does Qxh6+ Black has an additional defensive
not slacken ; the rook sacrifice drags out the resource - 32 . . . Ke8!? 33 Qxd6 Nx.f3 + 34
black king to face the onslaught of the gxf3 Rd8) 32 . . . Ke7 33 Qxho (33 Qh4 is all
remaining white pieces) 30 . . . Kxg7 3 1 the same met by 33 . . . Nxd5 , when the
84 London-Leningrad Championship Games
threat of a discovered check proves ephem­
eral; the centralized position of Black's king
also docs not cause him any particular diffi­
culties in the variation 33 Rxd6 Kxd6 34
Qxh6+ Kxd5) . Now the time has come for
Black to launch his counteroffensive - 33
. . . Nxd5 (33 . . . Rd8? 34 Bg5) 34 Rxd6 (in
the hope of 34 . . . Nxe3? 35 Qf6+ ) .
34 . . . Nf3+ ! ! (the white king, which up till
now has been calmly observing the battle
from its residence, itself comes under mur­
derous fire) 35 gxf3 Nxe3! (35 . . . Rg8+ is
much weaker because of 36 Bg5 + ! Rxg5 37
Qxg5 + Kxd6 38 Qd8+ , when White is out of
danger). In this explosive situation (both
kings exposed, almost all the pieces hang­
ing) , literally seething with study-like ideas ,
i t is not easy for White to find a satisfactory
defence, e.g. :
36 Rxa6? (36 fxe3? Rg8+ 37 Kfl Qcl + 38
Kj2 Qgl + 39 Ke2 Rg2 mate) 36 . . . Rg8+ 37
Rg6 Rxg6 + ! 38 Bxg6 Qcl + 39 Kh2 Nf1 + ,
winning the queen.
On the ultra-original 36 Bh7 Black wins by
describing a pretty triangle with his queen :
36 . . . Qal + 37 Nbl (37 Kh2 Qe5 + ) 37 . . .
Rxbl + 38 Bxbl Qxbl + 39 Kh2 Qb2 ! ! -
decisive loss of material for White is inevit­
able - 40 Kg l Nf5 ! , or 40 Qxe3 + Kxd6 41
Qh6+ f6.
Only 36 Rg6 ! ! , blocking the terrible g-file,
allows White to continue the struggle -
36 . . . fxg6 (after 36 . . . Qcl + 37 Kh2 fxg6
38 Qg7+ Kd6 39 Qf6+ Kc5 40 Qe7+ the
black king can hardly succeed in avoiding
perpetual check) 37 Qxe3 + Kd6 38 Be4.
Certainly, the advantage is still with Black,
but the insecure position of his king sharply
reduces his winning chances. The following
(non-obligatory) variation is possible: 38 . . .
Rb3 39 Qf4+ Qe5 40 Qf8+ Qe7 41 Qf4+
Kd7 42 Nxc4! Bxc4 43 Bc6+ Kd8 44 Qxc4
Rbl + 45 Kg2 Qe l 46 f4 with a draw.
Thus after 26 . . . Qd4 ! White's direct con­
centrating tactics get him nowhere. There­
fore instead of 27 Rg3 more positional
methods m ust be considered - 27 Nc2!
(from every point of view this exchange
favours White: firstly , he will have no in­
active pieces, and secondly, now h e can
always exchange the annoying knight at d3,
after depriving it of the support of its
colleague from b4) 27 . . . Nxc2 (the careless
27 . . . Qxd5 1eads instantly to catastrophe -
28 Nf6 + ! gxf6 29 Rg3 + and 30 Qg4) 28 Bxc2.
The resulting position is no less interesting
and diverse than the previous one, but to
devote as m uch time and place to it would be
superfluous. 1 w ill restrict myself t o the
recommendation 28 . . . Bc5 ! and to the
assessment - unclear. Those wishing to can
check this for themselves.
We can conclude that the correct 25 . . .
Ncd3 ! would have fully j ustified Black's
opening plan of gaining the d3 square for one
of his knights, and would have given him a
good game. So why then did Karpov play
25 . . . Nbd3? The answer suggests itself ­
h e , like everyone else, found 26 Qc2 ! ! only
later, after the conclusion of the game . After
all, were it not for 26 Qc2 ! ! , the move played
by Karpov would have had all the plusses i n
i t s favour - more centralizing, opening the
b-file, and also the fact that White cannot
immediately force a draw: on 26 Bxd3? there
follows 26 . . . cxd3 ! , when the advantage is
now with Black, e . g . 27 Nc6?! Rxb2! 28 Bxb2
(28 Rf3 Qc3) 28 . . . Qxb2 29 Re8 d2 ! 30
Ne7 + (30 Nc2 Qcl 31 Ne3 Be2!) 30 . . . Kh7
31 Qh5 Qal + ! 32 Kh2 d l =Q 33 Qf5 + g6 34
Qxf7 + Qg7 etc. The lack of coordination of
 Game 16
·x hite 's pieces causes him considerable
:rcmble in the e nding after 26 Naxc4? Qxf2 +
2 - Kf l Nf4 ! 28 Qf3 Qxf3 29 Rxf3 Nxd5 . . .
Srop ! Is this where the mystery lies? Perhaps
:\:arpov was bluffing, by deliberately avoid­
eng the draw which was possible after 25 . . .
\"cd3 ! 26 Bxd3 Nxd3 27 Rxd3 cxd3 28 Nd7?
This is quite possible , although somehow one
.:-annat believe it. Of course, the Ex­
Champion's position in the match was not
particularly good, but the time for reckless
risk had seemingly not yet come - it was still
a long way to the finish . And why in that case
refer to an allegedly poor positio n , when one
could vividly describe the despairing
· ·heroism" of one's decision, and one's in­
domitable fighting spirit . . .
However , everything is possible ! If this
really was the case, it convincingly demon­
strates how strongly Karpov wanted to win
this 16th game.
As for "Kasparov taking him at his word " ,
to b e frank Black's 25th move came a s a
surprise to me. As I awaited Karpov's reply.
I sat in my rest room, mainly working out the
variations after 25 . . . Ncd3 26 Ng4. The
position turned out to be unclear and un­
cert ai n , but very i nteresting. And so, on
encountering a surprise, I did not try to make
an instant readjustment, but decided to con­
tinue as planned. Although I realized that
the opening of the b-file was a further serious
argument in Black's favour in the coming
struggle , I nevertheless felt intuitively that
White's imminent attack on the king would
secure him against defeat , even if his Q-side
were completely destroyed. However,
strictly speaking, such justifications should
not be taken serio usly - a top-class grand­
master, with an hour for thought, should find
a move such as 26 Qc2 ! ! , even in a changed
situation. But, be that as it may, without
much hesitation I played
26 Ng4?
Karpov fairly quickly replied
26 ... Qb6!
85
and everything fell into place - Karpov
began preparing to win material , and Kas­
parov started assembling a striking force for
storming the king's fortress; i . e . each was
engaged in his favourite business!
Note that 26 . . . Qf5 ? ! would have
aliowed White to gain a firm initiative - 27
Rf3 Qxd5 28 Ba2! (28 Bxh6?! is ineffective
because of 28 . . . Qe6, but n ot 28 . . . Rxh2?
29 Nf6 + ! gxf6 30 Rg3 + ) , e.g. 2R . . . Qe6
(28 . . . Nb3? 29 Nf6 + ! gxf6 30 Rg3+ Bg7 31
Qg4, and Black no longer has the defence
. . . Nc5-e6) 29 Rc3 Qd5 30 Nxc4 ! . and the
knight is immune because of 30 . . . Bxc4 3 1
Nxf6+ ! gxf6 32 Rg3 + Bg7 33 Qg4 Ne6 34
Bxc4 Qd7 35 Bxe6 fxe6 36 Bxh6.
From this point a new game essentially
begins - behind are all the opening tricks,
the clash o f plans, the "courteous" e xch a nge
of mistakes . In this last moment of com­
parative calm before the brief, stormy battle ,
let us try to weigh u p the balance of forces of
the two opponents . Both sides have import­
ant trumps (incidentally , analysis confirms
that the position is still within the bounds of
dynamic equilibrium). The times left on the
clock are roughly equal , although not very
great (what is an hour in such a tense
situation? ! ) . There is no question of hoping
here for a full variational analysis - the
situations which can arise at literally every
move are too unusual and complex . Pos­
itional guidelines are totally eroded , and the
customary scale of values is displaced, since
the two sides are attacking targets of differ­
ent importance. Therefore the qualities
which come to the forefront as those such as
intuition and enterprise, and this means that
to complain of bad luck is, to say the least,
absurd - everything is within one's own
grasp.
27 Rg3
(see following diagram)
27 ... g6
86 London- Leningrad Championship Games
a c e g h Nxc4!) 29 Rg3 with a repetition of moves or
All the same B lack cannot avoid a weaken­
ing of his king's pavm screen - 27 . . . Kh8 28
N xh6�
Now after the simple-minded 28 . . . gxh6?
the outcome is immediately decided by a
temporary sacrifice of the forgotten knight at
a3 . which breaks up B lack's position in the
centre - 29 Nxc4 ! Bxc4 30 Og4 Qg6 31 Qxc4
N c5 (31 . . . Rb4 32 Qc3+ Bg7 33 Qxb4!
Qxg3 34 Qxc5!) 32 Qf4! Oxb I (32 . . . Qd6 33
Q.f5) 33 Oxe5 + Kh7 34 Oxb8 Qxcl + 35 Kh2
Bg7 36 Qc7 with an easy win .
The only thing that can save Black is
determined action - 28 . . . Ne4 ! , forcing
White to think also about defensive
measures : 29 Nxf7+ Kg8 30 Re3 ! (the pos­
ition after 30 Be3 Qxb2 31 Qh5 Nxg3 32 fxg3
is considered below) 30 . . . Next2 ! (30 . . .
Bxa3? 31 Bxd3 cxcG 32 Rxe4 with a decisive
material advantage) 3 1 Qh5 Bc5 ! (31 . . . g6?
32 Qh8 + Kxf7 33 Rf3 + Ke7 34 Bg5 + Kd7 35
Qlz 7+ Kd6 36 Rf6 + ) 32 Ng5 (32 Nh6 + ? . in
the hope of 32 . . . gxh6 33 Rg3+ Kh8? 34
Bxh6 with an irresistible discovered check -
34 . . . Ng4+ 35 Be3+ . is refuted by the
preventive "'discovered-interference·· move
33 . . . Ng4 + /) 32 . . . Bxe3 33 Qh7 + Kf8 34
Qh8+ (weaker is 34 Ne6 + ? Ke7 35 Qxg 7+
Kd6 36 Qg3 + Kxd5 37 Bxe3 Qxe6 or 37
Nc7+ Kc6 38 Nxa6? Nxh3+ + .' 39 Kh2 Bg1 +
40 Krh3 Rh8+ with an obvious advantage to
Black) 34 . . . Ke7 35 Qxg7 + Kd6 36 Qf6 +
Kd7 ! (36 . . . Kxd5'! 3 7 Qf3 + ! leaves White
\Vith good winning chances) 37 Qf5 + Kd8 ! .
and White has t o b e satisfied with a draw.
since in the event of 3H Qf8+ Kd7 39 Qf7+
Kc8 40 Qe8+ Kb7 4 1 Qe7+ Qc7 ! 42 Qxe3
Nxcl Black is not in danger.
After a careful analysis o f these compli­
cations, an obvious question arises - if the
knight move to e4 saves Black even after
27 . . . Kh8 2H NxhQ! . then \Vhy not play
27 . . . Ne4. so as on 2H Nxh6+ to move the
king to h7? White would have been faced
with difficult problems: the cowardly 28 Re3 .
i n t h e hope o f 2 8 . . . Nec5 (28 . . . [5'! 29
28 . . . Nexf2 29 Nxf2 Nxf2 30 Kxf2 Bxa3 3 1
Oc2 ! f5 3 2 hxa3 Qxh l 33 Oxh l Rxb l 34 Bd2
\Vith a draw. leaves him badly off after
28 . . . Bxa3 ! 29 Rxe4 Bxb2 - his attack has
petered out. and the knight at d3 is still there.
like a bone in his throat.
It appears that White can sacrifice the
exchange in a favourable version , eliminat­
ing the opponent"s outpost and at the same
time getting rid of the inactive knight at a3 -
28 Nxc4 Bxc4 29 Rxd3 Bxd3 30 Oxd3. but on
closer examination these exchanging oper­
ations do not bring him any particular .i oy .
The pawns at d5 and b2 are \>:eak and require
defending. and in addition after 30 . . . Re8
Black . who has retained his powerful knight.
is more harmoniously placed and has many
more active possibilities (pressure on f2 in
combination with threats along the back rank
looks fairly unpleasant). On the other hand .
White's threats along the bl-h7 diagonal are
easily parried - 31 Be3 Qxb2 32 f3 Rb8 1
(32 . . . h5? 33 .fxe4 hxg4 34 e5 g6 35 e6 with an
attack) 33 Bc2 Qal + 34 Kh2 Bd6+ 35 f4 f5 or
even 31 . . . Bc5. The conclusion is obvious:
in spite of the approximate material eq uality .
White faces a gruelling struggle for a draw .
White is forced to accept the ·'invitation"
- 27 . . . Ne4 ! ? 28 Nxh6+ Kh7. Here 29 Re�
N exf2 30 Of3 looks tempting, with the idea
after 30 . . . Qxh6'? of performing a study­
like "staircase·· with the rook - 3 1 Rxd.V
Qxcl + 32 Rdl + ! . White has a very strong
attack after 30 . . . Bxa3? 3 I Nxt7 . but 30 . . .
Qf6 ! ! completely refutes his plan . After
investigating the intricacies of the pieces . we
 Game 1 6
discover that White cannot avoid los s of
material , e . g . 31 Ng 4 (31 Qxf6 �xf6 32 N�4
Nxg4 33 hx�4 Bc5) 31 . . . Qxf3 32 R x f3 Nx g4
33 N xc4 (33 hxg4 Bxa3 34 Bxd3 + cxd3 35 R.fl
d2) 33 . . . B c5 + ! (it is th is cu nning i nter­
mediate check which sp oi l s e veryth in g ; on
33 . . . Bxc4? 34 hxg4 Rb3 t he re follows 35
Bc2) 34 Kh l (34 K.fl Nh2 + ) 34 . . . Bxc4
(34 . . . Ngj2+ g i v es White drawing ch ance s
- 35 Rxf2 Bxj2 36 Bxd3 + ) 35 h xg4 .
0 c d e g 3 5 Oxa6 (little is changed by i n terp o sin g 35
35 . . . Rh8 ! ! ( st a n d ing in ambush, the rook
he l ps it s king to m ove out of the p i n with g ai n
of tempo) 36 Bxd3+ Kg8 + 37 Rh3 Bxd3 etc.
All th a t remains is a d esp era te forward
burst - 29 Be3 Qxb2 30 Nxt7 Nxg3 31 fxg3 .
Bl<1ck h<1s the im m ine n t prospect of a
decisive m ateri al adv ant age , but White's
attack proves to be sufficient to save the
gam e . e .g. :
3 1 . . . Bx a 3 ( a fter 3/ . . . Qxa3'!.' 32 Qh5 +
Kg8 33 N�5 Rxbl + '! 34 Kh2 it all unex­
pec te d ly ends in m at e - 34 . . . Bc5 35 Qe8+
B/8 36 Qj7 + Kh8 37 Qh5 + ) 32 Bxd3 + cxd3
33 Qh5 + K g8 34 Ng5 with unavoida ble
perpetual check , s i nce 34 . . . Qb7'! ! 35
Q h7+ Kf8 36 Q h8 + Kc7 37 Qxg 7 + is
dan gerous o n ly for B lack - 37 . . . Kd6? 3R
Qf6+ Kd7 (38 . . . Kxd5 39 Qe6 mate) 39
Qc6 + Kd8 40 Nt7 + .
Returning the queen to th e defence does
not have the de sire d effect - 3 1 . . . Qf6 32
Qh5 + Kg8 33 Ng5 Bd6 (33 . . . Qf'5'! 34 g4
87
Nf4 35 Bxf5 Nxh5 36 Be6+ Kh8 37 d6! Nf6 38
Nxc4 1eads to a lost pos i tio n ) 34 Qh7+ Kf8 35
Qe4 ! Qe7 36 Qf5 + Ke8 3 7 Qg6+ Kd7 3R
Qf5 + . and White has nothing to fear. e . g .
3 8 . . . Ke8 (38 . . . Kc7 is bad because o f 3 9
Ne6+ Kh7 40 Nxc4l) 3 9 Qg6+ Kd8 4 0 Nt7 +
Kc7 4 1 Qxd6+ Qxd6 42 Nxd6 Kxd6 43
Nx c4 + ! Bxc4 44 Bxd3.
It b ecom es clear that Black can avoid
forcing drawin g vari ation s on ly by not allow·­
ing the h ar monio u s actions of the formidable
q ueen + knigh t combination close to his
king :
3 1 . . . g6 (ta k i n g t h e h 5 square away from
the qu ee n ; 31 . . . Kg6 with the same aim is
se nse le ss because of 32 Qg4+ K.rj7 33 Qe6
mate) 32 Ng5 + Kg8 33 Qf3 Q g7 (33 . . . Ne5 '!
34 Q/6 Qxa3 35 Qe6+ .') 34 d6 w i t h a d a n ger­
ous i n i ti ative .
3 1 . . . Be7 ( try in g to restr ict the k night ) 32
Qh5 + K g8 . Now Wh i te cannot be s a t isfied
with either 33 Og6'! Qf6 34 N h 6+ K£8 35 Q h7
Bxa3 (35 Bd6? 36 Ng4) 36 Oh8+ Ke7 37
Qxb8 gx h 6 . or 33 Nh6 + '! gx h 6 34 Qg6+ Qg7
Qe6 + ? Qf7 36 Qxa6 Bxa3 37 Bxd3 cxd3 38
Qxa3 Qxd5 ) 35 . . . Bxa3 36 Bxd3 cxd3 37
Q x a 3 Qxg3 . Corre c t i s 33 d 6 ! Bf6 (33 . . . Qf6
34 Qh8+ Kxf7 35 Qxb8 Qxd6 36 Qxd6 Bxd6
37 Bxd3 cxd3 38 Nhl Bxg3 39 Nd2 1eads to an
obvi ous draw , while the excessively greedy
33 . . . Qxa3? is im media t ely punished - 34
Nh6+ ! gxh6 35 Qg6 + ) 34 d 7 ! (34 Qg6 is
easi ly p a rri e d - 34 . . . Kf8 35 Bxd3 cxd3 36
Nh6 gxh6 37 Bxh6+ Bg7) , transforming the
d-pawn i n to a fo r mid a b le force . It is h ard ly
possi ble to e xha ust with variations the r e s ul t­
ing irrational pos it i o n , hut it seems to me that
i n the end the tactical skirmish will lead to
e q u al chances , e . g . 34 . . . B b7 (34 . . .
Qxa3? is weaker because of 35 Qh8 + Kxf7 36
Qxb8 Qe7 37 Qa7! Kg6 38 d8= Q with an
obvious a dva n t age , since 38 . . . Qxa 7 fai l s to
39 Qe8+ .' Qf7 40 Qe4+ Kh5 41 Qg4 mate) 35
Bc2 ! ( th e u n p rote cted b is h o p at bl and
k ni gh t a t a3 successfully carry out imp o r t a n t
d e fe ns i ve du ties) 35 . . . Qxa3 (35 . . .
Qal + '!l with t h e idea o f 36 Kh2 Qfl is
strongly m e t by 36 Nhl.') 36 Qh8+ Kxf7 37
88 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Qxb8 Qe7 38 d 8 = N + ! ( Whi te has no need to d a rk square b i s h o p . After 28 Nx h6 + ? B x h 6
-

tempt fate in the p osi tion w i t h a n unusual 29 Bxh6 Qxb2 nothing comes of the attack .
material balance after 38 Qxb7 Qxe3 + 39
28 Qxb2
Kh2 Bd8.' 40 Qc8 Ke7 41 Qxc4 Ne5 42 Qf4
. . •

Qc3.' 43 Qg5 + Kxd7 44 Qxg7+ Kd6) 38 . . . A t first s igh t B lack seems t o h a ve c l e ar l y

Kg6 3<,1 Qxb7 (39 Nxh7?? Qxe3 + 40 Kh2 succeeded - he h as al re ady broken through
Be5) 39 . . . Oxe 3 + 40 Kh2 Bxd8 (bad is on the 0-side and is re ady to win t h e a3
40 . . . Bd4 41 h4 Qgl + 42 Kh3 or 40 . . . Be5 k n i g ht whereas on the oppo s ite side of the
,

41 Qco+ Kh 7 42 Q/3 with w·inn i ng chances board White h as not yet cre a t e d any real
for White) 41 Qc6+ B f6 ( 4/ . . Kh5 42 . threats.
Bdl + Kg5 43 Qd5 + ) 42 Qxc4 Bd4! ( acc ur -

acy to the e n d ; the i m m e d i a t e 42 . . . Be5 '!

loses to 43 Qeo + .' Kh 7 44 Bxd3 + ) 43 B xd3 +
B
Kf6 44 h4 Bc5 with an obvious draw.
After se e i n g variations of this type , one 7

i nvoluntarily begins to fear the spec t re of the 6

'"dr a w i ng death" on the ch e ss board . Of
5
conso l ation , however, is t h e fact that o n e can
penetrate to such d e p t h s only i n a na l y s i s . . . 4
To j udge by the first impre s si on a fter
3
,

27 . . . N e4 ! ? B lack wo u ld have r i s k e d less

than Wh ite who would have had to find t he
, 2
one safe p a th . B u t at this p oi n t Karpov was
che ri s h i n g a m bitious hopes, and was prob­
a b c d e g h
ably c on ce r n e d least of all about reducing t o
the minimum the possible risk . . .
The E x-Champion e l im inate s the th reat o f
29 Qf3!
a s a c ri fi c e on h6 i n t h e most radical way: by
rem o v i n g t h e pa\\'n from g7 , ri gh t l y a ssu m i ng The i n c lu s io n in th e play of White 's
that i t wi l l not be easy for White to redi re ct s tro n ge s t p i e c e s ha rpl y cha nges the si t u a t i on
the fi r e of h i s attacking p iece s against g6 . By on the K-side . The b l ack king begi ns to feel
his cool decision K a rpo v clearly lets it he uncomfort able - the defences a ro u n d it
known tha t he co n s i de r s White's attack to he look u nco nvi n ci n g in comparison w i th the
short-l i ved and . g ui d e d by Ca pa hl anc a s ' opponent's p o w e rfu l group of fo r ce s . How­
we l l k n o w n pr i n c i p l e - the m i n i m um
- ever. after 29 . . . Qxa3 30 N f6+ Kh8 attack
number of pi ece s in defe nce - he is re a d y to and material a d v an t a ge would have b al a n ce d
assail w it h all his m ig h t the opponent ' s each other. Wh i t e has a choice between 3 1
d e fe n ce l ess 0-sidc . A n d Karpov rej ec t e d Bxf8 RxfR (Black docs not succeed in creat­
27 . . . Ne4, evidently to avoid the s i mp l i fi ­ in g counter-threats along the back rank -

cation i n t h e event of 28 Nxc4 or the un­ 3/ . . . Rxhl + 32 Kh2 Q cl 33 Qh5 + !, mat­

necessary (in his op i n i o n ) co mpl i ca t i o n s
after 28 Nxh6+ . In my opinion, t h is ep i so d e
of the struggle is of i n t e re st from the view­
po i nt of u n de rst a n d i n g the s u b s e q u e n t
ing) 32 Rg4 Q c 1 + 33 Kh2 Kg7 ( B lack loses
after 33 . . . Qh6? 34 Qg3 Kg7 35 Rh4 or
34 . . . g5 35 Rxg5 ) 34 N h 5 + Kg8 35 Nf6+ (35
Qf6? Qh6) 35 . . Kg7 with a rep e t i t i on of
.

eve n t s . moves, and th e spectacular 31 Qh5 , w h i c h

again l e a ds to perpetual check 31 . . - .

28 Bxh6
Rxbl + ( B lack is mated a ft e r 31 . . . Bd6? 3.:
I n the given sp e c i fi c i n st a n ce t h e k n i gh t is a Rf8+ ! o r 31 . . . Bg 7? 32 Qh4!) 32 Bel + ! (3.:
much more val uable attacking p i e ce than the Kh2? is elegantly refuted - 32 . . . Rh/ + ! 3_:
 Game 16
Kxhl Nxf2 + 34 Kh2 Qxg3 + ) 32 . . . Kg7 33
Ne8+ Kg8 34 Nf6 + .
29 . . . Bd6 i s also of interest, attacking the
dangerous rook , a l t h o ugh the dark-square
bishop, which now re ma i ns ali ve , success­
fully rep lace s it in the nttack - 30 Be3 ! ?
Bxg3 31 Nf6+ ! Kg7 3 2 Qxg3 Kxf6 33 Bxd3 !
Nxd3 (33 . . . cxd3? 34 Qf4+) 34 Qh4+ Kc5
(34 . . . Kg7? 35 Bd4+ or 34 . . . Kf5 ? 35
Qg5 + Ke4 36 f3 mate) 35 Qe7+ Kxd5 36
Qd7 + Ke5 (36 . . . Ke4?! 37 Qc6+ Kf'5 38
g4+ Ke5 39 Qxa6 is extre m e ly dubious) 37
Qe7 + , or 32 . . . Qe5 33 Nh5 + ! (33 Bh6 + ?
Kxf6 34 Qh4 + g5, or 33 Qh4? Rh8) 3 3 . .
Kh7 (the dark-square "draught" is Black's
downfall after 33 . . . Kh8? 34 Qxe5 + Nxe5
35 Bd4 Ncd7 36 Nf6! Nxf6 37 Bxe5 Rb6 38 d6
Kg7 39 d7) 34 Nf6+ , again with a draw !
I n fact, such a result would have been the
logical expression of the purposeful actions
of both players, who have endeavoured to
decide the game on different parts of the
board. But such a development of events
does not come into the plans of the Ex­
Champion , who still cannot believe in the
seriousness of White's attacking operations.
After all , B lack requires only a one-move
respite , in order to calmly pick up the
stranded· knight at a3 a nd then realize his
great material advantage . But he does not
obtain such a respite right to the end of the
game . . .
29 ... Nd7?!
Strangely enough, it is this plausible de­
fensive manoeuvre , covering the f6 square,
t hat is the cause of B lack's subsequent diffi­
culties. The commentators, who unani­
mously attached an exclamation mark to
Black's last move , did not notice its signifi­
cant drawback - the weakening of control
over the important strategic point d3. Now at
an appropriate moment White can get rid of
the k night at d3, which restricts his actions.
However, at this point the entire press
centre, obviously under the hypnosis of the
inevitable loss of the a3 knight , considered
that the win for Black was not far off, and
89
therefore Ka r po v s unwillingness to force
' a
draw was taken as being self-eviden t .
30 Bxf8 Kxf8
It isbest to move the king orf the g-filc.
since i n the event of 30 . . . Rxf8 ? ! 31 Nh6 +
Black encounters unp l ea s a n t problems:
31 . . . Kh7? 32 Nxt7 Qxa3 33 Qe4 ! Qcl +
34 Kh2 Qhl + (the only defence; 34 . . . Rg8?
35 Ng5 + is totnlly bad) 35 Kxh l Nxf2 + 36
Kgl Nxe4 37 B xe4 Rxf7 3� Rxg6� � (the
creation of a battery along the b l-h7 diag­
onal unexpectedly leads to decisive gain of
. material; 38 Bxg6+ ? Kg 7 39 Rx.f7+ Kxfl is
absol utel y unclear) 38 . . . Nc5 39 Bc2 ! Bb7
(39 . . Kh8 40 Rc6) 40 Rc6 + Nc.l3 41 Rxc4
.
with a won e ndi n g .
3 1 . . . Kg7 is stronger, although here too
after 32 Nf5 + Kh7 33 Qc3 the chances are
with White, for example, 33 . . . Qcl + 34
Qxcl Nxcl 35 Nd4, or 33 . . . gxf5 34 Bxd3
cxd3 35 Qg5 Qf6 36 Qh5 + Qh6 37 Oxf5 +
Kh8 38 Qxd7 Rg8 (weaker i s 38 . . . d2 39
Qg4 Rc8 40 Kh2 or 39 . . . ReB 40 Nbl ) 39
Rxg8+ Kxg8 40 Qg4+ Kh7 41 Qdl , and
Black faces a struggle for a draw.
a c d e g h
What is White to do now? As before the
unfortunnte knight at a3 must su b m i ss ive ly
await its fate . and on the K-side nothing
forcing is apparent (31 Nh6? Qcl + ) .
31 Kh2!
The final prophylaxis - the king has to be
moved off the weakened first rank , and now
90 London- Leningrad Championship Games
White is fully ready to begin his offensive. It
transpires that Black cannot take on a3 - i n
t h i s case the clastic clump o f white pieces
unbends with terrible force - 3 1 . . . Qxa3
32 Nh6 Qe7 (32 . . . N7e5 33 Qf6 , with the
irresistible threats of 34 Bxd3 and 34 d6) 33
Rxg6 KeR 34 Bxd3 ! (the hasty 34 d6? allows
Black to save the ga me - 34 . . . Qe5 + 35 g3
frg6 36 Qj7+ Kd8 37 Qg8+ ll/f8 38 Nf7+
Kd7 39 Nxe5+ Nxe5 ) 34 . . . Oe5 + (now
aft e r 34 . . . cxd3 35 d6 Q e5 + 36 g3 the black
queen at e5 is undefended - 36 . . . fxg6 37
Qj7+ Kd8 38 Qg8+ and 39 Nf7+ ; Black also
loses a fte r 34 . . . frg6 35 Bxg6+ Kd8 36
Nj7+ Kc8 37 d6 Ne5 38 Bf5 + ) 35 g3 ! fxg6 36
Bxg6 + Ke7 37 d6 + ! Ke6 38 B f5 + , winning
the q ueen. Inciden tally, one cannot help
noticing the amazing similarity of this last
variation with that which occurred in the
ga m e .
Thus White's first achievement is appar-
ent. Black is again obliged to divert his
attention from the knight at a3 and concern
h i mself ove r parrying threats by the oppo-
nent which are no l o nge r mythical. but very
concrete . The most natural defensive re-
action would be to take immediate control of
h6. to which the white knight is threatening
to go with great effect . This aim can be
attained in two ways . but in neither case are
things easy for Black :
3 1 . . . Kg7'? ! 32 Nxc4! Qxbl 33 Nd6 N3e5
34 Nxe5 Nxe5 35 Qe3 ! Q b2! (the alternatives
arc much worse - 35 . . . f6? 36 Qa7+ ;
35 . . . Nd7 36 Qe7; 35 . . . N'c4� 36 Nxc4
Bxc4 3 7 Qd4+ ; 35 . . . Qa/ 36 Nf5 + Kf8 37
Qh6 + Ke8 38 Qh8 + and 39 Qxb8) 36 N f5 +
Kf8 37 f4 ! (37 Qh6+ is pointless, since the
rook at b8 is defended) 37 . . . ReR ! (after
3 7 . . . gx/5 38 fre5 White's attack can hardly
be parried) 38 fxe5 Oxc5 39 Qc5 + Kg8 40
Nh6+ Kg7 4 1 Ng4 with good winning
chances. I should like t o poi nt out that the
knight at g4 i s the recently doomed one from
a3. which with incredible speed has galloped
right across the board.
3 1 . . . Qc l ? ! - this leads to a variety of
incredible vari ations. which to some extent
are a prototype of the coming complications:
32 Bxd3 (White is not afraid o f giving the
opponent an irresistible passed pawn ; h e
eliminates the d3 knight , in order to effec­
lively include his q ue e n in the attack) 32 . . .
cxd3 33 Nf6! Nc5 34 Qe4 d2 (34 . . . Qc7 is
very strongly met by 35 Qd4! with the threats
of d5-d6 and f2-f4) 35 Qxe5 d l = Q 36
Qxb8+ Kg7 (a similar position is reached
after 36 . . . Bc8 37 Re3! Qd4 38 Qd6+ Kg 7
3 9 Ne8+ Kh 7 40 Nb5, when the two queens
can hardly help Black) 37 N e 8 + (37 Re3 �
allows Black to gain excellent drawing
chances by the counter-sacrifice of one of his
queens - 37 . . . Qg1 + 38 Kg3 Qxe3 + 39
fxe3 Qxe3 + 40 Kh2 Kxf6 41 Qd6+ Kg7 42
Qxa6 Qe5+ 43 Kgl Qd4 + ! 44 Kfl Qd1 + 45
Kf2 Qd4+ 46 Ke2 Qe4+ 47 Kd2 Qxg2 + 48
Kc3 Qxd5 , but not 43 . . . Qel + ? 44 Q[I
·
Qe3 + 45 Qf2 Qxa3 46 Qd4+ and 47 d6)
3 7 . . . Kh7 3 8 Rc3 ! Qd4 ( i n spite o f having
two queens , Black cannot play actively -
38 . . . Qgl + ? 39 Kg3 Bfl 40 Nf6 + Kg7 4/
Qg8+ Kxf6 42 Qh8 + . a nd White is the first
to give mate ) . Of co u rse , the unusual balance
of forces makes a categorical assessment
difficult, but the black queens undoubtedly
face a difficult task.
Things are very dismal for Black a fter
33 . . . Nxf6 (instead of 33 . . . Ne5 ) . With
minimal forces White manages to create
decisive threats - 34 Qxf6 Kg8 (34 . . . d2 35
Rxg6l d! = Q 36 Qd6 + ) 35 Rg4 ! Oc7+ (35
. . . Qb2 36 Qxa6 d2 37 Nc4l) 36 d6 Qd8 37
Qd4 Rb6 (3 7 . . . Qh6 38 Qxb6 Rxh6 39 Rd4
Rb8 40 Nc4 with an easily \Vo n endi ng) 38 d7
Rb7 3 9 Rh4 f6 40 Qe4 Kg7 (Black has a l most
defended - 4 1 Qe3� g5 , but. . . )
(see following diagram)
41 Rh8 ! ! (such moves should be recorded in
the golden treasury of chess! ) 41 . . . Qxd7
(the rook is o f course taboo - 41 . . . Kxh8
42 Qe8+ or 41 . . . Qxh8 42 Qe7+ ) 42 Qh4
Qd6 + 43 g3 Kt7 44 Nc4! Qc5 (44 . . . Bxc4 45
Qh 7+ and 46 Qxb 7) 45 Ne3 with an i rresist­
i ble a ttack.
The impression might be gained t ha t the
decisive turning point has a l rea dy occurred .
But apart from the continuations examined
 Game 16 91
assocmt10ns with game 16 of the p re v ious
match . A n d i n general . without the d3 kn igh t
B lack 's position l oses m uch of ih attrac t iv e ­
ness.
To all app e aranc e s . for Karpov such a turn
of events proved unexpected . The Ex­
Champion spen t al most all of his remaining
time trying to choose the best o r the four( ! )
possi bl e piece captures. but in every one of
them White's t hreats were now very obvious.
St u p efied by the mass of h ighly com ple x
variations. the majority not su bject to calcu­
0 c d e g h l atio n . Karpov loses control over the pos­
ition . an d in ch asing the mirage of victory he
ov ers teps the fatal mark . . .
above, B lack has avai l able an e nergetic I ncide n ta l l y . as I was l a te r told . at this
manoeuvre . su ccessfu l l y combining attack­ point in the press centre they began to
ing an d defensive duties. which appears to reassess what was happe ni n g on the board.
put everyth i n g in its place. B ut the residual i mp re ss ion s were so strong
that for a long time the re s pected commen­
31 Rb3!
tators tr i e d to assure the spectators (and
O n m ak i n g this move . Karpov calmly perh a ps themselves too ) that at some poin t
stood up ami began leisurely st rollin g about Black had been winning, although the search
the stage , transferring h i s triumphant glance for the elusive ··where" cons t a n t ly led them
from the board to the auditori um and hack nowhe re . . .
again. I n deed . the black rook comes i nto
play with great effect , cr e atin g an u npleasant
X-ray a long the third rank . the aim of \vhich
8
is to reach the whi t e rook standing in ambush
at g3 . And after safeguarding hi mself against 7

the opp�1nent's combined threats. B lack wi l l 6

a t last be able to treat himsel f to t h e knigh t at
5
a3. Now White has essentially n o choice . but
his one sensible r e ply radically changes the 4
situation .
3
32 Bxd3
2
By this poin I had less t h a n 10 n1inutc s
rem a i ning on m y clock , whereas Karpov had
more than h a l f a n hour. but after 32 B xd3 I o b c d e g h

became absolutely cal m , since I felt intuit­

ive ly that Wh ite had nothing to fea r . Of
32 cxd3(?!)
course , Black can win a p i ece i n various
ways, but now too the white q ueen gains the Objectively this move is no weaker than
chance to steal right up o n the enemy king, the others , but now Black is faced \Vith
whose solitude suggests that the very first problems which to solve at the hoard . and in
check may prove fatal. In addition , the time trouble . is practically i m p ossible .
disappearance from the board of the d3 The obvious 32 . . . Rxd3 would have led
knigh t completely swept aside the negative by force to an ending where White h as an
92 London- Leningrad Championship Games
extra pawn , but very limited winning chances
- 3 3 Qf4 Qxa3 34 Nh6 Qe7 35 Rxg6 Qe5 36
Qx e5 Nxe5 37 Rxa6 Rxd5 38 R a8 + (38 Nf5
N.f3+ .') 38 . . . Ke7 39 N f5+ Ke6 40 Ne3 Rc5 .
B ut such a metamorphosis obviously could
not satisfy Karpov. How could i t - to he
effectively a piece up, and to go into an
ending a pawn down'? !
32 . . . Rxa3 33 Qf4 1ooks rather dangerous
for Black. Let us try to work out where this
path l e ads us - 33 . . . Rxd3 (the position
after 33 . . . cxd3 will be considered in the
notes to Black ' s next mo ve ) 34 Qd6+ Kg7 35
Oxd7 Rxg3 36 fxg3 (in endings with yuccns it
is impor t a nt to keep the king screened from
checks) . Here it is not easy for B l ack to find
the one correct reply.
36 . . . c3? suggests itself, in the hope of 37
Ne5? Qf2. but after 37 Qc7 c2 38 Ne5 ! the
harmonious coordination of queen and
knight bears fruit - 38 . . . Qb7 (a new
queen cannot be obtained because of mate in
t\vo moves, while 3 8 . . . Kf6 leads to the loss
of the old one - 39 Qxh 7+ Kxe5 40 Qg 7 + )
39 Qc3 ! (the h as ty 39 Qxc2? allows B lack to
emerge unscathed - 39 . . . Qxd5 40 Qb2
Qe6!) 39 . . . c l = 0 (at all costs the white
queen has to he diverted from the long
diagonal - 39 . . . QxcL5 40 Nd7 + Kh6 41
Qh8 + Kg5 42 Qh4 + Kj5 43 Qg4 mate, or
39 . . . f6 40 Ng4 Qj7 41 d6 Bd3 42 Qxd3
ci = Q 43 d7) 40 Qxcl QxdS 4 1 Qa t ! (the
queen returns with decisive effect to its
chosen diagonal) 41 . . . f6 (41 . . . Qe6 42
Nd7+ f6 43 Nc5 - this is why the queen is
needed at a 1 !) 42 Nxg6, and the win for
White is only a question of time.
Belated centralization also fails to save
Bl ack - 36 . . . Qd4? 37 Qc6! c3 38 Qxa6 c2
39 Qa3! Qd2 (39 . . . Qdl 40 Qh2 + Kg8 41
Ne3) 40 Qb2 + Kg8 (40 . . . Kf8 41 d6l) 4 1
Nf6+ Kf!S 42 QbiH Kg7 ( 42 . . . Ke7 43
Qe5 + Kd8 44 d6) 43 Ne!S+ ! ( 43 Nd7 Kh7! 44
Q.f8 Qf2 45 Qc8 Qd2) 43 . . . KfH (43 . . . Kh6
44 Qe5! cl = Q 45 Qh8+ Kg5 46 Qf6 + and 4 7
Qh 4 m at e ) 44 Nd6+ Kg7 45 Qc7 c 1 = 0
(45 . . . Qxd5 46 Nx.f7!) 46 Qxf7 + Kh6 47
Qf8 + Kh7 (47 . . . Kg5 48 Ne4+ , or 47 . . .
Kh5 48 g4 + ) 48 N e8! ( d u a l solution 48 Ne4!) ,
and after winning back one of the queens,
White remains with a decisive material
advantage . The coordinated actions of the
yueen + knight mechanism create a strong
i mpression !
The correct defence is 36 . . . Bb7 ! , but
here too after 37 h4! great accuracy is re­
quired of B lack . e.g. 37 . . . Qd4? 38 Qxb7
0xg4 39 Qb2 + , and the queen ending sur­
prisingly proves to be lost - 39 . . . Kgg
(other continuations do not ch a nge anything
- 39 . . . Kf8 40 d6! Ke8 41 Qb8+ Kd7 42
Qc7+ , 39 . . . Kh7 40 Qf6 Qj5 4 1 Qxf5 gxf5
42 d6 c3 43 d7 c2 44 d8= Q cl = Q 45 QJ6, or
39 . . . f6 40 Qb7+ Kh6 41 d6 c3 42 d7 c2 43
d8= Q) 4 0 Qb8 + Kg7 4 1 Qc5 + KgS 42 d6 c3
(42 . . . Qd7 43 Qe7) 43 Qe8+ Kg7 44 d7.
o b c d e g h
It will be noticeable just how important a
factor in such endings is a secure shelter for
the k i n g . The draw is achieved by a paradoxi­
cal diverting manoeuvre - 37 . . . Ba8 ! ! 38
Qd8 Qd4! (38 . . . Bb7? loses to 39 h5! gxh5
40 Qg5 + K/8 41 N.f6 wi th irresistible threats)
39 Qxa8 Qxg4. Little seems to have changed
in comparison with the pre v i o us position, but
the lack of a check at h2 prevents White from
successfully com b in i ng the advance of his d­
pawn with checks t o the black king. For
example, 40 Qa 1 + K f8 ! (after other moves
the difference in the pl aci n g of the white
queen is not a fac to r) 41 d6 Kc8 42 Qa4+
Kd8 43 Qc6 (or 43 Qa5 + Ke8 44 Qb5 + Qd7
 Game 16
45 Qe5 + Qe6) 43 . . . Qe6 44 Qc7 + Ke8, and
White is not able to strengthen his position.
Even an approximate calculation of these
variations would have been out of the
question , but the general assessment of the
position after 32 . . . Rxa3 33 Qf4 is not in
doubt - Black has to twist and turn in search
of equality . After rejecting 32 . . . Rxd3 and
32 . . . Rxa3 as obliging Black to struggle for
a draw , the Ex-Champion decided on the
capture with the pawn, no doubt hoping in
the time scramble to obtain a new queen .
33 Qf4 Qxa3?
In the end Karpov's nerves give way, and
he removes from the board the knigh t which
has been plaguing him for so many moves.
As we have seen , on the preceding moves
Black did not have time to capture the
knigh t , and here too it proves to be a
poisoned bait - the loss of a tempo allows
White to whip up a decisive attack with
lightning speed.
Hastily, immediately after the game, cer­
tain commentators, who were unable to take
their bewitched eyes off the defenceless
white knight , recommended 33 . . . Rxa3 ,
taking the piece and at the same time con­
tinuing to control the long diagonal (34 Nh6?
Qf6) . Karpov's .bi tter experience failed to
teach them that in this game the capture on
a3 always loses! It is sufficient for White to
display a little inventiveness and change the
pattern of the attack - 34 Rf3 ! , and Black's
position collapses like a house of cards:
34 . . . Qb8 (other defences also fail to set
White serious problems - 34 . . . f6 35
Qd6+ Ke8 36 Nxf6+ Nxf6 37 Re3 + , 34 . . .
f5 35 Qd6+ Ke8 36 Re3+ Kd8 3 7 Ne5 Bh5 38
Nc6+ Bxc6 39 dxc6 Qb8 40 ReB+! Kxe8 41
cxd7+ , 34 . . . Ke8 35 Qxf7+ Kd8 36 d6 Qh8
37 Nf6, or, finally, 34 . . . Ke7 35 Qxf7+ Kd6
36 Qe6+ Kc7 37 RJ7 Bb5 38 Ne5 d2 39
Rxd7+ Bxd7 40 Qxd7+ Kb6 4/ Nc4+ etc.)
35 d6 Qe8 36 Re3 ! Qc8 37 Re7 Bc4 3R Qh6+
Kg8 39 Rxd7.
The only way for Black to justify his
previous move (32 . . . cxd3?!) was by play­
ing 33 . . . d2! , exploiting his main trump -
93
the far-advanced d-pawn. True, after 34 Nh6
it is not easy to find a satisfactory defence , for
example : 34 . . . Ne5? (34 . . . Qj6? 35 Qxd2)
35 Rxb3! Qxb3 36 Qxe5 dl = Q 37 d6. and
mate can be avoided only at the cost of a
quee n , or 34 . . . Ke8 35 Qxf7+ KdX 36 d6!
dl =Q 37 Qg8+ Nf8 38 QxfH+ Kd7 39 Qe7+
Kc6 40 Qc7+ Kd5 41 d7.
There only remains 34 . . . Nf6 ! It is hard
to believe, but in all variations Black hangs
on literally by a thread :
35 Rxb3 Qxb3 36 Qxf6 Qxd5 37 Nx l7 ! (in
the event of 37 Qh8+ ? Ke7 38 Ng8+ Kd6 39
Qf6+ Kc5 the black king succeo;;s fully
escapes; 39 Nf6 fails to 39 . . . Qe.5 + 40 g3
Qe2 !) 37 . . . d 1 0 (it would appear that
=
Black can delay queening the pawn and
�pend a tempo on removing his king from the
danger zone -37 . . KeB? , but then the idle
.
knight at a3 gains the chance to exact terrible
revenge for the debasement to which it has
been subjected:
38 Nbll! dl = Q 39 Nc3! - a fork of two
queens ! - when has a knight been so lucky !
Black cannot avoid a prosaically lost ending,
since 39 . . . Q5d4 is decisively met by 40
Qe6+ ) 38 Nd6+ Kg8 39 Qxg6+ Kf8 40 Qf6+
Kg8 . D raw? Not immediately , since White
has in reserve a strong measure - 41 N f5 !
The black king is in a mating net, and the two
queens appear unable to prevent its
94 London-Leningrad Championship Games
execution. But by rephrasing a well known
chess saying - "The advan tage of the two
bishops is that one of them can always be
exchanged"' - into a j oke, we can say "The
advantage of the two queens( !) is that one of
them can always be advantageously given
up ! " - 41 . . . Qxf5 ! (the over-showy 41 . . .
QxR2 + does not achieve its aim - 42 Kxg2
Bbl+ 43 KR3 Q/3 + 44 Kh4 Qxj2 + 45 Kh5!
Qj3 + 46 Kg6 Qg2 + 47 Qg5) 42 Qxf5 Qd6+
43 f4 Qxa3 . In this ending the three pawns for
the piece give White only a moral advantage .
But all these terrors arc child's play com­
pared with the dangers awaiting the black
king after 35 Qd6+ (instead of 35 Rxb3).
35 . . . Kg7 loses rapidly - 36 Nf5 + Kh7 3 7
Qf8 Ng4 + 38 Rxg4 Qc5+ 3 9 f4 Rxh3+ 40
gxh3 Qc2 + 41 Rg2. and therefore , suppress­
ing its fears. it has to emerge i nto the open
field - 35 . . . Ke8. However, White lacks
the strength to land a decisive blow: 36 Qc6+
(before trying the main resource. it is worth
testing the opponent's vigilance) 36 . . . Kf8 !
(the incautious 36 . . . Ndl? is mercilessly
punished - 37 Qxa6! dl Q 38 Qc8+ Kel 39
= 41 . . . Ke7 (41 . . . KdB? loses to 42 Nxfl+
Ng8+ Kd6 40 Nc4 + ) 37 Qd6+ (White, in
turn , should not overstep the mark - 37
Qcl? F?hl 38 Qd6+ Kgl 39 Nf5 + Khl 40 Qf8
Ng8! and it is Black who wins) 37 . . . Ke8 38
Oxa6 d 1 0 (the appearance o f the second
= Kel 45 Nxb2 Rxb2 46 Rf3, with an uninter­
queen cannot be delayed - the only thing
that can save Black is his enormous material
advantage ; bad is 38 . . . RxgJ? 39 Qc8+ Kel
40 d6+ Kxd6 41 Nc4+ , when once again the
knight from a3 performs brilliantly, captur­
ing one queen and preventing the appear­
ance of a second) 39 Qc8 + Ke 7 40 QcS + (the
two queens arc not to be trifled with - 40
Nc4? Qxj2! 41 d6+ Qxd6) 40 . . . Kd7 ! !
(after other moves White includes t h e a3
knigh t in the attack with decisive effect -
40 . . . Ke8? 41 Nc4 Qbd4 42 QcB+ Kel 43
Qcl+ Ndl 44 Nf5 + ! gxf5 45 Qd6+ , 40 . . .
Kd8? 41 Nc4 Qbd4 42 Nxfl+ Ke8 43 Ncd6+
or 42 . . . Kdl 43 Nce5 + , in each case with
inevitable m ate ) .
Now after 41 Nc4 Qba l ! the threat o f mate
forces White to hurry, and against correct
play by the opponent he is not able to exploit
the open pm;ition of the black king - 42
Oc6 + Kd8! (in the event of 42 . . . Kel? the
king faces a "pleasurable" stroll into the
centre of the board - 43 Qcl + Ndl 44
Nf5 + ! Kf6 45 QdR+ Kxf5 46 Qg5+ Ke4 47
RxbJ!, and despite his material deficit ,
White retains good winning chances) 43
Nxf7 + Ke 7 44 QcS + (44 RxbJ, in the hope of
44 . . . Qxb3? 45 Qe6+ KJB 46 Nfe5, is sense­
less , since Black simply ignores this rook and
launches a decisive counterattack - 44 . . .
Qgl + 45 KgJ Ne4 + ) 44 . . . Kxf7 45 Nd6+
Kg7 (45 . . . Kel 46 Nf5 + + Kdl 47 Qel+
KcB 48 Nd6+ KbB 49 Rxb3+ Qxb3 50 QdB+
Kal 51 Qcl+ Ka652 Qc8+ leads to the same
result) 46 Qc7+ (the attempt to give mate by
46 Nf5 + ends dismally for White - 46 . . .
KhB! 47 QJB+ NgB) 46 . . . KhH! (B lack too
cannot afford to relax 46 . . . Kh6? 47
-
Nj7+ Kgl 48 Ne5 + , mating) 47 Nf7+ Kg8 !
48 Nh6+ (48 Rxg6+ ? Kf8) 48 . . . Kh8 49
Nf7+ etc.
And for ''dessert" here is another possible
attacking try: 41 Qc6+ (instead of 41 Nc4)
Kel 43 Qe6+ KJB 44 Ne5 Qxd5 45 Nxg6+
Kgl 46 Qe7+ Qfl 47 Ne5 + ) 42 d6+ Kf8 (the
complications could have ended immediately
- 42 . . . Qxd6 43 Qxd6+ Kxd6 44 Nc4+
esting ending, where White has few chances
of realizing his extra pawn ; but with an extra
queen it is not easy to agree to go into such a n
ending) 43 Qc8+ Kg7 ( 43 . . . NeB? 44 dl) 44
NfS + Kh7 4S Qf8 Ng4+ (45 . . . Ng8? 46
Qxj7+ Kh8 47 Nel!) 46 Rxg4 Qe5+ 47 Ng3
(47 f4? Qxf5 48 Rh4+ Qdh5) 47 . . . g5 (it
unexpectedly transpires that this is the only
defence: 47 . . . QJ6? 48 Ne4 Qe5 + 49 g3 with
irresistible threats) 48 Nc4 ! (ignoring the
opponent's extra queen , White methodically
assembles his pieces into a striking force)
48 . . . Rb l ! (after 48 . . . Qg7? 49 Qel! Rb1
50 NJ5 the two queens are little consolation
to Black) 49 Qxf7+ Og7 SO Qxg7 + (50
Qh5 + Qh6 51 Qxh6+ Kxh6 52 Nf5+ Kg6 53
Rd4! Qgl + 54 Kg3 Kxf5 55 Ne3+ Ke6 56 dl
Rh8 57 dB= Q Rxd8 58 Rxd8 also leads to an
advantage) SO . . . Kxg7 5 1 Ne4 - in this
 Game l6 95

unique position White has the better

chances, in my opinion .
Let us now display a little fantasy on the
part of B lack.

a b c d e g h

a e f g
I nstead of the plausible 46 . . . Qe5 + ? ! we
discover the grandoise 46 . . . Rxh3 + ! ! ,
when a forcing variation leads us to a draw -
47 Kxh3 Qhl + (not 47 . . . Qc3+ because of
48 Kh2.1 Qxg4 49 Qh6+ and mate by the
knight next move) 4R Kg3 Qe5 + (not 48 . . .
Qxa3 + 49 j3 Qel + 50 Kh2 Qe5 + 51 f4) 49
Rf4 g5 ! 50 Qxf7+ KhH 5 1 Qf8+ Kh7 . The
desperate attempt to play for a win - 52
Qc7+ Qxe7 53 dxe7 gxf4+ 54 Kxf4 (after all ,
i t is not easy fo r the black q ueen battling on
i ts own - 54 . . . Qcl + � 55 Kg4 Qc8 56 Nh5
Qc4+ 57 Nbd4) is most simply parried by
exploiting a study motif - 54 . . . Qxg2! 55
e8 =Q Qg4 + ! ! 56 Ke5 Qe4 + ! 57 Kxc4 stale­
mate!
Our j ourney into the dark j ungles of
adventures is complete. Compared with the
"canvasses" we have seen (normally, alas,
remaining behind the scenes) the combi­
nation carried out by White in the game has
very much the appearance of an amateurish
j ob !
34 Nh6 Qc7
35 Rxg6 Qe5
For an instant B lack has everything in
order - White's strongest piece is
crippled . . .
36 Rg8+ Ke7
37 d6 + !
By sacrificing itself. this weak little pawn
not only saves its own queen , but also causes
the downfall of the opponent's! As if at the
wave of a m agic wand , the uncoordinated
white pieces achieve amaz ing harmony.
37 ... Ke6
Time trouble agony.
38 Rc8+ Kd5
39 Rxe5+ Nxe5
40 d7 Rb8
41 Nxti Resigns
It is impossible to describe that intoxicat­
ing wave of j oy which engulfed me on the
conclusion of this game ; as regards strength
of emotional effect, it was perhaps compar­
able only with the reaction after the conclud­
ing, 24th ga me of the previous match. o r
course, a brilliant a nd memorable victory
ove r a formidable opponent is a lwa ys a red­
letter day for any genuine chess player, but
that day I intuitively felt that something more
significant had occurred. The time had n o t
yet come for a detailed analysis of all the
upheavals of this most fascinating encounter,
and as yet it was di Cficult to give an accurate
assessment of the two sides' plans or to delve
into all the nuances of the rapidly changing
situation , but I was in no doubt that , for
richness of conten t. this game had no equiv­
alent analogu e among all our other en­
counters. The meticulous analysis of the
96 London-Leningrad Championship Games
mind-boggling complications, arising as a
result of the clash of profound strategic
plans, took me a week of painstaking work
and conclusively convinced me of the cor­
rectness of this concl usion . The reader
should not b e put off by the enormous
amount of commentary - a guided tour
through th e labyri n t h s of this game will lead
you into the colourful world of the most
varied ideas, which comprise the basis of
modern chess . As they spread quickly, many
of the side variations begin to acquire in­
dependent significance, and, carrying you
along in their current , they cause you to
forget about the m ai n line. United under the
aegis of ga m e 16, to all intents and purposes,
are a great number of fine and frenzied
battles, the analysis of which will afford
genuine pleasure to connoisseurs of chess
art .
In general , unfortunately, the chess com­
mentators did not receive this game with any
great enthusiasm, but regarded it as an
irregular heap of accidents. The sharp dis­
ruption of equilibrium on the different parts
of the board , the lack of correspondence with
generally accepted dogmas, and finally, the
raid of cavalier recklessness - in their
opinion all this deprived game 16 of the
necessary aesthetic logic. However, the
commentators were successfully accom­
panied by Karpo v , who listed this game
am ong those lost " through bad luck " . It turns
out that in this simple way everything can be
e x plain e d Nothing particular happened,
. But this time I for some reason refrained for
j ust one blunder caused by bad luck. Is it
really only bad luck that is to blame? But
where is the clash of aggressive plans, the
sacrifices and counter-sacrifices , the depths
of boundless variations - all that which
embodies a struggle of the highest intensity
and demands the total commitment of the
two players? No, the role of game 16 cannot
be belittled by a cynical reference to bad
luck , undermining the very essence of chess
j ustice.
It was m y deep conviction that the out­
come of this grandiose battle symbolized the
failure of Karpov's hopes in the Return
M atch . After seizing the opening initiative
and ceasing t o avoid an open battle, the Ex­
Champion was undoubtedly aiming to
demonstrate h i s superiorit y in all the crucial
debates. To bre a k the opponent's resistance,
usi n g a broad arsenal of means, and i n
particular t h e opponent's own chess methods
- this was the strategic aim which Karpov
apparently put to the forefront. But as a rule
his blows did not connect , and moreover he
suffered a fiasco i n an open duel. This
crushing blow in game 16 essentially settled
the outcome of the match - the enormous
lead plus m y obvious pl a yin g advantage did
not leave this in any doubt.
But it is one thing to discuss this logically
and calmly, when everything is over, and
quite another to come to such a conclusion in
the course of the match. After m aking this
psychological blunder, I was unable to main­
tain that maximum level of concentration
which had served as a reliable shield in all
tests.
Of course, the extreme match tension had
exhausted both players, but while for Karpov
the new battle was his only chance of lifting
the burden of failure , for me, on the con­
trary, a slight break was required, so as to
gather my thoughts and genuinely motivate
myself for the finish of the match . It is
surprising, but in a similar situation after my
victory in game 14 I took a postponement,
and managed to prepare successfully (mainly
emotionally) for the next two encounters.
such a sensible step, probably because I did
not want to use my last postponement so
soon, although the maximum that was
demanded of me was to conduct one or two
games at the necessary level. Even maintain­
ing the + 3 score would have concluded the
genuine struggle in the match. Thus by
slowly hurrying, the match could have been
concluded ahead of schedule !
After missing this chance, and b y going
into the 17th game in a disoriented state
against an opponent thirsting for revenge, I ,
without suspecting it . . . returned to the
match its disappearing drama.
 GAM E 1 7

Karpov-Kasparov
Griinfeld Defence
d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nc3 d5

It is quite appropriate to ask the question

(which was asked by many after the 1 7th and
especially the 19th games), whether in so
favourable a match situation I should have
stuck with such persistence to the Grtinfeld
Defence? After all , I realized perfectly well
that only a successful prepared line in the
opening could raise the tone of Karpov's
play . . . - we thought that everywhere Black had an
4 Nf3 Bg7 acceptable game . We failed to discern the
5 Qb3 dxc4 main strategic danger . . .
6 Qxc4 0-0 14 h3!
7 e4 Bg4
Bull's eye ! In this line we failed to find the
Once again the S myslov Variation . Before most effective possibility for White , but it did
the game I had doubts about whether or not not escape the attention of Karpov and his
to repeat 7 . . . Bg4 . It is now quite obvious helpers.
that 7 . . . Na6 was more sensible . As it
transpired in game 19, i n this line too an 14 ... Bxf3
innovation awaited me, but the resulting 15 Bxf3 Bxe5
position would have been much easier to play Most of the commentators recommended
with a three-point lead in the match. 15 . . . Nxe5 as the lesser evil , but I cannot
8 Be3 Nfd7 agree with this. After 16 Bxb7 Rb8 17 c6 Nc4
9 Rd1 Nc6 1 8 Nd5 ! (less clear is 18 Rdl Nxe3 19 fxe3 Be5
10 Be2 Nb6 20 Nd5 e6 21 Bxc8 Rxb2 22 Ne7+ Kg7 23 0-0
II Qc5 Qd6 Rxa2 24 Bb7- White is a piece up, but Black
12 e5 Qxc5 seems to have set up an unusual positional
13 dxc5 Nc8 fortress, and there appears to be no realistic
way to win; here 21 . . exd5?! is dubious ­
.

(see following diagram) after 22 Bb7 White has an obvious advan­

This position had been analyzed a t home.
We looked at 14 0-0, 1 4 Bf4, 1 4 NbS and 14
h3, but, as soon transpired, rather carelessly
97
tage) 1 8 . . . Nxe3 19 fxe3 Nd6 20 Nxe7+ Kh8
21 Rxd6! cxd6 22 Ke2 Bxb2 23 Rb1 Bf6 24
NdS B d8 the position is probably lost for
Black . White has a pleasant choice between
98 London- Leningrad Championship Games
the forcing 25 c7 Bxc7 26 Nxc7 f5 27 Na6, and
the quiet 25 Rcl .
In playing 15 . . . Bxe5 , I was reckoning
mainly with 16 Rd7 , when there can follow
16 . . . e6 17 Bxc6 bxc6 1 8 f4 Bg7 ! (the
posi tion after 18 . . . Bxc3+ 19 bxc3 ReB 20
g4 Ne7 21 c4 is very depressing - Black's
k night is crippled, he has no counterplay,
and he is condemned to a difficult defence)
19 Rxc7 ReS 20 Rxc6 N e7 21 Ra6 Rb8
(2 / . . . Nd.5 is interesting) 22 Na4 Nd5 (22
. . . Nj5 is also perfectly possible) 23 Be l (23
Bd2 Bxb2) 23 . . . e5! - Black enlivens his
pieces which can soon become centralized .
and he will have rich possibilities for active
play. But Karpov has quite other ideas.
16 Bxc6 bxc6
17 Bd4!
The most clear-cut from the positional
viewpoint . White intends an exchange of
m inor pieces. leaving the knight at c8 as a
mere spectator.
17 ... Bf4
Black intends to free himself by . . . e5 and
. . . Ne7 (e.g. 18 g3 e5 or 18 Ne2 e5) .
1 assessed the position after 1 7 . . . Bxd4 18
Rxd4 as very difficult - B lack is cramped
and against correct play by White he is
unable to escape from the vice :
18 . . . Rb8 1 9 b3 a5 20 Ra4! (weaker is 20
Rd7 Na7 21 Rxc7 Nb5 22 Nxb5 Rxb5 23 Rxc6
a4. when Bl ack saves the game) .
Here 1 8 . . . a5 still has some point, and is
j ustified in the event of 19 Rd7 a4 20 Rxc7
Ra5 21 Rxc6 Na7 or 19 . . . Rb8 20 b3 Na7 21
Na4 Rb4 22 Rxc7 Re4+ 23 Kfl Rd8 24 g3
NbS 25 Rxc6 Rd2 - Black should not lose.
But after 1 9 Ke2 ! Na7 20 a4 he is still unable
to solve satisfactorily the problem of his
knight: 20 . . . Rb8 2 1 Rbl Rb7 22 Kd3 Rfb8
23 Kc2 - White has a wide range of means
for methodically improving the placing o f his
pieces .
1 8 . . . a6 i s evidently the most acceptable ,
but here too Black has more than enough
problems: 19 Rd7 Na7 20 a4 ! (of course , not
20 Rxe7 Rfe8 or 20 Rxc7 Nb5 , when B lack
activates h is game) 20 . . . Rfb8 21 Rxe7
Rxb2 22 0-0 Rc2 23 Ne4 Rc4 24 Rd 1 Rxa4 25
Rdd7 Rf8 26 Ng5 Nc8 27 Rxf7 Rxf7 28 Nxf7
Kf8 - it is not clear whether White's advan­
tage is sufficient for a win. Instead of the
direct 19 Rd7, the suffocating 19 a4! is much
more thematic: 1 9 . . . Na7 20 Kd2 Rfd8 2 1
Rxd8+ Rxd8+ 2 2 Kc2 Kf8 (the position after
22 . . . NcB 23 Rdl Rxdl 24 Kxdl e6 25 Na2
Ne7 26 Nb4 a.S 27 Nc2 Nd5 28 Nd4 and then
Nb3 is suitable only for instructional
material) 23 Rd 1 Ke8 (23 . . . Rxdl 24 Nxdl
Ke8 25 Kc3 is essentially no different -
Black is defenceless) 24 Rxd8+ Kxd8 25 Na2
Kc8 (25 . . . Kd7? 26 Kd3 Ke6 27 Kc4, draw­
ing the pawn out to a5 and condemning i t to
death) 26 Kc3 (after 26 Kd3 Kb7 27 Ke4f6 28
Ncl e5 Black has real drawing chances)
26 . . . Kb7 Nc I Nc8 (27 . . . e5 28 Nb3) 28
Nb3 , and Black is again in the role of passive
observer.
It becomes clear that , if Black does have a
saving path , it lies via the square e7 . It is
interesting that, in lnformator No. 42, Kar­
pov modestly assessed the position after 17
Bd4 as ''compensation for the pawn". Such
restraint can be explained only by his game
with Timman, played 20 days after the match
at the tournament in Tilburg.
18 0-0
(see following diagram)
18 ,. . aS??
 Carne l l 99

That's it - the knight from cR cannot

manage to get to the centre , and the game is
essentially decided.

19 • • . a4

No sensible moves are apparent - 19 . . .

f6 20 Re6 Ra6 2 1 Nd5 .

20 Re4 Bh6
21 Be5 a3
22 b3 Na7

At last the luckless beast comes into play,

but its imaginary freedom is acquired at too
h igh a price .
This dreadful move is a further confir­
23 Rd7
mation of the fact that after game 16 a
postponement was necessary. One involun­ Consistently played; 23 Rxc7? ! Bg7 is less
tarily recalls 20 . . . a5 from game 5, but there accurate .
at least the pawn was aiming for the queening
23 Bel
square. It is clear that Black must either play
. . . e5, or else resign . So - 18 . . . e5 19 Be3 24 Rxc7 Bb2
Bxe3 20 fxe3 Ne7 (the e-pawn is alive and the 25 Na4
knight is in play). I have no doubt that Again Karpov chooses the simplest and
Karpov was ready for such a turn of events, most convincing decision, although 25 Rxe7
but against Timman he did not m anage to would also have won .
give convincing evidence of White's advan­
tage , although the Ex-Champion undoubt­ 25 NbS
edly demonstrated his analysis: 21 Rd7 Nf5 26 Rxc6 Rfd8
22 Rxc7 Rfc8 23 Rd7 Rd8 24 Rfd 1 Rxd7 25 27 Rb6 Rd5
Rxd7 Nxe3 26 Rc7 Rb8 27 b3 Rd8 - Black An attractive trap before the curtain
obtained counterplay sufficient for equality. comes down - 28 Nxb2? Rxe5 ! . but there
To the credit of the Dutch grandmaster, he are to be no miracles in this game .
was not afraid to check the depth of White's
plan, and he upheld the Smyslov Variation. 28 Bg3 Nc3
Perhaps (when you play 18 . . . a5??, you 29 Nxc3 Bxc3
involuntarily think "perhaps"), if I had 30 c6 Bd4
played 18 . . . e5 , 1 would have succeeded in 31 Rb7 Resigns
saving the game - in my meetings with
Without the least embarrassmen t , Karpov
Karpov I have managed to save more diffi­
refers to his defeats in games R, 1 4 and 16 as
cult positions.
"gifts". What then should be said about this
19 Rfel game? Or the 5th? Or the 18th? . . .
 GAM E 1 8
Kasparov-Karpov
Queen's Indian Defence
My defeat i n the preceding game did not
especially distress me ("well , what can you
do - an opening catastrophe!"), the match
situation remained favourabl e , and in this
"white" game I was in the mood to engage
my opponent in a determined fight. I
assumed that Karpov too would not avoid a
battle.
Generally speaking, a favourable match
position also has a drawback - in certain
conditions it may give an undesirable ''back­
ground": insufficient mobilization , and not
the same concentration and tenacity.
1 d4
As games 14 and 16 showed, the Ex­
Champion was well prepared in the Ruy
Lopez. The other reason for me beginning
the game with the queen's pawn was that I
had something in store for my opponent i n
h i s usual set-ups.
l Nf6
2 c4 e6
3 Nf3 b6
And here is confirmation that Karpov is
aiming for "large-scale" play - the Queen's
Gambit is given a rest.
4 Nc3 Bb4
Earlier (in games 10 and 32 of our first
match) Karpov preferred 4 . . . B b7 . In the
variation 5 a3 d5 6 cxd5 Nxd5 we both have
great practical experience . But here he
allows White to employ one of the most
complex variations:
5 BgS
101
A rapid development of this line has
occ� rred in very recent years, with Karpov
takmg almost no part in it. I , on the other
? and, have played several theoretically
Important games with the 5 Bg5 variation
and have studied it a great deal , taking
account of the fact that among the Ex­
Champion's helpers arc several specialists o n
this variation - Salov. Lerner and Tuk­
makov.
s Bb7
6 e3 h6
7 Bh4 Bxc3 +
I n the past Black normally used to act here
on a more "grand'' scale - 7 . . . gS 8 Bg3
Ne4, but in modern games he often experi­
ences difficulties both in the classical treat­
ment - 9 Qc2, and in the gambit line 9 Nd2.
8 bxc3 d6
It is clear what attracts those playing Black
.
such set-ups: defects in the opponent's
m
pawn chai n , the lack o f scope for the white
bishops, and the flexible placing of their own
pieces. The virtues of the position from
White's viewpoint are also understandable:
P?werful pawn centre , potentially dangerous
bishops . . . The answer to the question
"Who will win?" is even clearer: the one who
demonstrates the correctness of his own view
on the position - what in fact is more
important: the defects in the pawn chain or
the power of the centre , the "dangerous"
white bishops or their "lack of scope"? . . .
9 Nd2
In my opinion , the most logical plan : after
f2-f3 and e3-e4 the bishop at b7 is restricted,
and the significance of White's centre and his
1 02 London-Leningrad Championship
spatial advantage are increased. Inciden­
tally, this is quite an old plan and is known
from a game Botvinnik-Keres ( 1940) : 9 . . .
e5 10 f3 Qe7 1 1 e4 Nbd7 1 2 Bd3 g5 13 Bf2
NbS 14 g3 etc. Two more recent examples are
Lputian-Lerner (USSR Championship
Premier League, 1 986) and Azmaiparash­
vili-Khalifman (Kuibyshev, 1986).
9
g5
. . .
Black cannot get by without this, and
Karpov prefers to advance the pawn before
White prepares a retreat for his bishop at f2 .
If White now carries out the "Botvinnik
plan", it will involve the loss of a tempo.
But White can change plan: the early
. . . gS allows him to seize the h-file by the
undermining h2-h4. In itself this is not yet
dangerous, as was shown by the game Milcs­
Sokolov (Bugoj no , 1986) : 10 Bg3 Nbd7 1 1 h4
Rg8 1 2 hxg5 hxg5 13 Qc2 Qe7 1 4 e4 0-0-0 1 5
Bc2 eS 1 6 f3 Rh8 , and Black even had the
better chances .
10 Bg3 Qe7
Another innovation by Karpov i n this
match. He does not follow Sokolov, since he
anticipates an improvement on my part . . .
The point of the queen move is obviously to
retain for the moment the possibility of
bringing out the quecn's knight either to d7
or to c6 .
8 Bxc7.
6 Perhaps 14 . . . Bc6 should have been
5 played, to retain the possibility of normal
4
3 Karpov hopes that he will manage to castle ,
a b c d e h
g
11 a4
Games
A useful move, since Black is planning to
castle long. 11 h4 Rg8 12 hxg5 hxg5 1 3 a4
would have been an inaccurate way of carry­
ing out the same idea: 13 . . . Nc6 ! , and if 14
Nb3 Ne4 - the bishop at g3 is prematurely
deprived of support.
In the recent game Vareyev-Dolmatov
(USSR Championship Premier League,
1 987) White associated 1 1 h4 with a highly
interesting pawn sacrifice: 13 Be2 ! ? Bxg2 14
Rh6 (threatening 15 Bf3 ) 14 . . . g4 15 Bh4,
and he went on to win.
In general, pawn sacrifices and other
"drastic" measures are typical of White's
play in this opening variation. And this is
understandable: the static features of the
posi tion (the integral nature of the pawn
structure) arc in Black's favour, and White
must act energetically!
11 ... aS
Black would like to get by without this
advance, but 1 1 . . . Nc6 is well met by 12
Nb3 Ne4 13 Bd3 Nxg3 1 4 hxg3, when he is
passively placed .
12 h4 Rg8
12 . . . g4 is too dubious - 13 h5.
13 hxg5 hxgS
14 Qb3!
A very important point: White tries to
prevent the opponent from completing his
development - 1 4 . . . Nbd7 1 5 c5 ! dxc5 1 6
14 . . • Na6
development ( . . . Nbd7). At a6, of course,
the knight is not very well placed. True ,
and then seize the h-filc.
15 Rbl !
Now castling is ruled out : 15 . . . 0-0-0? 1 6
cS ! dxc5 1 7 Nc4 with the threats of 1 8 Nxa5
and 18 Qxb6! And 15 . . . Ne4 16 N xe4 Bxe4
17 Rb2 is unfavourable for Black - after
 Game 18
exchanging the passive knight at d2, he
remains with the same insoluble probl e m s :
where to put his king, and how to coordi n a te
his pieces.
15 KfS
0 c d e g h
White's achievements are evident : the
knight at a6 is badly placed, and the black
king has headed for the troubled K-side. B ut
on the other hand, to feel "happy" Black
does not require a great deal - . . . Kg7 and
. . . Rh8.
16 Qd l !
Clearly demonstrating t o the opponent the
entire weight of the problems facing him. On
16 . . . Kg7 there follows 17 Rb5 , but that i s
not all: White has taken control of g4, and
now Black has to reckon with the opponent's
plan of mobilizing his K-side forces - Rh2 ! ,
Bd3, then e3-e4-e5 etc.
16 . Bc6
• •
B l ack is still hoping for 17 . . . Kg7 , since it
is hard for him to conduct the game with his
pi ec e s uncoordinated. 16 . . . e5, with the
idea after 17 . . . exd4 18 cxd4 of establishing
his knight - 18 . . . Nb4, is strongly met by
17 cS ! exd4 18 cxd6 cxd6 1 9 Nc4! dxe3 20 fxe3
(not 20 Bxd6 exj2+ + and 21 . . . Ne4+)
20 . . . Kg7 21 Qxd6.
17 Rh2 Kg7
18 . . . Rh8 is all that remains . . .
1 03
Of course, it would have been risky to go
chasing after the pawn - 17 . . . Qd7 1 8 Bd3
Ke7 (not 18 . . . Bxa4? 19 Qf3 Ke720 Rh6) 19
Qe2 with the threat of 20 c5 .
18 c5!
This pawn sacri fice is very timely, and
Black, who was ready to neutralize the
consequences of his dubious opening, is now
faced with new, even more complicated
problems.
18 ... bxc5
I t i s easier for White to attack after 1 8 . . .
dxc5 19 Be5 (threatening Qh5) , e . g. 1 9 . . .
Kf8 (19 . . . Rh8 20 Qg4) 20 Bb5 Bb7 (or
20 . . . Nb8 21 Bxc6 Nxc6 22 Qf3 Nd5 23 c4)
21 Rh6 NdS 22 c4! Nc3 23 Qh5 Nxbl 24 Bf6
Qd6 25 Rh8, mating.
19 Bb5
The Ruy Lopez!
19 ... Nb8
There is nothing better: 19 . . . Bxb5? 20
axb5 Nb8 21 dxc5 , or 1 9 . . . Bb7 20 Bd3 Bc6
21 Qe2 Nb8 22 e4.
20 dxc5 d5?!
Of co urse , restricting the dark-sq uare
bishop by 20 . . . e5 looks "correct '' , b u t then
2 1 cxd6 cxd6 22 Nc4 Rd8 23 Nb6 Ra7 24 Bxc6
Nxc6 25 Qf3 (with not only 26 Qxc6 i n m i n d ,
but also 26 Qf5) settles all the q u est i on s .
20 . . . dxc5 was perhaps the lesser evil . The
drawbacks of this move , as of B l ack's pos­
ition as a whole, are obvi o us , but at least
White would not have had any forci ng
solution.
The move made by Karpov shows concern
for his pawn chain, b u t at the same time it so
weakens the dark squares (around his k i n g ! )
that it prompts White to seck a wi nning
continuation. In fact , there is no direct win .
Was this a lure on Karpov's part? I f so , i t hit
the target: I spent much time here see k i n g a
clear way to win, whereas, taking account of
the changed pawn structure , I should have
1 04 London-Leningrad Championship Games
been finding the correct plan for deploying Unfortunately , here I wasted some of my
my pieces - there is one ! few remaining minutes on calculating the
bishop sacrifice - 25 Qh6?! fxe5 26 Nf3.
21 Be5 K18
How I missed those minutes later on!
22 Rh6 Ne8
25 Kt7
22 . . . Nfd7? 23 Bxc7 Oxc5 (23 . . Nxc5 24
26 Qh5+ Kf8
Bxh8) meets with a tactical refutation - 24
27 Qf3 Kt7
Ne4!
B lack has no choice, but White has - and
a good one!
28 Rh6! Ne8

Not 28 . . . Nd7? 29 B xf6 Nxf6 30 Bxc6.

Here most of the experts and the spec­
tators expected a repetition of moves (29
Rh7+ etc . ) , and it is understandable why:
the favourable match situatio n , time trouble,
and the absence of a completely clear path.
But I sensed that the position promised
White more, that he could achieve some­
thing from it, and I decided to continue
playing for a win.
a b c d e g h
29 e4

The pawn joins the attack (30 Bxf6 and 31

23 Qh5? e5 is threatened) . The idea not used on move
23 is also very strong: 29 c4 g4 30 Qf4 (not 30
Such a move (and with a trap 23 . . .
Rh7+ K[B!) 30 . . . Bxb5 31 Rxb5 Nd7 32
-

Bxb5? 24 Rh7! and Qh6 + ) is hard to avoid

making . . . However, it is a weak move !
Had White looked more deeply into the
position, he would have had the sense to
retain his dark-square bishop on the long
diagonal - 23 c4 ! B xb5 24 cxb5 Nd7 25 Bb2
Nxc5 26 Qc2. Yes , Black is a pawn up, but
the difference in the power of the pieces is
such that the strategic battle can be con­
sidered decided.
23 ... f6
24 Rh7 Ng7?
24 . . . Rg7! would have forced a draw : 25
Qh6 Bxb5 (not 25 . . . fxe5? 26 RhB+ Kf7 2 7
Nf3 Qf6 2 8 Qh5 + Rg6 29 Rh6 Kg7 30
Qxg6+ , when White wins) 26 axb5 (or 26
Rxb5 Nc6) 26 . . . Nd7. Karpov evidently
considered . . . Rg7 and . . . Ng7 to be equiv­
alent . . .
25 Qf3!
Rh7 + Rg7 33 Rxg7+ Nxg7 34 B c3!
29 g4
30 Qf4 Bxb5
31 Rxb5
On the hasty 31 Bxf6 Nxf6 32 e5 Black had
prepared 32 . . . Bd3 ! , covering h7.
31 ... Nd7
31 . . . Nc6 would have allowed a danger­
ous piece sacrifice: 32 Rh7+ Rg7 33 Rxg7+
Nxg7 34 Bxc7 e5 35 Qxg4 Qxc7 36 exd5.
32 Bxc7
32 Bxf6 also looks rather tempting (in­
cidentally , this would also have been possible
after 31 . . . Nc6) - 32 . . . Nexf6 33 e5 Nxe5
34 Qxe5. Here Black should probably sacri­
fice a pawn by 34 . . . Rh8 35 Rxh8 Rxh8 36
Rxa5, in order to activate his game after
36 . . . Rh5 and then . . . e5 .
 Game /8 105

I preferred not to let the initiative out of It is hard to im agine a position which is
my hands. "more won". There were three more moves
before the time control, any three normal
32 NxcS
moves, and that would have been the end
• . .

Of course, 32 . . . e5 would not have won both of the game, and essentially of the
the bishop, if only because of 33 Rh7+ Rg7 match ! The most practical would have been
34 Rxg7 + Nxg7 35 Qxg4. B ut perhaps even 38 Bc5, 39 Qxd7 and 40 Bd4 (exactly three
stronger was 33 Qf5 Nxc7 (33 . . . Rg5 34 moves), the most decisive - 38 Qe5 !
Bd6! Qd8 35 Rxf6+) 34 Qh5 + Kf8 35 Rb7, followed by Bc5-d4 (38 . . . Rxa4 39
when White's offensive is hard to parry, e .g. Qxe6 + !) .
35 . . . Nxc5 36 Rxc7 Qxc7 37 Rxf6+ , or I cannot find a n explanation for what
35 . . . Rc8 36 c6 Nc5 37 Qf5 . happened next . . .
For 37 moves in this game Black has not
33 Qe3
once "raised his head" . And if in general one
Both forced, and strong! Now 33 . . . Nxc7 can talk about "gifts" as applied to the result
34 Rxc5, leaving White with the initiative, of a chess gam e , then - your attention
would nevertheless have maintained the please! - you are about to witness the
tension of the struggle . Karpov's mistake handing over of a substantial gift!
immediately clarifies the situation .
38 Rh7 + ? Ng7
33 Nxe4? 39 aS?? Kg6?
34 Nxe4 dxe4
39 . . . Qxb5 40 Qxa7 + Kg6 41 Rh4 Qd3 42
35 Bxa5
Qe3 Qbl + 43 Ke2 Rd8 would have won
Material is still equal , but all White's immediately. After 39 . . . Kg6? Black
pieces are taking part in the attack, and i t "merely" stands better.
cannot be parried. 40 Qxd7 Rxd7
35 rs
Here the game was adjourned .
36 Bb4 Qd7
For some ten minutes I stared at the board .
37 Qd4!
trying to understand - what had happened?,
Centralization and . . . a trap! - 37 . . . what h ad become of White's advantage? . . .
Qxd4 38 Rb7 + ! Initially I wrote down on my scoresheet
the panicky 41 Rxg7 + , in order to get rid of
37 ... Ra7
the rook which was now out of play. But then
I managed to take myself in hand and I
realized that all was not quite so bad : in the
end, m aterial is still equal, and White too has
8
his trumps - two passed pawns on the Q­
7 side. The move that went into the envelope
6
was
41 Rh4
5
Our analysis went on until six in the
4
morning. It was established that, out of
Black's numerous possibilities, two were
2
unpleasant: 41 . . . Nh5 and 41 . . . Rgd8.
The second was played in the game, and on
4 1 . . . Nh5 we had prepared the following:
0 e f g 42 g3 (obviously forced) 42 . . . e3! 43 Rb6!
1 06 London-Leningrad Championship Games
exf2+ (on 43 . . . Kg5 White has 44 Bc5!,
when the worst is over) 44 Kxf2 Kg5 45 Bd6
(not 45 Rxe6? Nxg3) 45 . . . Rgd8 46 Rxh5 + !
(the only chance - the bishop becomes
miraculously strong) 46 . . . Kxh5 47 Bf4 -
here, by threatening, firstly, the e6 pawn
(and hence also the opponent's king) , and ,
secondly, the advance of the a-pawn , White
should save the game .
41 Rgd8
42 c4 Rd l +
43 Kc2
8 4 9 . . . Rxd6 (the exchange sacrifice 49 . . .
7 Rxe3 + 50 Kd2 Rxe5 51 Rxd8 Rxa5 fails to
6
5 White sharply activates his game, which is
4
3 retained his a-pawn , and it constitutes a real
2
a c d e g h
The key position : which of the white
pawns should B lack first take under control
- "a" or ''c"? The a-pawn seems more
dangerous (it is closer to the queening
square) , and this is in fact the case . Therefore
our main attention was devoted to 43 . . .
Ra l .
By morning the picture had clarified: yes ,
extreme accuracy is required of White, but
nevertheless he can hold on. Let us check
this: 43 . . . Rai ! 44 Bc3 ! (all the alternatives
are bad: 44 c5? Ra2+ 45 Kef Nh5 . 44 g3?
Ra2 + 45 Kel e3 46 fre3 Rd3 , 44 Bc5? Ra2+
45 Kel Nh5 46 g3 Rd3 47 Rb6 f4.') 44 . . .
Rcl ! (44 . . . Ra2+ 45 Rb2 Ra3 46 Bd2 or
44 . . . RaJ 45 Bb2! Ra2 46 Rhl [4 47 Rh4!
p + 48 Kel is weaker - White has success­
fully regrouped, and need no longer have any
fears about the outcome of the game) 45 Be5
(45 Bxg7? , in the hope of 45 . . . Kxg7? 46
Rb2/, loses to 45 . . . Rc2 + 46 Ke3 Kxg7 47
Kf4 Kg6 48 Rb7 Rxj2 + 49 Ke5 Ra2 - White
has become active at too high a price)
45 . . . Rc2 + (45 . . . Rxc4 46 Rh6 Rc2+ 47
Kel is weaker - White has "caught on" to
the e6 pawn , which gives him counterplay,
for example : 47 . . . e3 48 fxe3 Rxg2 49 Bf4
Nh5 50 Rxe6+ Kf7 51 Re5 ReB 52 Rxf5 + Ke6
53 Re5 + Kf6 54 Kdl or 47 . . . Rd5 48 Bf4
Nh5 49 Rxh5! Kxh5 50 Rxe6 g3 51 fJl) 46 Kel
Rxc4 (after the plausible 46 . . . Rdd2 White
is saved by tactics - 47 R h6 + ! Kg5 48 Rh7!
Re2+ 49 Kdl NeB 50 Rb8, and the black king
too finds itself in danger) 47 Rb6 e3! 48 fxe3
Re4 49 Rd6 (not 49 Bxg7? Rxe3+ ! 50 Kj2
Rd(B with the terrible threat of . . . g3 +)
win for Black , while after 49 . . . Ra8 50 Bd4!
Rxa5 51 Rh8 Nh5 52 Rg8+ Kf7 53 Rdd8
quite sufficient for a draw) 50 Bxd6 Rxe3 +
5 1 Kd2 Re4 52 BcS Ra4 53 Bb6 - White has
strength (in addition , the king is heading
across to its aid) .
Thus after 43 . . . Ral White would have
saved the game. We made only a hasty
analysis of 43 . . . Rcl , and . . . it was this
that Karpov chose ! The Ex-Champion was
ten minutes late for the start of the adjourn­
ment session . According to his second
Makarychev, right to the last moment Kar­
pov was looking for a win after 43 . . . Ra l ,
but failed to find it. What should he decide
on : 43 . . . Ra I or the less strong 43 . . . Rcl ?
43 ... Rei ? ! !
Showing amazing perception ! Our analysis
of this second-rate move had been deplor­
able - Karpov must have had second sight!
44 a6??
It was on this terrible "hole'' that our
conclusions were based . Here we considered
44 . . . Rxc4, 44 . . . Nh5 and 44 . . . Ral , and
everywhere a saving line was found : 44 . . .
Rxc4 45 a7 Ra8 46 Rb7 Rxb4 (46 . . . Nh5 47
Bd6) 47 Rxb4 Rxa7 48 g3 etc . , 44 . . . Nh5 45
Rxh5 KxhS 46 a7 Ra8 47 Bc5 Ra l 48 Rb7 , or
44 . . . Ral 45 Bd2! (the bishop sacrifices
 Game 18 107
itself!) 45 . . . Ra2 46 Rho+ Kf7 47 Rb7+ 52 ... Rgc2
Kg8 48 Rg6 Raxd2+ 49 Ke3 R2d7 50 c5 ! e5
B lack combines attack with prophylaxis.
5 1 Rd6! Rxd6 52 cxd6 Ne6 53 a7 f4 + 54 Kd2 !
Rxd6+ 55 Kcl - the a-pawn will cost a roo k. 53 c6 Ra l
Unfortunately, an i mportant intermediate 54 Rh3 f4
check was overlooked . . .
Of course , 54 . . . Nh5 would also have
White 's problem is not in fact so difficult
won .
- he has to activate his unfortunate rook at
h4. This idea can be realized by the obvious 55 Rb4
44 Bc5 - to e3 as quickly as possible ! -
55 Rhh3 is a more interesting possibility, in
when it is a fairly simple matter to draw.
the hope of 55 . . . Rcc I 56 Rb 1 ! , but after
44 Rc2 + !
55 . . . Nf5 56 Rh l Raa2 the ga m e is lost.
45 Kel 55 ... Kf5?!

45 Ke3 is strongly met by 45 . . . Nh5. This gives Whi te some chances. 55 . . . N f5

is stronger, bringing the k night into play: 56
45 ... Ra2
Rxe4 Ng3+ 57 Rxg3 fx g3 58 Rg4+ Kf5 5<J
46 Rb6
Rxg3 Rxc6, and White can resign .
Too submissive: even at the cost of a pawn
56 Rb5 + e5
46 Bc5 was essential - the one saving chance
lies in transferring the bi s hop to the c1-h 6 On 56 . . . Kg4? there follows 57 Rh4+
diagonal . with perpetual check.
The mistakes on moves 38-39 a nd in the
57 RaS Rdl?
analysis of the adjourned position had de­
moralized me, and on the resumption I The next time con trol had now been
played with a feeling of doom . reached , and Karpov could have found the
correct path - 57 . . . Rac l ! 58 c7 c3 (the
46 Rd3!
combination which could now have saved
• • •

The start of the decisive attack. White would not then work ) .
47 c5 Ral +
48 Ke2 Ra2+
8
One senses that Karpov too had not
7
ana lyzed 43 . . . Rcl very thoroughly . . .
6
49 Kel g3
5
Unfortunately for White, this is good
enough to win , but 49 . . . Kg5 ! , including 4

"everything" i n the attack - king, knight, 3

pawns - would have won m uch more
2
simply. For example : 50 c6 (50 Rh7 Nh5)
50 . . . Kxh4 5 1 c7 f4 52 g3+ Kh3 ! gxf4 Nf5
with inevitable m ate.
o b c d e g h
50 fxg3 Rxg3
51 Kn Rgxg2 58 a7?
52 Bel
For the last time i n this game fortune
Somethi ng has to help the king. smiled on me, but I failed to notice . . .
108 London-Leningrad Championship Games
It is desirable for pawns to queen wi th check. On 58 . Reel there fol lows 59
. .

check - 58 c7 ! How can B lack win now? If c8=Q+ Rxc8 60 a7 Ra8 61 Rb3 while if ,

58 . . . c3 , then 59 Rh2 ! ! (it was this cha n ce 58 . . . Rxc7 59 a7 Reel 60 a8= 0, w h e n

that both players overlooked) 59 . . . Rxh2 Black do es have a draw . . .
(the game ends in perpetual check after
58 e3
59 . Reel 60 c8= Q + Rxc8 6/ a7 Rccl 62
. . .

. .

a8= Q Rxe1 + ) 60 e8=Q+ Ne6 6 1 Kg1 Rc2 62 A rapid mate is inevitable , and so White
Rxc5 + Kxe5 63 Qe3 + , again with perpetual resigned .
 GAM E 1 9

Karpov-Kasparov Of course , there are also drawbacks: the

knight is on the edge of the board . and from
Griinfeld Defence being a target for attack the d-pawn can be
transformed into a dangerous passed pawn.
Playing after two successive defeats is very
difficult and , to be frank , rather frightening 8 Be2
- one imagines traps in the soundest of set­
In the event of 8 Qb3 cS 9 d5 e6 1 0 Bxa6
ups. True, I had n ever lost three games in a
bxa6 B lack's bishops compensate for the
row, but "there is a first time for every­
defects in his pawn ch a in.
thing" . . .
It was decided to continue the debate in 8 cS
the Grtinfeld Defence, although a change of 9 dS e6
opening would have seemed more sensible . 10 0-0 exdS
This wa s made in game 2 1 , but there is reason 11 exdS Bf5
to think that the employment of a new 12 Bf4 ReR
opening in game 19 would not have affected
Both sides deploy their forces in the most
the opponent's preparedness . . .
natural way. With his last move Black
I d4 Nf6 prepares . . . Ne4 , whereas grandmaster
2 c4 g6 Gavrikov , a specialist in this variation, pre­
3 Nc3 d5 fers 12 . . . Qb6.
4 Nf3 Bg7 13 Rad l Ne4
5 Qb3 dxc4
6 Qxc4 0-0
7 c4

Apart from Sm yslov ' s 7 . . . Bg4 (from

which, of course, bad impressions remained)
Black has two other ways of fighting against
the centre : 7 . . . a6 and 7 . . . Na6. It was on
the second that I placed my choice .
7 ... Na6

The idea of this variation is simple: it is to

strike at the centre by 8 . . . c5 and initiate
piece play in the hope of exploiting the
advanced position of the white queen. Here , o b c d e g h
incidentally, is a striking illustration: Pan­
chenko-Sideifzade (USR, 1 980) : 8 Bg5 c5 9
d5 h6 10 Bh4 b5 ! 1 1 Nxb5 Qa5 + 12 Nd2 Rb8 Black looks to stand well: active pieces,
13 Rdl Nb4 14 a3 Rxb5 ! , with a crushing open files and diagonals, and the threat of
position . . . . Nxc3 followed by . . . Re4 . On 14 Bd3 he
109
110 London-Leningrad Championship Games
can use tactics to demonstrate convincingly
how insecurely placed the white pieces are :
14 . . . Bxc3 ! 1 5 bxc3 b5 16 Qxb5 Nxc3 17
Qxa6 Bxd3 and . . . Ne2 + .
14 NbS!?
This innovation by Karpov was perhaps
overrated by the commentators . Of course,
the knight at b5 occupies an ideal position ­
the d6 and c7 squares arc controlled, and the
advance of the d-pawn has become a real
threat. But also White's influence in the
centre has been weakened, and a pawn is
sacrificed . . .
To venture 14 . . . Bxb2 15 d6, or 14 . . .
g5, driving back the bishop but weakening
my posi tion , seemed dangerous (the oppo­
nent would have analyzed them thoroughly
at home ! ) , and so I chose a more solid move
- this is the usual reaction when confronted
with an i nnovation .
14 Qf6
15 Bd3
15 d6 is careless: 1 5 . . . Bd7 ! , and the
white pieces are "hanging" .
Karpov begins a battle for the centre,
aiming to drive away from there (or ex­
change) the opponent's pieces.
15 Nb4?
. . .
Black has many possibilities. 15 . . . Bg4
and 15 . . . Bd7 are incorrect on principle, as
they lead to the exchange of the active part of
Black's army and leave his bad pieces (Na6)
on the board : 15 . . . Bg4 16 Be5 Rxe5 1 7
Nxe5 Bxd l 18 Bxe4 Oxe5 1 9 Rxd l , o r
1 5 . . . Bd7 16 Be5 Qb6 1 7 Qxe4 Bxb5 1 8
Bxb5 Qxb5 19 d6.
A beginner would play 1 5 . . . Qxb2 , and
he would probably be right : 16 Rb1 (after 16
g4 Bd7 it i s n ot Black who stands badly, while
16 d6 Nb4 l 7 Nc7 b5 is unclear) 16 . . Qf6 1 7
. may become dangerous. For the moment
Rbe1 (1 7 Rfel Nc3) 1 7 . . . g5 (1 7 . . . Nc3?
18 Be5) 18 Bxe4 Rxe4 19 Rxe4 Bxe4 20 Qxe4
Qxf4 (20 . . gxf4 21 d6) 21 Oe7 g4 - both
. trumps: the strong passed d-pawn and the
sides have chances.
The most natural is 15 . . . Rad8 (also a
beginner's move !), with the possible con­
tinuation 16 Rfe l Qxb2 17 Bxe4 Rxe4 18
Rxe4 Bxe4 19 Qxe4 Qxb5 - as I have
already sai d , these exchanges are unfavour­
able for B lack , but he h as won a pawn , and
this of course influences the assessment of
the position . There was an interesting game
in a clock simultaneous (B aku , 1987) , in
which after 1 5 . . . Rad8 m y opponent, the
Soviet master Dzhandzhgava, continued 1 6
Rde1 Qxb2 17 Nc7. There followed 1 7 . . .
Nxc7 1 8 Bxc7 Nd2! 19 Rxe8+ Rxe8 20 Nxd2
Qxd2 21 Bxf5 gxf5 22 g3 Bd4! 23 d6 Re 1 24
Kg2 Rxfl 25 Qxfl Qxa2 26 Qb5 ! Kg 7! 27 Kh3
Qd5 ! 28 Qe8 Qc4 ! 29 Kg2 Qc2! 30 Qel Qa4!
31 Qd2 Qc6+ 32 f3 Bf6, and White resigned .
I felt that I had to initiate active piece play,
but the way I chose (15 . . . Nb4) was un­
fortunate. What told was that I was playing
the 7 . . . N a6 variation for the first time, and
I underestimated Black's possibilities (per­
haps for the reason that in other variations of
this opening I had several times advanced my
d-pawn to the queening square, when play­
ing White ! ) .
16 Nc7!
There is no time to retreat the bishop with
16 Bbl - then comes 16 . . . Bd7!
16 Nxd3
17 Nxe8 Rxe8
18 Qxd3
Not 1 8 Rxd3? Nd6. But now the knight has
no favourable discovery, because of the reply
Qb5 .
18 ... Qxb2
(see following diagram)
Black has lost the exchange , but all his
pieces arc very active, and the passed c-pawn
White's slight material advantage does not
count - more important are his two other
fact that the opponent's back rank is
weakened by the absence o f the second rook.
 Game 1 9
a b c d e g
19 Rde1?!
A bizarre decision , which , however, the
commentators awarded enough exclamation
m arks for the entire match ! Naturally, White
has created the threats of 20 g4 and 20 Nd2 ,
and a n exchange of rooks will facilitate the
advance of the d-pawn . But the rook at f1 is
shut out of play - will not Black's temporary
advantage in the number of active pieces tell ,
and has Karpov worked out everything
accurately?
The direct 19 d6 was pretty strong. e . g.
19 0 0 Nc3 20 d7 Rd8 2 1 Qe3 Qe2 (on
0 23 . . . Nf6 ! ! - this clever trick enables Black
21 . . . Qb5 White wins by 22 Qe7, while if
21 0 Be6 22 Rd2 Qh5 23 Be5 Nd5 24 Rxd5!
• •
Bxd5 25 Bxg7 Bxf3 26 Bf6) 22 Rfe l Qxe3 23
Rxe3 Rxd7 (23 . . . Bxd7 24 Rxc3 , or 23 . . . 19 . . . Qxa2 ! , Black really ought to lose the
Be6 24 Rxe6) 24 Re8+ Bf8 25 Rxd7 Bxd7 26
Rd8 Ne2+ 27 Kfl Nxf4 28 Rxd7 - the
ending is difficult for B lack. 1 9 . . . Rd8 20
Qe3 (threatening 21 g4) 20 . . . h5 is more
tenacious. Although 21 Rb1 Qxa2 22 Rxb7
Qd5 23 Rxa7 Nxd6 24 Bxd6 Qxd6 25 Ng5
puts the opponent on the ropes - 25 . . . Rf8
(25 . . . Bh6? 26 Nxf7) , i t is still not easy to
k nock him out.
19 . • . Qb4?
The queen aims to defend the rook from
a4, but it would have been better to do this
while picking up a pawn on the way! - c4 24 d6 White wins. The bishop move is
19 . . . Qxa2! 20 Nd2 (20 g4 c4) 20 . . . Qa4. I t
i s easy t o imagine what a strong influence this
pawn would later have had .
111
But Karpov , of course, had in mind 20
Qb5 . This is in fact a dangerous sortie ,
although in the variations arising Black
woul d have had fair counterchances pre­
cisely thanks to the superior mobilization of
his pieces (the rook at fl ! ) : 20 . . . Rd8 (the
attempt to confuse matters by 20 . . . Rf8?!
21 Qxb7 c4 also has its point) 21 Qxb7 (Black
would be satisfied with 21 Bc7 a6! 22 Qxb7
Qxd5 23 Qxa6 Rd7 or 21 g4 Bd7 22 Qxb7
Qa4! with counterplay ; weaker here is 22 . . .
Bxg4 23 Ng5 Nxg5 24 Bxg5 or 22 . . Nf6 23 0
Bg5 Bxg4 24 Ne5 Qxd5 25 Qxd5 Rxd5 26
Bxf6) 2 1 . . . Qxd5 ! (in spite of the weakness
of the back rank ! ; there is no time for
21 h6 - 22 d6!, but 21
0 0 • Bj8 is possible ,
0 0 •
when neither of the following two lines is
convincing: 22 Ng5 Nxg5 23 Bxg5 Qxd5 24
Qxd5 Rxd5 25 ReB Kg7, or 22 Ne5 Nd6! 23
Qc6 ReB 24 RaJ Qb3 25 Qa6 Qxd5 26 Rfdl
Qe6 27 Nxg6 hxg6 2B Bxd6 Bg7- the c-pawn
supported by the bishops gives Black real
chances; perhaps only 22 RaJ Qxd5 23 Qxd5
Rxd5 24 Rxa7 favours White, although even
here Black can hope to save the game) 22
Qxd5 Rxd5 23 g4 (White wins? - 23 . . .
Bxg4 24 Rxe4 Bxf3 25 ReB+ and Bh6)
to maintain the material balance and to hold
the position.
After failing to take a chance such as
game.
20 Nd2 Qa4
21 Qc4!
Very logical : the exchange of queens is
forced , while maintaining the pin on the e­
file and the threat of the d-pawn 's rapid
advance . Not 21 Nxc4 Rxe4 22 Rxe4 Bxe4 23
Qd2 c4 etc.
21 ... Qxc4
22 Nxc4 Bc3
After 22 . . . Rd8 23 g4 or 22 . . . b5 23 Nd2
connected with an interesting tactical oper­
ation, which unfortunately proves in­
sufficient.
112 London-Leningrad Championship Games
23 Nd2! The final stroke. B lack would still have
had some chances after 29 Rxe8 + Nx e8 30
Not a ll o wi ng B lack a respite - 23 Bd2
Bc7 f5 31 b6 32 Bd4 (32 d6 Nf6)
Bxc5
Bd4.
32 . . . Kt7,
but now he cannot find a reason-
23 Bxd2 able square for his knight: 29 . . . Nc4 30 d6
24 Bxd2 Bd7! Nb6 31 Rbl ! (threatening Rxb6), or 29 . . .
Nf5 30 Bxc5 Rxcl + 3 1 Kxel b6 32 d6!

29 ... Nc8

Black "battles on", me rely in order to

adjourn t h e game . . .

30 Bxc5 Rd8
31 ReS f6
32 Rf5 b6
33 Bd4 Ne7
34 Bxf6 RxdS
35 Rg5 + Rxg5
36 8xg5 Nc6
37 Ke2 Kf7
38 Kd3 Ke6

After 38 . . . Nb4+ 39 Kc4 Nxa2 40 Kb3

It seems to have come o ff : Black is the knight is trapped.
th reatening both . . . Nxd2 and . . . Bb5 . At
this point Karpov went pal e , and I realized 39 Kc4 Ne5+
that 23 Nd2 had been an oversight . But he 40 Kd4 Nc6+
was lucky: Whi te h as available a strong 41 Kc4
r e pl y , and the Ex-Champion found it.
This last move by K ar pov was seale d . The
25 Bf4! Bb5 continuations 41 Ke4 and 41 Kc4 Ne5 + 42
26 f3 KbS arc equa ll y good , and therefore I re­
signed the game without resum ing .
It t r an s pi r e s that after 26 . . . Bxfl 27 Kxfl So, a third zero in a row ! There was plenty
Nf6 28 Rxe8+ Nxe8 29 Be5 ! a most unusual
to think about , i n t r y ing to explain my
po sit ion arises: Black cannot stop the d­ frankly weak play in games 17 and 1 9 , and my
paw n , except by giving up his k night for it stumbles in game 1 8 . What had become of
(29 . . . [6 30 d6!)
that enormous playing advantage which I
26 ... g5 held up to game 1 7'! Into my head came the
m o s t v ari ed th ough t s . . .
In t h e hope of saving a rather difficult But the match was not over, and I had to
ending with opposi te-colou r bishops. But it prepare for the next game . I was still "in the
too is dashed . . .
lead" - the Ex-Champion still had to win
27 Bxg5! Bxn another game. Karpov's three wins h ad , so to
speak. saved his honour , but he had not yet
After 27 . . . NxgS 28 Rxe8 + Bxc8 White won the match.
picks up t he knight - 29 h 4 . The ending Before game 20 K arpov took his last
which arises in the gam e , where Black is a
postponement, and thus the match moved
pawn down, is completely hopeless . into the finishing straight - the day of e ac h
28 Kxfl Nd6 subsequent game was now determined.
29 Be7 Clearly, by his decision Karpov gave me time
 Game 1 9
t o ''lick my wounds" a n d h e lost h i s psycho­
logical initiative . Why did he do this? Later
Karpov explained that he h ad problems in
the opening, and perhaps this explanation
will satisfy people who arc remote from
chess . . . For the first time the Ex­
Champion had gained a chance to bring the
match to a successful conclusion . True, he
asserted that all the time h e had been con­
fident of success . . . So be it, I will put it
another way : for me, for the first time, there
was a real threat of defeat - it was not a
matter of the score , but of my psychological
state. And Karpov can hardly fail to have
been aware of this. Perhaps it was difficult
for him too to control himself? At any rate,
for h is decision to take a postponement he
must have had very pressing reasons.
And another factor, which gave rise to
false rumours , should also be mentioned
here. There were changes in my training
group, which was abandoned by Timosh­
chenko and Vladimirov. But whereas
Timoshchenko's departure was 'planned'
(the Novosibirsk grandmaster expressed his
113
desire before the start of the match , and he
left by mutual agreement after our return
from London), a serious con nict occurred in
my relations with Vladimirov after the 1 9th
game. To me he seemed to be behaving
strangely - copying out the analysis of
openings employed in the match . I cannot
assert anything, and I have no grounds for
accusing him , but equally I can no longer
trust Vladimi rov as 1 used to. We parted
company precisely the day before Karpov's
postponement was announced . . .
Du ring the rest days granted to me I came
to my senses and outlined a plan for the
finishing stretch of the match . In the 20th
game it was decided "not to play" (i . e . to aim
for a short draw), in the 2 1 st to parry the
opponent's onslaught, and to make the 22nd
the 'retribution' gam e . With this in mind we
constructed the opening repertoire for the
coming games, and in particular a new
'Black' opening was hastily prepared - the
Griinfeld Defence could not be played
(mainly for psychological reasons) .
 GAM E 20

Kasparov-Karpov This is a fundamental part of White's plan

and it has a clear-cut positional basis - it
Catalan Opening
diverts one of the black pieces from the
d4 Nf6
preparation of . . . c5 . The move order is
2 c4 e6
important - if, for example , 1 1 Nbd2 , then
3 g3
11 . . . c5 1 2 Bxf6 gxf6 is possible, not fearing
the weakening of the K-side. In the position
The Catalan is a not uncommon guest in after 13 Ng5 fxg5 1 4 Bxb7 RbR 15 Be4 fS 1 6
my games, but the last time it occurred with Bg2 cxd4 Black has a good game .
Karpov was in game 22 of our first match.
11 Nxf6
The reason for the choice of opening has
already been explained, the more so in that Of course , not 1 1 . . Bxf6 or I I . . . gxf6
.

the Ex-Champion plays with enviable con­ in view of 12 Ng5 - White achieves a
stancy a variation in which Black's chances of favourable exchange and . . . c5 can no
seizing the initiative are minimal . Given an longer be played (12 . . . Bxg5 13 Bxb7 Rb8
elementary degree o f caution, White docs 14 Bc6).
not risk anything, and this meant that I could
12 Nbd2 RcH
guarantee myself the necessary respite .
13 Nb3
3 d5
4 Bg2 Be7 B lack consistently prepares the freeing
5 Nf3 0-0 advance . . . c5, and White does his utmost to
6 0-0 dxc4 prevent it. Here I was expecting 1 3 . Be4 .. .

7 Qc2 a6 which had been approved in many games

8 Qxc4 (this, incidentally , is what Karpov himself
played in a game against Andersson .
8 a4 is also possible , as occurred in the
Moscow 1 981 - 1 4 Qc3 Nd5 / 5 Qc/ c5 etc . ) ,
afore-mentioned 22nd game. White ob­
but after prolonged thought Black decided
tained the better game , but since then effec­
on radical measures , and he temporarily
tive ways have been found for B lack to gain
sacrificed a pawn .
equality.
8 b5 (see following diagram)
9 Qc2 Bb7
13 ... c5!?
10 Bg5
14 dxc5
The soundest. In game 8 of the first match
Not 1 4 Nxc5? because of 1 4 . . . Bxf3 15
I played I 0 Bd2, but there I was fighti ng for
Bxf3 Qxd4.
an advantage , whereas here it was more
i mportant to hold on tightly to the "bird in 14 Bd5
h and" . 15 Rfd l Bxb3

10 Nbd7 However inoffensively White may h ave

11 Bxf6 played , Black still has the concern of regain-
1 15
1 16 London-Leningrad Championship Games
his problems, he is solidly placed, and White
8
cannot reach the c6 square .
17 ... QxcS

Played rather on the safe side , but 17 . . .

Bxc5 was more i n the spirit of the position .
not worrying about the fate of the b-pawn,
e . g . 1 8 axb5 axb5 (18 . . . Qb6 is too op­
timistic in view of 1 9 Rxa6 Bxf2+ 20 Kh1) J 9
Qxb5 Rb8 20 Qa5 Qxa5 2 1 Rxa5 Ne4 22 Nd4
Rfd8 - the ending is clearly drawish.
18 axbS axbS
a e g h
18 . . . Oxb5 19 Nd4 would h ave created
difficulties for B lack due to the weakening of
ing his pawn . 15 . . . Nd7 seems strong, e . g. the c6 square.
1 6 e4 Bxb3 , but for all my pacifistic mood I
would have played 1 6 Rxd5! cxd5 17 c6 -
White's passed pawn is very strong, his
knights coordinate excellently, and he has a
clear prospect of play in the centre and on the
0-side against the opponent's weakened
pawns. In a word, White has sufficient pos­
itional plusscs to feel master of the position.
15 . . . Qc7 was possibly the simplest for
Black, and then 1 6 N fd4 ( if 16 Racl , then
16 . . . Bxb3 is good enough to equalize)
1 6 . . . Bxc5 (1 6 . . . Bxg2 17 Kxg2 Bxc5 18
Nxc5 Qxc5 19 Qxc5 Rxc5 20 Racl forces
Black to concede the c-file, since 20 . . . Rfc8
is strongly met by 21 Rxc5 Rxc5 22 Nxb5, a c d e g
winning a pawn) 17 Nxc5 Qxc5 1 8 Qxc5 Rxc5
1 9 Racl Rfc8 20 Rxc5 Rxc5 2 1 Nb3 Rc8,
19 Nd4
when the draw is not far off.
The last try was 19 Ra5 , when B lack's task
16 Qxb3
is not as simple as it might appear:
After 16 axb3 Rxc5 17 Qxc5 Bxc5 (I think 19 . . . Ng4 (the cooperative 19 . . . Qc2
that the simple "greed" test 1 7 . . . Qxd 1? .' 18 leads to an advantage for White - 20 Rxb5
Rxd1 Bxc5 19 Ne5, when White has un­ Qxe2 21 Nd4, while after 19 . . . RfdB 20
pleasant pressure, would have been success­ Rxd8+ Rxd8 21 Qxb5 Rdl + 22 Bf1 Qcl 23
fully passed by Karpov) 18 Rxd8 Rxd8 1 9 e3 Black has insufficient compensation for
Rxa6 Rd1 + 2 0 Bft g6 2 1 e 3 (2/ Rc6 Bxf2 + !. the pawn) 20 Nd4! (20 e3 is less strong in view
forcing a draw) the activity of Black's pieces of 20 . . . Qc2 21 Qxc2 Rxc2 22 Rxb5 Nxj2 23
compensates for his minimal material deficit. Rd7 Bc5, forcing the transition into a drawn
ending by 24 Rxc5 Rxc5 25 Kx.f2 Rb5 etc. ,
16 . Qc7
since 24 Rc7 Nh3 + or 24 Nel NhJ + is bad for
• •

17 a4
White) 20 . . . Bf6 (20 . . . e5? 21 Rxb5 Qa7
17 Racl Bxc5 also promises nothing real ­ 22 Rb7 Qc5 23 BhJ leads to an advantage for
by accurate play Black must be able to solve White) 2 1 e3 Bxd4 22 Rxd4 Qct + 23 Rd1
 Game 20 117

Qc2 24 Qxc2 Rxc2 25 Rxb5 Rxf2 (25 . . . seize the c-file. The resources for further play
Nxf2?! 26 Rd4) 26 Rd4 (in the ending after 26 are exhausted.
Bh3 Nxe3 27 Kxf2 Nxdl + 28 Ke2 Nxb2 29
20 eJ Rfd8
Rxb2 h5 followed by . . . g6 White has merely
21 Rd2 Qb6
a moral advantage, and there is no question
of him winning) 26 . . . Rf5 27 Rxf5 exf5 28 e4 Draw agreed.
- Black still has problems. A typical "grandmaster" draw, although
B est is 19 . . . Ne4 20 e3 Nd6 (avoiding one can understand the two players - each
complicated variations) 21 Nd4 - White fulfilled the task he had set himself before the
retains a slight initiative , but B l ack's position game . The only noteworthy fact is that the
is sound. As we see , after 19 Ra5 a lively Ex-Champion spent an unusually long time
struggle could have arisen out of "nothing" . on the opening stage in a well studied pos­
ition.
19 ... b4

The pawn moves under the defence of the

dark-square bishop, and White is unable to
 GAM E 2 1
Karpov-Kasparov
Queen's Indian Defence
I realized that in this game I faced a
difficult test - this was essentially Karpov's
last real attempt to play for a win .
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6
An innovation ! I have no intention of
giving up the GrO.nfeld Defence , but the
accumulated negative emotions (three deep
"wounds'') demanded corrective measures. I
was obliged in transit to master a "new"
opening - the Nimzo-lndian Defence had
occurred in my games only twice (with
Psakhis in 19H I and in my m atch with Belyav­
sky) . The change was necessary - what was
important was not only the sound reputation
of this opening, but also the element of
surprise and novelty which it would intro­
duce into the extremely tense competitive
atmosphere of the match.
3 Nf3
To be honest, although Karpov very rarely
allows the Nimzo-Indian Defence, I was
more expecting 3 Nc3 - in the Leningrad
half of the match between games 13 and 19
his main motto was activity, especially with
the white pieces. Besides, he must have
known that in the Nimzo- I ndian Defence
my slight experience was rather dismal - of
the two games played with it , I h ad lost both.
It is difficult to i magine that the choice of
opening took h i m unawares - the prob­
ability of it was not so hard to work out.
3 b6
4 g3
1 19
Again a move (going against his usual
aspirations in the Return M atch) which
rather surprised me. Of course . after 4 Nc3 I
have accumulated a great deal of experience .
but playing these positions with White and
with Black is not the same thing. After 4 g3
White has few chances of an advantage , but
Black's counterplay is also reduced to the
minimum.
4 Ba6
5 b3 Bb4+
6 Bd2 Be7
7 Bg2
This position frequently occurred in our
first match , hut it was normally Karpov who
had Black , and he fairly successfully solved
his opening problems. Echoes of the un­
limited "marathon" involuntarily re­
turned . . .
7 0-0
. . .
On the basis of our two-year discussion ,
7 . . . c6 is considered the most accurate. but
the move in the game h as by no means been
rej ected . Its virtue is that it m ay lead to a
more complicated struggle .
8 0-0 dS
A slightly provocative move - B lack
begins operations in the centre without first
playing . . . c6, agreeing to future hanging
pawns (after 9 cxd5 exd5 and then . . c5) . .
Something similar occurred i n game 4 o f our
first match. For my part 8 . . . d5 was an
unequivocal invitation to a fundamental
struggle, but here too the Ex-Champion had
prepared a "surprise" . Objectively «} cxd5 is
the strongest, especially since Karpov
handles such positions well with White (for
examples one does not have to go far: it is
120 London-Leningrad Championship Games
sufficient to examine game 15 from our first
match and the games from the 1987 Can­
didates Super-Final i n Linares). Neverthe­
less, White declines to ''pick up the gaunt­
let" . Even now I can in no way explain this
psychological phenomenon.
9 Ne5
c6
10 Bc3 Nfd7
The basic idea - the centralized knight
has to be exchanged.
II Nxd7 Nxd7
12 Nd2 ReS
I mprovization on the "stonewall" theme
- 12 . . . f5 is not to everyone's taste.
13 e4
This advance cannot be delayed , since
after 13 Re1 c5 ! Black solves all his prob­
lems , e.g. 14 cxd5 exd5 15 Qbl Nf6 16 Qb2
ReB 1 7 a3 Qd7 18 Rac1 Rc7 19 e3 Rec8 ,
Petrosian-Timman (Tilburg, 1982).
a b c d e g h
Black is at the crossroads. Theory gives
preference to 13 . . . dxe4. In Yrjola-H.
Olafsson (Gjovik , 1985) White unexpectedly
lost the opening battle - 1 4 Nxe4?! b5 ! 15
cxb5 cxb5 1 6 b4 Bb7 17 Nc5 Bxg2 18 Kxg2
Nb6! A roughly equal game results from 1 4
Bxe4 c 5 15 d5 (15 Qc2 is interesting) 15 . . .
c xd5 16 Bxd5 Bf6 17 Qc2 Bxc3 18 Qxc3 Nf6.
1 3 . . . c5? ! is weaker because of 14 exd5
exd5 15 dxc5 dxc4 16 c6! - the pawn
exchanges have concluded to White's ob­
vious advantage, Gheorghiu-Cserna (Ber­
lin , 1986) .
The most accurate seems to be 13 . . . b5
(with this move order the possibility of
13 . . . dxc4 14 Nxc4 is excluded, although
even here Black has an acceptable game
-
14 . . . c5 15 d5 exd5 16 exd5 Bf6) 14 Re l dxc4
15 bxc4, transposing into a position reached
in the game.
13 dxc4
14 bxc4 b5
15 Rei
White sacrifices a pawn, hoping later to
exploit his spatial advantage and strong pawn
centre, while at the same time restricting the
opponent's counterplay. This position was
familiar to us both from game 6 of our first
match, where Karpov, with Black, did not
risk accepting the sacrifice , but played 15 . . .
Nb6. My reply was also unfortunate - 16
cxb5 ? ! ( it is hard to explain why I did not
choose the obvious 16 c5, which would have
given a clear positional advantage: 16 . . .
Na4 1 7 Qc2 e5 18 NfJ Nxc3 1 9 Qxc3, or
16 . . . b4 1 7 Bb2 Nc4 18 Nxc4 Bxc4 19 Qc2
Bb5 20 a4! bxa3 21 Rxa3 - White can
prepare unhindered a pawn-roller on the K­
side) 16 . . . cxb5 with a good game for Black.
15 • . . bxc4
When analyzing the 6th game (two years
earlier) , we came to the conclusion that
Black had a reasonable game. But a con­
siderable time had passed since then, and a t
t h e board I had difficulty i n trying t o re­
member anything (I think that Karpov had
the same problem) .
16 Qc2
16 Qa4 Bb5 1 7 Qc2 has also been played
(by drawing out the bishop to b5, White
intends to gain a tempo for the advance of his
pawn to a5) . In Lerner-Kayumov ( 1 983)
after 17 . . . Nb6 18 a4 B a6 1 9 aS Nd7 20 e5
Re8 21 Nfl Nf8 22 Ne3 Qd7 23 h4 White had
a firm hold on the initiative. Instead of
17 . . . Nb6, stronger is 17 . . . Ba3 ! , e.g. 1 8
 Game 21
N b 1 Bd6 1 9 a 4 Ba6 20 e 5 Bb8 2 1 aS cS 2 2 dS
exdS 23 BxdS NxeS - White does not
succeed in combining a4-a5 with e4-e 5 .
16 ... Qc7!?
Black's main problem is to activate his
pieces. His extra pawn and solid position do
not guarantee him a q uiet life . In the game
Chernin-Hertneck (Lucerne, 198S) Black
carried out a plausible but incorrect plan -
16 . . . Nb6 17 Nfl cS 1 8 d5 exd5 19 exd5 Bf6
20 Ne3 Rb8 21 Be4! h6 22 NfS , with an active
game for White (true, here a draw was
unexpectedly agreed) . I recalled rather
vaguely the basic conclusion of our old
analysis - to aim for . . . e5 , and at the board
I decided also to retain the possibility of
. . . c5 . It is interesting that in recent years the
theory of the Queen's Indian Defence has
developed rapidly, but for some reason
theorists and players have disregarded the
position after 16 Qc2.
17 NO
In analogy with the Chernin-Hertneck
game, White intends to transfer his knight to
e3. The energetic 17 f4 was of interes t,
continuing White's restricting play, bu t such
a committing move clearly did not come into
the Ex-Champion's plans. 17 Bfl (aiming to
regain the pawn) was also possible. I n this
case B lack should not cling on to his m aterial
- 17 . . . Nb6'? ! 18 a4 c5 19 aS , but should
reorganize himself for the undermi ning
. . . cS , e . g. 17 . . . Bb7 18 Nxc4 (18 Bxc4
Nb6) 18 . . . Nb6 19 BaS (19 Radl Rfd8)
1 9 . . . c5 or 19 Na5 c5 20 d5 (20 Nxb7 cxd4!)
20 . . . exd5 21 Nxb7 d4! , with a good game.
17 e5
18 Ne3 exd4
19 Bxd4
(see following diagram)
19 Bc5?!
. • •
The commentators unanimously approved
of this move , but in fact it is expedient only
from the viewpoint of Black's competitive
121
8
6
5
4
3
2
o b c d e g h
aim (to gain a draw) . 1 9 . . . Ne5 was much
stronger, maintaining the tension and not
fearing 20 Qc3 f6 21 BxeS Qxe5 (or 21 . . .
fxe5 22 BhJ Rcd8) 22 Qxe5 fxeS 23 Bh3 Rcd8
24 Be6+ Kh8 , with chances for both sides.
For all its apparent logic and soundness, the
exchange of dark-square bishops leads
merely to a stabilization of the position, and
frees White's hands for play against the weak
c-pawns.
20 Bxc5 Nxc5
21 Nxc4 Rfd8
2 1 . . . Ne6 also fails to solve Black's prob­
lems because of 22 e5 - the values of the d6
square (for White) and of d4 (for Black) are
clearly not equivalent.
22 Rad l ? !
Over the last few moves the position has
been markedly simplified , but White's
plusses are evident - a spatial advantage in
the centre and play against the weak c6
pawn. I t remains for him to stabilize the
position and coordin ate his major pieces. To
aim for exchanges in such a position is clearly
nonsensical . Was the Ex-Champion really so
afraid of the possibility of an invasion at d4 or
d3? Then why not the obvious (purely
"Karpovian") 22 Bfl , with the possible con­
tinuation 22 . . . Ne6 (22 . . . Rd4 23 NeJ) 23
e5 Nd4 24 Qc4 - White is assured of a
strategic initiative. Why did this happen ,
when in the 22nd game of the 1985 match ,
1 22 London-Leningrad Championship Games
which he also needed to win at all costs, he The knight ending after 29 . . Bxfl 30
.

had played so actively , seeking the slightest Kxfl is as difficult to assess as it is outwardly
chance to continue the struggle? What had simple - in chess one is sometimes
become of the i ndomitable spirit of this frightened not only by complexity, but also
uncompromising chess fighter? At the finish by simplicity , the more so in situations where
o f the Leningrad battle i t was amazing to sec any incorrect step may have fatal con­
the metamorphosis which had occurred in sequences for the fate of the match. Analysis
my formidable opponent . . . shows that here too a draw would have been
the logical outcome: 30 . . . g5 ! (in the first
22 ... Rxdl
instance the K-side pawns must be dealt
Played, of course, with great pleasure . with) 31 hxg5 (31 Nc4 gxh4 32 gxh4 Ke6 also
leads to equality) 31 . . . fxg5 32 Nc4 Ke6
23 Rxdl Rd8
(32 . . . g4? 33 Ne5 + ) 33 g4 (otherwise Black
24 Rxd8 + Qxd8
himself will break up the opponent's pawn
25 h4!
chain by . . . g4) 33 . . . Nd3 34 a3 (34 Ke2?
Otherwise White might even stand worse. Ncl + , or 34 Kg2 c5) 34 . . . Ne5 ! (an uncon­
ventional decision) 35 Nxe5 (avoiding the
exchange is pointless - 35 Nd2 c5 36 Ke2 c4,
and then the black king goes to c5) 35 . . .
Kxe5 - White has to submit to a draw.

30 Kf2 Ke6
31 Bc4+ Kd6
32 Ke3 Nd7
33 f4 Nb6

The ending after 33 . . . Bxc4 can hardly be

lost, but I persistently rejected this possi­
bility - with a time scramble approaching i t
i s not easy t o take such important decisions.
a b c d e g h
34 Bg8

25 Qd4
34 Bxb5 cxb5 35 Kd4 is interesting, hoping
to exploit the centralization of the king, but
Centralization in the endgame is always here too Black should maintain the balance
attractive, but in the given concrete instance - 35 . . . a5 36 Nd3 (36 Ndl Na437 Ne3 Kc6)
there was no necessity for it - Black could 36 . . . Na4 37 e5 + fxe5+ 38 fxe5+ Kc6.
have played 25 . . . g6 (or 25 . . . Bb5 .'? ) 26
Ne5 (26 Ne3 Qd4) 26 . . . Qd6 27 Ng4 h5 with 34 h6
good prospects. 35 Nd3 Nd7

26 Qb2 Qxb2 There is no point in creating additional

27 Nxb2 problems by the impulsive 35 . . . Bxd3
White does have a symbolic advantage - (remember game 10 in London). A certain
the weakness of the c6 pawn , but it should accuracy is demanded of Black - White
not be forgotten that it is also a passed paw n . intends e4-e5 , and this must be prevented.

27 f6 36 Kd4 c5+
28 f3 Kf7 37 Kc3 Bc6
29 Bfl Bb5!? 38 Nf2 Nb6
 Game 21 123
White's only chance is to activate his 44 Ke3 Kc5 45 Ndl Bd7 46 a3 (46 [5 Nb6)
knigh t , but for the moment it is tied to the 46 . . . aS 47 Bxa4 Bxa4 48 Nc3 Bd7 (48 . . .

defence of his e-pawn . Be8 49 g4 g5 50 hxg5 or 49 .f5 Bj7 50 Ne2 g5.'

also leads to a draw) 49 f5 Be8 50 Ne2 (50 g4
39 Bb3 Na8
h5!) 50 . . . g5 5 1 fxg6 Bxg6 52 Kf4 Bh7.
40 Kd3 Nb6
44 Bxa4 Bxa4 45 Kc3 Kc5 46 Ng4 Bc6 47 e5
41 Bc2
fxe5 48 Nxe5 Bb5 (48 . . . Be8 49 Nxc4 Kd5 is
also perfectly possible) 49 Ng4 h5 50 Ne3 (50
Ne5 Kd5) 50 . . . Bd7 5 1 Nxc4 Be6.
44 Nd l Kc5 45 Bxa4 Bxa4 46 Nc3 Bd7 47
Ke3 Bg4 48 a3 aS 49 f5 h5, and again the draw
is obvious.

44 fxeS
45 Ne4 +

Hoping for 45 . . . Kc6? 46 fxe5, when

White strongly activates his game . But it is
not difficult to check that after 45 . . . Ke6 46
Bxa4 (46f'i + Ke7) 46 . . . Bxa4 47 Nc5 + Kf5
48 Nxa4 exf4 49 gxf4 Kxf4 Black cannot lose .
o b c d e g h
Can Karpov have seriously thought that after
adjournment analysis I would not risk giving
Here the game was adjourned. A similar up the piece?
position arose in game 20 of the previous
45 ... Ke6
match. but here there are more grounds for
hostilities. B lack can passively waiL but this Draw agreed.
is not the most pleasant of occupations. In statements after the match the Ex­
Champion called this the decisive game at
41 BbS+
the finish - after it he realized that he could
• • .

The sealed move. hope only to keep the score level, but that he
would not manage to change it in h is favour.
42 Kc3 Na4 + !
Does this mean that in game 21 Karpov
A dilemma for White - he must e ither fought ''to the last"? Are we supposed to
exchange , or retreat his k ing. I was expecting believe that 9 Ne5 , 1 7 N f1 , 22 Rad l? and 44
the exchange , and was geared up for a e5 + were the essence of playing to win'! Or
lengthy adjournment session , but the show­ perhaps it was all much simpler, perhaps
down came almost instantly. even before the first move in the game the
Ex-Champion realized that he was unable to
43 Kd2 c4
engage in a genuine battle?
A necessary demonstration of strength - At any event, my opponent's irresolute
Black threatens to activate his king. play could not fail to lift my spirits -
everything was going according to plan . It
44 eS + !?
was time to switch to the offensive - "fate
This forces a draw. We can see that other leads the daring, but cowards are dragged
moves too do not give White anything real: along'' . . .
 GAM E 22

Kasparov-Karpov
Queen 's Gambit
I d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6
3 Nf3 dS

By his third move Karpov lets it be known

that h e does not want to take a risk (as, for
example, i n game 1 8) , and that today h e has
essentially rejected playing for a win. A very
debatable decision. it cannot be denied ,
although also typical o f Karpov - he did the a b c d e
same in game 23 of the previous match .
I ncidentally, here he also employs the same
opening variation . is one of the most recent ideas: he provokes
a2-a3, depriving the bishop (which has to
4 Nc3 Be7
remain on the a2-g8 diagonal) of its support ,
5 Bg5 h6
and weakeni ng White's 0-sidc.
6 Bxf6 Bxf6
7 e3 0-0 16 a3 Re8
8 Rcl c6
Soon after the match Karpov himself,
9 Bd3 Nd7
playing White, showed Belyavsky that the
10 0-0 dxc4
other continuation to be employed here -

11 Bxc4 e5
16 . . . Qd7 - is insufficient: 1 7 Ne5 Bxe5 1 8
12 h3
Rxe5 Rfe8 1 9 Qe2 Rad8 20 Rei Rxe5 21
A year earlier this move had a great Qxe5 a4 22 Qc5 ! axb3 23 Re7 Qd6 24 ReS+ ,
psychological effect, but I failed to win the and White won. This game was played in the
game. Now the novelty effect was l ack­ match TsSKA v. Trud in the European
ing . . . Champions Cup ( 1 986) .
12 exd4 17 Rxe8+ Qxe8
13 exd4 Nb6 18 Qd2
14 Bb3 Bf5
One of the axioms of the 1 2 h3 variation is
15 Re1 aS
that after the exchange of all the rooks -
(see following diagram) 1 8 . . . Qd7 1 9 Rel Re8 20 Rxe8 + Qxe8 -
there follows 21 Qf4 , when White retains the
White's opening plan appears to offer only initiative. In the game Gurevich-Van der
modest chances, but after the 1985 match it Sterren (Baku , 1986) doubts were cast on
became popular, and for a long time Black precisely this axiom : 21 . . . Be6! 22 Bxe6
was unable to neutralize it. Black's last move Qxe6 (had Black not played 15 . . aS, he
.

125
126 London-Leningrad Championship Games
would now have lost his a-pawn - 22 Qb8+
8
and Qxa7) 23 Qb8+ QcR 24 Qa7 Nc4 25 b3
Nxa3 26 Qxa5 Be7 , and the game ended in a 7
draw. And in the event of 23 Qc7 Black
6
solves his strategic problem by tactical
means: 23 . . . Nc4 24 Qxb7 Bxd4! Now on 25 5
Nxd4 there follows 25 . . . Qe 1 + 26 Kh2 4
Qe5 + , while if 25 QbR + Kh7 26 Nxd4, then
26 . . . Qe 1 + 27 Kh2 Qxf2, when (in view of 3

the threat of . . . Ne3) he has a guaranteed 2

perpetual check .
This game was played after the m atch , a nd
for the moment Karpov demonstrates his
own way of solving Black's problems.
18 • • • Nd7?!
Black takes the e5 square under control
and clears the way for a possible . . . Qd8-b6;
his supervision of d5 has been weakened, but
d4-d5 leads merely to simplification . In what
direction , then, should White operate? In
the most critical ! - he must demonstrate to
the opponent that his control of e5 and the
threat o f . . Qd8-b6 are mere details, and
. White's position becomes less attractive.
the main thing in this position is that , by
playing energetically and accurately, he can
nevertheless force the opponent onto the
defensive.
19 Qf4!
This way, rather than 1 9 Re1 (although the
rook move rules out 19 . . . Be6), on which
Black could have chosen between 19 . . .
Qd8 and 1 9 . . . Qh8, preventing Qf4.
19 ... Bg6
Many of the commentators suggested that
Black should play 19 . . . Be6 20 Bxe6 Qxe6
21 Qc7 Qb3, but I am absolutely sure that
none of them would want to defend the
position after 22 Ne4! Qxb2 23 R e 1 ! NfR 24
Nxf6+ gxf6 25 Qf4. Karpov too did not want
to.
Meanwhile, 19 . . . Bg6 is a minor victory
for White: the stock of the b3 bishop, which
has escaped the threat of exchange, has
risen .
(see following diagram)
0 b c d e g h
20 h4!
It was difficult to find this versatile move ,
which is both attacking, and, more import­
antly, restraining (restricting, prophylactic
- as you will) .
20 Rel QdR 21 Na4 (21 Ne4 Qb6!) is
strongly met by 21 . . . Bh5! 22 g4 Bg6, when
20 ... Qd8
21 Na4!
Parrying the threat of 2 1 . . . Qb6. Now
Black has a difficult choice: 2 1 . . . Bh5? 22
g4 Bg6 23 h5 Bh7 24 NeS is bad for him ,
21 . . . Qb8 22 Qg4 Nf8 23 hS Bh7 24 NcS is
little better, and 21 . . . NfR 22 Re1 fails to
solve his problems. In order to avoid h4-h5,
which threatens in several different vari­
ations, Karpov acts simply -
21 ... hS
But this radical step also has i ts darker
side : the g5 square (and in general , the
position of the black king) is weakened, and
Black is deprived of the possibility of
. . . Bh5.
22 Rel b5
A quite natural attempt to create counter­
play on the Q-side, which Karpov prefers to
the passive 22 . . . Qb8 (22 . . . Nf8 23 Ne5)
23 Qe3 (23 Ne5 Bxe5 24 dxe5 b5 25 Nc3 is
considered below with a transposition of
 Game 22 1 27
moves) 23 . . . Qd6 24 Nc3, when Biack faces 24 ... b4
the same problems.
O r 24 . . . a4 25 Ba2 b 4 26 Ne4 bxa3
23 Nc3 Qb8 (26 . . . b3 27 Bbl favours White) 27 bxa3 .
24 Qe3!?
25 Ne4 bxa3
Very tempting possibilities open up after
The light-square bishop cannot be given
the plausible 24 NeS !? In general this move is
up, the more so since after 25 . . . Bxe4? 26
in accordance with White's plans, but in this
Qxe4 Black dare not play 26 . . . bxa3'? be-
concrete position Black has two concrete
cause of 27 Qxc6 ! axb2 28 Qd5 , forcing h is
rejoinders. Let us examine them :
immediate capitulation .
(a) 24 . . . NxeS 25 dxeS b4 26 axb4 Qxb4
(26 . . . axb4 involves a clever trap - if 27 26 Nxf6+ Nxf6
Na4 ? , then 27 . . . Ra5! 28 Qg3 Rxe5 29 Rxe5 27 bxa3
Qxe5 30 Qxg6 Qe1 + 31 Kh2 Be5+ 32 g3
Qxf2+ 33 Kh3 QjJ; by defending f2 with 27
Nd1.', W hite forestalls this combination and
threatens 28 Qg3 , and on 27 . . . Be7 he
brings up his reserves - 28 Ne3, with a 7
dangerous initiative) 27 Bc4 ! Qxb2 28 Re3 -
6
the storm clouds are gathering over the black
king. 5
(b) 24 . . . Bxe5 25 dxe5 Nc5 26 Ba2. Here 4
the commentators recommended 26 . . . b4,
when there can follow 27 Qg5 Kh7 (weaker is
27 . . . b3 28 Bhl Bxb1 29 Nxb1 NdJ 30 Re3
Nxb2 31 Nd2!, with a threatening concen­
tration of white pieces against the opposing
king's fortress) 28 Ne2 Nd3 (after 28 . . . a b c d e g h
bxa3 29 Nf4! Qxh2 30 Nxg6 fxg6 31 Bb1 it is
all over for Black ; perhaps the soundest is
28 . . . Qd8f 29 Qe3 b3 30 Bxb3 Nxb3 31 The outcome of the struggle following the
Qxh3 Qxh4, although White still stands opening is apparent : Black has been de­
better - 32 Qc3) 29 Nf4 ! , and Black must prived of one of h is bishops, the pawn
resign h imself to a clear advantage for White structure is balanced , but the white minor
after the exchange of knights, since in the pieces have the better prospects. This means
event of 29 . . . Nxe l ? 30 Nxg6 fxg6 3 1 Bf7 he that White (who has managed to exchange
cannot hold out (31 . . . Kh8 32 Bxg6 Qd8 33 his a4 knight for the f6 bishop!) has a m arked
Qxh5 + Kg8 34 Bj7+ Kf8 35 Bc4 Qe8 36 advantage .
Qh8+ Ke7 37 Qxg7+ Kd8 38 Bj7! Ra7 39 e6
27 ... NdS!
Qe7 40 Qh8+ Kc7 41 Qe5+ and Qxe1 ) .
Black should probably win the exchange - I think that all the commentators con­
26 . . . Nd3 27 Qg3 Nxe l 28 Qxg6 Qxe5. demned this decision by Karpov, which
After 29 Ne4 Ra7 30 Qxc6 his position is allows White, in their opi nion, to exchange
uneasy, but the situation as a whole is not on d5 and obtain a ''stable" advantage . Such
altogether clear. an assessment, in my opinion , is superficial.
The restrained 24 Qe3 retains the advan­ The white knight is certainly stronger than
tages of White's position and avoids risks ­ the bishop, but Black has provoked the
this was the spirit of game 22 (the finish was exchange of the dangerous b3 bishop, he has
close! ) . got rid of his weak c-pawn , and he can exploit
1 28 London-Leningrad Championship Games
the b- and c-files for counterplay. The ex- 39 Qa8 Qxd4, and the black king manages to
change on d5 , in my opinion , strengthens find shelter: 40 QhB+ Kg6 41 Rc6+ Kj7 42
B lack's position! Of course , White's chances Qc8 Re5) 38 . . . h4. Here 39 Qc8 leads to a
are better, but they also were before the drawn rook ending (39 . . . Qxc8 40 Rxc8
exchange . . . hxg3 41 Rh8+ Kg5 42 fig3 Rd6) , and 39 Qg8
27 . . . Ng4 was recommended, but after 28 to a double-edged position: 39 . . . Rd6l (not
Qc3 Qd6 29 g3 or 29 N e5 Re8 30 g3 ! (not 30 39 . . . hxg3? 40 Qh8 + Kg5 41 Rc5 + Kf4 42
Nxg4? Rxel + 31 Qxel hxg4 32 QeB+ Kh7 or QbB+) 40 Rc7 Qxd4. And only after 39 Rc3 !
30 f3? Nxe5 31 dxe5 Qd3!) 30 . . . Qf6 3 1 Re2 can White still hope to maintain his
it leaves White with a more significant dwindling advantage .
advantage.
28 Bxd5 cxd5
29 NeS Qd8!
Stronger than 29 . . . Qd6 30 Rcl followed
by Rc6.
30 Qf3

Unusual. Play on the dark squares - 30

Qf4 and 31 Rcl (30 . . . ReB 31 Nxg6 fxg6 32
Re6) is more natural , but White is also
fighting for influence on the light squares!
30 ... Ra6
Black , in turn , avoids the "banal" and
probably better 30 . . . Rc8.
31 Ret Kh7?

Karpov wants to make "solid" moves , but

32 Qh3!
in a situation where the opponent has stra­
tegic plusses, chances such as 31 . . . Qxh4! A preparation for the invasion of the
have to be taken. Although unfavourable in opponent's position. It is true that Black also
the abstract sense, the exchange of Black's gains this possibility, but the white knight
central pawn for a flank pawn would have will be taking part in the coming attack,
imparted liveliness and concreteness to the whereas the bishop will have no such chancel
play, and, as analysis shows, would have left
32 Rb6
him with real hopes of saving the game: 32
. • .

Qxd5 Kh7 33 Nf3 (33 ReB? Rb6, or 33 g3 Be4!
- Black shows his teeth !) 33 . . . Qg4 ! (not
33 . . . Qf6? 34 Ng5 + Kh6 35 ReB) 34 Ng5 +
Kh6 35 Nxf7+ Bxf7 36 Qxf7 Rf6! (after
36 . . . Qxd4? 37 ReB g6 3B Qf8+ Qg7 39
Qf4+ g5 40 Qb8 there is no defence) 37 Qc4
(37 Qd5 is met by 37 . . . Rxf2! 3B Kxj2 Qf4+
39 Qf3 Qxcl , with a draw both in the queen
ending and in the pawn ending: 40 Qe3+
Qxe3 + 41 Kxe3 g5 42 d5 Kg6 43 d6 Kf6 44 d7
Ke7 45 Ke4 Kxd7 46 Kf5 g4 47 Kg5 Kc6)
37 . . . Rg6 38 g3 (if 38 Qd5 , then 38 . . . Rg5!
32 . . . Re6 is passive - 33 ReS .
33 ReS Qd6
34 Qg3 a4?!
This loses a pawn. However, it is already
difficult for Black to find an acceptable path.
Thus the attempt at a counterattack -
34 . . . Rb1 + 35 Kh2 Qa6 (with the idea of
. . . Qfl) - is parried by the subtle 36 Re8 ! ,
e .g. 36 . . . Qfl 37 Qf3 a4 38 Nxf7l Bxf7 39
Qxf7 Qg1 + 40 Kg3 Rb3 + 41 f3, when White
wins (had White played 36 Rf8, there would
 Game 22
now have been a check at e l ! ) . Instead of
36 . . . Qf1 , 36 . . . Qb5 seems more ten­
acious, but then 37 Ra8 ! deprives Black of
counterplay.
35 Ra8!
An unpleasant surprise for B lack! The a-
pawn cannot be defended: 35 . . . Ra6 36
Nxf7! Bxf7 37 Qd3 + , or 35 . . . Rh3 36
Rh8 + ! Kxh8 37 Nxf7 + . Of course, these
tactical blows are not accidental , but are a
consequence of the white pieces' great
activity.
But , by giving up a pawn, Black can use
the time spent by the opponent on its capture
for the activation of his forces.
35 Qe6!
36 Rxa4 Qf5
37 Ra7!
Ra7 or Ra8'? I decided that on the 7th rank
the rook would be capable of more , incl uding
securing d7 for the knight, the appearance of
which at f8 would be fatal for the black king.
37 ... Rbl +
38 Kh2 Rei
On 38 . . . Rb2 White wins by 39 Nf3 ! f6 40
Qc7.
For many moves Karpov had been short of
time, and by this point I was too. And
meanwhile, . . . Qb l is threatened.
39 Rb7 Rc2
40 f3
Here 40 Nf3 f6 is ineffective , since i f 41
Qd6 Kh6 ! 42 Qf8?, then 42 . . . Qf4+ .
40 ... Rd2
(see following diagram)
Time trouble was over, and in this position
the game was adjourned .
Outwardly Karpov was very content -
indeed, B lack appears to have achieved a
great deal. The most n atural for White is 4 1
Rh4, but after 41 . . . f6 4 2 Nxg6 Qxg6 43
Qxg6+ Kxg6 Black has excellent chances of
1 29
0 c d e g h
saving the rook ending. And at the adjourn­
ment it was this development of events that
was predicted by all the commentators!
However, I did not consider any move
other than 41 Nd7 (which had been con­
ceived "in rough" when 37 Ra7 was played ) .
Fairly quickly I also discovered the third
move of the combination . Staggered by its
beauty, I checked and rechecked the vari­
ations for 17 minutes, not believing my own
eyes !
"Either I have gone mad, or else I have a
forced and very beauti l"ul win ! '' - I informed
my seconds, who, incidentally, were looking
rather despondent - they too had been
analyzing only 41 Rb4'? We spent a long time
investigating the position : it was an incom­
parable pleasure, and, besides, we had to
check over and over again that our eyes were
not deceiving us, and that all these beautiful
variations really were possible and really
were from game 22 of a match for the World
Championship !
41 Nd7! !
Karpov, of course , arrived for the ad­
journment session with a heavy heart. It
stands to reason that he had found the
combination , and one can imagine with what
feelings he awaited the revealing of the
sealed move , and with what difficulty he
demonstrated his "indifference'' !
The threat is 42 Nf8 + Kh6 43 Rb8 and 44
Nxg6.
 1 30 London- Leningrad Championship Games
41 ... Rxd4 45 Rb5) 45 Rb8 Oe5 (45 . . . Bh 7 46 Qg5+ ­
White has retained his a-pawn) 46 Qxe5
It is not a matter of the pawn, but of the
Rxe5 47 Nd7, and after Rh8+ and Nf8 Black
exchange of queens, which Black wishes to
again loses a piece . But after 43 . . . Rd3 a
offer ( . . . Qf4) .
tempting third path - 44 Qe 1 - proves
42 NfS + Kh6 false : Black loses prettily after 44 . . . d4 ( 45
43 Rb4 ! ! Qcl + was threatened) 45 Qg3 ! followed by
46 Rb5 ! , and after 44 . . . Bh7 45 Rb6+ g6 46
Qcl + Kg7 47 Ne6+ ! ! fxe6 48 Oc7 + Qf7 (or
48 . . . Kf6 49 f4!) 49 Qe5 + Kh6 50 Rxe6 and
8
5 1 Re7. but the paradoxical 44 . . . Qc8 ! ! 45
Qe7 Qf5 would have spoiled White's entire
7 pla n !

44 Rxc4 dxc4
5 45 Qd6!
4
With that same threat of a check on the
3 cl-h6 diagonal !
2 45 ... c3
46 Qd4

a c d e h
g
The poin t of the combination . White's
small and scattered army operates so har­
moniously that Black is unable to break the
mating net around his king without great loss
of material . The following variation is es­
pecially beautiful: 43 . . . Rxb4 44 axb4 d4 45
b5 d3 46 b6 d2 47 b7 d l = Q 48 b8= Q
(threatening check and m ate from f4) 48 . . .
Ocl 49 Nxg6 Qxg6 50 Qh8+ Qh7 5 1 Qgxg7
mate !
43 ... Rc4
After 43 Rb4 the Ex-Champion thought
for a moment, choosing which way to
lose . . . There were two other ways: 43 . . .
Rd1 44 Rb8 B h7 45 Qg5 + , and 43 . . . Rd3 44
Rb8 Bh7 45 Qg5 + Oxg5 46 hxg5 + Kxg5 47
Nxh7+ Kh6 48 Nf8 Rxa3 49 Rd8. So that i n
the second case B lack's agony should be
shorter, White can piay 44 a4! Re3 (44 . . . d4
Black could have contin ued the ''struggle"
to t h e end (46 . . . Bh7 47 Qxc3, and now
either 47 . . . g5 48 Qe3 f6 49 hxg5 + .fxg5 50
Nxh7, transposing into a pawn ending - if
one can call it that ! , or 47 . . . Bg8 48 Qe3+
g5 49 Qxg5 + Qxg5 50 hxg5 + Kxg5 51 a4f5 52
a5 Bc4 53 Nd7 Kf4 54 Nc5 Ke5 55 a6 Kd6 56
a7 Bd5 57 Nd3 Kc7 58 Nf4, eliminating all the
black pawns) , but here Karpov stopped the
clocks, signifying his resignation .
This game , which was of colossal com­
petitive significance and which essentially
decided the outcome of the contest, was
simultaneously the best of the match !
By the irony of fate many of my successes
are associated with the number 13: I was
born (and that is a success! ) on 13 Apri l , I
became the 13th World Champion in '85 (8 +
5 = 1 3) , winning by a score of 13- 1 1 , and this
game - the 94th between me and Karpov (9
+ 4) was played on 3 October (the 3rd day of
the lOth month) and became my 13th win
over Karpov! How can I avoid being super­
stitious? !
 GAM E 23

Karpov-Kasparov Black draws up his forces in the fami liar

"hedgehog" formatio n , which is notable for
English Opening its solidity. This suited me, although it must
be admitted that in the re sultin g m anoeuvr­
A similar competitive situation arose be­
ing play Karpov has a reputation as a great
fore game 24 of the previous match , but now
specialist.
Karpov had to win both the remaining �ames
- a virtually impossible task, although It was 9 Rdl Nbd7
worth trying to draw the match . 10 b3 ReS
Manv expected a very sharp clash , but
Black cannot get by without this move ,
Karpo� had to take account of his experience
and he makes it before ca st l i n g so as to avoid
in the previous year's 24th game , where play
,

(in reply to 10 . . . 0-0) 1 1 Qh4 followe d by

in this unaccustomed manner (even in a more
Bh6. True, after 1 1 . . . Ne4 1 2 N xe4 Bxa 1 1 3
favourable psychological situation - after a
Bh6 Bf6 the position looks equal .
win in the 22nd game and a miraculous
escape in the 23rd) ended in failure. 11 Bb2 0-0
12 Qe3
1 Nf3
In such positions the s t ruggl e revolves
A surprise. The Ex-Champion evidently
around the d5 square , and here the immedi­
wanted to avoid the rather hackneyed
ate 1 2 Nd5 was possible . This appears to be
Queen's Indian variations.
"refuted" by 1 2 . . . Bxd5 ] 3 cxd5 Rc2 , prac­
Nf6 tically forcing the sacrifice of the queen : 1 4
2 c4 b6 Rd2 N h 5 (14 . . . Rxh2 1 5 Qxh2 Ne4 16 Rd4
3 g3 c5 favours White) 1 5 Rxc2! B xd4 1 6 N xd4. But I
4 Bg2 Bb7 had no wish to try and defend this position
5 0-0 g6 with an ''extra" queen ! Other "protest
actions" by Black are also easily suppressed :
The double fianchetto occurred three
1 2 . . . NcS 1 3 Nxe5 N x d5 1 4 Qh4 Bxe5 1 5
times in the very first match between us,
BxeS dxeS 1 6 BxdS , o r 1 2 . . . hS 1 3 Oxa7
when it demonstrated its reliability . I n the
Bxd5 14 cxd5 Nc5 15 Qa3 Ra8 1 6 Qh4 Nxd5
1 1th game Karpov chose a slow development
_ 17 Qd2 with a clear a dv an t age . However , the
plan 6 b3 Bg7 7 Bb2 0-0 8 e3 etc . , wh1le
simple 12 . . . a6! and only then . . . h5 would
-

the 1 3th and 20th games went 6 Nc3 Bg7 7 d4

have given B lack good prospects.
cxd4 8 N xd4 Bxg2 9 Kxg2 .
Therefore Karpov d-oes-licit hurry. but
6 d4 cxd4 manoeuvres . . .

7 Qxd4
12 • . . ReS
This time Karpov avoids "superfluous"
exchanges. A useful move: by defending his e-pawn .
Black frees his queen .
7 Bg7
8 Nc3 d6 13 Racl a6

131
 1 32 London-Leningrad Championship Games
Strictly speaking, this concludes the followed by f3-f4 and Ne3 White obtains a
" compulsory program " , and now the free favourable (Karpovia n ! ) position .
one has to be demonstrated! Something similar to 16 . . . RfS occurred
in the 1 908 Tarrasch-Lasker World Cham­
14 Ba t
pionship Match (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Nj6
The bishop is moved to a defended square 4 0-0 d6 5 d4 Rd7 6 Nc3 Be7 7 Rei exd4 8
- this prophylaxis can be understood . B ut Nxd4 Nxd4 9 Qxd4 Bxb5 10 Nxb5 0-0 11 Bg5
one cannot help thinking that White's play is h6 12 Bh4 Re8 13 Radl Nd7 14 Rxe7 Rxe7 15
insufficiently energetic to cause Black any Qc3 Re5l 16 Nd4 ReS! 1 7 Qb3 Nb6 etc . ) . 80
discomfort. years later the rook is in a more dangerous
position - there are still m any pieces on the
14 .•. ReS
hoard !
Here the rook will help in carrying out the Of course , it is not a question of the threat
typical "hedgehog" un dermining moves of . . . Ng4: hy controlling the d5 square and
. . . b5 and . . . dS, and in addition Black assisting . . . d5 , the rook performs useful
prepares to switch his queen at a8 . work. It is not easy for the opponent to attack
it with his passive minor pieces. There is also
IS a4
a psychological aspect to the provocative
Karpov wishes to ''forget" for ever about rook move: it is hard for the opponent to
0 0 0b5 . avoid thinking about it, and about the desire
to trap it, hut there arc few resources for
IS ... Qa8
doing this. Tarrasch , incidentally, became
16 Nel
carried away by thoughts of trapping the
White foresees the exchange of bishops, rook, and in the end he lost the game . .
and the transfer of his knight via g2 to dS . . .
17 Bxb7 Qxb7
It is hard to explain the desire which
18 f3
suddenly arose in me to play freshly, origi­
nally and boldly. A fter m aking my next A necessary move. On 18 Nd3 Black
move. I myself was frightened by my own (p r ovided he is not tempted by the trappy
boldness! 18 . . . Nc5 19 Nxc5 bxc5 with an attack on
the b3 pawn and, in view of 20 . . . Ng4, on
16 ... Rf5!?
f2 ; then c omes 20 Qd3.' Qxb3? 21 Rbl Qa3 22
Rd2 and Ra2) obtains a good game in two
ways: 1 8 . . . Nc5 19 Nxc5 Rxc5 , and 1 8 . . .
d5 19 cxd5 Nxd5 20 Oe4 N7f6 21 Qg2 Oa8 .
18 . .. h5

The aim of this move is defensive

concern about the rook!
19 Ng2

White would no doubt like to avoid allow­

ing the rook back - 1 9 Nd3 , but Black has
everything ready for . . . d5 .

a c d e g h
19 ... ReS

1 9 . . . d5 would have been the logical

also considered 1 6 . . . Bxg2 17 Nxg2 consequence of the preceding play. But after
RhS, hut then by 1 8 Qf3 Qxf3 19 exf3 exchanges - 20 cxd5 Nxd5 21 NxdS Rxd5 22
 Game 23 133

Rxd5 Qxd5 23 Bxg7 Kxg7 - White would

8
nevertheless h ave gained a sligh t initiative by
24 Rc7 , and, in order not to mak e life easy for
Karpov, I decided to maintain the tension,
6
by returning the rook to "base" . A loss of
time? Yes, hut the position allows it. The 5
" large pawn" - Rf5 - can return , but the f3 4
pawn cannot.
3
20 Bb2
2
A strange transfer of the bishop - the
manoeuvres of the black rook would appear
to have unsettled Karpov. 20 Nf4 did not
work because of 20 . . . Bh6, but 20 Qd3
followed by Ne3 would have been in the
spirit of the position . White needs exchanges: the weaknesses in
his position make his chances worse in a
20 .• . Rcc8 complicated struggle with the queens on.
21 Ba3
26 NxbS
The impression might be gained that the 27 QxbS Qxb5
black hedgehog is still destined m e rely to 28 axbS Rb8
stay on the defensive: after all , neither . . . b5
nor . . . d5 is possible . But in fact Black has It would appear that Black has a clear
achieved something - the opponent's pawn advantage.
chain has been weakened. And he 29 Bb2!
begins . . .
White still has resources. He even hopes
21 ... NcS for 29 . . . Rxb5 30 B xf6 B x f6 3 1 N d 5 Reb8 32
22 Rbl Ne6! Nxf6+ exf6 33 R d3 , when he can play on for
The knight has occupied and immediately a long time without risk, and has the prospect
abandoned the excellent square c5 , for the of a favourable adjournment. But it is not
sake of carrying out Black's chief strategic essential to capture immediately.
task - the advance . . . b5 . 29 ... Rb7!
23 Qd3 Nc7 Black is ready for 30 Bxf6 Bxf6 31 N dS Bg7
After . . . b5 the position will simplify to a 32 b6 Reb8 and . . . e6. "Something'' told me
draw. 23 . . . Nd7 ! ? promised interesting that there would not now be an adjourn­
possibilities, but my aggressive urge (16 . . . ment . . .
Rf5!?) had gone - from the position in the 30 b6 Reb8
match I needed a draw! 31 b4
24 Nf4 bS! Not as much in the hope of 31 . . . Rxb6 32
Bxf6Bxf6 33 NdS, so much as to defend this
(see followin�: diagram) pawn with the knigh t .
Success! The pawn sacrifice is, of course, 31 Nd7!
only temporary. 32 Bxg7

25 cxbS axbS
26 NxbS (see following diagram)
134 London- Leningrad Championship Games
After 32 . . . Kxg7 33 Nd3 Rxb6 the b4
pawn is a weakness, for the moment all four
rooks arc on the board, and therefore
Karpov offered a draw. The offer was under­
standably accepted , and at that the battle for
the title of World Champion concluded.
It is often asked why in such cases the
match conti nues. I t is all very simple: not j ust
the title of World Champion is at stake , but
also a monetary prize . The winner's share ­
five eighths of the prize fund - goes to the
player who scores 1 2112 points .
a e g h
 G A M E 24

Kasparov-Karpov which was possible after 9 Nc1 Ne4, but 9

Qc2! is objectively stronger. and playing
Queen 's Indian Defence openly for a draw often fails to achieve i ts
aim.
I d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6 9 h6
3 Nf3 b6 10 Bxf6 Bxf6
4 g3 11 Nc3
The concluding games in the matches I White is harmoniously developed, with a
have played have usually taken the form of a spatial advantage and clear play in the
fierce , tense (and at times dramatic) centre . B lack ' s position is solid . but passive .
struggle . It is sufficient to recall my en­
11 g6!
counters with Belyavsky and Korchnoi . The
white pieces , when the opponent has to win Essential prophylaxis - the routine 1 1 . . .
at all costs, are a good help. But here I had no d6 would have run into 12 Ng5 ! , e . g . 12 . . .
wish to go in for play on a large scale with 4 hxg5 1 1 Bxb7 Ra7 14 Bg2 (14 . . . Bxd4? 15
Nc3 - too much mental effort had been Nb5) , with an obvious advantage to White .
devoted to the solving of the grandiose
12 Rad l
competitive task. Any "supernatural"
measures for sharpening the struggle could A continuation of the same unsophisti­
be left to Black. cated strategy - placing the pieces close to
the centre , control over which guarantees
4 ... Bb7
White a quiet life .
Karpov usually plays 4 . . . Ba6, but in this
12 d6
game he is aiming for a more fresh , even if
. • .

13 h4
inferior position.
5
This appears to clash with White 's preced­
Bg2 Bb4+
ing ''lulling" play , but it is perfectly justified
6 Bd2 aS
- Black cannot allow h4-h5: 13 . . . Bg7? !
7 0-0 0-0
1 4 hS gxh5 15 d5 ! (15 Ng5? Qxg5 16 Bxb7 Ra7
8 BgS
1 7 Bg2 h4 leads to unnecessary compli­
The alternative 8 Bf4 Be7 9 Nc3 Ne4 with cations) 1 5 . . . c5 1 6 Nh4 - White's strong
inevitable simplification would appear to suit centre and the opponent's weakened K-side
White better, but 8 BgS is also quite good ­ assure him of a clear positional advantage .
he aims to obtain a spatial advantage i n the
13 ... h5!
centre , agreeing in return to allow the
14 e4
opponent the two bishops.
14 d5 would have set Black more difficult
8 .. Be7
problems - after 1 4 . . . e5 15 Ne4 Bg7 1 6
.

9 Qc2!
Nfg5 followed b y f2-f4 White would have
Again White avoids the simplification gained good prospects on the K-side. But

135
136 London-Leningrad Championship Games
was there any need to take on additional
obligations?
14 Nd7
. . .
15 e5! ?
White's forces are deployed actively
enough for him to cross the demarcation line ,
and in addition it is unpleasant for Black to
have his queen in opposition with the rook at
d l . It is interesting that, soon after the
match, in a game with Korchnoi (Tilburg,
1986) , the Ex-Champion made an attempt to
improve White's play - 15 Rfe l ! ? After
15 . . . Bg7 16 NbS Qb8! 17 d5 e5 18 b3 Qd8
19 a3 Bh6 20 b4 White secured a persistent
strategic initiative, but by resourceful de­
fence Black saved the half point.
15 Bg7
16 d5?!
o b c d e g h moral) advantage- it would be very difficult
By no means an active step - White is
aiming to simplify the position as much as
possible , by clearing the centre . The re­
strained 16 Rfe 1 , completing his develop­
ment, is more logical . Now in the event of
16 . . . dxe5 17 Nxe5 Bxg2 18 Kxg2 NxeS 19
dxe5 Qe7 20 f4 followed by Ne4 White stands
a little better, but a draw is the most probable
result. But if Black avoids simplificatio n,
then after 16 . . . Qe7 1 7 exd6 cxd6 1 8 Nd5
Qd8 19 Nf4 Nf6 20 Ng5 White obtains
unpleasant pressure (in some cases a de­
structive piece sacrifice becomes a reality) .
Instead of 1 8 Nd5 , a quiet positional plan is
also quite possible - 1 8 d5 e5 19 Nd4,
securing a persistent ini tiative. As we see ,
White had a choice , whereas against the
pseudo-active move in the game B lack has
only one defence , but a quite sufficient one .
16 ... Nxe5!
Of course, not 1 6 . . . exd5? 17 e6 with a
strong attack .
17 NxeS Bxe5
18 dxe6 Bxg2
19 exti + Kxt7!
I was counting on 1 9 . . . Rxf7 20 Qxg6+
Rg7 21 Qe6+ Kh7 22 Qf5 + Kg8 (22 . . .
Kh6? 23 Kxg2 Qxh4 24 Rhl Qg4 25 Rxh5+ !
Qxh5 2 6 Rhl - in the endgame White has a
clear advantage) with a draw by perpetual
check, and l underestimated the capture with
the king.
20 Kxg2
One more move - 2 1 Ne4 - and B lack's
position will be depressing, but Karpov had
foreseen a clear-cut positional solution .
20 . • . Bxc3!
A favourable exchange - the knight was
much stronger than the bishop. Now the
game goes into a rather tedious heavy-piece
ending, in which , thanks to his more flexible
pawn chain, Black retains a minimal (largely
for White to lose such a position.
21 Qxc3 Qf6
(see following diagram)
22 Qxf6 +
Things are quieter this way, but neverthe­
less 22 Qd2 was better, keeping the queens
on. After the possible 22 . . . Kg7 23 Rfe l
Rae8 24 Rxe8 Qf3 + ! 2 5 Kgl Rxe8 26 Rei
Re4 ! 27 Rxe4 Qxe4 28 b3 Kf6 29 Qh6! White
is in no danger. After the exchange of queens
Black acquires a slight plus thanks to the
possibility of activating his king.
 Game 24 1 37
d5 the ending was again bound to finish in a
8
draw: 29 cxd5 RxdS 30 Rxd5+ Kxd5 (30 . . .
7 cxd5?! is clearly worse because of 31 f3 d4+
32 Kd3 Kd5 33 g4 Ke5 34 g5! Kf4 35 Kxd4
6
Kg3 36 Ke5 Kxh4 37 f4 Kg4 38 f5, with
5 advantage to White in the coming queen
4
ending) 31 Kf4! b5 32 Kg5 b4! 33 Kxg6 c5 34
f4 c4 (in the pawn race Black is two tempi
3 ahead, but even this is insufficient to win) 35
2 f5 c3 36 bxc3 b3 37 f6 b2 38 f7 b l = Q + 39 Kg7
Qb7 40 Kg8 etc.
29 f3 Rh8
a b c d e g h
Preventing g3-g4.
30 Rei Rb8
22 Kxf6
This is more of a psychological attack than
• . .

23 a4!
a real one, but nevertheless White must
A very important move i n the positional prepare for possible activity by the opponent
sense , otherwise Black plays . . . a4 and it on the b-file.
becomes uncomfortable for White's Q-side
31 Kd3+ Kf6
pawns. Besides this, the rook at a8 would ·

32 Re4
gain the additional possibility of active
manoeuvres along the 5th rank . This involves a little trap - 32 . . . b5? 33
cxbS cxd5 34 b4! , and unexpectedly the roles
23 . . • Rae8
24 Rfel
are reversed , but 32 Kd4 was much stronger,
Rxel
dispelling all ghosts after 32 . . . b5 33 axb5
Directly played: 24 . . . ReS was more flex­ cxb5 34 c5 .
ible.
32 ... dS
25 Rxel Rd8
Simple and convincing - slight caution is
Black's idea is to play . . . d5 , after which it still demanded of White .
will be easier for him to attack the weak
white pawns on the Q-side. 33 cxdS cxdS
34 Re2 bS
26 Rd l c6 35 Kd4!
All the same Black cannot get by without
White's task is more difficult after 35
this move. 26 . . . Re8 27 Kf3 ReS 28 Rd4
axb5? Rxb5 .
would have led to equality.
35 bxa4
27 Kf3 KeS
36 Kxd5 Rb3
28 Ke3
37 Ke4 Rb4+
If B lack is still hoping for something, he
has to play . . . d5 . 37 . . . Ke6 is adequately met by 38 Kf4 .

28 • • • Rf8 38 KdS Rb5 +

39 Kd4 Rb4+
This guarantees . . . that the game will be
adjourned! However, a straightforward With enviable stubborness Black drags out
analysis shows that after the thematic 28 . . . the game to a pointless adjournment.
138 London-Leningrad Championship Games
40 Kd5 Rb3 courteously informing me by telephone the
41 Ke4 following day that there would be no ad­
journment session . . .
Here the game was (at last) adjourned,
Black's sealed move was 41 . . . Rb4 + .
and the Ex-Champion made the last move (a
"secret" one) in the match , before
 PO STS CRI PT
This concludes my account of 48 games*
from two matches for the World Champion­
ship (plus the 'shadow' of a further 48 from
the 1 984/5 match ) , in which I have talked
about cunning stratagems, both chess and
human , about strategic plans, and about
match psychology. This has frequently
strayed beyond the bounds of normal chess
routines, but h as in the end returned to
customary channels.
Yes , the lessons of the feverish course of
chess history in recent years have confirmed
very clearly that off-the-board scheming
does not help in achieving its aim, if it is not
supported by victory at the board. I hope that
my detailed opinion and commentary,
passed through the perception prism of a
direct participant i n the events, which con­
stitutes a detailed chess and psychological
analysis of the situations arising, will help the
wider chess public to gain a better grasp of
the deep processes of matches for the World
Championship, and to understand, or more
precisely to sense the incredible tension
concealed behind each game played at the
highest level.
The chess connoisseur will notice a slight
disparity between certain assessments made
in this book and in my previous book on the
1985 match. In my opinion , this is a positive
factor, since it enables the dynamics of the
duel to be better understood, and in addition
it gives documentary evidence of the changes
within a period of a year both in my chess
This postscript has been amended slightly since, like
the foreword, it was written for Kasparov's combined
<Iecount of the 1 985 and 1 986 matches - cf. the
footnote on p. vii (Translator's 11ote) .
139
views, and in chess theory itself, which has
been developing so rapidly in recent times.
The postscript to the 1985 match, written
in December of that year, should in my
opinion reveal to the reader the atmosphere
preceding the return match , and make more
appreciable and understandable those feel­
ings and that mood which seized me in the
first months as Champion, when I wanted
sincerely to believe that the most serious
tests were already behind me.
I think that the short review of the match
and the initial conclusions made then were
on the whole confirmed by the course of the
return match , although with some reser­
vations. Without the slightest doubt , in the
period between the matches Karpov did an
enormous amount of work , and prepared a
mobile opening repertoire, aimed at the
development of theoretical discussions dur­
ing the course of the match . I ntending to
battle for the demonstration of his rights in
a l l fundamental creative debates, Karpov
concerned himself very seriously over widen­
ing his arsenal of playing methods. I am
convinced that all this would have been quite
sufficient to give him victory in 1 985 , but by
the return match I in turn had managed to
work through the necessary amount of in­
formation and had largely eliminated those
defects which had been revealed in my pre­
vious meetings with Karpov. Essentially, the
return match broke the traditional stereo­
types about 'home' and 'away' grounds in
Kasparov-Karpov matches.
In the first instance it must be mentioned
that Karpov managed to reach a new quali­
tative level of opening preparation , largely
using the experience accumulated in our
140 London-Leningrad Championship Games
previous matches. My traditional advantage
in the initial stage, declared by m any com­
mentators (and by Karpov himself) to be the
foundation of my previous victory, melted
away in the return match . Moreover, by
skilfully combining purposeful work in the
most critical directions with deep strategic
anticipation of the opponent's plans, for the
greater part of the match Karpov held the
opening initiative. I think that now the
causes of the fiasco suffered by the Grlinfeld
Defence wil l be understandable.
I n employing the new opening, we were
counting on the conservatism of Karpov's
opening outlook and on his unwillingness to
engage in mutually dangerous theoretical
discussions (of which I already had positive
experience from my employment of the g2-
g3 variation against the Nimzo-I ndian
Defence in the 1985 match) . There was a
danger that the new opening might well show
signs of cracking, on encountering a
fundamentally changed approach by the
opponent to the solving of opening prob­
lems. This , of course , need not have hap­
pened , but during the course of the match I,
unfortunately, lacked flexibility and i n­
tuition . . .
On the other hand, Karpov's superiority in
the concluding stage of the game and i n
purely technical positions disappeared, and
at times he encountered difficulties precisely
in these situations. It can be ascertained that
the mutual creative exchange, inevitable
during such a prolonged duel, largely neu­
tralized the difference in the playing methods
resulting from the features of the two
players' styles. B ut for all the outward parity
of strength and possibilities, Karpov never­
theless fell behind. The great intensification
of his preparations before the return match
proved i nsufficient compared with the
thorough work in all directions, which had
consistently been carried out in my team over
the course of several years. In addition, a far
from minor role was probably played by the
purely age-related ability to assimilate the
new . . .
Of course , only a thorough analysis of the
games annotated in this book can help to
clarify the logical development of events and
conclusively put everything in its place .
But who, better than the participants
themselves in matches at the supreme level,
can make a maximum contribution to the
development of chess?! This was the reason
for my open letter to Anatoly Karpov , pub­
lished in the magazine 64, 1 987, No. 4, an
extract from which is given below:
I am appealing to you not in your
capacity as editor-in-chief of 64, but as my
long-standing opponent in a number of
gripping encounters at the chess board.
Unfortunately, games from World Cham­
pionship Matches often remain in history
with superlicial, instant commentaries.
made on the spot. This lends added im­
portance to intelligent commentaries,
made after the elapse of some time, when
passions have died down . Only a detailed
analysis, based on an impartial approach
to the solving of chess problems , can give a
complete picture of the struggle. And here
the decisive word belongs to the partici­
pants themselves .
I regret that your post-match comments
have created a distorted picture of events.
References to chance or bad luck can
hardly be considered serious arguments.
. . . I should like to draw your attention
to radical disagreements in our chess
assessments, in particular regarding the
24th. deciding game of the 1985 match.
You have repeatedly stated that you could
have easily won this game and thereby
changed the course of chess history. For
my part, I have upheld the opposite point
of view, one which, moreover, I have
supported with analytical evidence . B ut
you have not once found the time to give a
concrete reply to my objections. I am
convinced that a creative duel in print
between us will lead to a sharp increase in
the popularity of chess in our country and
throughout the world . . . Therefore I am
offering you an open chess discussion . ! am
.
convinced that only time and constant
analytical searching can determine the
 Postscript
true worth of games played , and give a
genuine picture of the struggle.
Karpov's reply, in which he pleaded that
he was exceptionally busy before his match
with Sokolov, essentially rejected my offer o f
an open chess discussion . In point o f fact, in
his letter Karpov once again expressed his
opinion about the unfortunate course of
circumstances i n the 24th game .
Here is an extract from it:
I must straight away admit that your
letter took me unawares. You write that
my "post-match comments h ave created a
distorted picture of events" , and draw
attention to the 24th game of our 1 9H5
match . I think that it is precisely here that
the logical disparity lies. You yourself talk
about the "picture of events" . But the
events in fact were such that White missed
141
very good practical (but by no means
analytical) winning chances.
. . . It must be agreed that, from the
course of play in that 24th game of the 1 985
match , about which you write, a win for
White would have been more logical than
a win for Black.
And so, a discussion did not result, but one
cannot disregard Karpov's categorical
assertion about the unfair outcome of the
24th gam e , and hence of the match as a
whole.
These words sounded strange after the
conclusion of the return match , which gave
convincing evidence of the rightfulness of my
victory in 1985. And it is well known that
history, even chess history, does not have a
subjunctive mood .
 I N DEX O F O PE N I N G S
Catalan Opening - 20

English Opening - 23

Griinfeld Defence
4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Bf4 - l
3 Nf3 Bg7 4 g3 c6 5 Bg2 d5 - 3, 13
4 Bf4 Bg7 5 e3 - 5, 9, 1 1
4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Qb3 dxc4 6 Qxc4 0-0 7 e4 Bg4 - 15, 17
4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Qb3 dxc4 6 Qxc4 0-0 7 e4 Na6 - 19

Nimzo-Indian Defence
4 Nf3 c5 5 g3 Nc6 6 Bg2 d5 - 2
4 Nf3 c5 5 g3 cxd4 - 4

Petrotrs Defence - 6

Queen's Gambit
3 0 0 0 Be7 4 cxd5 exd5 5 Bf4 c6 - 7
3 0 0 0 Be7 4 cxd5 exd5 5 Bf4 Nf6 - 8
3 0 0 0 Be7 Nf3 Nf6 5 B g5 h 6 6 Bx£6 - 10, 12, 22

Queen's Indian Defence

4 Nc3 Bb4 5 Bg5 - 18
4 g3 Ba6- 21
4 g3 Bb7 - 24

Ruy Lopez - 14, 1 6

143