Arizmendi Mastering The Najdorf

Se THE NAJDORF Julen Arizmendi and Javier Moreno A complete guide to understanding the most popular Sicilian systemAMBEET) The Najdorf is the most popular line of the Sicilian for a very good reason: Black can play for a win without taking undue risks. The Najdorf’s fundamental soundness has been confirmed in countless top-level games, and in particular by Garry Kasparov's successful use of it throughout his career. White has tried a wide variety of approaches against the Najdorf, including quiet positional lines and the traditional main line with 6 295, while more recently the idea of a rapid kingside pawn advance has found favour. The Najdorf’s landscape changes rapidly, and this presents its devotees with a complex task: they must not only keep up-to-date with sharp theoretical lines, but must also have a firm grasp of the strategies that underpin the main systems, both old and new. This book lends a helping-hand to those who play the Najdorf or wish to take up this complex opening. Two Najdorf experts from Spain present a flexible repertoire for Black, including a wealth of original analysis of the critical variations. They also explain the key ideas behind the Najdorf, focusing on those plans that are most relevant to modern practice. Julen Arizmendi is a Spanish international master with two grandmaster norms. He is an experienced writer, and part of Jaque and Teoria's editorial staff. He represented his country at the 2002 Olympiad. Javier Moreno Carnero is a grandmaster from Spain who has worked for Shirov and studied with Anand, and was a member of the Spanish Olympiad team in 2000. He has contributed to the magazines Jaque and Gambito. Gambit Publications Ltd is: Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dr John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM For further information about Gambit Publications, write to us at: Gambit Publications Ltd, P.O. Box 32640, London W14 OJN, England. (Or send an e-mail to: info@gambitbooks.com hnttp://wwww. gambitbooks.com Other titles from Gambit Publications include: The Complete Sveshnikov Sicilian Yuri Yakovich A Guide for Black Dorian Rogozenko The Queen’s Indian Jouni Yrj6la and Jussi Tella The Symmetrical English Carsten Hansen The Taimanov Sicilian Graham Burgess Understanding the Leningrad Dutch Valeri Beim Play the 2 c3 Sicilian Eduardas Rozentalis and Andrew Harley The Sicilian Sozin Mikhail Golubev The Petroff Lasha Janjgava ee $27.50 BN 1 O4L00 18 2 9"781 83"> 904"6001Mastering the Najdorf Julen Arizmendi and Javier Moreno AMBETFirst published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2004 Copyright © Julen Arizmendi and Javier Moreno 2004 The right of Julen Arizmendi and Javier Moreno to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Pat- ents Act 1988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent pur- chaser. A copy of the British Library Cataloguing in Publication data is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 904600 18 2 DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 SLN. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: orders @Centralbooks.com, USA: BHB International, Inc., 302 West North 2nd Street, Seneca, SC 29678, USA. For all other enquiries (including a full list of all Gambit chess titles) please con- tact the publishers, Gambit Publications Ltd, P.O. Box 32640, London W14 0JN. E-mail: info@ gambitbooks.com Or visit the GAMBIT web site at http://www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by John Nunn Cover image by Wolff Morrow Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts. 10987654321 Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: GM Murray Chandler Chess Director: GM John Nunn Editorial Director: FM Graham Burgess German Editor: WFM Petra Nunn Contents Symbols Bibliography Introduction 1 The Classical 6 Re2 2 The Positional 6 g3 3 6f4 4 The English Attack: 6 23/6 f3 5 The Old Main Line: 6 25 6 The Fischer Attack: 6 &c4 7 6a4 8 Alternatives on Move 6 (6 £.d3, 6 h3 and 6 Hg1) Index of Variations Qn i 50 70 86 136 174 205 210 221Symbols + check ++ double check # checkmate 7 brilliant move 1 good move 17 interesting move n dubious move ? bad move 2? blunder ++ White is winning + White is much better t White is slightly better equal position Black is slightly better Black is much better -+ Black is winning Ch championship Cht — team championship Wch world championship Weht world team championship Ech Echt ECC ct IZ Z OL jr wom rpd tt sim corr. 1-0 Yo-lh 0-1 (n) (D) European championship European team championship European Clubs Cup candidates event interzonal event zonal event olympiad junior event women’s event rapidplay game team tournament game from simultaneous display correspondence game the game ends in a win for White the game ends in a draw the game ends in a win for Black nth match game see next diagram Bibliography Nunn, John, and Gallagher, Joe. The Complete Najdorf: Modern Lines. Batsford, 1998. Nunn, John. The Complete Najdorf: 6 &g5. Batsford, 1997. Kosten, Tony. Easy Guide to the Najdorf. Everyman/Gambit, 1999. Emms, John. Play the Najdorf: Scheveningen Style. Everyman, 2003. Golubev, Mikhail. The Sicilian Sozin. Gambit, 2003. Polugaevsky, Lev. The Sicilian Labyrinth (Volumes I and II). Pergamon, 1991. De Ja Villa, Jess. Desmontando la Siciliana. Esfera Editorial, 2003. De la Villa, Jestis. El Ataque Inglés, Coleccién Teoria, 2000. Informator 1-88. ChessBase Mega Database 2004 DVD. ChessBase Corr Database 2002 CD. The Week in Chess (up to 499). Fritz 5.32, Fritz 8 and Shredder 8.Introduction Out of all the defences Black employs against 1 e4, the Najdorf Sicilian is probably the most studied, and has the highest reputation. The 5...a6 + 6...e5 set-up in the Open Sicilian was first played by Czech International Master Karel Opotensky, but it was Miguel Najdorf who devoted the most effort to investigating and popularizing the line, linking his name to that of the variation ever since. Argentina was then a chess power, as was shown in 1952 when they took second place, behind the USSR, at the Helsinki Olympiad. The best Argentin- ean players (Najdorf, Pilnik, Rossetto, Bolbochan and later Panno) worked on and played the new variation, and its popularity quickly spread. However, Najdorf's first game with the line was the real eye-opener: A. Rico — Najdort Argentina — Spain radio match 1948 1e4 cS 2 DE3 d6 3 d4 exd4 4 Dxd4 DEG 5 Ac3 a6 6 Re2 e5 (D) 7 Db3 Le6 This development was quite popu- Jar in the early years of the Najdorf, but nowadays 7...2e7 is the preferred move, keeping the option of developing the bishop to b7 and putting pressure on e4 in case White decides to play an early f4. The main advantage of 7...2e6 is that Kramnik’s favourite plan 8 2&5 (Game 2) is easily countered by 8...\bd7, keeping the important d5-square under control. However, Najdorf himself soon switched to the more flexible 7....2e7 (after a crushing defeat at the hands of Efim Geller in Zurich 1953), a move Fischer favoured as well. 80-0 The best way to meet Black's set-up is 8 {4 Wc7 9 g4!, first played by Puerto Rican GM Julio Kaplan in 1972. After 9...exf4 (9...h6 10 g5 hxgS 11 fxg Afd7 12 Dd5 xd5 13 exdS Wo 14 Wd2 2e7 15 b4 ALB 16 We3 Dbd7 17 Re3 Wa8 18 0-0-0 Bc8 19 Wb4 We7 20 c3 was quite good for White in Kruppa-Yuferov, St Peters- burg 1996) 10 g5 Dfd7 11 Lxf4 Ac6 INTRODUCTION 7 12 Wd2 Ade5S 13 0-0-0 Hc8 14 &b1 White had a clear advantage in Vol- okitin-Ghaem Maghami, Lausanne 2001. The remainder of the game was 14... De7 15 Ad4 2d7 16 D3 6 17 &g3 D7g6 18 Ad4 Be7 19 h4 0-0 20 hS @h8 21 ALS Bfd8 22 Vh4 6 23 Dh6+ SFB 24 293 b5 25 hxg6 Ahxg6 26 ALS b4 27 Ad5 QxdS 28 exdS Rxg5 29 Wxe5 Wxc2+ 30 Gal Wxe2 31 Wr6 Hd7 32 Wg7+ Ses 33 We8+ D8 34 Khel 1-0. 8...Dbd7 9 £4 We7 10 £5 &c4 11 Rd37! This is too passive. During the early 1970s White (especially Karpov) was very successful with 11 a4, but Black soon found ways to obtain enough counterplay. After 11...2e7 12 2e3 0-0 (D) White has two options: Y oe ek ae ae wa De A Ua Y _N e a) 13 g4?! weakens White’s kingside and allows Black to lash out with the typical 13...d5! (13...h6!? might be even better, and after 14 Ad2 then 14...d5!) 14 exd5 (the best move; both 14 g5 d4 and 14 Axd5 Axd5 15 exd5 DFG 16 d6 &xd6 17 &xc4 Wxc4 18 Wxd6 Wxg4+ 19 Sh] Wed+ are quite good for Black) 14...2xb3 (14...Ab6 15 &xb6 Wxb6+ 16 &h1 2xb3 17 cxb3 h6 18 &c4 e4 is fine also, but 14... &b4 15 g5 2xc3 16 gxf6 is not so clear because both kings may come under attack) 15 cxb3 &c5 16 R£2 h6, with adequate compensation for the pawn. b) 13 a5 (White now intends to take on c4 and follow up with Za4 and Wad, reaching a dominating position, so Black’s next move is easy to understand) 13...b5 14 axb6 xb6 (D) and now: bl) 15 &xb6?! Wxb6+ 16 Shi &b5!, and Black plans 17...2c6 and 18...a5. Unzicker-Fischer, Varna OL. 1962 was a good example of Black’s queenside play in the Najdorf: 17 &xb5 (17 AxbS axbS 18 Wd3 =) 17...axb5 18 Dd5 AxdS 19 Wxd5 Bad! 20 c3 Wa6 21 h3 (21 Had] Bc8 22 Aci b4 23 Ad3 bxc3 24 bxc3 was played in Tal-Fischer, Curagao Ct 1962; the American grandmaster now had the chance to finish the game off with8 MASTERING THE NAJDORF 24...Hixc3!, since 25 Axe5 dxe5 26 Wxe5 (26 Wd8+ 2f8 —+} 26...2b4 27 Wxc3 allows 27...Wxfl+, winning) 21,..Bc8 22 Bfel h6 23 dh2 Qg5 24 23 Wa7 25 dg? Ha2 26 wef Hxc3! and Black wins. b2) 15 hi (moving the king off the a7-g1 diagonal is usually a good idea) 15...fc8 16 S&xb6 (16 Ha2 ds! 17 &xb6 Wxb6 18 exds (18 Dxd5 Bxd5 19 exdS Ded!) 18...Rb4 19 &xc4 Hxc4 20 We2 Ef4 21 Haal &xc3 22 bxc3 Dxd5 23 Wxes Uxfl+ 24 Exfl Af6 = Aseev-Gelfand, USSR Ch (Odessa) 1989) 16...Wxb6 17 2xc4 (17 Ha4 2b5! (just like in Fischer’s game} 18 Dxb5 axbS 19 Bxa8 Hxa8 20 Wd3 Web 21 Ad2 'e-’2 Anand- Gelfand, Moscow 1989) 17...Exc4 (it is true that Black has remained with the ‘bad bishop’ and the d5-weakness, but his piece activity compensates for this; besides, the b3-knight is a long way from its ideal d5-outpost, while the white king could easily turn out to be weak) 18 We2 (18 Wd3 is more active, but Black was able to prove a tac- tical drawback to this natural move: 18...Hac8 19 Ha2 d5!? 20 exd5 &b4 21 Had a5 22 AxaS Hxc3 23 bxc3 2xa5 24 Bfal hS 25 ExaS Dgd 26 We2 Df2+ 27 Sgl Dh3+ 28 Lh |¥2+ 29 gl e-'2 Palac-Gallagher, Biel 1998) 18...Mac8 19 Ha2 £2d8 (19...d57! 20 exd5 £2b4 is less clear now; after 21 Ad2 Hd4 the rook does not hit the queen, which gives White the chance to play 22 Hxa6 Wb7 23 Bxf6! gxf6 24 Ade4, with more than enough play for the exchange) 20 ‘Bfal Wb7 21 Bad Exad 22 Hxad aS is fine for Black, P.Thipsay-Gallagher, London 1986. 1L...b5 12 2e3 Re7 13 We2 cB 14 Hacl 0-0 15 Ad2 (D) wy Sawada BY , A ek Bam ee Gamam i haa ie A WIE A B wy yes 15...d5! 16 &xc4 16 exdS &xd5 is quite good for Black due to his extra central pawn and safer king. 16...dxe4 17 a3 b4 18 axb4 2xb4 19 g4? This is strategic capitulation, but 19 Dds AxdS 20 exd5 Af is clearly better for Black anyway. 19...2xc3 20 bxc3 Hes 21 We2 DeS 22 &xe5 Wxe5+ 23 Lh Hfds 24 We2 h6 Fritz prefers 24...Axg4, but there is no need to complicate the game. 25 Lal Wa6 26 Bfd1 Web 27 seg2 Hd6 28 h3 Hcd8 29 df3 Wad7 30 He3 DeB! White is hopelessly pinned on the d-file, so Black’s knight simply comes to b5 and quickly ends the game. 31 Ha5 Ac7 32 BxeS Ab5 33 HdS Exd5 34 exd5 Dxc3 35 WE3 Dxd1+ 0-1 \ INTRODUCTION 9 White’s play in this game was far from perfect, but back then little could Rico know about the Najdorf Variation, which only became popular much later. Najdorf was a world-class player at the time and his games did not go un- noticed. Players like Petrosian, Geller, Kotov, Reshevsky, Stihlberg, Szabo and Gligorié, all of whom participated in the 1953 Candidates tournament in ‘Zurich, soon began to employ it But the final push came from Bobby Fischer, who invariably used it against the best players at the time to great effect. Thanks to his theoretical con- tributions, the Najdorf soon gained main-line status. The baton was picked up by Garry Kasparov. He discovered in it a great weapon, very much in accordance with his aggressive style, and has been successfully defending it for the last two decades. Still, we should not forget many other players, from amateurs to the world’s elite, who have not allowed the Najdorf’s popularity to fade away, and who have contributed to its continuing growth. But what is it exactly that makes this variation such an attractive option? Just like in other Sicilian lines, Black unbalances the game at an early Stage, trying to wrest the initiative from the very first moves. However, the Najdorf especially stands out because it is strategically correct and offers excellent possibilities to play for a win, with few simplifying or drawish lines available to White. It is dynamic and very flexible, and therefore open to various interpretations which can suit different styles. The objective of this book is to offer a complete repertoire for Black after the moves 1 e4 cS 2 AF3 d6 3 d4 exd4 4 Axd4 D6 5 Ac3 a6, and to this end we have recommended trust- worthy lines that have been tried and tested in practice at the highest level We have followed Najdorf’s original idea of playing 6...e5 which, compared to the Scheveningen pawn-structure (...e6), gains more space in the centre and chases the potentially dangerous d4-knight away, thus avoiding any direct attacks against the black king. Af- ter the moves 6 &g5 and 6 &c4, however, we do not suggest 6...e5, for both moves exert direct pressure on d5 and would make it harder for Black to fight successfully for this square. In order to help the reader orientate himself during the first moves of each variation, every chapter begins with a detailed introduction explaining how the material has been organized. Regarding the selected material, our intention was not only to present those. possibilities that have been tried in practice, but also to explain the rea- soning behind each move and search for novelties for both sides that could alter the theoretical evaluation. A great effort was made in this regard, which required hard investigative work. This resulted in much original analysis that, although inevitably containing mis- takes, was made with professional rig- our. We are conscious that a book based on openings in the age of information has a high risk of being out of10 MASTERING THE NAJDORF date very soon, especially with such a fashionable opening variation as the Najdorf, but nevertheless we are opti- mistic and believe that the explana- tions of the moves, the exposition of the typical plans and the great amount of suggestions will give this book a long and useful life. Time and the readers will be our judges. Meanwhile, we would not want to forget to men- tion the many players that helped us with this project, some with recom- mendations and others even with analysis. Thanks to you all. Javier Moreno Camero and Julen Arizmendi July 2004 1 The Classical 6 2e2 1e4 c5 2 AF3 d6 3 d4 exd4 4 Dxd4 DE6 5 2c3 a6 6 Be2 (D) (aus This move gives rise to a relaxed and extremely popular line within the Najdorf Variation. The idea is to castle kingside, certainly not the most active set-up, but not overly committal either, as is the case with 6 &c4. Many great players have used it, but Anatoly Kar- pov stands out especially, for during his reign he almost invariably used it and made a decisive contribution with his ideas that made it fashionable in those years. Nowadays, it is not so popular any more, but some elite players, Anand, Shirov and Leko amongst others, play it occasionally, although their intention is not to land a fatal theoretical novelty, but to impose their greater positional understanding. The latter is precisely what is needed to play this line well with both colours, and is much more important than memoriz- ing concrete variations, as happens in the 6 £g5 line. However, this variation has been played for decades, and due to the richness of possibilities it allows, there is a lot of material to learn, although it will be very useful to understand the Najdorf as a whole. After 6 2e2 Black has two main possibilities. One is 6, which transposes to Scheveningen set-ups that we shall not cover here; the other is our recommended move, 6...e5!. At the cost of weakening the d5-square Black can control more central squares and keep the h3-c8 diagonal open for the active deployment of the light-squared bishop. There has been much discus- sion concerning the supposed weakness of the d5-square, but in many other Sicilians, like the Sveshnikovy, it has been proven that controlling this square, even with a superior number of pieces, does not guarantee an advantage. Moreover, taking over this square in the Najdorf is extremely hard, and even when White succeeds in doing sO, many times he has to make some important concessions. Therefore, we should not worry too much about it, although this factor should not be ne- glected either. Now we should think12 MASTERING THE NAJDORF about the resulting pawn-structure if Black manages to break with ...d5 under the proper conditions. oo 8 @ al ama a0 i ae am A The extra pawn in the centre would, in principle, give Black some advantage. This is why White usually avoids this. The almost automatic response to 6...e5 is retreating the knight to b3. Yet this is not the only continuation, so the alternatives to this move will be covered in the first game of the book. Af- ter 7 Db3, Black follows with the flexible 7...Se7, when White has a great range of possibilities. Winning space by means of f4 or g4 and a4-a5 is a fundamental objective in White's strategy. On the kingside this would give him the preconditions to build up an attack, while on the queenside the idea is to profit from weaknesses that might appear in Black’s position later in the game. Another complementary strategy for White is to clamp down on Black’s central break ...d5. Against each idea Black has an effective way to obtain counterplay. Every game in this chapter explains what is covered in it, so we shall proceed with the games straightaway. Game 1 Zapata — Milos Yopal 1997 1 e4 c5 2 Df3 d6 3 d4 exd4 4 Axd4 D6 5 Ac3 a6 6 Le2 eS (D) ag In the Classical Variation this knight retreat is harmless and only hinders White’s usual play on the kings There is an idea, however, and that is to control d5 with moves such as 8 2.g5 or 8 &c4, although the latter is obvi- ously less appealing since the light- squared bishop has already moved once. There are other variations where 7 D3 works better, namely 6 23 eS 7 ®£3 (Chapter 4) and 6 a4 e5 7 Df3 (Chapter 7). Although there are some nuances specific to each line, for a better understanding of this set-up we recommend the study of these varia tions as a whole. The position after 7 THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 13 ®F3 is quite schematic, so the move- order is not really important. Thus, more attention will be paid to plans. But first we shall look at another possible move in this position: 7 Af5?!. This, continuation is not very popular, and rightly so since Black can seize the initiative with very logical moves. 7...d5! (with this simple tactic Black gains a space advantage) 8 &g5 d4.9 2xf6 (White must exchange this bishop, for 9 \d57? loses a piece to 9...2xf5 —+) 9... Wxf6 10 Dd5 Wd8 11 c4 g6 12 Dg3 2g7 (we like this flexible move, not yet committing Black's queenside pieces) 13 0-0 0-0 (D). As a result of the opening White has a strong knight on d5, but also a passive bishop and a badly positioned knight on g3. White’s chances lie in pushing his queenside pawn-majority, and his play must therefore be directed to this end. Meanwhile, Black has the bishop-pair and a strong passed pawn on d4 which, although safely blockaded at the moment, can become a telling factor in the ending. He will develop his initiative on the kingside, where his pieces are especially active. 14 cS (at first, it may seem logical to blockade the d4-pawn with the ugly knight on g3, but this idea is too passive; after 14 &f3? Re6 15 De2 Ad7 16 Acl Hc8 17 b3 bS 18 Le2 £5 F White is worse on both sides of the board, Lanzani-Costantini, Monteca- tini Terme 2001; it can be inferred from this that the g3-knight at least prevents ...f5 for the time being, for after exf5 gxf5 White would gain access to h5 for his knight and exert considerable pressure on Black’s position) 14...8.e6 and then: a) Since Black’s b8-knight has not been developed yet, 15 Ab6 is nothing to worry about because the knight will not be there for long; after 15...2a7, 16 Hcl?! Qh6 17 Hal Ad7 18 Axd7 Wxd7 = did not turn out well for White in Zeléi¢-Bukié, Bled 1993. 16 2c4!? is probably a better try, but even then 16... 47 17 Bxd7 (17 Bxe6 Dxc5! 18 &xf7+ Bxf7 19 Ads? Axes F) 17... Wxd7 18 Rxe6 Wxeb gives Black a nice advantage. b) 15 &c4 and here: bl) One interesting option is the active 15...c6!? 16 Db6?! (16 a3 £5 F; with the knight on c6 Black can chal- lenge White’s d5-knight more readily) 16...&xc4 17 Axc4 We7 and White has problems defending his pawn; e.g., 18 Ad6 b6 19 Wad Ad8 20 b4 bxc5 21 bxc5 Deb F. b2) 15...Ad7 16 b4 Bh8 17 Hel b6 (another attractive idea is 17...h4!?, followed by ...Had8 and ...f6 or ...f5. with good chances on the kingside) 18I4 MASTERING THE NAJDORF Dxb6 Axb6 19 Bxe6 fxe6 20 cxb6 Wxb6 21 Wad2 h5 22 Hecl Hac8 23 a3 Bh7 24 Wd3 Qh6 25 Exc8 Bxc8 26 De2 Wb F Smeets-L’ Ami, Nijmegen 2001. Tow! (D) By keeping White’s bishop off g5, Black is fighting for the d5-square. Another positive aspect of this little pawn move is that the light-squared bishop can be developed to e6 without having to worry about gS. Of course, 7..,&7!7 is also possible, but the text- move is more ambitious. . a aa a White decides simply to develop and allow Black to place his bishop on. 6, but he can try to be less accommo- dating and play 8 &c4, even if this means moving the bishop again. Black, however, does not fear the doubled pawns, so ...2e6 will eventually be played. 8.,.2e7 (this seems more ac- curate than 8...2e6 9 Sxe6 fxe6 10 @h4 Ac6, when 11 f4! might be annoying; in Van der Wiel-Portisch, Til- burg 1984, White played 11 \g6?! instead, after which Black could dem- onstrate the strength of the doubled pawns in exemplary fashion: 11...2g8 12 0-0 Sf7 13 Axf8 Bxf8 14 f4 eg8 15 &e3 exf4 16 Bxf4 We7 17 We2 De5 18 2d4 H7 19 Hdl Haf8 F)9h3 (a strange move, but after the natural 9 0-0, 9...2e6! also seems quite good for Black; this position compares fa- vourably to those analysed in Isupov- Vaulin {Game 22, Chapter 4}, for Black has played the very useful ...h6 almost for free, avoiding any inconve- nient gS after the exchange on e6; to understand better these positions, we recommend a careful study of the game Van der Wiel-Portisch cited above; 10 We2 Abd7 gives Black good chances) 9.,.206 10 We2 Ac6 11 0-0 Bc8 12 &b3 NaS 13 Lxe6 fxe6 (D). Once more we have a position with doubled pawns, although this is quite usual in this line. Time and again Black has proved that this pawn-structure is good, and the following game is another good example of it. Special attention should be paid to Black’s 16th THE CLASSICAL 6 S.e2 15 and 18th moves, which are essential and must be played confidently. 14 Bai Wc7 15 Hd3 Dc6 16 Dhd sef7 17 Hg3 Dad 18 Wall g5! F 19 D3 Dxf3+ 20 Wxf3 b5 21 a3 Web 22 hd gxh4 23 Hh3 Hcg8 24 Exhd h5 25 We2 He6 26 £3 Ehg8 F Drimer-Bronstein, Buda- pest 1961 8.266 The actual move-order in the game was 8...2e7 9 Hel 0-0 10 &f1 We7 11 a4 Re6. The text-move does not change the general idea of Milos’s plan, but it seems clearer. 9 Hel (D) of what can happen to White if he decides not to impede Black’s queenside expansion is Gashimov-Bologan, Minsk 2000, which continued 10 h3 0-0 11 &£1 Abd7 12 b3 bS 13 Lb2 We7 14 a3 Bfc8 15 Wd2 Web F 16 Bad1 Hab8 17 Be2 (White has no plan, while Black steadily improves his position) 17.,.2£8 18 We3 (18 Dds? Dxet 19 Bxed &xd5 20 Wxds Wxd5 21 Exd5 Af6 —+) 18...a5! (hostilities be- gin) 19 a4 bxa4 20 Axad Lcd 21 Heel Qxfl 22 &xfl Wb5+ 23 &gi &xc2 -+ Gashimov-Bologan, Minsk 2000. White can no longer develop his bishops to their best squares, so he decides to follow a Smyslov idea: defend e4 with the rook after 10 &f1 and then hop into d5 with the knight. This plan proves quite effective when there is a knight on c6, but in the Najdorf it is completely harmless and thus seldom employed. 9...2e7 10 2f1 (D) In the games that follow White plays a4 on the next move. A good example 10...0-0 11 a4 Zapata intends to fix Black’s queenside pawns. Another idea often played here is to fianchetto the cl-bishop. We will give another Bologan game to show how should Black react against it: 11 b3 Dbd7 12 a4 We7 13 Kb2 Wc6 (controlling d5 in view of a possible AdS; by simple means Bologan hinders all of White’s plans) 14 Wd2 Hfc8 15 Had] Hab8 16 He2 2g4 17 We3 bS 18 axbS axbS 19 h3, and now16 MASTERING THE NAJDORF 19....2e6 would have kept an edge for Black in Tordachescu-Bologan, Kish- inev 1998. 11...We7! (D) sa wi aw ay Milos employs a plan which we have already seen in Bologan’s games. The pressure on c2 prevents White from playing dS, the only idea that can bring some life into White’s position. Since this does not seem possible, White must remain in a very passive situation. 12a5 ‘The immediate 12 4d5 runs into an annoying pin after 12...\xd5 13 exdS &g4. White could first play 12 h3, but then 12...&c8!? definitely stops the knight move to d5. 12...2c8 13 2e3 Abd7 14 Bad This is strange, but Black’s position was already slightly better. From. this point on, the Brazilian grandmaster’s play is irreproachable. We will add that after 14 h3 (necessary to prevent 14 Wd2 @g4) Black can play 14...Wc6 and break in the centre with dS. 14...Ac5 15 Axe5 Wxe5 F 16 Dd2 Ded 17 WE3 2g5 18 Ab3 Web 19 h3 Dfo 20 Hdl He8 21 Eb4 Had8 22 Hb6 We7 23 g3 hS! 24 &g2 hd 25 g4?! 96 26 Aci?! Ad7 F 27 Hb4 Ac5 28 Ab3? &xb3 29 cxb3 WxaS 30 Hed ®xb3 31 Had WeS 32 Ads Ad4 33 Wa3 Hc8 34 LF1 We2 35 Abb Hc6 36 Wxe2 Exe2 37 Bb4 2d2 38 Had Re3 39 Shi Bxf2 40 Dds 2g5 41 b4 Hc8 0-1 Game 2 Kramnik — Anand Wijk aan Zee 2004 1 e4 c5 2 Af3 d6 3 d4 exd4 4 Axd4 DEG 5 Dc3 a6 6 Re2 e5 7 Db3 Le7 (D) At this juncture, White has many different set-ups from which to choose. We will look into each one of them in this and subsequent games. 8 igs This tricky move-order has been known for years, but it has always been considered harmless. It was only THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 17 recently that Kramnik employed this move twice in very important games, coming up with new ideas which need to be seriously taken into account. But first we shall explain the idea behind 8 &g5. As we have seen already, the battle for d5 is the main strategic aspect in these positions, so White wants to get rid of the f6-knight which controls this square. Thus, the natural reply would be 8...Abd7, reinforcing Black’s control on d5. There is a problem, however, and that is 9 a4 b6 10 &c4!, which leaves Black under very unpleasant positional pressure. A good example of this is the game Kramnik- Gelfand, Cap d’Agde rpd 2003. This is why we shall be advocating 8....2e6 instead. White can also try 8 0-00-09 &g5, which is the traditional move-order for this idea, although certainly less dangerous for Black. Other options for White on move 9 will be analysed in later games. 9...2e6 10 &xf6 (Karpov used to play 10 f4 exf4 11 &xf4 here, which takes us to Game 6) 10...S.xf6 White has some control over the d5-square, but Black’s position remains very solid. Games played with this set-up probably encouraged many Sveshnikov players later on. The position is actually very similar, but here Black has not weakened his queenside. The two main continuations now are: a) 11 Ads Ad7!. This square is ideal for the knight. White has a very good knight on d5, but the rest of his pieces cannot find active squares. 12 Wa3 Hc8 13 c3 Lg5 (the bishop improves its position, while planning, after adequate preparation, the typical ..£5 break) 14 Zad1 g6 (another model game was Averbakh-Petrosian, Tbilisi 1959, which continued 14...@h8 15 2£3 26 16 De3 Hob 17 Bfel D6 18 We2 bS 19 Hal Wb6 20 Ad? a5 21 Daf Efc8 with a slight advantage for Black) 15 @h1 2h6 16 De3 46 17 £3 Bc6 18 We2 Who 19 Ads &xd5 20 exd5 Hcec8 = Unzicker-Fischer, Santa Monica 1966. Black already has a significant advantage and will soon advance his pawns on the kingside. b) With 11 Yd3 White intends to put pressure on d6, although he does not rule out Ads. 11...2c6 12 Ads (once the black knight is on c6, this move is stronger; this is a Pyrthic vic- tory for White, however, and Black can obtain an excellent position in various ways) 12...2g5 (also reasonable is 12...Qxd5!? 13 Wxd5 We7 14 c3 Hfd8 15 2f3 bS 16 Hfdl 2g5 17 a3 Hab8 18 g3 a5 = Khasin-Gufeld, Kis- lovodsk 1968; White’s pieces are very passive, and his queen on d5 is little18 MASTERING THE NAJDORF consolation) 13 Bfd1 He8 14 c3 De7 (after the exchange of White’s powerful knight, Black has a very pleasant position which, thanks to the bishop- pair, could favour him in the long run) 15 De3 (15 Dxe7+ Bxe7 = 16 Ad2 'p-'2 Zarnicki-Sunye, Villa Gisell 1998) 15...Wb6 16 &£3 Bfd8 17 Dd5 &xd5 18 exd5 £5 left Black with the better chances in Kuczynski-Pulkis, corr. 1986. These variations show that Black has no particular problems meet- ing the &g5 plan if White castles first. This is why Kramnik prefers a more flexible approach, keeping the possibility of castling queenside if the situation requires it. 8...2e6! (D) Bs (el 9 &xf6 White carries on with his idea to control d5. Another possibility is to try to bring the b3-knight to d5, via e3, but this plan seems too slow: 9 d2 ®Dbd7 10 Ac4 0-0 11 Ae3 (11 Axd6?! Who 12 Ac4 Rxc4 13 Kxcd Wxb2 14 &d2 Hac8 15 Bb1 Wad F; 11 Axf6 Dxf6 12 De3 W6 also gives Black good counterplay, Masserey-Galla- gher, Geneva 1995) 11...8c8, Black makes sure, by keeping c2 under attack, that no white piece will end up controlling d5. For instance, 12 &xf6 Dxf6 13 Neds Axd5 14 AxdS Lxd5 is very much OK for Black, for taking ‘on d5 with the queen would leave c2 hanging. 9... 2xf6 10 Wd3 White intends to castle queenside and put pressure on the d6-pawn, with the hope of tying Black down to its defence. Once more, 10 2d2?! Yc7 11 0-0 0-0 12 Hel Ad7 13 Dfl &gs offers Black an excellent position, while 10 0-0 0-0 transposes to the note to White’s 8th move (8 0-0 0-0 9 &g5). 10...\c6 This is a very normal developing move, but it does not impede White’s idea of castling queenside. To this end, 10...&g5!? seems to be a very interesting alternative. 11 Bd1 (D) (the critical move; 11 0-0 “c6 12 “d5 transposes to the note to White’s 11th move, which is quite alright for Black). x4 Un gq THE CLASSICAL 6 2e2 19 11...2\c6!. This is the key to Black’s play: he gives up the d6-pawn, but be- comes very active. Now, taking the pawn is certainly the most consistent move, but there are other possibilities: a) 12 0-0 (lack can gambit the pawn even after this) 12...2c8!? 13 Wxd6 (13 Ads De7 14 Bxe7 Wxe7 15.c3 Hd8 =) 13... Wxd6 14 Bxd6 &e7 15 Eddi 4b4 with compensation for the pawn. b) 12 a3 stops any ...AAb4 ideas. After 12...2c8 (12...S2xb3 is also playable; the following line illustrates the possibilities for both sides: 13 cxb3 Dd4 14.4 (14 DdS Bo8} 14...0-0 15 Sed 26 16 h4!? 2h6 17 hs Wes 18 Wh3 &g7, with good prospects for Black) 13 0-0!? (White can take the pawn here as well, but 13 Wxd6 Wxd6 14 Bxd6 2xb3 15 cxb3 cl 16 Ad! Be7 (16...d4 17 Bcd} 17 Bd5 £6 18 Qgd Bcd8 19 h4 Bxd5 20 exd5 dd still gives Black sufficient play for it) 13...e7! (wasting a tempo, but a3 will not make a big difference) 14 D5 Bg5 15 c3 0-0 16 Ad2 He7, as we have already seen in similar positions, Black is doing fine. c) 12 Wxd6 Wxd6 13 Bxd6 ge7 14 Hdl Ab4 15 243 (possible, albeit passive, is 15 Aal Hhd8 16 a3 Bxd1+ 17 Axd1 Dc6 18 h4 Bh6 19 De3 Dd4 20 &d3 Ha, with compensation for the pawn) 15...Bac8 16 0-0. We are following the game Thinius- Naiditsch, German Ch (Hoekendorf) 2004, where Black could have played 16...xd3! 17 cxd3 (17 Bxd3? Bcd) 17...Bhd8, with more than enough play for the sacrificed pawn. 110-0-0 It is still too early to place the knight on d5, as was shown in Amnason-Kas- parov, Dortmund jr Wch 1980: 11 Dd5 &g5 120-0 De7! 13 Dxe7 Wxe7 14 Bfdl Hd8 15 Bas 0-0 16 Acd ds 17 exd5 (17 DxeS cB! F) 17...Hxd5 F 1L..2e7 Now, with the white king safely castled on the queenside, it is necessary to defend d6. Black should not fall for the simplifying 11...d4? 12 Axd4 exd4 13 Ads Qxd5 14 exd5, when White, despite the exchanges and the presence of opposite-coloured bishops, has a considerable advantage due to Black’s clumsy bishop. 12 &bi 0-0 13 Ads (D) ay 13...2.g5 (D) We cannot ascertain that this move: is wrong, but in a few moves White’s attack will be very dangerous. While analysing this position, we found another possibility that involves less risk and seems to give Black good chances: 13...a5! — Black decides to20 MASTERING THE NAJDORF seize the initiative by immediately attacking on the queenside. Now: a) Taking the d6-pawn is not a good idea, After 14 Dxe7+7! Wxe7 15 Wxd6 Wro!, despite being a pawn down, Black has excellent play. For instance, 16 £3 (16 Ac5 Bfd8 17 We7 Hdc8 18 Wa6 Wxf2 ¥) 16...Ad4! 17 Bxd4 fds is much better for Black. b) Another dubious option is 14 a4?!, which weakens White’s king con- siderably. 14...b4! 15 Dxe7+ Wxe7 16 Wxd6 Wo gives Black a very dangerous initiative for the pawn. c) A safer approach is 14 a3, although this represents no problem for Black. 14...a4 15 Dd2 &xd5 (also reasonable is 15...Dd4!? 16 c3 {16 DF3 @xe2 17 Wrxe2 BaS =} 16...Axe2 17 Wxe2 Bxd5 18 exd5 &g5 19 Ded f5 20 Dxgs Wxgs 21 g3 f4, with equal chances) 16 Wxd5 BaS 17 Wa3 d5 is also equal. d) 14 c3 (keeping the black knight off d4) 14..a4 15 Ad2 &xd5!? 16 Wxd5 (16 exd5 Abs 17 Wb5 We7 18 Ded Dd7 =) 16...a5 17 Wa3 d5 is fine for Black. 14h4 From this point on, the game be- comes quite complicated, but we shall not give detailed analysis because earlier in the game two good alternatives have been given for Black. A more re- strained possibility here for White is 14 g3!?, with the same idea as in the game but without giving up the h- pawn. The thematic 14...e7?! then is. amistake due to 15 h4 2h6 16 Dxe7+ Wrxe7 17 Wxd6 Who 18 Wo +. 14...2xh4 15 g3 2£6 16 W3 2g5 17 Wh5 h6 18 £4 2£6 19 Dd2 Ad4 20 2.4 Bc8 21 3 AbS 22 £5 Bxd5 23 &xdS Bxc3 24 Wg6 Kramnik takes no more risks. The alternative is 24 a4!?, with great complications. 24...\Wb6 25 Bxh6 2-42 In view of 25...2a3+ 26 Sal Dc2+, the players decided to call it a day. A brief, but very intense game. Game 3 Svidier — Gelfand Haifa rpd 2000 104052 Ac3 d6 3 Af3 Df6 4 d4 cxd4 5 Dyxd4 a6 6 &e2 e5 7 Db3 Le7 (D) 8 203 In this game we shall cover those lines in which White delays castling kingside. The main option is the text- move, which normally transposes to the next game (8 0-0 0-0 9 2e3), but two other ideas have been tried here, although they are seldom seen: a) Nigel Short has played 8 24?! several times, but the idea is quite dubious and Black can achieve an THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 21 Ion ow CAMB OBN A % Y, a y OE, excellent position by simple means. 8...h6 and now: al) The aggressive 9 f4 should be met with 9...b5!, planning 10...2b7 to put pressure on ed, After 10 g5 hxg5! 11 fxe5 (White must already think about a slightly inferior end- game; 11 fxg5?! Dh7 12 Was Ha7 13 Be3 Leb 14 Wd2? {14 Wa3 Bd7 F} 14...2xg5! F de los Santos-Paredes Sanchez, Madrid 2003) 11...dxe5 12 Wrxd8+ &xd8 13 &xg5 Abd7 14 £3 2b7 15 0-0-0 Hc8 (another attractive possibility is 15...2h3!? 16 &g2 Exc3 17 bxc3 &xe4, with excellent compensation for the exchange in view of White's destroyed pawn-formation) 16 h4 Ab6 Black has an edge due to his better pawn-structure. a2) 9 Be3 Be6 10 Bgl Dbd7 11 h4 Dh7! (D). This is the move that Black was depending on to take advantage of White’s kingside weaknesses. 12 5?! (12 hS should be played, but then White’s previous play does not look too logical) 12...hxg5 13 hxgS 2xg5 14 Bxg5 Axgs 15 Wxd6 Dh3 16 Bxg7 (16 Bhi Bho 17 Wd2 Wie 18 Hel Wea 19 0-0-0 Bc8 = Campora Sivori-Moreno Carnero, Seville 1999) 16... Wi6 17 Hg? Af F 18 Hel Dg2+ 19 Sxg2 Bhi+ 20 &f1 Bxfl+ 21 Sxfl Bcd4+ 22 Wd3 Bxd3+ 23 cxd3 0-0-0 24 Ads Wh4 25 ge2, Short- Palac, Catalan Bay 2003. Here, Black missed the chance to increase his advantage with 25...Af6! ¥. b) 8 f4 has been played very little, and even then most of the time it transposes to lines that will be covered later, 8...0-0 (the normal continuation, but 8...b5!? is also reasonable; then 9 0-0 0-0 leads to the game Levchen- kov-Malishauskas, while other moves give Black good play; e.g., 9 &f3 0-0 and 9 a4 b4 10 AdS 27 11 0-0 Abd7 12 a5 @xd5 13 exd5 Af6!? are both fine for Black) 9 g4 (the only inde- pendent idea; 9 0-0 b5! is analysed in Game 5, while 9 a4 exf4 10 &xf4 Aco 11 0-0 &e6 leads to Game 6) 9...d5! 10 Axd5 Axd5 11 exd5 Sh4+ 12eF1 f5 gave Black very dangerous compensation in Tiviakov-Poluliakhov, Kropotkin 1995.22 MASTERING THE NAJDORF 8...e6 (D) One thing to remember is that Black should not castle until White has done so or committed his position. We 9 Dd5 This knight move has become a frequent guest in the last few years. White wants to play those plans seen in the next game, but while keeping the option of castling queenside. An- other possibility is to castle queenside straightaway and quickly open up the game. Dolmatov was quite successful with this idea, until Black found the way to take the sting out of White’s set-up: a) 9 Wd2 @bd7 10 £4 bS (this position is very similar to those seen in Chapter 4 after 6 2e3 e5 7 Ab3 Leb 8 Wd2 Abd7 9 f4, which theory considers as satisfactory for Black; the only difference is that £e2 and ...2e7 have been played, but this seems to favour Black because White’s set-up has lost flexibility) 11 0-0-0 (White should not play 11 52! yet, for this gives Black a free hand on the queenside: 11.04 12 2£371 b4 13 Dd5 Axds 14 exd5 a5 F Zamicki-Brunner, Bue- nos Aires 1992) 11...Hc8 12 &b1 0-0 13 h3 We7 14 Bhel Ab6 (already Black's position is better; what follows gives a good idea of what Black should be aiming for) 15 £5 £47! 16 24 206 17 &xb6 Wxb6 18 2F3 b4 19 DAS ADxd5 20 exdS LAT 21 Led Mh4 22 Hfl f6 F Arizmendi-Andersson, Pamplona 1997/8. b) White has also tried 9 f4 first, but it has been rendered harmless by 9...exf4! 10 &xf4 Dc6 11 Wd2 ds! 12 exdS Axd5 13 Dxd5 Wxd5 14 0-0-0 (D) (14 Wxd5 &xd5 15 0-0 0-0 = Ye Jiangchuan-Ponomariov, Bled 2002) and now: ED), b1) We must wam the reader against the widely recommended 14...b4?!, for our suggestion 15 Wxd5! (15 &f3? Wed 16 Be2 Axa2+ 17 bl Wad F Oms-Lalié, Benasque 1996) 15...\xd5 (15...2xd5 16 a3 &xb3 17 cxb3 £) 16 £d2 leads to a slight advantage for White. At first the ending seems equal, but Black has problems preventing the THE CLASSICAL 6 £.e2 23 knight from taking one of his bishops, thus leaving White with the bishop- pair. For example, 16...0-0 (16...2f6 17 Ac5 £; 16...0-0-0 17 Ad4 £) 17 Bd4 t. b2) 14...Wed! (this subtle move is very important, and with it Black ob- tains an excellent game) 15 &£3 Wed! (15... Wad?! 16 Qxc6+ bxc6 17 Wad +) 16 &xc6+ bxc6 17 Wd4 0-0 18 Wxc4 &xc4 19 Bhel Efe8 gives Black the better ending thanks to his bishop- pair, R.Byrne-King, London 1991. 9...\bd7 10 Wd3 (D) The most popular way to protect the pawn. If 10 £3, then 10...axd5 11 exd5 &£5 12 0-0 0-0 transposes to Game 4. 10...0-01 Apparently this move allows 11 c4, but it is the key to Black’s strategy. On the other hand, the normal-looking 10...2xd5 11 exdS 0-0 gives White the chance to profit from not having castled earlier by playing 12 g4!, with a dangerous initiative. l1c4 The critical move. 11 0-0 again leads to Game 4. 11..b5! (D) The key to Black's previous play. White’s centre must be attacked, as otherwise he would be better. 12 exbS axb5 13 0-0 Another possibility is 13 £3, but after 13...2xd5 14 exd5 e4 (an interesting pawn sacrifice, although Black could also play in Benko Gambit style with 14..Ha4!? 15 WxbS Wa8, which offers very good counterplay) 15 &xe4 De5 16 Wo Axed 17 Wxed £5 18 We2 f4 19 &d4 £3 Black has compensation, Sebag-Xu Yuhua, Bled wom OL 2002. 13...&2xd5 14 exd5 Abo! This is the last important move to remember. Play along the open files on the queenside provides more than enough compensation for the pawn. 15 &xb6 In the game Votava-Fressinet, Bun- desliga 2001/2, White tried to give back the pawn in order to keep the two bishops: 15 Wxb5 Dbxd5 16 &d2 &b8 (now White can force a draw if he24 MASTERING THE NAJDORF wishes; more ambitious is 16...fa7!? 17 a4 Wa8 18 a5 Eb8, with good prospects) 17 Wad, Now, in our view, Black should have played 17...28a8! 18 Wc4?! (18 Web Hc8 19 Wa6 Ba8 20 Wa3 Bad is quite good for Black; probably best is 18 Wb5! Hb8 =) 18...Wd7 19 2F3 (19 Bfdi Hfbs F) 19...Had F. 15...Wxb6 16 WxbS Wa7 17 a4 ms Or 17...Hab8 18 WaS Wb7 19 Ba3 Wxd5 20 Wxd5 DxdS 21 g3 Hfc8 22 Hdl Db4 'h-'h Zviagintsev-Popov, Samara 2000. 18 Wc4 Bc8 19 Wa3 Habs 20 a5 Bb4 21 a6 2d8 (D) All of Black’s pieces are doing a wonderful job, especially his rooks. We believe White, despite being a pawn up, is probably somewhat worse here. This was a rapid game, so the rest of the game was far from perfect. 22 DaS LxaS 23 ExaS Exb2 24 Hb5 Ba2 25 Bb7 WeS 26 Wh5 g6 27 a7 &g7 28 g3 Wxb5 29 &xb5 Ha8 30 ‘Eb8 E8xa7 31 Sd8 Xb2 32 Lcd Des 33 2d3 ALG 34 Exd6 Hd2 35 Bcd Ded 36 Heb Had 37 2b3 Badd 38 Hed Ate 39 Hel Ag 40 He2 Axf2 41 Exd2 Hxd2 42 Lxes Ags 43 He7 FS 44 d6 Bxd6 45 Ext7+ des 46 xh7 Hb6 47 Qc2 SE8 48 Bc7 De5 49 Bc5 DET Y2-Ye2 Game 4 Svidier - J. Polgar Dos Hermanas 1999 1 ed c5 2 Af3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Dxd4 D6 5 Ac3 a6 6 Be2 e57 Ab3 Le7 8 0-00-09 2e3 Se6 10 Dd5 (D) The same plan we saw in the last game, but now in the usual move- order. 10...Abd7 Black does not get enough play for the exchange after 10...xe47! 11 2b6 Wd7 12 Dc7 Ac6 13 Dxa8, while 10...Axd5, though playable, is slightly worse for Black: 11 exd5 &£5 12 Wd2 @®d7?! (an important strategic mistake; 12...a5 13 f4 £ Svidler-Gelfand, Tilburg 1996) 13 DaS! We7 14 c4 £. By playing 10...Abd7 Black renews THE CLASSICAL 6 &e2 25 the threat on e4, thus forcing White to waste time defending it. 11 Wa3 Otherwise: a) 11 £3?! is not a good idea. Black can play 11...&xd5! (11...Axd5!? 12 exd5 2f5 13 Wd2 a5! is also possible) 12 exd5 b5! 13 a4 (13 c4 bxcd 14 &ixcd Db6 F Salem-Wong Zi Jing, Elista OL 1998) 13..b6 14 axbS Dbxd5 15 Bf2 axb5 16 Bxa8 Wxad 17 &xb5 Af4, when his central pawns give him very interesting counterplay, Rossolimo-Sursock, Skopje OL 1972. b) Exchanging the bishop with 11 ®xe7+! is usually a mistake because it allows Black to break in the centre. After 11...Wxe7 12 £3 d5 13 exd5 ®xd5 F, the extra central pawn controls many important squares. 11...2xd5 12 exd5 Ac! (D) onan é &&B aes Walter Browne was the first player to show the strength of this move, which theory nowadays considers best. Basically, Black wants to keep the queenside and the centre closed in order to get his play on the kingside going. In the variations that follow, the passivity of White’s light-squared bishop is the feature that stands out the most. 13 Wd2 Or: a) 13 Wal?! Da4!? 14 bt bs 15 Wa2 Abo 16 &xb6 Wxb6 17 Aas Ded 18 Wb4 £95 19 Wxe4 Wxa5 F Y.Gon- zalez-L.Dominguez, Havana 2003. b) White can get a passed pawn by exchanging knights with 13 @\xc5, but it can easily be blockaded, thus getting in the way of its own pieces, especially the e2-bishop. After 13...dxc5 White has several possibilities, but Black always answers in the same way: bl) 14 Hadi e4! (this fine move enables Black to make good use of the dark squares) 15 Wb3 (15 Wd2 2d6 16 &g5 He8 17 c4 Le5 gives Black excellent play) 15...We7 16 &g5 was drawn here in Kasimdzhanov-Lautier, Elista OL 1998, but Black could have played on with 16...De8!. b2) 14 c4 ed! 15 Wd2 dé, followed by the same plan asin line ‘b3”. b3) 14 Bfdl e4! 15 Wd2 (15 Wb3 We7 16 Bg5 De8! {a good manoeuvre to blockade White’s passed pawn} 17 Bxe7 Wxe7 18 Wb6 Ad6 F 19 Wxc5? Zac8 20 Wad Exc2 F) 15...2.d6 16 a4 We7! 17 g3 (17 h3 Ad7!, and ...f5-£4) 17...Bae8 18 aS Dd? (D). White has no clear plan in this position. Black, on the other hand, has achieved all his positional aims: he has a good dark-square blockade and excellent attacking prospects on the kingside, What follows is quite instructive: 19 &£4 (19 c4 £5) 19...De5!26 MASTERING THE NAJDORF (19...2.xf47! 20 Wxf4 Wxf4 21 gxf4 £) 20c4 £5 21 Hacl h6 22 h4 Ago 23 Bxd6 Wxd6 24 b4 e3 25 Wel £4! -—+ King-Browne, Reykjavik tt 1990. 13...Afed 14 Wh4 a5 As has been mentioned earlier, Black wants to close the queenside. The slight weaknesses there are not too important if White cannot take advantage of them. 15 Wbs Also possible is 15 Wet &g5 16 Axc5 Axc5 17 Axc5 He8, when the position is about even. 15...We7 16 Bfdl It is difficult to propose a constructive plan for White. He cannot get his play going on the queenside, and Black’s attack on the other side is only a matter of time. For instance, if White decides to chase the knight away with 16 £3 Af6 17 c4, then the queen will not be well placed. Black could simply play 17...Dfd7, followed by 18...n6 and 19...25. 16 xc5 dxc5 is similar to King-Browne seen above, so the plan would be pretty much the same. 16...b6 17 Wed £5 Finally the time has come to take action on the kingside. 18 2d3 Wd8 19 Axc5 Axc5 20 a3 He8 21 Wh5 e4 22 SF1 2F6 23 Babli eS F 24 b4 axb4 25 Exb4 Dd7 26 Hed Excd 27 Wxc4 We8 28 Hel D6? It was better to move the queen to g6, or play 28...f4 straight away, with better chances for Black. 29 h3 Dd7 30 We7 £4 31 Bel? 31 &xb6 Af6 is unclear. 31...e3 32 &b5? exf2+ 33 dexf2 £3 0-1 Game 5 Levchenkov - Malishauskas Katowice 1993 1 e4 c5 2 Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Dxd4 D6 5 Ac3 a6 6 Re2 eS 7 Ab3 Le78 0-0 0-0 9 £421 (D) In the Sicilian Defence White must gain space on the kingside in order to be able to attack there. Practice has shown, nonetheless, that the early advance of the f-pawn is too direct and gives Black very satisfactory play. THE CLASSICAL 6 2e2 27 Although this move has virtually dis- appeared at master level, it is still played from time to time at club level. The resulting positions are quite instructive, so we shall analyse the line in detail. 9.5! White’s e4-pawn has become a clear target, so Black logically wants to place his bishop on b7 as soon as possible. 10 a3 This move prevents the b-pawn from advancing, but White has tried two more possibilities in this position: a) The exchange of pawns by 10 fxe5?! leads to a deterioration of White’s pawn-structure. The only way to compensate for this is to attack on the kingside, but it proves quite difficult with both knights on the other side of the board. 10...dxe5 and then: al) 11 Wxd8 Bxd8 leads toa slight advantage for Black. After 12 &g5 £e6?! (12...Abd7!? F) 13 a4 b4 14 Axf6 Rxf6 15 Ads Bxd5 16 exdS (Klovans-Gutman, Riga 1978), Black should play 16...e4! =, a2) 11 @g5 bd7 12 43 (12 a3 is best answered by 12...82b7! 3; instead, it is risky to capture on e4: 12...Axe4?! 13 Bxe7 Dxc3 14 &xd8 @xd1 15 Baxdl Bxd8 16 AcS Ba? 17 gd) 12...b4 13 De2 aS 14 Dg3 a4 15 @®d2 Ac5 F Milner-Barry — Petrosian, London 1954, Black has an obvious advantage. b) 10 a4 is a thematic continuation against ...b5 in many Sicilian positions. Here, however, Black’s pressure on e4 makes White’s attempt unsuccessful. 10...27 (D) (it is difficult to choose between this and 10...b4, which is also very effective; the text-move is easier to play, but it also tends to lead to many exchanges) and now: bl) Black’s play after 11 Wd3 is fairly standard: 11...b4! 12 Dd5 Abd7 13 a5 Axd5 14 exd5 We7 15 &d2 (15 Bad Dc5! 16 AxcS dxc5 17 c4 2d6 #) 1S... Hac8 16 Bfcl (16 c4 bxc3 17 (another possibility is 17...e4!2 18 xed Axed 19 Wxed 26 20.03 Wed, with the better ending for Black) 18 c4. (18 &xb4 Wed!) 18...bxc3 19 Exc3 Wa7 20 Qxf4 Dgd! 21 Ddd Des 22 Bxe5 dxeS 23 Ac6 2d6 24 We3 £5 and Black is for choice, Prandstetter- Saeed, Taxco IZ 1985. b2) 11 &£3. If White wants to play for a win, then this move is necessary, although it is objectively very risky. The resulting pawn-structures, at least in practice, favour Black, who seems to be able to improve the position of his pieces more than White. 11...Abd7!? 12 AdS Dxd5 13 exdS28 MASTERING THE NAJDORF Wo6+ (13...2f6 =) 14 dhl 2f6, and Black is at least equal. b3) 11 fxe5 is a drawish continuation. 11... Wb6+ (11...dxe5 = will trans- pose to one of the lines after 11 axb5) 12 Wh dxeS 13 Bg5 Dbd7 (maybe Black can try to keep some life in the position with 13...8d8!7 14 Wel b4 15 Lxf6 Axf6 16 Dds 2xd5 17 exd5 ed, with chances for both sides) 14 axb5 axbS 15 Bxa8 Exa8 16 &xb5 Axed! 17 &xe7 Dxc3 18 Wxd7 Wxbs 19 Wxbs Dxbs 20 Hdl Led = Para- monov-Staniszewski, Polanica Zdroj 1999. b4) 11 axbS (another simplifying option) 11...Wb6+!? (good but too equal is 11...axb5 12 Bxa8 2xa8 13 fxe5 dxe5 14 Wxd8 &xd8 15 2e3 b4 16 @a2 £7 = Dvoirys-Novikov, Vil- nius 1984) 12 dhl axbS 13 Bxa8 &xa8 14 fxe5 (once again the safe approach is probably best; 14 Wd3?! b4 15 Dd5 Bxd5 16 exdS Abd7 17 Le3 We7 18 g3 Ab6 19 23 Dc4 20 Scl d7 21 Dd2 Dcb6 22 c4 was played in Bode-King, Bundesliga 1991/2, and now 22...bxe3!? would have given Black the better chances) 14...dxe5 15 &g5 Bd8!? (trying to complicate the game alittle; 15...b4 16 &xf6 2xf6 17 Dd5 Bxd5 18 Wxd5 Bas 19 Wes Dc6 =) 16 &d3 (16 Wel b4! =) 16...bd7 17 AxbS Bxed 18 Rxe4 cS 19 We2 ®Dexed is dynamically equal, but the position is unbalanced and both sides can still play for a win. 10...2b7 White can now defend the e4-pawn, in two ways, but in both cases Black’s play is very similar. For those readers who are studying the Najdorf for the first time, we recommend paying special attention to Black’s plans, for they are instructive and can easily be employed in other lines of this opening. Li &f3 The bishop can also defend from the other diagonal with 11 £d3 Abd7, and then: a) 12 We2?!. Once Black puts a rook on e8, the queen will not feel com- fortable on this square. After 12. 13 Ph1 He8! 14 Le3 d5! (D) Black has reached a Najdorf player's dream position. RNS Yj eonwaan Y 73s The rest of the game is very convine- ing: 15 exd5 Hxc3 16 bxc3 e4 17 2xb5 axbS 18 Wxb5 S&xd5 19 c4 a8 20 Hadi We8 21 c5 Ads 22 Bfel A7L6 23 Wed Dxe3 24 Hxe3 Ded 25 He2 e3 26 HFl DF2+ 27 Hexf2 exf2 28 Bxf2 &xc5 0-1 Houtman-A.Shneider, Gro- ningen 1994. b) 12 £3 Hc8 13 £5? (this advance releases the central tension and usually favours Black) 13...2b6 (13...d5!? 14 exd5 Db6) 14 Aas Ba8 15 whl d5!F THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 29 (15...Qe4 F $.Farago-Kotsur, Buda- pest 1993). c) 12 Shi He8 13 fxe5 AxeS!? (13...dxeS is equal) 14 &2f4 Dg6 (Black should prefer 14...Ac4!, with good counterplay) 15 &g3 £ Klovans-Zai- chik, USSR 1978. 11...Abd7 (D) 12¢h1 Perhaps White should swing the queen to the kingside immediately with 12 Wel. Then 12...8c8 13 Wg3 a5!? (Black can also play the thematic exchange sacrifice 13...2xc3!? 14 bxc3 Dxe4 15 Wel £5, with excellent compensation; another idea is 13...@h8!?, suggested by Gallagher and Nunn) 14 fxe5 DxeS 15 Dxb5?! (15 Dd4 Dxf3+ 16 gxf3 b4 is better, although satisfactory for Black as well) 15...Axe4 is slightly better for Black, Grushevsky- Krogius, Riga 1975. 12... 28 = We believe that Black has an edge in this type of structure because it is easier for him to improve the position of his pieces. The same thing happens after 12...We7 13 £52! Hac8 14 g4 d5!. Once White weakens his kingside Black can make use of this thematic pawn sacrifice to attack the white king. There are many games that illustrate this theme, but the following is quite instructive: 15 exdS e4 16 &g2 h6 17 Rf4 Bd6 18 Bxd6 Wxd6 19 Dxed Dxe4 20 Axed Hfe8 21 Bg2 Dre 22 c3 Be3 = 23 Bel Bxd5 24 Qxd5 @xd5 25 He2 Hce8 26 Hd2 Heo 27 Dd4 Wa8 28 DAZ Df4 F Zarnicki- Sadler, Buenos Aires 1995. 13 We2 Also better for Black are 13 2e3 We7 14 Wel Abe (this is an alternative plan to the ...d5 advance) 15 &.xb6 Wxb6 | Wendland-Bangiev, Kassel 1992 and 13 Wel Be8 14 5?! 28 15 &g5 We7 16 Bdl d5! = Helbich- Vokaé, Hlohovec 1996. 13...We7 14 Re3 Bfe8 15 We2 28 (D) x ike ya Malishauskas’s play in this game is very enlightening. The bishop retreat increases the pressure on e4 and pre- res ...d5. We should not forget that30 MASTERING THE NAJDORF taking on e5 would seriously weaken White’s pawn-structure. 16 £5 16 Sael d5!. 16...d5 17 exd5 e4 F 18 2e2 Dxd5 19 Axd5 &xd5 20 Dd4 2d6 21 Wh Red 22 Bf2 DAG 23 xed bxed 24 Hdl c3 25 b4 Axh2 26 De2 Le5 27 24 cd8 28 Her Hed 29 Dgi Ld4 30 g5 2xe3 31 gxf6 Ldd 32 fxg7 e3 33 Ha3 We6+ 34 He3 266 35 Wel Hxd3 36 cxd3 c2 37 Wel 2 0-1 Game 6 Arnason - R. Byrne Reykjavik 1980 1 e4 c5 2 Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Axd4 D6 5 Dc3 a6 6 Le2 e5 7 Ab3 Le7 8 0-0 0-0 This game will deal with those lines where White plays f4 only after Black has developed his bishop to e6. 9 Be3 This continuation and 9 a4 (if White is to follow with 10 f4), are very closely related. They lead to almost identical positions, where the only difference is the location of White’s a- pawn, although this is not so important. Most ideas will be explained under the 9 2e3 move-order, so we recommend studying the main game first and only then to come back to look at 9 a4 2e6 (D). a) 10 &e3 usually leads to the same position as in line ‘b’ after 10...Abd7 11 £4 (here White can also reach the Karpov Variation via two different move-orders: 11 a5 &c8 12 Wd2 and 11 Wa2, but these will be analysed in Games 10 and 11) 11...exf4 and now 12 &xf4 (12 Bxf4 will be looked at in note ‘b’ to White’s 11th move) has barely been tried, probably because moving the bishop twice, together with a4, might be a little too much; besides, the bishop no longer controls b6, a square that Black's queen will find most useful; on balance, however, this should not be too problematic, but it does allow Black to equalize quite easily. After 12... e5 13 Shl Hc8 14 dq (14 a5? is wrong because after 14...\c6 Black seems to win a pawn) 14..§Wb6! Black makes good use of the tempo he has won. b) 10 f4exf4 11 &xf4 Ac6 12 h1 d5!? (D). Curiously enough, with the white pawn on a4 this continuation is not very popular. In our opinion, White’s extra a4 plays no special role, and in some lines it actually looks more like a weakening move. Now: bl) 13 exd5 is possible, but here White would rather have his pawn on a2. After 13...Axd5 14 Dxd5 Black has two options: THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 31 bI1) 14...Wxds is a very safe move. 15 Wxd5 (15 2£3 Wed 16 2e2 W417) 15...2xd5 16 &F3 (16 Bad] Re4 17 Hd7 2xc2 18 Bxb7 &xb3 19 Exb3 dé is equal, R.Gonzalez-Rodriguez Cespedes, Cienfuegos 1996; 16 2d27! Ad4 17 &d3 Zac8 18 c3 Ae6 leads to a slight advantage for Black, Nokso- Sammalvuo, Turku 1997) 16...Bad8 17 &xd5 Bxd5 18 Bfdl Bfd8 19 Rxd5 Hxd5 20 c3 2-12 Tseshkovsky-Tuk- makov, Ashkhabad 1978. b12) 14...2xd5!? (the fighting approach) 15 ¢3?! (we do not like this move, which weakens the b3-knight’s support; much better is 15 £3 &xf3 {15...2c4 is also OK} 16 Wxf3 Wd7 17 Bad WF5, with equal chances) 15...26 16 We2 Bc8 17 Badi Wb6 = Levitt-Kosten, British Ch (Brighton) 1984. It is obvious that Black has gained a significant advantage. As we can see, due to the unbalanced charac- ter of the line, Black has chances to play for a win, even in very simple- looking positions. We hope that these examples have provided enough evi- dence of this. b2) 135 is the principal continuation. Then 13.47 14 @xd5 Adxes 15 c4 (with the pawn on a4 this is un- convincing, for it weakens the entire queenside, especially the b4-square; thus, White should seek simplifica- tions with 15 Dxe7+ Wxe7 16 Wel!? {16 Ad4 Bfes8 17 Axc6 Axc6 18 2d3 Wes 19 WE3 Ads 20 WE2 WxF2 21 ‘Exf2=Britton-Nunn, Ramsgate 1981 } and now, instead of 16...&fe8 17 Wg3 Wb4?! 18 2h6 Ag6 19 2d2 +, Nunn’s: suggestion 16...f6!? 17 Wg3 Had8 gives Black very good play thanks to his powerful knight on e5) 15...s.g5 (the usual choice, but the recommended moves when White’s pawn is on a2, namely 15...a5!? and 15...Re8!? 16 Wd2 2£8, are quite reasonable here as well) 16 Wel (after this the position is equal; 16 &g3 &h4 17 2f4 'h-th Schekachev-Lalié, Zaragoza 1996 does not offer much either, while 16 Wd2 &xf4 17 Exf4 gives Black the chance to apply a blockading strategy on the dark squares after 17...2e7!? 18 Bd1 Bxd5 19 cxd5 Wa6; we prefer Black here) 16...22xf4 (16...n6 17 Bdl Bc8 18 Ac5 Bxd5 19 cxd5 Ab4 20 Qxg5 hxg5 21 We3 Axd5 22 WreS HxcS = Dvoirys-Mikhalchishin, USSR 1982) 17 Axf4 Bg (17...Wb6!?) 18 Bxed ®xg4 19 Dds Wd6 12-1 Dvoirys- Razuvaev, Sochi 1982. 9...82.6 10 £4 Some decades ago, this solid continuation was quite popular, for with it White could fight for a small advantage at almost no risk. However, as time passed by, Black found various good possibilities which rendered this32 MASTERING THE NAJDORF system harmless. The alternatives are 10 a4, which takes us back to note ‘a’ to White’s 9th move, and 10 Wd2, which will be analysed in Games 10 and 11. 10...exf4 (D) ma DOGS we RAGE AB a wee 11 &xf4 The main move, but 11 Exf4!? is interesting. For some reason, taking with the rook in this position has never really attracted much attention. Although the rook is somewhat ex- posed on this square, it does defend the e4-pawn, making 4d5 possible in some lines. We like 11...\bd7!? here, because after the normal developing move, 11...Ac6, White can answer 12 Dd5! Bxd5 13 exdS Des 14 Eb4 We7 15 a4. This does not necessarily give White an advantage, but he has an annoying initiative on the queenside, where the b4-rook is doing a great job. Black should probably play 15...Afd7 followed by 16...2f6, and then place his rooks on the e-file, with sufficient counterplay. Anyhow, this can be prevented by 11... Abd7, which neutralizes White’s main threat. Now White has several options: a) 12 AdS is not so effective any more. 12...&xd5 13 exd5 Hc8 (in this case, since 13...De5 is not forced yet, Black can quickly play along the c- file) 14 c4 (14 Hb4 We7 15 c3 Efe’ also leads to equality) 14...0e5 15 Bel Afd7 16 Hfl &g5 = Korzubov- Ubilava, Tallinn 1983. b) White can also try to suffocate Black with 12 a4, but this should not be a problem either. After 12...0e5 (12...De8!? 13 Bl {13 Bd4 Bg5 14 Dxeb fxe6 15 BxfB+ Axf8 =} 13...Ag5 14 Wd2 &xe3+ 15 Wxe3 =; the exchange of dark-squared bishops gives Black an equal but also somewhat passive game) 13 a5 (one can get a better insight into these positions by going over the games between Karpov and Polugaevsky; although White’s results were remarkable, this was more due to Karpov’s subtle understanding of the position than the line’s own merits; in those games the queen was already on C7, but on d8 it gives Black the ...d5 break as an extra option; another important feature is that the a5-pawn can easily become a target; 13 @h1 allows 13...d5 = {13...2c8!?}, while 13 Oda transposes to line ‘c2’ below) 13...c8 (13...d57! 14 2b6 Wd6 15 cS £) 14 Wel (14 &hl d5 =) 14..e8 15 We3 Wa7!? 16 Add Bd8 17 DFS Axf5 18 ixf5 Web Black has good chances. c) 12 Add De5 (D). cl) 13 Af57! is consistent with White’s previous move, but it does not trouble Black. Practice has proved the position after 13...2xf5 14 Exf5 THE CLASSICAL 6 S.e2 33 Bc8 to be fully satisfactory for Black. Against most moves, his plan will be ...Wd7 and ...We6, defending the d5- square while keeping e4 under pressure. As in many of these lines, White's passive light-squared bishop has problems finding a useful task. 15 hI Wa7! 16 Ad5?! (a better idea is 16 Wd4 Web 17 Hafl Hfes; it is difficult to do anything constructive with either colour in this position, so an as- sessment of equality seems in place) 16...Axd5 17 Wxd5 Exc2 = Wagman- Gaprindashvili, Reggio Emilia 1982. 2) 13 a4!? We7!9 (since the knight is already on d4, Black can afford to place his queen’s rook on d8 and pre- pare ...d5; 13...Afd7?! 14 Hfl! &g5?7 15 Sxgs Wxe5 16 Axe6 fxe6 17 Wxd6 +) 14 Phi (14 DLS AxfS 15 Exf5 We8!, with 16...We6 in mind, is equal; 14 a5 Hac8 15 &h1 Bfe8 16 Wad2 2d8 =) 14..Bad8! 15 Wel (15 DS Ago 16 Hfl d5 =) 15...8d7 16 Adi He8 17 Af5?! 2d8! 18 Ad4 Ags 19 Hffl eS 20 £47! Wes = Karpov- Polugaevsky, Moscow Ct (4) 1974. 11...Ac6 12 #h1 This is considered to be a necessary prophylactic move. The other possible idea is to swing the queen to the kingside while freeing d1 for the rook. The problem is that 12 Wel allows 12...d5!7 13 exd5 (13 Hdl 7! Wh6+ is one argument in favour of 12 #h1) 13...Dxd5 14 Dxd5 WxdS 15 Bdl Wed, with good counterplay. 12...d5!? (D) YY In our opinion, Black can easily obtain equality after this thematic pawn- break. Once the position opens up his pieces will quickly come to life. 13 e5 The most challenging continuation. Instead, 13 exd5 leads to an equal position in which, despite the simplifica- tions, Black has had the better results. After 13...2xd5 14 DxdS there is: a) 14..Wxd5 15 &£3 (if White is aiming for a draw, then 15 Wxd5 &xd5 16 Had1 Se6 is a better try) 15... Wed 16 Be2 Wad!? (16... Wd5 =) 17 37! (17 2.43 =) 17...Bfd8 18 Dd4 Wxdl 19 Efxdl Dxd4 20 cxd4 &f6 F Ateka- Sammalvuo, Elista OL 1998.34 MASTERING THE NAJDORE b) 14...2xd5!? is a bit more ambitious. After 15 2f3 &xf3 (15...204!7) 16 Wxf3 Wa7 17 Hadi WES 18 c3 Had8 we would rather be Black. Marti- nez-Quiroga, Buenos Aires 1998 continued 19 2c7 Wxf3 20 gxf3 Exdl 21 Exd1 £5 22 Aas Axad 23 Bxa5 Lf6 24 2b6 He8 25 Hd2 &g5 26 He2 224, with an edge for Black. 13..Dd7 14 AxdS AdxeS 15 c4 (D) We have reached the basic position of this system, We consider Black’s chances to be quite good, for he has many plans at his disposal. White can also secure the bishop-pair with 15 Dxe7+, but then 15...Wxe7 16 c3 Efd8 17 We2 Hack is very satisfactory for Black, In these lines we can appre- ciate how strong the black knight is on e5, because it controls many important squares and limits the e2-bishop’s scope. 15...a5!? This is only one of many reasonable plans Black can choose from. Other options: a) 15.,.Be8!? 16 Wd2 2£8 17 Badl He8 18 a3 Wh4 worked out quite well in Koskela~Maki Uuro, Lahti 1999. b) 15...2g5 is the recommended move in most sources, and also very solid. 16 Dc5 Sxf4 17 Dxe6 (17 xf b6 18 Axe6 {18 Dad b5 F} 18...fxe6 19 Hxf8+ Sxf8 =) 17...fxe6 18 Axf4 and now: bl) 18...Wxdi (White has the better pawn-formation, but Black’s dyna- mism outweighs this factor) 19 Haxd] Bf6! 20 dgl (20h4 Haf8 21 g3 De7 is very easy to play as Black, but the position should be equal) 20...2af8 21 ®h5 (21 g3?! g5 22 Ag2 Exfl+ 23 Sxfl Dad F Gurevich) 21...8xfl+ 22 xf (22 Exfl? Bd8) 22...26 23 Ags Hea F Psakhis-I.Gurevich, New York 1992. b2) 18...8f6!? 19 DhS Axfl+ 20 Wxfl 42-12 Mainka-Naiditsch, Senden 1999. Black has a slight plus after 20...Wa4. 16 Hel After 16 Ad4 &xd5 17 cxd5 Dxd4 18 Wxd4 (18 Bxe5 DAxe2 19 Wxe2 Rd6 20 &c3 Wh4 F) 18...Dg6 19 &g3 £.d6 Black has some advantage. 16...6 17 a3?! ad F 18 Dxe7+ Wrxe7 19 Ad4 Efd8 20 Axc6 bxe6 21 We2 2F7 22 Hdl Qg6 23 Bxd8+ Wxd8 24 We3 Dd3 25 &xd3 Wxd3 26 Wxd3 &xd3 (D) The ending is better for Black due to his superior pawn-structure. Byme gradually managed to improve his position and, with some help from his opponent, eventually won the game. 27 He3 Hd8 28 gl g5 29 Led Re2 30 SF2 Ad 31 AcS Ab3 32 He3 Qxc4 33 Qb4 LE7 34 Qc3 Hd5S THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 35 35 Hf3 £5 36 He3 £4 37 KeS Hdl 38 Bel Ha3 39 Hed &b5 40 Hes Hdl 41 Hel Zd6 42 Hes &g6 43 e7 ho 44 Hed hS 45 2b4 Bd3 46 23 hd 4713 Hd5 48 He S£7 49 Hed Ba3 50 Bes Hg3 51 del bg6 52 Hed £3 53 Bed Exgd 54 hxg4 2e2 0-1 Game 7 Sutovsky - Gelfand Israeli Cht 1999 1 e4 c5 2 Df3 dé 3 d4 cxd4 4 Dxd4 D6 5 DNc3 a6 6 &e2 e57 Db3 Le78 0-00-09 dh1 (D) In the last few years, White’s attention has been shifting towards this king move in order to fight for an opening advantage. But what is the idea behind this mysterious move? The answer is flexibility, For example, if Black develops normally with 9...2e6, then 10 f4! is strong, for 10...exf4 11 Sxf4 leaves White a very important tempo up compared to those lines seen in Game 6. The benefit of having the king on hl can already be seen after 11..Qc6 12 Wel! d5? 13 Edi, when Black does not have the check on b6 as a saving resource. Black of course can choose not to take on {4 so quickly and play 10,..Wc7, but then both 11 £5 &c4 12 g4 and 11 g4 favour White. Another logical alternative is 9...b5, although practice has shown that 10 a4! leaves White in the driving seat. 9...b6! (D) we &4 This very sophisticated solution has been successfully employed by Naj- dorf expert Boris Gelfand on many oc- casions. For those who are not familiar36 MASTERING THE NAJDORF with the position, this move might seem as strange as White’s 9 @h1. In fact, Black’s idea is the same: he is waiting for White to show his hand in order to answer accordingly. For instance, after 10 £4 &b7 the black bishop exerts pressure on e4 with the usual effectiveness, while blocking the diagonal with f3 makes White's task of preventing ...d5 more difficult. Another possibility is to play a4, but then he has to reckon with ...Ac6-b4. And lastly, ideas with ®d5 are usually not a problem because Black’s queenside has not been softened up enough. In this game we shall deal with three lines that are not especially dangerous, while the two critical moves, 10 3 and 10 £3 (10 a4 transposes) will be analysed in the next two games. 10 25 (D) White wants to take on f6 and then hop into d5, Other options are uncom- mon: a) 10 @d5 (a strange continuation that does not trouble Black) 10...2b7!? (this is Gelfand’s simple reply, keeping e4 under attack) and now: al) 11 Dxe7+?! Wxe7 12 £3 d5 Fis simply bad for White. a2) White does not really want to defend e4 with 11 £3, since after 11...Axd5 12 exdS Ad7 Black is doing very well. a3) Another possibility is to bol- ster the knight with 11 c4, but this involves an unclear pawn sacrifice. After 11..Axe4! 12 2f3 £5 (maybe keeping the pawn with 12...c5!? 13 ®xc5 dxc5 14 Wb3 Ha7 15 Bd Ad7 = is even better) 13 &xe4 fxed 14 Dd2 Bxd5!? (14...e3!2) 15 cxd5 Dd7 16 Axed AcS Black has excellent chances. a4) 11 Axf6+ &xf6 12 £3 is probably best (12 &f3 also defends the e4-pawn, but the bishop is passively placed here: 12...Wc7 13 &e3 Dd7 14 @d2 Ac5 is OK for Black), but then 12...d5 13 exd5 Wxd5 14 Wxd5 &xd5 15 &e3 &d7 leads to an equal ending. Smirin-Gelfand, Haifa 1998 concluded 16 Hfdl Se6 17 Ad2 (17 Bd2 Bfes 18 Zad1 c7 also leads to equality) 17...Bfc8 Y2-1h. b) 10 f4 gives Black annoying pressure on e4. 10...2b7 11 23 Abd7 12 a4 (White wants to restrict Black all over the board, but a surprise awaits him) 12...b5! (Black lashes out anyway) 13 axbS axbS 14 Hxa8 Wxa8 15 Bxb5 Axed 16 Axed Lxe4 17 We2 (certainly not 17 &xd7? Sxg2+ 18 Bgl Axfl 19 kxfl (19 Wxtt Wa7+ -+} 19...Wh14, etc.) and now in Shi- tov-Gelfand, Dos Hermanas 1997, Black could have played 17...Df6!, keeping strong pressure along the a8- hl diagonal. THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 37 10...Abd7! The old move was 10....8b7, but 11 &xf6 2xf6 12 2c4 is now believed to give White a slight plus. 11 Ads This virtually forces an equal ending. White can, of course, play something else, although the bishop sortie to g5 will be difficult to justify if Black is allowed to play 11...8b7. 11...Dxd5 12 Wxd5 Eb8 13 &xe7 Wrxe7 14 Hadl Af6 15 Wxd6 Wxd6 16 Bxd6 Axe4 17 Bd5 (D) 17...f61 ‘A good novelty at the time. Prior to this 17...%e8 had been played, but it seems more difficult to equalize with it. 18 £3 Dgs 19 Hdl Ae7 This was the idea behind 17...f6: the knight now controls all entry squares on the d-file. 20 B5d2 Le6 21 a3 A small inaccuracy. Instead, 21 Ac1 has been suggested. Black can then play 21...b5 (or 21...a5 22 &2b5 Bfd8 23 Bxd8+ Bxd8 24 Bxd8+ Axd8 =) 22 Dd3 Hfc8 with an equal position, although we would rather be Black here. 21...a5 22 Sb5 Hfc8 23 vgi?? A rare blunder from Svidler. Now Black wins a pawn. 23...xe2! F 24 Hxe2 &xb3 25 Edcl &xc2 26 Hxc2 Ad6 27 Lad Bc8B 28 Hd2 AS 29 Bd7 Ecl+ 30 Sf2 Eb1 31 Rd2 &f8 32 2c6 Dd4 33 Bed Shi 34 Sxh7 Exh2 35 2d3 de7 36 b4 a4 37 Edl Eh8 38 Sct Sd6 39 Ec4 g5 40 bS Ba8 41 g4 AxbS 42 ed HaS 43 Rc6+ d7 44 Hxb6 &xa3 45 243 dc7 46 Exf6 Abs 47 Rcd a3 48 bg3 a2 49 &xa2 Bxa2 50 EES bd6 51 Exgs Dd4 52 Hg6+ ve7 53 g5 Ha3 54 Hf6 e4 55 Efd Ae2+0-1 Game 8 Netzer - de Firmian Stockholm (Rilton Cup) 2003 Led c5 2 Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Dxd4 D6 5 Dc3 a6 6 Le2 e5 7 DAb3 2e7 8 0-0 0-09 Bhi b6 10 2e3 &b7 11 £3 (D) ‘The alternative is 11 @d5, although this move does not impress too much. Usually, if Black can play ...Axd5 and force White to take back with the e- pawn, then he will be alright. His majority on the kingside will advance comfortably, while the same cannot be said for White. Thus, after 11...@xd5 12 exd5 &g5 Black easily solved his opening problems in J.Polgar-Gelfand, Dortmund 1997. 11...b5! It is important to play this now, since 11...Abd7 allows 12 a4, when38 MASTERING THE NAJDORF Black cannot access the b4-weakness any more. We will see more on this in the next game. 12 a4 A quieter approach is 12 Yd2 Dbd7 13 Sfd1 We7 (D), very much in the style of the Karpov Variation. How- ever, this plan seems too passive here. Now: 2 wy “a a) 14 Bacl Db6 15 Aas Back is not very convincing. After 16 Dxb7 Wxb7 17 Bg5 (17 Bd3 Dcd 18 Rxcd Exc4 19 Dd5 Dxd5 20 Wxd5 Wxd5 21 Hxd5 Hfc8 =) 17...Bfd8 the position is equal. Instead, in Ganguly-Sriram, Mumbai 2003, White decided that the time was ripe for 16 &xb5?, but this could have been countered with the calm 16...d5!, which leads toa clear advantage for Black, since White cannot avoid material losses; e.g., 17 exd5 (17 Dxb7 axb5 F; 17 &c6 Bxc6 18 exd5 Axd5 19 &xb6 Wxb6 20 Axds DxdS 21 Wxd5 295 F) 17... Dbxd5 18 AxdS @®xd5 19 Axb7 (19 Ld7 Bed8 20 ®xb7 Bxd7 —+) 19... Dxe3 +. b) 14 a3 Bfd8 (planning ...d5) 15 Wel was played in Anand-Gelfand, Monaco rpd 1999. Now 15...d5! 16 exd5 48 is very strong, with a slight advantage for Black thanks to his e- pawn, which gives him more central control. 12...b4 13 QdS ADxdS 14 exdS DAT 15 3 Although this saddles White with a deteriorated pawn-formation, there is not much of a choice if White wants to keep the d5-pawn. For instance, 15 a5 We7 (15..Dl6 16 Sc4 We7 17 Was 4) 16 £4 Df6 17 Bb6 Wd7 18 fxes dxe5 19 d6 Wxd6 20 Wxd6 2xd6 21 Exf6 gxf6 22 Hdl Hfc8! 23 Bxd6 Bxe2 —+ Acs-Kundin, Oropesa del Mar U-18 Weh 1999. 15...bxc3 16 bxc3 &g5 17 £2 White can now consider ideas like Sel-a5. After 17 &gl?! We7 18 c4 Hab8! 19 a5 &a8 20 c5 dxc5 21 Bcd? (21 &xa6 c4!) 21...8b4 Black was clearly better in Sadykov-Pelletier, Bled OL 2002. 17...We7 18 e4 (D) This is the critical position of the line. White enjoys a space advantage THE CLASSICAL 6 2e2 39 on the queenside, so he will concen- trate his forces there, waiting for the proper moment to play c5, which is necessary if he wants to break Black’s defences down. Black has the better pawn-structure and a majority on the kingside, although it will not be easy to advance there. His problem piece is the light-squared bishop, but maybe not for too long: we should not forget that White is planning c5, and then the bishop will suddenly come back to life. 18... 81? This is Nick de Firmian’s latest in- terpretation of the position. His idea is to improve the bishop by playing ...&c8 and then double his rooks on the b-file. This plan is certainly very interesting, but we recommend 18...Hab8!?. ‘The general idea is the same as de Firmian’s as far as the b-file is con- cerned, but the bishop will go to a8 instead. We believe Black’s activity is more than enough compensation for his passive bishop. Then: a) 19 a5 is the most natural move, gaining some space and fixing a6 as a weakness. The drawback, however, is that the a5-square is no longer available to White’s pieces. 19...Hfe8?! (this move is not really necessary, so 19...2.a8! immediately should be preferred) 20 Hb1 g6 21 &d3 &a8 22 We2 Hb4 23 Sel Bbb& 24 2F2 Bb4 25 Sel (not satisfied with his position, Onishchuk decides to repeat moves; de Firmian accepts the tacit draw offer) 25..Abb8 26 22 'r-'2 Onishchuk-de Firmian, Lucerne Weht 1997. b) 19 Ha2 2a8 20 Wad3 Rb4! (the most logical move, but maybe 20...f5!? can be tried, not committing to a queenside plan too soon; the only problem is that the c5 break will be stronger with Black’s kingside weakened) 21 Rd1 (White is accumulating pieces in the centre, but he can also prevent Black from taking over the b-file with 21 Se1!?, although after 21...Bbb8 {if Black wants to play for more, then 21..,b7!? is the move} he has nothing better than 22 @f2 =, since 22 &a5 Wb7 gives Black very good play) 21...Bfb8 22 @d2 2xd2 23 Wxd2 cS (Black can be satisfied with his opening) 24 a5 h6 25 Wel Kb3 26 Haal (26 Wel &b7 {26...d7!?} 27 Bxc5 Wxc5 28 Wxc5 dxc5 29 d6 &f8 is equal) and now, instead of 26...04727 &d4 £ Neelotpal-Sadykov, India 2002, Black should continue 26...2b7! 27 Hab] S.c8 28 Exb3 Exb3 29 bi Wb8 30 Exb3 Wxb3 31 S&xc5 dxc5 32 &f1 Wb2 with equal chances. c) 19 Wd3 (D). Even though this seems very logical, it has not been played thus far.40 MASTERING THE NAJDORF After 19...2a8! (19...f52! is prema- ture: 20 c5! Dxc5 21 Vxc5 dxe5 22.46 Woe 23 a5 Wa7 24 Wed+ wh8 25 Wxc5 Was 26 Bad1 +) 20 Bfb1 (20 Hab1 Hb4) Black can try 20...£5!?, since the white rook is far away from the kingside now. Then 21 c5 (the natural reaction once Black has weakened his position, but it also allows the a8-bishop to become active) 21...e4! 22 Wxa6 £f6 23 Ha3 exf3 24 &xf3 4xc5 leads to an unclear position, although we would prefer to be Black here. However, if Black wishes to keep the position under control, then 20...24b4!? is a good choice. A possible continuation is 21 &e1 Bb7!? 22 Rad (22 Das Dc5 23 Wa3 Hxbl 24 xb] e4 25 fxed He8 gives Black adequate counterplay) 22...Wc8 23 We2 £d8 (a fine positional manoeuvre) 24 2c3 &bé6, with chances for both sides. 19 a5 (D) Maybe White should try 19 W/d3!2, although Black has sufficient chances after 19...2c8 20 Hfb1 Hb7!. 19...2c8 20 We2 Hb4! 21 243 26 22 Bfb1 Hab8 23 2el H4b7 24d2? Z 4 guage, A serious mistake. Better is 24 2f2, with a repetition in mind. However, Black does not have to acquiesce yet. For example, 24...52f6!? (24...%b4 =) 25 Ha2 h5!? 26 Dd2 Bxbl+ 27 Axbl h4 leads to complications. 24...2e3! F 25 Hxb7 Bxb7 26 94 Rd4 27 Ha2 Dc5 28 Det Dxe4 29 xed 247 30 2d2 We8 31 Lh6 Bb4 32 Wel £6 33 2d3 Sf7 34 2d2 Hb3 35 We2 2xg4 36 2xg6+ hxg6 37 Wxb3 Wxc4 38 Wh7+ Le8 39 Wb8+ e7 40 Wb7+ 2d7 41 Wb We2 0-1 Game 9 Asrian - Moreno Carnero Ohrid Ech 2001 1 ef c5 2 D3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Dxd4 D6 5 Dc3 a6 6 Le2e57 Db3 Le7 8 0-0 0-0 9 £h1 b6 10 £3 Another possible move-order is 10 a4 2b7 11 £3. 10...2b7 11 a4 This move is designed to prevent Black’s expansion on the queenside. The slight drawback is that it weakens the b4-square. THE CLASSICAL 6 Re2 41 11...Dc6! And this is how Black takes advantage of White playing a4. The situation is not ready for 11...d5% yet, since 12 exd5 Dxd5 13 Dxd5 Wxd5 14 Wxd5 &xd5 15 Re3 Dd7 16 Bfdl &c6 leaves Black somewhat worse in the ending. 12 2g5(D) The main strategic aim for both sides is to control d5, so the following moves are designed to fight for this square. The immediate 12 d52!, as we have seen in many examples, gives Black a very pleasant pawn-structure. After 12...2xd5 13 exd5 Db4 14.04 a5 15 £d2 Da6 the queenside is closed, thus giving Black a free hand on the Kingside. 16 &c3 &g5 17 Qd3 Lc8 18 We2 g6 19 g3 &h3 20 Hf2 Db4 21 We2 Wd7 22 Bd2 £523 Axb4 axb4 24 b3 We7 25 Wel e4! 26 fxed Wy7 27 5 dxe5 28 &f1 £2429 Re2h5 30 Axed hxg4 31 c5 bxc5 32 Dc4 e4 and Black is much better, J.Polgar-Topalov, Dos Hermanas 1999. 12.,.Be8! An important subtlety. Black wishes to play ...Db4, but at the same time he does not want to allow White to move his c3-knight and then chase the black knight away by pushing his c-pawn. Although the text-move will be our principal recommendation, we believe 12...@b4 is also playable: 13 Dbl! (White’s strongest move, searching for new squares for the knight and prepar- ing c3) 13...2h5! (D) (an original way to fight for d5; 13...h6?!, on the other hand, falls in with White’s plans: 14 Rxf6 Bxf6 15 Da3 We7 16 Wd2 Dc 17 &c4 + Ivanchuk-Topalov, Monaco rpd 1998) and now: a) 14 £c3 &g5! 15 2F2 Df (Black is becoming very active) 16.3 ®c6 17 @l1d2 (17 &c4 De7 is fine for Black) 17...d5! 18 exdS Dxd5 19 De4 (maybe 19 Acd4!? is better, but in any case Black’s position remains satisfactory after 19...b8) 19...2h6 20 cd Dce7 is quite good for Black, Azarov-Zhi- galko, Minsk 2003. b) 14 &xe7 (White’s usual choice) 14...Wxe7 15 c3 (another way to expel42 MASTERING THE NAJDORF the knight is 15 Wd2, even though 15...Dc6!? {normal, but 15...lWh4!? 16 dg] Df4 17 Bf2 Dxe2+ 18 Hxe2 a5 19 We3 £5 20 @c3 fxe4 21 fxed a6 22 Db5, as played in Zeldié- Prasad, Saint Vincent 2003, is very good for Black provided he continues with 22...2xb5! 23 axbS a4 24 Acl d5 ¥) 16 Qc3 Dea 17 Hdl {17 g3? Dxe2 18 Wxe2 Abd F} 17...Dd4! 18 Wxd6 We5 gives Black very good compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 15...Ac6 16 a3 Had8 17 @c4 We7 18 De3 De7! (18...DF4! also controls d5 and is equivalent) 19 c4 (this de- creases the e2-bishop’s activity still further, but it is necessary to impede Black’s ...d5 break) 19...2f4 and then: bl) 20 Hcl?! (Black should not be allowed to advance his f-pawn so comfortably) 20...f5! 21 Dd5 Dexds 22 exd5 a5 23 g3 Dxe2 24 Wxe2 Hdes8 25 Dd2 Bc8 26 b3 Ld7 27 Wa3 Wes 28 Bcel He7 F LHerrera-L.Dominguez, Cuban Ch (Las Tunas) 2001. b2) 20 &d3 &c8!? (Black makes further preparations to push his f-pawn, but maybe 20...f5!2 can be played straight away; then 21 exf5 d5 22 exd5 Dexd5 23 Axd5 Axd5 24 Rxa6 WAT 25 Qd2 Wxf5 gives Black interesting play for the pawn; another possibility is 20...a5!2, stopping White’s next move) 21 a5 bxa5 22 DxaS Wh6 = Volokitin-Bruzon, Lausanne 2001. 13 2xf6 It is most logical to exchange the bishop and place the knight on d5. However, since White will not be able to keep the knight there, this leads to no advantage whatsoever. The alternative is to develop normally, but then Black is allowed to carry on his idea: 13 Wd2 5yb4! (the key to Black’s previous move: the knight controls d5 and the pressure on c2 holds the c3-knight) 14 Efd1 (trying to prevent ...d5; 14 Hadi h6! 15 2h4 We7, followed by ...Hfd8 and ...d5, is also slightly better for Black) 14...h6! 15 23 d5 = Thipsay- Zhao Xue, Calcutta 2003. 13...2.xf6 14 Od5 (D) 14...2g5 This is the easy approach, but the more creative 14...2e7!? also gave Black a reasonable game after 15 Dxf6+ gxf6 16 c4 £5 17 Wd3 Dgo 18 exf5 Df4 19 We3 Wo 20 Hfdl d5 21 exd5 He2 in Ganguly-Rowson, Cata- lan Bay 2004. 15 243 After 15 Dd2 Dd4 16 2d3 Deo 17 Bc4 Axd5 18 exdS Df4 the players agreed to a draw in G.Hernandez- J.Polgar, Merida 2000, but the Mexican grandmaster told us that the draw offer came as a surprise, for he believed that Black had the more pleasant position. THE CLASSICAL 6 Se2 43 Certainly, it does seem easier for Black to get something going on the kingside than it is for White to play on the queenside. 15...De7! 16 Dxe7+ Wxe7 17 We2 a5 18 Hfd1 Hfd8 19 c3 We6! = The result of the opening could not be better for Black. He will finally manage to break free with ...d5, and then his extra central pawn and bishop- pair will give him the better chances. The pawn-break 19...d5? cannot be played directly due to 20 exdS &xd5 21 Qxh7+! @xh7 22 Bxd5 Bxd5 23 Wed+ &g8 24 Wxd5, when White has an advantage. 20 2d2 d5 21 exd5 &xd5 22 Led £5 23 Qxd5 Hxd5 24 Dfl edt? 25 fxed Hxd1 26 Hxd1 fxe4 27 Hd4? He8? 28 Dg3 e3 29 Hed WET 30 Exe8+ Wxe8 31 We4t+ Ph8 32 h4 2f6 33 &gl Was 34 Atl Wes 35 Dg3 Wd8 36 Df We8 th-1n Game 10 Leko - Topalov Wijk aan Zee 2004 1 ed c5 2 DEB d6 3 d4 cxdd 4 Dxd4 M6 5 Dc3 a6 6 Re2e57 Db3 Le7 8 0-0 0-0 (D) 9 R03 9 Bel is an important alternative. This seemingly strange rook move is the beginning of a plan popularized by Efim Geller in the 1990s. Nowadays it is rarely played at master level, with the exception of Kevin Spraggett, who has employed it often and with excellent results. 9...2e6 (Black continues with his usual development; 9...b5?! allows the typical 10 a4!, with some advantage for White) 10 2f1 (this is the idea behind 9 He: once the bishop moves off the e-file, the rook protects e4, thus permitting 11 @d5; another positive aspect is that 10...d5 is not possible because e5 hangs) 10...@bd7 11 @d5 @xd5 (Black must take the knight before White bolsters its position by playing 12 c4) 12 exdS 2£5 (the position has clarified somewhat and the result is a well-defined pawn- formation: White will normally play on the queenside, whereas Black will counter on the kingside) 13 a4 (White begins the assault: his aim is to gain space and fix a6 and b7 as targets, but a pawn avalanche should not be dis- carded) 13...2c8 14 c3 (D). We have arrived at the critical position of the 9 Hel variation. Now Black must decide how to continue: a) 14...2g5! looks very natural, and also the usual choice here, but we believe it works in White’s favour. Af- ter 15 &xg5 Wxgs 16 a5 (16 Das! Hc7 17 4c4 + seems even better) 16...2g6 17 Bd2 £5 18 Ded Hf 19

Arizmendi Mastering The Najdorf

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arizmendi Mastering The Najdorf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like