The

Tournament
Player's
The English Defence
Repertoire of
Openings ... e6, ... b6, ... Bb7

Raymond Keene, james Plaskett,

jon Tisdall

1
.
.
.

/;
/� - -
The English Defence
The English Defence

RAY KEENE
JIM PLASKETT
JON TISDALL

B.T.Batsford, London
First published 1 987
© Ray Keene, Jim Plaskett, Jon Tisdall 1 98 7

I S B N 0 7 1 34 1 322 O(limp)

Photoset by Andek Printing, London

and printed in Great Britain by
Billing & Son Ltd, Worcester,
for the publishers
B.T. Batsford Ltd, 4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London W I H OAH

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK

Adviser: R . D.Keene GM, OBE
Technical Editor: P.A. Lamford
Contents

Introduction IX

1 White Plays d5 1
2 White Plays lbc3 without d5 27
3 4 f3 and 'fic2 38
4 4 i.d3 47
5 White Delays d4 69

6 Odds and Ends 79

7 Accelerated Queen's Indian 90

Index of Games 99
Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank A ngela Day for typing and preparing
diagrams, Annette Keene for typing, Eric Schiller for arranging material
and layout, Richard Sams for typesetting, Les Blackstock for proof­
reading and Paul Lamford for compiling the index of games.
Symbols

+ Check
t + Slight advantage
± + Clear advantage
±± H Winning advantage
Level position
00 Unclear position
! Good move
!! Outstanding move
!? Interesting move
?! Dubious move
? Weak move
?? Blunder
corres Correspondence
01 Olympiad
IZ Interzonal
L League
Ch Championship
Yzf Semi-final
Introduction by Jim Plaskett

The reasons for England arrogating this opening for herself are
principally Wallis, Basman, Keene, Stean and Miles. These men boldly
went where few had gone before in employing the move orders 1 d4 e6
2 c4 b6 or 1 c4 b6 in their games as Black in the 1 9 70's (and in Wallis' case
even earlier) and many of the seminal ideas and model games of the
opening are theirs.
Indeed, if we go back to the last century the Reverend Owen was
fianchettoing his queen's bishop as Black almost regardless of White's
opening moves, while Tinsley (see page 28) unambiguously used a main
line of the English Defence at London 1 899. And then in the 1 9 50's and
1 9 60's the English county player Thompson regularly chose to deploy
his pieces thus as Black: . . . b6, . . . i.b7, . . . g6, . . . i.g7, . . . e6, . . . d6, . . . li:Je7,
. . . li:Jd7 etc. This huddled formation became known (I know not why) as
"The Hippopotamus", which Boris Spassky played in some World
Championship games against Petrosian.
" If 1 . . . g6 is possible, then why not 1 . . . b6?" was Michael Basman's
query when annotating a game of his which opened 1 e4 b6, and a very
cogent question it is.
Opening formations where Black fianchettoes his king's bishop are
followed almost invariably by the establishment of his pawns on the dark
squares. The Griinfeld Defence and some Modern Defence systems such
as 1 e4 g6 2 d4 i.g7 3 li:Jc3 c6 4 li:Jf3 d5 are exceptional. In the Modern,
Pirc, King's Indian and Benoni Defences (also the Benko Gambit) the
natural follow-up to . . . g6, . . . i.g7 is a dark square pawn chain.
And so when we look at the black queen's bishop in fianchetto, the
reflections of ... e6 and ... d5 or ... e6 and ... f5 occur. Also, the struggle
x Introduction

for the central square in the opponent's half of the board controlled by
the fianchettoed bishop - now e4 instead of d4 - is of great importance.
There exists, of course, an already well-established opening complex
concerned with the fianchetto of the black queen 's bishop and that is the
Nimzo/Queen's I ndian Defence. Throughout the theory of the English
Defence opportunities for comparison with - or just as frequently direct
transposition into - that complex occur.
And yet, the English Defence is not, unlike the Queen's I ndian or the
Nimzo , one of the established and reputable defences. It is audacious
and avant garde, so much so that Polugayevsky's air of disbelief
(Chapter 3, p.43), Hort's feeling that he was seeing "chess from another
planet" (Chapter 1 , p.4), or Donner's comment on television: "I'm
going to try to refute this !" - on move 5 of his game with Miles
(Chapter 2, p.30) - are all understandable.
The move orders 1 c4 b6 or 1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 both allow White to occupy
the centre with pawns immediately which Black, in the true spirit of
hypermodernism, intends to play against.
Chapters 1 to 3 are all about White setting up a pawn centre and
Black's attempts to prove that his counte rplay is sufficient for equality at
least. This battle of ideas has perhaps reached its apotheosis in the
picture after move 6 of the game Farago-Miles, Hastings 1 975-6 (after
I d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 e4 .tb7 4 lt:lc3 .tb4 5 'it"c2 'it"h4! 6 .td3 f5 !):

where White's classical play has met with the brute but brilliant
reponses of 5 . . . 'it"h4! and 6 ... f5 ! , adding to the pressure on e4 which 3 . . .
.tb7 and 4 . . . .tb4 already supply. In that instance, the "avan t-gardiste"
had triumphed.
 Introduction xi

The remainder of the book is concerned with less ambitious set-ups

from White and consequently there are fewer truly critical lines to be
examined.
The games of Miles, Stean, Keene, Basman and Korchnoi produced a
great deal of interest in the concepts of the English Defence in the 1 970's
and many of the principal games in this book are of that decade. People
were i mpressed that moves like . . . 'i!t'h4 very early on in the game could be
used to reach viable middle games against players as strong as Karpov or
Polugayevsky.
Another theme which captured masters' imagination was the pawn
jab . . . f5 which aims to rip up the white centre and looks particularly
apposite if White has played i.d3 . It is here , however, that we see one
of the basic distinctions between attempting to increase the effect of a
fianchettoed king's bishop via . . . c5 and the corresponding move when
the queen's bishop is in fianchetto, . . . f5; . . . f5 can lead to a weakening
of the black king's position and this drawback is most apparent in
Chapter 4.
The attempts at an outright refutation of the English Defence have
foundered with the sole exception, in my opinion, of the line 1 c4 b6
2 d4 e6 3 e4 i.b7 4 i.d3 f5 !? (see Chapter 4). In Chapter 2, we shall
see that the line 1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 d5, which on the evidence of two
Karpov-Miles games was once thought to be definitely in White's
favour, actually contains a variety of responses for Black in which he can
hope to equalise.
In Chapter 3 the "Samisch" move 4 f3 is examined. Black has a route
to equality with 4 . . . f5 5 ef ef and he can also look at a couple of
fascinating gambits; Piasetski's 4 . . . e 5 ! ? or Miles' truly imaginative 4 . . .
f5 5 e f ll:\h6!?.
Tony Miles deserves recognition as the grandmaster who has
contributed most to the theory of the English Defence. He has
consistently employed it at the highest levels of the game and revitalised
the opening with many new ideas.
The English Defence is still a recent arrival on the chess scene and
there are surely developments yet to come in this, one of the most
unexplored of the hypermodern defences.
Finally the theme of the reflection of systems where Black fianchettoes
his king's bishop reminds me of the grandmaster (who shall remain
nameless) who once arrived at the board having had a little too much to
xii Introduct{on

drink. He had the black pieces and after the moves I e4 lt:\c6 2 d4 b6 3
3 ll:\f3 e5 4 de stared at his game with a shocked expression and
remarked: "All my life I have played the Griinfeld Defence, yet I never
realised it lost a pawn!"
1 White Plays d5

White plays d5 before a3 clearly better.

6 b5
Petrosian-Keene A clever way to create counter-
European Team Championships chances.
Bath 1973 7 ll::lxb5 ed
1 d4 ll::lf6 8 .if4 d6
2 c4 b6 9 c5 0-0
3 liJc3 .ib7 10 cd cd
4 d5 e6 11 li:ld4 ll::lc6
5 a3 (1) 12 ll::lgf3 ll::le4
13 .ie3 ll::le 5
I 14 .ih3 'it'aS+
B 15 �n .ic8! (2)

This is not an English Defence

proper, but the position could
have been reached via a I c4 b6
2 d4 e6 3 d5 .ib7 4 a3 lLlf6 5 ll::lc3
move order.
5 .ie7
6 g3
Such meekness is not in the
spirit of this opening. The straight­
forward 6 e4 would leave White
Black's doubled isolated d-pawns
provide control of some important
central squares and he has achieved
an approximate equality in the
diagrammed position, even though
White went on to win m many
moves.
2 White Plays d5

O'Kelly-Keene Games such as these added

Premia de Mar 1977 weight to the assumption that it
1 d4 e6 was not wise for Black to allow the
2 c4 b6 cramping advance d5, for even
3 a3 lb f6 though Black achieved equality i n
4 lbc3 .ib7 both h e had to wriggle imagin­
5 d5 .id6 atively to obtain it.
6 lbf3 0-0 The case for d5! seemed firmly
7 .ig5 established after the following
On 7 e4 ed and 8 . . . l:l:e8 gives game.
counterplay.
Karpov-Miles
7 .ie7
Las Palmas 1977
A cute move with the threat . . .
lbxd5. 1 c4 b6
8 .if4 lbh5!? 2 d4 .ib7
9 .ig3 .if6 3 d5 e6
10 Ii:cl lbxg3 4 a3 lt:Jf6
11 hg h6 5 lt:Jc3 .id6
12 e3 c5 6 lt:Jf3 ed!?
1 3 .ie2 ed 7 cd 0-0
14 cd d6 8 .ig5 Ii:e8
A Benoni structure appears via 9 e3 .ie7
a strange move order. Once again Black resorts to this
15 .id3 lt:Jd7 move with the trick of threatening
16 .ib1 Ii:e8 . . . tt:lxd5 but since Karpov is able
1 7 �d3 lt:Jf8 to cope with that threat by a
18 lt:Jd2 Ii:c8 (3) developing move, 9 . . . h6 might
have been superior.
10 .ic4! h6
11 .if4 lbh5
12 .ie5! .if6
13 .id4
Karpov strives to prevent Black
from achieving a natural develop­
ment.
13 .ia6
13 . lt:Jf4 1 4 0-0 ltJg6 would still
..

With equality. leave White with a clear advantage

 White Plays d5 3

after, e.g. 1 5 'ti'd3. 29 fe li:lh7

14 �xa6 li:lxa6 30 'ti'f3 li:le6
15 0-0 c5 31 'ti'b7 Ita8
16 �xf6 li:lxf6 32 li:ld5 g6
17 'ti'd3 (4) 33 li:le7+ �g7
34 li:lc6
l -0
In the following game, Black
also tried the development of his
king's bishop at d6, but White
still obtained the advantage.

Timman-Speelman
Amsterdam Zonal 1978
1 c4 b6
2 d4 e6
A B enoni pawn structure has 3 d5 �b7
arisen and Black is left with a 4 a3 �d6
prospectless middlegame whilst 5 li:lf3 'ti'e7!?
White has the natural and very 6 li:lc3 li:lf6
strong plan of mobilising his 7 �g5 h6
central pawn majority. 8 �h4 li:la6
17 'ti'c8 9 e3 c6
18 li:ld2 d6 9 ... g5 l O � g3 �xg3 I I hg 0-0-0!?
19 li:lc4 Itd8 - Speelman.
20 e4 li:lc7 1 0 �e2 li:lc7
21 b4! 11 li:le4! (5)
Stifling all counterplay.
21 lt:\a6
22 b5 li:lc7
23 a4 'ti'd7
24 f4 Ite8
25 Itad1 Itad8
26 h3
There is no hurry.
26 'ti'e7
27 e5! de
28 d6! 'ti'f8
4 White Plays d5

11 ed! this queen move - it seems to be

1 2 lLl xd6+ 'ifxd6 quite interesting and is probably a
1 3 .i.g3 '!fe7 playable idea".
1 4 .i.xc7 d6 Indeed, neither then nor sub­
15 cd! 'ifxc7 sequently, was 3 ... 'ifh4 refuted.
Black cannot play 15 . . . lt:lxd5 4 lLlc3
because of 16 .i.xd6 'ifxd6 17 e4! . Another Miles experiment en­
White has a clear advantage and countered the safe 4 e3. After 4 . . .
Timman went on to win. lt:lf6 5 a 3 ? (better i s 5 lLlc3 aiming
Accordingly many players of the to transpose back to the text) 5 . . .
black pieces began trying move i.b7 (Black was already generating
orders designed to avoid set-ups embarrassing pressure against d5.
with . . . .i.b7 and . . . .i.d6 against The game is the now familiar sight
White's early d5. Their experimen­ of the English GM unceremoniously
tation was greatly to enrich the battering a white centre to death)
theory of the defence. 6 lt:lf3 (6 ll:Jc3 ed 7 cd ll:Je4! favours
Black also) 6 . . . 'ifh5 7 de fe 8 .i.e2
Karpov-Miles 'ilg6 9 lt:lh4 'ifh6 10 i.f3 lt:lc6 I I g3
Bugojno 1978 g5! 12 e4 lt:le5 13 i.g2 'ilg7 14 f4 gh
1 c4 b6 1 5 fe lt:lg4 16 .i.f4 0-0-0 17 lt:lc3
2 d4 e6 .i.c5 1 8 'ifd2 lt:lxe5 1 9 b4 h 3 ! 0-1,
3 d5 'ifh4!? (6) 0gaard-Miles, Reykjavik 1 978.
4 i.b4
5 i.d2 lt:lf6
6
w
Not 5 . . . 'ifxc4 6 e4 �c5 7 ll c l ,
threatening to invade b5 with the
knight.
6 e3
Black was actually threatening
to take the c-pawn and run. If 6
lLlf3? �xc4 7 e4 �c5 White has
no time for the reflex 8 llc I ?? due
to 8 . . . lt:lg4, with 9 �e2 impossible
because of 9 . . . .i.a6.
A shocking move. Hort com­ 6 .i.xc3
mented "Here we see an example Unfortunately Black cannot play
of chess from another planet . . . I slowly. 6 . . . .i.b7 is punished by 7
think Miles deserves the credit for g3 and the lady is em barrassed.
 White Plays d5 5

7 .txc3 ll:le4 structure predominantly entrenched

8 �c2 ll:lxc3 on white squares, White will
9 �xc3 0 -0 eventually expand - the most
10 g3! thematic break being the intrusive
If 10 ll:\0 �e7 =. c5 - and the change in affairs
10 �e4 implemented by such a procedure
11 f3 �g6 will open vistas for the now
12 ll:le2 dormant piece and it will be
Although many sources consider Black's bishop tha t suffers from a
this position equal there seems lack of prospects, inhibited by the
little doubt that White has a slight, greater control of the board that
but lingering, advantage - a fear­ White's pawn mass exerts.
some weapon in Karpov's hands.
�--�-%· ��i•
�-[..% �-[..%-
Though Miles defends grimly, he 7
is always a bit short of total w [.. .i. [.. • .t. [.. .t.
f"'�
equality and this state of affairs ,. • .
has put 3 . . . �h4 (though in some . -�- .
respects solid) low on the list of -�- -�9.
replies to 3 d5.
12 .ib7
• • u�•
1 3 0-0-0 d6 �u •tt:J• •
14 g4! ll:ld7 • �
� Mll·i.·ll
� �
15 h4
17 e4 ll:ld7
Quietly and simply Karpov
18 ll:lc3 ll:le5
begins to encroach territorially.
1 9 .te2 ll:lg6
The threat of g5 and ll:l f4 obliges
20 �d2 ll:lf4
Black to swap queens, when White's
Hort notes that "it is al most
spatial superiority amounts to a
unbelievable that Black is worse".
virtually eternal annoyance.
The opinion of the players at the
15 �f6
tournament was that the eventual
16 �xf6 ll:l xf6 (7)
loss of the game by Miles was in no
The tense opening has given
way due to his bold queen sortie,
way to a queenless middlegame
but was rather a result of not
where Karpov is free to inflict
playing for . . . f5 at this poin t by
interminable discomfort. One thing
preparing with . . . g6.
worth noting is that White's bishop
21 .td3 .ta6
is not as bad as it appears at a
22 �e3 ll:lg2+
cursory glance. Despite a pawn
23 �d2 ll:lf4
6 White Plays d5

24 :Sh2 33 :Sb2 lie8

Of course White avoids repeating 34 :Sc3 .id 7
the position. As Black cannot 35 c5!
fo rce favourable clarifications (e.g. Finally! This guarantees both
24 . . . ed 25 lb xd5 lbxd5 6 cd gives lines of invasion and points of
White a new target, the backward attack.
c-pawn) he is obliged to sit patiently 35 llea8
and await developments. 36 cd cd
24 llae8 37 lbf5
25 b3 �e7 Forcing a new concession. To
26 'i!;>e3 e5 save the d-pawn Black must grant
Supporting his best piece on its access to c6.
only outpost but this also renders 37 i.xf5
his pawn structure less flexible, all 38 gf :Sa3
part of the world champion's flair 39 :Sbc2 'i!;>f8
for reducing constructive counter­ 40 :Sxa3! 1ixa3+
play to an absolute minimum. 41 'i!;>f2 lab3
27 lbe2 lbxd3?! 42 :Sc6 :Sxb4
A surprising decision . As men­ 43 :Sxd6 c;!;>e7
tioned in the note after Black's 44 :Sc6 \t>d7
16th, White has the potentially 45 h5! (8)
better bishop, but this would seem
the lesser evil when compared to
acceding to a knight v bishop bout
in a closed position .
28 :Sxd3 lia8
Miles prepa res to meet the in­
evitable b4 with . . . a5, when White
must conceded the a-file to keep
his pawn st ructure intact. Un­
fortunately for him, control of this
file proves less significant than the A further bonus from the effects
long awaited arrival of the c5 of 37 lbf5. White uses his split
break. pawns to mangle Black's kingside.
29 lbg3 i..c8 45 . . . h6 f6! doesn't help either.
30 b4 a5 45 lib2+
31 a3 ab 46 lt>g3 �b1
32 ab lla4 47 h6 g6?!
 White Plays d5 7

47 . . . gh puts up more resistance. 3 .i.a6!?

48 fg hg An "over-fianchetto", perhaps
Giving White a second passed inspired by such opening lines as l
pawn but 48 . . . fg 49 l:le6 b5 50 d4 liJf6 2 c4 e6 3 liJf3 b6 4 g3 .i.a6.
l:lxe5 b4 51 l:le6 leaves Black 4 e4 ed?!
facing connected passed pawns in Not the most i ncisive. 4 . . . liJf6
the centre armed only with his puts more pressure on White: 5
b-pawn. .i.d3 ed 6 ed .i.b4+ is very
49 l:lc2! l:lgl+ comfortable for Black. 5 lbc3
50 l:lg2 l:lal allows . . . .i.b4 and 5 e5?! liJe4
51 l:lh2 l:la8 leaves White trying to fend off . . .
5 2 �g4 f6 .i.b4+ with . . . .i.c5 and . . . 't!t'h4
53 l:lb2 �c7 looming as potential menaces.
54 l:lc2+ 'i.t>b7 Although 3 . . . .i.a6 had its reput­
55 d6! bS ation dented in this game, it
56 d7 remains a viable idea.
l -0 5 ed liJf6
57 :ilc8 promotes the h-pawn. 6 liJc3 !?
A game that probably owes The open e-file allows White to
more to Karpov's technique than play this without having to worry
to the drawbacks of the opening. about . . . .i.b4 too much . 6 a3!?
.i.d6! 7 lt:Jc3 (7 't!t'e2+ il.e7) 7 ... 0-0
Browne-Christiansen gives Black pressure on the e-file
US Cham pionship 1977 and chances to play . . . c6.
1 c4 b6 6 i.b4
2 d4 e6 7 't!t'e2+ .i.e7
3 d5 (9) Black relinquishes the thematic
pin as White must lose time re­
positioning his queen. 7 . . . 't!t'e7? !
is a spineless method that fails to
equalise (according to Browne)
after 8 't!t'xe7+ 'i.t>xe7 9 il.d2
Christiansen's choice leads to ex­
tremely sharp complications.
8 't!t'c2!?
Preparing to gambit a pawn for
piece activity. A later discussion in
this line went: 8 .i.f4!? 0-0 9 0-0-0
8 White Plays d5
llcH I 0 '8'c2 d6 II li:lf3 cS!? with
mutual c hances, Schm idt-Pytel,
Poland 197H.
8 c6!
Black must undertake immediate
action to avoid a lasting inferiority.
White threatens an efficient develop­
ing scheme or �d3 , li:lge2, 0-0,
li:lf4 with a firm grip on the
position.
9 �d3 bS!? (10)
Black could also try to win a
pawn with 9 . . . �b7 !? since, as
ever, 10 de?! li:lxc6 leaves White
lagging in development. Rapid
deployment is paramount for both
sides, so White would best meet
this with 10 lt:Jge2 ! cd I I cd lt:JxdS
12 lt:JxdS j_xdS 1 3 lt:Jf4 ! with
dangerous compensation, though
Black is solid a position truthfully
- forestalls the recurring defensive
"unclear". Christia nsen's choice
gives him the possibility or ex­
changing white-squared bishops,
wh ich seems to guarantee him a
greater degree of safety.
10 cb cb
11 lt:Jge2 b4
12 lbe4 lt:JxdS
13 0-0 0-0
14 lidl!
Calmly increasing the pressure.
Blac k's forces are jumbled and
unco-ordinated, the extra pawn
isola ted and backward on an open
file.
14 'ti'aS!
A good waiting move, defending
the 5th ra nk. 14 . . . j_xd3 1 5 li xd3
lt:Jf6 16 lih3 gives White excellent
attacking chances despite the un­
sophisticated approach.
15 lt:J2g3 g6?
Although apparently well motiv­
ated - to guard the sensitive spots
on fS and hS - this is a grievous
weakening. Better is 1 5 . . . j_xd3
16 'ti'xd3 lt:Jf6 hoping to relieve the
pressure with wholesale trading.
Then Black would have a chance
to complete h is stunted develop­
ment, though returning the d­
pawn would be unavoidable.
16 i.h6 lieS
17 \!fd2!
A powerful manoeuvre, bringing
the queen in to besiege Black's
draughtly kingside. White also
try 17 . . . j_xd3 because 18 \!fxd3
lt:Jf6 1 9 lt:Jxf6+ j_xf6 20 \!ff3
spearing material. Only the begin­
ning of the troubles due to 1 5 . . .
g6?
17 lt:Jf6
 White Plays d5 9

18 'i!t'f4 'i!t'b6 gets a bit closer to the time

19 i.xa6 ! lZ:lxa6 (1 1) control. Black's pawns are too
scattered and it is only a question
of technique (and avoiding a loss
on time).
31 lie6
32 l:l:dl l:l:g8
33 'i!t'f4 lieg6
34 g3 f6
Preve nting 'i!t'e5+ and so allowing
the knight on a6 to make a show of
entering the game.
35 lixd7 lZ:lcS
20 lid6! 36 l:l:d6 h4
The first blow m a lovely 37 'i!t'xh4 aS
combination . 38 'i!t'd4
20 i.xd6 1 -0
21 lZ:l xf6+ 'it>h8 An excellent effort by Browne
22 i.g7+! 'it>xg7 in the old fashioned swashbuckling
23 lZ:lghS+! gh style.
24 'i!t'gS+ 'it>h8
24 . . . 'it>f8? 25 lZ:lxd7 mate. Now Tempone-Miles
that the avalanche of sacrifices is Buenos Aires 1 979
over, Black tries a few tricks but 1 c4 b6
must surrender his queen for 2 d4 e6
insufficient value. 3 dS lLlf6 (12)
25 'i!t'h6 i.xh2+
26 'it>h1 !
Black's last move wasn't quite
desperation. 26 'it>xh2?? 'i!t'd6+
and . . . 'i!t'd3 would win for Black.
26 'i!t'xf6
27 �xf6+ 'it>g8
28 'i!t'gS+ 'it>h8
29 'i!t'f6+ 'it>g8
30 �gS+ 'it>h8
31 Wxh2 Perhaps the most straightfor­
After a bit of circling, Browne ward move of all.
10 White Plays d5
4 g3
After this, White will be unable
to maintain his pawn wedge, but 4
a3, which by comparison with the
examples given might give White
an advantage, is well dealt with by
4 . . . i.a6! Hofland-Ree, Dutch
Championship 1 978, continued: 5
e3 ed 6 cd i.xfl 7 Wxfl i.d6 8 l2:\c3
0-0 9 l2:\ge2 E:e8 1 0 f3 c6 1 1 e4 cd
1 2 l2:\xd5 l2:\c6 1 3 i.g5 l2:\xd5 ! 1 4
1!t'xd5 i.e7 when Black was at
least equal. Cordez-Morrison, Graz
1 978, varied with 5 b3 i.c5!? 6
l2:\h3 ed 7 cd c6 8 b4 i.d6 9 i.b2 cd
10 g3 0-0 I I i.g2 E:e8 and again
Black was comfortable.
4 i.b4+ !
The beginning of a simple plan
and one for which Miles has shown
a fondness in analogous structures.
4 . . . ed!? and 5 . . . i.b4+ is an
interesting possibility but Miles'
choice is extremely pragmatic and
pulls everything resembling teeth
from White's position.
5 i.d2 1!t'e7
6 i.g2 c6!
Black has already, at least,
equalised. After the d5 pawn goes,
Black's structure is more compact
and more active due to his lead in
development. So White must be
careful . . .
7 de de
8 l2:\c3 0-0
9 l2:\f3 i.a6
10 l2:\e5?!
An extravagance that White
can ill afford. Better is 10 b3,
admitting that he should be taking
care to escape the opening intact.
10 E:d8!
1 1 1!t'c2 i.d6 !
By forcing White to take the
::-pawn, Black ensures an advantage
as the line opening this entails
accentuates his time edge. First
White's d-pawn and now the
king's knight vanish without having
gained anything for their m­
dulgences.
12 l2:\xc6 lbxc6
13 i.xc6 liac8
14 1!t'a4 E:xc6 !
15 1!fxa6 (13)
There is no choice as 1 5 1!fxc6??
i.b7 wins outright.
15 ..ic5!
Emphasising who's in charge
here. The pressure against d2 and
f2 leaves White with a choice of
evils. Larsen suggests the con­
tinuation 16 lid! li cd6 17 i.f4 ( 1 7
. . . 1!t'd7 was threatened) 1 7 . . .
 White Plays d5 II

lixd l + 1 8 lt:\xd l lt:\e4 but hints White's rooks rather pathetically

that this is quite good for Black. to where they stand.
For that matter 18 . . . .ib4+!? also 24 �xa6 't!i'xe2
causes unpleasantness. So, like 25 .ic3 h6
any young player getting pushed 26 �b7 :§:8c7
around a bit, Tempone goes west, 27 �b8 + ..t'h7
in the hope that castling opposite 28 �ffl?
sides will promote better prospects A serious loss of time forcing
of sharp counterplay. Black to play a useful move, after
16 0-0-0 !? lt:\g4! which White 's condition is terminal.
Good j udgment - Miles removes Perhaps Ternpone envisaged the
a defender of the white monarch's continuation 28 . . . f6 29 li h l Ii xc4
somewhat ramshackle shelter before 30 lidS when Miles can conclude
regaining his pawn. in straightforward fashion: 30 . . .
17 lt:\e4 lt:\xfl li xc3! 3 1 't!i'g8+ ..t'g6 32 't!i'e8+
1 8 lt:\xfl .ixfl ..t'f5 ! 33 g4+ ..t'f4 and White's fling
1 9 .ib4 't!i'g5+ is over and the rook on c3 is taboo
20 ..t'b1 lidc8 because of . . . lia7. White's last try
2 1 't!i'b5 't!i'g6+ was 28 b3.
22 ..t'a1 't!i'e4 28 f6
Parrying the threat of 't!i'xc6. 29 �a8 (I4)
Black's initiative is now ominous
- besides a tempting selection of 14
weak pawns to attack, his secure B

king position gives him licence for

acts of aggression.
23 lihfl a6 !
Very fine. Obviously 2 3 . . .
't!i'xe2?? fails to 24 �xc6, but 23 .. .
lixc4 is also imprecise: 24 .ic3
threatens li xf2 and �d7, and 24
. . . �xe2? 25 b3! turns the tables.
23 . . . �xc4?! 24 't!i'xc4 Ii xc4 25 M iles now winds things up with
.ic3 and 26 Iid7 is an improvement a long and brutal successwn of
in White's fortunes as well. The tactical blows.
text opens a line of attack and 29 b5!
allows Black to install another Blowing lines open and adding
piece on the seventh rank, clamping protection to a7, so n ow 30 cb?
12 White Plays d5

Iixc3! 3 1 be l:l a7 is fatal. diagonal. A further asset of this

30 a3 b4! move order is the additional lever
Setting the stage for an energetic . . . f5 as the knight on g8 has the
finish. option of the e7 square.
31 i.xb4 i.d4!
32 i.d2
32 l:l b l i.xb2+!
32 Iia7
33 'i!t'f8 Iic8!
Torturing the queen which is
tied to defence of a3. The rest is
forced.
34 'i!t'd6 Iid8
35 'i!t'b4 Ii b8
36 l:lfe1 l:l xb4!
37 Iixe2 Ii xa3+ 5 l/Jf3
0-l For 5 e4 see the game Suba­
Mate in two. Ruthless exploit­ Schiissler, p. l 4.
ation of superior activity in attack 5 i.g7
by Miles. Co-author Plaskett mentions 5
Curiously, we have been unable . . . 1'5 !? to pre-empt e4. The game
to find any examples of 3 continuation is sharper, . . . f5
i.b4+, although the move is being held in reserve for disrupting
obviously worth a try. the centre at a later date.
6 e4 ti:Je7
Akesson-Plaskett 7 i.e2 0-0
B ergsjo 1 98 1 8 ti:Jc3 f5
1 c4 b6 9 ef
2 d4 i.b7 If 9 e5, then 9 . . . ti:Ja6 intending
3 d5 e6 . . . ti:Jc5 .
4 a3 g6!? (15) 9 lt:\xf5
Plaskett's novelty infuses more 10 0-0
dynamism into the position and is l Ode?! will run into "structural"
a fluid reaction to an early d5. As problems. Black's simplest method
White has committed himself to is 1 0 . . . i.xc3+! l l be 'i!t'f6 when
trying to barricade the bishop on White 's pawns are well and truly
b7, Black immediately takes aim fractured and 12 ed? lt:\xd7 ! gives
along the weakened dark squared Black a tremendous position -

targets on c3 and c4, development,
two centre files and a glorious
outpost for a kn ight on c5 .
10 �e7
10 . . . �xc3!? was still a viable
alternative. Plaskett's policy of
ma intaining the tension is a good
practical decision , in keeping both
with the dynamics of the position
and his own temperament.
11 �g5 �f7
1 2 �c2 lba6
13 b4 ?!
Loosening his queenside. The
knight can not be kept offside this
way since Black can take strong
action to gain alternative routes
for the wayward steed to enter the
game. Undoubtedly, White felt
this aggressive bit of repression
justified because of the tactical
situation, the d-pawn being taboo
( 13 . . . ed?! 14 cd �xc3 15 �xc3
and the knight on a6 must remain
protected). Better was the steady
1 3 ll ad l .
13 c5 !
14 de
1 4 li ab l !? might have come into
consideration.
14 �xc6 !
Taking advantage o f im mediate
tactical threats, Black keeps all
pieces at maximum activity. 1 5
b 5 ? i s now met b y 1 5 . . . �xf3! 1 6
�xf3 lbd4! and 1 7 . . . lb xf3+
followed by 1 8 . . . lbc5 leaves
Black with a won game.
White Plays d5 13
15 ll:ad1
Preventing 1 5 . . . �xf3 which is
now met by 16 �xf3 lbd4 1 7
lixd4! and 1 8 �xa8 .
15 liac8
1 6 lbe 4
And not 16 b5? i.xf3 when 1 7
�xf3 allows 1 7 . . . lii:xc4.
16 lbc7! (16)
17 lbd6 ?
A serious error that runs into a
quick and pu nishing flurry of
punches. Plaskett mentions the
violent 17 g4 ?! when Black has a
chace of strong replies: 1 7 . . . �xe4
18 �xe4 d5! when White has
simply gashed h imself on the
kingsi de, or the more speculative
17 . . . d5!? 1 8 cd lbxd5 1 9 gf �xf5
with excellent attacking chances.
But White's most rational try is 1 7
�f4 ! lbd4 ( 1 7 . . . d 5 1 8 lbd6! o r 1 7
. . . �xe4 1 8 �xe4 d 5 1 9 cd ed - 19
... lbxd5 20 �e5! - 20 'it'b 1
unclear) 1 8 lLlxd4 ( 1 8 li xd4?
�xf4) 1 8 . . . �xe4 1 9 'ft'xe4 'ft'xf4
with rough equality. Having gone
14 White Plays d5

astray at the critical moment, 27 i.xf2+!

White now succumbs to a prolonged Precise and violent to the end.
tactical assault. 28 �xf2 :ii c2+
17 lt:Jxd6 29 �g1
18 1hd6 i.xf3! Or 29 �fl llxf3+ and . . . �e2+.
19 i.xf3 lt:Jb5 ! 29 �e3+
A diabolical route t o d4 that 30 �h1 l::l. xf3!
wins material. 0- 1
20 :i:i:d3 lt:Jd4 In the next game White opts to
21 �a4 seize more space in the centre with
Electing to surrender the ex­ 5 e4.
change rather than lose a pawn for
no compensation, the best practical Suba-Schiissler
chance. Alternative evils: 2 1 �a2 Tallinn 1983
�f5; 2 1 �c l d5; 2 1 �d2 Iixc4. 1 c4 b6
21 �f5! 2 d4 i.b7
22 :i:i:xd4 i.xd4 3 d5 e6
23 i.e7 lH7 4 a3 g6!?
24 �xd7 li xc4 5 e4 i.g7
25 :i:i:d1 �g7! 6 i.d3!?
Avoiding possible annoyances Suba considers this to be dubious
from unexpected checks. 26 :i:i:xd4 but it's hardly as clear as that. His
:i:i:c l + 27 Ii d l :i:i:xd l + 28 �xd l plan is to reinforce the white­
l::l.x e7 restores Black's material squared pawn wedge and to avoid
advantage so White creates breath­ a potentially splintering . . . i.xc3
ing space for his king. by developing with lt:Je2. If all
26 h3 �e5 goes well, the reinforced d-pawn
27 �d6 (1 7) will exert an irksome cramp on
Black's queenside pieces. Schussler
spots the potential drawbacks of
such a scheme and a sharp and
unusual struggle breaks out.
6 lt:Je7
7 lt:Je2 c6! ( 18)
Taking advantage of the fact
that White's piece deployment
doesn't control e5, Black invites
the d-pawn to come in or risk

redundancy.
8 d6!
8 tt:lf4 cd 9 cd ed 1 0 ed 0-0!
leaves White with long range
worries about his d-pawn and
lagging in development. As Suba
points out, 10 . . . tt:lxd5? would be
an error because of the following
attractive variation: 1 1 .i.e4 �e7
( 1 1 . . . lbe3 1 2 �d3 leaves Black's
pieces terminally unco-ordinated)
12 0-0 tt:le3 13 .i.xb7! lLJxd l 1 4
:t!.xd I and White gets a full set for
his queen.
8 l2Jc8
9 .i.c2 c5
Staking out the d4 square for
immediate occupation. Once in­
stalled on d4, Black can ingest the
adventurous d-pawn .
1 0 ttJ bc3 l2Jc6
II h4! 0-0
Not really castling into it as he is
safer here than at e8 - for example,
lbb5 could always induce flight
from the centre.
12 i.g5!
White Plays d5 15
Softening up the kingside and
slightly decreasing Black's grip on
d4 by inducing . . . f6, blocking the
king's bishop.
I2 f6
I 3 .i.e3 e5
14 h5 l2Jd4
IS hg hg
I6 tt:lb5! (19)
The moment or truth, and the
logical culmination or both sides'
plans. White is prepared to sacri­
fice material to maintain the
wedge on d6, while Black must
negotiate the best way of clarifying
the issue.
I6 f5?!
The position is razor-sharp.
Black could try 16 . . . a6 1 7 lbbxd4
ed 1 8 l2Jxd4 ( 1 8 .i.f4 �e8-e6) 1 8 . . .
c d 1 9 �xd4 :tl.e8! when White
obviously has compensation but
Black seems fully capable of
meeting the threats. Another possi­
bility, less chaotic, is 16 . . . lLJxc2+!?
1 7 �xc2 a6 1 8 l2Jc7 :t!.a7 when
Black finally threatens to remove
16 White Plays d5

the thorn on d6, e. g. 1 9 �d3 f5 !? 24 lt:lc3!

( 1 9 ... .i.c6 20 b4! ) with greater A calm regrouping that em­
activity and renewed access to the phasises White's complete grip.
f6 square. The move chosen has a 24 .i.h6
mista kenly materialistic motive 25 lbe4 �xf5
but is not clearly an error. 25 . . . �g7 26 lbxg5 ll:f6 27 lbe4
17 ef!? .i.xg2?? is also hopeless.
But this is. The initiative and 26 �h1 'it>g7 (20)
positional considerations are para­
mount in such a sharp position.
Correct was 17 . . . gf! with com­
plicated play.
18 lbexd4!
The beginning of a crushing
atta ck. Suba handles the rest of
the game with great elan.
18 i.xh1
Black decides to have material
compensation for the coming in­
dignities. 18 . . . ed 19 ll:h2 .i.c6
( 19 . . . de 20 l hg2 is clearly better 27 �xh6! 'it>xh6
for Wh ite) 20 .i.f4 gf 21 lbc7 and 28 lt:lxg5 �g4
�h5 is gloomy as well. Even the desperate 28 . . . �xg5
19 lt:lf3! loses immediately to 29 �h l +!
Threatening �d5+ and �xa8. 29 �hi+ 'it>g 7
With Black's force cut in half by 30 �h7+
the now secure d-pawn and dom­ 1 -0
inating the light squares, White's A vicious finish, but from a
offensive is irresistible. theoretical point of view, Black's
19 ll:b8 idea seems well worth playing.
20 �d5+ 'it>h8 In neither of these games could
21 0-0-0 .i.xf3 White demonstrate a clear ad­
22 �xf3 �f6 vantage against 4 . . . g6.
23 �d5! White's play was very ambitious
Threatening ll:h l + and meeting in Littlewood-Plaskett, H astings
the diagonal blocking 23 . . . �f7 1 982-3. From diagram 1 5: 5 e4
with 24 �h l + ! and 25 fg. .i.g7 6 lt:lf3 lt:le7 7 lt:lc3 0-0 8 h4!?,
23 g5 but Black achieved equality after

8 ... lt:la6 9 hS lt:lcS 10 hg l2:\xg6!?
11 .td3 fS ! 12 ef ef 13 wO �e7 1 4
.tgS .i.f6 1 5 lihS .txgS 1 6 lixgS
l2:\e4 17 lihS l:iae8 and the game
was drawn in 56 moves.
Finally, there was a somewhat
different interpretation from Boris
Spassky in the first game of his
match with Jan Timman in 1983:5
e4 .i.g7 6 l2:\f3 l2:\a6!? 7 lt:lc3 lt:lcS.
Grandmaster Michael Stean has
suggested the plan of 7 . . . .txc3+!?
8 be �e7, intending . . . 0-0-0. 8
'i!¥c2 ed !? 9 cd l2:\f6 10 i.c4 0-0 1 1
0-0 c6 1 2 d6 lt:le6 13 eS lt:ldS 1 4
lt:le4 aS 1 5 ll e l IreS 1 6 h4 b S 1 7
.ta2 cS. The white pawn wedge e5,
d6 reminds us of Michael Basman's
play. Spassky tried to play around
it and although he was not success­
ful ( 1 -0, 4 1 ) we cannot regard his
opening concept as refuted on the
evidence of this one example.
Nevertheless, the student should
note the clear distinction between
Spassky's opening play in this
game and the other three examples
of 4 . . . g6, in that he developed his
king's knight to f6 instead of e7
where it permits the disruptive . . .
f5.
When reviewing the gamut of
Black responses to an early d5,
Vlastimil Hort once commented,
"There remains the unanswered
question: How does Black meet
1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 d5 .i.b7 4 e4?"
Boris Spassky supplied a good
White Plays d5 17
answer i n the following game:
Timman-Spassky
Tilburg 1 983
I c4 b6
2 d4 i.b7
3 dS e6
4 e4 .tb4+
This simpl ifying move worked
well on this, its first, outing. The
double fianchetto starting with
4 . . . g6 would presumably be less
good for Black now than when
Wh ite has spent a tempo upon a3 .
Still it could be tried.
One move which has yet to be
seen here is 4 . . . .i.c5 ! ? with the
idea of . . . lt:le7 and . . . f5 . Before
further conclusions can be drawn
we need some practical examples.
5 i.d2 'i!¥e7! (21)
The exchange of dark-squared
bishops like this is often seen in
the Bogo-lndian Defence.
6 .i.xb4
This brings nothi ng, bu t Black's
r White Plays d5

st move has created the threat of 3 dS e6

.. ed winning a pawn and there is 4 e4 i.b4+
> comfortable way of coping s i.d2 �e7
tth it . 6 i.xb4 �xb4+
6 �xb4+ 7 �d2 �xd2+
7 �d2 �xd2+ 8 \t>xd2
8 \t>xd2 �f6 So far as in the previous game.
9 �c3 d6 8 rs
1 0 i.d3 0-0 Perhaps this is even more con-
11 �f3 c6 sistent.
12 de fe 9 f3 �a6
13 eS de 10 �c3 �e7
1 4 �xeS �bd7 11 �d3 0-0
1 S �xd7 �xd7 12 ef ed
16 f3 ll:ad8 (22) 13 Il:e1 �xfS
1;2-1;2 14 cd �b4
1S �h3 �d6
16 �e4 aS
17 a3 �a6
18 ..ic2 bS (23)

4 . . . �b4+ and 5 . . �e7 looks

.

�e a fine equalising idea, the

edit for which should once again
, to Miles because of this ante­
dent: The pressure on White's re­
maining fragment of centre was
Williams-Miles reaching such proportions that
BBC Master Game 1976 Williams gave it up with 1 9 �e4.
1 c4 b6 After 19 ... �c4+ 20 \t>cl .txdS 21
 White Plays d5 19

tt:lcS! White had no compensation

and lost in 75 moves. 24

White plays a3 before dS

A survey of the pn:ceding examples
will reveal the importance of
nuances in move order. Moves
such as . . . .ia6, . . . �h4 or . . .
g6 could be quite out o f place
if White refrains from playing
d5.
In order to reduce Black's 5 dS tt:lf6
options some players of the white 6 g3
pieces have preferred to play a3 Upon 6 de, aside from the
before com mitting themselves to normal recapture 6 . . . de, M iles
d5. A move order such as 1 d4 e6 2 also drew attention to the gambit
c4 b6 3 tt:lc3 .ib7 4 a3 removes possibilities 6 i.c5 !? or 6 . . .
the possibility for Black of many i.d6 !?
of the enterprising set-ups we have 6 i.cS
just examined. Of course, it also 7 i.g2 0-0
allows him to play the staid and 8 tt:lh3
· reputable 4 . . . d5 transposing The alternative deployment 8 e3,
into an orthodox Queen's Indian intending tt:lge2, IS well worth
Defence. considering.
If Black declines to play a 8 aS
Queen's I ndian in preference for 9 0-0 tt:la6
an E nglish Defence then he pro­ 10 b3! ?
bably must play another of Tony Mi les himself suggested that 1 0
Miles' ideas, 4 . . . f5 !? 'i!Vc2 would have cast doubt upon
his opening idea aAd also 10 e4,
Stean-Miles which was played in Pagden­
London 1980 Plaskett, Lloyds Bank 1 982, gave
1 c4 b6 White the advantage.
2 d4 i.b7 10 �e8!
3 tt:lc3 e6 11 i.b2
4 a3 fS!? (24) White could not win a pawn
Establishing a weird form of with 1 1 de .ixg2 1 2 ed because of
Dutch Defence. 1 2 ... �e5.
.!0 White Plays d5

II eS 1 8 �hi lt:Jxc2
12 e4 �g6! 19 l:l:xf8+ i.xf8
Via this typical Dutch queen 20 i.xg6 lt:Jxa l
manoeuvre, Miles generates at­ 21 i.xh7+
tacking chances for hi mself. There was no salvation ei ther in
13 �c2 (25) 2 1 i.f5 lt:lxb3 22 i.xd7 lt:J ac5 and
Black will mop up the remainder
of the white queenside.
21 �xh7
22 .txa l lt:JcS!
23 lt:Jd l lt:Jxb3
24 i.xe5 CZJd2
25 i..xc7
H 25 CZJe3 CZJxc4!
25 CZJxc4
26 lt:Jc3 i.xa3
27 lt:JgS+ �g6
28 lt:Jge4 b5
13 lt:Jg4! 29 lt:Jxb5 i.. x d5
14 ef l:l:xf5! 30 lt:Jc3 i.c6
15 i.e4 llaf8 31 �gl i.b4
An excellent sacrifice. Should 0- l
White accept the exchange, Black With admirable objectivity, Miles
will obtain an attack on the did not become so intoxicated by
weakened light squares. For in­ this splendid win that he forgot
stance, 1 6 i.xf5 llxf5 (intending about the possible inadequacies of
17 . . . lt:Je3 ! ) 17 �e2 llh5 1 8 �g2 his idea 4 . . . f5 !? in conjunction
�f5 and the threats of 1 9 . :t:i:xh3
.. with 6 . . . i.c5. Three years later he
or 1 9 . lt:Je3+ are decisive. The
.. faced Tal with the black p1eces
thought of such variations caused and varied with 6 . . . a5!?
Stean to lose his nerve at this
point, for he continued with: Tal-Miles
16 �g2? Niksic 1 983
which allowed a combinative liquid­ ( I c4 b6 2 d 4 .ib7 3 lt:Jc3 e6 4 a3 f5 5
ation to a winning endgame for d5 lt:Jf6 6 g3)
Black. 6 aS!?
16 :S:xf2+! 7 i.g2 lt:\a6
17 llxf2 lt:Je3+ 8 lt:\h3 i.d6 !? (26)
 White Plays d5 21

pawn down .
1 8 �xe4 tt:Jxe4
19 l:l:fe1 l:l:ae8
On 19 . . . tt:Jxc3 20 �d4 tt:Ja4 the
. ..

black knight has been driven

slightly offside, whilst White is
now much more active.
20 lt:Jg5 tt:Jd6!
21 e5 tt:Je4
22 e6
Tal tries to keep the balance of
A quaint development. The the position by initiating com­
bishop has little future on the b8- plications. On 22 cb cb Black has
h2 diagonal but the idea in many excellent chances.
variations is to exchange it for 22 de
White's queen's knight. Black might have done even
9 0-0 0-0 better here with 22 .. . tt:J xe3
10 e4 .ie5! because neither 23 fe de nor 23 cb
11 ef �xe3 lbxd5 planning . . . tt:Jf6 and . . . l:l:b8
12 be ef rounding up the rogue pawn on b7
13 �e2 tt:Je4! appear satisfactory for White.
A fine gambit by which Black 23 i.f4! ed
achieves a satisfactory development. 24 tt:Je6 l:l:f7
The mee k al ternative 14 . . . g6?! 25 tt:Jxe7 l:l:xe1+
was fa r less dynamic and would 26 l:l:xe1 l:l:d7
have created a serious weaken ing 27 tt:lbS �a6
of the kingside dark squares. And here too, the simple 27 . . .
14 �xe4 W f7 was probably stronger since
If 14 0, aside from the viable 1 4 White has little better tha n the
. . . tt:ld6 1 5 .ig5 �e8 1 6 l:l:ae l �g6, abject 28 �c l .
M iles also suggested 14 . . . tt:J f6!? 28 tt:Je7 g5!?
14 fe 29 tt:Je8 ! wn
1 5 �xe4 tt:Je5 30 i.xg5 tt:Jxa3
16 �g4 �e7 31 tt:Jf6 (27)
1 7 .ie3 �e4! Both sides now have passed
The weakness of the white pawns. Play remains complex but
queenside pawns means that Black Black, with his dangerous a-pawn,
can confidently enter this ending a stands at least equal.
> 1
White Plays d5

A very fine move. The pawn

sacrifice creates two con nected
passed pawns for Black, which
guarantees him at least equality .
44 lt:lxf7
Forced, because neither 44 cd
ll:e8! nor 44 h4 i..d 5+ 45 f3 d3 can
be contemplated.
44 'it>xf7
45 lacS b5
46 cd a4
31 lld6 47 d5 a3
32 lt:lg4 lt:lc4 Play is now about a thrilling
Recentralising. struggle of rival passed pawns.
33 l:te7+ 'it;>g6 48 d6 l'Id1
34 i.f4 l:i:c6 Miles demonstrated the variation
35 lt:lh6!? 48 . . . lt:lxd6 49 i.. xd6 a2 50 l'If8+
Tal has hopes of perhaps weaving 'it>g6 ( not 50 . . . 'it>g7?? 5 1 li: a:8 ! ) 5 1
a mating threat with 36 lt:lf7. lag8+ 'it>f7 5 2 li:f8+ 'it>e6 53 ll e8+
35 l:i: f6 'it>xd6 54 lhe l b4 55 li a 1 b3, but
36 .tel i.. c8 the idea that White might con­
37 l:i:e8 struct a fortress in the consequent
Black threatened . . . lle6 leading ending of rook and three pawns
to an exchange of rooks and a versus queen and one pawn on the
certain win for him because of his same flan k, e.g. 56 h3 'it>c5 57 f4 b2
a-pawn. �§. li:xa2 b 1 't!f 59 lif2, prompted
37 i.. e6 him to rej ect it.
38 g4! i.. f7 49 li:c7+ 'it>e8?? (28)
39 l:i:b8 li:e6
28 • ••• •
40 'it>g2? wg�
. �� . .� gfl.'
.i
40 'it>fl after which White keeps ''""�

the idea of f4-f5 was much better .. � .. ..

and would have left the ou tco me .. . .. .. ..
quite obscure.
-�- ��­
40 lle1
41 i.. f4 lae4
. .. .. ..
42 Act lle1
• �
� • [Qz
"<t>�
J..Qx

43 i.. f4 d4! .. .. . .. ..
 White Plays d5 23

The wrong square. With 49 . . . is clear from this game that 8 . . .

1!7e6, Black could have coped i.d6 deserves further outings.
with the d-pawn whilst retaining
Adorjan-Miles
the full potential of his own passed
Biel 1983
pawns, e.g. 50 li:e7+ 1!7d5 5 1 d7
\!7c6 winning. As the game went, I c4 b6
the a- and b-pawns became some­ 2 d4 .ib7
what stymied in their advance. 3 tt:lc3 e6
50 :!:l.e7+ 1!7d8 4 a3 rs
51 :S:xh7! 5 dS tt:lf6
Finely judged. 51 . . . a2 is now 6 tt:lf3
dealt with by 52 :!:l.a7! a 1 'iV 53 The most natural development
.ig5+ 1!7c8 54 d7+. of the knight, but one which
51 tt:lxd6 allows the possible irritant . . . tt:le4.
52 li:a7 tt:lc4? 6 i.e7
Miles had clearly overlooked 6 . . . a5 is a possible improve­
something at move 49 in his ment here.
calculations. Having missed a 7 g3 tt:le4
clear win there, he now com mits a 8 .id2 i.cS
second error after which Tal goes It hardly seems natural to move
on to win. After 52 . . . b4 things the bishop twice before develop­
were still not entirely clear. ment is complete.
53 h4 9 e3 aS
The white pawns now prove to 1 0 .ig2 0-0
be the stronger. 11 0-0 tt:la6
53 :!:l.d7 1 2 tt:leS! .id6
54 liaS + 1!7e7 13 tt:ld3 (29)
55 hS b4
56 h6 1!7e6
57 gS l!?fS
58 llfB+ 1!7e4
59 g6 a2
60 g7 a1 'iV
1 -0
After 6 1 g8 'iV, Black's exposed
king will stand no chance.
A pity that Miles should have
lost after such creative play, but it
 'I lll11t•· 1'/,ii'l ,f\

IIL1l'k has 11o1 quite

managed to 21 eS
achieve a satisfactory
deployment Also 2 1 �b2 was very strong
of forces and Adorjan demon­ here. Typically, Adorjan goes in
strates that White's space advantage for tactics.
means something. 21 be
13 li:lxd2 22 be lt:lxeS
14 �xd2 eS 23 �b4 �a6
I S lObS �e7 24 Ii:xa6 Ii:xa6
16 e4 f4 2S �xeS?
Black is not able to challenge in A mistake. Correct was 25
the centre with 16 . . . c6 because of lt:lxc5 with a large advantage after
17 li:lxd6 �xd6 1 8 f4! and White 25 . . . Ii:a7 26 de de 27 �c4+ 'it>h8
steamrollers through. 28 lt:le6 Ii:f6 29 lt:lg5 �f8 30 lt:lxf3
17 b4! ab Ii:xf3 3 1 �xf3 �xf3 32 �xc6. 26 . . .
18 li:lxd6 �xd6 �xc6 i s simply met b y 2 7 �xf3!
19 ab f3 Or 25 . . . ll aa8 26 de �xc6 27 li:ld3
And here 1 9 . . . c6 is dealt with d6 28 Ire 1 �a6 29 lt:le 1 �e2 30
by 20 c5! be 21 be lt:l xc5 22 �b4 �3+.
�a6 23 �xc5 �xc5 24 lt:lxc5 j_xfl 2S ed!
25 Ii: xfl ll a7 26 �h3. Matters a re now not so clear,
20 �hi e6 (30) and in fact after
26 h4 �xeS
27 lt:lxeS l:ld6
Miles went on to exploit some
further time-pressure inaccuracies
from Adorjan and he even won
the game (0- 1 , 56). Still, the idea of
6 . . . j_e7 and 8 . . . �c5 does not
look good.
Of course, White does not have
to meet 4 . . . f5 with 5 d 5 . After all,
White does not always play d5
versus the Dutch Defence, when
The passivity of both black permitted, so why should he here?
minor pieces and also White's A few months after the above
extra space add up to an almost game the same players met again
won game for White, in spite of his and Adorjan once more refuted
buried bishop. Miles' opening.
 White Plays d5 25

13 l::!e 1 lbc5
Adorjan-Miles 14 b4
Gjovik 1983 Driving the knight into a hole.
1 c4 b6 14 lbb7
2 d4 i.b7 15 de de
3 lbc3 e6 16 'i!Yb3 lle8
4 a3 f5 17 c5! 'i!fd5
5 lbf3 lbf6 18 'i!fxd5 ed
6 g3 lbe4? (3 1) 19 i.f4 (32)

32
J/
B
w

Wh ite's bishop pair make life

6 . . . g6 with a double fianchetto very uncomfortable for the second
formation, or 6 . . . i.e7 might both player.
leave White better here, but they 19 be
are surely better than this Im­ 20 i.xf5 cb
petuous advance. 21 ab lbd6
7 lbxe4! i.xe4 22 i.e6+ 'it'f8
If 7 . fe 8 lbe5 d6 9 lbg4
.. 23 �xd5
intending i.h3 and lbe3 with a Black has been forced to concede
clear advantage. a pawn for no real compensation.
8 i.h3! i.e7 After
9 ()..0 0-0 23 l::!xe1 +
10 d5! i.xf3 24 l::!xe1 l:Ib8
Forced. I f 10 . . . ed I I lbd2 and 25 l::!c l lbb5
the twin threats of I I f3 and I I 26 l::!c4
lbxe4 followed by I 2 'i!fd5+ decide. White had consolidated his
11 ef i.f6 advan tage and went on to win in
12 llb1 lba6 6I moves.
 ·, II l11tr· /'/111'.1 d\

I hr
l1a nchdl o ofWhite's king's 14 be be
h1shop 1s a very natural response 15 ll:b1 d6 (34)
In a Dutch-type formation. In the
f ollowing game White tried yet
another set-up.

Portiseh-Miles
Malta Olympiad 1980
(1 e4 b6 2 d4 .tb7 3 lt:ie3 e6 4 a3 f5)
5 lt:Jh3!? lt:Jf6
6 f3!? lt:ie6
7 e3 g6 (33)

Black's game looks playable

enough here although White won
in forty-two moves.
One last curiosity is Barlov­
Plaskett, Sochi 1 984: 5 lt:Jf3 lt:Jf6 6
.tg5!? .te7 7 .txf6 .txf6 8 f!/d3
0-0 9 e4 fe 10 lt:Jxe4 e5!? 1 1 h4
.txd4 12 lt:Jxd4 ed 1 3 lt:Jd6 lt:Je6! 14
lt:Jxb7 f!/e7 1 5 g3 and instead of the
Against White's slow build-up, unnecessary 15 ... lt:Je5, 15 . . .
this appears by far the most f!/xb7 would simply have left
natural posting of the bishop. Black better ( l -0, 5 1 ).
8 .te2 .tg7 Apa rt from 4 . . . f5 , Black can
9 0-0 0-0 a lso play 4 . . . lt:Jf6 5 d5 .td6!?
10 b4 f!/e7 which on the evidence of the
11 ll:e1 lt:Jd8 !? neglected games O'Kelly-Keene,
12 .tb2 lt:Jf7 1977, and Timman-Speelman, 1978,
13 .tn e5 may be better than its reputation.
2 White Plays lbc3 without d5

Having set up his pawn centre Reti, Goteborg 1 920, after 5 . . .

White allows B lack to develop his 't!fe7! 6 i.e2 lt:Jf6 7 't!t'd4 e d 8 ed
king's bishop on b4, thus con­ 't!t'e4 Black was already at least
tinuing the pressure against the e4 equal. 5 e5 is an idea of Yacob
pawn. Murei which he used successfully,
from the opening viewpoint at
Garces-Keene least, versus Guillermo Garcia at
Lausanne 1 977 the Moscow Interzonal l 982. Black
1 d4 e6 played 5 . . . 't!t'h4?! which does not
2 c4 b6 seem to make much sense in this
3 e4 i.b7 position. After 6 lt:Jf3 i.xf3 7 't!fxf3
4 lt:Jc3 i.b4 lt:Jc6 8 i.f4 Iic8 9 g3 't!fe7 1 0 0-0-0
5 i.d3 (35) Black, in his attempts to get
developed had to try 10 . . . i.xc3
35 I I 't!fxc3 't!t'b4 12 't!t'c2 't!fa5 where­
B upon the simple 1 3 a3 would have
left White clearly better. Murei
suggested the more natural 5 . . .
lt:Je7 which must b e better.
5 r5
5 . . . i.xc3+?! 6 be d6, as played
in Bronstein-Miles, Teesside 1975, is
quite another interpretation. Black
hopes to play a Nimzowitsch-type
One of the most natural methods blockading middlegame, but after
of coping with the threat to the 7 lt:Je2 lt:Jd7 8 0-0lt:Je7 9lt:Jg3 0-0 1 0
e-pawn whilst continuing develop­ 't!t'g4 lt:Jf6 I I 1!Ve2 e 5 1 2 f4 he had
ment. 5 1Wc2 and 5 f3 will be hardly succeeded since White had
considered below. 5 d5?! posed already a marked advantage.
Black no problems in Tartakower- 6 'i!t'e2
28 White Plays lbc3 without d5

In Whiteley-Keene, Cambridge get a better game in Sosonko­

1 976, White tried 6 d5?! only to Keene, Haifa Olympiad 1 976 ( 1 4
see his centre battered in a classic ltle5!). After the text the position
English Defence manner: 6 . . . fe 7 is equal. The game concluded 1 4
i.xe4 'i!Vh4! 8 'i!¥d3 ed 9 cd ltlf6 1 0 l:l:ae1 'i!¥xe4 1 5 l:l:xe4 l:l:fS!? 1 6 l:l:d1
i.f3 i.a6! 1 1 'i!¥e3+ <J;;fl 1 2 'i!¥f4 l:l:aS 17 d5 ltld8 18 ltlgS l:l:xa2 19
l:l:e8+ 1 3 <$;;d 1 'i!¥xf4 1 4 i.xf4 i.xc3 de ltlxe6 20 ltlxe6 de 21 l:l:xe6 M7
1 5 be d6 16 ltlh3 h6, and Black 22 l:l:c6 l:l:e8 23 l:l:xc7+ l:l:e7 24
went on to wiri. 6 'i!¥h5+ will be l:l:xe7+ �xe7 25 �fl l:l:a4 26 l:l:d4
examined in O. Rodriguez-Keene. l:l:a3 and a draw was agreed.
6 ltlf6
0 .Rodriguez-Keene
7 i.gS
7 f3 0-0! , rather than 7 . . . fe 8 fe Alicante 1977
i.xc3+ 9 be ltlxe4 10 'i!Vh5+ g6 1 1 1 d4 e6
'i!¥g4 lt:lf6 1 2 'i!Vh3 0-0 1 3 i.g5 , 2 c4 b6
Mason-Tinsley, London 1 899. Even 3 ltlc3 i.b7
here, 1 3 . . . 'i!¥e8! is not absolutely 4 e4 i.b4
clear. 5 i.d3 f5
7 fe 6 'i!¥h5+
8 i.xe4 i.xc3+ White avails himself of the
9 be i.xe4 opportunity to give this check, but
10 i.xf6 'i!¥xf6 on the evidence so far it is not clear
1 1 'i!¥xe4 ltlc6 that it helps him.
1 2 ltlf3 0-0 6 g6
13 0-0 'i!¥f4! (3 6) 7 'i!¥e2 ltlf6
8 i.g5 (37)

1 3 . . ltla5?! allowed White to

. 8 f3 is a pawn offer which Black
 White Plays tbc3 without d5 29

unwisely accepted in Botvinnik­ trap which GM Andras Adorjan

Wallis, Simultaneous Game, Lei­ had the misfortune to fall into. In
cester 1 967. After 8 ... fe 9 fe Adorjan-Spassky, Toluca Inter­
i.xc3+ 10 be lLl xe4 1 1 lLlf3 ! he was zonal 1 982, he chose 9 e5?? and
in difficulties. Play continued: 1 1 was rudely surprised by 9 . . . lLlxd4
. . . lLlf6 1 2 i.g5 �e7 1 3 0-0 d6 1 4 10 �f2 lLlh5. White has no com­
lLle5! 0-0 1 5 lLlg4 lLlbd7 1 6 llf2 pensation whatsoever for the pawn
and White was winning. and he now threw in his queen as
This variation is reminiscent of well: 1 1 �xd4? i.c5 and duly lost
the line i n Larsen's Opening 1 b3 (0- 1 , 23).
e5 2 i.b2 lLlc6 3 e3 d5 4 i.b5 i.d6 8 fe
5 f4 �h4+ 6 g3 �e7 7 lLlf3 f6 8 fe fe 9 .te2
9 i.xc6+ be 10 lLlxe5 lLlf6 ! , where A dubious gambit, but Rodri­
Black has tremendous play for the guez wanted to avoid the kind of
gambitted pawn. position arising out of Sosonko­
8 f3 tDe6!?, however, is worth Keene cited above .
consideration and has scored 1 00% 9 �e7
on its three outings so far. 1 0 0-0-0 .txe3
Crouch-Plaskett, Hitchin 1 977, 11 be lbe6
continued 9 i.e3 0-0 10 lLlh3 fe 1 1 12 f3 �a3+!? (38)
fe e5! 1 2 d5 (this permits Black to
establish an excellent centralised
knight, but after 1 2 de lLlxe5, the
white centre is crumbling) 12 . . .
lLld4 with advantage (0- 1 , 32).
In Flear-Plaskett, Blackpool 1982,
Black chose to meet 9 i.e3 with 9
. . . f4 1 0 .txf4? ! (Black now gains a
central pawn for his f-pawn and has
immediate comfortable equality.
10 i.f2 must be superior, when
Black must follow up with 1 0 . . . e5
and the play is obscure) 1 0 . . . Vigorous but risky. The sober
lLlxd4 1 1 �f2 lLlc6 ( 1 1 . . . . d6!?) 1 2 counter-sacrifice 1 2 . . . e 3 ! would
lt:Jge2 0-0 1 3 �h4?! .te7 1 4 i.h6? have taken all the fire out of
lLle5 15 0-0-0? lLlfg4 and White White's game.
resigned. A debacle. 13 'it>bl 0-0
8 . . . lLlc6!? contains a vicious 14 .tel !
30 White Plays li:J c3 without d5

The only way to gain counter­ obvious capture and his game
chances is to sacrifice a second soon collapsed.
pawn . 23 li:Jxd4 �xeS
14 �xc3 24 li:Jb3 �c4
1 5 i.b2 ll!t'aS 25 a4 li:Jxe4
Threatening . . . li:Jb4
. 26 i.xe4 �xe4+
16 a3 eS 27 'it>a1 �d3
17 dS li:Jd4 28 �h6 lif7
18 li xd4 29 li:Jcl �e4
Again the only chance. Wh ite 30 lid1 lieS
has to sacrifice the excha nge to 31 lid4 �e3
stay in the ga me. 32 �h4 li n
18 ed 0- 1
19 fe bS?!
After the game this was criticised D onner-Miles
(rightly) as oversharp. The sensible B BC TV Mastergame 1 978
procedure would have been 19 . . . 1 c4 b6
c5 ! 2 d4 e6
20 li:Jf3 �a6 3 e4 i.b 7
21 cS b4 4 li:Jc3 i.b4
22 �d2 liab8 (39) 5 f3 �4+!? (40)

40
w

Black's violent effort to blast When this game was played,

open the queenside files against
White's king could have led to
great confusion if Rodriguez had
now found the subtle 23 lic l !
Pressed for time he made the
this early queen sortie had changed
in status from shocking to "them­
atic" . As in so many of the lines
where White supports his proud
�awn centre with li:Jc3, Black has a

number of interesting alternatives
and 5 . . . 1!t'h4+ is only one of a
selection of viable tries, for example
5 ... f5 !?
a) 6 e5 lDh6! 7 a3 (7 i.xh6!? 1!t'h4+
and . . . 1!t'xh6) 7 . . . .ixc3+ 8 be lDc6
9 llJh3 llJf7 I 0 llJf4 1!t'h4+ I I g3
'fJJe7 I 2 i.e2 .ia6! I 3 'fJJa4 llJ a5 I4
.ie3 0-0 I 5 0-0 1!t'e8 ! and Black
already had the edge, Kraidman­
Keene, Netanya I977. A position
directly related to the Samisch
Nimzo-Indian has arisen, and . . .
d 6 will leave Wh ite will chronic
problems with his weak c-pawns,
the legacy of insufficient caution
aga inst Nimzowitschian techniques.
b) 6 efl llJ h6 7 fe llJf5! 8 lDe2
(8 ed+ !? llJxd7 dangerously i n­
creases Black's lead in develop­
ment. The greedy player of the
white pieces actually tried this in
Plaskett-Drury, Birmingham I 983,
and found Black's activity too
much to cope with: 9 .if4 0-0 IO
1!t'd2 c5 I I de 1!t'e7+ I2 1!t'e2
.ixc3+ I 3 be 1!t'f6 I4 lt>f2 llJxc5 I 5
1!t'e5 �g6 I 6 g 4 llJh6 I 7 .i.xh6
�xh6 I 8 li e i liad8 I9 lt>g3 lid6
20 g5 1!t'g6 2I .ih3 h6 22 .ig4 h5
23 .ih 3 'it>h8 24 lie3 li6d8 25 lDe2
lide8 26 lDf4 �c6 and in time
trouble, the vision of 27 �d4 lixe3
28 �xe3 �d6 intending 29 . . . h4+
winning the pinned knight caused
White to crack up: 27 .id7?? and
0- I in 43 moves. Once again the
theoretician is hampered in his
White Plays lbc3 without d5 31
efforts t o draw definite conclusions
upon lines of the English Defence
by the dearth of examples. This
game was a crush, but two pawns
are two pawns. Maybe a Korchnoi
would try 8 ed+ !?) 8 ... de 9 .i.f4
0-0 I O 1!t'd2 'fJih4+ I I llJg3 .id6! I 2
.ixd6 cd I 3 lDe2 lDc6 I 4 0-0-0!?
- unclear, Panno-Miles, Buenos
Aires I 979.
5 . .ixc3+ 6 be d6 7 .id3 1!t'h4+
. .
8 g3 1!t'h5 was played in Blackstock­
Basman, Charlton 1 974. White
chose to exchange queens with
9 1!t'd2 llJe7 10 1!t'g5 'fJixg5 I I
.ixg5, but this hardly seems ap­
posite in this setting. After I I . . .
lDbc6 Black had comfortable play
against White's fractured c-pawns.
Note that 7 lDh3 would transpose
back into Don ner-Miles after 7 . . .
'fJih4+ 8 g 3 , but 8 lDf2 might b e a n
improvement.
6 g3 .ixc3+
A more incisive move order
than Bas man's as Black has forced
g3 . 6 . . . 'fJih5!? is another Miles try
but after 7 .id2! f5 8 ef 'fJixf5 9
lbb5 i.xd2+ 1 0 1!t'xd2 lD a6 I I
0-0-0 lDe7 White's chances are
slightly prefera ble, certa inly in
comparison to the line chosen
against Donner, Ree-Miles, Am­
sterdam 1 978.
7 be 'fJih5
8 lDh3 f5!
This is much better than 8
1!t'a5? which was played in Ribli-
32 White Plays lbc3 without d5
Orso, Hungary 1 977. The black
queen is now completely misplaced
and White won crushingly after 9
.id2 f5 I 0 .id3 fe I I fe ltlf6 1 2 0-0!
e5 ( 1 2 . . . .ixe4 1 3 .ixe4 lt:l xe4 1 4
�f3 ! o r 1 2 . . . lt:lxe4 1 3 lLlg5 , both
leave White with a decisive attack)
13 E: b l ! a6 14 c5! lt:lc6 1 5 cb cb 1 6
c4! �xa2 1 7 d 5 lt:ld4 1 8 E:xb6 i.c8
19 lLlg5 0-0 20 li:bxf6! Ii:xf6 21
�5 Ii: xf l + 22 .ixfl 1 -0.
M iles' TV comment at the time
was: "I remember seeing some
game with 8 . . . �a5 but I don't
understand that. The whole point
of the opening is to play . . . f5. "
9 lLlf4 �f7
10 ef �xf5
11 .id3 �f7 (4 1)
41
w 1 5 c5 !? was worth a try to pry
1 2 .ie4?!
White has managed to gain
swift development at the expense
of Black's queen. Nevertheless,
the work of the agent provocateur
has secured Black a superior pawn
structure to comfort him in the
time to come. 12 .ie4? ! wastes
time and begins a risky and
committed operation. 1 2 0-0! leads
to sharp play with mutual chances.
The possibility of i.a3 renders
castling short difficult ( . . . d6
weakens the e-pawn) so an im­
balanced struggle with the kings
on opposite sides of the board
would be the logical prospect.
12 lt:lc6
13 d5 ed
14 lLlxd5?!
14 cd ! gives more chances of
causing Black trouble. A fter the
text White's structure has become
dangerously ossified, and the use
of d5 as a base of operations is not
s � fficient to outweigh the lasting
handicap of the doubled c-pawns.
14 0-0-0
15 i.e3
open some lines, particularly as
the c-pawns are only useful as
ballast. 15 . . . lLlf6 ( 1 5 . . . bc ? would
allow real trouble on the b-file) 1 6
lt:lxf6 ( 1 6 lt:lxc7? �xc7 1 7 �d6+
..t>c8 1 8 .if4 lt:le8 ! wins) 1 6 . . . �xf6
1 7 cb !? is mutually dangerous but
Black's king appears a whisker
safer.
15 lt:lf6
16 lt:lxf6 �xf6
1 7 .i.d4
White now seeks salvation in
wholesale trading but this plays
into Black's hands. H is positional
trumps are of a lingering, virtually
 White Plays ltJc3 without d5 33

perm anent, nature and simplific­ tinuation does not allow a glimmer
ation gives Black the luxury of or counterplay.
exploiting his assets in total safety. 30 ed ll:dS
17 lt:Jxd4 31 :ilf4 e5
18 �xd4 �xe4 32 de be
1 8 . . . �xd4 would be a terrible 33 g4 hg
inaccuracy. After the zwischenzug 34 'it>g3
19 � xb7+ White has no worries. Hoping to cause consternation
19 �xf6 gf with king and passed pawn, but
20 fe ll:de8! (42) this is easily neutralised.
34 lld1 !
35 h5 ll:h1
36 'it>xg4 d5
37 llf5 'it>e6
38 'it>g3 e4
39 '>t>g2 ll:e1
40 h6 ll:e8
41 h7 e3
42 ll:h5 llh8
Now the queenside pawns decide.
43 llh1 e2
44 llcl llxh7
Leaving the king's rook to 45 llxe2+ 'it>b5
support the h-pawn. Black now 46 lle3 llf7
wins a pawn and this diagram 47 'it>g3 d4
highlights the graphic difference 0-1
in the respective pawn structures. A very smooth exploitation of a
21 0-0 ll: xe4 typical positional advantage. Miles'
22 ll:xf6 ll:xe4 handling made the double rook
23 ll:f3 hS! ending look very simple indeed.
24 h4 ll:e8
Farago-Miles
25 ll:afl 'it>b7
ll:eS ! Hastings 1976-77
26 ll: 1 f2
27 'it>g2 ll:eeS! 1 e4 b6
28 ll:d2 d6 2 d4 e6
29 ll:d4 ll:xd4 3 e4 �b7
The most methodical. 29 4 lt:Je3 �b4
ll:xc3 also wins but Miles' con- 5 �e2 (43)
_14 White Plays lLlc3 without d5
Sixty years ago they were playing
5 . . . lt:lf6 here, but in neither
Griinfeld-Kostic, Trencianske Tep­
lice 1 928, after 6 .id3 lt:lc6 7 lt:le2
e5 8 d5 lt:lb8 9 a3 .ie7 10 0-0 d6 1 1
lL:lg3, nor Nagy-Maroczy, Debrecen
1 928, 6 .id3 lt:lc6 7 lt:lf3 .ie7 8 a3
d6 9 .if4 lt:lh5 1 0 .ie3, had Black
achieved anything more than a
cramped game with insufficient
counterchances for equality.
For the alternative plan 5 . . .
.ixc3+ see the following game
Speelman-Miles.
5 'i¥11 4 ! (44)
By far the most dynamic inter­
pretation of the opening.
6 .id3
6 d5 has been tried but it also
fails to i nstil confidence: 6 . . . ed
7 ed c6 8 lt:lf3 (8 a3!?) 8 . . . 'it'e7+ 9
.ie2 cd 1 0 cd lt:lf6 1 1 0-0 .ixc 3 1 2
'it'xc3 0-0 1 3 .ig5 lt:lxd5 ! , when
Black should have no problems
- G.Svensson-K . K rantz, Swedish
Team Ch 1 977. Two tactical points
are worth mentioning. First 13 . . .
'it'xe2? fails miserably t o 1 4 .ixf6
gf 1 5 :S:fe 1 with a winning kingside
attack, while the interesting attempt
14 .ixe7 lt:l xc3 1 5 be :S:e8 1 6 llae 1
:S:xe7 17 .ia6 .ixa6! 1 8 �xe7
lt:lc6! ends happily enough for
Black . A more consistent method
of meeting 6 d5 is, however, 6 . . .
f5 ! 7 e f e d 8 lt:lf3 'it'e4+ 9 'ifxe4 de
10 lt:ld4 lt:le7 when Black is
already better, Anderton-Wallis,
Wolverhampton 1 97 1 .
6 rs
7 g3
If White has to play this then
probably Black is already better.
Farago was dissuaded from 7 lLlf3
because of 7 . . . .ixc3+ 8 'ifxc3
'ifg4 winning material. However,
in the game Garcia-Gonzalez ­
Forintos, Montpellier Open 1 9 8 5 ,
this actually happened, a n d after 9
0-0 fe 1 0 lLle5 'it'h5 1 1 .ic2 lLlf6 1 2
.id 1 'ifh4 1 3 .ie3 lLlc6 1 4 d 5 lLle7
1 5 de de 1 6 .ia4+ c6 17 'it'a3 White
had very good compensation for
 White Plays ttJc3 without d5 35

his pawn in view of his bishop structure quietly, but quickly, caves
pair, Black's somewhat disco­ in.
ordinated pieces, and the difficulty 11 0-0
Black faces in castling. Yet it 12 tt:Jf3 �g6!
would be impetuous indeed to The beginning or an excellent
evaluate 7 lt:JO as conclusively manoeuvre. Miles forces the bishop
better for White on the basis of to d3 and re-establishes his queen
this game alone. What for instance on a threatening ki ngside post.
is going on after 10 . . . �h4 ! ? 1 1 White just has too many weak-
i.c2 d6 where Black traps White's nesses.
knight and Garcia-Gonza lez sug­ 13 i.d3 �hS!
gested that the position following 14 0-0 tt:Ja6
12 i.a4+ c6 13 d5 was "unclear"? 15 a3 i.xc3
We need some practical examples. 16 be
7 �hS If 1 6 �xc3 lt:Jc5 (not 1 6
8 i.e2 �f7 tt:Jxd5?? 1 7 ed ll:xf3 1 8 1l:xf3 �x0
9 f3 fe 19 i.xh7+ !) 17 e5 lt:Jg4! (or 17 . . .
10 fe tt:Jf6 tt:Jfe4) leaves White's centre pawns
11 dS (45) and kingside crumbling.
16 tt:JcS
45 17 .ie3 (46)
B

White's position is already ex­

tremely difficult - in order to beat There is no way to stem the tide,
off the pressure against e4 and e.g .. 1 7 i.f4 tt:Jg4! 1 8 i.xc7? lb xd3
complete his development Farago 19 �xd3 lixO! wins. Miles now
is forced to overextend and ossify reaps the rewards of his play.
his centre. What is remarkable 17 lbxd3
about the rest of the game is how 18 �xd3 ed
Black si mply develops and White's 19 ed lll x dS!
36 White Plays lt:lc3 without d5

20 cd 1hf3
0- 1 47
In the next game Black once B
again chose the straightforward
plan of doubling the white c­
pawns via 5 . . . �xc3+. He was
shot down in flames in a game of
astounding originality.

Speelman-Miles
British Championship 1975
1 c4 b6 "If White loses the initiative he
2 d4 e6 is doomed" - Hartston .
3 e4 �b7 15 'i!¥e8+
4 lt:lc3 �b4 16 wd1 lt:ld6
5 'i!¥c2 �xc3+ 17 cd lt:le7
6 be lt:le7 18 'i!¥c2 Wh8
7 h4!? 0-0 19 lt:le5
8 1ih3!? If 1 9 i.xh7 Black secures good
Speelman was going through a counterchances either by 19 . . . g6
phase at the time. 20 lt:lg5 'i!¥b5 or by 1 9 . . . i.c8 20
8 d6 lt:le5 .ixg4+ 2 1 lt:lxg4 'i!¥h5 .
9 �d3 e5 19 ti:Jf7
10 f4 f5 20 hS
Hoping to open files against the Now if 20 .ixh7 lt:lxe5 21 de g6
white king marooned in the centre. 22 h5 'i!¥d7.
11 ef ed 20 0.xe5
12 cd lt:lbc6 21 de 'i!¥d7
13 'i!¥c3 22 e6! 'i!¥xd5
Against the thr.eats of . . . lt:lxd4 23 h6!
or . . . lt:lb4 White has no time for Suddenly it is White's queen's
1 3 f6? li xf6 1 4 �xh7+ Wh8. bishop which poses the greater
13 d5 threats on its long diagonal.
After 1 3 . . . lt:lxf5 1 4 d5 Black's 23 lif6
chances of opening attacking lines 24 �b2 lixf4 (48)
are much reduced. Not 24 . . . li xe6 25 'i!¥c3 , but
14 lt:lf3 lt:lxf5 after the text move 25 'i!¥c3 IS
15 g4 (47) answered by 25 . . . 1i xg4.
White Plays lLlc3 without d5 37

as a last possible desperate move

to save the game.
26 �c3! �c6
27 �xc6 i.xc6
28 hg+ 'it>g8
29 i.xg6 lUI+
Not 29 . . .hg 30 ll:h8 mate.
30 'it>c2 Il:r2+
31 'it>b3 I:rxb2+
32 'it>xb2 hg
33 nn 'it>xg7
34 I:r f7+ 'it>g8
35 ll3h7 lle8
36 IHg7+ 'it>f8
37 e7+
1 -0
3 4 f3 and 4 !fc2

Ree-Miles perience, the shift of attention

Wijk aan Zee 1979 away from 4 f3 seems j ustified as
1 c4 b6 Black has the opportunity to
2 d4 e6 dictate the mood of the game, with
3 e4 .i.b7 a choice between solid, sensible
A 4 f3 play or a sacrificial attempt to
B 4 'ti'c2 wrest the initiative. The game
A examined here follows the latter
4 f3 (49) course and, while far from perfect,
reflects the pugilistic nature of the
opening and offers a wealth of
49
clever ideas in attack and defence
B
from both players.
4 fS
The most consistent move, im­
mediately nibbling at the white
centre. 4 ... .i.b4+ is probably best
met with 5 .i.d2 when Sosonko­
Bohm, Wijk aan Zee 1 979, saw
White retain a slight space ad­
vantage after 5 . . . 'ti'h4+ 6 g3
A very rational move bolstering .i.xd2+ (6 . . . 'ti'e7 7 .i.xb4 'ti'xb4+
the centre. Because of the rapid 8 'ti'd2 gave White a similar edge
development of theory in all of the in Szymczak-Forintos, Kirovkan
sharp lines i nstigated by White 1 978) 7 'ti'xd2 'ti'h6 8 ll:Jc3 'ti'xd2+
and the evolution of such dangerous 9 �xd2. 5 ll:Jc3 would tranpose
threats in the 4 i.d3 system , 4 f3 into Donner-Miles from Chapter
has received less rigorous testing 2. In Kordaschia-Stean, Hamburg
and remains nebulous territory. 1977, White chose 5 ll:Jd2 and the
From the examples of past ex- result was a lively miniature : 5 . . .

f5 6 ef 1Wh4+ 7 g3 1Wxd4 8 fe li:Je7 9
1We2 0-0 1 0 a3 i.xd2+ 1 1 1Wxd2
li:Jbc6 1 2 i.d3 1Wf6 1 3 i.e4 1Wxe6
14 li:Je2 1Wxc4 1 5 li:Jf4 li:Ja5 1 6
i.xb7 li:Jxb7 1 7 1Wxd7 lt:lc5 1 8 1Wd l
lixf4! 1 9 i.xf4 lt:ld3+ 20 �fl
lt:lxf4+ 21 �f2 li:Jf5! 0- l .
An intriguing jaunt off the
beaten track is 4 e5!? which led
...
to unusual play: 5 d5 i.c5 6 li:Jc3
a5 7 li:Jge2 li:Ja6 8 g3 li:Je7 9 i.h3
0-0 10 li:Ja4 i.b4+ 1 1 li:Jec3 li:Jc8 1 2
a 3 i.e7 1 3 0-0 li:Jc5 1 4 i.e3 i.a6
with queenside counterplay, Pytel­
Piasetski, Buenos Aires 1 978. A
somewhat stodgy treatment, but
not without sting (0- 1 , 46).
Nobody appears to have tried
4 ... 1Wh4+ 5 g3 "i!¥h 5 intending . . .
f5.
5 er li:Jh6 !? (50)
A critical moment. Also possible
is the solid 5 . . . ef. Experience has
seen 6 li:Jh3 i.b4+ 7 li:Jc3 (7 i.d2
"i!¥h4+ 8 g3 i.xd2+ 9 1Wxd2 1We7+
is good for Black) 7 . . . 1Wh4+ 8 g3
and now either 8 . . . 1We7+ 9 �f2
4 f3 and 4 1Wc2 39
i.xc3 10 be li:Jc6 1 1 i.f4 0-0-0 1 2
d5 lt:le5 1 3 1Wd4 with equal chances,
Sosonko-Keene, Bad Lauterberg
1 9 77, or 8 . . . 1Wf6 9 i.g5 1Wf7 1 0
1Wd3 li:Je7 1 1 0-0-0 0-0 1 2 li:Jb5
li:Ja6 1 3 i.f4 lt:lg6 1 4 a 3 ( 14 i.xc7?
li:Jxc7 1 5 li:Jxc7 liac8 and . . . d5
gives Black a ferocious attack)
14 . . . c6 15 li:Jc3 ( 1 5 li:Jd6!?) 1 5 . . .
lt:lxf4 1 6 lt:lxf4 i.d6 with mutual
chances, Vukovic-Schtissler, Smed­
erevska Palanka 1979, give Black
reasonable prospects.
Miles' gambit choice is the most
ambitious and is an echo of a
previous English duel with Panno
(see p. 3 1 ).
6 re
As ever, 6 i.xh6?! 1Wh4+! 7 g3
�xh6 gives Black a lot for his
gambit - the bishop pair, activity
and development.
6 li:Jrs!
Asking White to accelerate Black's
development even further in the
name of materialism and setting
up i m mediate kingside threats
with . . . 1Wh4+. White must tread
very carefully to avoid being
swept away in the face of this early
aggression.
7 li:Je2
To protect d4 and defuse
�h4+.
7 i.d6!
By comparison with Panna­
Miles (see ref. above) Black's
bishop takes up this threatening
·Ill ·I j.l and 4 t¥c2

post in one move and this suggests
that Ree must be under even more
pressure here. His solution is
drastic.
8 h4!?
Trying to lure Black's knight
from its influential post.
8 0-0!?
8 . . . l2Jxh4 is certainly playable
but allows White to shore up his
defences with �e3-f2. 8 . . . lbg3 9
lih3 (or 8 . . . �g3+ 9 l2Jxg3 lb xg3
10 lih3) is not convincing, so Miles
pursues the attack with all speed.
9 lbbc3
More solid than 9 i.g5 �e8
when Black is still coming and the
bishop is not securely developed.
9 �f6?! (51)
�xe6+ 13 1!ff2 leaves White relat­
ively unscathed. 1 0 . . . be? I I e7!
clears the way for the knockout
12 �3+. Miles elects to play for
an exchange of queens, relying on
White's insecure king to provide
counterchances.
11 ed 1!ff7!?
I I ... l2J xd7 was also possible,
but Miles' threat of . . . �xh4+
makes Ree's next a sensible measure
in view of his backward develop-
ment.
1 2 '1Wb3 '1Wxb3
1 2 . . . l2J xd7! gives Black good
chances of recouping his sacrifices
- c5 and h4 would be u nder attack
and White still needing to unravel.
The text allows Ree to fortify his
queenside pawn wedge and develops
the rook on a l .
13 ab l2Jxd7
Not 1 3 . . . �xh4+?? 14 Ii xh4!
l2Jxh4 15 �g5 .
14 b4 �xh4+
15 �d1 (52)

52
B

Too much of a good thing.

Miles hopes to force the line
opening ed but Ree has a nasty
trick up his sleeve. 9 . . . de or 9 . . .
�e7 ! ? are possible improvements.
10 cS! �e7
A difficult decision but I 0 . . .
�g3+ I I l2J xg3 l2J xg3 1 2 llh3 At first glance Black appears to
 4 /3 and 4 't!Vc2 41

have good compensation - the weak 18 laac8

d-pa wn keeping White congested 19 ll'lbS a6
and tied down - but on closer 20 ll'la7 laa8!
inspection it becomes clear that all 20 . . . lac7 2 1 i.f4!
Ree needs to do is develop his 21 c6
king's bishop and the tables turn 2 1 cb ? leaves White's knight
completely. Thus the logical 1 5 . . . stranded after 21 . . . ll'ld7!
.i.f6 meets with 1 6 ll'lf4! and 21 llxa7
the d-pa wn cannot be captured 22 cb llxb7
because of the horrific threat of 23 l:i:xa6 (53)
.i.c4+.
Trying to tie down the knight on 53
c2 with 15 . . . life8 leaves Black 8

awkwardly placed after 16 ll'lb5,

so Miles is reduced to . . .
15 llfd8
16 'it>c2?
Allowing Miles off the hook
and free to go on another attacking
frenzy. The point of Black's defence
was that he can now meet 1 6 ll'lf4
with . . . ll'le5 creating havoc around
the white king. But White can go
a long way towards sealing up the
point with the use of a tactic seen
before: 16 laxh4! ll'l xh4 17 ..ig5
ll'lf5 18 i.xd8 ll'le3+ 19 'it>d2
ll'lxfl+ 20 laxf1 li: xd8 2 1 'it>c2
leaves White a safe pawn up.
16 i.f6
1 7 ll'lbS ll'lf8!
Preventing knights from intruding
into e6 or g6 and bringing d4
under fire.
18 ll'lxc7?! .
Opening a Pandora's box of
complications. More sensible was
18 la xa7.
23 g4 !? to force Black to capture
on d4 immediately looks better as
then the dormant bishop on fl can
come out to c4 or a6. The second
wave of chaos has ended and
Black can now hardly be worse.
White's d-pawn is doomed and his
extra b-pa wn virtually meaningless.
Black must only take care that the
bishop on fl does not achieve a
dominating post and his ongoing
initiative should guarantee him
excellent chances.
23 ll:le6!
24 'it>b1 h6 !
Coolly played. Miles frees his
king from the task of defending
42 4 f3 and 4 '9Wc2

his h-pawn. The d-pawn is frozen with distracting mate threats and
by the glare of Black's assembled allows Black to bring further
forces. pressure to bear on the sensitive
25 g4 f-and g-pawns.
25 d5 lixd5 26 tt:Jc3 lid4! keeps
White bottled up.
25 tt:Jfxd4
26 tt:J xd4 lixd4!
27 liaS+ ..t>f7
2S lieS b5 !
Preventing i.c4.
29 llh5 i.g5
30 lih2 i.xc1
31 lixcl lixb4
32 i.d3
At last! It has cost all of his 3S ..t>c2?
surplus material but with all of his 38 lic5! intending to meet . . . b3
pieces out, White should hold the with llf5+ and lift is much better.
balance. There is a problem with 38 liee3!
the weakened kingside but this 39 f4 b3+ ?!
should be manageable. 39 . . . lig3 ! is simpler and gives
32 lld4 excellent winning chances as White's
33 i.e4 lle7 king blocks counterplay from the
34 i.c2? rook on c1 and . . . b3+ is just as
Anticipating eviction by . . . tt:Jg5 strong held in reserve.
White volunteers to set up shop 40 ..t>b1 lid6 ?!
elsewhere but this allows Black's 40 . . . ll:g3 41 lic6+ ..t>e7 or 4 1
king to encroach upon the exposed g5+ hg 42 fg+ ..t>xg5 should still
kingside pawns. 34 lic6! hampers give Black good winning chances.
this invasion and prevents 41 li ffl !
tt:Jg5?? due to 35 i.g6+! 4 1 l'lc3? lid I+ 4 2 lic l lhc l + 43
34 ..t>f6 ..t>xc l lig3 and 4 1 ll:g l ? lig3! 42
35 i.b3 lid3 ll.ffl l'l xg l 43 llxg l ll:d4! 44 lift
36 i.xe6 l:ixe6 l:id3 both lose for White.
37 llf2 b4! (54) 41 lig3
Suddenly life is very unpleasant 42 lid lixc3?
for White. The advancing b-pawn 42 . . . lidd 3 ! 4 3 lic6+ ..t>e7 ( 43 . . .
threatens to plague White's forces ..t>f7? 44 g 5 ! = ) 44 lig6 ..t>f7 4 5 f5
 4 f3 and 4 'ti'c2 43

lig2! or 44 lie l + \t>f7 ! wins the 3 .i.b7

g-pawn. Now Ree takes his oppor­ 4 't!i'c2
tunity to escape to safety. A developing move which denies
43 be lid2 Black both the pin with 4 . . . .i.b4
44 c4 lig2 and 4 .. . f5. How then is he to
44 .. . lic2?! 45 lic l lixc l 46 continue?
\t>xc l g6 47 c5 \t>e6 48 \t>b2! \t>d5 4 't!i'h4! (55)
49 \t>xb3 \t>xc5 draws. Black can't
try . . . h5 on his 47th or 48th move
because of f5!
45 g5+ ! hg
46 fg+ \t>xg5
47 licl \t>f6
48 lic3 b2
49 lie3 !
The simplest method.
49 g5
50 c5 lih2 Viktor had been analysing such
51 c6 g4 weird moves days before this
52 lic3 lih8 game, but to Polugayevsky it was
53 \t>xb2 \t>e6 unpleasantly new. I t is surprisingly
54 \t>c2 lig8 difficult to drive off the insolent
55 c7 lieS black queen. After the o nly other
\.-1-\.-1 plausible move 4 . . . .i.b4+ White
A tremendous struggle that plays 5 .i.d2 .i.xd2+ 6 lLl xd2.
highlights many of the themes of White then has an incontestable
the defence, and a good lesson in space advantage.
opportunism from both players. 5 lLld2 .i.b4
6 ..td3 f5
Polugayevsky-Korchnoi 6 . . . 't!i'g4! ? could be tried here.
Candidates Match Evian 1977 White must reply 7 \t>fl and will
1 d4 e6 then gain much time by chasing
2 c4 b6 Black's queen.
·

3 e4
The strongest move, played
with an air of disbelief by Polu­
gayevsky who obviously regarded
Black's set-up as a bad joke.
7 lLlf3 ..txd2+
7 . . . 'i!fg4 is better (see p.44).
8 \t>fl ?
After the text White gains a
pawn but loses the right to castle
44 4 f3 and 4 1!¥c2
and also lets his pawn structure be
ruined. To be consistent White
must sacrifice two pawns with
8 i.xd2! 1!¥g4 9 lL\e5! 1!¥xg2 1 0
0-0-0 fe I I i.e2 (56) when vast
complications ensue.
Investigations by Korchnoi,
Murei, Stean and Keene immed­
iately after the game convinced
them that White has truly dan­
gerous attacking chances in this
position . So dangerous, in fact,
that Korchnoi was reluctant to
repeat the entire defence. Let us
examine some variations:
a) 1 1 ...e3? 12 i.xe3 1!¥xh l 1 3
llxh 1 i.xh 1 1 4 i.h5+ g6 1 5 i.xg6+
hg 1 6 1!¥xg6+. The trade of Black's
queen for White's two rooks is, of
course, clearly a disaster.
b) 1 1 ...1!¥xf2 1 2 i.g5 (threatening
i.h5+) 1 2 . . . 1!¥f8 1 3 ll hf l lt:lf6 1 4
d5 with a terrific attack.
c) 1 1 ...d6 1 2 llhg1 1!¥xf2 1 3 i.g5 !
again with the threat of i.h5+,
while lldf l may also prove annoy­
ing.
d) 1 1 ... lLlf6. Korchnoi's second
for his match with Polugayevsky,
co-author Keene , had suggested
that 1 2 i.e3 was strong here. This
was subsequently played in the
game Anderton-Staker, corres.
1985, and after 1 2 . . . d6 1 3 h4 de
14 lldg l 1!¥xh 1 15 llxh l lL:lbd7
1 6 llg I �f7 things were not so
clear.
However, all this is academic;
after our latest improvement 1 2
llhg I ! 1!¥xf2 1 3 i.h6! threatening
14 i.h5+ Black's game is beyond
saving. For example, 13 . . . 1!¥xh2
14 i.xg7 llg8 1 5 i.xf6 llxg 1 1 6
i.h5+ 1!¥xh5 1 7 ll xg 1 and the
white attack is overwhelming.
e) 11 ... lt:lc6. This could be the
best try. Still, after 12 lt:\xc6 i.xc6
13 d5! ed 14 cd i.xd5 1 5 llhg 1
1!¥xf2 1 6 i.h6, once again intending
i.h5+, Black is unlikely to hold
the balance. 16 . . . 0-0-0 loses to 1 7
i.a6+ and 1 6 . . . 1!¥xg l 1 7 ll xg 1
lt:lxh6 1 8 1!¥xc7 1eaves Black unable
to castle: 1 8 . . . 0-0? 19 1!¥e5.
If correct, this analysis con­
stitutes a refutation of Korchnoi's
7th move. But we think a re­
habilitation is possible by deferring
capturing on d2 with 7 . . . 1!¥g4!?
when:
a) 8 ef? 1!¥xg2 wins a piece;
b) 8 a3? 1!¥xg2 9 llfl i.xd2+ 1 0
lLlxd2 lt:lc6 and Black is fine;
c) 8 0-0 i.xd2 and now:
i) 9 i.xd2? fe safely wins a piece;
 4 f3 and 4 1Wc2 45

ii) 9 lt:lxd2 lt:le7 or 9 . . . lt:lc6 should 57

leave Black all right; W
iii) 9 lt:le5 't!t'h4 1 0 i.xd2 fe should
not be dangerous for Black and I 0
lLlf3 't!t'h5 I I i.xd2? lt:lf6 is wonder-
ful for him.
8 't!t'h5
9 i.xd2 lt:lf6
Now all runs smoothly for
Black.
10 ef i.xf3 22 lie7!
11 gf lt:lc6 From now until the adjournment
12 i.c3 0-0 (at move 42) Polugayevsky plays
13 Iie1 't!¥h3+ excellently and brings about a
Spassky advocated I 3 . . . 't!t'xf3, drawish ending.
but pursuit of the attack is also 22 'ifg l+
excellent. 23 �e2 'irg4+
14 �e2 Iiae8 24 �e1 h5
15 �1 e5! 25 1Wg3!
16 de lt:lxe5 A difficult decision to make but
1 7 i.e2 it is the right one. Exchange of
If I 7 i.xe5 Iixe5 I8 Ii xe5 queens eases the task of defence.
1Wxf3+ and . . . 'ifxh I +. 25 'i!t'xg3
17 lt:lxf3! Maybe 25 ... Iif7 is stronger for
Preparing a neat combination 26 Ii xf7 'i!t'xg3 27 Iixg7+?? fails to
which brings a decisive advantage. the retrogressive 27 . . . 'i!t'xg7!
18 'ird3 Iixe2 26 fg Iif7 (58)
19 Iixe2
58
Or I 9 ct>xe2 'ifh5 ! and Black w
Wi ll S .

19 1Wg2
20 Iihe1 lt:lxe1
21 �e1 1Wxh2?
Jeopardising victory. By inter­
posing 2 I ... 'irg l + 22 �d2 and
only then ... 1Wxh2 Korchnoi
could have prevented the invasion
of his position which now occurs.
46 4 f3 and 4 �c2
Black stands better in the ending,
but White has chances to draw,
notably on moves 42 and 44:
27 .i.xf6 gf 28 Ile8+ Wg7 29 r$;(2
Wh6 30 b4 WgS 31 liaS WxfS
32 I:Ixa 7 d6 33 a4 r$;e6 34 aS ba
35 I:IxaS fS 36 cS I:Ih7 37 ed ed 38
bS h4 39 gh I:Ixh4 40 liaS I:Ib4 41
I:Ib8 '<t>dS 42 r$;(3 (42 I:Ib6! '<t>c5
43 I:Ic6+ ) 42 ... I:Ib3+ 43 r$;(4
=
<t>eS 44 lieS+? (44 '<t>xf5 ) 44 ...
=
'<t>xbS 45 '<t>xfS I:Ie3 46 '<t>f4 liel
47 lidS '<t>eS 48 lieS+ '<t>d4 49
<t>f3 dS 50 '<t>f2 lieS 51 liaS
'<t>e3 52 lia3+ '<t>b4 53 I:Ial d4 54
:tiel d3 55 lieS d2 56 I:Ib8+ <t>c3 57
lieS+ Wd3 58 lidS+ <t>c2 49
lieS '<t>dl 0- 1 .
4 4 �d3

1 d4 e6 5 fe
2 c4 b6 6 .ixe4 't!Yh4 !
3 e4 .ib 7 Compare Whiteley-Keene given
4 .id3 on page 28 , which would now arise
This move can lead to positions after 7 lt:\c3 .ib4.
of quite exceptional complexity if 7 'tit'e2 lt:\f6
Black replies with the most con­ 8 .if3 .ib4+
sistent and challenging move : 9 .id2 (60)
4 f5 (59)
60
For other fourth moves see pp. B
67-68.

Basman proposes the following

variations:
a) 9 lt:\d2 lt:\a6 10 de 0-0-0 I I ed+
Now 5 lt:\c3 .ib4 transposes into llxd7 1 2 .ixb7+ 'i:t>xb7 1 3 lt:\f3
the previous chapter and 5 't!Yh5+ 't!fh5 with excellent compensation;
g6 6 't!fe2 lt:\f6 is also likely to do b) 9 <t>n 0-0 10 de d5!? 1 1 e7 lle8
so . In the game Reuben-Basman, 12 g3 't!Yd4 1 3 'i:t>g2 llxe7 14 .ie3
Islington 1 982, White played 'tit'e 5 1 5 lt:\d2 c5 16 cd .ixd 5 again
5 d5 with very good play.
after which h is was one of several 9 .ixd2+
white pawn centres to receive a 10 lt:\xd2 0-0
battering at Basman's hands: 11 de lt:\c6
·18 ·I i.d.l

12 ed instead turning the opening into a

1 2 i.xc6 and 1 3 ltJf3 speeds up Black gambit.
White's development and was a
better try. Seirawan-Schiissler
ltJxd7 Malmo 1979
12
13 0-0-0 ltJd4 . 1 c4 b6
1 4 �d3?! lt:Jc5 2 d4 e6
1 5 �fl :i:l:ad8 3 e4 i.b7
16 i.xb7 Il.xf2! 4 i.d3 r5
1 7 ltJgf3 ltJxf3 5 ef i.b4+ (62)
1 8 ltJxf3 �f4+
19 'it>b1 Il.xfl 62

0- l w

But the move most White players

have preferred, and which entails
the sacrifice of at least the exchange,
IS

5 ef!? (61)

61
B

A 5 . . . i.b4+
B 5 . . . i.xg2
Bas man's suggestion of 5 . . .
� 4 does not seem t o have ever
been taken up, probably because
of 6 ltJf3.
A problems in keeping Black's bishop
5 i.b4+
Declining the g2 pawn and
6 'it>fl
Not just an instance of the
American's penchant for mean­
dering with his king but a necessary
measure. The clearance of f8
means that after 6 i.d2? i.xd2+ 7
lt:Jxd2 i.xg2 8 �h5+ 'it>f8 ! White is
simply left with a trapped rook.
6 ef
7 c5!
Excellent. 7 i.xf5 ltJf6 would
give Black a lead in development
a nd the half open f-file as compen­
sation. 7 c5 ! poses im mediate
alive.
7 be

8 a3 c4!
8 . . . i.a5 9 de leaves Black an
unpleasant choice, according to
Seirawan: 9 . . . c6 10 b4 i.c7 1 1
i.b2 ll:lf6 1 2 !¥e2+ and 1 3 i.xf5 or
9 ... !¥f6 1 0 Iia2 c6 ( 1 0 . . . i.d5 1 1
b3 intending Iie2, b4, i.b2) 1 1 b4
i.d8 1 2 lle2+ ti:Je7 1 3 i.b2, in
both cases with a sizeable advantage
for White.
9 i.xc4 .id6!
After 9 . . . i.e7 Seirawan offers
10 !¥b3 .ia6 1 1 ..ixa6 ti:Jxa6 1 2
!¥b5 !¥c8 1 3 !¥xf5 o r simply 1 0
li:lc3 ti:Jf6 1 1 ti:Jf3 d 5 1 2 !¥b3 in
both cases with White better. The
second alternative seems sounder
as Black may be able to generate
counteplay on the white squares
or along the f-file in the first
variant. Also deserving attention
(and what Schussler fea red) is 10
.i.xg8 i.a6+ 1 1 We l ll xg8 1 2
!¥h5+ W£8 1 3 !¥xh7.
10 ti:Jc3
10 !¥b3 !? still wins a pawn
along the lines of the last note but
the same judgment, that Black has
latent compensation still applies.
10 i.xg8 !? is now an error, e.g. 10
... .i.a6+ 1 1 wei !¥e7+ and Black
is better.
10 ll:l f6
11 ti:Jf3 !¥e7
Seirawan offers 1 1 . . . li:le4!? as a
possible improvement. Note that
kingside castling is definitely pro­
hibited: 1 1 . . . i.a6?? 1 2 i.xa6
4 i.d3 49
lLl xa6 13 !¥e2+ and !¥xa6. The
game now proceeds to a phase of
ingenious and original attack and
defence.
12 i.g5!
Ruling out any chance of the
knight on f6 entering the ga me. 1 2
. . . h6? allows 1 3 lt:Jh4 ( 1 3 . . . hg 1 4
ti:Jg6 and after ti:J xh8 there is no
danger of the beast being corralled
in the corner).
12 'i!i>d8!
Seirawan admiringly gives this
an additional exclamation mark.
'
T he first point is that now . . . h6 is
a threat since the black queen can
retreat to e8 after lt:J h4-g6, pro­
tecting the rook .
13 lt:Jh4!
The beginning of a wonderful
decentralisation process. White
forces . . . g6, leaving the bishop on
g5 inviolate and softening the
black squares, enhancing the pin
still further. The straightforward
1 3 ti:Jd5 was also strong: 1 3 . . .
.i.xd5 1 4 ..ixd5 c6 ( 1 4 . . . lt:Jc6 1 5
!¥a4 threatening lle l and .i.xc6)
1 5 !¥b3 ! threatening !¥b7 and
ll: e l gives White · a fearsome
initiative.
13 g6
14 d5
Blotting out Black's queenside
pieces and clearing the d4 square
for the queen.
14 i.c5
14 . . . .i.a6? 15 !¥d3! keeps Black
 ill I 'J& ,f l

h o l l bl u p and prepares Il:e l . 20 i.e4

15 lt:Ja4 ! ! (63) 21 '§'xb6+ <tieS!
Forced, in view of the last note,
63
but an easy idea to miss - after all,
B
Black has spent most of the ga me
trying to avoid horrors along the
e-file.
22 i.f4 tt:Jc6
23 'l!t'c7 ltJe5!
Preparing to return both d­
pawns in order to secure a haven
for his king at last.
Completing the central evacu­ 24 lt:Jxe5 de
ation and creating a knight array 25 i.xe5 d5!
that would have given Tarrasch a 26 'l!t'c6+ !
fit of apoplexy. 26 i.b5+!? Wfl 27 'i!l'xe7+ <tlxe7
15 i.xf2? was possible but with Black fully
Wins a pawn but loses a vital mobilised and an iron grip on the
tempo. Essential was: 1 5 . . . i.b6 centre he should have e xcellent
1 6 lt:Jxb6 ab 17 d6! cd 1 8 '§'d4 IH8 counterplay against the bishop
when White is better but Black is pair and queenside pawns, e.g. 28
still fighting. In the game SchUssler i.c3 l:l:fc8! planning . . . d4! and . . .
is forced to acquiesce to a si milar llc2.
position, with the important differ­ 26 wf7
ence that the knight on h4 has 27 i.xf6 'l!t'xf6
joined the attack. 28 i.xd5+ i.xd5
16 tt:Jf3! i.b6 29 'i!l'xd5+ <i;>g7
1 7 lt:Jxb6 ab 30 'l!t'e5 (64)
18 d6! cd
19 '§'d4 l:ifB
20 Il:e1?
Expecting a harmless tra ns­
position of moves but letting a
clear win slip: 20 'l!t'xb6+ <tlc8 2 1
l:l: e I '§'d 8 ( 2 1 . . . i.e4 2 2 ltJd4 Il: e8
23 li:lb5! i.d3+ 24 wf2 li:lg4+ 25
Wg3) 22 '§'xd6 li:lc6 23 l:i:e6 ! ! and
Black must lose material.
 4 i.d3 51

Sanity is restored but Black's

active rooks balance White's extra 65
pawn.
30 �xeS
31 lixeS l::r tb8
32 lie2 lib3!
The draw is in sight.
33 'i&f2 lL'lab8
34 lia1
34 lib ! li xa3 35 ba lixb l 36
lia2 '\t>f6 3 7 a4 would lead to the
same. 7 i.gS 0-0
34 lixb2 8 a3 i.d6
3S a4 �f6 9 lt:\e3 ef
36 aS 10 dS h6
36 lixb2 lixb2+ 37 �g3 lib6 =. 11 i.d2 lt:\a6
36 li2bS 12 b4 e6
37 lie2 liaS 13 de de
38 lie6+ '\t>eS 14 �1 i.xb4!
39 a6 lia7 1S ab lt:lxb4
40 lia3 '\t>dS 1 6 �xb4
41 lif6 1 6 i.xf5 �xd2 1 7 �xb4 lt:\e4!
Y2-Y2 Will S .

An agreeable conclusion to a 16 �xd3+

highly creative game. 17 lt:\ee2 lt:\e4
An alternative way of gambiting 18 i.e1 eS
is 6 . . . lL'lf6 which was successful 19 �1 (66)
on its only outing in the follow-
ing game: 66
B
Brondum-Plaskett
Copenhagen 1 981
1 d4 e6
2 e4 b6
3 e4 i.b7
4 i.d3 fS
S ef i.b4+
6 '\t>fi tt:Jf6 (65)
 I ,j, , / I

' ' I ' " " I ' I 'llt o � · l /1 \ d l l ) � I Vl'S l l l ; l l' k

, , " ' ' ' " ' � " ' ' ' " ' ' ' " " W h i l c sce k s t o
, " ·· · I l l '. d • · ,.,. , . , p , n c n l p roblems
' " ' ' ' " l '. l i ;111 l' X c h a nge of quee ns
h 1 1 t l l l a c k g e l s t h ree he a l th y passed
p a w ns a nd an initiative for his
( l i CCe .
The game continued: 1 9 ...
�xc4 20 �a2 �xa2 2 1 :S:xa2 aS 22
f3 a4! 23 lL'lf4 lL'ld6 24 Wf2 b5 25
lL'lge2 b4 26 :S:a1 :S:fc8 27 :S:d 1 lL'lb5
28 Il.d7 ..tc6 29 :S:e7 :S:e8 30 :S:xe8+ B1
..txe8 31 lL'ld3 a3. The pawns have 9 hg+ ..t?xg8
proved too much for White. 32 Basman christened this line
lL'lxc5 a2 33 ..txb4 a1 � 34 :S: xa1 "The Whole Hog Variation " .
Developed at last ! 34 ... :S:xa1 35 1 0 �g4 ..txh1
g4 :S:a2 36 ..t?e3 lL'ld6 37 h4 lL'lc4+ Black has won the exchange but
38 Wd4 :S:xe2 39 ..t>xc4 :S:f2 0- 1 . White has a pawn for it and there
A n entertaining game but one is no pawn cover at all around the
swallow does not make a summer black king. After
and there are many questions to 11 ..tg5 'fi'e8 (68)
be asked. For instance, does Black Co-author Keene confidently
have enough compensation after 6 assessed the position as winning
. . . lL'lf6 7 c5 be 8 a3 c4 9 ..txc4 and for Black in an analysis from the
10 fe? We rather doubt it. mid 1 970's but there are great
B complications. We should note
5 ..txg2 that Nunn has advocated I I . . .
6 'tih5+ g6 'fi'f8.
Forced. 6 . . . ..t?e7? 7 !t'g5+ wins
68
a piece for nothing. w
7 fg ..tg7
Again forced. 7 ... lL'lf6? 8 g7+
lL'lxh 5 9 gh� wins.
8 gh+ W£8 (67)
Now:
B l 9 hg+
B 2 9 lL'le2
B3 9 lbf3

Sugden-Basman, British Cham­
pionship Brighton 1 972, continued
1 2 h4 (it was en prise) 12 ... i.b7?
(it seems that Black doesn't have
time for this) 1 3 ll:Jc3 d5 14 ll:Jge2
ll:Jd7 1 5 0-0-0 1i'f7 16 lLJf4 ( with
multiple threats against which
Black cannot adequately cope) 1 6
. . . ll:Jf6 1 7 1Wxe6 'i!'xe6 1 8 ll:Jxe6
and White won after 1 8 000 ll:Je4 1 9
i.xe4 d e 2 0 ll:Jxg7 �xg7 2 1 d5
lihe8 22 ild4 c6 23 d6 c5 24 ild 1
i.c6 25 d7 lied8 26 i.xd8 I:I xd8 27
1id6 i.xd7 28 ll:Jxe4 W 29
ll:Jf6 1-0.
A few rounds later in the same
event the variation appeared again
in Lehmensick-Basman, where the
superior 12 ... ll:Jc6 was sub­
stituted and the consequences of
the opening were not at all bad for
Black after 1 3 ll:Jc3 ll:Jxd4! (White
had presumed this to fail due to 1 4
i.f6 but then Black has 1 4 000
lLJf5 ! ) 1 4 0-0-0 1i'f7 1 5 ll:Je4 .i.xe4!
16 .i.xe4 (upon 1 6 'i!'xe4 Basman
planned 1 6 000 1i'xf2 for if 1 7
1Wxa8+ � f7 and the threats of 1 8
0 0 0 I:Ixa8 and 1 8 . . . ll:Jb3+ decide)
16 0 0 0 1Wxf2 ! 17 .i.d2 (or 17 I:Id2
'i!'fl+ 1 8 lid 1 'i!'xc4+ 19 �b 1 1If8
20 h5 I:Ifl and Black wins) 1 7 000
I:If8 completing a more than
satisfactory development) 18 h5
1i'f6 ! 19 I:Ie 1 lt:lf5 20 .i.c3 1Wh6+ 2 1
�b 1 1Wxh5 2 2 .i.xf5 1i'xf5+ and
0- 1 in 32.
Allcock-Hardy, Loughborough
4 .i.d3 53
1 973, also saw 1 2 ll:Jc6 1 3 ll:Jc3
000
lt:lxd4 ! 1 4 0-0-0 'i!'f7 when White
varied with 15 .i.e4 .i.xe4 1 6 1i'xe4
d5 !? ( 1 600. lt:lc6 was possible) 1 7 cd
ed 1 8 1Wxd5? (White presumably
avoided 1 8 lt:lxd5 because of 1 8 0 0 0
'i!'xf2 with the familiar 1 9 0 0 lbb3+
threat but in that case he could
have continued with 19 lLJf6+ !
i.xf6 20 'i!'xa8+ with at least
equality because of the exposed
black king. 1 9 ll:Je7+ �f7 20 'il'g6+
�f8 or 20 'il'd5+ ll:Je6 were less
good) 1 8 'i!'xd5 19 lbxd5 �f7
000
(Black has few problems here) 20
1id3 c6 2 1 ll:Je3 c5 22 f4 .i.f6 23
ll:Jg2 liad8 24 1Ie3 Iife8 25 1I xe8
il xe8 26 �d2 �g6 and 0- 1 in 48
moves.
Basman's 12 i.b7? against
000
Sugden was prompted by the
spectre of the bishop becoming
entombed by White's f2-f3 but his
subsequent analysis suggests that
there is insufficient time for White
to go after it.
If after 12 ll:Jc6 White plays
000
1 3 lLJd2 ll:J xd4 14 f3 he advocates
14 ... 'il'h5 (69) with the following
variations:
a) IS 'i!'g3 I:If8 16 0-0-0 d6 17 Ir f l
.i.e5 ! when 1 8 .i.f4+ �f7 1 9 .i.xe5
'i!'xe5 20 'il'g6+ �e7 or 18 f4 .i.g7
(now the queen's bishop is free)
seems satisfactory for Black. 1 8
1i'h3 ? runs into one o f the main
tricks behind 14 ... 1i'h5 , 1 8 . . .
1Wxg5 ! winning.
 � .f ·I :li.dl

Browne produced a shocking

innovation:
B2
9 lt:le2 !? (70)

b) 15 �xh5 ll: xh5 1 6 �f2 ll:f8 17

�g6 ll:h8 I 8 h5 � h6 1 9 �xh6
ll:xh6 20 �g3 lt:lf5+! 21 �h2 lt:le7!
winning.
c) 1 5 �h3? �xg5 . Sacrificing a whole rook for just
We can find no obvious errors two pawns.
in this ana lysis and the games 9 lt:lf6
Lehmensick-Basman and Allcock­ 1 0 �h4!
Hardy certa inly look like interesting 10 �g6? �xh l I I i.h6 ll: xh7
additions to opening theory. Yet wms.
we cannot emphasise too strongly 10 �xh1
to the reader the hazards of 11 �g5
employing the move 4 . . . f5 , for as White mcreases the pressure
yet there are still very few practical against f6.
exa mples of it. 11 ll:Jc6
Nevertheless, even strong grand­ ll:Jf4 <i;fi? (71)

� •
12

�
masters derived sufficient faith
from games such as these combined
71 .E t �
with their own investigations, to w . · · ···�
be -prepared to take on the Whole �
?A!!!?. ... .
• . ��
a .
•
Hog Variation for there is nothing . . . ��
approaching a refutation of 4 . f5
..
••Wfw
R o �g� �·?� ffl�-���
�
to be found in the above. • . .t . •
�l!:l�� �;�[�� �
That explains how the position �-'1& • �-'1& �·�
after 8 .. . �f8 came to be on the
board in the game Browne-Miles
from the Interpolis tournament in In a totally unanticipated situ­
Tilburg 1 978. ation Miles' nerve gives way.

13 i.g6+ we7
Or 1 3 . . . <3lf8 1 4 lt:Jh5.
1 4 lLJhS �f8
15 lt:Jd2 e5
16 0-0-0 lt:Jxd4
On 16 . . . i.g2, simply 1 7 lig I .
17 lixh 1 lt:Je6
Black has returned a lot of his
material in the hope that he will be
able to free his kingside, but
White's next move puts the issue
beyond doubt.
18 f4! d6
19 lLle4
and Black's game caved in ( 1 -0,
28).
Such was the effect of this game
that pundits began to speak of a
refutation of the English Defence
despite the fact that Miles hi mself
had pointed out two possible
improvements on his 12 . . . Wf7:
a) 1 2 ... lLlxd4. This was played i n
Stassans-Sandler, Riga 1 979 . After
1 3 lt:Jg6+ W£7 (72) allows White a
repetition if he wan ts it. The
alternative 1 3 we8 may be
superior, e .g. 14 �xd4 (Black
threatened 14 . . . lt:Jf3+) 14 . . .
lixh7. White i s a clear e xchange
down but with his pieces on such
imposing squares and Black having
forfeited castling rights it is all
very 9bscure. Nunn has suggested
.
(1 5 lt:Je5 li xh2 intending in many
J:.i_pes . . . Ilg2 while 15 lt:Je5 li h3 16
i.g6+ wf8 17 lt:Jc3 d6 18 0-0-0
i.b7 is analysis by Miles.
4 i.d3 55
The position is razor sharp yet
Black is the exchange up and
White has no obvious win.
b) 1 2 ... e5. There are no examples
of this. Basman analyses 13 lLlg6+
wf7 and now:
i) 14 lZ:lxeS+ lZ:lxe5 1 5 de lie8 16 f4
d6 "and Black is hitting back
fiercely".
ii) 1 4 de lixh7. The capture of this
pawn usually represents a great
success for Black. 1 5 �f4 lih3 1 6
ef i.xf6 and wins.
Basman is surely correct in his
analysis of (ii) but is (i) so simple?
The remarks of IM Shaun
Taulbut and Miles (which were
both made on the same day in
1982 independently) should be
borne in mind about 4 . . . f5: "It's
just tossing a coin playing that
variation".
All the same, the analysis we
present contains no glaring mistakes
(we hope !) and the games and
variations are so critical that we
feel it impossible to omit them
from a survey of the defence.
72
w
' ro ·I i... J I

I o l ' O I I I I IHil' wi t h va riation B2 1 , 1980, and that was 1 2 ltJd2. (74)

thl' S t a ssa 11s-Sa ndlcr game:
14 lt:Je5+ 74

On 1 4 lt:Jxh8+? �xh8 1 5 'ifxd4 B

Black wins with the stunning 1 5 . . .

lt:Je4 ! !
14 'it>f8
1 5 'ifxd4
Playing to win.
15 d6
16 lt:Jg6+ 'it>f7
17 lt:Jxh8+ 'ifxh8 (73)
A difficult position to assess.
Play proceeded 18 'i¥b4?! lt:Jxh7! 19
J.xh7 �xb2 20 'ifh5+ 'it>f8 21 'ifg6
.txa1 (coincidentally picking up
the other rook on i ts original
square ! ) 22 'it>fl �c6 23 h4 (despite
Black's large material plus he finds
it difficult to do anything) 23 ...
lib8 24 lt:Jd2 �e8 25 'ifd3 �7 26
�e4 'ifc3 27 'ife2 a6 28 �d3 'ife5
29 �e4 'ifh2 30 'iff3 'ife5 31 �f6?
'ifxf6 0- 1 . All very messy.
Thus the move 1 2 lt:Jf4 was
defanged, but another move came
up in Maggeramov-Psakhis, Riga
One's first reaction is that if
White can continue so imperiously
as this when a rook down then h e
simply must b e winning. Black
replied with the most obvious
12 ... e5 and at this point we shall
fiddle with the chronological order
of events and switch to a game
played later that year in the World
Junior Championship between Ralf
Akesson and Nigel Short. A kesson
went after the h ! -bishop with 13
lbg3, a move which also brings the
knight closer to the attacking
squares f5 and h 5 . Short's 13 ... e4 !
was a clever way of gaining
counterplay. Play continued: 1 4
�xe4 �xe4 1 5 lt:Jgxe4 llxh7 1 6
'iff4 Here Nunn, w h o was Short's
second in the event, suggested
that 16 . . . 'ife7 was unclear.
After the game move 1 6 ... lt:Jxd4
Nunn also thought 17 lt:Jxf6 to be
an improvement over Akesson's
choice, 1 7 �xf6?!. Black now
brilliantly solved his problems
 4 .i.d3 57

with 1 7 ... .i.xf6 18 lLlxf6 �e7+ 1 9
tDde4 If <i& d l �e2+ 20 \&c l �e l
mate, but 1 9 <i&fl �e2+ 20 <i&g2
lig7+ 2 1 lLlg4+ <i&g8 22 h3 was the
only chance. 1 9 ... lih4! (75)
Black has retained the material
superiority of a rook for just two
pawns his game is almost definitely
lost.
76

75 B
w

17 Ii:hS
A nasty surprise. 20 lLlg4+ �f7 Hoping to break the pin by . . .
21 �g3 Ii:e8 22 <i&fl �xc4+ 23 \&g2 Ii: xg5.
lLlfS 24 �a3+ d6 0- l . 18 h4
However, we need not delve The simplest of antidotes re­
into the ramifications of the play establishes lLld5 as a threat.
at moves 1 6, 1 7 and 19 of this 18 lLlb4
game in any depth because White 19 a3 dS
(
has a m uc h stronger 1 3th move, All Psakhis' desperate struggles
the one that Maggeramov played: are in vain.
13 0-0-0! e4 20 lLlxf6 .i.xf6
14 .i.xe4! .i.xe4 21 ab �d6
15 lLlxe4 lixh7 22 �g4 liah8
As previously mentioned, the 23 lLlxdS .i.xgS+
disappearance of the h7 pawn is 24 hg
normally very good news for the And White soon won.
second player, but here after Maggeramov's 1 2 lLld2 looked
16 �f4 <i&f7 firmly established as one of the
1 7 lLl2c3! (76) most important additions to modem
it becomes apparent that White's opening theory, the refinement
brusquely straightforward play that added real power and not just
has left Black with no way to shock to Browne's 9 lLle2.
avoid the loss of a piece. Although The theoreticians went to the
\8 ·I .ttl I
ha t t i c a d c s a mi s t a rted
looking for
any a l t e rn a t
ive 1 2th move for
Blac k . For example, 1 2 ffie7 l 3
...
0-0-0 ltJb4 1 4 i.b l i.b7 but 1 5
Jag l with ideas of i.h6 and/or
ltJf4 looks too strong. Or 1 2 dS
1 3 ltJf4 Wf7 14 i.g6+ �e7 1 5 ltJh5
ffif8 16 0-0-0 with great pressure;
or here 1 3 . . . ltJxd4 14 ltJg6+ and
Black is not equal after either 14 . . .
Wf7 1 5 ltJe5+ and 1 6 ffixd4 or 1 4
... �e8 1 5 ltJ xh8 i.xh8 1 6 ffixd4.
In view of this, most men would
not have seen the point of flogging
the horse any further, but Bas man
extended the process of elimination
until 12 bS, and this madcap
...
move has actually been played in
three master games:
Flear-Plaskett
British Championship 1982
12 bS (77)
77
w black counter-attack arrrives too
13 cb!
A previous game between the
same players had gone 13 0-0-0 be
16 i.b 1 i.d5 !? (Basman suggests
1 4 . . . ltJb4 1 5 llxh 1 ltJd3+ to
eliminate the h7 pawn) 15 ltJf4
llb8, and 1 2 . . . b5 had paid off
as 1 6 ltJh5 is met by 1 6 . . . ltlxd4!
and 16 llg 1 (as played) should
... have been answered with 16 . . . c3 !
where analysis suggests that Black
is OK in either case.
In A. Schneider-Utasi, H u ngary
1 984, play continued 13 li:lf4 be
14 ttJxc4 (Schneider also advocated
1 4 i.g6 to be better for White)
14 . . . lt:lb4?! (Basman suggests
1 4 . . . li:l xd4 1 5 lt:Jg6+ �e8 1 6
ffixd4 llxh7 t o b e the correct
continuation here. Although this
is certainly better than Utasi's
move the position even then is
haywire and fraught with risk for
Black) 1 5 i.b 1 li:lbd5 1 6 li:lg6+
�e8 1 7 ltlxh8 i.xh8 1 8 li:le5 ffib8
(Black found he could make little
use of his extra piece) 19 i.g6+ We7
20 0-0-0 ffib4 2 1 a3! ffib6 22 i.c2
llb8 23 b4 i.f3 !? 24 li:l xf3 a5 (the
late) 25 li:le5 ab 26 ttJg6+ <M7 27
li:lxh8+ llxh8 28 i.xf6 li:lxf6 (28 . . .
ba 29 i.g6+ and wins) 2 9 ffig3 ba
30 ffig6+ �e7 3 1 ffig7+ �d6 32
'it'xf6 ll xh7 33 'it'e5+ �e7 34
'it'g5+ <M8 35 'it'f6+ 1 -0.
Schneider drew attention to the
move 13 f3!?, giving l 3 . . . ltlb4 1 4
i.g6 be 1 5 <M2 li:ld3+ 1 6 �g 1 d 5
1 7 �xh 1 with advantage.
Whatever the accurate con­
sequences of 1 3 0-0-0, 1 3 ltlf4 or
 4 .i.d3 59

1 3 0 we feel it will be very difficult The Huntingdon player P.Dansey

to rehabilitate 12 . . . b5 after the
most straightforward move 1 3 cb.
And one refutation will do.
13 lbb4
14 ..tg6 (78)
78
B Browne-Miles game but the sig­
14 .i.b7
Basman had suggested 14 . . .
lbbd5, when 1 5 l2Jg3 is m e t with
the fiendishly clever 1 5 . . . l2Je7! 1 6
.i.d3 ( 1 6 ..txf6 l2Jxg6) 1 6 . . . l2Jf5 1 7
..txf5 ef 1 8 lb xh l l hh7 1 9 �f4.
This position may not be absolutely
clear, although we think it should
be good for White.
Another possibility is 15 0-0-0
l2Je7 ! ? but although this is wonder­
fully imaginative, it is stretching
credibility to think that it is fully
satisfactory. 16 l2Jf4 should be
decisive , we think, e .g. 16 . . . lDf5
1 7 .i. xf5 ef 1 8 l2Jg6+ W£7 19
l2J xh8+ 'it'xh8 20 .i.xf6 (thus
White hangs on to his pawn) 20 ...
.i.xf6 21 'it'h5+ �e7 22 lhh l
..txd4 23 l::te l+ with a decisive
advantage.
deserves credit for 1 6 l2Jf4.
15 lDf4 <J;;e 7
The only move to cope with the
projected 16 l2Jh5 and 17 l2Jxg7.
16 l2Jh5 �f8
Black's huddled masses are
reminiscent of the unfortunate
nificant differences are that he has
managed to retrieve his queen's
bishop and, at the cost of a mere
pawn, has obtained the use of d5
for his queen's knight. The hope is
to play 17 . . . lbbd5 and then shift
the king across to d8 and c8.
17 d5 ! ! (79)
A brilliant solution that shatters
Black's dreams.
17 lt:\bxd5
18 l2Je4
The point emerges that White
intends 1 9 0-0-0 and 20 :S:xd5 after
which f6 falls. Black has no better
way of dealing with this than what
he played.
18 <t>d8
roll ·I }Ltf I
\!/c8 (80)
Made it . . . but it cost a whole
piece. There is now an approximate
material equality but the cramping
effect of the white pieces, especially
the terrible h7 pawn, is such that
he must have a decisive advantage.
The player of the black pieces
thought perhaps 20 0-0-0 to be
best here but it is likely that
O. Hardy and Basman are correct
in putting forward the following
analysis as best play: 20 tl:J xd5
i.xd5 ( 20 . . . i.xb2? 21 tl:Je7+) 2 1
tl:Jxg7 �xg7 2 2 i.d3! 'ii?b7 (22 . . .
�xb2? 23 i.f6) 2 3 0-0-0. White
accurately reorganises his game,
keeping his bishops and h7 pawn.
Most importantly Black is defence­
less in the face of 24 i.f6. They
suggest 23 . . . lihf8 (23 . . . liaf8 24
i.h6 lixh7 25 i.xg7) 24 i.h6 �f6
25 �xf6 lixf6 26 i.g7 liff8 27
i.xf8 li xf8 28 lig l e5 29 i.e4! and
wins. Perhaps 24 . . . �e5 25 i.xf8
lixf8 was a better chance but of
course Black is still losing.
For collectors of chess curios
we append the remaining moves
of the impeccable game Flear­
Plaskett: 20 tl:Jxg7 �xg7 21 i.e4
'i!¥f7 22 ll:cl d6 23 tl:JxdS i.xdS 24
i.d8 cS 25 i.f6 '.!Jb7 26 i.xh8
lixh8 27 i.b l eS 28 b4 c4 29 lidl
'ii7c7 30 �6 lif8 31 lid2 c3 32 lle2
� 33 �g7+ 'ii?b 8 34 �g l �f4 35
lie3 �xb4 36 i.c2 �2 37 lie2
�cl+ 38 i.dl �h6 39 i.c2 i.e4 40
�g8 dS 41 h8� (sealed) 41 ...
�xh8 42 �xh8 lixh8 43 i.xe4 de
44 lixe4 ll:xh2 45 \te2 lihl 46
'ii?d3 lih3+ 47 lie3 e4+ 48 \txe4 c2
49 ll:el lia3 50 licl lixa2 51 \td3
lla3+ 52 'ii?c4 ll:a4+ 53 \tb3 IiaS
54 'ii?b4 lia2 55 \tb3 liaS 56 lixc2
llxbS+ 57 'ii?c4 llbl 58 'ii?d S \tb7
59 f4 ll:fl 60 '.!JeS aS 61 fS 'ii?b6 62
f6 Y2-Y2
One last try against 1 2 tl:Jd2 was
suggested by O.Hardy; 1 2 . . . 'ii?fl .
After 13 0-0-0 tl:Jb4 1 4 i.b l i.b7
15 lig I he had based his defensive
hopes upon 15 . . . tl:Jxa2+. This
diversionary sacrifice has the laud­
able intention of getting rid of the
h-pawn after 16 i.xa2 lixh7. Even
here 17 �f4 would leave White
with a good attack for his sacrificed
exchange since the bishop soon
returns to the b 1-h7 diagonal.
Hardy also thinks 16 'ii?d 1 �f8
1 7 i.g6+ to be good for White after
1 7 . . . 'ii?e7 1 8 tl:Jf4 because Black is
so clogged up. Once again it was
P.Dansey who produced the idea

of 1 7 .i.g6+. 1 8 . . . lLlb4 1 9 lLlh5
lLlc6 20 llg4 and 21 ll f4 and wins
is a typical follow-up.
All this adds up to a great vote
of confidence in Maggera mov's 1 2
lLld2 since even the staunchest
supporters of the English Defence
have not found a worthy emend­
ation upon Psakhis' 12 . . . e5.
The last word (so far ! ) upon
Browne's 9 lLle2 should rest with
the Leicester chess enthusiast Otto
Hardy . He has analysed another
1 1 th move for Black, 11 i.f3. (81)
...
81
B
In much of what we have seen ,
the full extent of White's material
deficit has been masked by the
ineffectual placing of many of the
black pieces. Hardy's move seeks
to bring at least one of them to
bear directly upon the crisis zone,
and it is a piece which in many of
the games with 9 lLle2 seemed to
have so little potential that it was
j ust left to rot in the corner; the
queen 's bishop.
Hardy has analysed many of
4 i..d3 61
the possibilities stemming from 1 2
lt:lf4, reasoning that White will
hardly allow Black the chance to
exchange the bishop for a knight.
This seems sensible.
1 2 lLlf4 lLlc6
13 lLld2 i.g4 (82)
82
w
The bishop prevents both castling
and lLlh5 while allowing . . . i.f5,
exchanging off one of the attacker's
most powerful pieces. There seem
to be just two logical moves here:
a) 14 lLlg6+
b) 14 i.. xf6.
a) 14 lLlg6+ <M7 and now:
ai) 15 lLlxh8+ .i.xh8 1 6 i.xf6 (White
is still unable to castle and 1 6 lLle4
can be met with 16 . . . lLlxd4! , so
this seems ncessary) 16 . . . �xf6 1 7
�xg4 regaining all of his material.
Here Hardy proposes 17 . . . lLl xd4
when Black stands very well al­
though a pawn down . 1 8 0-0-0?
allows mate in two. 1 8 lLle4 �h6
should not be better for White and
neither should 18 'iM" l lLlf5 clearly
be.
 I oJi .J I
'
r.
o l l l ) l "i t1 W "i I (; \ X l' ) 1 6 Jc ..if5 (just
had.. 111 t i m e ! ) 17 ..ixf5 ( 1 7 ef?
ll xh 7 ! wins) 17 . . . ef 1 8 ef and
ll a rJ y
suggests 18 . . . :!le8+ 19 '.t;>fl
..txf6 where White is down an
exchange and since 20 lt:lf3 :!le6 is
an adequate defence a repetition
via 20 't!fh5+ '.t;>g7 21 't!fh6+ ct>fl 22
't!fh5+ is the logical outcome.
b) 14 ..ixf6 't!fxf6 and now:
bi) 1 5 lt:lg6+
bii) 1 5 't!t'xg4
bi) 1 5 lt:lg6+ '.t;>f7 1 6 't!t'xg4 1 6
lt:lxh8+ - see (ai) above. 1 6 ...
llxh7. Black has got the h7 pawn
but the music has not stopped yet.
17 0-0-0? runs into 17 . . . 't!fxd4 and
17 lt:le5+? lt:lxe5 1 8 de 't!fxe5+ 1 9
ct>fl llxh2 i s also not good, so
Hardy seems right to have focussed
upon 1 7 lt:le4. Despite the pre­
vention of castling by the bishop's
presence on the h5-d 1 diagonal,
White still manages to fling many
men toward the black king. 17 ...
't!fxd4 18 lt:lg5+ 'it>g8 (83)
83
w c) 22 ..ixh7 lt:le5! 23 't!fh5 . The
Going into an ending here
would be stupid for White , e.g. 1 9
't!fxd4 ..ixd4 2 0 lt:lxh7 and Black
can even get away with 20 . . .
..ixb2. Hardy proposes two attack­
ing possibilities here:
bia) 19 lt:le7+
bib) 19 't!ff3
bia) 1 9 lt:le7+ ct>f8 ! 1 9 . . . ct>h8 20
lt:lfl mate and 1 9 . . . lt:lxe7 makes
little sense for the best Black could
hope for after 20 i.. x h7+ '.t;>h8 2 1
't!fh 5 would be a draw and 20 . . .
ct>f8 allows 2 1 't!t'f3+ picking up
the a8-rook . 20 lt:lg6+ 'it>g8 On
20 ... ct>e8? White exchanges queens
and takes on h7 staying a piece up.
21 lt:le7+ IM8 This draw by
repetition seems forced, for neither
side can afford to vary. Were
White to play 20 lt:l xh7+? ct>xe7
Black has the advantage due to his
superior pawn structure and 20
't!ff3+? wxe7 21 't!ff7+ is un­
productive after 2 1 . . . ct>d6 ! , e .g:
a) 22 lt:le4+ 't!fxe4+! 23 ..ixe4
..ic3+ wins. A recurrent theme.
b ) 22 lld1 lt:le5 23 ..ixh7 't!fxd l +
Will S .
only available square, but White
has lost his co-ordination in re­
gaining his material) 23 . . . "frxc4
with advantage in all lines, viz:
i) 24 lldl+ ct>c6 25 ..ie4+ d5.
ii) 24 ..ie4 c6.
iii) 24 f4 "fVb4+ 25 <Ml lbc4.
iv) 24 "frdl+ <t;e7 25 ll c l \!t'h4! 26

i.e4 't!Vxg5 27 i.xa8 lbd3+.
v) 24 lbf7+ lb xf7 25 't!Vxt7 i.c3+ !
bib) 19 't!Vf3 't!Vf6 20 lbe7+ �h8 All
forced. 20 ... lbxe7? 21 i.xh 7+ or
20 . . . 't!Vxe7? 2 1 i.xh7+ �h8 22
't!Vh5 are both winning for White.
21 lbg6+ �g8 and once again
there appears to be no possible
avoidance of this repetition , e.g.
21 ll:lt7+ 't!Vxt7!
bii) 15 't!Vxg4 Perhaps this is the
most critical line because White
keeps the h7 pawn.
Hardy p roposes 1 5 ... �xd4.
(84) This certainly looks superior
to 15 . . . lbxd4 when 16 ll:le4 forces
16 . . . �d8 since all other squares
lose the queen, e.g. 16 . . . 1!t'f5
1 7 lbg6+ �e8 1 8 lbd6+ or 1 6 . . .
�f7 1 7 ltJg6+ �e8 1 8 lbxh8
and 18 ... i.xh8 fails to 1 9 ll:ld6+ cd
20 i,g6 and such passivity does
not appeal.
84
w
biia) 1 6 lLlg6+
biib) 1 6 �f3
biia) 16 lt:\g6+ �e8 1 7 1!t'h5 �8
1 8 ll:lxh8 i.xh8 and Black has
4 i.d3 63
good compensation for the pawn
( 1 9 't!Vt7 �c8). White would seem
to do better to go into the ending
with 17 1!t'xd4 i.xd4 1 8 lbxh8
i.xb2! 1 9 ll:lg6 i.xa 1 20 h81!t'+
i.xh8 2 1 ll:lxh 8 . Perhaps Black is
equal here.
biib) 1 6 1!t'f3. In response to this
Hardy proposes an intricate se­
quence : 16 . . . �e8 1 7 i.e4 lif8 1 8
i.xc6 1!t'e5+ and Black is better. I s
n ot 1 6 . . . 't!Vf6 simpler?
Almost all of this analysis of 1 1
. . . i.f3 is Otto Hardy's and we can
see no obvious errors in it. Even if
subsequent investigation should
prove it incorrect, we would like
to express our admiration for his
idea and the supportive analysis
he has given it.
B3
9 lbf3 (85)
A move even more astonishing
in appearance than 9 lLle2, for not
only does White spurn the offered
k night, he puts his own en prise.
This is the explanation for the
f\ ·1 -I w ,{ I

I ' 1 ', 1 1 I l l I" 1 1 ! 1 1 1 � 1 I I I I I' l' X a lll p ) c Of lt:lf4!?. d 6 has seriously under­
000

1l :, i l l , l l . 1 1 l ' i l l a ll l y , l 'l'lnhorough mined the e6 pawn. After 13

) 1) /1) lt:lxh8+ i..xh8 1 4 lLic3 lt:lc6 White
I) lt:lf6 should not play 15 i_g5 because
I 0 'tlt'h4 �xh1 Black can solve most of his
The r i g h t piece to capture. After problems with 15 000 lt:lxd4!? 16
10 i.. x f3 I I Itg l White already
. . . 'il:Vxd4 lt:le4 !?, e.g. 17 i.. x d8 i.. xd4
has two pawns for just a minor 1 8 i.. xe4 i..x e4 1 9 lt:l xe4 li xd8 or
piece and his ideas of 12 .th6, 1 7 'il:Vxe4 i..xe4 1 8 i.. xd8 i.. x d3 1 9
12 �xg7 or 1 2 'il:Vg3 are too much i..xc7 i..xc4 with approximate
to be dealt with. equality in either instance. Instead,
11 lt:le5 1 5 i..e3 avoids all that and leaves
Otherwise Black takes it. everything obscure after 15 . ..

11 lt:lc6 .if3, preventing castling and in­

The critical alternative is I I 000 tending i..g4-f5 a Ia Hardy.
000

d6, (86) when w e have: c) 12 i..h 6 de 13 de If 13 i.. xg7+

a) 12 lt:lg4 <iixg7 14 'il:Vg5+ <M7 and Black
b) 12 lt:lg6+ wins, e.g. 15 de lt:le4; 15 i..g6+
c) 1 2 i..h 6 �7 1 6 de lt:ld7; 1 5 'il:Vg6+ <iie 7 1 6
d e 'il:Vf8 o r 1 6 'il:Vg7+ <i;d6 1 7 de+
�6! 1 3 ... 'il:Vxd3 This seems a
reputable defence for Black, others
being less watertight, e.g:
ci) 13 ...�7 14 i..g 6+! wins.
cii) 13 . lt:lbd7 14 i..xg7+ <iixg7
..

(14 oo· <i;f7 15 ef lt:lxf6 1 6 i.. x h8

wins) 1 5 'il:Vg5+ and mates after 1 5
•oo �8 1 6 'il:Vh6+ <iie 8 1 7 i..g6+
�7 1 8 'il:Vg7 or 1 5 0 0 0 <i;f7 1 6
'il:Vg6+.
a) 12 lt:lg4? Here 12 i.f3! 1s 0 0 0 ciii) 13 ... lt:lc6 14 ef i..x h6 1 5
surely an excellent reply, re­ 'il:Vxh6+ <iie 8 1 6 'il:Vg7 wins; o r here
in troducing the queen's bishop 14 000 'il:Vxd3 15 fg+ <Jdf7 16 'il:Vf4+
into the fra y. 'il:Vf5 ( 1 6 <iig6 1 7 'il:Vg5+ <i;f7 1 8
0 0 0

b) 1 2 lt:lg6+ <iif7 There can be no gh lt:l+ li xh8 1 9 'il:Vg7+) 1 7 'i!:Vxc7+

doubt that White can retain lt:le7 ( 1 7 <iig6 18 gh 'il:V lixh8 19
000

genuine compensation here with 'il:Vg7+ <iih 5 20 'il:Vxh 8 or 18 000

1 3 lt:lxh8+ or even perhaps 1 3 'il:Ve4+ 1 9 i..e 3 lixh8 2 0 lt:ld2 with

 4 .id3 65

advantage) 1 8 gh lL:l + llxh8 1 9 16 Iid2 'ti'e7

'ti'f4 a n d B lack i s still a long way 17 'ti'f4 .ih5
from the draw. 18 cd ed
civ) 1 3 ... .ixh6 14 'ti'xh6+ 'it>e8 1 5 19 i.xf6 .ixf6
'ti'g7 'ti'xd3 1 6 'ti'xh8+ 'it>d7 and 20 ef 'ti'xf6
Black may draw by perpetual 21 'ti'xc7+ 'ti'e7
check, but this seems improbable. 22 'ti'f4+ 'ti'f6
14 'ti'xf6+ 14 ef Ii xh7 or 14 .ixg7+ 23 'ti'c7+ 'ti'e7
'it>xg7 1 5 'ti'xf6+ ( 1 5 'ti'g5+ 'ti'g6) 24 'ti'f4+
1 5 . . . 'it>xh7 and White has n o Y2-Y2
draw b y perpetual check. 1 4 ... even though White is probably
'it>e8 (8 7) winning.
Perhaps Black could improve
87 with 1 2 . . . d6, although we think it
w more likely that this is best on the
previous move. Still, after 12 . . .
d 6 (88)

White ca n now demonstrate a

simple draw with 15 'ti'xe6+ 'it>f8 1f
1 5 ... 'it>d8? 16 .ig5+. 1 6 'ti'f6+
'it>e8, but it is unlikely that he will
be able to achieve any more, e.g.
1 7 .ixg7 'ti'e4+ 1 8 'it>d2 'ti'd4+ 19 there are the following possibilities:
'it>c 1 would lose to 1 9 . . . 'ti'xc4+ a) 13 lL:lg6+ 'it>f7 14 lL:lxh8+ .ixh8
and 20 . . . lL:ld7. and 15 lbc3 would allow the
1 2 .ig5 lL:lxe5? simplifying 15 . . . lL:lxd4 (see note
This cannot be correct. to 1 1 . . . d6 12 lL:lg6+).
13 de 'it>f7 b) 13 lL:l g4? allows the extremely
1 4 lLlc3 d5 useful 13 . . . lL:lxd4!
14 . . . d6 1 5 'it>e2 is also very c) 13 lL:lxc6 i.xc6 14 lbc3. Wh ite
strong for White. simply plays on with two pawns
15 0-0-0 .if3 and pressure for h is rook . Un-
,-.,-, I Ill , / I
d � t u h l l'dl y hl' has ge n u i ne compen­
�ll l l o l l .
d ) U li1d7+ it'xd7 1 4 .i.xf6 e5 wins
for Black.
e) 13 .i.xf6!? .i.xf6 14 lLld7+ !? This
cannot be taken, so 1 4 . . . Wf7 1 5
it'h5+ <tle7 1 6 lLlxf6. Once again it
cannot be taken, but 16 . . . lLl xd4!
is playable and with Black in­
tending 17 ... it'f8 it is not clear
that he is worse. 1 6 ... it'f8
immediately is another possible
defe nce .
4 .i.d3 fS: Conclusions
There is no clear evidence that the
"whole hog" variation with 9
hgit'+ is good for White but Black
cannot equalise if Browne's 9 lLle2
lLlf6 10 it'h4 .i.xh 1 1 1 .i.g5 ll:lc6 is
followed up by Maggeramov's
idea 1 2 lLld2 ! . Therefore 1 1 . . .
ll:lc6 must be regarded a s unplay­
able .
The only rehabilitation of 4 . . .
f5 that has been put forward is
Otto Hardy's 1 1 .. . .i.f3 which
seems worth trying on the basis of
the analysis given here . However,
without any practical examples -
caveat emptor!
The possible viability of Hardy's
move means that White's move
order may need to be modified.
Instead of 9 lLle2, 9 .i.gS, intending
to transpose back into the main
line with 9 . . . lLlf6 10 it'h4 .i. xh 1 1 1
ll:le2 has been played. This was the
move order of Flear-Plaskett, Tor­
quay 1 982, and A kesson-Short,
Dortmund 1 980.
Were White to continue 9 .i.g5
lLlf6 1 0 it'h4 .i.xh 1 1 1 lLld2, he
would pre-empt 1 1 . . . .i.f3, and
1 1 . . . ll:lc6 transposes back into the
refuted line after 1 2 lLle2.
There have been no examples of
this specific move order with 1 1
lLld2 as yet. Hardy proposes 1 1 . . .
it'e7 1 2 lLle2 it'f7 a s a counter,
but once again this is completely
unexplored.
The bone-crushing impact of 9
lLle2 in conjunction with 1 2 lLld2
explains how the remarkable move
9 lLlf3 came to be overlooked.
Our investigations suggest that the
almost forced outcome to this is
a draw by repetition after 9 . . .
lLlf6 1 0 it'h4 .i.xh 1 1 1 ll:le5 d 6 1 2
.i.h6 de 1 3 de it'xd3 1 4 it'xf6+
<tle8 1 5 it'xe6+ Wf8 1 6 it'f6+,
unless White wishes to speculate
for more with 1 2 lLlg6+. The
only way yet available to make
4 . . . f5 possibly playable is 1 1 . . .
i.f3 . We wish Otto Hardy, and
anyone else who tries the move
out, the very best of luck .
Other fourth moves for Black
Black has three main alternatives
to 4 . . . f5 :
A 4 . . . .i.b4+
B 4 . . . it'h4
C 4 . . . lLlc6
 4 .td3 67

A
4 .i.b4+ (89)

Rather a bland move. Black was
not successful with it in either
Pinter-Forintos, Budapest 1 979:
5 �d2 �e7 6 a3 �xd2+ 7 lt:lxd2
�g5 8 lt:lgf3 �xg2 9 Il:g1 �h3 10
Il:xg7 �h6 1 1 Il:g3 lt:lc6 12 d5
lt:lce7 13 �a4 lt:lg6 1 4 0-0-0 lt:l 8e 7
1 5 �b1 a 6 1 6 �b4 a 5 1 7 �a4 �f4
1 8 .tc2 .i.a6 1 9 h4 h5 20 lt:lg5 e 5 2 1
d6! lt:lc6 22 de �xh4 2 3 c5 �f4 24
cb h4 25 Il:c3 .ie2 26 b7 0-0 27
ba� 1lxa8 28 lt:lh3 1-0, or Pytel­
Schi.issler, Trstenik 1 979: 5 .id2
.txd2+ 6 lt:lxd2 c5?! 7 d5 e5 8 f4!
(admirable vigour) 8 ef 9 lt:Jgf3
0 0 0
5 lt:lf3
The only truly critical response.
5 lt:lc3 would allow transposition
into Chapter 2 after 5 0 0 0.ib4 and
neither 5 �c2 f5 nor 5 �e2 f5 6
lt:lf3 �g4 ought to trouble Black.
5 �g4
6 0-0
I t must be noted that White can
force a repetition here if he so
chooses with 6 h3 �xg2 7 I:Ig1
�xh3 8 llg3 �h i + 8 :S: g l �h5 10
E:g5 �h6 1 1 E:g1 etc.
6 .txe4
7 .i.xe4 �xe4
8 lt:lc3 �b7 (9 1)

d6 1 0 e5 de 1 1 lt:lxe5 lt:ld7 1 2 �a4 91

f6 1 3 lt:lxd7 �xd7 1 4 �c2 lt:le7 1 5 w

0-0 with advantage ( 1 -0, 27).

B
4 �h4 (90)
A very ambitious move which
will, naturally, lead to W hite
gaining time by attacking the
quee n . Black hopes he will win a
pawn.
 I h t· on I y p i a yn
w h o has shown d-pawn to gain the two bishops,
oauy dl'si I' I' l o d e fend
the black yet he remains behind in develop­
pos i l 1 o 1 1 is the Hungarian grand­ ment and lacking in space.
m a s t e r Ciyozo Forintos. Even 6 0-0 lt:Je7
despite such successes as Flear­ 7 lt:Jc3 lt:Jxd3
Forintos, Ramsgate 1 98 1 (0- 1 , 35) 8 't!i'xd3 lt:Jg6
nobody else has wanted to play it. 9 a3 (93)
White h as lots of compensation Yz- Yz
after 9 ile 1 or 9 J.g5 .
c 93

4 lt:Jc6! (92) B

92
w

This does not tell us much , but

This was tried in Sosonko­
Miles, Tunis Interzonal 1 985.
5 lt:Jf3 lt:Jb4
Black uses his attack on the
at the moment 4 . . . lt:Jc6 looks like
Black's best move. There is certain­
ly plenty of scope for private
enterprise with it. The obvious
strategy for Black is . . . i.e7 and
. . . 0-0, trying to engineer . . . f5 .
5 White Delays d4
This chapter is concerned with
lines where White does not use the
chance to build up a pawn centre
at the earliest opportunity.
As might be expected this means
that the variations are usually of a
less critical nature than in most of
the earlier chapters. Indeed, Black
does not seem to be seriously
troubled by any of them.
1 c4 b6
2 lLlc3 e6
3 e4 �b7
4 lLlf3 (94)
94
B d6 7 d4 lLlxc3 8 be lLld7 9 �f4
The most com mon choice in
this position. In the heyday of this
variation, constant turmoil reigned,
with Hungarian GM Istvan Csom
coming out with several fine
victories as White against some of
the top "English exponents". At
present, Black seems to have
found a route to approximate
equality, but further testing is
necessary to form a truly composite
picture. Other, rarer, choices for
White's fourth move:
a) 4 �d3 �g5 !? 5 �f3 lLlc6 6 �g3 ?
�xg3 7 hg g6! and Black's grip on
the d4 square gives a tangible
edge, J.Watson-Schi.issler, New
York 1978. Schussler suggests 6
tt:lh3 ! when he intended 6 . . . �h4,
with unclear play.
b) 4 a3 (? !) lLlf6 5 e 5 lLle4 6 lLlf3
de 1 0 llJxe5 lLlxe5 1 1 �xe5 �d6
and Black is at least equal, Alburt­
Miles, Lone Pine 1980 (0- 1 , 36).
c) 4 b3 was played in the following
game:
Ljubojevic-Miles
Bugojno 1986
1 c4 b6 2 llJc3 �b7 3 e4 e6 4 b3
lLlf6!? 5 e5 5 d3 c5 is equal. 5 ...
lLle4 6 llJxe4 �xe4 7 �b2 Miles,
ever inventive, came up with 7 ...
lLlc6!? where 7 . . . �e7, 7 . . . d6 or
 '( ·I / lda l ' l d·l
I 1 1 111 /t'
� · 'l
S!'l' l l l n w n· n a t u ra l . 8 h4!?
h� •1 l/ \ 1'.\ l/ \h4!? 1 0 d3 i.xf3 11 gf
l'� 1 2 f4 �.:6 1 3 i.g2 lieS A similar
pawn structure to that in Kryboe­
Schtissler (p. 75) has developed
and Black should be all right, but
Ljubojevic so mehow engineered a
remarkable breakthrough: 1 4 i.e4
i.h6 1S a3 lLle6 1 6 �f3 bS!? 1 7
i.xe6 llxe6 18 a 4 b e 1 9 d e �aS+
20 �e2 �e7 21 llhd1 llb8 22 lld3
�e7 23 llad1 �e8 (95)
95
w
24 fS! ef 24 ... gf 25 �xh5
intending 26 ll xd7+. 2S llxd7+!
�xd7 26 llxd7+ <Ji>xd7 27 �dS+
<tie7 28 �xf7+ <Ji>b6 29 b4! lle7 30
aS+ <Ji>b7 31 �dS+ <Ji>e8 32 �g8+
<ot>b7 33 a6+ 1-0. A game full of
ideas.
d) 4 lLlge2!? This is a perfectly
sensible move, although surprising­
ly we have not been able to find
any examples of it. 4 . . . lLlf6, by
analogy with Alburt-Miles and
Ljubojevic-Miles, comes into con­
sideration but we would suggest
4 . . . i.b4 5 a3 i.xc3 6 lLlxc3 lLle7
intending 7 . . . 0-0 and 8 . . . f5 .
4 .ib4
4 . . . c5 is also possible, reaching
a "Hedgehog" formation which
falls outside the scope of this
book.
s �b3! (96)
96
B
The most venomous reply, super­
seding a variety of less incisive
alternatives:
a) S d3 i.xc3+ 6 be li:Je7 7 g3 d6 8
i.h3 li:Jd7 9 0-0 lLlc5 10 e5 de 1 1
li:Jxe5 lLlg6 1 2 �e2 li:Jxe5 1 3 �xe5
f6 14 �e 1 �xd3 1 5 i.xe6 i.e4 1 6
i.g4 0-0 1 7 i.a3 and the draw was
soon agreed in Uhlmann-Pribyl,
Warsaw 1 980.
b) S i.d3 lLle7 and now 6 a3!? is
a sharp try: 6 .. . i.xc3 7 de 0-0 8
�c2 lLlg6 9 .ie3 d6 1 0 0-0-0 lLld7
1 1 h4!? �e7 12 llh3 lLlge5 1 3
lLlxe5 de! 1 4 1Ig3 f6 + P. Nurmi­
Schtissler, Malmo 1 979 (0- 1 , 37).
Black's superior pawn structure
gives him a long term pull, but the
plan involving 0-0-0 is interesting.
Or 6 0-0 0-0 7 lie 1 f5 8 e5? (better

is 8 a3 .ixc3 9 de fe 1 0 .ixe4 .ixe4
I I l he4 t-2:'\bc6 with equality i n
Friedgood-Ke'!ne, Cape Town I976)
8 . . . ltJg6 9 .ifi .ixf3 10 'fi'xf3 ltJc6
I I d4 ltJ xd4 I2 'ti'd3 ltJc6 and
Black successfully exploited his
extra pawn in Hiibner-Miles, Bad
Lauterberg I 977.
5 ltJa6!
Another move that has become
standard through the rigorous
process of natural selection. Csom
did much to clarify which move
was fit to survive. Theoretical
casualties:
a) 5 ... c5 6 ltJb5 ! d6 (6 . . . 'it>f8 7
ltJd6 'fi'c7 9 tbxb7 'fi'xb7 1 0 !Ve 3 !
ltJc6 1 0 .ie2 ltJge7 I I a 3 .ia5 I 2
0-0 e 5 I 3 la b I ! also gave White
clearly the better of it, Gavrikov­
Eingorn, USSR I 980) 7 'fi'd3 d5 8
e5 de 9 't!t'xd8+ 'i.tJxd8 I O ltJg5 'it>e7
I I a3! .ia5 I2 ltJxf7 'it>xf7 I 3
ltJd6+ 'it>e7 I 4 liJxb7 ltJc6 1 5 .ixc4
liJxe5 I 6 .ia6! liJf6 I 7 b3 and
White's bishop pair gives him a
definite advantage, Csom-Keene,
Hanover I 976 ( 1 -0, 47).
b) 5 ... .ixc3 6 't!t'xc3 .ixe4 7 'fi'xg7
'ti'f6 8 'ti'xf6 ltJxf6 9 .ie2 Iig8 1 0 d3
.ib7 I I :ll g i with a very difficult
and complex position, probably
slightly preferable for White, though
Black won i n Smej kal-Miles, Rey­
kjavik I 978 (0- I , 46). The real
reason this line has been discarded
is due to a clever tactical possibility
spotted by the vigilant Jonathan
White Delays d4 71
Speelman, namely: 7 d 3 ! ! .ixf3
8 'fi'xg7 'fi'f6 9 .ih6! and Black
loses material!
c) 5 ... a5!? An interim attempt to
keep the line viable, but once
again it was Csom who found a
path to superiority: 6 a3 .ixc3 7
't!t'xc3 liJf6 8 d3 d6 9 b4 ltJc6 I 0
lib I ! ab I I ab 0-0 I 2 .ie2 ± Csom­
Christiansen, Hastings I 978-9. Here
the American GM l et fly with a
typically aggressive sacrifice: I 2 . . .
b5!? I 3 cb liJa7 I4 b6! liJb5! ( I 4 .. .
cb I 5 b5) I 5 be ltJxc3 I6 cd 'ti'
Iifxd8 I7 Iib3 Iidc8 I 8 .ib2 liJ xe2
I 9 'it>xe2 d5 20 e5 Iic2+ 2 I liJd2
(2 I 'it>d I Il:xb2!) 2I ... liJd7 22 .id4
Iiaa2 (97)
97
w
Although Black's initiative seems
sufficient compensation, Csom
unravels smoothly with 23 Il:d I f6
24 f4 'i.tJf7 25 Il:bb i ! ltJf8 26 g3
liJg6 27 Iia i ! liJe7 28 :!i xa2 Ii xa2
29 :ll a I and White is riow clearly
on top. This left practitioners of
the English Defence searching for
a new idea, hence the text move.
 II h i lt' l >t '/ay.l' d4
Forintos-Hecht
Correspondence 1983
1 c4 b6
2 li:Jc3 e6
4 e4 .ib7
4 li:Jf3 .ib4
5 �b3! li:Ja6!
6 .ie2
A big tactical difference lurks in
wait for 6 a3? Black can now hit
with 6 ... li:Jc5 ! 7 �c2 (7 �xb4 a5
wins the queen) 7 . . . .ixc3 8 �xc3
.ixe4! 9 �xg7 �f6 now clearly
favours Black and the attempt to
employ Speelman's trick (see Smej­
kal-Miles, note to Black's 9 th)
9 d 3 .ixf3 10 �xg7 �f6 1 1 .ih6
loses horribly to 1 1 ... �xh6! 12
�xh8 li:Jb3 . Accordingly, White
must exercise some restraint.
6 li:Je7 (98)
7 a3
But this is probably too energetic.
For the simple plan 7 0-0, 8 d3, see
D . Cramling-Schiissler, p. 73.
7 li:JcS
8 �c2 .ixc3
0-0
9 �xc3
9 . . . li:Jxe4 !? 10 �xg7 llg8
i ntending to meet 1 1 �xh7 with 1 1
. . . li:Jf6! is worthy of attention.
10 eS
1 0 d 3 is more circumspect,
though Black has no complaints
after 10 . . . f5 .
10 dS
11 ed?
Apparently another case of an
experienced GM getting ruffled by
the annoyance of having to solve
new problems at an early stage
of the game. Concerned with a
potentially hyper-extended e-pawn
and the spectre of trouble with
Black's d-pawn, White opts to
dissolve two worries with one
stroke, but he lags too far behind
in development to open the position
with impunity.
11 �xd6
12 d4
A natural attempt to complete
development and nullify the loom­
ing pressure on the d-file, but the
d-pawn now becomes terribly weak.
Unattractive, but better was 12 b4.
12 li:Je4
13 �d3 llad8
14 0-0 cS (99)
Black's advantage is manifest.
White now begins to defend grimly
and Hecht's energetic handling of
the trumps of his position is both
instructive and pleasing.
 White Delays d4 73

The brutal finish was:

15 :!ld1 cd 26 E:e3 :!le8
16 lt:lxd4 lt:lc5 27 lt:lb3 lt:lc2
1 7 't!Hc2 i.e4 28 :!lxd3 ed
18 't!Hd2 e5! 29 i.e3 f5!
19 lt:lf3! 30 g3 lt:lc3
Sidestepping a neat trap. If 19 31 :!lcl wf7
lt:lc6?! lt:lxc6! ( 19 . . . 't!Hxc6? 20 32 i.d2 lt:le4
't!Hxd8!) 20 't!Hxd6 :!lxd6 2 1 :!l xd6 33 E:d1 E:d8
lt:lb3 22 0 lt:ld4 ! leaves White with 34 i.c1 d2!
no escape from material loss. 35 i.b2
19 't!Hxd2 I f 35 lbxd2 lt:lc3 or 35 i.xd2
20 lt:lxd2 i.d3 l:id3 !
21 i.xd3 :!lxd3 35 E:d3
22 :!lei lt:lc6 0- 1
23 b4 After the ignominious 36 lt:la 1
A late bid for freedom which lt:lxa3 begins the mop-up. A game
meets with an exuberant stampede that seems symptomatic of the
from the knight pair. white side facing a theoretical
23 lt:ld4! novelty in the English Defence -
24 :!lb1 lt:la4 fright and bewilderment encounter­
25 wn e4! (100) ing ruthless execution.
Tying White up completely.
The possibilities 26 :!lxe4? lt:lc3 P. Cramling-Schiissler
and 26 lt:l xe4 lt:lc2 force White to Gausdal 1 983
allow the e-pawn to advance in 1 c4 b6
safety. 2 lt:lc3 i.b7
,'.J Whttr /Jc/a_yJ d4

3 e4 e6 suggestion as to what he feared

4 lt:Jf3 .ib4 more. (To us) White's pieces seem
5 �b3 lt:Ja6 ! oddly congested and prospectless
6 .ie2 lt:Je7 and Craml i ng's decision to clarify
7 0-0 0-0 the position a logical and natural
8 d3 one.
11 .ixc3
12 �xc3 c5
The beginning of a long and
soph isticated struggle for control
of key central squares. Black
seems to have enough weaponry
to annex a strong outpost, but
White makes full use or his
resources.
13 b4 cb
14 ab b5!
As Wh ite refuses to yield the c5
square Black makes a thematic
sacrifice to ga in d5 and stunt the
The most dynamic option, though dark-squared bishop's development.
8 . . . d5 should be quite sufficient. 15 d5!
Swedish experience gives: 9 ed ed Th is elminates weaknesses and
10 .ig5 d4 1 1 lt:Jd5 .ic5 1 2 lt:Jxe7+ opens lines for counterplay .
.ixe7 13 .ixe7 �xe7 14 Iife l �f6 15 be
and Black was already better, 16 de de
Tapai-Schiissler, Goteborg 1 98 1 . 1 7 �xc4 lt:Jc7
White should try 9 e5, though it 18 �c5 �b8!
doesn't appear very threatening. Rolling up into a ball, Black
9 e5 lt:J g6 leaves his opponent the difficult
10 d4 'it>h8!? task of finding a constructive
A very nice idea. Black tucks his plan. The d5 squa re beckons,
ki ng out or harm's way as a when White will have worries over
preparation to instigating guerilla b4, f4 and e5. White's position is
warfare in the centre. distinctly unpleasant, but Cramling
H a3 responds well. If Black has anything
Schussler felt afterwards that concrete he must demonstrate it
this was not best, but offered no quickly.
 White Delays d4 75

19 lbg5!? f4 (1 02) 27 lZ:lg5 fg

28 lZ:lxe6 lZ:ld5
29 lied1 lZ:ldf4
A nice trick - if 30 lZ:lc7? lbh4! ­
but by still straining to win Black
gets carried away.
30 lZ:lxf4 lZ:l xf4
31 :ii x a7 llxa7
32 i.xa7 lla8
33 b5 lZ:le6 ??
33 . . . lZ:le2+! and 34 . . . lZ:lc3
=.

34 b6 lZ:lc5
35 licl lbb7
Preparing . . . :ii f5 and . . . 'ti'd8 36 llc7 lZ:la5
and also introducing the possibility 37 b7 lZ:lxb7
of . . . f3 . 1 9 . . . h6!? is critical but 38 l hb7 h6
probably too risky, as it weakens 39 l:i:b8+
the king's cover, e.g. sacrificial 1-0
lines like 20 i.h5 lZ:lh4 2 1 'ti'c4 !? hg A sad finish to what should
22 i.xg5 lb xg2 23 i.g6 give White have been an extremely well con­
a tremendously dangerous attack tested draw. In conclusion, though,
and the knight on g2 is often it seems that 5 . . . lZ:la6! solves
trapped. Black's problems and lays the
20 i.d3 'ti'd8 charge of artificiality on White's
21 i.e4! i.xe4 5 'ti'b3 .
22 lZ:lxe4 f3 !? If Black i ntends t o capture o n
The beginning of mutual time f3 early in the game then he
pressure. 22 ... 'ti'd5! leaving White's should adopt the move order of
bishop entombed , was the correct the game presented below, since
path. he is able to strike quickly at the
23 i.g5 'ti'd5 centre with . . . c5.
24 1Ue1 ! 'ti'xe5
25 i.e7 Kryboe-Schiissler
At full activity White now has Gausdal 1 9 78
little to fear but there is still the 1 c4 b6
time control . . . 2 lZ:lf3 i.b7
25 'ti'xc5 3 g3 i..x f3!?
26 i.xc5 litb8 4 ef c5! (103)
 Whi/ 1' f)c/ays d4
/03
w
This is definitely Black's most
a dvan tageous move order for im­
plemen ting the plan with an early
capture on r3. This game has
much in common with Ka rpov­
Browne , San Antonio 1 972, where
the world champion executed a
similar strategy with colours re­
versed. In the game considered
here, Black gains a correspondingly
iron grip on the position and his
opponent is quickly reduced to a
state of bewildered helplessness.
5 .ig2?!
Perhaps the most serious error
of the game ! Once the d4 square
fa lls in to enemy hands, White
inherits an industry of severely
limited growth. His d-pawn remains
backwa rd, his minor pieces awk­
wardly prospectless and his pawn
structure rigid. The only attempt
at punishment is 5 d4 !
5 lbc6
6 b3 e6
Because of the ex tra half move
of playing White, Karpov was
able to fianchetto his king's bishop
and control the d5 square aga inst
Browne, while Schussler must
control this square by more
elaborate means, which are, none­
theless, sufficient.
7 .ib2 lbge7
8 f4
White does not have the option
of d4 here: 8 d4? lb xd4 9 .txd4 ed
10 'i!t'xd4 ll:\c6 with . . . ..ib4 and . . .
'ilt'f6 to follow, tying White u p in
knots on the dark squares.
8 lbf5
9 lbc3
White needs to prevent . . . .ie7-
f6 exchanging dark-squared bishops
and further consolidating the d4
square. .ixc6 is never a con­
sideration because of White's sen­
sitive backward d-pawn, a fter the
recapture . . . de.
9 ..ie7
10 lbe4 0-0
11 0-0 ll:lfd4
12 ilel ilc8
12 ilb8! is more accurate,
immediately preparing to encroach
on the queenside with . . . a6, and
. . . b5.
13 d3 f5!? (104)
An aggressive try, but perhaps
slightly suspect as the weaken ing
of e6 gives White t h ..: chance of
reducing Black's superiority by
aiming to negotiate a well-timed
.ixc6.
 White Delays d4 77

monitored Wh ite is absolutely

stymied and hopes that his fortress
proves diffi cult to assa i l . Though
a bit pathetic, practically spea k ing
it is a logical course, forcing Black
to do all the work and on his own
clock time. Schussler solves the
problem with patience and cunning.
19 l:i:fc8
20 'ii¥d2 lt:le7
21 .tb2 lt:ldc6
1 4 lt:lc3?! 22 l:Icdl b5
1 4 lt:ld2 is clearly better when 23 'ii¥c2
�xc6 will undermine Black's con­ White continues to pose the
trol of d4 as . . . de will create a question of how Black is to really
weakness on e6 as well as opening achieve concrete gains. .. . be
up a route to d3. Black's best then allows White to rid himself of a
would be 1 4 . . . i.f6 when 1 5 .ixc6 wea kness by de and even entertain
lt:lxc6! 16 i.xf6 'ii¥xf6, intending 1 7 hopes of eventual counterplay on
lt:lf3 d6 1 8 'ii¥e2 l:Ife8 when . . . e5 the d-Il le. U muffled by the tough­
keeps a definite advantage. ness of the nut, Schussler com­
14 .if6 mences on a fine manoeuvre.
15 l:Ibl a6 23 lt:ld4
16 ..ial l:Ib8 24 'ii¥c I lt:lec6
17 l:Icl ? 25 'ii¥d2 (I 05)
The beginning of abject passivity.
Rather than giving Black a com­
pletely free hand, 17 a3, trying to
organise a glimmer or counterplay,
was necessary.
17 'ii¥c 7!
Preparing to add even more
support to d4, and an addit ional
influence against b4.
1 8 'ii¥d 2 'ii¥d6
1 9 'ii¥d l
With his only remotely con­ 25 l:Ic7!
structive plan of b4 ca refully The beginning or the fi nal
 ·s 1 1 ,, , , . / 1, ·/,, , . , d·l

l . l l l l j l : I I F.I I . I I l l s rook
first sets in 32 l::!. e3 (1 06)
lllt >lron hrrlher expansion on the
q ueenside bdore preparing a nasty
and devious blow.
26 '1lt'cl l::!. a7
27 '1lt'd2 �f7!?
A clever intermediate step that
protects e6 and gives Black the
additional option of initiating
ki ngside action by advancing the
h-lile pawn should White somehow
stem the tide on the other flank. 32 be!
SchUssler also protects the bishop The stage lws been set for the
on f6 with a piece. fi nal infiltra tion .
28 �hi 33 de?
Freeing the rook on d I for White has been banking on this
defence. 28 l::!. c l be! and Wh ite recapture to ma inta in his position
cannot recapture with the d-pawn but 33 be, despite the impending
because or . . . liJf3+ and so must seizure or the b-li le, was forced.
allow Black to mount an invasion 33 liJde2 !
on the b-file. The point of Black's machinations
28 ,liJ b4! and instantly decisive. White cannot
28 . . . a 5 ? ! 29 liJxb5 liJxb5 30 cb avoid enormous material loss.
:ilxb5 3 1 .ixf6 �xf6 32 ..txc6 34 l::!. x e2?
relieves the pressure a bit, though 34 '1!fxd6 l::!. xd6 35 l::!. f3 ltJ xa l 36
Black maintains a minimal edge llxa I li d 3 ! 37 l::!. c l lhf3 38 .ixf3
after . . . '1!t'xc6+ and . . . :ilb4. liJd3 ! 39 l::i. c2 liJe l also wins
29 licl aS everything.
30 '1lt'dl 34 '1!t'xdl +
Now capturing on b5 only 35 liJxdl ltJxe2
exposes weaknesses as White cannot 36 ..txf6 ltJxe3
eliminate Black's second knigh t. 37 fe �xf6
30 g6 38 liJe3 a4!
31 .ial l::!. a 6! 0- 1
Not j ust preparing to double on 39 ltJxa4 l::!. xa4.
the b-file, but more craftily, to A one sided encounter. but a
protect the queen for tactical textbook example of the potential
action . . . of Black's system.
6 Odds and Ends
lbis chapter includes miscellaneous
set-ups not covered previously.
Ftacnik-Mestel
Hastings 1 980-1
1 c4 b6
2 d4 �b7
3 lLlf3 lLlf6
4 g3 �xf3!? (107)
107
w weakness in themselves, but are
An idea that attracts supporters
from time to time, particularly
those players who are fond of
structural advantages, n o matter
what the drawbacks, in this case
the opponent's bishop pair and a
lingering spatial inferiority. These
factors are inextricably linked, as
freeing manoeuvres for Black neces­
sarily entail enhancing the scope
of the much touted tandem of the
diagonals. This early, provocative
capture is less logically motivated
here than in some lines where
White has not yet played d4 (see
the games Rajkovic-Schussler,
Karpov-Browne, Kryboe-Schussler)
since Black does not gain d4 as a
compensating outpost. Also, by
comparison to , say, the Nimzo­
lndian, White's doubled pawns
are not a long range structural
potential debilities in a vaguer
sense, i.e. less capable of generating
passed pawns at a later stage of
the struggle (though in this
example Ftacnik makes excellent
use of them to influence other
sectors of the board) or by
obstructing the full potential of
White's minor pieces, in particular
the queen's bishop. Nevertheless,
the idea is viable and Schussler in
particular seems willing to tinker
with variations on the theme .
5 ef e6
6 �g2 dS
7 0-0 c6
A solid, consistent reaction,
though Schussler has tried an
in triguing alternative deployment
811 t 1. /, ! 1 1 1 n d F/1{/.1·

i n a n a na logous position: I d4 e6 2 1 2 �e2 lt:JeS !?

�.:4 b6 3 lt:Jf3 i.b 7 4 g3 i.xf3 !? 5 ef Rerouting to support . . . b5,
lt:Jf6 6 lt:Jc3 i.e7 7 i.g2 d5 8 b3 0-0 staking out more space and white
9 0-0 lt:Jc6!? 10 f4 i.b4! I I i.b2 squares on the queenside. The
�d6! 1 2 lic l i.xc3 I3 llxc3 llfd8 transfer comes at an auspicious
I4 c5? �d7 I 5 llfe i b5 with a moment, since I 3 f5 ? fails to I3 . . .
good position for Black, Holst­ ef I 4 c d c d I 5 i.xd5 lic2 I 6 llab i
Schiissler, Malmo I 978. 6 lt:Jc3 lt:Jdf6 I 7 i.g2 i.b4 I 8 :!Ifd I lt:Je4,
may not be accurate as d2-f3-e5 better for Black. This blow with
seems the logical route, though . . . the extra f-pawn is a recurring
i.b4! can occur even then. The theme which Black must constantly
battle between knight and bishop beware of.
pairs is very interesting and pre­ 13 llacl lt:Jd6
vents the white knight from occupy­ 14 lt:Jf3 de
i ng e5. Also, the black knight sits 15 be b5
well on e7, both sides have some 16 eb eb
difficulty in forming a long range 17 llxeS �xeS
plan here and this seems a worth­ 1S d5! (1 08)
while testing ground for .. . i.xf3
/08
adherents. Ftacnik also mentions B
7 . . . de? ! , when he intended 8
�a4+ �d7 9 �xc4 �c6 10 b3 with
advantage. I I f4 will force awk­
ward concessions from Black.
S b3 i.e7
8 . . . lt:Jbd7 to meet 9 lt:Jd2 with . . .
i.b4 reaching the bishops v knights
confrontation, is an option. Perhaps
8 .. . i.d6 planning a Ia ter . . . �e 7 Now it is the centre pawn which
and . . . i.a3 is an idea, though the strikes out. Ftacnik has astutely
queen could be misplaced if White judged the effects of this thrust.
prevents the exchange of bishops. Although it leaves Black with
9 lt:Jd2 0-0 essentially an extra pawn, the
10 f4 lt:Jbd7 dormant bishop pair now join in
10 . . . a5!? planning . . . lla7 and the action and the full co-ordination
. . . c5 or . . . �d7, . . . a4 seems more of White's forces saddles Black
dynamic. with a long and trying defence .
11 i.b2 lieS 1S �e4 !
 Odds and Ends 81

19 :riel ! lLlc5 can be used to unsettle the defenders

Mestel finds the best chance. and these factors give White an
19 . . . �xd5 20 lLle5 is obviously initiative that soon reaps material
out but 19 . . . �xa2 is less simple, benefits.
but clearly risks a fearful beating: 22 lieS
20 de fe (20 . . . �xe6 21 �d3) 2 1 23 .ic6! lieS
.ih3 l2Jc5 22 �e5 lLle8 (22 . . . llf6 24 .idS
23 .id4! lLlc4 24 �c7 ! ± Ftacnik) Bringing irresistible pressure to
23 .id4 �d6 24 �e3 �d5 25 .ixc5 bear on the a2-g8 diagonal.
�xc5 26 �xe6+ '>t>h8 27 lbg5 with 24 llc5
a decisive attack , e.g. 27 . . . �c7?! 25 .ib3 l2Jc4
28 �xe8! 26 f5 ! lLlxe5
20 de l2Jxe6 Acquiescing in the loss of a
21 l2Je5! �xe2 pawn , but the rook and bishops of
2 1 . . . �xa2 now loses abruptly opposite colour endings a re also
and straightforwardly. 22 lla l grim, e.g. 26 . . . l2Jxb2 27 fe f6 28
�b3 23 lla3 lbd4 (23 . . . �4 24 llxb2 fe (28 . . . ll xe5 29 llc2) 29
lbc6 ++) 24 ll xb3 l2Jxe2+ 25 '>t>fl lid2 '>t>f8 (29 . . . a5 30 lld8+ !) 30
puts down the invading black lld7 a5 3 1 lla7 wins a pawn and
knigh t. maintains a decisive grip on the
22 llxe2 (109) position (3 1 . . . lic l + 32 '>t>g2 .ib4
33 llf7+ - 33 e 7+? '>t>e8! - and
Black's kingside drops off).
2 7 .ixe5 ltJdS
27 . . . lLlg5 28 <;i;>g2 and 29 h4 is
no better.
2S .ixg7! '>t>xg7
29 lixe7 (1 1 0)

This is the type of position

White had to j udge when playing
1 8 d5. Despite reduced material
and Black's queenside maj ority,
piece activity reigns supreme. White
threatens 23 lLlc6 and 23 l2J xf7
..t>xf7 24 i.d5. The doubled f-pawn
.'i
'
I 1 , /. f l • I ll• / / 11,/1

l'l l:IxfS mends 6 . . . c6!? (a Ia Ftacnik­

llJ
. a 5 30 l:Id7 a4 3 1 i.d5 l:ic8
. . Mestel, p. 79) while 6 ... ll'lf6 re­
32 g4 leaves Black helpless. serving the c6 square for the b8
30 l:ixa 7 ll'lc6 knight in Holst-Schussler (see p.
31 l:id7 ll'leS 80) is another, sturdier, alternative.
32 :!:idS ll'lf3+ 7 i.xc4 c6
33 'i!i>g2 l:ixdS Here Schussler provides some
34 i.xdS interesting comm mentary: "Black
The rest is fairly easy, the knight was one hour ahead on the clock . .
cannot cope with the bishop and my home preparation was the
an extra pawn. plan . . . i.d6 and . . . ll'lge7." Bilek
34 ll'ld4 finds a more incisive path .
35 f4 hS 8 dS! ed !?
36 'i!i>f2 'i!i>f6 " Playing for a trap" - Schussler.
37 'i!i>e3 ll'lfS+ 9 ll'lxd5 ll'le7 (I l l)
38 c;!;>d3 ll'ld6
39 'i!i>d4 ll'lfS+
40 'i!i>cS ll'le3
41 i.f3 h4
42 'i!i>xbS hg
43 hg ll'lfS
44 'i!i>b6
1 -0
The a-pawn is unstoppable. A
clinical dissection of the black
position by Ftacnik.

Bilek-Schussler Played instantly, causing White

Helsinki 1 978 to tumble for it. 10 ll'lxe7 ! 'tifxd 1 +
1 c4 b6 1 1 'i!i>xd l i.xe7 1 2 i.f4 gives White
2 d4 i.b7 a sizeable edge with his bishop
3 ll'lf3 e6 pair in an open position, but the
4 g3 i.xf3 bait proves too much.
5 ef d5 I 0 ll'lf6+ (?) gf
6 ll'lc3 de 11 i.xf7+ 'i!i>xf7
A d o ubtful experiment, though 12 'tifxd8 ll'ldS!
it is responsible for a thoroughly The point. The threat of
enjoyable game. Schussler recom- i.b4+ winning the queen forces

White to get his king out of the
way when 1 3 . . . i.g7 14 'ti'd6 ..tf8 !
leads to a dance the white queen
cannot avoid. So . . . \12-\12.
Perhaps the greatest 1 2-move draw
of all time!
Gu.Garcia-Miles
Las Palmas 1980
1 c4 b6
2 d4 ..tb7
3 ..tg S (1 12)
A quaint move which aims to
prevent Black transposing directly
i nto a Queen's I ndian Defence.
Nevertheless, Black should surely
be able to equalise in a number of
ways.
3 lt:\f6!?
Naturally there are other moves.
The most straightforward is 3 . . .
h 6 with the possible follow-up
4 ..th4 g5 5 ..tg3 ..tg7.
Twice Miles chose 3 . . . f6 !? i n
the Tungsram 1 980 tournament in
Baden. His aim was to play a sub-
Odds and Ends 83
sequent . . . f5 and produce some­
thing akin to a Dutch Defence . It
worked well against Holzl after 4
..td2 e6 5 lt:\f3 f5 6 g3 lt:\f6 7 �g2
g6!? 8 lt:\c3 ..tg7 9 0-0 0-0 10 d5
lt:\a6! 1 1 ..tf4 lt:\c5 and Black is
fine (0- 1 , 40), but he was not so
successful against Smej kal: 4 i.d2
e6 5 lt:\c3 f5 6 lt:\f3 lt:\f6 7 g3 lt:\c6 8
e3 i.b4 9 ..tg2 lt:\e4 10 Ii c l 'ti'e7 1 1
0-0 lt:\xd2 1 2 'ti'xd2 0-0 1 3 a3 ..txc3
14 'ti'xc3 lt:\d8 15 l:ifd l lt:\f7 16 d5
d6 17 de lt:\d8 18 lt:\d4 ..txg2 19
\t>xg2 lt:\xe6 20 lt:\xe6 'ti'xe6 Black
is quite equal here but after some
inaccuracies he resigned on move
51.
4 i.xf6 ef
The recapture with the g-pawn
is possible but has never been
seen . Why don't you try it out?
5 lt:\c3 ..tb4
5 . . . f5 , intending to fianchetto,
is possible.
6 Iic1 0-0
7 a3 ..txc3+
8 Iixc3 dS?!
Miles tries to make something
of his development lead. Strategic-
ally 8 . . . f5 intending . . . d6, . . . lbd7
and . . . f6 would be more natural.
9 cS
Just about forced. 9 lt:\f3 de
would have been excellent for
Black .
9 ..ta6
10 lt:\f3 lieS
11 'ti'c2 l:ie7 (1 13)
84 Odds and Ends

well until h e saw 1 0 'i!fg7 !

5 e4 e5!
6 de
6 d5 could be met by 6 . . . ed
when 7 ed 0-0 or 7 cd 0-0
threatening 8 . . . lt:lxe4 are quite
playable for Black.
6 i.b7!
A vigorous reaction to White's
breach of principle through ad­
12 g4?! vancing his queen. so early. Black
Garcia goes over the top. 1 2 e3 develops as fast as possible.
would have left White with a 7 e5
simple structural advantage. Miles' 7 cb? i.xe4 1s dreadful for
8th move was probably wrong. White.
12 be 7 lt:le4
13 lixe5 lt:ld7 8 lt:le2 (1 1 4)
And since 14 :ilxd5? i.b7 or 1 4
Iixc7? i.c4 are not good, White 1 14

was forced to retreat with 1 4 :ilc3 B

after which the gambit 14 . . . c5 !

enabled Black to equalise.

Larsen-Timman
Montreal 1 979
1 e4 b6
2 lt:le3 e6
3 d4 i.b4
4 'i!fd3!? And here 8 cb 'ti'xb6 9 i.e3 'i!fa5
An unusual try which did not would give excellent compensation
work very well. We are taught not for Black. Still, that would have
to move the queen before the been better than what actually
minor pieces. happened to Larsen .
4 lt:lf6 8 'i!fh4!
After 4 . . . i.b7 5 'i!fg3 lt:lf6 6 9 i.e3 lt:lxe5
'i!fxg7 :ilg8 7 'i!fh6 li: xg2 8 i.xg2 10 'ti'd4 i.e4!
i..x g2 9 i.g5 i.e7 Timman's first With ideas of 1 1 . . . li:ld3 + ! and
impression was that Black stood 1 1 . . . lt:lc6.
 Odds and Ends 85

11 lL!g3 lL!c6 Nimzo-Indian by 5 . . . 4::i f6, Miles

12 1!¥d2 i.g6 chose
13 i.g5 4 c5!?
The o nly move i n view of 5 a3 i.a5!? (115)
Black's attack on the e5 pawn.
1 3 f4?? li:le4.
13 1!¥d4
14 1!¥xd4 4::\xd4
15 licl
Certainly not 1 5 0-0-0?? lL!cb3+ !
1 6 ab 4::\ x b3 mate.
15 lL!a4
Winning a pawn.
16 i.d2 lL!xb2
17 4::\ e4
Timman played: Here again, 5 . . . i.xc3+ 6 1!¥xc3
17 i.xd2+ 4::if6 would be more conventional
which should have sufficed for and analogous to the 4 1!¥c2
victory but he committed some variation of the Nimzo-India n .
technical errors and the great 6 4::if3 i.b7
tournament fighter, Larsen, m an­ 7 e3 lL!f6
aged to draw. Timman himself And, lo and behold, we have a
suggested that 1 6 . . . i.a3 was even Nimzo-Indian.
stronger. It was a shame that he 8 i.d2 0-0
did not manage to bring the game 9 i.e2 i.xc3
to its rightful conclusion after 1 0 i.xc3 4::\e4
such splendidly imaginative opening 11 0-0 d6
play. 12 lifd1 1!¥e7
with approxima te equality ( 1-0,
Larsen-Miles 49).
Riga IZ 1 9 79
1 c4 b6 Seirawan-Stean
2 lL!c3 e6 Malta Olympiad 1980
3 d4 i.b4 1 c4 e6
4 1!¥c2 2 4::if3 b6
Instead of 4 . . . i.b 7 after which 3 d4 i.b7
5 e4 �4 takes us into Chapter 5 4 lL!c3 i.b4
or 5 4::if3 , giving the option of a 5 �3
 'I
�cl or 5 c 3 would give Black
the option of 5 . . . lt:lf6 entering an
orthodox Nimzo-lndian or the
English Defence move 5 . . . f5 !?
5 a5
5 . . . c5 and 5 . . . �e7 deserve
consideration.
6 a3 .i.xc3+
7 �xc3 a4!
Ensuring that White can not
gain space with b4 and fixing the
b3 square as a weakness.
lt:lf6 (1 1 6)
8 .i.g5
A classic Nimzo is now before
us.
9 e3
Now 9 . . . d6 intending . . . 0-0, . . .
lt:lbd7 etc, should equalise com­
fortably. The proper theoretical
discussion ends here but the re­
maining moves of this game are
quite compelling: 9 ... c5!? 1 0 d5!?
ed 1 1 :S:d1! d4! 1 1 ... de 12 l!d6!
12 ed �e7+ 13 .i.e2 lt:le4! 14 .i.xe7
lt:lxc3 15 be wxe7 16 l!b1 .i.xf3 1 7
.i.xf3 lt:lc6 18 :S:xb6 cd 19 Wd2 !?
Ii:hb8 20 Ii:hb1 de+! 2 1 wxc3 Il:xb6
22 lhb6 wd6 23 .i.xc6 de 24 :S:b7
wc5! 25 :S:xf7 g6! 26 :S:xh7 :S:b8 27
:S:g7 lil:b3+ 28 Wc2 :S:xa3 29 lhg6
wb4! 30 lixc6 Ii:a2+ 31 wd3 :S:xf2
32 Il:b6+ Wc5 33 Il:b5+ wc6 34 g4
:S:xh2 35 We4 a3 36 :S:a5 a2 37 g5
:S:g2 38 W£5 Wb6 39 :S:a4 Wc5 40
g6 lif2+ 41 We6 lie2+ 42 wf7
:S:f2+ 43 wg8 :S:g2 44 g7 lif2 V:!-\12.
Fine play from both grandmasters.
F .01afsson-Miles
Las Palmas 1978
1 c4 b6
2 lt:lc3 e6
3 d4 .i.b4
4 e3
A move based upo n the same
principles as the Rubinstein vari­
ation of the Nimzo-lndian Defence.
White intends to complete develop­
ment of his kingside forces before
undertaking anything very active.
4 .i.b 7
5 lt:le2 f5!?
Here, as on the p revious move,
Black could have played ... lt:lf6
transposing back into a Nimzo­
Indian which may be objectively
best. 5 . . . f5 bestows the character
of the English Defence upon the
play, in that White is allowed to
make the central advance d5.
6 a3 .i.d6 !?
A more active idea than the 6 . . .
.i.e7 7 d 5 e 5 8 e4 f4 9 g 3 fg l O h g of
Petrosian-Boh m , Lone Pine 1978,
when Black had no real compen-
 Odds and Ends 87

sation for White's space advantage. .txg3! 0- 1 .

6 . . . .ixc3+ 7 lt:lxc3 lt:lf6, akin to a 9 de lt:le4
Ni mzo, is worth trying. An excellent idea. Black receives
7 d5 ltlf6 very good chances for his gambit
8 lt:ld4 pawn because of his development
The simpler 8 g3 0-0 9 .ig2 lead.
might be an improvement here, 10 't!Yc2?!
for then White retains his extra White wishes to avoid the doub­
space and it remains to be seen ling of his c-pawns, but 10 lt:ld5
how Black will satisfactorily com­ or 10 lt:l xe4 are possible improve-
plete his development. ments.
8 0-0! (1 1 7) 10 lt:lxc3
11 't!Yxc3 't!Yf6
117 12 ed lt:lxd7
B 13 .td2
Because of the battery of pieces
at his kingside, Olafsson attempts
to castle long.
13 lt:lc5
14 lt:lr3
Not 1 4 0-0-0? lt:le4.
14 'ti'g6
15 h4
This position also occurred in Trying somehow to complete
the game Hawksworth-Plaskett, development.
Hastings 1 9 80- 1 . White varied 15 lt:le4
with 9 g3 lt:le4 1 0 lt:lxe4 ( 10 i.g2 16 h5
was probably wiser even though it The only move, because 16 't!Yc2
allows the doubling of the c­ lost to . . . .tg3 !
pawns) 1 0 . . . fe 1 1 de 't!Yf6 1 2 't!Ye2 16 'ti'g4
lt:lc6! 1 3 lt:l xc6 (on 1 3 .tg2, 1 3 . . . 1 7 lt:le5
lt:l e 5 i s strong) 1 3 . . . .txc6 1 4 .tg2 Again forced . 1 7 't!Yc2? .tg3 !
1!¥xe6 1 5 0-0? ( 15 b3 was called for) 17 .txe5!
1 5 . . . .ta4! (winning) 1 6 .td2 .tc2 18 't!Yxe5 llae8 !
1 7 't!Yh5 .td3 18 lifc l lif5 1 9 't!Yd 1 19 't!Yh2
liaf8! 20 .th3 'ti'f7 2 1 .txf5 't!Yxf5 A grovelly retreat, but 1 9 't!Yxc7
22 't!Ye 1 't!Yh3 23 llc3 llf5 24 f4 (if would have worked out even
24 lixd3 lih5) 24 . .. ef 25 't!Yf2 worse after 19 . . . f4 ! 20 't!Yxb7 fe
1 1 11d .' 1 . . . li \ xf2. none of his pieces will ever move
19 lbxd2 again.
20 'it>xd2 f4 (118) 30 :S:xc3
31 be :S:d2+
l /8
w
32 ..tal .id 7
33 :S:f4 'it>g7
34 :S:f3 .ic6
35 :S:d3 :S:f2
36 ndl .i.a4
37 :iie l 'it>f6
37 . .i.c2, still preventing the
. .

development of the bishop, was

another technical solution, but by
Miles' gambit has been com­ now Black's advantage has reached
pletely vindicated. White's game such proportions that he can
is in total disarray, and it is all he permit White to develop his last
can do to bail out into a grossly piece.
inferior ending. 38 .i.d3 :S:xg2
21 ef lhf4 39 :S:fl+ 'it>g5
22 1Wg3! :S:d4+ 40 :S:f3 .i.c2!
23 'it>c3 1Wxg3+ 41 .i.xc2 :S:xc2
24 fg c5! 42 :S:f7
25 'it>b3 Or 4 1 'it>b 1 :S:d2 intending
There is nothing more productive :S:d6 and . .. 'it>g4-h3, with the
than slipping away with the king inevitable fall of the g3-pawn.
like this since 2 5 .i.d3? loses to 42 'it>g4
25 . . . :S:e3 26 :S:ad 1 .ie4. 43 :S:xa7 g5
25 :S:e3+ 44 :S:b7 'it>xg3
26 'it>a2 .ic8! 45 :S:xb6 g4
27 :S:h4 .i.g4 46 a4 'it>h4
28 :S:cl g5 47 a5 g3
29 hg hg 48 a6 g2
Perhaps even stronger here was 49 :S:bl llf2
to continue the theme of denying 50 a7 :S:f8
White the slightest activity by 51 �b2 :S:a8
29 . . . h 5 ! 52 �c2
30 :S:c3 0- 1
White has to do this, otherwise A very good game b y Miles.
 Odds and Ends 89

8 g3 tWh5
Polgar-Rogers 9 l1Jf6
i_g2
O HRA 1 985 10 l1Jh3 l1Jc6
1 d4 e6 11 l1Jf4 tWf7
2 c4 b6 12 e4 0-0-0
3 l1Jc3 i-b4 13 0-0 g5
4 e3 i_b7 14 l1Jd3 (119)
5 a3!?
Challenging Black to double
the c-pawns. The idea is obviously
similar to the Samisch variation
of the Nimzo-Indian Defence ,
where White hopes that h is central
superiority will outweigh the
"weaklings".
5 i-xc3+
6 be f5
7 f3 �4+
There are many other ways to The stage is set for a ding-dong
play it, for instance 7 . l1Jf6, 7 . . .
. . middlegame in which White looks
l1Jc6, 7 ... d6. We need more to have the superior chances. In
examples before clearer conclusions the event she delivered mate on
can be drawn. the 44th move.
7 Accelerated Queen's Indian
1 d4 lt:Jf6
2 c4 b6 (120)
120
w ed to achieve e4, thus throttling
The accelerated Queen's I ndian
lies somewhere between the Queen's
I ndian proper and the English
Defence. Since, however, it has
not been covered in either of the
standard Batsford works on the
Queen's I ndian (Queen's Indian
Defence by E.Geller and Winning
with the Queen's Indian by Z. Ribli
and G . Kallai) it is appropriate to
analyse it here. It should be noted
that one line, I d4 lt:Jf6 2 c4 b6 3
lt:Jc3 i.b7 4 d5 e6 5 a3, transposes
directly into the variation of the
English Defence discussed at the
·start of Chapter I .
We break this closing chapter
into two sections:
A White plays f3 (on move 3 or 4)
B White plays 4 'il¥c2
Both plans are evidently design­
the ambitions of Black's bishop
on b7.
A White Plays f3
B ogolju bow-Alekhine
World Ch Match, Wiesbaden 1 932
1 d4 tbf6
2 c4 b6
3 lt:Jc3
The main line, though White
may also try 3 f3 at once, with the
idea 3 . . . d5 4 cd lt:J xd5 5 e4 lt:Jf6
(there is no freeing exchange on c3
since White has not yet developed
his queen's knight) 6 i.e3 e6 7 lt:Jc3
when Black's position is passive
but not entirely unplayable.
If Black wants to avoid this
pseudo-Griinfeld structure he has
two alternatives:
a) 3 ... c5 4 d5 g6 5 e4 d6 6 lt:Jc3
i..g7 7 i.g5 0-0 8 'il¥d2 lt:Jbd7 9 lt:Jh3
lt:Je5, Kunsztowicz-Keene, Dort­
mund 1 973 . Here 1 0 f4 would have
 Accelerated Queen's Indian 91

been strong since 1 0 . . . .i.xh3 fails Now that Black's queen's bishop
simply to I I fe. Instead White is already committed to b7 it would
played 10 lLJf2 and Black won be dangerous to seek transposition
after manifold adventures. to a Samisch King's I ndian . The
b) An attempt to divert into the text is best, establishing Griinfeld
. . . b6 variation of the Samisch contours.
King's I ndian, e.g. 3 ... g6 4 e4 d6 5 cd lLJxd5
5 lLlc3 .i.g7 6 .i.e3 0-0 7 .i.d3 .i.b7 6 e4
(7 . . . c5?? 8 e5! and .i.e4 wins) 8 Quite feeble is 6 lt:J xd5 't!¥xd5
lLJge2 c5 9 0-0 (9 d5 !) 9 . . . lLlc6 I 0 7 e4 't!¥d7 8 .i.c4 g6 9 't!¥b3 e6 10
.i.c2 e5 1 1 de de 1 2 .i.g5, Botvinnik­ lt:Je2 .i.g7 1 1 .i.e3 lLlc6 12 l::[ d 1
Stein, USSR Team Championship lLJa5 1 3 't!¥c2 't!¥c6! + Agdamus­
1 964. Here Botvinnik recommends Fischer, Buenos Aires 1 970. Black
1 2 . . . lLJd4! 13 lLld5 lLl xd5 14 .i.xd8 soo n played . . . 0-0-0 to keep up the
lLJe3, with compensation. Stein pressure on d4. In spite of the
played . . . h6 before sacrificing the somewhat dubious reputation of
queen, inadvertently depriving 2 . . . b6 it is interesting that such
himself of the valuable later possi­ illustrious names as Nimzowitsch,
bility . . . .i.h6. Alekhine, Fischer and Larsen have
3 .i.b7 experimented with it.
4 f3 6 lLJxc3
The point of this is clear: a 7 be e6
concrete barrier is to be placed in 8 .i.b5+ lLJd7
the path of Black's fianchettoed 9 lLle2 .i.e7
queen's bishop. 10 0-0 a6
4 d5 transposes to Chapter I , 11 .i.d3 c5 (122)
page l .
4 d5! (1 21) 122
w
121
w

12 .i.b2?
IJ.' Accl'laatl'll Queen 's Indian

A really bad move . White had White is anxiou s to save his

the choice between at least two queen (which Black threatened to
good bishop moves, 12 �e3 and win by 26 . . . �g4) and overlooks
12 �f4. 12 a4 also came into con­ the following mating combination.
sideration. From now on Black However, his position was hopeless
gradually gets the initiative. anyway. If, for instance, 26 �e3
12 !fc7 then 26 ... �xe3 27 li xe3 lL'lf4 28
13 f4 lL'lf6 g3 hg 29 hg f5 followed by 30 . . .
1 4 lLig3 hS 'it'h7 and mate.
I S !fe2 h4 26 ltJg3+
16 lLihl lL'lhS 27 hg hg+
17 !fg4 0-0-0 28 lLih3 �xh3
18 liae1 'Ot>b8 29 gh lixh3+
19 rs 30 'Ot>g2 lih2 mate
This attempt to blockade the
centre proves unsuccessful as Black B White Plays !fc2
can secure strong diagonals for
both his bishops. But the game Alekhine-Andersen
was already strategically lost. Prague O lympiad 1 931
19 eS 1 d4 lL'lf6
20 dS c4! 2 c4 b6
21 �c2 �cS+ "I have tried this on several
22 lL'!f2 gS! occasions at the beginning of my
23 fg lidg8 professional career . . . and also
24 �cl �c8! against Bogoljubow with success.
25 !ff3 lixg6 Its disadvantage consists in allow­
26 'Ot>hl (123) ing White considerable freedom in
the centre, its merit in forcing the
123 opponent to select a definite open­
B ing plan possibly earlier than he
would like to." (Alekhine)
3 lLic3 �b7
If 3 ... e6 4 e4 �b4 5 e5 lLie4 6
!fg4 lLi xc3 7 a3! �f8 (7 . . . i.a5
8 !fxg7 lLie4+ 9 b4 Iif8 1 0 �h6 ±)
8 �g5 �e7 (8 . . . f6 9 ef gf 1 0 'it'h5+
'Ot>e7 1 1 �xf6+! ±±) 9 �xe7 'it'xe7
10 !fxg7 !ff8 1 1 !fxf8+ lixf8 1 2
 Accelerated Queen's Indian 93

be ±. 1 6 'it>d2 ± Tartakower) 1 2 0-0 c5

4 'it'c2! e6?! 1 3 fe fe 1 4 li:xf8+ 'it'xf8 1 5 lLl xe4!
4 . . . d5 is best - see Alekhine­ ± Tartakower-Marshall, Bad Kis­
Konig which follows. An alter­ singen 1 928.
native, exciting if dubious, is 4 . . . 6 f3
lLlc6!?, e.g. 5 lLlf3! ( 5 d5 lLlb4 6 Also strong is 6 .td3, not fearing
'it'd 1 a5 7 e4 e5 8 g3 g6 is less clear, doubled pawns on the c-file. Thus
Samisch-Nimzowitsch, Carlsbad 6 . . . .txc3+ 7 be d6 8 lLle2 c5 9 0-0
1 923) 5 . . . e6 6 e4 e5? ! 7 de lLlg4 lLlc6 1 0 f4 'it'e7 1 1 d5 lLla5 1 2 lLlg3
8 .tg5 .te7 9 .tf4 .tc5 10 .tg3 0-0-0 1 3 'it'e2 with advantage,
'it'e7 1 1 0-0-0 ( I I lLld5? lLlb4!) 1 1 Botvinnik-Silich, USSR Ch 1 929 .
... ll:Jcxe5 1 2 lLl xe5 lLl xe5 1 3 lLld5 Black could also try 6 . . . c5, trying
.txd5 14 ed '@'g5+? ( 1 4 . . . lLlg6! to assault White's central bastions,
Teichmann) 1 5 'it>b l lLlg4 1 6 li: e l + but experience with this has not
'it>d8 17 .td3 ± - Teichmann­ been encouraging: 7 d5 ed 8 ed b5
Alekhine, Berlin (match) 1 92 1 . 9 b3! 0-0 1 0 lLle2 d6 1 1 0-0 be 1 2
Black's whole idea with . . . e 6 and b e lLlbd7 1 3 f4 lie8 1 4 lLlg3 ±
.. . e5 is unsound, but 4 . .. lLlc6 Rubinstein-Janowski, Marienbad
looks anti-positional in any case. 1925. The sparkling finish was:
M aybe Black's best is Nimzo­ 14 . . . .ta6 15 lLlce4 lLl xe4 16 lLl xe4
witsch's retrograde proposal 4 ... ll:lb6 1 1 .tb2 f6 1 8 n o nf8 1 9
lLlc6!? 5 lLlf3! d6 6 d5 lLlb8. lLlg5! fg 20 .txh7+ 'it>h8 21 bg7+! !
5 e4 .tb4 (124) 'it>xg7 22 '@'g6+ 'it>h8 23 llh3 'it'd7
24 .tg8+ 'it'xh3 25 gh 1-0.
124 6 0-0
w 7 .td3 h6
8 lLle2 d5
9 cd ed
10 e5 lLlfd7
11 0-0 c5
12 a3 .txc3
13 be lLlc6
14 .te3 cd
15 cd llc8
If 5 . . . d5 6 cd ed 7 e5 ll:Je4 8 16 'it'd2 ll:Ja5 (125)
.tb5+ c6 9 .td3 .tb4 1 0 lLle2 f5 Black has done his best. He
1 1 f3 0-0 ( 1 1 . . . 'it'h4+ 1 2 g3 lLl xg3 threatens . . . lLlc4 and . . . lLlb3. The
1 3 ll:Jxg3 f4 1 4 'it'g2 fg 1 5 .te3 gh+ time has come for a combination.
•J.I :l n ·l 'lt·ratt·d {Jut•t•n '.\· Indian

Alekhine-Konig
Vienna 1 922
1 d4 li:lf6
2 c4 b6
3 li:lc3 .i.b7
4 'ti'c2! (127)

127
B

17 .i.xh6! li:lb3
Of course, 1 7 . . . gh 1 8 'ti'xh6 is
devastating.
18 'ti'f4 li:c6
19 .i.gS f6
20 ef li:lxa1 (126)

126
The most testing move. White
w aims ruthlessly for e4 without
weakening his structure or depriv­
ing his king's knight of its best
square. Both of the aforementioned
are drawbacks of 4 f3. The text
also permits Black fewer counter­
chances than 4 d5 (which may,
however, also be good - see
Chapter 1 , page 1 ).
4 dS
21 .i.h7-t:! The principal variation.
The sting in the tail. If 2 1 5 cd lUxdS
'it>xh 7 2 2 'ti'h4+ 'it>g6 (22 . . . 'it>g8 6 li:lf3!
23 f7+) 23 li:lf4+ 'it>f5 24 g4 mate. The most reliable move, though
21 'it>h8 6 e4 is certainly more attractive
22 'ti'h4 li:lxf6 than might be inferred from its
23 li:lf4 general reputation. For 6 e4 see
1 -0 Gligoric-Larsen which follows.
23 . . . g6 24 'ti'h6 ±±. 6 e6

Black may also head straight
for a Griinfeld set-up: 6 . . . lil xc 3
7 b e g 6 8 e 4 i..g7 9 i..b 5+ li:l d 7 I 0
0-0 0-0 I I i..f4 a6 1 2 i.. d3 :ile8 I 3
liadi c5 14 a4 e6 1 5 lifl , Quinteros­
Planinc, Ljubljana/Portoroz 1 973,
when 15 ... �c8! is recommended.
Nevertheless, Black's position never
looks absolutely satisfactory. Com­
pare this: I d4 lilf6 2 c4 e6 3 lilf3
b6 4 lilc3 i..b 7 5 a3 d5 6 cd lilxd5
7 e3 g6 8 i.. b 5+ c6 9 i..d3 i..g 7
10 e4 lil xc3 I I be c5, Kasparov­
Korchnoi, match ( I ) London I 983.
In Quinteros-Planinc the differences
are well in White's favour - no
wasted move a3, e4 achieved in
one go, etc.
7 e4 lilxc3
8 be i..e 7
9 i..b S+ c6
10 i..d 3 (128)
128
8 thus achieves an even more favour­
10 0-0?
This allows disaster to strike.
Black's only "fighting chances",
as Alekhine puts it, come from
10 . . . li:ld7 I I 0-0 c5 1 2 i..f4 0-0
Accelerated Queen's Indian 95
1 3 Ii:ad i cd I 4 cd llc8 - Moritz­
Griinfeld, Breslau 1925.
Once again a fruitful comparison
is provided by reference to the
"Petrosian Variation" of the full
Queen's Indian: I d4 li:lf6 2 c4 e6
3 lilf3 b6 4 lilc3 i..b 7 5 a3 d5 6 cd
lilxd5 7 �c2 c5 8 e4 lilxc3 9 be
li:ld7 10 i..f4 cd I I cd lic8 1 2 �b3
i..e 7 ( 1 2 . . . i.. xe4 1 3 i.. a6! ) 1 3 i.. d 3
0-0 1 4 0-0 lilb8 I 5 liad l i..d6 I 6
.id2! 'i1.c7 1 7 life l Ji.a7 1 8 i.. b l
'i1.e8 1 9 h4! ± Portisch-Korchnoi,
Montpellier (Candidates) 1 9 8 5 .
I n the middle of this particular
line Black can resist with the trick
I3 . . . lilf6! 14 d5 ed I 5 lid l 0-0
I 6 0-0 de! 1 7 i..x e4 lil xe4 1 8 li xd8
'i1.fxd8 + Miles-Polugayevsky,
Sarajevo I 987.
However, in Moritz-Griinfeld,
Black is effectively a tempo down.
White has not found it necessary
to waste a move playing a3, and he
able version of Portisch-Korchnoi.
Black's prospects look bleak indeed.
11 eS h6
12 h4
One slack move and Black's
position is transformed from pas­
sivity to a bomb-site. Alekhine
was superb at blitzing opponents
when he could obtain this kind of
initiative.
12 cS
13 llh3 'it>h8
14 Ji.xh6! (129)
CJ(J A ccl'lcrated Queen's Indian

130
w

I f now 1 4 . . . gh I S 'i!l'd2 wins A trick invented by Alekhine to

easily. Note the similarity with vitalise Black's position. White
Alekhine's combination against has to react positively even to
Andersen . avoid a slight disadvantage.
14 f5 8 de
15 ef i.xf6 This is feeble. Correct is Spiel­
1 6 i.g5 cd mann's sacrifice 8 lLJf3 ! ed, for
1 7 lLJe5 lLJc6 example 9 i.bS+ c6 1 0 i.c4 bS
18 'i!l'e2 g6 1 1 i.e2 de 1 2 't!Vxc3 lLJd7 13 0-0
The rest is simple: 19 i.xg6 Wg7 lLJcS! 1 4 li e ! lLJe6 I S i.e3 with
20 i.h6+ Wg8 2 1 lLJxc6 i.xc6 22 compensation for the pawn , or
't!Vxe6+ wh8 23 i.xf8 'i!l'xf8 24 9 i.c4 lLJc6 10 0-0 d3 1 1 i.xd3 i.cS
't!Vxc6 1 -0. 12 eS h6 1 3 i.f4 't!Ve7 14 i.fS g6
1S i.h3 lLJ d8 1 6 e6! ll:lxe6 1 7 i.xe6
Gligoric-Larsen
fe t. Gligoric seems quite bemused
Palma de Mallorca 1 967 in this game.
1 d4 lLJf6 8 �4
2 c4 b6 9 lLJf3
3 lLJc3 i.b7 9 i.bS+ is worth consideration,
4 't!Vc2 d5 as played in the stem game Euwe­
5 cd lLJxd5 Alekhine, Budapest 1 92 1 : 9 ... ll:ld7
6 e4 10 ltJf3 1Wxe4+ 1 1 't!Vxe4 i.xe4 1 2
Perhaps not best, but certainly lLJgS i.xg2 1 3 lig 1 c6 1 4 li xg2 cb
not bad. l S e6 fe 1 6 lLJxe6 Wf7 1 7 ll:lc7 li c8
6 lLJxc3 1 8 lLJxbS a6 1 9 lLJd4 li xc3 20 i.b2
7 be e5! (130) lieS 21 lid 1 lidS 22 lid3 lLJeS 23
 A ccelerated Queen's Indian 97

llb3 .tb4+ 24 ..t>fl .tc5 25 l2Jf5 17 l2Jd4 l2Jhe8

iihd8 26 iixg7+ ..t?f6 27 llf3 lid2 18 f4 g6
28 l2Jd6+ ..t?e6 29 .txe5 .txd6 30 19 i.b5?! (132)
.txd6 11 8xd6 3 1 l:la3 llb2 Y2-Y2.
9 �xe4+
1 0 �xe4 .txe4
11 .tc4 l2Jc6
12 0-0
It turns out that on 1 2 i.xf7+
..t>xf7 13 l2Jg5+ ..t?g6 1 4 l2Jxe4 l2Jxe5
Black would have a fine game.
12 0-0-0! (131)

This looks dubious. White should

have simply played 1 9 a4 ! , where­
upon after the exchange of the
weak a-pawn an almost even posi­
tion would have been reached.
19 c6
20 .tfl h5
21 g3 c5
22 l2Jb3
Also not quite sufficient was
In this position Gligoric thought 22 l2Jb5 l2Jf5 23 .th3 .tc6.
for almost an hour! He had intended 22 h4
the blow 1 3 .tg5 but now saw 1 3 . . . 23 c4
.i.d3 ! , when White has nothing 24 l:ladl
but weak pawns on the queen's 25 hg
wing.
13 lle1
It is hard to find a better move
for White. 1 3 i.xf7? .txf3 14 gf
lL!xe5 is horrible, and 13 l2Jg5?!
allows 1 3 . . . l2Jxe5.
13 .td5
1 4 .ta6+ ..tib8
15 .tg5 .te7
16 .txe7 l2Jxe7
98 A ccelerated Queen's Indian

A good move, emphasizing h is

control of the important d-file.
134
Black has a very clear, if not w
winning, advantage.
26 lhd8 llxd8
27 'iitf2 lt:lfS
28 i.e2?
I n time trouble Gligoric misses
his last chance 28 e6!.
-

28 i.xe2
29 lixe2 lld3
30 g4 lt:lh6
31 gS lt:lg4+ 39 'iite l lt:lg2+
32 'iite l lt:le3 (134) 40 'iitd l lt:lxf4
White's position starts to fall 0- 1
apart. The time scramble has come to
33 lt:ld2 lt:lc2+ an end and Gligoric, realising that
34 � 'iitc7 he was three pawns down, resigned.
35 lif2 lia3 The notes to this game are
36 e6!? fe based partly on Eric Brondum's in
37 lih2 lixa2 his excellent book Bent Larsen,
38 lih6 lt:le3+ Chess Fighter.
Index of Games

Adorjan-Miles 23, 25
Akesson- Plaskett 12
Alekhine-Andersen 92
Alekhine-Konig 94
Bilek-Schtissler 82
Bogolj ubow-Alekhine 90
Brondum-Plaskett 51
Browne-Christiansen 7
P.Cramling-Schtissler 73
Donner-Miles 30
Farago-Miles 33
Flear-Plaskett 58
Forintos-Hecht 72
Ftacnik-Mes tel 79
Garces-Keene 27
Gu.Garcia-Miles 83
Gligoric-Larsen 96
Karpov-Miles 2,4
Kryboe-Schtissler 75
Larsen-Miles 85
Larsen-Tim man 84
Lj ubojevic-Miles 69
O' Kelly-Keene 2
F.Olafsson-Miles 86
Petrosian-Keene I
Polgar-Rogers 89
Polugayevsky-Korchnoi 43
Portisch-Miles 26
Ree-Miles 38
0 . Rodriguez-Keene 28
I IIII /m/1' 1 o( Ciamc.1·

Sei ra wan-Schi.issler 48
Sci rawan-Stean 85
Spec! ma n-Miles 36
Stean-Miles 19
Suba-Schiissler 14
Tempone:Miles 9
Timman-Spassky 17
Timman-Speelman 3
Williams-Miles 18
FOR CHESS . . . READ BATS FORD
The English Defence, in which Black
plays . . . e6 , . . . b6 and . . . Bb7 has been
popularised by such creative
Grandmasters as Keene, Miles,
Plaskett and Speelman. Black allows
White to set up a broad pawn centre
which he can counterattack in
hypermodern style. The theory of
the opening is still in an embryonic
stage and opportunities exist for new
ideas by the creative player.
By basing the material around
complete games and game extracts,
the authors explain the strategic ideas
of the English Defence. Detailed
analysis is given of the more
Other Titles in this Series
Albin Counter Gambit
Lamford
Alekhine for the Tournament Player
Alburt & Schiller
Anti-Sicilian: 3 Bb5( + )
Razuvayev & Matsukevitch
Benoni for the Tournament Player
Nunn
Caro-Kann: Oassical 4 . . . Bf5
Kasparov & Sakharov
ro • � � � - A- - ·-
;;;; - ....__ ______---. v-:lnstantinopolsky
;.. _
;;;.
Keene
Petroff's Defence
Forintos & Haag
FOR CHESS . . . READ BATS FORD
complicated lines, in particular the
ultra-sharp 1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 e4
Bb7 4 Bd3 f5 , and this work will
therefore suit players of a wide
range of strengths.
Raymond Keene has represented
England in 8 Olympiads and written
over 50 books on chess. James
Plaskett is one of England's most
recent Grandmasters who always
plays to win. Jon Tisdall is an
International Master and chess
journalist for Reuters.
120 diagrams
ISBN 0 7134 1322 0 (limp)
Pirc for the Tournament Player
Nunn
Queen's Pawn: Veresov System
Bellin
Sicilian 2 c3 ( new edition )
Chandler
Siciclian: . . . e6 & . . . d6 Systems
Kasparov & Nikitin
Sicilian: Paulsen
Taimanov
Vienna Game
& Lepeshkin
>r a complete list of Batsford Chess
)Oks please write to B�
�<'itzhardinge Street, Lont
I SBN 0-i
9 l l l,l " 1 3 2 2 "911
78 0 7 1 3 4""'"'