Untitled

THE OPENING GAME IN CHESS
I .udek Pachman is weU-known as the author of a number of books covering

the whole range of opening play in chess. He has recently, however, become
convinced that mere rote learning of opening variations is a totally
unproductive activity: players must understand the reasons behind the
various moves of opening theory, so that they can begin to think for
themselves as soon as new situations arise over the board. In this book he
achieves the difficult task of reducing the complexity of opening theory to a
number of basic principles, without over-simplifying the issues involved. By
judicious exploitation of key games, Pachman has brilliantly succeeded in
maintaining the delicate balance between instruction on the one hand, and
information on the other.
Pachman gives a number of imponant openings, concentrating mainly on the

'open' and 'half-open' games. For the enthusiastic chess player who is no
longer a beginner but still some distance from the master stage, this volume
offers a positive and practical road to progress in chess.
This is the first in a three-volume series of boo ks by Ludek Pachman; the

others will be The Middle Game in Chess and Chess Endings for the Practical
Player.
TilE AUTIIOR
Ludek Pachman is an International Grand Master. He is widely known as a

chess theorist, and as the author of several boo ks on chess, including Modem
Chess Tactics and Attack and Defence in Modern Chess, both published by
Ro'utledge & Kegan Paul.
By the same author:
Modern Chess Tactics ( 1970)

Attack and Defence in Modern Chess Tactics (1973)
Ludek Pachman
The opening
game in chess
Translated by John Littlewood
Routledge & Kegan Paul

London and Henley
First published in 1982
by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd
J9 Store Street, London WCJE 7DD and
Broadway House, Newtown Road,
Henley-on- Thames, Oxon RG9 lEN
Set in Press Roman by

Hope Services, Abingdon
and printed in Great Britain by
Unwin Brothers Ltd
Old Waking, Surrey
Translation© Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1982
First pubfished as Eriiffnungs-praxis im Schach in 19 76

by Wilhelm Heyne Verlag, Mllnchen
No part of this book may be reproduced in

any form without permission from the
publisher, except for the quotation of brief
passages in criticism
ISBN 0 7100 9222 9

Contents
Translator's preface vii
Chess notation ix
Introduction 1
The basic principles of chess openings 2
2 The struggle for the centre 16
3 Time, space and material 23
4 Black counter-attacks 43
5 What is positional play? 61
6 An adventurous opening 95
7 Black prepares ... d7-d5 111
g A pseudo-gambit 136
9 Central control by pieces 156
10 Fighting the classical centre 169
11 Black prepares ... e7-e5 176
12 White becomes Black 188
Index of openings 195
Index of games 198

Translator's preface
Pachman is renowned for his encyclopaedic tomes covering the whole

range of opening play. However, of late he has become firmly convinced
that the mere rote learning of opening variations is counter-productive
in the extreme. A player must understand the reasons behind the various
moves of opening theory, so that he can begin to think for himself as
soon as new situations arise over the board. This aim is admirable, but
it is no easy task to reduce the complexity of opening theory to a number
of basic principles, without over-simplification of the issues involved.
By judicious exploitation of key games, Pachmann has brilliantly suc
ceeded in maintaining the delicate balance between instruction on the
one hand and information on the other. A beginner cannot fail to make
progress if he reads this volume carefully and begins to apply its precepts
to his own game.
John Littlewood
Chess notation
It is essential for every chess-player to know how to write down the

moves of his own games, if he is ever to learn from all the mistakes that
he and his opponents make. In fact, when he comes to play in tourna
ments of any real standard, it is a FIDE rule that he must write down
an accurate score of the game, using the very Algebraic Notation he will
see in this volume. Clearly , at the same time, the whole magnificent
world of chess literature is open to any reader who is willing to make
the initial effort to acquire the rudimentary skill of reading chess
notation.
We have decided to use the Alge braic Notation because it is an inter
nationally accepted method of writing down moves, whilst at the same
time being the most logical in that e ach square of the board is represen
ted by a letter from 'a' to 'h' along with a number between 1 and 8, as
shown in the accompanying diagram:
The pieces are indicated by a capital letter as follows: king= K, queen

= Q, rook = R, bishop = B, knight = N , a move thus being described
by the piece moved followed by the square it is moving to e.g. Ng5 =
x I Chess notation
knight moves to the gS square. If there is any ambiguity , it can be

specified which file or which rank the piece comes from e.g. , NhgS or
N3g5. Captures are indicated by 'x' e .g., Bxf6 =bishop captures which
ever piece is on f6 . A check is indicated by'+' e .g . , Qxf7+ . The simple
mention of a particular square means that a pawn has moved to that
square e.g. the first m ove of a game may well be I e4, which means that
a pawn has moved from i ts original square to e4. Note that a number
immediately in front of the move means that it is played by White . A
move by Black is indicated by I . . . Nf6, and of course a move sequence
by White followed by Black is coun ted as one n umber only, being wri t ten
as, say, 4 d3 Be7, meaning that on move four White plays his pawn to
d3 to which Black replies with a move of his bishop to e7. Castling king
side is wri t ten 0-0, and castling queen side 0-0..0.
Finally, writers o ften use exclamation marks after a move as an
evaluation of its strength, e.g., Bxh7+! (= strong) or Rxc3 ! ! ( very
=
strong) or question marks as a form of criticism e .g., Qxb7? (=weak) or

Kh6?? (=very weak), or even a mixture, e.g., Bxh6!? (=double-edged).
Introduction
Man has the remarkable attribute of creating a branch of knowledge out

of anything and everything, whether it be conversation, sport or games.
Even a hundred years ago the game of chess represented a delightful
adventure of the mind, but since then thousands of theoretical vol umes
have explored its fascinations. In fact, a chess encyclopaedia which
attempted to e m brace all known theory up to the present day would
consist of at least ten thousand pages.
However, in chess clubs, cafes and homes, chess is played enthusiasti
cally by millions of people who will never become grand masters. Nor
have they the time or inclination to study thousands of games and to
read page upon page of analysis. Moreover there are those who could
well become m asters but have so far only taken the first steps in this
direction. For aU such players, who are no longer beginners but are still
far from the master stage, these three volumes offer a positive road tu
progress.
ln the present volume we examine the opening phase of the game.
Our aim is above all to explain the prindples behind the openings, so
the reader is not expected to learn everything by heart . We give only a
few important openings, concentrating mainly on the 'open' and 'half
open' games (i.e. those beginning with l e4), and deliberately leaving
until later the complexities of the 'closed' games. It is no good trying to
run before we can walk. Beginners would be well advised to use two
chess sets when reading the book; one to follow the main line or any
major variations, • and the other (a pocket set perhaps) to play through
the detailed notes or carry out their own analysis.
--- -. ---- . - -- ---- ---
• When a solid circle appears by the top left hand side of a board, this indicates
that the diagram is iUustrating a variation or specific point and is not a position
found in a main game.
Chapter 1
The basic principles
of chess openings
The opening is that part of a game of chess when both players prepare
for action by developing their pieces and establishing a pawn chain. Let
us take the starting point of any game:
Of the pieces, only the knights can move at the moment, since all the
other pieces are hemmed in by their own pawns. As it is essential to
allow our pieces to participate in the coming struggle, the basic aim in
the opening is to develop our pieces. By this we mean posting our pieces
on squares which are the best for attacking or defensive purposes. From
the point of view of sheer flexibility of movement, it is clear that central
squares are the most favourable, especially for the knights. ln fact, in a
correctly played opening we rarely encounter moves such as Na3 or
Nh3 , whereas it is quite normal to see the knight going to c3 (c6), f3 (f6),
d2(d7) or e2(e7).
Similarly, bishops are usually effective on b5(b4), c4(c5), f4(f5) or
g5(g4). Of course, we may not be always in a position to develop our
pieces so actively. For example, in order to ward off enemy threats, our
bishop may have to go to d2(d7) or e2(e7), and in many modern
openings we 'fianchetto' our bishops i.e. develop t�em at b2(b7) or
g2(g7) (after an initial pawn move: b3 or g3 for White or b6 or g6 for
basic principles I 3
Black). After we have castled and moved our queen, the rooks can be
advantageously centralised at d I (d8) or e I (e8).
Many beginners are prone to make a serious error in the early stages
of the game by activating their strongest piece, the queen, as rapidly as
possible. However, it is only on rare occasions that such a move is good,
and the queen is usually left at home until we have developed our minor
pieces (bishops and knights) and have castled.The reason for this is easy
to understand: an exposed queen, in view of its strength, is a welcome
object of attack by enemy pieces and pawns which can thus be devel
oped with gain of time. For this very reason, even the once popular
Centre Counter Defence has practically disappeared from master
practice:
I e4 dS
2 exdS QxdS
When this variation is chosen at all nowadays, the idea is to continue

with the double-edged 2 ...Nf6!? which can even involve a pawn sacri
fice (White can cling to his extra pawn by 3 c4!? but after 3 ... c6!
4 dxc6 Nxc6 Black is ahead in development).
3 Nc3!
A typical way of exploiting the exposed queen. Since the latter must
now lose time retreating, it is just as though Black has presented White
with an extra developing move i.e. Black has lost a 'tempo' or White has
gained one.
We can now readily understand why beginners must be strongly urged
to avoid the following type of op�ning play:
e4 eS
2 QhS?
This move admittedly attacks the e-pawn but leaves the queen badly
exposed.
2 .. . Nc6
Defending the pawn whilst developing a piece.
3 Bc4
White plays aggressively but his 'attack' is insufficiently prepared, so

can be repulsed by Black with gain of time.
4 I basic principles
3 g6
4 Qf3 Nf6
Black defends against the at tack on his f-pawn with two useful developing
moves, as ... g6 allows the bishop to go to g7. Already Black is threat-
ening 5 .. . Nd4 which would force the white queen to retreat to its
original square on d I, losing yet another tempo.
5 c3 Bg7
6 Ne2 d6
It is clear that Black is better developed and has the advantage. As for
White, his queen is still awkwardly placed and can always be moved
again by ... Bg4.
In countless chess books we find horrible examples of neglected
development, leading to rapid defeats.Consider for instance the following
historic game called 'The Sea Cadet' after an opera by Genee which
began with the game:
1 e4 eS
2 Nf3 d6
This is not a mistake, although it is more usual to guard the e-pawn
whilst. developing a piece by . .. Nc6.The pawn move opens up a useful
diagonal for the white-square bishop but has the disadvantage of pre
venting. the developing of the black-square bishop to c5 or b4. This
bishop must now settle for the more passive posting on e7 or (after
... g6) on g7.
3 Bc4
A powerful looking move, but as we shall see later White has an even
stronger continuation in 3 d4.
3 . .. h6?
A typical beginner's mistake, losing time. Black wishes to develop his
knigh t on g8 and is worried about the attack on his f-pawn. However,
his judgment is wrong on two counts: he could do the same job whilst
developing a piece by the more useful . . . Be 7, and even the immediate
3 ... Nf6!? is possible,althoug1Hisky.After 4 Ng5 d5! 5 exd5 h6 6 Nf3
Black has given up a pawn for the initiative.
4 Nc3 Bg4?
Black overlooks a neat tactical point, but even after the better 4 ... Nf6
White would be two tempi ahead in development which he could exploit
at once by beginning active play in the centre with 5 d4.
5 Nxe5! Bxdl
After 5 . .. dxe5 6 Qxg4 White is a healthy pawn to the good which
should be enough to win.
6 Bxf7+ Ke7
7 Nd5 mate
As we already know from the line I e4 e5 2 Qh5? it is a serious mistake

to launch premature attacks in the opening stages. In particular it is
seldom good to move the same piece twice, before our other pieces arc
developed, in pursuit of such illusory attacks. Here is an instructive
example of this, a game played at Leipzig in 1853:
Came 1
Count Vithum Von der L.asa
I e4 e5
The purpose of these moves is clear: both players open up a line in
ord er to develop the king bishop and at the same time seize some space
in the centre, an extremely im po rta nt point, as we shall see later.
2 Nf3 Nc6
Once again, logical and sound moves. We immediately note the pattern
of attack and defence emerging. Since White has the first move he can
usually develop his pieces more actively (the knight on f3 attacks lllack 's
e-pawn!), whereas in the early stages Black must normally be content to
defend (his knight on c6 guards the e-pawn).
3 d4
This move leads us into the 'Scotch Game'. All common opening sys
tems have been given a name which usually refers to the first player to
use them or the country in wh ich they were first played.
3 . . . exd4
4 Bc4!?
This move requires some explanation. The obvious and logical movt:: is
4 Nxd4 giving us the normal line of the 'Scotch', when Black has two
good continuations:
(I) 4 ... BcS S Be3 Qf6 (in this situation the queen move is good,
since White must guard his knight by playing c3, thus blocking the
natural develo ping square for his knight on b l !) 6 c3 Nge7 7 Nc2
(after 7 Be2 then 7 ... dS! is strong, but 7 BbS 0-0 8 0-0 is a good
alternative)? ... Bxe3 8 Nxe3 QeS! (in chess theory it is important
to let rules be your slave rather than your master, so whilst it is
normally bad to bring out the queen early in the game we have
1-iere an exceptional case where Black's queen is excellently placed
on eS. It is powerfully centralised and in little danger of being
attacked by the white pieces).9 Qf3 Q.Q 10 Bc4 d6 with even
pros pects. Or 4 . .. BcS S Nb3 B b 6 6 a4 (threatening to win the
bishop by 7 aS) 6 . . .Qf6 7 Qe2 Nge7 8 aS Nd4! 9 Nx d4 Bx d4
10 d BeS again with equal chances.
As we can see, complications sometimes occur in the simplest
looking openings. The reader may weJI ask why White does not
exchange knights after 4 ... BcS, giving Black a doubled pawn
which can prove to be a disadvantage.However, after S Nxc6 Qf6!
(threatening ... Qxf2 mate) 6 Qe2 (or Qd2) Qxc6, Black is ahead
in development and has avoided the doubled pawn. White on the
other hand has developed only one piece, the queen, which blocks
one of t11e bishops. As a general rule it is unwise to exchange our
developed pieces, which may have moved more than once, for an
enemy piece making its first move. With S Nxc6 White would lose a
vital tempo by exchanging his knight, which has moved twice, for
Black's knight which has moved only once.
(2) 4 .. .Nf6 (in our first line Black applied pressure to d4, whereas
now the attack is uirected at e4) 5 Nc3 Bb4 ! (White 's knight on c3
is pinned, so the threat against the e-pawn is renewed) 6 Nxc6
bxc6 7 Bd3 (not 7 e5 Nd5) 7 ...d5 8 exd5 cxd5 with even
chances.For ill ustrative purposes we mention two further lines
which are not so good:
(3) 4 . ..Nxd4 5 Qxd4 and White stands better, since his powerfully
centralised queen cannot easily be driven away.
(4) 4 . . . Qh4 ! ? (this even wins a pawn, since 5 Qd3 fails to 5 . . . Nf6
6 Nxc6 dxc6 7 Nc3 Bb4 !! 8 e5 Ng4) 5 NbS (or 5 Nc3 Bb4 6 NbS
Qxe4+ 7 Be2 Bxc3 + 8 Nxc3 Qd4 9 Bd3 Nge7 10 0-0 0-0 II NbS
Qg6 1 2 Be3 and White has excellent play since Black has had to
q
lose too much time with his ueen) 5 . . . Qxe4+ 6 Be3 Kd8 (the
serious consequence of the queen sort ie, since Black m ust prevent
Nxc7+) 7 Nd2 (gaining time by attacking the queen!) 7 . . .Qg6
8 Nf3 a6 9 Nbd4 Nge7 (Black cannot develop his forces har
moniously, so White has the opportunity to increase his lead in
development by a second pawn sacrifice) I 0 Bd3 ! Qxg2 II Rgl Qh3
1 2 Rg3 QhS 13 Rg5 Qh6 14 Qe2 followed by 0-0-0 .
This 4 . . . Qh4 variation is important to us, because for the first
time we meet a 'gambit' i.e. the sacrifice of material in the opening
(usually a pawn but occasionally more pawns or even a piece) in order to
speed up one's development or achieve other advantages such as central
superiority . We will look at gam bit play more closely later, but it is worth
pointing out now that 4 Bc4 !? in our main line game introduces the
so-called 'Scotch gambit' in which White refrains from recapturing the
centre pawn and even allows his opponent to protect it, all in the
interest of rapid development.
4 .. . BcS
It would be very risky for Black to play 4 ...Bb4+ 5 c3! dxc3 6 0-0!
cxb2 7 Bxb 2 or here 6 ...d6 7 a3 BaS 8 b4! Bb6 9 Qb3 Qd7 10 Nxc3
followed by I I Bb2, in both cases with a massive lead in development
for White, well worth the sacrificed pawns.
5 NgS?
But this is a completely illogical way of continuing the gambit line, since
Black can easily parry the attack on his f-pawn.The correct method lay
in 5 c3! when 5 ...dxc3!? gives White the choice between two good
combinations:
(a) 6 Nxc3 d6 7 Qb3 with an attack for the pawn
(b) 6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 7 Qd5+ Kf8 8 Qxc5+ Qe7
9 Qxe7+ Ng8xe7 10 Nxc3 d5! II exd5 Nb4 and Black achieves equality
by the forced recapture of his d-pawn.
Black's best play after 5 c3! is 5 ... d3! giving back the pawn but
leaving White's c-pawn blocking his queen knight's best square.
5 ... Nh6!
Parrying White's threat by developing a piece.Admittedly, h6 is by no

means a perfect square on which to develop the knight, but it stands
better here than on g8.
Perhaps many readers will be wondering why Black does not prefer
the more aggressive 5 ... Ne5 protecting the f-pawn whilst attacking
White's bishop.However, this move is a serious mistake, sinning against
one of the main principles of opening play, moving a piece twice when
another piece could have been developed instead. 'Jhe punishment of
5 ... Ne5? is instructive: 6 Nxf7! Nxf7 7 Bxf7+ Kxf7 8 Qh5+ g6
9 Qxc5, and White stands better because Black's king is exposed and he
cannot defend his d-pawn (after 9 ... Qf6 the c-pawn falls, a n u 9 . . .
Nf6 10 0-0 Nxe4? fails to 11 Qd5+ and 12 Qxe4). Consider the dif
ference if White tries the same idea after 5...Nh6! (6 Nxf7!? Nxf7
7 Bxf7+ Kxf7 8 Qh5+ g6 9 QxcS). In ste ad of an undevelopeu knight
on g8, Black has an excellently p os ted knight on c6 ,guarding the d-pawn,
and can i m m ediately attack White's queen by 9 . . . d6! 10 Qc4+ Bc6,
or here I 0 QbS Re8 etc., with a clear advantage in both cases . In the
whole of opening theory there is no finer example of the need for rapid
development!
6 Qh5
So White decides against the above mentioned line and a ppl ie s more
pressure on the f-pawn, but his whole set-up is unconvincing:
6 ... Qe7!
Black must guard both his bishop and f- pa wn , since 6 ...0-D? fails to
7 Bxf7+! Rxf7 (7 ... Nx7?? 8 Qx h7 mate) 8 Nxf7 Nxf7 9 Qxc5 win
ning the exchange.
7 f4 d6
It i s clear that all Black's moves without e x ception have been directed
towards the development of his pieces, whereas White has moved his
king k ni ght twice, develo ped his queen prem aturel y and played 7 f4, a
move which hardly helps his develo p m e nt.
8 0-0 Na5
�
Black refus es to w in another pawn by 8 . .. d3+ Kh I dxc2 I 0 Nd, as
this only serves to help White's de velo pment. If Black plays 8 . .. 0-0
White has 9 f5 with the strong threat of 10 f6!, so Black chooses to
relieve the pressure on his f-pa wn. There is of course a famous dictum:
'a knight displaced is a knight disgraced', and after the text-move both
black knights will be momentarily on the edge of the boa rd.However,
all rules have their exceptions, and the main point is that White will
now be driven on to the defensive.
9 Bd3 Ng4!
Ad m ittedly this is the second move of the knight. but Black can allow
himself this lu xu ry because almost all his pieces are a ct i vely placed anu
his king knight reaches the 'normal' centralised position, all with gain of
time.
I 0 I basic principles
10 h3
Not I0 Nxh 7? g6! 11 Qh3 Ne3 winning material.
10 . . . Nf6
11 Qf3?
He had to play the queen to e2 to keep a retreat square available for his
knight on gS, when of course Black can maintain his extra pawn with
out any risk by ... h6, ... Nc6 and . . . 0-0 completing his development.
11 h6
12 Bd2 Nc6
13 b4 Bb6
The simplest, although he could capture the pawn.
14 bS Nd8
IS eS dxeS
16 fxeS Nd7
Not of course 16 ...QxeS?? 17 ReI .
17 Nxf7!?
White's game is equally hopeless after 17 Ne4 NxeS. Black now counters
·
the piece sacrifice without any great difficulty.
17 . . . Nxf7
18 e6 Qxe6
Now this is possible because a black kn ight can interpose on eS after

19 ReI. White could well have resigned here, but the game ended as
follows: 19 Bf4 Nf6 20 Nd2 0.0 21 Bc4 QfS 22 Qb3 QhS 23 RaeI Kh8
24 Ne4 Nxe4 25 Rxe4 Nd6 26 ReS d3+ 27 Kh2 Qh4 28 Bg3 Bg l + !
29 Kh l Rxfl ! 30 Bxh4 Bd4+ 31 Kh2 Bxe5+ 32 Bg3 Bxg3 + 3 3 Kxg3
d2 34 Resigns.
Let us now examine a line in which both sides play soundly, a vari·
ation of the Italian game called the Giuoco Pianissimo ('the very quiet
ga m e ' )
e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4
basic principles I I I
White chooses the 'Italian' development of the bishop to c4 where it is

clearly well posted and directed against f7, the weakest point in Black's
position.We shall examine later the reasons why this bishop move is no
longer as popular as it once was.
3 .. . Bc5
The simplest, symmetrical answer. Later we shall look at the alternative

3 ... Nf6 {The Two Knights Defence).The move 3 ...Nd4? is a weJJ.
known trap. As it contradicts our advice about not moving the same
piece twice without good reason, it is not surprising that White can
obtain a clear plus with the quiet continuation 4 c3 Nxf3+ 5 Qxf3.The
trap consists of the sequence (3 . . . Nd4 ?) 4 Nxe5! Qg5 and if now
5 Nxf7? Qxg2 6 Rfl Qxe4+ 7 Be2 Nf3 mate! Naturally a beginner
delights in such a mate, but an experienced player can even refute this
idea (after 4 Nxe5 Qg5) by 5 Bxf7+! Ke7 6 0.0! Qxe5 7 Bxg8 Rxg8
8 c3 Ne6 9 Rei d6 10 d4. White has only two pawns for the piece
(usually tluee pawns are a rough equivalent to a piece), but Black's king
is very exposed in the centre and White's central pawn mass is extremely
active. Black has two other solid but rather passive defences to 3 Bc4
with 3 .. . Be7 {Hungarian Defence) or 3 . .. d6. In both cases White
replies 4 d4 and obtains a positive plus thanks to his active development
and good central position e.g. 3 .. . Be? 4 d4 d6 5Nc3 Nf6 6 h3 (to
maintain his spatial advantage by preventing . .. Bg4, another exceptional
case when it is worth losing a tempo!) 6 ...0.0 7 0.0exd4 8 Nxd4 NeS
9 Be2! Bd7 10 f4etc.(see next diagram).
This is the starting position of the Italian Game. As we shall see in
later chapters, White now has much more aggressive moves than the
following 'quiet game' play:
I2 I basic principles
4 d3
This and White's next move can be interchanged.
4 .. . Nf6
Or 4 ...d6 first, since 5 Ng5? (again that impatient and faulty move)
can be answered by 5 ... Nh6.
5 Nc3
Jn general it is advisable to castle into safety as quickly as possible, and
in most openings a player castles on the K-side at the first opportunity
(0-side castling requires more preparation!) However, in this particular
situation 5 0-0 (?) is a very risky move because after S ...d6 6 Nc3
Bg4! the pin on White's knight on f3 is very uncomfortable and Black
is threatening to break up the king's position by ...Nd4 followed by
...Nxf3+ or ...Bxf3.
In 1900 the game Knorr Chigorin continued in exciting fashion:
5 00
- (?) d6 6 BgS (intending to support his knight on f3 by Nbd2
see next diagram) 6 .. . h6 7 Bh4 (better is 7 B xf6 when Black of
course has a good game) 7 . . . g5! 8 Bg3 hS! 9 Nxg5 h4! I 0 Nxf7 hxg3!!
I I Nxd8 Bg4! 12 Qd2 (losing at once; White had to give up his queen
by 12 Nxc6) 12 ... Nd4! 13 Nc3 (13 h3 would allow another pretty
finish by 13 ...Ne2+ 14 Khl Rxh3+! 15 gxh3 Bf3 mate) 13 ...Nf3+!
14 gxf3 Bxf3 and White resigned, since 15 ...gxh2 mate is threatened
and IS hxg3 allows IS . . . Rh l mate.
5 d6
6 Bg5
basic principles I I 3
The most natural and also most active development of the black-square
bishop, pinning Black's knight on f6 and planning Nd5 followed by
Nxf6+ or Bxf6 weakening the king's position. However, this is not so
fatal for Black as he has not yet castled this side. For this reason Black
must not of course reply 6 . . . 0-0'? 7 NdS! etc.White has an interesting
alternative in 6 Be3. It appears at first sight that it would be favourable
for Black to exchange bishops giving White doubled pawns. However,
such doubled pawns represent a strength rather than a weakness, because
White can exploit the open f-file after O.Q. Black can also double another
pawn by 6 ... Bxe3 7 fxe3 NaS 8 Bb3 Nxb3 9 axb3, but then the other
white rook would become active down the h-file. Remember, rooks
love open ftles!
Black's best reply to 6 Be3 is 6 . . . Bb6! when 7 Bxb6 axb6 hrives
him the open 111e!
6 ... h6
14 I basic principles )
As White is threatening NdS, we have already said that 6 . . . 0.{)? would

be suicidal . Interesting problems arise when Black copies White's moves
with 6 ...Bg4 7 NdS Nd4, as now 8 Bx f6 Bx f3! 9 Bx dB Bx d l I 0 Bx c 7
Bxc2 1 1 b4 b5! gives Black equality , somethin g that rarely happens i n
chess after copying moves. White has better in 8 c 3 ! B xf3 9 gxf3 Ne6
I 0 Bh4! and Black still has problems since I 0 . .. g5 makes his K-side
weaker than White's.
Another popular but complex alternative is 6 . . .Na5!? with the in
tention of eliminating White's active black-square bishop . After 7 Bb3
Nxb3 8 axb3 Be6 9 0-0 the game is even , but t here are great complica
tions after 7 Nd5!? Nxc4 8 dxc4 when (see next diagram) 8 . . . Bxf2+!?
9 K x f2? N xe4+ 1 0 Kfl Nxg5 I I Nxg5 Qxg5 12 N xc7+ Ke7 13 N xa8

Be6 (threatening . . . Bxc4+) 14 b3 Rxa8 follows and the insecure
p osition of White's king makes it difficul t for him to exploit his slight
material advantage. However, after 8 . . . B x f2+ !? White can sacrific� a
pawn by 9 Ke2! Bb6 I 0 Rfl with chances owing to his pressure down
the f-file. And Black too can improve on the whole line by 7 Nd5!? N xc4
8 dxc4 c6 ! 9 N x f6+ gxf6 I 0 Bh4 Qd7! when after I I B x f6 (otherwise
Black plays . .. Qe6 followed by . . . f5 eliminating his doubled pawn)
Black has II . .. Rg8 12 Bh4 Qg4 winning back his pawn with good
play . lt is easy to see that the term 'quiet game' can be a misnomer!
7 Bxf6
A fter 7 Bh4 gS White's bishop is driven to a passive position on g3, but
it is important here that Black has not castled, since White would then
have the standard 8 Nxg5! hxgS 9 BxgS threatening NdS or Qf3. With
Black still uncastled, the sacrifice is incorrect i .e. 7 Bh4 (?) gS 8 N xgS?
hxgS 9 BxgS Rg8! 10 h4 (or 10 Bh4 Rg4) I I : . . Be6 (in order to
exchange off th e knight if it goes to d5) I I Qf3 Rg6 followed by ...Nd4

winning.
7 .. . Qxf6
8 NdS Qd8!
The alternative$ ... Qg6!? is an interesting idea since 9 Nxc7+? fails
to 9 . . Kd8 I0 Nxa8 Qxg2 I I Rf l Bg4 winning, an idea worth re
.
membering.However, White can gain an advantage by 9 Qe2! Bg4 (not

9 . . Qxg2? 10 Rg 1 and 11 Nxc7+) 10c3! (again not !0Nxc7+ Kd7
.
11 Nxa8 Nd4 12 Qd1 Qf6!_etc.) 10 ... Bb6 11 a4!with thethreat of

12 b4 forcing Black to weaken his pawns by 12 ...a6 13 Nxb6 cxb6.
9 c3
We shall see this move recurring in other positions. White threatens to
advance in the centre after 9 ... 0-0 10 d4 exd4 I I cxd4 with a definite
spatial advantage.
9 .. . Ne7!
This illustrates an important strategic principle: when our opponent has

an advantage in space, the exchange of minor pieces can usually simplify
our defensive task.
10 b4
Now 10 d4 loses its effect, since after 10 . .. NxdS II BxdS exd4
12 cxd4 Bb4+ 13 Kf l BaS 14 Qb3 0-0! White has had to give up castling
and Black stands well (I 5 Bxb7? Rb8 ! )
10 Bb6
11 Nxb6 axb6
12 d4 exd4
13 Nxd4
Another important moment.If White plays the usual 13 cxd4 Black can
liquidate in the centre by 13 ...dS! 14 exdS NxdSieaving White with
an isolated d-pawn (i.e. unable to be supported by other pawns) which
can become a positional weaknes).
13 . . . 0-0
Black has finally achieved equality.
Chapter 2
The struggle for
the centre
The examples we have given so far indicate that the role of pieces in the
opening is fairly clear-cut: they must be developed quickly and actively.
But what about the pawns? We have already seen that unnecessary
pawn moves delay the development of our pieces and can have drastic
consequences. Inexperienced players are prone to waste time with moves
like a3 (a6) and h3 (h6) in the belief that they are thereby securing their
position against possible attacks. However, such moves are mistakes
unless there is a specific reason for them!
Pawn moves in the opening are above all a means of developing the
pieces, but we must not assume that this merely means opening up lines
for the pieces and nothing else. If this were the sole object of pawn
moves, the beginning of a game could look like this: Je4 g6 2 d4 Bg7
3 Nf3 b6 (?) 4 Bd3 Bb7 5 Q.Q•
Black has in no way neglected his development, having brought his

bishops out as quickly as possible. Nevertheless he is now suddenly
• When a solid circle appears by the top left-hand side of the board, tltis indi·
cates that the diagram is illustrating a variation or a specific point and is not a
position found in the main game.
struggle for the centre I 17
confronted with serious problems, since he has great difficulty developing

his remaining pieces. If his knights go to the natural squares f6 or c6
they can always be threatened by e5 or d5. Black's error has been to
think purely of time in developing his pieces, without considering the
other important factor space. He has allowed White a free hand in con
trolling the centre, without obtaining any compensation elsewhere.
If we are to secure our central squares, the pawns have to play an
important part in this. In the above example White was allowed to
achieve the ideal pawn centre, with pawns on d4 and e4. When White
plays I e4 (the main move we are considering at the moment) his
intention is to bring his d-pawn colleague alongside as speedily as possible
in order to achieve a grip in the centre. For his part, Black must make
efforts to counter tllis idea, the most radical method being to play
I ... e5 himself guarding d4. If White still plays 2 d4 Black will capture
and maintain the central balance . White's preparation for 2d4 remains
however an important strategic element in most e-pawn openings
beginning 1 e4 e5, which we refer to as open games. This term indicates
an important feature of these openings: the pieces usually have a rapid
and unhindered development and lines are opened by pawn exchanges.

We have already seen an example of one of these openings, the Italian
Game, so let us delve a little deeper into the theory of this opening.
Game2
Rossolimo Reissmann (San Juan, 1 967)
'
I e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4
From the comments we have just made about the strong pawn centre,
the question arises whether White could im!J1ediately prepare d4 by the
preliminary 3 c3 so as to recapture with this pawn after . ..exd4. We
then have the Ponziani Opening, rarely played nowadays, perhaps
because it delays the development of White's pieces and allows Black to
seize the initiative in some variations. There are two main continuations
for Black:
(I) 3 ... dS (good here, since after 4 exdS? Qxd5 White's c-pawn
blocks the natural developing square of his knight on b I!) 4 Qa4!
Nf6!? 5 Nxe5 Bd6! 6 Nxc6 bxc6, 7 Qxc6+? Bd7 8 Qa6 dxe4
9 Bb5 0-0 I 0 Bxd7 Qxd7 with a clear advantage to Black in view of
1 8 I struggle for the centre
White's misplaced queen, but White has the stronger 7 d3! 0-0 8 Be2!
Re8 and it is debatable whether Black's better development is suf
ficient compensation for the pawn.
(2) 3 ...Nf6! 4 d4 Nxe4 (but not 4 ...exd4 5 e5 followed by 6 cxd4
with a central advantage) 5 d5 Nb8 6 Bd3 Nc5 7 Nxe5 Nxd3+
8 Nxd3 d6 9 0-0 Be7 1 0 Qf3 0-0 or here 5 ...Ne7 6 Nxe5 Ng6
7 Nxg6 hxg6 8 Qc2+ Qe7 9 Be3 Rh5! with full equality to Black
in both cases.
3 BcS
4 c3
There is more logic behind this move here, since a later d2-d4 will gain
a tempo by attacking the bishop.
4 .. . Nf6(!)
White's last move did not help his development much, so Black must
take the opportunity to get his pieces out.This knight move also involves
an attack on the e-pawn. Black has two alternatives which leave White
with the initiative:
(I) 4 ...d6 5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bb6 (not 6 ...Bb4+ 7 Kfl! threatening ·
to win a piece by8 d5 followed by 9 Qa4+) 7 Nc3 Nf6 8 Be3 Bg4

9 Bb3! (moving the bishop twice, but to good effect since 9 0-0
would allow 9 .Nxe4! 10 Nxe4 d5 a very common idea)
. .
9 . .0-0
. I 0 Qd3 Re8 II 0-0 Bh5 12 Nd2.By regrouping his pieces
White maintains his strong central position, with a clear advantage.
in space.
(2) 4 ...Qe7 5 d4! Bb6 (after 5 ...exd4 6 0.0 dxc3 7 Nxc3 Whi_te
has an enormous lead in development) 6 0.0 d6 7 h3! (an important
struggle for the cen t re I ! 9
move preventing . . . Bg4 putting pressure on his central pawns)

7 . . . Nf6 8 Re I 0-0 9 Na3 ! (since the natural c3 square is denied
him , the knight aims for c4) 9 . . . K.h8 (bet ter than the immediate
9 . . . Nd8 which allows White to win a pawn a fter 10 Bfl Ne8
II Nc4 f6 1 2 a4 ! c6 1 3 Nxb6 a x b6 1 4 Qb3 + and 1 5 Qxb6 . Black
plans to strengthen hls cent re by . . . f6 without allowing a check
on b6) 1 0 Nc2 Nd8 II b3 ! Be6 1 2 B f l ! Ng8 1 3 Ne3 f6 1 4 N d S
with a n active position for White. This knight manoeuvre Na3 -<: 2-
e3-d5 is typical of modern opening play , and we find a similar plan
used in the Ruy Lopez. ( Another in teresting idea here is Mestel's
6 Bg5 ! Translator.]
5 d4 exd4
6 cxd4 Bb4+
This is the important difference from the play following 4 . . . d6 . Black

dare not play 6 . . . Bb6 here , since White can then advance powerfully
in the centre by 7 d5 Ne7 (after 7 . . . NaS 8 Bd3 White threatens to
win the off-side knight by 9 b4) 8 e 5 Ng4 9 d6 ! cxd6 ! (after 9 . . . B x f2 +
1 0 Ke2 Black loses a piece, since White threatens both 1 1 dxe7 and
I I h3 . Or if 9 . . . N x f2 White wins by 10 Qb3 N x h l I I Bxf7+ Kf8
1 2 BgS) 1 0 e x d6 Nc6 I I BgS N f6 (or 1 1 . . . f6 1 2 Bh4 and Black's
position is hopeless with the king stranded in the centre ) 1 2 0-0 0-0
1 3 Nc3 and Black has no defence to the threatened N d 5 . I f 1 3 . . . h6
then 1 4 Bh4 gS I S Nx g5 ! h x gS 1 6 B x gS wins e .g . l 6 . . . Re8 1 7 NdS
Re6 1 8 Ne7+ ! Nxe7 1 9 Bxe6 Ng6 20 Bb3 Kg7 21 Re i and Black is
lost.
7 Bd2 Bxd2+
More solid than 7 . . . Nxe4 ! ? 8 B x b4 Nxb4 9 Bxf7 + K x f7 10 Qb3 + dS

II Qxb4 when Black has a rather unsafe king's position .
8 Nbl xd2 . . . (see next diagram)

It would appear that White has now achieved the strong pawn cen tre he
was aiming for, b u t Black's next move shatters this illusion.
8 . . . dS!
This is the most precise way to count er in the cen tre , since 8 . . . N xe4 ! ?
(in tending to . answer 9 N x e4 with 9 . . . d S ) gives White a dangerous
sacrificial at tack after 9 d S ! N x d 2 I 0 Qxd2 Ne7 I I d6 ! cxd6 1 2 0-0 .0 !
threatening t o mobilize all his forces b y 1 3 Rhe I . Black is far behind in
20 I struggle for the centre
development (his white-square bishop is blocked in by his own pawns!)

and even after 12 ... Qc7 White can continue 13 Rhel Qxc4+ 14 Kb1
f6 I 5 Qxd6 Qf7 16 Rxe7 + Qxe7 17 Re1 etc., or here 14 . .. 0-0
I S Rxe7 b6 16 Qxd6 Bb7 17 NeS with strong pressure.
9 e xd S NxdS
1 0 Qb3
White has an i sol ated d-pawn which could be a serious disadvantage in
the end-game, so he must post his pieces as actively as possible in order
to m ai n tain the pressure on Black's position.
10 Nce7
11 0-0 0-0
12 Rfe 1 c6 '
It is essential for Black to keep control of the vital square dS. For
example, 12 ... Re8?? would lose material at once to 13 Rxe7! Nxe7
(otherwise 14 Bx d5 follows) 14 Bxf7+ and I 5 Bxe8. The text-move
also contains the positional threat of ... bS forcing White to exchange
his strong bishop for a knight or retreat it to a less active position. This
explains White's next move.
13 a4(!) (see next diagram) b6?

As t he further course of the game shows, this attempt to develop the
white-square bishop at b7 is faulty. A popular alternative a few years
ago was 13 ... Qb6 but it was found that after 14 aS! Qxb3 1 5 Nxb3
White had a clear advantage e.g. 15 ... Be6 NcS or 1 5 ...BfS 16 Ne�
Nb4 17 Rae I NedS 18 a6! b5 19 BxdS cxd5 20 Nc6 Nxc6 21 Rxc6
when White has far the better ending in view of Black's pawn weakn�sses.
struggle for the centre I 2 1
So the best con tin ua tion is 13 . . . Qc7 when Whi te plays 1 4 Rae!
t hr eaten n
i g t o win a piece by I S Bxd S . In an old game Schi ffers
Har m on ist (1 887) Bla c k n ow lost quickly after 1 4 . . . Nf4? 1 5 NgS
Ng6 1 6 Re8 ! ! Rxe8 1 7 Bxf7+ an d Black's game collapses ( 1 7 .. . Kf8
1 8 Nxh7+ Ke7 1 9 Rei + Ne6 20 Rxe6+ Kxf7 21 Rxc6+ etc.) H owever ,
ni stead o f 1 4 . . . Nf4? Black can tr y 1 4 . . . Qf4 ! with appr oxima te
equa il ty, a l though Whi te ca n impr ove the placin g of his pieces . The
game Ki ffmeyer P - a chman (Stoc kholm J 97S) con tin ue d : 1 5 Re4 Qf6
1 6 Re e l BfS 1 7 ReS Ng6 ! 18 Ne4 ! Bxe4 1 9 Re S xe4 Nb6 20 Bfl Rab8
2 1 aS N d S 22 Bc4 Qd8 !
1 4 NeS
Now White' s pieces arc extr e mely active an d he is alr eady thr ea ten n
i g
I S Nxc6 ! N xc6 1 6 Bx d S .
14 . . . Bb7
I S a S!
Thr ea ten n
i g 1 6 a6 Bc8 1 7 Nxc6 ! an d if1 5 . . . b S 1 6 a6 b xc41 7 Qxb7
is decisive.
IS ... Rac8
16 Ne4 ! . . . (see next diagram)
White's pieces wor k har moni ousl y together . If n ow 1 6 . . . b S 1 7 Bd3
followed by 1 8 Nc S .
16 Qc7
1 7 a6 Ba8
1 8 Qh3 !
2 2 I struggle for the c en tre
The cen tr ali sed white kn ights pr ovide the basis for a dir ec t K-side
attack, an d alr eady ther e is the subtle thr eat of 1 9 Ng5 h6 20 Ng5 xf7
Rxt7 2 1 Nx f7 K xf7 22 Qe6+ Kf8 (or 22 . . . Ke8 23 Bxd5 c xd 5
2 4 Rae! ! Bc6 2 5 Rx c6 ! ) 23 Ra3 ! an d Blac k has n o defenc e again st
Rf3+
18 Nf4
19Qg4 NedS
20 Ra 3 !
The last ' un developed' piec e j oin s in the ac tion , headin g for g3 or h3
with mor e dan ger t o Blac k's k ni g.
20 . . . Ne6?
This mi stake allows White to br n

i g off a splen did c ombin ation al fin ish,
bu t even the best move 20 . . . Ng6 would har dly suffic e aft er 2 1 Ng5 !
2 1 BxdS c xdS
22 Nf6+ Kh8
23 Qg6 ! !
A sur pr ise move whic h r emin ds on e o f the fam ous Levi tsky-Mar shalJ
fin ish . Ifn ow 23 . . . fxg6 24 N xg6+ hxg6 25 Rh3 mate , or if 23 . . .
gxf6 24 Q x f6+ Ng7 2 5 R.g3 Rg8 26 Nxf7+ win s the queen . Blac k tr ies
an other way to pr even t Qxh7 mate, but ther e isn o way out.
23 . . . Qc 2
24 Rh3 ! Resign s
(24 . . . Q xg6 2 5 Nxg6+ fxg6 26 Rxh7 mate; or 24 . . . fxg6 2 5 Rxh7
mate; or 24 . . . h6 25 R x h6 + e tc .)
Chapter 3
Time, space
and material
So far the reader has been made aware of two basic elements in chess
which play a large part in the opening: time (development of pieces,
gain and Joss of tempi) and space (the struggle for the centre = the
attempt to gain more space in which the pieces can manoeuvre).
Our third element is material, represented by the number and value
of the pieces each side possesses. Accurate assessment of material
balance is vital when exchanges take place, although many complex
factors can affect the static value of our pieces (e.g.in open positions
bishops are usually stronger than knights, whilst the reverse is true in
closed positions). A useful mathematical guide to material value is to
call the pawn I unit, the knight and bishop 3 units each, the rook 5 units
and the queen 9 units.
The above three elements of time, space and material are so inter·
mingled in the opening that we often see one factor balancing out
another, with a player giving up material to gain time or space, or vice
versa. Unless our opponent has played badly, we Jose time by pawn.
grabbing in the opening, and in the last game we examined, White's 4 c3
gave him a spatial advantage at the expense of time.
From the point of view of opening theory, it is very important to
assess those systems in which time or space (or both) are gained by
sacrificing material, our so-called 'gambits'. There are two justifications
for sacrificing material in the opening (one or even several pawns. or
exceptionally a minor piece or even a rook):
(I) in order to speed up the development of our pieces or improve
their co-ordination, or
(2) in order to gain space or control the centre.
The Danish Gambit is a typical example of pawn sacrifices for time:
J e4 e5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3!? dxc3 4 Bc4!? (White can also play 4 Nxc3
with good compensation for the pawn) 4 . ..c xb2 5 B xb2 (see next
diagram).
How do we set about assessing such a position? There is no doubt
24 I Time, space and material
that Whi te has an ideal developmen t , with hi s bishops aiming directly at

the enemy kin g' s position (f7 an d g7). For hi s two sacrifi cial pawn s
Whi te has al ready obtain ed three tempi within the space of fi ve moves.
I n such situati on s it is usually very dan gerous for the defen din g side to
clin g to his material. The best or at least the most solid method of com
batin g a ga mbit is to c hoose the correct momen t to return the material
in or der to catch up or even gain n i developmen t , or else to obtain a
cer t ain p osition al advantage.
In th is particular case Black can fight back with 5 . . . d 5 ( ! ) 6 Bxd5
Nf6 7 Bxf 7 + Kxf 7 8 Q xd8 Bb4+ 9 Q d2 Bxd2+ 10 Nxd2 c5 ! . H en ow
.
has a sligh t edge n i developmen t (his rook on h8 is rea dy for action ),
but has ab ove all a Q- side pawn maj ority which usually en sures an en d·
game advan tage (thi s will be discussed n i a later book).
The other way of dealin g with thi s kin d of gambit b to declin e i t ,
and n i fac t Black has a good game after 1 e 4 e 5 2 d 4 e xd4 3 c3 d 5 !
4 c x d5 (af ter 4 e 5 Black can play 4 . . . dxc3 with a clear plus) 4 . . .
Nf6 !, when we see that Whj te's ' at tackin g' move3 c3 has slowed down
his own developmen t. I f n ow 5 c4 c 5 6 d x c6 for example ( other wise
Bl ack has a sy mmetr ci al position with a tempo move ! ) 6 . . . N xc6 , it is
clear that Black stan d s well.
With these points ni min d, let us now return to the I talian Game
where a similar gambit was on ce popular.
Game 3
Steinitz Bardeleben (H astings1 89 5)
e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
Time, space and material I 2 5
3 Bc4 DeS
4 c3 Nf6
5 d4 exd4
6 cxd4 8b4+
7 Nc3!
We saw this opening in game 2 where White played the quiet 7 Bd2
which is nowadays considered the best continua tion . However, eighty
years ago this gambit move was extremely popular, the idea being to
answer 7 . . . N xe4 with l:! 0-0 sacrificing another pawn , with the hope
of launching an attack against Black's undeveloped position .
To appreciate the dangers Black faces , let us examine a variation in

which Black plays to win material: 8 . . . N x c3 9 bxc3 Bxc3 (better is
9 . . d5 ! al though White has good at tacking chances after I 0 cxb4
.
dxc4 II Re i + Ne7 1 2 Bg5 ! f6 13 Qe 2 ! fxgS 1 4 Qxc4 followed by

N xgS or Ne5 ) 1 0 Ba3 ! dS ! (if 1 0 . . . Ne7 I I Bxf7 + ! Kxf7 1 2 Qb3+)
I I Bb5 ! Bxal 12 Rei+ Be6 1 3 Ne5 and Black is helpless despite his
material advantage.
However, Black has a much be tter defence in 8 . . . Bxc3 ! 9 d5 ! (after
9 bxc3 d5 ! 10 Ba3 d xc4 II Rei Be6 1 2 Rxe4 Qd5 ! etc., Whi te's attack
is at an end) 9 . . . Bf6 ! 10 Re 1 Ne7 1 1 R_x e4 d6 12 Bg5 ! B xg5 1 3 Nxg5
with two possible continuations:
{I) 1 3 . . . 0-0 leading to a draw after in teresting complications :
1 4 Nxh7! Kxh7 15 Qh5+ Kg8 1 6 Rh4 f5 1 7 Qh7+ Kf7 1 8 Rh6 !
Rg8 (not 1 8 . . . Bd7? I 9 Be2 ! and 2 0 Bh5 + ) I 9 Re i ! Qf8 2 0 Bb5 !
Rh8 2 1 Qxh8 gxh6 22 Qh7+ Kf6 2 3 Rxe 7 ! Qxe7 24 Qxh6+ with ·
pe r pet ual check.

(2) 13 . . . h6 !? is double-edged but offers Blac k chances of avoiding
the draw. Admittedly his king remains in the centre after 1 4 Qe 2
hxg5 15 ReI Be6 ! I 6 dxe6 f6 but he has a very solid position. Or
14 Qh5 0-0 I 5 Rae I Nf5 and Black retains his extra pawn .
Be fore we continue our main-line game, we m ust mention that after
6 . . . Bb4+ White has another gambit continuation with 7 Kfl !? fixe4
(?) 8 d5! Ne7 9 Qd4 Nf6 I 0 Bg5 givin g him some dangerous attacking
chances (e .g. I 0 . . Ng6 I 1 Nbd2 h6 I 2 ReI and Black must renounce
.
c astlin g ). However, Black can simply decline ·the gambit by playing

7 . . . d5 ! 8 exd5 N x d5 9 Qe 2+ Be6 10 Bg5 Be7 e tc.
7 . .. dS
A perfectly sound alternative to 7 . . . Nxe4. Black declines the gambit
and liquidates White's ce11tre.
8 exdS NxdS
9 0.0 ! Be6 !
H e must n ot accept the pawn b y 9 . Nxc3? I 0 bxc3 Bxc3 1 1 Ba3 !
. .
Bb4 1 2 Rei+ Kf8 1 3 Bb4+ Nxb4 1 4 Qb3 , or by 9 . . . Bxc3 10 b xc3

N xc3?? 11 Qe 1+ etc.
10 BgS Be7
I I BxdS BxdS
12 NxdS QxdS
13 Bxe7 Nxe7
14 Rei
The position has become more simplified. White 's isolated d-pawn
could eventually give him proble ms, but Black has the immediate task
of countering the pressure down the e-me . As he cannot castle (i f
Tim e , space and material I 2 7
1 4 . . . Qd6 1 5 Qe2 ties him down) in the normal way, he must castle
'artificially' by playing his king to f7.
14 f6
1 5 Qe2 Qd7
1 6 Rac l
[Rad 1 is an in teresting idea, when 16 . . . Ki7 allows 1 7 Qc4+ Nd5
1 8 Ne5 + ! fxe S 1 9 dxeS winning at least a pawn. Translator. ]
16 . . . c6?
A fa tal mistake, a fter which Black cannot complete his development.

He ough t to have con tinued with his plan of 1 6 . . . Kf7 ! wi th an equal
game, but was worried about White giving up the exchange for two
pawns by 1 7 Qxe7+
. ! Qxe7 1 8 Rxe7+ Kxe7 1 9 Rxc7 + . However, Black
can then play 1 9 . . . Kd6 20 Rxb7 Rhc8 (threatening mate) 2 1 h3 Rc2
with the better game.
1 7 d5 ! !
A pretty pawn sacrifice vacating d4 for the knight and leading to a
briUian t finish.
17 . . . c x d5
1 8 Nd4 Kf7
White was threatening to win at once with 1 9 NfS .
1 9 Ne6 Rhc8
He had to defend against Rc 7, but now a forced sequence of moves
wins for White.
20 Qg4 g6
Not 20 . . . Rxc l ? 21 Qxg7+ Ke8 22 Qf8 mate .
21 Ng5+ Ke8
22 Rxe7+ ! ! Kf8!
The best defence, threa tening both the queen and mate on the back
ran k . Not of course 22 . . . Qxe7 23 Rxc8+ or 22 . . . Kxe7 23 Re i +
Kd8 24 Ne6+ Ke8 25 Nc 5 + or here 23 . . . Kd6 24 Qb4+ R.c 5 2 5 Re6 +
etc .
'
23 Rf7+ ! Kg8
Not 23 . . . Ke8 24 Qxd7 ma te.
24 Rg7+ ! Kh8
Or 24 . . . Kf8 25 Nxh7+ K xg7 26 Qxd7+ e tc .
25 Rxh7+! Resigns
The continuation would have been 25 . . . Kg8 26 Rg7+ Kh8 27 Qh4+
Kxg7 28 Qh 7+ Kf8 29 Qh8+ Ke7 30 Qg7+ Ke8 (or 30 . . . Kd6
3 1 Qxf6+) 3 1 Qg8+ Ke7 32 Qf7+ Kd8 33 Qf8+ Qe8 34 Nf7+ Kd7
35 Qu6 mate.
From a strategic point of view we need to pay even more attention
to those gambits which are concerned not only with a more rapid
development of the pieces but also with gain of space or control of the
centre, elements which are much more permanent. Our first example of
such a gambit is an opening which was extremely popular in t he 1 9th
cen t ury , the Evans Gambi t .
Time, space and materiaJ I 29
Game4
Anderssen Dufresne (Match 1 85 2)
I e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 BcS
4 b4!?
Captain E vans, who was the first to play this opening at the beginning
of the nineteen th centu ry , was not a st rong ch ess player and probably
sacriti ced this pawn in casu al fashion. Nevertheless , there is a sou nd
stra tegic basis to the gambit which cropsu p from time to time in modern
tourn ament play.
In the l talian G ame, White plays 4 c3 in order to prepare d4 , bu t as
we have see n this gi ves Black enou gh time to cou nter in the cent re by
4 . . . Nf6 and, later, 8 . ., . d5! The idea of th, e E vans G amb i t is to u
l re
Black' s bish op to b4 and thu s gain time to carry ou t c3 followed im
me diate ly by d4. However, it is not so mu ch rapid development which
White is aiming for , bu t central control and thu s gain of space!
4 ... Bxb4
If Black declines the gambit, White obtains some initia tive:
(I) 4 . . . Bb65 a4 ! a6 6 Nc3! N f6 (6 . . . N x b4? N xe5 Qg5 8 Qf3 !)
7 Nd5 N x d5 8 exd5 e4 9 dxc6 0-D! 10 Bb2! ( 1 0 Ng l ' ! Qf6) 10 . . .
e x f3 I I Qxf3 and Whi te' s well- placed bishops give him the edge .
( 2) 4 . . . Be75 c3! ( bu t not 5 b5 Na5 6 N xe5 Nxc4 N xc4 d5 8 exd5
Qxd5 and Black wins back the pawn with advantage)5 . . . N f6
6 Qb3 0-0 7 d3 with a slight plu s to Whi te.
30 I Time, space and m aterial
5 c3
5 . .. BaS
Black has two al ternatives:
( I ) 5 . . . BcS (weaker than 5 . . . BaS because Whi te can now attack '
the bishop with gain of time) 6 d4 exd4 7 0.0 (or the equally
promising 7 cxd4 Bb4+ 8 Bd2 or 8 Kfl !? when in comparison with
similar variations in the I t alian Game White has a tempo more ana
a pawn less ! ) 7 . . . d6 (not 7 dxc3 8 Bxf7 + Kxf7 9 Qd S + and
I 0 QxcS ) 8 cxd4 Bb6 giving us t he once popular 'normal' position
of the gambit, where once again White is a tempo up on the similar
line in the I talian Game (having now castled) wi th no pawn on b 2 !
White has good attacking chances e .g. 9 Nc3 Bg4 1 0 Bb5! (threat·
ening d5) 1 0 . . . Kf8 (better than 10 . . Bd 7 1 1 e 5 ! ) 1 1 Be3 Nge7
.
1 2 a4 , or here 9 . . . NaS 1 0 BgS ! f6 I I Bf4 Nxc4 1 2 Qa4+ Qd7

13 Qxc4 Qf7 14 NdS! Be6 1 5 Qa4+ Bd7 1 6 Qc2 ! Rc8 1 7 a4 BaS
18 Rib 1 wi th strong pressure for White.
(2) 5 . . Be 7 ! {the must solid defence , following the precept that the
.
best way to combat a gambit is to return the material at a favour

able momen t ) 6 d4 ( threatening 7 Qb3 when f7 cannot be defen ded)
6 . . . Na S ! NxeS N xc4 8 Nxc4 dS 9 exd5 QxdS 1 0 Ne3 Qd8 (or
Qa S) with a comfortable game to Black. White can play 7 Bd3 in
this variation but the bishop is not so aggressively posted here .
Black can choose between 7 ... dS !? 8 exdS QxdS and the more
solid 7 . . . d6 8 dxeS dxeS 9 N xe5 Be6 with full equality .
6 d4!
Although White's c-pawn is pinned, he must play sharply, sinci! the
immediate 6 0-0 once again offers Black a chance to return material by
Tim e , space and m aterial I 3 I
6 . . . <.16 7 d4 Bb6! e .g. 8 d xcS d xeS 9 Qxd8+ Nxd8 1 0 N xeS Be6

I 1 Nbd 2 Ne 7 12 Ba3 f6! 1 3 Nd3 Ng6 wi ht a slight advantage to Black.
6 ... exd4
Blac k can also try an idea sim ilar to th e one in th e previ ous note by
playin g 6 . . . d6 (! ) wh en , apart from wi nning backhi s pawn by 7 dxeS
dxeS 8 Qxd8+ Nxd8 9 NxeS Be6 Whi te can try 7 Qb3 Qd7 (both
7 . . . Qe7 and 7 . . . Qf6 allow 8 dS followed by 9 Qa4+ winning a
piece) 8 dxeS dxeS 9 0-0 Bb6 an d now:
( I ) 1 0 Rdl Qe 7 1 1 a4 ! Nh 6! 1 2 aS ! ? BxaS 1 3 Ba3 Qf6 1 4 B bS B d 7
I 5 c4 and Wh ti eh as good attacki ng prospects forhi s two pawns.
(2) l O Ba3 .NaS I I Nxe5 !? Nxb3 1 2 ax b3 wh en Black cannoth ang on
toh is vast material advan tage but m ust play for equality with
1 2 . . . Qe6! 1 3 Bxe6 Bxe 6 1 4 Nd2 Nf6 1 5 Nec4 etc.
7 0-0
7 .. . d3 (? )
As already stated Black sh ould go into th e ' norm al ' variation with 7 . . .
d6 8 cxd4 Bb6 but h e decides not to allow Wh ite a strong pawn centre
nor to go into th e ' comprom ised defence ' by 7 . . . dxc3. In th e latter
case play m igh t contin ue: 8 Qb3 Qf6 9 e5 ! Qg6 (if 9 . . Nxe5?? .
1 0 Rei d6 1 1 Qa4+ etc.) l O N x c3 Ne7 1 1 Ba3 0-0 1 2 Rd 1 ! ( but not

1 2 Nd5'! NxdS 1 3 Bxf8 Nf4 and B lack win s) 1 2 . . . Re8 1 3 Bd3 ! Qh 5
1 4 Ne4 Nxe5 (oth erwise Wh i te plays 1 5 NegS th reatening 1 6 Nxn!
Qxf7 1 7 Bc4) 1 5 Nxe5 Qxe S 1 6 Bb2 Qe6 1 7 Qb 5 ! as in th e game
La sker-Marsh all. Despite hi s th ree pawns min us Whi te h as a deci sive
at tack e .g. 1 7 . . . Bb6 1 8 Ng5 or 1 7 . . . Qb6 1 8 Qe5 Qf6 1 9 B xh 7+
K xh 7 20 QhS + Qh 6 21 Ng5+ winning.
8 Qb 3 Qf6
9 eS ! Qg6
1 0 Re l Nge7
1 1 Ba3 bS!?
Such diversionary sacrifices were common in several o l d variations of
this opening, with the idea of taking the pressure from the a2-g8 diagonal
and opening a file for Black's rook currently on a8. After 1 1 . . . 0.0
White would continue his attack with 1 2 Nbd2 followed by Ne4 and
Bxd3 .
1 2 QxbS Rb8
1 3 Qa4 Bb6
Not of course 1 3 . . . 0-0? 1 4 Bxe7 N xe7 I S Qxa5
14 Nbd2 Bb7
IS Ne4 - QfS ?
After t his loss of t ime there is no hope for Black. Relatively best was
15 . . d 2 ! 1 6 Ne4x d2 0-0, but of course Whi te then m aintains his
.
pressure by 1 7 Ne4 with no material defici t .

1 6 Bxd3 QhS
White was threatening to win the queen by Nd6+ .
1 7 Nf6+ !
In the early days players sought not only to win but also (and often
principally) to win beautifully . Nowadays most players would probably
have opted for the prosaic win by 1 7 Ng3 Qh6 1 8 Bel Qe6 1 9 Ng5 Qd5
20 Bc4 .
17 gxf6
1 8 exf6 Rg8
19 Radl ! Qxf3?
Allowing an un usually brillian t finish. HQwever, Black is lost even after
other moves e.g. 1 9 . . Rg4 20 Re4 NeS !? 2 1 RxeS Rxg2+ 22 Kfl !
.
Rxf2 + 23 Ke l Q xf3 24 Rxe7+ Kf8 25 Re3 + etc. (see next diagram).

20 Rxe7+ ! N xe7
Or 20 . . . Kd8 2 1 Rxd7+ Kc8 22 Rd8+ ! ! Nxd8 (if 2 2 . . . Rxd8
23 gxf3 ) 23 Qd7+ ! ! Kxd7 24 Bf5+ followed by 25 Bd7 mate.
Time, space and material I 33
21 Qxd7+ ! ! Kxd7
22 BfS+ Ke8
23 Bd7+ Kf8
24 Bxe7 mate
Another age-old gambit opening which contains a deep strategic idea is
the King's Gambi t. We shall illustrate the possibilities by q uoting a
modern game in which the defence triumphs, hoping that the reader
will not thereby be put off this highly in teresting and instructive opening!
GameS
El�y Bouwmeester (Holland 1 972)
l e4 eS
2 f4! ?
We have s o far dealt almost exclusively wit h the logical and strong move
2 N f3 , but have also mentioned the continuation 2 d4 exd4 3 c3 ! ? . If
a fter 2 d4 exd4 White plays 3 Qxd4, the Centre Game (see next diagram)
Black can gain a tempo by 3 . . . Nc6 ! 4 Qe3 N f6 5 Nc3 (after 5 e5
Black can try a promising gambit with 5 . . . Ng4 6 Qe2 d 5 ! 7 exd6 e .p.+
Be6 8 dxc7 Qxc7 with a lead in development worth more than the
pawn; or here 6 Qe4 d 5 ! 7 e xd6 e .p.+ Be6 8 Ba6 ! ? Qxd6 ! 9 Bxb7 Qb4+
I 0 Qxb4 Nxb4 I I Na3 Rb8 etc.) when Black can choose between two
good e qualising continua tions:
( I ) 5 . . . Bb4 6 Bd2 0-0 7 0-0 . Q Re8 8 Bc4 ! Ne5 (it is too risky to play
8 . . . Bxc3 9 Bxc3 Nxe4 I 0 Qf4 ! N f6 I I Nf3 d6 1 2 NgS and now
it is White who has an attack for the gambi t pawn ! ) 9 Be2 d6 1 0 h3
Be6 I I f4 Nc4 1 2 Bxc4 B xc4 etc.
34 I Time, space and m aterial
(2) 5 . . . Be 7 6 Bd2 dS ! 7 ex dS Nx dS 8 Qg3 Nx c3 9 Bx c3 Bf6 etc.

Ano ther ol d openin g, an alysed as early as the 1 5 th cen tury , is I e4
eS 2 Bc4, the Bishop' s O pening. Black can imm ediately becom e ac tive
in the cen t re by 2 . . . N f6 and if now3 d3 Black's best reply is3 . . . c6
aim ing for dS . I f instead3 Nc3 Black has (apart from the q uiet . . . Bb4
or . . . BcS) the counter3 . . . Nx e4, a tact ical idea seen in an um be r of
op enings. It is useful to know that the reply often m ade by n i experienced
players, 4 Bx f7+ is weak in view of 4 . . . Kx f7 5 Nx e4 d5 6 Qh5 + Kg8
7 NgS Qe7 an d Black's strong centre en sures him th e advantage despite
the position of his king. Sin ce after 3 . . . Nx e4 4 Nx e4 dS White has
nothin g, the usual contin uation is 4 QhS !? Nd6 5 Bb3 ! (5 Qx e 5 + Qe7
6 Qx e 7+ Bxe7 gi ves a drawn position) 5 . . . Nc6 ! ? (if Black wishe s to
avoid the following complications he can play the q uieter 5 . . . Be 7 6 Nf3
Nc6 7 Nx e5 0-0 ) ! 6 NbS g6 7 Qf3 f5 8 Qd 5 Qe7 ! 9 N xc7+ Kd8 1 0 Nxa 8
b6 when White is t he exchan ge up, sin ce the kni gh t on a8 will be lost, but
i s behind n i development an d his queen will be exposed after Black's
. . . Bb 7. Alli n all, a risky an d un clear variation . White's third possibility
after 2 Bc4 Nf6 consists of the gambit lin e 3 d4!? ex d4 4 Nf3 Nx e4
5 Qx d4 Nf6 6 BgS Be7 7 Nc3 c6! 8 0-0-0 d5 9 Rh e l Be6 1 0 Bd3 Nbd7
I I Qh4 NcS 1 2 Nd4. White has som e lastin g pressure for the pawn , b ut
Black can probably defen d by . . . Ng8 !
Another correct but seldom played ope ning is the V ienna G am e ,
I e4 eS 2 Nc3 , when White doe s not attack an ythin g dir ectly, which
m eans that Black has a choice of replies e.g. (see next diagram)
( 1) 2 . . . N f63 f4 ! (3 Bc4 l ea ds to the abov e-mention ed Bishop's
O pening, an d3 Nf3 Nc6 gives us the Four Kn ights Opening whi ch
we shall deal with later)3 . . . dS (not 3 . . . ex f4? because after.
4 eS Qe7 5 Qe 2 the black knightm ust retrea t to g8) 4 fx e 5 Nx e4
Time, s pace and material I 35
5 Nf3 Bc7 (or Black can play 5 . . . Bb4 , or 5 . . . Bc5 6 d4 Bb4 or

5 . . . Bg4 or 5 . . . Nc6) 6 d4 0-0 7 Bd3 f5 8 exf6 e .p . Bxf6 ! 9 0-0
(White must not capture a pawn on e4 when he will lose material
to the pin . . . Re8) 9 . . Nc6 with a comfortable equality i.e.
.
I 0 Ne2 Bf5 I I c3 Qd7, or I 0 N xe4 dxe4 I I Bxe4 N xd4 1 2 Ng5 !?

Bf5 ! 1 3 c3 ( 1 3 Bx f5 Nx f5 14 Qxd8 Ra8x d8 1 5 Rx f5? Bd4+ or
here 1 5 Ne6 Bd4+ 1 6 Khl ?? Ng3 + !) 1 3 . . . B x g5 1 4 B x g5 Qx g5
with full equality .
(2) 2 . . . Nc6 3 Bc4 (or 3 f4 !? with a variation of the King's Gambit)
3 . . . Nf6 4 d3 Bb4 5 Nf3 d6 6 0-0 Bxc3 7 b xc3 Na5 8 Bb3 N xb3
9 axb3 0-0 with only a minimal plus to Whi te.
2 ... e x f4
Of cou rse Black is not compelled to take the pawn . He has the passive
yet solid continuations 2 . . . d6 or 2 . Nc6 3 Nc3 d6 , whilst after
. .
36 1 Time, space and material
2 . Nf6 White obtains a slight advantage by 3 Nf3! Nxe4 4 d3 Nc5

. .
5 fxe5 uS 6 d4. However, there are two main ways of declining the
gambit, both perfectly acceptable:
( I) 2 Bc5 . . .
3 Nf3 (not the disastrous blunder 3 fxe5??Qh4+ 4 g3Qxe4+ fol

lowed by ... Qxhl or here 4 Ke2 Qxe4 mate!) 3 . .. d6 4 c3
(another blunder would be 4 fxe5 dxe5 5 Nxe5??Qd4!) 4 . . .Nf6
5 fxe5 dxe5 6 Nxe5Qe7 7 d4 Bd6 8 Nf3 (8 Bf4 Nxe4 9 Bd3 Nc5!)
8 .. Nxe4 9 Be2 0-0 I 0 0-0 c5 with an even game.Instead of 4 c3
'
.
White can also play the quieter 4 Bc4 Nc6 5 Nc3 Nf6 6 d3 when
Black can equalise by 6 ...a6 (to protect his black-square bishop
from an exchange by Na4) 7 f5 NaS! 8 Bg5 c6! 9Qe2 b510 Bb3
Qb6, or by 6 ... Be6 BbS (after 7 Bxe6 fxe6 8 fxe5 dxe5 Black's
open f-file gives him good play) 7 ... a6 8 Bxc6+ bxc6 9Qe2
(9fxe5dxe5 10Nxe5??Qd4) 9 .. . exf410Bxf4Qb8! I I Nd l 0-0 ..
(2) 2 .. d5 .
•
3 exd5 e4! (the Falkbeer Counter Gambit) 4 d3 (it is vital to deal

with Black's advanced pawn, since if White clings to his extra pawn
Black has an active game e.g.4 Nc3 Nf6 5 Bc4 Bc5! 6 d4 exd3 e.p.
7Qxd3 0- 0 8 Nge2 Re8 etc.) 4 . . . Nf6! 5 Nc3 (there are three
other possible continuations: 5 dxe4 Nxe4 6 Nf3 Bc5 7Qe2 Bf5!
8 Nc3Qe7 9 Bc3 Bxe3 I 0Qxe3 Nxc3 I I Qxe7+ Kxe712 bxc3
Bxc2 with an equal ending, but not here 8 g4'? 0-0 ! 9 gxfS Re8 etc.
Or 5 Nd2 exd3 6 Bxd3 Nxd5 7Qe2+ Be7 8 Ne4 0-0 9 Nf3 Nd7
1 0 0-0 Ndf6 I I NeS with only a slight edge to White. Or 5Qe2
Bg4! 6 Nf3Qxd5 7 Nbd2 Bf5 8 Nh4 Bg4 9 Nf3 Bf5 with a draw by
repetition) 5 .. . Bb4 6 Bd2 0-0! 7 Nxe4 Re8! 8 Bxb4 Nxe4 9 d xe4
Rxe4+ I 0 Be2 Rxb4 I I Qd2Qd6 and Black recovers his pawn
with equality.
If we now consider the diagram it may seem incredible after 2 ...
exf4 that White has bothered to sacrifice a pawn at all, since he has
thereby weakened his king's position and in fact Black is already
threatening ...Qh4+ winning!
However, in reality White is aiming for a positional advantage in the
shape of a powerful pawn centre now that he has moved Black's e-pawn.
In addition there is an open f-file waiting for him once he has captured
the f-pawn. First he must of course safeguard his king.
3 Nf3
The most natural continuation, preventing ...Qh4+ , but even 3 Nc3!?
and 3 d4!? have been tried here, although in both cases after 3 .. .Qh4+
4 Ke2 White's king is insecure, which compensates Black for his loss of
time with the queen move (he will later have to move it after Nf3 !).
However, 3 Bc4 is a good alternative to the texl move .
•
After 3 . .. Qh4+ 4 Kfl Black's queen is more vulnerable than White's

king, as can be seen by the following variation : 4 . . . gS 5 Nc3 Bg7
6 d4! Ne7 7 g3 ! fxg3 8 Kg2! Qh6 (after 8 ...gxh2?? 9 Rxh2 the queen
is l ost! ) 9 hxg3 Qg6 I 0 Nf3 h6 I I NdS! NxdS 1 2 exd S 0-0 1 3 d6! Qxd6
14 BxgS! h x gS I S Qd3 Re8 1 6 Bxf7+ and White wins.
In this line Black docs better to play 4 . . . dS 5 BxdS gS but even
then White has the advantage after 6 g3! Qh6 (if 6 . .. fxg3 7 Qf3! g2+
8 Kxg2 Nh6 9 Qg3! Qxg3 10 hxg3 with the better ending) 7 d4! Nf6
8 Qf3! NxdS 9 exdS Bd6 I 0 Nc3 BfS 1 1 h4! (a typical attack on Black's
pawn c hai n ) I I . . . g4 1 2 Qf2 etc. However, after 3 &4 Black has the
st ronge r 3 . . .Nf6 ! 4 Nc3 (4 eS dS!) 4 . . . c6! preparing to play .. . dS
even if this means sacrificing a pawn e.g.
( I ) 5 e S dS! 6 exf6 dxc4 7 fxg7 Bxg7.
Cn 5 Qe2 dS ! 6 exdS+ 13e7 7 dxc6 Nxc6 8 N f3 0-0 9 0.0 BcS + I OKhl
Bg4 an d Black is cl early better thanks to his lead in development.
(3) S Nf3? bS! 6 Bb3 b4 and 7 . . . Nxe4.
(4) 5 Qf3 dS! 6 exdS Bd6 7 Nge 2 0.() with a promis i ng game to Black.
3 . .. dS (!)
The so-called Modern Defence, not necessarily the strongest but defi
nitely the must solid continuation for Black. In t he early days of the
King's Gambit 3 . .. gS was pla yed al most exclusively with the idea of
protecting the f-pawn an d if need be driving the knight away with ...g4
so that the queen can go to h4.Whi te then has two main plans :
( I ) 4 Bc4 with the intention of sacrificing a piece by 4 . .. g4 5 0-0!
(the Muzio Gambit)5 . ..gxf3 6 Qxf3 with a p ro m isi ng attack for
W hit e down the f-file . We just give two ty pical examples of how
play m i gh t go : 6 .. . Qe7 7 Qxf4! QcS + (7 . . . Nh6 8 Nc3! c6 ·
9 d4 d6 I0 Bd2 Rg8 II Rae 1 Bh3 12 Rf2) 8 d4! Q xd4+ 9 Be3

Qxc4 10 Qe5+ Ne7II Qxh8 Ng6 12 Qxh7 Nc6 13 b3! Qe6
14 Nc3 followed by 15 NdS with advantage.Or 6 ...dS 7exdS!
(7BxdS Nf6 8 Qxf4 Bc7is not so good) 7...Bd6 8 d3 Ne7
Y Bxl4 Bxt4 10 Qxf4 0. 0 II Nc3 Ng6 12 Qg3 Nd713 Rae1 and
again Black can hardly set up a defence, since his K-side is weak
and his Q-side undeveloped.
So after 4 Bc4 Black plays 4 ...Bg7(with the idea of maintaining
his pawn chain a fter 5 h4 h6!) 5 0-0 d6 6 d4 h6 7 c3 Nc6.White
has a strong centre but Black's pieces are well placed for defence.
Strong measures arc required such as 8 g3! g4 9 Nh4 f3 I 0 Nd2 (or
I 0 Qb3 Qe 7II B f4 followed by Nbd2 and Rae I) I0 .. Bf6
.
II Nh4xf3! gxf3 1 2 Qxf3 with the strong tlueat of 13 eS! dxeS

14 Ne4.
(2 ) 4 h4 in order to break up the pawn chain and capture the f-pawn.
The Kieseritsky Gambit proceeds as follows: 4 ...g4 5 NeS (after
5 NgS !? h6 White has to sacrifice h is knight on f7) 5 ...Nf6
(Black has tried many moves here without success e.g. 5 ...hS? is
weak in view of 6 Bc4 Rh77d4 Bh6 8 Nc3 Nc6 9 B x f7+! R x f7 I 0
N x f7K x f7 II B x f4! B x 14 1 2 0-0 Qxh4 13 R x f4+ Kg7 14 Qd2 d6
IS Rafl and WhHe's attack was decisive in Bronstein-Dubinin,
Moscow 1947, a triumph for the f-file ! ) 6 d4 ! (stronger than the
old continuation 6 Bc4 dS 7exdS Bd6! etc., and even worse for
White is 6 Nx g4? Nxc4 7 Qe2 dS 8 d3 Bxg4 9 Qxg4 Ng3) 6 ... d6! .
7 Nd3 Nxe4 8 Bxl4 Qe79 Qe2 Bg710 c3 BfS 11 Nd2 Nxd2
12 Qxe7+ Kxe713 Kxd2 Nc6 1 4 Be2 aqd we have an interesting
position which well illustrates the theme of the King's Gambit,
pressure down the f-ftlc.Despite his pawn minus White has slightly
the better of the ending because he can immediately begin oper
ations down the f-filc with Rhfl.
Apart from 3 ... dS and 3 . .. gS Black has three other viable de·
fences:
(I) 3 ...Nf6 4 eS NhS (protecting the f-pawn but the knight is some
what exposed) 5 Qc2 ! (an interesting idea of Alekhine's, preventing
... dS and preparing to castle long) 5 .. Be 76 d4 0-0 7g4! (as
.
always, lines must be opened on the K-side) 7... fxg3 8 Qg 2! d6

9 h xg3 Bg4 io Nh2! Nxg3! II Rg l! (not of course 11 Qxg3?? Bh4.
After II N xg4 Nxhl 12 Qxh l Bh4+ 13 Kd l Nc6 Black stands very
well) II ...Bc8 12 Bf4 NfS 1 3 Bd3 g6 14 Ng4 and White has a
dangerous attack against Black's weakened K side.
(2) 3 . . . Be 7 ! ? (t he C unningham Gambit, thr eatening . . . Bh4+ )

4 Nc3! (this seems the stro ngest mov e . After 4 Bc4 Bh4+ 5 Kfl
White stand s bett er, but Black can impr ov e with 4 . . . N f6 ! 5 Nc3
N xe4 ! or her e 5 e 5 Ng4f ollowe d by 6 . . . d6) 4 . . . Bh4+ ( wher eas
now a fter 4 . . . N f6 White has 5 d4 d5 6 Bd3 !) 5 Ke2 and Wh i te
stands well despite his king's position, since Black's bishop ma
noeuvre has wasted time e .g. 5 . . . Be7 6 d 4 g5 7 Kf2 d6 8 Bc4
Nh6 9 h4 ! . Or 5 . . . Bg5 6 d4 Bh6 7 Kf 2 g5 8 Bc 4 d6 9 Rfl ! g4
10 Kg l ! gx f3 I I Qxf3 (compar e with the Muzio Gambit !). Or
5 . . . d 5 ! 6 Nxd 5 Nf6 7 Nc3 Bg4 8 d3 etc.
(3 ) 3 . . . d6 (recommend ed by Fischer at one time !) 4 d4 g5 Bc 4
(aft er 5 h4 g4 6 Ng5 h6 or 6 . . . f6 Whi te m ust giv e up his knight
for an a t tack which is probably insufficient but is not without
danger) 5 . . . Bg7 and Blackr eaches the defensiv e set- up we hav e
alr ead y men tioned. 3 . . . h6 a t tempts the same id ea (4 Bc4 g5 and
5 . . . Bg7) but is r isk ier in v iew of the shar p line 4' d4 g5 5 h4 Bg7
6 g3 !? g4 7 Nh2 fxg3 8 Nxg4 d6 9 c3 etc .
4 exdS N f6 !
Th e idea o f the previous mov e . Cl e a rl y 4 . . . Qxd5? is weak and 5 Nc3
Qh5 6 Be2 Bg 4 7 d4 Bxf3 8 Bxf3 Qh4+ 9 Kfl c6 l 0 g3 ! fxg3 I I Kg2
gives Whi te t he advantage .
5 BbS +
Two other moves come into consider ation here :
( I ) 5 N c3 Nxd5 (5 . . . Bd 6 ! is good too, concen trating on defending ..,
the f- pawn instead of winnin g back the d-pawn) 6 Nxd5 Qxd5 .
Time, space and material I 4 I
7 tl4 Be7! (to answer 8 Bxf4? with 8 ...Qe4+) 8 c4 Qe4+ 9 Be2

Nc6 I0 0-0 Bf5 II ReI 0-0-0 12Bf l Qc2 with equality.
(2) 5c4c6! 6d4! (not 6dxc6 Nxc67d4Bg4and Black is splendidly de
veloped) 6...exd5 7 Nc3Bb4 8 Bd3 !? (more solid is 8 Bx f4but
after8 . 0-0 9 Be2 dxc4 10 Bxc4Nd5! Black has slightly the better
. .
of it) 8 ... Qe7+! 9 Kf2Bxc3 10 bxc3 Ne4+ 11 Kf1 (or II Bxe4

dxe4 12 Bx f4 gx f3 13 Re J Be6 14d5 0-0 etc.) I I .. dxc4 12 .
Bxe4!? (12 Bxc4Be6! 13 d5? Qc5) 12 ... Qxe4 13 Kf2 Be6! 14

Re1 Qd5 15 ReS Qd7 and in the game Karlsson-Pachman (1974)
Black maintained his extra pawn, since 16 d5 fails to 1 6 .. Nc6! .
17 ReI 0-0-0!
5 .. . c6!
Black must play energetically or he will drift into a lost position e.g.
5 ... Nbd7 6 0-0! Nxd5 7 c4 Nf6 8 d4 Be7 9 Bxf4etc. Or 5 ...Bd7
6 Qe2+Be7 7Bc4! 0-0 8 0-0 etc.
6 dxc6 N xc6!
Botvinnik introduced the idea of 6 ...bxc6 7 Bc4 Nd5, but it was later
found that White still had an advantage by advancing his central pawns
with 8 Nc3! Be6 9 Bb3Bd6 I0 Ne4followed II c4 and a later d4.
7 d4 Bd6 !
Not 7 ... Qa5+ 8 Nc3 Bb4 9 0-0 Bxc3 Qe2+Be6 II bxc3 Qxc3 (or
11 . Nd512Bd2)12Bxf4etc.
. .
8 Qe2+
It is better to castle at once, but Black does not stand worse after
8 0-0 0-0 9 c4Bg4since White's white-5quare bishop is badly placed on
b5.
8 Be6
9 NgS 0-0!
10 N xe6 fxe6
11 Qxe6+ Kh8
12 Bxc6 bxc6 (see next diagram)
Once again Black has used successfully the well -tried defence against a
gambit. Not only has he given back the pawn but he has thrown an extra
one in for good measure ! The result is clear: White's only tleveloped
piece is his queen which Black now threatens to win by ... Re8 .
l 3 0.0 Qc7
14 N d2 Rae8
1 5 Qc4 g5 !
N ormally su ch a move i s risky, bu t in this position Black's piec es are so
active that a pawn stom1 decides mat ters quickly .
1 6 Nf 3 N e4 !
No t a t o nce 1 6 . . . g4 17 N eS Bx e5 18 dx e5 and the f-pawn falls.
1 7 Rf e l g4
18 N e5 Bx e 5
N ot however 18 . . Rx e 5 ? 1 9 dx eS Qb6+ 2 0 Be 3 !
.
19 Rx e4 Bd6
20 Rx e8 Rfx e8
21 Qf l f3 !
22 gxf 3 gx f3
23 Qxf3
O r 23 Bh6 Bx h2+ 24 Khl Qg3 ! wins.
23 Qg7+ !
24 Qg2 Rei +
25 Resigns
(after 25 Kf2 Re2 + ! wins at once) .
Chapter 4
Black counter-attacks
As we have already mentioned, White usually tries to develop his pieces

with threats. For instance, after I e4 e5 2 Nf3 White is attacking the
e-pawn. ln the Italian Game, it is White who operates with such threats
in the early stages, with Black having to defend. Tilis is why after I e4
e5 2 Nf3 Ne6 3 Bc4 most players prefer the counter-attacking move
3 ... Nf6 giving us the Two Knights Defence. It is doubtless a more
active but at the same time a riskier reply than 3 ... Bc5. However, the
problems which arise are so interesting that we devote two model games
to our analysis of it.
Game6
Kuindshi Klovan (USSR 1973)
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Nf6 !?
Why do we consider such a natural reply as risky? The reason is that we
now have one of the rare occasions in the opening when White can
launch an attack with only a few pieces developed.
4 Ng5 !?
The great German player and teacher, Dr S. Tarrasch, once referred to
·this as a beginner's move because it goes against the usual principles of
development. Nowadays the experts view it as a risky but perfectly
viable system.
4 0 0 0 d5
The only way to defend the f-pawn. The Czech master Traxler intro
duced a startling alternative 4 ... Bc5 !? at the end of the last century.
Black ignores the attack on f7 (see next diagram), even allowing White
44 I Black counter-attacks
to capture tllis critical pawn in two ways, but the fmal verdict may well
be that it verges on the unsound:
(I) 5 Bxf7+? Ke'l 6 Bb3(Black was threatening ... h6) 6 ... Rf8
7 d3 d6 8 h3Qe8 followed by ... Qg6 with a strong attack for
Black. [6 BdS!? has �o be tried, with complex play. Translator.)
(2) 5 Nxf7Bx f2+! (a second surprise ) and if White accepts the sacrifice
he can hope at most for a draw: 6 Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7Kg! (not 7 Ke3?
Qh4 8 g3Nxg3! 9 hxg3Qd4+ I 0 Kf3 dS II Rh4e4+ 12 Kg2 0-0 !
wins ) 7 ... Qh4 8 g3Nxg3!9 N>V18! (it is very dangerous to play
9 hxg3 Qxg3+ 10 Kfl 0 -0 !e.g. I I d3dS!12 BxdSNb4 13 Bb3c6
followed by 14 ...NdSand the knight on f7 is lost) 9 . Nd4!
. .
10 hxg3 Qxg3+ I I Kfl Qf4+ with a draw by perpetual check.

However, White has better with 6 Kfl! e.g.6 ... Qe77 Nxh8
dS! 8 exdS Nd4! 9 h3(otherwise Black plays . .. Bg4) 9 . . Bh4!
.
and Black has a dangerous attack but is a whole rook down !

(3) 5 d4 ( ? ) dS!6 BxdS? (it is better to accept the drawn ending after
6 dxcS! dxc4 followed by the exchange of queens, but tl1is is
hardly attractive for White!) 6 . .. Nx d4! 7 Nx f7 (or 7 Bx f7+ Ke7
8 c3h6 9 cxd4 Qx d4!) 7 ... Qe78 Nx h8 Bg4!9 Bf7+ (or 9 f3
NxdS I 0 fxg4 Nb4 I I Na30 -0 -0 , or 9 Qd2 NxdS I0 exdS BfS
11 0 -0 Nxc212g4 Nd4! 13Qdl Be4 etc.) 9 ... Kf8 10 f3 Nxe4!
I I fxg4 (11 h4 Qf6!) 11 ... Qh4+ 12 g3Nxg3 13 BgS! QxgS
14 hxg3 Qe3+ IS Kfl NfS!!and Black wins. All these variations
are fairly complex but extremely instructive and well worth
(;areful exanlination by the reader.
5 exdS . . . (see next diagram)
Very few chess positions have been subjected to such comprehensive
Black counter-at tacks I 45
analysis as thjs one . The firs t question is whether Black can simply
recapture with the knight. He cannot, as White even has two elegan t
ways of winning: after 5 . . . NxdS he has:
( I ) 6 N x f7 ! Kxf7 7 Qf3+ Ke6 (otherwise White wins back the knight
at once ) 8 Nc3 Nb4 9 Qe4 ! c6 1 0 a3 Na6 I I d4 Nc7 1 2 Bf4 ! K f7
1 3 BxeS and Black is in trouble, the threat being 1 4 Bxc7 Qxc7
1 5 NxdS etc.
(2) 6 d4 ! Bb4+ (other moves are even weaker e .g. 6 . . . exd4 7 0.0
Be7 8 N xf7 ! Kxf7 9 Qf3+ Ke6 1 0 Nc3 ! dxc3 I I Re i + NeS 1 2 Bf4
Bf6 1 3 Bxe5 BxeS 1 4 Rxe 5 + ! KxeS I S Re i + Kd4 1 6 BxdS e tc . Or
6 . . . Be6 7 N xe6 fxe6 8 dxe S Nxe5 9 Qh5 + etc. Or 6 . . . Be 7
7 N x f7 ! Kxf7 8 Qf3 + Ke6 9 Nc3 Nb4 I 0 Qe4 c6 I I a3 Na6 1 2 Bf4
etc.) 7 c3 Be7 8 Nxf7 ! Kxf7 9 Qf3 + Ke6 1 0 Qe4 ! Bf8 I I f4 ! and
Black is helpless in face of the ever-increasing pressure .
' 5 ... NaS
Black also has the following interesting possibil ity : 5 . . . Nd4 ! ? and if
now 6 d6 !? Qxd6 7 B xf7 + (not 7 N xf7? Qc6 !) 7 . . . Ke7 8 Bb3 N xb3
9 axb3 h6 I 0 Nf3 e4 I I Ngl Kf7 and Black has an excellent position
for the pawn (more space and development). The main variation after
5 . . . Nd4 !? is 6 c3 b S ! 7 Bfl ! N x dS 8 Ne4 ! Ne6 ! 9 Bxb 5 + Bd7
1 0 Bxd7+ Qxd7 1 1 0.0 Be7, or here 1 0 Qa4 fS 1 1 Bxd7+ Qxd7
1 2 Qxd 7+ Kxd7 13 Ng3 NcS ! and in both cases Black's ac tive pieces
com pensate for rus pawn minus.
6 BbS +
'
Another important possibilt ty here i s 6 d3 h 6 7 N f3 e4 ! 8 Qe 2 N xc4
9 dxc4 BcS ! and Wrute has serious problems e .g . :
( I ) 1 0 d b5 ! I I b4 Be 7 1 2 Nf3-d2 Bg4.
(2) 1 0 0-0 0-0 I I Nf.3 -d2 Bg4 1 2 Qe l Qd7 ! 1 3 N xe4 (or 1 3 Nb3 Bf.3 ! )
1 3 . . . N xe4 1 4 Qxe4 Rae8 I S Qf4 Be 2 1 6 Re i Bxc4 !
(3 ) 1 0 Nd2 0-0 I I N b3 Bg4 ! 1 2 Qfl Bb4+ 1 3 c3 Be7 1 4 h3 BhS I S g4
Bg6 1 6 Be3 N d 7 !
(4 ) I 0 h 3 0-0 I I Nh2 e3 ! Bxe3 Bxe3 1 3 fxe3 Ne4 1 4 0-0! Ng3 .
(S) 1 0 Bf4 ( ! ) gS ! I I NxgS ! ( I I Bg3? Bg4 follwed by . . . 0-0) I I . . .
hxgS 1 2 BxgS Bf5 1 3 Nd2 Qe7 1 4 Nb3 Bd6 .
This last variation is unclear but all the others are in Black's favour.
6 .. . c6
There has been a re turn to the earlier undervalued 6 . . . Bd7 with the
continua tion 7 Qe2 Be7 ! 8 Nc3 0-0 and Black can probably equalise.
7 dxc6 bxc6
8 Be2
It would be quite wrong to play the seemingly active 8 Ba4? h6 9 Nh3
(if 9 Nf.3 e4 1 0 NeS Qd4 ! I I Bxc6+ N xc6 1 2 Nxc6 QdS trapping the
knigh t ) 9 . . . Bg4 ! 1 0 f.3 8x h3 I I gxh3 sd ! and White is helpless
( 1 2 c3 NdS and 1 3 . . . Qh4+ ) . An in teresting alte rnative is 8 Qf3 when
Black does best to offer a further pawn with 8 . . . Rb8 ! giving :
( I ) 9 Bxc6+ N xc6 1 0 Qxc6+ Nd7 ! I I d3 Be? I 2 Nf3 0-0 1 3 Qe4 Rb4
1 4 Qe2 e4 ! 1 5 dxe4 Nc5 with advantage to Black (Zicherl-Krzisnik,
1 9S 6 ).
(2 ) 9 Bd3 h6 1 0 Ne4 Nd5 I I Nbc3 N f4 1 2 Bfl f5 1 3 Ng3 g6 1 4 d3
Bg7 again with a clear advantage to Black (Paoli-Kluger, \ 9S4).
8... h6
9 Nh3 ( ! )
Black counter-attacks I 4 7
Once again we have a case where the 'rules' are broken. This eccentric
looking retreat has recently proved more successful than the previously
t ried normal retreat 9 N f3 e4 I 0 Ne5 Bd6 f (gaining time by attacking
the knight), and now:
( 1 ) 1 1 d4 exd3 (stronger than 1 I . . Qc7 1 2 Bd2 or here 1 2 . . . Nb 7
.
1 3 0-0 0-0 1 4 Na3 ! ) 1 2 N x d3 Qc7 1 3 h3 0.0 1 4 0-0 Rb8! 1 5 Nc3

c5 and Black has excellent play for his pawn .
(2) 1 1 f4 exf3 (after 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 Nc3 ! Re8 ! 1 3 0.0 Bxe 5 1 4 fxe5
Qd4+ 1 5 Kh l Qxe5 1 6 d4 e xd3 1 7 Bxd3 Bg4 1 8 Qd2 Nb7 1 9 Qf2
White has the edge) 1 2 N x f3 Qc7 1 3 0-0 Ng4 ! ? (or 1 3 . . . 0.0
14 d4 c5) 14 h3 Bh2 + 1 5 Kh 1 h5 1 6 d4 Bg3 ! 1 7 Bd3 ! Be6 1 8 Qe2
0-0 with complex and unclear play .
9 ... BcS ! ?
I t i s perfectly correct for Black n o t to hurry with . . . B x h 3 since at
the moment White's knight has only g 1 to go to. However, 9 . . .
Bd6 ( ! ) seems to be stronger, since White will soon castle when h2 will
be the point to attack rather than f2 . In fact, after 9 . . . Bd6 White
dares not castle at once because h 2 is weak. The game Tringov-Geller
(1971 ) continued 10 d3 0-0 I I Nc3 Nd5 1 2 Bf3 N xc3 1 3 bxc3 Qh4 1 4
Ngl f5 1 5 g3 Qf6 1 6 Ne2 e4 ! with a good game t o Black. White can play
instead (after 9 . . . Bd6) 1 0 d4 ! Bxh3 ( I 0 . . . e4 1 1 N f4) 1 1 gxh3 e4
1 2 h4 0-0 1 3 hS etc.
1 0 Nc3
In several games White has castled without worryi,ng about the weakening
of his K-side , as played by Fischer. After I 0 0.0 0.0 II d3 we have :
( 1 ) I I . . Bx h3 1 2 gx h3 Qd7 1 3 Bf3 ! Qxh3 1 4 N d 2 ! Rad8 1 5 Bg2 Qf5
.
1 6 Qe l Rfe8 1 7 Ne4 Bb6 1 8 Nxf6+ Qxf6 19 Kh l c5 20 Qc3 as in

Fischer· Bisguicr ( 1 963 ) where White has a clear advantage, as
Blac k's pawns are m uch weaker than White's. It is interesting to
note that all this would not have been possible with Black's bishop
on d6 (on move 1 4 Black could have won at once with . . . e4 !).
(2) I I . . . NdS I 2 Nc3 Nxc3 13 bxc3 Qh4 1 4 Kh I Bxh3 1 5 gxh3
Qxh3 1 6 BfJ Bd6 (wasting another tempo in order to reach the
correct diagonal ! ) 1 7 Bg2 Qh4 I 8 Qf3 , again with advan tage to
White. [Geller's I I . . Nb7 is in teresting. Translator.]
.
These examples reveal the point of 9 Nh3 . White is quite prepared to

give back a pawn in order to post his bishop on the splendid h l -a8
diagonal.
48 J Black coun ter-attacks
The text-move is not as accurate as 1 0 O..Q or 1 0 d3 since it gives

Black a chance to post his queen on h4 without ha vin g to move his
king knight .
10 . . . Qd4 !
1 1 d3 Qh4
After I I . . Bxh3 White can interpose 12 Be3 Qh4 1 3 g3 ! Qb4 14 a3
.
Qxb2 ( 14 . . . Qb6 1 5 Na3) 15 Na4Bb4+ 1 6 axb4 Qxb4+ 1 7 Bd2 Qb5

18 c4 Qa6 19 Nc5 and Black loses his queen knight.
1 2 0.0! 0.0
13 Kh 1 !
Forcing the capture of his knight which would otherwise head for f3via
gl.
13 . . . Bxh3
1 4 gx h 3 Rad8 (?)
Of course 14 . . Qxh3 IS Bf3 would suit White, but 1 4 . . . Bxf2
.
I S Bf3 Rad8 ! is worth serious consideration.

1 5 f4 ! exf4
Perhaps Black had originally intended I S . . .e4, but White could then
force the exchange of queens by 1 6 Qe 1 ! since 16 . . . Qxh3 allows
1 7 Nxe4.
\
1 6 Rxf4 Qxh3
It now appears that White can win material by 1 7 b4, but after 1 7 . . .
Bd4 ! 1 8 Rxd4 Rxd4 1 9 bxaS Re8! Black obtains a dangerous attac k .
Black coun ter-attacks I 49
The immediate 20 Bf3? loses to 20 .. . Re1 +! 21 Qx el Qx f3+, and after

20 Bd2 Ng4 2 1 Qg1 Black has perpetual check by 21 . . . Rxe2 ! 22 Nxe2
Qf3 + 2 3Qg2 Nf2 + 24 Kg 1 Nh3+etc.
1 7 Rxf6 !
The correct method, removing one of Black's main attacking pieces and
breaking up his K-side position. White now obtains a clear initiative .
17 gxf6
1 8 Ne4 Bd4
1 9 Bg4 ! Qh4
20 Bd2
Suddenly White is not only attacking the knight but also threatening to
win the queen by Be l !. So Black must give up a pawn.
20 . . . fS
2 1 BxfS RdS (?)
This attacking move is out of place.Black should be thinking of defence

by playing his knight to d6via b7 in an attempt to exchange pieces.
22 Qf3 Nb7
Not of course 22 ... Bxb2? 23 Rgl +followed by Rg3with a decisive
attack on the king.
23 Be l Qe7
24 Qg4 + Kh8
25 QhS Qe6 !
A witty defence which proves insufficient, but the alternative 25 . . . Kg7
allows the strong 26 Bh4 .
26 Ng3 Nd6
Losing the exchange , when White's extra pawn gives him a comfortable
win. After 26 . . . Qf6 White would win by 27 Bd2 ! Kg7 28 Rfl Nd6
29 Qg4 + Kh8 30 Be4 etc.
27 Bxe6 RxhS
28 NxhS fxe6
29 Bg3 NfS
Now 30 c3 would be su t'ficient to win, but White chooses the simplest
method. The game ended as follows : 30 ReI Nxg3+ 31 Nxg3 Rf6
50 I B lack counter-attacks
32 b3 1<117 33 Rf l Kg6 34 Kg2 Rxf l 35 N x f l Kf5 36 Kf3 Ke5 37 Ne3

h5 38 Ng2 Bg l 3 9 h3 Kd4 40 N f4 Resigns (if now 40 . . . Kc3 4 1 Ne2+
wins the bishop).
Game 7
Florian Deutsch (Budapest 1 973 )
e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 N f6
4 d4
This is the m ost important alternative to 4 Ng5 but we m ust also mention
two other continuation s :
(I ) 4 d3 c a n transpose a fter 4 . . . Bc5 to the Italian Game which we
have already met, but Black can also con tinue quietly with 4 . . .
Be7 S N c3 d6 6 h3 (otherwise . . . Bg4 is unpleasan t) 0-0 7 0� N a 5
etc.
(2) 4 N c 3 allows the following typical central exchange : 4 . . . Nxe4 !
S N xe4 d S 6 Bd3 d xe4 7 Bxe4 Bd6 8 d4 (after 8 Bxc6+ bxc6
9 d4 e4 ! Black s tands better ) 8 . . . e x d4 (even more favourable
than g . . . N x d4 9 N xd4 exd4 I 0 Qxd4 0� I I Be3 Qe7) 9 Bxc6+
bxc6 I 0 Qxd4 ! (after I 0 Nxd4 Black can sacrifice a pawn by
I 0 . . . 0-0! II N xc6 Qh4 wit h a dangerous a t tack) I 0 . . . 0�
I I 0-0 c 5 1 2 Qc3 Bb7 with a good position for Black. Despite his
weakened pawn structure hjs t wo b�hops give him a strategical
advan t age.
4 . . . exd4
Bu t not 4 . . . N xe4 ('?) d xe5 with the strong threat of 6 Qd5 winning
(see next diagram).
5 0..0
An im por tan t alternative here is 5 e5 when Black has two viable con
tinua tions:
(I ) 5 . . . Ng4 6 0-0 (not 6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 7 Ng5 + Kg8 8 Qxg4 h6 9 Nf3
d6 , or here 8 Qf3 Bb4+ ! 9 c3 Ng4xe S ! 10 Qd5 + Kf8 etc . However,
Whi te can play 6 Qe 2 Qe7 7 Bf4 d6 8 exd6 Qxe2+ 9 Bxe2 Bxd6
I0 B x d6 cxd6 I I Na3 with a minimal plus) 6 . . . d6 7 e xd6 Bxd6
Black counter-at tacks I 5 1
8 Re I + Kf8 and it is not clear whether White has enough for the
pawn .
(2) 5 . . . dS 6 BbS Ne4 7 N xd4 Bd7 8 B xc6 bxc6 9 0-0 Be 7 1 0 f3 NcS
1 1 f4 Ne4 ! [Now 1 2 f5 ! 0-0 13 Nc3 1ooks good for White. Trans
lator. ] or here 9 . . . BcS 1 0 f3 NgS 1 1 Be3 0-0 1 2 Qd2 f6 !
However, in the diagrammed position Whi te gets nothing from the
immediate a ttack by 5 NgS (?) dS 6 e x d S Ne5 7 Qx d4 (if 7 Bb S + c6
8 d xc6 bxc6 9 Be2 Qd5 Black stands very well ) 7 . . . N xc4 8 Qxc4
QxdS 9 Qe2 + ! (9 Qxc7? Bd6 1 0 Qc3 Q xg2) Be6 ! 1 0 0-0 0-0-0 I I N xe6
ReS ! (even be tter than Qxe6) 1 2 Nxc7 Rxe2 1 3 NxdS NxdS and in
spite of his extra pawn White stands somewhat worse , as Black controls
the important 7 th rank.
5 ... Nxe4
At first sigh t a risky-looking move, since this knight can be pinned at
once. However, Black has sufficien t defensive resources, as we shall see .
Very interesting and complex play arises after 5 . . . Bc5 6 eS ( the Max
Lange at tack) 6 . . . d5 (once again 6 . . . Ng4 is a good alternative , the
best continuat ion t hen being 7 Bf4 d6 ! 8 e xd6 Bxd6 9 Bxd6 Qxd6
1 0 BbS and White regains his pawn) 7 e x f6 (or 7 BbS Ne4 8 N xd4 Bd7
as in the eS line) 7 . . . dxc4 8 Re i + Be6 9 NgS QdS ! (the reader must
be careful not to fall into the t raps 9 . . Qd7?? I 0 N xe6 fxe6 I I QhS +
.
winning a piece , or 9 . 0-0?? 1 0 Rxe6 fxe6 f7 + Kh8 1 2 QhS h6

. .
1 3 Qg6 h xgS 14 QhS mate ! ) 1 0 Nc3 ! (Black's d-pawn is pinned, so

1 0 . . . dxc3?? all ows I I QxdS because the bishop on e6 is also pinned ! )
1 0 . . . Qf5 I I Nce4 0-0,0! 1 2 N xe6 fxc6 1 3 g4 ! QeS 1 4 fxg7 Rhg8
1 5 BgS ! and in this sharp position White has somewhat the better of it.
5 2 I Black counter-attacks
6 Re i dS
7 BxdS !
Beginning a ma n oeu v re which regains his material . An o t he r i nte re s t in g
method which is not qui t e sound enough is 7 Nc3 !? d xc3 (or 7 . . . Be6
8 N xe4 dxc4) 8 Bxd5. Now it woul d be foolish to defend the piece by
8 . . . f5? wh e n 9 Ng5 ! gives Whi te a winning attack, so Black plays
instead 8 . . . Be6 ! 9 Bx e4 (9 Rx e4?? Ne7 ! ) 9 . . . Bb4 ! with a good game .
7 ... QxdS
8 Nc3 QaS
The most popular con t inuation, but the si m p le s t equalising line is prob
ably 8 . . . Qd 8 9 Rxe4 + Be 7 ! 1 0 Nxd4 f5 ! I I Rf4 0-0 1 2 N xc6 Qxd l +
1 3 N x d 1 b x c6 , or here 9 N xe4 Be7 1 0 Bg5 Be6 I I Bxe7 K xe 7 ! The
b l a c k queen is m o re exposed on other squares e .g. 8 . . . Qh5 9 N xe4
Be6 10 Bg5 h6? I I Bf6 ! Qa5 1 2 Nxd4 ! gxf6 13 N xf6 + Ke7 1 4 b4 !
Nxb4 1 5 Nxc6 ! Kxf6 1 6 Qd4+ w inn in g ( Rossolimo-Prins, 1 95 2 ) .
9 N xe4 Be6
1 0 Bd2 ! ?
A sharp con t i nua t io n which i s popular at the moment. White is now
com m i t t e d to playing a gamb i t prope r ! After 1 0 Neg5 0-0-0 I I Nxe6
fxe6 1 2 Rxe6 White has regained his pawn , but Black obtains a pproxi
ma tely even chances by 1 2 . . . Bd6 or 1 2 . . . QfS .
10 . . . QdS
Once again we witness a queen being vulnerable to attack. The obvious
developing move I 0 . . . Bb4 is answered by the surprising I I N xd4 !
Nxd4 ( I I . . . Bxd2 1 2 N xc6 bxc6 1 3 Qxd2 is worse for Black in view

of his weakened pawns) 1 2 c3 Be 7 1 3 cxd4 QdS 1 4 Re i c6 I S BgS !
BxgS 1 6 ReS ami Blac k is hard pu t t o achieve equali ty . After I 0 . . .
QfS or I 0 . . . QhS or I 0 . . . Qb6 , White s till continues wi th I I BgS !
and Black has difficulty completing his development.
1 1 BgS Be7
Black cannot castle because I I . . . h6 is answered by 1 2 Bf6 ! and
1 1 . . . Bb4 by J 2 c3 so Black settles for exchanging bishops and placing
his king on the seemingly safe e7 square . [Best is probably I I . . . Bd6 ! .
Translator. ]
1 2 Bxe7 Kxe7
13 c4!
An excellent sacrifice of a second pawn. White must force open the
position before Black consolidates by . . . Rhd8 and . . . Kf8 .
13 . . . d xc3
After 1 3 . . . Qxc4 White sacrifices yet a third pawn by 1 4 Re i ! e.g. if
1 4 . . . Qxa2 I S N x d4 N xd4 1 6 Qxd4 threatening both Rxc7+ and
Q xg7. Or 1 4 . . . QdS J S ReS Qd7 1 6 Qc I ! threatening both I 7 QgS +
and 1 7 Ne S ! NxeS 1 8 Rxc 7. Black's best reply is 1 6 . . . Rhc8 but after
1 7 Qf4 ! White has a s trong attack ( 1 7 . . . Kf8 1 8 NegS Kg8 1 9 Qe4 !).
Or i f Black re t reats the queen by 1 3 . . . Qd8 White has 14 NcS b6?
I S N xe6 fxe6 1 6 NgS e S 1 7 Qf3 etc. winning.
14 Qc2 ! Nd4
Black tries to ease his defence by exchanges. He can hardly cling to his
material since after 1 4 . . . cxb2 I S Qxb2 Black's b - and g-pawns a re
threatened.
IS Q xc3 N xf3 +
16 gxf3 !
M uch stronger than 1 6 Qxf3 ? Rad8 with advantage to Black, whereas
now Black has problems e .g. 1 6 . . . c6 1 7 Qb4+ followed by 1 8 Qxb7.
Or 1 6 . . . Rhc8 1 7 Rad l Qh S 1 8 NcS etc.
16 . . . Qc6
1 7 Qb4+ Kd8
Black's king seeks refuge on the Q side. After 1 7 . . . Ke8 White has
19 Rac l Qb6 1 9 Qc3 ! e tc .
54 I Black co unter-attacks
18 Rad l + Kc8
19 Rei Qb6
20 Qe7 ! aS
. Black creates a loophole for his king in anticipation of 21 Nd6 + Kb8
22 Nx t7 Bx f7 23 Q x t7 but White has an even stronger line .
2 1 NcS ! Rhd8
Not of course 2 1 . . . Kb8?? 22 Rxe6 ! fxe6 23 N d 7 + winning the quee n .
22 Nxe6 fx e6
23 Rxe6 Rd7?
An e rror in a lost position. The al ternative 23 . . . c6 24 Qxg7 is equally
hopeless for Black because after 24 . . . Qc7 2 5 Re7 Qf4 ( 2 5 . . . Rd 7?
26 Qg8+ Qd8 2 7 Re8) 26 Qg4+ Q x g4+ 2 7 fx g4 White has a won rook
ending.
24 Qf8+ ! Rd8
25 QfS Qd4
26 Rd6+ Resigns
The reader will have realized by now tha t 4 . . . N f6 1eads to an interesting
and lively game, but he m us t not be put off by the fact that both our
model games ended in a win for White !
Black may indeed think abou t counter-attacking even earlier in the
ga me. The attempt by I e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5? ! [ the Latvian gam bi t ] is dubious
in view of the con tinuation 3 NxeS (the alternatives 3 Bc4 fxe4 4 Nxe5
Qg5 ! 5 d4! Qx g2 6 Qh 5 + g6 7 817+ Kd8 ! 8 Bx g6 Q x h l + 9 Ke2 Qx cl l 0
Nf7 + , or 3 e xf5 e4 4 NeS N f6 5 Be 2 d6 6 Bh 5 + Ke7 7 Nt7 Qe8 8 N xh8
Black counter-a ttacks I 55
Qx h5 lead t o great complications which are unclear) 3 . . Qf6 4 Nc4 !

.
fxe4 5 Nc3 Qg6 (or 5 . . . Qe6 6 d 3 ! e xd3 + 7 Ne3 d xc2 8 Qxc2 c6 9 Bd3
etc.) 6 d3 ! Bb4 7 dxe4 (or 7 Bd2) Qxe4+ 8 Ne3 B�c3 + 9 bxc3 Ne7
I 0 Bc4 ! d6 1 1 0-0 and White stands be tter.
Even worse is (I e4 e 5 2 ND) 2 . . . d5? 3 exd5 e4 4 Qe 2 Qe7 5 Nd4
Qe5 6 NbS Bd6 7 d4 Qe7 8 c4 etc.
However, the Petroff Defence, beginning with the move 2 . . . Nf6 is
perfe ctly viable, as is shown by our next game.
Game 8
Ljubojevic Makaritschev (Amsterdam 1 97 5 )
e4 eS
2 Nf3 N f6
3 NxeS
After the alternative 3 Nc3 Nc6 we have the Four Kni gh ts Game which
can also a rise a fter 1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 ND Nc6 . We have already dis
cussed the 4 Bc4 Nxe4 ! con t in uation , and in fact 4 Bb5 is the usual
move here with two main possibilities for Blac k ;
( I ) 4 . . . Bb4 5 0-0 0-0 6 d3 (White cannot win a pawn b y 6 Bxc6

dxc6 7 Nxe5 in view of 7 . . . ReB 8 Nd3 Bxc3 9 dxc3 N xe4 ) 6 . . .
d6 7 Bg5 ! Bxc3 (or 7 . . . Ne7 9 Nh4! c6 9 Bc4 d 5 1 0 Bb3 Qd6
etc.) 8 bxc3 Qe7 9 Re I Nd8 1 0 d4 Bg4 ! I I h3 Bh5 1 2 g4 Bg6
1 3 d5 c6 !
(2) 4 . . . Nd4 !? 5 Ba4 (there is i mmediate equality after 5 Nxd4 e xd4
6 e 5 d xc3 7 exf6 Qxf6 ! 8 d xc3 e tc . or 5 Nx e5 Qe7 6 f4 N x b 5
56 I B la c k c o u n te r-a ttacks
7 Nxb5 t.l6 followed by 8 . . . Qx4+ ) 5 . . . Bc5 ! 6 N xe5 0-0 ! a gam

leading to interes ting play e.g. 7 Nd3 Bb6 8 e5 Ne8 9 0-0 d6
bit
1 0 exd6 Nf6 ! I I d 7 ! ( I I dxc7? Qd6 ! ) I I . . . Bxd7 1 2 Bxd7 Qx d7
· and 13 . . . Rae8, or here 8 Nf4 ! ? d6 ! 9 d3 Bg4 ! 10 f 3 Nh5 !
I I Nxh5 ( I I fxg4 Qh4+ 1 2 g3 Nxg3) I I . . . Bxh5 1 2 h4 f5 with
an a t t ac k , or finally 8 0-0 d 5 ! 9 Nx d5 Nx d5 I 0 ex d5 Qx d5 (or the
equally goo d . . . Qh4) I 1 Nf4 Qg5 1 2 d3 Bg4 with good a ttacking
prospec t s for Bl a c k in aU cases.
An other i n t eres t ing alternative to the text-move is 3 d4 giving us
an ot he r i m portant variation of Pe trofrs Defence with the following
main l ines :
(I )3 . . . Nxe4 4 Bd3 d 5 5 Nxe5 Bd6 6 0-0 0-0 7 c4 Nc6 (perhaps even
stronger is 7 . . . Bxe5 8 dxe5 Nc6 9 f4 Bf5 ) 8 Nxc6 bxc6 9 c5 Be7
wi t h some spatial advan tage to White.
(2) 3 . . . exd4 4 e5 Ne4 5 Qxd4 (or the more complex 5 Qe2 ! ? Nc5 !
6 Nxd4 Nc6 e tc . ) 5 . . . d5 6 exd6 Nxd6 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 Qf4 g6
9 0-0 Bg7 1 0 Nc3 (after 1 0 Re i + Be6 I I Ng5 0-0 1 2 Nxe6 fxe6
1 3 Qg4 Bd4 ! 1 4 Qxe6+ Kh8 a n d Black has strong pressure for the
pawn ) I 0 . . . Be6 I I Be3 Qf6 with eq ua l i ty .
3 . .. d6
It w a s thought for a l on g time that 3 . . . Nxe4 !? was a blunder because
after 4 Qc2 the black knight cannot move without allowing 4 Nc6+
winning the queen. However, Black can make this line in to a gambi t
which is n ot withou t chances : 4 . . . Qe7 5 Qxe4 d6 6 d4 d xe5 7 dxe5
Nc6 8 Bb5 Bd7 followed by . . . 0-0-0 or 7 Qx e5 Qx e5 8 d x e5 Bf5
followed by . . . Nd7 and . . . 0-0-0. Nevertheless, the text-move is more
popular and definitely more solid.
Black counter-a t tacks f 5 7
4 Nf3 N xe4 (see diagram )

5 d4
There are three alternative moves which are worth consideration.
( 1 ) 5 Qe 2 Qe 7 6 d3 N f6 7 BgS ! Qxe2+ 8 Bxe2. ln an otherwise
symmetrical position White is two tempi u p , but it appears that
Black can j ust about main tain equality with 8 . . . Be ? 9 Nc3 Bd7 !
I 0 0-0-0 Nc6 I I h3 h6 1 2 Be3 0-0-0.
However, instead of 7 . . . Qxe2+ , Black has a bet ter defence with
7 . . . Nbd 7 ! 8 Qxe7+ Bxe7 9 Nc3 c6 1 0 0 -0-0 0.0 etc., or here 8 Nc3
h6 9 Bh4 Qxe 2 + I 0 B xe2 gb ! 1 1 0-0-0 Bg7 1 2 N b S Kd8 1 3 Rhe 1 Re8
etc.
(2) 5 Nc3 Nxc3 6 dxc3 Be7 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 Bf4 Be6 9 Qd2 Qd7 an d
White has a minimal advan tage due to his bet ter posted pieces.
(3 ) 5 c4 (to make . . . dS more difficult) 5 . . . d 5 ! (nevertheless)
6 Nc3 Bc5 ! 7 d4 Bb4 8 Bd2 Nxd2 9 Qxd2 0.0 I 0 cxd S Nd7 I I a3
Re8+ 1 2 Be2 Bxc3 1 3 bxc3 Nb6 1 4 0.0 Nxd5 1 5 c4 Nf6 with
equality.
5 ... d5
The most logical move in order not t o lose any spatial advantage in the
centre. After 5 . . . Be7 6 Bd3 N f6 7 h3 (preven ting . . . Bg4) 0-0 8 0-0
c6 9 c4 and 10 Nc3 White has more space in whlch to manoeuvre, al
t hough Black's position is extremely solid.
6 Bd3 Be7!
Black is well advised not to con tinue too aggressively with the sym
metrical 6 . . . Bd6 which gives rum problems: 7 0-0 0-0 8 c4 Bg4 9 c x d 5
fS 1 0 h3 BhS 1 1 Nc3 e tc . , or here 8 . . . Be6 9 Qe2 Nf6 1 0 cS Be7
I I b4, or 8 . . . c6 9 Qc2 ! etc.
7 0..0 Nc6!
More precise than 7 . . . 0-0 8 Rei with a minimal plus to Whit e . Black
would then do best to play 8 . . . Nd6! followed by 9 . . . Bf5 .
8 Re t Bg4 ! ?
Black could still play . . . N d 6 . The text-move leads t o great compl i ·
cations. White now ge ts nowhere with 9 Bxe4 d xe4 I 0 Rxe4 fS ! o r with
9 c4 Nf6 ! I 0 cxd5 Nxd5 1 1 Nc3 0-0 1 2 Be4 Be6 e t c .
9 c3! f5 !?
Black secures his best posted piece , the knight on e4, but a t the same
time creates certain weak points. Admittedly , White can hardly exploit
these weaknesses by 1 0 c4 ! ? (or 1 0 h3 Bh5 I I c4 !?) since Black can
counter wi th . . . Bh4 ! yielding him promising tactical chances.
1 0 Qb3 !
However, this move creates danger for Black with the threat against the
b-pawn and pressure down the a2-g8 diagonal.
IO . . . 0.0!
Black must proceed boldly , as 1 0 . . . Rb8? 1 1 Nfd2! is good for Whi te .
I f now Whi te captures the b·pawn Black can launch a dangerous attack
by . . . Rf6 1 2 Qb3 Rb8 1 3 Qc2 Rg6 e tc . Of course I I Bxe4? fxe4
1 2 Rxe4? fails to 1 2 . . . Na5 ! In an old game Lasker-Pillsbury White
played the weak I I Bf4? Bxf3 1 2 gxf3 Ng5 I 3 Kg2 Qd7 with a strong
a ttack for Black.
II Nfd2?
This is the decisive error. The fact that such a strong grandmaster pro
duces it should be a salutary lesson to beginners ! Whi te completely
neglects his development and is immediately punished for i t . The correct
move is I I Nbd2 ! threatening I 2 N xe4 fxe4 I 3 Bxe4. In two master
games Black chose I I . . . Kh8 ! ( I I . . . Nxd2 1 2 Nxd2 Rb8 1 3 Qc2 and
14 Nfl is very good for White) with the intention of playing 1 2 . . . Rf6 !
after 1 2 Q x b 7 , and play wen t : (see next diagram .)
( 1 ) Capablanca-Kostitch , 1 9 I 9 : 1 2 Nfl ? Qd7? I 3 N fd 2 ! with advan
tage to White, but it was found after the game that Black missed
the exceUen t chance of playing I 2 . . . Bx f3 ! 1 3 gx f3 N x f2 !
1 4 Kxf2 Bh4+ 1 5 Ng3 f4 with a decisive attack. Thus even the

famous 'chess-machine' could make m istakes !
(2) Karpov-Korchnoi, World Championship Match , 6th Game, 1 974 :
1 2 h3 ! Bh 5 ? 1 3 Qxb 7 ! (now possible ! ) 1 3 . . . Rf6 1 4 Qb3 Rg6
1 5 Be2 ! Bh4 1 6 Rfl ! Bxf3 1 7 Nxf3 Bxf2 + ? 1 8 Rxf2 Nxf2 1 9 Kxf2
Qd6 20 Ng5 ! Rf8 2 1 Qa3 ! Qd8 22 Bf4 h6 23 Nf3 ReS 24 Bd3 Re4 !
2 5 g3 ! and White won . Black should have played 1 2 . . . Bxf3 !
1 3 Nxf3 Rb8 when, al though White has the edge , Blac k 's strong
point on e4 must not be underestimated. This is the possibility
which Ljubojevic was probably trying to avoid, but Black now
carries out a splendid combination.
11 N xf2 ! !
1 2 Kxf2 Bh4+
1 3 g3 f4 ! !
This second piece sacrifice must be declined since 1 4 g x h4? Q x h4 +
1 5 Kfl Bh3 + wins at once .
60 I Black coun ter-attacks
1 4 Kg2 fxg3
1 5 Be4
After 1 5 h xg3 Black would produce the third and decisive sacrifice with
1 5 . . . Bxg3 ! ! 1 6 Kxg3 Qg5 and White is helpless. Howeve r, the bril
liance is not over yet.
15 . . . Bh3+ ! !
j
I f now 1 6 Kxh3 Qd7+ ! 1 7 Kxh4 Rf4 + 1 8 Kxg3 Qg4 is mat e , or here
I 7 Kg2 Rf2 + followed by 1 8 . . . Qh3 concludes the game. So White
has nothing be tter than to give up a rook, delaying the inevitable but no
more.
16 Kg l gxh2+
17 Kxh2 Qd6+ !
18 Kh l Bxe1
19 Qxd5+ Qxd5
20 Bxd5+ Kh8
21 Nf3 Bg3
22 Ngl Bft
23 Nd2 Rae8
24 N e4 Rxe4 !
25 Bxe4 Rf2
26 N f3 Bg2+
27 Kg 1 Bxf3
28 Bxf3 Rxf3
29 Resigns
Chapter 5
What is
positional play ?
After the moves I e4 e S N f3 Nc6 we have so far only considered the

developmen t of t he bishop t o c4, a tactical idea in that the bishop is
aimed a t the weakest poin t in Black's position (t7) which can be seriously
threatened a fter, for example, 3 Bc4 N f6 4 NgS ! ? In fac t , most of the
variations we have examined contain lively t u rns, combinations and
sacrifices.
Play takes on a somewhat different character in general after 3 BbS
the Ruy Lopez opening .
This is the only opening among the open games (be ginning with I e4 c S )
which has maintained i t s popularity alongside t h e modern closed or
semi-closed openings. It is in teresting to ask ourselves why the Ruy
Lopez has been so popular ove r the years that i ts theory is the most
extensive and comprehensive of all opening systems.
The basic difference in the developmen t of the bishop to b S lies in
the fac t that it involves the m uch more s tra tegic idea of a p plying per·
man en t pressure on Black's e-pawn by weakening the defensive possi
bilities of Black's knight on c6 . I t is thus a logical follow-up to the threat
involved in 2 N f3 . Howeve r , the key word is 'pressure', since there is no
immediate thre a t , because 4 Bxc6 dxc6 5 N x e S would be adequately
6 2 I What is positional play?
met by 5 . . . Qd4 ! 6 Nf3 Q xe4 + with a good game for Black (the two
bishops !). Nevertheless, the latent threat will become a reality once
White has guarded his own e-pawn, for instance by d3 . In addition the
m ove 3 Bb5 involves the pin of a piece whenever Black plays . . . d6 to
develop his white square bishop before he has castled . Such elements as
constan t pressure on a certain point in the enemy position or the res
triction of tJ1e mobility of an enemy piece constitute the bricks orchess
st rategy , an d we use the term positional play to denote play based on
iliese elements. So in our study of ilie Ruy Lopez we are going to meet
for ilie first time set-ups which are differen t from the direct tactical
posit i ons we have seen so far. However, let us begin with an example of
an old-fashioned open game arising from this opening.
Game 9
Shamkovitch Averbach (USSR 1 974)
I e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 BbS N f6
A move just as logical here as it was against 3 Bc4, and introducing the
Berlin Defence, one of the oldest methods of defence against the Lopez.
4 0..0!
Of course White can also simply protect his e-pawn e.g.

( 1 ) 4 d3 (now threatening Bxc6 winning the e-paw n ! ) 4 . . . d6 (4 . . .
Bc5 is tactically possible because Whi te cannot win a pawn by
5 Bxc6? dxc6 6 Nxe5?? Qd4 7 Be3 Qxb2 or here 7 . . . Qxe5 8 d4
Qxe4 9 dxc5 Qxg2 etc., bu t it has the strategic disadvantage of
allowing 5 Be3 ! Bxe3 (forced ) 6 fxe3 allowing Whi te to apply
pressure down ilie open f-fl.le. Black can still continue in trappy
fashion with 6 . . . Ne7 ! ? when 7 N xe 5 ?? fails to 7 . . . c6 followed .
by 8 . . . Qa 5 + winning ilie loose knight , (bu t after 7 0-0! c6 8 Bc4
d6 9 Bb3 White stands be tter) 5 c3 g6 ! 6 0.0 Bg7 7 Re I 0-0 8 Nbd2
Bd 7 with even chances. Already we have an example of a closed
position arising from ilie Lopez , which is rarely the case after
3 Bc4 .
(2) 4 Qe2 Be 7 5 0.0 (again there is no win of a pawn after 5 Bxc6 dxc6
6 Nxe5 Qd4 ! ) 5 . . . d6 6 d4 e x d4 7 N xd4 Bd7 (pin and unpin ! ) ·
What is positional play? I 63
8 Bxc6 bxc6 9 Nc3 0-0 wi th equal play . After . . . Re8 White's

queen on e2 is not well place d.
(3 ) 4 Nc3 transposes into the position we know well in the Four
Knigh ts Game.
As we shall see, White does not have to worry about his e -pawn
yet, and his strongest play is in fact to ignore it at the momen t . However,
we must emphasize that after 4 0-0 ! Black's e-pawn is really threatened
e .g. 4 . . . a6? 5 Bxc6 dxc6 6 Nxe5 Nxe4 (or 6 . . . Qd4 7 Nf3 Qxe4??
8 Re i ) 7 Re i Qd4 8 Nf3 ! Qxf2 + 9 Kh l f5 1 0 d3 wins.
4 . .. Nxe4
An important alternative is 4 . . . d6 giving us the Steinitz Defence .
As we mentioned before, Black's knight on c6 is now pinned allowing

White to advance in the centre by 5 d4 ! (threatening not only dxe5 but
also d 5 ) 5 . . . Bd7 ! 6 Nc3 Be7 (Black cah ign ore the threa t on rus
e-pawn for the moment, since after 7 Bxc6 Bxc6 White's e -pawn is also
under a ttack) 7 Re i exd4 (now forced) 8 Nxd4 0.0 (or 8 . . . N xd4
9 Qxd4 Bxb5 1 0 N x b5 a6 I I Nc3 O.Q and Bl ack has a solid but some
what cramped position) 9 Bxc6 ! bxc6 (stronger than 9 . . . Bxc6 10 Nf5 )
1 0 b3 ! R e 8 1 1 B b 2 Bf8 I 2 Q f3 a n d w e have a typical position i n the
solid but passive Stein i tz Defence. Black lacks space in which to man
oeuvre and must play very carefully if he is to avoid a clear disadvan tage .
In the game Pachrnann-Thelan ( 1 94 5 ) Black now made the instructive
mis take of playing 1 2 . . . Ng4? (heading for e5) wruch immediately lost
a pawn to 1 3 Nxc6 ! Nxh2 14 Qxf7+ Kxf7 1 5 N xd8+ Ra8xd8 1 6 Kxh2
e tc .
[See next diagram ] This i s t h e starting position o f the Berlin Defence .
White has two good con tin ua tions both leading to the recapture of his
pawn .
64 I W h a t is positional play?
S Re l
White chooses the simpler of t he t w o . Let us examine the important
a l te rna t ive 5 d4 ( ! ) before we move on .
I t is clearly very risky for Black to open the e-file by 5 . . . exd4 (?) but
it is well worth looking at the instructive continuation : 6 Re I d S (note
the difference between this position and the similar one arising from
the Two Knigh ts, where Whi te 's bishop on c4 is under attack. TI1e Lopez
bishop on bS is clearly much bet ter placed here.) 7 N x d4 . Now Whi te
has two very s t rong threats, 8 f3 winning a piece (aft e r , say , 7 . . . Bd7)
and 8 N xc.:6 winning a t least the exchange (after, say , 7 . . . Be7).
ln fact it is only by the following interesting counter·at tack (the
Riga variat ion) that Black can avoid serious material loss : 7 . . . Bd6 !
8 N xc6 (not 8 f3 Bxh 2 + 9 Kxh 2 Qh4 + , o r even 8 . . Qh4 9 g3 Bxg3 !
.
or here 9 h3 Bxh3 ! ) 8 . . . Bxh2 + ! 9 K.h I ! (after 9 K xh2 Qh4+ I 0 �g l

Qxf2+ Black has perpetual check, and i f 9 K f l Qh4 ! 1 0 Nd4+ c6 e t c . ,
What is positional play? I 6 5
h e has a strong at tack) 9 . . . Qh4 I 0 Rxe4 + ! d xe4 I I Qd8+ ! Qxd8

1 2 N x d H + KxdH 1 3 Kxh 2 lle6 14 Be3 f5 1 5 Nc3 Ke 7 1 6 g4 ! and White
has a clear advantage . Despite the rough material balance of rook and
two pawns against two minor pieces, the bishop on e3 is actively posted
and Black's pawns can be easily blockaded by g5 followed by Kh2-g3 -f4 .
S o after 5 d4 Black has t wo main replies :
( I ) 5 . . . Nd6 6 Bxc6 d xc6 7 d xe5 NfS 8 Q xd 8 + K xd8 9 Nc3 Ke8 1 0
Ne2 Be6 I I N f4 Bd5 1 2 N xd5 c xd 5 1 3 g4 ! N e 7 1 4 Bf4 with an
e dge to Whi t e .
(2) 5 . . . B e 7 ( ! ) 6 Q e 2 ( b e t t e r than 6 Re I Nd6 7 B xc6 d xc6 8 d xe5 Nf5
9 Q xd 8 + Bxd8 1 0 Bg5 Nd4 ! Note that 6 d xe5 d5 ! 7 Nd4 Bd7 trans
poses to a line we have met in the Two Knigh ts) 6 . . . Nd6 7 Bxc6
b xc6 ! 8 d xe 5 Nb7 (an unusual position for the knight but i t can
later be brought into action via cS and e6) 9 Nc3 (or 9 c4 0-0 I 0 Nc3
f6 ! I I Be3 fxe5 1 2 N xe S Qe8 ! followed by . . . d6 with equality)
9 . . . 0-0 w i th two main variations : I 0 Re I Nc5 I I Nd4 Ne6
1 2 Be3 N x d4 1 3 Bxd4 c5 1 4 Be3 d S 1 5 e xd6 Bxd6 1 6 Ne4 Bb 7 !
w i th e quali ty , since 1 7 NxcS? l oses t o 1 7 . . . BxcS 1 8 BxcS QgS .
Or I 0 Nd4 BcS I I Rd I Re8 ! 1 2 QhS (but not 1 2 Nxc6? Qh4
1 3 g3 Qh3 1 4 Nd4 d6 ! ) 1 2 . . . Qe 7 ! 1 3 Nf3 Nd8 ! and the knight
has found another way into the action, maintaining the equilibrium .
Black i s a l i t tle cramped b u t has enough manoeuvring possibil i ties .
5 ... Nd6!
The best move, forcing Whi te's bishop to ret reat .
6 NxeS Be7
7 Bd3(!)
Aiming a t t h e enemy position once Black h a s castled. The o l d continu
ation 7 Nc3 !? has had its sting remove d : 7 . . . Nxb5 {or 7 . . .0-0)
8 N d S 0-0 9 Nxc6 dxc6 1 0 N x e 7 + Kh8 and Whi te has to play I I N xc8,
since II Qh 5 fails to 1 1 . . . Re8 ! 1 2 Q x f7 Nd6 ! [see next diagram. ]
7 . .. Nxe5
This is a l ogical simplification but 7 . . . 0-0 is perfectly playable too
e.g. 8 Nc3 Ne8 ! 9 Nd5 Bf6 1 0 Ng4 d 6 ! e t c .
8 Rxe5 0-0
9 Nc3 Re8(?)
An u n fortunate choice of move after which Black's game starts to slide
66 I What is positional play?
d ownhill. He should play 9 . . . c6 10 b3 Ne8 I I Bb2 dS I 2 QhS and

now he m us t n ot fall into the splendid trap 1 2 . . . g6? I 3 N x d S ! ! gxhS
1 4 Nxe7+ Kg7? (he has to play 1 4 . . . Qxe7 with a pawn down)
I S RxhS + ! Nf6 1 6 Rxh 7 mate. Or here 1 3 . . . cxdS 1 4 Qxh7+ ! ! Kxh7
15 RhS + Kg8 1 6 Rh8 m a te . Or 1 3 . . . QxdS 1 4 Qh6 and Black m us t
give up IUs queen or else I S RhS ! follows. A delightful combination but
Black can defend by 1 2 . . . h6 ! 1 3 Rae ! Bd6 1 4 RSe2 N f6 I S Qh4 Bd7
followed by . . . Re8 with equality.
I 0 Qe2 Bf8(?)
Making mat ters even worse. He might have survived with IO . . . Bf6
I I Rxe8 Qxe8 1 2 NdS Bd8 1 3 b3 Qxe2 1 4 Bxe2 c6 e t c .
I I b3! RxeS
I 2 QxeS Ne8
After this White quickly launches an unexpectedly strong a t tack, but
even after 1 2 . . . Qe8 1 3 Qf4 ! Qe 1 + I 4 Bfl (threatening Bb2) Qe6
Qf3 followed by Bb2 and NdS White is completely on top.
13 Bb2 d6
1 4 Qe4 g6
Or 1 4 . . . N f6 I S Qh4 Be 7 1 6 Nd5 ! etc.
I S Ret Nf6
1 6 Qf3 !
Now much better than 1 6 Qh4? Bd 7 1 7 Ne4 Nxe4 1 8 Qxe4 Qe8 !
e qualising.
16 . . . dS?
W hat is positional play? I 6 7
Losing immediately b u t also 1 6 . . . c 6 i s insufficient after 1 7 Ne4 Nxe4

1 8 Qxe4 (threatening Qd4) 1 8 . . . f6 (or 1 8 . . . Bg7 1 9 Qe8+ Qxe8
20 Rx e8 + Bf8 2 1 Ba3 ! cS 22 Be4 etc.) I 9 g4 ! Bd7 20 Qd4 followed by
2 1 g S . Or here 1 7 . . . Ne8 1 8 N f6 + N x f6 1 9 Bxf6 Qd7 20 Bb2 Bg7
2 1 Bxg7 Kxg7 22 Qe3 Qd8 23 Qe7 ! etc.
1 7 NbS!
By an unusually s imple means White has built u p his final a t tack. Both
1 7 . . . Bg7 1 8 Nxc7 ! Qxc7 1 9 Bxf6 and 1 7 . . . Ne8 1 8 Rxe 8 ! Qxe8
1 9 Qf6 Qe 1 + 20 BfJ:.. win for Whi te.
17 . . . NhS
1 8 ReS !
Threatening b o th 1 9 RxdS and 1 9 Rxh5 ! gxh5 20 Bxh7 + ! Kxh 7
2 1 Qxh 5 + Kg8 22 Qh8 mate.
18 Nf6
1 9 Nxc7! Bg4
20 Qf4 Rc8
Or 20 . . . Qxc7 2 1 Qxf6 Bg7 22 Qxg7+ ! Kxg7 23 Re7+ etc .
2 1 Nxd S ! NxdS
22 Rxd S ! Resigns
(after 22 . . . Qxd5 23 Qf6 wins).
Before we come to Black's usual reply to 3 Bb5 which is 3 . . . a6 , let us

exan1ine three other main defences for Black, 3 . . . Bc5 , 3 . . . f5 and
3 . . . Nd4. Mter 3 . . . Bc5 , the Classical Defence , we have the following
variations :
( I ) 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 ! (sharper and more dange r ous to Black than 5 0-0

0-0 6 d4 Bb6 ! e.g. 7 dxe5 Nxe4 8 Qd5 Nc5 9 Bg5 Ne7 1 0 Qd l Ne4
II Bh4 d5 etc.) 5 . . . exd4 (now 5 . . . Bb6 allows 6 Bxc6 ! bx c6
7 Nxe 5 0-0 8 0-0 ! Nxe4 9 Re i Nd6 1 0 Bf4 , or here 6 . . . dxc6
7 Nxe5 Nxe4 8 Qe2 with the be tter game for Whi te in bot h cases)
6e 5 ! ( the gambit con t in uat ion 6 c xd4 !? Bb4+ 7Nc3 , echoing
the I talian Game , is not so c o nvinc in g here after 7 . . . Nxe4 8 0-0
Bxc3 9 bx�3 0-0 1 0 d 5 ! N xc3 I I Qb3 Nxb5 1 2 Qxb5 Ne7 1 3 d6
cxd6 14 Ba3 Ng6 ! 1 5 Bxd6 Re8 with advan t age to Blac k) 6 . . .
Ne4 (but not 6 . . . Nd5? 7 0-0 0-0 8 cxd4 Bb6 9 Bc4 Nee? 1 0 BgS
Qe8 I I Qb3 c6 1 2 Nbd2 wi t h a clear plus to White in Smyslov
Barcza , 1 95 2) 7 0-0 (there are great c om plica tions after 7 cxd4
Bb4+ 8 K f l ' a6 9 Bd3 ! d S 1 0 exd6 Nf6 ! I I dxc7 Dxc7 1 2 Nc3 , or
here 9 Ba4 b5 1 0 Bc2 d5 II exd6 Nxd6 1 2 d5 Ne 7 1 3 Qd4 BaS
1 4 Qxg7 Rg8 1 5 Qxh 7 BfS 16 Bxf5 N xf5. In both cases White is
a pawn up but is behind in development) 7 . . . d 5 ! (not 7 . . . 0-0?
8 cxd4 Bb6 9 dS Ne 7 1 9 Bd3 f5 I I Nbd2 NcS 1 2 d6 etc., a typical
method of u til ising a st rong c en tre ) 8 exd6 N xd6 {the pa wn sacri
fice 8 . . . 0-0? proved inco rre c t in Ste in -Spass ky , 1 96 1 , after
9 dxc7 Qf6 ! ? 1 0 Bxc6 bxc6 1 1 cxd4 Bd6 1 2 Re i BfS 1 3 Nc3
Rfc8 1 4 Nxe4 Bxc4 1 5 Bg5 ! ) 9 Bxc6+ bxc6 1 0 Re i + Kf8 and
White has a slight plus, al though Blac k c a n pr oba bly hold the
p o s it i o n .
(2) 4 c3 f'5 ! '! A complex and hi t he r t o unclear va ria t ion . We l imit our·
selves to a line wi th which White can achieve a sligh t advant a ge ,
without any risk s : 5 d4 fxe4 (5 . . . exd4 6 e S ! dxc3 7 Nxc3 Nge7
8 0-0 is good for White) 6 Bxc6 dxc6 7 Nxe5 Bd6 8 Qh5 + ! g6
9 Qe2 Qh4 I 0 h3 ! Be6 (the queen is lost after I 0 . . . Nf6? I I g3
Qh 5 1 2 g4 Qh4 1 3 Nf3 !) I I Nd2 Bxe5 1 2 d xe 5 Qg5 ! 1 3 0-0 Bxh3
1 4 Qxe4 e tc .
{3 ) 4 c 3 Nge7 5 0-0 (al so good i s 5 d 4 exd4 6 exd4 Bb4+ 7 Bd2
Bxd2+ 8 Qxd2 d 5 9 exdS NxdS I 0 Bxc6+ bxc6 I I 0-0 0-0 1 2 Nc3
etc.) 5 . . . Bb6 ! 6 d4 e x d4 7 cxd4 d 5 ! 8 exdS NxdS 9 Re i + Be 6
I 0 BgS Qd6 1 1 Nbd 2 ! and in view of the threats of Nc4 and Ne4
(the exposed Black king!) White has bet ter prospects al though the
play remains complicated.
(4) 4 0-0 Nd4 (a fte r 4 . . . N f6 extremely sharp play ensues : 5 NxeS !
Nxe4 ! 6 Nxf7 Kxf7 7 Qh5 + g6 8 QdS + Kg7 9 Bxc6 Re8 1 0 Ba4 c6
I I Qd3 Qh4 1 2 g3 Qh6 1 3 b4 ! Nxf2 1 4 Qc3+ Kg8 I S bxcS ! N g4
1 6 Bb3 + d S 1 7 cxd6+ Be6 1 8 Rf2 ! e tc .) 5 Nxd4 Bxd4 6 c3 Bb6
7 d4 c6 8 Ba4 d6 9 Na3 ! and Black is faced with problems, as is

seen in the following game Ljubojevic-Durao, 1 974 , which is an
excellent e xam ple of how White should con t inue : 9 . . . Bc7 (more
exact is 9 . . . N f6 ! and after I 0 Bg5 to play the sharp I 0 . . . h6
I I Bh4 g5) 1 0 d 5 ! Bd7 1 1 dxc6 bxc6 1 2 Nc4 Qe7 1 3 f4 ! N f6
1 4 fxe 5 dxe5 1 5 b3 ! Bb6+ 1 6 Kh 1 Nxe4 1 7 Ba3 ! Qe6 (after
1 7 . . . Qh4 1 8 Qd3 ! Nf2+ 1 9 Rxf2 Bxf2 20 Nd6 + White has a
decisive a t tack. After the text-move Black threatens 1 8 . . . Ng3 +
1 9 hxg3 Qh6 ma te) 1 8 Qd3 ! f5 (if 1 8 . . . N f2 + ? 1 9 Rxf2 Bxf2
20 Nd6+ Kd8 2 1 Qf3 ! wins) 1 9 Rae ! ! Bc7 20 Rx f5 ! ! Qxf5
2 1 Rxe4 (threatening 2 2 Bxc6 ! Bxc6 2 3 Rxe 5 + ! ) 21 . . . 0-0-0
22 Nd6+ Bxd6 23 Qa6+ Kc7 24 Qxa 7 + Kc8 25 Bb5 ! ! Resigns .
After 2 5 . . . c x b 5 26 Qa6 + Kc7 2 7 B x d 6 is m a t e . O r 2 5 . . . Rdf8
26 Bxd6 Qfl + 2 7 B x f l Rxfl + 28 Qg 1 Rxg l + 29 K x g l and
20 Rxe5 winning the end-game easily with his two extra pawns.
The next interesting defence which has again become popular of late
is 3 . . . f5 ! (the Schliemann De fence). White can hardly accept t he pawn ,
since Black has good play after 4 e x f5 e4 5 Qe2 Qe7 6 Bxc6 b xc6
7 Nd4 N f6 , or here 6 . . . dxc6 7 Nd4 Qe5 8 Ne6 Bxe6 9 fxe6 Bd6
I 0 Nc3 Nf6 . Nor does the passive 4 d3 promise m uch e .g. 4 . . . fxe4
5 dxe4 Nf6 6 0..() d6 7 Qd3 Bg4 , or here 6 Bc4 Bc5 7 0-0 d6 , e t c .
S o the main variation arises after Nc3 ! fxe4 5 Nxe4 d5 ! ? 6 N xe S !
(Black m ust also play carefully after 6 Ng3 e .g. 6 . . . Bg4 ! 7 h3 Bxf3
8 Qx f3 Nf6 9 0-0 Bd6 1 0 Nh 5 ! N x h5 I I Qx h5 + g6 1 2 Qf3 a6 ! 1 3 Ba4
Qh4 ! or here 9 Nh5 Qd6 I 0 N x f6 + gxf6 I I Qh5+ Kd7 I 2 c3 Qe6
1 3 d3 Re8 and the black king reaches safety on c8) 6 . . . d xe4 Nxc6 .
[See next diagram . ] In this wild position Black has three possibilitie s :
( I ) 7 . . . bxc6? 8 Bxc6+ Bd 7 9 Qh5 + Ke7 1 0 Qe 5 + Be6 I I f4 ! (or
70 1 W h a t is posi tional play?
sim ply 1 1 Bxa8 Qxa8 1 2 Qxc7+ Ke8 1 3 0.{) although White is badly
developed) I I . . . Nh6 1 2 Qxe4 ! Rb8 1 3 d4 Kf7 1 4 f5 ! and White
stands we U ( 1 4 . . . Nxf5 1 5 0-0).
(2) 7 . . . QdS 8 c4 Qd6 ! 9 Nxa7+ Bd7 1 0 Bxd7+ Qxd7 1 1 QhS +
(after 1 1 N b S Nf6 1 2 0 .{) & S ! Black's active pieces give him full
compensation for the pawns) I I . . . g6 1 2 Qe 5 + Kf7 1 3 N b S c6
1 4 Qxh8 ! (stronger than 1 4 Qd4 !? Rd8 ! 1 5 Qxd7+ Rxd7 1 6 Nc3
N f6 1 7 0.{) Bc S and despite his two extra pawns White has some
difficul ties to contend with) 1 4 . . . N f6 1 5 Nc3 ReB 1 6 b3 & S
1 7 Qxe8 + Kxe8 1 8 0-0 Qd3 1 9 B b 2 Qxd2 20 Na4 Bd4 .
So far we have been following the game Kavalek-Mohring ( 1 962)
when White could n ow have won by the interesting line 2 1 Rad I !
Bxf2+ 22 Kh 1 Qf4 2 3 Bxf6 Qxf6 24 Rd 1 -e 1 QfS 2 5 Re2 e3
26 Rxe3 + ! etc.
{3 ) 7 . . . Qg5 8 Qe2 Nf6 9 f4 ! (White offers the pawn back so as to
ensure a positional plus after 9 . . . Qxf4 10 d4 Qd6 1 1 NeS + c6
1 2 Bc4 Be6 1 3 Bxe6 Qxe6 1 4 Qc4 ! when Black's pawn on e4 can
become weak in the end-game. But this was his best chance)
9 . . . Qh4+? 1 0 g3 Qh3 1 1 NeS + c6 1 2 &4 & S 1 3 d3 ! Ng4 ! ?
(seems dangerous e .g . 1 4 Q x e4 Nf2 , or 1 4 N x g4 Bx g4 1 S Q x e4 +
Kd7, or 1 4 d4 !? Bxd4 1 S Qxe4 Nxe S ! 1 6 fxeS Bb6 1 7 e6 Rf8.
Howeve r , White has an interesting refu ta t i on which we see in the
following play from another game by the Czech grandmaster living
in exile) 14 Nf7 ! Bf2+ I S Kd l e 3 1 6 Qf3 ! Nxh2 (or 1 6 . . . N f6
1 7 fS ! Bxf5? 1 8 Nd6 + or else Whi t e wins the e-pawn [Nunn
Rumens, 1 97 7 , went 1 7fS Rf8 ! 1 8 Nd6 + K d 7 19 N xc8 Nd5 ! !
20 Ne7 ! ! and eventually ended in a dra w . Translator.] ) 1 7 Qe4+
Kf8 1 8 Bxe3 Bg4+ 1 9 K d 2 Qxg3 ( 1 9 . . . Bf3 20 R xh 2 ! ) 20 Bxf2
Qxf2 + 2 1 Kc3 Re8 22 Ne 5 g6 23 Rxh 2 ! Qxh2 24 Qd4 ! and Wh i te

W t H l in Kavalck-Ljubujcvic, 1 97 5 . So White appears to have good
chances in these main lines.
After 3 . . . f5 !? 4 Nc3 Black can also play 4 . . . Nf6 5 e x f5 ! Bc5
(afte r 5 . . . e4 Whi te has a good game after both 6 Ng5 d5 7 d3 or
6 Nh4 d5 7 d4 ! ) 6 N xe 5 ! 0-0! 7 0.0 Nd4 ! but his attacking chances
seem insufficien t e.g. 8 N f3 c6 9 Nxd4 Bxd4 1 0 Ba4 d5 1 1 Ne2 Bb6
1 2 tl4 . Or 8 Be2 d5 9 Nf3 etc.
Black can also t ry Alekhine 's idea of 4 . . . Nd4 but after 5 Ba4 (or
5 N xe 5 Qf6 6 Nf3 fxe4 7 N xd4 ! Qxd4 8 0-0 c6 9 Ba4 and 1 0 d3 ) 5 . . .
c6 (5 . . . Nf6 6 0-0 Bc 5 7 N xe S 0-0 8 e xf5 ! d S 9 Nf3 is good for Whi te)
6 N xe S Qf6 7 Nf3 fxe4 8 N xd4 ! Q xd4 9 0-0 N f6 1 0 d3 White h as the
edge because the black queen is expose d . All things considered, 3 . . fS !? .
is an interesting idea which is probably unsound.

The third defence begins with 3 . . . Nd4 ( Bird's Defence), an attempt
to simplify the game by exchanging a min or piece . Howeve r , it has
some p ositional disadvantages. The main line runs : 4 N x d4 (Whi te can

also play 4 Bc4 Bc5 5 Nxd4 Bxd4 6 0-0 Nf6 7 c3 Bb6 8 d4 d6 but the
main line achieves more) 4 . . . e xd4 5 0.0 c6 6 Bc4 (6 Ba4 only gives
Whi t e a slight edge after 6 . . . N f6 ! 7 d3 d5 8 Bg5 d xe4 8 dxe4 Be7 )
6 . . . N f6 (after 6 . . . ciS 7 e x d 5 c x d 5 8 Re i + Ne7 9 B b 5 + Bd7
I0 Bxd7+ Qxd7 II Qh5 ! Rc8 1 2 d3 ! Black cannot play 1 2 . . . Rxc 2?
13 N d 2 Rc6 1 4 N f3 Re6 1 5 Rxe6 Qxe6 1 6 Bg5 as his position is fatally
undeveloped. White also has the advan tage after 1 2 . . . Rc6 I3 Nd2
followed by 14 Nf3) 7 Re i d6 8 c3 Ng4 ! ? (or 8 . . . Qb6 9 Qb3 Qxb3
10 Bxb3 dxc3 II bxc3 with a s trong cen t re for White ) 9 h3 Ne5 1 0 d3 !
(much be tter than I0 B f l d3 II f4 Bb6+ 1 2 Kh 1 h5 ! and Black has a
72 1 What is positional play?
dangerous at tack) 1 0 . . . N xc4 I I dxc4 Be6 1 2 b3 White has the be t ter

developmen t and Black's d -pawn is somewhat weak.
Now we come to Black's usual continuation in the Ruy Lope z , 3 . . .
a6 .
Black's idea is to use the fact that White is not at the moment threatening
the e-pawn, since as we have seen 4 Bxc6 d xc6 5 Nxe5? allows 5 . . .
Qd4 e t c . However, this Exchange Variation has been popular of late ,
not of course witll the i dea of capturing the e-pawn , but in order to
achieve a rapid developmen t of White's pieces and later (perhaps in the
e n d ing) exploit the fa.ct that Black has weakened his pawn s t ru c t u re . At
the prese n t time the favoured method of carrying out t his idea is by
5 0-0 (5 Nc3 f6 is all right for Black) with the following possibili ties
which we can only consider in brief outline :
( I ) 5 . . . Bg4 6 h3 h5 ! (after 6 . . . Bxf3 Black woul d lose his main

t rum p-card , the t wo bishops) 7 d3 (or 7 Re i Qf6 8 hxg4 h xg4
9 Nxe 5 ! Qxe5 I 0 Qxg4 N f6 followed by I I . . . 0-0-0 wi th an
a t tack down the h-file t o compensate for t h e l o s t pawn) 7 . . . Qf6

8 Nbd2 Bd6 9 Re i Ne7 1 0 d4 ! Ng6 I I h xg4 (this move was once
considered suicidal , but White plans to give back the material)
1 1 . . . h xg4 1 2 Nh2 Rh2 ! J 3 Qxg4 ! (but not 1 3 Kxh2? Qxf2
and White has no defence to Black's threat of . . . Ke7 and . . .
Rh8 + ) 1 3 . . . Qh4 (if 1 3 . . . Rh4 1 4 Qf5 !) 1 4 Qxh4 Rxh4
1 5 Nf3 Rh5 with a small plus to Whi t e . This assessment requires
some explanati o n . The exchange of White's d-pawn for Black's
e-pawn has given White a 3 : 2 pawn m ajority on t he K-side .
Admit tedly Black h a s a 4 : 3 majority o n the other wing, but the
doubled c-pawn means that it is not so easy to create a passed
pawn from this m ajori ty. Herein lies t he main idea of 4 Bxc6 .
(2) 5 . . . Qd6 (an ar tificial -looking defence of the e-pawn which
however proves e ffective enough) 6 d4 (or 6 d 3 followed by
Nd2-c4, but not 6 Na3 b5 ! and White's knight is misplaced )
6 . . . exd4 7 N xd4 (or 7 Qxd4 Qxd4 8 N xd4 Bd 7 followed by
. . . 0-0-0) 7 . . . Bd7 ! 8 Be3 c5 9 N b3 Qxd l 1 0 Rxd l b6 I I Nc3
0-0-0. If we compare this position with the one from the first
variation, we see t h a t White still has t he better pawn structure but
Black's two bishops are by no means negligible compensation ,
giving him active piece-play to offse t the weakness of his pawn
st ructure . Our a d vice to the reader is clea r : Black must not play
passively in such situation s !
(3 ) 5 . . . Bd6 ( a seemingly logical cont inuation which however turns
out badly ) 6 d4 Bg4 7 dxe5 Bxf3 8 Qxf3 Bxe5 9 Nc3 Nf6 1 0 Bf4 !
with a clear plus to White. Once again Black has voluntarily given
up his bishop pair for no good reason .
(4) 5 . . . f6 6 d4 Bg4 ! (st ronger than 6 . . . e xd4 7 N xd4 c5 8 Nb3
Qxd l 9 Rxd l for if Black now continues with 9 ... Bd7 to prepare
. . . 0-0.0 White can develop his bishop actively on f4 linked with
the positional threat of Nd5 . Or if 9 . . . Bd6 White has I 0 Na 5 !
m a king i t difficult for Black t o develop his Q-side, since a fter
I 0 . . . b 5 b oth I I c4 and I I a4 are strong) 7 c3 (or 7 dxe5 Qxd I
8 Rxd I fxe5 9 Rd3 Bxf3 I 0 Rxf3 N f6 I I Nc3 Bb4 1 2 Bg5 ! or here
9 . . . Bd6 1 0 Nbd2 Nf6 and White h as only a minimal advantage )
7 . . . Bd6 ! (we do n o t recommend the win of a pawn by 7 . . .
exd4 8 cxd4 Bxf3 9 Qxf3 ! Qxd4 I 0 Rd I when Black l oses valua ble
time) 8 h3 Bh 5 9 Be3 Qe7 I 0 Nbd2 0-0-0 I I Re i Nh6 wi th a p
proximate equal i t y . I f now 1 2 Bxh6 Black can use the g-filc for
a ttacking purposes.
74 I W hat is positional play?
Usually after 3 . . . a6 White plays 4 Ba4 .
The keen reader m ay well ask what the point of 3 Bb5 is i f the bishop
can now be driven back to b3 by 4 . . . b 5 t h us reaching the same diag
onal as in the I talian Game. However, there are significant differences.
On b3 the bishop i s safer than on c4. After . . . Na5 it is already guarded
and if Black should later play . . . d5 the bishop will no longer be unde r
attack. If Black n o w cont inues a s i n t he Italian Game with 5 . . . Bc S
6 c3 Nf6 7 d4 e x d4 8 cxd4 (or 8 eS and 9 cxd4) Bb4+ 9 Bd2 Bxd2+
I 0 Nbd2 d S I I e 5 ! w e see the difference, as White's b ishop is n o longer
.
attacke d !
For t h is reason 4 . . . b5 i s only rarely played, with the i dea o f
eliminating t h e bishop b y . . . N a 5 . After 5 Bb3 N a 5 White can gain the
advantage by neither 6 NxeS Nxb3 7 axb3 Qe 7 8 d4 d6 9 Nf3 Qxe4+
nor 6 Bxf7+ !? Kxf7 7 Nxe 5 + Ke 7 ! 8 d4 (or 8 Nc3 Bb7) N f6 ! 9 Qf3
Bb7, b u t 6 0 -0 ! d6 7 d4 Nxb3 8 axb3 f6 9 c4 ! is good for hi m. Thls line
points to another disadvantage of an early . . . b 5 for Black. His Q-side
pawns can easily become weak. In thls case c4 ! a t t acks t he m , b u t usually
a4 is the method used.
This is why White's bishop is left on a4 in t he early stages, so the real
usefulness of 3 . . . a6 lies in t he fac t that . . . bS is always available as a
weapon to be used at a favourable momen t , as we shall see in the
following games.
Came J O
Tatai Portisch (Hastings 1 97 2 )
e4 eS
2 Nf3 N c6
3 BbS a6
4 Ba4 d6
We have already seen that i f Black plays this move without a prelimin
ary . . . a6 , White can obtain a central advantage at once with 4 d4 ,
whereas now 5 d4 is no l onger the best continuation in view of 5 . . . b S !
6 Bb3 Nxd4 7 Nxd4 exd4 when 8 Qxd4 ?? fails t o 8 . . . c 5 ! 9 QdS Be6
1 0 Qc6 + Bd7 I I QdS c4 winning a piece . So Whi te has to choose be
tween the e q ualising line 8 Bd 5 Rb8 9 Bc6+ (9 Qxd4 Bd 7 ! 1 0 c3 N f6
II Bb3 Be7 etc.) 9 . . . Bd7 1 0 Bxd 7 + Qxd7 1 1 Qxd4 N f6 1 2 0-0 Be7
and the gam bi t continuation 8 c3 ! ? Bb7 ! (not only is the play unclear
after 8 . . . dxc3 9 N xc3 N f6 1 0 0-0 Be7 It Re t 0-0 1 2 Bg5 , but White
i f he wishes can draw by repe t i tion with 9 QdS Be6 1 0 Qc6+ Bd7
I I QdS etc.) 9 c x d4 Nf6 ! 1 0 f3 c5 ! II Be3 Be 7 1 2 0-0- 0-0 1 3 d5 Re8
14 Nd2 Nd7 foll owed by . . . Bf6 with good chances for Black.
5 0.0
At the moment this is the most popular move her e . The al ternatives are :
( ! ) 5 c3 Bd7 6 d4 Nge 7 {after 6 . . . Nf6 7 0-0 we transpose to the
given game, and a fter 6 . . . g6 7 0-0 Bg7 8 dxe5 d xe 5 9 BgS Nge7
1 0 Qc l ! h6 1 1 Be3 NaS 1 2 Rdl b5 1 3 Bc2 Nc8 ! 1 4 Nbd2 Nd6 , or
here 8 d5 Nce7 9 Bx d 7 + Qxd7 1 0 c4 in both cases giving Black an
unatt ractive position) 7 Bb3 !? h6 (to prevent NgS) 8 Nbd2 (an
i n teresting t ry is 8 Nh4 ! ? exd4 9 cxd4 Nxd4 ! 1 0 Qxd4 Nc6 I I Qd S
Qxh4 1 2 Qxf7+ Kd8 with equal chances) 8 . . . Ng6 9 Nfl (an idea
we will often meet i n the Lopez, intending to play the knight via
e3 to d 5 ) 9 . . . Be 7 I 0 Ne3 Bg5 ! (to exchange his passively placed
bishop) I I Nxg5 (Black stands well after II 0-0 Bxe3 ! 1 2 Bxe3
0-0 1 3 h3 Re8 , or here II NdS Bxc l 1 2 Rxc l OD 1 3 0-0 Nce 7 )
76 I W h a t is positional play''
I I . . . hxgS 1 2 g3 Nce7 ! defen ding the important d 5 and f5

squares, wi t h an even game.
( 2) . 5 c3 f5 !? (This move is the reason why m os t players pre fer 5 0-0)
6 ex f5 Bxf5 7 0-0 (or 7 d4 e4 8 Ng5 d5 9 f3 e3 ! 1 0 f4 Bd6
1 1 Bxe3 N f6 ! 1 2 0-0 0-0 1 3 Bc2 Bxc2 1 4 Qxc2 h6 1 5 Ne6 Qe7
1 6 f5 Bx h 2 + ! , or here I 0 Bxe3 h6 I I Nh3 Bxh3 with good play
fur Black) 7 . . . Bd3 ! 8 Re i Be7 9 Re3 e4 1 0 Ne l Bg5 ! I I Rh3
N f6 1 2 Nxd3 exd3 1 3 Rxd3 0-0 and Black's good development
com pensates for his pawn minus.
(3 ) 5 Bxc6+ bxc6 6 d4 f6 ! m a in t ai n ing Black's centre with approxi
mate equal i t y . After 7 Be3 Black can either develop by . . . N7g6 ,
Be7 and Bd7 (or Be6), or occasionaUy by : . . g6 and Bg7 .
(4) 5 c 4 ( t o exert more control over t h e centre before playing Nc3 )
5 . . . Bd7 6 Nc3 g6 7 d4 Bg7 8 Bg5 f6 9 Be3 Nh6 ! 1 0 h3 0-0
followed by . . . Nf7 , or here 5 . . . Bg4 6 h3 Bxf3 7 Qxf3 Nf6
8 Nc3 Nd7 9 d3 Be 7 1 0 0-0 0-0 followed by . . . Nc5 .
S .. . Bd7
The sharp va r i a t io n 5 . . . Bg4 6 h3 h5 !? is in teresting, but Black does
no t appea r to h ave sufficien t at tacking chances after 7 d4! b5 8 Bb3
Nxd4 ! ? (H . . . Qf6 ! is better) 9 hxg4 hxg4 1 0 Ng5 Nh6 I I Bd5 etc.
6 d4 !
The prepara t ory 6 c3 gives Blac k more choice , in particular allowing
him to p la y 6 . . . Nge7 when 7 Bb3 (?) Ng6 would have no point since
NgS is im possi ble. The game would proceed along quieter lines : 7 d4
Ng6 8 Be3 Be 7 9 N bd 2 0-0 1 0 Re i Re8, etc.
Nor docs 6 c4 promise m uch, as Black can reply with 6 . . . Nf6 e.g.
7 Nc3 Be 7 8 d4 Nxd4 9 Nxd4 exd4 1 0 Bxd7+ Nxd7 1 1 Qxd4 Bf6 . 0r
7 d4 exd4 H Nxd4 b 5 ! 9 cxb5 Nxd4 1 0 Qd4 axb5 , etc.
6 ... Ngf6
It is wor t h n ot ing that Black cannot achieve as m uch here with 6 . . . b 5
as he did in t h e earlier si tuation (5 d4 b5 ! ) because after 7 Bb3 Nxd4
8 Nxd4 exd4 9 c3 ! dxc3 (or 9 . . . d3 1 0 a4 !) 1 0 Qh5 ! g6 1 1 Qd 5 Be6
1 2 Qc6+ Bd 7 1 3 Qxc3 and White's gambit promises much more success .
7 c3
h as in troduced a new a ttacking method here with
G ra n d m a s t e r Tal
7 Bxc6 ! Bxc6 8 Re I r giving us :
W hat is positional play? I 77
( 1 ) 8 . . . Bxe4 (not of c ourse 8 . . . N xe4 9 d5 !) 9 Nc3 BxD I 0 QxD

winning bac k the pawn with the bet ter game.
( 2 ) 8 . . . Be 7 9 Nc3 ! (9 dxe5 Nxe4 ! ) exd4 I 0 Nxd4 Bd7 I I QD 0-0
1 2 Bf4 and White 's pieces are more actively posteu, al though Black
can probably hold out.
Once again we see that White can often leave his e-pawn un protected in
the Lopez. I n teresting possi bili ties arise after 7 . . . Nxe4 8 Re i :
( I ) 8 . . . f5 9 dxe5 d xe5 1 0 Nbd2 N xd2 1 I N xe 5 ! N xe5 { I I . . . Ne4?
1 2 Qh 5 + ) I 2 Rxe5+ Be7 1 3 Bxd2 and Black 's position is exposed.
(2) 8 . . . Nf6 9 Bxc6 Bxc6 I 0 dxe5 dxe5 1 1 Qxd8+ Rxd8 ( I I . ·. .
Kxd8 1 2 Nxe5 Bd5 1 3 Bg5 ! ) 1 2 Nxe5 Be4 1 3 Nd2 ( 1 3 D ? Bc5 +

1 4 KJ1 J Bf2 ) 1 3 . . . Be 7 1 4 Nxe4 Nxe4 1 5 Bh6 ! a surprising move
which gives White the a dvan tage e .g. I 5 . . . gxh6 1 6 Rxe4 0.0
1 7 Nc6! bxc6 I 8 Rxe7 . Or 1 5 . . . Nxf2 1 6 Bxg7 Rg8 I 7 Bf6 Rd 2
1 8 Kfl Nd8 1 9 Nd3 . Or 1 5 . . . Nxc3 1 6 Bxg7 Rg8 I 7 Nc6 ! bxc6
I 8 Bxc3 .
7 ... Qe7
Strengthening e5 and preparing to develop his dark square bishop on
g7. This bishop woul d be rather passively placed on e7. After 7 . . . Be7
8 Re i 0-0 9 Nhd2 we have :
( 1 ) 9 . ex d4 1 0 cxd4 N b4 I I Bx d7 Qxd7 1 2 d5 and Whi te is better
. .
after both I 2 . . . Nd3 I 3 Re3 and 1 2 . . . c6 I 3 d xc6 b xc6 1 4 Nc4 !

( 2 ) 9 . . Re8 (an interesting pawn sacrifice which White does best to
.
decline , since after I 0 Bxc6 Bxc6 I I dxe5 dx e5 1 2 Nx e5 Bx e4

1 3 N x f7 ! ? Kxf7 1 4 Nxe4 Qxd l 1 5 Ng5+ Kg8 1 6 Rxd l BcS Black's
pieces are so actively placed that White can hardly exploi t his extra
pawn ) 1 0 Nfl ! h6 ( Black prepares to regroup his pieces by . . . Bf8 ,
7 8 I W hat is positional play?
g6 and Bg7 , and so prevents Bg5 ) I I Ng3 Bf8 1 2 h3 Na5 1 3 Bc2 c 5

1 4 c!5 with a typical Lopez position in which White must try to
. at tack on the K-side and Black appears to have sufficient defensive
resources. Compare game 1 2 .
(3 ) 9 . . . Be8 10 Bb3 Nd7 1 1 Nfl Kh8 ! 1 2 Ne3 f6 an d Black has a
passive but soli d posi tion .
8 Re1 g6
9 N bd 2 Bg7
10 N fl 0.0
11 Ne3
Un til recently tllis pawn sacrifice was considered sound, but the game
Shamkovi tch-Pachmann ( 1 9 7 5 ) changed this verdic t : 1 1 . . . e xd4 ! (not
of course I I . . N xe4?? 1 2 Nd5) 1 2 c xd4 Q xe4 ! 1 3 Bc2 Qe7 1 4 Nf5
.
(or 1 4 Nd5 N x d 5 ! 1 5 Rxe7 Nc6 xe7 wi th more than sufficien t compen

sation for the queen) 14 . . . Bxf5 ! (but not 1 4 . . . Qd8? 1 5 Nxg7 Kxg7
1 6 Qd2 ! Ng8 1 7 dS Nce7 1 8 b3 ! followed by Bb2 + wi th a decisive
K-side at tack) 1 5 Rxe7 Nxe7 1 6 BgS Rfe8 1 7 BxfS NxfS 1 8 Bxf6 Bxf6
and despite Black's slight material defici t , the activi ty of his pieces and
pressure on the d-pawn give llim a clear advantage.
So instead of 1 1 Ne3 White should play 1 1 BgS ! when Black has to
counter the positional threat of Ne3-d5. His best reply is 1 1 . . . Qe8 !
an in teresting freeing manoeuvre threa tening 1 2 . . . N xd4 ! 1 3 cxd4
Bxa4 , or here 1 3 Bxd 7 N x f3 + . Play could contin ue 1 2 Bc2 Kh8 !
1 3 Ne3 N g8 1 4 NdS Rc8 and White's pieces will be driven back by
. . . f6 and Nce7.
11 . .. Rae8
Not as strong as I I exd4 and 1 2 . . . Qxe4 , but i t gives Black good play .
1 2 Bc2
A good alternative is 1 2 d5 Nd8 1 3 Bc2 foll owed by 1 4 c4 with the
freer game to White.
12 . . . exd4!
A t the correct moment Black opens up the cen tre . I f now 1 3 cxd4 Qd 8 !
(again n o t 1 3 . . . Nxe4?? 1 4 Nd5) with strong pressure against the
e-pawn e.g. 1 4 d5 Nb4 1 5 Bb l a S ! 1 6 a3 Na6 . After 1 3 Nxd4 Black still
plays 1 3 . . . Qd8 an d Wh ite has no advan tage . Perhaps all this explains
Shamkovitch 's n e r vuus reaction which will lead to his defeat .
1 3 Nd5? Nxd5
14 exdS NeS
1 5 N xd4
If 1 5 cxd4?? Nxf3 + wins. Or 1 5 Nxe5 Bxe5 16 cxd4 Bxh2 + !
15 . . . Qh4!
Suddenly Black goes over to a K-side attack, threatening . . . Ng4 . I f
n ow 1 6 h 3 h e can even play 1 6 . . . Bg4 ! since 1 7 hxg4? Nxg4 wins for
him .
1 6 Rfl Bg4!
1 7 f3 Bc8
An instructive manoeuvre, weakening e3 and threatening at once . . . Nc4
followed by . . . Ne3 .
1 8 Bb3 Re7!
Preparing to double rooks on the e -file and leaving Whi te with surpris
ingly little he can do e xcept weaken his own position , which he now
proceeds to do.
1 9 f4 Ng4
20 Nf3 QhS
21 h3 Nf6!
Even stronger than 21 . . . Ne3 2 2 Bxe3 Rxe3 .
22 c4 Rfe8
23 Ba4 Bd7
24 Bc2
80 I W hat is positional play?
Or 24 Bx d 7 Nxd7 25 Rb I Re2 ! when 26 Ne5 ? fails t o 26 . . . Bxe5

2 7 Qxc2? Bd4+ .
24 bS!
25 Bd3 b xc4
26 Bxc4 8b5!
Removing the protection of White's d-pawn.
27 Qd3 Bxc4
28 Qxc4 QxdS
Now 29 Qxa6 woul d lose the queen after 29 . . Ra8.
.
29 b3 Qxc4
30 bxc4 Ne4
3 1 Rb l Ng3
32 Rfd I ? Ne2+
33 Resigns
(since 33 . . . Nc3 wins the exchange).
Game 1 1
Hubner K orch n oi (Solingen 1 974)
e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 BbS a6
4 Ba4 N f6
The most nat ural developing move. Apart from 4 . . d6 and 4 . . . b 5
.
5 Bb3 N a 5 which we have already considered, l e t u s briefly look a t

three other replies :
( I ) 4 . . . Bc5 is more risky here than on the third move, and White
plays 5 c3 followed by 6 d4 with good play .
(2) 4 . . . Ne7 transposes after 5 c3 ! d6 6 d4 Bd7 into a line we have
just examined (4 . . . d6 5 c3 Bd7 6 d4 Ne7).
(3 ) 4 . . . f5 !? is again rather risky , but another point of 3 . . . a6 is
seen if White now t ries 5 Nc3 ? b5 6 Bb3 b4 ! followed by 7 . . .
fxe4, so White must try another way : 5 d4 ! exd4 (5 . . . fxe4
6 Nxe5 Nf6 7 Bg5 ) 6 e 5 ! (compared with the Falkbeer Counter
gambi t , White is a tempo up with colours reversed !) 6 . . . Bc5 7 0-0
Ne7 8 Bb3 ! d5 9 exd6 Qxd6 I 0 R.e 1 h6 I I Nbd2 b5 1 2 a4 ! and
Black is clearly worse because he can never castle K-side.
What is positional play'! I IS I
5 0..0
We have already discussed this move in an analogous si tuation in the
Berlin Defence, and the same commen ts apply here. Of course W u • .
can also play more quietly and defend his e-pawn. In particular the
move 5 Nc3 is significan tly different from the usual Lopez plan of c3
e .g. 5 . . . Be7 6 0..0 (6 Bxc6 dxc6 7 Nxe5 N xe4! 8 N xe4 Qd4 regains
the pawn) 6 . . . b5 7 Bb3 d6 8 Nd5 and now 8 . . . Bb7 is the simplest
way of equalising e .g. 9 Nxf6 + Bxf6 I O Bd 5 Qc8 I I Re i 0-0 1 2 c3 Na5 !
or (following the game Ney-Portisch , 1 964) 9 Nxe7 Qxe7 1 0 Re i Na5
I I d4 !? Nxb3 I 2 axb3 Nxe4 1 3 Qd3 f5 I 4 c4 0-0 I 5 c xb 5 a xb 5 I6 Rxa8
Bxa8 1 7 dxe5 tlxe5 J 8 Qxb5 ReB with equal play .
After 5 tl3 Black has the usual . . . d6 or else can try 5 . . . b5 6 Bb3
Be 7 7 a4 Bb7 8 c3 d5 9 Nbd2 0-0, or here 7 0-0 d6 8 c3 Na5 9 Bc2 c5
1 0 Re i Nc6 etc.
Another in teresting try for White is 5 d4 when Black's best line is
5 . . . e xd4 6 0-0 Be7 ! 7 e5 (or 7 Re i 0..0 8 e5 Ne8 followed by . . . d6)
7 . . . Ne4 8 N x d4 Nc5 ! 9 Nf5 ! 0 ..0 ! 1 0 Qg4 g6 I I Bxc6 dxc6 1 2 Nxe7+
Qxe7 1 3 Qg3 Re8 ! and despite his weakened K-side position Black can
survive e.g. I 4 Re I Bf5 ! 1 5 Na3 Qe6 etc.
5 . .. Nxe4
The same move we saw in the Berlin De fence, but the si tua tion is very
different here, now that Black has played 3 . . . a6, and we have one of
the most important systems of the Ruy Lopez, the Open Defence.
6 d4!
In practice this is the only move played here , since after 6 Re I Nc5
7 Nxe5 Be7 Whjte cannot avoid the exchange of his light�quared bishop.
82 I What is position al play?
6 ... b5!
The same analysis applies to 6 . . . exd4 7 Re I that we gave in the Riga
Varia tion. I t is in teresting to note that Black cannot use the same
methods as in the Berlin Defence, since both 6 . . . Nd6? and 6 . . .
Be7 (?) 7 Qe2 Nd6 no longer attack the white bishop ! However, this
disadvantage of having played 3 . . . a6 is more than offset by the fac t
that Black can now build up a much more active defence set-up than i n
t h e Berlin Defe nce.
7 Bb3 d5!
Now 7 . . . exd4 would be even worse than on. the previous move : 8 Re 1
dS 9 Nc3 ! Be6 (9 . . . dxc3 I 0 Bxd S ) 1 0 N xe4 d xe4 I I Rxe4 Be7
1 2 Bxe6 fxe6 1 3 N xd4 0-D 1 4 Qg4 with advant age to White in Fischer
Trifunovic, 1 96 1 .
8 dxe5
The al ternative 8 NxeS NxeS 9 dxeS makes the defence easier , as Black
can equalise by guarding his d-pawn with . . . c6 .
8 . . . Be6
A very important position in opening theory which it woul d take a

whole volume to discuss fully . We must limit ourselves to a few main
variations.
The classical treatmen t of the White pieces begins with 9 �3 , not only
preven ting the exchange of White's light-squared bishop but allowing i t
t o take up an a ttacking position o n c 2 . Black is faced with t h e dif[lcult
problem of where to develop his dark-squared bishop. The most active
square is cS b u t 9 . . . B c S has some difficulties at tached t o it. After

1 0 Nbd2 0.0 1 1 Bc2 we have :
( I ) I I . Nxd2 1 2 Qxd2 ! (much st ronger than 1 2 Bxd2? d4 !) 1 2 . . .
. .
Re8 1 3 Qf4 ! g6 1 4 NgS Bf8 I S Qg3 Bg7 1 6 f4 with a promising

attack.
(2) 1 1 . . . N x f2 !? 1 2 Rxf2 f6 1 3 exf6 Qxf6 1 4 Nfl Bxf2 + 1 S Kxf2
Nxe5 1 6 Kg l Rae8 1 7 Be3 Nxf3 + 1 8 Qxf3 Qxf3 19 gxf3 Rxf3
20 Bf2, or here 1 4 Qfl Bg4 I S Qd3 ! and Black appears to have
insufficien t compensation for his slight material loss .
(3 ) 1 1 . . . fS 1 2 Nb3 ! (Black's pieces become active after 1 2 exf6
N x f6 1 3 Nb3 Bb6 1 4 NgS ! Bg4 ! I S Bxh 7+ Kh8 1 6 Qc2 Qd6 ! or
here 1 4 . . . Bc8) 1 2 . . . Bb6 1 3 Nfd4 Nxd4 1 4 N xd4 Bxd4
1 5 Qxd4 ! (after I S cxd4 Black can begin an interesting at tack with
1 S . . . f4 ! 1 6 f3 Ng3 ! I 7 hxg3 fxg3 1 8 Qd3 BfS ! 1 9 QxfS RxfS
20 BxfS Qh4 2 1 Bh3 Qxd4+ 2 2 Kh l Qxe5 23 Bd2 Qxb2 24 Bf4
d4 ! when several games have shown that Black's game is preferable )
I S . . . c5 1 6 Qd l f4 1 7 f3 NgS ! 1 8 a4! b4 1 9 cxb4 c x b4 20 Qd4 !
and White is clearly bet ter.
The alternative 9 . . . Be7 is more solid, as it defends against a possible
K-side at tack. The main variations are :
( I ) I 0 Be3 0-0 1 1 Nbd2 Nxd2 1 2 Qxd2 Qd7 ! 1 3 Bg5 (or 1 3 Rad I
Rad8 1 4 Qd3 Rfe8 ! 1 5 Ng5 BfS ! with even chances) 1 3 . . . Rad8
14 Rfe 1 Bxg5 1 5 N xg5 Bf5 16 Rad 1 Ne 7 an d Black has a solid
set-up.
(2) J 0 Nbd2 0.0! I I Bc2 (or I I Qe2 Nc5 ! 1 2 N d4 Nxb3 ! 1 3 Nd 2xb3
Qd7 1 4 Nxc6 Qxc6 1 5 Be3 Bf5 or 1 5 . . . Qc4) I I . . . f5 1 2 exf6
Nxf6 1 3 Nb3 (after 1 3 Ng5 Black's best is 1 3 . . . Bg4 ! 1 4 f3 Bc8 !
1 5 Re i Bd6 ) Qd7 1 4 Nbd4 N xd4 1 S Nxd4 c 5 1 6 Nxe6 Qxe6 and
White has only a slight pl us. Black can even try here t he sharp
1 3 . . . Bg4 !? 1 4 Qd3 Ne4 ! 1 5 N bd4 Nxd4 1 6 N xd4 Bd6 1 7 h3
(not 1 7 Nxb5? Bxh2+ 1 8 Kxh2 Rf5 ! ) 1 7 . . . Qh4 ! with unclear
complications.
(3 ) 1 0 Re i 0-0 I I Nd4 (the Breslau Variation) I I . . . Nxe5 ! 1 2 f3 Dd6 !
1 3 fxc4 Bg4 1 4 Qc2 c5 1 5 Bxd5 c xd4 1 6 Bxa!:l Qh4 I 7 Rfl d3
1 8 Qf2 Qxf2 + 1 9 Rxf2 Rxa!:l 20 Bf4 Re8 2 1 Bxc S Rxe S , or here
1 4 Qd2 Qh4 I S h3 cS 1 6 Qf2 ! Qxf2 + 1 7 Kxf2 Bd7 ! 1 8 NfS Bxf5
1 9 exfS Nd3+ , and in both cases the hair-raising complications
have resulted in approximate equality.
9 Qe2
84 I What is positional pl ay?
In this game White opts for a modern system int roduced by Keres.
Wh ite's rook on fl is heading for d l to exert pressure on the d-pawn.
9 . .. Be7
Other moves are weaker e .g. 9 . . . Bc S I 0 Be3 Qe7 I I Rd I with some
posi ti�nal advan tage to White. Or 9 . . . NaS I 0 Rd I Be7 I I Nd4 ! cS
1 2 N fS ! BxfS 1 3 BxdS, or the quieter 1 1 c3 Nxb3 1 2 axb3 . Or 9 . . .
NcS 1 0 Rd l N xb3 1 1 a xb3 Qc8 1 2 c4 ! Nb4 ! (White has strong pressure
a ft e r 1 2 . . . dxc4 1 3 bxc4 Bxc4 1 4 Qe4) 1 3 cxbS axbS 1 4 Rxa8 Qxa8
I S Bd 2 ! c6 1 6 Nd4 Na6 1 7 b4 ! and Black has problems on the Q""ide.
10 Rd l 0..0
Often I 0 . . . NcS is played here e .g.
( I ) I I Bxd S ! ? Bxd S 1 2 Nc3 Bc4 ! 1 3 Rxd8+ Rxd8 14 Qe3 b4 I S b3
Be6 ! ( I S . . . bxc3? 1 6 Ba3 ! ) 16 Ne4 Rd l + 1 7 Ne l Nd4 1 8 Bb2
Nxc2 1 9 Qc2 Rxa I 20 Bxa I Nxal 2 1 NxcS BxcS and many
an alyses an d practical games have shown this complex position to
be about even .
(2) I I c4 d4 ! 1 2 cxbS Nxb3 1 3 axb3 axbS 1 4 Rxa8 Qxa8 with a lively
game offering equal chances.
(3 ) 1 1 Be3 0-0 1 2 c4 bxc4 1 3 Bxc4 NaS 1 4 BxdS ! BxdS 1 S Nc3 ! Bxf3
1 6 Qxf3 Qe8 1 7 b4 Na4 1 8 NdS! with good chances to White.
1 1 c4 ! bxc4
12 Bxc4 Bc5(?)
After this move Black's game is difficult . Better is Nilsson's 1 2 . . . Qd7 !
1 3 Nc3 ! (not 1 3 Bxa6 Nc5 ! 1 4 Bc4 Na5 ! or here 1 4 BbS Nb3 e tc .)
·
1 3 . . . N xc3 1 4 bxc3 f6 ! I S exf6 Bxf6 1 6 BgS {or 1 6 NgS BxgS 1 7 BxgS
h6 1 8 Be3 N e S 1 9 Bb3 Qd6 2 0 Rd4 c 5 2 1 Rf4 g5 ! ) 1 6 . . Kh8 ! (the

.
threat was 1 7 Qxe6+ and I H BxdS) 1 7 Bxf6 Rxf6 with even chances.
13 Be3 Bxe3
14 Qxe3 Qb8
1 5 Bb3 ! Qb6(?)
White can now immedia tely increase his a dvantage . However, even a fter
the bet ter I S . . . NaS ! 1 6 Ne I ! N x b3 I 7 axb3 Qb6 1 8 Q xb6 cxb6
White has a winning end-game by 1 9 b4! followed by 20 f3 . [ In his
1 978 match with Karpov, Korchnoi improved here by 1 6 . . . Qb6 !
Translator. ]
16 Qe2 ! Rad8
17 Nc3 N xc3
18 bxc3 QcS
19 h3!
Preven ting . . . Bg4 . Now of course 1 9 . . . Qxc3? fails to 20 Rac l .
19 Bc8
20 Qd3 Re8
2 1 Ret !
With the s trong threa t of 22 Ng5 h6 23 Qh7+ Kf8 24 Nf3 !
21 . . . g6
22 Rad 1 aS ?
Black ought to have avoided the following pin by . . Ne7 ! but even
.
then he stan ds positionally worse in view of his wea k black squares

brought about by the e xchange of the black-squared bishops .
23 Ba4 ! Bd7?
This tactical error in time-trouble set tles mat ters a t once, but Black 's
position is already lost e .g 23 . . . Rf8 24 Nd4! Nxd4 25 cxd4 and Whi te
simply piles up pressure against the c-pawn down the open file .
24 Qxd5! Qb6
Perhaps Korchnoi had overlooked t ha t 24 . . . Qxc3? 25 Rc I Nb4 loses
a piece a fter 26 Qxd7 !
25 NgS ! Rf8
26 Qc4
86 I Wha t is positional play?
Threatening 27 Rxd7! Rxd7 28 Bxc6.

26 NbS
27 Rb l Qa6
28 Qh4 hS
29 Rxb8! Rxb8
30 Bxd7 Qd3
31 Ne4 Rb6
32 e6! fxe6
33 Qe7 QdS
34 N gS Resigns
Game 1 2
Kusmin Averbach (USSR 1 9 74)
e4 eS
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 BbS a6
4 Ba4 Nf6
5 0-0 Be7
Introducing the Closed System of the Ruy Lopez. The immediate point
of the text-move is that it blocks the e-fi!e, which means that 6 Bxc6
Jxc6 7 NxcS N xe4 is now possible. Nevertheless White often plays this
delayed exchange variation wi th the con tinuation : 7 d3 Nd7 ! 8 Nbd 2
0-0 9 N c4 f6 1 0 Nh4 (or 1 0 d 4 e xd4 I I Nxd4 Ne 5 ! 1 2 NxeS fxe5
1 3 N b3 BJ6) Nc5 I I N fS Be6! with an even game.
Before we con tinue with the main l ine , let us briefly consider alte r
nat ive moves for Black here :
{ I ) 5 . . . bS 6 Bb3 Bb7!? (the Archangel Variation) 7 Re i (or 7 d4 ! ?
Nxd4 ! 8 Bxf7+ ! '? Kxf7 9 NxeS + Kg8 I 0 Qxd4 c5 ! a n d I I . . . Qe8 ,
or h e re 8 Nxd4 exd4 9 c 3 Nxe4 ! 1 0 Re l Be 7 I I Qg4 0-0 1 2 Rxe4
Bxe4 I 3 Qxe4 Bf6 1 4 Bd2 Re8 with approximately equal chances
in t his sharp posi tion) 7 . . . BcS 8 c3 d6 9 d4 Bb6 I 0 Bg5 h6
I I Bh4 Qe 7 with good equalising prospects for Black.
(2) 5 . . . d6. N ow White can transpose into a line we know from game
1 0 , or he can try 6 Bxc6+ bxc6 7 d4 Bg4 ! ? (after 7 . . . N xe4 8 Re i
f5 dxe5 dS I 0 Nd4 BcS ! I I c 3 0-0 1 2 f3 NgS 1 3 Kh 1 ! Bxd4
14 BxgS ! QxgS I S c xd4 or 7 . . . Nd7 8 Na3 ! f6 9 Nc4 aS 1 0 Re i
Whi te is be t ter) 8 dxe5 Nxe4 9 exd6 Bxd6 1 0 h3 Bh S I I Nc3 ! fS
1 2 Qd3 0 .0 1 3 Qc4 + Kh8 1 4 N xe4 BxO I S N xd6 B d S 1 6 Qf4

when White has the edge.
6 Rel
The most popular way of defending the e -pawn White plans to advance
in the centre by c3 and d4, so does not defend the e-pawn by Nc3 or
d3 . The al te rnative 6 Qe2 ( the Worrall Variation) is occasionally played
but it is not so s t rung as t11e text-move . White intends to advance in the
centre in conjunction wi th Rd l , but this manoeuvre costs too m uch time,
and in addition has the tac tical disadvantage that if Black continues as
in the present game with 6 . . . bS 7 Bb3 d6 8 c3 NaS 9 Bc2 c S I 0 d4
Qc 7 1 1 Rd I 0-0 1 2 h3 Bd7 Wh i te cannot play 1 3 Nbd2? cxd4 ! when he
loses a pawn because his bishop on c2 is unprotec ted ! So White usually
plays instead, after 6 . . . bS 7 Bb3 d6, the move 8 a4 ( ! ) to use the
placing of his queen in order to a ttack Black's Q�ide pawns. Play can
go 8 . . . Bg4 ! 9 c3 (9 a x b S ? N d4 ) and now:
(I) 9 . . . 0-0 1 0 h3 NaS ! I I Bc2 Be6 ! 1 2 axbS axbS 1 3 d4 Bc4 1 4 Bd3
Bxd3 I S Qxd3 Nc4 1 6 Rxa8 Qxa8 1 7 b3 Qa2 ! etc.
(2) 9 . . . b4 ! ? I 0 Bx f7 + (White obtains even less a fter I 0 Qc4 NaS
I I Qxf7 + Kd7 1 2 NgS Nxb3 1 3 Qxb3 h6! when 1 4 Nf7? fails to
1 4 . . . Qg8 ! ) I 0 . . . Kx f7 1 1 Qc4+ dS 1 2 Q x c6 B x 0 1 3 g x f3 dx e4
14 Qc4+ ( 1 4 fxe4 Qd6 ! ) Qd5 I S Qxd 5 + NxdS 1 6 fxe4 N f4 with
good coun ter play .
6 . . . bS
To avert the threat of Bxc6 . The only viable al ternative is 6 . . . d6

when White can play either 7 c3 Bd7 8 d4 or 7. Bxc6+ bxc6 8 d4 .
7 Bb3
!18 I What is positional play?
7 ... d6
Black can also play the imme diate 7 0-0 8 c3 d5 ! ? (the sharp Marshall
Attack ; H . . . d6 would transpose to the game) 9 exd6 N x d5 (weaker is
9 . . . e4 1 0 dxc6 exf3 I I d4! fxg2 1 2 Qf3 ! Re8 1 3 Bg5 Bg4 1 4 Qxg2
etc.) I 0 Nxe5 Nxe5 I I Rxe 5 c6! (the original i dea here was I I . . . N f6
1 2 d4 Bd6 but White can successfully defend by either 1 3 Re2 Nh5 !
1 4 Qd3 1 or 1 3 Re i Ng4 1 4 h3 Qh4 1 5 Qf3 Nxf2 ! 1 6 Bd2 Bxh3
1 7 gxh3 N xh3+ I 8 Kfl etc.) when the two main l ines run :
( I ) 1 2 d4 Bd6 I 3 Re I Qh4 1 4 g3 Qh3 1 5 Be3 Bg4 I 6 Qd3 Rae8
I 7 N d 2 Re6 ! ( I 7 . . . f5 I 8 f4 g5 ! ? I 9 Qfl Qh 5 20Qg2 !) I 8 Qfl Qh 5
1 9 a4 ! with complex play in whlch White has the bet ter prospec ts.
(2) 1 2 BxdS cxd5 1 3 d4 Bd6 14 Re3 ! Qh4 (or he can try 1 4 . . . f5 ! ?
I S N d2 f4 1 6 Re I QgS ! ) I S h3 Qf4 {after I S . . . g S 1 6 Qf3 Be6
White has the strong 1 7 Qf6 !) 1 6 Re S ! Qf6 1 7 Re I ! Qg6 1 8 Qf3
Be6 1 9 Bf4 ! Bxf4 20 Qxf4 Bxh3 2 1 Qg3 Qxg3 22 fxg3 Be6
23 N d 2 with a small but persisten t end-game advantage to White in
Tal -Spassky, 1 96 5 .
A fter 6 . . . bS 7 Bb3 0-0 Whi te can i f h e wishes avoid the Marshall
At tack by playing 8 a4 with complex but in teresting play e .g. 8 . . . Bb 7
9 d3 (not 9 Nc3 Nd4 ! ) 9 . . . d6 1 0 Bd2 (and now 1 0 Nc3 NaS ! 1 1 Ba2
b4 1 2 Ne2 d S ! 1 3 e x d S b3 ! 14 cxb3 NxdS 1 S NxeS N b4 1 6 Bd2 Nc6
gives Black an excellent game) I 0 . . Qd7 I I Nc3 Nd4 ! 1 2 Nxd4 exd4
.
1 3 Ne2 cS with equality .
8 c3 0-0
'This manoeuvre 8 . . . NaS 9 Bc2 c5 (see later in the gam e ! ) is premature
in view of 1 0 d4 Qc7 I I a4 ! e.g. I I . . . b4 1 2 cx b4 cx b4 1 3 h3 ! 0.0
14 Nbd2 Be6 I S N f l Rfc8 I 6 Ne3 g6 1 7 b3 NhS 1 8 Bb2 e t c .
9 h3
A quie t but useful preparatory move. After 9 d 4 Bg4 ! Black applies
uncomfortable pressure on Whi te's cen tre e .g .
( I ) I 0 d S N a S I I B c 2 c6 ! 1 2 d xc6 Qc 7 ! I 3 N b d 2 N xc6 1 4 Nfl Rad8 I S
h3 { I S Ne3 Bh S 1 6 h3 d 5 ! ) 1 5 . . . Be6 (or even I S . . . Bh 5 1 6 Ng3
Bg6 1 7 Qe2 dS !? 1 8 exdS Bxc2 1 9 d xc6 Bd3 20 Qxe5 Bd6}
1 6 NgS d 5 ! 1 7 Nxe6 fxe6 an d Black's excellen t piece play compen
sates for his weakened pawn structure.
( 2 ) I0 Be3 exd4 (perhaps even st ronger is the sharp c ounter I 0 . . .
u S !? e .g. I I exdS exd4 ! 1 2 BgS dxc3 ! 1 3 Nxc3 NaS etc .) 1 1 · c xd4
Na5 1 2 Bc2 c5 ! (a typical a ttack against Whi te's centre) 1 3 dxc5

( 1 3 d5? Nc4 and 14 . . . Nd7, or 1 3 Nbd2 exd4 14 Bxd4 Nc6
1 5 Be3 d5 !) I 3 . . . dxc5 14 Nbd2 Nd7! with even play .
Or instead White can launch an attack on the Q-side by 9 a4 b4 (if
9 . . . Bb7 1 0 d4 when Black no l onger has . . . Bg4) wi th two possi
bilities :
( 1 ) 1 0 d4 exd4 ! ( 1 0 . . . bxc3 1 1 d xe 5 ! ) I I N x d4 (not I I cxd4 Bg4 ! )
1 1 . . . Bd 7 1 2 N f5 Bxf5 1 3 exf5 with unclear complications.
(2) I 0 aS bxc3 1 1 dxc3 Be6 1 2 Nbd2, or here 1 0 . . . Rb8 1 1 Bc4
Bb7.
9 . .. Na5
Beginning a manoeuvre in troduced in the last century by the Russian
grandmaster Chigorin. Black aims to increase his central control by
. . . c5. At the present time there are many popular alternative defences
of which we merely give a brief synopsis here :,
( I ) 9 . . . Nb8 ( the Leningrad Variation) 1 0 d4 Nbd7 I I Nbd2 (after
1 1 c4 c6 1 2 c 5 ! ? Qc 7 ! 1 3 c x d6 Bx d6 14 Bg5 e x d4 ! 1 5 Bx f6 gx f6
1 6 Nxd4 Nc5 is good for Black, and the sharp move 1 1 Nh4 !? is
best met with I I . . Re8 ! 1 2 N f5 Bf8) 1 1 Bb7 1 2 Bc2 Re8 (or
.
1 2 . . . c5 1 3 d5 c4 1 4 a4 Nc5) 1 3 N f l (another t ry is to play on

the Queen 's wing with 13 b4 Bf8 1 4 a4 ! etc.) 1 3 . . . Bf8 14 Ng3 g6
I 5 Bg5 ! h6 1 6 Bd2 wi th a slight edge to Whi te .
(2) 9 . . . h6 (preparing . . . Re 8 which cannot be played at once because
of 1 0 Ng5 ! etc. 9 . . . Qd7 is another way to do this e .g. 10 d4 Re8
1 1 NgS !? Nd8 1 2 f4 Bb 7 ! ) 1 0 d4 Re8 I I Nbd2 Bf8 1 2 Nfl Bd7
(n ot 1 2 . . . exd4? 1 3 c xd4 Nxe4 1 4 BdS ) 1 3 Ng3 NaS 1 4 Bc2 c S
1 5 b3 R c 8 (or 1 5 . . . c x d4 1 6 c x d4 Rc8 1 7 Bb2) 1 6 dS ! wi th the
freer game to White.
90 I What is positional play ?
(3 ) 9 . . Nd7 (another Chigorin i dea) 1 0 d4 Bf6 I I a4 ! NaS 1 2 Bc2

.
N b6 1 3 b4 ! Nac4 1 4 a S Nd7 I S Bd3 etc.

(4 ) 9 . . . Be6 1 0 d4 ! Bxb3 I I axb3 ! e xd4 1 2 cxd4 Nb4 1 3 Nc3 cS
14 dS Re8 I S Bf4 , or here 1 2 . . . d S ! ? 1 3 e S Ne4 1 4 Nc3 in both
cases with advan tage t o White.
(S ) 9 . . Bb7 1 0 d4 exd4 I I cxd4 d S 1 2 eS Ne4 1 3 Nc3 NaS 14 Bc2
.
fS I S exf6 Bxf6 ! 1 6 N xe4 dxe4 1 7 Bxe4 Bxe4 1 8 Rxe4 c S !

1 9 Rg4 ! cxd4 2 0 BgS ! and White's pieces are actively placed .
1 0 Bc2 cS
1 1 d4
Here, and in most of the above-mentioned variations, White can choose
instead to wai t in the centre with d3 but it is rather passive, and perhaps
White does be tter to play it before h3. At all events Black can quickly
equalise.
11 . .. Qc7
Keres introduced the in teresting I I . . Nd7 when Whi te's best is
.
I 2 Nbd2 cxd4 1 3 cxd4 Nc6 1 4 Nb3 ! aS I S Bd3 ! Ba6 1 6 Be3 .

1 2 Nbd2
N ow 1 2 a4 would be poin tless, since Black can simply play 1 2 . Bd7, . .
a move that would have been bad before castling because o f axbS
followed by b4 !
12 Nc6
Again wit h the idea of e xerting more pressure on the centre t.o force a
decision from White. Let us briefly examine some other i mportant i deas :
( I ) 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3 cxd4 Nc6 1 4 Nb3 a S I S Be3 a4 1 6 Nbd2 with the

be t ter game to White e .g. 1 6 . . . a3 1 7 b xa3 Rxa3 1 8 Qc I ! dS ! ?
1 9 Bb3 ! o r 1 6 . . . N b4 1 7 Bb l a 3 1 8 Qb3 ! QaS ! 1 9 d x e S dxeS
20 Qxa3 Qxa3 2 1 b xa3 Rxa3 22 NxeS Be6 23 Nef3 ! Nxa2 24 Nd4 ,
or 1 6 . . . Be6 ! ? 1 7 d5 (or 1 7 Bb l ! threatening 1 8 dS) Nb4 1 8 B b l
Bd7 1 9 Nfl Rfc8 2 0 Qd2 ! Na6 (20 . . . Nc2 2 1 Re i !) 2 1 Ng3 a3
22 b3 as in the game Geller-Ivkov ( 1 96S ).
(2) 1 2 . . . c xd4 1 3 c xd4 Bb7 14 Nfl Rac8 I S Re2 ! d S ! ? (the sharp
Panoff Attack instead of the quieter I S . . . Nd7 1 6 Ne3 Rfe8
1 7 b3 Bf8 e tc .) 1 6 dxeS N xe4 1 7 Ng3 ! f5 ! 1 8 e xf6 Bxf6 1 9 Nxe4
dxe4 20 Bxe4 Bxe4 2 1 Rxe4 Qc2 (or 2 1 . . . Nc4 22 Qb3 ! )
22 Qd S + Kh8 2 3 Ne l Qc 7 24 Bf4 with advan tage to White.
(3 ) 1 2 . . . Bd7 1 3 Nfl Rfe8 ! (the Yugoslav Variation). White stands
well after 1 3 . . . Nc4 14 Ne3 ! Nxe3 1 S Bxe3 Bc6 1 6 Nd2! followed
by 1 7 f4) 1 4 b3 ! (after the immediate 1 4 BgS Black has 1 4 . . . Nc4
or 14 Ne3 g6 ! an d n ow either 1 5 d xe5 dxeS 1 6 Nh2 ! Rad8 1 7 Qf3
Be6 1 8 Nhg4 Nxg4 1 9 h xg4 Nc4 or 1 5 b4 ! ? cxb4 1 6 cxb4 Nc4
1 7 Nxc4 bxc4 etc.) 1 4 . . . g6 (or 1 4 . . . c xd4 I S cxd4 Nc6 1 6 Bb2)
1 5 BgS ! Kg7 1 6 Ne3 Be6 1 7 Qd2 and White stands be t ter.
13 dS
White has t o release the central tension, since after 1 3 Nfl c xd4 14 cxd4
Nxd4 1 S Nxd4 e xd4 White can not recapture the pawn because his
bishop is hanging. Best play would then go 1 6 Ng3 Nd7 ! 1 7 NfS Bf6
1 8 Bb3 ! Qb6 1 9 Bd S Bb7 ! 20 Bxb7 Qxb7 2 1 Nxd4 dS with rapid
equality . White 's most important al ternative is 1 3 dxeS dxeS 1 4 Nfl
aiming for dS, but a reliable defensive m e thod has been found for
Blac k : 1 3 . . . Be6 1 4 Ne3 Rad8 I S Qe2 c4 ! (in order to activate his
bishop on cS) 1 6 NfS (or 1 6 Ng5 h 6 ! 1 7 N xe6 fxe6 followed by . . . Bc S
with active play for Black) 1 6 Rfe8 1 7 BgS Nd7 with full equality .
13 . . . NaS?
This was once held to be Black's best continua tion , but praxis has
shown that the more modest 1 3 . . . N d 8 ! is preferable , so that the
knight can be used in defence of the k-side. This position is so important
that it deserves a diagram . (See next diagram. )
1 4 a4 Rb8 ! ( I I . . . b4? is a serious error which concedes White the square
c4 . In Capablanca-Vidmar, 1 924 , play wen t 1 S Nc4 aS 1 6 Nf3 xe S !
dxeS 1 7 d 6 with advantage to Whi te . I f here the better I S . . . Nb7
White has 16 aS ! ) and now White has two plans:
( I ) He can close up the Q-side , then devote himself to a K-side attac k :

1 5 c4 ! b4 ! ( i t would b e a stra tegic error to play 1 5 . . . Bd7 1 6 axb5
axb5 1 7 cxb5 Bxb5 1 8 Ba4 ! Ra8 1 9 Re3 ! Nb7 20 Rea3 and White
freed c4 in Stein-Ivkov, 1 964) \ 6 Nfl NeB 1 7 g4 g6 1 8 Ng3 Ng7
1 9 Kh2 f6 20 Rg I N£7 and Black's position is solid enough to hold
ou t with careful defence.
(2) He can try to combine his K-side a ttack with pressure down the
a-file : 1 5 b4 c4 1 6 axb5 axb5 1 7 Nfl Bd 7 1 8 Be3 followed by g4
and Ng3 . This latest method offers more chances, but Black can
probably hold ou t . Now let us return to our main line game and see
how badly Black's knight is placed on aS !
1 4 b3 !
It would be a differen t story a fter the inexact 1 4 Nfl ? Nc4 ! 1 5 Ne3
( n o w 1 5 b3 Nb6 ! is good for Black who can prepare . . . aS followed by
. . . c4 or . . . a4 . If we continue this line with \ 6 g4? h 5 ! Black's last
surprising move gives him an advantage e .g. 1 7 g5 Nh7 and Black can
play . . . g6 followed by . . . f6 opening up the f-file in connection wit h
. . . Q-d7-h3 a n d a strong at tack. O r 1 7 N h 2 hxg4 1 8 h xg4 N h 7 ! 1 9 Be3
Bg5 ! 20 Qd2 Qe7 followed by . . . g6 and . . . Kg7 with play down the
h-file . It is clear that White must not play g4 t oo hastily.) 1 5 . . . N xe3
and Black has exchanged his problem piece .
14 Bd7
1 5 Nfl
(Diagram)
15 Rfb8
Black is still dreaming of a Q-side a ttack, but the idea of . . . b4 followed
W hat is positional play? I 93
by . . . Nb7 and the advance of the a-pawn to open the a-file is too slow.
Black's only chance is to lose two tempi by playing hiS' knight from aS
to d8 via b 7 !
1 6 Bd2 g6
1 7 Ng3
Note that White care fully avoids the impatient 1 7 g4? allowing 1 7 . . .
hS ! as we have already seen. A good al ternative was 1 7 Ne3 planning
Kh2, g4, Qe2 followed by doubling rooks on the g-flle and the advance
of the h-pawn or sacrifice of the knight on fS . Kusmin's plan is simple
and effective : he prepares for f4 opening up the f-file and creating space
for his pieces.
17 . . . Nb7
18 Nh2 Be8
Black vacates d7 for the knight now on f6 . Another possibility is
1 8 . . . Ne8 1 9 f4 Bf6 when White has the choice between 20 fS followed
by Ng4 and Rfl (etc .), or 20 Nf3 ! exf4 2 1 Bxf4 Bxc3 22 eS ! Bxe l
23 Qxe l and despite the material deficit White has strong threats against
Black's weakened K-side .
19 f4 exf4
20 Bxf4 Nd 7
21 Ng4 NeS
22 Rfl Kh8
23 Qd2 Nxg4(?)
This slightly eases White's task, but even after the bet ter 23 . . f6
.
24 Bh6 Qd8 White can force the exchange of knights by doubling his
rooks on the f-flle .
94 f What is positional play?
24 hxg4 f6
Aft e r 24 . . . Bf6 White wins by a typical b reakthrough : 25 e 5 ! Bxe5
26 B x c5 d x e 5 27 Qh6 Qe7 (if 2 7 . . . Kg8 or 27 . . . Qd6 then 28 Ne4)
28 Bxg6 ! or here 25 . . . dxe5 26 Bh6 Bg7 27 Bxg7+ Kxg7 28 QgS e tc.
2 5 Bh6! Nd8
Too late , but even after 25 . . . g5 White wins quickly by 26 e 5 ! dxe5
(if 26 . . . fxe5 2 7 BxgS) 27 Ne4 Qd8 28 NxgS ! fxg5 2 9 Qxg5 ! ! e tc .
2 6 g5 ! fxgS
27 c4! Resigns
Black cannot prevent the invasion by White's queen d own the long
black diagonal e.g. 27 . . . b4 28 Bd3 N£7 2 9 Rx£7 ! Bx£7 30 Qb2+
followed by mate in two moves.
Chapter 6
An adventurous
opening
So far we have dealt excl usively with the reply I . . e S to I . . . e4 , but

.
Black can also con trol d4 by I .cS. The game then takes on a totally
. .
different character. Firs tly , the move does l i t tle to help Black's develop
men t , making way solely for the queen which it is dangerous to b ring
out too early, as we have seen . So the main purpose of I . . . cS is to
control t he cen t re and in particular to give Black a 2 : I pawn advan tage
in the cen tre a fter the usual exchange of Black's c-pawn for Whi te's
d-pawn. In compensa tion White has some . advantage in time and space
which he usually tries to exploit by attacking Black's king, whilst Black
l ooks for coun ter-chances on the Q-side.
I t is clear that a difficult two-e dged struggle is in prospec t , which
means that we can hardly recommend this Sicilian Defence to the
inexperienced beginner . Even the expert has difficulty m astering the
problems which arise from this opening, and it requires above all a
mature defensive technique. The theoretical lines are even more exten
sive than those of the Ruy Lopez. We l imit ourselves to two games and
point to the basic elemen ts of the most important systems .
Game 13
Karpov Korchnoi (Match 1 974 )
e4 cS
2 NO
This a n d Wh ite's next move constitute his usual plan of opening up the
position for rapid development of his forces. Other possibilities are ,
very briefly :
( 1 ) 2 Nc3 ( the Closed System) is a m uch quieter positional approach :
2 . . . Nc6 3 g3 (another good idea is to play 3 f4 and 4 N f3 wai ting
to see which is the best square for the light-squared bishop. Depe n
ding upon Black's play , t his bishop c a n g o to b S , c4 , e 2 or even g2 ,
96 I An adve n t urous opening
an in teresting illustra tion of why knights are usually developed

be fore bishops) 3 . . . g6 4 Bg2 Bg7 5 d3 d6 6 f4 (other common
alternatives are 6 Be3 , 6 Nge2 or 6 Nh3) 6 . . . e6! 7 Nf3 Nge 7
8 0-0 0-0. Blac k has a flexible set-up main taining control o f d 4 and
ready t o answer g4 with f5 !
(2) 2 c3 , a move we know well by now, preparing d4, but of course a
little slower than the main line : 2 . . . N f6 (or the simple but e ffec
tive 2 . . . d 5 3 e x d5 Qxd5 4 d4 Nc6 5 Nf3 Bg4 6 Be 2 e6! 7 0.0
N f6 etc., or here 7 c4 Qd7 8 d5 exd5 9 cxd5 Bxf3 I 0 Bxf3 Nd4
e tc .) 3 e5 Nd5 4 d4 cxd4 5 cxd4 (of late White has also been
experimen ting with 5 Qxd4 ) 5 . . . d6 ! 6 Nf3 Nc6 and Black at tacks
the advanced e-pawn e .g. 7 Nc3 dxe 5 ! 8 dxe5 Nxc 3 , or 7 Bc4 Nb6
8 Bb5 Bd7 e t c .
2 ... d6
3 d4
Another popular method is to e xchange the bishop c urren tly on f1 by
3 Bb5 + Bd 7 (or 3 . . . Nc6 or 3 . . . Nbd7) 4 Bx d7+ Qx d 7 and now
e i ther 5 0-0 Nf6 6 Re i Nc6 7 c3 e6 8 d4 cxd4 9 cxd4 d5 1 0 e5 Ne4
I I Nc3 , or 5 c4 !? Nc6 (it is too risky to win the pawn by 5 . . . Qg4
6 0-0 Qxe4 7 d4 ! e t c . ) 6 d4 cxd4 7 Nxd4 N f6 8 Nc3 g6 9 f3 Bg7
1 0 Be3 e t c .
3 .. . cx d4
4 Nxd4
Possi ble but fai rly innocuous is the alternative 4 Qxd4 Nc6 5 Bb5 Bd7
6 Bxc6 Bxc6 .
4 . .. Nf6
In m ost variations it is wise to play t his m ove as quickly as possible , in
order to prevent the advan tageous c4 by White e .g . 4 . . . g6 5 c4 Bg7
6 Nc3 Nc6 7 Be3 N f6 8 Be2 etc.
5 Nc3 g6
The Dragon variat ion . Black's bishop goes to g7 to defend the K�ide
and apply pressure down the long diagonal . A totally different situation
arises after 5 . . . e6 with a view t o placing t he bishop on the modest e7
square . White can then choose between the quiet continuation 6 Be2
(or else 6 Be3 and placing the other bishop on e 2 , d3 or c4) Be 7 7 0.0
0-0 8 Be3 Nc6 9 f4 ! a6 I 0 Qe l Qc7 I I Qg3 (the Scheveningen variation ,
An adventurous opening I 9 7
where it i s clear that Whi te prepares a K-side at tack b y moves such as

Rae 1 , Bd3 and c5 or f5 , and Black will try for counterplay on the Q-side
by , say , . . . N xd4, b 5 , Bb7 and Rac8) or can opt for 6 g4 ! ? a sharp
move emanating from Keres, the aim of which is to drive Black's knight
away from f6 and gain space e .g. 6 . . . a6 (or first 6 . . . h6 , but not
6 . . . d5? 7 Bb5+ Bd7 8 exd5 N xd5 9 Nxd5 exd5 1 0 Qe2 + etc.) 7 g5
Nfd 7 8 Be3 Be7 9 Qd2 Qc7 I 0 0-0-0 with good chances for Whi te of
exploiting his spatial advantage by a dangerous attack on the king. In
this line Black can often prepare to castle long by . . . b 5 , Bb 7 and N c6
to escape the corning pawn storm on the K-side .
A very popular variation at the moment is int roduced by the move
5 . . . a6 , in ten ding after 6 Be2 the interesting 6 . . . e 5 ! ( bad on the
previous move because of 6 Bb5 + ! when the at tacked knight can go to
f5 ) when play might proceed : 7 N b3 Be7 8 0-0 0-0 9 Be3 Be6 I 0 f4
Qc7 (or perhaps better I 0 . . . exf4 and I I . . . Nc6) I I f5 Bc4 1 2 a4 !
Nbd7 etc.
However, Whi te can int roduce a veritable labyrin th of variations after
5 . . a6 by the sharp l ine (again stemming from Keres !) 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 1'!
.
whose complications are best illustrated if we give the reade r three

typical continuations :
( I ) 7 . . . Qb6 !? 8 Qd2 (after 8 N b3 Black can force off the queens by

8 . . . Qe3 + ) 8 . . . Q x b2 9 Rb I Qa3 I 0 f5 ! Nc6 I I fx e6 fx e6 1 2
N x c6 b x c6 1 3 e 5 ! d x e5 1 4 B x f6 g x f6 1 5 Be 2, or here 9 N b3 Nc6
I 0 Bx f6 gx f6 I I Be2 h 5 1 2 0-0 Qa3 e tc . , both variations which have
been inte nsively analysed over the last twenty years but still remain
unclear !
(2) 7 . . . Be7 8 Qf3 h6 9 Bh4 g5 ! ? 1 0 fxg5 Nfd 7 ! I I N xe6 ! ? (perhaps i t
i s best t o play the quie t 1 1 Bg3) I I . . . fxe6 1 2 Qh5 + Kf8 1 3 Bb5 !
98 I An adven turous opening
when Black can just wriggle out by 1 3 . . . Rh 7 ! 1 4 0..0+ Kg8

I S g6 Rg7 1 6 Rf7 ! Bxh4 1 7 Qxh6 Rxf7 1 8 gxf7+ Kxf7 1 9 Qh7+
Ke8 2 0 Qh8+ Ke7 ! 2 1 Qh7 + with perpetual check (not 21 Qxh4+ ?
Nf6).
(3 ) 7 . . . Nbd7 8 Qf3 Be7 9 0·0-0 Qc7 1 0 Bd3 (or the equally good
1 0 g4 bS I I a3 Rb8 ! 1 2 Bxf6 Nxf6 1 3 gS Nd7 when both sides are
a t tacking) 1 0 . . . bS I I Rhe l Bb7 1 2 NdS ! ? (or 1 2 Qg3 b4 ! ?
1 3 NdS ! e x d S 1 4 e x d S ) 1 2 . . . NxdS 1 3 exdS BxgS 1 4 Rxe6 + !
fxe6 I S QhS + g6 1 6 Bxg6+ etc.
Has the reader had enough of wild complications? We are sorry to
tell him that after S . . . a6 White has a third move 6 Bc4 which can give
rise to a variety of sacri ficial play ! However, let us now continue with
the present game.
6 Be3 Bg7
Not 6 . . . Ng4? 7 BbS + ! winning, but n ow Black is threatening this
move because his king has a flight square on f8 .
7 f3
This is the fashionable move at present. At one time the standard con
tinuation was the quiet 7 Be2 0-0 8 Nb3 (to prevent . . . dS) 8 . . . Nc6
9 0-0 (or 9 f4 Be6 1 0 g4 !? NaS ! I I gS Ne8 1 2 Qd2 Rc 8, or here 1 2 Bd4
Bc4 ! ) 9 . . . Be6 1 0 f4 Qc8 ! which is better than 1 0 . . . NaS 1 1 fS Bc4
1 2 NxaS Bxe2 1 3 Qxe2 QxaS 1 4 g4 ! etc.
7 . .. 0�
8 Qd2 Nc6
Not the premature 8 . . . dS 9 e5 Ne8 1 0 f4 f6 I I 0..0..0 ! etc.
An advent urous opening I 99
9 Bc4
The immectiate 9 0-0-0 allows Black to equalise by 9 . . . d5 ! I 0 exd5
Nxd5 I I Nxc6 b xc6 and now :
( I ) 1 2 Nxd5 cxd5 1 3 Qxd5 Qc7 ! (stronger than 1 3 . . . Rb8 ! ? 1 4 b 3 ! )
1 4 Qxa8 (or 1 4 Qc5 Qb7 I 5 Qa3 Bf5 when the open b- and c-files
ensure Black a good at tac k) 14 . . . Bf5 1 5 Qxf8+ Kxf8 1 6 Rd2
Qb8 I 7 Bb5 h 5 1 8 Rhd I Bxb2+ ! 1 9 Kxb2 Qxb5+ with equality .
(2) 1 2 Bd4 e5 ! 1 3 BcS Be6 ! (a cunning idea , for if now 1 4 Bxf8
Qxf8 Black threatens to win t he queen by . . . Bh6 and after 1 5 Kb l
Rb8! or 1 5 Nxd5 cxd5 followed by 1 6 . . . Rb8 he has a strong
attack) 14 Bc4 Nxc3 ! 1 5 Qxc3 Qg5 + 1 6 Be3 Qxg2 with even
chances.
9 . .. Bd7
Interesting variations arise a fter 9 . . Nxd4 I 0 Bxd4 Be6 I I Bb3 ! QaS
.
1 2 0-0-0, but they favour White e .g. 1 2 . . . b5 {or 1 2 . . . Bxb3 1 3 cxb3

Rfd8 1 4 Kb l Rd7 1 5 g4 Rad8 1 6 Qf2 b 5 1 7 g5 Nh5 1 8 B xg7 N xg7
1 9 Nd5) 1 3 Kb l Rfc8 {or 1 3 . . . b4 14 Nd5 B xd 5 1 5 e xd S Qb5
1 6 Rhe l a5 1 7 Qe2 ! ) 14 R11e l B xb3 1 5 c xb3 b4 1 6 B xf6 b xc3
1 7 Bxc3 Bxc3 (or 1 7 . . . Rxc3 1 8 Re 2 ! ) 1 8 b xc3 Rxc3 1 9 Re3 Rac8
20 Rxc3 Qxc3 2 1 Qxc3 Rxc3 22 Re i and as the game Tal-Portisch
{ 1 96 1 ) showed, Whi te has a won ending, since if the rooks are exchanged
White creates an outside passed pawn by advancing his a- and b-pawns .
A good example of an opening varia tion which leads directly into the
end-ga m e !
10 h4
Or White can t ry 1 0 0-0-0 Rc8 1 1 Bb3 Ne5 and only then 1 2 h4. How
ever, it is im precise to re treat the bishop from c4 immediately because
after I 0 Bb3 N xd4 1 1 Bxd4 b 5 ! 1 2 h4 a5 1 3 a4 bxa4 1 4 Nxa4 e5 !
1 5 Be3 Be6 Black has equalised, since it would then be risky for White
to castle Q-side, the whole point of the 7 f3 se t-up.
10 . . . Rac8
Ano ther very common method is I 0 . . Qa5 1 1 0.{).{) Rfc8 I 2 Bb3
.
Ne5 with two importan t variation s :

{ 1 ) 1 3 h5 ! ? Nxh5 1 4 Bh6 ! ? {Black m ust also b e careful after 1 4 NdS
Qxd2+ I S Rxd2 since only the ret urn o f the pawn by 1 5 . . . Kf8
1 6 g4 Nf6 gives him equality) 1 4 , . . Nd3 + ! 1 5 Kb l Nxb2!
1 00 I An adventurous opening
1 6 Kxb2 Bxh6 1 7 Qxh6 Rxc3 ! ( only this saves Black, as the

obvious I 7 . . . Qxc3 + 1 8 Kb I l oses in surprising fashion) 1 8 g4
Nf6 I 9 g5 NhS :w Rxh5 Rxb3 + ! (not 20 . . . gxh S ? 2 1' Bxf7 + etc.)
2 I axb3 gxh5 2 2 Qxh5 Rc8 with even chances .
(2) 1 3 K b l ( ! ) Nc4 1 4 Bxc4 Rxc4 I 5 Nb3 Qa6 I 6 e 5 ! ? Ne8 1 7 Nd5
K f8 ! or here 1 6 h 5 Nxh5 1 7 g4 Nf6 1 8 e 5 Nxg4 ! 1 9 fxg4 Bxg4
with great complications.
I I Bb3 NeS
Faced with the imminent attack by White consisting of the opening of
the h-ftle by the h5 pawn sacrifice or the pawn storm by g4, Black seeks
coun terplay down the c-fl.le.
12 0-0-0 Nc4
1 3 Bxc4 Rxc4
14 h S !
The only promising continua tion , since after 1 4 g4 Black h a s 1 4 . . .
Qa 5 , threatening . . . Rxc3 , and after 1 4 Kb l he can play 1 4 . . . Qb8
followed by . . bS or Rfc8.
.
14 NxhS
IS g4 Nf6
1 6 Nde2!
This ret reat looks harmless at first sight, but i ts purpose is clear when
we examine the variation 1 6 Bh6? Nxe4 ! 1 7 Qe3 (or 1 7 N xe4 Rxd4
1 8 Qh 2 BeS ! ) 1 7 . . . Rxc3 ! 1 8 b xc3 N f6 I 9 Bxg7 Kxg7 and already
Black has the be tter prospects e .g. 20 Rh2 ! Rg8 ! 2 1 Qh6+ KhS 2 2 Rdh I
Rg7 e t c . Black's typical counterplay is apparent here , the e xchange
An advent urous opening I 1 0 1
sacrifice and tactical pressure down the long black diagonal , both of
which the tex t-move tries t o n ullify .
16 Q a5
1 7 Bh6 Bxh6
18 Qxh6 Rfc8 !
Once again a t tack is the best form of defence , since if White now t ries
to carry out his main threat immediately by 1 9 g5 Nh5 20 Ng3 (or
20 N f4) Black has 20 . . . Rxc3 ' 2 1 N xh 5 Rxc2 + 22 K b l Rxb2 + !
winning. An in teresting idea for White is 1 9 Rd 5 ! ? when both 1 9 . . .
R4 -c5 20 g5! Nh5 2 1 Ng3 and 1 9 . . . Qd8 20 e5 ! ! d x e 5 2 1 g5 Nh5
22 Ng3 win for White. However, Black has 1 9 . . . Qc7 ! when 20 g5
Nh5 2 1 Ng3 again allows 2 1 . . . Rxc3 ! e tc . Jhis explains White's next
modest but powerful move .
1 9 Rd3! R4c5?
This preven tion of g5 turns out to be illusory . Black's only chance lies
in 1 9 . . . Qd8! in order t o b ring the queen to f8 for K -side defencl! .
20 e5? dxe5 2 1 g5 Nh5 22 Ng3 would then fail t o 2 2 . . . Rd4 ! 22 N xh 5
gxh5 23 Rxh5 Bf5 . Aft er 1 9 . . . Qd8 White m ust continue with 20 g5
Nh5 2 1 Ng3 Qf8 ! 22 Qxf8 + K x f8 23 N xh5 gxh5 24 Rxh5 Kg7 2 5 Rd 2
threatening to double rooks on the h-file . However, it seems that Black
can j ust h old the game by 25 . . . Rxc3 ! 26 b xc3 Rxc3 27 f4 Bc6 , or
here 2 7 Rdh2 RxiJ 28 Rxh7+ Kg6 .
20 gS ! ! RxgS
Or 20 . . . NhS 2 1 N f4 RxgS 22 Ncd S ReS 23 N xh5 etc.
21 RdS ! ! RxdS
22 NcxdS Re8
After 2 2 . . . Qd8 23 Nef4 there is no defence to the threat o f 24 N x f6+
exf6 25 Nh5 ! gxh5 26 Rg I + mating.
23 Nef4 Bc6
The threat was 24 Nf6+ exf6 25 Qxh7+ Kf8 26 Nd 5 , and 23 . . . Bc6
fails to 24 Nxe6 fxe6 25 N x f6 + e x f6 26 Qxh 7+ Kf8 2 7 Qxb7 Re7
28 Qb8+ etc.
24 eS!
The final poin t , whereas if instead 24 N xf6 + e x f6 2 5 Nh5 Qg5 + I I
1 0 2 I An adventurous opening
26 Qxg5 fxgS 27 Nf6+ Kg7 28 N xe8+ Bxe8 with an edge to Black in

the en ding. Should Black now capture the e-pawn, his queen can no
longer reach gS in the above line !
24 BxdS
25 exf6 exf6
26 Qxh7+ Kf8
27 Qh8+ Resigns
Game 14
Martinovic Musil (Yugoslavia I 973)
1 e4 cS
2 Nf3 N c6
Another common continuation . Black alternatives will be considered
briefly at the end of this section.
3 d4
White can also t ry the Lopez development by 3 Bb5. Of course there is
no black e-pawn under at tack here , but the Lopez i dea of pinning the
knight on c6 comes in as soon as Black plays . . . d6 . I n addi tion there
are possibilities of weakening Black's pawn s tructure by exchanging the
bishop for knigh t in some lines e.g. after 3 . . . a6 4 Bxc6 dxc6 5 h3 ! e5
6 0-0 ( not 6 NxeS? Qd4) 6 . . . f6 7 d3 Be6 8 a4 ! followed by b3 and
N-a3-c4 White s tands better. He can also answer 3 . . . e6 wit h 4 Bxc6
b xc6 5 0-0 dS Re i plannin g Nc3 , b3 , Ba3 and Na4 a ttackin g the c-pawn !
Black's most popular continuation is 3 . . . g6 4 0-0 Bg7 5 Re l when
Whi te inte nds c3 followed by d4.
3 . .. cxd4
4 Nxd4 Nf6
TI1ere are two o ther popular replies here, 4 . . . g6 and 4 . . . e6. After
the former White has two differen t plans :
( I ) 5 c4 (the Maroczy bin d , con t rolling d 5 ) 5 . . . Nf6 (more common
at presen t than 5 . . . Bg7 6 Be3 Nf6 7 Nc3 Ng4 ! 8 Qxg4 N xd4
9 Qd I Ne6 I 0 Rc I d6 I I Bd3 foil owed by 0-0 and f4 wit h more
space to White) 6 Nc3 Nxd4 7 Qxd4 d6 8 Be3 Bg7 9 Be2 0-0
1 0 Qd 2 , or here 9 f3 0-0 1 0 Qd2 QaS I I Re i Be6 1 2 Nd 5 ! etc.
(2) 5 Nc3 Bg7 6 Be3 N f6 7 Bc4 ! (better than 7 N xc6 bxc6 8 �5 Ng8
followed by . . . f6) 7 . . . Qa S (after 7 . . . 0-0 8 Bb3 d6 9 f3 !
An adventurous opening f I 03
White reaches a posi tion similar to game 1 3 . Note the blunder

8 . . . Na5?? 9 e 5 ! Ne8 1 0 Bxt7+ !! Kxt7 I I Ne6 ! ! K xe6 1 2 Qd 5 +
Kf5 J 3 g4+ ! and Black will be mated. There i s also in teresting play
after 7 . . . d6 8 f3 ! ? Qb6 ! 9 Bb5 Qc7 1 0 g4 ! Bd7, or here 9 N f5 !
Qxb2 J O N xg7+ Kf8) 8 0-0 0-0 9 Bb3 (or 9 Nb3 Qc 7 1 0 Be 2 d6)
9 . . d6 I 0 h3 Bd7 I I f4 etc.
.
After 4 . . . e6 t he reply 5 c4 is not as dangerous in view of 5 . . . Nf6

6 Nc3 Bb4 ! 7 Nxc6 dxc6 ! etc. After 5 NbS (the quiet 5 Nc3 leads into
the Paulsen system which we shall deal with later) 5 . . . d6 some
complex play ensues e.g. 6 Bf4 (6 c4 N f6 7 N l c3 a6 8 Na3 Be7 9 Be 2
0-0 1 0 0-0 b6 I I Be3 Bb7 etc.) 6 . . . e5 7 Be3 N f6 (safer is 7 . . . a6
8 N dc3 Nf6) 8 Bg5 ! Qa 5 + 9 Qd2 Nxe4 1 0 Qxa5 Nxa5 I I Be3 Kd7
1 2 N 1 c3 ! N xc3 1 3 N xc3 followed by 1 4 0-0-0 when White has compen
sation for the pawn in view of the insecure position of the Black king.
5 Nc3 d6
The main alternatives here are :

( J ) 5 . . . e6 (the Sicilian Four Knights Game) 6 Ndb5 (or 6 N x c6
bxc6 7 e5 Nd5 8 Ne4 f5 9 e xf6 Nxf6 1 0 Nd6+ Bxd6 I I Qxd6
Qb6 ! with equality) 6 . _ . Bb4 Bf4 ! ? (after 7 a3 Bxc3+ 8 Nxc3 d S
White's t w o bishops give him a minimal advantage) 7 . . . Nxe4
8 Nc7+ Ke7 (or 8 . . . Kf8 9 Qd3 d5 1 0 0-0-0 Bxc3 I I bxc3 Rb8
1 2 Nxd 5 ! exdS 1 3 Qxe4 ! d xe4 14 Rxd8+ N xd8 I 5 B xb8 with a
small plus to Whi te) 9 Qf3 d 5 I 0 0-0-0 Bxc3 I I bxc3 g5 ! 1 2 Bg3 f5
and now 1 2 c4 or 1 3 Bc4 lead to a double-edged position which is
probably slightly better for Whi te.
(2) 5 . . . e 5 !? 6 Ndb 5 ! (after 6 Nf3 or 6 N b3 t he reply 6 . . . Bb4 gives
Black a comfortable game) 6 . . . d6 7 Bg5 a6 8 Na3 ! {stronger than
8 Bxf6 gxf6 9 Na3 d 5 ! 1 0 Qxd5 Be6 ! I I Qxd8+ Rxd8 1 2 Nc4
Bb4 , or here 1 0 Nxd5 Bxa3 I I bxa3 Be6 1 2 Bc4 Qa5 + , or 10 exdS
Bxa3 I I bxa3 Qa 5 ! 1 2 Qd2 Nd4 with a good game for Black in all
cases) 8 . . . Be6 9 Nc4 Nd4 I 0 Bxf6 gxf6 1 1 Ne3 Rc8 1 2 Bd3 , or
here I 0 . . . Qxf6 1 1 Bd3 ! Qg6 I 2 0-0 Be7 1 3 Ne3 when the weak-
ness of Black's cont rol of d5 gives White a positional plus. (See
next diagram. )
6 Bc4
At one time the move 6 Be2 was very popula r here, leading either to
the Dragon Variation after 6 . . . g6 or to the Scheveningen System
after 6 . . . e6. However, the Soviet gran dmaster Boleslavsky discovered
1 04 I A n advent urous opening
a very good reply in 6 . . . e S ! e .g. 7 Nb3 (7 Nf3 h6! 8 0-0 Be7 9 Re i

0-0 I 0 h3 a6 ! I I Bfl b4 is good for Black whose move . . . h6 pre
vents White gaining cont rol of the dS square by BgS. Play is even
after 7 Nxc6 bxc6 8 Qd3 Be7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 Rd l Qc7 I I BgS Rd8)
7 . . . Be7 8 0-0 (now 8 BgS can be answered by 8 . . . N xe4 ! e .g. 9
Bxe7 N xc3 1 0 Bxd8 N xd l I I R xd l K xd8 1 2 Rxd6+ Ke7, or 9 N xe4
BxgS 1 0 NxgS QxgS I I Qxu6 Qe7. This . . . Nxe4 ! idea occurs in many
lines of the Sicilian Defence) 8 . . 0-0 9 Bf3 (or 9 f4 aS !-H) a4 Nb4 !
.
and Black main-tains control of dS) 9 . . . Be6 I 0 Be3 NaS ! I I NxaS

QxaS 1 2 Qd 2 Rfc 8 ! (to answer I 3 NJS wi th 13 . . . Qxd2 14 Nxe7+
Kf'R winn ing back the piece) 13 Rfd l Qb4 1 4 Rab l h 6 ! and again
Black prevents I S BgS and fully equalises. For this reason 6 Be2 has
practically disappeared from tournament practice, but the other alter-
native 6 BgS (the Rauser System) is still extremely popular e .g. 6 . . . e6
(of late there have been many games where Black has tried 6 . . . Bd7
7 Qd2 Rc 8 , or here 7 . . . Nxd4 8 Qxd4 QaS ) 7 Qd2 ! giving the following
main varia tions :
( I ) 7 . . . Be7 8 0-0-0 0-0 9 f4 ! (after both 9 Bxf6 Bxf6 ! I 0 Nxc6
b xc6 I I Qxd6 Qb6 ! or 9 Ndb S Qa S ! 1 0 B xf6 Bxf6 Black has
good prospects) 9 . . . Nxd4 I 0 Qxd4 h6 I I Bh4 QaS 1 2 Bc4 ! and
White stands better, since after 1 2 . . . Rd8 he can play 1 3 Rhfl !
and 1 4 fS whilst the complications after 1 2 . . . eS 1 3 fxeS dxeS
14 Qd3 Bg4 ! ? I S Rd f1 are in his favou r e .g. I S . . . Rac8 1 6 Bxf6
Bxf6 1 7 Rx f6 gxf6 1 8 Rfl ! followed by NdS.
(2) 7 . . . a6 8 0-0-0 h6 (or 8 . . . Bd7 9 f4 h6 1 0 Bh4 ! Nxe4 ! I I Qe l !
Nf6 1 2 NfS QaS 1 3 Nxd6+ Bxd6 1 4 Rxd6 O.Q-0 I S Rd I !) 9 Be3 !
(afte r 9 Bh4 Black has 9 . . Nxe4 ! 1 0 Qf4 gS !? I I Qxe4 gxh4
.
1 2 Nxc6 bxc6 1 3 Qxc6+ Bd 7 , and after 9 Bf4 Black's b est is

An advent urous opening I 1 OS
9 . Bd7 ! e .g. 10 N x c6 Bx c6 1 1 D d S 1 2 Qe 1 Bb4) 9 . . . Ng4 (or 9

. .
. Bd7 1 0 f4 Rc8 1 1 Kb l b S 1 2 Bb3 Be7 with sharp play) 1 0 Nx c6

. .
b xc6 I I Bc S ! Bb7 1 2 h3 d xcS 1 3 Qxd8+ Kxd8 1 5 h xg4 with the

edge to White (Smyslov-Botvinnik, World Championship, 1 95 7).
6 . .. e6
The most logical reply , setting up a barrier t o Whi te's advanced bishop.
If Black wishes to se t up the Dragon Variation, he m ust not play 6 . . .
g6? a t once because of 7 N xc6 b xc6 8 e S ! when 8 . . . dxeS?? loses the

queen to 9 Bxf7+ ! whilst 8 . . . Nd7 (or 8 . . . Ng4) 9 e6 ! gives Whi te a
strong attack. However, he can play 6 . . . Bd 7 7 O.Q (if Whi te tries to
reach his normal set-up by 7 D Black can advantageously change his
plan by 7 . . e6 !) 7 . . g6 8 h3 (8 Be3 ? Ng4 !) 8 . . . Bg7 9 Be3 0-0 etc .
. .
Perhaps White's most precise reply is 7 Bb3 ! g6 8 D transposing to his

strongest a ttacking line .
7 Be3 Be7
8 �2(!)
Once again White intends to sharpen the game by castling l ong and
using h is K-side pawns to at tack the enemy king. For some time the
most popular method was to castle on the K-si de , due mainly to Fische r's
success with the line, but the game Fischer-Spassky from their 1 9 72
World Championship (righ tly christened Match of the Cen tury) changed
this view. Play went 8 0-0 0-0 9 Bb3 (not at once 9 f4 when 9 . . . d S !
dest roys White's cen tre) 9 . . . a6 1 0 f4 Nxd4 1 1 Bxd4 b S ! 1 2 a3 Bb7
1 3 Qd3 a S ! 14 eS ( 1 4 fS b4! or 1 4 QxbS? Ba6 or 14 NxbS Bxe4 )
1 4 . . . d x e s 1 5 fx eS Nd7 1 6 Nx b S Nc5 ! 17 B x c S B x c S + 1 8 Kh l QgS
with excellent play for Black.
8 a6
9 0-0..0 Qc7
1 0 Bb3 NaS ! ?
Black chooses t he risky plan o f leaving h i s king in t h e cen tre i n order t o
carry o u t a n at tack o n the Q-side without loss of time. A more solid
alternative is I 0 . . . 0-0 I I g4 N xd4 1 2 Rxd4 b S ! (after 1 2 . . . eS
White can play either the q uiet 1 3 NdS N xd5 1 4 Rxd5 Be6 1 5 Rd3 or
the sharp 1 3 Rc4 Qd8 1 4 g5 Ng4 1 5 Rxc8 ! Qxc8 1 6 N d 5 ) 1 3 g5 Nd7
14 Rg l intending Qe 2-h5 and R-g3 -h3 . Here are two e xamples of this
line :
( 1 ) 1 4 . . . Rb8 (?) 1 5 Qh5 ! Rd8 (he should play 1 5 . . . g6) and now in
I 06 I An adventurous opening
the game Janosevic-Gheorghiu ( 1 973), instead of the faulty 1 6 e 5 ?

d S wi th a good game for Black, White should have played 1 6 g6 !
hxg6 1 7 Rxg6 ! with a very s trong at tack, forcing 1 7 . . . Nf8 !
because after 1 7 . . . N f6? the sacrifice 1 8 Rxg7 + ! would prove
decisive.
(2) J 4 . . g6 ! (the correct defence , preven ting QhS which Whi te should
.
therefore have played on the previous move ! ) 1 5 h4 Nc5 1 6 h S

Re8 J 7 Rh I B b 7 1 8 Qg4 ! Bf8 1 9 f3 Rad8 with unclear play i n
Duebali-Kuzmin ( 1 9 74).
1 1 g4 bS
1 2 gS Nxb3+
13 axb3 Nfd7
1 4 NfS ! ?
A typical sacrifice in the Sicilian Defence , along with the even more
frequen t sacrifice on d 5 , and yet the experts, despite a great deal of
analysis and practical testing, are still in doubt regarding their soundness.
14 exfS
I S NdS Qd8
1 6 exfS Bb7
Whi te has only a pawn for the piece but it is clear that Black's defence
is difficult. For instance, he dare n ot castle, in view of 1 7 f6 ! gxf6
1 8 Bd4 ! Re8 1 9 gxf6 Bf8 20 Ne7 + ! Kh8 2 1 Qh5 etc.
1 7 f6 ! gxf6
1 8 Rhe 1 BxdS
1 9 RxdS Rg8
An adventurous opening I I 07
Despite t h e simplification Black i s still faced with serious problems.

Again 1 9 . . . 0-0 fails to 20 gxf6 Bxf6 (or 20 N x f6 2 1 Bh6 Kh8 2 2 RgS )
2 1 Rxd6 t hreatening 22 Qg4 + or 22 Red I .
20 Bf4
The game Boudy-Kuzmin continued in interesting vein : 20 h4 Rg6
2 1 f4 Kf8 22 Kb I Rc8 23 Rd3 fS !? 24 RdS NcS? (he had to play
24 . . . Kg8 ! 25 RxfS Nf8) 25 Qh S ! Kg8 26 RxfS Qd7 27 Rxf7 ! ! Kxf7
28 Qxh7+ Rg7 29 g6 + KJ8 30 Qh8 + Rg8 3 1 g7+ Kf7 3 2 QhS + K xg7
33 fS ! with a winning at tack.
After 20 Bd 2 Black can defend by 20 . . . K£8 2 1 BaS QxaS !
22 Qxe7+ Kg7 etc.
20 . . . Kf8
2 1 QhS Rg7?
Now Black loses to clever play. The correct move was 2 1 . . . QaS !
gaining time and giving his king an escape square on d8.
22 Rxe7! ! Kxe7
23 Bxd6+ Ke6
Or 23 . . . Ke8 24 Qe2 + NeS 25 gxf6 etc. winning.
24 c4! bxc4
25 bxc4 RxgS
26 Qh3+ ! fS
27 f4 !
Black is a whole rook up, but his king is hopelessly exposed. If now
27 . . . Rg l + 28 Kd2 White threatens both 29 Qe3+ and 29 QxfS
mate.
27 Nf6
28 Qe3+ Ne4
29 fxgS Rc8
Or 29 . . . Qxg5 30 Bf4 and 3 1 ReS +
30 b3 Rc6
31 ReS+ Kd7
32 Qa7+ Kc8
33 Qa8+ Kd7
34 Qb7+ Resigns
J 08 f An adventurous opening
Another common sys tem in the Sicilian Defence is the Paulsen System
which arises after I e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 N x d4 a6 .
I f we compare this position with the one arising after 2 . . . Nc6 3 d4

cxd4 4 N xd4 N f6 5 Nc3 d6 , there is the important difference that in
the d i agra m me d position Black's dark-squared bishop has the possi bility
of becoming ac tive on c5 or b4 , as we see in the t wo following variation s :
( I ) 5 Bd3 B c 5 6 N b3 Ba 7. N o w if 7 Qg4? N f6 8 Qxg7? Rg8 9 Qh6
Bxf2 + ! e tc.. , so White m us t continue m ore modestly with 7 0-D
Nc6 8 Qe2 (again i t is wrong to play 8 Qg4 N f6 ! 9 Qxg7 Rg8
I 0 Qh6 Ne 5 ! when Black has excellent play down the g-file) 8 . . .
d6 � BeJ BxeJ and the exchange of his usually passively placed
bishop has eased Black's defence .
(2} 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 Be3 N f6 7 Be2 (after 7 Bd3 d 5 ! Black has freed his
gam e , as was shown by Fischer in his a bove-mentioned ma tch
against Spassky) 7 . . . Qc7 8 0-0 Bb4 ! 9 Na4 !? with great compli-
cations. If now 9 . . . N xe4? I 0 N xc6 Qxc6 I I Nb6 Rb8 1 2 Qd4
Bf8 1 3 Bf3 wins. Also 9 . . . Bd6 1 0 g3 N xe4 gives White a good
game after I I Nxc6 Qxc6 (J I . . . bxc6 1 2 Nb6 Rb8 1 3 Nc4 ! )
1 2 N b6 Rb8 I 3 Bf3 f5 1 4 Bxe4 fxe4 1 5 Qh 5 + g6 1 6 Qh6 Be 5
1 7 Bf4 ! Qc 7 1 8 Qg7 ! etc. (Szabo-Langeweg, 1 964}. Black's usual
reply to 9 Na4 is 9 . . . 0-0 I 0 N xc6 b xc6 I I N b6 Rb8 1 2 N xc8
Rfxc8 I 3 B xa6 Re8 (or Rd8} winning back the pawn , since apart
from . . . Nxe4 he threatens . . . Bd6 at tacking both t he b- and
h-pawns.
Ou r third variation explains why Black has no need to fear the nor
mally s tr ong c2-c4 :
(3 } 5 c4 Nf6 6 Nc3 Bb4 ! 7 Bd2 (after 7 e5? Black has 7 . . . Ne4 !
8 Qg4 N xc3 9 a3 Bf8 I 0 b xc3 d6 ! etc., and after 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 Nc2
An advent urous opening I I 09
Bxc3 + 9 bxc3 uS the game is even) 7 . . . 0-0 ! (better than 7 . . .

Bxc3 8 Bxc3 N xe4 9 Qg4) 8 e5 Bxc3 9 Bxc3 Ne4 ! 1 0 Qc2 d 5
I I e x d 6 Nxc3 1 2 Qxc3 Qxd6 I 3 0-0-0 Q c 7 . O r here 1 0 Bb4 ! ? d 6
I I Q e 2 ( I I ex d6 Qb6) I I . . . Q b 6 I 2 Nc2 N c 6 1 3 a3 d 5 !
Let u s finally consider briefly a few other systems:
(I ) 2 Nf3 N f6 (the Nimzovitch system) 3 e5 (Whi te obtains little from
3 Nc3 Nc6 4 d4 d 5 ! or here 3 . . . d5 4 exd5 N xd 5 5 Bb5+ Nc6 !
6 Ne5 N xc3 9 dxc3 ! etc.) 3 . . . Nd5 4 Nc3 ! e6 5 Nxd5 exd5 6 d4
Nc6 (sharper than 6 . . . d6 7 Bb5 + Bd7 8 Bxd7+ Qxd7 9 0-0 Nc6
1 0 exd6 Bxd6 I I Re i + Ne7 1 2 dxc5 with the edge to White. Or
here 7 Bg5 ! ? Qa5 + 8 c3 cxd4 9 Bd3 dxc3 1 0 0-0 Nc6 ! with com
plex play) 7 dxc5 Bxc5 8 Qxd5 (8 Be2 d4! 9 0-0 d6 I 0 Bg5 Qc7 is
even) 8 . . . Qb6 ! 9 Bc4 Bxf2 + I 0 Ke2 0-0 I I Rfl Bc5 1 2 Ng5 , or
here 8 . . . d6 9 exd6 Qb6 I 0 Bc4! Bxf2+ 1 1 Ke2 0-0 1 2 Rd I ! and
in both cases the complic2tions seem t o favour Whi te.
(2) 2 . . . g6 usually t ransposes t o lines we have already met , but here is
an unusual continuation : 3 c3 Bg7 4 d4 cxd4 5 c xd4 d 5 ! 6 exd5
( Black stands well a fter 6 e S Nc6 followed by . . . Bg4 , or if 7 h3
h5 followed by . . . Nh6) 6 . . . N f6 ! 7 Bb5 + Nbd7 8 u6 (othe rwise
Black simply plays . . . 0-0 and . . . Nb6) 8 . . . e xd6 9 Qe2+ Qe7
with only a minimal advantage to Whi te.
(3 ) 2 . . . a6 3 c4 ! (the natural 3 d4 allows 3 . . . cxd4 4 N xd4 Nf6
5 Nc3 e5 ! 6 Nf3 Bb4 !) 3 . . . Nc6 4 d4 cxd4 5 Nxd4 Nf6 6 Nc3
e5 ! ? 7 Nf5 ! d5 !? 8 cxd5 Bxf5 9 exf5 Nd4 I 0 Bd3 Nxd5 I I 0-0
Bb4 ! 1 2 Be4 ! N x c3 1 3 b x c3 Bx c3 14 Rb l winning back the pawn
wi th the be t ter game in view of his two bi.shops .
(4) 2 b4 ! ? (the Wing Gambit) cxb4 3 a3 d 5 ! 4 exd5 Qxd5 5 Nf3 e5
6 a xb4 Bxb4 7 Ba3 ! Bxa3 8 Rxa3 Nc6 9 Nc3 Qd6 and White has
insufficient compensation for the pawn .
(5) 2 N f3 d6 3 b4 !? cxb4 4 d4 N f6 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nbd2 e6 ! 7 0-0 Nc6
8 Re I Be 7 Black again holds on to his extra pawn wi thout much
danger.
(6) 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3 !? (the Morra Gambit ) 3 . . . dxc3 (or Black can
decline the gambit by 3 . . . d3 or 3 . . . N f6 4 e5 N d 5 , as in the
2 c3 ! line ) 4 N xc3 Nc6 5 Nf3 d6 (a good alternative is 5 . . g6
.
6 Bc4 Bg7 7 0-0 Nh6 ! ) 6 Bc4 e6 7 0-0 Nge 7 ! (st ronger t han 7 . . .
N f6 8 Qe 2 a6 9 Rd l Qc7 1 0 Bf4 Nd7 1 1 Rac l ) 8 Bg5 a6 9 Qe2 h6
I 0 Be3 Ng6 and Black has a solid position .
(7) 2 Ne2 (once again a Keres idea, retaining the possibility of trans
posing if need be into the closed system by g3 ) 2 . . . N f6 (after
I I0 I An adventurous opening
2 . Nc6 or 2 . . . g6 White can go into the usual lines by 3 d4)

. .
3 N bc3 dS 4 e xeS N xdS 5 N xdS QxdS 6 d4 ! e S ! 7 d xes (unclear

complications arise after t he pawn sacrifice 7 Nc3 !? Qxd4 8 Bb5 +
Bd7 9 Qe2 Nc6 , o r here 8 Be 3 Qxd l + 9 Rxd l Bd7 1 0 N d S Kd8)
7 . . . QxeS 8 Bd2 ! Be7 ! (8 . . . Qxb2? 9 Nc3 ! ) 9 Bc3 QgS with
equality .
In conclusion , may we point out that the Sicilian Defence and all the
other lines in which Black answers I e4 with moves other than J • •eS •
are referred to a s half-open games. W e shall deal with these half-open

games in the next chapter.
Chapter 7
Black prepares
. d7-d5
. .
The moves I . . . e5 and I . . . c5 (in reply to I e4) are attempts to

make it difficult for White t o set up the 'ideal ' cen t re with pawns on
e4 and d4 . However, Black can instead allow White to play d2-d4
whilst preparing to counter in the centre by . . . d7-d5 himself. As we
already know, the immediate I . . . d5 has the disadvantage t hat after
2 exd5 Qxd5 3 N c3 Black has to lose time e .g. 3 . . . Qa5 4 d4 N f6
5 N f3 Bg4 6 h3 Bxf3 (6 . . . Bh5 is risky in view of the sharp 7 g4 Bg6
8 Ne5 c6 9 h4!) 7 Qxf3 c6 8 Bd2 Nbd7 9 0-0-0, or he re 4 . . . eS
5 Nf3 ! Bb4 6 B d2 Bg4 7 a3 ! Bd6 (if 7 . . . BxiJ 8 axb4 B x d l 9 RxaS )
8 Bc4 ! e xd4 9 Q e 2+ with a difficult game for Black.
N owadays Black only plays I . . . d5 2 exd5 in connection wi th
2 . . . N f6 ! when White does best n ot t o guard t h e d-pawn e .g. 3 c4 c6 !
4 dxc6? N xc6 when Black has an e xcellent development for his pawn ,
or 3 Bb5+ Bd7 4 Bc4 Bg4 ! 5 f3 Bc8 ! 6 Nc3 Nbd7 7 Qe2 Nb6 8 Qd3 g6
9 Nge2 Bg7 1 0 Ng3 0-0 I I 0-0 a6 1 2 b3 N xc4 1 3 b xc4 b5 with good
counter-play . The correct plan for Whi te is 3 d4 ! N xd5 4 c4 Nb6 5 NIJ
g6 (or 5 . . . Bg4 6 c 5 ! Bxf3 7 QxiJ Nd5 8 Qb3 ! b6 9 Bg5 Qd7 1 0 Nc3)
6 Nc3 Bg7 7 h3 0-0 8 Be3 Nc6 9 Qd2 e 5 1 0 d 5 Ne7 I I g4 ! f5 1 2 0-0-0
with good prospects for White.
For this reason Black prefers systems in which he prepares . . . d7-d5
by I . . . e6 ( the French Defence) or I . . . c6 {the Caro-Kann Defence).
We reach the basic position of the French Defence after l e4 e6 2 d4
d5 : (see next diagram . ) We see at once that Black in one respect has
taken over the initiative, since he is threatening 3 . . . dxe4 , thus forcing
White to guard the pawn , exchange it or advance i t . It is fairly clear that
3 e xd5 exd5 produces a symmetrical position which promises White
little and gives Black an easy development of his pieces . A rapid draw is
the usual outcome after, for example, 4 Bd3 Bd6 5 Ne2 (after 5 N IJ
Bg4, the pin is uncomfortable) 5 . . . Ne7 6 0-0 0-0 7 Bf4 Bf5 etc. I n
fac t the exchange i n the centre allows Black to solve immediately his
main problem in this opening, his passive light-squared bishop blocked
in by his e-pawn !
1 1 2 I B lack prepares . . . d 7-d 5
M uch more interesting problems arise after 3 e5 cramping Black's

position but at the same titne allowing the defence to counter strongly
with an attack on the pawn chain by 3 . . . c 5 !
I f White captures t h e pawn , play can go a s follows : 4 dxc5 Nc6 !

(stronger than the immediate 4 . . . Bxc5 when 5 Qg4 ! sets Black prob
lems) 5 Nf3 BxcS 6 Bd3 f6 ! 7 Qe2 fxe5 8 Nxe5 Nf6 9 Bf4 0-0 1 0 0.0
Ne4 ! I I Nxc6 bxc6 1 2 Be3 Bxe3 1 3 Qxe3 N f6 with equal play . Note
that White's pawn centre has completely disappeared !
White usually protects the d-pawn by 4 c 3 and Black continues t o
apply pressure o n this pawn a s follows : 4 . . . N c6 5 Nf3 Qb6 ! 6 Be2 (if
White tries 6 Bd3 cxd4 ! 7 cxd4 Bd7 ! it is usually connected wi th the
risky pawn sacrifice 8 0-0 ! ? and if 6 a3 c4 ! weakens White's control of
b3 e.g. 7 g3 Na5 8 Nbd2 Bd7 9 Bg2 0-0-0 or here 9 . . Nb3 I 0 Nxb3
.
Ba4 ! although the 6 a3 line has become popular of Ia te) 6 . . . cxd4

7 cxd4 Nge 7 8 Nc3 N f5 9 Na4 Qa5 + I 0 Bd2 Bb4 I I Bc3 Bxc3+
1 2 Nxc3 Qb6 1 3 Bb5 Bd7 and Black has no difficulties. Th.is is a clear
Black pre pares . . . d 7 -<l S I 1 1 3
example of t he importance of Black's pressure on White's d-pawn . The

alternative 3 . . . f6 on the other hand is a wrong idea, because Whlte
can maintain his cen tral position by 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 Bb5 etc.
For all these reasons White usually protects his e-pawn by 3 Nc3 or
3 Nd2. At first sight this latter move seems illogical since it blocks the
line of the dark-squared bishop, but in reality the Tarrasch Variation
3 Nd2 has a sound basis when we examine the line 3 Nc3 N f6 4 e5 N fd7
followed by 4 . . . c5. In this case White cannot play the natural c3
protecting his d-pawn. Hence the idea of 3 N d 2 .
Let us first have a brief glance at the continua tion of the game Spielmann
Havasi ( 1 928 ): 3 . . . dxe4 4 N xe4 (the Rubinstein Variation which can
also arise a fter 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4) 4 . . . Nf6 (bet ter is 4 . . . N d 7 !
5 Nf3 Ngf6 but White stil l obtains a clear advantage in space b y 6 Nx f6+
N x f6 7 Bd3 Be7 8 0-0 0.{) 9 Qe2 b6 1 0 Rd 1 Bb7 1 1 Bg5 followed by
1 2 Ne5 ! ) 5 N xf6 + Qxf6 6 Nf3 (threatening 7 . Bg5) 6 . . . h6 7 Bd3 Nd7
8 0.{) c5 9 c3 Bd6 I 0 Qe2 Qe7 1 1 Ne5 ! a6 1 2 Bf4 N f6 l 3 dxcS Bxc5
14 Rad l Nd5 1 5 Bg3 0-0 1 6 Bb l Re8 1 7 Rfe l Nf6 1 8 Qd3 ! ( still
preven ting . . . Bd7) 1 8 . . . g6 1 9 Bh4 g5 20 Bg3 Kg7 2 1 Ng4 ! ! Rd8
(there is an attractive finish after 2 1 . . . N xg4 22 Qh7+ Kf6 23 Qxh6 + !
Nxh6 24 Be5 mate ! ) 22 Qxd8 Qxd8 23 Rxd8 N xg4 24 h3 Nf6 25 Be5
Be7 26 Re8 Bd6 2 7 Rxc8 ! Resigns.
The important lesson to be learn from t his game is that it is vital for
Black t o avoid passivity , as such a policy only higlllights the weak
aspects of his p ositi o n (the passive light -squared bishop and lack of
space). Since 2 . . . d5 is an at tacking move, Black m us t continue to
play actively or else he will inevitably be swamped . Here are three
variations that can arise after 3 Nd2 :
( I ) 3 . . . c5 4 exd5 exd5 (after 4 . . . Qxd5 the queen is somewhat
1 1 4 I B1a�.:k prepares . . d 7-d 5
.
ex posed ; play might go S Ngf3 ! cxd4 6 Bc4 followed by 0-0, Nb3

and the capture of the d-pawn) 5 Ngf3 (or S BbS+ Bd7 6 Qe2+
Qe7 7 Bxd7+ Nxd7 8 dxcS NxcS 9 N b3 Qxe2+ , or here S . . . Nc6
6 Qe2 + Bc7 ! ? 7 dxcS Nf6 8 Ngf3 0.0 9 N b3 Re8 10 Be3 Ne4
I I 0-0.0 NxcS) 5 . . . Nc6 6 BbS Bd6 ! 7 0.0 Nge7 8 dxcS BxcS
9 Nb3 Bd6 (stronger than 9 . . Bb6 I 0 BgS ! f6 I I Be3 !) I 0 Nbd4
.
0-0 with approximately even play . Black has an isolated d-pawn

but can develop his pieces comfortably .
(2) 3 . . . N f6 4 eS N fd7 5 Bd3 (of late White has been t rying 5 f4 cS
6 c3 N c 6 7 Ndf3 Qb6 8 g 3 cxd4 9 cxd4 Bb4+ I 0 Kf2 ! followed
by I I Kg2) and now the continuation 5 . . b6! is worth considering,
.
with the idea of exchanging the passive light-squared bishop for the
active White counterpart by . . . Ba6 followed by a Q-side at tack.
(3 ) 3 . . . Nc6 ! ? 4 Ngf3 N f6 5 eS Nd7 6 N b3 f6 (an exceptional case
where Black can attack the e-pawn because White has l ost some
time with N-d2-b3) 7 BbS Be7 8 Bf4 0.0 9 exf6 gxf6 wi th sharp
play which favours White just a lit tle .
Now let us turn to the most natural move 3 Nc3 :
The first point to examine is whether Black can immediately con tin ue
his attack on White's centre by 3 . . . c S as in the 3 Nd2 line . The active
position of the knight on c3 ensures White a clear positional advantage
by 4 exdS exdS 5 dxcS d4 6 Bb S+ ! Nc6 7 Bxc6+ b xc6 8 Nce 2 ! BxcS
9 Nf3 QaS + (after 9 . . Bg4 1 0 N fxd4 ! wins a pawn) 1 0 Bd2 Qb6
.
I 1 0-0 with a clear plus e.g. I I . . . Qxb2 1 2 Re i Ne7 1 3 Ne2xd4 ! 0.0

1 4 N b3 Qa3 I S Be l Qb4 1 6 NxcS etc.
Another common continuation is 3 . . . N f6 applying mor.e pressure
on the e-pawn. Here are some possibilities :
Black prepares . . . d 7 -<1 5 I I I 5
( 1 ) 4 e S Nfd7 S f4 (if Wltite wishes to protect his d-pawn by c3 , he has

to lose time by S Nce2. After S . . . cS 6 c3 Nc6 7 f4 fS ! 8 Nf3 Be7
it is difficult for White to develop a K-side a ttack whereas Black's
Q-side a t tack by . . . bS, . . . Qb6 etc. proceeds smoothly) S . . . cS
6 d x cS Nc6 ! 7 Nf3 BxcS 8 Bd3 when Black can play either 8 . . . fS
9 exf6 N x f6 and 1 0 . . . 0-0, or 8 . . . a6 9 Qe 2 Qc7 1 0 Bd2 b S , but
not the blunder 8 . . . 0-0? 9 Bxh7+ ! Kxh7 1 0 NgS + Kg8 1 1 QhS ,
o r here I 0 . . . Kg6 (or Kh6) 1 1 Qg4 with a winning at tack.
(2) 4 BgS Be7 S eS N fd7 6 Bxe7 (or Wltite can try the Alekhine-Chatard
a t tack 6 h4 ! ? when 6 . . . BxgS 7 hxgS QxgS 8 Nh3 Qe7 9 N f4 ! a6
1 0 Qg4 gives White a good attack. Black can try 6 . . . cS 7 Bxe7
Kxe7! 8 f4 Qb6 9 N f3 Qxb2 ! 1 0 NbS Na6 when Wltite's best is
probably to take the draw by repetition with 1 1 Rb I . Not here
7 . . . Qxe7? 8 N b S ! etc. Or Black can play very sharply with 6 . . .
f6 !? 7 Qh S + ! Kf8 ! 8 exf6 Nxf6 9 Qf3 c S b u t not here 7 . . . g6?
8 exf6 ! etc.) 6 . . . Qxe7 7 f4 (now 7 N b S Nb6! 8 c3 a6 9 Na3 c S
1 0 Nc2 Nc6 I I f4 Na4 ! gives Black good co unterplay) 7 . . . 0 {)
8 N f3 c S 9 Bd3 (again threatening the Bxh7+ sacrifice) 9 . . . fS !
1 0 exf6 Rxf6 (or 1 0 . . . Qxf6 I I NgS ! Qxf4 1 2 Bxh7+ Kh8
1 3 Qd2 ! Qxd4 14 Qxd4 cxd4 1 5 NbS etc.) I I Qd2 Nc6 1 2 dxcS
NxcS 1 3 0{) Nxd3 14 cxd 3 ! and Wltite s tands better in view of
Black's passive ligh t-squared bishop.
(3 ) 4 BgS Bb4 !? (the MacCutcheon variation) 5 e S (after 5 Bd3 dxe4
6 Bxe4 Nbd7! 7 Bf3 0{) 8 Ne2 cS Black has equalised) 5 . h6 . .
6 Bd2 ! Bxc3 7 bxc3 Ne4 8 Qg4 ! g6 9 Bd3 ! (stronger t han 9 Be l !?

N xc3 1 0 Bd3 c S ! I I dxcS QaS ! 1 2 Bd2 Qa4 ! 1 3 h3 Ne4 ! ) 9 . . .
Nxd2 1 0 Kxd2 c S I I Qf4 ! and White stands better because Black's
weakness on the dark squares counts for more than the insecure
position of White's king.
1 1 6 I Black prepares . . . d 7-d 5
(4) 4 Bg5 dxe4 (much better here than on the previous m ove ) 5 N xe4
&7 (or 5 . . . Nbd7 6 N x f6 + Nx f6 7 Nf3 c 5 ! ) 6 Bx f6 Bx f6
7 Nf3 Nd7 8 Qd2 0·0 9 0·0-0 b6 1 0 d 5 ! Ne5 (or 1 0 . . . Nc 5
I I N x c5 b x c5 1 2 Bc4 Rb8 1 3 c3 e 5 ) I I Qf4 Ng6 1 2 N x f6 +
Qx f6 1 3 Qx f6 gx f6 with a minimal edge to White .
Now let us h ave a look at t he most popular system for Black.
Game 15
Romm Tatai (Nathanya 1 973 )
I e4 e6
2 d4 dS
3 N c3 Bb4
The Nimzovi tch system which is the m os t popular line a t the moment,
perhaps because its aggressive nature fi ts in with the spirit of the opening.
4 eS
The alternatives are :
( I ) 4 exd5 is just as harmless as on the previous move e.g. 4 . . . exdS
5 Bd3 Nc6 6 Ne2 Nge7 7 0-0 Bf5 ! 8 N g3 ! Bg6 (8 . . . Nxd4 9 N x f5
N d4x f5 I 0 Bxf5 N x f5 I I Nxd5 favours White) 9 Nce2 Qd7 1 0 f4
f5 I I a3 Bd6 with even play .
(2) 4 Bd3 dxe4 5 Bxe4 c5 6 a3 Bxc3+ 7 bxc3 N f6 8 Bd3 0.{) 9 Nf3
Nbd7 1 0 0-0 b6 followed by I I . . . Bb7 with a comfortable game
for Black.
(3 ) 4 Qg4? N f6 5 Qxg7 Rg8 6 Qh6 c5 ! 7 a3 Rg6 8 Qe3 BaS 9 Nf3
Nxe4 1 0 Bd3 f5 with the be t ter game to Black. .
(4) 4 Bd2 ! ? dxe4 5 Qg4 Qxd4 6 0.{).{) Nf6 7 Qxg7 Rg8 8 Qh6 Bf8 !
Black prepares . . d 7 -<1 5 I 1 1 7
.
9 Qh4 Rg4 1 0 Qh3 Qxf2 I I Be 2 ! Qxg2 ! {bu t not I I . . . Rh4??

1 2 Qxh4 ! Qxh4 1 3 g3 winning the queen ! ) 1 2 Bxg4 Qxg4 1 3 Qxg4
Nxg4 1 4 Nxc4 Nd7 and Black's two extra pawns slightly outweigh
the exchange.
(5) 4 a3 Bxc3 + 5 bxc3 dxe4 6 Qg4 N f6 7 Qxg7 Rg8 8 Qh6 c5 9 Ne2
Rg6 10 Qd2 Nbd7 I I Bb2 Qc7 with equality.
(6) 4 Ne2 d xe4 5 a3 Be?! (be t ter than hol ding on t o the pawn by 5 . . .
Bxc3 + 6 N xc3 f5 7 f3 ! exfJ 8 Qxf3 Qh4 + 9 g3 Qxd4 I 0 N b S , or
here 6 . . . Nc6 7 BbS Ne7 8 BgS ! f6 9 Be3 0-0 I 0 Qd2 f5 I I f3 !
and in both cases White has m ore than enough for the pawn)
6 N xe4 N f6 7 N2g3 0-0 8 Be2 Nc6 9 Nxf6 + Bxf6 10 c3 e5 l l d5
Ne7 1 2 c4 Ng6 1 3 NhS BgS ! wit h equality.
4 . .. cS
Again a logical move attacking White's cen tre. Other moves tend to lead
to com plex strategical play :
( I ) 4 . . . b6 (in tending to exchange his problem bishop) S Qg4 Bf8 !
6 Nh3 Qd7 7 N f4 N h6 8 Qh3 Ba6 9 Bxa6 Nxa6 I 0 Be3 with a
slight plus to White.
(2) 4 . . . Qd7 (planning to exchange his ligh t -squared bishop as in the
above line, but an ticipating White 's next move) 5 Qg4 fS ! 6 Qg3 b6
7 Nf3 Ba6 8 Bxa6 N xa6 9 0-0 Bxc3 I 0 bxc3 0.().() with unclear
play .
(3) 4 . . . Ne7 S a3 Bxc3+ 6 bxc3 b6 (if 6 . . . c5 Black t ransposes t o
t h e line he can reach i n t h e game after 6 . . . N e 7 ) 7 Qg4 Ng6 8 h4 !
hS 9 Qd I ! Ba6 (9 . . . Nxh4 I 0 g3 and I I RxhS ) I 0 Bxa6 N xa6
I I Bg5 Qd7 1 2 Ne2 and Black's game is ra ther uncomfortable .
.
5 a3
Forcing Black's bishop to declare its in tentions. The al ternatives are :
{ I ) S Bd2 Ne7 6 N bS (or 6 a3 Bxc3 7 Bxc3 b6 ! and 8 . . . Ba6) 6 . . .
Bxd2+ 7 Qxd2 0-0 8 c3 NfS 9 Bd3 Bd7 1 0 N f3 BxbS I I BxbS
Qb6 with equality.
(2) 5 Qg4 !? Ne7 6 dxc5 N bc6 ! 7 Bd2 0 -0 8 NfJ fS ! 9 Qg3 (9 e x f6
Rxf6 and . . . e 5 ) 9 . . . d4 I 0 N b l BxcS wit h e ven chances.
{3 ) S dxc S ! '! Qc7 ! ( bet ter than S . . . d4 6 a3 Ba S 7 b4 or 5 . . . Ne7
6 Nf3 Nc6 7 Bd3 d4 8 a3 BaS 9 b4 N x b4 I 0 a x b4 Bx b4 I I
0-0 ! B x c3 1 2 Rb I with good attacking chances for White in
both cases) 6 NfJ Ne7 7 Bd3 Nd7 8 0-0 Bxc3 9 b xc3 N xcS l O Be3
N x d3 and play is abou t even.
1 1 8 I Black prepares . . . d 7 -d 5
5 ... Bxc3 +
A risky alternative is S . . . BaS !? 6 b4 ! c x d4 (6 . . . c x b4 7 NbS ! Nc6 !
8 Nf3 a6 9 Nd6+ Kf8 1 0 Bd3 b3 + 1 1 Kf1 is good for White) 7 Qg4 !
(Black can defend after 7 NbS Bc7 8 f4 Ne7 9 Nf3 Nbc6 1 0 Bd3 Bb8 !
1 1 Nbd4 a 6 1 2 Be3 Ba7 ! a s i n Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 9S4) 7 . . . Ne7
8 bxaS ! dxc3 9 Qxg7 Rg8 10 Qxh7 Nbc6 1 1 f4 Qxa5 1 2 Nf3 Bd7
1 3 NgS Rf8 14 Rb 1 0-0-0 ! I S Nxf7 Rxn 1 6 Qxf7 Be8! 1 7 Qxe6+ Bd7
1 8 Qf6 Bf5 with great complications which probably favour White. It is
interesting to see why S . . . cxd4 (?) has practically disappeared from
tournament play : 6 axb4 dxc3 7 N f3 ! Qc7 8 Qd4 ! Ne7 9 Bd3 Nd7
10 0-0 cxb2 1 1 Bxb2 with very active play to White.
6 bxc3
How to evaluate this position? White has a clear advan tage in space
along with the bishop pair , and in particular his black-squared bishop
can often be developed actively on a3 . However, Black is not without
good counter-chances. Above all he can often attack strongly down the
c-flie , when White's pawn on c2 can become very weak if Black manages
to exchange the white-squared bishops.
Another plan for Black consists in the blockade by . . . c5-c4 when
Black's light-squared bishop or queen can be posted on a4. If White
tries to prevent this by a4 , the pawn can be captured after . . . Qa5 and
. . . Bd7 with very complex play offering equal chances.
However, in the early stages it is Whi te who is in the driving seat, and
Black must deal at once with the strong positional threat of 7 Qg4.
6 .. . Qc7
In order to answer 7 Qg4 with 7 . . . fS . An important alternative is
Black prepares . . d 7 -d 5 I 1 1 9
.
6 . . . Ne7 7 Qg4 cxd4 ! (better t han 7 . . . 0-0 N f3 Nbc6 9 Bd3 f5

I 0 exf6 Rxf6 I I Bg5 Rf7 1 2 Qh4 h6 1 3 Bd2 when Black's K-side is
weak) 8 Qxg7 Rg8 9 Qx h 7 Qc7 ! 1 0 Ne2 (or I O Kd l Nd7 ! I I Nf3 !
Nxe5 1 2 Bf4 Qxc3 1 3 Nxe5 Qxa l + 1 4 Be l Rc8 with about even
chances in this complex position) I 0 . . . N bc6! I I f4 Bd7 1 2 Qd3 dxc3
and although White can now win the c-pawn he obtains no advantage
because Black is well developed and has coun terplay down the c-file e .g.
13 Nxc3 a6 1 4 Rbi Rc8 1 5 h4 Na7 ! and . . . NbS. Or 1 3 Be3 Nf5 . Or
I 3 h4. Or I 3 Rb I . All with complicated play . For this reason after
6 . . . Ne 7 White usually plays the quieter 7 Nf3 or 7 a4 followed by
8 Nf3 .
7 N f3
White decides to avoid the double-edged play arising from 7 Qg4 which
could transpose (after 7 . . . Ne7) into the line given in our previous
note, or Black can try 7 . . . f5 8 Qg3 Ne7!? (after 8 . . . cxd4 9 cxd4
Ne7 ! 1 0 Bd2 0-0 I I Bd3 b6 1 2 Ne2 Ba6 1 3 N f4 Qd7 1 4 Bb4 ! Rf7
1 5 Nh5 Kh8 Black's game is difficult but he can probably hold out)
9 Qxg7 Rg8 10 Qxh7 cxd4 I I Kd l ! Bd7 1 2 Qh5 + Kd8 ! 1 3 Ne2 dxc3
1 4 Qf3 ! Nbc6 I S Q xc3 N xe5 1 6 Q xc7+ K xc7+ with only a m inimal
e dge to White.
7 ... Ne7
8 a4 b6
Once again Black plans to exchange the white-squared bishops by . . .

Ba6. White can prevent this but the pawn move still provides useful
protection for the c-pawn which will block the diagonal of White's light
squared bishop if it goes to a3 .
9 Bb5 + ! Bd7
Black could still carry out his first plan by 9 . . . Nec6 (?) but would
lose too much time e .g. 1 0 0.() Ba6 I I Ng5 ! etc .
1 0 Bd3 ! Nbc6
I I 0-0 h6
Again Black must delay castling which would be answered by the
standard sacrifice Bxh7+ ! (see next diagram ).
12 Bf4
1 20 I Black prepares . . . d 7 -<1 5
\
It is more exact to play 1 2 Re I , since the dark-squared bishop may

wish to go to a3 . Here are t wo examples of play after 1 2 . . . 0-D!
( I ) 13 Bxh6 ! ? c4 ! ? (after 1 3 . . . gxh6 White has a s trong attack by
1 4 Qd2 Kg7 I S Qf4 NfS ? 1 6 g4 c4 1 7 Bfl Nfe7 1 8 Qf6 + Kb 7
1 9 NgS + ! hxgS 20 Re3 etc., or here I S . . . Ng8 1 6 Re3 Rfc8
1 7 Nh4 etc.) 1 4 Bh7+ ! Kb8 I S NgS (after I S Be I f6 ! White's
pieces are in a tangle) I S . . . gxh6 1 6 QhS Kg7 I 7 Re3 f6 ! 1 8 Rh3
( 1 8 exf6+ Rxf6 1 9 Rg3 Qxg3 ! 20 hxg3 hxgS Black has too much
for the qu�en) 1 8 . . . h xgS 1 9 Qh6+ Kf7 20 QhS + Kg7 d raw
(Harts ton-Keene, 1 97 1 ).
(2) 1 3 h4 fS ! 1 4 Ba3 (this bishop is now required on the c 1 -h6 diagonal)
14 . . . NaS I S hS Rf7 ! 1 6 Nh4 Bxa4 1 7 g4 Raf8 ( 1 7 . . . f4 ! is
stronger) 1 8 Be I ! (but not 1 8 gxfS N x fS 1 9 N x fS RxfS 20 BxfS
RxfS ami Black stands bet ter despite his material deficit ) 1 8 . .
.
Be8 1 9 gS hxgS 20 BxgS cxd4 2 1 cxd4 Qc3 2 2 Ng6 Nec6 2 3 h6 ! ?

gxh6 24 Bxh6 Rh7 ! 2 5 Nxf8 Rxh6 26 Nxe6 ! ? Bh S ! (26 . . . Rxe6
27 BxfS Re7 28 Re3 ! etc.) 27 Qc 1 Rg6+ 28 Kfl ? (losing at once ,
whereas he would have equal chances a fter 28 NgS Nxd4 29 Kh2
N f3 + 30 Nxf3 Bxf3 3 1 Qf4 ! Qc7 3 2 Qxf3 Qh 7+ 33 �:t3 Rh6
34 Rg l + etc.) 28 . . . N b3 ! ! and in the game Van den Berg-Keene
( 1 9 73 ) Whi te resigned because Black is threatening . . . Nd2+ and
after 29 cxb3 Qxd3 + . This game is an exceUen t e xample of the
possibilities of both sides, in particular emphasising the point we
have already made that Black's counter-a ttack is often so strong
that material loss can e ven be ignored.
12 0-0
13 h4 c4?
Black prepares . . . d 7 -d 5 I 1 2 1
lnunediately after his opponent's new move Black commits a strategic

error by blocking the Q-side, thus allowing White a free hand to proceed
with his K-side at tack. Admittedly White was t hreatening 1 4 Qd2 and
1 S Bxh6 but Black could defend by 1 3 . . . f5 ! and . . . Ri7 securing the
K-side, when his counter-play down the c-flle would give him at least
equal chances.
1 4 Be2 f5
1 5 hS Kh7
1 6 Qd2 Rg8
AJ we shall soon see , Black is thinking of obtaining active play on the
K-side, a faulty plan since this will only help White . He could instead
play N-d8-f7 to support his h-pawn , followed by . . . aS and . . . bS to
create a passed a-pawn which would at least pose some threat to Whi te .
1 7 g3 Be8
18 Nh4 Qc8
1 9 Kg2 BxhS?
Pursuing his fatal idea of opening up lines for White's pieces , instead of
waiting for White to do this himself by g4.
20 Bx hS gS
2 1 Rhl ! gx f4
After 2 1 . . . gxh4 22 Rxh4 or even 22 Bxh6 Black loses at once.
2 2 Qxf4 Rg7?
There is a pre tty finish after 22 . . . Qf8 23 Nf3 Qg7? 24 Bf7 ! etc., but
23 . . . N d8 ! would offer be tter resistance . White would then double
rooks on the h-n.te.
1 2 2 I Black prepares . . d 7-d 5
.
23 Qxh6+ ! !
A splendid queen sacrifice which has some neat points and which cannot
be refused because after 23 . . . Kg8 24 Ng6 Rh7 25 Qg5 Rg7 26 Qf6
White has a winning a t tack.
23 . . . Kxh6
24 Nxf5+ ! KgS
I f 24 . . . exf5 2 5 Bf7+ ! Kg5 26 Rh5 + Kg4 2 7 f3 mate .
25 Nd6 !
Not 25 Nxg7? Qg8 26 f4 + Kh6 27 Bf7+ Kxg7 28 Bxg8 Rxg8 when
Black is even better, whereas after the text-move White threatens
26 f4 + Kh6 27 Bf7 mate , thus forcing Black to give back the material.
25 . . . Ng6
Or 25 . . . Rh7 26 f4+ Kh6 27 N xc8 Rxc8 28 Bf7+ Kg7 29 Rxh7+
Kxh7 30 Bxe6 Rf8 3 1 Kf3 wins.
26 Nxc8 Rxc8
27 f4+ Nxf4
Or 27 . . . Kf5 28 Kf3 Nxf4 29 gxf4 Rcg8 30 Bg4+ ! Rxg4 3 1 RhS+ etc.
28 gxf4+ Kxf4+
29 Kf2 RegS
Even though material is even, Black's king is too exposed for him to
hold out for long e .g . 29 . . . Rh8 30 Rh4+ Kg5 3 1 Rah 1 Re7 32 Rg4+
Kf5 33 Kg3 etc.
30 Bt1 Nd8
3 1 Rh6(?)
There was a quicker and more elegant finish here or on the next move
by 3 J Rh3 ! followed by 3 1 Rah l .
31 Rg6
32 Rah 1 (?) Rxh6
33 Rxh6
There is now n o mate if Black defends correctly , but the ending is won
because White's rook can penetrate into Black's position e .g. 33 . . . Rg7
.
34 Rh8 Nf7 (34 . . . Rd7? 3 5 Rg8 and 36 Rg4+ wins) 3 5 Rf8 ! Kg5
Black prepares . . d 7 -d 5 I 1 2 3
.
(3 5 . . . Rh7 36 Bxd 5 ! exdS 3 7 e6 wins) 36 Re8 KfS 3 7 Re7 etc.
33 Rf8?
34 Rg6 ! KfS
35 Rg7 aS
Or 35 . . Rf7 36 Rg8 followed by 3 7 Ke3 and 38 Bg4 mate , as in the
.
final position.
36 Ke3 Resigns
Blac k's other a ttempt to carry out an early . . . d 7-d 5 is I . . . c6 2 d4
dS giving us the m ain position of the Caro-Kann Defence .
A comparison with the French Defence ( l e4 e6 2d4 d 5 ) shows us that

in the Caro-Kann Defence the l i ght-squared bishop is no longer restricted
but a t the same time the dark-squared bishop i,s temporarily blocked in .
It is perhaps the most sol id defence to I e4. Let us first examine 3 eS
when Black can at once develop his light.,.. q uared bishop by 3 . . . Bf5 !
with these possibilities :
{ I ) 4 Bd3 Bxd3 5 Qxd3 e6 6 Nc3 (after 6 f4 or 6 Nf3 Black has the
good manoeuvre . . . Qa 5 + and . . . Qa6 ! either exchanging queens
or ob tain ing a useful diagonal) 6 . . . Qb6 7 N ge 2 c5 8 dxc5 Bxc5
9 0-0 Ne7 1 0 Na4 (after 10 a3 Qc6 ! I I b4 Bb6) 1 0 . . . Qc6
I I Nxc5 Qxc5 1 2 Be3 Qc7 1 3 f4 Nf5 and Black had a good game
in the famous encounter N imzovi tch -Capablanca , 1 927.
(2) 4 Ne2 e6 5 Ng3 Ne7 ! 6 c4 (or 6 Bd3 Bxd3 7 Qxd3 Qa 5 + and
. . . Qa6) 6 . . . Bg6 7 Nc3 Nd7 8 h4 h6 9 h5 Bh7 10 Qb3 Qb6 wi th
equality.
(3) 4 h4 ! ? (after 4 g4 ! ? Black replies 4 . . . Bd7 ! followed by . . . e6
and . . . c 5 when White's position is compromised, but not 4 . . .
1 24 I Black prepares . . d 7 -d 5
.
Rg6 ? 5 h 4 h 6 6 e6 ! fxe6 7 Bd3 !) 4 . . . h6 S g4 !? Bd 7 ! (again 5 . . .

Bh 7? 6 e6! is good for Wh ite) 6 hS (preventing 6 . . . h 5 ! 7 gS BfS .
After 6 c4 e6 7 Nc3 cS ! Black stands well e .g. 8 dxc5 Bxc5 9 cxd5
exd5 10 Nxd5 Bxg4 , or here 10 Qxd5' Qb6) 6 . . . c5 ! 7 c3 e6 8 f4
Qb6 9 Nf3 Nc6 1 0 Na3 cxd4 1 1 cxd4 0-0-0 1 2 Nc2 Kb8 and Black
stood be tter in the game Tal-Pachman, 1 96 1 . An eccentric line in
which While's first eight moves are made with pawns ! However, it
is a good example of how difficult it is t o refute the Caro-Kann out
of han d .
(4) 4 c4 (relatively the best try) 4 . . . e6 5 Nc3 Nd7 ! (more precise
than S . . . dxc4 6 Bxc4 Nd7 7 Nge2) 6 cxd5 cxd5 7 Nge2 Ne7
8 Ng3 Bg6 9 Bd3 Nc6 I 0 0-0 Qh4 ! with full e quality .
In con trast to the French Defence the exchange 3 exd5 cxdS , com
pared with 3 exd5 exdS in the French Defence, is not so harmless here
because the resulting position is not symmetrical ! Admittedly the quiet
continuation 4 Bd3 promises little after 4 . . . Nc6 5 c3 Nf6 6 Bf4 (or
6 h3 e 5 ! ) Bg4 7 Qb3 (or 7 Ne2 Bh S ! 8 Qb3 Qd7 9 Nd2 Bg6) 7 . . . NaS
8 Qa4 + Bd7 9 Qc2 Qb6 with equali ty , as Black threatens to exchange
his passive bishop by . . . Bb5 . However, the Panov Attack by 4 c4 ! Nf6
5 Nc3 gives White good chances :
We shall deal with a similar type of position in our next chapter, but
here the open nat ure of the position leads to sharper play than in the
Queen's Gambi t . Let us briefly consider the various possibilities :
( I ) 5 . . . Nc6 6 Bg5 (the alternative 6 Nf3 is not as dangerous to Black
e,g. 6 . . . Bg4 ! 7 cxdS Nxd5 8 Qb3 Bxf3 9 gxf3 Nb6 ! 1 0 d5 Nd4
I I Qd I NfS ! or here 9 . . e6 I 0 Qxb7 N xd4 1 1 Bb5 + NxbS
.
1 2 Qc6+ Ke7 1 3 QxbS Nxc3 ! 14 b xc3 Qd5 etc.) 6 . . . e6. (the only
serious alternative is the gambit continuation 6 . . . Qb6 !? 7 cxd5
Black prepares . . . d 7-d 5 I 1 2 5
Nxd4 ! when Wh ite can play ei ther 8 Be3 e5 9 d xe6 Bc5 1 0 e xf7+
Ke 7 I I Dc4 or 8 Nf3 Nxf3 + 9 Qxf3 Qxb2 1 0 Re i with good
chances. If instead 6 . . . d xc4 White has both 7 d5 Na5 8 b4 ! cxb3
9 axb3 b6 1 0 b4 Nb7 1 1 Bb5 + Bd7 1 2 N f3 , or 7 Dxc4 Qxd4
8 Qxd4 9 0-0-0, or 7 . . . N xd4 8 N f3 Nxf3 + 9 Qxf3) 7 c5 !
Be 7 8 Bb5 0-0 9 Bxc6 bxc6 1 0 Nf3 Ne4 (if 1 0 . . . Ba6? 1 1 Qa4
Qc8 1 2 Ne5) 1 1 Bxe 7 Qxe 7 1 2 0-() N xc3 1 3 bxc3 followed by
Rb 1 , Re 1 etc. wi th a clear advantage to White because his knight is
more active than Black's bishop.
(2) 5 . . . e6 6 N f3 Be 7 7 c xd 5 ! (here 7 c5 is not so effective in view of
7 . . 0-() 8 Bd3 b6 ! 9 b4 a 5 ! 1 0 Na4 Nbd7 ! 1 1 Bf4 ! ? a x b4 1 2 c6
.
Nc5 ! 1 3 dxc5 bxc5 and the strong pawns give Black an advantage)
7 . . . Nxd5 (after 7 . . . exd5 8 Bb5 + Bd7 9 Bxd7+ Nxd7 1 0 Qb3
Nb6 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 Bg5 followed by 1 3 Re 1 , or here 8 . . Nc6 9
.
Ne5 Bd7 1 0 0-0 0-0 1 1 Re 1 White is clearly bet ter in both cases)
8 Bc4 Nc6 9 0-() 0-() 1 0 Re I or 8 Bd3 0-() 9 0-() Nc6 I 0 Re I Bf6
1 1 Be4 and we have reached positions which form part of the
Queen's Gambit proper.
(3) 5 . . . g6 6 Qb3 ! Bg7 (Black must temporarily give up his pawn , as
6 . . . dxc4 7 Bxc4 e6 8 Nf3 would leave his light-squared bishop
shut in) 7 cxd5 0-0. It is now by no means easy for Whi te to main
tain and exploit his extra pawn . We recommen d the contin uation :
8 Nge 2 ! (after the immediate 8 g3 e6! 9 dxe6 Bxe6 1 0 Qxb7 Nbd7
Black h as good play) 8 . . . Na6 (after 8 . . . Re8 White does not
play 9 g3 e6! but 9 Bg5 ! in order to answer 9 . . e6 by 1 0 d xe6
.
B xe6 1 1 d 5 ! Bf5 1 2 0-0-0 Na6 1 3 N d4 etc . ) 9 g3 Qb6 I 0 Qxb6

a xb6 I I Bg2 Nb4 1 2 0-0 Rd8 1 3 d6 ! and !he typical timely retu rn
of the gam bit pawn gave White the better game in Spassky-Pe trosian
( 1 966) e.g. 1 3 . . . R xd6 1 4 Bf4 Rd7 1 5 Be5 etc.
As in the French Defence, a fter I e4 c6 2 d4 d5 White usually protects
his e-pawn with 3 Nc3 when Black cannot i mmediately apply more
pressure by 3 . . . Nf6 in view of 4 e5 Ne4 5 Nxe4 dxe4 6 Ne2 when the
e-pawn is weak , or here 4 . . . Nfd7 5 f4 (5 e6! fxe6 6 N f3 is also strong)
5 . . . e6 6 N f3 c5 when Black is a tempo d own on the same position
arising from the French Defence. However, after 3 . . . d xe4 4 Nxe4
Black can use the fact that his light-squared bishop is not blocked in ,
and adopt the Capablanca system 4 . . . Bf5 . (See next diagram .) Black
develops his bishop with gain of time or else drives the knight away
from its strong central pos t. Play develops : 5 Ng3 (after 5 Bd3 !? Black
can play the aggressive 5 . . . Qxd4 6 N f3 Qd8 or the quiet 5 . . . Bxe4
1 2 6 I Black prepares . . . d 7-d S
6 Bxe4 N f6 7 Bf3 Nbd7 8 Ne2 e5, and after 5 Qf3 e6! 6 e3 Nd7 7 Bf4
Ndf6 8 Nd2 Ne7 or here 6 Be3 Qa5 + 7 Bd2 QdS Black stands well)
5 . . . Bg6 with good chances of equality e .g .
( I ) 6 h 4 h6 7 Nf3 N d 7 ( b u t n o t 7 . . . Nf6? 8 N e 5 Bh 7 9 Bc4 w i t h a
splendid position for White) 8 h5 (even less is obtained after the
quieter 8 Bd3 Bxd3 9 Qxd3 Qc7 I 0 Bd2 Ngf6 I I 0-0-0 0-0-0 1 2 c4
e6 1 3 K b l c5 1 4 Bc3 cxd4 1 5 N xd4 a6 1 6 Qe 2 Bd6 1 7 Ne4 N xe4
1 8 Qxe4 Be5 ! etc.) 8 . . . Bh7 9 Bd3 Bxd3 1 0 Qxd3 Qc7 1 1 Bd2
(or I I Rh4 e6 1 2 Bf4 Bd6 1 3 Bxd6 Qxd6 14 Ne4 Qe7 ) I I . . .
Ngf6 1 2 0-0-0 c6 1 3 Qe2 0-0-0 1 4 Ne5. N ow 1 4 . . . Nb6 1 5 BaS !
Rd5 !? 1 6 b4 ! Rxa5 ! 1 7 bxa5 lead to complications which probably
favour Whi te, whereas 1 4 . . . Nxe5 1 5 dxe5 Nd7 1 6 f4 Be7 1 7 Ne4
Nc5 1 8 Nc3 gives Black a cramped but playable game .
(2) 6 Nh3 Nd7 7 Bc4 Ngf6 8 N f4 e5 9 N xg6 hxg6 I 0 dxe5 Qa5 + wit h
equal ity .
(3 ) 6 Bc4 e6 7 Nge2 Nf6 8 Nf4 (or 8 0-0 Bd6 9 f4 Qd7 ! ) 8 . . . Bd6
9 Bb3 (9 0-0 Nd5 ! I 0 Nh5 0-0 I I Bb3 Nd7 1 2 N xg6 hxg6 1 3 Ng3
Qh4 ! or 9 Nxg6 h xg6 i O Bg5 Nbd7 I I 0-0 Qa5 , are favourable to
Black , as was seen in the Tal -Botvinnik 1 96 1 match) 9 . . . Nbd7 !
(stronger than 9 . . Nd5 1 0 N xg6 hxg6 I 1 Ne4 Be7 1 2 0-0 Nd7
.
13 c4) 1 0 Qf3 Qc 7 I I h4 0-0-0 ! 1 2 h5 Bf5 ! 1 3 Nxf5 Qa5 + 1 4 c3

Qxf5 with equality in Keres-Pe trosian ( 1 963).
(4 ) 6 Nge2 e6 7 h4 h6 8 N f4 Bh7 9 Bc4 Nf6 1 0 Qe2 Bd6 ! 1 1 c3
( I I Bxe6? 0-0 ! ) I I . . . Qe 7 ! (play is double-edged after I I . . .
Nbd7 1 2 Bxe6 ! when 1 2 . . . 0-0 fails to 1 3 Bxd 7 , and if 1 2 . . .
fxe6 1 3 N xe6 Qe7 1 4 N f5 ! Bxf5 1 5 N xg7 + and 1 6 N xf5) 1 2 Nh5

N xh5 13 Nxh5 Rg8 with equal chances.
On the 4th move Black has a riskier contin uat ion with 4 . • Nf6 ! ?
.
Black prepares . . . d 7 -<I S I 1 2 7
After 5 Nxf6 + ! Black has two continuations :

( 1 ) 5 . . . exf6 . I t is interesting to compare this position with the one
arising from the Exchange Variation of t he Ruy Lopez. Black has
obtained a weakened pawn position without the compensation of
two bishops ! Admi t tedly, Black has a free development for his
pieces, which is why no lesser a player than Alekhine preferred this
way of cap turing, bu t White maintains a lasting positional plus e .g.
6 Bc4 ! Bd6 7 Qe2+ Be7 (7 . . . Qe7 8 Qxe7+ Kxe7 9 Ne2 and
1 0 Bf4) 8 NO Bg4 (or 8 . . . 0-0 9 0-0 Bd6 1 0 Re i Bg4 I I Qe4 ! )
9 c 3 N d 7 1 0 h 3 Bh5 I I g4 Bg6 1 2 Nh4 N b6 1 3 Bb3 N d 5 1 4 Bd2
etc. (Bogoljubow-Aiekhine , 1 94 1 )
.
(2) 5 . . . gx f6 . Now White's task is much more complex , because if he

does not play actively enough, Black can even launch an at tack
down the g-file e .g. 6 Nf3 Bg4 7 Be2 Qc7 8 0-0 Nd7 9 c4? (9 Ne l ! )
9 . . . 0-0-0 1 0 Be 3 e 6 I I Qa4 Kb8 1 2 b4 f5 1 3 Rad i Rg8 etc.
Whi te 's best plan is 6 Ne2 ! Bg4 (after 6 . . . Bf5 7 Ng3 Bg6 8 h4 h6
·
9 h 5 Bh 7 10 c3 Qb6 I I Bc4 or 6 . . . h5 7 Bf4 ! Bf5 8 Ng3 Bg6 9 h4

White stan ds well) 7 Qd3 ! threatening 8 Ng3 and 9 h 3 and if 7 . . .
e 5 8 Qg3 ! Bxe2 9 Bxe2 sacrificing a pawn for a good attack . Black
has hardly anything better than 7 . . . Bxe2 8 Bxe2 e6 when White
has the two bishops as well as the be t ter pawn posi tion . [ Korchnoi
has been playing the 5 . . . exf6 capture with some success. 1n his
I 978 match with Karpov, play wen t 6 Bc4 Nd7 ! 7 Ne2 Bd6 8 0-0
0-0 9 Bf4 Nb6 with equal chances. Translator. ]
There is another 4th move for Black which is m ore active than 4 . . .
Bf5 and not so risky as 4 . . . Nf6 . Le t us ill ustrate it with a game.
1 2 8 I Black prepares . . . J 7- d 5
Game 1 6
Westerinen Pachman (Mannheim 1 9 75)
t e4 c6
2 d4
White has an interesting alternative here which takes the sting out of
4 . . . Bf5 and 4 . . . Nd7. He can develop both knights by 2 N f3 d5
3 Nc3 when 3 . . . dxe4 4 Nxe4 Bf5 allows 5 Ng3 Bg6? (better is 5 . . .
Bg4 ! 6 h3 Bx f3 7 Qxf3 ) 6 h4 ! h6 7 Ne5 Bh 7 8 QhS g6 9 Bc4 ! e6
I 0 Qe2 with a winning game. 4 . . . Nd7 also has its disadvan tages :
5 Bc4 ! Ngf6 6 Neg5 e6 7 Qe2 NdS 8 d4 h6 9 Ne4 Be7 1 0 0-0 followed
by Bb3 an d c4, or here 6 . . . Nd5 7 d4 h6 8 Ne4 Ndb6 9 Bb3 etc.
The move 4 . . . N f6 !? has fewer disadvantages than after 2 d4, but
Black's most popular counter is not to exchange pawns in the cen tre
and to play instead 3 . . . Bg4 ! e .g. 4 h3 Bxf3 (play is unclear a fter
4 . . . BhS !? 5 ex d5 e x d 5 6 g4 Bg6 7 Ne 5 Nc6 8 Bb 5 etc.) 5 Qx f3 Nf6
6 d3 (after 6 d4 dxe4 dxe4 7 Nxe4 Qxd4 ! White has insufficien t for the
pawn) 6 . . . e6 7 Bd2 Nbd7 and now both the quiet 8 0.{) and the sharp
8 g4 !? can be met by 8 . . . g6 ! followed by . . . Bg7 .
Finally w e m us t men tion 2 c 4 which can transpose into t h e Panov
Attack after 2 . . . . d5 3 exdS cxd5 4 d4 ! (better than 4 cxd5 a6 !
followed by . . . Nf6 an d . . . N x d S ) 4 . . . N f6 or else lead t o an edge
for White a fter 2 . . e6 3 d4 d5 4 eS ! etc.
.
2 ... d5
3 Nc3 dxe4
TI1e reader may well ask if Black has anything else here than giving Whi te
a space advantage . Indeed , Black players have been experimenting with
3 . . . g6 when 4 e5 allows 4 . . . h 5 ! 5 f4 Nh6 followed by . . . Bg4
(after 6 N f3 ) or . . . Bf5 (after 6 Bd3). White does best to play 4 h3 !
Bg7 5 N f3 when Black mus t se ttle for 5 . . . dxe4 or go in for the eccen
tric-looking . . . Nh6 followed by . . . f6 , Nf7 and 0-D, by no means easy
to re fu te !
4 Nxe4 N bd 7 (see next diagram)

The point of this Nimzovitch system (so many ideas have stemmed
from Nimzovitch that the nomenclature is confusin g ! ) is that, although
this knigh t tem porarily blocks the light-squared bishop, this restriction
is not as absolute as . . . e6 in the French Defence . For example, let us
continue now with 5 Nf3 N gf6 and compare the position wit h the one
Black pre pares .. . d 7- d 5 I 1 2 9
arising after I e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Nd7 5 Nf3 Ngf6 in the

French Defence, where after 6 N x f6+ N x f6 7 Bd3 Black's light-l>quared
bishop is difficult to develop.
Returning to the Caro-Kann position, after 6 N x f6+ N x f6 Black's
light-squared bishop is ready to be developed ! Let us continue :
( I ) 7 Bc4 Bf5 ! (but not 7 . . . Bg4?? 8 Bxf7+ Kxf7 9 Ne5+ , a t rap
typical of many opening;) 8 Ne5 e6 9 0-0 (Black answers the sharp
9 g4 with 9 . . Be4 I 0 f3 Bd5 I I Bd3 g5 or I I . . . Qb6) 9 . . Be7
. .
I 0 Re I h6 I I Bf4 0-0 1 2 c 3 Nd5 1 2 Bg3 Bh4 ! with full equality.

Or here 8 0-0 e6 9 Bg5 Be7 I 0 Qe2 Bg4 ! and Black has not hing to
fear.
(2) 7 Ne5 Bf5 (or 7 . . . Nd7 8 Bf4 N xe5 9 B xe5 Bf5 I 0 Bc4 e6
1 1 0-0 Bd6 ! 1 2 Bxg7 Rg8 13 Be5 Bxe5 1 4 dxe5 Qh4 with an
attack) 8 c3 e6 (8 . . . Nd7 9 N xf7 K xf7 1 0 Qf3 and I I g4 is
riskier for Black) 9 g4 Bg6 1 0 h4 Bd6 ! when 1 1 h5 allows I I . . .
Be4 I 2 f3 Bxe 5 ! etc.
So what else can White do on the sixth move? If 6 Bd3 (?) Nxe4
7 Bxe4 N f6 ! 8 Bd3 Bg4 and Black's worries are over. The only other t ry
is 6 Ng3 e6 (blocking his light-squared bishop but this is not too bad for
Black in view of Whi te's waste of time) 7 Bd3 c5 8 0-0 c xd4 9 N xd4
Bc5 ! Or here 7 . . . Be7 8 0-0 c5 9 Re i b6 10 c4 cxd4 I I Nxd4 Bb7
1 2 a3 0-0 etc .
S Bc4 Ngf6
6 NegS
With 6 Nxf6 + Nxf6 7 c3 White can prevent 7 . . . Bf5? because of
8 Qb3 attac king the b- and f-pawns, but Black can play 7 . . . Qc7 !
8 Nf3 Bg4 etc.
1 3 0 I Black prepares . . . d 7- d 5
6 . .. e7-e6
So Whl te has forced Black to b l ock in his light-squared bishop, l osing
time however.
7 Nge2
The al ternat iv� 7 Qe2 is very popular, threatening 8 Nxf7 ! Kxf7
9 Qxe6+ with a decisive attack. Black replies 7 . . . Nb6 8 Bd3 h6 ! (but
not 8 . . . Qxd4? 9 N 1 f3 Bb4+ I O c3 Bxc3 + I I Kfl ! or here 9 . Qd5. .
1 0 Ne5 e tc.) 9 N5f3 c 5 ! e .g.

( l ) 10 Be3 Qc7 I I Ne5 cxd4 1 2 Bxd4 Bc 5 !
(2) 1 0 dxc5 Bxc5 (or 1 0 . Nbd7 when I I b4? allows I I . . . Nd5 !
. .
followed by . . . Qf6 , but not the splendid trap I I . . . b6? 1 2 Nd4 !

bxc5? 1 3 Nc6 Qc 7 1 4 Qxe6+ ! fxe6 1 5 Bg6 mate !) I I Ne5 Nbd7!
1 2 Nf3 Nxe 5 I 3 Nxe5 0-0 and now neither 14 Bd2 Qd5 ! 1 5 f4 Bd4
nor 1 4 0.0 b6! 1 5 Qf3 Qc7 ! { 1 6 Qxa8? Bb7 I 7 Qxa7 Ra8) gives
White any advantage.
7 h6
8 Nf3 Bd6
9 0..0 Qc7
10 Re i bS!
11 Bd3 Bb7
So Black has found a future for his light-squared bishop which will in
fact become his best placed piece after . . . c 5 and eventually even decide
the fate of the whole game !
1 2 b3
Black prepares . . . d 7- d 5 I 1 3 1
In a game Geller-Smyslov ( 1 969) the con tinuation was 1 2 Nc3 b4

1 3 Ne4 and n ow Black had the in teresting m ove 1 3 . . . c S ! giving
White the two bishops but ob taining ample compensation in his actively
po�ted light-squared bishop. My opponent chooses another plan .
12 . . . 0.0
1 3 Bb2
The bishop may look passive here, but it controls the important square
e5 and will have an open cliagonal once Black has played his necessary
freeing move . . . c S . Black's next move is the final preparation for tllis.
13 a6
1 4 Ng3 cS!
15 dxc5 BxcS
16 Ne5
This looks very strong, as Whi te threatens both 1 7 Nh S ! an d 1 7 Nxd7

Qxd7? 1 8 Bxf6 gxf6 1 9 Bh7+ . However, this position once again illus
trates the fact that a piece attack usually fails against a well centralised
defence.
16 . . . NxeS
1 7 BxeS Qc6!
Black's light-squared bishop makes its presence felt . The threat of mate
sets problems for Whi te . 1 8 Ne4 Nd7! wins a piece for Black ( 1 9 Bb2
fS ! or 1 9 Bxg7 !? Kxg7 20 Qg4+ Kh8 2 1 Qh4 e S ! ) and 1 8 Be4 N xe4
1 9 Nxe4 fS leads to the same result. Of course White can defen d by
1 8 Bfl but this completely hands over t�e ini tiative to Black a fter
1 8 . . . Rfd8.
1 8 Re4 ! ?
A re so u rc eful b u l in lhe long run inadequate defence , based on the fac l
that 1 8 . . . N xe4? 1 9 Bxe4 Qb6 2 0 Qg4 f6 2 1 N h S gives White a winning
attack.
18 Be7 !
1 9 Bxf6 Bxf6
20 Nh5 ! ?
White is commi tted t o the attack, since 2 0 Re i BgS ! and 2 1 . . . fS wins
for Black, whilst 20 Rb l Rfd8 1eaves White helpless.
1 3 2 I Black preparl.!s . . d 7- d 5
.
20 . . . Qc3 !
Again the sacrifice i s rejected. ln fact 2 0 . . . Bxa l 2 1 Qxa l f6 2 2 Rg4

Rf7 23 Nxf6+ is in White's favour.
21 Nxf6+ Qxf6
22 Rg4?
This makes Black's task easier. Best is 22 Re3 Rfd8 when Black is s till
in control of the situation .
22 . . . h5!
In tending to answer 23 Rg3 with 23 . . . h4 24 Rg4 h3 ! or here 24 Re3

QgS .
23 Rd4 Rfd8!
24 Rxd8+ Rxd8
25 Qfl Rd4 !
Already th reatening 26 . . . Bxg2 ! 2 7 Kxg2 Rg4+ etc.
26 f3 g5 !
27 a4?
After 2 7 Re i ! g4 28 Be4 Bxe4 29 fxe4 (29 Rxe4 Rxe4 30 fxe4 Qd4+
wins a pawn) 29 . . . Qd8 ! Black's con trol of the d-ftle is the decisive
fac tor .
27 . . . g4
28 fxg4
Or 28 ax b S gx f3 29 b x a6 Rg4 ! 30 ax b 7 (30 g3 f2 + ! ) 3 0 . . . Qd4+

3 1 Kh l fx g2+ 32 Q x g2 Qx a l + 33 Qfl Qa7 etc. wins for black.
28 . . . Rf4!
29 Qd 1 Rxg4(?)
A perfectly good move, but a more precise and elegant finish would
have been 29 . . . Qd4+ 30 Kh l Bxg2 + ! 3 1 Kxg2 Rf2 + 32 Kh l Qd5+
with a quick mate .
30 Bfl Qg7 !
3 1 Resigns
(3 1 g3 Rxg3 + ! or 3 1 Kf2 Bxg2 or finally 3 1 Qd 2 Qxa I are all hopeless
for White).
Black prepares . . . d 7- d 5 I 1 33
Let us now glan.:e brie t1y a t a few other main defences to I e4:
A I • N c6 2 d4 ti S (tla: Nimwvi tch Defence - again that name ! )
. .
3 exd5 Qxd5 4 Nf3 e 5 ! 5 Nc3 ( 5 dxe5 Qxd I + 6 K x d l Bc5 7 Ke I Bf5

8 c3 0-0-0 is very good for Black) 5 . . . Bb4 6 Bd2 etc. Or 3 e 5 f6 4 f4
Bf5 ! 5 Ne2 e6 6 Ng3 fx e5 7 fxe5 Qd7 8 N x f5 e x f5 wi th a m in im al plus
to White. Whi t e 's best is probably 3 Nc3 ! dxe4 4 d5 Nb8 (after 4 . . .
Ne5 White can choose ei ther 5 Qd4 or 5 f3 ! ? e xf3 6 Nxf3 ) 5 f3 ! exf3
6 Qxf3 N f6 7 Bf4 a6 8 h3 followed by 9 0-0-0 wi th a powe r fu l a t tack.
B I . . . N f6 (Ale khine's Defence) 2 e5 (after 2 Nc3 Black can play
2 . . . d5 or else t ranspose to the Vienna Game by 2 . . . e 5 ) 2 . . . Nd5
3 d4 d6 .
An interes ting exam ple of t he conversion of one basic element t o

another in chess s t ra tegy . Black offers Whi te space i n the h ope of gai ning
time later by at tacking the advanced pawns, as we see in the main line :
( I ) 4 c4 N b6 5 f4 dxeS 6 fxe5 Nc6 7 Bc3 Bf5 8 Nc3 e6 9 N f3 when
Black has two m e thods of a t tacking White's cen t re . Fi rst, 9 . . . N b4
1 34 I Black prepares . . . d 7- d 5
I0 Re i c S ! with the following complex play leading t o e qual ity :

I I Be2 Be7 ! 1 2 a3 cxd4 1 3 N xd4 Nc6 1 4 N x fS exfS I S Qc2 BgS
1 6 Rd I Bxe3 ! I 7 Rxd8 + Rxd8 1 8 QxfS 0-0 1 9 Rfl g6 e tc. Second,
9 . . . Be 7 I 0 Be 2 0-0 I I 0-0 f6 ! 1 2 exf6 Bxf6 etc .
(2) 4 Nf3 Dg4 (after 4 . . . g6 play usually runs 5 Bc4 Nb6 6 Bb3 Bg7
7 0-0 0-0) 5 Be2 e6 6 0-0 Be7 7 c4 Nb6 8 Nc3 0-0 (after 8 . . . Nc6
9 e xd6 c xd6 White has 1 0 d S !) 9 Be3 d 5 ! 1 0 cS B xf3 I I Bxf3 Nc4
1 2 Bf4 b6! e tc. Or here 5 . . . c6 6 Ng5 ! Bxe2 {6 . . . Bf5 is risky in
view of7 e6 ! ? fx e6? 8 g4 ! Bg6 9 Bd3 ! or 7 . . . B x e6 ! 8 N x e6 fx e6
9 Bg4 Nc7 1 '0 0-0 Nd7 I I Re i etc.) 7 Qxe2 dxe5 8 dxe5 e6 9 0-0
Nbd7 I 0 f4 with a space advantage.
C I . . d6 2 d4 N f6 3 Nc3 g6 (the Pirc Defence). A new element
.
appears with Black adopting a waiting policy in the centre whilst first
developing his bishop on g7. Only la ter will he coun ter-attack in the
centre by . . . e5 or . . . c5 or even d5 .
Let us examine a few typical continuations :

( I ) f4 Bg7 5 Nf3 0-0 (after 5 . . . c5 White can play either 6 dxc5 Qa5 !
7 Bd3 Qxc5 8 Qe2 0-0 9 Be3 Qa 5 1 0 0-0 Nc6 1 1 h3 ! or 6 Bb5+
Bd7 7 e5 Ng4 8 e6 ! Bxb5 9 e xf7+ Kd7 1 0 N x b 5 Qa 5 + 1 1 Nc3
cxd4 1 2 Nx d4 Bxd4 ! 1 3 Qxd4 Nc6 etc.) 6 Bd3 (or 6 Be2 c 5
7 dxcS QaS 8 0-0 Qxc5 + 9 Khl N c 6 . O r 6 Be3 Nc6 7 Bb 5 ! O r 6 e S
d x e S 7 fxeS NdS e t c . ) 6 . . . Na6 ! ? {after 6 . . . Nc6 White does not
play 7 dS Nb4 followed by . . . c6, but 7 e S or 7 0-0 Bg4 8 Be 3 )
7 eS Ng4 ! 8 h3 Nh6 9 g4 c S ! 1 0 Be3 cxd4 1 1 Bxd4 Nb4 a typical
example of how Black should attack White's centre !
(2) 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Be2 (the apparently m ore active 5 Bc4 0-0 6 .0-0 Bg4
7 h3 Bxf3 8 Qxf3 Nc6 9 Be3 Nd7 ! 1 0 Rad l e S is all right for Black)
B lack prepares . . . d 7-d5 I ! 3 5
5 . 0.0 6 0.0 c6 7 h3 (or 7 a4 Nbd7 8 Re l e 5 ) 7 . . . Nbd7 8 e5

. .
Ne8 9 Bf4 Nb6 10 Qc l Bf5 with a solid game for Blac k .

(3) 4 Be2 Bg7 5 h4 ! ? Nc6 ! 6 Be3 e 5 7 d5 Nd4 ! 8 Bxd4 exd4 9 Qxd4
0.0 followed by . . . Re8 with good compensation for t he pawn.
(4) 4 f3 Bg7 5 Be3 c6 6 Qd2 b5! followed by . . . Qa5 and . . . Nbd7
with active play on the Q-side, reserving . . . e5 until i t is necessary .
D 1 . . . g6 2 d4 Bg7 (the Robatsch Defence) which often transposes to
the Pirc De fence. However, Black can delay the development of the
knight on g8 and aim first for play on the O·side by . . . c5 or . . . c6
and . . b 5 . For his part, White can play either 3 c4 d6 4 Nc3 leading to
.
a kin d of King's Indian Defence which we shall examine later, or 3 Nc3

Nf6 4 Bd3 followed by 0.0.
Chapter 8
A pseudo-gambit
We now turn to the Closed Openings which include all those openings
where Whi te's first move is other than 1 e4 . The oldest and most natural
move is I d4 opening a line for the dark-squared bishop and establishing
a hold in th e centre, but bringing a bout a very different situation from
the I e4 openings. Let us first see what happens if White pursues a
similar type of development to t he Ruy L>pez by I d4 d5 2 Nc3 Nf6
3 Bg5 .
The moves 2 Nc3 and 3 Bg5 now involve no pressure on Black's d-pawn
which is guarded by the queen , so Black has a fairly comfortable game
wi th a choice of good contin uations :
( 1 ) 3 . h6 4 Bh4 (after 4 Bxf6 exf6 5 e4 dxe4 6 Nxe4 Be7 Black
. .
s tands bet ter than in t he Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation , since he

can quic kly castle and occupy the e-file) 4 . . . e6 5 e4 ! ? g5 (or
5 . . Bb4 6 e5 g5 ) 6 Bg3 Nxe4 (6 . . . dxe4 7 h4 Rg8 may be even

.
stronger) 7 Nxe4 dxe4 8 h4 Bd6 9 Bxd6 cxd6 1 0 Qg4 gxh4 I I Qg7

Rf8 1 2 Qxh6 Qa5 + l 3 c3 Nc6 1 4 Qe3 d 5 with full equality ( WaLie
Pachman, 1 964).
(2) 3 . . . Nbd7 ! 4 Nf3 (after 4 f3 c6 5 e4 dxe4 6 fxe4 Qa 5 7 Qd2 e 5 !
A pseudo-ga m bit I 1 3 7
Black stands well) 4 . . . h 6 5 Bh4 (or 5 Bf4 a6 6 e3 e6 7 Bd3 c 5 )

5 . . . e 6 6 e 3 Be 7 7 Bd3 c 5 ! with the edge to Black.
(3) 3 . . . Bf5 4 f3 (a quieter method is 4 Bxf6 e x f6 5 e3 when Black
has either 5 . . . c6 6 Bd3 Be6 followed by . . . f5 and . . . Bd6 , or
else the simpler 5 . . . Qd 7 6 Bd3 Bxd3 7 Q xd3 f5 ) 4 . . . c6! (4 . . .
Nbd7 5 Nxd5 !) 5 Qd2 (White h as nothing after 5 e4 dxe4 6 Bxf6
exf6 7 fxe4 Bg6 8 NfJ Nd7 and the gambit l ine 6 Bc4 Nbd7 7 Qd2
h6 is du bious) 5 . . . Nbd7 6 e4 ! ? (or 6 0-0-0 h6 7 Bh4 e6 8 e4 !?
dxe4 9 fxe4 Bxe4 I 0 Re I Bh 7 etc .) 6 . . . d xe4 7 Qf4 Qa5 8 0.0.0
e6 ! 9 B x f6 Nxf6 I 0 fxe4 Bg6 I I Bd3 Bb4 1 2 Nge2 e 5 ! I 3 dxe5
Nd 7 with advantage to Black.
So, after I d4 White must play more energetically in the centre with
2 c4 ! giving us the Queen's Gambit.
TI1e atten tive reader will see the resemblance t o the King's Gambit . ln
particular , after 2 . . . dxc4 White will soone• or later obtain a prepon
derance in the cen tre along with pressure down the c -ftle . The main
difference between the two gambits is that here Black has no compen
sating threats against White's king, which means that the latter can
quickly reca pture the gambi t pawn . He can do this by Qa4 + , usually
after 3 Nf3 Nf6 , or can play 3 e3 when Black m ust not t ry t o hang on
to the pawn because of 3 . . . b5? 4 a4 ! c6? 5 axb5 cxb5? 6 Qf3 winning
at once. I t is clear that we are really dealing with a pseudo-gambit .
However, after 2 . . dxc4 , the move 3 e 3 has the disadvantage of
.
all owing 3 . . . e5 ! when 4 dxeS Qxd I + 5 Kxd I Be6 foll owed by . . .

Nc6 and . . . 0.0-0 is good for Black, and 4 Bxc4 e xd4 5 e xd4 Bb4+
6 Nc3 N f6 7 N f3 0.0 8 0.0 Bg4 leads to full equali ty.
Similar play occurs after 3 e4 eS ! 4 Nf3 ! exd4 5 Bxc4 Bb4+ ( n o t
5 . . . N c 6 6 0-0 Bc S 7 NgS Nh6 8 N xf7 ! Nxf7 9 Bxf7+ Kxf7 1 0 QhS +
1 3 8 I A pse udo-gambit
and White 's good development ensures him the better game) 6 Bd2
Bxd!+ 7 Nb l xd2 Nf6 (not 7 . . . cS 8 Qa4+ ! Nd7 9 b4 !) 8 eS Ng4 9 h3
Nh6 1 0 0-0 0-0 I I Nb3 Nc6 1 2 Nb3 x d4 N x d4 1 3 Q x d4 Qx d4 1 4 N x d4
with a minimal plus to White (Pachman-Tringov, 1 96S).
However, White does not have to rush t o recapture his pawn, and
can quietly con tinue with 3 N f3 ! since 3 . . . a6 4 e3 bS can be answered
by S a4 Bb7! 6 b3 ! e6 7 bxc4 bxc4 8 Bxc4 , or here 6 . . . cxb3 7 a xbS
axbS 8 BxbS+ etc. The move 3 . . . a6 is usually linked with the i dea of
4 e3 Bg4 S Bxc4 e6 6 Qb3 Bxf3 7 gxf3 b S 8 Be2 {the Alekhine Vari·
a tion). So after 3 Nf3 Black usually plays 3 . . . Nf6 , and only now does
White play 4 e3 giving us the following position :
Once again Black can try to hang on to the pawn , this time by 4 . . .
Be6 which gives him good chances after 5 Na3 cS 6 Bxc4 Bxc4 7 Nxc4
Nc6, or here 6 Nxc4 Nc6. However, now that Black has blocked his e
pawn, White has a sharper con tinuation in S Nc3 ! c6 (S . . . cS 6 NgS !)
6 a4 g6 7 e4 Na6 8 NgS Nc7 9 eS NdS I O N xe6 N xe6 I I B xc4 Nec7
I 2 h4 ! with a superior game (Pachman-Herink, 1 9S8).
Thus Black must aim to complete his development by 4 . . . e6 ! S
Bxc4 cS 6 0-0 a6 (6 . . . Nc6 7 Qe2 ! c xd4 8 Rd l ) planning . . . bS and
. . . Bb7 , giving the 'normal' position of the Queen's Gambit Accep ted.
Here are two games with brief notes illustrating some possibil ities.
A Geller-Hermlin (Correspondence 1 972): 7 Qe2 bS 8 Bb3 Bb7 9 Rd l
(after 9 a4 Black can still play 9 . . . Nbd7! e .g. I O axbS axbS 1 1 Rxa8
Qxa8 I 2 Nc3 b4 I 3 NbS QaS ! etc.) 9 . . . Nbd7 I 0 Nc3 Qb8 (the earlier
10 . . . Qc7 has been found to expose the queen after I I e4 ! cxd4
J 2 Nxd4 , whilst I 0 . . . Qb6 allows 1 1 a4 ! b4 I 2 a S ! Qc7 1 3 .Na4 QxaS
1 4 Bd2 Qc7 1 S Rac l with �ood play. After I O . . . Bd6 I I e4 cxd4
A pseudo-gambit I 1 3 9
1 2 Rxd4 ! is strong) 1 1 d 5 ! (now 1 1 e4 is not so good e.g. 1 1 . . . cxd4

1 2 Nxd4 Bd6 or 1 2 Rxd4 Bc5) 1 1 . . . Nxd5 1 2 NxdS Bxd5 1 3 Bxd5
exdS 14 Rxd5 Be7 I S e4 Nb6 (after 1 S . . . Qb7 16 BgS ! Bxg5 1 7 Rad I !
or here 1 6 . . . Nb6 1 7 Rad 1 ! Whlte has a winning attack) 1 6 RhS 0.()
1 7 eS Re8? (he had to play 1 7 . . . Qc8 !) 1 8 e6 f6? (this loses quickly
whereas 1 8 . . . Bf6 still offered chances of defence) 1 9 Nh4 (threatening
20 Rxh7 Kxh7 2 1 QhS + Kg8 22 Ng6 mating) 1 9 . . Qd6 20 NfS Qc7
.
21 Rxh7! Resigns.
8 Portisch-Radulov, 1 974 : 7 a4 Nc6 8 Qe2 Qc7 (other possibilities are
8 • . Be7 9 dxcS Ne4 ! l 0 Nd4 NxcS I I Nxc6 bxc6 or 8 . . . cxd4
.
9 Rd l Be7 l O exd4 0-0 1 1 BgS NdS 1 2 Bxe7 Nc6xe7 1 3 NeS 8d7

14 Nd2 Bc6 I S Ne4 with a minimal plus to Whlte) 9 Nc3 Bd6 !? (the
earlier line was 9 . . . Be7 1 0 Rdl 0-0 I I b3 Bd7 1 2 Bb2 Rfd8 with
even chances) 1 0 Rd l O.Q I I h3 b6? (better is . . . Bd7 and Rad8)
12 dS exdS 1 3 BxdS Bb7 14 e4 Rae8 I S BgS Nd4? (better is I S . . .
Be7 1 6 eS Bd8) 1 6 Nxd4 NxdS 1 7 NxdS BxdS 1 8 NfS ! Rxe4 1 9 QhS
Rfe8 (if 1 9 . . . g6 20 Bf6 ! ! gxhS 21 Nh6 mate. Or 1 9 . . . ReS 20 Bf6 !
etc.) 2 0 Nxg7 ! ! R8eS (if20 . . . Kxg7 2 1 Qh6+ Kg8 22 Bf6 Bf8 2 3 Qg5 + )
2 1 f4 Rxf4 2 2 Ne8 ! Qc6 (or 22 . . . Rxe8 23 Bxf4) 23 Nxd6 f6 24 Re i !
Resigns (if 24 . . . Qxd6 25 Bxf4 . Or 24 . . . Rxg5 2S Re8+ Kg7 26 Re7+
Kf8 27 Rf7+ . Or 24 . . . Rd4 25 Rxe5 fxe5 26 NfS etc .)
Despite Black's drastic losses in the above games, our notes show
that the defence is viable. Nevertheless, m ost players prefer to decline
the gambit by 2 . . . e6 or 2 . . . c6 , each of which we shall ill us tra te in
a full game. Many beginners opt for 2 . . . Nf6 whlch dangerously con
cedes White. the centre . Play is interesting: 3 c xd5 N xd5 4 N f3 ! (White
must not be over-hasty in occupying the centre· e.g. 4 e4? Nf6 5 Nc3 eS !
6 dxeS Qxd l + 7 Kxd l Ng4 , or here 7 Nxd l Nxe4 with excellent play
for Black. Or 4 e4? Nf6 5 Bd3 e 5 ! 6 dxe5 Ng4 7 Nf3 Nc6 etc.) 4 . . .
Bf5 5 Qb3 ! Nc6 6 Nbd2 (but not of course 6 Qxb7? Ndb4 7 Na3 Rb8
winning the queen in typical fashion) 6 . . . Nb6 7 e4 Bg6 8 d5 and
White's strong centre gives him a clear advantage .
Here are a few less popular continuations:
(I) 2 . . . Nc6 (the Chigorin Defence) 3 Nc3 Nf6 (3 . . . dxc4 4 Nf3 !
Bg4 5 d5 Bxf3 6 exf3 Ne5 7 Bf4 Nd3+ 8 Bxd3 cxd3 9 O.Q! Nf6
I 0 Qb3 ! etc.) 4 Nf3 Bf5 (or 4 . . . Bg4 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e4 Bxf3
7 gxf3 Nb6 8 d5 Nb8 9 Bf4 c6 I 0 Qb3) S cxdS Nxd5 6 Qb3 e6
7 Bg5 Qd7 8 e4 ! Nxc3 9 exfS Nd5 1 0 0-0-0 with a clear plus to
Whlte.
1 4 0 I A pseudo-gam bit
(2 ) 2. . . e5 ! ? (the Albin Coun ter-gambit) 3 dxe5 d4 4 NO (beware the

trap 4 e3'? Bb4 + 5 Bd2 dxe3 ! 6 Bxb4?? exf2 + 7 Ke2 fxg1 =N+ !
8 Rxg l Bg4 + etc.) 4 . . . Nc6 5 a3 (good al ternatives are 5 Nbd2,
5 g3 and 5 Bf4 , but not 5 e3 Bg4) 5 . . . Bg4 6 Nbd2 Qe7 7 h3
Bxf3 8 Nxf3 0.{).{) 9 Qd3 h6 1 1 Bg2 Bg7 1 2 0-0 N xeS 1 3 NxeS
Bxe5 14 b4 ! ( Lasker-Aiekhine, St Petersburg 1 9 1 4 ) when White
has obtained a positional advantage by the usual method of returning
the gambit pawn . An in teresting alternative is 4 e4 Nc6 5 f4 gS !
6 fS ! NxeS 7 NO when Black's K-side is seriously weakened.
(3 ) 2 . . . c S ! ? 3 cxdS Nf6 ! (3 . . . QxdS 4 NO cxd4 5 Nc3 ! Qd8
6 Qxd4 Qxd4 7 Nxd4 gives White a powerful lead in development)
4 e4 ! (or 4 dxcS QxdS 5 Qxd5 NxdS 6 e4 Nb4 7 Na3 , or here
6 Bd2 eS 7 Nc3 etc.) 4 . . . N xe4 5 dxcS ! NxcS 6 NO e6 7 Nc3
exdS 8 QxdS Nc6 9 Qxd8+ Nxd8 I 0 NdS Ne6 1 1 Be3 and White
stands bet ter (Dooner-O'Kelly, 1 965).
Game 1 7
Fischer Spassky (Match 1 972)
I d4 dS
2 - c4 e6
3 N c3 Nf6
Ot her moves fur Black are :

( I ) 3 . . . c S (the Tarrasch Variation which gives free play for the pieces
in re turn for some positional weaknesses, in the modern spirit)
4 cxdS exd5 (the gambit variation 4 . . . c xd4 does not appear
sound enough e .g. 5 Qxd4 Nc6 6 Qd l exd5 7 QxdS Be6 ! 8 Q xd8+
Rxd8 9 e3 Nb4 1 0 Bb5+ Ke7 1 1 Kf1 ! Or 5 Qa4+ Bd7 6 Qxd4
exdS 7 QxdS Nf6 8 Qd 1 ! Nc6 9 e3 Qb6 1 0 NO 0-D-0 1 1 Bd2 !
Qxb2 1 2 Rb 1 Qa3 1 3 Bc4 ! etc.) 5 NO ! (after 5 dxc5 Nf6 6 Be3
Nc6 7 NO QaS 8 Nd2 Ng4 Black has good play for the pawn , and
if 5 e4 ! ? d xe4 6 dS Nf6 7 BgS Be7 8 Bb5+ Kf8 ! Black stands well)
5 . . . Nc6 ! (5 . . . Nf6? 6 BgS ! Be6 7 Bxf6 Qxf6 8 e4! d xe4 9 Bb5 + )
6 g3 ! Nf6 (the Swedish Variation 6 . . . c4 favours White e .g. 7 Bg2
Bb4 8 0.{) Nge7 9 a3 BaS 10 e4 0.{) ! 1 1 exdS NxdS ! 1 2 NxdS
QxdS 13 NeS QbS 14 a4 Qa6 1 5 Nxc6 bxc6 1 6 QhS , or here
1 3 NgS Qxd4 1 4 Qc2 Qd3 1 5 Qa4 Bb6 1 6 Be4 etc .) 7 Bg2 Be7
8 0.{) 0-0 9 dxc5 (after the popular 9 Bg5 Spassky has developed
the following method : 9 . . . cxd4 1 0 N x d4 Re8 ! with good piece
A pseudo1:am bit I ! 4 I
play as compensation for the i s ol a te d pawn. Perhaps White's

strongest is 9 b 3 ! Ne4 1 0 Bb2 Bf6 I I Na4 ! when I I . . . bS fails to
1 2 NxcS ! N xcS 1 3 Re i ! so 1 0 . . . Be6 and . . . Rc8 is b et t er ) 9 . . .
BxcS (the ga m b it 9 . . . d4 ! ? is risky but in teres ting: 1 0 N�4 BfS
I I Bf4 Be4 ! I 2 Rc l Qd S 1 3 Qb3 etc.) I 0 Na4 Be 7 I I Be3 (White
plans to con trol the important cS and d4 squares) I I . . . Ne4
1 2 Re i QaS 1 3 Nd4 Bd 7 ! or here I I . . . BfS 1 2 NcS BxcS 1 3 BxcS
Re8 followed by 14 . . . Be4 with equality.
(2) 3 . . . Be 7 usually transposes to the game line, but different
positions arise after 4 Nf3 Nf6 5 Bf4 c S ! 6 dxcS Na6 ! or 4 cxdS
exdS 5 Bf4 c6 6 e3 BfS 7 g4 !? Be6 8 h3 Nf6 9 Nf3 with sharp play .
(3) 3 . . . c6 4 Nf3 (unclear an d complex play arises after 4 e4 d xe4
5 Nxe4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 !? Qxd4 7 Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8 Be2 and now not
8 . . . Qxg2? 9 Qd6 ! followed by 0-D-0, but either 8 . . . Na6 or
8 . . . c S 9 BxcS Qxg2 ! I 0 Qd6 Nd7 1 1 0-0-0 Qc6) 4 . . . Nf6 (the
Noteboom Variation 4 . . . dxc4 is very risky e .g. 5 a4 Bb4 6 e3 bS
7 Bd2 aS ! 8 axbS Bxc3 9 b xc3 ! cxbS 10 Qb i ! Ba6 1 1 Be2 fol
lowed by 0-0 and e4 with a good game for White) reaching the
Semi-Slav Defence which we shall discuss later.
4 BgS
A common alternative is the Exchange Variation 4 cxdS exdS 5 BgS
Be7 6 e3 c6 7 Bd3 0-0 8 Qc2 Nbd7 when White has various possibilities :
( 1 ) 9 Nge2 followed · by 0-D an d f3 preparing e4 .
(2) 9 Nge2 or 9 Nf3 followed by 0-0-0 intending a K-side attack.
(3 ) 9 Nf3 Re8 1 0 0-0 Nf8 (beware of two mistakes here : IO . . . Ne4?
1 1 Bxe4 ! BxgS I 2 Bxh7+ , and 1 0 . . . h6 1 1 Bf4 ! NhS? I 2 N xd S !
cxdS?? I 3 Bc7 winning the queen !) 1 1 Rab 1 ! Ne4 I 2 Bxe7 Qxe7
1 4 2 I A pseudo-gambit
1 3 b4 ! or at once I I Bxf6 Bxf6 1 2 b4 ! launc!Ung the famous

minority attack. The move 4 Nf3 is not so precise as the move in
the game, as Black can now try 4 . . . c5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e4 Nxc3
7 bxc3 cxd4 8 cxd4 Nc6 9 Bc4 b 5 ! (tills move introduced by
Fischer in his World Champions!Up match against Spassky seems
sufficient to equalise) I 0 Bd3 Bb4+ 1 1 Bd2 Bxd2+ 1 2 Qxd2 a6
and Black plans . . . 0-0 and . . . Bb7 to control W!Ute's centre. The
game continued: 1 3 a4 0-0! 1 4 Qc3 Bb7 ! etc. Or White can play
here 6 e3 Nc6 7 Bc4 (7 Bd3 Be7 8 0-0 0-0 Re i b6 ! etc .) 7 . . .
cxd4 8 exd4 Be7 9 0-0 0-0 I O Re i Nxc3 (or 1 0 . . . a6 1 1 a3 !
Nxc3 I 2 bxc3 b5 1 3 Bd3 Bb7) I I bxc3 b6 1 2 Bd3 Bb7 I 3 Qc2 g6
1 4 Bh6 Re8 e tc.
4 ... Be7
The move 4 . . . c5 !? leads to great complications w!Uch seem to favour
W!Ute after 5 cxd5 e.g.
( I ) 5 . . . Qb6 6 dxe6 cxd4 ! 7 exf7+ Kxf7 8 Na4 Qa5 + 9 Bd2 Bb4
I 0 Qb3+ Nd5 I I Bxb4 Qxb4+ I 2 Qxb4 Nxb4 1 3 Rad 1 ! wtth ad
vantage to White according to analysis by H. Platz.
(2) 5 . . . cxd4 6 Qxd4 Be7 ! 7 e4 ! Nc6 8 Qd2 ! Nxe4 !? 9 Nxe4 exdS
1 0 Bxe7 Qxe7 I I Qxd5 0-0 ( I I . . . f5 1 2 Bb5 ! Qxe4+ J.3 Qxe4
fxe4 1 4 Re i Bd7 I S Ne2 gives W!Ute the better ending) 1 2 f3 Nb4
1 3 Qc4 ! Be6 I 4 Qc5 ! Qxc5 1 5 Nxc5 Nc2+ 1 6 Kd2 Nxa i I 7 Nxe6
fxe6 1 8 Bd3 with a winning game according to analysis by
Korchnoi e .g. 1 8 . . . Rfd8 I 9 Ne2 Rxd3+ 20 Kxd3 Rd8 + 2 I Kc3
Rc8+ 22 Kd2 Rd8+ 23 Kc l etc.
The other move for Black 4 . . . Nbd7 sets the well-known trap 5 cxd5
exd5 6 Nxd5 ?? NxdS ! 7 Bxd8 Bb4+ winning a piece. After 5 e3 Black
can either transpose to the normal line by 5 . . . Be7 or can try two
other ideas :
( I ) 5 . . . c6 6 Nf3 Qa5 (the Cambridge-Spring; Variation) 7 cxd5 !
(stronger than 7 Nd2 dxc4 ! 8 Bxf6 Nxf6 9 Nxc4 Qc7 1 0 Re i Be7
when White's space advantage is off-set by Black's two bishops)
7 . . . Nxd5 (or 7 . . . exd5 8 Bd3 Ne4 9 0-0! when 9 . . . Nxc3
1 0 bxc3 Qxc3 is answered by I I e4 ! dxe4 I 2 Re I ! f5 1 3 Rc 1 Qa3
14 Nf4 with a clear plus to W!Ute) 8 Qd2 N7b6 ! ? (or 8 . . . Bb4
9 Re i 0-0 10 e4 Nxc3 1 1 bxc3 Ba3 1 2 Rb i ) 9 Bd3 ! (9 e4? N xc3
1 0 bxc3 Na4 I 1 Re i Nxc3 ! ) 9 . . . Nxc3 I O bxc3 Nd5 I 1 0-0!
Qxc3 1 2 Qe2 Bd6 I3 Ra e ! QaS I4 Bb i ! with excellent attacking
chances for W!Ute according to analysis by Stahlberg.
A pseudo�ambit I 1 43
(2) 5 . . . Bb4 (the Manhattan Variation) 6 cxd5 exd5 7 Bd3 c5 8 Ne 2 !

and Whi te stands be tter. This variation is a li ttle more acceptable
for Black if White has played the move order 5 Nf3 Bb4 6 c3 e .g.
6 . . . c5 7 cxd5 exd5 8 Bd3 Qa5 9 0.0! c4 1 0 Bc2 Bxc3 1 1 b xc3
Ne4 ! 1 2 Qe 1 Qxc3 1 3 Bxe4 Qxe1 14 Rf1 xe l dxe4 1 5 Nd2 h 6
1 6 Bf4 f5 1 7 Nxc4 Nf6 with equality .
5 e3 0.0
6 Nf3 h6
The most modest system of the Queen's Gambit Declined. The once
popular Orthodox System runs as follows : 6 . . . Nbd7 7 Re i (after
7 Qc2 c S ! White h as a choice between the over-sharp 8 0.0 .0 ! ? and the
simplifying 8 cxd5 NxdS 9 Bxe7 Qxe7 1 0 dxc5 Nxc5) with two main
variations:
( 1 ) 7 . . . c6 8 Bd3 dxc4 9 Bx c4 Nd5 (the Capablanca freeing man

oeuvre) 1 0 Bxe7 Qxe7 1 1 0.0 (or 1 1 Ne4 N5f6 1 2 Ng3 eS e tc . )
1 1 . . . Nxc3 1 2 Rxc3 eS 1 3 Qc2 ! e .g. 1 3 . . . e 4 1 4 N d 2 Nf6
1 5 Rfc 1 Kh 8 ! (to answer 1 6 Bb3 with 1 6 . . . Be6 !) 1 6 b4 ! Qxb4
1 7 Nxe4 Nxe4 1 8 Qxe4 . Or 1 3 . . . exd4 14 exd4 Nb6 1 5 Re3
followed by 1 6 Bb3 wi th some advantage for White in both cases.
(2) 7 . . . a6 . Let us illustrate this move by the game Hort-Portisch
( 1 973 ) : 8 c5 (White usually transposes to the Exchange Variation
by 8 cxd5. The usual 8 Bd3 would now fall in with Black's plans
e.g. 8 . . . d xc4 9 Bxc4 b5 ! 1 0 Bd3 Bb7 followed by . . . c5) 8 . . .
c6 9 Bd3 b6 1 0 cxb6 Qxb6 1 1 0.0! Qxb2 1 2 Na4 Qb7 1 3 NeS c 5
1 4 Nxd7 Bxd7 1 5 Nxc5 Bxc5 1 6 Bxf6 ! gxf6 1 7 Qg4+ Kh8 20 Qh4
f5 1 9 Qf6+ Kg8 20 Qg5 + Kh8 2 1 Qf6 + Kg8 22 d xc5 Bc6
23 Qg5 + Kh8 26 Qf6+ (presumably to gain time on the clock!)
1 44 I A pseudo-gambit
24 . . . Rg8 25 Rb l Qc7 26 Rb4 ! Ra7?? (26 . . . Qd8 ! ) and now

Wh ite could have won immediately with the same combination he
played four moves later in the game : 27 Rg4 + ! ! fxg4 28 Qg5+
Kh8 29 Qh6 and mate next move , because of the unprotected rook
on f8.
7 Bh4
7 Bxf6 Bxf6 has also been played but White must watch out for . . . c5
e .g. 8 Qc2 c 5 ! 9 d x c5 Qa5 1 0 Be2 d x c4 1 1 0-0 Bx c3 1 2 Qx c3 Ox c3
1 3 b x c3 Nd7 etc. White's best is 8 Re i c6 9 Bd3 Nd7 1 0 0-0 dx c4
I I Bx c4 e5 1 2 Ne4 ex d4 1 3 Nx f6+ Nx f6 with equality .
7 . .. b6
There is a second important way in which Black can free his position :
7 . . . Ne4 (the ' Lasker Variation ') 8 Bxe7 Qxe7 and now:
( I ) 9 Nxe4 (?) dxe4 10 Nd2 f5 1 1 Re i Nd7 1 2 Qc2 c6 1 3 c5 e5 ! with
good play for Black.
(2) 9 Rc 1 c6 1 0 Bd3 N xc3 1 1 Rxc3 dxc4 1 2 Bxc4 N d7 1 3 0-0 e5 and ,
Black has 'gained' the useful move . . . h6 in comparison with the
Orthodox System position .
(3 ) 9 Qc2 c6 1.0 Bd3 ( I 0 Nxe4 dxe4 1 1 Qxe4 Qb4+ 1 2 Nd2 Qxb2)
I 0 . . . N xc3 I I Qxc3 dxc4 1 2 Bxc4 b6 1 3 0-0 Nd7 1 5 e4 Bb7
1 5 Re i c5 ! 1 6 dS exd5 1 7 exdS Qf6 ! with equality .
(4) 9 cxd5 Nxc3 1 0 bxc3 exd5 I I Qb3 ! is the most awkward line for
Black to meet but recent analysis has come up with the following
solid defensive idea : 1 1 . . . c6 1 2 c4 Be6 ! 1 3 Be2 Nd7! with
equali ty , since 1 4 Qxb7 allows 1 4 . . . Rfb8 followed by . . . Qb4+
and . . . dxc4.
8 cxd5
For a long time this was considered White's most promising continuation
but the present opinion is that it is too quiet to give any advantage .
Other moves are :
(1) S Qc2 Bb7 9 Bxf6 Bxf6 1 0 cxdS exdS 1 1 0-0-0 cS ! 1 2 d xcS Bxc3 !
1 3 Qxc3 Nd7 with equality ( 1 4 c6 Bxc6 ! )
(2) S Bd3 B b7 a n d the game Polugayevsky-Saidy , 1 972, went 9 Bxf6 !
{Black equalises after 9 0-0 Nbd7 1 0 Qe2 Ne4 ! ) 9 . . . Bxf6 1 0 cxdS
exdS 1 1 0-0 Nd7 1 2 Qb3 ! c6 13 Rad 1 ReS 1 4 Bb l Qb8 ? (the
beginning of a faulty plan . He should play 1 4 . . . Be7 followed by
. . . Nf6 to control the e4 square) I S Rfe l Be7 1 6 a3 Bd6 { 1 6 . . .
Nf6 !) 1 7 e4 dxe4 1 S Nxe4 Re7 1 9 Ba2 ! (threatening 20 Nf6+
N x f6 2 1 R x e 7 B x e7 22 Q x f7+) 1 9 . . . Qc7 20 NegS ! Nf6 21 Rx e7
Qxe7 2 2 Qxf7 + KhS 23 NeS ! Resigns.
(3) 8 Be2 Bb7 9 Bx f6 Bxf6 . Here is the game Korchnoi-Cuellar ( 1 973) :
1 0 c x d S e xdS 1 1 0-0 Qe7? (the queen i s badly placed here, so
1 1 . . . Nd7 ! 1 2 Qb3 c6 13 Rad 1 Be7 ! 1 4 Rfe 1 Nf6 is correc t , as in
Korchnoi-Hubner, 1 974) 1 2 Qb3 c6 (or 1 2 . . . Rd8 1 3 Rad l cS
1 4 dxcS Bxc3 I S Qxc3 bxcS 16 Re i Nd7 1 7 Rc2 RabS I S b3 Qe6
1 9 Rdl Qb6 20 Ne l ! RbcS 2 1 Bg4 and in the game Korchnoi
Geller, 1 97 1 , Black had trouble with his hanging pawns) 1 3 Rfe 1
Bc8 1 4 Rac 1 Be6 I S Qa4 aS 1 6 Bd3 ReS 1 7 e4 Qd8 1 8 e x dS !
cxdS ! 1 9 Nxd S ! Nd7 ( 1 9 . . . BxdS 20 RxcS QxcS 2 1 Re8+ wins)
20 Bc4 Nf8 2 1 Nxf6+ Qxf6 22 NeS QgS 23 Qd l bS 24 Bxe6 Nxe6
2S Nc6 Nf4 26 Qf3 and White won.
8 ... NxdS!
So far Black's opening has followed the Tartakower System , but Tarta
kower used to capture here with the pawn giving Black a difficult game.
After the text-move Black exchanges two minor pieces , thus making his
defence easier.
9 Bxe7 Qxe7
1 0 NxdS
Black s tands well after I 0 Rc l Bb7 1 1 NxdS BxdS ! etc .
10 . . . exdS
1 1 Rcl
An important alternative is 1 1 Bd3 Be6 (note that in such positions the
queen exchange 1 1 . . . Qb4+ 1 2 Qd2 Qxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2 is bad for Black

in view of his backward c-pawn) 1 2 0-0 c5 1 3 dxc5 bxc5 1 4 e4 Rfd8!
{stronger than 14 . . . d4 1 5 Nd2 and f4) 1 5 exd5 Bxd5 with equality .
11 . .. Be6
The bishop is more actively posted here than on b7 e .g. 1 2 Be2 c5
1 3 dxc5 bxc5 1 4 0-0 Nd7 1 5 b4 ! c4 1 6 Nd4 and White s tands better
(Trifunovic-Pirc , 1 94 7)
1 2 Qa4 cS
13 Qa3 ! Rfc8
1 4 BbS
The usual 14 Be2 N d 7 1 5 0-0 Qf8 (or even 1 5 . . . Kf8 !) leads to equality,
as Black threatens . . . c4 and after 16 dxc5 bxc5 the h anging pawns are
easy to defend.
14 . . . a6?
This natural-looking move is surprisingly a serious error. Black should
play 14 . . . Qb7 ! 1 5 dx r.5 b x c 5 1 6 R x c 5 Rxc5 1 7 Qx c5 Na6 ! (even
1 7 . . . a6 1 8 Be2 Qxb2 1 9 Nd4 Qb 1 + 20 Bd 1 Qb7 is enough for
equality) 1 8 Bxa6 ( 1 8 Qc6 Qxc6 1 9 Bxc6 Rb8 ! 20 b3? ReS ! ) 1 8 . . .
Qxa6 and it is White who must fight for equality e.g. 1 9 Qa3 Qxa3
20 bxa3 Rb8 and . . . Rb2.
15 d xcS bxcS
1 6 0.0! Ra7
This unpinning costs too much time, but even after 16 . . . Qb7 1 7 Ba4 !
Black would still have difficulties in developing his knigh t .
1 7 Be2 N bd7
Perhaps he should play . . . a 5 , since he now allows a new pin.
18 Nd4 !
An excellent manoeuvre. If now 1 8 . . . Nf6 1 9 Nb3 c4 20 Qxe7 Rxe7
2 1 N d4 with an ideal square for the knight, or here 1 9 . . . N d 7 20 Rfd 1
etc. (See next diagram .)
18 Qf8
1 9 N xe6 f x e6
20 e4! d4( ?)
A pseudo�ambit I 1 47
This allows the powerful posting ofWhite's bishop on the a2-g8 diagonal .
Black could not play 20 . . . dxe4 21 Bc4 Qf7 22 Qb3 Re S 23 Red I and
24 Rd6 but 20 . . . Nf6 2 1 eS Nd7 or even the exchange of queens by
20 . c4 would have offered a stiffer resistance.
. .
2 1 f4 ! Qe7
22 eS
Apparently giving Black's knight a strong post on d5, but after 22 . . .
Nb6 23 Qb3 ! Nd5 White has 24 f5 !
22 . . . Rb8
23 Bc4 Kh8
Now 23 . . . Nb6 24 Qb3 ! wins a pawn.
24 Qh3 Nf8
25 b3 aS
26 fS exfS
27 RxfS Nh7
In order to answer 28 Rf7? with 28 . . . Ng5 .
28 Rcfl Qd8
29 Qg3 Re7
30 h4 Rbb7
31 e6 Rbc7
32 QeS Qe8
Black's position is hopeless and White can calmly prepare the finish .
33 a4! Qd8
34 Rf2 Qe8
1 48 I A pseud o-gam bit
35 Rf3 Qd8
36 Bd3 Qe8
37 Qe4!
Threatening 38 Rf8 + ! Nxf8 39 Rxf8+ Qxf8 40 Qh7 mate .
37 N f6
38 Rxf6 ! g x f6
39 Rxf6 Kg8
40 Bc4 Kh8
41 Qf4 Resigns
The actual opening sequence of the above game was 1 c4 e6 2 Nf3 d5
3 d4 N f6 4 Nc3 Be7 5 Bg5 0-0 6 e3 etc., and such transpositions are
very common in the Closed Openings. Let us look at the position after
Black's 3rd move.
In the above game White played 4 Nc3 giving Black the chance to play
the ac tive 4 . . . c 5 . Spassky preferred instead the solid Tartakower
Variation . The move 4 BgS leads to in teresting play if Black rejects the
normal 4 . . . Be7 e.g.
( I ) 4 . . . Bb4+ S Nc3 dxc4 (the Vienna Variation) 6 e4 c S 7 e5 c xd4
8 Qa4+ Nc6 9 0-0-0! Bd7 1 0 Ne4 Be7 1 1 exf6 gxf6 1 2 Bh4 Rc8
1 3 Kb l b S ! ? (or 1 3 . . . NaS 1 4 Qc2 eS 1 5 Nxd4 ! exd4 1 6 Rxd4
Qb6 1 7 Rxd 7 ! Kxd7 1 8 Be2 with a strong attack) 1 4 Qxb5 c3 !
1 5 Nxd4 ! Qc7 1 6 Bg3 ! eS 1 7 Qb3 ! with a winning position .
Or here 7 Bxc4 cxd4 8 Nxd4 QaS (8 . . . Qc7 9 Qb3 ! Bxc3 + 1 0 Qxc3
N x e4 1 1 NbS ! ) 9 B x f6 ! Bx c3+ 1 0 b x c3 Qx c3 + 1 1 Kfl Q x c4+ 1 2 Kg1
Nd7 ! ( 1 2 . . . Bd 7 1 3 Rc 1 Qa6 14 N xe6 ! ! fxe6 1 S Rc8+ ! !) 1 3 Re i !
Qa6 ( 1 3 . . . Qxa2 1 4 Bxg7 Rg8 1 S NbS !) 1 4 Bxg7 Rg8 1 5. a4 ! Qd6
( l S . . . Rxg7 1 6 NbS ! ) 1 6 Bh6 with a winning game for White.
A pse udo�ambit I 1 49
(2) 4 . . Bb4+ 5 Nc3 h6 (?) (the Ragosin Variation) 6 Bxf6 (6 Bh4?

.
dxc4 7 e4? g5 etc.) 6 . . . Qxf6 7 cxd5 exd5 8 Qb3 (better is Qa4+

Nc6 9 e3 O.Q 1 0 Be2 Be6 1 1 O.Q a6 Rfc 1 Bd7 1 3 Qd l Ne7 with
even chances) 8 . . . c5 ! 8 Be3 (bad is 9 Qxd5? Nc6 1 0 e3 Be6
I I Qe4 O.Q.Q!) 9 . . . 0-0 1 0 dxc5 Bxc3+ I I Qxc3 Qxc3 + 1 2 bxc3
Nd7 13 Rd l N xc5 14 Rxd5 b6 1 5 Rd2 Bb7 1 6 Be2 Rfc8! and
Black has fully equalised.
(3) 4 . . h6 5 Bxf6 (after 5 Bh4? we again have 5 . . . Bb4 + 6 Nc3
.
dxc4 etc.) 5 . . . Qxf6 6 Nc3 c6 7 Qb3 (the quiet 7 e3 Nd7 8 Bd3

Bb4 9 O.Q Qe7 is probably better) 7 . . . dxc4 ! 8 Qxc4 Nd7 9 e4 e5
10 d5 Nb6 with equality .
Game 18
Mikenas Kupreichik (USSR 1 973)
I d4 dS
2 c4 c6
3 N f3 Nf6
4 Nc3
Other possibilities are :

( 1 ) 4 cxd5 c xd 5 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 Bf4 and in this symmetrical position
Black has li ttle trouble in equalising e .g. 6 . . . Bf5 7 e3 e6 8 Qb3
Bb4 ! Or 6 . . . e6 7 �3 Bd6 etc.
(2) 4 e3 Bf5 ! 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 Qc7 7 Nc3 (or 7 Na3 ! ? Nc6 8 Bd2 e6
9 Re i Ne4 ! 10 Bb5 N xd2 I I K xd2 ! ? Rc8 1 2 Qa4 Qb6 1 3 Ne5 Bd6 !
1 4 N xc6 bxc6 1 5 Rxc6 Rxc6 1 6 Bxc6+ Ke7 1 7 Qb5 Rb8 and
Black stands better) 7 . . . e6 8 Bd2 Nc6 9 Rc 1 a6 I 0 Qa4 Rc8 !
1 50 I A pseudo�ambit
I I Ne S Nd7. Or here 5 Bd3 e6 ! 6 Nc3 Bxd3 (or 6 . . . Be4 !)

7 Qxd3 Nd7 8 0 .0 Bb4 ! with even chances i n both cases .
(3) 4 Qb3 e6 S g3 Nbd7 6 Bg2 Be7 7 0.0 0.0 foll owed by . . . b6 and
. . . Bb7.
4 ... dxc4
5 a4( !)
Because White has already played Nc3 and Black has played . . . c6,
White must not forget that Black can defend the gambit pawn e .g.
( I ) S e4 bS ! (the Slav Gambit) 6 eS (White can also try 6 Qc2 e6 7 Be2
Bb7 8 0.0 Nbd7 9 Rd I a6 1 0 BgS h6 I I Bh4 Be7 and White's strong
centre offers compensation for the pawn) 6 . . . NdS 7 a4 e6 !
(much stronger than 7 . . . Be6 8 Ng5 ! Nxc3 9 b xc3 Bd5 I 0 e6 !
fxe6 I I Qg4 , or 7 . . . BfS 8 axbS Nb4? 9 B xc4 ! Nc2+ 1 0 Ke2
Nxa l I I Qa4 ! Bc2 1 2 Qxa l ) 8 axbS Nxc3 9 bxc3 cxbS 1 0 Ng5 !
Bb7 I I QhS g6 1 2 Qg4 Be7 1 3 Be2 Nd7 1 4 Bf3 Qc8 ! and Black
stands well , since he can answer 1 5 Ne4 with I S . . . 0.0 1 6 Bh6 f5 !
Note that 1 4 . . . Qc7? is weaker because it does not protect the
e-pawn.
(2) 5 e3 bS 6 a4 b4 ! (not 6 . . . Nd5? 7 axb5 Nxc3 8 bxc3 cxb5 9 Ne5!
Bb7 10 Rb l Qd5 1 1 f3 fS 1 2 Qc2 e6 1 3 Qb2 ! - Rubinstein-Alapin,
1 9 1 2) 7 Na2 (after 7 N b l Ba6 ! 8 Qc2 e6 ! 9 Bxc4 B xc4 1 0 Qxc4
QdS I I Nbd2 Nbd7 1 2 Qe2 Ne4 1 3 N xe4 Q xe4 14 0-0 Be7
1 S Bd2 O.Q 1 6 Rfc l c5 ! and Black stands weil , since 1 7 Qb5? can
be answered by 1 7 . . Rfb8 1 8 Qxd7 Rb7 1 9 Ng5 Bxg5 etc.) 7 . . .
.
e6 8 Bxc4 Bb7 9 O.Q Be 7 1 0 Qe2 O.Q 1 1 Rd l a S ! 1 2 Bd2 ( 1 2 e4

cS ! ) 1 2 . . . Nbd7 1 3 Nc l c 5 14 Nb3 Qb6 ! with full equality . White
regained his pawn but in doing so gave Black time to develop
effectively.
5 ... BfS
The bishop is well placed here , controlling the square e4, but we must
mention two other continuations :
( 1 ) 5 . . . Na6 (the Lasker Variation) 6 e4 (or the quieter 6 e3 Bg4
7 Bxc4 e6 8 Qe2 Nb4 9 O.Q Be7 1 0 Rd I O.Q 1 1 aS Qc8 1 2 h3 BhS
1 3 b3 c 5 . If instead 6 Ne5 then 6 . . . Ng4 ! 7 Nxc4 e 5 !) 6 . . . Bg4
7 Bxc4 e6 8 Be3 Be7 9 0-0 O.Q 1 0 h3 Bh5 1 1 gS (or 1 1 Be2 c 5 ! )
I I . . . Bg6 1 2 N e 5 Nb4 1 3 Rcl c 5 ! wi th even chances.
(2) 5 . . . Bg4 6 NeS Bh5 7 g3 (if 7 f3 Nfd7 8 Nxc4 e5 ! ) 7 . , . e6 8 Bg2
Bb4 9 O.Q 0.0 1 0 Nxc4 and White stands a li ttle better.
A pseudo-gam bit I 1 5 1
6 Ne5
A move which leads to great complications. The simpler line is 6 e3 e6
7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0.0 0-0 9 Nh4 Nbd 7 ! (better than 9 . . . Bg4 I 0 f3 Nd5
I I fxg4 Qxh4 1 2 e4 ! ) 1 0 f3 Bg6 1 1 e4 e5 1 2 Nxg6 hxg6 1 3 Be3 Qe7
14 Qe2 e xd4 1 5 Bxd4 Bc5 with only an edge to White (Botvinnik
Smyslov, 1 9 54 Match). Or here 9 Qe2 Nbd7 1 0 e4 Bg6 1 1 Bd3 Bh5 !
with an equal game e .g. 1 2 e5 Nd5 1 3 Ne4 Be7 1 4 Bd2 c5 , or 1 2 Bf4
ReS 1 3 e5 Nd5 1 4 Nxd5 cxd5 etc.
6 ... e6!
In the Euwe-Alekhine 1 93 5 Match , the continuation 6 . . . Nbd7
7 Nxc4 Qc7 8 g3 ! e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 1 0 Bf4 Nfd7 1 1 Bg2 Rd8 1 2 Qc l f6
1 3 � was adopted several times, but it is to White's advantage e.g.
13 .. . Qb8 14 Ne4 Be7 1 5 Qc3 0-0 1 6 Rad 1 Be6 1 7 N xe5 Bxe5
18 Ng5 1 Or 1 3 . . . Be6 1 4 Ne4 ! Bb4 1 5 aS ! 0.0 1 6 Ra4 ! e tc .
7 f3
Or 7 Bg5 Bb4 ! 8 Nxc4 h6! 9 Bxf6 Qxf6 1 0 Qb3 Na6 and Black s tands
well in view of White's weak d-pawn .
7 ... Bb4!
The critical line now is 8 e4 ! ? Bxe4 ! 9 fxe4 N xe4 e .g. :

( I ) 1 0 Q£3? Qxd4 ! I I Qxf7+ Kd8 1 2 Bg5 + ( 1 2 Qxg7?? Bxc3 +
1 3 bxc3 Qxf2+ 1 4 Kd l Nxc3 mate) 1 2 . . . Kc8 ! 1 3 Qxe6 + Nd7
I 4 Nxd7 Bxc3 + 1 5 Bxc3 Qc3+ 1 6 Ke2 Nxg5 ! 1 7 Nb6+ Kc7
1 8 N xa8+ Kb8 with advantage to Black.
(2) 1 0 Bd2 Qxd4 I 1 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 1 2 Qe2 Bxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2 Qd5 +
1 4 Kc2 Na6 1 5 Nxc4 0-0.0 1 6 Qe3 Nc5 1 7 Qe5 f6 1 8 Qxd5 cxd5
and Black's three extra pawns just about compensate for White's
extra piece .
Another possibility is 8 BgS cS 9 d xc S ! QdS 1 0 QxdS exdS ! I I e4
dxe4 I 2 Nxc4 0.0 1 3 Bxf6 gxf6 1 4 0.0.0 exf3 1 5 Nd5 Nc6 1 6 gxf3
BxcS 1 7 N xf6 + Kh8 I 8 RdS Nd4 ! with equality (Euwe-Alek.hine,
1 93 7). In our game White chooses a third possibility .
8 Nxc4 Nbd7
After other moves White obtains an advantage e .g. 8 . . . NdS 9 Qd2!
(9 Bd2? Qh4+ and 10 . . . Qxd4) 9 . . . bS 1 0 Ne3 ( 1 0 NeS QaS) I O . . .
0.0 I I Ned I Bg6 1 2 e4. Or 8 . . . 0-0 9 BgS h6 1 0 Bh4 and 1 I e4.
9 BgS
If White plays 9 e4 Black is compelled to react sharply by 9 . . . Nxe4!
I 0 fxe4 Qh4+ 1 1 Kd2 ( 1 1 g3 ? Qxe4+ or 1 1 Ke2? Bg4 + ) and now
1 1 . . . Qxe4?? fails to I 2 Nd6+ ! but I I . . . Bxe4 leaves White's king
exposed.
9 ... h6
1 0 Bh4 bS!?
Otherwise White gains a clear space advantage by 1 1 e4 , whereas now
he has trouble finding a decent move. If now 1 1 Ne5 N xe5 1 2 dxe5
Qxd l + 13 Rxd l NdS ! I 4 e4 Nxc3 1 5 bxc3 Bxc3+ 1 6 Kf2 Bh 7 1 7 axb5
cS with good play for Black.
I I Nd2 eS!
12 e4?
An error but it was not easy to guess Black's intentions . White had to
play 1 2 dxe5 Nxe5 1 3 e4 Bd7 etc .
12 . . . exd4
1 3 Na2
If Black were n ow forced to play 1 3 . . . Bxd2+ , White would stand
well after 14 Qx d2 ( I 4 . . . Nxe4? 1 5 Qf4 ! ), but . . .
13 Nxe4 ! !
1 4 Bxd8 Bxd2+
1 5 Ke2
After 1 5 Qxd2 N xd2 Black comes out a pawn up.
A pseudo-gambit I I 53
IS d3+ !
1 6 Kxd3 NdcS+
1 7 Ke2 Rxd8
Black only h as two minor pieces for the queen but he completely domi
natesthe board. Now 1 8 fxe4 Bg4 + wins.
18 g4 Be6!
19 Qc2 Bb3 !
Even stronger than 1 9 . . . Bc4+ 20 Qxc4 .
20 Rac l Bxc l
2 1 Qxcl Rd2+
22 Ke3 Rd l !
Black settles for mating the queen ! The game now ended : 23 Qxd 1 Bxd I
24 fxe4 Bxa4 2 5 b4 Nd7 26 Nc3 Bb3 27 Be2 Ke7 28 Ra J Ra8 29 h4 g5
30 Kd4 f6 3 1 hxg5 hxg5 3 2 Ra3 Be6 33 Resigns .
Let us n ow return to the position 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3
and continue with 4 . . . e6. We m ust first see if White can transpose to
the Orthodox System of the Queen's Gambit by 5 Bg5 .
However, apart from the solid continuation 5 . . . h6 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 we

have already mentioned, Black can play the sharp 5 . dxc4 ! ? 6 e4 b 5 !
• .
giving us the highly interesting Botvinnik Variation : 7 e5 h 6 8 Bh4 g5

9 Nxg5 (or 9 exf6 gxh4 J 0 Ne5 ! Qxf6 I I g3 Nd7 1 2 f4 Nxe5 I 3 fxe 5 !
or here I I Be2 Nd7 I 2 0.0! Nxe5 1 3 dxe5 Qxe5 1 4 Bf3 with compli
cated play in both cases, but Black should be able to defend) 9 . . .
hxg5 1 0 BxgS Nbd7 and n ow :
( I ) 1 1 Q f3 Bb7 1 2 Be2 Qb6 ! 1 3 Bxf6 ( 1 3 exf6? c5 1 4 d 5 b4) 1 3 . . .
c5 ! 1 4 Ne4 Rg8 1 5 QfS cxd4 ! 1 6 Bh5 Nc5 ! 1 7 Bxf7+ ! Kd7!
1 54 I A pseudo-gambit
1 8 NxcS+ BxcS 1 9 0.0-0 BdS 20 Bxg8 Rxg8 2 1 h4 c3 and Black

won in Zollner-Junge, 1 942.
(2) 1 1 g3 QaS ! 1 2 exf6 b4 13 Ne4 Ba6 14 Qf3 (or 14 a3 !? bxa3 +
I S Bd2) 1 4 . . 0.0.0 1 S Be2 Bb 7 1 6 0.0 Qd5 ! with a complex
.
game offering equal chances.

(3 ) 1 1 exf6 Bb7 1 2 Be2 Qb6 ! ? (better than 1 2 . . . Nxf6 1 3 a4 ! ) 1 3 a4 !
b4 1 4 aS ! Qc7 ( 1 4 . . . Qa6 1 S b3 ! bx c3 1 6 B x c4) 1 5 a6 ! with
the better game to White. Black's best is probably 1 2 . . . Qc7 1 3 h4
b4 ! 1 4 Ne4 c5 1 5 Bf3 0.0.0.
White's o ther method of play is 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 (alternatives are
not so popular : 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 b3 0-0 8 Be2 dxc4 9 bxc4 e5 1 0 0.0 Re8
1 1 Bb2 exd4 1 2 exd4 Nf8 and . . . Ng6. Or here 7 Bd2 0-0 8 0.0-0 e5 !
or 7 e4 dxe4 8 N x e4 N x e4 9 Q x e4 e5 ! )
6 . . . dxc4 (or Black can t ry 6 . . . Bd6 7 e4 ! dxe4 8 Nxe4 Nxe4 9 Bxe4

0.0 10 0-0 h6! 1 1 Re i ! e5 1 2 Bc2 ! exd4 1 3 Qxd4 . Or 6 . . . Be7 7 0.0
0.0 8 b3 ! b6 9 Bb2 Bb7 1 0 Qe2 Qc7 1 1 Ne 5 ! c5 1 2 f4 . Or 6 . . . Bb4
7 a3 ! BaS 8 Qc2 0.0 9 Bd2 Bc7 1 0 0.0 dxc4 1 1 Bxc4 e5 1 2 Ba2 ! exd4
1 3 e xd4 Nb6 1 4 Bg5 . But in all these cases, the defence is difficult)
7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3 (Black has fewer worries after 8 Be2 a6 9 e4 b4 ! 10 e5
bxc3 1 1 exf6 Nxf6 ! 1 2 bxc3 Bd6 , or after 8 Bb3 b4 ! 9 Ne2 Be7 1 0 0.0
0.0 1 1 Nf4 Bb7 1 2 Re 1 c 5 ) and now :
( 1 ) 8 . . . a6 (the Me ran Variation) 9 e 4 c 5 1 0 d5 ! (the old continuation
1 0 e5 cxd4 ! I I Nxb5 ! brings li ttle e .g. 1 1 . . . axb5 1 2 exf6 Qb6
1 3 fxg7 Bxg7 14 0.0 Nc5 1 5 Bf4 ! Bb7 1 6 Re t Bd5 ! or even simpler
I I . . . N xe5 ! 1 2 NxeS axb5 1 3 Qf3 Bb4+ 1 4 Ke2 Rb8 1 5 Qg3
Qd6 1 6 Nf3 Qxg3 1 7 hxg3 Bd6 ! with e quality) 1 0 . . Nb6 !
.
(weaker are the m oves 1 0 . e 5 1 1 b3 ! or 1 0 . . . exdS . 1 1 e5 ! Ng4

. .
1 2 BgS ! or 1 0 . . . c4 1 1 d xe6 ! fxe6 1 2 Bc2) 1 1 dxe6 ( 1 1 d6 c4 !

1 2 Bc2 e S ! or I I 0-0 exdS 1 2 eS Nfd7 1 3 BgS Be?! 1 4 QhS Nxe'i !

or 1 1 BgS exdS 1 2 eS h6 1 3 Bh4 gS etc.) 1 1 . . . Bxe6 1 2 Qe2 Be 7
1 3 O .Q h6 1 4 Rd l a n d White i s a little better.
(2) 8 . b4 9 Ne4 Nxe4 1 0 Bxe4 Bb7 1 1 Qa4 Qb6 ! 1 2 Bd2 Be ? 1 3 Re i
. .
Rc8 1 4 O.Q O.Q followed by . . . Nf6 and . . . c S . Or here 9 . . . Be7

1 0 Nxf6+ Nxf6 1 1 e4 cS 1 2 dxcS Nd7 ! winning back the pawn
with equality.
(3) 8 . . . Bb7 9 e4 b4 1 0 Na4 c S 1 1 e S NdS 1 2 NxcS (double-edged
play ensues after 1 2 0-0 cxd4 1 3 Re i g6 !) 1 2 . . . NxcS (or 1 2 . . .
Bxc S 1 3 dxc5 NxcS 1 4 Bb5 + Kf8 1 5 Qd4 Qb6) 1 3 dxcS BxcS
14 Bb 5 + Ke7 witl1 good equalising chances for Black .
Chapter 9
Central control
by pieces
After I d4 Black has of course other ways of fighting for central con trol
than I . . . d 5 . Let us begin by examif}ing an old opening I . . f5 , the
.
Du tc h Defence, controlling the centre in a similar way to the Sicilian

Defence but much more double-edged .
White has several ways of playing against this defence, the sharpest of
which is the Staunton Gambi t : 2 e4 ! ? dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ! exf3
5 Nxf3 g6 ! 6 Bf4 Bg7 7 Qd2 0-D 8 0.0-D or here 4 . . . d5 5 Bg5 Bf5
6 fxe4 dxe4 7 Bc4 Nc6 8 Nge2 Qd7 9 0-D e6 1 0 Qe i ! and Whi te has
good play for the pawn .
However, White 's usual method is to set up a solid position by 2 g3
Nf6 3 Bg2 and now :
( I ) 3 . . . e6 4 Nf3 Be7 5 0-0 0.0 6 c4 d6 7 Nc3 Qe8 8 Re i Qg6 9 e4 !
fxe4 I 0 Nxe4 ! N xe4 I 1 Rxe4 Nc6 ! ( I I . . . Qxe4? 1 2 Nh4 or
l l . . . e5 I 2 Re i !) 1 2 Re l Nb4 ! or here 6 . . .. d5 7 Nc3 c6 8 Qc2
Qe8 ! (8 . . . dxc4? e4!) 9 Bf4 Qh5 1 0 Rad l N d7 I I b3 Kh8 (or
I I . . . Ne4) with complex play .
(2) 3 . . . g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 0-D O.Q 6 c4 d6 7 Nc3 Nc6 ! ? (or the quieter
. . . c6 followed by . . . Qc 7 and . . . e 5 ) 8 d5 ! Ne5 9 Nxe5 dxe5
1 0 e4 e6 1 1 dxe6 c6 (or 1 1 . Bxe6 I 2 exf5 ) 1 2 Qxd8 Rxd8
. .
Central control I 1 5 7
1 3 Re 1 ! or here 8 . . . NaS 9 Qd3 cS 1 0 Bd2 followed by 1 1 b3 ,

Ra b l and e4.
Another answer to 1 d4 is the Staunton Opening I . . . cS ! ? which is
occasionally played e.g. 2 dS (after 2 dxcS e6 Black wins back the
pawn) 2 . . . e5 3 e4 d6 4 Bd3 ! (4 f4 is premature in view of 4 . . . exf4
S Bxf4 Ne7 ! 6 Nf3 Ng6 7 Bg3 Be7 followed b6 . . . 0-0 , Nbd7 and . . .
Ne5) 4 . . . Nf6 5 c3 (5 Ne2 c4 ! ) 5 . . . Be7 6 Ne2 0-0 7 0.() followed by

Nd2, a4 and Nc4.
However, Black's main answer to 1 d4 in most m odern games is
1 . . Nf6 . When this move was introduce d at the beginning of the 1 920s
.
it was considered so exotic that Tartakower bestowed the name Indian

Systems on all lines arising from it, a terminology that has remained with
us to the present day ! This move controls the square e4 preventing 2 e4
whilst leaving Black's pawn structure more elastic. We can immediately
aee the significance of all this if we consider the Nimzo-Indian Defence
which arises after 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Bb4 .
Without exaggeration we can assert that this opening represents the

beginning of m odern chess strategy , with Black con trolling the centre
by means of pieces (his advanced knight and bishop here) rather than
pawns. The latter can then be posted according to the type of position
which arises. For instance, he can play a later . . . d5 or . . . c 5 , . . . d6
followed by . . . e5, or . . . b6 to develop his bishop on b7 followed by
. . . Ne4 and even . . . f5 . In other words , Black retains great flexibility
of choice which in turn makes White's task m ore difficult. In addi tion ,
Black can give White a doubled c-pawn in many variations after . . .
Bxc3+ and then proceed to attack tltis weakness. Clearly a most com
plex defensive system in all its ramifications. Let us analyse :
A 4 a3 Bxc3 + 5 bxc3 (the Samisch Variation)
! 58 I Central control
White has obtained the two bishops but the weakness of his doubled
c-pawns must not be underestimated, the pawn on c4 being particularly
vulnerable. Here are some variations :
( 1 ) 5 . . . c5 ( ! ) 6 e3 b6 ! 7 Ne2 (or 7 Bd3 Bb7 S f3 0-0 9 Ne2 Nc6 1 0 e4
NeS ! 1 1 0-0 Na5 etc .) 7 . . . Nc6 S Ng3 0-0 9 Bd3 Ba6 ! 1 0 e4! NeS !
(it is vital t o prevent the pin b y Bg5 , a n d 1 0 . . . ex d 4 1 1 e x d4
Nxd4 1 2 e5 NeS 1 3 Qg4 is too dangerous) I 1 Be3 Na5 I 2 Qe2 ReS
1 3 Re i (or 1 3 d5 Qh4 ! 1 4 0-0 Nd6) 1 3 . . . Nd6 and Black has
good counterplay .
(2) 5 . . . c5 (!) 6 f3 d5 (White can now get rid of his doubled pawns
but remains behind in development) 7 cxd5 Nxd5 ! S dxc5 (White
cannot maintain his centre e.g. S Bd2? cxd4 9 cxd4 Qh4 + , or
S Qd2 Nc6 ! 9 e4 Nb6 10 Bb5 Bd7 1 1 Ne2 Na5 1 2 Rb l ReS and
Black had good play down the c-ftle in the game Botvinnik
Donner, 1 95 S . Or S Qd3 cxd4 9 cxd4 Nc6 ! 1 0 e4 Nb6 1 1 Ne2 0-0
J 2 Be3 f5 ! with excelJent play for Black) S . . . f5 ! 9 c4 (after
9 e4 !? fxe4 1 0 Qc 2 Black's best is 1 0 . . . e3 ! 1 1 Bd3 Nd7 and . . .
Nxc 5 ) 9 . . . Qf6 ! (Black loses too much time with 9 . . . Qh4+
10 g3 Qxc4 1 1 e4 Qc3 + 1 2 Bd2 Qe 5 1 3 Bd3 ) 1 0 Bg5 ! (if 1 0 Bd2
Nc3 ! I I Qc 1 Na4 ! and Black stands better, or here 1 1 Qc2 Ne4 ! )
1 0 . . . Qxg5 I I cxd5 e x d 5 I 2 Q x d 5 Qf6 1 3 R c I Nc6 a n d Black
has a good development for the pawn .
(3 ) 5 . . . 0-0 6 f3 NeS ! (once again the best, since 6 . . . d5 7 c x d5 e x d5
S e3 is good for White) 7 e4 b6 ! S Bd3 Nc6 9 a4 Ba6 1 0 Ba3 d6 1 1
f4 Na5 I 2 Qe2 c5 1 3 Nf3 f5 ! with even chances.
B 4 Qc2 is a much quieter idea, aimed at preventing the doubling of his
c-pawn. Here are the main lines : (see next diagram.)
( I ) 4 . . . d 5 (preventing 5 e 4 a n d transposing t o a kind of Queen's
Gambit set-up) 5 cxd5 (play is much sharper after 5 a3 Bxc3+
Cen tral control I 1 59
6 Qxc3 Ne4 7 Qc2 cS 8 dxcS Nc6 9 cxdS exdS I 0 Nf3 BfS 1 1 b4

0..0 ! 1 2 Bb2 d4 ! 1 3 g4 ! Black's best is probably 6 . . . Nc6 7 e3 e S !
8 dxeS d4 ! with equality) S . . . exdS (more elastic is S . . . QxdS
6 Nf3 c S ! 7 Bd2 Bxc3 8 Bxc3 cxd4 9 Nxd4 e S 1 0 Nf3 Nc6 1 1 e3
0..0 1 2 Be2 Bg4 with only an edge to White) 6 BgS h6 7 Bxf6
(Black obtains excellent play after 7 Bh4 c S ! 8 0-0..0 Bxc3 ! 9 Qxc3
gS I 0 Bg3 c xd4 1 1 Qxd4 Nc6 1 2 Qa4 BfS or here 8 Rd 1 Bg4 !
9 d x cS d4 1 0 a3 B x c S , or 8 dx c S Nc6 9 Nf3 gS 1 0 Bg3 Ne4) 7 . . .
Qxf6 8 a3 Bxc3 + 9 Qxc3 and White stands a li ttle better.
Here is the continuation of the game Pachmann-Korchnoi, 1 963 :
9 . . . 0..0 I 0 e3 c6 1 1 Nf3 Nd7 (more logical is . . . BfS followed by
. . . Nd7 and . . . Rfe8) 1 2 Be2 Re8 1 3 0-0 b6 1 4 Rfc l ! Bb7 l S b4
Qe6 1 6 Qb2 fS ! ? 1 7 Bd3 gS 1 8 Rc3 Qf6 1 9 a4 g4 20 Nd2 f4 2 1 aS
Rad8? (2 1 Rab8 ! ) 22 axb6 axb6 23 Ra7 Rb8 24 Nfl Nf8 2 S Qc2
Ne6 26 BfS ! fxe3 27 Bxe6 + Rxe6 28 Rxe3 Rxe3 29 Nxe3 ! Qxd4
30 Qg6+ Qg7 3 1 Qe6+ Qf7 32 Qxh6 R�8 33 QgS + Kf8 34 h3
gxh3 3 S NfS Re i + 36 Kh2 Qc7+ 37 g3 Re6 38 Nh6 Ke8 39 Qg8 +
Kd7 40 NfS Re2 4 1 Rxb7 ! Resigns .
( 2 ) 4 . . . N c 6 S Nf3 d 6 6 a 3 Bxc3+ 7 Qxc3 aS 8 b3 0..0 9 g3 ! Qe7
1 0 Bg2 Ne4 I 1 Qc2 fS 1 2 0-0 eS 1 3 dxeS dxeS 1 4 Bb2 . Or here
6 Bd2 eS 7 dxeS dxeS 8 a3 Bxc3 9 Bxc3 Qe7 I 0 e3 aS 1 1 Be2 wi th
a minimal plus to Whi te in both cases.
(3 ) 4 . . . cS S dxcS 0 ..0 ! 6 Bf4 (better than 6 BgS Na6 ! 7 a3 Bxc3 +
8 Qxc3 NxcS) 6 . . . BxcS 7 e3 dS 8 Nf3 Nc6 9 Rd l , or here 7 . . .
Nc6 8 Nf3 b6 9 Be2 Bb7 1 0 0-0 dS 1 1 Rfd 1 Qc 8 with a slight
advantage to White. .
(4) 4 . . . 0..0 (the most flexible continuation) S a3 (if S e4 d6 ! 6 Nf3
Nc6 7 e S dxeS 8 dxeS Ng4 when 9 Qe4? fails to 9 . . . Bxc3 +
1 0 bxc3 Qd 1 + ! 1 1 Kxd 1 Nxf2+ and . . . Nxe4) S . . . Bxc3 +
1 60 I Central control
() Qxc3 d6 7 Nf3 Nbd7 8 g3 (or 8 Bg5) 8 . . . b6 9 Bg2 Bb7 1 0 0.0

Ne4 I I Q c 2 f5 with good play for Black.
C 4 Qb3 c5 5 d xc5 Na6 6 a3 Qa5 ! 7 Bd2 B xc3 (8 B xc3 N xc5 9 Qc 2 8
Qxc3 Qa4 ! ) 8 . . . Qxc 3 9 Bxd N xc5 I 0 f3 Na4 1 1 Be5 Ke7 1 2 Rd I Ne8
antl . . . d6 . O r 4 . . . Nc6 5 Nf3 d5 ! 6 a3 d xc4! 7 Q xc4 Qd5 ! equalising.
D 4 Nf3 b6 (or 4 . . . c5 ! 5 e3 0.0 6 Bd3 d5 transposing to our game
position) 5 Bg5 ! Bb7 6 e3 h6 7 Bh4 with good play for Whi te e .g. 7 . . .
g5 8 Bg3 Ne4 9 Qc2 Bxc3 + 1 0 bxc3 d6 1 1 Bd3 f5 1 2 d 5 ! exd5 1 3 cxd5
Bxd5 14 Nd4 etc.
E 4 Bg5 (the Leningrad Variation) 4 . . . h6 5 Bh4 c5 6 d5 Bxc3 +
{after 6 . . . e xd5 7 c xd5 d6 8 e3 Nbd7 9 Bd3 ! Qa5 1 0 Ne2 N xd5
·
I I 0.0 ! Nxc3 1 2 bxc3 Bxc3 1 3 Nxc3 Qxc3 1 4 Be 2 ! 0.0 1 5 Qxd6 White
s tands better, whilst 6 . . . b 5 ! ? 7 d xe6 fxe6 8 cxb5 d5 or here 7 e4 ! ?
exd5 8 cxd5 ! g 5 9 e5 ! are double-edged lines) 7 bxc3 e5 8 e 3 d 6 9 Qc2
Nbd7 1 0 Bd3 Qe 7 with equality. However , the m ost popular fourth
move for White is t he quiet 4 e3 to which we devote our next game.
Game 1 9
Portisch Karpov (San Antonio 1 972)
d4 . Nf6
2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 Bb4
4 e3 cS
Some other possibilities here are :

( I ) 4 . . . d 5 5 a3 Bxc3 + ? (5 . . . Be 7 ! ) 6 bxc3 0.0 7 cxd5 exd5 8 Bd3
c5 9 Ne2 ! b6 1 0 0.0 Ba6 1 1 f3 Bxd3 1 2 Qxd3 Re8 1 3 Ng3 Nc6
14 Bb2 ! Rc 8 1 5 Rae ! NaS 1 6 e4 ! and White's powerful centre
guarantees him an advantage.
(2) 4 . . . 0.0 (usually transposes to the game line after 5 Bd3 cS 6 Nf3
d5 etc.) 5 Ne2 d5 6 a3 Be7 7 cxdS exdS 8 g3 Nbd7 9 Bg2 Nb6
10 Qd3 aS ! I I a4 c6 , or even simpler 7 . . . NxdS ! 8 Qc2 Nxc3
9 Nxc3 c5 with equality.
(3) 4 . . . b6 5 Ne2 (or S Bd3 Bb7 6 Nf3 Ne4 7 0.0 ! f5 ! ) 5 . . . Ba6 !
(if 5 . . . Bb7 6 a3 Be7 then 7 d 5 ! is strong, or here 6 . . . Bxc3 +
7 Nxc3 and White stands better) 6 Ng3 (or 6 a3 Bxc3 + 7 N xc3 d 5 !
8 b 3 0.0 9 Be 2 Nc6 ! 1 0 a4 dxc4 I I Ba3 Re8 1 2 b xc4 Na 5 ! 1 3 NbS
c6 1 4 Nd6 Re7 with even chances) 6 . . . Bxc3 + 7 bxc3 dS 8 Ba3 !
(8 Qf3 0.0 9 e4 dxe4 1 0 Nxe4 Nxe4 1 1 Qxe4 Qd 7 ! 1 2 Bd3 fS
Cent ral control I 1 6 1
1 3 Qxa8 Nc6 is to Black's advantage) 8 . . . Bxc4 9 Bxc4 dxc4

10 o.o Qd7 I I e4 Nc6 and White is a little better .
(4) 4 . . . Nc6 5 Bd3 (an interesting variation in Black's favour is 5 Ne2
d5 6 a3 Be7 7 cxd5 exd5 8 Nf4 Bf5 ! 9 Qb3 Na5 10 Qa2 g5 ! when
1 1 Nf4xd5? NxdS 1 2 NxdS Be6 or here 1 2 QxdS QxdS 1 3 NxdS
Nb3 ! 14 N xc7+ Kd7 wins for Black) 5 . . . e S 6 Ne2 dS ! 7 cxd5
Nxd5 8 e4 Nb6 9 d5 Ne7 with equal chances.
5 Bd3
Again 5 Ne2 is possible but d oes n ot promise much after 5 . . . cxd4
6 exd4 d5 7 a3 (7 cS Ne4 8 Bd2 Nxd2 9 Qxd2 b6 1 0 a3 Bxc3 I I Nxc3
bxc5 1 2 Bb5+ Bd7 1 3 d xc5 aS ! 1 4 0-0 a4 ! equal ises) 7 . . . Be7 8 c5
0.{) ! 9 b4 b6 1 0 g3 bxcS I I dxcS a S 1 2 Rb l axb4 1 3 axb4 Nc6 and
Black's centre pawns are stronger than White's wing pawns.
5 . .. 0..0
An interesting alternative is S . . . Nc6 6 Nf3 Bxc3 + 7 bxc3 d6 in order
to play . . . eS and in some cases even castle on the Q-side . As an
example we quote the game Spassky-Fischer ( 1 972 Match ) : 8 e4 e S
9 dS Ne7 1 0 Nh4 ! (otherwise Black will play . . . h6, . . . g5 a n d . . .
Ng6 preparing to castle l ong) 1 0 . . . h6 1 1 f4 ! Ng6 ! ( I I . . . exf4
1 2 Bxf4 gS 1 3 e S ! is bad for Black) 1 2 N xg6 fxg6 1 3 fxe S ? (this sur
prisingly reduces Whi te 's possibilities, giving him already a strategically
lost game . He should play 1 3 0.{) 0.{) 1 4 fS ! with sharp play ) 1 3 . . .
dxeS 1 4 Be3 b6 1 5 0.0 0.{) 1 6 a4 (?) a S ! 1 7 R b l Bd7 1 8 Rb2 Rb8
19 Rbf2 Qe2 20 Bc2 gS ! 21 Bd2 Qe8 ! 22 Be l Qg6 23 Qd3 NhS !
24 Rxf8+ Rxf8 25 Rxf8+ Kxf8 26 Bd l Nf4 ! 2 7 Qc 2? Bxa4 ! 28 Resigns
(28 Qxa4 Qxe4 wins).
6 N f3 dS
Almost always played here . 6 . . . b6 is not so good in view of 7 dS !
exdS 8 cxd5 Bb7 (8 . . . Nxd5 9 Bxh7+ Kxh7 1 0 Qxd5 Nc6 1 1 0-0 a n d
1 2 e4) 9 e4 Re8 1 0 0-0 Bxc3 1 1 bxc3 Nxe4 1 2 Bxe4 Rxe4 1 3 NgS !
with a s trong attack e .g. 1 3 . . . Rh4 1 4 g3 Rh6 1 5 Nxf7 ! Kxf7 1 6 B xh6
gxh6 1 7 Qh5 + and Re i . Or 1 3 . . . Re7 1 4 Qh5 etc .
7 0-0 dxc4
The most popular continuation nowadays, but twenty years ago the
main line ran 7 . . . Nc6 8 a3 Bxc3 (better than 8 . . . cxd4 9 exd4 d xc4
1 0 Bxc4 Be7 I I Qd3 followed by Bg5 , Rfe l , Rad l e tc .) 9 b xc3 dxc4
(or 9 . . . Qc 7 1 0 cxdS exd5 I I Nh4 ! Ne7 1 2 g3) 1 0 Bxc4 Qc7 with the
following position :
Black prepares . . . e5 which gives him good equalising chances e .g.

( I ) I I Bd3 e5 1 2 Qc2 Re8 ! 1 3 N x e 5 (after 1 3 e4 c4 ! 14 Bx c4 e x d4
1 5 c xd4 Na5 ! 1 6 Bd3 Q xc2 1 7 B xc2 N xe4 is fine for Black) 1 3 . . .
Nxe5 1 4 dxe5 QxeS 1 5 f3 Bd 7 1 6 a4 &6 1 7 e4 Rad8 etc.
(2) I I Bb5 Bd7 1 2 a4 Na5 13 Ba3 b6, or here 1 2 c4 a6 1 3 Bxc6 Bxc6 .
(3 ) 1 1 Ba2 e5 1 2 h3 e4 1 3 Nh2 Bf5 1 4 Ng4 ! Bxg4 1 5 hxg4 h6 1 6 Qe 2
Rfe8.
(4) I I Be2 e5 1 2 Bb2 Bg4 ! 1 3 d5 e4 ! 1 4 d xc6 e xf3 1 5 Bxf3 Bxf3
1 6 Qxf3 Qxc6 ! 1 7 Qxc6 bxc6 1 8 c4 Ne4.
(5) I I Bb2 e5 1 2 h3 Bf5 (or 1 2 . . . e4 1 3 Nd2 Na5 1 4 Ba2 c4 ! ) 1 3
Bb5 ! e4 1 4 Nh4 Bd7 1 5 c4 c xd4 1 6 e xd4 Qf4 !
I n all cases we have complex positions wi th chances for both sides.
However, alternatives for Black on move 7 favour White e.g. 7 . . . Nbd7
8 cxd5 exd5 9 a3 BaS 10 b4 ! cxb4 I I NbS ! with promising play for
White. Or 7 . . . b6 8 cxd5 exd5 9 Ne5 ! Bb7 I 0 Bd2 Nc6 1 1 a3 Bxc3
1 2 Bxc3 NxeS 1 3 dxeS Ne4 1 4 Bxe4 dxe4 I 5 Qg4 or here 1 0 Ne2 c4

I I Bc2 Nbd7 1 2 f4 with good attacking chances for Whi te.
8 Bxc4 Nbd7
Black has a variety of alternatives here :
( I ) 8 . . . b6 9 a3 cxd4 1 0 axb4 ! dxc3 1 1 Qxd8 Rxd8 1 2 b xc3 Bb7
1 3 Be2, or here 9 . . . Bxc3 1 0 b xc3 Bb7 I I Re i Nbd7 1 2 Bd3 Be4
1 3 Bfl ! followed by Nd2 and e4. In b oth cases White 's two bishops
give him the edge .
(2) 8 . . . Nc6 9 a3 Ba S (9 . . . Bxc3 1 0 b xc3 Qc7 gives a line we met
above) 10 Qd3 (or 1 0 Bd3 cxd4 1 1 exd4 Bb6 1 2 Be3 NdS) 1 0 . . .
a6 I I Rd l b S 1 2 Ba2 c4 ! ? 1 3 Qe2 Qe8 followed by . . . e S .
(3 ) 8 . . . Bd7 (intending . . . & 6 a n d . . . Nbd7 . If now 9 dxcS Bxc3
1 0 bxc3 Bc6 with good play for Black) 9 Qe2 &6 1 0 Rd 1 Qe7
1 1 Ne S Rd8 1 2 a3 Ba S .
(4) 8 . . . Qe7 9 a3 BaS I O Qc2 (or I O Qe2 Nc6 ! I I Bd2 c xd4 1 2 e xd4
Rd8 ! 1 3 BgS h6! 1 4 Bxf6 Qxf6) 1 0 . . . Bd 7 1 1 Bd3 Rc8 1 2 Bd2
Bb6 1 3 dxcS QxcS 1 4 e4 Nc6 etc.
9 Qe2
The most common and natural continuation. 9 Qd3 is interesting, but
Black can reply 9 . . . a6 1 0 a4 ! Qc7 ! 1 1 Bb3 Rd8 1 2 Bc2 b6 1 3 Na2 a S
1 4 Nxb4 axb4 I S Re i e S ! (Giigoric-Keres, 1 963). O r 9 Bd3 b 6 1 0 a 3
cxd4 I I exd4 Bxc3 ( or 1 1 . . . Be7 followed b y . . . Bb7 and . . . Rc8 is
possible) 1 2 bxc3 Bb7 1 3 Re i Rc8 1 4 Bd2 and we reach a position in
which the weakness of White's c-pawn offsets the bishop pair.
9 . .. cxd4
Black has two o ther moves which lead to great complications :
( I ) 9 . . a6 1 0 a4 Qc 7 I I Na2 bS ! 1 2 Bd3 ( 1 2 axbS axbS 1 3 Bxb S
.
Bb7 gives Blac k active play) 1 2 . . . BaS 1 3 e4 ! c4 1 4 Bb l eS

I S axbS e x d4 16 Nxd4 Bb6 1 7 Be3 axbS 1 8 NxbS QeS 1 9 Nbc3
NcS 20 h3 ! Nb3 2 1 Bxb6 Nxa l 22 f4 . This complicated position
was reached in Ant oshin-Keres ( 1 963) when 22 . . . Qe6 ! would
leave the ou tcome unclear.
(2) 9 . . . b6 10 dS !? Bxc3 I I dxe6 NeS ! ? (after I I . . . BaS 1 2 exd7
Qxd7 13 Rd l Qe7 14 e4 ! White is a little better) 1 2 exf7+ Kh8
1 3 bxc3 Bg4 1 4 e4 with wild complications which are difficult to
assess e.g. 1 4 . . . Nh S ! (but not 1 4 . . . Qe7? I S Re i ! b S ! ?
1 6 BxbS Rxf7 1 7 NxeS ! Bxe2 1 8 Nxf7 + Qxf7 1 9 Bxe2 with a
winning position) I S BdS Qf6 ! 1 6 Qe3 Nxf3 + 1 7 gxf3 Bxf3

1 8 QgS Rac8 etc.
1 0 exd4 b6
1 1 dS
This b reakthrough is an important stra tegic and tactical element in all

isola ted pawn positions. Previously this move was only played after
I I Rd I Bb7 1 2 dS !? but then 1 2 . . . Bxc3 1 3 dxe6 Bxf3 ! followed e .g .
1 4 Qx f3 ! ? (after 1 4 gxf3 fxe6 I S bxc3 Qc7 ! 1 6 Bxe6+ Kh 8 1 7 Be3
NcS with equality. in view of White's weak pawn position) 14 . . . NeS
I S exf7+ (or l S Qe2 Qc7 16 Bb3 Neg4 1 7 g3 QeS 1 8 Qxe5 Bxe5 1 9 h3
Nh6 20 g4 fxe6 21 gS with equality in Donner-Van den Berg, 1 96S)
J S . . . Kh8 1 6 Rxd8 Nxf3 + 1 7 gxf3 Ra8xd8 1 8 bxc3 and White's
strong pawn on f7 forces Black to return the exchange by 1 8 . . . Rd7
1 9 Ba3 Rd7xf7 with equality.
11 . .. Bxc3
I I . . . exd5 1 2 Nxd5 favours White, as Black's bishop is badly placed
on b4 .
12 dxe6 Bb4
13 exd7 Qxd7
14 a3 Bd6
IS Rfd l
In the game Portisch-Panna, played a year later, White varied with
I S Bg5 Re8 1 6 Qd3 BcS ! 1 7 Qb3 Bb7 1 8 B xf6 gxf6 1 9 Rad l Qc7
20 Bd5 and again White had only a minimal plus .
15 Qc7
16 h3 Bb7
Central control I I 6 5
1 7 Be3 Rae8(?)
White's pieces are well posted b ut after 1 7 . . . Rad8 or 1 7 . . . Qe7
White's advantage would be of a purely theoretical nature, or Black
could try 1 7 . . . Bxf3 1 8 gxf3 giving up the two bishops in order to
weaken White's pawns. The text-move is the beginning of a faulty plan.
1 8 Rac l Qb8
1 9 Bb5 Re7
20 Bc6 B xc6?
But this is serious, whereas after 20 . . . Rc8 ! 2 1 Nd4 ! Black could still
hold out.
21 Rxc6 Bc5
Otherwise White plays 22 Nd4 threatening Rxf6 and Nf5 .
2 2 Rxf6! gxf6
23 Nd4 Bxd4
24 Rxd4
An interesting position . Black will find his K-side difficul t to defend
despite the advan tage of the exchange. Perhaps he should give back the
material by 24 . . . Rxe3 25 Qxe3 Qe S , although White still stands
better after 26 Rd7 Qxb2 27 Rxa7 etc.
24 . . . Qe5
25 Qf3
With the powerful threat 26 Rg4 + Kh8 2 7 Bd4 . N ow comes a surprising
blunder by the present World Champion , afte � which the game ends
abruptly . He had to play 25 . . . fS ! 26 RdS wi th the following variations :
26 . . . Qe4? 27 Qg3 + Kh8 28 Bh6 Rg8 29 Rd8 ! Re8 30 Rxe8 Qxe8
3 1 Qc3 + mating. Or 26 . . . Qg7 27 Bd4 f6 28 Rxf5 Re6 29 Rf4 etc. Or
finally 26 . . . Qxb2 2 7 Bd4 ! Qc 1 + 28 Kh2 Re8 29 RxfS with a continu
ing at tack by Whi te, but no clear win in sigh t .
25 . . . Kh8??
26 RdS ! Resigns
(Whether Black plays . . . Qe6 or . . . Qxb 2 , the move 27 Bd4 concludes
matters.)
Because the Nimzo-lnclian Defence is such a sound defence , many
players try to avoid it as White by playing {after 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6) 3 Nf3 .
Black can then try the Queen's Indian Defence by playing 3 . . . b 6 .
I 66 I Central control
Black plans to increase his con trol of e4 by playing his bishop to b 7 .

Here are four methods o f play :
A 4 Nc3 Bb7 5 Bg5 Be 7 (the m os t solid move, b u t Black can also play
5 . . . Bb4 or 5 . . h6 6 Bh4 g5 !? 7 Bg3 Nh5 ) 6 e3 Ne4 ! 7 Bxe7 Qxe7
.
8 Nxe4 Bxe4 with even chances. Let us continue as in t he classic game

Bogolj ubow-Capablanca (1 928): 9 Nd2 (?) (better is 9 Be2 ! Qb4+ and
only now 1 0 Nd2 ! After 9 Bd3 Qb4+ I 0 Qd2 Qxd2+ the game is equal)
9 . . Bb7 1 0 Be2 Qg5 ! ( 1 0 . . . Bxg2 1 1 Rg 1 and 1 2 Rxg7) 1 1 Bf3
.
Bxf3 1 2 Qxf3 Nc6 1 3 Qg3 Qxg3 1 4 h xg3 Ke7 (of course a draw is still
on the cards, but �lack has the active plan of . . . Rb8 followed by . . .
b5 t o prize open the b-file) 1 5 g4 h6 1 6 a3? (White will dearly regret
this weakness) 1 6 . . . a6 ! 1 7 Ke2 Rhb8 1 8 Ne4 b 5 ! 1 9 c5 d 5 ! 20 c xd6+
cxd6 2 1 f4 Rc8 22 f5 ? (White has no time for this) 2 2 . . . Na5 ! 23 Kd3
Nc4 24 Rab I d5 25 Nc3 (after 25 Nc5 e5 ! followed by . . . e4+ ) 25 . . .
Rc6 26 fxe6 fxe6 27 g5 ! ? h xg5 28 Rh 5 Kf6 29 Rh3 Rac8 (threatening
. . . N x b2 + ) 30 Na2 aS 3 1 Rf3 + Kg6 32 g4 Nd6 33 Nc3 b4 34 axb4
axb4 3 5 Nd l Rc2 36 Rf2 b3 3 7 Ra l Ne4 38 Re2 R8c6 39 Rb l e 5 !
4 0 Ra J R6c4 4 1 Ra5 Nc5 + ! 42 Resigns (42 . . . e4 mate comes next)
B 4 a3 (to preven t the pin of his knight after Nc6) 4 . . . Bb7 5 Nc3 d5
6 cxd5 Nxd5 7 e3 Be7 8 Bb5+ c6 9 Bd3 c5 l 0 Nxd5 exd5 I I b3 Nc6
1 2 Bb2 Bf6 ! or here 6 . . . exd5 7 Bg5 Nbd7 8 e3 Be7 9 Bd3 0-0 1 0 0-0
Ne4 e tc.
C 4 g3 (the most common and resilient plan of development) 4 . . .
Bb7 (4 . . . Ba6 5 Qa4 ! is riskier) 5 Bg2 Be7 6 0-0 0-0 7 Nc3 Ne4 !
(stronger than 7 . . . dS 8 Ne5 c(i 9 e4 ! ) and again we quote a short
game to illustrate Black's possibilities. Hug-Hort ( 1 972) continue d :
8 N xe4 (stronger i s 8 Qc2 Nxc3 9 Qxc3 c5 1 0 Rd I or 8 B d 2 d 6 9 Qc2
Nxc3 1 0 Bxc3 etc.) 8 . . . Bxe4 9 Bf4 (White should simplify by 9 Ne 1
e .g. 9 . . . Bxg2 1 0 N xg2 d5 1 1 Qa4 c5 1 2 Be3 c xd4 1 3 Bxd4 d xc4
1 4 Qxc4 Qc 8, o r here 1 0 . . . cS !?) 9 . . . d6 1 0 Qd2 Nd7 1 1 Rfd l h 6 !

1 2 Ne l fS ! 1 3 Bxe4 fxe4 1 4 Qc2 Nf6 1 5 D gS ! 1 6 Be3 Qe 8 1 7 Kg2 (if
1 7 fxe4 Ng4) 1 7 . . . QhS ! 1 8 h3 Qg6 1 9 Rac 1 Rf7 20 fxe4 g4 2 1 h4
e S ! 22 Qd3 Nxe4 23 Nc2 Raf8 24 Bg1 Bxh4 ! 25 gxh4 RD ! 26 Ne3
Rg3 + 27 Ka 1 Rf2 28 Resigns.
D 4 e3 Bb7 5 Bd3 Be? 6 0-0 0-0 7 Nc3 dS 8 Qe2 Nbd7 (or 8 . . . c S
and . . . Nc6) 9 b 3 Ne4 e t c . [ Miles has had great success latterly with
4 Bf4 Bb7 5 e3 Be 7 6 h3 ! posting his dark-squared bishop more actively .
Translator. ]
Apart from the Queen's Indian Defence by 3 . . . b6 Black can of course
transpose to the Queen's Gambit by 3 . . . d S where we know that
3 ND is n ot so precise as 3 Nc3 . Or he can try the two following systems :
( 1 ) 3 . . . Bb4+ (the Bogolj ubow-ln dian De fence) 4 Bd2 Qe 7 (Black has
also experimented with . . . a S ) 5 g3 Nc6 6 Bg2 Bxd2+ 7 Nb 1 xd2
(7 Qxd2? Ne4 and . . . Qb4 + ) 7 . . . cl6 8 0-0 0-0 9 e4 e S 1 0 dS
Nb8 1 1 b4 Bg4 . Or 4 Nbd2 dS 5 e3 0-0 6 a3 Be7 7 b4 (or 7 b3 b6
8 Bb2 Bb7 9 Bd3 cS etc.) 7 . . . b6 8 Bd3 Bb7 9 Bb2 c S ! etc.
(2) 3 . . . c S 4 dS bS !? (the Blumenfeld Gan1bi t , but nowadays the
Benoni t reatment is preferred e.g. 4 . . . exdS 5 cxdS d6 6 Nc3 g6
7 e4 Bg7 8 Be2 0-0 9 0-0 Bg4 , or here 9 . . ReB 1 0 Nd2 Nb d7
.
etc.) 5 dxe6 (the decline of the gambit by 5 BgS gives Black chances
of equalising by 5 . . . exd5 6 cxd5 h6 7 Bxf6 Qxf6 8 Qc2 d6 9 e4
a6 10 a4 ! b4 1 1 Nbd2 Bg4 , or here 6 . . . d6 7 e4 a6 8 a4 Be7 !
9 Nbd2 Nxd5 ! ) 5 . . . fxe6 6 cxb5 d 5 7 Bf4 Bd6 8 Bxd6 Qxd6
9 Nbd2 and Black's strong pawn centre does n ot seem enough for
the pawn .
White can in his turn vary after I d4 Nf6 2 c4 �6 by 3 g3 (the Catalan
System) preventing the Queen's Indian and the Nimzo-Indian . Black's
•
1 68 / Central control
best is 3 . . . d5 since after 3 . . . c5 White can choose between 4 N f3

cxd4 5 Nx d4 d5 6 Bg2 ! e5 7 Nf3 ! d4 ! 8 0..0 Nc6 9 e3 B e 7 1 0 exd4
exd4 I I Bf4 ! and 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 Bg2 g6 7 Nc3 Bg7 8 Nf3 0..0
9 0-0 Nbd7 I 0 Nd2 ! heading for c4 . After 3 . . . d5 4 Bg2 we have :
( 1 ) 4 . . . dx c4 5 Qa4 + (or 5 Nf3 c5 6 0-0 Nc6 7 Qa4 Bd7 8 d x c5 etc .)
5 . . . Nbd7 (or 5 . . Bd7 6 Qxc4 Bc6 7 Nf3) 6 Qxc4 a6 7 Qc2 c5
.
8 Nf3 b6 ! with equality (9 0-0 Bb7 or 9 Ne5 Nd5).

(2) 4 . . . Be 7 5 Nf3 0-0 6 0..0 Nbd7 (or 6 . . . dxc4) 7 Qc2 ! b6 8 cxd5
Nxd5 9 Nc3 Bb7 1 0 Nxd5 Bxd 5 1 1 e4 Bb7 1 2 Rd l c5 1 3 d5 exd5
1 4 exd5 etc.
(3 ) 4 . . . c5 5 c x d5 N x d5 (or 5 . . . e x d 5 transposing t o the Tarrasch
Defence !) 6 Nf3 Nc6 7 0-0 Be7 8 Nc3 0-0 9 Nx d5 ex d5 etc .
Chapter 1 0
Fighting the
classical centre
In most of the openings we have seen so far , Black has been doing his
utmost to stop White setting up the 'ideal ' centre of pawns on d4 and
c4 . Le t us now turn to a modern opening in which Black chooses a
completely different method : he allows, nay even provokes , the pawn
centre and then strives to attack it with all his migh t !
1 d4 N f3 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5
This is the G rlinfeld De fence , the most critical variation of which is

4 cxd5 Nxd5 5 e4 Nxc3 (note the importance of the fac t that the whi te
knight is on c3 , because if 5 . . . Nb6? 6 h3 ! Bg7 7 Nf3 0-0 8 Be2 White
has a cl�ar advan tage) 6 bxc3 Bg7 7 Bc4 0-0 8 Ne2 (if the natural 8 Nf3
c5 Black is already threatening t o put pressure on t he d-pawn by . . .
Bg4) [ Bu t this line has become quite popular recently - Translator.]
8 . . c5 9 0-0 Nc6 I 0 Be3 . (See next diagram. )
.
Black has two ways of attacking White's centre :

( 1 ) Gligoric-Portisch ( 1 974): I 0 . . cxd4 I I cxd4 Bg4 ! (forcing f3
.
which will later be useful for Black) 1 2 f3 Na5 ! 1 3 Bd3 ( 1 3 Re i

Nxc4 1 4 Rxc4 Bd7 1 5 Qb3 Qa5 ! 1 6 Nc3 ! gives White a slight pl us)
1 3 . . . Be6 ! 1 4 d5 !? (Black was threatening . . . Nc4 . As 14 Qa4
a6 ! followed by . . . b5 is good for Black, White's only viable
1 70 I Fighting the classical centre
alternative is to go in for the double-edged sacrifice of a pawn by

1 4 Re i ? Bxa2 1 5 Qa4 Be6 1 6 d5 Bd7 1 7 Qb4 e6, or here 1 5 d5
Bb3 1 6 Qe l e6 etc.) 1 4 . . . Bxa l 1 5 Qxa l f6 ! 1 6 Qd4 (many
moves have been tried here e .g. 1 6 Nd4 Bd7 1 7 Bh6 Re8 1 8 f4 Rc8 !
O r 1 6 Bh6 Re8 ! i 7 Nf4 Bf7 ! i 8 Re i g 5 1 9 Nh3 e 5 ! O r 1 6 Qb i Bf7
1 7 Nd4 Rc8 i 8 Qb4 etc.) 1 6 . . . Bf7 1 7 Bh6 Re8 1 8 Bb 5 e5 !
i 9 Qf2 Re7 20 Be3 Rc8 2 1 Bxa7 Nc4 22 Bc5 Rec7 23 Bb4 Be8
24 Nc3 Nd6 2 5 Bxe8 Qxe8 26 Qb6 Nf7 27 Qe3 Kg7 28 Rd l Nd6
29 Rd3 Qd7 30 h3 NbS ! 3 1 Nxb5 ! ? (3 1 d6 ! Rxc3 32 Bxc3 Rxc3
33 Rxc3 Nxc3 34 Qxc3 Qxd6 is even) 3 i . . . Qxb5 32 a3 Rc2
3 3 d6 Qd7 34 f4 Re8 ! 35 fxe5 Rxe5 3 6 Rd4 b 5 37 Bd2 Rc4
38 Rxc4 b xc4 39 Qd4 Re6 40 Bb4 c3 4i Qxc3 Rxe4 42 Qc5 gS
43 Qd 5 ReS 44 Qd 1 Kg6 45 Kh2 h5 46 a4 Re8 ! 47 Ba S Kg7
48 Bb6 g4 49 hxg4 hxg4 50 Qd4 Kg6 5 1 a S f5 52 a6 Re4 53 Qd5
Qh 7+ 54 Kg 1 ?? ( 54 Kg3 ! might still have saved the game) 54 . . .
g3 55 Kfl Qh 1 + 56 Resigns (56 Bg 1 Qxg1 + ! 5 7 Kxg l Re i mate).
(2) 1 0 . . . Qc7 1 1 Re i Rd8 (the Smysiov Variation) 1 2 Qd2 ( 1 2 f4 ! ?
Bg4 1 3 f5 gxf5 1 4 h3 ! leads t o complex play) 1 2 . . . Q a 5 i 3 Rfd 1
cxd4 I 4 cxd4 Qxd2 1 5 Rxd2 and White has slightly the better of
the end-game.
Our next game and notes give other methods of dealing with the
G riinfeld Defence.
Game 20
Portisch Gheorghiu (Manila 1 974)
d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nc3 dS
4 N f3
Fighting the classical centre I I 7 1
The latest systems are concerned with the development of White's dark
squared bishop e .g.
( 1 ) 4 Bg5 Ne4 ! 5 Bh4 c5 (or 5 . . . N xc3 6 bxc3 dxc4) 6 cxd5 N xc3
7 bxc3 Qxd5 8 e3 c xd4 9 Qxd4 ! Qxd4 I 0 c xd4 Nc6 1 1 Nf3 e6 !
followed by . . . Be 7 with only a minimal plus to White.
(2) 4 Bf4 Bg7 5 e3 0-0 6 cxd5 (after 6 Re i c5 ! 7 d xc5 Be6 ! or 6 Qb3
dxc4 ! 7 Bxc4 c 5 ! 8 dxc5 Qa5 Black equalises comfortably) 6 . . .
Nxd5 7 Nxd5 Qxd5 8 Bxc7 Na6 (or . . . b6 or . . . Bf5 and in all
cases Black has counter-play down the c-flle as compensation for
the pawn) 9 Bxa6 (9 Bg3? Bf5 ! 1 0 a3 Rac8 1 1 Nf3 Rc2 etc.)
9 . . Qxg2 1 0 Qf3 Qxf3 1 1 Nxf3 b xa6 1 2 Re i f6 1 3 Rg l Bb7
.
with even chances.

4 ... Bg7
5 Qb3
The alternatives here are :
( I ) 5 e3 0.0 6 cxd5 Nxd5 7 Bc4 Nb6 8 Bb3 Na6 ! 9 0.0 c5 1 0 h3 c xd4
1 1 exd4 Nc7, or here 6 Be2 c 5 ! 7 dxc5 Qa5 8 cxd5 N x d5 9 Qx d 5
Bxc3 + 1 0 Bd2 Bxd2+ I I Qxd2 Q x c 5 , o r 6 Qb3 e6 ! 7 Bd2 b6
8 cxd5 exd5 9 Be2 c5 ! or 6 Bd2 c6 7 Bd3 Nbd7 8 0-0 e 5 ! 9 dxe5
Ng4, or 6 b4 ! ? c6 7 Bd2 Bg4 8 h3 Bxf3 9 Qxf3 dxc4 10 Bxc4
Nbd7 with even chances in all cases.
(2) 5 Bg5 Ne4 6 cxd5 N xg5 7 N xg5 e6 8 Nf3 (or 8 Qd2 exd5 9 Qe3 +
Kf8 1 0 Qf4 Bf6 1 1 h4 c6 1 2 0.0.0 h6 1 3 Nf3 Kg7 etc .) 8 . . . exd5
9 e3 0.0 10 Be2 c6 e tc .
(3) 5 Bf4 0-0 6 Re i dxc4 (or 6 . . . c5 7 dxc5 Be6 ! ) 7 e4 c5 ! 8 dxc5
Qxd l + 9 Rxd 1 Na6 1 0' Bxc4 Nxc5 with equality .
5 .. . d5xc4
This move is in the spirit of the G riln feld Defence, as opposed to the
solid 5 . . . c6 6 cxd5 cxdS (6 . . . NxdS 7 e4 ! Nb6 8 Be3 0-0 9 Rd I or ,
here 7 . . . N xc3 8 bxc3 c5 9 d 5 ! 0.0 1 0 Be2 and White stands better)

7 Bg5 Nc6 8 e3 e6 9 Bd3 0.0 1 0 0.0 Bd7 1 1 Ne5 with a slight plus to
White .
6 Qxc4 0..0
7 e4 . . . (See next diagram .)
White has set up a powerful-looking centre which will swamp Black i f
h e plays passively e.g. 7 . . . c 6 8 Qb3 Nbd7? (m uch better i s 8 . . . e 5 !
9 dxe5 Ng4) 9 Be2 Nb6 I 0 0-0 Be 6 1 1 Qc2 Bc4 1 2 Rd l Bxe2 1 3 Qxe 2 .
I 72 I Fighting the classical centre
So Black m ust take active measures against the centre before White
can complete his development.
7 .. . Bg4
Smyslov's idea. An in teresting alternative is the Prins Variation 7 . . .
Na6 ! ? preparing . . . c5 , which can continue as follows :
(I ) 8 Be2 cS 9 dS e6 I O 0-0 exdS I I exdS Bf5 I 2 a3 Re8 I 3 Rd 1 Ne4
etc. when White has a passed pawn but Black's pieces are well
placed. Note that 9 dxcS is not good because of 9 . . Be6! I 0 QbS
.
Rc8 1 1 Qxb7? NxcS I 2 Qxa7 Rc7 ! 1 3 Qa3 Nd3+ , or here 1 1 c6

Rxc6 1 2 0-0 ( I 2 Qxb7 Rxc3 ! 1 3 b xc3 NcS) 1 2 . . . Qc7 etc .
(2) 8 BgS h6 9 Bh4 (an interesting idea is 9 Bf4 cS 1 0 dS e6 1 1 d6 !)
9 . . . c5 1 0 d5 b5 ! (if 1 0 . . . e6 I I d6 ! e5 1 2 0-0-0 !) 1 1 N xb S
QaS + 1 2 N d 2 Nxe4 ! ( 1 2 . . . Nb4? 1 3 Nb3 !) 1 3 Qxe4 Bxb2 (if
1 3 . . . BfS 1 4 Qc4 Bxb2 1 5 g4 ! ) 1 4 Rb l BfS 1 5 QxfS e xfS
1 6 Rxb2 with unclear play .
8 Be3 N fd7!
An unusual way o f building up pressure on the centre, but this can
be seen clearly in the variation 9 Be2 Nb6 1 0 QcS (already the queen is
force d to guard the d-pawn !) 1 0 . . . Nc6 (or 1 0 . . . c6 1 1 Rd l Nbd7
1 2 QaS e S ! ) 1 1 Rd l Qd6 ! 1 2 h3 Bxf3 1 3 gxf3 (if 1 3 Bxf3 ? QxcS
14 dxc5 Nc4) I 3 . . . Rfd8 etc.
9 Qb3 Nb6
Or 9 . . cS ! ? (the Yugoslav Variation) e .g. 1 0 dS ! ( 1 0 Qxb7? Bxf3
.
1 1 gxf3 cxd4 1 2 Qxa8 dxc3 , or here 1 2 Bxd4 Bxd4 1 3 Qxa8 Qb6)

I 0 . . . Na6 1 1 Be2 Rb8 followed by . . . QaS and . . . b S . Also 9, . . .
Bxf3 I 0 gxf3 ( I 0 Qxb 7? cS ! ) I 0 . . . Nc6 1 1 Rd I e5 ! with complex play .
Fighting the classical centre I I 73
1 0 Rad l N c6
Mter I 0 . . . e5 White d oes not play I I dxe5? Nbd7 12 Ne2 Qe7 but
the stronger 1 1 Be2 ! exd4 ( 1 1 . . . Bxf3 1 2 dxe5 ! ) 1 2 Bxd4 Bxd4
13 Nxd4 Bxe2 1 4 Nd4xe2 Qe7 1 5 0.0 Nbd7 1 6 f4 with some advantage.
1 1 dS NeS
1 2 Be2 Nxf3+
13 gxf3 BhS
Other moves are worse e.g. 1 3 . . . Bd7 1 4 h4 ! Qc8 1 5 h5 e6 1 6 hxg6
hxg6 7 a4 ! etc. Or 1 3 . . . Bh3 1 4 Rg 1 ! Qd6 1 5 f4 c6 1 6 a4 ! etc.
1 4 Rgl !
An excellent positional move. Other ideas are not so good :
( I ) 1 4 h4 Qd7 1 5 f4 Bxe2 1 6 Nxe2 c6 ! 1 7 h5 cxd5 1 8 hxg6 hxg6
1 9 Bd4 Bxd4 20 Rxd4 Kg7 2 1 Ng3 Rg8 ! or here 20 Nxd4 Qg4 !
2 1 Nf5 ! gxf5 ! 22 KI1 dxe4 23 Rg 1 Qxg 1 + with even chances .
(2) 1 4 NbS Qd7 1 5 Rc 1 c6 ! 1 6 Nxa7 Rxa7 1 7 Bxb6 Ra8 and Black's
good development fully compensates the loss of a pawn .
With the text-move White threatens to post his rook on g5 where i t
can transfer t o the Q-side i f necessary whilst main taining the possibility
of Rxh5 .
14 . .
. Qd7
I S Rg3 c6
Now Black's queen will be awkwardly placed, but it is al ready difficult
to fm d a good continuation for him e .g. if 1 5 . . . Be5 1 6 f4 Bxe2
1 7 Kxe 2 ! Bg7 1 8 f5 ! etc.
1 74 I Figh ting the classical centre
16 dxe6 Qxe6
1 7 NbS!
From now on Whi te proceeds with a continuous stream of tactical
threats, beginning with 1 8 Nxa 7 winning a pawn . If 1 7 . . . a6? 1 8 Rc1
and 1 9 Nc7 wins.
17 . . . Nc8
18 RdS !
Threatening 1 9 Rxh5 ! gxh5 20 Bd4 {the Black bishop on g7 is pinned! ) .
18 . . . Kh8
1 9 ReS Qf6
All other moves l ose at least a pawn e .g . 1 9 . . . Qe6 20 Qxe6 fxe6

2 1 Nc7.
20 Bd4 Qh4
21 Bxg7+ Kxg7
22 Qe3+ Kg8
23 Ne7 Rab8
24 RegS !
Threatening 25 Qe"S ! f6 26 Rxh5 etc.
24 . . . f6
Or 24 . . . Qxh2 {24 . . . N d6 2 5 e5 Ne8 26 Nd5) 25 Bfl ! {t hreatening
26 Rh3) 25 . . . h6 (to answer 26 Rh3 with 26 . . . Qxh3 ! If 25 . . . Qh4
26 Qe5 ! ) 26 Ne6 ! fxe6 (or 26 . . . f6 27 Rxg6+ Bxg6 28 Rxg6+ .Kf7
29 Nxf8 ) 27 Rxg6+ Bxg6 28 Rxg6+ .Kf7 29 Qg7+ Ke8 30 Bb 5+ etc.
2S Ne6 Rfe8
26 f4 Bxe2
2 7 Rh3 ! QxgS
Or 27 . . . Qxh3 28 Qxh3 fxg5 29 Nxg5 h5 30 Qe6+.
28 NxgS fxgS
29 Kxe2 gxf4
30 Qe4+ Kg7(?)
Fighting the classical centre I 1 75
Leads to an elegant fmish but 30 . . . e6 3 1 Qc7 Ne7 3 2 Qxf4 was com

pletely hopeless.
3 1 Rh7+ ! Kxh7
32 Qf7+ Kh6
33 Qxe8 Resigns
Chapter 1 1
Black prepares
. . . e7-e5
We have seen, with the Nimzo-lndian and the Queen's I ndian defences,
the strategic idea of controlling the centre by means of pieces rather
than pawns. T his idea is pursued in the King's Indian Defence also , after
such moves as I d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7.
Instead of playing 3 . . . dS (the Grtinfeld) before White prevents the

move by 4 e4 , Black chooses to prepare . . . eS himself by the m odest
4 . . . d6 with the idea oflater exchanging his e-pawn for White's d-pawn ,
thus opening up the long black diagonal for his bishop. One of the most
common systems arises after (4 e4 d6) 5 Nf3 0-D 6 Be2 (after 6 g3?
Black has the strong reply 6 . . . Bg4 ! e.g. 7 Bg2 Nc6 8 0-D Nd7 ! 9 Be3
eS ! 1 0 dS Nd4 etc . , whereas now 6 . . . Bg4 7 Be3 N fd7 8 Re i ! or
here 7 . . . eS 8 Be3 etc. sooner or later leads to the exchange of his
useful dark-squared bishop) 6 . . . e S ! (See next diagram .)
( I ) 7 dxeS dxeS 8 Qxd8 Rxd8 9 NdS (9 N xeS? N xe4! I 0 Nxe4 BxeS
I I 0-0 Nc6 , or 9 BgS Re8 I 0 0-D-D Na6 ! I I NxeS NcS ! etc.) 9 . . .
NxdS (or even 9 . . Rd7 ! ? I 0 NxeS NxdS I I Nxd7 Nb4 1 2 Nxb8
.
Nc2 + ) 1 0 cxdS c6 I I Bc4 c xdS 1 2 BxdS Nc6 with equality.

( 2) 7 dS Nbd7 8 0-D (very sharp play arises after 8 BgS h6 9 Bh4 gS
I 0 Bg3 NhS I I h4 !? Nxg3 1 2 fxg3 gxh4 ! If instead I I 0-D Black
Black prepares . . . e 7- e 5 I I 7 7
can play 1 1 . . . Nf4 1 2 Nd2 Nc S ! ) 8 . . . N c S 9 Qc2 a S ! 1 0 Bg5

(after l O Nd2 Bh6 ! Black succeeds in exchanging his passively
placed bishop, whilst after I 0 Ne I he can play 1 0 . . . Ne8 and . . .
fS ) 1 0 h6 1 1 Be3 ! Ng4 1 2 BxcS d xc S 1 3 h3 Nf6 1 4 NxeS Nxd S !
1 5 cxdS BxeS with even chances.
(3 ) 7 Be3 Ng4 (or 7 . . . Qe7) 8 BgS f6 9 Bh4 Nc6 10 dS Ne7 I I Nd2
Nh6 with complex play .
(4) 7 0-0 Nc6 ! (after the passive 7 . . . Nbd7 White can play 8 Re i ! c6
9 Bfl Re8 1 0 dS) 8 dS (after 8 Be3 Re8 ! e.g. 9 dS Nd4 ! Black
stands well) 8 . . . Ne7 9 Ne 1 (alternatives are 9 Bd2 , 9 Nd2 and
9 b4) 9 . . . Nd7 1 0 Nd3 (;:,r the interesting 1 0 f3 fS I I g4 ! ) 1 0 fS
1 1 Bd2 Nf6 1 2 f3 f4 1 3 cS gS 1 4 Re i with exciting play in pros
pect. White at tacks down the c-fi.le by NbS and cxd6 , whilst Black
must defend by . . . Ng6 , . . . Rf7 and . . . Bf8 whilst preparing a
K-side attack by . . . hS and . . . g4 etc. Our next game and notes
illustrate other possibil ities :
Game 21
Bobotsov Gligoric (Skopje 1 972)
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 g6
3 Nc3 Bg7
4 e4 d6
5 f3
Apart from this move and 5 N f3 , there are two other main systems :
( 1 ) 5 f4 (the Four Pawns Attack) 5 . . . 0.0 6 Nf3 c S ! (Black must
proceed energetically before he is swamped by White's massive
1 78 I Black prepares . . . e 7-e5
pawn centre) 7 d5 (or 7 Be2 cxd4 8 Nxd4 Nc6 9 Be3 Bg4 ! and this
surprising move equalises for Blac� e .g. 1 0 Nxc6 Bxe2 1 1 Nxd8
Bx d l 1 2 N x b7 Bc2 , or 10 Bx g4 Nx g4 1 1 Nx c6 N x e3) 7 . . . e6 8
Be2 e x d5 9 ex d5 (9 ex d5 Bf5 and . . . Ne4 promises White lit tle) 9
. . . b 5 ! (or 9 . . . Re8 1 0 Nd2 Ng4! 1 1 B x g4 Qh4+ 1 2 g3 Q x g4) 1 0
e 5 ( 1 0 B x h 5 N x e4 ! ) 1 0 . . . d x e 5 I I fx e 5 Ng4 1 2 Bx b5 ( 1 2 Bg5
Qb6) 1 2 . . . N xeS I 3 0-0 etc .
(2) 5 Be2 0-0 6 Bg5 c 5 ! (but not 6 . . . e5? 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 Qxd8 Rxd8
9 Nd5 etc.) 7 d5 e6 8 Nf3 exd5 9 exd5 Bg4 I 0 0-0 ReS I I h3
BxfJ 1 2 BxfJ Nbd7 and White's pair of bishops has no real signifi
cance .
These two Jines show us . . . c5 as an effective way of increasing the
scope of Black's dark-squared bishop ; the idea occurs in many variations.
The diagran1med position is the beginning of the Samisch System of the

K ing's Indian Defence (we have already met one of Samisch's ideas in
the Nimzo-l ndian Defence). White guards his e-pawn and prepares to
develop a bishop on e3 (the immediate 5 Be3 allows 5 . . . Ng4) and
us ually castle on the Q-side, a similar set up to the Yugoslav system
employed against the Sicilian Dragon Variation !
5 0 . . 0-0
After 5 . . . e5 Black is not afraid of 6 dxe5 dxe5 7 Qxd8+ Kxd8 when
White's control of the square d4 is weak, but White can reply 6 Nge 2 !
0-0 7 BgS ! Pachman-Pilnik ( I 959) continued: 7 . . . c6 8 Qd2 Re8 ?
(too slow, allowing White to block the centre a n d attack on the K-side .
Black m ust play energetically : 8 . . . Qa5 ! 9 d5 cxdS I 0 cxd5 Na6
followed by . . . Bd7 and . . . Rfc8) 9 dS Qc7 1 0 0-0-0 cS (even worse is
I 0 . . . cxd5 I I Bxf6 Bxf6 1 2 NxdS Qxc4+ ?? 1 3 Nec3 winning) I I g4 !
Black prepares . . . e 7-e5 I 1 79
a6 1 2 Ng3 Nbd7 1 3 h4 Nf8 1 4 a S Bd7 I 5 Bd3 Reb 8 (Black's only

counter-play is down the c-file) 1 6 NfS ! (a typical combination) 1 6 . . .
gxfS 1 7 gxfS (threatening a decisive attack down the g-file which Black
now tries to close by giving back the piece. If 1 7 . . . Ne8 1 8 Rdg 1 f6
1 9 h6 ! fxgS 2 0 h xg7 Nxg7 2 1 RxgS ! Kh8 22 Rhg l wins) 1 7 . . . Be8
1 8 Rdg l Ng6 1 9 f4 ! ! (the main idea being 1 9 . . . e xf4 20 e S ! d xe S 2 1
fxg6 fxg6 22 h xg6 h xg6 23 B xf6 B xf6 2 4 Bxg6 Bxg6 25 Rxg6+ K f7
2 6 Rxf6+ ! Kxf6 2 7 Ne4+ KfS 28 Rh S + ! with a quick mate) I 9 . . . b S
2 0 h xg6 fxg6 2 1 fxg6 h xg6 22 fS ! b xc4 2 3 Bfl ! Rb7 2 4 fxg6 Rab8
25 Bxf6 ! B xf6 (2 5 . . . R xb2? 26 B xg7!) 26 Bh3 ! Bd7 (26 . . . Rxb2?
27 Be6 + Kf8 28 Qh6 + Qg7 29 Qxg7+ K xg7 30 Rh 7 + Kf8 3 1 Rfl !) 27
Qf2 ! Rf8 28 g7 ! BgS+ (28 . . . Bxg7 29 Rxg7+ ! K xg7 30 Rg l + ) 29
RxgS Rxf2 30 Be6+ Resigns (it is mate in three).
6 Be3
If White now develops his bishop on g S , Black can play 6 . . . c S ! 7 d5
e6 with good prospects.
6 . .. eS
Because the results o f this main line have been disappointing, other
ideas have been tried here :
( 1 ) 6 . . . Nc6 (a modern idea , retaining the possibility of playing . . .
e S whilst preparing Q-side action by . . . a6 , . . . Rb8, and . . . b S )
7 Nge2 (not 7 Bd3 e5 ! 8 dS Nd4 or here 8 Nge2 Ng4 ! 9 fxg4 exd4)
7 . . . a6 8 Qd2 Re8 (if at once 8 . . . Rb8 then 9 Bh6 can be played)
9 h4 ! (if 9 Nc l e5 ! ) 9 . . . Rb8 1 0 0.{).{) with attacking chances for
both sides down the h-and b-flles respectively . Black plays I 0 . . .
b5 but not 1 0 . . . h5? I I Bh6 Bh8 1 2 g4 ! hxg4 1 3 h S ! gxf3
1 4 hxg6 fxe2 1 5 g7 ! exd l = Q+ 16 Nxd l winning.
(2) 6 . . . b6 (preparing . . . c S ) 7 Bd3 ! a6 (bu t not 7 . . . c5? 8 e5 ! and
Be4 etc. If 7 . . . Bb 7 8 Nge2 c5 9 d5 e6 10 0-0 e xd5 1 1 c xd5
White is better) 8 Nge2 c 5 9 e5 Ne8 ! 10 exd6 Nxd6 ! I I dxcS bxc5
1 2 Bxc5 Nd7! a promising pawn sacrifice , e .g. 13 Bxd6 exd6 or
13 Be3 NeS 14 b3 NbS ! etc.
(3 ) 6 . . . c6 7 Qd2 a6 preparing . . . b S , when White's best is t o launch
a sharp attack by 8 0-D-0 bS 9 h4 ! etc.
7 dS (See next diagram .) c6
Black intends to open the c-file to counter-attack on the Q-side . Two
other lines have been tried :
1 80 I Black prepares . . . e 7-e5
( I ) 7 . . . cS (?) gives Wh ite a free h an d on the K-side : 8 Qd2 NhS 9

0-0.0 fS I 0 exfS gxf5 I I Bd3 a6 1 2 Nge2 bS 1 3 Rdg 1 ! bxc4
1 4 Bb l ! followed by g4 ! with a very strong attack.
(2) 7 . . . Nh S 8 Qd2 fS 9 0-0.0 Nu7 (If Black plays 9 . . . f4 White will
transfer his a t ten tions to the Q-side e .g. 1 0 Bf2 Bf6 ! 1 1 Nge2 Bh4
1 2 Bg l ! b6 1 3 Kb 1 aS 1 4 Nc 1 followed by b3 , a3 and b4 and
eventually the thematic cS when his king can be well protected by
his pieces) 1 0 Bd3 Ndf6 I I Nge2 K.h8 ! (an important move because
if I I . . . a6 1 2 exf5 gxfS 1 3 Ng3 ! and Black has to play 1 3 . . .
Nxg3 1 4 hxg3 , since 1 3 . . . f4 allows 1 4 Nxh5 fxe3 I S N x f6+
Qxf6 1 6 Qe2 ! when Black's weak pawn will sooner or later be lost).
Black's king m ove prevents the saving check (on move I S !) and
chances are even.
8 Bd3 !
A nat ural and good move . The sharp 8 Nge2 cxdS 9 cxdS a6 1 0 g4 !?
allows the in teresting counter 1 0 . . . h S ! I I h3 Nh 7 ! (threatening . : .
h4 followed by . . . Bg7-f6-gS ) I I gxhS Qh4+ 1 2 Bf2 QxhS 1 3 Ng3 Qg5
1 4 Bg2 with unclear play .
8 ... cxdS
9 cxdS NhS(?)
We shall see that this move is no longer good enough , because Whi te
already has the open c-ftle available. Black should ei ther play 9 . . . Nbd7
I 0 Nge 2 a6, waiting, when White must castle K-side, or else play here
I 0 . . . NcS I I Bc2 a S ! with chances of equality, al though White stands
better.
10 Nge2 fS
1 1 Qd2 f4
Black prepares . . . e7-e5 I 1 8 1
After this blockade White will have a free han d to operate on the Q-side,
but even after 1 1 . . . Nd7 1 2 0-0-0 White can always capture on fS
followed by Ng3 or else play Rg 1 followed by g4 .
1 2 Bf2 a6
13 0-0-0 Bf6
1 4 Kbl !
Whi te must be careful . I f he continues carelessly with 1 4 Rh fl ? Bh4
I S Bgl Black plays I S . . . QgS ! and White's knight curren tly on e2 can
not move anywhere to save the g-pawn . Now c 1 will be available !
14 Bh4
1 5 Bg 1 Nbd7
1 6 Nec l N c5
1 7 Bc2 Qc7?
The decisive m istake. l ie had to safeguard the position of his knight on
cS by 1 7 . . aS ! 1 8 N d3 b6 and . . . Bd7 when Black can s till resist
.
despite having the worse of it.

18 b4 ! Nd7
19 Nb3 Nb6
20 Bd3 Nc4
21 Bxc4 Qxc4
22 Na4!
Now White 's kn ights con trol aS and b6, so he sets about exchanging the
black-squared bishop to weaken the black squares even further .
22 . . . Qc7
1 8 2 I Black prepares . . . e 7-e5
After 2 2 . . . Bd8 23 Nb6 Bxb6 24 Bxb6 QbS 25 Bc7 ! Qd7 26 Re i

threatening BaS and Rc7 . Black is in as much trouble as in the variation
played.
23 Rcl Qd8
24 N b6 Rb8
25 Bf2 ! Bxf2
26 Qxf2 N f6
27 a4! Bd7
28 Rc3 gS
Black's only plan is to advance this pawn after . . . Kh8 but he never
ge ts time to carry out this plan .
·
29 Rhc l Be8
30 Kb2 Nd7
31 aS Nf6
Or 3 1 . . . Nxb6 32 axb6 followed by Rc7.
3 2 Nc8!
In troducing the horrible threa t of 33 Qa7. I f n ow 32 . . . Ra8 33 Qb6
Qxb6 34 axb6 is t!1e simplest, and if 3 2 . . . Bc6 ! ? 33 dxc6 Qxc8 34 c 7
Ra8 3 5 Qb6 etc.
The game ende d : 3 2 . . . b6 33 Nxb6 Bb5 34 Rc7 Ne8 3 5 Rc8 Rxc8
36 Nxc8 g4 3 7 Na7 Bd7 3 8 Nc6 Qg5 39 b5 axb5 40 a6 Nf6 41 a7 Ra8
42 Rc2 Qg7 43 Qb6 Ne8 44 Nba5 Resigns.
The King's Indian Defence often arises (by transposition of moves
sometimes) after White has fianchettoed his own light-squared bishop as
in the following game :
Game 22
Dr Ostenneyer Pachman ( M unster 1 9 74)
1 d4 Nf6
2 Nf3 g6
After 2 . . . e6 3 Bg5 we have the Torre System when 3 . . . c5 4 e3 Qb6
and 3 . . . h6 4 Bh4 g5 ! 5 Bg3 Nh5 are both viable con tinuations.
3 g3 Bg7
4 Bg2 0..0
5 0..0 d6
Black prepares . . . e 7-e5 I 1 8 3
Black plumps for the usual King's Indian set-up. He can also play the
solid symmetrical variation S . . . dS 6 c4 c6 ! e .g. 7 cxdS cxdS 8 Nc3
Nc6 (or 8 . . . Ne4 ) 9 NeS e6 ! Or 7 Nbd2 Ne4 ! 8 b3 Nxd2 9 Qxd2 BfS
etc.
6 c4
In this position Black has three main plans:

(1 ) 6 . . . c5 (the Yugoslav Variation) 7 Nc3 (or 7 dS Na6 8 Nc3 Nc7
9 a4 a6 10 Bf4 Rb8 1 1 aS bS 1 2 axb6 Rxb6 1 3 b3 eS ! 14 dxe6
N xe6 I S Bd2 etc.) 7 . . . Nc6 8 dS (after 8 dxcS d xcS 9 Be3 Be6 or
here 9 Bf4 NhS 1 0 Be3 QaS chances are even) 8 . . . Na5 9 Nd2 !
e S ! 1 0 e4 Ne8 1 1 b3 fS .
(2) 6 . . . Nc6 7 N c3 a6 (or 7 . . . eS 8 dS Ne7 9 c S ! opening the c-ftle .
Or 7 . . . Bg4 8 dS ! Bxf3 ? 9 exf3 ! NaS 1 0 Qe2 etc.) 8 h3 Rb8 9 e4
bS or 9 . . . Nd7 e t c .
Black's third method i s t he one adopted in the game, preparing . . . eS.
6 Nbd 7
7 Nc3 eS
8 e4 c6
9 b3(?)
Jt is remarkable how dangerous this move can be , as a number of brilliant
games have shown . Whi t e 's be s t plan is either of these two ideas :
( I ) h3 Qb6 (or 9 . . . Qa 5 , or 9 . . . Re8 1 9 De3 exd4 I I Nxd4 NcS
1 2 Qc2 aS etc.) 1 0 Re i exd4 (if 1 0 . . . Re8 I I dS !) I I Nxd4 Re8
1 2 Nc2 ! or here I I . . . Ng4 1 2 Nce2 NgeS 1 3 b3 NcS 1 4 Rfl !
and Be3 .
(2) 9 Rb l (guarding the b-pawn to take the sting out of . . . Qb6) e xd4
1 84 I B lack prepares . . . e 7- e 5
( o r 9 . . . a6 a n d . . . bS) I 0 Nxd4 Ng4 ! ? which w e shaU illustrate

by the game Kozma-GcUer { 1 97 2): I I h3 Qf6 1 2 Nce2 NgeS 1 3 b3
N b6 1 4 f4 Ned? I S Bb2? (the bishop looks strong but is in reality
misplace d here. After 1 S Be3 followed by Nc3 and Qc2 White's
space advan tage is clear) I S . . . Qe7 1 6 Kh2 NcS 1 7 Nc3 a S !
1 8 Ba l a4 ! 1 9 b4 N xc4 ! 2 0 bxcS dxc S ! 2 1 Nc2? {after 2 1 Nf3 !
Nc3 chances a re eve n ) 2 1 . . . Rd8 22 Qe 2 Rd 2 ! 23 Qxc4 Be6 (the
queen is trapped and after the best con tin uati on 24 Qe2 Rxe2
2S Nxe2 Bxa2 Black's pawns are too strong) 24 Qxe6? Qxe6
2S Ne3 Bd4 26 fS Qe7 27 fxg6 fxg6 28 Ng4 Rf8 29 eS Rxfl
30 Rxfl h S 3 1 Nh6+ Kg? 32 Rf7+ Qxf7 33 Nxf7 Kxf7 34 Ne4
Rxa 2 3 S Bxd4 cxd4 36 Nd6+ Ke7 37 Resigns.
9 ... exd4
to Nxd4 Re8
In compensat ion for his weak d-pawn Black has active play for his
pieces.
I I Bb2 NcS!
Also in teresting is I I . . . Qb6 when the famous Zita-Bronstein ( 1 946)
game continued 1 2 Qd2? {bes t is 1 2 Qc 2 ! a S I 3 Rad I NcS 1 4 Ba3 ! with
a clear advantage to Whi te. Note t hat 1 2 . . . Qxd4? loses to 1 3 Na4)
1 2 . . . NcS 13 Rfe l aS 1 4 Ra b l a4 ! I S Ba l axb3 1 6 axb3 Ng4 ! 1 7 h3
N x f2 ! 1 8 Kxf2 Rxa I ! I 9 Rxa I Nxb3 with a won position .
1 2 Rfe l aS
1 3 Qd2?
Again 1 3 Qc 2 is better, al though Black has good play a fter 1 3 . . . a4 !
( 1 4 b4 a3 ! )
13 a4 !
14 Rad l Qb6
I S Qc2 axb3
16 axb3 hS !
A typical move i n such posi tions, threatening 1 7 . . . h4 ! { 1 8 gxh4 NhS).
1 7 h3 Nfd7
18 Kh l
Preparing f4 which would at the moment fail to . . . Nxb3 .
18 . . . NeS
Black prepares . . . e 7-e5 I 1 8 5
Threatening . . . Nd3 , even after 1 9 Bfl ( 1 9 . . . Ned3 20 Bxd3 Bxd4

when the b-pawn falls).
1 9 Re3
19 . . . Nxb3!
As in the Geiler and Bronstein games, White's Q-side pawns a re capt ured
with sacrifice, and the potential power of Black's pieces is unleashed. If
now 20 Qxb3 Qxb3 21 Nxb3 N xc4 22 Rb l Nxe3 23 fxe3 Be5 24 Ne2
Ra2 wins easily.
20 Nxb3 Nxc4
2 1 Red3
Or 2 1 Be l Be6 ! and White's knight on b3 has n owhere to go !

21 . . . Be6
22 R b l
Or 22 N d 5 c x d 5 23 13xg7 when Black has the important in terposal
23 . . . dxe4 !
22 NeS
23 N c l Nxd3
24 Nxd3 Bb3 !
But not at once 24 . . . Ba2? 25 Nxa2 Rxa2 26 Bxg7 ! etc .
25 Qd2 Ba2!
26 Ret Bc4
27 Nf4 dS !
28 Rcl d4
I R6 1 Black prepares . . . e 7-e5
29 Ne2 Bxe2
30 Qxe2 Bh6!
31 Rc2 Bxf4
32 gxf4 Ra2
33 Qd2 cS
34 Bfl
A desperate a ttempt to s top the advance of Black's passed pawns
34 Rxe4
35 Bd3 Re7
36 fS c4 !
The simplest method, winning both bishops for his rook.
The game now ended : 37 Bxc4 Rxb2! 3 8 Rxb2 Qc6+ 39 Kgl Qxc4
40 f6 Rc7 ! (so that if 4 1 Qh6 Qc l + wins) 41 Kh 2 Qc5 42 Qf4 Rd7
43 Re2 Qd6 44 Re5 d3 45 Kg l Rf8 46 Qd2 Rd6 4 7 Resigns.
After I d4 N f6 2 c4 Black has three other popular systems :
A 2 . . . c 5 3 d 5 (the Hromad.ka System)
Black has four basic ways of meeting this :

( I ) 3 . . . e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 after which White must
play energe tically e.g. 7 f4 Bg7 8 Bb 5 + ! Nfd7 (after 8 . . . Bd7 or
8 . . . Nbd7 then 9 e5 is very strong) 9 a4 ! (to prevent the advance
of Black's Q-side pawns) 9 . . . a6 1 0 Bd3 0-0 I I Nf3 followed by
0-0 and White stands better.
(2) 3 . . . e 5 4 N c3 d6 5 e4 Be7 6 Nf3 (or 6 g3 , or 6 Ne2 and N g3 )
6 . . 0-0 7 Be 2 Bg4 ! 8 0-0 Bxf3 ! 9 Bxf3 Ne8 ! followed by . . .
.
Bg5 and Black achieves equal i ty .

(3 ) 3 . . . b 5 ! ? is the Volga Gambit, sacrificing a pawn to open up lines
Black prepares . . . e 7-e5 J 1 8 7
on the Q-side e.g. 4 cxb5 a6 5 b xa6 Bxa6 6 Nc3 g6 7 e4 Bxfl

S Kxfl d6 9 Nf3 Bg7 I 0 h3 0-0 I I Kg l Na6 1 2 Kh2 Qb6 followed
by . . . RfbS. Practice has shown how difficult it is for White to
exploit his material advantage.
(4) 3 . . . d6 . Black waits, retaining the above options, but usually
breaking later in the centre by . . . e6 and thus avoiding variation 1 .
The continuation might be : 4 Nc3 g6 5 e4 Bg7 6 Be 2 0-0 7 Nf3 e6
(or . . . e 5 ) S 0-0 exd5 9 cxd5 ReS etc .
B 2 . . . d6 (the Old Indian Defence) often transposes later to the King's
'
Indian, but has its own isQ»riduality in lines such as 3 Nc3 (after 3 Nf3
Black can post his light-squared bishop on f5 or g4) 3 . . . e5 4 Nf3
(4 dxe5 dxe5 5 QxdS+ Kxd8 gives White little) 4 . . . Nbd7 (or 4 . . . e4
5 Nd2 Bf5) 5 e4 (if 5 Bg5 Be7 6 e3 0-0 7 Be2 c6 8 0-0 Ne8 !) 5 . . . Be 7
6 Be2 0 -0 7 0 -0 a 6 followed b y . . . b 5 .
C 2 . . . e5 ! ? (the Budapest Gambit) 3 dxe5 and now :
( I ) 3 . . . Ne4? 4 Qc2 d5 !? (better is 4 . . . Nc5 but Black has no com-
pensation for the pawn) 5 exd6 Bf5 6 Nc3 ! Nxd6 (6 . . . Ng3
7 Qa4+ Bd7 8 NbS ! wins) 7 e4 ! Nxe4 8 Bd3 ! Nxf2 9 Bxf5 Nxhl
1 0 Nf3 Bc5 I I Ne4 Qe 7 I 2 Bg5 ! f6 13 0-0-0 winning.
(2) 3 . . . Ng4 ! 4 Nf3 ! (White must continue quietly , since 4 f4? is bad
in view of 4 . . . Bc5 5 Nh3 d6! 6 exd6 0-0 7 e4 cxd6 8 Nc3 Nc6
etc., and 4 e4 Nxe5 5 f4 Ng6 6 Nf3 Bb4+ 7 Nc3 d6 8 Bd3 Nd7
gives even chances) 4 . . . Bc5 5 e3 Nc6 6 Be2 Ng4xe5 7 Nc3 d6
S 0-0 0-0 9 b3 ! Bf5 I 0 Bb2 ReS 1 1 Na4 Bb6 1 2 Nxb6 axb6
13 Nd4 with the better game.
Chapter 12
White becomes Black
Our final theme would require a vast tome if we were to do i t justice ,

because in a sense it incl udes ail White's first moves apart from 1 e4 and
I d4 . In 'classical ' times i t was taken for granted that White would
occupy the cen tre with pawns a t the first opportunity . However, the
'In dian ' defences were so successful that the same ideas began to be
in corpora ted i n to White's opening play , allowing Black to build up a
pawn centre which could subsequently be attacked. Of course, such
stra tegy is hardly to be recommended to the inexperienced player, as i t
dem ands technique and p01;itional play of a high order. One of t h e most
popular 'reverse d' openings is I c4 , the English Opening, when White
plan s t o play a Sicilian Reversed after 1 . . . e5 e .g. 2 Nc3 N f6 (or the
closed method with 2 . . Nc6 3 g3 g6 4 Bg2 Bg7 etc.) 3 Nf3 (or at
.
once 3 g3 when apart from 3 . . . d 5 an d 3 . . Bb4 Black can try 3 . . .

.
c6 when play might go 4 Nf3 ! e4 5 N d4 d5 6 cxd5 cxd5 7 d3 Bc5

8 N b3 Bb4 9 Bg2 0-0 I 0 0-0 Bf5 etc.) 3 . . . Nc6 4 g3 (4 d4 e4 5 Nd2
N xd4 6 Nd2 xe4 N xe4 7 N xe4 Bb4 + 8 Bd2 B xd2+ 9 Q xd2 + Ne6 1 0
g3 is equal) and Black h as the following possibilities:
( I ) 4 . . . d5 5 exd5 Nxd5 6 Bg2 Be6 7 0-0 Nb6 (otherwise 8 d4 ! .

follows) 8 a3 aS ! 9 d3 Be7 I 0 Be3 Nd5 1 1 Nxd5 Bxd5 1 2 Re i . Or
White becomes Black I 1 89
here 6 . . . N xc3 7 bxc3 e4 8 Ng1 f5 9 d3 exd3 I 0 exd3 Be6

I I Nf3 Be7 1 2 0-0 0-0, with advantage, albeit a slight one , to White
in both cases. He is of cou rse playing the Dragon Variation of the
Sicilian Defence with an extra tempo !
(2) 4 . . . Bb4 5 Bg2 (after 5 Nd5 Black can play ei ther 5 . . . e4 or else
5 . . . N x d5 6 cxd5 Nd4) 5 . . . 0-0 6 0-0 e4 7 Ng5 Bxc3 8 b xc3
(or 9 d xc3 Re8 9 Qc2 Qe7 1 0 Nh3 Ne5 I 1 b3 d6) 8 . . . ReB 9 d3
(9 f3 exf3 I 0 Nxf3 d5 ! I I cxd5 Qxd5) 9 . . . e xd3 1 0 e xd3 d6 with
even chances.
Com pletely different problems arise after the symmetrical 1 c4 c5
2 Nc3 (or 2 N f3 Nf6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 e6) 2 . . . Nc6 3 Nf3 (3 g3 g6
4 Bg2 Bg7 5 e3 e6 6 Nge2 Nge7 leads to a very quiet game) 3 . . . N f6
(3 . . . g6 4 e3 ! Bg7 5 d4 d6 6 Be2 Bg4 7 d5 is better for White).
Here are two possibilities :

( 1 ) 4 d4 cxd4 5 N xd4 e6 (5 . . . d5 6 Qa4 !) 6 Ndb5 (or 6 g3 Qb6 ! )
6 . . . d6 7 Bf4 e5 8 Bg5 a6 9 Bxf6 gx f6 1 0 Na3 f5 followed by
. . . Bg7 with unclear play .
(2) 4 g3 g6 (after 4 . . . d5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 Bg2 Nc7 White plays either
7 b3 e5 8 Bb2 Be7 9 Re i f6 I 0 Na4 Na6 I I 0.0 followed by Ne l
and f4 , Or 7 0 .0 e5 8 d3 followed by N-d2-{;4 and f4) 5 Bg2 Bg7
6 0.0 0.0 7 d4 c x d4 8 N xd4 Nxd4 9 Qxd4 d6 I O Qd3 a6 I I Be3 !
and Whi te h as the edge ( 1 I . . . Ng4 1 2 Bd4 Ne5 I 3 Qd l ! when
1 3 . . . N xc4? fails to 14 Bxg7 Kxg7 1 5 Qd4+ Ne5 I 6 f4).
After I c4 Black can of course t ry to steer the game towards one of
the Indian defences by playing, for example, I . . . Nf6 . White on the
other hand can avoid these transpositions by delaying d4 e.g . 2 Nc3 e6
3 N f3 Bb4 4 Qc2 when Black no longer has an attack on White 's d-pawn
by . . . c5, and if he tries to control the square e4 by fianchettoing his
1 90 I W hite becomes Black
bishop on b7, White can play d3 and e4 , when Black's light-squared

bishop is much less effective than in the Queen's Indian Defence. In
other words, holding back in the centre can have its advan tages !
Another popular first move is 1 Nf3 . Let's see this in action :
Game 23
Kavalek Pomar (Skopje 1 972)
1 N f3 dS
2 c4
l11e Reti System. There are two other major ·c ontinuations:
( 1 ) 2 g3 when White plays a King's Indian Reversed ! Black must be
careful not to commit himself too m uch in the centre , and should
play , for example, 2 . . . c6 3 Bg2 Bg4 ! 4 0..0 Nd7 5 d3 e6 ! 6 Nbd2
Bd6 7 h3 Bh5 8 e4 Ne7 etc.
(2) 2 b3 , the Zukertort-Nimzovitch System , when White plays a
Queen's Indian Reversed ! Here is the game Plache tka-Zinn ( 1 974)
with brief n otes: 2 . . . c5 (already Black is perhaps playing too
many pawn moves, whereas he has a solid continuation in 2 . . .
Bg4 ! when 3 Ne5 Bh5 4 g4 can be answered by 4 . . . f6 ! and after
3 Bb2 Nd7 4 c4 he has the choice between the quiet 4 . . . e6 5 e3
Ngf6 followed by . . . c6 and . . . Be7, and the sharp 4 . . . dxc4
5 bxc4 Bxf3 6 gxf3 e5) 3 e3 ! (but not 3 Bb2? f6 ! and Black builds
up a solid centre. If now 3 . . . f6 White has 4 d4) 3 . . . Nf6 4 Bb2
Nc6? (a natural but risky move. He should play 4 . . . e6 or 4 . . .
g6 and 5 . . . Bg7) 5 Bb 5 ! (White has now obtained a good variation
of the Nimzo-lndian Reversed !) 5 . . . e6 6 Ne5 Qc7 7 0..0 Bd6
8 Bxc6+ bxc6 9 f4 0..0 1 0 Rf3 ! (White has such a good game that
he can begin his a ttack immediately) 1 0 . . . Nd7 1 1 Rh3 ! g6? ?
(this loses to a n unexpected combination . After 1 1 . . . Nxe5
1 2 fxe5 Bxe5 1 3 Qh5 f5 14 Qxh7+ Kf7 1 5 Nc3 Black's king would
be insecure , but the game is far from over) 1 2 Qh 5 ! ! Resigns . (If
1 2 . . . gxh5 1 3 Rg3 + Kh8 1 4 Nxf7 mate . Or 1 2 . . . Nf6 1 3 Ng4 !
gxh5 1 4 Nxf6+ Kh8 1 5 Rxh5 h6 1 6 Nxd5+ e tc .)
2 ... e6
There are three other possibilities here :
( 1 ) 2 . . . dxc4 after which 3 e3 e6 4 Bxc4 and 5 d4 leads to the
Queen's Gambit Accepted . White can also try 3 Na3 after wliich
White becomes Black I 1 9 1
either 3 . . . c 5 4 Nxc4 Nc6 5 g3 f6 ! and . . . e5, or even 3 . . . e5 ! ?

4 N x e 5 Bxa3 5 Qa4+ b5 ! 6 Qxa3 Qd5 7 Qf3 ! Nf6 gives equal
chances.
(2) 2 . . . d4. Now 3 e3 Nc6 4 exd4 Nxd4 5 Nxd4 Qxd4 6 Nc3 e5 7 d3
c6! 8 Be3 Qd6 ! is equal (Whi te must continue 9 d4 exd4 1 0 Qxd4
or else Black plays 9 . . . Nh6 ! and . . . Nf5). If instead 3 b4 !?
Black's best is 3 . . . f6 4 d3 e 5 5 a3 Be6 6 g3 etc., and White's
most popular continuation is 3 g3 c5 4 Bg2 Nc6 5 0.0 e5 6 d3
when he is playing the Hromadka System Reversed !
(3 ) 2 . . . c6 when White can transpose to the Slav Defence lines by
3 d4 or can continue in Reti style by 3 b3 Bf5 (or Bg4) 4 Bb2 Nf6
5 g3 e6 6 Bg2 Be7 7 0-0 0.0 8 d3 and Nbd2.
3 g3 N f6
4 Bg2 Be7
Mter 4 . . . dxc4 5 Qa4+ an d 6 Qxc4 White obtains a strong cen tre , but
there is an interesting alternative in 5 Na3 !? Bxa3 6 bxa3 when his
bishop will be powerful on b2.
5 0..0 0..0
A typical position in the Reti System with White's d-and e-pawns staying
back whilst his pieces exert pressure on the enemy centre from the flank .
6 b3 ! cS
7 e3 Nc6
8 B b2 b6
8 . . d4 would be grist to White's mill after 9 exd4 cxd4 1 0 Re i !
.
followed by manoeuvring the knight from b I to b5 or c2 attacking the

d·pawn .
1 9 2 I White becomes B lack
9 Qe2
Another idea is 9 Nc3 Bb7 1 0 cxdS NxdS I I N xdS QxdS 1 2 d4 !
threa tening NeS ! although Black can probably equalise by 12 . . . NaS !
In the game White has the more complicated idea of first posting his
rook on d l before advancing in the cen tre.
9 ..
. Bb7
10 d3 Re8
This is not an error but not as precise as I 0 . . Qc7 followed by . . .
.
Rad8, when Black would then even have the possibility of capturing
on c4 followed by . . . Qb8 and Qa8 with pressure down the long white
diagonal , a manoeuvre which also originated with Reti who used it
often as White. The idea o f the text-move is to take the s ti ng out of
o.:xd5 because of the position of the rook vis-a-vis the queen , but White
has another way of taking central action.
1 1 Rfd l Bd6
1 2 N c3 a6
1 3 d4!
Now White 's rook is facing Black's queen !
13 cxd4
1 4 N xd4! N xd4
1 5 Rxd4 Be 5
16 Rd3 ! aS
Preven ling 1 7 cxdS because of 1 7 . . . Ba6 winning the exchange.
1 7 Rad 1
W hite becomes Black I 1 93
A good example of pressure applied t o a point in the enemy position

(Black's d-pawn here). Black has one move to avoid material l oss :
1 7 . . . Qb8 ! when White has a choice between 1 8 Na4 Bxb2 1 9 Nxb2
when 1 9 . . . dxc4 (?) 20 N xc4 Bxg2 2 1 Kxg2 gives White complete
control of the d-file, or 1 8 cxd5 ! ? Ba6 1 9 dxe6 Ra7 ! 20 exf7+ Rx f7
2 1 Nd5 Bxd3 22 Rxd3 with two pawns and a bishop for his rook.
Instead Black, thinking only of the threatened cxd 5 , misses a stronger
continuation for White . The game ended : 1 7 . . . Ba6? 1 8 e4 ! Qb8
1 9 exd5 Bxc3 20 Rxc3 ! Nxd5 (or 20 . . . exd5 2 1 Re3 ! winning the
pinned pawn) 2 1 Rcd3 ! Nb4 22 Rd7 ! Ra 7 23 Rxa7 Qxa7 24 a3 ! Na2
25 Ba l Resigns.
Index of openings
Scotch Gam e ( I e4 e5 2 N f3 Nc6 3 d4 e xd4 4 N xd4), 5

Scotch Gam bit ( I e4 e 5 2 N f3 N c6 3 d4 exd4 4 Bc4), 7
Italian Game ( 1 e4 e 5 2 N f3 N c6 3 Bc4 B c 5 ) , 1 0 ;
A ) Giuoco Pianissimo (4 d 3 ), 1 0 ;
B ) Classical System ( 4 c 3 ) , 1 8 ;
Hungarian Defence ( I e 4 e 5 2 N f3 Nc6 3 Bc4 B e7), I I
Danish Gam bit ( I e4 e 5 2 d4 exd4 3 c 3 ), 23
Evans Gambit ( I e4 e 5 2 N f3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 b4 ), 29
Ponziani Opening ( I e4 e 5 2 N f3 Nc6 3 c3), 1 7
Kings Gambit ( I e4 e 5 2 f4 ), 3 3 ;
A) Declined ( 2 . . . d6/ 2 . . . Nc6/ 2 . . . Bc5), 3 5 ;
B ) Falkbeer Counter Gambit ( 2 . . . d S ), 3 5 ;
C ) 2 . . . exf4 3 Bc4, 3 7 ;
D ) Modern Defence ( 2 . . . e x f4 3 N f3 d 5 ), 3 8 ;
E) Muzio G ambit ( 3 . . . g5 4 Bc4 g 4 5 0-0), 3 8 ;
F) Kieseritsky Gam bit ( 4 h4 g 4 5 N e 5 ) , 3 9 ;
G ) Other defences after 2 . . . exf4 3 N f3 , 39 ;
Centre Game ( I e4 e 5 2 d4 exd4 3 Qxd4 ), 33
Bish op 's Open ing ( I e4 e 5 2 Bc4), 3 4
Vienna Game ( I e4 e 5 2 N c 3 ) , 34
Tw o Knigh ts Defence ( I e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6), 43 ;
A) 4 Ng5 d 5 , 4 3 ;
B) N g 5 Bc 5 , 4 3 ;
C ) 4 d4, 5 0
La tvian Gam bit ( I e 4 e 5 2 N f3 f 5 ) , 5 4
Four Knights Game ( I e 4 e 5 2 N f3 N c 6 3 N c 3 Nf6), 5 5
Petroff's Defence ( I e4 e 5 2 N f3 Nf6), 5 5
R uy L opez ( I e4 e 5 2 N f3 N c6 3 B b S ) , 6 1
A ) Berlin Defence ( 3 . . . N f6 4 0-0 Nxe4 ) , 6 1 ;
B ) Steinitz Defence ( 3 . . . N f6 4 0-0 d6), 63 ;
C) Classical Defence ( 3 . . . BcS), 6 7 ;
D) Schliemann Defence ( 3 . . . fS ), 6 9 ;
E ) Bird 's Defence ( 3 . . . N d 4 ) , 7 1 ;
F ) Ex change V ariation ( 3 . . . a6 4 Bxc6), 7 2 ;
I 96 I ndex of openings
G) Steinitz Defence Deferred (3 . . . a6 4 Ba4 d 6 ), 74 ;

1-1 ) O pen Defence (3 . . . a6 4 Ba4 N f6 5 0-0 N x e4 ), 8 I ;
I ) Closed Defence ( 5 0-0 B e 7 ) , 8 6
Sicilian Defence ( I e 4 c 5 ) , 9 5 ;
A ) Closed System ( 2 N c 3 ) , 9 5 ;
B ) 2 c 3 , 96 ;
(') Dragon Defence ( 2 N f3 d6 3 d4 c x d 4 4 N x d 4 N f6 5 N c 3 g6), 9 6 ;
D) N ajdorf Defence ( 5 . . . a6 ), 9 7 ;
E ) 3 B b 5 , 1 02 ;
F ) Sicilian Four K nights ( 2 N f3 Nc6 3 d 4 cxd4 4 N xd 4 N f6 5 N c 3
e6), 1 03 ;
G ) Systems with . . . e6 and . . . d 6 , I 05 ;
H ) Paulsen System ( 2 N f3 e6 3 d4 c x d4 4' N x d4 a6), I 08 ;
I ) Other lines, I 09
Centre Cou n ter D efe n ce ( I e4 d 5 ) , I I I
Fren ch Defence ( I e4 e 6 ) , I l l
Caro -Ka n n Defe n ce ( I e4 c 6 ) , 1 2 3
Nimzovitch Defe n ce ( I e4 N c 6 ) , 1 3 3
A le k h in e 's Defe n ce ( I e 4 N f6 ), 1 3 3
Pirc Defence ( I e4 d6 2 d4 N f6 3 N c3 g6), 1 34
R o ba tsch Defence ( I e4 g6), 1 3 5
Queen 's Pa wn Came ( I d 4 d 5 2 Nc3 ) , 1 3 6
Queen 's Gambit ( l . d 4 d 5 2 c4), 1 3 7 ;
A ) Accepted ( 2 . . . d xc4), 1 3 7 ;
B ) Chigorin Defence ( 2 . . . Nc6), 1 3 9 ;
C ) A lbin Counter Ga mbit ( 2 . . . e 5 ) , 1 40 ;
D ) Symmetrical Defence ( 2 . . . c 5 ), 1 40 ;
E ) Tarrasch Defence ( 2 . . . e 6 3 Nc3 c 5 ) , 1 40 ;
F ) Orthodox Defence ( 2 . . . e 6 3 Nc3 Nf6), 1 4 3 ;
G ) Slav Defence ( 2 . . . c6 ), 1 4 9
Du tch D efence ( I d 4 f5 ), 1 56
Nimzo-/ndian Defence ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 e6 3 N c 3 B b 4 ) , 1 5 7 ;
A ) Samisch Variation ( 4 a 3 ) , 1 5 7 ;
B ) 4 Qc2, 1 5 8 ;
C ) 4 Qb3 and 4 N f3 and 4 Bg5 , 1 60 ;
D ) 4 e 3 , 1 60
Queen 's Indian Defence ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 e6 3 N f3 b 6 ) , 1 66
/logo -Indian D efe n ce ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 e6 3 N f3 B b 4 + ) , 1 6 7
/llumenfeld Ga m b it ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 e6 3 N f3 c5 4 d 5 b 5 ), 1 67
Ca talan System ( l d4 N f6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 ) , 1 67
King 's Indian Defence ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 g6), 1 69 ;
A ) G r iinfeld Defence ( 3 N c 3 d 5 ) , 1 69 ;
B ) M ain Li ne ( 3 Nc3 B g 7 ) , I 7 6
Index of openings 1 97
Hromadka System ( I d4 Nf6 2 c4 c 5 ), 1 86

Old Indian Defe n ce (I d4 Nf6 2 c4 d6), 1 8 7
Budapest Gam b it ( I d4 N f6 2 c4 e 5 ), 1 87
English Open ing ( I c4), 1 88
R e ti and Zukertort-Nimzo vitch Syste ms ( I Nf3 ), 1 90
Index of games
A Fu lly a n notated B Brief n o tes o n ly

(game nos in parentheses)
Anderssen-Dufresne ( 4 ), 29 Bobolju bov-Capablanca, 1 6 6

Bobotsov-Gligoric ( 2 1 ) , 1 7 7 Geller-Hermlin, 1 3 8
Eley-Bouwmeester ( 5 ), 3 3 Gligoric-Portisch, 1 69
Fischer-Spassky ( 1 7 ), 1 40 Harhton-Keene , 1 20
Florian-Deutsch ( 7), 5 0 H ort-Portisch, 1 43
Htibner-Korchnoi ( I I ) , 8 0 Hug-Hort, 1 66
Karpov-Korchnoi ( 1 3 ) , 9 5 K avalek-Ljubojevic, 7 0
Kavalek-Pomar (23 ) , 1 90 K norr-Chigorin, 1 2
Kuindshi-K lovan ( 6 ) , 43 K orchnoi-Cuellar, 1 4 5
Kusmin-Averbach ( 1 2} , 8 6 K oz ma-Geller, 1 84
Lj ubojevic-Makaritschev ( 8 ), 5 5 Lju b ojevic-Durao, 69
Martinovic-Musil ( 1 4 ) , I 02 Pachman-Korchnoi, I 59
Mikenas-Kupreichik ( 1 8), 1 49 Pachman-Pil n i.k , 1 7 8
Ostermeyer-Pachman ( 2 2 ) , 1 8 2 Plachetka-Zinn, 1 9 0
Portisch-Gheorghui ( 2 0 ) , 1 70 Portisch-Radulov, 1 3 9
Portisch-Karpov ( 1 9 ), 1 60 Polugayevsky-Saidy , 1 4 5
Romm-Tatai ( 1 5 ) , 1 1 6 S passky-Fischer, 1 6 1
Rossolimo-Reissmann ( 2 ), 1 7 S pielmann-Havasi, 1 1 3
Shamkovitch-Averbach ( 9 ) , 6 2 Tai-Portisch , 99
Steinitz-Bardeleben ( 3 ) , 2 4 Van den B erg-K eene, 1 20
Tatai-Portisch ( I 0), 7 4 Zollner-J unge, I 5 3
Westerinen-Pachman ( 1 6) , 1 2 8
Count Vithum-Von der Lasa ( 1 ) ,
5
ROUTLEDGE CH ESS BOOKS
tMO D E R N C H E S S TACTICS
Pieces and Pawns in Action
Ludek Pachrnan
Translated by P. H. Clarke
*ATTACK A N D D E FENCE IN MODERN CHESS

Ludek Pachman
Translated by P. H. Clarke
tHOFFER'S C H ES S
Revised and brought up-to-date
by J . du Mont
TAL'S W I N N I NG CH ESS COMBINATIONS

Mikhail Tal and Victor Khenkin
A H I STORY OF CHESS
Harry Golombek
tC HESS-BOARD DELIGHTS
Selected from t h e 'Sunday Telegraph' 1 964-74
Comins Mansfield
*C H ES S TECHNIQUES
A. R. B. Thomas
ROUTLEDGE CHESS HANDBOOKS

Edited by Peter Clarke
t i AN INTRO DUCTION TO CHESS

Leonard Barden
*2 FURTHER STEPS IN CHESS

Owen Hindle
*3 L E SSONS IN CHESS STRATEGY

W . H . Cozens
t4 BASIC CHESS OPENINGS

Raymond Edwards
tS C H ES S TACTICS AND AITAC KING TECHNIQUES

Raymond Edwards
*6 PRACTICAL CHESS ENDGAMES

David Hooper
*Also avuiluble in paperback

tPuperback only
Rout ledge & Kegan Paul

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Untitled

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE OPENING GAME IN CHESS

I .udek Pachman is weU-known as the author of a number of books covering

Pachman gives a number of imponant openings, concentrating mainly on the

This is the first in a three-volume series of boo ks by Ludek Pachman; the

Ludek Pachman is an International Grand Master. He is widely known as a

Modern Chess Tactics ( 1970)

Routledge & Kegan Paul

Set in Press Roman by

Translation© Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1982

First pubfished as Eriiffnungs-praxis im Schach in 19 76

No part of this book may be reproduced in

ISBN 0 7100 9222 9

Translator's preface vii

The basic principles of chess openings 2

2 The struggle for the centre 16

3 Time, space and material 23

5 What is positional play? 61

7 Black prepares ... d7-d5 111

9 Central control by pieces 156

10 Fighting the classical centre 169

11 Black prepares ... e7-e5 176

12 White becomes Black 188

Index of openings 195

Index of games 198

Pachman is renowned for his encyclopaedic tomes covering the whole

It is essential for every chess-player to know how to write down the

The pieces are indicated by a capital letter as follows: king= K, queen

knight moves to the gS square. If there is any ambiguity , it can be

strong) or question marks as a form of criticism e .g., Qxb7? (=weak) or

Man has the remarkable attribute of creating a branch of knowledge out

--- -. ---- . - -- ---- ---

When this variation is chosen at all nowadays, the idea is to continue

Defending the pawn whilst developing a piece.

White plays aggressively but his 'attack' is insufficiently prepared, so

As we already know from the line I e4 e5 2 Qh5? it is a serious mistake

Parrying White's threat by developing a piece.Admittedly, h6 is by no

The simplest, although he could capture the pawn.

the piece sacrifice without any great difficulty.

Now this is possible because a black kn ight can interpose on eS after

White chooses the 'Italian' development of the bishop to c4 where it is

The simplest, symmetrical answer. Later we shall look at the alternative

This and White's next move can be interchanged.

As White is threatening NdS, we have already said that 6 . . . 0.{)? would

9 K x f2? N xe4+ 1 0 Kfl Nxg5 I I Nxg5 Qxg5 12 N xc7+ Ke7 13 N xa8

exchange off th e knight if it goes to d5) I I Qf3 Rg6 followed by ...Nd4

membering.However, White can gain an advantage by 9 Qe2! Bg4 (not

11 Nxa8 Nd4 12 Qd1 Qf6!_etc.) 10 ... Bb6 11 a4!with thethreat of

This illustrates an important strategic principle: when our opponent has

Black has in no way neglected his development, having brought his

confronted with serious problems, since he has great difficulty developing

and unhindered development and lines are opened by pawn exchanges.

to win a piece by8 d5 followed by 9 Qa4+) 7 Nc3 Nf6 8 Be3 Bg4

move preventing . . . Bg4 putting pressure on his central pawns)

This is the important difference from the play following 4 . . . d6 . Black

More solid than 7 . . . Nxe4 ! ? 8 B x b4 Nxb4 9 Bxf7 + K x f7 10 Qb3 + dS

8 Nbl xd2 . . . (see next diagram)

development (his white-square bishop is blocked in by his own pawns!)

13 a4(!) (see next diagram) b6?

This mi stake allows White to br n

best way to combat a gambit is to return the material at a favour

3 Nf3 (not the disastrous blunder 3 fxe5??Qh4+ 4 g3Qxe4+ fol

7 Nxb5 t.l6 followed by 8 . . . Qx4+ ) 5 . . . Bc5 ! 6 N xe5 0-0 ! a gam