Chapter 4 - be Semi-Slav 129

16...0—0—0 17. e3! Conclusion: The new old move 14. d2!? puts
Simple and strong. The queen exchange does the traditional &a5-line out of business, that
not make the positional advantage go away. is with 12...bd, but Black can still try 12......a6
On the contrary. when 13.a3 is natural.

That said, 17.&c2 also looked good.

17...$fxd1
17... xb2 is no better: 18. d61 xd6 A. Kovacevic - Simmelink
19.tfxd6 /ñb8 20.tIc5z
Correspondence 2006
18.&Ad1
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.OG Of6 4. c3 e6 5.âg5
dxc6 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. 4 g5 f. xgs lrsgs
8 10. g5 bd7 11.exf Ii b7 12.g3 c5 13.d5
7 &b6 IN. g2 0—0—0 15.0—0 b4 16. a4 a6
6
5 8
4 7
y 6

2
1 4
a b c d e f g h
2
' 1
White has good control and is much better.
In the game Black blunders and loses more a b c d e f g h
or less instantly, but it was not easy to find Black sidesteps the mainline. Putting the
a lasting defence anyway. Maybe a move
like 18...&h should be tried.
queen on the a-file just urges White even more
18... b6i 19.iZxd8t &xd8 20. g5 to open the position, but Black has a specific
Just winning. tactical liquidation of the d5-pawn in mind.

20... c7 17.at ñxds

On 20... e8 there was 21. xb6 axb6 That’s it.
22. xc61.
18. xd5 e5
21.Af4J c8 22. &g8 23. c6 bds Winning the piece back.
24. e5 &g6 25.&d1 fib7 26. xb7t &xb7
27.Od8} If. e2 &xd5 20.axb4 cxb4
 150 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

Fortunately White can parry both.

8
25.G
6
5 8
4
6
2 5
1 4
3
a b c d e f g h
Black succeeded with his little operation, but 2
his queen is momentarily vulnerable on a6, 1
which White exploits to activate his knight.
a b c d e f g h
21. c3 White is ready to undermine the black
Actually c4 is also rather weak. A new l‹Jlight with b2-b3. In the game Black tries to
try is 21.l7fcl!' c6 22.A4 I d3 23.&xc4! defend tactically. be question is if he has any
&xc4 24.Act xc1 25.fixcl &b7 26. e3 alternatives.
and Site was better in Braun — Naumann,
Nuernberg 2008. 25...a5
25...b3 26.@g5! b7 27.h4 paralyses the
21...&•5 black queen. In Mueller Alves — Simmelink,
Black could also offer the exchange with corr. 2006, White won quickly: 27...fib4
21...&c6 but White is not forced to take it. 28.g4 h7 29.dcl! a5 (29...dxcl 30.dxcl
22. f4 bxc3 23. xe5 Bd2 24.Tel c5 25.bxc3 Of 29...&c8 30.IIXC4 &xc4 31.7fxd3) 30.&xc4
With Ad4 coming. 25...&d3 (or 25...&hd8 ¥1d8 31.h5 )—0
26.fid4 &b2 27. c5 xc5 28.&e4+ Alexa
— Necesany, corr. 2005.) 26.fid4 Bf3 27.&a5 26 b3
@b6 Rahman — Sriram, Calcutta 2001, and Going for the black queen with 26. g5
now 28.&a4 Bd5 29. xb6 axb6 30.7fal is looks tempting just like in the last note:
decisive. 26...\lth3 27.g4 a4 28.dcl key 2$. c4J
xc4? (29... b7 was forced) 30.&xc4J 1—0
22. &xa5 Oxa5 23. e4 d3 24. e3 Luhn — Noble, corr. 2007.
White introduces the threat of g5. Other
moves such as 24.b3 and 24.&d1 have not 26...RJ
been very successfiil. Not 26...cxb3 27.h4.

2d...Bh5 27.h4! axb3

This threatens mate and offers an ending A lTlistake. Blackshould get the queen where
rhe strong pawn majority on the out while it was still possible, however total queenside would
be a significant factor. Satisfaction was far off: 27...&e5 28.bxc4 c5
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav 131

29. g2 &g8 (29... xe4 30. f4) 30.Act c5 Conclusion: The sideline 16...&a6 is in deep
31.&d1 b3 32.h5+ Daus — Moreno Carretero, trouble, and even if White does not want to
corr. 2007. enter the complications then Braun’s 21.&fc1!i
27...& 28.bxcd is similar. looks like an interesting new path to follow.

28.$£gS
The queen is out of play.

28.: g6 Strangmueller - Sakai

Correspondence 2004
8
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.OG &fd 4.'k\I e6 5.@@
dac4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. h4 g5 f. xg5 hxg5
6 lff. g5 bfi7 11.93 fib7 12. g2 b6
13.exK 0-AO 14.0—0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. a4
b5 17.a3 exd5 18.axb4 nb4
4

8
2
7
6
a b c d e f g h
29.8c1!
The tactics work in Sites favour. 4
3
29...b2
2
29...Ikxcl 30.Wxc41 b7 31.¥fb5J c8
32. c6J d8 33. e3 mates. 1
 b d e h
30.l2xc4J Ac5t 31.&xc5{! xc5 32. c2 a C ' '
bl=&} 33. xb1 xe4 34.fxe4 29•
Black defended well, but his open king’s A relatively new move. White takes control
position and the bad coordination of the heavy over the dark squares around the black king
pieces makes it a hopeless task. and it is not easy to find an adequate
answer.
There are, as ever, alternatives:
34...b3 35.ñ f4 Oh5 36•Bxb3 c5l 37.&g2
e5 38. gS d4 39.&f3 ¥1d8 40.h5 19. be1
White is no longer afraid of an ending. his is another interesting try. White creates
the possibility of putting the rook on e7,
40...Oa1 41. g4 e1 42. e3 b4 which could be a bomb in the middle of
43.h6 &h8 44.Fch &d7 45.Od2t Oxd2 Black’s position. In his book on the Semi-Slav
Vigorito praises the idea, but unfortunately
1—0 it is a good illustration of what happens
132 Playing the queen’s Gambit

over and over again in such an ultra-sharp

25. xd7 &xd7 26. g5 b6 and Black is
opening as the Botvinnik variation: a new
ready to push d5-d4 with great play for the
move completely changes the verdict. The
exchange.
thematic line goes:
22...&xc5 23.&fe1
19...d4 20.&xd4 xg2 21. xg2 &xg5
23.1fg7 was possible.
22.&xc4 b8 23.&ed1
23...&hd8 2d.&e7 c7 25.Gael c6 26.1ff4J
And White wins according to Vigorito. He
Or again 26.1fg7.
gives the apparently convincing line:
26...&b6 27.fih3 &d6 28.&xf7 d4 29.&e5 &d5
23...1fh5 24.&d5 lfxh2 25.&f3 1fh6
30.&e6 d3 31.@g4 d2 32.fid1 &f5 33.1fc7t
26.&b5} Ikb6 27. xb6 &xf6$ 28. g2 axb6
&b5 34.&e3 &d5 35.f3 &d4 36.&fe7 fixf3
29.&e4+—
37.@ f3 d1=&} 38. xd1 &xd1 39.Tel &d4
But then came the following correspondence
40.&h1 1fd5} 41. g1 &d4} 42.&h1 1fd5}
game:
43.$gi 'r›—'r›
Kasimdzhanov — Ragger, Dresden (ol) 2008.
23...1ff5! 24.&d5 &xh2}! 25. xh2 lfxf2
26.&h3 fid6! 27.&b5}
19... c5
Not 27.&xd6 &h81.
The standard reaction and the only move
27...ifib6 28.&h4 &e8 29. xb6 axb6
that has been played, but let’s check some
Despite being an exchange up, White’s
alternatives.
position is very uncomfortable with no
shelter for the king.
If 19... h6 to exchange the bishops, then
30.&d5 b7 31.&ad1 &h8! 32.&xd6 &xh4
20. d6! is very annoying, because on
33. xh4 ¥fh2 34. g4 &xb2
20...fif8 White has 21. e7.
Black has good winning chances.
35.&h3 b3 36.&d7t c6 37.&7d6} &b5
On other moves such as 19...Ex6, 19...&e8 or
38.&f1 &e5 39.&dd1 1fh5} 40. g2 b2
19...&c6 the centralization of the white queen
41.Odel &d5} 42.&h3 1fd3 43.&d1 lfh7t
with 20.&d4 seems quite strong.
d4. g2 c4 45.Odel b5 46.&4 c5 47.&ff1
&b4 48.&f4 a5 49.&ff1 a4 50.&g1 &c2
20. xc5 @ c5 21.&e1
51. f3 &c6 52. g4 Ex6 53.&gf1 &g6}
White even has a promising alternative in:
54. h3 a3 55.&f3 a2 56.&f2 b4 0—1
21.h4
Repanic — Ljubicic, corr. 2006.
This threatens @h3{.
21...@c6 22.Tel d4
19.Àe3
Vigorito suggests 22... b7 as an
this has traditionally been the mainline.
improvement, but then 23.&e7t looks
White is slightly better, but Black’s position
thematic, for instance 23... xe7 24.fxe7
is rather compact and difhcult to overcome.
&de8 25.&d4 a5 26.&e5+ with great play
A recent example highlights the way Black
for the exchange.
usually gets counterplay.
23.&g4 &d7 24.&a5! 1fb6
19...Öc5 20.&g4 &d7 21.Öxc5
24...1fxa5 25. xc6
The stunning 21.&g7 is nothing for White
25.&f5 g2 26.&xc5 c6 27.&e7 &hd8
after 21...Àxg7 22.fxg7 &g8 23.Öxc5 &xg7.
28.Exp
21... c5 22.Jäxc5
White is winning, Porper — Lock, Guernsey
22.&g7 &hd8 23.Àxc5 &xc5 24.Àh3 c7
2006.
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav 133

21.••»£ 6. 4
21...¥fd7 22.&e7 xe7 23.fxe7 &xe7 This is the sharpest choice, which is known
24.¥fd4 a6 25. b6 is no better. as the ti-Moscow Gambit. The normal
Moscow 6. xf6 xf6 7.e3 Ihd7 8.Ad3 dxc4
22.&e7 9. xc4 g6 10.0—0 g7 has been tested in many
games and so far Black’s pair of bishops seems
to balance White’s extra space and freer play.
8
7 6...dxc4 7.e1 g5 8.Ag3 b5
6
5
7

2
4

a b c d e f g h
Standard by now. 2

22...Jfxe7 23.A e7 &dg8 24.¥fd4 1

With complete dominance. a b c d e f g h
The Moscow Variation’s similarity to the
24... d7 25. e5 c5 26. e8 27.&d1
Botvinnik is striking, but so are the differences.
1—0
Here Black is a pawn up instead of being
one down! White has long-term positional
Conclusion: The mainline Botvinnik is also in
compensation though: a strong centre with
dire straits after the simple but strong 19 f4.
the further advances d4-d5 or e4-e5 constantly
Notable is the rook manoeuvre to e7, where
iii the air gives a lot of dynamic quality.
White gives up an exchange for complete
Furthermore Black has exposed himself on
dominance on the dark squares.
both flanks and almost invites White to play
a4 and h4. Let's stop a moment at that last
Botvinnik conclusion. The Botvinnik
point: the weakening of the Ringside is the
Variation leads to many fascinating lines, but
most significant and therefore a quick h2-h4
at the moment Site seems to be on top in all
could be strong.
of them, so it is no wonder that the world’s top
players have already left the sinking ship and
9. e2
climbed on board the Moscow.
A good developing move.

Theorjn Moscow Gambit Also possible is rhe immediate 9.h4 or the

more sophisticated:
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.€1G €\G 4. c3 e6 5.fig5 9.fie5 fib7 10.h4
h6 White sidesteps some of the problems in the
134 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

mainline. But typically he also creates a new

one, namely: 9...b4 10. a4 xe4
10...94 11. xg4 xg4 12.&xg4 ¥fxd4 Black wins a central pawn but neglects
Taking the central pawn. normal development.
13.&dl g7 14. f4 a6 15.@e2 11. e5 f6
White just wants to castle with good On 11...&g8 there follows 12. c2. ten
compensation; he has scored very well from 12...f5 13. xc4 g4 14. d2 xd2 15.7fxd2
this position. A recent example from the &g6 16.Sci a5 17.€\c5 €id7 18. d3+ and
Olympiad in Dresden continued: Black’s position is full of holes, Rodriguez —
15... e7 16.0—0 c5 17.e5 7fg 6 18.&d4 &d8 Pecha, c rr. 2001. That means Black has to
1s.&fdl &d5›! withdraw the knight with 12...ihf6 when
Better is 13...&xd4. 13.0—0 or xc4 gives White a pleasant
initiative.
20.&e3 h5 21. f3 a6 22.b4 cxb3 23.axb3
a5 24 e4 xe4 25 xe4 &h6 26 fi ¥fg7
27 xd5 exd5 28. g5 &g8 29.f4 g6 30.i24d2 8
7
c5 31. xe7 d4 32. g5 1—0
6
Aronian — Caruana, Dresden (ol) 2008.

A few rounds later in the same tournament

Aronian repeated the line against Kramnik and
the Russian came up with 13...7ff6!? 14.e5 &f5
15.Bd4 Ae7 16.b3 c5 17. e3 c6! 18.bxc4 2
iñb4 19.&4 c2$ 20. e2 xf4 21. xf4
bxc4 22.f3 Ikd4l 23.&f2 Ad5i and Black had a b c d e f g h
won the opening duel, Aronian — Kramnik,
12. c5! &g8
Dresden (o1) 2008.
12... xc5 13.dxc5 bd7 14.fid6a
Or 12...fig7 13. c4 0—0 14.&c2 bd7
8 l5.h4 gxhd (15...94 IN. g5!—+) lb.
xd7 fixd7 17.&xh4+ Sakaev — Kobalia, St
Petersburg 1998. White can castle queenside
and launch a big attack.
13.&c2 Iñbd7 14.Axd7 xd7 15.0—0 fid5
4 16.âxc4
3 16...f6 17.fig3 &f7 18.&h7J &g7 19.Ah5t
e7 20.&xh6 e8
2
P.H. Nielsen — T. Thorhallsson, Reykjavik
2001.
a b c d e f g h 21. g4 c3 22.bxc3 bxc3 23. c4+
9...fib7
The best move. Other tries can quickly lead Another way is:
to trouble, especially if Black is driven by 9...fib4 10.&c2 g4 11. e5 &xd4 12.0-0
greed. xc3 13.bxc3 xe4 14.¥fd2
Black is three pawns up, but terribly weak on
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav 135

the dark squares: White just has to open up 9... bd7 is also imprecise. With 10.d5 White
the position with f2- to get going. gets promising play — see Game 38.
i4...iñbd7 15.f3 tfd 5 16.7ff4 7fc5J
16...&g8 17. xd7 xd7 18.Sgt e5 10.h4
19.&xh6+ Goldin Ippolito, Philadelphia
1999.
8
17.Ch i &e7 18.fxg4 d5 19. x 1 Exp
20.Axl+ 7
6
8
7
5
6 4
5 3
4 2
3
1
2
a b c d e f g h
a b c d e f g h
This thrust is the most direct and disruptive
This has been tested in some correspondence for Black who will have to pay for moving
games. White has a strong initiative after his pawns on the Ringside. In practice White
either: has often chosen a different path with i o.0 0
C\bd7 11. e5 fig7 12. xd7 xd7 13.fid6,
20...&h7 21.7id61 &d8 22.a4 bxa4 23. xc4 but after the cool 13...a6 Al attempts to
e3 2d. h4 &c7 25. e8J b7 26.&fb 1 generate a serious advantage have so far failed
€\b6 27. e2 d7 28.€\f6 &f2 29.ct e5 30.c5 and White seems stuck.
McKenzie — Le Bled, corr. 2006. g
1
Black tries to keep the position closed.
20...0—0 21. 7\xh6J &h7 22.$.x& kxf8
23.g5 Öxc3 24.AG fi d7 25.J g4
Again greed backfires:
Geissler — Zolochevsky, corr. 2006.
10...b4 11.hxg5 bxc3 12.bxc3!
A spectacular piece sacrifice.
9...Cih5
12...Axed
This is a tactical mistake:
On 12...€\fd7 13.96! fxg6 14. h4 is good.
10.@e5
1d...&g8 15. xg6 & a5 (15...&xg6 16.@h5
This misplaces the rook.
17.ñ xg6t xg6 18.Oh5J &h7 19.ENI
10...&g8 11. xb8 &xb8 12. e5 f4 13. xc6
&h8 20.;kh4 &c8 21. g5+—) lb.fih4
1fb6 14. xb8 xg21 15.& fl Qf4 16. xc4!
&xc31 17.& f1 ibb6 18.fih5 &d7
a6
19.&h3
16...bxc4 17.&a41 e7 18.&xa7$! xa7
¥fb2 20.i7f3+— fid6 21.e5 22.&b1
19. c6} d7 20. xa7 is nice.
&xa2 23.Tal b2 2d.&fxa5 c3 2b.Bf3 c7
17.Bb3 Jfxb8 18.a4 b4 1$. e2+
26.€\f8 c2 27.7ff7J 6d7 28. xe6 b6
With an exchange more.
29.Bf4 6t 30. gl jet 31. c5 &bl1
32.&h2 cl=& 33.l7xb11 ¥fxbl 34.
&xg2$
136 Playing the queen’s Gambit
3§. xg2 &flJ 36.&h2 Öxf7 37.fid8J 1—0
Raijmaekers — Einarsson, corr. 2004.
13.Äe5
8
6 ending, for instance:
5 23...f6 24.Öxe6 &e8 2§. d2 &xe6 26.&h8J
4 nÉf8 27.&xf8
a b c d e f g h
13... xc3
Black has passed the point of no return,
as simply moving the rook will not work:
13...&h 7 14.tfbl This highlights the
power of the queen: it attacks black pieces
all over the board. 14...&a5 15.'\ild2! And
after this precise blow it is all over. 15...f5
(15...Ikxd2 16. xb7 or 15...&xc3 16.0—0)
16.gxf6 c5 17. xe4 @xe4 18. h5J &d8
19.&xe4 xc3$ 20. e2 &d3t 21. xd3
cxd3$ 22. xd3 With a winning position,
Rogozenko — Filipenko, Internet 2001.
Returning to 13... xc3:
14.&c2 xe2 15. xe2 &g8
Black could dso sacrifice the rook: 15...1 d7
16. xh8 hxg5 17.&h7 &a5 Only move. (17...
gd 18. e5 xe5 19. xe5 &d5 20.Pahl c5
21.& &e4 22.&xe4 xe4 23.&c7 cxd4
24.&h8 &b8 25.fixd4 fid3t 26. e3 &b1
27. c5 Tel 28.&f4 &e4J 29. g3 1—0
Stohl — Kuczynski, Germany 2002) 18.&b1
a6 19. f1 g4 20. e5 xe5 21. xe5 &a3
And now first 22.&h8 d7 23.&h7 e8
depriving Black of the right to castle, then
24.&dl Ab5 25. gl +.
Or 15...c5 16. xh8 hxg5 17.&ad1 7fc 7
18. e5 xg2 19.&h 7 cxd4 20.&xd4 €1c6
21.Exp 1-0 Seipel — Tokmachev, corr.
2003, was a quick KO. The finish could be
21...IÉxd4$ 22.Jäxd4 1fc6 23.IÉd6 lfxd6
24.&g61 d8 25.Äf6$.
16.gxh6 6 17.7fh7!
Even stronger than 17.&xh6.
17...&g6 18.&xh6 &xh6 19.7fxh6 ibd7 20.fid6
tff6 21.&h1 ’&xh6 22.&xh6 0—0—0 23.€195
White wins the pawn back with a better
d7 28.Öc5 t
11.Öe5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a b c d e f g h
The starting position of the h4-variation:
Black is in a serious dilemma.
As should be clear by now the aggressive
...b5-b4 cannot be recommended:
11...b4 12.had xe4 13.dxcl xg3
No better was 13...h5 ld.&e2 xg3 15.ikg3
&h6 16.0—0 f5 17.d5! ¥fa5 18.&xf5! &xa4
19.&xf8$ xf8 20.&f2 e7 21.& &d6
22.7ff8} c7 23.d6J &b6 24.fib3 ¥fb5
25.7fd8J c5 26.&c1$ d4 27.7fg5 1—0
Stohl — Pavasovic, Portoroz 1999.
14.fxg3 d7 15. xI7! Exp 16.&xg4 &e7 17.0-
0 e8 18.@xe6 c8
This was Khdifman — Dreev, Elista 1998.
Khalifman continued 19.&ae1 and won a
nice game, but the computer claims that
White can win on the spot:
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav 137

19.l7ff! Exp 10...exd5 11.exd5 b4 12.dxc6 bxc3 13.cxd7t

19...Bd6 20.Tel d8 21.J»id7 xd7 Oxd7 14.bxc3 &xd1J 15.&xd1 Ag7 16. xc4+
22. c5! Yermolinsky — Hayward, Las Vegas 2002.
20.Axf71 Exp 21.&f11 &e8 22.&e4 d8
23.d5 cxd5 24. d4 &g8 25.7fxd5 10...cxd5 11.exd5 €1b6
Attacking both rooks. 11...C\c5 12.0—01
12.dxe6 xe6
Black has three respected options. First of all it 12...Ylxd1$ 13.&xd1 xe6 14. e5 fig7
is tempting to speed up development and offer 15.'kxb5a gives White a. good ending with
the g4-pawn as bait. That could be done by active pieces and some weak black pawns.
either 11... bd7 — see Game 39 — or 11...&g8 13. d4 EH
— see Game 40. Finally Black can protect g4 13...a6 14.0—0 fig7 15.fi f3 bd5 16.€\ xd5
with 11...h5. That is covered in Game 41. xd5 17. xe6 fxe6 Solozhenkin — Alavkin,
St Petersburg 1999, and now 18.Tel is
decisive: 18... 19. h51 g8 20.&xe6
Gaaet6 14.0—0 0-0
Beliavsky — Bacrot, Bugojno 1999, when the
Ferrini - Richardson simplest was:
15. xe6 fxe6 16. xb5+
Correspondence 2003
10... c5 is also suspicious: 11.dxc6 t¥xdl1
1.d4 d5 2. Hi 3.câ eâ 4. c3 c6 5Ag5
12.&xd1 a6 13. e5 e7 14.h4 g4 1§.€\d4 0—0
h6 6•%x4 g5 7. g3 dxc4 8.ed b5 9. e2
16.f3 gxf3 17.gxf3+ Can Rely — Nakamura,
'ktbd7
Bastia 2007.

8 Finally we have 10...b4:

7
8
6
6
5
4
4
3 3

2
1 1
a b c d e f g h a b c d e I g h
10.d5! Th’is has been played in several games, but
Seizing the initiative. the complications tend to lead directly to a
positional advantage for White:
10... bJ 11.dxe6 bxc3 12.exd7t ¥fxd7
Taking on d5 is not good: Worse is 12...fixd7 13.bxc3 xe4 IN.¥fd4
xg3 15.hxg3 &g8 16.&d1 g7 17.dxcl
138 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

&e7 18. d4 &c8 l9.0—0+ Mercadal Weakening the structure further with
Benejam — Lopepe, corr. 2001. 15...b4 16. ce2 has not gone well for Black.
13.7fc2 cb2
Not 13...gd ld &dl 1tb 7 15. e5 &xb2
16. e4!
16.&a4 1fb5 17.&d8} 1—0 Beliavsky — Nice. On 16... xe4 there is 17. xe6 .
Bacrot, Albert 1999.
14.&xb2 Äg7 15.Öe5 & b7 16.&a3 a5 17.0—0 16... c8 17.£ld6! d6 18.exd6J &b7
7fb4 18.&c1 0—0 19.@f6 19.a4! Oxa4 20.&xa4 bxa4 21.IIxa4 d7
Or l9.Öxc4!i Öxe4 20.Tel Öxe5 21.Öxe5. 22. xc4
19...Öxf6 20.e5 fig7 21.Äxc4 &b8 22.&c2
&e7 23.&fe1ü
8
Kuhne — Noack, corr. 2001.
7
11.dxe6 fxe6 12. d4 c5 6
5

7
6
2
5
1
4
a b c d e f g h
Black is busted. The knight goes to b3 next
2 and then lands on c5 with devastating effect.
1
a b c d e f g h 22...@/8 23.Q6 &b8 24. c5$ a8 25.&a1
be strongest: lfi threatens &xa7t and mate
13.e5 d5 14.fih5J 15.0—0 c7
The king is forced to take a walk.

14...&d7
Running towards safety on the queenside.
Staying in the centre with 14... e7 leaves
Black without many prospects: 15.0—0 fig7
16.&g4 &d7 17.&adl + Ikd3 18. e4 5f4
19.Axf4 lfxd4 20. xg5! &xf4 21.&xe6
&d8 22.&xd31! c7 (or 22...cxd3 23.1fd6t
c8 24. ) 23.&e7t b6 24. e6 &xe5
25.&e3 @f8 26.&xf8 &hxf8 27.& xe5 and
White won in Vermeulen — Sherwood, corr.
2004.
next move. In the stem game White also won
after 25.&a6 1fb6 26.&a3 Stohl — Ziegler,
Germany 1999, when 26...&bd8 could have
prolonged the fight a bit, but probably not
changed the result.

25...&b5 26. e2 &f7 27. a4

Winning the exchange back, while the
grip on the position remains. The end
comes quickly.

27...¥¥b8 28. b5 cxb5 29. e4 c8

30. g6 VG 31.tfg7 €\b6 32. xe6 a4
33. c7t &b8 34. e5 h5 35. d4 g4 36.&c1
'ilb6 37.kxb6 axb6 38.b4
1—0
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav

Conclusion: 9...Obd7 is an inaccuracy that

White can immediately punish by 10.d5! with
a strong initiative.
8

Grischuk - Gelfand
4
Odessa 2007

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. f3 VG 4. c3 e6 5.Ag5

h6 6. h4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8. g3 b5 9. 2 b7
10.h4 g4 11. e5 €\bd7
a b c d e f g h
8 This move is the right way to challenge Black’s
7 typically very compact pawn structure in the
6 Moscow. If Black takes on b3 then lines are
5 opened for White and he can calmly intensify
4 the pressure, while it is not obvious how Black
can liberate himself and get counterplay.

2
1
a b c d e f g h
Black makes no attempt to hold onto
the extra pawn and instead gives priority to
finishing his development and getting rid of
the strong knight on e5. Of course White is
not obliged to take on g4.
12. xd7 O xd7 13. e5 e7 14.
Grischuk prefers to keep playing a gambit.
14...&g8
Actually Grischuk had previously lost a
game, also in rapid, to another Semi-Slav
expert, Dreev, but after 14...h5 15. c2 h6
16.b3 cxb3 17.axb3 he had fine compensation,
Grischuk — Dreev, Mainz 2005. Also, instead
of 1â.&c2, why not play 1â.b3.
15...b4
On 15,..cxb3 16.axb3 b4 White activates the
knight by 17. xf6 xf6 18.e5 &xh4 19. e4
with good compensation: 19...g3!? (or 19,.. e7
20.g3 hâ 21. a6 and Black’s queenside
will be exposed) 20. $lf6J &d8 21.fxg3 &xg3
22. h5 &e3 23.&f4 &e7 24. c4+ The black
rook in the middle of White’s position misses
its friends.
16.€ia4 c3
It is risky for Black to open the position
before he has completed development:
16...Axed 17. c2 c5 18. xc4 g7 19. g7
&xg7 20.Gael d6 21. xc5 xc4 22.bxc4!
c6 Riazantsev — Vitiugov, Moscow
2008, and now 23.Iéd3 Oxh4 24.d5 fid7
25. e5+ would put Black in a precarious
position.
IQ. d3 Ad7 18. g3 e5 19.&ad1 g7
20.d5
140 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

White tries to open the position while Black’s

c7 (s5... c8 36.&c4) 36. xe51 &d6
king is still stuck in the centre.
37.7fc31 d7 38. c5t d8 39. h81 c7
40.7\xa6$ l2xa6 41.&c4} d7 42.&c8J e7
20... d6 21. g4
43. xa6
Finally he takes it.

34...nb7
21...cxd5 22.exd5 .0—0-0
The last chance was 34...c1=& but then
It was of course tempting to get the king
35. xa6t b7 36.i7b41 Wxb4 37. xb4
away from the centre, but maybe he chose the
wrong Bank. &xd7 38.d61 and White still has a dangerous
initiative.
Possible was 22...&c8 23.&c2 Af6 24.US
f8 and anything can still happen.
35. fd 6 36. xe5t c7 37.Oxc71 xc7
38.&c4 kxd5 39.&xc2 d6 40. a4 &b8
23.a3! 6 24. e3
41. d3
Black’s queenside is full of holes.
1—0
2d...h5
Conclwioii: A tense game where White
Not 24... xf1 25. xa7.
always had the initiative. Pay attention to the
25 A G typical idea 1â.b3: a great way to combat
b8 26.&fe1 b6 27. d2
28.axb4 Set 29.&xe1 Black’s otherwise impressive pawn structure.
Whire has excellent compensation for the
exchange: e5 is weak and the knight has a key
square on c5.

29... xb4 30.&e4 Jfxb3 31.Axd7 &xg3

ñuiz - E. Andersen
32.fxg3 1$ 33. h2 c2
Correspondence 2006

8 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. f3 f6 4. c3 e6 5.fig5

h6 6. 4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8. g3 b5 9. e2 b7
7 10.hd gd 11. e5 Bg8
6
5 8
4 7
3
2 5
1
a b c d e f g h
Black puts everything on this passed pawn. 2

34. f6 won instantly: 34...&xd7 35.Bh8

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav 141

12. xg6
15.d5 exd5 16.exd5 &xd5 17.&xd5 ikxd5
Actually I like another move-order more:
18.0-0-0 &xg4 19.&xd5 fid7 20.&e1J d8
12.0-0 tsbd7 13.ihxg4
21.&ed1 &d4 22.&1xd4 cxd4 23.2ixd4 &c8
his is because it takes away Black’s extra
possibility with ...bd and ...c5 — see next
24.fid6
An ending is reached that looks slightly
note. If Black does not transpose to the
better for Site, but probably it should be
main game with 13... xgd ld. g4 he can
nothing.
instead try:
13...b4!' 24... e8 2§.&e41 d8 2b. xf8 xf8 27.a5
Then there could follow:
bxa3 28.bxa3 &c6 29.é6b2 &f6 30.&e2
White had good winning chances because
14. a4 xe4 15. c4
the black c-pawn is very weak, Grischuk
Once again Black’s strategy of opening up
Anand, Mexico City 2007.
the position with his own king in the centre
is at least questionable. be evaluation
Later Black improved with 24...Axd6 25.5lxd6
should be based on concrete analy5is though
&e7 26.&xh6 Zz—Zz Riazantsev — Karjakin,
and things are not so clear:
Dagomys 2008. After 26...&g8 27.g3 fñ
White’s rook is out of play and 27.&a6 &xg2
1$...had 16.&c1 0—0—0 17.fih2 fid6 18.fid3
28.&xa7 is about equal.
xh2 19. xh2 fidf6 20. xe4 xe4 21. c5
xc5 22.&xc5 &xa2 23.b3 Wb2 24. f3 Sgt
14.0—0
25.&c2! &gxd4
25...&a3 26. e5 &gxd4 27.O f3
26.Ikxd4 Bxd4 27.7fh5a 8
Nakamura — Dreev, Stepanalcert 2005, seems
7
good for White. So far so good.
6
And outright bad is: 1§... xg3 16.fxg3 O e7
17. c5+ Vitiugov — Stripunsky, Internet
2005. 4
3

However interesting is:

2
15...h5 16. e3 &f6
Avrukh — Akopian, Crete 2007, when the i
critical line is: a b c d e f g h
17.Bxh5 Oh6 18. xh6 @h6 19.&fel Oxg3
20.fxg3 0-0—0 21.&h2
And Black has some compensation after: 14,..'1\f6 15.fif3 Ob6 16.7fd2 &d8 17.¥ff4!
21...&g7 fig7 18.&fd1 was good for Whire in Vermeulen
— Richardson, corr. 2003.
12... xg4 l3. g4 d7
Instead Black can try to solve his problems 14...b4 15. J\a4 a6 16. h5 Ab5 17.7ic5 1xc5
by force:
18.dxc5 & e7 19.Tel &xg3 20.fxg3 &xcâ1
13...b4 14. a4 c5 21.&h2 0-0—0 22. xf7 and Black did not
have enough for the exchange, Ronczkowski —
And after:
Mercadal Benejam, corr. 2004.
142 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

i5.fih5 Also strong is 25.&f3+.

A key move: the bishop attacks Blacks weak
spot on and makes it harder for him to castle 25...c5 26. f3 c6 27.Tel
long. Another standard try is 15.a4 with play 1—o
on the queenside.
Black resigned — still a pawn up but with no
15... fli 16. e5 xb5 17.t $ah5 prospects whatsoever.
The queen replaces the bishop.
Conclusion. If Black wants to return the
17. ..b4 pawn then 11...&g8 is probably not the way
Seeking counterplay. Instead 17...&d8 to do it. White gets equal material and keeps
18.&adl &d7 19.&fe lfi was Atalik — Markus, a strong Initiative, which is almost too much
Jahorina 2003. to ak for.

18.had US l9. c5!

A great positional pawn sacribce.

ls...@c5 2o.dxc5 Oxc5 21.$fd1 Griséhuk - K@akin

Sochi 2008
8
7 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. f3 fd 4.OJ e6 5Ag5
h6 6. h4 dxc4 7.e3 gS 8. b5 9. e5
6
An experimental move-order, which in this
5 game just transposes. For more details about
the pros and cons please see the Theory section.
4
9. e2 b7 10.h4 g4 11.key hâ is the normal
way.
2
9...h5 10.h4 g4 11. e2 b7
i
a b c d e f g h 8
The black king will remain in the centre and 7
Site’s super-bishop on e5 is from another
planet from its rival on b7, so White has more 6
than enough for the pawn. Also, opposite- 5
coloured bishops tend to favour the side with
the initiative.
4
3
21...&g6 22.&d2 Ob5
2
Or 22...c3 23.bxcs bxc3 24.&c2 & a5
2$.&xc3z Jpevakova — Jones, corr. 2007. 1
a b c d e f g h
23.a4 bxa3 24.&aa3 a5 25.&al
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav U3

Black is guarding his g-pawn, but having 13...&g8 1d.&fdl xe5 15. e5 d7 16.fig3
moved his pawn-chain from h6-g5 to h5- fig7 17.d5! Tel 18.a4! White already has
gd has certainly not hidden the holes on his a powerful initiative. 18...b4 19.dxc6 xc6
kingside, and the pawns can still be attacked. 20. b5 ñxb5 21.axb5 €\b6 22.fid6 ¥fxh4
23.e5+ Babula — Montes, Dresden 2008.
12.0—0
Here, and again on the next move, it was 14. e5
also possible to confront Blacks pawn-chain
with f2-f3 to open the position, but I like
8
Grischuk’s style. He develops smoothly and
makes all his pieces work well together. 7
6
12... bd7 13. c2

g 4
7 3
2
5 1
4 a b c d e f g h
3
The most natural, but it has also been
2
popular to put the rook on the g-file.
1
a b c d e f g h 14...&g8 l5.&ad1
Which rook? 15.&fd1 looks just as good.
13... xe5
Black must get rid of the annoying knight. 8
And you don’t have to write home to your 7
Mom and tell her about the alternatives: 6
‹
13... g7 14.b3 (14.&ad1 is also natural) 4
3
14...cxb3 15.axb3 a6 16.Bad1 0 0 17.Jld3 c5
(17...Yfb6 18.e5 Odd l9. xd5 cxd5 20.i5f4
and h5 falls) 18.Tixc5 xc5 19.dxc5 c8
20.b4+ Skrondal — Lovik, Norway 2008.

b d f g h
13...¥fb6 14.Wadi Àe7 15.b3 cxb3 16.axb3 "'
C e

&c8 17.Òxd7 Òxd7 18.e9 a6 19.Nb}
(anticipating ...c5) 19...c5 20.d5!+ exd5
21.IÉxd5 Òxd5 22.&xd5 &e6 23.Bfdl €ib5
2d.&d6 White is winning, Conté — Dlugosz,
Krakow 2000.
19...iúd7 16. 3 ¥fb6 17.b3 cxb3 18.axb3=
18...a6 19.e c5 20.d5 exd§ 21.Òxd5 àxd5
22. xd5 Òe7 23.&fd1 tlf8 24.e6!? Àxe6
25.&e5 &c6 26.del ÒgÜ 27.i2xh5 i7d8
 Playing rhe Queen’s Gambit
28. xg4+ Kordts — Makovsky, corr. 2001.
19.e5 c3 20.&xc3
Site has a significant positional advantage
despite the missing pawn, Gilimshin —Petraitis,
corr. 2004.
Black has also tried:
15...&g6
But this is artificial.
16. f4 e7 17.b3
On the recommended move 17.g3, as played
by Sakaev, Black should try either 17...&a5
or 17...fib4.
17...cxb3
17...b4 18. a4 c3 gives Black impressive
pawns, but White succeeded in breaking
them up and building a direct attack iii the
following game: 19. c5! c8 20. c4 &a5
21.9d3 fib7 22.key &g7 23.a3! bxa3 24.b4
Axb4 25.\fb3 &b6 26.fih6 &h7 27.fig5 Set
28.&xc3 xe4 29.&e3 Ikd6 30.âxe7 &xe7
31.Og51 f6 32.&g6 &ah8 33.kxe6! Od8
(33...&xe6 34.&fel) 34.€id7 1—0 Dhanish
— Dothan, corr. 2006.
18.axb3 a6 19.g3 7fb6 20.e5 fid5 21.C1xd5
cxd5 22.
Very illustrative: the Ringside is easily opened
and White both wins material and penetrates
the black position.
22...&c8 23. b1 gxf3 24. xf3 d7 25.fixh5
&g7 26. h6! i7xg3 27. h2 Ilcg8 28.¥Jth7
1—o
Voyna — Kramer, corr. 2000.
14...fih6
This looks a bit extravagant.
15.b3 cxb3 16.axb3 0-0
But is in fact not so clear.
17.&fdl
17. Ad3 is possible.
IN...key
17... e8 and 17... d7 can be answered with
18.@g3 with good long-term compensation.
18. g3 d7 19.e5 f5 20.exf6 xf6
Krush — Erenburg, Las Vegas 2007, and
now 21. d3â would emphasize White’s good
control of the white squares. The pawn-chain
h5-g4 is actually quite loose.
15.b3!
Very standard by now.
15...cxb3 16.axb3 0-0
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a b c d e f g h
17. g3
A very important decision. Grischuk has a
flair for attacking chess, no doubt about that.
He knows it must be very risky for Black to
take on d4 wirh the queen, so he doesn’t waste
time with the preliminary 17.&adl, but moves
the bishop immediately creating the threat e4-
Actually 17.&adl is also quite good. It is a
move you can make automatically without
thinking, and a dozen players have done that
— made the move I mean, I don’t know about
the thinking part — with good results. White
always has fine long-term compensation for
the pawn in these types of position.
Grischuk’s move forces the pace more and looks
promising, but let’s check the other option:
17.&ad1
 Black has tried different moves:
Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav l45

8 18... xg7 19.e5 f5 20.exféi &xf6 21.fid3 f5

22.Exp exf5
Black held iii Taucius - Figueiras, corr.
6 2005.

8
3
7
2
6
a b c d e f g h
4
17...Ad7 18. xg7 (18. g3!?) 18...&xg7 19.e5
IS 20.exf61 xf6 21.&felâ '2'd5 22. xd5 exdâ 2
23.fid3 &xh4 24.&e6 &f6 25.g3 g§ 2b.&e5
tfh6 27.&e7t &O 28.Odel c8 29.&e2 Of6 1
30.&x Exp 31.&e51 &(d 32.&c7t 1—0 a b c d e f g h
Daus — Blauhut, corr. 2006.
17...c5
This liberates the passive bishop on b7 and
17...fih7 l8. g7 7 1 9.g3 b6 20.e5 &ad8
seeks active counterplay. Black does not mind
21.fid3 I 22.exf6} xf6 23. e2 c5 24.&xc5
that material equality will be restored.
&xc5 25.dxc5 a6 26.C1f4 fid5 27. c2â White
has good winning chances in the ending, as e6
and h5 are weak, Karason — Mayer, corr. 2002. 17...b4 18. a4 €1d7 19.&ad1 &e7 20. c5
xc5 21.dxc5 \\fd8 22.&d6z fid4 23.e5 &xd6
17...&e7 18. g3 b4 19. a4 c5!' 20. xc5 2lfc8 24.crd6 GB 2â.&e4 b6 Avrukh — Sargissian,
21.f3 d7 22.fxgd xc5 23.dxc5 &xc5 24. c4 Germany 2007. Now 26.&xb4 takes the
&d8 25.&e2 &a5 26.gxh5 8xd1 27.&xdl 7fc5t pawn back and leaves Black with a miserable
position.
28. f2 &e5
28...&xh5 29.&d8} &h7 30.¥fxh5} $xh5
31.fid3+— After 17 ...b4 18. a4, instead of 18...Ikd7,
29. h6 fif6 Black’s most recent try is: 18...c5!? 19. xc5
29... 6 30.i7d8t &h7 31.fid4 ¥ff4 &c8 This is an intelligent way to try to solve
the opening problems. 20. d3 &xc5 21.dxc5
32.&h8J g6 33. xe6! fxe6 34.h5t &f7
xe4 22.&xd8 $.xd8 23.l2xa7 k\xc5 24.&dl
35.&h 7t e8 36.&xb7z
&xd1J 25.fiid1 fid5 26.¥lc7 1 2—' 2
30. g4J h7
Christensen — Selyanchin, corr. 2005.
This was Leitao — Matsuura, Sao Paulo
2008. In the game Black succeeded, but White
31.fid4 7fh 5 32.&xh5 é xd4} 33.Bxd4 Bxh5
could instead try: 20. c4 &xc5 21.dxc5 xe4
34. d3 xh6 3â.&xb4 c6 36.g3+
22.&fdl
With a pawn more.

17... e8 18. xg7

18. @g3!? f5 19.CXf5 exf5 20.EU f6 21. 17... xd4 is indeed
extremely risky: I 8.&fd1
with good positional compensation, Neto — ¥fb6 19.e5 45d5 20. e4† is a good answer.
Avotins, corr. 2004.
146 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

17...iñd7 18.e5 f§ 19.exf6 xf6 20.&adl

e7 21.&g6 22.Eg5 maintained strong
pressure. Black tried to return the pawn with
22...b4 23.Oa4 c5 2d. xc5 Set 25. e3 xc5
26.dxcâ+ but it was no longer satisfactory,
Pashikian - Ter Sahakyan, Yerevan 2008.
17... e8 18.e5 &xd4 19.&ad1 Wc5 20.b4!
tfxb4 21. e4 is a good illustration of how
dangerous this set-up is. White has sacribced
his entire queenside, so the attack had better
work. 21...fih6 22.&d7 c8 23.&d8 fi b7
24.Axed! fxe8 2$. f6} f8 26.tfh 7 kd2
27.fixgâ! e7 (27...hxg4 28.h5 &ed8 29.fih4)
28. xh9 &f8 29. e4 c5 30. Jid6 fi d5
31.âxf7
1-0 Dhanish - Misitinas, corr. 2006.
18.e5
18.dxc5 b4 19.&adl 2fc8 20. b5 xe4
21.fid6 &d8 is unclear.
18... d5
In a recent game Black tried 18...1 d7 but
after 19.Set e4 20.&xe4 cxd4 21.fid3z
it ended in a massacre on the light squares.
21...1 22.exf6 xf6 23.&xe61 h8 24.
¥fd5 2â. e5 &ae8 2d.&fe1 &e7 27.&a6 &g8
28.&e2 c5 2d.g3 Fch 30. h2 &c5 31.&e6
& 32.&c2 1—0 Shulman — Baramidze,
Dresden (ol) 2008.
19. Oxb5 cad4 20. d6 &b8
7 with sacribcing the exchange with &xc3.
21. d2
In a correspondence game White successfully
employed 21. c4 and after 21... b4 22.¥fd2
fid5 23.&fe1 a5 24.Gael J7b6 2§. e4! was
strong: 25... e4 26.&xe4 d3 27.fif4 &h7
28. g5 6 29.exf6 f6 30. xe6 xg5 31.lixg5
Bd6 32. c4 g3 33.Jg3 xg3 34,&e7t &g6
35.tfb 2 1—0 Van Unen — Lanc, corr. 2007.
The problem is that 2d.,. c4 2â.&xc4 tsd5
seems to hold without any problems.
21... c3 22. 3 a5
22...fid5 23.5lxa7 &xb3 would simplify but
Site would keep the pressure with 24.Utah.
23.&a3 5 26. c2
A nice regrouping: the bishop move protects
b3 but also prepares &d3.
2J...&b6
The position is very complicated and it is
hard to find the right plan. Here Black had a
couple of alternatives.
24...1 25.exf6 &xS 26.&d3 ¥fh6 27.l7xa5
@b3 28.JJxb3 &xb3 29.Eggs and Black will
have to pay for the open kings position.
24...a4!? was perhaps best. 25.¥fd3 (25.bxa4
\\b2 i unclear: Black is ready to sacrifice the
exchange) 25...f5 26.exf6 &xf6 and now finally
27.bxa4 and White could come out on top in
this tense position. After all, he can also flirt

6 25.Tel a4
5 Now it probably comes too late, but the
position was difficult anyway. 25...1 26.exf6
4
xf6 27. c4â is the normal way while
3 25...&xd6 is a more drastic solution that hardly
2 is sufficient after 2f›.exd6 27. d3 followed
by c4.
1
a b c d e f g h 26.&d3 IS 27.exfd &xf6 28. c4 xc4
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav 147
once.

Not good. 28...axb3 29.Yih7t &f8 30.&a7

lost instantly, for instance 30...&b7 31.&xb7
@b7 32.fid61, but 28...& to block the
dangerous diagonal was the best chance, even
though it costs at least an exchange: 29. xb6
Oxb6 30.7fd2a

29.bac4

4
3

a b c d e f g h
White threatens &xc3. Black has to move
the queen away, which loses the important d4-
pawn.

29... e7 30. xd4 Oxa3 31. xb6 e5

32. d8$ f8 33. a5 e4
Karjakin finds the last resource.

34. e4
But Grischuk keeps it simple. 34.&xc3 7lxG
3â. e5 &c5 36. xg7 &xc2J 37.1id4 Yixd4}
38.JIxd4 dxc4 was unnecessary, especially
since 39.Axe4 enters a pin and 39...a3 draws.

34... xe4 35.&xe4 a3 36.&e3 IV 37.Oxa3

xc4 38. a5
Attacking h5.

38... fZ 39.&e5 &h6 40. d8} &h7

41.&e7
1—0
On 41...\Sf5 42.JSc7 &g6 43. e5 wins at
 6...R«5
Conclusion: Another great performance by
Grischuk. The Russian star is like a fish in
the water in these complicated affairs. So
could you be. Play over the game a few more
times and get a feel for this dynamic
initiative. It is notable thai Grischuk again
uses the 15.b3 break.

MoScow Variation Conclusion: The Moscow

Variation is ar the very cutting edge of
modern opening theory. Many of the lines
are strangely balanced: White has a good
long- term initiative for the pawn, but
perhaps not more than that. In a practical
game, however, it will be difficult for the
black player to find his way through this
tactical maze. And that’s why it often pays off
to play razor-sharp chess with White — you
will dictate events and psychologically it is
much more pleasant to attack than to
defend. Of course the Moscow and the
Bowinnik Variations both lead to hair-
raising complications and there is a lot of
theory, but you don’t have to know
everything by heart to play them. And please
remember that even though FIDE has
made the game faster and faster over the
years, you are acmally still allowed to think at
the board.

Theory: Cambridge
Springs

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. f6 4. c3 e6 5.fig5

&bd7 6.e3
White could transpose to a Queen’s Gambit
Exchange variation with 6.cxd5 exd5 7.e5.
This structure is rightfully considered easier
for White to play, so it could be a good
practical choice. However, when I
recommended the Exchange variation in
Chapter I it was with the knight on e2. Here
it is on , so that would create some
discrepancy and also the Cambridge Springs
is harAy something to be afraid of.
148 Playing the Queen's Gambit

It was also possible to transpose to a Queen’s

This is symmetrical, but the knight is passive
Gambit Declined with 6... e7 while other
on d7.
bishop moves such as b... b4 or 6... d6 do
not quite meet the positional demands of
8.i5d2
the situation. On 6... b4 a simple answer is Directed against ... e4.
7.cxd5 and no matter how Black takes back 8. d3 Set 9.0—0 was also possible.
he will get an inferior Exchange Variation, 8...Ab4 9.7fb3 0—0 l0,a3 Ad6
and on b... d6 there is nothing wrong with If lo... c3 i 1.bxc3 b6 then 12.Wb4.
7. d3. 11.Ad3 a6 12.0—0 b5 13.N dxe4 14. dxe4
e7 15.d5!
A thematic breA.
8 " 1$... e5
7 15...exd5 16. xd5 Clxd5 17. xd5 Clb6
18.&a2! e6 19.b4 a4 20. e2 and the
6 black queen is in trouble.
5 16.d6 fid8
16...Axd6 17.€1xd6 Ikxd3 18.$xf6 gxf6
4
I 9.Aceh wins.
17.ik xf61 gxf6 18. e4 &a7 19. h6&e8 20.&c2
2 b4 21.axb4 xH 22.l2a4 ’&xd6 23. «h71
&h8 24.&h4 G 25.&h3 Sgt 26.Exp xh6
1 Gritsak — Grabarczyk, Glogow 2001, and
a b c d e f g h here 27.dcl would have won instantly.

The old Cambridge Springs line has regained

7...exd5
some popularity, primarily because many
This creates a QGD Exchange structure after
Black players want to play the Semi-Slav and
all, but with the queen misplaced on a5.
are ready to enter be various Meraii lines but
8. d3 Set
are reluctant to try the chaos of the Bowinnik
Otherwise the queen’s position does not
or Moscow Variations. They are therefore in
m e sense:
search of something solid. With the queen
9.0—0
move Black pins the white knight and creates
the possibility of ... e4.
7
7.nd5 6
The sharpest. If White wants a more 5
4
positional game he can opt for 7. d2 instead,
3
but the chances to get an opening advantage
will be much smaller.

7-..ñitxd5
The real CS move, but of course it is possible
to take back with a pawn. a b c d e f g h
Black now has various options, but White
7...cd5 will come out on top:
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav

9... xc3 13.fid3 fi d7 14.l7c2 e5

Taking the pawn is too risky. I N... c5 loses a pawn after 15. xf6 gxf6
1o.bxc3 xc3 11.e4 dxe4 12.Tel O 13.dcl 16.&h5t and dxcl.
Ifa3 15.dxe$ e5 l b.0-0
13...EH 14.Ah4 Cif6 lâ. f6 6 16.Bh51 Gorelov—Novopashin,Volgodonsk 1981, and
&d8 17. c4 d6 18. g6 &e8 19.&ih7 the threat of c4 gives White the initiative.
db6 20.&g7 Ab4 21.&edl e3 22.fxe3 &xe3
23.&hl fid6 24.i5e5! Yib4 23.&bl fif8 8. d2
26.Bh8 1—0 Tummes — Klugstedt, corr.
1993.
8
14.iñh4 ii5f6
Or 14...fib6 15.&h5t g6 16. xg6 hxg6 7
1/.Bxh8 tfxd3 18.&g8 Ba3 19.l7c5 kd5 6
20.fih6.
5
15.Axf6 gxf6 16.Oh5t &d8 17. c4 Ab4
18.&ed1 d2 19.&c2 g5 20.d5 4
Opening the position.

9...€idf6 10.fixf6 €ixJ 11. e§ d6 12.f4+ 2

9...1 xg5 10.1 xg5 f6

On 10...tfd8 or 10... e7 White gets 11.fd in a b c d e f g h
and on 10...h6 11.Bh5 is strong. 8...fib4
11.h3 Black intensifies the pressure on the c3-
Black was ready to play ...h6 followed by knight. Another way to do that is: 8...'k'i7b6
...Jkg4. 9.Ad3 xc3 10.bxc3 J1d5 (or 10...Ika4) 11.0—
11...h6 12.iilf3 fib4 0 &xc3 12.&e2
Or 12...fid6 13. e5 0—O 14.G c5 15.&f3
cxd4 ld.exdd b4 17. e2 &d8 18.a3 @f8 8
19.&adl d7 20.iñc3= Borovikov — Eggert, 7
Nettetal 2004. White quickly launched a 6
pawn offensive on the Ringside.
13.Bc2 0-0 14.a3
14.key is also fine. 4
14...@xc3 15.bxc3 c5 16.7fb2 &c717.a4+ 3

Grischuk — Godena, Saint Vincent 2005.

There is yet another approach:

7...Set a b c d e f g h
This is tricky, but not that good. A typical scenario in the Cambridge Springs:
8.dxe6 fxe6 9.@h4 fib4 10. d2 xc3 11.bxc3 Black has won a pawn by his consistent
c3 12.dcl I f6 exploitation of the pin on the c3-knight, but
Worse is 12...eâ 13. c4 or 12...0—0 13. c2 he has fallen way behind in development.
fib4 l4,fid3. Game 42 shows how it can continue.
150 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

9.&c1 h6
But Black can play:
Usually Black wins this tempo on the bishop
1l...b6
by playing ...h6 but it is possible to do without
Then 12.fid3 h6 will transpose to something
it. In their famous Candidates match Smyslov
in the mainline that we try to avoid.
tried some other moves against Kasparov, but
Instead we can take the ending, when a
he was severely punished.
recent example went:
9...e5 10.a3! Åd6 (10...Axc3 11.bxc3 lfxa3 12.c4 lfxd2 13. I\xd2 €15 f6 14.@e2 a6
12.e4 Ö5b6 13.fid3äi) 11.dxe5 Öxe5
15.f3
With ...h6 and @h4 included, the bishop
12.Öxe5 Åxe5 13.b4! Åxc3 14.&xc3 Jlxc3
often returns to f2 where it coordinates well
15.bxa5 Öe4 16.Åf4 0—0 17.f3 J\f6 18.e4
with the other troops, so here it is maybe a
&e8 19.Åf2
slight disadvantage to have the bishop on
a6 20.Åe2 Åe6 21.&b1 &e7 22.&hd1 &ae8
23.&b2 Ac8 24.&bd2 &d7 25.&xd7 'J\xd7 g5.
26 g4 Öc5 27.Åe3 Öd7 28.g5:i In Kasparov
15...0—0 16.&f2
16.0—0 was more natural and looks slightly
— Smyslov, Vilnius (9) 1984, Black lacked
better for White.
counterplay.
1d...h6 17. h4 &fe8 18.&hd1 cxd4 19.exd4
e5 20. b3 &ac8 21.a4 e4 22. xf6 Clxf6
9...f6 10.@h4 e5 11. d3 0—0 12.0—0 exd4
23.d5 exf3 24.gxf3 &f8 25.fi f1 &ed8 26.Cld4
12...&e8 13.&c2
&c5 27.'J\b3 &c7 28. Jld4 &c5 29. I\b3 &c7
l3.exd4 &d8 l4.a3! @c3 15.bxc3 I\f8
15...7fxa3 16.c4 C\b4 17.fif5 'I\a6 18.Tal
30.C\d4 &c5
With a draw by repetition, Meier — Carlsen,
1fb4 19.&c2 f8 20.@e4
Dresden 2008.
16. g3 e6 17.&fe1 18.c4 lfxd2 19. xd2
i\b6 20.€\b3 Ika4 21.Afi &d7 22. a5 e6
23.d5 I\d4 24.dxc6 Oxc6 25.nkxc6 bxc6 10.Ah4 c5
26.c5a After: 10...0—0 11.a3 Axc3 12.bxc3 xa3
Kasparov — Smyslov, Vilnius (3) 1984. The chances on the Ringside.
bishop pair is very strong.

The most interesting line is:

9...c5 10.a3 Axc3 11.bxc3
As usual, it is dangerous to try:
11...1fxa3
When Khalifman gives:
12.e4 'i l5f6 13.Ad3 1fa5 l4.d5! exd5 15.exd5
0—0
15...4xd5 16.Ac41
16.0—0 I\xd5
l6...h6 17.3kvh6! gxh6 18.&xh6 wins.
17.fixh7t xh7 18.1fxd5 &g8 19.@e7 &e8
20.&fe1
White’s impressive bishop dominates the
black position and he will have good attacking
13.e4

a b c d e f g h
White again gets a good play for a pawn.
Game 43 shows how the initiative can unfold. 6
5
11.«3 4
Standard by now. 3

1
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav 151

11... c3 12.bxc3 b6 This move prevents Jld4-b5-d6 and

prepares The positional choice: Black prepares ... a6............................. b6-b5 followed by
&c4.
to exchange his problem bishop. Even worse 23.
than before is: 23.S b5 2d.Tel &c4 25. e2 &fc8 and it is
not easy to improve White’s position. 26.Tal
12...&xa3 13.e4 C15f6 14.Ad3 Ba5 15.d5! Bb2 27.&b1 B 2 28.&d1 V2— 2 Simeonov —
exd5 16.e5 e4 17.fixe4 dxe4 18.&d6 Lindqvist, corr. 2007.
reatening mate. 23...&c4 24.e5 b5 25. e2 c5 26.h3 a5
18...95 19. xg5! &b6 27.&f1 b4 28.cxb4 axb4
19...hxg5 20. g5 f6 21.exf6 and it is over. The passed pawn gave Black the upper hand,
20, xe4 xd6 21. xd61 f8 22.fit kb6 Braun — Fridman, Bad Woerishofen 2008.
23.0—0 &g8 24.0
And Black never got out, Petursson — Halasz, 13.e4
Naestved 1988. This is nothing.
13...C15f6 14.fid3 fi b7 15.d5 c4! 16.dxe6
g cxd3 17.exd71 xd7 18.&xd3
This position has been considered fine for
7 Black since an old game between Kramnik
6 and Ivanchuk. A later correspondence
game confirmed this:
5 18...Ac5!' 19.¥fd6 f6
4 Now White could not find anything better
than giving up a piece.
3 20.Jkxf6 gxf6 21.¥fxf6 &f8
2 Rosr — May, corr. 2001, and the finish could
have been:
1
22. e5J 23. c7t &g8 24.&g31
a b c d e f g h With perpetual check.
13.c4
The modern solution. White is content J i4.€i d2
' •
with a slightly better ending, where the pair
of bishops hopefully can claim their right. g
Traditionally White has played:

13.Ad3 Aa6 14.0—0 cxd4 15. xa6 iSxa6 6

16. xd4
5
16.cxd4 0—0 17.e4 5f6 18.&e3 &ac8
should be okay for Black who is ready to 4
swap rooks on the c-file. 3
16...0—0 17.e4 I f4 18.¥fxd7 C\e21 l9.&h1
dxcl 20.dxcl &xa3 21. d2 I\ac8 22. d4 2 22. a6
But this position is considered fine for Black i
rhese days.
a b c d e f g h
152 Playing the Queens Gambit

Black must withdraw the knight to e7 or f6. 18.ke5 with good compensation.
White continues with the flexible f3 and e2. 14.Bd1 I c3 15. d2 e2
The other bishop can always return to f2 with a Or 15...Ab4 16. d3 when 16... a5 is
harmonious position. Game 44 tells more. a mistake after Khalifman’s l7.a3 Axa3
18.2ifb1 b5 19.&b3 20.&axa3 bxa3
21. xc3 &xc3 22.&xc3 a2 23.&a3+ and
16...Oa4 17.a3 Aa5 18.Ob2 f6 19.Ah4 Ad5
20.&fc1 was Magerramov — Sherbakov,
Mehlhom - Drosson Cheliabinsk 1991. The black queen is not
safe and White is ready with moves such as
Correspondence 2003 c2, threatening h7.
i6.&h 1 Ab4 17.a4! xd2 18.axb5 c3
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.AG f6 4.€ic3 e6 5.fig5 19 &a2
Rbd7 6.e3 a5 7.cxd5 Oxd5 8. 7 Black has to go to extremes to avoid losing
9. d3 SECL 10 .bxc3 his knight.

19...fid7
8 19...h6 20.bxc6 bxc6 (20...hxg5 21. e4z)
21. a4 Ad7 22.fih4 g5 23.&xe2 gxli4
24. &c2 ha5 Pankratov — Kariz,
6 corr. 1997.
25. e5a
5 20.fid3
4 20. e4 also looks good.
20...h6 21. h4 g3 22. e2 gxhd 23.&c1 b4
3
2d. e5 d6 25. xd7 xd7 26.bxc6J bxc6
2 27. f3 &hc8 28.&a6+
1 Gerstner — Jirovsky, Germany 1999.

a b c d e f g h 11.0-0 xc3 12. e2

1o...€id5
Black can also win the pawn with: 8
10... a4
7
Because 11.dcl allows 11... xc3 and 11.c4 6
fib4 is even worse.
5
White should of course just give up the pawn
and accept the inevitable. 4
11.0— xc3 12.Oe2 3

The knight looks funny on a4, but Black can

harass the white queen by keep threatening 2
to exchange. A pawn down, White prefers to
wait a little before going into an ending.
12...¥fb2 13. c2 Ytb5 a b c d e f g h
Another line is: 13... c3 14.Wd3 d5 Black has no real weaknesses, but he is
1§.fib3 h6 l6. 4 &c3 l7.&e2 3 terrible behind in development, and his
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav
vulnerable queen almost guarantees that he will
lose even more time getting her back to safety.
White has more than enough for the pawn and
should be in no hurry. The compensation is of
a long-term positional kind: the extra space,
the easy piece-play. Black will without doubt
be able to castle, but he will have great trouble
developing his queenside.
12...fid6
12...Öe7 13.Öxe7 Öxe7 II.Öe5 Ög6
15.Öxg6 hxg6 16.a4!? (16.&fc1) 16...7fa5
17.&fc1 g5 18.h3 f6 19.Öc4 1fc7 20.e4
Eingorn — Meister, Bad Wiessee 2008.
13. d2
Activating the knight.
13...Ba5
Black should be alert. A careless move like
13...0—0? would after 14. c4 c7 15.Cabl
cost the queen because there is no satisfactory
defence against &b3 or &fc1.
14. c4 c7 15. xd6J
A simple decision. White just takes the
bishop pair and secures good play, especially
on the dark squares. 15.1fh5 has also been
tried but it is not as clear-cut.
15...Bxd6 16.fih4 0—0 17.fi g3
8
7 bishop to e5, and then h2-h4-h5.
6
5 Nice bishop.
4
3
2 attack.
1
a b c d e f fl h
153
The bishops exert strong long distance
pressure. Poor Black still has to develop the
queenside.
17...Hd7
Protecting c6 and preparing ...b7-b6
followed by ...@b7. On 17... e7 White could
try the new move 18.e4b.
18.&ac1
Also possible is 18.&fc1 n b4 19. c4 b6
20.e4 a5 21.a3 a6 22.&e3 b7 23. e2 b5
2d. e5 f6 25. g3 &ad8 26.&d1 f5 27.f3 a4
28.&ac1+ Innocenti — Fleischanderl, corr.
2004. Black’s position does not impress.
18...b6 19.&fd1
White centralizes the rooks and finishes his
development. The compensation will not go
away and he is in no hurry. The stem game
continued 19. b1 fi b7 20.&d3 g6 21.&fd1
&ad8 22.&e2 f5 23.@e5 with compensation,
Gligoric — Shengelia, Panormos 1998. But as
Panczyk and Ilczuk proclaim, 20...f5 would
have been better with unclear play.
A double-edged decision, but on 19...fib7
comes 20.e4 e7 21.&b2â when play can
continue 21...f5 22.f3 &ad8 23. c2.
20. e4 e7
20...fxe4 21.&xe4 g6 creates a weakness.
White can put the queen on g4, play the
21. e5
21...fib7 22.&c3 &ad8 23. c2 fxe4
Otherwise the rook would go to h3 with an
24.&a3 a5 25.&b3
153 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

First he creates some new weak spots in the

black camp. 8

25...b5 26. e4 off 27.&c3 h6 28.f4 a4

6
8
7 4
6 3
2
4 1
3 a b c d e f g h
2 Another pawn sacrifice, another initiative.

1
T3... e7
a b c d e f g h 13...ii55b6 14. d3 &e8 l â.0—0 eâ 16. g3
29.gd e7 30.95 exd4 17.cxd4a just opened the position to
Site’s advantage in Kramnik — Lobron,
White launches a direct assault.
Frankfurt l99â.
30... IS 31.gx1i6 xh6 32.&g3 &fZ 33.&
h5 'klf5 34.&dd3! 14.fi g6 15.fig3 e5
1—0 Seeking influence in the centre.

Nice. If 34... xg3 then simply 35.&xg3 and be alternative is:

g7 falls in connection with the check on h7. i5...b6 16.H-o
And l6.hd would very likely have been even
stronger.
Conclusion: A typical display if Black goes for
an early win of a pawn. His bad development 16...k b7
and the strong pair of bishops will make the But with:
rest of the game an unpleasant uphill struggle. 17.e5 &e7 18.h4
White took the initiative.
18...c5 19.h5 f3 20.gxf3 €\h4 21.7ff4 Af5
22. f5 exf5 23.axle &e6 24.&e4 f5 25.d5!
e8 2b.Off+
Kramnik - Bmzon PH. Nielsen — Cu. Hansen, Esbjerg 2002.
White’s central pawns are some sight.
Turin Olympiad 2006

T.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.VG f6 4. c3 e6 5. gS
bd7 6.e3 a5 7.cxd5 xd5 8. d2 fib4
9.&c1 h6 10.@h4 0—0 11.a3 c3 12.bxc3
tfxa3 13.c4
16.h4 was also possible, but Kramnik just
finishes development. It is clear he believes in
the long-term prospects of White’s position.
16...&e8
 Chapter 4 - The Semi-Slav 155

16...&e7 has been played in a correspondence 2d. xd4

game, but it does not change much. White The most dynamic option.
can continue 17.&fel like amnik or even
17.h4!?. 24... c5
24...dded 29.f41
17.&fe1 a5 18. 2 $fd8
Black got his queen home, but Kramnik still 25. fi c7 8a8
doesnt hurry. Slowly but surely he implDVRS his
pieces. He has a nice centre and good prospects
8
on the Ringside, while Black’s majority on the
queenside will not be a real threat for long. 7
6
19.Ab1! a5 20.dcdl a4 21.
5

8 4
3
2
1

4 a b c d e f g h
3* 26. $!
2 The culmination of Kramnik’s remarkable
1 handling of this bishop.

26...&xf2 27.OAT &B

a b c d e f g h In his notes in Informant the winner
Kramnik has coordinated his pieces mentions the nice detail 27...&f6 28.fid8t!
beautifully. He found an active post for the with mate in a few moves.
light-squared bishop where it points all the
way down to the weak spot and at the same 28. e6J Axed 29.%xe6
time blocks Black’s passed a-pawn. The black king is caught: White will follow
up with &e3 and &f3. Black cannot move
21... e7 22. c1 &a5 the knight from d7 because of the weak back
Black tries to get his rook out without rank.
developing the c8-bishop at all.
29... e7 30.&e3 e8 31.VG B h5 32.$;d6
23.&d2 exd4 1—4
Releasing the tension mainly benefits White, On 32...iifg5 then 33.& decides.
but Black’s position was not easy to play. 23...
b6 could be answered by 24 h4 when Black Conclusion: This game is another illustration
should perhaps try 24...Cif6 25 xe5 xe5 of the long-term dangers that await Black if
26. xe5 &xe5 27.dxe5 xe5 with some he takes the pawn. Such positions are almost
compensation for the exchange. impossible to defend over-the-board.
i56 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

17. d3 is of course also fine.

17... a6 18.dxc5 bxc5 19.e4 &c8 20. e2 b7
21. d2 $1b6 22.a4 e7 23.a5 d7 24.&hd1
Bubir - Nemec f6 25. c3z
Tasic — Norman, corr. 2006. Space and
Correspondence 2006 bishops!

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. c3 Id 4. e6 5.fi@ 1•

bd7 6.e3 a5 7.«d5 €lxd5 8. dz Abu A key move, but White could also develop
9.Pict h6 10. h4 c5 11.a3 xc3 12.bxc3 b6 the light-squared bishop first.
is.ci a»azt ii.bxaz
15...Àb7 16.Àe2
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
4
3 4
3
2
2
i
1
a b c d e f g h
14...€i5f6 a b c d e f g h
This is the most solid option. 16...&c8
The right square for the rook, but both sides
Black has an alternative that looks tempting: could just as well have started by castling short
14... e7 and then Black could have played ...&ac8 with
The knight can jump to f5 and harass the a transposition.
white bishop. However, the bishop does
not really mind returning to f2, and Black’s The following games took a more original
knights may be misplaced. These are the course:
words; let’s translate them into some practical
examples: 1 ...W0 17.0—0 cxd4
15.f3 USG 16.èG Öd6 U...&fe8 18.&fe1 Bac8 19.Af1ü Vaganian —
Or 16...Aa6 17.Äd3 ¥1c8 18.g4! Öd6 l9.fig3 Masenkow, Barcelona 2007.
e7 20. f2Ë &hd8 21.&hdl iilb8 22.h4 18.exd4 e5 19.c5! bxc5 20.dxe5
i5b7 23.d5! exd5 24.fif5 Öd7 25.cxd5 g6 With the idea 20...Öxe5 21.&xc5.
26.bbl c4 27.h5 ikdc5 28.e4 g5 29.7if1 20...&fe8
Ab3 30.I2c3 Öd6 31.a4 f6 32.Öe3a Potkin GFl5Chllk — Filippov, Tripoli 2004, and now
— Mdakhov, Russia 2008, both 21.Öc4 and 21.4 would have been very
17.4b3 good for White.
 Chapter d - The Semi-Slav 157

16...\$e7
Keeping the king in the centre is not 28...f6 2f.h4 &f7 30.h5z
necessarily a good idea. White does not mind closing the position.
He fixes the black pawn on h6, where it might
17.0—0 &hd8 18.&c2!'
18.ihb3 later be hit by the unopposed dark-squared
bishop. Furthermore, the weakness on b6
18...&ac8 l$.&fcl c6 20. bl iñf8 21. f2
will always be there and the dynamics are on
¥\8d7 22. c3 a6 23.a4+
White’s side in the centre and on the Ringside,
Black did not find a plan and now he
so there will be good winning chances.
suffers, Babula Ashton, Pardubice 2008.
30... e8 31. kb7 32.Cabl 6 33.Decl
17.6-0 0W
tid6 34.Ad3 fS 35.$J $c7 36.$e1 $dc8
37.gxf$ e 38. g3 IN 39. f2
8

4 5
4
3
2 2

a b c d e f g h
18.a4 a b c d e f g h
A good positional idea. The further advance 39...&g8
a4-a5 would attack Black’s pawn chain. It was It was difficult to find a move. 39... xc4
also possible just to centralize the other rook 40. xc4 xc4 41.Decl lost an exchange and
and see what Black intends to do. 18.&fd1 &fe8 on 33...C\f8 White advances 40.d5.
l9.âkd3 I a6 20. ifl cxd4 21.exd4 &c6 22.a4
&ec8 23.Tal e5 Obviously this is the plan, 40.&e6!
but there was never a good time to execute it. Penetrating Black’s position.
24.d5 &d6 25.a5 i5c5 26.&db1+ Zonrakh —
Romanko, Russia 2008. 40...€\xc4 41.8g61 f8 42. xc4 c4

18...&fd819. b3 g5 20. f2 a5 Not only winning the black h-pawn, but

A drastic decision, but otherwise Site also creating a strong passed pawn.
would play a5 himself
43... e7
21.&fd1 cad4 22.exd4 f8 23. e3 e7 Not 43...Axd3 44.&h8J &g7 45.&xc8.
24. d2 c6 25.fat Oh5 26.Tel & 27.g3
€\g7 28.g4 44.8h7T &d6 45.$t 'klG 46.&h6 Bf8
Taking squares from rhe knight. 47.&g6 %d5 48.&xc7 xc7 49.h6 âxf5
158 Playing the Queen’s Gambit

50.d5! Black just develops and plays a classical

Decisive. Queen’s Gambit Declined. The move ...c6
makes ii quite passive though, and White
50...dfh5 gets a rather free game just by making natural
Or 50...Jtid5 51.&d4 ifid7 52.h7. moves.

51•&xg5 &b8 52.h7 $lxh7 53.&xh5 &g8J 6.e3 0—0

54.&G Af6 ss.Ae6 &g6 56.&fS g4 Or 6...ii\bd7 host will be the same thing.
57.&frT d6 58. b6 e3J 59. e3 fxe3
6O. e2 7.kd3 &bd7 8.0—0 h6
1—o Winning a usefiil tempo, but actually also
giving Wtiite an important extra possibility.
Conclusion: The ending is probably the best The alternative is the old liberating manoeuvre:
Black can get, but still it is nice for White. 8...dxc4 9.) c4 ld5 10. e7 7lfx e7 11.&c1
xc3 12.&xc3
bridge Spz?zzgs Conclusion: be
Cambridge Springs is not the easy solution to
the question posed by 5. g3 that Black might
have hoped for. It is solid on the surface, but
with active and coherent moves Sitegains
the initiative. He should not be afraid to
sacrifice a pawn on the way. If Black takes
it, h« will suffer. Black does best by keeping
his structure intact and trying to develop, but
even here he cannot solve all the problems
and ends up in an inferior ending.
a b c d e f g h
3ñseoxy: @GD Here play divides.

1.dd d8 2.c4 c6 3. f6 4. c3 e6 5.dgS 12...c5

e7 This try to solve his positional problems
leaves Black with a rather passive position
after:
8
13.fib5 cxd4 14. xd4 CIS 15.&d1i
7 When it is not clear how the problem child
6 on c8 shall be developed.
15...b6
5 On 15...a6 16. e2 b5 IN.&e5 is annoying.
4 16.&e5
Khalifman proposes 16.mdcl when 16...&d8
3 17.¥fe5 is a possible continuation.
2 16...&d8
Gotti — Long, Nice 1938. Now:
1
17.iild4 &d5 18.Bc7 &xc7 19. c7 Ad7
a b c d e f g h