Intrlductian

Richter-Veresov System
The Chameleon Chess Repertoire
1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115

by
grandmaster
Eduard Gufeld
&
master
Oleg Stetsko

Thinkers' Press, Inc.

Davenport, Iowa
1999
'hi Ilehter-VlrlSII Cha.eleon Chess lepertoire
Copyright © 1999 by Eduard Gufeld & Oleg Stetsko

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced nor transmitted in
any form nor by any means, electronic nor mechanical, including photocopying
and recording, nor by any information storage nor retrieval system, except as
may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the
publisher. Included in these reserved rights are publishing on the Internet or in
annotated databases.

The Richter-Veresov Chameleon Chess Repertoire

ISBN: 0-938650-97-1

December 1 999

Requests for permissions and republication rights should be addressed in writing to:

Bob Long, Editor,in,Chief

Thinkers' P ress, Inc.
P.O. Box 8
Davenport, lA 52805,0008 USA
e.mail: blong@chesseo.eom
 I ntrlldultilD

Contents
Symbols .................... ........................................................................... 4
Preface ................................................................................................. 5
Introduction .............. .................. ..... .................... ............................... 6
1. d4 N£62. Nc3 d5 3. BgS
One: 3 ... c5 ................................................................................... 13
Two: 3... c54. e3 ......................................................................•..... 21
Three: 3 ..• B£5 . . . .. . . . . . .
. . ... .. .. . .. . . . ...................................................... 24
Four: 3 ... B£54. Bxf6 ...................................................................... 30
Five: 3... B£54. e3 ..........................................................................• 38
Six: 3... Nbd7 4. Nf3/4. e3 ..................................................... ........ . 41
Seven: 3... Nbd7 4. Nf3e6............................................................... 49
Eight: 3... Nbd7 4. Nf3g6 . ..... .. .
..... ................................................. 60
Nine: � ... Nbd7 4. Qd3 . ... ... . . . .. .. . ..... .. . .... . . .. . .. .... .
. . . . . ... . .... ...... ..... .. . 72
.

Ten: 3... Nbd7 4. f3c6 ..................................................................... 82

Eleven: 3... Nbd7 4. f3 e6 ................................................................ 88
Twelve: 3... Nbd7 4. f3h6 ............................................................... 91
Thirteen: 3... c64. Bxf6/4. Qd2 ....................................... ....... ....... . . 96
Fourteen: 3 . . c64. f3
. ............................................... ....... ... .... . . . . . . . 101
Fifteen: 3 ... c64. Qd3 . ... .. .. .
..... ......... . . .. . . .
.... ... .... .... . .. . . .. . . ..... . . .. .. 103 ...

Sixteen: 3 ... c64. e3 ...................................................................... 108

Seventeen: 3... g6/h6/Nc6 ............................................................ 110
Deviations
Eighteen: After 2. Nc3 .................................................................. 122
Nineteen: 2 ... c53. BgS ................................................................. 125
Twenty: 2 ... c53. BgS Qb6 ............................................................ 130
Twenty-One: 2 ... c53. dxc5 .
...................... ................................... . 136
Twenty-Two: 2 ... e63. BgS . .
.. ............. ................. ......... ... .. ... . . . .. . 144 ...

Twenty-Three: 2 ... e6 3. e4 Bb4 .

................................. .... .. .. .. ...... . . . . 152
Twenty-Four: 2 . d6 ..................................................................... 156
. .

Twenty-Five: 2 ... B£5/£5 ................................................................ 162

Games from 1998·1999 ................................................................. 170
Openings' Index .......................................................................... 176
Players' Index . . . ... . . ... .. ........ ..... .. . .
. .. ... ..... . . .. .............. ... .. . . .. . ... . 185
.. . .

The Authors . .
. .... ..... . . . . . .. .
.. .. ........ ... . . . . .. .. . .... . ..
. . . . . .. . . ... . . . . 189
..... ... ... ..

Colophon and Diskette Info ......................................................... 190

The Publisher's Notes . .. ... ....... . ... ..... ..... ..
.. .......... .... . .. .
.. ........ ..... . . 191
The Rlchter-Vereslv Chameleon Chess Rlpertaire

Some Keys to Symbols

;!; = white stands slightly better

+ = black stands slightly better
± = white has the upper hand
+ = black has the upper hand
= even
00 = unclear
t check
:j: = double check

Bibliography

Chess Assistant 4.0, ChessBase 7, Ultimate III

Encyclopedia of the Chess Openings D 3rd ed., SI editors, Sahovski Informator, Yugo�
slavia 1998
My Life in Chess, Eduard Gufeld, International Chess Enterprises, Seattle 1994
Queen's Pawn: Veresov System, Robert Bellin, B. T. Batsford Ltd., London 1983
Richter Veresov System, Jimmy Adams, The Chess Player, Nottingham 1978
 Intraductiln

Preface
y good friend Bob Long is a staunch advocate of the Richter�Veresov
M opening, which he employs for the psychological reason of steering (perhaps
herding is more appropriate) his opponents into unfamiliar territory on the
second move: 2. N c3 . This denies Black the chance to play the typical responses
to 1 . d4, that is, the Queen's Gambit, the King's Indian, or the Griinfeld. For
his psychological motives and his numerous games with the Richter�Veresov,
I must grant Mr. Long a Doctorate in Psychology.
Aside from the psychological advantages of playing this opening, UDr:' Long
demonstrates that the Richter allows White the option of central or kingside
play. The following game illustrates this feature quite nicely, and it shows how
the accumulation of small advantages results in a strong attack.
Long-Sholl, Moline, IL 1 992: 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 Bf5 [3 . . . Nbd7 is more
popular these days] 4. f3 [Supporting central play with an eventual e4, or kingside
play with g4.] c6 5 . g4! ? [An interesting and aggressive plan.] Bg6 6. h4 h6 7.
Bf4 e6 8 . e3 Bd6 9. Nh3 Qc7 10. Bd3 e5 [If 10 ... Bxd3 1 1 . Qxd3 , White will
castle long and utilize his kingside advantage. Therefore, Black. tries for counterplay
in the center.] 1 1 . dxe5 Bxe5 12. Bxg6 fxg6 1 3 . Qd3 Bxc3 t [If 13 . . . Kf7, then
14. Bxd6 Qxd6 1 5 . Nf4.] 14. Qxc3 Qf7 1 5 . O�O�O [Or 1 5 . g5 hxg5 1 6 . Nxg5 Qe7 .]
Nbd7 1 6 . Qb4! ! ' A grandmaster move which prevents castling on both wings
and exploits Black's weakened dark squares, for if 1 6 . . . O�O�O, then 1 7 . Qa5
and White is winning. White now has a winning advantage [What more could
one want from an opening?] which he eventually converted on move 46.

GM Eduard Gufeld
1 999

The publisher's comments about the production of this work are available at
the back of the book.
Ihl Rlchter-VereSII Ch._eIIID Chlss Rlpertlire

Introduction
This opening branch of the Queen's Pawn opening: 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 .
Bg5

is called the Richter�Veresov System. This opening was worked out by the German
and White Russian masters Kurt Richter (1900� 1 969) and Gavril Veresov (1 912�
1 979) , who actively practiced this opening from the late 30s and early 50s re�
spectively.
For the sake of obj ectivity it must be noted that it was the Russian player
Stepan Levitsky who first used this opening in the early 20s, trying to imple�
ment one of the main ideas of l. e2�e4 through the setup 3 . . . Bf5 4. f3 .
Through Veresov's efforts in the 50�60s, White's attention turned on the
realization of a breakthrough in the center after the preliminary exchange on
f6 . Nowadays Black prefers to defend the Knight on f6, avoiding the doubling
of pawns, on which the experts of this opening worked out interesting plans
for White based on the operations in the center only after finishing his de�
velopment.
An interest in the Richter�Veresov System is worthwhile . In closed open�
in gs, against a background of thoroughly wo rked out classic metho ds of ob�
 Iltrlductill
taining the center by c2�c4, the system Richter and Veresov were great pub�
of play which is based on attacking the licists for their system of play, dem�
center by the e�pawn, comparatively onstrating it in brilliant, even elegant
speaking, is not researched enough and style. Here are some miniatures of their
allows wide scope for carrying out a creative work.
complicated struggle stuffed with fresh
ideas. Not in vain was it used by chess�
Game 1
players with a very sharp and original
Richter-Whitaker
style of play. In the 50�60s this open�
Wiesbaden 1 928
ing was seen in the games of Spassky
and Tal. In the 70�SOs it was actively
used by Alburt, Miles, and Hort. In 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Bfs 4. f3
the 90s this system was regularly prac� cS .
ticed by Morozevich and Mestrovic. Until now this continuation had not
Another attractive factor of the Rich� been explored much. Usually 4 . . . c6
ter�Veresov System is its ability to trans� or 4 . . . Nbd7 was played.
pose to different openings depending S . e4
on the reply to 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 . On White can sacrifice the pawn. 5. dxc5
2 ... cS, by playing 3. d5 White can trans� d4 6. e4 des erves attention, when
pose to the Benoni Defense; 3. Nf3 cxd4 White's chances are better.
4. Nxd4 and the replies 4 . . . e6, 4 ... d6, S.••. dxe4
4 . . . g6, and even 4 . . . e5 leads to the Si� The alternative is 5 ... cxd4 6. Bxf6
dlian Defense; the continuation 3. Bg5 dxc3 7. Bxc3 dxe4 S. QxdS KxdS 9. O�O�O
gives the game an original character. Kc7t 10. Bc4 and, despite the exchange
On 2 . . . e6, 3 . e4 and 3 . Bg5 can lead of Queens, White has sufficient com�
to the French Defense. After 2 . . . d6, pensation for the pawn.
by playing 3. e4 White can allow a trans� 6. ds exf3
position to the Pirc Defense (3 . . . g6) 7 . Nxf3 Nbd7
or in reply to 3 ... Nbd7, to lead the game 8. Bbs h6
into Philidor's Defense (4. Nf3 e5 5 . 9 . Bh4 gS
Bc4) . All these possibilities are exam� Black should have gotten rid of the
ined in the second part of this book. bind: 9 . . . a6 10. Bxd7t Qxd7 1 1 . O�O
Kurt Richter and Gavril Veresov (with the threat Nf3�e5) Bg4 12. Qd2,
practically belonged to the same gen� though White's initiative compensates
eration, and their period turned out fully for the sacrificed pawn.
their highest achievements, including 1 0. Bg3 Bg7
the foundations of the N c3 + Bg5 sys� 1 1 . 0 .. 0 Bh7
tern. However, the Second world War Black moves his Bishop away from
split their output. In the creative sense its unprotected position, but better was
they had many things in common. Both 1 1 . . . Bg6, defending the f7 �pawn.
Tbe Ilchter-VerlSII ChlllelelD Chess Repertlire
1 2 . d6 !
Hammering in the IIpawn nail" near
the King, since 12 . . . exd6 fails due to
1 3 . Qxd6 and the threat 14. Rael .
12. ... eS

Black got rid of the bind, but it is

too late.
1 8 . Rxf7 ! Kxf7
1 9 . Qhs t
1 9 . Bc4t will lead t o mate in 7 !
Black tries to buy his way out with 19. ..• Rg6
a pawn in order to castle kingside, If 19 . . . Ke6 and 20. Bxc6 bxc6 2 l .
which does not work due to the loss Qg4 t Kxe5 2 2 . Re 1 t Kxd6 the mating
of the Exchange (12 . . . O-O? 1 3 . dxe7 attack follows: 23. Qg3t Kd5 24. Qd3#.
Qxe7 14. Bd6) . However, 22 . . . Kf6 stops White. Hence
1 3 . h4 ! Ne4 the IIgoodness" of 1 9. Bc4t.
Black acknowledges the dangerous 2 0 . Rfl t Nf6
bind his King is in. If I3 ... e4, then 14. The defense 20 ... Qf6 just postponed
hxg5 exf3 15. gxf6 Bxf6 16. Qxf3 threat­ the agony: 21. Bc4t Kg7 22. Bxf6t Nxf6
ens to take on d7, and after 16 . . . Bd4t 23 . Rxf6! Rxf6 24. hxg5 hxg5 25. Qxg5t
17. Khl , then 17 . . . O-O? is bad because Rg6 26. Qe7t Kh8 27. d7 Bxd7 28. Qxd7
of 1 8 . Qg4t, winning a piece. Let us and White will win.
note that with the Bishop on g6, cas­ 2 1 . B d3 1 0. ..

tling would have been possible.

1 4 . Nxe4 Bxe4
Game 2
I S . NxeS BxeS
Richter-Baratz
1 6 . BxeS Rg8
Now on 16 ... 0-0, 17. Bxd7 Qxd7 18.
Prague 1 931
hxg5 could follow with the threat of
Qdl -h5. 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS BfS 4. f3
1 7 . Qg4 c6 5 . e3 .
17. Qe2 is also very hard on Black. Nowadays 5 . Qdl Nbd7 6. 0-0-0 is
1 7 . ... Bc6 played, intending e2 -e4, but Richter
preferred to erect a Stonewall.
5. . . . Nbd7
 Intraductill
6 . f4 !

1 4 . e4 !
Richter used the Stonewall not as The opponent's Stonewall is shat�
an end in itself, but as a means to tered! Note that the d4�pawn, which
strengthen control over the e5 square, is practically untouchable, also stays
while at the same time it is difficult under attack.
for Black to prevent e3�e4, which opens 14. ... dxe4
the center. Th,is same method of play If 14 ... Qxd4, then 15. Bf2 Qf6 1 6 .
was exploited by Veresov. This method exd5 Nc S 17. dxc6 follows.
is still seen today. I S . Nxe4 ! fxe4
6. ... QaS 15 . . . Qxd4 is no good: 1 6 . Bf2 fxe4
More natural is 6 . . . e6. Black decides 17. Qh5 g6 1B. Bxd4 gxh5 19. BxhB and
to counter the Stonewall . Black drops a Rook.
7 . Bd3 Ne4 1 6 . Qxe4 Qd6
Black should have hurried to castle 1 7 . QfS !
after 7 . . . e6 and B Be7.
• • • The e6�pawn is doomed.
8. Bxe4 Bxe4 17. ... Qxd4t
9. Nf3 f6 Black can't stop himself from tak�
1 0. Bh4 e6 ing the d4�pawn and loses quickly.
11. 0 .. 0 Bxf3 Brinckmann, the author of the book
It's better to keep the Bishop with about Richter, offers an alternative: 17 . . .
1 1 . . . Bg6=. e5 1 B . dxe5 Qg6 19. Qh3 Bc5t (or 1 9 . . .
12. Qxf3 fs Be7 2 0. Bxe7 Kxe7 21. f5 with the threat
1 3 . Rael Qb4 ? ! f5�f6) 2 0. Khl Nb6 2 1 . Qc3 (if 2 1 . f5,
This attempt to tie the pawn to b2 then possible is 2 1 . . . Qh6 22 . f6 O�O)
is just ignored by White. 13 . . . Bb4 was Na4 22 . Qb3 ! b5 23. f5 Qf7 24. e6 Qc7
necessary. 25. f6 gxf6 26. Bxf6 RfB 27. e7 Rf7 2B.
BeS Qxe7 29. Rxf7 Qxf7 3 0. Bd6t and
White wins.
1 8 . Kh1 Be7
1 9 . Qxe6 0 0 .. 0
..
The Ilchter-Veres., ChlllellBn Chess Ilpertlire
2 0 . Bxe7 RheS 1 3. Nge2 threatens 14. Rdl which is
2 1 . Qh3 Qxb2 decisive.
2 2 . BxdS 1 .. 0 . 1 0 . g4 !
The pawn barricades blow up. 1£ 10.
Nh3, then possible is 1 0 ... RgB.
Game 3
1 0. .•. a6
Veresov-Smoljaninov
10 . . . Bxc5 ? fails on account of 1 1 .
USSR 1 963
gxf5 exf5 12. Nxe4! [Ed. : 12. Rd5 is good
too!] Qxb5 1 3. Nf6t Ke7 14. Nd5t KfB
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 ds 3 . BgS cS 4. Bxf6. 1 5 . Qh6± {Bellin} .
This exchange was introduced by 1 1 . Bxe6t bxe6
Veresov should Black keep his Knight 1 2 . gxfS exfS
Uunprotected:' White damages Black's 1 3 . Nge2 QxeS
pawn structure and pushes for e2�e4. After 13 ... Bxc5 14. Nd4 the pawns
on f5 and c6 are hanging, and there is
S. e4 dxe4 the threat of a fork on b3.
6 . dxeS 1 4 . Nd4 RbS
White agrees to exchange Queens Of course 14 ... Bg7 is no good in view
since it is difficult to prove the correct� of 1 5 . Nxe4, but 14 . . . Bd7 was prefer�
ness of the pawn sacrifice after 6. d5 able, outlining the King's escape to the
f5 7. Qh5 Bg7 B. Nge2 {or B. Bb5t KfB queenside. The threat of the Rook sac�
9. Nh3 Qd6 10. Be2 Qh6} Qb6 9. O�O� dfice on b2 is just ignored by White.
o Qh6t. I S . Rhe l ! Bd7
6. . . . QaS
6 . . . f5 7. Qh5, another main line,
also leads to a complex game.
7 . QhS
The plan to castle long after 7. Qd5
or 7. Qd4 is also tenable.
7. . . . e6
Lately there has been a tendency to
castle after 7 . . . Bg7 .
S . 0 .. 0 .. 0 fs
If B . • . Bxc5 ? ! , then 9. Bb5t. It turns out that on 15 ... Rxb2? there
9 . Bbs t follows 16. Nxe4! . Now the same stroke
The simple 9 . Nh3100ks like a strong is decisive.
alternative . If 9 . h6, then 10. Ng5 .
. . 1 6 . Nxe4 ! fxe4
9. ... Ne6 1 7 . Rxe4 Kds
On 9 . Bd? 10. Bxd?t Nxd? 1 l .
. .
IS. Qxf7 KcS
Rxd?! Kxd? 12. Qxf?t Be? and no w Saving hims elf from the Knight
 Iltrldlltiln
threats Nd4�e6 or Nd4xc6 (after 1 8 . . . to play 1 3. Be7 Re8 14. Bd6 with the
Qe 7 ) , but n o t from the frontal attack threat of Nc3�bs.
by White's major pieces . 1 1 . Qd2 cxd4
1 9. Nbs Bh6t 1 2 . exd4 NxeS
20. Kbl RxbS 1 3 . dxeS Ng4
21. Rxd7 QhS Black is optimisitic, both 14. f4 Qb6t
22. Rc7t Kb8 15. Khl Nf2t 16. Kgl Ne4t and 14. Bf4
23. Rb7 t ! 1 .. 0. d4 1 5 . Ne4 QdS 1 6 . c4 dxc3 17. Nxc3
The final nuance in the decoy theme. Qd4 fully suits him, but he really un�
derestimated White's reply. Surprise!
14. Qf4 ! NxeS
Game 4
I S . RxeS f6
Veresov-Buniatian
USSR 1 965

1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 dS 3 . BgS Nbd7 4.

Nf3 g6 S . e3 ,
cS .
A flank assault supported by the
g7�Bishop, Black's best counterplay.
8 . Ne5
White strives to close the black di�
agonal to the enemy Bishop. Another
widespread continuation is 8. ReI .
8. ..• e6
Too passive. Black usually plays 8...
cxd4 9. exd4 NxeS 10. dxeS Ng4.
9 . ReI
Also good is 9. Bbs h6 10. Bh4 c�d4
1 1 . exd4 Qb6 12. a4 a6 1 3. as !.
9. ... QaS
1 0 . a3
White prevents the encroachment
of QaS� b4.
10. ... a6
Now after 10 . . . cxd4 1 1 . exd4 NxeS
12. dxeS, Black has to retreat with 12...
Nd7, after which White has an alter�
native in the sacrificing of a pawn with
1 3. f4 Qb6 14. Khl t Qxb2 1 5. Nbs or
1 6. NxdS !
A terrific shot! Now it is Black who
suffers the material losses.
16. . . . exdS
It turns out that after 16 ... fxeS l 7 .
Ne7t Kh8 18. Qh4! the threat of Bd3xg6
is decisive, and in the event of 16 ... fxgS
17. Ne7t Kh8 18. Qxf8t Bxf8 19. Nxg6t
and 20. RxaS, Black loses the Exchange.
1 7 . Rxds !
Another surprise: 17 ... QxdS 18. Bc4
and from now on the black Queen has
no comfortable life.
1 7. Qb6
1 8. Qc4 Be6
1 9. B e3 !
The final blow. The Queen cannot
escape, and if I 9 ... Qc6, the prosaic 20.
The Ilchter-Vereslv Challeleon Chess lepertlire
Qxc6 bxc6 21 . Rd6 leads to the loss of
a second pawn. } o. ..

Bilsk vs. Gavril Veresov (left to right) in Hungary 1958. Interestingly

enough , Veresov played quite a few games in 1958, yet almost none are
in any of the major software databases for that year, Veresov Opening
or not. At this point, databases still are no match for a fine book on
opening theory or biographies.

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS
3 c5
•••
A principle continuation. White is
delayed from a pawn attack in the cen,
ter, and Black tries to seize the initia,
tive with this counterstroke. This con'
tinuation frequently leads to sharp play
with a forced character.
White has choices:
• 4. Bn6 or to continue development
with
• 4. e3 (see Chapter Two, page 16) .
• Doubtful is 4.dxc5 ? ! d4 5. Bxf6 gxf6
[Also possible is 5 . . . exf6 6. Ne4 Bf5
7. Ng3 Bc5 ! B. Nxfs Qa5t 9. c3 dxc3+ ,
(Yudovich) ] 6. Ne4:
a) 6 . . . QdS 7 . Qd3 BfS B. Nc3 QeS
9. QbSt Bd7 10. Qxb7 dxc3 1 1 . b4 Bh6
1. d4 flfB 2. fle3 d5 I. 815 e5
12. e3 0,0 1 3. QxaB Bxe3 14. Nf3 Bdlt
1 5 . Kdl Qf4 16. Qd5 [Ed. Note: 1 6.
Qxa7! ?J Bc6 17. Qd3 Be4 l B. Qe2 RdB
19. Nel Nc6 20. a3 Bxel t 21. Kxel Nd4
22 . Rdl Nxc2t 2 3. Qxc2 Rxdl t 0,1 ,
Zakharov-Yudovich, USSR 1 962.
b) 6 ... Nc6 7. Nf3 Qd5 B. Nedl Qxc5
9. a3 Be6 10. g3 RdB 1 1 . Bgl Bh6 12.
0,0 0,0 + H. Kuyf-Van Mil, Netherlands
1 987.
c) 6 . . . Bf5 7. Ng3 [passive is 7. Ndl
e5 ! 8. Nb3 Nc6 9. a3 as 10. Nf3 a4 1 1 .
Nbdl Qa5 12. Nh4 Be6 13. e4 dxe3 14.
fxe3 Qc5 =+= Van der Werf-Topakian, Am,
hem 1 988J Bg6 8. h4 h5 9. c3 dxc3 10.
bxc3 e5 + .
•4. e4 Nxe4 5 . Nxe4 dxe4 6 . dxc5
Nd7 7. Be3 e6 B. Qd2 Qc7 9. b4 Be7
10. Bb5 0,0 1 1 . Ne2 Nf6 12. Nc3 RdB
leads to complicated play where Black's
chances are not worse, Wade-Pa1liser,
England 1 998.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c5
4. Bxf6
The lichter-Vereslv ChlllelelD Chess lepertlire
White compromises Black's pawn
structure.
4. ... gxf6
It is to be noted that 4 ... exf6 is hardly
good for Black:
a) S. e4 dxe4 6. dxcS QaS 7. QdS QxcS
S. Qxe4t Qe7 9. BbSt Bd7 10. Bxd7t
Nd7 1 1 . 0-0-0 and chances were approxi­
mately equal in Grecnkin-Stoliar, USSR
1 954.
b) S. e3 Nc6 6. Nge2 Be6 7. Qd2 Qd7
S . g3 cxd4 9. exd4 ReS 10. Bg2 Bb4 1 1 .
0-0 0-0 12. a3 BaS I3. Rfel RfeS I4. Nf4
Bxc3 I S . Qxc3 NeS 1 6 . Qb4 Nc4 17.
Re2 ± Veresov-Heuer, USSR 1 955.
White has a choice between play in
the center (I. 5. e4) and the plan of
castHng long after (11. 5. e3 ) .
I.
1 . d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. B gS c5
4. Bxf6 gxf6
5.e4
By opening up the center White
strives to activate his major pieces.
5. ... dxe4
6. dxc5
White agrees to exchange Queens
because sacrificing a pawn would hardly
be correct 6 . ds fS 7. QhS Bg7 S. Bbst
[if S. Nge2 Qb6 9. 0-0-0 Qh6t 10. Qxh6
Bxh6t 1 1 . Kbl Nd7 12. Ng3 Nf6 White
has no compensation for the sacrificed
pawn. Hebden-Milov, Isle of Man 1 995J
Kfs 9. Nh3 Qd6 10. Be2 Qh6 1 1 . NgS
QxhS I2. Bxhs Nd7 13. Rdl [13. Nxf7?!
Bxc3t 14. bxc3 Nf6 1 S . NxhS NxhS + ]
Bxc3t 14. bxc3 Nf6 1S. Be2 RgS 16. Nh3
Rxgl and Black is already two pawns
up, Mestrovic-Sennek, Croatia 1 996.
After exchanging the central pawns
in this situation there is no reason for
Black to exchange Queens since his
main continuations are (LA. 6 ... Qa5)
and (LB. 6 ... £5) .
lA.
1 . d4 N£6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS cS
4. Bxf6 gxf6 S. e4 dxe4 6. dxcS
6 ... Qa5
 1. d4 Nf. 2. Ne3 d5 I. Ig5 e5
for the tactical improvement 7. QhS . ]
9. BbSt Nc6 10. g4! [The energetic 10.
Nh3? ! can be met by 10 ... Rg8 1 1 . Qxh7
(An improvement over 1 1 . Nf4 in
Remizov-Goldin, Moscow 1 992.) Rg6 12.
Nf4±.] a6 1 1 . Bxc6t bxc6 12. gxfS exfS
1 3. Nge2 QxcS 14. Nd4 Rb8 1 5 . Rhel
Bd7 16. Nxe4 with a strong attack for
White in Veresov-Smoljaninov, USSR 1 963
(GAME 3).
Black attacks the cS-pawn. B. BbSi
7. QhS Or 8. Bc4 0-0 9. 0-0-0 Nc6 10. BdS
The plan of castling long also occurs [10. Bb3 NeS ! 1 1 . Qh4 QxcS 12. Nxe4
in 7. QdS [7. Qd4 would be met by 7 . . . Qc7 13. Ne2 Ng6 14. Qg3 Qxg3 1S. hxg3
Nc6 8 . Bbs QxbS 9 . Nxbs Nxd4 1 0 . BfS + Vrusman-Pytel, Wroc1aw 19721 NeS
Nxd4 Bd7 with a good endgame for 1 1 . f4 Ng6 12. fS Nf4 1 3. Qh4 NxdS
Black] a6 [7 ... N c6 involves the unpleas­ 14. RxdS e6 1 S . Rdl exfS l6. Nge2 Be6
ant pin 8. BbS Bd7 9. 0-0-0 Rd8 10. Qxe4 1 7 . N f4 Rfd8 with mutual chances in
fS l 1 . Qe3 e6 12. Nge2 a6 1 3. Bxc6 Bxc6 Hoi-Bang, Copenhagen 1 991.
14. Rxd8t Qxd8 1 5 . Rdl QaS 1 6 . QeS B. ..• Nc6
and White gets a spatial advantage] 8. Previously there occurred 8 . . . Bd7
0-0-0 N c6 9. Qxe4 [If 9. Bc4, Black sim­ 9. Qg4 Rg8 10. Bxd7t Nxd7 1 1 . Nge2
plifies the position: 9 . . . Be6 10. Qxe4 QxcS 12. Qxe4 0-0-0 1 3. 0-0-0 fs 14.
fS 1 1 . Qe2 Bxc4 12. Qxc4 e6 1 3. Na4 QdS e6 [Ed. Note: 14 ... Qxfi ro 1 1 S . QxcS
.

QbS 14. Qb3 Nd4 1 5 . QxbS axbS 16. NxcS 1/2-1/2 Schneider-Odendahl, Ger­
N c3 BxcS 1 7 . a3 Ke7 and Black gets a many 1 993.
favorable endgame in Goldin-Khalif­ 9. Nge2 0.. 0
man, USSR 1 984.1 fS l0. Qe3 Be6 1 1 . a3 10. a3 £S
Bg7 12. Nge2 [12. Nf3 f4! 13. Qcll QxcS + 11. 0.. 0 Qc7!
Palatnik-Kupreichik, USSR 1 9741 NeS I3. This is more energetic than 11 . . . a6
Nd4 Ng4 14. Qe2 Bxd4 1 S . Rxd4 QxcS 1 2 . b4 Qc7 1 3. Nds QeS 14. Bc4 Be6=,
16. Qcll Rc8 17. f4 Nf6 18. Be2 0-0 with Hoi-Brinck-Claussen, Denmark 1 985.
an even game, Goldin-Aseev, Podolsk 1990. 12. b4
7. ... Bg7 Protecting the pawn should have
Black hurries to castle his King. been postponed. Better was 1 2 . NdS
After 7 . . . fS , possible is 8. 0-0-0 [8. QeS, and now 1 3. b4.
BbSt Nc6 9. a3 Bg7 10. Nge2 0-0 leads 12. ... Be6
to the b elow lines of Hoi-Brinck­ 13. Radl RadB
Claussen, 19851 e6 [AfterS .. Qxc5 !? there
. The active Bishop pair along with
follows 9 . Nxe4, and this is the idea the harmonious layout of the black
The lichter-Veres., Ch._elell Chess lepertaire
pieces was more than sufficient for the
sacrificed pawn in Mestrovie-Gligorie,
Hastings 1 971 (GAME S) .
Kc7 and after NbB-a6 Black wins his
pawn back with good play.
7. ... Bg7
Or 7 . . . e6 B . g4 Bxc5 9. gxf5 Qd4 10.

lB. Qh4 e3 11. Qxd4 Bxd4 12. fxe3 Bxc3t

1 3. bxc3 exf5 14. Ne2 RgB I 5 . Nf4 Nc6
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . BgS cS 16. 0-0-0 Be6 with equal chances, Mestro­
4. Bxf6 gxf6 S. e4 dxe4 6. dxcs vie-L. Popov, Banja Luha 1 974.
6 £S
•••
8. Bc4
9. bxc3
Bxc3t
e6
10. Qh6! Nd7
11. BbS QaS
12. Qf6 RfS
More energetic is 12 . . . RgB ! ?
13. Bxd7t Bxd7
14. Rhl Qxa2
IS. Rxb7 Qalt
16. Kd2 e3t!
Opening up the position, Black
makes White reckon with his threats.
Black postpones the attack on the
c5-pawn, preferring to protect the pawn
on e4 first.
7. QhS
At this point useful would be 7. g4! ?
Bg7 [ 7 . . . Qa5 ? B . Qd4 ! RgB 9 . b4 ! ±
Florian] B . QxdBt KxdB 9 . o-o-ot Bd7
10. Nge2 fxg4 1 1 . Nxe4 Nc6 12. h3 h5
1 3. hxg4 hxg4 14. RxhB BxhB 1 5 . Nf4
KeB 1 6 . Bc4 Ne5 with equal chances
in Bellin-Dunean, Gausda1 1 996. 17. fxe3 RdS
If the Queens are exchanged, 7 . IS. Rh4 Bc6t
QxdBt ? ! KxdB B. O-O-ot Bd7 9. Bc4 e6 19. Rd4 Rxd4
the endgame which arises is favorable 20. Qxd4 Bxg2
for Black: 21. Nf3 Qxhl
a) 10. g4? ! fxg4 1 1 . Nxe4 Ke7 ! 12. 22. c6 Ke7
f3 Bc6 + , Floreen-Alhurt, New York 1 993. 23. Qb4t Kf6
b) 10. b4 a5 1 1 . a3 b6 [1 1 . .. axb4 12. 24. Qh4t
axb4 Ra1 t 13. Kb2 Rxd1 14. Nxdl b6=] and White forced the draw, after 24 •..

12. Na4 bxc5 1 3 . Nxc5 Bxc5 14. bxc5 Kg7 2S. Qgst Khs 26. Qf6t, with per-

petual check in Mestrovic-Banas, Kesz­
thely 1 981.
11.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS cS
4. Bxf6gxi6
S.e3
White calmly carries on with his de­
velopment.
S. ... cxd4
It is useful to remove the pawn. De­
veloping with S . . . BfS 6. dxcS e6 7. b4
as 8. a3 axb4 9. axb4 Rxa1 10. Qxa1
Bxc2 1 1 . Qa8 loses the pawn; if S . . . e6,
it is easier for White to retain the ini­
tiative: 6. NB QaS 7. BbSt Bd7 8. Bxd7t
Nxd7 9. 0-0 a6 10. e4 � Rajna-Csom,
Hungarian (ch) 1 974.
6. exd4 Nc6
Interesting is 6 . . . hS ! ? 7. Qf3 [7. Be2
will be followed by 7 . . . h4 8. Bf3 e6 9.
Nge2 Bh6 10. 0-0 Nc6 1 1 . ReI Bd7 12.
Nc1 Kf8 13. N3e2 Qb6 and Black stands
better thanks to the Bishop pair, and
White can ' t oppose with his dark­
squared one in Maksimovic-Tatai, Vrn­
jacka Banja 1 979; 7. h4 deserves atten-
tion, aiming at the hs -pawn after Ngl-
1. d4 NIB 2. Me3 dli I. Hili IIi
e2-g3 and Bfl -e2 . ] e6 8. 0-0-0 Nc6 9.
Nge2 fs 10. Kb1 Bg7 11. h4 Qb6 12.
Qe3 Kf8 1 3. Rh3 Bf6 14. Qf4 Ne7 I S .
g3 Bd7=, West-Ahn, Elista. 01. 1 998.
7. QhS Be6!?
Black intends to castle long, simul­
taneously defending the pawn on f7.
In case of the obvious 7 . . . e6 8. 0-0-0
Bg7 White retains the initiative with
the energetic 9. g4 Bd7 10. f4! [threat­
ening f4-fS] Qc7 1 1 . Nge2 Ne7 12. Rg1 !
and, parrying possible counterplay by
means of f6-fS, White stood better in
Bujakin-Shamkovich, USSR 1 963. In this
instance it should be noted that the
suggestion 10. Bg2 Qb6 1 1 . Nge2 works
only if 1 1 . . . 0-0 12. Rd3 with a strong
attack for White. By playing 1 1 . .. O-O-O!
12. Qxf7 Rdg8 in connection with the
threat of h7 -hS and Bg7 -h6 Black gets
enough counterplay. Ma.ksimovic-Am.
Rodriguez, Belgrade 1 980 (GAME 6) .
The pawn sac, 7 . . . Rg8, is hardly cor­
rect. Now 8. Qxh7 Rg6 9. 0-0-0 BfS 10.
Bd3 Qd7 [Ed. Note: 10 ... Bxd3 is worth
looking at.] 1 1 . Nge2 0-0-0 here, and in
the game Shrentzel-Hodgson, Tel Aviv
1 988, instead of the hasty 12. Qxf7? !
Nb4! 1 3. Ng3 Nxd3 14. cxd3 Rg7 I S .
QhS Bg4 and Black wins the Exchange
as compensation for the pawn, White
should have played 12. Ng3, exchanging
the active Bishop.
8. 0.. 0..0 Qd7
9. h3 Bfs
10. g4 Bg6
11. Qxd5 Bh6t
12. Kb1
The Richter-Vereslv Chllleleln Chess Repertlire
Now the Bishop pair more than com­
pensates for the sacrificed pawn.
13. RadI Rad8
14. Ba4?!
Losing a tempo even to protect a
pawn in this dynamic position is an
unjustified extravagance. White should
have used his Queen for defense 14.
Qg5, indirectly parrying 14 ... Qe5 [15.
Bxc6 bxc6 1 6 . Qxe7] .
12. Bxc2t! 14. as
13. Kxc2 Nb4t 15. Nb5 Qe5
14. Kb3 Nxd5 16. c3 axb4
15. Bb5 0 ..0 .. 0 17. axb4
16. Bxd7 Rxd7
17. Nxd5 Rxd5
with an approximately equal endgame
in Kravtsov-Labu.nsky, Vladivostok 1 994.

Game 5
Mestrovie-Gligorie
Hastings 1 971

1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Ne3 d5 3 . Bg5 e5 4. Bxf6 17. ... Be4

gxf6 5 . e4 dxe4 6. dxe5 Qa5 7. Qh5 . Tying White's Ithands," Black pre­
An alternative plan is to castle long pares a long maneuver for his Queen
after 7. Qd5 . to . . . al .
7 . ... Bg7 18. Rxd8 Rxd8
8. Bb5t Ne6 19. Nbd4 Nxd4
Possible is 8 . . . Bd7, not being afraid 20. cxd4 Qf6
of 9. Qg4 in view of 9 . . . Rg8. 21. ReI Qa6!
9. Nge2 0..0 22. Bd1 Qa2
10. a3 f5 Now White is helpless.
11. 0..0 Qc7 23. h3 BdJ
12. b4 24. Ng3 Qdl
The defense of the pawn in such a 25. Nxf5
dynamic position should have been de­ With a naive hope for 25 ... Qc1 ? 26.
layed until 12. Nd5 Qe5 1 3 . c4. Qg4 to draw by 26 ... Kf8.
12. ... Be6 25. . . . e3!
 1. d4 NIB 2. NI:3 dli I. Igli IIi
26. Nxe7t KhS Hced pawn. (Am. Rodriguez)
27. Qh4 exf2t 13. ... KbS
2S. Kh2 Rxd4 14. f4 fS!
29. Qg3 fl=Nt Not only parrying the threat of f4-£5,
0 .. 1 but mainly activating the important
Bishop, and to that end White has noth­
ing with which to oppose it.
Game 6
IS. gxfS Nxd4
Maksimovic-Am. Rodriguez
16. Nxd4 Bxd4
Belgrade 1 980
17. fxe6 Bxe6
IS. Bf3
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3 . BgS cS 4. Bxf6
gxf6 S . e3 Nc6.
Deserving of attention was 5 ... cxd4
6. exd4 h5 ! ? 7 . Be2 h4.
6. QhS cxd4
7. exd4, e6
An alternative is 7 . . . Be6 with the
idea of QdB-d7 and 0-0-0.
S. 0..0-0 Bg7
9. g4 Bd7
10. Bgl Of course not lB. Bxd5 ? in view of
More energetic is 10. f4 with the lB . . . Bg4.
threat of f4-f5 . IS. ... ReS!
10. ... Qb6 Black is not satisfied with winning
11. Nge2 0-0 ..0! back the pawn on f4 and so he launches
Black comes under a very stro ng at­ an attack.
tack if he plays 1 1 . . . 0-0 [then 12. Rd3] . 19. Rhel
By sacrificing a pawn, Black entices the I n case of 1 9 . Rd3 Black heighte ns
enemy Queen to occupy a very unstable the threat after 1 9 . . . RhfB. Now the
positio n. positio n reveals itself very forcefully.
12. Qxf7 RdgS 19. ... Rxc3 !
13. QhS 20. Rxd4! Qxd4
White blocks Black's counterplay af­ 21. bxc3 Qxf4t
ter h7-h5 and Bg7-h6. O n suggesting 22. Kb2 QfS
itself 1 3. Na4 Qc7 14. Nc5 there would By losing a pawn the position trans­
follow 14... Ne5 ! 15. dxe5 Qxc5 16. Nd4! forms into practically an equal end­
[16. exf6 Qxf2 is bad in view of Bg7- game. If Black endeavors to fight for
h6.] QfB 17. QxfBt RxfB 18. exf6 Rxf6 the initiative by means of22. .. Bf7 [with
Black has compensation for the sacri- the idea of 23 . Qh3 d4] , he would be
'.e lichter-Vlrls., Ch._lllal Chess lepert.ire
met by 23. Qe5t. difference .
23. Qxf5 Bxf5 28. c4 b6
24. Bxd5 Rd8 29. Kc3 Kc7
25. Re5 Bg6 30. Kd4 Kd6
26. h4 Re8 31. Be4 h6
27. Rxe8t Bxe8 32. a3 as
The extra doubled pawn makes no 1/2 .. 1/2

Thinkers' Press Has Published a Few Opening Books

In 25 years, the list has been small but productive. We take this work
very seriously. Opening books are difficult to do, evaluate, and care for
because of the massive amounts of information to be managed.

Alapin French by Tim Sawyer (1995*)

Alekhine's DeJenseAs White, Four PawnsAttack by GM Christiansen, Raingruber &
Joseph (1988*)
Anti-Indian, The by ICCF-IM Allan Savage (1984)
Blackmar-Diemer gambit keybook by CM Tim Sawyer (1992)
Bronstein-Ljubojevic Variation, Alekhine's Defense by Long & Tucker (1989)
Budapest DeJense, The by Staker, Glasscoe & Stayart (1980)
Center-Counter Uprising by SM Dunne & D. Taylor (1990)
Center Gambit, The and Supplement by John Hurt (1976, 1980)
Exploring the Chess Openings by Hugh Myers (1978)
French Defense, New and Forgotten Ideas by IM Nikolay Minev (1988, 1998*)
Great Evans Gambit Debate, The by GM Michael Rohde (1996*)
Hedgehog, The by ICCF-IM Jon Edwards (1998)
King's GambitAs White By GM Christiansen, Raingruber, and Maser (1984, 1986,
1995*)
Latvian Gambit, The by WCCF Champion Kon Grivainis (1985)
LDL Sicilian by SM Alex Dunne (1987*)
Meran and Rubinstein's Anti-Meran, The by NM Tom Tucker (1982)
Nimzovich DeJense by Hugh Myers (1973, 1974)
Reversed King Pawns, Mengarini's Opening by Hugh Myers (1977)
Romanismn Variation of the 4g3 Nimzo-Indian by NM Barry Spiro (1981)
Richter-Veresov, The Chameleon Chess Repertoire by GM Gufeld & NM Stetsko (1999*)
Sicilian Wing Gambit, The by John Hurt (1983)
Toxic Precision edited by Bob Long (1991 *)

* means still available


1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c5
4.e3
For 4. Bxf6, see Chapter 1 .
White defends the center and con­
tinues with his development. However,
with this kind of subdued play he can
hardly count on getting the advantage.
4. ... Nc6
There could also occur: 4 . . . cxd4 5 .
exd4 Bg4:
a) 6 . Be2 Bxe2 7. Qxe2 e6 S. Bxf6
gxf6 9 . 0-0-0 Nc6 10. QhS [10. f4 fS =]
Qc7 1 1 . Nge2 0-0-0 12. Kbl KbS I3. Rcl
with even chances inArhhipov-Czerna,
Kecshemet 1 985.
b) 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Bxf6 [7. Qd2 Bxf3
8. gxf3 e6 9. N dl (On 9 . 0-0-0 there is
9 . . . B e7 or 9 . . . Bb4. ) Be7 (Black's po-
1. d4 NIB 2. Nel dli 3. alii I:Ii 4. 13
sition is good. In the future the plan
is to exchange dark-squared Bishops
and occupy the f4-square.) 10. N e3 0-0
1 1 . Bxf6 Bxf6 12. c3 BgS I 3 . 0-0-0 Rbs
14. Kb l bS 1 5 . Qd3 NaS , and Black
started his attack on the queenside first
in Kholmov-Petrushin, Tallinn 1983.J gxf6
s. Be2 with equal chances.
c) 6. Qcll e6 7. f3 BfS S. 0-0-0 Nc6
9. Nge2 Be7 10. Ng3 Bg6 1 1 . h4 hS and
the game is even.
5. Nf3
5. BbS ! ? Kortchnoi-Lipnitshy, 1 952.
5. ... e6
There is the more energetic 5 . . . Bg4,
causing the crisis on the d4-square, be­
cause 6. Be2 is followed by the unpleas­
ant 6 . . . Ne4. The exchange of Bishops
on gS -6 . Bxf6 gxf6 causes no serious
problems for Black. For example in
Zilberman-Rotman, Rishon Lezion 1 9 93,
the game continued 7. Be2 e6 S. 0-0
fs 9. ReI cxd4 10. Nxd4 Bxe2 1 1 . Qxe2
Bg7 12. Radl 0-0 13. QhS Nxd4 14. exd4
Qc7 1S. Re3 RacS with better prospects
for Black.
More thematic [after 5 . . . Bg4] is 6 .
dxc5 e 6 7. h 3 [ O r 7. Be2 Bxc5 8. 0-0
0-0 9 . Nd4 Bxd4 1 0. exd4 Bf5=, Shem-
The Richter-Veresa, Cha.elell Chess Reperlaire
bris-van der Wiel, Groningen 1 977, but e6.
the novelty 7. Na4! ? deserves atten� 6. dxc5 e6
tion.] Bxf3 B. Qxf3 QaS 9. Bxf6 gxf6 7. h3 Bxf3
10. BbS [After 10. Qxf6 RgB the activ� S. Qxf3 QaS
ity of the Black pieces is compensation 9. Bxf6 gxf6
for the sacrificed pawn.] fS 1 1 . O�O BxcS 10. Bb5
12. a3 Bd6 13. b4 Qb6 14. Qe2 ! and, After 10. Qxf6 RgB the sacrificed
in view of the threat Nc3�a4 and c2� pawn is compensated for by the activity
c4, White had some initiative in Hort- of the Black pieces.
van der Wiel, Amsterdam 1 982 (GAME 7) . 10. ... £5
6. Bb5 11. 0..0 Bxc5
After 6 . Be2 Be7 7 . O�O cxd4 B . exd4 12. a3 Bd6
O�O Black has an easy game. For ex� 13. b4 Qb6
ample: 9. a3 h6 10. Bf4 a6 1 1 . Bd3 bs 14. Qe2! RcS
12. b4 Nd7 1 3 . Ne2 gS 14. Be3 fs 1 5 . Simpler is 1 4 . . . a6, parrying the
g3 Rf7 1 6 . Nel Rg7 1 7 . f4 NfB IB. Nf3 threat, as occurs in the game. Now
Bd7 19. Khl BeB 20. c3 BhS +, Agagon- White gets a small initiative.
Barsenilla, Manila 1 991 . 15. Na4 Qc7
6. Bd7 16. c4 a6
7. 0 ..0 cxd4 17. Bxc6t Qxc6
S. exd4 Be7
9. ReI 0 ..0
10. a3 ReS
11. Bd3 NeS
12. Bxe7 Nxe7
13. Ne5 Nd6
14. Re3 g6
15. g4 Nc6
16. Rh3 £5!
with active counterplay for Black in
Kogan-Oll, London 1 994. IS. c5 Qxa4
Black intends to attack the isolated
d6-pawn, whereas after lB . . . Be5 1 9 .
Game 7
N b 6 Bxal 2 0 . NxcB B e 5 2 0 . N b 6 Bc7
Hort-van der Wiel
2 1 . Qb2 O�O 22. Qd4 he is not able to
Amsterdam 1 982
painlessly take the trapped Knight.
19. cxd6 Qd7
1 . d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. B g5 c5 4. e3 20. Qb2 0..0
Nc6 5. Nf3 Bg4. 21. Qf6 Qxd6
Another main continuation is 5 . . . After 2 1 . . . QdB 22. Qe5 it is impos�
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 1:5 4. I1
sible to get the d6�pawn. Now the draw 23. Qf6t Kg8
is forced. 24. <2g5t
22. <2g5t Jdn8 1/2.. 1/2

A Who's who of
some who've played
the white side of the
Richter..Veresov

Alburt
Balashov
Bellin
Bronstein
Goldin
Gufeld
Hector
Hodgson
Hoi
Hort
Kapengut
Kortchnoi
Krogius
Kupreichik
Larsen, B
Maksimovic
Mestrovic
Mikenas
Miles
Morozevich
Nezhmetdinov
Plaskett
Richter
Rossetto
Shirazi
Smyslov
Spassky
Tal
Vaganian
Veresov
The lichter-Veres., Chl_ellll Chlss lepertaire
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS
3 BfS
•••
This was the main continuation for
Black during the early years of this open�
ing. Black moves forward with his devel�
opment, impeding White's plans con�
nected with the e�pawn push.
Here the main continuations for
White are: 4. f3, 4. Bxi6 (Chapter 4) ,
and 4. e3 (Chapter 5 ) .
4. f3
The Russian chessplayer S tepan
Levitsky used to play this move in the
early 1 920s, and he used to co mbine
this plan with castHng long, no t stop�
ping for the pawn sacrifice on e4.
The main continuations for Black
are (I. 4 . . . c6) and (11. 4 ... Nbd7) .
Sometimes (Ill. 4 ... Bg6) will be seen.
Bellin uses more than a page on 4 . . .
c S , where White's chances are better,
and White can sacrifice the pawn with
5 . e4 (except for 5 . dxc5 d4 6. e4) :
a) 5 . . . dxe4 6 . d5 exf3 7. Nxf3 Nbd7
B. Bb5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Bg7 1 1 . O�O
Bh7 12. d6 e5 1 3 . h4! with a danger�
ous initiative for White in Richter-Whit­
aher, Wiesbaden 1928 (GAME 1).
b) 5 . . . cxd4 6. Bxf6 dxc3 7. Bxc3 dxe4
B. QxdBt KxdB 9 . O�o�ot Kc7 10. Bc4
e6 1 1 . fxe4 Bxe4 12. Ne2 Nc6 1 3 . Rhfl
Bg6 14. Nf4 Bf5 1 5 . h3 h6 with com�
pensation in kind for the piece pres­
sure in Krogius-Aronin, USSR 1952.
I.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Bfs 4 . f3
4... c6

This reply, due to the number of years
which have elapsed since its time, and
its solidity, can be related to classical
continuations. Black backs up his pawn
on d5, not allowing the temporary sac�
rifice of his Knight to take place, which
will be exami�ed a little while later.
However, the delay of piece develop�
ment enables White to carry on with
his programmed e2 �e4.
5. Qd2
Richter preferred to build a Stone�
wall: 5. e3 Nbd7 6. f4 Qa5 [More natural
is 6 ... e6, Black deddes to counter with
a Stonewall.] 7. Bd3 Ne4 8. Bxe4 Bxe4
9. Nf3 f6 10. Bh4 e6 1 1 . O�O Bxf3 [It is
better to keep the Bishop with 1 1 . . .
Bg6=.] 12. Qxf3 f5 13. Rael Qb4?! [13 .. .
Bb4! ? ] 14. e4! dxe4 1 5 . Nxe4! fxe4 1 6 .
Qxe4 Qd6 17. Qf5 and White devel�
oped a strong attack in Richter-Baratz,
Prague 1931 (GAME 2) .
If 5. e4, then Black can equalize with
5 . . . dxe4 6. Bxf6 exf6 7. fxe4 Bg6 8. Nf3
Bd6= .
See Preface for 5 . g4! ? as in Long­
Sho11, USA 1992: 5 . g4! ?Bg6 6. h4 h6 7 .
B£4 e6 8. e 3 Bd6 9. Nh3 ! Qc7 10. Bd3
e5 1 1 . dxe5 Bxe5 12. Bxg6 fxg6 13. Qd3
Bxc3t [1£ 13 . . . Kf7, then 14. Bxd6 Qxd6
1. d4 Rfl 2. Re3 d5 3. 1.5 If5
1 5 . Nf4.] 14. Qxc3 Qf7 1 5 . O�O�O [Or
1 5 . g5 hxg5 1 6 . Nxg5 Qe7.] Nbd7 1 6 .
Qb4! ! ± .
5. .. . Nbd7
6. 0 .. 0 .. 0
Finishing the development of the
queenside, White prepares e2�e4. The
pawn sac introduced by Levitsky 6. e4? !
dxe4 7. Qf4 Qa5 8. O�O�O is premature:
a) 8 ... exf3 9. d5 g6 [9 . . . e6 ! ?] 10. dxc6
bxc6 1 1 . Nxf3 Bg7 12. Nd4 O�O 13. Nxc6
Qc5 14. Qc4 e6 with even chances,
Levitsky-Rubinstein, Vilna 1912.
b) 8 ... e6! 9. Bxf6 [Or 9. Bc4 Nb6 10.
Bb3 Nfd5 1 1 . Nxd5 Nxd5 12. Qh4 e3
with an obvious advantage for Black
in Braun-Herndl, Austria 1989.] Nxf6
10. fxe4 Bg6 1 1 . Bd3 Bb4 12. Nge2 O�O�O
[Stronger is 12 ... e5 ! + Bogoljubov.] 13.
e5 Nd5 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 1 5 . Bxg6 fxg6
16. a3 Qxg2 with an advantage for Black
in Spielmann-Bogoljubov, Moscow 1925.
If 6. Qf4 Bg6 7 . e4 Qb6 8. O�O�O e6
is played, the white Queen occupies
an unfavorable position, and after its
retreat Black gets an easy game: 9. Qe3
h6 10. Bh4 Be7 1 1 . e5 Ng4! 12. fxg4
Bxh4 13. Nf3 Be7 14. Bd3 Bxd3 15. cxd3
cS 1 6 . dxc5 Qxc5 17. d4 Qa5 transfer�
ring the Knight to the weakened c4�
square in Kulaots-Veingold, Parnu 1996.
The modest 6. e3 Qb6 7. O�O�O e6
doesn't cause any problems for Black.
6. . . . e6
This allows a transposition to the
French Defense. If other continuations
are played, then e2 �e4 is good enough:
a) 6 . . . Qa5 7. e4 ! dxe4 8. fxe4 Bg4
[The pawn on e4 is inviolable (8 . . .
Nxe4? 9 . Nxe4 Qxa2 10. Nc3 ) , and if
The lichter-Veresol Challeleon Chess lepertlire
the retreat B Bg6 9. Nf3 e6 10. eS
• • •
White gains the advantage.] 9. Be2 Bxe2
10. Ngxe2 0-0-0 1 1 . Rhfl and White
has the better chances in Demeny-Bach,
Odorheiu Secuiesc 1993.
b} 6 . . . h6 7. Bh4 Bh7 B. e4! dxe4 9.
fxe4 Nxe4 10. Nxe4 Bxe4 1 1 . Qe1 ! Bfs
12. Bc4 Nf6 13. Nf3 e6 14. dS cxdS 1 5 .
RxdS with dangerous threats in Tomson­
S. Kogan, Moscow 1959.
c} 6 . . . Bg6 7. Nh3 QaS B. e4? ! [If B.
Nf4 0-0-0 9 . Nxg6 hxg6 the move 10.
e4 is too late because of 10 ... dxe4 1 1 .
fxe4 e S ! 12. dxeS? Bb4! 1 3 . exf6 Nxf6
14. Bd3 Bxc3 and Black gains the ad­
vantage in A. Zaitsev-Krogius, USSR
1962.1 dxe4 9. fxe4 0-0-0 with a good
position for Black. For example: 10.
Bc4 or 10. Bd3 eS ! .
7 . e4
7 . e3 Qc7 B. Nge2 Bd6 9 . g4 Bg6 10.
Nf4 eS l l . dxeS NxeS 12. Be2 0-0-0 with
complicated play in Fuderer-Golombek,
Opatija 1953.
7. dxe4
8. fxe4 Bxe4
9. Re I Bb4
More accurate is 9 ... Bg6 ! ?
10. a3 Bxc3
11. Qxc3 Qb6
12. Nf3 h6
13. Bh4 Bh7
1 4 . NeS
with unpleasant piece pressure for the
sacrificed pawn in Filchev-Pelitov, Bul­
garia 1956.
11.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Bfs 4. f3
4 ••• Nbd7
This is acknowledged as the most
hopeful continuation. Black avoids dou­
bling his pawns, though it enables
White to continue with the move e2-e4
without unnecessary risk, and the
position simplifies and reduces Black's
problems.
S . NxdS
a} 5. e4 dxe4 6. fxe4 Nxe4 7. Qf3 NxgS
8. QxfS eS 9. 0-0-0 Bd6 10. h4 Ne6 1 1 .
dxeS NxeS 12. BbSt KfB 1 3 . Ne4 h6=,
Bronstein-Veresov, USSR 1959.
b} 5 . Qcll c6 [5 . . . e6 6. 0-0-0 Bb4 7.
a3 Bxc3 B. Qxc3 Ne4 9. BxdB Nxc3 10.
bxc3 RxdB 11. c4 0-0 12. e3 cS 13. g4
Bg6 14. h4 hS 15. cxdS exdS 16. gS cxd4
17. Rxd4 RcB lB. Rh2 Nb6 + . For ex-
ample: 19. e4 Gabdarakhmanov-Vavlin,
USSR 1987, dxe4 20. fxe4 RfeB 2 1 . Bd3
Rc7 22. Nh3 Rce7 + . ] ; 6. 0-0-0 leads to
variation I.
S. . . . Nxds
6. e4 h6
It is necessary to set up the position
of the Bishop. Risky is 6 ... Bxe4? 7. fxe4
Nsb6 B. Nf3 g6 9. a4 a6 10. as Nc8 1 1 .
Bc4 in view o f the threatened e5-e6
push, and White gained the advantage
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Ig5 115
in MacDonald-Rix, Hastings 1 992. [10... c6 11. O-O-O±] 11. Ne2 Qd7 12.
7. Bh4 0-0-0 0-0-0 13. c4 and White achieved
If 7. Bdl, then possible is 7... e6 B. an advantage in the center in Potterat­
exf5 Qh4t 9. g3 Qxd4=, Donev-Schumi, Riand, Genf 1 993.
ZUrich 1 993, or even 7...eS!? 9... cS 10. Kxfl Qb6 11. Qb3 cxd4
7. ... Ne3 12. Ne2 and Black is down a pawn.
The "drawbacks" of other moves 1 0 . Qc3
were shown by the co-founders of the Apparently the only move. Of course
Richter-Veresov: 10. dxcS? is bad, because 10... Qxd3 11.
a) 7... Bxe4? B. fxe4Ne3 9. Qd3 Nxfl cxd3 Ne3 12. Ke2 Nxf5 is advantageous
10. Qxfl gS 11. Bg3 c6 12. 0-0-0 QaS to Black.The continuation 10. Qb5t?!
13. Kb1 Bg7 14. Ne2 RfB 15. h4! f5 16. c6 11. Qxc5 Ne3 causes serious prob­
e5 e617. hxgS hxg5 1B. Rh7 RgB [IB... lems forWhite. If 12. Kf2 Nxf5 13. QxfS
Rf7!?] 19. dS! cxds 20. Nd4 NfB 21. Qxd4t 14. Kg3 g5 15. Qe4 gxh4t 16.
Nxe6! Nxe6 22. QxfS with a strong Kxh4 0-0-0+, Vatter-Neunhoffer, Ger­
attack in Richter-Kretschmar, Berlin 1925. man!1 1 986; or if 12. Ke2 Nxgl 13. Bg3
b) 7... N7bq B. exf5 Ne3 9. Qe2 Qxd4 e614. QeS Be71S. fxe6 0-0+, Bairamov­
10. Bfl Qxb2 [Much better is 10... Qxd3 Smagin, USSR 1 982 (GAME 8) .
11. Bxd3 Nxglt. (Bellin)] 11. QbSt 10. ... Na4
Qxb5 12. Bxbst c6 13.Bxc6t bxc6 14. 1 1 . Qb3 Nb6
Bxe3�, Veresov-Makagonov, USSR 1 938. 12. Ne2
c) 7... c6 B. exf5 Ne3 9. Qdl Nxfs If 12.0-0-0 QdS!; or 12. Bf2 Qd713.
10. Bf2 e6 11. Bd3 Qf612. Ne2 Bd613. g4 hS 14. Kxfl Qc6 Black's chances are
0-0-0 0-0-0 and it was unclear in G. Por­ preferable. (Smagin)
tisch-Varga, Zalakaros 1 994. 12. ... Qd5
8. Qd3 1 3 . RxfI Qx f5
Weaker is B. Qe2?! Nxf1 9. exfS Nb6 With even chances. (Smagin)
10. 0-0-0 [If 10. Qe4, then Black has
10... Nc4!] QdS! [After 10...Qd6, then
11. g4! (Hachian-Elkin, USSR 1 986) Nc4 Ill.
12. Qxc4 Qf4t 13. Kb1 Ndlt 14. Rxdl I .d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 BfS 4. f3
Qxdl 15. Ne2 and White has enough
compensation for the Exchange.] 11. 4 Bg6
•••

Kbl Nc4 12. Rxfl Qxd4 13. c3 Qxh4

14. g3 Qg5 15. Qxc4 Qxfst with the
advantage to Black in Hachian-Obukhov,
USSR 1 986.
8. . . . NxfI
9. exf5 Nc5 !
Weaker is 9 . . Nxh2?! 10. Rxh2 Nb6
.
The Richter-Veresov Chameleon Chess Repertoire
6. Nf4 Bd6
Weaker is 6... Be7?! 7. Qcll. The game
Manninen-Johnsen, Rilton Cup 1996, con�
tinued 7... Nc6 B. O�O�O a6? [Necessary
was B Nh5!?±.] 9. h4 Nh5 10. Bxe7
. • •

Qxe7 11. Nxh5 1�0.

7. Qd2 e6
8. h4 h6
9. Nxg6 Bg3 t
10. Kdl fxg6
Rare, but a quite radical continua� 11. Bf4
tion. Black pulls back his Bishop to pro�
tect it.
S . Nh3
At this point Richter preferred to
build a Stonewall: 5. e3 Nbd7 6. f4 e6
7. Nf3 Be7 B. Bd3 cS 9. O�O c4?! [Bet�
ter is 9... a6.] 10. Bxg6 hxg6 11. Qe2
Bb412. e4! Bxc313. exd5 Bxb2 14. Rabl
Bxd4t [After 14... Ba3, then 15. dxe6
fxe6 16. Qxe6 Qe7 17. Qxc4 with the
threat of Rbl�el , and Black has a hard 11. Nhs
position.] 15. Nxd4 Nb616. Qe5 Qxd5 1 2 . Bxg3 Nxg3
17. Bxf6 gxf6 l B. Qxf6 O�O and though 1 3 . Rh3 Nxfl
Black managed to deflect the direct 1 4 . Qd3 0 .. 0
threat , White had sufficient compen� I S . Ke l Ng3
sation for the sacrificed pawn in Riehter­ 1 6 . Rxg3 Qxh4
Weissgerber, Bad Aaehen 1933. 1 7 . Qxg6 Rf7
If 5. e4 dxe4 6. Qd2 e6 7. fxe4 Bb4 1 8 . Rdl Nd7
B. Qe3 [bad is B. Bd3 because of B... 1 9 . e3 eS
Bxe4! 9. Bxe4 Nxe4 10. BxdB Nxclll 1. and Black completely freed himself in
Bxc7 Nc4! with the advantage to Black. Lipski-Kholmov, Warsaw 1989.
(Aronin)] Ng4 9. QcllNf610. Qe3 Ng4
with an even game. In the game Spass�
Game 8
ky-Filip, Amsterdam (et) 1956, White re�
BaiI'amov-Smagin
fused the repetition of moves with 11.
USSR 1982
Qf4andafter l1... Qxd412. Nge2 Bxc3!
13. Nxc3 h6! 14. Qxg4 hxg5 15. Qxg5
N d7 gained a poor position. 1 . d4 N£6 2 . Ne3 d5 3 . Bg5 B£5 4. £3
5. ... e6 Nbd7 5. Nxd5 Nxd5 6. e4 h6 7 . Bh4
 1. d4 NfB 2 . Ncl d 5 I . 115 If5
Ne3 S. Qd3 Nxfl 9 . exf5 Nc5 ! 1 0. I S . Kf2 Nh4
Qb5 � ! ' 1 9 . Qg4
Bad is 10. dxc5? Qxd3 11. cxd3 Ne3 If 19. N e2, Black opens up the po�
12. Ke2 Nxf5 with the initiative to sition with the stroke 19... eS [20. dxe5
Black. This active push puts the Queen Qb6t).
into a vulnerable position. Correct is 19. Nf5
10. Qc3 Na4 11. Qb3 Nb612. Ne2 Qd5 20. Ne2 Qb6
13. Rxfl Qxf5= . (Smagin). 21. b4 RaeS
10. ... c6 22. Rhdl Bg5
1 1 . Qxc5 Ne3 23 . Qe4 e5 !
1 2 . Ke2 Taking advantage of the faceoff be�
White gets rid of a geometrical motif, tween the Rook and the Queen.
sort of. On 12. Bg3 Qxd4! or 12. Kf2 24. Bxe5 Bf6 !
Nxf5 13. Qxf5 Qxd4t 14. Kg3 g5 and 2 5 . Ke l
there is the hope of "restoring" the lost White had become convinced of the
Knight. However he cannot succeed impossibility of finding any peace on
because of the King's unstable position. the kingside [25. Kg1 H Bxe5, or 25.
12. Nxg2 Kgl Nh4t 26. Kh1 Nxf3], and so the
1 3 . Bg3 e6 poor King returned home. However,
1 4 . Qe5 he cannot get rid of the tiresome
Knight.
25. Nd6
26. Qg4 Nc4
2 7 . f4 Bxe5
2S. dxe5
If 28. fxe5, the Knight reminds him
of his existence 28 ... Rf1t! 29. Kxf1 Ne3.
2S. Rxe5 !
2 9 . Rd7 Rxe2t
30. Kxe2
Or 14. Qc3 exf5 15. Kf2 f4. On 30. Qxe2 decisive is 30 ... Qg1 t.
14. ... Be7 ! 30. Qe3 t
Lost illusions. Black secures the 31. Kdl Qxc3
h4�square for his Knight, because af� 32. ReI Nb2t
ter 15. Qxg7 Bf6 16. Qg4 Qxd4 the 33. Ke2 ReSt
Knight returns home in an even bet� 34. Kf2 Nd3t
ter condition. 35. Rxd3 Qxd3
1 5 . fxe6 0-0 36. Rgl Qd2t
1 6 . c3 Bf6 37. Kg3 Re3 t
1 7 . Qh5 fxe 6 0 .. 1
rhl liGhter-VerlllV Cha.elell ChllS lepertlire

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS BfS

4 gxf6
. .•

4. Bxi6
See other appropriate chapters for:
4. f3 (Chapter 3) , 4. e3 (Chapter 5 ) .

5 . e3
The main continuations for Black
are (lA. 5 e6) and (lB. 5 c6) .
• • • •••

This move was regularly played by

the White Russian Gavril Veresov.
White spoils Black's pawn structure and lA.
plans to launch an attack against the 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS BiS
enemy pawn center by means of e2� 4. Bxi6 gxf6 S. e3
e4.
Black faces a choice between (I. 4 .•.
5 e6
•••

gxf6) and (II. 4 . . exf6) .

.

I.
1. d4 Ni6 2 . Nc3 d5 3 . BgS Bis 4. Bxf6
 1. d4 RIB 2. Re3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. Bxll
In Kacheishvili-Buehl, Kona 1998 there
occurred 7. g3 N c6 S. dxc5 Bxc5 9. Bg2
Qd7 10. e4dxe411. Nxe4, with approxi�
mately equal chances.
7. ... Bg6
8. h4
If S. Bd3 Nc6 9. O�O cxd4 10. exd4
Qb611. Nce2, then 11... O�O�O as Black
played in Braga-Am. Rodriguez, Bayamo
1 984.
In a turn of events Black carries out 8. . . . h6
a plan with the shot c7�c5. 9 . h5
6 . Nge2 The energy of the continuation 9.
In this kind of pawn structure it is e4 cxd4 [On 9... dxe4? is met by the
important to refrain from an exchange strong 10.d5!±.] 10. Bb5t Nc6 doesn't
of Bishops and continue with a clamp seem to be enough in order to get the
on the kingsi �e. If 6. Bd3 Bg6 Black advantage:
continues his plan with no problems: a) 11. exd5 a6! 12. dxc6 axb5 13. cxb7
a) 7. f4 Bxd3 S. cxd3 cS 9. dxc5 Bxc5 RbS and the advantage of the two Bish�
10. d4 Bb411. Nf3 Nc6 12. O�O O�O 13. ops guaranteed Black good play in
Nh4 f5 14. Qh5 KhS 15. Rf3 RgS 16. Kupreichik-Westerinen, Dortmund 1 975
Rh3 Rg7 17. Ne2 Be7 1S. Ng3 Bxh419. (GAME 9) .
Rxh4 Qf6+ Maryruhin-Cherepkov, Minsk b) 11. Qxd4 a6 12. Bxc6+ bxc6 13.
1 981. O�O=.
b) 7. Qf3 cS S.Nge2 Nc6 9. O�O�O Bxd3 9. Bh7
10. Rxd3 f5 11. g4 fxg4 12. Qxg4 Qa5 1 0 . Bd3 cxd4
13. Kb1 O�O�O 14. Qh5?! [White should 1 1 . exd4 Bxd3
have exchanged first 14. dxc5 Bxc5 + . ] 1 2 . Qxd3 Nc6
c4, with Black's attack on the queen� 1 3 . O � O .. O
side in Hanreck-Hennigan, London 1 993. and White's chances are preferable.
6. . . . c5 (Kmic).
In Miles-Hort, Amsterdam 1982, Black
played 6... Bd6 and after 7. Nb5 Be7
S.Ng3 Bg6 9. c4 c610. Nc3 h5 11. Nge2 lB.
[White could fight for the advantage 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5
by playing 11. Bd3!?;!;.] Bd6 12. Qb3 4. Bxf6 gxf6 5. e3
Na6 13. cS Bxc5 14. Nf4 Be7 15. Bxa6
bxa616.Nxg6 fxg6 17. Qc2 arose a po� 5 ••• c6
sition with even chances.
7 . Ng3
The Richter-Veresov Chameleon Chess Repertlirl
Qxe4 O�O�O 12. O�O�O e6 13. fS Black
cannot achieve equality, and White's
chances are preferable in Bellin-K. Lie,
Gausdai 1 9 96.
7. Qxd3 e6
s. e4 Nd7
9. Nge2
An alternative is 9. Nf3 dxe4 10.
Nxe4 fS 11. Nedl Bg7 12. O�O O�O 13.
Rfel Qc7 14. Radl RadB lS. Qe3 Nb6=,
Black strengthens the center intend� Alburt-Dzindzicnasnvili, USSR 1 973.
ing to castle queenside. 9. Qc7
6. Bd3 1 0 . 0 .. 0 .. 0 0 .. 0 .. 0
An attack on the kingside is possible: 1 1 . Kb l Kbs
6. Nge2 Nd7 7. Ng3 Bg6 B. h4 hS 9. 1 2 . g4 Be7
Be2 Qb610. Rbl e611. NxhS BxhS I2. 1 3 . Qf3 RhgS
BxhS fS 13 . a3 Bd6 14. g3 Ke7 15. Bf3 with sharp play for both sides in Bel�
Qc7 16. Qd2 bS and the sacrificed pawn lin-Wemmers, Amsterdam 1 994.
is compensated by Black's activity on
the queenside in Watson-Poeksteiner,
corr. 1 987/91. 11.
6. . . . Bxd3 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS BiS
In case of the retreat 6... Bg6 Black 4. Bxi6
is not afraid of 7. Nge2 Nd7 B.e4 dxe4
9.Bxe4 e610. Qd3 QaS ll. O�O�O O�O�O=, 4 exf6
•••

Kottnauer-Waiter, Switzerland 1 966.

Unpleasant is the Stonewall plan of
7. f4! . In the game Veresov-Abakarov,
USSR 1974, Black played 7 .. . fS, but hav�
ing thwarted the threat of f4�fS, he bur�
ied the white�squared Bishop. There
followed: B.Nf3 Nd79. O�O e610. Ne2
Bg7 11. c4 dxc4 12. Bxc4 Nb6 13. Bb3
Nds l4. Qdl O�O 15. NeS RcB I6. Racl
Rc7 17. Bxds QxdS lB. RcS Qd619.Rfcl
RdB 20. b4 BfB 21. Qc2 f6 22. Nd3 Rg7 The most common continuation, by
23.a4 BeB 24.as KhB 25.a6 b6 26.Rxc6! which Black quickly develops his pieces.
Bxc6 27. Qxc6 Qxc6 2B. Rxc6 Bd6 29. Its drawback [a purely philosophical
bs± . If 7 ...Bxd3 B. Qxd3 Qc7 [B e6 • • • one ] could see its toll taken in the end�
9 . fS ±.] 9. Nge2 Nd7 10. e 4 dxe4 11. galll e , when the exchange of the
 1. d4 RIB 2. Re3 d5 3. lg5 115 4. lxlB
dS-pawn for the e-pawn could cause
Black to have a pawn minority on the
queenside. However, this can be pre­
vented by the timely advance of f6-fs.
5 . e3 c6
The main answer, however there are
others:
a) 5 Bb4 6. Bd3 Bxd3 7. Qxd3 Nc6
.••

[7... Bxc3 B. bxc3 c6 9. Ne2 0-0 10. 0-0

Nd7 l1. Ng3 bS 12. f3 Nb6 13. e4 ReB
14. Rael �, Tal-Vladimirov, USSR (ch) 6. ... B x d3
1961J B. Nge2 Qd7 9. 0-0-0 0-0-0 10.g3 7 . Qxd3 Bb4
Bxc3 11. Qxc3 Ne7 12. Nf4 fS=, Vere­ Black choose the radical way: he ex­
sov-Bronstein, USSR 1959. changes the Bishop and with bind by
b) 5 Qd7 6.Bd3 Bxd3 7. Qxd3 fs the Knights indirectly influences the
•.•

B. 0-0-0 Bb4 9. Nge2 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 e4-square.

11. Nxc3 Ne7 12. f3 0-0-0=, Malich-Filip, 7...g6B.e4 [If B.0-0-0 Black can build
Haile 1960. a barrier against the e-pawn by B.. . fS,
6 . Bd3 for example, in the game Veresov-Liav­
Currently Black's continuations are dansky, USSR 1974, after 9. g4 fxg4 10.
(IIA. 6 ... Bxd3) , (lIB. 6 ... Bg6) and e4 Bd6 11. exdS 0-0 12. Kbl ReB Black
(IIC. 6 ... Qd7) . was on the right track.] dxe4 9. Qxe4t
6... Be6 7. Nge2 Bd6 B. Ng3 [if B. Be7 10. Nf3 fS 11. Qd3 0-0 12. 0-0-0
Nf4 then stable is B fs 9. 0-0 0-0] g6 Bf6 13. Rhel Nd7 deserves attention
•••

9. e4 dxe4 10. Ncxe4 [Or 10.Nge4 Be7 because of equal chances in Hoi­
11. O-O?! Qxd4 12. Ne2 Qb6 13. Nf4 Hjartarson, Copenhagen 1985.
BcB I4. ReI KfB lS. Qd2 Nd7 16. NhS If the passive 7... Be7, then on B. Nf3
h6 17. Nf4 NeS occurred in A. Fernan­ 0-0 9.0-0 Nd7 l0.e4 Nb6 11.Rfel Bb4
dez-Spassov, Spain 1995 and White has 12. a3 Bd6 13. b3 White had a slight
no compensation for the sacrificed edge in 1. Ibragimov-Karayannis, Greece
pawn.] Be7 l1. Ne2 Qc7 12. Qd2 Nd7 1996.
13. 0-0 Nb614. Qf4 0-0-0 with an even 8 . Nge2 0-0
game in Peicheva-Ko m arov, Dortmu.nd In Bronstein-Vasju.kov, USSR 1959,
1992. Black continued B...Nd7 9. e4 Nb6 10.
exdS NxdS 11. 0-0 Nxc3 12. Nxc3 0-0

lIA. 13.Ndl Qc7 14. Ne3 Rfd8 1S. Radl and

White had some initiative.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . BgS Bf5 9. 0-0-0
4. Bxi6 exf6 5. e3 c6 6. Bd3 Also 9 . a 3 BaS 10.0-0-0 Na6 1 1 . h4
bS I2. hs Nc7 13. Ng3 b4 14. axb4 Bxb4
DI .ic�tlr-Veresav Challelean Chess Repertaire
IS. Nfs Ne6 gave good counterplay to
Black in Hachian-Jirovsky, Decin 1996.
If White castles short, 9. 0-0 Nd7
10. e4 dxe4 11. Nxe4 Re8 12. a3 Bf8
13. b4 fs 14. Nd2 as 15. c3 g6, Black
would gain a hopeful position as in
Lengyel-Kolarov, Kecskemet 1962.
9. ... Nd7
1 0 . g4 ReS
The immediate 10... Nb6 11. a3 [if
White ignores the main threats he A natural retreat, where Black re­
might face difficulties, for example: 11. frains from exchanging the Bishops to
h4 Nc4 12. gS QaS 13. Rdgl {13. gxf6 keep his influence in the center.
Ba3 + . } fS 14. hS bS 15. QxfS Bxc3 16. 7 . Nge2
Nxc3 b4 deserved attention in Braun­ If 7. Nf3 Nd7 8. 0-0 Bb4 9. Ne2 0-0
Stummer, Austria 1989, and Black out­ 10. Ng3 Re8 11. c3 Bd6 Black preserved
strips the attack.] Bd612. e4 with equal equality inJurgens-Szruanczy, Dortmund
chances. 1992.
1 1 . h4 bs 7. h4 is not dangerous for Black. For
12. Kb l Nb6 example, 7... Qb6 8. hS Bxd3 9. Qxd3
1 3 . Ng3 as ! in Mihailovsky-Kostin, Moscow 1996,
After 13... Rb8?! 14. Nce2 Nc4 15. Black continued 9... Nd7 10. e4 Bb4
NfS White's initiative was very dan­ 11. exdS Bxc3t 12. Qxc3 cxdS l 3. 0-0-
gerous in Gufeld-Uitumen, Tbilisi 1971 0 0-0 14. Nf3 Rfc8 1S. Qb3 Rc4and Black
(GAME 10) . had the better prospects.
1 4 . Nce2 Nc4 7. ... Bd6
I S . N£S B£S S . Ng3 Qb6
1 6 . gS a4 After 8... Qc7 9. 0-0 Nd7 10. e4! dxe4
1 7 . RdgI b4 11. Ncxe4 Bxe4 12. Bxe4 White kept
In this position there are mutual the initiative in Peicheva-Arakhamia,
chances. {Alburt}. Jakarta 1993.
9 . Rb I as
lIB. 10. 0 .. 0
11. Bxg6
0 .. 0
hxg6
1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS B£S 1 2 . e4 dxe4
4. Bxf6 exf6 S. e3 c6 6. BdJ 1 3 . Ncxe4 Be7

6 Bg6
•..
1 4. c3 £s
The chances were equal inJurgens­
Trichkov, Dortmund 1 992.
 1. d4 RfB 2. ReI d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. Bill

lIe. I S . Qd3 RadS

And the game was equal in Shipman­
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Bfs Waitzkin, New York 1 993.
4. Bxi6 exf6 S. e3 c6 6. Bd3

6 ... Qd7 Game 9

Kupreichlk-Westerlnen
Dortmund 1975

1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 dS 3 . BgS BfS 4.

Bxf6 gxf6 S . e3 e6 6. Nge2 cS 7. Ng3
Bg6 S. h4 h6 9 . e4.
Stronger is 9. hS Bh7 10. Bd3.
9. cxd4
1 0 . BbSt Nc6
1 1 . exdS
Black protects his Bishop. On 11. Qxd4 Black forces the ex�
7 . Nge2 change of Bishops with 11... a612. Bxc6
Interesting is 7. Nf3 Bb4 B. O�O O�O bxc6 and equal chances are maintained.
9. a3 Bd6?! (More simple is 9... Bxc3 11. . .. a6 !
10. bxc3 ReB with mutual chances.) 10. An important zwischenzug, otherwise
ReI as 11. BxfS QxfS 12. e4 dxe4 13. the position with the isolated pawn
Nxe4 Bc7 14. Nh4 Qd7 IS. QhS with after 11... exdS 12. Qxd4 favors White.
a dangerous attack byWhite, Berg-Thor� 12. dxc6 axb S
hallsson, Akureyri 1 994. 13. cxb7 RbS
7. ... Be7 14. Nce2 Bb4+
Stronger than 7 ... Bd6 B. Ng3! [The IS. Kfl eS
immediate B. e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4 Bxe410. Even the energy of the famous Vik�
Bxe4 fS is equal.] Bxd3 9. Qxd3 O�O 10. tor Kupreichik cannot break down the
e4 ReB 11. O�O Bxg3 12. fxg3 Na6 13. power of the Bishop pair.
a3 dxe4 14. Nxe4 and White's position 1 6 . f4 Qd7
was preferable in Khodos-Saveliev, USSR Black is not tempted by 16... d3? 17.
1958. fs dxe2t l B. Qxe2 and White would
S. Bxfs QxfS win back one of the Bishops and gain
9. O�O O�O the initiative.
10. Ng3 Qd7 1 7 . c3 BcS
11. Qd3 Na6 Of course not 17 ... dxc3? lB. Qxd7t
12. a3 g6 Kxd7 19. bxc3 BcS 20. fs, and the power
13. e4 dxe4 of the light�squared Bishop Itdries up:'
14. Qxe4 £5 1 8 . cxd4 exd4
The Richter-Verls., Chl.eleal Chesl Repertlire
1 9 . ReI Bb6
Game 1 0
Gufeld-Uitumen
Tbilisi 1 971

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 dS 3 . BgS BfS 4. Bxf6

exf6 S. e3 c6 6. Bd3 Bxd3 7 . Qxd3
Bb4 B . Nge2 0 .. 0 9. 0 .. 0 .. 0 .
Leading t o even play is 9 . O�O Nd7
10. e4 dxe4 11. Nxe4 ReB.
9. ... Nd7
20. fS ! 10. g4 ReB
A last attempt to support a flicker� Deserving of attention is 10... Nb6
ing initiative. If 20. RcBt RxcB 21. with the idea of Nb6�c4.
bxcB=Qt QxcB 22. Nxd4 O�O the posi� 1 1 . h4 bs
tion is opened up and favors Black, 1 2 . Kb l Nb6
whose King is better hidden than his 1 3 . Ng3 RbB
White counterpart. Black begins his optimistic plan to
20. Bxfs transfer his Rook to the a6�square. Sim�
2 1 . Nxd4 Bxd4 plifying the position with 13... Bxc3
22. ReBt was worth consideration.
The last attempt: 22.. . RxcB? 23. 1 4 . Nce2 Ne4
bxcB=Qt QxcB 24. Qxd4 is in White's 1 5 . NfS Rb6 1 !
favor. However, Black goes around the More logical was 15... BfB.
last reef and at the same time sets a small 1 6 . gS Ra6
trap. 1 7 . Nel QaS
22. ... Ke7 ! l B . gxf6 g6
And now 23. Qxd4?? is met by the
intermediate check 23... Bd3t.
2 3 . Qel t Kd6
24. Qdl Ke7 !
A rare case of repetition of position
with a dangerously centralized King.
If 24... Ke6 25. Nxfs KxfS 26. RcSt!
White has a dangerous assault.
2 5 . Qel t
1/2 .. 1/2
Bla ck will be too late with 18 ... Bd2
becau se of 1 9 . Nxh6t gxh6 20. Rdg1
Kh8 2 1 . Rg7 .
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. BoB
1 9 . h5 ! gxf5 Qe7 winning. For example: 27... Bel ,
If 19... Nxb2, a mating attack could then 2B. h6!!. Now Black is in an aw�
have arisen with 20. hxg6! Nxd3 21. ful zugzwang. If 2B... Bxf2, then 29.
Nh6t KfB 22. g7#. Rci2 !!.
20. Qxf5 Re6 2 3 . Qh6t Ke8
2 1 . Qf4 ! 24. Rg8t Kd7
Weaker is 21. Rhg1 t KfB 22. Qxh7 2 5 . Qg7 Be7
Rxf6. The try 25... Qb4 also fails. 26. Nb3
21. ... Kf8 Qa4 27. a3. (Bellin)
If 21... QdB, White attacks with 22. 26. fxe7 Rxe7
Rhg1t KhB 23. Rgl! and White threat� 27. Qxh7 Nd6
ens to double Rooks on the g�file and 28. h6 b4
then Qf4�g5. 29. Qd3 f5
22 . Rhgl Bd6 30. Rg7 cS
Or 22... Nd6 23. c3 Bxc3 24. RgBt! 31. dxe5
KxgB 25. Qh6 Rxf6 26. Qxf6 Bb4 27. 1 0
..
rhe Richter-Veresol Chameleon Chess Reperllire

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Bfs

I.
4.e3 1. d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. BgS Bfs 4 . e3

4 e6
•.•

For the following continuations, see:

4. f3 (Chapter 3 ) , 4. Bxf6 (Chapter 4).
A natural developing move.
This quiet developing continuation S . Bd3
demands accurate play by Black, how­ Leading to sharp play is 5. g4 Bg6
ever White can scarcely count on get­ 6. Nge2 cS 7. Nf4 Qb6 8. Bb5t Nc6 9.
ting an advantage. a4 cxd4 10. as! Qc7 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12.
The most frequently used continu­ Qxd40-0-0 [12... e5? 13 . Ncxd5 !± ; 12...
ations are (I. 4 e6) and (11. 4 Nbd7) . Be7!?] 13. Bxc6 Qxc6 with an unclear
••. .•.

Also possible is 4. . . Ne4 5. Nxe4Bxe4 position in Ciocaltea-Tabor, Baja 1 971.

6. f3 Bg6 7. c3 c6 8. Bd3 Qb6 9. Bxg6 S. ... Bxd3
hxg6 10. Qb3 Nd711. Qxb6 axb6 with Also possible is 5 . . . Bg6 6. Nf3 [6.
an even endgame in Opocensky-Euwe, Nge2 cS 7. Bxg6 hxg6 8. e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4
Pistyan 1 922 . cxd4 10. Bxf6gxf6 11. Qxd4=, Grechkin­
Sadomsky, USSR corr. 1 957] Be77. Ne5
Nbd7 [The game Ricnter-Rein nardt, Ger-
 1. d4 Nfl 2 . Ne3 d 5 3 . Bg5 Bf5 4 . e3
many 1937, continued 7 . . . Bxd3 8. cxd3 7. . . . 0 0
-

0-0 9. 0-0 Nfd7 10. Bf4 NxeS l1. dxeS 8 . 0-0 Nbd7
cS 12. e4 d4 13. Ne2 Nc6 14. Bg3 Rc8 Also possible is 8 ... Ne8 9. Bxe7 Qxe7
1 5 . f4;!; . ] 8. f4 a6 9. Qf3 Bxd3 10. cxd3 10. Rcl Nd7 11. e4 Nb6 with an even
cS 11. 0-0 cxd4 12. exd4=, Sakharov­ game in Karaklajic-Minic, Belgrade 1962.
Shiyanovsky, USSR 1958.
6 . cxd3
If 6. Qxd3, there can occur 6. . . cS
which is premature in view of 7. Bxf6!
gxf6 8. dxcS Nd7 9. e4 dxe4 10. Qxe4
NxcS 11. Qf3 Bg7 12. Nge2 0-0 13. g4
with a better game for White in Bron­
stein-Fischer, Mar del Plata 1960; deserv­
ing of attention is 6. . . a6 7. Nf3 cS 8 .
0-0 cxd4 9 . Nxd4 Nc6 with satisfactory
play for Black. The pawn sacrifice with The above complicated position has
6. . . Be7 7. Qb,St Nbd7 8. Qxb7 Rb8 9. not been researched enough through
Qxa7 Rxb2 10. Nge2 0-0 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 serious practice, but it seems that Black's
12. Qa3± in Zakharov-Gaister, Moscow position is rather solid. Here are some
1961, was scarcely correct, but possible examples:
is 6. . . Nbd7 7. e4 dxe4 8 . Nxe4 Be7 9. a) 9. h3 cS 10. dxcS NxcS 11. Bxf6
Bxf6 Bxf610. Nf3 0-0 11. 0-0-0 Re8 12. Bxf6 12. d4 Nd7 and the game was even
g4 Nf8 13. h4 Be7 14. gS cS 15. Kbl cxd4 in Zakharov-I. Zaitsev, USSR 1963.
16. hs fs 17. gxf6 Bxf6 with compli­ b) 9. e4 c6 10. Qe2 Kh8 11. eS Ng8
cated play from Hoi-Sorensen, Denmark 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. a3 as 14. Racl fs 15.
Ch. 1991. h4 f4 with equal chances in Juglard­
6.
. .• Be7 Sellos, France 1989.
A solid choice, however 6... cS looks c) 9. Qb3 Rb8 10. Racl h6 11. Bf4
more energetic. 7. dxcS BxcS 8. d4 Bb4 Bd6 12. Bxd6 cxd613. Qb4 Ne8 14. e4
9. Nf3 QaS 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. 0-0 Nc6 dxe4 1S. dxe4 Qb616. Qxb6 Nxb6 and
12. Qb3 0-0 13. Racl Rfc8 14. a3 Bf8 Black had a solid endgame in Gaiinsky­
and Black maintained equality in Lica­ Leontiev, Moscow 1996.
yan-Primel, Paris 1995. Deserving of attention is 9. Bxf6
7 . Nf3 Bxi6 10. e4 with equal chances.
If 7. Qb3 b6 8. Nf3 cS, then Black
breaks through the center with 9. 0-0
0-0 10. Rad1 Nc611. NeS NxeS 12. dxeS 11.
Nd7 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 14. £4 £6 and Black 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS BfS 4. e3
gained the better position in Moonen­
Euwe, Netherlands 1 96 1 . 4 ••• Nbd7
The Richter-Vereslv Chameleon Chess ReperlBire
IJubljana 1995.
6 . f4 !
A useful attacking move. If 6. Nf3,
then 6... e6 7. Nf3 e6 7. 0-0 Be7 the
line leads to variation I.
6. e6
7. fS BxfS
8. Bxfs exfS
9. Nxds h6
10. Bxf6 Nxf6
S . Bd3 11. Nxf6j Qxf6
In the event of the natural 5. Nf3 12. Qf3
it is easier for Black to set up counter­
play.
a) 5... e6 6. Ne5 Be7 7 . g4 Bg6 B. h4
h6 9. Nxg6 fxg6 10. Bf4 Kf7 11. Bd3
g5 12. hxg5 hxg5 13. RxhB QxhB 14.
Bxc7 RcB 15. Nb5 Rxc7 ! 16. Nxc7 a6
17. Qf3 Bd6 l B. Nxe6 Kxe6 19. 0-0-0
Ke7 20. Rhl QgB 21. Qf5 Qe6 22. Qxg5
Qxg4 23. Qxg4 Nxg4 with an even end­
game in Yandemirov-Kalegin, USSR 1988.
b) 5... c6 6. Bd3 Bxd3 7. Qxd3 e6 B. 12. ... Bd6 !
e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4 Be7 10. Nxf6t Bxf6 Black sacrifices the pawn, which is
11. h4 Qa5t 12. Bdl Qb6 13. 0-0-0 cS risky to take if White gets behind in
14. Be3 RcB with even chances in Leilic­ development [13. Qxb7 0-0 14. Qf3 cS].
Ahesson, Copenhagen 1996. If 12... 0-0-0 13. 0-0-0 Qe614. Kbl Bd6
S. ... Bg6 15. Nh3 then White stood better in
Or 5. .. Bxd3 6. cxd3 [6. Qxd3 e6 7. Zahharov-Krogius, USSR 1962.
e4 dxe4 B. Nxe4 Be7=. (Alburt) ] c6: 1 3 . Ne2 0 .. 0
a) 7. Nf3 e6 B. e4 Be7 9. e5 NgB I0. 1 4 . 0 .. 0 Qe7
h4! h6 11. Be3 Qb6 12. Na4 Qa5t 13. I S . Nc3
Bd2 Qa6 14. Qc2 h5 15. Nc5 Bxc5 16. White's chances were preferable in
dxc5 with a clear advantage for White Mestrovic-Kurajica, Jugoslavia Ch. 1968.
in Richter-Carls, Bad Aachen 1933.
b) 7. f4!? e6 B. Nf3 Be7 9. 0-0 h610.
Bh4 0-0 1 1. Qe2 Ne4 12. Bxe7Nxc3 13.
bxc3 Qxe7 14. Rabl bs 15. e4 a6 1 6 .
c4 and White used the congestion in
the center to his favor in Mestrovic-Kecic,
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Ig5 Nbd7

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS choose 5. Bd3 Bg7 6. f4! with the ini�

3 ... Nbd7 tiative. For example: 6... cS 7. Nf3 cxd4

8 . exd4 O�O 9.O�O Nb610. Qel Nc4 11.
b3 Na5 12. Qh4 Be6 13 . Rael Nc6 14.
Bh6 Nb4 15. Ng5 with a White attack
in Shabanov-Tsesarsky, USSR 1987.

4. Nf3

This most frequently used move en�

abIes Black to avoid doubling his pawns.
In this chapter we will consider 4 .
N£3, which lately i s the most used in
the Richter-Veresov System.
The continuations 4. £3 (Chapter 9),
and 4. Qd3 (Chapter 10) prepare the White postpones pawn play in the
rapid advance e2-e4. center until he completes his devel�
opment. The most often used replies
4. e3 is most frequently met by 4... by Black are 4 . . c6, 4 . . . e6 (Chapter
.

e6 or 4. . . c6, when after 5. Nf3 and 6. 7) and 4 . . g6 (Chapter 8) .

.

Bd3 , leads to a rearrangement of moves Also there is the premature Bishop

and is considered in the appropriate retreat by 4... h6 5. Bh4 with 5... c6
sections. The move 4 ... g6 has origi­ or 5 . . . e6 to follow, also covered in the
nal importance, on which White can appropriate sections [See lB. 5 ... h6.
Thl RiGhter-VerlSII Cha.IIIID Chess Rlpertaire
Also can be 5. Bf4 c6 6. e3 in Nezhmet­
dinov-Gurgenidze, 1 958.J. Don't over­
look the pawn sacrifice 5 ... cS, and note
the attempt to stop it can cause some
real problems for White:
a) 6. dxc5 e6 [Weaker is 6... Qa5?!
7. Bxf6 Nxf6 B. e4 e6 9. Bb5 t Bd7 10.
Bxd7t Nxd7 11. exd5 ±, Hort-Oster­
me!1er, Dortmund 1 982.J 7. b4 b6 B. Nb5
[poor is 8.c6? Bxb4 9. cxd7t Bxd7 10.
Qd4 Qe 7 with a hard position for
White, who was unable to untangle his
King without material losses in Mes­
trovic-Deze, Jugoslavia 1 969J Ba6 9. e4
bxc5 10. exd5 c411. dxe6Bxb4and Black
refuted White's strategy in Seledkin­
Smit, USSR 1 970. [Ed. Note: 12. c3 ! ? J
b) 6. Bxf6 Nxf6 7. dxc5 e6 8. Qd4
Be7 9. Rbl [9. e3 0-0 10. b4 a5 !] 0-0 10.
b4 as 11. a3 axb4 12. axb4 b6 13. cxb6
Ne414. Nxe4 dxe4 15. Qxe4 Bb7! with
sufficient compensation for the sacri­
ficed pawns in Alburt-Butnorius, USSR
1 973.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. NO
4 .•. c6
Black defends the pawn on ds in-
tending to fianchetto his dark-squared
Bishop. White has two possible direc­
tions of play connected with kingside
or queenside castling: I. 5. Qd3, and
11. 5 . e3 .
I.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. NO e6
5 . Qd3
White prepares the advance e2-e4.
Now Black's main plans are connected
with (lA. 5 ... g6) and (lB. 5 . . . h6) .
On other continuations Black will
come across great difficulties:
a) 5 ... Qa5 6. Bdl Qb6 7. 0-0-0 e5 B.
e4! exd4 9. Nxd4 Nc5 10. Qg3 Ncxe4
11. Nxe4 Nxe4 12. Qe5 t Be7 13. Be3!
f6 14. Qh5 t g6 15. Qh6 BfB 16. Qh4
and White's initiative fully compen­
sated for the sacrificed pawn in Miles­
Watson, British (ch) 1 982.
b) 5 ... Qb6 6. 0-0-0 e6 7. e4 Bb4 B.
Ndl Qa5 9. e5 Bxc3 10. Qxc3 Qxc3 11.
bxc3 Ng4 12. Bh4 h5 13. Be2 makes
White's chances preferable in the com­
plicated endgame, Van Mil-Boscn, Sonne­
vanck 1 995.
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Ig5 Nbdl
c) 5 . . . bS 6. a3 as 7. e4 b4 B. axb4 be met by 10. .. QaS, preventing cas­
Ba6 9. bS cxbS l0. Nxds NxdS l1. exdS tling with the intention to exchange
b4 12. Qxa6! Rxa613 . Bxa6 h614. BbS on d4. Less accurate play was shown
Qb61S. Bxd7t Kxd7 16. NeSt KeB I7. in Leuba-Kamber, Switzerland 1993: 10 ...
Be3 andWhite had more than enough cxd4 11. cxd4 Qb6 [The counterstrike
compensation for the Queen in Donev­ e7-eS returns like a boomerang and
Weindl, Bad Ragaz 1993. therefore more stable is 1 1 . .. Nds 1 2.
Bc4 N7f613 . NeS;!; .] 12. Bc4 e5 13 . dxeS
Ng4 14. e6 fxe61S. 0-0 NdeS 16. NxeS
lA. BxeS 17. Qe2? [Better is 17. RaeI, be­
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 cause after 17. Qe2?, Black has 17. . .
4. Nf3 c6 S. Qd3 Rxf2!, then l B. Rxf2 Nxf2 19. Be3

5 ...g6 Qxb2!.] hS l B. Qe4 and White gained

the initiative.
8. ... 0-0
9. h4 hS
In Alburt-Savon, USSR 1970, Black
eased the position: 9... Nxe4?! 10. Qxe4
Nf6 11. Bxf6 [Better is 11. Qh4.] Bxf6
12. hs QdS 13 . QxdS cxd5 14. NeS BfS
15. Bci3 Bxd3 16. Rxd3 RfdB, and gained
an even endgame.
10. Kbl as
11. Be2 a4
Black does not impede White's in­ 12. a3 Nxe4
tentions, and he considers the Bishop's 13. Qxe4 Nf6
fianchetto as a reliable weapon against 14. Qf4 Be6
his opponent's queenside castling. IS. Bd3 bs
6. e4 dxe4 and Black's threats on the queenside
Also likely is 6. . . h6 7. Bf4 [or 7. Bh4 were more dangerous in Platonov-Gu­
dxe4 B. Nxe4 Bg7 9. 0-0-0 0-0=] dxe4 feld, USSR 1971 (GAME 1 1 ) .
B. Nxe4 Nxe4 9. Qxe4 Nf6IO. Qd3 QaSt
11. Qd2 Qxd2t 12. Bxd2 Be6 13. Be2
Bg7 14. c3 0-0=, Bellin-Lanka, Amster­ lB.
dam 1994. 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7
7. Nxe4 Bg7 4. Nf3 c6 S. Qd3
8. 0..0..0
If castling is delayed: 8. Ng3 0-0 9 . 5 ••• h6
Qd2, then Black carries out a counter­
attack by 9 . . . cS and here on 10. c3 can
The lichter-VeresDv Challeleon Chess lepertaire
Doubtful is 6... bS 7. a3 as B. e4 Ba6
in view of the maneuver 9. Qe3! with
the initiative toWhite (Miles), in Wock�
enfuss-Gutman, West Germany 1985,
White played 9. b4? axb4 10. axb4 e6
11. eS, and after 11... gS! 12. Bg3 Ne4
13. Rbl Bxb4! 14. Rxb4 QaSWhite had
gotten himself into a difficult position.
7. Ndl e5
This is more energetic than 7... e6
As often happens with Bishops on B. Nb3 Qb6 9. e4 Bb4 10. f3 dxe4 11.
gS, it is useful for Black to clarify the fxe4 eS 12. a3 Be713. Bf2 Ng4 14. Bgl
position to determine his forthcom� exd4 15. Bxd4 NdeS 16. Bxb6 Nxd3t
ing prospects. 17. cxd3 axb6 with chances equal in
6. Bh4 the endgame in Atanasov-Krasenkov,
If 6. Bf4, then Black carried out the Copenhagen 1985.
plan of a pawn attack on the queen� 8. Nb3 Qb6
side: 6... e6 7. a3 bS B. NeS NxeS 9. BxeS 9. 0..0 ..0 e4
b4 10. axb4 Bxb4 11. Qg3? [More logical 10. Qe3 Be7
is 11. f3! ? with the idea of Kel�f2 and 11. h3 gS
e2�e4.] Ne4 12. Qxg7 RfB 13. Bf4 [13. 12. Bg3 Nhs
Qxh6 Qb6 (13... Nxc3 14. Qdl) 14. f3! 13. Bhl £S
Nxc3 15 . Kf2 Nbs 16. c3 Be7 17. Bg7 14. g4 Ng7
cS l B. BxfB BxfB 19. dxcS QxcS+ ] Qb6 15. Qdl as
14. Bdl Bxc31S. bxc3 Qb2 16. Rcl as+, and Black achieved a large spatial ad�
Porper-Smirin, Tei Aviv 1991. vantage in Hoi- Gutman, Cap di\dge 1986.
6. ..
. QaS
With the Bishop posted on h4, this
pin [Which strengthens control over 11.
the e4�square.], outlines if the oppor� 1. d4 N£6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
tunity arises, the invasion of the Knight 4. Nf3 e6
to e4 and is more effective.
Also possible is 6... g6, because Black 5. e3
does not have to be afraid of the h2�h4
attack, and on 7. h3 Bg7 B. g4 QaS 9.
Bgl Ne4 Black interrupted the initia�
tive in A. Rodriguez-Andersson, Costa
Brava 1978; so White has to be contented
with 7. e4 dxe4 8. Nxe4 Bg7 9. O�O�O
O�O with approximately equal chances.

The plan of kingside castling causes
Black more problems. Here the most
active continuations for Black are (IIA.
5 Qb6) and (lIB. 5 ... Qa5) .
•••
Also deserving notice is 5... g6 6. Bci3
Bg7 7. 0-0 0-0 B. ReI Re8 9. e4 dxe4
10. Nxe4 Nxe4 11. Rxe4 Nf6 and here
in the game Soy1u-Franzom, Manila (01)
1992, instead of the obvious 12. ReI,
White tried to grab the initiative with
12. Rh4?!, but after 12... Bg413. h3Bxf3
14. Qxf3 Qb6 15. b3 Rad8 he landed
in hot water.
After 5 . . h6 6. Bf4 we get Nezhmet­
. 13. Rh4 Bg4 with equal chances in Hoi­
dinov-Gurgenidze, 1958.
lIA.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. Nf3 ,6 5. e3
5 ... Qb6
1. d4 Rfl 2. Re3 d5 3. Bg5 Rbdl
The Queen takes control of the
pawns on b2 and d4, and assists Black's
counterplay due to c7-c5 or e7-e5.
6. Rhl g6
7. Bd3 Bg7
S. 0-0 0-0
9. Qe2
If the immediate 9. e4 dxe4 10. Nxe4
Nxe4 11. Bxe4 Nf612. Bd3 Bg413. ReI
RfeB 14. c3 Qa5 Black equalized eas­
ily in Berg-Lane, Ostende 1987.
On 9. ReI, possible is 9 . . . Re8 10.
e4 dxe4 11. Nxe4 Nxe4 12. Rxe4 Nf6
c. Hansen, Archus 1986, but 9 ... e5 ! is
more active. For example, in Fauland­
Muse, Altensteig 1991, the continuation
was: 10. Bfl h611. Bh4 Re8 12. b4 Ne4
13. Nxe4 dxe4 14. Ndl £5 15. Nc4 Qc7
16. dxe5 Nxe5 17. Nd6 Re6 18. Nxc8
Rxc8 19. Bg3 Rd6 20. Qc1 Rcd8 and
Black had obviously gained the initia­
tive. 10. dxe5 was deserving attention,
and 10... Ng4 11. e6 leads to unclear
play.
9. ... ReS
Interesting was 9.. e5 10. Bxf6 [10.
.
Nxe5 Nxe5 11. dxe5 Ng4=] Bxf6 11.
dxeS NxeS with a slight advantage.
10. e4 dxe4
The Richter-Veresol ChalleleoD Chess Repertlire
11. Nxe4 Nxe4
12. Qxe4

Black carries out the theme of pin­

ning the Knight, taking advantage of
12. Nf6 the Bishop on gS being cut off from
Stronger is 12 ... cS! , apparently d2.
equalizing chances in Hoi-C. Hansen, 6. Bd3
Denmark 1987. If 6. Ncll, possible is 6... e6 7. a3 Qc7
13. Qh4 Be6 B. Nf3 Bd6 9. Bd3 eS l 0. dxeS BxeS l1.
14. Rbel Qxb2 NxeS QxeS 12. Bf4 Qe713. 0-0 NcS I4.
Weaker was 14... BdS 15. NeS Qxb2 b4 Nxd3 15. cxd3 and here, in the game
16. c4 Be6 17. Rbl Qa3 l B. Rb3 Qd6 Mestrovic-Damjanovic, Slovenia 1996, in­
19. Rxb 7 ± in Hoi-Scha ndorff, Holstebro stead of 15... 0-0, which after 16. bS!
1987. h6 17. d4 led to White having the ini­
IS. Rxe6 fxe6 tiative, necessary was 15... h6, in view
16. Bc4 NdS of 16. bS cS.
17. Qh3 Qxc2� 6. ... Ne4
Necessary was 17... Bxd4 ! with de- Also good is 6... g6 7. 0-0 Bg7 B. e4
fensive resources. dxe4 9. Nxe4 Nxe4 10. Bxe4 Nf6 11.
18. Qxe6t Fdn8 Bd3 Bg4 with an equal game in Dolian­
19. NeS Rf8 in-Adorjan, Stara Pazova 1983.
20. Bd3 7. 0 .. 0 NxgS
with a strong attack [threatening Black's tasks are more difficult if 7...
Nxg6t] for White in Hoi-Lanc, Koben­ Nxc3 B. Qcll, For example: B eS 9.• • .

haven 1987. dxeS Bb4 10. e6 Ne4 11. exd7t Bxd7

12. Qe2 Bg4 13. Bf4 0-0 14. c3 Be7 15.

lIB. Qc2 BfS? [More obvious and stronger

is 15... Nf6.] 16. Ndl Nxd2 17. Bxfs
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 Nxfl lB. Bxh?t KhB 19. QfS andWhite
4. NB c6 S. e3 won in Romero Holmes-Magalotti, An­
dorra (zt) 1 987.
5 ... Qa5 8. Nxg5 g6
 1. d4 NIB 2. NI:3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl
9. e4 dxe4 20. Bxf6
10. Ncxe4 Bg7 21. RheI RabB
11. ReI 0 ..0 22. Re3
12. Bc4 Nb6 22 . . . Qb3 was threatened.
13. Bb3 Nds 22. QdS
14. c3 Qc7 23. ReI QbS!
with even chances in Hoi-Tukmakov,
Jurmala 1985.

Game 1 1
Platonov-Gufeld
USSR 1971

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Nf3

g6 S. QdJ Bg7 6. 0 ..0 ..0 c6 7. e4.
On 7. e3 then 7 . . . bS . Now the black Queen penetrates the
7. ... dxe4 rear lines of Black's camp.
B. Nxe4 0 ..0 24. Rc2
9. h4 hs Trying to win the Exchange is sui ..
A useful blockading move. Another cidal: 24. b4? axb3 25. Nd7 Ra8.
move 9. . Nxe4? ! , doesn't work because
. 24. ... Qflt
if 10. Qxe4, then 10 . . . Nf6 1 1 . Qf4. 2S. ReI Bxe5!
10. KbI a5 Before taking the pawn it is a good
11. Be2 a4 idea to eliminate White's advanced
12. a3 Nxe4 Knight.
13. Qxe4 Nf6 26. dxe5
14. Qf4 Be6 After 26. RxeS Qd3t 27. Rc2 Qdl t
Deserving of a test is 14 . . . Ng4 ! ? 28. Qc1 [28. Rcl Rxb2t!] Qxd4 the pawn
15. BdJ b5 is lost without any compensation.
An alternative is the preliminary 26. ... Qxg2
1 5 ... QdS I6. c4 QaS followed by b7 .. bs. 27. Rec3�!
16. Ne5 Qd5 More stubborn is 27. Re2 .
17. c4 bxc4 27. Rb6
lB. Bxc4 Qd6 2B. e6 fxe6
19. Bxe6 Qxe6 29. Qe3 Qxf2
20. Bxf6 30. Qxe6t Kh7
Exchanging the Knight in order to 31. R3c2 Qxh4
prevent the black Knight from land� After losing the pawn White is
ing comfortably on dS . doomed. The pawn on the h�file can�
The liehter-VereslI Chl.elean Chess lepertaire
not be stopped. 37. Rxfl Qxflt
32. Rxc6 Rxc6 38. Ka2 Qc4t
33. Qxc6 Rf2 39. Kal Qclt
34. Ka2 Qf6 40. Ka2 Qe3
35. Qb7 Qf7t 41. Qd7 Qe4
36. Kal Rfl 01
..

IM Kurt Richter (1900 .. 1969)

Richter was an extraordinary tactician,
and though he did not write an autobiog�
raphy or offer us his games' collection, he
did write a number of books, concentrat­
ing mostly on tactics. He played attacking
lines, and besides his efforts in the Richter�
Veresov opening, he was also famous for
the Richter Attack in
the French Defense and
the Sicilian Defense
(Richter� Rauzer) .
Alfred Brinckmann
however, did write a
beautiful book about 98
of Richter's games
(Berlin 1961, 2nd. ed),
titled Kurt Richters beste
Partien, published by
WaIter de Gruyter.
 1. d4 NIB 2. Nel d5 I. Ig5 Nbdl 4. NII IB

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 A solid continuation, leading to quiet

4. Nf3 play.
5. ... Be7
4 ••• e6 Sometimes the Bishop is pushed by
first by 5 . . . h6 6. Bh4:
a) 6 . . . Be7 7. Ne5 [or 7. Bd3 cS B .
0-0 0-0 9. Ne5 Nxe5 10. dxe5 Nd7 1 1 .
Bxe7 Qxe7 12. f4 f6 1 3 . exf6 Nxf6 14.
Qf3 Bd7 15. e4 c4 1 6 . e5 Qc5t 17. Kh1
cxd3 lB. exf6 Rxf6 1 9 . cxd3 RafB 20.
g3 e5=, O. Rodriguez-Christiansen, In­
donesia 1982} Nxe5 B. dxe5 N d7 9 . Bg3
Bb4 10. Qg4 Bxc3t 1 1 . bxc3 Qg5 with
complicated play in Hort-Szmetan, Biel
The main continuations are (I. 5 . 1982.
e3) and (11. 5 . e4) . b) 6 . . . cS 7 . Bb5 cxd4 ? ! [More reli-
able is 7 . . . Be? ! ? ] B. Qxd4 Be7 9. 0-0-0

I. 0-0 10. e4 Nxe4 1 1 . Bxe7 Qxe7 12. Nxe4

dxe4 1 3 . Qxe4 Nc5 14. Qe3 a6 1 5 . Be2
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. B gS Nbd7 b5 1 6 . Rd4 Bb7 1 7 . Rhd1 b4 lB. Ne5
4. Nf3 e6 and White stood better in Muratov­
Maliutin, Moscow 1991}.
5 . e3 Sharper continuations are:
a) 5 . . . Bb4 6. a3 Bxc3 7. bxc3 h6 B .
Bxf6 Nxf6 9. c 4 0-0 10. Bd3 b6 1 1 . 0-0
Bb7 12. Qe2 QcB 1 3 . cxd5 exd5 14. c4
dxc4 1 5 . Bxc4 Qf5 1 6 . Rac1 Qa5 [ 1 6 . . .
Bxf3 ? 1 7 . Qxf3 Qxf3 l B . gxf3 ± ] 1 7 .
Ne5 ! ±, Lahdawala-WatsoH, USA 1982.
b ) 5 . . . cS 6 . Bd3 c4 7 . Be2 Bb4 B. 0-0
Bxc3 9. bxc3 Qa5 10. Bxf6 Nxf6 1 1 . Qe1
Ne4 12. Ndl Qxc3 1 3 . Nxe4 Qxe1 14.
The Richter-Veresov Ch•• eleon Chess Repertoire
Rfxel dxe4 1 5 . Bxc4 Bd7 1 6 . Be2 Rc8 manov, USSR (ch) 1 965 and Black's
17. c4 and White had a slight but stable chances are preferable.] Nxe5 10. dxe5
edge in the endgame in Hoi-Lein, Copen� N d7 1 1 . Bf4 [To play the exchange 1 1 .
hagen, 1984. Castling queenside with Bxe7 Qxe7 1 2 . f4, it would have been
1 1 . . . Bd7 deserved attention. more logical to keep the Rook on £1 . ]
6. Bd3 f6 12. exf6 Nxf6 and here i n the game
Too passive is 6. Be2 cS 7 . O�O O�O 8. Finegold-Shahed, Las Vegas 1995, White
dxc5 [White has nothing in 8. Ne5 Nxe5 made up his mind to sacrifice a piece
9 . dxe5 Nd7 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 1 1 . f4 b6 with 1 3 . e4 [13. Qf3 Bb7=.] c4 14. exd5
12. Bf3 {12. e4, and then 12 ... d4 1 3 . cxd3 1 5 . dxe6, yet after 1 5 . . . Nd5 1 6 .
N b 5 Ba6 {13 . . . Bb7 ! ? 1 4 . Nd6 Bc6 with B e 5 Bc5 1 7 . Qg4 Qe7 h e did not ob�
the idea of . . .f6} 14. Nxd4!) Ba6 13. Rf2 tain enough compensation.
Rad8 14. Qel f6 ! +, Liebert-Uhlmann, 8. Nxe5
Zinnowitz 1966.1, or 8. a4 b6 9. as ? ! [9. 9. dxe5 Nd7
h3 =] bxa5 10. Ndl cxd4 1 1 . exd4 Bb7 10. Bxe7 Qxe7
12. Nb3 Bb4 and Black has an extra 11. f4 f6
pawn in Dydyshho-Sadler, Pula 1997] 12. Qh5 g6
Nxc5 9 . Qd4 b6 1 0. b4 Nce4 1 1 . Nxe4 13. exf6 Nxf6
Nxe4 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 1 3 . a4 Bb7 14. as After 1 3 . . . Qxf6 14. Qf3 , White
f6 1 5 . axb6 e5 1 6 . Qb2 axb6 17. c4 Qe6 stands better.
1 8. Rfc1 . The game was even in Mihe� 1 4 . Qg5
nas-Savon, USSR (ch) 1970.
6. ... c5
More restrained, but possible, is 6 ...
c6 7. O�O O�O. For example: 8. Ne5 Nxe5
9. dxe5 Nd7 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 1 1 . f4 f6 1 2 .
Qh5 g6 1 3 . exf6 Qxf6 14. Qh6 e5 ! [Af�
ter 14 . . . Nc5 ? ! 1 5 . Radl Nxd3 16. cxd3
cS 17. d4 White achieved a serious po�
sitional advantage, because his Knight
was stronger than the Bishop in Vyzh�
manavin-Bronstein, Moscow 1981.1 1 5 . 14. ... c4 ! ?
fxe5 Qxe5 1 6 . Rael Qg7 with approxi� In game seven of the Larsen-Kava�
mately equal chances . (Stetsko) . leh, Solingen 1970 match, Black played
7 . 0-0 0-0 14 . . . Ri7 and after 1 5 . e4 d4 1 6 . Nbl,
8 . Ne5 in order to not get into an unstable and
8. ReI b6 9. Ne5 [After 9. e4 c4 10. passive position if 1 6 . . . Bd7 1 7 . a4 � ,
BfI Nxe4 1 1 . Bxe7 Qxe7 12. Nxe4 dxe4 h e sacrificed the pawn by 1 6 ... b 5 ! ? 17.
1 3 . Rxe4 Bb7 14. d5 Qf6 1 5 . Rxc4 Bxd5 Bxb5 Nxe4 18. Qxe7 Rxe7 19. Bc6 Bb7
16. Rc3 Nc5 occurred in Bukhman-Tai� 20. Bxb7 Rxb7 21. ReI Nd6 22. Rxe6

Nc4 23 . b3 Ne3 24. Nd2 RiB ! , but ap�
parently his initiative was only of a tem�
porary nature. [Ed. : Larsen was on a roll
in this match which he won +5�1 =2.J
IS. Be2 QcS
1 6 . QeS bs
If 1 6 ... Bd7 1 7 . Qd4 RacB, then lB.
Qxc5 [or lB. Radl ;!; ] Rxc5 1 9 . Bf3 fol�
lowed by Ne2�d4 ;!; .
1 7 . Bf3 ! ? b4
1 8. Ne2 Ne4 !
1 9 . Nd4
with a small advantage for White.
11.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. Nf3 e6
5. e4
This energetic move is considered
to be White's main weapon, but its prac�
tical results often do not justify these
hopes. The point is that in the posi�
tion which arises the pawn structure
is related to the French Defense, but
its concrete peculiarities give Black wide
p rospects for counterplay.
5. ... h6 !
An important move, which narrows said that 7 . . . Ne4 gives equal chances.]
1. d4 NfB 2. Nel d5 3. Bg5 Nbdl 4. Nf3 eB
White's possibilities, since he has to
determine what he is going to do con�
cerning his e�pawn.
6 . Bh4
White can scarcely count on an ad�
vantage by exchanging the Bishop in
6. Bxf6 Nxf6. Let's consider some pos�
sibilities:
a) 7. Qe2 ? ! Be7 B. e5 Nd7 9 . O�O�O
a6 10. h4 c5 1 1 . g4 b5 12. Bg2 ? ! [Black
outstrips White in the attack and so
White must be reconciled with 12. dxc5
b4 1 3 . Na4 Qa5 14. b3 Nxc5 1 5 . Nxc5
Bxc5 +.] b4 13. Nxd5 exd5 14. dxc5 Nxc5
1 5 . Nd4 Bb7 1 6 . f4 Ne6 1 7 . Nxe6 fxe6
and it becomes clear that the attempt
to prevent the initiative by sacking the
piece failed in Yermolinsky-Kaidanov,
New York 1 993.
b) 7. Bd3 ? ! Bb4 B. exd5 Nxd5 [B . ••
exd5 9. O�O O�O 10. Ne2 ReB 1 1 . Ng3
Bd6 1 2 . Re I Bg4 1 3 . RxeB QxeB + ,
Rossetto-Gligoric, Havana 1 967] 9 . Qdl
c6 10. Ne5 Qb6 ! [10 . . . Qa5 1 1 . Nc4=]
1 1 . Rcl Qxd4 12. Nxf7 Nxc3 1 3 . NxhB
Qe5t 14. Kfl Nxal 15. c3 Nxcl l6. Qxcl
Bc5 and White was a pawn down in
Ark ell-Thipsay, Calcutta 1 987.
c) 7. e5 [clearly best] Nd7 [Thipsay
The Richter-Veresov ChalleleoD Chess Repertlire
B. Be2 Bb4 9. O�O Bxc3 ? ! 10. bxc3 Nb6
1 1 . Nel Bd7 12. Rbl RbB I 3 . Nd3 Na4
14. Qd2 Qe7 1 5 . Nf4 O�O 1 6 . c4 and
White gained a solid initiative in Hec�
tor-Van Mechelen, Antwerp 1 994 (GAME
12) : stronger was 9 . . . cS 10. a3 Bxc3
1 1 . bxc3 QaS 12. Qd2 Nb6 and after
BcB�d7 and RcB Black organizes un�
pleasant pressure along the c�file. (Stet�
sko) .
6. . . . g5
The main continuation which de�
stroys the pin, but Black can play in
the spirit of the MacCutcheon Varia�
tion of the French Defense: 6 . . . Bb4
7. eS gS B. NxgS hxgS [B Ne4? 9. Nf3
. • .
Nxc3 ? ! 10. bxc3 . Now if 10 . . . Bxc3 t,
then 1 1 . Ke2, and after 1 1 . .. f6 12. Qd3,
White is winning; if 9 . . . NgS, then 10.
NxgS (10. Nd2 is also good) hxgS 1 1 .
Bg3 ;t . ] 9. BxgS RgB I0. Bxf6 Nxf6 1 1 .
exf6 Qxf6 1 2 . Qd2 Bd7 1 3 . O�O�O O�O�O
[13 . . . cS ? ! 14. Kbl RcB l S . f4! Bxc3 1 6 .
bxc3 Qe7 1 7 . fS ;!; , Hoi-De Firmian,
Copenhagen 1 985J 14. f4 Bxc3 1 5 . bxc3
KbB 16. g3 Qe7 17. Kb2 cS lB. Be2 RcB
with sharp play for both sides in Hoi­
Smyslov, Copenhagen 1 985.
Apparently reliable, though passive
is 6 . . . Be7 7. exdS Nxds [7 . . . exdS= ] B.
Bxe7 Qxe7 9. Qd2 Qb4 [9 . . . Nxc3 ? 10.
Qxc3 cS 1 1 . O�O�O O�O 12. BbS cxd4 1 3 .
Qxd4 Nf6 14. N e S ± , Berg-Jacobsen,
Copenhagen 1 988J 10. O�O�O [10. NxdS ! ?
Qxd2t 1 1 . Kxd2 exdS 1 2 . ReI t ;!; / = ]
Nxc3 1 1 . Qxc3 Qxc3 12. bxc3 cS with
an equal endgame. (Stetsko) .
There also is 6 . . . dxe4 7 . Nxe4 Be7
B. Nxf6 Bxf6 9. Bxf6 Qxf6 10. Qd2 O�O
1 1 . O�O�O e5 12. dxe5 Nxe5 13. Nxe5
QxeS 14. Bc4=, Hoi-Larsen, Copenhagen
1 985.
7 . Bg3 Nxe4
It is too late for 7 . . . Bb4: B. exdS !
NxdS 9. Qd3 cS l0. Nd2 Bxc3 1 1 . bxc3
QaS I2. h4 g4 13. Bd6 b6 14. Nb3 Qxc3t
1 5 . Qxc3 Nxc3 16. dxcS ;!; , [White has
the two Bishops.] A1burt L u tikov, USSR
-
1 970.
8. Nxe4 dxe4
So, as a result of weakening his king�
side pawns, Black has won a pawn.
What is White to do: continue being
active or try to win back the pawn?
9 . Nd2
The aggressive 9. NeS enables Black
to simplify the position and, while
White is busy winning back the
e4�pawn, successfully complete his de�
velopment: 9 . . . Bg7 10. h4 [Or 10. Qe2
NxeS (Passive is 10 . . . Qe7 ? 1 1 . O�O�O
NxeS 12. dxeS Bd7 13. Qxe4 O�O�O 14.
Ba6 ! c6 1 5 . Rd6 BeB [Ed: 15 . . . bxa6 1 6.
Rhd1 h5 1 7. R1 d3 a5 18. Rxd7 Qxd7;t .J
1 6 . Rhdl and White had the attack in
Muratov-Lipman, Moscow 1980.) 1 1 . dxeS
QdS and to win back the pawn White
has to make new compromises. ] Nxe5
1 1 . Bxe5 Bxe5 [Possible is 1 1 . . . f6 12.
Bg3 O�O {12 ... KfS 13. hxg5 hxg5 14.

Rxh8 Bxh8 1 5 . Qh5 Bg7 1 6 . O�O�O ;!;,
Spal-Pachman, Ceske Budejovice 1 992) 13.
hxg5 fxg5 14. c3 Bd7 15. Bc4 Qf6 1 6 .
Qe2 Qf5 and here i n the game Shagal�
ovich-Shamkovich, USSR 1 969, White will
have to make up his mind to play 1 7 .
O�O�O b5 1 8 . B b 3 b4, though Black's
counterplay is very unpleasant. ] 12.
dxe5 Bd7. Black has finished his de�
velopment and threatens to defend the
e4�pawn by B d7 �c6, and what was
shown by Nunn, for example, is effec�
tive in case of the blunt 1 3 . Qd4 Bc6,
because in the event of 14. Qxd8t Rxd8
1 5 . hxg5 , the e5 �pawn is lost with an�
other to follow later: 1 5 . . . Rd5 16. gxh6
Rxe5 with the forthcoming Rg5�g6, or
16. Rxh6 Rxh6 1 7 . gxh6 Rxe5 18. Be2
Kf8, and the position favors Black. [The
idea here is that Black will play . . . e5,
then ... f5�f4. But, Black must watch
White's advanced h�pawn. ] In prac�
tice the following has occurred after
12 . . . Bd7:
After 12 ... Bd7
a) 13. Qd2 gxh4 14. Qb4 Bc6 1 5 . Bb5
Qd5 16. Bxc6t bxc6 +, Mestrovic -Bobots�
ov, Sarajevo 1 971 .
b) 13. Qg4 Qe7 [1 3 . . . Bc6 ? ! 14. hxg5
1. d4 NfB 2. NI:l d5 3. 115 Nbd7 4. Nfl eB
Qd4 1 5 . c3 Qxe5 1 6 . O�O�O Ke7 1 7 .
Rxh6 ± , [ 1 7 . . . Rxh6 1 8 . gxh6 Rh8 1 9 .
Qh4t Qf6 2 0 . Qg3 Qxh6t 2 1 . Kb1 - + ]
Muratov-Kiselev, USSR 1 9881 14. O�O�O
O�O�O 15. Qxe4 Bc6 16. Rxd8t Rxd8 17.
Qe3 gxh4 18. Qxa7 ? ! [Necessary was
18. f4 + .] Qg5t 19. Qe3 Rd4! and Black
gained the advantage in Re!1nolds-Nunn,
London 1 987 (GAME 13) .
Also worth considering is 9 . . . h5 10.
h4 g4 and White is practically forced
to play 1 1 . Qe2 with mutual chances,
because after 1 1 . Bc4 ? ! Nxe5 12. dxe5
Qxdl t 1 3 . Rxdl Bh6 14. Rd4 Bd7 1 5 .
O�O Bc6 1 6 . Rfdl Ke7 and Black was a
pawn up while White was without any
compensation in Schmittdiel-Mainka,
Dortmund 1 988.
9. ..
. Bg7
In the first use of this variation Black
defended the e4�pawn by 9 . . . f5 :
After 9 . .. £5
This move was justified in case the
active 10. h4 was played. Then 10 . . . f4
[Also possible is 1 0 . . . g4 1 1 . Nc4 Bg7
12. Qd2 Nf6 13. O�O�O O�O 14. h5 b5 with
complicated play in Veresov-Kortchnoi,
USSR 1 967.1 1 1 . Qh5t Ke7 12. hxg5 £Xg3
1 3 . O�O�O Qe8 14. Qh4 Kd8 1 5 . Nxe4
The lichter-VeresDv Challel.ln Chess leperllire
Be7 16. ds in Shagalovich-Sakharov, USSR After 10. c3 fS l 1 . h4 g4 12. Bc4 Nf6
1 969 (White has compensation for the 13. Qe2 0-0 14. hS NdS l S . 0-0-0 c6 16.
piece after Bellin's 16. Qxd3 ). f3 bs a doubledged game arose where
However, it is a better idea to fix Black's chances were at least as good
Black's shortcomings with 10. Bc4 Nf6 as White's in Ignatiev-Rogovoi, Russia
[Ed. : If Black pushes the lpawn, White 1 998 (GAME 14) .
probably has compensation in theform of 1 0. . . . Bxd4
10... f4 11. Qh5t Ke7 12. Bxf4gxf4 13. Nxe4 Favoring Black is 1 1 . Nxe4 Bxb2 12.
Bg7 14. Qh4t Nf6 15. 0-0-0 b5 1 6. Bb3 (1 6. hxgS [12. Rbl Nf6! 13. Qxd8t Kxd8 14.
Bxb5 Qd5) a5 1 7. Nc5!.J 1 1 . BeS : Rxb2 Nxe4 1 S . hxgS Nxg3 1 6 . fxg3 hS
17. Rh4 Rg8+, Neukirch-Uhlmann, 1 972J
hxgS 1 3 . Rxh8t Bxh8 14. c3 [Subtler
is 14. Rb1 . (Vukic) ] Bg7 1 5 . Qb3 fS +,
Mestrovic-Vukic, Jugoslavia (ch) 1 974.
1 1 . c3

After 1 1 . Be5

a) 1 1 . .. Be7 12. f3 e3 [Sounder is 12 . . .

exf3 ! ? ] 13. N b 3 0-0 1 4 . Qd3 NdS 1 5 .
0-0-0. The pawn o n e3 needs to b e taken
care of, and White's chances were pref­
erable in Veresov-Radashkovich, USSR
1 969.
b) 1 1 . .. Bd6 12. Qe2 BxeS 13. dxeS
11. ... Be5
If the Bishop retreats to g7 White
will have a solid initiative :
a) 1 1 . . . gxh4 12. Rxh4! Bg7 [On 12 . ..

Ng4 14. f3 e3 1 S . £Xg4 Qxcll t 16. Qxcll
excll t 1 7 . Kxcll fxg4 18. RhfI Bd7 1 9 .
Rf6 Ke7 2 0 . RafI Raf8 2 1 . Ke3 bS ? ! [A
dubious weakening of the cS-square,
the immediate 2 1 . .. hs was better.] 22 .
Be2 hS 23 . Rxf8 Rxf8 24. Rxf8 Kxf8 25.
Kd4 Ke7 26. KcS a6 27. c4 and, in spite
of White's pawn deficit, he had the bet­
ter endgame in Van Mil-Geenen, Virton
1 988.
1 0. h4
Bf6, very strong is 13. QhS ! BgS (If I3 . . .
e3 (?), then 14. Ne4 exflt 1 5 . Bxfl with
a strong initiative . ) 14. Nxe4 Rg8 1 5 .
Rg4 a6 ? 16. Rdl [Ed. : 1 6. f4 is very good
too.J eS 17. Bh4 Qe7 18. Bc4 with a clear
advantage to White in Veresov-Zhelian­
dinov, USSR 1 969.J 13. Nxe4 Qe7 14. QhS
Nf6 1 S . Nxf6t Bxf6 16. Rf4 eS 17. Rxf6
Qxf6 18. BxeS. The pair of strong Bish­
ops, with the King stuck in the cen­
ter, was more than sufficient compen-
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nel d5 I. Ig5 Nbdl 4. Nfl eB
sation in Tiscnbiereh-Uhlmann, Leipzig 1 6 . Qxe4 Bc6
1983. [If 18 ... Qe7, then 19. Be2 followed and the play was complicated in Otero­
by 0-0-0 is unclear or a small advan- Camacno, Cuba (m/3) 1 998.
tage to White. ]
b) 1 1 . . . Bg7 12. Nxe4 [Take a look
at 12. hxg5 hxg5 13. Rxh8 Bxh8 14. Qh5
Game 1 2
with 0-0-0 to follow. ] Nf6 1 3 . Qxd8t
Hector-Van Mechelen
Kxd8 14. Be5 Nxe4 1 5 . Bxg7 Rh7 1 6 .
Antwerp 1994
B e 5 g4 1 7 . Rdl t Bd7 18. f3 f6 19. Bd3
fxe5 20. Bxe4 Rg7 2 1 . Rcll gxf3 22. Bxf3
c6 23 . Kf2 Kc7 24. ReI Rf8 2 5 . Rxe5 l. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Nf3
with an obviously better endgame for e6 S. e4 h6! 6. Bxi6 Nxi6 7. eS Nd7.
White in Ignatiev-Rogovoi, St. Petersburg The pawn structure which has arisen
1 998. is typical of the French Defense. Be-
1 2 . BxeS sides the move in the game, 7 . . . Ne4
After 12. Nxe4 Bxg3 1 3 . fxg3 gxh4 is also a possibility.
14. Rxh4 Qe7 1 5 . Qcll [On 1 5 . Qd4, S . Be2 Bb4
possible is 1 5 ... e5 16. Qcll f5 . ] f5 ! 16. 9 . 0 .. 0 Bxc3 ? !
Ng5 [Sounder is 16. Nfl Nf6. (Volzhin) ] A premature exchange. 9 . . . c5 was
Nf6 17. 0-0-0 Bd7 18. Nf3 0-0-0 19. Rxh6 more in the spirit of the position, af­
Ne4 20. Qe3 Rxh6 2 1 . Qxh6 Nxg3 and ter which Black would play, according
Black won the pawn in Galhin-Vohhin, to circumstances, Qd8-a5 or Qd8-c7.
Russia 1 997 (GAME IS) . 1 0. bxc3 Nb6
12. . . . NxeS 1 1 . Nel Bd7
1 3 . Qa4t 1 2 . Rb l Rbs
1£ 13. hxg5, likely is 13 ... e3 ! 14. Ne4 Just too passive. More action-packed
[ 14. fxe3 Qg5 + ] exf2t 1 5 . Kxf2 Qxdl was I2 ... Na4 13. Qcll [Or I3. Rxb7 Nxc3
1 6 . Rxdl Ke7 with a better endgame 14. Qcll Nxe2t 1 5 . Qxe2 cS with the
for Black in Veresov-Yuferov, USSR 1 974. idea of 16. dxc5 Qc8. ] b6 with c7-c5 to
13. ... B d7 follow.
1 4 . Qd4 1 3 . Nd3 Na4
Or 14. Qxe4 Nc6 1 5 . Nf3 gxh4 [ 1 5 . . . 1 4 . Qd2 Qe7
Qf6=] 16. Ne5 Nxe5 1 7 . Qxe5 Rg8 18. Again, 14 . . . cS was more energetic,
Rdl Qe7 19. Qxc7 Bc6 20. Qxe7t Kxe7 leaving a wider spectrum of choice for
1/2-1/2 0tero-Camacno, Cuba (m/1) 1 998. his Queen.
14. ... Ng6 I S . Nf4 0 .. 0
I S . hS 1 6 . c4 dxc4
On 1 5 . Qg7, good is 15 . . . Qe7 ! 16. 1 7 . Bxc4
h5 QfB 1 7 . Qd4 e5 ! = {Camacho} .
15. ... e5
The Richter-Veresov Chamelean Chess Repertoire
9. . . . Bg7
Losing is 9 . . . NxeS . Then 10. BxeS
f6. If 1 1 . QhS, then 1 1 . .. Ke7 12. Qg6 ! .
1 0. h4
Doubtful is 10. Qe2, because of 10 . . .
NxeS 1 1 . dxeS QdS .
1 0. NxeS
1 1 . BxeS BxeS
1 2 . dxeS Bd7
1 3 . Qg4
17. ... Nb6 ? ! If 1 3 . Qd4, Black transposes into a
Black does not sense any danger. favorable endgame: 13 ... Bc6! 14. QxdBt
Once again it is not too late for 17 . . . RxdB 1 5 . hxgS Rds and after winning
c S and if l B . c3 , then lB . . . RfcB. Now the pawn on eS his advantage is obvi�
White attacks the unprotected King. ous.
I S . Be2 RfdS 13. ••. Qe7
Now lB . . . cS ? fails, due to 1 9 . dxcS 1 4 . 0 .. 0 .. 0
QxcS 20. Rxb6 Qxb6 2 1 . Qxd7 . After 14. Qxe4 Bc6 ! 1 5 . Qd4 RdB I6.
1 9 . Rb3 BeS? Qc3 gxh4 Black achieves an advantage.
Tougher i s 1 9 . . . Bc6, planning the 14. 0 .. 0 .. 0
transfer of the Bishop to the e4�square. I S . Qxe4 Bc6
20. Nhs Qh4 1 6 . RxdSt RxdS
21. Rg3 Rxd4 1 7 . Qe3 gxh4
22. Rxg7t KfS Thanks to the fact that Black pos�
23. Qxh6 Ke7 sesses the d�file and causes pressure on
24. g3 Qe4 the long diagonal aB�hl , he stands
2S. QgSt better. So lB. Qxh6 ? is unfavorable to
1 .. 0 White due to l B . . . QcS 1 9 . Qf4 QdS,
but White could have shown more re�
sistance in supporting the eS�pawn by
Game 1 3
lB. f4 ! . However, having caved in to
Reynolds-Nunn
the temptation of taking the a7 �pawn,
London 1987
he gave all the key main lines up to
his opponent.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 4. NB 1 8 . Qxa7 ? ! QgS t
e6 S. e4 h6 6. Bh4 gS 7. Bg3 Nxe4 S. 1 9 . Qe3 Rd4 !
Nxe4 dxe4 9. NeS.
This overly active move allows Black
to simplify the position and seize the
initiative. Stronger was 9. Ndl.
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbdl 4. Nf3 el
3 0 . c4 cS
3 1 . a3 b6
32. b4 Kc7
0.. 1

Game 1 4
Ignatiev-Rogovoi
Russia 1 998

Stopping f2�f4, which was possible 1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Nf3
if 19 . . . Rd5 . Black threatens to attack e6 S. e4 h6 6. Bh4 gS 7. Bg3 Nxe4 S.
the e�pawn from the rear with 20 ... Re4. Nxe4 dxe4 9. Nd2 Bg7 10. c3.
20. QxgS hxgS The main line is 10. h4.
21. £3 RdS 1 0. • . . £S
22. £4 gx£4 11. h4 g4
23. Rxh4 £3 12. Bc4 N£6
24. Rhs 1 13. Qe2 0 .. 0
On this square the Rook doesn't re� 14. hs NdS
ally protect the pawn and instead be� IS. 0 .. 0 .. 0 c6
comes an obj ect of attack. He should 16. £3 bs
have been satisfied with 24. gxf3 Rxe5 17. Bb3 e3
2 5 . Bd3 Bxf3 26. Rf4 Bh5 . Another idea is 17 ... b4! ? lB. c4 Nb6
24. . . . RdS ! 19. fxg4 Qxd4 with sharp play.
2 S . Rh2 I S . Nbl £4
Now after 2 5 . gxf3 ? ? Bxf3 , due to 1 9 . Bh4
the mating threat, the Rook is lost, and
if 2 5 . g4, decisive is 25 . . . Rd4 26. Rg5
f2 .
2S. ••• RgS
2 6 . g3
A piece will be lost by 26. gxf3 Rg1
27. Rf2 Bb5 .
26. ... Rxg3
2 7 . Kd2 Rgl
Down the road a false trail would
have been 27 . . . Rg2t, because of 2B. 1 9 . ... Bf6
Bxg2 fxg2 29. RhBt Kd7 30. RgB. A double�edged game can come
2 8 . Ke l Bb5 about by 1 9 ... Qd6 20. fxg4 eS.
2 9 . Rf2 Be2 20. Qd3 !
The lichter-Veresol Cha.eleol Chess lepertaire
This explains the weakness of the Nxe4 dxe4 9. Nd2 Bg7 10. h4 Bxd4 11.
bl �h7 diagonal. After the exchange 20. c3 Be5 12. Nxe4.
Bxf6 Qxf6 21. fxg4 and 21. .. as and 22 ... Stronger was 12. BxeS NxeS 13. Qa4t
Ra7, Black would have protected his Bd7 14. Qd4 or 14. Qxe4 with equal
flanks and stood better. chances.
20. Bxh4 12. Bxg3
11. Qg6t Kh8 1 3 . fxg3 gxh4
22. Qxh6t Kg8 1 4 . Rxh4 Qe7
23. Qg6t Kh8 1 5 . Qd2
24. Bc2 On 15. Qd4, possible is 1 5 . . . eS 16.
White hopes for more than a draw Qdl fs .
and so misses the 26th move of his 15. ... f5 !
opponent. 1 6 . N g5
24. . . . Rf5 More reliable is 16. Nfl Nf6 17. Rxh6
2 5 . h6 � Rxh6 18. Qxh6 Bd7 1 9. Qh8t Qf8 20.
This is an overestimation of his pos� Qxf8t Kxf8 2 1 . O�O�O Ke7 =t . {Volzhin} .
sibilities. H e should have been satis� 16. Nf6
tied with 2 5 . BxfS exfS 26. Qh6t. 1 7. 0 .. 0 .. 0 Bd7
25. . •. Bf6 18. Nf3 0 .. 0 .. 0
2 6 . fxg4 f3 ! 19. Rxh6 Ne4
Now if27. fxgS, then winning is 27.. . 20. Qe3 Rxh6
Nf4. 21. Qxh6 Nxg3
27. Bxf5 exf5 22. Qe3 Kb8
28. gxf3 Nf4 23. B d3
29. Qf7 Be6 On 23 . . . Ne4, good is 24. Bxe4.
30. Qb7 fxg4 23 . . . . Ba4 !
31. fxg4 Bxg4 In addition to the pawn, Black
32. Rdfl Nd3 t (twins" the d�file because 24. Rdl Rh8
33. Kc2 Nf2 25. Nel Rg8 is unfavorable for White,
34. Rh2 Bf5 t and Black promotes the e�pawn.
35. Kcl Qe8 2 4 . ReI Qd6
0 .. 1 2 5 . Nd4

Game 1 5
Galkin-Volzhin
Russia 1997

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. NB

h6 S. Bh4 e6 6. e4 gS 7. Bg3 Nxe4 8.
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. Nf3 IB
work either for White.
2S. . . . Rxd4 !
2 9 . cxd4 BxbS
3 0. ds
After 30. dxc5, Bc6 Black wins the
g2-pawn because 31. Rf6 Bxg2 32. Rxf4?
does not work due to 32 . . . Ne2 .
3 0. .•. Bfl
31. d6 KcS
32. ReSt Kd7
If 25. Ne5 ? , there would have fol­ 33. Re7 t Kxd6
lowed 25 . . . Ne4 and then 2 6 . Be4H 34. Rxb7 Bxg2
would lose due to the mate on dl . 3S. Rxa7 f3
2S. .•• f4 ! 36. Rf7 Ne4
2 6 . Qxe6 37. Kdl KeS
2 6 . Qe5 is followed by the unpleasant 3S. a4 f2
26 . . . cS. 39. Ke2 fl = Qt
26. . . . Qxe6 40. Rxfl t Ng3 t
27. Rxe6 41. Kf2 Bxfl
I f 27. Nxe6, then decisive i s 27 . . . 42 . Kxg3 Kd4
Rxd3 28. N c 5 Ne2 ! . 43 . as Ba6
27. ... cS 44. Kf3 Kd3
2S. BbS 4S. Kf4 Kc2
28. Be2 Bd7 nor 28. Nb5 c4 ! won' t 0 .. 1
The Richter-Vereslv ChlllllelD Chess Reperllire

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7

4. Nf3

4 ••• g6

Black prepares to fianchetto his
Bishop fo r a flank assault on the
d4-pawn.
Even though the (I. 5. e3) is the main
continuation, White can also play (11. 5.
Qd3) . And, sometimes (Ill. 5. Qd2) is
also played.
5. .. . Bg7
6. Bd3
6. Be2 is too passive. For then there is
6 ... 0-0 and:
a) 7. 0-0 b6 [7 ... c6 B. Ne5 Nxe5 9. dxe5
Nd7 10. f4 f6 1 1 . exf6 exf6 12. Bh4 Qb6
13. Qd4 f5 14. Qxb6 axb6 15. g4 [If 15.
Ndl, then 15 ... Nf6+.] Nc5 + was played
in Svobodova-Movsesian, Brno 1 994J B.
Ne5 Bb7 9. Bf3 [9. f4 deserves attention,
then 9 ... c5 10. a4 a6 1 1 . f5 NeB 12. Ng4
Ndf6 13. fxg6 fxg6 14. Nh6t KhB 15. as

I. Nd6 16. Bf4;!; .] Ne4 10. Nxd7 Nxc3 1 1 .

Qcll Qxd7 12. Qxc3 c5 13. Qcll f6 14. Bh4
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 cxd4 15. exd4 e5 16. Rfel e4 17. Be2 RaeB
4. Nf3 g6 and Black's chances were preferable in
Miagmasuren-Browne, Lu.cerne (01) 1 982.
S . e3 b) 7. h4 can be met by 7 ... c6, while
the optimistic 7 . . . h6 8. Bf4 cS 9. NeS
keeps the initiative in White's corner.
For example: 9 . . . Qb6 10. a3 e6 1 1 . g4
NxeS 12. BxeS Ne8 13. Bxg7 Nxg7 14.
 1 . d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d 5 3 . Bg5 Nbd7 4. Nfl lB
dxcS QxcS IS. Qd4 Qxd4 16. exd4;!;, in f4 cS with sharp play for both sides in
Spangenberg-Seitaj, I Blista (01) 1998. Mihailovsky-Yandemirov, Minsk 1 996.
6. ... 0..0 After 7 . . . cS the game usually devel"
7. 0 ..0 c5 ops along the directions of (lA. 8. ReI)
The flank attack on the center cor" or (lB. 8. NeS) .
responds well with the dark"squared
Bishop's fianchetto. Sometimes it is car"
ried out after the preliminary pushing lA.
back of the Bishop by 7 . . . h6: 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7
a) B. Bh4 cS 9. ReI b6 10. e4 dxe4 4. NB g6 5. e3 Bg7 6. Bd3 0..0
1 1 . Nxe4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Bb7 13. c3. This 7. 0 ..0 c5
position does not differ basically from
the one examined in the main line. In 8. ReI
the game Miles-Christiansen, London
1 982, the game continued 13 . . . RcB I4.
Qe2 NcS l S . Nxf6 exf6 16. Bc4 Qd7 17.
f3 fS lB. Be7 [lB. Bf2 ! ? ;!; ] RfeB 1 9 . BbS
Bxd4 20. cxd4 Qxd4t 2 1 . Kfl ! Qb4? 22 .
BxeB 1,,0. As was shown by Miles, Black
could have retained equality with 21 . . .
Ne4! 2 2 . Radl QeS 23 . BxeB RxeB 24.
Bd6 QaS ! in view of the threat Bb7 "a6.
b) B. Bf4 cS 9. ReI b6 10. NeS Bb7 11.
Qf3 NhS 12. BbS NxeS 13. BxeS BxeS 14. White prepares e2"e4.
dxeS Qc7 1S. NxdS QxeS 16. Nf6t Nxf6 8. .
.. b6
17. Qxb7 Qxb2 lB. Qxe7 NdS 19. Qb7 Lately the more subtle B a6 has
. . •

QxbS 20. QxdS RadB with equal chances been seen. Unlike the main continu"
for both sides in Miles-Portisch, London ation of 9. e4 which can be met by 9 . . .
1982. cxd4 1 0 . Nxd4 h6, forcing 1 1 . Bxf6=,
Less active was 7... b6 B. e4 dxe4 9. [Since 11. Bh4? will lose a piece with
Nxe4 Bb7 10. Qe2 h6 1 1 . Bf4 Nxe4 12. 1 1 . . . dxe4 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Bxe4 NcS
Bxe4 Bxe4 13. Qxe4 Nf6 14. Qe2! e6 1S. 14. c3 Nxe4 I S . Rxe4 gS 1 6 . Bg3 fS in
Radl QcB 16. Rfel Qb7 17. h3 RadB lB. Barabas-Cs. Horvath, Budapest 1 994.1,
c4 and White had the better prospects in the natural reaction of 9. a4 is 9 . . . b6.
Miles-King, Amsterdam 1 982. Then 10. e4 dxe4 1 1 . Nxe4 cxd4 12.
Black tried 7 . . . c6 B. Qd2 [On B. ReI Nxd4 Bb7 1 3 . c3 , and Black can play
then the more active move is B Qb6 13 . . . Qc7 14. Nxf6 Nxf6 1 S . Qe2 NdS
• • •

9. Rbl eS.] ReB 9. e4 dxe4 10. Nxe4 Nxe4 1 6 . Rad1 Rfe8 17. Bc4 e6 maintaining
1 1 . Bxe4 Nf6 12. B d3 Bg4 1 3 . NeS Be6 even chances in Brynell-Kengis, Haninge
[13 ... Qxd4? 1 4. Nxf7 ± ] 14. c3 Rc8 1 S . 1 992. On 8 . . . h6 there occurred 9. Bf4
The Richter-Veresov Challeleon Chess Repertoire
b6 10. Ndl Bb7 1 1 . h3 Nhs= in Loomis­
Donlan, USA Corr. 1 999.1
9. e4
If9. NeS, then with 9 ... Bb7 10. f4 RcB
1 1 . Qf3 NeB 12. Radl a6 13. a3 f6 14.
Nxd7 Qxd7 15. Bh4 Nd6 Black played
correctly in Tihhonov-Neverov, Minsh
1996.
9. . .. dxe4
la. Nxe4 cxd4
The continuation of 10 ... Bb7 1 1 . c3
cxd4 leads to a rearranging of the move
order, but weakerwas 11. Nxf6? ! exf6 12.
Bh4 Bxf3 1 3 . Qxf3 cxd4+ which oc�
curred in Miles-Speelman, London 1 982.
11. Nxd4
12. c3
Bb7
Nxe4
Black eases the position. In other
lines White has more chances to retain
the initiative:
a) 12 . . . RcB I3. Qe2 NeS I4. Bc2 Nc4
1 5 . Radl Qc7 1 6 . NbS ! QbB I 7 . Bxf6 !
Bxf6 lB. Nxf6t exf6 19. Bb3 RfeB [19 . . .
NeS 20. f4 Nc6 2 1 . Nd6 Rc7 2 2 . QeB±
Miles-Andersson, 1 982J 20. Qg4 Rxel t
2 1 . Rxel NeS 22. Qh4 ± in Veresov­
Suetin, USSR 1 953.
b) 12 . . . Qc7 13. Qe2 RfeB 14. Radl
a6 1 S . Nxf6t Nxf6 1 6. Nf3 e6 1 7 . QeS
QxeS lB. NxeS bS 19. c4 RecB 20. Bxf6
Bxf6 21. Nd7 Bxb2 22. Nb6 b4 23 . NxaB
BxaB and White managed to win the
Exchange for the pawn, but the pres�
ence of the Bishop pair kept his ini�
tiative to a minimum in Miles-H. Dlal
sson, Lucerne (01) 1 982.
c) 12 . . . NcS 1 3 . Bxf6 exf6 14. NxcS
bxcs 1 5 . Nb3 Qb6 1 6 . Qe2 fS =, Vere�
sov-Shagalovich, USSR 1 957.
13. Bxe4 Bxe4
14. Rxe4 Nf6
15. ReI
If 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 16. Nc6 Qc7 17. Rc4
RadB! lB. Qf3 Rdl 19. b4 RfdB Black,
possessing the d�file, has sufficient
counterplay. (Hazai)
15. ... Qd5
Not as good is 15 ... Qc7 16. Qf3 RacB
17. Bf4 QcS lB. ReS Qc7 19. Nbs Qc4 20.
Nxa7 and White won a pawn in Ravi�
sehhar-Spassov, New Delhi 1 984.
16. Nf3!
White's chances were preferable in
Plashett-Hazai, Mruibor 1 985 (GAME 16) .
lB.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. Nf3 g6 5. e3 Bg7 6. Bd3 0 ..0
7. 0.. 0 c5
8. Ne5
White strives to close the diagonal to
the liKing's Indian" Bishop.
8. .. . cxd4
This is the most provoking plan to
counterattack the center. If Black plays
B NxeS immediately, then 9. dxeS Ng4
•••
and White's chances are preferred. In
Veresov-Krupshy, USSR 1 963, Black re�
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. NI3 gB
treated with 9 ... Ne8? and after 10. Bc4 IS. Be3 Qc7
Bxe5 1 1 . Nxd5 White created a minia­ 16. Qd2 Kh7
ture game upon 1 1 ... Nf6 12. Bxf6 exf6 17. £4 Nc4
13. f4 Bb8 14. Qf3 Kg7 15. Radl Qe8 16. 18. Bxc4 Qxc4
e4 b5 17. Nxf6! Kxf6 18. Bd5 1-0. with approximately equal chances in
8 . . . e6 is somewhat more passive. Voloshin-Gufeld, Alushta 1993 (GAME 18) .
Then 9. Bb5 [Also good is 9. ReI Qa5 10.
a3 a6 1 1 . Qcll cxd4 12. exd4 Nxe5 13.
dxe 5 Ng4 1 4 . Qf4 ! ± as in Veresov­ 11.
Buniatian, USSR 1 965, (GAME 4) .] h6 10. 1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7
Bh4 cxd4 1 1 . exd4 Qb6 12. a4 a6 13. as 4. Nf3 g6
Qc7 14. Nxd7 Nxd7 15. Bg3 Qd8 16. Ba4
and White's chances were very good in 5. Qd3
Alburt-Gufeld, USSR 1974 (GAME 17) .
9. exd4 NxeS
9 ... Qb6 also has its points. In Volosh­
in-Yandemrrov, Warsaw 1993, White was
tempted by a pawn: 10. Nxd7 Bxd7 1 1 .
Bxf6 Qxf6 12. Nxd5 Qxd4 13. Nxe7t Kh8
14. Be2 Be6 15. Qxd4 Bxd4 16. Rfdl Rad8
17. c4 Bxb2 and then White was faced
with a bad position. White should have
considered 10. Bb5 ! ? .
10. dxeS Ng4 White is preparing the advance e2 -e4.
11. Be2 d4! S. ... Bg7
12. Nbs NxeS If 5 . . . c6, play can head for variation
13. Nxd4 Bd7 lA., Chapter 6 (4 ... c6 5. Qd3 g6) .
Also good is 13 ... Qb6 14. c3 Qxb2 15. 6. e4 dxe4
Bxe7 Re8 16. Bb4 a5 17. Qb3 ? [Necessary 7. Nxe4 0 .. 0
was 17. Rbl=, though Gallagher gives 8. 0..0 .. 0
17 . . . Qxa2 18. Ral Qd5 19. Nb5 Qxd1 20. After 8. Nxf6 Nxf6 9. Be2 c5 10. dxc5
Bxdl Bd7! 21. Nc7 axb4 22. Rxa8 Rxa8 Qa5t 1 1 . c3 Qxc5 12. 0..0 Be6! 13. Qd4
23 . Nxa8 bxc3 + . But, better is 20. Qa5 14. a3 h6! 15. Bxf6 [On 15. Bf4 or
Rfxdl.).] Qxb3 18. axb3 Bg4, and White's 15. Bh4, good is 15 ... Nd5 ! with better
shortcomings secured for Black his real prospects for Black.] Bxf6 16. Qe3 Bg7
advantage in the endgame in Peters­ 17. N d4 Bd5 and Black got the better
Browne, USA (ch) 1 981. game in Sm!1s1ov-Gufeld, New York 1989
14. c3 (GAME 19) .
White can also play 14. Qd2. 8. ... Nxe4
14. . .. h6 After the thrust 8 . . cS, then 9. d5
.
The Richter-Vereslv ChallelelD Chess Reperllire
Nxe4 10. Qxe4 indirectly strengthens
the pinned Knight's role [The possibil­
ity of d5-d6 may arise.] and allows White
to create threats in the center. For ex­
ample: 10 ... Qb6 11. c3 Qa5 12. Bxe7 ReB
13. d6 Nb6 14. g4! Qxa2 15. Bb5 Bd7 16.
Bxd7 Nxd7 1 7. Rhel b5 lB. Qd5 and
White achieved the advantage in Hoi­
Geller, Reykjavik 1 990.
9. Qxe4 Nf6
10. Bxf6 Bxf6 White prepares to castle queenside
11. NeS Be6 and intends to exchange Bishops after
Bg5-h6. At the same time he does not
preclude the possibility of preparing for
e2-e4.
S. ... h6
If Black ignores White's threats he
risks being attacked: 5 . . . Bg7 6. Bh6 0-0
7. h4 e6 B. h5 Qe7 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10.
hxg6 £Xg6 1 1 . Qh6t KgB 12. Qh4 e5 13.
0-0-0 c6 14. e4, and the position was
opened up in White's favor in Mestro­
12. f4 c6 vic-Z. Ivanovic, Pula 1 996.
13. h4 QdS The effect of the Knight swooping
14. QxdS adS to e4, that is, S . . . Ne4 6. Nxe4 dxe4 is
IS. BdJ BxeS hardly effective. The game Muratov­
16. dxeS Bg4 Tsiganov, Moscow 1 996, continued 7. Ngl
with approximately even chances in h6 B. Bf4 Bg7 9. 0-0-0 Nf6 10. e3 Be6
Mestrovic-Brenjo, Yugoslavia (ch) 1 991. 1 1 . Kb1 NhS 12. Ne2 f5 ? ! 13. f3 exf3
14. gxf3 Qd5 1 5 . Nc3 Qa5 1 6 . e4, and

Ill. White gained the advantage in the cen-

ter.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 6. Bf4 c6
4. Nf3 g6 7. NeS
By maintaining his piece influence in
5. Qd2 the center, White will use f3 to prepare
for e2-e4.
7. ... Bg7
On 7 ... Nb6, possible is 8. 0-0-0 Bg7
9. £3 NhS 10. e4 Nxf4 1 1 . Qxf4 Be6 and
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. Nf3 18
here in the game Sadvakasov-Blenm, Bra­
Game 1 6
tislava 1 993, instead of 12. Qg3 ? ! [12. Kb1
Plaskett- Hazai
is better.], which brings 12 ... Qc7 13. Bd3
Maribor 1 985
0-0-0, Black gets a good game.
8. Nxd7 Bxd7
9. BeS BfS 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 4. e3
10. f3 g6 S. Bd3 Bg7 6. Nf3 0 .. 0 7. 0..0 cS.
8 . ReI
An alternative is 8 . NeS .
8. b6
9. e4 dxe4
10. Nxe4 cxd4
11. Nxd4 Bb7
12. c3 Nxe4
Black simplifies the position. 12 . . .
Rc8 1 3 . Qe2 leads t o a more compli­
cated game.
White has everything ready to push 13. Bxe4 Bxe4
his e-pawn, and apparently the forth­ 14. Rxe4 Nf6
coming clash will revolve around the e4- IS. Re I (tdS
square. For example, in Mestrovic-Kodric, 1 6. Nf3 ! (tb7
Ljubljana 1 995, the game continued After 1 6 . . . e6 1 7 . Bxf6 Qxd1 1 8 .
10. hS Raxd1 Bxf6 1 9 . Rd7 Rfd8 20. Red1 Kf8
11. 0..0..0 Bh6 21. Rxd8t Rxd8 22. Rxd8t Bxd8 23. Nd4
12. e3 (td7 and White has the preferable endgame
13. Bd3 Rg8 because Black must protect the pawn
14. Kbl (te6 pair on his queenside.
IS. Rhel Nd7 1 7 . (te2 h6
16. Bg3 (tf6 1 8 . Bh4 e6
17. (te2 h4 1 9 . Radl
18. Bf2 Bxd3 The struggle for the initiative, in
19. (txd3 e6 many aspects, depends on possessing
1 9 . . . 0-0-0 is better, + / = . the d-file. Therefore, in hindsight of
20. e4 the move Rf8-d8, it would have been
and White carried out his plan of seiz­ more cunning to exploit the possibil­
ing the center. His advantage was win­ ity of a bind by 1 9 . NeS ! Rfd8 20. Ng4
ning. gS 2 1 . Nxf6t Bxf6 22. Bg3 . (Hazai)
1 9. ... Rid8
2 0 . Nd4
Here, on 20. NeS Black has 20 . . . Rds!
The Richter-Vereslv Cha_IIIID Chess Repertlire
20. Bxd7 29. Qd7
2 1 . Bg3 Nhs 3 0 . Nf3 f6
22. BeS BxeS 3 1 . Nh4
23 . QxeS Rad8 More accurate was 3 1 . h3 .
31. Qf7
3 2 . Qe4 Kg7
3 3 . Rh3 � !
Here too it still wasn't too late for
33. h3 .The Rook on the kingside is a
drawback which allows the initiative
to pass to Black.
33 . . . . Rdl
3 4 . Kfl � !
34. Rhe3 is a little better. With the
24. g4 � text move the King's return to the center
An unj us tifi e d weake ning. H e leads to material losses.
should have been content with 24. g3 . 34. Ne7 !
24. ... Ng7 � ! 3S. Rxdl Rxdl t
Black misses the chance to make use 36. Ke2 Rd8
of White's mistake. 24 . . . Rd5 2 5 . Qe4 37. Rd3 Rxd3
Nf6 26. Qf3 Nxg4 ! . 38. Kxd3 Ne6
2 S . Rd3 Rds 39. Kd2 NeS
2 6 . Qf6 eS � 40. Qe2 Qd7
This overly active move could have 0 .. 1
cost Black the game. Black could have
used this threat after the preliminary
Game 1 7
26 . . . Qd7 .
Alburt-Gufeld
2 7 . Rde3 ! Ne8
USSR 1974
It turns out that taking the Knight
by 27 . . . exd4? loses due to 28. Re7. 27 . . .
Qd7 is too late because o f 28. Nc6 ! . Here is a game where the "psycho­
2 7 . ... Ne8 logical moment" moment is at work.
2 8. Qe6 ! I have not had this opening many times
This is stronger than 28. Qf3 because in my practice, so I did not feel very
of 28 . . . f6 . good in this lively and new position.
2 8 . ... Qe7 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS.
2 9 . Qe4 � ! As many know, the King's Indian
After 29. f4! Qh4 30. fxe5 Qxg4t 3 l . Defense is in my opening repertoire.
Rg3 White would carry out the deci­ My opponent invites me to play the
sive breakthrough with eS -e6. Pirc Defense, or other defenses.
 1. d4 Nfl 2. Ncl d5 I. Ig5 Nbdl 4. Nil 1I
3. BgS Nbd7 26. Rxe6 fxg3
4. Nf3 g6 27. Qxb6 gxf2t
S. e3 Bg7 2S. Kfl Qh4
6. B d3 0 .. 0 29. Qc7 Rf7
7. 0 .. 0 cS 30. Qg3 QdS
S. NeS e6 � ! 31. Nc6
Later I had this position a second The Knight, once a prisoner, now
time and knew how to play it (see be� has his freedom.
low) . 31. Qd7
9. Bbs h6 32. Qxg6 BcS
10. Bh4 cxd4 33. Re2 Qb7
11. exd4 Qb6 34. ReSt RfS
12. a4 a6 3S. Ne7t
Better is 12 . . . Nxe5 1 3 . dxe5 Nd7. 1 .. 0
1 3 . as Qc7
1 4 . Nxd7 Nxd7
Game 1 8
Why not 14 . . . Bxd7 ?
Voloshin-Gufeld
I S . Bg3 QdS
Alushta 1 993
1 6 . Ba4 bS
Much better is 1 6 ... NbB ! ? with the
idea of BcB�d7 and NbB�c6. 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Nf3
1 7 . axb 6 Nxb6 g6 S. e3 Bg7 6. BdJ 0.. 0 7. 0..0 cS.
I S. Bc6 S . NeS
Now you can see how well Alburt White closes the dark�squared Bish�
plays when his pieces have freedom! op's diagonal.
IS. ... Ra7 S . ... cxd4
1 9. Nbs Re7 If B Nxe5, then after 9. dxe5 Ng4
. • •

20. Nd6 Ra7 White's chances are preferred.

21. c3 ! 9 . exd4 NxeS
White has a clear advantage. 10. dxeS Ng4
2 1 . ... Bd7 � � 1 1 . Be2 d4 !
2 2 . NbS ! This completely equalizes. From a
I had decided that a Knight on a7 philosophical viewpoint, it means that
would not be safe. Black has accomplished his part of the
22. Bxc6 game in a better way.
2 3 . Nxa7 Bb7 1 2 . NbS NxeS
24. Qb3 fS 1 3 . Nxd4 Bd7
Black is trying to complicate, but 14. c3
Alburt is on a hill ! 14. Qdl deserved attention because
2 5 . Rfe l f4 of the possibility of 14 . . . Nc6.
The Richler-Veresol Challeleon Chess Replrllire
3S. axbs

19. Rdl
The desired 19. c4 [Which was pos­ 3S. ••• Bd7?
sible on 18. Radl .] does not work now In time pressure Black misses his
because of 19 . . . Bxc4! 20. Bxc4 Qc5 2 l . chance to win the game: 35 . . . Bxg2t!
Bxf7t Rxf7 2 2 . Ne6 Rxd1 t 23 . Rxd1 36. Bxgl f3 37. Bxf3 [Or 37. Ne4 fxg2t
Qxe3 24. fxe3 Bxb2 . Now the initia­ 38. Kxg2 Bd4 39. Qc2 Bxc5.] Qh4 and
tive passes to Black. Black wins.
19. ... eS! 36. QB!
20. NB Bb3 Immediately stopping the threat of
21. ReI a6 f4-f3 , which would have occurred if
22. Bfl Qc7 White had played 36. Nxb7?
23. h3 Rxdl 36. ... Bxd6
24. Nxdl Bd5 37. Rxd6!
2S. c4 Bc6 The ex-world champion's intuition
26. cS fS is amazing, because if 37. cxd6 had been
27. Nc4 e4 played, then I would have replied with
28. b4 Kh7 37 . . . Qe1 L
29. Nd6 BeS 37. ... BxbS!
30. Rdl Qe7! 38. Qxf2 Bxfl ?
The Queen has been switched over Black is stunned by the magic of f4-
to attack. On the natural 30 . . . Rd8, f3, otherwise a clear mind would have
White would protect himself with 3 1 . produced 38 . . . Bc6 39. Bd3 Rf6, retain­
Qb3 . ing the threat and the pawn.
31. Qb3 f4 39. Qxfl B?!
32. a4 e3! 40. gxf3 Rf7
33. bs exflj Of course, in difficult time pressure,
34. Khl it isn' t always easy to find a good time
On 34. Kxf2 then decisive would have control move such as 40 . . . h5 !
been 34 ... Qh4t 35. Kgl f3 36. bxc6 Qg3. 41. Qgl ! Rg7
34. ... axb5 42. Qd4!
 1. d4 NIB 2. NI:3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. Nfl lB
After centralizing the Queen the 45. Rd7 Rxd7
worst is over. 46. Qxd7t Kh6
42. Qe2 47. Qd4 Kh7
43. i4 Qilt 48. Qd7t
44. Kh2 h5 1/2 .. 1/2

IM Gavril Veresov (1912 .. 1979)

Although the White Russian Veresov
played this system differently than the
German Richter in his strategical aims, he
too obtained marked successes with it,
even against much stronger opponents. He
even played it in the final of the 1940
USSR championship according to Hooper
and Whyld. Others, before Richter and
Veresov, had played the 2. Nc3 + 3. BgS
line before them, but their frequent use
and successes have forever made it the
Richter-Veresov.
Ihe lichter-Veresll Challelean Chess lepertaire

We'll discuss (I. 4. Qd3) first (though

not played as much) , and then White's lA.
main strategical move (11. 4. f3) . 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. Qd3

I. 4 ••• e6
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3 . BgS Nbd7

4. Qd3

Black quietly carries on with his

development, and gets a Rubinstein�
style French.
White prepares the move e2 �e4 with 5 . e4 dxe4
the aid of the Queen, and counts on Also deserving of attention is 5 . . .
organizing piece pressure on the cen� Bb4! ? ( Suetin) .
ter. Black's main replies are lA. 4 e6,
..• 6. Nxe4 Be7
lB. 4 ... h6, and IC. 4 ... c5 . 7 . Nxf6t
Seldom seen is 4 ... c6 5. e4 [The move Or 7. Bxf6 Nxf6 B. O�O�O Nxe4 9. Qxe4
5. Nf3 is examined in Chapter 6.] dxe4 Qd5 10. Qxd5 exd5 with an even end�
6. Nxe4, where White has the freer game, Sagalchih-Kharlov, Kemerovo 1 995.
game. E.g., 6 . . . Nxe4 7. Qxe4 Qa5 t B. 7. Bxf6
Bd2 Qd5 9. Qe3 Nf6 10. Nf3 Bf5 1 1 . 8. Bxf6 Nxf6
c4 Qe4 12. Ne5 RdB 1 3 . Qxe4 Nxe4 14. 9 . Nf3 0 .. 0
Be3 f6 15. Nf3 e6 1 6 . o�o�o. White had 1 0. Be2
the better chances in Hachian-Koniush� If instead White fianchettos with 10.
hov, Moscow 1 9 96. g3 b6 1 1 . Bg2 Bb? 12. O�O Be4 13. Qe2

Qd5 14. c4 Qb7 1 5 . Rfdl RadB, then
Black controls the long diagonal and
got the better chances in Negulescu-A.
Schneider, Cappelle la Grande 1 993.
1 0. •• . b6
1 1 . 0 .. 0
According to Suetin, White has the
better game after 1 1 . O�O�O.
11. . .
. Bb7
12. Rfdl Be4
The game is even, Smyslov-Geller,
USSR (ch) 1 977 (GAME 20) .
lB.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. Qd3
4 ••• h6
Just like in a number of similar situ�
ations, it is useful to drive the Bishop
back.
5. Bh4
On 5. Bf4, then 5 . . . cS 6. e3 e6 de�
serves attention because 7. Nb5 ? ! c4
B. Qdl Ne4 9. Nc7t Ke7! 10. Qb4t Kf6
1 1 . Qa4 g5 12. NxaB gxf4 13. Qxa7 [On
13. £3 a6 14. c3 ! Nd6 15. e4, Black plays
1 5 . . Kg7 + . ] fxe3 14. fxe3 Bb4t 15. Ke2
. 8 . Nxf6
Kg7 1 6 . N £3 Qa5 ! was unfavorable to
1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. Od3/f3
White in Bellin-Nikolac, Eerbek 1978 and
which continued 17. Qxa5 Bxa5 lB. c3
Ndf6 1 9 . Ne5 Bd7 20. Nxd7 Nxd7 2 1 .
g3 RxaB 2 2 . Bgl Ndf6 23. Rhfl Nxc3 t
24. Kf2 Ng4t 2 5 . Kgl Ne2t 26. Khl
Nxe3 , O� 1 .
5 . ... e6
Also good is 5 . . . c6, on which 6 .
O�O�O? ! i s risky [Sounder i s 6 . Nf3 . ] .
Then 6 . . . b5 7. f3 b 4 B . N b l Qb6 9. e4
e6 10. e5 NhS 1 1 . Nh3 g5 12. Bf2 cS ! .
Black eventually Itproved" his advan�
tage in Rossetto-Darga, Lugano (01) 1 968.
[The game went a few more moves: 13.
g4 c4 14. Qe3 Nf4 15. Nxf4 gxf4 1 6 .
Qxf4 Be7 17. h 4 Qa5 1B. B e l Qxal l9.
c3 b3 20. Rh2 as 21. Rddl a4 (like a
freight train) 22. g5 hxg5 ( only an in�
terlude) 23. hxg5 Rxh2 24. Qxh2 NfB
(preventing an annoying check fol�
lowed by g5 �g6) 25. f4 Qal ! 26. f5 a3
O� 1 . Rossetto was a very experienced
handler of the Richter,Veresov, with
games dating back to 1 959 which in�
eluded wins over Quinteros, Silman,
and many opponents in the Argentine
championships. ]
Another try was 5 . . . c S 6 . dxc5 e6
7. e4 dxe4 B. Nxe4 Qa5t 9. c3 Nxe4 10.
Qxe4 Qxc5 1 1 . Nf3 Be7 12. Bxe7 Qxe7
13. O�O�O O�O with equal chances, Gove,
darica-Mestel, Belgrade 1 982.
6 . e4 dxe4
Suetin recommends 6 ... Bb4 ! ? [Af�
ter 7 . exd5 exd5 B. Nf3 , the B/b4 will
eventually lose a tempo by returning
to e7 .]
7. Nxe4 Be7
If 8. O�O�O? Nxe4 9 . Bxe7 Nxf2 ! 10.
The lichler-VereslI I:hallllelD I:hlss Ilpertaire
Qf3 Qxe 7 1 1 . Qxf2 O�O and White lost over the d�file secured the better chances
a pawn in Lalev-Espig, Varna 1 983. for White in Freisler-Delchev, Pardubice
8. . .• Bxi6 1 997.
9. Bxi6 Nxf6 8. Nxe4 Qa5t
10. Nf3 0..0 9. c3 Nxe4
with approximately equal chances. 10. Qxe4 Qxc5
11. NB Be7

le. 12. Bd3

with White having the more active
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cl5 3. BgS Nbd7 game.
4. Qd3

4 ... c5 11.

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cl5 3. BgS Nbd7

4. f3

Black strives to outdo his opponent.

5. Bxf6
Premature is 5 . e4 cxd4, which gave
Black good play in 6. Bxf6 Nxf6 7. Nxd5
Nxd5 8 . Qb5 t Bd7 9. Qxd5 Bc6 10. White fights for the creation of a
Qxd8t Rxd8 1 1 . f3 e5+, Juergens-Ernst, pawn center. Black's replies are 4 ... c5
Groningen 1 992. If 5 . dxc5, then good (see below) , 4 c6 (chapter 10) , and
•. .

is 5 . . . e6 [For example, 6 . b4 as 7. Nb5 4 .. e6 (Chapter 1 1 ) . Lately the pre�

.

axb4 8. Qg3 ! e5 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. e4 Qa5] . liminary 4 ... h6 (Chapter 12) has been
5. Nxf6 seen frequently.
6. dxc5 e6
7. e4 dxe4
Doubtful is 7 ... d4, because of 8. O�O�O 4 . .• c5
Bxc5 9. Na4 b6 10. e5 Nd7 1 1 . Qg3 Qc7
12. Nf3 O�O 1 3 . Bd3 h6 14. Be4 Rb8 1 5 .
Nxd4 Bxd4 1 6 . Rxd4 Qxe5 17. Qxe5
Nxe5 18. Rhdl , and absolute control

A thematic reaction to weaken the
gl -a7 diagonal after f2 -f3 has been
played.
5. e4
At this point there are two popular
methods for relieving the pawn pres-
sure: IIA. 5 ... cxd4 and lIB. 5 dxe4.
.•.
It's not a good idea for White to try
to win a pawn with 5 . dxc5 Qa5 [Or
5 . . . e6 6. b4 Be7 7. Rbl as B. a3 b6 9.
c6 Ne5 10. b5 Bxa3 1 1 . e4 Bb4 12. Bdl
dxe4 13. Na4, with an unclear game
for White (or perhaps ;t ) in Hachian­
A. Donchenko, Moscow 1 995.J 6. Bxf6
Nxf6, and 7. Qd4 bumps into 7 . . . e5 !
B. Qxe5t Be6 9. e4 Bxc5! 10. 0-0-0 [Weak
is 10. Bb5t?! KfB l l . 0-0-0 Be3t 12. Kbl
d4 with the advantage to Black in Wock­
enfuss-Timman, Bad Lauterberg 1 977.J
0-0-0, and having absolute possession
of all the dark squares is more than
enough compensation for the sacrificed
pawn.
lIA.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. f3 c5 5. e4
5 ... cxd4
1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Ig5 Nbdl 4. Idl/fI
This is how Black entices the Queen
to d4, and assisting is the thrust e7-e5 .
6. Bxf6
Black gets an easy game after 6. Qxd4
e5 7. Qa4 d4 B. N d5 [Weaker is B. Bxf6
Qxf6 9. Nd5 QdB 10. f4 Bc5 1 1 . Nf3
0-0 12. 0-0-0 a6 13. fxe5 Nxe5 14. Nxd4
Bg4 + , Steinberg-Anka, BalatonberenM
1 993.J Be7 9. Nxe7 Qxe7 10. Ne2 h6 1 1 .
B dl 0-0=, Bellon Lopez-Keene, Dortmund
1 980 (GAME 21) .
6. ... Nxf6
It is risky to leave the Bishop on the
long diagonal: 6 . . . dxc3 7. Bxc3 dxe4
B. fxe4 e6 9. Nf3 [9. Qf3 Qh4t 10. g3
Qh6 1 1 . Nh3 [If 1 1 . Bdl, then 1 1 . . .
Qf6=.] Be7 12. e 5 0-0 1 3 . Nf4 Nc5 14.
Bgl Bd7 1 5 . h4 [If 1 5 . 0-0-0, then 15 . . .
Bc6 16. Qe2 Bxgl l7. Qxgl as with the
idea of b7 -b5-b4, a5 -a4 and Black is
counterattacking.] Bc6 16. Qe2 f5 [16 . . .
Bxg2 1 7 . Qxg2 as ! with the idea of
b7-b5=.] 17. Bxc6 bxc6 1B. Bb4 g5 +, G.
Portisch-Tunik, Budapest 1 992 [1 9. Ng2
Nd3t 20. Qxd3 Bxb4t 21. c3 Rad8 and
White can't castle. (Bd. Note: WhM not 1 9.
Bxc5 Bxc5 20. Nd3 and then 0-0-0 ?)J Qb6
10. Qdl Bc5 1 1 . Bxg7 Be3 12. Qd3 Bflt
13. Ke2 RgB 14. Bd4 when Black had
no compensation for the pawn in Fang-
The Richter-Vereslv Chlllelean Chess Reperlaire
D. Brown, Philadelphia 1 990.
If 6 ... exf6 or 6 . . . gxf6, White replies
7. Qxd4 and then castles queenside.
7. Qxd4 dxe4
8. BbSt
Should the Queens be exchanged by
8. Qxd8t Kxd8, Black attains equal�
ity easily: 9. O�o�ot Kc7 10. fxe4 [And
if 10. Bc4 e6 1 1 . Nxe4 Nxe4 12. fxe4,
Black gets a good endgame. ] Bg4 1 l .
Nf3 e S 12. Bc4 Bb4 1 3 . NbSt Kb6 14. If 13 . . . g6 [With the threat of 14 . . .
a3 a6 1 S . Nc7 Kxc7 16. axb4 Nxe4 1 7 . Bh6t.] then 14. Nf3, aIvi already two
'
Rhe1 Nd6 18. RxeS. The game i s even, pawns are 11 hanging."
Keller-Bunk, German!1 1 996. 14. Nc3
8. ... Bd7 After 14. Nc7t Kd7 1 S . Nf3 Bd6 16.
9. 0.. 0..0 BxbS Rd1 Ke7 1 7 . NdSt NxdS 18. RxdS f6,
It is risky to accept the pawn sacri� and Black felt comfortable in Vogler­
fiee: 9 . . . exf3 ? ! 10. Nxf3 a6 1 l . Ba4 bS Friedricn, German!1 1 993.
12. Bb3 e6 13. NeS, and there is no guar� 14. bs
antee the black King will lead a com� 15. Rc6 b4
fortable life. For example: 13 . . . Qc7 14. 16. Na4 Nxe4
Ne4 Nxe4 1 5 . Qxe4 Rd8 16. Rhf1 fs 17. Nf3 Bd6
1 7 . Qe2 [17. RxfS ! exfS 18. Bf7t. 1 8 . . . 18. ReI £S
Ke7 fails to 1 9 . Qh4t gS 1 9 . QxgS#.] 19. NxeS 0..0
Bc8 [Preventing 18. Rxfs! exfS 19. Nc6t, The chances were equal in Vogler­
but not for long.] 18. Rxd8t Kxd8 1 9 . Munch, German!1 1 9 96.
RxfS ! exfS 2 0 . Nf7t Qxf7 2 1 . Bxf7, and
it appears that Black did not have
enough for his Queen inJugl ard Mo u.1
lain, France 1 989.
- �

lIB.
10. NxbS Qxd4 1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
11. Rxd4 eS 4. f3 cS S. e4

5 ... dxe4
12. Rc4
Or 12. Nc7t Ke7 13. NdSt NxdS 14.
Rxds exf3 1 S . RxeSt with an even end�
game. (Alburt)
12. ... Rd8
13. fxe4 a6

Sharp play arises as a result of this
exchange.
6. fxe4 Portisch-T. Horvath, zalakaros 1 991.
6. dxcs QaS 7. BbS a6 B. Bxd7t Nxd7
favors Black: 9. Qd4 eS l0. Qxe4 NxcS !
1 1 . QxeSt Be6 12. Bf4 Be7 and, since
taking on g7 is risky, Black's Bishop
pair was full compensation for the
sacked pawn in Capello-Leng!:1el, Reggio
Emilia 1 979/80.
6. ... QaS
In threatening to take on d4, Black
indirectly attacks the Bishop ( L e . ,
. . . QaS ) . I n the event the immediate
6 . . . cxd4 is played, then 7. Qxd4 and
the open character of the position al�
lows White to exploit the use of his
active pieces:
a) 7 . . . QaS ? B . eS ! e6 [B QxeSt 9.
• . •
QxeS NxeS 10. NbS ± ] 9. Bbs Bb4 10. and the game was agreed drawn in
exf6 QxbS 1 1 . fxg7 RgB 12. Nf3 QcS Morozevich-Timoshenko, Alushta 1 994.
1 3 . QxcS NxcS 14. O�O�O Bd7 1 5 . Bf6,
with a full clamp in Rajna-Vogt, Leip�
zig 1 976 (GAME 22) .
b) 7 . . . eS B. Qa4 Be7 ? ! [Stronger was
B BcS . ] 9 . Bxf6 Bxf6 10. O�O�O a6 1 1 .
• • •
Nf3 RbB 1 2 . Qa3 Qe7 1 3 . Rd6 b S 14.
NdS b4 1 S . Nxe7 bxa3 16. NxcB RxcB
17. Bxa6 axb2t lB. Kbl RbB 1 9 . Rds
Ke7 20. Rhdl , with an obviously bet�
1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 1.5 Nbdl 4. Qdl/f3
ter endgame for White in Muratov­
Umansk!:1, Moscow 1 989.
7. Bxf6 exf6
8. QhS
The lunge B. dS allows Black to settle
comfortably on the eS�square: B Bd6 • . •
9. Nf3 O�O 10. Be2 NeS 1 1 . Qd2 Bd7
12. O�O RfeB 1 3 . Nh4 a6 14. Nfs BfB
1 5 . a4 Qb4 1 6 . as RacB 1 7 . Khl g6 lB.
Ng3 Bg7 19. Rfb 1 hs and, by regrouping
the pieces in the spirit of the Benoni,
Black gained the better chances in G.
8. ... g6
9. Qd5 Be7
9 . . . Nb6 10. Qb3 cxd4 1 1 . Qbst QxbS
12. Nxbs Bb4t. But, 10. Bbst gives
White the advantage. [Ed. Note: 1 dis�
agree because of 1 0 ... Ke7!. Eduard an�
swered 11. Qxc5t. But, 1 replied 11. .. Kd8!.
1f12. O�O�O Bxc5 13. dxc5t Nd7 and Black
wins; if 1 2. Qxf8t Rxf8 and Black wins; if
12. Nf3 Bxc5 13. dxc5 a6 14. o�O�Ot Ke7
15. Nd4 axb5 16. Nb3 Qa6 and Black wins;
if 12. b4 Qa3 13. Nge2 Bxc5 14. bxc5 Bg4
15. o�o Nd7 and Black wins!.]
10. BbS O�O
1 1 . Bxd7 Rd8
12. O�O�O Rxd7
Game 2 0
Smyslov-Geller
USSR (ch) 1 977
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Qd3
e6 S. e4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Be7 7. Nxf6.
If 7. Bxf6 Nxf6 8. O�O�O, Black un�
The Richter-Veres., Cha.eleal Chess Reperllire
loads the position: 8 . . . Nxe4 9 . Qxe4 moving to b 7, and is therefore useful
Qd5 . in the cause of weaking the a7 �gI di�
7. Bxi6 agonal.
8. Bxi6 Nxf6 18. £3 Bb7
9. Nf3 0..0 19. d5
10. Be2 b6 Black's tasks would be more com�
11. 0.. 0 plicated upon the Rooks being doubled
After 1 1 . O�O�o, there arises a posi� after 1 9. Rdl.
tion with opposite�sides castling, where 19. exd5
White's chances look preferable. 20. ad5 c6
11. Bb7 21. dxc6 Bxc6
12. Ridl Be4 22. Bc4 -:, BeS
13. Qb3 23. Nd5 Qe5
From the ambush at b8, the Queen,
which was recently trapped by her own
pawns, controls the position. On the
obvious 24. ReI , Black has the reply
24 . . . Qd4t 25. KhI b5 ! . Now White
makes an offer . . . Peace.
24. Qc3

Game 2 1
13. ... Qb8!
Bellon Lopez-Keene
A keen understanding of the posi�
Dortmund 1980
tion, the key to which is in control�
ling the long diagonal a8� hI . Black in�
tends to move his Queen to b 7. 1. Nc3 d5 2. d4 N£6 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3
14. Ndl Bd5! � c5 5. e4 cxd4 6. Qxd4.
In trying to be active Black weak� This helps Black to seize the center.
ens the d4�pawn. Usually this is avoided by the prelimi�
15. c4 Bb7 nary exchange 6. Bxf6 Nxf6 7. Qxd4.
16. N£1 RdS 6. ... e5
17. Ne3 Be4 7. Qa4
The Bishop does its job along the Now the exchange 7. Bxf6 exd4 8.
long diagonal, gaining extra pluses for Bxd8 dxc3 9. BaS cxb2 10. Rb 1 dxe4 leads
its position. White was getting ready to a better endgame for Black.
for the push d4�d5, which is impossible 7. ... d4
for the time being because the d5�pawn S. Nds
will be attacked by the black Queen The exchange of the Bishop, 8. Bxf6
 1. d4 NIB 2. Nel d 5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. Od3/fI
Qxf6 9. NdS QdB I0. f4 BcS, weakens more logical.
th e defense of the pawns on the dark 17. ... Nd6!�
s quares. On lB. Bb4, Black sacrifices the Ex�
8. Be7 change. Then lB . . . NcB [lB . . . Nxc4 19.
9. Nxe7 Qxe7 Rcl ! ] 19. BxfB NxfB, and after N fB�g6,
10. Ne2 h6 Black counts on posting his Knight on
11. Bdl 0..0 either of the weak squares f4 or h4.
12. g4� ! 18. Rel �!
A risky weakening o f the position. The sacrifice should have been ac�
More cautious is 12. Ng3 NcS 13. Qa3 . cepted since now White has no kind
12. ... Nb6 of counterplay.
White's risky move could have been 18. b6
refuted by a Bishop sacrifice: 12 . . . NcS 19. h4 £6
13. Qa3 Bxg4! ? 14. £Xg4 Nfxe4. (Keene) 20. N£S Nxfs
13. Qb4 Qc7 21. gxfS Bf7
14. Ng3 Ne8 22. b3 BhS
If I4 ... Qxc2 1S. Rcl Qa4, and White 23. Kf2 as
has compensation because of his ini� 24. Be2 NeS
tiative. 16. Qxa4 Nxa4 1 ? b3 Nb6 and Black's pieces are ready for decisive
lB. Rc? is unclear. action.
I S . c4 2S. Regl Kh7
If lS. O�O�O, then 15 . . . as ! ? gives Black 26. Rg2 Qb7
a small advantage. 27. Rhgl Rg8
IS. Be6 28. ReI Rad8
16. QaS Nd7 29. Qel Bxi3 !
17. Qa3 After this sacrifice White's position
is in ruins.
30. Kxf3 Nxe4
31. Bxh6 gxh6
32. Rg6 Rxg6
33. fxg6t Kg7
34. Bdl NeSt
01
..

Game 2 2
Rajna-Vogt
Unjustified optimism. Black will be
Leipzig 1 976
better mobilized for the upcoming
battle and a transposition into the
endgame. 1 7 . Qxc7 Nxc7 l B . b4 was 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3
The Richter-Vereslv ChlllelelD Chlss Repert.ire
c5 5. e4 dxe4 6. fxe4 cxd4 . 18. �1 Bxg2�
More cunning is 6 ... Qa5, indirectly This could have led to a quick loss.
attacking the Bishop. It was necessary to I t even-out" the
7. Qxd4 Qa5� Bishop on f6 : lB . . . Be7 1 9. g3 Nxf6 20.
Nxf6t Bxf6 2 1 . Rxf6 Rxg7 22 . Rxh6,
and the extra pawn would guarantee
White an enduring advantage.
19. Rf4�
The intermediate Knight maneuver
1 9 . NbS ! , with the threat of mate on
c7, would have decided the game, since
after 1 ,,� .. RcB 20. Rf4 BcS 21. Rc4, Black
could not protect himself against the
Knight invasion to d6 .
Missing the threat. The natural 7 . . . 19. Bc5
e S B . Qa4 BcS guaranteed Black against 20. Kbl a6
any shocks. (Vogt) 21 . Rd3 Bc6
8. e5! e6 Black managed to not only win back
I t turns out that after taking the a pawn, but to consolidate his position
pawn: B . . . QxeSt? 9. QxeS NxeS 10. as well.
NbS, Black cannot prevent the Knight's 22. Ne4
invasion, and if B NxeS 9. Bbst [9.
• • • White might even have a slight ad­
b4?, then 9 ... Nc6 ! ] Nc6 10. Bxf6 gxf6 vantage with 22. Rdl Be 7 23. Rgl eS
1 1 . 0-0-0 Bh6t 12. Kbl oo/�, then Black 24. Rffl bS ! ? 25. a3 as .
cannot get untangled without mate­ 22. Bxe4
rial losses. 23. Rxe4 Be7
9. Bb5 Bb4 24. Bd4�
Also favoring White is 9 . . . Nds l0. It was necessary to protect the Bishop
0-0-0. with 24. Rf4. Now Black cuts off the
10 exf6
. Qxb5 Knight.
11. £Kg7 Rg8 24. £6!
12. NB Qc5 25. Rg3 Kf7
13. Qxc5 Nxc5 26. Reg4 e5
14. 0-0-0 Bd7 27. Bc3 £5
15. B£6 28. Rg6 N£6
This hits the bulls eye in cooperation 29. Nxf6 Bxf6
with the promoting of the g-pawn. 30. Rxh6 Rae8
15 . . . . Bc6 Depriving White of his last illusion
16. Ng5 h6 connected with 30 . . . Rxg7? because of
17. Nh7 Nd7 31. Rxf6t! Kxf6 32. Bxe5 Kxe5 33. Rxg7.
 1. d4 RfB 2. Re3 d5 I. 115 Rbdl 4. Id3/f3
31. a4 Rxg7 38. h4 Be7
32. Rxg7t KXg7 39. hs f3t
33. Rh3 £4 40. Kf2 BcS t
In spite of material equality, White 41 . Kg3 Bd6t
has nothing to stop the e- and f-passed 42. Kh4 BeS
pawns. 43. Rxb7 Bxc3
34. Kc1 Kg6 44. bxc3 e3
3S. Kd1 Kfs 4S. Kg3 e2
36. Ke2 BgS 46. Rf7t Ke6
37. Rh7 e4 0 .. 1

A List of Richter's Books

A short list of some of Kurt Richter's writings :

Carl Carls una die, Bremer Ptutie 1957, WaIter de

Gruyter
Der Schachpraktiker 1959, WaIter de Gruyter
Einftille-Reinfalle 1960, WaIter de Gruyter
Kombinationen 1955, WaIter de Gruyter
Kurzgeschichten um Schachfiguren 1955, WaIter de
Gruyter
Mein erstes Schachbuch 1959, WaIter de Gruyter
Schach-Delikatessen 1960, WaIter de Gruyter
Schacheroffnung (Der kleine Bilguer) with
Teschner 1961, WaIter de Gruyter
Schachmatt 1958, WaIter de Gruyter
The Richter-Verlslv ChamelelR Chess Re.erllire

1. d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7

4. £3

4 . .• c6

When this natural move is played

Having protected the ds pawn first,
Black lets his Queen get to a more ac­
tive position, where it can have a stron­
ger influence on the center. Now the
main continuations are I. 5. e4 and 11.
5. Qd2 .
Black makes use of the gS-Bishop's un­
protected position and therefore will
manage to achieve a counterblow in
the center.
5. ... dxe4
6. fxe4
If 6 . Qci2, then good is 6 . . . QaS 7.
fxe4 [7. Nxe4 Qxci2t 8. Nxci2=; 7. Bxf6
Nxf6 8. fxe4 (8. Nxe4 Qxci2t and Black
has the two Bishops. ) eS 9. dxeS Ng4

I. 10. Bel NxeS (10 . . . Qb6! ? 11. Bxg4 Bxg4

12. Nf3 looks unclear. ) 1 1 . Nf3 Be7
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 ( 1 1 . .. Bb4 is interesting. ) 12. 0-0 (12.
4.£3 e6 O-O-O? ! ) Nxf3 1 3 . Rxf3 Be6+, Mestel­
Webb, Birmingham 1 975.} eS 8. Nf3 [8.
5. e4 dxeS NxeS 9. 0-0-0 Be6 10. Nf3 Nfd7

1 1 . a3 h6 1 2 . Bh4 BcS 1 3 . Nd4 O�O 14.
Be2 (Better is 14. Nxe6, then fxe6 1 5 .
Kb1 with an equal position.) bS 1S. Kb1
( 1 5 . Nxe6 fxe6 is unclear. ) b4 16. axb4
Qxb4 17. Nal Qb6 + , (White must play
carefully for equality after 18. Nxe6 fxe6
19. Bg3 Bf2!? {On 1 9 . . . as, then 20. Qc3
Bb4 2 1 . Qxd4 Qxd4 22. Rxd4 BcS 23.
Rdd1 Bf2=.}) Voorema-Bronstein, rallinn
1 981] Bb4 9. Bd3 exd4 10. Nxd4 h6 1 1 .
Be3 N eS with even chances.
6. ... e5
The main idea, but also possible is
6 . . . QaS 7. eS [7. Qd2 eS 8. dxeS NxeS
9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. a3 Be6 1 1 . Rd1 Ng4
12. Nh3 Bh6 13. Nf4 O�O (13 . . . Qb6 14.
g3 Qxb2 1 5 . Bgl O�O + . ) 14. Be2 Bxf4
(Interesting is 14 . . . Qb6.] 1 5 . Qxf4 QeS
16. QxeS fxeS=, v. Gusev-Averkin, Dau�
gavpils 1 978.] Ne4 8. Nf3 Nb6 [But losing
is 8 . . . NxgS 9 . NxgS NxeS 10. dxeS
Qxest because of 1 1 . Nce4 ! f6 1 2 . Bc4
fxgS 1 3 . O�O with dangerous threats
(13 . . . BfS 14. Ng3 ! ? Qcst 1 5 . Kh1 Qxc4
16. RxfSoo/t, ) . ] 9. Bdl Nxdl 10. Qxdl
Bfs 1 1 . Bd3 e6, with a rather sound po�
sition for Black in An. Bykhovsky-Ljav�
dansky, USSR (ch) 1 965.
Previously there occurred 6 . . . Qb6
7. Nf3 eS [Check out 7 . . . Qxb2.] 8. dxeS
Ng4 9. Qdl NdxeS 10. h3 Nxf3 t 1 1 .
gxf3 NeS 12. O�O�O Be6 13. Be3 Qc7 [13 ...
QaS ? 14. f4+-, Morozevich-V. Lazarev,
Alushta 1 993] 14. f4 Nc4 1 S . Bxc4 Bxc4
1 6 . Qd4 ± .
7. dxe5
Doubtful is 7. dS QaS 8. dxc6 bxc6
9. Bd3 Rb8 ! 10. Qf3 Rxb2 1 1 . Nge2 BcS
and White had nothing for the pawn
in Andarias-C. Garcia Fernandez, ]avea
1. d4 RfB 2. Rc3 dli I. Hgli Rbdl 4. fl cB
1 992.
If 7. N f3 , then certainly possible is
7 . . . exd4 8. Nxd4 Bb4 9. Nfs O�O 10.
Bd3 NeS 1 1 . Bxf6 Qxf6 12. O�O Bxfs 13.
Rxfs Qe 7 with better chances for Black
in Schiller-Ligterink, Reykjavik 1 986.
7. ... Qa5
8. Bxf6
White's exchange of his Bishop spoils
Black's pawn structure. If instead 8. Qdl
NxeS, Black has no problems. For ex�
ample: 9. O�O�O Bb4 10. Nf3 Be6 [Ed.
Note: While 1 0 ... Be6 is considered the
"main line," an interesting t1] is 10 . . . Nxf3
1 1 . gxf3 Bxc3 12. bxc3 Qa3t 13. Kb1 Be6
14. c4 Qxf3, and 15. e5 has some possibili�
ties for Black, e.g. 1 5 . . . Qxhl 1 6. exf6 O�O
1 7. Bd3 Qj3 18.jxg7 Rfe8.] 1 1 . NxeS Nxe4!
12. Nxe4? Bxdlt 1 3 . Rxd2 QxeS 14.
Nd6t Kf8, and White's temporary ac�
tivity hardly offered equal value for the
sacrificed Queen in Hodgson-Flear, Brit�
ish (ch) 1 988.
White gains nothing with 8. exf6
QxgS 9. fxg7 Bxg7 10. Qd2 Qxd2t 1 1 .
Kxd2 NcS 1 2 . Bd3 Be6 [ 1 2 . . . Bg4 1 3 .
Nf3 O�O�O 14. Rad1 fS=, S. Johnsen-Bellin,
Gausdal 1 996] 13. Nf3 O�O�O 14. Ke2 bS!
15. a3 as 16. h3 Rhe8 17. Rhd1 f5, with
better prospects for Black in Alburt-
The Richter-Vereslv ChaDlelelD Chess Repertlire
ral, USSR (ch) 1 9 72.
Also insufficient for an advantage
is B. Nf3 Nxe4 9. Bdl Nxdl 10. Qxdl
Bb4 1 1 . O�O�O O�O 12. a3 Bxc3 1 3 . Qxc3
Qxc3 14. bxc3 Nc5 1 5 . Rd4 Be6 16. Bc4
RaeB=, Sahovic-Schmidt, Vrnjacka Banja
1 981 .
8. ... gxf6
9. e6
White wins back a pawn and devel�
ops with tempo. If 9. exf6 Bb4 10. Qdl White protects the Bishop on g5 and
Nxf6 1 1 . Qd4 Ke7 12. O�O�O Be6, and prepares e2 �e4.
Black had an active position in Branrucs­ 5. ... b5
Meszaros, Budapest 1 989. Black, by threatening b5 �b4, indi�
9. ... fxe6 rectly tries to stop e2�e4.
10. Bc4 But Black can't stop e2�e4 with 5 . . .
10. Qg4 Ne5 1 1 . Qh5 t Ke7 gives Qa5 6 . a3 e 6 7. e4 dxe4 B. fxe4 Bb4 9 .
Black a small advantage. Bd3 O�O 10. Nf3 c5 11. O�O Bxc3 [Weaker
10. ... Bb4 is 1 1 . . . cxd4? ! 12. axb4 dxc3 1 3 . bxc3
10 . . . Ba3 ! 1 1 . Qbl Qg5 . Black has Qb6t 14. Be3 Qc7 1 5 . e5 ± Fernandez­
the advantage. Adams (Ed. Note: This was not the Brit�
11. Nge2 � Ne5 ish GM.), Strasbourg 1994. The game only
12. Bb3 Bd7 lasted a few more moves: 1 5 . . . N g4 16.
12 . . . RgB has also been played. Then Bd4 f6 1 7 . exf6 Ngxf6 1B. Rae1 (or lB.
1 3 . a3 ! Bxc3 14. Nxc3 Bxgl 1 5 . Qxh5 Ng5 ) Nb6 19. Ng5 1�0.] 12. bxc3 [12.
Rg6, and Black managed to defend him� Qxc3 Qxc3, then 13. bxc3 c4! and the
self in Rossetto-Gufeld, Camague!1 1 974 game is even.] cxd4 1 3 . Nxd4, and
(GAME 23) . White has the better chances. White
13. Qd2 c5 is preparing an attack with e4�e5 . And
14. 0.. 0..0 0 .. 0..0 after Khl , then Rael � . White has the
with equal chances in Maksimovic-Chan� two Bishops to support an attack on
dler, Nis 1 983. Black's kingside.
Black has the more energetic 5 . . . e5
6. dxe5 Nxe5 7. e4 h6 ! [By sacrificing
11. the pawn, Black develops strong piece
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 pressure on the queenside. If instead
4. f3 c6 the modest 7 . . . Be7 were to be played,
then B. f4 Ng6 9. exd5 O�O 10. O�O�O cxd5
5 . Qd2 1 1 . Nde2 Qa5 12. h4 would gain White
the initiative, as in Bellon-Sosonko, Las
 1. d4 NfB 2 . Ncl d 5 I . Bg5 Nbd7 4. fl cB
Palmas 1 980.] 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. exdS Bb4 eS Ne4.
10. 0-0-0 0-0 1 1 . dxc6 [1 1 . Nge2 ? ! cxdS 7. dxe5 Qa5
12. QxdS BfS and Black has the two S. Bxf6
Bishops and the initiative. ] Nxc6 12. Until recently, only 8 . exf6 was
Bd3 Be6 1 3 . a3 BaS 14. g4 [14. Nge2 played. Then 8 . . . QxgS 9. fxg? Bxg?,
Rfd8 1 S . Qe3 Bb6 with the initiative. ] with an active position for Black.
Rac8 1 S . Nge2 NeS, and Black's threats S. ... gxf6
were more dangerous in S. Johnsen­ 9. e6
Remlinger, Gausdal 1 991. A timely return of the pawn, since,
6. e3 9. exf6 Bb4 10. Qd2 Nxf6 activates Black
The pawn sac for the sake of getting too much.
the initiative 6. e4 b4 ? Ndl dxe4 8 . 9. ... fxe6
Nf2 exf3 9. Nxf3 e6 10. Bc4, can be re­ 10. Bc4 Bb4
j ected by Black with 8 . . . e3 ! 9. Bxe3 Stronger is 10 . . . Ba3 ! .
e6 10. Bd3 Be? 1 1 . Ne4 NdS 12. BgS 1 1 . Nge2 Ne5
0-0 1 3 . Ne2 cS 14. 0-0 Bb?, and Black 12. Bb3 RgS
had a slight edge in Heyken-Kengis, Also acceptable is 12 . . . Bd?, getting
Hamburg 1 995 (GAMB 24) . further developed.
6. eS! 13. a3!
7. Nge2 Be7 White sacrifices the pawn not only
S. g4 for the sake of the initiative, but be­
On the passive 8. Ncl 0-0 9. Nd3 h6 cause in the absence of the dark-squared
10. Bh4, Black seizes the initiative: 10 ... Bishop, he worries about the weakness
b4 11. Ndl exd4 12. exd4 as 13. Bf2 of his own black squares.
Ba6 14. Ne3 Re8 1 S . 0-0-0 Nb6 1 6 . NeS 13. ... Bxc3t
Bd6 +, Morozevich-Savon, Alushta 1 993. Black has to make the choice be­
S. h6 tween material (the pawn on g2 ) and
9. Bxi6 Bxf6 the strategical 13 . . . BcS + .
10. Bgl 14. Nxc3 Rxg2
with a double-edged game. 15. Qh5 t Rg6

Game 2 3 ��.'�/-������
�A��� �
,�� �r'f4�'
�

i����'��' ��
Rossetto-Gufeld
Camaguey 1974
_� I��I
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. f3 �,� ���,/� �� �� ��
c6 5. e4 dxe4 6. fxe4 e5.
The main way of approaching this ��
�i� �,�
� �Z��" �,
����� �
��
position. Also possible is 6 . . . QaS 7 .
The Richter-Veresl' I:hameleon I:hess Reperl.ire
16. Qh3! 12. Bg5 0 .. 0
The h7 �pawn won't run away, and 13. Ne2 cS
in the meantime it is useful to keep 14. 0.. 0 Bb7
the black King in the center. IS. a3 cxd4
16. ... Ng4 16. Bxe7 QJc.e7
17. O..O..O! 17. Nxd4 NeS
With such a poorly placed King as IS. axb4 Nxb4
White's, he does not have to fear a fork. 19. Be2 RfdS
17. Nfl 20. c3 NdS
IS. Qxh7 QgSt 21. b4�!
19. Kbl Rg7 An unnecessary weakening. Stronger
20. QhS+ RgS was 2 1 . RaS , with a further doubling
21. Qh7 Rg7 of the Rooks for attacking the a7-pawn.
After 2 1 . . . Nxd1 22. Rxdl , the King 21. Ng6
should not be allowed to get to c7, but 22. g3
22 . . . Qg7 23 . Qhst Qg6 24. QcS is also
unpleasant enough. Therefore Black
is content with the repetition of moves.
22. Qhst RgS
1/2 .. 1/2

v
Game 2 4
Heyken-Kengis
Hamburg 1995
22. ... eS!
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3 Black launches the decisive offen�
c6 s. Qd2 bS 6. e4. sive.
A pawn sacrifice for the sake of the 23. Nfs Qc7
initiative. On 6. e3 good is 6 . . . eS ! . 24. Bd3
6. b4 After 24. c4 Ndf4 2S. Qe3 Nxe2t 26.
7. Ndl dxe4 Qxe2 Bxe4 27. fxe4 Qb6t 28. Kgl Qxb4
S. Nfl e3 White loses a pawn.
Black returns the pawn, and has no 24. ... as
desire to pass the initiative to White 2S. buS BcS!
which would happen after 8 . . . exf3 9. A strong zwischenzug, which clears
Nxf3 e6 10. Bc4. the position of the Knight on fs .
9. Bxe3 e6 26. c4
10. Bd3 Be7 More stubborn would have been an
1 1 . Ne4 Nd5 attempt to transpose, though in a
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nc3 d5 3. 115 Nbdl 4. fa 1:8
weaker, but defendable endgame: 26. 28. Qe3 exf4
Ne3 Nxe3 27. Qxe3 f5 [On 27 ... Rxa5 29. Qb6 Qe5
28. Rxa5 Qxa5 29. Bc4! and it's unclear.] Now the white King, as expected,
28. Qc5 Ra7 29. Qxc7 [Ed. Note: 29. Bc4t! gets attacked.
is an important zwischenzug! 29 . Kh8 30.
. . 30. Radl Rab8
Oxe7! Rxc7 31. Rfd1 ±.] Rxc7 30. Nfl Rxc3 31. Qa7 Rb2
3 1 . Be2, where the e-pawn is of more 32. Qc5 Bh3!
importance than in the continuation 33. Bbl Rdb8
of the game. 34. Rfel Rgl t
26 . ... Ndf4 35. Khl Qb2
27. gxf4 Bxi5 0 .. 1
rhe lichter-VereslI ChlllelelD Chess lepertlire
1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
4. f3
4 ... e6
T�is continuation is rarely used,
though after 5. e4 the idea of prepar�
ing the move c7 �c5 in the style of the
French Defense is rather promising.
5. e4 h6
A useful prophylactic move . But
other continuations are also playable:
a) 5 . . . Be7 6. Qd2 c6 7. O�O�O b5 S .
e5 NgS 9. Nh3 N b 6 10. Bd3 a s 1 1 . f4
a4 12. Rhfl Nc4 1 3 . Bxc4 bxc4 14. a3
Qb6 with a complicated game in A1�
burt-Kapengut, USSR (ch) 1 9 72 (GAME
25) .
b ) 5 . . . dxe4 6 . fxe4 cS 7 . e 5 cxd4 S.
Qxd4 Bc5 9. Qf4 h6 10. Bxf6 gxf6 1 1 .
Bb5 Qb6 1 2 . Nge2 f5 1 3 . a4 a6 14. as
Qc7 1 5 . Ba4 Kfs 16. Bxd7 Bxd7, and
the presence of the two Bishops equal�
ized the chances in Tompos-Kahn, Hun�
gary 1 993.
6. Bh4 Be7
Carrying on the game in the spirit
of the French Defense.
Premature is 6 . . . cS because of 7. Bb5
Qb6 S. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Nge2 a6 10. Bxd7t
Bxd7 1 1 . exd5 O�O�O 12. Qd3 with an
extra pawn for White in Mohr10k-Fuchs,
Vrnjacka Banja 1 967.
But interesting is 6 . . . dxe4 7 . fxe4
Bb4. For example, Sahovic-Tseshkovsky,
B1ed/Portoroz 1 979, continued S. Qf3 ? !
c S 9 . O�O�O cxd4 10. Rxd4 Qa5 1 1 . Nge2
O�O 12. Kbl Bc5 13. Rdl Ne5 14. Qh3
[ 14. Qg3 Nfg4! ] RdS [Black's chances
are to be preferred with 14 . . . Be7.] 1 5 .
RxdSt QxdS 16. Ncl Ng6=.
7. e5 NgS
S. Bxe7
Nothing can be obtained by S. Bf2
Bb4 9 . f4 Ne7 10. a3 Bxc3t 1 1 . bxc3 cS
12. dxc5 Qa5 13. Qd2 Nxc5 14. Bd3 O�O
with an even game in Tartakower-Yates,
Car1sbad 1 923.
S. ... Nxe7
9. £4
A pawn is lost by 9. Bd3 ? Nc6 10.
f4 Nxd4 1 1 . Qg4 O�O 12. O�O�O f5 1 3 .
Qg6 Rf7 14. Nf3 Nxf3 1 5 . gxf3 NfS+,
Bellon Lopez-Kar1sson, Malta (01) 1 980.
9. c5
10. NB N£5
11. Qd.2 cxd4
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 I. 115 NIdI 4. fI eB
12. NbS NcS pawn and the initiative passes to Black.
13. Nbxd4 Ne4 It was necessary to exchange Bishops
by 1 5 . Bxe7 Nxe7, and to set a block­
ade along the b-file on b4-16. Na2 !
( Kapengut) . In this case, after 1 6 . . . cS
1 7 . dxcS, the strategically important
point d4 remains at White's disposal.
IS. ... Rbs
16. Qc3 hS
Stopping White's attack after g2-g4
and f4-fS .
17. Rdel h4
14. Qb4 Nxd4 18. fS ?!
IS. Qxd4 QaSt White sacrifices the pawn and frees
16. c3 Bd7 the f4-square for his Knight. However
17. BdJ NcS he gains insufficient compensation for
with equal chances in Foetsch-Uhlmann, it, and he should have contented him­
Dresden 1 9 98. self with 1 8. Bxe7 Nxe7 1 9 . NgS f6 20.
exf6 gxf6 21. N f3 .
18. exfS
Game 2 5
19. Nef4 Be6
Alburt-Kapengut
20. Bxe7 Nxe7
USSR (ch) 1972
21. NgS Rh6
22. Rdl Nc8
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3
e6 S. e4 Be7 6. Qd2 c6 7. 0..0 ..0 bs S. eS
NgS 9. NhJ Nb6 10. BdJ as.
The position which arose has a pawn
structure similar to the French Defense.
At this point the immediate 10 . . . Nc4
is more accurate, and if the Queen re­
treats, possible is Qd8-aS with threats
of bS-b4 and c6-cS .
11. f4 a4
12. Rhfl Nc4 Black has parried some of White's
13. Bxc4 bxc4 activity, and he moves the Knight to
14. a3 Qb6 the queenside where it controls the im­
IS. Ne2?! portant points a3 and c3 .
White condemns his Queen to the 23. Kbl Na7
modest role of a defender of the b2- 24. Kal Qd8
The lichter-VerlsDv Chlllllell Chess Ilparllire
25. Ngxe6 fxe6 42 . Qb4 Qa8, with the transfer of the
26. Ne2 Nb5 Rooks to the queenside after Rh6-h8,
27. Qf3 Qe7 makes Black's threats more potent.
2S. Ka2 Kd7 41. Qb4 QaS?!
29. Rhl Rg6 Black cannot free himself from the
30. h3 Qg5 illusion of attack, while after 41. .. Qxb4
31. Nf4 Rh6 42 . cxb4 g5 43 . Ne2, then 43 . . . Rh8
32. Qe3 Qe7 maintains some chances in the end-
33. Rfdl Rh7 game.
On 33 ... c3 White will play 34. N d3, 42 . g4! g5
and then 34 . . . cxb2 35. Nc5t Kc8 36. It is clear that Black is trying to avoid
Rxb2 and White has compensation for the counterattack: 42 . . . hxg3 43 . Rgl
the pawn. g5 44. Rxg3 ! .
34. Qel Qg5 43. gxf5!
35. Qd2 Qg3 This part of the game was played very
36. Ne2 Qg6 well by Alburt. White reminds Black
37. Nf4 QeS that he (Black) also has a King. If there
3S. Qb4 QbS is 43 . NhS, then 43 . . . Ra4 44. Qc5 Ra5 !
Black counts on exploiting the open- Black can still play c6-c5 to revive his
ing of the a-file for launching an at- attack.
tack on the King. But, even after 38... 43. gxf4
Qa8, Black would maintain the initia- 44. Rgl Rh7
tive. 45. Rg6!
39. Qxa4 QfS The suggestion of 45. f6 would have
40. c3 enabled Black to protect his King and
collect new resources for launching an
attack: 45 . . . Ra4 46. Qc5 Ra5 47. Qb4
cS ! 48 . dxc5 Kc6 . (Kapengut)
45. Ra4
46. Qc5 Qa7
47. QfS c5
4S. Rcl!
White prevents the sacrifice of the
Knight on c3, and since its sacrifice on
a3 won't work [48 . . . Nxa3 ? 49. Rg7t]
'
40. ... Ra7?! Black has nothing else but to force the
After this Itobvious" move White gets draw.
a short rest. He manages to open the 4S. �t
g-file and obtain counterplay. Kapengut 49. bxaJ QxaJ t
points out that 40 . . . . g5 ! 41 . Ne2 Ra? 1/2.. 1/2
 1. d4 NIB 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 Nbd1 4. f3 h&

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7

4. f3 I.
4 .. h6
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Ne3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7
.
4. f3 h6 5. Bh4

5 . . . c5

The Bishop is driven back to a more

passive position. However, it doesn't
make much difference, though in some 6. e4 cxd4
variations there are some substantial Another way to play is 6 . . . dxe4:
distinctions. Black's methods of play
are similar to the continuation 4. f3
cS.
5. Bh4
Black does not fear 5 . Bf4 c6 6 . e4
dxe4 7 . fxe4 Nb6 8. Nf3 Bg4 9. Qcil e6
10. a3 Bxf3 1 1 . gxf3 Nh5 12. Be3 Qh4t
1 3 . Bf2 Qg5 14. Be3 Qh4t. The game
was even in Ilczuh-Flis, Poland 1 997.
Now we consider Black's main con�
tinuations : I. 5 ... c5 and 11. 5 . . . c6. After 6. . . dxe4 (analysis)
Variations with . . . e6 were examined
in Chapter 1 1 . a) 7. fxe4 QaS [Or 7 . . . cxd4 8. Qxd4
The Richter-Vereso, Chameleoo Chess Iploiol
e5 9. Qa4 Bc5 10. O�O�O O�O 1 1 . Nf3 Qc7
12. Bb5 Nb6 13. Qa5 Ng4 14. Rd3 Be6
with a complicated game in Steinbacher­
Pogorelov, Oberwart 1 992.J B. Bxf6 exf6
9 . Nf3 [Also possible is 9 . . . Qh5 10. g6
Qd5 like variation 4. f3 cS .] cxd4 10.
Nxd4 Bb4 11. Ndb5 a6 12. Nd6t Ke7
13. Nf5t KfB 14. Qd4 Ne5 1 5 . Ne3 Be6
with mutual chances in Keller-von
Gleich, Lugano 1 989.
b) 7. d5 Qa5 [7 ... e3 B. Qd3 g6 9. Qxe3 13. Bc4 Be6!
Bg7 10. Bc4 O�O 1 1 . Nge2 a6 12. a4 Nb6 14. Bxe6 fx.e6
1 3 . Qcx5 Bh3 =t , Johnsen-Nikolaidis, 15. Ne2 Rac8
Corinth 1 998J B. Qd2 g5 9. Bg3 Bg7 10. 16. Qe3 Rid8
O�O�O a6 11. Kb1 b5 12. Qe3 Bb7 13. 17. Rxd8t Rxd8
fxe4 Ng4 14. Qd2 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Qa3 +, 18. Rdl RxdI t
Shirazi-I. Sokolov, Antwerp 1 998. and the game was drawn in O. Rod�
7. Bxf6 exf6?! riguez-J. Lautier, Sruantanca 1 998.
More natural i s 7 . . . Nxf6 B. Qxd4
dxe4 9. Bb5t Bd7 and chances are equal.
8. Qxd4 Bc5 11.
On B • . . dxe4, then good is 9. O�O�O. 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7
9. Qd2 4. f3 h6 5. Bh4
Another way is 9 . Qxd5 Qb6 ! [9 . .
5 ... c6
.

Bxg1 10. Bc4 0�O as inMaksintovic-Geller,

Nis 1 977 (GAME 26) ] 10. O�O�O Bxg1 1 1 .
Bb5 Be3t 1 2 . Kb1 O�O which leads to
a doubled�edged game.
9. ... dxe4
la. Nxe4 0 .. 0
11. 0.. 0 .. 0 Qb6
12. Nxc5 Nxc5

6. Qd2
Another way is 6. e4 dxe4 7. fxe4
Qa5 [7 . . . e5 B. Nf3 exd4 9. Qxd4 Qb6
10. Qd2 Bb4 1 1 . O�O�O O�O=] B. e5 Ne4
9. Qf3 Nxc3 10. Qxc3 Qxc3 t 1 1 . bxc3
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. lg5 Nbd1 4. fa hB
e6 12. Nf3 Be7 13. Bxe7 Kxe7. The game S. Qxd4 Bc5
was even in Maksimovic-Radulov, Vrn� If 8 ... dxe4, then 9. O�O�O is good.
jacka Banja 1 983. 9. Qxd5 Bxgl
6. ... b5 More flexible is 9 . . . Qb6 ! 10. O�O�O
Also goo d is 6 ... e5 7 . dxe5 Nxe5 8. Bxgl l 1 . Bb5 Be3t 12. Kbl O�O.
e4? Nxe4! [With the Bishop posted on 1 0. Bc4 0 .. 0
g5 this move would have been impos� Suicidal is 10 . . . Qb6? 1 1 . Qxf7t Kd8
sible.] 9. fxe4 Qxh4t 10. g3 Qg5 1 1 . exd5 12. O�O�O.
Bc5 12. Qxg5 hxg5 1 3 . O�O�O Bxg1 14. 11. Rxgl Qc7
Rxgl Rxh2, and Black won a pawn in 12. Bb3 Nb6
Schoellmann-Uhlmann, Dresden 1 994. 13. Qd2 RdS
Deserving of attention was 8. O�O�O or 14. Nb5 Qe7
8. Qd4, and playing e2�e4 after proper 15. Nd4 as
preparation. 1 6. 0 .. 0 .. 0 Bd7
7. e3 e6 If 16 ... a4?, then White prepared the
S. Bf2 a6 killer 17. Nc6 ! .
9. Nge2 17. a3 Qc5
Another idea is 9. a3, then e3�e4 de� IS. Rgel RacS
serves attention. 19. Kbl BeS
9. ... cS 20. Re3 Qe5 � �
10. g4 Bb7
11. Bg2 BcS
12. Ng3�! Qc7
13. ReI cxd4
14. exd4 Nb6
and Black achieved the better game in
Morozevich-Ehlvest, Podolsk 1 993 (GAME
27) .

Game 2 6
A blunder in time pressure, which
Maksimovic-Geller
permits White to develop a dangerous
Nis 1 977
initiative.
2 1 . Rd3 Nc4
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3 22. Qe l b5
h6 5. Bh4 cS 6. e4. 2 3 . f4 !
Another way is 6. Qd2 . Making use of the implausibility of
6 . ... cxd4 23 . . . Qxf4?, because of 24. Ne6, [Ed.
7 . Bxf6 exf6 ? ! Note: Nf5 is also interesting.} and White
More natural is 7 . . . Nxf6. s tr engthens his influence in the cen�
The lichter-Verlslv Ch._ellol Chess Upllill
ter. s o m ewhat b e tter, since n o w the
23. Qc7 c2 -pawn is under threat.
24. Qg3 g6 12. ... Qc7
2 S . Qh4 a4 13. ReI
If 2S . . . Kg7, there would follow 26. It is difficult to castle without get­
eS ! , since on 26 ... fxeS ? there would ting attacked: 1 3 . 0-0-0 cxd4 14. exd4
be 27. NfSt. Nb6.
26. Qxh6 � 13. cx:d4
It was necessary to eliminate Black's 14. exd4 Nb6
only active piece (which played the fatal IS. Ndl Nc4
role), and carry on the attack with 26. 16. Qd3
Bxc4 bxc4 27. Rh3 . Now White loses a pawn without
2 6 . ... Nxa3 t ! any real compensation. He should have
1 0
.. tried holding on to it with 1 6 . Qc3 b4
Maksimovic won as Geller lost on 17. Qb3.
time. However, White had 28. c3 ! 16. Qast
Rxd4! 29. Rh3 Rxdlt 30. Kb2 Rd2t 3 l . 17. c3 Qxa2
Kbl . IS. 0..0 QaS
19. b3 Nd6
20. Bel
Game 2 7
The Queen should not have been
Morozevich-Ehlvest
activated. 20. Ne3 with the further
Podolsk 1993
movement of the f-pawn deserved at­
tention.
1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. f3 20. Qb6
h6 S. Bh4 c6 6. Qd2 bs. 21. Nf2 as
Also good is 6 ... eS. 22. Bd2 Ba6
7. e3 e6 23. b4 Nc4
S. Bf2 a6 24. £4 Nxd2
9. Nge2 2S. Qxd2 axb4
On 9. e4, likely is 9 . . . dxe4 10. fxe4 26. cxb4 Rc4
eS 1 1 . dxeS N g4, with a good game for 27. Rxc4 bxc4
Black. 2S. bs Bb7
Also deserving of attention is 9. a3 Having an extra pawn and a better
with the idea of e3 -e4. position, Black avoids opening the
9. ... cS position, which is possible after 28 . . .
10. g4 Bb7 Bxbs [Ed. Note: It seems that 28 ... Qxb5
11. Bg2 ReS is also strong, and safe. E.g., 29. f5 Bb4.J
12. Ng3�! 29. Rb1 or 29. fS .
The immediate retreat 12. N d1 was 2 9 . g5 Nd7
 1. d4 NfB 2. Ne3 d5 3. Ig5 Nbdl 4. f3 hB
30. ReI hxg5 36. Ng4 0 ..0
31. fxgS g6 37. �f4 d3
32. �f4 Bg7 3S. Nd4 Qb6
33. Ne2 �a5 39. Nf6 t Nxf6
34. RfI 40. gxf6 Bhs
41. KhI �xf6!
Having made the time control, Ehl�
vest finds the simplest way of exploiting
the pawn roller.
42. �xf6 Bxf6
43. �6 c3
44. RfI ReS
4S. Nb3 d2
46. Nd4 cl
47. Nxc2 Rxc2
34. ... eS! 4S. KgI ReI
The decisive breakthrough. Black 49. Bf3 d4
quickly organizes the mobile passed SO. Be2 Bds
pawns. SI. b6 Bc4
3S. �f3 exd4 01
..
The Richter-VeresDI Cha_eleln Chess Reperllire
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS
3 ••• c6
The reason for this move is not only to
strengthen the center and allow the
Queen to go to the queenside, but it also
restricts White's possibilities to develop
by 4. Nf3, a move which now is not quite
good enough because of 4 ... Ne4!, and
Black gets the better game.
When examining 3 ... c6, one should
take into account that the variations
which arise after this move frequently
differ from variations with 3 ... Bf5 and
3 . . . Nbd7 [examined previously] , by
move order only. Therefore let us con­
sider only the variations which have
their own importance.
White's main moves are 4. Bxf6, 4. f3
(Chapter 14) , 4. Qd3 (Chapter 15) and
4. e3 (Chapter 16) .
4. Qd1 can also occur, on which 4 ...
Nbd7 5. 0-0-0 g6 [Stronger is 5 ... e6.] 6.
f3 is not enough to equalize. For ex­
ample: 6 . . . h6 7. Bxf6 Nxf6 B. e4 h5 9. e5
NgB 10. Bd3 Nh6 1 1 . Kbl Bf5 12. Nge2
Bxd3 13. Qxd3 e6 14. Nf4 Qd7 15. Qe2
0-0-0 16. g4 hxg4 17. fxg4±, Schneider­
Leko, Nettetal 1991. However, Black can
stop queenside castling by the energetic
4... b5 ! ? 5. Bxf6 gxf6 6. e4 b4 7. Nce2 dxe4
B. Qxb4 Qb6 9. Qxb6 axb6 10. N c3 f5 1 1 .
f3 exf3 1 2 . Nxf3 RgB I3. Ne5? [After 13.
Kf2 White did not take any risk.] Bg7 14.
Kf2 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Be6 16. ReI Nd7, and
Black successfully attacked White's weak
points in Johnsen-Akesson, Gausdal Troll
1 996. The game finished: 17. b4 Ra3 lB.
Re3 f4, 0-1 .
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 e6
4. Bxf6
The main move which ruins Black's
pawn structure.
 1. d4 Nfl 2. Ne3 d5 3. 115 cl
Black strives for quick development.
6. Bd3 0-0
7. Qf3
White prepares for queenside cas­
tling, which supposedly intends a more
accurate use of the kingside Knight.
7. ••• ReB
B. Nge2 Nd7
9. 0..0 ..0

4. ... exf6
If 4 . . . gxf6 White does not have to
play 5. e3, and after 5 ... Bf5, a position
arises which was examined in Chapter 3
(3 ... Bf5), but he can use the more ener­
getic 5. e4! and and obtain the better
prospects.
5. e3
Here, on 5. e4, there is 5 . . . Bb4! 6.
exd5 Qxd5 7. Nf3 0-0, and White gains The attempt to play in the center,
nothing. (Bagirov) which took place in Larsen-Westerinen,
The main Black replies are: I. 5 Bd6
.•• Hastings 1 972: 9. a3 Qc7 10. e4 dxe4 1 1 .
and 11. 5 ... f5. Nxe4 Be7 1 2 . 0-0 b6 1 3 . Rad1 Bb7 1 4.
c4 RadB 15. b4 g6 16. cS f5, allowed Black

I. to obtain good counterplay.

9. ...
.
NfB
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c6 There also occurred the preliminary
4. Bf6 exf6 5. e3 9 ... Qa5 10. Kb1, and then 10 . . . NfB 1 l .
g4 b5 12. Ng3 Be6 13. Nf5 Ba3 with com..
5 . .• Bd6 plicated play in Miles-Tisda11, England
1982 (GAME 27) .
10. Nf4 as
1 1 . g4 b5
This position is full of dynamic pos­
sibilities, based on mutual swift pawn at-­
tacks where each tempo is of great im­
portance. In Hoi-Wessman, Gausda.1 1 990,
play continued:
12. h4 a4
13. g5 b4
The Richter-Vereslv Cha.elelD Chess Repertlire
14. Nbl b3 In the game Alburt-RomanisWn, USSR
IS. a3 bxc2 1972, after 6 ... Be6 7. NB Nd7 8. Ne2 Bd6
16. Bxc2 RbS 9. Nf4 Qe7 10. Qe2 gS ! , Black gained the
17. Nc3 QaS better position. However White could
IS. Nfe2 Ba6 prevent Black's counterplay by 10. h4! ;!; .
19. Nxa4 Rxb2! 7. Qf3
20. Kxb2 RbSt A plan connected with White's prepa­
21. Ka1 Bill ration of a blowup in the center by c2-c4
22. Rbl Bb4 has occurred: 7. Nce2 Nd7 8. Nf3 Bd6 9.
23. gxf6 g6 c4 dxc4 [Or 9 ... Nf6 10. Nc3 dxc4 (More
24. e4 dxe4 reliable is 10 ... Be6!, not surrendering
2S. Qxe4 BbS the center.) 1 1 . Bxc4 bS 12. Bb3 0-0 13.
26. QeS Nd7 0-0 a6 (Gurgenidze-Stein, Kislovodsk 1 972)
and Black is doing well. 14. a4! and White had the better chances.
14. Ne2?! was played by Gurgenidze.] 10.
Bxc4 Qe7 1 1 . 0-0 Nb6 12. Bb3 Be6 13.
11. Nc3 Rd8 14. Qc2 0-0 and Black main­
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS c6 tained equality in Burger-Henley, New
4. Bxf6 exf6 S. e3 York 1 983.
7. . .. Nd7!
5 ••• £5 A flexible move. Before castling Black
secures piece control over the central
squares, providing a wider spectrum of
possibilities forhis dark-squared Bishop.
The positions which arrive after the
move 7 ... Bg7 are examined in Chapter
17.
S. Nge2 Nf6
9. 0..0
If 9. h3, then 9 ... Bb4! 10. 0-0-0 Qe7
1 1 . Rdg1 hS ! , and Black got a good game
Black takes the center under firm con­ in Schmitt-Dautov, Bad Woerishofen 1991
trol. (GAME 2S) .
6. Bd3 9. ... Bd6
The alternative 6. g3 g6 7. h4 hS 8. Bg2 Also possible is 9 ... Bg7.
Nd7 9. Nce2 Qb6 10. Qc1 as 1 1 . c3 Nf6 10. Nf4 0..0
12. Nh3 Bd6 13. Qc2 Qc7 14. 0-0 0-0 15. This position has not been researched
Nhf4 Qe7 favored Black in Voloshin­ enough, but obviously a complicated
Wojthiewicz, Katowice 1 993. game should take place, in which Black
6. ... g6 does not have the worse chances.
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nc3 d5 3. Ig5 cB
It seems that Black is outstripped
Game 2 7
in the attack. How else can the squares
Miles-Tisdall
cl and c3 be defended? 1£20. Nfd4, there
England 1982
follows 20 . . . Bxg4. [Ed. Note. Look at
the continuation 21. h6! g6 (21 ... Bxe2 22.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS c6 4. Bxf6 Bxh7t! Kf8 23. hxg7t Ke7 24. Nxe2 and
exf6 S. e3. White has c2 and c3 covered; 21 ... Nxd3
After 5. e4 Bb4 6. exd5 Qxd5 White 22. Qxg4) 22. Qxf6 Qj8, and after 23. Bxb5
gains nothing. it is White who has the advantage!]
S. ... Bd6 With the move 20 . . . Bb4 he could
Played more often is 5 ... f5. force 21. c3 [Ed. Note 21. h6 seems to work
6. Bd3 0.. 0 again. If 21 ... Nxd3, then 22. Rxd3 and
7. Qf3 ReS White is on top. Or if 21 . . . Ng6, then 22.
S. Nge2 Nd7 Qh2 Qj8 23. Bxb5 Red8 24. hxg7 Qxg7 25.
9. 0 .. 0..0 QaS Ba6 then White is good here too.} Bxc3 22 .
10. Kbl Nfs RcI b4, but he preferred the Knight's
1 1 . g4 bS obvious invasion and missed his op�
12. Ng3 Be6 ponents resource.
13. NfS Ba3 20. ... Nc4!�
When playing on different flanks [Ed. : Black does well with 20 ... Bb4.}
each tempo is very important. With the 21. Bxc4 dxc4
Bishop's 11 throw in" Black wins time for 22. Nxg7!
advancing his c�pawn. Here is the summary of the move
14. Ne2 Qb4 from commonsense considerations :
IS. b3 cS White already possesses the attack.
16. dxcS QxcS 22. ... cxb3
17. h4 Ng6 23. axb3 Kxg7
IS. hs NeS 24. h6t KfS
19. Qf4 RacS On 24 ... Kg6, dedsive is 25. Qg3 ! ! . Af�
20. Rdl ter 25 . . . Qg5, then 26. Nf4t Qxf4 27.
exf4 Rc3 2B. Qh4 leads to mate.
2S. Qxf6 Bb4
26. RhS!
Threatening to entice the King onto
gB after Rh5�g5�gB. Black should have ex�
changed his Queen for two Rooks, but
he was tempted by an illusion, and once
again, he had underestimated White's
resources.
26. ... Bc3
The Richter-Veresov Chameleon Chess Repertoire
[Ed. Note: It seems Black has a forced 12 . ... Be6
draw in: 26 . . . Qxh5 27. gxh5 Bxd2 28. Qg7t 13. Nf4?!
{28. f4 is unclear.} Ke7 29. Qg5t Kd6 30. The doubling of pawns should not
Qj4t Ke7.J have been allowed.
27. Rd4! 13. Bxc3
Now it turns out that the Bishop fired 14. bxc3 0 .. 0..0
only a blank shot. 15. Nxe6 Qxe6
27. ... Bxd4 16. Qf4 RheB
2B. Nxd4 Qc3 17. ReI c5
Black counts on perpetual check lB. f3
along the el -aS diagonal, but this was
just a dream.
29. Rxb5 Rc5
30. Nxe6j KgB
30 . . . Rxe6 would also lose: 3 1 . Rb8t
Re8 32. Qd6t.
31. Nd4
1 ..0

Game 28
lB. ... c4!
Scbmitt-Dautov
Black starts the attack on the weak-
Bad Woerishofen 1991
ened queenside.
19. BfI Rd6
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 g6 4. Bxf6 20. Kdl Ra6
exf6 5. e3 c6 6. Bd3 f5. 21. RaI Ra3
The most accurate move to parry the 22. Bgl Qa6
restricting g2-g4. 23. RhbI Qa5
7. Qf3 Nd7 24. Rb4 Rxc3!
B. Nge2 Nf6 As so often happens in positions with
9. h3 opposite-side castling, the Rook sacrifice
White prepares g2-g4, but the g4- lead to a quick result. White is defense­
square is covered too well to carry out 9. less.
0-0. 25. Kxc3 Qa3j
9. Bb4! 26. Rb3 ab3
10. 0.. 0 ..0 Qe7 27. ab3 Re6
11. RdgI h5! 0 .. 1
12. g3
12. Nd1 with the further Ne2-f4 de­
served attention.

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c6
4. £3
White tries to create a pawn structure
in the center, but Black organizes coun­
terplay on the queenside at the right
moment.
4. ... Qb6
5. Qd2
A pawn sacrifice for the initiative.
Richter preferred 5. e4 Qxb2 6. Nge2 e6
7. eS Nfd7 8. Rb1 Qa3 9. Rb3 QaS 10. Bdl
Qc7 1 1 . Nf4 a6 12. Bd3 Be7 [Stronger is
12 ... cS with a double-edged game which
will probably favor Black in the long run
ifWhite plays 13. NfxdS.] 13. 0-0 0-0 14.
Qel Re8 1S. Qg3 Nf8 16. NhS Ng6 17.
f4, and White started the pawn assault
aiming at the black King in Richter-Rog-
1. d4 NfB 2� Nel d5 3. 815 cB 4. f3
mann, Berlin 1 937.
After S. Rb1 e6 6. e4 cS 7. Bxf6 [Weak­
er is 7. BbSt Bd7 8. Bxd7 Nbxd7 9. Nge2
cxd4 10. Nxd4 BcS 1 1 . Nb3 Bflt 12. Ke2
dxe4 13. fxe4 Ng4 14. h3 Be3, and Black
exploited the weakness of White's dark­
squared flank in Zurmel!1-Gif.{ard, val
Maubuee 1 989.} gxf6 8. dxcs BxcS + .
S . ... Qxb2
If Black desires to avoid complica­
tions he can play 5 ... e6 6. e4 h6 7. Bxf6
gxf6 8. 0-0-0 Nd7, and it's unclear.
6. RbI Qa3
7. e4 Nbd7
Another idea is 7 ... e6 8. Bd3 QaS 9.
Nge2 Nbd7, and it's unclear. In Pasman­
Kir. Georgiev, Groningen 1 977 Black con­
tinued 9 ... h6?! [Ed. Note: Perhaps 9... Be7
is better than 9... Nbd7. See note on Black's
11th move.} 10. Bh4 Nbd7 11. 0-0 dxe4? !
[More cautious is 11 ... Be7.] 1 2 . fxe4 Bb4
13. a3 Bxa3 14. Ra1 Qb4 15. eS NdS 16.
Rxa3 ! Qxa3 17. Ne4 0-0 18. Nf6t! N7xf6
19. exf6 eS ! 20. fxg7 Kxg7 21. dxeS Qcst
22. Kh1 fs [Unclear, or possibly slightly
advantageous to White, is 22 ... Qe3 23.
Bf6t Kg8 24. Qxe3 Nxe3 25. Rf3, and of
course White will play h3 .] 23 . exf6t
Nxf6 24. Qf4 NdS 2 5 . Qg3 t Kh8 26.
The Richter-Veresl' I:hallelell l:hlss Replrtlire
Qe5t KgB, and here White unexpectedly 10. Nf3
forced a draw after 2 7 . Qg3 t KhB, More reliable is 10. Nge2.
though, as was shown by v. Sokolov, he 10. Bb4
could have carried on the attack with 27. 11. Rb3 QaS
Rf6! Rxf6 2B. Bxf6 Bg4 29. Qe4. 12. dxeS Ng4
S. eS 13. e6 NdeS
After B. Bd3 ? ! Black frees himself by 14. exf7t Nxf7
B dxe4 9. fxe4 e5 !, when he gained the
..• As a result of negligence,
committed
better chances in Pasman-Stean, Beer­ by White in the opening, Black is a
Sneva 1980 (GAME 29) . pawn up with a better position. Now
S. ... NgS threatened is 15 ... Be6.
9. f4 IS. Be4
In this practically virgin position If 1 5 . a3 , then 1 5 . . . Bxc3 1 6 . Qxc3
White's spatial advantage compensates Qxc3t 17. Rxc3 is unclear, or a small
for the sacrificed pawn. (Stean) advantage to White.
IS. NxgS
16. NxgS NeS
Game 2 9
17. Be6 Be7!
Pasman-Stean
Favorably simplifying the position.
Beer-Sneva 1980
IS. BxeS BxgS
19. Qd6
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ds 3. BgS e6 4. f3 Qb6 White cannot avoid defeat.
S. Qd2 Qxb2 6. Rbl Qa3 7. e4 Nbd7 S. 19. RxeS
Bd3?!. 20. Qe6t Kds
A superficial move. Mainline was B. 21. 0 .. 0 QeSt
e5, since this move allows Black to de­ 22. Khl ReS
liver a counterstroke in the center. 23. QfS Qe7
S. dxe4 01
..

9. fxe4

9. .. . e5 !

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c6
4. Qd3
White prepares the advance e2�e4.
The Queen's early appearance in the cen�
ter gives Black tempi for development.
4. ... Nbd7
The most natural form of develop�
ment: after the exchange on e4 this
Knight will be transferred with tempo
to f6.
Other plans have been used:
a) 4 ... Qa5 [The early appearance of
the Queen on as makes White's plan
easier to realize, since the Queen can be
driven back.] 5. £3 Nbd7 6. Bd1 ! Qc7 7.
e4 Nb6 B. e5 NgB 9. £4 g6 [9 . . . Nh6!? is
interesting.] 10. Q£3 h5 1 1 . g3 Nh6 12.
1. d4 NIB 2. NI:l d5 3. Bg5 cB 4. Qdl
h3 BfS 13. O�O�O O�O�O 14. Rh2 KbB 15.
Be3 ;t, Sahovic-Shembris, Vrnjacha Banja
1 989.
b) 4 ... g6 5. f3 QaS [After 5 ... Bg7 6. e4
O�O 7. O�O�O bS B. eS b4 9. Nce2 NeB I0.
Bdl as 11. h4, and White won in his at�
tack on the King in Muratov-Airapetian,
Erevan 1 981; 5 ... BfS ! ? 6. e4? dxe4 7. fxe4
Nxe4! B. Nxe4 QdS 9. Nc3 Bxd3 10.
NxdS Bxfl 11. Nc7t KdB 12. NxaB
Bxg2 + . (Malaniuk) ] 6. Bdl! [6. h4? ! (6.
Qdloo) bs 7. e4 b4 B. Nce2 Ba6 9. Qe3
dxe4! 10. fxe4 Nbd7 1 1 . Nf3 Bg7 12. Bxf6
exf6! 13. hS O�O 14. hxg6 hxg6 15. Ncl
Bxf1 16. Kxfl RfeB+, Morozevich-Ma1an�
iuh, Alushta 1 994 (GAME 30)] Qc7 7. e4
dxe4 B. fxe4 e5 with equal chances. (Ma�
laniuk)
5. e4
If 5. O�O�O, possible is 5 ... h6 6. Bh4 b5
7. f3 b4 B. Nbl Qb6 9. e4 e6 10. e5 NhS
1 1 . Nh3 g5 ! 12. Bfl c5 ! + , in Rossetto­
Darga, Lugano (01) 1 968.
The continuation 5. Nf3 is examined
in Chapter 3.
5. ... dxe4
6. Nxe4 Nxe4
The Bishop's distraction 6 . . . Qa5 t
Thl Richter-Veresav Chameleon Chess Repertoire
7. Bd2 Qb6 is also interesting. For ex­ 11. N£3 Bf5
ample: 8. 0-0-0 dxe4 9. Qxe4 Nf6 1 0. 12. Qd2 0..0 0
..

Qe5 Ng4 1 1 . Qf4 e5 12. dxe5 Be6 1 3 . 13. Be2

Nh3 Bc5 14. Bc4 Bd4 1 5 . c3 Nxe5?! 16.
Be2 + - , Ionescu-Emodi, Odorheiu Secui-
esc 1 993. More natural is 1 5 . . . Bxe5, in­
tending 1 6 . Qe4 Bxc4.
7 . Qxe4 Qb6
Another move which has been played
was 7 . . . Nf6 8. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Bc4 [If 9.
0-0-0, possible is 9 ... Qd5 ! 10. Qxd5 cxd5
1 1 . Bb5t Bd7 12. Bxd7t Kxd7=.] Qa5t
10. c3 Bf5 11. Qf4 [Or 1 1 . Qf3 Bd7?! (bet­
teris 1 1 . .. Bg6) 12. Ne2 Rg8 13. Ng3 Qg5 13. g5
14. 0-0, and White's chances were pref­ 14. c3 Bd6
erable in Negu.1escu-Tomescu, Odorheiu 15. 0.. 0 Qc7
Secuiesc 1993] Bg6 12. Nf3 Bg7 13. 0-0 0-0 Black's chances were preferable in
14. Rfel e6 15. Nh4 c5 !, and Black equal­ Shipman-Dzindzichashvili, New York 1993
ized in Alburt-Doda, Lublin 1972. (GAME 31).
The Bishop is driven back by 7 ... h6
8. Bdl [After 8. Bh4? Qa5t 9. c3 g5 ! 10.
Game 30
Bg3 f5, White suffers material losses. ]
Morozevich-Malaniuk
Nf6 9. Qf4 g5 10. Qe3 Bf5 1 1 . Bd3 Bxd3
Alushta 1994
12. Qxd3 Qd5 1 3 . Nf3 Qe4 14. Qxe4
Nxe4. The game was equal in Alburt­
Furman, USSR (ch) 1972. 1. Nc3 Nf6 2. d4 d5 3. Bg5 c6 4. Qd3 g6
8. b3 5. £3.
Forced, since 8. O-O-O? Qa5 leads to An alternative is 5. Bxf6 exf6 6. f3 [6.
loss of a pawn. White's temporary ini­ e4 dxe4 7. Nxe4 Bg7 and Black has the
tiative after 9. d5 Qxal 10. Bc4 Qal t 1 1 . two Bishops as comp e nsatio n for
Kdl Qxb2 1 2 . dxc6 bxc6 13. Nf3 Qb4t doubled f-pawns.] f5.
14. Ke2 Ba6 is parried, because the King 5. ... Qa5
was not secure in Govedarica-Lanc, Black indirectly parries e2 .. e4, but the
Trnava 1987. Queen's early appearance allows it to be
8. ... Nf6 driven back by 6. Bdl Qc7, and to ad­
9. Qd3 vance 7. e4.
9. Bxf6 ? fails to the zwischenzug 9 . . . 6. h4?!
Qb4t , with the loss o f castling rights. This allows Black to develop the ini­
9. g6 tiative on the queenside, and to win a
10. Bxf6 exf6 tempo for developing his light-squared
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nc3 d5 3. Ig5 cB 4. Qd3
Bishop. matic f6-fS after 18 ... NeS 19. NxeS RxeS.
6. bs 18. ... bxe3
7. e4 b4 19. bxe3 Rae8
8. Nee2 Ba6 According to Malaniuk, he could
9. Qe3 dxe4 have fought for the initiative by 19 . . .
It is useful to remove the pawn pres­ Rab8 ! ? as well. For example: 20. Ndl
sure for launching a counterattack with cxd4 21. cxd4 fS ! 22. eS NxeS 23. dxeS
e 7 -eS, since if e4-eS, Black can use the QxeS 24. Ncb3 Qf4t-+ .
dS-square for his Knight. 20. Nb3 Qa4
10. fxe4 Nbd7 21. Nbd2 Qa3!
1 1 . NB Bg7 With the threat of an invasion by the
12. Bxi6 Queen, Black carries out an unpleasant
Otherwise Black will play 12 ... eS. bind.
22. Ne4 Qa6!

12. ... exf6!

A very concrete decision. Now the 23. dS Nb6
white Queen feels uncomfortable even 24. Nfd2 Red8
on the e-file. As for doubled pawns, 2S. ReI fS !
Black hopes to get rid of them by play­ White's already weakened position is
ing f6-fS. collapsing, and he suffers material losses.
13. hS 0..0 26. exfS Rxel t
14. hxg6 hxg6 27. Kxel Nxd5
IS. Nel Bxfl 28. Rh3 Qf6
16. Kxfl Rfe8 29. Ne4 QxfS
17. Qd3 30. Rf3 Qd7
White gets rid of the counterplay on 31. Ned6 Nxc3!
the kingside (f6-fS ) , but Black gets 32. Qe4 Qe6
around that by going to the otherside. A transposition to the endgame was
17. ... cS! possible: 32 ... Nxe4 33. Rxf7 Nxd6 34.
18. e3 Rxd7 Nxc4 35. RxdBt BfB, and Black's
If lB. d5, Black carries out the the- minor pieces should beat up the Rook.
The lichter-Veresa¥ Cha.eleon Chess leperloire
33. Qxe6 fxe6 16. Bd3 Bg4
34. Rg3 Nxe4 Another idea is 16 ... Qd7.
3S. Nxe4 c4 17. h3! ?
36. Rxg6 Kf7 White continues his pursuit o f the
37. Rg3 Bd4? Bishop, not fearing 17 . . . Bxf3 lB. Bf5t
By letting the Rook have more scope, KbB 1 9 . gxf3 Bf4 20. Qd3 , since he
Black drops the initiative, which could counts on stopping the Black defense
have been retained by 37 ... Bb2 ! . (Mala� by using the light squares.
niuk) 17. Be6
3S. Ra3 Ke7 IS. Bc4 hS
39. Ra4! RcS 19. Bxe6t fxe6
40. Nd2 Bc3 20. Qe2 RdeS
41. Ke2 21. Nd2
1/2.. 1/2

Game 3 1
Shipman-Dzindzichashvill
New York 1993

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Qd3

c6 S. e4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nxe4 7. Qxe4
Qb6.
Deserving of attention is 7 ... h6, on 21. ... eS
which B. Bh4? loses due to B ... Qa5t 9. Strange as it might seem, but this ob�
c3 g5 ! 10. Bg3 f5 and White suffers ma� viously energetic move allows White to
terial losses. free himself, because it weakens the
S. b3 Nf6 f5�square. Deserving of attention was
9. Qd3 g6 21. .. g4 22. h4 f5 23 . Nc4 e5 24. Nxe5
10. Bxf6 exf6 Bxe5 25. dxe5 Rxe5 26. Qd2 RheB 27.
11. Nf3 BfS Qg5 ? ! Qf7, preparing f5�f4.
12. Qd2 0.. 0..0 22. Qf3 ! exd4
13. Be2 gS 23. cxd4 Be7
14. c3 Bd6 24. Ne4 g4
IS. 0 ..0 Qc7 2S. Q£St Qd7
This position favors Black with its op� 26. Qxd7t Kxd7
posite�sides castling, and Black is ready 27. Rfel £S
to attack, because of his Bishop pair. It is 28. NcSt BxcS
not surprising that White wants to ex� 29. dxcs Rxelt
change one of them. 30. Rxel Re8
 1 . d4 NIB 2. Ncl d5 3. Bg5 cB 4. Qd3
In the endgame the attacking king� H owever, it soon becomes clear that
side pawns are transformed into an ob� 34 . . . b6 also favors White. Black needed
j ect of attack. However, the transpo� to realize that the preventive 34 . . . as !
sition to a pawn endgame requires pre� held the position indirectly while weak�
dse calculation. But Black did not like ening the cS�pawn. For those study�
the Rook endgame either, where af� ing this "preventive" endgame, we give
ter 30 . . . Rf8 3 1 . ReS, the white King them the opportunity to be convinced
could move to f4. that if White attempts to win the game
31. Rxe8 Kxe8 by going around the King, as was done
32. hxg4 hxg4 in the game, Black is by not wasting
33. Kh2 Kf7 pawn moves.
34. Kg3 35. Kf4 Ke6
To oppose 3S ... Kf6, White should not
even need the extra tempo.
36. cxb6 axb6
37. b4 b5
Otherwise after 38. a4 White creates
a distant passed pawn. Now Black is un�
able to prevent the opposition.
38. a3 ! Kf6
39. f3! gxf3
40. gxf3 Ke6
34. ... b6?! 41. Kg5 Ke5
Black did n o t want t o make this 42. Kg6 Kf4
move after 34 ... Ke6 3 S . Kf4 Kf6 36. 43. Kf6
b4, since on 36 ... b6 he could count on 1 ..0
White breaking through with 37. bS ! .
The Richter-VereslI Ch••11111 Chess Rapertlire
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS c6
4. e3
A modest continuation which allows
Black to show some activity.
4. ... Qb6
An energetic thrust, which deprives
White of the plans connected with cas­
tling long. Though Black can be content
with the rather reliable 4 ... Nbd7, after
5. Nf3 we get the variation examined in
Chapter 4.
S. Rhl g6
Deserving of attention was 5 . . . Ne4.
For example: 6 . Nxe4 dxe4 7 . Qd2
[Pushing aside the threat 7 . . . Qa5,
which is not solved by 7. b4 because
of 7 . . . eS.] BfS 8. Bc4 h6 9. Bf4 Nd7
10. Ne2 e6 1 1 . 0-0 aS 12. c3 Be7 13. Qc2
g5 14. Bg3 h5 1 5 . h3 h4 1 6 . Bh2 Rg8,
and Black developed an initiative on
the kingside in Gu.seinov-Gulho, Ta11inn
1 983. With respect to this, 8. b4! ? looks
more logical, then with the idea of
c2 -c4.
6. Bd3 Bg7
7. h3
If 7. N f3, then 7 ... Bg4, and after Nb8-
d7 and e7 -e5 Black solves the problem
of the opening.
7. ... 0 ..0
S. NB ReS
This position can also arise from:
3 ... g6 4. e3 Bg7 5 . Nf3 c6 6. Bd3 Qb6
7. RbI 0-0 8 . h3 Re8. See Chapters 6,
8, and 1 7 for possible transpositions.
9. 0 ..0 Nbd7
Also seen was 9 . . Bf5. Now 10. Bxf5
.
gxf5 11. Ne5 Nbd7 led to an equal game
in Veresov-Su.etin, USSR 1 957. The idea of
10. ReI with e2-e4 deserves attention.
Bellin says Boleslavsky's 9 . . . cS is best.
10. Bf4 NhS
Or 10 ... Nf8 Il. ReI Bf5 12. Bxf5 gxf5
13. Qd3 e6 14. Ne5 ;!;, Veresov-Gromeh,
Belorussia-Poland 1 958.
11. Bh2
 1. d4 NfB 2 . NI:l d 5 I . 815 I: B 4 . el
2 9 . gxf5 Nxf5
3 0 . h4 Nxg3
30 . . . Nf3 ! 3 1 . Kxf3 QxcS .
31. hxg5 Nh5
32. Qh4 QeS
33. Be2 fxg5
34. Qxh5 Qxh5
35. Bxh5 Bxd4
36. Nb3 Be5
37. Ndl Kg7
11. ... e5 3S. c3 Kh6
Weaker is 11. .. fS 12. Na4 Qd8 13. c4 3 9. BeS g4
e6 14. cxdS exdS IS. b4, with a better 40. Nc5 B d6
game for White in Veresov-Uusi, USSR 41. Nb3 Kg5
1 960. 42. Bf7 h5
12. g4! exd4 43. Nd4 h4
After 12 ... e4? ! 13. gxhS Nf6 14. hxg6 44. Be6 h3 t
hxg6 1S. Kgl Qd8 16. NeS exd3 17. cxd3 45. Kfl Bxe6
Nh7 18. f4, Black is a pawn behind in 46. Nxe6t Kf6
Veresov-Peterson, USSR 1 958. 47. NdS g3
13. exd4 Nhi6 4S. Nxb7 Bc7
14. ReI 49. Nc5 Bb6
White's chances are preferable. In Ver' 50. b4 Kf5
esov-Kostro, Belorussia-Poland, 1 958 the 51. Ne3t Kf4
game continued: 52. Nc2 Kf3
14. . .. QdS 53. Nd4t Ke3
15. Qd2 NfS 54. Nxc 6 � Kd2
16. Rxe S NxeS S4 . . . BxcS! leads to mate.
1 7. Re I Ne6 55. Ne7 Kxc3
IS. Qe3 Nd6 56. Nxd5t Kc4
19. Be5 f6 57. Nxb6t axb6
20. Bg3 Nf7 5S. Ne4 g2 t
21. Nd2 Bd7 59. Kf2 Kxb4
22. Nb3 QfS 60. Ng5 Ka3
23 . f4 ReS 61. Nxh3 Kxa2
24. Qf2 Nd6 62 . Nf4 b5
25. f5 Ng5 63 . Nd5
26. Kg2 Rxe l 1/2 - 1/2
27. Qxe l gxf5
28. Nc5 Bc8
The Richter-Veresl' Cha_eleol Chess Repertoire

will only consider original variations.

Rare Continuations
1. d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. BgS
I.
Before starting to examine other pos­ 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS

3 .. . g6
sible continuations it is to be noted that
after 3 ... e6, the best reply is 4. e4, which
transposes the game toward lines of the
French Defense. White should be ready
for such a turn of events, otherwise he
falls into a psychological trap as he dis­
covers he's been captivated by the closed
opening turning into a semi-open one.
Not seen enough is 3 ... Ne4 [In the
style of the Trompowsky.] 4. Nxe4 dxe4
5. g3 [Also acceptable is 5. e3 cS (5 ... g6 6.
Bc4 Bg7 7. c3 c6 8. f3 ±; 5 ... BfS 6. Bc4;!;)
6. dxcS QaSt 7. Qd2 ;!; .] cS 6. dxcS QaSt This fianchetto demands accurate and
7. c3 QxcS 8. Be3 Qc7 9. Bgl fs 10. Nh3 active play by White, since if he should
eS? ! [More cautious is 10 ... e6 ;!;.] 1 1 . Qb3 proceed with a lackadaisical develop­
Nc6 12. Rdl Be7 13. 0-0 Bd7 14. NgS Nd8 ment, Black can succeed with a queen­
15. Bh3 BxgS 16. BxgS Nf7 17. Be3, with side attack.
the better game for White in Djurhuus­ The main continuations are lA. 4.
Loysel, Gausda1 1 991. Bxf6 and lB. 4. Qd2.
From the remaining continuations
only the seldom seen I. 3 . .. g6, 11. 3 . h6,
lA.
..

and Ill. 3 . Ne6 deserve special men­

. .

tion. Black allows the f-pawns to double, 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS g6

and in some cases, the game may lead to
positions previously examined. Here we 4. Bxf6
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nel d5 I. Bg5 gl/hl/Nel
chances in Bronstein-Kremenietsk!1, Mos�
cow 1982.
5. ... Bg7
The continuations 5 ... c6, and 5 ... fS
followed by c7 �c6, lead to positions seen
in Chapter S.
6. Bd3 0 .. 0
Black should not hurry with castling,
but instead parry the plan of gl �g4 with
6 ... fs. In the event of a typical setup such
The main line. In previous continua� as 7. Qf3 c6 S. Nge2 Nd7 9. O�O Nf6, the
tions which ignore the doubling of game would be equal as in Leuba-Rosen�
pawns, Black finds sufficient counter� tails, Switzerland 1 991. If 9. g4, there is the
play. interesting reply 9 ... fxg4 10. Qxg4 NeS
4. ... exf6 1 1 . Qg2 QgS ! , which also maintained
5. e3 equality in Borst-Boesveld, Netherlands
If the active 5. e4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Bg7 is 1 995. [1 1 . .. Nxd3t?, and then 12. cxd3
played, Black has a reliable position: cuts down on the activity for the B/g7 .
a) 7. Nf3 O�O S. Be2 fs 9. NcS b6 10. After 0-0 White prepares a queenside at�
Nb3 Bb7 1 1 . O�O Nd7 12. c3 Nf6 13. ReI tack with b4-bS etc. or perhaps even
a6 14. a4 ReS 1 5 . as NdS , and chances h4� hS and Nf4.]
were approximately equal in Alburt­ 7. Qf3 c6
Marjanovic, Bucharest 1 978. S. g4
b) 7. c3 O�O S. Bd3 fS 9. Ng3 ? ! [This White stops f7 �fS, which was possible
allows Black to seize the initiative, better if he had played S. Nge2.
was 9. NcS . ] cS 10. dxcS Nd7 1 1 . Bc2 S. ... ReS
NxcS 12. QxdS RxdS I3. Nle2 ? ! [Stron� 9. 0..0 .. 0 Nd7
ger is 1 3 . Nf3 + . ] Be6 14. b3 Nd3t 1 5 . After 9 ... as 10. Nge2 a4 1 1 . a3 bS 12.
Bxd3 Rxd3 and Black had a n obvious Nal Na6 13. c3 Nc7 14. h4 Ne6 15. e4,
advantage in L!1s-Prandstetter, Czecho� and White got the advantage in Miles­
slovakia (ch) 1 992. Spassov, Surakarttil/Denpasar 1982.
White gains nothing substantial by 10. Nge2 b5
the fianchetto of his Bishop: 5. g3 c6 6. 1 1 . Ng3 b4
a3 hs 7. h4 Bg4 S. Bgl Bd6 9. Qd3 O�O 10. 12. Nce2 Bb7
e3 [10. O�O�O Nd7 with the idea of . . . bS, 13. h4
. . . as, . . . b4 and the tlhome" of the white
King is vulnerable; 10. Bh3 Bxh3 1 1 .
Nxh3 fs with the idea of Nd7�f6.] Nd7
1 1 . Kfl ReS 12. ReI Qb6 13. Rbl RadS
14. B£3 Bxf3 1 5 . Nxf3 £5, with mutual
The Rilhler-Veresl' Challeleln Chess Repert.ire

IBI.
l . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 g6 4. Qd2

4 ••• h6

13. ... cS
14. dxc5 QaS
15. Kbl Ne5
16. Qg2 Nxd3
17. Rxd3 Re6
Black's initiative looked more lasting A responsible move, Black is ready to
in Dittmar-Bastian, Germany 1 993 (GAME lose a tempo for the sake of exchanging
32) . off the Bishop.
5. Bxf6

lB. Should White retreat with S . Bf4,

Black will attack the center:
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 g6 a) S ... c6 6. f3 Bg7 7. g4 [Or 7. 0-0-0 bS
8. e4 b4 9. Na4 QaS l0. NcS Nbd7 =t, Kap­
4. Qd2 engut-Vaganian, USSR 1970J Nfd7 8. 0-0-0
eS 9. dxeS NxeS l0. e4 d4 1 1 . Nce2 cS 12.
c3 Nbc6 13. cxd4 [Karahlajic-V. Sokolov,
Jugoslavia 1968J cxd4! 14. Nxd4 Nxd4 1S.
Qxd4 Qxd4 16. Rxd4 Be6°o.
b) S ... cS 6. 0-0-0 cxd4 7. Nbs Na6 8.
Qxd4 Bg7 9. e4 0-0 10. exdS Bfs 11. BeS
QaS 12. g4! Bxg4 13. Bxf6 Bxf6 14. Qxg4
Qxa2 1S. c3 Rac8 16. NB ReS, and Black's
attack will compensate for the sacrificed
piece in Pyshkin-Stapanov, corr. 1990. [Ed.:
With the move BgS-h6, White in­ This is a very interesting, and difficult posi­
tends to exchange the ((King's Indian" tion. Both sides must play perfectly. Can they?
Bishop- Now we can split up with IBl. A detailed explanation is available on the
4 ... h6 and IB2. 4 ... Bg7. dish. See back of this bookfor details.}
5. ... exf6
6. e3
 1. d4 NIB 2. Nel d5 3. ag5 gB/hB/NeB
More natural is 6. e4 dxe4 7. Nxe4 Bg7 slightly better chances for White in Vere­
which lead to more favorable play for sov-Shagruovich, USSR 1 955.
Black: 8. O�O�O O�O 9. Nf3 [Or 9. h4 f5 10. b) 6 ... Bxh6 7. Qxh6 Nbd7 8. Nh3 Nf8
Ng3 cS 1 1 . d5 b5 ! +, Kapengut-A. Petro­ 9. e4 Bxh3 10. e5 NhS 1 1 . gxh3 Ne6 12.
sian, USSR 1970.J f5 10. Ng3 Nd7 11. Bc4 Rgl Qb6, with a double�edged game in
c6 12. h4 b5 13. Bb3 a5 14. a3 h5 15. Rhel Prins-Lehmann, Leipzig (01) 1 960.
Nb6 16. Ne5 Qd6 17. Qc3 b4+, Veresov­ 5. ... Bxh6
Zhurahhov, USSR 1 955. If 5 ... O�O, White can launch an attack
6. ... Bg7 in the style of the liKing's Indian De�
7. Bd3 £5 fense:' For example: 6. h4 Nc6 7. h5 Bxh6
S. Nce2 Be6 8. Qxh6 Nxd4 9. O�O�O Ng4 10. Qcll Nxfl
9. N£4 1 1 . Qxd4 Nxhl 12. Qh4 e5 13 . Qxhl
The play is even. Qg5t 14. Kbl c6 15. Nf3 Qf4 16. e4 d4 [If
1 6 . . . dxe4, then 1 7 . hxg6 hxg6 1 7 .

IB2. Nxe4! ;t.] 17. Ne2 Qf6 18. Ncl Bg4 19.
hxg6 hxg6 20. Be2 Bxf3 21. Bxf3 . In the
1 . d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS g6 middlegame, the prospects of two minor
4. Qd2 pieces were preferred over the Rook's in

4 ... Bg7
Mestrovic-Grosar, Portoroz 1 996.
6. Qxh6 Bf5
A pawn assault in the center is also
possible: 6 ... cS 7. e3 Nc6 8. o-o�o Qa5 9.
dxc5 Qxc5 10. Nge2 Be6 11. Nd4 0�0�0= ,
Prins- T. Petrosian, Leipzig (01) 1960.
Another plan, with piece develop�
ment, also deserves attention: 6 ... Qd6
7. NB Nc6 8. e3 Bf5 9. O�O�O O-O�O 10. h3 ? !
[Too passive, 10. Bb5 ! ? with unclear play
is better.] e5 ! 11. Bb5 exd4 12. Nxd4=,
Muratov-Reprintsev, Moscow 1991.
The natural reply. 7. O�O-O c6
5. Bh6 S. e3 Qa5
White can start with 5. O�O�O, and if 9. Bd3 Nbd7
5 ... O�O, he can switch to playing in the 10. Kbl 0-0-0
center with 6. f3 ! ? and then 7. e4, when 11. Nge2 RdgS
Black has no time to play c7 �c6 and b7 -b5. 12. f3 Bxd3
Cleverer is 5 . . . c6, after which 6. Bh6 13. cxd3 gS
leads to similar play: 14. Qh3 hs
a) 6 ... O�O 7. Bxg7 Kxg7 8. f3 b5 9. e4 The chances for both sides were about
b4 10. e5 bxc3 1 1 . exf6 exf6 12. Qxc3, with equal in Cecn-Pekarek, Cnema 1 997.
The Rilhler-VlresDv Ch.melell Chlss Reperl.ire
9. Nf3 Nb6 10. Bb3 Bd7 1 1 . Ne5 Qf6 12.
11. Qf3 0-0-0 13. Nhs Qe7 14. 0-0-0, and
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS White's Knights control Black's weak
points in Cigan-Petschar, Austria 1989.1 e6
3 .. h6
.
6. Qh5 ! cS 7. 0-0-0 cxd4 B. exd4 Nc6 9. f4
Bb4 10. Nge2 f5 1 1 . h3 Bd7 12. g4 Ne7
13. Bg2, and White had the initiative in
Spasshy-Uusi, USSR 1 960.
5. e3
On 5. e4, then good is 5 ... Bb4 6. exd5
Qxd5 7. Nf3 0-0 B. Be2 Qa5 9. Qdl Nd7
and, the Knight threatens to transfer
himself to d5, and Black stood better in
Spasshy-Kortchnoi, Belgrade (m/1 6) 1 977
(GAME 33) .
Black is ready to lose a tempo in order Also seen is the fianchetto of the Bish­
to force White make up his mind im­ op 5. g3 c6 6. Bg2. For example: 6 ... Qb6
mediately about the Bishop on g5 . 7. Rbl Bb4 B. Nf3 Qa5 [B Bxc3t, then
• • •

4 . Bxf6 9. bxc3 Qa5 10. Qdl Qxa2 1 1 . O-Ooo/t. If

If the exchange is refused with 4. Bh4 White tries 10. 0-0, then 10 . . . Qxc3 11.
Bf5 5. f3 c6 [An interesting King hunt ap­ Rb3 Qa5 12. Re3t KfBoo/t .] 9. Qd3 Bxc3
peared in Richter-Kretschmar, Berlin 1 925: 10. bxc3 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 ReB 12. Ndl b6 13.
5 . . . Nbd7 6. Nxd5 Nxd5 7. e4 Bxe4 B. Nb3 Qa4 14. Rfel Nd7 15. e4 Ba6 16. Qdl
fxe4 9. Qd3 Nxfl l0. Qxfl g5 1 1 . Bg3 c6 Bc4, with mutual chances in Begun­
12. 0-0-0 Qa5 13. Kbl Bg7 14. Ne2 (Black Zagrebelny, USSR 1 991. The black Queen
is having some problems.) RfB I5. h4 f5 is very far away. White can play 17. h4
16. e5 e6 17. hxg5 hxg5 1B. Rh7 RgB 19. with the positional idea of h5, or perhaps
d5 ! ? (A typical surprise move by Richter; g3-g4-g5.
he wants to put his Knight on d4.) cxd5 5. . .. c6
20. Nd4 NfB 21. Nxe6! Nxe6 22. Qxf5 6. Bd3
Qb6 23 . Qg6t Ke7 24. c4 d4 25. Rxd4! .] The game develops in the spirit of the
6. Qdl Nbd7 7. 0-0-0 [7. Nh3 ? ! Bxh3 B. variation 3 ... c6 4. Bxf6 exf6 5. e3, but in
gxh3 e5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Qe3 Nfg4 1 1 . this particular case White has an extra
hxg4 Qxh4t 1 2 . Qf2 Qf6+, Bellon Lopez­ tempo. As in the aforementioned line,
Spasshy, Linares 1 981.1 e6, then a position here too Black's main plans are con­
comes about in the spirit of 3 . . . Bf5, nected with IIA. 6 ... Bd6 and lIB. 6 .. .
which was examined in Chapter 2. ds.
4. . . . exf6
Weaker is 4 ... gxf6 5. e3 [Also good is lIA.
5. e4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 f5 7. Ng3 e6 8. Bc4 Nd7 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. BgS h6
 1. d4 NIB 2. Nel d5 I. Bg5 gB/hB/NeB
4. Bxf6 exf6 S. e3 c6 6. Bd3 13. Nxb6 axb6
6 ... Bd6

14. gS fxgs
IS. hxg5 Rxa2
7. Qf3 16. gxh6 Ralt
White could have created a pawn ma� 17. Kdl Rxdlt
jority on the queenside by 7. Nge2 O�O B. 18. Kxdl g6
e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4. In Steinitz' times things 19. Rgl Be6
like this were considered an achievement 20. Nf4 Bxf4
in view of the forthcoming endgame. 21. Qxf4
Nowadays this concept is viewed with White's position was preferable in
skeptidsm: it is too early for the end� Tal-Geller, Curafao (et) 1 962.
game, while Black's counterplay is very
real: 9 Bc7 10. c3 Nd7 1 l . Bel ReB 12.
lIB.
...

Qd3 NfB 13. O�O�O as 14. f3 fs 15. N4g3

Be6 16. Kbl a4 17. Nc! ? ! [17. c4 with the 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS h6
idea of Nc3, and ds is better.] g6 1B. Qd2 4. Bxf6 exf6 S. e3 c6 6. Bd3
Qh4, with a double�edged game in
Suetin-Balashov, Moscow 1 978. 6 ••• £5
Therefore, playing on the kingside
promises better chances for White.
7. ... 0 .. 0
The doubling of pawns after 7 ... Na6
B. Bxa6 bxa6 9. Nge2 fS 10. Nf4 O�O 1l.
Nd3 RbB I2. O�O, favored White in Rog�
ers-Goh Cheng�Hong, Hong Kong 1 982.
8. Nge2 Re8
9. 0 ..0 ..0 bs
10. g4 b4
1 1 . Na4 Nd7 With this move Black not only con�
12. h4 Nb6 troIs the important e4�square, but pre�
The Richter-Vereso, I:halleleoD I:hess Repertoire
vents a pawn assault agains the kingside
as well.
7. Qf3
Or 7. Nge2 g6 8. Qd2 Nd7 9. a3 Nf6
10. Nf4 Bd6 1 1 . h4 O�O 12. Be2 Re8 13. g3
Kg7 14. Nd3 Qe7 15. Rgl h5 16. Bfl as
17. Rbl a4 18. Rdl Qc7 19. Be2 Qe7, with
an active game for Black in Balashov-T.
Georgadze, USSR (ch) 1 979. Be1lin-Harito�
nov, 1980 had 7. h4! h5 8. Nce2 ! .
7. g6
8. Nge2 Nd7
9. Nf4 Nf6
Even though a position has arisen
which is similar to 3 ... c6 4. Bxf6 exf6 5.
e3, White has an extra tempo, though it
is not easy to use it because Black has a
solid fortress. For example: 10. h4 Bd6
1 1 . O�O�O Bd7 12. Kbl Qa5 13. Nce2 O�O�O
14. Ng3 Ne4, and Black's chances, hav�
ing occupied the e4�square, were prefer�
able in Hachian-A. Ibragimov, Russia 1996. count on anything special: 4. e3 e6 5. Nf3
1 0 . 0 .. 0 Bd6
Because Black controls e4 he has a 6. Nge2. (Tartakower) ] Be7:
good, perhaps even the better position.
Ill.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 d5 3. Bg5
3 ... Nc6
This move was evoked in the 1920s
from the ideas of Nimzovich. From a
philosophical point of view it fully cor�
responds with 2. Nc3. Though it did not
get wide dissemination in serious prac�
tice, apparently because of the accepted
ideology of playing dosed openings [Le.,
the Knight should not obstruct the
c�pawn, which is an active resource in
fighting forthe center] , this Knight's de�
velopment, which attacks the d4 and c4
squares, has every right to be used in
practice. In this aspect it fuHy corre�
sponds with the Chigorin Variation of
the Queen's Gambit 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Nc6,
or the Tarrasch Variation of the French
Defense 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nc6.
4. f3
By playing passively White cannot
[The alternative, S. Bd3, is followed by
a) 6. Bd3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. O�O Bb7 9.
Bb5?! O�O 10. Bxc6 Bxc6 11. Ne5 Bb7 12.
f4 Ne8 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 14. Qf3 Nd6 15. g4
c5 16. £5, and here, in Ttrrtakover-Nimzo�
vich, Copenhagen 1 923, by 16 . . . exf5 ! 17.
gxf5 Qg5t 18. Kh1 £6, Black could have
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nel d5 I. Ig5 gB/hB/NeB
achieved the advantage (Tartakover) .
b) 6. Be2 O�O 7. O�O b6 8. h3 Bb7 9. Bf4
Na5 10. Ne5 Ne8 1 1 . Bd3 c5=, Conrady­
Honfi, Hague Zonal 1965.
If instead, the exchange 4. Bxf6 exf6
[The pawn sacrifice after 4 . . . gxf6 5. e3
e5 6. dxe5 Be6 7. exf6 Qxf6 8. Qf3 Qh4
9. Bb5 Bg7 10. Qg3 Qf6 (10 . . . Bxc3t 1 1 .
bxc3 Qf6 1 2 . Ne2 ;!; ) 1 1 . Nf3 O�O�O 12.
Bxc6 bxc6 13. Qg5 was ±, in Brynell­
Evertsson, Sweden 1 997.1 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. e3 7.
•.. Qe7
Bb4 7. h3 Bh5 8. Be2 Qd7 or 8. Bd3 Bg6 In Masa1ister-Kostic, Brom1ey 1 920,
with equal chances. Black sacrificed a piece with 7 . . . Nxd4,
4. ... Bf5 which White refused: 8. Nf3 Nxf3t 9.
Apparently a uFrench" turn in the Qxf3 Be6 10. Be2 [Or 10. Bd3 Bc5 1 1 .
game is also possible: 4 . . . h6 5. Bh4 e6. O�O�O Qe7 =t . ] c6 1 1 . Qf2 [After 1 1 . O�O
For example, 6. Nh3 Be7 7. Qd2 Nh7 8. Bc5t 12. Khl O�O, White has no compen�
Bf2 Ng5 9. Nxg5 Bxg5 10. f4 Be7=, Semko� sation for the pawn.] Qa5 12. a3 Bc5 13.
vich-Czauszev, Sandomierz 1 976. Qg3 O�O�O, and White faced difficulties.
5. e4 However, it seems that the Bishop
5 . a3 ! ? deserves attention: 5 . . . Bg6 could have been taken by 8. exf5 Qe7t
[5 . . . e6? 6. e4;!; ] 6. e3 e6 7. Nge2 h6 [Bet� 9. Nge2 [Or 9. Be2 O�O�O 10. Qd3 Nb3
ter is 7 . . . Be7 8. Nf4 O�O with a complex 1 1 . Nd5 Rxd5 12. Qxb3 Qe4 1 3 . KfI
game.] 8. Bh4 Be7 9. Nf4 Bh7 10. Nd3 Rxf5t 14. Bf3 Bb4 1 5 . Ne2 should win
N d7 [Better is 10 . . . Bxd3 ! ? 1 1 . Bxd3 e5 for White. ] O�O�O 10. Qd3 Nxe2 [10 . . .
with a complicated game.] 1 1 . Bf2 O�O 12. Qe5 1 1 . O�O�O Nb3t 1 2 . axb3 Rxd3 13.
Be2 Na5 1 3 . O�O Nc4 14. e4 ;!; , Fred­ Rxd3 Qxf5 14. Ng3 ;!; ] 11. Qxe2 Qb4 [If
Shapiro, Varna (01) 1962. 1 1 . .. Qc5, then 12. Rdl , with the idea
5. ... dxe4 of Rdl �d3, or 12. Qf3 . ] 12. Qf3 Bc5 13.
6. Bxi6 a3 Rhe8t 14. Be2 Qb6 15. Rdl , and
6. d5 ! ? deserves attention, with the White parries the threats. (Stetsko)
idea that if6 . . . Ne5, then 7. Qd4±. If 7 . . . 8. Qe2
exf3, then upon 8 . O�O�O! £Xgl 9 . Bxgl Also occurring was 8. d5 Bxe4! 9. Qe2
White has a big advantage in develop� Nd4 10. Qxe4 Qxe4t 11. Nxe4 Nxc2t 12.
ment, a typical strategical sacrifice! Kdl Nxal 13. Bb5t c6! 14. dxc6 O�o�ot
6. ... exf6 15. Kcl bxc6 16. Ba6t [Or 16. Bxc6 Kc7]
7. fxe4 Kc7 17. N£3 [Stronger is 17. Ne2 Rb8 18.
Bc4 £5 19. N4c3 ;!; {Stetsko, Ed.. Note: To
my mi nd. 1 9 . . . Bb4 20. Kb1 [20. Nd.1 Rhd.8
21. Kb1 Rd.2 22. Kxa1 Rbd.8 keeps Black's ad.�
Thl Richter-VereSII ChamelelD Chess Repertlire
vantage} Bxd 21. Nxc3 Rhd8 is advantageous 11. Ng3 b4
to Blach.}.} RbB IB. Bc4 fS 19. Nc3 Bb4! 12. Nce2 Bb7
20. Na4 RheB 2 1 . Kbl Re4, and Black 13. h4 cS
achieved the advantage in Rozanski-Kras� 14. dxcS
kiewicz, Poland 1 973. Not only stopping cS�c4, but obtain�
B. Qd3 deserves attention: B . . . O�O�O, ing the important d4�square for the
and then 9. ds Bg4 10. Be2 NeS l1. Qg3±. Knight as well.
S. ... Nxd4 14. ... QaS
9. QU! cS IS. Kbl NeS
Favo ring White is 9 . . . Bxe4 1 0 . After IS . . . NxcS 16. Nd4 (prevent�
O�O�O± . ing dS�d4) Nxd3 17. Rxd3 , it's more
10. 0 ..0 ..0 Bd7 difficult for Black to develop a coun�
The game Kubart-Ha1lbauer, Leipzig terattack.
1 946, proceeded 10 . . . Be6? 1 1 . BbSt Bd7 16. Qg2 Nxd3
12. Nds QeS 13. Bxd7t Kxd7 14. Nf3 17. Rxd3
Qxe4 1S. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Nxf6t gxf6 17. White could have tried to seize the
Rxd4t 1 �0. cS�square: 17. cxd3 QxcS 1B. Ncl aS 19.
11. Nd5! QdS d4 Qb6 20. Nb3, but after 20 ... RecB
12. Qg3 ReS 2 1 . NcS Bc6 22. Rcl BfB, the Knight
13. c3 Ne6 won't have enough support.
14. NB 17. ... Re6
and White's initiative was full compen� IS. Nd4 Ra6
sation for his sacrificed pawn. 19. a3 bxaJ
20. Rxa3 QxcS
21. Rxa6 Bxa6
Game 3 2
The position has a double�edged char�
Dittmar-Bastian
acter, though it seems that the white
Germany 1 993
King is more vulnerable.
22. hS RbS
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3. BgS g6 4. Bxi6 23. hxg6 fxg6
exf6 S . e3 Bg7 6 . Bd3 0 .. 0.
� � � *�
Probably better is 6 . . . b6 7. Qf3 fS,
stopping g2 �g4. ���
..
�,� . �% �% ��r�
� � �� � � i:
7. QB c6
, �� ,�, � ��'� . . ' ....�

�� ' �F;�� ��
S. Nge2
More accurate is B. g4, preventing B ...
fS. ���/.'W#���J�w#
� �� '�%'//����///.� �
8. ... Re8 �Jffi� �•.
�''' �
9. g4 Nd7 ��� � ��Jffi".��
..u..
���
�
'et

10. 0 ..0 ..0 bs

 1 . d4 NfB 2. Ncl d 5 I . Bg5 IB/hB/NcB
24. b3 Bxb4t, White should not play 32. Ke2,
Practically a forced weakening. For which allows Black to successfully de�
instance the line: 24. Nge2 f5 ! . fend himself with 32 . . . Bf8 33 . Qb8 Ba6
25. ... Rb6 34. Rxh6 Bxd3t 35. Kxd3 Qa6t 36. Kdl
25. Nh5! Bf8 Kg7, but instead, should play 32 . Nxb4
Capturing the Knight would give Qxb4t 33. Ke2, after which the white
White an enduring initiative: 25 . . . gxh5 King slips away, and the h6�pawn can�
26. gxh5 Kf7 [26 . . . h6 27. Rgl Rb7 28. not be protected [33 . . . Qf8 34. Ne6] .
Ne6 ± ] 27. h6 Bf8 28. Rgl Ke8 29. Qg8. 32. Qf4 Bc8?
26. Nf4 Bb7 Total confusion. Black should have
27. Kcl tried to consolidate his position with
In order to avoid the mate on al 32 . . . Qe7, intending to play Qe7�e4 or
White evacuates his King. But, White Bb7�a6.
does better with 27. Qh2 . Then if 27 . . . 33. Rbl Qd7?
h6 [27 . . . Qc7 28. Nde6 Qf7 29. Nxf8 Kxf8 It wasn' t too late for 33 . . . Qd6 34.
30. Qxh7 Qxh7 3 1 . Rxh7 is better for Qf3 Bb7 35. Nf4 Kf7 . By allowing the
White. ] , then 28. Nxg6 Ra6 29. Kb2 ! invasion of the white Queen, Black loses
Qa3t 30. Kc3 Qb4t 3 1 . Kd3. immediately.
27. ... Ra6? 34. Qxf6 Qxg4
This impulsive move allows the King 35. Ne5 Qe4
to escape from a very dangerous area. 36. Qf7j
Suggesting itself is 27 . . . Qc3, making } o ..

use of the fact that White cannot take

on d5 [28. Nxd5 ? Qal t 29. Kdl Qa5t] .
Game 3 3
Now it would not be easy for White
Spassky-Kortchnoi
to protect himself. For instance 28. Qh3
Belgrade (m/16) 1 977
h6 29. Kdl [29. Nd3 Ba6] Ba6 30. Nxd5
Qal t 3 1 . Kdl Qa5 t 32 . Nc3 Bb4 33 .
Nde2 Rd6t, or 28. Nfe2 Qal t 29. Kdl 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 h6 4. Bxf6
Bb4t 30. c3 Qb2t. White also has 28. exf6 5 . e4.
Nd3 , but now after 28 ... Ra6 29. Kdl A hasty move, which allows Black
Ral t, Black has the more real threats. to solve his opening problems. Correct
28. Kd2 Ra2 is 5 . e3 .
29. Qh2 h6 5. . .. Bb4
30. Nd3 Qa5j 6. exd5 Qxd5
31. b4 7. NB 0..0
If 3 1 . Ke2 , then 3 1 . . . Qc3 , with 8. Be2 Qa5
threats Bb7�a6 and capturing on c2 . 9. Qd2 Nd7
3 1 . ... Qd8 Black tries to squeeze the most from
Black makes his last stand. If 3 1 . . . his bind on the Knight by posting an
The Richter-Veresol Ch._eleln Chess Repert.ire
antagonist on dS. ens the bind with 2S. Kcl !, leaving Black
10. a3 Nb6 with his weak pawns.
1 1 . Rbl 24. Rxd4
If 1 1 . O�O, Black could have carried out 24. cxd4?! would have been met by
the same maneuver. the unpleasant 24 ... as.
11. Bxc3 24. Rd7
12. Qxc3 Qxc3t 25. Rxd7 Bxd7
13. bxc3 Nd5 26. Re4 g5
14. Kdl Nf4 27. c4!
15. Bfl b6 Thanks to his centralized pieces
g3
16. Nh3 White had the preferable endgame.
Stronger is 16 . . . Bb7 17. gxf4 [If 17. 27. Be6
Ke3H, then 17 ... Rfe8t wins.] Bxf3 18. 28. Kc3 Ke7
Rgl + . 29. Rd4 b5?
17. Bxh3 Bxh3 This helps White create a passed
18. Nel Rfd8 pawn. Black should have limited the
19. Nd3 Rac8 King by 29 ... as ! .
20. Rhel Kf8 30. Nb2 bxc4
21. Rbs c6 31. Nxc4 Rc5
22. Rb4 32. Kb4 Rf5
33. f4 gxf4
34. Rxf4
The feeling of being a pawn down
has increased the tension, and it is clear
that to save himself Black has to keep
his Rook.
34. Rh5
35. Rf2 Rd5
36. NaS Rd6
37. a4?!
22. ... c5 The obvious 3 7 . c4 Rb6t 3 8 . KcS Ra6
One should note that White possesses 39. N c6t would have maintained the
an extra pawn on the queenside, and initiative.
that simplifying the position actually 37. Rb6t
favors him. Therefore, this move should 38. Kc5 Bd7
have been preceded by the preventive 39. Rf4 Re6
22 . . Rc7. Now White manages to acti�
. 40. c3 f5!
vate his Rook. Conquering the important e4�square.
23. Ra4! cxd4 41. Nb3 Re5t?
If 23 ... as 24. dxcs bxcS, White loos� Here is the mistake. By playing ac�
 1. d4 NfB 2. Nc3 dli 3. Igli gB/hB/NcB
tively 41. .. Re2 42. Rh4 Re4! Black would 45. Ka5 Rc2
have caused a favorable exchange . 46. Kb4�!
(Stean) There were some chances for win�
42. Kb4 Re2 ning by 46. Ka6! Rxc3 47. Nb7, capturing
43. Nc5 Be6 the pawn on a7. However, White agreed
A clever move. Otherwise White upon the triple repetition of the posi�
would exchange his Bishop on d7, leav� tion.
ing Black with multiple pawn islands. 46. Rb2t
On 44. Nxe6, Black has 44 ... Kxe6! 45. 47. Ka5 Rc2
Rh4 Re4tL 48. Kb4 Rb2t
44. Rh4 Rb2t 1/2 .. 1/2

We Care
What You
Think!
Did you like this book? Do
you b e lieve we a c c o m �
plished our aims, your de�
sires? Let us know.
The number of books on
QP systems is woefully
small. The number of good
ones is almost non�existent,
yet these games make up a
good chunk of each issue of
the Chess Informants. Would
you like to see more books
on the various QP systems
(Torre, Colle, Trompowsky,
Unusual, etc.) by GM au�
thors?
The lichter-VeresD' Ch._elell Chess Repertoire
Deviations
1 . d4 N£6 2. Nc3 + 1 . d5 2. Nc3 £5
•.
Contemporary chess is not only the
spectrum of opening theory and the
skills in playing them, but the also the
application of psychology as well. After
1 . d4 Nf6 the unexpected reply of 2 .
Nc3 can puzzle an opponent who is dis­
posed to play one of the classic open­
ings after 2. c4. The groundwork for
th ese fundamental systems is well
known.
Besides the psycholgical aspect of the
unexpectedness of 2 . N c3 , Black must
also deal with the transfer of the game
to purely practical lines. The Richter­
Veresov seldom gets into the sphere of
grandmaster praxis, as it does not guar-
antee, if anything does, an advantage
in the opening, and is therefore not
normally considered in the manuals
of opening theory. But, an important
aspect of the Richter-Veresov is that
White retains the chance of transposing
the game into different opening sys­
tems. So, Black must also be prepared
for that unexpected possibility too.
Therefore, the player of the Richter­
Veresov setup has a good chance to drag
his opponent off to his web.
In the diagrammed position White
gets ready to play e2-e4. Black's natu­
ral reaction to counter this is 2 . . . d5 ,
probably the strongest move. Then
White plays 3. Bg5 , and we are in the
R-V system again. The opponent may
desire to explore a detour in a num­
ber of risky variations.
In this brief chapter we examine ways
in which Black tries to thwart the Rich­
ter-Veresov. Even in some of these excep­
tions, the Nc3+Bg5 complex remains
White's main weapon. Let's note right
away that in attempts to transfer the
game to lines of classical openings, there
can be deviations by both sides, though
the value of each can be different. And
for White, who has the advantage of the

first move, these deviations are okay,
while for Black, risk must be incurred.
Black's main deviations are: 2 c5...
(Chapters 19-21), 2 e6 (Chapters 22-
...
23) , 2 d6 (Chapters 24) , and 2 £5
... . . .
(Chapter 25) .
d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5
1.
The most common is 2 ... cS . IfWhite
plays 3 . d5 then we transpose to the
Benoni, in which contemporary theory,
in most variations, gives preference to
White. Here Black faces even more dif­
ficult problems than with 2. c4, because
White has an opportunity to post his
Knight on the c4-square by way of N gl ­
f3-dl-c4, and to create strong piece pres­
sure in the center and on the queen­
side.
In this monograph we will consider
another original system of play:
1) White carried on his development
by 3 . Bg5 (Chapters 1 9 and 20) . In this
case our theme frequently intersects
with variations from the Trompowsky
Attack ( 1 . d4 Nf6 2. BgS cS 3 . Nc3 ) .
2 ) White takes and removes the pawn
pressure with 3. dxcS (Chapter 21), striv-
Deviations
ing to give the game the character of
the Sicilian Defense.
3) White can also try to transpose
in a radical way: 3. Nf3 cxd4 4. Nxd4
and now after 4 . . . e6, 4 . . . d6, and 4 . . .
g6, White can play 5 . e4. After 4 . . . e5
the game might lead to the Sveshnikov
Sicilian by 5. Ndb5 d6 6. e4. This Si­
cilian can be prevented by Black with
the energetic 4 . . . d5 , but then 5. Bg5
gives White the preferred game:
a) 5 . . . e5 6 . Ndb5 ! [If the retreat 6.
Nb3, then 6 . . . d4 7. Nbl Be7 B. e3 dxe3
9. QxdBt BxdB 10. Bxe3 Ng4 1 1 . Bc5
N d7, and Black had equality in Koeni­
ger-Held, Munich 1 993.1 d4 [And 6 ... a6?
fails to 7. Nxd5 ! axb5 B. Nxf6t 1 -0 in
Djurhuus-Liardet, Santiago 1 990.1 7. Nd5
Na6 B. e4! [B. Bxf6 gxf6 9. e4 Be6, with
sharp play] Be6 9. Nxd4! exd4 10. Bb5t
Bd7 1 1 . Bxd7 Kxd7 [ 1 1 . .. Qxd7? 12.
Bxf6] 12. Qxd4 KcB 1 3 . 0-0-0, with a
strong attack in Basman-Martens, Har­
rachov 1 967.
b) 5 . . . e6 6. e4 dxe4 [6 . . . Bb4 7 . e5±]
7. Ndb5 Qa5 B. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Nd6t Bxd6
10. Qxd6 Qb6 1 1 . Nxe4 Qxd6 [ 1 1 . . .
Qxb2 ? loses to 1 2 . Rdl Bd7 1 3 . c3 , fol­
lowed by Ne4xf6 .] 12. Nxd6t Ke7 1 3 .
0-0-0, and Black's misshapen pawn
structure left White the better chances
in the endgame in van Geet-Gereben,
Beverwijk 1 965.
Thl Richter-Vereslv Chllllllll Chess RlplrtDire

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d6

Black's attempts to transpose into the In the event of 2 ... d6 (Chapter 24),
French Defense by 2 . . . e6 seems logical with 3. e4 White can offer Black the
enough. Even here mutual variants are transposition to the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defense
possible: with 3 ... g6, which is the theme of other
1) White carries on his development opening books. In this book we will ex�
using the 3 . Bg5 concept ( Chapter 22) , amine 3. Bg5, in which after 3 ... Nbd? 4.
allowing Black t o have a wider range e4 e5 5. Nf3 Be? 6. Bc4 follows the path
of options: the Burn� Rubinstein Varia� of PW.lidor's Defense.
tion [3 . . . d5 4. e4 dxe4] , the Classical
d4 d5 2. Nc3 £5
System [3 . . . Be? 4. e4 d5 5 . e5 Nfd?],
Anderssen's Variation [3 . . . Be? 4. Bxf6 1.
Bxf6 5. e4 d5 6. e5 Be?], and MacCutch�
eon's Variation [3 . . . Bb4 4. e4 d5] .
2 ) White shows his willingness to
play the French by 3. e4. The attempt
to evade it by 3 . . . Bb4 (Chapter 23) is
already connected with taking a risk
by Black.

See Chapter 25.


Benoni-type
Deviations I
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. BgS
White proceeds in his development in
the spirit of the R-V system, and he is not
embarrassed at losing a tempo while
bringing out his pieces, because his
Queen gets activated.
3. ... cxd4
Black stops the pawn pressure and
plans to develop his forces in a man­
ner akin to the Sicilian Defense.
Another widespread continuation,
3 ... Qb6, which gives the game a com­
pletely different character, is examined
in Chapter 20.
Sometimes 3 ... QaS is seen, but in
that case Black must deal with the de­
formation of his kingside pawn struc-
Benloi-type Devillilos 1
ture: 4. Bxf6 gxf6 [The capture 4 ... exf6
5 . e3 Be7 6. Nf3 0-0 7 . Bd3 d5 8. dxc5
Be6 9. 0-0 Qxc5 10. Be2 Nc6 1 1 . Nb5
Rac8 12. Nbd4 leaves Black with the
isolated d5-pawn in Toth-Nagy, Hun­
gary 1 994.J 5. e3 [or 5. d5 f5 6. e3 Bg7
7. Nge2 d6 8. a4 Na6 9. g3 h5 10. h4 ;!;
inJepson-Clemente, Spain 1995J e6 [There
also occurred 5 ... cxd4 6. exd4 e6 7. d5 ? !
Ba3 8. Qcl Qb4 9. Rbl Qxc3 1 0 . bxc3
Bxcl 1 1 . Rxcl b6= in Mihh. Tseitlin­
Pohojowczyh, Slupsh 1 978; 7. Qf3 ! ? de­
serves attention: 7 . . . f5 8. O-O-O;!; . ] 6.
d5 Bg7 7. Nge2 Na6 8. g3 Nc7 9. Bgl
Nb5 10. 0-0 Nxc3 1 1 . Nxc3 f5 12. e4
fxe4 13. Nxe4 0-0 14. c3, with a slight
advantage to White in De la Viila­
Wiersma, Berlin 1 997.
4. Qxd4
In the event of the intermediate ex­
change 4. Bxf6 gxf6 [4 . . . exf6? is not
as good. 5 . Qxd4 Nc6 6. Qe3t ;!; . ] 5.
Qxd4 Nc6, and Black has an acceptable
position.
4. ... Nc6
If 4 ... h6, the same reply is possible:
5. Qh4 e6 [Doubtful is 5 ... Qb6 6. 0-0-0
hxg5 ? ! 7. Qxh8 Qxf2 8. e4 Nc6 9. Nf3
g4 10. Qh4 Qc5 1 1 . Ndl d6 12. Nb3 ±
in Mesaros-Moltchanov, Cannes 1 997.1
6. 0-0-0 RgB 7 . Bxf6 Qxf6 B. Qxf6 gxf6
9 . e4 [Nothing substantive can be
The Richter-Veresol Cha.eleol Chess Repertoire
achieved by 9. Ne4 Be7 10. Nd6t Bxd6
1 1 . Rxd6 Ke7 12. Rdl b5 13. e4 Bb7 14.
f3 a6, and Black did not face any seri�
ous problems in Berhes-Volohitin, Cannes
1 997.] Bb4 10. Nge2 Nc6 1 1 . g3 ± .
5 . Qh4
In Achenbach-Gustavson, Germany
1 992 there also occurred 5. Qa4 e6 6 .
e 4 Be7 7. Nf3 d 6 8. e5 dxe5 9. Nxe5 ± .
However, if the Queen is transferred
to the kingside, the plan using the dark-­
squared Bishop's fianchetto looks more
promising with 5 . . . g6.
If the modest 5 . Qdl Qa5 [Good is
5 . . . e6 6 . e4 Bb4 7. Bd3 d5= . ] 6 . e4 e6
7. Bd3 a6 8. Nge2 Be7 9. f4 d6 10. h3
h6 1 1 . Bxf6 Bxf6 12. O�O b5 [Ed. Note:
Development, and King safety are more
important here than 12 . . . Qb6t.] 13. Kh1
b4 14. Nd1 Qc5=, and Black had good
counterplay in Chlaifer-Prange, Ger�
many 1 994.
5. ... e6
This is the most frequently used con�
tinuation. Before that 5 . . . d6 used to
be played, as in 6. O�O�O Bd7 [Or 6 . . .
Be6 7. e 4 Qa5 8 . a3 Ng4 9. Bdl g5 10.
Qg3 Qc5 11. Nh3 , and Black's activ�
ity is stopped cold. White threatened
to push back the Black pieces by Bfl �
e2 and Bdl�e3 as in Ha11-Winge, Sa1ts�
jobaden 1 988] 7. e4 Qa5 [or 7 . . . Rc8 8 .
Kb1 Qa5 9. Nf3 a6 10. Ndl Be6 1 1 . Bc4±
as in West-Seredenho, Manila (01) 1 992]
8. Bc4 h6 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Nd5 Rg8 1 1 .
Ne2 Rg4 12. Qh5 Ne5, and here in Mihh.
Tseitlin-Taborov, Daugavplls 1978, instead
of the Itobvious" 1 3 . Bb3 [Which loses
the Queen, after 13 . . . Rg5 14. Qh4
Ng6 .], White was tempted to win the
Queen, but at a high price [Though the
game was eventually drawn . ] : 1 3 .
Nxf6t?! exf6 14. Rd5 Qxd5 ! 1 5 . Bxd5
Rg5 16. Bxf7t Nxf7 17. Qf3 Bg4 18. Qe3
Bxe2 1 9 . Qxe2 Rc5ro/+. .
Analysis after 19 . . . ReS.
However, instead of the exchange
on f6, 9. Bdl ! ? ± , deserves attention.
If the white Queen is driven to the
kingside, Black's attention can be fo�
cused on the queenside:
a) 5 . . . Qa5 6. O�O�O b5! 7. e4? ! [7. a3]
b4 8. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Nd5 Qxal 10. Nc7t
Kd8 1 1 . Nxa8 Bb7 12. Qh3 Qa1 t 1 3 .
Kdl Qxb2 =+= , as i n Soetewey-Gulbas, Bel�
gium 1 998.
b) 5 . . . b5 6. e4 [If 6. Nxb5, there fol�
lows 6 . . . Qb6 . ] a6 7. Nf3 d6 8. Be2 e6
9. Bxf6 ? ! [9. O�O Be7. After 10. Rfd1
b4 1 1 . Nb1 ! h6 12. Nbde O�O +' . ] Qxf6
10. Qxf6 gxf6, with a better endgame
for Black in Grimm-Marh Tseitlin, Passau
1 998; 8. Bd3 e6 9. O�O Be7 10. Rfe1 Qc7
1 1 . Rad1 100ks more active with a com�
plex game to follow.
6. e4
6 . O�O�O Bel l . e4 takes us into the
main line.
6. . . . Be7

6 ... Bb4 has also been played: 7. Bd3
NeS B. Nge2 h6 9. f4 Ng6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6
1 1 . Qxf6 gxf6 12. Rfl RgB 1 3 . g3 d6 14.
O�O�O Ke7 1 S . a3 BcS 16. b4;!; , as in De
la Villa-So Polgar, Leon 1 989.
7. 0..0.. 0
Unlike similar structures of the Si�
cilian Defense, White switched his
Queen to assault the kingside, an as�
sault which he is planning after devel�
oping with f4 and Ng1 �f3. But, Black's
position is also well developed.
On 7. f4, according to the great ex�
pert on such similar positions, grand�
master Taimanov, the most active is
7 . . . bS, with B. Bxbs Qb6. The game
Nei-Taimanov, USSR 1 981 continued:
B. eS b4 9. Nbs a6 [9 ... Ne4? ! is worse,
according to Taimanov, because of 10.
Bxe7 Nxe7 1 1 . Bd3 RbB 12. Bxe4 RxbS
13. Nf3 ± . ] 10. Nd6t [Or 10. exf6 gxf6
1 1 . Nd6t Bxd6 12. Bxf6 Be7 13. Bxe7
Qxe7+ . (Taimanov) ] Bxd6 11. exd6 Nd4
12. O�O�O [More reliable is 12. Bd3 Bb7
13. Qf2 .] Nfs 13. Bxf6 Nxh4 14. BxdB
KxdB, and Black obtained the better
endgame.
7 ... Qb6 deserves attention: B. O�O�O
Qe3t 9. Kbl Nxe4 10. Nxe4 Qxe4 1 1 .
Bd3 BxgS [Uncertain is 1 1 . . . Qxgl 12.
Benlni-type Deviatians 1
Bxe7 Nxe7 ( 12 . . . Qxhl 13. Bd6 ! ro/;!; )
and White has a big lead in develop�
ment.] 12. QxgS Qd4 1 3 . Nf3 Qf6 14.
QhS, and now in Ochoa-Browne, New
York 1 989, instead of 14 . . . Qxf4 1S. NgS
NeS 1 6 . Rhfl after which White re�
gained the sacrificed material, Black
should have played 14 . . . g6 .
Also insufficient for gaining the ad�
vantage was 7. Nf3 Qc7 [Or 7 . . . QaS
B. Bd3 h6 9. O�O Nd4 10. Nxd4 QxgS
1 1 . QxgS hxgS 12. eS Ng4 1 3 . Nf3 fS
14. Rad1 a6 1 S . Na4 BdB 1 6 . b4 b6 17.
h3 Nh6 and, after the Knight's trans�
fer to f7 and the Bishop's to c7, Black
paralyzed White's eS ..pawn defense, as
in Shereshevsky-Zhidkov, Daugavpils
1 978.} B. Bd3 a6 9. O�O h6 10. Rfe1 d6
1 1 . Rad1 bS 12. a3 Bb7. Black built up
his forces actively in the manner of the
Paulsen Variation of the Sicilian De�
fense and obtained good play in Corre�
dor-R. Rodriguez, Candas 1 992.
7. ... Qa5
Other moves have also been tried.
First of all it is to be noted that cas�
tling while under attack looks rather
risky:
a) 7 ... O�O B. f4 [If B. Bd3, Black ex�
changes this Bishop to decrease the
power of White's attack: B h6 9. Bdl
• . •
NeS 10. Nf3 Nxd3 t 1 1 . cxd3 dS 12. Qf4
bS! 13. g4 b4 14. h4? ! bxc3 1S. Bxc3 Nh7
1 6 . gS hS, and Black countered the at�
tack in Walti-Klauser, Switzerland 1 987.}
NeB [B ... h6 ? ! looks like a challenge.
9. Nf3 hxgS lO. NxgS Qc7 1 1 . eS ! NxeS
12. NdS ! exdS 13. fxeS QxeS 14. ReI ,
and White launched a dangerous at�
tack in Krasenkov-Degraeve, Cappelle la
The Richler-VeresDv Cha_IlelD Chess Reperllire
Grande 1 990 (GAME 34) ; and as was 8. £4 d6
shown by Krasenkov, White could have B d5 deserves attention. For ex�
• • •

even played 9. Bxh6 ! ? gxh6 10. Qxh6 ample: 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. Nxd5 exd5
Ng4! 11. Qh5 Nf6 {Weaker is 1 1 . .. Nf2? ! 1 1 . Bxe7 Nxe7 12. a3 Bf5 1 3 . Nf3 Qc5
12. Rdl ! Nxh1 1 3 . Rd3 Bf6 1 4 . e 5 Bg7 14. Bd3 RcB=, Sahovic-Quinteros, Bled!
15. Ne4ro/± [Ed. Notes: This position and Portoroz 1 979.
Gufeld's intuition are amazing. I suspect, 9. Nf3 h6
from lengthy independent analysis, that 10. Bb5
lS. Ne4 ultimatelyfails. However, in con� Premature was 10. e5 ? ! dxe5 1 1 . fxe5
junction with lS. Nh3 it may succeed! E.g., Nxe5 12. Bb5t Bd7! 13. Nxe5 Bxb5 14.
lS ... Re8 16. NgS! Re7 (1 6 ... Qe7, after 1 7. Nxf7 Kxf7 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 16. Qh5t KgB
Nce4 Rd8 18. Nh7 bombs also.) 1 7. Nce4! 1 7 . Qxb5 Bxc3 l B . Qxb7 Bxb2t ! 19.
NxeS 18.fxeS should winfor White.1.) 12. Qxb2 [ 1 9 . Kxb2 ? fails to 1 9 . . . Qe5t L ]
Qg5t KhB 13. Qh6t Nh7 14. Rd3 RgB Kh7 2 0 . Rhe l ? [B etter i s 2 0 . Rd3 . ]
1 5 . Rh3, and the attack continues.] 9. RhdB ! , and Black not only interrupts
Bd3 Bxg5 10. fxg5 Ne5 1 1 . Nf3 ;!; , as in White's initiative, but creates some dan�
West-Curtis, Sydney 1 992. gerous threats as well in I uldachev-Ser�
b) 7 ... a6 B. f4 b5 9. e5 b4 10. exf6 pe� Tashkent 1 993.
gxf6 1 1 . Ne4 fxg5 12. fxg5 Qa5 13. Kbl 10. Bd7
b3 14. axb3 [Stronger is 14. cxb3 Bb7 11. e5 dxe5
15. a3.] Nb4 15. Nf6t KdB I6. Qd4 Qalt 12. Bxe6! Bxe6
17. Kcl Qalt lB. Kdl Qa5 19. Ke2 Nxc2 13. Nxe5 Re8
20. Qe4 RbB 21. Nf3=t, Vaganian-Knaak, and Black maintained equality (Serper) .
Tallinn 1 979; better was 20 ... Qxg5 ! 2 1 .
Ng4! with sharp play. (Cvetkovic) [Ed.
Game 3 4
Note: After 21 ... QbSt there seems to be
Krasenkov-Degraeve
nothing wonderful about White's game.1
Cappelle la Grande 1 990
c) 7 ... d6 B. f4 Qc7 [For B Qa5 ! ? ,
• • •

cf. 7 . . . Qa5 .] 9. Nf3 a6 10. Qel O�O 1 1 .

Kbl RdB 1 2 . Rgl b 5 1 3 . Bd3 Bb7 14. 1. d4 N£6 2. Bg5 e5 3. Nc3.
g4 Nd7 15. Nd5 exd5 16. exd5 Nce5, The Trompowsky Attack has been
and now, instead of l7. Nxe5 Nxe5 1B. transformed into a Richter�Veresov type
Bxe7 Qxe7=, as in Mayer-Shibut, Phila� system.
delphia 1 991, better is 17. Bxe7 Nxd3 ! 3. cxd4
l B . BxdB Nxe1 19. Bxc7 Nxf3 20. Rg3 4. Qxd4 Ne6
Nxh2 ! + 2 1 . Rhl ReB with the idea of 5. Qh4 e6
. . . Re2 . 6. 0 ..0 ..0 Be7
d) 7 . . . h6 8. f4 Rg8 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. 7. e4 0..0
Qg3 Bxc3 1 1 . Qxc3 QaS 12. QxaS NxaS=, Too much. The continuations 7 ...
Dorfanis-Atalik, Katerini 1 993. QaS or 7 ... d6 offer more possibilities.
 Ben.ni-type Dlvillilns 1
B. f4 h6?! 13. fxe5 Qxe5
With the King castled, a challenge is 14. ReI Qf5
brought forth. More cautious was 8 ... The only way to protect the King. Af�
Ne8. ter 14 ... Qd6, White would proceed with
9. NB his attack by IS. Bd3 g6 16. Qh6.
A different kind of piece sacrifice, 9. 15. Ftle7 �4!
Bxh6 gxh6 10. Qxh6, appears to also be 16. Qxg4 Nxg4
dangerous for Black. 17. Bb5
9. ... hxg5 Supporting the Rook on the 7th rank.
Black is ready to suffer for his mate� Black faces difficulties in avoiding losses.
rial advantage. More reliable was 9 . . . 17. ... Nf6
Ne8;!;. If 17 ... f6, there might have been 18.
10. Nxg5 Qc7 Nh3, with the Knight being transferred
The threat of e4�eS could only be to f4. 17 ... d6 deserves attention.
stopped by 10 . . . g6 [If 10 . . . eS? there lB. h4 a6
would follow 1 1 . N dS ! . ] , counting on 19. Bd3 b5
1 1 . eS NhS, but after 1 1 . Qh6 ! Re8 12. More stubborn was 19 ... g6.
eS Bf8 13. Qh4 NhS 14. g4, White would 20. h5 ReB
regain the piece and continue his at� 21. Bh7t! KfB?
tack. Now the King will be mated! This
1 1 . e5 Nxe5 curiosity can only be justified by time�
Black has counted on 12. fxeS QxeS, pressure. After 2 1 . . . Kh8 22 . Rhel Bb7
posting the Queen on the Sth rank from 23. BfS Kg8, Black would parry any
where it will exploit his opponent's direct threats, though White's posi�
Queen's bind with the threat of Nf6� tional advantage looms large.
hS, but disappointment awaits him. 22. Rf7#

12. Nd5!
A nice sacrifice, the sense of which
becomes clear a move later.
12. ... exd5
DI .ic�tlr-VI"'s., I:b•••1111 I:hlss Rlpert.irl
Benoni-type
Deviations 2
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. BgS Qb6
This wing attack corresponds to the
spirit of the thrust c7 -cS, though it is
connected with some risk, because it
is not supported by enough pieces. The
normal reaction by White is to sacri­
fice the b-pawn. Though the position
in the diagram corresponds more fre­
quently in the Trompowsky Attack, with
the order of moves as 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Bg5
cS 3. d5 Qb6, for the full enlighten­
ment of this theme we will now con­
sider this plan.
4. ds Qxb2
Black takes up the challenge, since
after 4 . . . d6 5. e4 g6 6. Bb5t Bd7 7. a4
the Queen's jump to b6 loses its sense.
For instance, in Lputian-Wang, Mos­
cow (01) 1 994, the game went 7 . . . Bg7
8. Nf3 a6 9. as Qc7 10. Be2 b5 1 1 . axb6
Qxb6 12. Ra2 h6 13. Bd2 0-0 14. e5 Ng4
15. exd6 exd6 16. 0-0, and White main­
tained a slight but enduring advantage.
S. Bd2 Qb6
If the Queen isn't careful, it could
be lost by 5 . . . Na6?, and then 6. Rb1
Qa3 7 . e4 d6 8. Nb5 Qxa2 9. Ral , as
was seen in Zambor-Kundrik, Czecho­
slovakia 1 997.
6. e4 d6
Preventing e4-e5, while if the radical
6 . . . e5 ? ! is played, this aim cannot be
achieved: 7. dxe6! dxe6 8. e5 Nfd7 9.
f4 a6 10. a4 Qc7 1 1 . Nf3 Nc6 12. Ne4
and White takes the d6-square under
his control and gained the advantage
in Thora11sson-Bricard, Iceland-France
1 993.
7. f4
 111.lIi-type Delillilos 2
After e4-e5 White threatens to obtain might be 9 . . . Bxf3 1 0 . Qxf3 dxe6 1 1 .
a large spatial advantage. As shown RbBoo/ � . ] 10. fxe5 Bxf3 [Black should
by practice, the most efficient way of note 10 . . . Nxe5 1 1 . Nxe5 ! Bxdl 1 2 .
preventing this are the continuations Bb5t KdB 1 3 . Rxdl oo/ � . ] 1 1 . gxf3 !
I. 7 . . e5 and 11. 7 . . e6.
. . [Unclear is 1 1 . Qxf3 Nxe5 1 2 . Qe2
If other moves are played, they fail: Nfd7] Nxe5 1 2 . Qe2 Nfd7 13 . f4 Ng6
a) 7 . . . g6 ? B. e5 dxe5 [or B . . . Nfd7 14. Rb l Qf6 1 5 . Rxb7 a6 1 6 . h4! e6
9. Nf3 Bg7 10. Rbl QdB l 1 . e6 fxe6 12. 17. dxe6 Qxe6 1 B . Qxe6 fxe6 1 9 . Bc4
Ng5 NfB 13. Bb5t Bd7 14. dxe6 Bxb5 Bd6 20. 0-0, and White had a clear
1 5 . Nxb5 QcB 16. 0-0 a6 1 7 . Bc3 axb5 advantage in Chepuhaitis-Bujahevich,
lB. Bxg7 RgB I9. BxfB RxfB 20. Nxh7 ±, St. Petersburg 1 996.
Vaganian-Jansa, Kragujevac 1 974J 9. fxe5
Nfd7 10. Nf3 Bg7 1 1 . Rbl QdB 12. e6
fxe6 13. Ng5 Nf6 14. Bb5t KfB I5. dxe6
a6 16. Be3 Qa5 17. 0-0 h6 1 B. Qd3 , and
White had a decisive advantage in
Vaganian-Kupreichih, USSR (ch) 1 974.
The game finished: IB . . . KgB 19. Qxg6
Bxe6 20. Nxe6 Rh7 2 1 . Rxf6 Nd7 22.
Bxd7, 1 -0.
b) 7 ... a6 B. e5 dxe5 9. fxe5 Ng4? !
10. e6 Nf6 1 1 . exf7t Kxf7 12. Nf3 g6
1 3 . Bc4± , Vaganian-Passerotti, Rome
1 977. After Passerotti's 13 . . . Qd6, a
possible continuation is 14. Ng5t! [The
game itself went 14. 0-0 b5 15. Ne4 Nxe4
16. Ng5t KgB 17. Nxe4 Qe5 lB. Qf3 Black tries to block the center and
Bf5 1 9 . Bd3 c4 20. Bc3 Qc7 2 1 . g4 cxd3 gives White the choice of taking the
22 . gxf5 Nd7 23 . fxg6 1 -0.] KeB I 5 . 0-0 e-pawn.
b5 1 6 . Bf4 QdB I7. d6 ! bxc4 1 B . Nd5 .; 8. fxe5
more natural is 9 . . . Nfd7 10. Nf3 , B. dxe6 has also been played in this
though even here White has a lasting position: B . . . Bxe6 9. Nf3 Nc6 10. f5
advantage. BcB 1 1 . Bc4 Be7 12. Qe2 QdB 1 3 . g4!
c) 7 . . . Bg4 ? B. Nf3 [Also goo d is B. Nxg4 14. Rgl h5 1 5 . h3 Bh4t 1 6 . Kfl
Be2 Bxe2 9. Qxe2 Nfd7 10. Nf3 g6 1 1 . Nge5 1 7 . Rxg7 Bf6 18. Rgl Nxf3 19.
Rb l Qc7 1 2 . e5 dxe5 1 3 . fxe5 Bg7 14. Qxf3 , and White's initiative was full
d6 Qc6 15. dxe7 Kxe7 16. 0-0, and it compensation for the sacrificed pawn
was not easy for Black to find safety in Plashett-Handley, Hastings 1 989.
for his King in Vaisman-Mira11 es, France Tempting is B. fs ! ? Nbd7 [If 8 ... Be 7,
1 9 92 .] Nbd7 9 . es dxe s [A Black try then possible is 9. g4 h6 10. h4 Na6 1 1 .
The Richter-Veresol Chi_Ileal Chess Repertoire
Qf3 , preparing g4�gS . ] 9. g4 h6 10. h4
a6 1 1 . Qf3 Qc? 12. a4 RbB I 3 . Bc4 Nb6
14. Be2 Be? IS. gS ± , Emms-Franklin,
British (ch) 1 987. Apparently it was nec�
essary to play B hS! ? for Black to avoid
. • .
being smothered.
If B. Nf3 , then after B . . . Nbd7 9. a4,
simplest is 9 ... exf4! 10. as QdB l 1 . Bxf4
Be? 12. Nd2 O�O 13. Nc4 NeB + , as in
Sahovic-Rib1i, Vrbas 1 977.
8. ... dxe5
9. NB Bd6
10. Bc4
After 10. Rbl QdB 1 1 . BgS Nbd?,
White fails to use the Queen's bind ef�
fectively, because on 12. Nh4, possible is
12 ... h6. The game Landenbergue-XuJun,
Cannes 1977, continued 12. Nd2 O�O 13.
Nc4 Nb6 14. Nxd6 Qxd6 1S. Qf3 Bd? 16.
Bxf6 Qxf6 1? Qxf6 gxf6 1B. BbS RfdB I9.
o�o, and White had compensation for
the pawn.
10. . .. Nbd7
Black hurries to drive the Bishop
back from his active position. In other
continuations he faces problems:
a) 10 ... QdB l 1 . O�O Bg4 12. Qel Nbd?
13. Nh4 ! , and Black had to retreat his
Bishop from g4 in Prib!11-Hazru., Varna
1 978 (GAME 35) .
b) 10 . . . a6 1 1 . O�O Qc? 12. a4 Nbd?
1 3 . Nh4 Nb6 14. Be2 Bd? I S . Bh6 BfB
1 6 . BgS Be? I ? d6 ! , with a serious po�
sitional advantage for White in Laszlo�
G. Horvath, Hungar!1 1 992/1 993.
1 1 . 0 ..0 0.. 0
Black's position is restricted, but just
unsound enough for White to easily
find a key towards opening it up. For
example, Soos-Leko, Budapest 1 993, pro�
ceeded 12 . Nh4 QdB 1 3 . Nfs Nb6 14.
Be2 BxfS IS. RxfS NeB 16. Qf1 Nd?
I? Rb l Be? l B . Bg4 Nd6, and Black
successfully regrouped his forces, main�
taining the extra pawn because White
didn' t find the key. Deserving of at�
tention is 12. a4! ?, which by the threat
of pushing the pawn prevents the
Knight's transfer to b6.
11.
1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 c5 3. Bg5 Qb6 4. d5
Qxb2 5. Bdl Qb6 6. e4 d6 7. £4 e6.
Black IIblows open" the center, tem�
porarily parrying e4�eS .
8. Rhl
The capture B. dxe6 is examined in
comments to move ? .. eS.
8. ... Qd8
If B Qc?, possible is 9. dxe6 Bxe6
• . •
10. fs Bd? 1 1 . Bc4 controlling the ds�
square.
9. Bb5t
Before playing e4�eS, White diverts
Black's Bishop from protecting the

b7�pawn. On the other hand, if 9. dxe6
fxe6 10. eS, it is not easy for White
to defend himself. Here are some ex�
amples :
a) 10 . . . Nfd7 ? ! 1 1 . Bd3 Kf7 12. Nf3
Be7 13. O�O dS 14. fs KgB 1 5 . fxe6 NfB
16. NgS c4 17. Qf3 Bxe6 1B. Nxe6 QeB
1 9. QxdS wins, Klinger-Wildi, Zurich
1 992.
b) 10 . . . NdS l 1 . Bd3 Nxc3 12. Bxc3
dS 1 3 . QhSt Kd7 14. fS ! Kc7 1 5 . Nf3
Nc6 1 6 . f6 ! [Weaker is 1 6 . fxe6 ? ! Be7 !
17. Bxh 7 Bxe6, and Black managed to
protect himself in Golubenko-Sepp, Eesti
1 996.J d4 1 7 . Bd2 gxf6 l B . exf6 Qxf6
19. O�O ± . (Golubenko )
c) 1 0 . . . dxeS 1 1 . fxeS NdS 12. Bd3
Nxc3 13. Bxc3 g6 [Radically preventing
the move Qdl �hS , since 13 . . . QgS I4.
Qe2 Be7 1 5 . Nf3 QhS 16. BbSt Nc6
17. Bxc6t leads to a ruined position
for Black. ] 14. Nf3 Be7 1 5 . h4 O�O 1 6 .
h S gS 17. Qe2, and White's threats fully
compensate for the slight material
deficit . (Golubenko)
9. Bd7
10. dxe6 fxe6
1 1 . Bc4!
White attacks the pawn on b7 and
the threat of e4�e5 is resumed, which
Blllli-type DeviatillS 2
until now was less effective: 11. eS dxeS
[Worse is 1 1 . . . NdS ? ! 12. Qhst g6 1 3 .
Qg4 N c 6 14. Ne4 dxeS 1 5 . fxeS Qc7
16. c4 QxeS 17. Nf3 , and Black did not
have sufficient compensation for the
piece in Hodgson-Glavina, Spain 1 993
(Ed. Note: The game continued: 17 . . . Qj5
1 8. cxd5 exd5 1 9. Qxf5 Bxf5 20. Nf6t Kf7
2 1 . Nxd5! ? Bxb1 22. O�O Bf5. The "safe"
move. 22 ... Bxa2 would have been a real
test of nerves.).J 12. fxeS N dS 1 3 . Qg4
Nxc3 14. Qxe6 Qe7 1 5 . Bxd7 t Nxd7
1 6 . Qxe7t Bxe7 17. Bxc3 Nb6 lB. Nf3
N dS 1 9 . Bd2 O�O�O, and in spite of
White's regaining the pawn, he had
the inferior endgame in Kolev-Dochev,
Bulgaria (ch) 1 994.
11. ... Nc6
One could 11 keep hold" of the pawn
by 1 1 . .. Qc7 12. Nf3 Nc6, but Black was
tempting to win the Exchange.
12. Rxb7 NaS
13. Rxd7 Qxd7
14. Bb5 Nc6
15. e5 dxe5
16. Nf3 0.. 0.. 0
17. Qe2
and there arose a position which is hard
to evaluate. The activity of the light
pieces fully compensated for the Ex�
change in Chepukaitis-Yemelin, St. Pe�
tersburg 1 996.
Game 3 5
J. Pribyl-Hazai
Varna 1 978
1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 c5 3. d5 Qb6 4. Nc3.
Another way of the Trompowsky At�
The lichter-Veres., ChallalelD Chess Ilparllire
tack transposing into one of the main
positions of the Richter�Veresov System,
in which White sacrifices a pawn.
4. Qxb2
S. Bdl Qb6
6. e4 d6
7. f4 eS
7 . . . e6 looks more reliable.
S. fxeS dxeS
9. Nf3 Bd6
10. Bc4 QdS 16. ... Be7
More accurate is 10 ... Nbd7, striv� If 16 . . . Qxf6 ?, then 17. Bgs wins. If
ing to draw the Bishop away from his 16 . . . gxf6, there follows 1 7 . Bh6t Ke7
active position. lB. Bg7 RgB 19. Rf1 .
11. O�O Bg4 17. �6! a6
12. Qel Nbd7 IS. Ril !
This move just creates problems. He White heightens the threats. If l B ...
should have made up his mind to ex� axbS, there follows: 1 9. Ng6t KeB 20.
change the Bishop. NxhB gxh6 21. Nxf7 .
13. Nh4! Nb6 IS. Bxh4
14. Bbst KfS 19. �4 axbs
Black has to reconcile himself that 20. QxeS!
he has lost the right to castle, because The same theme of restriction for
14 . . . Bd7 I S . Nfs Bxbs 16. Nxbs BfB the ill�fated Queen. 1£20 ... Qxh4?, then
1 7 . d6 is even worse. 2 1 . Bgs Qh5 22 . Qe7t KgB 23. QeB#.
IS. Qg3 BcS 20. ... Nc4
The attempt to cover the g7 �square 21. Qf4
by means of IS . . . Bhs 16. Nfs Bg6 fails More accurate was 2 1 . QhS f6 22 .
due to 17. Nxg7 ! Kxg7 lB. Rxf6 ! Qxf6 Bf4, since some complications arose.
19. Bgs, and the black Queen is lost. 21. ... Qe7
More certain is 1 6 . Rxf6 ! , then 16 . . .
Be7 1 7 . Rxb6 ! axb6 l B . Qxes Bg6 1 9.
Nxg6t.
16. Rxi6!
 leoaoi-type Dlvialiaos 2
22. Bel g5 If26 . . . Bg4, then decisive is 27. Bg3 .
23. Qf3 Ra6 27. h4 Bg4
If 23 . . . gxh4, White could find the 28. Rxg5 £6
maneuver 24. Bxh4! Qd7 2 5 . Qf6 RgB 29. Rxg6t hxg6
26. Qh6t KeB 27. Qxh7 RfB 2B. e5 ! . 30. Bg3 Be2
(Pribyl) 31. Rhl Nc4
24. Rh5 Rg6 32. Nc7 Qxe4
25. Nxb5 Ne5 33. Ne6t
26. Qc3 Kg7 1 .. 0

An Opening Repertoire
in Just 24 Hours?
That genius chess writer, C.J.S. Purdy, promised
one in 10 hours. Well, there is a lot more infor�
mation out there these days so we extended it to
24 hours, or let's say 2 hours per day for 12 days.
Purdy certainly thought it was possible with
the program he set up: An AlI� Purpose System
for Black except for 1. e4, the Stonewall Attack,
and the Colle System. Against 1. e4 he recom�
mended the French, or the Old Dragon of the
Sicilian. He had special lines for treating the
Colle and Stonewall.
The APS features the
QG Declined Orthodox.
This book has been
compiled by Purdy editor
Ralph Tykodi (with open�
ing updates and commen�
tary) from Purdy's writ�
ings and will be offered as
Action Chess, March
2000 for $22.00.
Thl lichter-Vereslv Chlllellln Chess le_ert.ire

Sicilian-type RfB-cB the pressure on White's weak­

ened pawns compensates for the sac­
Deviations rificed pawn.
An early winning back of the pawn
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. dxc5 by the Knight 3 . . . Na6 4. e4 Nxc5 ? !
[Better is 4 . . . Qa5 -see 3 . . . Qa5 . ] al­
lows White to get a sound position
in the center: 5. e5 ! NgB 6. Be3 Ne6
7. Nf3 g6 B. Qd2 Bg7 9. 0-0-0 f5 10.
Bc4 Qa5 11. Bxe6 dxe6 1 2 . Nb5, and
White had the upper hand in Mestrovic­
Cirkvencic, Ljubljana 1 994.

I.
It was co-author Gufeld who first rec­ 1. d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 c5 3. dxc5
ommended this move. Judging by the
strategy of transferring the game to lines 3 . . . Qa5
of the Sicilian Defense, the straight­
forward center promises White more
chances than in variations examined
previously ( Chapters 7 and B) . This
method of play is rather frequently used
in practice and demands special con­
sideration.
Black's most common continuations
are I. 3 . . . Qa5 and 11. 3 . . . e6.
3 . . . g6 deserves attention: 4. e4 N c6
5 . Nf3 Bg7 6 . Bc4 0-0 7. 0-0 Qa5 B. Be3 The wing assault will be aimed at the
Ng4 [B Qb4 9. Bb3 Nxe4 10. Nxe4
• • • e5-pawn. White can continue with: lA.
Qxe4 1 1 . c3 t ] 9. Qd2 Nxe3 10. Qxe3 4. e4 and lB. 4. NB.
Bxc3 1 1 . Qxc3 Qxc3 12. bxc3 Na5 1 3 .
Bb3 b6 14. cxb6 axb6, and after BcB-b7,

IA.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. dxc5 QaS
4. e4
White wants to play along Sicilian
lines.
4. ... e6
If 4 ... Na6, then plausible is 5. Bxa6
bxa6 6. Qd4, protecting the pawns. The
game Opitz-Kos, Berlin 1 994, proceeded
6 . . . Bb7 7. b4 Qd8 8. Nge2 [B. Bg5 ! ?
is cleverer.] d6 9 . cxd6 Qxd6 10. Qxd6
exd6 1 1 . f3 d5 12. exd5 Bxb4, and Black
managed to free himself. The stron�
gest move is 7. Nge2 ! ± .
5 . Bd3
Losing a tempo. 5 . Bdl aims to lure
the Queen to cS, but it doesn't pay any
dividends to White, because Black
makes use of it by building the Sicil�
ian scheme of the It Hedgehog" : 5 . . .
Qxc5 6. Bd3 [If 6. Nf3, Black ruins the
coordination of White's development
by 6 . . . Ng4 7. Qe2 b6 8. Nd4 Qxd4 9 .
Qxg4 f5 10. Qg3 Bd6 1 1 . Qg 5 O � O 12.
O�O�O Qxf2 13. Bd3 f4 14. e5 h6 1 5 . Qh5
Qc5 1 6 . Ne4 ( 1 6 . Qf3 ! ) Qxe5 1 7 . Qg6
Rf6 1B. Nxf6t Qxf6 19. Qxf6 gxf6, and
in the endgame Black held in Vaklinov-
Sicilian-type leliatians
Pap, Rimavska Sobota 1 996.1 a6 7 . Nf3
d6 B. O�O Be7 9. a4 Qc7 1 0 . Be3 Nc6
1 1 . h3 O�O 12. Qd2 Na5 , with equal
chances in Vamos-Nagy, Hungary 1 994.
5. ... Na6
Black outlines the capture of the
c5 �pawn by the Knight.
After 5 ... Qxc5 6. Nf3 d6 7 . O�O a6
B. Be3 Qc7 9. a4 Nc6, compared with
the variation from the previous com�
ment, White has an extra tempo so he
moves forward to develop the initia�
tive: 10. Ndl b6 1 1 . Nc4 RbB I2. f4 Be7
13. Khl O�O 14. e5 dxe5 1 5 . fxe5 Nd5
16. Nxd5 exd5 17. Nd6 Nxe5 1B. NxcB
QxcB 19. Bxh7t Kxh7 20. Qh5t KgB
2 1 . Qxe5, with slightly better chances
for White, based on the isolated d5 �
pawn in Klaric-Plaskett, Banja Luka 1 985.
Also possible is 5 ... Bxc5 6. Nf3 [Noth�
ingis obtained by 6. e5 Nd5 7. Bdl Nxc3
B. bxc3 Nc6 9. Nf3 d6=.] Nc6 7. O�O Qc7
B. Qe2 Ng4 9. g3 a6 10. Bf4 d6, and al�
though Black has an extra tempo, in
comparison with the position examined
in the similar variation 3 ... e6, his posi�
tion is rather sound. For example,
Vogler-KUYZ, Germany 1 991, proceeded
11. Ndl Bd7 12. c3 h6 13. a4 g5 14. Bel
Nge5 with equal chances.
6. NB Nxc5
7. 0.. 0 d6
8. ReI Be7
9. Bf1 0 ..0
10. Bf4 Qb6
11. Rh1 a6
12. a4 Ncd7
and the position was unclear in Hec�
tor-Wang Zili, Manila (01) 1 992.
The Richter-Veresl' ChBllalelD Chess Rapart.ire
lB.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcS QaS
4. Nf3
Foreseeing the taking on cS, this
Knight, if necessary, can cover the
a7 -gl diagonal from d4.
4. ... e6
Black also has 4 . . . Qxc5 . Then 5. e4
[After 5. Bg5 Nc6 6. e3 d6 7. Qd2 ? ! Bg4
B. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Nd5 Bxf3 10. gxf3 Ne5
1 1 . Be2 RcB 12. Qc3 Qxc3t 1 3 . Nxc3
RgB 14. Kd2 Nc4t 1 5 . Bxc4 Rxc4 1 6 .
f4 f5 Black gained the better endgame
in Donka-Hever, Hungary 1 991; 6. e4
deserves attention with the idea of 6 ...
Ng4 7. Bh4.] d6 [If 5 . . . Ng4, then 6.
Nd4 d6 7. Be2 ;!; ; also possible is 5 ...
e6 6. Be3 Qc7 7. Nd4 a6, and there arises
a position from the Paulsen Sicilian.]
6. Be3 Qa5 7. Qd2 g6 B. Bd3 [Ed. Note:
IfB. Nbs Qxd2t 9. Nxd2 Na6 10.Bxa7100ks
good to you it is because the real move or­
der was 1 . e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 cS 4. AACS
QaS S. Nf3 Nf6 6. Bd3 QxcS 7. Be3 QaS
B. Qd2 0-0 9. 0-0 Nc6 1 0. h3 d6.} Bg7 9.
0-0 Nc6 10. h3 0-0=, Sveshnikov-Roman­ tion it looks as if White's prospects
ishin, USSR (ch) 1 977.
5. Bd.2
By playing 5. Nd4, White transposes
to the Sicilian: 5 ... Qxc5 6. e4 a6 7. Be3
Qc7. But in this Hne he takes on cS with
the Queen.
The same type of situation can also
be seen in 5. N d2 Qxc5 6. e4, but af­
ter 6 . . . d5 ! Black solves his problems
of defense: 7. Nb3 Qc7 B. exd5 Bb4
9. Bb5t [ Or 9. Bd2 exd5 10. Bb5t Nc6
1 1 . 0-0 0-0 12. Ne2 Bd6 1 3 . h3 Ne5 = . ]
B d7 1 0 . Bxd7t Qxd7 1 1 . O-O ? ! [He
should have reconciled himself with
1 1 . dxe6 Qxe6t 12. Qe2 = . ] Bxc3 12.
bxc3 Qxd5 1 3 . Ba3 Nc6 14. Qe2 0-0-0,
with the advantage to Black since White
had nothing to compensate for the
pawn ruins on the queenside in Mes­
trovic-Ferges, Croatia 1 997.
S. ... BxcS
Possible is 5 ... Qxc5, and after 6. e4,
the position examined above arises.
6. e3 QdS
7. Bd3 d5
S. 0 ..0 Nc6
9. e4 dxe4
10. Nxe4
At first glance in this calm situa­
are better because Black has yet to de­
velop his queenside . In K. Mueller-J.

Rodriguez Gonzales, Ralle 1 974, Black 5 . e5 Ng8 [Forcing is 5 . . . Qb6 ? , and
retreated in a tranquil manner with
10 . . . Be7, and after 1 1 . Qe2 O�O 12. Radl
the clouds over his position had thick�
ened. Going further, 12 ... Qb6 13. Rfel !
Qxb2 ? ! [In this concentration of mi�
nor pieces directed at the King, tak�
ing the pawn is suicidal, hence 13 . . .
Rd8 was necessary followed b y e6�e5 .]
14. Bc3 Qa3 15. Nxf6t gxf6 16. Ng5 !
h6 17. Qh5 ! Kg7 18. Re3 ! Qc5 19. Bxf6 !
1 �0.
Apparently the preliminary exchange
of Knights, as in 10 ... Nxe4 11. Bxe4 Be7,
would have been stronger, though here
too White's chances are preferable.
11.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcs
3 ••• e6
The most natural move, one which
develops the kingside.
4. e4
After 4. Bg5 Bxc5 5. e3, Black equal�
izes by 5 ... d5 6. Nf3 Nbd7 7. Qcll a6 8.
Be2 Qc7 9. a3 b5=.
4. ... Nc6
If 4 .. Bxc5, Black should reckon with
.
SiCilian-type Deviations
then 6. exf6 Bxf2t 7. Ke2 Bxgl 8. Rxgl !
Qxgl 9 . Qd6 gxf6 10. Be3 Qhl l 1 . Ne4
led to a decisive White advantage in
Vogler-Roeberg, Germany 1 993.j 6. Ne4
Be7 7. Nf3 � . In Chibukhchian-Ogan�
esiants, Erevan 1 996, White sacrificed
a pawn: 7. g3 ? ! Qa5 8. Bd2 Qxe5 9 .
Bgl Nf6 10. Bc3 B b4! 1 1 . Bxb4 Nxe4
12. Nf3 Qxb2 13. Rbl Qxa2 14. O�O Nc6,
but he did not get any compensation
for it .
Here the most natural ways of devel�
opment are connected with HA. S. Nf3
and lIB. S. Be3.
Other variations are also possible:
a) 5. f4 Qa5 6. Bd3 Bxc5 7. e5 Nd5
8. Bcll Nxc3 9. Bxc3 Qb6 10. Nh3 Nd4?!
[10 . . . Bb4! ? ] 1 1 . Qg4 g6 12. O�O�O ± ,
Johnsen-B. Stein, Gausda.l 1 993.
b) 5. g4 h6 6. Be3 Qa5 7. Bd3 Ne5? !
[More reliable is 7 . . . Bxc5 . ] 8 . Bd4 !
Nexg4 9 . f4 Bxc5 10. Bxc5 Qxc5 11. Qe2
h5 12. h3 Nh6 13. O�O�O with a strongini�
tiative for the sacrificed pawn in Evert�
sson-Ka.l1gren, Sweden 1 997.
c) 5. Bf4 Qa5 6. Bd3 Bxc5 7. Nf3 a6 8.
O�O Nhs 9. Qcll d6 10. h3 Nxf4 1 1 . Qxf4
Nd4=, Novak-Mauro, Cannes 1996.
lIA.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcs e6
4. e4 Nc6
5. Nf3
The Richter-Veresl' ChamelelD Chess Repemire
White proceeds with his develop­
ment trying to get a position typical
of a Sicilian Defense.
5. ... Bxc5
6. Bd3
In this kind of pawn layout, devel­
oping the Bishop to c4 is not quite logi­
cal: 6. Bc4 Ng4 7 . 0-0 Qc7 B. h3 , be­
cause after B NgeS, White has to lose
•••
a tempo to protect his Bishop. In Heit­
lcmd-Rademacher, Dortmund 1 987, Black
preferred to launch an attack: B hS ? !
• . .
9. Nbs Qg3 10. Khl Bxf2 [10 . . . Nxf2t
1 1 . Rxf2 Bxf2 12. eS Bb6 (Ed. Note: I
like 12 . . . 0-0 for Black. Eduard retorts:
13. Nc7.) 1 3 . Nd6t KfB 14. BgS , with
the threat to win the Queen by N d6-
e4], which boomeranged after 11. Qd6!
NceS [or 1 1 . . . Qxd6 12. Nxd6t Ke7
1 3 . Bf4 eS 14. Nxf7 ± ] 12. Nc7t KdB
13. BgSt f6 14. Nxe6t, with White hav­
ing decisive material.
6. ... Qc7
The maneuver 6 ... Ng4?! at this mo­
ment is premature: 7. 0-0 NgeS B. NxeS
NxeS 9. QhS Nxd3 10. cxd3 Be7 1 1 .
Be3 b 6 12. f4 g6 1 3 . Qe2 Bb7 14. Bd4
BcS l S . Qe3 d6 1 6 . b4! Bxd4 17. Qxd4,
and White dominated the center in
Drazic-Montheard, France 1 9 98.
7. 0..0 a6
Also played was 7 . . . Be7 B. ReI d6
9. NbS QbB I0. c4 a6 1 1 . Nc3 Qc7 12.
b3 0-0 13. B b2 b 6 14. Qd2 Bb7 1 5 .
Radl � , R . Watson-Schmall, Bad Woer­
ishofen 1 988.
s. Qe2
After B. h3 bs 9. Qe2 d6 10. Be3 Bb7
with an equal position.
s. ..
. Ng4!
Not only for blocking the eS-square,
but with a threat of N c6-d4 too.
9. g3 b5
10. Bf4 d6
Black sets up his forces in a pattern
typical of the Paulsen Sicilian, but in
a structure which is favorable to him
and which threatens to invade the key
d4-square. White is deprived of the
chance to exchange dark-squared Bish­
ops, and he can only get the d4-square
under his control by the retreat 1 1 .
Ndl Bb7 12. c3 . The game Mestrovic­
G. Horvath, Hungary 1 981, proceeded
1 1 . Radl NgeS 12. NxeS?! dxeS l3. Be3
N d4, and Black stands slightly better.
After the more accurate 12. Be3 Nxf3t
13. Qxf3 NeS 14. Qe2, White's chances
are not worse.
 Sicilian-type Deliations
1 3 . NxeS QxeS 14. Qe2 ;!; deserves at­
lIB. tention. ] 12. eS ! fs 1 3 . exf6 Nxf6 1 4.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcS e6 c4 dS 1 5 . Qe2, and White gained the
4. e4 Nc6 advantage in Mestrovic-Medic, Pula 1996
[GAME 36] .
5. Be3 10. a3 d5
11. Qe2 a6
12. Radl bS
If 12 . . . d4, Black has to reckon with
the attack after 1 3 . Na4 QaS 14. eS .
13. Rfel

White places his Bishop in a more

natural position [similar to the afore­
mentioned Paulsen Variation] and for
a time being protects the cS -pawn.
S. ... QaS
6. BdJ 13. ... b4
6 . Qd2 led to an equal game after Now if 13 . . . d4 14. eS dxc3 1 5 . exf6
6 . . . BxcS 7. BxcS QxcS B. 0-0-0 a6 9. gxf6 16. Qe4 fs 17. Qf4 Kg7 1B. b4, and
f3 bS l0. Nh3 Bb7 1 l . Nf4 NeS I2. Nd3 White has an attacking position.
Nxd3 t ? ! [12 . . . Qc7 ! ?=] 1 3 . Bxd3 0-0-0 14. axb4 Qxb4
[13 . . . b4! 14. Ne2 0-0 + ] 14. Rhel dS ? ! IS. Rhl Bb7
[Better is 1 4 . . . h6= . ] , in Csizmadia-A. 16. exdS exdS
Forgacs, Hungary 1 994. Now 15. QgS ! ;!; . 17. Qd2 Rad8
6. BxcS 18. Ral Qb6?
7. BxcS QxcS Incorrect. Better is l B . . . as ;!; .
8. Nf3 19. Na4 Qa7
The attempt to show activity by B. 20. Qf4
f4 is doubtful. After B Qe3 9. Nge2
••• White had a clear advantage in Mes­
Ng4!, Black can certainly worry White. trovic-R. Tomasic, Slovenia 1 995.
8. ... 0-0
9. 0-0 h6
A similar position arises with 9 . . .
a6 IO. a3 ds. Less successful is 1 0.. Ng4?!
.

1 1 . Na4 Qa7 [ 1 1 . . . QaS 1 2 . c4 NgeS

Thl Richter-VlrlSDV I:hl.eleDD I:hess leperl.ire

Game 3 6
Mestrovic-Medic
Pula 1996

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcS e6 4. e4 Nc6

S. Be3.
One of the results of the exchange
3. dxcs . From the viewpoint of this Si�
dlian structure, White moves his 12. ... £S
Bishop to a more natural position. After 1 2 . . . Ngxes , then 1 3 . Nxes
S. QaS Nxes 14. Bxh7t Kxh7 1 5 . Qhst KgB
6. Bd3 BxcS 16. Qxes, and White is slightly better.
7. BxcS QxcS 13. exf6 Nxf6
B. Nf3 14. c4 ds
[Ed. Note: Eduard joked to me that IS. Qe2
White probabh:1 refrained from 8. f4 be� As a result of 10 . . . Ng4, Black has
cause heforesaw his brilliant 26th move.} a backward pawn on e6 and and weak
B. O�O dark squares in the center and on the
9. O�O a6 queenside .
10. a3 Ng4�! IS. Bd7
Black strives to carry out the ma� 16. b4 RaeB
nuever Ng4�es, which is typical for 17. NcS BcB
these types of positions, but he did not lB. Qc2 dxc4
consider one important thing: the If l B ... d4, then 19. Ngs h6 20. Nge4
Queen stands on cS, not on c7. More es 2 1 . Nd6 RdB 22. NxcB RxcB 23 . Bfs
natural was 1 0 . . . ds . RceB 24. Rfe l , and White is in abso�
11. Na4 Qa7 lute charge of the weakened light
Black should have tried 1 1 . . . Qas . squares, but it would have been bet�
Then i f 12. c 4 Nges 1 3 . Nxes Qxes ter than the move in the game.
14. Qe2 ;!; , since after the text he gets 19. Qxc4 KhB
a less favorable position. 20. Ne4 eS
12. eS! 21. N£gS Nxe4
22. Bxe4 Rf4
Preventing 23. Nxh7 in view of 23 ...
Qd4, but White prepares a bigger sur�
prise.
23 . g3 Rf6
24. Nf7t KgB
 Sicilian-type Dlviltilns
25. Ng5t KhS Here 27 ... Rxg6 doesn't work because
of 2B. Qxc6 ! .
2S. Bxh7
In the final analysis White has won
a pawn and maintained his positional
advantage.
2S . ... Be6
29. Nxe6 Kxh7
30. Rd6 Khs
31. Qh4t KgS
32. Ng5!
26. Bg6! Mate is threatened!
Black counted only on 26. Nxh7 Be6. 32. ... Rh6
26. ... Re7 33. Qc4t KfS
After 26 . . . Rxg6 ? Black would get a 34. Rfdl Qc7
smothered mate by 27. Nf7t KgB 2B. 35. Fbdn6 gxh6
Nh6t KhB 29. QgBt RxgB 30. Nf7#, and 36. Ne6t Rxe6
if26 ... hxg6, he would lose the Exchange 37. Qxe6 Nd4
on 27. Qh4t KgB 2B. Qh7t KfB 29. QhBt 3S. Qxh6t KgS
Ke7 30. Qxg7t KdB 3 1 . Qxf6t. Now 39. Qg6t KhS
the back rank is weakened. 40. Qe4 KgS
27. Radl ! Qb6 41 . Qd5t
1 ..0
The Richter-VeresD' GhallelelD Ghess Repertlire
French-type
Deviations 1
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6
Black's attempt to transpose to French
lines after 3. e4 d5 seems to be a logi�
cal reply to White's psychological di�
gression of 2 . Nc3 . In the diagram
mutual deviations are, of course, pos�
sible. However, it should be noted that
if White, who has the advantage of the
first move, finds them acceptable, then
for Black they are sometimes connected
with risk.
3 . B g5
A thematic move of the Richter�Vere�
sov System. White does not shrink from
playing the French yet, retaining that
possibility after 3 . . . d 5 4 . e4 [With the
modest 4. e3 cS 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Be2 White
can scarcely rely on anything substan�
tial] . Here Black also gets some addi�
tional resources.
The continuation 3. e4, which means
that White agrees to play the French,
is covered in Chapter 1 1 .
3. ... h6
A useful move which clarifies the
position of the B/g5 before Black plays
3 . . . d5 . Other continuations have also
been examined which follow the French
structures, but with the following varia�
tions:
a) 3 ... Be7 4. e4 [The Classical System.
If the exchange 4. Bxf6 Bxf6 after 5 .
e 4 d 5 6 . Nf3 , we get the Anderssen
Variation of the French. ] h6 [Black
refuses to play the French, which can
be done with 4 . . . Nxe4 5. Bxe7 Nxc3
6. BxdS Nxdl 7. Bxc7 Nxb2 S. Bd6 Na4
9. c4 Nc6 10. Nf3 , where White has
the advantage of the two Bishops, with
the dark�squared one being the stron�
gest of the two, and that is sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed pawn
in Hodgson-Glickman, London 1 992.1 5.
Bh4 [Also possible is 5 . Bxf6 Bxf6 6 .
e5 Be7 7 . Qg4 KfS S. Nf3 ;!; . ] Nxe4 6.
Bxe7 Nxc3 7. BxdS Nxdl S. Bxc7 Nxb2
9 . Bd6 Nc6 1 0 . Nf3 b6 1 1 . a4 Na5 12.
Nd2 Nb7 1 3 . Bb4 d5 14. Ra3 Nc4 1 5 .
Nxc4 dxc4 1 6 . Bxc4 ;!; , Hort-Mista,
Czechoslovakia (ch) 1 974.
b) 3 . . . Bb4 [Black is ready to play
the MacCutcheon Variation 4. e4.] 4.

Nf3 [White refuses to play the French. ]
d 5 5 . e 3 cS 6 . Be2 h 6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8.
O�O O�O 9. Ne5 Nd7=, Rehm-Krebs, Ger�
many 1 995.
There is an original method for re�
fusing the French:
c) 3 . . . d6 4. e4 Be7 [After 4 . . . Nbd7
5 . Nf3 h6 6 . Be3 e5 7. h3 Be7 8 . Bc4
O�O 9. a4 c6, we have a position like a
Philidor, where White did not exploit
his advantage of the first move by Be3,
the game A. Sokolov-Nalbandian, Cap�
pelle la Grande 1 995, continued with
10. Bal exd4 1 1 . Bxd4 Qc7 12. O�O Ne5
13. Ncll Ng6 14. ReI Be6, with an equal
position; 6 . Bh4 � deserves a look. ] 5 .
f4 [By comparison, passive i s 5 . Nf3
O�O, for example: 6. Qd2 Nc6 7 . Bb5
Bd7 8 . O�O�O a6 9. Bxc6 Bxc6 10. Rhe1
h6 1 1 . Bxf6 Bxf6 12. d5 exd5 13. Nxd5
Re8=, Piket-Oll, Wijk aan Zee 1 993.J h6
6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Qd2 O�O [After 7 . . . a6
8. O�O�O b5 9. Nf3 Bb7 1 0 . Bd3 b4 1 1 .
Ne2 a5 1 2 . Kb1 Nd7 1 3 . e 5 Be7 14. f5 ,
with a clear advantage to White in
Tolnai-Fogarasi, Hungary (ch) 1 9 95.J 8.
O�O�O d5 9 . e5 Be7 10. Nf3 c5 1 1 . dxc5
Nc6 12. Bd3 �, and the position which
arose reminds us of themes in the
French Defense .
After 3 . . . h6, White has a choice be�
tween I. 4. Bh4 and 11. 4. Bxf6.
I.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 e6 3. Bg5 h6
4. Bh4
french-type De'ialilns 1
White keeps the bind, but this trans�
position to the French Defense setup
is connected with losing a pawn.
4. ••• d5
Best, preventing 5 . e4 which can be
followed up with 5 . . . g5 6. Bg3 dxe4
winning a pawn. The game Gores-Todor�
cevic, Las Palmas 1 995 went : 7. f3 Bb4
8 . a3 Bxc3 t 9. bxc3 Nc6 10. Bb5 Bd7
1 1 . Qe2 Nd5 12. Qxe4 Nxc3 1 3 . Qd3
Nxb5 14. Qxb5 Nxd4, and Black kept
his advantage.
5 . Bxf6
This is the result of 3 . . . h6 . In or�
der to play e2 �e4 White has to resort
to this exchange, giving Black the ad�
vantage of the two Bishops .
When preparing e2�e4 by 5 . f3 ? ! ,
White has to reckon with the thematic
counterattack 5 . . . cS! 6 . e4 Nc6 and
Black's position is already preferable.
For example: 7. Bb5 Be7 8. exd5 exd5
9. dxc5 O�O 10. Qcll d4 1 1 . Bxf6 Bxf6
12. Ne4 Bf5 1 3 . Nxf6t Qxf6 14. O�O�O
Rfd80Cl, Richtrova-Michaliek, Czechoslo�
vakia 1 996. For example, 1 5 . Ne2 Rac8
16. Bxc6 Rxc6 1 7 . Nxd4 Rxc5 18. c3
b50Cl.
5. Qxf6
6 . e4 Bb4
Thl lilhtlr-VlrlSII Cha.llell Chess lepertlire
7 . e5 14. Nf3
Leading to an equal endgame was If 14. Rb1 , then 1 4 . . . a4, and the
7. exd5 exd5 S. Qe2t Qe6 9. Qxe6t Bxe6 kingside castling will be hurt by the
10. Nge2 c6 1 1 . a3 Bd6 12. Nc1 Bf5=, h�pawn.
Vidovic-Jovanovic, Croatia 1 998. If 14 . . . Bd7 [in the text line] , then
7. ... Qd8 15. O�O�O RcS and the position was equal
Also possible is 7 ... Qe7 S. Qg4 Qg5, in Guigonis-Kouat1y, France (ch) 1 998
which is examined below. In Ziochev� [GAME 37] .
sky-Bischoff, Bad Woerishofen 1 9 93,
White played S. a3 Bxc3 t 9. bxc3 cS,
and there arose the Nimzovich Varia� 11.
tion of the French, in a position fa� I . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3 . BgS h6
voring Black: White's dark�squared
Bishop is exchanged. The game con� 4. Bxf6 Qxf6 5 . e4
tinued: 10. f4 Nc6 1 1 . Nf3 Bd7 12. Bd3
c4 1 3 . Bfl g5 14. Qd2 g4 1 5 . Ng1 O�O�O
1 6 . g3 h5 1 7 . h3 f6, with a slight ad�
vantage to Black.
8 . Qg4 Qg5
This move happened as a result of
3 . . . h6.
9 . Qf3 cS
1 0. h4 Qe7
1 1 . a3 Bxc3 t
1 1 ... Ba5 has been played. Then 12. This position is frequently seen in
O�O�O cxd4 13. Nb5 Nc6 14. Qg3 g6 1 5 . Trompowsky's Attack, from 1 . d4 Nf6 2 .
f4 a6 1 6. Nd6t Kd7 was unclear in Gui� Bg5 e 6 3 . e4 h 6 4 . Bxf6 Qxf6 5 . Nc3,
gonis-Marciano, France (ch) 1 998. but for a precise examination of this
1 2 . Qxc3 O�O subject let's look at the following plan:
The main continuations are IIA . 5 .. .

d6 and lIB. 5 . . . Bb4.

Worth looking at is 5 . . . QdS 6. Qd2
d5 7. Nf3 Bb4 S. Bd3 dxe4 9. Bxe4 Nd7
10. a3 Bd6 1 1 . Nb5 a6 12.- Nxd6t cxd6
13. c4 O�O 14. O�O Nf6 1 5 . Bd3 b6 16.
Rfel Bb7 17. Qf4�, Pomes-Corral Blanco,
Salamanca 1 998.
After 5 . . . g6 6. Qd2 Bg7 7. O�O�O O�O
Black gets squeezed: 8. f4 d6 9. N f3 b6
13. dxcs as 10. h4 h5 1 1 . e5 Qe7 12. Bd3 Bb7 1 3 .
 french-type Devialilns 1
Ne4 Nd7 14. Nfg5 dxe5 1 5 . fxe5 ± , as Nf3 Qe7 1 0 . e5 d5 1 1 . h4 h5 12. NgS
in Gelfand-Rozentalis, Tilburg (rapids) Nb6 1 3 . g4 hxg4 14. Qg2 Bd7 1 5 . Qxg4
1 992. 0-0-0 1 6 . h5 f5 , and Black had good
counterplay in Dunnington-Lerner, Cap­
pelle la Grande 1 996.J B. f4 Bg7 9 . Nf3
lIA. Qe7 10. Bd3 Nd7 1 I . f5 [And here lI .e5
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Bg5 h6 d5 1 2 . g4 cS 1 3 . dxc5 g5 14. fxg5 hxg5
4. Bxf6 Qxf6 5. e4 1 5 . Rdel Nxc5 led to equality in Ha1l­
Khalifman, Vienna 1 996.J 0-0 12. g4 b5
5 . . . d6 1 3 . h4 cS 14. g5 cxd4 1 5 . Ne2 exf5 1 6 .
exf5 B b 7 1 7 . f6, and White had the
initiative in Pomes-Lalic, Spain 1 995.
[Ed. : It is quagmires like the move orders
in this paragraphfor which the software
program "Bookup" is particularl!1 adept.J
There was also a plan with a cen­
tralized strategy of 6 . . . c6 7. f4 e5 [or
7 . . . Nd7 B. e5 dxe5 9 . dxe5 QdB 10.
Ne4 Qb6 1 I . 0-0-0 Nc5 12. Nd6t Bxd6
1 3 . exd6 Bd7 14. Qd4 0-0-0 1 5 . Nf3 ± ,
Black stops further movement of the in Hodgson-Kellenberger, Bern 1 994J B.
e-pawn. dxe5 [Less efficient is B. fxe5 dxe5 9 .
6. Q.d2 d 5 Bb4 10. 0-0-0 0-0=.] dxe5 9. f5 Qd6
The main line, White carries out [weaker is 9 . . . g6 ? ! 10. Bd3 Nd7 1 1 .
his plan of castling queenside. Also Nge2 h5 12. O-O ±, as in Minasian-Glek,
possible is 6. Nf3, but in this instance Moscow 1 992.J 10. Bd3 Be7 1 I . Nf3 Nd7
a position crops up which is in one 12. a4 as 1 3 . g4 Qc5 14. Qf2 Qxf2 t 1 5 .
of the variations of the Torre Attack Kxf2 Bd6 1 6 . Bc4 Nf6 1 7 . Radl Bc7
( 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bg5 h6 4. Bxf6 lB. g5 hxg5 19. Nxg5 � , Hodgson-Ma­
Qxf6 5 . e4 d6 ) . gem, Linares (zt) 1 995.
6. ... g5 Lately this complex position has
The fully expanded Bishop's fian­ been seen in practice quite frequently.
chetto, by which Black stops £2-f4, natu­ White has a certain spatial advantage,
rally this corresponds to d7 - d6 . but nevertheless Black has no weak
I f i t was just an ordinary fianchetto, points and he can justifiably rely on
Black would suffer some territorial his counterplay. Let's look at some of
losses, though his defensive potential the directions research has been go­
is very high: 6 . . . a6 7. 0-0-0 g6 [7 . . . ing:
Qe7 B . £4 g6 9 . N£3 Bg7 1 0 . Bd3 Nd7
now transposes; 7 . . . Nd7 B . £4 g6 9 .
The lichter-Veresov Challeleon Chess leperl.ire
After 6 . g5
. .
a) 7 . h4 Bg7 [Weaker is 7 . . . g4 ? ! B.
hS a6 9. O�O�O N c6 10. f4 gxf3 1 1 . Nxf3
Bd7 12. eS dxeS 1 3 . dxeS Qe7 14. Ne4
O�O�O 1 5 . Qf4 � , Pomes-D. Garcia Ilun,
dain, Salamanca 1 998.} B. hxgS hxgS 9.
RxhB BxhB I0. O�O�O Nc6 1 1 . Nf3 [or
1 1 . BbS Bd7 12. Nge2 O�O�O 13. Qe3
KbB I4. f3 Bg7 1 S . g4 RhB=, Shereshev,
sk!1-Kolev, Burgas 1 994} Bd7 12. dS Nb4
13 . Bc4 g4 [Weaker was 13 . . . bS ? ! 14.
eS ! ±, in Lputian-Tukmakov, Tilburg (rap,
ids) 1 9 94. } 14. N d4, and the position
is unclear.
b) 7. O�O�O Bg7 B. g3 [If B. eS, then
B dxeS 9. dxeS Qe7 10. f4 Nc6 1 1 .
• • •
Nf3 Bd7, and Black gets goo d devel�
oping opportunities for his pieces. For
example in Adams-Karpov, Las Palmas
1 994, it went 12. h4 gxf4 13. Qxf4 O�O�O
14. Ne4 NbB! 15. Nf6 Bc6 16. Be2 Nd7 !
with a slight advantage for Black.] N c6
9. Bbs [The advance d4�ds stymies the
Bishop on g7 . 9. NbS QdB I0. dS exdS
1 1 . exdS Ne7 12. Bg2 NfS I3. ReI, KfB
14. Ne2 Qf6 1 S . c3 Bd7 1 6 . Nbd4 ReB
17. Nxfs BxfS 18. Nd4 Bd7=, R. Garcia-
David, Linares (zt) 1 995.] Bd7 10. Nge2
a6 1 1 . Bxc6 Bxc6 12. f4 [or 12. Qe3 0,0,0
1 3 . f4 KbB 14. Rhfl Qg6 1 5 . Qd3 fs
1 6 . exfS QxfS 1 7 . Qc4 g4 l B . dS ± , v.
Milov-Chuchelov, Brussels 1 9 95} O�O�O
13. Rhfl Qg6 14. g4 ! ? Bxe4 1 5 . Ng3
dS 16. Ncxe4 dxe4 17. fS exfS lB. NxfS,
and the lIeternal" Knight on fS , and
White's initiative, fully compensated
for the sacrificed pawn in Hodgson­
Gabriel, Horgen 1 995.
c) 7. Bc4 Nc6 B. Nge2 Bg7 9. Rdl
Bd7 1 0 . O�O O�O�O 1 1 . NbS [or 1 1 . b4
Qg6 ( 1 1 . .. g4 12. bS NaS I 3 . Bd3 hS­
Anand; after 1 1 . . . Nxb4 there is a
dynamic equality in the air) 12. bS Ne7
1 3 . Bd3 fs 14. exfS exfS 1 5 . a4 Qf7 1 6 .
f4� , Wall-Webb, England 1 9 98.} a6 12.
Na3 g4 1 3 . f4! gxf3 14. Rxf3 Qe7 [14 . . .
Qg6 1 S . Rg3 Qh7 � ] 1 5 . c 3 hS 1 6 . Rdfl
RdfB 1 7 . b4 Na7 1 B . Nc2 Bh6 1 9 . Qel
KbB 20. Bd3 Bc6 2 1 . Nf4 RfgB 22. dS ! � ,
Anand-Karpov, Lausanne 1 9 98.
lIB.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Bg5 h6
4. Bxf6 Qxf6 5. e4
5 . . . Bb4
In the case of this bind Black also
influences White's mobile center.
 frelch-type D.villiaos 1
6. Qd2 7. ..• Ba5
The most popular continuation. It's useful to keep the Bishop. Af�
White intends to attack the Bishop by ter 7 . . . Bxc3 8. Qxc3 Nc6 9. Nf3 O�O
a2 �a3 and if there is an exchange on 10. Bd3 Qe7 1 1 . eS f6 12. exd6 cxd6 13.
c3, White will retake with the Queen. O�O fS 1 4. Rael Qf6 1 5 . b4, and White
In a different scenario Black can try had some initiative in Geifand-Rozen�
to disrupt White's center with c7�cS . talis, Tilburg (rapids) 1 992.
a) 6. Nge2 cS [Also possible is 6 . . . s. Nge2
d 6 7 . a3 BaS 8 . b 4 Bb6 9. Qd3 O�O=, 8. f4 gS suggests itself. After 8 . . . O�O
Parker-Lalic, England 1 99 7.1 7 . eS Qe7 9. Nf3 cS l0. b4 cxd4 1 1 . Nbs Bb6 1 2 .
8 . ds O�O 9. d6 Qh4 10. Qd3 Nc6 1 1 . Nxd6 Nc6 1 3 . eS Qe7 14. Bd3 , White
g3 Bxc3t 1 2 . bxc3 Qa4 1 3 . Qe3 b6+ , had an attacking position in Hodgson­
Kupreichik-Uhlmann, Polanica Zdroj 1 981. Enders, Germany 1 994. In Hodgson-Gran�
b) 6. Nf3 cS 7. eS Qd8 8. a3 Bxc3t 9. da Zuniga, Amsterdam 1 996, Black pre�
bxc3 dS l0. exd6 Qxd6=, Tapaszto-Barus, ferred to give up a pawn by 8 . . . gS ,
Thessaloniki (01) 1 988. and after 9. Nh3 gxf4 10. Nxf4, he could
6. ... d6 have gotten acceptable play by 1 0 . . .
6 . . . cS 7. a3 has also been played. Bb6 1 1 . Rdl Nc6 12. Bbs Bd7 13. Bxc6
a) 7 . . . Bxc3 8. bxc3 d6 9. f4 [or 9. Bxc6= . ( Hodgson)
Nf3 O�O 10. Be2 Nc6 1 1 . O�O eS 12. dxcS However, as shown by Knaak, Black
dxcs 1 3 . Qe3 b6 14. Bc4 Bg4 1/2� 1/2, has a better idea, 8 . . . Bxc3 9. bxc3 eS,
Hodgson-DeFirmian, Amsterdam 1 996] meaning 10. fxeS ? Qh4t.
O�O 10. Nf3 Nc6 1 1 . BbS NaS ? ! [1 1 . . . S . ... c6
Bd7 ;!; ] 1 2 . Bd3 b 6 1 3 . O�O Bb7 14. Rael 9 . b4 Bc7
Rac8 1 S . eS Qe7 1 6 . fS ± , Hodgson-Yu� 10. a4 0-0
dasin, Intel Grand Prix 1 994. 1 1 . as eS
b) 7 . . . BaS 8. b4 cxd4 9. Nbs Bb6 10. 12. ds Nd7
Nd6t Ke7 1 1 . Nf3 Nc6 12. Nc4 Bc7 13. 1 3 . Ng3 QgS
bs Bf4 14. Qdl NeS lS. Nxd4;!;, S. Schnei� 1 4 . QxgS hxgS
der-A. Kogan, Copenhagen 1 996. I S . dxc6 bxc6
7. a3 16. bS Nbs
1 7. Bel
17. Bc4 should be checked out: 17 . . .
Be6 [17 . . . Bd7 18. Ke2 cxbS l9. BdS Bc6
2 0 . NfS ;!; ] 1 8 . Bxe6 fxe 6 1 9 . h3 ;!;
(Knaak) .
1 7. g6
IS. 0-0 Be6
1 9. Rfdl RdS
20. Nfl
The lichter-VeresDI Cha.eleln Chess lapert.ire
and White had a slight advantage in The straightforward attack by ma�
Knaak-Enders, Duisberg Bremen 1 998. j or pieces in the event of an exchange
of two minor pieces is unrealistic. 16.
g4 looks more logical with the exem�
Game 3 7
plary continuation 16 . . . Rxc5 17. Qe3
Guigonis-Kouady
b5 lB. g5 h5 1 9. g6 fxg6 20. Bd3 BeB
France (ch) 1998
21. Nd4 b4 22 . axb4 axb4 22. Kd2, and
a complex game ensues.
1 . d4 Nf6 2. BgS e6 3. Nc3 h6 4. Bh4 16. RIcS
ds S. Bxf6 . 1 7 . Qd2 Nc6
The immediate 5 . e4 leads to the I S . Rg4 fs
loss of a pawn after 5 . . . g5 6. Bg3 dxe4. 1 9 . exf6 Qxf6
S. Qxf6 The position which has arisen is
6 . e4 Bb4 typical of a Classical French, and fa�
7 . eS Qe7 vors Black since the advance e6�e5
The continuation 7 . . . QdB B. Qg4 cannot be prevented.
Qg5 1eads to a transposition of moves. 20. B d3 RfS
S. Qg4 QgS If 20 . . . e5 is played, it fails due to
9. Qf3 cS 2 1 . Rg6 Qe7 22. Qxh6 with the threat
1 0. h4 Qe7 Nf3 �g5 , but 20 . . . BeB 2 1 . Rf4 Qe7 22 .
11. a3 Bc3t ReI e5 is certainly possible.
A complex game comes about by 2 1 . Rh3 eS
1 1 . .. Ba5 12. O�O�O cxd4 1 3 . Nb5 Nc6. 22. Rg6
1 2 . Qxc3 0-0
13. dxcS as
1 4 . Nf3
If 14. Rb 1 ? ! , then 14 . . . a4.
14. Bd7
I S . 0-0-0 RcS

22 . ... Bxb3
It looks like Black could have played
22 . . . Qf4 ! , and after 23 . Rhg3 , then
23 . . . Rf7.
2 3 . Rxf6 Rxf6
2 4 . b4 e4
1 6 . Rd4 2 5 . bxc5 exd3
 french-type Deviltilns 1
2 6 . Ne l Bf5
2 7 . cxd3
Also possible was 27. N xd3 , and if
27 . . . Bxd3 28. cxd3 d4, then 29. g4 fol­
lowed by 29 . . . Rf3 will lose to 30. Qe2 .
2 7 . ... Nd4
2 S . Qb2 Ne6
2 9 . d4 � !
This allows Black to activate his
game. Stronger was 29. QeS, and if29 . . .
NxcS, then 3 0 . Qxdst Ne6 3 1 . Qxb7 Black saves the endgame since White
with the threat of Qa8 . cannot support the cS-pawn with the
29. ... Be4 Knight.
30. f3 Bg6 43 . Nxd5 Kg4
3 1 . Kd2 � 44. Nf6t Kg5
3 1 . g3 still retained the advantage. 45. Nd5 Kg4
31. •.. Rf4 46. Nf6t Kg5
32. Ke3 Rxh4 47. Ne4t Kg4
33. Qxb 7 Rxd4 48. Kd4 Bb7
34. QcSt Kf7 49. Ke3 Bc6
35. Qxe6t 50. Nf6t Kg5
3 S . c6 Rd1 is unclear. 51. Ng8 Bg2
35. ... Kxe6 52. Ne7 Kf6
3 6. Kxd4 h5 53. NcS Ke5
37. g3 BeS 54. Nb6 Bh3
3S. Ng2 g5 55. Kd3 Be6
39. f4 Bc6 56. Ke3 Bh3
40. fxg5 Kf5 57. Kd2 Kd4
41. Ne3 t Kxg5 5S. c6 Kc5
42 . Ke5 BaS 59. Nd7t Kxc6
60. Nf6 Bg4
1/2 - 1 /2
Thl Richter-VlrlSIV ChallelllD Chess Repertoire

French-type Nbxd7 9 . Qe2 exf3 1 0 . Nxf3 cS 1 l .

dxcs 0-0 1 2 . 0-0-0 Qc7 1 3 . Qf2 QxcS
Deviations 2 14. Qg3 , and White would have had
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Ne3 e6 no compensation for the pawn if Black
had played 1 4 . . . NhS in Toroh-Papp,
3. e4 Hungary 1 994 instead of 1 4 . . . Rac8.
b) 4. BgS h6 ! 5 . Bxf6 Qxf6 6. eS Qe7
7. a3 Bxc3t 8. bxc3 dS, and Black main­
tains the status quo .

I.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3 . e4 Bb4

4. Bd3
White is ready to play the French De­
fense after 3 . . . ds . If Black deviates
from the classical directions of play
he does so at his own risk.
3. ... Bb4
B y replying with a style similar to
the Winawer French, Black attacks
the pawn on e4. White can protect
the pawn I. 4. Bd3 or advance it 11.
4. e5. White protects the pawn.
Other continuations are not suf­ 4 . ... b6
ficient to fight for the advantage . In the event of the preliminary ex­
a) 4. f3 d5 5 . B d2 [If 5 . BgS , then change 4 . . . Bxc3t 5 . bxc3 b6, strong
possible is 5 . . . c5 + or 5 . . . h6 + . ] Bxc3 is 6. eS Nd5 7. Qg4, and now 7 . . . g6
6 . Bxc3 dxe4 7. Bb5t Bd7 8. Bxd7 t fails to 8. Bg5 Ne7 9. Be4.
 frencb-type levillians 2
On 4 . . . cS, possible is 5 . dxc5 Na6 Qxe4 he would retain some initiative.
6. e5 [In case of placid development For instance, if 17 . . . NfB 1B. Rad1 Ng6,
with 6 . Nge2 Nxc5 7. 0-0 Nxd3 B. cxd3 unpleasant is l B . Rd6 .
0-0, Black retains the better game on
9. e5 NeB 10. d4 b6 1 1 . a3 Be7 12. Be3
d6 1 3 . f4 Bb7=, G. Portisch-Brandics, 11.
Hungary 1 993.j Nd5 7. Qg4 KfB B. Bdl 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. e4 Bb4
and White maintains the initiative .
S . BgS 4. e5
Equal play was found in 5 . Bdl Bb7
6. f3 0-0 7 . Nge2 d5 B. e5 Nfd7 9. Nb5
Bxd2t 10. Qxd2 a6 1 1 . Na3 Qh4t 1 2 .
g3 Qe7 1 3 . h 4 c5=, Huppert-Dalhoff,
Duisberg 1 992.
5. . .. h6
6 . Bxf6 Qxf6
7 . a3 Bxc3 t
S . bxc3 Bb7
9 . Ne2
9 . Nf3 deserves attention. The best reply. By driving the Knight
9. d6 away White strives to deprive Black
1 0. 0 .. 0 Nd7 of castling.
11. Ng3 0 .. 0 4. ... NdS
12. f4 cS S. Qg4
13. eS dxeS In the event of the lackadaisical
14. dxeS Qh4 5 . B d2 Nxc3 [No goo d is 5 . . . c6, be­
cause of 6 . Ne4 Be7 7 . Qg4 ± . ] 6. bxc3
Be7 7. Qg4 KfB B. Bd3 cS 9. Ne2 d6
10. Ng3 dxe5 1 1 . dxe5 Qd5 12. f4 Nc6
Black had compensation for his lost
castHng rights by virtue of the activity
of his pieces in DaY-lung, Ontario 1 997.
S . ... KfS
If Black should weaken his king­
side with 5 . . . g6, then 6 . a3 f5 7. Qg3
Bxc3 t B. bxc3 still makes it danger­
In.Csizmadia-Nogradi, Hungary 1 994, ous for Black to castle because the
White played 15. Be4? and lost a pawn: counterplay on the queenside is il­
1 5 . . . Bxe4 1 6 . Nxe4 Nxes. However, lusory: B cS 9. h4 Qas 1 0. Bd2 Nc6
. • .

after 1 5 . Qe2 RfdB 1 6 . Be4 Bxe4 1 7 . 1 1 . c4 Ndb4 12. RcI Nxd4 1 3 . axb4
Th. liGhter-Veresl' Challeleao Chess lepertaire
cxb4 1 4 . h5 and Black lost a piece d) B dxe5 ! ? 9. dxe5 Nxc3 10. bxc3
• • •

because of the attack in Aronian-Usatch­ Be7 1 1 . 0-0 Qd5 12. Rfe1 Bd7� . (Stet­
ev, Omsh 1 9 96. sko )
Of course, no go od is 5 . . . Nxc3 6 .
Qxg7 Nxa2 t 7 . c 3 RfB B . Rxa2 B e 7 9 .
Game 3 8
Bh6 .
I . Ibragimov-R. Tomasic
6 . Bd2 Nc6
Croatia 1 994
6 ... d6 deserves attention: 7. Nf3
cS B. dxc5 Bxc3 9. bxc3 dxe5 10. Nxe5
Qf6 1 1 . f4 N d7 and White has a slight 1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 e6 3 . e4 Bb4 4. eS.
advantage . This looks stronger than 4. Bd3 .
7 . Nf3 d6 4 . ... NdS
8. B d3 S. Qg4
If 5. Bd2 , then 5 . . . Nxc3 6 . bxc3
Be7 7. Qg4 KfB B. Bd3 cS 9. Ne2 d6
makes it easier for Black to organize
counterplay.
S. ••• Kf8
6 . Bd2 Nc6
6 . . . d6 deserves attention because
of 7 . Nf3 cS .
7 . Nf3 d6
8 . B d3 B d7 � !
Black's position is uncomfortable, After this move the black Queen
and to find counterplay is not an easy is condemned to lead a passive life .
matter. Consider: B dxe5 ! ? is worth a look: 9 . dxe5
• • •

a) B Bd7 ? ! 9. 0-0 Bxc3 1 0 . bxc3

. . • Nxc3 10. bxc3 Be7, allowing the pos­
dxe5 1 1 . dxe5 Nde7 1 2 . Rad1 Ng6 ? sibility of QdB -d5 = .
1 3 . Bg5 ! and White had a spatial ad­ 9. 0 .. 0 Bxc3
vantage in I. Ibragimov-R. Tomasic, 1 0. bxc3 dxeS
Croatia 1 9 94 (GAME 38) ; stronger is 11. dxeS Nde7
1 2 . . . h5 ! ? 1 3 . Qg3 Nf5 � . 12. Radl Ng6 �
b) B Bxc3 9 . bxc3 dxe5 10. dxe5
• • . On this square the Knight is de­
Nde7 1 1 . 0-0 Qd5 12. Rfe1 Ng6 13. Qg3 prived of any prospects. Stronger is
Bd7 14. h4 and though, in comparison 12 . . . h5 ! ? 1 3 . Qg3 Nf5 14. Bxf5 exf5
with the previous note, the black Queen with Bd7 -e6 to follow.
stands more actively, White still has a 1 3 . BgS ! Qe8
clear advantage. 1 4 . Rfel
c) 8 . . f5 9. exf6 [or 9. Qg3 � ] Nxf6
.

1 0 . Qh4 ± .
 frenc.-Iype Devilli.os 2
16. hS Nge7
17. h6 Ng6
18. e4 Ne3
1 9. hxg7t Kxg7
20. Bf6t Kg8
21. Bxg6 fxg6
22. Rd3
White doesn't even consider it nec�
essary to win the Rook, his Bishop
is stronger!
White dominates the board. Black's 22 • ••• Nxa2
subsequent moves with his Knight are 23. Redl hS
just acknowledgements of his wrong 24. Qg5 Rh7
choice of opening strategy. 25. Nh4 Nb4
14. •.. Nee7 26. Rxd7 !
1 5 . h4 Nd5 1 .. 0

The Thinkers' Press and Chessco website may

be found at: www.chessco.com

Our Toll.. Free Order number: 1 .. 800 ..397 .. 7 1 1 7

The Richter-VeresDI Ch•••leDI Chess ReplrtDir.
Pire-type
Deviations
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d6
A completely different direction of
play, which after 3. e4, allows White
to offer a transposition into the Pirc
D efense with 3 . . . g6 .
If 3 . . . Nbd7, likely is 4. f4 ! [ 4. Nf3
e5 5 . Bc4, transposing the game to a
type of Philidor Defense] . The game
Richter-Hobensee, Berlin 1 924, continued:
4 . . . g6 5 . Nf3 Bg7 6 . e5 [And after 6 .
B d3 O � O 7 . O � O e5 B . fxe5 dxe5 9 . d5
White stands better. ] Ng4 7. Ng5 Nb6
B. e6 Nh6 9 . f5 f6 10. Nxh7 Rxh7 1 1 .
£Xg6 RhB 12. d5 and White has a strong
attack. Nowadays, on 4. f4, Black prefers
4 . . . e5 5 . Nf3 [A transposition into
the endgame is possible: 5. dxe5 dxe5
6. fxe5 Nxe5 7. QxdBt KxdB with un�
clear play. ] exd4 6 . Qxd4 c6 7 . Be3 � .
3 . Bg5
White prefers R�V type structures.
3 . ... Nbd7
Black prepares e7�e5, trying for a
Philidor Defense type position.
4. e4 e5
Now if a transposition into the Pirc
is desired by 4 . . . g6, Black should be
aware of 5. f4. For example: 5 ... cS
6. e5 NhS 7. g4 cxd4 B . Qxd4 [B. Nb5 !
is also very go od.] dxe5 9 . fxe5 Ng7
10. e6! ± , Vasiukov-Pribyl, Za.1aegerszeg
1 977.
Besides 4 . . . e5, Black has played 4 . . .
cS [5. Bb5 1/2 -1/2 ! ? Ha.rt:ung-Hamelink,
Netherlands 1 9981, but in the follow�
ing instance his kingside is weakened:
4 . . . h6 5. Bh4 g5 6. Bg3 cS 7. d5 [ 7 .
e5 leads to simplifying the position
because of 7 . . . cxd4 B. Qxd4 dxe5 9 .
Bxe5 Nxe5 1 0 . Qxe5 a 6 1 1 . Bd3 [ 1 1 .
Rdl ! is very strong! . E . g . , 1 1 . . . Bd7
1 2 . Nd5 ! Qa5 t b4 ! , or 1 2 . . . Nxd5 1 3 .
QxhB Qa5 t 1 4 . c3 + - . ] Bg7 1 2 . O�O�O
Qb6 1 3 . Nd5 Nxd5 14. Qxg7 Qf6 1 5 .
Qxf6 Nxf6 =, as in Rosenvald-Puuska,
Tallinn 1 9981 Bg? 8. h4 g4 9 . h5 Ne5
10. Qd2 Bd? 1 1 . f4 gxf3 12. gxf3 Qa5
 Pire-type Deliltiln
1 3 . f4 Neg4 14. eS Nh7 1 5 . Nf3 0-0-0 9 . . . QaS deserves attention: 1 0 . Kb l
16. Bh3 fS 17. O-O-O�, Belitsh!1-G. Sorohin, Ba6 with the idea after bS - b4 to ex­
Kstovo 1 994. change the light-squared Bishops, which
5. Nf3 Be7 lessens White's attacking po tential .
After 5 ... c6, then 6 . dxeS dxeS 7 . 6. ... 0 0
..

Bc4 Be7 1eads t o a simple transpositon 7 . 0 .. 0 c6

of moves. In Vaganian-Kasparov, USSR A structure typical of PhiHdor's De­
(ch) 1 9 79, there was 6 . a4 h6 7 . Be3 fense arises, which differs from the
Ng4 8. Bcl exd4 9. Qxd4 NdeS l0. Be2 Classical PhiHdor by the development
Be7 1 I . 0-0 Nxf3 t 12. Bxf3 Bf6 13. Qdl of the Bishop to gS , while in another
NeS 14. Be2 0-0 1 5 . f4 Ng6 1 6 . Qd3 case the gS -square, if the opportunity
Qe7 1 7 . B d2 , and White was slightly arises, is for the Knight .
better. If 7 . . . exd4, then 8. Qxd4 h6 9. Bh4
6. Bc4 Ng4! 10. Bxe7 [or 10. Bg3 NgeS=] Qxe7
More passive is 6 . Be2 c6 7 . 0-0 0-0 1 1 . NdS Qd8 12. Radl NdeS 1 3 . NxeS
8 . a4 [or 8. a3 h6 9 . Bh4 Re8 10. Re I NxeS 14. Bb3 � , Katsiris-Margaronis,
aS l I . Bfl a4 12. b4 axb3 1 3 . cxb3 exd4 Greece (team ch) 1 998.
14. Nxd4 NeS 1 5 . f3 dS =, Opocensh!1- After 7 . . . c6, the main continua­
Blatn!1, Pardubice 1 965J as 9. Re I Re8 tions are I. 8. dxe5 and 11. 8. ReI .
1 0 . Bc4 [the most active move] Qc7 I f 8 . a4, possible is 8 . . . h 6 9 . B e3
1 1 . Nh4 Nb6 1 2 . dxeS dxeS 1 3 . Bb3 Re8 10. Bal Bf8 1 1 . dxeS dxeS 12. Nh4
h6 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 1 S . Nfs Be6 ! 16. Bxe6 Bb4 1 3 . Qf3 Nf8 14. Radl Qe7 1 S . Nfs
fxe6=, Hermann-Me!1er, German!1 1 994. Bxfs 1 6 . QxfS Rad8=, Kosic-Pihula,
The plan of castling long leads to Nihsic 1 99 7.
sharp play for both sides : 6. Qd2 0-0
7. 0-0-0 c6 8 . h3 [8. li4 weakens the
g4-square, which can be used by Black I.
right away: 8 . . . Ng4! 9. Be3 bS l0. Ne2 1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d6 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4 . e4
N df6 1 1 . Ng3 Qc7 12. hS Re8 1 3 . Nh4 e5 5. NB Be7 6. Bc4 0 0 7. 0 0 c6
.. ..

Nxe3 14. Qxe3 Ng4 1 5 . Qe2 BgSt 1 6 .

Kb l g6= { 1 6 . . . exd4 ! ? 1 7 . NhfS {1 7 . 8. dxe5
Nf3 Bf4oo} BxfS I8. NxfS Nf6°o), Krav­
tsov-Korpushin, Russia 1 997.J bS 9. Bd3
as 10. g4 a4 1 I . dxeS dxeS l2. Ne2 Rb8? !
[A loss o f time, Black should have of­
fered the exchange of Queens 12 . . . QaS,
and after 1 3 . Kb l played c6-cS . ] 1 3 .
Ng3 b 4 1 4 . Nfs b 3 1 5 . Nxe7t Qxe7
16. cxb3 axb3 17. a3 NcS 18. Qc3 ± ,
as in Romcovici-Pa nus, Kishinev 1 9 93;
The lichter-Veres., ChalleleDD Chess lepertoire
White fixes the pawn structure, si�
multaneously getting rid of the po�
tential threat of the Knight taking on
e4, followed by d6 � dS .
s. ... dxe5
9 . a4
A typical reaction on c7 � c6 . White
prevents b7�bs .
9 . ... Qc7
The idea of the exchange of the dark�
squared Bishops also deserves attention: A natural developing move. White
9 . . . as 1 0 . Qe2 h6 1 1 . Bh4 NhS 1 2 . protects the e4�pawn and frees the fI
Bg3 [or 12. Bxe7 Qxe7=] Nxg3 13. hxg3 square, where, if necessary, he can post
Bf6 14. Radl Qb6 1 5 . Bb3 NcS . The his Bishop.
game was equal in Szuk-Del!1, Hun� s. ... Qc7
gar!1 1 9 93. 8 . . . bs can also be played, with the
1 0. Qe2 Nc5 idea that on 9. BfI Black can play 9 . . .

1 1 . Rfdl b4. If there is the preliminary exchange

If 1 1 . h3, Black will post his Knight 9 . dxe S dxeS , the retreat 1 0 . Bfl Qc7
to f4: 1 1 . . . Ne6 1 2 . Be3 NhS 1 3 . Rfdl 1 1 . Qd2 N cS also leaves Black good
Nhf4 14. QfI NgS 1 5 . NxgS BxgS 1 6 . chances. For example, in Bletz-Junker,
Ne2 Qe7 1 7 . Ng3 g6 1 8 . as hS . Black German!1 1 991, there was 12. Bxf6 Bxf6
stood slightly better in Ovsejevitsch­ 1 3 . b4 Ne6 14. a4 Rd8 1 5 . Qe3 Nd4,
Krivoshe!1, Nikolaev (zt) 1 995. and Black seized the initiative . The
1 1 . ... Be6 Bishop stands more actively on the
O n 1 1 . . . Bg4, White might play 12. "working" diagonal a2�g8 : 9. Bb3 Qc7
h3 Bxf3 [or 1 2 ... BhS 13. Qe3 ;!; ] 1 3 . [ H ere, after 9 . . . b4 1 0 . dxeS dxeS l 1 .
Qxf3 Rad8 1 4 . QfS ;!; . Nbl Qc7 12. Nbd2 , and Black has the
1 2 . Be3 Bxc4 weak square c4 for White 's pieces . ]
1 3 . Qxc4 Ne6 1 0 . a3 Bb 7 1 1 . dS ;!; .
1 4 . h3 Rfds 9 . a4 h6
with equal chances in Kourek-Knazovcik, After 9 . . . Nb6 10. Bb3 Bg4 1 1 . dxeS
Czechoslovakia 1 994. dxeS 12. h3 Rad8 1 3 . Qe2 Bc8 14. Nh4
Ne8 1S. QhS BxgS I6. QxgS, and White's
chances are to be preferred, Afonin­
11. Stotika, St. Petersburg 1 998. There is the
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d6 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. e4 threat 1 7 . as Nbd7 1 8 . NfS .
e5 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Bc4 0..0 7. 0 ..0 c6 Lately the plan with the fianchetto
is in fashion, 9 . . . b6 [This transposes
8. ReI on this move to GAME 3 9 .] , but by play�
 'ire-type DelillilR
ing 10. dS ! Bb7 White reveals the weak� Berescu-Sharov, Duisberg 1 9 92 .
ness of the ds square : 1 1 . dxc6 Bxc6
12. Bb3 [A loss of time is 12. Qe2 Rac8
Game 3 9
1 3 . b3 and Black can develop some
Winants-Cifuentes
initiative : 13 . . . h6 14. Bh4 gS 1 5 . Bg3
Wijk aan Zee 1 995
NcS 1 6 . Nd2 Kg7 1 7 . f3 Ne6 1 8 . Nfl
Nd4=, Aseev-Hasangatin, Kstovo 1 9 94.]
h6 1 3 . Bxf6 Nxf6 14. Qd3 Rac8 1 5 . 1 . e4
Nh4 d S [Taking into consideration the Our reader shouldn' t be surprised.
Knight on h4's unprotectedness, Black Chess' ways are sometimes unpredict�
takes his chance to rid himself of the able, and we still will run into the
backward d6 �pawn . ] 1 6 . Nfs d4 1 7 . Richter-Veresov system.
Qg3 NhS 1 8 . Qg4 and Black suffered 1. d6
material losses in Winants-Cifuentes, 2. d4 Nf6
Wijk aan Zee 1 9 95 (GAME 39) . 3. Nc3 e5
1 0 . . . cS deserves attention and, de� 4. Nf3 Nbd7
spite the restricted position, Black can S. B c4 Be7
launch a counterattack with f7 �fS. Here 6. 0-0 0-0
is a probable continuation: 1 1 . Bfl Qd8 7. a4 c6
12. Nd2 Ne8 1 3 . Be3 g6 14. Nc4 fS 1 5 . S. Re I Qc7
exfS gxfS 1 6 . f4 Bf6 °o . 9 . BgS
1 0. Bh4 ReS A paradox in contemporary theory.
10 . . . exd4 surrenders the center. 1 1 .
Having passed through the Pirc De�
Nxd4 NeS 1 2 . Bb3 a s 1 3 . Bg3 with the fense, the game transp osed into a
threat of f2 �f4, allowing preference Philidor 's, and with the last move 9 .
to White in Dembo-Moser, Spain 1 998. BgS [9. h 3 i s considered a main move
1 1 . Bg3 in the Philidor. ] , it transposed to one
1 1 . h3 should also be thought about: of the basic positions of a Richter�Veresov
1 1 . . . as 1 2 . Bg3 with a slight advan� type structure .
tage to White .
The center can be closed with 1 1 .
d s Nf8 1 2 . h3 gS 1 3 . Bg3 Ng6 °o .
1 1 . ... as
1 1 . . . Nhs doesn't work, due to 1 2 .
dxeS dxeS 1 3 . Bxf7t Kxf7 14. NxeSt
NxeS l S . QxhS t winning two pawns.
1 2 . Nh4 Nfs
1 3 . Qd3 Be6
14. Rad1
White had a slight advantage in 9 . . .. b6
The Bichler-Veresov Chameleon Chess Beperllire
More reliable is 9 . . . h6 10. Bh4 ReB. 1 8. Qg4
Now White gets an opportunity to Now Black began to suffer mate­
reveal the weaknesses of the dS-square. rial losses.
1 0 . d5 ! 1 8. ... B g5
Uncovering the problems of the 1 9 . Qxh5 Kh8
c6-square . On 19 . . . dxc3 the role of the ubiq­
1 0. Bb7 uitous Queen is decisive, Le. 20. Qg6 .
1 1 . dxe6 Bxe6 20. Nb5
1 2 . Bb3 Stronger is 20. h4! . If 20 ... g6, then
1 2 . Qe2 RacB 1 3 . b3 only weakens 2 1 . Qf3 dxc3 22. hxgs gxfS 23. QxfS ± .
White's position. 20. Bxb5
12. h6 2 1 . axb5 g6
1 3 . Bxf6 Nxf6 2 2 . Qf3 gxf5
1 4 . Qd3 2 3 . Qxf5
How can Black pro tect his eS and White won a pawn, but the pres­
dS squares ? ence of opposite-colored Bishops in­
1 4 . ... Rae8 spired Black.
1 5 . Nh4 d5 23. Qe7
If lS ... RfdB, then White might play 24. Ra4 Re7
16. NfS BfB I7. Qg3 KhB IB. Qh4 threat­ 25. Qf3 Rd8
ening to take on h6 . So, it isn't sur­ 2 6. Qd3 Re5
prising that Black uses his first chance 27. Real Re7
to free himself. 28. g3 Qd7
1 6 . Nf5 29. h4 ? !
After 16. exdS NxdS 17. N xdS BxdS White must b e winning o n the
lB. BxdS Bxh4 the game is simplified. kingside and so he must put a Ro ok
1 6 . ... d4 on the f-file, and then after adequate
If 1 6 . . . dxe4, the same maneuver preparation, make the thrust f4 ! .
would follow. 29. B f6
1 7 . Qg3 Nh5 30. Be4 Qg4
31. b3 Qd7
32. Ra6 Qe7
33. Rla4 Rdd7
34. Kg2 Re8
35. Qf3
White now began looking for his
chances on the kingside. White must
prepare the Rook on the f-file.
3S. Ree 7
3 6 . Qg4 Bg7
 'ire-type I.Iiatilo
37. Qf5 Rd6 50. Rxf6 Qxf6
38. Qf3 Bf6 51. Ral Qe7
39. Qh5 Bg7 52. Rdl Rd7
40. Ra2 Rdd7 53. Qg4 Rd6
41. B d5 Qd6 54. Ral Rd7
42 . Qf5 Qe7 55. Qf5 Rc7
43 . Bc4 Rd6 56. Rdl Qf6
44. Ral Kg8 57. Qxf6 Bxf6
45. Qh5 Rf6 ! 58. Kf3 Be7
Because Black showed signs of ac- 59. Kg4 Kg7
tivity, White had to exchange the Rooks. 60. Kf5 B d6
46. Rdl Qb4 Black built a fortress, and even with
47. Qe2 Qe7 ano ther 58 moves White was unable
48. Rd3 Rg6 to successfully storm it.
49. Rf3 Rf6 1/2-1/2

Two More Books by

Grandmaster Gufeld in
2000 from TPI
Leonid Stein, Master of Risk
Strategy by Gufeld and Lazarev.
Biography, photos, over 60 annot.
games.
ISBN: 0.. 938650.. 54 ..8
Bobby Fischer, The Legend by
Gufeld. Recollections and
thoughts.
ISBN: 0..938650..84..X
Thinkers' Press, Inc.
The lichter-Vereslv Ch••elell Chess leperllire

R-V Deviations
Masters K. Richter and G. Veresov, after
1 . d4 dS, often played 2. Nc3 and af�
ter 2 . Nf6 3. BgS ended up in the Clas�
. .

sical Richter�Veresov which we saw in

Chapters 1 � 1 7 .
We have no classical traditions to
prevent White from preparing an attack
in the center by e4. However, Black Black has stopped the move e4. The
has made s ome efforts in I. 2 ... Bf5 main continuations are: lA. 3 . Bg5 and
and 11. 2 ... f5 . lB. 3 . f3 .
By transposition, 2 . . . BfS 3. BgS Nf6
we have, of course, the Richter�Veresov
system . lA.
With respect to 2 . . . fS , we have a 1 . d4 d5 2. Nc3 Bf5
variation of the Dutch Defense, which
is popular enough in 1 . d4 fs 2 . Nc3 3 . Bg5
dS . Because the lover of the Richter­
Veresov must be concerned about this
potential situation, we begin an ex�
amination of them.

I.
1 . d4 d5 2 . Nc3

2 ••• BfS
 R-V leviali.os
Played in accordance with the R-V a) 6 . Qxd3 Ngf6 7. Nf3 e6 [Or 7 . . .
system, with the idea that Black can­ g6 S . 0-0 Bg7 9 . Rfe1 h6 10. Bh4 0-0 1 1 .
not play 3 . . . Nf6. If that happens, then e4 dxe4 12. Nxe4 ReS 1 3 . Qb3 Qb6, and
Black has transposed to Chapters 3-5. play was equal in Ku.ehn-Wiechen, Ger­
3. ••. c6 many 1 997.j S . e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4 Be7 10.
The main continuation, but it is good Nxf6t Nxf6 1 1 . 0-0 0-0 12. NeS Qc7 13.
to know of other possibilities: Qe2 RadS 14. Rad1 NdS=, Rejcheva­
a) 3 . . . h6 4. Bh4 c6 5. f3 [Or 5. Qcil Ionov, Dortmu.nd 1 992.
Nd7 6 . f3 Ngf6 7. 0-0-0 e6 S . ReI Bh7 b) 6 . cxd3 h6 7. Bh4 Ngf6 8. Nf3 e6
9. Bg3 ? ! b S ! 10. Nh3 QaS =t , Hachian­ 9. 0-0 Be7 10. a3 0-0 1 1 . b4 Ne8 12. Bg3
Landa, Moscow 1 996; stronger is 9. e4! ? Bd6 1 3 . e4 Bxg3 14. hxg3 Nef6 1 5 . Rb1
Nxe4 10. fxe4 Qxh4 1 1 . Nf3 QdS with ReS 1 6 . Nd2 Qb6 1 7 . eS Nh7 1S. Nb3 .
a complex game.] Qb6 6. e4 Bg6 7. Bd3 White stands slightly better in Sagal­
e6 8. Nge2 Be7 9. Bf2 Nf6 1 0 . O-O? ! chik-Sveshnikov, Kemerovo 1 9 95.
[Better is 10. eS Nfd7 1 1 . a3 with the 5 . Rb l e6
idea b2-b4, Nc3-a4� .] dxe4 1 1 . fxe4 Ng4 6 . Bd3 Bxd3
12. Nf4 Nxf2 1 3 . Rxf2 Qxd4 =t , Hoi-C. 7. cxd3 c5
Hansen, Vejstrup 1 989. 5 . . . QaS ! ? deserves Weaker i s 7 . . . Be7 ? ! 8. Nf3 BxgS 9 .
attention: 6 . Qcil e6=. NxgS h6 10. QhS g6 1 1 . Qh3 QdS 12.
b) 3 . . . f6 ! ? 4. Bh4 Nc6 5. e3 Qd7 6. f4 Qf6 13. Nf3 QfS 14. g4 Qxd3 1 S . NeS
Bd3 0-0-0 7 . Nge2 Nh6 8. f3 eS, and Qa6 16. b4, with a dangerous initiative
the position was unclear in Aronian­ for White in Veresov-Shashin, Moscow
Yegiazarian, Erevan 1 996. 1 965.
c) 3 . . . Nf6 and the transposition into 8. Nf3 Nc6
the R-V, as mentioned earlier, is com­ 9 . Qa4
plete ( 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS BfS ) . Or 9. dxcS BxcS 10. 0-0 Be7=.
4. e3 9. Qb4
The other possibilities for White are: 1 0. dxc5 Bxc5
a) 4. Nf3 h6 5 . Bh4 Qb6 6. Rb1 Nd7 11. Qxb4 Bxb4
7. e3 Ngf6 S. Bd3 e6 9. 0-0 Bd6 10. b4 12. Ke2 f6
0-0 1 1 . Na4 Qc7 12. NcS Ne4 with equal 13. Bf4 Nge7
chances in Mestrovic-Tratar, Bled 1 996. with equal chances in Hoi-Bareev, Naest­
b) 4. Qcil Nd7 5. f3 Ngf6 6. 0-0-0 QaS ved 1 988.
7. e4 Bg6 8. eS NgS 9. Nh3 h6 1 0. Bh4
e6 1 1 . Kb1 Bb4 12. Bel cS, and the po­
sition was unclear in Reprintsev-Grigor­ lB.
iants, Moscow 1 999. 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 Bf5
4. ... Qb6
The other possibilities for Black are 3 . £3
4 . . . Nd7 5 . Bd3 Bxd3 :
The liehtlr-Veresa, Chlllllloo Chess leplrtoire
1 998. 4. dxc5 ! ? deserves attention: 4 . . .
d4 5 . e 4 dxc3 6. QxdBt KxdB 7. exf5
with the better chances for White, sup�
ported by the advantage of having both
Bishops.
4. e4 Bg6
4 ... dxe4! ? deserves attention: 5. fxe4
Bg6 6. Nf3 Bb4 7. Bd3 cS B. d5 exd5 9.
Bb5t KfB 10. exd5 Nf6 11. O�O a6 12.
Bd3 Nbd7 13. Bg5 b5 14. Bxg6 hxg6 1 5 .
This move has been popular of late. Ne4 c4 with a complex game in Bozanic­
White has the idea of using a tempo Mrhonjic, Slovenia 1 995.
to take the center with e2 �e4. 5 . Bd3
3 . ... e6 Also possible is 5. Nge2. For example:
The main continuation. I f instead 5 . . . Nf6 ? ! 6. e5 Nfd7 7. h4 h6 B. Nf4
Black opts for 3 . . . Nf6, then by avoid� Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 Be7 1I. Nxe6!
ing 4. Bg5 as studied in Chapters 3�5, fxe6 12. Qg6t KfB 13. Qxe6 c6 14. Ne2
White can play the more aggressive 4. QeB 1 5 . Nf4, and White created dan�
e4. Thus, 4. e4 dxe4 5. g4 Bg6 6. h4 exf3 ? ! gerous threats in Hachian-Dolinshy, Mos�
[carefully, 6 . . . h6 ! ? ] 7. Qxf3 c 6 B. h 5 cow 1 996. 5 . . . Bb4! ? should be investi�
Bxc2 9. Rh2 Qxd4 1 0 . Rxc2 Qxg1 1 1 . gated: 6. a3 Bxc3t 7. Nxc3 Nf6 � .
Rg2 Qc5 1 2 . Be3 Qa5 1 3 . O�O�Oro in 5 . ... B b4
Claesen-Hjelmaas, Arnhem 1 990. Weaker is 5 . . . Nf6 6 . Nge2 Be7 7 .
The other possibilities for Black are: B e 3 Nc6 B. e5 Nd7 9 . Bf2 Bxd3 10.
a) 3 . . . e5 ? ! 4. dxe5 d4 5 . e4 Bg6 6. cxd3 N cbB 1 1 . Qb3 b6 12. f4, and White
Nce2 Nc6 7. Nh3 Bc5 B. Ng3 h5 9. f4 was better in Varga-Lengyel, Bu.dapest
h4 10. Nf5, and White was better in 1 994.
Demir-Tell, Germany 1 993. 6. Nge2 dxe4
b) 3 . . . Bg6 4. Bg5 h6 5. Bh4 c6 6. e4 7. fxe4 Qh4t
Qa5 7. e5? ! [Better is 7. Bd3�, or 7. Qd2 � 8. g3 Qh5
with the idea O�O�O.] e6 B. a3 cS 9. Bb5t 9. Bf4 Nf6
Nc6 10. dxc5 Bxc5 1 1 . Nge2 Qc7 12. f4 1 0. a3 Ba5
Nge7 13. Na4 Nf5 14. Nxc5? [14. Bf2 11. b4 Bb6
doesn't help because of 14 . . . Ne3 1 5 .
Bxe3 Bxe3 =t= . ] Ne3 ! 1 5 . Qd2 Nxglt 1 6 .
Kf2 Nxh4, and Black was winning in
Aronian-Dragomeretshy, Moscow 1 995.
c) 3 . . . cS 4. e4 dxe4 5 . fxe4 cxd4 6.
exfS dxc3 7. Qxd8t Kxd8 8. bxc3 g6 with
equal chances in Leriche-Courval, Qu.ebec

12. eS Nds
1 3 . Nxds exds
1 4 . 0 .. 0
White was slightly better in Remizov­
Begunov, st. Petersburg 1 9 94.
11.
1. d4 d5 2. Nc3
2 . . . £5
It is strange, but in this situation this
move does not help Black. While this
setup has shown up many times in the
Dutch Defense, the praxis of this line
for Black is nothing but "normal."
3 . B gS
A popular response from Richter�
Veresov advocates. White stops the de�
veloping move 3 . . . Nf6 . At this point
R-V leviltillS
the usual move is IIA. 3 ... g6, and some�
times lIB. 3 c6.
•..
On 3 . . . N f6, we have for example
the game Volkov-Malaniuk, Krasnodar
1 998, which proceeded 4. Bxf6 exf6 5 .
e 3 Be6 6 . Qf3 Qd7 7. Bb5 Nc6 8. Nge2
a6 9. Ba4 RdB 10. h4 h5 1 l . Nf4 Bf7 12.
Nd3 g6 and White was slightly better,
but Black's position is very solid [with
the idea b7-b5, Nc6�a5-c4] .
lIA.
1 . d4 d5 2. Nc3 £S 3. BgS
3 ••• g6
This move has become popular.
4 . e3
4. f3 is interesting: 4 ... Bg7 5 . Qd2
c6 [Or 5 . . . Nc6 6 . e4! (6. e3 h6 + ) dxe4
7. d5 Ne5 B. fxe4 fxe4 9. O�O-O Nf6 10.
Bf4 Nf7 1 l . Bb5t Bd7 12. Nge2 0-0 13.
Nd4 Bxb5 14. Ndxb5 Nh5 1 5 . Be3 Nd6
16. Nd4 (16. Nxd6! ? deserves attention:
1 6 . . . Qxd6 17. Nxe4 Qe5 1B. Nc3 ;!; , V.
Ivanov) Bxd4! 17. Qxd4 Nf6 with a co m­
plex game in V. Ivanov-Lastin, Moscow
1 997.] 6. O�O-O h6 7. Bf4 Nf6 8. e4 fxe4
9. fxe4 dxe4 10. Bc4 Nbd7 1 1 . Nh3 Nb6
12. Bb3 Bfs 1 3 . BeS NbdS, and Black
The Richter-Veresov Cha_eleoD Chess Repertlire
was better in Reichmann-Lutz, Germany
(ch) 1 998.
The main continuations here are
IIAl . 4 ... Bg7 and lIA2. 4 Nh6. . .•
lIAI .
1 . d4 d5 2. Nc3 £5 3. Bg5 g6 4. e3
4 • .•• Bg7
5 . h4
Harmless is 5. Bd3 Nf6. For example:
6 . Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Nce2 e5! [7 . . . c6 8. f4± ]
8 . dxe5 Bxe5 9 . c3 Nd7 10. Nf3 Bg7 1 l .
Nf4 Ne5 12 . Nd4 c6 1 3 . Be2 [ 1 3 . Nfe6
Bxe6 14. Nxe6 Qe7 1 5 . Nxg7t Qxg7 + ]
Qf6 14. Qb3 O�O 1 5 . h4 h6 ! with equal
chances in L. Hansen-J. Kristiansen, Co�
penhagen 1 990.
5 . ... c6
Other possibilities for Black are:
a) 5 . . . Nf6 6 . h5 Be6 [Risky is 6 . . .
Nxh5 7. Rxh5 ! gxh5 8 . Qxh5 t Kf8 9 .
Nf3 c 6 1 0 . Bd3 Qe8 1 1 . Qh3 e 6 1 2 .
g4 h6 13. Bf4 fxg4 14. Qxg4 e5 1 5 . Bf5
N d7 1 6 . dxe5 Nxe5 1 7 . Bxe5 Bxe5 18.
Nxe5 Qxe5 19. Bxc8+-, as in Nikolaev­
Lastin, St. Petersburg 1 9 98.1 7 . h6 Bf8
8 . Nh3 [ 8 . NB and the position is
unclear.] Nbd7 9. Nf4 Bf7 10. e4? ! [The
preliminary 10. f3 deserves attention:
10 . . . c6 1 1 . Qd2 Qc7 with the idea
. .. O�O�O, e7�e5 . ] fxe4 1 l . g3 c6 12. Bh3
Qc7 13. Ne6 Bxe6 14. Bf4 Bg4! 1 5 . Bxg4
e5, and Black had the upper hand in
Lputian-Danner, Germany 1 996.
b) 5 . . . Be6 6. Nh3 [6. Nf3 c6, cf. 5 . . .
c6] h6 7 . Bf4 Nf6 8 . Qf3 Bf7 9. Be5 Nbd7
10. Nf4 O�O [Worse is 10 . . . Nxe5 1 l .
dxe5 Ne4 12. e6 ± , or 1 0 . . . g5 1 l . hxg5
hxg5 12. Rxh8t Bxh8 1 3 . Nfxd5 Nxe5
14. Nxf6t Bxf6 15. dxe5 Bxe5 16. Qxf5 ± .
(Skembris)] 1 1 . O�O�O c 6 12. Qg3 Kh7
[12 . . . Nxe5 1 3 . dxe5 Ng4 ! ? is interest�
ing: 14. Nd3 or 14. e6 Be8 1 5 . Be2 and
White has the initiative. ( Skembris) ]
1 3 . Bd3 Ne4 [Weaker is 13 . . . Nxe5 14.
dxe5 Ne4 1 5 . Bxe4 fxe4 16. h5 with an
attack. ] 14. Bxe4 fxe4 [Worse is 14 . . .
dxe4? ! 1 5 . Bxg7 Kxg7 1 6 . Nxg6 Bxg6
17. h5 ± .] 1 5 . Bxg7 Kxg7 16. f3 ! Nf6 17.
fxe4 dxe4? ! [Better is 1 7 ... Nxe4 18.
Nxe4 dxe4 1 9. Nxg6 Bxg6 20. h5 Rf6 ± .
(Skembris) ] 1 8 . Nxg6 ! with a danger�
ous attack for White in Shembris­
Kourtesis, Greece 1 997.
6 . B d3
The continuation 6 . Nf3 Be6 7. Bd3
leads to a transposition of moves . 7 .
Bf4 Nf6 8 . h5 Nbd7 ! [Weaker is 8 . . .
Nxh5 9 . Rxh5 ! ? gxh5 1 0 . Ng5 Bg8 1 l .
Qxh5 t Kf8 1 2 . Bd3 e 6 1 3 . g4 h 6 14.
Nf3 Bf7 15. Qh3 with compensation
for the material in Khalifman-Lerner,
Kujbyshev 1 986.1 9. h6 Bf8 10. Qd2 Bf7
1 1 . Ne5 e 6 ! 1 2 . f3 Be7 1 3 . g4 ? ! [Bet�
ter is 1 3 . O�O�O with a complex game. ]
Nxe5 14. Bxe5 fxg4 1 5 . fxg4 O � O 1 6 .
Be2 Bd6 ? ! [The strongest move i s 16 . . .
Nd7 ! 1 7 . Bg3 BgS + . (Khalifman) ] 1 7 .
 R-V Dlliltilns
Bxd6 Qxd6 l B . O�O�O and White had on e4. Check the diskettefor why I think
the advantage in Khcilifman-Legky, USSR it is unclear. Var. : C2 b23221 1) a vari�
1 987. ant is 13 . . . Bf6 ! ? 14. Bxf6 exf6 1 5 . Qhl
6. ... Be6 Ke7 ! 1 6 . Qh6 QhB 1 7 . Rhl (17. Ng6 ! ? ;
Clearly possible i s 6 . . . Qb6 7 . Rb l 1 7 . Qg6 ! ? ) Qxh6 l B . Rxh6 RgB ! 1 9 .
N d7 [If 7 . . . e5, then White wins by Rh7 KfB = . (Grivas) ] 1 4 . Nxg5 Bf6 1 5 .
B. dxe5 Bxe5 9. Nf3 Bg7 1 0 . h5 ± . ] B . Nxf7 Kxf7 1 6 . g4! e6 1 7 . Qhl QhB I B .
Nf3 [or B . h5 h6 9. Bf4 g 5 1 0 . Bh2 e 5 Qg2 ! , and White was slightly better
1 1 . Bxf5 exd4 1 2 . exd4 N e 7 1 3 . Qe2 in Vera-Grivas, Leningrad 1 989.
Qxd4 14. Nf3 Qf6=, I. Sokolov-Nikolic, b) B Qb6 9. Rbl Ngf6 10. hxg6 hxg6
• • •

Rotterdam 1 9 98J Ngf6 9 . h5 Ne4 10. 1 1 . RxhBt BxhB 12. Bf4 Ne4 13. Ng5
hxg6 hxg6 1 1 . RxhBt BxhB 12. Bxe4? ! Nxg5 14. Bxg5 Bf6 1/2� 1/2 in Atalik­
[ 1 2 . Bf4 ! and White i s slightly bet� Pedersen, Cappelle La Grande 1 996.
ter. ] fxe4 [Or 1 2 . . . dxe4 1 3 . Nh4 NfB 8. ... h6
14. Nxg6 ! Nxg6 1 5 . Qh5 Kf7 16. Qh7t 9 . g4 !
Bg7 1 7 . Bh6 and White has a decisive Insufficient is 9 . h 5 g5 10. Bxg5 ! ?
advantage . (Beliavsky) ] 1 3 . Nh4 Kf7 hxg5 1 1 . Nxg5 Bf7 1 2 . Bxf5 e5 ! 1 3 .
1 4. Qg4 ! NfB 1 5 . Qg3 Be6 1 6 . Bh6 ? Nxf7 Kxf7 14. Qf3 Ngf6 ! [ 1 4 . . . Ke7 ? !
[The best move is 16. £3.] Bf6=t, Z. Polgar­ 1 5 . O�O�O ±, Vera-Paneque, Santa Clara
Beliavsky, Munich 1 991 . 1 995J 1 5 . g4 [Weaker is 1 5 . Bxd7 e4 !
7 . Nf3 Nd7 1 6 . Qg3 Qxd7 =t . ] e4 1 6 . Nxe4 dxe4 1 7 .
Bxe4, or 1 5 . . . exd4 1 6 . exd4 Bh6 with
a complex game. (Vera)
9. ... fxg4
1 0. Bxg6t Kf8
1 1 . Nh2
White has the edge. Not good enough
is 1 1 . N e 5 Nxe 5 1 2 . dxe5 h5 1 3 . f3
Nh6ro .

8. Bf4 lIAI .
B. h5 has also been seen: 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 fS 3. BgS g6 4. e3
a) B Ngf6 9. hxg6 hxg6 10. RxhBt
• • •

BxhB l 1 . Ne2 Bf7 12. Nf4 Ne4 1 3 . Ke2 4 • ••• Nh6

Nxg5 [Weaker is 1 3 . . . NfB ? ! 1 4. Qhl
Bf6 1 5 . Bh6 Ne6 16. g4! ±, V. Kovacevic­
J. Kristiansen, Plovdiv 1 983 (Ed. Note:
I will defer to GM Gufeld on this evalu�
ation based on winning back the pawn
Thl lichter-Veresa, Ch••eleln Chlss I.perlaire

A very popular recent move . 10. eS

S . Nf3 11. dxeS NxeS
Although S . B d3 is premature be­ 12. 0 .. 0 .. 0 Qe7
cause it allows Black to counterattack 13. Be2 Be6
with c7-cS : S . . . Nf7 6 . Bf4 Bg7 7. Nf3 14. BxeS BxeS
0-0 8 . NeS ? ! [B etter is 8. b4 ! ? with a IS. f4 Bg7
complex game.] cS ! 9 . Nxf7 Rxf7 1 0 . 16. Bf3 0 .. 0 .. 0
BeS BxeS 1 1 . dxeS Nc6 1 2 . f4 Be6 1 3 . with equal chances in Gu.1ko-Onischuk,
0-0 c4 14. Be2 Qb6 1 S . Qd2 Rd8, White Blista (01) 1 998.
had a small advantage inAnanchenko-
01enin, St. Petersburg 1 998.
S. ••. Nf7 lIB.
6. B f4 c6 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 fs 3. BgS
7 . h4
7. Bd3 has also been played: 7 ... Bg7 3 ••• c6
8. Ne2 Nd7 9. c3 eS 1 0 . dxeS NdxeS
1 1 . NxeS NxeS 1 2 . h4 0-0 [12 . . . Qb6
deserves attention: 1 3 . BxeS BxeS 14.
Qd2 Be6 with the idea ... 0-0-0=. (A.
Kuzmin) ] 1 3 . BxeS BxeS 14. hS=, A.
Kuzmin-G1ek, Bie1 1 993.
7. ... Bg7
8 . NgS
Or B. hS Nd7 9. hxg6 hxg6 10. Rxh8t
BxhB 1 1 . Bd3 eS with equal chances in
Lorscheid-Krizsany, Budapest 1 997. Black tries a flank attack to destroy
8 . ... NxgS any coordinated development by White.
9 . hxgs Nd7 4. e3
1 0 . Qd2 The other possibilities for White are:
a) 4. e4 [White sacrifices the pawn
 R-V HIViltiloS
to obtain the initiative. ] dxe4 5 . f3 Qb6 Weaker is B . Nf3 e5 9 . Bh4 e4 1 0 .
6. Qcil [6. Rb l ! ?] Qxb2 7. Rbl e3 ! ? [Or Bg3 Bd6 + , Gulko-Short, Hastings 1 988/
7 . . . Qa3 B. fxe4 with compensation for 89.
the material. ] B. Qxe3 Qa3 9. Bc4 h6 S . ... Nxc5
10. Bf4 Nf6 1 1 . Nge2 Nbd7 12. Kf2 ? ! 9 . Bf4
[Better is 12 . 0-0 and the position is 9 . bxc5 N f6 is equal.
unclear. ] Nb6 ? ! [The strongest move 9 . ... Qd S
was 12 . . . g5 ! with sharp play. {Polulia­ 1 0 . bxc5 Qa5
khov} ] 1 3 . Bb3 Qa6 14. h4 ! with the 1 1 . Qb3 Nf6
initiative going to White in Poluliakhov­ 1 2 . Bd3 e6
Glek, USSR 1 990. 1 3 . Ne2 Nd7
b} 4. Qd3 Na6 5. f3 Qa5 6. Qcil Nf6 1 4 . 0-0 b6
7 . a3 [Insufficient is 7 . e4? ! fxe4 B .
Nxe4 Qxd2 t 9 . Nxd2 Nb4= . ] b 5 B . e4
fxe4 [Or B b4 9. Na2 fxe4 1 0 . Bxa6
• • •

Bxa6 1 1 . axb4 Qb6 1 2 . Nc3 and the

position is unclear. { Glek} ] 9. Nxe4
Qxd2 1 0 . Nxd2 Bd7 1 1 . Nb3 e6 1 2 .
a4 ! N b 4 1 3 . Kdl bxa4 14. N c 5 Bxc5
1 5 . dxc5 a5 1 6 . Rxa4 � , Glek-Fishbein,
Philadelphia 1 990.
4. ... Qb6
5 . Na4 1 5 . Bc7 Ba6
5. a3 has been seen: 5 . . . Nd7 6. Bd3 1 6 . c4 ReS
g6 7 . h4 [M ore passive is 7 . Nf3 Bg7 ! 1 7 . cxb6
B. h4 h6 + . { Vera} ] h6 B . Bf4 Ngf6 9 . Weaker is 1 7 . cxd5 Rxc7 1 B . d6 Rb7
Nf3 Bg7 1 0 . N e 5 Nxe5 1 1 . Bxe5 0-0 1 9 . Qxe6t KdB + . { Gulko } [Ed. Note:
12. f3 Ne4 1 3 . fxe4 [ 1 3 . Bxg7 Nxc3To me, more interesting, and definitely
14. bxc3 Kxg7 = . ] Bxe5 14. exf5 ! [14.
tricky, is: 20. Bxa6 Qxa6 2 1 . Nf4! bxc5
dxe5 Qxe3t 1 5 . Qe2 { I S . Be2 fxe4co/+ }
22. dxc5. 1f22 ... Nxc5, then 23. Qxf5 Bxd6
Qg3t 16. Kcil { 1 6 . Kdl } fxe4co/+ ] Bg3t
24. Rfd1 Rd7 and GM Gufeld marks it
IfCO/± '� 1finstead 22 ... g6, then 23. g4Jxg4
1 5 . Kd2 Bxf5 1 6 . Bxf5 gxf5 1 7 . Qh5
1/2-1/2, Vera-Gtrrcia 1lundain, Btrrcelona
24. Qxg4 Kc8 25. Ne6. However, GM Gufeld
1 996. sends us 23 ... Bh6! (with the idea of ... Re8
The continuation 5 . Rbl Nd7 6. Bd3 and . . . Bxf4) . The obvious (?) 24. Qe7t
g6 is similar to variation lIAl . Kc8 25. g5 suggests itselJ.]
5. Qa5 t 1 7. ... axb6
6 . c3 Nd7 I S . Bg3
7 . b4 Qc7 and White stood slightly better in
8 . Nc5 Gulho-Deng Kong Laing, Hawaii 1 998.
The Richter-Veresll Chllleleln Chess Reperllire
Newest Games
Worthy R�V games played in
1 998� 1 999 which have not
been referenced in this work.
1 998
(51 ) Auchenberg, E-Tretvold,M
Copenhagen 1 99B
1 . d4 dS 2. Nc3 NfS 3. BgS N bd7 4. f3 cS
S. e4 dxe4 S. fxe4 eS 7. BxfS OxfS B. dS cxdS
9. NxdS Oh4t 1 0 . Kd2 BdS 1 1 . Bd3 Ogst 1 2 .
Ne3 Bc5 1 3. Of3 0-0 1 4. Nh3 OhS 1 S. Ke2 0bS
1 S . Nc4 Oc7 1 7. a3 NfS 1 B . Nf2 BeS 1 9. N e3
ObS 20. b3 Oc7 2 1 . Nd5 Bxd5 22. exdS Bxf2
23. Kxf2 Ocst 24. Kg3 Oxd5 2S. OxdS Nxd5
2S. c4 Nf4 27. Be4 RabB 2B. Rhd1 fS 29. BdSt
Nxd5 30. Rxd5 RbeB 31 . Re1 e4 32. Kf4 gS
33. h4 Kg7 34. Re3 KfS 35. g4 fxg4 3S. Rd7
KeSt 0-1
(52) Bachmayer,J-Tober,G
Austria 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 NfS 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. Nf3 gS 5 .
e 3 Bg7 S . Bd3 0 - 0 7 . 0 - 0 R e B B . R e 1 b S 9 . e4
dxe4 1 0 . Nxe4 Bb7 1 1 . c3 hS 1 2 . Bh4 Nxe4 1 3 .
Bxe4 Bxe4 1 4. Rxe4 gS 1 5. Bg3 f5 1 S. Ob3t
KhB 1 7 . ReS f4 1 B. h4 g4 [ 1 B . . . fxg3 1 9. hxg5
NfB =t] 1 9. Bxf4 gxf3 20. BxhS NfS 2 1 . BgS fxg2
22. Rae1 c5 23. h5 Nxh5 24. Od 1 NfS 25. BxfS
BxfS 2S. OhSt KgB 27. Og4t Kf7 2B. Oh5t Kg7
29. Og4t KfB 30. dxc5 Od5 3 1 . f4 Oxc5t 32.
RSe3 Kf7 33. OeSt Kg7 34. b4 Oh5 d rawn
(53) Borst,J-J usupov,A
CERA Bank 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 NfS 2. N c3 dS 3. BgS Nbd7 4. Nf3 hS 5 .
B h 4 cS S. e 3 g5 7 . B g 3 Nh5 B . e 4 dxe4 9. Nxe4
Bg7 1 0. c3 fS 1 1 . Ned2 f4 1 2 . h4 fxg3 1 3. hxgS
gxf2t 1 4. Kxf2 hxg5 1 5 . NxgS N dfS 1 S. Oc2
Od5 1 7. Ogst KfB 1 B. Bc4 RhS [ 1 B . . . Oxg2t!]
1 9. Of7t Oxf7 20. Nxf7 RgS 2 1 . N eS N g4t 22.
Kg 1 Nxe5 23. Rf1 t RfS 24. RxfSt NxfS 25. dxeS
Nd5 2S. Rh5 BeS 27. Ne4 Nf4 2B. Rh4 Bxc4
29. Rxf4t KgB 3 0 . NcS bS 3 1 . b3 Bf7 32 . eS
BgS 0-1
(54) Brandner,S-Uhlmann,W
Austria 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 NfS 2. N c3 dS 3. Bg5 N bd7 4. e3 eS 5. f4
Bb4 S. Nf3 cS 7. BbS OaS B. 0-0 Bxc3 9. Bxd7t
Nxd7 1 0 . bxc3 Oxc3 1 1 . fS 0-0 1 2 . R b 1 c4 1 3 .
Oe2 exf5 1 4. Nh4 NbS 1 5. Rf3
fS 1 S . Bf4 Oa3 [ 1 S . . . g5 1 7. BdS:
A) 17 . . . ReB 1 B. Of2 (1 B. Bb4 0xd4!)
OaS 1 9 . NxfS Bxf5 20. RxfS Oxa2 2 1 .
Rf1 Nd7 22. Rxg5t KhB 23. Rxd5 Oa4
24. OfS OcS 25. Bb4! RadB 2S. RdS Oc7
27. c3! ± ; B) 1 7 . . . gxh4 1 B . Bb4!] 1 7.
Rg3 Rf7 1 B. Rf1 Bd7 1 9. Oh5 ReB 20.
Rh3 gS 2 1 . Rg3 Rg7 22. NxfS RgS 23.
NhSt Kg7 24. Bxg5 Oe7 2S. BxfSt OxfS
2S. RxfS KxfS 27. Rf3t Ke7 2B. Oh4t
KdS 29. Nf7t KcS 30. NeSt KbS 31 . Oxh7
RdS 32 . c3 as 33. Rf7 BcB 34. e4 dxe4
3S. Oxe4 KaS 3S. Ob 1 Nd5 37. a4 RbS
3B. Of1 N e3 39. Oe1 1 -0
(55) Bukal,V-Rogulj,B
Porec 1 99B
1 . d4 NfS 2 . Nc3 d5 3. BgS Nbd7 4. e3 gS 5.
Nf3 Bg7 S. Bd3 0-0 7. 0-0 cS B . Re1 bS 9. e4
dxe4 1 0 . Nxe4 cxd4 1 1 . N xd4 N eS 1 2 . NxfSt
exfS 1 3 . Be3 Bb7 1 4. Bf1 f5 1 S. c3 Oh4 1 S.
Od2 hS 1 7. f3 Kh7 1 B. Rad 1 RfeB 1-9 . Of2 Oxf2t
20. Kxf2 Re7 2 1 . Nb5 BcS 22. h3 BxbS 23. Bxb5
as 24. Bf1 bS 2S. Bc5 ReeB 2S. f4 RacB 27.
Bd4 Nc4 2B. RxeB RxeB 29. Bxg7 Kxg7 30. b3
N bS 3 1 . RdS ReS 32 . RxeS fxeS 33. c4 bxc4
34. bxc4 KfS 3S. c5 Nd5 3S. BxaS Nxf4 37. Bc4
Ke7 3B. a4 Kd7 39. BbSt Kc7 40. a5 eS 4 1 .
Bc4 g5 42. as N gS 43. Bd5 KbB 44. cS 1 -0
(56) Claesen,P-McShane,L
Lippstadt 1 99B
1 . d4 NfS 2. Nc3 dS 3. Bg5 gS 4. BxfS exfS 5.
e3 cS S . Bd3 fS 7 . N ce2 Nd7 B. c4 dxc4 9. Bxc4
b5 1 0. Bd3 Bb7 1 1 . Nf3 aS 1 2. a4 BdS 1 3. Nc3
0-0 1 4. 0-0 ReB 1 S. Rc1 NfS 1 S. Ob3 Oe7 1 7.
Rfe 1 b4 1 B . N b 1 N e4 1 9. N bd2 cS 2 0 . N c4 Bd5
2 1 . Od1 Bc7 22. Nce5 RedB 23. Bc4 cxd4 24.
exd4 BbS 2S. BxdS Rxd5 2S. Ob3 RdS 27. Oxb4
Bxd4 2B. Rxe4 fxe4 29. N cS RxcS 0-1
(57) Drazic,S-Nevednichy,V
Jugoslavia 1 99B
1 . d4 NfS 2 . N c3 dS 3. Bg5 N bd7 4 . Nf3 hS 5.
Bh4 as S . a3 bS 7. N eS Bb7 B. e3 eS 9 . f4 RgB
1 0 . Bd3 g5 1 1 . Bg3 gxf4 1 2. exf4 c5 1 3. 0-0
cxd4 1 4 . N e2 NxeS 1 S. fxe5 N g4 1 S. Nxd4 hS
1 7. Of3 Oe7 1 B . h3 BhS 1 9. Bf4 Bxf4 20. Oxf4
0-0-0 2 1 . c3 KbB 22. hxg4 Rxg4 23. OfS OxfS
24. RxfS RdgB 25. Bf1 Re4 2S. Rxf7 RxeS 27.
Re7 h4 2B. BxaS BaB 29. Kh2 RegS 30. Bf1 bS
31 . Nf3 Rg3 32 . NeS d4 33. Nd7t KcB 34. N bSt
KdB 3S. Rd7t KeB 3S. Re1 Re3 37. Rxe3 dxe3
3B. Rd3 1 -0

(58) Farkas,T-Lakat,G
Szeged 1 998
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 dS 3. BgS BfS 4. Bxf6 gxf6 S.
g3 c6 6. Bg2 e6 7. e4 Bg6 8. Nge2 Bd6 9 . 0-0
Qc7 1 0. Qd2 hS 1 1 . h4 Nd7 1 2. Rab 1 N b6 1 3 .
b3 0-0-0 1 4. a4 as 1 S . exdS exdS 1 6. Bh3t
Kb8 1 7. Nd1 Nc8 1 8. Ne3 N e7 1 9. Rbd1 Be4
20. c4 b6 2 1 . Rc1 Bb4 22. Qb2 Rhg8 23. Kh2
Ng6 24. f4 Rge8 2S. cxdS BxdS 26. NxdS RxdS
27. Bg2 Rd6 28. dS cS 29. Nd4 Qd7 30. NbS
RxdS 3 1 . BxdS QxdS 32. Rcd1 Qe4 33. Rf2 Qe3
34. Rg2 Nxh4 3S . gxh4 Qxf4t 36. Kh 1 Qxh4t
37. Rh2 Re1 t 38. Rxe1 Qxe 1 t 39. Kg2 Bd2
40. Qxf6 Qe2t 4 1 . Qf2 Qe4t 42. Qf3 Qc2 43.
Kh3 Qc1 1 -0
(59) Fomina,T-Hitzgerova,G
Elista 1 998
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 dS 3. BgS N bd7 4 . e3 e6 S .
Nf3 c S 6 . B e 2 Q a S 7. 0-0 c 4 8. a 3 b S 9. N eS
Bb7 1 0. Nxd7 Nxd7 1 1 . e4 dxe4 1 2. dS exdS
1 3. NxdS BcS 1 4. b4 cxb3 1 S. BxbS Bc8 1 6.
cxb3 Bd6 1 7. a4 a6 1 8. Bc6 Rb8 1 9. Nf6t gxf6
20. Qxd6 fxgS 2 1 . Bxd7t Bxd7 2 2 . Qxb8t Qd8
23. QeSt 1 -0
(60) Hansen,R-Andersen,J
Roskilde 1 998 [RBL]
1 . N c3 dS 2. d4 Nf6 3. BgS BfS 4. Bxf6 gxf6 S .
e 3 e 6 6. Bd3 B g 6 7. Qe2 [Better is 7 . Nf3.] cS
8. Bxg6 hxg6 9. QbSt Qd7 1 0. dxcS QxbS 1 1 .
NxbS Kd7 1 2. b4 as 1 3. c3 axb4 1 4. cxb4 N c6
1 S . Rb1 Rxa2 1 6. Nd4 [1 6 . N c3 Ra3 1 7. N ge2
Rh4 1 8. f4�] Nxd4 1 7. exd4 Rh4 1 8. Nf3 Re4 t
1 9. Kd1 Ree2 20. Rf1 Rxf2 2 1 . Rxf2 Rxf2 22.
N e 1 Bh6 23. N f3 Rxg2 24. bS gS 2S. Rb3 g4
26. c6t bxc6 27. b6 gxf3 28. Rxf3 fS 29. Ra3
Rxh2 30. R a7t Ke8 31 . Rc7 Bf4 32. Rxc6 Rd2t
33. Ke 1 Rxd4 34. b7 Rb4 0-1
(61 ) Hubel,H-Hans,M
Chemn itz 1 998
1 . d4 dS 2. N c3 Nf6 3 . BgS BfS 4. f3 c6 S. e4
dxe4 6. Bc4 e6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8. fxe4 Bg6 9 . Nf3
Bb4 1 0. 0-0 0-0 1 1 . Qe2 Bxc3 1 2. bxc3 Nd7
1 3. a4 Rae8 1 4. Rab1 b6 1 S. NeS Qd8 1 6. Nxc6
Qc7 1 7. N b4 Nf6 1 8. Na6 Qc8 1 9. eS NdS 20.
Rb3 Bxc2 2 1 . Ra3 Bg6 22. BxdS exdS 23. QbS
Be4 24. N b4 Qg4 2S. Ra2 Rc8 26. NxdS BxdS
27. QxdS Rxc3 28. Raf2 Rc7 2 9 . e6 Re7 30.
Rxf7 Rexf7 3 1 . exf7t Kh8 32. Qd8 Qc8 33. Qxc8
1 -0
(62) Jazbinsek,S-Maksimenko,A
G raz 1 998
1 . d4 Nt6 2 . Nc3 d5 3 . 8g5 N bd? 4 . Nt3 h6 5 .
1118-1111 11118S
Bh4 e6 6. e3 Be7 7. Be2 a6 8. Nd2 cS 9. Bf3
bS 1 0 . h3 Bb7 1 1 . 0-0 0-0 1 2 . Bg3 Re8 1 3. N e2
Bf8 1 4. c4 Qb6 1 S. cxdS NxdS 1 6. dxcS NxcS
1 7 . Nb3 Na4 1 8. Qb1 eS 1 9. Rd 1 Rad8 20. Kh2
g6 2 1 . Bh4 Rd6 22 . a3 Bg7 23. Nd2 Rd7 24.
BxdS BxdS 2S. Ne4 Bxe4 26. Qxe4 Rxd 1 27.
Rxd 1 Nxb2 28. Rd7 N c4 29. Nc3 Qe6 30. Qb7
Nd6 3 1 . Qa7 Nc8 32. Qc7 [32 . Qb7] e4 33. Bg3
Bxc3 34. Rd8 Bf6 3S. Rxe8t Qxe8 36. Qb7 Qe6
37. Bf4 gS 38. Bg3 Kg7 0-1
(63) Karayannis,A-Tsichlis,G
Panormo 1 998 [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS N bd7 4. Qd3 h6 S.
Bh4 c6 6. Nt3 g6 7. e4 dxe4 8 . Nxe4 Nxe4 9.
Qxe4 gS 1 0. Bg3 QaSt 1 1 . c3 [1 1 . Nd2 fS 1 2 .
b4: A) 1 2 . . . fxe4 1 3. bxaS Bg7 1 4. c3 cS ( 1 4 . . .
Nf6 1 S . BeS BfS 1 6. a6 b6 1 7. Bc4 ;!; ) 1 S . Nxe4
cxd4 1 6 . cxd4 Bxd4 1 7 . Rd1 : A 1 ) 1 7 . . . BcS 1 8.
Rxd7 Bxf2t 1 9. Bxf2 Bxd7 20. N cS Bc6 2 1 . Bc4
Bxg2 22. Rg1 Bc6 23. Bd4 eS (23 . . . Rh7 24.
Ne6 Kd7 2S. Rf1 Kd6 26. BcSt KeS 27. Rf2
Rc8 28. Re2t Be4 29. Bd3 Kxe6 30. Bxa7+-)
24. BxeS Rh7 2S. Bf6 b6 26. Ne6 Rc8 27. Bd3
Rf7 28. Bg6 BdS 29. N g7t Kf8 30. Bxf7 Kxf7
3 1 . Bb2 Rc2 32 . Rf1 t Kg6 33 . Rf2 Rxf2 34.
Kxf2 Bxa2 3S. axb6 axb6 36. N e8oo; A2) 1 7 . . .
eS 1 8. Nd6t Kf8 1 9. Be2 Nf6 20. NbS ± ; B) 1 2 . . .
QdS 1 3 . QxdS cxdS 1 4. Bc7 Bg7 1 S . c3 0-000]
fS 1 2 . Qe6 f4 1 3 . Qg6t Kd8 1 4. h4 fxg3 1 S.
hxgS QdS [1 S . . . gxf2t 1 6. Kxf2 Qb6] 1 6 . gxh6
Rg8 1 7. Qc2 Qe6t 1 8 . Qe2 gxf2t 1 9. Kxf2 N f6
20. h7 Rh8 2 1 . Qxe6 Bxe6 22. NgS BdS 23.
Bd3 Bh6 [23 . . . bS 24. Rae 1 ] 24. Rxh6 N g4t
2S. Kg3 Nxh6 26. Rf1 Kd7 27. Kh4 Ng8 28. c4
Be6 29. Re1 Nf6 30. Nxe6 Nxh7 3 1 . N cSt Ke8
32 . Bg6t Kf8 33. g4 b6 34. Nd7t Kg7 3S . BhS
Rhd8 36. Rxe7t Kh8 37. dS cxdS 38. cxdS Nf8
39. Nf6 Rd6 40. KgS Rad8 4 1 . Bf7 N h7t 42.
Nxh7 Kxh7 43 . Be6t Kh8 44. Kh6 1 -0
(64) Kiss,T-Son koly,L
Hungary 1 998
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 dS 3. BgS BfS 4. Nt3 N bd7 S .
e 3 h6 6 . B h 4 e 6 7. B d 3 Bxd3 8 . Qxd3 B e 7 9 .
h3 0 - 0 1 0 . 0-0-0 c S 1 1 . dxcS NxcS 1 2 . Qd4 Rc8
1 3 . g4 Nfe4 1 4 . Bxe7 Qxe7 1 S. Rh2 Nxc3 1 6 .
Qxc3 Ne4 1 7. Qd3 Qf6 1 8. Qe2 RcS 1 9. N e 1
Rfc8 20. f 3 Nd6 2 1 . h4 R b S 2 2 . N d 3 e S 23. g S !
h x g S 24. hxgS QxgS 2S. R d h 1 f 6 26. R h 8 t Kf7
27. Rxc8 Nxc8 28. NxeSt QxeS 29. QxbS Qxe3t
30. Kb1 N b6 3 1 . a4 Qxf3 32 . Rt1 Qe3 33. as
N c4 34. QxdSt Qe6 3S . Qxb7t Qe7 36. QdSt
Qe6 37. Qb7t Qe7 38. Qd5t Qe6 39. QhSt
Ke7 40. Qcst Kt? 4 1 . Qc?t Kg8 42. Rg1 gS
43. Rh1 N d2t 44. Ka1 Qe4 45. Qb8t Kt? 46.
The Richter-Veresol Chlllelean Chess Repertaire
Qxa7t Ke6 47. Qb6t Kd7 4B . Rh7t 1 -0
(65) Kopriva,P-Van Gelder,J
Brno 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. f3 h6 5 .
B h 4 e 6 6. e4 B e 7 7. e5 Nh7 B . Bf2 c 5 9 . f4
cxd4 1 0 . Bxd4 a6 1 1 . Nf3 Bc5 1 2 . Be2 b6 1 3 .
0-0 Bb7 1 4. a3 g5 1 5. g3 gxf4 1 6. gxf4 Qe7
1 7. Kh 1 Bxd4 1 B. Nxd4 Nc5 1 9 . Qd2 0-0-0 20.
Qe3 Ne4 2 1 . Nxe4 dxe4 22. c3 f6 23. Bg4 NfB
24. f5 fxe5 25. Nxe6 Nxe6 26. fxe6 Rd3 27.
Rf7 Rxe3 2B. Rxe7 h5 29. Rh7! RgB 30. Bxh5
Rd3 31 . Rg1 e3t 32. Rxb7 Rxg 1 t 33. Kxg 1
R d 6 3 4 . e 7 Re6 3 5 . Bg4 1 -0
(66) Lauritsen,N-Grabliauskas, V
Copenhagen 1 99B
1 . d4 d5 2. N c3 Nf6 3 . Bg5 N bd7 4 . f3 c6 5 . e4
dxe4 6. fxe4 e5 7. dxe5 Qa5 B . exf6 Qxg5 9.
Nf3 Qxf6 1 0 . Bc4 N e5 1 1 . Nxe5 Qxe5 1 2 . Qf3
Be6 1 3 . Bxe6 Qxe6 1 4. 0-0 Bc5t 1 5 . Kh 1 0-0
1 6. Ne2 RadB 1 7. Nf4 Qh6 1 B . Rae1 Bd4 1 9.
Nd3 Qe6 20. b3 f6 2 1 . Qh5 RfeB 22. a4 a6 23.
Nf4 Qe7 24. Qg4 Be5 25. Nh5 Rd2 26. Rd 1
RedB 27. Rxd2 Rxd2 2B. h3 Qd7 29. Qf3 Rxc2
30. Rd1 Rd2 3 1 . Rxd2 Qxd2 32 . g3 Bd4 33 . h4
Qe3 34 . Nxf6t gxf6 35 . Qg4t KfB 0-1
(67) Lehner,E-Zoltek,T
G rieski rchen 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 d5 2. N c3 Nf6 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. e3 g6 5 .
B d 3 B g 7 6. N f 3 0 - 0 7 . Q d 2 c 6 B. N e2 Ne4 9 .
Bxe4 dxe4 1 0 . N f g 1 Q b 6 1 1 . Bxe7 Qxb2 1 2 .
Qc3 Qxc3t 1 3 . Nxc3 ReB 1 4. Ba3 [ 1 4 . Bd6] b5
1 5 . Nge2 a5 1 6. Bd6 N b6 1 7. 0-0 Ba6 1 B . Rfe1
b4 1 9. Bc5 Nd7 20. Na4 Bb5! 2 1 . N b6 Nxc5
22. NxaB RxaB 23. Ng3 f5 24. dxc5 Bxa1 25.
Rxa1 RdB 26. a4 Bc4 27. f3 exf3 2B. gxf3 Rd5
29. e4 Rxc5 30. Rd1 f4 3 1 . Nh1 Be2 32 . Rd2
Bxf3 33. Nf2 b3 34. Nd3 bxc2 35. Nc1 Bxe4
36. Rd4 Rd5 37. Rxe4 Rd 1 t 3B. Kf2 Rxc1 0-1
(68) Manninen,M-Veingold,A
Vantaa 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 ,Nf6 2. Bg5 d5 3. Nc3 N bd7 4. f3 h6 5 .
Bf4 c 6 6 . Qd2 Nh5 7 . Be5 f 6 B . Bg3 Nxg3 9 .
hxg3 Qc7 1 0. 0-0-0 Qxg3 1 1 . e 4 Nb6 1 2 . exd5
[ 1 2 . N ge2] Nxd5 1 3 . Nxd5 cxd5 1 4. Bb5t Kf7
1 5 . Ne2 Qd6 1 6 . Bd3 g5 1 7. f4 Bg7 1 B . Rdf1
g4 1 9. Rh5 e6 20. f5 exf5 2 1 . Nf4 [21 . Nc3]
ReB 22. a3 Re4 ! ? 23. Bxe4 dxe4 24. Qc3 BfB
25. Qc4t [25. Qb3t] Kg7 26. Rxh6 Be6 27. Rg6t
[27. Nxe6t! ! Kxh6 2B. Nc7+-] Kf7 2 B . Qb5 RcB
29. b3 [29. d5] Qxd4 30. Qxb7t KeB 31 . Qa6
[31 . Kb1 =] Qa1 t 32. Kd2 Bb4t 33. Ke3 Qc3t
34. Ke2 Qd2# 0-1
(69) Mashinskaya,I-Jurkiewicz,K
Koszalin 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. Bxf6 exf6 5.
e3 Bb4 6. Nge2 c6 7. a3 Ba5 B. Qd2 Nd7 9.
N g3 Bg6 1 0 . h4 h5 1 1 . Bd3 Qe7 1 2 . N ge2 Bc7
1 3 . 0-0-0 b5 1 4. Bxg6 fxg6 1 5 . e4 b4 1 6 . axb4
Qxb4 1 7 . exd5 RbB 1 B. Qe3t KdB 1 9. b3 ReB
20. Qd3 cxd5 2 1 . Nxd5 Qa3t 22. Kb1 Ba5 23.
Rh3 Nb6 24. Nxb6 Rxb6 25. Nc3 Ree6 26. Nb5
Qb4 27. d5 Re1 2 B . Nd4 Kd7 29. Re3 Rxd 1 t
30. Qxd 1 Qc5 3 1 . Nc6 Bc3 32 . Qd3 Be5 33.
Nxe5t fxe5 34. Rxe5 Qxf2 35. Qe4 Qf1 t 36.
Kb2 Qf6 37. c3 a5 3B. Qa4t Kc7 39. QeB Rd6
40. Re7t Kb6 4 1 . QbBt Kc5 42. Qa7t Kb5 43.
Rb7t Rb6 44. Rxb6t Qxb6 45. c4t Kc5 46. Qxb6t
Kxb6 47. d6 1 -0
(70) Mestrovic,Z-Schalkx,J
Sremic Krsko 1 99B [RBL]
1 . Nc3 Nf6 2 . d4 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. e3 N bd7 5.
Bd3 Bxd3 6. Qxd3 c6 7. Nf3 h6 B. Bxf6 Nxf6 9 .
N e5 e6 1 0 . 0 - 0 B d 6 1 1 . f 4 0-0 1 2 . N e 2 c 5 1 3.
N g3 cxd4 1 4. exd4 Qb6 1 5. Rab1 RacB 1 6. c3
a6 1 7. Kh 1 Qb5 1 B. Qf3 Qa4 1 9. a3 Qc2 20.
Nd3 g6 2 1 . Rbe1 Qa4 22. Ne5 Kh7 23. f5 exf5
[23 . . . Bxe5 24. Rxe5 Nd7 25. Ree1 ;!;] 24. Nxf5!
Bxe5 25. dxe5 Ne4 26. Nd6 f5 27. NxcB RxcB
2B. Rd1 Qc2 29. Rxd5 Qxb2 30. Rd7t KgB 31 .
e6 Qb5 32. Qf4 ReB 33. a4 Qe2 34. Rxb7 Nd6
35. Rbb1 Rxe6 36. Qxh6 Kf7 37. Qh7t Kf6 3B.
Qh4t Kf7 39. Rfe 1 Qd3 40. Rbd 1 Qc2 4 1 . Rxe6
1 -0
"
(71 ) Mo rtensen,H-Larsen,K
Copenhagen 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4 . f3 c6 5. Bxf6
gxf6 6. e4 Bg6 7. Qd2 e6 B. h4 h5 9. Nh3 Bh6
1 0. Qf2 Qb6 1 1 . Rb1 Nd7 1 2 . Bd3 0-0-0 1 3 .
0-0 e5 1 4. Kh1 exd4 1 5. Na4 Qb4 1 6. b3 Be3
1 7. Qe2 Qd6 1 B . c4 dxe4 1 9. fxe4 RheB 20.
Qc2 Ne5 2 1 . c5 Qc7 22. Nf2 Nxd3 23. Qxd3
Qg3 0-1
(72) M urawski,G-Jurkiewicz,K
Koszalin 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 Bf5 4. e3 N bd7 5.
Nf3 e6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. 0-0 Bxc3 B . bxc3 h6 9.
Bh4 g5 1 0 . Bg3 Ne4 1 1 . c4 h5 1 2 . cxd5 exd5
1 3 . h4 g4 1 4. N e5 RgB 1 5 . c4 Nxe5 1 6. Bxe5
Qxh4 1 7. cxd5 g3 1 B . Bb5t Ke7 1 9. fxg3 Nxg3
20. Qf3 Qh 1 t 2 1 . Kf2 Ne4t 22. Ke1 Qh4t 23.
g3 Nxg3 24. Rf2 Rg5 25. d6t KfB 26. Bxg3 Rxg3
27. Qxf5 Rxe3t 2B. Be2 Rxe2t 29. Kxe2 ReBt
30. Kd3 Qg3t 3 1 . Rf3 1 -0
(73) Navinsek,T-Avrukh,B

Lj ubljana 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. Bg5 cS 4. Bxf6 gxf6 5 .
e 3 cxd4 6. exd4 h5 7 . Be2 h4 B . Bf3 e6 9. Qe2
Nc6 1 0. Bxd5 Nxd4 1 1 . Qe4 e5 1 2 . Bxb7 [ 1 2 .
Bb3] Bxb7 1 3. Qxb7 RbB 1 4 . Q e 4 Rxb2 1 5. R d 1
h3 1 6 . Nge2 Rh4 1 7. g4 B b 4 1 B. K f 1 Bxc3 1 9.
Nxc3 KfB 20. R g 1 Qc7 2 1 . Rg3 f5 22. Qd5 fxg4
23. Ne4 Rxc2 24. Nd6 Rxf2t 2 5 . Kg 1 Qc2 0-1
(74) Negulescu,A-Chernov,V
Cupa Dinamo Brasov 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 d5 3. Nc3 Bf5 4. f3 N bd7 5.
Nxd5 Nxd5 6. e4 h6 7. Bh4 N e3 B . Qe2 Nxf1 9.
exf5 c6 1 0. Kxf1 Qb6 1 1 . c3 0-0-0 1 2 . Nh3 ReB
1 3 . Nf4 e5 1 4. fxe6 Bd6 1 5. exd7t Kxd7 1 6.
Qc2 g5 1 7. NhS gxh4 1 B. Nf6t Kc7 1 9 . NxeBt
RxeB 20. Re1 Qa6t 2 1 . Kf2 Rxe1 22. Rxe1 Qxa2
23. Re4 h3 24. g3 as 25. Re2 Qd5 26. Qe4 a4
27. Qxd5 cxd5 2B. Ke3 b5 29. Kd3 Kd7 30. f4
f5 3 1 . ReS 1 -0
(75) Oeksuz,A-Liitiainen, E
M u rek 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4 . Nf3 e6 5. e3
Nbd7 6. Bd3 Bxd3 7. cxd3 cS B. dxc5 Bxc5 9.
d4 Be7 1 0. Qd3 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 RcB 1 2 . Rac1 a6
1 3 . Rc2 b5 1 4. Rfc1 Qa5 1 5. Nxd5 exd5 1 6.
RxcB Qxa2 1 7. RxfBt BxfB 1 B . Bxf6 Nxf6 1 9 .
Qc2 b4 20. Nd2 Qa5 2 1 . b3 Qb5 2 2 . Re1 as
23. f3 1 -0
(76) Pert,R-Moskovic,D
Witley 1 99B
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 N bd7 4 . N f3 g6 5 .
Qd3 c 6 6. e 4 dxe4 7 . Nxe4 Nxe4 B . Qxe4 Qa5t
9. Bd2 Qd5 1 0 . Qe3 Nf6 1 1 . Bd3 Bf5 1 2. 0-0
Bxd3 1 3. Qxd3 Bg7 1 4 . Rfe1 e6 1 5 . Qa3 BfB
1 6. Qa4 Qb5 1 7. Qxb5 cxb5 1 B . c3 Be7 1 9.
Bh6 N g4 20. Bg7 RgB 2 1 . Be5 f6 22. Bg3 Kf7
23. Re4 f5 24. NeSt KfB 25. Re2 Nf6 26. f3
NhS 27. Rae1 Ng7 2B. d5 Bc5t 29. Kf1 RdB
30. dxe6 Nxe6 3 1 . Nxg6t Rxg6 32. Rxe6 Rxe6
33. Rxe6 Rd1 t 34. Re1 Rd2 35. ReS Bb6 36.
Rxf5t Ke7 37. Rxb5 Rd1 t 3B. Be1 Ke6 39. Rb4
Kf5 40. Ke2 Ra 1 4 1 . Bf2 Rxa2 42. Bxb6 axb6
43 . Rxb6 Ra7 44. Kd3 1 -0
(77) Shirazi,K-Gofshtein,L
Bastia 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. Bg5 N bd7 4. Nf3 g6 5 .
h 4 c 6 6 . Qd2 B g 7 7. B h 6 Bxh6 B . Qxh6 Qb6 9 .
0-0-0 N g4 1 0. Qf4 N df6 1 1 . N g5 e5 1 2 . dxe5
Qxf2 1 3 . Qf3 Nh5 1 4. e6 Qe3t 1 5 . Kb 1 Bxe6
1 6 . Nxe6 Qxe6 1 7. e4 d4 1 B. Rxd4 N e5 1 9.
Qe3 Nf6 20. Be2 0-0 2 1 . h5 b5 22. R h d 1 Nfd7
23. Rd6 Oe7 24. Oh3 Rad8 25. hxg6 fxg6 26.
1118-1111 Gllles
a4 a6 27. Qg3 Rde8 2B. axb5 axb5 2 9 . Nxb5
[29 . Bg4] cxb5 30. Bxb5 RdB 3 1 . Ba4 Rf6 32.
R6d5 Ra6 33. Qb3 Kg7 34 . Bxd7 Rxd7 35. Rxd7
Nxd7 36. Qd3 0-1
(78) Tompos,A-Heilig,Z
H u ngary 1 99B
1 . d4 d5 2. N c3 Nf6 3. Bg5 N bd7 4 . f3 e6 5. e4
dxe4 6. fxe4 Be7 7 . Nf3 cS B. dxc5 Nxc5 9.
QxdBt BxdB 1 0 . e5 Nfe4 1 1 . Nxe4 Nxe4 1 2.
BxdB KxdB 1 3 . Bd3 Nc5 1 4. 0-0-0 Ke7 1 5 . b4
Na4 1 6. Bc4 N b6 1 7. Rd4 Bd7 1 B . R h d 1 RadB
1 9. b5 h6 20. Bd3 RcB 2 1 . a4 Rc5 22. Be4 RhcB
23. Bxb7 Rxc2t 24. Kb1 RBc7 25. as R2c5 26.
Bc6 Bxc6 27. bxc6 Rb5t 2B. Ka2 Rxa5t 29.
Kb3 Rxc6 30. Rb4 Rc7 3 1 . Rg4 Rb5t 32. Rb4
Rbc5 33. Rd2 Nd5 34. RbB as 35. Nd4 N c3 36.
Rd3 a4t 37. Kb2 f6 3B. exf6t gxf6 39. Rg3 Nd1 t
40. Ka3 Rc3t 4 1 . Rxc3 Nxc3 42 . RhB Rc4 43 .
Nf3 N b5t 44. Kb2 a3t 45. Kb3 Rc3t 46. Kb4
a2 47. RaB Ra3 0-1
(79) Wade,R-Shah,A
Hampstead 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 N bd7 4. e3 c6 5. f4
Qb6 6. Rb1 e6 7. Bd3 c5 B . Nf3 cxd4 9. exd4
a6 1 0 . 0-0 Be7 1 1 . Kh 1 NbB 1 2 . b4 Qc7 1 3 .
Qe1 b6 1 4 . N e5 h6 1 5 . Bh4 0-0 1 6 . f5 Nc6 1 7.
fxe6 Bxe6 1 B . Bxf6! Bxf6 1 9. Rxf6! Nxe5 20.
dxe5 gxf6 2 1 . Qg3t KhB 22. Qf4 f5 23 . Qxh6t
KgB 24. Bxf5 RfdB [24 . . . Bxf5 25. Nxd5+-] 25.
Qh7t KfB 26. Bxe6 Ra7 27. Rf1 d4 2B. QhBt
Ke7 29. Rxf7t Kxe6 30. Qf6# 1 -0
(80) Zakhvatov,V-Boui llot,S
Paris 1 99B [RBL]
1 . d4 d5 2. Bg5 Nf6 3. N c3 N bd7 4. Nf3 c6 5 .
e 3 Qa5 6 . Bd3 N e 4 7 . 0 - 0 Nxg5 [ 7 . . . Nxc3 B .
bxc3] B . Nxg5 Nf6 9. e 4 h6 1 0. Nxf7 Kxf7 1 1 .
e5 N e4 1 2 . Nxe4 dxe4 1 3 . Bxe4 g6 1 4. Qf3t
Kg7 1 5 . Qg3 g5 1 6 . f4 QdB 1 7 . Rad1 e6 1 B.
fxg5 RgB 1 9 . Rf6 KhB 2 0 . Qh4 Rxg5 2 1 . Rxh6t
Bxh6 22. Qxh6t KgB 23. Bh7t Kf7 24. Rf1 t
Rf5 25. Qg6t 1 -0
1 999
(81 ) Boeven,M-Bu Xiangzhi
Budapest 1 999
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c5 4 . e4 Nxe4 5.
Nxe4 dxe4 6 . dxc5 Qa5t 7. Qd2 Qxd2t 8. Bxd2
e5 9. Be3 Be7 1 0 . h4 Be6 1 1 . Bb5t Nc6 1 2 .
0-0-0 0-0 1 3 . Ne2 Bg4 1 4 . Rd2 Rfd8 1 5 . Rxd8t
Rxd8 1 6. N c3 f5 1 7 . Bc4t Kf8 1 8 . Bg5 Rd4 1 9.
Bxe7t Nxe7 20. Bb3 a6 2 1 . R e 1 Bh5 22. N d 1
The lichter-Veres., Challelell Chess leperllire
as 23. c3 Rd7 24. Ne3 Rc7 2S. g4 fxg4 26.
Nc4 RxcS 27. Rxe4 N g6 28. Ne3 Nf4 29. Nc4
Nd3t 30. Kd2 Bg6 3 1 . Rxg4 Nxf2 32. Rg1 Ne4t
33. Ke3 Nf6 34. RgS a4 3S . NxeS RxeSt 0-1
(82) Boeven,M (21 59)-Tokmachev,1
Budapest 1 999
1 . d4 dS 2. N c3 Nf6 3. BgS BfS 4. f3 Nbd7 5.
Qd2 c6 6. 0-0-0 Bg6 7. e4 dxe4 8. d5 Qc7 9.
Bc4 Ne5 1 0 . Bb3 0-0-0 1 1 . Qe3 exf3 1 2 . Nxf3
Nxf3 1 3. gxf3 Nxd5 1 4. Nxd5 cxd5 1 5. Qxa7 f6
1 6. Be3 Rd6 1 7. Qa8t Qb8 1 8 . Qxb8t Kxb8
1 9. Rxd5 Rxd5 20. Bxd5 e5 2 1 . Rd1 Be7 22.
Bxb7 Kxb7 23. Rd7t Kc6 24. Rxe7 Rg8 25. c4
Bh5 26. f4 exf4 27. Bxf4 f5 28. Be5 g5 29. Rxh7
Be2 30. Rc7t Kb6 3 1 . c5t Kb5 32. Bd6 f4 33.
Kd2 Bc4 34. b3 Bd5 35 . Rh7 Ra8 36. a4t Kb4
37. Rg7 Bxb3 38. Rxg5 Bxa4 39. c6t Kc4 40 .
c7 1 -0
(83) Bozanic,I-Grosar,K
Bled 1 999 [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. Qd3 g6 5 .
0-0-0 B g 7 6. h4 a 6 7 . h5 g x h 5 8. e4 Nb6 9 . e5
Ng8 1 0. Be2 Be6 1 1 . Bxh5 Qd7 1 2 . N ge2 0-0-0
1 3. Nf4 Nh6 1 4 . Nxe6 Qxe6 1 5. f4 f5 1 6. g4
[ 1 6. Bf3] Kb8 1 7. gxf5 Qxf5 [ 1 7 . . . Nxf5] 1 8 .
Bxe7 Qxf4t 1 9. Kb1 Nc4 20. Bxd8 Rxd8 2 1 .
Nxd5 Rxd5 22. Qxc4 c6 23. Qf1 Qe3 24. Qd3
Qxd3 25. Rxd3 cS 26. Rg1 Bf8 27. Rf1 Be7
28. c3 cxd4 29. cxd4 Rd8 30. d5 1 -0
(84) Bozanic,I-Licina,A
Bled 1 999
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. Qd3 c6 5.
e4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nxe4 7. Qxe4 Qa5t 8. Bd2
Qb6 9. 0-0-0 Nf6 1 0 . Qe5 Qd8 1 1 . Bc4 e6 1 2 .
Nf3 Be7 1 3. g 4 bS 1 4. Bb3 0-0 i s. g S NdS 1 6 .
c3 as 1 7. Bc2 a4 1 8. a3 Bd6 1 9. Qe4 g6 20.
h4 Qe7 2 1 . hS Bxa3 22. NeS Ra6 23. hxg6
�g6 24. Nxg6 Bxb2t 2S. Kxb2 hxg6 2a Qxg6t
Qg7 27. Qxg7t Kxg7 28. Rh7t Kg8 29. R d h 1
Nb6 30. Rh8t Kf7 3 1 . R i h 7 t 1 -0
(85) Feicht,A-Timm,T
Bad Zwesten 1 999 [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . N c3 dS 3. BgS c6 4. e3 BfS S. Bd3
Bxd3 6. cxd3 Nbd7 7. f4 Qb6 8. Rb1 e6 9 . Qa4
Bd6 1 0. b4 h6 1 1 . Bh4 Ng4 1 2 . Ke2 gS 1 3 .
fxg5 eS [1 3 . . . hxgS 1 4. BxgS f6-+] 1 4. Nf3 exd4
i s . exd4 0-0-0 1 6. bS Rde8t 1 7. Kd 1 Ne3t
1 8 . Kd2 Nxg2 1 9. Bg3 Qc7 20. bxc6 Bf4t 2 1 .
Bxf4 Qxf4t 22. Kc2 Ne3t 23. Kb2 bxc6 24.
Qxc6t Kd8 2S. NxdS Re6 26. Qxd7t! Kxd7 27.
Nxf4 Rb8t 28. Kc3 Rc8t 29. Kb4 Ra6 30. NeSt
Kc7 3 1 . Nc4 Nc2t 32. Kc3 Rxa2 1 -0
(86) Goldsmith,A-Solomon,S
Australia 1 999 [RBL]
1 . d4 dS 2. N c3 Nf6 3. BgS BfS 4. f3 Nbd7 5.
Nxd5 Nxd5 6. e4 h6 7. Bh4 N7b6 [7 . . . cS] 8.
Bf2 [8. c3] Bh7 9 . exd5 Qxd5 1 0 . Ne2 ? ! [ 1 0.
Bd3 0-0-0 1 1 . N e2 e5 1 2. 0-0 Bxd3 1 3. Qxd3
exd4 1 4. Nxd4=] e6 1 1 . Nf4 Qa5t 1 2. c3 Bd6
1 3. Bg3 0-0-0 1 4 . Bd3 e5 1 5. N e2 exd4 1 6. b4
Qg5 1 7. Bxh7 Rxh7 1 8 . cxd4 Bxb4t 1 9. Kf2
Nd5 20. Qd3 Rhh8 2 1 . Rhc1 Rhe8 22. Rc2 Re6
23. Rac1 Ba5 24. h4 Qe7 25. Nf4 Nxf4 26. Bxf4
Qxh4t 27. Bg3 Qxd4t 28. Qxd4 Rxd4 29. Bxc7
Rd2t 30. Rxd2 Bxd2 3 1 . Rc2 Be3t 0-1
(87) Holving,R-Lappalainen,T
Stockholm 1 999 [RBL]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 d5 3. Nc3 Bf5 4. f3 Nbd7 5.
Nxd5 Nxd5 6. e4 h6 7. Bh4 g5 8. Bf2 e6 9.
exd5 exd5 1 0. Bd3 Qe7t 1 1 . Ne2 Bxd3 1 2. Qxd3
Qb4t 1 3. c3 Qc4 1 4. Qe3t Be7 1 5 . 0-0 0-0-0
1 6. b3 Qc6 1 7. Ng3 Rde8 1 8. Qd3 Qg6 1 9.
Rad 1 h5 20. Rfe 1 Bd8 2 1 . Nf5 g4 22. c4 Nf6
23. ReS dxc4 24. bxc4 gxf3 25. Qxf3 Ng4 [25 . . .
Qg4] 26. Rb5 Qc6 27. d5 Qxc4 28. Nd4 [28.
Rc5± with the idea of Nd6t. 2 8 . . . Qa6 29. d6
Kb8 30. dxc7t Bxc7 3 1 . Rxc7 Kxc7 32. Bg3t
Ne5 33. Bxe5t Rxe5 34 . Qc3t+-] Bf6 [28 . . .
ReS 29. Bg3 Bf6 30. Bxe5 Bxe5 3 1 . Nc6! Qc2
to stop Qf5 . 32. Nxa7t Kd8 33. Rxb7 Qc5t
34. Kh 1 Nf2t 35. Qxf2 Qxf2 36. N c6t Kd7 37.
Nxe5t Ke7 38. Rxc7t Kd6 39. Nd3 Qxa2 40.
Rc6t Kd7 4 1 . N eSt Ke7 42. d6t+-] 29. N c6
Qe4 30. Nxa7t Kb8 3 1 . Rxb7t Kxb7 32 . Qb3t
Ka8 33. Nb5 Kb8 34. Nd6t 1 -0
(88) Meshkov,Y-Sergienko,S
St. Petersburg 1 999 [Avrukh , B]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. Nf3 g6 5 .
e 3 B g 7 6. B d 3 0 - 0 7. 0 - 0 c S 8. Rei b6 9. N e5
[9. e4! ?] Bb7 1 0 . f4 Ne8 ! ? 1 1 . Bh4 Nxe5 1 2 .
fxe5 Nc7 1 3. Be2 Qd7 1 4. Bg4 N e6 1 5 . N e2 ? !
[ i s. e 4 ! cxd4 1 6. Nxd5 Rfe8 1 7 . Qxd4! ? Nxd4
1 8. Bxd7 Red8 1 9 . Nxe7t Kf8 20. e6!?] f5 1 6.
exf6 exf6 1 7. Nf4 f5 + 1 8. Nxe6 Qxe6 1 9. Bf3
c4 [ 1 9 . . . Rf7!?] 20. a4 Rae8 2 1 . Qd2 Bh6! 22.
Bf2 Re7 23. as b5 24. a6? ! Bc6 2S. b3 g5 26.
bxc4 bxc4 27. g3 Rb8 28. Ra5 ? ! [28. Rab 1 !
Ree8 29. Bg2 g4+] Rd7 29. c3 Rb6 30. Qa2
Rd8 3 1 . Bd 1 Rdb8 32. Qe2 g4 33. Bc2 Rb2
34. Qd 1 BbS 3S. Qc1 0-1
(89) Reprintsev,A-Evelev,V
Geller Mem 1 999 [Avrukh , B]
1 . d4 Nf6 2. N c3 dS 3. BgS N bd7 4. Qd2 cS!?
[4 . . . e6 S. e3 (S . e4!? dxe4 6 . f3 e3!? 7. Bxe3
Bb4 8. a3 Bxc3 9. bxc3 0-0 1 0 . Bd3 cS 1 1 .
 1118-1111 GIIIII
Nh3;!; , Loboda, E-Suetin,A USSR 1 975) Be7 (5 . . .
c5 6 . f4 a6 7. Nf3 Qc7 8 . Bd3 c4 9 . Be2oo,
Vincent,S-Si m i c , R/Montpellier 1 988) 6. h4 c5
7. Be2 a6 8. g4 b5 9 . Bxf6 gxf6 1 0. dxc5 Nxc5
1 1 . a3 Bb7 1 2 . Nf3 Qb6 � , Tukmakov-Alavkin,A
Russia 1 995] 5 . dxc5 e6 6. e4!? dxe4 7. 0-0-0
[7. Bb5 ! ? See ChessBase for d etails. ] Bxc5 8.
Bb5 0-0 9. Bxf6 Qxf6 1 0. Nxe4 Qe5! 1 1 . Qe2
Nf6 1 2 . Nxc5 Qxc5 1 3 . Nf3 b6 1 4. Qe5 Nd5?
[ 1 4 . . . Qxe5 1 5. Nxe5 Bb7 1 6. Bc6 Rab8 1 7 .
Rd4 Rfc8 1 8. Rhd1 Kf8 1 9. Bxb7 Rxb7 20. Rd8t
Rxd8 2 1 . Rxd8t Ne8=] 1 5. Bd3 Qxf2?! 1 6. Rhe1
Qc5 1 7. Be4! Bb7 [ 1 7 . . . Rd8? 1 8. Bxd5 exd5
1 9 . Rxd5 ! ! Rxd5 2 0 . Qxd5!+- Qxd5 2 1 . ReB#]
1 B. Ng5!+- KhB 1 9 . Nxh7 RfbB 20. Bxd5 Kxh7
[20 . . . Bxd5 2 1 . Qh5 KgB 22. Ng5 Qf2 23. Rf1
Qe3t 24. Kb 1 +-] 2 1 . Qe4t ! f5 22. Qh4t 1 -0

(90) Reprintsev,A-Kachar, V
Geller Mem 1 999 [Avrukh , B]
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . N c3 d5 3 . Bg5 g6 4 . Qd2 Bg7
5 . Bh6 0 - 0 6 . 0-0-0 c6 7 . f3 b 5 B. h4 N h 5 !
[ B . . . b4 9 . N b 1 Q a 5 1 0 . h 5 ! B x h 6 1 1 . Qxh6
Qxa2 1 2 . e4 b3 1 3 . c3 dxe4 1 4 . fxe4 Nxh5
1 5 . Be2+-] 9 . g4 N g3 1 0 . R h 3 Nxf1 1 1 . Rxf1
f5? [ 1 1 . . . f6 ! 1 2 . Bxg7 Kxg7 1 3 . h 5 g5 1 4 .
e3 e5 1 5 . N ge2 Be6 1 6 . Ng3 N d700] 1 2 . Bxg7
Kxg7 1 3 . h5! ± fxg4 [ 1 3 . . . f4 1 4. hxg6! hxg6
1 5 . e3 Qd6 1 6 . N g e2+-] 1 4 . R h 1 Qd6 [ 1 4 . . .
g 5 1 5 . Qxg5t KhB 1 6 . h 6 Rf7 1 7. Qe5t KgB
( 1 7 . . . Rf6 1 B . fxg4+-) 1 B. R h 5 ! +-] 1 5 . hxg6
Qxg6 1 6 . N h3 ! gxh3 [ 1 6 . . . b4 1 7 . Na4 g 3
1 B . Rfg 1 K h B 1 9 . N g 5 h 6 2 0 . R x h 6 t ! Qxh6
2 1 . Nf7t+-] 1 7 . Rfg 1 +- Be6 1 B . Nd1 Nd7
1 9 . Nf2 Rf6 2 0 . Qc3 [ 2 0 . Nxh3? Bxh3 2 1 .
Rxg6t Rxg6 2 2 . Qb4 c5 2 3 . dxc5 Bf5 24. e4
with the i n itiative] Qg2 ! ? 2 1 . Rxg2t hxg2 2 2 .
R g 1 Rg6 2 3 . Qxc6 RgB 2 4 . e4 Kf7 2 5 . Qxb5
Rg5 26. f4 1 -0

(91 ) White,M-Bjornsson,S
Wakefield 1 999
1 . d4 Nf6 2 . N c3 d5 3 . Bg5 Nbd7 4. Nf3 h6 5.
Bh4 e6 6. e4 g5 7. Bg3 Nxe4 B . Nxe4 dxe4 9.
Ne5 Bg7 1 0 . h4 Qe7 1 1 . c3 Nxe5 1 2 . dxe5 Bd7
1 3. Qd4 Bc6 1 4. 0-0-0 0-0 1 5 . Qe3 RfdB 1 6.
Be2 Rxd 1 t 1 7. Bxd 1 a5 1 B. hxg5 hxg5 1 9 . Bc2
a4 20. a3 RdB 2 1 . Bxe4 Bxe4 22. Qxe4 Qc5
23. Qxb7 Bxe5 24. Bxe5 Qxe5 25. Qf3 KfB 26 .
Rd1 Qf4t 27. Qxf4 Rxd 1 t 2B. Kxd 1 gxf4 29.
Kc2 Ke7 30. b3 Kd6 3 1 . b4 e5 32 . Kd3 f5 33.
c4 e4t 34. Kd4 c6 35 . g4 fxg3 36. fxg3 c5t 37.
Kc3 cxb4t 3B. Kxb4 Kc6 39. Kc3 Kc5 40. Kd2
Kxc4 0-1
The Rlchter-Veres., Cha••IIID Chess Repertoire

Openings' Index

• These statistics are based on 1 , 134,689 games in CnessBase Mega99 + CnessBase Magazines
through Extra 70. CnessBase does not contain all the games that are in this book,
and so it should be made clear that these stats are based solely on the above cri�
teria and not any sense of completeness. E . g . , in the line 1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 .
Bg5 Nbd7 4. Nf3 c 6 5 . Qd3 h 6 there are several examples i n the book which are
not in CnessBase.
• Occasionally CnessBase and some games in this book may have a different move
order and the timain lines" may no t converge for a number of moves. Each time a
move is added to a main line, the chances of transposition to the same position
increase, hence, the tireactions" may total more than the originating tiaction."
• Also, bear in mind that a small game sampling, considered less than 30 games, is
not a very clear indicator of reliability. Also, be aware that ONE move may have
put a line out of business, and it might be unlikely to see new explorations in
that area except by those who do not know of its refutation.
• The numbers in parentheses indicate percentages of White wins, draws, and Black
wins, respectively (from left to right) . The game citations indicate the first tiknown"
use of this variation in the CnessBase database given above (or occasionally in
books which contains games not in CnessBase) : the players (White first) , the year
played, and the result.
• The ranking of the variations given (see for example Chapter One) are simply in
order of the number of times that line was used in the CnessBase database, not
necessarily an indicator of its worthiness.
• Chapters 1 9�2 5 aren' t complete in their response because the authors are articu�
lating some of their specific preferences for dealing with these lines.
• Another thing to be kept in mind is that duplicate citations indicate a transposi�
tion, and no information is given to show the exact move order of the original
game.
* The variation cited is not included in this work.
 Blck DI the BDII
Chapter One (pages 13-20)
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 c5 (25=35-40---+ 1 59)
4. Bxf6 (24=34-42---+ 89) A. Magergut-M. Kamishov (1947) 0
4. Nf3 (23=39-38---+13) A. Ilyin-Zhenevsky-v. Ragozin (1929) 0
4. e4 (33=34-33---+12) K. Richter-K. Opocensky 1/2
4. dxc5? ! (50=25-25---+4) A. Poliak-A. Lllienthal (1945) 0
4. f3 (25=25-50---+4) Semkovic-P. Szilagy (1976) 0
4. e3 (see Chapter 2)

Chapter Two (pAges 21·23)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c5 4. e3 (25=39-36---+44)
4 . . . Nc6 (20=35-45---+24) K. Richter-I. Rohacek (l941) 1
4 . . . e6 (22=40-38---+ 1 8) B. DeGreiff-M. Bobotsov (l963) 1/2
4 . . . cxd4 (0=17-83---+ 6) M. Levin-E. Lazarev (1954) 0
4 . . . Bf5 (66=34-0---+ 3) F. Tenner-R. Kleeschaetzky (1981) 1/2
4 . . . Ne4 (50=50-0---+2) R. Ruemmler-C. Jahn (1993) 1/2

Chapter Three (pAges 24-29)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 (34=34-32---+6 61)
4. f3 (36=28-36---+322)
4 . . . Nbd7 (37=24-39---+ 146) G. Breyer-E. Bogol;ubow (1914) 0
4 . . . c6 (35=31-34---+ 1 1 1) S. Levitsky-A. Rubinstein (1912) 1/2
4 . . . Bg6 (28=41-31---+3 5) K. Richter-G. Weissgerber (1933) 1
*4 . . . h6 (42=16-42---+ 1 9) I. Von Popiel-G. Marco (l890) 0
4 . . . c5 (7=47-46---+ 1 3) K. Richter-L. Steiner (1936) 0
*4 . . . Nc6 (50=25-25---+ 1 2) G. Breyer-R. Loman (1913) 1
*4 . . . e6 (80=0-20---+ 5) L. Tapaszto-D. Sinclair (1990) 1

Chapter Four (pAges 30-37)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5
4. Bxf6 (34=37-29---+ 1 75)
4 . . . gxf6 (33=27 -40---+ 57)
5. e3 (32=3 1-37---+ 53)
5 . . . e6 (34=15-51---+29) H. Rossetto-Lopez Bahamonde (l959) 1
5 . . . c6 (27=51-22---+22) E. Bykova-N. Gaprindashvili (1962) 0
5 . . . Nc6 (33=67-0---+ 3) K. Nickl-A. Rosht (l987) 1/2
5 . . . Qd7 (100=0-0---+ 1 ) G. Seul-F. Holzke (1993) 1
5 . . . Bg6 (0=100-0---+ 1 ) Buhmann-K. Graeser (1987) 1/2
5 . . . Bg7 (0=100-0---+1) T. Zobel-G. Schracke (l997) 1/2
5 . . . Rg8 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) P. Torres-S. Schabanel (l991) 0
5. g3 (50=0-50---+2) S. Vanderwaeren-P. Nikolic (l997) 0
5. f3 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) Nebreda-J. Klein (1963) 0
5. Nf3 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) J. Mindl-M. pfeifer (1996) 0
4 . . . exf6 (34=41-25---+ 120)
5. e3 (33=43-24---+ 1 18)
5 . . . c6 (25=45-30---+89)
ne Ilchler-Veresov Chameleon Chess leperllire
6. Bd3 (24=49-27-'77)
6 . . . Bxd3 (20=56-24-'29) D. Bronstein-E. Vasiukov (1959) 1/2
6 . . . Bg6 (23=39-38-'21) H. Rossetto-R. Cruz (1959) 1
6 . . . Be6 (13=47-40-'15) S. Tartakower-E. Gruenfeld (1921) 1/2
6 . . . Qd7 (41=51-8-'12) G. Khodos-Savellev (1958) ?
*6 . . . Qc8 (0=100-0-'1) S. Tartakower-R. Reti (1922) 1/2
*6 . . . Bc8 (0=100-0-'1) S. Tartakower-J. Donner (1951) 1
*6. Nge2 (36=19-45-'11) O. Rodrlguez Vargas-Fraguela (1976) 1/2
*6. Nce2 (0=0-100-'1) J. Bakos-F. Lisko (1998) 0
5 . . . Bb4 (48=24-28-'25) S. Tartakower-E. Colle (1929) 1/2
*5 . . . Nc6 (42=44-14-'7) S. Tartakower-R. Spielmann (1923) 1/2
5 . . . Qd7 (50=50-0-'4) Mallch-Filip (1960) 1/2
*5 . . . Be6 (50=50-0-'2) S. Small-K. Arkell (1985) 1/2
*5 . . . Be7 (100=0-0-'2) Napias-R. Camacho (1990) 1
*5. e4 (100=0-0-'1) T. Fischer-G. Schebler (1988) 1
*5. Nf3 (0=0-100-'1) A. Oeksuz-Y. Yudkovsky (1997) 0

Chapter Five (pAges 38-40)

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. e3 (30=43-27-'161)
4 . . . e6 (26=44-30-'91) E. Colle-E. Sergeant (1930) 1
4 . . . Nbd7 (30=48-22-'40) J. Schulz-H. Kmoch (1926) 1
4 . . . Ne4 (0=100-0-'1) K. Opocensky-M. Euwe (1922) 1/2
*4 . . . c6 (31=48-21-'61) K. Richter-C. Ahues (1935) 1
*4 . . . h6 (100=0-0-'2) H. Rossetto-A. Aparicio (1973) 1
*4 . . . g6 (100=0-0-'1) T. Scholz-A. Lossnitzer (1993) 1
*4 . . . Nc6 (50=0-50-'4) P. Juergens-I. Keck (1990) 1

Chapter Six (pAges 41-48)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 (29=34-37-'1 138)
4. Nf3 (30=33-37-'557)
4 . . . h6 (29=37-34-'147) V. Saigin-J. Klavins (1962) 1
4 . . . c6 (39=29-32-'102)
5. Qd3 (33=21-46-'30)
5 . . . g6 (30=24-46-'13) L. Alburt-V. Savon (1970) 0
5 . . . Qa5 (57=15-28-'7) K. Opocensky-F. Schubert (1919) 1
5 . . . h6 (0=20-80-'5) W. Schinzel-A. Suetin (1976) 0
5 . . . b5 (50=0-50-'2) I. Donev-A. Weindl (1993) 1
*5 . . . Qc7 (0=50-50-'2) Elm-A. Lange (1948) 0
*5 . . . e6 (100=0-0-'1) J. Garwell-M. Hassan (1992) 1
5 . . . Qb6 (100=0-0-'1) J. Van Mil-J. Bosch (1995) 1
5. e3 (36=29-35-'100)
5 . . . g6 (26=38-36-'38) R. Kholmov-E. Vasiukov (1959) 1/2
5 . . . Qa5 (53=17-30-'26) J. Schulz-R. Mikulka (1923) 1
5 . . . Qb6 (31 =42-27-'22) R. Wade-G. Garcia (1963) 1
*5 . . . e6 (40=30-30-'10) G. Kleopas-A. Bakali (1966) 0
5 . . . h6 (33=17-50-'6) L. Myagmarsuren-K. Langeweg (1968) 1
 Back Of Ibl Balk
*5. a3 (0=50-50--+2) H. Pialzer-H. Stieg (1995) 0
*5. Ndl (0=100-0--+1) R. Puhiera-R. Garda (1998) 1/2
*5. g3 (0=0-100--+1) W. Zichler-W. Weissbeck (1998) 0
4 . . . e6 (see Chapter Seven)
4 . . . g6 (see Chapter Eight)
4. Qd3 (see Chapter Nine)
4. f3 (see Chapter Nine)

Chapter Seven (pages 49-59)

1 . d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. NB
4 . . . e6 (30=33-37--+122)
5. e3 (36=23-41--+55)
5 . . . Be7 (44=20-36--+47) M. Raizman-G. Gudmundsson (1946) 1
5 . . . c5 (6=41-53--+15) Y. Anokhin-D. Bronstein (1963) 0
*5 . . . c6 (40=30-30--+10) G. Kleopas-A. Bakali (1966) 0
5 . . . Bb4 (50=17-33--+6) J. Lakdawala-J. Watson (1982) 1
5 . . . h6 (50=0-50--+4) F. Fuglsang-J. Kristlansen (1979) 0
*5 . . . g6 (0=100-0--+1) R. Bellin-U. Andersson (1980) 1/2
5. e4 (30=34-36--+86)
*5 . . . dxe4 (43=39-18--+44) G. Kluger-Z. Balla (1935) 1
5 . . . h6 (17=30-53--+41) J. Sehulz-E. Steiner (1928) 0
*5 . . . Bb4 (0=0-100--+1) J. Cox-G. Flear (1985) 0
*5. a3 (0=34-66--+3) B. Collet-B. Dude (1989) 0

Chapter Eight (pages 60-71)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. NB g6 (26=32-42--+189)
5. e3 (26=33-41--+ 136)
5 . . . Bg7 (25=33-42--+135)
6. Bd3 (24=35-41--+1 1 1)
6 . . . 0-0 (27=35-38--+94)
7. 0-0 (27=37-36--+84)
7 . . . c5 (23=36-41--+63) R. Persia-J. Smejkal (1968) 0
7 . . . c6 (25=36-39--+58) R. Kholmov-E. Vasiukov (1959) 1/2
7 . . . b6 (33=34-33--+6)
8. ReI (33=34-33--+3) T. Farrand-D. Cummings (1977) 1
8. e4 (50=0-50--+2) A. Miles-D. King (1982) 1
8. Ne5 (0=100-0--+1) W. Traudes-J. Kyas (1996) 1/2
*7 . . . Re8 (50=50-0--+2) C. Hoi-M. Wiedenkeller (1986) 1
7 . . . h6 (0=100-0--+1) A. Miles-L. Portisch (1982) 1/2
*7. Ne2 (100=0-0--+1) E. Klein-v. Menchik (1935) 1
*7. e4 (50=25-25--'4) J. Veselyi-J. Smejkal (1965) 0
*7. h4 (50=50-0--+2) Z. Jasnikowski-J. Pokojowezyk (1980) 0
*7. Be2 (19=24-57--+21) A. Thiellement-L. Portisch (1964) 0
*7. Qdl (33=0-67--+3) D. Jurikova-R. Vaculikova (1994) 1
*7. a3 (0=100-0--+1) B. Rodriguez-J. Barkhagen (1995) 1/2
*6 . . . h6 (0=100-0--+1) O. Sarapu-P. Garbett (1982) 1/2
The Rlchter-Veresal Challelean Chess Repertlire
*6 . . . c6 (23=36-41---+ 5 1) R. Kholmov-E. Vasiukov (1959) 1/2
*6 . . . c5 (0=0-100---+ 5 ) K. Wockenfuss-L. Christiansen (1990) 0
*6 . . . Nb6 (100=0-0---+ 1 ) J. Mosny-M. Budzak (1996) 1
6. Be2 (22=28-50---+22)
6 . . . 0-0 (19=24-57---+2 1)
7. 0-0 (11=31-58---+ 1 7) A. Thiellement-L. Portisch (1964) 0
*7. h3 (33=34-33---+3 ) J. Jansson-T. Karolyi (1982) 0
7. h4 (100=0-0---+ 1 ) H. Spangenberg-I. Seitaj (1998) 1
*7. Ne5 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) R. Burkhardt-T. Coste (1990) 0
*6 . . . c6 (11=56-33---+ 9 ) A. Thiellement-B. Rometti (1964) 1/2
*6. h3 (20=20-60---+5 ) J. Jansson-T. Karolyi (1982) 0
*6. NeS (50=0-50---+4) C. Hartman-J. Engsner (1988) 0
*6. Qdl (100=0-0---+ 1 ) D. Jurikova-R. Vaculikova (1994) 1
*6. g3 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) A. Dadildna-M. Grabies (1993) 0
*6. b4 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) C. Ududec-M. Pino (1997) 0
*5 . . . c6 (26=38-36---+3 8) R. Kholmov-E. Vasiukov (1959) 1/2
5. Qd3 (20=39-41---+2 9) A. Kapengut-A. Vooremaa (1962) 1/2
5. Qdl (37=26-37---+ 1 6) S. Pimenov-E. Vasiukov (1955) 1/2
*5. Ne5 (50=17-33---+ 6 ) S. Fitzpatrick-P. Smart (1991) 1/2
*5. g3 (16=51-33---+ 6 ) H. Nielsen-L. Schandorff (1986) 1/2
*5. Qc! (33=67-100---+3 ) S. Torhola-T. Kilpi (1991) 1/2
*5. h3 (33=0-67---+ 3 ) J. Jansson-T. Karolyi (1982) 0
*5. h4 (50=0-50---+2 ) S. From-H. Holmsgaard (1991) 1
*5. e4 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) K. Mueller-J. Smejkal (1974) 0

Chapter Nine (pAges 72-81)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 dS 3. Bg5 Nbd7
4. Qd3 (29=34-37---+ 9 6)
4 . . . e6 (25=47-28---+28) P. Fric-J. Pelikan (1933) 1
4 . . . h6 (12=32-56---+ 1 6) H. Rossetto-K. Darga (1968) 0
4 . . . c5 (0=34-66---+ 9 ) D. Villing-P. Meister (1985) 0
4 . . . c6 (34=26-33---+3 9) Elm-Lange (1948) 0
*4 . . . g6 (27=40-33---+ 1 8) I. Donev-I. Zlatilov (1986) 1
4. £3 (30=30-40---+3 34)
4 . . . cS (29=34-37---+9 6)
5. e4 (31=33-36---+69)
5 . . . cxd4 (30=31-39---+ 3 3) B. Zappas-J. Carjaval (1964) 0
5 . . . dxe4 (32=33-35---+31) A. Kwilecki-J. Sowinski (1955) 1/2
*5 . . . Qb6 (67=0-33---+3 ) S. Quigley-S. Macaulay (1979) 1
*5 . . . Qa5 (0=100-0---+ 1 ) M. Sibllio-M. Trepp (1986) 1/2
5. dxcS (22=38-40---+22) H. Rossetto-S. Reshevsky (1966) 1/2
*5. e3 (25=25-50---+4) A. Conrady-G. Pena (1964) 1/2
*5. Bxf6 (0=100-0---+ 1 ) H. Schulz-K. Lehmann (1984) 1/2
4 . . . c6 (see Chapter Ten)
4 . . . e6 (see Chapter Eleven)
4 . . . h6 (see Chapter Twelve)
 lick If I•• •lla
Chapter Ten (pAges 82-87)
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. f3
4 . . . c6 (30=29-41----. 1 12)
5. e4 (30=26-44----. 7 6) S. Tartakower-G. Thomas (1923) 1
5. Qd2 (34=32-34----. 3 8) A. Fred-R. Wade (1956) 1/2
*5. Qd3 (50=0-50----.2 ) T. vogler-T. Grzesik (1978) 0
*5. e3 (50=0-50----.2 ) K. Seeck-R. Wocke (1990) 1

Chapter Eleven (pages 88-90)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Nbd7 4. f3
4 . . . e6 (33=34-33----. 45) R. Wemeck de Castro-S. Rivas Costa (1921)

Chapter Twelve (pAges 91-95)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3 . Bg5 Nbd7 4. f3
4 . . . h6 (32=23-45----. 84)
5. Bh4 (33=20-47----. 6 3)
5 . . . c5 (24=21-55----.2 9) L. Espig-K. Mueller (1974) 0
*5 . . . e6 (50=25-25----. 1 6) R. Reti-S. Tartakower (1919) 1/2
5 . . . c6 (28=15-57----. 1 4) T. Farrand-C. Frostick (1978) 1
*5 . . . g5 (50=0-50----. 4) E. Juglard-F. Meinsohn (1989) 1
*5. Bxf6 (45=19-36----. 1 1) A. Alekhine-E. Jesty (1926) 1
5. Bf4 (10=50-40----. 1 0) W. Duckworth-J. Rymuza (1987) 1

Chapter Thirteen (pages 96-100)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c6 (26=32-42----.2 33)
4. Bxf6 (26=31-43----. 41 )
4 . . . gxf6 (50=13-37----. 8 ) Wade-Zuidema (1963) 1/2
4 . . . exf6 (22=33-45----. 3 5)
5. e3
*5 . . . B£5 (25=45-30----. 8 9) S. Tartakower-E. Gruenfeld (1921) 1/2
5 . . . Bd6 (41=26-33----. 1 2) L. Vizantiadis-L. Pachman (1967) 0
5 . . . £5 (33=34-33----. 6 ) B. Gurgenidze-L. Stein (1972) 0
*5 . . . Qb6 (0=20-80----. 5 ) F. Van derVliet-G. Ligterink (1982) 0
*5 . . . Bb4 (100=0-0----. 1 ) N. Kuijf-M. De waal (1994) 1
*5. Qd3 (0=0-100----.2 ) Z. Gunev-N. Kirov (1983) 0
5. e4 (12=51-37----. 8 ) I. Vesela-M. Muresan (1974) 0
4. Qd2 (36=5-59----. 22) R. Spielmann-E. Bogoljubow (1925) 0

Chapter 14 (pAges 101-102)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c6
4. £3 (31=35-34----. 3 8)
*4 . . . Nbd7 (30=29-41----. 1 12) S. Tartakower-G. Thomas (1923) 1
*4 . . . B£5 (35=31-34----. 1 11) R. Reti-A. Kaufmann (1915) 1
4 . . . Qb6 (33=50-40----. 1 0) K. Richter-G. Rogmann (1937) 1
*4 . . . h6 (67=33-0----. 3 ) J. Orlowski-M. Rehm (1987) 1/2
*4 . . . Qa5 ( 50=0-50----.2 ) Bratsev-Krishtopa (1991) 1
Tbe Ilchter-VereSll Chllleleln Chess lepertlin
*4 . . . g6 (0=100-0---+ 1 ) I. Kourkounskis-H. Banikas (1995) 1/2

Chapter 15 (pa.ges 103-107)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c6
4. Qd3 (26=31-43---+ 41 )
4 . . . Nbd7 (41=26-33---+3 9) Elm-A. Lange (1948) 0
4 . . . Qa5 (16=26-58---+ 1 2) G. Miasoedov-I. Rabinov (1932) 0
4 . . . g6 (42=30-28---+7 ) L. Alburt-L. Polugaevsky (1966) 1
*4 . . . Na6 (0=34-66---+3) C. Lakdawala-L. Christiansen (1989) 0
* 4 . . . e6 (100=0-0---+ 1) L. Amman-S. Movsesian (1996) 1

Chapter 16 (pages 1 08-109)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 c6
4. e3 (17=48-35---+ 6 7)
*4 . . . B£5 (31=48-21---+ 6 1) K. Richter-C. Ahues (1936) 1
*4 . . . Nbd7 (18=28-54---+3 3) V. Stulik-v. Hanak (1944) 0
4 . . . Qb6 (0=59-41---+ 1 2) G. Veresov-N. Krogius (1953) 1/2
*4 . . . g6 (16=34-50---+ 6 ) P. Voiculescu-B. Sandor (1954) 0
*4 . . . e6 (0=0-100---+2 ) A. Roizman-V. Antoshin (1963) 0
*4 . . . b5 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) N. Velanda-G. Garcia Gonzales (1978) 0
*4 . . . h6 (0=100-0---+ 1 ) K. Berg-O. Moen (1994) 1/2

Chapter 17 (pa.ges 11 0-121)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 (33=33-34---+2 916 thru 1999) or (34=34-32---+ 942 from 1995-1999)
3 . . . g6 (32=37-31---+ 1 49)
4. Bxf6 (20=42-31---+48) G. Breyer-H. Muller (1921) 1/2
4. Qcll (24=43-33---+45)
4 . . . Bg7 (34=32-34---+2 6) K. Richter-E. Gruenfeld (1928) 1
4 . . . h6 (22=56-22---+ 9 ) E. Bogoljubow-G. Stahlberg (1951) 0
*4 . . . Nbd7 (20=40-40---+ 5 ) E. Loboda-v. Faibisovich (1975) 0
*4 . . . c6 (0=75-25---+4) M. Czerniak-M. Castillo (1950) 1/2
*4 . . . Ne4 (33=34-33---+ 3 ) A. Tolush-D. Bronstein (1945) 1
*4 . . . B£5 (0=0-100---+ 1 ) H. Bletz-E. Luethgens (1993) 0
4. e3 (22=34-44---+ 9 ) R. Grubiak-V. Karlik (1980) 0
3 . . . h6 (30=33-37---+ 80)
4. Bxf6 (34=36-30---+46)
4 . . . exf6 (37=33-30---+ 40)
5. e3 (44=34-22---+2 7)
5 . . . c6 (42=35-23---+2 1)
6. Bd3 (45=35-20---+20)
6 . . . £5 (22=56-22---+ 9 ) E. Colle-G. Thomas (1929) 1
6 . . . Bd6 (66=1-33---+ 6 ) Tal-Geller (1962) 0
*6 . . . Bb4 (50=50-0---+2 ) N. Padevsky-N. Kirov (1971) 1/2
*6 . . . g6 (0=100-0---+1) Y. Balashov-T. Giorgadze (1979) 1/2
*6 . . . Be6 (100=0-0---+ 1 ) M. Ehrke-R. Breyther (1990) 1
*6 . . . Bel (100=0-0---+ 1 ) P. Orgler-F. Weissenbich1er (1994) 1
 Back of the Bilk
*6. QB (0=0-100--'1) P. Stein-B. Colias (1987) 0
*5 . . . BfS (50=50-0--'4) H. Rossetto-A. Aparicio (1973) 1
*5 . . . Be6 (50=50-0--'2) O. Hardy-R. Thomas (1974) 1/2
*5 . . . Be7 (100=0-0--'1) M. Sabillo-V. Peysachovich (1990) 1
*5 . . . Bb4 (0=0-100--'1) J. Nagy-M. Sykora (1998) 0
*5. e4 (25=13-62--'8) M. Kupferstich-T. Haahr (1951) 0
*5. g3 (0=67-33--'3) Z. Mestrovic-K. Robatsch (1968) 1/2
*5. Qd3 (0=100-0--'1) K. Robatsch-R. Wade (1964) 1/2
*5. a3 (100=0-O--'1) J. Sofer-v. Sustek (1995) 1
*4 . . . gxf6 (16=51-33--'6) B. Spassky-G. Uusi (1960) 1/2
4. Bh4 (25=30-45--'31)
*4 ... e6 (12=38-50--'24) A. Thiellement-P. Lindblom (1954) 1/2
4 . . . BfS (2S=38-37--'16) A. Thiellement-F. Anderson (1954) 0
*4 . . . c6 (0=0-100--'2) v. Kuznetsov-K. Muchnik (1961) 0
*4 . . . Nbd7 (100=0-O--'1) R. Wade-Wo Ziltener (1994) 1
*4 . . . Nc6 (100=0-0--'1) R. Tavcar-J. Medvescek (1997) 1
*4 . . . cS (0=100-0--'1) H. Schutz-T. Hagemann (1984) 1/2
*4. Bf4 BfS (0=34-66--'3) 1. Stortl-R. Castelli (1968) 1/2
3 . . . Nc6 (47=18-35--'17)
*4. NB (45=1-54--'11) J. Hvenekilde-F. Jensen (1968) 0
4. e3 (42=16-42--'7) S. Tartakower-A. Nimzowitsch (1923) 1/2
4. B (40=40-20--'5) F. Thorbergsson-J. Torfason (1973) 1/2
*4. e4 (100=0-0--'1) F. Drill-E. Bomert (1991) 1
*4. Bxf6 (100=0-O--'1) S. Brynell-K. Evertsson (1997) 1

Chapter 19 (pages 125-129)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. BgS (45=26-29--'125)
3 . . . cxd4 (47=28-26--'75) Y. Shereshevsky-V. Zhidkov (1978) 1

Chapter 20 (pages 130-135)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. BgS
3 . . . Qb6 (60=20-20--'10) R. Vaganian-V. Kupreichik (1974) 1

Chapter 21 (pages 136-143)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 cS 3. dxcS
3 . . . QaS (33=17-50--'24)
4. e4 e4 (14=29-S7 --'14) J. Mazzoleni-1. Chemes (1969) 0
4. NB (23=25-52--'17) K. Smith-Wo Browne (1972) 0
3 . . . e6 (50=34-16--'6) Z. Mestrovic-G. Horvath (1981) 0

Chapter 22 (pages 144-151)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. BgS h6 (24=24-52--'26)
4. Bh4 (13=41-46--'15) D. Sahovic-J. Speelman (1 978) 1/2
4. Bxf6 Qxf6 5. e4 (44=0-5 6--'9 )
5 . . . d6 (40=27-33--'1 58) B. Enklaar-F. Van der Vliet (1976) 1
5 . . Bb4 (13 =41-46--'72) E. Bogoljubow-S. Vajnstejn (1916) 1
.
The Rlchter-Veresov Chameleon Chess Repertoire
Chapter 23 (pages 151-155)
1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 e6 3. e4 Bb4 (54=17-29--'37)
4. Bd3 (56=19-25--'16) M. Janata-J. Soler (1968) 1
4. eS (75=13-12--'8) A. Roesch-Demhardt (1990) 1
4. BgS (37=13-50--'8) G. Kleopas-Ko Chi (1966) 1/2

Chapter 24 (pages 156-161)

1. d4 N£6 2. Nc3 d6 (39=25-36--'21 1)
3 . e4 (40=32-28--'18,038) E. Schallopp-L. Paulsen (1883) 1
3. BgS Nbd7 4. e4 eS 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Bc4 0-0 7. 0-0 c6 (32=36-32--'34)
8. dxeS (33=0-67--'6) W. Swiedcki-A. KwUecki (1955) 1
8. ReI (25=50-25--'4) K. Rausch-L. Estrln (1912) 1

Chapter 25 (pages 161-169)

1. d4 dS 2. Nc3 (38=30-32--'1353)
2 . . . B£S (32=32-36--'173)
3. BgS (37=36-27--'43)
3 . . . c6 (33=44-23--'39) S. Levitsky-A. Rubinstein (1912) 1/2
3 . . . h6 (25=530-25--'12) A. Fernandez-J. Purgimon (1987) 1
3 . . . £6 (0=100-0--'1) L. Aronian-A. Yegiazarian (1996) 1/2
3 . . . N£6 (34=34-32--'661) I. Von Popiel-G. Marco (1890) 0
3. £3 (33=29-38--'68) J. Mieses-P. Johner (1922) 1
2�. . £5 (38=31-31--'684)
3. BgS (40=30-30--'395)
3 . . . g6 (45=24-31--'194)
4. e3 (42=29-29--'85)
4 . . . Bg7 (42=26-32--'71) F. Street-E. Formanek (1976) 1/2
4 . . . Nh6 (25=50-25--'8) A. Huss-E. Bhend (1988) 1/2
4. f3 (0=0-100--'3) D. Nuvolini-V. Kontic (1990) 0
3 . . . c6 (38=35-27--'141 ) K. Opocensky-S. Tartakower (1922) 1/2

Achenbach-Gustavson 1992 126
Adams-Karpov 1994 148
Afonin-Stotika 1998 159
Agagon-Barsenilla 1991 22
Alburt-Butnorius 1973 42
Alburt-Doda 1972 104
Alburt-Dzindzichashvili 1973 32
Alburt-Furman 1972 104
Alburt-Gufeld 1974 63, 66
Alburt-Kapengut 1972 88, 89
Alburt-Lutikov 1970 52
Alburt-Marjanovic 1978 111
Alburt-Romanishin 1972 98
Alburt-Savon 1970 43
Alburt-Tal 1972 83
Ananchenko-Olenin 1998 168
Anand-Karpov 1998 148
Andarias-Garcia Fernandez,C 1992
83
ArkeU-Thipsay 1987 51
Arkhipov-Czerna 1985 21
Aronian-Dragomeretsky 1995 164
Aronian-Usatchev 1996 154
Aronian-Yegiazarian 1996 163
Aseev-Hasangatin 1994 159
Atali k-Pedersen 1996 167
Atanasov-Krasenkov 1985 44
Auchenberg-Tretvold 1998 170
Bachmayer-Tober 1998 170
Bairamov-Smagin 1982 27, 28
Balashov-Georgadze,T 1979 116
Barabas-Horvath,Cs 1994 61
Basman-Martens 1967 123
Begun-Zagrebelny 1991 114
Belitsky-Sorokin,G 1994 157
Bellin-Duncan 1996 16
Bellin-Haritonov 1980 116
Bellin-Lanka 1994 43
Bellin-Lie,K 1996 32
Bellin-Ni kolac 1978 73
Bellin-Wemmers 1994 32
Bellon Lopez-Keene 1980 75, 78
Bellon Lopez-Spassky 1981 1 14
Bellon-Sosonko 1980 84
Players' Index
Berescu-Sharov 1992 159
Berg-Jacobsen 1988 52
Berg-Lane 1987 45
Berg-Thorhallsson 1994 35
Berkes-Volokitin 1997 126
Bletz-Junker 1991 158
Boeven-Bu Xiangzhi 1999 173
Boeven-Tokmachev 1999 174
Borst-Boesveld 1995 111
Borst-Jusupov 1998 170
Bozanic-Grosar 1999 174
Bozanic-Licina 1999 174
Bozanic-Mrkonjic 1995 164
Braga-Rodriguez,Am 1984 31
Brandics-Meszaros 1989 84
Brandner-Uhlmann 1998 170
Braun-Herndl 1989 25
Bronstein-Fischer 1960 39
Bronstein-Kremenietsky 1982 111
Bronstein-Vasjukov 1959 33
Bronstein-Veresov 1959 26
BryneU-Evertsson 1997 117
BryneU-Kengis 1992 61
Bujakin-Shamkovich 1963 17
Bukal-Rogulj 1998 170
Bukhman-Taimanov 1965 50
Burger-Henley 1983 98
Bykhovsky,An-Ljavdansky 1965 83
Capello-Lengyel 1979/80 7 7
Cech-Pekarek 1 9 9 7 1 14
Chepukaitis-Bujakevich 1996 131
Chepukaitis-Yemelin 1996 133
Chibukhchian-Oganesiants 1996
139
Chlaifer-Prange 1994 126
Cigan-Petschar 1989 114
Ciocaltea-Tabor 1971 38
Claesen-Hjelmaas 1990 164
Claesen-McShane 1998 170
Conrady-Honfi 1965 117
Corredor-Rodriguez,R 1992 127
Csizmadia-Forgacs,A 1994 141
Csizmadia-Nogradi 1994 153
Oay-Jung 1997 153
De la Villa-Polgar,S 1989 127
De la Villa-Wiersma 1997 125
Dembo-Moser 1998 159
Demeny-Bach 1993 26
Demir-TeU 1993 164
Dittmar-Bastian 1993 112, 1 18
Djurhuus-Liardet 1990 123
Djurhuus-Loysel 1991 110
Dolianin-Adorjan 1983 46
Donev-Schumi 1993 27
Donev-Weindl 1993 43
Donka-Hever 1991 138
Dorfanis-Atalik 1993 128
Drazic-Montheard 1998 140
Drazic-Nevednichy 1998 170
Dunnington-Lerner 1996 147
Dydyshko-Sadler 1997 50
Emms-Franklin 1987 132
Evertsson-Kallgren 1997 139
Fang-Brown,D 1990 75
Farkas-Lakat 1998 171
Fauland-Muse 1991 45
Feicht-Timm 1999 174
Fernandez-Adams 1994 84
Fernandez,A-Spassov 1995 33
Filchev-Pelitov 1956 26
Finegold-Shaked 1995 50
Floreen-Alburt 1993 16
Foetsch-Uhlmann 1998 89
Fomina-Hitzgerova 1998 171
Fred-Shapiro 1962 117
Freisler-Delchev 1997 74
Fuderer-Golombek 1953 26
Gabdarakhmanov-Vavlin 1987 26
Galinsky-Leontiev 1996 39
Galkin-Volzhin 1997 55, 58
Garcia,R-David 1995 148
Gelfand-Rozentalis 1992 149
Goldin-Aseev 1990 15
Goldin-Khalifman 1984 15
Goldsmith-Solomon 1999 174
Golubenko-Sepp 1996 133
Gores-Todorcevic 1995 145
Govedarica-Lanc 1987 104
The IIGhter-VereslI ChamelelD Chess lepart.ire
Govedarica-Mestel 1982 73
Grechkin-Sadomsky 1957 38
Grechkin-Stoliar 1954 14
Grimm-Tseitlin,Mark 1998 126
Gufeld-Uitumen 1971 34, 36
Guigonis-Kouatly 1998 146, 150
Guigonis-Marciano 1998 146
Gulko-Onischuk 1998 168
Gulko-Short 1988/89 169
Gurgenidze-Stein 1972 98
Guseinov-Gulko 1983 108
Gusev,V-Averkin 1978 83
Hachian-Dolinsky 1996 164
Hachian-Donchenko,A 1995 75
Hachian-Elkin 1986 27
Hachian-Ibragimov,A 1996 116
Hachian-Jirovsky 1996 34
Hachian-Koniushkov 1996 72
Hachian-Landa 1996 163
Hachian-Obukhov 1986 27
Hall-Khalifman 1996 147
Hall-Winge 1988 126
Hanreck-Hennigan 1993 31
Hansen-Andersen 1998 171
Hansen,L-Kristiansen,J 1990 166
Hartung-Hamelink 1998 156
Hebden-Milov 1995 14
Hector-Van Mechelen 1994 52, 55
Hector-Wang Zili 1992 137
Heitland-Rademacher 1987 140
Hermann-Meyer 1994 157
Heyken-Kengis 1995 85, 86
Hodgson-DeFirmian 1996 149
Hodgson-Enders 1994 149
Hodgson-Flear 1988 83
Hodgson-Gabriel 1995 148
Hodgson-Glavina 1993 133
Hodgson-Glickman 1992 144
Hodgson-Granda Zuniga 1996 149
Hodgson-Kellenberger 1994 147
Hodgson-Magem 1995 147
Hodgson-Yudasin 1994 149
Hoi-Gutman 1986 44
Hoi-Bang 1991 15
Hoi-Bareev 1988 163
Hoi-Brinck-Claussen 1985 15
Hoi-De Firmian 1985 52
Hoi-Geller 1990 64
Hoi-Hansen,C 1986 45
Hoi-Hansen,C 1987 46
Hoi-Hansen,C 1989 163
Hoi-Hjartarson 1985 33
Hoi-Lanc 1987 46
Hoi-Larsen 1985 52
Hoi-Lein 1984 50
Hoi-Schandorff 1987 46
Hoi-Smyslov 1985 52
Hoi-Sorensen 1991 39
Hoi-Tukmakov 1985 47
Hoi-Wessman 1990 97
Holving-Lappalainen 1999 174
Hort-Mista 1974 144
Hort-Ostermeyer 1982 42
Hort-Szmetan 1982 49
Hort-van der Wiel 1982 22
Hort-van der Wiel 1983 22
Hubel-Hans 1998 171
Huppert-Dalhoff 1992 153
Ibragimov,I-Karayannis 1996 33
Ibragimov,I-Tomasic,R 1994 154
Ignatiev-Rogovoi 1998 54, 55, 57
Ilczuk-Flis 1997 91
Ionescu-Emodi 1993 104
Iuldachev-Serper 1993 128
Jazbinsek-Maksimenko 1998 171
Jepson-Clemente 1995 125
Johnsen-Akesson 1996 96
Johnsen-Stein,B 1993 139
Johnsen,S-Bellin 1996 83
Johnsen,S-Nikolaidis 1998 92
Johnsen,S-Remlinger 1991 85
Juergens-Ernst 1992 74
Juglard-Moullain 1989 76
Juglard-Sellos 1989 39
Jurgens-Szalanczy 1992 34
Jurgens-Trichkov 1992 34
Kacheishvili-Buehl 1998 3 1
Kapengut-Petrosian,A 1 9 7 0 1 1 3
Kapengut-Vaganian 1 9 7 0 1 1 2
Karaklajic-Minic 1 9 6 2 3 9
Karayannis-Tsichlis 1998 171
Katsiris-Margaronis 1998 157
Keller-Bunk 1996 76
Keller-von Gleich 1989 92
Khalifman-Legky 1987 167
Khalifman-Lerner 1986 166
Khodos-Saveliev 1958 35
Kholmov-Petrushin 1983 2 1
Kiss-Sonkoly 1998 171
Klaric-Plaskett 1985 137
Klinger-Wildi 1992 133
Knaak-Enders 1998 150
Koeniger-Held 1993 1 23
Kogan-Oll 1994 22
Kolev-Dochev 1994 133
Kopriva-Van Gelder 1998 172
Kortchnoi-Lipnitsky 1952 21
Kottnauer-Walter 1966 32
Kourek-Knazovcik 1994 158
Kovacevic, V-Kristiansen,J 1983 167
Krasenkov-Degraeve 1990
127, 128
Kravtsov-Korpushin 1997 157
Kravtsov-Labunsky 1994 18
Krogius-Aronin 1952 24
Kubart-Hallbauer 1946 118
Kuehn-Wiechen 1997 163
Kuijf, H-Van Mil 1987 13
Kulaots-Veingold 1996 25
Kupreichik-Uhlmann 1981 149
Kupreichik-Westerinen 1975 31, 35
Kuzmin,A-Glek 1993 168
Lakdawala-Watson 1982 49
Lalev-Espig 1983 74
Landenbergue-Xu Jun 1977 132
Larsen-Kavalek 1970 50
Larsen-Westerinen 1972 97
Laszlo-Horvath,G 1992/92 132
Lauritsen-Grabliauskas 1998 172
Lehner-Zoltek 1998 172
Leilic-Akesson 1996 40
Lengyel-Kolarov 1962 34
Leriche-Courval 1998 164
Leuba-Kamber 1993 43
Leuba-Rosentalis 1991 111
Levitsky-Rubinstein 1912 25
Licayan-Primel 1995 39
Liebert-Uhlmann 1966 50
Lipski-Kholmov 1989 28
Loboda-Suetin 1988 175
Long-Sholl 1992 5, 25
Loomis-Donlan 1999 62
Lorscheid-Krizsany 1997 168
Lputian-Danner 1996 166
Lputian-Tukmakov 1994 148
Lputian-Wang 1994 130
Lys-Prandstetter 1992 111
MacDonald-Rix 1992 27
Maksimovic-Chandler 1983 84
Maksimovic-Geller 1977 92, 93
Maksimovic-Radulov 1983 93
Maksimovic-Rodriguez,Am 1980
17, 19
Maksimovic-Tatai 1979 17
Malich-Filip 1960 33
Manninen-Johnsen 1996 28
Manninen-Veingold 1998 172
Maryashin-Cherepkov 1981 31
Masalister-Kostic 1920 117
Mashinskaya-Jurkiewicz 1998 172
Mayer-Shibut 1991 128
Mesaros-Moltchanov 1997 125
Meshkov-Sergienko 1999 174
Mestel-Webb 1975 82
Mestrovic-Banas 1981 17
Mestrovic-Bobotsov 1971 53
Mestrovic-Brenjo 1991 64
Mestrovic-Cirkvencic 1994 136

Mestrovic-Damjanovic 1996 46
Mestrovic-Deze 1969 42
Mestrovic-Ferges 1997 138
Mestrovic-Gligoric 1971 18
Mestrovic-Grosar 1996 113
Mestrovic-Horvath,G 1981 140
Mestrovic-Ivanovic,Z 1996 64
Mestrovic-Kecic 1995 40
Mestrovic-Kodric 1995 65
Mestrovic-Kurajica 1968 40
Mestrovic-Medic 1996 141
Mestrovic-Popov,L 1974 16
Mestrovic-Schalkx 1998 172
Mestrovic-Sermek 1996 14
Mestrovic-Tomasic,R 1995 141
Mestrovic-Tratar 1996 163
Mestrovic-Vukic 1974 54
Miagmasuren-Browne 1982 60
Mihailovsky-Kostin 1996 34
Mihailovsky-Yandemirov 1996 61
Mikenas-Savon 1970 50
Miles-Andersson 1982 62
Miles-Christiansen 1982 61
Miles-Hort 1982 31
Miles-King 1982 61
Miles-Olafsson, H 1982 62
Miles-Portisch 1982 61
Miles-Spassov 1982 111
Miles-Speelman 1982 62
Miles-Tisdall 1982 97, 99
Miles-Watson 1982 42
Milov,V-Chuchelov 1995 148
Minasian-Glek 1992 147
Mohrlok-Fuchs 1967 88
Moonen-Euwe 1961 39
Morozevich-Ehlvest 1993 94
Morozevich-Ehlvest 1993 93
Morozevich-Lazarev,V 1993 83
Morozevich-Malaniuk 1994
103, 104
Morozevich-Timoshenko 1994 77
Mortensen-Larsen,K 1998 172
Mueller,K-Rodriguez Gonzales,J
1974 138
Muratov-Airapetian 1981 103
Muratov-Kiselev 1988 53
Muratov-Lipman 1980 52
Muratov-Maliutin 1991 49
Muratov-Tsiganov 1996 64
Muratov-Umansky 1989 77
Murawski-Jurkiewicz 1998 172
Navinsek-Avrukh 1998 172
Negulescu-Chernov 1998 173
Negulescu-Schneider,A 1993 73
Negulescu-Tomescu 1993 104
Nei-Tai manov 1981 127
Neukirch-Uhlmann 1972 54
Nezhmetdinov-Gurgenidze 1958
42, 45
Nikolaev-Lastin 1998 166
Novak-Mauro 1996 139
Oeksuz-Litiainen 1998 173
Ochoa-Browne 1989 127
Opitz-Kos 1994 137
Opocensky-Blatny 1965 157
Opocensky-Euwe 1922 38
Otero-Camacho 1998 55
Ovsejevitsch-Krivoshey 1995 158
Palatnik-Kupreichik 1974 15
Parker-Lalic 1997 149
Pasman-Georgiev,Kir 1977 101
Pasman-Stean 1980 102
Peicheva-Arakhamia 1993 34
Peicheva-Komarov 1992 33
Pert-Moskovic 1998 173
Peters-Browne 1981 63
Piket-Oll 1993 145
Plaskett-Handley 1989 131
Plaskett-Hazai 1985 62, 65
Platonov-Gufeld 1971 43, 47
Polgar,Z-Beliavsky 1991 167
Poluliakhov-Glek 1990 169
Pomes-Corral Blanco 1998 146
Pomes-Garcia Ilundain,D 1998 148
Pomes-Lalic 1995 147
Porper-Smirin 1991 44
Portisch,G-Brandics 1993 153
Portisch,G-Horvath,T 1991 7 7
Portisch,G-Tunik 1 9 9 2 75
Portisch,G-Varga 1994 27
Potterat-Riand 1993 27
Pribyl-Hazai 1978 132, 133
Prins-Lehmann 1960 113
Pyshkin-Stapanov 1990 112
Rajna-Csom 1974 1 7
Rajna-Vogt 1976 7 7
Ravisekhar-Spassov 1984 6 2
Rehm-Krebs 1995 145
Reichmann-Lutz 1998 166
Rejcheva-Ionov 1992 163
Remizov-Begunov 1994 165
Remizov-Goldin 1992 15
Reprintsev-Evelev 1999 174
Reprintsev-Grigoriants 1999 163
Reprintsev-Kachar 1999 175
Reynolds-Nunn 1987 53, 56
Richter-Baratz 1931 8
Richter-Carls 1933 40
Richter-Hobensee 1924 156
Richter-Kretschmar 1925 27
Richter-Reinhardt 1937 38
Richter-Rogmann 1937 101
lick If the Bilk
Richter-Weissgerber 1933 28
Richter-Whitaker 1928 7, 24
Richter-Baratz 1931 25
Richter-Kretschmar 1925 1 14
Richtrova-Michaliek 1996 145
Rodriguez,A-Andersson 1978 44
Rodriguez,O-Christiansen 1982 49
Rodriguez,O-Lautier,J 1998 92
Rogers-Goh Cheng-Hong 1982 115
Romcovici-Panus 1993 157
Romero Holmes-Magalotti 1987 46
Rosenvald-Puuska 1998 156
Rossetto-Darga 1968 73, 103
Rossetto-Gligoric 1967 51
Rossetto-Gufeld 1974 84, 85
Rozanski-Kraskiewicz 1973 118
Sadvakasov-Blehm 1993 65
Sagalchik-Kharlov 1995 72
Sagalchik-Sveshnikov 1995 163
Sahovic-Quinteros 1979 128
Sahovic-Ribli 1977 132
Sahovic-Skembris 1989 103
Sahovic-Tseshkovsky 1979 88
Sakharov-Shiyanovsky 1958 39
Schiller-Ligterink 1986 83
Schmitt-Dautov 1991 98, 100
Schmittdiel-Mainka 1988 53
Schneider-Leko 1991 96
Schneider-Odendahl 1993 15
Schneider,S-Kogan,A 1996 149
Schoellman n-Uhlmann 1994 93
Seledkin-Smit 1970 42
Semkovich-Czauszev 1976 117
Shabanov-Tsesarsky 1987 41
Shagalovich-Sakharov 1969 54
Shagalovich-Shamkovich 1969 53
Shereshevsky-Kolev 1994 148
Shereshevsky-Zhidkov 1978 127
Shipman-Dzindzichashvili 1993
104, 106
Shipman-Waitzkin 1993 35
Shirazi-Gofshtein 1998 173
Shirazi-Sokolov,I 1998 92
Shrentzel-Hodgson 1988 17
Skembris-Kourtesis 1997 166
Skembris-van der Wiel 1977 21
Smyslov-Geller 1977 73, 77
Smyslov-Gufeld 1989 63, 69
Soetewey-Gulbas 1998 126
Sokolov,A-Nalbandian 1995 145
Sokolov,I-Nikolic 1998 167
Soos-Leko 1993 132
Soylu-Franzoni 1992 45
Spal-Pachman 1992 53
Spangenberg-Seitaj 1998 61
Spassky-Filip 1956 28
The Rlchter-Veres., Ch••eleln Chess Repertaire
Spassky-Kortchnoi 1977 114, 119
Spassky-Uusi 1960 1 14
Spielmann-Bogoyubov 1925 25
Steinbacher-Pogorelov 1992 92
Steinberg-Anka 1993 75
Suetin-Balashov 1978 115
Sveshnikov-Romanishin 1977 138
Svobodova-Movsesian 1994 60
Szuk-Dely 1993 158
Tal-Geller 1962 115
Tal-Vladimirov 1961 33
Tapaszto-Barus 1988 149
Tartakover-Nimzovich 1923 117
Tartakower-Yates 1923 88
Thorallsson-Bricard 1993 130
Tikhonov-Neverov 1996 62
Tischbierek-Uhlmann 1983 55
Tolnai-Fogarasi 1995 145
Tompos-Heilig 1998 173
Tompos-Kahn 1993 88
Tomson-Kogan,S 1959 26
Torok-Papp 1994 152
Toth-Nagy 1994 125
Tseitlin,Mikh-Pokojowczyk 1978
125
Tseitlin,Mikh-Taborov 1978 126
Tukmakov-Alavkin 1995 175
Vaganian-Jansa 1974 131
Vaganian-Kasparov 1979 157
Vaganian-Knaak 1979 128
Vaganian-Kupreichik 1974 131
Vaganian-Passerotti 1977 131
Vaisman-Miralles 1992 131
Vaisman-Pytel 1972 15
Vaklinov-Pap 1996 137
Vamos-Nagy 1994 137
Van der Werf-Topakian 1988 13
van Geet-Gereben 1965 123
Van Mil-Bosch 1995 42
Van Mil-Geenen 1988 54
Varga-Lengyel 1994 164
Vasiukov-Pribyl 1977 156
Vatter-Neunhoffer 1986 27
Vera-Garcia Ilundain 1996 169
Vera-Grivas 1989 167
Vera-Paneque 1995 167
Veresov-Abakarov 1974 32
Veresov-Bronstein 1959 3 3
Veresov-Buniatian 1965 11, 6 3
Veresov-Gromek 1 9 5 8 108
Veresov-Heuer 1955 14
Veresov-Kortchnoi 1967 53
Veresov-Kostro 1958 109
Veresov-Krupsky 1963 62
Veresov-Liavdansky 1974 33
Veresov-Makagonov 1938 27
Veresov-Peterson 1958 109
Veresov-Radashkovich 1969 54
Veresov-Shagalovich 1955 113
Veresov-Shagalovich 1957 62
Veresov-Shashin 1965 163
Veresov-Smoyaninov 1963 10, 15
Veresov-Suetin 1953 62
Veresov-Suetin 1957 108
Veresov-Uusi 1960 109
Veresov-Yuferov 1974 55
Veresov-Zheliandinov 1969 54
Veresov-Zhurakhov 1955 113
Vidovic-Jovanovic 1998 146
Vincent-Simic 1988 175
Vogler-Friedrich 1993 76
Vogler-Kurz 1991 137
Vogler-Munch 1996 76
Volkov-Malaniuk 1998 165
Voloshin-Gufeld 1993 63, 67
Voloshin-Wojtkiewicz 1993 98
Voloshin-Yandemirov 1993 63
Voorema-Bronstein 1981 83
Vyzhmanavin-Bronstein 1981 50
Wade-Palliser 1998 13
Wade-Shah 1998 173
Walti-Klauser 1987 127
Watson-Poeksteiner 1987/91 32
Watson,R-Schmall 1988 140
West-Ahn 1998 17
West-Curtis 1992 128
West-Seredenko 1992 126
White-Bjornsson 1999 175
Winants-Cifuentes 1995 159
Wockenfuss-Gutman 1985 44
Wockenfuss-Timman 1977 75
Yandemirov-Kalegin 1988 40
Yermolinsky-Kaidanov 1993 51
Zaitsev,A-Krogius 1962 26
Zakharov-Gaister 1961 39
Zakharov-Krogius 1962 40
Zakharov-Yudovich 1962 13
Zakharov-Zaitsev,I 1963 39
Zakhvatov-Bouillot 1998 173
Zambor-Kundrik 1997 130
Zilberman-Rotman 1993 2 1
Ziochevsky-Bischoff 1 9 9 3 146
Zurmely-Giffard 1989 101
 The Authors

Eduard Gufeld was born in Kiev in 1936. He re�

ceived his Grandmaster title in 1967.
His chess credits include playing in 8 U.S.S.R.
championships, and winning a number of first
places in important tournaments. He is very well
known as the Trainer/Coach of Women's World
Champion Maya Chiburdanidze.
He has written many books (70+) and articles.
His friends are worldwide and consider him af�
fable and with a great sense of humor. He is on
the FIDE Commission for Chess in Art.
His skill against top GMs is well�known, with
victories over ex�world champions Smyslov, Tal,
and Spassky, and many other GMs such as Bron�
stein, Stein, Polugaevsky, Vaganian and many
more. His book. My Life in Chess (see the Bibliog�
raphy) is full of great stories, games, and his love
of chess for which GM Gufeld is so well known.

Researcher Oleg Stetsko was born in 1935. He

served in the S oviet Air Force for 28 years and
left with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.
His chess credits include the title of National
Master ( 1 968) , Trainer/manager of the Soviet
Men's Team ( 1 980� 1 990) , and Deputy Manager
of the Syndicated Chess Club ( 1 99 1 � 1 992 ) . He
also worked at the 64 Chess Observer from 1 993�
1 997 and authored several articles.
Books he has co�authored with Gufeld: Win�
ning with the Torre Attack (1 9 93), Giuoco Piano
(1 996), the Complete Dragon (1 997), and the Caro�
Kann Defense, Smyslov System (1 998).
 Colophon
The body of The Richter..Veresov Chameleon
Chess Repertoire was set in Adobe's Kinesis, a
Multiple Master font. Other fonts used were ITC
Officina, and Compacta. Diagrams and chess
symbols were from Thinkers' Press, Inc.'s C.R.
Horowitz chess font, set at 14/14.

Art Direction and Design: Bob Long

Cover Design and Chapter Heads: Bass Long
Original Translator: Unknown
Retranslation: Bob Long
Proofing: Mark Donlan & Bob Long
Keyboarding: Bob Long

Diskette
A 3.50 inch PC ..diskette is available from
Thinkers' Press (for $ 1 5 + $2 for S&H) which
contains the games, analysis, and evaluations in
this book, and so much more. To properly
investigate the validity of evaluations and new
ideas, Junior5 was used extensively, sometimes
for days on one line. When combined with
It educated analyses {guesses in the (right' direc­

tion) ," some exciting discoveries were made or

Itopinions" changed. For example, see the

comment on page 128 concerning intuition (the

disk has the full details) . It seems a shame to let
6-7 months worth of hard work disappear only
because the book has been finally issued.
 "Mr. Bob Long, you are the toughest
chess publisher I have ever worked for! "
-GM Eduard Gufeld

Does this say something good about Thinkers' Press or something bad about many
other chess publishers? Probably both.
This book was a difficult project because of translations, additions, misunder�
standings, and the fact that besides a few limited sections in some openings' books,
there wasn't much around on the Richter�Veresov. We couldn't even locate a copy�
right free photo of Kurt Richter, and you wouldn't believe the number of respected
sources we tried! Someone will turn up photos after this book is published, it al�
ways works that way.
We take our work seriously at Thinkers' Press. I have beaten this book to death
analytically and proofing�wise. Of course there is still that fear of missing some�
thing, a wrong name or attribution, whatever. But, it has to go to the printer. I
want to thank Mark Donlan for his work in ferreting out errors in the first couple
of drafts sent to him. He also made some suggestions we have incorporated.
Though I am sure there were times that the jovial Grandmaster from LA wanted
to wring my neck, I think he will enjoy this collaborative product. We met, by acd�
dent, at the Magic Castle in Hollywood, California in 1998 while I there on a buy�
ing mission for Chess co. Within a few weeks, a proposal was produced.
I had been unable to get several top writers to work on this subject for us. Too
bad for them. I discovered many neat things about this opening I have played for
25 years. Here is a quick synopsis:
a) The Richter�Veresov can be just as combinative and complex as any other
opening;
b) It is rich in transpositions to a number of favorable �Pawn openings;
c) This opening is still being played with regularity, and has even been played
many times by Super GM Morozevich, one of the top players in the world!
d) After seeing GM Tony Miles' treatment, I have come to the conclusion that
the only thing wrong with this opening is that most of the other players who have
White don't play it very well, or have a very limited creative imagination.
e) I do not buy the spewings by GMs that 2. Nc3 in place of 2. c4 is a question�
able move. Should Kasparov or Anand ever take up the Richter�Veresov, if only for
a couple games, writers from all over the world will be tripping over their feet try�
ing to explain the "genius" of 2. Nc3 . Look at the Players' Index.
The point is, ifyou feel comfortable with something, and you get decent games,
play it. Many of my opponents become flustered after seeing 2. N c3 and almost
without thinking they play 2 . . . e6 or 2 . . . g6. After 3. e4 they are often very, very
Thl Rlchter-Veresov ChalleleoD Chlss leperllire
unhappy to be playing a system they do not know. As a result, I have played about
25 A1ekhine�Chatard Attacks in the French. If I played a straight 1. e4, I would see
50% Sicilians, and maybe 25% Frenches (and few would let me walk into the 6. h4
line) . But, by playing L d4, I get about 50% Frenches and a lot more ACAs.
Everyone involved in this project should thank Jimmy Adams and Robert Bel�
lin for their early work on this opening. Lev Alburt played the R�V in many of his
earlier games.
Systems involving f3 often produced losses for White. When someone would
produce a book, tract, or piece on what I called the Gligorich line: 3 . . . Nbd7, I en�
joyed the uthought" of the possibilities of 4. Nf3 e6 5. e4 h6 6. Bh4 g5 7. Bg3 Nxe4 8.
Nxe4 dxe4 9. H?, but never the results! So it looks like, for me, the move must be 5.
e3. You would think with all the problems on Black's kingside that White would
win hand over fist, but reality shows he doesn't do that well.
The weird thing is, Master Veresov just kept coming up with solutions, and
often they were good ones. Master Richter was unflappable when he played the
Classical French. He would win as White with one of his unstoppable sacrificial
attacks, only to meet a Unew" move in his next encounter, and from there also pro�
duce something new and winning. To Richter and Veresov, this opening was meat
and potatoes.
Years ago I hated the thought, as well as the reality, of transpositions. Today, I
see them as just another tool in our bag of tricks to befuddle our opponent. I am
not possessed with an amazing memory like some players but, by understanding a
few things about this opening, I manage to make a decent ubook move" now and
then.
When Black would start playing . . . Bb4 against me without even a d5 to his
credit, it was hard work dealing with a Umodified MacCutcheon French:' My re�
sults were decent, but Gufeld's mastery, intuition, and experience has shown me
some much better methods in Chapters 19�25. If you wonder what to do against
3 . . . N c6, that move so often employed by chess computers, consult Chapter 17.
I thank GM Gufeld for his ufaith" in my psychology (see page 5 ) .
Scattered hither and yon I have placed a few advertisements for Thinkers' Press
products to fill some space. I know this bothers a small few, but we have bills to pay
like anyone else, and must produce our own PR. If we had to rely on the goodwill
of reviewers and chainstore booksellers, I would have been out of this trade a long
time ago.
I thank you reader, for purchasing this product. I hope it meets with your satis�
faction, and that you win many games.
Bob Long
Publisher
October 1999