INDIA’S ONLY CHESS QUARTERLY

Vol. 3 No. 2 Rs. 4-50 June, 198

V UN I ILIN 1 N
Pagi

The IM Circuit A’ Ran Sekhar ... I ]

Queen's Indian-4 a3 — M. Aaron 5

National Team Championship ... ... 10
Breaking the Balance '..................... . . 12
Chess Tricks ... ... 13
King and Pawn Endings- R. P Sa pre 15
1
Thipsay Triumphs at Bangalore
S. C. Saha .. ... 17
From + To +----- J. N. Parameswaran ... 20
Basic Strategies ... 21
News from States .. 24
International News ' 30
FIDE Section 39
Games Section .. 40
Book Review ... ... 44

'Oncial Organ of ’he V ;

Ail India Chess Federation À I /?
AX \\ ‘ // Æ
Corporation Recreation Centre. \\i\j \J[// ’
----
„ Lake Area, Madras.600 034
.___
 CHESS INDIA
14, 5th Cross Street; Shastri Nagar, Madras-600 020.

Owned by-: • Collaborators :

National Chess Trust of India, Hariharan V.
24, Community Centre, East of Kailash. , Meetei A. B.
New Delhi - HO 065 Pârameswaran T. N.
Ravikumar V.
Publisher : Ravisekhar R.
S. K. Tarapore, Sahu S. C.
Zal Irani Building, 14, Arathoon Road, Sapre R. B.
Madras-600 013.
Correspondents
Editor ;
Andhra K. Sivaprasad
Manuel Aaron,
14, 5th Cross Street, Shastri Nagar, Bombay N. Neelakantan
Madras-600 020. Bihar Syed Masoodur R
Delhi V. P. Jain
Assistant Editor : Karnataka. D. V. Venkatram:
K. V. Shantharam Madhya Pradesh V. K. Rathi
Tamil Nadu V. Kameswaran
Tinted at : Uttar Pradesh A. K. Singh
tex Printers, 233-A, R. K. Mutt Road, Vidharba Abhay Agrawal
lylapore, Madras-600 004. West Bengal S. S. Roy
tubscription Rates : Advertisement Rates :
India Sri Lanka Others (Handsome commission offered)
ingle Copy Rs. 4-50 — — Indian
"our Copies Rs. 16-00 $3 $ 5 Back cover Rs. 1000
Ud copies are available at reduced rates, Inside front cover Rs. 1000
nagural issue Rs. 2-00 Inside back oover Rs. 750
)ecember ’79 (Bhilwara Full page Rs. 500
pecial) Rs. 2-50 Half page Rs. 300
‘lease send M. O. or Postage stamps. Quarter page Rs. 150-
Symbols used in this issue:
+ White slighty better + Black is slightly better
+ White is clearly better + Black is clearly better
+ - White is winning - + Black is winning

INFORMANT NO « 30
The AU India Chess Federation will be getting direct from Yugoslavia 7tr -7
of Informant No 30 within a few weeks. As the publishers have increased the
to U. S. $ 17.60-and as the American dollar has become dearer, Vol 30 wi
Rs. 100 each, inclusive of registered post cost. The federation can also <
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings at 45% discount if firm orders are placed.
June 25 there will be a change in secretary of the federation. Meanwhile,
all payments for Informants and E. C. O.s by Money Order or by Bank
on New Delhi favouring, the All India Chess.&FederatioUi.,4fl^ the.^tsaa;
M>. R S. Tiraati. «U49 KSnÜN^war.

BSfo raatttfts be nepS^dy r cepiuntee'-tt

 THE IM CIRCUIT
By R. RAVI SEKHAR

convincing two point margin. This gained

Yap an IM norm.

I took the lead with three straight wins

T. N. Parameswaran is the on looker.
The 2nd leg of the Asian International
Master Circuit held at Baguio City, Philippines
from 24 March to 5 April was won by 21
year old Andronico Yap (Philippines) with a
but got bogged down by draws while young
Yap streaked ahead. Two losses to Ardijansyah
in the 7th and to the new IM Maninang in
the 11th round left me one point short of the
IM norm. But, I had the consolation of
defeating GM Balinas and obtaining a FIDE
Master norm.
Another player who missed the IM norm
was Handoko (Indonesia) whose chances
were dimmed by our Parameswaran in their
crucial last round encounter. Parameswaran
otherwise seemed to have missed winning
chances in quite a few games, possibly being
tired after playing the Asian Cities and IM
tournaments at Hong Kong prior to this event.
Andrian Ros Pacis (Philippines) with one
Master result from last years GM tournament
struck a bad patch to score only 5J- points.

Player Country Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Total

'I '•

A. Yap (Phil) 2260 X i 1 0 0 i 1 1 1 >1 1 1 1 1 10

IM Ardijansyah (Indo) 2420 i x 1 1 1 i 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 i 8
Handoko (Indo) 2390 o i X i 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 8
R. Ravi Sekhar (Ind) 2380 1 0 i X 1 1 0 i 1 i i 1 1 1 8
GM R. Balinas (Phil) 2380 1 0 0 0 X 1 1 1 Hi 1 1 1 71
IM R. Rodriguez (Phil) 2375 1 i 0 1 0 X i 1 1 1 0 :1 1 1 71
IM R. Maninang (Phil) 2345 0 0 1 1 1 i X 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
IM R. scarinas> (Phil) 2400 0 1 i 1 0 0 !• X 1 0 1 0 1 1 6
Parames\ n (Ind) 2330 0 0 i 1 1 0 0 0 X i 1 1 1 1 6
Bernal (Phil) 2275 0 0 0 i i 0 1 1/ i X i 1 1 I 6
Pacis (Phil) 2360 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 i i X 1 0 1 51
J. Liew (Mai) 2280 0 1 1 0 i 1 0 1 0 0 0 X 0 1 41
C. Caturla (Phil) 2315 0 1, 0 0 0 0 1 i 0 i 1 1 X o 41
S. Aiitonang (Indo) — 0 1 i 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 X 21

Averagf/' infa = 2339.

Internaisu " Result = 9 points,
s- w ‘ ■ i
FIDE Master Result = 7 points.

1
12. Bf5! ef5 13. Nd5 Qd8 14. Ne7 Ne7 15. d5î
Ne5 16. Ne5 Qd5 (Black seems to have sur­
vived the worst by returning the sacrifised
piece but White gives up yet another piece
to keep the attack raging—the game is a good
example of decisive lead in development)
17. Qh5+ g618. Qh4! Qe5 19. Bg5 00 20. Rael
Qd5 21. Re7h5 22. Bf6 Rf7 23. Re8+ Rf8
24. Qg5 Qf7 25. Rf8+ Kf8 26. Qh6+ 1-0.
15. Bf4! Rad8 16. b4 Rfe8 17. Be5! Rc8
18. Qb3 Rcd8 19. Radi a6 20. Na4 Ng4
21. Bh3 f5 22. Nb6 1-0. A good example
of the pressure that can be developed on a
isolated pawn with the two bishops.
Here is an interesting rook ending from
the game Ramesh Jhunjhunwala = R. Ravi
sekhar.

GAMES FROM THE SINGAPORE LEG

1. Maninang 4- Gunawan
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nf3
Qb6 6. Bd3 Bd7 (better is 6.. ,cd4 7. cd4 Bd7)
7. dc5 Bc5 8. 00 a5 9. Nbd2 Qc7 10. Nb3 Ba7
11. Bf4 Nge7 12. Bg3 a4 13. Nbd2 Na5 14. Qe2
Rc8 15. Rael h6 16. b3 0-0 17. c4 ab3 18. ab3
Qb6 19. Bh4 Rfe8 20. Rbl Nac6 21. Rbcl Nb4
22. Bbl Nec6 23. Rfdl Na5 24. g4! Bb8 25. g5
Bc7 26. gh6 Bd8 27. hg7 Kg7 28. Khl Rh8
29. Rgl 4* Kg8 30. Bd8 Qd8 31. c5 Qe7 Play continued 1.. Rc7 2. a7 (if 2. Kd2
32. Qe3 Ke8 33. Rg4 Nac6 34. Rcgl Kd8 Rf7 3. a'/ Kf4 transposes) 2.... Rf7! 3. Rh8
35. Qc3 Na6 36. b4 Nb4 37. Rb4 Nb4 38. Qb4 d4-f-! 4. cd4 ed4-t- 5. Kd4 Ra7 and the game
Qc5 39. Qb7 Qf2 40. Qb4 Bc6 41. Qd6+ Ke8 ended in a draw. Let us examine the interes­
42. Bg6! d4 and 1-0. (43. Qe6+ Kh8 44. Qf6+ ting possibility of 3. f4 when White tries to
plan Be4 4—) exploit the awkward position of the Black
King, since control of the passed pawn frôm
2. A Chia - Goh the adjacent side is an unusual theme rarely
1. Nf3 15 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. d4 Nf6 encountered in tournament chess.
5. 0-0 d6 6. c4 0-0 7. d5 c5! 8. Nc3 Na6
9. Nh4 Nc7 10. Qd3 b5 11. cb5 a6 (An interes­ (1) 3. f4 ef44-? 4. Kf3 Kf6 5. Kf4 and
ting combination of Leningrad Dutch and Black is in Zugzwang
Benko gambit — Black soon obtains an ideal (2) 3. f4 e4 4. Rd8 Ra7 5. Rd5-f- Kg6
position) 12. ba6 Ba6 13. Qc2 Rb8 14. Rdl 6. Ke4 emerging two pawns ahead
Qd7 15. h3 Nb5 16. Nb5 Qb5 17. Bf3 Qc4
18. Qc4 Bc4 19. b3? Ne4 20. Rbl Nc3 21. Bg5 (3) 1. f4 d4 4- ! 4. cd4 ed44- 5. Kd4 Kf4
Re8! 22. Rbcl Ndl 23. Rc4Nc3 24. g4 fg4 and we reach a curious ending where both
25. Bg4 Rb4 26. Bd7 Rd8 27. Be6+ K18 kings must oppose each other across the «Ï’
28. KHRc4 29. bc4Ra8 30. f4Ne4 31. Nf3 line: eg. 6. Kd5 Kf5 7. Kd6 Kf6 8. Kc6 Kf5
Ra2 32. Bh4 Nd24- 33. Nc2 Rd2 0-1. 9. Kb5 Kf4! (not 9... Kf6 10. Kb64--)
10. Kb6 Rf6-|- 11.4Kc7 Rf7-f- 12.Kc6Kf5!~
3. R. Ravisekhar 4- Kuh No amount of triangulation by White can lead
1. d4 Nf6 2. C4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 to any progress and the game is drawn- a very
c5 5. Ne2 cd4 6. ed4 d5 7. a3 Be7 8. cd5 instructive study—Readers are invited to woik-
ed5 (Exchanging pieces by 8. . Nd5 is pro­ out the result of the variation with 2 Kd2 Rf7
bably better) 9. g3 Nc6 10. Bg2 Be6 II. 0-0 3 a7 Kf4 4 Ke2 d4 5 c4 and decide whether
Qd7 12. Nf4 0-0 13. Ne6 Qe6 14. Rel Qd7 Black can still draw.
READERS WRITE
Referring to ‘Another study Busted” by Mr. T. Swaminathan in your March
1981 issue, page 9, I would like to point out that he has conveniently ignored 7. . a4
instead of 7. .g2 after the variation 1. Kc8 Be2 2. Nf7 Bb8 3. Nd8 Bd6 4. Ne6 Bb8
5. Nc7 g3 6. Na6 Ka6 7. Kb8. Though Black ultimately loses, it is anybody’s guess
howmany more moves are required after 7. . a4. What I want to say is that in the
enthusiasm to reduce the number of moves in the solutionjustice has not been done-to
the study.
—K. Subrahmanyam
Rourkela.
Theory
Queen’s Indian - 4 a3
1 d4 NfS 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 a3
This move was introduced into practice by
Tigran Petrosian. White prevents the usé of
the b4 square by the Black Bishop and intends
in case of 4. . Bb7 5 Nc3 Be7 to play d4-d5
restricting the range of activity of the Bishop
at b7 and making Black’s task of developing
his Queen-side very difficult. One example:
6 d5 0-0 7 e4 ed 8 ed Re8 9 Be2 Na6 10 0-0
Nc5 11 Nd4 a5 12 Bf4+ Arvind Aaron-
K.V.S. Rajan (Poona, 1980) However, the move
4 a3 is not active enough and Black can
equalise with precise play. Black must con­
tinue with the principal idea of the Queen’s
Indian Defence limiting the pressure of White’s
pieces in the centre, or by continuing d7-d5
creating an outpost in the centre. These ideas
will be explored in this article.
4...... Bd7
Th’s is the most popular continuation. The
immediate 4. . Ba6 has also been tried. 5 Qc2
(5 e3 d5 6 Nbd2 Be7 7 b4 00 8 Bb2 Nbd7
9 Qa4 Qc8 10 Rcl c5 11 Be2!+ Gheorgiu-
Raikovic, Lone Pine 1980) 5 ... .d5 6 cd (if 6
e3 c5 or if 6 Nbd2 c5) 6...... ed 7 Nc3+ c6!
(7. . . .Be7 8 g3+ 7. . . . Bd6 8Bg5 c6 9 e4!
with initiative) 8 g3 Bd6 9 Bg2 0-0 10 0-0 Re8
11 Rel Nbd7 12 Bg5 h6 13 Bf6 Nf6 14 e4
(14 Nh4!?+)del5Ne4Ne4 16Re4Re4 17 Qe4
Rc8 (threat.......Ba6-c4-d5) 18 Ne5 Bxe5
(18...... c5? 19 Nc6 and then 20 d5) 19 de5 Qd3 8 e3 c5 9. Be2 Ne4 10. 0-0 Nc6 11. de Nxc3
20 Qd3 Bd3 21 Bh3! Re8 22 f4+ 4.......c5 has
also been tried. After 4... ,c5 White has two
major alternatives (a) 5 d.5 and (b) 5 e3.
(a)
5. d5 ed 6. cd g6 (6... b5?) 7. Nc3 Bg7
8. Bg5 (also interesting is 8 d61? which has
not been seen in practical play) 8., .0-0 '9. e4 5e3g6!? (The latest innovation in this
(also good is 9. e3 d6 10. Nd2 h6 11. Bh4 variation) 6 Nc3 Bg7 7 Be2 0-0 8 0-0 Bb7
,Na6 12. Be2 Nc7 13. e4 b5 14. 00 Qd7 9 b4 cd 10 ed d5 11 c5 Ne4 12 Qc2 Nc6!
5
By MANUEL AARON
15. Qc2 Re8 16. Rfel Bb7 17. h3 Petrosian-
Larsen, Palma-de-Mallorca, 1968) 9....d6
10. Nd2 Re8 11. Be2a6 12. a4 Nbd7 13. 0-0
Qc7 (more flexible was 13....h6 in view of
the need to play the Queen to d7. The game
Ftacnik-Vadaz, Trnava 1979 went 13..h6
14. Bh4 g5 15. Bg3 Ne5 16. f4 gf 17. Bf4 Rb8
18. h3?? Qd7!=) 14.Khl h615 Bh4 g5 16. Bg3
Ne5 17. f4 with a good game in Olafsson -
Andersson, Las Palmas, 1975.
After 5 d5 a new idea for Black is
5. ,Ba6 compelling White to worry about his
c4 pawn. A game Marianovic-Trois, Sarayevo,
1980wont: 6Qc2 (6 e3 ed 7 cd Bfl 8 Kfl d6=)
6. .ed 7 cd d6 (7. .Bb7 8. e4 Qe7 9. Bd3 Nd5
10.0-0 with compensation for the pawn,
Bernat - Korchnoy, Buenos Aires, 1979)
8 Nc3 g6 (bad is 8. .Nbd7 9. Bf4 Be7 10. g3
0-0 11. Bg2 Re8 12. 0-0 + Kasparov-Browne,
Banya Luka 1979) 9 b4 (or 9 Bf4 Bg7
10. Qa4 + Qd7 11. Bxd6 Qxa4 12. Nxa4 Nxd5
Darga-Ligterink, Graz 1979) 9..Bg7 10. Bb2
0-0 11. b5 Bc8 12. Nd2 Ng4 13. h3 Ne5 14. g3
f5 15. f4 Nf7 16. 0-0-0 Nbd7.
In the above variation 6... ,Qe7!? with
the idea of taking on d5 was tried in the
game Vaganyan-Kupreichik, 1978. 7. Bg5 ed
8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. cd g6 10. e4 Bxfl 11. Kxfl
Bg7 12. Nc3 0-0 13. e5 Qe7 Here White was
tempted into winning the exchange with
14. Nb5?!Bxe5 15. d6 Bxd6 16. Qd2 Be5
17. Nxe5 Qxe5 18. Rel Qf5 19. Nc7 Nc6 and
Black obtained strong counter play. Never­
theless after 5... .Ba6 Whites chances are
better.
As far as Blacks idea of a counter in the
centre with d7-d5 is concerned, it is better to
have the bishop posted at e6. The immediate
4. . d5 with the idea of developing the Queen’s
bishop in the King-side (instead of Bc8-b7)
leads to Wh'te obtaining good chances after
5 Nc3 Be7 6 cd ed 7 Bg5 (less active is 7 Bf4 0-0
12. be Bxc5 13. Qa4 Bb7 14. Rfdl Qf6 15. Qc2
Na5 16. Ne5 Rfd8+ Ivkov - Harandi, Rio de
Janeiro 1979) 7..0-0 8 e3 (also interesting is
8. Rcl c5 9 g3) 8. ,c5 9. Be2 (Geller).
(»>)
 13 Rdl be 14 be Qa5 15 Bb2 Rab8 + Schuss-
ler-PoIugaevsky, Skara 1980. Instead of 5..g6
other moves have been tried, but without
success 5. .Bb7 6 Nc3 cd (worse is 6. ,d5? 7 cd
Nxd5 8 Bb5-f-Bc6 9 Bd3 cd 10 ed Be7 11 Ne5
0-0 12 0-0 Bb7 13 Qc2 Nf6 14 Rdl Nc6
15 Qa4!+ Gheorgiu-Skrobek, Warsaw 1979)
7 ed d5 8 Bg5 Be7 9 Bxf6 Bxf6 10 cd Bxd5
(deserving attention is 10. .ed!? 11 Bb5 + Nc6!
12Qe2+&f8 13 Bxc6 Bxc6 14 Ne5 Bxe5
15 Qxe5 Qe8) 11 Nxd5 Qxd5 12 Qa4 + Ke7
13 Rcl Rd8 (obviously 13...Nd7 gives White
the advantage after 14 Qb4+ Qd6 15 Ba6)
14 Bd3 Nd7 with a difficult game, Ree-Ligterink,
Graz 1979.
5.. a6 6 Be2 Bb7 7 0-0 Be7 8 Nc3 cd 9 Nd.4
0-0 10Qc2(10 b4 threatening 11 Bb2 with
equality (!) was better) 10 ...... Qc7 11 Rdl
Nc6 + 12 Nc6 Bxc6 13 b3 Qb7 14 f3 b5 15 cb
ab 16 a4 Rfc8 Alburt-Korchnoy, Wike-an-Zay
1980. 5. ,a6 6 Nc3 Bb7 7 Bd3 Be7 8 0-0 d6
9 Rbl Nbd7 10 b4 0-0 11 Bb2 h6 12 Qe2 Qc7
13 Rfdl Rfe8 14 Rbcl Bf8 15 Nd2!+ Gheorgiu
Whitehead, Lone Pine 1980.
5.. ..a6 6Nc3d6 7Bd3Be7 8 0-0 0-0 9 b4
Bb7 10 Qe2?(10d5! = ) Nbd7 11 Rdl Re8
12 Bb2 B18J3 Rael Rc8 14 h3? (14 d5 e5
15 e4 g6) e5-f- = Raikovich-Stean, Smederevska
Palanka 1980.
5. . cd 6 ed d5 7 Nc3 Be7 8 cd Nd5 9 Bb5 +
Bd7 10 Bd3 Bc6(10. .Nc3 11 bc3 Nc6 12 0-0
Bf6 13Rel + Speelman-Andersson, Hastings
1979-1980) 11 0-0Nd7 12 Rel Rc8?! 13 Nd5
Bd5 14 Ba6! Ra8 15 Bf4 0-0 16 Rcl Nb8 (the
only move, 16. .Nf6 17 Bc7 Qe8 18 Ne5 wins)
17 Rc8 Qc8 18 Bc8 Rc8 19 Ne5 Nc6 20 Ng4
with attack in Timman-Van der Veel, Wike-an
Zay 1980.
5 Nc3 d5 6 cd
If 6 e3 Be7 7 b4 0-0 8 c5 Black’s control
over the e4 square guarantees him a good
game: 8.. Ne4! 9 Bd2 be 10 be Qc8 11 Bd3 f5
12 Ne2 Bf6 13 Rcl Ba6!
White obtains nothing by 6 Bg5 Be7 which
leads to the comfortable exchange of bishops.
Let us examine a few examples.
6
7 e3 0-0 (in case of 7. .Nbd7 8 cd ed!? the
game transposes into the basic variation; Bad
is 8. ,Nxd5 9 Bxe7 Qxe7 10 Nxd5 Bxd5 11 Rcl
Qd6 12 Qc2 c5 13 e4+ Vaganian Farago; Graz
1972/8 Bd3 (or 8 Be2 Nbd7 9 0-0 Ne4 10 Bxe7
Qxe7 11 Qc2 Rac8 12 Nb5 a6 13 Na7 Ra8
14 cd Rxa7 15 Qxe4 Bxd5 = Van-Baarle-Csom,
Amsterdam 1969) 8. .Nbd7 9 Rcl de 10 Bxc4
c5 11 0-0 Ne4 12 Bf4 Nxc3 13 Rxc3 cd 14 ed
Nf6 Payev-Mititelu, Match Bulgaria-Rumania
1971.
7 cd Nxd5 8 Bxe7 Qxe7 9 Nxd5 Bxd5 (after
9 . .ed 10 e3 0-0 11 Rcl Rc8 12 Bd3Nd7 130-0
c5 14 de be 15 Bf5 (White develops pressure on
the hanging pawns in the centre, Popov-Ilievsky
Skople 1967 though, even in this case he was
not able to achieve anything substantial).
10 Rcl 0-0 11 e3 Rc8 (ll..Rd8 12 Bd3 c5?!
13 de e5 14 e4f Bb7 15 cb+ Fair hurst-
Vranesich, Havana 1966) 12 Bd3 c5 13 de Rxc5
14 Rxc5 Qxc5 15 Qc2 (15 Qbl h6 16 0-0 Nd7
17 Rcl Qd6 = Petrosian-Polugaevsky, Moscow
1969) 15. ,Qxc2 16 Bxc2 Nd7 = Petrosian-Polu-
gaevsky, 1970.
6ed
The move that was popular in the sixties,
6. .Nxd5, with the idea of exchanging pieces,
is again coming back into vogue. After 7 e3
Be7 (possible is the move recommended by
Keres 7. . Nd7 which is intended to render
White’s future Bb5 ineffective. On 8 Nxd5 it
is necessary to repiy 8. .ed since after 8. .Bxd5
9 b4! White has a bind on Black’s game. Now
dangerous for Black is 9. .c5 10 be be 11 Qa4
with the threats of Bb5 and Ne5 or 8 Bd3 Nc3
9 bc3 Bd6 10 0-0 e5 11 e4 0-0 12 Bg5 Be7
13 Be3 Bf6 14 Qc2 Farago-Szabo. Now 14. ,g6
leads to unclear play.) 8 Bb5 + ! c6 (compulsory,
for if 8.. Nd7 then 9 Nxd5 ed 10 Ne5 + )
9 Bd3
Instead of the previously popular 9. . .00 (if
9.. c5 then 10 Nxd5 ed stronger than
10.. .Qxd5 11 de Qxc5 12 Bd2 Nc8 13 Rcl Qd6
14 Qc2 Rc8 15 0-0 h6 16 Rfdl 0-0 17 Bc3 Qb8
18 Qa4! and transfering the Q to the king’s flank
White had a strong attack Petrosian-Smyslov,
Moscow 1961 11 b3Nc6|12Bb2+ 01 afsson-
Keres, Tallin 1975) it is better to continue
9. . Nd7 and castie only after White bas himself
castled. Otherwise White emerges with addi­
tional attacking possibilities.
For example 9.... 0-0 10. e4
Harmless is 10. Bd2 Nd7 11. Nxd5 cd!
12. 0-0 Bd6 13. Qa4 a6 14. Bb4 Qe7
15. Bxd6 Qxd6 16. Rael and as shown in the
game Petrosian-Reshevsky, Santa Monica 1966
White has only a minimal advantage; in case
of 10. Qc2 Black utilises the position of the
White Queen on the ‘C’ file for counterplay
10. ,.h6 11. Bd2 Nd7 12. e4 Nxc3 13. be
(or 13. Bxc3 c5=) 13. . ,c5 14. 0-0 Rc8
15. Qbl (bad is 15. Qb2? because of 15.. .cd
16. cd Nc5) 15. . .Qc7 16. a4 Rfd8 Vaganian
— Timman, Rio de Janeiro 1979.
10. . . Nxc3 11. be c5
Here White has two plans.
12. 0-0 Nd7 13. Qe2 Rc8 14. Bb2
(14. Be3 tried in Vaganian — Makarichev,
1979 was o. k. for Black who should have
played 14. ..cd and 15. ..Rc3 instead of
14. . . Qc7) 14. . . Qc7 (now, since Black has
no point of entry along the c file this move is
o.k.) 15. Nd2 Bg5 16. a4 Rfd8 17. Rfdl g6
18. a5 Bc6 19. ab ab 20. f3 Ra8 21. e5! +
inGheorgiu— Browne, Novi Sad 1979.
12. h4!? cd 13. cd Nc6 14. e5 Na5
15. Be3 (the combination 15. Bxh7-f- Kxh7
16. Ng5+ Kg8 17. Qh5 is incorrect because
of 17. . . Be4). 15.........g6 16. h5 Timman—
Polugaevsky, Breda 1979. Here, instead of
16. . . Rc8, the attack should have been re­
pulsed by 16. .. Qd5 17. hg (17. Qbl Qb3)
fg 18. Qbl Rf7 with a very sharp game.
White now has to make a choice between
(A) 7. Bg5 and (B) the latest craze 7. g3
A Also to be considered is 7...Nbd7 and
7. BgS
White develops his Q-s'de pieces first and
vacates the cl square for his rook keeping in
mind Black’s counter play with c7-c5. The
7
straight— forward 7 b4 leads to a comfortable
game for Black after : 7. . . Be7 (also possible
is 7. . . a5 8. b5 Bd6 9. e3 Nbd7 10. Qb3
0-0 11. Bd3 Ne4 and in case of 12. Nxd5
good for Black is 12. . ,Ndc5 13. de Nxc5
14. Bxh7+ Kxh7 15. Qc2-j-f5! 16. Nc3 Be4!
and after 12. 0-0 Re8 13. a4 Ndf6 14. Ba3
Nxc3 15. Qxc3 Ne4 the outpost at e4
neutralises the weakness of the c7 pawn.
Gheorgiu-Bobotsov, Siegen 1970) 8. e3 0-0
9. Be2 Nbd7 10. Qb3 c6 11. 0-0 Bd6
12. a4 a5 13. Ba3 ab 14, Bxb4 Qc7 with
a good game for Black, Gheorgiu-Mecking,
Mar del Plata, 1971.
Black has no difficulties against 7 Bf4.
For example 7.......Be7 8 e3 0-0 9 Bd3 c5
10. 0-0 Nbd7 11 Ne5 cd 12 edNe4 = Qr 7.......
Bd6 8 Bxd6 (8 Bg3 0-0 9 e3 Ne4 10 Qb3 in
Petrosian-Harandi, Rio de Janeiro 1979 led
to White’s advantage only after 10 ....... c6?
11. Bd3 Re8 12 Bxe4 de 13 Ne5 Bxe5 14 de
Nd7 15 Nxe4 Nxe5 16 Rdl with the decisive
invasion 17 Nd6. Black should have continued
10.. Nc6! ? 11 Qxd5 Nxc3 12 be Bxg3
13. Qxd8 Bxf2-t-14 Kxf2 Raxd8 rnaintainig
equality) 8.......Qxd6 9 Rcl a6 10 g3 0-0
11. Bg2 Nbd7 12 0-0 c5. Bernat - Browne,
Buenos Aires, 1979.
After 7 e3 Black has a hopeful way to
reach equality. 7 ....... Nbd7 (if 7 . . Be7
then 8 Bb5 + compels Black to mask his
own bishop through 8 ...c6 since if 8...Nd7?
9 Ne5) In case of 7...Nbd7 White has to
choose between 8 Bd3 (defending the e4
square and entering at f5) and the preliminary
8 b4 to be followed by Bd3. 8 Be2?! allowed
Black to come out on top in the opening
struggle in the game Spassky-Petrosian,
Moscow 1969 8...Bd6 9 b4 0-0 10. 0-0 a6 with
control over e4 and attacking possibilities.
..Be7
7..
and on 8 e3 -Bd6!? Rcl a6 (the threat of
10. Nb5 has to be parried) 10 Bd3 0-0 11. 0-0
Qe8 12 Rel! Ne4 13 Bf4 and here in the game
Uhlmann-Bisguier, Stockholm 1962 Black
erred with 13...Bxf4? 14 ef Ndf6 15 Ng5 Qd7 Damianovich, Vrnyaka-Banva 1971) ll...»Qxe7
16 Nce4 and White won a pawn. Better was 12. 0-0 c5 13. Rel g6 14. Bb5 Ndf6 15. de be
13.. .Qe7 maintaining the outpost at e4. 16. Qa4 Rfd8 17. b4 a6 18. Bfl c4 and even
though. White controls d4, Black’s passed
8 e3. c-pawn and the strongly posted Knight at e4
The attempt to weaken Black’s control give Black a solid position, Antoschin-
over e4 through an exchange at f6 leads Damianovich, Havana 1968.
nowhere. 8 Bxf6 Bxf6 9 e3 (9 g3 0-0 10 Bg2
Qe7 11 0-0 Rd8 12 Rcl Tatai 0. Rodriguez, 11. 0-0
Rome 1980, here Black should continue 12... If 11 de bcl2. 0-0 Ne4 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 14. Qe2
Na6 Unclear) 9... 0-0 10 Be2 c5 11 Rcl cd Rab8 15. Rfdl Rfd8 16. Nd5 Ng5 !? and Black
12 Nxd4 Popov - Chipev, Bulgeria 1973. gets into favourable complications Kuzmin-
Here 12...Nc6! can remove the piece blockade Belinkov, 1968. 11. Bf5?l is an unsuccessful
at d4. attempt to attack the d7-Knight and weaken
the support to the c5 pawn. After 11. . ,g6
More logical appears the plan to wage a 12. Bh3 Ba6! Black organised an attack on the
struggle against Black’s central pawns. 8 Rcl White king in the game Olafsson-Parma,
0-0 9g3 c5 10 Bg2 but here 10...Ne4 11 Bxe7 Reykyavik 1975: 13. Qa4 cd 14. Qxa6
(or 11 Bf4 Bf6 12 Be5 Nd7 13 Bxf6 Qxf6 ^14 Nxd4 loses immediately to 14...Nc5 and if
14 0-0 Rfd8=) H...Qxe7 12 de Nxc3 13 Rxc3 14 ed Bc4 and White cannot 0-0) 14. . de
be does not offer White any real chance of 15 b4 (more resistance can be given by
increasing the pressure. 15 Rxc3 Nc5 16. Qe2 Nfe4 17. Bxe7 Nxc3
8 ....... 0-0 18. Bxd8 Nxe2 19. Be7but even here Black can
win through 19. ...Nel!) 15. . Ne4 16. Bh6 Ra8
The game Wirthensohn-Korchnoy, Biel 17. 0-0 Bd6 18. Qd3 Ne5 19. Nxe5 Bxe5
1979 went: 8...Nbd7 9 Bb5 c6 10 Ba4 0-0
20. g3 Bh8! 21. f3 Nd2 22. Rf2 Qf6 23. f4 d4
11 0-0 Re8 12 Rcl Rc8 13 Bc2 c5? (better 13 ..
g6) 14 Bf5 Ra8 15 Qc2 g6 16 Bh3+
24. ed Qxd4 25. Rxc3 Ne4 0-1.
11. . Re8
9 Bd3
Worse is 11 ...h6? This was confirmed in
Less active is 9 Be2 for example:9. .Nbd7
(or 9..Ne4 10. Bxe7 Qx37 11. Rcl Nbd7 the game Timman-Hubener, Wike-an-Zay 1975
12. 0-0 Rfd8 13. Qa4c5 14. Rfdl a6 15.de 12. Bf4 Ne4 13. Bbl (with the threat 14. de be
Nxc3 16. Rxc3 be = Olafsson-Browne, Ams­ 15. Nxe4 de 16. Nd2 and the weakness of the
terdam 1976) 10. Rcl h6 11. Bh4 Ne4 12. Bxe7 pawn at c5 and the d6 square become percep­
Qxe7 13. 0-0 c5 14. de Nxc3 15. Rxc3 be 16. b4 tible). 13. . Nxc3 14. ■ Rxc3 c4 (Some what
Rfc8 with the plan Nd7-f6-e4 Smyslov-Tukma- better was 14. .. Nf6 maintaining the tension
kov, Buenos Aires 1970. on the centre) 15. Qc2 Nf6 (because of the
If White attempts to prevent the expected vulnerbility of the h6 pawn. 15..g6 is not
c7-c5 by pressure on d5 through 9. Qc2 Nbd7 possible, and on 15. ,f5 follows 16 g4!)
10. Rdl (After 10. Bd3 the play is similar to 16. Ne5 Re8 17 g4! b5 18. h4 b4 19. ab Bxb4
the main variation) then possible is 10. ,a6 20. f3! (denying Black's Knight access to e4)
11. Ne5 h6 12. Bh4 Ne4 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 20. . . Bxc3 21. be Kf8 22. g5 hg 23. hg
14. Nxe4 Nxe5 15. Ng3 Ng4 16. Qf5 Nf6 in
Ivkov-Gheorgiu, Vtnyaka-Banya 1967 and Nd7 24. Qh7.
Black has a comfortable game. 12. Qe2 a6
9.. .NM7 10 Rcl c5 The exchange of Blacks White square
To equality leads 10..Ne4 11. Bxe7 bishop should be prevented, as that Bishop has
(if HBf4c5 12. 0-0 Nxc3 In the game a great role to play in the centre.
Vaganyan-Karpov, Leningrad 1970 — after 13. Rîdl c4 14. Bbl Bd6
12 ...a6? 13. Qc2! f5 14. de be 15. Rfdl Qc8
16. b4 cb 17. ab Bxb4 18. Na2 White obtained White’s play has led him into a blind alley
a great lead in development for the pawn— since it is difficult for him to display any
13. Rxc3 c4 14. Bbl b5 15. Ne5 Nxe5 in activity on the king-side. Blacks queen side
ease of 15..Nf6 16. f3 a5 17. Rc2 b4r)! \ pawn majority will have a great say in the
18. ab ab 19. g4 Nd7 20. Rg2 White has the
initiative Podgaetz - Averbakh, Lvov 1973 - further course of the game. Black stands
16. Bxe5 g6 17. f3 Re8 18. Rc2 a5 = Vagarjyan- better.

8
 11 ....... Ne4
7. g3 A typical solution. Black gets rid of one of
the opponents attacking piece the Knight on c3.
Deserving attention is ll...Re8 threatening
after 12.„Bd6 to deprive White of the
possibility of exchanging on c5. Therefore,
in the game Gheorgiu-Adorian, Riga 1979
White played 12 de Nc5 (12...be leads to
White’s advantage as the Knight ona6 is
badly placed). 13 Nf3 (Planning to keep d4
Spassov-Renman, Skara 1980 went 13 Be3
but instead of 13....Nfe4 14 Nxe4 de 15 b4
Ne6 16 Rcl Bf6 17 Nc4 Qe7 which leads to a
good game for White, Black should continue
As already remarked, this recent idea of 13..
. ...Bf8 driving away the N to f3, after
fianchettoing the bishop is intended to pressu­ which 14. ,Nfe4gains in strength) 13. . Nfe4
rise d5 in case of c7-c5. 14 Nb5 a6 (to be considered is 14. .Bf6
7. . ,Be7 not fearing 15 Nc7 because of 15. .Bxb2
7. . . Bd6 has to reckon with Bg5 pinning 16 Nxe8 Qe8 17 Rbl Nc3 18 Qc2. Ne2 +
the f6 knight and Nb5. 19 Khl Nf4 20 gf Bf6 with sufficient compensa­
tion for the exchange) 15 Nbd4(herel5 Nc7?
For example 8. Bg2 (8. Nb5 0-0! 9. Bg2 is wrong because of 15. . g5!) 15. . Bf6. White
if 9. NdCcd!— 9. . .Be7 10. Bf4 Na6 11. 0-0
c6 12. Nc3 Nc7 13. Ne5 Ne6 14. Rcl c5 carries out his plan, but Black’s pieces are
15. de be 16. Qb3 Nf4= Petrosian—Holmov, sufficiently well-placed for a king-side attack
1979) 8. . .0-0 9.0-0 Re8 (9. . . Na6? with g7-g5-g4 and h7-h5.
10. Bf4c5 11. Ne5+ Gheorgiu — Adorian, 12 Nxe4 de 13 de Nxc5
Riga 1979). 10. Bg5 Nbd7 (10. . .Na6?! The critical position. The pawn at e4 is
11. Qb3! c6 12. Rfel Be7 13 Bf6 Bf6 14. e4
Mochalov — Sturua, USSR 1980 and if now an object of attack but Black’s minor pieces
14. . .de 15. Ne4c5 16. Nfg5! Bg5 17. Ng5 are in comfortable positions.
Bg2 18. Qf7+ Kh8 19. Qf5+) 11. Nb5 14 Qc2
Ba6 (if 11. ..Bf8 12. Bf4) 12. Nd6 cd
13. Rel h6. Here, instead of 14. Bf6 Nf6 Black has nothing to fear from an exchange
15. Nd2 Qd7 16. e3 Rac8 17. Nbl as played of Queens.
by Petrosian in his match against Korchnoy in 14. . a5!?
Felden 1980, White should keep the pair of
bishops with 14. Bd2 with Bd2-b4 and a3-a4 in Furn'shing the Knight on c5 a good
view. Also 7. . .Nbd7 has been tried un­ square or in case 15 b4 ab 16 ab- an object of
successfully. 8. Bg2 a6 (Black intends counter attack (the pawn on b4). Worse is
9. ..Bd6) 9. Bf4 Nh5 10. Bg5! Be7 11. Bxe7 14. . Rc8. For example: 15 Rfdl Qe8
Qxe7 12. Nh4+ Karpov — Antoschin,
Baku 1980). 16 Bh3. Further the g-meLputyan-Haritonov,
8. Bg2 0-0 9. 0-0 Na6 Riga 1980 went: 10. . Rd8 17 b4 (after 17 Rd8
Played with the intention of c7-c5. The Bd8 18 Rdl or 17. .Qd8 18 Rdl Qa8 19 b4+)
immediate 9. . .c5 allows White to increase 17. . Ne6 18 Bxe6 fe 19 Qc7 Bd5 20 Qxa7 Bf6
the pressure on d5 through; 10. Bg5 (the with the threats 21. ,g5 and 21. . Qh5 compel­
game Vaganyan—Sunye, Rio de Janeiro 1979 ling White to reconcile to constant attack on
went 10. Ne5?! Nc6! 11. Nxc6 Bxc6 12. de his Queen. 21 Qc7 Qh5 22 e3 Rc8 23 Qd6
be 13. Bg5 and Black got action along the
b-file- 13...Rb8 14 Rbl h6 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 Rcd8 24 Qc7 Rc8.
16. Qc2 Qd6 17. Rfdl Bxc3 18. be Rxbl 15 Rad 1 Qc8 16 b4 ab 17 ab Ne6 18 Qb3 Ba6
19. Qxbl Rb8) and 10. . .Nc6 is not possible
because of 11. de Besides 9. . . Na6 Black The chances are equal. After the careless
also has 9. . . Nbd7 after which he can mano­ 19 Rd7 Bf6 20 Rcl in the game Gavrikov-
euvre Rf8-e8, Nd7-f8-e6 and the.n c7-c5. Kengis, Riga 1980, Black sacrificed the Queen
10. Bf4 c5 11. NeS The pressure on with 20. .Nf4 and obtained a strong attack.
d5 increases, but Black has ways of neutrali­ (Based on Geller’s article in 11/1980
sation. Schachmatny Bulletin).
 National Team Championship
The National Team Championship held at
Guntur from April 6to 12 was an unprecedented
success as a change in rules allowed organi­
sations not affiliated to the AICF to enter dire­
ctly though on an enhanced entry fee of
Rs. 500/-
The Sastrys team of Hyderabad comprising
of (See picture from L-R) 1. Nandakumar
2. N. Ghalib 3. V. V. Sastry (Captain)
4. Mohamed Hassan and 5. Dr. Nagendra
started as favourites with 3 National ‘A’
players. Even though they ultimately came
first, so many exciting things happened within
the 6-rounds of this Swiss tournament.
After 3 rounds T, N. Captained by
5. V. Natarajan and Sastry’s were level on 9
points, but in the fourth round Sastry’s were
badly defeated by CRPF 3-1, and TN went in
to sole lead with 11^-. T. N. maintained this
in the 5th round by a 2J--1-J- victory over CRPF,
but lost to Maharashtra 1^-2-j- in the last round
while Sastrys team swamped A. P. (Vijaya­
wada) 3|-£. to reach 17 and win the Mrs. Indu-
mati Korke Rolling Trophy.
Tamil Nadu’s loss in the last round cost
them dearly as they finished only 3rd. But they
were without the services of Aaron and Hari­
haran (who were playing for Indian Bank),
Ravi Sekhar and Parameswaran (who were
playing in the Philippines IM tournament) and
Ravi Kumar who was having his exams.
The holders of the trophy, Maharashtra
(captained by S. G. Joshi) were without the
services of Ravi Hegde, Abdul Jabbar and
Avinash Awate. They suffered an unbelievable
1^-2^ defeat at the hands of Indian Bank,
Madras and till the last round were never in
contention f or the first place.
10
The tournament was made a success mainly
by Mr. G. V. L. N. Sanjeeva Rao of the
Karpov Chess Club. He had an unfortunate
scooter accident a few hours before the teams
started arriving for the Championship, and
fractured his arm. But he was (nevertheless
present at the opening and closing ceremonies.
Here are the final standings : 1. Sastry’s
17/24, 2. Maharashtra 16, 3. Tamilnadu 15J-,
4. C. R. P. F. (Delhi) 14£, 5. R. B. I. (Bombay)
14, 6. Kerala 13, 7. Delhi ‘A’ 13, 8. Karnataka
13, 9. Indian Bank 12|, 10. Karpov ‘A’ 12J
11. Delhi-B 12j-, 12. Cochin Fatima 12,
13. A. P. (Vijayawada) 11£, 14. Orissa 11,
15. A. P. (Hyderabad) 10|, 16. U. P. 10|,
17. Rourkela Steel 9|, 18. Bihar 9|, 19. Pondi­
cherry 8|, 20. P. M. G. sTeam 8|, 21. Karpov
‘B’ 7. The 3 cash prizes were Rs. 1500, 1000,
500.
The foliowing piayers got board prizes of
Rs. 100/- each.
Board.- 1. M. Aaron (Indian Bank) 6/6,
2. V. Hariharan (Indian Bank) 5/6, 3. Anil
Kumar (Cochin Fatima Chess Club) 5/6,
4. A. Pavanasam (C. R. P. F. Delhi) 5£ /6,
5. R. N. Rajyadyaksha (Maharashtra) 3|/6. By
virtue of winning the board prizes Anil Kumar,
A. Pavanasam and R. N. Rajadyaksha got
seeding to this years Nat-B. Mr. A. G. Subb-
araju directed the tournament.
Now for a few interesting games from this
event :
1. N. Neelakantan (Mah) + G. C. Mahapatra
(R.S.P.)
(Sicilian Najdorf)
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4cd4 4. Nd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Nb3
(Sharper is 8. Qd2 Qb2 9. Rbl) 8....Qe3+?!
(Instead of walking into a lost ending, simple
was 8. . . Nc6 with the probable continuation
9. Qf3 Bd7 10. 0-0-0 Qc7 with the idea of
0-0-0 leading to an even fight) 9. Qe2 Qe2-|-
10. Be2 Nbd7 11. 0-0-0 (Thanks to Black’s
8th move, White as early in the 11th move it­
self enjoys an overwhelming advantage)
 .
11.. .b5?? 12. Bf3! Bb7 13. Na5 b4
14. Nb7 bc3 15. Nd6+ Bd6 16. Rd6 cb2+
17. Kbl e5 18. Rhdl h6 19. Bf6 Nf6 20. fe5
Nh7. 21.e6!fe6 22. e5 (idea Bh5+) 1-0
2. R. Nagendra (Sastry’s) — A. N. Venkatesan
(Sicilian Dragon) (C.R.P.F.)
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cd4 4. Nd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 0-0 8. Qd2
Nc6 9. Bc4 Bd7 10. Bb3 Rc8 11. h4 h5
12. 0-0-0 Ne5 13. Bg5 Rc5 14. Rhel b5
15. 14Nc4 16. Bc4 bc4 17. e5 Qb6! 18. ef6
Rb8! 19. Qe3 ef6 20. Qe7 20. . Bd8 21 g6 fg6 22 [g6 Rfl+ 23 Rtl
Re6 24 Kh2 Qe8 25 Bc5Rg6?! 26 Qf2 dc5
27 Qc5 Bh4 28 R15 Bg3 + 29 Khi B14 30 N13
Qa4 31 Qc8 + Kh7 32 Rh5 + Bh6 33 Q15!
Qal+ 34 Kh2 Qcl 35 Ng5+ Qxg5 37 Rg5 Bg5
37 QeS Bf6 38Qd5Bb2 39Qb7Be5+ 40Khl
Kh6 41 Qd5 Rg5 42 c4 Kh5 43 c5 Kh4 44 c6 B14
45 Qd8 Kg4 46 c7 Bc7 47 Qc7 g6 48 Kg2 Rb5
49 Qg3+ Kh5 50 Qd6 a5 51 e5 a4 52 e6 Rb2 +
53 Ktl Rbl+ 54 Ke2 Rb2+ 55 Kel Rbl +
56Qdl+! 1-0
4. T.K. Joseph (Ker) + Nasir Ali (CRPF)
1 e4 c5 2 N13 Nc6 3 d4 cd4 4 Nd4 e6
20. ,.fg5! 21. Qd7Qb2+ 22. Kd2 Bd4 5 c4 N16 6 Nc3 Bb4 7 Nc6 bc6 8 Bd3 e5 9 0-0
23. Re8+ Re8 24. Qe8+Kg7 25. Na4 Qb4 + d6 10 Bg5 00 11 QÎ3 h6 12 B16 Q16 13 Q16
26. Ke2 Ra5 27. Rd4 gf4 28. Qc6 Re5-f- gf6 1414 Rb8 15 Na4 Bd2 16 15 Be3 F 17 Khl
29. Re4 Re4+ 30. Qe4Qa4 31. Qd4+ Kg8 Bd4 18 Rabi Ba6 19 b3 Rb4 20 Rbcl d5 21 R13
32. Kdl Qa2 33. Qd6Qal+ 34. Ke2 Qc3 dc4 22 Bc4 Bc4 23 Rc4 Rlb8 ? ! 24 Rcl c5 25Nc5
35. Qb8+ Kg7 36. Qf4 Qc2+ 37. Kel Qc3 + Bc5 26 Rc5 Re4 27 h3 Re2 28 Ra5 Rb7 29 Ra6
38. Kdl Qd3+ 39. 0-1. e4 30Rg3+ Kh7 31Kh2Re7 32R16e3 33Rc6
Rf2 3416 Re8 35 Rg7 + Kh8 36Rf7e2 37Rcc7
3. R.K. Shukla (Delhi-A) + S. Nasir Ali Rf6 38Rh7-f- Kg8 39Rcg7-F Kf8 40Rh8-F
(Sicilian Najdori) (CRPF) Kg7 41Re8R12 42 a4K17 43Re3Kf6 44 Kg3
el = Q 45 Rxel Rb2 46 Re3 KÎ5 47 Kf3 h5
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cd 4 Nd4 Nf 6 5 Nc3 48g4 + bg 49hg Kf6 50Kf4Rf2+ 51 Rf3 Rg2
a6 6 Be2 e5 7 Nb3 Be6 8 a4 Be7 9 00 00 52 RC3 Rf2+ 53 Kg3 Rd2 54 Rc6 Ke5
10 Be3 Qc7 1114 Nbd7 12 15 Bc4 13 Nd2 Bxe2 55 Rc5+ Ke4 56 Rb5 a6 57 Rb4 + Ke5 58 Kh4
14 Qe2 Nc5 15 g4 Qc6 16 Qg2 h6 17 h4 h5? ! Rd8 59Rb6Kf4 60Rf6+ Ke4 61g5Rb8 62 g6
18Nd5 Rae8 19 N16 , B16 20 g5 Rb3 63 g7 Rb8 64 Rf8 1-0.

SPECTATORS BRILLIANCY Here aecording to Sivakumar (and con­

A spectator at the 1980 National-B
Championship at Delhi, N. R. Sivakumar sent
us the following position from the Avinash
Awate — K. K. Shukla encounter which ulti­
mately ended in a draw.
11
firmed by us with K. K. Shukla), Shukla
could win with:
1. . . Re3 2. Ne3 (if 2. fe3 Qe5 3. Nd4
Rc3 4. Qb5 Bc5 with a strong attack as well
as also the simple 2. . . gf5) 2.. .Qe5 3. Ndl
(3. Qe2 Qe4+ 4. Kai Bc3 -F mates) Bd2
4. Qd2 Qe4+ 5. Kai Qd4+ !! 0-1.
But the game continued. . . .
“21.. . Bd6 22. Bd4 Qd8 23. Nh6chKg7
24. g5 Be5 25. gf6ch Bf6 26. Ng4 Bd4
27. Qd4ch f6 28. Ne3 and ended in a draw
after 48 moves!
Our Champions Page
BREAKING THE BALANCE
R. Ravi Sekhar
End game is the phase whore material
advantage assumes great significance and
priority over other considerations—let us
examine the following example from practical
play which seems to be a balanced end game.
Caturala - R. Ravisekar (Asian Master Baguio,
1981)
The game continued. 1. Rfcl a natural
move as Black was threatening Rc2 winning
a pawn. 1. . Rb4! A strange move conceding
the open ‘C’ file to White - The student will
note that classical concepts of occupation of
open file, seventh rank etc do not apply to
all positions. The Rook on b4 renders the
Knight immobile as the White ‘b’ pawn would
be lost. 2 Rc7 Ki6 But not2..e6 3 Rdl
followed by Rd2 freeing his Knight. 3 Rael
Be6 4 R1 c3 If 4 Nd2 Rb2 5 Ne4 + Kg7
6 Re7 Re2 7 Nd6 Rd8 with a strong
initiative and extra pawn. 4.. Rd8! 5 Kfl
Rd7 6 Rd7 Nd7 Black has exchanged off
White’» active piece,while his own active
12
/?. RAVI SEKHAR
»
Black Rook on b4 cannot be dislodged.
White’s Bishop on b7 is also unable to attend
to the defence of the Queen side. We can
conclude that all the three Black pieces are
aggressively placed while their White counter­
part can only wait for the roof to cave in.
7 Bc6 Black was threatening 7..Nc5!
8. Nc5 bc5 winning a pawn. 7. .Ne5! But
not 7. . Bb3 8. a3! the point of White’s
7th move.
8. Be8 Kg7! Sometimes a retreat can be
offensive. Black intends 9. . KfS forcing the
loss of a pawn—White is now forced to
weaken his position further. 9. f4 Nc4
10. Kt2 10. a3? Rb3 - + 10. ... Nb2
11. Kel Na4 12. Ba4 12 Re3 Nc5 + 12. .Ra4
13. RC2 Ra3 14. Rb2 Bb3 15. ab3 Kf6
16. Kf2 Kf5 17. Kf3 d5 18. e3 e6 19. Rbl
b5 20. Rb2b4 21. Rbl Ra2 22. Rdl Rb2
23. Rd3 f6 A typical zugzwang position
24. Rdl Rb3 25. Rcl d4 0-1.
Here is another instructive ending from
the same tournament.
Manjnang—Adijansyah, Position after 25. c4
Play continued 25. ...b4!! 26. Kfl Re8!
27. g3Re6 28. Rb8Kc7 29. Rb4 (This gets
the White rook and Knight into a curious
position, but if 29. Rf8 Re7 30. Kg2 Kb6
31. Rc8 Rc7 wins the stranded Knight)
29 .Rh6 30. h4 Rg6 31.g4 Rh6 32. h5 g6
33. hg6 hg6 34. Kg2 Rh8 35. g5 Rh5 36. f4
ef4 37. Kf3 Rg5 38. Kf4Ne6-|- 0-1 Black’s
king proved to be too active in the ending.
 CHESS TRICKS
(The positions are given in the order of increasing
difficulty. For solutions turn to page No. 43)

No. 1 White to play

No. 3 Black to play

No. 5 White to play

No. 7 Black to play

13
 0< \2i
foj
i SAKTHI SUGARS LIMITED
Jo>
I
O

’O<
Manufacturers of:
O
WHITE CRYSTAL SUGAR AND
;o.
>a
INDUSTRIAL ALCOHOL a
foj
fa
■o! o.
t-*-
k*i
foj O.
*o!
Producers of

ttBRXD SEEDS
O<
fa
fa

;g
fa
S O.
[Sj
fa O
fa

*oj
Jgj
g
fol Factory : O.
fa 73A» Race Course Road, SAKTHI NAGAR POST
fa
[a
Coimbatore-641018. Bhavani Tahxk
Phone N& 25551-5. Erode
Ja
Ja
fa
Small is beautiful
KING AND PAWN ENDINGS
By R. B. SAPRE

The simplest and most important of end 1. c4? Kg5 2. Ke4 Kf6 3. Kd5 g5 4. c5
game positions is the King and Pawn ending. g4 draws. The winning move is 1. Ke4! Kg5
Important, because much of the strategy and (1.. . g5 2. c4 g4 3. c5 g3 4. Kf3! leads to the
tactics in the previous play depend on how one main line) 2. Ke5! K,h4 3. c4 g5 4. c5 g4
would stand in the King and Pawn ending if 5. Kf4! g3 6. Kf3! Kh3 7. c6 g2 8.c7 gl = Q
the last piece is exchanged. 9. c8 = Q+ Kh4 (or 9.. .Kh2 10. Qh8 mate)
A familiar stratagem in King and Pawn 10. Qh8+ Kg5 11. Qg8+ wins the Queen.
endings is the creation of an ‘outside’ or Apart from correct King movement, two other
‘distant’ passed Pawn. While the enemy King tactical motifs, viz queening with a check and
is engaged in arresting that Pawn his counter­ mating or queen-winning continuations are
part gobbles up Pawns on the other flank. also present in the above example.
Tchekhover—Bondarevsky, Leningrad, 1938
The following position has a useful lesson
for the student in that even as White sacrifices
the exchange for King side threats he has
already calculated the ultimate outcome of the
attack, viz. a winning King and Pawn ending.
Turayev + Manin, Bukhara, 1979
White: Kg2, Qh4. Rh5, Bd3, Ne6, P’s-a5, b2,
c2, f2, f 5, g4.
Black: Kg8, Qe5, Rel, Bh6, Nf7, P’s-a6, b7,
c6, d5, f6, g7.
The play was : 36. Rxh6! Nxho 37. QhS
Qb8 38. Qg6 Rxe6 39. fxe6 Kf8 40. e7 + White to play
Kxe7 41. Qxg7+ Nf7 42. Bg6 Qf8 43. Qxf7 + This ending from Znosko—Borovsky’s
Qxf7 44. Bxf7 Kxf7 45. b4! Ke6 46. f4 Kd7 ‘‘How to play Chess Endings” contain several
47. g5 1-0. themes such as skilful King play, distant
All Black’s moves are are forced. 45. b4!, passed Pawn, Skewer after queening, zugz­
rendering Black’s Q-side Pawn majority immo­ wang, conditions of draw or win with the
bile is an important link in the simplifing Rook Pawn, Here is the continuation with
combination. It is now easy to calculate that the winner’s analysis:
after 47.. . fxg5 48. fxg5 Ke6 49. Kf3 Kf5 1. Kf4’ h6 (a) 2. Ke5 h5 3. gxh5 gxh5
50. Ke3 Kxg5 the Black King cannot return in 4. a4! (b) a5 (c) 5. Kf5 Kd6 6. Kg5 Ke5
time to defend the Q-side Pawns, but White 7. 13! Ke6 (if 7. . ,h4 8. Kg4!) 3. f4 h4
had to see it far ahead on the 36th move. (zugzwang) 9. Kxh4 Kf6 10. Kg3 Kg6 11. Kf3
Various tactical motifs come into play in the Kf6 12. Ke4 Ke6 13. Kd4 Kf5 14. Kc5 Kxf4
management of King and Pawn endings. 15. Kb6 Ke5 16. Kxa5 Kd6 17. Kb6 Kd7
Consider this study which recently appeared in 18. Kb7 wins.
“Maharashtra Times’”:
(a) If 1. . . Kd6 2. Kg5 Ke5 3. f3!h5
4. f4 4- Ke6 (or 4. . . Ke4 5. gxh5 gxh5
. .9. f8 = Q hl = Q 10. Qa8+ wms) 5. 15+-
gxf5 6. gxf5 and wins because of the distant
h-Pawn.
(b) After 4. Kf5 Kd6 5. Kg5 Ke5 6. f3
a6! 7. a4a5 8. f4+ Ke6 the game position
is reached with White to move and 9. f5 + Kf7
13. Kxh5 Kf6 11. Kg4 Kf7 12. Kf4Kf6
13. Ke4 Kf7 14. Kd5 Kf6 15. Kc5 Kxf5
16. Kb5 Ke6 17. Kxa5 Kd7 18. Kb6 Kc8!
draws: In this 9. Kg6 h4 10. 154- Ke5 11. f6
h3 etc. also draws (R.B.S.)
White to play
 (c) If 4. . . h4 5. Kf4 Kd6 6. Kg4'Ke5
7. a5 Ke4 8. a6 h3 9. Kg4 h2 10. Kxh2
Kf3 11. Kgl Kf4 12. Kg2 Kg4 13. f3+ KÎ4
14. Kf2 Kf5 15. Ke3 Ke5 16. f4+ Kf5 17. Kf3
Kf6 18. Ke4 Ke6 19. f5+ Kf6 20. Kf4 Kf7
21. Ke5 Ke7 22. Kd5! Kf6 23. Kc6 Kxf5
24. Kb7 Ke6 25. Kxa7 Kd7 26. Kb6 and wins.
Timman—Browne, Bmsterdam, 1978
to clear the way for his d-Pawn: 50. a5! bxaS
51. c5! (51. .. dxc5 52. d6) 1-0. Such break
through sacrifices to create a fast moving
passed Pawn are an important tactical possi­
bility to be kept in mind.

From this position, Sax-Law (Lloyds (Bank

Masters, London, 1980) went: 41. b5 axb5
White to play. 50. Kxb6 Kxf3 51. a5 g4
etc. leads to a difficult queen ending. Instead42. aS Resigns??? 42. . .Kd6 is -a dead
White won quickly by sacrificing two Pawns draw.

lest compliments

BHARAT RICE £c OIL MILLS

(Refinery)
19-3-1075/1, Shamsheergunj,
HYDERABAD, (A.P.)

EXPORTERS
AND
IMPORTERS
ALL EDIBLES AND NON-EDIBLES REFINED OIL

Our Special Product

Char Brand
Double REFINED GROUNDNUT OIL
Double REFINED COTTONSEED OIL

Phones: 51849 & 44690 Telex: 371 (Brom) Grams: PILVAE

16
 THIPSAY TRIUMPHS AT BANGALORE
By SEKHAR SAHU
Within a period of I year, Pravin Thipsay Nasir Ali was also in good form. Playing
(a 22 year old Bombay M. Sc) has won 3 fast (which he usually does) and logical chess
major tournaments at Bangalore. The FIDE he quite often stampeded his opponents twice
rated 16 player tournament hosted by the into time trouble in the first 5 hour session it
Malleswaràm Association during April was a self.
lucky event for Thipsay. Playing good practi­ The TN stars Aaron and Parameswaran had
cal chess he proved a worthy winner, intelli­ a bad time struggling even against the unrated
gently saving or winning lost games. He stood players. The 14 year lad Sudhakar Babu gave
in danger against Barua, Parameswaran, a plucky display defeating Ghosh, in the first
Meetei, Aaron and Prasad. But, after all the round.
15 rounds wore over he was undefeated and This tournament could be called the tour­
had half a point more than his closest rival nament of Champions since all the 4 reigning
Nasir Ali. At one stage Thipsay was leading National Champions-Manuel Aaron, Rohini
by 2 points from Nasir, but shed 3 draws in Khadilkar (women) P. K. Singh (junior) and
the remaining games to clinch the title by only Dibyendu Barua (sub-junior) participated.
a half point margin. Games from the event follows the cross table
Player Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Total
P. M- Thipsay 2325 x i i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 13
S. Nasir Ali 2310 i x 1 i 0 1 i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 12i
A. B. Meetei 2235 i 0 X 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 10
T. N. Parameswaran 2330 0 i 0 X i 1 1 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 10
D. V. Prasad — 0 1 1 i X i i 0 1 1 1 1 i 0 1
D. Barua — 0 0 0 0 i X 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9*
A. K. Ghosh — 0 i i 0 1 X i i 1 1 1 0 i 1 1 9
M. Aaron (IM) 2415 i 0 1 i i 0 i X 1 0 0 1 1 i 1 i 8
S. C. Sahu 2205 0 0 0 i 1 0 i 0 X 1 1 1 1 0 i I 7*
P. K. Singh — 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 1 0 X 1 0 i 1 1 1 6
C. S. Unni — 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 X i 1 1 1 1 6
P. Gopalakrishna — 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 i X 0 1 1 1 5
N. Sudhakar Babu — i 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 i 0 1 X i 0 1
S. N. Ravish ankar — 0 0 0 0 0 i 1 0 0 i i X 0 1
Miss Rohini Khadilkar 2200 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 1 1 X i 4
(IWM)
Mrs. Vijay Vasanthkumar — 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ooo t X 1
1. P. K. Singh + M. Aaron (Sicilian Paulsen) ; 9. Bf3? Nbd7 10. 00 Rc8 11. Rel 00 12. aS
Qc7 13. Be3 h6 13. Re2 Rfe8 15. Rd2 bS! +
1. e4 C5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 cd4 4 Nd4 a6 5 Nc3 :
d6 6 a4 Nf6 7 Be2 Be7 8 00 00 9 Be3 Nc6 10 f4 16. ab6 Nb6 17. Bb6 Qb6 18. Be2
Bd7 11 Nb3 Rc8 12 aS! Qc7 13 Qd2 e5 14 f5 j
(The position reached slightly differs from j
Karpov vs Bronstein USSS 1971. Here White’s ;
bind on Black squares and his control over j
*d5’ gives him a clear advantage.) 14...Nb4! j
15 g4 Qc616 Bf3 h6 17 gS hg5 18 BgS Rfd8 i
19 Khl Kb7 20 Qg2 Rh8 21 Rgl Bf8 22 Bf6+ j
— gf6 23 Qh3 + Bh6 24Qh5 Rhg8 25 Qf7+ ‘
Rg7 26 Bg7-f-Bg7 27 Rgl Rg8 28 Qg6-bl-0. '
2. D. Barua - T. N. Parameswaran
» (Sicilian Najdorf) '
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cd 4. Nd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6 6. a4?! eS 7. Nb3 Be7 8. Be2 Be6 18. . Rc3! 19. Ra6 Rxb3! -+ (Black
17
gives up his Queen for a Rook and two minor
pieces, a very profitable bargain indeed).
20. Rxb6 Rxb6 21. Bf3 Rb2 22. h3 Nh7
23. Bg4 Reb8 24. Kh2 Ng5 25. Bxe6 Nxe6
26- Qal Bg5 27. Rxd6 Rxc2 28. Rxe6 Bf4 +
29. g3 Rxf2+ 0-1.
3. A.B. Meetei-D.V. Prasad (Sicilian Paulsen)
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cd4 4. Nd4
a6 (Meetei himself plays this variation
invariably!) 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be2 Nf6 7. 00
Nc6 8. Be3 Be7 9. f4 d6 10. a4 00 11. Nb3
b6 12. Bf3 Bb7 13. Qe2?! (better would
hâve been 13 Qel threat Qg3 and e4-e5)
13. . Nb4! 14. RfdldS 15. e5 Nd7 16. Qf2
Rac8 17. Rd2 Nc5 18. a5 (Preferable was
18 Nd4 and try for a kingside attack) 18. .
ba5 19. Na5 Ba8 20. Ne2 Ne4! 4. 21. Bxe4
de4 22. Nd4 Nd5 23. c3 Nfd8 24. Nab3
Bb7 25. Nc2 Nxe3 26. Ne3 Rxd2 27. Qxd2
Rd8 28. Nd4 Bc5 29. b4 Bb6 30. Qel Qd7
31. Rdl Qc8 32. Khl a5 33. b5 Qc5
34. Rai Rc8 35. Nd! Qc4 36. Nb2 Qxc3 - +
37. Qxc3 Rxc3 38. Nc6 Bxc6 39. Na4
Rc2 40. bxc6 Bd4! 41. Rbl h6 42. g3
Rxc6 0.1
4. A.B. Meetei + D. Barua (PetroffDefence)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Ne5 d6 4. Nf3
Ne4 5. d4 Be7 6. Bd3 Nf6 7. 00 00 8. h3
h6 9. c4 d5 10. Nc3 Be6 11. b3 Nc6?!
12. a3 a5 13. Bf4 Bd6 14. Be3 Re8
15 Qc2Rc8 16. c5! + Bf8 17. Rfbl g5?!
18. b4 Bg7 19. b5 Ne7 20. b6 c6 (23. .cb
21 Rxb6+) 21 g4! (Preventing g5-g4) 21..
Nd7 22. Ne2 Ng6 23. Ng3 N(7)-f8
24. Kg2 Ra8 25. Rel Bd7 26. Radi Qf6
27. Nh5! Qd8 28. Re2 Qc8 29. Rdel (here
White does not prevent theBishop sacrifice on
g4 which is unsound)
Bg4?? 28. hg4 Qg4+ 29. Ng3 h5
(Black threatens queen sacrifice on f3 followed
by mate with Nh4 + ) 30. Rhl Ne6 31. Bxg6
(31. Bf5 fails to Ne6—f4 + ) 31. . ,Nf4 +
32. Bf4 Re2 33. Be5!! (Now Rxc2 fails to
34. Bf5 winning the queen) 33. . .Re5 34. Ne5
Qf4 35. Rh5 1-0
18
5. Sekhar Sahu+C.S. Unni (Benko Gambit)
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 b5 4. cb a6
5. ba Ba6 6. Nc3 g6 7. f4!? Bg7 8. Nf300
9. e4 Bxfl 10. Rxfl! d6 (better now is
10. ...Qb6) 11. Kf2 Qb6 12. Kgl Na6 13. Khl
Rfb8
14. e5! Ne8 15. Qe2+ N(6) c7? (Better
was N(8) c7 with counter chances on the queen
side) 16. f5! Qb7?? (16. . . de5 would have
given more resistance) 17. e6! fe6? (better was
Nf6) 18. fg! hg 19. Qe4 Nf6 20. Qg6 ed5
21. Bh6N(7) e8 22. Bg7! Ng7 23. Ng5 + —
Qd7 24. Nd5! Qe8 25. Ne7+ 1-0 (Now if
25. . . Qe7 26. Rxf6 wins easily.)
6. S. Nasir Ali — D. V. Prasad
(Modern Benoni)
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 e6 4. Nc3
exd5 5. cd d6 6. e4g6 7. Bb5q- Bd7?
(7. ..Nfd7) 8. Bd3?! (8. a4!) 8. ..Bg7
9. Bf4 Qe7 10. Qb3 b6 11. Nf3 0-0 12. 0-0
Nh5 13. Bg5 f6 14. Be3 g5 15. e5!+ feS
16. Ng5 Nf4 17. Bh7+ Kh8 18. Nce4 Bh6
19. h4 Bf7 20. Bf4Rf4 21. g3 Rf7 22. Nxf7 +
(22. Bg6 should win easily) 22.. . Qf7 23. Nxd6
Qxh7 24. Qc3 Bg7 (unclear) 25. Nf7+ Kg8
26. Ne5 Bh3 27. Rfel Nd7 28. f4 Rf8
29. Qd3 Bf5 30. Qb3 Bc2 31. Qa3 Ne5—+
32. fe5 Be4! 33. Radi Qg6 34. Qe3 Rf3!
0-1
7. P. M. Thipsay + P. K. Singh
(Sicilian Paulsen)
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cd 4. Nd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be2 e6 7. Be3 a6 8. 0-0
b5?! 9. Nxc6 dxc6 10. f4 Be7? (better was
10. ..Bb7 11. e5 Rd8 12. Qel Nd7 13. Ne4
c5 followed by Nb6 with counter play) 11. e5
Nd5 12. Nxd5!+ cd5 13. Khl 0-0 14. Bd4
Bc5 15. c3 Bb7?? 16. Qd2 Rfc8 17. Qe3
Qb6 18. Bd3 g6 19. g4! Bd4 20. Qxd4
(but not 20. cxd4 because of 20. . . Rc4!
21. Bxc4 dc4q- with compensation) 20.. . Qxd4
21. cxd4 Rc7 22. Kg2Rac8 23. Kf3 Kf8 24. f5
Ke8 25. Ke3 Bc6 26. f6! Bd7 27. a3 a5
28. Rf3 Kf8 29. Rffl Ke8 30. g5 Bc6 31. Rf3
Kf8 32. Rgl Bb7 33. Rh3 Rcl (if33..Kg8
34. RM+-) 34. Rxh7Kg8 35. Rxcl Rxcl
36. Bxg6!+— Rc7 37. Rg7+ Kf8 38. Bh7
1-0

8 S.N. Ravi Sankar 4- Sekhar Sahu

(Kings Indian Defence)
1. d4Nf6 2. c4g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4
d6 5. f3 00 6. Be3 c6 7. Bd3 a6 8. Ne2
b5 9. 00 bxc4 10. Bxc4 Jd5 11. Bd3 N(8)
d7 Here Black should have opened the 'game
with 11. .de 12 fewith equal chances to both
sides) 12. e5!+ N(6) e8 13. f4 e6 14. Rcl
Nb6 15. Na4Nxa4 16. Qxa4 Bd7 17. Qc2
Qe7 18. Nc3 Nc7 19. Na4 Rfb8 20. Nc5
Be8 21. b3 Qd8 22. Qf2 h5? (instead
of weakening h's King’s side pawn position
Black can'just hold his own by simply sitting
down quietly. Now it has become easy for
White to attack the king.) 23. Qg3 Ra7 24. Rc2
Î5? 25. exf6 Qxf6 26. Rc-f2 Kh7
27. f5! ef5 28. Rf5!! (Now Black cannot
accept two rooks for his Quean since the
position of the other pieces are hopelessly
placed) 28.. ,h4?? 29. Qg4 (Missing
29. Qxc7 winning a piece) 29.. . Qd6
30. Qh4+Kg8 31. R(5) f3 Ne6 32. Nxe6
Qxe6 33. Rh3 Rf7 34. Rxf7 Qxf7? (34. .
Bxf7 also loses to 35 Qh7+ Kf8 36. Bxg6
etc) 35. Qh7+ Kf8 36. Rf3 Bf6 37. Rxf6!
Black resigned since after 37. .Qxf6 he is
mated with 38 Bh6q-

STUDY FROM MOSCOW Solution to the Moscow study.

Mr. N. Sikdar a Second Secretary in our 1. Nb5-f-(other alternatives will lead no
Embassy in iMoscow is a well known composer where), Kb7 2. Qc7+ Ka6 3. Qc6 + Ka5 4.
Of end-game studies. Here is his latest work. Na3 !(Threat 5 Qb5 mate) Qfl (best: if 4..
Kb4 5. Nc2 + gets the Q, Or if 4..Nc3 5.
Qa8+ Kb6 6. Nc4 + 7. Qxal wins) 5. Nc4 +
Kb4 6. Qd6-f- (and not 6 Qb6q-? Kc3
7. Qa5+ Nb4! 8. Qa3 + Kxc4!) 6. Kc3 (best
is say6..Kb5 7. Qb6 + Ka4 8. Qa5q-Kb3
9. Nd2q- wins) 7. Qa3-|-Kc2 8. Qxa2q- (and
not8Qb2+?Kd3 9. Qb3! + Nc3) 8..Kc3
(8..Kd3 9. Qb3 + ) 9. Qa3 + Kc2 10. Qb2 +
Kd3 11. Qb3 4-Ke2 12. Qc2 4-Kel 13. Qd2
mate because the Black Q acts as a self block.
White to play and win.

CANDIDATES 1980 - 81
a set of 76 games covering Candidate’s
Quarter Finals, Semi-Finals, and Final
Price Rs. S-2S (including ordinary postage)

For Copies Write to: GADRE & CO.,

1358, Sadashiv Peth, Pune 411 030

19
In Depth
FROM ± TO + -
When Karpov was scheduled to meet
Fischer in the aborted World Championship
match in 1975, many considered that it would
be a walk over for the American. (Who was
in his peak) The reason? Karpov weighed less
than 50Kg and a person just has to weigh more
to last a long and gruelling Chess match
stretching over 2£ months.
We all now know that Karpov has been
improving his physique year by year and also
his Chess. The following Karpov victory
proves that the World Champion can last as
long as anybody else and come out on top.
Karpov + Unzicker (Queen’s Gambit Declined)
(Bad Kissingen, 1980)
1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7
5. Bg5 00 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 (Unclear is 7. Bf6
Bf6 8. Rcl c6 9. Bd3 Nd7 10. cd ed 11. b4
Be7 12. b5 Ba3 13. Rc2 Bd6 14. 00 Nf6 15. be
be 16. Na4 Ne4 17. Ne5 Qe8 18. f3 Tal-
Geller (USSR (ch), 1978) 7...b6 8. Qb3
(Making room for the occupation of the ‘d’
file by his rook and at the same time exerting
pressure on the ‘d5’ square. Three other
ideas are:
(a) The calm, 8. Be2 Bb7 9. Bf6 Bf6
10. cd ed H. b4 c6 12. 00 a5 13. a3 Qd6
14. Qb3 ab 15. ab Nbd7+ Estevez—Karpov
(Leningrad, 1973).
(b) 8. Rcl Bb7 9. Bf6 Bf6 10. cd ed
11. b4 Be7 12. Qb3 c6 13. Be2 Qd6 14. Rbl
Nd7 15.00 a5 16. a3 ab 17. ab Ra7 17. Rfdl ±
R. Ravisekhar-Pffeger, Malta Olympiad) and
(c) Kasparov’s interesting 8. Qc2 Bb7
9. Bf6Bf6 10. cd ed 11.0 0 0!? c5 12. dc5
Nd7; 13. c6Bc6 14. Nd4 Bb7 15. Be2+)
8.. . dc4 (usual here is 8.. .Bb7 9. Bf6
Bf6 10. cd ed 11. Rdl Re8 12. Bd3 c5
13. dc5 Nd7 14. c6 Bc6 15. 00 Nc5 16. Qa3!
Qe7!? + ) 9. Bc4 Bb7 10. 00 Nbd7 (positionally
10.. . Bf3 is a mistake as it gives up the double
bishop, and also invités White to attack on the
dangerous open ‘g’ line) 11. Rfdl Ne4 12. Bg3
(White gets nothing after 12. Be7 Qe7)
12.. . Nc3 13. bc3 Bd6 14. a4 (Not 11. Bd6?!
cd 12. Be6? Bf3! 13. gf fe 14. Qe6+ Kh8
15. Qd6 Rf3—+) 14.. .Bg3 15. hg3 Qf6
16. Nd2 c5 (the bteak through e5 losing control
of d5 is bad as 16.,.e5 17. Bd5! c6 18. Bf3
plan Ne4 and Qa3+) 17. a5 Qe7 18. Bb5
Rfc8 19. ab (White is not getting the ‘b’ pawn
20
by T. N. PARAMESWARAN
after 19. Bd7 Qd7 20. ab Qc6!) 19...Nb6
20. Ba6 (Now since the task of isolating the
‘a’ pawn is over, Karpov now prefers to
exchange off Black’s dangerous Bishop)
20.. . Rc7 21. Bb7 Rb7 22. Ne4 cd4 23. cd4
Nd5 24. Qd3 a5 25. Nc5 Rba7 26. Qb3 Nf6
27. Qb5 Qd8 28. Rdbl Nd7 29. Qa4 Nb6?
29. Ra4 Nb6? (better was 29... Qc7) 30. Qc6
Nd7 31. Ne7 Qe7? (31... Qe8 was the only
move)
32. Na5!!+ (at first glance this strange
capture of the isolated pawn seems to be a
blunder. But. . 32. . . Ra5 33. Qa8 4- ! Ra8
34. Ra8 4-Nf8 35. Rbb8+ - or if 34. .Kh7
35. Rb7+—) 32. ,e5 33. Nb3 Rai 34. Nal
(Karpov correctly prefers to have the rooks on
the board) 34. . . Ra2 35. Nc2 ed4 36. Qc8 4-
Kh7 37. Qc4 Ra8 38. Qd3 +Kg8 39. Nd4
Nf6 40. Rcl Qe4 41. Qe2 Rd8 42. Qf3
Qe5 (The ending after 43. . Qf3 43. gf3 is
theoretically won for White) 43. Qf4 Qh5
44. f3 Nd5 45. Qe4Nf6 46. Qf5Qf5 (Black
atlast snaps the queen, leaving Karpov with
the problem of winning this technically difficult
R + N ending) 47. Nf5 Rd3 48. g4Nd7
49. Kf2 Ne5 50. Rc5 Ng6 (forced, for if
50. . . Nd7 51. Ke2 Ra3! 52. Rc8+ Kh/
(51...Nf8? 52. Ne7+) 53. Rc7 Ne5 54. Re7Ra5
55. f4! Ra2+ 56. Kfl Rai 4- 57. Kf2! Ng4 +
58 Kg3 plan Rf 7 4- - whi 1 e 50. . f6simply weakens
his position) 51. Rc8q- Kh7 52. f4 (Restricts
the mobility of the Black Knight) 52. . . Rd5
53. g3 Ra5 54. Rc7 Kg8 55. Nd6 Nh8
(this bottled up Knight can only save the pawn
but not the game) 56. e4 (56. Rc8q- Kh7
57. Rh8+?! Kh8 58. Nf7+ only draws)
56. ..Ra2+ 57. Kf3 Ra3+ 58. Kg2 f6
59. Re7 Rd3 60. Re8+ (time is not yet ripe
for White to create an ‘ e’ passer as 60. e5 fe5
61. fe5 Rd5! 62. Nf5 Nf7 63. e6 Nd6
64. Rd7 Nf5+ 65. gf Rf5=) 60. ...Kh7
61. Nf5 Nf7 62. Re6 Kg8 63. Kf2 Kf8
64. Ra6 Rd8 (Now tffà't both the Black
pieces are tied up, Karpov decides to bring
his king out into the battlefield) 65. Ke3 Rb8
66. Ra7 Rd8 67. Nd4 Re8 (Black just sits Ï
back and waits for the tide to sweep him off)
68. Ra6 Rb8 69. Kd3 Rd8 70. Kc3 Rc8 +
71. Kb4Re8 72. Ne6+ Kg8 73. Kc4 Nd8
74. Nc5 Nf7 75. Kd5 Rc8 76. Nd7 Nd8
77. Nc5 Nf7 78. Rc6 Ra8 79. Rc7 Kf8 :
80. Ne6+Kg8 81. e5! (Mission accomplished!)
81. . . fe5 82. fe5Re8 83. Rd7 Ra8 84. Nc5
Re8 85. e6Ng5 86. Kd6 K18 87.Ra7Rd8+
88. Nd7+ Ke8 89. Ra4 Nh7 90. Ke5 Nf8
91. Kf5! + - (wins out of hand, White avoids
91. Nf8 Kf8 92. Rf4+ Ke8 (92.. Kg8?
BASIC STRATEGIES
(From the Russian Book “Programme for
preparing Young Chess Players of the First
category’’ by Golenitschew — Translated by
M. Aaron).
QUALITATIVE PAWN SUPERIORITY
The theory of the qualitative superiority
of pawns and pawn structures was first enun­
ciated by Nimzovitsch. “The pawns of a
particular flank in which they can move for­
ward attacking the base of the opponents pawn
chain are reckoned as qualitatively stronger”
So, in the position with White pawns at a2, b2.
c3, d4, e5, f2, g2, h2 and Black pawns at a7,
b7, c5, d5, e6, f7, g7, h7 White has qualitatively
pawn superiority on the King side and Black
on the Queen’s flank.
Let us extend this understanding and
examine positions in which the qualitative
superiority of the pawns leads to successfully
accomplishing the attack on the flank.
Example I
Alekhine—Reti, (Semmering, 1926)
21
93. e7! Ra8 94. Ra4! Rb8 95. Kd6+-)
93. Rf7 Rd3 94. Rg7 Rg3 95. Kf6 Rf3 +
96. Kg6 Rh3 97. Kf5 Rf3+ 98, Ke5 Rg3
99. Kf4Rh3=) 91. . .Nd7 92. ed7+ Rd7
93. Kg6 Kf8 (both 93. ...Rd3 94. Kg7 Rg3
95. Re4+ Kd7 96. Kh6 and 94. . .h5
95. Re4+ Kd7 96. g5 Rg3 97. Kh6 wins
outright). 94. Ra8+ Ke7 95. Kg7 Rd4
96. Ra7+ Ke8 97. Kh6 Rg4 98. Rg7 Ra4
99. g4 Kf8 100. g5 Rg4 101. Ra7 Rgl
102. Kg6 Rg2 103. Ra8+ Ke7 104. Rg8
1-0 on 104. . . Rgl 105. Kh7 Rhl -f-
106. Kg7 Rgl 107. g6 Rg2 108. Ra8 Rgl
109. Kh7Rhl+ 110. Kg8 Rgl 111. g7 Rg2
112. Ra6 Rgl 113. Kh7 Kf7 114. g8= Q +
wins.
(continued)
1. c5 Rxe4 2. Bxe4 Rf7 3. Ke3 15 4. Bf3
Kf6 5. Kd4 (White centralises his king and
threatens not only to increase pressure on the
Q-s>de but also to open up the game through
e2-e4) 5. . Rh7 6. h4Rg7 7. a4 Rf7 8. a5a6
(this leads to material loss. Better was 8...Re7
on which will follow 9. e4) 9. c6 b5 10. ab
Nxb6 11. Ra3Ke7.
Now 12. e3 and then Rxa6 would have
deprived Black of any counterplay for the
pawn.
Example n
Reshevsky — Korchnoy
(5th Match game, Amsterdam 1968)
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2
g6 5. d3 Bg7 6 f4 Nf6 7. NÏ30-0 8. 0-0
Rb8. yThe plan of both sides are clear. White
intends a king-side offensive where he has
qualitative pawn superiority, while Black plans
on the Queen side) 9. h3 b5 10. a3 a5 11. Be3
b4 12. ab ab 13. Ne2 Ne8 (starting with a
tempo the manoeuvre Nf6-e8-c7-b5-d4) 14.Rbl
Nc7 15. f5 Nb5 (Of course not 15. . ,gf
16. Ng5!) 16. Qd2 Nbd4 17. Nh4 (losing time
better 17. Nexd4 Nxd4 18. g4 or 18. Bh6)
17. ..Nxe2+ 18. Qxe2 Ne5 19. Nf3 (White
has perhaps refrained from 19. g4 because of
19. ...e6) 19. ..Nxf3+ (19. . ,e6 20. g4 Kh8
was interesting) 20. Qxf3 Bb7 21. h4 Kh8
22. Qe2? (after 22. g4 White’s chances are
better) 22. . . Be5 23. g4 e6! (this equalises)
24. g5 ef 25. ef Bxg2 26. Qxg2 Qd7 27. fg
fg (27. ...hg with the idea of Kg7 and Rh8
could have sharpened the fight) 28. b3 Kg7
29. Rxf8Rxf8 30. Rfl Rxfl+ 31. Kxfl Qe6
and soon -J—■£.
 Example III
Savon—Unlmann (Skople, 1968)
1. e4 e6 2. <13 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3
c5 5. g3 Nc6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. 0-0 0-0 8. Rel
b5 (starting without delay the utilisation of his
qualitative pawn superiority) 9. e5 Nd7
l0. Nfl a5 11. h4 b4 12. Bf4 Ba6 13. Ne3
a4 14. c4? (as in Example I an ill timed
attack on the same flank where the opponent
is stronger) 14. . .be 15. be d4 16. cd cd
17. Nc4 Nc5 18. Ng5 Nb4! 19. Bxa8 Qxa8
20. Qh5 Bxg5 21. Bxg5 Nbxd3 with more than
neccessary compensation for the exchange.
Home Work
I Position from the game
Geller-Hort (Skople, 1968)
White: Kc2, Qf4, Be3, Ps a3, b3, c4, e5,
f2, g3, h5,
Black: Ke8, Qd7, Bf8, Ps a7, b7, c5, e6,
f7, g7, h6, Show the most promising plan for
White. The most deserving plan is 1. Qe4 to
be followed by g3-g4, f2, f4, with the idea of
f4-f 5 or g4-g5.
II Position fiom the game
Reshevsky — Keres, (Hague—Moscow, 1948)
White: Kgl, Qc2, Rai, Rdl, Be2, Be3,
Nc3, Nf3 Ps a2, b2, c4, e4, f2, g2, h2.
Black: Kg8, Qd8, Ra8, Re8, Bb7, Bg7,
Nd7, Nf6, Ps a7, b6, c6, e5, f7, g6, h7.
What is the idea behind 1. b4?
The basic idea is to carry out a2-a4, b4-b5
and a4-a5. After the exchange on c6 the
possibility of invading the d5 square comes
into reckoning. Black must also reckon with
the creation of an outpost at d6 through c4-c5.
RESTRAINING MOBILITY AND
BLOCKADE
In his theoretical work “The Chess
Blockade” Nimzovitsch gives more attention
to the important strategical method-restricting
the mobility. He wrote “Any pawn which has
the possibility, or even most insignificant hint
of advanci ng, any passed pawn, any bit in the
centre, any quantitative or qualitative superio­
rity, restrict it! The culminating point, the ideal
act of restraining is and will be-Blockade!”
Restraining the mobility is not a passive
method but is connected with definite attacking
ideas. Here is how, for example, Nimzovitsch,
recommends the struggle against pawn mobility
in the the centre should be conducted. “First
restrict the mobility, next blockade it and
finally destroy it”. Thus, the idea of restriction
and blockade is aimed at immobilising the
future object of attack.
22
Example I
Geller — Symslov (XVII U S S R, (ch)
Moscow, 1949)
Black’s positional advantage in clear. He must
play 1.. . Nc4 and then a7-a5 and only at the
opportune moment Qf5-g6 and Ne7-f5.
1.. . Qg6? (allowing mobility) 2. f5! Nxf5
3. Rf3 Nc4 4. Qcl a5 5. Nd3 h4 6. Bf2 Qh5
7. Qf4 g6 8. Rh3 Qh6 (trying to weaken
White’s attack) 9. Qxh6 Nxh6 10. Bxh4 Nf5
11. Bf6Ng7 12. Rh6(threatening the manoeuvre
Nd3-f4xg6 and also transfering the king to e2
and then Rel-fl-f4-h4, Black’s position has
become difficult.)
The following positions illustrate the
restriction of mobility of central pawns.
Example H
Taimanov—Geller (XXXI USSR (ch) Leningrad,
1963)
White: Kgl, Qa4, Rai, Rel, Bel, Bg2,
Nd2, Nf3, Ps a3, b2, d4, e4, f2, g3, 112,
Black: Kg8, Qb6, Ra8, Rd8, Be7, Bg6,
Nd7,Nf6, Ps a5, b7,c6, e6,f7,g7,h7. Aposition
where pawns at c6 and e6 restrain a pawn on
d4 has been figuratively described by Nimzo­
vitsch as “Saw”. This is a spècial character
of the Caro-Kann Defence. After the refined
1. ..Qa7! White has no useful move. He
must reckon with c6-c5 and also b7-b5. For
example (a) 2. Nh4 b5 3. Nxg6 hg! 4. Qc2
Qxd4 5. Qxc6 Ne5 with the threat Nd3.
(b) 2. e5 Nd5 3. Ne4 c5 4. Bg5 (White
could get into more difficulties in case of
4. de Nxc5 5. Nxc5 Bxc5) 4. . .çd 5. Be7
Nxe7 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 Nxe5 8. Nc5
Nd3 9. Nxd3 Bxd3 10. Bxb7 Rab8 11. Nc6
Nxc6 12. Bxc6 Rxb2 and Black .has an extra
pawn.
Example HI Spassky —Geller,
(8th Match game, Sukhumi, 1968)
White : Kgl, Qdl, Rbl, Rfl, Bd2, Bf3
Ne2, Ps a3, b3, c4, d3, e4, f4 g3, h2.
 Black: Kg8, Qd7, Rc8, Rf8, Bc6, Bg7, Ne7, 8. Ne2 b6 9. e4 Ne8 (Black avoids Bcl-g5 and
Ps a7 b7 c5, d4, e6, f7, g6, h7. 1 g4 (on 1. b4 at the same time prepares the pawn offensive
Black replies 1. .b5) 1. . f5! (this is a model f7-f5 to be followed by Ne8-d6 with pressure
of play on restricting the mobility against a on c4) 10. Be3 d6 (also possible was 10.. .Ba6)
side with qualitative pawn superiority), 2. Ng3 11. 0-0 (preferable was 11. Ng3) 11. ..Na5
Kh8 (in oraer to prepare the opening of the 12. Ng3 Ba6 13. Qe2 Qd7 14. f4 (better was
g-file) 3. Qe2 Rce8 4. Bg2? (Relatively 14. e5) 14...f5 (The centre is blocked, On
better would have been 4. Qg2 fg 5. Bxg4 15. d5 follows 15.. ,g6 16. de Qxe6 17. ef gf
Nf5) 4.. ,e5! 5. b4 ef 6. Bxf4 cb 7. ab b5! and the pawn on c4 is lost) 15. Rael (losing
(again, the strategy of restriction) 8. cb Bxb5 time. Better was the immediate 15. Radi or
9. gf Nd5 10. Bh3 (in order to reply 10...Nc3 15. Rfel) 15...g6 16. Rdl Qf7 17. e5 Rc8
with 1 lQg2 or even 11 Qf3 with the threat of 18. Rfel de 19. de (if 19. fe then 19.. .cd and
f5-f6) 10.. ,gf 11. Qh5Nxf4 12. Rxf4 Bxd3 20.. .Bxc4) 19. . Ng7 2O.Nfl Rfd8 21.B12 Nh5
13. RxfS. In spite of the inventive defence of 22. Bg3 Qe8 23. Ne3 Qa4 (White’s position is
White, Black has good winning chances after strategically lost) 24. Qa2 Nxg3 25. hg h5
13.. Qc6 14. Rc5 Qh6 15. Qxh6 Bxh6. (possible was 25... Qb3 26. Qxb3 Nxb3
27. g4 fg 28. Nxg4 Na5) 26. Be2 (the position
HOME WORK could have been made a little less difficult with
I Position from the 9th Match game 26. Bc2 Qc6 27. a4) 26...Kf7 27. Kf2 Qb3
28. Qxb3 Nxb3 29. Bd3 Ke7 30. Ke2 Na5
Tai—Gligoric, (Belgrade, 1968)
31. Rd2. Now Black should continue 31... Kf7
White: Khl, Qd2, Rel, Rfl, Bc2, Nf3, and then Rc8-c7-d7.
Ng3, Ps a2, c4, d5, e4, g2, h3.
Example H Kotov — Gligoric (Zurich, 1953)
Black: Kg8, Qc7, Re8, Bc8, Bd8, Nc5» 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6
Nd7, Ps a5, b4, d6, f 7, g7, h6. 5. f3 0-0 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 c5 8. Bd3 Nh5 9. Nge2
Show the strongest continuation for White? f5 10. ef gf 11. Qc2 e4! (Initiating the plan for
1. e5! (else Nd7-e5 with compensation for an effective plan of blockade) 12. fe f4 13. Bf2
the exchange) 1.. . Nxe5 (no better is 1.. .de Nd7 14. Ngl (14. e5 Nxe5 15. Bxh7+ Kh8 + )
2. Nd4) 2. QI4 with active positions for the 14.. Qg5 15. Bfl Ne5 16. Nf3 Qe7 17. Nxe5
pieces and material advantage. Qxe5 18.0-0-0 Nf6 19. h3Bd7 (very interesting
was 17-a6 to be followed by b7-b5) 20. Bd3 a6
II Position from Tarnowsky—Ivkov 21. Nbl (intending a dangerous plan : Nbl-
(Varna, 1962) d2-f3) 21...f3! 22. gf Nh5 23. Nd2 Nf4.
White: Kel, Qdl, Rai, Rhl, Bd2, Bfl,
Nh3, Ps a3, c2, c3, d4, e5, f2, g2, h2.
Black: Ke8, Qa5, Ra8, Rh8. Bd7, Nb8,
Ne7, Ps a7, b7, c4, d5, e6, f7, g7, h6.
In what way is 1. Nf4 insufficient? After
1. Nf4? Ba4! White will have great difficulty
in getting his Queen and rook into play,
correct is 1. a4.
RESTRAINING MOBILITY AND
BLOCKADE (concluded)
Let us examine more difficult examples of A classical example of blockade. The
blockade. immediate objects are the 4 White pawns, but
Example I the influence of the blockade goes much deeper:
White’s white square bishop has been trans­
Botwinnik — Reshevsky (Haag—Moscow, 1948) formed into a pawn and his knight’s useful
This gante demonstrates restriction of squares are taken away by her own pawns.
doubled pawns and a pawn centre. Moreover, the blockaded almost completely
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 blockaded White pieces includes the queen itself!
5. a3 Bxc3q- 6. be (The doubled pawns have 24. Bfl b5 25. h4 Kh8 26. Rgl Bf6 27. Nb3
already lost their mobility. The pawn at c4 Rab8 (stronger was 27... b4 28. Na5 Ba4)
will become an object of attack in the further 28. Bel b4 29. Kbl Ra8 30. Bg3 Rg8 31. Qh2
course of the game). 6.. .Nc6 7. Bd3 0-0 Rxg3 32. Rxg3 Ne2 33. Qxe2 Qxg3 34. Nel a5
 35. Nd3 Bd4 36. h5 Qh4 37. Bg2 Rg8 38. Rhl
Qg3 39. Bfl a4 30. Kc2 a3 (the last few moves
were made in time trouble. Black could have
attained winning chances with 40.. ,b3 41. ab
ab + 41. Kxb3 Qg7) 41. b3 After home analysis
W-
HOME WORK
I. Position from the game Geller - Symslov,
(Amsterdam, 1956).
White : Kel, Qe2, Rai, Rhl, Bd3, Be3,
Ng3, Ps, a3, c3, c4, d5, e4, f2, g2, h2.
Black : Kg8, Qd8, Rc8, Rf8, Ba6, Na5,
Ne8, Ps a7, b6, c5, d7, e6, f7, g7, h7,
How Should Black continue.
l..
.Qh4! (Dangerous was l...Nd6 2. e5
N(6)c4 3. Qh5 g6 4. Qh6 with the threat Nh5)
2. 0-0 Nd6 and. ..f7-f5.
IL Position from Tolush-Sokolsky,
(Leningrad, 1938).
White: Kel, Qa4, Rai, Rhl, Bel, Be2,
Ps, a3, c3, c4, d4, e3, f2, g2, h2.
Black : Kg8, Qd7, Ra8, Rf8, Nc6, Nf6,
Nf6, Ps a6, b7, c7, d5, e6, f7, g7, h7.
Find the strongest continuation for Black.
1. -65! 2. cb ab 3. Qxb5 Rfb8 4. Qd3 Na5
5. 0-0 Qc6 with a blockade of White’s queen
side.

NEWS FROM STATES

ANDHRA PRADESH on 9....... d6 10. Qh4 Nbd7 11. Nf4 or here
10.. .h6 H.Bh6!gh6 12. Qg3+Kh8 13. Qg6
Vijayawada Nbd7 14. Rf3+—) 10. Qh4 g6 11. Nf4 Nh5
The combined A. P. selection tournament (There is no good move for Black) 12. Ng6!
conducted by the Vijayawada division was held Rfl-f- (12...hg6 13. Bg6 Bg5 14. Qh5 Be3 +
during April to select six players who along 15. Khl Qe7 16. Rf8 + wins) 13. Rfl Bg5 14.
with the seeded Md. Hassan, Dr. Nagendra Qh5 Be3 + 15. Khl Qg5 16. Ne7 + ? (crushing
and Govindlal Sarma would represent A. P. was 16. Rf8+! Kg7 17. Rf7-f- !! Kf7 18.
in the forthcoming National ‘B’. Qh7+ Kf6 19. Ne4+ Kf5 20. Qf7+ Kg4
21. Be2+ Mate) 16.,.Qe7 17. Bh7 + Qh7 18.
Seven players each from the Hyderabad and Qe8+ Kg7 19. Qf7+ Kh8 (I9...Kh6 20.
Vijayawada divisions took part in this semi­ Rf6+ Kg5 21. Qh7 Kf6 22. Ne4 is mate).
league tournament (Players from one division 20. Qf8+? (20. Qe8+! Qg8 21. Qh5+ Kg7
meeting all the players of the other division) 22. Rf3+—) 2O...Qg8 21. Qf3 Bh6! 22. Qh5
Y. Nanda Kumar, L. Ravi and C. S. Amar Qg5! 23. Rf8+ Kh7 0-1.
remained unbeaten, while K. Ashok scored
more number of wins (5). The first six were Y. Nanda Kumar + K. Ashok (Reti Opening),
1-3 Y. Nanda Kumar, L. Ravi, K. Ashok 5^/7, (Comments by the winner)
4. C. S. Amar 4£, 5-6. H. Karmali and L. R.
Sarma 4 each. 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. b4 Bg7 4. Bb2 d6
(MCO gives 4... 00 5. d3 c6 6. e3 a5 7. b5
The Professional Chess Players Association cb5 8. ab5 a4> 9. Na3 d5= Benko-Byrne,
conducted the first Andhra Challengers Invita­ Mallorca, 1968.) 5. g3 00 6. Bg2 e5 7. d3 c6
tion Chess Super league here during March. 8. 00 Re8 9. N(l)d2 N(8)d7 10. a4 a5 11. b5
This six player league was won by C. S. Amar (In a similar position, Capablanca in his game
who scored all the 5 points while L. Ravi against Reti as Black fianchettoed his QB and
finished second with 4 points. The remaining countered, White’s threat on White squares on
places went to 3. V. G. K. Murthy 3, 4. K-Siva the long diagonal). 11...c5 (Unnecessarily
prasad 1£, 5. D. Venkaiah 1 and 6. K. Ashok weakens the long diagonal). 12. Qc2Ra7 13. e3
b6 14. Radi d5 (A grave positional blunder
Ravi missed a winning continuation against prematurely opening up the game and as well
Amar in this cruicial deciding game. giving White a strong post on c4for his Knight
from where it attacks Black’s weak points
Ravi — C. S. Amar (Staunton Gambit, Notes b6, d6 and e5, Instead Black should try Rc7
by Ravi) followed by Bb7 and Qa8). 15. cd5 Nd5 16.
1. d4 15 2. e4!? fe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 e3? Nc4 Qe7 17. Qb3 (threatens Ne5) 17.. ,NM
(Better is e6, g6 or Nc6) 5. fe3 e6 6. Bd3 Bb4 18. Bh3 Bb7 19. e4 Bc8 20. Nh4 (20. Bd7 also
7. Nge2 00 8. 00 Be7 9. Qel! Nc6 (If 9.. .h6? wins) 2O...Kh8 21. f4 ef4 22. Bg7+ Kg7 23.
10. Bh6! gh6 II. Qg3 + Kh8 12. Qg6 +— and Rf4 Ne5 24. Bc8 Nc4 25. Qc4 Rc8 26. d4! Qe6

24
27. d5 Qd6 28. Rlfl Re8 29. R112 Rb7 30.
Nf3 (The Knight is in route to the dominating
post c4) 30.. .f6 31. Qc3 h6 32. Nd2 Qe5 33.
Qe5 feS 34. R4f3 R8e7 35. Nc4 Rf7? 36. Rf7 +
Rf7 37. Rf7+ Kf7 38JNe5+ Ke7 39. Nc4Na2
40. d6+ Ke5 41. e5 1-0.
BIHAR.
Patna
The annual S. S. P. Verma Memorial Chess
Championship was conducted at the Science
College by the B. S. C. A. from 24th March, 81.
Yusuf Hassan a promising and gifted young
ster bagged the title with an (impressive 100%
score in this seven round Swiss. Of late this
youngster has been playing with remarkable
consistency and in the process has virtually
over shadowed and eclipsed the other strong
contenders by shooting to the top with a clear
two points lead. National stars A. K. Sinha
and B. K. Srivastava were relegated to low
placings while National Junior Champion
P. K. Singh hung on to the 3rd place. Final
placings were : Yusuf Hassan 7/7; 2-6. P. P.
Ambastha, P. K. Singh, Sheonatb. Prasad,
A. M. Verma and Krishna Prasad 5 each. This
tournament was a base for selecting the state
team to the Guntur National team champion­
ship.
—S. M. Rab.
DELHI
State Championship
Kishan Behari Lal Srivastava has won the
Delhi State ‘A’ Championship for the umpteenth
time, this March. In a 14-player round Robin,
he scored 10 points to claim the first prize of
Rs. 500/-. The championship was marked
by the non participation of two qualifiers Hamid
Hassan and Sidhart Chib, and the withdrawal
of Anup Chib half way through the tourna­
ment.
The final standigns were : 1. K. B. L.
Srivastava 10/13, (2-3) Rajesh Shukla, T. K.
Ohri 9, (4-6) Som Nath, Rajinder Singh and
C. P. Dham 7|, (7) K. Murali Mohan 7, (8)
S. K. Sharma (9-10) Laxman Singh, C. S.
Sharma 5, (11-12) Hukam Chand, N. C. Paliwal
4£, (13) Ravi Jain 4, (14) Anup Chib 2.
Simultaneous Displays
On March 28 Manuel Aaron and Nasir Ali
gave Simultaneous Displays at the R. B. I.
Aaron took 4 hours to win 12, lose 6 (R. S.
Tiwari, Sunil Mahajan, A. Chhabra, M. B.
Muralidharan, A. Pavanasam and Kanhaya)
and draw 2 (N. C. Paliwal and Mahesh).
25
Simultaneously (!) Nasir Ali gave a 20 board
simul but took less time to win 17, lose 2 (P. K.
Verma and J. K. Mahendra) and draw only one
against Anish Sharma.
Delhi University Inter College Team
Chess Championship
St. Stephen’s College Team comprising of
Ashvin Chabbra (Captain), S. Mahajan, A.
Matoo and P. Saxena won the championship
amassing 19^- pts/24, with a margin of 2£ pts,
over their nearest rival.
The team created a record by winning all
the 4 tournaments held in the University this
year, including the prestigious prize money
(850/-) in the Delhi School of Economics
invitational Inter College.
The Hansraj Team which came second was
Rajeev Sharma (captain), Arun Khattar, Sanjeev
Gupta who had successfully won the title last
year.
KARNATAKA
Bangalore
Dusk to Dawn Drama
The 1981 State championship was conducted
from 13/5 to 24/5 on a 11 round Swiss. Coming
in the wake of the Malleswaram rated tourna­
ment, this championship attracted a record
94 players thereby giving evidence to the in­
creasing popularity of the game in Karnataka.
Since the State Squad for National ‘B’ was to
be picked on the basis of the final placings,
tension mounted as the rounds progressed.
There were some strenous night sessions for
adjourned games. In particular, there was one
dusk to dawn battle between Champion D. V.
Prasad who retained his title and Secretary of the
Karnataka Chess Association, Sai Prakash
which was played from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. and
continued from 11.30 p.m. to 4.30 a.m.! It
was finally drawn. The game between D. V.
Ravi and Sudhakar Babu lasted till 3 a.m.
The top placings : 1. D. V. Prasad 9, 2-3.
R. Sridharan and H. S. Manjunath 81 each,
(4-8) K. Sai Prakash, S. N. Ravi Shankar,
R. Ravindran, N. Sudhakar Babu and K. B.
Shankar Rao 8 each.
Fourteen year old Sudhakar Babu will be
making his debut in Nat ‘B’ at Kanpur.
D. V. Prasad 4- R. Sridharan
(Kings Indian, Averbakh System).
1. d4 N16 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2
00 6. Bg5 c5 7. d5 e6 8. Qd2 Re8 9. Nf3 ed
10. ed Nbd7 11. 00 a6 12. a4 Ne5 13. Ne5 Re5
14. 14 Re8 15. 15! gf (If 15.. Bf5 16. g4
B moves 17. Qf4 wins Or 16... h6 17. gf hg
18. fg fg 19. Bd3 with advantage. For 16.. .h6
not 17. Bf6 since Qf6 18. gf Qd4-f- 19. Qd4
cd getting back the piece). 16. Bd3 Qc7
17. Bh6 Bh6 18. Qh6 Qe7 19. Rael Qel
20. Qg5+ Kf8 21. Rel Rel+ 22. Kf2 Ne4 +
23. Be4 Re4 24. Ne4 fe 25. Qd8+ Kg7
26. Qd6 Bg4 27. Qg3 e3+ 28. Ke3 Re8 +
29. Kd3 1-0.
II SC Annual Open Chess Tournament
Sixty-nine players competed in an eight
round Swiss from 2/4 to 14/4 This event was a
thumping success for K. Sai Prakash who
finished first with an unbeaten record, ahead
of several State and National players. Besides
being a top class organiser, Sai Prakash proved
that he is still a force to reckon with in tourna­
ment play. The leading scores were : l.K. Sai
Prakash 7/8; 2. R. Ravindran 6J-; 3. S. Kiran
Kumar 6^; 4. D. V. Ravi 6£; 5. N. K. Upadh-
yaya 6; 6. R. Sridharan 6; 7. H. S. Manjunath
6; 8. J. A. Shariff 6.
Two lightning tournaments were conducted
one before the start of the main tournamen-
and the other on the prize distribution day
The first one was won by N. K. Upadhyaya and
the second by Rohini Khadilkar.
Malleswaram Open
This event was conducted side by side with
the Malleswaram Association’s Internationally
Rated Invitation Tournament. This nine round
Swiss for 76 participants from 15/4 to 30/4
was won by K. Prabhakaran.
Final placings : 1. K. Prabhakaran 8; 2.
5. Kiran Kumar 7-J- 3-6. B. Sasidar Rai, M.
Vasanth Babu, R. Raghu Srivastava, Manohar
K. Hegde 7 each, 7-9. A. N. Venkatesan,
D. V. Ravi, S. Srihari 6J each and 10. S. V.
Prasad 6.
—D. V. Venkatraman
Mangalore
P. Gopalakrishna of Kalmadka became the
1981 Dakshina Kannada District Chess Cham­
pion by winning the District ‘A’ Champion­
ship held at Canara College from 28/2 to 4/3
with 8£ points out of 9. Only the reigning
District Champion Gangadhara Kini of Syndi­
cate Bank Manipal could offer him a good
fight. Kini was rather unlucky not to win both
his drawn games against Gopalakrishna and
Sitarama Achar and finished runner up with 8.
The other results : 3. K. Sitharama Acher
6, 4-5 M. Niranjana Shetty and K. B. Sankara
Rao 5, 6-7 M. U. Jayadeva and N. Shridhara
Shetty 4 each.
M. Ganapathi Bhat of KEB Ullal, won the
7 round Swiss Tournament for the rest of the
players scoring 6£ points. Narendra Acharya
of Mangalore with 6, Shashidhara Kote ofSt.
Alloysius College 6£, and Muralidfiara Pyati
of KREC Surathakal 4-£, secured the II, III and
IV places respectively.
B. Suresh Rao of KPT Mangalore won the
District Junior Chess Championship scoring
3 points in 4 rounds. Prakash Bhat of K. P. T.
Mohan Prabhu of S. 1. D. M. College of Busi­
ness Management and Gurudutt Kamath of
Canara Junior College were placed II, III arid
IV respectively.
MADHYA PRADESH.
Rajnandgaon
The Eleventh M. P. State Chess Champion­
ships, which was organised at Rajnandgaon
from 5th to 16th April 1981 attracted 78 partici­
pants. The participants represented BHEL,
Bhilai Steel Plant and 16 Districts. Rajendra
Bagdi of Indore emerged Champion for the
2nd time in succession by scoring 9 points out of
11 followed by another Indore player Sunil
Janwade with 8. The lone lady participant of
the tournament Ku Kiran Agrawal of Raj­
nandgaon scored 7. The Team Championship
was introduced for the 1st time and the coveted
‘Savitri Devi Grover running cup” was cap­
tured by Jabalpur District with 29 points.
Bilaspur and Bhilai were placed 2nd and 3rd
with 28J points each.
The final positions : 1. Rajendra Bagdi 9,
2-7. Sunil Janwade, Mujahid Ali, Rajesh Baha­
dur, R. C. Rastogi, Manoj Verma, Abid Ali
8 each. 8-10. Anil Tuleja, CBS Ahiwar and Abu
Ahmed 7% each.
The tournament was inaugurated by Shri
Sharad< Kothari and the prize distribution was
done by Shri Inderchand Dhariwal, Member
M. P. Sports Council. Cash prizes and other
articles worth Rs. 3,000/- were distributed to the
players.. .The director of the tournament was
Shri S. P. Mishra (Jabalpur).
MAHARASHTRA
Bombay M.L.W.B Open
Dr. Marzban Irani and Raghu Gokhale
started as favourites in the Maharashtra
Labour Welfare Board Open Tournament
played at Kamgar Kreeda Bhavan from
7th to 28th February with 156 entries, in
the absence of the National ‘A’ and State
Selection players. With one round to go, they
 shared the lead with S. V. Honmurgi and D. A.
Andurkar, all on 8-j- out of 10. Andurkar
scored over Honmurgi in the last round in a
welcome return to form and took the title,
edging out runner-up Dr. Irani on median
count. Anil Ghag who defeated Gokhale
claimed the third prize with 9 points. Other
prize winners : Honmurgi, Gokhale, M. N.
Abhayankar, and B. C. Sarda 8-J, Suneel
rRahator, S. G. Chiplunkar and H. P. Pathare
^8. 15 year old Megh Manseta (7) and 14 year
old C. K. Kolambakar (5|.) received special
prizes.
Sajandas Joshi claimed the first prize of Rs.
700/- in the 2nd Adarsh Chess Circle open
tournament played at the Adarsh Science
Institute premises (Mahim) from 20-4 to 29-4-81.
Joshi played his normal, sound, positional
1 game and was the only unbeaten player. The
surprise was youngster Sharad Tilak’s perfor­
mance in tying for first place. After an early
defeat Sharad defeated an out-of form Hegde
held Joshi in the penultimate round and caught
up with him by winning in the last round,
against Neelakantan while Joshi was fighting
for a draw with Bhagwat.
Prize winners : (9 round swiss, 71 entries)
1-2. S. G. Joshi, S. S. Tilak 7£, 3-5. M. D. Bhag­
wat, R. M. Rajadhyax, N. Neelakantan 7,
S—7. R. G. Hegde, D. A. Andurkar 6J-,
6. Hasan 6.
Two games from the event :
Sharad Tilak + R. Hegde
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 e6 8. 0-0-0 Bd7
f4Be7 10. Be2h6 ll.Bb.4Qa5? 12.Nb3Qc7
9.
13. Bxf6gxf6 14. Bb.5 Na5 15. f5 Nxb3 +
16. cxb3 Kf8 17. fxe6 fxe6 18. e5! f5 (Black has
been playing aimlessly and apparently doesnt’
realise what is happening) 19. exd6 Bg5
20. dxc7 Ke7 21. Nd5+ ed 22. Rhel + Kd6
24. Re3 and White won.
N. Neelakantan — S. G. Joshi
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Qe7
5. d4 Bb6 6. 0-0 Nf6 7. a4 a5 8. Bb5? (missing
Black’s tenth move, White believes that this is
favourable to him. 8 Na3 or Rel was correct)
8.. .0-0 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. Nxe5 d6! 11. Nc4
(not 11. Nxc6 Qxe4 and the N is in danger)
11.. .Qxe4 12. Nbd2 Qg6 13. Nxb6 axb6
14. Qf3Ba6! 15.c4d5 16. b3Qc2! 17.QdlQd3
(wins a pawn and the game)
18. Nf3 dxc4 19. Ne5 Qxb3 20. Ba3 Re8
21. Qxb3 cxb3 22. Rfbl c5 23. Rxb3 cxd4
24. Nf3d3 25. Rxb6 Re4 26. Bel h6 27. Bd2Bc4
27
29. Rc6 Bb3 29. Rc5 Bxa4 30. Rxa5 Rxa5
31. Bxa5 Bc6 32. Bd2 Re2 33. Be3 Bxf3
34. gxf3 Nd5 35. Rdl Nxe3 36. fxe3 Rxe3
37. Kf2 Re2-|- 38. Kg3 d2, White lost on time
in this hopeless position.
—Neelakantan.
MEGHALAYA
Shillong
The Meghalaya State Chess Championship
was divided into groups A and B. While
Group B was a 9 round swiss, Group A was a
Round Robin and had a prize fund of Rs. 440-
Results of Group A: 1. R. P. Pyrbot, 2. R. R.
Nandi, 3. L. B. Rana, 4. Apurba Datta, 5. S. P.
Majaw, 6. Dipak Kumar Dev,
An Inter Club Team Chess Championship
was held on a 7 round swiss for 14 teams, each
team consisting of 3 players. Accountant
Generals Office won the Championship while
Professor’s Recreation club and Khasi Pnar
Chess Club tied for the second spot.
PONDICHERRY
Arianagar
An Open chess tournament conducted by
the Bharathidasan sports Club on a Six round
Swiss from 13/5/81 to 15/5/81 had 26 partici­
pants with a total prize fund of Rs. 500/- The
event was won by 14 year old Sathyanarayanan.
Final standings: 1. V. Sathyanarayanan 5,
2. Philip Selvin 5, 3. V. Hariharan and
4. S. Manikandaswamy 4J each.
A game from the event.
V. Sathyanarayanan + R. Devakumar.
1. g3 g6 2. Bg2 Bg7 3. e4 d6 4. Ne2 Nf6
5. 00 00 6. h3 Nbd7 7. Nbc3 c6 8. d3 Qc7
9. Be3 b6 10. Qd2 Bb7 H.Bh.6e5 12. Bg7Kg7
13. f4c5 14. g4ab 15.f5Ne8 16. Ng3 f6 17. g5
Qd8 18. h4 Nc7 19. Bb.3!d5 20. fg6 hg6 21. Bd7
Qd7 22. gf6+ Kh7 23. Nce2 Rae8 24. Rf2!
Qf7 25. h5 Re6 26. hg6+ 1-0. A Simultaneous
display was given by Manuel Aaron on 15/5/81.
He played 13 games, Won 11 games and lost
to J. Dhandapani and S. Ravindran.
The Pondicherry State Chess Champion­
ship was won by V. Ravichandran again.
He scored 5 points in a 18-player, 6 round Swiss
from May 1 to May 6, 1981. The other
results were 2. S. Kesavaraj 5, 3. V. Sathya­
narayanan 4J, 4-5. V. Sivakumar and R. Deva­
kumar 4, 6. Pravin Bhatia 3£.
Ravichandran won the Nolaire Prospéré
Memorial Rolling Shield and Rs. 150/-. The
total prize fund was Rs. 525/-.
 PUNJAB
Jullunder
Rajesh Gupta of Amritsar became the
Punjab State Chess Champion when he won
the open Punjab Chess Championship this
March. It was a 7-round Swiss for thirty eight
players. Gupta 6/7 was followed by
H. T. Singla (Muktsar), H. K. Tiwari and
Channa Lal-both of Jullunder.
RAJASTHAN
Bikaner
The Rajasthan State Chess Championship,
1981 was conducted during April was won by
S. S. Dave. The other results were : 2. S. C.
Acharya, 3. Bahadur singh, 4. N. R. Sharma,
5. R. Sharma, 6. R. K. Verma, 7. A. M. Sharma,
8. Gopal Lal Maheshwari, 9. R. K. Vyas and Manuel Aaron played 31, won 29 and lost
10. V. L. Goswami.
TAMIL NADU.
Madras
The First Inter Club Team Championship
at Madras attracted 11 clubs including 3 indus­
trial recreation clubs from the belt area of the
city. The Championship which was conducted
at Tai Chess Club from 27th to 29th March in a
5 round swiss was won by Solar Chess club,
scoring 17 points out of a possible 20. Tai chess
club-A finished with 14, while Olympic Recrea­
tion club and Tai ‘B’ scored 12 points each.
Paul Wallace of Ireland, on a flying visit to
India, played for O. R. C. and won the 3rd
board prize scoring 4|.
Representing Solar C. C. were: M. Ramesh,
M. Suresh, R. Vijayaraghavan (Captain), S.
Krishnamurthy and N. Balasubramaniam while
Tai C. C. A., lead by K. V. Shantharam was
K. Vasantha Kumar, S. P. S. Panayappan,
S. Narayanaswamy, and V. Jaganathan. 3rd
- 4th Olympic Recreation club and Tai ‘B’
12 each, 5 Indian Bank 11, 6 AGRC 8^-,
7. Madras Fertilizers 8, 8. ITRC 7£, 9. BHEL
7-J-, 10. Indian Organic Chemicals Q,
11. Madras Rubber Factory 6.
Board prizes : 1st: Ramesh (SCC) 4^)5,
2nd V. Subramanian (O.R.C.) 3-J./4, 3rd R. P.
Wallace (O.R.C.) 4^/5, 4th S. Krishnamurthy
(S.C.C.) 4/4, 5th N. Balasubramaniam (S.C.C.)
3/3, V. Jaganathan (Tai. A. C. C.) 3/3, T.
Sivakumar (Tai. B. C. C.) 3/3.
—A. Govindarajan
In a 21-board Simultaneous Display organised
by the Indian Bank Sports Club at its Head
Office on May 5th, 14 year old Dibyendu Barua
won 20, lost none and drew only one (against
K. Raghavan) in 1 hour and 45 minutes.
Pollachi
The Second Sakthi Blitz Tournament played
on May 17th at Pollachi had a first prize of
Rs. 500/- and a total prize fund of Rs. 2,015/-
Played under FIDE Blitz regulations with 5
minutes for each player in a game, it was won
by T. N. Parameswaran of Air India. The
prize winners in this 9 round 34 player
tournament were : 1. T. N. Parameswaran,
2. M. Suresh, 3. V. Ravichandran, 4. M. Ramesh,
5. P. Mithrakanth, 6. S. Manikandaswami,
7. R. Vijayaraghavan, 8. S. Paul Arokiaraj,
9. K.V. Shantharam, 10. A.V. Balasubramaniam,
and 11. V. Sathyanarayanan.
In a simultaneous display the same day,
to Easwaramoorthy and D. Natarajan.
UTTAR PRADESH
Allahabad
Mrs. Maduri Dwivedi won the Allahabad
District Women’s Championship with 4£ points
in a 5 round Swiss. Km Kavita Sripat who
finished 7th in the Delhi Women’s National
was second with 4.
The Anant Gupta Memorial 9-round Swiss
was won by veteran Abdul Shakoor with 7%
while Yogesh Chand Nand of IIT Kanpur was
second.
Kanpur
The newly formed ‘Welcome Chess Club’,
in Moti Mahal organised a tournament from
20th to 26th January. Ram Chandra Kashyap
won the tournament and the Shambu Dayal
Tripathi rolling shield. Second and Third
places went to Ajai Swarnkar and Vijai Swarn-
kar. Chandrasekhar Tripathi a U. P. Junior
stood first in the lightning tournament.
Lucknow
A 7 round Swiss tournament held at Lucknow
University and open only to students of affiliated
colleges of Lucknow University was won by
R. K. Agnihotri. Atamjeet Singh the U. P.
champion was the hot favourite and was ex­
pected to make a clean sweep. But fate decided
it to be the other way when in the first round
itself he lost to the eventual winner Rakesh
Kumar Agnihotri and had to be satisfied with
the second place. Agnihotri later lost to Rajesh
Rastogi, while Atamjeet won all his remaining
matches to tie for the first place which was
resolved through median.
28
 Final results : 1. Rakesh Kumar Agnihotri WEST BENGAL
6/7, 2. Atamjeet Singh 6, 3. Vimal Kumar Calcutta
Bhatia 5J, 4. Rajesh Rastogi 5^ 5. A. K. The State Chess Library was inaugurated at
Sinha 5, 6. Naveen Kumar Wai 4£.’ the Netaji Subhas Institute, Calcutta on Aprij
1, 1981 by the Hon’ble Minister Shri Prasanta
Here is the all important first round match Sur in a colourful and impressive ceremony
in which Atamjeet mishandled the end game presided over by Shri Asoke Krishna Dutt.
and lost. This pure chess library has begun with 120
books and 40 magazines.
R. K. Agnihotri — Atamjeet Singh.
(Queen’s Gambit declined—Slav defence)
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 d5 4. e3 (Usual FOURTH YEAR OF PUBLICATION

hereis4Nf3) 4...Bf5?! 5. Bd3?! (5. Qb31? ± THE

concentrates on the weak point ‘b7’, If 5... Qd7 • «S. -5- INDIAN
6. Nf 3 and on 5... Qb6 6. Qb6 favouring White '.A 1 B CHESS
in both cases) 5... Bg6 6. cd Nd5 7. Bg6 hg . AiL4^ MAGAZINE
8. Nd5 Qd5 9. Qf3 Qa5 + 10. Bd2 Qb6 11. Rbl r/3 M.LG. K. K. NAGAR, MADRAS-78
e6 12. a4 Nd7 (Better seems 12. ..Bb4 13. Qe2 12.. ISSUES ^(12 .MONTHS). ‘ Rs 18
( SEND MÔNEY ORDER ’ bNLY )
Nd7 14. b3 Rh5=) 13. a5 Qb5 14. Qe2 Qb3
15. Qdl Qd5 16. Qf3 (White seems to be play­
ing for a draw) 16...Bd6 17. Qd5 cd5 18. Nf3 INTERNATIONAL TOURNAMENT IN INDIA
Nf6 19. Ng5 Rc8 (Pawn snatching at h2 is not Tamilnadu will be hosting the 7th leg of the
good) 20. g3 (better 20. b.3) 2O...Ke7 21. Ke2 1981 Asian International Master Circuit
Nd7 22. Nf3 f6 23. b4 Nbl 24. Rhcl g5 ! 25. h4
g4 26. Nel Kd7 27. Nd3 Rel 28. Rd Rc8 Tournament at Madras from July 3 to 18.
29. Rc8Kc8 30. Nc5 Bc5 31. bc5 Kc7 (The Karnataka will be conducting a Grandmaster
position reached is quite an interesting ending,Tournament at Bangalore from July 26 to
where Black apparently has a slight advantage August 11, 1981. Grandmasters who have
due to White’s Bad Bishop blocked by its own accepted to participate are Engine Torre of
pawns. Black’s plan is to pentrate with his
King on the weak light squares and to main­ Philippines and Hans Ree of Holland and
tain his all important ‘g4’ fixer tactically). Filip of Chezoslovakia.
The Algebraic Notation
32. f3 gf3?+ (32.. .f5! 33. fg4 fg4 34. e4 The algebraic notation (used by Chess India
Kc6 35. Ke3 Kb5 (Now if 40. h5 Nd7 plan and demonstrated by us on the back cover of
Nf6 — + , and on 40. cd5 ed5 41. Kf4 Nc6
42. Be3 Na4 ! 43. Kg4 Nb3—|- ; or 40. cd5 ed5 our December 1980 issue) is obligatory in
41. Kf4 Nc6 42. Kg4 Nd4 43. Bc3 Ne6 44. Kf5 tournaments and matches in the F.I.D.E.
d4! 45. Bel! Nf8 46. g4 Kc5 and Black should cycle for the individual Wor d Championship
be able to hold the game). 33. Kf3 Kc6? and thus the only recognised notation system
(Black should try 33... b6 if he wants to fight in FIDE.
for a draw) 34. Kg4 Nd7 35. Kh5 Nf8 36. g4
a6?? (By this final mistake he immobilises the MAN IN WOMEN TOURNAMENT
Q-side which in turn eliminates all counter These days it is not so sensational when a
chances) 37. g5fg5 38. Kg5 Kb5 39. Bel e5? lady player participates in a tournament with
and Black resigned on his 55th move. only male opponents. The other way around
on the other hand is stilla rarity.
Varanasi But when a player did not show up for a
The Eastern deligasy of Varanasi, had orga­ women tournament in Erevan (USSR), IM
nised a tournament during the first week of Mantsakanyan agreed to take her place. Not
March for the students of Benaras Hindu Univer­ without conditions, though, as he asked that
sity. Ajita Charan Pandey, Devendra Kumar
Pandey and Arun Kumar Singh (not your his games should not be published afterwards.
correspondent) took the first three places in He won the tournament with 9/13 winning
that order. 5 games and drawing 8, not all of them quite
painless. Four players finished only half-
—Anmkumar Singh.
a-point behind.

29
 INTERNATIONAL NEWS
ARGENTINA I Radulov immediately after won the play-off
2i -1* (i i 1 *)•
Mar del Plata
Here are a couple of games from this Cham­
America Vs. Europe. pionship.
An unofficial match between America and
Europe was played from Feb. 7th to 22nd. The Radulov -p Inkiov
result was a convincing victory for Europe: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd.4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
19-1. - 121. Topscorer was ULF Andersson 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 Be7 8. 0-0-0 0-0
(Sweden - Europe) 6/8. Then came Ljubojevic 9. f3 d5 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Bxe7 Ndxe7 12. Nxc6
5, Larsen 41 and Portisch 4. Only American Nxc6 13. Bb5 Qc7 14. Bxc6 Qxc6 15. Qxd6
to reach the average mark was Larry ChristianQxd6 16. Rxd6 e5 17. Nd5 Be6 18. Nc7 Rad8
sen 4. The other players in the American team
were Browne, Seirawan and Quinteros. 19. Rxd8 Rxd8 20. Nxe6 fxe6 21. Rdl Rd5
22. Rd3 Kf7 23. Kd2 Ke7 24. c4 Rd4 25. Rxd4
Andersson + Browne exd4 26. Kd3 e5 27. f4 exf4 28. Kxd4 Kd6
29. b4 a5 30. a3 axb4 31. axb4g5 32. Ke4 Ke6
1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 33. h4 f3 34. Kxf3 Ke5 35. hxg5 Kd4 36. Kg4
5. Bg2 Nc6 6. Nc3 g6 7. 0-0 Bg7 8. Nxd5 Qxd5 Kxc4 37. Kh5 Kxb4 38. Kh6 1-0.
9. d3 0-0 10. Be3 Bxb2 U.RblBg7 12. Qa4
Qb.5 13. Rb5 e5 14. Bxc5 Re8 15. Be3 Re7 The most amusing game from the tournament
16. Rfbl a6 17. h4 h6 18. Nd2 Rb8 19. Rc5 was this with a Very nice combination :
Nd8 Velikov + Semkov
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. Nc3 cxd4
5. Nxd4 Bb4 6. Bd2 0-0 7. a3 Be7 8. Bf4
a6 9. e3d5 10. Qc2 Nbd7 11. Bg3 dxc4
12. Bxc4 Nh5 13. Rdl Nxg3 14. hxg3 g6.

Ljubojevic examined this position care­

fully from behind, and may be he looked a
little disappointed when 20. Bf3 Qf5 21. Qc2
Bd7 22. Ne4 Bc6 23. Nd6 Qd7 24. Bxc6 Qxd6
25. Bf3 b5 26. Rcl Ne6 27. Rc6 Qa3 28. Qb3
Qa5 29. Bd5 and the flag fell for Black! And
there was Ljubojevic to tell something. Yes,
in the diagrammed position White could win
immediately by 20. Rxc8 Rxc8 21. Bf3 Qf5
22. Bg4 or 21...b5 22. Qa3 b4 23. Rxb4.
Another proof that the b2 pawn is a risky
luxury in the opening phase!
BULGARIA
A play-off was necessary to decide this year’s
Bulgarian ch ship : 1-2. GM Radulov & IM
Inkiov 11/16, 3-5. IM Georgiev, IM Velikov &
GM Spiridonov 10, 6-7. GM Spassov & IM
L. Popov 9-J-, 8. IM Donchev 8|, 9-10. GM
Kirov & IM Peev 8...etc in a 17 players
round-robin.
15. Bxe6! fxe6 16. Nxe6 Qa5 17. Rxb.7!! Kxh7
18. Rd5 Rf5 19. Rxa5 Rxa5 20. Nc7 Rb8
21. N7d5 Bf6 22. Nxf6+ Nxf6 23. Ne4 Ne8
24. Nf6+Nxf6 25. Qc7-f- Bd7 26. Qxb8 Rb5
27. Qd8 Rxb2 28. Qxf6 Rbl + 29. Kd2 Bc6
30. g4 Rb5 31. e4 Ra5 32. g5 Ra4 33. f3 1-0.
CHINA
A British team visited the PRC in February,
coming back with a 17J-18^- defeat after 6
matches despite their two GMs on the top
boards. A parallel round-robin tournament
was a triumph for IM Robert Bellin after many
recent disappointments since he won the
British ch. ship in 1979: 1. IM Bellin 8-J/ll,
2-4. IM Liu, IM Liang & GM Speelman 7,

3b
5. GM Keene 6J, 6. Chen De 6, 7-8. Li & IM a Commonwealth Chess Association (R- Keene
Pritchett 5|, 9. Qi 4J-, 10. Zhang 3-J-, 11. Lamford
was elected President), and at Brighton, the
3, 12. Blackstock 2. first steps were taken to implement Common-
Chen De 4- Beilin
Wealth events. IM’s from New Zealand and
Canada (Chandler and Day) competed the
1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c3 Be7 4. Qc2 d5 main event, while on the side lines, Lloyd’s
5. Bf4 Nf6 6. e3 0-0 7. Ne5 Nbd7 8. Nd2 Nxe5 Bank and the National Bank of New Zealand
9. Bxe5Bd6 10.Nf3Bd7 H.Bd3Qe8 12.a4a5 sponsored a Ladies match between Carey
13. 0-0 Bc6 14. Ra2Kh8 15. Rfal Qh5 16. b4 Groves (England) and New Zealand top board
Ng4 17. Bxd6 cxd6 18. Qe2 g5 19. b5 Bd7 Fenella Foster. The match was drawn 2-2.
20. c4 dxc4 21. Bxc4 Rf6 22. h3 Nh6 23. e4 India is now a member of the Commenwealth
fxe4 24. Qxe4 g4 25. Qxb7 Raf8 26. hxg4 Nxg4 Chess Association. Results of the Brighton
27. Qxd7 Rh6 28. Kfl Qhl + 29. Ngl Rh2 International : 1. Chandler (NZ) 6J/9, 2.
30. Qxd6 Qxg2+ 31. Kel Qxgl 32. Bfl Rhxf2 Speelman (Eng) 6|, 3-4. Day (Canada), Taulbut
04. (Eng) 4£ each, 5. V. D. Vliet (NZ) 5, 6-7.
. • ENGLAND Watson (Eng), Goodman (Eng) each, 8-9.
■ 4 1 Gruchasz (USA) Tisdall (USA) 2^. each and
Nunn British Champion 10. Gummings (Eng) 2.
GM Jonh Nunn won the play-off for the
■1980 British ch.. ship against IM Hartston Chandler— Gruchasz (Nimzo - Indian defence),
3|-2| (i i i 1 i i £)• The match had a strange 1. d4 e6 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5
end when Hartston offered the draw in the 5. Ne2 d5 6. cd Nd5 7. g3 cd 8. ed Bd7? (Too
ultimate game just when the commentator was conservative. Black should proceed actively
telling the kibitzers in a near by room that he with 8.. .Nc3! followed by . . Qd5) 9. Bg2 Bc6
was at the point of equalizing by winning that 10. 00 00 11. Nd5 Bd5 12. Bd5 Qd5 13. Nf4 Qd7
game! 14. d5 ed 15. Nd5Bd6(If 15.. .Rd8 16. Bg5!f6
This was the decisive game. 17. Bf6!) 16. Qb3 Na6 (16...Nc6 is more
natural) 17. Be3 Nc5 18. Qc2 Qa4 19. Qe2
Nunn 4- Hartston Rfe8 20. Rfdl Rad8 21. Rael b6 22. Rc4
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 (sacrificing a pawn to whip up a K-side attack)
5. Nc3 a6 6. Be2 Nge7 7. Bf4 Ng6 8. Nxc6 22. ...Qa2 23. Rh4 Bf8 24. Qh5 h6 25. Rg4 (with
bxc6 9. Bd6 Bxd6 10. Qxd6 Qe7 11. 0-0-0 a murderous threat which Black in desperate
Qxd6 12. Rxd6 Ke7 13. Rhdl Nf4 14. Bf3 Ra7 time-trouble, overlooks. He had to defend his
15. R6d2 g5 16. g3 Ng6 17. Bh5 d5 18. Rel Kf6 third rank with 25...Rd6) 25...Qb3?
19.
f4gxf4 20. gxf4 Rd8 21. f5 Nf4 22. ©54-
Kxf5 23. Rf2 f6 24. exf6 e5 25. Ne2 Kxf6
26. Nxf4 exf4 27. h4 Kg7 28. Rxf4 c5 29. Be8

26. Nf64- ! Kh8 27. Qh64- ! 1-0.

.Rd6
29.. 30. b3 Rc7 31. Re5 c4 32. Rg54-
Kh6 33. Rf8cxb3 34. axb3 Bd7 35. Rh54- Kg7
36. Rf74-'Kg8 37. Rg54- 1-0.
Brighton
Conunenwealth Chess
During the Malta FIDE Congress, countries
of the Commonwealth banded together to form
London
Oxford chess players break losing run
Oxford beat Cambridge 6-2 in their 1981
Chess match held at London.
It was Oxfords first win since 1969, breaking
a record run of 11 Cambridge victories. The
traditional series began in 1873 and is the
longest running annual fixture in the chess
world. It is sponsored by Lloyds Bank as part

31
X SRI BHAGAVATHI TEXTILES LIMITED
CHITTUR
X
X X
X
X
X AUTHORISED SHARE CAPITAL Rs. 1,00,00,000
X
X
X ISSUED & SUBSCRIBED CAPITAL Rs. 30,00,000
X PAID-UP CAPITAL Rs. 28,90,000 X
X
X
X ALLOTTED SPINDLES 12360
X X

X ESTABLISHED IN KERALA
X
X
X
,n!\
X Manufacturers of:
X
X . 80s, 90s, 2/80s, 100s & 120s.
X X
X
X
X
-X
COTTON YARN (INDIAN AND FOREIGN COTTON) AND 8
X BLENDED YARN
X
X
X
X
LA

X IN HANKS AND CONES

X
X
X
of an £ 18,000 a year programme tô de^élop and 4. V. Kàmeswaran 2/7.Hyderabad scored
chess in schools and universities. 13J- points to take the 11th place, with 1 N.
Ghalib 5/7, 2. S. Viswapathi 3/7, 3. V. V. Sastry
Oxford fielded one of the strongest team in the 4/7 and 4. M.D. Naidu 2/7. Karachi with 13-J
history of the match. All their seven men had was placed thirteenth. Scisy’s computets (a
ratings above 2200 and four of them had norms team of machines) led by David Levy scored
towards theIM title. Lloyds Bank trophies for 6 points to go down to the 26th position which
the games were judged by refree Harry Golôm- is nothing 6ut last!
bek and awarded to John Branford for Oxford
and Kim Hàrris for Cambridge^ Readers would sit up when they learn that
the team which placed 23rd was “Bandar Seri
J. W. Branford 4- P. P. Taylor Begawan” from Indonesia.
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 (the Bishop’s opening is an
Oxford favourite under the influence of British ITALY
Champion John Nunn who teaches at the Rome
University). 2..,Nf6 3. d3 Be7 4. N13 d6 Korchnoy Won the 1981 Banco di Roma 10th
5. Nbd2 c6 6. a4 Nbd7 7. 00 Ü6 (Black’s open­ Category Tournament with |a tremendrous
ing is passive and this weakens his K-siiie) gap from his closest rival. In a 10-player
8. Rel Nf8 9. c3 Be6 10. d4 Qc7 11. Qb3 Bc4 GM Tournament he scored 8 out of 9 while the
12. Nc4 Ng6 13. Ne3 00 14. Nf5 Nh7 15. Qc4 second placed Hungarian GM Csom’s score
Ng5 16. Ng5Bg5 17. Bg5hg5 18. g3Ne7I9.Ne3 ;was only 5£!
Rad8 20. a5 Qd7? (under pressure Black
loses a pawn) 21. de5 de5 22. Qc5 b6 23. ab6 The final results were : 1. Korchnoy 8,
ab6 24. Qb6 Rb8 25. Qc5 Rb5 26. Qa3 c5 2. Csom 5|, 3-4. Tatai and Parma 5, 5. Mata-
27. Nc4 Qe6 28. Qa4 Rfb8 29. Radi R(5) b7 novic 4J-, 6-9. Makropoulos, Mariotti, Rod­
30. Rd6 Qh3 31. Redl Ng6 32. Rd8+ Rd8 riguez (Peru) and Tolh 3|- each, 10. Zichichi
33. Rd8+ Kh2 34. Qe8 Qg4 3. Here is a Korchnoy win.

35. f3 (simpler is 35. Qg8f Kh6 36. Qh8+ !)
35..Qh5 36. Qg8+ Kh6 37. Qh8+ Nh8
38. Rh8+ 1-0. Moscow"
HONG KONG
III'Asian Cities Team Championship 1981
held diiring Feb - March, attracted in all 25
cities. In a 7-round Swiss, Shangai emerged
on top with 22 points, £ a point ahead of Metro
Manila which in turn finished half a point
ahead of Guang Zhou.
Bangalore with 14J- points finished 9th through
1. D. V. Prasad 3/6, 2. R. Ravindran 3/6, 3. R.
Sridhafan 3^/6, 4. C. S. Unni 2/5, 5. Dr.
Sailendra 2/3, and 6. Sudhakar Babu 1/2,
Madras also with 14£ pts was placed 10th
through 1. T. N. Parameswaran 4/7, 2. K.
Ranganathan 4J/7, 3. S. Manikandaswamy 4/7
Korchnoy 4- Matanovic
Lc4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4 4. Qc2 0-0'
5. a3 Bxc3 6. Qxc3 b6 7. b3 Bb7 8. Bb2 d6
9. g3 Nbd7 10. Bg2 Ne5 11. 0-0 Nxf3+ 12. Bxf3
Bxf3 13. Qxf3 e5 14. Qg2 Re8 15. f4 e4 16. f5
d5 17. e3 Qd6 18. Rf4 Rad8 19. cxd5 QxdS
20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. Qh3 Re5 22. Rafi Kf8
23. R4f2 Qxb324. Qxh7 Ke7 25. g4Qd5 26. h4
Qa8 27. g5 Rg8 28. Rg2 fxg5 29. hxg5 Qe8
30. g6Kd6 31. gxf7Rxg2+ 32. Kxg2 Qf8
33. Qg8 1-0.
SOVIET UNION
Super GM Tournament
The first super-tournament of 1981 was
played in Moscow during April, It just hit
category 15-the second highest possible- but
had all invited players been present, it would
have been even stronger. In any case, Geller
was the last minute replacement, and he had a
tough time, entering without any preparation
in such a strong event. Another veteran was the
biggest surprise of the tournament, 60 year
old Smyslov who opened with wins against
Torre and Timman and led for some time.
He only lost to Karpov and ensured himself a
share of the 2nd prize by defeating Belyavsky
late in the tournament. A very strong perfor­
mance indeed.

33
 SUPER GM TOURNAMENT
Average Rating-2601. GM=6|
Name Country Rating
Karpov USSR 2690 X i 1 i 4 4 1 1 i 4 i i 1 1 9
Polugajevsky »> 2620 i X 4 4 i 4 4 i 4 4 i 4 i 1 74
Smyslov >> 2545 0 i X 4 i i i 1 1 4 4 4 4 1 74
Kasparov >> 2625 i i i X 4 i 4 1 4’ 1 0 4 4 1 74
Gheorghiu R 2545 4 i i i X i 4 i i i i i 1 4 7
Portisch H 2650 I 4 4 4 X 4 0 4 1 1 1 0 Î 7
Balashov USSR 2600 0 4 i i 4 4 X 4 4 4 i i 0 1 Q
Belyavsky 2620 0 4 0 0 4 1 4 X i i i 4 «4
Petrosian J’ 2585 4 o I i 4 ¥1 ¥ 0 X ¥1 ¥
1
¥ 4 ■S1 6
Andersson s 2610 i 4 4 ¥ 1
0 ¥t 0 4 X
1
¥
1
¥
1
¥ 1 6
25'35 1
Smejkal cz 4 4 4 ¥ 0 0 Ti
1
¥ X .1 .0 1 1 54
Torre PH 2550 4 0 0 0 4 0 1 ¥ 1 ¥
1
X 1 4 54
Timman NL 2620 0 4 0 ¥ 0 1 1
1
4 ¥ 0 ¥
1
0 X 1 54
Geller USSR 2615 0 i 4 0 1 I 1r
¥ ‘0
1 1
¥ ¥ i 1 r i 0 X 4
But the focus was on the two big K’S - event like this is the final blue stamp for Kas­
Karpov and Kasparov. How strong is Karpov parov whom you could now expect to see as a
in the year in which he has.to defend his title?. candidate in the coming cyclus. But let us see !
Is he able to keep down the challenge of his
own compatriot, Garri Kasparov?. FIDE President Olaffson was present at the
closing ceremony and expressed his satisfaction
The answers were easy : Karpov is in with the tournament, its surroundings and
excellent shape - and he is still well ahead of conditions. Karpov on that day told in an
Kasparov!! interview that he was well satisfied with him­
May be it will worry Karpov a little that all self, drew the attention to the bleak performance
his five wins were with White, But they were of Timman whom he nevertheless still expects
convincing. The game against Kasparov ended to see as a serious challenge in the coming
in a draw in the ultimate round - like all the cyclus, and he explained that his . own last
other games of the round. In all, there were appearance before the world championship
many, many draws - more than 70 percent match will be the IBM tournament ip Amster­
dam, May 16-31.
but again in a category 15 tournament the
difference cannot be too big and on one day the And now for some games. On the opening
tournament exploded in 6 wins and an adjourn­ day. Smyslov impressed :
ment. On that day Polugajevsky beat Petrosian
Torre—Smyslov
with White, Kasparov refuted a dangerous
sacrifice by Geller, and Karpov defeated 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 d5 A. e3 g9
Smyslov. 5. d4 Bg7 6. Be2 0-0 7. 0-0 b6 8. b4 dxc4
9. Bxc4 Nd5 10. Nxd5cxd5 ll.Be2a6 12. a4
Kasparov confirmed his status as a world Ne6 13. Bd2 Bg4 14. Bc3Qc7 15. Qd2 Rfc8
top class player. Now it is evident that he is 16. Rfel e6 17. b5 Bxf3 18. Bxf3 axb5 19 axb5
also a front runner in a super tournament - Ne5!
many have waited to see if he would succumb
to the strength of such an event, which is very
different from an “ordinary” category 10-
event. He Opened strongly, beating Belyavsky
and Torre in early games. After 6 rounds he
had 3j and a favourable adjournment against
Andersson. Then he had an adjournment
against Petrosian, but at the play - off he was
only able to draw Andersson, and he lost to
Petrosian. That was an exciting moment of
the tournament - what would happen to' him
now? But he just went on, and 2nd in an

34
20. dxe5 Rxal 21. Rxal Qxc3 22. Qxc3 Rxc3
23. Ra8+ Bf8 24. h4 Kg7 25. h5 Bc5 26. Ra7
d4 27. exd4 Bxd4 28. h6+ Kxh6 29. Rxf7
Rcl+ 30. Kh2 Bxf2 31. Bg4 Bd4 32. Bxe6
Bxe5+ 33. g3 Rc2+ 34. Khl Bxg3 35. Rd7
Rc7 36. Rxc7Bxc7 37. Kg2 Kg5 38. Kf3 Kh4
39. Bf7 g5 40. Be6 h5 0-1.
Some Karpov wins.
Karpov + Tinman
I. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6
5. d4 d5 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. Bd3 Be7 8. 0-0 0-0
9. a3cxd4 10. exd4 Bf6 11. Be4Nce7 12. Qd3
h6 13. Ne5 Nxc3 14. Qxc3 Nf5 15. Be3 Nd6
16. Bf3 Bd7 17. Qb4 Bb5 18. Rfel a5 19. Qb3
Ba6 20. Radi Nf5 21. Be4 Nxe3 22. Qxe3 Qd6
23. Bc2 Rfd8 24. Qe4 Rael 25. Qh7+ Kf8
26. h3 b6 27. Bb3 Bb7 28. d5 Qc7 29. dxe6 Rxdl
30. Ng6+ 1-0.
: Karpov + Smyslov
J. Nf3 d5 2. c4 c6 3. d4 Nf6 4. e3 g6 5. Nc3
Bg7 6. Be2 0-0 7. 0-0 Bg4 8. b3 Nbd7 9. Bb2
Re8 10. Rel Ne4 11. b.3 Nxc3 12. Bxc3 Bxf3
13. Bxf3 dxc4 14. bxc4 e5 15. Qb3 exd4 16. oxd4
Rb8 17. Rfdl Qc7 18. Qa3 Bf8 19. Qb2c5
20. Bd5 Bg7 21. dxc5 Bxc3 22. Rxc3 Nxc5
23. Rf3Ro7 24. h4Rf8 25. Qf6Ne4 26. Qd4
Nc5 27. h5 Nd7 28. hxg6 hxg6 29. Rg3 Qe5
30. Rxg6+ Kh7 31. Rg3 Nf6 32. Qh4+ 1-0.
Never the less, many have thought that it is
a game by Kasparov which will be remembered
by the chess history from this tournament.
Belyavsky + Kasparov.
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6
5. f3 0-0 6. Be3 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. Ng©2 Re8
9. Nel e5 10. d5 Nd4 11. Nle2 c5 12. dxc6(ep)
Nxc6 13. Nd5 b5 14. Bb6 Qd7 15. Nc7 Rb8
16. Nxe8 Qxe8 17. Be3 bxc4 18. Nc3 Be6
19. Be2 Nd4 20. 0-0 d5 21. exd5 Nxd5
22. Nxd5 Bxd5 23. Rf2 h5 24. Rel Qe6
25. Bfl h4 26. Rel Qc6 27. Bh6 Bh8 28. f4 e4
29. Rdl Be6 30. f5 Nxf5 31.Qf4Re8 32. Rfd2
Qc5+ 33. Khl Be5 34. Qg5 Kh7 35. Rd8 Rxd8
36. Rxd8 Qf2 37. Rdl Nxh6 38. Qxe5 e3
39. Qc3 h3 40. Qel Ng4
o-l!!
35
And yet another Kasparov win.
Geller — Kasparov
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6
5. Nc3 d6 6. Be2 Nf6 7. 0-0 Be7 8. Be3 0-0
9. f4 e5 10. Nb3 exf4 11. Bxf4 Be6 12: Khl
d5 13. e5 Nd7 14. Nxd5 N7xe5 15. c4 Bg5
16. Nc5 Bxf4 17. Rxf4 b6 18. Ne4 b5 19. b3
bxc4 20. Bxc4 Kh8 21. Qh5 Bxd5 22. Bxd5
Qxd5 23. Rh4 h6 24. Rdl Qa5 25. b4 Qxb4
26. Nf6 Qe7 27. Rfl Rfd8 0-1.
You will undoubtedly have noticed that
Kasparov has the knack of winning with Black!
Polugajevsky + Petrosian
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. Nc3 Bb7 4. d4 e6
5. a3 d5 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. e3 Be7 8. Bb5+ c6
9. Bd3 Nxc3 10. bxc3 c5 11. 0-0 0-0 12. Qc2
g6 13. e4Qc7 14. Qe2 Rd8 15. h4Nc6 16. Be3
Bf6 17. e5 Bg7 18. h5 Rd7 19. hxg6 hxg6 20.
Radi cxd4 21. cxd4 Qd8 22. Be4 Ne7 23. Ng5
Nf5 24. Qg4 Bd5 25. Bxf5 gxf5 26. Qh5 f6
27. Qh7+ Kf8 28. Nh3 Qe7 29. exf6 Qxf6
3O.Bg5 Qf7 31. Nf4 Bf6 32. Qh6+Ke7 33. Rel
Rad8 34. Rfel Bxg5 35. Qxg5-f- Qf6 36. Ng6+
Kf7 37. Ne5+ Ke7 38. Ng6+ Kf7 39. Ne5 +
Ke7 40. Qxf6+ Kxf6 41. Nxd7+ Rxd7
42. f3 b5 43. Kf2 Rb7 44. Rhl Rb6 45. Rc7
Ra6 46. f4 1-0.
All these games were played in that explosive
round, as was the following nice attack by
Belyavsky, sacrificing a piece and completely
outplaying Andersson.
Belyavsky + Andersson
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 I<lf6
5. Nc3 e6 6. g4 b.6 7. b.4 Nc6 8. Rgl h5 9. g5
Ng4 10. Be2 Qb6 H.Bxg4Qxd4 12. Be3 Qb4
13. Be2 g6 14. a3 Qxb2 15. Nb5 Qe5 16. Rbl
Kd7 17. Qd3 a6 18. f4 Qg7 19. Nxd6 Bxd6
20. Rdl Rd8 21. Bb6 Qf8 22. e5
.Ke8
22.. 23. Bxd8 Nxd8 24. Qxd6Qxd6 25. Rxd6
Bd7 26. Rg3 Rc8 27. Kd2 Nc6 28. Rgd3 Rc7
29. Bf3 Ke7 30. Rc3 Rc8 31. Be4 Rc732. Rc5
Rc8 33. Kc3 Be8 34. Bxc6 Bxc6 35. Kb4
 Rb8 36. Rc4 a5+ 37. KXa5 RaH 38. Kb4 5, e4 ,Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 c5 8. Be3 Qai
Ra6 39. Rcd4 Rb6+ 40. Kc3 Rbl 41. Rdl Rb5 9. Qa2 Nc6 10. Rel cxd4 11. cxd4 Qxd2+
42. R(6)d4 Bd5 43. Rb4 Ra5 but at the same 12. Kxd2 0-0 13. d5 Rd8 14. Kel (TN) Na5
time 1-d. 16. Bd2 b6 17. Rc7 Bg4 18. Ba6 e6 19. Ng5 Be5
Whenever Timman and Geller 'met yon would 20. Rxf7 exd5 21. f4 Bg7 22. f5 dxe4 23. Bxa5
expect an exciting game. So was it this time, bxa5 24. Bc4 Bc3 + 25. Kf2 e3 + 26. Kgl
but the unusual thing was that it was the battle Be5+ 27. Kxg4 Rd4+ 28. Kh3 Rxc4 29. f6
for last place! In the ultimate round. Bxf6 30. Rxf6 Re8 31. Rel e2 32. Kg3 (Re6!)
Ra4 33. Kf2 Rxa2 34. Ne6 a4 35. Rbl a3
Timman + Geller.. 36. Rb7 el=Q+ 37. Kxel Rxg2 38. Rg7+
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 Kh8 39. Rgf7h5 40. Kfl
5. 0-0 Nxe4 6. d4 b5 7. Bb3 d5 8. dxe5 Be6
9. c3 Bc5 10. Nbd2 0-0 .11, Bc2 Bf5 12. Nb3
Bg6 13. a4 Bb6 14. Nbd4 Nxd4 15. Nxd4 c5
15. Nc6 Nxc3 17. Nxd8 Nxdl 18. Bxg6 Raxd8
19. Bf5 Nxf2 20. Kxf2 c4-|- 21. Kg3g6 22.Bg4
Bc7 23. Bf4 Rfe8 24. axb5 axb5 25. Ra7
Bb8 26. Rb7 g5 27. Bxg5 Bxe5-f- 28. Kh3 Rb8
29. Rbxf7 Bxb2 30. Bh6 b4 31. Be6 1-0.
SOVIET TRAINING.
Wanting to give its players adequate training,
the Soviet Chess Federation organized a 8-
board team tournament during the 26th con­
gress of the communist party in Moscow. Now, In Sovietsky sport it is told that Kasparov
in the USSR it is no problem to put together a in that very moment found the drawing vari­
lot of teams due to reasonable criteria. ation for his opponent: 40. .a2! 31 Rxa7
This time the four teams were an A, B-» Rb2 42. Rxg6 Rbl + 43. Kg2 al=Q covering
a youth, and a veteran team. What do you g7. But Romanishin with only one second
think of the veterans : Smyslov, Bronstein, left oti his clock banged this move in the
Taimanov, Vasiukov, Averbakh, Bagirov, Gu- board: 40. Rxh2 41. Rxg6 Rxe6 42. Rxe6
feld, & Suetin? Or the youth team : Kas­ Kg8 43. Rxa7 1-0.
parov, Yusupov, Psachis, Dolmatov, Kochiev,
Mikhalkhishin, Lputyan, Chiburdanidze? Before we take a look at the Karpov-Kasparov
Would this in our country be a nice B-team? encounters, we should take a look at the play
Romanishin, Cheskowsky, Vaganyau, Kusmin, of the hew Soviet Champion, Psachis. He
Kupreitchik, Rashkowski, Georgadze, & played a real brilliancy in Rd-2 beating Taima­
Macarychev, Which leaves for the A-team : nov:
Karpov. Spassky, Polugajevsky, Petrosian, Taimanov-Psachis
Tai, Balashov, & Geller.
1. Nf3 c5 2. b3 b6 3. Bb2 Bb7 4. e3 Nf6
Everybody was waiting for the two clashes 5. d4 g6 6. Be2 Bg7 7. 0-0 0-0 8. c4 e6 9. dxc5
between world champion Anatoly Karpov and bxc5 10. Nc3 Qe7 11. Qd2 Rd8 12. Rfdl d5
the new star Garri Kasparov who has been 13. cxd5 exd5 14. Rael Bh6 15. Na4 Ne4
quoted saying that “Karpov is a chess player 16. Qc2 Nd7 17. b4 d4 18. bxc5 dxe3 19. c6:
with no special talent’’. Just as surely as this exf2 + 20. Kfl Bxc6 21. Qxc6 Bxcl 22. Qxcl
is not true, it is a sure sign of the ambitions of Ndf6 23. Nc3 Rxdl 24. Nxdl Ng4 24. Qf4.
the younger player.
The tournament was won by the A-team
28| ahead of Y 23|, V 23 and B 22. A 1J-6I-
defeat against the Y team prevented " the
veterans from taking a sure and impressive
2nd.
In the first round Kasparov heigtened the
expectations for his encounter with Karpov
when he beat Romanishin.
Kasparov + Romanishin (Grunfeld defence)
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5
 25. ,.Re8! 26. Ne5 Qf6 27. g3 Nxh2 + 19. Qxd5 0e3 20. B64 Ée6 21. Qsd8 Rxd8
28. Kg2 Qxf4 39. gxf4 Rd8 30. Nxf2 Rd2 22. Rxd8 Bxc4 23. bxc4 Kf8 24. Rhdl Qxg5
31. Nxe4 Rxe2+ 32. Nf2 Rxb2 33. Ned3 25. Rb8 Qg2 26. Rel g6 27. Rexe8 +
Rxa2 34. Kxh2 a5 35. Kg3 a4 0-1. Kg7 28. 63 Qxf3 29. Kb2 h5 30. Re7 Qh3
31. Rbxb7 Qxh2 32. Ne4 Kh6 33. c5 Qg2
In that same round it was noticed that 34. c6 1-0.
Çhiburdanidze beat Suetin. Back to Karpov
and Kasparov who never met before on equal The World Championship match will be
terms. They played two high class and a in September-October in Tibilisi where both
bit cautious games against each other, both ladies arè living-the Champion Maya Chibur-
drawn at adjournment. danidZe and the challenger Nana Alexandria
who alteady once has played this part when
Kasparov made 4/6 while Karpov only she challenged Nona Gaprindashvili in Pit-
made 3|, winning from Romanishin and sunda/Tibilisi 1975, losing by 3^.-8|. It will
drawing the lot. Kasparov won twice against be a huge sensation if she does better this
Symslov, once against Romanishin like we time against Çhiburdanidze who is well on
have seen, but Romanishin had his revenge her way to be the second lady flayer to make
in the second game (like Taimanov had it the “real” GM-title.
against Psachis!). Nevertheless, don’t put too
much in the score of Karpov. He is the one U.S.A.
who has nothing to gain by fighting such a Lone Pine
tournament out, while every opportunity is
important to Kasparov in his try to establish This year’s Lone Pine Tournament had a
himself among the top players of the USSR. record breaking participation of 27 GMs!
IMs, FMs, highly rated seniors and talented
Tibilisi juniors added up to 61 participants, fighting
Alexandria is Challenger
for the usual huge prize fund with a 1st prize
of 20,000.
Nana Alexandria won the Women As a surprise Korchnoi arrived in Lone
Candidates final by beating Nana Ioseliani Pine at the moment, and may be this was a
by 6£-2|. The match was similar to the men’s wise decision, because the two Soviet players
final in that Ioseliani made a blunder just as lusupov and Romanishin had already arrived,
horrifying as Hubener did in a tied position. and after phoning home they were allowed
At 1-1 the audience in Tibilisi did not believe to stay and play, and thiis a situation which
their own eyes when they saw: seemed very similar to a boycott was brought
to an end.
Korchnoi went on to play a very strong
tournament and finally pocketed the $20,000
with a sole 1st of 7 out of 9. In the ultimate
Rd against Sosonko, you might wonder why
Sosonko accepted a draw in the position
after these moves :
Konchnoi=Sosonko
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Bb4
5. Bg5 h6 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 7 Qb3 c5 8. dxc5 Bxc3 +
9 bxc3 dxc4 10. Qxc4 0-0 11. e3 Bd7 12. Bd3
Ioseliani-Alexandria continued 43. Rxg6+?? Bc6 13. 0-0 Nbd7 14. Be2
Bxg6 0-1. It is well known that the easiest
moves to miss are the backward diagonal Black seems to have won the opening Phase
moves, especially in time- trouble. and in fact Sosonko thought for more than
half an hour before accepting the draw. Win­
Here is the decider. ning meant $20,000 drawing around $7,500
Alexandria + Ioseliani losing virtually nothing—so he decided to
1. d4 c5 2. dxc5 Nf6 3. Nc3 e6 4. e4 Nc6 play it safely! And then the outcome for the
5. Be3 Qa5 6. f3 Bxc5 7. Bxc5 Qxc5 8. Qd2 0-0 top players became; l.GM Korchnoi 7, 2-4
0-0-0 d5 10. exd5 exd5 11. Nge2 Rd8 GM Seirawan, GM Sosonko and GM Gligoric
12: Nd4 Bd7 13. Be2 Rac8 14. g4 Na5 15. Nb3 6£, 5-12 GM Christiansen, GM Tarjan, IM
Nxb3+ 16. axb3 Qa5 17. Kbl Qc5 18. g5 Ne8 Henley, GM lusupov, GM Ivanovic, GM

37
 Pfleger, Campora (ARG) & GM Alburt 6, Tarjan+Gutman
13-14 GM Romanishin, IM Wilder 5J-, 15-24 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 <
IM Shirazi, GM Larsen, IM Kudrin, GM Ree, 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4 a6 7. g5 Nfd7 8.iBe3 Nc6 9. f4 i
Kogan (USA), GM Lombardy, GM Sigur, Qc7 10. Qe2 Nxd4 11. Bxd4 b5 12. a3 Rb8
jonsson, GM Shamkovich, GM Grunfeld & 13. 0-0-0 b4 13. axb4 Rxb4 15. Bg2 Qa5
IM Gutman 5.. etc. 16. Kbl e5 17. Be3 d5 18. Rxd5 Rxb2-b
19. Kxb2 Ba3-f-20. Ka2 Nc5 21. Qc4Bb4+
Korchnoi + lusupov 22. Na4H 1-0
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 5. e3 Bg4
5. h3 Bxf3 6. Qxf 3 e6 7. Bd3 Nbd7 8. Nc3 g6 YUGOSLAVIA
9. 0-0 Bg7 10. Rdl 0-0 11. Qe2 Qc7 12. Bd2
Rad8 13. Rael Qb8 14. Bel Rfe8 15. Qc2 For the first time in the history of the
Rc8 16. b4 e5 17. dxe5 Nxe5 18. cxd5 Nxd5 Yugoslave (ch) a player was able to take
19. Be2 Nxb4 20. Qb3 Nd5 21. Nxd5 cxd5 home the title losing 4 games in the tournament
22. Qxd5 Rxcl 23. Rxcl Rc8 24t Rdl Nc6 which was very sharply fought. Ljubojevic,
25. Bc4 Qc7 26. Qe4 Ne5 27. Bb3 b5 28. Qd5 Gligoric, Matulovic, Kurajica etc were missing
but still there are lots of GMs left, and tliis
a6 29. a4 Bf6 30. Qe4 Nc4 31. axb5 axb5
32. Rd5 Ra8 33. Kfl Rai 34. Ke2 Kg7 35. Bb4 ch ship was especially important as it served
Nb6 36. Rd6 Rel as qualification for the zonal tournament
later this year. The first 7 qualified. The .
winner was 34 year old GM Bozidar Ivanovic
from Titograd. And not only did he win the
championship, he took care of the brilliancy
prize too. We give you that and also the
decisive game, in which Ivanovic stood up
to the furious attack of Velimirovic with a
nice defensive performance to win and finish
half a point ahead of his rival.
1. GM Ivanovic 12^/19, 2. GM Velimirovic
12, 3-4 GM Rajkovic & IM Cebalo 11|. 5-8
GM Ivkov, GM Bukic, GM Hulak & IM
Rukavina 11, 9. GM Kezevic 10£ 10- 12
37. Rxf6 Kxf6 38. Qd4-j-Kg5 39. Be7-t-Qxe7 GM Vukic, IM Simic, & Z Nikolic 10.
1-0 time-but White is mating in four anyway.
Shirazi 4-Alburt Vukic-Ivanovic (Brilliancy Prize)
1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. c5 Nd5 1. d4 c5 2. d5 e5 3. e4 d6 4. Nc3 a6 5. a4
5. Bc4 c6 6. Qe2 b6 7. Nc3 Nxc3 8<(xc3 bxc5 Be7 6. f4 exf4 7. Bxf4 Bg5 8. Qd2 Bxf4
9. Nf3 e6 10. Ng5 f5 11. Bf4 Be7 12. h4 Qa5 9. Qxf4 Ne7 10. Nf3 Ng6 11. Qg3 0-0 12. h4
13. g4 h6 14. Nxe6 dxe6 15. gxf5 h5 16. Rgl f6 13. h.5 Ne5 14. Be2 Nf7 15 a5 Nd7 16. 0-0
Kf7 17. fxe6 Bxe6 18. Bg5 Bxg5 19. Rxg5 Nde5 17. Nd2 Bd.7 18. b3 b5 19. axb6 (ep) a5
Qc7 20. 0-0-0 Bxc4 21. Qxc4 +Ke8 22. Qd3 20. Ra2 Qxb6 21. Khl Kh8 22. Rfal f5
1-0. 23. exf5 Nb.6 24. f6 Rxf6 25. Nce4 R6f8
26. Qc3 Qd8 27. Kgl Nf5 28Nxd6 Nd4 29 Rel
, Soltis + Gurevich Qh4 30. N2e4 Nxe2-F 31. Rxe2 RÜ4-H
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nge2 d6 4. d4 cxd4 32. KxflQhl-t- 33. Kf2Ng4 + 34. Kf3Rf84-
5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Bc4 e6 7. Be3 Be7 8. Qe2 0-0 35. Nf6 Rxf64-36. Ke4 Qfl 37. Kd3 Nf2-|-0-l.
9. 0-0-0 Qc7 10. Bb3 a6 11. Rhgl Nd7 13. g4
Nc5 13.g5b5 14. Nxc6Qxc6 15. Bd4 Nxb3-|- Ivanovic 4-Velimirovic (Sicilian Dragon)
16. cxb3 b4 17. Qh5! bxc3 18. Qh6! e5 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 .4.Nxd4 Nf6
19. Bxe5 dxe5 20. Qxc6 cxb2+ 21. Kxb2 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2 04)
Be6 22. Qc7 1-0. 9. 0-0-0 Nxd4 10. Bxd4 Be6 11. Kbl Qc7 12.
h4 Rfc8 13. h5 Qa5 14. hxg6 hxg6 15. a3 Rab8
And now to the most astonishing defensive 16. Ne2 Qa4 17. g4 b5 18. g5 b4 19. gxf6 bxa3
move of the tournament. In the midst of an 20. b3 exf6 21. Nc3 Qc6 22. Kai a5 23. Qf4
apparently Smoothe attack which had exposed Rb4 24. Bc4 Rxc4 25. bxc4 Qxc4 26. Rd3
the king and threatened mate, Tarjan had a g5 27. .Qxd6 Qb4 28. Qxb4 axb4 29. Nd5 Rxc2
parry which made his opponent think for 30. Ne74- Kf8 31. Nf5 Kg8 32. Bc5 Bxf5
Long, long, long period..and then resign! 33. Rd8-f-l-0.

38
 F. I. D. E.
ARTICLE 17, THE LOSS OF THE GAME
A game is lost by a player—
1. Who has not played the prescribed number
of moves in the given time,
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17. 1
(1970). With reference to the General Obser­
vation (FIDE Interpretation Art. 1 (1959)
the Commission expresses the opinion
that special regulations should be allowed
insofar as they are required for conducting
tournaments in which the number of players
is large and the number of arbiters is rather
small, so that the procedure to determine
whether a player has lost a game, under Article
17. 1 cannot be observed. '
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17. 1
(1979A) Question: Player A had almost no
time for several moves. He moved and in­
advertently knocked over several pieces.
He pressed his clock. Player “B” immedi­
ately pressed his side of the clock, Stating
that “A” had made an illegal move. “A”s
clock fell. Was “A” correct in pressing his
clock for correcting the position?
Answer : “A” was wrong and properly
lost on time. “B” acted correctly.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17.1
(1979 B) Question : Both players were in a
time scramble. Player “A” ’s flag fell. They
could not; agree on how many moves were
made, or on how to reconstruct the game.
“A” offered a set of moves ending in 40, but
“B” had another set that meant “A” would
lose on time. The arbiter ruled, since there
was no clear reconstructiort, that the game
should be continued. Was he correct?
Answer: The arbiter must make every
effort to determine all the facts, including
questioning of witnesses. If he is then not
certain whether the time control has been
passed, then, as an exception and only in
tournaments played according to the swiss
system, the Arbiter can allow the game
to continue.
2.Who arrives at the chessboard more than
one hour late.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17.2
(1958) In the case where a player or team of
players arrives late for a competition, the
Commission deems that it should stand by
the principles of the General Observations
(FIDE Interpretation Art. 1 (1959). If the
39
SECTION
delay is due to cause for which the players
are not responsible, then it must follow from
the principle of sportsmanship in chess, at
least in international tournaments that con­
cessions should be granted as far as it is possible
to do so without creating eventual difficulties
to other players or to the organizers.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17.2
(1962). The Commission declares that the
stipulations of Article 17.2 and 17.4 of the
laws of Chess, stating that a game is lost for
players arriving at the chessboard more than
one hour late are applicable as mush at the
commencement of a game as on resumption
of play after an adjournment. In the opinion
of the Commission, there cannot be any diffi­
culty in applying this rule in the situation in
which on resumption of an adjourned game,
the player who has sealed a move is absent
while his opponent presents himself at the
chessboard. If the former is still absent
after the lapse of one hour, the game is lost
for him unless it has been decided previously
by one of three circumstances, viz- (a) the
absent player has produced a drawn game by
virtue of the fact that the sealed move is
stalemate, or (b) the absent player has won
the game by virtue of the fact that the sealed
move is check mate,
(c) the player present at the chessboard has
lost the game according to Article 17.1 by
exceeding his time-limit.
Basically, this declaration by the Commis­
sion implies a mere substantiation of the
evident fact that what happens in consequence
of an action or of an omission after the termi­
nation of a game is without importance.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17.2
(1966). Question: If in adjourning a game,
a player has some remaining time in his
favour (more than one hour) should his
opponent, when the game is continued, wait
an hour or wait until the full time which the
player has in this favour has elapsed before
claiming a win in case of the player’s non
appearance ?
Answer: This case has already been solved
by FIDE Interpretation Art. 17.2 (1962).
3. Who has sealed a move the real signi-,
ficance of which it is impossible to establish
or.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17.3
(1958) Having been asked a more precise
formulation of Article 17.3, the Commission
once again refers to the General Observation
(FIDE Interpretation Art. 1. (1959) It is the
duty of the arbiter to make the necessary
decision in accordance with the circumstances
of each particular case.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17. 3
(1965). According to the opinion of the
Commission, it ought to be clearly established
by the wording of this Article that not only
when the notation is inexact but also when
a clear notation indicates an irregular move,
it is incumbent on the arbiter to judge whether
there exists any reasonable doubt as to the
move which the player has intended to indicate.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17. 3
(1975) Question : In a recent tournament,
player A was asked to seal a move of adjourn­
ment. Player A subsequently handed his
sealed - move envelope to the arbiter, who
kept in his custody. When the adjourned
game was resumed, the envelope was opened,
but only the score sheet of player B was found
in the envelope. The arbiter ruled that Player
A’s failure to seal his move automatically
entailed the loss of the game under Article 17.3.
Was the arbiter’s ruling correct?
GAMES SECTION
1. Polugaevsky-Korchnoi
(Candidates, 1980) (Queen’s Indian Defence)
I. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. g3 Bb7 4. Bg2 e6
5. 0-0 Be7 6. d4 0-0 7. d5! ? (Raises a few eye­
brows) 7..ed5 8. Nd4 Bc6!? (Natural is 8..
Nc6 completing the development of the Queen­
side. Uhlmann-Taimanov (Belgrade, 1970)
continued 9 cd5 Nd4 10 Qd4 c5 11 Qd3 d6
12. Nc3 a6 13. Bf4 b5 14. a4 b4 with good
counterplay for Black.) 9. cd5 (if 9. Nc6 dc6
and Black is a solid pawn-up) 9. .Bd5 10.
Bd5 Nd5 11 e4 Nb4 (if 11. .Nf6?! 12. e5 Nd5
13. Nf5 c6 14. Qg4 with a fierce attack and
on 12..Ne8 13. Qf3 c6 14. Rdl is crushing)
12. Nc3 Bf6 13, Nf5 Re8! (this invention by
Korchnois’ team, helps Korchnoi to withstand
the oncoming brilliant attack conducted by
Polugaevsky). 14. f4 d6 15. Qg4 N8c6
16. e5 (literally forced as White cannot afford
to exchange of his beautifully posted Knight
on f5).
40
Answer: Yes. It should be remarked,
however, that the arbiter (or one of his assis­
tants) should be blamed, as he did not make
sure that the scoresheet of player A was in
the envelope, even though it was his duty to
do so.
FIDE INTERPRETATION ART. 17. 3
(1976) Question: According to FIDE Inter­
pretation Art. 17. 3 (1958) the arbiter has
the duty of deciding the real significance of
a sealed move. This is undesirable, as the
arbiter should interfere as little as possible in
the game and should serve only to see that
neither player gains an unfair advantage from
his mistakes. What is the opinion of the
Commission ?
Answer: The player sealing a move should
be aware that the responsibility for sealing
a correct move is entirely his and that if he
seals an illegal or ambiguous move, he may
lose the game.
4. Who during the game refuses to comply
with the laws: If both players refuse to comply
with the laws or if both players arrive at the
chessboard more than one hour late, the game
shall be declared lost by both players.
I6..de5 17. Ne4 ef4 18. Nh6+Kf8 19. Nf6
Qf6 20. Rf4 Rel +- ! (2O..Qh6? loses to 21.
Rf7 + Kf7 22. Bh6 plan Qc4q-and a3) 21.
Kg2 Ne5! (unclear.is 21..Qh6 22. Rf7q-Kf7
23. Bh6 Rai 24. Qg7-f-Ke6, with the move
played, Korchnoi takes the sting out of the
attack by exchanging off the Queens) 22.
Rf6 Ng4 23. Rf7 + (if 23. Ng4 Nc2! not 23..
gf6??) 23.. ,Ke8 24. Rg7 Nh6 25. a3! (plan
26. Bh6!; 25. Bh6 now fails to 25.. Rai 26.
Rg8+ Kf7 27. Ra8 Ra2) 25..Rd8 26. ab4
Rd7 ! (26..Rddl fails to 27. Ra7!) 27. Rd7
Kd7 28. Kf2 (the strong pin forces White to
 to give up his ‘h’ pawn) 28. .Rhl 29. Ke2 NI5 (Polugaevsky prefers development to regain­
30. Kd3 Kc6 31. b3 Kd5 32. g4 Ne7 33. Bb2 ing his pawn). 19...N7c6 20. Qe3 (prevents
Rh2 34. Bc3 Nc6 35. Rfl (35. b5 Nd8 36. Ra7 20.. Nd3 and prepares 21. f4) 20. ..Qe7 21.
Ne6 plan Rg2 ensures the ‘g’ pawn and the f4 Nc4? (necessary was 21. .Nf7 which controls
game). 35..Rh3+36, Kc2 a6 37. Rf5-f-Kd6 all the Black squares and holds 22. e5?! too)
38. Rf6+Kd7 39. Rf7 + Kc8 40. Rf8 + Kb7 22. Nc4 Bc4 23. e5! fe5 24. Bc6 dc6 25. Rd7!
41 Rf5 Rh2-f- (Korchnoi one of the World’s (leaves White in full command of the Black
best endgame players continues to handle squares) 25.. Qd7 26. Qe5+ Kf7 27. Qf6 +
the ending with great finesse and substlety.) Kg8 28. Qg5-f-Kf7 29. Rel! Qe6 (If 29..Be6
42. Kd3 Rh3 + 43. Kc2Ne7 44. Re5 Ng6 45. 30. f5!) 30. Qg7+Ke8 31. Re6+Be6 32. Bf6!
Re4 Rf3 46. g5 Rf5 47. Bd2 Kc6 48. Rel Rf7 Bf7 33. Bg5! Kd7 34. Bh6 c4 35. Qh7 c5
; 49. Rai Kb5 50. Rel Ne7 51. Re4 Kc6. 36. Bf8 (better was 36. g4! leaving Black in a
(the Black monarch starts his march back Zugzwang) 36..Rf8 37. Qg7 Ke7 38. Qe5 +
towards the K-side to help his pieces capture Kd7 39. g4 Re8 40. Qf6 Bd5 41. g5 Re2
the ‘g’ pawn, while his counterpart just sits 42. h4! (Polugaevsky’s handling of the ensuing
back helplessly watching the proceedings). Queen and pawn ending is instructive) 42.. b5
52. Rc4+Kd7 53. Rd4+Ke6 54. |Re4+Kd5 43. Qf5+ Kd6 44. Qf8+Kc6 45. Qc8+ Kd6
55. Rg4 Ng6 56. Rgl Ne5 57. Rg2|Ke4 58. Bc3 46. Qd8 + Kc6 47. Qa8+Kd6 48. Qf8-f-Kc6
Ng6 59. Bd2 Nf8 60. Re2+ Kd5 61. Bc3 49. a3 Re3 50. h5 c3 51. Qf6 + Be6 52. Kf2!
. R15 62. Rd2+Ke6 63. Bg7 Ng6 |64. Rh2 Rf7! c2 53. Qb2 Rh3 54 Kg2 Bf5! (Threatens..
65. Bc3 Nf4 66. Bd2 Nd5 67. Re2+ Kf5 Rb3 followed by Rbl) 55. Qf6 + Kc7 56. Qf5
68. Rf2+ Kg6 (atlast !) 69. Re2 Re7 70. Rf2 cl=Q 57. Qe5 + Kb6 58. Kh3 b4 59. ab4 cb4
Ne3+71. Kd3Nf572. Bf4 Rd7+73. Kc3 Nd6 60. h6 Qhl+ 61. Kg4 Qdl-j-62. Kf5 Qc2+
741 Re2 Nb5+ 75. Kb2 Rf7 76. Re4 Kf5 63. Kf6 b3 64 h7 Qh7 65 Qe3+Kc6 66 Qb3
77. Rel Nd4 78. Bel Nf3 79. Rdl Rg7 80. Kc3 Qh8 + 67. Ke7! Qh4 68. Qc4 + Kb6 69. Qb4+
Ng5 81. Rd5 + Kg4 82. Rd4+Kh5 83. Rd5 h6 Kc6 70. Qe4+Kb5 71. Kf7 a5 72. g6 Qg4
84. Kc4 Rg6 85. Be3 bS-f-86. Kc5 Kg4 87. Rd7 73. Qe5-(-l-0 Tit for Tat.
Ne4+ 88. Kd4 Rd6+ 89. Rd6 Nd6 90. Kd5
h5 91. Bf2 h4 92. Bh4 Kh4 93. Kc6 Kg4 3. Miles+Geller (lone Pine. 1980)
94. Kc7 Ne4 94. Kb6 Kf4 0-1. 1. c4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7
5.b3 0-0 6. Bb2 c5 7. 0-0 Nc6 8. e3 d4 9. ed4
2. Polugaevsky 4-Korchnoi (Queen’s Indian cd4 10. Rel Re8 11. a3 a5 12. d3 Bc5
Defence) Candidates, 1980 | 13. Nbd2e5 14. Ng5 Bg4 15. Bf3! Bf3 16. Qf3
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 Bb7 h6 17. Nge4 Ne4 18. iNe4 Bf8 19. Bel Re6
5. 0-0Be7 6. d4 0-0 7. d5!? ed5 8. Nh4!? (Polu. (planning Qd7, Rg6 and f5) 20. h4! Be7 (Not
gaevsky’s innovation prevents the defence 8.. 20. .£6? 21. h5 f5 22. hg6!+)21 h5Qf822. Qf5
Bc6. but has the (drawback of putting the Rb8 23. g4! (the start of a devastating pawn
Knight in the corner) 8.. c6 9 cd5 Nd5 10. storm). 23..b5 24. Kh2! (Making room for
Nf5 Bc5?! (had Korchnoi visualised White’s the heavy pieces) 24.. bc4 25. bc4 Rb3 26. Rgl !
shocking 12th move he would have preferred Ba3 (on 26. .Rd3 27. g5 hg5 28. Bg5 h6 29. Bf6
10. .Nc7 plan 11..d5) 11. e4 Ne7 12. Ng7H Qh6 30. Rg6 + fg6 31. Qe6-f-Kf8 32. Ng5!
Qh5+ 33. Kg2+—) 27. Ra3 Ra3 28. Ba3
Qa3 29. g5!+ Qf8 (alternatives are no
good as (a) 29. .Kf8 30. gh6 Rh6 31. Qc 8 +
Ke7 32. Rg7 Rh5-t-33. Kg2 plan Qc7+ -and
(b) 29...Ne7 30. Qf3! Kf8 31. Nf6! Rc6
32. gh6 gh6 33. Nd7 Ke8 34.Ne5 + —)
30. Nf6+ gf6 31. gh6+ Kh8 32. Rg7 Qg7
33. hg7+ Kg7 34. Qg4 + Kh7 35. h6! Kh6
36. Qg8 Re7 37. Qc8! Re6 38i Qh8 + 1-0 as
after 38.. Kg6 '39. Qg8+ Kf5 40. Kg3! e4
41. Qg4+ Ke5 42. Qf4 mates).

12..
Kg7 13. b4 Bb4 14. Qd4 + f6 15. Qb4
c5 16. Qd2 Nbc6 (with the Black bishop out
of the board, Korchnoi tries to cover the Black
squares with his pawns and pieces. But can
be hold?) 17. Bb2 Ba6 18. Rdl? Ne5 19. Na3
4. Azmajparasvili + Cernin (English opening)
(USSR, 1980)
1. c4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. e3 Bb4
5. Qc2 0-0 Ermenkov-Bisguier (Lone Pine.
1980) went 5. .Bc3 6. Qc3 Qe7 7. a3 0-0 8. d3

41
d5 9. cd5 Nd5 10. Qc2 a5 11. b3 f5 12. Bb2 Rc2 34. fg6 Qg6 (only move) 35. Bc8 Rc8
f4 13. e4 Nf6 14. h3 with a double Bishop 36. Be5 e3 37. Qg4 Rc2 38. Qd7 Nde6
advantage) 6. Nd5 Bc5 7. a3 a5 8. Ng5 g6 39. Qe8+ 1-0.
9. h4!? d6 10. Bd3 (10. Nf6 + Qf6 11. Ne4
Qe7=)10..Nd5 16.cd5Ne7 12. hS! Nd5!? 6. Mahia — Quinteros (Sicilian Najdorf. Sas
13. Nh7! Kh7 14. hg6+Kg8! (not 14.. .Kg7? Miguel, 1980)
15. Rh7+! Kg8 16. Bc4) 15. Bc4! N16! 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cd4 4. Nd4 Nf6
16. gf 7+ Kg7 17. d4! Bb6 18. de5 de5 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 (This poisoned
19. Bd2 Qe7 20. Bc3 Qc5? (better was pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf is one of
2O..Bd4 21 ed4 ed4-f-22. Kfl dc3 23 Rel Qc5 the most vastly analysed opening and interest­
24. Qc3+ or 20. .Rf7 21. Bf7q-Kf7 22. Rh7+ ing too). 8. Qd2 Qb2 (this leads to a very
Nh7 29. Qh7 + Ke6 24. 0-0-0 with attack) sharp position. Naturally this complicated
21. 0-0-0! Rf7? (If 21..Qc4 22. Rh7+! Nh7 line is very difficult to handle, for both White
23. Be5+—) 22. B17 K17 23. Rh7+! Ke6 and Black) 9. Rbl Qa3 10. e5!? (the move
24. Qb3 + Kf5 25. Q17 Kg5 26. Rg7+ K15 played in modern times is 10. f5! Nc6 11.
27. g4 + Ke4 28. Qf6 c6 29. Rf7 1-0. fe6 fe6 12. Nc6 bc6 13. e5 with a whirlpool of
variations to follow). 10.,.de5 11. de5 Nfd7
5. QuinterosJ 4- Miles (Buenos-Aires, 1979) 12. Be2 Bb4 (Not 12...Ne5 13. Ne6+—)
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 b5 3. Na3 (a novelty, usual 13. Rb3 Qa5 14. 0-0 0-0 (Now Black seems
is 3. Bg2 Bb7 4. Na3) 3.. .a6 (not the tempting to be safe but for White’s next move) 15. Bf6!
3..
.b4?! 4. Nc4 d5 5. Nce5 plan Ng5+) Nf6 16. ef6 Rd8 17. fg7 Rd4 18. Qh6! Qe5
4. c4 c6 (interesting now is 4.. .b4 as the c4 19. Ne4H (giving up another piece to maintain
square is not available for the Knight. Play pressure) 19... Qe4 20. Bh5 Rd7 21. Rd3!
might continue 5. Nc2 e6 6. d4 Bb7 7. Bg2 Bc5+ 22. Khl Bd4 23. Rg3 Nc6 24. Bg6!!
Be7 8. 0-0 0-0 9. Nd2+) 5. Bg2 d5 6. b3 Nbd7 (Electrifying) 24. ..Qg6 25. Rg6 Ne7 26. Rf7
7. 0-0 e5 8. cd5 cd5 9. d4+ e4 10. Ne5 Bd6 Kf7 27. g8 = Q + Ng8 28. Qh7+ 1-0.
11. f4 0-0? (better is ll...ef3 12. ef3 0-0)
12. Nc2 Qb6 13. Khl Bb7? (apparently the 7. Seirawan — Christiansen (English opening
correct followup is 13... Re8 14. Ne3 Nf8 plan (U. S. A. (ch), 1980)
Bb7) 14. Bh3! Rfd8 15. g4! (signals the start 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4 4. Qc2 0-0
of a devastating pawn storm) 15.. .Nf8 16. g5 5. a3 Bc3 6. Qc3 b6 7. b3 Bb7 8. Bb2 d6 9. e3
Ne8 17. Ne3 Ne6 18. Nf5 Bf8 19. Be3 (Quin­ Nbd7 10. Be2 e5 11. d4 Ne4 12. Qc2 Qe7!?
teros uses his ‘e3’ square for his pieces from (12.. .Ng5!?) 13. Rdl Rad8 14. Bal Rfe8
where they blockade the “e” pawn and if (alternative is 14...Ng5 15. Qf5+) 15. 0-0 a5
necessary could easily be transfered to the 16. Rfel h6 17. Bd3 f5 (17... Ng5! ?) 18. c5! bc5
king-side where the action is going on) 19... 19. de5 Kh8 (Bad is 19...de5? 20. Bb5! c6
Rac8 20. Qd2a5 21. a3 b4 (if here 21.. ,g6 22. 21. Bd3+) 20. ed6 cd6 21. Bfl Qf7 22. Qb2
Nh6+ Bh6 23. gh6 f5 24. Rgl+) 22. Rgl! Ndf6 23. Nd2 Bd5! 24. Ne4 Re4 25. Rd3?
(plan Nh6 + ) 22. . .Rc7 23. a4 Rdc8 24. Qel (good is 25. f3!) 25...Rg4! 26. Qd2? Bf3!!
g6! 27. g3 (not 27. Rd6? Rg2+ ! 28. Bg2 Qg6
29. Rd8 + Kh7) 27.. .Ne4 28. Qa5 Rf8 29. Qa6
Qg6 30. Redl f4! 31. Rd6 fg3! 32. Bg7+ Kh7!
0-1.
8. Ghinda — Sax (Sicilian defence, Malta
Olympaid)
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cd4 4. Nd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 g6 6. Bg5 (Trying an irregular line
against the Dragon) 6...Bg7 7. Bb5q- Bd7
8. Qe2 Nc6 9. 0-0-0 Rc8 10. Bc6 bc6 11. f4
00 12. e5 de5 13. fe5 Nd5 14. Nd5 cd5 15. e6
fe6 16. Ne6 Qb6! 17. Ng7 Rf2! 18. Qd3 Kg7
19. Rd2 Bf5 20. Be3 Bd3—+ 21. Bf2? (Nor
25. Ng4! Rc3 (25.. .gf5 loses to 26. Nf6-f- Nf6 21. Bb6 saves the. game as 21...Rc2+
(if 26.. ,Kh8 27. Qh4 h6 28. gh6+—) 27. gf6 22. Rc2 Rc2+ and ab6—+) 21...Qf6 0-1.
Kh8 28. Qh4) 26. Qh4 R8c7 27. Rafi Bc8
(on 27.. .Rb3 28. Nfh6+ Bh6 29. Nh6+ Kh8 9. Karpov 4- Alburt (Alekhine Defence, Malta
30. f5!) 28. Nfh6+ Bh6 29. Nh6+ Kh8 30. Rg3 Olympiad)
N8g7 31. f5!+ Nd8 32. Bf4 Rg3 £33. Bg3 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 4. Nf3 Bg4

42
 5. Be2 Nc6 6. c4 Nb6 7. ed6 ed6 8. d5 Bf3 9.
Bf3 NeS 10. Be2 (Karpov always on the look
out for a small postitional advantage grabs the
oppurtunity of retaining the double bishop
advantage) 10...QI14 11. 0-0 h5 (ll...Nec4
12. g3 Qe4 13. Nc3 wins the Knight on c4)
12. Nd2 g6 13. f4 (thought this move weakens
his e3 square, Karpov correctly evaluates
that his control of e5 compensâtes for it)
13..
.Ng4 14. Nf3Of6 15. Rel 0-0-0 16. a4a5
17. Qd2 Bg7 18. h3 Rde8 19. Bfl (Of cource
19. hg4 hg4 plan Qh4 wins for Black) 19.. .Nh6
20. Oa5 NÎ5 21. Rdl Kb8 22. Ra3 Re4 23.
Qb5 Nc8 (if 23... Rc4 24. a5 + — and if 23...
Nc4 24. Rb3 plan a5 4—) 24. Rb3 b6 25. a 5
Qe7 26. Qa6 Rhe8 27. c5! dc5 28. Bb5 c6
Solution to CHESS TRICKS
(Zakopaney, 1978)
1. Panceik 4- Shurale
1. Qa8! ! on taking the queen follows
2. Ne7 -i- and 3. Nc8 remaining a piece up.
while 1. . Rb7 fails to 2. Ne7 4- Re7
3. Qb8 + —
2. Unzicker + Hon1! (Bucharest, 1975)
1. Be4 4- ! fe 2. Qd5+ Kc8 3. Qc6 mate.
3. Kopilov - Karlsson (Inkutsk, 1961)
1. . . Rd3! ! threatening two mates via ..
Na3 4- and . . Rc3 4- and upon 2. Nd3 Be6
mate.
4. Skvia-f- Rosenburg (Rega, 1962)
This position requires decisive action and
hence l.Qf84-!Rf8 2. Rh7-f- Kh7 3. Rhl
mate.
5. Vitollnsh 4- Silerf-Zaie (Belksi. 1979)
Black hopes to draw the Rook ending, once
the queens gît exchanged, but 1. Rh7 4- ! ! is
there.
6. V Sthalekar 4- PVGK Murthy
(National team (ch) Guntur, 1981)
1. Qg6!! 1-0
7. P. Mithrakant-M. Aaron
(TN State Ch.ship, 1980)
This one appeared in the December, 1980
issue without the Wh'te Bishop on h5. 1. . .
Ng2!! 0-1 for if 2. Ng2 Be5!—4-
8. Romanishin -4- Petrosian (USSR, 1975)
Tniscame out in the March 1981 issue with
a White Knight on g4 instead of a Black
knight.
43
29.BC6+—Bd4+ 30. Nd4 Nd4 31. ab6 Nf3+
32. Rf3Rel+ 31. Rel 1-0.
10. Strezelecki — Antunes (European Junior)
I.e4c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nd4 g6
5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Bc4 d6 8. f3 Qb6
9. Nf5 Qxb2 10. Nxg7+ Kf8 11. Nd5 Nxd5
12. Bxd5 Kxg713. 0-0 Qc3 14. Qcl b.6 15. Rbl
Qa5 16. f4f6 17. Rb3 Qc7 18. Qb2 e5 19. c4
Na5. 20. Rb5Bd7 21. fxe5 dxe5 22. Rxf6!
Kxf6 23. Qf2+ Bf5 24. Qh4+ g5 25. Qf2
Kg7 26. exf5*Kf6 27. h4 Nc6 28. bxg5 +
hxg5 29. Bxg5 + ! Kxg5 30. Qg3 + Kxf5
31. Be4+!Ke6 32. Qg6+ Kd7 33. Bf5 + 1-0.
Games carry the comments of K. V. Shantharam
1. Qf4!! ef4 2. Rg4 Bg5 3. Rdl 4- —
(the pawn queen’s at d8).
objection overruled
With reference to “Another Problem
Busted’1, published in our March issue and
the comments by Mr. K. Subrahmanyam in
‘ Reader’s write” found else where in this
issue, we would like to point out that the
problem is merely, “White to play and win”
(not mate as quickly as possible). Mr. Subrah­
manyam points out that mate can be delayed
by permitting White to queen with 7...a4?
after the moves 1. Kc8 Be5 2. Nf7 Bb8
3. Nd8 Bd6 4. Nc6 Bb8 5. Nc7 g3 6. Na6
Ka6 7. Kb8. Howeves this is also found to
be true in the composer’s solution via 1. Kc8
Be5 2. Nf7 Bb8 3. Nd8 Bd6 4. Nc64-
Ka6 5. Nd4 a4! 6. Nb5 Ka5 7. Nd6 Kb4
8. b8 = QKc3 and it is anybody’s guess, how
many more moves are required to corner the
king.
Granted that being a Queen ahead cons­
titutes a win (in both the composer’s and our
solution), we sail maintain that our solution
is much shorter and aesthetically mote
pleasing and hence Mr. Subrahmanyams
objection is not justified.
T. Swaminalhan
R. Ravisekhar
 BOOK REVIEW
COMPLETE CHESS STRATEGY, advance in the centre, but this important gain
VOLUME-I. of space is only possible because the ensuing
Part of a trilogy by GM Ludek Pachman, tactics have been carefully assessed. 14. PxP
it gives the fundamentals of Chess Strategy in PxP 15. P-K4 PxP 16. N2xP the point is that
instructive chapters like Character of the he cannot play 16. N-N5? PxP! 17. N-K6
position and choice of plan, Bishop, and open Q-B3 18. B-B3 RxB and Black wins. But
diagonals, the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ bishop, Oppo­ for this combination White would have a clear
site colour bishops, Bishop versus Knight, advantage after 16...Q-K2? 17. NxKP, for
Creation and significance of open lines for Black would be left with an unpleasant isolated
rooks, the queen and play with the heavy KP. 16...NxN 17. PxN
pieces, to 0-0 or 0-0-0, active king in the middle-
game, the exposed king’s position as a strategic
factor, etc.
Every strategy is illustrated with games
from modern chess and detailed explanations.
There is a diagram to each of the 163 pages,
for the 81 illustrative games. This Corner­
stone library paper book is reasonably priced
at Rs. 33.35 and available from M/s. V. S.
Gadre & Co., 1358 Sadashiv Peth, Pune 30.
This is a book that every chess player must
possess AND STUDY.
Both sides have an isolated KP but close study
COMPLETE CHESS STRATEGY, reveals that White’s pawn is much the weaker
VOLUME-2. of the two. The reason for this is that Black’s
The second part of Ludek Pachman’s trilogy, pieces are placed most favourably both for
This book deals thoroughly with the influences defending his own KP (queen and KB) and also
of pawns and pawn configurations in middle for attacking is openent’s KP (his QB and . .N-
game strategy. Q2-B3). White’s pieces in contrast are far
The first part deals with the passed pawn, its less effective. For example, if he tries to
blockade, isolated pawn, backward pawn, develop his QB aggressively by P-QN3 and
doubled pawn etc., while the second part deals B-N2, his KB4 becomes an ideal post for
with the classical centre, the ‘little centre’, Black’s KR attacking the KP. Black’s plan
tension in the centre, control of the centre, now is to prevent the regrouping of the enemy
centralisation of pieces, etc. pieces and tie his opponent down to the defence
of the KP.
This Cornerstone library book priced at
Rs. 25. 65 is available from M/s. V. S. Gadre & 17. .P-KR3! Otherwise after 17.. .N-Q2 White
Co., 1358 Sadashiv Peth, Pune. 30. : obtains counter-play with 18 N-N5! 18. N-Q2?
' Attempts to attack the king fail because of the
The book contains 184 pages and 93 i weakness of the KP e.g., 18. N-R4 RxR-|-
annotated Grand master games—all of them 19. QxR Q-B2! with a clear advantage to
with diagrams. Here is game No. 20— Black. However, White should try to activate
Zita—Pachman. his pieces by 18. B-K2! e.g. 18...P-B5 19.
(Czechoslovak Championship 1954, Birds Q-N4 when Black can create a passed pawn
Opening). after 19...BxP 20. QxBP + QxQ 21. BxQ +
K-R2 or else play 19...B-R3 followed by
1. P-K3 P-KN3 2. P-KB4 B-N2 3. N-KB3
..N-Q2-B3, but in both cases his task would
P-Q4 4.B-K2N-KB3 5.0-0 0-0 6. P-Q3 P-N3
be more difficult than in the game. 18.. .N-Q2
7. Q-Kl P-B4 8. QN-Q2 B-N2 9. B-QI Q-B2 19. RxR + RxR 20 B-B3 N-B3 21. N-Bl Q-B2!
10. N-K5? he should play 10. P-KN3 followed Threatening 22...NxP which is of course still
by P-K4 although his K-side is then weakened possible after 22-B-Q2. 22. N-N3 Q-B5 23. Q-B3
a little. 10...N-KI.’ so that after 11. PK-4
BxN 12. PxB QxP this knight can replace the With his last moves Black has succeeded in
bishop on KN2 11. N2-B3 P-B3 12. N-N4 positioning all his pieces effectively and after
N-Q3 13. N-B2 P-K4! so Black is the first to the passive 23. P-B3 R-Ql White would soon

44
be embarrassed for good moves. So Zita It is this last variation which the text-move is
decides to exchange queens, hoping that piece designed to prevent 41...K-N4 The sealed
play will comoensate for the weakness of bis move; Black Obviously plays a waiting move
pawns. 23.. .QxQ 24. PxQ Although White’s before committing himself to the final winning
Q-side pawns are now seriously weakened, I manoeuvre. 42. N-N4 K-B5 43. N-K3 B-N8!
decided after lengthy deliberation that at the It would be premature to play 43...P-R7
moment this weakness is not easy to exploit, 44. N-Q5+ K-N4 45. K-N2 BxP 46. KxP BxN
and White’s KP must still be the main object of 47. PxB when the pawn ending has, become
attack. However, a successful attack is only a veritable study; 47...P-B5 48. K-N2!! (not
possible if Black can exchange his ‘bad’ bishop 48. K-N3 K-B3 49. P-B4 K-B4! winning)
on KN2. 24. P-KR4! 25. B-N5 N-R2 26. B-K3 .K-B3
48.. 49. K-N3! (zugzwang) 49...K-K2
B-KB3 27. R-Ql B-N4 50. P-B4 draws. 0-1. If 44. N-Q5+ K-N4
The first stage of the plan is over. Pressure 45. N-K3 P-R7 etc., Or 44. P-B3 K-N4!
against the KP now forces White to exchange 45. N-N4 BxP 46. NxP K-B5 wins.
into an extremely disadvantageous minor piece The isolated pawn in the above example was
ending. not on an open file, so it was not possible to
28. BxBNxB 29. R-Q7 R-B2 30. RxRKxR. attack it from the front with the major pieces.
If Black tries instead to attack the weak Q- We deliberately chose this untypical example
side pawns, White defends after 30... NxR ? for our first illustration of the isolated pawn,
31. N-Bl! N-Q3 32. N-Q2 N-N4 33. N-Nl because many books only deal with isolated
The text move threatens .. PR5 winning the pawns on an open file. Clearly an isolated
KP. pawn is just as much of a weakness, even if it
cannot be attacked from the front, as the pre­
31. P-KR4 NxB+! vious game showed, of course, as our next
This move is only possible because White example illustrates, an open line greatly helps
has played P-KR4 which will later allow Black us to exploit the weakness of an isolated pawn.
to create an outside passed pawn by .. P-KN4. —M. Aaron
This is a typical case of pressure against one
weakness (the White KP) leading to another complete chess strategy
weakening move (P-KR4) forced by the con­
sequential unfavourable placing of his pieces. Play on the Wings. Ambitious players wanting
a practical guide to the middlegame will find
32. PxN B-Bll. that Ludek Pachman’s great trilogy, which is
Not at once 32...P-KN4? 33. N-B5. The completed with this volume, stands in a class
rest of the game belongs to the end game of its own.
proper, but contains a number of interesting In a hard bound David McKay book of
points whieh are worth our consideration. 175 pages, Pachman deals with, practically
33. KB2P-KN4! 31.PxPK-N3 35.N-B1B-K3! useful themes like superiority on the wings, the
It would be a bad mistake to play 35.. .KxP? minority attack, strategic points, dynamic
36. P-QB4! drawing. 36. PR3 KxP 37. N-K3 elements, methods of conducting the fight,
B-R7! This deliberate enclosure of bis own the individual style and the psychological
bisbop is the only way to win, as 37.. .P-R5 approach, the chess computer, etc.
allows White to draw by 38. P-QB4. followed
by 39. N-Q5. 38. P-QB4. Th:s makes Black’s Though originally priced at $10.95 it is now
task easier, although his strong passed pawn available at a reduced price of Rs. 40/ - from
still guarantees the win against other defences M/s V. S. Gadre & Co., 1358 Sadashiv peth.
eg. 38. N-Q5? BxN 39. PxB P-N4 40. K-N3 Pune - 30.
K-B3 41. K-R4 K-K2 42. KxP K-Q3 43. K-N5
KxP 44. K-B5 P-R4 etc. Or 38. K-N3 P-R5 + Ivkov — Fischer.
39. KB2P-R6 40. K-N3 P-R7 41. KxPK-B5 (Santa Monica 1966, Queen’s Pawn.)
39. N-N4 B-K3 wins. Or 38. N-B5 P-R5
42. N-K7 B-B5! 40. N-B6 K-B5 41. NxRP 1. P-Q4N-KB3 2. N-KB3P-KN3 3. P-KN3
P-R6 42. N-B8 B-K7 43. NxPBxP 44. N-Q5 + B-N2 4. B-N2 0-0 5. 0-0 P-Q3 6. N-B3 P-Q4
KxP 45. N-B6+ K-B5 wins. 38...P-R5 39. 7. N-K5 P-B3 8. P-K4 B-K3 9. PxP PxP
NN4 K-B5 40. N-K3 P-R6 41. P-R4 if 41. 10. N-K2 N-B3 11. N-KB4 B-B4 12. P-B3 B-K5
N-Q5+ K-N4 White loses after both 42. N-K3 13. B-R3Q-B2 14. N4-Q3 BxN 15. NxB P-K3
P-R7 43. K-N2 P-R8 = Q+ 44. KxQ K-B5, 16. B-B4Q-Q1 17. R-K1R-K1 18. B-N2 N-Q2
or 42. K-N3 BxP 43. KxP BxN 44. PxB P-N4! 19. P-KR4 P-KR4 20. B-B3? (better 20. P-R4)

45
2L..P-QN1! 21. P-R3 P-R4 22. Q-K2 R-QB1
As the attentive reader will realize, White could
now kill the minority attack by 23. P-QN4!
with an equal game, but instead decided to
alter the pawn structure by playing 23 B-Q6
Q-N3 24. B-K5 N2xB 25. NxN NxN 26. PxN.
However, despite the opposite coloured bishops,
Fischer now gained a decisive advantage with
.P-N5!
26.. 27. RPxPPxP 28. Q-K3 (28. PxP
is not much better, as 28... QxNP leaves both
the QNP and KP weak) 28... QxQ 29. RxQ
PxP 30. PxP R-B4 31. B-K2 R1-QB1
32. R-R3 B-Bl 33. R-N3 B-K2 34. K-N2 B-Ql!
(aiming for QR4 when the QBP falls) 35. B-R6
R-Rl 36. R-B3 B-B2! (if 36... RxB 37. R-N8)
37. R-N5 R-B5 38. B-N7 R-R6 39. R-K3 K-N2
40. B-B8 R6xP 41. R-Kl R-B7 42. B-Q7 0-1.
White resigned without resuming play.
Naturally such an advance is not always easy
to carry out, as the changed pawn structure
gives Black more manoeuvring room in the
centre.
ZASHEETA PIRCZA - UFIMTSE VA
(RUSSIAN).
This exhaustive book on the Pirc Defence
by G. S. Friedstein is uafortuna'ely (for us)
only in the Russian language. The notation
is in algebraic and the pieces are denoted by
the Russian ini ials: Kp for King, <pfor Queen,
C for bishop, K for Knight and j for rook.
Players who are content to go through the
variation and only guess the Russian comment­
ary will find this 192 page ridiculously cheap
at Rs. 5.25 a copy, published in 1980 by
“PHYSIKULTURA AND SPORT” Moscow,
Copies may be had from M/s. V. S. Gadre &
Co., 1358 Sadashiv peth, Pune-30. This book
is an incentive for ambitious chess players to
study the Russian language !
—M. Aaron then Mashian had to resign, having made the
CANDIDATES 1980-81
The first two pages of this 13-page cylostyled position changed many times, in move 186-
booklet contain the results of all the candidate may be out of exhaustion!
46
matches with a brief summary of the happenings.
In the remaining eleven pages there are
seventy six unannotated games compiled by
V. K. Sahasrabudhe covering the Quarter­
finals, Semi finals and Finals. Published by
M/s. V. S. Gadre & Co., 1358 Sadashiv Peth,
Pune-411 030, it is priced Rs. 5.
BOBBY FISCHER’S MY 60 MEMORABLE
GAMES.
By Robert J. Fischer
In this book, Bobby Fischer probably the
greatest player of all times analyzes his most
important and representative games, showing
the strategic considerations, the tactics and
sometimes the blunders - that occur under
pressure of tournament play. He assesses
his opponent’s thinking as well. The introduc­
tion to each game is given by GM Larry Evans.
These 60 memorable and exciting games were
all played during 1957 through 67 and contain
about 250 diagrams. This thick 384 page
Fireside paper back edition is priced at Rs.
25. 65 and available with M/s. V. S. Gadre &
Co., 1358, Sadashiv Peth, Pune - 411 030.
Heartily recommended! For all styles of
players.
WHAT IS THE BEST MOVE?
—By Larry Evans.
This is a Chess Quiz which teaches the
beginner sixteen different openings without the
need for memorizing the moves. The first part
of the book containsl80 diagrams all taken
from actual games. The second half contains
the solutions given by the author GM Larry
Evans. It is recommended that solutions be
worked out directly from the diagram to aid
visuliza ion. If you want to avoid mere drift
or imitation in openings, this is the book for
you. This Fireside paper back edition priced
at Rs. 34.35 can be had from M/s. V. S. Gadre &
Co. 1358 Sadashiv Peth, Pune 411 030.
—K. V. Shantharam
WORLD RECORD-193 moves!
The semi finals of the 1980 Israeli ch ship
produced a world record when the game
Stepak-Mashian lasted for 193 moves, played
during 6 sessions and 241. hours!! Not till
decisive mistake of the game in which the
StXKXXXXXXXXXXXK-XXXXXX-XXXXXXXXXXXXXJB
st
THE VIJAYAKUMAR MILLS LTD
Kalayamputhur - 624615
Via Palani, - TAMILNADU.
Announces
THE TENTH R. GURUSWAMY NAIDU MEMORIAL
OPEN CHESS TOURNAMENT

« for
R. GURUSWAMY NAIDU MEMORIAL ROLLING TROPHY
at the Mills premises, 5 miles from Palani.
r from 27th September 1981 to 6th October 1981
This tournament is recognised by the All India Chess Federation and
players in the Medalist section will enter the National Rating list.
TOURNAMENT DETAILS
OPEN TO ALL X-ROUND SWISS TOURNAMENT
FREE BOARDING AND LODGING TO ALL COMBERS !
BOARDING : SOUTH INDIAN, VEGETARIAN, GOOD QUALITY.
LODGING IN DORMITORIES. KINDLY BRING YOUR BEDDING.
Prizes:— Medalist Non-Medalist K
FIRST Prize Rs. 1500/-. Rs. 600/-
SECOND Prize Rs. 1000/-. Rs, 500/-
THIRD Prize Rs. 700/-. Rs. 400/-
FOURTH Prize Rs. 300/-. Rs. 200/-
Bonus Prizes:
for 5th to 10th places Rs. 60/-. Rs. 40/-
*
Entry Fees :
Medalist
Non-Medalist
Rs.
Rs.
30/-.
20/-.
*
FIDE Rules shall apply. Appeals committee will decide all disputes.
The R. Guruswamy Naidu Memorial Chess Association (Affiliated to the Madurai
District Chess Association) will conduct the tournament.
»
Smoking is permitted only inside the tournament hall as it is a cotton mill.
*
For further details please write to •
*
The Chairman,
R. GURUSWAMY NAIDU MEMORIAL CHESS ASSOCIATION,
*
C/o, The Vijayakumar Mills Ltd. Kalayamputhur - 624 615.
Via. Palani, Tamil Nadu.
Welcome to this unique free-hospitality-to-all tournament of India !!
* Welcome to the famous Murugan Temple in Palani ! !

SXXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX-XX-XXXK-XXXS
 WOMEN AT WAR
These pictures were taken at the National Women's Championship at Delhi

L—R: Vasanti Khadilkar (No. 3), L—R : Jayshree Sankpal (No. 5),
T. Suryakala, Rohini Khadilkar (No. 1) Bhagyashree Sathe (No. 2), Swarnalatha
and Vijaya Vasant Kumar (No. 6) Joseph (No. 11) and Jayshree Khadilkar, (No. 4i
INDIAN CHESS CALENDAR
(as on June 15. 1981)
(The dates underlined are confirmed. Please send details of your tournament
for inclusion in the next calendar)
July 3—18 July Asian IM Circuit, Madras.
July 24— 8 Aug World Cadet Championship (U-16) Cordoba, Argentina.
July 26—11 Aug GM Tournament, Bangalore.
Aug 14—28 Aug Marlboro GM Classic, Manila, Philippines.
Aug 17— 3 Sept World Junior (U-20), Mexico City.
Aug 30— 8 Sept Kasturi Cup, TN. (T.N.C.A. Corpn. Rec. Centre, Madras-34.)
Sept 2—19 Sept International Rating, Colombo.
Sept 10—16 Sept Open Team Champ, Cochin. (Anthony Thai Prambil, Teachei
9 St Ritas High School, Ponnurunni, Cochin-682019).
Sept Sept All India Open, Pune (Central Maharashtra Chess Assn.
C/o Mitra Agencies, 419 Narayan Peth, Pune 411030.
Sept 20—23 Sept North Zone Champ. Jullundur (R. C. Chopra, NB 259
Luxmipura, Jullundur 144004).
Sept 26—10 Oct Men & Women’s Zonal, Dubai, UAE.
Sept 27— 6 Oct R. G. N. Memorial, Palni (Vijayakumar Milk,
Kalayamputhur, via Palni, 624615).
Oct 2-11 Oct National Subjunior, Mysore.
Oct 11—20 Oct Indian Bank Open, (M. Aaron, Indian Bank H. O., Madras-1
Oct 26—10 Nov Asian Junior, Dacca, Bangladesh.
Nov 1—11 Nov Asian Team Champ., Hangzhou, China.
Nov 27—20 Dec National A. U. P.
Dec 25— 2 Jan Sri Mappillai Vinayagar, Madurai (Sri Mappillai Vinayagar,
163, Nethaji Road, Madurai 625001)
Dec 29—10 Jan National Women’s Championship, M. P.
Jan. ’82 9—21 Jan National Junior, U-l?, Darwar, Karnataka.
Oct 31—17 Nov Men & Women’s Olympiad, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Registered with the Registrar of News papers for India under R. N. 34700/79.