First published in the United Kingdom in 2009 by

Contents
Batsford
The Old Magistrates Court
10 Southcombe Street
London
Wl4 ORA
Page
An imprint of Anova Books Company Ltd

Copyright © B T Balsford 2009

Authors' Preface 5
Text copyright © Tibor Karolyi, Nick Aplin
Anatoly Karpov the 12th 9
The moral right of the authors have been asserted.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored Robert James Fischer the 11th 54
in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the
prior written permission of the copyright owner. Boris Spassky the 10th 81

Tigran Petrosian the 9th 94

ISBN: 9781906388263

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Mikhail Tal the 8th 123
17 16 I 5 14 13 12 II I 0 09
10 9876543 2 I
Vassily Smyslov the 7th 143
Reproduction by Spectrum Colour Ltd, Ipswich
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th 169
Printed and bound by Athenaeum Press Ltd., Gateshead, Tyne & Wear

This book can be ordered direct from the publisher at the website Max Euwe the 5th 192
www.anovabooks.com

Or try your local bookshop Alexander Alekhine the 4th 202

Jose Raul Capablaoca the 3rd 218

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd 235

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1st 254

3
2
 Authors' Preface

This book is a unique reaction to a that we briefly considered the title The
unique collection of creative work. Great Successor would be appropriate.
This present book now provides us
W hen Garry Kasparov, the most
with an obvious opportunity to
successful world champion, retired, he
introduce some humour, particularly as
published a series of books under the
Kasparov - we think - subconsciously
title My Great Predecessors and it was
favoured some teasing of the great
the stimulation from reading his
players and former champions more so
excellent series that prompted the
than others. By doing so he invited
present work.
others to have ajoke at his expense too.
After writing two books on Humour in chess - sometimes a rare
Kasparov's astonishing career, cover­ commodity - needs to take its rightful
ing his flnal period of active play from place.
1 993 to 2005, we realised that there
The Hungarian half of our
were similarities between Garry's
co-authorship played in tournaments
games and some of his predecessors -
with Garry and even faced him across
and this has opened the door for a little
the board in 1 980 and 1 98 1 . The 1980
bit of friendly leg-pUlling!
World Junior Championship was
particularly memorable for Tibor,
Our original idea to write an article
because of the leisure hours he spent
for the satirical chess magazine
with Garry himself - during which time
Kingpin took on greater proportions
the future world champion revealed his
as we found more and more games
keen sense of humour.
resembling those of past champions.
This characteristic is something that
The increasing number of examples
has not been reflected in his interviews
changed the single article into a series
in recent times, although there were
of articles. We had originally intended
glimpses of it when he came to write
to look only at the post-World War II
his My Great Predecessors books.
champions but then discovered so
It goes without saying that games
many comparable games from earlier
played by world champions can be
times that we were encouraged to write
especially interesting, entertaining and
a whole book!
instructive. But it is also well worth
There was a stage during the writing loolcing at them from a new angle - and
of Kasparov s Fighting Chess J & 2 with a lighter touch.

5
Authors' Preface
The temptation is also there to look at
some of Kasparov's losses - which are
in fact well worth analysing. Anyone
who manages to force resignation from
the most successful chess player ever,
clearly deserves due recognition for
their triumph.
In no way does the present book try
to erode the tremendous
Kasparov has rightfully
with his stunning and breathtaking
performances. It just reminds everyone
emphatically what a great game chess
is and that even the greatest players
make mistakes and do
sometimes! The royal game is just so
complicated ...
Also we consider that the My
Predecessors books represent a superb
contribution to chess culture
warmly recommend that both non­
professionals and serious players read
the whole series, as Garry's chess
genius shines brightly through his deep
analysis.
One of the intentions of the present
book is to take a look at some lesser
known masterpieces of the champions,
as well as presenting the better-known
examples, with shon explanations. We
hope you enjoy and learn from these
games.
It is great that Garry wrote his series,
but if I were him I would
produced another version for reading
on New Year's Eve'
Our book is designed to be light­
heaned. So before we allow Garry to
speak, let us emphasise that we did not
Alithors' Preface
contact him at all and the words are Of course, I must also take some soften, but not erase, the negative effect
ours" We just put our ideas into his responsibility for my losses, but you they had on me.
mouth in the following way. will see that for the particular defeats
So as to underline the fact that this is
shown here the world champ i ons are
• • * • not a totally serious book, I do not lay
mostly to blame because they misled
out the material in the conventional
me - sometimes seriously. After all, it
way. Instead of starting from the distant
My series on the world champions is
was they who demonstrated the ideas in past and working my way towards the
entering its final phase. In these books,
the first place. present day, I adopt a different plan
I have covered the development of
respect based on the fact that the closer a
chess culture. Thank God they sold like Can you imagine how hard it has
earned champion was to me in time, the more
hot cakes. I wrote nice things about all been for me to hold back my true
energy I spent on examining his play.
the 12 champions, which is what they opinions for so long? But now I cannot
justly deserved, but I only showed the remain silent any longer and must show
So I look at the c hampions in reverse
rosier side of their chess. how the champions really played.
order, starting with An atoly Karpov,
Though I have to admit that their games who was crowned before me as the 12th
lose By now most of the books have been
are very entertaining, that can only world champion.
sold, so it is time to tell the rest of the
story. My career has been the best a
chessplayer has ever had and, all things
Great
considered, I am satisfied with how
things went. On the other hand, I am
and
convinced I did not achieve everything
that I could have done: for example, I
lost more games than was necessary.
And in the present work I reveal for the
first time how I came to lose quite a
few important games simply because I
copied the world champions. It's a pity
that I dido't gain a fuller appreciation
of their methods.
Almost all chessplayers read books
on the world champions. I did so as
well and in my childhood I even went
through their games in great detaiL In
fact I frequently tried to memorise
have
their games, but it is more likely that
they planted themselves in the
subconscious pan of my brain. Their
games were praised so many times and
in so many places that I came to trust
them implicitly.
6 7
 Anatoly Karpov the 12th

Anatoly Karpov was my immediate effect on my style. Of course I learned

predecessor. He held the title from to play simple positions - there were
1975 until 1985 and certainly had an many of them - and I improved my
immense effect on my chess. I played technique in this area.
him 23 times in regular tournaments.
There is nothing special about that In this book J would like to
but the 1 44 games in the five world concentrate on the negative effects
championship matches we contested is that I experienced from the world
unique in the history of chess.
champions - effects which prevented
Despite this large number of games, me from becoming even more
you might think they had little negative devastating in my play.

One idea J picked up from Karpov was to push the a- or h-pawns all the way
- and win. Below are positions from Karpov's games illustrating this theme and
then positions from my own games where I followed his plan.

S.Sazontiev - A.Karpov A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

A.Karpov - P.MarkJand A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

Readers note: throughout the text you will read the words see diagram with
a reference to a certain page. It's the diagTams in the frames to which we refer.

9
Ana/Diy Karpov the 12th
First let me show you some games
where Karpov employed one of his
favourite concepts.
S.sazontiev - A.Karpov
Vladimir 1964
1 d4 tU f6 2 tUo e6 3 iLg5 d5 4 e4
j..e7 5 tUe3 0-0 6 e3 tUbd7 7 j..d3 .l:.e8
8 0-0 tUrs 9 tUe5 e6 10 f4 tU6d7
11 iLxe7 ilhe7 12 no f6 13 tUg4 tUb6
14 e5 tU bd7 15 :'g3 'iti>b8 1 6 tUn e5
17 'irb5 e4 18 j..e2 g6 19 'iWb6 b6
20 b4
20...a5!
Karpov starts pushing his a-pawn. It
looks like it merely undermines
White's pawn chain but in fact this
move represents its debut performance
in a very important role.
21 b5 iLb7 22 exb6 tUxb6 23 bxc6
iL xe6
See diagram on page 9.
24 h4 .l:.ee8 25 b5
25...'it'g7!
To exchange the most dangerous
white piece in the attack.
10
26 "ih:g7+ �xg7 27 bxg6 bg6
28 %:tbl %:tabS!
Now Black turns his attention to the
side where he is stronger.
29 iLa6 %:tc7 30 tU fdl tUfd7
31 %:tb3?!
White wants to transfer the rook to
the queenside.
On the other hand 31 j..e2! would
have kept B l ack rather busy on the
kingside and he would not then have
had such a free hand for his queenside
operations.
31...iL a4 !
Karpov starts exchanging on the
queenside so as to prepare an invasion.
He follows up this plan witb his
customary and distinctive purpose­
fulness.
32 :'b2 j..xdl 33 tUxdl tU a4!
34 :' a l ttJe3! 35 g3 tUxdl 36 :'xdl
%:te3 3711el
37 .. a4!
.
The pawn is becoming increasingly
powerful.
3S %:td2 %:tb6 39 iLn �f7 40 %:tee2
40...a3!
The pawn makes its final stride of a
glorious march. It gets closer
promotion and takes control of the
b2-square.
41 �f2 %:tb4 42 g4 tUb6 43 .!:te2 %:tIe2
44 %:tIe2 %:tb2!
This is a poignant demonstration of
the strength of the a3-pawn.
45 %:te2 tUa4 46 �e1
46 ...tUc3 47 %:td2 tUxa2 0-1
Finally the fixed a-pawn falls, and
Black wins easily. Karpov engineered
this game beautifully, yet strangely he
di d not include it in any books of his
selected games. Maybe he did not want
to alert his rivals to such an effective
pawn-pushing device. Naturally,
game did not escape my attention.
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
A.Karpov - P.MarkJand
Hastings 197111 972
1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tUc3 iLb4 4 eS e5
5 a3 iLxe3+ 6 bIe3 'ire7 7 llJo llJe7
to
S a4
I wouldn't mind betting that Karpov
had not yet seen the final role this
a-pawn had to play. Of course it is a
well-known variation. Since that time
7 "ii'g4 has taken over as the main line.
S ...b6 9 j..b5+ j..d7 10 iLd3 llJbe6
11 0-0 b6 12 %:tel llJ a5 13 'iWd2 l:teS
14 b4
Karpov uses his flank pawns wel l .
Here he gains space and makes sure
that . . . g7-g5 is prevented.
14 ...0-0 15 'ir f4 f5 16 exf6 %:txf6
1 7 the7 .!:txe7 18 dxeS bxeS 19 tUeS
iL eS
Here 19 . c4 looks better. It restricts
. .
the light-squared bishop even though
that in tum grant s more freedom to his
dark-squared brother.
the
II
Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h

20 c4! Karpov continues to play with great our matches forced him to increase his
Karpov gets rid of the doubled pawns purpose. He will exchange the standard of play in the openings.
and opens the position for his bishops. defending rook as well. 12 ... "xe5 13 dxe5 lLle8
20 ...lDac6 21 �b2 lDb4 4 1 ...nxd7 42 lDxd7 �e6 43 lDb8 The variation has continued to
�bS develop ever since our game. The
See diagram on page 9.
knight can also be retreated to d7.
22 as!? 14 h3 �xf3 1 5 �xf3 �xeS 16 �xe6
This is a hard move to come up with. bxe6 17 �d4
Perhaps it had been planned earlier. White achieves domination along the
Had he already anticipated the role of d-file - which provides compensation
this pawn or did he just want to prevent 3 1 a 6 ! n f7 3 2 ltJe4 for the pawn deficit.
Black from playing a5 - a move which The a7-pawn is fixed. Karpov now 17...�f4 1 8 0-0
fixes White's a-pawn on the colour of brings up his bishop to place it under See diagram on page 9.
the c8-hishop? closer surveillance.
1 8... a5?
22 ....l:f8 23 �a3 32...lLlrs 33 �eS! .l:c8 34 �f2 .l:re7
At this moment I adopted Karpov's
23 h5, playing extravagantly with the 3S.l:xe7
plan of pushing the a-pawn as far down
Now Karpov starts to exchange
other edge pawn, was also possible. 44 �xa7 the file as possible. And I really paid
pieces around the weak a7-pawn. All
23 ... dxc4 24 lDxc4 .l:f4 Finally the ripened fruit drops quietly the price for this misguided decision.
part of the plan.
from the tree. White wins the pawn and A few months later Timman
3S .. Jhe7 36 l:tbl lLle7 37 .l:b8 +
so the rest is simple. improved on this game with 18 ...e5!.
<;Pb7 38 'iti>h2!
44...lLle7 45 �b6 lLlc8 46 �cS �g6 Maybe he never bothered to investigate
This is a typical Karpovian king
47 a7 lLlxa7 48 �xa7 e5 49 d4 exd4 Karpov's earlier games. After 19 �e3
move. It prevents Black from
50 �xd4 <;Pf7 51 f4 g5 52 fxg5 bxgS" �xe3 20 fxe3 lLle7 21 l:td7 lLlf5
delivering a check on c 1, which
53 Wg3 Wg6 54 Wf3 �r5 55 g3 1-0 Timman achieved a draw against
would be followed by an attack on the
Karpov in Tilburg 1986. Black has
a6-pawn with .l:a1. Karpov won this game in impressive
done well in this position ever since.
38 ...lLlg6? style. This plan was implanted in my
19 .l:fe1 a4? !
This only helps White. He moves brain and I was just waiting for an
I stuck t o the plan that I had learned
away a valuable piece from the area opportune moment to carry i t out in
from Anatoly Evgenievich.
where the battle will take place. one of my own games. Quite incredibly
25 liJd6 20 l:te4 �b6 21 �eS
39 lLleS l:te6? I had my chance against Karpov
Karpov sacrifices a pawn to keep his
Returning the knight was better.
opponent's rook out of the game. Here himself.
40 nd8 nc7
25 .l:e4 holds on to the pawn by
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
stopping ... nxc4.
Game 17, World Championship
2s ... lDlI.d3 26 cxd3 l:txh4 27 liJe4
LondonlLeningrad 1986
.l:hS 28 .l:ecl �b7?!
After 28...ndS 29 nc3 a6 Black can 1 d4 lLlr6 2 e4 g6 3 lLle3 d5 4 lLlf3
live with his position.
�g7 5 "ifb3 dxe4 6 "xe4 0-0 7 e4 �g4
8 �e3 lLlCd7 9 .l:dl lLlc6 10 �e2 lLlb6
29 liJxcs �dS 30 f3 nfS
11 'ilfe5 'ifd6 12 e5
Black could improve his knight with
This was my third match against
30... lDc6!? Then 31 a6 lDd4.
Karpov and he had prepared most
Not to be sidetracked, Karpov now
diligently for it. Here he sacrifices a 2 1 ...a3?
plays according to a well-formulated
pawn - something he had rarely done I was still playing in the spirit of
plan. Firstly he fixes Black's a7-pawn. 41 l:td7!
before in this kind of situation. I think Karpov, in the hope that somehow I

12 13
Anatoly Karpov the J2th
would be able to get down to the
a2-pawn. However it proves to be an
illusion.
22 b3 CUa7
This was not my day, I was Wlable to
push either of my rook's pawns, but
putting the knight on the edge was also
unfortunate. 22 .�g7 was probably
. .
better.
23 l:.d7! �el 24 l:.xe7 ..Itb2 25 CUa4
CUbS 26 l:.xe6
Now White is already a pawn up.
26 ... nfd8 27 l:.b6 l:.dS 28 �g3
28 ... CUe3
This is the closest I got to attacking
that a2-pawn.
29 CUxe3 �xe3 30 e6
The c-pawn simply kills Black.
30 ... �d4 3 1 l:.b7 1-0
To end the misery I resigned.
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Game 5, World Championship,
LondonlLeningrad 1986
1 d4 CUf6 2 e4 g6 3 CUe3 dS 4 �f4
�g7 5 e3 eS 6 dxeS WaS 7 llc1 CUe4
8 exdS CUxe3 9 Wd2 Wxa2 1 0 bxe3
WxdH 11 �xd2 CUd7 12 �bS 0-0
13 �xd7 �xd7 14 e4 fS 15 eS e6 16 c4
nfe8 1 7 e6 bxe6 1 8 d6 eS 19 h4 b6
14
Anatoly Karpov the J 2th
23 ... a2
The pawn has got this far yet it is to
no avail. I was so happy to see the open
road ahead but should have checked
more carefu lly where that road would
lead.
24 CUd3 lIa3 25 nal gS
A desperate attempt to stir things
up.
26 hJ:gS hxgS 27 iixgS <;t>f7 28 ..Itf4
J:l.b8 29 1:tecl ..Ite6 30 l:.e3 l:.aS 31 l:.e2 Here I re s ig ned and decided that in
20 CUb3!
l:.ba8 32 CUd 1-0
A strong move that my team and I the future I would be far more cautious
Finally White wins the a-pawn.
missed during preparation. I hoped the ab out following Karpov·.� method of
Black spent four tempi advancing the
g7-bishop would become a powerhouse pl ay
pawn to its doom
.
.
on the long diagonal, but it stayed
buried all the way to the end.
20 ... aS? Karpov contributed to one of my losses in the final of a knockout
tournament I played on the internet. From the first position below he taught
See diagram on page 9.
me that in a roo k ending, with 3 pawns versus 4 on one side of th e board, the
Again I push the rook's pawn just game can be saved .
like Karpov.
The second diagram shows the very similar position that [ reached.
2 1 n 84
The plan must be pursued. J.Piket - G.Kasparov
22 l:.hel ! V.Korehnoi - A.Karpov
Another strong move as it preserves
the e5 pawn and makes sure the
g7-bishop remains bottled up. I should
have copied this aspect of Karpov's
style!
22 ... a3
Nothing will divert me from pushing
the a-pawn.
23 CUn
V.Korebnoi - A.Karpov . xe7
Gam e 5, World Championship, dxeS
Merano 1981 bxeS
Two games later in the match Karpov
played 13 .....Itb7 and drew.
1 e4 e6 2 CUe3 dS 3 d4 �e7 4 tUn
tUf6 S �gS h6 6 �h4 0-0 7 l:.c1 b6 1 4 ..Itxa6 tUxa6
15
Anatoly Karpov the 12th Ana/oly KalpoV the 12th

4 1...na3 42 nd6+ �g7 43 h4 11b3 Would you believe what happened?

15 �xdS
Petrosian, the specialist of this line
where White delays e2-e3, did not take
the pawn and went on to beat Portisch
this w ay.
44 nd3 nbS 45 'it>e3 '1z-'1z Karp ov You will see it in the Fischer chapter.
effortlessly held this position. 24...tbd4 25 <;t.;>g2 ncs 26 nbl nfd8
27 �xd4 l:txd4 28b4
J.Pikct - G.Kasparov In my case this plan did not work, so
KasparovChess G rand Prix
I was optimistic that I would do well
60 minute game, Internet 2000
against it.
1 tbf3 tbf6 2 c4 cS 3 tbc3 dS 4 cxd5 28. ..axb4 29 axb4 �d7 30 bxcS
tbxd5 5 g3 tbc6 6 �g2 tbc7 7 d3 e5 bxeS
8 0-0 �e7 9 tbd2 �d7 10 tbc4 0-0 Here I realised I couldn't win. But
28.. .hS!
11 �xc6 �xc6
okay, no problem. It was a knockout
This is a very useful refinement in
the ensuing rook ending.
final and I thought I wo uld draw the
29 'it>g2 'it>g7 30 lla5 tbc6 next game with the white pie c es.
He finally agrees to defend the 3 1 11bb2 h6 32 .l:!.a2 Wh7 33 na5

IS...tbb4 16 'Wc4 'Wf6 17 tbh4 .](b2 4 against 3 ending. But Black was not l::td8 34 'iVxe5 �xd3
180-0 W'xa2 forced to give up the pawn as 30... 'it>f6
was an option. This misled me and gave
me the impression this it is an easy
draw.
3 1 tbxc6 lh:c6 32 11xa7 ll](37
33 111.37
See diagram on page 15. 12 tbxe5
33 ...IIc2 Piket accepts my pawn sacrifice.
Karpov often pins pieces. With 12...�e8 13 'iltb3 �f6 14 tbg4 �d4
White's king on f2 the pawn can't go 15 e3 �xc3 16 W'xc3 b6 17 f3 �b5
much further. I used to think it requires 18 tba W'd7 19 e4 tbe6 20 �e3 as 2 1
35 11xd3
some effort to draw this type of 11adl l:tad8 22 11d2 'lir'c6
position but the ease with which After 35 l:tb2 11e8 36 'li'f5+ ihf5
According to my opponent's a n aly sis
Karpov held this one made me think 37 I1xf5 �c4 it is hard to do anything
Taking the last white queenside pawn the queen should go to b7.
Black can't lose at all. I was wrong. with White's piece s .
is an achievement, yet there is no 23.l:!.cl ,*"7
34 e4 11c3 35 l:ta2 'it'f6 36 f3 llb3 35... l1xd3 36 tbxd3 1i'xd3 37 Ita2
guarantee of a draw as the knights are
37 �a nc3 38 �e2 llb3 391b6+ r;I;e7 'iWb3
still on the board. 40 lla5 �f6 4 1l:tdS
19 W'xa2 tbxa2 20 l'h:cS l:rfc8
21 l:!.aS tbc 1 22 tbfS 11c7 23 tbd4 11b8
24 IIai tbd3
Karpov is not yet ready to enter the

4 pawns against 3 rook ending. If

24 ...tbb3 25 nfb I IIcb7 26 IIxb3 llxb3

27 tbxb3 nxb3 28 nxa7.

25 nfdl tbeS 26 11a2 g6 27 ndal 24 a3
11bb7 28 h3 I also tried a6 and b5 with Black in a

number of Engl i sh opening games. 38 'tIfc2

16 17
Anatoly Karpov the 12'h Anatoly Karpov the 12,h

With queens on the board White can't Korchnoi did not try anything like
really push the pawns, therefore it this - and Korchnoi was a really strong Karpov has played some very well-known games in which he moved his
should be an easy draw, but I knew how endgame player knight backwards to the first rank. I also know some games where he placed
easily Karpov drew with Korchnoi, so I 4 2 ....:I.e3 the knight on the rook file. Here are three of his positions - followed by three
decided to follow him. I was also aware I just keep moving like my or mine.
that Karpov wasn't able to squeeze a predecessor before me.
win against Olafsson when he had an 43 'it>b4 �g7 44 'it>g5 Sadovsky - A.Karpov G.Kamsky - G.Kasparov
extra pawn in this kind of endgame. Here I deviated from Karpov and
Even before the Karpov game I knew removed the rook from the third rank.
this position was a draw, however it
was Anatoly who convinced me it was
easy and made me play too casually.
38 .. JlhcH 39 .:I.](c2 h5

Z.RibU - A.Karpov Y.Nikolaevsky - G.Kasparov

44 ...l:tel ?
This was m y independent idea - but
it loses. I was short of time. Correct·
was 44 ...1:ta3! 45 .:I.c? .:I.a5.
I play just like Karpov. 45 .:I.c7 .:I.e2 46 l:I.e7! .:I.a2
40 f4 g6
See diagram on page 15.
Karpov also had his pawn on g6.
4 i e5 l:td3
I'm just following Karpov, who kept
his rook on the third rank, did nothing
and held easily. J.Nunn - A.Karpov L.Zaid - G.Kasparov

47 f5!
This is nasty indeed. I was in time
pressure because it was a I hour game
with no increment.
47 ... g](f5 48 e6!
Oh no.
48 ... h4 49 .:I.d7+ �g8 50 r;t>f6 1-0
42 'it>h3 And I had to resign.

18 19
Anatoly Karpov the 12th A natoly Karpov the 12t/!

Sadovsky - A.Karpov
USSR Olympiad 1967

1 c4 4Jf6 2 4Je3 es 3 g3 g6 4 �g2

jLg7 5 e4 d6 6 4Jge2 �e6
Karpov was fairly young when he
played this game.
7 d4! 0-0 8 ds jLd7 9 0-0 tOhs

See diagram on page 1 9.

31...jLg4 32 f4?! �Ie2 33 'it'xe2 11 tOds Karpov achieves symmetry with his
ed4 34 �d4 .rI6f7 35 bs tOfS The knights still look to the centre, knights and rooks on the two sides of
Karpov develops his knight on the
For a long time the knight which had but maybe this just diverts the attention the board.
edge.
been on h5 had no useful move, now it 16 tOe2 b5 17 ltJel ltJb6 18 ltJb3
10 jLe3 (5 11 'ii'd2 tOa6 of the opponent.
intervenes with decisive force. ltJe4 19 l::thgl a5 20 .i.cl a4 21 tOeS
The other steed does the same thing. 1l...'ii'd 7 12 �h2 fs 13 f4 bs 14 .l:l.bl
36 �f2 fxg3 37 jLxg3 4Jxg3 .i.xe5 22 dIe5 ltJxes 23 'iWg3 ltJeO
12 0 l:!.f7 13 a3 4Jcs 14 Wc2 We8 bxc4 15 dxc4 e4 16 b4? tOas!
38.1:1.xg3 24 llhl e5 25 .i.e4 'iWf6 26 .i.xo tOxo
15 b4 4Ja4 27 t!.d3
See diagram on page 1 9.

Karpov puts his knight on the edge

and wins instantly. What a lucky
fellow!
17 tOd4 tOxc4 18 tOxe7+ 'lihe7
19 We2 �xd4 20 exd4 ltJb6 21 �b2
ltJd5 22 a3 ltJe3 23 We3 ltJxfl+
24 �xfl �d5 25 �e4 We6 0-1

38...'ife5 The next game is unusual, as I was

The rest is simple. not selecting lost games from a 27...e4
The third knight move to the edge.
39 .rIaa3 axbs 40 exd6 b4 41 llad3 champion, but here Karpov reached Black is winning. If I wanted to be
16 es f4 17 jLf2 fxg3 18 hxg3
CId6 42 WeI .rIe7 43 .rIgO .rIxO a position with two krUghts on the sarcastic I could say he has a winning
Now the players enter a long
44 �xn l:!.c2 45 jLg2 ltel 46 ltdl edge. edge (advantage) in the middle of the
manoeuvring phase.
�e3+ 47 'it>hl ltIdl 48 'ii'xdl b3 board.
18...tOxc3 19 4Jxc3 'il'e7 20 'ifd2
49 'il'xb3 'iWg3 50 'ifxb7+ c;t>h6 0-1 J.Nunn - A.Karpov 28 t!.xn exn 29 llel+ Wf8 30 .i.g5
11af8 21 'ife3 a6 22 a4 jLf6 23 'ilfd3 Wf5 31 h4 ..t>g8 32 lles 'it'd7 33 lle7
3rd Amber-rapid, Monte Carlo 1994
�gs 24 fla3 tOg7 25 tOe2 'ifeS 26 'iWe2 Wfs 34 lles "e8 35 .i.f6 t!.h7 36 h5
Z.RibJi - A.Karpov
hs 27 jLel t!.f6 28 jLf2 'it>h7 29 jLel 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 .i.rs 4 tOe3 e6 'it'f8 37 a3 'ii'xes 38 'ii'gl llh6 39 "gs
Tilburg 1 980
jLh6 30 jLf2 jLc8 31 �fal? 5 g4 �g6 6 ltJge2 ltJe7 7 �e3 h5 SltJf4 "f8 40 hxg6 fxg6? 40 . .l:!.xg6 wins.
. .

This is overdoing a good idea. One 1 c4 es 2 tOe3 tOe6 3 g3 g6 4 jLg2 hxg4 9 ltJxg6 ltJxg6 10 'iWIg4 ltJh4 41 l:te7 .l:l.e8 42 l:td7 lIh! + 43 Wa2
piece too many goes to the edge. �g7 5 d3 d6 6 e3 tOge7 7 4Jge2 0-0 11 �d3 g6 12 0-0-0 �e7 13 <l;>bl tOd7 'ikh6 44 'iVg3 llhel 45 'ike7 ll1e7
8 0-0 �d7 9 h3 nb8 10 'ii'd2 �e6 14 tOe2 tOb6 15 tOr4 tOa4 46 llIe7 lhe7 47 the7 "f8 48 'ike6+
31 nib I was correct.

21
20
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
it'f7 49 'ill'Ic6 d4+ 50 'it>bl d3 51 cIdJ
�h7 52 it'd] it'b3 53 "h3+ 'it>g8
54 'ill' h8+ �f7 55 it'g7+ 'iPe8 0-1
Karpov's knight on the brink was in
my mind almost all the time. Let me
show you one of my games from the
time when I reigned as world champion
and two when I was a junior player.
G.Kamsky - G.Kasparov
Dortmund 1992
1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 g6 3 li:lc3 �g7 4 e4 d6
5 li:lo 0-0 6 �e2 e5 7 0-0li:lc6 8 d5
li:le79li:ld2 as 10 a3 li:ld7
There is no chance of this knight
going to h5, but with a couple of moves
I manage to close the diagonal and
make it' possible to place the other
knight in an attacking position on that
square.
11 l:l.bl fS 12 b4 'iPh8 13 0
The diagonal is now closed and it's
worth spending a few tempi getting the
knight where Karpov had put it.
13 ...li:lg8 14 '\!i'c2li:lgf6 15li:lb5 axb4
16 axb4li:lh5
Mission accomplished.
See diagram on page 19.
22
17 g3 li:ldf6 18 cS �d7 19 :tb3 �h6
Against Karpov in Tilburg 1991 I
played 19... li:lxg3 and the game
continued 20 hxg3 li:lh5 21 f4 exf4
22 c6. I later drew the game, despite
finding myself in an almost hopelessly
lost position. See page 34.
20 :tc3
2o...�f4
This was a novelty in 1992.
21 cId6
I was hoping for 21 gxf4?! as I could
then have demonstrated
remarkable footwork along the touch
line. 21...li:lxf4 22 �c4 (22 li:lb3
li:l6xd5!) 22... li:l6h5. The other knight
goes there as well. Please note that all
Black's moves now will be played on
the flanks. 23 li:lb3 fxe4 24 fxe4 li:lh3+
25 'it>h I 'ill'h4 26li:lxc7 J:hfl + 27 �xfl
:tfS and Black's subtle play has earned
him a winning attack.
21...li:l:xg3
After 2 I.. .cxd6 22 li:lc7
23 hxg3 lDxg3 24 :tel li:lfh5 Anand
produced some analysis and concluded
that Black has the initiative;
Not 2l...�xb5 22 dxc7; or 2l...�xg3
22 dxc7 'WIe7 (22.. �xh2+ 23 �xh2
.
li:lg4+ 24 fxg4 'WIh4+ 25 nh3 wins.)
23 d6! when Black is in trouble.
22 hIg3 lDh5
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
Black gets his knight to the h-file, but
does not have enough fire-power to
back it up. This is rather transparent,
but I also have one particularly nice
memory of a surprising knight check on
h3.
Here it is:
A.Grischuk - G.Kasparov
The other knight follows to h5. I did Linares 2001
not pay due attention to the fact that
Karpov had not played with such
ferocity.
23 gxf4li:lxf4
After 23... 'iWh4 24 :tf2li:lxf4 25 �fl
�xb5 26 dxc7!! wins as Anand pointed
out.
24 ... li:lh3+!! 25 c;t>g2 Ilxb5 26 �g3
li:lg5 27 �f2 �b7 28 �gl :tc8 29 h4
some
�xO+ 30 .thO li:lxo 3 1 �xO �xc5
32 lDxc5 :tbxc5 33 �xc5 J::txc5 34 c3
h5 35 gxh5 :txh5 36 b4 axb4 37 cxb4
:txh4 0-1
Now back to my game with Kamsky:
24 �c4!
If 24 :tf2 li:lh3+ - a common theme 25 Whl
by now - (if 24 .....g5+ 25 �hl! 'iWh4+ If 25 Wg2 "g5+ 26 Wxh3? f4+
26 :th2 "e l + 27 �fl �xb5 28 :txc7 27 'it>h2 'i!t'g3+ 28 �hl 'iWh3+ 29 'itgl
li:lh5 - even this doesn't help - 29 'WWb2 "g3+=
wins.) 25 �fl (25 Wg2? "g5+!
�xg3! 26 Wxh3 "gl! leads to a checkmate.)
25..li:lxf2
. 26 'itxf2 'iWh4+ 27 Wg2
(27 <ti>fl 'iWh1+ [27 . .. f4 28 �c4!l
28 <ti>f2 'iWh4+=) 27 ...f4 28 �fl White
survives the attack and wins with the
extra material.
24... li:lh3+
If 24... 'iWh4 25 lDb3 lDh3+ 26 Whl;
or 24.....g5+ 25 �f2 'iWh4+ 26 �e3.
23
Anato!y Karpov the J 2110
2s...'ilVh4
This sets up a dangerous looking
banery.
26tUb3 fIe4
After 26...tUf2+ 27 �g2 there is not
enough juice left in the banery. 27... f4
28 �xf2 "itb3+ 29 �gl wins as Anand
pointed out.
27�h2
Not 27 fxe4?? tUf2+ 28 �g2 �h3+
29 �gl 'il'g4+ 30 'it>h2 'il'g2 mate.
27...nfs 28 f4!
After 28 fxe4 nh5 (28...'ilVxe4+
29 'il'g2) 29 nco wins as well.
28..Jlhs
Black's pieces are picturesquely but
precariously placed on the h-file.
29 �g3 'il'xg3
This is tantamount to resignation but
other moves also lose. If 29...tUxf4+
30 �xh4; or 29...it'f6 30 fxe5 'ilVg7
31 dxe7; or 29...it'd8 30 dxc7 tUxf4+
31 'it>gl it'f6 32 �xf4.
30 1:hg3 exf4 31 �b2+
32 dxe7! �xbs
After 32... fxg3 33 d6+ �e6 34 �xe6
is mate.
33 ii.xbs fIg3 34 Wg2! tUgS
And after 34...e3 35 ..ITi.d7 wins.
35 d6 l::!.hH 36 �xg31hb2 37 �e4+
'it>g7 38 d7 1-0
Y.Nikolaevsky - G.Kasparov
Moscow 1976
1 tUf3 tUf6 2 g3 g6 3 �g2 �g7
4 0-0 0-0 5 d4 d6 6 b3 es 7 ..ITi.b2 tUe6
8 ds tUas
The knight has reached its planned
destination on the edge of the board
fairly early in the game.
See diagram on page J 9.
9 .l:l.el ..ITi.fs
Just like Anatoly Evgenievich I am
prepared to give up a tempo.
10 tUbd2 it'e8 11 e4
My opponent takes the free tempo,
just like Karpov.
11. .�g4 12 e4
.
Black can build up pressure on the
e4-square.
12...tUd7 13 �xg7 �xg7 14 .e2
�xf3 15 lLlxf3 'jie7 16 it'c3+ �g8
17 ..ITi.h3 b6
�g8
18 es
White correctly opens the position in
the centre. Now the knight is missing
from the action.
18... dxes 19 ..ITi.xd7 'il'xd7 20 lLlxes
�d6 21 lLlg4 hs 22 lLles .f6
24
23 .l:l.e3
The e7-pawn is an obvious target.
23...J:!.ad8 24 .l:l.f3 'ilVg7 25 J:!.e1 l:td6
26 b4 tUb7 27 'ilVa3 as 28 bxas tUxas
It is a true delight that the knight can
return to as.
29 'ilVa4 'ilVh6 30 J:!.ee3?!
30 tUd7 wins the exchange.
30 ... h4 31 gxh4 'ifxh4 32 tUxr7?
An imaginative trick that wins the
game, but objectively this thrust spoils
White's position. 32 'ii'c2 keeps an
edge.
32...l:tf6?
The exploitation of the pin along the
fifth rank by 32...l:txd5!? allows many
tactical possibilities, however Black
almost miraculously survives in every
variation. 33 tUh6+ Going after the
king achieves no more than a perpetual.
(33 lLle5 wins the exchange but leaves
his king too exposed, e.g. 33...l:txeS
25
Anatoly Karpov the 12'10
34 .l:l.xf8+ 'it>xf8 35 J:!.xe5 'CIVg4+ 36'it>n
'ifh3+ and White can do nothing with
his extra exchange. White has no time
to make room for his king with 33 h3 as
after 33...J:d2 34 lLle5 J:!.xf2 35 IOxg6
.l:l.2xO 36 lLlxb4 lhe3 the position
is equal.) 33...<;t>g7 34 lhf8 'it>xf8
35 J:!.O+ 'it>g7 36 'ii'e8 1!t'g5+ 37 11g3
l:[dl+ 38 Wg2 'iff6 39 'ilVg8+ 'if.oxh6
40 l:th3+ Wg5 41 .l:l.g3+.
33 .l:l.xf6 'ihf6 34 lLlh6+ Wg7
35 lLlg4 'ii'd4
After 35...'ii'g5 36 h3 White will
quickly bring his queen over to the
kingside, while Black's knight has to
remain on the queenside.
36 lhe7+
The pawn is gobbled up and Black's
king remains vulnerable. Black is
simply lost.
36...'.ti>h8 37 h3 'ii' c3 38 'ifd7 'ii'xb3
39l:te8 'ifn 40 l:te7 'ifh3 41 'ife6 'ifhs
42 l:te8 <;t>g7 43 'ii'd7+ 1117 44 'ikc8
'ifb7 45 d6 g5 46 d7 'ifb1+ 47 'it>g2
1-0
L.Zaid - G.Kasparov
Leningrad 1977
1 d4lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLln �g7 4 g3 d6
5 �g2 0-0 6 0-0 lLle6 7 tUe3 a6 8 d5
lLla5
Allatoly Karpov the 12th
The knight naturally goes to the edge.
9 tDd2 c5 10 �c2 nb8 11 b3 b5
12 �b2
See diagram on page 19.
12...bxc4 13 bxe4 �b6 14 tDebl e5
15 �e3 �d7 16 tDa3
Sad, but my opponent also knows the
knight to the h- and a-file strategy.
16 ...�g7 17 nabl 'ite7 18 e4 b5
I should have followed in Karpov's
footsteps and played 18 ... tDh5.
19 f4 nb4 20 �d3 tDb7
I wanted to leave the knight where it
was, but the fact that it was undefended
worried me.
21 tDc2 nxbl 221hbl b4?1
There is no time to free the h5-
square for the knight. After 22 ... exf4
23 gxf4 ne8 Black is in the game.
23 fr:e5 dxe5 24 tDO! hxg3 25 �xe5
gxh2+ 26 �xh2
White's centre is rock solid.
26... 'i'c8 27 lbe3 lbg4 28 tDxg4
�xg4 29 tDe5 lba5
Now White no longer attacks the a5-
square. So I waste no time putting the
knight back on the edge of the board.
30 no �h5 31 d6 �xe5?
If 3l...�g4 32 lbxg4 �xg4 33 iVd5
�d4+ 34 Wh 1 'i'd7 Black still resists.
32 �xe5�e6 33 JiLf6
The exposes the weak black king
and the d6-pa.wn becomes more
threatening.
33...tD e6
He must come back to hold the pawn.
34 'lIke3! Wh7 35 'llr'xe5 tDb8
Karpov played some remarkable
knight retreats during his career, for
example: Karpov-Spassky, 9th game,
Moscow 1974, or Karpov-Quinteros,
26
Anaioly Karpov the 121A
Malta 1980, or Bouaziz-Karpov, 32 tDbl! tDg7 33 tDd2 tDe6 34 b4 25...lOb81! 261Of3 lOd7 27 'iftg31Oc5
Hamburg 1982. Two of these were .l:I.d8 35 tDc4 nd4 36 tDd6 .l:I.xb4 28 .:td I a5 29 'iPf2 na6 30 We2 lOa4
played after this game and so I hadn't 37 tDxb7 1:.b5 38 h4 h5 39 'iPf2 'ltd7 31 d4 %:lb6
seen them. In a way my retreat is more 40 lOd6 lhc5 41 nb2 1-0
effective than Karpov's. It ends the
game far more quickly, in just two S.Bouaziz - A.Karpov
moves. Hamburg TV 1982
36 �e7 ne8 37 iVd5 1-0
Leaving out the analysis, here are the
three retreat pearls mentioned:
A.Karpov - B.Spassky
Game 9, Candidates semi-fmal 32 dxe5 nxb2+ 33 Wfl lOxc3
Leningrad 1974 34 exd6 cxd6 35 nxd6 nb I +
36 lOel Wf6 37 nd2 b5 38 nc2 b4
39 Wf2 na I 40 e5+ 'iftxe5 41 1Of3+
'lte4 42 lOd4 'iitd3 0-1
Karpov sacrificed the e5-pawn ill a sharp Sicilian against Ljubojevic.
I decided to use this weapon as well.
A.Karpov - L. Lj uboj e vi e G.Kasparov - A.Yermolinsky
24 lObi!! iVb7 25 <l;>h2 'it>g7 26 c3
lOa6 27 1:.e2 1:.f8 28 1Od2 Jtd8 29 lOD
f6 30 %:ld2 �e7 31 'iWe6 %:lad8 32 %:lxd8
Jtxd8 33 .l:I.d I lOb8 34 Jtc5 nh8
35 %:lxd8 1-0
A.Karpov - M.Quinteros
Malta Olympiad 1980
A.Karpov - L.Ljubojevic
Turin 1982
1 e4 e5 2 lOo d6 3 d4 lOf6 4 1Oc3
cxd4 5 lOxd4 a6 6 Jte2 e6 7 f4 fie7
8 0-0 b5?! 9 JtO Jtb7 10 e5 dxe5
11 fxe5 lOfd7 12 Jtf4 b4
27
Anatoly Karpov the 12'h Anatoly Karpov the 12'h

13 llle 4 21 .l:l.adl f6
Karpov sacrifices the pawn. This Moving the knight with 2J...lllc6
game was so convincing that the 2 2 'ii xgS 'iixd6 23 lllfS 'iie5 24 lllh6+
position never occurred again. wins, while if 2J...h6 2 2 h4 JLxh4
13 ...lll xes 23 'iixh4 'iix d6 24 lllf 5 decides.
22 JLxb8 .l:l.axb8
See diagram on page 27.

14 It'hl! JLe7
Not 14...lllbc6?? IS lll xc6 .i.xc6
16 JLxeS 'iixeS 17 lllf6+ winning nor 9.. bS
. 42.. .';:.od6 43 'WbS+ Wxd5 44 "iWd8+

14... lllbd7 IS lllgS! and White has nice This is a rarely played line at the top ..t>e6 45 'il'e8+ <;.t;>fS 46 "ilfd7+ <;t>g6

play for the pawn. level. It leads to very exciting games. 47 "g4+ ..t>f6 48 lll c3 'iffl+ 0-1
10 lllxc6 Karpov-Torre, Manila 1976.
IS lllgS! JLxgS 16 JLxb7! 'iixb7
If 16... .I:I.a7 17 lllx e6 or 16 ... JLxf4 Karpov was nicely beaten by Torre
Back t o the game:
17 JLxaS lllg6 IS ..e I 0-0 19 JLe4 and with 10 'ifel. Here is Torre's
23 h4! JLxh4 masterpiece. 10... lllxd4 II .l:l.xd4 �6
White is better.
Retreating with 23... JLh6 is met by 12 .l:l.d.2 JLe7 13 JLd3 b4 14 llldl JLb5
17 JLxeS 0-0
24 lllf5 'iic7 25 lll xh6+ �hS 15 lllf2 h6 16 JLh4 g5 17 fxg5 hxgS
17 ... lll d7 allows IS JLxg7 .l:l.gS
19 lllxe6. I S JLg3 lllh5 19 lllg4 lllxg3 20 hxg3

18 'iig4 'iie7? .l:l.xhl 21 'Wxhl :leS 22 �bl JLxd3

After this White's advantage is 23 exd3

decisive. Also after IS...h6? 19 lll xe6

'iid7 20 JLxg7 wins. Better is Is... llld7!
19 'iixgS f6 20 .i.xf6 but White is still
somewhat better.
10 . JLxc6 11 it.d3 JL e7 12 eS dxeS
. .

1 3 fxe5 lOd7 14 Sixe7 'ifxe7

26 .l:l.dS+!! This lovely shot decides

the game instantly.
24 'iixh4 :lc4 25 'iig3 .l:l.bc8 26 lllrs
'iia7 27 '-Dd6 .l:l.4cS 28 �3 1-0 23... 'ifd4 24 'Wdl as 25 lOhl g4
26 lOxg4 SigS 27 .l:l.c2 .l:l.xc2 28 �c 2
G.Kasparov A.Yermolinsky
a 4 2 9 a3 b3+ 30 ..t> b I d S 3 1 exd5 'iixd5
-

LeningrasJ. 1975
32 lOf2 'Wxg2 33 llle 4 JLe3 34 lOe3
19 'iig3! .l:l.c8
"c6 35 d4 'Wc4 36 d5 e5 37 'itbl 'Wd3+
After 19 ... .I:I.dS 20 :ladl!. 1 e4 cS 2 lOn d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lllxd4
3S �al Sid4 39 'iWhS+ ..t>d7 40 'iiaS
20 JLd6 'iid 7 lLlf6 5 '-Dc3 '-Dc6 6 JLg5 a6 7 "d2 e6
"[1+ 4 1 lObi 'Wc4 42 'ifb7+ 15 JLe4
Or alternatively 20...'iidS 21 lllxe6! 8 0-0-0 JLd7 9 f4

2S 29
Anatoiy Karpov the J 2th Anatoiy Karpov the J 2tA

I did not mind sacrificing the e5

pawn, hoping I would get enough play
for it in return.
Karpov sacrificed the b6-pawn in S.Garcia Martinez - A.Karpov
15 .. :.c5 16 l: bel l:a7 17 � xc6
" xc6 1 8 " fl " c5 1 9 l: e3 0-0 a hedgehog position against Garcia

Black has equalised by moving his and went on to win.

king into safety.
20 ltJe4 "xe5
And below is another example

See diagram on page 27. from my annoying predecessor,

21 l:g3
Karpov also allowed short castling
and caught Ljubojevic's king on the
kingside. I hoped my attack would
bring Yermolinsky down too.
21...l:aa8 22 l:xd7 "xe4 23 l:f3
"g6
32...l:e5 33 "d2 l:fe8 34 l:e3 "b6 followed by my game against him
35 g3 " b3 36 l:c6
where he himself took the b6-pawn.
36 l:d6 is an alternative.
36.....f5 37 "c3 "d7 38 b3 l:f5
39 �b2?? J.Saren - A.Karpov A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
White has had to play carefully for
quite some time, now a losing mistake
leads to disaster. The king blocks the
queen. After 39 �a2 l:f1 40 l:c5 "d1
41 'it'b2 White is in tbe game.

24 a3 Ga.rcia Martinez - Karpov

White's heavy pieces control many Madrid 1973
files and ranks.
24 ...l:ac8 25 � bl e5!
I e4 c5 2 ltJf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4
Keeping White busy and holding on
39...l:fi!! a6
to the pawn.
26 l:g3 "e6 27 "d2 g6 28 l:h3 "f6 Surprisingly catching the king on the Interestingly Karpov stopped playing

29 " h6 "g7 30 " g5 l:ce8 31 l:d6 e4! first rank:. the Paulsen pretty soon after he became
32 l:xa6 40 l:f6 l:bl 41 " c6 "d4+ 42 l:c3 world champion. Avoiding direct
Material equilibrium has been l:f8 43 l::d7 l: xf7 44 "xb5 l:xh2 confrontation suits his style better.
13 ...ltJe6
restored. White is still not worse, but he 45 b4 l hc2+ 46 <,P xc2 l:fl+ 47 <,Pb3 5 � d3 ltJf6 6 0-0 d6 7 c4 We7 8 "ilfe2 A slightly unusu�1 way to develop.
must play with care. "dl + 48 � c4 " e2+ 0-1
g6 9 f4 � g7 1 0 � hl 0-0 11 ltJe3 b6 Here Black only defends the b6-pawn
12 � d2 lI.b7 13 ltJo with his queen. 13 ... ltJbd7 is usual.

30 31
Anatoly Karpov rhe 12t'
14 l:lac1 l:lae8 IS �f2
This is a mUlti-purpose move. White
can think about attacking the king with
fVh4 or. . .
15...tDg4 1 6 1IWgi
White keeps an eye on the b6-pawn.
16...fS 17 exfS gxfS 18 h3?!
White diverts the knight to a better
place and weakens b6 as well . He could
play 1 8 tDd5 'iff? 19 tDxb6.
18...tDf6 19 tDdS j1'd8 20 ,*xh6
See diagram on page 31.
20.. .'i!h:b6 21 tDxb6
This is the idea implemented later.
Black can give up the b6-pawn in such
a situation.
21...tDe4 22 Jtxe4 fxe4 23 tDgS tDd8
Karpov sacrifices a pawn and can
also afford to step back with his knight.
Where is it going to? To the edge of the
board of course'
24 11fe l ? !
I t is hetter to defend the f4-pawn by
24 Ike I ! d 5 2 5 cxd5 exd5 2 6 tDd7.
24...dS 2S tDd7
A fter 25 cxd5 ! ? exd5 26 tDd7 h6
27 tDxfB 11xfB 28 ii.b4 lhf4 ! 29 ii.e7
hxg5 30 ii.xd8 !In 3 1 b3 d4 Black's
central pawns are menacing. The
position is hard to evaluate over the
board, however White might be better
here.
2S... h6
32
2 6 tDxe4 dxe4 2 7 tDxfl! l:lxfl!
Black has two pieces against the
rook. The position is roughly equal and
the stronger player will outplay his
opponent.
By the way, this game misled me in
several ways. I lost twice by opting for
two pieces against a rook. Once against
Kappe and once against Romanishin.
Here are those examples:
A.Kappe - G Kas p arov
.
Cagnes-sur-Mer, 1977
1 1 tDdxe4 'ifxd l 1 2 tDxf6+ ii.xf6
13 .l::r a xd 1 ii.xg5 14 ii.xb7
I S ii.xa8 ii.xa8
1 6 h4 Jte7 1 7 ii.e5 tDa6 1 8 c3 ii.c6
1 9 � f4 ii.f8 20 l:ld2 f6 2 1 l:l fd 1 �f7
22 'it>fl h6 2 3 ii.e3 4Jc5 24 l:ld8 a6
25 l:lxe8 'it>xe8 26 f3 tDe6 27 wn h5
2 8 c4 ii.d6 29 llbl a5 30 �d2 tDd4
3 1 � f4 We7 32 ii.xd6+ 'it>xd6 33 Itd I
Anatoly Karpov the 12"
�c5 34 �e3 tDe6 35 g4 a4 36 gxb5
gxb5 37 bxa4 Wxc4 38 %le i + �d5
39 a5 �b5 40 %lg I tDd4 41 %lg8 c5
42 %lh8 �c6 43 %lxb5 �xe2 44 %lh7
�xf3 45 a6 �b6 46 a7 �b7 47 h5
�xa7 4 8 %I f? �b8 49 %lxf6 �c8
50 �e4 �e6 5 1 h6 �xa2 52 �e5 1-0
O.Romanishin - G.Kasparov
4-teams, Moscow 1 9 8 1 38...tDxe5 39 fxeS �g7 40 llf7 '1t>b6
41 h4 �hS 42 �h3 �e8 43 :l.a7 �g6
44 .l:xa6 �d3 45 .l:f2 �xc4 46 .l:a3
26 %lxe7 tDb6 2 7 %lb7 tDa4 28 %lb8+
�fB 29 c4 �g7 30 �g2 �d6 3 1 %la8
46...�h6?
tDb2 32 a4 tDxc4 3 3 a5 tDe5 34 %lc8
Karpov rarely misses a trick in
1 -0
�e4 endgames. However 46 . . . �xe5 was
winning after 47 l1a5 �d5.
Back to the game.
47 l1g3 %la8 48 .1:17 llal 49 1:I.h7
.l:hl+ SO Wg2 11xh4 S I ..t>gl
28 b4 �c6 29 a4 �xa4 30 lhe4 �c6 SI ...�e2 S2 �f2 �g4 S3 bS �f5
31 .l:e2 b5 32 <t>h2 h4 33 g3 hxg3+ 54 l1b8 l:lb4 SS l:lgl llbH 56 '\t>f3
34 �xg3 �h7 35 �c3 �h6 36 l1n l1b3+ 57 �f2 �e4 58 l1g3 %lb2+
%lg8+ 37 �h2 tDf7 38 �e5?! 59 �gl �f5 60 .l:g2 .l:xg2+ 61 9o>xg2
33
Anato/)' Karpov the 12'h
�e4+ 62 'it>g3 'it> g6 63 b6 .t.d5 64 l:tb 8
'it>f5 6 5 b7 'it>xe5
If 65.. .�f4+ 66 'it>h4 'it>xe5 67 <;Pg4
�e3 68 'it>h5 holds.
66 � g4?
After 66 ];[h8 ! ! White contrives
to engineer a miraculous escape.
66 ... .>i f4+ 67 \t.?g4 �xb7 68 ];[h5+ ! !
Recovering a piece, Without this
move White would lose. 68 . . . 'it>e4
69 ];[b5 ! and White wins a bishop.
Luckily the position is drawish.
Interestingly, it would take more time
to win if Black had a knight on e6
instead of the pawn.
On the other hand in the next position
against Karpov from Tilburg 1 99 1 I did
manage to salvage a draw with rook
versus two knights and a bishop.
People drew the conclusion from
my body language that I considered
my position lost at adj ournment. My
reaction to this? No comment!
34
Or should I say has any of my
Predecessors had such an endgame?
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Tilburg 1 99 1
I I I lbg6+ <;Pg8 1 1 2 lbe7+ <;Ph8
1 1 3 lbg5 l:ta6+ 1 1 4 <;Pf7 .l:tf6+! 11,-11,
Capturing the rook results in stalemate.
Back to the main game:
66...�e3 67 'it>g3 .t. g5 68 �fZ .t.e7
0-1
Karpov sacrificed the b6-pawn not
only in this game but also in an earlier
one where the circumstances were very
similar.
J.Saren - A.Karpov
Skopje Olympiad 1 972
I e4 c5 2 lZ:lo e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4
lZ:lc6 5 lbb5 d6 6 c4 lbf6 7 lb I c3 a6
8 lba3 iLe7 9 �e2 0-0 10 0-0 b6
I I .t.e3 �b7 1 2 0 l:tb8 1 3 'it'e! lbd7
1 4 ir'f2 lbc5 I S .l:tfd I f5 1 6 exf5 l:txf5
1 7 lbc2 �h4 1 8 g3 �e7 1 9 b4 lbd7
20 f4
20 . . . 'i!Vf8 2 1 b5 axb5 22 cxb5 lba5
23 �xb6 lbxb6 24 'i!Vxb6 �d8 25 ir'a7
J:!.c8 2 6 'i!Ve3 e5 2 7 �g4 lbc4 2 8 'ii'd3
.t.b6+ 29 'itJfl ];[xf4+ 30 gxf4 'it'xf4+
Oe l
I tucked this idea away safely and
prepared a novelty for my first World
Championship match. I employed it
when the score was 0:0. Let's see how
Karpov's idea worked against him.
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Game 3, World Championship,
Moscow 1 984
1 e4 c5 2 lbO e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4
lb c6 5 lb b5 d6 6 c4 lb f6 7 lZ:l lc3 a6
8 lZ:l a3 �e7 9 �e2 0-0 1 0 0-0 b6
1 1 .t. e3 � b7 12 'iYb 3 lba5
This was my prepared novelty - you
can guess where it came from.
13 'ifxb6
See diagram on page 31.
Black's pawns have not advanced as
far as in the Garcia-Karpov game, but I
did not have to sacrifice a pawn.
35
Anato/y Karpov the 1 2,h
13 ... lbxe4 1 4 lZ:l xe4 �xe4 15 'ii'xd8
� xd8 16 ];[adl d5?!
Maybe defending the pawn was
better, but that would be slightly
passive. An interesting psychological
echo is that 1 6 years later I also gave a
free pawn to my opponent in the World
Championship final when neither
player had yet scored a victory.
1 7 n � f5 1 8 cxd5
At the time, commentators thought
1 8 g4?! .t.g6 1 9 cxd5 exd5 20 lhd5?
was a losing move, but after 20 . . . .l:I:e8
2 1 ];[fd I ! White is still a bit better.
18 ...exd5 1 9 1hd5 �e6
If 1 9 .. Jle8 20 Wf2 �e6 2 1 J:td6.
2 0 l:td6!? � xa2?!
After 20 . . . �e7 21 lha6 J:txa6
(2 l . . ..t.xa3? 22 bxa3 lZ:lc4 23 lhe6
wins.) 22 �xa6 .l:I:b8 23 �d4 lbc6
24 .t.c3 �c5+ 25 'it> h l lZ:lb4 it would be
hard to progress with White.
21 lha6 J:tb8 22 � c5 l:te8 23 iL b5!
l:te6
Other moves were no better.
If 23 . . . J:!. e 5 ? ! 24 .t.d6 :!:texb5
25 lbxb5 l:txb5 26 l:ta8 lZ:lb7 27 �c7
wins. If 2 3 .. Jhb5 24 lZ:lxb5 iLc4
25 lZ:ld6 ! ? or 2 5 J:tdl �xb5 26 J:txd8
l:txd8 27 lha5.
Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th Anatoly Karpov the / 2th

24 b4 lO b7 If 28 ....txc2 29 l%xe6 fxe6 30 :Xe7 A.Beliavsky - A.Karpov 28 .t xd7?

After 24 . . . l%xa6 25 .txa6
26 l%e l ! ?
2S .t f2 .t e7 26 lOc2 .t dS 27 l%d l
.t b3 2 8 l%d7! l%d8
Karpov won an opposite coloured
bishop endgame where he had a
strong light-squared bishop and a
rook and won despite being a pawn
down. Furthermore, to make it even
more misleading, he beat a very fine
player - Beliavsky.
lOb3 1Od6 3 1 .td7 l%xb4 32 .tc5 Ab I +
33 � f2 wins as Taimanov pointed out.
29 A Ie6 A Id7 30 l%e l ! A c7 31 .tb6
1-0
A.Beliavsky - A.Karpov
USSR Championship, Moscow 1 97 3
1 d 4 lOf6 2 c4 e 6 3 lOc3 .tb4 4 e 3 c S
S .t d3 0-0 6 lOo d S 7 0-0 dxc4
8 .t xc4 cxd4 9 exd4 b6
The Karpov line brought me my
second loss in the Kramnik match,
from there on it was hard to stage a
comeback.
10 .t gS .t b7 11 We2 lLlbd7 12 A acl
A c8 1 3 lOeS W e7 1 4 .t bS 'lIVd6
IS A fdl .t xe3 16 bxe3 'ii'dS 17 f4
'lIVd6
Better was 28 lOxf7! 'i;xf7 (28 ... :xf7
29 dxe6 :e7 30 l%xc8 wins) 29 dxe6+
'lIVxe6 30 .tb3 lLld5 3 1 'ii'xe6+ q"xe6
32 Ac6+ ! ; 2 8 lLlxd7 lOxd7 29 'ifc3+
�h7 30 dxe6 fxe6 3 1 .tg3. In both
cases White's advantage is sufficient to
sail home with the full point.
28 ...lOxd7 29 dxe6 'ii'xe6 30 lUe4
.t a6 3 1 'ii'xe6 fxe6

Remembering this particular game well, I twice opted for such positions
32 .t g3?
against Kramnik. In one of them (below. left) I was a pawn up, not down,
Placing the bishop on a passive
and my opponent had no passed a-pawn and I only drew. square. 32 g3 was a better way to
simplify as the bishop is then far more
But this was not all in the match. In the next example (below, right), I did
18 e4 active: 3 2 . . . :c8 33 :d 1 i.xc4
not have a strong bishop, but the similarity is still there as my opponent was
White's centre is huge. Black should 34 :'xd7+ � f8 35 :a7 i.d5 36 a4.
a pawn up and possessed a passed a-pawn. undermine that zone as the more space 32... :e8 33 J:[d l i. xe4 34 :'xd7+
White has the quicker he will suffocate �f6
Out of these two games I totalled a miserable half a point whereas
his opponent. See diagram on page 36.
Karpov scored twice as much as that from a single game. To make matters
1 8. . 'ii'c7 19 .t a4 a6 20 .t e2 g6
. White has an extra pawn but no
worse, this happened to me during the World Championship match against
2 1 WeI � g7 22 .t a4 h6 23 .t h4 bS longer an advantage. But Beliavsky is a
Kramnik. At a cost of a pawn Karpov gets rid great fighter and still plays for a win.
of the nagging bind. 3S 83
V.Kramnlk - G.Kasparov V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov 24 nbS 'lIVd6 2S bxa6 .t xa6 26 dS! After 35 J:[d2 :a8=.
Axel 27 A xel .t e8 3S....t dS

36 37
Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th
36 h3?
In this case, placing the pawn on the
colour of his opponent's b ishop means
it's going to fall in the long run.
White can force matters and move
closer to a draw by 36 �h4+ 'it'f5
3 7 1:.f7+ 'it'e4 (37 . . . c;t>g4? 3 8 �el and
White can play for a win again.) 38 11f6
(38 h3 Now he makes room for the
king. 38 . . . 1:.c l + 39 'it'h2 'it'e3 40 1:.f6
�e4 4 1 f5 gxf5 42 1:.xe6 lIc2 43 'it'h l
f4 44 11e8 and White holds. ) 38 . . . 1:.c 1 +
39 <oPf2 1:.c2+ 40 'it'g3 (40 <oPg l c;t>e3)
40 .. .'�)d4 4 1 'it'g4 �e4 42 �g3. Black's
advantage is no more than symbolic.
3 6 ...1:. c l + 37 'it' ll lIc2+ 38 <oPe3
1:.c3 +
Suddenly Karpov can start to squeeze.
39 <oP ll 1:.xa3 40 � h4+ g5 41 fIg5+
hxg5 42 .i. g3 1:. a2+ 43 'it'e3
43 ...1:.xg2
From being a pawn down, Karpov
reaches an endgame a pawn up!
44 � c7 1:. a2 45 lI h7
45 .i.d6 avoids the irrunediate loss
of more material. 45 . . . lIb2 (After
45 . . . 1:.a4! 46 'it'f2 it is hard to tell if
Black can win.) 46 'it'd4 lIb3? (This
direct attempt to win fails. Black
can maintain his edge by 46 . . .lIe2.)
47 �e5+ 'it'g6 48 1:.g7+ 'it'h6 49 1:.g8
and White holds.
38
45...1:. a8 4 6 'it' ll 'it'�6 4 7 lId7 1:.a3
48 1:.d8 110+ 49 'it' gl
49 ...1:. xh3
Karpov once held Torre in a single
rook and opposite colour bishop ending
but there Torre had h- and g-pawns.
Karpov's position must have been lost,
but here he wins even though it takes
time.
50 lIb8 1:. c3 51 .i. d6 11c2 52 1:. f8 1:.c6
53 .i.e5 g4 54 1:.f6+ 'it' g5 55 1:.f8 .i.f3
5 6 .i. f4+ <oPg6 57 'it' ll 1:.c2+
In the old days when there were
adjournments the players sealed at
move 56. Here Furman and the other
helpers found a way to win.
.
58 'it'g3 lIgH 59 <t> h4 1:.e2 60 .i. g3
e5
Karpov wins by pushing the e-pawn
without using his king.
61 1:. b8 e4 62 11b5 11e3 63 1:.b6+ 'it'f7
64 'it' g5 1:.d3 65 'it'f5 e3 66 1:. d6 1:.b3
67 1:. d7+ <oPe8 68 'it'e6 e2 69 1:.e7+ 'it'f8
70 'it.> f6 � d5 7 1 .i. h4 1:. 0+ 72 �g6
.i.f7+ 0-1
V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
Game 8, World Championship,
London 2000
1 d4 liJf6 2 c4 e6 3 �c3 .i. b4 4 "c2
0-0 5 a3 .i. xc3+ 6 "xc3 b6 7 .i.g5
� b7 8 0 h6 9 � h4 d5 1 0 e3 � bd7
11 cxd5 � xd5 1 2 .i.xd8 �xc3 1 3 .i. b4
�d5 1 4 .i.f2 c5 15 .i.b 5 11fd8 16 e4
1 6 ...�c7! !
At the time this was a very important
novelty. We had already played a few
games in which I accepted a weakness
�r a material deficit for better
development.
17 .i. xd7 lIxd7 18 dxc5 f5! 19 cxb6
axb6 20 �e2
Giving back the pawn at once with
20 l:I.d l ! ? would lead to an equal game.
For example: 20 . . .lIxd l + 2 1 'it'xd l fxe4
22 fxe4 .i.xe4 23 �f3 .
20... fxe4 21 fxe4 .i. xe4
22 0-0?
After 22 �c3 .i.xg2 23 l:I.g l .i.f3
24 lIg3 lId3 25 .i.xb6 �d5 26 �xd5
exd5 we could say it's a balanced yet
fighting game.
39
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
22 ...1:. d2 23 � c3 .i. b7
The g2-pawn is weak and the bishop
can target it, just as in the Karpov
game.
24 b4 l:I. f8 25 l:I. a2 1:. xa2 26 ttJxa2
ttJd5 27 .i. d4 l:I. a8
28 lLl c3
After 28 nf3 g5! (28 . . . lLlxb4?
29 1:.g3) 29 lLlc3 lLlf4 Black has the
upper hand. If 28 .i.b2 lLle3 29 l:I.c1
l:I.d8 (29 . . .�d5 30 lLlc3 lLlc4 31 1:.c2!
Probably Black has no win here,
because he can get the a- and the
b-pawn in exchange for the e-pawn,
reaching a rook ending a pawn up but
which I evaluated as slightly better for
Black only.) 30 lIc7 �e4! (30 . . . 1:.d2
3 1 l:I.xg7+ 'it'f8 32 .i.c3 holds.) 3 1 .i.e I
(3 1 l:hg7+? �f8 32 �c3 .i.b I 3 3 1:.g3
lLlf5 34 1:.f3 Ad l + 35 �f2 h5 wins.)
3 l . . .lId 1 + 32 �f2 lLlg4+ (32 . . . lLld5?
3 3 lLlc3=) 3 3 'it'g3 lLlf6 3 4 .i.e3 l:I.d8!
Black keeps his winning prospects as I
pointed out in some analysis in
Informant.
28 ...lLl xc3 29 � xc3 lba3 30 .i. d4 b5
See diagram on page 36.
3 1 11 f4
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
3 1 ... :d3
I was a pawn up whereas Karpov was
a pawn down. He won, so it made me
too complacent and I missed a chance . . .
After 3 1 . . . h5 ! 32 g4 h 4 33 g 5 :a2
34 :xh4 :g2+ 35 'it>f1 :xg5 the
situation is almost identical to the
Beliavsky-Karpov game. The extra
b-pawns must increase the stronger
side's chances.
32 l1g4 g5 33 h4!
Now White holds.
33 'it>f7 34 hxg5 hxg5 35 'it>n :d2+
...
36 o;t> e3
36... :xg2
I win the g2-pawn as well, but sadly
it only leads to a draw since my passed
pawns are too close to one another.
A gap of one rank is usually not
enough.
37 l:txg2 .i. xg2 38 .i.e5 lA-v]
40
V.Kramnik G.Kasparov -
Game 2, World Chess Championship
London 2000
1 d4 tUf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltJ c3 d5
Against Kramnik, I had quite a few
draws i n the GriinfeId during the
second half of the 1 990s. Some were
very close, maybe I should have sensed
that sooner or later I would lose one.
4 exdS liJxd5 5 e4 tU xc3 6 bxc3 .i.g7
7 tU f3 cS 8 .i. e3 "a s 9 "d2 .i.g4
1 0 :b l
1 0. 8 6
..
Later I said I just gave up a pawn
here. I had already visualised the
ensuing opposite coloured bishops
position.
11 ':xb7 .i. xf3 12 gxf3 ltJc6 13 .i. c4
0-0 1 4 0-0 cxd4 1 5 cxd4 .i. xd4 16 .i. d5
.i. c3
Not 1 6 . . . .i.xe3 ? 1 7 "xe3 :ac8
1 8 lIc 1 tUb4 1 9 ':xc8 ':xc8 20 "d2
"d8 and Black must suffer in this
position a pawn down. If 20 . . . e6?
2 1 .i.xe6 wins.
17 'ifc1 ! ltJd4 18 .i.xd4 .i. xd4
I was not particularly
here.
19 ':n7 ':a7 20 ':Ia7 .i. xa7
Anatoly Karpov the l}Th
35 ':c4 White retains decent winning
chances.
31 f3 ':e7
If 3 1 ... ':b5 32 a4 ':b2 33 h4 ! ?
32 a4
21 f4! 'iWd8 22 'ifc3 .i. b 8
If 22 ...'ifh4 23 'ifg3.
23 'iff3 'ifh4 24 eS gS 25 ':e 1 'ifxf4
If 25 ... gxf4 26 e6 fxe6 27 ':xe6.
Later, in my second loss in this match,
I did not mind a battery when Krarnnik
32 : a7
moved a rook to e6. 27 . . ...g5+ 28 'iWg2
...
After 3 2 ... .i.a7+ ! ? 3 3 c;tg2 .i.e3
"xg2+ 29 o;t>xg2 c;tg7 30 :xa6. White
Kramnik suggests several plans to
is a tempo up compared with that game.
convert the pawn advantage . Here are
26 'ifxf4 gxf4 27 e6 fxe6 28 ':xe6
�g7 two of them. 34 o;t>h3 ! (or 34 :c6 ! ?
Even 28 ... a5 is possible, but it leads : a 7 3 5 .i. c 2 ) 34 . . . ':es ! (34 . . . :a7?
to a miserable defence. 35 ':xa7+ .i.xa7 36 c;tg4 .i.e3 37 as h6
29 ':xa6 38 o;t>fs wins.) 35 o;t>g4 h5+ 36 c;th4
See diagram on page 36. .i.f2+ 37 o;t>h3. It's difficult to tell
29 ':fS
•..
which one was the best, but in all lines
Karpov still had to take'the g2-pawn, B lack must suffer.
which did not even exist here. The a­ 33 lIb6 .i. e5
pawn never assumed a role in that game Maybe I should have tried to defend
- and I was hoping for the same. I knew with 3 3 . . . .i.c7 34 ':b4 .i.d6! 35 :c4
in a match Kramnik would not be :a5.
careless and lose as Beliavsky did, but 34 :b4 ': d7 35 � g2 :d2+ 36 o;t> h3
if Karpov won his game I should have h5 37 : b 5 o;t>C6 38 a s : a2 39 ':b6+
at least made a draw.
After 29 ...':f6 30 ':a8 (30 :a5 !?)
30 ...':b6 3 I a4 ':b2 32 as .i.d6 33 ':c8
White is likely to win. Indeed 33 . ':b5
. .
34 a6 ':xd5 35 a7 f3 3 6 ':g8+ �f6
3 7 � h l is decisive in a nice line shown
by Kramnik.
unhappy 30 .i.e4 : e5
Upon 30 . . .':b5 ! ? 3 1 �g2 ':b2 32 a4
.i.e5 3 3 ':c6 ! ? .i.d4 34 .i.c2 ':a2
41
Anatoly Karpov the J 2th Anatoly Karpov the J 2,h

39 . �e7??
. . 45 .l:l.d5 White loses the opposite
This loses a piece III one move. colour bishop ending as he drops a
Having shown you the posItions Quite incredibly the structure
However, the position is lost anyway. second pawn or else allows White's
Karpov went on to win, I ' l l show you occurred once again in the same
Even after 39 . . .<.Pg7 40 a6 .i.d4 king to invade on the queenside.
mine against Kramnik. I spoiled my match - only that there were
4 5 . . . .I:I.xd5 (45 . . ..I:I.a2 46 .l:l.xh5 .i.gl
41 .I:1g6+ 'it>f8 42 .i.b7 ! is winning. position and only drew - and ended additional a-pawns in each camp and
4 7 <oPg4) 46 .i.xd5 �g7 (46 ... .i.f2
Here are Kramnik's lines. 42 . . . .I:I.a5 up not winning a single game in the there were no minor pieces on the
4 7 �g2 iLa7 48 h4) 47 'iti>g2 h4
(42 . . . .i.e3 43 .l:l.g5 h4 44 .l:l.g4 �e7 match. board.
(47 . . .'it>f6 48 h4) 48 �h3 .i.f2 49 'it>g4.
45 .l:l.xh4 .i. g l 46 �g4 wins.) 43 .l:l.d6
40 .i.dS 1 -0 V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
.i.g l 44 .l:l.d l ! .i.e3 (44 . . . lIg5 45 lhg l )
I should not have lost the title match
against Kramnik. My flrst loss was
related to Karpov while in the second -
as you will see in the Alekhine chapter
- I fol lowed the fourth world
champion. See page 2 1 5. Why do my
countrymen have such an adverse
effect on me - forcing me to lose my
title? Fortunately the crown at least
remained in Mother Russia.

Karpov also had a game against A.Antunes - A.Karpov

Antunes which was very similar to
The last kind of position that influenced me from Karpov's games had also my second game against Krarnni k
occurred twice in my match with Kramnik. Karpov's contribution to the loss and I thought that this time I would
of my title was considerable. make it as Karpov won the position
despite not even being a pawn up (his
The 12th world champion won a game where he had a sole extra c-pawn on
opponent had a doubled pawn), but
the queens ide and both sides had four pawns on the kingside. He also won
again I could not convert the material
another game like this against Van Wely.
advantage.

A.Karpov - P.Nikolic L. van Wely - A.Karpov

A.Karpov - P.Nikolic
Tilburg, 1 9 8 8

1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 li:lo b6 4 g3
A quick look in the database shows
that Karpov has had this position with
White 100 times in regular and rapid
games and lost only twice.
4 ... .i.a6 5 b3 .i.b7 6 .i.g2 .i.b4+
7 .i.d2 as 8 0-0 0-0

42 43
Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th Anatoly Karpov the 1 2 th

9 �c2 l:I.xeS 20 'it'a4? 1ic7 21 e5 tOd7 22 f4 1 2 ...'iixcJ

The start of a long manoeuvring b5! I was two points behind and had to

phase. Winning a pawn. try to win, even with Black.

9 ... cS 10 .tt d l tOa6 11 iLe3 a4 23 'ii a 3 bxc4 13 .llI. a 3 4:ldS! 14 libl '*f6 15 .llI. dJ
See diagram on page 42. h6
12 tOe3 axb3 13 axb3 dS?! 14 tOa4!
If 15 ... 'ifh6?! 16 b5.
Nicely applying pressure on the 24 lled! 4:lb6 25 lle3 g6 26 lld6
1 6 bs l:I.d8 1 7 iLb2 'ike7 18 lla4 ? !
queenside. Waiting passively did not offer much
hope either. This i s both imaginative and risky.
14 ... h6 15 'ifb2 lle8 16 tOeS l:I.b8 If 1 8 iLa3 ! '*f6. The alternative
26 ... .tt e8 27 h4 tOd5 28 l:I.e2 llaS
17 tOd3! dxc4 18 iLxb7 l:I.xb7 19 bxc4 29 .0 'iie5+ 30 <;t>h2 tOe3 3 1 l:1.ed2 1 8 . . . tOe5 ? ! is a risky way to play for a

.e7? This is a hacking sacrifice. Karpov win. 1 9 iLh7+ �h8 20 tOeS. Now
This loses a pawn. easily neutralises the ploy and wins. 1 9 .1l1.b2=.
29 �xfl e3+ 30 �g2 l:I.xcS 31 'ifbl 18 ... tOeS 19 iLh7+
l:I.bS 32 h4 'iWh5 33 .d3 l:I.fS 34 l:I.f1 Not 1 9 iLa3? tOe3.
lhfl 35 c,t>xfl "g4 36 �g2 1-0 1 9 ...�h8

Karpov had another game like this

and won it as well.

L. van Wely - A.Karpov

European Rapid 30 minute 3 1 ...c3
Championship, Cap d'Agde, 1 996 The c-pawn makes its decisive
advance.
32 l:I.d8+ <;t>g7 33 l:1.xc8 'iix c8 3 4 llc2
20 tOaxeS ! bxeS 2 1 llxa6 4:lg4 1 d4 4Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 tOo b6 4 g3 .ta6
4:lxc2 0-1
22 �cl exd4 23 iLxd4 5 b3 iLb4+ 6 .i.d2 .i.e7 7 .tg2 c6
8 iLc3 d5 9 tOeS tOfd7 10 4:lxd7 tOxd7 20 l:I.h4
V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
11 tOd2 0-0 1 2 0-0 tOf6 13 l:I.el c5 Kramnik moves against the king.
See diagram on page 42 . Game 1 2 , World Championship,
14 e4 CId4 15 iLxd4 dxc4 16 4:lxc4 Krarnnik could play on the c-file with
London 2000
20 l:I.c4 but 20 . . . .i.d7 followed by .llI. e 8
White wins a pawn and steadily 1 d4 4:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tOc3 iLb4 4 e3 keeps Black in the game. Going after
converts his advantage. 0-0 5 .i.d3 dS 6 4:l0 cS 7 0-0 dxe4 the king on the g-file with 20 l:tg4 1 ?
23 ... eS 8 iLxc4 tObd7 9 a3 exd4 10 axb4 dxeJ might have led t o some very exciting
11 bxd .c7 12 iLe2 1 ? tactics. 20 . . . eS ! 2 1 l:I.g3
Pre drag looks for counterplay.
Waiting passively with 23 . . .l:I.c8 ! ? may
have prolonged the game.
24 iLal e4 2S 4Jxb4 llxb4 26 eS l:I.bS
27 llad6 .gS
Trying to fish in muddy waters.
27 . . . e3 28 f3 tOf2 29 l:I. l d5 was also 1 6... iLxc4
hopeless. Karpov creates a weakness.
28 h3 ! tOxfl 17 bxc4 llc8 18 %lcl ..ieS 19 .txcS

44 45
Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h Anatoly Karpov the J 2,h

2 1 . . . e4 ! ! (2 J . . .lLlf6 22 lLlxe5 ! 2 7 "ifb2 V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov 3 1 ...lLla4?

[22 �xe5 lLlh5] 22 . . . .I:[d5 23 f4 lLlx.h7 If 27 "ifb7 'Wd6; or 27 lLlh4 'Wd6 ! Botvinnik Memorial rapidplay But Black blunders the pawn back,
24 lLlc6 'Wf8 25 �xg7+ and Kramni.k 27 ... .I:[bS 28 'Wa3 lLlb6 Moscow 200 1 after which his dream of winning is
prefers White In his Informant Karpov exchanged this at once. I did gone. If 3 1 . . . �c6? 32 llxc5=. Best was
analysis.) 22 lLle5 ! (22 lLld2 lLla4 ! ! ) 3 1 . . .l:tc8 which keeps the extra pawn
not have the opportunity to follow suit,
22.. .ltJf6 (22. ..'iPx.h7? 23 lLlc6) 2 3 �g6 ! and retains some chances of wiruting.
so I had to think about alternatives.
�e6 24 f3 ! with an unclear position. Kramni.k mentions this move, but also
2S . . . ltJb4 ! ? was promising. Placing the
20 ... f6 3 1 . . . c4 looks promising.
bishop on the long diagonal, just as
Not 20 . . . lLlf6? 2 1 �xf6 'Wxf6 22 .l:[f4.
Karpov had done, looks reasonable.
2 1 .1:[c4!
Vladimir wisely returns to the Then 29 �b l (29 'Wa7 'Wd6) 29 . . .1l.c6

queenside. 30 e4, intending 'We3.

2 1 . ..�d7 22 �a3?!
A trip to the edge of the board with
22 lLlh4 ! would have kept the position
balanced. White has enough play for
the pawn.
22 ... b6 23 �e4
I f 23 .l:[fc l �xb 5 !
23 ... a6!
A fter 23 ... .I:[acS 24 lLld4 !
25 .l:[fc I it is a matter of personal taste
which colour you prefer.
24 bxa6?
This is a serious mistake as it allows
the rook to come into play. After
24 lLlh4 �eS ; or 24 1lfc l axb5 2 5 �xc5
bxc5 26 .l:[xc5 and White has just
enough to hold.
24 ... .I:[xa6 25 �Ic5
Here 25 �xd5 .l:[xa3 !
(26 'Wxb6? lLla4) 26 ... �eS 27 �c6 and
it is difficult to tell whether or not there
is enough in the position to win.
25 ... bIc5 26 %:tfc1 .l:[a5!
See diagram on page 43.
Black is a safe pawn up and as
Karpov had won so convincingly with
the same structure, perhaps I became a
little too casual.
33 .l:[a8+ lLlf8 34 'ifc2 g6 35 g3 �g7
36 �g2 e5 37 1:I.a4 'ii'd 6 38 'ii'c4 lLle6
39 Wd5 'iib 8 40 1:I.a8 'iib 2 41 .l:[a2 Wc3
42 'tWd2 'ii'b3 43 Wd5 'ii'b s 44 .l:[a8 Wc7
45 .l:[a6 �d4 46 'tic6 'tWe7 47 l:ta8 'tWf6
48 'tic2 lLlg5 49 .l:a3 'We6 50 h4 'tWh3+ 32 .l:[xcS! .l:b2
5 1 �gl lLle6 52 .l:[b3 'ii'g4 53 'i!fd3 lLlc5 If 32 . . .I:[bb8 3 3 l::I. 5 c3.
�eS 54 'Wf3 'tixD 0- 1 . 33 ttJc4 'tWxc5 112-112
All the queenside pawns are gone
Back to the game and there is nothing left to play for. If
29 .1:[4c3 3 3 . . . l::I.xf2? 34 1.'tc8.
Not 29 .l:[xc5? when �c6 ! ! wins; nor
29 .l:[d4 ! ? .l:[cS.
29 ....I:[b4! 30 lLld2 A.Antunes - A.Karpov
Tilburg 1 994
Nor 3 0 �b l ?? when . . ..I:[a8 wins.
And if 30 'WaS lLla4.
1 ttJf3 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 d5 4 �g2
3 0 ... f5?
26 lLlh4 �e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 d4 dxc4 7 ttJeS ttJc6
This is too hasty. Also 30 . . . ltJa4?!
8 ttJxc6 bxc6 9 ttJa3 �xa3
allows 3 1 llxc5. However Kramnik
points out the beautiful 30 . . . �c6 ! ?,
3 1 �f3?
C . . .l:c8 is a good move as well)
Having little time left White misses
3 1 .l:[xc5 (3 1 ..i.xc6 .l:[xd2) 3 l . . ..I:[xe4
the draw ish simplification 3 1 .l:[xc5 ! .
3 2 'WaS lhd2 33 'Wxd2 �d7 with
Then 3 l . . .l::I.xe4 (3 l ....I:[b5 32 � D �e8
excellent wiIUling chances. 33 lLlb l ! ; 3 l . . ..I:[a4 32 'ii'b 2) 32 lLlxe4
fxe4 33 'ii'b4 ! and White wins the
I beat Vladimir from a very similar e4'pawn, which is enough to hold on.
position in the 200 I Botvinnik 3 3 . . . lLla4 (33 . . . 'tWd6 34 'Wxe4=)
Memorial, my first rapidplay match. 34 .l:[5c4 'ii'xb4 35 .l:[xb4.

46 47
Anatoly Karpov the 12'h Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h

10 bxa3 2S ...l:[e6? 44 l:lc7+ �f6 45 l:!.b7 Black has no time 53 .. .';Pc7 54 Ita3 �b6 55 naS l:tc3+
This somewhat awkward pawn Thougb tbis wins tbis game, be to defend fl therefore White gets away 56 �d4 l:[e4+ 57 'ite3 l:te3+ 58 �d4
structure often occurs in the Catalan misses a clearer path to victory by with it.) 4 1 l:tc4 (4 1 'ite2 l:l3xa4 l:te4+ 59 We3 l:te7
opening. 28 . . J:�b l ! ! 29 l:[xb l (29 'ii'c 2 l:[xfl + 42 1:xa4 l:[xa4 43 �d3 l:ta3)
10 .. �a6 11 �g5?!
. 30 'it>xfl 'itb I + 3 1 'iif e2 'ii'g2 wins.) 4 1 . . .l:t6xa4 42 l:[2xc3 1:lxa2 43 J:!.c7
Taking the pawn is the main line and 29 . . ...xf2+ 30 <'phI "xg3. �g6 44 h5+ 'itxh5 45 l:[xfl and White
is more natural. 29 l:[d4 "e2 3 0 l:[d2 'ii'fJ 3 1 Itd4 probably bolds.
11 ... b6 12 .lhf6 "](f6 13 �Ie6 'ii'e 2 32 l:ld2 "h5 40 ... l:[3xa4 41 l:[exe3 lha2 42 l:tb7
nabS 1 4 "a4 l:[b6 1 5 l:[fd} l:[dS l:[b6
1 6 �fJ e6 1 7 �g2 "e7 I S e3 nes
1 9 b4 �b5 20 �4 e5 21 dIeS

60 J:l.gS ? !
The subtle intermediate check
60 Itb8+ ! ! would at least force Karpov
to fight hard for the point. 60 . . . �a5

33 l:tb 1 l:td5 (after 60 . . . l:[b7 6 1 l:[g8 b4 62 'itd2 l:tc7

2 1 ...Ih:e5
Karpov creates a passed c-pawn.
22 ItdS+ Wh7 23 Itadl �e6 24 "e3
�xfJ+ 25 'ito'xfJ
See diagram on page 43.
Black's advantage has by no means
evaporated.
34 'ii' e 2+ 'iVg6 35 'ii'x g6+ 'it>xg6
36 l1e2 l:ld3 37 a4 na3 38 l:[b4 c3
39 'it>n l:la6
43 l:[xb6 axb6 44 l:[b3 l:ta6 45 e4
�f6 46 f4 �e7 47 �e2 Wd6 48 g4
l:[a2+ 49 'ite3 �e6 50 l:tc3+ �b7
51 l:[d3 l:[e2 52 h5 b5
63 g5 b3 64 l:[b8+ l1b7 65 lIg8 I think
White draws - by the way there is no
beautiful win by 65 l:[xb7+ �xb7 66 f5
exf5 67 g6 as after . . . fxg6 Black's king
is close enough to stop the e-pawn.)
6 1 l:[g8 b4 62 lhg7 b3 63 Itg8 l:!.b7
64 'iifd2 and White can hold as the
b-pawn can't be pushed because the
rook check on a8 saves White.

25 .. JH5+ 60 ... b4 61 'itd3 ? !

If 25 . . . �7+!? 26 e4 Itb2. With 61 'itd2 ! White has more
26 �g2 1Vb7+ 27 �gl �fJ 2S l:[n chances of getting behind the b-pawn.
6 1 . . .'ita7 ! (Karpov should play
differently from the game. After
6 l . ..b3? 62 J:!.b8+ lIb7 63 l1c8 ..ta6
40 l:tb3
53 e5? 64 �c I White has decent drawing
40 llg4+! ! would be an interesting
5 3 l:[d7+ would have produced a chances.) 62 l:td8 b3 63 l:[d3 b2 64 l:tb3
cbeck that gives better chances as it
better fight. 53 . . . l:tc7 54 l:td8 �b6 l:[b7 65 l:txb7+ �xb7 66 �c2 'itc6 and
drives the king further away from the
centre. 40 . . . 'it>h7 ! (40 . . .'it>f6 4 1 nf4+ 55 g5 b4 56 l:[g8 �b7 5 7 l:td8 and Black wins.

�e7 42 Itc4 It6xa4 43 112xc3 l:[xa2 (on White still has chances of holding the 61...b3 62 l:[bS+ l:[b7 63 nes 'ita7
43 . . .11xc3 44 l:[xa4 ! and White holds] game (57 l:[xg7?? b3 i). 64 l:[c1

48 49
AnalOly Karpov the 12th
64 .. J�b5!
Karpov's subtle play has provided his
king with a path to invade the kingside.
65 lIbl �b6 66 �c3 �c5 67 �b2
.l:l.b4 68 lIO si;>d5 69 .l:l.f3 si;>e4 70 lin
lIb7 71 lIf2 It>e3 72 !;to si;>e2 73 l:I.g l
�f2 0-1
V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
Game 1 2 , World Championship,
London 2000
1 lLlf3 lLlf6 2 c4 b6 3 g3 c5 4 �g2
�b7 5 0-0 g6
Once r drew a very important game
against Karpov with this variati on.
This was in the 23rd game of our third
match when r needed a draw to hold on
to my title - and I achieved my
obj ective with this particular English
opening.
6 lLlc3 �g7 7 d4 cxd4 8 'ihd4 d6
9 .l:l.dl lLlbd7 10 �e3 .l:l.c8 11 !;tacl 0-0
12 "h4 a6 13 lLle l ? ! �xg2 14 lLlIg2
':e8! 1 5 b3
If 1 5 �g5 ':c5 ! to prepare 1 6 . . . h6.
Then after 16 b4 l1e5! 17 f4 ':e6 Black
is okay.
15 ... •c7 16 �g5 'Wb7 17 lLle3 b 5
1 8 lLled5 bxc4 1 9 bIC4
50
Black has at least equalised by
isolating White's c-pawn.
19 ... h5 20 "f4 "c6 21 �If6! lLlIf6
n lLlxf6+
After 22 "e3 lLlxd5 23 cxd5 "c5 .
22...�If6 23 lLld5 �b2 24 ':bl �g7
25 "g5 �f8 26 ':dcl e6 27 lLlf6 .l:l.ed8
28 h4!
28 .....a8!
I f 2 8 . . ...c5 29 ':b7 !
2 9 c5!
Kramnik prefers to sacrifice the
c-pawn rather than let my rook get to
c5.
29 ...l:b:c5!
If 2 9 . . . dxc5 30 !;txc5
3 1 ':xc8=.
3 0 .l:l.xc5 �If6 31 "If6 dxc5
See diagram on page 43.
Almost the same pawn structure bas
occurred in the match again. This time
I decided not to give the pawn back.
32 Wh2! Wg8
33 ':b6!
This is a nasty move, White now
threatens simultaneously to take on a6
and e6.
33 ...!;te8
a) If 33 ... c4 34 1::tx e6 .l:l.d l 35 lIc6
holds.
b) Alternatively 33 .. .l::t b 8 34 �f3 !
'tWa7 3 5 ':c6 'tWb7 36 a4 lIc8 3 7 ':xc5!
as Kramnik pointed out.
c) If Black tries to go after White's
king with 33 ... 1:I.dl there is a draw.
Kramnik shows some remarkable lines.
34 e4 'fi'c8 35 'tWe5 ! ':d8 3 6 �g2 ! ? c4
37 g4! hxg4
e l ) 37 . . . c3 38 gxh5= c2? 39 h6 wins.
c2) 37 . . . Wh7 38 gxb5 (3 8 'iff6 'ifd7)
38 . . .':g8 39 hxg6+ ':xg6+ 40 �h3 ;
3 8 h5 gxh5 ( 3 8 .. .'�h7?! 39 "f6)
39 'tWg5+ ( 3 9 ':b7? f6 ! ) 3 9 . . .WfS
40 .l:l.xa6 ! and B lack's king is too
exposed to do anything.
34 'iff3?
�xf6 After 34 'it'e5? 'ifd5 . But 34 'tWc3 ! ,
blocking the c pawn earlier, was
stronger. 34 ... ':c8 (34 ... 'ife4 3 5 'ifd3 )
3 5 'tWc4 'ifd5 (35 . . . lIc6 36 'ife4; 35 ... a5
36 ':xe6 ! ) 36 'ti'xa6 ! .l:l.a8 37 'iWb5 c4
38 a4 and White gets away with it.
34 ... 'ifxf3
51
Anatoly Karpov the 12th
Not 34 ... 'ifc8? 35 ':c6=
35 exf3 ':c8 3 6 ':xa6 c4 37 .l:l.d6
37 ... c3?
Pushing the pawn too far. 37 ... W fS '
would have p u t much more of an
obstacle in White's path. White has
chances to survive but he must play
very carefully. I show Kramnik's line.
38 �g2 <j;; e 7 39 1:td l ':a8 (39 . . . e5!?
40 a4 ! ? ':a8 ! 41 !;ta l �d6 42 as
[42 �fl �c5 43 �e2 Wb4 44 lib I +
Wc3 wins] 42 . . . l:ta6 ! 7 [42 . . . �c5 43 a6
Wb6 44 llb 1 + Wxa6 45 Wf! ]
43 Wfl Wc5 44 'i!i>e2 'itb4 and White
has a really difficult task.) 40 J::rd4
(40 llc 1 .ll a4) 40 ... c3 (40 . . . .lla4 4 1 f4)
4 1 l:tc4 (4 1 a4 l:l:c8 42 l:tdl c2 43 1:I.e l
�d6 44 Wf! <j;; d 5 45 �e2 1:I.c3 ' )
4 1 . . .!;ta3 4 2 �fl 'itd6 43 'i!i>e2 (43 l:k8
Wd5 44 �e2 e5 ! [44 . . .Wd4 45 l:l:d8+]
45 �e3 f5 ) 43 . . J::tx a2+ (43 . . . �d5
44 llc7 �d4 45 .l:l.d7+) 44 We3 .l:l.a3 45
f4 and maybe this position can be held.
38 l:td 1 lla8
After 3 8 .. .'o1;>g7 39 Wg2 Wf6 40 f4 !
<j;; f5 4 1 <j;; f3 c2 (4 1 . . .1:ta8 42 l:tc l l:ta3
43 ':c2) 42 .ll c l llc3+ 43 �e2 'if;>e4
44 �d2 ':fJ 45 'i!i>e2=
39 llcl
Anatoly Karpov the 1 2rh Anatoly Karpov the J 2rh

43 .l:l. b 7 � e 8 4 4 .l:l.b8+ � e 7 4 S .l:l.b7+ c;t;>g5 (57 .. .'it>e6 58 l:txO <it>d5 [58 . . . e4 This was my last game with the
c;t>f6 46 1ti>n 59 l:tb3] 59 l:tf5=) 5 8 l:txO Iifg4 Black pieces as the reigning world
B etter was 46 f4 ! (58 ... e4 59 .l:l.f4) 59 .l:l.e3; or 55 . . . lifd5 ! ? champion.
46 ••• e5 47 l:[b6+ �f5 48 J:[b7 �e6 56 l:td8+ (56 f4 e4) 5 6. . .lifc4 (56. . .<;t>c5
49 l:I.b6+ Iti>fS 50 l:tb7 f6 57 fxg4 hxg4 5 8 l:tg8 .l:l.a4 59 life2=) Tal said once that Karpov was the
57 fxg4 hxg4 5 8 l:tg8 �d3 59 l:txg4 and honoured trainer of Azerbaij an. Yes ,
though the position is equal, White still Tal has a point a s I improved during my
has to be careful. matches with Karpov. On the other
56 l:tf8+ Iifg6? 57 l:tg8+ rJ;f5 hand you can see I lost games because
This allows a threefold repetition. of him. Had I won these two games the
39 . . .11:.:a2
After 57 . . .<it>f7 58 J:l.g5 <;t>f6 59 f4 exf4 aggregate score in our five World
I had to allow the proud c-pawn to
60 gxf4 ,I:U12 6 1 lifg 1 .l:l.h3 62 �g2 life6 Championship matches would not have
fall after all. From here on the position
63 1iff2=. been 2 1 wins 1 9 losses for me, but 23
is drawish. After 39 . . . .I:I.a3 40 �g2 rJ;g7
58 .l:l.f8+ th-I/z wins and 1 7 losses in my favour.
41 f4 <;t>f6 42 .1:1.c2 e5 43 c;t>0=.
40 .l:l.xc3
5 1 .1:1.g7
If 40 c;t>g2? l:I.a3 41 c;t>f1 c;t>g7 42 �e2
Unnecessarily providing Black with
c;t>f6 43 l:I.c2 c;t>f5 44 c;t>d3 e5 45 l:I.xc3
another chance. 5 1 .l:l.f7 ! was called for.
(45 rJ;e3 t:!.b3 46 'it'd3 .l:l.b2 wins)
SL.gS
45 ... .I:I.xc3+ 46 c;t>xc3 e4 47 fxe4+ c;t>xe4
If 5 l . . ..I:I.d2 5 2 11g8.
48 rJ;d2 c;t>o 49 c;t>e l f5 wins according
S2 hxgS fxgS S3 .l:l.g8 g4
to IlIescas.
After 5 3 ... h4 54 .l:l.f8+ rJ;g6 55 l:I.g8+
40 ... .I:I.xf2+ 41 c;t>gl l:I.a2
c;t>f6 56 gxh4 gxh4 57 .l:l.g4 h3 58 <;t>g l
h2+ 59 rJ;h 1 l:I.f2 60 .l:l.f4+ White holds
with the help of the stalemate motif.
54 l:[f8+ c;t>e6 55 l:[e8+

42 t:!. c7
42 f4 ! looks dodgy because of the
isolated king, however Black still can't
win. 42 . . . rJ;g7 43 t:!.c5 rJ;f6 44 c;t>f1 .l:l.d2
45 l:[a5 .l:l.d5 46 .l:l.a7 c;t>f5 47 .l:l.xf7+ 55 ... c;t>fS
c;t>g4 48 11 f6 c;t>o 49 �g l =. This was just not my World
42 .•. c;t>f8 Championship match. With 55 . . . c;t>f6 ! ?
If 42 . . . e5 43 l:[c5 f6 44 .l::t c 7 c;t>f8 I could still have created problems.
45 rJ;fj 11d2 46 l:[a7 J:[d8 47 c;t>e2 t:!.e8 However White can save the game with
48 c;t>e3 l:I.e7 49 .l::ta4 c;t>f7 50 f4. precise play. 56 .l:l.g8! gxO 57 .l::t f8+

52 53

Rob ert J ames Fisch er th e 1 1 th
Fischer won the title at the end of the
1 969- J 972 cycle. On his way to the
final he beat Taimanov and Larsen 6-0
and Petrosian 6'n-2',h. In the world
title match he dethroned Spassky
1 2 'h - 8 '.h which ended a 24 year-long
Soviet dominance of the World
Championship, which began in 1 948.
It was only natural that I should have
investigated Fischer's games deeply,
and the effect can be seen in my
repertoire with the Black pieces,
especially as we both played the
Najdorf most of the time. B obby also
had an opening repertoire which was
ahead of his time.
Intriguingly, he actually helped me
indirectly by not playing against
Karpov - whose name in English
means ' carp' and this darting fi sh
eluded the reluctant fisherman ! - as h e
would have strengthened Anatoly with
the experience of additional match­
play. Karpov would have had an even
A typically occurring situation in the main Ruy Lopez: White has a strong
e-pawn, kingside majority and central advantage - and B lack a good queenside.
R.Fischer - L.Stein
54
Robert James Fischer the 11th
14...exd4 15 cxd4 as Then 2 l . . ..Ihf3 ! 22 ltJxf3 c4 23 tiJd4
Black starts to undermine the centre. ..i.c5 24 .IT&.b2 'ifb6 and it is not easy to
16 bxa5 c5 17 e5 attack with White.
Fischer pins his hopes on the idea 2l...ltJb6?
that the e5-pawn provides space in the With his last three moves Stein has
centre and opens the way for White's strengthened the queens ide but
better chance to defeat me in our
pieces to irritate B lack's king. I n neglected to take precautions on the
matches.
my Predecessors book 1 7 ..i.b2 was other flank. 2 1 . . .l:te8 followed by tiJffl
Fischer'S influence included bringing recommended. ensures a p layable position.
more money into the game which also 17... dn5 18 dn5
was beneficial for me. However as you
will see from the following examples I
may have had even better results if I
had not followed his games so closely.
Let's see one of his games which is
well known and a focal point for me
later when I played against Karpov.
Fischer had a strong e-pawn, Black had
a good queenside. Below you see his
position first and then my own:
22 ltJfg5!
In one of my later games I also
R.Fischer - L.Stein F ischer starts operations against
adopted the idea of having an e-pawn
Sousse Interzonal 1 967 Black's king.
like this.
22.....i.xe4
1 e4 e5 2 ltJo ltJc6 3 ..i.b5 a6 4 ..i.a4 18...ltJd5
If 22 . . . h6 23 tiJh7 wins.
ltJf6 5 0-0 ..i.e7 6 l:te 1 b5 7 ..i.b3 d6 See diagram on page 54. 23 'ifxe4 g6 24 'ii'h4!
8 c3 0-0 9 h3 ..i.b7 10 d4 ltJa5 11 ic2
No more preparatory work is needed
ltJc4 12 b3 ltJb6 13 ltJbd2 ltJbd7 14 b4 19 tiJe4
White has to act quickly since if and Fischer forces matters with direct
White intends to transfer his knight
Black gets to an endgame his chances threats.
to a5.
are encouraging as he possesses a pawn 24...h5 25 'li'g3! tiJc4
maj ority on the queens ide. Not 25 . . . 'ifd4? 26 tiJxf7 J:hf7
19...ltJb4 27 ..i.xg6 when White has a devastating
After 1 9 . . . l:txa5 20 ltJeg5 h6 2 1 'ifd3 attack.
G.Kasparov - A.Karpov
g6, I showed that the tactical shot 26 ltJO?
22 tiJxf7 wins. (Fischer's 22 ltJe6 Fischer's move is slow. He could
is not so convincing because of land a potentially lethal harpoon by
22 . . . ltJb4 ! ) 22 . . .l:txf7 23 'li'xg6+ l:tg7 26 e6 ! ? f5 27 ltJf7 l:txf7 28 exf7+ Wxf7
24 'ife6+ �h8 25 'ifxh6+ �g8 26 e6 29 .IT&.xf5 gxf5 30 'iff3 Wg6 3 1 g4
tiJffl 2 7 l:te5 and White has a winning generating a strong attack. Even more
attack. And if 1 9 . . . c4 20 ..i.g5 ! deadly however is the sacrifice
20 ..i.bl lha5 21 'ife2 26 tiJxf7 ! which leads to a win after
Keres ' suggestion was 2 1 ltJeg5. 26 . . . .ll x f7 27 .IT&.xg6 11g7 28 ..i.h6 'lifE
55
Robert James Fischer the 11th Robert James Fischer the 11th

29 �xg7 .xg7 30 e6 h4 3 1 'ii'b 8+ .f8 33 l:[d7! .I1xe6 34 4Jg5 l1f6 35 � O ! In the next game I constructed very
32 �fl+ <llg 7 33 _f4. The most artistic way to win was much the same Spanish centre as
26 ... <ll g7 with 35 a3 . Then 35 . . . 4Jxa3 36 �e5 Fischer did against Stein. But, to put it
Upon 26 . . . 4Jd3 comes 27 l:[d 1 4Jxc I 4Jc4 37 � a l ! 4Jb6 3 8 l1b7 4Jc8 mildly, I should not have done this.
28 l:[xc 1 . 39 �b l !
27 .f4 l:[b8 35 ...l:[xf4 3 6 4Je6+ G.Kasparov - A.Karpov
Game 5, World Championship,
Moscow 1 985

35 a4 ! ! 4Jb2 3 6 l:[b l 4Jxa4 37 .e5 1 e4 e5 2 lLlo lLle6 3 �b5 a6 4 �a4

4Jf6 5 0-0 �e7 6 l:tel b5 7 �b3 d6
.e8 3 8 e7 Wbite has a winning attack.
30 �e4? 8 e3 0-0 9 h3 �b7 10 d4 l:te8 U lLlbd2
�f8 12 a4 �d7 13 axb5 axb5 14 nxa8
Sacrificing the knight with 3 0 4Jh4!
�xa8 15 d5 lLla5 16 jLa2 e6 17 b4
would have finished off Black.
.!Db7 18 e4 l:te8 19 dxc6
3 0 ... �xh4 3 1 .xh4 .xf5 (3 1 . . .•f6
3 2 .g3 .I1e8 3 3 � b l na7 34 �g5 After 19 'ife2 .!Dd8 20 �b2 bxc4
28 e6 ! 36 ... Wf6 2 1 .!Dxc4 'ilVa7! 22 l:tal cxdS 23 exdS
.xa l 35 �h6+ wins so nicely.)
Wbite has to hurry with his 32 .e7+ 33 .d8+ r:tg7 34 .c7+ �g8 With an exchange sacrifice Black �xd5 24 lLlxd6 �xd6 25 jLxd5 'iWxa I +
operations against the black king. 35 e7 wins as Fischer pointed out. stabilises his position and prolongs the B lack has compensation.
28 . . . f5 game considerably. To convert White's 19 ...•xc6
30 ...•.d4 31 �xf4 l:[e8?
After 2 8 . . . � f6 29 exfl �xa l This time another queens ide move advantage requires the technique that
30 f8=.+ .xf8 31 .c7+ ..t>g8 Fischer possesses.
was required. B ener was 3 1 . ..l:[xa2!
32 �xg6 4Jd5 33 'ii'b7 4Jf6 34 lle6 37 4JIf4 4Je5 3 8 l:[b7 �d6 39 wn
3 2 1ha2 4Jxa2 3 3 4Je5 g5 34 �g3 4Jb4
l:[a8 3 5 .xb5 4Jd6 3 6 'ii' b 1 �d4 3 5 4Jxc4 bxc4 36 �e5+ �f6 37 �d6 4Je2 40 l:[e4 4Jd4 41 l1b6 l1d8
3 7 4Jxd4 cxd4 38 'ii'b 3 l:[b8 3 9 .g3 h4 ne8 3 8 �xc5 4Jd3 39 �xd3 cxd3 42 4Jd5+ ..ti>f5
40 .g5 llb5 41 �fl+ wins as I pointed and Black can simplify to a tenable
out in the Predecessors book. endgame.
29 �If5! 32 l:[adl l:[a6
Wbite demolishes the pawn chain Regaining the extra pawn with
around the black king. 32 . . . .I1xa2 does not solve Black's
29 ... �f8 problem. After 33 nd7 l%.a6 34 �b l 20 e5?!
Stein settles for an endgame a pawn 4Jc6 35 �g5 Wbite is better. Just as in the Fischer game the
down which, however, sti l l requires developing move 20 �b2 was stronger.
spec ial skill to win. If 29 . . . 'ii'b 8 20 ... .!Dd8 21 jLh2 dxe5 22 bxe5
30 4Je5 ! (Hubner). Alternatively 'iVxe5 23 �xe5
29 . . . gxf5 3 0 .g3+ (30 ' .xf5 .e 8 43 4Je3+
See diagram on page 54.
3 1 4Je5 4Jxe5 32 .xe5+ .i. f6 33 .g3+ Fischer sealed this move .
..t>h7 34 .c7+ "e7 35 "xa5 �xal 43 .. .'i<>e6 44 �e2 ..ti>d7 45 �xb5+ When I captured the pawn I was
3 6 Wxb5 looks bener for White . ) lLlxb5 46 l:[xb5 ..t>e6 47 a4 � e 7 inspired by the Fischer game. Here, just
3 0 . . . <ll h 7 3 1 4Jg5+ �xg5 32 .i.xg5 4 8 We2 g 5 49 g 3 l1 a 8 5 0 l1b2 l:t f8 like the American champion, I had an
l1a3 ! 33 .f4 .f8 34 .11 ad 1 l:[d3 5 1 f4 gxf4 52 gxf4 4J f7 5 3 l:[e6+ 4Jd6 extra pawn in the centre while Black
(34 . . . 4Jd3 35 �g3) 54 f5 l:[a8 55 l:[d2 l:[134 56 f6 1-0 had an extra pawn on the queenside. I

56 57
Robert James Fischer the J ] Ih
was hoping to create an attack on
Karpov's king and even dared to think
that I would conduct the attack without
any mistakes. Maybe this distracted me
from the reality of the game.
23...lLld7 24 R.b2 'Wb4!
This intennediate move
undoubtedly strong as it allows White
no time to build up an attack on the
king. However I was still relaxed
because another famous Fischer game
sprung to mind - one which was very
similar to the present one. Here it is:
R.Fiseher - B.Spassky
Game 1 0, World Championship,
Reykjavik 1 972
26 .ltb3 axb5 27 'ii'f4 1:d7 28 lLle5
'ii'c 7 29 1:bd l 1:e7 30 it.xD+ 1:xf7
31 .xf7+ 'ii'x f7 32 lLlxD
3 3 1:xe4 �xD 34 l1d7+ �f6 3 5 1:b7
1:al + 3 6 �h2 it.d6+ 3 7 g3 b4 3 8 �g2
h5 3 9 tlb6 tld 1 40 1ti>f3 <l;f7 4 1 �e2
nd5 42 f4 g6 43 g4 hxg4 44 hxg4 g5
4 5 f5 it.e5 46 tlb5 <l;f6 4 7 tlexb4 it.d4
48 l:b6+ �e5 49 �f3 l1d8 50 1:b8 1:d7
5 1 l:t4b7 1:d6 52 1:b6 1:d7 53 1:g6 ¢>d5
54 l'hg5 it.e5 55 f6 c,t>d4 56 tlb 1 1 -0
2s lLlb3 ? !
B y defending one piece and attacking
another, you might think this kills two
birds with one stone. But the catapult is
pointing backwards. The queen should
have gone to the diagonal with 25 'ii'b l
as happens later in the game.
2S ...lLle5!
is
26 it.a l
I gave up material in order to ensure
play against the black king. It was
possible to hang on to the pawn by
26 lLlxc5 and then defend passively -
but I did not like to do that as after
26 . . ...xb2 27 1:e2 'ii'c 3 28 lLld3 Black
stands rather better with his two
bishops and distant passed pawn.
26 ... it.:xe4 27 lLlfd4 lLldb7 28 'ii'e2
lLld6
Karpov should have pinned my
queen to the defence of the a2-bishop
it.xe4 by 28 . . . 11a8 ! ? His extra pawn would
probably then be decisive.
29 lLlICS "xeS
58
Robert James Fischer the ll'h
3 0 'iig 4 Karpov likes to restrict bis opponents
Just like Fischer I create some play and often does so with a pin.
against the king. However, in my case 33 'ii' c l �e4 34 1:el 'liaS 35 it.b3
this proves to be insufficient. 'ii' a 8 ! ? 3 6 'iib 2 b4
30 ....l:te8 3 1 .l:tdl Karpov takes no risks and declines
If 3 1 "'f4 it.d5 ! the pawn on g2.
3 1 . .. it.g6! 37 .l:te3 it.g6 38 lhe8 'lixe8 39 'ii' c l
White no longer has any realistic llJe4 40 R.dS llJe5 4 1 lLlb3 lLld 3 0-\
attacking chances against the king. White has nothing for the pawn,
32 'ii'f4 'ilVb4 which is why I resigned.
Let's continue with another even more famous Fischer game - or should I
say endgame. This example of domination by the bishop in endgames is often
taught to young players. Here the opponent's pawns are fixed and the pawns
are positioned on both wings. My game which follows has similarities.
k.Fiseher - M.Taimanov G.Kasparov N . de Firmian
-
R.Fiseher - M.Talmanov 3 3 a4 llJe7 34 h3 llJe6 35 h4 h5
Game 4, Candidates match, 3 6 1:d3+ �c7 37 1:d5 f5 38 l:td2 J::tr 6
Vancouver 1 97 1 3 9 l:te2 �d7 40 l:te3 g6 41 �b5 J:ld6
4 2 <;f;>e2 <t>d8
1 e4 e5 2 lLlo lLlc6 3 d4 exd4
4 lLlxd4 'lie7 5 lLle3 e6 6 g3 a6 7 it.g2
lLlf6 8 0-0 lLlxd4 9 'ilfxd4 it.eS 10 R.f4
d6 1 1 'ilfd2 h6 1 2 .l:tadl eS 13 R.e3
�g4 1 4 it.xeS dxeS 15 0 �e6 1 6 f4
1:d8 1 7 lLldS �xdS 1 8 exd5 e4 1 9 l:tfe l
.l:txd5 2 0 l:xe4+ �d8 2 1 'ii'e2 .l:txdI +
22 'lixd 1 + 'lid7 23 "xd7+ �xd7
24 lle5 b6 25 .in as 26 �e4 1:1'8
27 �g2 �d6 28 �O lLld7 29 .l:te3 lLlb8
30 lld3+ �c7 3 1 c3 lLle6 32 .l:te3 �d6 43 l:td3!
59
Robert James Fischer the 11th
Fi scher exchanges rooks, after which
the bishop's domination over the knight
will be even more potent.
43 ... 'it>c7 44 1b:d6 <bId6 45 �d3
See diagram on page 59.
While has a winning advantage as
Black's kingside pawns are fixed on the
same colour square as the bishop and
he has a route for a queenside invasion.
45...lLle7 46 1t.e8 <bd5 47 1t.n+ �d6
48 <be4 �e6 49 1t.e8+ �b7
50 �b5
The way Fischer improves
position is quite beautiful.
50 ... lLlc8 51 ..IlLe6+ <be7 52 ..IlLd5 liJe7
53 ..IlLn �b7 54 ..IlLb3 �a7 5S ..IlLd l
<bb7 56 ..IlLf3+ <be7
57 ..t>a6
The white king invades.
57 ... lLlg8 58 ..IlLd5 lLle7 59 ..IlLe4 lLle6
60 ..IlLn lLle7 61 ..IlLe8 <bd8
Robert James Fischer the 11th
34 .. .'�xe6 35 'it>f3 'it>d6 44 c4 Black is in zugzwang and
Closing the queenside with 3 5 . . . ..IlLc l White still has a spare tempo at his
would be clever, but White is not disposal. 44 . . . �c7 45 Q;a7 'ifilc6 46 Wb8
obliged to allow that. 36 �e2 ..IlLxb2 and White invades.
37 �d2 ..IlLa3 38 1t.e3 White wins. 37 ...'ifile6 38 ..IlLel ..IlLg5 39 'iti>e4 �e3
36 �e2 ..1lLcl
62 ..IlLIg6!
White's passed pawn will be
decisivc.
62 ... lLlIg6 63 �xb6 'it>d7 64 <bIe5
lLle7 65 b4 aIb4 66 exb4 lLlc8 67 as
liJd6 68 b5 lLle4+ 69 �b6 �c8 70 'it>e6 40 b4!
�b8 71 b6 1 -0 Aiming to open the position for
Fischer played the entire endgame 37 'it>d3 invasion. As B lack is in zugzwang the
very powerfully. I stopped short of exchanging; game continuation is forced.
luckily it did not spoil anything. 40 ... cxb4 41 cxb4 axb4 42 ..IlLxb4
Now let's have a look at an endgame
After 37 ..IlLe3 the pawn ending was ..IlLel 43 �f8 �g5 44 ..IlLg7
with a very similar queenside pawn
simply winning. 37 . . . ..IlLxe3 38 'it;xe3 f6 As often happens in same coloured
structure - just like the famous Fischer­
(on 3 8 . . . c4 3 9 g 5 ! White soon promotes bishop endings, the weaker side is
Taimanov encounter.
the pawn to a lady.) 39 'it;d3 'iti>d7 caught by a zugzwang.
his
40 �c4 'ifilc6 41 b3 (White has a lot of 44 f6
G.Kasparov N. De Firmian
•••
spare moves to lose a tempo.) 4 \ . . .�d6 A sad necessity. Black has to put one
PCA!Intei-Grand Prix, New York 1 995
42 �b5 'ifilc7 43 �a6 (White has to be more pawn on the same colour as the
careful; he can 't do whatever he wants, opponent's bishop. 44 .. .'�d6 was not
e.g. 43 g5? fxg5 44 g4 [44 �a6 g4] any better. 45 Q;bS �e3 46 ..IlLf6.
44 . . . �b7 and Black holds.) 43 ... 'Otc6
(43 . . . c4 44 bxc4 �c6 45 �a7 Q;c7
46 c5 bxc5 47 c;t>a6 'Otc6 48 �xa5 and
White wins.)
34 ..1lLxe6!
My pawn structure is very similar to
the Fischer example. In that game
Bobby swapped rooks. I knew the
45 ..1lLh8!
I was lucky to have an extra square
bishop was not the same piece but I
followed his exchanging idea to invade. available on the diagonal.
60 61
Ro bert James Fischer the 1 1 th Robert James Fischer the 'llt!'

45...'it>d6 46 'it>b5 'it>c7 47 �g7 I followed F ischer. It was a close call 20 'iWg3
The bishop's objective is to get to dS but nevertheless I won! I usuall y play on the queenside
in order to net a pawn. In general I am not going to compare against the hedgehog set-up.
47...lti>b7 48 �f8 the champion's e ffectiveness at 20 �f6 21 �xf6 l'Llxf6 22 l:tfdl eS
.•.

Transferring the bishop to dS. damaging my career. Maybe this Black has obtained a fully playable
48 ...�c7 49 �e7 c;t>d7 50 �b4 �e3 'lucky' win makes Fischer's effect on game.
If 50 . . . 'it>c7 51 �e l �e3 only me less negative. 23 'it'h4 h6 24 ::td2 l'Lld7 25 �dl
temporarily prevents the bishop from Before I show the games in which I l'Lle5 26 f4 exf4 27 "ii'xf4 l'Lle6
invading. 52 g5 ! fxg5 5 3 g4 �c5 emulated Fischer's play, I would like to According to Vasiukov the position is
(53 �d4 54 �b4 White wins. ) 54 a5 present one game on a topic already equal after 27 . . .lle7 ! 2S ..te2 l:te5 .
40 ..t 13 !
'it>b7 55 axb6 (55 a6+ �a7 56 ..tc3 discussed in the Karpov section. This 28 fig3 fie7 29 l'LldS "ii' eS+ 30 � h l
The bishop is very nicely placed on
�d6 57 �b2 and B l ack is in game was also planted in my mind as ..te6 3 1 l:te3 l'LlgS 32 ..t e 2 ..txd5 the diagonal. If White creates a passed
zugzwang.) 5 5 . . . �fS setting up a well as Karpov's. White is just a little better after a-pawn it will get tremendous support
fortress can sometimes save an 32 ... :te8 3 3 h4 ! l'Llh7 34 l'Lle3 l:te6 from the long diagonal bishop. This is
identical coloured bishop ending. R.Fiseher - M.Taimanov 3 5 l'Llf5 l:tg6 36 "ii'e 3. what I wanted to do against Karpov, but
Though this time it is ineffective, such Palma de Mallorca Interzonal 1 970 33 1:txd5 fie7 ? ! the circumstances there were far less
This blocks the b7-rook. Better is fortunate than in Bobby's game.
a device can sometimes rescue the
1 e4 e5 2 l'Ll13 l'Lle6 3 d4 eId4 40 ...l:I.d7
weaker side. (55 . . . ..txb6 5 6 ..tb4 wins.) 3 3 . . .'ii'e 6! 34 e5 (34 b3 l:te7) 34 ... l:tbd7
4 l'LlId4 e6 5 l'Llb5 d6 6 e4 a6 7 l'Ll5c3 Black can live with his position after
On 56 �c3 �d6 57 �b2 Black is in 35 ..tf5 l'Lle6 when Black is safe.
l'Llf6 8 �e2 �e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 l'Lla3 b6 40 . . . l:tc7 ! 4 1 l:tb5 l:tc5.
zugzwang. 41 l:tbS l:td4?
11 �e3
This wins a pawn but allows White to
So far the players have followed
open the queens ide. Better was
main line theory. Now the Russian
4 \ . . ..l:dd8.
grandmaster deviates from the most
42 e5! l:I.xh4+ 43 Wgl ::tb4 44 l:txb4
common 1 1 . . . ..tb7. axb4 4 5 l:te4 bxc5
1l ... ..td7 12 l:tel 'Wb8 1 3 13 ':a7 Or 45 . . . l'Lld7 46 c6.
14 l'Lle2 .f;td8 1 5 'iWel ..te8
Black plays for b5. In the main line
they play for d5 or even 'it>h8 and ':gS
with g5.
16 "WIt'fl l:l.b7 1 7 a4
51 g5 ! ! 34 eS!
This stops b5 once and for all.
This is a very nice and instructive The more the position opens up, the
17 ... a5 1 8 l'Lld4 l'Llxd4 19 �xd4 l'Lld7
breakthrough. B lack's pieces are more the bishop has a chance to
overloaded. dominate the knight.
51 ...bg5 52 g4 'it>e6 53 'it>c6 34 ... dxeS 35 'it'xeS .l:db8? !
The simplest option. Taking on b6 Vasiukov ' s move 3 5 . . .l'Lle6 IS more
46 l:txcS
wins more quickly than going after the natural.
Now the bishop is a real powerhouse.
h6-pawn. 5 3 ..tfS would be winning as 36 ..tf5 "ii'x e5 37 l:tIe5 g6 38 h4 l'Llh7 46 .. .'l;>g7 47 as l:te8 48 ::tel ! l:e5
well, since after 5 3 ... <;Pf6 5 4 ..txh6 'it>n After 38 ... f6 Black could exchange 49 l:a 1 l:e7 50 �fl!
55 'it>c6 �d2 56 'it>d5 �f4 57 'it>d6 the light pieces. Four-rook endings tend The a-pawn and the bishop are
Black is in zugzwang. to give considerable drawing chances. indeed strong, however they still need
53 ... �d4 54 ..td6 1-0 39 ..tg4 l'Llf6 the help of the king.

62 63
Robert James Fischer the 1 1 ,h Robert James Fischer the J J,h

50 ... liJe8 51 a6 l1a7 52 'it>e3 liJc7 This move was inspired by one of 24 fxe5 f4 A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
53 �b7 Fischer's ideas - Random Chess. At the Linares 1 993
White buries the rook. start of the game the pieces are
53 ...liJe6 54 l1a5! 'it>f6 55 'it>d3 'it>e7 positioned on the first rank in irregular
56 'it>c4 'it>d6 or random positions. Somehow I must
have thought we were playing his brand
of chess, so I started to arrange my
p i eces on the first rank in an
unorthodox manner.
1 7 liJd2 g6
Of course the knight can't retreat to
b8 but liJe7-g6-h8 would have given 25 exd6
a most exciting Fischer Random I had to resign here, because 2 2 . . . c3 23 liJxa2 c2 24 'ikd4
position. B lack would then only have to
White has a decisive battery: 25 . . . fxg3 cxd l =1!t'+ 25 c;t;>xd l liJdc5 26 1!t'xd8
transfer the c8-bishop to a8.
26 'ii'e 8+ �ffl 27 1!t'xffl+ 1 -0 llxd8+ 27 ;tc2 1lJf2 0- 1
57 l1d5+ 'iii> c 7 58 'it>b5 1 -0 1 8 liJd5 f5 19 e:dS
A most unfortunate encounter.
The king soon invades on b6 as well
and this decides the outcome of the Incidentally Karpov himself also got After this effort my games against
game. caught by the Fischer Random virus. Karpov were far less regular than they
Here is his position: had been previously. . .
In the next game Fischer had a
negative effect on my play like no other
champion.
Fischer won a game i n a I c 4 c 5 English type position, where h i s opponent
V.Akopian - G.Kasparov had a c4-pawn, while he himself had a d6-pawn and undermined White's
Russia v The World, Moscow 2002 pawn structure with . . . a6 and . . . b5 and went on to win.
1 9 ... gxf5?
1 e4 c5 Z lilo lilc6 3 i.b5 e6 4 0-0
Preoccupied with thoughts of Fischer I played . . . b5 under very similar conditions in three games, losing all three,
liJge7 5 b3 a6 6 .i.:lC6 liJ:n6 7 .i.b2 b S Random Chess, I just wanted to keep against Romanishin (below) , Shneider and Anand (next page) .
8 c4 bxc4 9 bxc4 l1b8 1 0 .i.c3 d6 my pieces on the back rank. But better
1 1 liJa3! e5 1 2 liJcz .i.e7 1 3 liJe3 0-0 was 1 9 . . . .i.xf5 .
14 d3 'iVe8 15 lIb 1 lb:b1 1 6 'iix b1 20 f4! M.Aaron - R.Fischer O.Romanishin - G.Kasparov
Akopian puts pressure on the centre
and the king.
ZO .. Jln 21 �e1 l1g7 22 liJf3 it'g6
23 g3
Here it dawned on me that we were
playing ordinary chess and that I was
now simply lost.
Z3. ..nn
23 ... e4 was no better. 24 �xg7 'it>xg7
25 dxe4 fxe4 2 6 liJd2 �a5 27 �a 1 +
1 6...�d8? 'it>f7 2 8 [5 wins.
Robert James Fischer the 11th
A.Shneider - G.Kasparov
M.Aaron - R.Fiseher
Stockholm Interzonal 1 962
1 d4 tLJf6 2 e4 g6 3 tLJc3 �g7 4 e4 d6
5 f3 0-0 6 �e3 tLJbd7 7 .d2 e5 8 tLJge2
a6 9 tLJg3 ? ! cxd4 1 0 �xd4 tLJe5
11 �e2 �e6 12 tLJd5 b5!
See diagram on page 65.
Fischer undermines Black's pawn
structure.
1 3 cxb5 nbS
14 �xb5
White could not have gone a pawn up
by 1 4 tLJxf6+ since after 1 4 . . . �xf6
1 5 �xb5 comes the lovely tactical shot
15 tLJxf3+! 16 gxf3 �xd4 1 7 .xd4
Wa5+.
66
V.Anand - G.Kasparov
1 4 ...tLJxd5
1 4 . . . � x d5 ! ? 15 exd5 �h6
1 6 'it'xh6 'iVa5+ 1 7 'iVd2 'iVxb5 leaves
B lack slightly better.
1 5 exd5 �xd5 1 6 a4 e6 1 7 0-0 Wh4
1 8 tLJe2 nfc8 1 9 �e3
It would be more appropriate not to
give up the rwo bishops by 1 9 rIfe I .
Then after I 9 . . . �h6 20 l:txc8+ l:txc8
2 1 'iVe I 'iVg5 22 'ili'g3 'iVf5 the position
would be unclear.
1 9 ... tLJc4 20 �xe4 'ili'xc4 2 1 l:tfel
'ili'a6 22 llxe8+ nxc8 23 tLJc3 �e4
24 f4
After 24 �d4 �xd4+ 25 Wxd4 e5
2 6 'iVd2 (26 'iVe3 nb8) 2 6 . . . �b6+
27 'it>h I d5 it is easier to play Black's
position.
Robert James Fischer the 11th
8... tLJxd4
I beat him in the Kosmos 1 998 blitz
match with 8 . . .lLJg4.
9 'it'xd4 d6 1 0 'it'd3 a6 11 �e3 �d7
1 2 �d4 .i.e6 1 3 e4 l:le8 1 4 J:tfet neS
1 5 l:tadl 'it'a5 1 6 a3 b5
See diagram on page 65.
I also undermine the centre.
1 7 exb5 axb5
24 ... d5 25 �d4 �xd4+ 26 'iWxd4
'ifb7!
Fischer improves his position with
strong, natural moves.
27 'iWf2 ? ! �a6 28 l:tdl l:te4
1 8 e5!
I t 's a smart idea to weaken the
b5-pawn.
1 8 ... dxe5 19 �xc6 exd4!
I planned this exchange sacrifice.
29 J:{d2?
Unlike the Fischer game, here the
A bad blunder in a tough position.
b5-pawn is really weak after 1 9 . . . l:txc6
29 ...l:txe3 0- 1
20 l:txe5.
20 �xe8 dxe3
This was a convincing game, sO
decided to give the a6tb5 plan a try :
O.Romanishin - G.Kasparov
Moscow-4-teams 1 9 8 1
1 tLJf3 g6 2 d4 �g7 3 g3 tLJf6 4 �g2
0-0 5 c4 e5 6 0-0 cxd4 7 tLJxd4 tLJe6
8 tLJe3
I had a few irregular games against
Kramnik in this variation. Once he
dtew after playing an early d6 and .i.d7 2 1 �d7!
instead of castling - and once when I This subtle intermediate move forces
withdtew my knight to c2. the rook to a less effective square.
67
Robert James Fischer the 11th
2 1 ..Jld8 despite being the exchange down.)
Black has nothing for the exchange 27 . . .h6 2 8 h4 c2 (28.. .�xb4 29 l:td4
after 2 1 . . J:tb8 22 �xc3. If 2 1 . . .l:tc7 [29 g5 'ifg4+=] 29 . . . l:te7 30 l:txb4 l:txe5
Black can exchange all of White's 3 1 l:txe5 �xb4 32 �a4 [32 D?? c2]
queens ide pawns, but only just - and it 32 . . .iLd6) 29 l:ta l (29 g5 cxd l =�=)
requires very precise calculation. But 29 . . . �xal 3 0 �xa l (30 l:txal
there is no point entering into this when
there is a more comfortable line in
22 b41 �xa3 23 �xb5
30 ... iLd6 ! ! 31 �xf6+ 'it>xf6 32 l:tc I
l:tc7 B l ack is safe.) 30 . . . l:txa l 3 1 l:txal
ltJd5 ( B lack can also draw by
2 3 . . .�fB ! ! (After 23 . . . l:tc8 24 �a6 3 1 . . .iLxb4 as well as White has no time
White is better.) 24 �d8 (24 l:tb I �a2 to keep all his kingside pawns. 32 l:te l
25 .l:r.e2 [25 �d8 ltJe4 26 l:tn ltJxf2 ! ltJxg4 33 l:txc2 h5) 32 lLa4 ltJxb4
27 na l ltJh3+ 28 'it>h l �e6 29 l:tae l 3 3 11c l �d6 and Black has no problem
�a2 and White is unable to take the at all.
rook, so Black is not worse.] 25 . . . c2 2 2 'ifxb5
26 l:tc I ltJd5 ! Black wins the b-pawn
and survives. 27 .l:r.exc2 ltJxb4 and
Black gets away with it.) 24 . . . l:ta7
25 'ifd4 e 5 ! 26 'ifxe5
2 2 .....c 7 ?
After 22 . . . �xb5 23 �xb5 nb8
24 bxc3 (upon 24 a4 cxb2 the pawn on
b2 is really strong and compensates for
26 .. ';!?g7 ! ! 27 g4 (27 �d4 I.%b7 the exchange. After 25 l:te2 ltJd5
[27 ... ..Ii.xb4) 2 8 l:ta l �xb4 29 �xb4 White's advantage is symbolic.)
�xb4 30 �d3 .ltc5 and Black holds 24 ... l:txb5 25 lhe7 Now one can see
68
why my text move was a big mistake.
Black still has the rook to hold the
queens ide pawns until his minor pieces
come over to help.
23 bxe3 l:txd7 24 l:txd7 �xd7
2S 'ifxd7 ltJxd7
26 l:txe7
Black has no pieces on the queens ide
to hold back White's pawns.
26 ... ltJb6
After 26 ... ltJc5 27 .l:te8+ �fB 2 8 l:ta8
ltJe4 29 a4 Black is in trouble as well.
27 l:tb7 ltJa4 2 8 l1b8+ .tfB 29 c4
�g7 3 0 �g2 �d6 31 l:ta8 ltJb2
32 a4 ltJxc4 33 as ltJeS?
Taking the pawn was possible, but it
offers no chances of holding the game.
r had virtually the same position against
Speelman in Graz 198 1 and easily
converted my advantage. However, if
White 's pawn were on h4 and Black
had one on h5 that might be a draw.
69
Robert James Fischer the J J th
34 1Ie8!
Now r can't even sacri fice a single
one of my pieces.
1 0
-
A.Shneider - G.Kasparov
EU Cup, Lyon 1 994
1 d4 ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltJf3 �g7 4 g3 eS
S �g2 cxd4 6 ltJxd4 0-0 7 0-0 ltJc6
8 ltJc3 ltJxd4 9 'i!fxd4 d6
10 Wd3
I knew that Fis cher had beaten
Spassky in the 8th game of their 1 972
match but had an idea I wanted to try
out to combat Fischer's plan. I must
admit that those games where two
champions played each other always
gave me such a headache. Which
champion to follow? When I began
to realise that they could also be
inaccurate even when they won, then it
became even more confusing.
10 ... a6 11 .td2 nb8 12 l:tacl bS
See diagram on page 66.
13 b3
Oops, what to do now - they took on
b5 in the previous examples.
13 . . .ius
I wanted to close the diagonal,
thinking it was worth a tempo.
Robert James Fischer the 11th
14 e4 Ji(.d7 IS h3 ! ?
This stops . . . tLJ g4 .
IS ... bxe4 16 it'xe4 'il'aS
1 6 . . . jtlJ6 is le ss pro vocat ive.
17 it'd3 it'a3?
18 ne2! Ji(.bS?
I t m ay seem weird but perhaps
retreating with the queen
objectively stronger than this mov e .
Not I S . . . nfcS? when 1 9 tLJb I ! traps the
queen.
19 tLJxbS axbS 20 nc7 e6 2 1 �e3!
nbe8
Other moves were miserable as well.
a) 2 l . . .'Wxa2? 22 l:ta7 'i!fb2 23 iLd4
wins.
b) 2 1 . . .lla8 22 nfc I it'xa2 23 eS
hurts.
c) 2 l . . .nfc8 22 l:: a7 (22 nfc l l:txc7
23 nxc7 tLJe8 (or 23 . . .it'xa2 24 l:ta7
'il'b2 2S 'il'xd6) 24 na7 iVb2) 22...�4
23 11 d l tLJe8 and Black is passive.
22 l:: a 7 iVb4
Robert James Fischer the 11 tn
23 11dl tLJe8 In the preceding game (against
Here 23 . . . 11fd8 24 �b6 (24 a3 it'c3 Shneider) White did not take and that
2S it'xbS 11bS 26 l:txd6 wins prettily.) led to trouble. Maybe it was primarily
24 . . . l:td7 2S a3 it'c3 26 it'xc3 .Ihc3 because of that game th a t I
27 l:ta8+ Ji(.f8 28 iLd4 and Black must
su b co ns c i ous ly did not expect my
resign.
opponent to capture here. It was better
24 a3 'ifc3 2S it'xbS iVb2 26 it'd3
to stop the h-pawn with 2 1 .. . hS.
Simpler is 26 b4.
26 .. J:[c3 27 �1 "'xb3 28 'ilt'xb3 22 nbS
l:t1b3 Taking the b5 -pawn simply wi ns.
13 ... 1<.g4
Perhaps it is would be more efficient Black doesn·t lose just one pawn, but
to prepare bS, e.g. by 1 3 . . .lhbS 14 h3 two.
bS. 22 ... axbS 23 lOxbS tLJbc6 24 a3 dS
14 1!t'e3 lOd7 IS lOdS iLxb2 1 6 l:t1b2 25 exdS AxdS 26 nxdS exd5 27 b4
1<.1f3 17 1<.xf3 e6 IS lOe3 'iWa4
was
29 a4
In Fischer's game the queenside
pawns played no role. My opponent,
unlike Fischer 's, opened the back rank,
so there was no real hope.
1 8 ...l:td8? 2S lhdS 1-0
29 ..• hS 30 as l:ta3 31 a6 1<.eS
This is too passive. Usually playing a
32 1<.h6 1<.g7 33 iLgS iLf6 34 1<.d6
dynamic move like 1 8 . . . bS I ? would There are many elements to Fischer's
tLJIf6 3S l:t1d6 l:tal + 36 'iPh2 11a2
come naturally to me. Fischer also did contributions to chess culture, some
37 eS tLJh7 38 l:: a d7 111f2 39 l:td2 1 -0
not move his centre much, maybe that of which are quite complex. However,
is why I postponed it. 1 9 l:txd6 tLJceS in pure chess terms, perhaps his
V.Anand - G.Kasparov
2 0 1<.e2 (20 l:tbd2 lOf6 2 1 cS 'tWa3) contribution t o his own pet opening -
PCAlIntel-Grand Prix, Moscow 1 995
2 0 . . . bxc4 2 1 b4 'iWa3 2 2 'iWd2 as 23 bS the Najdorf - is the biggest. He adop tcd
lOd3 and Black is i n the game. it in almost all his gamcs when faced
1 e4 eS 2 tLJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'iWxd4
1 9 l:tbd2 ! ? with 1 e4. I employed some other
In 1 999 Peter Svidler tried this line
When the rook took on b 2 , i t was variations at times but the Najdorf was
against me. That time I won.
simultaneously building up White's my most common response.
4 ...1<.d7 S c4 tLJe6 6 'il'd2 g6 7 iLe2!?
position. Suddenly the d6-pawn is
Anand now stops 7 . . . Ji(.h6, as 8 'ilt'c3 Fischer was so good at taking pawns
vulnerable.
is then possible. and calculating precisely. I also took
1 9 ... lOdeS 20 1<.e2 tLJb4 21 h4 b5??
7 ...iLg7 8 0-0 lOf6 9 1Oe3 0-0 10 Abl the eS-pawn oncc . . . but let's start with
a6 11 b3 'WaS 1 2 Ji(.b2 nfe8 13 nfdl See diagram on page 66. Fischer's game.
70 71
Robert James Fischer the 11th
Fischer took the centre pawn
on e5 with his knight and
calculated precisely to win.
So I decided I would try the
same thing.
H.Lehmann - R.Fiseher
H.Lehmann - R.Fiseher
Capablanca Memorial, Havana 1 965
1 e4 cS 2 ltJo d6 3 d4 nd4 4 ltJxd4
ltJr6 5 ltJc3 a6 6 il..e2 ltJbd7 7 0-0
I had a nice and in my opinion very
instructive win against 7 a4, as played
by Short in the Moscow Olympiad
1 994. White should try to follow my
plan despite the different move order.
G.Kasparov - N.Short
Moscow Olympiad 1 994
I e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4
ltJf6 5 ltJc3 a6 6 1I..e2 e6 7 f4 il..e7
8 0-0 ,*,c7 9 ,*,e I ltJbd7 1 0 11.. £3 0-0
72
B.Lanen - R.Fischer
Velibekov - G.Kasparov
1 1 'i!7h l 'it'h8 1 2 a4 nb8 1 3 g4 b6 14 g5
tOeS 1 5 1I.. g 2 JiLb7 1 6 b3 ir'dS 1 7 h4 g6
I S 1I..b2
I S . . . ltJg7 1 9 I!.d l I!.cS 20 f5 c5 21 f6
exd4 22 fxe7 'i!t'xe7 2 3 11xd4 f6 24 ir'd2
fxg5 25 llxfB+ llxfB 26 llxd6 ltJe5
27 lhb6 gxh4 28 ltJd5 1I.. xd5 29 'it'xd5
lle8 30 1I.. h 3 'Wic7 31 ':c6 llxc6
32 1I.. xe6 ltJc6 33 'Wig5 'iVd6 34 1I.. d 5
ltJb4 3 5 'iVf6 'ii'xf6 3 6 1I.. x f6 ltJxc2
37 1I..c 3 h6 38 b4 �h7 39 b5 axb5
40 axb5 ltJh5 4 1 b6 ltJg3+ 42 �h2 1 -0 .
Back t o the Fischer game.
7... e6 8 f4 bS 9 11.. f3 JiLb7
1 0 eS
White feels like forcing the issue
without delay.
10...il.. xo 11 ltJxo dxeS 12 fxeS
ltJg4 13 'Wi e2 b4 14 ltJe4
White scores well without sacrificing
the e5-pawn. He could opt for 1 4 ltJa4.
14 ...ltJgxeS 15 ltJxeS ltJxeS
See diagram on page 72.
16 ltJgS
White has to react quickly since if
Black castles then that's it.
16...�6+ 17 <Jo>hl
73
Robert James Fischer the J J th
17...�S!
Gaining an important tempo.
18 'life! il.. e7 19 b3 0-0
Fischer has survived and the win was
just a matter of time.
20 a4 'WieS 21 'ii' e2 :tae8 22 e4 bllC3
23 1I..a3 'iVe7 24 1I.. xe7 'iWxe7 25 'iWxeS
':cS
Fischer calculated so well.
26 'Wie2 1hgS 27 "iVxa6 'ifb4 28 ':fbl
l:d8 29 as b6 30 'lIfc4 'ilhc4 31 bxc4
c2 32 .l:!.c1 0-1
B.Larsen - R.Fischer
Game 6, Candidates match,
Denver 1 97 1
1 f4 cS 2 ltJo g6 3 e4 1/..g7 4 il.. e2
ltJc6 5 0-0 d6 6 d3 e6 7 ltJa3 ltJge7 8 c3
0-0 9 il.. e3 a6 10 d4 cxd4 n ltJxd4 bS
12 ltJxc6
1 2 ...ltJxc6
Black has equalised effortlessly.
13 'ii'd2 'Wie7 14 l:adl ':d8 15 ltJc2
l:b8 16 a3 ltJaS 17 eS
At this point the match stood at 5-0 -
such a shock for Larsen. Nevertheless,
he presses on as he has nothing really to
lose.
17...1I.. rs 18 b4 ltJc6 19 ltJd4 dIeS
20 fxeS ltJxeS
See diagram on page 72.
Robert James Fischer the 1 1 th Robert James Fischer the 11 th

Fischer again takes th e e5-pawn in a 30 1:[xf7 is one way to draw. Then 38 It'JxgS :t xe1 39 1:[ x e 1 ..I1. dS 40 1:[ e8+ such a good player. 26 . . . hS 27 .t g l
S icilian. 30 .. '.Pxf7 3 1 1:[fl + ltfS 32 "xh7+. �g7 0-1 It'J e 7 2 8 � d 3 It'J d S 29 .i. d 2 �e7
21 � gS 1:[ dS 22 'iff4 � g7 23 b4 30 It'Jxe6 is another. Then after 30 Wf2 ..I1.c5+ 3 1 We2 �d6 3 2 c4 bxc4
1:[ b7? ! 30 . . . .i.xe6 3 1 1:[xd5 �xd5 32 "g5+. Karpov also took an e5-pawn and 33 .i.xc4 �xg3 34 .i.xa6 It'Jf4+
Alternatively, 23 . . . 'ifxc3 ! and White 30 f5 31 "f6??
... went on to win. 35 �xf4 �xf4 36 It'Je3 gS 37 It'Jd2 fS
has almost nothing for the sacrificed Larsen fm al ly cracks. How else to 3 8 a4 <ofi>f7 39 It'Jdc4 J:b8 40 It'Jc2 g4
materiaL explain why a world-class p l ay er V.Ivanehu k - A.Karpov 4 1 It'Jd4 h4 42 lt'Jc6 :ta8 43 �b5
24 �f6? �xf6 25 "xf6 makes a losing move like this. S ic ilian tournament,
3 1 �h2 allows the knight to move. Buenos Aires 1 994
3 l . . . ..c7 (3 1 . . . .i.c8?? 32 It'Jxe6 wins.)
32 "gS+ 'iit f7 3 3 'iVh5+ and there is I e4 c5 2 It'Jf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 It'Jxd4
another perpetual. It'Jc6 5 It'Jc3 �c7 6 .i.e2 a6 7 0-0 It'Jf6
After 3 1 'ii'g S+ 'it>f7 32 'iVh5+ Black's 8 <ofi>h I �e7 9 f4 d6 1 0 .i.e3 0-0 1 1 'ili'e I
king should not try to run away from .i.d7 1 2 'ili'g3 c;Ph8 1 3 1:[ad I ltac8
the checks by 32 . . �e7 33 "g5+ �d6? 14 It'Jf] It'Jb4 1 5 It'Je l bS 1 6 a3 It'Jc6
1 7 e5 dxe5 1 8 fxe5 'ifxe5

2s ... ihc3 26 hS gxbS 43 . . . h3 44 gxh3 gxh3 4S lt'J6e5+ <ofi>f6

After 26 . . .l:hd4 27 "xe5 1:[d3 46 It'Jd7+ 'it>e7 47 It'Jdb6 :th8 48 .i.c6
28 iH4 Ihd l 29 ltxd l �d7 3 0 1:[d3 h2 49 a5 ..I1.b8 50 a6 c;Pd8 5 1 ..I1.h I :tg8
White has compensation. 52 It'Je5 'i;c7 0- 1
27 �hl
27 It'Jxe6 simp l i fies to an equal Of course I too developed an appetite
p o si ti on after 27 . . . �xe6 (27 . . ...e3+ for swallowing the e5-pawn in the
28 �h2 �xe6 29 1:[xd5 �xd5 . . . as 34 :txf5 ! ! and suddenly Black's Sicilian.
30 .d8+) 28 lhd5 �xd5 29 'ii'd 8+. king is under flIe.
27 ... lt'J g4 28 �xg4 hxg4 29 " h6 3 1 ...�c8 32 1:[ff1 19 �f4 'ili'c5 20 .i.e3 'ilke5 2 1 1:[xf6 Velibekov - G.Kasparov
�d7 'ifxg3 22 hxg3 .i.xf6 23 l:[xd7 �g8 USSR 1 97 6
24 It'Jd 1 1:[fd8 25 1:[xd8+ l:[xd8

1 e4 c5 2 It'Jf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 It'J xd4

It'J f6 5 It'Jc3 d6 6 �e2 a6 7 0-0 It'J bd7
8 f4 b5 9 �f3 �b7 10 a3
My opponent may have known the
Fischer game.
10 •e7 1 1 <;;P h I
...

I t would also b e nice t o know

whether he was aware of the following
32 . 1:[17
. .

game between two former champions .

30 1:[ f4 It's all over now.
Larsen refuses to force a perpetual, 33 .h6 �b7 34 It'J xe6 "f6 3S "e3 26 It'Jf3 It is hard to imagine how After I I 'i¥e l �e7 1 2 Wh l J:b8 1 3 b3

still hoping to break his duck. lI e7 36 lI del lI d6 37 "g5+ 'ifIg5 Karpov can win this endgame against 0-0 1 4 �b2 :tfe8 I S 'ili'g3 ..11. f8

74 75
Robert James Fischer the ]J th
1 6 nae l e5 1 7 llJf5 �h8 1 8 'ifh4
exf4 1 9 'it'xf4 lLle5 20 J:.e3 g6 2 1 llJh6
iLg7 22 llJd5 lLlxd5 23 exd5 f6 24 �e4
g5 25 'ii' f5 iLxh6 26 'ii' xf6+ iLg7
27 -.f5 llJg6 2 8 l:[h3
28 . . . iLxb2 Black is winning.
29 'ilVxg6 J:.e7 30 nh6 11g8 3 1 'ilVf5 �c8
32 'ii'f3 g4 3 3 -.d3 �e5 34 c4 bxc4
35 bxc4 l:[eg7 36 c5 dxc5 37 d6 'it'a7
3 8 iLd5 nd8 3 9 'li'e4 iLd4 40 'li'f4
40 . . . ngd7?? (40 . . . -.d7 was wilUling. )
4 1 nf6 ! 1 -0 Tal-Smyslov, Candidates,
76
Yugoslavia 1 9 5 9 . What a hacking
game.
1 l ... h5?!
This is a risky move!
1 2 �e3 llJ c5 13 e5 dIe5 1 4 fIe5 llJ g4
1 5 �xb7 'ilV xh7 1 6 iL g5 llJxe5
I took the pawn - just as Fischer liked
to do.
1 7 'ilVe2 llJcd7 1 8 J:. adl �e7 19 llJ e4
See diagram on page 72.
Suddenly Black has difficulty
finding a continuation.
1 9 ... 'Ii'c7 20 iL xe7 �xe7
Steinitz didn't mind placing his king
in the centre.
2 1 llJ g5 J:. afS 22 'ii' e l
2 2 ... llJc5??
This is a dreadful mistake. I came to
the conclusion that it is not as simple to
take the e 5-pawn as one may think.
23 'li'xe5! 1-0
When the King's Indian becomes a Benko Gambit. . .
M.Cuellar - R.Fischer
The Najdorf was my pet opening.
whereas the Benko Gambit was a rare
choice. I played it only a few times.
I should clarify that the Benko type
of position in the King's Indian
sometimes transposes to the Benko and
m then a similar pawn sacrifice occurs.
M.Cue lIar - R.Fischer
Stockholm Interzonal 1 962
1 d4 llJ f6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 iL g7 4 �g2
0-0 5 llJf3 d6 6 0-0 llJ c6 7 llJc3 .i.fS
8 d5 llJ a5 9 llJ d4 �d7 1 0 'ifd3 c5
1 1 llJ b3 llJg4 1 2 f4
1 2 ... b5
This pawn sacrifice is rather a
surprise as the knight can capture as
77
Robert James Fischer the 11th
V.Ivanchuk - G.Kasparov
well. On the other hand, I already
hinted that a Benko type pawn sacrifice
might occur.
1 3 llJxa5 'ii'xa5 1 4 llJ xb5 �xb5
15 cxb5 l1 fb8 1 6 �f3 llJf6 1 7 a4 a6
See diagram above!
1 8 bxa6
After 1 8 iLd2 ' ? 'tib6 I 9 e3 .
1 8 ...'it'x a6
For players who do not know the
Benko, it comes as a small surprise that
Black exchanges pieces when he is a
pawn down. But the idea has its logic.
Black exchanges in order to clear
squares for an invasion by his well­
positioned pieces. Black has no need to
fear the endgame.
Robert James Fischer the 1 1 th
19 lIa3 -.xd3 20 exd3 J:tb4 21 a5
21 b3 ' ? keeps the pawn, but Fischer
would have compensation anyway.
21 ...J:lbS
22 �d2 1hb2
B l ack recovers the pawn which
makes him feel more comfortable,
however he is not yet better as the
white a-pawn stymies him and h i s
opponent's position is not loose enough
to invade.
23 �c3 l:I.b7 24 lIet lLle8 2S �d2
This defends a5 but allows Black's
dark-squared bishop to assume
dominating role.
25...1!;>f8 26 �dl llb2 27 �c1 �d4+
28 1!;>ht lln
White has the usual problem in the
Benko of keeping his position together.
29 .i.g4 lLlf6 30 �h3 J:tc2 3 1 a6 J:ta7
32 �c8
If 32 .i.g2 lLlg4.
Robert James Fischer the 11th
32 ... lLlxdS IS axbS 22 'it>xf2 c4 23 b4 iVa7 is unpleasant for
Black moves ahead in material and The pawn formation is s l ightly White) 20 . . .'iIt'xb5 2 1 lLlac3 'i!fa6 is
White's position deteriorates very different from that in the Fischer game. lovely for Black.
quickly. I s ... lLl hS 18 b3 e6 19 dxe6 11xe6!?
33 J:tb3 lLlb4 34 fS gxfS 3S �gS e6 Black could try swapping pieces on After 19 ... fxe6 ! ? comes 20 .li.e3 .
36 .i.d8 J:ta8 37 .li.b6 lhc8 0-1 the queenside with 15 ... lLla4 ! ? 20 �e3 �xe3 21 'i!ixe3 dS
1 6 ltbl
I beat B areev with the Benko at
After 1 6 0-0 �d4+ 1 7 �h I �xc3
Linares 1 994 and in the last round of
I S bxc3 f6 1 9 � h6 11fbS Black bas
the Dubai Olympiad I defeated
compensation in an unusual form.
Sclunidt when the Soviet Union needed
16 . .i.d4
. .
to win 4-0. Evgeny took the pawn
I also manage to put my bishop on
whereas Schmidt kept the position
the dominating d4-square.
c losed. Despite these pl easant
17 �h6
memories, when I think of the Benko
Gambit it is the Fischer effect that is the
most pronounced and it really hurts.
22 b4
The next defeat helped Karpov to win
Not 2 2 'i!fxc5? lLlf4 2 3 0-0 d4 !
another Linares tournament.
24 'il'xd4 'llVxa2 25 llf2 (25 lLlxa2??
V.lvanchuk G.Kasparov
-
lLle2+) 25 .. .'iIt'a5 and this time the three
Linares 1 99 7 pawns are not enough for the piece.
22 .. :ika3? !
I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 �g7 4 e4 d6 After 22 . . . cxb4 23 lLlxb4 dxe4 24 0-0
a S f3 0-0 6 .li.g5 a6 7 'Wd2 c5 8 dS bS exD 25 'il'xD Black should be able to
9 exbs iUbd7 10 a4 fr'aS l l lLlge2 lLlb6 17 ...11fe8 live with his small disadvantage.
Bobby put his rook here too. Of 23 hxcS lLlc4
See diagram on page 77. course he was defending the e7-pawn I f 2 3 . . . dxe4 24 0-0 exD 25 'iWd4 fxg2
whereas I was looking for dynamic 26 1112 lLla4 27 c6 White's passed
12 lLlcl nbS 13 �xbS .li.a6 play, but his rook move affected me and pawns are menacing.
14 lLlla2 played a negative role in my decision 24 'ii'd 4 lLlf4
If 14 �xa6 'itxa6 ! making.
1 4 ... .li.xbS Maybe the simplest way was to exert
pressure on the queenside with
1 7 ... J:tfb S ! ? and try to gobble up the
b5-pawn. I S b3 lLld7 1 9 .i.e3 ( 1 9 b4
'iit'a 3; 1 9 �e2 lLle5) 1 9 . . . .i.xe3 20 'iit'x e3
J:txb5 and B lack i s better. I also
suggested the dynamic attempt I 7 ... f5 ?
sacrificing the exchange. Then I S .i.xfS
ltxfS 1 9 b3 ( 1 9 b4 ' ? 'iWa7 and Black has
nice play for the material.) 1 9 ... fxe4
20 lLlxe4 (20 fxe4 1:lf2 2 1 'ilVxf2 .i.xf2+ 2S O-O!
78 79
Robert James Fischer the 11th

Ivanchuk simply sacrifices a knight 2 7 tUxd5

to neutralise B l ack's play and get his
White's connected passed pawns
passed pawns rolling.
can't be contained and he has a
25 ... 1ha2 26 .un!
Not 26 tUxa2? because of tU e2 +. completely winning position.
Boris Sp assky the 1 0th
26 .. J/Va3 27 ..JWd3 28 'iVxd3 tUxd3 29 l:!.c2
tUa3 30 1:1a2 tUxc5
The tenth world champion reigned that mantle, and in 1 972 won the title.
After 30 . . . tUxb l 31 l:!.xa8+ IPg7 from 1 969 to 1 972. He defeated Tigran Spassky, like Capablanca, Euwe,
32 c6 wins. Petrosian at the second time of asking. Smyslov, Tal , Fischer and Topalov

31 nbal f5 32 tUc7 l:!.e5 33 tUxa8 Beating the Annenian world champion never successfully defended the title.
was in itself a great achievement, but Of these, Fischer was the only one who
tUxb5 34 exf5 gxf5 35 liJb6 tUc3
winning the Candidates matches twice did not actually try to do so. I wrote in
36 nc2 1-0
was also great. In the second half of the the Predecessors book that Spassky 's
And here I lost on time. 60s he was probably the strongest style was more attacking than
player. From 1 97 0 Fischer took over universal.

I copied a positional idea from S passky, but it did not pay off. He used to
create many problems for Black in queenless variations of the Queen's Gambit
Accepted. The pawn structure is symmetrical and yet Spassky managed to
inject power into the proceedings. I also tried the idea of pressing in a
symmetrical queenless opening. Here are the positions:

B.Spassky - R.Fiscber G.Kasparov - P.Leko

Let's start with a game by two world This is one of Spassky 's pet lines. He
champions. managed to breathe l i fe into this
seemingly dead boring variation and
B.Spassky - R.Fiscber after his return match with Fischer the
Game 4, St StefanlBelgrade match
line caught on. Krarnn i k tried it against
1 992 me as well. Now we understand this
1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 liJo tUf6 4 e3 e6 position much better tban before
5 �xe4 eS 6 0-0 a6 7 dxeS! ? Fischer-Spassky 1 992.

80
81
Boris Spassky the 1 0'h Boris Spassky the 1 0,h

7 . .'ihdl
. 9 . liJbd7 1 0 � b 2 b 6
.. l::r.b2 40 lle7+ 'Wt>f8 4 1 lle6 'Wt>g7 42 'Oth3
I n a match, players tend to be happy This was Fischer 's first reaction to ne2 43 lld6 liJe l 44 �f6+ �g8
with a draw. For a long time people did the problem. He holds back b5 as he 4S �xe5 Ihe3 46 �f4 ne2 47 l::r. g6+
not understand how many pitfalls there doesn't want the queenside to be Wfl 48 :g5 �e6 49 �c7 l:ta2 50 �b6
were in this variation. attacked by a4. tDd3 5 1 �h2 tDe 1 52 �h3 tDd3 5 3 �c7
8 1hlil �xc5 On the next two occasions the nc2 54 �b6 1:.a2 5 5 Wg3 tDe l 5 6 l:txh5
American no longer rejected the lhg2+ 57 Wf4 tDd3+ 58 We3 tDe5
tempo-gainin g I 0 . . . b5 and after 1 1 �e2 59 l:th6+ Wd5 60 �c7 ng7 6 1 �xe5
�b7 1 2 tDbd2 Fischer castled when he ..txe5 In- In Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade
faced the line for the third time. 1 992) 13 Ihc l : fc8 1 4 h3 'itf8
1 2 . . . 0-0. Interestingly, castling has an (Fischer still returns to the centre.) 14 f3 ! ?
1 5 Wfl 'Wt>e7 1 6 tDe l �d6 17 a4 I also won a few games b y freezing a
unusual advantage compared to what
b7 bishop, for example against Karpov
happened in his second attempt at this
in the second game of our 1 990 World
variation. Here the king defends the
Championship match. However, as you
g7-pawn. The more natural king move
will probably guess, this plan is not as
1 2 .. .'3,e7 was Fischer's choice upon
sparkling as it looks.
facing tbe line for the second time,
14 ... bS 15 .>te2 �c5! 16 Wfl! We7
Despite its symmetrical nature, this when play continued 13 a4 bxa4
endgame provides White with more 14 l::r.xa4 l::r.h b8 1 5 l::r. c I �d5 1 6 liJe5
opportunities to fight for an advantage �d6 1 7 lDxd7 tDxd7 1 8 l::r.xa6 l::r.xa6
than was at first thought. 1 9 �xa6 f6 20 .i.c4 �xc4 2 1 l::r.xc4
9 b3 tDc5 22 l::r.c3 f5 23 �a3 tDe4 24 l::r. c7+
Spassky tried this move three time s 'it>d8 25 �xd6 liJxd2
against Fischer in the m atch. 1 7 . . . �c6 (Black defends the
In the fourth and fmal occurrence o f queens ide in a different way.) 1 8 axb5
the line Boris changed over t o another axb5 1 9 l:tc2 1:.c7 20 lldc l nac8
plan with 9 tDbd2 . By this time Fischer 21 iof3 �xf3 22 tDdxf3 e5 23 l:txc7
had l earned how to neutralise the nxc7 24 l:txc7 ioxc7 25 liJc2 tDe4 17 e4
endgame advantage. 9 ... 0-0 10 a3 b 5 26 liJa3 b4 27 tDc4 f6 28 liJe l liJdc5 This is the position that confused me.
1 1 � e 2 �b7 1 2 b 4 � e 7 1 3 .i.b2 liJbd7 29 tDc2 tDxb3 30 liJxb4 tDbd2+ The outcome o f the game and the
14 l:t ac 1 nfc8 This way of developing 3 1 tDxd2 tDxd2+ 32 �e2 tDc4 lh-In pressure Boris managed to exert in this
looks very convincing for Black and he Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade 1 992. line prompted the idea of going for a
has equalised the position. 1 5 liJb3 11 tDc3 position with a similar pawn structure .
nxc 1 1 6 nxc I nc8 17 llxc8+ .i.xc8 And after 26 l:txg7 Bobby survived This was Boris' deviation from one See diagram on page 81.
1 8 tDfd4 tDb8 19 �f3 �f8 20 liJa5 this lost position. of his earlier games. 1 7 . gS
..

.i.d6 2 1 liJdb3 e5 22 liJc5 'l;e7 23 h3 It may have affected me in some 11 ... .i.b7 12 l:tacl �e7 Bringing the h8-rook to the
tDfd7 24 tD d3 f6 25 �e4 g6 26 f4 exf4 games, but I have not worked out yet in After 1 2 . . . h6 comes 1 3 tDa4 ! which queens ide was playable for Black.
27 exf4 liJb6 28 tDb7 .i.c7 29 liJbc5 which one. 26 . . . l:txb3 27 h4h5 28 .i.f4 is the point of White's I l' h move. Then 1 8 tDbl g4 19 .>ta3 b4?
tDc4 30 .i.c 1 liJd7 3 1 'l;n tDxc 5 'it>e8 29 'it>hl l::r.b2 30 'it>h3 liJe4 31 f3 1 3 . . .�e7 14 �xf6 �xf6 I S l:txd7 ! and Taking on a3 was better.
32 tDxc5 .i.b6 33 .i.d3 .i.xc5 34 bxc5 liJf2+ 32 'it>g3 tD d3 3 3 .i. g5 e5 34<,Ph3 Black loses a pawn. 20 l::r.x cS!
.i.e6 35 'l; f2 ..t>d7 36 .i.xc4 .i.xc4 In- lh liJf2+ 3 5 'it>h2 liJ d3 36 .i.h6 liJe I 13 tDd4 llc8 The exchange sacrifice brings
Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade 1 992. 3 7 <,Pg 1 ttJ d3 38 .i.g5 lIb 1 + 39 <,Phl Not 1 3 . . . 0-0? 1 4 liJxe6! Fischer into an eternal pin.

82 83
Boris Spassky the J 0'· Boris Spassky the I ()<h

20 ...tUxc5 2 1 ..I1I.. x b4 :ahd8?! If 33 ..111..d3 :abc8 34 e5+ �e7 35 b5+ 50 h 5 + ! 1-0 This is not the best despite the fact
This twns out t o be a loss of tempo. lZ'lbcS 3 6 lZ'lb4 ..I1I..b 7 (36 . . . l:th8 37 ll'la6 Black resigned as White can soon that piece play is fully in the spirit of
B etter was 2 1 . . .tUfd7 wins. ) 3 7 b6 wins. 33 f4 wins as well. play b7 which wins. the Griinfeld Defence.
22 tUa3 ! 33 ... tUbe5 34 tUd4 e5 1 4 . . . b5 looks more natural but my
A subtle way of developing the It's time to look at the games opponent may have been worried that I
knight in which Spassky's ' instructive' play had analysed it all previously at home.
22 ... gxfJ 23 gxfJ tUfd7 affected me. We start with his strategy Then 1 5 D, Spassky's idea to cut off
After 23 .. tUe8 24 lZ'lc4 (or 24 :ac t in the symmetrical Queens Gambit the b7-bishop in this pawn structure,
lhd4 2S ..I1I..x cS+ 'it'd7 26 nc2 and Accepted pawn structure. (other moves can be met satisfactorily,
B l ack has nothing for the paw n . ) e.g. 1 5 a4 b4; I S �D lZ'le S ; 1 5 lZ'lc6
2 4 . . . tU d 6 2S tUb6 l:t c 7 26 l:t c I White G.Kasparov - P.Leko �b7) I S . . . ..I1I..b 7 1 6 lZ'lb3 and White has
wins. Fuj itsu-Siemens G iants, a small edge as the knight soon reaches
Frankfurt 2000 as . But then it will be difficult to decide
which small advantage to go for as any
35 lZ'lxe5! 1 d4 lZ'lf6 2 lZ'lfJ g6 3 e4 ..I1I.. g7 4 lZ'le3 of them might prove to be more
After 3S tUfS ! l:txb5 3 6 l:txh5 wins, d5 5 'iWb3 dIC4 6 'ilhc4 0-0 7 e4 36 significant than expected. Alternatively
as Ftacnik pointed out. The Hungarian variation, played by a 14 . . . b6 ! ? deserved some consideration.
35 ... tUxe5 36 l:tf5+ �g7 37 l:txe5 Hungarian grandmaster. Pushing the b-pawn only one square
W h i te has obtained a winning 8 'iWb3 allows him to control more squares.
position. White makes a third move with the
37 ... tUxe4 38 ..I1I.. d 3! queen. This subtle move order is the
If 3 8 fxe4 l:tc3 + . result of experience.
24 lZ'le4 38 ...I:te3 8 ... c5 9 dxe5 WaS 10 'iYb6 'ifxb6
It is remarkable that the knight on c4 If 38 . . . lZ'lc3 39 ..I1I.. d6 wins. 11 cIb6 tUbd1 12 ..I1I.. e 2 lZ'lxb6 13 ..I1I.. e3
actually blocks the c-file, thus helping 39 ..I1I.. b 4 l:tId3+ lZ'lbd1
Black to defend the cS-knight. Yet it Giving back the exchange in order to
paralyses B lack's position. Fischer may prolong the game but really it changes
have underestimated the move. nothing else in the position.
24 ... ..I1I.. a 8 25 �f2 ng8 26 h4 :Ie7 40 'it>Id3 lZ'lf6 4 1 ..I1I.. d 6 ne8 42 l1g5+
27 lZ'le2 :ab8?! 'it>h7 43 ..I1I.. e5 lZ'le8 44 l:tIh5+ 'it'g6 1 5 fJ
After 2 7 . . .�f6 2 8 ..I1I.. a S :Ib7 29 ..111..d2 45 l:tg5+ It>h7 46 ..I1I.. f4 f6 47 l1f5 �g6 In the queenless middlegame I am
'it>e7 30 lZ'ld4 White has nice play for 48 b6 l:td8 49 l:ta5 ..I1I.. x fJ building up my pawn structure in the
the exchange. same way that Spassky did. In my case
28 ..I1I.. a 3! hS? it did not bring the same result.
Giving up the g-file twns out to be a See diagram on page 81.
huge mistake. After 28 . . . J:[g8 29 b4 1 4 lZ'ld4! 1 5 ... e5
tUa4 30 b5+ 'it>d8 3 1 b6 llc8 32 lZ'l2e3 An endgame has arisen which Or I S . . . lZ'le6 to get rid o f the
Black is in trouble. greatly resembles that mastered by dominating d4-knight and develop his
29 ngl 'it'f6 30 It>e3 Boris Spassky in the Queens Gambit bishop on e6. Then 1 6 lZ'lb3 1 and B lack
30 l:tgS is met by 30 . . . ..I1I.. x e4! Accepted. I follow Spassky's strategy. is still under pressure. His queens ide is
30 ... a5 3 1 llg5 a4?! 32 b4 tUb7 Let's see where it led me! vulnerable and he must also reckon
33 b5 1 4 tUe5?!
•.. with e 5 . 1 6 . . . ..I1I.. d 7 ( 1 6 . . . b5 1 7 Wf2 �d7

84 85
Boris Spassky the 10'"
[or 1 7 . . . �b7 1 8 tOa5] 1 8 llhdl and
White has an edge.) 1 7 f4 ..i.c6 1 8 ..i.B
i.h6 1 9 g3 llfd8 20 �e2. White's space
advantage in the centre makes Black's
game difficult.
1 6 tOe6 !
This is the only jump that causes
headaches for Black - otherwise Black
will just complete his development.
After 1 6 tOf5 gxf5 1 7 i.xc5 lld8
18 ..i.b6 l:te8 19 l:rd I i.e6 and Black is
doing all right.
If 1 6 tOc2 tOe6 17 0-0-0 b5 1 8 tOd5
.lil.b7 the position is safe for Black.
16 ... bxc6
Leko takes on a pawn weakness. On
the other hand the move considerably
loosens White's grip.
Black could think of sacrificing a
pawn instead with 1 6 . . . tOe6. Then
1 7 tOxe 5 ! ( 1 7 tOe7+ 'it>h8 1 8 tOa4 !?)
17 ... tOxe4 18 tOxg6 hxg6 ( 1 8 ... tOxc3
19 tOxfS 'it>xfS 20 bxc3 ..i.xc3+ 21 'it>f2
i.xa I 22 lha I and the endgame is not
attractive for Black.) 1 9 fxe4 tOd4 and
Black has some cOW1terplay, though he
is a pawn down.
17 ..i.xc5 J::1 d 8
86
18 c;t>fl?!
A t least an inaccuracy as it allows the
c8-bishop to move to e6. 1 8 i.c4!
is a better move as it hampers the
opponent's bishop. Having the king on
e2 would be better and even queens ide
castling might be possible. Another try
is 1 8 .lil.b6 ! ? which would create some
confusion in Black's camp.
1 8 ... i.e6 19 l:tbdl
19 J:lhc l ! ? looks better.
1 9 . . . l:td2 ( l 9 . . . tOd7 20 �e3 a5 [20 . . . f5
2 1 tOa4] 2 1 lOa4 l:tdc8 22 i.c4 and
defending c6 is not going to be fun.)
20 b3 i.h6 2 1 ..i.e3 ..i.xe3+ 22 �xe3
and Black's TOok is active on d2 but
may soon corne under pressure.
1 9 ... tOd7! 20 i.e3 i.fS! 21 l:td2 f5!
22 l:tadl �e7! 23 g3
Boris Spassky the 1 (}1"
23 . .'.ti'f7!
.
Black has improved his pieces. Now
he has play of his own.
24 b3 as 25 l:te2 lOf6!
Black has certainly played very
purposefully over the last six moves
and managed to equalise.
26 %hd8 llxd8 27 exf5
Defending the e4-pawn would not
leave White very much scope for 39 l:te2??
action. After 3 9 �g6? llh4+ 40 <.t>g7 J:lg4
the pin is lethal.
27 ...gd5 28 lOa4 i.d5 29 i.b6 l:ta8
Or 39 l:tf2 l:th4+ 40 >t>g7 llxh2
30 i.c5 tOd7 31 i.xe7 �xe7 32 We3
4 1 l:txh2 lOxh2 42 'ifo>f6 and White
'ifo>d6
achieves a draw.
39 .. Jlh4+ 40 'ifo>g7 lOxh2
The intermediate 40 ... lOd4! was
winning at once, e.g. 4 1 l:te8 lOe6+.
4 1 lOc3 1Of3 42 lOe4+ �c7 43 lOf6
tOd4 44 lOxd5+ cxd5 45 l:td2 'i\>d6
46 i.d3?
I was already short of time in this
Then rapid game. After the text my bishop
lands in a losing pin. Maybe I was
angry that the strategy did not work as
33 ..i.d3 ? ! well for me as it had done for Spassky
I had t o w i n t o have a chance o f and that affected my concentration.
catching up with Anand who was Black could try playing on but White
can proba? ly hold with 46 �b 1 .
leading the event. Of course White
does not stand at all worse after
33 tOc3.
33...f4+!
Black seizes his chance to take the
initiative.
34 gxf4 exf4+ 35 'iPxf4 l:tf8+ 36 �g5
lOe5 37 i.xh7
After 37 i.e4 lOxf3+ 3 8 i.xf3 l:txf3
39 lOc3 'ifo>e5 Black's king is somewhat
troublesome, yet White should be able 46 ...lOe6+ 47 'ifo>f6 l:tf4+ 0-1
to live with it. White resigned as after 48 'it'g6 J:ld4
37 ... lOxf3+ 38 'ifo>h6 l:tf4 ! Black wins.
87
Boris Spassky the 1 0th Boris Spassky the l {)lh

13 ... f6? I also made a similar knight sacrifice

B.Larsen - B.Spassky This buries the g7-bishop. After in my game against Chiburdanidze.
13 . . .lob5 ! ? 1 4 .i.xc4 lDd4 1 5 'ira 1 7 ... gxf5 18 1i'h5+ �g8 19 gxf5 .l:l.n
We now look at how Spassky White should do well - nevertheless 20 .i.e2 lDc5?!
used the h-file as a stulUling Black is still alive and kicking. This allows a forced checkmate, but

14 h5 We7? Black is completely lost anyway. If

avenue for attack.
20 . . . �f8 21 lldg 1 'ire8 (2 l . . .'it>e8
Black played 1 3 . . . f6 to make an
22 .l:l.xg7; 2 I . . . lDb 5 22 1i'h8+ and White
I knew these games and wanted escape route for the king, but now he
delivers a nice checkmate .) 22 1i'h7 !
to hanuner my opponents in the blocks the path with this natural­
lDb5 23 lhg7 (Capturing with the
same way along the h-file. looking yet losing move. B etter
queen would be more elegant but this is
resistance was offered by 14 . . . .I:I.f7.
far more decisive.) 23 ... .I:I.xg7 24 .i.h6
15 bxg6 hxg6
WillS .

B.Spassky - J. van Oostel"om G.Kasparov - V.Anand 21 .l:tdgl 'ird7?!

Other moves would have lasted
longer but it's all the same now.

It is worth seeing Spassky's games.
B.Spassky - J. van Oosterom
Junior World Championship,
Antwerp 1 95 5
1 d 4 lDf6 2 c 4 g 6 3 lDc3 .i.g7 4 e 4 d6
5 f3 0-0 6 .i.e3 e5 7 lDge2 lDc6 8 'ird2
lDd7
Black opens the diagonal for his
bishop. In fact this move is still played
competitively.
9 0-0-0 a6 10 d5 lDa7
1 O . . . lDe7 looks more natural than
putting the knight on the edge.
11 g4 b5
Black doesn't get enough play on the
flank. The alternative I I . . . f6 12 h4 'iPf7
is depressing for B lack but he can at
least last longer than in the game.
1 2 lDg3 bxc4
1 3 h4
Spassky conunences operations on
16 1i'b2 !
S o natural. And what makes i t even
nicer is that it wins directly.
22 'ti'h8 mate
16....ti>n
After 16 ... lDb6 1 7 1i'h7+ �f7 18 .l:l.h6 The next game is probably Spassky 's
g5 19 1i'g6+ wins. most famous masterpiece and of course
I knew it well.
B.Lal"Sen - B.Spassky
USSR v Rest of the World,
Belgrade 1 970
1 b3 eS 2 .i.b2 lDc6 3 c4 lDf6
4 lDf3?! e4 5 lDd4 .i.c5 6 lDxc6 dxc6
7 e3 .i.f5 8 'irc2 'fIe7 9 .i.e2 0-0-0
10 f4?
Black is ahead in development, so

queenside and wastes time on the other the h-file. 17 lDf5 ! ! White has no time for this.

88 89
Boris Spassky the l Orh Boris Spassky thi!'J b�A '

14 .. .l:lh l ! !

See diagram o n page 88.

B l ack sacrifices a whole rook for a

decisive tempo.
15 lbh l g2 1 6 11fl ? !
In a hopelessly lost position White
walks into a checkmate. But if 16 llg l
'ii'h4 + 1 7 'it>dl 'ii'h l wins.
10 ... lDg4!
Spassky acts at once, before White
16 ...'it'h4+ 13 0-0-0 17 ... 'ifxa2!
can bring his pieces into the game. Spassky's queen invades on the h-file It has taken some effort but at last Black is confident that he has got his
11 g3 hS! and checkmates White. White can consider launching a snap bearings right in this complicated
To open the kingside. 17 <;Pd t gxfl='it'+ 1-0 attack on the kingside. position.
12 h3?
White could make only three more
White allows the opening of the 13 ... lDeS ! 14 �eS 1 8 �If6
moves.
kingside. After 12 h4 f6 Black stands After 14 �xf6 White can't double If 1 8 .l:txe4? lDxe4 1 9 'lIVxe4 'lIVa l +
better anyway. B lack's pawns because of 14 . . . lDxd3+ 2 0 <ot>d2 'ifxh I 2 1 'iWg4 f6 wins.
We saw how effectively Spassky
1 5 .l:txd3 'iWf4+. 1 8 ... �g6!
used the h-file for attack. I was not
14 ... lDxd3+ 1 5 %hd3?! 'iWe4! B lack can't win the rook with
careful enough when I tried to emulate
Grabbing a counetrattacking chance, 1 8 . . . 'ifa l +? as White's attack has
his play. This game was unfortunate
offered by the unprotected state of the grown too strong. 1 9 'it>d2 'ifxh 1
indeed!
a2-pawn. 20 .l:l.xe4 gxf6 2 1 'ifg4+ 'it>h8 22 'iWh4

G.Kasparov - V.Anand 1 6 lDd4?! .1:1.&8 23 'ifxf6+ ng7 24 l:!.g4 nag8

Reggio Emilia 1 992 Going for a s l ightly worse but 25 lDD and quite incredibly Black is
tenabl e ending with 1 6 �xf6 was defenceless.
1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 lDd2 eS 4 exdS 19 na3 'ifdS 20 h4
White's best option. After 1 6 . . '''f4+
12 ... h4! 'it'IdS 5 duS
1 7 <;Pb I 'ifxf6 White can live with this After 20 �e5 f6 2 1 .\tg3 1 'iWxd4
Black opens the h-file at the cost of a The first sign that White may castle
piece - which turns out to be a low position. But not 1 6 'it>b I ?! �e4 1 7 lle3 22 'ifxe6+ the position is equal
queenside.
priced but highly fruitful investment. 'ifxe2 1 8 .l:l.xe2 �xf3 and the doubled according to Ernst.
S ... �xcS 6 ltJgf3 lDf6 7 �d3 0-0
13 hxg4 h:lg3 14 ng1 pawns make it a really tough endgame 20._.gxf6 21 hS 'it'xd4 22 hllg6 hxg6
8 'it'e2
for White.
White persists with h i s idea of
castling long. 16... �e4
8 ...ltJbd7 9 lDe4 b6! After 1 6 . . . 'ifxa2 17 �xf6 gxf6
B l ack would rather give up the 1 8 'ifg4+ <ot>h8 1 9 'ifh4 'ifaH 20 �d2
two bishops than fal l behind in 'ifa5+ 2 1 l:I.c3 'ifgS+ 22 'ifxg5 fxgS
development. 23 l:!.c7 White has some compensation
10 lDxcs 'ifICS! 11 �e3 'it'e7 for the pawn.
12 �d4 �b7
1 7 l:!.e3

90 91
Boris Spassky the 1 0th Boris Spassky the 1 0th

23 l:1ah3 A sad moment for White, who gives 43 ... 'iia 4+ 44 b3

See diagram on page 88, up his hopes of creating an effective This is particularly annoying as it is After 44 Wc3 Ernst gives 44".'iic6+
This is the position I was hoping for, attack on the h-file, Black who creates a winning attack 45 llc4 axb4+ 46 �xb4 Ilb5+ 47 �c3
Spassky's raids on the h-file were very 28._.We5 29 g3 "e1 + 30 �c2 J:[cd8 from an edge file. This was exactly 'iix f3+ wins,
much the models I had in my mind, He 3 1 lld4 "e5 32 J:[hf4 "c7 33 "e3 e5! what I wanted to do to my opponent 44 ... Wa2+ 45 r;i;>e3 a4 46 bxa4 'iia3+
succeeded with this theme several 34 lhd8 Ilxd8 35 l:1e4 and now I get checkmated in the same 47 ..te2 'ii:l 34+ 48 <;Pc3 �a3+ 49 �c2
times, 35 llb4 would allow no more than way. So not only Spassky but also
a Ild3 0-1
23 .f5 24 llh4
__
check on the h-file, B l ack replies Anand gets it right - just not me!
35 " ,"d6.
35 ...l:1d5
Black gradually makes progress with
his extra pawn.
36 g4 b5 37 g5 "d6 38 f3

24 ... f4 !
Black correctly keeps his queen i n
the centre where it can easily deny its
counterpart access via the h-file. If
instead 2 4 " ,,*f6 25 ,*e3 ! ? llfd 8
2 6 'ii'h 3 'iP fB 27 J:[h8+ 'iPe7 28 "a3+
'iPd7 29 J:[d I + and White has an attack. 38 ... a5!
25 '*13 J:[ae8 26 1hf4 Now he starts opening up White's
The queen can reach the h-file with ldng.
26 'ii'h 3, but it would all be in vain, 39 'We2 We6 40 Wh2
26., ,"xf2 ! 27 Ilh8+ �g7 28 J:[h7+ A useless demonstration on the h-file.
(28 'Wh6+ �f6) 2 8 . . .� f6 29 c3 "e3+
40.....f5 4 1 Wg3 Wd7 42 Wel b4
and Black wins,
43 cxb4
26 ..:it'e5 27 c3 <bg7
Upon 43 J:[xe5 Wa4+ 44 'iPc l bxc3!
wins,

28 J:[hh4

92 93
 Tigran Petros ian th e 9th

J. Van der Wiel - G.Kasparov

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

Petrosian 's wish came true in 1 96 3
when he defeated Botvinnik. The first
Soviet world champion was
afforded the privilege of a rematch, so
Petros ian enjoyed a complete three
year cycle as Champion before being
I lost all these games after
sacrificing the exchange.
challenged. Tigran is in many ways the
closest to me, as he is from a Caucasus Let's look deeper into them
not republic. He spent his childhood in and see what went wrong!
Tbilisi, G eorgia, just a few hundred
kilometres away from B aku where I
grew up.
24. . . g4

In which particular way did Tigran Vartanovich affect me? He is known for
his exchange sacri fices. I also tried them a few times.
S.Reshevsky - T.Petrosian 1 4 "ilfe2 c4 1 5 �c2 b5 1 6 e4 �e6
Here are a couple of his exchange sacrifices which I had in mind when I 1 7 'ire l itJd7 1 8 "i!fg3 [6 19 � f4 rJ.n
Candidates tournament,
made my own. 20 lHe I itJfll 2 1 �d6 :td8 22 �c5
Zurich 1 95 3
1;'- 1;' Rabar-Petrosian, Belgrade 1 9 54.
S.Reshevsky - T.Petrosian A.Yusupov - G.Kasparov
1 d4 4Jf6 2 c 4 e 6 3 4Jc3 �b4 4 e3 White obtained some advantage and
0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 4Jf3 c5 7 0-0 4Jc6 8 a3 probably convinced P etrosian that he
�xc3 9 bxc3 b6 should switch to another Nirnzo-Indian
This is a relatively rarely played line. line.) 1 4 'ilfe l itJd7 1 5 e4 c4 1 6 �c2 f5
Petrosian adopted it four times in 1 9 5 3 1 7 e5 .l:!.n 1 8 a4 as 1 9 [4 b5 20 axb5
and 1 954, then h e stopped using it. Wxb5 21 �a3 itJb6 22 'ifh4 'ife8
Before him, Keres was the only great 23 :to itJc8 24 �a4

player to emp loy this line. For example,

he drew against Alekhine with it in
1 93 8 . Petrosian used this move for the
25 . rJ.e6!!
. .
14 . . . gxf5 1 5 �h5 ile8 16 iLe7 rJ.e8 fITst time in this game.
10 cxdS exdS 11 �b2
M.Tal - T.Petrosian J.Timmao - G.Kasparov At the 1 95 3 Candidates tournament
in Switzerland, Petros ian played the
line twice more. In the first two games
the bishop move was played. In a third
game at Zurich, Taimanov beat him
after 11 itJe5 when, interestingly, 24 . . . :t:J.d7 (24 . . . �d7 25 e6 wins .)
Petros ian tried a simi lar exchange 25 1:tb 1 'ird8 26 �xd7 "ilfxd7 27 :t:J.g3
sacrifice but this time it didn't work itJa7 28 �e7 �n 29 'ilr'g5 �g6 30 h4
just as in my games ! 1 1 . . . 'ifc7 itJc6 3 1 �a3 lLld8 32 h5 lLle6 33 'ilfh4
1 2 itJxc6 Wxc6 1 3 0 �e6 (after 1 3 . . . a5 � n 34 h6 g6 3 5 'ilff6 'ifd8 3 6 �e7

3 l . . . �4!! 1 6. . :t:J.b4
95
.

94
Tigran Petros ian the 9th Tigran Petrosian the 9th

'iVc7 37 1:txg6+ hxg6 3 8 h7+ 'it>xh7 22 .1i.g4 After 28 1:1D b4 1 29 l:tefl lOd5 8 e3 d6 9 h3 lOaS 1 0 .i.e2 e5 11 d4
39 it'xf7+ 0.g7 40 c;t>f2 1 -0 Taimanov­ By inserting this move he announces 30 'ii' g5 l:lb8 Black stands well as I 'ike7 12 lObd2 i.d7
Petrosian, Zurich 1 953 his intention of pushing the e-pawn. pointed out in the above-mentioned Petrosian pl ayed this line seven
I I ...c4 12 .1i.c2 .1i.g4 Alternatives were 22 h4 ! ? and 22 1:1e3 1 ? analysis. times, holding three world champions.
Reshevsky played 1 2 . . . lOe7 in a 22...it'e8 23 e5 28 ... lOd5 ! Both Karpov and I were unable to hurt
match against Najdorf the same year. This is menacing since White can There are no open files for the rooks him.
He drew one and lost one out of these open up the position with e6. However and both Black's minor pieces have 13 'On lOe4 14 lOe3
games. it gives up the dS-square and the bishop wonderful play. 14 b3 is the main line.
13 it'd lO e4 14 lOd2 lOxd2 on b2 is out of play. 29 1:.13 i.d3 30 l:lxd3 14 ...lOxe3 15 ..txe3 i.e6 ? !
A Soviet player Ababkarov played 23 ... a5 24 ne3 l:ld8 25 1:1fe1 White gives back the exchange, but Players no longer put the bishop on
1 4 . . . ..tf5 twice in 1 957, interestingly he Crouch recommends 25 1:1eD as it Black's knight remains very strong and e6 nowadays it's c6. Tigran drew
won both games. prevents 25 . . . f6. easily compensates for the pawn against Karpov in Milan 1 975 with
1 5 it'xd2 .1i.h5 16 13 .1i.g6 1 7 e4 it'd7 See diagram on page 94. deficit. 1 5 . . .l:l fc8.
1 8 l:tllel dxe4 25 .. J1e6! ! 30 ... exd3 3 1 1hd3 b4 32 exb4 1 6 lOd2 1:1fe8 17 f4 l:tad8 18 fxeS
A couple of rounds later Petros ian B l ac k blocks the e6-thrust, and If 32 c4 lOb6. If 1 8 f5 exd4 ! or 1 8 d5 exf4 .
diverged and pl ayed what was perhaps at the same time Petros ian clears the 32 ... axb4 33 as 1 8 ... dxeS 1 9 dS i.d7 20 e4 l:tb8
his most famous game. Against e7-square. 21 a4 b4
Smyslov he went 1 8 ... f5 and the game 26 a4? !
continued 1 9 exd5 'iVxd5 20 a4 lHe8 I n the Predecessor series I indicated a
2 1 'WIg5 'WIf7 22 .1i.a3 h6 23 it'g3 lhe 1 preference for the immediate capture
24 l:txe I ne8 25 l'he8+ it'xe8 26 'it>f2 2 6 ..txe6. Then 26 . . . 'tIVxe6! (26 . . . fxe6
lOa5 27 'iVf4 lOb3 28 .1i.xf5 .1i.xf5 27 l:lg3 lOe7 2 8 nn ltJd5 29 'iVg5 "iWe7
29 it'xf5 'iVxa4 30 'iVc8+ c;t>h7 3 1 'iVf5+ [29 . . Jld7 30 h4) 30 .1i.c l it'xg5
<.t>g8 32 "iWe6+ <.t>h7 33 it'e4+ c;t>g8 3 1 .1i.xg5 nb8 32 .i.d2 and White has
34 'iVa8+ c;t>h7 35 it'e4+ <oPg8 36 it'd5+ an advantage in the endgame.) 27 1:1g3
'it>h7 37 iJ..e7 ltJc l 38 ,*,f5+ 'it>g8 lOe7 28 h4 lOd5 29 'iVg5 1:1d7 30 h5 h6
3 9 'iVf8+ <.t>h7 40 it'f5+ 'it>g8 41 d5 31 iVh4 .1i.d3 and B l ack has a 33 ...l:la8
'tIVa2+ 4 2 c;t>g3 'iVd2 43 d6 it'e l + reasonable fortress. If 32 .1i.c 1 lOxc3. Even though he is a pawn down, 22 as!
44 'it>g4 lOd3 45 it'd5+ 'it>h7 46 d7 it'e5 Black does not even stand worse. Tal wants to exchange the light­
47 'iVxdH cxd3 48 d8='iV 112 - 112 34 1:tal 'iVe6 35 i.el 'iVe7 36 a6 'itb6 squared bishop in order to remove an
Smyslov-Petrosian, Zurich 1 95 3 . 37 i.d2 important defensive piece.
1 9 fn4 1He8 20 it'f4 b5 2 1 iJ.. d l ne7 If 3 7 h3 lOc7 picks up the pawn, as 22 ...l:tfB 23 ..ta4 i.xa4 24 l:lxa4
pointed out by Crouch.
37... b3 38 'iVe4 b6 39 h3 b2 40 l:lbl
�h8 41 i.e1 t;S-t;S

M. Tal - T.Petrosian
26 ... lOe7! USSR 1 958
Tigran Vartanovich radically
improves the position of his knight. 1 e4 eS 2 '00 lOe6 3 i.b5 a6 4 i.a4
27 .i.xe6 fxe6 28 it'n lOf6 5 0-0 i.e7 6 l:le1 b5 7 i.b3 0-0

96 97
Trgran Petrasian the 9th
24 ... .I:I.bd8!
Black improves the rook, but his
position remains troublesome.
25 'Wo ftd6 26 llJb3 llJd7 27 .l:l.aal
l:tg6 28 .l:l.fl it.d6 29 h4 'Wd8 30 h5 .l:l.f6
3 1 .g4
See diagram on page 94.
3 1 ..Jlf4 ! !
A great saving concept, Pen-os ian
sacrifices the exchange for a blockade.
32 it.)(f4?!
Even such a broad-minded player as
Tal could not resist taking
exchange. Tal could have retained an
advantage by playing 32 l:txf4. Then
32 . . . exf4 33 it.xf4 .e7 (After other
moves White will stand clearly better,
e.g. 33 ... it.xf4 34 'it'xf4 .e7 35 h6 g6
36 ftn ; 33 .. .ti:lf6 34 'lif3
35 'iltxf4 llJxh5 36 'it'e3; 33... llJe5
34 .g3 fte8 35 h6 g6 36 ftcl .c7)
and Black can either try to blockade or
break out. There might follow 34 h6 g6
35 .g3 it.xf4 36 'iixf4 f5 37 .l:l.e ! .
32 ... ed4 33 ltJd2 ltJe5 34 'ihf4?
White had two moves to obtain the
better prospects. Either 34 'ilfh3 'iig5,
or 34 'iWf5 g6 35 'Wh3.
34 ... ltJ)(C4 35 e5 ltJn5 36 ltJe4
Tigran Petrosian the 9th
I f 36 h6 f5. 'iff6 69 '1!i'e4+ 'it>g8 70 'ife8+ 'iWf8
36 ... b6 37 .l:l.ae 1 ? 7 1 'ifxf8+ �xf8 72 <;i;>g4 'it>f7 73 �f5
After 37 b3 ! ? c4 38 ltJxd6 (38 bxc4 liz-liz
.ltb8) 38 ...•xd6 39 lhel f6 40 bxc4
Here is my game against Timman.
.l:l.c8 41 .l:l.e4 .c5+ 42 'it.>h2 'iha5
43 .f5 the position is unclear. J.Timman - G.Kasparov
Tilburg 1 98 1
37 ..• �b8 38 .l:l.dl
1 d 4 ltJf6 2 e4 g6 3 g3 it.g7 4 .tg2
0-0 5 ltJfJ d6 6 0-0 c5 7 ltJc3 ltJc6 8 d5
47 'ih:dl nb8 48 .l:l.0? ltJa5 9 ltJd2 a6 10 'ifc2 nb8
He should play 48 'iWd3 b3 49 a6 .
A deviation fro m this line
48 .I:I.a8?
with 10 . . . e5 resulted in Tigran's
..•
After 48....I:I.b5 49 'iWe I �h7 50 .l:l.b3
Vartanovich's most beautiful and most
.l:l.xa5 5 1 'it'xb4 .I:!. a I + 52 �h2 .1:!.f1 wins.
famous combination from the 1 966
49 'it'el nu5 50 '1!i'xb4 ne5 51 'it'f4
World Championship final match
'it>h7 52 ..t>b2 .l:l.d5 53 .l:l.fl 'ii'g5 54 'iffJ
against Spassky. Here is how that game
l:I.e5 55 ..t>gl .l:!.e5 56 'it'f2 .t!.e5 57 'it'fJ
went: 1 1 b3 ltJg4 12 e4 f5 1 3 exf5 gxf5
38 ... c4 39 d6 ltJd3 40 .g4? .l:l.a5 58 'it>b2 �b8 59 'it>gl ]:ta2
1 4 ltJ d 1 b5 I S fJ e4 1 6 �b2 exf3
Better was 40 .e3! f5 (40...ltJxb2 60 'il'd5?
1 7 .txf3 .txb2 1 8 'il'xb2 ltJe5 1 9 .te2
4 1 .l:l.d5! 'it'd7 42 ltJc5 .c6 43 .l:l.ff5!) f4 20 gxf4 � h3 2 1 ltJe3 �xf1 22 ftxfl
41 'Wd4 with a still unclear position. ltJg6 23 .ltg4 ltJxf4 24 .l:l.xf4 .l:txf4
40 ... it.a7+ 41 'it.> h l f5 42 ltJf6+! <;Ph8 25 it.e6+ llf7 26 ltJe4 'iWh4 27 ltJxd6
the 43 .xc4 ltJxb2 44 .)(36 ltJxdl 'il'g5+ 28 <;i;>h 1 ]:taa7 29 .txf7+ lhf7
45 'iWxa7
Tal was not yet prepared to defend
passively with 45 .l:l.xdl I ? , but maybe it
was the better option as after 45 ... �b8
46 ltJd5 it.xd6 47 ltJe7 'it'xe7 48 .xd6
.ltxf4 '1!i'xd6 49 .l:l.xd6 .l:l.a8 50 l:tb6 nxa5 60 ....t!.c2?
51 Ilxb4 White probably holds. 60 .. .'*,e3+ ! ! would have been
decisive. Then 61 'it>h2 .l:l.a4 62 '*'d8+
45 ...•)(d6?
�h7 63 .l:!.xf5 .l:l.d4 64 .l:l.d5 .l:l.g4 65 .l:l.d3
P en-osian misses a win. Black can
,*,e5+ 66 ..t>g l 'iVel+ (66 . .. 'it'e4 67 'ii'd 5
force the issue after 45 ... ltJc3! 46 .e7 30 'ifh8+ ! ! 1 -0 Petrosian-Spassky,
.l:!.xg2+ 68 r;to>h I 'ii'x d5 69 .l:l.xd5 .l:l.gS
Moscow 1 966.
gxf6 47 .l:l.xf5 .xe7 48 dxe7 .l:l.e8 Black wins.) 67 'it>h2 fth4+ 68 .l:l.h3
49 .l:l.xf6 'it>g7 50 Ilb6 (50 ng 6+ �f7 ,*,e5+ 69 'it>gl J:td4 and Black catches 11 b3 b5 1 2 .ltb2 bxc4 13 bxc4 .i.h6
51 nxh6 ltJa4 1 ! wins.) 50 . . . .I:I.xe7 White 's king. In the databases Donner is credited
51 .l:l.xb4 l1e5 52 g4 .l:l.xa5 53 ftb7+ 'it.>f6 61 'it'a8+ ..t>h7 62 'iWfJ .l:l.cI 63 .1:1.xcI with playing this for the first time
54 llb6+ 'it.>g5 55 <;Pg2 ltJe4! 'ii'x cI + 64 ..t>h2 'il'e7+ 65 'it>h3 'iWe5 against Botvinni!<, way back in 1 958.
46 .d7 .d6 66 g4 fxg4+ 67 'it>xg4 'ii'g5+ 68 <;Ph3 14 ltJcbl
98 99
Tigran Petros ian the 9th 1igran Petros ian the 9th

According to the database this move
was introduced by Udovcic. It was then
seen regularly, although it has never
been played as often as 14 f4. Petrosian
tried 14 f4 unsuccessfully with White
against his problem opponent in the
sixties. 14... e5 15 l:tael (Petrosian
deviated from Portisch's play when he
faced the young Chiburdanidze by
playing 15 dxe6 fxe6 16 l:tab 1 �g7
17liJce4 l:I.xb2 18 l:I.xb2liJg4 19 l:I.bb I
�d4+ 20 'it>hl liJe3 21 it'cl R.b7
22 ..liD liJxfl 23 it'xfl �xe4 24 liJxe4
it'e7 25 liJg5 �h8 26 it'h3 e5 27 liJe6
l:I.e8 28 �d5 exf4 29liJxf4 it'f6 30 it'd7
it'd8 31 "iWxd8 l:I.xd8 32 J::tb 6 ..Iic3
33 liJe6 1-0 Petrosian-Chiburdanidze,
Vilnius 1978) 15...exf4 16 gxf4 liJh5
17 e3 l:te8 18 liJce4 �f5 19 ..Iic3 liJb7
20 it'a4 a5 21 l:I.b I it'e7 22 l:I.fe I i..d 7
23 'i!i'c2 �fS 24 it'a4 'it>f8 2S J::tb 6 J::tbd8
26 'ifb3 �c8 27 liJfl l:I.d7 28 liJfg3
liJxg3 29 hxg3 �g7 30 1ib2 f5
31 ..Iixg7+ it'xg7 32 liJf6 1-0 Portisch­
Petrosian, Santa Monica 1966.
did not offer this exchange sacrifice at
once. I lost a game against Zaid after
playing 16 ... �g7. I have not
decided which world champion I
should blame for that. 17 nabl it'c7
18 e4 hS 19 f4 l:I.b4 20 it'd3 lLlb7
21 liJc2 l:I.xbl 22 l:I.xbl h4?!
(22... exf4!?) 23 fxe5 dxe5 24ll:lD! and
White's centre pawns will be strong.
24...hxg3 25 �xeS gxh2+ 26 �xh2
it'c8 27 ll:le3 ll:lg4 28 lLlxg4 �xg4
29 ll:leS tLlaS 30 llfl i..hS 31 d6 �xe5
32 i..xeS it'e6 33 i..f6 ll:lc6 34 it'e3
�h7 3S it'xc5 ll:lb8 36 ..Iie7 l:I.e8
37 it'dS 1-0 Zaid-Kasparov, Leningrad
1977.
17 ..Iixb4 cxb4 18ll:labl
White's rooks have no open files,
therefore the sacrifice comes into
consideration. However, Black doesn't
even have a pawn for it.
41 l:I.b6 1-0 Petrosian-Toran, Bamberg 22...b3 23 ll:lxb3 �a4 It looks like
1968. White can live with this pin. 24 ll:l1d2
yet 19 e3 l:I.b8 2S l:I.abl ll:lxb3 26 ll:lxb3 1ib6
Two years later Kurajica tried an 27 c5 �xb3 (27... dxcS 28 "xcS �xb3
interesting idea, he gave up the c-pawn 29 'CWxb6 l:I.xb6 30 1:[ec I and White
with 19 c5 in order to open the file. soon invades on the queenside.)
19... 1hcs 20 1ib2 ll:lg4 (20...it'b5!?) 28 'ii'xfS gxf5 29 cxb6 l:I.xb6 30 l:I.ec I
21 ll:le4 'iltb6 22 �D �g7 23 ll:lbd2 and White is better.
lLlh6 24 l:I.abl fS 2S 'ii'xb4 White is 20 lLle4 �xe4 21 �xe4 lLlb7
ready to give up a piece to open files In a closed position one usually has
for his rooks. 25...'ii'xb4 26 lhb4 fxe4 time to manoeuvre, however Black
27 liJxe4 liJf5 28 l:I.cl ll:ld4 29 �g2 now lacks just one move to obtain a
�bS 30 l:I.c7 �f6 31 ll:lxf6+ l:I.xf6 32 a4 favourable setup. After 21. .. lLlxe4
�xe2 33 �xe2 ll:lxe2 34 l:tb6 ll:ld4 22 'ii'xe4 f5 23 'iWc2 'i!i'xc4 24 'iWa4 'ifcs
35l:1.xa6 ll:lab3 36 aS1:[f7 37 1:[a8+ �g7 25 lLld2 f4 26 exf4 exf4 27 l:I.ad I White
38 l:I.aa7 1-0 Kurajica-Filipovic, Banja has the better prospects. And if
Luka 1983. 21. .'iWxc4 22 'ii'xc4 lLlxc4 23 i..d3
19. . �f5
. White retains an edge.
I wanted to retain the knight for use 22 lLld2 lLlc5
against the bishop. The alternative
19 ...l:I.c8 has not disappeared from
grandmaster practice and here is a
recent example of it. 20 a3 b3 21 ll:lxb3

14 ...e5 �a4 22 lLl I d2 lLlxb3 23 liJxb3 l:I.b8

In the debut game, Suetin preferred
14...�d7 which then became routine.
15 �c3 ..Iid7 16 liJa3
See diagram on page 94.
16 .. Jlb4
I got excited when I read about
exchange sacrifices in a chapter in
Petrosian's book. What advantages
does Black accrue with this exchange?
The position is closed so the rooks do
not work well. In addition the c5-
square is firmly under Black's control
and he has an outside passed pawn. I
did not pay attention to the interesting
fact that Petrosian himself had opted
for this position. In my younger days I
18...'ii'c7
Petrosian's opponent followed up the
exchange sacrifice with 18...ifb6. Theo
came 19l1:lb3ll:lb7 20 ll:l1d2l:1.c8 21 a3
a5 22 axb4 a4 (22...'clhb4!?) 23 ll:la5
ll:lxa5 24 bxa5 it'xa5 25 e3 �g7 26l:1.a2
liJe8 27 llfal l1a8 28 e4 "cS 29 'ii'c3
l:I.c8 30 �D �h6 31 l:I.b I
32 ii'xd2 'CWxc4 33llb4 'i!i'cl+ 34 "xci
l:I.xc I + 35 <;i;>g2 �g7 36 �e2lLlf6 37 f3
g5 38 g4 h5 39 h3 hxg4 40 hxg4 lLlg8
24 l:I.ab I �6 25 l1b2 ll:lg4 26 'iYe2
lLlxe3 27 fxe3 �xb3 28 l:I.fb I �xe3+
29 �bl �d4 30 c5 �xc5 31 'ii'd3 �c4
32 l:I.xb6 1::tx b6 33 'ii'd l llxbl 34 'ii'x bl
�xa3 35 'llVb8+ �g7 36 1ib7 �c5
37 g4 �d3 38 g5 a5 39 h4 a4 40 �h3
�f8 41 'ii'a8+ �g7 42 'ii'xa4 h6 43 �e6
hxg5 44 hxg5 1-0 Psakhis-Avrukh,
Israel 2001.
Maybe gaining space in the centre by
19...ll:lg4!? is after all a reasonable
�xd2 option. 20 l:I.e I f5 21 h3 (21 ll:lb3?! is
Timman's recommendation but Black
has an aggressive and good reply in
2L.f4!) 2 l ...ll:lf6 22 a3 (22 c5 e4)
23 i..g2!
Interestingly this move fights for the
cS-square. Chess can be stunning,
indeed. The bishop will cut Black's
kingside knight off from the queenside.
If 23 a3? b3.
23 ...l:I.b8 24l:1.fbl as 25 a3!
Weakening b4 and opening the a·file
for the rook.
25 ... e4 26 axb4 axM 27 i..h3!

100 101
Tigran Petros ian the 9th
A subtle move which cuts off the
f6-knight
27 ...1Lg7 28 1:ta2 hS 29 LOb3 LOdJ
30 l:!.dl tDeS
31 cS!
Black loses an important component
of his compensation for the exchange.
He relinquishes the c5 post for his
knight.
3 1...tDd3 32 cxd6 'ikxd6 331Ln tDeS
34 na6 "d7 35 nxf6
35 d6!? was also attractive.
3S...1Lxf6 36 'iVxe4 nc8?
Black gives up the pawn for free.
36 ..."a4 would still enable him to
continue resistance but in the end
White's extra pawn should prevail.
37 'ikxb4
White is just wirming with his two
extra pawns.
37 ...h4 38 'ikf4 'it>g7 39 gxh4 'ikd6
40 tDd2 1-0
A.Yusupov - G.Kasparov
World Cup, Barcelona 1989
1 tDfJ tDf6 2 c4 g6 3 tDc3 1Lg7 4 e4
d6 5 d4 0-0 6 1Le2 eS 7 dS as 8 1LgS
h6 9 .i.h4 tDa6 10 LOd2 'ike8 11 0-0
tDh7 12 a3 1Ld7 13 b3 f5 14 edS
See diagram on page 94.
14...gxfS 15 ..\i.hS 'ikc8 16 .i.e7 l:!.e8
102
Tigran Petrosian the 9th
I sacrificed the exchange, just like It's more corrunon to develop the 20 ..Ii.xg4 11ad8
Petrosian. But after some mutual bishop on b7. After 20 ...g5 21 'iPh I gxf4 22 1Lxf4
mistakes I went down to Artur. 10 ..\i.e3 LOe6 11 0-0 0-0 12 "el LOdxe5 23 J:tg I the position is unclear.
17 1LIe8 'ikxe8 18 .i.h4 e4 19 'ikc2 ..\i.xfJ 13 l:!.xfJ e6 14 'ifh4 'ikd8 2 1 11d! fS
'ikh5 20 1Lg3 %1f8 2 1 .Ji..f4 'ikg4 22 g3 The queen retreats to defend the king. Black wants to carry out g5 under
LOgS 23 'it>hl LOfJ 24 l:!.acl tDeS ISl:!.h3 hS 16 .i.e2 better conditions than in the previous
25 tDxfJ 'ikxfJ+ 26 'it>gl LOd3 27 'it'd2 line.
1Ld4 221Lf3!
Van der Wiel is alert. He stops g5.
22...1H7
If 22 ... g5 23 tDxd5.
23 '1Phl!
He wastes no time and goes after the
weakness on g6.
23 ...gS
If 23 ...LOfS? 24 ..Ii.c5.
16...d5 24..1i.hS!?
This is thematic. As White is See diagram on page 95.
28l:!.c2 'it>b7 29 h3l:!.g8 30 'it>h2 'it'h5 attacking on the flank, Black switches 24...g4?
3 1LOdi tDeS 32 13 tDd3 33 tDe3 tDxf4 to the centre. B lack could ease the Black gets some play for the
34 gxf4 ..Ii.b6 35 'ik12 'iVg6 36 lle2 ..Ii.c5 attack by getting rid of the strong queen exchange, and White's rooks have no
37 fxe4 fxe4 38 fS 'ikhS 39 11d2 11g5 on h4 with 16...LOg4. Then 17 ..Ii.xg4 open files - however that factor can be
(17 "xd8 l:!. fxd8 18 ..Ii.xg4 hxg4 rectified. After 24 ... 11ffS 25 fxg5
19 l:!.g3 f5 and Black has a nice game.) LOdxe5 (After 25 .....Ii.xe5 26 ..Ii.g6 'ifb4
17......xh4 18 l:!.xh4 ..Ii.f6! 19 l:!.h3 hxg4 27 ..Ii.h7+ 'iti>g7 28 g6 B lack's king is in
20 l:!.g3 tDb4 and Black has a good danger.) 26 ..Ii.c5 (26 ..Ii.b6 1lc8 27 g6
endgame. And after 16 ...tDb4 17 l:!.c\ LOd7) 26 .....xg5 27 .i.xfl! nxfS 28 ng I
tDd7 18 'ife I 'ifc7 Black is doing well. tDg4 29 "e2 tDce5 30 tDd I and Black
17 eS tDd7 has to work hard to keep his position
The queen can still be swapped by together.
means of 17 ...d4. Then after 18 l:!.d I 25 .i.xf7+ 'i'xf7 26 11g3 "hS
tDg4 19 ..Ii.xg4 "'xh4 20 l1xh4 dxe3 27 '1Pg2 LOrs 28 LOe2 LOg6
40 'ikf4 'ike8 4 1 tDg4 1-0 21 ..Ii.f3 f6 Black has nothing to worry
about.
18 "'12 'it'e7 19 g4 bxg4
J. Van der Wiel - G.Kasparov Black can also stir up things with
World Under 16 Championship, 19 ...�4!? Then 20 gxb5 d4 21 ..Ii.c\
Wattignies 1976 dxc3 22 bxc3 �6 23 h6 'ii'xf2+
24 'iPxf2 ..Ii.h8 25 h7+ �g7 26 f5
1 e4 eS 2 tDfJ d6 3 d4 exd4 4 tDxd4 tDdxe5 27 ..Ii.h6+ 'iPf6 28 ..Ii.xfS l:!.xfl!
tDf6 5 tDe3 a6 6 f4 'ike7 7 a4 g6 8..\i.d3 29 fxg6 and Black has compensation
..Ii.g7 9 tDfJ ..\i.g4 for the excbange.
103
Tigran Petrosian the 9 th
29 h3!
Interestingly, a similar fonnation
occurred in my game against another
Dutchman, Timman, where I sacrificed
the exchange. In that game I had a
b-pawn (which has the same qualities
as the g-pawn). He undennined it with
a single move of an edge-pawn. With
the same result - he beat me too. Had
Black stopped all that he would have
had a decent position.
29...lOh4+ 30 'it>n 'it>n 31 lOgl
White is not in a hurry to take on g4,
which would free the f5-square.
3 1 . ..d4 32 �cl gxh3?
Petrosian also had one
remarkable game where
allowed himself to be saddled
with a doubled f-pawn and it
has remained in my memory.
But when I took on the
responsibility of doubled f­
pawns, I lost, as you will see in
the following two examples ...
B.Gurgenidze - T .Petrosian
This mistake completely relaxes the
pressure. White's king is no longer in
danger and the rooks start to work.
Black should protect g4 with 32...J:tg8.
Then 33 l:tdd3 (33 We2 �f8) 33. .�f8
.
34 c3 �e7 35 cxd41Ob4 36 J:tb3 b6 and
though Black's position is troublesome
it has Dot fallen apart.
33 'ife2 ! 'iheH 34 1O:xe2
Black is just the exchange down.
34 ... lOg6 35 J:t xh3 �rs 36 l:tb3 :d7
37 J:tbd3 �c5 38 c3
Now John wins a pawn in addition to
the extra exchange. It's all over now.
38 ... �a7 39 �e3 ltd5 40 ud4 lOb4
41 :b3 as 42 �d2 1-0
V .C beskovsky - G.Kasparov
he
A.Beliavsky - G.Kasparov
104
B.Gurgenidze - T .Petrosiao
USSR Championship 1967
1 e4 e5 2 1Of3 d6 3 �b5+ �d7
4 ..txd7+ Wxd7 5 0-0 lOf6 6 e 5 dxe5
7 lOxe5 'ife 8 8 d4 e 6 9 lOe3 lOe6
1 0 lOxc6 �xe6 1 1 ..tg5 0-0-0
Petrosian puts pressure on d4 at once.
12 ..txf6
White sacrifices a pawn in order to
create a doubled pawn in Black's camp.
1 2 ... gxf6 13 d5 exd5 14 'iVf3 J:td6
See diagram on page 104.
It looks like Petrosian is defending
the f6-pawn with the rook.
1 5 J:tfe 1 d4
The rook can recapture on c6, which
was the po int of 14 ... J:td6.
16 'iVf5+ �b8 17 lOe4
The knight's aim is to get to f5.
1 7... lte6
Petrosian organises his pieces while
White's knight heads for f5.
18 lOg3 ..te7 1 9 'iVhs "e8 20 lOr5
105
1igran Petros ian th e 9tA
20 ... �d8! 2 1 l:[.xe6
After 21 �n 1t'b5+; or 21 'iVdl �5
22 b3 ..ta5 and Black wins.
2 1 ...fxe6 22 'iVxe8 lhe8 23 l:tel
Black dissolves the doubled pawns,
but the knight has a chance to force
matters and improve his situation.
2 3 ...�c7 !
Just in time, the king lends a hand
thanks to the fact that the e I -rook is
unprotected.
24 lOg7 l:te7 2 5 lOh5 r5 26 b3 'it.>d6
2 7 g4 fxg4 28 bxg4 e5 29 lOg3
29...Wd5
Black's active king prevents an
effective blockade by the knight.
30 f3
If 30 lOe4 :g7 31 f3 h5 wins.
30 ...J:tn 3 1:0
The natural king move 31 <;!tg2
allows an exchange of bishop for
knight by 31...�h4.
3 1 ...�g5 32 Wg2 b5
White has blocked the kingside but
Black has a winning pawn majority on
the queenside.
33 lOe4 .i.e3 34 lIhl h6 35 b3 J:trs
36 J:tbl J:tf4 37 a4 b4 38 J:thl
Tigran Petros ian the 9'h
3 8 .. Jixe4
The exchange sacrifice wins because
Black has too many pawns for White to
cope with.
39 be4+ 'it'xe4 40 ltdl as 41 <;t>g3
'it'd5 42 11n �f4+ 43 'it'f3 c4 44 'it'e2
After 44 bxc4+ 'it'xc4 45 'it>e4 'it'c3
46 l:!.f2 d3 47 cxd3 b3 48 d4 b2 wins.
44 ... Cl:b3 45 cxb3 'it'e4 ! 46 nf3 �g5
4711n
If 47 l:!.d3 'it>d5.
47 ... d3+ 48 'it'dl 'it'd4 0-1
V.CheskoYsky - G.Kasparoy
USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1978
1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 liJd2 dxe4 4 liJxe4
�f5 5 liJg3 �g6 6 h4 b6 7 h 5 .ii. h 7
8 liJf3 liJd7 9 �d3 Jixd3 1 0 Wxd3
"*,c7 11 �d2 liJgf6 1 2 0-0-0 e6 13 liJe4
0-0-0 14 g3 c5 15 .ii. f4 c4
This was my novelty. It is an
ambitious move which aims to place a
knight on d5.
16 We2 'ili'c6 17 liJxf6 gxf6
106
1 8 d5!
See diagram on page 1 04.
1 8 .. .exd5
With a pawn sacrifice, White blocks
the d5 square. I was not worried that
Petrosian had won with the doubled
pawns and without having any
knight.
19 liJd4 'ili'a6 20 'it' b l .ii. d 6 2 1 _13
�xf4 22 jt'xf4 liJe5 23 jt'f5+ 'it>b8
24 f4
Unlike Gurgenidze, Cheskovsky
manages to win back the pawn.
24 ... lUd7?!
After 24...lUc6 25 Wxf6
26 .xd4 White has a small edge.
25 it'xd5 lUeS 26 it'e4 lUg4?
He should try to enter a slightly
inferior rook ending by 26 ... liJc6
27 lUxc6+ 'ili'xc6 28 "il'xc6 bxc6.
27"i1'e2
White has obtained a better position.
2 7 .. .'ilfb 6
I f 2 7... l:!.hg8 2 8 nhe1.
28 c3 f5 29 l1he l Wc5 30 We7 'it'xe7
3 1l:!.xe7l:!.he8
Black could try to hang on the
material by playing 31...llhfB. After
32 ':del l1d5 33 'it'c2 Black is rather
passive.
32 l1de l ':xe7 33 lhe7
33 ... liJr6
Reducing the number of pawns on
the board does not lead to salvation.
After 33 ...f6 34 ..tel (34 a4!? nd5
35 �a2) 34.. Jid5 35 ..td2 a6 36 �e2
Black is struggling.
34 llxn liJxh5 35 liJxf5
36 llf8+ �c7 3 7 .l:[g8 �d7 38 ng6 b5
39 a3 .l:t d 1 + 40 �a211g 1 4 1.1:[d6+ �c7
42 l:l.xh6 liJxg3 43 liJd4
Black loses a second pawn after
which his position is hopeless.
43 ... liJe4 44 liJxb5+ 'it>d7 45 llh7+
�e6 46 llxa7
lUxd4
It's all over now.
46 ... liJc5 47 liJd4+ 'it'd6 48 liJ f5+
�d5 49 lUe3+ We4 50 l:tc7 lUd3
5 1 lle7+ 1-0
A.Beliavsky - G.Kasparov
Game 4, Candidates match,
quarterfinal, Moscow 1983
1 d4 lUr6 2 c4 e6 3 lUc3 �b4 4 e3
0-0 5 .i.d3 c5 6 lUf3 dS 7 0-0 dxc4
8 .ii. x c4 cxd4 9 exd4 b6
This system of development
Karpov's favourite variation.
1 0 'il'e2 .ii. b7 1 1 .l:[ d l .i.xc3 1 2 bxe3
.c7 13 .i.d3
Tigran Petros ian the 9'h
1 3 ... 'lWxc3 ?!
This position with 13... lUbd7 14 c4
has been played many times. 13...liJd5
has not been tested. Black is treading a
very narrow path but objectively the
move might be playable. 14 �d2 <fJxc3
l:!.d3 15 .ii.xc3 (15 .ii.xh7+ Wxh7 16 lUg5+
�g8! 17 'ifh5 liJe2+! 18 Wh I [18 'ii'xe2
lUd7] 18... 'lWc2 and Black is in the
game.) 15 .. .'.wxc3 16 .l:[del 'il'a5 17 .l:[c7
'il'd5 (17....ii.d5 18 liJg5!) 18l:!.acl and
White has compensation for the pawn.
1 4.ii. b 2
If 14 .ii.g5 liJbd7
1 4 •c7
...
After 14 ...'iVb4 15 d5 .>ixd5
(15...liJxd5? 16 liJg5 h6 17 'ii'e5 <fJf6
18 .ii.h7+ 'it>h8 19 'ifxf6 wins.) 16 .ii.xf6
gxf6 17 <fJd4 f5 (17 ...lUc6? 18 'ti'g4+
'it>h8 19 'ifh4 f5 20 Jixf5 and White
mates.) 18 �xf5 (18 'ii' e3 <fJd7
[18...liJc6 19 .>ixf5±] 19 .>ixf5 c;i;>h8)
18... exf5 19 liJxf5 'ife4 20 liJe7+ �h8
21 'lWb2+ f6 22 liJxd5 and White stands
much better. If 14...'ii'c6 15 d5 exd5
16 liJd4 'il'e8 17 'ii'd2 liJe4 18 .>ixe4
is 'ifxe4 19 nel 'ii'g 4 20 l:!.e7 .>ia6
21 'ii'c3 and White has tremendous
compensation for the two pawns.
1 5 dS .>ixdS 1 6 Jixf6 gxf6
107
Tzgran Petros ian the 9th 1igran Petrosian the 9,h

Just like Petrosian, I did not mind I was happy with the doubled f-pawn.
having the doubled f-pawns. 21 ':c4 Wd7?
I gave back one of the pawns but this
was an Wlllecessary concession. After
2 l ...lLle7 22 l:th4 lLlf5 23 ':g4+ c;t>h8
24 .d.3 lLle7 25 l:th4 lLlg6 26 :th5
Black is safe.
22 ':h4 -.f5
compensation for the pawn. (31 lLlf5
�f8 32 lLle7 'iig7=; 31 'if;>h2 l:te8 32
lLld5 ':e6 and Black may be able to
hold on.) 31...a6 (3l...lLlg6 32 �h2;
31...l:te8 32 lLld5 ':e6 33 lLlxf6. This is
the point of putting the rook on h5;
White retains a small edge.) 32 �h2
and Black must be. careful.
b l) 33 f4 lLlxg4+ 34 hxg4 'il'xg4
35lLle3! 'il'g7 (35....:d2+ 36 'it'hl 'iig7
37lLlg4) 36lLlg4 wins.
b2) 33 ':xf6 "iWc5 34 lLlh6 'itt g7
35 l:I.f5 'il'd6 36 <t>g2 �xh6 37 l:txe5
�g7 and though Black's king is
exposed, it is not easy to exploit the
situation.
31 "iWaS+ 'il'gS 32 'il'xa7 l:txh4
33 lLlxh4 'tIfg5 34 1!faS+ c;t>g7 35 1!fe4

17 �e3! c;t>g7
Not 17...�7 18lLlg5!
IS l:tacl lLlc6
After I 8...� 7 19 lLle5 lLld7 20 'ifh3
f5 21 .li.a6 'iixa6 22lLlxd7 Black's king
remains vulnerable.
19.1i.e4? 23 l:txd5 lLle5
After 19 lLld4 'ii d6! (19 .. .lHd8 After 23 ...�1+ 24 lLlel 'it>h8 30�h2
surprisingly loses. 20 .li.b5 �7 25 ':dh5 ':fe8 26 ':xh7+ .xh7 Not 30 f4? ltJf3+. 35...h5??
2 1 �g3+ c;t> f8 2 2 .li.xc6 .i.xc6 2 3 'ii'f4! 27 lhh7+ c;t>xh7 28 �3+ �g8 30.. J�c4?! TItis is a bad blunder as Black drops
:td7 [Other moves also lose. 23....i.xg2 29 'iig4+ c;t>f8 30 lLlc2 is dangerous This looks active but it just drops a the knight. Better was 35... lLlg6
24 lLlxe6+; 23.. .l::t ac8 24 lLlxe6+; according to Be1iavsky. The knight pawn. After 30....:d8?! 31 g4 (31 f4 36 lLlf5+ �g8 37 g3 �d2 when Black
23...f5 24l:tel; 23....i.d5 24 :tc7 �8 aims to get to f5 after creating a flight lLlf3+!) 31...'tlfg8 32 ':h6 �f8! doubtless has problems but he is still in
25lLlb5] 24 'iixf6 c;t>g8 25 h4!! [25 :td3 square for his king with h4. a) 32....:d2? 33 lLle7 'il'g7 34 'il'a8+ the game.
.i.e4] 25... .li.xg2 26 f3 and White wins.) 24 h3 :tfeS wins; 36 itJf5+ �g6 37 lLle7+ 'ith6 3S f4
20lLlxc6 (20 'ifh3 l:th8 21lLlxc6 .li.xc6) Not 24...lLlxf3+? 25 gxf3 and White's b) 32...�g5? 1-0
20....li.xc6 and Black probably heavy pieces catch the king.
survives. 25lLld4 'ii'g 6
Similarities in a rook versus bishop endgame - with rook's pawns too.
After 19 �b5! l:tfd8 20 :td3!? Not 25...•g5? 26 ':g4 winning.
(20 lLld4 also wins as it transposes 26�f4 T.Petrosian - L.Aronin G.Kasparov -A.Yusupov
to the line with 19 lLld4) 20...l:tac8 Not 26 f4? 'Wb I + 27 c;t>h2 lLlg6
21 lLld4 'iie5 22 lLlxc6 'ii'xe3 23 fxe3 28 "g3 :te l .
l:td6 24 �a4 a6 25 :tc2 and White 26.. J:tadS 27 lLlf5+ c;t>h8 28 ':xd8
wins. ':xd8 29 'lWe4 l:tc8?
19...'ii'd6! 20 �xd5 If 29 .. J:tg8 30 g4. Alternatively
If 20 l:txc6? 'iixc6 21 l:txd5 exd5 29 .....g8! to free the g6-square for his
22 �d4 'ii'a4! 23 �c2 'lIVe8 and Black knight. 30 lLle7 (30 ':h6 lLlg6; 30 £4
wins as BeJiavsky pointed out. lLlg6 31 "iWc6 l:td I + 32 c;t>h2 �d8
20 ...exd5 33 lLlh6 'it>g7 34 lLlf5+ is a repetition.)
See diagram on page J 04. 30... �g7 31 :th5! and White has

J08 109
Tigran Petros ian the 91h Tigran Pelrosian the 9';'

T.Petrosian - L.Aronin Black can resist. Petrosian won even though bis
USSR Team Championship, Riga 1 954 32 ... iJ.. d6 33 1:e2 iJ..e5 34 'ii' b l 1:c4 opponent bad an additional f-pawn. I

35 1:113 h5 36 b3 :lh4 37 h3 lif4 had every reason to be optimistic.

8l...iJ.. f2
1 e4 c5 2 lllo d6 3 d4 cId4 4 lll x d4 38 'ii'c 2 'it>c7 39 1:g2 �c6 40 �dl
The forthright 8 1 ...£3 82 .rIe8 f2
lll f6 5 lllc3 a6 6 ..tg5 e6 7 'it'D lllb d7 lin+ 41 'ii'e 2
83 :Irs sets up a zugzwang.
8 0-0-0 tic7 9 'it'g3 b6 10 iJ..If6 gxf6
82 1:g2 iJ.. g3
This is a risky option.
11 c,t>bl lll b6 1 2 f4 iJ.. d7

13 'iVh4! iJ.. e7 14 'it'h5
Black has serious problems with his
special Rauzer pawn formation.
4 1 ...rIf4
The rook is actively placed on the
fourth and causes much inconvenience.
42 rIg8 as 43 1:h8 1:h4 44 rIa8 'it>b6
45 a4 .rIe4+ 46 c,t>01H4+ 47 'it>e2 11e4+
48 :e3 .rIh4 49 1:c8 :ld4 50 :ld3 :le4+
51 'it>f3 :f4+ 52 'it>e2 1:e4+ 53 1:e3
66.. .'�b4
Black is likely to take the a-pawn and
with the h4-pawn he has chances to
draw even with the exchange deficit.
67 l1a7 (5 68 �f3 f4 69 :a8 Wa3
70 �g2 �b4 7 1 :a6 'it>a3 72 :a7 Wb4
73 �O �a3 74 �e4
83 1:b2!
I recalled that Tigran Vartanovich
had won this endgame.
83 ... Wa8 84 1:b7 iJ..f2
After 84 . . .n 85 lid7 Wb8 86 1:h7 fl
87:£7 wins.

14 ... .I:[h7 1 5 f5 e5? Alternatively, 84 ... iJ..h 2 85 Wc7 n+

Alternatively 1 5 ... 0-0-0 1 6 fxe6 fx.e6
1 7 'lWh3 c,t>b8 1 8 iJ..e2 and White's
advantage is smaller than in the game.
16 lll e6 'it'c6 17 'it'g4 .i.f8 18 'it'g8
fxe6 1 9 'it'1h7
lid4 54 .rIc2 1:h4 55 1:d3 1:e4+ 56 'ottO
86 �c8 f2 87 1:b2 Wa7 88 :xfl iJ..g 3
rIf4+ 57 'ii'g 2 lie4 58 �O 1:f4+
89 :lb2! White must keep Black's king
59 'it>e2 1:e4+ 60 1:e3 1:f4 in the corner. 89 :lf6 was winning as
74...lt>b4
well.
After 74 ...�b3 75 a5 �b4 76 a6 Wb5
77:a8 'it>b6 78 '1ttd5 .i.fl (78...0 79 a7

White has won the exchange, and in fl 80 nrs 'it>xa7 81 �c6 wins.

return Black has very little. 8 1 .. .fI='if 82 :lxfl 'it>b8 [82...iJ..h 2

83 1:bI] 83 �d7 White cuts off the king
19 ... 0-0-0 20 fIe6 iJ..1e6 21 iJ.. e2 d5
from bI and his king goes to g5 and
22 n:d5 lll1 d5 23 lll 1 d5 ..t1d 5
takes the h4-pawn. ) 79 a7 'it>b7
24:1h n ?
(79...iJ..g 3 80 :lg8 �xa7 8 1 �c6
Best was 2 4 iJ..g4+! c,t>b8 25 .i.f3
transposes to the game.) 80 1:rs �xa7
winning.
6 1 l:tc4 81 1:xf4 iJ.. g3 82 1:b4 wins.
24 ... c,t>b8 25 'ilr'f5 iJ..e7 26 .i.o e4 Finally he removes Black's rook. 75 1:a8 Wb3 76 as �b4 77 a6 Wb5 85 Wc7!
27 iJ..e 2 .l:!.c8 28 *'1d5 tixc2+ 29 c,t>al 6 1 ...1:txc4 62 b1C4 �c5 63 lib3 78 Wd5 �b6 79 a7! Wb7 80 1:g8! White not only stalemates the black
'it'xe2 30 l1fel 'it'1g2 3 1 'it'1e4 '�he4 'ottx c4 64 1:Ib7 h4 65 .l:[b5 iJ.. g3 �xa7 8 1 �c6 king but also creates threats of
32 :lxe4 66 1:ha5 See diagram on page 109. checkmate.

110 11 1
Tigran Petros ian rhe 9th
85 ... .i.gJ 86 'it> e 8 fJ 87 .l:r.e7!
Black is in zugzwang. After 87 .l:r.b3
<tia7 88 thO �b6 Black holds as the
king can leave the comer.
87 .. . fl
88 llf7
Black has no choice but to drop the
pawn because of the zugzwang.
88 ... .i. e5 89 J:[Ifl �a7 90 .l:r.fS! .i.g3
91 J:[b S!
White must make sure Black's king
stays in the comer. It is remarkable that
Black loses this type of endgame if his
king is in any comer, whereas he can
draw if his bishop gets on the e l-h4
diagonal and his king reaches the
centre. It can be very useful to know
these secrets. Incidentally 91 11f6 wins
as well.
91 ...<,Pa6 92 llb l <baS 93 <,Pd7
White just collects the h-pawn and
wins.
112
93 ...<,Pa4 94 'it>e6 <,PaS 95 <,Pf5 'it>a4
96 'it>g4 <,PaS 97 .l:r.b7 1-0
G. Kasparov - A.Yusupov
Linares 1993
1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 J lOc3 .i.e7 4 eIdS
exd5 5 .i.f4 lLlf6 6 eJ �f5 7 lOge2 0-0
8 lLlg3 .i. e6 9 .i.dJ c5 10 dI eS iLxe5
11 0-0 lLle6 12 J:[c 1
12 ....i.d6
Artur is ready to defend the isolated
pawn middlegame. It looks like Black
gets away with exchanging all the
central pawns if he were to play
12...d4!? 13 lLlce4 (after 13 lLlb5 iLb6
14 e4 lLlg4 Black has a nice position,
as in Lautier-Marciano, France 1999)
13 ....i.e7 14 lLlf5 .i.xf5 15 lLlxf6+
.i.xf6 16 �xf5 'ilfa5 (16 ... dxe3
17 �xe3 'ilfxd I 18 J:[ fxd I J:[fd8 19 il.d7
lLle5 20 il.b5 J:[xd I + 21 J:[xd I a6
22 .i.e2 J:[d8 23 11c I lLlc6 and Black is
able to live with White's two bishops as
in Karo1yi-Zahilas, Hungary-Greece,
E-mail Olympiad 2000) 17 Si.bl J:[ad8
18 iVb3 J:[d7 19 exd4 11fd8! and Black
is not worse, Gulko-Shabalov, Seattle
2000.
13 lLl h S �e7 14 lLlb5 lLlxh5
I S Wxh5 g 6 1 6 'fifJ ll e8 1 7 J:[ fd l _d7
1 8 h3 llfd 8 19 'iVg3 lOb4 20 lOc3
lOxd3 2 1 J:[ xd3 .i.fS 22 J:[d2 " e6
23 .l:r.cdl h5 24 h4?!
Taking the pawn with 24 ltJxd5 was
better thanks to a little tactic. 24 ...lhd5
25 J:[xd5 h4 26 "0 �e4 27 .l:r.e5!
24 ... J:[ e S 25 fJ 'ife6 26 e4
26 ... J:[ xe3!
The exchange sacrifice offers real
chances of survival.
27 b x e3 it"b6+ 28 Wh2 d xe4
29 lbd8+ �xd8 30 �e3
30 fxe4!? offers White
promising way to enter an endgame.
30 ... �xe4 31 "e3 �c6 32 "e5!?
(32 "xb6 .i.xb6 33 .i.e5) 32...Wh7
33 J:[d2 "a5 34 'it'xa5 �)(a5 35 .i.e5.
30 ... 'it'a5 3 1 "b8 "e7+ 32 "xe7
�xe7+ 33 rjo> g l exfJ 34 g xfJ b6
35 rjo>f2 rjo>f8 36 J:[d4
36 ...�e7?!
This allows the exchange of bishops.
1igran Petrosian the 9th
37 .i.f4
Reducing the amount of material. On
the other hand White will now have
more freedom of movement for his
king. Another idea is 37 J:[a4 a5
38 l:tc4!?
37 ... �d4 38 J:[ xf4 rjo>d6 39 rjo>e3 'iii> e5
40 J:[d4 �e6 41 a3 as 42 r;!;>e4 b5
After 42...f6 43 f4 White can breach
the fortress by defending the queenside
with the king on cI and invading with
the rook on d8.
43 'Wte5 a4 44 f4 We6 45 1o>f6 'itc5
46 J:[b4 �e4 47 'l;e7 �e6 48 J:[e4 'Wtd5
49 lld4+ 'Wtc6 50 'itd8
White cannot penetrate yet.
50 ... �f5 5 1 rjo>e8 �e6 52 Wf8 .,p eS
53 'Wtg7 �c6 54 'Wtg8 'Wt e 5 55 'l;f8..t>c6
56 'Wtg7 'Wt e5 5 7 'Wth8 'l;c6 58 Wh7 '1t> c5
59 'it h6 �f5 60 'l;g5 �e6 6 1 'it>f6..t>c6
a more
62 f5 !
Reducing the number of pawns while
simultaneously freeing the f4-square
for the rook.
62 •.. � xf5 63 'it xf7 'Wtc5 64 'itf6 �c2
65 'Wt e7 �f5 66 'Wtd8 'it e6 67 J:[f4!
It was 62 f5 that enabled him to play
this move.
67 ... 'Wtd6 68 .l:r.b4 'itc5 69 <ti e7 il.d3
70 J:[d4 �e2 71 'l;b7 .i.f1 72 'it>a7 il. e2
73 J:[e4 �d3
But not 73... �c4? 74 'Wta6 b4+
113
Tigran Petros ian the 9th
75 lhc4+! and having the king on c4
enables the g-pawn to promote. If
75.. ';!i'xc4 76 cxb4 g5 77 hxg5 wins.
74 nb4 .i.c4 75 �a6 �dS 76 �aS
'it> eS
Black can't stay on the queenside
with 76...�c5, because of zugzwang.
77 lIbl .i.d3 78 nb2. Then 78....i.c4
79 l:d2 i..f1 80 l:td4! .i.e2 (80... .i.g2
81 lId8 i..f1 82 l:tc8+ 'it>d5 83 'it>b4)
81 l:te4 i..f 1 82 l:te5+ wins.
77 lIb l
77 ...gS?
Black reduces the number of pawns
but the final endgame is unfortunate for
him. Keeping the pawns on with
77...c,t>f4 was just enough to survive:
78 l:g l .i.d3 79 c,t>b4 <;t>fJ 80 c4!?
(80 <;t>c5 'it>f2 81 l:g5 <bfJ) 80... .i.xc4!
(80...bxc4? 8 1 �xa4 'it>e3 82 'it>b4 'it>d2
83 1:I.g2+ .i.e2 84 a4! c3 85 l:txe2+
<bxe2 86 <;t>xc3 g5 87 hxg5 h4 88 g6 b3
89 g7 h1 90 g8='ii' h l ='ii' 91 'iVg4+!
[or 91 'ii'e6+!]9 l...<'pf2 92 "'f4+ White
can swap queens and win.) 81 l:xg6
<;t>f4 82 l:tg5 .i.e2 83 �c5 i..g4 84 'ii;>d4
<bg3 85 'it>e3 'it>xh4 86 �f4 Black's
king is choked, and it's scary, but Black
can hold. 86 ... i..d7' 87 lIc5 i..e8!
114
88 lIc3! .i.f7 89 lIc2 <bb3 90 lIc5 �c4!
(90...h4? 91 l:I.xb5 'it>g2 92 lIb2+ 'it>gl
[92... <bfl 93 lIh1 �e l 94 <be3 wins]
93 �g4 �f 1 94 �xh4
Black's king is in a poor position and
now be loses. If his king were instead
on f6, that would be enough for him to
obtain a draw. If Black's bishop were
dark-squared and situated on f8, the
position would also be a draw even
though White could defend the a-pawn
with his rook along the third rank.
94.. .'�el 95 <bg4 'it>d l 96 <bf4 i..b3
97 �e3 �cl 98 lIh1 .i.c2 99 'it>d4 <;t>b2
100 'it>c5 wins. [but not 100 'it>c4??
'it>xa3].) 91 lIxh5+ �g2 92 'it>e3 �f1
93 .J:g5 .i.e2 94 <t>d2 .i.c4 95 lIf5+
<t>gI! 96 <;t>e3 �g2 and White can make
no progress as I pointed out in my
Informant analysis.
78 bIgS 'it> fS 79 lIg l <bg6 80 'it>b4
h 4 8 1 <bcs h3 82 'it>d4
Not 82 lIh I? .i.e6 83 �xb5 �xg5
84 'it>xa4 'it>g4 85 'it>b5 i..d5! and White
has to give up the rook for the pawn,
while the bishop contains the a- and
c- pawns.
82 ... .i. e6 83 <be5 i..d 7 84 'it>f4 it. c6
85 �g3 <'pIg5
86 nd l ! !
White exchanges the weak c 3 pawn.
After 86 'it>xh3+ �f4 87 ng3 �e4
88 �g4 �d5 89 �f4 �c4 Black's king
is active.
86 ... h2 87 �xb2 �f4
If 87 ... �f5 88 lId4! and White cuts
off the king. (On the other hand 88 c4
allows Black to escape into
favourable version of the game. On
88...bxc4 89 l:d4 c3 90 l:tc4 .i.d5
the bishop would reach b3, and that
would save him as his king is in the
centre and can't be forced into any
comer.) 88 .. .'t>e5 89 'it>g3 and White's
king has time to return to the centre and
push Black back.
88 c4
Now cutting off the king by 88 l:I.d4+
is ineffective, as it is only temporary.
88...�e3 89 �g3 (if 89 l:d6 .i.e4)
89... .i.e4! (Black has to approach c3
Ttgran Petrosian the 9th
otherwise White's king invades, e.g.
89... .i.e8 90 �g4) 90 'it>g4 ..id3.
88 ... b:u4 89 1:I.d4+ �e5 90 lIIC4
Since the computer programs have
reached new levels of analysis we can
understand this type of endgame much
better. Now the bishop can't reach b3.
90 ... �d5 9 1 l:I.b4 <;j;>c5 92 <;f;>g3
a Not 92 l:tb2? i..d5'
92....i.b5 93 'it>f4 c;t;b6
If 93.....ic6 94 'ite3 it.b5 95 We4
i..c6+ 96 ot>d3 ..ib5+ 97 �c3 i..e8
98 l:tf4 wins.
94 <;j;> e3 Wa5 95 'it>d4 i..e2 96 l:b l
i.. h 5 97 nel .i.f7
Now the bishop reaches b3 and yet
Black is lost because his king is in the
corner. If Black's bishop were dark­
squared and stood on f8 it would be a
draw.
98 Wc5 ..ib 3 99 lle8 Wa6 100 ..t>c6
�a7 101 'it>b5 'it>b7
1'15
Trgran Petrosian the 9th Trgran Petros ian the 9th

112 f1c7+ 'it>b8 [112...c,t>d8 113 f1a7 rush his king to the b-file and win. He 113 'ii' d6 'it g S ! 114 'iteS 'ii' g 6
wins.) 113 'it>c6 �c2 114 �b6 �b3 can't allow the black king to reach g5 115 1:0 c;t> g7 116 f1f6 �e4 117 'iti>fS
115 .l:td7 �c8 116 .l:td4 is the same earlier. �b3 1 1 8 'it gS �e2 VI-VI
zugzwang.) 112 �c6 �d8 113 f1d7+ l l l ...'iti>n 1 1 2 f1f4+ <,f,;> g6 ! When I went home I quickly checked
�c8 (113 ... We8 114 f1d4 wins.) Not 112 ...�g7? which loses after the Petrosian game and noticed that he
114 f1h7�f3+ 115 �b6 �dl 116 f1h4 113 Wc6 Wg6 114 'itb5 and the king was in fact Black and actually lost this
.i.b3 117 f1d4! wins. 102 f1e4! <lIc7 can't get to c8. game.
103 f1d4 �b7 104 1:d7+ 'it>c8 105 �c6
�c2 106 'it>d6 �dl 107 f1f7 �b3 I had the most annoying experience of all with Petrosian, as he beat me with
108 f1b7�dl 109 'it>c6 .i.f3+ 110 <lIb6 a particular central pawn structure seen in the diagram below. I learned from
102 f1e7+?? �dl III 1:h4 �b3 112 1:d4 also wins. that and wanted to use my new found knowledge against Karpov when exactly
Petrosian won because his 102... �c8 103 �c6 �d8 the same structure arose.
opponent's king was too far away, I
hoped that I could chase the king t o
G.Kasparov - T.Petrosian A.Karpov G. Ka s p a rov
wbere Tigran's opponent's king was.
-

Better was 102 f1d8! as the king has to

be kept in the corner, White wins even
if the bishop is on b3. This is the case if
Black's pawn were on a5, his bishop on
b4 and White's pawn on a4. 102... 'it>c7
103 l:td3 �c8 Postponing the
inevitable. If 103...'it>b7 104 f1c3 �dl
105l:tcl �b3 106'it>a5'it>a7107t!.c7+ 104 f1d7+ <;Pe8!
'it'b8 108 �b6 .i.a2 [if 108... �g8 Black escapes from the corner and
109 l:te7) 109 t!.a7�b3 110l:td7'it>c8 that saves him.
111 f1d4 105 �c7 �c2 106 1:d2 �b3!
First here is the game against How could I try the Petrosian
107 f1eH �n 108 �d6 �c4
Petrosian. variation against its inventor? Could
109 1:e7+ 'it>f8 110 l:te4 �b3 that in itself have been a mental
G.Kasparov - T.Petrosian blackout?
Moscow, 1981 4 . �b7 5 lLle3 dS 6 exdS lLlxdS 7 e3
. .

�e7 8 � bS+ c6 9 �d3 lLlxc3 10 bxe3

1 d4 eS 11 0-0 0-0
This is perhaps my most unfortunate
game. I picked up the idea from
Petrosian when he beat me. Then I used
it at a most critical moment against
Karpov in a World Cbampionship
The key position. Black is in a lethal
match. I lost that game as well when I
zugzwang.) 104 'it'c6 �a2 105 f1d4
needed a draw to retain the title. While
R.f7 106 .l%f4 �e8+ The bishop has t o 1 1 1 <;Pd7
analysing it for my Predecessors book I
leave the diagonal. I 0 7 �c5 'it>c7 If White had one more move, then a
realised some of my earlier comments
108 1:e4 �d7 109 1:e7�c8 110 'it>d6 rook check would help - just as in the
were not quite correct.
R.b5 III f1f7 �e2 (11l...�d3 Petrosian game and he could then
1 ...lLlf6 2 e4 e6 3 lLlo b6 4 a3 1 2 'We2 g6 1 3 e4 4Je6 14 �h6l:te8

116 1-17
TIgran Petrosian the 9th
This time there is no exchange
sacrifice.
IS l::tfdl jVc7 16 We2 l::ted8 17 jVe3
e5 18 d5 ttJa5 19 c4
After 19 a4 c4 20 it.c2 it.c8 the
position is equal.
19...ttJb3
Petrosian centralises the knight. I lost
quite a number of games by leaving a
knight on a5 or h5. Nikolaevsky, Zaid,
Magerramov, Beliavsky and Gulko
beat me in those games.
20 1:[a2 f6 21 h4 .liLe8
Dvoretsky and Yusupov pointed out
that Black should have exchanged the
bishop with 2 L..>tfB!.
22 l::tb 1 ttJd4 23 ttJId4 C](d4
I thought the d4-pawn was not bad,
but hoped to get a good game in the
end.
24 'it'g3
See diagram on page 117.
24....liLf8
118
25.liLd2!
Now I can save it.
25....liLd6 26 ':'0 jVg7 27 a4?!
Dvoretsky and Yusupov found the
right move which was 27 .liLb4,
stopping .i.d7. 27... jVe7 28 f4 leaves
White a bit better.
27...a5 2811b2 it.c5 29 f4.liLd7
Petrosian suggested 29...h6!.
30 h5 .liLxa4?
If 30...gxh5 3 1 'it'h4 .liLg4. This move
was not mentioned in my 198 1
analysis. The position is unclear.
31 h6
As we have already seen, Karpov
pushed his pawns as far as this.
31..:ii'c 7 32 f5?!
In 198 1 I did not spot that 32 fxe5!
would give me an advantage. Then
3Lfxe5 33 .liLg5 11fB 34 .liLf6. I shall
not repeat the analysis from My Great
Predecessors. Suffice it to say W hite
retains the advantage against all Black
defences.
32... g5 33 .liLIg5! fIg5?
Better was 33... 'it?fl. Petrosian often
used his king with great style. For
example when he beat Fischer in the
1959 Candidates tournament. After
34 .liLcl 11g8 35 'it'h3 White has a slight
edge.
34 1hg5+ 'it?f8
35 Wf6+?
In time trouble I lose my way. Best
was 35 f6! 'fIfl 36 lIfxe5 11e8 (if
36... lIfg6 37 11xb6! lIfxh6 38 'fIe7+!
wins) 37 'fIg5 lIfg6 38 11f5 and the
white pawns are too dangerous and he
will win. I lost to Kramnik in a 1994
Intel rapid game in a similar fashion. I
consolidated a piece on d4, he took it,
then he sacrificed
exchange. He went on to defeat me.
You can see that game on page 166 in
the Smyslov chapter. So even my own
analysis helped my rival, making this
really the most unfortunate game of all!
35...'it>e8! 36 l::ta1
36...We7!!
This is a great defensive move. I
understand now why Botvinnik did not
always anticipate Petrosian's moves.
37 'ilr'e6?
I should have swapped queens and
defended in the endgame.
119
Tigran Petrosian the 9th
37.. J:td6! 38 'ilVg8+ 'it'f8 39 'ilr'g3
lIfxh6
401:[xa4?
When I wrote the chapter on
Petrosian I discovered that White could
still stay in the game or at least
resist with 40 lIfg8+. Then 40... 'it'fB
41 'itxfB+ <;i<xfB 42 11xa4 and Black is
somewhat better. However it is hard to
tell whether he can win.
40...'ii'cl+ 41 <;i<f2 1\fxb2+ 42 WO
'it>fl 0-1
My fourth World Championship
match with Karpov stood at II- I I and
I needed to score one more point to
retain the title. This was the dramatic
end ofthe match.
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Game 23, World Championship,
Seville 1987
I e4 e5 2 ttJO ttJf6 3 ttJe3 d5 4 exd5
ttJxd5 5 d4 ttJxe3 6 bxe3 g6 7 e3 it.g7
8 it.d3 0-090-0'ite7 10l:[b1 b6
The pawn structure is becoming very
similar to my game against Petros ian.
11 'it e2 l:[d8 12 it.e4
Tigran Petrosian the 9th Iigran Petrosian the 9th

19 nfc1 nac8 20 �d2 :f7 21 a4 If 48 nxe5 �d6 49 l:th5+. I was

fxe4 22 Wh.e4 l:tcfS hoping that sacrificing material would
I even control the f-file. not bring any luck, as had happened
23 B 16 years earlier. After 49 ...gxh5 50 e5+
�g8 5 1 exd6 'ii'xd6 52 'ii'xd4 'ii'f 6
Karpov and Zaitsev evaluated the
position as equal.
48...l:tfl 49 .i.d2 .i.c5 50 .!lc6

33 fxe4
12 �a6!
..•

The central pawns are configured in

To weaken the d4-square.
the same way.
13 c4lDc6 14 d5 f5 15 �d3 e5! 16 e4
33...:f7 34 Wg3 bu5 35 �xa5 l:tf4
lDd4
36.!leI 'ii'a6 37 �d2l:tf7 38 Wd3.!lefS
I got very excited and realised I did 23...�c8
39 h3
not even have to expend tempi like I had yet to become acquainted with
Karpov doesn't push the h-pawn two
Tigran Vartanovich. the analysis of Yusupov and Dvoretsky
squares like I did.
17lDl:d4 nd4 who pointed out that ...�c8 was not the
39....!lf2 40 .!lat 'ii'f6 41 l:tgl h5!?
best move for Petrosian. I just copied 50...n7B??
42.!la5
See diagram on page J J 7 his play. A horrible blunder. thought
Or 42 �e l ! ? l:tfl 43 �g3 :xgl+ 44
24 a5 everything was going my way and it
q,;,xgl .
I felt things were really going my Karpov did not let me fix the a5- was time to reap the fruit of my lexical
42...'ii'e7 43 :bl
way. pawn. Okay, you can't have everything. knowledge. 1 felt it was time for a
It is the same pawn structure and 24 ... �f5 25 'it'e2 l1e8 26 �e4 �fS knockout punch. In a way I was
I would be able to use the knowledge 27 'it'd3 successful as the battle does indeed end
I had gained from my loss against fairly quickly. But after the game I was
Petrosian. not satisfied. A much better alternative
18 �g5 was 50 ... .i.b4!?
51 gxB .!lxB 52 l1e7+ �h8

43...h4
Showing my optimism, I don't need
to worry about putting pawns onto the
27...�c5 colour of Karpov's bishop as there will
Now my bishop has arrived at the be no bishop ending here.
same square as Petrosian's. Life can be 44 :a6 :8f7 45 nc6
18 ....I:I.fS sweet, I thought. If 45 .l:te6 'ii'fS. 53 .i.h6!
In addition I have more space on the 28 nal 'ii'd 7 29 nel We8 30 �hl 45...'ii'flI 46 :gl .i.e7 47 :e6 �h7! What a shock it was to be on the
queenside. l1c7 31 nabl �g7 32 .!lec1 �xe4 48 .i.eI receiving end of this intermediate

1 20 121
Tigran Perrosian the 9th

move. Suddenly Black is completely
lost.
53 ...l:I.xd3 54 �d"8 l:I.xh3+ 55 <;i;>g2
l:I.g3+ 56 <;i;>h2 l:I.xgl 57 �xc5 d3
1-0
In the end I won the last game and
thus kept my title but, my word, it was
a close run thing. Had I lost the match,
Petrosian would have had something to
Mikhail Tal the 8th
do with it.

Tal decisively defeated Botvinnik in and certainly picked up many ideas

1960 to become world champion, but from these experiences. His calculating
he lost a return match in a similarly ability was one of his strong points. I
convincing fashion one year later. T he believe this features in my chess as
magician from Riga was the last well.
champion to gain the title before I was I do have very nice memories
born and is famous for his very associated with Tal, but also some
aggressive attacking style. I played painful ones. Let's have a look at a few
some training and blitz games with him examples.

With synunetrical pawn islands of four kingside pawns and a- and c-pawns,
whoever exerts greater pressure on the opponent's pawn structure should gain
the upper hand.

N.Rashkovsky - M.Tal A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

N.Rashkovsky - M.Tal He previously beat Gulko with the

Chigorin Memorial, Sochi 1973 main move 8 .. c5. Tal was extremely
.

good in positions where one player had

1 d4 g6 2 e4 tOf6 3 tOe3 d5 a rook versus bishop and knight and
Interestingly, Tal rarely employed the I lost a slightly similar game to
Griinfeld - according to the databases Romanishin in Moscow 1981. Tal
only four times. It is a bit of surprise as played extremely powerfully when
this opening often provides very there was unbalanced material on the
dynamic positions, ones which Misha board and my most bitter memory in
would have handled so well. such circumstances was my loss to
4 exd5 tOxd5 5 e4 tOxc3 6 bxe3 .ltg7 Anand in Tilburg 1991.
7 �e4 0-08 liJe2 liJc6 90-0 b6 10 �e3 .ltb7 11 'ii'd2 liJa5

122
123
Mikhail Tal the 8th
12 .i.d3 e6 14 ... 0-0! 15 cxb6 axb6 However the
Let me stress the effect this game had pawn structure doesn't always give
on me. In my game against Korchnoi in Black a good game. For example,
the World Cup in Reykjavik 1988 I Smyslov beat Ribli with White the
same year in a Candidates match.
also played a similar e6 in a main line
16 0-0 'it'c7 17 .i.b5 .i.xe5 18 .i.h6 .i.g7
Griinfeld.
19 .i.xg7 'it>xg7 20 'it'd4+ 'it'g8 21 lLlg5
13 �h6 eS 14 .i.xg7 'it>xg7 IS 'it'f4
h6 22 lLle4 .i.xe4 23 'it'xe4 lLla6 24 'it'e3
Korchnoi put his queen on the
'it'c5 25 'it'xc5 lLlxc5 26 l:fbl l:fd8
queenside - that game ended in a draw.
27 l:b4 l:d6 28 .HI �f8 29 a4 l:a5
Is ...LOc6 16 �bS 'it'f6 17 'ihf6+
30 g3 �e7 31 'it>g2 f5 32 .i.b5 l:d2
'it'xf6 18 dxeS
33 l1d4 l:xd4 34 cxd4 lLlxa4 35 lha4
l:xb5 36l:a7+ \t>d6 37l:h7 h5 38l:g7
l1d5 39l:xg6 b5 40 'it'0 b4 41 'it>e3 b3
42 'it>d2 l:xd4+ 43 'it>c3 b2 44 �xb2
11d2+ 45 'it>c3 l:xf2 46 h4 f4 47 l:g5
110+ 48 c;t>d4 l1xg3 49 l1xh5 l1e3
50 l:h6 'it>e7 51 h5 e5+ 52 c;t>d5 0 0-1
Kasparov-Korchnoi, London 1983.
19 lLlcl
Whoever starts exerting pressure on
the opponent's pawn structure will be
the one who gets the upper hand.
18 ...bxcS
19 ...lLlaS! 20nel nab8 21 eS+ \t>g7
We have reached a key position.
22 lLlb3
Alternatively, 18...lHc8 would also
22 �fl!? keeps the pawn structure as
have been interesting. Korchnoi beat
it is.
me only once in our many encounters ,
the only time I suffered was during our
Candidates match in London 1 983. He
used the pawn sacrifice motif under
rather similar conditions after 1 d4 lLlf6
2 c4 e6 3 lLlo b6 4 lLlc3 �b7 5 a3 d5
6 cxd5 lLlxd5 7 e3 g6 8 �b5+c6 9 .i.d3
.i.g7 10 e4 lLlxc3 I I bxc3 c5 12 �g5
lfd6 13 e5 'it'd7 14 dxc5
22 ...�xg2!
Tal weakens Rashkovsky's pawns on
the kingside.
23 c4 lLlxb3 24 axb3 �b7 2S l:xa7
l1fd8! 26 It>n .i.n 27 �d7nxb3
27... l1b7 also gives reasonable
winning chances as after 28 l1xb7
124
Mikhail Tal the 8th
�xb7 29 �a4 g5 White is rather T his is the very same queens ide
passive and his pawns are loose. pawn formation that Tal had against
28 �xe6 l:b7 29 l:a3 fxe6 30 lbn Rashkovsky.
l:d4 31 lIf6ne7 32 l1al See diagram on page 123.
32 J:lci J:le4 33 f4 l:I.f7 34 l:xe6
Black's king is less active than in
l:fxf4+ 35 'iPgI h5 is tough for Black,
Misha's game, therefore I thought
but not hopeless.
White had better drawing chances.
32 ...l:e4 33 f4 lhe4 34 'it>e2 l:I.e2+
Nevertheless I had no inkling of what
3S 'it>d3 lhh2 36 ::tel l:h3+ 37 'it>e4??
was about to happen.
The king is frequently well-placed
Another famous game by a champion
in the centre, but not always. T hese
suggested to me that I have a good
exceptions make chess such a
position because of the pawn structure.
wonderful game. White finds himself
Here it is:
in a difficult endgame after 37 'it>c4!,
L.Portisch - R.Fischer
although he has chances of holding on.
Piatigorsky Cup, Santa Monica 1966
37...l:d7!
21 -tf4 h6 22 ne2 g5 23 �e5 "d8
Tal grabs the chance to net
Rashkovsky's king. 24 l::tfe l 'iPn 25 h3 f4 26 ..t>h2 a6
38 l:e4 l:dd3! 0-1 27 ne4 'it'd5 28 h4 lLle3 291:[Jxe3 fxe3
30 l:xe3 'li'xa2 31 110+ <Ji>e8 32 �g7
Out of the blue White's king IS
getting checkmated. 'li'c4 33 hxg5 hxg5 34 J:lf8+ ..t>d7
35 lh8 <Ji>c6 0-1
Now we look at the game which was 15 nabl lLlb6 16 -te2 e5
inspired by Tal.
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Game 27, World Championship.
Moscow 1984
1 lLln dS 2 d4 lLlf6 3 e4 e6 4 lLle3
�e7 S �gS h6 6 �xf6 �xf6 7 e3 0-0
8 'li'e2 eS 9 dxeS dxc4 10 �xe4 'li'aS
11 0-0 �xc3 12 'li'xe3 'li'xe3 13 bxe3
lLld7 14 e6 bu6
125
Mikhail Tal the 8th
1 7 1Hcl
Karpov places the rook behind his
own pawn instead of occupying an
open file. I felt good as he was
defending the c-pawn before advancing
it and generally it is reassuring when
your opponent feels obliged to defend.
Karpov doesn 't go for Rashkovsky's
pawn formation with 1 7 tDe5 when
after 1 7 . .. .i.b7 1 8 tDd7 nfc8 1 9 tDxb6
axb6 the position is equal .
1 7...�b7?!
Since this game other players have
developed the bishop on d7, following
up with .l:1fd8 and <;t>f8. But I felt I was
ready to start applying pressure.
18 <;t>n .i.dS?!
Out of 1 7 games played since this
game, nobody has lost this position
with Black. Perhaps they didn't know
Ta l's game and perhaps I was
overconfident. Tal also developed his
bishop on this square.
19 nbS tDd7
Not 19 . . . .i.xa2? when 20 c4 wins.
Bener was 1 9 . nfc 8 !
..
20 naS
When Karpov made this move I
started to feel even bener about l ife. H e
had already used his other rook to
defend a pawn, thereby giving up the
open file. He must have been feeling
troubled.
20 ...nlb8 21 c4 .i.c6
1 26
Mikhail Tal the 8th
22 tDel Taking the pawn with 26 lbxc5? led 42 g3 ne8 43 ng7!
Such a superb endgame player as to equal ity. After 26 ... lZ'lxc5 27 l:txc5 Classical principles. The rook stands
Karpov is now retreating. This made l:I.b2 28 nxc6 ndd2 Black's rooks are well on the seventh.
me feel that I was on the right track. good enough to draw. 43...l:.t1I 44 .l:1xa7 :Lf2 45 ..t>h 4
2 2 ...l:.b4 26 ...'1f;1t11 27 lZ'lxcs
Exerting pressure on the c-pawn. Now the sobering reality of the game
After 22 . . . nb2? 23 f3 ! White can made me forget about Tal's win. I wish
follow up with tDd3 (but not 23 tDd3 I had not known about that game at all.
27...lZ'lxc5
.i.xg2+).
White is just a pawn up for nothing.
22 . . .i.e4 is also met by 23 f3 and
.
after 23 ... .i.g6 24 e4. Later I will show Very annoying indeed. Misha, Misha
how I was misled in my judgment of what did your magician's spell do to
such a bishop. Alekhine and Euwe are me?
guilty for creating that impression. 28 nxc5 l:I.d6 29 'iPe2 'iPe7 30 l:I.dl
Then 24 .. J:tb7 25 tDd3 l:.c8 enables l:I.xdl 31 <1f;1xdl �d6 32 l:1.85 f5 33 �e2
45 ...l:.xh2
B lack to survive without losing h5 34 e4!? fxe4 35 fxe4
Fischer also misled me with the
material.
power of the edge-pawn due to his
23 .i.dl
game against Taimanov. Tal is not the
Karpov keeps going backward. I was
only one who can be blamed for my
pulling his strings just as i f he were a
loss in this game. However he played
puppet.
the biggest role in it. Simplifying with
2 3...l:.b7
45 ... ltb2 did not help either as then
Here I got a bit confused - suddenly
comes 46 c5+ ..t>c6 47 ..t>c4 .i.a2
I had to retreat as well.
48 .i.xa2 l:txa2 49 1:[a6+ 'it>b7 50 .l:1b6+
24 f3 nd8 25 tDd3 gS
'iPc7 51 .l:1h6 lhh2 52 ..t>d5 l:I.h l
53 l:.h7+ Wb8 (53 .. .'it>c8 54 c;t>d6 ! )
3S....i.xe4
5 4 ..t>e4! - a very strong switch.
Tal was able to take the g2 pawn.
46 c5+ �c6 47 .i.a4+ ..t>d5 48 :Ld7+!
remembered that - and hoped to do it as
In an adjournment it was easy for
well. But it never happens.
Karpov. He had so many seconds to
36 l:1.xg5 .i.f5 37 �e3 h4 38 <1f;1d4 e5+
analyse for him.
39 'iPc3
48.. .'ote4 49 c6 .l:1b2+ 50 <1f;1a5 ltb8
Karpov sends a message that he is
going to play on the queenside again.
39....i.bl 40 83 l:.e7 41 l:.g4
In his analysis Tal preferred 41 h3 to
26 .i.b3 the game continuation but he did not
Karpov seems to be in trouble. mention his Rashkovsky game - maybe
Indeed he defends c4 with one more he did not dare to !
piece, when it is not even attacked. 4 1 ...h3
However the picture is not so rosy for I made the h-pawn push one of my
Black. trademarks. The legacy of Karpov.
1 27
Mikhail Tal the 8th Mikhail Tal the 8t�

51 c7 5 5 lldl �a2 56 nel + 11 tUbd2 2 5... tUe3!

That same c-pawn that I pressurised Now even the e-pawn falls. Smyslov also won this position with Tal, of course, finds a sweet tactical
with nb4 finally decides the outcome 56...'iPf4 5 7 ne4+ 'it>g3 58 llxeS B lack against Golombek i n 1 95 6 . shot like this. He sweeps the white
of the game. It was hard to take. 'it>xg4 S9 ll e2 1 -0 Smyslov i s covered i n the next chapter. pieces away from the d-pawn, which in
5 1 ..J.tc8 52 'iPb6 We3 53 �c6 h 2 Tal refused to work for either of us in 1 l ...�e6 1 2 nel 0-0 13 b3 'iWd7 turn decides the outcome of the game.
S4 g 4 nh8 our world championship matches. In 1 4 �b2 llad8 1 5 a3 as An alternative sacrifice, 25 . . . tUxf2, was
Here 54 . . . e4 5 5 nh7 wins. this game however he helped Karpov. also promising. 26 �dS+ (26 lldxf2
�xf2+ 27 llxf2 d2 wins.) 26 . . . 'tiVxd5
27 cxdS tUe4+ 28 'ii'x c5 bxc5 and
Let's have a closer look at Tal's win as B lack with a particular queenside
Black should win with the extra pawn.
pawn fonnation where B lack has a potentially powerful passed d4-pawn.
26 fI e3 �Ie3+ 27 'it>h 1 .lt xd2
Tal's game against Rashkovsky was played in 1 973 when I was 1 0. Of course
2 8 'ii'x d2 ne2 29 'ii'c 3 nxg2
that age is a very fonnative period for a young and ambitious player and I was
29 . . . 'it'e7 wins as well .
keen to pick up all available knowledge from the fonner champion's games.
3 0 WJ.g2
V.Saigin - M Tal
. A.Kochyev - M.Tal

1 6 tUeS
If White can block the d-pawn and
exchange many pieces, it can become a
nice target. However it is not easy to
achieve both objectives.
16 ...tUxe5 17 llxeS b6 18 tUo �c5
1 9 'iWd2 tUg4 20 lleel d3 21 nO 'ifd6
22 'iWc3?
30 ... dl
This is too optimistic. After 22 h3
Tal 's game plan works so well; his
comes 22 . . . tUxf2 (22 ...tUf6 23 tUeS)
N.Andrianov - G.Kasparov d-pawn is irresistible.
23 nxf2 'iWxg3. Tal was so good at
3 1 11dl �g4 32 tUo 'iWd3 0-1
playing positions with two pieces
In the first two diagyam positions versus a rook. He won many games like
Tal was B lack, whereas in the third that with both colours.
A.Kochyev M.Tal
I played B lack.
-

2 2 ... f6 23 %:tad l llfe8 24 lld2 �f5

Moscow 4-teams, 1 9 8 1
25 tUgS
I guess you already know the 1 d 4 tUf6 2 c 4 e 6 3 g 3 c S 4 tU o cxd4
results of these games. 5 tUxd4 d 5 6 �g2 eS 7 tUb3
Retreating the knight is the most
popular choice here.
7 ...d4 8 e3 as! 9 exd4 a4 10 tU3d2
V.Saigin M.Tal 8 0-0 tUc6 9 e3 �e7 1 0 exd4 exd4
exd4
-

Game 8, match, Riga 1 954

See diagram above. See diagram on page 12 8.

1 d4 tUr6 2 c4 c5 3 tUo e6 4 g3 exd4 It's a fine line between a pawn being Again Tal pins his hopes on the
S tUxd4 dS 6 �g2 e 5 7 tU o d4 a strong point on d4 or a target. d-pawn.

1 28 1 29
Mikhail Tal the 8th
11 0-0 iLe7 12 ttJa3 ttJc6 13 ttJf3 2S ...d2!
iLe6 14 iLf4 0-0 White wins the d-pawn but overall he
loses material.
26 'iixd2 tUd3
Black wins the exchange and his
position is winning.
27 l::t e3 tUxcl 28 .](CI ttJe5 29ttJb5
ttJg4 30 l::t e2 �xe4
Tal exchanges some pieces in order
to invade.
31 iLxe4 tUf6 32 l::td2 'ike7 33 �f3
l1ad8 34 c;t>g2 b6 35 lhd8 l::txd8
IS ttJgS 36 ttJc3 nd4 37 b3 axb3 38 axb3 .e5
The grandmaster from Leningrad 39 .c2 .el 40 ttJbl lLld7 41 �2
doesn't go for exchanges at all. l:td3 0-1
Is ...iL g4 ! 16 iLf3 �fS 17 .l:tel ttJd7
] 8 b4 h6 19ttJe4 tUdeS 20 iLg2 iLb4 N.Andrianov - G.Kasparov
2] tlf1 Azerbaijan Team Championship,
Baku 1 978
1 d 4 ttJ f 6 2 c 4 c 5 3 ttJf3 cxd4 4 ttJxd4
e6 5 g3 d5 6 �g2 e5 7 ttJf3 d4
When I played this move I hoped the
pawn would perform heroically like the
d-pawn in Tal 's games.
8 0-0 ttJc6 9e3 �c5 10 exd4 eId4
See diagram on page 128.
21...d3
Somehow Tal's d-pawn has become a 11 iLf4 0-0 12 lLle5
powerhouse again. My opponent went for exchanges.
22 .l:tcl ttJg6 23 �d2 .l:te8 24 iLxb4 12 ...lLlxe5 13 �xe5 ne8
ttJxb4 25 l1el
1 30
14 �If6
And he sticks to his plan. Tal drove
his opponents crazy with his knight
moves. Although I was left with no
knight, I did not feel there were any
drawbacks.
14..:iVxf6 15 tUd2 1fb6 16 ttJb3 �e6
17 �xb7
17...l::tad8
I was still optimistic, B lack can win
back the pawn and simplify to a
drawish endgame. I felt the d-pawn has
the same latent power as in Tal 's game,
while White's extra queenside pawn
won't start working at all. Tal probably
would have won even if he had been
missing the b-pawn in those positions.
After 1 7 ......xb7 1 8 ttJxc5 "'xb2.
18 ttJIc5 "'Ic5 19b3
19...d3
131
Mikhail Tal the 8th
My d-pawn gets to the third rank as
well.
20 l:tel 1fb4 21 �c6 l:tfS
Trying to retain as many pieces as
possible, but it gives White time to
organise his defence . After 2 1 ...d2
22 l::t e3 �d7 23 �xd7 l:txe3 24 fxe3
l:txd7 and the strong d-pawn secures a
draw, but no more. If 2 1 . . . l:te7 22 �d5
�xd5 23 l:txe7 'ilt'xe7 24 cxd5 J::txd5
25 "'d2 White is a bit worse but with so
few pieces he may get away with
blocking the d-pawn.
22 l:te3
22 d2
...
This looks just as strong as it did in
Tal's game.
23 'ilt'e2 l:td6 24 �e4 l:tfd8 25 l:tdl
But the difference is that it is well
blockaded this time.
25 ... g6 26 h4
White makes room for his king in
case of mating threats and will perhaps
push his h-pawn all the way to h6 in an
attempt to create his own threats.
26 ...h5?
I j ust wanted to stop the further
advance of the h-pawn.
Mikhail Tal the 8/� Mikhail Tal the 8/�

In both these diagrams White's king is better centralised than Black's aDd
surrounded by the opponent's pawns. First we will look at how Tal snares
Augustin's king - similar to the way he trapped Rashkovsky on page 1 25 1
I was hoping that I might catch my opponent's king in the centre as Tal did.
In any eveDt, no way could I lose with an extra pawn. . .

J.Augustin - M TaI. S.Rublevsky - G.Kasparov

27 �xg6 46 1bd2 1-0

My last move was a blunder, which
gave away a pawn.
27 ... �xc4 28 lle8+ llu8 29 "ihe8+
�g7 30 'iVeS+ <t>xg6 31 'iVgS+
I did not lose just one pawn but
several moreover Black's
becomes exposed.
3 1 . ..'it>b7 32 'iVxbS+ Wg7 33 'iVg4+
�f8 34 'iVc8+ <t>e7 35 'iVxc4 'iVaS
36 b4 'iVeS 3 7 'it>n 'it>d8 3 8 'iVcs lldS
39 'iVf8+ 'it>c7 40 'iVxf7+ 'it>b6 4 1 'iVn
'iVd6 42 'iVe3+ 'it>bS 43 a 3 'it>a4
44 'iV:u7+
Now even the d-pawn falls.
Let me just add that I finally had
something to cheer about when I
defeated a tough opponent the
king knockout world champion Khalifman.
This victory was sweet indeed and
I went OD to win the tournament as J.Augustin - M.Tal 1 9 h3 �e6 2 0 'ifb3 'fWd7 21 '1th2 llea8
well. European Team Championship, 2 2 �f4 ll l a3 23 'iWc2 llc3 24 'fWd2 b6
Moscow 1 977 25 �h6 �e5 26 �f4 �b8 27 .l:l.a2
.l:l.ac8 2 8 l:[ b l �f6 29 �gS 'fWe7
G.Kasparov - A.Khalifman
1 c4 eS 2 lLlc3 lLlf6 3 lLln lLlc6 4 d3 3 0 �x:f6 'fWx:f6 31 'fWf4 'fWxf4 32 gxf4
FIDE Grand Prix, Moscow 2002
d6 S g3 g6 6 �g2 �g7 7 0-0 0-0 8 llb l .l:l.c2 33 l:[bb2 l:[xb2 34 .l:l.xb2 llcS
a s 9 a 3 lLld4 1 0 b 4 axM 1 1 axM c 6 3 5 ..t>g3 ..t>f8 3 6 .l:l.b4 �e7 37 lhd4
1 2 b S �g4 1 3 lLlxd4 exd4 1 4 lLle4 .l:l.xbS
lLlxe4 I S �xe4 lle8

1 5 ... lLlc6 16 b 5 axb5 1 7 cxb5 lLlb4

44 ... 'it>b3
I S lLlc4 'iVf5 1 9 lle5 1It'c2 20 �f4
Other champions have won so many
'iVxdI + 2 1 lhd I WaS 22 a3 f6 23 axb4
games with long king marches. 38 f5
1 -0
However I did not have as much luck as 16 llb2 ? ! With this imaginative pawn sacrifice
they did. In the next game Tal 's opponent I f 1 6 bxc6 bxc6 1 7 llb2 and unlike the Czech player opens a route for his
45 'iVe3+ .l:I:d3 seems to have a dominating king in the the game White doesn 't have to defend king to the centre. It seems to improve
After 45 . . . <ltc2 46 'iVe4+1 lld3 centre, but it can also become a target his b-pawn. his rook.
47 We2 White also wins. as we will see . . . 16 ... dS 17 cxdS exdS 18 �g2 llal 38 . . gxf5 39 .l:l.a4 �d6 40 d4 llb2
.

132 133
Mikhail Tal the 8th Mikhail Tal the 8th

41 .i.fl l:tb I 42 �g2 bS 43 .tta 6+ q;,c7 S.Rublevsky - G.Kasparov Black can hold on tight to the All so classical getting to the
44 q;,f4 EU Cup, Izmir 2004 c4-pawn, but his central pawn chain seventh with the rooks.
becomes somewhat rigid. 2 7 llle 6!
See diagram on page 133.
1 e4 cS 2 1Of3 lOc6 3 .i.b5 19 �c2 lOeg6 20 �Ig6 lOIg6 Forcing more exchanges.
White's king can become menacing Rublevsky is quite an expert in the 2 1 1Oc2 e5 2 2 lOe3 �f5 23 lOxCS! 2 7....tt 2f6
in the centre. Rossolimo variation, but I also have Sergei gets closer to the pawns by After 2 7 . . . 11 8 f5 28 nb8+ lO fS
44 ... .tt b4 4S q;,eS p leasant memories with White. For exchanging the pieces around it. After (2 8 . . .�f7 29 lOg5+) 29 .tt xfS+ lhfS
The king looks like a powerhouse o n 23 .tte I �d3 ! 24 lOxd5 e4 25 lOd4 30 lllx fB .:I.xfB 3 1 a4 ' White has decent
instance I beat Salov with it.
t h e e5 -square. .:I.fb8 B lack has some compensation
3 ... e6 4 0-0 lOge7 5 c3 a6 6 �a4 winning chances.
according to Rublevsky. Alternatively
28 lll x ffl nxa6 29 lOxg6 h x g6
23 lOxd5 .i.e4 24 lOe3 .i.xf3 25 gxf)
After 29 . . ..ttxg6 3 0 'it> f2 ! (30 .tt b 5
.tt f4 26 .ttc6 lOh4 and B lack has nice
nd6) 30 ... .:I.a6 3 1 nb5 d4 3 2 cxd4 lha2
play.
33 �e3 Black is struggling.
23 .:I. X C5
•..

4S .. .:I.a4!
.

Out of the blue, Tal virtually traps 6 ... c4

White's rook and also exploits his This is an ambitious move. The pawn

unfortunate king. can be a target too.

46 .:I.d6 b4 47 �IdS 7 'ife2 bS 8 �c2 lOg6 9 b3 'ifc7

1 0 bJ:C4 lOf4 11 'ife3 bIC4 1 2 .i.a3 24 .:I.fb I ! .:I. a ffl 30 ":';'f2 ! !
�e7 13 �J:e7 lOxe7 1 4 lOa3 Getting to the second rank attracted Bringing the king into the centre.
This softens up the c4-pawn. me. Not 24 . . . lOf4? 25 g4! .:I.ffB hoped I was going to catch White's
14 ... 0-0 I S .:I.abl 26 lll x e5 .:I.ae8 27 llld 7 lllh 3+ (27 . . . .ttf7 king the same way that Tal did.
This is Rublevsky's novelty. 28 .:I.b8) 28 ":';'g2 lOf4+ 29 �f3 .:I.f7 And in case there were no efficient
l S. . . fS 1 6 'iWb6 'ifxb6 1 7 .ttx b6 fxe4 30 .ttb 8 and White is c learly better as tactics against the king, I thought the
1 8 �J:e4 the winner pointed out. Better was extra pawn would still guarantee a
24 . . . .:I.f6! although White still has the draw.
upper hand after 2 5 .:I.xf6 26 .:I.b7. 3 0 .:1.132
•••

25 .ttx a6 e4 26 llld4 lhf2 After 30 ... d4 31 cxd4 na3 32 llc l

47 ... .:I. aS! .ttd 3 33 �e2 .ttxd4 34 nc3 <kf7 3 5 a4'

A lethal pin shows j ust how wins according to Rublevsky.

precarious White's king is on e5. 31 �e3

48 .tt c 6+ 'it>d7 0-1 The king is lured into a cage in the

Tal 's b-pawn will win the game. centre of the board.
3 I ...�f7 32 .tt b 7+!
I wanted to plagiarise the idea! And Unlike Tal's opponent, White doesn't
ny punislunent came not in court but step further into the danger zone.
Iver the board. . I S .. d S
.
3 2 ... ":';'f6 33 .ttb 6+ �n

1 34 1 35
Mikhail Tal the 8,h
See diagram on page 133.
I f 33 ... o;1;>f5 34 nd6 'it>e5 3 5 Ihg6
na7 36 l1g5+ 'it>e6 37 h4 Black has a
very tough ending.
34 11d6 %laS
H ere I realised White's king could
not be caught, but still didn't appreciate
the full scale of Black's problem.
35 h4
35 ... g5?
Aware o f the trouble, I resorted to
desperate measures. However, with
35....Ilb5 Black could wait and see -
and he has a hidden resource that
provides tough resistance if White
further improves his king. Then 3 6 g3 ! ?
(White could also play 3 6 g4 at once,
which might create more obstacles for
Black.) 36 . . . .J:la5 37 'it>f4 .J:lb5 38 'it>e5
38 . . . .J:lb3 ! ! This move prompts
enough exchanges to create drawing
1 36
chances. Interestingly, Black should
now look for exchanges.
White could go back with 39 'it>d4 ! ?
and push his g-pawn before doing
anything else. (After 3 9 .J:ld7+ 'it>e8
40 .J:lxg7 [40 .J:lxd5 e3! 41 dxe3 .J:lxc3
Black should be able to hold) 40 . . . e3 !
4I dxe3 .J:lxc3 42 .J:lxg6 .J:lxe3+
43 'it>xd5 c3 and Black saves himself.)
Then 39 . . .l:tb2 40 'it>e3 l:tb5 41 g4 .J:la5
42 g5 .J:lb5 43 'it>f4 Rublevsky gets to
this position by a different move order.
He stops analysing here, evaluating the
position as a clear win. However Black
seems to be able to live with passive
defence. 43 . . . .J:la5 44 'it>e5 .J:la3 45 .J:ld7+
'it>e8 46 .J:lxg7 e3 47 dxe3 .J:lxc3 48 'it>f4
(48 'it>xd5 l:l.xe3 49 .J:lxg6 .J:lh3 and
B l ack survives.) 48 . . . .J:lc l 49 .J:lxg6 c3
50 'it>e5 c2 5 1 llc6 d4 and Black is safe.
36 hxg5 o;1;>e7 37 .J:lc6 .J:lal
38 'it>d4
The king is in the cage, but there is
no way to hurt it. Furthermore, I can 't
prevent it from carrying out its threat.
A l l so tragic.
38 ....J:ldl
3 8 . . .na3? 39 'it>xd5 e3 40 .l:e6+ wins.
39 'it>xd5 e3
Forcing simplification but not to the
desired extent. If 39 . . . nxd2+ 40 'it>xe4
.J:lxg2 4 1 'it>f5 .
40 .J:le6+ 'it>d7 41 .J:lxe3 .J:lxd2+
42 'it>xc4 .J:lxg2 43 .J:le5 'it>d6
If Black could exchange his last
pawn the game would be a draw.
44 .J:la5 .J:lg4+ 45 'it>b3 .J:l g l ? !
According t o m y opponent I should
have played 45 . . .'iPe6 and then 46 c4 g6
47 'it>b4.
46 'it>b4 nbl + 47 'it>c4 'it>e6 48 .J:la6+
'it>f5 49 g6 %lgl 50 'it>b5 o;1;>e5
After 50 . . ..J:lb l + 5 1 <;Pc5 .J:lgl 52 c4
.J:le l 53 .J:lc6 'it>e5 54 'it>b6 White's king
penetrates.
51 c4 .J:lhl+
If 5 1 . .. .J:lg2 52 c5 %l g I 5 3 .J:ld6
(on 5 3 'it>b6 .J:lxg6+ Black would not
lose) 53 . . ..J:lg2 54 o;1;>b6 .J:lgi 5 5 o;1;>c7!
White's king walks over to collect the
From Tal I picked up a way to
crack the Rauzer formation when
Black castles kings ide.
This time I show my position fust
followed on the next page by two
misleading ones from the Magician
from Riga.
1 37
Mikhail Tal the 8,h
g7-pawn. On the other hand, giving up
the g6 pawn to advance the passed
pawn would let Black off the hook, e.g.
5 5 'it>b7? llg2 5 6 .J:ld l .J:lxg6 57 c6 .J:lg2
and White i s not far enough ahead in
the race.
52 'it>c6 ngl
After 52 . . . 'it>f5 5 3 'it>d7 .J:lc l 54 .J:lc6
.J:la l 55 c5.
53 'it>d7!
White simply collects the g7-pawn
and wins. According to my plan I was
supposed to hurt this king in the centre,
just like Tal did - but instead it invaded
my territory with fatal results.
53 ....J:l d l + 54 'it>e7 .J:lbl 55 .J:la5+
'it>d4 56 'iPflI .J:lb7 57 .J:lf5 1-0
G.Kasparov - Y.Anikaev
Mikhail Tal the 8'h Mikhail Tal the 8'•

M.Tal - I.PlatoDov M .Tal - Y.Sakbarov

23 . . . .CI.D ! ! 24 .CI.xg7+ 'it>h8 2 5 'We i 1 4 tUb3

lhfl + 26 'Wxfl 'We3 and the position is In this earlier game White wasted a

equal. tempo by puning his rook on b I - and

23 'Wb6 Ihg3 his anack still broke through. This

We still start by looking at Tal 's 15 .CI.afl tUa5 16 .CI.b3 increased my confidence.

games. 1 4 nd8 IS fS tUeS 16 .CI.g3

..•

See diagram above.

M.Tal - I.Platonov
See diagram on page 138.
Dubna 1 973
16 ..• tUxb3 17 axb3 .CI.ac8 18 q., b l f5
1 e4 c5 2 tUo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tUxd4 1 6 .. .'�b8 17 .CI.n 'Wb4 18 'it>bl dS
1 9 exf5 �4 20 f6 �xf6 2 1 f5 .CI.xc3?
tUf6 5 tUc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 �6 19 exdS exdS 20 tUd4 "i!ffS 21 ':h3 b5
B l ack misses a win here by 2 1 . . .exf5 !
8 'Wd2 'Wxb2 9 tUb3
Then 2 2 'ir'h6 (22 .CI.ff3 f4) 2 2 . . . � g7 23
Nowadays the popularity of this line
l:!.g3 'ii'x c3 ! decides.
is increasing.
9 ... 'IIi' a3 10 �xf6 gxf6 11 �e2 tUc6
24 �g6! ! 1-0
White sets up an unstoppable
checkmate threat.

Here is his second game cracking the

Rauzer fonnation.
2 2 .CI.f4
Tal brings another piece into the
M.Tal - Y.Sakbarov anack.
USSR Championship, Kiev 1 964 22 ... �b7 23 .CI.fh4 'ii'g 8 24 'ii'f4 .CI.ac8
22 .CI.g3+ 'it>h8??
12 0-0 �d7 1 3 �h5 �g7 14 .CI.O This loses to a wonderful fmesse.
2S liJ d l
1 e4 c5 2 tUo d6 3 d4 cId4 4 tUxd4
Bringing the rook into play. I f 25 ll h 5 tUd7.
With 22 ... �g7 Black has a beautiful
tUf6 5 tUc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 'Wb6 2S .CI.e8 2 6 tUe3
14 ... 0-0 defence thanks to the weak back rank.
•..

8 'Wd2 'WIb2 9 %1b 1 'Wa3 1 0 �xf6 First it was the rooks and the queen,
Portisch later put his king on the 23 f6 (23 .CI.xg7+ �xg7 24 "i!fg5+ Wh8
queens ide and defeated Tal in a well­ 2 5 .CI.f4 .CI.O ! I forces White to accept a gxf6 1 1 �e2 �g7 1 2 0-0 0-0 1 3 n o now it is the distant knight that joins the

known game in 1 9 76. perpetual check.) tUc6 anack.

138 139
Mikhail Tal the 8,10 Mikhail Tal the 8110

Now here is my game: 24 . . . l:txa5 25 bxa5 li'lc2+ 26 'itb2 1 2 f4 �h6

l:tb8+ 27 'it>c 1 li'ld4 28 �d2 1itb4+ 0- 1 This gains a tempo.
G. Kasparov - Y. Anikaev Kasparov Sideif Zade, Azerbaijan 13 0-0 �b7 1 4 :13 l:d8 1 5 l:th3 �g7
USSR championship, Minsk 1 979 Team Championship, Baku 1 97 8 . So I 1 6 fS 0-0
thought if he castles long I was ready, Black's king could still walk over to
1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 li'lxd4
as I knew Tal's game. By the way the the queens ide, but I decided to look for
ltJf6 5 ltJc3 ltJc6 6 �g5 a6 7 'ilfd2 'iWb6
Rauzer formation with B lack caused safety on the kings ide. And I did not
8 ltJb3 e6 9 .i.e2 "ii'c 7 1 0 a4 b6
me another painful memory. I held a even have to sacrifice for an attack that
11 � xf6 gxf6
record of winning or tieing for first i n looked very promising.
I was happy to have the typical
all tournaments for a period o f 9 years
Rauzer pawn formation. One year
2 6... l:tc3 and 9 months. I did not make it a clean See diagram on page 1 3 7.
earlier, back in my home town, I lost a
Black has not obtained enough play 10 years because I came 2-3,d i n
game to Sideif Zade with reversed 1 7 .f4 ltJe5 1 8 lt d l 'ife7 19 'ifh4 h6
on the queenside. He'll make Tal pay Linares 1 9 9 1 where Ivanchuk was the
colours. Here it is: I li'lf3 li'lf6 2 c4 g6 2 0 'iff2
attention to that. winner. He beat me in the very first
3 ltJc3 d5 4 cxd5 li'lxd5 5 'ifa4+ �d7 I decided to improve the bishop as
27 l:th5 ltJd7 28 �d3 l:te5 29 "ii'b 4 round.
6 'iJb4e6 7 ltJxd5 exd5 8 'ifd4 f6 well.
ltJflI 3 0 ltJg4 l:e8
9 'ili'xd5 ltJc6 1 0 'ifb3 'i!ie7 I I d3 0-0-0 2 0...'ifc7 21 li'ld4 �c8 2 2 'iffl '1Ifb7
Giving up the exchange with V.Ivanch u k - G.Kasparov
1 2 �d2 �g4 1 3 0-0-0 �xf3 23 �c4 d5 24 ndS
30 ...l:te4 removes some of the attacking Linares 1 99 1
pieces and gives him more practical
chances after 3 1 �xe4 lhh3 32 'ifxh3 I e4 c5 2 li'lf3 d6 3 �b5+ lLld7 4 d4
dxe4. li'lgf6 5 0-0 cxd4 6 'ifxd4 a6 7 �xd7+
3 1 Wg l .i.xd7 8 �g5 h6 9 �xf6 gxf6
A careful move.
3 1 .. .l:tc4

24 ...exd5
14 gxf3 ltJd4 1 5 'i!ia4 ltJxe2+ 1 6 'it'b 1
At first it all looked similar to Tal's
ltJd4 1 7 'ifxa7 'ifc5 1 8 'iWa8+ 'it'd7
game against Platonov, but by now the
1 9 �h3+ f5 20 'ifxb7 'ifc2+ 2 1 �a l
pawn structure is the same as in the
�d6 22 .d5 na8 23 �a5 'i!ia4 24 b4
10 c4 e6 I I li'lc3 l:tc8 1 2 'it>h l h 5 Sakharov game. I knew that game as
1 3 a4 h4 1 4 h 3 �e7 1 5 b 4 a5 1 6 b 5 well so I was still optimistic.
32 ltJxf6 'if c 7 1 7 li'ld2 .c5 1 8 . d 3 l: g 8
25 �b3 %tfe 8 26 l:tg3 'ith7 27 1*'f2
Tal has reached his optimum position 1 9 l:tae l 'ifg5 2 0 l:g l .f4 21 l:e fl b 6
Bringing the queen closer to the king
so starts the decisive operation which 2 2 li'le2 '1Ifh6 23 c5 l:txc5 24 lLlc4 'it>f8
leads to a win of the exchange with no by 27 1i'f4, as Tal did, was preferable.
2 5 li'lxb6 �e8 26 f4 f5 27 exf5 l:xf5
compensation for Black. 28 l:t e l 'it>g7 29 g4 l:tc5 30 l:txc5 dxc5 27 ... li'lc4 28 li'lde2 bS 29 axbS axbS
3 2 ...�xf6 33 'ifxf6+ 'ifg7 34 'ifxg7+ 3 1 li'lc8 �flI 32 .d8 'ifg6 33 f5 '1Ifh6 30 ltJf4
Wxg7 35 l:tg3+ �h8 36 �xc4 dxc4 34 g5 'iih 5 3 5 l:tg4 exf5 3 6 ltJf4 "ifh8 Tal transferred the other knight to g4,
37 l:h6 %td8 3 8 c3 �e4 39 a3 l:a8
37 'iH6+ 'it>h7 38 l:xh4+ 1 -0 but I was happy with my choice.
40 l:td6 a5 41 l:b6 b4 1-0

1 40 141
Mikhail Tal the 8'�

Black takes th e exchange.

30 .. J:te5 3 1 liJh5 �h8 32 l:tf3 liJIb2
33 l:!.d4 liJc4 34 �Ic4 bIC4 35 g4
This is something Tal did not play,
yet I liked it. Sadly my position
gradually de te r i o rat es as Anikaev
steadily improves his pieces.
35 ..:We7 36 'iWd2 �b7 37 1t>f2 l:te8
38 liJf4 �g7 3 9 l:th3 �g8 40 liJce2
�fB 4 1 liJc3 W'c5 42 lDh5 'ifb6 43 l:tf3
It>h7 44 It>g3 l:td8
51 'it'xd4 'Wd8 s2 lDh5 l:te8
52 ... l:ta6 fol lowed by 'it'b6 wa:
wi nni ng .
53 g5 hIg5 S4 l:txg5 l:tg8 55 l:tIg8
After 55 'Mfh4 fxg5 56 liJf6+ ..t>g7
57 'it'xg5+ �f8 58 liJh7+ It>e8
59 'i!t'xg8+ ..t>d7 60 'it'xf7+ It>c8 6 1 �g4
White has some practic al chanc es .
55 •.. �Ig8 56 lDb5 l:tc6
56 . . . l:ta6! gains a winning tempo.
57 'i!t'g4+
Unfortunately the queen stands on
the same diagonal as the bishop. Best
was 57 "it'g l + ! �f8 58 liJd 4 :a6
59 liJe6+ l:txe6 60 fxe6 �e7 61 exf7
and the position is equal according to
A nikaev.
S7.....t>fB 58 lDd4 l:ta6
Vassily Smyslov the 7th
Smyslov won the world title in 1 9 5 7 the champions and with that many
by beating Botvinnik 12th-9th. They games he bad a stronger effect on me. I
had already played a match three years had the most games against the other
earlier, when they drew 1 2 - 1 2 . In 1 95 8 champions, but only played matches
Botvinnik won the rematch but with Karpov and Smyslov. Against the
Smyslov kept on playing successfully rest I just played a few games. Let me
for four decades. Incredibly he made it give you a few examples of Smyslov 's
to the Candidates matches fmal, where influence on me.
I met him. The age difference between Firstly, here are a couple of positions
us is 42 years . He had the longest from Smyslov's games that caused me
career, playing the most games of all particular damage.
White's queenside pawn majority, spearheaded by the pawn on c5 ,
often occurs in the Alekhine defence and Panov attack versus the Caro-Kann.

V.Smyslov - W.Schmidt G.Kasparov - A.Yermolinsky

59 liJe6+ l:txe6 60 fIe6 q;e7 61 'i!t'g7

45 It>b4
Steinitz liked to walk with his king . .
45 ... �b4 46 'ii' f4
After 46 l:tn l:te2! 47 'ii'xe2 'ii'x d4
White is in trouble.
46 .. :it'd6 47 l:tg3 'ire7 48 ..t>h3 �c5
49 'i!t'd2 l:td6 50 lDf4 �xd4
�xe6 62 lDf4+
Sometimes Tal caught the king in the V.Smyslov - H.Azizi G.Kasparov - A.Dreev
.
centre in endgames even though he had
no queen. Th i s time White has no
chance even with the queens.
62 ...�e5 63 �g3 'i!t'a5 64 �f2 'it'b6+
65 �f3 d4+ 66 �g4 d3 67 'i!t'xf7 'it'gl +
68 �h4 'it'gS+ 0-1

1 42

1 43
Vassily Smyslov the 7th Vassily Smys/ov the 7'h

Any loss is very painful, two losses
are even worse, but to lose two games
with White is really pathetic. Making it
almost impossible to bear is the fact
that one of the games was a regular
one. Even now, decades later I need
time to calm down when I think about
it. It stil l upsets me that much!
V.Smyslov - W.Schmidt
Warsaw-Moscow, 1 980
1 e4 It:lf6 2 eS It:ldS 3 d4 d6 4 It:ln
�g4 5 �e2 e6 6 c4 It:lb6 7 exd6 cxd6
8 h3 �hS 9 0-0 il.. e 7 1 0 It:lc3 0-0
l 1 l:tel a6 12 b3 It:lc6 13 �e3 dS 14 cS
25 l:tb4
It is quite an unusual role for the rook
to defend the d4-pawn from b4 in the
middlegame.
2 S .. .l::t e 8 2 6 l:I. n l:te6?!
, 26 ... e4 would lead to an unclear
position after 27 �b I It:lc4 28 'ilfc 1
� g5 29 l:I.xc4 dxc4 30 �a2.
'!We7 35 '!Wxf6+!
The sixth world champion finishes
with an eleg ant petit combination.
35 .. ."iVxf6 36 nd7+ �h6 37 l:I.xf6
l:I.e5 38 h4 1-0
Smyslov had another win with this
pawn structure.
V Smyslov - H.Ami
. bIC6 41 g4 It:lf6 42 'it>f2 It:lSd7 43 'it>e3
Rilton Cup, Stockholm 1 998
1 e 4 It:lf6 2 e 5 It:ld5 3 d 4 d6 4 It:ln
..I1l.g4 5 ..I1l.e2 e6 6 c4 It:lb6 7 exd6 cxd6
S h3 �h5 9 0-0 �e7 10 It:lc3 0-0 1 1 b3
It:lSd7 1 2 �b2 It:lr6 1 3 nel l:I.cS
14 lt:lh4
29 �Ic6 1hc6
Even Tigran Vartanovich did not
come up with double exchange
sacrifices too often.
30 It:lxc6 'iWIc6 31 '!Wg3 It:ld7 32 'ilt'c7
It:lhfS 33 .l::tb 1 Ji.g5 34 Ji.cl Ji.xcl
35 lIncl g5 3 6 nn g6 37 f4 gxf4
3S nxf4 'it>g7 39 .l::tb n f5 40 'iWIc6
It:lb8 44 n4f2 It:lbd7 45 gxf5 exf5
46 lIg2 'it>f7 47 nfgl It:lfS 48 b7 It:l6d7
49 h4 1-0
Here are some of my own games.
G.Kasparov A. Yermolinsky
-

A surprising decision. UI8 USSR Championship.

White often gains space like this in
the Alekbine.
14 ... �xn IS �xn lt:lc8 1 6 l:tb l � f6
17 b4
See diagram on page 143.
17 . ..ti:J8c7 1 8 il.. g 4
Smyslov fights to prevent Schmidt's
knights from taking up positions i n the
centre.
18 ... g6 19 a4 hS 20 bS axbS 21 axbS
It:laS
The knight never comes back into
play.
22 �e2 It:lrs 23 ..I1l.d3 It:lxe3 24 fIe3
eS
14...�g6? Vilnius 1 975
Better is 14 ... �xe2 because you are
27 e4! 1 e4 It:lf6 2 e5 It:ld5 3 d4 d6 4 It:ln
supposed to exchange when you have a
A nice riposte. .lig4 5 ..I1l.e2 e6 6 0-0 �e7 7 h3 �b5
disadvantage in space.
2 7 ... exd4? 8 c4 It:lb6 9 nd6 cxd6 10 It:lbd2 0-0
1 5 lt:lxg6? ! hxg6 16 ..I1l.d3
After 27 ... dxe4 28 lt:lxe4 � g7 29 l:ta4 1 1 b3 It:lc6 1 2 �b2
The bishop is strong now.
f5 (29 . . . exd4 is met by 30 It:ld6) To retain the bishop. On e3 it would
1 6 ... a6 17 '!Wn 'iWc7 I S l:I.acl 'iWd7
3 0 ..I1l.bl Wbi te is better. have been vulnerable to . . . tLlf5 .
1 9 a4 d5 2 0 c5 lt:la8
2 8 lt:lxdS �eS 1 2. . .�f6 1 3 a 3 d 5 14 c 5 tLlc8 15 b4
To put it mildly, this is not exactly
Of course I was satisfied. I thought I
classical chess.
would just copy Smyslov's play.
21 b4
1 5 ... a6
See diagram on page 143.
See diagram on page 143.
2 l ...Ji.d8 2 2 b5 It:lc7 23 b6 It:lceS
24 as It:lh7 25 �c2 It:lef6 26 �a4 nc6 1 6 ncl tLl8e7 17 tLlb3 �xn 18 .lixn
27 lt:la2 Ji.e7 2S It:lb4 nfc8 tLlf5

29 'lWn
With remarkable ease, Smyslov has
gained space on the queens ide and now
wins the game on the other side of the
board.
29 ... f6 30 It:lf4 il..d4 31 Wxf4 c;f;>g7
32 l:I.a4 l:I.eS 3 3 'iff2 l:I.xc5 34 Ihd4

1 44 1 45
Vassily Smyslov the 7t�
19 �g4
My predecessor put this bishop on
g4. I reckoned that had to be correct.
19 ... g6 20 'ii'd 3 �g7 21 �c3 _f6
22 �J:fS 'tWxfS 23 'tWxfS exfS 24 a4
tt'ldS
2S bS
All goes according to the Smyslov
concept.
2S ... tt'le6 26 l:[ a l
I must admit that for just a second I
lost my discipline and omitted . . . b6,
thereby deviating from Smyslov's plan.
I felt I could improvise. But a single
improvisation and I ended up losing -
what a harsh pWlishrnent!
26 ...l:[fcS 27 l:[Cdl
27 ... b6! 2 S l:[dcl
White should have taken
28 cxb6, but I was not
Vassily Smyslov the 7th
remember any game with this motive 13 ... a6 14 ii.a4
from any champion. 28 . . . l:[xc3 29 nac l
l:[c4 30 b7 l:[b8 3 1 bxa6 tt'lc7 32 tt'la5 See diagram on page 143.
tt'lxa6 33 tt'lxc4 dxc4 34 nxc4 l:[xb7
35 d5 and White has the upper hand. 14 ... h 6 15 ii.e3
28 ... bxeS 29 b6 exd4 30 �b2 l:[ab8 Vassily also developed the bishop on
31 as e3 in one of his games.
After 3 1 l:[xc8+ l:[xc8 32 l:[c I White IS ...liJeS 16 ifd2 'i!th7 17 ttJg3
is still no worse. I provoked him into pushing his
3 1 ...l:[e4 3 2 tt'ld2 l:[xc1+ pawns, but maybe it was not in my best
40 c;t>f2?
If 3 2 ...nb4 3 3 �a3 l:[b5 34 ii.d6 nd8 interes ts.
I not only missed a forced win with
3 5 .:lab ! . 17 ...e6 18 ttJge2 g5 19 ii.c2 it.xc2
this move but actually squandered the
33 Ihc1 �f8 34 liJb3 �e5 ? ! 2 0 ifxc2+ f5 2 1 l:tab l liJf6 22 a4 We8
full point. I no longer remember
After 34 . . .� e 7 35 �a3+ �d7 23 it. f2 it'g6 24 b5
exactly but I suspect I was in time
3 6 tt'lc5+ tt'lxc5 3 7 llxc5 �e5 Black
troubl e . Had Smyslov published
does better than in the game.
annotations to his game I may have
been able to memorise it and play
faster, thereby avoiding this time
trouble b lunder. The winning
continuation was 40 l1xe5+! fxe5 4 1 b7
d2 42 tt'lxd2 tt'le2+ 43 'i!t t2 tt'ld4
44 ii.xd8.
40 ... d2!
Oh, no. White has to resign.
24 ...tt'la5
41 l:[xe5+ fxeS 42 tt'lxd2 tt'ld3+
The knight may become strong on c4.
43 'i!te3 tt'leS 44 ii.xe5 c;t>d7 4S lDn
25 bxa6 l:[xa6 26 nb5 ttJd7 27 nfbl
ne8 46 'i!td4 ttJb3+ 47 c;t>xd5 ttJ:ta5 48
3S ii.a3+ �e8? liJb8 28 liJa2 lDbe6 2 9 tt'lb4 na7
ii.f4 c;t>cS 0-1
In principle it is right to bring the 3 0 tt'ld3 f4 31 'iVdl nf7 3 2 lD62 l:ta8
king to the centre, however in this 33 h3 h5 34 it'd3 na7 35 h4 g4
Here is my second game with the
particular position it has its tactical same pawn structure.
drawbacks.
36 l:[el f6 37 f4 ! tt'lxf4 3S ii.d6 l:[d8 G.Kasparov - A.D reev
3 9 ii.c7 d3? Moscow PeA-Grand Prix,
This is a bad move in a bad position. Kremli n Stars, Moscow 1 996
B lack could have played on the
exchange down with 39 . ..ttJd3, but his 1 c4 c6 2 e4 dS 3 exd5 cxd5 4 d4
position has to be lost. 40 l:[e2 Wd7 tt'lf6 5 tt'lc3 tt'lc6 6 it.g5 it.e6 7 a3 ii.g4
(40 . . . liJb4 41 b7 ttJc6 42 ttJc5) 8 n ii.e6 9 c5 g6 10 ii.bS ii.g7 11 ttJge2
41 ii.xd8 �xd8 42 l:[d2 tt'lb4 43 tt'lxd4 0-0 12 0-0 ii.fS 13 b4
with and the protected b6 passed pawn is too The pawn structure again reminds m e 36 'iifx g6+ c;t>xg6 37 liJd3 it.h6
able to strong to live with. o f Smyslov's. 3 8 it.el lDc4 39 l:[al gxn 40 gxn �fS
1 46 1 47
Vassily Smyslov the 7'� Vassily Smyslov the 7'�

4 1 as 11g7+ 42 <;Ph I l:La8 43 .i.c3 lUe3
44 l:Lgl ? ! l:Llg I + 45 lU1g1 11a7 46 lUeZ
lUe4 47 Wg2 lU4xa5 48 .i.:u5 lUxa5
49 lUeS lUe6 50 lUxe6 bxe6 51 l:Lb6
l:Lc7 52 �f2 .i.g7 53 �e1 .i.f6 54 �d2
54 .i.xh4
•..
Losing a second pawn should be the
draws.) 70 l:Lxc6 d4 7 1 �g2 (7 1 l:Ld6?
'it>xf3 wins.) 71 ...l:Lc2+ 72 �f1 �e3
73 l:Le6+ �d3 74 c6 and White holds.
67 ... ¢>g3 6 8 l:Lg6+ �h3 69 nh6+
Wg3 70 l:Lg6+ <;txf3 7 1 .l�he6 �g3
72 l:Lg6+ �f3 73 c6 l:LeZ
After 73 . . . �e4 74 l:Lg2
(74 . . . l:La7 7 5 11c2 Ac7 7 6 �xh2 �xd4
77 �g2 draws) 75 �xh2 l:L c l 76 l:Lg6
�xd4 77 �g2 White draws.
11a l +
80 11h2??
What a dreadful mistake! Even i f it
was a rapid game this should never
have been played. In a way Smyslov is
a guilty party for influencing me to
conduct the opening the way he did. I
must say Levenfish is also partly to
ending. In the games Karpov-Kasparov
Las Palmas 1 996, Kramnik-Kasparov,
Intel rapid 1 995 and in my match in
2003 against Azmaiparashvili, I made
serious mis takes, some of which
changed or could have changed the
result of the game. I did not make these
mistakes in pawn endings in a simul
against an amateur but against my arch­
rivals, Karpov and Kramnik. Yes,
Smyslov and Levenfish really should
have written a book on pawn endings.
80 . . . 'it>xe4 (80 ... dxe4 8 1 d5 or 8 1 ¢>e l
is also an elementary draw.) 8 l 'it>e2
¢>xd4 82 'it>d2 resulting in one of the
best known drawn positions in chess.
80 ..'it>xd4 81 Ild2+ 'it>c4 0-1
.

end, but i t was a rapid game so you blame for this. Together they wrote a I miss a successful frontal attack by
never know. classic book on rook endings, which I three tempi. My rook should check him
55 l:Lb8 .i.f6 56 l:Lrs b4 57 lUgl Wg6 studied deeply. But they neglected to from cl and my king should be on f2. I
58 ¢>d3 l:La7 59 lUb3 l:La3+ 60 �eZ 74 l:Lh6? publish a book on pawn endings. invested so many hours on his rook
�f5? Cutting off the king with 74 l:Le6 ' Simplifying to a pawn ending with ending book and yet here I was not able
60 . . . l:Le3+! simply wins. was correct. 80 l:Lxe4 ! was the solution to the to gain three tempi.
61 lUxf4 � x f4 6Z l:Lxf6+ WgS 74 ...<;te4 75 l:Lh4+ <;td3 76 11xh2 problem. I tried to erase this weakness By the way, this tournament was ru n

63 l:Lxe6 h3 64 Wf2 l:La2+ 65 'Ot>gl h2+ I f 76 .l:g4 Axc6 77 ..t>xh2 l:Lc4 wins from my play but even in the very last on a knockout system - I won the next
66 Wh l �f4 as well. game of my career I made a losing rwo games and reached the next round
76 ... l:Lxc6 77 AM move against Topalov in a pawn of the competition.

Once Smyslov planted a knight on I also planted his idea in my mind

c4. Here is the position: and reached the foHowing position:

W.Fairhurst - V.Smyslov Y.Seirawan - G.Kasparov

67 11f6+
67 l:Lxc6 was another option, but 7 7 ltcZ?
..•

more fun was 67 l:Le2 ! . This nice Here 77 ... Ac4 78 �g2 Axd4 79 l:Lh l
stalemate finesse probably saves the We2 80 'Ot>g3 l:Lc4 wins, as does
position. 67 . . . l:La4 68 l:Le6 l:Lxd4 7 7 ... Ag6.
69 'It>xh2 l:Lc4 (69 . . .�xf3 70 l:Lxc6 78 Wgl 11eZ 79 �n Ae4

1 48 149
 Vassily Smyslov the 7th
I wanted to encourage m y
opponent to place a knight on c4.
KIamnik was oblivious to the
dangers of having such a knight -
and beat mel
W.Fairhurst - V.Smyslov
Hastings 1 954/55
I d4 lOf6 2 c4 e6 3 1Oc3 SLb4 4 e3
0-0 5 tOge2 d5 6 a3 SLe7 7 1Og3 b 6 ! ?
Smyslov claims he is
searching for hannony but he often
goes in for unbalanced fights. Here
7 . . . c5 was better, just to equalise.
8 cxdS exd5 9 iLe2 SLb7 1 0 �f5 .l:l.e8
I I lZ"lxe7+ 'iWxe7 12 0-0 lObd7 13 b4 c6
1 4 SLd2 1 4 ... a6 15 'it'b3 b 5 ! ?
Smyslov's knight i s heading for c4.
16 .I:bel lOb6 17 SLcl a s 18 f3 axb4
1 9 axb4 SLc8 2 0 SLd3 SLe6 21 'ii'b l
tOc4
22 e4?
White pushes forward without proper
preparation.
Vassily Smys/ov the 7th
A.Karpov - B.Spassky
G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik Game I I , Candidates Semifinal,
Leningrad 1 974
I d4 �f6 2 c4 e6 3 �O d5 4 lOc3
SLe7 5 SLg5 h6 6 SLh4 0-0 7 e3 b6
8 SLe2 SLb7 9 SLxf6 SLxf6 1 0 cxd5 exd5
II 0-0 'ili'd6 1 2 .l:l.cl a6 1 3 a3 lOd7
14 b4 b5 1 5 lOe 1 c6 1 6 lOd3 lOb6 1 7 a4
SLd8 1 8 �c5 SLc8 1 9 a5 SLc7 20 g3 1 5 ... b5 1 6 lOe5 a4 1 7 We3 lLlb6
lOc4 18 �d2 .l:l.ae8 19 l:[fe 1 l:[e7 20 SLO
l:[fe8
Now I prefer to transfer the bishop to
22 ... 'ii' a 7 ! 23 �e2 dxe4 2A fxe4
g6 after 20 . . . g 5 ! ? and start pushing the
SLg4 !
f-pawn.
Suddenly White's centre falls apart.
2 1 g3 �h3 2 2 SLg2 SLxg2 23 'it>xg2
25 SLxc4 bxc4 26 lOg3 'ii x d4+
f5 24 b4
2 7 SLe3 'ili'd3 2 8 'i!ib2
always
See diagram on page 1 4 9.
24 ...lOe4
I managed to position the knight
just like Smyslov and at this point I was
2 1 e4 SLh3 22 .l:l.el dxe4 23 103xe4
satisfied and thinking appeciatively of
.g6 24 SLh5 'li'b7 25 "lifO f5 26 lOc3
him.
g6 27 .xc6 gxh5 2 8 lOd5 f4 29 l1e7 25 lOo SLf6 26 l1e2 .l%g7 27 l1 b l
'ii' fS 30 thc7 .l:l.ae8 3 1 'ii'xh6 .l:l.f7 "iWe7 2 8 .!:t e e l b6 2 9 "iWd3 .l:l.f8 30 lOd2
32 l1xf7 'it>xf7 3 3 'ii'xf4 ne2 3 4 "iWe 7+ "iWe8
2 8 ...lOxe4
The rest is uninteresting. �f8 3 5 tOf4 1 -0
29 lOxe4 .l:l.xe4 3 0 'ilffl r6 31 SLc5
SLe2 32 nal l1ae8 33 nrel c3 34 'iWr5
c2 3 5 h4 'ilfd5 3 6 'ilffl h5 3 7 .l:l.acl SLdl Y.Seirawan - G.Kasparov
3 8 .l:l.xe4 .l:l.Ie4 39 n a l 'iWe5 0-1
Dubai Olympiad 1 986
This Smyslov game was against a
relatively unknown player whereas 1 1 d4 tOf6 2 e4 g6 3 �e3 d5 4 lOo
used his idea against a genuine
SLg7 5 SLg5 lOe4 6 exd5 lOxg5 7 lOxg5
contender. I should add that it was not
e6 8 tOo exd5 9 b4 "iWd6
only Smyslov who made me think that
This move was a novelty then. 3 1 lOxe4
a knight on c4 would be almost
decisive but also two other 10 a3 0-0 1 1 e3 c6 12 SLe2 SL f5 White would have done better not to
champions misled me in one game. 13 0-0 tOd7 14 tOa4 as 1 5 'iib 3 have taken the c4-knight.
1 50 151
Vassily Smyslov the 7th Vassily Smyslov the 7'"

3 1 ...dIC4 32 �dl :te7 33 :ten 'ifn Objectively this neither spoils nor (Not 59 . . .l:ta l ? 60 g6 �e l 6 1 f4 ! Two 63 l:tfl+ 'it>c6 64 'it>f3 a3 65 .Ila7 d4
34 'i!ff3 'i!fd5 35 'i!fxd5+ cxd5 36 �f3 improves the position, but puts Black connected passed pawns are often and this unusual position with two
�g7 37 � d l �rn 38 �d2 �e8 into a situation where be has to find a advanced together. [t is best not to connected passed pawns in both camps
39 l:tddl �rs 40 l1dgl �g7 4 1 l:td l very subtle plan in order to draw. The separate them by sending only one out is probably equal.
<t>rs 42 �d2 �e7 43 �ddl �d6 practical move 55 . . . fxg4 56 �xg4 l:[h5 in front. 6 1 . . .c3 59 l1 d l d4
44 l:th2 ¢>c6 45 � h h 1 �rs 46 l:td2 offered an equal endgame.
�d6 47 �dd1 56 uf4 �IB3 57 fIgS �a2+ 58 �f3

62 �d I ! ! I not only investigated the 60 g6 d3

champions' games but also those of Many champions won games by
other world class players. How hard it pushing two passed pawns all the way
47 ... �IC5 ? !
was to balance my time between them! to the sixth rank. The c4 knight
A n impatient move. I should have 58 ... c3?
Timman also liked to give up his rook on that I planted like Smyslov was later
further improved the positions of my This natural move loses. The c-pawn
the back rank as in his games against transformed into this pawn - but in the
other pieces, for example by 47 . . .�ee7. is closer to promotion than White's g5-
Ivkov at Amsterdam 1 9 7 1 and Kramnilc at end its slow pace is responsible for my
Then after 48 l1d2 (48 �h2? �xc5 ! pawn, but Black's rook has less effect
Belgrade 1 994. The rook can't be taken as defeat.
49 dxc5 l:te4 wins.) 4 8. . . �h7 4 9 l:tdd l on it than White's on c3 . And that
White surprisingly checkmates Black's 61 c,t>e3 l1xfl
g5 Black can exert pressure. matters at this point. Better was A fter 6 1 . .. d2 comes 62 g7 c2
king after queening his g-pawn first,
48 dIC5 �e4 49 l1he1 �d7 50 lld4 58 . . . �a3+! 59 � g2 (59 �f4 �a2) 63 ¢>xd2 cxd I ='W+ 64 'it>xd I .
as I first pointed out in my Informant
g5 51 hxg5 hxg5 52 �edl lhd4 62 g7 1-0
analysis. Alternatively:
53 lhd4 l:tb7 54 �e2 a) 62...�e2+ 63 cJig3 [63 �f3 l1e8 I will not analyse i n detail my
54 g4 was interesting. 64 f5 d4] 63 ... d4 64 g7 �e8 65 f5 c2 encounter with Krarnni k as it is j ust a
54, .. l:th3 66 11 fl d3 67 f6 d2 68 fl d 1 ='iW blitz gamf'. I happily let my opponent's
I f 54 . . . �h l 5 5 �d L 69 fxe8='if+ wins. knight go to c4 and when it arrived
5 5 g4 b) 62 ... l1e8 63 f5 d4 64 f6 c2 65 �fl there I could not resist a little smile.
d3 66 fl l:td8 67 g7 d2 68 f8='ih d l ='iW
69 'iWf6+ ¢>c7 70 g8='iW �xg8
C.Kasparov - V.K.ramnik
Champions Club, 5 minute game
7 1 'iWb6+ �c8 7 2 .e6+ 'it>b7 73 �fl+
wins. Or 6 3 g7 c2 64 g8=" l:tg I + Kasparovchess.com 200 I

65 �h3 l:th I + 66 'it>g3 l:tg I + 67 'it>h4 1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 b6 4 ttJc3

59 . . . l1a2 ! ! �c7 [67 . . . c l =W" 68 'iWc8 mate] �b7 5 a3 d5 6 exd5 ttJxd5 7 e3 g6
This pin o f the f-pawn is an 68 'iWfl+ ¢>c6 69 'iWe6+ ¢>c7 70 'iWe7+ 8 ttJxd5 exd5 9 �b5+ c6 10 �d3 �g7
extremely difficult move to find. I t 'it>c6 7 1 'iWd6+ 'it>b7 72 'iWd7+ <Ji>b8 1 1 b4 0-0 12 �d2 ttJd7 13 l1b 1 l:te8
temporarily stops White pushing h i s 73 c6 White catches B lack's king.) 14 0-0 ttJf6 15 'iWc2 ttJe4 16 l:tfc1 l:tc8
pas seq f and g-pawns a s a team. I t also 60 g6 (60 ¢> g 3 c3 61 g6 l:te2) 17 �el ttJd6 18 a4 a6 19 ttJd2 llc7

55 ... f4? ! gains a tempo to help win the race. 60. . .11e2 61 l:t f4 neB 62 � f6+ <J;; c 7 2 0 ttJb3

1 53
1 52
 Vassily SmyslOIl the 7th Vassily Smysloy the 7th

38 g4 '*g5 39 �xh3 �xd4 that he has lovely piece play. However Smyslov makes i t so easy to remove
40 �b l ? ! lOeS 41 1fg3 lOxg4 White's d-pawn can become dangerous the d6-pawn. A fascinating fight starts
42 1he6? as i f he can push and then consolidate it in the centre.
on d6, it could stifle Black. 24 1Of6+
1 4 �e3 ne8 If 24 lOxd6 'ir'a6+.
24 ... 'i!tb8 25 �d4 SLeS 26 lOd7

20 ... bS 2 1 LUeS �e8 2 2 1:I.al lIee7

23 �c3 LUc4 See diagram on page J 50.
24 l:ra2 'lid6 2S BIbS BIbS 26 l::t a 8
lO b 6 2 7 l:ra2 h S 2 8 %:'cal b 4 29 'li d l
h 3 30 g 3 LUe4 3 1 �fl �b6 3 2 %:. a 8 42 ...�xe5 43 l:ru5 'ifb5 44 ..I1.g2 ?
�fS 33 %:'xe8+ %:.xe8 3 4 � d 2 'iff6 LUr6? 45 f] ? ? lOe4 46 'fIe7 LUxeS 47
3S �c1 �g7 36 lIa6 �h7 37 "ilff] �g8 bxeS �h3 0-1
15 d6 26 ..• f6? !
I got the impression from this Smyslov takes a huge risk. After
Smyslov and I both played the Griinfeld quite regularly. Assessing the particular game that the d6-passed 26 . . . SLxd4 27 'lixd4+ 'i!tg8 28 LUf6+
strength of the d6 passed pawn is not always a simple matter. I knew his win pawn is not something Black can't
'i!tfS! (Euwe spotted that the natural
against Euwe, so I also went for a variation in the Griinfeld with a d6-pawn. handle, especially in the Griinfeld.
continuation 28 . . .'i!th8, allowing a
1 5...�d3 16 �xb7 nb8 17 �g2
Very sadly the result was not 0- 1 as in Smyslov's game. battery, gives more than just a
�xfl 1 8 'i!txfl
perpetual: 29 lOd5+ 'i!tg8 30 lOe7+ 'i!tfS
Actually the position I reached against Piket was virtually the same. White has reasonable compensation
3 1 'lWh8+ 'i!txe7 32 ne I + 'i!td7 33 'Wd4+
for the exchange.
lOd5 34 SLxd5 nb4 3 5 'iWe5 'iWa6+
M.Euwe - V.Smyslov J.Piket - G.Kasparov 18 ... lOd7 1 9 lOc4
36 'i!tg l 'fId6 37 'Wc3) 29 LUxh7+ 'Ot>g8
30 LUf6+ 'i!tfS the players have to settle
for a repetition.
27 �xeS fxeS

19 ...lOeS
Smyslov exchanges to get closer to
M. Euwe - V.Smyslov Nowadays players who develop the
the d6-pawn.
Candidates Tournament, Zurich 1 95 3 e2-knight on c3 go thcre at on c c with
1 0 lOec3.
20 LUxeS �xe5 2 1 �Ic5 ? !
1 d 4 lOr6 2 c 4 g 6 3 g3 �g7 4 � g 2 dS After 2 1 lOe4 ! ? 'fIa5 22 lOxc5 28 'Wd2?
10 ... lOa6 11 lOa3 exd5 1 2 exd5 ..I1.f5
2 1 ...'fIaS 22 �e3 1:I.fd8 23 lOe4 Going after B lack's king with
S exdS LUxd5 6 e4 lOb6 7 LUe2 eS 1 3 1Oc3 lOb4
8 d5 e6 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 a4 �xd6 2 8 'iWd6 would force Black to return the
Black bases his strategy on the fact

1 54 155
Vassily Smyslol' the 7th Vassily Smyslov the 7th

exchange and settle for a position a J.Piket - G.Kasparov prepared this move to counter h i s match: 1 9 . . . tUdJ ! 20 �g3 c4 2 1 'iWc2
pawn down. 2 8 . . . l:lbc8 (28 . . . l:lxd7 Euwe Memorial, Amsterdam 1 995 preparation. Gulko defended the 1:[c8 22 l:lad l 'it'd7 23 h4 f5 24 nxd3
29 "xd7) 29 .f6+ �g8 30 'fie7 l:lxd7 position differently with I3 ... lLle4. \h-Ih Karpov-Kasparov, Game 21,
3 1 .xd7 and White should win this I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 d 5 4 lLln Then 14 lLlb5 �d7 1 5 a4 ! lLlb4? Seville 1 987. And I had also come up
without too much of a problem. �g7 S "ifb3 dxc4 6 "ifxc4 0-0 7 e4 lLla6 16 'Wb3 ! 'Wb6 ? ! I7 .i.e3 .i.xb5 against 19 �g3 in a quite different kind
2S ... l:lbcS 29 �gl ? 8 �e2 eS 9 ds e6 1 0 0-0 exd5 1 8 .i.xb5 tUc6 19 d7 l:led8 20 'ifc4 lLlf6 of event: 1 9 . . . 'ifd7 20 a3 tUc6 2 1 'iWb5
29 "d6 was still better than the 2 1 �xc5 'ifc7 22 �xc6 bxc6 23 .i.d6 l:lc8 22 l:lad 1 �xc3 23 bxc3 lLle5
game. After 29 . . . 'ifa6+ 3 0 'l!fxa6 lLlxa6 'iWxd7 24 lLle5 1 -0 Piket-Gulko, 24 'it'xd7 and I went on to win in
3 I lLlxe5 it looks balanced. Groningen 1 990. a simultaneous exhibition game, Rao­
14 �f4 Kasparov, New York 1 98 8 .
I had already played against 1 4 h3?! 1 9...l:l e4?
when I managed to show that 19 ... tUxa4 deserves consideration.
Black's pieces work well and he can 20 .1Lg3
even take over the initiative with his After 20 ..Ile3 tUc6 ' 2 1 tUxc5 llb4
piece play. 14 ... tUb4! 1 5 .i.f4 ! tUd7 22 'iWd3 lLlc4.
1 6 l:ld2 a6 1 7 'Wb3 b5 1 8 'ifd l c4 1 9 a4! 20 ... tUc4
11 cxdS ne8 tUc5 20 axb5 lLlbd3 2 1 .i.xd3 tUxd3 If 20 . . . lLla6 2 1 lLlxb6 'ii'xb6 22 'ifc2.
In an earlier game - with 1 1 . . . � f5 - 22 l:lxd3? cxd3? (22 . . . �xd3 ! ) 23 lLld5 ! 2 1 lLlxc5
the d-pawn did not move yet assumed a axb5 24 tUe7+ ! '12- '12 Karpov­
29 ... ,*,e5 ! great role just by threatening to move. Kasparov, Game 1 5 , World Champion­
He makes sure White doesn't get out Sadly, I lost that one as well. 12 .1L f4 ship, Seville 1 98 7
of the pin. ne8 1 3 nad I lLle4 1 4 lLlb5 'iif f6 1 5 �d3 1 4 ...tU d 7 1 5 lld2 lLl b 4 1 6 'Wb3 � e6
30 �h3 'fie7 31 'fie2 lLlb4 1 6 tUc7 lLlxd3 1 7 lLlxe8 llxe8 Just like Smyslov I exchanged pieces
If 3 1 11d l nc7. 1 8 'lixd3 'fixb2 1 9 l:lde I 'lWb4 20 lLld2 around the d6-pawn in order to weaken
3 1 ..Jhd7 'fia4 2 1 'iifc 4 'lixc4 22 lLlxc4 �c3 it.
Black wins a piece. Euwe resists but 23 lLld2 �xd2 24 �xd2 �d7 25 .1Lf4 17 � c4 lLlb6 18 .i.xe6 l:lxe6
in the long run he has no chance. �b5 26 f3 g5 (26. . . �xfl 27 Wxfl lLlf6
32 �xd7 "xd7 33 'ifxe5+ ..t>g8 28 nxe8+ lLlxe8 29 �e5 lLlg7 30 d6
34 'ife4 as 3 5 h4 'ifd5 3 6 'ir'g4 nnJ Now the d6-pawn wins.) 2 7 �xg5
37 l:ldl 'iifn 3 8 "e4+ 'ifn 39 "ifc5 'it'f5 �xfl 2 8 ..t>xfl lLld6 29 �e7 lLlc8 2 1 ...lLlxd2
40 'i!fe4+ 'fin 4 1 'lie5 'fif5 42 'fie4+ 30 �xc5 l:ld8 3 1 l:[e5 f6 32 nf5 b6 Everything goes according to plan .
..t>g7 43 'iif d 4+ 'iif f6 44 'ifc5 l:ln 33 .1Ld4 lLle7 34 .1Lxf6 l:[xd5 35 ng5+ Just like Smyslov I win the exchange.
45 lld2 'ife7 46 "ife3+ nf6 47 nd4 nxg5 36 �xg5 lLlc6 37 �e2 ..t>f7 22 tUxd2 lle2
lLle6 48 l:ld5 'iife 6 49 l:lc5 h5 50 b3 ..t>n 38 �d3 �e6 39 Wc4 lLle5+ 40 Wd4 Here 22 . . . l:ld4 23 tUf3 l:lxd6 !
51 l:lb5 'iif d 7 5 2 �g2 "ife7 53 'ilVc4+ tUc6+ 1 -0 Karpov-Kasparov, London! (23 . . . l:lg4 24 lLle6 wins.) 24 lLlxb7 l:ldJ
..t>g7 54 'lid3 �h6 5 5 1:[d5 l:ln 56 l:ld6 Leningrad 1 986. 25 'iJ'xb4 (25 lLlxd8 l:lxb3 26 axb3
lLle5 57 'lie3+ �h7 58 l:[b6 .e7 0-1 1 2 l:[ d l �fS 19 tUa4 ! ? l:lxd8s) 25 . . . nd l + 26 nxd 1 'iWxd l +
Tal recommended this and I lost 27 'ife l and White consolidates his
See diagram on page 1 54.
I suspected I would face the variation against it. This is one more example material advantage and has decent
in the next game and was hoping I 13 d6 b6 where a world champ ion had a chances to win with the two pieces
could prove I was able to neutralise the Piket has his own lines, which he has controversial effect on my career. against the rook.
d6-pawn at least as well as Smyslov. developed and refined to a high level. I I had faced 1 9 a3? ' in a world title 23 ihb4 as 24 'iWxb7 l:lxd2

1 56 157
Vassily Smyslov the 7th Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Here 29 ... ':a7 30 ltJe4 wins. This i s a desperate attempt, but it Here I resigned because I saw that I
Alternatively 2 9 . . . 'iff8 30 ltJe4 ! can't loosen White 's grip. There are had run out of plausible moves. I never
'it'xd6 (30 . . . 1:I.d8 3 1 ltJf6+ .t>g7 32 'ifd4 three other possibilities.
got rid of that daITUled d6 pawn.
lHs 33 lOe8+ 'it?h7 34 g4 .l:tb5 a) I f 38 ... f6 39 'iWeI ! .
The conclusion of the game mght
35 ltJf6+) 3 1 ltJxd6 .l:tbb8 32 .l:tc I l:td8 b) 3 8 . . ..l:tc6 3 9 'iWh8 + 'l;e7 4 0 'iWxh4+
have been 4 \ . ...l:tg6 (If 4 \ .. ..l:tc6 42 g3.)
33 l:tc8 .t>g7 34 1:I.xa8 wins. wins.
c) 38 . . .1:I.b4 3 9 'iWh8+ <tIe7 40 'i!fxh4+ 42 'ii> h l (Black has no move.) 42 .. J:tb6
30 h3 1:I.bl 3 1 nxb! .l:txb 1 + 32 .t> h 2
1:I. b6 f6 4 1 'i!fe I + 'l;d6 42 'iWe8 wins. 43 g6 .l:txg6 44 'i!fb8+ 'l;e7 45 'iWxh4+

If 32 . . .l:tb8 33 'ife5 'it>f8 34 ltJe4 l:tb7 39 'iWb8+ 'l;e7 40 'iWe5+ '.t>f8 4 1 fxgS IIf6 46 <t:le4 and wins.
3 5 1It'h8+ rJ;e7 36 'ife8+ wins. 1 -0
25 d 7
33 'ife5 rJ;f8
Here some doubt came into my mind
And here 3 3 . . .l::t b 8 is countered by
as Euwe's d-pawn never got this far, An attacking player like me often obtains positIOns with unbalanced
but I still did not worry. In reality B l ack 34 ltJb7 ! .
material. Therefore it quite often happened that my opponent had several
already has a lost position. 34 'ifb8+ <tI e 7 35 'ife5+ �f8 3 6 f4
connected pawns, while I preferred to have a piece. In this way Smyslov had
25 .. Jb.b2 26 'ifd5 ltb5 h5
a very strong influence on me. Two of his games impressed me very much.
After 26 ... � f8 27 ltJe4! intending After 3 6. . .g 5 3 7 f5 'ifb8 3 8 'ifxb8+
Here are a couple of critical positions from his games. Then come my games.
�e5 is better than 27 ltJd3 ltd2 28 �f4 l:txb8 39 f6 .l:td8 40 .t>g3 wins. And
1:I.a7! 29 �xd2 1:txd7 30 'ifxa5 nxd3 after 36 . . . f6 ! 7 37 'ifd5 <tIe7 38 h4 !
3 1 'ifxd8 1:I.xd8 32 �e3. White keeps Black under pressure. V.Smyslov - D.Bronstein G.Kasparov - B.Spassky
27 1:I.dl �f8
After 27 . . . .l:ta7 28 'ife4! �fS
(28.. .�f6 29 'ife8+ .t>g7 30 � eS ! )
2 9 'ife8 .l:ta8 3 0 ltJe4 White wins.
28 �d6 �xd 6
Not 28 . . . ':a7? 29 �xf8 .t>xfS
30 'ife5.
29 'ifxd6

37 'ifd5 h4 V.Smyslov - J.Timman G.Kasparov - J.Lautier

Now the pawn ending will not bring
victory:
a) 37 .. :vPe7 38 'ifgS+.
b) 3 7 ... gS 3 8 ltJd3.
c) 3 7 ... a4 38 IOb7 .l:txb7 39 'ifxb7
rJ;e7 40 Wg3 and Black can't enter the
29 ... 1:I.ab8 pawn ending.
Now the d-pawn is almost 3 8 'ifeS!
suffocating me. Black treads a narrow After 38 IOb7 comes 3 8 . . . l:txb7
path but it is not enough to stay in the 39 'it'xb7 .t>e7.
game. 38 ... g5

IS8 I S9
Vassily Smyslov the 7th
Till s is the third of my losses
where there was unbalanced
material and a mass of pawns
coming in my direction.
No mistake, I lost three games
in this way! In fact I may have
lost even more, but (luckily for
me) I can't remember them.
V.Smyslov - D.Bronstein
USSR Championship, Moscow 1 95 1
1 e4 c5 2 lL\c3
Smyslov played 5 6 Closed S i cilians
in his career. His first game and first
win with it came in 1 946, his last was
in 1 99 8 . His fust victim was Kottnauer,
his last Arakhamia. 5 2 years had
elapsed between these two games.
2 ... lL\c6 3 g3 g6 4 ..Itg2 ..Itg7 5 d3 d6
6 ..Ite3 lL\h6 7 ..wcl lL\g4 8 ..Itd2 lL\d4
9 b3 lL\e5 1 0 lL\ce2 'ii' b 6 11 (4
1 1 ...lL\xc2+
This is a cute move, but not really a
good deal.
12 ..wxd .xb2 13 ..wxb2 lL\xd3+
1 4 ¢>n ..Itxb2 15 n b l
1 60
Vassily Smysloy the 7"
V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
1 8 ... ng8 37 lL\xd6
White has three pieces against a rook Smyslov not only takes a pawn, but
and four pawns. This kind of position with his enormous piece power also
See diagram on page J 59. with unbalanced material is really hard very quickly catches Bronstein's king.
to judge. I have already mentioned one 37 ...nxb3 3 8 ..Ite5 na8
l S . Jte6
.. painful experience against Anand in He does not see a checkmate in two,
but his position was hopeless anyway.
Tilburg 1 99 1 ; in that game he had a
39 lL\c4+ 1-0
queen, I had three pieces.
i 9 �f2 .ltc4 20 lL\n .ltxe2
V.Smyslov - J.Timman
Black has invested two moves to
Hoogovens, Wijk aan Zee 1 972
exchange the bishop for the knight. H e
1 lL\n g6 2 e4 .ltg7 3 d4 d6 4 lL\c3
could have made two pawn moves
instead. ..Itg4 5 ..Ite3 lL\c6 6 ..Itb5 a6 7 ..Itxc6+
bxc6
21 �xe2 �d7 2 2 l:tdl a5 23 lL\e5+
Interestingly, Smyslov himself took
�c7 24 lL\xf7 a4 25 e5 a3 26 .ltal
on doubled c-pawns with Black against
l::t ge8 27 �g5 l::t a 5 28 lL\e6+ <;t>d7
1 6 ..1tc3 Timman in 1 9 84. Even more
Smyslov prefers to face the three interestingly, several decades earlier in
pawns with a piece, rather than have a 1 94 3 , Smyslov also had a similar
rook against four pawns. After 1 6 nxb2 position against Botvinnik. He lost the
comes 1 6 . . . lL\xb2 17 ..Itc3 lL\d3 first and drew the second game.
1 8 ..Itxh8 f6 19 ..It g7 h 5 20 g4 ri,tf7 8 h3 ..ItxfJ 9 ..wxn e6 10 e5 ! lL\e7
2 1 Jth6 ..Itxa2.
1 6 . . ..Itxa2?!
.
After 1 6 . . ...It x c 3 Bronstein avoids the
equation of three pawns against a piece.
1 7 lL\xc3 ..Itc4 1 8 lL\ge2 ( 1 8 lhb7 29 ..1td5
lL\b4 + 1 9 c;t>e l Jta6) 1 8 .. Jtb8 and it is White simply has too many pieces.
hard to pick a colour. Everyone to their 29 ... a2 30 g4 l:tc8 31 lL\g5 l:tf8 3 2 f5
own taste. gxfS 33 gxfS b6 34 ..It e6+ �c7
1 7 nxb2 lUxb2 18 ..Itxb2 35 exd6+ exd6 36 lL\e4 na3
161
 Vassily Smyslov the 7th Vassily Smyslov the 7th

11 lLle4 2 6 ... eS 2 7 lLle2 'ii'd 2 ? ! 37 >Ph2 d2 If 1 5 . . . fxg6 1 6 'ilfh3 'ilfg5+ 1 7 <;t>b l

Smyslov plays powerfu l ly. Timman adopts a risky app ro ach . It i s :txb2+ 1 8 'iPxb2 l1b8+ 1 9 <;t>a I lLlb4
l l ...lLld5 1 2 �g5 'Wbs 13 0-0 h6 dangerous to release the p re s sure on the 20 'Wxe6+! (In my Informant analysis I
14 �f6 �xf6 1 5 exf6 it'xb2 1 6 c4 f6-pawn. gave 20 a3 as winning. I can no longer
it'xd4 17 exd5 cxdS 2S <t>n 'ih:a2 remember why, since it only leads to a
draw. 20 . . . lLlc2+ 2 1 >Pa2 'it'a5 22 lLlb I
See diagmm on page 159. [22 a4?? 'iWb4] 22 . . . lLlb4+ 23 'iPa l and
B l ack has a perpetual.) 20. Ai'hS
Black has three pawns for the piece. 2 1 a4 ! ! This move wins. 2 1 . ..lLle2+
If they start rolling they will be like an (2 l . . .'iVa5 22 lId2) 2 2 >Pa2 lLlb4+
avalanche. On the other hand th e (22 . . . lt'a5 2 3 It'xg6) 2 3 >Pb l ! and
choking f6-pawn can cause a lot of 38 lLlxd2 White wins as there is not enough
problems for B lack. Interestingly, The strongest pawn in B lack's power in the bartery.
seven years later Smyslov, i n the position has now disappeared and with 16 l:td2 lIe8 17 lLlgl ! dS IS lLlo as
9 lLlbd2 vari ati on, introduced a very it all hope goes too.
important novelty which established a 29 ..we3 ! �h7 30 'iib 6 3s ..Jlff6 39 lLle4 'ilff4+ 40 >Pg2 l:tc2
new variation. In that line B lack also Of course White's queen is free to 41 'ilfd6 as 42 'it'dS 1-0
sacri fices a p i e ce for three passed invade.
pawns. I beat S hi ro v in that l i ne (I had 30 .. :iib3 3 1 �g2 d4 32 'ilh:d6 lWe6 Here are my exciting games featuring
the piece of c o urs e ) in Linares 200 I . 33 'i!t'xb4 'ii'xf6 the topic of a pieee against three
H o wev er the line is st i l l playable for connected passed pawns.
B lack nearly three decades after
Smysl ov first played it. G.Kasparov - B.Spassky
IS lLle3 0-0 19 :tad l 'iWe5 20 g4 Niksic 1 9 83
l:tabS 2 1 nfe! 'iWgS 22 lIbl
1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 �g7 19 e5?!
Sp a s sky doesn ' t often play the Berter was 1 9 11dh 2 ! dxe4 (I9 . . . lLle7
King's Ind i an . 20 nhS+ ! ! is rather similar to Spassky's
4 e4 d6 5 0 lLlc6 6 �e3 a6 7 lLlge2 . . . nh I against Larsen. 20 . . . �xhS
lIbS 8 'ilfd2 0-0 9 h4 bS 1 0 hS bxe4 21 l:txhS + ! >PxhS 22 'ilfh6+ 'iPgS
34 lLlg3! 11 g4 �xg4 ! ? 12 fxg4 lLlxg4 23 lLlg5 and White is about to
The ' three pawns for the piece' checkmate.) 20 lLlxe4 f5 2 1 lLlc3 lLlxd4
balance is restored, but Black's pawns See diagram on page 1 59. 22 lLle5 White wins.
are no longer in a mass, but separated. 19 ...lLle7 20 �h3
The knight will really dominate and Black has three pawns for the piece 20 lLla4 was not a clear win, though
2 2 ... eS sooner or later White will penetrate. and no real weaknesses - perhaps only White is berter after 20 . . .lLlf5 2 1 'ilff4
Finally the first pawn of the herd 34 ... it'e6+ 35 lLle4 ne7 the h-file. I knew how much Smyslov 'ilfe7.
moves. After 35 . . . f5 36 gxf5 gxf5 37 it'e7+ preferred to retain the piece. B lack's 20 ... eS 21 dxeS
23 'iPg2 nb4 24 lhb4 exb4 25 lLle2 wins. pawns are a long way from promotion. Black has only two pawns, but the
:teS 26 lLld4 3 6 it'flI d3 These two factors made me confident. path for his d-pawn is open. If
Smyslov provokes B l ack into 36 . . . g5 would have resisted fo r 13 O-O-O ! lLlxe3 14 'ilfxe3 e6 15 hxg6 2 1 lIdh2 lLlc6.
pushing the pawn. l o n g er. hxg6 2 1 ...�e7 22 'ilff4 lLle6! 23 net d4

1 62 1 63
Vassily Smyslov the 7th Vassi/y Smys/ov the 7th

31 'ith7+ WfS 32 liJxnr wins.] llf2] 37 . . . 11f2 B lack wins.) 35 . . . .d2+ B lack wins.) 1 9 . . . 11e8 20 .f1 and
3 1 'itb7+ �fS 3 2 llxf7+ [32 'iixg7+ (Or 3 5 .. �e7 ! 36 �f5 .xa4.) 36 'it>b l Black is doing fine here.
<ot>xg7 33 llxf7+ �h8 34 llh7+ <;Pg8 llD 37 llc I .i.h6. 17 exf6 .If6 18 lOb3
35 liJf6+ �fS 36 liJxe6 mate] 32 . . . 'ito>e8
33 liJf6+ ..t>d8 34 liJxe6+ 'ito>c8 35 llc7 G.Kasparov - J.Lautier See diagram on page 159.
mate) 30 "iWh7+ �fS 3 1 llfl llc3 + 1 I Linares 1 994
This incredible move saves B l ack. Remembering Smyslov's example
3 2 bxc3 'iWa3+ 3 3 Wdl lld8+ 34 lOd2 1 e4 e5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 �c4 �c5 4 c3 retained the piece, but other
llxd2+ and Black has a perpetual. liJf6 5 d3 d6 6 .i.b3 h6 7 h3 a6 8 liJbd2 continuations, like 1 8 .d3 g6, offered
29 . . 'iPfli 30 lOIe6+ be6 31 l:tfl+
.
�e6 9 �c2 �a7 1 0 'ite2 'ife7 nothing but gloom.
24 lbd4 <;Pe8 3 2 'itg8+ �flI B lack intentionally holds back 1 8 ...liJxb4
I knew Smyslov played 24 liJe4, but castling. Four pawns may not be one too
here B l ack gets nice play after 1 1 b4! d5 12 a4 b5! 13 0-0 0-0 many. White has chances to block them
24 . . . liJxe5 25 liJf6+ �xf6 2 6 liJxe5 c 3 . 14 axb5 axb5 as there are holes on Black's queenside.
24 ... liJxd4 19 �b1
Black recovers the exchange. After 19 .liLe3 .liLxe3 2 0 fxe3 lOxc2
Although the material no longer 2 1 'iVxc2 b4 22 liJfd4 .g5 favours
favours White, he still has a dangerous Black; 1 9 .i.a3 lOxc2 20 .xc2 1:tfd8
attack. and the d-pawn can't be blocked.
25 liJId4! 19 ... d4!
After 25 'i!fxd4 "ifb7 2 6 .£2 �h6+ Not I 9 . . . c5? 20 .i.a3.
27 �b l lled8 2 8 c6! ii'xc6 2 9 �g2 the 33 'iix g6 +
position is balanced. I did not see the possibil ity of
25 ... '1Ii'xc5 26 liJf3 ! lled8 33 lOd5 ! ! which forces a draw. Then
If 2 6 . . . ii'b6 27 lle2 lled8 and I 33 .. '>t>d7 taking the pawn would lead
preferred Black's position even a good to the same perpetual . (33 . . . exd5 1 5 d4
two decades ago. 34 lhfS+ ji'xfS 35 it'e6+ 'Vie 7 Opening up the centre doesn't favour

27 liJg5! �e7? 3 6 'i'g8+; 33 . . . 11xd5 34 llxfS+ 'itxfS White, and other options o ffer nothing
White has no more than a draw after 35 'iixe6+) 34 lOxe7 �h6+ 35 �c2 either. I f 15 .i.b2 llfd8; 1 5 exd5 liJxd5

27 . . . l:td7 28 �xe6 fxe6 29 '1Ifh2 �h8. llxg8 36 lOxg8 llxh3 and the endgame 1 6 .liLb2 lOf4 1 7 'Vie4 �d5.
28 'Vih4 lld3 29 'ith7+ should end in a draw. 1 5... eId4
Here I started to have problems with 33 ... '>t>d8 0-1 Not 1 5 . . . dxe4? when 1 6 lOxe5 is 20 llu7?!
my time. The situation has changed, Here I lost on time. Maybe I spent better for White. In such a complicated position it is

so, just like Smyslov, I might have too much time trying to work out the 16 e5 natural that players cannot always fwd

considered 29 liJce4 1 Sometimes I simi larities between this game and Other moves were also harmless for the best moves. The best choice was

copied the champions too much, Smyslov's. But the position is lost Black. 20 .i.a3 ! This extremely complicated

sometimes not enough. They should anyway. 1 6... dxc3 ! ? position could take pages of analysis,

have written instructions on their For example: 34 .i.xe6 "'4! (After I saw that Black has time t o step but for now I ' U just show the best

games. I f you buy a television you get 34 ... 11b6 35 ji'g8 1 llxc3+ 36 �b l ! aside with 1 6 . . . .i.d7 ! . Then 1 7 cxd4 defence for White. 20 . . . d3 2 1 .i.xd3

a manual. 29 . . . �xe 5 ! I missed this llxb2+1 3 7 ..t>xb2 ji'a3+ 3 8 ..t>b l llb3+ ( l 7 lle I dxc3 ! ) 1 7 . . . �xd4! 1 8 llxa8 (2 1 iVe4 �xb3 22 .i.xb4 .i.xf2+!

move in my 1 983 Illformant analysis. draws nicely.) 35 lOa4 (If 35 lOd I ( 1 8 .d3 .i.xe5 wins) 1 8 . . . 11xa8 1 9 .lIe I 23 'i1>xf2 llxa I 24 .i.xd3 'iVb6+ 25 'it>g3

(29 . . . c3 30 lln ! "Wb4 [30 . . . 11b6 "i!t'd2+ 36 �b l llD ! 37 llg l [37 llh l ( 1 9 lOxd4 liJxd4 20 .d3 .xe5 and f5 26 .e7 .g6+ 27 <;Ph2 White is still

1 64 1 65
Vassily Smyslov the 7th
in the game.) 2 L.lLlxd3 22 .i.xf8 lLlf4!
23 Wxb5 lLlxh3 + ! 24 \t>h l lLlxf2+
25 \t>g I and White is still alive.
20 ... e2
Good is 20 . . . 11xa 7 ! 2 1 lLlbxd4
(2 1 lLlfxd4? .i.e4 22 We4 �g6! 23 lLlf5
c5 ! ) 2 l . . .11a 1 ' 2 2 'ife4 �g6! 23 'ifxg6
fxg6 24 lOxe6 l:tf6 and White is i n
trouble.
2 1 lluB exb l =W 2 2 l:txfS+ \t>xfS
23 Wx b5??
This is a bad mistake or should we
say that it misses the opportunity to
play a great move. The position was so
exciting that I forgot about Smys10v
completely. The surprise is 23 �g5 ! '
'i'fg6 (23 . . . 'fhfl + 2 4 'ifxfl hxg5
25 tt'xb5 lOd5 26 lLlbxd4 !=) 24 """xb5
\t>g8 25 'WIfb8+ ( 2 5 lhb 1 """x b 1 +
26 .t>h2 .xb3 27 lLlxd4 White i s
a pawn behind, but i t is n o t easy
to do anything with the extra pawn.)
2 5 . . .�h7 26 llxb l 'flfxb l + 27 <t>h2 lLla6
28 .a7 'lixb3 29 lOxd4 'lic4 Despite
Black's extra material White can resist.
23 .... xb3
White has only a rook agains t
B lack's queen.
24 'i'b8+ \t>e7 25 'ifxe7+ �e8
26 .i.d2 .d8
B etter was 26 . . . lLld3 L
27 -.te5 �fS 28 lLlxd4 lLld3! 29 'flfe3
-.te4 0-1
1 66
These kinds of positions are harder to
play in a rapid game. Maybe that's an
excuse for my loss. Because it was a
rapid game our analysis was limited.
V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov
PCA Intel-Grand Prix, Moscow 1 994
1 lOn lOf6 2 e4 g6 3 lOe3 �g7 4 e4
d6 5 d4 0-0 6 .i.e2 e5 7 d5 lObd7
8 .i.e3 lLlg4 9 .i.g5 f6 10 .i.h4 h 5
1 1 lOd2 lLlb6 1 2 n 1Of7 1 3 'ife2 .i.h6
1 4 0-0-0 c5 1 5 dxc6?!
1 5 ..tb 1 came into consideration.
1 5 ... bxc6
16 IP b l as
B etter was 1 6 ... lLlc5 ! .
1 7 lOa4 c 5 1 8 1Oc3 .i.e3?
There is no need to think about
moving the bishop to d4.
19 lLld5 .i.d4 20 lOb3 .i.b7 21 lOxd4
cxd4 22 f4 l:tb8 23 llhO lOh6 24 c5!?
.i.xd5 2 5 exd5 lOf5
Vassily Smyslov the 7'}'
26 fIe5! 32 llg4+! 'it>f8
Kramnik sacrifices a piece. His
pawns are closer to promotion than
those o f Smyslov's opponents.
26 ... lOxh4
If 26 . . . lLlxe5 27 llxf5 gxf5 28 c6.
2 7 exd6 lOe5 2 8 llxd4
See diagram on page 1 60.
28 ... lOf5
After 28 . . . llb4 2 9 llxb4 axb4 30 .e4
lO f5 3 1 il'xb4 the five queenside pawns 33 il'e6! nb7 34 c6
might be too much to handle even for White's central pawns are just too
Smyslov. much to bear.
34 .. Jhb2+
The rook sacri fice causes some
tension, but not much else.
35 �xb2 'ifb6+
29 llxf5! gxf5 30 .xf5
Black has a rook for the pawns, but it
is hard to make a breach.
3o...'it>g7
After 30 . . J%b4 31 .e6+ �h8
(3 1 . . . 1Of7 32 llxb4 axb4 33 d7
36 �a3!
(33 .i.xh5 is also sufficient.] White
The king moves up and finds a
must be winning, e.g. 3 3 ... �g7
shelter near the central pawns.
34 .i.xf7 llxf7 3 5 c6) 32 lhb4 axb4 36 ... iI'c5+ 37 'it>a4 il'c2+ 38 ..t>b5
33 il'e7! and White's pawns will soon 'ifb2+ 39 �a6 il'e2+ 40 �b7 nh7+
move forward decisively. 41 d7 1 -0
3 1 �xh5 ll h 8?
The rook shifts out of play. It was not After all these losses I gave up
at all hopeless for Black after 3 1 .. J%b4! trusting in the piece against connected
32 nd2 ! (32 nxb4 axb4 33 il'e6 .a5 ! ) passed pawns. The following position
32 . . . iI'c8 3 3 'ilfxc8 lhc8 34 c6 1Oc4 and occurred in my game against Radjabov
he is still alive and kicking. at Linares 2003.
1 67
 Vassily Smyslov the 7th

G.Kasparov - T.Radj abov 26...Wd6

Linares 2003 The young Estonian grandmaster
centralises his king.
2 7 l:tdl 'it>e6 2 8 f4 �fS Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th
Black's king is very active.

Radjabov has just sacrificed a piece
on e5 and in the game I decided not to
take it but play 2 2 We3. However
22 �xe5 ! ? llJxe5 23 dxe5
24 0-0-0 would have given White a
clear advantage. I had lost confidence
so much in Smyslov's piece against
M·i kbail Botvinnik was the first
world champion who did not defeat his
immediate predecessor, Alekhine, i n a
title match. Botvinnik convincingly
won the title of world champion in a
5-player match-tournament in 1 948, in
which he played all his rivals four
times. He scored 14 points out of a
'ilc7 possible 20, beating each opponent
2 9 g4+ ! !
in their individual match. Thereafter, in
People who bum the candle at both
duels with Bronstein, Smyslov and Tal,
ends live shorter lives.
he retained his title only by drawing
29 ..t>Ie4 30 1lJf2+! �xf4
...
- or winning rerum matches! But when
he lost to Petrosian in 1 963, FIDE
denied him the right of a re-match and
he was finally dethroned.
Botvinnik retired from active play
in 1 970 but continued working on
computer chess programs, something
he had started much earlier. He also
opened his own school for teaching
juniors and I was one of his pupils. He
influenced my play not only as a great
player but as a trainer as well.

connected passed pawns method, that I

did not opt for this possibi lity which Botvinnik liked to play on the edge A.Uyin Zbenevsky - M.Botvinnik
promised a winning position. B lack has of the board, especially the h-file.
only two pawns for the piece. Later I
Though I won games with this
even blundered and lost. This painful
method I also lost some. On the right
game prevented me from winning
is a position I remember so well.
Linares one more time.
The patriarch attacked on the h-file
Smyslov also influenced me with a
while his opponent played along the
lovely checkmate of his opponent's
g-file and in the two positions
centralised king, just like Tal did.
below I tried to copy Botvinnik's
Here is that sweet finish! method.
3 1 J:l.g l ! 1 -0
V.Smyslov - L.OII
Smyslov allows Lembi! to decide
Rostov 1 993
whether he wants to be checkmated by P.Svidler - G.Kasparov LSokolov - G.Kasparov
the bishop or the knight, but he has no
say as to how many moves it will take
to do the deed. Smyslov was 72 when
he set up this lovely checkmate.

Vassily is the oldest living world

champion. Though I have suffered from
his influence, I wish him an even
longer and very healthy life .

168

1 69
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'h
A.llyin Zheuevsky - M.Botvinnik
USSR Championship, Moscow 1 927
1 e4 e6 2 lOc3 d5 3 g3 dxe4
White applies little pressure in the
opening.
4 iLg2 iLd7 5 lOb3 iLc6 6 0-0 lOd7
7 lOxe4 lOgf6 8 d3 iLe7 9 lOf4 0-0
10 iLd2 e5 11 lOx f6+ lOxf6
1 2 iLxc6
White finally doubles Botvinnik's
pawns on the queenside. In exchange
Black has a small space advantage.
12 ... bxc6 13 lOg2 Wd7 1 4 lOe3 lOd5
1 5 lOc4 f6 1 6 iLe3 l:I.ae8 1 7 a3 a6
1 8 �g2 iLd6 19 0 f5 2 0 iLgl
20 .. ..I:tr6 !
Botvinnik slowly but surely builds up
an attack on the kingside.
1 70
21 'it'e2 h5! 2 2 �hl b 4 23 gxh4
White opens the g-file for himself
and the h-file for Botvinnik.
2 3 ... lOf4 24 Wd2 l:I.b6 2 5 iLe3 lhb4
See diagram on page 1 69.
26 iLxf4 l:I.xf4 27 l:I.ael Wn 2 8 1fg2
'ifh5 2 9 l:I.e3 l:I.e6 30 l:I.gl
3 0 ... W'b6
Defending the g7 pawn
assisting his own attack on the h-file.
31 b4 l:1.h4
Botvinnik neatly brings up more
fire-power to the h-file.
3 2 'ii' e 2 'it'f4 33 'ii'g 2?
White hopes to attack on the g-file,
B otvinnik repulses the move nicely.
33 ... 11g6!
Cute and effective.
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'1,
34 Wfl e4 ! 35 lLl x d6 l:I.xb2+! P.Svidler - G.Kasparov
36 Wxh2 l:I.h6 37 :te2 'ilho+ 3 8 l:I.eg2 Tilburg 1 997
1 e4 c5 2 lLlo d6 3 c3
This little move is not as hannless for
Black as it looks.
3 ...lLlf6 4 iLe2 lLlbd7 5 d3 b6 6 0-0
iLb7 7 lLlbd2 g6 8 d4 ! ? cxd4 9 cxd4
lLlxe4
Black can simply develop, but I
could not resist taking the central pawn.
1 0 lLlxe4 jLxe4
38 ...l:I.xh2+
White survives the attack but has to
settle for a lost ending.
39 �xh2 Wh5+ 40 'iii> g3 cxd6
4 1 dxe4 "g4+ 42 'it>fl "f4+ 43 'it>e2
"xe4+ 4 4 'it;ld2 'ii'd 4+ 4 5 'i!.>e2
while
1 1 lLlg5 d5
White's attack is very dangerous. The
text is probably an 'onJy move' Black
has no time to retreat the bishop with
I I . . .iLb7? as then comes 1 2 .l1.c4 e6
1 3 iLxe6! fxe6 ) 4 lLlxe6 Wh4 ( 1 4 .....c8
• 45 . 'i!.>n
. . 1 5 l:I.e I �f7 16 in>3 d5 1 7 "0+ lOf6
Black's two connected passed pawns 1 8 iLg5 iLe7 1 9 llac ! iLc6
are too much to cope with. Winning the
game takes time but is never in doubt.
46 :tg6 "c3 47 'it;ldl d5 4 8 116g3
'ii'd 4+ 49 'iii> e2 "e4+ 50 'it>d2 "f4+
51 �e2 1i'b6 52 Il l g2 g6 53 a4 f4
54 llc3 g5 55 b5 "h5+ 56 �d2 cxb5
57 nbS axb5 58 :tc7+ �f6 59 1:1c6+
c;11 f5 60 llc5 'ii'n 6 1 lhb5 g4 62 c4 0
63 l:I.gl fl 64 nft g3 65 llxd5+ �g4
66 lld4+ 'it;lb3 0-1
20 lLlg7 ! ! 1:1£8 2 1 1:1e6 wins according
I also like to attack on the h-file. to Winants.) 1 5 l:I.e l iLe7 ( 1 5 . c;11 f7
. .
171
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'h

1 6 �g5 'iVh5 1 7 'ifb3 d5 1 8 h3 ' ! traps that I should try and have some fun. I perpetual as pressing forward would 24 ... lOhS 2 5 � fS lOf4 26 �xh3
the queen.) 1 6 �g5 ! �xg5 1 7 g3 ! ! know that it doesn't sound the way land him in checkmate. lOxh3+ 2 7 � h l
'ith6 1 8 lOxg5+ <Ji> f8 1 9 'ti'd2' <Ji>g8 serious and professional chessplayers 19 �e3 lOr6 20 'i'd2 'i'd6 21 llf2 Svidler, just like l l i n-Zhenevsky,
20 lle7 �c6 21 lOe6 ' and White wins are supposed to think during the game, goes to hi with his king, so I had reason

according to Peter Svidler's remarkable especially if it's a game against the for hope. In reality, Black simply has

analysis. world champion, but that's exactly insufficient compensation for the pawn.
27 ... 'i'f6 28 llg3 ! 'i'rs 29 �xg5
A fter I L . �d5 12 � f3 �xf3 what I thought. And, after all, it
lOxgS
1 3 'i'xfJ lOf6 1 4 ,*c6+ lOd7 1 5 'ifd5 e6 worked."
After 29 .. Jhd4 30 'i'g2 lOxg5
1 6 lOxe6! ( 1 6 'ifO lOf6 17 ,*c6+ lOd7 13 ...� rS 14 g4 h6
3 1 lhg5 'iVh7 (3 1 . . .'i'f6 32 l:tg l ) is
1 8 'i'fJ lOf6 1 9 ifc6+ lOd7 20 'iff3 My plan was based on play along the
given by Winants, then 32 l:tg l .tf6
I/,- I/, Degraeve-Bacrot, France 1 996) h-file.
33 ':h5 ! wins.
16 . . . fx e6 17 ifxe6+ �e7 White IS gxfS hxgS 16 fxg6
30 1hgS
stands better. Two of three possible
continuations lead nowhere. ( 1 7 ... 'Wie7
2 1 ...11ah8
18 'i'd5 llb8 ! 1 9 �g5 lOf6 20 'it'b3 ! I directed all my heavy pieces against
'iff7 [20 . . . ifg7 21 l:tfe l + �e7 the h2 pawn, actually more so than
22 lle6±] 21 llfe l + �e7 22 l:te6' 0-0 Botvinnik, therefore I was optimistic,
23 llxe7 and White has won a pawn . ) 22 llg2 !
I was not worried about my
opponent's play on the g-file,
Botvinnik's opponent also had the
g-file but got nowhere with it.
2 2 ...llh3 ? ! 30 ... ifh3
1 6 ... a6! I kept attacking when I should have Black might have hoped for serious
I was not certain whether my been defending. Botvinnik won so I felt counterplay, but not in this case
opponent saw this in advance. obliged to play for a win as well. because o f the weakness of hi s own

17 gxf7+ ¢>xf7 1 8 �a4 llhS?! 22 . . . lOh7 or 22 . . . ..if6 should have been king.

tried. 31 l:tg2 �r6

1 8 �g5 ! lO f8 ( 1 8 . . . <Ji>f8 1 9 �h6+ See diagram on page J 70. If 3 1 ....i.xd4 32 'i'd3.
23 ':n ':8h4?
�e8 20 llfe l and White has very nice 3 2 1i'd3 ':xd4 33 'i'g6+ cbe6 34 'i'e8
compensation.) 19 'ife4 ]:tc8 20 llfe I Trying to forcc mattcrs on the h-file. llc4
llc7 2 1 llac l l:td7! Now all the normal 1 8 ... 'i'c7 ! 1 9 llf2 JIh4 20 �e3 l:tah8 After 34 .. . �d6 comes 3 5 'iWb8+ 'it>c6
moves do not succeed: 22 'ifO ! ! Peter's 2 1 llc l and White can force a draw if 36 1i'a8+ 'it>b5 37 a4+!
move is very strong indeed. (22 iH6 he wants (Alternatively 21 'Wid2 b5
<Ji>f7 ! ! ) 22 . . . h6 23 �xe7 lhe7 2 2 �c2 ! ? lOb6 23 b3 '*g3+ also leads
24 llxe7+ 'i'xe7 25 llc8+ and White to a safe position for Black and in fact
WinS. after 24 llg2 llxh2 25 ':xg3 llxd2
12 �bS �g7 13 f3 26 �g6+ �xg6 27 llxg5+ '>1;>f7
Here I quote Peter's words from h i s 2 8 llxg7+ ¢>xg7 29 �xd2 he has a very
Chessbase analysis: "Then I realized slight edge.) 2 1 ...l:txh2 22 llxc7 llh I + 24 �c2!
that 1 3 fJ leads to some very interesting 23 ¢>g2 ll8h2+ 24 ¢>g3 llh3+ 25 'it>g4 Here I had to realise that my rook on
and promising positions and decided llh4+ and White must settle for a h3 was trapped.

1 72 1 73
Mikhail Botvinnik th e 6th Mikhail Botvinnik th e 6th

35 .d8! This is a sideline. Just like llin-Zhenevsky. damage. Thus 24 . . . '1Ifh5 25 : l g2 f6

Black's king will stay where it is. 13 ... exd4 2 1 ...:xh7 (25 . . :e8 26 'ilt'e4 f6 27 �c3 ! ) 26 'ilt'c4
3 5 .. :itf5 36 l:.el + �e5 37 'iWb8 After 13 ... c4 1 4 �xc4 exd4 1 5 cxd4 Hiding the king with 2 L .'iii> f8 (26 'ilt'g6 'ilt'xg6 27 :xg6 and White is
Black loses more material, therefore I lUa5 1 6 �d3 'it'xc2 I 7 �xc2 IOxe4 and, if necessary, walking over to the somewhat better in this endgame.)
1 8 : e l ll'ld6 1 9 � f4 lUac4 20 �b3 �f5 queenside, occurred to me. However
resigned. 26 ... 'iIt'f7 27 'ilt'xc 5 ! (If 27 'ifd3 :h6
2 1 lUe5 �e6 2 2 lUdJ :ad8 23 lUe5 Botvinnik kept his king on g8, so gave
1 -0 28 'ilt'd2 'ilt'h7 29 'ilt'f4 b6?? [29 . . . .I:le8 or
�c8 (23 . . . �d5?? 24 �xd6 wins)
me no hint what to do. He should have 2 9 . . . .I:l fll should have been tried . )
24 �xc4 lUxc4 25 �c7 Rogers went on
This game was not the only time I told me this in his school. 30 :h3 and White was winning i n the
to beat Solomon in Sydney 1 999.
attacked along the h-file while my 2 2 :gl+ �h8 game Joshi-Shankar, Mumbai 1 999.
14 exd4 �g4 1 5 eS
opponent was looking for a result along I decided to step over to the edge. My
But Sokolov is thinking of an exchange
the g-file. brain was preoccupied with aggressive
sacrifice.) 27 . . . lUe2 28 'ilt'g5 nd I +
ideas along the h-file, not my
(28 . . . lUxg3+ 29 fxg3 nd6 30 nc2 .I:lh5
I.Sokolov - G.Kaspar-ov opponent's play on the g-file.
is equally unclear.) 29 ng l lUxg3+
Hoogovens, Wijk aan Zee 1 999 23 :g3 'ilt'e5
30 fxg3 lld6 White certainly has
On e5, the queen stops a threat. Not
1 d4 lUf6 2 e4 e6 3 lUc3 �b4 compensation for the exchange and
23 . . . b6? when we see White's threat:
I have never performed really well in Black must be careful. Nevertheless, to
24 �xd4+ :xd4 25 iVf5 and wins.
the Nirnzo - my Psakhis game comes to be objective, Black may well survive.
24 :agl
mind here - but before this game in the 2 5 'ilt'e l ?
tournament I had j ust won seven games Ivan wants t o improve his queen, and

in a row. My opponents were strong 15 ... �xO 16 exf6 lUxd4 17 �xh7+ in the end he does, but he needs some
�h8 1 8 fxg7+ �xg7 19 �b2 Ihd8 input from me. My opponent missed an
grandmasters, but only two of them
20 gxO :h8 almost winning continuation in 25 f4 !
made it into the top 1 0. Among these
seven Topalov was the strongest. See diagram all page 1 70. when White opens the second rank

4 e3 for the queen to get to g 2 ! 25 . . . 'ilt'h5

Of course I could select this game
I expected 4 ,*e2 as that is Ivan's ( 2 5 ,.'iWd6 26 'ilt'f5) 26 f3 ! 'Wb6
under the motif of the doubled f-pawns,
main weapon against the Nirnzo. I can't ( 2 6 . . . :h3 27 ng4) 27 .g2 ! 'ilt'fS
but I was hoping to attack on the h-file
be certain why he changed to the 4 e3 28 :g7 White overwhelms Black on
and I was not worried about the g-file
line. Maybe he did it because this was the g-file. Then 28 . . .l%h6 29 'ilt'g5 wins.
as Botvinnik dealt with this problem
24...:h4
Botvinnik's main line. well. There was no reason to think that
Ftacnik writes: "The first
4 ... 0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 lUo e5 7 0-0 lUe6 I was not going to handle things equally
independent move is very unfortunate,
8 a3 �xc3 9 bxe3 fie7 10 'ite2 dxc4 as well.
it seems that Black's position instantly
I I �xe4 e5 12 �d3 ne8 13 e4 21 �hl
becomes hopeless . " The S l ovak
grandmaster did not know that it was
not fully independent. I just copied
Botvinnik who had put the rook in front
and the queen behind. When one
attacks a pawn the rook goes in front,
however when the king is the target, 2 5 ...c;t>h7??
then often the queen goes in front as an Botvinnik gave no instructions on his
invasion is feasible and it wreaks more game. I lost track of what to do with

1 75
1 74
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

my king. Anyway I wanted to attack
Sokolov 's king, not start defending my
own. Better was 25 . . . 'ifh5 ! 26 .::I. I g2
(26 l:t3g2 f6 (26 . . . b6 27 'iVe3 'iVd5
28 'fie7 wins . ) 27 W'e3 .::I.e 8 28 �xd4
cxd4 29 'iib 3 'iih 7 and though Black is
living very dangerously, according to
Tsetsarsky, he will get away with
26 . . . l:te8 27 'fig l W'e5 28 l:tg8+ l:txg8
29 l:txg8+ �b7 3 0 l:tfB 'i!ff4 (30 ... W'g7
31 'iib l + i q.,h6 3 2 �C \ + q.,h5 33 � e 3
and Ftacnik c a l l s it a w i n a t t h e e n d o f
h i s line.) 3 1 W'g8+ � h 6 3 2 'ili'g2 �h7
33 'ill' g3 White i s better.
26 'i!fb l + !
A subtle check forces the king t o h 8 .
26...�b8
A fter 26 . . . f5 27 �xd4 cxd4
2 8 W'xb7+ q.,h8 29 'ili'f7 ! B l ack gets
checkmated.
27 ifn
Now Black can't ease the g-file
pressure with . . . .::I. g8 as White would
take the rook with check. On other
moves Black's king will be caught on
the g- file.
27 ... W'e6 28 W'g2
it.)
1 -0
Both l:tg8+ and l:th3 ! , threatening
'*g7 mate, are menaced. I could have
postponed the checkmate for another
six moves, but there was no point in
doing so. It is remarkable that there are
nine Kasparov versus Sokolov games
in the database and only one draw,
when I was White against Andrei
Sokolov in the USSR Championship
1 988 - the other 8 times the result was
1 -0. In addition I lost to Andrei at the
Reykjavik 1 98 8 World Cup where I
missed a battery and dropped a piece.
M.Botvinnik - V.Smyslov 1 1 ...�b7 1 2 'ili'el lObd7
USSR Spartakiad, 1 964
U 11 l i l my matches with Karpov these
two gr.:at players held the record of
playing the most games at the very top
of world chess. This game was their
first since their fmal match in 1 95 8 . In
the sixties they played seven games .
Botvinnilc won two and the rest were
drawn. My score after my last match
with Karpov produced a somewhat
similar picture - relatively few games
1 3 g4
and one champion who won no more
Push i n g the g-pawn was one of
games. I won 5 of the 1 2 regular games
Botvinnilc's specialities.
we played together.
13 ... b6 14 h4
1 c4 lOf6 2 lOc3 e5 3 g3 �b4 4 �g2
A pawn move that I also employed
0-0 5 a3 �xc3 6 bxc3 e4
regularly.
This is quite ambitious.
14 ... lOf8 15 'ili'g3 lOg6 16 lOb3 lOb7
7 lOb3 .::I. e 8 8 0-0 d6 9 lOf4 b6
17 h5 lOb4
10 f3 e3
It is quite unusual to put a knight on
See diagram on page J 76. the edge like this, but Smyslov soon
makes sure he can rescue it.
Smyslov sacrifices the e-pawn m 18 � h l f5 1 9 �b2 '*f6
return for the doubling of White's
pawns.
1 1 d3

Botvinnik affected my play in many ways. I also picked up his idea in the
English Opening of allowing the opponent to push a black pawn to the
e3 -square and letting him keep it there.

M.Botvinnik - V.Smyslov G.Kasparov - A.Karpov

Botv innik doesn't take i t - i f he had
done so, then the game would become
unclear. Now the e3-pawn cuts White's
camp into two but at the same time it
can itself become a target.
2 0 f4
White can exploit the fact that the
queen is on f6 .
20 ... il. x b l 2 1 g5 bIg5 22 fIg5 We5
23 'iix h4 il.c6 24 l:tf4 g6
Opening the kings ide helps White.
2 5 bxg6 lOf8

176 1 77
Mikhail Botvinllik the 6th
26 'it'h6 'it'g7 27 J:bf5 /tJxg6 2S 1:80
1:f8 29 J:H6
White has not only exerted pressure
against Black's king but has cleared the
way to the e3-pawn.
29 . . :ihh6 30 gxh6 Ihf6 31 lhf6
�h7
32 .tel
Botvinnik captures the e3-pawn.
32 ... :gS 33 /tJg5+ �xh6 34 .txe3
�h5 35 1:f7
White is now winning easily.
35 .. .l:1es 36 llh7+ �g4 37 �f2 /tJe7
3S /tJe6 /tJfS 39 /tJd4 /tJxd4 1 !
Smyslov makes sure h e loses. After
39 ... /tJxe3 40 /tJxc6 /tJd l + 41 �e l
/tJxc3 42 �d2 /tJxe2 43 1:xc7 Black
struggles with his cut-off king.
40 cxd4 1:cS 41 d5 .t84 42 .td4 86
178
43 e4 c51
Black is lost anyway.
44 .tf6 1-0
Black resigned as White will deliver
checkmate.
G.Kasparov - A.Karpov
Game 2, World Championship,
Seville 1 987
1 c4 e5 2 /tJc3 lUf6 3 /tJf3 /tJc6 4 g3
.tb4 S .tg2 0-0 6 0-0 e4 7 /tJgS .txc3
8 bxc3 neS 9 f3 e3 ! ?
See diagram 0 11 page 1 76.
A novelty in this particular position.
It was Igor Zaitsev's idea.
1 0 d3!
I could have taken b u t I knew
Botvinnik's game, he had beaten such a
great player as Smyslov. Why not just
follow him?
1 0 ... dS
Karpov plays differently.
1 1 'W!fb3
I changed sides because Karpov was
playing on a different flank. I was able
to adjust.
1 1 ...lLlaS 12 "a3 c6 1 3 cxdS cxdS
14 f4 /tJc6 IS :bl 'it'c7 16 �b2 �g4
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6U.
1 7 c4 25 . . . lLlxg3+ ! 26 ..ti'g I ! (26 hxg3?
"xg3 wins) 26 ... /tJe2+ (26 . . . /tJxfl
After 17 /tJO "d7 18 .ta l 1:e7 ! ?
27 1:xc7 e2 28 "xa7 e l=" 29 Ibf7+
1 9 :fc I �h3 2 0 c 4 White is a bit better.
1 7 :fe I ! and White has an edge �h6 30 lhf6+ ! 'it'g5 3 1 "g7+ �f4
according to Karpov and I. Zaitsev. 32 'irh6 mate) 27 'it'h l lLlg3+.
20 ...1:adS 21 1: b3 lLld4
1 7 ... dxc4 1 8 .txf6
Doubling the f-pawn, as we know, is
a tricky matter.
18 ... gxf6 1 9 /tJe4 ..ti'g7
After 1 9 .. .lhe4 ! ? 20 .txe4 f5 !
2 1 �O /tJd4 22 dxc4 �xO 23 exO e2
24 lUe i 'iWxc4 Black is safe.
20 dxc4
This is an inaccuracy. I thought I was 22 1:xe3
getting closer to the e3-pawn - just like Finally I took the pawn, but there
Botvinnik. are too many pieces left on the
board, many more than in Mikhail
a) If 20 "c3 "d8 ! (not 20 .. .'.e7
Moiseevich 's game.
2 1 nxb7).
22.. ...xc4
b) 20 h3 �xe2 2 1 /tJxf6 .txfl
After 22 ... /tJc2 23 "c3 lLlxe3
22 "c3 ne5 ! and with this beautiful
24 "xf6+ 'iPf8 25 'irh6+ ..ti'e7
move Black takes charge.
they miss the precise check 26 "g5+!
c) 20 lUd6 Karpov and Zaitsev show which covers the c5-square. (26 "f6+
a very nice way to a perpetual, and I �d7) 26 .. .'it>d7 27 /tJc5+ and White is
should have gone for it. 20 . . . ne6 in the game.
21 tUxc4 1:d8 22 f5 1:ee8 23 1:b2 liJd4 23 ..ti'h l /tJf5 24 l'Id3 �xe2 25 1:xd8
24 1:xb7 tUxe2+ 25 ..ti'h l 1:xd8 26 1: e 1 :re8
1 79
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

To make things even more annoying,

with Black I pushed my e-pawn all the N.Short - G.KlIsparov V. Anand - G.Kasparov
way to e3 in a 1 982 game against
Romanish i n . Do you know what
happened? I lost the following position
as well!

O.Romllnlshin - G.Kasparov
U S S R 1 982
27 .aS
After 27 'Dd6 'Dxd6 28 �xd6 �o ! !
and the battery exploits the weakness o f
the back rank.
M.Botvinnik - A.Pomar
27 ... bS 2S 'Dd2 .d3 29 'Db3
IBM, Amsterdam 1 966

3 2 ...e3 33 f4 gxf4 34 lbf4 J:[xf4
35 gxf4 'itfS 36 J:[xdS 'ihdS 37 'ili'e7+
Wg6 38 'iWe2+ Wf6 39 a6 'ili'1I8 40 'ili'c4
1 e4 e6 2 'Dc3 dS 3 cxdS
Though I played a few Exchange
S lavs and French defences, these
variations do not suit my style. By the
way I beat Dolmatov in an Exchange
Slav. I didn't select my loss against him
for this book but he did beat me in a
Youth tournament in the U S S R in 1 97 7 .

lte4 4 1 'itcs 'i!fb l + 42 Wg2 ltd 1 I s e t u p a battery but it v e ry quickly

12 . . . g 5 ! 1 3 �g3 h5 14 h3 g4 15 hxg4
29 ... � f3 ! ! 30 �xf3 .xf3+ 31 W g I 43 .gS+ �f7 44 .hS+ Wg7 45 a7 lost. The opening of the Botvinnik
hxg4 16 tOe5 tOxe5 17 �xe5 f6
J:[ x e 1 + 3 2 .xel 'De3 0-1 1-0 game did not catch my imagination but
1 8 �g3 q"fl 1 9 J:[e l nh5 20 if d2 �e4
the game did.
2 1 'iPfl �f3 O- \ .
3 ... exdS 4 d4 'Df6 5 'Df3 'De6 6 �f4
1 4... �g6 1 5 cS tOe4 1 6 f3 tOd2
� fS 7 e3 e6 8 �bS �b4 9 'DeS 'WaS
1 7 J:[f2 tOc4
1 0 �xe6+ bxc6 11 0-0 �xc3 1 2 bxe3
M.Botvinnik - A.Pomar Black saves the bishop, but it will
nc8 1 3 c4 0-0 14 g4
remain rather passive.
One of my specialties was to push See diagram on page 1 8 0. 18 tOxc4 dxc4
my g- and especially my h-pawn. I Going after the bishop also occurs in
won games with both, but sometimes this line, sometimes Black can even
do this to White, one example being
the idea backfired. First I show you
Seirawan-Beliavs\cy, Brussels 1988.
a di agram of the inspirational

Botvinnik game and then, on the next That game went like this: I d4 d5
2 c4 c6 3 'Dc3 'Df6 4 cxd5 cxdS 5 �f4
page, my games.
'Dc6 6 e3 � f5 7 'Do e6 8 �b5 'Dd7
9 0-0 �e7 I 0 �xc6 bxc6 I I J:[c I J:[c8
1 2 'Da4

1 80 181
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

1 9 �d6 34 ... e5 35 �xe5 nb7 36 Wf4 as The standard sacri flee 14 liJd5? Black has fully equalised.
The bishop targets nothing but still it 37 %:1f2 �b3 3 8 d5 cxdS 39 c6 need not worry Black, e.g. 14 ... exd5 2 2 'ii'e3 'ittg 8 2 3 'it>gl 'ittf8 24 'iff2
is very useful as i t keeps both black Botvinnik chooses to win with the 15 exd5 liJxd5 1 6 'li'xg7 �d7 1 7 .x£1? �a8 25 ttJe2 g6?
rooks very p as s ive . c-pawn. He could have triggered an (17 'ifg4+ 'itt c 7 IS �xd5 'it'xd5 I should have exchanged queens and
19 .. .l:tre8 20 e4 f5 21 .c2 fxe4 execution on the long diagonal as well. 1 9 l'lxe7+ 'it>b8 Black is very active.) settled for an equal endgame. However
22 fxe4 'ii a3 23 %:1el 'iih 3 24 %:1g2 3 9 ...%:1a7 40 c7 'ife7 17 . . . l'ldeS IS �g5 tlhgS! 1 9 iLxe7 I had won the previous game quite
%:1cd8 25 tlg3 'iWh6 26 'iix c4 'ilVd2
convincingly and had not yet lost a
27 'iWc3 .xa2
single game in the match. All of which
B l ack wins back the pawn, but
made me fall asleep.
material often doesn't count in opposite
26 liJd4 'i'ie5 27 l'lel g5
coloured bishops middlegames.
White's pieces are pretty active.
See diagram on page 181.
28 .!:tg2 'iWa6

I advanced my g-pawn further - the

same way Botvinnik did so many

41 iLd6 1-0 times.

N.Sbort - G.Kasparov
Game 1 6, PCA-World Championship,
28 c3 'itt g 7
1 9 . . .%:1xg2+ ! ! Black finds an effective
way to destroy White's king. 20 'ittx g2
ttJe3+ 2 1 'itt g3 .g2+ 22 �f4 .e4+

London 1 99 3 23 'itt g5 (23 'itt g3 'li'g4 mate) 23 . . . h6+!

24 �xh6 (24 'itt h 5 .g4+ 25 �xh6

29 h4 1 e 4 c5 2 liJ f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 liJxd4 .!:th8+ 26 'ifh7 liJf5 mate; 24 'itt f6
Pushing the h-pawn is a nice plan and liJf6 5 liJc3 a6 6 �c4 e6 7 �b3 bS 'li'e5+ 25 'itt g 6 �e4+) 24 . . . %:1h8+
further restricts the bishop. 8 0-0 iLe7 25 'itt g 7 'li'h7+ 26 �f6 1i'h4+ 27 'itt g 7
29 .. J:td7 3 0 h5 �f7 31 %tal 'ii'c 8 I tri ed several set-ups against the 'li'h6 mate.
32 'li'f3 'ii'd 8 33 g5 g 6 Sozin, but this was my final choice in
14 ... 0-0 15 �h6 liJe8 16 � h l 'itt h 8
the match.
17 �g5 �.J:g5 18 iW'Ig5 liJf6 19 .!:tadl 2 9 �c2 !
9 'iWf3 'iWc7 10 'i'ig3 ttJc6 11 liJxc6
%:1d7 20 %:1d3 tlfd8 2 1 %:1ed l Now Nigel starts so ftening up my
'i'ixc6 1 2 nel �b7 13 a3
queens ide with a strong regrouping of
his pieces.
29 ...l'lg8 3 0 liJb3 'it>f8 31 .!:td4 �e7
My king presented problems on the
e7-square not only in this game, but
also when I was Black against Kramnik
in the Korchnoi-tribute tournament at
Zurich 200 l .
34 b6
3 2 a4! h 5 3 3 axb5 axb5 34 tlb4 h4
B otvinnik's h- and g-pawns are
2 1 .. ••c5 35 liJd4
suffocating the Spanish grandmaster. 13 ...tld8! 14 f3

I S2 I S3
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

1 0 ... b5 3 1 'ilfe2 We4 32 l:I.f2 lLld5 33 ':e I Black's problem i s that he can do
Of course I advance my h-pawn. Wxe3?? A dreadful mistake. 33 . . . 0-0 nothing as any move would expose his
11 �xg4 �xg4 wins simply. 34 Wxg4! Suddenly White own king. But in the long run White
I later played the simpIer 11. . . hxg4. is winning. 34 . . .0-0 35 l:txe3 lLlxe3 will still open up Black's king.
12 f3 �d7 13 �f2 lLlc6 14 it'd2 lLle5 36 Wxh3 and though I played on I 27 ...Wc8 28 �b2 �7 29 lLldc2 f6
no longer was in a position to save the 3 0 lLld4
game.
15 ... e6 1 6 lLlde2 ! ':c8 17 �d4! bS
I S lLld l ! ':g8 19 lLle3 ! as
[ decided to do what Botvinnik did
35 ... g4
on the other side of the board as well.
It was too late to back down
from Botvinnik's pawn onslaught. If
35 . . . l:tb8 36 �d3 .
36 l:1.xb5
The unusual queen exchange with
36 . . .'i!fh2 offered no hope either. IS b3!
36 ... d5 37 �xh4 'ilVh5 If 15 0-0 then 1 5 . . . g4 ! After all,
After 37 . . . gxf3 38 lLlxf3 'ifh5 3 9 '1!ff2 sometimes Mikhail M oiseevich's ideas 3 0 ... b4
White wins. really work. Two years earlier we had a I have tightened my grip on
38 lLlr5+! 1-0 play-off in the PCA Geneva rapid absolutely nothing! That's because

tournament. In the blitz, improving on Anand has no pieces on the kingside -

V.Anand - G.Kasparov our rapid game from the same event, I 20 O-O-O ! and especially not his king.
Frankfurt Giants 1 998 pushed my g-pawn. I got a fabulous Vishy has handled the opening i n 31 g3 g4
game, yet I spoiled it. 1 6 f4 lLlc4 great style, but that offers m e little The same push but with a different
1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4
1 7 it'e2 Ik8! 18 b3 lLla3 19 lLld5 e6 consolation. Maybe Botvinnik had effect.
lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6 6 �e3 lLlg4 7 � g5 h6
8 �b4 g5 20 lLlb4 it'a5 2 1 it'e I mentioned that the opponent could 32 r4 lLlf3 33 lLlxf3 gIf3 34 f5 hIg3
castle on the other side, but he certainly 35 bxg3 ':xg3 36 'ilfb2 ':g5 37 �cl
See diagram o n page 181.
did not emphasise it sufficiently. ':g7 3 8 'Wb5+ ':f7
This is not the Botvinnik-effect as the 20 ... a4 2 1 'iti>b 1 ub3 22 cxb3 ':a8
variation goes like this, but maybe
23 �c3 ':a6 24 lLlc2 �f8 25 lLlb4 ':a8
indirectly there is an effect as I was
26 liJd4 iLe7
entering a g- and h- pawn pushing line.
9 �g3 �g7 10 �e2

2 1 . . .h4 ! I keep following Botvinnik's

play. 22 �e3 h3 23 g3 lLlb5 24 l:td I
lLlc3 25 iDd3 '1!fc7 26 l:.c ! lLlxe4 White
3 9 'iVIf3 1-0
has very little for the pawn, yet Black
I resigned as in a moment or two my
has to play carefully. 27 f5 e5 28 f6
2 7 nhel king will be caught.
lLlxf6 29 lLlf5 �xf5 30 l:.xf5 it'c6

1 8.5
1 84
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

.i.a4 27 g4 lLle8 28 .i.xe7+ �xe7 29 h4

Botvinnik's influence came from so many different directions. It is almost lLld6 30 �d2
impossible to surrunarise. 1 ' 11 just show you one more example where,
wi thout any fear of losing, I went for a queenless isolated pawn endgame.

G.Veresov - M . Botvinnik A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

4 8 ... d4?!
Botvinnik pushes his pawns,
although there were other candidate
30 ... .i.bS moves. Possible was 48 . . . g 5 ! ? or
Karpov also had a similar example, 48 . . . gxh5 49 nh l ! ? You will see that I
he beat Karasev brilliantly by
have to face a problem like this when
exchanging pieces to obtain control
my opponent did not automatical1y
over the c4-square in a queenless
G. Veresov - M . Botvinnik recapture after I took his h-pawn.
It is an interesting idea to exchange isolated pawn endgame.
U S S R Champi onship Semi-Final when you have an isolani, but Black's Botvinnik did not mention this
31 �Ib5 axb5 32 �d3 �d7 33 lLlb3
Leningrad 1 93 8 quick play justifies it. possibility in his school.
lLlc4 34 lLld4 l:te8 35 lLlc2
17 ':xc3 ':xc3 18 'il'xc3 1r'b6 After 35 lLlxb5 ':xe3+ 36 'it>d4 Ihf3
49 hxg6
I d 4 lLlf6 2 e4 e 6 3 lLl e 3 .i. b 4 4 'iWel 1 9 -.d4 -.xd4 20 lLlxd4 11c8 37 'it>xd5 lLlb6+ 38 'it>e4 ':h3 39 ':c l Best was 49 g5! Interestingly,
dS S cxdS exdS 6 .i.gS .i.e6 7 lLlo White is not worse. Botvinnik missed a similar pawn
lU b d7 8 a3 .i.e7 9 e3 h6 1 0 .i.h4 0-0 See diagram above. 35 ... lLle5+ 36 'it>e2 11c8 37 lLld4 breakthrough in his book on Karpov. I
11 �e2 eS 12 0-0 ':eS 13 ':fel a6 discovered it and published it first in
1 4 dxeS Black has solved his problems.
the Predecessors book. 49 . . . hxg5
21 0 �f8 22 �O �d7 23 �d3
(49 ... lLle5 50 gxh6 ':xf3+ 5 1 \t>g2 ':f5
5 2 ':h l the h- pawn is dangerous.)
50 h6 nd2+ 5 1 'it>g I lLle5 52 ':0 ':c2
53 lLlxd4 l:tc8 54 'it>g2 White has an
edge.
49 ...fxg6 50 a4
After 50 ne l ! lLlxa3 5 1 lLlxa3 ':xa3
52 ':e4.

37 ...':c3 50 ... ':d2+ 51 'it>g3 d3

Botvinnik's rook became anno ying. The d-pawn becomes strong. On the
14 .. . lUxcs
23 ... g6 38 ':a2 ? ! lLlc4 39 lLlxb5 11xe3+ other hand I lost to Karpov when I had
Botvinnik had quite a number of nice
wins in isolated pawn middlegame I also played this it covers the 40 'it>f2 l:td3 4 1 'it>e2 l1b3 42 ':c2 b6 a d6-pawn with the white pieces. That

positions. f5-square. 43 l:I.a2 l:te3+ 44 'it>f2 ':d3 45 \!te2 l:tb3 was the sixth game of our first 1 984

I S b4 lLlce4 16 'ilkd3 lLlxc3 24 q"e2 l:te3 25 �d2 ':eS 26 cbe2 46 ':al l:I.e3+ 47 'it'f2 ':d3 48 h 5 match.

1 87
1 86
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th
In this game, however, the d-pawn
becomes so powerful that it decides the
outcome, whereas in the earlier game I
just dropped it.
52 a5 bu5 53 bu5 11b2 54 lUe3
11e2 55 lUd5??
In my game the same move would
have been a mistake by Karpov. After
55 lUe4 1 d2 56 lUxd2 lhd2 57 a6 lUb6
58 a7 <tJa8 59 l:lh I White holds.
55 ... d2 56 .l:l.dl l:[e l 57 lUe3 �e6
58 �r4 ct>b5 59 �e4
59 ... b5 60 gxh5 gxh5 61 �d3 b4
62 �e2 h3 63 <tJg4 l:tx d l 0-1
I trusted Botvinnik so much that I
even employed one of his ideas in my
very first world title match against
Karpov in 1 984.
1 88
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
Game 9, World Championship,
Moscow 1 9 84
1 d4 d5 2 r4 e6 3 lUn c5 4 c.xd5
exd5
In the Predecessors book I looked at
chess culture in general. In this work I
do not go into details of the giants other
than the champions. Nevertheless do
keep in mind that this defence is named
after Siegbert Tarrasch.
5 g3 lUr6 6 �g2 �e7 7 0-0 0-0
8 lUe3 liJc6 9 �g5 exd4 10 lUxd4 h6
11 �e3 l:[e8 1 2 iVb3 lUa5 13 'iWe2 �g4
1 4 lUr5 11e8
1 5 �d4 �e5 1 6 �xeS 11xc5 l 7 lUe3
�e6 1 8 l:[ad l 'ikc8 1 9 'iWa4 11d8
2 0 l:[d3 a6 21 l:[fdl lUe4 2 2 lUxc4
l:[xe4 23 "ifa5 l:[e5 24 'ilfb6 nd7
2 5 l:[d4 We7 2 6 'iWxc7 l:[dxe7
See diagram on page 1 86.
Just like Karpov I strengthened the
c-file, toying with idea of invading on
the c-file.
27 h3 h5
Botvinnik paid a lot of attention to
gaining space. For this reason, it is a
question whether I should put my pawn
on the same colour square as Karpov's
bishop. If it is a mistake I will have to
work out who encouraged me to do
this.
28 a3
2 8 ... g6
Another pawn goes to the white
squares, but Botvinnik played this
move as well.
29 e3 I!i>g7 3 0 �b2 l:[e4 31 �n b5
32 �g2 l:[7c5 33 11xe4
33 ... l:[xc4
I had a chance to recapture with
either pawn. 33 . . . dxc4 maintains the
balance by dynamic means, which
comes to me more naturally, but
Botvinnik's game was in my mind and
I wanted to follow it. After 33 . . . dxc4
3 4 l:[d6 a5 35 .l:l.b6 (3 5 <tJa2 lUd5)
35 ... <tJd7 36 l:lxb5 l:[xb5 37 <tJxb5 lLlc5
Black retains a material balance and
has a secure position.
34 .l:l.d4 1!i>f8 35 �e2 l hd4
189
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th
I should have kept the rooks on, but
his rook was a tower of strength on d4.
I hoped my d-pawn would work like
Botvinnik's.
3 6 exd4 �e7 37 lLla2 �c8
Geller suggested 37 . . . lLle4 which is a
Karpov-style move.
38 <tJb4 'it>d6 39 n <tJg8 40 b4 <tJb6
4 1 'it>n <tJf5 42 <tJe2 r6 43 �d3 g5
44 �xfS �xfS
Karpov beat Van der Wiel in
Amsterdam 1 980 when they had a very
similar pawn structure endgame (the
pawn islands were tbe same). Karpov
had a bishop versus a knight, but a pair
of rooks remained on the board. I
thought, okay, I will not win but there
was no way I could imagine losing it.
J. van der Wie1 - A.Karpov
IBM, Amsterdam 1 980
But back to my game . . .
45 lLle3 � b l 46 b4
Daniel King mentions in his analysis
that the position was reminiscent of the
game Saidy-Fischer, New York 1 964.
This was the U.S. Championship where
Fischer made 1 00 percent. Maybe he
spent less time investigating the games
of the world champions.
46 ... gxh4?
Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

I missed Karpov's reply, but at least I Taking the pawn is a mistake, as

contributed to the development of Black's king can cause problems by
endgame theory. Daniel King analyses approaching the queenside. On the
in depth the position after 46...�g6.
other hand 55 tiJh5!! wins. 55 ... �xf3
His conclusion is that Black can hold.
56 tiJxf6. From this point g4-e5-c6-a5-

b3-c5 attacks the a6-pawn; then with a

king move White will bring the

opponent into zugzwang. When Black

drops tbe a6-pawn, then the direct
manoeuvre tiJb8-c6-tiJa7 forces him to 66...�b7 69 tiJxb5 '.t>a4 70 ttJd6 1-0
The amazing move 66...�h I!! still BotviTUlik also set an example that
defend the b5-pawn. After any casual
holds. I thought of this but could not sadly followed. He trained me and
king move the knight returns to e3 via
remember any champion playing passed on his knowledge. I also gave
c6-e7-f5. If White accomplishes these
anything like it before. 67 tiJf5 �d5 lectures to young juniors, including
things, he just has to march to a7 to win
47 tiJg2! This is the difference compared with Shirov and Kramnik. But BotvilUlik
the game.
This is against all principles, I did not the game: here the �hl stops �d3. undertook coaching only after he had
55.. .'�e6 After 68 It>f4 �e4 69 tiJd6 �c2 retired, whereas I made the mistake of
think that when I have the bishop, and
Better according to Geller was 70 tiJxb5 �c4 Black draws. doing the same thing while I was still
he a knight, that he would open the
position. You can see how fair I am, 55...Wd6. He is right. 67 tiJf5 �g2? an active player. So I helped to improve

here I could blame my seconds for 56 tiJe7+ ";'d7 57 tiJxa6 �xf3 That damned g2-square in this game! the play of the champions who

missing this move. Such a move 58 �xf6 Wd6 59 ";'f5 Wd5 60 Wf4 Key moves keep taking place there. dethroned me. What a mistake that

becomes part of our chess heritage, but 67...'it>d5 was the best move, but the was! Had he worked on his own maybe
�hl 61 We3
why does it happen against me? It legacy ofBotvilUlik's game is to remain I would have stayed champion for

would take pages to show you all active on the c-file, therefore I did not longer. However, when all is said and

finesses of this endgame. I'll just show return with my king. done, overall I am of course very

you some interesting points. 68 tiJd6+ �b3 appreciative of our· great first Soviet

47... hxg3+ 48 Wxg3 We6 49 tiJf4+ world champion.

c;t>f5 50 tiJxh5 We6 51 tiJf4+ c;t>d6

52 Wg4 �c2 53 Wh5 �dl 54 Wg6
We7

6I...'.t;>c4
Finally I do something active on the
c-file, just like BotvilUlik did.
62 tiJc5 �c6 63 tiJd3 �g2?
Averbakh and Taimanov suggested
63 ...�e8! keeping the bishop on this
diagonal.
55 tiJxd5+? 64 tiJe5+ We3 65 tiJg6 'iti>c4 66 tiJe7

190 191

Max Euwe the 5th
Euwe was the last champion still
alive when I was born. He
Petrosian were able to form an opinion
on my play as they both died in the
1980s when I was already a decent
player. Not everyone knows that Euwe
won the world title back in 1 92 8 .
But that was the World Amateur
Championship. Later, in 1 935, he
defeated Alekhine by the narrowest of
margins: 151;2- 1 41/2. Though
rematch began with Euwe dominating,
in the sixth game Alekhine commenced
a winning streak of three games and
I fo llowed Euwe's play where he
cut the position into two with a
d5-pawn and paralysed the b7-bishop.
Then he gave up the strong d5 pawn.
M.Euwe - A.O'Kelly de Galway
I played the same idea in a very
important last round rapid stage of
match against Kramnik. We drew 4
regular games, I won the first rapid
and then we drew 4 games.
cODvincingly regained his title with a
and final score of 1 5 1;2- 91;2 .
In 1 946 Euwe still played very well,
but the 1948 World Championship final
showed that he had lost touch with the
very best players of the
Nevertheless he continued to write
many fine articles and books. Though
he was an amateur world champion
I always considered him to be a
their true world champion too and began
studying his games when I was young -
and not only for my Great Predecessors
series.
I show the position of my last rapid
game where I should have drawn
- and thereby won the match - by
adopting Euwe's idea.
This game was extremely important
to me because I wanted to prove my
superiority over Kramnik after losing
the title - and so there was a lot of
pride at stake.
G.Kasparo" - V.Kramnik
a
192
Max Euwe the 5110
M.Euwe - A.O'Kelly de Galway
Groningen 1 946
1 d4lDf6 2 e4 e6 3lDe3 �b4 4 e3 b 6
5lDge2 � b 7 6 a 3 �e7
22lDa4!
In the next few moves the Dutch
world.
world champion increases the pressure
in a very subtle way.
22 ... Wb8 23 We3 1fa7 24 %ta2 �e6
25 %td2 %tad8 26 e5 1fe7 27 exd6
7 d5 �xd6
The pawn chokes Black. It is quite
hard to undermine it.
7 .. 0-0 8 e4 d6 9 g3 c6 1 0 dxe6
.
See diagram on page 192.
White hopes to get play on the
e6-square which is why he gives up the
strong pawn.
10 .. fxe6 11 lDd4 �c8 12 .i.g2 e5
.
13 lLlf5 lDa6 14 0-0 lLlc5 1 5 �e3 'iPh8
2 8 1L1e5
By now the position has crystallised
thanks to very fine positional play by
Euwe. Black has two many weak
pawns.
28 ... �xc5 29 Wxe5 Ihd2 30 'iihf8+
.i.g8 31 Ita 1 Wb6
1 6 �xc5
Rather a sw-prise. Euwe voluntarily
keeps on taking pieces.
16 ... bxc5 17 b4 cxb4 18 axb4 �e6
1 9 lLle3 a6 20 Wd3 lDg4 2 1 lDxg4
�xg4
193
Max Euwe the 5,h Max Euwe the 5,h

32 �n l:tb2 ? 1 5 f4 .e7 1 6 J:tadl 1:I.cd8 1 7 'it>hl My mam weapon throughout my 22 ... 'Wg6 23 .i.f3 nc8 24 'Wbl e4
A bad blunder i n an inferior position. 1!t'n 18 1!t'c2 ..t>h8 career was to stir up complications and 25 liJh4 .n 26 iLe2 a6 27 liJc3 dxc4
After 32 .. J:l.d4 33 l:txa6 " xb 4 34 .xb4 because of my special orientation 28 'Wb2
1::r.xb4 35 f3 Black would suffer with his when there was a jungle of variations I
pawn structure. outplayed my opponent many times.
33 iLc4 'ii'd2+ 34 "xn 1:I.xn However after my game with the black
35 �xg8 1-0 pieces against Kramnik at Linares 2000
I realised that I should play for open
positions. In our match I did not
G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik succeed in getting those positions
Botvinnik Memorial 2001 because of the damned Berlin defence.
Later, in the first rapid game of the
I d4 liJf6 2 c4 e6 3 liJc3 �b4 4 e3 b6 1 9 b4 200 I Botvinnik Memorial, I managed
5 ltJge2 �b7 6 a3 iLe7 7 d5 Just like Euwe. However, under to beat Kramnik after obtaining an open
I happily followed the same different circumstances. I wish I knew position, despite the fact that he had an 28 . . b5
.

variation. why Kra llU1ik refrained from placing edge early on. I was expecting to create some
7...0-0 8 liJg3 his knight on c5 earlier. Because of this Here, objectively, keeping the weaknesses, instead I had to live with a
I too did not allow the g3-square to I was prevented from taking it with the position closed with 20 f5! was a better
protected passed pawn. Slowly my
remain vacant. bishop. You know, it's hard to adjust to plan. I have never investigated deeply
compensation for the pawn was
8 . .1::l. e8 9 iLe2 iLfli 10 e4 d6 11 0-0 n ew situa tions. how far the Dutch world champion
dissipated.
.

liJbd7 12 �e3 c6 13 "d2l:tc8 14 dxe6 1 9 e5 adapted his way of playing against

•..
29 ltJf5 liJd5 30 liJxdS .xfS 31 ltJc3
particular opponents, or whether he
liJ f6 32 h3 ncd8 33 l:txd8 nxd8
See diagram on page 192. played the same way whoever he faced.
34l%dl
I see now that I had made a mistake

Playing 7 d5 was somehow a way of in this game, but why did I receive such
following Euwe, but this is an opening harsh punishment?

line. On the other hand here it is in 20 ... dS 2 1 exdS cxd5

black and white that I am behaving like
a pupil foll<;lwing his instructions. But I
should have been more cautious as,
after all, White hereby gives up
his centre. But Euwe played this 20 liJfS
because he appreciated the special Missing the best move because of the
circumstances. He did such a desire to obtain a certain type of
tremendous job with his writings, position against a particular player. It is
34 ...l:lxd1 +
adding significantly to chess culture. interesting that before he beat me I
With a n extra pawn it is not out of
How unfortunate he did not publish his called him V l adi . But when he didn't
22 liJb5 place to exchange. Tigran Vartanovich
analysis here. dare to give me a rematch I referred to
Maybe White is still okay, but from might have played 34 ...l%d3.
14 ... fxe6 him as KrallU1ik. We know language
I knew I would not be able to attack constantly changes, but Russian has not now on Black is kicking. After 22 fxe5 35 .i.xdl 'ilfd7 36 �e2 �c6 37 'il'cl
e6 like Euwe, but I was able to gain changed that much in the last few ltJxe5 23 cxd5 was nice for White and g6 38 'lWgI .i.g7 39 .i.d4 <l;>g8 40 .i.e5
space. years .
in little danger of losing. liJd5 41 .i.xg7 'lWxg7

194 195
Max Euwe the 5th Max Euwe the 5th

42 lOxd5 Si<..xd5 43 'it'c5 ifa l+ 46 'il'c7 G.Fontein - M.Euwe 20 ... tiJf4

Putting the queen on the edge of the I try to pin like Karpov, but for me Dutch Championship, Black's pieces are alive and
board is fraught with danger. Better here it did not work. Amsterdam 1924 the f4-knight has special vitality.
was 43 ...W'd7 46 ..:.f6 47 � d l h5 48 a4 'ili'd4 Nevertheless White panics by taking
1 d4 lOf6 2 lOO g6 3 c4 �g7 4 lllc3
44 �h2 Si<.. f7 45 Si<.. g4 49 �c2 e3 50 f5 e2 the f4-knight, thus opening up the g7
0-0 5 e4 d6 6 h3 eS 7 dS lObd7 8 Si<.. d3
If 45 'ili'a7 'ili'f6 (but not 45... 'iIi'xa3?) bishop and giving Black the e5-square.
h6 9 �e3 �h7 10 'il'c2 b6
4s...�g7
Players no longer play ... b6 in such 21 � x f4 exf4 22 tiJe3 Si<..xd3
positions. 23 'il'xd3 lOeS 24 'it'e4 f3! 25 g3
11 0-0 lOeS 12 lOe1 lObS 13 �e2

51 fxg6 el="it' 52 'il'xf7+ 'iPh6 0- 1

Time and again Euwe was happy giving up the e4-square in the King's
2S ...'it'g5
Indian. And unfortunately I too didn't mind giving up the e4-square - twice!
13 ...'il'h4 14 b4 lOa6 1 5 lOO 'il'e7 Euwe plays fluent chess.
G.Fontein - M.Euwe A.Veingold - G.Kasparov 16 :tabl fS 17 exfS 26 nfd l nae8 27 lll b 5 'il'd8 28 nb3
Or 17 nfe l fxe4 18 lOd2!? 'il'd7 29 �h2 nf5 30 g4?
l7 ... �xf5 18 �d3 Once more Fontein panics. This time
he creates an even bigger problem.
See diagram on page 196.
30 lOd4 lllxc4 3 1 tiJe6 lOxd2 32 nxd2
l8 ...lOb8 c6 leads to a position in which he is just
Playing such a casual move on the a pawn down.
other side of the board shows that he
is not paying much attention to the
e4-square at all.
19 lll d2 lOd7 20 lllc e4
KJeefstra - M.Euwe FRITZ X3D - G .Kasparov

30 ...ngS! 31 'il'f4 lllxg4+ 0-1

This sacrifice wins against any reply
by White.

196 197
Max Euwe the 5 th Max Euwe the 5th

Kleefstra - M.Euwe A.Veingold - G.Kasparov 1 8...lUxf6

Amsterdam Chess Club Championship USSR Spartakiad 1979 My knight never reached h5 as
1927 Euwe's had done.
1 d4 lUf6 2 lUf3 g6 3 c4 .i.g7 4 lUe3 1 9 .d2 lUeS 20 .i.e2 'i&>g7 2 1 nae!
1 e4 g6 2 d4 d6 3 .i.e3 lUf6 4 lUd2 d6 5 e4 0-0 6.i.e2 eS 7 dS as 8.i.gS h6
lUb3 22 .d3
.i.g7 5 .i.e2 0-0 6 c3 eS 7 dS lUbd7 9.i.h4 lUa6 10 0-0 .e8 11 lUd2 lUh7
S ,*,c2 b6 9 h3 as 10 a4 lUcS 12 a3 fS

20...�b7
Interestingly, Euwe did not mind that
both his bishops had very limited
prospects on their respective diagonals.
21 'if d3 l:lfll 22 tbe4 .i.cs 23 lUgS
'iWf6 24 lUe4 '*'fS 25 l:lael 'ifhS
261i'g3
2 2 ... gS
There is very little dynamism in
11 .i.xcS ? 13 exfS
This is clearly not a testing move. In 1977 I played a game against Black's position.

l l...bxcS 12 .i.bS lUh5 13 lUdf3 f5 my trainer Nikitin in which he 23 .i.g3 lUeS 24 .d2 .£1 2S h4
14 lUe2 fxe4 1 5 'iWxe4 lUf4 1 6 lUxf4 replied 13 n. That game ended in a lUh7 26 .i.xh7 gxh4 27 .i.xeS+ dxeS
draw. 28.i.bl
1 3 ... .i.xfS
Maybe I should have taken with the
g-pawn.
1 4 g4 .i.d7

26 ...l:lh4
See diagram on page 196.
Euwe puts his pieces on the edge. I
played something similar when r lost to
15 lUde4 a4 16 0 b6 1 7.i.d3 .i.f6
Ivanchuk at Linares in 1991. I did not
1 8 lUxf6+
realise this game might have had an
1 6 .. .lhf4
effect in that respect as well. This was
There is no black knight to go to a
the flrst tournament I did not win fOT
vacant e5-square. This explains why he 28 ....f4
almost a decade. What a pity I was not
captured this way. Defending the king was also an
able to make it a full ten years.
17 'iWe2 'iWf6 18 lUd2
unpleasant choice.
27 'ifgS?
White blunders a piece in a playable
29 .xf4 lhf4 30 l:lxeS l:1afll
See diagmm on page 196.
position. It looks as though Black has achieved

IS .. :i!t'£1 19 0-0 ot.>h8 20 .i.c4 27 .. .'ilhgS 28 lUxgS lhe4 0-1 some activity.

198 199
M= Euwe the 5th M= Euwe the 5th

FRITZ X3D - G.Kasparov
Match, New York 2003
1 e4 eS 2tOf3tOe6 3 i..bS tOf6 4 d3
d6 S e3 g6
This time the King's Indian pawn
structure arises from a Spanish.
6 0-0 i..g7 7 tObd2 0-0 8 rLel rLeS
9 d4 i..d 7 10 dStOe7
31 rLe7+
But this check hurts.
3l...rLsn 32 rLxn+ �xn 33 tOe4
Euwe also put his rook and queen on
the g-file, however in this particular
position I drop a pawn.
33 lIuS!
Chopping off my pawn! If the
electricity had gone off maybe the
blackout would have driven the chips
of the computer crazy and they might
have missed this tactical shot. But no
such luck for me.
2S rLle2 33...dxeS 34 'iifxfSlbd4?!
This is not very natural, yet it defends In a bad position this merely hastens
f2 satisfactorily. the end.

2S... g4 26 'Wb3 rLafS 27 eS .g6 3S �xd4 exd4 36 IleS l:tg8 37 .e7+

tOb3 34 wa i..xg4 35 �e3 rLfS
28 cxd6 exd6 29 bS axbS 30 .xbS Ilg7 38 .d8 ngS
Stepping into a battery.
i..h6 31 'Wb6 �h7 32 'Wb4 Ilg7?
36 rLa i..bS

11 i..x d7
Without the light-squared bishop
Black's attack develops more slowly.
11 ...tOxd7 12 a4 h6 13 as a6 14 b4
fS IS e4tOf6 16 i..b2 it'd7 17 rLbl

39 'iWd7+ 1-0

37tOd6 + exd6 38 i..xf'S Wf6 39 i..c2

tOeS 40 l:lh2 WgS 41 i.. dl 1-0
What a miserable defensive game
that was'

The Veingold accident happened

when I was only 14. Sadly I lost one
game like this when those numbers 17 ... gS 18 edS .xfS 19 tOn 'lih7
turned around to 41 ! Everything has 20 t03d2tOrs
advantages and disadvantages my
memory has served me well during See diagram on page J 96.
my career, but in these games
influenced by Euwe it helped only my 21 tOe4 tOxe4 22 rLxe4 b5 23 'tIfdJ
opponent. rLf'S 24 nbe1 nn

200 201
 Alexander Alekhine the 4'h

A.Alekhioe - E.Bogolyubov
Game 5, World Championship,
Gennany/Holland 1929

Alexander Alekhine the 4th 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 ltJf3 ltJf6 4 ltJc3

dxc4 5 a4 .i.f5 6 ltJe5 e6 7 .i.g5 .i.e7
8 f3 h6 9 e4 .i.b7 10 .i.e3
Alekhine is the last champion to precise to say Alekhine) avoided each

be born in the 19th century. He beat other for nine years and their next game
See diagram on page 202.
Jose Raul Capablanca by 6-3 in 1927. took place only in 1936. In fact they

Maybe that match generated the
greatest interest of all matches until
World War Two. Looking back, that
duel still attracts my interest like few
other matches in the whole history of
chess. Alekhine won the all-Russian
Championship in 1909 for the first
time. I won it in a tie with Karpov in
1988 and on my own in 2004.
In the late 19205 and early 1930s he
enjoyed one of the strongest periods of
domination in chess history. Alekhine
and Capablanca (probably it is more
played only three more games against
10 ... ltJbd7 11 tLl:xc4 0-0 12 .i.e2 16 'ii'x d8!
each other. In 1935 he lost his title to
W hite IS happy to keep on
Euwe, however two years later he took
exchanging - nonnally that would just
his revenge and' beat him 15'12-91/1. He
help the opponent develop.
died in 1946 in Portugal. As Fischer
16... .I:!.fId8 1 7 lOa2 ltJb8 18 'it>f2
played a rematch with Spassky, I am
lOc6 19 nhd l
the only player who retired as world
Intending t o exchange even more
number I, while Alekhine is my only
pieces.
predecessor who died as the defending
1 9 ... ltJd4 20 l:tac1 '1t>f8 21 .i.n ltJe8
champion.
2 2 lOc3 f6
Maybe there is a similarity between
Black's last three moves indicate that
his play and mine. Both of us are very
12 ... cS he clearly wants to bring the bishop
hard to follow. Even so I tried to use
This is a difficult decision. In a way into play.
some of his ideas.
it helps, as Black exchanges the d4- 23 ltJa5 l:1ab8
pawn, plays e5 and f6 and the bishop

Alekhine was such an imaginative player, playing some stunning attacks, may come back. Then, with the control
but, interestingly, the strongest effect he had on me was positionally: freczing over the b4 and b3 squares, the flow of

the Slav bishop on the kingside , opening the position in the centre and then play could go Black's way. On the

forcing a win on the queenside where Black misses his Slav bishop. other hand this may prompt the

following plan: by opening the

queenside and exchanging a number of

A.Alekhine - E.Bogolyubov G.Kasparov - GENIUS
pieces he will effectively have an extra

piece with which to invade the

queenside. Let's have a look to see

whose strategy prevails. 24 ltJb5!

13 dIc5 .i.ICS 14 .i.:xc5! Further exchanging.

The fewer pieces 00 the queeoside, 24 ... lOIb5 is .l:!.xd8!

the easier it is to invade. Enviable dedication to the task.

14 .. .luIc5 15 b4 tLla6 25 ... .I:!.:xd8

203

202
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
26 lLlxb7!
He is not only playing a great
strategic game, but the tactics are on
Alekhine's side too.
26....l:tb8 27 lLleS We7 28 axbS
It was not necessary to accept the
doubled pawns. After 28 �xb5 lLld6
29 lLla6 :b7 30 �c 6 wins.
28...lLld6 29 11al lLle8 30 �c4 it.g8
31 f4 �f7 3 2 e5
Alekhine pushes his opponent back.
32... fxe5 3 3 fxe5 nb6 34 We3 �e8
35 J:[aS jLd7
The bishop finds another diagonal
but it is not too active here either.
36 Wd4 �e8 37 h4 jLd7 3 8 jLe2
nb8
39 lLlxd7!
In order to invade, he keeps on
exchanging. Now, when I analyse this
game, it occurs to me that maybe
Fischer too was copying the other
champions! How many congratulations
204
he r�eived for his win over Petros ian,
but it may have just been a copy, almost
plagiarising Alekhine when he took a
bishop with his knight on d7' If there is
a reprint of My Great Predecessors I
may add an extra comment on that.
39 ...'it>xd7 40 �O l:lb6 41 'ittc5 lIb8
42 b5 �d8 43 �c6 We7 44 :a3 '>t>f7
45 �e4 We7
46 We6
Finally the world champion invades
nicely with his king.
46 ...Wd8 47 tld3+ '>t>e7 48 'it>c7 1-0
G.Kasparov - GENIUS
PCAJlntel-Grand Prix rapid 1994
1 c4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 lLlo lLlf6 4 "c2
dxc4 5 .xe4 �f5 6lLlc3 lLlbd7 7 g3 e6
8 �g2 �e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 e3 iDe4
1 1 'i!Ve2 'i!Vb6 12 tldl :ad8 13 lLlel
' 3 5.. �f8 36 'it>g2
lLldf6 14 lLlxe4lLlxe4 IS 0 lLld6 16 a 4
"ifb3
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
17 e4 29 1'bd8+
I was optimistic about this game as Tbe first element was not in my plan,
the bishop on g6 is really out of play. r wanted to exchange queens not the
17...�g6 rooks but I tbougbt, okay, it is after all
See diagram on page 202.
an excbange.
18 ltd3 "b4 19 b3 iDe8
29 .....xd8 3 0 .ltn b6 3 1 "c3
20 lLle2 1fb6 21 �f4
The computer's 24 ... e5 was strong as
it gained space.
3 1...f6 32 .ltc4+
21...c5
All goes according to the super
instructive Alekhine game !
22 �e3 cxd4 niDxd4 �c5 24tladl
3 2 .ltn
•..
e5 25 iDe2 lbd3 Black offers another exchange which
I am not at all against exchanges.
fits into my plan, but I was no longer
26 "xd3 lLle7 27 b4 �xe3+
happy as the computer's bishop was
supposed to be frozen on the kingside.
3 3 iDe3 "d4
Black keeps exchanging!
34 .ltxf7+ �If7 35 "ifb3+
Maybe entering an equal knight
ending would have been more practical
against a never tiring opponent.
.
If 36 'it>f1!? 'ilfd2 37 iDc4 .
3 6.....d2+
28 "Ie3
Further swapping just like Alekhine
and an invasion will not be long
coming as well. I was already thinking
how nice it would be to penetrate with
my king.
28 .. tld8
.
The computer doesn't know those
classical games. It (or should I say he
or she) seems to play into my hands.
205
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
37Wh3
Alekhine had activated his king. I
wanted to start a march as well, but on
the edge the king remains isolated.
37...'tie2 38 ltJg2 h5 39 'tie3 'ti'c4
40 'ii d 2 -'e6+ 4 1 g4 hxg4+ 42 fxg4
White's pawns have been separated
and e4 is now a target.
42 .. .'ii'c4 43 "el 'ifb3+ 44 ltJe3 'iid 3
45�g3
45 .....xe4
Alekhine caught some of his opponents on their back rank. I was really
impressed by those examples and it is natural that I wanted to do something
similar to that..
E.Bogolyubov - A.Alekhine
206
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
Going a pawn down is already a very
gloomy prospect. ... so here are a couple of my attempts at checkmate on the back rank.
46 'ti'd2 '6'r4+ 47 �g2 'iWd4 48 'tixd4
The knight ending gives little hope of G.Kasparov - N.Short DEEP BLUE - G.Kasparov
survival.
48 ... exd4 49 ltJc4 ltJc6 50 b5 ltJe5
51 ltJd6
E.Bogolyubov - A.Alekhine 2 11bc 1 %1ad8 22 d6 lLlb.ld6 23 ltJxd6
.Game 22, World Championship match %1.ld6 24 'fixa6 'fid7
5I...d3 52�f1 ltJxg4+ 53�el ltJxh2
GermanylHolland 1 929 The position is equal.
54 �d2 ltJf3+ 55 �xd3 �e7 56 ltJr5+
�n 57 �e4 ltJd2+ 58 �d5 g5 25 llc2 c5 26 a4 f4 27 �d2 g5
1 e4 eS 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 �b5 a6 4.li.a4
59 ltJd6+ �g6 60 �d4 ltJb3+ 0-1
d6 5 c3 �d7 6 d4 g6 7 �g5 r6 8 �e3
ltJh6 9 0-0 �g7 1 0 h3 ltJn 11 ltJbd2
0-0 12 dxe5 dxeS 13 �c5 %1e8 1 4 �b3
b6
A.Alekhine - E.Colle
28 'iWbs
Bogolyubov panics unnecessarily, as
Black's attack is not yet that dangerous.
28 ...'fi.lb5 29 nbS %1d3 30 llalltJd6
15 ..ie3 'fie7 31 lla6
Alekhine stabilises his position. The rook leaves the first rank, but it
16 "e2 ltJcd8 17 ..idS ..ic6 ?! 1 8 c4 is not yet a matter of decisive concern .
..ixdS 19 cxdS fS 2 0 lLlc4 ltJb7 3I...l1b8
207
Alexander Alekhine the 4th Alexander Alekhine the 4th

d4-pawn. However only one move A.Alekhine - E.CoUe

had entered my head and as the time Paris 1925

control had been passed I was able

32 �c3?
White opens the way to his back
rank. He should exchange the active
rook by 32 l:tc3!
32 .. .loxe4 33 �xe5
In a bad position he goes for a direct
loss. Better was 33 �e I .
3 3. . .�xe5 3 4 ltJxe5 l:tdl + 35 � h 2
ltJd 2 !
See diagram o n page 2 06.
Of course I found this move because
of my talent not because of Alekhine 's
influence! Incidentally I also caught
Karpov like this in our 1986 world title
match.
G.Kasparov - A.Karpov
World Championship, Leningrad 1986
1 d4 dS 2 e4 It)e6
to spend 17 .minutes checking the
Sill) ;lov played the Chigorin against
variations before writing down...
me once in our Candidates match fmal.
4IltJd7!!
3 It)fJ .i.g4 4 "a4 �xfJ 5 ufJ e6
Even today, this move still pleases
6 It)e3 �b4 7 a3 �xc3+ 8 bxe3 It)ge7
me. It threatens 42 ltJfS+ �h6 43 l:tb8!
9 l:tb l l:tb8 10 exd5 "xdS 1 1 .i.d3 0-0
followed by 44 ltJxg6 and 45 l:th8+
12 0-0 "d6 13 'ife2
mating the boxed in king.
White has got little from the opening. 30 'ifxd7 ! !
41...l:txd4
13 ... lt)g6? ! 14 f4 It)ee7 1 5 g3 l:tfd8 A wonderful and unusual way of
Karpov takes the pawn in the hope of
16l:tdl b6 17 a4ltJdS 18 .i.d2 e5 1 9 fS exploiting the weakness of the first
swapping queens, but...
exfS 20 �xfS cxd4 2 1 cxd4 It)de7
43 l:tb4!! rank.
22 .i.b4 'iff6 23 �xe7 'ifxe7 24 l:tbc1
Ruling out his intended 43 ... 'iff4, 30 ...l:txd7 3 1 l:te8+ 'it>b7 32 nec8
l:td5 25 �e4
while upon 43... l:txb4 I had planned the Black can do nothing.
White only has a small advantage.
beautiful idea 44 axb4 d4 45 b5 d3 32...l:td8 33 l:texd8 1-0
25 ... l:td7 26 d5 'iff6 27 l:tel l:tbd8
46 b6 d2 47 b7 d l ='it' 48 b8='ii' 'ii'cl
28 'ifc6
49 ltJxg6 'it'xg6 50 'it'h8+ 'ifh7
51 'ifgxg7 mate. G.Kasparov - N.S hort
43... l:tc4 44l:txc4 dxc4 45 'ifd6! Game 3, exhibition match,
Now I have a mate from a different
London 1987
angle. If 45...f6? 46 'ifd2+.
45... c3 46 'ifd4 1 It)fJ dS 2 d4 �g4
And Karpov resigned as the c3 pawn The bishop develops in a similar
is lost and with it game, set and match!
fashion to the Alekhine game.
But back to Alekhine's game: Narurally I did not anticipate any back
rank chances.
36 b4 l:te8 37 It)fJ It)xfJ+ 38 gxfJ
2 8 ... 'ifgS? 3 It)e5 .i.fS 4 c4 f6 5 It)fJ e6 6 It)e3
Black must be able to hold with e6 7 g3 �b4 8 �g2 It)e7 9 0-0 0-0
28... lt)e7! 10 �3 as 1 1 a3 �xe3
29 �xg6!! bxg6

See diagram on page 206.

29... fxg6! would have prolonged

the game and delayed resignation.

Nevenheless after 30 'ife6+ l:tf7

In Game 22 of the match, I had to
31 l:tc8 l:txc8 32 'ifxc8+ l:tfS 33 'ife6+
seal my move at adjournment. My 3 8...l:tee1 !
l:tf7 34 d6 White's advantage is
seconds and all the commentators were Setting up a lovely mating net.
overwhelming.
now expecting 41 l:tb4. covering the 39 �h3 b5 0-1

209
208
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
12 bxe]
White has emerged from the opening
wi th a small ad vantage, but it will
ev aporate .
1 2 ...lLl d7 13 lLld2 a4 1 4 �a2 �g6
15 e4 �n 16 l1bl l1b8 1 7 �c2 b5
1 8 cxd5 cxd5 1 9 'it'd3 �a5 2 0 l1el
l1fc8 2 1 .Ilb4 lLlc6 2 2 :!.b2
22 ...lLle7
By now Nigel has equalised. There
follows a long manoeuvring phase.
23 :!'c2 lLlb6 24 b4 l1b 7 25 �h3 l1c6
26 nb2 lLlc4 27 l1b4 �c7 28 lLlxc4
:!.xc4 29 �d2 Wc6 30 e5 f5 31 �n
�h5 32 We3 h6 33 :!'ebl cJo>n 34 nlb 2
cJo>g8 35 fJ �86 36 nbl
36 ... lLlc6
Nigel sacrifices the exchange. The
position is very closed, so the move is
justi fi ed.
37 �xc4 dxc4 38 .Il4b2 lLle7 39 d5
210
It is worth giving up a pawn in or der 46 �cl 'it>hS 47 na8 'il'cS ?
to open t he positi on. Here 47 ... lLle3+ wins. 48
39 ...lLlxd5 40 'it'c5 �xfJ 4 1 nxb5 (48 ..i.xe3 'ilr'xe3 49 'ilr'xe7) 48... ..i.xa8.
l1c7 48 nc8 ?
White could keep Black busy with
defensive duties. 48 .Ile8 should have
been played.
42 :!.b8 +
Suddenly Alekhine's back rank
checkmates came to mind. I should
have just taken the a-pawn after 42 l1a5 48 .....xa3
and pushed my own a-pawn. 42. ..'ii'c8 Suddenly Black's pieces can attack
43 "d6. White's king, leaving him lost.
42...� b7 43 -;tf8 49 g4 + ..i.xg4 50 l1xc4 "al 0- 1
See diagram on page 207.
I trusted the back rank attack of
I was trying to catch the h7-king just Alekhine so much that I even played
like Alekhine. for it against the calculation monster
43 ... 'iVa7+ 44 �n ne7 45111b2 super computer Deep Blue. Normally
knowledge is an asset but, though I
knew Alekhine's back rank
after my experience in the next game
they left me feeling blue. Even today, a
decade later, whenever I think of that
computer, it makes m e dee ply blue!
DEEP BLUE - G.Kasparov
Ma tch, Philadelphia 1996
4S...Wg6! 1 e4 cS 2 c3 dS
Nigel had a similar win against I beat Sveshnikov with the other
Timman in an Alekhine defence in main line in the USSR Championship
Tilburg 199 I! In th at game he set up a at Minsk 1979. My opponent missed a
mating net, here Nigel escapes with his very interesting blockade of my king in
king intact. a bishop ending.
Alexander Alekhine the 4th
3 exdS "xd5 4 d4 lLlf6 5 ttlfJ �g4
�el 6 �e2 e6 7 b3 � b5 8 0-0 ttlc6 9 �e3
cxd4 1 0 exd4 �b4! 1 1 a3 �a5 1 2lLlc3
"d6 13 lLlbS We7 1 4 ttle5 �xe2
15 'ilr'xe2 0-0
Black has eq ual ised.
1 6 nacl nac8 1 7 ..i.g5 �b6 1 8 .i.xf6
gxf6 1 9 ttlc4 :!.fd8 20 lLlxb6 axb6
2 1 l1fdl f5 22 'ilr'e3 'iit' f6
tactics,
23 dS !
I was taken completely by surprise.
This is the kind of positional sacrifice
computers are not supposed to play.
Later we found that by sheer brute
force Deep Blue had calculated that it
could win back the pawn after 23 "g3+
'it>f8.
23 ...nxd5
Friedel pointed out that White is
better after 23...exd5 24 "xb6 'ilr'xb2
25 'il'xb7 nb8 26 "xc6 .Ilxb5 27 nc3.
24 nxd5 exdS
211
Alexander Alekhine the 4'h
25 b3!
Deep Blue adopts my style! A quiet
move after a sacrifice. Maybe I have a
way to stay in the game, but it is very
hard to find among the
complicated variations.
25 'iPh8
..•
I have already shown games in which
I tried to force a checkmate on the g­
file. I think Botvinnik passed on this
idea to me. After 25.JiJe7 26 'Wg3+!?
(This is Nunn's suggestion.
26 l:xc8+ LDxc8 27 ir'e8+ 'l;g7 2 8
'Wxc8 'Wa l+ 29 'l;h2 ir'e5+ 3 0 g 3 ir'e2
3 1 ir'xf S 'Wxb5 Black should hold.)
26 . . . ..t>f8! and Black stands his ground .
Alternatively, after 2 5 . . . l:td8 2 6 �xb6
l:d7 White has a small edge.
26 ir'xb6 %ig8 27 'iVc5
Not 27 ir'xb7?? ir'g5.
27...d4
If 2 7 ... ir'g5 28 g3 ir'd2 29 LDd6
Black's pawns are all separated.
28LDd6 f4
Alexander Alekhine the 4'·
29LDxb7 36LDg5+
Sadly White has time to grab a pawn. We have anived at the next motif I
learned from Alekhine and this position
29 ...LDe5 30 'Wd5 f3 3 1 g3 LDd3
is an example of his effect on me. I
Forcing my way through on the g-file
underestimated the power of the
with 3 1 . . . "f4 did not work.
discovered check arising from the
battery.
36 . . . c;t>b6 37 l:xh7+
34 .LDxf1
..
1 set up a mating net just like
Alekhine. But there IS a small
difference between our games - my
many checkmate can be panied.
35 LDxf7+ �g7
1 f 3 5 ... 'ii'xf7 36 'iWd8+ <;t>g7 37 l:xf7+
�xf7 38 .d5+ 'it>e7 39 'ii'x f3 wins.
32l:tc8!! (32 ..t>h2? l:xg3 ! ! and B lack
mates) 32 ... 'ii g5 33 LDd8 ! leaves Black
1-0
in trouble. White can control matters
I resigned as I drop the f3-pawn
After with 33 l:c5 ! as well.
which cages in the Icjng. Without it I am
But not 3 3 h4?? when 3 3 . . . l:txc8!!
just desperately lost.
34 bxg5 l:tel + 3 5 'l;h2 LDg4+ 36 'it>h3 After 37 . . .'it>g6 38 'iWg8+ <;Pf S
LDxf2+ 37 ..t>h4 l:h l is mate. comes 39 LDxf3 and now Black's
3 2l:tc7 %ie8 mating threat has disappeared and I am
hopelessly behind on material.
After 32 . . .LDf4 33 'iix f3.
33LDd6!
I continue to show Alekhine's effect on me when it came to handling
After 3 3 'iVxf 7 the Alekhine-like back batteries. In the next game he rightly ignored the power of the opponent's
rank play 3 3 . . . l:te I + 34 'it>h2 ir'xf 7 battery.
35 l:txf7 occurred to me and some V.K.ramnik G.Kasparov
M.Euwe - A.Alekbine -
commentators thought it would win as
well. But after 35 . . .LDe5 36 l:tf8+ <tt g7
37 l:d8 LDd3 3 8 g4 LDxf2! (Playing on
the back rank, just like Alekhine.)
39 <tt g3 (On 39 l:xd4 LDh l ! B l ack is
better. But not 39 . . .LDe4 40 l:xe4 l:xe4
41 'l;g3) 39 . . .LDxh3 40 'l;xf3 l:te3+ the
game ends in a draw.
33 . l:tel+ 34 'l;h2
..
212 213
Alexander Alekhine the 4'h Alexander Alekhine the 4'"

Most chessplayers know that 14 ... cxd5 15 lOxd5 �d7 16 lOd4 f4 24 ...llxf7 25 lOxf7+ �g8 In the match the Griinfeld did not

Alekhine and Euwe played two work welL It is a pity Griinfeld did not
See diagram on page 213. become a world champion, then I could
matches for the world title. However
blame him for losing the second game
they also had a third or should I say a
Alekhine intentionally steps into the of this match.
first match in 1926. Later on Euwe also
discovered check of a battery. I knew 4 e3 0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 ttJf) c5 7 0-0
played a match against Capablanca, this example when I played my last exd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 .i.xc4 b6
who beat him 6-4 with no losses. World Championship match. I employed Karpov's variation, but
Bogolyubov also beat him 51/,-41;' i n 26 lOe5+ Alekhine is also not 100 percent free

two different matches. from guilt for this loss.

10 �g5 �b7 11 llel ttJbd7 12 1:cl
In the Alekhine-Euwe match of 1926 nc8 13 "b3 .i.e7 14 �xf6 lOxf6
Alekhine won two games early on but 17 lldel? 15 .i.xe6
lost the seventh and the eighth, and This is a bit too subtle. Winning a
they drew the ninth. We look at their pawn for nothing with 17 b4 was the

decisive last game with the match simplest. 17...•d8 18 lOxf6+ "xf6

standing at 4V,-4V,.
19 �xb7.
17 ...lOxd5 18 �xd5+ '>Ph8 19 lOe6
l:H6 20 lbg5
M.Euwe - A.Alekhine

Game 10, match, Am ste rdam 1926 26..... xd5!!

Euwe must have missed this.

1 lOo e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 lOc6 4 d4 27 cId5 lOe2+

And Euwe resigned.
�b4+ 5 �d2 �xd2+ 6 ir'xd2 d6 15 ... fxe6
0-1
7 lOc3 lOf6 8 �g2 0-0 9 lldl lOe7 I've already showed you that I was
10 0-0 lOg6 11 ,*c2 c6 You might say Euwe was Wllucky. not worried by the battery, and in fact
Yes and no. Looking at this match only, this time the battery is not dangerous
yes, but probably he learned from the after I5... Itc7!. Then 16 ttJg5 (16 �c4
extremely tense situation. When he �xf3 17 gxf3 lld7 and Black is safe.)

20 . J:tars
.
played the last game of the 1935 match 16..."xd4! 17 ttJe2 (17 lOxn �c5

Black's pieces come into the game. he was able to handle the pressure 18 ttJe5+ 'i!th8 is okay; 17 llcd I '1Ifh4

21 'i!tb3 fxg3 22 ,*xg3 and he was successfuL He probably 18 ttJxn �c5 and Black can move

White h ascompensation for the became wiser because of this painful despite the discovered check.) 17 .....d2
pawn after 22 b.xg3 llxfl 23 'i!fe3. experience, whereas I derived no 18 ttJxn "xe2 and Black is doing all

Black's pieces have now become benefit from it because I got no chance ri ght. In this game all the motifs are
threatening. of a return match. here that I picked up from Alekhine -

23 ne7 llg6 24 Itf7?? the back rank included.

V.Krawoik - G.Kasparov
12 e4 Even after 24
lOn+ llxn 25 llxn 16 'ii'xe6+ 'it>h8 17 li'xe7 �xf)
Game 10, World Championship
White occupies the centre. ttJe2+ 26 >Ph 1 ttJxg3+ 27 fxg3 h5 18 gxf)
London 2000
12..... a5 13 ed5 ed5 14 d5! 28 Itxd7 White is worse, but it is far After 18 "xd8 Itcxd8 19 gxf3 comes

Euwe cuts Black's camp into two. from over. 1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJc3 �b4 19 ...llxd4.

214 215
Alexander Alekhine the 4th Alexander Alekhine the 4th

lS ,*:td4 19 LObS
... 24 lLlg5+ <;Ph8 25 '*f5 fi'xa2 (25...'*c3 After this game started to match but, unlike Euwe, I was
26 %1e6 [26 %1e7 ,*c5] 26 ...•c7 understand that the crown won't stay inexperienced when I played this game
[26...�g8 27 h4!] 27 .g6 %1fl! 28 %1xf6 with me till I die as happened with against Krarnnik.
gxf6 29 'Wh6+ �gS 30 ,*xfl!+ a nice Alekhine. It was a very important
Indirectly, Alekhine affected me as
check follows.) 26 "g6 ,*a3 (26 ..%1£8 game.
well, since Krarnnik learned from him
.

27 ne7) 27 ne6 �g8 28 h4 White wins.

The world champions have had a how to avoid a rematch. He never gave
If 23 ...h6 24 lUxh6+ �h7 25 -.f5+!
strongly negative effect on me, me a chance to prove my superiority
�h8 (25 ...�xh6 26 '*f4+ �h7
27 fi'xbS This is why putting the something which has probably escaped over him in a match, the same way

rook on a8 creates a bigger obstacle.) everybody's attention. I learned from that Alekhine denied Capablanca. So
26lUf7+ �g8 27lLlg5 ,*xa2 (27...W'c3 them never to be behind at a decisive Alekhine had an especially marked and
28 %1e7 -'c5 29 ':'xg7+) 28 %1e6 %1c8 final stage of a World Championship controversial influence on my career.
19 ... ,*xb2 (28 ...%1e8 29 %1xe8+ lUxe8 30 �g2
The excellent Hungarian junior wins; or 28 ... ..Ild8 29 'ito>g2) 29 W'g6
trainer Hazai, playing the White pieces, wins.
had a game where he was faced with 24lUdS+
19 ...'*f4. He did not mind taking a The battery looks innocent as the
walk in the centre. 20 %1xc8 %1xc8 knight wins nothing, however it still
21 lLld6 'ir'xo 22 lUxc8 'ir'g4+ 23 �f1 blocks the eighth rank.
'Wh3+ 24 �e2 ,*xc8 25 �d2 and went
on to win in Hazai-Danie1sen, Valby
1994.
20 %1:tcS lhcS 21 lLld6 llbS
21 ...%1a8 was better as the rook would
be less vulnerable if Black's king goes
in front of its pawns. 22 lLlf7+ 'ito>g8
23 'ir'e6 h6 24 lLlxh6+ �h7 25 lLlf7!
(25 lLlg4 %1fl!) 25...lle8 (25 ...fi'd2
26 ne41?) 26 '*f5+1 and White has
good winning chances.
22 lLlf7+ Wg8 23 'ii'e 6 24 �h8
...

I did not have the same luck as

See diagram on page 213. Alekhine and was not able to take the
piece at the base of the battery.
This is the battery I did not mind. 25 ,*e7 1-0
Thanks to Alekhine. I resigned, because the d8 knight
makes it possible to trap my rook or,
23 ... 11fS if it moves away, there is a back rank
Trying to include the rook in the checkmate or even worse a nightmare
defence, but in vain. Other moves did smothered mate. All Alekhine's motifs
not help either. Krarnnik showed how that I wanted to employ played a role in
White wins with 23...h5. Then this game. I knew them all and still lost.

216 217

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd
Capablanca beat Emanuel Lasker in
1921 to become the third world
champion. Capablanca won 4 games
and 10 were drawn, therefore the result
was 9-5. The match took place in Cuba,
where the weather favoured him, but
anyway the great Cuban was destined
to become world champion. Actually
he may have been the best player
earlier or, more precisely, during World
War I. At that time there was hardly
any chess activity in Europe and
Capablanca was performing at his best
in America. In a way, among the world
champions he is the most dissimilar
type of player to myself. He had a very
positional style, whereas I prefer
complications. He was a laid back
easy-going person, whereas I am a hard
worker and have conflicts. Of course
there are similarities too, He was very
talented and had better results in
individual tournaments against a very
Because Capablanca had won with the bishop takes h-pawn sacrifice,
I settled for a draw when I was faced with it - instead of trying for more.
J.CapabJanea - L.Molina
21S
strong player who beat him and never
gave him a chance for a rematch. What
did I pick up from him? Well, there are
a few indications of his style in my play
. but these are rather superficial. First I'll
show you the games that inspired me -
and also cost me dearly.
J.CapabJanea - L.Molina
Casual game, Buenos Aires
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lLlc3 lLlf6
li'lbd7 S e3 e6 6 lLln iLe7 7 exdS?!
lLlxd S 8 1Lxe7 lUxe7 9 iLd3 eS 10 0-0
0-0 1 1 dxeS lUxeS
See diagram below.
1 2 �xh7+!?
Capablanca had a positional style,
but also very sharp tactical vision. It is
very hard to foresee all the components
of this sacrifice.
I 2...�xh7 13 lUgs + 'itr>g6
G.Kasparov - DEEP JUNIOR
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td
13...'it>h6?? loses to 14 lLlxf7+; and
there is no way back with 13...<.ti>g8 as
after 14 1t'h5 l:I.e8 15 l:I.ad1 �d7
16 'ili'xf7+ <.ti>h8 17 1t'h5+ 'it>gS 1S b4
WillS.
1 4 'ili'g4 f5
This is the only move.
If 18 ...e5 19 ltad I 'iib6 20'iib4�e6
21 lUxe6+ 'iPxe6 22 exfS+ <.ti>f7
23 'ilfc4+ 'it>e8 24 b4 lUa6 25 llJe4 and
White has nice prospects.
19 exfS exfS 2 0 l:tadl lLld3 2 1 'iVh3!
21 'il'hs could lead to a perpetual.
1911
2l..Jlh8 22 llJce4+ fxe4 23 llJxe4+
4 �gS <l;f7 24 lUg5+ 'it>f6 2SllJe4+ 'it>f7.
15 'ili'g3 <.ti>h6 2 1...lUdf4
After IS...f4 16 exf4 lUfS 17 'ili'g4 There's nothing better. If 21...l:thS
lUh6 J S 'iib4 White has two pawns 22 'ilfe3 lUgf4 23 g3 and White wins
back the piece. Or 21...llJgf4 22 'ilfg3
and play for the piece enough
l:ths 23 h4 �e6 24 nfe 1 l:teS 2S lUe2
compensation for the material deficit.
and Black's position has deteriorated.
And after I S ...l:th8 19 l:tfdl 'ilff6 22 'ilfg3 'ilVc7
20.Ihc I he will play b4with an edge. After 22...'ilfaS 23h4.
If 15 ...'it>f6 16 l:tadl 'ii b6 (16...'ilfaS 23 l:tfe! lUe2+
leaves White two ways to look for play. After 23...l:tdS 24 l:txdS 'ilfxd8 25 h4
17lUh7+ 'it>f7 18 lUxfS <.ti>xfS 19 l:td4or Black is in trouble. And if 23...lthS
24h4lLlxh42Sl:td6+! 'ilfxd6 26lUce4+
17e4lUxe418 lUcxe4+ fxe419 lUxe4+
White wins.
'it>f7 20b4) 17e4(17llJh7+) 17...lUxe4
24 l:txe2 'ilfxg3
IS llJcxe4+ fxe4 19 'ilff4+ lUfS
20 lUh7+ 'it>f7 21 lUxfS <.ti>xfS 22 'ilfxe4
with easier play for White.
1 6 'ilfh4 + 'it>g6 17 'iVh7+ 'it>f6
Not 17 ...'it>xg5?? IS 'iVxg7+ 'it>hS
19l1Je2! f420exf4llJf5 21 'iib7+ lUh6
22 lUg3+ <.ti>g423'ilfxh6and checkmate
follows on the next move.
18 e4! lLlg6
219
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd
25 lO b 7+
This is an effective intennediate
move. It crushes Black's position.
25 ...<;t>n 2 6 hIg3 Ilh8 2 7 1Og5+ �r6
28 f4 1-0
G.Kasparov - DEEP JUNIOR
Game 5, Man v Machine,
New York 2003
1 d4 lOf6 2 e4 e6 3 lOe3 �b4 4 e3
0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 exd5 nd5 7 1Oge2 lle8
8 0-0 �d6 9 a3 c6 1 0 'ifc2
See diagram all page 2 J 8.
1 0 . .. �Ih2+?
Seeing this move on the screen had
the effect of a cold shower. It struck me
that perhaps it was my tum to lose to an
opening trap, the same way that Karpov
once lost honibly to Korchnoi. Then,
with the Capablanca game rapidly
flashing across my mind, my heart
nearly missed a byte's worth of beats.
11 <;t>xh2 lOg4+
12 q;.g3
The only move - and just like th e
Capablanca game.
12 ...'ifg5 13 f4
Things are developing in a very
similar way to the Capablanca game.
13 ..JlfhS
This represents a slight difference.
220
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rr1
14 �d2 'ifh2+ 15 �f3 b) 1 6 . . . 'iWh5 17 :h l lOxe3+ 1 8 lb.h5 Maybe White is somewhat better, but
�g4+ 1 9 �f2 lOxc2 20 :ah l .txh5 this is by no means certain and things
21 :xh5 1O a l 22 �xh7+ wins. can easily go wrong for White.)
20 . . .lOd7 (threatening tLle5 mate) 21 e4
17 �f2 lOg4+
c5 (Black is not worse in the line
starting 2 1 . . . dxe4+ which might end in
a particular perpetual check. 22 tLlxe4
[22 .txe4 lOdf6] 22 . . .gxf5 23 104c3
:e3+ 24 .txe3 lOdeS+ 25 dxeS lOxeS+
26 'it>f4
15 .. JiM
The pieces are placed in a similar
fashion to the Capablanca game.
Now White's king can run away with
1 8 �e l ! .
Before we continue with this line
let's see the continuation if White's
king stays in the area with 1 8 'it>g2,
which allows Black to hold. There
follows 1 8 . . . 'ifh2+ 19 'it>f3 g6 ! ! ( 1 9 . . . f5 26 . . .'iWh6+ 27 �xe5 '-g7+ leads to a
20 � x f5 'iWh5 2 1 .i.xg4 wins.) draw.) 22 .i.gS (White should settle for
16 .txh7+? a draw. It is too risky to play for a win
Here I was ·virtually settling for by 2 2 'it>xg4? cxd4 23 .i.g5 [23 :h l ??
a draw because of the game of the lOeS+ 24 �f4 h6 - 24 . . . g5+ 25 �xg5
Cuban champion. I thought it would h6+ 26 �f4 'ii'f2 mate - 2S lOxd4 'ii'f2+
be dangerous to p lay on because and checkmate on the next move.]
Capablanca had won with the sacrifice. 23 . . . dxe4 24 lOxe4 'iWh5 + 2S 'it>f4 gxfS
However I should have continued with
26 1Oxd4 'ii'g4+ 27 <l;>e3 'ii'xgS+ 28 �f2
1 6 g3 ! ! as the centre is not as open as in
fXe4 29 .i.xe4 lOf6 and Black takes
the Capablanca game.
over.) 22 . . . gxfS 23 lOxdS cxd4 24 exfS
Then 1 6 . . .lOh2+
1t'h5 25 �g2 'ifh2+ is another
a) 1 6 . . . 'it'h2 This is surely the move
20 f5 (20 e4 dxe4+ [Black can force perpetual.
Capablanca would have chosen. 17 f5
a draw by 20 . . . 'iWh5 2 1 �g2 - 2 1 Ilh l
( 1 7 Il ae l ) 1 7 . . . lOd7 ( 1 7 . . . h5 1 8 e4 or
1 7 . . . 'Wh3 1 8 Ilh l lOh2+ 19 �f2 wins.) tLle5+ 2 l . . . 'ifh2 + 22 �f3 'itb5] Meanwhile back to 1 8 �e I ! when
1 8 '1Pxg4 'ifg2 1 9 e4 lOf6+ 20 'iPf4 dxe4 21 .i.xe4 lOf6 22 f5 'iWh5+ 23 �f2 play continues 1 8 . . . 1t'h3 ( 1 8 . . . 'it'h2 ! ?
21 .i.xe4 lOxe4 22 lOxe4 .-xe2 tLlxe4+ 24 lOxe4 'ii' xf5+ 25 �e3 'ii'g 5+ 1 9 lOd I lOd7 2 0 e 4 dxe4 2 1 .i.xe4 Wb5
23 lI a e l .Ihe4+ 24 .xe4 .xd2+ 26 �d3 [26 �f2 'ii' f5+ 2 7 'it>e3] 22 :h 1 1Oh2 23 lOe3 lOf6 24 .Jtg2
25 'ife3 and B l ack runs out of play. 26 . . .tfS 27 102c3 'ii'xg3+ 28 .te3 'iWh3 tDfg4 25 'ii'c 5 leaves White an edge.)
22 1
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td

16 ...'it'h8 17 <1Jg3 ciJh2+ 18 �f2 J .CapabJanca - A.Alekhine

<1Jg4+ Game 29, World Championship,
Buenos Aires 1 927

1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 <1Je3 ciJf6 4 .1gS

ciJbd7 5 e3 c6 6 ciJo WaS 7 ciJd2 .1b4
8 Wc2 dxc4 9 .lhf6 ciJxf6 10 ciJxc4
We7 11 aJ

19 l: g I (Had not known 2 1 'iWb3 ciJdS

Capablanca's game I might have tried
19 ciJd l I ? � I am not saying this wins but
I knew he had won with the rook move
and I trusted his idea.) 1 9 . . . ciJd7 20 e4
dxe4 2 1 ciJxe4 'iVh2 (2 l .. . ciJ df6 22 ciJ d6
l: e6 23 ciJ c4 and White keeps his
position together.) 22 'it' d I ciJ df6
23 ciJ xf6+ ciJxf6 24 l:e I .li. g4 25 'ifc4
and White is tied up.
Capablanca beat Alekhine in an
endgame in which he was a pawn up
and with a particular pawn structure.
J.Capablanca - A.Alekhine
19 'it'O ciJh2+ Ij,-Vl
And the game ended in a perpetual.
But I should have won this game or at
least pressed harder. So, planted deep in
my mind in my junior years was
Capablanca's game - and it returned to
me much later when I played Deep
Junior.
Here is my position - also from a
world title match - and with similar
characteristics.
G.Kasparov - A.K a rpov
1l ....li.e7
There are problems assessing this
type of middlegame. This bishop may
be worth as much as White's extra
space. For example, players once
considered the Moscow variation to be
slightly better for White. By the end
of the 1 9905 masters be gan to sacrifice
the c4-pawn instead. I also beat
Dreev with this idea in an extremely
important game in the 2004 Russian
Championship.
12 g3 0-0 13 .li. g2 .li. d7 14 b4 b6
15 0-0 as 16 ciJeS axb4 17 axb4 l:xal
If 17 ... .li. xb4 1 8 ciJb5 Wc8 19 ciJ a7
wins.
18 .l:b:al l:c8
If 1 8 . . . .li. xb4 19 <1Jb5 Wc8 20 .li. xc61
Capablanca liked this continuation and
he had a point.
19 ciJxd7 WId7 20 ciJa4 'Wd8
Here Alekhine missed a chance to
reduce his disadvantage with 2 1 . . .b5.
Then 22 <1Jc5 .li. xc5 and Black is only a
fraction worse.
22 b5 exb5 23 .-xb5 l:a8 24 IIc1
l:a5 2 5 'Wc6
White soon wins the b6-pawn.
2S ... .li.a3 26 l:t bl .i.f8 27 .i.xd5
l:xdS
28 <1Jxb6
White has excellent chances of
converting his advantage.
2 8 ...l%d6 29 'Wb7 h5 30 tDe4 l:d7
31 'ife4 l:te7 32 ciJe5 We8 33 'it>g2 .li. d6
34 .I:1 a l IIb7 35 ciJd3 g6 36 l:a6 .i.f8
37 l:tc6
It is interesting that Capablanca
chooses not to attack with h3 and g4.
37 ...l1c7 3 8 l:txe7 Wxc7 3 9 ciJeS .li.g7
40 'Was+ 'it>h7 41 tUo .i.f6 42 'ifa6
'it> g7

222 223
Jose Raul Capobianco the 3rr1
43 'iVd3
Capablanca starts creating a passed
d-pawn.
43 ... 'Wi'b7 44 e4 'iWc6 45 h3 .c7
46 d5 exd5 47 e:xd5
Had the Cuban not exchanged rooks
ten moves earlier, and if the game had
proceeded in a similar way, by now his
advantage would have been greater.
47 ... 'ifc3 48 '1!t'xc3
Another small swprise when it was
possible to keep the queens on.
48...�xc3
See diagram o n page 222.
49 �n �r6 50 �e2 �b4 51 iDd4
.ic5 52 lUc6 �r5 53 �n � f6
54 g4 hxg4+ 55 hxg4 �g5
An unfortunate move, as it fixes
White's king. However, it does provide
freedom for the knight. Moving the
224
bishop along both diagonals was better
so perhaps b6 is the best square for the
bishop. Then B lack has real chances of
survival.
56 lUeS! .t.d4
If56 . . . f5 57 d6! fxg4+ 58 �g2 ! wins.
Alternatively, 56 . . . .t.a3 57 d6 �f6
58 d7 �e7 59 lUxf7 is decisive.
57 lUxf7+ �f6 58 lUd8 �b6 59 lUc6
�c5
60 �f4 !
Capablanca can now use his king and
returns a pawn for a winning endgame.
60 �e2 �d6 (60 . . . �g5 6 1 lUe5)
6 1 'OPd3 �g5 62 lUd8 �xg4 63 'iPe4
also wins.
60 ....ixfl 61 gS+
As Capablanca played g5, I too opted
for the same idea - see the next game!
6 1 .....t>f7
If 6 l . ..'iPg7 62 d6.
62 lUeS+ 'OPe7
Jose Raul Capobianco the 3rr1
After 62 . . .'it>g7 63 d6 wins. 1 8 0-0 a6 1 9 ltJa3 .l:l.e8 20 ltJc2 .l:l.xe2
63 lUxg6+ 11 ihe2 �b5 22 .l:l.xb5 axb5 23 'iWxb5
Winning a second pawn. The rest is .l:l.132 24 lUe3
simple.
63 ...�d6 64 �e4 �g3 65 lUf4 <l;e7
66 'it>e5 .iel 67 d6+ <li>d7 68 g6 �b4
69 <li>d5
Not 69 g7?? �c3+ draws.
69 ...<;t>e8 70 d7+ 1 -0
This game looked very convincing to
me.
G.Kas p arov - A.Karpov
Game 40, World Championship, 24 ....I:I.a5?
Moscow 1 985 Karpov hangs on to the pawn, but
soon he has to relinquish it. Geller
1 d4 lUf6 2 c4 e6 3 lUn d5 4 lUc3 recommended 24 ...ltJa6! ? which loses
.ie7 5 �g5 h6 6 .ih4 0-0 7 e3 b6 the pawn but might hold the game.
8 �e2 .i.b7 9 �d6 �If6 1 0 cxdS For example, 25 l:tc l (25 ltJxd5 .l:l.a5
e:xdS 11 b4 c5 12 buS bxc5 26 lUe7+ 'it?ffi 27 ltJc6 lhb5 28 ltJxd8
ltJb8) 25 ... g6! 26 lUxd5 (26 "'7 .f6)
26 ... .I:I.a5 27 ltJe7+ �g7 28 ltJc6 .l:l.xb5
29 lUxd8 ltJb4 30 .l:l.b l .l:l.b8 and Black
seems to escape.
25 'Wi'b7 "e8 26 ltJxd5 .l:l.b5 27 .a8
.d7 28 lUc3 .l:l.b4 29 d5 "c7 30 ltJdl
l:tb5
There are 1 2 6 games with this
particular position in the database.
Karpov and I played this position five
times in our World Championship
matches, all ending in draws. These
games do not belong to the most
exciting pages of World Championship
history but as far as I was concerned 3 1 lUe3
they were justified because of my White has consolidated his extra
standing at the time in those matches. pawn. However it is not so simple to
13 .l:l.bl .as 14 .d2 exd4 I s lUxd4 convert it.
.ixd4 16 exd4 �c6 17 lUb5 "d8 3 1 .. .•a5
225
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3..0 Jose Raul Capablanca the 3..0

I had no choice, but it was not 42 11d4

against my wishes as Capablanca had
exchanged queens as well.
32 'ii'x a5 11xa5 33 l:[dl
See diagram on page 222.
There are rooks on the board and
Black has a knight. But I thought the
rooks could be swapped and
difference between having a knight
instead of a bishop is not significant.
Capablanca won his game, therefore I
was hoping to win my endgame as
well.
33 ...tOd7 34 g4 g6 3 5 Wg2 11a4
36 h3 �g7 3 7 d6
Capablanca advanced his pawn at a
much later stage.
37 ...11a6 38 f4 11e6 39 h4 �f8
After 42 gxf6 comes 42 ... 'it>f7!
42 ... Wn 43 tOe4 �e6 44 wn 11e5
45 �e3 l:[b5 46 Wd2 J:[d5 47 11Id5
�Id5
We too have simplified to one piece
against one piece. But I was not so
lucky as Capa.
48 tOeS �xd6
the
49 tOIg6
My simplification is di fferent from
the previous game. White's king is
unable to improve its position and so no
progress can be made. Oh, it's all so
sad!
49" ,ltJc5 50 ltJh4 �e6 5 1 �e3 ltJe4
52 tOn 'it>n 53 �d4 �e6 54 �e4 tOa
55 ..ti>d4 [55 tOg I !?] 55 ...ttJe4 56 tOel
A.Shirov - G.Kasparov
Astana 200 1
22 . . . 'i!t'c4 23 11ae I tOc6 24 tOc I
Wxd4 25 tOe2 Wa4 26 Wg3 11fd8
27 tOc3 Wb3 28 11e3 d5 29 .i.. h6 .i.. f8
30 lOe4 ifb2 3 1 lOc5 .i..xc5 32 lIc3
.i..xf2+ 33 llxf2 lla l + 34 lIf1 Wb6+
35 11e3 llxf1+ 36 �xf1 Wd4 37 Wc7
Wc4+ 0- 1
I have sacrificed a piece on b5 a few times, of course this occurs most
frequently in the Sicilian defence. So my main recourse to employing this idea
came from other games and I very clearly remembered one of Capablanca's
wins where he sacrificed a bishop on b5. He played i t in his first European
tournament at San Sebastian 1 9 1 1 after which he was universally regarded
as a world-class player.
Here is the position where And here you can see the moment
Capablanca had just sacrificed on b5: when I unleashed the same move.
J. Capablanea - O.Bernstein G.Kasparov - J.Lautier

�d6 57 tOe2 tOeS 58 �e3 tOe6

40 g5
The great Cuban pushed the g-pawn
later. But he pushed nevertheless and
why shouldn't I do the same? That's
what I thought. On the other hand
Geller preferred 40 h5.
4 0. . .h x g 5 4 1 hxg5 f5 !
Karpov does not allow my king t o
penetrate.
59 ttJd4 tOg7 60 Wd2 �e5 61 �d3
�d5 62 tOe2 tOh5 63 We3 tOg7
64 tOg3 ..ti>d6 65 'iPn ..ti>e7 66 tOe2 tOe6
67 ttJg3 tOg7 68 tOn �n 69 tOe3 ..ti>g6
70 tOd5 ttJe6 Vz-Vz
But not all my memories were sour
as regards the particular pawn structure
with three pawns on the kingside and
o n e extra d-pawn. Here is m y game
against Shirov:

226 2:27
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd Jose Raul Capablanca the 3'"

J.Capablanea - O.Bernstein 30 h3
SI. Petersburg 1 9 1 4 White is a rook down but has plenty
of pawns for it and, more importantly,
I d4 d S 2 lUn lUf6 3 c4 e 6 4 lUe3 far too many pieces around Black's
lUbd7 S �g S �e7 6 e3 e6 7 �d3 dxc4 king.
8 �J:C4 bS 9 �d3 a6 10 e4 eS II dxeS 30 ... lUe8
If 30 . . . lUh6 3 1 lUg3 mate.
31 hxg4+ 'it>xg4 32 �xd8 l:lxd8
Black has avoided direct loss, but he
22 lUxc8
has given back the rook. Now he is 12 a3 bS
This is a surprising solution. He gives
absolutely constrained with his three One year earlier Ivanchuk castled
up h i s well placed knight for an
pawn deficit. against me in this position. Joel
undeveloped bishop.
22 ... 'ihe6 23 W'd8+ 'ike8 obviously had time to prepare.
If 23 . .Wn 24 lUd6+.
.

1 3 �xbS!?
24 .i.e7+ wn 2S lUd6+ <ot>g6
26 LDh4+ �hS 27 lUxe8 l:lxd8
I have had two games in which my See diagram on page 227

opponent had doubled e-pawns in the

opening and I lost. One was only a blitz I also had time to prepare and felt this
game again Kramnik, but the second sacrifice would wreak psychological
one was a regular game against Hubner. damage.
Tal, Euwe and Steinitz all won games 33 g3 %td2 34 'it>g2 :te2 3S a4 LDb6 13 ... axbS 1 4 lUdIbS 'ikb 6 ? !
against such a pawn structure. 3 6 lUe3+ 'it>hS 3 7 as lUd7 3 8 lUhfS After 1 4 . . . 'ikc6 1 5 �xc5 dxc5 1 6 e5
I J ...ltJg4 12 �f4 �eS 13 0-0 'ike7 lUf6 39 bS �d4 40 'it>n %ta2 4 1 a6 �a6 17 a4 lUd5 18 lUxd5 exd5
1 4 l:le l f6 IS �g3 fxeS �a7 42 l:lel l:lb2 43 g4+ 'it>g6 44 l:le7
1 9 lUd6+ 'it>e7 20 l:lel h5 21 'if13
Against Hubner I did not mind him 28 lUxg7+ l:lxf2+ 45 'it>If2 lUxg4+ 46 'it>n 1 -0
Lautier evaluates his line as giving
taking back the e-pawn, as I based my Capablanca had luck with such
knight-saving intermediate moves. enough compensation.
play on my queenside pawn maj ority. This b5 sacrifice is nice indeed and I
28 ... �b6 29 lUgfS+ �hS 15 �xe5 dIe5 16 lUd6+
1 6 b4 �a7 1 7 �xbS! have also tried it.
Also after 1 6 e5 �a6 1 7 a4 ! �xb5
See diagram on page 227. G.Kasparov - J.Lautier ( 1 7 . . . lUd5 1 8 lUd6+ 'it>e 7 1 9 tLixd5+
Euwe Memorial, Amsterdam 1 995
exd5 20 'ikxd5 wins.) 1 8 lUxb5 lUd5
In return for the bishop Capablanca
( 1 8 . . . lUe4? 1 9 'ik13) 1 9 c4 lUe7 20 'ikd6
obtains three pawns and prevents 1 e4 e5 2 lUn e6 3 d4 exd4 4 lUxd4
White has decent compensation for the
Bernstein from castling. ltJe6 5 lUe3 'ike7 6 �e3 86 7 �d3 lUf6
piece.
17 ... axbS 1 8 lUxbS W'd8 19 lUd6+ 8 0-0 lUe5 9 b3 �eS 1 0 'it> h l d6 1 1 f4
�f8 20 lhe6 lUb6 21 �b4 'ifd7 tLied7 1 6 ... 'it>e7

228 229
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rt! Jose Raul Capablanca the Jrd

28 . . :r5 29 Wb5 lUr6 3 0 'ilhb6+ 'i!tf7

.

3 1 ..t>gl

27... g5!
1 7 lUxc8+ 22 g4!
Capablanca captured the bishop after B y now I had already cleared my Black saves the g-pawn which is a

the d6-check. I did not do the same head of the Capablanca game. I just very important achievement for h im.
even though I had had the controversial used my own brains and made a His queen stands well on the long 3 1 ...:g8 0-1
experience when the computer reasonably good move, which creates diagonal.
sacrificed the bishop on hl. I still fully chances. H owever, sadly, it is not
28 .Ilgg3 Had Capablanca actually observed
trusted Capablanca's way of attacking. enough. If 2 2 :g3 Wf2.
D efending the vulnerable f3-rook in my position collapsing in ruins like
After 17 e5 �a6 ( l 7. . lUe8 1 8 lUc4) 22 ... fIg4 23 W:lg4
advance. But White'S king remains this, he would surely have been
.

I 8 :f2 :hd8 1 9 :d.2 the position is After 23 hxg4 Wc6.

23 ... :a5! precariously placed. For example, after embarrassed at his negative influence
unclear.
Not 2 3 ...jj'xb27 24 f5 . 28 fxg5+ :f5 29 :gg3 iOe5 wins. on me.
1 7 ... :hxc8
24 lUe4 Wc6?!
It i s a bit worrisome that Lautier's
Once again taking the b2 pawn was
rook is not stuck on h8 as Bernstein's
decisive: 24 ... 'ii'x b2! 25 lUd6 lUxd6
was. But I still felt relaxed.
26 exd6+ �xd6 ! 27 jj'xe6+ Q;c7 Capablanca played a very famous G.Kasparov J.Tlmman
18 e5 lUe8 19 Wh5 b6 20 tIae! -

28 :d l lUb6 and Black is too far ahead

Not 20 f5 7 lUxe5 2 1 fxe6 'ii'x e6. game where he froze his opponent's
in material.
20 . . [5 ! bishop on g3 with his g5 and e5
25 lUd6 iOxd6? !
.

Lautier consolidates his king and pawns.

Impatiently and prematurely parting
now I started to realise things would
with the d6"-knight. After 25 . . . l:tb8
not necessarily go my way. Not W.Winter J.Capablanca
26 �gl :d5 ! 27 :f2 iOxd6 28 exd6+
-

20 . . . Wxb2? 2 1 f5 ! Wxc3 22 fx e 6 fx e 6
23 :f7+ ..v d 8 2 4 :d l and White has
compensation even for the doubl e
knight deficit.
2 1 :13
After 2 1 exf6+ lUexf6 22 Wg6 �fll
Black wins.
2 1 ...c4 ? !
Knaak's move 2 1 . . . ..xb2 wins. After
22 :d I (22 g4 :xa3) 22 . . . lUfS it is all
over.
�d8 Black wins.
26 exd6+ �f8 27 .Ilg1?
This move is a bad time-trouble
mistake. 2 7 :xe6 was necessary. Then
after 27 . . . :e8 (27 . . . iO f6?? 28 d 7 1 ) No doubt you have already noticed
2 8 :xe8 + ( 2 8 :e77 :xe7 2 9 dxe7+ that while Winter had a frozen bishop,
�f7) 28 . . . �xe8 29 �gl 'ilhM Timman has a knight. It's so annoying
30 Wxg7 B l ack has just a few pawn! that this could happen. Go through the
left and his king has no shelter. All 0 game and you can see why I say this!
which makes it very hard to win witl
the extra knight.

230 23 1
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td

W.Winter - J.Capablanca In the later part of the analysis you Now we return to my game:
Hastings Victory Congress 1 9 1 9 can see why I thought Timman had a
bishop on g6. But here I had some 14 ... e6 1 5 .0 d5 I 6 lDn a5 I 7 lDg3
1 e4 e5 2 lDn lDc6 3 lDc3 lDf6 chessic doubts when a Steinitz game �eS 1 8 a4 �e7 1 9 �a2 .!:ta6 20 ill b 5
4 �b5 �b4 5 0-0 0-0 6 �J:c6 dJ:c6 suddenly occurred to me.
7 d3 �d6 8 �g5 h6 9 �h4 c5
A.Scbwarz - W.Steinltz
Vienna 1 873

23 ... e4! 24 nb5 CJ:b3 25 CJ:b3 :lJ:b5

26 l:la4 :lxb3
With such a frozen kingside White is
hopelessly lost.
27 d4 l:lb5 28 :le4 'l:tb4 29 lhe6
l:hd4 0-1
10 lDd5? gS 1 1 ill d6+ "d6 12 �g3
�g4 13 h3 �xn 14 "iJ'xo 'ilt'xf3
15 gxn G.Kasparov - J.Timman
Wereldhaven Festival, Rotterdam 1 999
See diagram on page 2 3 1 .
1 e4 e5 2 lDo ille 6 3 �c4 ltJr6
4 d3 �eS 5 c3 d6 6 �b3 0-0 7 �gS
White's bishop on g 3 i s dead.
�e6 8 lDbd2 a6 9 b3 �a7 10 �h4
15 ...f6 16 'it>g2 as 17 a4 Wf7 18 :lh l
Wb8
�e6 1 9 h4 l:lfb8 20 hIgS hJ:g5 21 b3
11 g4
2 1 ...c6
When I was really young I also
Having centralised his king,
gained space like this against Petrosian.
Capablanca now opens the queenside.
1 l ... ille 7 1 2 � xf6 gJ:f6 13 lDh4 lDg6
He can afford a lot of things on that
1 4 ttJg2
side as White is virtually a piece down.
22 :la2 bS 23 :lhal See diagram on page 231.
2 0 ...l:lb6
Timman's rook play is interesting.
2 1 1i'e2 .d6 22 0-0 l:I.d8 23 .!:tfdI d4
24 .!:td2 .e5
Jan should have played 24 . . . dxc3
1 6 ...lDJ:g3
25 bxc3 'Wa3 26 l1ad l 'li'xc3 27 lDe3.
This confused me. Steinitz captures
White has some play for the pawn but
the bishop which seems to imply that a
Black should be better.
bishop like this may not be so bad after
25 ':c2 .d6 26 lDel l:tg8 27 lDn
all. Steinitz went on to win the game.
.d7 28 'itbl e5 29 �u6 be6 30 ill d2
On the other hand Capablanca won by
l:ta6
saddling his opponent with this bishop.
I was aware of the contradictory
messages these champions were
sending but thought, as the Cuban was
the later champion, he must have
played better than Steinitz, therefore it
was his principle I followed.
17 l:hh8 lDu2+ 1 8 �J:e2 l:hb8
19 dxeS dxe5 20 l:lgl l:tg8 21 'ite2
ill d 8 2 2 .d5 .e7 23 l:I.dl e6 24 �3
b5 25 e4?
Giving up the d4-square was a huge 3 1 lDc4
mistake of course. Somehow I have gained a small edge.
25 ... lDe6 26 <;PbI lDd4 27 .e3 l:th8 3 l ...�d8 32 l:lecl .!:trs 33 n �e7
28 .d2 l:tb2 29 �n b4 30 'We3 'Wf6 34 l:la3 :laa8 35 ':b3
3 1 l:td3 g4 32 bg4 %hrz 0-1 It is my turn to use the rook the way
White resigned in this lost position. that Timman did.

232 233
Jose Raul Capablanca the 3"<1

35 ... 'lIh,a4 36 lhb7 it'c6 37 .:tb3 f5 cranes. Their shapes were somewbat
38 lLld2 .:t n 39 c4 a4 40 l1b 5 ? ! similar and I mixed them up. I was so
[40 l:ta3] 40 ...�a5 4 1 lLln happy that I could copy Capablanca's
Creeze technique. He is DOt solely
responsible for my loss here but shares
E manuel Lasker the 2nd
the blame with the heavy metal
designer. Maybe chess events should be
separated as in tennis indoor and The second world champion beat Lasker had to win the last game to save

outdoor - so this game would not count Wilhelm Steinitz l O-5 with 4 draws in the match. In the same year he beat

against my indoor record. Philadelphia 1 894. It was 2-2 with two Janowski again. This event was even

47 'iW0? draws after the sixth game, then Lasker more convincing as he dropped only 3

I was so stunned tbat J made a losing raced away with five consecutive wins. draws out of 1 I games. In the final of

move, but Timman stood better Two years later Lasker started with four the 1 9 1 4 St Petersburg tournament

4 l . . .JLb4 anyway. consecutive wins. In the first eleven he scored 7 out of 8 and won the

Timman's bishop is very much better 47 ... lLlIh5 48 'ilh h 5 _f2 49 lLle2 games the ageing Steinitz made only tournament ahead of both Capablanca

than Winter's as it traps the b5 rook. 'iW0+ 50 'ilho and Alekhine.

42 lLlCg3 fxg4 43 fxg4 l1ars
Black takes over the C-file.
44 l1n 'iWe8 45 .:tIn '�lhn 46 g5?
46 ...lLl r4
This came as a huge shock. I thought
this piece was a bishop and DOW
suddenly it moves like a knight! The
piece on g6 has not moved for so long,
and in my mind it remained like a
slumbering bishop on g6. How could
this happen? This game was an outdoor
exhibition in which pieces and pawns
were large steel containers moved b y
234
50 . ..1110
That's it.
51 cot>g2 l1Id3 52 lLlg3 cot>g7 53 l:tb6
JL e l 54 lLln cot> n 5 5 lLlh2 .:td2+
5 6 cot>hl l1e2 57 lLlg4 l::t x e4 58 lLlc6 11e2
59 lLlIh 7 0-1
Alekhine praised Capablanca's talent
so highly after the Cuban died and
Krarnn i k said Leko was a tougher
opponent in the final than me. I think
his true thoughts lie in the fact that he
never gave me a chance of a rematch.
four draws. Then Steinitz won two
games in a row. In the last four games
Emanuel scored three more wins,
winning the match 1 0-2 with 5 draws.
Lasker held the title for the longest
period - 27 years in all. However he
was the champion who played the least.
After the second Steinitz match
Lasker played very little. He frrstly
defended his title in 1 907, demolishing
Marshall 1 1 th-3th, winning 8 games
and drawing 7 with no losses. One year
later he beat the ageing Tarrasch
1 0 th-5 th , He won 8 games, lost 3 and
drew 5 .
In the famous St. Petersburg
tournament Lasker and Rubinstein both
scored 1 4 th out of 1 8 games, although
Rubinstein beat him in their individual
encounter, Rubinstein also showed his
class in other tournaments. Sadly a
match between the two never took
place. In the same year he destroyed
Janowski 8-2, winning 7 games and
losing one with two draws.
In 1 9 1 0 Lasker again defended his
title with a 5-5 score against Schlechter.
During World War I Lasker lost his
wealth, so consequently he had to put
his title at stake i n 1 92 1 . It was here
that he lost to Capablanca in Cuba,
However he still scored some fine
tournament results, including a victory
at New York 1 924 ahead of Capablanca
and Alekhine, In 1 93 5 he took third
place in an extremely strong event in
Moscow - at the age of 67.
The chess he played is quite different
from the style of the late twentieth
century. So his effect on me is less than
say Smyslov's. Nevertheless, he still
p layed games that influenced me.
He won many games with the
Alekhine defence pawn structure
b4-c5 -d4 against Black's b7-d5-e6, but
those we have discussed in the Smyslov
chapter.
In the following examples we see
how Lasker gained space on the
kings ide with g4 and then backed up
his attack with the aid of his knights.

235
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd
I found Lasker's pawn and knight s etup rather attractive so I gave it a try.
KLaske.. - W.Steioitz
E.Laske.. - W.Steinitz
Hastings 1 895
I e4 eS 2 llJo llJe6 3 �bS a 6
4 �a4 d6 5 0-0 llJge7 6 e3 �d7 7 d4
lOg6
Though this setup is a bit passive it i s
steady and was still being played more
than a century later. Timman won
crucial game with it against Motylcv a t
the European Team Championship in
2005 where Holland went on to win the
event!
8 ne1 �e7 9 lObd2 0-0 10 llJn 'ife8
11 �c2 >t>h8 12 lOg3
White is a slightly bettcr.
12...�g4 13 dS llJb8 14 h3 �e8
IS lOfS �d8 16 g4 llJe7 17 lOg3
See diagram abo ve.
Whitc's g4-pawn providcs a DIce
space advantage on the kings ide and
the white kn i gh ts provide
support.
17 ... llJg8
G.Kasparov - R.Hiiboe..
a 35 l:[e2 llJ xe2+ 36 �Ie2 'Wd7 37 lXdl
Masters still play moves likc this in
the King's Indian. I also played lO gS a
few times in a King's Indian position
(this game is similar). I won with this
move against Korchnoi in B arcelona
1 989, and Khalifrnan and Gelfand were
my victims in the Paris Immopar rapid
in 1 99 1 . The position seems to be like a
Fischer Random chess position. Only
three of the eight B lack pieces are on
their starting squares of a conventional
chcss game.
1 8 'it'g2 llJd7 19 �e3 llJb6?
Players no longer develop thcir
proper queen's knight in this way.
20 b 3 �d7 2 1 c4 llJe8 22 'ifd2 llJce7
23 eS!
236
A classical manoeuvre. White cracks
Black from both sides of the board.
a very effective method when it
comes to exploiting a space advantage.
23 ... g6 24 'We3 fS
A desperate attempt to get some play.
Waiting passively was also hopeless.
25 lOxeS!
This takes Black apart; the rest is not
very interesting.
2S ...dxeS 26 'Wxe5+ llJf6 27 �d4
fIg4 28 hxg4 �xg4 29 'Wg5 'Wd7
30 �xf6+ <;Pg8 3 1 �dl �h3+ 32 <;PgI
lOxd5 33 �xd8 lOf4 34 �f6 'Wd2
'Wf7 3 8 �c4 �e6 3 9 e5 �xc4 40 lLlfS
1-0
G.Kasparov - R.Hiiboer
Game 4, Cologne TV blitz 1 992
1 e4 e5 2 �e4 lOc6 3 d3 �cS 4 lOo
d6 5 c3 lOf6 6 �b3 0-0 7 b3 �e6
8 lObd2 a6 9 'We2 �a7 10 g4
I intentionally postponed castling.
10 ...lLld7 11 �c2 d5 12 lLln f6
13 lOg3
See diagram on page 23 6.
Hiibner's position is stronger on the
queenside than Steinitz's, but I was still
237
Emanuel Lasker the 2M
confident because of the plus I had on
the kings ide.
13 ... d4 14 llJf5 lLlc5 IS l:[gl 11f7
16 cxd4 �xf5 17 gxf5 lOxd4 18 tLlxd4
'Wxd4 19 <;t>n <;Ph8 20 nbl
20 ...lXd7
I was already gaining the impression
that my kings ide play was possibly no
stronger than Hubner's initiative on the
other side of the board.
21 l1g3 as 22 �e3 'Wd6 23 ndl lOa6
24 �b3 �d4 25 l1 g4 llJc5 26 �c4 'WfS
27 nh4
Putting the rook on the edge doesn't
achieve enough to gain an advantage.
27 ...'We8 28 'Wg4 �xe3 29 fIe] h6
30 'it>e2 c6 3 1 a 3 b 5 32 �a2 a4 33 .l:l.g1
llJb3
At the end o f his plan Hubner nicely
cuts off the dangerous bishop.
34 �xb3 axb3 35 .l:l.cl l:[ad8 36 l:[c3
'ii' g 8 3 7 'ii' g 6 l1 d6 3 8 llg4 nSd7
3 9 l:[ gl 'WdS 40 l:[xb3
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2""

40 ... cS! s o nice I really want to share them.

This was a blitz game, so I had little Maybe I was enjoying calculating In the first two examples the second world champion allowed his opponents
time to think. Nevertheless I did them. 49 J:lf7 J:lxe3 + ! (49 . . . 1i'g8 to have a strong rook on the seventh and yet he still won. Recalling his games
remember that Lasker managed to 50 :!.ec7 .l:[bb3) 50 c;t>f2 (50 c;t>xe3? I also allowed this - but regrettably with a different result.
attack Steinitz's king. For a while I was It'a3+ 51 ¢>d2 'VIVb2 + and B l ack
hoping to do the same, but from now on delivers a checkmate in 8 moves . ) Heydebreck - E.Lasker D.JaDowski - E.Lasker
I had to divide my attention between 5 0 . . . J:lb2+ 5 1 c;t> fl .1:0+ 5 2 c;t>g l .l:g3+
attacking and taking care of my own 53 1i'xg3 'ifixf7 5 4 .l:c8+ c;t;h7 and it
king.
looks like Black is winning.
41 .r:txbS .I:hd3 42 c;t>o
After 4 2 .I:txc5 .r:txe3+? there is no
perpetual, but 42 .. .l:l:d2 transposes back
to the game.
42...J:ld2 43 J:lxcs J:lxb2 44 J:lgc l
J:lb8 45 a4
Bringing back the queen with
45 'iit' g 2 was not e ffective. After
45 . . J:ld2 46 J:lc8 J:lxc8 4 7 llxc8 'VIVxc8
.

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov V.Topalov - G.Kasparov

48 'VIVxd2 'VIVa6 4 9 'VIVc l 1i'a4 the queen is
tied to the defence of the pawn and the
idea of a perpetual. White probably 55 .l:c7 ! ! .l:b 1 + 56 c;t>h2 fi'a2+
can't make any progress. 57 .g2 'iWxg2+ (57 ... .l:b2? 5 8 .r:txg7 + I )
4S . . 'iit' f8 46 as J:la7 47 36 llba8 !
.
5 8 ¢>xg2 .l:b4 B l a c k c a n press o n , but
Hiibner's feel for chess doesn't let probably White holds.
him down. H e patiently takes back the
pawn, or should I say tries to take back
- as you will see. Recapturing at once
with 4 7 ... J:lxa6? was clearly a worse
option. 4 8 J:lc7? ! (White is a pawn u p
with some winning chances after
48 J:lxe5 ! )

Heydebreck - E.Lasker l .1:d 7

Berlin 1 889 This time t h e rook on the seventh i s
n o t particularly dangerous. However i t
48 J:lc6 0-1
looks n o fun for Black either.
In playing my move I overstepped
See diagram aboye.
the time limit! The position is equal as
l....l:b l !
Black could take the a6-pawn.
What a nice riposte!
2 .1:ddl
Luckily this Lasker-affected game
Losing without much resistance. Blit
was only blitz, so it was not important.
taking the queen with 2 J:lxb7 leads to a
48 . . . .l:a3 ! ! It is rather strange to However the next one hit me at a
analyse a blitz game, but the lines are crucial moment. beautiful win.

238 239
 Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

2 . . . lLlf2+ ! ! 3 lLlxf2 l:hg l + ! 4 �xg 1 1 9 .. :iWa6 ? ! 27 .1::t x e7 34 lLle8+ 'it.>h6 35 h4 g5 1 [35. hxg4

.l::te 1 mate. Staying closer t o the centre with 36 fB='ii+ .l::t x fB 37 �d2+ <;P h S
Janowski plays in optimistic fashion.
2 ....l::t x dl 3 llxdl lLlxc3 0-1 1 9 . . . 'ifc6 seems better. Then 20 lLlxe7 After 27 ""f2 the position is unclear. 3 8 .l::t h 7 mate] 36 hxg5+ 'iti>xgS 37 .l::t e 5+

White resigned. �xe7 2 1 'Wh6 � e6 22 f5 gxf5 23 'ife3 27 ...ltJf3+ 28 'iix f3! <;Ph4 38 b3 'iix a2 3 9 � e l + <;Ph)

White sacrifices his queen based o n [)9 . . 5.Pxg4 40 lLlf6+] 40 .l::te 3+ o;i.>xg4
.l::t a 6! and B lack keeps his position
the strength of a rook on the seventh. 4 1 lLlf6+ o;i.>f5 42 lLlxd5 and at the end
together.
28 �xf3 of this long tactical line the position
D.Janowski - E.Lasker 20 'ifh6 �e6 2 1 lLlxf6+? ! ..•

remains very complicated.) 30 IIf7+

Cambridge Springs 1 904 Capturing a pawn but allowing
�g8 3 1 .l::t e e7 �d5 32 .ll g7+ �f8
B lack back into the game. Better
I e4 eS 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 lLlc3 lLlf6 was 21 lO x e 7 ! � xe7 22 d5 � fB
4 �bS �cS 5 lLlxeS lLlxeS 6 d4 �d6 23 'Wh4 � xc5+ 24 1;h I and Black is in
7 f4 lLlg6 8 eS c6 9 �c4 �c7 10 exf6 trouble .
•xf6 11 0-0 dS 2 1 . . . 'it'f7 22 ltJe4 ltJfS 23 'ifb3 �e7
24 �c3

29 llf7+?
33 b3 ! White has compensation for
Janowski probably misses Lasker's
the queen and the game should
32nd move. Bringing his other rook
probably end in a draw. I t looks like
across with 29 .l::t a e l ! leads to some
Black can't do anything useful in the
fascinating tactics. 29 ... 'iic 6 (29 ... .i.d5
ensuing ending. (33 f5 'iia4 1 ! wins.
30 fS hS ! [30 . . . gS? 3 1 f6 'Wc6 32 f7 �x f7
33 .l::t g f7+ 34 .l::t x f7+ 't>g8
12 �xdS 'iia4 32 . . . ""g7 33 .l::t l e6 ! ! .i.xe6 3 5 .l::t g 7+ 'iti>xg7 36 d5+ 'iti>g8 37 dxc6
An interesting piece sacrifice. 24 ..• �dS 34 dS+ <;PfB 3 S .l::t x e6 wins - 3 3 .l::tc 7 bxc6 and Black should be a bit better.)
12 cxdS 13 lLlxdS 'ifd6 14 'ife2+
•.. After 24 . . . ltJ xd4 25 'iWh6 lhd8 'iti>g7 34 fB='ii+ r;t>x.f8 35 .l::t fl + <l;>g8 3 3 . . . h5 (33 ... a4 34 .ll gf7+ �xf7
lLle7 15 llet �d8 16 c4 f6 26 .l::t a dl ltJe2+ 2 7 'it>h l ltJxc3 2 8 llxd8 36 ltJ f5 White wins.] 3 1 f6 [3 1 fxg6? 35 ltxf7+ <t>g8 36 .l::t g7 + �xg7 3 7 d5+
Black wants to play 1 7 . . . 1; f7. .l::tx d8 the position is equal. .l::th6 32 .l::t 7 e5 .l::t xg6J 3 l . . .'iic 6 3 2 f7 'iti>g8 38 dxc6 bxc6 39 b4 White is no

17 �d2 as 1 8 'ifhS+ g6 19 cS 25 g4 ltJb4 26 ltJd6+ 'it>f8 'iia4 33 .l::tc 7 r;t>g7 longer worse. ) 34 f5 gxf5 (34 . . . hxg4

24 1
240
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd
35 f6 J:l. h3 36 11en+ Sl.xn 37 11 xn+
Wg8 38 J:l.g7+ 'it.;>f8 is equal, but not
38 . . . W h8?? 39 l1:J n and checkmate)
35 11c7 fxg4 3 6 11xc6 bxc6 37 11b7 and
the position is still unclear.
29 ... Wg8 30 dS Sl.xdS 3 1 l:lg7+ �f8
32 11el
32 . . :wWc6 !
The only move to win. It stops
33 J:l.c7
33 b4 J:l.d8 34 �d4 J:l.xd6 3 5 cxd6
SLh l 0-1
G.Kasparov - A.Karpov
Game 1 8, World Championship
LondonlLeningrad 1 986
1 d4 l1:Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 l1:Jf3 b6 4 l1:Jc3
�b4 5 �gS �b7 6 e3 h6 7 SLh4
Lasker's spirit was alive in this game.
One game earlier I had a 4- I lead
against Karpov and wanted to finish
him off once and for all. So even
though he had won the previous game,
I still wanted to clinch the match
with a decisive result. What does this
have to do with Lasker? Well, he was
the champion who won the most
one-sided world title matches, doing
comprehensive demolition jobs on both
Janowski and Marshall.
7 ...SLxc3+ 8 bxc3 d6 9 l1:Jd2 g5
242
10 SLg3 We7 11 34 as 12 b4 llg8
13 hxgS hxgS 14 'ilfb3 l1:Ja6
15 11b l !
I made sure Karpov would not castle
long.
15 ... W f8
He got the message.
16 It'dl SLc6 17 11h2 ! Wg7 18 c5
buS 19 �bS l1:Jb8 20 dxcS d5 2 1 SLe5
c;t>f8 22 llh6 l1:Je8 23 'ilt'h5 f6 24 11h7
l1:Jg7 25 'WIff3 wn 26 'WIfhS+ W f8
27 'Cif3
With the help of imaginative play I
have forced him to defend doggedly.
My problem was that it took too long to
calculate and I was already short of
time.
27 . . c;t>n 2 8 llh6 l1:Je8 29 e4 g4
. when his opponent has passed pawns.
30 'WIff4 �xb5 31 l:lxb5 l1:Jd7 3 2 �xc7
l1:Jxc5 33 'iWe3 l1:Jxe4 34 l1:Jxe4 dxe4
35 �xa5 f5 36 SLb4 'i!fd7
37 'ilt'd4
Karpov has done well to stay in the
game, but I still had the preferable
position.
37 .. .l:la7 38 l:lh7+
38 � c5 was strong.
38 ...l1:Jg7 39 as?
Better was 3 9 � c5 !
39 .. .'ltg6?
After 39 . . . 'iIt'xb5 ! 40 'ilt'xa7+ � g6
4 I J:l.h4 J:l. d8 42 'ilt'e3 l1:Jh5 White is in
trouble.
40 'ilt'xd7 J:l.xd7 4 1 J:l.h4
This was my sealed move.
4 1...11gd8!
Karpov goes after my king.
42 c4 J:l.dI+ 43 'it>e2 l:lcl ! ?
Karpov controls himself s o well
Perhaps he would play this move
anyway but the must-win situation
helps to prompt a move like this. After
243
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd
43 . . . l:la l 44 � c3! ll e I 45 �e5 .I:1 c2+
46 'it>e l J:l. xc4 (46 . . .l:l dd2 47 J:l.h6+! !
'i&.> g5 48 .I:1h 7 .I:1 e2+ 49 'it> d I l1:J e8
50 J:l.b8 Black has no more than a
perpetual.) 47 .I:1b6 e3 48 fxe3 J:l.e4
49 lld6 (49 SL xg7? l he3+ 50 � f2
l:l dd3 ! ! wins.) 49 . . . J:l.xe3+ 50 'it> d2
J:l.xe5 5 I .I:1xd8 .I:1xa5 White holds as I
gave in my book of the match.
44 a6 ?
After 44 � c5 l1:J h5 45 g3 J:l.xc4
46 � e3 n a4 47 11b6 White is okay.
44 ....l:tcZ+!
Karpov gets his rook to the second
rank but I was not worried as Lasker
coped with it even when his opponent's
minor pieces were backing it up. If
44 ... 11 a l 45 � d2 J:l.a2 46 J:l.h6+ 'it'f7
47 'it> e3 ! I (White 's king creates
sufficient counterplay. After 47 11b7+
'it> g8 48 11 g6 .l:taxd2+ 49 �e3 11 2d7
50 c5 the subtle intermediate move
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

50 . . . 'it>h7 ! ! wins. [On the other hand However, as played, he is really hurting 5B...e3 Taking the b2-pawn was more
50 . . . e5 is met by 5 1 1:d6.] 5 1 1:f6 g3 the king. I had to resign as the rooks and the consistent.
52 fxg3 l:I.d3+ 5 3 �f4 e5+ 54 �xe5 54 l1h3 f4 55 l1b4 Wr5 56 l1b5+ e5 knight deliver a checkmate. 1 6 �xd6 lOxg4
1:e8+ 55 'itf4 e3 56 1:fD 1:e4+ 57 'it>g5 57 11a5 11 d l 59 l1n lOh5 60 aB=. lOg3+ After 16 . . . lOd4 1 7 e5 ' ? .xb2 1 8 exf6
1:g4+ 58 Wf6 1:g6+ B lack wins . ) Makarychev says this squanders the 61 l1xg3 11f2+ 62 'it>gI 1be1 mate .xa 1 + 1 9 'it>f2 .xc3 20 .xc3 l1xc3
4 7 . . . 1:axd2 (47 . . .e 5 4 8 l:td5) 48 1:b7+ win. I was right - it makes Black find 2 1 fxg7 l1g8 22 ttJe4 Speelman's line is
Wg8 (48 . . . 112d7 49 c5) 49 �f4 l:I.2d7 more good moves. V.Top alov - G.Kasparov winning for White.
(49 . . . 1:xf2+ 50 �g5 ! ) 50 c5 e5+ 58 a7? Moscow Olympiad 1 994 17 �xg4 .xb 2 ?
(50 . . .1: f7 5 1 c6) 5 1 'Wt>xe5 g 3 52 fx g 3 e3 I went down without putting up a I f 1 7 . . . �xg4 ! 1 8 ttJa4 'ilf b 5 1 9 hxg4
53 l:I.xd7 l:txd7 54 l:th 1 and White fight. Pushing 58 c7 would have given 1 e4 c5 2 lOn d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lOxd4 .xa4 20 'tWd5 .a5+ 2 1 c3 White has a
holds. me some practical chances, but in lOf6 5 lOe3 a6 6 �e3 e6 7 g4 b6 small edge.
45 'itel l:ta2 46 l:I.b6 1:dJ! 47 c5 reality it was losing as well. After In those days the Perenyi variation
After 47 �c5 g3 ! (47 . . . f4 48 1:b l ) 5 8 . . . e3 had not yet been exhaustively analysed.
48 fxg3 .lhg3 49 l1d6 l1gxg2 50 a7 e 3 B f4 lOc6
5 1 l1 h I lOh5 52 l1d8 lOf4 5 3 a8=..w In Wijk aan Zee 1 999 I played 8 . . . e5
l:I.xa8 54 lha8 l:tc2+ ! 55 'itd l l:td2+ like this game . Timman forced a
56 '>tc l lOd3+ 57 �b l lOxc5 Black perpetual after 9 lOf5 h5 1 0 gxh5 exf4
wins. II �xf4 lOxh5 1 2 lOxd6+ �xd6
47 ...l:I. a l + "8 �e2 l1a2+ 49 'ite1 gJ 13 �xd6 'ilfh4+ 1 4 'it>d2 'ili'g5+ 1 5 'it>e l
49 . . . Wg5 ! was even stronger. 'ilfh4+ 1 6 'it>d2 Ih- Ih. I did not dare to
50 fIg3 l:tIg3 51 'Wt>n play on as I knew Steinitz liked to walk
into the centre with his king. But we 18 e5 ! ?
have one more chapter to deal with This temporary rook sacrifice allows
that. White to maintain the initiative.
5 9 11h2 ! ! l:tcc l ! is the simplest move. 9 �e2 e5 1 0 lOf5 g6 1 1 lOg3 exf4 However 1 8 ttJge2 ! was even better,
(If 5 9 . . .llxb2 60 c8=.+ lOe6 6 1 'ikc3 12 �xf4 �e6 13 l1n l1eB 14 bJ perhaps just winning for White after
11f2+ ! [if 6 L.lOd4? 62 'ikc8+ 'it>e4 1 8 . . . 'tWxa l + 1 9 'it>f2 �2 20 l:tb l .
63 'ifb7+ White has a perpetual check 1 8 ttJxc5 1 9 l:t b l 'ilVxcJ
...

at his disposaL] 62 'it>g I lOd4 63 �c8+ 86nsch's move I 9 . . . lOc4 , underlines

Lasker's play in the previous examples
�e4 64 'itb7+ [64 l:txe5+ 'it>xe5 ]
- and Alekhine's play in relation to
64 . . . Wd3 65 l:ta3+ ..t>e2 and Black
5 1 ...!!.gxg2 batteries. 20 llxb2 lOxd2 2 1 ..Itxe6 fxe6
wins.) 60 l1e2 lOe6 61 a7 lOxc7 wins.
22 1hb7 �xc3
At this stage I was not certain
whether I should have all owed both
rooks to go to the second rank.
However, I was still relaxed. Lasker did
not mind things like this either. 14 ... • b6
52 �el Since Fischer's time we Najdorf
As a junior Karpov liked to double believers p lay this kind of move.
on the seventh. B6nsch suggested 14 ... d5 as a standard
52 ... l1gc2 53 c6 l1 a l kind of response.
H e gives u p the idea of doubling. 15 'ili'd2 �g7

244 245
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

23 1::.ff7 (The doubled rooks on the

seventh can force no more than a
Kramnik did not play the Russian Now here are positions I had
draw). 23 . . . ltJe4+ 24 '1t>d l ltJxd6
defence (known in the West as the against Kramnik in my ill-fated
25 l:tbe7+ and the game ends in a
Petroff) in honour of his homeland. World Championship match in
perpetual.
He kept playing the Berlin defence London 2000.
20 'it'xc3 1::.x c3 21 �xe6 fxe6
(or walI). Lasker could not have
After 2 J . . .1::.xg3 22 l:txb7 (22 ii.xf7+
anticipated the existence of the G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik
Wd7 ! ) 22 . . . fxe6 B l ack is living
Berlin wall. More importantly he
dangerously, but I see no win for
did well against the Berlin defence
White.
and exceptionalIy welI against the
26 ltJd4!
exchange Ruy Lopez where Black
Moving the rook away from the
has a rather similar pawn structure a
f-file with 26 l::. fe7+! was more precise.
half a pawn down. Here is the
Then 26. ..'iPd8 27 ltJd4 �g3+ 28 'it.>e2
position from which Lasker went on
and Black can ' t even sacrifice the
to win.
piece.
2 6...lle3+
I f 26 . . . �g3+ 27 We2! l::.h2+ 28 'iPfJ E.Lasker - HerzILewittIKeidanski G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik
l:tf2+ (28 . . .�h4 29 l::. fc7 ltJd2+ 30 'it.>f4
ii.d8 3 1 l::.b 8 wins.) 29 'if.Jxg3 l::.x f7
22 1::. x b7
30 l::. b 8+ 'iPd7 3 I l::.x h8 and Black has
From what I had learned from Lasker
I was confident that there is no point only two pawns for the piece.

panicking just because one rook 27 wn lle4 28 l::. fe7+

reaches the seventh rank. Checkmate comes very soon.
22 ... ltJc4 28 ... 'iPd8 29 4Jc6+ 1-0
If 22 . . . ltJd7 ! ? 23 l:ta7 ii.f6.
23 �b4 1::. e3+ The last motif is not really a motif at
A fter 23 .. Jbg3 24 1::. x g7 a5 all, more a variation. Maybe it is best to
(24 . . . ltJe3 2 5 l:te7+ (25 1::. ff7 ? ltJf5) call it a defence. So far I have not paid
25 . . . '1t>d8 26 l:tff7 wins.) 25 �c5 1::.g 5 attention to where the champions were E.Lasker - HerzILewittIKeidanski 8 .xd8+ <l;>xd8 9 l: d 1 + <l;>e8
Black still resists. born. In this case strangely enough it Consultation game, Berlin 1 896 10 ltJc3 h6 11 h3
24 ltJe2 ii.e5 25 lHf7 adds to the interest. I was born in Baku,
no other champion was born there. The
See diagram on page 239. 1 e4 e5 2 ltJn ltJc 6 3 ii. b5 ltJf6 4 0-0
closest was Petrosian who was born in
ttJxe4 5 d4 ltJd6 6 .ltxc6 dxc6 7 dxe5
25 ...l:txh3? nearby Tbilisi. Emanuel Lasker was
ttJ f5
I became too casual because of the born a long way from Baku in
The first game with this position in
Lasker examples. A fter 25 . . . �d6 B erlinchen, which of course sounds so
White can keep up the pressure with the database is from Leipzig 1 879. Bier
similar to the German capital . My last
26 ii.c5 ! ! Then 26 . . . 1::.e4 (26 ... �xc 5 ? world title match took place in London, was White against Flechsig. But the
27 1::. fc7) 27 1::.g 7 ii. e 5 2 8 lhg6 �d8 yet thinking of the German capital second game was indeed played in
29 1::. a7 and White has an edge. generates rather painful memories. Berlin in 1 8 80.

246 247
 1 1 ...�e7 14 ... 11gS I s 11d2 .i.cs 1 6 11adl 11xd2 Emanuel Lasker the 2 nd
The next time this position occurred 1 7 1Oxd2
was in 1 990 in the game Yudasin­ He prepares to advance his pawns. an advantage. This forces exchanges, 8 'ilt'xd8+ c;t>xd8 9 lOe3 ii.d7 1 0 b3
Rogers. Manila 1 990. 1 7 ... gS 18 g4 1Og7 which allow an invasion. h6 11 ii.b2 'it'c8 12 h3 b 6
12 lOe2 Black's knight has moved five times 27 ..�:d8 28 ndS
.

Lasker plays the move which is still to get to g7 from g8. Chess i s weird White invades.
popular. sometimes, but it didn't confuse 28 ...lOe6 29 nxc8 'itt g7 30 lOdS hS
12. ..�d7 Lasker' 31 gxhS .l:.h6
Later I played a different move in this 19 lOe4 lOe6
position with B l ack and lost to Judit
Pol gar. Here are the moves. 12 ... lOh4
1 3 lOxh4 �xh4 1 4 �e3 � f5 1 5 lOd4
�h7 16 g4 �e7 1 7 �g2 h5 1 8 lO f5
�f8 19 �O �g6 20 11d2 hxg4+
21 h.x.g4 11h3+ 22 'lPg2 11h 7 23 �g3 f6 1 3 nad l
24 .i.f4 .i.xf5 25 gxf5 ixe5 26 11e l .i.d6 At the same time I wanted to copy
27 �xe5 'lPd7 28 c4 c5 29 �xd6 cxd6 and improve on Lasker's play.
30 11e6 11ah8 31 11exd6+ <t.>c8 32 112d5 My finesse was to use the a I-rook on
11h3+ 33 �g2 11h2+ 34 'lPO l:t2h3+ 3 2 1Of6 ! the d-file. In exchange, I allowed
3 5 �e4 b6 36 11c6+ �b8 20 .i.cl ! Flexible thinking again. He returns to Krarnn i k's king to go to the queenside.
Showing intelligent flexibility. The This is an idea Romanishin introduced.
the queenside and wins.
bishop is no longer useful on the a l -h8 Incidental ly, the grandmaster from
3 2 . . 11hS 33 <t.>g2 c;t>h6 34 h4 .i.g7
.

diagonal. Lvov defeated me a number of times,

35 hxgS+ lOxgS 36 nxh8+ .i.xh8
20 ...11g6 although I beat him too.
37 lOe4 1 -0
B l ack plays confusing moves just 1 3 ...ti:)e7!?
like Krarnnik did later against me. This is a manoeuvre by Zoltan
Here are my first two games against
Almasi . The Hungarian grandmaster
21 �e3 eS 2 2 102g3 b6 23 lOhS lOg 7 the Berlin. In the fust game I tried to
p layed it just a few weeks before our
24 lOhr6+ �rs 2S lOh7+ 'lPg8 copy Lasker's play. It contributed a lot
match so I had no time to analyse it.
26 lOef6+ �hS to the loss of my title. I had a reputation
1 4 lOe2
for being formidable i n the opening but
37 11d7 and again I did not mind my against the Berlin the sharpness of my See diagram on page 24 7
opponent invading on the seventh. sword was lost for a good while.
All goes according to the Lasker
37 . . . 11h2 3 8 �e3 11£8 3 9 11cc7 I even
plan.
allow the second rook to join the first G.Kasparov V.Kramnik
1 4 ...lOg6
-

on the seventh. 39 . . . 11xf5 40 11b7+ 'lPc8 Game I, World Championship,

4 1 .l:.dc7+ �d8 42 11xg7 �c8 and I was London 2000
so upset I just rushed off home. 1 -0
J . Polgar-Kasparov, Moscow rapid, 1 e4 e5 2 lOo lOc6 3 .i.b5 lOf6 4 0-0
2002. lOxe4 S d4 lOd6 6 .i.xc6 dxc6 7 dxeS
13 b3 11d8 1 4 .i.b2 2 7 lOrs lOrs
With some remarkab l e j umping This line came as a surprise. I had
See diagram on page 24 7. around here and there Emanuel obtains had l i m i ted experience with it. I
switched to I e4 as a main weapon only
248 in the early 1 990s.

249
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

1 5 tOel G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik have been played when Black can lOxb3 29 l:txb7 lOc i 30 lOxc 1 l:lxc3
Lasker moved his knight to d2, so I Game 3 , World Championship, almost equalise.) 1 8 tOfS �c8 1 9 lOxh6 Ill- Ill Kasparov-Kramnik Game 9,
also paved the way for my kingside London 2000 .l:xd I 20 l:lxd 1 .l:h8 2 1 lOfS f6) 1 8 tOfS World Championship, London 2000.
pawns. l:lh7 1 9 � f6 l:lc8 20 �xg7 (20 f4 ! )
1 e4 e5 2 tOn tOc 6 3 �b5 tOf6 4 0-0 20 . . . �xg7 2 1 tOxg7+ l:lxg7 22 tOf6+ In our first Berlin after the match
15 ... h5! 1 6 tOd3 c5
lOxe4 5 d4 lOd6 6 �xe6 dxe6 7 dxeS <Ji;e7 23 lOxd7 l:ld8 24 lOeS l:lxd I Vladimir played 9 .. .'iite8, a move he did
Not 1 6 .. .'Jo>b7? 1 7 tOcS+ ! .
tOrs S 'ir'xdS+ 'Ot>xdS 9 tOe3 �d7 25 .l:xd l lOf4 (2S . . . tOd4!) 26 �h l ! l:lg5 not use against me earlier. I got very
1 7 c4
In the third Berlin game or the match 27 lOg4 l:ldS 28 l:le 1 +! �f8 29 lOxh6 close to beating him, but he escaped.
17 l:ld2 ! ? was the right way
Kramnik did not repeat his previous .l:d2 1 0 h3 i.e7 I I �g5 i.xg5 1 2 lOxg5 h6
according to Lasker.
play and devi ated here with 9 . . . h6. 1 3 lOge4 b6 1 4 l:lfd 1 lOe7 I S f4 lOg6
1 7 ... a5 IS 84
Then 10 nd l + ( 1 0 h3 was my choice in 1 6 lIf! hS 1 7 lIae I � f5 1 8 lOg3 lOe7
I wanted to keep the a-file closed.
the fourth and last Berlin of the match. 1 9 lOxfS lOxfS 20 'itt f2 lOd4 (20 .. h4
J S h4
•.•

I also employed it in our seventh and
This is confusing. Kramnik's last
final Berlin as well. 1 O . . . 'lPe8 He drew
three moves were cS, as and h4. What
with ease in the last game of the match
is he playing for?
with 1 0 . . . �d7. Still he changed for this
1 9 tOc3 �e6! 20 tOd5 'Ot>b7 2 1 tOe3
one. I show you an abbreviated version
of Dokboian's analysis. I I b3 'lPe8
1 2 �b2 l:ld8 1 3 nad l lOe7 14 l:tfe l
tOg6 1 5 tOe4 tOf4 1 6 e 6 tOxe6
2 1 l:ld I 'itte 7 22 l:ld] with a slight
advantage) 2 1 l:lc 1 lId8 22 lIfd 1 'itte7
2] lOe4 h4 24 b4 l:lhS? This is what
happened in my game against Kramnik
at Wij k aan Zee 200 I , but better would
have been 24 . . . lOfS ! 7 . Here I missed
30 l:le5 ! l:lxf2? This is a mistake, but the opportunity to gain an almost
he was already in time trouble. 3 1 .l:fS winning advantage.
'itt g 7 3 2 lOg4 l:lxg2 33 llxf4 llxc2
34 l:lf2 l:lc3 3S �g2 bS 3 6 h4 c4 37 hS
cxb3 3 8 axb3 l:lcS 3 9 h6+ <Ji;f8 40 lOf6
.l:gS+ 4 1 <Ji;h l Finally I brought down
the Berlin wall. It was a last round
game; I had to win to grab the first

2 1 ..J:th5 place from Kramnik. It eased my

By means of unorthodox play Black fe elings about the Berlin Defence.

has equalised. 1 -0 Kasparov-Kramnik, Astana 200 I )

22 �c3 1 7 lOd4?! ( 1 7 �e5 ! ! This magical I I lOe4 cS 1 2 c3 b 6 1 3 lle l �e6 1 4 g4 2S g4 ! We both overlooked this

1f 2 2 f4 tOe7. move would have given Kramnik a '.Iz-Ill Kasparov-Kramnik, Game 13, simple move. 2S . . . l:lhh8 (25 . . . hxg3+

22 ...l:leS 23 l:ld2 ..t.>cS severe headache. 1 7 . . . nc8 [ 1 7 . . . �c8 London 2000) 1 0 . . 'it>e8 II h3 as 26 lOxg3 l:lxh] 27 l:lxd4 ! ) 26 [S and

Going back with the king. 1 8 tOf6+ 'Ot>e7 19 tOh4 g6 20 tOd7 ! ] 12 � f4 �e6 1 3 g4 lOe7 14 lOd4 lOdS B lack is in big trouble.

24 f4 tOe7 1 8 lbh4! White follows u p with f4; and I S lOce2 i.c5 ! ? (New) 1 6 lOxe6 fxe6 10 b3

Now he even goes back with the has a clear advantage.) 1 7. . . cS7! 17 c4 lOb6! 1 8 b3 a4 1 9 �d2 �f7 In 200 I 1 had already played 10 l:ld I

knight and he has a reasonable and safe ( 1 7 . . .i. c 8 1 8 lOf6+ gxf6 1 9 tOxe6 20 i.c3 l:lhd8 2 1 l:lxd8 l:lxd8 22 <Ji;g2 against Kramnik, but I still could not

position. Everything goes against logic. l:lxd l 20 lOg7+ ..t.>d7 2 1 nxd l + and lld3 23 l:lc 1 gS 24 .l:c2 axb3 2 S axb3 get it right. 1 0 . . . 'itt c 8 I I lOg5 �e8

25 tOrz tOes 11>_11> White is better. But 1 7 . . . l:tg8 ! should lOd7 26 l:la2 �e7 27 .l:a7 lOc5 28 f) 1 2 lOge4 b6 1 3 h] <;Pb7 14 g4 lOe7

2S 1
250
Emanuel Lasker the 2nd Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

1 5 �f4 h5 1 6 f3 c5 1 7 1t>f2 tiJc6 doesn 't mean the disappearance of 39 1%e7 47 h4?!
1 8 tiJd5 tiJd4 19 c3 tiJe6 20 �g3 �c6 Black's difficulties. According to Kramnik 39 �c3 Allowing an easy draw. Better was
2 1 1%d2 hxg4 2 2 hxg4 c4 2 3 <t>g2 1%d8 23 exf6 tiJc6 24 1%d3 1%fl! 25 1:te4 would have given an edge. 47 �h2! 1%a6! which however also
>Pc8 3 9 ... tiJd3 40 f7 tiJxfl 41 1%e8+ 'i!?d7
24 1%ad 1 �a4 25 11e I �c6 26 1%ed I draws.
42 1%xfl! 'i!?e7 43 1%c8 �xf7 44 1%xc7+
�a4 27 .l:1e l �c6 LA- LA Kasparov­ 47 ...11a6! 48 �d4 1%a4 49 ..txc3
�e6 45 �e3 tiJdl 46 �xb6 c3
Kramnik, Zurich rapid 200 1 . tiJxc3 50 lh:c3 lhh4 51 1%f3 IA-IA
10 ... h6 1 1 �b2 �c8 1 2 1%ad l b 6
13 tiJe2 ! ? Probably, of all the past world
champions, Lasker was the least
See diagram on page 247 'professional' in his approach to chess
- he had no need to be so focused -
I still trust Lasker's plan, but use an
maybe my own attitude represents the
improved version and hold back h3. In
modern approach of being highly
our last Berlin, when I finally stopped 26 f4 ? ! professional in all aspects.
the slight embarrassment caused by this More testing was 2 6 h4!
defence, I developed the knight on e4. 2 6 ... gxf4 27 1%xf4? 1%e8 28 �c3 ? !
But even in my second game with the lte2 29 1% f2 1%e4
line I followed Lasker. The initiative is gradually drifting
13 ... c5 14 c4 �c6 1 5 tiJf4 c;i;>b7 away from me.
1 6 tiJd5 tiJe7 30 1%h3 as! 3 1 1%h5 a4 32 bxa4!?
1%xc4 33 �d2 lha4 34 ltxh6 11g8?
1 6 .. Jle8 1 7 ltd3 .
B l ack is somewhat better after
1 7 1%fel 1%g8 18 tiJf4 ! g5 1 9 tiJh5
34 . . . 1%xh6! 35 �xh6 c4 36 g4 c3 .
.l:1g6
35 11h7 1%xa2 36 1%xf7 tiJe5 37 1%g7
1%fl! 38 h3 ! ?
After 3 8 h 4 comes 34 . . . tiJd3 !

20 tiJf6
The knight is jumping around just
like it did in the Lasker game.
20 ... �g7 21 1%d3 ! �xf3 ? ! 22 1%xf3
�xf6
My knight will not become a hero
l ike Lasker 's, but its disappearance
3 8 ... c4
Kramnik had little time left for the
next few moves. Best was 3S . . . tiJd3 !
39 f7 <t>d7! 40 1%gS na 1 + 4 1 �h2 tiJxf2
42 nxfl! <t>e7 and Black is safe.

252 253

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1 st
Steinitz declared himself world
champion after his 1 2 V,-7 'j, victory
over Zukertort. B efore Stei n i tz,
Morphy was the best player, but they
never met. Before Morphy, Anderssen
was the :world's best player. Steinitz
met Anderssen in a match i n 1 866 and
beat him 8-6 with no draws.
Steinitz contributed a lot to
foundation of modem chess and also
had many sacrificial games.
One might think his chess was too
distant from mine, as he was born
Here, Steinitz had a very nice
riposte when his opponent tried to
play on his first rank.
In the next two examples from
my career, my opponents played
on my back rank. I ' m sure there
must have been an answer to all
this, but I failed to find it.
G.Kaspal"ov - E.Magerl"amov
Wilhelm Steinitz the }SI
J.Lautier - G.Kasparov
Once Steinitz misled me because
I thought my opponent must have a
1 2 6 years earlier than me. In a way defence against any ploy on the
this is true, yet I was a good pupil back rank. That is why I did not IIy
who was taught to respect all world to exploit White's boxed in king
champions.
standing there all alone.
My junior trainers Oleg Privorotsky
and Alexander Shakharov also showed
me Steinitz's games and I remembered
his ideas and employed them. So let me
W.Steinitz Ph.Meitner 18 'it'g2 lOh5 19 nn lOc6
the
-
show you how his games affected me.
Vienna 1 88 2 Black's knights control White's weak
They may not bear such a strong
spots most e ffectively.
resemblance as those in the previous
1 e 4 e 5 2 f4 � e 5 3 lO fJ d 6 4 �e4 20 b3 nhfll 2 1 �e3 lIbd8 22 'ilfd2
chapters, yet Stein i tz's very strong
�g4? lOf4+ 23 'iit h l .Il f6 24 nacl lOd4
spiritual effect can still be traced back.
O f co urse my opponents never made 25 'ilfa5 'ilfh3 26 �xf4 exf4 27 nn
mistakes like this. lOxfJ
W.Steinitz - P.Meitner 5 fxe5 dxe5
28 e5
White retains the advantage.
6 �xf7+! ct>flI 7 �b3 lOe6 8 lOe3 g6
A.Karpov - G.Kasparov 28 ....Ile6 2 9 e6 lIxd3
9 d3 ct>g7 1 0 lOa4 �b4+ 11 e3 b5
12 exb4 bxa4 13 �xa4 ltJxb4 14 �b5? See diagram on p.254
14 0-0 was almost winning.
14 . . . �xfJ 1 5 gxfJ lIb8 1 6 .i.e4 Black tries to take advantage of
'iWh4+ White's unprotected rook on the back
Blac k has managed to get some rank.
compensation for the pawn. 30 e7! 'ilfe6
17 ct>n lOf6 Black seems able to hold the passed
Better was 1 7 . .'ilfh3+!
. pawn.
255
254
Wilhelm Steinitz the lSi
31 �el %hc4
32 �xe6 ! !
White still takes the queen despite h i s
visibly very weak back rank.
32 ... �c1+ 33 lIel ! !
A beautiful defensive move.
33 ... �xel 34 'ilVe5+
This leads to checkmate.
1-0
G.Kas p arov - E.Magerramov
Moscow 1 976
1 e4 e5 2 �f3 �c6 3 �b5 a6 4 �a4
�f6 5 0-0 �xe4 6 d4 b5 7 �b3 d 5
8 dxe5 � e 6 9 c 3 � e 7 1 0 � b d 2 0-0
II � c2 f5 12 �b3 'ilVd7 13 �bd4
�xd4 1 4 �xd4 c5 1 5 �xe6 ii'xe6
16 f3 �g5 1 7 �xg5
This is not the main line. Spassky
played like this against Chekhov in
USSR 1 972, and I was following that
game.
17 ... �xg5 18 f4 �d8
In the above-mentioned game Black
went back to e7.
1 9 ..t>hl �b6 20 a4 c4 2 1 nbS
256
2 1 ...a5
Magerramov sacrifices a pawn. He
was not able to hang on the pawn with
2 1 . . .axb5 because then 22 �xa8 lha8
23 �xf5 wins.
22 1i'f3 l:tac8 23 b3 l:lc5 24 bxc4
dxc4 25 l:tfd 1
I felt there was no need to waste time
defending the pawn. 25 �ab I was also
strong.
25 ... l:txb5 26 �d6 'ir'e7 27 'ir'c6
White is about to win.
27 ...l:lb2
28 �xf5?
This is a dreadful mistake. White
should just divert the queen first with
28 l:td7! and then would win after the
decisive 28 . . . 'ife8 29 �xf5 !
30 �xg7+.
28 ...l:txf5 29 l:te6?
29 �d7 was still good enough to stay
in the game. Then 29 . . . 'ilVfB is met by
30 'ife6+ l:tn 3 1 �b7.
Wilhelm Steinitz the jJt
29 ...'Wa3 ! ! 32 'We6+ 'it>f8 33 'Wc8+ �g7
34 exf6+ lhf6 35 'Wg4+ �h8
See diagram o n page 254 I have run out of play.
0-1
I thought I had a riposte, just like the
very first world champion. A.Karpov - G.Kasparov
30 lIdl Game 1 7, World Championship,
My plan was to play on his back rank Lyon/New York 1 990
as well by 30 �e8+. But, after 30 . . �fS
.
3 1 'Wxc4+ 'iii> h 8 1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 �c3 d5 4 exd5
�xd5 5 e4 �xc3 6 bxe3 �g7 7 � e3
Kramnik started with 7 �D in the
second game of our world title match in
London. I just gave him a pawn and
lost. Okay, he played well, but still.
7 . . . c5 8 �e3 'Wa5 9 'Wd2 �g4 10 lib I
a6 I I l:lxb7 .ltxf3 1 2 gxD �c6 1 3 .ltc4
0-0 1 4 0-0 cxd4 1 5 cxd4 �xd4 1 6 �d5
�c3 1 7 'Wc I �d4 1 8 �xd4 .ltxd4
1 9 �xe7 �a7 20 l:txa7 .ltxa7 2 1 f4 'Wd8
32 'Wa4, I missed 3 2 ... �c5 which 22 'ii'c 3 .ltb8 23 'ir'D 'Wh4 24 e5 g5
defends two pieces with one move. 25 lIel 'Wxf4 26 'ii'xf4 gxf4 27 e6 fxe6
Then 33 'Wxa3 �xa3 34 �xfS+ .ltxfS 28 �xe6 'iii> g7 29 lha6 �f5 30 �e4
35 g3 �b5. �e5 3 1 D �e7 32 a4 �a7 33 nb6 .lte5
30... �xf4 34 �b4 �d7 35 'iii> g2 l:td2+ 36 <;t>h3 h5
Black can even afford to take this 37 �b5 <;t>f6 38 a5 1h2 39 lIb6+ <;t>e7
pawn. 40 �d5 1 -0 Kramnik-Kasparov,
London 2000.
7 ... c5 8 'Wd2 0-0 9 �f3 �g4 1 0 �g5
cxd4 II exd4 �c6 1 2 h3 �d7 13 l:lbl
.!::tc 8
�xf5
3 1 1H6
Neat but ineffective.
3 1 ...gxf6!
White not only has no mating attack,
he does not even have a perpetual. 14 �f3
257
Wilhelm Steinitz the J."

3 0 .c3 .l::l. e8
Karpov did not take the pawn with Of course with such domination
1 4 lhb7? I thought Kramnik would not White must be winning.
either. But Vladimir did not investigate
31 83 �g7 32 g3 �eS 33 .c5 h5
Karpov's play. 1 4 .. .lZlxd4 1 5 �xd4
34 �c7 �al 35 �f4 .d7 36 ltc7
�xd4 1 6 'ili'xd4 .l::l. c l + ( 1 6 . . . 'i!r'a5+?
This is more or less the end.
1 7 1i'b4) 17 <oPd2
36 ... • d8 37 d6 g5 38 d7 .l::l. fB
39 �d2 �e5 40 .l::l. b 7 1-0

1 4 ...'it'e8
2S �xd2! J.Lautier - G.Kasparov 1 knew how to neutralise White's
One can easily can miss the fact that Tilburg 1 997 witty pawn sacrifice.
the bishop can take back the knight. 15 ltJxc6 bxc6 1 6 .l::l.a 4 f6 17 .l::l. fa l
2S ...ltc8 1 c4 c5 2 ltJf3 ltJf6 3 ltJc3 dS 4 cxd5 'it'f7 1 8 J:[xa7+ .l::l.x a7 1 9 ltxa7+ �e7

ltJxd5 5 e4 ltJb4 6 .i.b5+ ltJ8c6 7 d4

See diagram on page 2 5 4.
cxd4
And now Black wins the queen with
the lovely finesse 1 7 ... Ild I + I 1 8 <oPxd I 26 J:[c6!
�a4+. Oh no ! White is able to gain
14 .. .lZlstS IS �d3 �e6 1 6 0-0 �c4 domination over the c-file.
17 .l::l. fdl bS 26... �eS
Maybe this is a bit optimistic. 26 ... llxc6? 27 dxc6 'ifxc6 (27 .. .'ikc7
18 �gS! 86 19 J:[bc1 �xd3 20 lhc8 28 'it'd 7) 28 'i!r'd8+ D amn, unlike
'ili'xcS 21 'ifxd3 Steinitz I have no riposte against the
back rank mate as after 2 8 " .�f8
20 .l::l.c 7?? In-v'
29 �h6 wins.
27 �c3 �b8 With this bad mistake Lautier offered
27 ... �xc3 28 'i!r'xc3 1:hc6 29 dxc6
8 a3 a draw. I accepted. 1 thought that had I
(29 'ili'xc6 'ifa7 30 e5 'i!r'd4) 29 . . . 'iIi'c7 is
This is the start of the so-called played to exploit the back rank, the
no fun for Black at aIL
Dream Variation. This move occurred Frenchman would have a riposte just
28 'ili'd4 f6 29 �a5 �d6
first in a dream of Hungarian 1M like Steinitz. But 20 ... c 5 ! would win a
B l ack still can't take the pawn.
Navarovszky. His friend Csom played pawn as 2 1 bx:c5? nb8 wins.

it first and beat Stean with it in Las

As well as Botvinnik, Steinitz also
21 ... lleS? Palmas 1 978. However for me this
Black should defend the e7-pawn contributed to my understanding of the
game proves to be not a dream but a
with the queen from d7 or b7. concept o f attacking on the h-filf
nightmare.
22 ltd 1i'b7 23 dS ltJc4 when the opponent has play on tht
8 ... dxc3 9 Wxd8+ 'it'xd8 1 0 axb4
After 23 ... h6 24 �f4 ltJc4 25 ltJd2 g5 g-file.
26 �g3 ltJxd2 27 Ilc7 ! White is better cxb2 11 �xb2 e6 12 0-0 .i.d7 1 3 �xc6
as Mikhail Gurevich pointed out. �xc6 1 4 ltJe5 Here is the game I had in my mind:
24 ltJd2 ltJxd2
259
258
Wilhelm Steinitz the lSI Wilhelm Steinitz the 1"

Reiner - W.Steinitz 17 ng2

Game 4, match, Vienna 1 860
1 e4 e5 2 �O �c6 3 d4 exd4 4 ..tc4
�c5 5 0-0 d6 6 c3 �g4 7 'Wb3 �xO
8 �xn+ .t>(8 9 �xg8 1hg8 1 0 gxO g5
1 1 "'e6 �e5 12 .f5+ 'it>g7 1 3 "'hI
<;fo>h8 1 4 llgl g4 IS f4 lll o 16 llxg4
1 6 ... 'ii h4 ! !
What a nice way to show the
superiority of the h-file attack over that
on the g-file!
In my garnes, I did not mind taking G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik
risks and played with my king in
the centre too. You saw my 1 993
World Championship loss to Short. I
selected it for the Botvinnik chapter
where I pushed my g- and h- pawns.
But I have plenty more examples of
king play in the centre - in fact you
can see this even in the very last
regular game of my career.
1 7 ... 'ii'x h 2+! !
The sacrifice on the h-file provides a
cute mate on the g-file. Chess is
confusing isn 't it? But marvellous for G.Kas p arov - V.Kramnik V.Top alov - G.Kasparov
sure. By the way I also used the motif
of having a knight on f3 and a g-file
rook to beat Sunye in Graz 1 9 8 1 in a
sacrificial game.
18 lhh2 llgl mate
Checkmate and what a neat one!

Steinitz's openings are no longer played in high-class tournaments, though

he has left his mark on this phase of the game. Also I had a completely
d i ffe rent repertoire. Steinitz's legacy was that the king can take a walk to the
centre and several times I used this technique myself. Here are two of
Steinitz's games where his king successfully took an active role. W.Steinitz - J.Zukertort 5 'it>e2
London 1 872 This is Steinitz's variation. White has
W.Steinitz - J.Zukertort W.Steinitz - G.Neumann occupied the centre and in return for the
1 e4 e5 2 lllc3 �c6 3 f4 exf4 4 d4
loss of castling rights his king will seek
"ir'h4+
shelter behind his central pawns. Of
course if Black can demolish these
pawns, White's king will be exposed.
Between 1 900, when Chi gorin played,
and 1 963 when Averbakh employed the
opening as White there was only one
game with Steinitz's line.
5 ... d5 6 exd5 .li.g4+ 7 �f3 O� O-O
8 d.xc6 .li.c5
This is quite a wild line.

260 261
 Wilhelm Steinitz the lSi
9 cxb7+ <;Pb8 10 ltJbS ltJf6 11 <;Pd3 ! ?
See diagram o n page 260.
Steinitz continues to walk with his
king in the centre.
1 1 ...1ihS
After I I . . . � f5+ 1 2 W c3 ltJ e4+
13 <;Pb3 1i f6 Lasker lost to Shipley,
USA 1 893.
1 2 'itc3 �xd4+?
Zukertort misses his chance to play
1 2 . . . a6!
13 ltJbxd4 1icS+
14 'itb3 'ii'b 6+ IS �bS
White has enough extra materia1 to
give back some to cover his king.
IS ... �xO 1 6 'iho l:[xd4
Recovering one piece but he is still i n
arrears.
1 7 'iWc6 'iraS 1 8 c3 l:[d6 1 9 1ic4 a 6
20 �a4 ltJdS
262
21 Wa3
The king continues on his journey ..
2 1 ...gS 22 b4 "1IJb6 23 1id4
Zukertort keeps on playing despite
having to swap queens.
23 ...'iWxd4 24 cxd4 ltJb6 2S �b2
ltJc4+ 26 <;Pb3
The king has to move because of the
check but Steinitz liked to move his
king voluntarily as well.
26...ltJxb2 27 <;pxb2 l:[xd4 28 'it>c3
l:[hd8 29 l:[ad l l:[4d6 30 l:[xd6 ':xd6
31 l:[dl l:[f6 32 �c2 <;pxb7 3 3 �xh7
<;Pb6 34 h3
34 ... 0
Black can exchange some pawns but
not all of them.
35 gxO l:[xO+ 3 6 lld3 llfl 3 7 a4 a5
3 8 bxaS+ <;PxaS 3 9 l:[d5+ Wb6 40 as+
<;Pa7 41 �d3 l:[ o 42 lhgS
Wilhelm Steinitz the l Si
Just like the previous game he moves
away from the centre.
l l . d5 12 �g4+ 'it>b8 13 e5
..
White can keep the position closed.
n .. :iWg6
42 .. .lhh3
. White still has one extra pawn, and
that is enough.
43 ':fS l:[h7 44 l:[cS f5 45 lbf5 l:[e7
46 l:[gS l:[d7 47 l:[e5 l:[g7 48 ':e8 t!.gl
14 'it>f2
49 .i.e4 l:[cl + SO 'it>b4 cS+ 5 1 'it>b5
Returning the king to the centre.
1-0
14 ... hS 1 5 �h3 f6 1 6 exf6 ..wxf6+
It is symbolic that Black resigns in
1 7 'lio 'lixO+
reply to a king move. Exchanging queens takes the
pressure off the king.
W.Steinitz - G.Neumann 18 gxO g6 19 ltJe2 ltJf5 20 �xf5
Dundee 1 867 gxf5
Black's pawns are vulnerable.
1 e4 e5 2 ltJc3 ltJc6 3 f4 exf4 4 d4 2 1 c3 �d6 22 �f4 'it>c8 23 llhgl
..wh4+ 5 'it>e2 d6 6 ltJo �g4 7 .i.xf4 'it>d7 24 l:[g7+ tOe7 2S l:[agl
�xo+ 8 'it>xo
See diagram on page 260.
8 ...ltJge7 9 �e2 0-0-0 1 0 �e3 ..wf6+
25 ...'it>e6
The king helps the pawns but B lack's
king becomes a target in the centre.
26 �xd6 t!.xd6 27 ltJf4+ �f6
1 1 �g3 28 ltJd3 llb6 29 b3 l:[h6
263
Wilhelm Stein it;; the Is/ Wilhelm Steinitz the I"

9 ... a6 10 e4 cS 11 dS c4 12 �c2 ,*,c7 too exposed. However an alternative is

1 3 ltJd4 lDcs 14 b4 cxb3 15 axb3 b4 21 h3 "e5 22 f4 "f6 23 �b2 with a
16 ltJa4 ltJcxe4 17 �xe4 ltJxe4 1 8 dxc6 complicated middlegame.
2 1 . 0-0
••

Nor can the black king take an early

stroll: after 2 1 . . .4Jc5? 22 J:te 1+ �f7
23 4Jf5 ! "xf5 24 "xd6 White wins.
But after 2 1 . . .4Jxg3 ! 22 hxg3
(22 "e l + 4Je4 23 J:ta2 0-0) 22 . . . 0-0
23 J:ta2! (23 �g2? .g4) 2 3 . . .�xg3
30 ltJeS 27 <;Pe3 "xa2 28 'it>xe4 and White is
24 :g2 �e5 25 4Jc5 l:tad8 26 �e3
White trap s the rook in a remarkable winning as Black can do harm to the
�c 8 ! Black is slightly better according
way. king in the centre.
30 ... J:tbS 3 1 a4 J:taS 32 b4 J:ta6 to Kramnik.
1 8...�d6 23 4Jf3?!
33 ltJd 7+ �e6 34 ltJcS+ 1 -0 22 fxe4 ""3!
Black's p iec e s look scary, but i f they Bringing the a I -rook into the defence
On 22 . .lhfl +? ! I would have with 23 l:ta2 was the right move.
are not able to make any tangible
.

U s ing the king in the centre was a
threats he can have problems.
te chn i q u e I employed right up to my 19 uf7+ 'it'xf7
very last game. Here is the fi rst loss Kramnik prefers to retain the right to
from the mid- 1 990s. castle. There is nothing wrong with
1 9 . . . 'it>xf7 initi ati ng a march to the
G . K asparo\' - V.Kramnik centre and meet in g 20 'iWh5+ with
Dos Hennanas 1 996 20 . . . g 6.
20 f3
1 d4 dS 2 c4 c6 3 ltJc3 0jfJ 4 ltJf3 e6 This is one of my specia l iti es , I like
5 e3 ltJbd7 6 �d3 dxc4 7 �xc4 bS to block th e b 7-bish o p . I n my career I
8 �d3 �b7 beat Karpov five times in the main Ruy
Lopez and in e ach of those games I
block e d his b7-b is h op . I did it by
playing d5 or D. Perhaps my win in the
second game of our 1 990 world title
match in New York, where my f2-0
w a s a theoretical novelty, virtually
refuted Karpov's opening. B u t I
also scored nice victories against
the Hedgehog where I reinforced e4
against a b 7 b i s hop.
-
20 ...'*'bS 21 g3
9 0-0 The immediate king exc urSIOn
Unlike Steinitz, I castled here but as resulting from 2 1 fxe4 would b e fatal.
you will see I d i d not mind returning to 2 l . . .'*'xh2+ 22 �f2 0-0+ 23 ltJo �g3+
the centre. 24 �e3 'it'xg 2 wins as White's king is
undertaken a glorious king-march in
the centre. Had Steinitz seen it he
would have loved it.
(Recapturing with the king simply
loses) 23 . . . �xg3 24 hxg3
25 l:ta2 ! The most precise way of
preparing the king march. (25 "e2 ! ?
'ifh l + 2 6 <ii> f2 ""2+
27 �f4]
27 �e I ! [27 <;Pe3 "xg3+ 28 <;Pd2
"g5+ 29 "e3 "g2+ 30 We2 'iVg5+
with a perpetual is given by
27 .....g l + 2 8 "fl "xd4 29 "e4+ and
Black has problems in the ending.)
2 5 ... 'ifh 1 + 26 'it>f2 'iWh2+
23 . . .�xe4 (23...�xg3? 24 ltJf5 ! lhf5
25 l:txf5 �xe4 26 J:tg5 wins.) 24 ne l
23 "xfl �b7 (24 ... nae8 25 :e3 ! �b7 26 J:txe8
J:txe8 27 "f1 (27 ne2 .!:tfB 28 lZle6
�xe4 �xg3 29 ltJxfB �xh2+ 30 J:txh2 "g3+
3 1 'it>f1 "xh2 32 "g4 'ifh l + White's
king is too exposed, and B lack holds.)
[26 . . . l:tf8+? 27 .....g4 (27 ... 'ifh5 2 8 ltJf5 !) 28 lZlf5 !
"e4 2 9 "c4+ and Black i s active but
has only one pawn for the piece.)
25 "d3 (25 lZle6 �xg3 26 J:te3 l:t0 ! )
25 . . . J:tae8 26 l::t x e8 J:txe8
Kramnik]
... and though Black has only a pawn
for the piece his bishops provide him
with sufficient compensation.

264 265
Wilhelm Steinitz the J" Wilhelm Steinitz the lSI

23 .....Iihg3 24 lUc5? 25 ... ':xfl + 26 'ii'x o 'ii'x O + 27 ..ti>xo 30...':xe4+ 31 'it>d2 13 .. Jifd5
After 24 .e2! l:b:f3 25 l:hO �x.h2+ ':c8 28 �e3 �f4. If 3 1 �e3 .g2+ 32 :tf2 'ii'x f2 mate. I had already decided not to castle.
26 �f2 (26 �h l �xe4 ! ) 26 . . . 'iWh4+ 25 ... 'ii' x b2+ 26 �fl 31.. . •g2+ 32 <li>c1 .xa2 33 :txg3 14 ':dl 'it'h5 15 h3
(26 . . . �g3+ 27 l:hg3 l::[[8 + 28 ':0 I thought Black had no more than a Here 33 ':f8+ �xf8 34 .0+ �f4+ If 1 5 e4 lUg4 16 �b5+ �f8.
'iWh4+ 29 �e3 .xe4+ perpetual . leads to a checkmate. 1 5 .. .l:ld8! 1 6 lUd4
If 1 6 e4 lUxe4.
1 6... 'iVd5
Exchanging queens was safe enough
but I wanted a sharper fight.
1 7 lU13 'it>e7

See diagram on page 2 61.

This is clearly Steinitz's influence . I

30 �d2 Aftcr the king march in the 2 6...�c6!
centre the position transposes to an Thi s came as a cold shower.
However, I still hoped that Steinitz's
equal endgame.) 27 �O �e5 Black
method would work.
has other playable moves as well
27 �g5 ! ?
(27 . . .�d6 28 �b2 �xe4 29 1!i'c4+ �h8
After 27 'lit'd3 '1i'h I + 28 ,.pe2 'lit'e I
30 �xg7+ and White can force a draw
mate; 27 ':a2 �b5+ 28 lUd3 �xd3+ 29
by 30 . . . .t>xg7 3 1 'lit'd4+ .t>g8 32 .c4+
':xdJ (29 .xdJ 'iWh 1 +) 29 . . .l:tf8+ also
.t>h8 33 'jfd4+) but White can stay in
leads to a checkmate.
the game. After 27 ... �e5 Black can
If 27 .l:!.a5 �c7 ! .
exploit the king in the centre. 28 .c4+
2 7 ... �b5+ 2 8 lUd3 ':e8!
�h8 29 'lit'f7 'iWh I + (29 . . . h6 30 'lit'xb7
Kramnik conducts the attack
':d8 3 1 �e3=) 30 �e2 .g2+
effectively.
29 ':a2
Other moves also don't offer much
resistance, e.g. 29 ':e l '1i'h I + 30 �e2
':xe4+ or 29 ':a5 �xd3+! or29 �e3
':xe4 30 ':f8+ �xf8 3 1 'ilV0+ .tI.f4 ! .
2 9...'Iit'hl+
Kramnik was already in time trouble
and misses 29 . . . �xd3+! which is a
forced checkmate. 30 ':xd3 'ii'h 1 +
3 1 �e2 .g2+ 32 �e3 ':xe4 mate.
30 �e2
3 1 ,.pc3 .g5+ 32 �f2 '1i'h4+ with a
perpetual check. See diagram on page 26J.
33 .... al+ 34 'it>c2 .c3+ 35 'iit b l
.l:!.d4 0-1
I did not want to risk eventually
being checkmated, therefore I resigned.
V.Kramnik - G.Kas parov
Zurich rapid 2001
1 d4 lUf6 2 c4 e6
After losing my title in 2000. like
Muhammad Ali I started to float like a
butterfly and broadened my opening
repertoire.
3 lUo d5 4 lUc3 dxc4
This was one of my new openings.
5 e3 a6 6 �xc4 b5 7 �d3 c5 8 a4 b4
9 lUe4 lUbd7 10 lUxf6+ lUxf6 11 0-0
�b7 12 dIC5 �Ic5 13 .e2
intentionally did not castle and now
advance with my king. I would never
have lost this game if I had played
safely.
1 8 e4
Kramnik sacrifices a pawn to get
some play.
18 ... lUxe4 19 �e3 �Ie3 20 .xe3
.c5 2 1 .el lUf6
I did not feel like playing 2 1 . . .f5,
though it was playable. Then 22 :tae l
'itb6.
22 nac 1 'Wb6 23 lUeS :td4?
One move leads to two different
tactical motifs. I became too optimistic.
I knew how many times Wilhelm won
with his march in the centre. I couldn ' t
wait to score with h i s brand of king
play.

24 ... .I:I.x13 25 ':x13 I hoped that my king would survive,

I did not want to enter a worse just like Steinitz's, especially in view of
endgame after 25 ':a2. Then comes the time trouble.

266 267
Wilhelm Steinitz the J.I Wilhelm Steinitz the JS I

24 ..l
ha6! ! ? I thought he might have missed this.
Kramnik sees a very deep 29 lOxb4
exploitation of the risky placement of White has only one pawn for the
the black king. But he misses a simple piece, yet Black is struggling.
win with 24 lOc4 ' . Then 24 .. .lhc4 29 ...�e2
(24 . . .'ifc5 25 lOe3 'ih15 26 lOf5+ wins . ) After 29 . . . �b7? 30 as ¢>e7 3 1 %l.b8
25 l::h c4 a 5 26 .e5 a n d Black has �dS 32 a6 %l.fll 33 lOxdS+ exd5
nothing for the exchange. the lovely 34 llc8 ! wins.
24 ... Jb dl S l i ghtly better was 2 9 . . . <,Pe7
2 4 ... %l.e4 would have resisted for 30 lOc6+ �f6 3 1 b4 gS 3 2 b5 �b7
34 'it'd3 lIg3 3S as %l.xO+ 36 'it'e4 I S . . JUS
much longer. 25 .d2 %l.xe5 26 �xb7 33 lOaS ! �dS 34 b6 �e7 3S b7 (3S %l.b8
1-0 ".. After 1 5 . . . 'ifb6 1 6 eS lOg6 1 7 %l.f7+
lOd5 (26 . . . %l.d8 27 "tt'x d8+ 'it'xd8 %l. f8 ) 3 5 . . . �xb7 36 lOxb7 and the
J resigned because White's two 'it'e8 Black can do a lot with his king.
2 8 llxd8 �xd8 29 llc4 b3 30 llc3 knight ending will be tough for Black.
queenside passed pawns are too strong. 16 %l.x fll 'ifxfll 17 lOxd4 exd4
%I.e I + 3 1 �h2 %l.e2 32 %l.xb3 %l.xf2 3 3 a5 Black's best was to divert the rook
18 lOe2 .-f6 19 e3
wins according to KraITUlik.) 27 �xd5 from d8 by 29 . . . �c4! 30 llc8 ' �e2
(27 �c6 %l.c8 2 8 �b5 and White is 3 1 0 �e7 (3 1 ...h5 32 �f2 �d l 33 a5) V.TopaJov - G.Kasparov
somewhat better.) 27 . . . 11xdS 2 8 .f4 3 2 �f2 Wd7 33 %l.c3 and White wins L inares 2005
and with his king under pressure, Black back the p i ece, whi l st retaining
has to fight to survive. promising chances. 1 e4 eS 2 lOO lOe6 3 lOe3 eS 4 �e4
2S 11xdl �u6 d6
2S . . . �dS is met by 26 �bS . 1 played this line a few times against
Alternatively 2S . . .•xa6 26 'iWxb4+
Leko, who repeatedly rejected castling
�e8 27 %l.d6 lOdS 28 %l.xa6 lOxb4
even though he normally plays safe.
29 %l.b6 wins.
S d3 �e7 6 0-0 lOf6 7 lOh4 lOd4
After 7 . . .lOxe4 8 dxe4 �xh4 9 f4 19 . . .lIfll

White has very nice compensation. Now, in order to launch an attack

first, I sacrificed a pawn. 1 9 . . . dxc3
8 g3 �g4 9 0 �e6 10 �gS lOg8
20 .a4+ lOc6 2 1 11n .g5 22 'ifb3
10 lOb I , as Karpov played against
lOd8 23 lOxc3 .e3+ 24 <t>g2 %l.c8 leads
Spassky, is a rather similar knight to a complicated position, as Topalov
30 f3! move. pointed out.
KraITUlik's great idea is to trap the 20 lOxd4 lOe6 21 ..n .xn+
11 �xe7 lOxe7 12 f4 exf4 13 .i.xe6
bishop. Black is paralysed because of After 2 1 . . . lOxd4 22 .xf6 %l.xf6
fxe6 14 lIxf4 'it>d7
the pin. 23 cxd4 1ID 24 %l. d l g5 25 ¢>g2 (25 g4?
26 .xb4+! 30 .... hS d5 ! ) 25 . . . g4 Black probably bolds,
See diagram on page 26J.
KraITUlik sees a great idea on the After 3 0 ... �e7 3 1 lOc6+ �f6 3 2 b4 though once, i n Game 32 o f their world
horizon. gS 3 3 b S ¢>g7 3 4 �f2 �c4 3 5 b6 wins. title match in Buenos Aires 1 92 7 ,
Even in the last game of my career I
26 ... ..xb4 27 lO c6 + Wfli 3 1 b3 ! l:I.h6 Alekhine freed a passive rook against
I had Steinitz in mind and thought I follow the principles of a world
I f 3 l . . .�e7 3 2 lld2. Capablanca and managed to beat bim.
would be able to handle any back rank 32 wa %l.g6 33 It>xe2 %l.xg2+ champion. The king should be safe in So who knows? But who do you trust
checkmate threat. The rook finally becomes active, but the centre. when two world champions play
28 lld8+ lOe8 it is too late. IS lOO against each other?

268 269
Wilhelm Steinitz the 1-" Wilhelm Steinilz the J SI

22 lhO lbO + 23 'i!;>xo iOxd4 used Steinitz's idea. It made me realise career, the best a chessplayer has ever had a plus score against all his
I knew the principle of having little that somehow they were able to use the produced. He was the dominating force close rivals, except Kramnik and
chance of survival in a pawn ending, champion's legacy better than myself. in world chess for approximately two against some of them very convincing
but during the game I lost faith i n all At this stage, writing the Great decades. He was world champion for plusses.
champions and principles. Predecessors books was well Wlder 1 5 years. He was a world-class player
His contribution to the development
24 cxd4 dS way. After this game I made the for 25 years.
of chess is immense, although we
I played this instantly. Maybe playing dramatic announcement of my
He produced the greatest number o f need still more time to form a
for a fortress with 24 . . . �e7 was better. retirement from professional chess.
superb creations b y anyone w h o ever comprehensive judgement.
25 �(2 �e7 26 'iti>n �f6
You may joke that I retired to become played our game. Kasparov himself
He left the game in a different state
an amateur in politics. But let me estimated 250 of his games were of top
from when he found it. Partly because
remind you I gained the chess crown in quality and we are inclined to agree
of computers, chess culture would have
my second match against Karpov. with him. In fact if one counts the great
developed anyway, but his unique
Maybe I will become president after games he lost or drew maybe he played
artistry has been a telling factor.
entering the race for a second time and even more than three hundred
will then rule for 1 5 years just as I did superlative games. Furthermore no This time we dared to joke around
in chess? other player faced such strong with his games, but we never trivialised
opposition as him. them, nor for a single moment forgot
Some may think I ' d rather fight
that they will continue to bring joy to
Putin than the new generation of Very few won as many individual
new generations of chess fans.
27 h4?? chessplayers on the chessboard. tournaments as him - and he must be
27 Wg4 wins after 27 . . . g6 (27 . . . h6 one of the players who gained the most Kasparov's impact on chess will be
But now I ' ll make a sensational
28 'iti>h5 ; 27 . . .Wg6 2 8 �f4 'it>f6 29 h4 material rewards from chess. He also felt for as long as i t is played.
confession . . . I stopped playing chess
h5 3 0 g4 h.x.g4 3 1 <t>xg4 <t>g6 32 �f4
not because of any particular interest in
'it>f6 33 h5 wins . ) 28 h3 ! (28 h4? h6=)
Russian politics, but because my last
28 . . . h6 (28 . . . h5+ 29 IPh4) 2 9 h4 as
game made me lose all faith in my
Krnic pointed out.
Predecessors.
27 ... g6??
A blWlder in reply. 2 7 ... h61 draws, • • • •
since i f 2 8 'it>g4 then 2 8 . . . g6.
28 b4 bS 29 �f4 h6 30 �g4 1-0
Now at last we take back the
commentary from Garry and speak
I resigned here. Topalov was a point
with our own voice!
behind me before this last round game,
therefore I had to share the first prize. Maybe these losses were hard to take,
Once I finished the game I somehow but they were a necessary part of
sensed that Veselin would win the next Kasparov's career. His losses and the
World Championship. champions' wins were i nstructive and
one can learn and profit considerably
I suddenly Wlderstood that I could
from studying them. Just as Kasparov
trust nobody - not even the champions.
himself did.
Then who could I follow? How was I to
carry on playing chess? My successors What did these losses help him to
Kramnik and Topalov beat me when I achieve? He completed a fabu lous

270
271