LEXEI , — ae) ra NeaFIRE ON BOARD PART II: 1997-2004 PVE (Th Alexei Shirov has dazzled and inspired a generation of chess fans PIM EM PL UCM ciel me-lecclod ie Ren CRM RCI Wee ALI From el Fal ein PCR oN Morel Ike Mono Meee] No and inventive chess players of the modern era, an argument backed oe AU MUR UCPalne Rr Aeele- OCEAN) eee folel iT 1p Me MONS elcome AM ek moe} Ties ea M i RMA CL Meinl ne atc lee cee cole ao) ol the chess world since that year and presents a delightful collection form MAW a Re oael Ro col ela eM Me doa oic] ee a aC a|6 (oe PS te AM ecco aC) ol oe ne Roel ln re) ML ® Acompilation of violent, attacking and imaginative chess ® Written by one of the world's leading players Since becoming a Grandmaster in 1990, Alexei Shirov has firmly Cre-lelare Ma usc me Taare Lares tamed SoM [eae i=) Cele ATOM a string of tournament victories to his name. Highlights of his career so far include a runners-up spot in the 2000 FIDE World Championship, plus an impressive match victory over the BGN World Corer eM UCL nm Acc lttL ome koa) ante) eI ROLSA Le in the 2004 Sarajevo super-GM tournament, his winning margin over his nearest rival being an emphatic 1/2 points. ISBN 1-85744-382-9 19 78 MM 01 0 uted in the US by the Globe Pequot Press - =a! Ad A Ola as Reon a 2: FREON 199 ee ee cn. RARE occa 23.70 EURFIRE ON BOARD PART II: 1997-2004 ALEXEI SHIROV EVERYMAN CHESS Glou hers ple www.everymanc!First published in 2005 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman Publishers ple), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London ECLV OAT ce pyright © 2005 Alexei Shirov First published 2005 by Gloucester Publishers ple ‘The right of Alexei Shirov to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in ac cordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All tights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, clectronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or other mission of the publisher. ¢, without prior ps British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available ftom the British Library. ISBN | 85744 3829 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT. tek: 020 7539 7600. fax: 020 7379 4060 email: info@everymanchess.com website: www.everymanchess.com Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work under license from Random House Ine. EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Cl Chief advisor: Garry Kasparov Commissioning editor: Byron Jacobs ‘Typesetting by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. ted by Jonathan Tait ver design by Horatio Monteverde. Production by Navigator C Printed and bound in the US by Versa Press. CONTENTS Foreword ‘The Struggle without Limits (1997-2004) Notes on Creativity Selected Games Index of Opponents Index of Openings wy 16 21 191 192FOREWORD Almost cight years have passed since my first book Fire on Baad was published. \ period of many changes, both in my life and in the chess world in general, New time controls, new for mats for official competitions, and a new meaning of the term ‘world championship’. All this can but when I think about the current attitude of be seen from both positive and negative sid players towards: che today, it isn’t easy to be particularly optimistic, not compared with the times of Fire on Board 1. Viverything; in chess is much more materialistic and less respectful to- wards ethics and morals than it was before, in my opinion. I remember that during, thos © years, especially when [ was in top sporting form, L often felt like writing a sequel to my first book, but something always stopped me... so difficult was it to concentrate on purely ch of the | nd not start turning my book into a ‘political weapon’, such as Antichess by Victor Korchnoi. Fortunately, in the summer of 2003 [ managed to convince myself that it was the right moment to begin revising my best games, thanks to a aspect long, break between two important tournaments. ‘The analytical work started successfully and | would become really fascinated finding new ideas and polishing long variation tees. I felt as excited as I did during the preparation of my first book, so my aim to forget politics and concentrate on chess was achieved. But fighting for time was less successful: analysing some of the games took so many hours (or even days, as was the ease for the game against Karpov) that my next tournament, to be followed by another, was rapidly approaching, Therefore I took the decision to try not to spoil my preparations and to continue the book in a slower fashion. Not all my tournaments were a success (something similar happened to me while writing the first book too), but when [ won the Sarajevo tournament in May 2004, I decided that it was time for ‘victory’ in the ficld of writing, as well. In two months the second collection of my best games was finished. How can I cor pare this book with the first volume? I remember that previously I didn’t like to mention which moves were produced by the computer, but I believe this impossible to avoid nowadays. Analytical engines are so advanced that when one really wants to discover theFire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 truth about certain positions it’s necessary to use the external help. At the same time I found it ial brain, because my ideas often scemed bet rather interesting to try to ‘compete’ with the artific ter than Frfg’s suggestions. (Punnily, I would still have «0 use / Hopefully 1 was able to reduce the number of errors to a minimum but, unfortunately, the jIz to prove my point of view!) commentaries are more technical and less creative than in former times. Nowadays I don’t like to give a clear evaluation if [am not sure about it myself, because I feel there is a big difference between giving general explanations based on strategical rules, and trying to give the deepest evaluations while still remaining within human possibilities. Despite having changed slightly the method of analysing my games, It criteria in selecting them for the book. First of all I wanted to present to the reader: unusual and sacrifices, the best attacks and endgames, the most memorable games and also some ‘ive on Board in 1996, although my play has advanced since then in d to use the same ides painful moments — just as in many respects I leave it to the readers judgment whether my recent game: ones. But if you want again to enter the universe of razor-sharp and ‘tasteful’ chess, then my new are more enjoyable than the old book is for you. Alex Shirov Riga, February 2005 CHAPTER ONE The Struggle without Limits I look at the final sentences of my previous work, completed in 1996, and find these words Now that this book is finally finished (jt really took too long!) my to remember where I wanted to come back eight years ago and realise there is something in me that will never change: whenever for some r the highest level. Writing a book is good, but playing... is more interesting! And now, before I start preparing for my games again, I would like to contemplate this important period a lite. When I finished that old text in July 1996 I wanted to deliver my book to the publisher at once, but I was unable to conclude some technical analys uncertainty led to a continval instability in my p| September-October at the Yerevan Olympiad and in Tilburg (the events that end Fire ait Boar), but some very stupid lo: I had definitely to end my first book and think how to improve my che Although I adjusted quite well to the ‘computer changes’ of those times, using the internet to update my s and Fritz for analysing engines didn’t yet offer much help in discovering new ideas and creating, new opening concepts. 1 still needed a lot of ‘human contact’ and this was not easy to arrange while living with my fam- ily in Tarragona, chesswise quite an isolated place. Besides which, many of my chess friends were not yet accustomed to going online to exchange ideas and analyses. ‘Therefore I took any oppor uni real comeback will start!’ [ try son my results worsen, [always want to return to of my games until November. This . Lremember playing many good games in s in those tournaments, One 's deprived me from having real suc dlay y databat ritical positions, | could also see that the analyti to have shor ) training s Apart from Zigurds Lanka, Jordi Magem and Mikhail Rytshagov, whom [ had known and worked with for years, I should also mention Henrik Teske, Daniel Fridman, Kevin Spraggett, Alexander Cherniaev and, later on, Tal Shaked, who all helped me on various occasions. When I ed with other players I always intended to check with a computer any idea that seemed ing, and try to get deep enough into the positions, years earlier, Such work always required a lot of time and [ remember Teske saying ‘What a de voted guy you are!’, and all L could say in my defence was that I was only able to be like that with ions with other playe analy inter ible a few omething that was impc other players around me; at home T would be much lazier. Funnily, a few days after that conver sation | had to play against this ‘ideological opponent’, and that encounter opens the games see- tion of the book.Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 In my tournaments I still played with inconsistency, combining good games with some in- credible oversights in better positions, such as blundering the queen in first two @) rounds of Groningen 1996. And when I had a dismal failure in Linares 1997, sharing last place, it was easy So when I to become pessimistic. Some interesting ideas in some games, but the final result en though I felt that the months of work should pay off one day. But suddenly I won that tourna ment scoring 4 out of 5! My next stop was Dos Hermanas, more or less an elite event. Once again I started badly, so the final result of 50% was especially important for me to regain confi- dence in my play. And when a month later I shared first place with Topalov in Madtid, I alr had a feeling I could have done even better, something that a few months before was impos: to imagine. It scemed that the crisis was over, but then another problem appeared, something that can of- ten happen to a professional player. The Madrid tournament finished in May and I had no good invitations until Tilburg in September, so [ had to spend more than four months without playing a game at a classical time limit. | decided to make a more long-term preparation, first of all for the World Championship in Groningen (December 1997) that was to be played for the first time under the climination system, so I had to be especially concerned about possible rapid chess tie- breaks. [ took part in some active tournaments in Spain and saw that my way of thinking in chess was a little slow went to a small Category 17 tournament in ‘Ter Apel I didn’t have many expectations, ev ‘ady ble mance turned ou When I went to Tilburg I felt rather unconcentrated and stale, so my perte to be another failure: only 5 out of LH, losing against Kasparov, Kramnik and Svidler, all of whom scored three points more than me and shared the first three places. My form in view of the World Championship seemed critical once aration didn’t make up for my mistakes in other parts of the game. again, as good theoretical prey After Tilburg | began working permanently with the Estonian GM Mikhail Rytshagov, and this change helped me drastically improve the level of my opening preparation. It’s truc that Zigurds Lanka and [had also discovered a great many ideas in the Ruy Lopez, Sicilian and King’s Indian, but it was Mikhail who assisted me in the formation of a complete repertoire. When in November 1997 I invited him to my flat in Riga for the first time, even after six hours of analysing the Najdorf Mikhail didn’t let me go to sleep, but insisted that we analyse other openings! In the first round in Belgrade (my next tournament) T was able to beat Gelfand with White ‘almost’ according, to our preparation. "The list of sporting achievements that [attained with Mikhail’s help is extensive and runs from Belgrade 1997 to Moscow 2002 (the Russia vs. the Rest of the World match) — almost five years of successful co-operation, For some reason, during the last two years I have performed better when going alone to the tournaments but still using the fruits of my work with him, Dur ing our years of analysing together, Mikhail and I have discovered so many theoretical novelties that I prefer make them the subject of my next book, which will deal with a selection of open ings and themes. I think that it is especially important for a coach to be able to work on the main lines of all the principal openings, and not just on those that he plays himself. Ln the World Championship in Groningen I didn’t get past the fifth round, having le Anand, but I still rated my result as a satisfactory one, beca formula well enough. But how to defeat the very best players such as Anand? I had to work even st against use [adapted to the new knockout harder. In January 1998 I started badly in Wijk aan Zee with only 1% points from the first four rounds, missing a simple win against Karpov, whom I’ve never yet beaten under a classical time The Struggle without Limits control. After that game I took a long walk on the North S¢ start scoring points, especially si ber now what my final conclus a beach, asking myself how to finally ince my play seemed strong and creative enough, 1 don’t remem jon wa s, but the win over Kramnik the next day was already quite an answer. This game marked the beginning of my relatively glorious period. Even though | spoiled my tournament a litte, losing to Salov in round 12 and finishing, equal third with of 13, it was now 100% clear that I could do better. My next tour V2 out the seven participants were also the seven highest rated players in the world at that moment, And when I went there I was able to have a clear conscience as regards the preparation I made, The Isracli GM Emil Sutovsky helped me d A, nent was Linares, one of the strongest tournaments in chess history, as ag both preliminary training and the tournament while Mikhail Rytshagov joined us for the last seven rounds In Linares | passed through all stages of mood: ‘pessimismy’ when I lost 10 Ai round; ‘optimism’ when I won good games against Ivanchuk, Topalov and Svidler, together with draws as Black against Kramnik, Kasparoy and Anand (everybody pkayed two games against each other); ‘realism’ when I lost to Ivanchuk from a nearly winning position; ‘euphoria’ after beating Topalov and Kramnik; and finally a ing against Svidler and hed the tournament in second place and in the first return to earth’ after lo: parov. Although I fini behind Anand, it was definitely my biggest ever success in ‘slow chess’. ne with b clrawing the last round ga [ill never forget that the ‘return to earth’ was only partial because, against my initial prinei- ples but influenced by one of my coaches in Linares, I accepted the offer of Luis Rentero Suarez, the fraudulent organizer (and also the President of the World Ches created by Kasparov), to contest a match with Kramnik after two and a half months in (Jacn, near Lina should have been pl s Council, an organiza Zora parov. Normally, the match s), in order to determine the challenger to yed by Anand, but he de the end | thought that my second place in the tournament of the best playel ered a serious argument for me conte ined and so the offer was passed over to me, In s might be consid- icial world championship, But now I am ing this uno! sure that the sporting criteria must be very strict and announced beforehand. Linares was envisaged as a classifica Despite the fa not tion fournament. crt at | consider my acceptance of the match against Kramnik to have been a il think that Rentero, Kasparov and Kramnik are themselves responsible for what they have done to me, all of them in general and each one in particular. grave error, Is But in March 1998 I couldn’t know what was going to happen, and at tha ¢ moment my aim : for the match against Kramnik in the best possible way, Although Kramnik was the world number two at that time, I considered my chances to be quite good, especially because of my positive score against Vladimir. [ thought that by neutralis openings I could outplay him in the subsequent stages of the game. was clears to prepa ing his advantage in the Almost immediately after Linares I went to Monaco to participate blindfold event ‘Melody Amber’. Mikhail Rytshagov went as my second, and almost immediately ated planning our strategi wainst Kramnik, during our seafront walks after the games. We decided to strengthen my team of trainers by inviting Lembit Oll and Valery Sa in the traditional rapid and we s 's for the match lov, and also invented a ‘preparation trick’... As | found it an interesting idea to employ the Griinfeld De 1 d4, ‘Thanks to a draw with the advantage against Kramnik and my last round vietory over Van Wely, I could make believe that the King’s Indian wa ce in the match, in Monaco I played the King’s Indian exclusively agains s my main and best prepared opening, Later on Kramnik admitred that he spent a lot of time preparing something against it for Cazorla, while 1 didn’t even think about employing it there again. éFire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Its interesting that, despite starting ‘as. badly preparation for the gam al always’ and not making much specific in Monaco, | played confidently and shared first place with Kramnik, ad of Ivanchuk, Anand, ‘Topaloy and Karpov among others. Everything indicated that I could even improve my form for the match in ( and I took the decision to go my native town of Riga to train for nearly one month with Rytshagov and Oll. Never in my life did [tak chess so seriously. Vale! azorla lov didn’t help me during preparation but his advice during, the in 1994.95 was match was of great importance, since his own experience in Candidates matche still quite fresh, ‘The mateh started at the end of May and went more or k expected. My team of trainers (Salov, Oll, Sutovsky and Rytshagov) worked to the maximum every day, and although T was not achieving a great deal with White (probably it dawns on everybody for the first time how difficul it is to refute the Petroff Defencel), I was nevertheless able to create some practical problems in the fourth game and win a long endgame. With Black I played the Griinfeld Defence experience many problems in the first and third games. I only suffered a litle in the fifth, so when | managed to save a Sas and didn’t suspect position, I felt that victory in the match was dose. ‘There were ten games to be played and I remember a curious decision before the eighth game: not to risk anything and play a peaceful variation (5 We2 in the Petrofi), because with the draw I forced Kramnik to play for a win at all costs in the ninth game. ill play for a win in my last game with White! But that wasn’t necessary as I was able to win the ninth game, even though I had some difficult moments after the opening. Winning the match, not getting any prize money but ‘securing? the match against Kasparov with the ‘prize fund? of two million dollars — what else could be asked from life? But the ava- la And even if he achieved it I could s nche of unexpected events was about to start... When I returned to my house in Tarragona | found it empty. My family relationship was al- ready not good over the final years (which may happen when sport absorbs everything), but in any case the change was drastic. ‘The same da ‘cleaned!’ by my already ex-wife. ‘The divorce procedure is always tough, especially with fou y I learnt that the main bank account had been -old child (my daughter Na talia) in the middle. Besides, 1 felt like a complete beginner with the Spanish legal system, be cause two or three years adapting to the society is not the same as living one’s whole life in the same place. 1 remember that it seemed completely absurd to me that you receive the divorce papers no earlier than one year after signing the conjugal separation agreement, and therefore 1 tried to speed up the process to the maximum, accepting terms that were not especially favour- able to me, [ had to forget completely about studying che circus ‘s for a period of time, and in those ances it would have been wise to cancel my participation in the Dortmund tournament due to take place in June-July 1998, But sometimes it isn’t easy not to fulfil your contractual obli- gations. Going to Dortmund was a grave error; it would have been better to try to reach an agreement with the organizers at any cost. During the tournament I was both very unconcentrated and stressed at the same time, The level of the world’s best players is so high that they don’t forgive you any moment of weakness but always take their chance, I scored just 2% points from 9 games, despite playing well ac some stages, and finished in last place. The chess magazines im- mediately ran the headline ‘Kramnik up (he was the winner), Shiroy down’. My worst suspicions, that they would ‘reclaim’ the Cazorla result, unfortunately became true two years later. In the games section the reader can see how I felt between tournaments, struggling with my bad form and waiting for the ‘confirmation’ of my match against Kasparov, which originally was 70 The Struggle without Limits scheduled to be played in Seville in November 1998. I tried to keep preparing seriously despite all the private troubles, and this time I was helped by the Armenian GM Vladimir Akopian, who arcet a year later becoming the world vice-champion. Step by achieved the biggest success in his arted getting back to my best form. During the Polanica Zdlroj tournament in August I received a phone call from Luis and he horrified me with the news that my match against Kasparov in Se . When I told him that it was his obligation, in ¢ step I Rentero, lle was cancelled and n nothing similar was being offer case, to pay me two hundred thou J in its plac nd dollars cancellation fee according, to the contract signed in March, his answer was that he would cat that contract and didn’t want to compensate me any- thing, After that conversation that man stopped standing in the chess world surprisingly quickly, perhaps becau isting for me of course, but he regained his © human memory is very short nowadays The bellish period began. First I had some conversatior jinst him in California for a prize fund of one million dollars instead of evo, and it seemed that an agreement to play under these conditions might be made. But then I received a fax from the other confidence man, this time the vice-president of the WCC, Dr, Wik liam Wirth, saying that California was also cancelled. I tried to get the match to Barcelona with the support of the Catalan government, but then — it was October 1998, only four months after Cazorla — Kasparov publicly announced that he was going to look for a new challenger. As for . That was the end of my ‘adventure? with the ‘unofficial world champion- ly recognized by FIDE as the legitimate one during, Prague's schism’ of s already ‘the champion’. I don’t think such an extreme violation of the rules has ever occurred in any other sport. Going back to 1998-99... My first memory of that period is that I had to continue emptying, n Cazorla was that | would pay them a decent sum for their work, and also a certain bonus for ‘winning’ the match. Salov and Ryt with people close to Kasparov about a possible match my tights... nothin, ship’, which was actua 2002 when Kramnik w: count. The agreement with my four trainers agov understood the situation and didn’t claim the bonus, but § mil Sutovsky seemed ‘un ware’ of what had been done to me by the WCC and demanded the whole sum. I decided to pay the bonus to all four, since they had all done the same work and deserved the same treat ment. This strong Israeli GM happened to be a typical example of the contemporary mercenary attitude, but fortunatel few people to whom | had to stop talking for long; Life would be terrible if | had to be like this more often. Finally, with broken family, finances and sporting rights, | started a friends I was able to calm down reasonably quickly and work on chess again, In November 1998 I already showed good play in a match against the Czech grandmaster Zbynek Hracek, winning in Ostrava. In January 1999 | beat Kramnik in the European Cup in Belgrade, combining it with my team’s victory against a club that was theoretically a lot stronger (they had Kramnik, Anand, Beliavsk ski on the top four boards). Unfortunately my club, Polonia Warsaw, lost in the final against a team including Van Wely, Adams and Timman, but my result (2442/3) was good enough. From Belgrade [ went directly to Wijk aan Zee and there Kramnik took his revenge. Since | also lost to Kasparov (my worst game in years — at that moment it was completely impossible for , he is one of ve new life, ‘Thanks to a few and Gelfand, while our team was myself, Oll, Rozentalis and Gdar ile was rather modest. But neither was it a fail- eserved to be included in this book. es: second equal in Monaco (with Topaloy, behind Kram- car before); me to concentrate when facing him), my final re ure: I scored 7 out of 13 and my game against Reinderman d Then I had another serie nik, but ahead of Anand and the rest of a field which was almost the same as the of succes: 17Fire on Board Part tl: 1997-2004 then second equal with Barcev in Sarajevo (behind Kasparov, but ahea ly my match against Judi J of Adams and Leko); Polgar in Prague in July, where | won five games with one draw. As it happens, I decided not to include any games from that match in th is book, because the wins were due more to preparation than ‘fire on board’, so they will be analysed in my next volt ne, Why did [ say ‘finally my match against Polgar’? Simply because, after the last game, my Elo rating was the highest in my career ~ more than 2760 — and if L di is then third place in the next ranki ured. But how not to go to Las Vegas when it was an off n't go to Las Vega ng list would already be s cial World Championship and so another real chance to get the title? Anand and Morozevich didn’t participate for some teas nik and I were the main favourites. against f ning, the second game with Black and then the tie-break. Nor could I avoid the tie-break against Gilberto Milos, so [ could see that my form was far from perfect. Nevertheless 1 won that match too, and then the nes one against Nigel Short in a very strange way. So I was already in the fifth round and faced the Romanian GM Liviu-Dieter N pecially well on, SO Kram- But the tournament wasn’t to be mine. First I lost with White an Sokolov and only went through to the next round by « sipeanu, who was playing very well but was not yet known. ‘The first game finished with a quick draw, while in the second one I played the “ultra-sharp’ 4 Ac3 in the Caro-Kann as White and got a strong initiative for the sacrificed pawn, However, Nisipeanu kept calm and defended accurately, so at a certain point I should have chos leading to a more or less forced draw. I will never understand why I chose a different continua tion which w ena line s very tisky and finally brought me elimination. I believe that with a draw | would have had slightly better chances in the tie-break, since 1 had already won many tic-breaks in World Championships. But of course Nisipeanu’s totally justified. As it happened Kramnik was also knocked out at the same stage, but without losing rating points, so he main- tained third place in the Elo lis victory was t because [lost 12 points. Although in Las Vegas I was probably closer than ever to the world title, | took and keep tak- ing my defeat calmly, because one can’t compare sport with an ‘off-board’ game. 1 simply de- cided to wait for another chance. My private life also changed. During the 1998 Olympiad in F Polish chess player, the futu long — less than two y born, [ realised that it w: My play b ta I initiated a romance with a woman grandmaster Marta Zielinska. Our relations did not last — but when on 7 November 1999 my second daughter, Mari: s increasingly difficult to combine top-level play with a father's ne unstable ag; [ played for the Spanis! duties. ss in the European Team Championship in Batumi (where team and scored 6 out of 8, which allowed me to achieve my highest in, Succ ever official Elo rating of 2751) was followed by a couple of strange defeats in the German Bundesliga — and then by a mediocre result in f tournament | had agreed to play in, hav- ing received the promise that Rentero would have nothing to do with it, though it still cost me a lot to concentrate): 44% out of 10, after dropping. piece in an absolutely drawn position as Black against Kasparoy, and not making use of the opening advantage in the other game against him, and also when playing Peter Leko. It was especially painful for me to lag behind Kramnik again, since this Linares result was used as ‘justification’ for the Kramnik-Kasparov match, which had likely been intended in 1998, but without taking my possible win into consideration. As we all know, the match was played in October-Novembs after s nares 2000) and ended with victory for Kramnik ome games that were a little strange; for example, Kasparov's loss in 25 moves, or his w offer on move 13 as White when his « ich situation was already de ince then ssperate. 12 The Struggle without Limits Kramnik has been recognized as the ‘world champion’, though fortunately there ate still people who doubt whether itis really possible After Linares I went again to Mona pated as always, and I achieved an even greater success than in 1998 and 1999, this time aking a clear rst place. But | have to admit that [was luckier in this event than in the avo previous on which is why I could not be really satisfied with the quality of my play. well, But when T went to Sarajevo in co where Anand and Kramnik, among others, partis he ame happened in the rapid tournament in Paris a month later, which | won as May I felt very well prepared once again and really wanted to win the tournament in which Ka an, parov participared. | was leading before the last two rounds but by losing to Sergei Movse who is always a dangerous opponent, I mi a Category 19 tournament was very good, but [only shared s me feel dissatisfied, especially as Kasparov s point more. After the tournament Ka id to the press: ‘What I wanted Icast would be Shirov’s victory in this tournament, be- chance. The final result (8 points out of L1) in sed my ond place with Adams and it left ‘ored half parov sa Sah he would then claim his rights again’. No comment. Soon after Sarajevo 1 won the four-player tournament in Merida, However, during the rest of the summer my play worsened again, Nevertheless, in Pokanica Zdroj in August, | played rather well, finishing in with my ‘habitual’ joint second place, on 6 out of 9, tying with Van Wely and behind Boris Gelfand, T also played many interesting novelties in the opening: reader for patience to wait until the thitd edition of Fire on Beard is published, which will hope fully be completed soon. Immediately after the Polanica tournament I left Poland, where | had so I ask the spent the past year and a half keeping a Spanish passport which made me feel a little uncomfortable. (And now my life is di : Tarragona, Riga, and Siauliai in Lithuania, which is the native city documents of divorce, because I yery tough. I still don’t know if 1 ~ and settled my unofficial residence in Riga, my native city, despite vided among three residenc of my wife.) This time there was no need to sign any offici was not married, but leaving my little daughter in Poland wa am going to be a good father for her, but at le st of all started preparing for the World Championship which was to take place in st [ have never denied my responsibilities In Riga f November-December in New Delhi, Apart from studying openings and preparing physically (fortunately, in Riga I have always , which allows me to run regularly), [had to adjust myself psychologically and, most of all, reduce the negative effect of the recent changes in my life. | also decided not to repeat the ‘Nisipeanu syndrome? and not be afraid of possible ti lived near the wood: -breaks in knockout events. During the Olympiad in Istanbul my personal life changed radically when 1 met my future wile, Victoria Cmilyte. At the World Championship, which started in New Delhi one week after already decided that we were going to become a family. Victoria helped me a lot while [ was approaching the finals of the Championship and, before leaving for ‘Tehran, | «le her a proposal, which she accepted. My cuphotia was slightly spoiled by losing to Anand, but in the end I did not consider myself a loser at all! In fact, reaching the finals of the World the Olympiad, w Championship was extremely important for me Most of my matches — against Onishchuk, Mikhail Gurevich, Gelfand and Bareev — ended 1-1 after the first two games. Mikhail Rytshagov (who also played in New Delhi, but lost to Etienne Bacrot in the first round) and Jordi Magem (who came to New Delhi to consult me) helped me immensely. [also worked hard of course, and in the rapid games managed to surprise and outplay my rivals using our preparation, And thus with my success in New Delhi the 20th century ended very well for me, In Wijk aan Zee 2001 which, as always, took place in January, in the first stage of the tourna- 13Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 ment I played pethaps the best chess of my lif 1 failed in the final stage and lost the hi coring 6% in the first 8 round storic opportunity of Is. Unfortunately, inishing ahead of Kasparov, Anand and Kramnik, Now it seems to me that after this tournament I partially lo cause it i st my motivation, be- single thing for so many years. Furthermore, some new problems with Kasparov appeared, which are aot worth mentioning hete but which have made our encounters rather aggravated and uncomfortable for me. Anyway, in our game in Linares 2004 which ended ina very interesting, draw, [ finally removed these ney impossible to be focused on one ive emotions, In 2001 the number of tournaments I was able to play in increased, thanks to my recent title of world vice-champion. Most of my achievements were due to outplaying weaker opponents but there wer e some pl unt exceptions, such as my wins against Topalov in the semifinals of the tournament in Len in June and in the fourth round of the World Championship at the end of the year, Both times after defeating Veselin my next opponent was Anand, against whom | was not able to offer much resistance. But undoubtedly my marriage to Victoria on the 7th of August was the most joyous event of that year. Among the guests we invited to the wedding were Mikhail Rytshagov, Jordi Magem (the witness) and Zigurds Lanka, who had always helped me in the most important moments of my career. On the 3rd of February 2002 our son Dmitry was born, and about two years later our second son Alexander appeared. In such circumstances it was almost impossible to play all tournaments equally well, because my level of preparation fell notably. Nevertheless, | managed to some good results: in Monaco, March 2002 (second place after Morozevich, ahead of Anand and Kramnik); Prague, April-May of the same year (re Kramnik had alr chieve ching, the semifinals, when Kasparov and ly been eliminated), and in the Russia vs, the Rest of the World match, Mos- cow, September 2002, which was most successful for me. Although Iam an ethnic Russian 1 played in the Rest of the World team, and felt especially satisfied scoring, 7 out of 10 and defeat- ing Kramnik (although losing to Kasparov). In 2002 L also participated in the Spanish Champi onship for the first time, I had no problems in reaching the final (I only dropped halfa point in the first seven games). Then I faced Paco Vallejo, the future of not consider myself a favourite in this match at all, with a tained the title which had a certain meaning for me, Up to now it ha participated in the national championship. panish chess, and although T did ittle bit of luck 1 won ) and ob- s been the only time I have In 2003 I made another attempt to return to the ‘super elite’ and, with 7 points out of 13 in Wijk aan Zee, combined with victory in the Category 15 tournament in Reykjavik (7 out of 9), L thought I was on the tight track, But then failures in Monaco and Dos Hermanas made it clear to me that the stability | had demonstrated in 1998-2000 was very difficult to regain. Neverthe less, on January Ist 2004 1 still kept fifth position in the world ranking list and, right after Alex ander was born, | won a rapid tournament in Tallinn (a memorial for Paul Keres). This tourna ment took place on the 3rd-4th January and 1 went there directly from the hospital where our baby bad been born the night before. The first day I played three games and although I managed to defeat Rytshagov and Dreev, I lost to Rozentalis. But the next day, in the morning I felt re- freshed and defeated Sulskis, Brodsky and Sveshnikov. I was leading Radjabov by one point, and in the last game an interesting struggle ended in a draw, which ensured me of victory in the tour: nament. Nevertheless, this small triumph in ‘Tallinn had not improved me for the Wijk aan Zee tour- nament a few days late Being in a somewhat cuphoric state, and at the same time somew tired to the changes in my life that were of great importance to me, I did not feel prepared enough. In the first six rounds I lost two games (against Bareev and Anand) in technically drawn The Struggle without Limits positions, which had almost nev imman and Ivan Sokolov, but occurred in my career before. [ recovered a little with wins in the last round | made again the ‘Las Vegas error’, since against | took an unnecessary risk against Victor Bologan and lost. In contrast, in Linares of that yea ther well: although missing the victory against ‘Topaloy in the third round 1 beat Radjabov in the sixth, but after that I felt tired awed only four more draws and no victories, And in the ensuing tox iga, 1 was not successful either. sh this book with some notes on the ‘player 0, which is no ir I started + vain and man: in Monaco, the French League, and the Bundes It seemed to me that the only remedy was to fi ?, who is only able to write about his former successes. 1 went to Sara dered a super-clite tournament (Category 15), with these rather pessimistic thoughts. uriously enough, my results there in 2002-03 had been worse than in 1999-2000, when the 3 of the world used to participate. However, I was visiting Sarajevo for the fifth ty, and this helped me maintain good concentration. so the victory in the 2004 edition was mine. of the pas longer cons a strongest play time and had become ace With a little bit of luck [ scored a lot of point One week later I had another slice of luck in the rapid tournament in Le6n, struggling wildly with Radjaboy (the outcome of our match was decided in blit) and then apainst Svidler, having won the first two games in almost desperate post shed with 3%-! did not reflect the true ‘balance of forces’. Since the first knockout World Championship in Groningen in 1997, rapid games have formed a very significant part of every player's chess life, istomed to the a score which ions, and fini though grave errors can often be made there I was finishing the main part of this book when the FIDE World Championship in Tripoli was coming to an end. This time I had decided not to participate — and not only me, but also Anand, Morozevich, Svidler, Ponomariov, Polgar, Gelfand, each for thei ons. I don’t want to speak for others, but my own reason is evident: ‘Prague's schism’ of 2002, which was concluded after that tournament where I, as the reader know: shameful agreements recognized Kramnik as the world champion and gave Kasparoy the right to play a match directly with the winner of the FIDE World hip. And now Kasparov was not pre: poli cither, but in contrast to Anand (who has performed excellently in the VIDE Championships), he was just awaiting his rival — with the only difterence being that, as opposed to 1998, Kasparov is not world champion anymore. I don’t know whether Kasparov or Kramnik would win a real World Championship if they participated — in order to determine the final winner the knockout s s fairest, in my opin- ion — but as long as they continue to receive their eternal privileges, [am not going to fight for the title of World Cha But of course, it is not my plan to abandon the ‘struggle without limits’ — the strugele to per fect my play, the strugele against my opponent of tomorrow, the struggle for brilliancy in ches own reas . achieved a good result, “Thes: mpion: ent in’ stem, mpion anymore, S. Postscript: I wrote the last sentence six months ago, so now it’s time to reflect a little on this final period, A nice coincidence is that L have once more been able to win my last ‘slow’ and rapid tournaments — in Drammen over the New Year, and in Tallinn already in 2005. some ‘usual’ bad Bundesliga weekends a much less ever, is the fact that I struggle to find good games played earlier in autumn, when my form was the present collection. S future. And of course it is c again forgotten. What is from those events, although the three we definitely a worthy addition to satisfying, how- even worse, ill, i's good to finish the book in a quiet mood and hope for a better also time to start working on Fire o# Board 3, in which | hope ches tod and games. sclose some unseen peculiarities of my chess life, analy 14 15CHAPTER TWO Notes on Creativity It isn’t easy to define chess and say to which category it belongs. Being a mental sport it includes elements of both art and science ‘Science’ may be too general a description, so 1 would like to narrow it a little by saying, that, for me, chess is first of all a logical, and sometimes even a mathematical, exercise Having said that, it’s often very difficult to find a mathematical (or even a logical) solution in chess — that’s when things may become irrational and one can get room for creativity. Chess creativity is often compared with creativity in art, but 1 tend to disagree with that, The rules of chess are strict: you can neither ma up your own tules, nor expand chess beyond its 64 squares. Nevertheles there are amazing discoveries to be made with the limited means, and then things may suddenly seem so unusual that one forgets that the combinations derive from. strict limitations. Aesthetic feeling becomes so strong that one gets the illusion of an endles art, until you are back once more to the game limited within its 64 squares. During my professional career | have made a fair number of interesting discoveries in that make me feel proud. 1 think that, basically, I can distinguish between two types ches of che cre: ivit 1. ‘Home’ creativity. ‘That is when you find new ideas during your technical preparation for the next chess match or tournament. ‘Technical preparation can be cither for a specific opponent or just a general attempt to improve your chess. skills. It’s the most s because you nes home creativit common jway to create in ches work quietly, Somet be shared with other people: you pay attention to an idea suggested by another chess player, or even a computer, and do your best to make that idea work. 2. Over the board creativity, When playing, a tournament game and the clock is ou are ticking, you tend to choose moves according to your general knowledge of the game and your pre-established method of logical thinking, However, sometiny > s you need to ¢ beyond your usual frames, to escape the confines of your knowledge and think less rationally. You ate still strictly limited within the constraints imposed by the rules of chess, but you ean’t absorb the whole game, it’s too big, so you end up using your associative intuition. And sometimes a brilliant — and mathematically correct! — solution is the result In my practice | have had two especially memorable cxamples of cach kind of 16 Notes on Creativity creativity. By coincidence my opponent in those two ga Veselin Topalov, who is not only one of the world’s leading grandmasters but also a very combative and creative chess player. The story that Iam about to tell has its origins in carly 2000, when I was preparing at home for one of the most important tournaments in my career, due ¢o take place in Linares, Spain, some three weeks later. During my preparation | noticed that some of my opponents might employ the Sveshnikoy Variation (the most common ways of begin ning, a chess game are usually named after the 's players who first employed them), and prise I decided to prepare a very old and sharp continuation, which was almost completely forgotten in top level chess during, the 1990s. While studying that old line I came upon the following critical position: mes was the same: the Bulgarian as as One can sce that White has a material disadvantage (Black has two bishops for a knight), but his attacking chances (such as the threat to mate the black king with the queen) are quite promising, ‘The position was not new: to chess theory and one of Black’s possible continuations that really disturbed me was 15...Mxc7. ‘The idea is simple: by sacrificing, his queen for White's wo knights Black hopes to create safety for his king and use the force of his three minor pieces against: White’s queen, Now, capturing the queen with the knight, 16 Axc7 slexe7, ae fly ime ai ZS AS seems to be the only reasonable continua tion for White, and one tends to consider and play such moves absolutely automatically, not only in a tournament but also during home preparation. | was no exception and, at the beginning, | kept analysing with my trainer the consequences of this capture. After some three hours of work I gave up on the whole idea of trying, the line with White, since Black seemed fine ir It all happened during our lunchtime. My wainer and I went to the kitchen to make variations. some simple food and filled our glasses with some fine beer. Already feeling relaxed I still kept thinking about the position, And just little beer was sufficient for me to realise that White was not at all obliged to take the qui there were other ideas in the position tool Work on the ‘buried? line started all over again with new momentum, and a year and a half later (not just three weeks later as was originally ‘planned’ — such is the destiny of s bom at home) I was finally able to play ide: my idea in a tournament game. ‘The idea that came into my mind with the aid of beer was 16 ¢3!!, See following diagram not taking the qu instead! Before this game only 16 Axc7 daxe7 17 Whs Hxed 18 Wxt7+ @e7 had been played. The reader will understand later why 1 nt to emphasise this position wi 17Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 ‘The game continued 16...kxe4 17 Wh5 Gd8 18 A)xe7 sexc7 19 Wxf7+ Ge7 s, 4) a x Ae i iy \) y & WN and reaching this position was the point of White’s play. As Black didn’t want to give up his rook on the last two moves (which would yield White a strong attack), White was finally forced to capture his queen, But if we compare this position with the one after 16 se Sexe7, we can see that White on c3 instead of ¢2. This small difference the pawn on €3 takes the important d4 square away from Black’s knight — proved sufficient to win the game later on. The idea had worked! pawn is As I have already mentioned, most of the brillia § ¢ born at home in a quict atmosphere. When you play a tourna ment game you tend to be more concentrated, yet more tense and maybe more automatic too, Basically, you demonstrate your home preparation at the beginning of the game and try to exploit your ge later chess skills in the arch either for the Ss you best move o the best practical solution, depending on how complicated the position is and how much time is left for thinking, You can either opt for suategic planning or simply perform mechanical calculations. In the game thar T am about to demon eT was tu y chough to have some time at my disposal when the critical position arose, so | could stop and think. \ WK oo ea “16 em ae = a — — Le er "oe N << Wall, the position seemed rather simple apart from the kings, only two minor were left on the board. However, plicity may often be misleading, I came to realise that any ordinary solution would a draw, as is often the case with opposite- coloured bishops. All the same, I had two extra pawns and felt that there should be something to be done! Alas, it was all in vain — ad to. once again T saw that normal continuations would lead to a draw. White would simply move his king to ¢3 and neutralise Black’s winning attempts for good. I wondered if I should give it up, while my clock continued to tick. I believe that real creativity comes when you master the ability to connect different parts of your experience and_ perception, sometimes even small chaotic pieces of it which at first sight don’t seem to be directly 18 related, When you're pressed for time it is sometimes necessary 10 expand the dimen sions of your brain-work, from logic based on knowledge into the so-called ‘associative level’. And then the solution should come.. 47...&h3!t matte Y GY 4 e 20 7 rae fig ee ED, ath As J have already stated, the ‘normal’ paths 47.4 48 93 bet, would lead to a draw, € 49 2, and as the black the white king manage: square, In order to make a breakthrough to the decisive ed square, Black must first sacrifice his bishop! 48 gxh3 48 G22 S15 49 se3 Bxp2 would leave White pawnless and helpless, but now Black can his goal 48.0815 49 si2 hea Es Pgs G aes y ie fem — eta e a WE and Topalov had to resign the ga few more moves. The king helps ae Vay, ie after a the black Notes on Creativity pawns promote t a queen. ‘The idea of giving. up the bishop in order to gain the necessary tempo seems very logical and easy to find when it has already been played, but no computer program proved competent enough to suggest it. I would like to think that no human in chess history would be able to find it under the same conditions, but who knows..? Maybe the Swedish grand- master, Ulf Andersson, would be able to rise to the challenge. 1 guess that the next game should explain everything... 5,5, i ee a, i Aa ab ao aie Ate” As A-4 es ee ‘This position suddenly came into my mind when I played against Topalov. In the game against Andersson, played almost seven years earlier, I became a idea of the bishop s: 44...Oxh4! 45 Sxh4 &f5 46 wg3 wed 47 sef2 td im of the astonishing when Black’s centralised king and pawns 19Fire on Board Part tI: 1997-2004 dominate completely and I soon had to resign. Seven years is a long time and Tam not just talking about human memory. My ...2h3 in deed Andersson’s ...82xh4, but still, it was a different position and not exactly the ne idea, since Topalov didn’t even have a pawn on h3 as had on h4 Nevertheless, the embl sociation was very strong and my high concentration (always nec- essary to perform well in chess) did the job. My conclusion on the above examples from my practice as in any other field, you need to reach beyond your knowledge (the greater the knowledge, the further you can gol). And that’s when creativity begins. ather simple. In che 20 CHAPTER THREE Selected Games Gamed Shirov-Teske European Cup Final, Budap Caro-Kann Defence, Advance Variation ‘The game was annotated after the tourna- ment and published in various magavines, though the notes were revised several times cial when I was working on the book. My spi thanks to Henrik Teske for his comments on ly visiting me in the game when he was casu Spain in September 2003, ‘The game was played when the club teams. from both Berlin (whom I played for) and Dresden already could achieve nothing in the Cup. Asa fanny circumstance, before going to Budapest 1 had a short training: se: Dresden with Zigurds Lanka (also playing for the Dresden team) and’ my opponent in this game! Fortunately, we didn’t analyse the Caro’ Kann. The present game had a certain theo retical importance at that time because it in troduced the way of challenging Karpoy’s fa- vourite set-up. And even though Karpov managed to find equality for Black some time later, I still like the game itself. ion in 1 04 c6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 215 4 D3 e6 5 Se2 Ae7 6 0-0 c5 ‘The German grandmaster employs the same line as Karpov played against me in Vi- enna 1996. In that game I thought for about twenty minutes on my 7th move, while this time my next few moves took me nearly an hour. The line indeed needs a high level of precision from White if he wants to fight for the opening advantage. 7 dxc5 Against Karpov | played 7 e4 and got noth- ing from the opening. 7...dec6 8 £03 7 9 c4 dxc4 10 Aad wy pr hit RS SN 2 [ae re fee 21Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 10...8.xe5 Up to here everything has been theoretical, but this logical capture is new. The known path was 10...c3, which I was expecting during the game and planning, to answer with 11 b4!? Bur if [ remember correctly, afterwards my opponent said that he rejected 1U...c3 because of a very strong idea, 11 Wb3! exb2 12 Badl, which he saw at the board. When we started ing, it seemed to us that White was tly better, Naturally | didn’t mention the idea in notations, hoping, that some day I would be able to employ it in a tournament game. And an opportunity next game t Karpov (Monaco 1997) the position appeared on the board. He continued 12...b11H 13 Dxb1 We8 which 1 had missed in my preparation, Here [ mu admit that | should have given Henrik’s id better look later on and not just have been soon cami my satisfied with the postmortem, Nevertheless, I managed to react reasonably well: 14 We3! and Black still has certain difficulties. The game continued 14.,.2xb1 15 Bxbl Be? 16 Add ADxd4 17 Lxd4 Asc 18 G63 Bhs 19 Was 0-0 20 Wa? and here Karpov had serious chances to equalise with 20...2d8!, while in the gam 20...24a8 21 Wh6 Kao 22 Ws We7 23 Rect Bas 24 Wxb7 Waxb7 25 Sixb7 Hd8 26 £3, 1 managed to get a rea sonable advantage. ‘The end of the story was tragic. Later on, when my position became completely winning, I started messing up and at the end I couldn't even remember wh my pieces were and lost on time! Yes, it blindfold game ‘Teske’s suggestion 16 Adal? esting, but we concluded that after 16,..0-0 (not 16..Acxe5? 17 4 Ach 18 Wxe7 26 19 Who £4 20 £5 and wins, or 17...Ag6 18 2.63 Eb8 19 c6 bxc6 20 Exb8 Axbs 21 Wxe7 with a clear advantage) 17 f4 b6! 18 exb6 (18 Ded?! Bxe5 19 Bxe5 bxe5 20 B£3 Addl is equal 18,.Dsb6 19 2.13 Ba! 20 Wh3 Aods! Black is quite OK. After all 1 should conclude that 10...c3 is probably playable, but so is the move chose by the German grandmaster. 11 Oxe5! Only in this order! The line 11 Axcd Lxe3! 12 AdG+ Bc7! (12...88 13 fed Dd: Dse5 Axes 15 Wdd Aco 16 We y White a strong initiative for the pawn) 13 DsfS+ ext 14 Wd6+ eB 15 66 Feeh 16 Wreo+ We7 17 Wxe7+ Bxe7 18. fxe3 just leads to an equal ending, 11...2xe5 12 Dxo4 0-0 Black cannot now exchange queens, as after 12... Wed 13 Blexdl see7 14 is extremely 13 Wel! aoe ee also inter- acl his position a a "aa \\ \ analysis h3! and 32 h6t Hasch6 33 Axed (if 33 WARY Shs 34 Asd4 Bel wins) 33...cxd4 34 Wxe7 Wert 35 Sh3 (or shot d3 36 Wy5+ 27 37 €5 dxes WES 39 do holy 35..Wel+ 36 Sh2 Wet 37 dh3 Wel! 38 pd We3+ 39 na WA2+ 40 2h3 Wetd with a decisive advantage. 2) 31 h6+! (the only move) 31...staxh6 32 W8+ O97 33 Wxe7 Txt! (the point! — if the check on d2 was included, the £ pawn would he protected by the knight on 92) 34 oxf4 Wxf4+ 35 cig2 Wg4+ 36 weft Wxd1 37 Wh4+ Wh5 38 Wt4a+ g5 39 Wxd6+ 16 se S. at iy @ ee oe Hila Te yf Fe . 5 a ae In 1998 F ended my analysis in this position with the assessment ‘Black is better’, How: ever, the teal investigation only starts here! White has two reasonable queen moves, 40 Weo and 40 We7, but only the latter move draws: 40 We6 is losing after 40... Whi+ 41 22 (41 stef2 What! is the same thing; 41...Wh2+ 42 p2 seems less clear) 41... Wh2+ 42 sedl Wes! 43 WxeS fxe5 44 Dds (Black also wins after 44 d6 a5 45 Ad3 ad 46 Axc5 a3 47 Abs gd) 44.2.8! (only this! — giving up the ¢ pawn would yield White at least equal chances after 44.206 45 Axc5 a5 46 Db7! a4 47 c5) 45 Dxe5 He7 46 Dco 61 and 1 don’t think White can save the game; for example 47 ¢5+ BES 48 do eb 49 Aust Bxe5 50.d7 Be7 St Det deb 52 dW Bxd8 53 Axd8+ ste5 and the knight is powerless against the three passed pawns. ‘The question is, of course, why 40 We7 is to be preferred to 40 Weo. It turns out that after 40...Wh1+ (if 40. h3+ 41 202 £5 42 Wet draws) 41 #e2 Wh2+ 42 sbd1 (on 42 BFL the best reply is 42.041 43 Wecs Wet Selected Games and wins, or 43 Dy? 93! 44 Wxes Whit 45 Wel Welt 46 fsp1 @.£8! and White cannot save the endgame; eg, 47 Abd By5 48 Ars SHEA 49 6 Sexe4 50 d7 Bc5+ 51 Ho? Vh6 52 Ddo+ Bd 53 Sxg3 a5 etc) 42...We5, White has the resource 43 d6! Fy Y, yy 7} “@ &, At ime 4.9 wy og oe A eiace *e ean ae a — and further deep analysis demonstrates that there is no win here: a) 43...65 44 Dest Wes (after 44... Waly 45 er 2.f6 46 WR+ BhS 47 We7+ Bed 48 Wsh7! Wh2+ 49 DAd2 White is not worse, while 45... Wb2+ 46 Dd2 23 47 Weert &hs 48 Wad5l is similar to 44...W4) 45 Dd2 B.c3 46 Weot ths 47 Was Sxd2 48 Wxd2 Hel 49 ec2 Weed 50 Gb2. b) 43...Wadt 44 cee? Wixedt 45 deh 45 dl would be the same) 45...Wd4+ (if 45...5 then 46 AB!) 46 Be2 (5 (nor 46..Wes 47 Das) 47 d7 266 48 West hs 49 West Bed 50 eS! and Black would have nothing better than a perpetual cheek Instead Black may insist on exchanging, is with. when, under the threat of 44...Yxe7 45 dxe7 BE7, White is obliged to go for 44 Wxe5 fxe5 45 2d3 but, despite be ing two pawas down, White achieves the draw i strong, enough. op them as easily as in the 40 able to play ....2.f8! ill on d5). Never- For becau sed pawns Black can’t s WeG line (where he was when the white pawn was Bxc5! (see below) and not 46 d7 Lf6 47 ®xe5+ s4e5 which is winning for Black; e. 48 17+ (also insufficient is 48 Ad3 h5 49 ed h4 50 Axed M4 51 AeGt+ Bet or 51 Dsab h3 52 DcT Bh4 53 DdS+ sexed 54 ADc3+ Hdd 55 DhS+ fe5 and White loses) 48...02f4 49 GSW Bxd8 50 Axd8 xed 51 No — Os UY, Eaostent ate pk 18 YU: eae a = 51.263! (the only move that wins!) 52 @wxc5 h5! 53 Bel h4 $4 BEL h3 55 Wel adt and White is helpless against three black rect move 46 Axe5!, Black's best chance is 46...a5, when White again has to find the only move 47 ske2! (alter 47 7 B66 48 Dds ET 49 Dves+ Seo 50 Dred 867 Black is even temporarily a pawn down, but either the h- or a-pawn will queen) and then: cl) 47..d8.£6 forces 48 Dad!, and after Black's best 48...827 49 c5 #2e6 50 bb h5 51 Ded Bd7 52 DxaS h4 53 S12, things are rather similar to the main line in the next note. If now 53...825 54 Act Sf White is just in time to save the game with 55 Abo seb 56 d7 Gc7 57 66 h3 (or 57.85 58 Bed) 58 Dast+ Hus 59 c7+ Vxa7 60 Ator Bxc7 61 Dros. ) 47...h5 (the main linc) 48 Ae6! (only this! 48 Db7 a4 49 c5 a3 50 d7 2.66 51 c6 a2 52 c7 alW 53 co Wa2t 54 ded3 Wb3+ is hopeless for White since he loses his e4-pawn with check and, later on, will be unable to 57Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 fight against Black’s passed pawns; meanwhile the same idea as in previous ion, 48 Dad G7 49 5 BeG 50 Ab6, wouldn't work here because Black has 50...8/8! 51 Zc ad keep- ing the a-pawn alive) 48....0f6 49 c5 27 50 ‘Ac7 ad! (giving up the passed a-pawn in order to deactivate the white knight is the best vinning chance: 50...h4 would be weaker in view of 51 c6 h3 52 82 Bh4+ 53 shel) 51 Abs a3! (if 51...st2e6 52 c6 Bd8 53 c7 Bd7 54 cxdsW+ Gxd8 55 Dad kd7 56 Ded draws) 52 Axa3 He 2 ae a he - 7 a — Yy Pata Now White’s passed pawns ate stopped while Black’s will he supported by the bishop ss, White can still resist with 53 Ded wed7 54 Db2 fg5 55 Ads Ata! 56 Af! (but not 56 Axé4 exf4 57 stef2 h4 58 Hy2. 3+ 59 Bh2 3 60 4y3 Ve6 or 58 Hel kec6! 59 5 sed7 with zugzwangl) 56.8206 position. The most he can achieve is a bishop versus knight endgame with extra pawns on 93 and h4 which, contrary to the computer's ssments, is not enough to win; eg, 57..h4 58 A293 59 Ah3 Sct 60 V3 Va3 ol Ags Bxc5 62 dg2 2xd6 63 AB with a draw. a oe ee ee, a2 me moe nt oo a2 a As we can see I had to ana se to this very endgame position to ‘conelude’ that Black cannot win after 30) h5!, Lam not sure whether the hours and days spent were worth it, but sometimes chess research really fascinates me. I should also add that 30 ¢5?? is not at all typi- cal of Karpov, because with his incredible defensive skills he would normally see 30 hS! within half a second (remember his 42...,2.c4!! against Kasparov in New York 2002). I was just lucky that it wasn’t his day. 30...Wd2+ 31 Dg2 Hxt3 32 Wxe7 dxed 33 nS Wxd1 0-1 ae "age Me ce ee ttt ee A Ee @ wis Rated a Ee, WEE i a apa 4 ne es 57 @d3 and Black can’t really improve his White has no perpetual and so resigned. 58 Selected Games Game 13 Kramnik-Shirov WCC Candidates (game 9), Cazorla 1998 Griinfeld Defence ‘This game was annotated when working on the book. When my match against Kramnik was ended I couldn’t annotate the games for magavines or Infarmator because of private troubles, Later on, the match itself was the trouble: the fraud? and e beeame known as ‘Cazorla’s centually it was not me, the win- ner, but Kramnik, the loser, who played the against Kasparov in 2000, a match which was supposed to be the winner's only vorlal Meanwhile, the loser’s prize nable cheque — and then it was match supplemented. Even now, when 1 membering the Cazorla mateh, which remains one of my greatest achievements at the chess board, it is not ea the chess part of the game properly, And this decisive ninth ga leading 4%-3%, so victory match, while a draw would practically do the job as well since I would be White in the final game) is also a very complicated one. ‘There fore [have decided just 10 give it some brief remarks, My 19th and 21st moves, as well as y for me to concentrate on e them id an: (L was would finish the the sporting importance, are the main reasons for including this yame in the book. In the next volume there will be a broader che story with more annotated games from rorla 1d4 M6 264 g6 Ready for the Gr my games with Black in the match, 313 ‘This move came as a surprise. But at least it was an ‘expected’ surprise, because it was clear that my opponent would have to do some- nfeld Defence, as in all thing special in his last game as White, though it was difficult to guess what it would be. [ had employed 3 £3 myself, as long ago as 1987-88, in a couple of games against Kamsky (without much success, despite getting reasonably good positions), so now T had to decide whether to u insufficient knowl my old and definite edge ot try something new. 3...d5 Tt was not easy to make the right choic cording to the match situation, Normally 1 and turn the wouldn't mind playing. 3. game into a Simisch King’s Indian which knew reasonably well. Instead 1 decided to play more safely (before the match I decided that | would not defend any King’s Indians) and soon ended up in unknown territor 4 cxd5 Axd5 5 e4 AE 6 Ac3B Lg? 7 £e3 0-0 ‘The exclamation mark is for taking me out of my knowledge. 8 fw ma s supposed to be the 16 9 d5 Dad 10 Qdd 5! Black is doing reasonably OK in the com- ine and after 8... plications, so I wouldn’t mind going into such a game. But now I had to work at the board with not much time, no knowledge, and not much understanding of this particular position either, while Kramnik, as he later admitted, had everything more ot less prepared to move I had a brief look at 8..Ac6 9 0-0-0 65 10 d5 Dds 1 f4 (U1 Al also known and interesting, though I didn’t even consider it during the game) 1L...c5, but it seemed to me 59Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 I would need preparation to play this line In fact the game would be very double-edged. 9d5 c6 10 ha! 1 underestimated this, of course. threatened dircet attack on the kingside strong, 10...h5?! A dubious novelty, though as I mentioned, the position was completely new to me any way. Instead 10..cxd5 11 exd5 Dar (11...£5!P 125 ahs 13 Hxh5 8d7, suggested by The very ble) 2 hs MG 1 3 hxgo ar: ted in tournament practice ‘er 1998 and I think Black Now, when writing these annotations, 1 can’t really understand why 1 didn’e play the immediate 10,.cxd5 11 exd5 @8d7, but when the clock is ticking and the situation is so .». Nevertheless, there is no reason to play incorrect chess! After 10..h5 Black’s position strategically very difficult. tens checked what other GMs wrote about it. Here Igor Stobl suggested an interesting move: I HAUP, trying to save a tempo on 202, but I think that Black may then uy U...cxd5 12 exd5 AaG 13 Be2 Bd7 14 g4 Be8 creating some counter-threats. Neither can 1 see whether, after 11..Abd7, White has anything better than 12 2c, so LL e2 is probably the most accurate move, 11...cxd5 12 exd5 A8d7 Now 12.26 13 g4 8.47 14 exh5 exh5 15 £6 is definitely not advisable for Black, since White still has the option of castling long, 13 d6 2G 14 2g5 Mes? As I said, Kramnik had everything pre- pared; he played quickly and confidently up to this point and here I completely cracked under the pressure, Even now I wouldn't like to be Black after 14...d7 or 14....2c6, but either move would at least yield me a playable posi- tion, whereas the text should have sent my game going downhill, ‘The disadvantage of 14..Me8. is that it doesn’t really challenge kin ive d6-d7 in some lines what helped me to win the game in the end, but that is a different story 15 Hd1 S06 15,..8d7 16 h3 would be a loss of tempo. compared with 14...2d7, but maybe I should still have preferred it. Meanwhile, the C Magazine suggestion 16 @b5 (instead of 16 ADh3) would be wrong b © of 16... 8xb5 17 Bixb5 Keo and White's pride, the d6-pawn, will soon be in trouble, 16 Dh3 Ded 17 Axed Yxe4 18 b3 a6! Sometimes opti White’s development, while putting Bl danger of a de Amusingly, this Base nism helps! As I could only see myself in darkness after 18...8e6 19 D2, followed by 0-0 with a clear edge based on the 60 powerful dé-pawn, I decided at all costs to prevent White from castling. And it worked! Ey ea a a a 0 eisai a i ae 19 \d5? But of course the co-operation of my op: ponent 1 an important stage was neces- sary, Instead 19 d7! was probably the way to play. I was planning to continue 19...2e6, not seeing that | could also try the knight sacrifice 19,.Wixd7!2 20 Wd? @sd7 21 Hxd7 ed which Kramnik was ly. However, in this case White would emerge with a nearly decisive advantage after 22 dS! exf3+ 23 De7+ h7 (23...00B 24 wPF2) 24 ox. i pretty much forced, though it’s very hard to find a reasonable reply after 20 Ad5; for ex- ample 20...8b5 21 &xfo Bx 22 DyS and White is close to winning, 19...e4!! Suddenly all my moves in this game became justified as the complications for Black. White's king is in the centre, he is down in development that work well for hity single error. 20 )xf6+? A typical example of how one big mistake is usually followed by another. This time 20 d7 aid of, if 1 remember cc are favourable nd there are no lines Such is the price of a would allow a very strong rook sacrifice 20.0exf3+! 21 dxed+ Wre8+ 22 Wes (22 De3? Nes) 22... Nxd5 23 Rxd5 Web! 24 Rast Exd8 25 Qxd8 We2 26 Wes+ 2.8 and Black wins, Instead 20 Dc7+ was a must, when I Selected Games very much like Black’s position after 20...2xe7 21 dxeT Weep as now 22 Wd6 can be an Wel, but it’s also clear that with 22 £2 White isin the game. 20....xf6 21 d7 swered ‘This is now the only continuation (how much better ro move that pawn earlier!), and just as after 21) d7 Black is not forced to move the rook from e8! 21...Wb6!! 1 didn’t see this move beforehand, but it came very naturally as | felt that the position of White’s king, had to be exploited somehow 21.86 was also possible but why calculace other moves when you are just winning! 22 dxeBiif+ Mxe8 23 Wes y to see that there was nothing else; 3 Sxh4t 24 AE exf3 winning im- xg5! 24 Wxb6 Oxh4+ ithout this intermediate check, the whole idea with ...4b6 wouldn’t work, of course 25 sed2 ‘The best chance, Both 25 4)f2 exf3+ and 25 W2 exf3+ 26 d2 Bxf2 lose even more quick! 25...axb6 26 fxed xed s and two pawns are nearly al- Two bishoy wer force than rook and knight, and ways a gi the presence of one more rook on cach side icreases Black’s advantage. Some tech nique is still required, but knowing that it would bring me victory in the match I didn’t 67Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Zs Gy Y Zp Y y jb \N Ak Y it ope x A re 27 See2 Nig4 28 d2 27! 29 Bgl seg7 ‘There is no hurry in endgames! | learnt this principle ablanca’s, IT think) from Shereshevsky’s book Endgame Siratyy when | was young, and it worked well at the high points of my career such as this one. 30 ‘\f2 Xf4 31 Ad3 Hea 32 Hgd1?! 32 42 would be usel 32... eG, but 32 a4!? should have been tried as ss in view of Black’s bishop would be temporarily out of Still, his 32. uckeeS 33 BD £5 is more than sufficient. 32...2b5! 33 a4 2.06 34 Xe1?! White finally manag but losing the g2-pawn me to exchange rooks, s throwing the towel. However, there was no other real otherwise Black would simply advance his kingside pawns one day. 34...Hxe1 35 Axel &b4 chance to hold, “377 U7 Yy 36 He2 {xe1 37 Uxet Oxg2 38 srd2 h4 39 whe3 2d5 40 b4 h3 41 Le2 F517 41..g5 was winning too, but 1 didn’t wane to put my bishop on g2 just yet. 42 Kd2 2e4!? 42...02y212 43 G2 was what 1 wanted to avoid, even though 43.95 44 Ba7+ do 45 Rot ee 46 Hxb6 4 still wins. 43 hf4 Gg2 Now! With the white king on 93, Black’s .£5-F4 will be with check. 44 Rd7+ Or 44 03 f+ 45 Gh? 95 ete. 44.06 45 Mh7 g5+ 46 wg3 f+ 47 shg4 ske5 0-1 Going across to collect more white pawns. Here 1 accepted my opponent’s congrat tions and I could not imagine at that moment the ‘meaning’ of that f “1 of my ches er. Game 14 Markowski-Shirov Polanica Zdroj 1998 Rei Opening ‘The annotations to this game are based on my article Forget Deep Blue’, 9 after the tournament and published in various including Sebac. The atti cluded two games of mine and dealt with the ‘new computer che: Kasparov Deep Bl itten shortly tendencies” such as the match and ‘Advanced Chess’ events, I believe that these a rently the most important subje fore I have changed the text a little. y critical moment for me. I had only 2 points from 5 This game was played at av games «and couldn't help the annoying feeling that some people would start questioning my WCC candidacy and stuff like that. How naive | w: = years ago! Nowadays we know that the ‘world championship candi- cacy’ often has litle to do with sporting rents and failures. At least the *1998 tory’ was a matter of intrig sults. Nevertheless, looking back at Polanica es, Not re 62 Selected Games 1998 (played two months after the match in Cavorla), | should say that finishing the diffi- cult tournament ‘in style’ (with 3% points from the last 4 games) made me very And the present game is especial because of the deep and preci managed to make. 1 D3 d5 2 g3 94 3 2g2 Ad7 4 64 6 5 cxd5 During my preparation [noticed that ‘Tomasz Markowski is quite « specialist in the 1 QP opening, Here he goes for the early pawn exchange on d5 which is the correct strateg until Black pla the other pawn. 5...exd5 6 0-0 ‘Agf6 7 d3 c6 | made this move almost automatically as Black nearly alwe s However, if he wants to place his bishop on satisfied. memorable calculations I I decision, as White shouldn’t wait 's ...c6 and can take on d5 with ys plays it in such positic She might as well do it immediately, whereas the text appears to be a tempo loss. ‘Then again, perhaps Tam exaggerating: things here, es it just since in most ¢: Is to a transposi- tion and the position is roughly equal in either 8 Wic2 &ic5 9 e4 0-0 10h3 Not yet a mistake, but I think Black's bishop will be better times on g6) than on g4, Therefore 1 would prefer 10 ®c3. 10...8h5 11 Abd2?! laced on h5 (and some- But this seems to be erroneous as White will now get in trouble with his e-pawn. Again, 11 Dec3 would be correct. 11,..dxe4! 12 dxed eB 13 b3?! Another inaccuracy. After 13 Ab4 White could still hope for an even fight. 13...We7! . though White can still hope to get some compe: 14 Sb2 During the game | was afraid of 14 hd Wes 15 Drs Weal 16 2b2 Wea2 17 Bal Wealt (17..2d12! 18 Wel Qxb3 19 Bxa2 Bxa2 20 Bxf6 ext seems less attractive to me) 18 &xal, but anal me that afier 18.....68 Black’s position is excellent, 14...Dxe4! 15 Mae1 ‘The right decision, Otherwise White has nothing for the pawn; for example 15 Axed Wied 16 We3 Ao 15...0.g6! Iw the position arising after 15.23 16 xf Dxd2.17 Exe? Ax{3I+ 18 We2 Dh4+ 19 exh4 2xc7, although a little better for Black, did not seem clear enough to me. 17 Yxd2 Wa6 18 Wado &xd6 19 Hdl Ae5 20 Bxe5 Bxe5 21 Hd7 Hab8 22 Hel also yields White good drawing chances. 16 \h4t Again, less concrete play would leave White a pawn down; cg. 16 Dxet Bxe4 17 Wed sation, sis convince s tempted to sactifice the queen, but 63Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 WEB and if 18 Boxed Bxed 19 16...2xf241? I spent 45 minutes thinking about this, leaving myself less than half an hour to reach the time control. It was very difficult to decide whether the text was better than 16..Axp3, which also seemed very attractive. Even now | cannot quite decide which of the two options is better, but it seems that the line I chose at least contained more traps and hidden things. After 16...\xg3!? White would continue 17 xc7! (not 17 Axeo? Wy5! 18 Wa3 Axel 19 Bxc8+ Bxe8 20 Wed? Has 21 Ded &xt2+ 22 Sxfl Whs+ 23° xf2 Exd7 winning) 17..xe2 18 Bxd7 Axfl (not 18...Bad8? 19 Exd8 Hxd8 20 Hel) 19 Axel and t couldn't find a way to establish Bla vantage, while White’s defence is pretty easy; for ex- ample 19,..Rad8!? 20 Hxb7 He2 21 Ae3 Le! 22 8.c3 (not 22 Lxe4? Bxe3 and wins). In this position I nearly stopped calculating, as 1 couldn't hing real, but now 1 doubr that after 22...8xe3 23 fixe} Bxa2 24 Lid4 Hxg2t+ 25 Dye? ch 26 He7 Bxe2 27 &xe7 Qxh3 it would be so easy for White to make a draw. Looking back at those chaotic old annota- tions I should perhaps conclude — that was objectively stronger than hough the move played in the nly more interesting, 1 should also mention that 16...Axf2? would be bad in view of 17 Bxe7 &xc2 18 Hxd7 Had8 19 PBlsd8 Bxd8 20 bd. 17 Lixt2 Dxf2 18 Mxe7 2.xc2 19 lxd7! game is cert Pare Pa anna We, Y YU ae ae ‘The correct approach. Keeping the active rook is fundamental to White’s counterplay. ‘The other option would be much worse; ie. 19 Mxe8#? Bxe8 20 esf2 Ac5 and Black is dearly bett 19...ad8! Meanwhile Black has to try to exchange this rook by whatever means, My original inten- tion, 19..Ad1, would not promise anything real in view of 20 Qedl, increasing White's activity and counterplay. 20 Tixd8 Hxd8 21 cA! This is better than 21 2xf2l? Bxd2+ 22 shel (if 22 dee3? Hd3+ 23 2 Qxb3 wins) 3d8 when Blick has the better chances. as 21..Ad1!? was another option. 22 a3 b5?! 2 64 i et cane aa .s g me 22... 8.11? was probably stronger, keeping, but 1 was fascinated by the nin the some adlvantng line that had nd, being, . | couldn't evalu already under time pr ate everything, 23 a5? ‘This active move happens to be the deci- sive mistake, By playing the correct 23 De White would probably secure the draws for example 23...8xb3 (23..b4 24 Dxc2 bxa3 25 Bxe6 is unclear) 24 Be7 He& (24...Kd7 25 Dh Ld5 26 Asd5 exdS 27 Ll Aed 28 &xb5 is also quite OK for White) 25 Abts @xa2 26 Sxc6 Wh8 27 Ld6 Hho 28 c7 with approximate equality. 23...b4! "This is what I had in mind, The idea of sac- rificing an exchange in order to promote a pawn is So natural that I would perhaps leave it unmarked, but when I put the positon on Selected Games Fitgs (just to do. some blunder-checking) | saw that it didn’t even come close to suggest ing 23..b4, And yet the move wins by force, whereas otherwise things ate le My current computer, five years ing those lines, suggests 23.-b4 as the third strongest move after some four minutes think- ing. It considers 2 fier writ- to be would good chances to win the game with one of them. Nevertheless, 23... forcing and thus the better move. I think that my b4 in this game, as well as 47,,..8b3 against Topalov, well demonsteates that a hu- man can still find better moves than a com- puter in certain positions, even in a tourna- ment game — and the beauty of such moves is in their depth, players strive for this kind of perfection and creativity on the chess- board, they have a lot to offer to the chess is more long audience. 24 D\ixc6 Forced. 24...bxa3 25 O\xd8 ba! This is a lor stronger than 25...2xb3 26 aS 27 Dal4. Now Black can block the 13 square in some lines. 26 {M3 Axa2 27 Acé e ee want ee saat ZZ ne nie ee Aan oe e4! ¢ sufficient, but the text is both simpler and far more attrae- tive. 28 DMtd4 &xc6 29 “\xc6 ab! 65Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Selected Games 29..Ac1 30 Abs a2 31 Axa2 Dxa2 would be less clear, 30 b4 After 30 xa5 Abd we sce the importance of blocking, the b3-ps 30...axb4 0-1 White cannot avoid material los resigned. T had only two + ch the time and so inutes left for 10 control, but making dy be easy, Normally it’s nor advisable to consume alll the ti those moves would al: 4 the yume, but in this we it definitely helped me to caleulate things better Game 15 Shirov-Korneev ‘Team Ch., Salamanca 1998 Sicilian Defence, Kan Variation ‘The annotations to this game are based on my notes for Injormator 73 made after the tournament. The text was added when work- ing on the book. Shorily before the Spanish ‘Team Champi- onship I learned that 1 might nor play the match against Kasparov at all and, of course, such news severch ed my play. Before the last round [ had only 3% points from 7 games, and all | could do was to concentrate as if nothing had happened. "The game turned to be a litle bit one-sided but I still like the final part of it. 1 04 5 2 “FS e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Axd4 a6 5 2d3 205 6 Ab3 a7 ‘This was the firs and, so far, the only time when somebody employed this s me. It also came as a surprise b expecting some line of the Ruy Lop. Oleg, Still, this line of Paulsen was popular enough in those times, so I was well prepated anyway. 7 64 “\c6 8 Ne3 dé 9 0-0 Af6 10 veh 1!? Not a novelty but an extremely seldom played move which I prepared a year before the actual game, White wants to play f2-, or first 85 followed by £2-f4. up against I was rom. 10...h5 In my home analysis, concentrated ‘on a typical move for such positions: 10..c5. ‘Then White can play the standard 11 £4, hop ing, to ¢ ne, or the more ambitious 11 @d5, after which Black has an ultra-sharp continuation 11..Ag4!? 12 Wes Wh4 13 h3 Bb8!? 14 set hS! with very dou- ble-cdged play. 11 &g5! Bk the a slightly better g previous move was rimed against 4 advance but, as | mentioned, this was not White's only idea behind 10 ht We? 12 Wd2?! Black’s main weakness is the d6-pawn, but sometimes it’s not the best idea to ty only to exploit your opponent's weaknesses! Now I would prefer the standard and active 12 f4! h4 13 WS with a slight adva 66 12...8d7 13 Kad Now 13 £4 h4 would be less convin ny be cause the queen is worse on d2 than on £3. 13...0e5 14 0e2 2.06? After this inaccuracy White’s strategy works, Also bad is 14..\xc4? 15 &.xe4 Wee 16 Wrd6! (16 e52! Dd5 17 Dxd5 Wrd5 Be and wins. But as he hims 23 What ext 24 WeIt 65 F pointed out in the postmortem, Oleg had a very interesting pawn sacrifice: 14..Afed! 15 &h4 £6! 16 Wexdo Wado 17 Hxd6 g5 18 B93 ht 19 Bxe5 Axes with good compensation, | don’t know why he didn’t play what he had seen, 15 13 Naturally I avoided taking the pawn, which would give Black the two bishops and some compensation after 15 Sxf6? gxfo 16 Wsdo Wxd6 17 Kxd6 Be7, 15...0-0-0 ‘This looks brave and... bad! But possibly there was no alternative. 16 \b5!? [like this move more than 16 d5!2, whieh also seems to bring White thi er 16...exd5. 17 exd5 Bb5 18 Bel &c5 19 Sxb5 axb5 20 Dd4 b4 21 a3 b3 22 @xb3. 16...axb5 17 cxb5 sie8?! I think it was better ro leave the bishop where it was, bee wase saving the extra material is impossible anyway. 18 cl &c5 19 Ada sbb8 20 b4 bé 21 ad?! awn assault against the enemy kin, lian, though it es place on the kingside! Here it is ary as 21 b3 would win a lot normally ta also unne¢ more quickly. 21...n4! Starting some counter nately, is too late 22 a5 Dns jay which, fort 23 Sxhat This is more accurate than 23 bxe5 dxc5 when Black can still hope for miracles. 23...95!? During the game I saw ghosts like 23...We7 24 Bxe7 Dest 25 yl Lxcl4+, but of course the calm 26 Er2 would refute it. Neither would 23..A6 work after 24 bxeS! (but not 24 axb6? Bxb6! 25 Hxc7 Axha! 26 Wes Gexc7 intending 27 Kel+ Sb7 28 Acé Ago!) 24...@xh4 25 axb6 We7 26 6 Dy3+ 27 Hel, so as we see Black’s position was already pretty hopeless. ‘The text doesn’t help either. 24 Wixg5 16 25 We3! Wg7 25...8.xd4 26 Wedd Wb7 was slightly more resistant, but White would still win by force with 27 a6! Ha 28 £4 Ago 29 Bxh5 Axh4 (or 29,.2xh5 30 Bxf6) 30 Bxc8 Bhxe8 31 Heo. 26 g4! Eliminating any threats. 26...\f4 27 bxeS xe2 28 “\xe2 Mxh4 67Fire on Board Part I: 1997-2004 29 c6 Me8 30 Wxb6+ a8 31 c7 1-0 Here Black lost on time and thus avoided getting mated, Gane 16 Shirov-Ftacnik European Cup, Senec 1998 Philidor Defence ‘The annotations to this same are based on my notes for Informutor 73 mace shortly after wards, ‘The text was added when working on the book. Mier the Spanish ‘Team Championship my next event was the preliminary part of the European Cup, where I bad to meet Fracnik and Almasi. ‘The situation with my match vs Kasparov was not improving, but at least 1 had some optimism because, at that time, 1 ship in Barcelona. In vain of course, but I would only know that later, while the optimism helped me to win both games in a reasonable style. Before starting work on this game 1 thought I would only need to add text to the variations I analysed in 1998, but th ier was trying to obtain spon id than done sinec my old analysis turned out to be very hasty and full of errors. When I realised that, my first intention was to exclude the game from the book, because my own ned no longer anything special, A y easy’ game (as I had thought before) was, in fact, only won because of my oppo- nent’s bad mistake on move 18. However, I found some sidelines so fascinating, especially the ones starting, with 8..Dxg4l, that I decided annotations for the readers” judg- ment anyway. After all, I didn’t make bad mis- takes myself I didn’t stand worse, so why not? A draw would b to give my this game, but that’s chess. 1 e4 d6 2 d4 AIG 3 Ac3 Abd7 4 f4 I had only encountered this opening in some blitz games, so on my 4th move [was already. thiriking chosen 4 gf And maybe 1 should have , though it seemed too aggressive tome. 4...e5 5 TS exd4 6 Wxd4 c6 7 fe3 »o passive. The theoretical 7..d5. would be preferable, though not because of my next move. 8 g4!? Here | saw no reason to slow down, and | was surprised to afterwards that such a natural attacking move was a novelty (8 0-0-0 and 8 W/d2 had been played before), However, right after writing the notes for Informalor | realised a possible problem with 8 g4 (sce the note to the next move) and therefore | would now prefer 8 0-0-0. 8.. After the game I was convinced that this was the best possible reaction to White’s 8th move, but what | completely missed was that after 8...Axg4!? 9 Wxp7 Axc3 10 Wxh8t AB, 68 Selected Games more logical outcome of for White to find a good is shows that i’s probably it's not at all ca: continuation! Anal best for White to go for a forced draw after tremendous complications with 11 S2d2 2e4l (an important intermediate move; 11.2.6 12 Wes Who 13 Dps! @ Wespe5 White seems to parry Black’s threats) 12 bxe3 Bol 13 Wys Wor 14 dee2! Web2 15 Wed @xc3! 16 Hal! (16 Kel Wxc2t 17 Bed Sa5 18 6 West 19 e2 may not be losing either, but it looks precarious to me) 16..Wsc2+ 17 Qd2 Bxd2 18 Hxd2 Wrett 19 2 Wexht 20 Heat bas 21 Wy7! &c7 (the variation is so forced for both sides that I pre fer to give no sidelines; for example, 21... Wexh24? loses to 22 te3) 22 Ket+ Da7 23 Hxd7+ Gxd7 24 Wext7+ dds 25 WEB+ 8c7 and White should either give a perpetual e Black do the same by t or mal ing his rook: Thus ting with et would lead to a draw with perfect play and would also be very fascinating, ‘The pleasure of cl is that you can ‘replay’ all the nice the line s anallysi variations presuming they are correct ones, while on the board one always has to choose a move. In fact is good cnough too. I should also mention that during the game 1 anticipated 8..c5 9 Wd2 Dxud winning the pawn, when White’s compensation afer 10 0-0-0 seemed sufficient to me. 9 95! Going for mass looked rather uns anges as 9 exd5a 2c5 tive. 9....e5 10 Hd3 I wasn’t convinced by the idea of sacrificing, a pawn with 10 Wd2?! here, as I saw nothing definite for White in the line 10..@xe4 11 Dyed dred 12 Dcl4 0-0 13 0-0-0 Abo. 10...dxe4! Less good was 10,..2xe3 11 Wxe3, 11 Dxed Axed 12 Wxedt+ We7 13 Wxe7+ exe7 SS WY, a - Be SR Twas mostly expecting 13...&xe7 and hop- ing to get some small advantage with 14 0-0-0, but now | think that with 14..Ab6 Black should equalise sooner or later. Instead of that Ftacnik wants to exe the bishops and simplify the position, White can’t reall this exchange but... 14 oda! White can do it while gaining a very impor tant tempo, so his initiative becomes strong: avoid Here we also sce why it was safer to take on 7 with the bishop as now the black king will be exposed. 14....xd4 15 Dxd4 Acs! 15...Ab6 16 0-0-0 Bd8 would be a tough, but much more pa however, require Black later on. 16 0-0-0 fas! Black is balancing on the razor’s edge and, for the moment, he finds the strongest moves. e817 bd Det 18 Be2 clear advan sive defence. The text, accurate play. from Much weaker was 1 D3 19 Adel+ with 16...26 17 Sc! would also yield White a plus. 1, while 69Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 17 £5! ‘Trying to gain space and confusing Black. Funnily, during and after the game I thought 1 as already much better in this position, 17...h6! Again the best continuation, The immedi- ate 17...Ae4 would be bad in view of 18 £92! Dod 19 h4 c5 20 Hdel+! GB 21 hxgs Bxdd 22 Exh? winning. 18 ha Dea? ‘The fatal error, Back in 1998 1 was con- vinced that Black’s position was already clearly inferior, but as often happened when working on the book, I had to change certain evalua- tions. Here 18...hxg5 19 hxe5 Ded was suffi- cient for equality; eg, 20 Hh5 Ap3 21 Hel+ do 22 Hh3 Dxfl (but not 22...Axf5? 23 Rd3) 23 Bxfl ec? is level, while after the move which I thought to be very strong, 20 Bet \\ b e » Ws yY Sas RE Abr . Black would have 20,..8f8! which I missed in my analysis five years ago. 1 was counting on 21 Het! Rxd4 22 ¢3 Bad 23 b5 Fsa2 24 Hxed+ uo 25 Halt oc? 26 Be7+ bo 27 seb1! Oxf5+ (or 27...ka5 28 Sd7) 28 Lxa2 GxbS 29 b3! G6 30 g61, which is in deed a pretty win. But as we can see, Black is not obliged to go for such a line! And after 20,..€@18 I found no way that White could be hetter; for example 21 892 Do3! 22 2h3 Exd4 (22..e4!? might also be possible) 23 Fixg3 Hxd+ 24 Gxdi {6 and there are simply not enough pieces on the board. Iv’s difficult to say what Feacnik was afraid of, but 18..Hed is the decisive mistake. Now White easily gets a winning advantage. 19 Sig2 a6 19..2\f2 would allow the nice shot 20 DscGt! bxeb 21 (6+ gxf6 22 gxto+ Bxfo 23 Axd8 Axhl 24 Qxc6! QbT 25 Eder wees 26 Hd5+ He6 27 Bxb7 Bbs 28 MbS with an tra pawn and a decisive advantage in the end- game. ‘The game is practically over. though some technique is still required. 20...Dxf5 21 Sxb7! xb? 22 Oxf5+ FB 23 gxh6! All White's moves are simple, but also rather elegant, [ think. 23...gxh6 Not 23...8xh1? 24 h7. 24 Yxd8+ Kxd8 25 841 70 Selected Games rying to be as accurate as possible, 1 re jected the immediate rook exchange 25 Ed! Bxd1+ 26 @xdt because of 26...2c81? as it seemed to me that White was not clearly win ning; eg. 27 Duo Lg4+ 28 Bd2 e7. 1 think the evaluation ‘not clearly winning’ was simply influenced by my ‘usual’ time pressure, 25...h5 26 Hd1 Mbs! ying to set up some practical chances in a lost position, Otherwise after 26,..Hxd1+ 27 Wxdl Bc8 28 De3 de7 29 dd2 Bet 30 ted I could play with my eyes closed. 27 Kd7 G4 28 A\d6 g6 29 c4 a me patent a Uo 29 Exa72l Ed8 would be unnecessary in time-trouble 29,..¢g7! Activating the king is not at all a bad way to confuse things. Fortunately, I kept myself cool and calculated to the end, despite having only a few minutes left to reach move forty. 30 cB tef6 31 c6 Mb6! 32 Ae8+! de6 If 32...8e5 33 7 Keot 34 sed2 LFS 35 EXT or 34...£6 35 Re7+ Hed 36 Ast wins, 33 Hd6+ ve7 33.85 34 c7 B65 35 Exb6 axb6 36 Ae7 is similar, 34 c7 Of5 35 Hxb6 axb6 36 “\g7 “The h-pawn falls and there is no more hope for Black, 36...28 37 DxhS sud6 38 Ag7 sxc? 39 hS Ob7 Or 39...B.a6 40 fd2. 40 h6 fe4 41 \e8+ 1-0 ae AD ma Y atafae ae A i A ae yy Game 17 Shirov-Hracek Match (game 2), Ostrava 1998 Caro-Kann Defence, Advance Variation ‘The annotations to this game were done shortly after the match and published in vari- ous magazines, including Scbuch. My match against Hracek didn’t contain a but the final score 5-1 in my fa vour didn’t seem just, because Hmeek mis played various strong. positions third and sixth games). I believe t ond game, which [ present here, was the most single g. in the it the sec interesting, one. 1646 ‘The first surprise. Zbynek would normally choose the Sicilian. 2. d4 d5 3 05 2f5 4 Acs? zone for 4 D3, but when I saw how convincingly Sutovsky (one orla) beat Magem at the ‘lista Olympiad with 4 Ac3, | couldn't help trying it. After success in this game, | was ged to continue employing this sharp m and, for several years, it became my ain weapon against the Caro-Kann, How- my current opinion about the s isn’t great — see my games vs. Topalov and Dreey, played in 2003, later in vihis book, 4...ib6 The main line is 4...e6, but for some reason. Previously ’d_abw: em 71Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 the text move was quite popular at the time 5 D3 e6 6 Le2 Ad7 7 0-0 “\e7 8 b3 i a be eG a \\Y hee SY NY ee WC RA wy \ Be Re Mi), In the fourth game I tried to improve White’s play with 8 Dad, which is possibly |. In Monaco 20001 later T also tried it against Karpoy, but unfortunately it turned out to be a very low-quality blindfold game, even though T eventually won. ro-Kann suddenly . The move was also a broke and the ‘boring’ becomes very ex novelty. 9 dxc5 AxcS 10 da Maybe, in retrospect, I should suggest something like 10 @e3 Deo 1 Ab5!? (but not 11 Dade! Was). 10...a6 11 03 Was 11...2,g6? is also interesting, At the time | thought that going for the queen with 12 ADseGr fxe6 13 Dat Dxad 14 Lxbo Axbo would not be in Whit our, but now I believe that his position is very reasonable in this line, He can pkyy 15 edl?, for example. | don’t know why T thought White was worse five and a half years ago. 12 g4?! Going for complications I overlooked Hracek’s 14th, 12 b42! Ad7! (not 12... ede! 13 Bxed Bxe4 14 b5!) 13 gt?! Lp6 14 £4 Hed would be a si story, so maybe 1 should have played 12 F4!2 with an unclear position. 2g6 13 £4 Ded! 14 Daa Feeling, very confident as f-f5 is threaren- ing, but... 14...h5! 15 £5! ‘There is no way back. 15 exh5! Af tains. 15...hxg4 16 fxe6! AC +a AR Y te ag 72 As 16. fxg6 Axgeo 17 xed Wha 18 Wer DxeS 19 B63 Bd6 20 Bxe4 Ded! would be terribly unpleasant for White, 1 had to dive into muddy waters. | must add that during the an in aver game | felt a lot more pessimistic analysis. 16...93!? Maybe not bad, but 1 was much more 1 of 16...£5!. Only in analy could 1 es- ceptable: tablish that White’s position \ a) 17 Bf4? B.h7 is b) 17 't advisable, 6 (the most critical continuation) 18 QFal (18 Qxe4 15 19 263 b5 20 Gb? We7 21 We2 2.97 is horrible and, during; possibility ar, with the game, | thought it was my onl: after 16...£5!) 18...8¢7 19 c4 is uw the idea of sacrificing the © 19...dxe4 20 bxed (5 21 Ab31, ©) 17 cle also seems to hold the dynamic nge after balance; for example: cl) 17..20h3 18 &.64 dxe4 19 bxe4 is unclear. 2) 17..Me72 18 Kell? (not 18 exd5? Dsd5 19 Dxf5 Weed 20 Ltd Wxes 21 Dad WG 22 2.03 Wy5 and Black wins) 18.93 19 QF pxh2+ 20 292 is also unclear. 3) 17.93 18 hxg3 Axed 19 2.63! Dx 20 Wefl_and White has compensation. cd) 17.6 18 Ast! (bur not 18 Debs Wh4 19 24 93 and wins) 18..2.xf5 19 Ebsts Wh 20 Raft BsfB 21 Wed5 Hee 22 Wa7+ 18 23 Bxt2 Wri2t 24 Bh g3 25 WIT Wsxf7 26 exf7 Axc5 with a level position. 17 exf7+ Qxt7 18 h3! N N \ b> aa ~ N Pa NSN Yy Selected Games It cost me a lot ro find this move, and when I made it 1 was left with about 20 minutes (or even less) to reach the time control. But I was confident that my position was at least not worse, Other moves didn’t work; for example 18 hxg3? Axg3 or 18 Qed? exh2+ 19 seer Do6 20 6 Dhd+ 21 Bxh2 Wert 22 BA Dot 23 Seg Dx 24 ext7+ Wst7 and Black is winning, 18...92? Afier a long, thought Hracek made the deci- sive error. 18..2&xh3 19 &g4 would also be bad, so he had to try 18.2! 19 G.xf2 gxf2+ 20 Bxt2 Ac6 hoping to ger enough activity for the pan. 19 Rxt7! sext7 20 f.g4! And White is winning, 'The rest is easy to understand without much comment. All the remaining white pieces participate in the attack and Black is not even developed yet. 20...We7 21 Wt3+ wte8 22 e6! 22...c6 If 22... \p6 23 Bxd5 Dc5 24 Wxp2! wins, or 22...Wse5 23 STH (better than 23 WET+ Bd8 24 DcG+ bxc6 25 Bb6+ We7 26 dexe2) 23...8d8 24 Hal! (24 DeG+?! Bd7 25 Abor cb would be unclear) 24...Me8 (or 24...AcB 25 Bf) 25 Dect ted7 26 bor seco 27 Axc8 Dxc8 28 Dds+ and wins. 23 LixdS Dxd4 24 ilxed 1-0 Black can’t protect his king anymore and therefore he resigned. 73Fire on Board Part tI: 1997-2004 Game 18 Shirov-Reinderman Wijk aan Zee 1999 Sicilian Defence, Taimanon Variation ‘The annotations to this game were done when working on this book and are based on my notes for Lyformator 74 back in 1999, though with a new copyright: Fn (Hamburg, Germany) ‘This is one of those games of which I had a far higher opinion before starting the detailed analysis. It’s also difficult to understand: why my comments on it five years ago contained some obvious mistakes in evaluations. Once again I had every doubt about whether to in- clude the game in the book or not, but in the end I decided that some bad moves don’t Atleast Pll ions this time. 1 e4 cS 2 M3 Dc6 3 Ac3 e6 4 d4 cxd4 5 \xd4 a6 6 Se2 Dge7 to pro- Somehow this set-up has always seemed too slow to me. Black wants to put his other knight on c6 after an exchange on d4, but | believe that it stands a little better on the ‘normal’ (6 square due to its control over d5. In the present game it will be difficult for Black to employ the ‘freeing’ idea ..d6-d5. 7 fa! Preparing, in advance the (2 square for the queen. 7...2xd4 8 Wxd4 b5 9 0-0 Van der Wiel played 9 a4 against Anders son in Wijk aan Zee 1987 and, funnily enough, the game transposed to that one anyway later on. | think 9 0-0 is a more precise move order thoug 9...We7?! Beliavsky played 9.6 against Palac (Slovenian League 2001) and it option, though he didn’t equal ms a better © completely either. The game continued 10 W2 &c7 11 863 0.0 12 a4 bd 13 Bb6 Wes 14 Dbt with an edge for White. 10 WF2t Possibly my opponent didn’t expect this. 10...0c6 Now we can see that 9...e7 was rather y as it didn’t prevent White’s plan. ‘The ‘logical continuation’ would have been 10...b4 11 @a4 Wse2. winning a pawn, but coming under terrific attack, after either the quiet 12 b3!2 with compensation (that 1 was ly planning during the game) or the straightforward 12 £5! Wad (12..exf 13 Db6 Hh 14 Acd Deb 15 24 is curtains) 13 £6! gxfo 14 Wxt6 Deo 15 Bp5 Be7 16 Wxt7+ sbd8 17 Qxe7+ Dxe7 18 We? He8 19 Bh5 Do6 20 Wxh7 and White is winning (accord- ing to Fiiig’s ‘investigations’ five years later). 11 Ge3 Ge7 12 aa! 12 243, planning to move the knight to ¢2 (as Tal did once in a similar position), interesting, but I prefer my move. also 74 Selected Games 12...b4 13 b1 ‘The knight will be extremely well placed on it can later go to 4, b3 or F3 depending, on the situation, 13...d5 14 &.b6 Wb7 15 Ad2 would also be int for Black. rN we ~ So o Here I think 15...d5 would be preferable. White could then continue 16 2b3 with a slight advantage. 16 Had1! Only this move is new because, as 1 men: tioned before, we had transposed to the old game Van der Wiel-Andersson (after 14...0-0). Here Van der Wiel played 16 We3, and following, 16...f5! Black got good play since the queen on g3 is now telatively stupid. ‘The move | chose aims for a better co-ordination of White’s pieces, parrics the threat of 17.8.6 (which can now be answered by 18 b3) and has in mind attacking the do-pawn one c: 16...b3 There's no need to sacrifice a pawn of course, but neither y to find a good move. 17 cxb3! After 17 Axb3 Dbd or 17.8661? Black could hope for decent compensation, 17,..06 18 Ket! The c-file is much more important than the extra pawn. 18....2xb2 19 Me2 a3 . a .e waa 4 19...8.6 looks more stubborn, since after 20 Bfel Qb7 21 Bxa6 &xa6 22 Exo Wh7 Black would retain some counterpay for the sacrificed material. OF course White is better anyway; for example 23 Bb6 Was 24 Hxdo. 20 e5?! ‘This spectacular continuation, that made me select this game for the book, is in fact a ! Instead 20 Hal would grab a milar fashion to the previous note, wrong 0 pawa in but would yield Black some extra activity; eg, 20...0b4 21 Bact &b7 22 Bxa6 Lxa6 23 Exco Wast (not 23..Mb7 24 He7! Was Ha7 Bbc8 26 Kxa8 Bxel+ 27 AFI and wins) 24 Ded Bxed 25 Roxed Ba3!, although | think that White should still be able to con- solidate and slowly win after 26 Ele3 d5! 27 exd5 exd5 28 Keb &b4 29 Baal, However, I believe that 20 65!, which 1 didn’t even consider during the game, would be even stronger than 20 Hal. 21 £6 is now a serious threat, so Black's reply 20...£6 seems forced, And now it’s time to go after Bl pawn; ic. 21 Ral! (21 fxe6 Wh7! offers Black more counter-chances) 2t...8c5 (21...Sub4 22 act is just terrible this time) 22 &xc5 dxe5 23 Wre5 We5 24 Hc3! WeS+ 25 Excd Des 26 BI and the endgame seems winning for White. 20...d5? The decisive mistake. 20,.dxe5 21 @e4 8b7 22 Bal would also be bad, but 20...!d7! ck’s. 75Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 might make me regret my exuberant 20th move. Objectively White’s best move now is 21 exd6, as 21 Ded? dyed 22 AGH pxl6 23 Rxh7+ Sxh7 24 What og8 25 Wed+ dhs only leads to a draw, while 21 &xh7-+2! &xh7 22 Ded f6! (22..8h8 is also pood enough to draw; c.g. 23 Exco Wxc6 24 What des 25 Was+ @2h7 and now 26 Apg5+? 6 27 Wshs fails to 27... Wxg2H 28 Bxe2 @b7+ and Black obtains a superior endgame) 23 exf6 Bos! (but not 23...Axb3? 24 Exc6! Wes 25 Wha-+ Hy8 26 fxg7 xy? 27 £5 winning) has White already looking, for a narrow escape, such as 24 fxe7 (24 Bcl Bxb3 25 fxeT Wre7 favours Black) 24... Wxe7 25 Etxe6 267 26 Bed! Bus! (not 26...d5? 27 Bd 05 28 Hed! exd4 29 He3 dxe4 30 bal! and White wins) 27 dd Exb3! 28 Bxd5! exd5 29 Bd4 Woo 30 Wh! (not 30 Sal Wod!) 30..WWxed 31 Wydt 17 32 Wa7+ We7 33 Wrst she8 34 We8+ with a draw by perpetual check, It’s amazing that such a long and complicated line was in fact rather forced. OK, it’s time to get back to 21 exdé, BI ck should capture the pawn with the bishop, be- cause the tempting 21..b4 loses to 22 Bixh7+! texh7 23 Ded! Dds 24 What dos 25 He7! Was (25..Axc7 26 ApS is mate) 26 Dos Dio 27 Ld! Wrxdo 28 Bxto BcS+ 29 ht a3 30 Kel with a decisive attack, while 21..Wxd6 22 Bed Da Ba7 BAT 24 Axb8 Hxbs 25 We3 leaves Black with no compensation for the exchange. However, after 21...Qxd6 White doesn’t have anything better than 22 cd Qe7 23 Sed with a tiny advantage, much smaller than in case of 20 £5 or 20 Hal. All the same, from a practical point of view, a in und quite @ natural mi decisive andable try and 21.15? is Now I can tack that gave me a lot of though my moves were not all perfect from the computer’s point of view. 21 D3! Hd7 ‘This queen move is now late, During the game | was completely unsure w! ver 21... Rats, because [ thought that after 22 Qxh7+ Bxh7 23 Ada! Black would still have 23...28b2 and, although [ would win the piece back, it might be not enough for a win, Fortu- nately, Fitz ‘prolonged’ my calculations and stated (even back in 1999) that after 24 @cl! White should he winning, OK, I have to give a few more computer lines: 24..2xd4 (or 24... Exc2 25 Wxc2+ Bo8 26 Bxa3 Wb6 27 2sf8 Wd4+ 28 dahl) 25 Wh4+ see8 26 Hxc7 De2+ 27 Sh Abt 28 Wee Axct 29 Wer Etbs 30 Hes! b2 31 Bh3 6 32 Bho and Black has no defence. 22 &xh7+! A simple, known, but still a nice, sacrifice. 22...%exh7 23 Wh4+ seg8 24 Ags Kes 24. hd8 25 Wh7+ 08 26 Whst Bee7 27 Wse7 loses more quickly. 25 BAB! 25 Wh7+ sets 26 Whst stee7 27 Wxe7 as, at to do af- 76 would be less convincing now. 25..e7 Forced. 25...2xb3 loses to 26 2h3 fers 27 Dh7+ fae8 28 Afor, 26 Wh7+ &f8 27 Wh8+ Ag8 mt EA TM ane OB Le 2 _ Bs 28 151? Fritz claims that 28 £21, strangling the black king, would be more effective, bur un fortunately | learned to attack with old books. 28...ext5 1f 28,.,.Exb3? 29 £6. 29 e6! 29 A\n7+2! see7 30 QeS+ He6 31 Wxe7 dt would create some unnecessary mess, if only point of view. White is winning from a hum: on monster. cording to the s At least there is some solidarity in the line 29,.2xe6 30 Ah7+ He7 31 ByS+ £6 32 Wxps which I saw during the game. 30 Ng3! g6 31 Ah7+ sef7 32 Ah6! I saw this move when playing 22 &xh7+. And you, my German friend? 32...she7 Tf 32..Axh6 33 Wher ep8 34 BxeG+ ixh7 35 HxhGt mating, 33 Og5+ w7 33.826 34 .f4+ Be7 (34...c5 35 Kxest) 35 We7+ Sed8 36 Bc7+ would be ish. 34 S461? ‘Too concerned about a short of time, I didn’t noti nice fin- thetics and a little e 34 ASG, after Selected Games which Pr#g gives an unusval evaluation +25.52 in White's favour. 34.08 e.g ada 34.2.8 35 Ay5 mate is how | would pre fer the game to end, of course, Meanwhile 34...05 35 Hc7 is the same story as the game. 35 Ke7! Not +25.52 anymore but still clearly win ning for White. Not a bad end to an attack starting with 20 @5, is it? 35....Dxf6 36 Wxt6+ sveB 37 Wxg6+ Finally gathering in the harvest. 37...8dB 38 Nxd7+ Axd7 39 AxfB LxfB 40 Wit6+ Se7 41 RgB+ ike7 42 West skb7 43 Uxb8+ soxb8 44 h4 1-0 Black resigned due to the obvious 44,,.82.xh4-45 Wht. Game 19 Shirov-Van Wely Monaco (blindfold) 1999 Réti Opening ‘The annotations to this game were done when working on the book and are based on my notes published in Informator 75 in 1999. In the 1999 edition of the Melody Amber tournament 1 was especially successful in the blindfold games. Not only in the result (shar- ing first place if | remember correctly) but also in the quality of my play. The two T offer for the readers’ judgment gave me a real pleasure. I remember that I even wanted to play my 77Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 rapid games blindfold, but this wasn’t permit- ted by the tournament rules! 1 D3 D6 2 g3 Shortly before going to Monaco I started living in Glogow (Poland), which also. hap- pened to be the hometown of Tomas Markowski. As Tomasz, was preparing for the Polish Championship (which he later suc fully won) we did some taining together, played various blitz games, and somehow I was convinced into trying some of Markow ski’s repertoire sometimes. 1 gave up the idea after struggling for a draw with White two months later against Nigel Short Sarajevo 1999), but that’s a different story 2...d5 3 Lg2 G15 4 d3 e6 5 0-0 hé 6 c4 c6 7 fe3 dxc4 White will have a long-lasting initiativ queenless: middlegame, 7...2¢7 looks more normal to me. 8 dxc4 Wxd1 9 Exd1 Abd7 10 Ac3 ' ing, swept the queens from the board, Black should have tried to ex- change more pieces and played 10....2.¢5. 11 £d2 £c5 12 261 White’s passivity is only temporary 12,..0-0-0 13 Ada! i A new move. Previously 13.87 used wo be pkyed, but I doubt it would change any- thing in White’s plans. 14 Daa! If White manages to wade his knight for a black bishop, his advantage will be quite seri- ous, Naturally Van Wely wants to avoid this happening... 14...007 wit one SI S oN < Ww “ i > SN ize . RR B at ! pointed out Joel Lautier, who was watching the in the pressroom, (In Monaco the competitors are always split into two groups ~ six play at a time, then the other six, and so on, and at this moment Joel wasn’t playing) The time control in the blindfold games is 25 minutes, plus 20 seconds pet move. Having played a new open ing I was thinking a lot over the first moves, and when sacrificing on ¢6 I had barely three minutes left! Not a nice way to ‘start’ the game, which only thanks to Fischer clock could still be continued. White could not hope for any advantage af- ter the alternative 15 @a5 Bde8 16 b4 Apes, and sacrifices are now dubious; ic. 16 SLxc6?! bxe6 17 Axc6 Dde5 or 16 Axc62! bxe6 17 Lxc6 Apt, 15...bxc6 16 \xc6 846 After the game I thought this was the only move since 16..Hde8 17 Dsxa7+ Bb8 18 Bxd7 De5 would lose to 19 Bxe7!, But Black could also play 16..2ihe8, to which the best reply is probably 17 @a5! Apes 18 Bxe7+ Bxe7 19 Oxd8 fexd8 20 Rach ne Fact Selected Games 78 with an edge for White, who will now start advancing his queenside pawns, 17 Gab? Thad no time to evaluate whether 17 Dxd8 Bxd8 would be a better option than the text, so I simply chose the more spectacular movel 17...8.02 18 Axd8 KxdB Black had two alternatives, but neither of them would equalise completely a) 18..0xa4 19 Bxf6 Doxt 20 Dxa7+ <2b7 21 b3 Sxa7 22 bxad and White is better. b) 18..2xd1!? 19 Bexdt Bxd8! Gvorse is 19....xd8 20 @xa7+ Sec7 21 Ab5+ BHc8 22 Ddot e7 23 Dxt7 with a big edge) 20 Axd8 Bxd8, which could also occur one move later: 19 OxdB Sinad?! s to break up my queenside pawns but this allows White additional activ: ity. 19...S.xd8? was bad due to 20 Had, but he could play 19... &xd1! 20 Bxdt &xd8. ea a Compared with the 16...2he8 line indicated t, Black has a which, in some lines, can give him impor control over d6 and ¢5 squares. All the it’s difficult to fight after 21 bd. 20 “\xt7 xb2 21 Dd6+! Black's idea would work after 21 Bab! xdl 22 Bxb2 de7!, but 22 DdoH! trans- poses to the game 21,..3867 21.988 would also be answered by 22 Babl Sxd1 23 Bxb2! with a clear advantage. 22 Mab1 2xd1 23 A\b5+! se6 -squared bishop nt ne, wainst the white pawns 7 a ee $A Me 7 ae yaw Hee Ye [e's an unusual situation when one has to choose between two bishops. I preferred the d pla dark-squared on 24 Exb2!? but it’s clear to me that 24 Exdi!? would ust a matter of taste, also do. So, finally, it w especially with no time to evaluate everything: 24...ge5 25 Dda+ sid6 26 Nd2 Using the rempo to win another pawn. 26....a4 27 5+ LET 28 xg? which is actually a very important one, since White the kingside, 28...c5 29 da Going for the h6-pawn, When it falls the game should be over, though White must still take into account the slightly misplaced posi- tion of his knight and the danger of Black ere- ating a passed a-pawn. now create ‘a passed pawn on 79Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Selected Games 29...a5 30 Uih4 Dt7 31 Mf4 Des 32 116 sbd7 33 xh6 se7 win, With the t trying to activate my knight and utilise the strong kingside pawns. 34...\xc4 35 £5 exfS 36 AxfS+ d7 37 hal An obyious, but still effective move 37...S0¢2 38 Add 2b1? A typical ‘blindfold blunder when you are already in time-trouble. 38...8e4 would pro- long. the rx ance, though not change the final result after 39 ge 39 Hc6 Winning a piece and the game. 39....1xa2 40 SixeS a4 41 NS a3 42 h6 1-0 Game 20 Shirov-Ljubojevic Monaco (blindfold) 1999 Sieian Defewce, Scheveningen Variation ‘The annotations to this game were done when working on the book. Although 1 vays considered this game to be relativ clud ed to in- e it is nice to re member, And when I started annotating it, 1 also noticed that the position on move 22 was less clear than I had thought before. in the book bs 1 e4 c5 2 SMB d6 3 da cxd4 4 Axd4 “AFG 5 ‘Ne3 a6 6 ke3 Nc6 7 ite2 eG 8 f4 We7?! I think this is already a mistake. ‘The queen does not always stand well on ¢7 and the loss be very important. 8...2c7 would be a more normal continuation. 9 Wd2 Se7 10 0-0-0 0-0 11 g4! of a tempo & Of course! 11...Dxd4 12 Wxd4 e5 Black goes for a pawn but White’s compen- sation will be too strong, | can’t suggest an alternative, however. 13 Wd3 Sxga ‘There were some carlier games with 13...exf4 14 xf, but after 14....8e6 15 ¥5 or 14..Bxp4 15 Bxed Axed 16 Dds Was 17 Wy3 Ac 18 Bxe5 dxe5 19 Bhgl 96 20 Yred White is definitely better. 14 2x94 ‘Dxg4 15 Ads WaT 80 15.8 is bad after 16 &.b6 WaT 17 Bhel. 16 15! A positional approach. There was no fore ing way to yet the advantage, and since it was a blindfold rapid game I couldn’t think for too long, ‘The superiority of the knight on d5 over the black bishop is more than enough com- pensation for a pawn 16...2d8 17 Uhg1 Axe3 18 Hxe3 16 19 h4.WA7 20 hS ORG a \y A x isc oy N Y Ye, wae i RR Y Y NX EA Y pe = ie re 16 Wid6! ‘The only move but a strong one, | already’ felt very confident at this stage because, some- how, I sensed that my pieces were placed armoniously for the forthcoming com- more plications. 16...04 17 Ads 2.97 18 DgS Ada! alt position one can, of course expect best play from a player like Topalov. He already ‘had a chance’ to be severely mated after 18..h6 19 exb5 axb5 20 @xb5 Ded (if 20..Nb4 21 De7+ PhS 22 Led Dxadt 23 In a dil Selected Games Bb1 wins) 21 Dc7+ Hh8 22 Wyol!, or 18...Wa5 19 skeb1 ho 20 Ato+ Bhs 21 Wxcd!, but naturally he avoids such lines. 19 e7+ &hB i poet Yh, +e wits a" ace SS y Kt 20 h3!? Back in 20000 1 considered this continuation imprecise, but now 1 believe that it is one of the best moves in the position. 20 b4!? wa interesting alternative, but during the game i not so easy to dare opening up the king like this. And then thet also 20 tb 1!? which would lead to a t i 4 21 3h3, whi might be even more effective than in the game! 20...f4 By not allowing my rook to g3, Topalov practically forces me to find the right winning plan. After 20..b4!2 I would probably con: tinue 21 e3 (actually 21 GIP a5 22 Hes! a perfectly acceptable alternative move order) and a good question remaining is what | would do after 21.05, Other lines s is very strong!) ‘ 3 Hxe7 daxe? 24 Budd) 23 Web$ Barb 24 And Badd Axf5 Be5 26 Ke3! seem more or less clearly in White’s favour, So after 21..a5, L decided back in 2000 that 22 Exc! chance to get the advantage, since variations like 22 Wxe5 Wxd7 23 Axh7 Hfds 24 &b1 De6 25 Exd7 Axcd 26 Des Hxd7 27 Dxt7+ the best 93Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 h7 28 Dgs+ h8 with a draw or Ws! 23 Wxbs (23 Wxes Wr+ 24 Hd2 Deo! 23..EREsb8 24 De5 ES are not especially promising, To my gre is good for Blacl ed that White still has a very strong alternative in 22 @b1! when writing these notes, Ir and Black is paralysed, facing the threat of 23 Wexe5 Wd7 24 @xh7! which is now ine! His best chance now is possibly (22,..Rao 23 Wrxc5 Wexd7 allows a neat mate after 24 Eixdd &xd4 25 Dxt7+ Bxi7 26 Bes, while 22...f4 23 Bed Bab — what else? — 24 Wxc5 Wxd7 loses to the more complicated but no less beautiful 25 Exd4! Wxet 26 Hd8!), but after 23 h7 Hab 24 Wxes Bxh7 25 Hxg7+ daxe7 26 Bad White is winning, Returning «0 22 Hxd4, the position after 22..cxd4 23 WEA! Wd7 24 Dxf5 3 25 Pxa7 d2+ (not 25,,MWad 26 Hxd3! exd3 27 2@xd3 and Black will get mated) 26 Wxd2 Wxd2+ 27 Sxd2 should be winning, but it’s clear that 22 SDI! is more convincing, It’s never a bad idea your old analysis throught 21 bale more seriously, but I preferred a different idea 21...b4!? During the game T was more concerned about 21..h6, which would finally make me play 2 because after 22 Dgo+ web) (of 6 23 Wep6 hxgS 24 bxeSt+ y8 25 cxb5! Bd5 26 Bcd! Bxcd 27 Kaht and mate is inevitable) White is forced to re- Here 1 was already considering peat the position with 23 e7+ Sh8 and then play 24 ba! anyway, But then Black is in fact helpless. Is the b2-b4 idea generally better than the one (b1 and then 262!) that [ found? Aesthetically I like both of them, so it depends on 22 Ge2i! ste ~ and the actual position! Norm: something, concrete, be it a che combination, Maybe a direct mating three this case White will only get a_ thre threaten mate! Unusual, isn’t it? The immedi- ate 22 Wixe5 Wad7 would suit Black perfectly. 22.13 tying to win a tempo to get the knight to 26 via 4, but probably missing my 26th move. If instead 22...8 ‘Wsc5 and it’s impos sible to parry the threat of 24 WES; eg, 23.65 24 Ae wins, while 23...A\d4 24 Kxd4 Oxd4 25 WIS S297 26 &g8! is another neat end — the many in the sidelines of this ‘The most stubborn try would be 22...a5, but after 23 Qed! (defending the precious d7- pawn!) 23...f5 (if 23...£6 24 Wxe5 wins) 24 Doo! Seg8 25 Bxdd! Bxdd 26 West 497 27 Asks Wet8 28 Whol White finally gathers in the harvest. 23 gxf3 “)\xe2?! Black's position should be considered lost yin chess one sactifi to vame! e White has both an attack antage, but this capture is virtually an immediate resignation. 24 Wixc5 fa 25 WHS Ag6 bee: and a material a 94 26 hS! ‘The last finesse. [ had to sce this move well in advance, of course, 26...Wxe7 27 hxg6 1-0 Black resigns; he is finally getting mated Game 29 Bacrot-Shirov Sarajevo 2000 Budapest Gambit This game was annotated after the tourna- ment and published in various 6 nes, in- cluding Schach: 1 d4 Af6 2 c4 e517 er Cs SY eV Py SN We a It had been almost ten years s the Budapest Gambit. Bacror’s second in jevo was Alexander Nikitin, Kasparov's long, so I tried to take them out of their ration, Here F think T should tell time coach, opening prey Selected Games the whole story. Shortly before the 2000 S; jevo tournament I gave a simultaneous exhibi tion in mbourg, and an amateur played the Budapest Gambit in the Jardin de Lu: against me. After that game I realised that there were some new (at least for me!) ideas in the opening and I decided to give it a try. In 2001 T gave another simul ina different part of Paris and before it I answered my oppo- nents’ questions. Somebody asked my opinion of the Budapest Gambit, referring to my game against Bacrot, and I started telling, the story amateur in 2000 — but it I was speaking to the same he try the opening about the Paris turned out So T suggested th {me again in the simul and this wed to beat him more convincingly. As for me, I haven't tried the Budapest Gambit tume | again in a tournament game since, but who knows about the future... 3 dxeS ‘ig4 4 e4 But here is a surprise for me. | expected 4 264 or 4 DP and was now already out of the book. 4... DxeB 6 £4 Dec6 6 DIS Probably not the best move. 6 &e3 looked more logical. 6...205 7 \e3 0-0 8 £5 A new move. § 243 used to be played, but Vd better skip theoretical remarks as White’s set-up doesn’t convince me anyway. 8...d6 9 Og5 16 10 f4 Hes 11 Wa5+ eh8 12 0-0-0 a7 95Fire on Board Part ll: 1997-2004 bly and aims Afier the laimning 1 Black has developed comfort for the play on the dark square game Nikitin surprised me a lot by was much worse here. 13 ha? 13 g4! with an unclear position would still be normal for White. 13...ee5 14 h5?! 14 Wa2 was not good in view of 14...\e4! but White should have pkiyed something other than the tex play will be ended. 14...h6 15 Wid2 “V7 White is alre: ed-pawn is very w 16 £243 &2b4 17 62 Des 18 Was Or 18 Khel £7. 18...sg8 19 Ne2 Aiming for the estranged bishop on b4 ( 19,847? 20 a3 &e6 21 Wada with an unclear position), but missing the tactieal blow. 19...06! 20 Wd4 2xf5 21 exf5 Exe2 22 gi? During the game [ was more concerned ince now his kingside in severe difficulties as the ufficient in the long run (after 26 De Wh6, for example). 22...Xxg2 ee” an. fe a 5 ama gy ee A Ey 23 a3?! ‘The last chance was 23 @e4, when [ would have to find the computer continuation 23...Aned (23.04? 24 2.65 Ext 25 Wet would be unclear) 24 Wxe4 Ryd 25 WB Des 26 Bxc5 Bxcdt+ 27 c3 Bxc3 28 bxc3 Wad 29 S42 Bad 30 Bal Bed winning, 23...Mid7! ‘The simplest win. 24 axb4 Exc2+ 25 xc2 Wxf5+ 26 sve3 De6 27 We3 Axt4 28 Af3 a5 29 Mat axb4+ 30 iixb4 Hd8 31 Ehf1 We2 32 We3 c5+ 0-1 Z \ fu Z a o o oe 5G - “ene White resigned because of 33 25 Wel. Game 26 Shirov-Akopian Merida 2000, French Defence ‘The game was annotated shortly after the nent and published in various maga- including the late Gambit rounds Judit Polgar (who was to play Gilberto Hernandez with Black) and I had 3 points, and I was determined to fight for the tourna- ment victory, thinking that my chances as White would be pretty good. As it happened, starting the game in time and not Ic ing default w round began 3pm, and theor lly these ib chibi un- usual about that since is a common practice in che tournaments. ‘The peculiarity of this case, however, was that L simply didn’t know 96 Selected Games about the schedule! It was in the restaurant, during a dinner which took a lot longer than expected, that Alfonso Romero asked me why: 1 was still enjoying the food of preparing for the d it turned our there was not much time left anymore! All the same, I thought there was no real reason to prepare for Akopian, who nd wine instead ame, Only then would, for sure, employ some surprise open- ng, so Twas nor in any hurry to pay the bill. 1 64 06 2 d4 d5 3 \c3 2b4 4&5 65 5 a3 Bab!? ‘This line is becoming very popular nowa specially at top level. When Akopian played it (he had never done so before), 1 wondered whether he wanted 10 follow his fellow Armenians, such as Vaganian and Lpu- tian, or his opponent in the World Champion ship final, Alexander Khalifman. ‘Nowadays? meant the year 2000, of course, although the Armenian grandmasters still employ this line. 6 b4 In 2003 (against Aualik in the Bosnian League) I played 6 Wed in this position, and then 6.7 7 dxeS xc 8 bxc3, influ enced by the game Leko-Khalifman (Linares 2000). Although I happeacd to win after a lot I presume that the other t Suat were a better days, of mutual mistake two victories choice for this hook! 6...cxd4 7 Wg4 “e7 8 bxaS dxc3 9 Wxg7 Mg8 10 Wxh7 A\be6 re eo. se i 11 DB T used to play U1 £4 here, but in this deci- Akopian's cl that chess is chess, and if 11 fis better than 11 £3 (and 1 think rdless of the Eto see sive game I didn’t it is), then it should be played reg tournament situation! 11...We7 12 844 £d7 13 2g3 0-0-0 14 2.03 Wxad 15 0-0 We5 18 ee “T Alf Some months later in Hoogeveen 2000, Khalifman played 15.Xh8!? here against i and after 16 Wxf7 Hat8 17 We7 Khes 18 Who (18 Wh7 Hhs is a draw) 18...Kxf3! 19 gxf3 Add! 20 We Ades he got excellent compensation for the exchange in a position similar to the current game. 16 Wxt7!? After the game I was surprised to learn from my opponent that grabbing the pawn in computer style was in fact new. 16 Hel had been played by Dolmatoy the 1990 Manila Interzona inst Lputian in |, but 1 wasn't sure what to do after the obvious 16..4d 88. 16 Wh4 has also been tried in a few games, 16....df8 17 Wh7 Rxf3!? A very ambitious exchange frankly speaking, 1 didn’t serious! his old annotations Dolmatov gave the line 17...h8 18 We7 hes 19 Who AS (now Khalifiman’s idea, 19.2 20 gxf3 Dcl42t, doesn’t work so well because of 21 We3!, 2 with his queen on 5, Black can't play 21... DefS) 20 Sxf3 Hxf5, after which | was going to continue 21 We3l? with a slight ad- rifice which, consider. In a7Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 vantage. It’s funny thar after 21...b6!? 22 Hfdl, one can still get back to the Dolmatoy Lputian game. 18 gxf3 xed A fa0 8 Uh 8 a me 19 Ge2 Iw not especially happy to make this move as I wanted to continue 19 Shil2, The position after 19..xf3 20 WhS quite ap- pealed to me, but 1 wasn’t sure whether 1 would be better if, instead of taking a pawn, Black exchanged his knight for my bishop and gota passed c-pawn after 19,..)xd3 20 exd3, 19...d4 Now White really has to watch out, [ also reckoned on 19...A5g6!2, and my intention was to repeat the position by 20 £d3 Ded (Black can look for course) and then play 20 Hfe1 2c6 omething else here, of 21 ef! Probably the best move, which made my opponent think for nearly an hour. The threat to take on £3 was quite strong; for example 21 dl ska7! or 21 Badt Bxt3 22 Wh D7Q6! and the game is quite unclear. 21...0xi3 ‘The correct way of capturing. 1 expected 21.263 and must admit that 22 O.x63 x63 23 Bxe6, which I was going to play, probably leads to a draw after 23. Wed+ (23..Dd2+4 gives White a chance to fight on with 24 Shell? DAB+ 25 thee? Des 26 Wxe7 Was+ 27 Hed Weed+ 28 Weed Axed 29 Hell? and the h-pawn might become dangerous; instead 24 bet Was! 25 Hxe7 Whit 26 treo West 27 Wet would be just another draw) 24 He2 Was (nor 24,..Ad24? 25 Het Wa 26 stedt) 25 Wixe7 (25 Hxe7 @d2+ 26 dre2 WES+ also draws, while 25 Wh3+4 AG can be dangerous for White) 25..2xh2+ 26 del APT ete. However, 22 &d1!, which was seen by Vladi- mir but not by me, may give White some edge al W5+ 23 Soe xd] 24 BxeS Hxe3+ 25 hyg3 Wexe5 26 Exd 22 Bxf3 Oxf3 23 He5!? It was tempting to play 23 WE7, but the endgame arising after 23...WES! (much worse is 23...8d5 24 WH with a clear advantage) 24 Wee6+ Wee 25 Bxe6 AE5 didn't convince me, as Black can sometimes sacrifice the pawn on d3 and er tected by a bishop on di or knight on d4, 23...0d5 24 seg sed7! 25 Md1 te a passed pawn on €2, pro- 98 Selected Games 25...Wxa3?! ce the white rook is still on e5 Black takes an opportunity to capture the a-pawn. It shouldn’t have been the best move @25.. ‘would: promise’ more: compedsatién), but. reacted incorrectly. 26 Wha? Instead, after 26 Bxd5t1 exd5 27 Bel! White would be two pawns down, but with terrific attack and a deadly pin. 26...Wa4? Missing, White’s When I played 26 Wh4 I nearly had a seizure when J saw that Black could play 26...d3!? here. But then | calmed down, realising that with 27 Bisd5+ (why didn’t I consider this exchange sac lier?) 27..exd5. 28 Bxd3 1 would maintain ilities; for example 28...Wel+ 29 ‘Aficr the game Vladimir suggested and it seems the position is more balanced after 27 Wxdd Dc (or 28 Bdel Wd2 29 Wh!) 28 Bxd5+ 9 Wid St exd5 30 Exds+ Seo 31 Has. 27 Exeé! Now White is winning. It was good we were playing with the FIDE time control (meaning the Fischer clock with a half minute bonus per move, not the PID! 2001), so the rest was relatively easy for 27... xg3+ ‘The rook is taboo; ic, 27...8xe6 28 Exc or 27...88xe6 28 Hel-+, control of 28 hxg3 1064 \ a s - oe a ane 2, oe / amo esd “yy O op 4 m2 28.65, Now 28...8%xe6 is an option, but 1 think White should win after 29 Hel+ sd7 30 Wre7+ cB 31 Wed+ 6 32 Hest wec7 33 Be7+ det 34 Wt a7 35 Waste 29 Wh7+ skxe6 30 Wg6-+ ved7 If 30..82e5 31 f4+ Seed 32 Belt eS 33 ‘Wet and wins. 31 Wxf5+ wc6 32 WI6+ wc 33 We7+ shed 34 We5 ch 35 £4 bS a foe mo a 2 a = at Se . Wi, Z ae, = a 36 f5! It made no sense to enter into complica- tions such as 36 We7+ &.c6 37 Bel Wxe2 38 Best &b4 39 Wxco Whit 40 deer Wart 41 HXe2 Weal! — especially since, checking it now with Fitz, | reach the conclusion that it’s a draw in the end. 36...<86 37 WH6+ Repeating moves in order to the second 99Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 time control and consider the exchange sacti- fice at more leisure. 37.085 If 37...82b7 38 Bel. 38 We5 sie6 39 Hxd4! Wal+ 40 vef2 WhI 41 Hxd5! ‘The simplest 41...8xd5 42 Wxe3+ kdé example 42...¢%b6 43 We3+ stec6 (otherwise White takes the a7-pawn with the check) 44 WS a5 45 Wed5+ fxd5 46 stee3 wins. 43 Wd3! a5 Again if 43... Wxd3 44 exd3 a5 45 Be3, 44 he3 a4 45 Wxd5+ skxd5 46 vd2 b4 47 see1 1-0 White will play &b2 and then ¢2-c3. Game 27 Shirov-Rublevsky Montecatini Terme 2000 Sicilian Defence, Kan Variation ‘The annotations to this pame w while working on the book and are my notes for Infarmator 79. done ased on. ‘The Russian grandmaster Sergei Ruble is a very strong tact and his opening r¢ tremely well- worked. Howev is also very narrow, So preparing against hitn is nor such a difficult task, But being, prepared ertoire ii does not yet mean winning the game, of k cannot avoid the queen exchange; for 1 e4 65 2 ‘MI3 06 3:d4 exd4 4 xd4 a6 5 seas In Polanica 1998 [ played 5 Dc3 againse Sergei, but he managed to obtain an almost equal ending right from the opening, ‘There~ fore | had to adjust my preparation this time. 5...216 6 0-0 d6 7 64 d7 8 Ac3 Acé Ly 47 tt ay mls 9 803 9 Bxc6 Bxc6 10 b4 has become the main line since Kk Rublevsky in 9...e7 9..£51 10 Be2 He, planning to answer 11 b3 with 11..b5, was the line that worried me in 1998 when I chose 5 Ac3. ‘This time 1 was ready to challenge it, but Rublevsky played differently (and expectedly!) 10 f4 0-0 11 deh1 Axd4 12 Lxd4 26 13 We2 Dd7 14 Kadi e5 15 Ge3 ext4 16 axfa ifman’s beautiful victory over an 2001. 100 16...Ae5 Now | can’t remember exactly how my, preparation went, but this move is a novelty. 16..Wa5 17 Ads Bxd5 18 exd5 Kac8 19 We2 ho with unclear play was tested in the game Christiansen, Philadelphia 1998, G.Hernandey which soon ended a draw, so White could possibly improve at some stage 17 82 We7 18 c5!? ‘The pawn sacrifice looks very attractive of course, but in retrospect 1 would prefer 18 Ab3r. 18...dxc5! 19 Ads Was 20 8.g3!? Even though I didn’t see anything clear, | still couldn’r force myself to go into the equal ending after 20 ®b6 &b5 21 Web5 axb5 22 Hxd6 Bxd6 23 Dxa8 Hxas 24 Bat Da3! 25 Bxd3 Bxf4 26 Qxb5. Now the fir burning again as in the good old times, 20....2.b5! 21 Wh5 £6 22 fa! I rejected 22 Axf6+ Ext because the end- game after 23 Qxc5 Eixrl+ 24 Bxtl Wee 25 WES Wxt5 26 Bx Bus 27 &c3 seemed dan yerous to me, Actually, instead of 23 Bxe5, 23 Biel! would be enough to keep the position equal, but | doubt Pd have chosen differently even if P'd seen that. 22...g6! 23 Wh6!? Once again rejecting a drawish line 23 Dsfor Wet6 24 Exfo exh5 25 Uxt8+ Ext 26 BxeS Be 27 Kb — pletely missing Black's reply. id of course, com- Selected Games 23...HadB!! 24 Dxt6+ Being in shock I didn’t mind going into forcing variations, unless they led to a lost position. 24 af? was the other option, but it would probably lead to a similar position after 24.0.4 25 Deto+ Hxto 26 Hxdo Resdo 27 Rel. 24...2x16 25 Mxd6 Eixd6 26 X#1! ‘The critical moment in the game, We both were under severe time pressure and my op- ponent thought (as he later admitted) that he was already better. Looking for winning chances may have cost him the game as the position is still very unclear, 26....<1f8? Probably 26.25 was the best option for Black (26..Ae4 27 Wel Qxft 28 Sxd6 and 26.467 27 Wel &g5 28 Wel both seem good for White), when I would have to find 107Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 the pr 27 Wh3! (after 27 Whs Qxfl 28 Bxc5 Koo 29 &c3 b5 30 5 Bd3 31 Bxd3 Hxd3 Black is better) 27..xfl (27...8d7? allows 28 Wh5) 28 &xe' mains unclear, 27 Wel Now White is finally better and my oppo- nent’s time-trouble speeds up the process. 27...0xf1 28 ixe5 ris - aod aA ae mite rr ‘oss oS me Poly a s N ay Layy ly AS w @ whee 28...[1e6? During and after the game I thought I was ly winning at this point, but in fact after Red (the only move) 29 &xd6 Kxd6 it would still be very difficult to convert White’s advantage into a victory. Possibly the best he can do is exchange the bishops im mediately with 30 &b3 2xb3 31 axb3 retain- ing good winning chances. 29 Wixf1 Exe5 30 2b3+ c4 31 Wxed+ eg7 32 We7+ 1-0 alr Game 28 Shirov-Bauer Istanbul Olympiad 2000 Nimgo-ludian Dg This game was specially annotated for the book and hasn’t L ed by me before, ‘The Istanbul Olympiad played an extremely important role in my life — as there I met my wife Victoria Cmilyte, who was playing for the Lithuanian women’s team and took the gold medal on board one. Now Victoria is also the mother of my two children and we have every reason to look back happil at our beginning: Istanbul 2000. As for me, I was in ex psychological shape duting the Olympiad, but my final result was slightly damaged by the fact that, just a few days after World Championship was duc to start didn’t want to demo: lent end, the nd I trate my repertoire ‘That's why, when | played with black pieces against Gelfand and Vaganian, 1 chose side- lines which, in the romantic atmosphere, were not carefully prepared and ended up helping, my opponents to convert their brilliant pl into victories. Nevertheless, my final re with seven wir . three draws and two losses was reasonable for the life-turning tourna ment. [ managed to win all my games with White, and I chose this one for the book. Tt seems that my opponent made his deci arly as on move 9, but to prove it y very precisely. ve I played this instead of my usual 1 4 not just to hide my main Preparation, but also be cause | found a we reper toire. 1...M6 2 ¢4 06 3 Dc3 2b4 4 Wc2 cB 5 dxc5 “a6 6 a3 Wa5!? 7 Ad2 Axe5 IF Lam not mistaken, this set-up was first employed by Victor Korchnoi against Yas Scirawan at the 199) Novi Sad Olympiad, exactly 10 years before the pre happened to be in Novi Sad 1 ent game, As I f during the 102 and remember first rounds, I noted that game analysing it with Leonid Yudasin. Seirawan played 8 Kel and 1 suggested 8 b3!2, which seemed interesting to Leonid as he himself employed it against Korchnoi a month later in Pamplona — though all he got was a difficult draw with White ant “habit- ual’ Korchnoi remarks in the postmortem! It me clear that 8 b3 was not the way to get nd some unp navantage. ight years later Kramnik discovered (or be he just knew the 1960's juniors’ game where the idea was seen first) that there was a simple solution for White, and he went on to beat Campora in idl chess game (Villar robledo 1998). A reasonable path to follow 8 0-0-0! 8 Hel Qxc3 9 Bxc3 Wad with equality oc- curred in that old Seirawan-Korchnoi game. xe3 9 oxe3 Wad?! Here this move is a mistake, because the active position of Whiti difference to the aforementioned game. Black should have kept the queens on with 9... We7 or 9.186 and, not being a 1 d4 specialist anymore, | can’t say much about the positions arising, 10 Wxad Axad 11 2e5! b6 A novelty, but it doesn’t bring, Black equal play either. Kramnik’s game saw 11..d5 12 2x16 yxf6 13 cxd5 exd5 14 e4! with ad to White. 12 £3 she7I? rook on dl makes a i Y aa: ee ff 6:8 BURT RA gucaan Selected Games Intending ...Ae8 followed by ..d6 and ..c5 with good chances. White must act 13 Gd6+! sedB 14 e4 DeB 15 2.93! we7 At least ...d6 will no longer be with tempo, but Black can get still out of trouble if he completes his plan, Fortunately, there is aw: for White to win another tempo and gain more space. 16 b3! A\c5 17 b4 a4 The knight goes back because other Black’s position would be too passive; for ex ample after 17... Nb7 18 De2. 18 we2 d6 Dating the game | was especially concerned about 18.05 19 @e2 d6 20 Add a7 and didn’t have a very clear idea what to do then. I saw that 21 82b3 axb4 22 axb4 c5+ 23 bse Batt 24 ee3 Axdl 25 cxbo Bad would be rather unclear, while 21 Ab5? S&xb5 22 exb5 axb4 23 axb4 Be8t 24 dab32 Mc3+ 25 dexad? DT 26 BxdGr e06 27 e5+ Lp ead y ie | nO, oa a ‘enw aoe would lead to the brilliant m would have chosen 21 &e2! 21.05 22 QS+ Qxt5 23 ext axb+ 24 axbd MG 25 f4! and the advantage of two white bishops become deci versus two black knights will soon ive. Sti angely, the computer con: sid ter 21 Be2 to be good for Black but once again my own. feeling, contradicts that judgment. 19 &b3 2d7 20 5! ‘This move would be useless if Black had al ready exchanged the a-pawns. At the same s the position 103Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 time, it would rake little sense to play 20 2 now because of 20...¢5. 20...d5 Otherwise Black would lose material. 21 cxd5 exd5 22 Sa6! Preventing ...a7-a5, developing pieces, and feeling confident about forthcoming, forced jons! eT 23 e6! \xe6 Once again the only move 24 Iixd5 B.c6! Bauer correctly decides here (and lat that getting cook and pawn fi pieces would be virtually hopeless for him; for example 24...Dec5+ 25 bxch Axc5+ 26 Mixed bxe5 27 Ab3! and White is winning, 25 Sd6 + siif6 26 Se5+ Normally 1 consider such move repetitions not very aesthetic, but what can you do when you are getting short of time? Be practical. 26...c7e7 27 Ld6+ M6 28 Kd2! After this move, which required a lot of calculation, White is on top, Still, he has to bring the rest of his pieces into play. 28... 8hd8 ‘The immediate 28..b5 would probably be more stubborn, but after 29 Ac2 Abo (if 29..Had8 30 Kel @d7 31 Dg Abo 32 Ded+ 6 33 Le7 Rde& 34 @h4 also seems win- ning for White) and then 30 @c3! Act 31 Eddl Bhd8 32 2xb5! and Black would still Jose a pawn with no compensation. 29 De2 two. 29...b5 ‘This loses, but 29...Ac7 30 Bel Acs+ 31 bxc5 Bxa6 32 exb6 was no better. 30 Hcl &e8 31 Hdd1! White has placed his pieces ideally, kept his avo bishops, and will now win material. 31...Ab6 32 2b7 Ac4 33 Lxa8 UxaB 34 Ac3 tig6 35 Axb5!? In time-trouble this seemed the easiest way to win, and probably rightly so. -nixb5 36 Hxcd fxcdt+ 37 vexed Ec8+ 38 iibS He2 39 a6 Rxg2 40 sbxa7 1-0 Game 29 Shirov-Bareev FIDE World Ch., New Delhi 2000 French Defence ‘The annotations to this game are based on 104 the notes made for Iyformalor 80 shorily after the tournament. ‘The text was added when working on the book. The World Championship in New Delhi was my third PIDE knockout, Afier being climinated by Nisipeanu in 1999 1 decided to ‘gy and, first of all, not be y-ofs, | was and!’s half’, so 1 considered my chances of adopt a di aliaid of ple in reaching the final to be quite good. From the second t the fourth round my plan worked welk against Alexander Onischuk, Mikhail Gurevich and Boris Gelfand E made draws in all the main games (even though some of them were hard fought) and then won the tie- breaks rather confidently. But the match against eI lost the lucky not to be seeded Bareey changed this routine, becau first game with Black and was ina totally must- win situation in the second one, 10406 Very solid! After 1..c6 1 would of course 5 305 AS 4 and see instead. have played the sharp 2 d4 )c3I?; Bareey preferred 0 wa In the tic-break he did play 1.06 though, and fortunately the result was the same, 2 d4 d5 3 Ac3 “MG 4 Og5 dxe4 5 “\xed 2e7 6 &xt6 &xf6 7 3 Ad7 8 Wa2 0-0 9 0-0-0 Ge7 10 264 26 11 het!? The tension of knockouts is sometimes so high that one can simply confuse moves in the opening, ‘There was nothing, wrong with the theoretical line 11 Dxt6+ &xf6 12 Khel. 11...)d5?! Selected Games ‘After making, my 11th move | immediately saw 11...Axed 12 Bxe4 b5! and already started thinking about going, to the travel agency, to arrange the trip back home as carly as possi ble. ‘Then, while Bareey was thinking himself, I decided thar I could still fight after 13 2d3 (not 13 &xb5? Was 14 Hed Wad 15 Wes Hb8 with a clear advantage) 13...8b7 14 eS, but it is difficult for me to explain why Bareev didn’t go for this line, as in the game he gets an inferior position 12 ‘e5!? Another hasty move but, fortunatch , Not a bad one this time. 12.15 ‘This time Barcev does play the move I saw right after having made mine. 13 OxdS 13...exd5. Now White any material, 13. the edge without losing xe4, winning the exchange, al. However, when making my was more crit 13th move, 1 was already confident that after 14 Bxed Bg5 15 Be3 Who (15..c5 16 Mbt Bxe3 17 Wexe3 or 15...2.xc3 16 Wxe3 is also good for White) 16 @b1 &xe3 (16...Wxt2? loses nicely to 17 Bh3!, intending, 17...8xd2 18 Qxh7+ PhS 19 Dg6 mate) 17 feed 1 would be better anyway. 14 cS 295?! ing the F4 square away from the white knight but losing an important tempo. And the pawn will stand very well on f4 too. The 105Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 immediate 14,,.2.f6 would have been prefer able, when White would reply 15 Ded3. 15 f4 2.16 16 h3! This is one of those few positions where two knighis are stronger than wo. bishops. Having, full control over “five cighths’ of the e- file, including the important €5 square, White starts preparing an assault on the kingside, though he must still be al not to allow Black activity when the game opens up. 16...\!d6 17 “\cd3! b6 18 g4 c5 19 g5 2d8 20 Wg2! In a tournament game, especially such an important one, you can’t help uying to find a forcing way to convert the advantage into a full point. In analysis later you also mention possibilities as 20 3 or 20 hal? which are also good for White. 20...2b8 ‘There was no good way to party the threat such ‘qu of 21 26; for example 20...c4 21 Axed dxe4 22 Wexa8 cxd3 23 Wac8 Wild+ 24 @eb1 dxc2+ 25 c2 Bxe5 26 d5 wins for White, while 20...26 21 hd will lead to a quick mate once the pawn gets to ho. 21 g6 c4 A PON oF SS Gi, WE WO tae aes =a 22 Aba! Simple and effective. 22...4b7 23 gxh7+ #xh7 24 Hg1 Wh6l? As time pressure approaches Barcev tries a clever trick which, after White’s correct reply, ets him die quickly, rather than suffer in lines like 24...816 25 Wet Be8 26 c3! Bxe5 (26...a5 27 Ne2) 27 dxcd5 Wry 28 Hxp6 or 24,.g8 25 3 and White dominates com- pletely in both e: 25 WS! 25 a7! Bc7! was what Bh hoped for. 25...5.16 26 Dd7 might have 106 Selected Games Now there is no objection to this fork. 26...2bd8? Probably overlooking White’s 29th move He should give up the other rook, but after 26..EUfd8 27 Axb8 Bxb8 28 3 (not 28 Bxd52! hs!) 28...Le8 29 Ae? Mes 30 Bde t should equalise the score anyway. 27 AXB+ UxtB 28 DxdS svhB 29 Was 10 So the match finished 1-1 and [had to play another tie-break, and again T managed to win rather convincingly, though my opening preparation for the third (and thus for the second!) game turned out to be a bluff later on, Game 30 Shirov-Grischuk FIDE World Ch, New Delhi 2000 Ray Lopes, Classical Variation The annotations to this game were done when working on the book. ‘This was my first ever encounter with Sa- sha Grischuk at a normal time-control, but his tive play had already caught my attention a year earlier in Batumi when he was sixteen years old. Also, I once lost four blivz games in a row to him in the Internet Chess Club, so it was easy to feel alert for this game. One thing was for sure: Grischuk’s qualification for this semifinal match was ao surprise at all 1 e4 06 2 D3 Acé 3 Ab5 AE 4 0-0 Bc But his opening choice was! He had never employed this move order before. 5 Dxe5!? Rytshagoy and I worked on this capture in 1999 and we had a lot of confidence in White’s position, not noticing one funny de tail. 5...A\xea! ‘The correct reply. 5...2)xe5 6 dé would be indeed promising for White according to our preparation, 6 We2 “)\xe5 7 da! An amusing position: three minor black pieces are hanging simultaneously as early as move 7, It’s too bad that White will catch only one of them, 7 Wxed We7 8 d4 Apo was the known theoretical line leading to equality 7...2e7 8 Wxed Ag6 9 {4 This was a novelty; 9 ¢4 had been played previously 9...c67! Now things ean go according to my plan. ‘The critical continuation was 9...0-0 10 £5 d5t and here | must admit that my original inten- tion from the preparation in 1999 was 11 Wa3, which isn’t good because of 11...Ah4 12 p3.a6 13 Bat c5! and Black has an excellent pame according to... theory! Yes, it was a shock to discover that there were many games in the database with Black playing 5...2xe5 (instead of 5...Axed) followed by 6 d4 a6 7 Bad?! Axed 8 We2 Be7 9 Wxet Deo 10 f4 0-0-1 £5 d5 12 Wd3 Ah4 13 g3 5! when the same position is reached! (7 22! is critical, which is why I never paid attention to. that line) As [analysed it without being, fami with the database games, | soon made some stake in my investigations, though I don’t remember what it was now. It is worth men tioning, however, that instead of 11 Was, White can try 11 We2 or 11 Well? with inter- esting play, though this is less promising than what I got in the game. 107Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Selected Games 10 243 d5 11 We2 Now if Black castles he will practically be a tempo down on the 9...0-0 line, because White’ 's bishop is already on «3. Therefore he the £5 square first. 11..45 12 Ad2 0-0 13 AS Y, a Y o59 “le White’s knight is much better placed than his opposing number, so a small advantage is already secured. 13...)n8!? ‘etting the message! 14 2.d2 abB!? Probably Grischuk didn’t like bis position very much after 14..A\F7 15 Bael @66 (15...8d6 would spoil the original plan of transferring the knight to 4!) 16 &b4 Ad6 17 4)e5, bur with the text he expends another tempo. 15 c4?! And I didn’t find the way to use it effec y! Instead 15 Bact! ££6 16 b4! would be preferable as now Black is almost forced to fice compensation after 16.. AVE 17 bxaS D6 18 De5 Ded 19 Vbd Bes. 15...217 16 exd5 Maybe 16 c5!? with a slight advantage was better, but I don’t like closed pawn structures in general! 16...cxd5 17 Hact!? Still trying to prevent ..Ad6. Black could insist’ on his plan with 17..Dd6. After 18 He5! he would have to re- treat again with 18..2\F7 (since 18..Ae4 fails to 19 Exd5), but on 19 He2 he could of course try 19..®d6! once more. ion ae 2 og eo "alt an a 2 @ ee 0, ay a a Ow a a We mS “3 Ss 18 ba! a4?! Justly rejecting 18..axb4 19 Sxb4 Hes 20 De5 when White is better, but missing that 18..He8 19 Des Wh6 20 Bb5 He7! (nor 20...8d8 21 bxa5 Wxd4+ 22 @c3) 21 Hed axb4 22 &xb4 £.c6! would probably equalise. 19 b5! Active play often helps to pretend that you eB 20 eS Dd 21 iba ea 22 sea I took this drastic decision being afraid that Black would complete his development and consolidate his position. Is true that to make use of a lead in development, you normally do it by concrete play, otherwise a quiet 22 Hi Aotibling, the Iso deserved attention. hoping to get a small edge rooks on the e-file, 22...dxe4 Afier 22...fxe4 White should probably play 23 &.c5! intending 24 b6 with excellent con- trol of the dark squares all over the board. Black can try 23...b6, but the position after 24 Deol We7 till in White's favour as well placed on c! better than on €5. So, it looks like 22..dxed was a reasonable di ision. However, 1 must admit that during the game I planned something like 23 gd?! which 108 would only play into Black’s hands, as after ’e continue with his aggre: 23...8Le6 White 23...8.xc5 (not 23...96? 24 Axe Bxd4+ 25 Bh bxg6 26 Wey6+ Shs 27 65! with a crush- ing win) 24 fxe5 &c6 is roughly equal. 23 Mfd1 Se6 24 d5! ie patie a or nee 24...2d7? But now White is on top. It seems that both players missed 24...e8! during the game, and although after 25 dxe6 (I should probably play 25 Exc8 Qxc8 26 Ded! with a slight advantage) 2: cl 26 Hxcl Wdd+ 27 Shi Webs 28 Wh5 26 29 Apo! 31..Waol2 32 Dh4! Hes! 33 Hel! 23! 34 Wott Bhs 35 Hat Who! with good compen- sation, but 1 should mention that this is a purely ‘advanced? analysis without a single move that a human would come up with by himself) 32 Hel (32 De5 Bxe5 33 fees Was 5 We5+ Bhs also looks like a for White) 32..c3 33 De5 Lxe5 34 fred Hes 35 West dhs 36 Wxe3 Wb2! 37 Het a3! and me for White tw go for perpetual cheek er, for example, 38 WE3. It should also be mentioned that the d5- pawn is untouchable; e.g, 24.,.2xd52 25 Hes or 24,805 25 Bxd5 26 Med Bs Maxd5 Bacd5 28 Weed and wins. 25 Dc6! ‘This blow turns a promising position into a winning one! 25... Wc8! Giving up the queen is the only way to pro- long resistance, as otherwise White's passed pawns would advance; e.g. 25..bxe6 26 dxc6, or 25..AMb6+ 26 8.c5 We? 27 do Wes 28 DeT+ Bxe7 29 dxe7, ot 25..Lxc6 26 dco We7 27 Ba7 Wed 28 Hel! and White wins. 26 D\e7+ Qxe7 27 MxcB Raxc8 28 .xe7 Bxe7 29 dé Z os marae ie Aa ry OLE s “7 oe cao Black’s position looks delicate, he can probably save his honour with 29...¥Wd2! (29..Wd6 30 Dh4! Wxeo 31 AxfS Hes 32 Hxc8+ Wrxc8 33 g3! is really dangerous) 30 Bgl Hyxe6 31 Wt Wsa2 (also interesting is & Ai Ae geal Without this pawn, White's material advan. tage would not be of much importance. 29...E47! Correctly protecting the seventh rank and avoiding forced Ic has 29.6 30 709Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 We3 Bxb5 31 Who 27 32 Wexb7 Has 33 «12! (the king blockades the passed e-pawn to free up the rook) 33..c3+ 34 te2 Bes 35 Hd5 Bh5+ 36 Wel or 29..Kee8 30 Wes. 30 Hd5 Ne1+ 31 wf2 31.018! Again the tight decision. Passive defence was no longer possible because White would simply activate his queen, so Black connects his rooks in order to make threats. 32 Meb!? I was confident about the forthcoming rook endgame, so I preferred not to look for other winning plans. Friéz doesn’t approve my decision, but this time [ won't ‘discuss’ things with him. 32...2fe8 WY na oo AP oe BON 33 He7! But I will agree that hiding the king, instead of giving back the queen, was also possible: 33 51? ho 34 2p3! (34 Woo H8c3 35 h3 edt! 36 Hixe3 H1c2+ 37 He2 Hxe2+ 38 dxe2 Be2+ 39 G3 Bxa2 doesn’t look so clear) 34,.8c3+ 35 Ghd EFL 36 3 M2 37 h3 Bers 38 We6 and White wi 33.1102 34 Hxd7 Hxe2+ 35 dexe2 b6! Great defence. After 35...Ke2+ 36 del Eixa2 the forced line 37 Hxb7 Balt 38 a2 Eade 39 dred Bad+ 40 add Ba3+ 41 Wed 3 42 b6 a3 43 ec7 a2 44 b7 wins, so Grischuk finds the only chance to provoke a mistake. 36 lb7 He2+ 37 se3! Now the previous variation would not do since the b-pawn wouldn’t advance so quickly. 37...Re3+ 38 td4 Kd3+ 39 ced! This required very preci cause now the e-pawn starts running, How ever, White’s passed pawn plus mating threats weigh more. 39...e3 40 sie6 h6 Again the best chance, 40...c2? was of course impossible due to 41 kb8 mate, while 40...¢5 would lose to 41 Rd7! 248 (or 41.62 42 Sf6! h6 43 S26 with mate) 42 HA7+ sees 43 EAxt5 xf 44 d7 €2 45 Bed Bs 46 Hxe2. 41 Ke7 calculation be- 41.,.d4?! ally allowing a forced win. However, A1..c2 42 Best deh7 43 skd7 Ba2 44 Bc? Byxa2 45 d7 Het 46 dexbo Hd2 47 Bxe2 Fxd7 48 Ha2 would also be hopeless, or if 96 42 ded7 Bei 43 dads AB 44 d7 a3 45 ind Black is in zugzwang! 770 Selected Games 42 Gd7 Xe4 43 Axed fxe4 44 Ye7 1-0 Black resi dsl/+ @h7 47 BET and there are no queen checks to prevent We8 mate! A funny rook- turning-to-queen endgame with mating ideas in both stages, Game 31 Shirov-Grischuk PIDE World Ch, New Delhi 2000, Ruy Lypex, Main Line This game w: and published in Infermaior 80. However, al analysed by me early in 2001 when Twas working on the book and gave this game a closer look, My lead in the semifinal match of the World Championship didn’t last long, Gris chuk struck back in the second game, outplay ing me in a complex position where 1 was a pawn up but didn’t sense the danger in time. Despite this painful loss, | had to do my best in my last game with White under the slow time-control. ‘The situation was pretty tense and, although I tried to keep as calm as possi ble, J ended up mixing up the lines that Ih prepared. 1 e4 e5 2 3 Ac6 3 2b5 ab No more surpr 4 Sa4 D6 5 0-0 &e7 6 Mel b5 7 Lb3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 AaB 10 Lc2 c5 11 da b7 7 we Pao wt oe a Fest GY bs ‘This move was in Grischuk’s repertoire at the time and I believe it’s pretty dubious. 12 d5! Closing the centre is very dangerous for Black in many lines of the Ruy Lopez, due to the space advantage that White gets. | experi- enced it recently myself as Black, in a game ast Topaloy (Linares 2004) which he won in the 11...Wc7 12 d5 variation. Ned 13 a4 No, this is nor what 1 had prepared, al though in my defence I should mention that | looked through the line before the first game, not the third, and 13 ad without b2-b3 also one of the p ble plans. Fortunately, three months later I got another chanee, in a blindfold game against Piket in Monaco 2001, and this time I did play 13 b3 Ab 14 a4. My opponent continued 14...c8, and after 15 We2 BA7 I introduced a strong novelty: 16 Al ba 17 Dba. Here there is another funny story. As | learned afterwards, this position also arose a few miles away (in the Rapid Chess World Cup in Cannes to be precise) in the Kasparov-Grischuk almost the same day means that, while | had a last opportunity to use my preparation, Grischuk: w: ially unlucky because, knowing my game, he could not try the line again. ‘This cost him another defeat at the semifinal stage, since Cannes also a knockout event. My game continued 17..9h5 Grischuk chose 17.46 and stood atFire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 worse after 18 AFL Ah5 19 4 Ae4 20 Bxt4 exf4 21 Wa2 2.f6 22 ¢5 dxe5 23 Dxe5 Gps?! 24 4h2, although in this line, interestingly enough, 23...8xe5 24 Hxe5 Wo 25 Back Hac8 would offer Black serious counter- chances, so maybe Kasparov had already gone wrong somewhere) 18 AFL SFO? 19 gl 20 Qxf4 cxf4 21 cS! dxe5 22 Wed 96 23 g5 was a tougher defence, as vd with the white queen on oe) ing to > Frit 2fdes 2 27 Badll 1 got a serious advantage. ‘The rest of the game was a little need by the fact that it was not only blindfold but also rapid chess: 27...He8 28 Wef4 (if 28 WxeS Axel 29 Exel Wxd6 30 Wsd6 Axd6 31 Ke6 Bet 32 Bxed Axes 33 Hb6 fet 34 hed Ha8) 28...Exel 29 Exel Wado 30 Wy! (the endgame after 30 Wado Dxd6 31 gxf5! should be winning as well; for example 31...gxf5 32 Re Bed 33 Bed Dred 34 £3 Dc3 35 Dps fF 36 DhS Wes 37 hry? Dot 38 My5+ Gh8 39 Hd5, bur the text seems more effective) 30...a7?! (30...fxe4 31 hygd Ba7 looks stronger, but in fact after 32 De3 He7 33 Kal! Web 34 Dh5! Black is lost 31 gxf5 h6 (some blindfold tricks) 32 Wed! (noc 32 Wae6+?? By7) 32...Wdd 33 Reb Wrett 34 bxgt 2.63 35 Best and Black re- signed, 13...Ab6 14 We2?! It was still possible to play 14 b3 but, as 1 said, L completely mixed up the ‘offi ory’ of that time with my own preparation, 14...2)xaal ial the- a ao A yypical idea in many types of closed Ruy Lopez. Black voluntarily accepts an isolated and thus weak a-pawn in exchange for the bishop pair. ‘The position is still very closed and White’s two knights and bishop are by no means weaker than Black’s two bishops and knight, but there is always a danger that the position will open up and Black will get strong, play. All the same, White’s position seems slightly preferable to me so far. 15 Oxad bxad 16 c4 Ad7 17 Kxad “Ab6 18 Na3 a5 19 \c3 a4 20 Sie3 fic! eee All this had been known and played before. The last move is especially important in Black’s set-up: his bishop gets to d7 just in 172 Selected Games time and the a4-pawn can no longer be con- sidered weak, as W imply doesn’t have a light squared bishop to attack it. Therefore he has nothing better than exchanging it for the b-pawn sooner or later. 21 b3 A novelty. The game Topalov-Piket, Gron- ingen 1997 saw 21 Dd2 (threatening 22 fH) nd Black stood well. Lt looks like 1 didn’t want to exchange my bishop, preferring to sacrifice ir, and therefore kept my knight on £31 A joke that turned out to be true 21...axb3 22 Uixb3 Ha6 23 Meb1 Rat "a ‘ita. ‘e V Ae) "a Ne a a e We a. tts 23...f5? Back in 2001 | indicated thae after 23...2d7 or 25...8d7 White would only have a slight advantage. Now I think that ‘equality’ would be a more proper evaluation in either strong positional sacrifice that was mated by Grischuk. At this moment I felt comfortable, as I knew that two pro: tected central pawns should be a little stronger than the Black bishop. And my optimism wasn’t excessive, though I spoilt things later on. 24...dxe5 25 xe5 Dad! ‘The only answer, Black’s knight is bad but White is now obliged to exchange it, After 25.87 26 exfS Black would be clearly worse. 26 ‘\xa4 Uxa4 27 2\c6 We7 28 eS A picturesque pawn centre. aa e Boe 2 paar Rg? omy a "e ie oe mae S a os RS 28...Na6!? Forcing White to make a decision, 28... could be met by 29 Dxe7+ Wse7 30 66, while after 28.2952! 29 Kb5 the bishop would have to return to e7 anyway. 29 Wita? ‘The wrong choice, | didn't want to give up my strong knight, but it was more important to shut in the bishop on c8, so I had to con tinue 29 Dxe7+ Wxe7 30 61. Before analysing this game properly, 1 wasn’t sure whether 1 antage would be serious had [ played thi but now I think itis. lack cannot excha d5 and e6 pawns so easily, 12¢ his bishop for the while White can combine different igainst the cS and £5. Now a possible defence is covering the h2-b8 diagonal as oth erwise the white queen would be very strong, on 5; e.g, 30...F42t 31 Wes Bad 32 Bell, while 113Fire on Board Part il: 1997-2004 Selected Games 30...Wd6 fails to 31 Wb2! 4 (if 31...We 32 Hibs Wxc4 33 Wed) 32 Hho Hxbo 33 Wxbo. After 30...!fe7 White should play 31 Hibs! 31 Wh2 fl 32 Hb6 £3! is now less after 33 g3 Exb6 34 Wxbs We , sine White can’t take on c5 because of ...WES) 31...Ral (if 31..h6 then 32 Wh2! followed by Wh5 is strong, slowly rounding up the c5-pawn) 32 Etxal Webs 33 Blast We7 34 Wa2! and 1 be- lieve that Black is objectively lost, 29.441? Not a bad move, but 29...Bxe6! 30 dxe6 Wexe5 would be the most effective way to punish me for my weak 29th move, since White can’t even dream about the advantage with just rook and c-pawn against two strong, black bishops. 1 could only hope wouldn't be much worse cither after, for ex. ample, 31 Hdl 30 Het Avoiding any such future possibility, but al- lowing Black to activate his bishop in return. F 30 Eib8 then 30...2ixc6 31 dxc6 Wse5 looks even worse for White than on the previous move. 30... e it was preferable to try and repeat sition with 33 Hb5, but once again | ‘n want to think about it! B Black may decide to play on with 3 though the position alter 34 Dxc7+ Wxe7 35 Hb8 Wa7 36 Kebt Bal 37 6 should still be about equal 33....0¢87! Correctly rejecting 33...Hxe62 34 dxco Be8 because, after the blow 35 Ha! @xd7 36 Wa5+, White would have very strong com pensation for the sacrificed piece. During the game Grischuk’s move seemed like a blunder e, but in fact it aims for some incredibly complicated tactics... which were not needed because 33...8¢5! would already create defi- nite problems for me, especially with the knight on 6, And after 34 6 (possibly the only move, as the threat of ...£.c8 is strong) the bishop can go back with 34...2c7! (34...2.16 is not good because of 35 e7 Hfa8 36 do! Wixe6 37 d7 Gxe7 38 Rxe7 Kas 39 Wefd and Whit 35 DxeT+ (White can’t allow both bishops to become active; for example after 35 Ded cB!) 35...Wxe7 and White has to struggle for adraw, which I believe he can still achic to the strength of his pawns, even though the computer program clearly prefers Black 34 )xe7+ Wxe7 35 d6! So a 1 eee yk aa Mim ¢ © De es mes R Wh FORD Zw & e due NN Ivs good that sometimes a strategically ti- diculous move can work out tactically. 35...We6 36 Wb7 Is the game close to being over? ‘That’s what I felt after playing this move, but my opponent didn’t share my thoughts. 36....2.06! Lightning from a clear sky! T had only reek 114 oned on 36...£3 37 d7! 37 Wa We6 38 g3 Who is unclear) 37...£xg2 (or 37...Wy6 38 93 2xd7 39 Hxd7) 38 ds? Wsh3 39 We? Zoo 40 Wads+ 27 41 6 and wins, while after 36...ixe4 White should win by continuing 37 7 &xd7 38 Exd7 Bg6 39 Bed! h6 (or 39...£3 40 Hast) 40 Bus Kxd8 41 Bxd8+ &h7 42 Wh with a decisive attack. 37 Wxa6 2xg2! 38 £3! ‘The only way to continue fighting for a win, as trying to avoid the draw after 38 tixg2 G+ 39 Bh2 Wh6 would be not without prac- eg, 40 Hada (40 Wh7 Wra+ 41 ht 5 xd4 41 c5 We5 42 Wedt hs 43 Wh (43 Bol Wxed+ 44 Be3 5 is unclear) 43..d3 44 c6 Wxe5 45 d7 Bg8 46 Wel d2. 47 Bal Was and Black is OK, 38....2xf3 39 deh Z ES “a8 Y “a et 7: Sg Incredible imagiaarion. 1 expected 29.. which is not good because of 40 Hd3! Bas (if 40..g4 41 Exf3! gxf3 42 Wh7) 41 Wa3 p4 42 hygt 3.43 Wel! and White parties all threats while keeping a decisive material advantage. 40 Wb7?! Here 1 misse now from working on the annotations. Back in 2001 1 indicated the following line after capturing the bishop: 40 hxgd Wxp4 (40... 41 Wn2 Wed 42 Hl is the same) 41 Hl £3 42 Wa2 Wh4t 43 2g1 Wy3t (43... Wott 44 spa Wh4+ 45 she3 wins) 44 Hp2 Wxe2+ a win, but E only know it (44...fsp2 seems to lose after 45 Eixf8+ dxi8 46 Wa8t S267 47 cOH Hxe6 48 West srs 49 d7 Wh 50 We7+ ed 51 Wd5+ Prd 52 Lexe? We3t 53 Sel Wh3+ 54 Be2 We3+ 55 Hdl Wo3+ 56 sbd2 Wh2+ 57 et Welt 58 Wal We3+ 50 We2) 45 Wrxe2 fxe2 46 Exf8+ @xiB 47 c6 25 48 Sexy? 5 ee a A. als aa ct ‘A a 2. a and I thought this pawn endgame was drawn. Not so, as White ‘The most precise way is 49 e7+ e8 (after 49,..82£7 White completes his task more easilys eg, 50 HFS dee 51 Wed o4 52 de5) 50 Gh?! (not 50 G3? h4 51 Bet e7 with a draw) 50.8247 (if 50...h4 51 G2h3 GI7 52 Sepa des 53 shexg5 h3 54 defo wins) 51 tbep3 stee8 52 y2! and Black is in zugewang! After 52...¢4 53 do3 she7 54 dors dec8 55 wee5 GET 56 dd 93 57 <3 22 58 Bd7 gl W 59 es+ White wins It’s a pity and probably didn’t have much time, Maybe | would have found this win if it was already the second time control. Although the fact that in the end it took me three years, and computer assistance was required, does question my ability to do it within one hour! 40...8h6 41 Wa5+ 7! ‘huk plays precisely, After 41...82h8 42 We2 3 1 would have 43 Be! winning, Buc funnily he still mis: 42 keg I? Again not even thinking about repetition by 42 WaS+, while seeing that 42 e6 Wxh3+ 43 an use the triang] at 1 had to make my 40th move similar idea later on. 115Fire on Board Part tl: 1997-2004 Selecied Games Sgt West 44 SF Bh3+ 45 He? Bxv2+ 46 Wp? Wa3+ 47 fet KG 48 c7 Wad+ 49 Fl Wa3+ would also lead to a draw — and reject- ing it in order to balance on the razor’s edge instead! It finally paid off, but only with my opponents’ help. 42...!ixh3 43 Wg2 43 Hal?! could already be dangerous after 43.96. 43... 44 5f2!2 y ame ae ‘gg iy “ ok a Yj ee Oe eh ps not the greatest piece of luck in my career, but definitely a precious gift, Black had litle difficulty in holding the balance after 4... 2.3 45 Wast Hes 46 Was+ sens 47 Wes WeS+ (bur not 47..h6 48 Hal or 47...h5 48 Bal Wyst 49 dht Bed 50 Wed and White is better again) 48 S¢ht Wh4. He could also try 44..,.2.c61?, although then I would probably prefer my position after 45 Befl 95 46 Wed! Anyway, now the game ends. 45 e6 BIB 45... S.xe6 46 Kxe6 fxe2 47 HeSt is mare, 46 e7 MeB 47 d7 Sxd7 48 Wxt3 Wg5+ 49 wbF1 1-0 h5 50 Wds+ ed pawns decide Black didn’t the game in White’s favour. The fourth game was drawn (also with some luck) and thus I reached another peak in my sporting career. It was a pity that couldn't offer any serious fight to Anand in Game 32 Shirov-Piket Wijk aan Zee 2001 Petroff Defence ‘The annotations to this game are based on the notes 1 made for laformator 80 after the tournament, The text was added when work- ing on the book For me Wijk aan Zee 2001 ment that is rounds, 1 was a tourna s. After 8 confidently leading with 6¥% points; then 1 lost to Kasparov, almost struck back in round ten (drawing, after missing a win against Anand), and then complete disaster with two more losses (to Ivanchuk and Kramnik) and Morozevich, When the tow tried to find non-chess to split in two raw in the last round against ament ended, I of my poor finish, but now I think it was simply physical exhaustion which I felt strongly for the first time in many years. The only conclusion to be at when a player approaches his thirties, he should be more and more careful about conserving his energy. Still, I played many good games in the first ten rounds ike this one the most. 1 ed 5 2 M3 ATG 3 Axed dé 4 ANB Dxe4 5 d4 d5 6 0d3 246 This line, which I have played many times with both colours, in fact aims to be a refuta- tion of 1 e4 as Black keeps trying; to find a forced draw in the labyrinths of long, concrete variations. 70-00-08 c4 c6 9 Net The alternative 9 Wc2 is probably prefer- Sc drawn is d able, at least according, to my later experience with Black. 9...9f5 10 We2 296 A. reasonable move, but Piket’s later suggestion 10...Ad7 11 De3 Dak, which was introduced into practice by K 2002, might be an e: simdzhanov in jer way to equality. 116 11.65 A typical advance, making Black’s position alittle more passive at the risk of endangering, White's pawn structure, Other _ movi wouldn't promise much; e.g, 11 Ac3 Axe3 3 Qxd3 13 Wxd3 dxcd 14 Wxct Dd? transposing to known lines 11...2¢7 12 Ae3 At6! A strong novelty that yields Bk but solid position, During my preparation | expected 12...2xc3 and 1 thought my hopes a passive to get a slight advantage after 13 8x6 hxgo 14 bxc3 would be justified. 13 295 I didn’t want to exchange on 96, as I would then have more or less to abandon my hopes of attacking his king, And organizing, posi- tional pressure would not be easy either; ¢.g.13 Qxg6 bxg6 14 Bg5 Abd7 15 Me2 (15 Des We8! 16 £4 @a5) 15..Hc8 16 Bact Exc? 17 Eixe2 48 and Black should hold the balance. 13...Abd7 14 Ded A strategically 1 wanted to attack so some risks had to be taken, After 14 b4l? Black would continue 14,..2le8 preventing me from such a possibility. 14....xd3 15 Wxd3 Wc8! Creating two positional threats that can't both be partied a 16 f4 After 16 b4 @xe5 17 dxe5 @d7 18 F4 a5 (18...f612 is also possible) 19 a3 axb4 20 axb4 Rxal 21 Bxal £6 the position is equal. inclear decision but, as I said, 16...0.a5! Just in time! If White managed to pl b4 he would be a bit better. But now he of all has to watch out for the e4 square. 17 Wg3! Still, watching out doesn’t mean looking back. 17...¢h8 18 Wha 729 arataté mi z. a me iA Possibly this-capture is not flexible enough, Getting the knight to e4 is strategically sound of course, bur later in the game Piket ex- changes it for the g5 bishop. And in that ease it was more logical to play 18..De4l? immedi- atcly, since after 19 He3 AxeS 20 fxe5 Axes 21 Wrxe5 £6 22 exf6 Hxt6 Black would still have his strong bishop on the board. White would probably continue 23 Be7 Hy6 24 Wes with unclear play. 19 bxc3 “e4 20 Hea! 117Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Only by creating fast threats White can challenge such aces as the protected knight in the centre of the board, 20...2)xg5?! Now White gets the initiative. 20..Axe5 21 Fxe5 £6! would be cortect (or el Wee 22 HEFL £6) with an approximately equal position after 22 ext gxt6 23 Bho BAT 24 Bei Wee since the white bishop is also quite strong here 21 Wxg5! Even when you ate trying to attack it’s often advisable not to damage your own pawa struc- ture; in this game, anyway, it will be important at a later stage. 21 fxg5 AxeS 22 Blxe5 Wal7 23 Fact Hae8 looks completely fine for Black. 21...h6 21...f6? was impossible because of 22 Ae6+ hxg6 23 Wxg6 and there is no defence against 24 Be7 or 24 Hh3+ eg8 25 Bh7 followed by 26 Wh5 mati 22 Whs Are! EY ae & WY ASS \ y bob Bae Y Vie [2 Ly OLS @ PEN Pear il & i WW Po NY A slightly worse position is usually unpleas ant to defend, so Bla 22... Bwe5 23 fxeS and tri lems tactically. 23 O\xt7+! 23 Wh4 was possible, but then another ht would come to e4. With the text White sactifices a piece for vatious pawns (thus the pawn structure was important!) and keeps the initiative 23...00h7 24 Ag5+ seg8 25 Wg6 hxg5 26 Re7 avoids the line to solve his prob- Without this intermediate move the sacri- fice wouldn’t work; ic, 26 fxg? Ded. 26...\e8 27 Rael! Creating another unpleasant threat. 27...Wig4 Forced, since 27...exf4? would lose to 28 Exg7H Dxy7 29 Her, 28 fxg5 What? ‘Three and a half years ago I considered this move to be a mistake, because | thought that after 28... WF! 29 h3 We3 Black, while suffer- ing, would still be able to hold the position. I's true that I sec nothing better than 30 EFI! Gf 30 Sht Wxc3 31 Hxe8 Haxe8 32 Exes Welt 33 teh Wes or 31 Weot hs 32 Wor Bes! dra Eixflt+ 31 Gaxfl Wxc3! 32 Bxc8+ Hxe8 33 Wxe8t @h7 when, despite being a pawn up, White will probably not win if Black defends correctly; e.g. 34 Wh5+ @y8 35 Wet Walt 36 stef2 Wra2+ 37 dee3 Wh3+ 38 Gh2 We3t 39 26 Wes! 40 Whs Weot 41 Wh7+ sees 42 What Wes 43 Wha dees! 44 Wea ded7 45 hd a5 46 b5 ad 47 ho gxh6 48 Wixho sBe8l. But it is also clear that finding all these moves at the board would be very diffi- cult! And the text doesn’t spoil anything. 29 g3!? Only now can I say that White has indeed sacrificed the knight, as after Black’s reply it can no longer be recaptured, 29 h3- would force 29... Wg3 and therefore t variations indicated in the pr seemed to me that 29 g3!? would be nspose to the ious note, but it stronger. 118 Now I feel like cha 29 h3 is more unpl wing my opinion because ant from practical point of view. 29..,Wh3! After 29...We4 White wins with a funny king march: 30 @2¢2! WE3+ 31 fh3. 30 Rxb7 WES 2 BS ae x es ia tows Zi one Mii pat aes all a a 31 We6+! Wxe6 32 Rxe6 Mf7? \ serious time-pressure inaccuracy, after which White has the upper hand, ‘There would he nothing, wrong, with Black’s position after 3 1, when I only see a draw for White ter 33 dap? (33 Hxe6 Exe3 doesn’t promise anything either) 33..2xe3 34 hd! Re2+ 35 bh3 Hxa2 36 Abe? SB 37 h5 Hal 38 tp? %a2+ with a probable repetition of moves. 33 Uixt7 cext7 34 Bxc6 Four pawns should be normally stronger than a knight and this one is still on €8. 34...2b8 35 a6 Mb7 36 h4?! Selected Games It was better to keep Black's knight inactive by playing 36 a4! Ac7 37 Hao. 36...\e7 37 Xd6 Ab5! ‘The only chance, but not a sufficient one 38 g6+! White’s only winning chance is to promote a pawn, so he must use the possibility to ad k, 38 xd Axed van wn with chi ms less clear fo me. 38...e7 38.828 would Bxd5 Axed 40 He5+, and if 40...Ke7 White wins in the style of a good study: 41 h5! Bxe5, 42 dxe5 ske7! 43 tap2! deeb 44 263 Das 45 Bed! De7 (if 45...Dc3+ 46 dS! Dds 47 Bd Dh4 48 94 Acot 49 sbed Axed 50 g5! and Black is in zugzwang) 46 g4 e647 95 Axes. Now it’s White to move and he can’ vugzawang so easily, but he is still winning after 48 a3! ab 49 ad is just as ood) 48...6 49 hdd DB+ 50 decd Axes 51 sbb5 and White creates as many passed pawns as he needs) 49 a5! (zugzwang!) 49...Ac6 50 h6 Ae? 51 hxe7 As 52 c6! e7 53 c7 Sd7 54 eS and wins. | don’t know whether I would find all this at the board, but at home fascinating to analyse such endings! 39 ixd5 Axc3 40 KeS+ sif6 With the time control move, Piket goes into an unusual mating net. I believe his posi tion was hopeless any for example 40...8208 41 d5 Dxa2 42 HES! wins. 41 c6! mak a fu ae a a ry Dy 119Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 Selected Games ‘The intermediate moves (we alread saw 38 g6+!) seem to be the most important in this endgame! 41 h5 2b2 would be less clear. 41,..2b1+ White’s idea was based on the line 41...¢7 42.h5 Exe 43 g4 (threatening 45 g5 mate!) 43...2he6 44 5 Best he7 45 Bi 46 Bxy7 is also winning of course) 44.,.8¢7 45 h6! Exe5 (or 45..De2+ 46 Hxe2 Bxe2 47 hxg7) 46 dxe5 exh 47 g7 BT 48 GH Sxe7 49 gxh6t and one of the two pawns will queen. 42 ag? Kb2+?! Losing at once, but 42...2¥b5 43 Has! Saxe6 Dc7 AS Ha7 would lead to the same 44 result, 43 &f3 1-0 After 43.5 White has 44 Eixbs! BxbS 45 c7 and the pawn is unstoppable. Game 33 Shirov-Grischuk Linares 2001 Sicilian Defence, Vonr Knights ‘The annotations to this game were done when wi on the book and are based on my notes published in Infarmator 81 ‘The memories of the New Delhi: match were still quite fresh, so it is no wonder that in Linares Qvhich was a double-round robin event) new blood came out and both players won with White, Actually my win turned out to be not so difficult as [man to exploit Black’s opening, inaccuracies reasonably well 1 ef c5 2 ‘M3 Ac6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Axdd OMG 5 5\c3 e6 6 Adb5S 6 Axco is more ctitical, but somehow | thought my opponent wanted to play the Sveshnikov and I wanted to try my @xb5 line See the next game). b4 Oops, | forgot about that one. Now White s a couple of to fight for a minimal we, but he has to accept ge ing, ex- tremely dull positions! 7 a3 2xc3+ 8 Dxc3 d5 9 Ld3 a more boring, though ste. that’s a matter of 9...d4 Complicating things unnecessarily, After 9..dxe4 10 Axed Axed 11 Bxet Wed lt 12 xd Ba7 it would only require some accu racy to hold the endgame. 10 Ae2 e5 11 0-0 0-0 12 h3 White’s play is still unpretentious, but at least now he has some targets to aim at, And the presence of the quee! very important factor once he opens the position with £2-f4, 12...e8 13 Ag3 2e6?! A novelty, Against Ponomarioy a month before this game, Korchnoi played 13...d7 and his choice seems stronger because it slows down (2-4, Actually, during the current game neither opponent remembered its predeces 14 £4 ext4 15 Sxt4 \d7?! 120 Now this knight retreat is too late, 15...h6, with a slight plus for White, was called for. 16 Whs! Now we can see the disadvanta 5 square so easily. 16...967! weakens the kingside and Whit vantage becomes evident, Neither 1 65 nor 16.218 17 5! D; better, but Black could still alter any queen move, the At first 1 thought that White had no, we here, but then | took a look at 17 Wbs!? and decided that it was promising, enough. The main line seems to be 17..“2d7 18 Wxb7 Ades 19 Wao! Bbs 20 ba! 2h3! (otherwise Black is pawn down, but what to do after this?) 21 5 (21 exb3 Eb6 with a good position was the idea behind 20....8b3) RxaG (if 22... dd White is better) 23 2.16! with an excellent initiative for the queen, though the position is too complicated to give any definite assessment. 17 he He Black was already in dire straits, since other moves could be refuted sharply; ey. 17...f6 18 cS! Dexe5 19 DhS! Wer (if 19..Be7 20 Dxtor+ Axio 21 Bxe5) 20 Bxe5 fred 21 Lxg6 hxg6 22 Wrxe6+ hs 23 Ato! Axt 24 Exo Wh7 25 Wys! Rys 26 We 17..Ace5 18 AES! Qxf5 19 \d wins, or f5 Dxd3 20 fkg6 hye 21 Ge5! and White’s attack is very strong, 18 .g5 Wg7 19 Wh4 Aces This allows a nice breakthrough, but trying to avoid it with 19..h5 would weaken Black’s position even farther, White could then con- tinue 20 De2 with a big edge. 20 h6 Whs 21 AfS! Even here 21 \e2!? deserved serie tion, but if straightforward play works reject it? 21.,.2xf5 21...gxf5 22 We5+ Dob 23 exf5 is lost for Black, 22 ext5 \xd3 23 exd3 We5 iiva't tt een ora - es owse a yy es nae an \ zk eee oa sal aol 2 WY ae [ars 24 Kat After White doubles the rooks on the f file, all his pieces will attack the king, which will simply have no defence. 24...2)¢5 25 Mafl Axd3 26 fxg6! fxg6 127Fire on Board Part I: 1997-2004 Selected Games ‘The rook was poisoned: 26... sf4 27 ext7+ Shxt7 28 Hxta+ sees GF 28...ee6 29 Bet or 26 29 We3+ exh6 30 Bhd+ Whs Wat ego 32 Exhs wins) 29 Wy3t+ @hs 30 Ef8+ and mates, 27 B47 D\c5 28 Hig? + Missing an casier win by 28 &f8 h5 29 Jbxc5 WeeS 30 Wo with mate. 28...teh8 29 BH7 29...\e6 Afier the queen scicharige Weel Bxel+, simply 31 2 wins the rook. 30 Exg6 d3 31 Mg4 Xg8 32 Xxh7+ 1-0 Game 34 Shirov-Topalov Leén (rapid) 2001 Siilian Defence, Svesbnikov Variation This game has already been mentioned in the article ‘Notes on Creativity’ earlier in the book. Since the reader already knows how the 16 3! idea was found, [ will concentrate here on technical aspects of the game using the notes [ made for Lyformaior 81 back in 2001. 1 4 c5 2 D3 DcG 3 d4 cxd4 4 Axd4 ‘M6 5 A\c3 e5 6 Adb5 dé 7 295 a6 8 a8 bS 9 Axf6 gxf6 10 Ads 15 11 sixb5?! What a pity! Today the ma the most appropriate for t memories of ion remain. 11...axb5 12 AxbS Had is probably sacrifice, But the ‘The best continuation according to both old and new theory. 13 ba! ‘This move was introduced by Alvis Vito- linsh somewhere in the 1970s. As with of Alvis’ ideas, it looks completely illogi White gives up the b-pawn, so his que: no longer a force compensating fot the ficed piece! In exchange the b-file is open, but what is its worth when the black king is still on €8 and the board is full of pieces? Once acri- again Alvis proved that he could see deeply into complex positions. Now, when about seven years have passed since Alvis? death, I notice th ome of his tly, Alvis able to make them as a true artist, he practical skills. Then, sometimes lacked cert picked up by s only name layers (here T would elf, but there are many more of is ideas would shine, and then one daya. they would be vefured by mad ern determination and technologies. But not all of them. 13...2xb4 ‘Wh4 is an alternative that probably gives Black equal chances. But this was only paid attention to when the problems with 3,..2exb4 first became evident! 14 bc7 + Sd7 15 0-0 This is the main position of the 13 bé line. ‘The strongest. move now is probably 122 15.0981, which was first played by Leko against Lather (Essen 2002) with Black achieving a brilliant victory. | must admit that U had missed 15...2g8 in my preparation, Bur here we were still in 2001 and Topaloy played the move that was considered good at that time. 15...lixe7 ‘There was an old game, Vitolinsh Cherniaey, USSR 1990, which continued 15..Mig5 16 Axb4 Axb4 and here Vitolinsh didn’t find 17 Ebi! that gives White the strongest attack. | played it myself in a Paris in 2001, and all [ remember is that Black was mated rather quickly after 17...@2xc7 18 EBxb4 Fred 19 WS and so on, Instead Vito- linsh played 17 Wb12 and lost a complicated battle. Another critical position arises after 15..b7 16 Whs @e7 17 West? Hxc7 (17.206? 18 Ral fred led to quick disaster in the blindfold game Shirov-Lautier, Monaco 2000: 19 Eixb7 S2xb7 20 Eb t+ co 21 Bbot+ eS 22 Bb3 eG 23 He3+ kb7 24 Axe7 Bxc7 25 Wad5+ a7 26 Wa8+ 1-0) 18 Dbor simul in eo 19 Babl d5 (the only move, since if 19,,.a6 then 20 Wb3! with 20 Wor Wade 21 Wxh8 Ago See following diagram and back in 2000 1 decided that White should be better in this position, The main line was 22.227 (22..fixed led to a quick ca- tastrophe in the game [which I only learned about when working on the annotations] Berendsen-Van Beek, Nijmegen 1993 23 ch d4 24 xc Hxc8 25 5!) 23 Wad Wad5 24 exd5+ e7 25 93 with a slight ad- vantage to White. = uae i Vi, of 10 oe 8 ae 0 @ &. WY am one Se Y GERD au Am es zo 16 c3! ‘The reader already knows how this move occurred to. me, All I can add is that it’s the strongest move in the position. 16...ixed a Ge dont x mt mE pa ihe Probably best, 16...!b7 allows White to open of the e-file by 17 exb4, which should yield a terrific attack after 17...fxe4 18 Bel. 17 WhB! sed ‘Topalov insists on giving up his queen, He could have chosen something like 17...Wa5 18 Watt Sd8 19 Wed, leading toa complex position that required many hours of investigation. My final assessment was that tremely, 123Fire on Board Part tl: 1997-2004 White was slightly better there as well. 18 ‘\xc7 sexe7 19 Wxf7+ %e7 20 Hab1! 20....2.a6! low it’s probably time for me to mention the rules under which the game was played ‘Advanced chess’ allows each player to consult a computer program during the game and thus avoid very bad mistakes. Still, it’s quite well known that the programs don’t understand the positions with imbalanced material very well as yet, Besides, we were only given half an hour each for the whole game without any increments. No wonder that by this point some time had already been consumed, so it was only possible to consult the computer for quick checking of you : play the computer's moves without checking them yourself, The proper combination of two brains w: impossible and ‘Topalow was mostly sticking to his own. That let him find the s own ideas, or el ready rongest move which was missed in my preparation, so I had to start working on the position good that I could do it using the same tool as before: the analysis engine. | still had some time for that. 21 Btd1 21 Efel!2 was an alternative. 1...2f8 22 Wb3! ‘The only move to keep fighting for the win. As Thad a bit more time than Veselin, I could carefully check the line 22 Wsh7 Eh4 23 We Hed 24 Who &e2! 25 Hel (25 h3 Hh4 26 We3 Sxdl 27 Whot sed7 28 Wh7+ e629 Bxdl ain. It Eca isn’t advisable for White) 25...kxg2+ 26 Gexg2 Hyst 27 sbh3 @e4+ and establish that it would be a forced draw. Now I should men- tion that I had to wy to win not only to ‘de- fe down in the four-game match at thar moment (this was the second game). 22...Xb8 23 We6! 1 my opening idea, but also because | was 23...8xb1 ‘This, and especially the next, move is an in- dication that Topalov had too little time left to consult the program properly. I expected him 3.8.04 24 Waf5 Hxbl 25 Exbt 23 after which [ would be obliged to give up the exchange in some way. Neverthe- fier 27 Wxh7 Axfl 28 Lxfl White's .c4 29 Ws! edo (if 29...2ixc3 30 Wrd5) 30 @3! Bxc3 31 hd. 24 Eixb1 243?! It was still not too late to play 24.84 and get into the above-mentioned lines 25 Hd1! After this precise move White’s advantage becomes sufficient to convert into victor Normally I would still face serious difficulties in the technical patt but, as the reader knows, Thad serious external help. 25...f4?! Now Black pieces get misplaced. 26 Kel 8.43 would be more stubborn. 26 WS! 2.c2 27 Mel Xe2 28 ad! A human move, quickly checked with the Bc2 124 Selected Games machine, This pawn will decide the game. 28...e4 28,..8.04 29 Wh5 Bd2 30 a5 would make no difference. 29 a5 S.d3 30 Nat! 32 Wxe4 with a decisive advantage, but then | would still have to take his h-pawn to create a new passer, As I saw nothing wrong with my move, which would keep the a5: once again I disregarded my ass 31...8b7 One doesn’t need Fritz to see the pretty win after 31.24 32 a6 S.xct 33 WreGt Lexc6 34a. 32 a6 Ma7 33 13! The game i — in the purest sense of the word. 33...)e5 34 fxed &xe4 35 Mel Mxa6 36 Hxed+ Oxcd 37 Wxed+ Be6 38 WT sbd8 39 Wg8+ sad7 40 Yixh7 Rcd 41 WET Het+ 42 f2 Xe8 43 WI5S+ svc7 44 Web 1-0 over and the rest is automatic Game 35 Fedorov-Shirov European Team Ch., Leon 2001 Bishop's Opening The annotations to this game are based on my notes for laformator 83 made shortly after the tournament. The text was added when working on the book, 1e4e5 2 ica If Fedorov doesn’t play 2 £4 anymore, it means the King’s Gambit has finally become an opening of the past. 2...M6 3: d3 c6 There would be nothing wrong with the ftalian Gam eb, but why not € lenge White’s set-up directly? But you still need to remember the actual variations... 4 M3 d5 5 &b3 2d6 6 e3 dxe4 7 Ags 0-0 8 Acxed Axed 9 Axed 9...a5?! As with many of my ‘novelties’, this one was the result of confusing the moves. My plan was to follow the game Adams-Kramnik, Tilburg. 1998, which went 9...9.65 10 WE Gxed 1 dxed Dd7 12 ¢3 and only then 12..a5, Did I dream 9...a5 of what? | don’t know. 10 Whs! Here I realised with horror that Fedorov wed to sacrifice his might not ab wn on move 2 in order to mate his opponent! At first my position looked grim, but then I found somethit 10...0.b4+! With this check Black mans the white pieces a little, ‘The alternative, 10...8&e721, looked much more unpleasant, as 1 s to misplace saw no way to finish my development after 11 ad! (but not 11 Wxe5? ad 12 @xad Ad? 13 Wid Brad 14 Dor Bxto 15 Wexad Bett 125Fire on Board Part il: 1997-2004 which is good for Black) 11..“Ad7 12 0-0 and White is clearly better, 11 wet! A very direct approach. It’s true that with- cout castling White’s pieces can be misplaced (which will in fact be the case later in the game), but at the moment White just wants to attack! And if his qucen’s rook comes to el, then to ¢3, then... 1 really needed to calm down and look for counter-chances. Instead, 11 c3 would be answered by 11..8e71, and after 12 0-0 (or 12 Wxe5 a4 13 &c2 £5 with compensation) 12.04 13 82 Black can choose between 13...d7 or 13...15 14 De5 h6 15 AB 2.66, which seems to lead to a reasonable position after 16 Mel Wes 17 Wixeh Hxe8 18 d4 ef 19 4 Ad7. Bur not 11..Wixd3? as the complications after 12 Ags are clearly favourable for White; eg, 12...2c5 xc3+ 13 bxc3 ixed+ 14 he2 265 , and a lot with White before it became popular in tournament practice. 8h3 {b7 9 d3 d6 10 a3 According to the database, the first time this position appeared was in the game Westerinen-Poulsson, Oslo 1973. However, I don’t think it would be a mistake to call Lat vian GM Zigurds Lanka (it’s funny to mention his name again, having just finished the notes on my game against Radjabov) ‘the Godfather’ of the h3-d3-a3 set-up, as he started employ- ing it regularly in the 1980s, introducing all the ical ideas. It’s also amusing that both opponents in the curtent game played it for the first time only in 1996, finally giving deserved respect to Zigurds’ ideas. And other leading, players en later. 10...b8 Switching colours when preparing a_par- ticular opening is not always a k. You tend to play what you of yourself, but then new problems, which were unnoticed before, begin to appear. Here I had tried both 10...Wd7 and 10...a5, until I decided that the main str did so ¢ 171Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Breyer-type set-up might be preferable, as White has less activity than in che Breyer. 11 Dbd2 bd7 12 “AF1 Kes 13 Gaz Paco Vallejo played 13 Dy5 against me in an earlier round, but after 13..d5 14 exd5 JBsd5 15 Bxd5 Axd5 he found nothing bet- ter than 16 WES going for further simplifiea- tions, I managed to equalise comfortably with 16...8x25 17 Bxe5 Wxes 18 Wxd5 Abo 19 W7 Was! and after 20 WES 1 accepted Paco’s draw offer. In the pressroom 1 Ibojevic was claiming, that I was already better at this point, but I don’t believe him. is 13 Dy3 6 14 Des which | faced against Svidler in Wijk aan Z ‘ks befo is time there were no simplifications, but still after L4...d5 15 d4l? ho! (not 15...exd4? 16 5) 16 dxe5 (16 Axt7? Gxt7 17 dxeS Dxe5 18 exdd fails to 18...De4) 16...hxg5 17 exf6 &xf6 1 gor a comfortable game, Kasparov prefers to follow his game against Kramnik in Linares the previous year, and 1 should say he was especially quick and confi- dent at this stage, which made me nervous of course, 13...c6 14 Ag3 2f8 15 “\fS d5 16 da 5! Kramnik was right to consider this move the strongest in his annotations Another option some Six w for Informator 87. If Lam not mistaken, he also indicated the line 16...962! 17 AhoH Bxh6 18 Bxh6 Axes 19 Etxed! dxe4 20 Ay5 Ke7 21 Axes with an attack for White hows roe 7m 7 tt ao _ 17 dxe5 “)\xe5 18 exd5 e4 19 “\h2?! parov decides (well, in fact can’t call it ion’, given the impressive speed of his play) to deviate from the previou he continued 19 @3d4, which is probably a better option. | was very. su from journalists later that, sight after his game with Kramnik, Kasparov claimed that 19 2h2 would yield him ‘a decisive attack’. me where rised to learn foe 2 cig a ieee fe 19...Dxd5! Thad to spend a half an hour on this move because, even though I remembered that my position should be OK, I still had to recon- board. In: i fas Kramnik played and equalised with after 19 @fdd) 20 @pd (the point of 19 Dh2) 20...2.xa2 21 Wrxd8 Haxd8 172 22 Axf6+ gxf6 23 Hxa2 can’t be recom mended for Black 20 Aga Played after more than one hour thought. swered by 20... Wf, 20 Wed would be a 20...n5! preparation, but here he started thinking a Meanwhile 1 was still following my analysis with Rytshagov. Instead 20,,.Md72! 21 Ztho+ hs 22 De3 would be unattractive, though 20..d2h8!2 might have been an alternative. 21 Age A very surprising decision when having less than 20 minutes for the remaining 20 moves. | expected 21 Bxd5 and was planning to an- swer it with 21..Waxd5 (though 21.8 Deed Be6 23 Add Bc? is also interesting) 22 Det (22 Wed Bxd5 23 Age 206 is nor worse for Black) exf6 23 Wexh5 Best, forcing White to go for the perpetual check after 24 Wott, I should also mention that knight sacrifices wouldn’t work; e.g, 21 Ah6+ exh 22 Bxd5 Qxd5 23 Axh6+ Sxh6 24 Lxh6 He DehOr? oxh6 22 Axh6t (similarly 22 @xh6 Wo 23 Wsh5 eS or if 22 Wxhs Who 23 Axd5 Bxd3) 22..0xh6 23 Bxho Wr 24 Wehs He5 and wins. 21...04! Here | was ‘out of book’ myself, but | still had total confidence in my position. Now B8 Selected Games when writing these notes, Iam rather puzzled to see that Frit prefers White, but th tations are not on a man vs. machine clash. 22 b4 aa anno OK, Prieg tion, 23 g3?! An unexpected pawn sacrifice. White should have settled for passive defence after 23 Wrxd8 Haxd8 24 AFL Zeb when Black is only slightly better. 23...Mxd1 24 [xd1 Axh3+ 25 sg2 AgS Black has a clear started. smelling my first victory against Kas- parov. (Did T have any other chan Manila 1992, besides in 19982). However, wasn't to be this time cither, 26 2.d5 &xd5 27 Dxdd Iva antage and naturally 1 nee aa “lat 244 ee as t a v it gf eu wea “one Se 27...He5? Now White gets sufficient compensation 173Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Selected Games for the pawn, After the game I thought that 27.23 was winning, but in fact White still gets a certain counterplay by continuiny 24! (not 28 Bh? Bad8 or 28 Ac7 Keds 29 S24 Hack and wins) 28...Hac8 29 ht! So the best move was 27...e6!. During the game I rejected this because of 28 Zh Hed 29 Dfe3 regaining, the sacrificed material, but had 1 prolonged my calculations 1 would probably have realised that after 29..g6! 30 Afo+ Sh8 31 Axed O97 Black gets a possi bly decisive positional advantage, 28 xg5 White could also play 28 h4, which T saw right after making my 27th move. Then I might have returned the pawn by 28....\63 29 Asf3 ext3+ 30 Gxf3 He8 with a slight edge, though not as big as in the previous note. 28...Lixf5 29 2f4! I missed this move completely. Black re- healthy pawn up, but his rook on £5 is so misplaced that White’s own piece activity grants him nearly full compensation for a pawn. Nevertheless, it still requires a lot of accuracy to save the game, 29...Me8 30 De3 Kt6 31 Md5! g6 32 Had1 Mfe6 33 dB mains 33.06 Playing it safe. Variations like 33 H1d7 Bxd8 35 Leas 97 1 normally consider only in computer analysis, but who knows, maybe it would have been a winning wy? 34 g4! uh7! I would like to repeat my previous com- ment, this time regarding the 34...bxg4 35 Dey line, 35 Reda! A very ning to atta ‘ong move again, White is plan k the black kings both rooks alive in order to be able to create threats, 35...he6?! Missing another computer suggestion: 35.651? 36 gxfS gxf5, after which White should probably continue 37 $2h3 (less advis able is 37 Ax(5 Bro 38 Ado Axt 39 Axc8 Dsc8 40 c4 Be7! and Black is better) 37.827 38 Hd6 with good drawing chances. 36 gxh5 gxh5 37 ith svg6 38 £37! Finally time-trouble tells. 38 Hg would be an immediate draw, 38...exf3+7! 38..£5 would be better, I rejected it because of 39 12, intending 40 Hddl, but here 39...8¢7! would still offer some hopes of win- ning. 39 sexf3 Me3 40 Xgi+ ieh7 41 Kd3 Here I sank into long thought, only to reach the conclusion that the position was drawn. 41...xd3 42 exd3 “ia, Za so he keeps SN me . ~ 42...016 ling for the repetition, since variations like 42..9h6 43 &xh6 Bxho 44 Hye or 42,,.Rd6l? 43 AES Oxf4 44 Ho7+ Bhs 45 ixtt Dust 46 HB (nor 46 Gye5?? Mi6) 174 46...16 47 &o6 didn’t convince me. 43 hed Ne6+ 44 vet3 ‘Trying to win with 44 25 would now be answered by 44...8d6 as there is no AS anymore, though 45 Sg5 draws anyway 44,.\A7 And suddenly 1 wanted to win again! Hon- estly speaking, 44..f6 was better. 45 4! Now Black has to be extremely careful, 45...e6! But fortunately he is not worse yet. 46 gS Hc3 47 Uxh5+ sig6 48 Ng5+ ” ey RT re Wi ary ip ana en naa “a Fi a2 BQ, a 48..ieh7 48.816 49 Bed Bxa3 50 Hy8! would be good for White, so it’s better to end the game. 49 HhS+ sag6 50 Xg5+ %-% Game 49 Shirov-Atalik Sarajevo 2004 Ray Lopes; Main Line ‘This game was annotated shortly after the tournament and published in Now fr Chess: en though | was in reasonable shape in Sarajevo and ended up winning the event, | still struggled in the opening of almost game, consuming a lot of time. But on this d I was rather fortunate that Suat chose the same line that Ivan Sokolov had played against me two rounds earlier, so 1 had some fresh thoughts about it 1e4 eS In our two previous yames, both played in 2003, Suat went for the French Defence. 2 M3 Ac6 3 Obs a6 4 Lad AE 5 0-0 fie7 6 He bS 7 b3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 Dab 10 fc2 ¢5 11 d4 exdd 12 cxd4 Db7 13 d5 Le8!? 14 Abdz Against Ivan | opted for 14 b3, which looks a litle artificial but is not necessarily wrong, Nevertheless, thi ime L fet like ying a more sical approach. 1a. “h51? By playing 14...lMc7 Black could transpose to the line that was tested in my old game against ‘Timman in Belgrade 1995 (see Pie ov Boar). Keeping the queen on uf looks logical, but it has also a drawback since Black cannot get the knight on F4 with tempo, as in the ear- li er 15 Bb (15 Qd3 is a different 5..0h5 16 AFL Aes when Black threatens to sacrifice on cl in some lines. 15 AM Aca Mier 15..\f4 White could either ‘arrest’ the a5 knight with 16 &xf4 exf 17 b3 or play something else; for example 16 e3. 16 ad! I found this natural the board, I was a little surprised to discover in the database later a lot of games with 16 b3 Dbo 17 De3 v6, including an old game of ‘Tal’s as Black. I believe that when the bishop. is on b7 ina standard Ruy Lopez set-up, the b5-pawn is Blick’s major weakness, soit and concrete move at 175Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 should be ‘bothered’ immediately. 16...b4!? A novelty. Even though Suat wase’t in his best form in Sarajevo, it didn’t reflect on the usual creativeness of his play. Not wanting to suffer under the typical ‘Spanish torture? aft for example, 16.24 17 b3 Abo 18 axb5 19 p53, he sei the sacrifice of one or even two pawns in some lines. 17 b3! At first | thought there was nothing wrong with 17 243 Ata 18 Bxe4 Axed 19 Oxf exf 20 Yb3 winning a pawn, but then it dawned on me that Black would have excel lent play after 20,..We7 21 B1d2 Bc2i. 17...2)a3! ji, Another strong move, though 1 coulda’t believe my eyes when it was played. ‘The knight goes to the edge, not even attacking, White’s pawns, but its activity is not to be un derestimated. In fact Black had no alternative; for instance if 17...Ab6 18 a5 Dd7 19 Ded Aé4 20 Bd2 Des 21 Bxb4 and here White wins a pawn comfortably. 18 0d3! 18 .xa3 bxa3 19 Bxa3 96! would Black easy play on the king pawn. 18...a5?! But this is a litle over the top. During the game I thought I would also be better after 18.04! 19 Bxtd extd 20 Wa2 Hes! 21 ide for ‘ju Exa3 Bad3 22 Wab4 We7 23 Ba2 or 20...05 21 Macl, but in faet in the latter line, by play- the ‘ugly’ 21..8¢5!, Black has every chance to hold the balance. 19 )xe5! And White has an extra pawn in the centre. IP Is anything else requ 19....2.f6! Wall, as long as it’s not a passed pawn (as in the line 19..dxe5 20 Wxh5), things are still rather me 20 WxhS 2xe5 21 Ma2 Re3 22 Wd Should I mention that I stopped my ealeu lations here, thinking that a with a second one about to drop? 22... MHEG! Who cares about the second pawn when one is aiming for piece activity! 23 Mes! I believe this was a correct decision, even AWA Was a pawn, Selected Games though White is on the razor’s edge now. ‘e3 was an alternative, after which Black’s strongest reply is 23...8c8!, and even though White can take the second pawn with 24 Qxa3 bxad- 25 Bsa3, the position after We6 doesn’t seem entirely clear to me. The same is true after 23 2xa3 bxa3 24 Bwad cdl, 23... 2fcB!? Another unexpected move. I had calculated 23...8.64 and planned to answer it by 24 &b2 xe 25 Axed Bees 26 Dedl? (26 Wed !? is computer suggestion that didn’t_cross_ my mind) 26...Axc4 (if 26...2a67! 27 &xc3 Wxed 28 Axd6 Wxd3 29 Zd2 We3 30 Axe8 LxcB 31 do 27 32 Has and White is winning) 2xc3 Wrxc3 28 @xcd with a clear advs 24 Sd2 X3c5 25 M43! Wd! A move connected with a devilish plan that 1 didn’t notice in time, 26 \e3!? Objectively this isn’t a mistake, but I wasn’t mentally prepared for the forthcoming chaos on board. | should have chosen 26 83! He3 27 Dg3l, finally achieving good co-ordination of White’s pieces while keeping, an extra pawn. 26...28¢7 AED Aiwaan Be 7) 22S i oe 27 Aga! Now if 27...2d4 28 He3! hs 29 tWe3 and White is clearly better. 27...Wc8! What a cold shower. 1 completely over- looked this simple move, threatening ...Sel, first | and as often happens in such cases, wanted to resign. ‘Then | realised tha was forced. 28 241 Ke’ 28...8.62| would give Black an inferior ver sion of the game afier 29 Axed Kel 30 &xcl Hxcl 31 Wel. 29 2x1 Lixcl 30 Wd2 2a6 a Ee c oe ae a a x ate ne. Baha es x Oe my reply a i> \ SN = i ee Ce as ‘ 31 Dxeb5! By this point { had calmed down and felt 1 could continue trying to win the game. 31 2d3 seemed less ambitious to me in view of 31..AbL (31...2xd3 32 Wxd3 We! 33 Axes Wee5 is also interesting) 32 Wed x3 (dur- ing the game I didn’t see 32..ixfl+ 33 Sixfl 3+, but in fact it’s pretty dangerous for lack; eg, 34 el Dc3 35 Axes! dxe5 36 Hd2 BQxc4 37 d6 and the d-pawn is extre strong) 33 Wd3 Wea! 34 Axes Ys Eixc2 36 Whee2 Ac3 and 1 doubt thar White can hope for more than a draw. 31...Hx1+ 31..dxe5 32 ®h2 would probably transpose to the game, as xfl 33 Wy5! is worse for Bla 32 ih2 dxe5 33 d6? ‘This tempting move, aiming 10 utilise White’s major foree — the d-pawn, is surpris: ingly not the best, White’s piece harmony could have been achieved by 33 We5!, attack- ing the e-pawn and making a deadly threat of We7. Black’s pawn on c5, along with his posi- part; for example tion, would probably fi 176 177Fire on Board Part tl: 1997-2004 33...AWB (iF 33...WeS then 34 Bg3 p6 35 Wits, followed by 36 2g5, wins the pawn) 34 Yxe5 bl 35 Kall and if 35..Ad22! 36 Extl Dxf3+ 37 ext S.xfl 38 do! WS 39 4 wins. Boy gl Un wey As we can see, after Black’s inaccuracy at move 18, his position was ah bad and the mo We: brought me a decisive advantage. However, 1 objectively would have was already a little short of time, the position was complicated, and my opponent played the whole game in the spirit of the young Mikhail Tal 3a). But this returns the favour immediately. Af- ter the obligatory 33...WU7! things would still be very unclear from a practical point of view. 1 intended 34 Wa52! which probably doesn’t yield White more than a draw after 34...2b7 35 Wexa5 (if 35 Wxe5 Hdl) 35...Wixd6 36 Wa7 WeT 37 Ba3 ho 38 Bad2 Abt 39 Ba? (not 39 Halt Bxdt 40 Bxdt @c3 41 Het Wa7! and Black is beticr) 39...Wc6 40 Bxb7! (40 Wh8t ah7 41 203 Weed 42 Wrxb7 Wet 43 Bo Exi2 44 Bxt7! Wat? 45 Wea+ Wes 46 Wb7 also draws) 40...xd2 41 Kbst Seh7 42 Wxt7 Hal 43 We5+ We6 44 Bhst xh8 45 Wxe6 DV with a relatively happy end for both lowever, White's best move is again 34 it any wonder that I finally erred? b72? 1. at the last moment | would have realised that 34 We5 was stronger, but even if | did E would still have had to cal- culate the following line: 34..Xd1 35 We7! Exd6 36 Hxt7 Wxe7 37 Exe7 Hd3 38 Mb2! doubt whether \ \ ‘“ ee Nr “ WS \ > SK os “ae Zu 38... Kc31? 39 Bxe5 Bcd! 40 Ha2 &d3 41 Bt Hxb3 42 Bd5! with excellent winning chances. 34 d7 Was 35 Kas + oe ana “eo 8 atae ae am a mes in So Ss On d7 the pawn is already too close to queening, Black has no defence. 35.16 h6 would prolong the resistance but not change the result, in view of 36 Kd6 “Ab1 37 Wa3 Xct 38 Wh5 Ac3 39 Wxb7 Dxa2 40 Fec6 Bxc6 41 Waco Set8 42 Wes+ and wins. 36 Rd6 wif7 37 We2 Kel 38 Wh5+ se7 39 He6+ texd7 40 Rd2+ 1-0 Game 50 Shirov-Bologan Sarajevo 2004 Peiraff Defence ‘The game was annotated shortly after the 178 tournament and published in New ii Chess. 1 ed eS 2 3 NG 3a Nowadays this move is close to being a ‘fingerfehler’ since 3 @xe5 is played almost exclusively. 3...2xe4 4 2d3 d5 5 DxeS Dd7 6 Axd7 Oxd7 7 0-0 £46 8 De3!? Aa old line that I played against Kramnik and Anand back in 1997-98, but gave up when I started studying 3 Dxe5, influenced by fash- ion 8...2xc3 9 bxe3 £06?! ‘The normal continuations are 9...0-0 and 9,..Wh4, When Bologan played his move I thought it was a dubious novelty which should try to refute right away. In fact it had already been played by Zhu Chen against Kovalevskaya in Shenyang 2000. L oe ti ier a m te 10 Hb1! Selected Games The first move in a new position is often a very important one. Black should be pre- vented from castling long, 10...ib8 10...b6 11 &.b5+ SF8 was possibly playable, but who wants to leave the king in the centre so early in the game? 11 Whs! Now iv’s time to prevent short castling as well. This move turned out to be a novelty, as the aforementioned game continued 11 f4 £5 and Black seemed comfortable. 11...06?! Afterwards Viorel was very unhappy about this move, suggesting 11..96 12 Who da! ad, I should admit that his idea pletely cortect and, even more, it would have was com taken me by surprise, as 1 had only reckoned with 12...218 13 We3! when White is clearly bette! ess, White still has a pleasant game after 12..8d7 13 @g5 Wis 14 Wh4 ho 15 B.6 Bc7 16 FAP (16 c4 95 17 Sxc7 exh 18 QxfB dxe4 19 d5 Bed 20 Bxcd Khxtd would only be equal, though 16 Hfel!? is an alternative) 16...xf6 17 Wst6 We7 18 Wes Wao 19 We3, since the black king is not best placed in the centre, Still, it’s not casy to sug- gest anything concrete after 19...8hg8! and if 20 £5 Oxf5 21 BxfS+ ext, 12 g5 Le7 13 Lxe7! I seriously considered 13 F, but th saw a similar idea for him; ic. 13...2xg5! (13.962! 14 B@xe7 exh 15 Bxd8 Bxd8 16 ime | 179Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 fel is good for White) 14 fxg5 g6 15 Who sBd7! and Black has some defensive possibili- tes, 13...Wxe7 14 £4 14...WWH6! Now 14...¢6? would lose to 15 We5 0-0 16 £5 yxfS 17 Gxt5 Mfeb (17..Rbe8 18 Axh7+ Sbxh7 19 Wh5+ 7 20 KP is even more direct) 18 Wp3+ @h8 19 @xh7I, so Black has to abandon any hopes of castling, But to ex- ploit the kin; to play energeti 15 Hbe1 sd8! ion in the centre, one has er 15..98268 16 £5 (con go 17 Whot We7 18 Waar Shexe7 19 £5 exf5 20 gxfS Bc 21 for Pho 22 Hes or the immediate 16 eS! are also interesting) 16..2d7 17 seems almost stalerated (if 17..e8 18 Biel). Meanwhile 15...¢6 would be bad in view of 16 Who see7 17 Wh3! followed by 18 5. 16 g4! ] Yi, 2 Z Baas Fe a a ag fa Y HRT he Vi a8 uy a WY nek ae 16...96 Once again Bologan’s decision seems best. 16.,.82c8?! fails to 17 £5 Bd7 18 g5 Was 19 WaT Wag5t 20 Hht and wins. Instead the computer prefers 16.87 17 5 LAT 18 g5 Was also very passive, and I believe that White can prove it by continuing 19 Wh4! (19 £62! 6 20 Wh4 &c6 would only give White a slight ad- vantage) 19...£6 20 Wes+ f2c8 21 Wa We? Gf 21...fxg5 22 He7) 22 Wes! (22 Wa3l? is also possible) 22...Who 23 Wa! (23 Waxb62 axh6 24 He7 Hy8 25 pst gxto+ 26 S12 Bad! is not as good for White either) 23...fxg5 24 He7 and I don’t think it would be incorrect to say that White's position is winning, Selected Games 780 17 Wh6 sc7?! Surprisingly B ck makes a wrong choice, which might also be considered the decisive mistake. During the game 1 thought that this forced, since 17...S.xp4! would dose’ to 18 (51, overlooking that Black still has 18..s2d7. move was complete tite on: < £ aus a Wh ana ‘This is probably one of the most fascinat- ing positions I have "The com: puter gives White a clea single blow, but in fact Black holds on in practically every line! a) 19 Ret Shs 6 hxgo 21 Exto Exho 22 Hxt7+ dd6 23 Bee? Bed! 24 Exb7 Bxb7 25 Eixb7 Pa “gio! leads to an ending that Black probably holds with 25....8.651! (not 25...a5? 26 BIT! @e6 27 Ha7 2.65 28 v2! and White is winning) 26 Bxa7 (26 e2 a6 27 Ha7 Bhd 28 Bxao Rod and 26 &xf5 gxf5 27 Bxa7 Bot 28 shi Be6! also deaw) 26..8xd3 27 cxd3 Bh3 28 Hig7 Bxd3 29 Expr ded7 and I don’t see how can White make use of his two extra pawns — for example after 30 h4 Bh3! (nor 30...Bxc3? 31S Hd3 32 h6 Bxc4 33 By2! and wins) 31 Hod Hxc3, or 30 By3 Hal+ 31 seg? Ha2+ 32 ht (or 32 @h3 Mxa2 33 BS Bas! 32..d 14 33 Eyl Rel3 a 8 iy, eee a =a a Ps a a ee ee _ a Y @ ; e Ns and if 34 Bet Bd2 35 ad Ba2 36 h4 Bxat 37 h5 c5 38 Bal ie7 39 dp? Bed, or 35 h4 Re2! Gif 35..Hxa2 36 h5 White still has chan- ces) 36 Bet Hea 37 He7+ do 38 Hh7 Hes. b) 19 fxg6l? hxg6 20 Hx Exh 21 Ex t7+ Sedo 22 Hot ded7 23 Bxgo Hxg6 24 2xg6 He8 25 Qd3 reaches a similar position as in the game, but one thing is clear: BI ing, chances are much higher here as he has some extra tempi. After many hours of White's best winning try w ©) 19 13! BhS 20 fxg6 and now if 20,..hxe6 21 Rxf6 Bxho 22 Bxt7+ ded6 23 Bee? and wins, but Black has 20,....31! (can che human brain foresee such a fore? | honestly didn’t), when it looks very promising to go for a double rook ending with 21 WhS!? @xh5 22 Bxf6 Qxo6 23 Qxp6 feo 24 MET+ ted8 25 Bee7, but once a i to find a win after 25...h6! 26 so2 example 27 #3 h5 28 hd gxhd+ 29 dasha Hes! or 27 Ba7+ Beck 28 Ke7+ deus 29 Hfd7+ Ge8 30 Bxb7 Hxb7 31 Rxb7 Bes 32 sis | decided that urce five moves be- 187Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 Bxa7 Bro. Instead 21 Ee5! is the most critical move (it should also be mentioned thar 21 We3? is wrong because of 21...Ebe8 22 Hxf3 Bxe3 23 Bxf6 Bxel+ 24 Wf2 Re7!) 21...hxe6 22 HS! WsfS (forced) 23 Bxf5+ exf5 24 WHEL when White’s extra queen gives him excel lent practical chances. | hope to be forgiven for not analysing in detail. Variations such as 24..2bg8+ 25 Bf2 Red 26 Wxt7+ Bc8 27 Weot! Sec7 28 We7+ seb8 29 Bygi! Hes 30 WE7 Ehf8 31 We7! Qxc2 32 h4 or 28...82c8! 29 hd! more or less confirm my optimism, 18 {5 2d7 19 fxg6 Wd6 20 Lxt7 hxg6 ‘These moves were indeed forced. 21 Wrat It was frustrating to conclude that there was no mate after 21 Hxd7+? Wsd7 22 Wea+ sb6 23 Hbi+ dea5, so 1 calmed down and prepared myself mentally 10 uy and win the endgame a pawn up, 21...Wxt4 22 Exfa Liha 23 Ne7! dé ‘The best practical try. If Black lets White keep both kingside pawns, then it would be virtually all over straight away; for instance 23...ie8 24 h3! Bsh3 25 BEA Beds 26 2x96 Bd6 27 B65 BS 28 extS Bho 29 Exb7 or 24... d6 25 He3 and White will win. 24 Mg?! Lxg4+ 25 Mxg4 Sxgd 26 Rxg6+ Ge6 27 ha! The bishop endgame after 27 252 Hos scemed completely unclear to me in respect of winning chances, so this pawn advance pre- vents possible rook exchanges. However, with the aid of remarks made by the Spanish GM Alfonso Romero, I later established that White should in fact win by continuing 28 Exy8 Bxes 29 Br2 &e7 30 he3 Hto 31 Sea 16 32 h4 27 33 Bd7 c5 34 ed! Lo6 YY Oa Is aa WY aoa We Xe gy a uo “Y 182 35 dxc5! (I think | missed this intermediate exchange; instead 35 B13 cxd4 36 exdd Bxc2 37 Bxd5 didn’t look so clear to me) 35...bxe5 36 &.£3! and the res Had 1 realised this I would probably have preferted 27 25! to 27 h42l, since it’s always advisable to exchange rooks in such positions. 27...tie7 27.898? was impossible due to 28 Bxgs B.xg8 29 h5 and wins, 28 ef2! G7 28..2h8 would lose to 29 Hy7+ S27 30 yo 6 31 Rxt7+ Expo 32 Exb7 Asha 33 hed. 29 Xg5! b6 ‘The immediate 29...c5 was a better try. 30 dig c5 31 h5! & nt ta an Black should have tried to prevent this pawn advance. Now he is lost. 31...2h8 32 skh4! chef6 33 2g6! ‘The last finesse. Now White wins with or without bishops on the board. 33...2.xg6 1£33..ke6 34 By? ete. 34 Hxg6+ sef5 35 Rg5+ Wed Or 35...82e6 36 dxc5 bxe5 37 ¢4 and White wins. 36 He5+ whf4 37 Mxd5 exd4 38 Mxd4+ {5 39 Kd7 Hc8 40 N67+ we6 41 BIBI? Actually 41 xa? wf6 42 Had was both greediet and simpler. 41...Uh8 42 ¢4 Hh7 43 XB we5 44 Kes shd4 45 Re6 Selected Games Y a ean at aoe i a ae i.e 8 @ ne _< 45...2ig7 46 h6 Xg2 47 h5 1-0 Game 51 Huzman-Shirov European Cup, Lzmir 2004 Sav Defence ‘This was the third consecutive year I played for the Bosna Sarajevo team in the European Club Cup. We managed to win the competi- tion in 2002, though we had a total dis year later. Both previou I played on the second board (scoring 5/7 and 5¥2/7 respec- tively). ‘This time my task was a little tougher as Twas put at the top of the team. Apart from a new, unfortunate loss against Kas- parov I could be rather satisfied with my per formance (4'/2/7), but not really with the level of my play. The team finished second, so the event was still a relative success. Out of my three wins, this one was the most interesting, 1 D3 d5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 MG 4 cxdB Before making this modest capture Alex- ander Huzman spent some minutes looking, at the openings on the other boards, so I sus- pected that he didn’t have a clear idea whether to play fora win ora draw. 4...cxd8 5 cd Dc6 6 14 151 ‘The exclamation mark is for the tight psy- chological choice in the situation, Normally 1 play the 6..a6 line, but then White can do some ‘theoretical’ pressing for a while, before deciding whether to be aggressive or super 183Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 solid. Now he has to make such a choice al- most immediately 7 3 06 8 O.b5 ‘This is what | hoped for. After 8 2&d3 1 would still have been able to catch some sun on the beach, but it wouldn’t be mentioned in this book. b4 is probably also OI, but [already wanted to try to avoid a quick draw. 9 Wada Kes, It’s not the first time this position has ap- peared in my practice, though now it is with the opposite colour! It wasn’t easy to remem- ber my old non-computer analysis when I tried to find an advantage for White. 10 &xc6?! According to my memories, I never con sidered this capture to be very good, I em- ployed 10 (1-0 a6 11 @xc6 Hxc6 12 Bfcl Be7 13 Adil? in the late eighties and even won did Shabalov), but despite those that at some point Shaba and 1 decided the line wasn’t promising for White. 10...2xe6 11 Wxa7?! ‘This came asa rprise — and an unpleasant one at first. More than fifteen years ago Black’s initiative seemed evident to me, but who knows... Nowadays one can bravely col- leet the pawn, having analysed all the defen th Jawior9, andl then safely write home about! Well, in fact, after wards Huzman admitted that he was also just sive in advance relying on some old analy tained a mistake. 11... He8 12 Wad Sd3! that possibly con Preventing White from castling short and causing a ce 13 shed2? Surprisingly this move still follows ‘theory’ as I was able to check on the database af terwards, 13 Hdl Bed 14 Ab5 would be a little safer and offer roughly equal chances. 13...b6! ‘This was a novelty, At the time 1 had no that other moves such as. 13. Bet, in trouble for his qui but the concrete ply stronger. 14 Wa7? The decisive , after which her maj- esty will be in serious trouble. The critical con tinuation is 14 Wad when Black would have 184 Selected Games several opportunities to get a good game. ‘The best is probably 14. (since 14. Heal? 15 WaT! @.b4 16 he! looks less clear to me) and after 15 Wa5 Bcd! (not 15..b4? 16 Sxd3 bxc3 17 bxc3) 16 AxbS Sxb5 17 Webs Bho 18 ‘Wa3 Hxb2+ 19 det Dfo a" a eats ss ed 7 wae — A, vy Oy LL, ane Pa a R ana and according to the rules, White can’t cas- Uc anymore and therefore stands worse. 14...2b4 15 Mhet he aim of this move is to defend the knight on d7! Pll explain why. 16 wd 16 a3 would allow Black a winning, attack after 16...8xe3+ 17 Bxc3 (17 bxc3 0-0 is simi- lar to the game) 17..2xc3 18 bxe3 Wed! and we can see that White doesn’t hiv nation beginning 19 Wxd7-+! (as would work in the case of the immediate 15....2.062). 16...&xe3 17 bxc3 e a combi- If 17 Bixc3 Hxc3 18 bxc3 Wxc3 wins easily. 17... a6! But now this move is important to jail the queen, which otherwise would come back into the game via a3 18 a4 Trying to get some air with 18 ct wouldn’t help because of 18...dxc4 (18..8xe4 19 Wad {6 is also good enough, but why grant the queen amnesty?) 19 d5 e5! and wins. 18...0-0 19 a5 The immediate 19 Act would lose more quickly 10 19.,.051 20 &xe5 [621 23 BE7. 19...b5 20 ‘et Or 20 De5 He7. 20...g5! 21 Sg3 15 White can’t control the c7 square anymore, so the rest requires no comment 22 Ad3 14 23 exf4 Ne7 24 Wxe7 Wxo7 25 fxg Wea 26 ‘Ab4 26...e5! s bishop sacrifice is the most effective way to finish the game. 27 D\xaB exd4 28 \c7 dxc3 29 a6 cS 30 a7 W1+ 0-1 Game 52 Shirov-Fressinet Calvia Olympiad 2004 Semi-Slav Defence ‘The last Olympiad in which I represented Spain ended disas rously for me (6 out of 12 185Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 including three losses, which is quite a lot), despite all my efforts to make a good appear ance for the country that granted me citizen ship in 1996. It is still rather difficult to find the exact reasons for my bad play, so 1 would rather limit myself to analysing a game that is nice to remember. Spain finished 10th, which is worse than in 1996 (6th) when IF played for the country for the first time, but still better than on other occasions. 144 Unfortunately after making this move 1 still have to explain why, as I keep playing 1 ed almost exclusively. Let’s hope it will change one day. 1...d5 2 04 66 3 De3 D6 4 D*3 e6 [ rather expected that Laurent would play the Semi-Slav and therefore 1 dé was chosen, though of course there were other things to prepare as well. 53 It always seemed to me that 5 &e5 was sharper, until one day in 1991 Shabalov found 7 gd in a ‘very boring’ line, Nevertheless, I more often chose to go for the Botvinnik and Moscow as my then compatrior’s med insufficient to fight for the ad- idea vantage. But this time I changed my mind. 5... \bd7 6 We2 2d6 ‘The solid 6...b6 only became known when 7 g4 got really popular. It’s a reasonable alternative when you ar sharp variations. 7 94! Here it is again! I remember when, some four years ago, 2 much younger player played it agains iendly blitz. game, and my opponent didn’t even know who introduced this sacrifice into practice. So, 1 remind the dear reader that Shiroy-Thorhallsson (Reykja vik 1992) was the game in which 7 g was first played, and of course it was published in Fire on Board, 7...dx04 8 0x64 e5!? sinet follows the line that I myself adopted with Black against Gelfand and Rad- id of long and me ina jabov earlier in the year, To be honest, w already talking about recent development are and not the beginning of the 90's, when 8...b5 was played almost exclusively fand and Radjabov went for 9 g5 ADd5 10 Bd2, bur 1 was able to achieve rea sonable positions after 10...exd4. The text was played by Chabanon — a big connoisseur of 7 gA line, as I could see when sharing im- sions with him in the Prench League — against Boudre somewhere in France in 2002, and was pointed out to me by my wife who, as one might guess, has studied the mysteries of ‘Shabalov-Shirov’ gambit as well. 9...exd4 10 Axd4 e5!? Formally a novelty. Boudre played 10..2b6 11 Se2 0.0, but in my opinion he didn’t cequalise after 12 425. Still, the fact that such a strong defender as Dreey chose 10..Ab6 against Harikrishna (also. in Calvia, three rounds after the present game) indicates that 1 might be wrong. 11 2e2! ‘This is our “family analysis’, though in factit is also the only move, now White gets a big initiative. T.Dominguez played 11...Afxpdl? against Gelfand in the last round and the game was drawn after an interesting struggle (12 Det Le7 13.0.0-0 0-0 14 Bc3 We7 15 Bdgi £5 and so on), though I got the impression 186 Selected Games that White could improve somewhere. 12 fa! Ag6 ‘The logical retreat. 12....8xe2? would fail to 13 fxe5, while 12..Ded7 13 Axed Dred 14 N65 also looks promising for White. 13 Aixgt Axg4 14 Df5 14,..Dh4a? ‘The decisive mist: .c. Black was absolutely forced to continue 14...0-0 and | must admit L missed that, after 15 Del? (also interesting is 15 Hel !? Dxh22! 16 He3! or 15.6 16 0-0-0 with compensation), Black would have 15....xf4! (I was counting only on 15...8267 16 0-0-0 and White retains a strong initiative, e.g. 16..Me8 17 Axc7+ Axe7 18 h3 Aho 19 24 Dhf5 20 AS), So, after 16 ext Was Ws Z, j GY CZ, i Y I would have to find 17 @fg3! (17 h3? Wesf5 18 hxgt Whsge4 looks really bad for White) 17...f5 18 b3! keeping a slight edge in the complications, eg. 18...Dh6! (if 18...fee4 19 hygt Dxf4 20 0-0-0 or 19..€3 20 Bxe3 Hae8 21 def2 Bxe3 22 Wexe3 Hxfd 23 Act and White is clearly better) 19 g5! Kae8+ 20 eo Wa4t 21 Pei (21 wg? Dh4t 22 Wel AMT 23 Dst7? Hxf? 24 Bh2 is also good) 21... Dxfd 22 D3 Was+ (or 22...Wd6 23 Bx Weft 24 sop2, while 22..WWd52 23 Wb3 is worse for Black) 23 Wxd3 @xd3 24 Bxh6 exh@ (or 24...4 25 Bxo7 Bxe7 26 Ded not 25 Bgl?! fxg3 26 Hxe3 HET unclear) 25 Mgt! tehs 26 Hat! He3 27 DAhs Dxb2 28 Had7 Dd3 29 Abxf5 We5 30 Hc7 Web 31 He? with a slight edge. So, 1 can conclude that 1 was better after my L4th move, even in the case of the correct defence. 15 D)xg7+ sif8 16 0-0-0! Now the game is over as Black comes un- der a terrific attack, though I nearly spoiled it at the end. 16.12 If 16...exp7 17 Ded wins. 17 Dea! xd1 17..Axe4 18 Wxe4 We7 (if 18...exg7 19 Lett (6 20 Wee He8 21 Hhglt+ Ago 22 Wsd6 wins) would be more stubborn, but after 19 Wd3 Bd8 20 Khgl! 20 Sc3!? &c7 21 We2 is less precise) 20,..h5 21 Bel Bc7 22 xh4 Wexh4 23 We3 White still wins. 18 Uxd1 2e7 ae 19 151 ‘The key move, after which the game really should be over. 19.,.Wb6 187Fire on Board Part II: 1997-2004 cya a2 20 16? Only my terrible form in Calvia can explain why | didn’t find 20 We3 Hg8 21 £6 winning immediately. 20....b4 21 Gxb4+ Wxb4 22 a3 Complic ADcSI? leads to a forced win, e.g. 22..Ag6 (if 22... Wed 23 Was or 22..h5 23 Dd7+ Gg8 24 DMS Bh7 25 Heit dhs 26 a3) 23 Dd7+ dees 24 AES h5 25 De7+ Bh7 26 DeS Bhds 27 Dr7xp6 Hxdl+ 28 Weal tho 29 Ans! ete. 22..,Wa5 23 cB rh t Ww XN PW x ss A SaaS wy 23...h6? This loses at once, whereas after 23,.De6 1 would still have to calculate 24 DFS hS 25 DdT+ Be8 26 De7+ Bh7 27 Wed AheB 28 Dxo6 fxg6 29 DxiB+ HB 30 Ha7+ Bho 31 Wet 95 32 Wes Welt 33 deca Mhs 34 We7 winning, 23.,.h5 24 465 would be the same, 24. M5 Dg 24...d8 would just check whether, after 25 DAT+ Eixd7 26 Kxd7 Hys, | could come up with 27 @b1 and if 27...A\xf5 28 West! Wxc5 29 Bd8 mate. 25 Ad7+ wig8 26 Ae7+ wh7 27 xg6 fxg6 28 Ae5! 1-0 Mate is inevitable. Game 53 Shirov-Navara Match (game 2), Prague 2004 Sicilian Defence, Scheveningen Variation David Nav some reasonable winning chances. ‘There would be no tie-break in the event of a 1-1 score, so T wanted to and press to the maximum with the white pieces. 1 04 c5 2 Af3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Axda ‘Ac 5 Ac3 ab ‘The first surprise. Normally David plays a 5..d6 set-up, after which I was going to place my bishop on c4 (and later on, on b3), as lv- anchuk did against him in Calvia. 6 202 Nowadays 6 &c3 followed by We2 and 0.0.0 is much more popular, but sometimes 1 tend to be conservative. 6...d6 Oh dear... Now it looks like I am forced to play the line [ tried to avoid in my preparation 7 263 (MG 8 £4 Se7 9 G41? 188 Selected Games This good old style’ aggressive advance took me half an hour, I realised perfectly that it might be very tisky (after all it had only been tried in capid chess before), but as I said, play ing, the main lines with 9 Wd2 or 9 0-0 was not my intention that day. 9... Wa5!? H comes up with a 9.15 10 65 Dd7 WM gs game Ponomarioy sev, Rus: Rest of the World, Moscow 2001, 10 b3 Probably the only reasonable answer. 10) ! would be strongly met by 10..2xd4 11 Wadd 65. 10...We7 ving also spent half an hour, Navara x novelty 1 the tapid vs. the ‘The manocuvee ...fb6-c7 is typical in 1 Sicilian set-ups. Here it is especially effective because White usually tries to challenge it by placing his queen on £3 and bishop on d3, whereas now he has already played 6 2¢2, so 11 2.03 would be a loss of tempo. After a due thought I chose a different, 1195 After 11 Wd2.b5 my idea wouldn’t work because of 12 52! b4. 11...2\d7 12 Wd2 b5 13 0-0-0!? ‘This was the idea. Normally it's not advis- able to allow ..b4, especially when the 2 highly risky plan. square is occupied, so you have to choose whether to place your knight on bt which is very passive, or on a4 where it can simply be lost! However, the alternative 13.13 J&b7 14 0-0-0 De5! didn’t appeal to me at all, as Black would probably get a slightly better game without any effort. 13.,.0b7 I had a fecling, that after 13..b4 14 Bat 207 15 h4 my knight would be but E might easily be wrong, 14 f5!? square is very import jk, but I felt there was no way back as 14 h4 could be an- swered by 14...An5!. 14... de5 Possibly a first step in the wrong, direction as Black no longer has the ...b4 id mediate 14...b4!2 w: cerned me the most, since after 15 fxe6! (15 42! doesn’t seem correct in view of 15..exf5! 16 exfS Ace5 17 Hhl Hes 18 £6 gxfé 19 Bed fxg5 20 Exbd 13 21 &xf3 BLXf3) 15...Fxe6 16 Dad, Black would hi: strong ‘silent? move in 16...2c8! (16..0-4 Led! Dds 18 Wxb4 would favour White) and iS not easy to find an appropriate response. Probably the best move is 17 Zhf i! and after 17..Dce5 (17.40! is possible) 18 Ad4 Was 19 Dxc6 Black can already go for the perpet- ual check after 19..Whxad (19..2y8l? is inter- esting to0) 20 Axg7+ sted8 21 DeGt tees 22 Bh5+ Dpo ete. 15 Bhf1 a5! Correctly rejecting 15...0-0-0 16 Dd4 when ‘he im- of course, what con- 189Fire on Board Part Il: 1997-2004 White stands better. 16 Sxad Wxad 17 a3 aa # 17...0-0-0? But this castling is difficult to explain be- cause White will be even more comfortable ion. After b4 Black would still have a teasona game, for example 18 a2! (18 axb4?! good because of 18,.Wal+ 19 Dbl Bxe4 20 f6 Kes! 21 fxe7 22 Wrc2 Bxc2 xc2 Wadt+ and White may be in danger) 18,.2xe4! (better than 18..@co 19 Dxb4 Abd 20 Wxb4 Wabd 21 axb4 Bxe4 22 fred fxe6 23 c3 and the weakness a6 would tell) 19 f6 gsf6 20 gxfG B68 21 Dxb4 21 Wexb4 Wexb4 22 Axb4 Ob7 seems equal) 21...d5 22 We3 Bxb4! 23 axb4 Wad and Black’s strong control over the centre compensates for the n the above-mentioned vari king’s weak position. 18 ada Suddenly White is much better b Black has no counterplay. It is also rather easy to continue. 18...2ihg8 18...h6 should have been tried as it would at least fix the pawn structure on the kingside. Nevertheless, White would have a big advan- tage after 19 £6 exf6 20 pxfo 2.8 21 We3 hd 22 eb! Ad7 23 Wes. 19 We3 Ded As David admitted after the game, he saw: 100 late that 19..2e6 would be answered by 20 fol Dxd4 21 Fxe7! and after 21... Dxe2 KdeS 23 Ext? We7 24 Df Bxe7 25 Dxeb Wa7 26 We3t (or 26 Dc5!2) 26...teb8 27 Bxc7 We7 28 We3! White is winning, 19..We7 would also lose to 20 {6 gxf6 21 Abo. 20 2x4 bxe4 21 hd! Hd7 22 2b6 In time-trouble I played to gain some addi tional seconds thanks to the increment each move. A not very aesthetic approach, but practical 22..,We5 23 2d4 Wa 24 fxe6 fxe6 25 2b6 We5 26 Ld4 Wad 27 e5! Now Black's defence collaps has too many weak pawns. 27...MeB If 27..We7 28 Dad! wins. 28 exd6 2xd6 as he simply (Em ake A “oo oe Pama O a 4G “a we a arate BAZ 29 2xg7! So, one of them drops. The game is over. 29....2.05 30 fid4 Axd4 31 Exd4 Wes 32 xetat 32 Md3 Wxe3+ 33 Bxe3 Med! would give Black some small chances in the endgame. 32....0.06 33 dea Wd6 34 Exod Hed 35 &b1 1-0 Black will certainly Jose more pawns and therefore resigned. I would like to give a special mention to David's very friendly behaviour in the post- mortem, despite the unfortunate result of the ent, so I can i his talent game. His love of chess is evid only wish him well in developi even further. INDEX OF OPPONENTS Numbers refer to game numbers. Bold numbers indi Agrest 36 Akopian 8, 26 Atalik 44, 49 Bacrot 25 Bareev 29 Bauer 28 Bologan 50 Dreev 42 Fedorov 35 Fressinet 5 Feacnik 16 Grischuk 30, Gyimesi 37 Hracek 17, 45 Huzman 51 Karpov 12 Kasparov 48 Korncev 15 ite that Shirov was Black. Kramnik 3,9, 11, 13 Ljubojevic 20 Markowski 14 Navara 53 Piket 32 Ponomariov 38, 39 Radjabov 43, 47 Sokolov, |. 46 Stohl 23 Teske ‘Topalov 10, 21, 24, 34,40 Van Wely 19, 41 Yusupoy 4 190 191INDEX OF OPENINGS Numbers refer to game numbers. Bold numbers indicate that Shirov was Black. Bishop’s Opening 35 Budapest Gambit 25 Caro-Kann Defence 1,17, 40, 42 French Defence 22, 24, 26, 29, 44 Griinfeld Defence 13 King’s Indian Defence 6, 12, 23, 3 Nimzo-Indian Defence 28. Petroff Defence 4, 32, 50 Philidor Defence 16 Réti Opening 14, 19 Ruy Lopez. Berlin Defence 5, 11, 30 Chigorin 9...2a5 31, 49. Exchange Variation 2 ECO index A07 14 B45 33 ALL 19 B46 18 A52 25 B66 3, 9 BOLT B81 8 BOT 16. B83 20 B12.1,17, 40 B84 53 B19 42, B92 21 B30 38, 41 C11 22, 24, 29 B33 34, 45 C16 44 B42 10, 15, 27, 36 C17 26 Anti-Marshall 48 Modern Steinitz 46 Scandinavian Defence 7 Semi-Slay Defence 39, 43, 52 Slav Defence 51 Sicilian Defence Anti-Sveshnikoy 38, 41 Four Knights 33 Kan 10, 15, 27, 36 Najdorf 21 Richter Rauzer 3, 9 Scheveningen 8, 20, 53 C24 35 D451 C42 32 D44 39 C43 4, 50 D45 52 a 1D47 43 D7013 C67 11 1:38 28, C68 2 E63 12, 23 C72. 46 E7137 C88 48, F906 C96 31,49 597 47 7192