Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Winning With The Schliemann (Maxwell Macmillan Chess Openings) PDF
Winning With The Schliemann (Maxwell Macmillan Chess Openings) PDF
Winning With The Schliemann (Maxwell Macmillan Chess Openings) PDF
THE SCHLIEMANN
•
MAXWELL MA MILLAN CHESS
INNING WITH
THE SCHLIEMANN
9781857440171
MAXWELL MACMILLAN CHESS SERIES
BASMAN, M.
Play the St. George
The Killer Grab
GLIGORIC, S.
Play the Nimzo-lndian Defence
KEENE, A.D.
The Evolution of Chess Opening Theory
KOVACS, L.M.
Sicilian: Poisoned Pawn Variation
MAROVIC, D.
Play the King's Indian Defence
Play the Queen's Gambit
NEISHTADT, I.
Play the Catalan
Volume 1 - Open Variation
Volume 2 - Closed Variation
SUETIN, A.S.
Modern Chess Opening Theory
TAULBUT, S.
Play the Bogo-lndian
VARNUSZ, E.
Play the Caro-Kann
Play Anti-Indian Systems
WATSON, J.L.
Play the French
Mikhail Tseitlin
International Grandmaster
Symbols 6
I ntroduction 7
1 4 exf5 a nd others 9
2 4 't!Je2 13
3 4 d3 17
4 4 d4 37
5 4 4jc3 4jf6 and 4 . . . others 49
6 4 4jc3 4jd4 67
7 4 4jc3 fxe4 5 4jxe4 without 5 ... d5 81
8 4 4jc3 fxe4 5 4jxe4 d5 97
9 4 4jc3 fxe4 5 4Jxe4 d5 6 4Jxe5 108
10 4 4Jc3 fxe4 5 4jxe4 d5 6 4Jxe5 dxe4 7 4Jxc6 't!Jg5 121
Il l us trative Games 139
Index of Variations 154
Symbol s
+ Check
Good move
!! Excellent move
? Bad move
?? Blunder
!? Interesting move
?! Dubious move
( !) Best move i n difficul t circumstances
± Smal l advantage for White
; Smal l advantage for Black
± Clear advantage for White
+ Clear advantage for Black
+ Winning advantage for White
-+ Winning advantage for Black
1: 0 White wins
0: 1 Black wins
lf.l:lf.l Draw
The position is equal
co The posi tion is unclear
as Wi th counterplay
t With attack
!:::. With the idea of
D Only move
Ch. Championship
01. Olympiad
The jaenlsch Gambit
Introduction
Mikhai l Tseitlin,
E. Glaskov .
1) 4 exfS and others
1 e4 eS g6 8 4Jxg6 hxg6) 7 . . . hS 8
2 4Jf3 4Jc6 4Je3 {)f6 as in Amateur -
3 �bS fS van Vliet, London 1 899
Interesting compl ications
can arise after 4 .a_xc6 . The
game Schroder - Nimzo
vitch, Berlin 1903 continued
4 . . . bxc6 S {)xeS �e7 6
�hS+ g6 7 4Jxg6 hxg6!?
(Youthful fervour! Nimzo
vitch w as only sixteen) 8
�xh 8 �xe4+ 9 �ft? (neces
sary was 9 �d1 �xg2 10
�e1 + �f7 1 1 t/JeS t/Jxf2 with
4 exfS eq uality) 9 . . . t/Jxc2! 10 {)c3
This simple capture No better is 10 t/JeS+ �f7 I t
does n't present Black with t/Je1 in view of I t . . . .a_a6+ 1 2
any difficu l ties and so is d 3 .a_xd3+ 13 �g 1 �e8) 10 . . .
not often seen. However, it t/Jd3+ ! 1 1 �g1 'i:ftf7 12 h 3 .a_a6
shou l d be noted that, by 13 'i:fth2 .a_d6+ 1 4 g3 {)f6! and
playing like this , White can Black won.
force a draw at wi l l . Instead of S {)xeS correct
In the event o f 4 Q-0, is S exfS! and after S . . . e4 6
Black gets the advantage t/Je2 t/Je7 7 {)d4 �eS! 8 {)f3
after 4 . . . fxe4 S .a_xc6 dxc6 �e7! leads to repetition, as
6 4JxeS �d4 7 4Jg 4 (7 �hS+ 8 . . . �xfS 9 d3 {)f6 10 4Jbd2
10 4 exfS and Others
A) 5 .a_xc6
B) S �xe4
A)
5 .a_xc6 dxc6
K. jaenisch considered 6 tbxe4
this contin uation to be the
best ( Deutsche Schach
zeitung, 1850) , but in real i ty
it can o n ly be worse for
White.
4 fxe4
The usual response. Acc
ording to jaenisch , also
possible is 4 ... 4Jd4 5 4Jxd4
exd4 6 exf5+ tbe7= as
White cannot hold the
14 4 itte2
6 .Q.d6 9 �e8
Here attention s hould be 9 �e81? 10 f4 (10 0-0 is
...
6 .Q.d61
This is an original idea of
V. Zak. M uch i n ferior i s
6 . . e4 7 d 3 d S 8 dxe4 dxe4
.
i) 1 1 . . . .Q.cS! ? 12 c3 aS 13
7 d6 .Q.c4 .Q.e6!? 1 4 4Jxf6 gxf6 15
Risky i s 7 ...�0?1 i n view .Q.xe6 fxgS 16 .Q.g4 �f6 17
of 8 4Jg5 ! 'i!;lh8 9 .Q.c4 �e8 1 0 �e2 4Je7 1 8 4Jd2? (Not w hat
4 d3 23
(Another method of trying
to l i mit White's advantage
to manageab le proportions
is 12 . . . c[)e7 13 -'l,xf6 gxf6 14
c[)xe7 -'l,xf3! ( 1 4 . . . t/1xe7 15
c[)h4 -'l,e6 16 -'lg 4 l 1S .O,xf3
�xe7 16 -'lg4) 13 -'l,xf3 c[)e7
1 4 c[)xf6! gxf6 1S -'l,h6 !:!gB 16
aS -'l,cS 1 7 c3 a6 1 8 -'l,hS! c[)g6
19 �ht �e7 20 g3 c6 21 t/1f3
c[)f8? ! 22 !:!ad 1 c[)e6? ( Black
the position is ca l l ing for. had to try 22 . . . !:!dB. The
Thi s loses time and al lows move played a l l ows a pow
Black's ki ngside initiative erfu l tactical response) 23
to develop alarming pro b4! -'l,a7 24 !:!xd6! !Xad8
portions. Better plans were (Also hopeless are: 24 . . .
A2)
6 d6
8 . . 0-0 is 8 . . . .Q.g4 9 h3
. 12 .Q.xdS+ �h8 13 4Jf7+ �xf7
.Q.xf3 to �xf3 0-0 11 �d3 14 .Q.xf7 .Q.e2 15 �d2 �f8 16
�h8 12 .Q.e3 as in C hibur �e1 �xf7 17 �xe2 .Q.gS=
danidze - Gaprindashvili, Ledezer - Mal lee, Corres
Pi tsu nda 1978 . This game pondence 197 4.
conitnued 12 . . . 4JhS 13 !:tad1 b) 9 4Jh4 �d7 10 4Jf5
(13 4JdS 4jf4) 13 . . . .Q.gS 14 .Q.xfS 11 exfS dS 12 .Q.gS a6 13
4JdS ( i f 14 4Je2, Black can .Q.a4 0-0-0 with good play
reply 14 . . . .Q.xe3 or 14 .. . a6) for Black, Krasnov - Mik.
14 . . . .Q.xe3 1S fxe3! 4Jf6 16 Tseitlin, Moscow 1976.
�c4i Instead of 14 . . . .Q.xe3, c) 9 .Q.c4 �d7 to a3 h6 1 1
possible are: 14 . . . 4Jf4 1S 4Jh4 g S 1 2 4Jg6 �h7 13 4Jd5
.Q.xf 4 exf 4 16 .Q.xc6 ( 16 �c3 .Q.d8 1 4 f4 gxf4=F Kaidanov -
f3!) 16 . .. bxc6 17 4Jc3 f3! Mik. Tseitlin, Bel tsi 1978.
and 14 . . . a6 lS .Q.c4 ( 1 S .Q.xgS d) 9 a3 0-0 to 4Jg5 �e8 I I
�xgS 16 .Q.xc6 bxc6 17 4Jxc7? h 3 .Q.d7 1 2 4Jd5 .Q.d8 1 3 .Q.c4
4Jf4) lS . . . 4Jf4 16 .Q.xf4 exf4! �h8. The game Suchting -
4 d3 29
Duz - Hoti mirski, Prague e) 9 t!Jc4 .Q.xf3! and the
1908 continued 14 .Q.d2 h6 1S correspondence game Prajn
c[)f3 c[)e7 16 c[)xe7 .Q.xe7 17 falk - Konstantinopolsky
!:tae 1 c[)hS 18 !l1h2 c[)f 4 19 (197S/78) conti n ued to gxf3
.Q.xf4 r!xf4 with the better t!Jd 7 11 c[)dS a6 12 -'lxc6 bxc6
position for Black. In Pi n 13 c[)xe7 (or 13 c[)b4 cS 14
kas - M al lee, Lublin 197S, c[)dS c[)xdS 1 S t!Jxd5 c6, and
Black preferred 9 . . . c[)d7 to Black begins the counter
c[)dS 0-0 1 1 .Q.c4 !l1h8 12 attack) 13 . . . !l1xe7 14 .Q.gS
c[)xe7 t!Jxe7 13 c[)gS c[)d4 1 4 �hf8 15 !l1h1 t!Jh3 16 t!Je2 ( 16
!:t e l h6 1S t!Jg3 c[)f6 1 6 h3 .Q.d7 t!Jc3 !l1d7 17 !:tfd1 t!Jh5) 16 . . .
17 c[)f3 c[)hS 18 t!Jg6 ( 1 8 c[)h4 h 6 , with active Black play .
t!Jf6) 1 8 . . . c[)xf3+ 19 gxf3 Preferable to 1 0 gxf3 is
t!Jh4 20 .Q.xh6 !:txf3 with a 10 .a_xc6+ bxc6 11 t!Jxc6+
winning position for Black . t!Jd7! 12 t!Jxd7+ (certainly
In answer to 9 a3, Black not 12 t!Jxa8+? !l1f7 and
can also conti n ue in simi lar White loses the queen) 12
fashion to the main line, . . . !l1 xd7 13 gxf3 . Here, how
i .e . 9 . . . .Q.xf3 10 t!Jxf3 0-0 ever, after 13 . . . c[)h5, Black
with the fo ll owing exam has su fficient compensa
ples: tion for the pawn, e.g. 14
di) 11 t!Jd3 !l1h8 12 -'le3 �dt ( 1 4 c[)e2 �hf8) 14 . . .
c[)hS 13 c[)dS (Kostro - Fran �hf8 15 �d3 �f6! Instead of
zen , Stary Smokovec 1972) 15 . . . �f6 ! , 15 . . . �f7 is in
and now 13 . . . c[)f4! 14 .a_xf4 accurate as can be seen
exf4 tS t!Jc3 f3+ from the correspondence
dii) 11 .Q.c4+ !l1h8 12 t!Jd3 game Mik. Tseitlin - Ban
c[)hS 13 c[)e2 c[)f4 14 .Q.xf4 falvi (1985/89) which con
exf4 1S f3 .Q.f6= Zatulovs ti nued 16 c[)e2 !:taf8 17 !l1g2
kaya - _Gaprindashvili, Pet !:tf6 18 c[)g3 g6 19 !:tb3 c£jf4+
ukov Tribunalski 1979. 20 .Q.xf4 !:txf4 21 �dt h5 22
diii) 11 t!Jdt (11 t!Jh31?) 11 . . . �dd3 �a8 23 c4 aS 24 c5
!l1 h 8 1 2 .Q.e3 h 6 1 3 !l1 h 1 c[) h7 and White obtained the
14 f3 .Q.gS 1S .Q.g 1 hS 16 c[)dS initiative.
c[)e7 17 .Q.e2 aS 18 c[)xe7 t!Jxe7 Returning to the position
19 a4 h 4 20 .Q.c4 c[)f6 21 !:ta3 after 9 h3:
c[)hS=F Malinichev - Mik. 9 .Q.xf3
Tseitlin, Sochi 1981. 10 t!Jxf3 o-o
30 4 d3
B2)
4 4Jf6
5 exf5 .Q.c5
The little known game
Pavlov - A lekhine, Moscow
1920 i s worthy of attention:
5 . .. .Q.e7 6 .Q.xc6 dxc6 7
4Jxe5 .Q.xfS 8 0-0 0-0 9 f 4
�d4+ to cat h 1 �ad8 1 1 c[)d2 very risky plan) 8 . . . .Q.xfS.
�dS 12 4jdf3 .Q.cS 13 �e1 The game Burba - Havuch
!:tde8 14 �g3 !:te6 1 5 .Q.d2 ek, Prague 1 961 continued 9
c[)hS 1 6 �e1 .Q.g4 with s uff 4Jc3 �e8 ( 9 . . . .Q.d4 1 0 4Jc4
icient compensation for the 4Jg4 1 1 4je3 �h4 is recomm
pawn. ended by ECO) 10 �e1 4Jg4
The origi nal 5 ... 4Je717 1 1 4Jxg4 .Q.xg 4 1 2 !:txe8
led to equal chances after 6 !:taxeS! and Black wins as a
34 4 d3
1 e4 e5
2 4Jf3 4Jc6
3 -'l,b5 f5
4 d4
Whte p l ayers choosing
this dou ble-edged contin
uation must be prepared to
sacrifice a piece.
4 fxe4
4 ... 4Jxd4 5 4Jxd 4 exd4 6
�xd4 fxe4 i s a weak al ter
native. Kupfer - Gul brand
sen , Denmark v Norway A) 5 .Q.xc6
conti nued 7 0-0! 4Jf6 8 -'l.g5 B) 5 4Jxe5
c6 9 .Q.xf6 �xf6 10 �xe4+
.Q.e7 and now with the move A)
1 1 4jc3! White cou l d get the 5 .Q.xc6 dxc6
advantage. The usual reaction to
After 4 . . exd4 5 eS!
. White's captu re, but poss
there arises a position from ible is 5 ... bxc6. The game
the Fa lkbeer Counter Schiffers - Hardi n, Samara
gambi t with colours rever 1895 saw 6 4Jxe5 4Jf6 7 0-0
sed and an extra tempo for .Q.e7 (Tchi gorin recomm
White. ended 7 . . . .Q.b7 8 4Jc3 dS 9
White now has two alter fJ exf3 1 0 �xf3 .Q.e7= ) 8
natives: 4Jc3 .Q.b7 9 -'l.gS 0-0 10 �e2
38 4 d4
Now :
a ) 1 1 tf1d4 h6! 12 .Q.e3 �e7
13 0-0-0 .Q.eS 1 4 �cS �xeS
1S .Q.xcS 4Jd7 16 .Q.d4 0-0-0-
Belousov - Krikunov, 1977.
b) 11 �e2 �e7 12 0-0-0
0-0-0 13 h3 �heB 14 �e3
7 cxbS .Q.cS 1S }';txdB+ nxdB 16 �f 4
If 7... �aS good is B 0-0! .Q.g6- Belousov - Hermlin,
4 d4 43
1977. An alternative to 1 3 h3 deserves serious research .
i s 1 3 f3! ? Koifman - Krik Returning t o the main con
unov, 1977 continued 13 ... tinuation after the Black
!:the8! , as the follow-up 1 4 capture 7 . . . cxb5:
fxe4 .Q.g6! 1 5 !:thet �e5! 8 4jxe4 dS
yields sufficient compen 9 exd6 c[)f6
sation for a pawn, and in Worthy of attention i s 9
the event of 14 �het h6 15 ... .Q.fS 10 �d5 ( 10 �e2 ljf;jlf7 )
.Q.xf6 �xf6 16 ci)xe4 .Q.xe4 17 10 ... �d7 1 1 o-o. I n Gudens
fxe4 �g5+ 18 ljf;jlbt .Q.xh2 the - Schneider, Berlin 1902,
chances are equal. B lack's response was stan
Of i nterest i s the recent dard: 11 . . . ci)f6?, and after
development 7 ... �e71? 8 12 ci)xf6+ gxf6 13 !:tel+ ljf;jld8
0-0 cxb5. I f White now 14 .Q.f4 White had obtained
tries 9 ci)xe4, then 9 . . . �e6 an overw hel ming position
10 �et ljf;jld8! 1 1 �f3 ( 1 1 ci)d6 for the sacrificed piece. I n-·
ljf;jlc7) 1 1 . . . ci)h6 and Black stead 11 . . . .Q.xe4 12 �xe4+
can hold the extra piece �f7 13 �d5+ �g6 14 �e4+
without too m uch trouble. �f7 leads to a draw by rep
Golubtsov - Anuhin, 1986 etition.
saw i ns tead 9 .Q.f4 �c5 10 However, Black has one
ci)xe4 �c6 11 �et b6, and further i nteresting poss
after 12 �f3 .Q.e7 13 ci)d6+ ibil i ty, i.e. 1 1 . . . ci)e7!? 12
.Q.xd6 14 exd6+ ljf;jlf8 15 �e4 �e5 .Q.xe4. If now 1 3 !:let
ci)f6 16 �aet .Q.b7 17 .Q.h6 then 13 . . . . 0-0-0; if 1 3 dxe7
�xd6 Black had repu lsed �xe7 1 4 �xe7+ .Q.xe7 15 !:let
the attack, maintaining his o-o-o 16 h3 �hf8!-+ and
extra piece. Preferable to finally 13 �xe4 �xd6 14 .Q.f4
12 �f3 i s 12 �h5+! ljf;jld8 13 ( 1 4 �xb7 �c6) 1 4 . . . �c6 15
!:tadt! (not 1 3 �f7 ci)h6 1 4 �e5 �d8 and Black has
.Q.xh6 gxh6 1 5 nadt .Q.e7 1 6 e6 sufficient defensive resou
�f8 17 �xh 7 �xe6 when rces.
there i s no effective con
tinuation of the attack) 13 see following diagram
. . . g6 14 �h3 h6!? 15 e6 �h7
16 �g4! and Black's situa Here the fol lowing
tion i s critical . three alternatives deserve
This w h o le variation consideration:
44 4 d4
If instead 10 tbe2, 10 . . .
'3;f7 i s a good reply, e.g. 1 1
.Q.g5 tba5+ 1 2 .Q.d2 b4 1 3 0-0
ci:)xe4 14 �xe4 .Q.xd6 15 a3
tbf5 16 tbh4 bxa3 0 : 1 Ross
mann - Mohring, GDR 1982.
B1 13 ... ci:)f61
10 o-o ci:)xe 4 This, the s uggestion of
According to Keres , 10 . .. Kurt Bardeleben ensures
'l/f7 11 .Q.g5 .Q.f5 deserves Black the advantage in al l
attention . However, doubt variations. Others are l ess
ful is 10 ... .Q.fS?I i n view of i mpressive, e.g.
11 ci:)xf6+ �xf6 12 !ie1+ '3;f7 a) 13 ... tbd6 14 tbxh7+ .Qg7
(after 12 . . . '3;d8 13 .Q.f4 �c8 15 .Q.h6 tbfB (15 ... tbf6 16
14 tbd5 h6 15 !iad1 .Q.d7 16 llfe1 ci:)g5 and now Whi te
.Q.e5 tbg6 17 tbxb7 .Q.c6 18 gest the advantage with 17
tbc7+! Whi te wins) 13 tbd5+ �e7+! '3;xe7 18 .Q.xg5 tbxg5 19
'3;g6 14 .Q.f4! �dB 15 �ad1 tbxg7+) 16 �ad1 ci:)f6 ( noth
!id7 16 lle3. The game Pinter ing else is satisfactory
- Sze l l , H ungary 1971 con either, e.g. 16 . . . .Qg 4 17 f3;.
tinued 16 ... h6 17 lld4! '3;h7 16 ... .Q.f5 17 g4!; 16 . . . .Q.e6 17
4 d4 4S
�fet) 17 t/!lxg7+ t/!lxg7 1 B
.Q.xg7 �xg7 1 9 �dB ! b6 20
�fd1 �f7 21 f3 +- Karlsson -
Jansson, Uppsala 1971.
b) 13 ... t/!lf61? 14 t/!lxh7+
.a,g7 1 S .Q.h6 and White has
reasonable c hances.
14 .Q.g5
14 .Q.h6 .Q.e6 IS t/!lxfB+
�xfB 16 .Q.xfB �xfB 17 �ad1
�dB and White loses a
pawn . 1 1 .Q.f4 is weaker, e.g. 1 1
14 . . . .Q.e6 0-0 and now 1 2 0-0-0 ( 12
Gipslis recom mends 14 ... t/!leS �eB! 13 0-0-0 .Q.fB 14
,O.f5 IS �adl .Q.g7. c£)xf6+ gxf6+ Honos - Hor
15 �ad1 vath, Hu ngary 1976) 12 . . .
After 15 .Q.xf6 t/!lxf6 16 c£)xe4 1 3 t/!lxe4 �xf4! 1 4
t/!lxh7+ .a,g7 and 1 7 . . . �hB, t/!lxe7 ( 1 4 dxe7 �xd1+ 1S
White loses the queen. �xd1 �xe4) 14 . . . .Q.d7 I S f3
1S .Q.g7 �cB 16 �hel �fc4 17 c3 b4
16 t/!lxdB �xdB 1B �e4 �xe4 19 fxe4 bxc3
17 �fe1 20 t/!lxdB+ �xdB 21 bxc3
Mal l ee - Parma , Mannheim �f7-+ Buiakovich - Mik. Ts
197S. Now the simplest for eitlin, Moscow 1 989) w hen
Black w as Black has two ways to play:
17 .. . .Q.fBI a) 11... .Q.f5 12 0-0-0 ( 12
18 .Q.f4 c£)d5 c£)g3? .Q.xc2 13 t/!ld2 .Q.xd6! 1 4
With a w i n ning position t/!Jxc2 .Q.b4+ + ) 12 . . . .Q.xe4 13
for B lack ( B . Parma) �hel t/!lxd6 (13 ... 0-0 1 4
dxe7 t/!lxe7 1S .Q.xf6 t/!lxf6 = )
B2 14 t/!lxd6 .Q.xd6 1S r;txd6 0-0
10 t/!ld4 16 .Q.xf6 .Q.xg2 and a draw
fol l owed q uick ly in Hal if
see follo wing diagram man - Glek, Leni ngrad 19B5.
b) 11 ... h6 12 .Q.h4 .Q.f5
10 . . . c£)xe4 (Gipsl is offers 12 . . . gS 13
A l so seen here is 10 ... .Q.g3 .Q.f5 1 4 c£)c3 �f7 15
.Q.e7 11 .Q.gS! (the al ternative 0-0-0 .Q.fB as a double-
46 4 d4
edged continuation) 13
0-0-0 < Diaz - Rodriguez,
Havana 1 982) 13 . . . g5! 1 4
�he1 �f7 1 5 4:Jxg5+! (acc
ording to Rodriguez, after
15 4:Jg3 .a_xd6! 16 4:)xf5 .a_f4+
17 �b1 �xd4 18 �xd4 �ae8
White cannot avoid mater
ial l osses) 15 . .. hxgS 16
�xe7+ �g6 ( not 16 . . . �xe??
17 dxe7 gxh 4 1 8 �e5 ± ) 17
.a_xgS �xgS 18 �e3+ with an 15 �xd6 �xd6
attack s u fficient for eq ual 16 .a_xd6 �e8+
ity . 17 �f1 .a_rs
11 �xe4+ �f7 Gonzales - Montalvo, Cuba
12 .a_f4 1978. Despite the paw n deficit,
12 �dS+ .a_e6 (if 12 . . . �g6 the endgame is favourable for
13 g4 is unpleasant) 13 Black .
�xb7+ �g8 ( 13 . . . �g6 1 4 h 4
h S ! 15 .a_g5 �aS+ 16 .a_d2 �dB B3
17 .a_gs= > 1 4 .a_f4 �b8 15 �e4 10 .a_gs
�d7 16 0-0= Z uidema - van This modern conti nuation
Sch u ur, Siegen 1970. is the strongest.
12 ... �e8 10 ... �aS+
13 .a_es .a_xd6
Be lousov - Meshkov, 1978
saw 13 . . . �c6 1 4 �f4+ �g8
15 0-0 (better 15 0-0-0!)
and after 15 . . . hS 16 �ad1
�h6 17 �gS .a_d7 Black had a
comfortable extra piece.
14 �dS+
14 �f3+ �e6! 15 0-0-0 Unimpressive is 10 ... .a_fS
.a_xeS 16 �he1 �fB=F 11 .a_xf6 gxf6 12 �hS+ .a_g6 13
14 . . . �e6 �xb5+ �f7 14 �xb7+ +- as
4 d4 47
mentioned by Bardeleben in d7+ �e7 1S '/!he2+ keeps the
1904 and seen i n the game attack going) 14 0-0-0 nc8
Robatsch Contendini, IS �het �xc3 16 �xe6! .Q.h6+
Leipzig 1960. 17 '/!hxh6! �xc2+ 18 rtfjlxc2
11 cf)c31 '/!ha4+ 19 �d2 �b4+ 20 �e2 +-
This move breathes new 12 .Q.xf6 gxf6
life i nto the variation. 13 cf)dS
Weaker is 11 .Q.d2 b4 12 �e2 Not 13 0-0 bxc3 1 4 net+
(12 cf)xf6+ gxf6 13 0-0, rtfjld8 and Black is defend-
Gri mmens htein - Bardele in g.
ben, Berl in 1904 and now 13 b3+
with 13 . . . .Q.d7 ! 14 �e1+ rtfjlf7
1S a3 .Q.c6 16 .Q.xb4 �gS
Black wou l d get the advan
tage) 12 . . . �eS 13 cf)xf6+
gxf6 14 �xeS+ fxeS IS .a.xb4
�g8 16 0-0-0 Wttle better
is 16 �d1 �g 4! 17 .Q.a3 �e4+
18 rtfjlf1 .Q.d7 -+ Barry - Mar
s hal l , Cambridge Springs
1904) 16 . . . .Q.h6+ 17 .Q.d2
.Q.xd2+ 18 !!xd2 !!xg2 19 �e1
.Q.e6 20 f4 !!xd2 21 �xd2 e4! 13 . . .Q.e6 1 4 '/!hhS+ (14
.
6 o-o
6 �c6 is a mistake, e.g.
6 ... dxc6 7 4:)xeS (7 4:)a4
�xf2+ 8 �xf2 e4) 7 . . . �xf2+
8 �xf2 �d4+ 9 �f3 �xfS 10
�e1 0-0-+
6 4:)xe5 4:)d4 (6 . . . 0-0 7
In this critical position 4:)f3! dS (7 . . . �e8+ 8 �e2) 8
Black has sati sfactory play. d4 �b6 9 0-0 �xfS 10 h3± ,
11 �5 Euwe) 7 0-0 0-0 leads to
Probably better is 11 0-0 the mai n conti nuation.
4:)xe4 1 2 4:)xe4 �e8 13 f3 6 d3!? 0-0 7 4:)e4 �e7 8
�xe4 1 4 fxe4 �d4+ w hich is 4:)g3 4:)d4 9 4:)xd4 exd4 t o
approxi mately eq u a l . 0-0 c6 11 �a4 dS 12 �f4 �d6
11 4:)xe41 13 �d2 �c7 14 �xd6 �xd6 15
12 4:)xe4 �xe4! �b3 �h8 16 !lae1 �d7 17 �e2
13 �xd8 �xg2 4:)g4 18 �gS 4:)h6 19 �e7 4:)f7
14 �g1 �b4++ 20 �h4 4:)h6 21 �fe1 4:)xfS
22 4:)xfS �xfS 23 �g3 1-0
B2) (as after 23 . . . �xg3 24
5 �c5 hxg3, Black is i n a tangle
This was first u sed i n the on the back rank and must
game Bardeleben - Duz lose a piece) was v an
Hotimirsky, Prague 1908, Riemsdijk - Klip Dieren
and was then forgotten Open 1989. Black's 7 ... �e7
about for nearly fifty looks rather passive. 7 . . .
years! �b6 maintai ning the s trong
4 f)c3 f)f6 and 4 . . . Others 57
821
8 .Q.a4
This bishop retreat is a
loss of time and a llows
Black to develop a danger
ous initiative.
8 dS
1 e4 eS knight.
2 �f3 �c6 White has n u merous pos
3 ,O,b5 f5 sible responses, from which
4 �c3 �d4 we shal l discuss the fol
lowing in detai l:
A) 5 exfS
B) 5 �e5
C) 5 ,O,c4
D) 5 (}-0
E) 5 ,O,a4
10 o-o c£)f6
11 d3 a6
12 c£)c3 �4
5 c6
The best response. If 5 ...
d6 then 6 exfS! gives White
Here Black has eq ual excel lent chances. For ex
play thanks to the poten ample 6 . . . c£)f6 ( 6 . . . .Q.xfS 7
tial acti vity of the bishop c£)xd4 exd4 8 �f3! -'lg6 9
pair. �xb7 dxc3 10 �c6+ �e7 1 1
13 f3! 0-0 �c8 12 ZXe t+ �d8 1 3 .Q.e6
13 t;Ye3 exd3 14 �xd3 c£)e7 1 4 �f3 �b8 IS dxc3
0-0-0 IS -'lgS �d7 t6 l:!fe t cS wi th a decisive attack for
with the initiative, Zaharian the sacrificed piece, Kir
- Nikiti n , Moscow 1963. ianov - Remeni uk, Semi
13 ... exf3 Final Ukraine Ch. 19S9) 7
14 �f2! 0-0! .Q.xfS (7 . . . c£)xfS 8 �e1
14 �xe7+ .Q.xe7 simplifies 6 ( d4) 8 c£)xd4 exd4 9 �e1+
Black's task of uti l isi ng the .Q.e7 10 c£)e2 cS 1 1 c£)f4 dS 12
bi shops. c£)xdS! c£)xdS 1 3 �f3± ( Euwe)
14 o-o-o 6 d3 (i nstead of 6 exfS!) 6
15 c£)xf3 �b8 . . . c£)f6 can lead to inter
16 �5 h6 esting play, e.g. 7 c£)xd4 (7
17 �ae1 t/;Jf7= -'lgS h6 8 c£)xeS hxgS 9 c£)f7
Black can hold his ow n �b6 10 c£)x h8 �xb2 11 0-0
here, Bobo lovich - Nikitin, �xc3 12 eS �xc2 13 exf6
Moscow 1 963. �xd1 14 flf7+ �d8 IS �axd t
gxf6 16 �del flcS 17 �h1 bS
c 18 f4 �c7 19 �e8 aS 20 -'lg6
5 .a_c4 b4 21 fxgS fxgS 22 c£)f7 a4
4 4Jc3 4Jd4 73
6 d6
Black's alternatives:
a) 6 ... cijf6 7 exf5± see
Chapter 5, B3.
b) 6 . . t!Jf6 7 d3 cijxf3+ 8
.
e
80 4 4)c3 4)d4
15 �d2 16 4Jc3
Of course not 15 �e1? Mechkarov claims this is
4Jef3+! White's best chance. The
15 ... .Q.f311 alternative is 16 fxe5 .Q.xe4!
An excel lent resource, 17 dxe4 �xfl + 18 �xfl �f8+
discovered by Mechkarov. 19 �g1 4Jf3+ 20 gxf3 �xf3
After 15 .. . 4Je2+ 16 �h2 res u l ting i n a highly u n
Black's attack is stil lborn. clear position. White is
best advised to take the
safer course of the text
conti nuation.
16 �f6
17 �f2 �g6
18 �xh4 �xg2+
19 �ht �f2+=
A very instructive var
iation which emphatica l ly
demonstrates the value of
the in itiative.
7) 4 �c3 fxe4 5 �xe4
w-ithout 5 . . . d5
A)
5 .a_e7
A) 5 ... .a_e7
B) 5 ... 4Jf6 This should not be good
for Black but White is
5 .. d5 i s considered i n
. forced to cou nter energ
the eighth a nd ninth chap etical ly .
ters. 6 d4!
82 4 tfjc3 fxe4 5 t£Jxe4 without 5 . . . d5
B2
6 �e2 7 o-o
Others are not dangerous
for Black :
a) 7 .a_xc6 bxc6 ( 7 . . . dxc6
8 dJ ,a.g4 9 hJ .a_hs to 4Jg3
.a_xf3 1 1 �xf3 0-0-0= Shish
ov - Mik. Tseitlin, Moscow
1977) 8 d4 4Jxe4 9 �xe4
exd4 to �xe7+ .a_xe7 1 1
4Jxd4 .a_f6+ Ghitescu
Letelier, Leipzig 1960.
b) 7 c4 4jd4 8 4jxf6+ gxf6
Here we analyse the con 9 4Jxd4 exd4 10 �xe7+ �xe7
sequences of Black's two 1 1 0-0 �f7 12 �a4 d6 13 .a_d1
responses: hS= Kirpichnikov - Lanka,
4 fjc3 fxe4 5 fjxe4 without 5 . . . d5 91
9 .Q.d6
For 9 . . . .!l,e7 see chapter
seven, part A.
9 . . tbd6 10 d4 e4 l1 thfS
.
B2
10 . .. e41
A
7 bxc6
An interesti ng, but very
risky choice.
8 .Q.xc6+ .Q.d7
9 t!YhS+ �e7
Thi s popu lar continua 10 t!YeS+ .Q.e6
tion is accompanied by a
temporary piece sacri fice
which leads to a sharp and
interes ting strugg le.
6 dxe4
7 4Jxc6
7 t!YhS+ g6 8 4Jxg6 h xg6 9
t!Yxh8 i s too risky as dem
onstrated by Sol ntsev -
Sel ivanovsky, Moscow 1961
which conti nued 9 . . . .Q.e6!
4 tf)c3 fxe4 5 tf)xe4 dS 6 tf)xeS 109
12
... �f6 13 0-0! �g6 ( 13 c3 {:)dS 1 9 �fe1 �g6 20 �h 1
. . . !J.e7 1 4 f3! and 13 . . . �dS Evans - Duckstein , Lugano
1 4 b3 !J.e7 1 5 !J.b2 + �f7 16 d3! 1968.
don't help Black) 14 d3 {:)f6 c) 14 ...exd3 15 cxd3 �dS.
15 �e1 hS 16 �g3+ �h7 17 This ( recommended by B.
dxe4± Smejkal - Duckstein, Nes terenko) is probably
1969. Black's best try , but White
12 !J.d7 13 d3 {:)f6 1 4 0-0
... sti l l stands we l l .
h6 15 dxe4 �e8 16 �aS !J.e6
17 !J.e3 a6 1 8 �ae1 �f7 19 B
�a4 !J.e7 20 f4+- Adamski - 7 �dS
Nilsson , Skopje 1962. This variation first ap
13 o-o !J.e7 peared in practice in 1950
14 d3 and has successfu l ly s ur
vived the test of time over
40 years .
8 c4
8 {:)xa7+ c6 9 c4 �cS! and
White loses a piece.
8 �d61
The o l d move was 8 . . .
�gS? w hich i s disastrous
fol lowing 9 d4 �xg2 10
�h5+ . The text move brea
thes life i nto the variation
White has a rook and and was first u sed by Can
two paw ns for two minor didate Master Agri nsky
pieces, and the exposed against Krogiu s in Moscow
position of the b lack king 1950.
gives him every hope for We now examine the
victory . Practical examples fol lowing possibi lities:
are:
a) 14 {:)f6 15 .Q&S! �f7
... Bt> 9 cS
16 dxe4 �c8 ( 16 . . . �xe4 17 B2) 9 �h5
�ae1 ) 17 �f4 �xc2 18 �act! B3) 9 {:)xa7+
Hennings - Lanka, Riga 1971 .
b ) 14 �f7 15 !J.e3 {:)f6 16
... Bt)
dxe4 �c8 17 �xa7 �xe4 1 8 9 cS �xeS
4 4)c3 fxe4 S 4)xe4 dS 6 tf]xeS 111
12 -'l_cS
The text contin uation
was worked out by Asatur
yan. In the event of 12 c6
. . .
� � . .. .
�i: � i � tr � i:
� ..L
� +� � � +�
r.IU ..L �
� � � �
�:Jt � i: � � After 15 �xh8 there can
�
� �
� �
� �
� fol l ow 15 . . . c[:)f6 16 b3 :gds
4l> �: �' 4l> Y.!F/. ( 16 . . . cxb5? 17 .Q.b2! or 16 . . .
Lb � � .�.� Lb �
��- ��f -� �- 9!!9
.
ence 1966. A
8 4Jf6 9 �xf4
8 . . �xg2? is a gross
. And now :
error on accou nt of 9 �h5+
8 ... -'ld7 is poor after 9 A1) 10 4Jxa7+
�xe4+ 4Je7 10 4Jxe7 -'lxb5 A2) 10 d4
( 1 0 . . . �xb5 1 1 4Jg6+ �f7 12 A3) 10 4Je5+
4Jxh8+ �g8 13 a4! �a6 1 4
�d5+ -'leo 15 �b5± > 1 1 4Jg6+ A1
�d7 12 d3! �xg6 13 �d5+ ± 10 4Jxa7+
9 f4 L. Svenonius proposed
this move as a refu tation of
9 . . . �x f4.
10 ... -'ld7
10... c6 11 4Jxc8
10 . . . �dB 11 4Jxc8 �xc8
is bad after 12 d4, e.g 12 . . .
�h4+ ( 1 2 . . . �fS 1 3 -'lc4 .Q.d6
1 4 �f1 �aS+ 1S -'ld2 �b6 16
0-0-0! ± Suchko - Myasn
ikov , Kishinev 1962) 13 g3
�h3 14 -'lf4 4Jd5 15 �xe4! ±
9 4Jxa7+ -'ld7 ! 10 -'lxd7+ Gufeld - Myasni kov , Riga
4Jxd7! gives Black excel lent 1960.
chances . Thomas - Bos h 11 .O,xd7+ �xd7
kovi ch , USA 1 975 continued 11 . . . 4Jxd7 12 4Jb5 0-0-0
1 1 �xe4+ ( 1 1 4JbS �xg2 12 13 d4 and Black has i n
�f1 0-0-0 with a very sufficient for the paw n ,
strong attack) 1 1 . . . �d8! 12 e . g . 13 . . . �f6 ( 13 . . . �f7 1 4
�xb7 ( 12 d3 �aS+) 12 ... �f1 �dS 1 5 c 4 -'l.b 4+ 1 6 �f2)
�xa 7! 13 �xa 7 �xg2 1 4 �f1 14 �c4! c6 IS �ft
-'lcS+ 12 d4
Others :
After 9 f4 Bl ack has two a) 12 4Jb5 �e8 ( 1 2 . . . c6 13
separate paths: 4Jc3 -'ld6) 13 b3 -'lb4 1 4 c3
-'lcS 1S -'la3 �eS 16 -'lxc5
A) 9 ... �xf4 �xeS 1 7 b4 �eS 18 0-0 hS 19
B) 9 . . �h4+
. 4Jd4 �c8 20 �fS �d6 21
4 .fjc3 fxe.J. 5 .fjxe4 dS 6 .fjxeS dxe4 7 .fjxc6 �gS 123
�� a � ��
10 ... �d6!
Black's positional ad 10 �fS is bad after I t
...
10 ... c6
11 d4 �h4+!
11 ... exd3? 12 .Q.xd3 �b4+
13 .a_d2 �e7 14 0-0-0 .a_e6 1S
�he 1 ±
12 g3 �h3
13 .a_c4
After 13 c£)xc6 Bl ack can
play 13 . . . a6 14 .a_a4 .a_d7 and
17 cS if IS .Q.gS then IS . . . �g4! 16
17 �d1 �cS �xg 4 c£)xg4 17 dS h6!� Per
17 �xb7 0-0 18 c£)xc6 �cS! kins - Thales, Correspond
19 .Q.xd6 �e3+ ence 1 962.
17 . . . .Q.xeS 13 ... .Q.e6
18 �e6+ �f8 13 . . . .a_d6 1 4 .a_f7+! �dB ( 1 4
19 .Q.xeS . . . �e7 1 5 .Q.b3) 1 5 .a_f4 �c7 1 6
Not 19 �d1? �xd 1 + ! 20 �d2±
�xd1 .Q.xf4� 14 .o,gs
19 . . . �e3+ M. Euwe recommends 14
With a draw by perpetual .a_xe6 �xe6 15 �c4. Never
check . theless after 15 . . . c£)d5 the
position is approximately
A3 equal.
10 c£)e5+ 14 .a,f4 .Q.d6 1 5 0-0-0
126 4 f)c3 fxe4 5 f)xe4 dS 6 f)xeS dxe4 7 f)xc6 fM'gS
B1) 11 4Jxa7+
B2) 11 4Je5+
812) 13 . c6 . .
B11
13 ... o-o-o
14 b3
14 0-0 is dangerous after
14 . . . �cS+ 15 li:tth 1 hS!t
4 4)c3 fxe4 S 4)xe4 dS 6 tf)xeS dxe4 7 4)xc6 tftgS 131
21 o-0!
Capturing with 21 .Q.xc5 is
mistaken, e.g. 21 . . . nhe8+
22 .Q.e3 (22 litlf1 .Q.h3+ 23 litJg1
ndt + 24 nxdl fhxdl + 2S .Q.ft
136 4 fJc3 fxe4 5 fJxe4 dS 6 fJxeS dxe4 7 fJxc6 '/tlgS
sacrificed material .
biv) 1 7 �e4+ fiftf8 18 .Q.xe3
.Q.xe3! ( 18 . . . .Q.g4+ 19 fiftd2
ne8 20 4Je5± ) 19 �xe3 c£jxf7
20 �c5+ (20 �e 1 �d7) 20 . . .
fiftg8 21 !!e1 .Q.g 4 + 2 2 fiftd2
�xh2+ 23 fiftc3 ttfh5 24 �eS
�g6 25 lie? �f6+! 26 fiftd2
(26 fiftb3 !!f8 27 �ae1 b5!) 26
. . . nf8 27 !!ae1 h6 28 �xb7
gS!+
and White has various 17 fS
possible responses : 17 c£jd6+ fiftd7 18 4Jxc8
bi ) 1 7 4Jd6+ fiftd7 1 8 .Q.xe3 �e8! led to Black's advan
�g4 and White loses mat tage i n Sunye Neto - Boey,
erial. Nice 1974.
bii) 17 4Jxh6 g x h6 1 8 �e4+
fiftf8 19 .Q.xe3 09 c3 bS) 19 . . .
.Q.g 4+ 2 0 fiftd2 ne8 2 1 .Q.xf2
�xe4 22 dxe4 �g2 23 !!hf1
reaches a position w hich
M arie assesses as unclear.
Indeed , after 23 . . . �xe4 24
.Q.c5+ fiftg7 25 .Q.d3 �d5 26
.Q.b4 �e8 27 .Q.c3+ fiftf8 a
situation of dynamic equal
i ty arises.
biii) 17 4Je5 can l ead to an A critical position.
i mmediate repetition by 17 17 ... 4Jd51
... 4Jg4 18 c£jf7, but Black 17... lif8 18 c£jd6+ (stro
can try 17 . . . c£jf5, e.g. 18 c3 nger is 18 .Q.xe3! �g4 19
h5 19 fiftc2 h4, 18 g4 �xf3+ 19 c£jd6+ fiftd7 20 fifte2 �xf3+ 21
c£jxf3 c£jh4 20 4Je5 4Jg2 or �xf3 .Q.xe3 22 4Jxc8 .Q.cS 23
18 �e4 c£jd6 19 �f3 4Jxc4!? .Q.e6+ fiftc7 24 d 4 .Q.xd4 25 c3
(19 . . . c£jf5) 20 dxc4 o-o 21 which M arie suggests is
.Q.xe3 .Q.xe3 22 �xe3 �g2 very good for Whi te, but
- in all cases with s uffi this assessment shou ld be
cient compensation for the chal lenged as after 25 . . .
138 4 f)c3 fxe4 5 f)xe4 dS 6 f)xeS dxe4 7 f)xc6 r!ftgS
10 . . . 4Jf6?
This i s already the dec Now Black's king is tied
isive mistake. Necessary to the defence of the
was 10 . . . �gS! 11 �xgS bishop at e7 and his
4JxgS 12 �e1 + 4Jge6! (com position is hopel ess .
mentators had only con 16 ... 4Jg8
sidered 12 . . . 4jde6? here) 13 There i s nothing better,
4Jxh8 bS 1 4 .Q.b3 'i:ttf B and e.g. 16 . . . �b6 17 �h6+ 'i:tte 8
Black w i l l get cou nterplay . 18 �gS.
11 �e5+1 .Q_e7 17 �h5 'i:ttg 7
12 4jxh8 b5 18 4jf7 �e8
13 �xd4 bxa4 19 �h6+ 4Jxh6
14 �e1 'i:ttfB 20 �xh6+ 'i:ttxf7
15 d3 Black at last captures
Now that the knigh t on the enemy knight, but finds
h8 i s i nv u l nerable, White his king exposed to a
has a material and pos mating attack.
itional advantage . 21 �xh7+ 'i:ttf8
15 ... �bB 22 !!e3 !!b6
15 . . 'i:ttg 7 would be met
. 23 !!g31 1:0
by 16 .Q.f4! d6 ( 16 . . . �f8 17
�e3! ; 16 . . . .Q.d6 17 .Q_h6+!
1 46 Illustra tive Games
Illustrative game 8
Estrin - Nelshtadt
Correspondence 1963/64
1 e4 e5
2 4Jf3 4Jc6
3 .a,b5 f5
4 4Jc3 fxe4
5 4Jxe4 dS 19 o-o-o
6 4Jxe5 dxe4 Best was 19 g4!±
7 4Jxc6 t(1g5 19 ... hxg3
8 t(1e2 4Jf6 20 hxg3 .r;txh1
9 f4 t(1h4+ 21 .r;txh1 b5
10 g3 t(1h3 Not 21 . . . �xa2 22 !ittc 2 .:.:...
11 4Jxa7+ .Q.d7 X!at.
12 .a,xd7+ t(1xd7 22 4Je5 t(1xa2
13 4JbS o-o-o 23 4Jxc6
Our earl ier analysis 23 !ittc 2 .Q.a3 24 �b 1 �h8!
shows that 13 . . . c6 is not !::,
..• �h 1
worse for Black. 23 ... Citilc71
14 b3 c6?1 A very s trong and un
A ques tionable move. expected move. 23 . . . .Q.a3
The best here is 14 . . . .Q.cS 15 would have been answered
.Q.b2 4Jg4 2iS by 24 4Ja7+! with a winning
15 4Ja31 t(1d4 position
16 c3 t(1a7 24 4Jxd8 .Q.a3
17 4Jc4 25 4Je6+ �d6
A l though Black has some 26 d3 t(1a1+
play , the two paw n deficit 27 Citild2 �xb2+
means that White is for 28 Citile3 t(1xc3
preference . 29 f5 �e5
17 ... h5 30 �f21
150 Illustra tive Games
3 !,lbS fS
4 4jc3 fxe4
5 4Jxe4 dS
6 {)xeS dxe4
7 4Jxc6 �gS
8 �e2 4Jf6
9 f4 �h4+
10 g3 �h3
11 4Je5+ c6
12 !,lc4 hSI?
The main con tin uation.
White plans to jettison as analysed earl ier, is 12 . . .
some extra material to .Q.c5. With the aggressive
regain the initiative. text, Black i ntends to
30 �xfS+ launch a fierce attack ag
31 4Jf4 gS ai nst the enemy position,
32 dxe4 �cS+ involving sacrifices if nec
After 32 . . . 4Jxe4+ 33 �f3 essary
4Jxg3 Whi te can get a 13 4Jf7?1
winning position w ith 34 The novelty already
�d2+ �c6 35 �h6+ �b7 36 begi ns to take effect. This
�xg3 gxf4+ 37 �xf4 move al lows Black to carry
33 �3 gxf4 out a bold and u nexpected
34 gxf4 �c6 rook sacri fice. Later it was
35 �d3+ �e7 discovered that now is the
36 �d4 !,ld6 correct moment to remove
37 �at !,lb8 the king from the danger
38 b4 �e6 zone, e.g. 13 d3! h4 14 !,le3!
39 eS �h3+ hxg3 1 5 0-0-0! gxh2 ( 15 . . .
t.2 : t.2 !.lg 4 16 dxe4 !,lhS 1 7 hxg3
�xh1 18 !!xh1 !,lxe2 19 !,lf7+
Illustrative game 9 �dB 20 �xh8± Slyunt
Kuntselman - Nesterenko sevsky - Wi l l em , Hol l and
Correspondence 1975/76 1980) 16 dxe4 !,le7 17 �d3±
Liberzon - Wockenfuss, Bad
1 e4 eS Lauterberg 1977.
2 4Jf3 4Jc6 13 ... h41
Illustrative Games 151
15 4Jxh8 gxh2
16 �h1 .Q.cS
17 �xh2
17 �xh2 would run into 17
. . . t!Jg3+ 18 �f2 .Q.g4 19 �f1
.Q.h3 20 t!Je2 0-0-0 with
decisive threats , e.g. 21 �f7
�g4 22 .Q.e6+ rJ;;c 7 23 .Q.xg 4
.Q.xg4 24 thfl e3! - +
14 �g1
Nesterenko's idea has
received one further prac
tical test i n Hangl i - Menne,
Oslo 1978: 1 4 �xh8 h xg3 15
�g6 ( 15 �g 1 leads to the
main vari ation) 15 . . . .Q.c5 16
d4 .Q.xd4 17 .Q.e3 .Q.g4 1 8
.Q.xd4 and now w i t h 1 8 . . .
.Q.xe2 19 .Q.xe2 �dB ! Black 17 ... .Q.f2+1 !
cou l d play for the advan A bri l l iant move re
tage gai ning material equal ity
Better than 18 .Q.xd 4 is 1 8 and preserving a dangerous
�d2 when play can con initiative.
tinue 18 . . . g2! ( 1 8 . . . .Q.xe3 19 18 t!Jxf2
�xe3 .Q.f3 20 �d2! ( 20 t!Jc5? 18 �xf2 �g4+
0-0-0 2 1 �e5 �g2! 22 .Q.e6+ 18 �d1 -'1g4+ 19 .Q.e2 .Q.xe2+
l:Id7 23 .Q.xd7+ �xd7- + } 20 20 �xe2 thf3+ 21 �f1 -'1g3+ - +
. . . .Q.xh 1 21 �xg3= ) 19 l:Ig1 18 �xh1+
.Q.xe3 20 �xg2 (the temp 19 .Q.f1 t!Jxh8
ting 20 �d6? loses imm- 20 d3 .Qg 4
ediately to 20 . . . .Q.f2+ 21 21 .Q.e2 o-o-o
�xf2 t!Jf3+) 20 ... .Q.xg 1 21 Black has succeeded in
t!Jxg1 0-0-0 22 �xa7 �xh2 regaining the sacrificed
23 t!Ja8+ �c7 24 t!JaS+ w ith material and now has a
perpetual check . winning i ni tiative.
14 ... hxg3 22 .Q.d2 �e8
152 Illustra tive Games
23 .a_xg4+ c£)xg4
24 �g1 �h4+
25 \tle2
25 \tldt c£)f2+ 26 \tid e3 27
.a_et �xf4-+
25 ... exd3+
0:1
A splendid game.
Illustrative game 10
Heemsoth
Konstantlnopolsky 15 ... \tld8
Vidmar Memorial 15 . . . \tle7 can lead to the
Correspondence fol l ow ing play: to �c4 .a_bo
Tourn81Dent 1976/78 17 �f1 �xh2! 18 �b4+ (18
.a,g 8 �xg3!; 1 8 .a_d2 �xg3!)
1 e4 e5 1 8 . . . cS 19 �d2 c£)g 4 20
2 c£)f3 c£)c6 �xh2 c£)xh2 21 �h1 c£)g 4 22
3 .a_b5 f5 c£)xg4 \tlxf7 23 ciJeS+ \tlf6
4 c£)c3 fxe4 and al though White has an
5 c£)xe4 d5 extra paw n, Black has good
6 c£)xe5 dxe4 chances for the draw .
7 c£)xc6 �g5 16 �c4 .a_b6
8 �e2 c£)f6 17 �f1
9 f4 �h4+
10 g3 �h3
11 c£)e5+ c6
12 .a_c4 .a_c5
13 d3 c£)g4
14 �xe4 c£)f2
15 .a_f7+
For IS �e2 see the theo
retical section .
1 e4 eS
2 4Jf3 4Jc6
3 .Q.bS fS
4 4Jc3
4 exf5 9
4 0-0 9
4 �� 9
4 �2 �4 D
4 . . . fxe4 5 .Q.xc6 13
5 ��4 �
4 d3 fxe4 5 dxe4 4Jf6 6 0-0 .Q.c5 20
6 . . . d6 25
4 . . . 4jf6 5 0-0 31
5 exffi �
4 d4 fxe4 5 .Q.xc6 37
5 4Jxe5 others 41
5 4Jxe5 4Jxe5 6 dxe5 c6 7 4Jc3 cxb5
8 4Jxe4 d5 9 exd6 4jf6 10 0-0 44
tO �d4 45
tO .Qg5 46
4 fxe4
4 . . . .Q.c5 50
4 . . . .Q.b4 50
4 . . . 4jf6 5 �e2 4jd4 51
5 . . . .Q.c5 52
5 exf5 e4 54
5 ... .Q.c5 56
5 ... 4jd4 63
Index of Variations t55
4 . . . 4:)d4 5 exf5 68
5 4:Jxe5 70
5 �4 n
5 0-0 75
5 �4 n
5 4:Jxe4 dS
5 . . . fJ.e7 81
5 . . . 4:)f6 6 4:)xf6+ thxf6 7 0-0 85
7 the2 87
6 the2 the 7 90
6 . . . d5 93
6 4:Jxe5
6 4:Jg3 others 98
6 . . . !J.g4 7 h3 fJ.xf3 8 thxf3 4:Jf6 9 c4 101
9 0-0 102
9 4:)h5 105
6 dxe4
7 4:Jxc6 thgS
7 . . . bxc6 108
7 . . . thd5 8 c4 thd6 9 c5 110
9 thh5 112
9 4:Jxa7+ fJ.d7 tO fJ.xd7+ thxd7:
tt 4:Jb5 114
tt thh5+ 116
8 the2 4:Jf6
9 f4 thh4+
9 . . . thx f4 tO 4:Jxa7+ 122
to d4 123
to 4:Je5+ 125
10 g3 thh3
11 4:Je5+
t t 4:Jxa7+ 130
11 ... c6
12 .Q.c4 .Q.cS
D cl m
13 d3 /35
�¥1� Chess enthusiasts, MAKE A
subscribe to
WINNING MOVE
Maxwell Macmillan Chess and
receive 12 issues packed with interesting,
infonnative and entertaining articles. Whatever
your level there will be something for you in .
So MAKE YOUR WINNING MOVE and Sla't subscribing IOday. Simply send your
name and address together wilh payment to: MuweU MacmUlan Chess, London
Road, Wheatley, Ox ford, Oxon, OX9 1 YR, Engbnd.
_
SUBSCRIPTION nATES
For 12 i1111e1:
UK .t. Ewupc £21.9S
USA (Air .t. Slllfaa:) $44.9S
Canada (Air .t. Sutfaa:) $64.SO
Rat ol World (Air .t. Slllfaa:) £36.9S
Rat of World (SIIIfaa:) £22.9S
Wc iiCIOOf' chajua, paotalllnancy onion or ACCESS/VISA/AIIIEX. For ....!it urd
paymatla plcuc q"""' canl numbor utd upil)' date.