ATTACKING CHESS bee ee, yr EVERY MAN: CHESSATTACKING CHESS KING'S INDIAN vowuwe 1 DAVID VIGORITO EVERYMAN CHESS www.everymanchess.comFirst published in 2010 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman Publishers plc), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT Copyright © 2010 David Vigorito The right of David Vigorito to be identified as the author of this work has been as- serted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988, All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a tetrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: 978 1 85744 645 6 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT tel: 020 7253 7887 fax: 020 7490 3708 email: info@everymanchess.com; website: www.everymanchess.com Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work under licence from Random House Inc. This book is dedicated to two people: for my darling wife Heather, for all her love and support; and for my dear friend Joe Fang, for getting me well on my way in the King’s Indian Defence with many long nights of speed chess back in the olden days... Everyman Chess Series Chief advisor: Byron Jacobs Commissioning editor: John Emms Assistant editor: Richard Palliser Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Cover design by Horatio Monteverde. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays, Bungay, Suffolk.Contents oN aunerwne 10 14. Bibliography Introduction Part I: The Classical Variation 1.d4 Df6 2 c4 g6 3 c3 2g7 4 e4 dé 5 FZ 0-0 6 Be2e5 70-0 Acé Mar del Plata Variation: 9 De1 Ad7 10 43 Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Ae1 Ad7 10 f3 Mar del Plata Variation: 9 e1 Ad7 10 2e3 Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Ad2 Mar del Plata Variation: 9 b4 h5 without 10 He1 Mar del Plata Variation: 9 b4 AhS 10 He1 Mar del Plata Variation: White’s Other 9th Moves White’s Eighth Move Deviations Part Il: The Classical Variation 14 Af6 2 c4 g6 3 Dc3 Lg7 4 e4 dé 5 DF3 0-0 6 £e2 e5 without 7 0-0 Gligoric Variation: 7 Re3 Dg4 8 2g5 f6 9 Bc1 Ac6, 9 Bh4 Acé Gligoric Variation: 7 £e3 Ag4 8 &g5 f6 9 Sha gs Petrosian Variation: 7 d5 a5 without 8 25 10 12 38 47 76 Ps 105 144 156 167 168 184 20212 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Petrosian Variation: 7 d5 a5 8 2g5 Exchange Variation: 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 Wxd8 Exd8 Part Ill: The Samisch Variation 1.d4 Df6 2 c4 g6 3 Ac3 2g7 4.4 d6 5 f3 0-06 2e3 Acé 7 Dge2 ab 8 Wd2 Bbs Panno Variation: 9 h4 without 9...h5 Panno Variation: 9 h4 h5 10 0-0-0 Panno Variation: 9 h4 h5 10 ca Panno Variation: 9 @c1 Panno Variation: 9 0-0-0, 9 &h6 and 9 g4. Panno Variation: 9 a3, 9 Zb1 and 9 Hct Panno Variation: Other lines Index of Variations 222 238 264 273 293 302 320 331 344 364Bibliography Books 6...2)c6 in the Sdmisch Variation, King’s Indian Defense, John Watson (Chess Enter- prises 1982) Attacking Manual |, Jacob Aagaard (Quality Chess 2008) Beat the KID, Jan Markos (Quality Chess 2009) Beating the Anti-King’s Indians, Joe Gallagher (Batsford 1996) Beating the Fianchetto Defences, Efstratios Grivas (Gambit 2006) Dangerous Weapons: The King’s Indian, Richard Palliser, Glenn Flear & Yelena Dembo (Everyman Chess 2009) King’s Indian Defence: 4 e4, Efim Geller (Batsford 1980) King’s Indian Defence: Mar del Plata Variation, Svetozar Gligoric (Batsford 2003) My Great Predecessors Part Ili, Garry Kasparov (Everyman Chess 2004) My Great Predecessors Part IV, Garry Kasparov (Everyman Chess 2005) Play 1 d4!, Richard Palliser (Batsford 2003) Play the King’s Indian, Joe Gallagher (Everyman Chess 2004) Starting Out: 1 d4!, John Cox (Everyman Chess 2006) Starting Out: The King’s Indian, Joe Gallagher (Everyman Chess 2002) The Art of the King’s Indian, Eduard Gufeld (Batsford 2002) The Classical King’s Indian Uncovered, Krzysztof Panczyk and Jacek Iiczuk (Every- man Chess 2009) The Controversial Sdmisch King’s Indian, Chris Ward (Batsford 2004) The King’s Indian: A Complete Black Repertoire, Victor Bologan (Chess Stars 2009) The King’s indian for the Attacking Player, Graham Burgess (Batsford 1993) The Main Line King’s Indian, John Nunn & Graham Burgess (Batsford 1996) The New Classical King’s Indian, John Nunn & Graham Burgess (Batsford 1998) The Sémisch King’s Indian, Joe Gallagher (Batsford 1995) The Sdmisch King’s Indian Uncovered, Alexander Cherniaev and Eduard Prokuronov (Everyman Chess 2008) Understanding The King’s Indian, Mikhail Golubev (Gambit 2005)Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 Winning with the King’s Indian, Eduard Gufeld (Macmillan 1991) Winning with the King’s Indian, Andrew Martin (Caissa 1989) Periodicals Chess Informant through Volume 105 New In Chess Magazine through issue 2010/4 New In Chess Yearbook through Volume 94 Electronic Resources Mega Database 2009 (ChessBase) The King’s Indian, Viktor Bologan (ChessBase 2009) Chessbase.com Chesscafe.com ChessLecture.com ChessPublishing.com The Week in Chess through issue 815Introduction The King’s Indian Defence is one of the richest openings in all of chess theory. Black does not play to equalize as he does in the classical defences. Rather he seeks to unbalance the game from the outset. The last decade has seen a revitalization of the King’s Indian, as even top players are often trying to win with the black pieces. Compared to the classical openings, the price of each move is quite high and a mistake by either side can easily lead to disaster. The King’s Indian has always been considered a somewhat risky opening, but despite that common sentiment, the King’s Indian has an impressive pedigree. While this dynamic system was pioneered in the 1950s by Russian and Yugoslav Players such as David Bronstein, Efim Geller and Svetozar Gligoric, the two big names that are often attached to the King’s Indian are those of its World Cham- pion practitioners, Robert Fischer and Garry Kasparov. Whereas Fischer's retire- ment signalled the end of his King’s Indian era, Kasparov gave up our favourite opening while he was still an active player, which ‘indicated’ its unsoundness. At least that was the general feeling after he lost a well-known game in 1997 to Kramnik in the then dreaded ‘Bayonet’ system. In fact Kasparov stated something to the effect that the Sicilian and King’s In- dian were too much to keep up with at the level he was playing at, and so he stuck with the Sicilian while heading for more solid systems in the closed openings. Nowadays young players are not so worried about this; with advances in technol- ogy many modern talents play both the Sicilian and the King’s Indian, as well as other sharp defences. Opening fashions come and go. The beginning of the new millennium brought forward a great new champion of the King’s Indian Defence in Teimour Radjabov. Like Kasparov, Radjabov hails from the city of Baku in Azerbaijan. Radjabov really took over where Kasparov left off, even scoring well in the aforementioned Bayo- net (see Chapters 5 and 6). Radjabov’s success influenced the younger generation as well as the old guard, and nowadays most of the top players have been found at one time or another on the black side of the King’s Indian.Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 The King’s Indian Defence has always been an opening I've felt greatly attached to. Despite the fact that | have written extensively on the Slav Defences, the King’s Indian was my first real defence to 1 d4. While the King’s Indian is considered to be a ‘tactical’ opening, | have always considered it to be very strategic in nature. It is an opening where a feeling for piece placement and pawn structure is very im- portant. There are many thematic ideas and although the opening lends itself to frequent complications, the tactics have always seemed ‘logical’ to me. So, while it is true that when | ‘grew up’ | began to rely more on the solid Slav systems, it is always useful to have a sharp weapon available, especially when one really wants to try to win with Black. Even though the King’s Indian is a complicated opening, | do not think it is so difficult to learn. For one thing, it is relatively ‘move order proof’. That is, the King’s Indian set-up can be employed against 1 4, 1.c4, or 1 4f3. Also, the King’s Indian lends itself to just a handful of pawn structures, so the ideas are easier to assimi- late. In this book, as well as the second volume, | will generally focus on the main lines. The reason for this is that | think the best way to learn an opening is to study the main lines. It is easy to add other secondary systems later. The biggest exam- ple of this is in the Classical Variation, 1 da Af6 2 c4 g6 3 Ac3 297 4e4 dé 5 Df3 0-0 6 &e2 e5 7 0-0. Here | have gone for what is no doubt the main line, 7...Ac6. This is the most uncompromising approach and it is also the most difficult. The main alternative is 7...Aa6. This line is safer, easier to learn and may well be just as good as 7...c6. In fact, | have played 7...1a6 myself on several occasions. Nev- ertheless, | think it is best for the aspiring King’s Indian player to learn the main lines. One great thing about the King’s Indian is its flexibility - if you learn the main systems, it is easy to expand your repertoire by adding additional lines with- out having to learn a whole new opening. In the Samisch Variation, 1 d4 Af6 2 c4. g6 3 Ac3 2g7 4 e4 dé 5 f3 0-0 6 2e3, the main line nowadays is 6...c5. This was not always the case, and 6..Ac6 and 6...e5 used to be considered Black’s two main systems. | have elected not to go with 6...c5 even though it may well be the best move. While White often steers the game into a Benoni structure, it is also possible for White to simply grab a pawn while exchanging queens as well. Moder practice has clearly shown that Black gets sufficient compensation for the pawn, but some White players are rather well prepared in these endings. If Black is well prepared too and has a good under- standing of these positions, he should certainly be able to draw, but | believe that heading into a pawn-down endgame straight out of the opening is probably not to everyone’s taste.Introduction Moreover, 6...c5 against the Samisch has been very well covered in modern King’s Indian literature and | did not have a lot to add to what is already out there, especially as the lack of popularity of the Samisch at high level has not produced much fresh material to examine. The classical 6...e5 must still be playable, but | always thought it was easier to play White in these lines and so decided to go for the Panno Variation with 6...Ac6. This is an uncompromising system that still has a lot of fresh territory to explore. Note that the second volume will cover the Fianchetto Variation, the Four Pawns Attack, the Averbakh and all of White’s other tries. | would like to thank a few people for their help with this book: John Emms, for suggesting the topic, allowing me to split the book into two parts and for his pa- tience; Richard Palliser, for listening to me rant and rave about various lines that may or may not have found their way into this book; Joe Fang, for the use of his impressive library; and Vasik Rajlich, for keeping me well supplied with Rybka 3 and 4, Thanks to you all! David Vigorito Somerville, Massachusetts, October 2010Part 1 The Classical Variation 1.d4 6 2 c4 g6 3 Ac3 2g7 4e4 dé 5 DF3 0-0 6 Le2 e5 70-0 Acé The Classical Variation 1. d4 f6 2 ca 6 3 Dc3 &g7 4e4 dé 5 Af3 0-06 Lez is one of White’s most principled sys- tems against the King’s Indian Defence. White develops in a logical manner by simply developing his kingside and preparing to castle. Despite this appar- ently modest approach, the Classical is a very complex set of systems and sub- systems which can lead to many differ- ent types of position. We will focus on the main move, 6...e51. There are other moves, such as 10 6..a6 and 6..@bd7, which aim to avoid certain lines in Part II (most nota- bly the Exchange Variation), but in my opinion we should dive headfirst into the most critical lines. After 7 0-0 (other moves are considered in Part II) we will play 7.61. Here White usually plays 8 d5 (other moves are discussed in Chap- ter Eight), and after 8...2e7 we have the Mar del Plata Variation. Most of the world’s top players have been found on one side or another of this position (some players like bothsides), because the play is very rich both strategically and tactically. In general White will play on the queen- side and Black on the kingside, but there are many instances where one side can take the initiative on their ‘weak’ side. One feature that is specific to the Mar del Plata Variation is the position of Black’s e7-knight. In many King’s Indian lines with a blocked centre, Black's queen knight would head for the natural c5-square by ...Ab8-d7-c5, or ...2)b8-a6-c5 (see, for example, the Petrosian Variation of Chapters 11 and 12). In the Mar del Plata, Black has played 7...2\c6 in order to entice White to clarify the structure in the centre with 8 d5. In general the knight on e7 is not well placed and Black’s success is often connected in some way with ac- tivating this piece. In many of the lines with 9 4e1, Black brings the knight to g6. The knight is not necessarily well placed there, but it may participate ina kingside attack. Alternatively, the knight may emerge on fs (after an ex- change of pawns on f§ or e4), and sometimes Black will redeploy the The Classical Variation knight by playing ..deh8 and ...2g8. This looks funny at first, but the knight can re-emerge on f6 or even h6, There are also cases where the knight goes to c8 or even to c6. White has four basic ways to pro- ceed in this position. He can play 9 4e1, which can be considered the ‘main line’. This move is considered in Chapters 1-3. A different knight rede- ployment is 9 Ad2, which is covered in Chapter 4. The dangerous ‘Bayonet’, 9 b4, has been White’s main weapon for the last couple of decades. The play tends to be quite different here, as cen- tral play is more prominent than it is after White’s knight moves. 9 b4 is cov- ered in Chapters 5 and 6. Other 9th moves are less common but they are not altogether harmless. These lines will be examined in Chapter 7. Some- times too White chooses to avoid the discussion of the Mar del Plata Varia- tion and avoids the critical 8 d5. These sidelines are not so dangerous, but Black should not ignore them, as they can be tricky to meet for the unpre- pared. White’s 8th-move deviations are covered in Chapter 8. a1Chapter 1 The Mar del Plata Variation 9 e1 Ad7 10 Ad3 1 d4 Af6 2 4 g6 3 Dc3 2g74e4d65 D3 0-0 6 Re2 e5 7 0-0 c6 8d5 De7 9 4% 4 are “Wen BBS Cee P| SR a, \\ SW ve “\ RR KK o> This move quickly became White’s main try when the Mar del Plata Varia- tion first became popular and it re- mains topical to this day. White pre- vents Black’s knight manoeuvre ...AhS, prepares to bolster the centre with f3 if necessary and avoids blocking in his c1- bishop. Although the knight is passively placed at the moment, it can quickly come to d3, from where it surveys the important central squares c5, e5 and 12 f4, The knight will help force through White’s important c4-c5 advance and it may also drop back to the f2-square, where it will help prevent Black’s ...95- g4 pawn break. One thing we must always be aware of is the value of Black’s c8-bishop. Without this piece not only is it diffi- cult to break with ..g5-94, but the bishop is often needed to sacrifice itself on h3 if the kingside becomes blocked. Sometimes the bishop does not even move until it can deliver the decisive blow. So valuable is this bishop to Black’s attack that we will often see White spending a number of tempi to hunt down the bishop on its original square. 9...Dd7 Black clears the way for ...f7-f5 and covers the c5-square at the same time. Another plan for Black is 9...Ae8. This looks less logical, but as we shall see in the main lines following 9..Ad7 10 Dd3 f5 11 2d2 Afo 12 f3 f4, Black of-The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Het d7 10 Dd3 ten drops the knight back to e8 after all in order to protect the sensitive c7- square. By playing 9..@e8 straight- away, Black hopes to gain a couple of tempi. Of course White does not need to be so cooperative though. For one White can continue with 10 4d3 fs, but instead of 11 £42, as played in this chapter, White may change the charac- ter of the position with 11 f4, exploit- ing the fact that Black’s knights are far away from the e5-square. Another dangerous plan is to continue along the lines of Chapter 2 by playing 10 3 5 11 94, when the knight on e8 is less flexible than it would be on d7. Perhaps the greatest danger, though, comes from 10 £e3. In this case White will have no trouble playing c4-c5 and plans involving a4-a5 become very dangerous. While 9..\e8 may be playable, the main move has always been 9...Ad7 and most experts consider it best. From here White has three main schemes to choose between. In this chapter we look at the flexible 10 Ad3. The next chapter examines the radical plan 10 f3 f5 11 g4!?, while Chapter 3 covers White’s most aggressive con- tinuation, 10 2e3. 10 \d3 White improves the position of his knight and prepares the c4-c5 advance. This is a very straightforward continua- tion and some of the theory goes very deep in the main lines. The fashion of such long lines comes and goes, and eventually White turned to other sys- tems in the Classical (most notably 10 &e3 and the Bayonet), while Black also found ways to deviate. Recently 10 Ad3 has become rather fashionable again. We will generally study the main lines because that will help to develop a good general King’s Indian under- standing. There are also some interest- ing sidelines that will be mentioned that may be worthy of further research. 10...f5 11 2d2 This is the main line. White simply develops his bishop and prepares Hc1. There are a couple of alternatives. a) First, let us take a look at 11 f3. 13Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, This is quite a natural reaction to Black’s pawn advance, but sometimes this move is considered inaccurate. This is because Black can begin his kingside play while leaving his knight on d7 to hold up White’s c5-break. Nevertheless, this move is not bad and some even consider it to be the most accurate move because it avoids the line 11 &d2 fxeq!?, which we discuss in the notes to Black’s 11th move, below. White may also steer the game into independent channels by avoiding 242 altogether. Here Black can play 11...f4 tight away, because there is no &e2-g4 to worry about. 11...Af6 is possible too, but Black can try to take advantage of White's move order by leaving the knight at d7 to hinder White's c5- advance. Note that 11...2h8?! is not so good because White can switch gears with 12 2e3!, aiming for positions akin to those in Chapter 3 where 11..2h8 is likely to be a wasted tempo. After 11...f4 White has: a1) 12 2d2 looks like an inferior version of the main line because White 14 Volume 1 will have to spend an additional tempo to break with c4-c5. This move does have some historical significance, how- ever. Now 12...g5 13 b4 13..0f6 14 c5 Dgé 15 Her Zf7 compares favourably to the main line for Black because White has played b4. (instead of Abs or cxd6, for example) which may or may not turn out to be a useful move. Black's last few moves seem rather obvious today, but this was not always so. An old plan for Black in such posi- tions is to play ..Rf6 and ...&h6, with the idea of directly attacking down the h-file with ...We8 and ...Whs. If White plays h2-h3, Black will try to engineer a .xh3_ sacrifice. Although this plan can indeed be quite dangerous to the first player, to me it seems a bit too simplistic to think that White’s position can just be taken by storm like this. Often Black will have to worry about the possibility of White playing Abs after the queen has gone to e8. He can deal with this by throwing caution to the wind and allowing Ab5xc7. ThisThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 &e1 “d7 10 Ad3 sounds like fun, but if White can play 2 and h3, the h-file attack will not work. In this case, Black can change the direction of the attack by then playing .Hig6 and ...h5. Another way for White to defend is by playing #h1 and 21. Black does not really have any way to increase the pressure on h2, but if he could get a knight to 3, it would be mate. This can be achieved either by moving the black queen from h5 to threaten ...f6-h5 or by a sacrifice such as ...Af6xd5; exd5 Se7-£5. This all sounds very nice, but if White is alert to the possibility it is not so easy to achieve these tricks. White may also defend against mate on h2 in some positions with his bishop on f2 by playing the ugly ha. This may look fatally weakening, but it is not always easy to get through and Black’s queenside will certainly disap- pear. Black can also throw in ...a6 before moving the queen to safeguard against the knight raid to b5, but this costs a tempo and also leaves Black vulnerable to “a4-b6 ideas after an exchange of pawns on dé. In general I have avoided lines where Black seeks to attack in this way, but there are exceptions as we shall see, most notably in Line C of Chapter 3. Another attacking plan, which seems more natural to me, is to play ..DF6 and ...5. Gligoric was one of the first players to develop this concept. One of his games continued (after 15...87 above) 16 Af2 hS 17 cxd6 cxd6 18 a4 2f8! 19 a5 Bg7 20 h3 “hs! As we shall see, Black's 18th and agth moves are extremely common- place, but the last one requires a few words of explanation. The g6-knight often heads to h4 to both unleash the g7-rook and scare the white king. The knight manoeuvre to h8 is not so un- common, though, and the knight will then come back to f7, from where it may hop to g5 or even to hé6, to further support the ...g4-break. We will even see positions where Black plays ..d2h8 and ...e7-g8 in order to come to hé6. The game continued 21 Abs g4 22 fxg4 hxg4 23 hxg4 a6 24 a3 &d7 25 Ac4 Hc8 26 Abe Bxct 27 Axct Le8 28 La3 £7 29 Wc2 Dh 30 g5 Hxgs 31 Hea Bg3 32 &b2 DAfg4 33 Axg4 Dxg4 34 &xg4 Exg4 35 WF2 2g6 36 cq We7 37 £c3 Wh7 38 We2 Zh4 39 &f2 £3 40 We3 Bf4 41 gxf3 Wh2+ 42 e1 Whit 43 @e2 Bhs 44 Sd2 Exf3 45 Wo5+ 2g7 46 Sc2 Hf2+ 47 Ad2 Wdi+ 48 &c3 Wa1+ 0-1, M.Najdorf-S.Gligoric, Mar del Plata 1953. Najdorf learnt a lesson 415Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 4 from this game as we shall see in Line B of Chapter 3. Going back, White probably can re- frain from 13 b4 and play 13 Bc1 Ag6 14 c5!? when instead of grabbing the pawn, Black should really just play 14...Df6 to transpose to the main lines, while 13...h5 is also possible. Another idea is 13 g4 when Black can play 13..h5 14 h3 Bf6!? (Black tries to turn the delay in going ...Af6 to his benefit) 15 b4 (White should probably prefer a quick 2e1 and €g2) 15..Bh6 16 &g2 Agé 17 Hh DAha+ 18 Sf2 AFB 19 Hc1 a5 20 a3 c6, which gave him good play in R.Shabtai-D.Komljenovic, Biel 1989. a2) 12 g4 is quite a common counter in general - see, for instance, Line D of this chapter. Here, however, it does make a difference that Black has not played either ...Af6 or ...g5 yet. White’s thrust is well met by 12...Rf6!. Black's delay in playing ...Df6 allows this move, seizing control of the h4-square. After 13 &d2 h5 14 h3 &h4 (alternatives are 14..6f7 and 16 14...g7!?) 15 2e1 Bxe1 16 Axe1 Sg7 17 h4?! g5 (or 17...hxg4 18 fxg4 Bh8 19 g2 g5 20 hs Afé) 18 Ag2 hxg4 19 fxga gxh4 20 “xh4 Zh8 Black had a strong attack brewing in S.Karp- AKuzmin, Ostend 1991. a3) 12 b4 (in the main line we will see that this preparatory move usually is not necessary; the only way this move makes sense for White is if he intends to deploy the bishop on a3 or b2) 12...g5 (Black has also tried to take advantage of White’s move order with 12...a5, but | think Black should just leave the queenside alone and get on with it) 13 cS Df6 14 a4 and now: Ty @ bof GY a31) 14..@h8!? (here we see an- other typical plan; Black gears up for a quick ...g4, rather than play ...Bf7-97, which makes some sense because White has refrained from £d2 and Hc1, so the c7-square does not really need additional protection) 15 2a3 Eg8 16 a5 2f8 17 cxd6 cxd6 18 b5 (or 18 h3 hs 19 “f2 when Black could try 19..g7 20 Hci Deg’, with the idea .h6 and ...g4) 18...g4 and Black hadThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 Dd7 10 Adz good play in S.Lagrotteria-B.Socko, Saint Vincent 2001. 432) The direct 14...h5 is also possi- ble and after 15 Af2 Agé 16 aS Sf7 17 6 &F8 18 cxb7 &xb7 19 Za3 Bg7 20 h3 &c8 21 dS D8 22 Da2 Af7 23 Ab4 Dhe 24 Acé We8 25 We2 g4 Black had good counterplay in G.Vescovi- M.Krylov, Moscow 2010. b) The old move 11 exfs is not seen too often these days. The simplest solu- tion is 11...2xf5. Usually in the King’s Indian Black prefers to take with the f- pawn, but here Black immediately solves the problem of the e7-knight and has good piece play. That said, 11...gxf5 12 £4 Ag6 is also possible. Af- ter 11...Dxf5 12 3 Df6 13 Af2 Black has: b1) 13..2h6 14 &xh6 Axh6 and now 15 g4 was suggested by Hort, to prevent the knight from coming to d4, but after 15...@f7 Black looks to be fine in any case. b2) 13...c6 was Nunn’s recommen- dation. However, 14 Afe4 Axeg (in- stead 14...cxd5 15 Axf6+ 2xf6 16 DAxdsS 295 17 243 gave White a slight edge in F.Doettling-A.Hunt, Patras 1999) 15 Dxed Wh6+ (15..cxd5 16 Wxd5+) 16 c5!? dxc5 17 &c4 gives White danger- ous compensation for the pawn. b3) 13...c5 14 Afeg Ad4 15 &g5 RFS looked fine for Black in T.Overbeck- V.Rojicek, Pardubice 2009. b4) 13...Ad4 is simple enough: 14 Dfe4 c6 15 Re3 Dxe4 16 Axed cxd5 17 oxd5 2f5 was equal in R.Markus- R.Polzin, Austrian League 2006. Now we finally return to the main line, 10 £d2. 11...06 At the cost of ‘letting go’ of the c5- square, Black induces White to play f3 before advancing on the kingside. Note that the immediate 11..f4? is a big strategic mistake because after 12 294 Black will be hard pressed to avoid the exchange of the light-squared bishops. Black does have a couple of other ideas here, though: a) One possibility is 11...h8!?, x wv re _ \~ NS QO Y RAT, This is Black’s main alternative to the main lines. If Black wants to avoid EPsAttacking Chess: The King’s Indian, the long main lines of ‘A’ and ‘B’, the complications of ‘C’ and the blocked positions of ‘D’, this is a decent alterna- tive. Instead of fixing the kingside, Black makes a useful, semi-waiting move. Playing 11..&8 does a few things. The king gets off of the a2-98 diagonal, which may seem rather vague, but in the main lines we will see a few situations where this could be useful. Black also moves his king off of the g-file. This could be good or bad - we will come across positions where after multiple exchanges on g4, a white rook or queen ends up sliding over to h3. Perhaps the biggest advantage to 11..@h8 is that the g8-square is cleared for Black’s knight. Playing ..)e7-g8 creates the possibility of play- ing ...&h6 and clears the h4-d8 diago- nal for both Black’s queen and g7- bishop. This can be useful if White adopts a plan involving 4. And, lastly, by leaving the knight on d7, Black hopes to make White spend an extra move preparing the c5-advance. Perhaps the most natural continua- tion is 12 Hc1. White hopes to get a favourable version of the main lines by opening the c-file. Now 12...Af6 13 f3 4? just allows 14 c5 and thus is a worse version of the main lines, be- cause Black has played ...@h8 rather than ...g5. Instead Black usually plays 13...c5 to try and make the move Hc1 look irrelevant, while 13..Deg8 and 13...c6 are alternatives. b) Another idea is 11...fxe4!?. This 18 Volume 1 looks too simplistic, but it is not easy for White to prove an advantage. Mar- kos, for one, thinks enough of this reac- tion to avoid playing 10 Ad3 alto- gether. After 12 Axeq AfS (12..Af6 looks less accurate because Black would like to recapture on 6 with the queen) it seems as though Black has lost time compared to the line 11 exf5 xfs, but there White generally prefers to play f3, 2d3-f2 and Afe4. White's knight moves have also left him with less control of the d5-square, so a ...c6- break may be appealing. Now 13 f3 fe 14 Adf2 cél (14...Ad4 is also okay) looks fine for Black. One example: 15 £d3 cxd5 16 cxd5 Gh8 17 Dxfo &xf6 18 Deg Wh6+ 19 Ef2 &h4 20 g3 &e7 with a good game for Black in J.Sofrevski-LPortisch, Skopje 1968. A better idea is 13 £c3, although this is not too terrifying either: 13...2°6 14 23 Dha (14..Axe4 15 &xe4 Wha 16 He1 b6 17 g3 looks a little better for White) 15 Axfé+ Wxf6 16 Re4 FS 17 We2 &xe4 18 xed Ws 19 Hae wasThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 &e1 Dd7 10 Adz agreed drawn here in P.Lukacs- T.Radjabov, Budapest 2000. After 19...Rae8 20 £3 Wigs 21 We2 Afs 22 Af2 &h6 Black should be able to hold the balance. Overall, 11...fxe4 looks very solid, al- though it is a little dull. These lines are interesting and look quite playable. | think that after learn- ing the main lines, these alternatives would make a useful addition to a player's repertoire, but we will chiefly stick to the main line, 11...Df6. 12 £3 f4 Here 12...@h8?! would make little sense, as White could proceed with 13 c5 immediately. With the centre closed, the battle lines are clear - White will play on the queenside, whereas Black will try to attack the white king. Here the way divides: ‘A: 13 c5 g5 14 cxd6 cxd6 15 Ect B: 13 5 g5 14 cxd6 cxd6 15 Df2 C243 c5 g5 14 ca Dg6 15 Dbsl? D: 43 gal? Usually White just proceeds with his own play, and in Lines A and B we look at White’s traditional continua- tions where we have a typical King’s Indian ‘race’, with both sides trying to blow the other away. Line C examines a radical idea that has become very popular of late. Finally, Line D looks at a completely different plan where White looks to slow Black down on the king- side before pursuing his queenside ambitions. The position becomes blocked and the play greatly slows down. A)13.c5 This is the main line. White imme- diately initiates queenside play, trust- ing in his chances in the ensuing race. He will decimate the black queenside while Black tries to mate the white king. Although White’s play is usually faster, Black is playing for higher stakes. 13...g5 There is no need for Black to be sub- tle at this point. White will now bring a 19Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 took to the c-file, but he has a choice as to how to go about it. 14 cxd6 White immediately opens the c-file. The preparatory 14 Hic1 will be seen in Line C. 14...cxd6_ 15 Hea White’s main choice, taking the c- file immediately. Instead 15 Sf2 pre- pares to bring the king’s rook to c1. This is Line B. 15... g6 16 Db5 The knight threatens to invade on c7, from where it will go to e6. 16...2f7 20 We will see this multi-purpose move again and again. Black defends the c7-square in advance, and prepares wALf8 and ...2g7. These moves will help him prepare ...g4. The bishop on f8 is often well placed - from there it pro- tects the d6é-pawn and sometimes the bishop will come to e7 from where it could join a kingside attack (with wdth4 or ...%g5), or emerge on the queenside (....d8). Note that 16...Wb6+?! doesn’t win a piece; rather it just wastes time be- cause White is happy to play 17 fz when the b5-knight is suddenly pro- tected by the e2-bishop. 17 We2 White again threatens 4c7-e6, so Black has to retreat his knight, making the ...g4 advance more difficult to achieve. Also the tactical shot @xa7 is sometimes possible, exploiting the loose bishop on c8. 17...De8 18 a4 This move is always useful for White to include. It gives the b5-knight extra support and should Black kick theThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Het d7 10 Ad3 knight back with ...a6, then 4)a3 will be played when ...bS is prevented, and White will often threaten cq and &a5 (or a4-a5), with a grip on the b6-square. If White can play b6, he will be able to eliminate Black’s important light- squared bishop. Black will often feel compelled to play ..a6 to drive the knight away anyway, but usually he takes some useful moves first. 18...h5 Black threatens ...g4 again. 19 Af2 White prevents ...g4 and increases the scope of his light-squared bishop. It is too early for ...a6 because of Aa3-c4, followed by aS and 4)b6. The e8-knight has to defend c7, so Black has to make a choice between two bishop moves. We have: Al: 19.268 A2: 19...2d7 Al) 19... 28 This is the traditional move. Black Prepares ...2g7, overprotects dé and may also improve the bishop by playing ..Se7. For a while 19...%d7 supplanted 19...f8, but | think the two moves are of approximately equal value. Feet #® 20h3 This prophylactic move is the most common. Instead 20 b4 is not terribly useful, but it does set a positional trap. After 20..Bg7 (Black could consider 20..a6) 21 xa7 Black should avoid 21..4c7? because of 22 Ac6! bxc6 23 dxc6 when White had more than enough for the piece in N.Rashkovsky- E.Gufeld, Daugavpils 1978. Instead Black can play 21...2d7! with a good version of the pawn sacrifice discussed below. 20 Wb3 is a tricky move order: 20...2g7?! (20...2d7 transposes to Line A2, but Black should consider 20...Af6 too) 21 Bc2! when White can omit the prophylactic h2-h3 and double on the c-file immediately. White does have an important al- ternative in 20 xa7. This grabs a pawn, but Black has a counter available which regains the eeeAttacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 pawn if he is willing to go into an end- game. One would think that this would favour White, but actually Black equal- izes pretty easily. Still, most black play- ers have preferred to sacrifice a pawn here to keep playing for an attack. Black has: \r> RE el me xo Te a) 20...c7 forces White’s reply and mass exchanges follow: 21 &a5 Hxc2 22 &xd8 Hxe2 23 Axc8 Exa4 (worse is 23...8xb2 24 a5! with hopes of an edge) 24 Dd3 (24 &xg5 Axb2) 24.94 25 Bf2 Be3! 26 Der Ha8 27 Bfc2 Hb3 28 Sf2 Ba2 29 Ebi &f7 30 we2 2e7 31 Axe7 @xe7 32 Dd3 Ha8 33 Lxe7 dxe7 was completely equal in |.Novikov-I.Glek, USSR 1985. b) 20...247!? leads to a more full- blooded struggle, but it is of course tiskier: 21 Ab5 Hg7 22 h3 Ah4 23 Wb3 Bhs sees Black patiently make one more little preparation for ...g4. (see following diagram) The main point of this move is to get off the a2-g8 diagonal in anticipa- 22 tion of an eventual @c7-e6. N Cee i Yost The importance of this detail can be seen after 23..g4?! 24 fxg4 hxg4 25 hxg4 @fé 26 Ac7! (much better than 26 &e1 45! which gave Black coun- terplay in LFtacnik-ASznapik, Baile Herculane 1982) 26..xg4 27 De6 @xf2 28 Exf2 2xe6 29 dxe6 Ph8 30 Ec3 £e7 31 Eh3 when White was much better in LFtacnik-M.Vokac, Czech Championship, Frenstat 1982. After 23...@h8 White has tried both 24 %c3 and 24 a5. In both cases Black should sacrifice a pawn with 24...94, when in practice he has been rather successful. This is all very nice, but | suspect that 20...2c7 is sounder. 20...2g7 Instead 20...d7 21 Wb3 Hg7 will likely transpose to Line A2. Also possible is 20../h4. Then 21 &\xa7 £47 (note that 21..2c7? is not good here, because after 22 &a5 Bxc2 23 &xd8 Exe2 24 Axc8 Exa4 25 &xg5! White wins a pawn and a tempo) 22 ®b5 Eg7 23 Wb is the pawn sacrifice in variation ‘b’ above.The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Ae1 Ad7 10 Adz 21 Wb3 White prepares to double rooks on the c-file. The queen is also useful here for defence - after mass exchanges on 94, she may slide along the third rank. Sometimes White plays Hc3 (or Ha3 in certain positions) to utilize a rook in this fashion too. White can also change his mind and. take the pawn after all with 21 @xa7, when 21...8d47 22 bs is again varia- tion ‘b’ above. Sounder is 21..2c7 22 aia5 which leads to the same endgame as before with White having the extra move h3. This does not necessarily help him: for example, 22...—xc2 23 &xd8 Bxe2 24 Axc8 Hxa4 25 Ad3 g4 26 Bf2 3e3 27 De1 g3 was fine for Black in O.Averkin-G.Kasparov, Moscow 1979. Another idea is 21 a5 @h4 (21...2d7!? 22 Wb3 ha is probably better) 22 Dxa7!? Bc7 (22...2d7!?) 23 Dc6! bxc6 24 dxc6 Hg7 25 b4 Ac7 26 bs AxbS!? 27 &xbs g4 and now in- stead of 28 hxg4 Axf3+! 29 gxf3 Wha, which was unclear in AJakubiec- K.Chojnacki, Lublin 2009, | suspect that 28 fxg4 hxg4 29 hxg4 &xg4 30 Axg4 4Axg4 31 Zf2 would test Black’s play. 21...Nh4 22 Ee2 a6 Black plays this now that he will be able to force through ..g4. Alterna- tively: a) 22...94?! (the immediate advance is premature) 23 fxg4 Af6 24 2e1 hxg4 25 hxg4 Dhs5 was played in V.ivanchuk- L.Cheparinov, Sofia 2008. Here 26 Ad1! xg4 27 &xg4 Exg4 28 Wh3 Wg5 29 Dc7 f3 30 &xh4 Bxh4 31 We6+ Lh8 32 Exf3 gives White a big advantage ac- cording to Mikhalevski. b) 22...Af6!? is possible, though: 23 Efca 94 24 fxg4 hxg4 25 hxg4 2xg4 26 xg4 Dxg4 27 Axg4 Hxg4 has been play a few times and seems okay for Black. Then 28 £e1 f3! 29 &xh4 Wxh4 30 Wxf3 Exe4 31 Hc3 (31 g3 Wg4 32 Wxg4+ Hxg4 was at least equal for Black in K.Langeweg-).Donner, Amster- dam 1971) 31...8e1+ 32 Hxe1 Wxe1+ 33 Wa Wxfi+ 34 &xf1 a6 35 Dc7 Bc8 36 De6 Exc3 37 bxc3 b6 38 Ac7 a5 39 Se2 Be7 V2-Y2 was J.Knap-V.Tasic, cor- Tespondence 2006. 23 Da3 Dfe Another possibility is 23...%d7, which actually transposes to the main line of Line A2. 24 Qe1 This move sizes up the h4-knight and clears the second rank for defence. 24...g4 25 hxg4 Instead 25 fxg4 hxg4 26 hxg4 (26 @®xg4?! Axed) 26...Axg4 should trans- pose, but White should certainly avoid 23Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 the temptation of 27 2xc8?. 32 Ef3 2e7 He hopes to win two pieces for a took, but Black has the trick 27...Axf2! 28 &xf2 (28 Bxd8 Bxg2 mate) 28..Hxc8 29 Wh3 Axg2 30 &g4 De3 31 Rxe3 Wd7 and 0-1 in V.Talla-M.Szelag, Us- tron 2008. 25...hxg4 26 Dxg4 xga The alternative 26..h5 may be playable, but it looks sketchy to me. Instead of 27 a5 g3 28 &xg3 fxg3 29 Wb We7 30 Bfc1 &xg4 31 fxg4 Ags 32 RZ Wha 33 Sf1 Df4, when Black had plenty of counterplay in LFtacnik- ZPolgar, Trencianske Teplice 1985, White should play 27 cal. Now 27...g3 28 &xg3 fxg3 29 Wb6 We7 30 @ce3 Hh7 31 Efca has been played ina couple of correspondence games. The position is messy, but | think Black is better off with the text move. 27 fxga 2xga 28 2xg4 Bxg4 29 Wh3 This is a good square for defensive Teasons as well as for a possible coun- terattack. However, Black can hold the balance. 29...Wg5 30 2xh4 Exh 31 We6+ Lhs 24 This position has been reached a few of times in practice and Black has enough play. White’s knight is far away and his pawn structure is a little loose. One game continued 33 h3 Bg8 34 Bxhq+ Wxh4 35 Hc3 We1t 36 @h2 Bxg2+ %a-¥2, |.Schuett-V.Conti, corre- spondence 1999. A2) 19...2d7 This is a more modern move. Black avoids any @xa7 tricks and sometimes even plays on the queenside himself. Of course, the main plan is still a kingside attack.The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 Dd7 10 Dd3 20 Wb3 White can also play 20 h3 &f8 21 Wb3 which will transpose. 20...2f8 Black has also tried 20...2f6!?, which is not without its logic. Black often plays ...2f8-e7 and then sometimes either ..2h4 or ....2d8, so it makes some sense to put the bishop on the h4-d8 diagonal in one move instead of two. White has: a) With 21 &b4 White decides to take advantage of Black’s last move to attack dé immediately, but he should probably wait on this, as it runs into some tactical problems: 21..2e7 22 2c2 a6 23 “a3 ga! 24 fxga hxg4 25 2xg4 &xg4 26 DAxg4 Wh6+ 27 hi a5 28 Dh6+ &g7 29 Axf7 Wxb4 with complications that were not unfavour- able to Black in V.Neverov-M.Vokac, Bled Olympiad 2002. b) 21 Bc2 Wb8!? (consistent; Black wants to play ...&d8 quickly) 22 a5 &d8 23 Hfc1 (the prophylactic 23 a3!? is another idea when %e2-b5 is a possi- bility and there are ideas like Ac4, &b4 and Wa3, laying siege to the d6-pawn) 23...a6 24 a3 b5 gave Black counter- play in S.Zilka-R.Ramondino, Vienna 2009. 21 Bez This is very natural. White doubles tooks on the c-file. Others: a) 21 h3 and now 21...g7 will gen- erally transpose elsewhere, depending where White moves his rook, but Black also has the option of making some manoeuvres on the queenside: a1) 21..Wb8!? 22 a5 Bg7 23 Hc3?! (this leaves the a5-pawn without sup- port; 23 Hc2 is more natural and could transpose to the next note) 23...2e7 24 a1 (not a nice move to make) 24...2d8 25 Bcc Dh8!? (a typical idea; Black routes the knight to h6é to support the --g4-break) 26 a3 a6 27 Acq RbS 28 Sf1 Df7 29 Be1 Dh6 30 Ab6 Axb6 31 axb6 &xe2+ 32 dxe2 Wd8 33 Dd3 g4 gave Black the initiative in M.Roeder- M.Hebden, Bern 1992. a2) 21...2e7!? 22 Bc2 Wb8 23 Hfct Rd8 24 a5 a6 25 Daz b5 26 Ker (26 &b4 Eg7 27 &f1 Afe 28 Wd3 Dhs 29 ®b1 Df7 was similar in M.Vukic- D.Sahovic, Tuzla 1983) 26...Af6 27 Wd3 2g7 28 &£d1 hs! left ...g4 imminent in A.Olcayoz-E.Grivas, Mangalia 1992. b) 21 Ec3 was played in S.Conquest- P.Thipsay, British Championship, Southampton 1986. it guards the third tank (in the event of exchanges follow- ing ...g4), and leaves the possibility of Wb3-d1 open, but compared to 21 Ec2, White limits his d2-bishop - an a4-a5 25Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, advance will not be supported and £b4 is not possible. ¢) 21 Bc4 is a bit strange looking be- cause there is no 4a3-c4 possibility: 21...a6 22 a3 (again, there is no Acq; perhaps White was hoping to use the rook on the fourth rank with Eb4 to pressure the b7-pawn) 22..g7 23 aS D6 24 Whe We8 25 h3 (25 Wxb7? bs) 25.94 26 fxg4 hxg4 27 hxg4 Dh4 28 Ec7 Wg6! 29 2e1 (or 29 Wxb7 Hd8 30 Wxa6 &xg4 31 Exg7+ &xg7 32 Axg4 Dxg4 33 &xga Wxg4 34 Bf2 3 35 Wd3 fs with a decisive attack according to Gallagher) 29..2h7 30 Wb3 (30 Wxb7 Whe! 31 Ah3 Axg2 wins) 30..Dxe4 34 Wd3? (after 31 Wxb7 Ag3! 32 2d3 Sts! 33 Exh7 Wexh7 34 Wxh7+ &xh7 Black wins the exchange, but this was proba- bly the best chance) 31..g3 32 Exb7 was Z.Kozul-T.Radjabov, Sarajevo 2003. ae Here Gallagher points out that 32.25! 33 Bxh7 (33 gxfs Axe2+ 34 Wxe2 Wxg2 mate) 33...2xd3 34 2xd3 &xh7 35 &xg6+ Axgé gives Black a clear advantage. 21...a6 26 Volume 1 Without White having spent a tempo on h3, 21...Wb8?! looks too slow: 22 Bfct a6 23 Da3 Re7 24 a5 &d8 25 Dc4 &bS 26 &b4 b6? was G.Kacheish- vili-D.Sharavdorj, Lubbock 2009, and here White could have played 27 Axdé! Dxd6 28 Lxd6 Wxd6 29 &xbs axb5 30 Hc6, winning the knight on g6. 22 Da3 Bg7 22...Af6 23 h3 47 is the same. 23 h3 Aha Black has to time his pawn break carefully: 23..Df6 24 Hfci1 ga?! (24..Dh4) 25 fxg4 hxg4 26 hxg4 DAh4 27 Hc7! &£e7 28 &e1 was much better for White in LFtacnik-G.Ligterink, Am- sterdam 1977. If 28..Axg4 then 29 2xg4 &xg4 30 Dxg4 Bxg4 31 Wh3 %xg2+ 32 &h1 wins for White. 24 Bfca 24...DF6 Again 24.94?! is premature: 25 fxg4 hxg4 26 hxg4 Hc8 (or 26...f6 27 c7, transposing to 23...Af6, above) 27 Hxc8 &xc8 28 Ac4 Af 29 Wh3 with a clear advantage in N.Rashkovsky- ANitolinsh, Daugavpils 1978.The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 Dd7 10 Dd3 Black also does not need to commit to 24..Rb8 yet. After 25 Dc4 b6 26 a5! 94 27 fxg4 Af6 28 Axb6 hxg4 29 hxg4 xg2, as in V.ivanchuk-J.Timman, Hilversum 1991, White could play 30 xg2! Dxg4 31 &xg4 fxg4 32 &f1 2d7 33 &e2 when he should win. 25 Rea Alternatively, 25 Wxb7? runs into 25...2xg2!, while 25 Hc7 can be met by 25...2b8 26 a5 De8 27 H7c2 “fo 28 Hc7 De8 29 B7c2 Af when H.Gruenberg- P.Hesse, Eilenburg 1984, ended in a draw. 25...84 Black has made the necessary preparations and now breaks. 26 fxg4 hxg4 27 hxg4 2xg4 28 Sxga xg 29 Dxga Exga 30 Wh3 Hgs This position was agreed drawn in F.Quiroga-E.Maggiolo, Buenos Aires 2000. White was quite a bit higher- rated here, which shows the health of Black’s position. The position is very similar to the one we saw in Line A1, but here Black has an even better ver- sion. B) 13 c5 g5 14 cxd6 cxd6 15 Af2 Before playing Wc2 and fc1, White shores up his defence of the g4-square. 15...g6 Black could also begin with 15...h5 to try to force White to play h3. If 16 We2 (16 h3 Ag6 17 We2 Bf7 18 Bfca transposes the main line), then 16...94!? (16...4f7 17 Abs Ag6 18 Hfc1 DeB 19 a4 allows White to delay h3) 17 DbS g3 is an untried possibility. 16 We2 Ef7 17 Bfca hs After 17...De8 18 a4 h5 White went backwards with 19 Acd1!? and won a long struggle after 19..2f8 20 2a3 in LAronian-H.Nakamura, World Team Championship, Bursa 2010. The text move avoids this possibility because then 18 @cd1 could be met with 18...94!. Black has also tried 17...a6, but after 18 a4 h5 19 h3 2f8 20 a5 we transpose to 18..a6 19 a4 &f8 in the note to Black’s next move, which looks unsatis- factory for him. 18 h3 It is important for White to hold up rdAttacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 .94 as long as he can. He can, though, also play the immediate 18 @b5 here. After 18..e8 19 a4 &f8 or 19..2d7 the play is similar to the main line and may even transpose. Wa7 25 &a5 Hb8, and now White has a very pleasant choice between 26 &c7 and 26 g5! 2g4 27 &xg4 &xg4 28 Acs! (but less good here is 28 Wc6 2e2!). b) 18...g4!? is a better try: 19 fxg4 hxg4 20 hxg4 18...281? Black stays calm. Practice has also seen him take immediate measures on either flank: a) 18..a6 stops Abs, but it does weaken the queenside and White has other ways into the black position after 19 a4l. Now 19...b6 is considered bad after 20 Ha3 (with the idea of a2 and 43 or Zac3, while 20 Daz is also pos- sible) 20...2f8 21 Aazl. The alternatives are supposed to be better, but it all just seems rather shaky to me: a1) After 19..dh4 20 Wd1 g4 21 fxg4 hxg4 22 hxg4 Ah7 23 aS Dg5 24 2f1 bS 25 axb6 Wxb6 26 “a4 Wa7 27 a5! Bb7 28 Bc6 Zab8 29 2b6! White was winning in B.Lalic-L.McShane, Southend 2000. a2) Instead 19...2f8 runs into 20 a5. (with the idea Daq-b6) 20...94 21 fxg4 hxg4 22 hxg4 b5 23 axb6 Wxb6 24 Haq 28 20...De8! (Black intends ...@f6-h4; a useful idea to know) 21 a4 &f6 22 Ba3 Bh4 23 DAcd1 2g3 24 Hc3 (24 Dh3 Wha 25 Adfa Afe 26 Wda &d7 27 aS Haf8 28 £e1 f3 29 Exf3 Af4 30 Bxfa and ¥2-¥2 was G.Sosonko-F.Hellers, Wijk aan Zee 1986) 24...2d7 25 2b5?! &xb5 26 axb5 Wh4 27 Dh3 Dfé 28 Hc8+? (28 g5 Dg4 29 Bc8+ Hxc8 30 Wxc8+ Af! is given by Gallagher) 28...axc8 29 Wxc8+ sbg7 30 Adf2 &xf2+ 31 Axf2 3! 32 WTS Axes 33 Wxf7+ (33 Wxea Wq3) 33...8xf7 34 Dxe4 Wxg4 and Black had a winning attack in GAndruet- V.Spasov, Sofia 1990. 19 Abs “eB 20 a4 The thematic 20 Axa7?! seems to work tactically because the c8-bishop is loose, but it appears too slow: 20...2d7 (the counter 20..8c7? does not work well here after 21 &a5 Hxc2 22 &xd8The Mar de! Plata Variation: 9 Ae1 Ad7 10 Dd3 Bxe2 23 Axc8 Bxb2 24 &xg5 Zaxa2 25 Bxa2 Bxa2 26 Bb1 and White is much better) 21 Abs ga! 22 fxg4 hxg4 23 hxg4 3! 24 gxf3 &xb5 25 &xbs Exf3 gives Black excellent play: for example, 26 Wdi Sxf2 27 exf2 Wb6+ 28 &e3 Wxbs_MStean-J.Hjartarson, Lucerne Olympiad 1982, or 26 &xe8 Wh4 27 gS Wg3+ 28 &f1 Bxe8 29 We2 (29 ‘Wd2 Wh3+ 30 he2 Wg2 31 Hf Afg+ 32 ixf4 exfq is also winning for Black) 29...€7 0-1, J.Barkhagen-M.Tumer, Sas van Gent 1992. 20...5d7 With the b5-square covered, Black should not ignore White's idea: for ex- ample, 20...h4 21 @xa7! 2d7 22 Abs 94 23 fxg4 hxg4 24 hxg4 Hg7 25 Wd1 ie7 26 Ha3 was much better for White in Z.Kozul-A.Sznapik, Tbilisi 1988. 20...Eg7 is playable: 21 Ba3 a6 22 3c3 &d7 23 Da3 Dh4 24 Ker Hbs 25 ‘@d1 Df6 gives Black counterplay. 23 Wda This move tries to clamp down on the g4-square. Probably White should look at the alternatives, though. 21 a3 a6! forces the knight back to c3, while after 21 a5!? Black should play 21...297, which is the same as the Line A2, ex- cept that White’s rook is on a1 instead of f1. This probably does not change much, especially as White usually dou- bles rooks on the c-file over the next couple of moves, but White will have the option of playing a quick Wd1 or e1 without locking his rook in on f1. 21.287 Black intends ...h4, .. to force through ...g4. White should play 22 aS or double rooks with 22 Ha3 or 22 Hc3. Instead 22 df4?! ‘takes ad- vantage’ of the free f1-square, but this is not a very good place for the king. After 22..@\h4 23 &e1 &e7 24 Bc3 Wb8!? (another idea is 24.6 25 Da3 D6 26 Bact g4 27 hxg4 hxg4 28 fxg4 We8!?, hitting the a4-pawn and prepar- ing ...Wg6) 25 a5 2d8! (here we see one of the points of 24...Wb8; from d8 the bishop can help defend the queenside and it may even become active itself) 26 Eb3 a6 27 Ac3 (27 Aa3 Rad!) 27...2c7!? (Black intends to use the b5- square, but a more thematic plan is 27...f6, trying to force through ...g4) 28 Eb4 &h8 29 Baz Wc8 30 Bcq Ws 31 Bb4 Wc8 32 Bab3 Abs 33 Axbs axb5 34 &xbs &xas 35 &xd7 Exd7 36 a4 3c7! Black suddenly took over the queenside in AGavrilov-A.Shomoev, Krasnoyarsk 2007. Cc) 14 Bca White clearly will need a rook on the 29Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, c-file, so he plays this immediately in- stead of exchanging on dé. 14...Dg6 15 DAbs!? This is a very sharp move which has become popular recently. Of course 15 cxd6 cxd6 brings us back to Line A. By delaying the exchange on d6 White is able to create some unusual problems. Black can now force White to make a positional piece sacrifice or he can play normally, although this allows White to play an original manoeuvre to weaken the black queenside. 15.27 Instead both 15..94? 16 cxd6 cxd6 17 Ac7 and 15..e8? 16 &aS are clearly better for White, but practice has also seen the critical 15...a6, trying to refute White's play. Here White has: a) 16 4)a3 intends Ac4 and £a5. However, this move abandons control of e4 and Black can play 16...g4 imme- diately. After 17 cxd6 cxd6 18 Ac4 g3 White has: a1) 19 h3 &xh3 20 gxh3 b5 (better than 20...Wd7 21 Af2! gxf2+ 22 Exf2) 30 Volume 1 21 Hea?! (better is 21 Aas Wd7 22 Af2 gxf2+ 23 Exf2, although Black still has the initiative after 23..h5) 21..bxc4 22 Exc4 Dh4 was clearly better for Black in H.Hoeksema-LRiemersma, Dutch League 1987. a2) 19 a5 gxh2+ (worse is 19...We7 20 Db6 gxh2+ 21 &xh2 Hbs 22 We2!) 20 &xh2 We7 21 Eh Dhs 22 Abs Dg3 gave Black good play in M.Yudovich- E.Arlind, correspondence 1974. b) 16 cxd6! (this piece sacrifice is critical) 16...axb5 17 dxc7 Wd7 (worse is 17...We8?! 18 Wb3 g4 19 Dc5 Dh4 20 fxg4 and White was much better in the game F.Berkes-M.Pavlovic, Kragujevac 2009) reaches quite a complicated po- sition. White’s play certainly seems easier, but Black is up a piece: b1) 18 Wb3 Ae’ with a further di- vide: 11) 19 &b4 Des 19 Wh3 Axc7 20 &xf8 &xf8 looks unclear. 12) 19 Dc5 Wd6 20 De6 (after 20 &b4 Black can just play 20...Wb6) 20...8.xe6! (much better than 20...Wb6+The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 Bd7 10 Adz 21 #h1 Lxe6 22 dxe6 Dxc7 23 e7+ Bf7 24 &c4 Dh8 25 Bfda when White had a big advantage in O.Biriukov-S.Soloviov, Saint Petersburg 1999) 21 dxe6 Axc7 22 &b4, and now both 22...Wb6+ and 22...Wd4+ 23 #h1 Efc8 are possible, while earlier 21 &b4 Wb6+ 22 &c5 Was 23 dxe6 Axc7 24 &xf8 Sxf8 25 Bfd1 Wb6+ 26 &h1 Axe6 27 Wh4+ 8 is ‘unclear according to Soloviov. b2) 18 &b4 was Giri’s recent try. Black has: b21) 18..Ae8 19 2xf8 (19 Wb3 is ‘p11’ above) 19...2xf8 with the idea of -d6 was given by Nunn, although Hoeksma points out that White has some initiative after 20 Wb3, intending %c3 and Hfc1. 22) 18...g4?! 19 Acs (19 dé! gxf3 20 gxf3 b6 21 Af2 #h8 22 a3 Hg 23 Shi We8 24 Hg1 gives White more than enough compensation according to Giri) 19..Wxc7 20 Ae6 and here, in- stead of 20..Wf7? 21 &xb5! when White was much better in A.Giri- F.Nijboer, Haaksbergen 2009, Black should have tried 20..Wb6+ 21 &c5 Was. b23) 18..2f7 19 Wb3 2f8 20 &xf8 &xf8 21 Wh4+ Gg8 22 Af2 Ae8 23 Axbs Wade 24 Wxd6 Axdé6 25 a4 LF8 is a line given by Giri, who thinks that Black is okay here. 15...f7 This is a more normal continuation. Black hopes to transpose to the main lines, but White has an independent course. p> Oe aN out roe > ~ a \ SN a \\Y os SN RR x a SWS a. WS < 16 2a5! This is the point of White's play - he forces Black to weaken his queenside. This is somewhat annoying, but the ™anoeuvre costs White some time and Black is not without practical chances. Instead 16 cxd6 cxd6 17 Wc2 would again take play back into Line A. 16...b6 This weakens the c6-square, but there is no choice. 17 cxd6! This is more accurate than 17 cxb6 when 17...axb6 may be a playable al- ternative for Black. 17...cxd6 31Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 Instead 17...bxa5? is just bad after 18 dxc7 Wf8 19 Acs (also good is 19 Wad g4 20 Ac5 gxf3 21 &xf3 Dha 22 Wxa5 Se8 23 Deé and Black was mauled in V.Bhat-D.Aldama, Boca Raton 2008) 19...a6 20 Ae6 Wb4 (or 19 cS a6 20 Aes We7 21 Axg7 &xg7 22 d6 We8 23 a3 with a crushing posi- tion in M.Mchedlishvili-A.Rustamov, Tashkent 2010) 21 a3 Wxb2 22 3b1 Wa2, as in D.Fridman-M.Szelag, War- saw (rapid) 2009, and now 23 “d6 wins quickly. 18 £e1 This is better than 18 2b4 2f8 19 £2?! (Bhat suggests 19 Hc6 or 19 We2) 19...a6 20 Aa3 WS 21 Ac4 aS 22 Ker &d7 23 a4 Kg7 24 h3 Dhsl?, which gives Black good play. After 25 a3 “f7 26 Abs Ac8 27 Axc8 Wxc8 28 Ad3 g4 29 &h4 4g5 he scored a notable upset in V.Bhat-K.Sai, New Delhi 2009. 18...g41? This is a very principled reply and a typical reaction to the white knight's jaunt to bS. Black takes the opportunity to play this advance immediately be- 32 cause the e4-pawn is not well pro- tected. Another possibility is 18...a6 19 Ac3 (after 19 a3!? Black should probably play 19...g4, again exploiting the fact that the e4-pawn lacks protec- tion), and here: a) 19.247?! 20 Ab4 bS 21 Acé &xc6 22 dxc6 was much better for White in D.Pergericht-W.Winterstein, Luxembourg 1987. b) 19.5?! compares poorly with the main line: 20 Ab4 g4 21 Aa4 Hb7? 22 Sxa6 Bxa6 23 Axa6 bS 24 Las! Wras 25 Exc8+ &h7 26 Dacs5 Baz 27 We1 Wxa2 28 Db4 Wc4 29 b3! Wd4+ 30 whi and 10 was G.Meier- S.Bromberger, Zurich 2009. c) 19...a5! is the best move. Black must cover the b4-square to prevent a knight invasion. Here White has tried: cl) 20 DAbS g4 21 Hc KFS 22 Rf2 bs 23 Wc2, although Black had coun- terplay after 23...g3 24 &xb6 gxh2+ 25 Sxh2 Exb6 26 Bxc8 We7 27 Ec7 Ad7 28 f2 Dh4 in D.Cummings-B.Sam- buev, Toronto 2010.The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 @d7 10 Adz €2) 20 Df2 &F8 21 Abs hs 22 Bcé6 &q7 23 a4 &d7 24 Hh1!? D8 25 Hz 94 26 Eg1 (winning the exchange with 26 %c7 leads to an unclear position after 26..axa4 27 Wc1 &d7 28 Axa Wxa8) 26...g3 27 Dh3 Bc8 28 We2 gxh2 29 &xh2 Ag4+! 30 fxg4 Bxc3 31 Wxc3 hxg4 32 g3 gxh3 33 “c7 was G.Meier- J.Lopez Martinez, Pamplona 2009. Now Black’s best looks like 33...Ag6, with the idea 34 De6 &xe6 35 dxe6 d5! when Black has the initiative in a very com- plicated position. 3) 20 2F2 Hb8 21 Abs AFB 22 Hc6 De8 23 a4 2d7 24 Ac3 Hb7 25 ba hs 26 bxa5 bxa5 27 “a7 Df6 28 Dcé Was 29 We2 g4 30 Ab2 Eg7 31 Ac4 g3 32 hxg3 fxg3_ 33 &xg3 ha 34 &h2 Dns was G.Meier-R.Polzin, Austrian League 2010. White is probably quite a bit bet- ter here, but as usual there is counter- play and Black went on to score a big upset against one of the main propo- nents of White's set-up. 19 Db4 This is critical. White pounces on the weak c6-square. Instead 19 fxg4 @xe4 is unclear. 19 Bcé6 is also worth investigation, but after 19...2f8 at least there is no knight coming into c6. 19...g3! A thematic and strong pawn sacri- fice. We will now follow the game R.Rusev-A. Diamant, Malakoff 2010: 20 hxg3 20 Ac6 just gives Black the extra option of 20...gxh2+. 20...fxg3 21 Dc6 WEB 22 2xg3 Zh! Black is a pawn down and White has made some inroads into his queen- side, but he has very good counterplay. 23 Ec3 To stop ...e3+. 23.84 There are other tempting possibili- ties as well, such as 23..g7!? and 23...Dh5!?. 24 2xfq Not 24 &f2? Wh6! 25 g3 (25 He1 Wh2+ 26 &f1 Whi+ 27 &g1 Dh4 mates) 25...Wh3, which is winning for Black. 24... Dxfa 25 g3 25..DH3+ Also good is 25...Hg7!? 26 &f2 ahs, 33Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, (or 26...Ah3+) 27 kes (27 g4? Axea+) 27...Axg3 28 Bg1 Dgxe4!? 29 Bxg7+ Wxg7 30 fxe4 Dxe4 31 We2 Wg1+ 32 Rf Dxc3 33 Axc3 Vh3 (33...We3+ is also interesting) 34 Wd3 £g4l? which seems promising for Black. 26 Sg2 Hg7 27 Hh1?? Under pressure White blunders, but after 27 Wc2 @h5 Black has strong pressure. 27...xe4! 28 De7+ As 28 fxe4 Wf2 is mate, White’s po- sition falls apart. 28...Bxe7 29 Hxc8 Dfg+! Black does not relax, even in a win- ning position. 29..8xc8 30 Exh3 a6 is still much better for him, but the text is much stronger. 30 gxf4 Hg7+ 31 Sf1 Hxc8 32 fxed Woxfa+ 33 ker Her 34 Axd6 Hxd1+ 35 xdi Hc7 36 Hgit dhs 37 2cq WE3+ 38 e1 Exc4 0-1 In conclusion, 15 bs is rather dan- gerous, but White must take risks too and not everyone wants to commit to sacrificing a piece with the white pieces right out of the opening. If prac- tice does eventually show this line to be too dangerous for Black, it will negate several decades of opening theory! That said, although we must be pre- pared for this line, we will not worry too much just yet. The important thing is to be aware of the possibility of 15 &b5 and to have something in mind. D) 13 gal? This is a completely different ap- 34 Volume 1 proach. Instead of engaging in a straight race, White takes a stance on the kingside first. If White can com- pletely block the kingside, he will have a free hand on the other side of the board, where he holds a spatial advan- tage. This plan was very popular for White in the late 1980s and prompted Black to look at flexible alternatives to 11..Af6 12 £3 f4, such as 11..@h8. Nowadays this plan is not considered to be so alarming to Black, although the play can become a bit stodgy. aoe : 13...g5 After 13...fxg3?! 14 hxg3 Black does not even have an advantage on the kingside, so he leaves the position closed and plans to open the h-file. The immediate 13...n5?! is bad because af- ter 14 g5 Dh7 15 h4 Black cannot open the kingside unless he makes an un- sound piece sacrifice on g5. By playing 13...g5 Black prevents h4 and will open the kingside himself with .-hS. He also prepares ...Ag6, aiming for the h4-square. White usually plays sbg2, so he can contest the h-file, and aThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 d7 10 Dd3 quick &e1-f2, when the bishop covers the h4-square and also takes aim at the black queenside. Admittedly, Black has a narrow field to play with, so he needs to hold things together on the queen- side while gradually building up on the kingside, looking for tactical opportu- nities. This often involves sacrifices on g4or ed. 14 2e1 Both sides have a lot of flexibility here. Instead 14 dg2 h5 15 h3 Agé 16 e1 transposes to note ‘b’ to White's 16th move, below. White can also play on the queenside immediately: a) 14. c5 h5 15 h3 7 (15...g6 16 &e1 leads back to the main line) 16 Hci Hh8 17 Abs hxg4 18 hxg4 Hh3 19 bf2 Qxga! 20 cxd6 cxd6 21 fxg4 Axegt 22 ske1 Wb6 gave Black excellent play in G.Tallaksen-E.Lie, Gausdal 2007. b) 14 b4 h5 15 h3 F7 (15...g6 16 &e1 Hf7 is another way) 16 2e1 Bhs 17 &g2 Dg6 18 c5 hxg4 19 hxg4 Dhs?! (an amazing offer, which Gelfand de- clines) 20 Hh (20 gxh5 Bxh5 21 Bhi Exh1 22 &xhi Wh8+ 23 &g1 tests Black’s idea) 20...g3 21 &xg3 fxg3 22 Wd2 Hh4 23 &xg3 2d7 24 Bxh4 gxha+ 25 #h2 &f6 gave Black dark-squared compensation for the pawn in B.Gelfand-G.Kasparov, Reggio Emilia 1991. Kasparov's sacrifice may not have been completely sound (it is easier to say this almost 20 years later!), but the idea is still noteworthy. 14...h5 15 h3 Dge 16 ¢5 White begins his queenside play. Some alternatives: a) 16 &f2 Bf7 17 a4 2f8 18 kg2 &e7 19 a5 WF8! 20 Abs 248 21 Axa7 hxg4 22 hxg4 &xg4! was a typical shot in H.Fioramonti-O.Cvitan, Geneva 1995. b) 16 &g2 Ef7 (| prefer this regroup- ing to 16...¢f7 because Black keeps the option of a quick ...Wf8 available) 17 &f2 2f8 and here: b1) 18 b4 Bh7 19 Bhi £e7 20 Wb3 g7 21 cS &d7 22 Baca a6 (Black avoids 22..Wh8 23 c6! bxc6 24 dxc6 &xc6 25 Wea) 23 a4 hxg4 24 hxg4 Dh4+ 25 Axh4 Bxh4 26 Exh4 gxh4 27 Wic4 3+ 28 Sh1 (28 &xh3 Wha+ 29 35Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, &g2 Wh4 gives Black a strong attack) 28...Wh8 29 c6 bxc6 30 dxc6 &c8B 31 Bg1 Dh7 32 Wb3 Dgs 33 Ads Reb 34 5 axb5 35 axb5 Qxd5 36 Wxds Wb8 was good for Black in P.Lukacs-E.Grivas, Budapest 1993. b2) 18 Bh1 Zh7 19 Wb3 (19 c5 Dh4+ 20 &xh4 gxh4 21 b4 We8 22 #h2 hxg4 23 fxg4l? Bg7 24 &f3 Dh7 25 Bc1 &d7 26 Hf1 a5 gave Black good counterplay in S.Knott-M.Hebden, British Champion- ship, Scarborough 2004) 19..@h4+ (Hebden is fond of this knight hop; the kingside closes up a bit, but White may miss his dark-squared bishop) 20 &xh4. gxh4 21 agi hxg4 22 hxg4 h3+ 23 Exh3 Exh3 24 Sxh3 Dhs!? 25 Kd1 Le7 26 &g2 Ag3 27 De2 Axe2 28 &xe2 Kh4 29 Zhi Wo5 30 Af2 Sf8 31 Eh3 we7 32 Wd1 2d7 33 Wh1 Eh8 gave Black enough compensation to draw in S.Knott-M.Hebden, British Leaque 2009. 16...Ef7 17b4 White maintains the tension on the queenside. He may also exchange on d6 immediately with 17 cxd6 to avoid 36 Volume 1 the possibility of Black recapturing on d6 with his bishop. The downside to this early exchange is that White gives up some of his queenside space. He also loses flexibility, since, for example, c5-c6 is no longer an option. After 17..cxd6 18 Hc1 2f8 19 &f2 Hh7 20 Wb3 hxg4 21 hxg4 Dh4 22 &xh4 Bxh4 23 Df2 a6 24 a4 EBh7 25 &g2 2d7 26 ®b1 b5! 27 axbS axbS 28 “\a3 Wb6 29 @xb5 (after 29 Ac2 Black would play 29...2g7, with the idea of ..2e7 and ..Hah8 with an attack) 29..2xb5 30 Wxbs Wxbs 31 &xb5 Hb8 32 &c6 Exb2 33 Bai, as in AKhalifman-V.Spasov, Manila Interzonal 1990, and now 33...Ad7 34 Bfb1 Sxb1 35 Hxb1 Acs 36 Bai Mb3 with the idea ...\d4 equalizes according to Khalifman. 17...2f8 18 &g2 2e7 19 22 Ws! This is a nice set-up for Black. The d6-pawn remains well protected, from f8 the queen can go to the h-file and, more importantly, there is latent pres- sure along the f-file, which may create opportunities for a sacrificial break- through on g4 or e4.The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Be1 Ad7 10 Adz 20 Dbs ads! This is another typical idea. The bishop efficiently defends the c7- square and an exchange of pawns on dé6 will also open a route for Black’s bishop to the queenside. 214 2d7 Black has a harmonious position: a) Grabbing a pawn with 22 cxd6 cxd6 23 &xa7 fails to the shot 23...hxg4 24 hxg4 &xgdl. b) Instead 22 Ac3 &e7 23 Abs Rd8 24 2c3 repeats moves, but Black chose to play on with 24..a6 in Z.Gyimesi- O.Cvitan, Ticino 1994. c) A good example of Black's possi- bilities is 22 Hh1 a5 23 bxa5S BxaS 24 cxd6 cxd6 25 Ab2? (White wants to play Aca, but he overlooks a tactic) 25..nxg4 26 hxg4 xg4! (White thought that everything was covered, but it turns out that the b5-knight is not sufficiently supported) 27 fxg4 f3+ 28 &xf3 &xb5 29 &g3 (the white queen is overloaded, since 29 axb5 xa1 30 Wxa1 Bxf3 wins for Black) 29...)h4+! (now this check is well timed; the position has opened up and Black comes in on the dark squares) 30 &xh4 gxh4 31 Eh3 &d7 (31...2a6! pre- vents @c4 and looks even stronger) 32 Acq Bc5 33 De3 Bg7 34 whi Wea when Black was still better and went on to win in |.Bedgarini-P.Popovic, Moscow Olympiad 1994. 37Chapter 2 The Mar del Plata Variation 9 Aes Ad7 10 f3 14 Af6 2 ca g6 3 Ac3 2g74e4d65 DF 0-0 6 Le2 e5 7 0-0 Ac6 8 d5 Ae7 9 Det Dd7 10 f3 Vs B Y This move can just be used for transpositional purposes, but in this chapter we will look at an independent idea. 10...f5 11 g4 Instead 11 Ad3 transposes to Chap- ter 1, while 11 2e3 transposes to Chap- ter 3. This idea was pioneered by the Hungarian Grandmasters Benko, Pinter and Lukacs. As in Line D seen in Chap- 38 ter 1, White fights for space on the kingside. There is a big difference here, how- ever, because Black has not resolved the tension with ...f4. Although in gen- eral Black should be happy about this, he must not forget that White may be able to play on the kingside too. The famous game Pinter-Nunn did a lot to dampen enthusiasm for this line from White’s point of view, but what is old is new and recently there has been some revived interest in this variation. 11...2h8The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Be1 Ad7 10 f3 eC An '\N NS) a \ x 2 \ . \\ KS ww \ This flexible move is now consid- ered the main line and will be the only continuation we examine in detail. 11..f4 is considered to be a mistake because White can keep the kingside closed with 12 h4, although after 12...c5 Black’s position is very solid. Still, because Black cannot open the kingside, he is basically just trying to hold the queenside and this way of playing is too passive. 11..df6 is the other main continuation. After 12 ®d3 6 Black increases the tension across the board. Then 13 2e3 &h8 is similar to the main lines, except that both sides have committed themselves - White with ®d3 and £e3, and Black with ...AF6. It is logical for Black to keep the ten- sion and the move 11...&h8 is almost always useful to him. The main idea is to improve the placement of Black’s worst piece - the knight on e7. It will go to g8 from where it can re-emerge on f6 to pressure the e4- and g4-pawns. Moving the knight also opens up the h4-d8 diagonal and 11..@h8 can be seen too as preparation for an eventual wf4. This advance will make some sense if White can be prevented from blocking the kingside. 11..@h8 helps because the retreat ...0g8 will allow Black to fight for the h4-d8 diagonal with both his queen and dark-squared bishop. Note that the other knight re- mains on d7 for the moment, not only to leave the f6-square free for Black’s bishop in some positions, but because Black may want to play ...aS and ...\c5, increasing the pressure on the e4- pawn. Because 11 g4 is becoming popular again, rather than just examine the aforementioned model game Pinter- Nunn, we will look at all of White's pos- sibilities in some detail. A:12 £e3 B: 12 Qd3 C:12 Dgz D:12 ha Instead 12 &2d2 Dg8 13 Wer pre- vents any ideas of ...&2h6, but is a bit artificial. After 13...f4 Black is ready to begin his kingside play. Meanwhile 12 g5 Ag8 13 h4 transposes to Line D, as does 12 Sg2 Ag8 13 gS f4 14 hd. Fi- nally, 12 #&h1 @\g8 13 Hg1 has been played several times by the Hungarian IM Kiss. Black can play 13...f4, when 14 d3 g5 transposes to Line B, or he can try 13...a5!?. A) 12 2e3 39Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 LR oer ee “ Hid Wy, Statistically this has been the most popular move, but it is not seen much nowadays. The bishop goes to an active square, but now ...f4 will come with tempo. 12...g8 13 Wd2 Instead 13 4d3 is considered in the notes to White’s 13th move in Line B. There is an alternative in 13 Dg2 f4 14 &f2 h5 (Black could also try 14...g5 with the idea 15 h4 h5!) 15 g5 (after 15 h3 &f6 16 b4 Bf7 17 c5 Bh7 18 Wd3 ®Dh6 19 cxd6 cxd6 20 Abs Af7 21 h4 a6 22 c3 g5 Black tore open the kingside in $.Mirovshchikov-S.Soloviov, St Pe- tersburg 2002) 15...Wxg5 16 &h4 Whé 17 DbS g5 18 Rf2 DAdf6 19 Axc7 Bh3 20 @xa8 8xa8 was Alesiege- J.Fedorowicz, New York 1993. White has won the exchange, but Black's kingside play is still very dangerous. 13...f4! This advance is usually called for when White cannot play h4. Here Black has not committed to ...g5 yet, so he can still use the h4-d8 diagonal. 14 2f2 hs 15 h3 Ef7 16 gz 2f6! 17 40 Dd3 Eh7 18 Zhi &h4 19 2da 19...DF8 Often in the Mar del Plata Variation we see Black play ...Ad7-f6 and ...e7- g6. Here Black has already played ..2g8, so he finds another way to bring a knight to g6. 205 Sxf2 21 Wxf2 g5 22 cxd6 cxd6 23 Bet 2d7 24 £44 2xaq 25 Dxag Dee Black certainly had no problems here in DJacimovic-M.Vukic, Kastel Stari 1988. B) 12 Ad3 12...Ags Black continues with the standardThe Mar del Plata Variation: 9 Det Dd7 10 f3 plan. Another idea is to block the queenside and activate the d7-knight by going to c5. After 12..a5 13 &e3 b6 14 Wd2 (14 a3 Ac5 15 b4? walks into 15..axb4 16 axb4 Exal 17 Wxa1 Dxd3 18 &xd3 fxg4) 14...0c5 15 AxcS bxcS 16 @h1 2d7 17 Bg1 f4 18 2F2 Ac8 19 h4 &f6 20 We1 Abé6 Black was very solid in E.L’Ami-S.Shyam, Dieren 2009. Black can also play the immediate 12...f4. Because White’s 12th move did nothing to influence the h4-square, Black immediately closes the kingside, after which the e7-knight will often go to g6. Now 13 h4 g8 14 We1 2f6 15 g5 2xg5 (Black could also try 15...2e7!? with the idea of ...h6) 16 hxg5 Wxg5+ is a draw. More interesting is 13 EZf2!? Rf6 14 Bg2 &h4 15 b4, which was played in P.Eljanov-I.Cheparinov, Jer- muk 2009, and here Golubev suggests 15...g5 16 c5 “\f6, with the idea of ...hS White’s next couple of moves indi- cate that he may have ambitions on the kingside himself. After 13 2e3 2h6 (13...f4 14 &f2 h5 is also possible and then 15 h3 26 is similar to Line A) Black has scored quite well. Compared to 12 2e3 Ags 13 Dg2, White does not control the h4-square and after 14 &f2 &g5 Black has improved the scope of his bishop. 13...f4 Again the plan with 13...a5 is a solid alternative. After 14 Hg1 fa 15 &d2 &f6 16 a3 b6 17 b4 Bh4 the game K.Sakaev-V.Bologan, European Club Cup, Ohrid 2009, was soon agreed drawn. 14 Bga 14...g5!? White’s kingside manoeuvres indi- cate that Black should switch plans. After 14...2f6 15 b4 2h4 16 c5 Adf6 17 &b2 Black’s pieces do not coordinate well and White can play on all parts of the board. Then 17...2d7 18 a4 hs?! 19 ®xfal exf4 20 g5 was V.Belov- AGrischuk, Russian Team Champion- ship 2009, where White won back the piece and kept the initiative. 15 2d2 h5 16 h3 Ef6 17 Bea Eh6 18 41Attacking Chess: The King’s Indian, Volume 1 2g2 2F8 19 b4 De7 20 c5 Dgeé 21 cxd6 Bxd6!? Perhaps Black was concerned about 21...cxd6 22 DbS, although this sortie does not achieve much after 22...hxg4 23 hxg4 Dh4+ 24 Sf1 Af6 25 Ac7 Hbs because White’s remaining pieces are not very active. Still, the capture with the bishop is quite viable. 22 bs Afe 23 Af2 &d7 24.04 This was |.Cheparinov-A.Fedorov, Khanty Mansiysk 2005, and in this bal- anced yet dynamic position a draw was agreed. €) 12 Dg2 ey Pee ’ ee ee \ > aa \\ 7, a N WY eR te \ Pre White shores up his kingside, but this move is somewhat passive. 12...dg8 Black can also play 12...a5 13 ha Ac5 14 23 2g8 and in fact this was the actual move order of Pinter-Nunn. However 12...g8 is both more com- mon and more flexible, so we will con- sider it the main line. 13 h4 The alternative 13 2e3 was consid- 42 ered in the notes to White’s 13th move inline A. 13...a5 Because White is making prophylac- tic kingside measures, Black goes for the queenside plan. It will not be easy for White to keep control of Black’s counterplay across the whole board. 14 263 Acs 15 Hba This does not give White anything, but other moves have also failed to trouble Black: a) 15 g5 f4 16 2f2 h6 opens the kingside before White is ready for it. b) 15 Hct We7 16 a3 fxg4 17 fxg4 Exfi+ 18 xfa (it is unappealing to capture this way, but it is usually nec- essary, as here, to avoid ...Af6 forking White’s e4- and g4-pawns) 18...Af6 19 &f3 2d7 20 b4 axb4 21 axb4 Dad was pleasant for Black in T.Markowski- S.Dolmatov, Polanica Zdroj 1993. White is beginning to look overextended. c) 15 Wd2 b6 16 exfs gxfs 17 g5 f4 (this gives up the e4-square, but Black will get many dark squares in return)The Mar del Plata Variation: 9 He1 Dd7 10 f3 18 &xc5 bxc5 19 Ded De7 20 2d3 AAfS gave good play in A.Chernuschevich- J.Rowson, Bratislava 1993. d) 15 We2 2d7 16 Hada b6 17 2f2 ‘Wc8 18 g5 h6 19 #h2 Was (Black's little queen moves annoy White; first the g4- pawn is attacked and then when it ad- vances, the black queen takes aim at it again) 20 exf5 &xf5 21 Wd2 &h7 22 &e3 Wd7 23 Hg1 hs was very comfort- able for Black in B.Rumiancevas- \.Schutt, correspondence 1996. e) 15 a3 fxg4 (Black could also try 15...a4 16 &xc5 dxc5 17 xa4 fxg4 18 fxg4 Exfa+ 19 &xfa Ah6!? 20 Ac3 Af7 21 &g1 Ad6 when white’s position looks a bit airy) 16 fxg4 Exfi+ 17 &xf1 6 18 2f3 h5!? (a notable idea; Black grabs control of g4 for his pieces) 19 gxhS gxh5 20 ba (20 &xh5 “cxe4) 20...axb4 21 axb4 Exa1 22 Wxa1 Da6 23 bS Acs 24 Wd1 Ag4 ¥2-Y2 A.Gipslis- D.Lapienis, Parnu 1982. White was much higher-rated here and he surely tealized his position was beginning to look rather overextended. 15...2d7 16 b3 b6 17 a3?! This is a mistake, but it is not clear how White should continue. For exam- ple, after 17 Wd2 fxg4 (the immediate 17..2f6!2 may be even stronger) 18 fxg4 Dfé White is forced to part with his dark-squared bishop with 19 &xcs, when Black can play 19...bxc5 or even 19...dxc5 with the idea ...e8-d6. 47...a4! This is a useful device to be ac- quainted with - not only in this varia- tion, but in the King’s Indian in general. White's knight on g2 is a long way from controlling d4 and Black takes full ad- vantage. 18 b4 Ab3 19 Abs This prevents ...Ad4, but it leaves White’s pawn structure looking vul- nerable. 19... D°6 Also good is 19...fxe4 20 fxe4 Exfa+ 21 Sxf1 (else 21..Df6) 21..A6 22 2F3 Wc8! 23 g5 Ag4 24 &g1 (to cover h2) 24..h5 and Black's firmly entrenched knights give him the advantage. 20 exf5 gxf5 43